HomeMy WebLinkAboutGPAC_2005_05_09GI
n
•'
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGENDA
May 9, 2005
7:00-9:00 p.m.
OASIS Senior Center
5t" and Marguerite
7:00 I. Call to Order
7:05 II. General Plan Traffic Study Preliminary
Alternatives Analysis
8:45 III. Discussion of Future Agenda Items
8:50 IV. Public Comments
Public Comments are invited on items generally considered to be within
the subject matter jurisdiction of this Committee -- Speakers are asked to
limit continents to 5 minutes. Before speaking, please state your name and
city of residence for the record.
*Reports are available on line at www.nbvision2025.com
41 Corporate Park, Suite 300
Irvine, •CA 92606
Prepared by:
Carleton Waters, P.E.
Marlie P.E.
�OFESS10
52^ 16
• Prepared for:
Mr. Elwood Tescher
EIP ASSOCIATES
12301 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 430
Los Angeles, CA 90025
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
GENERAL PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY
PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
May 3, 2005
JN:01232-18
• CW:MW:mg
3
•
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
ES.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................
ES.1 GPAC Subarea Trip Generation Anaysis
ES.2 Preliminary Alternatives
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY.......................................................
1.1 Goals and Objectives
1.2 Methodology Overview
1.2.1 Data and Analysis Methodology
PAGE
ES-1
1-1
2.0 MODEL TRIP GENERATION FOR GPAC SUBAREA
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES........................................................................... 2-1
2.1 Trip Generation Rates and Adjustments
2.1.1 Coastal Trip Generation
2.1.2 Mixed Use Developments
2.1.3 High -Rise Apartments
2.2 Subarea Land Use Alternatives
• 2.2.1 Airport Area
2.2.2 Balboa Village
2.2.3 Banning Ranch
2.2.4 Cannery Village
2.2.5 Corona Del Mar
2.2.6 Lido Isle
2.2.7 Lido Village
2.2.8 Mariner's Mile
2.2.9 McFadden Square
2.2.10 Newport Center / Fashion Island
2.2.11 Old Newport Boulevard
2.2.12 West Newport Highway and Adjoining Residential
2.2.13 West Newport Industrial
2.3 Conclusions
3.0 CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
(POST-2025) WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK SCENARIO ...................... 3-1
3.1 Land Use and Socioeconomic Data (SED)
3.1.1 Existing Land Use Data
3.1.2 General Plan Buildout Land Use Data
3.1.3 Existing Socioeconomic Data (SED)
3.1.4 General Plan Buildout Socioeconomic Data (SED)
•
5
3.2 Trip Generation
3.3 Traffic Assignment
• 3.4 Daily Capacity Analysis
3.5 Peak Hour Forecasts
4.0 TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (POST-2025)
ALTERNATIVE WITH OPEN SPACE NETWORK SCENARIO ...................... 4-1
01
4.1 Land Use and Socioeconomic Data (SED)
4.1.1 True Minimum General Plan
Buildout Land Use Data
4.1.2 General Plan Buildout
Socioeconomic Data (SED)
4.2 Trip Generation
4.3 Traffic Assignment
4.4 Daily Capacity Analysis
4.5 Peak Hour Forecasts
5.0 SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (POST-2025)
ALTERNATIVE WITH OPEN SPACE NETWORK SCENARIO ...................... 5-1
5.1 Land Use and Socioeconomic Data (SED)
5.1.1 Subarea Minimum General Plan
Buildout Land Use Data
5.1.2 General Plan Buildout Socioeconomic Data (SED)
5.2 Trip Generation
5.3 Traffic Assignment
5.4 Daily Capacity Analysis
5.5 Peak Hour Forecasts
6.0 SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (POST-2025)
ALTERNATIVE WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK SCENARIO ................... 6-1
6.1 Land Use and Socioeconomic Data (SED)
6.1.1 Subarea Maximum General Plan
Buildout Land Use Data
6.1.2 Subarea Maximum General Plan
Buildout Socioeconomic Data (SED)
6.2 Trip Generation
6.3 Traffic Assignment
6.4 Daily Capacity Analysis
6.5 Peak Hour Forecasts
0
APPENDICES
•
MIXED USE TRIP GENERATION INFORMATION......................................................
A
B
EXISTINGLAND USE....................................................................................................
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE .......................... C
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE CHANGE BY TAZ............... D
EXISTINGTRIP GENERATION.................................................................................... E
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRIP GENERATION .......... F
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN
TRIP GENERATION CHANGE BY TAZ........................................................................ G
CONSTRAINED ROADWAY SYSTEM ASSUMPTIONS LETTER ............................... H
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED
NETWORK INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) WORKSHEETS.........
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED
NETWORK INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) WORKSHEETS
• WITH IMPROVEMENTS................................................................................................ J
TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE ........................................ K
TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE CHANGE
FROM CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BY TAZ......................................... L
TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRIP GENERATION ......................... M
TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRIP GENERATION
CHANGE FROM CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BY TAZ ........................ N
TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION
CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) WORKSHEETS.......................................................... 0
TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION
CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) WORKSHEETS WITH IMPROVEMENTS .................. P
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE .................................. Q
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE CHANGE
FROM CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BY TAZ......................................... R
•
0
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRIP GENERATION ................... S
• SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRIP GENERATION
CHANGE FROM CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BY TAZ ........................ T
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) WORKSHEETS ................................ U
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION
CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) WORKSHEETS WITH IMPROVEMENTS .................... V
SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE ................................ W
SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE
CHANGE FROM CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BY TAZ ........................ X
SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRIP GENERATION .................. Y
SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRIP GENERATION
CHANGE FROM CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN
BUILDOUTBY TAZ........................................................................................................ Z
SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) WORKSHEETS ............................ AA
• SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION
CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) WORKSHEETS WITH IMPROVEMENTS ................ BB
•
LIST OF EXHIBITS
• EXHIBIT PAGE
1-A INTERSECTION ANALYSIS LOCATIONS ............................................ 1-5
3-A NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
CONSTRAINED THROUGH LANES ..................................................... 3-13
3-13 CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN WITH
CONSTRAINED NETWORK AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT)......... 3-14
3-C GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED
NETWORK VOLUME/CAPACITY (V/C) RATIOS .................................. 3-24
3-D CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN
WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK DEFICIENCIES ............................. 3-33
4-A TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC(ADT)........................................................ 4-9
4-B TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
VOLUME/CAPACITY (V/C) RATIOS ..................................................... 4-18
• 4-C TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE WITH OPEN SPACE
NETWORK DEFICIENCIES................................................................... 4-27
5-A SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC(ADT)........................................................ 5-9
5-B SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
VOLUME/CAPACITY (V/C) RATIOS ..................................................... 5-18
5-C SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE WITH
OPEN SPACE NETWORK DEFICIENCIES .......................................... 5-27
6-A SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE AVERAGE
DAILYTRAFFIC (ADT).......................................................................... 6-9
6-B SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
VOLUME/CAPACITY (V/C) RATIOS ..................................................... 6-18
6-C SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN WITH
CONSTRAINED NETWORK DEFICIENCIES ....................................... 6-27
•
I$
LIST OF TABLES
• TABLE PAGE
ES-1 RECOMMENDED OVERALL GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
ALTERNATIVES SUMMARY........................................................... ES-2
ES-2 TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ..................................................... ES-3
ES-3 AM OVERALL CONSTRAINED
IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY .................................................. ES-5
ES-4 PM OVERALL CONSTRAINED
IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY .................................................. ES-8
ES-5 DEFICIENT INTERSECTION SUMMARY ...................................... ES-10
ES-6 OVERALL LOS SUMMARY............................................................. ES-11
1-1 ROADWAY SEGMENT CAPACITIES .................................................. 1-4
2-1 MODEL TRIP GENERATION RATES .................................................. 2-2
2-2 MODEL RESIDENTIAL TRIP GENERATION RATE REVIEW ................ 2-4
• 2-3 CONVERSION FACTORS BASED ON PM TOTAL ONLY ..................... 2-6
2-4 OVERALL MIXED USE CONVERSION FACTORS ................................. 2-8
2-5 ABSOLUTE WORST CASE CONVERSION FACTORS ......................... 2-9
2-6 APARTMENT TRIP GENERATION RATE COMPARISON ................... 2-10
2-7 AIRPORT AREA SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ............. 2-12
2-8 BALBOA VILLAGE SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY......... 2-13
2-9 BANNING RANCH SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY......... 2-15
2-10 CANNERY VILLAGE SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY...... 2-16
2-11 CORONA DEL MAR SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ...... 2-18
2-12 LIDO ISLE SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ...................... 2-19
2-13 LIDO VILLAGE SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ............... 2-21
•
6
2-14 MARINER'S MILE SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY.......... 2-23
• 2-15 MCFADDEN SQUARE SUBAREA
TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY........................................................... 2-24
2-16 NEWPORT CENTER / FASHION ISLAND
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ......................................... 2-26
2-17 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ......................................... 2-28
2-18 WEST NEWPORT HIGHWAY AND ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ......................................... 2-29
2-19 WEST NEWPORT INDUSTRIAL
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ......................................... 2-31
2-20 RECOMMENDED OVERALL GENERAL PLAN
BUILDOUT ALTERNATIVES SUMMARY .............................................. 2-32
2-21 OVERALL ALTERNATIVES
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ......................................... 2-33
IS 3-1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH EXISTING
LANDUSE SUMMARY.......................................................................... 3-2
3-2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN
BUILDOUT LAND USE COMPARISON ................................................ 3-4
3-3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN
BUILDOUT LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING ........................... 3-5
3-4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LAND USE BASED
EXISTING SOCIOECONOMIC DATA SUMMARY ................................ 3-6
3-5 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LAND USE BASED
SOCIOECONOMIC DATA GROWTH FROM EXISTING ...................... 3-7
3-6 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH EXISTING TRIP GENERATION ............ 3-9
3-7 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRIP GENERATION GROWTH ............. 3-10
3-8 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRIP
GENERATION COMPARISON.............................................................. 3-11
•
11
3-9 CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERALPLAN BUILDOUT
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON ......................................... 3-15
• 3-10 CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH
CONSTRAINED NETWORK AVERAGE
DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH................................................................... 3-19
3-11 CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU)
COMPARISON TO EXISTING............................................................... 3-27
3-12 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU)
COMPARISON TO BASELINE.............................................................. 3-29
3-13 CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK INTERSECTION
ANALYSISSUMMARY.......................................................................... 3-31
3-14 CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN INTERSECTION
CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY ......................................... 3-35
3-15 CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
• WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK
ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS............................................................ 3-37
4-1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL
PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE COMPARISON ...................................... 4-2
4-2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL
PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING ................. 4-3
4-3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LAND USE BASED
SOCIOECONOMIC DATA SUMMARY/ COMPARISON ...................... 4-5
4-4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRUE MINIMUM
TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY........................................................... 4-6
4-5 CITY OFNEWPORT BEACH TRUE MINIMUM
TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON..................................................... 4-7
4-6 TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON ......................................... 4-10
4-7 TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH ................................................. 4-14
U
15
•
•
r 1
U
4-8 TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY
UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO CURRENTLY
ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN................................................................. 4 21
4-9 TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY
UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO EXISTING .............................. 4-23
4-10 TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION
ANALYSISSUMMARY.......................................................................... 4-25
4-11 TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY
UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY............................................................ 4-29
4-12 TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE WITH OPEN SPACE NETWORK
ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS............................................................ 4-31
5-1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MINIMUM
GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE COMPARISON .................... 5-2
5-2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL
PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING ................. 5-3
5-3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MINIMUM
LAND USE BASED SOCIOECONOMIC DATA
SUMMARY/COMPARISON ................................................................. 5-5
5-4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MINIMUM
TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY .............................................. :............ 5-6
5-5 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MINIMUM
TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON..................................................... 5-7
5-6 SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON ......................................... 5-10
5-7 SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH ................................................. 5-14
5-8 SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTIONI
CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN .......................................... 5-21
5-9 SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION
CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO EXISTING ........... 5-23
2f
5-10 SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY .............................................. 5-25
• 5-11 SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY ............. 5-29
5-12 SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE
ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS............................................................ 5-31
6-1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MAXIMUM
GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE COMPARISON .................... 6-2
6-2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL
PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING ................. 6-3
6-3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MAXIMUM LAND
USE BASED SOCIOECONOMIC DATA
SUMMARY/COMPARISON................................................................... 6-5
6-4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MAXIMUM
TRIP GENERATION GROWTH FROM EXISTING ............................... 6-6
6-5 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MAXIMUM
TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON..................................................... 6-7
6-6 SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE AVERAGE
DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON........................................................... 6-10
6-7 SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH ................................................. 6-14
6-8 SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION
CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN .......................................... 6-21
6-9 SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION
CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO EXISTING ........... 6-23
6-10 SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN ALTERNATIVE
INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY .............................................. 6-25
6-11 SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY ............. 6-30
6-12 SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE
ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS............................................................ 6-32
•
91$
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY
0 PRELIMINARY GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
ES.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report summarizes the preliminary buildout alternatives traffic analysis completed
for the City of Newport Beach General Plan update. The initial analysis consists of
individual GPAC subarea trip generation estimates for all GPAC subarea buildout
alternatives. These have then been combined to form four city-wide preliminary land
use buildout alternatives that have been evaluated on the basis of a constrained
roadway network. The constrained roadway network eliminates improvements currently
in the General Plan Circulation Element which either have no identified source of
funding, or are questionable due to public controversy.
ES.1 GPAC Subarea Trip Generation Analysis
A total of 65 different trip generation calculations have been completed
' addressing all of the various GPAC land use alternatives for thirteen subareas
considered by the GPAC. A fairly substantial range (>10,000 trips per day) in trip
generation occurred for some subareas including the Airport Area, Banning
Ranch, Newport Center, and West Newport Industrial areas.
This resulted in the overall preliminary land use buildout alternatives summarized
on Table ES-1. The overall alternatives are intended to range from a minimum
trip generation to a maximum trip generation scenario including the currently
adopted General Plan buildout as a benchmark. A "subarea minimum"
alternative has also been developed that is based strictly on subarea options
developed by GPAC that exclude the currently adopted General Plan.
ES.2 Preliminary Alternatives
The preliminary General Plan buildout alternatives resulted in a range of overall
. city-wide daily trip generation as shown on Table ES-2. All of the alternatives
ES-1
2S
TABLE ES-1
RECOMMENDED OVERALL GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT ALTERNATIVES SUMMARY
SUBAREA
TRUE MINIMUM
SUBAREA OPTIONS
ONLY MINIMUM
SUBAREA OPTIONS
ONLY MAXIMUM
Airport Area
Adopted General Plan
Option
2
Option
3
Balboa Village
Option 3
Option
3
Option
4
Banning Ranch
Option 1
Option
1
Option
2
Cannery Village TAZ 1449
Adopted General Plan
Option
1
Option
1
Cannery Village TAZ 1454
Option 2
Option
2
Option
1
Corona Del Mar
Option 2
Option
2
Option
1
Lido Isle
Option 1
Option
1
Adopted General Plan'
Lido Village TAZ 1452
Adopted General Plan
Option
3
Option 1
Lido Village TAZ 1453
Adopted General Plan
Option
1
Option
2
Mariner's Mile
Adopted General Plan
Option
1 or 2
Option
1 or 2
McFadden Square TAZ 1450
Adopted General Plan
Option
1
Option
1
McFadden Square TAZ 1451
Adopted General Plan
Option
1
Option
1
Newport Center/ Fashion Island
Adopted General Plan
Option
2
Option
1
Old Newport Boulevard
Adopted General Plan
O
tion 2
Option
1
West Ne ort Highway and AdjoiningResidential
Option 16
O
tion 16
O
tion 5
West New ort Industrial
Option 3
Option
3
O
tion 2
' Only alternatives considered are option 1 (existing densities) and currently adopted General Plan
U:\UcJobs\_01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.x1s]ES-1
TABLE ES-2
•
TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
PRELIMINARY
DAILY TRIP GENERATION
EXISTING
ALTERNATIVE
A EXISTING %0(EXISTING
(ADOPTED)
%A ADOPTED
ALTERNATIVE'
879,759
19ff,61828.03%
0
0%
1. CURRENTLY ADOPTED
1 687,141
2. TRUE MINIMUM
687,141
842,368
1522.59%
37,391
-4%
3. SUBAREA MINIMUM
687:141
880,085
28.08%
326
0%
4. SUBAREA MAXIMUM
687,141
961,043
273,902 39.86%
81,284
9%
1 Alternative = General Plan buildout scenario.
U:\U cJ obs\-01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18. xl s] E S-2
i
•
ES-3
21)
produce a trip generation growth of at least 20% for the City of Newport Beach.
The highest increase (for the subarea maximum scenario) is almost 40%. •
Overall, the subarea minimum alternative trip generation is almost the same as
for the currently adopted General Plan scenario.
The true minimum (where "true" is added to better identify the difference from the
"subarea" minimum alternative) alternative decreases daily trip -end generation by
approximately 37,000 (a 4% reduction). The subarea maximum alternative
increases trip generation by approximately 81,000 daily trip -ends. In many
cases, any increase in trip generation includes strategies intended to improve the
balance of residential and non-residential uses (for instance, adding housing in
the Airport Area or encouraging mixed use development) in ways that can
actually reduce traffic congestion.
The latest version (December 2003) of the Newport Beach Traffic Model (NBTM)
has been used to evaluate each of the preliminary alternatives. Daily traffic
volumes for each alternative are discussed in the main body of the report. In •
general, daily traffic volumes change by 1,000 vehicles per day (VPD) or less on
most roadways. Volumes on certain key roadways (such as Coast Highway,
Newport Boulevard, etc.) changed by as much as 7,000 VPD.
Table ES-3 summarizes the resulting intersection AM peak hour levels of service
assuming constrained roadway improvements for all scenarios. The constrained
network eliminates improvements currently in the General Plan Circulation
Element which either have no identified source of funding, or are questionable
due to public controversy. This differs from the previously published baseline
data, which included all roadway improvements included in the General Plan
Circulation Element. Key constraints reflected in the analysis include:
• No extension of SR-55
• No widening of Coast Highway through Mariner's Mile Is
ES-4
911
•
•
L
TABLE ES-3 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
AM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
TRUE
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
ICU
I LOS
ICU
LOS
ICU
LOS
ICU
I LOS
1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw.
1.27
F
DNE
DNE
DNE
DNE
1.28
F
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.72
C
0.74
C
0.73
C
0.72
C
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
1.01
F
0.98
E
1.00
E
1.03
F
4. Newport Bl. & Hospital Rd.
0.79
C
0.79
C
0.84
D
0.93
E
5. Newport Bl. & Via Lido
0.54
A
0.52
A
0.55
A
0.60
A
6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St.
0.52
A
0.47
A
0.48
A
0.57
A
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
1.03
F
1.01
F
1.02
F
1.04
F
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
1.021
F
1.01
F
1.04
Fl
1.061
F
9. MacArthur BI, & Campus Dr.
0.76
C
0.75
C
0.77
C
0.811
D
10. MacArthur Bl. & Birch St.
0.71
C
0.70
B
0.75
C
0.79
C
11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr.
0.66
B
0.64
B
0.69
B
0.74
C
12. MacArthur BI. & Von Karman Av.
0.54
A
0.54
A
0.51
A
0.52
A
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.92
E
0.93
E
0.93
E
0.98
E
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.79
C
0.80
C
0.81
D
0.87
D
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. N
0.96
E
0.96
E
0.97
E
1.00
E
16. Birch St. & Bristol St. N
0.92
E
0.93
E
0.92
E
0.91
E
17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S
0.93
E
0.91
E
0.93
E
0.931
E
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S)
0.52
A
0.52
A
0.54
A
0.53
A
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.68
B
0.68
B
0.70
B
0.73
C
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
1.14
F
1.15
F
1.15
F
1.14
F
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.70
B
0.69
B
0.70
B
0.71
C
22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr.
0.61
B
0.61
B
0.62
B
0.63
B
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.78
C
0.78
C
0.79
C
0.82
D
24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr.
0.67
B
0.66
B
0.69
B
0.70
B
25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr.
0.39
A
0.40
A
0.40
Al0.411
A
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.64
B
0.641
BI
0.64
B
0.641
B
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.86
D
0.84
D
0.87
D
0.891
D
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.83
D
0.82
D
0.83
D
0.84
D
29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd.
0.96
E
0.97
E
0.96
E
0.96
E
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. N
0.701
B
0.71
C
0.71
C
0.69
B
31. Bayview PI. & Bristol St. S
0.60
A
0.59
A
0.61
B
0.61
B
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
0.96
E
0.97
E
0.97
E
0.94
E
33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W .
0.48
Al0.48
A
0.481
A
0.48
A
34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr.
0.64
B
0.65
Bi
0.66
B
0.65
B
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.51
A
0.50
A
0.51
A
0.521
A
36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd.
0.78
C
0.76
C
0.79
C
0.811
D
37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.61
B
0.60
A
0.60
A
0.64
B
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.55
A
0.54
A
0.58
A
0.69
B
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.85
D
0.85
D
0.87
D
0.88
D
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.36
A
0.34
A
0.38
A
0.39
A
41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 1
0.391
Al0.391
A
0.39
A
0.43
A
42. New ort Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.50
Al0.50
A
0.50
A
0.55
A
44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr.
0.37
A
0.381
Al0.39
A
0.43
A
45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 1
0.771
C 1
0.781
cl
0.801
C 1
0.811
D
ES-5
9A
TABLE ES-3 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
AM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
TRUE
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
I MAXIMUM
ICU
LOS
ICU
LOS
ICU
I LOS
I ICU
I LOS
46. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.47
A
0.47
A
0.47
A
0.47
A
47. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.38
A
0.39
A
0.38
A
0.38
48. MacArthur Bl. & Bison Av.
0.78
C
0.77
C
0.79
C
0.81
D
49. MacArthur Bl. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.77
C
0.77
C
0.78
C
0.79
C
50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.77
C
0.77
C
0.81
D
0.83
D
51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr.
0.63
B
0.62
B
0.63
B
0.71
C
52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw.
0.74
C
0.74
C
0.73
C
0.74
C
53. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.69
B
0.69
B
0.69
B
0.72
C
54. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.45
A
0.45
A
0.46
A
0.46
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.30
A
0.30
A
0.30
A
0.31
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Mi uel Dr.
0.52
A
0.51
A
0:55
A
0.54
A
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
1.08
F
1.06
F
1.06
F
1.08
F
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.38
A
0.38
A
0.38
A
0.39
A
59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.90
D
0.88
D
0.89
D
0.901
D
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.60
A
0.59
A
0.60
A
0.62
B
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw.
B
0.68
B
0.67
B
0.68
B
62. New ort Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
nO.67
A
0.54
A
0.53
A
0.5564.
New ort Coast Dr.& San Joa uin Hills Rd.
B
0.63
B
0.63
B
0.66
B
65. New ort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw.
A
0.57
A
0.56
A
0.57
U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xls]ES-3
ES-6
•
•
30
• No extension of 19th Street across the Santa Ana River
• . No widening of Jamboree Road north of Ford Road
In general, most intersections experience a maximum change of 1 level of
service (LOS), for instance from LOS "C" to LOS "D". A few intersections
(Newport Boulevard at Hospital Road, for example) experience a greater range
(LOS "C" to LOS "E" for the example cited).
Table ES-4 provides a similar summary for the PM peak hour.
Table ES-5
highlights those intersections
projected to
experience deficient
operations.
From Table ES-5, individual
intersection
performance across
scenarios can be evaluated for the key intersections where deficient operations
are anticipated for 1 or more of the preliminary alternatives. For instance, the
intersections where the true minimum alternative results in improved levels of
service compared to the adopted General Plan are Superior Avenue (NS) at
• Coast Highway (EW) and Marguerite Avenue (NS) at Coast Highway (EW).
•
Table ES-6 provides an overview of the number and percentage of intersections
experiencing each level of service by time of day (AM/PM) and overall (AM+PM).
The subarea maximum alternative experiences the most overall deficiencies (34)
and the true minimum alternative experiences fewer deficiencies (24) than the
remaining two alternatives, which experience an equal number of deficiencies
(26).
Improvements have been developed that provide acceptable operations at all
potentially deficient intersections (outlined within the body of the report). The
feasibility of the necessary improvements is questionable at some locations
(particularly where additional through lanes are necessary).
ES-7
3t
TABLE ES-4 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
PM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
CURRERTEY-F
ADOPTED
TRUE
I MINIMUM
I SUBAREA
I MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
ICU
I LOS
I ICU
I LOS
I ICU
I LOS
I ICU
I LOS
1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw.
1.29
F
ONE
DNE
DNE
DNE
1.28
F
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.82
D
0.86
D
0.86
D
0.83
D
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
0.99
E
0.94
E
0.95
E
1.04
F
4. Newport Bl. & Hospital Rd.
0.97
E
0.96
E
1.01
F
1.18
F
5. Newport Bl. & Via Lido
0.46
A
0.41
A
0.45
A
0.52
6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St.
0.71
C
0.58
A
0.63
B
0.81
D
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
1.12
F
1.10
F
1.151
F
1.191
F
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
0.851
D
0.83
D
0:87
D
0.92
E
9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr.
1.251
F
1.25
F
1.29
F
1.29
F
10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St.
0.80
C
0.80
C
0.86
D
0.86
D
11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr.
0.93
E
0.94
E
0.98
E
1.02
F
12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Karman Av.
0.64
B
0.64
B
0.64
B
0.65
B
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
1.24
F
1.23
F
1.25
F
1.25
F
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.80
C
0.80
C
0.80
C
0.81
D
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. N
1.08
F
1.08
Fl
1.08
Fl
1.081
F
16. Birch St. & Bristol St. N
0.72
C
0.72
C
0.73
C
0.72
C
17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. S
0.77
C
0.76
C
0.78
C
0.77
C
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S
0.53
A
0.53
A
0.54
A
0.54
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.90
D
0.90
D
0.91
E
0.94
E
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
1.19
F
1.16
F
1.17
F
1.18
F
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.78
C
0.76
C
0.78
C
0.77
C
22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr.
0.63
B
0.63
B
0.651
B
0.66
B
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.70
B
0.71
Cl0.72
C
0.721
C
24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr.
0.821
D
0.80
C
0.80
C
0.83
D
25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr.
0.56
A
0.57
A
0.58
A
0.59
A
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.64
B
0.65
B
0.65
B
0.64
B
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.90
D
0.88
D
0.91
E
0.94
E
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.94
E
0.93
E
0.95
E
0.98
E
29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd.
0.99
E
0.99
E
1.00
E
1.08
F
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. N
0.69
B
0.68
B
0.691
B
0.72
C
31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. S
0.63
B
0.63
B
0.63
B
0.64
B
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
0.851
D
0.84
D
0.86
D
0.87
D
33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayvlew W .
0.701
B
0.70
B
0.71
C
0.71
C
34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr.
0.691
B
0.68
B
0.70
B
0.71
C
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.58
A
0.58
A
0.59
A
0.62
B
36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbiuff Dr./Ford Rd.
0.72
C
0.73
C
0.73
C
0.76
C
37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.65
B
0.65
B
0.68
B
0.71
C
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.71
C
0.71
Cl0.781
C
0.87
D
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw,
0.89
D
0.87
D
0.86
D
0.91
E
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.34
A
0.34
A
0.36
A
0.36
A
41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.71
C
0.70
B
0.68
B
0.73
C
42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.63
B
0.62
B
0.62
B
0.66
B
44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 1
0.79
C
0.78
C
0.79
C
0.84
D
45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.80
C
0.79
C
0.83
D
0.83
D
U
L J
Ll
ES-8
g2
ri
U
TABLE ES-4 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
PM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
TRUE
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
ICU
LOS
ICU
LOS
ICU
I LOS
ICU
LOS
46. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.56
A
0.56
A
0.561
A
0.56
A
47. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.29
A
0.29
A
0.29
A
0.29
A
48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av.
0.80
C
0.80
C
0.81
D
0.81
D
49. MacArhtur Bi. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr.
1.06
F
1.06
F
1.06
F
1.09
F
50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
1.04
F
1.02
F
1.06
F
1.08
F
51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr.
0.77
C
0.76
C
0.76
C
0.80
C
52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw.
0.83
D
0.80
C
0.79
C
0.81
D
53. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.53
A
0.52
A
0.53
A
0.54
A
54. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.59
A
0.57
A
0.59
Al0.60
A
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.38
A
0.38
A
0.38
Al0.39
A
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.68
B
0.68
B
0.68
B
0.71
C
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
0.79
C
0.75
C
0.75
C
0.77
C
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.51
A
0.49
A
0.50
A
0.53
A
59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.91
E
0.90
D
0.92
E
0.91
E
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.46
A
0.45
A
0.46
A
0.50
A
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw.
0.76
C
0.75
C
0.75
C
0.74
C
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
0.40
A
0.39
A
0.40
A
0.41
A
64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.47
A
0.46
A
0.48
Aast
0.51
A
65. Newport Coast Dr. & CoHw.
0.60
A
0.60
A
0.60
A
0.61
B
• U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\(01232-18.xls]ES-4
•
ES-9
193
TABLE ES-5
DEFICIENT INTERSECTION SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
TRUE
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
AM
I PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
I PM
1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw.
F
F
DNE
DNE
DNE
ONE
F
F
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
F
E
E
E
E
E
F
F
4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd.
C
E
C
E
D
F
E
F
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
F
D
F
D
F
D
F
E
9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr.
C
F
C
F
C
F
D
F
11. Von Kerman Av. & Cam us Dr.
B
E
B
E
B
E
C
F
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
El
F
E
F1
E
F
E
F
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. N
E
F
E
F
E
F
E
F
16. Birch St. & Bristol St. N
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
B
D
B
D
B
E
C
E
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
D
D
D
D
D
E
D
E
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
D
E
D
E
D
E
D
E
29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd.
El
E
E
El
E
E
E
F
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
E
D
E
D
E
D
E
D
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
E
49. MacArthur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr.
C
F
C
F
C
F
C
F
50. MacArthur Bl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
C
F
C
F
D
F
D
F
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
F
ClF
C
F
ClF
C
59.Mar uerite AV. & Coast Hw.
D
El
D
D
DI
El
2L
E
U:\UcJobs\-01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xls]ES-5
•
L
0
ES-10
.0
t�]
TABLE ES-6
OVERALL LOS SUMMARY
NUMBER OF LOCATIONS
AM
PM
TOTAL
LOS
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
TRUE
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
TRUE
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
TRUE
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
A
22
23
22
19
15
16
15
13
37
39
37
32
B
13
12
12
11
11
11
11
7
24
23
23
18
C
12
12
11
9
15
16
14
14
27
28
25
23
D
4
4
6
11
8
7
7
11
12
11
13
22
oa
Acceptable
51
51
51
50
49
50
47
45
100
101
98
95
E
6
7
7
7
6
5
7
6
12
12
14
13
F
61
4
4
6
8
7
8
12
14
11
12
18
oa
Deficient
12
11
11
13
14
12
15
18
26
23
26
31
TOTAL
63
62
62
63
631
621
621
1261
1241
1241
126
PERCENT OF LOCATIONS
AM
PM
TOTAL
LOS
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
TRUE
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
TRUE
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
TRUE
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
A
34.92%
37.10%
35.48%
30.16%
23.81%
25.81%
24.19%
20.63%
29.37%
31.45%
29.84%
25.40%
B
20.63%
19.35%
19.35%
17.46%
17.46%
17.74%
17.74%
11.11%
19.05%
18.55%
18.55%
14.29%
C
19.05%
19.35%
17.74%
14.29%
23.81%
25.81%
22.58%
22.22%
21.43%
22.58%
20.16%
18.25%
D
6.35%
6.45%
9.68%
17.46%
12.70%
11.29%
11.29%
17.46%
9.52%
8.87%
10.48%
17.46%
oa
Acceptable
80.95%
82.26%
82.26%
79.37%
77.78%
80.65%
75.81%
71.43%
79.37%
81.45%
79.03%
75.40%
E
9.52%
11.29%
11.29%
11.11%
9.52%
8.06%
11.29%
9.52%
9.52%
9.68%
11.29%
10.32%
F
9.52%
6.45%
6.45%
9.52%
12.70%
11.29%
12.90%
19.05%
11.11%
8.87%
9.68%
14.29%
oa
Deficient
19.05%
17.74%
17.74%
20.63%
22.22%
19.35%
24.19%
28.57%
20.63%
18.55%
20.97%
24.60%
TOTAL
1 100.00%1
100.00%
100.00%
100.00%
100.00%1
100.00%1
100.007.
U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excelk[01232-18.xis]ES-6
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
•
0
ES-12
qL
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY
• This report has been prepared in support of the update of the City of Newport Beach
General Plan and Circulation Element. This report documents the preliminary General
Plan buildout alternatives analysis. This report is intended to supplement the Cityof
Newport Beach General Plan Traffic Study Baseline Data and Analysis (Urban
Crossroads, December 5, 2003), and may refer to data and procedures contained therein.
This chapter of the report introduces the reader to the preliminary General Plan buildout
alternatives analysis portion of the City of Newport Beach General Plan Circulation
Element update project and presents the goals and objectives of the work effort. The
General Plan forecasts have been prepared using the Newport Beach Traffic Model,
version 3.1 (NBTM 3.1). For detailed discussion of the model, see Newport Beach Traffic
Model (NBTM) 3.1 Technical Documentation Report (Urban Crossroads, Inc., December,
2003).
• The NBTM 3.1 travel demand forecasting tool has been developed for the City of Newport
Beach to identify traffic and circulation issues in and around the City. The NBTM 3.1 tool
has been developed in accordance with the requirements and recommendations of the
Orange County Subarea Modeling Guidelines Manual (August, 1998) and has been found
by the Orange County Transportation Authority to be consistent with these guidelines.
The NBTM 3.1 is intended to be used for roadway planning and traffic impact analyses,
such as:
• General Plan/Land Use analysis required by the City of Newport Beach.
• Amendments to the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH).
• Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP) analysis.
The NBTM 3.1 is a vehicle trip based modeling tool, and it is intended for evaluating
general roadway system supply and demand problems and issues. The NBTM 3.1 has
been specifically calibrated to represent "shoulder season" (spring/fall) conditions in the
• City of Newport Beach.
1-1
1.1 Goals and Obiectives
The goals of the General Plan Update preliminary alternatives analysis are to •
analyze future General Plan buildout alternative daily and peak hour volume
forecasts and provide comparisons of the four buildout alternatives selected for
analysis.
1.2 Methodology Overview
This section provides a broad overview of the analysis methodology.
1.2.1 Data and Analysis Methodolooy
The City of Newport Beach has a circulation system consisting of arterial
roadways and local streets. State Route (SR-) 55, SR-73 and Highway 1
(Coast Highway) provide regional access to the City. Established transit
service also connects the City to nearby communities. A bicycle and •
pedestrain system is also in place.
For vehicular transportation, a hierarchal roadway network is established
with designated roadway types and design standards. The roadway type is
linked to anticipated traffic levels. As growth within the City occurs, capacity
analysis should be performed and improvements made to the roadway
system. Because local circulation is linked with the regional system, the
Circulation Element also focuses on participation in regional programs to
alleviate traffic congestion and construct capacity improvements.
Plans prepared by Caltrans, the County and other regional agencies guide
developmentlimprovement of the regional transportation system. Strategies
to handle anticipated traffic levels from future regional development are
currently being developed as discussed hereafter.
•
1-2
3`�
Existing conditions data has been collected by field verification. Analysts
have identified existing roadway network characteristics, and vehicles have
• been counted at locations throughout the study area. Existing conditions
land use data has been provided by City of Newport Beach staff. The
existing land use data is combined with the existing roadway system in the
Newport Beach Traffic Model (NBTM) development validation scenario.
Minor adjustments have been made to the existing input data to retain
consistency with buildout conditions.
Future land use and roadway data has been provided by City of Newport
Beach staff and the City's planning consultant, EIP Associates. Raw
forecasts from the General Plan Buildout scenario of the NBTM have been
refined using existing count data and validation model results.
Daily roadway segment analysis (including freeways) requires calculating
the daily traffic volume divided by the roadway segment capacity. The City
• of Newport
Beach
daily
roadway capacities used in
this analysis
are
presented in
Table
1-1.
For analysis purposes, the
upper end of
the
n
LJ
approximate daily capacity range has been used.
The daily capacity of a roadway correlates to a number of widely varying
factors, including traffic peaking characteristics, traffic turning volumes, and
the volume of traffic on crossing streets. The daily capacities are therefore
most appropriately used for long range General Plan analysis, or as a
screening tool to determine the need for more detailed peak hour analysis.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis has been performed at sixty-
three (63) study area intersections (see Exhibit 1-A). ICU values are used to
determine levels of service at study area intersection locations. To calculate
the ICU value for an intersection, the volume of traffic using the intersection
is compared with the capacity of the intersection. The ICU is usually
1-3
3`�
TABLE 1-1
ROADWAY SEGMENT CAPACITIES'
CLASSIFICATION
RIGHT-OF-WAY
CURB TO CURB
WIDTH
OF LANES
MEDIANWIDTH
APPROXIMATE
DAILY CAPACITY
8 Lane Divided
158
Variable
8
14-18
60-68,000
MaorAu mented
Variable
Variable
6-8
Variable
52-58,000
Major
128-134
106-114
6
14-18
45-51,000
PrimaryAugmented
Variable
Variable
4-6
Variable
35-40,000
Prima
104-108
84
4
16-20
30-34,000
Seconds
84 •
64
4
0
20-23,000
Commuter
60-70
40.50
2
0
7-10,000
Couplets:
Secondary couplet - 2 lanes for each leg
Primary couplet- 3 lanes for each leg
Major couplet - 4 lanes for each leg
NOTE: Daily capacity of a roadway correlates to a number of widely varying factors, Including traffic peaking characteristics,
traffic turning volumes, and the volume of traf0c on crossing streets. The daily capacities are therefore most appropriately used
for long range General Plan analysis, or as a screening tool to determine the need for more detailed peak hour analysis.
U:1UcJobsl 012001012321E=11401232-1 O.xIsIT1-1
•
•
01
1-4
1.417
Cl
Ln
EXHIBIT 1-A
INTERSECTION ANALYSIS LOCATIONS
11
LEGEND:
• = INTERSECTION COUNT LOCATION
PACIFIC 65 = INTERSECTION ID
OCEAN
t
expressed as a decimal percent (e.g., 0.86). The decimal percent
represents that portion of the hour required to provide sufficient capacity to •
accommodate all intersection traffic if all approaches operate at capacity.
•
t
•
lid
uz
2.0 MODEL TRIP GENERATION FOR GPAC SUBAREA LAND USE
• ALTERNATIVES
This chapter documents trip generation for the subarea land use buildout alternatives
identified by the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC). Full analysis with the traffic
model has been run on four comprehensive alternatives derived from the subarea data
and overall City-wide data for the remainder of the City. Thirteen subarea land use
tables were provided to Urban Crossroads, Inc. staff. Each table contains land use data
quantities and comparisons for each option being considered for the subarea, as well as
for the currently adopted General Plan. Several of the subareas are further segmented
into individual Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) or even blocks. In some cases, the TAZ is
larger than the study area. A total of 67 discrete alternatives have been evaluated.
Urban Crossroads, Inc. staff has performed calculations on each subarea (or TAZ or
block) to determine the approximate trip generation from the Newport Beach Traffic
Model (NBTM). A separate sketch planning tool has been developed specifically for this
task. Daily and peak hour trips have been computed. The resulting trip generation is
• used to determine the minimum and maximum intensity alternative from a traffic
standpoint. The identification of minimum and maximum land use alternatives is based
on the PM peak hour, as the PM peak hour is the timeframe in which the highest
number of operational deficiencies has been identified under the currently adopted
General Plan.
2.1 Trip Generation Rates and Adjustments
This section provides information on trip generation issues (including
adjustments to some standard/typical rates). Coastal trip generation for
residential land use is compared with general residential trip generation by type.
Mixed use trip rate refinements are discussed. High-rise apartments trip
generation rates are evaluated in comparison to typical apartments. Overall
model trip generation rates are included as Table 2-1. These are typical trip rate
calculations which change slightly based on changes in input variables such as
• median income. These rates have been derived from the NBTM and underlying
2-1
45
TABLE 2-1
MODEL TRIP GENERATION RATES
NBTM
LAND
USE
CODE
NBTM LAND USE DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY
UNITS
TRIP RATE
AM
PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
IN
OUT
TOTAL
IN
I OUT
TOTAL
DAILY
1
Res -Low SFD -Coastal
1
DU
0.19
0.50
0.69
0.41
0.27
0.69
7.50
1
Res -Low SFD
1
DU
0.21
0.64
0.84
0.49
0.30
0.79
8.63
2
Res -Medium (SFA)-Coastal
1
DU
0.12
0.41
0.53
0.32
0.19
0.52
5.64
2
Res -Medium (SFA)
1
DU
0.13
0.55
0.68
0.40
0.21
0.61
6.66
3
Apartment -Coastal
1
DU
0.11
0.38
0.49
0.31
0.19
0.49
5.37
3
Apartment
1
DU
0.12
0.48
0.60
0.36
0.20
0.56
6.12
4
Elderly Residential
1
DU
0.11
0.29
0.40
0.27
0.18
0.45
4.90
5
Mobile Home -Coastal
1
DU
1 0.10
1 0.34'1
0.44
0.29
1 0.18
0.46
5.06
5
Mobile Home
1
DU
0.11
0.45
0.56
0.34
0.20
0.54
5.92
6
Motel
1
ROOM
0.40
0.13
0.53
0.23
0.34
0.57
6.08
7
Hotel
1
ROOM
0.51
0.17
0.68
0.28
0.43
0.71
7.58
9
Regional Commercial
1
TSF
1.14
0.49
1.64
0.93
1.25
2.18
1 23.48
10
General Commercial
1
TSF
1.78
0.80'
2.59
1.53
2.02
3.55
38.24
11
Comm./Recreation
1
ACRE
2.12
0.80
2.92
1.42
2.04
3.46
37.07
13
Restaurant
1
TSF
2.39
1.07
3A6
2.05
2.70
4.75
51.18
15
Fast Food Restaurant
1
TSF 1
2.94
1 1.32
4.25
2.51
3.32
5.83
62.78
16
Auto Dealer/Sales
1
TSF
1.74
0.74
2.48
1.38
1.86
3.24
34.84
17
Yacht Club
1
TSF
1.30
0.49
1.791
0.87
1 1.25
2.12
22.71
18
Health Club
1
TSF
1.30
OA9
1.79
0.87
1.25
2.12
22.71
19
Tennis Club
1
CRT
1.35
0.54
1.89
0.98
1.37
2.35
25.26
20
Marina
1
SLIP
0.12
0.05
0.17
0.09
0.13
0.22
2.39
21
Theater
1
SEAT
0.02
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.34
22
Newport Dunes
1
ACRE
0.96
0.42
1.39
0.80
1.06
1.86
20.02
23
General Office
1
TSF 1
0.84
0.26
1.10
0.39
0.65
1.04
11.08
24
Medical/Government Office
1
TSF 1
1.14
0.39
1.53
0.64
0.98
1.63
17.38
25
R & D
1
TSF
0.57
0.17
0.74
0.25
0.42
0.67
7.10
26
Industrial
1
TSF
0.48
0.13
0.62
0.18
0.33
0.52
5A8
27
Mini-Stora etWarehouse
1
TSF
0.40
0.11
0.51
0.16
0.28
0.43 1
4.61
28
Pre-School/Day Care
1
TSF
2.08
0.65
2.73
1.04
1.68
2.721
29.05
29
Elementary/Private School
1
STU
0.18
0.02
0.20
0.04
0.07
0.11 1
1.30
30
Junior/High School
1
STU
0.18
0.02
0.20
0.04
0.07
0.11
1.30
31
Cultural/Learning Center
1
TSF
1.13
0.35
1.48
0.54
0.89
1.43
15.22
32
Library
1
TSF
1.13 1
0.35
1.48
0.54
0.89
1 A3
15.22
33
Post Office
1
TSF
1.54
0.49
2.03
0.78
1.25
2.03
21.63
34
Hospital
1
BEDS
1.10
0.32
1.42
0.47
0.80
1.27
13.57
35
Nursin /Conv. Home
1
BEDS
0.12
0.08
0.20
0.08
0.10
0.18
2.00
36
Church
1
TSF
0.48
0.14
0.62
0.21
0.36
0.57
6.09
37
Youth Ctr/Service
1
TSF
2.08
0.65
2.73
1.04
1.68 1
2.72 1
29.0511
38
Park
1
ACRE
0.18
0.06
0.23
0.09
0.14
0.23
2.49
39
Regional Park
1
ACRE
0.18
0.06
0.23
0.09
0.14
0.23 1
2.49
40
Golf Course
1
ACRE
0.27
0.10
0.37
0.17
0.26
0.42
4.55
41
Resort Golf Course
1
ACRE
0.27
0.10 1
0.37
LL17
0.25
0.42
4.55
U:\UcJobsl
01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.x1s]T2-1
•
•
2-2
40
subregional model data (i.e. these rates closely represent actual model trip
generation).
2.1.1 Coastal Trip Generation
As the Newport Beach Traffic Model (NBTM) was developed, Urban
Crossroads, Inc. staff determined (during model validation) that the traffic
patterns/trip generation rates in the coastal areas were different from
elsewhere in the City of Newport Beach. The existing traffic model
volumes were higher in the coastal areas than the count data. Occupancy
factors and trip rates were developed for residential uses in the coastal
areas during the validation process. The shoulder season (spring/fall)
occupancy rate for typical City of Newport Beach residential uses is 95%.
For Coastal areas, the occupancy rate is 90%. Trip generation rates from
the model have been provided as part of Table 2-2. The trip rates in Table
2-2 include the occupancy factor. For total AM, total PM, and Daily trip
rates, the trip generation range in Coastal areas is between 79% and 88%
• of typical residential trip rates. The PM peak hour is the timeframe in
which the highest number of operational deficiencies has been identified,
and in the PM peak hour, the coastal trip rates are between 85% and 87%
of typical trip rates.
2.1.2 Mixed Use Developments
Mixed use trip generation information and research compiled by Urban
Crossroads, Inc. has been included as Appendix "A". Information has
been gathered from sampling done by ITE and documented in Trip
Generation, 5�h Edition (ITE, 1991). More recent versions of ITE's Trip
Generation do not include information on mixed use sites. There are two
examples of mixed use developments containing residential uses in the
5th Edition. Internal' capture (the proportion of traffic that would typically
be generated, then distributed to the surrounding system that is instead
• served on -site as a result of the land use mix) has been identified.
2-3
TABLE 2-2
MODEL RESIDENTIAL TRIP GENERATION RATE REVIEW 0
NBTM
LAND
USE
CODE
NBTM LAND USE DESCRIPTION
UNITS
TRIP RATE
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
IN
OUT
TOTAL
IN
OUT
TOTAL
DAILY
1
Res -Low SFD ,Coastal.
DU
0.19
0.50
0.69
0.41
0.27,
0.69
7.50
1
Res -Low SFD
DU
0.21
0.64
0.84
0.49
0.30
0.79
8.63
Res -Low (SFD) Ratio
0.92
0.78
0.81
0.84
0.91
0.87
0.87
2
Res -Medium (SFA)-Coastal
DU
0.12
0.41
0.53
0.32
0.19
0.52
5.64
2
Res -Medium SFA
DU
0.13
0.55
0.68
0.40
0.21
0.61
6.66
Res -Medium (SFA) Ratio
0.90
0.75
0.78
0.82
0.90
0.85
0.85
3
Apartment -Coastal
DU
0.11
0.38
0.49
0.31
0.19
0.49
5.37
3
Apartment
DU
0.12
0.48
0.60
0.36
0.20
0.56
6.12
Apartment Ratio
0.92
0.78
0.81
0.85
0.92
0.87
0.88
4
Elderly Residential
DU
1
0.11
0.29
0.40
0.27
0.18
0.45
4.90
5
Mobile Home -Coastal
DU
0.10
'0.34
0.44
0.29
0.18
0.46
6.06
5
Mobile Home
DU
0.11
0.45
0.56
0.34
0.20
0.54
5.92
Mobile Home Ratio
0.90
0.76
0.7?F
0.83
0.89
0.85
0.85
U:\UcJobs\_01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xls]T2-2
•
•
2-4
5.2
The first example contains 606 dwelling units and 64,000 square feet of
commercial/office. The internal capture rates are 27% for the PM peak
hour and 17% for the daily.
The second example is for a larger site, with 2,300 dwelling units and over
160 thousand square feet of total commercial, office, restaurant, and
medical center uses. This site also includes schools, a church, and a day-
care center. The internal capture for this site is substantially higher (45%
or more for all time periods).
An additional data resource was the Santa Monica Civic Center study.
The Santa Monica Civic Center study included a 50% reduction for the
retail component, but no reduction was done on other uses. The net result
in the analysis was an overall reduction of approximately 10%
A final data resource consulted was the San Diego Association of
Governments trip generation handbook. The San Diego Association of
. Governments (SANDAG) trip generation handbook suggests up to a 10%
reduction.
Based on the examples cited, an adjustment factor of 10% of traffic for
mixed uses will provide a conservative representation of trip generation.
The factor is applied in cases where the land use has been defined as
mixed use development. Where both the mixed use and coastal factors
are applicable, only one is applied to avoid overstating trip generation
benefits. Later sections of this report will discuss individual sub -area land
use representation.
To assist with land use planning refinements in mixed use areas,
conversion factors have been developed from the rates presented in Table
2-1. Table 2-3 contains the results of this analysis for the PM peak period.
As shown in Table 2-3, for the PM peak hour, a reduction of one single-
family detached residence allows 220 square feet of commercial without
2-5
14'r
TABLE 2.3
CONVERSION FACTORS BASED ON PM TOTAL ONLY 0
STARTING LAND USE
I UNITS
ENDING LAND USE
I UNITSI
CONVERSION FACTOR
Res -Low SFD
DU
General Commercial
TSF
0,22
Res -Medium (SFA)
DU
General Commercial
TSF
0.17
Apartment
DU
General Commercial
TSF
0.16
General Commercial
TSF
Res -Low SFD
DU
4A9
General Commercial
TSF
Res -Medium (SFA)
DU
5.82
General
Commercial
TSF
Apartment
DU
6.32
' TSF = thousand square feet
DU = Dwelling Units
U:1UcJobs\ 012001012321Excell[01232-18.xls]T2-3
•
•
KIM.
Q
an increase in trip generation. A transfer the other direction (from
• commercial to single-family detached residential) could be performed to
increase dwelling units by 4.49 for every thousand square feet of
commercial lost. Similar conversion factors are included for single-family
attached and apartment residential uses.
The factors presented in Table 2-3 are related to the PM peak period
(consistent with other trip generation calculations for Newport Beach
modeling purposes). Conversion factors could potentially be related to
daily traffic or AM peak hour, or a subset of AM or PM peak hour total.
These factors are included in Table 2-4. The worst case conversion for
each type of residential use is included in Table 2-5. To provide the most
conservative conversion, AM peak hour inbound rates should govern for
converting residential uses to commercial (approximately 70 to 120 square
feet per dwelling unit). To convert from commercial to residential using
• the worst case conversion factor, the AM outbound should be used (and
1.25 to 1.67 units would result from a reduction of 1 thousand square feet
of commercial).
2.1.3 High -Rise Apartments
High-rise apartments are a special apartment use. As defined by ITE Trip
Generation Manual, 7th edition (2003), high-rise apartments have more
than 10 floors and typically include one or two elevators. Trip Generation
rates for high-rise
apartments
are
compared
to general
apartment trip
generation rates in
Table 2-6.
As
shown in
Table 2-3,
the ratio of trip
generation for high-rise apartments to apartments ranges from 0.56 to
0.63 trips, depending on the time period. Because the ITE rates show a
trip reduction of 37 to 43% the factor of 20% used for high-rise apartments
• in this General Plan analysis is conservative.
2-7
TABLE 2-4
OVERALL MIXED USE CONVERSION FACTORS
STARTING LAND USE
UNITSL
ENDING LAND USE
I UNITS
PEAK HOUR
DAILY
AM
PM
I IN
I OUT
TOTAL
IN
I OUT
I TOTAL
Res -Low SFD
DU
General Commercial
TSF
0.12
0.80
0.33
0.32
0.15
0.22
0.23
Res -Medium (SFA)
DU
General Commercial
TSF
0.07
0.68
0.26
0.26
0.11
0.17
0.17
Apartment
DU
General Commercial
TSF
0.07
0.60
0.23
0.24
0.10
0.16
0.16
General Commercial
TSF
Res -Low SFD
DU
8.68
1.25
3.06
3.12
6.71
4.49
4.43
General Commercial
TSF
Res -Medium (SFA)
DU
13.94
1.46
3.83
3.87
9.42
5.82
5.74
General Commercial
TSF
Apartment
DU
14.66
1.67
4.29
4.25
10.05
6.32
6.24
2 TSF = thousand square feet
DU = Dwelling Units
•
U:\UcJobs\_01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xls]T2-4 •
•
W
N
L�
TABLE 2-5
ABSOLUTE WORST CASE CONVERSION FACTORS
STARTING LAND USE
I UNITS'
ENDING LAND USE
I UNITSI
TIME PERIOD/
DIRECTION
CONVERS109
FACTOR
Res -Low SFD
DU
General Commercial
TSF
AM IN
0.12
Res -Medium (SFA)
DU
General Commercial
TSF
AM IN
0.07
Apartment
DU
General Commercial
TSF
AM IN
0.07
General Commercial
TSF
Res -Low SFD
DU
AM OUT
1.25
General Commercial
TSF
Res -Medium (SFA)
DU
AM OUT
1.46
General Commercial
TSF
Apartment
DU
AM OUT
1.67
2 TSF = thousand square feet
DU = Dwelling Units
• U:\UcJobs\_01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xls]T2-5
0
TABLE 2.6
APARTMENT TRIP GENERATION RATE COMPARISON' •
LAND USE
I ITE CODEJ
UNIT8211
PEAK HOUR
DAILY
AM
I PM
IN
I OUT
I TOTAL
I IN
I OUT
I TOTAL
Apartment
220
DU
0.10
0.41
0.51
0.40
0.22
0.62
6.72
High -Rise A artment
222
DU
0.08
0.23
1 0.30
0.21
10.141
0.35
4.20
Ratio (High -Rise Apt.
Apartment)
1 0.59
0.56
0.63 ji
Source: ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition, 2003.
2 DU = Dwelling Units
U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xls)T2-6
E
•
2-10
m
2.2 Subarea Land Use Alternatives
• 2.2.1 Airport Area
For the Airport Area, three alternative scenarios (in addition to the
currently adopted General Plan) have been presented. All residential use
in the Airport Area is either high-rise apartments, or mixed use residential.
Option 2 contains 295 mixed use residences and 2,104 high-rise
apartments. Option 3 includes 589 mixed use residences and 6,633 high-
rise apartments. There is no residential component for the currently
adopted General Plan or for Option 1. Table 2-7 summarizes the results
of the analysis. PM peak hour trip generation ranges from 10,168 peak
hour trips to 13,556 peak hour trips. The currently adopted General Plan
generates the lowest number of trips, while option 3 generates the most
PM peak hour trips. Daily trip generation follows the same pattern as for
the PM peak hour (currently adopted General Plan has the minimum and
• option 3 has the maximum). The AM peak hour minimum and maximum
follow the same pattern as PM peak hour and daily, but options 1 and 2
are switched. The added housing in option 2 and option 3 could help
refine traffic congestion by locating workers near to their jobs.
2.2.2 Balboa Village
For Balboa Village, five land use options, in addition to the General Plan
scenario, have been evaluated. Options 4 and 5 each have a mixed use
component. There are 440 mixed use residences and 281,986 square
feet of mixed use commercial in Option 4 and 308 mixed use residences
with 205,150 square feet of mixed use commercial in Option 5. Table 2-8
summarizes the results of this analysis. PM peak hour trip generation
ranges from 1,677 peak hour trips to 1,932 peak hour trips. Option 4
generates the highest number of trips, while option 3 generates the fewest
• PM peak hour trips. AM peak hour and daily trip generation follow the
2-11
N
TABLE 2-7
AIRPORT AREA
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
ALT
MIXED USE / HIGH-
RISE APARTMENT
(DU)
HOTEL
(ROOM)
MIXED USE
COMM.
TSF
GEN.
COMM.
(TSF)
GEN.
OFFICE
(TSF)
MED./GOV.
OFFICE
(TSF)
INDUSTRIAL
(TSF)
YOUTH CTR/
SERVICE
(TSF)
TRIPS
AM
PM
DAILY
Option 3
5835
1431
127.217
790.559
5547.078
86.096
0
10.9
13,181
13,556
145,765
Option 1
0
1561
0
911.414
6753.537
86.096
606.37
10.9
11,380
11,841
126,630
O tion 2
1950
1431
63.608
790.559
5915.596
86.096
606.37
10.9
11,416
11,795
126,394
opte
General
Plan
0
984
0
871.5
5700.816
86.096
551.93
10.9
9,692
10,168
108.771
U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xls)T2-7
N
W
TABLE 2.8
BALBOA VILLAGE
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
A
COASTAL
RESIDENTIAL
MIXED
USE
HOTEL
ROOM
GEN.
COMM.
TSF
COMMJ
REC.
AC
MARINA
SUP
THEATER
SEA
GEN.
OFFICE
TSF
LIB.
TSF
POST
OFFICE
S
CHURCH
TSF
YOUTH
CTR/
SERVICE
TSF
TRIPS
RES•
LOW
(SFD)
DU
RES-
MEDIUM
(SFA)
DU
APART-
MENT
DU
APART-
MENT
DU
COMM.
TSF
AMI
PM
I DAILY
O Bon 4
360
815
242
396
253.787
0
2.400
4.25
14
350
0
4.8
1.7
21
4.97
1,714
1,932
20,964
Option 5
360
815
242
276
184.635
330
2.400
4.25
14
350
0
4.8
1.7
2
4.97
1,691
1.856
20,115
Adopted
General
Plan
375
815
242
0
0
34
217.34
4.25
14
350
89.26
4.8
1.7
2
4.97
1,513
1,708
18,504
Option 1
381
815
242
0
0
34
214.34
4.25
14
350
89.26
4.8
1.7
2
4.97
1,509
1.701
18.432
Option 2
378
815
242
0
0
34
214.33
4.25
14
350
89.26
4.8
1.7
2
4.97
1.507
1,699
18.410
O lion 3
375
815
242
0
0
34
217.34
4.25
14
350
60
4.8
1.7
2
4.97
1.481
1.677
18,180
UAUcJobs\ 01200\01232%ExceB]01232-18.x1s]T2-8
S
same pattern as for the PM peak hour (option 4 generates the most trips
and option 3 generates the fewest trips). •
2.2.3 Banninq Ranch
For Banning Ranch, four alternative scenarios (in addition to the currently
adopted General Plan) have been presented. Banning Ranch has not
been analyzed as part of the coastal area. Table 2-9 summarizes the
results of the analysis. PM peak hour trip generation ranges from 12 peak
hour trips to 2,057 peak hour trips. The currently adopted General Plan
generates the highest number of trips, while option 1 generates the fewest
PM peak hour trips. Trip generation for AM peak hour and daily traffic
follow the same pattern as for the PM peak hour (currently adopted
General Plan has the maximum and option 1 has the minimum).
2.2.4 Cannery Village
Cannery Village is composed of two Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs), each
of which is analyzed individually, as the options are not related and can be •
considered separately in the overall minimum and maximum intensity
alternatives. TAZ 1449 is located west of Newport Boulevard south of
32nd Street while TAZ 1454 is east of Newport Boulevard south of 32nd
Street. Because of the location, the mixed use residential in Option 1 of
TAZ 1449 may be represented as coastal residential. The same is true of
mixed use residential in TAZ 1454. In both cases, coastal representation
has been used. TAZ 1449 also includes 96,050 square feet of mixed use
commercial. TAZ 1454 contains 206,910 square feet of mixed use
commercial. Table 2-10 summarizes the results of the analysis.
Scenarios for TAZ 1449 include only the currently adopted General Plan
and Option 1. For TAZ 1454, the currently adopted General Plan is
considered, in addition to options 1 and 2.
For TAZ 1449, PM peak hour trip generation ranges from 334 peak hour
trips to 444 peak hour trips. The currently adopted General Plan
2-14
M
11
•
11
N
Ln
TABLE 2-9
BANNING RANCH
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
ALT
RES-LOW
(SFD)
DU
APARTMENT'
DU
HOTEL
ROOM
GENERAL
COMMERCIAL
SF
GENERAL
OFFICE
SF
INDUSTRIAL
SF)
ELEMENTARY!
PRIVATE SCHOOL
(STI.
PARK
AC
TRIPS
AM I
PM
I DAILY
Adopted
General
Plan
225
2510
0
50
235.6
164.4
0
0
2,163
2.057
22.335
Option 2
875
890
75
75
0
0
500
77
1,621
1.560
17,016
Option 3
436
453
75
35
0
0
500
40
884
828
9,059
Option 4
0
94
262
25
0
0
0
10
302
328
3,528
O tion 1
0
14
0
0
0
0
0
20
13
12
134
' Land use inclues 14 units outside Banning Ranch but in overall Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs).
U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\(01232-18.xis)T2-9
v�.
N
rn
TABLE 2-10
CANNERY VILLAGE
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
COASTAL RESIDENTIAL
ALT
I MIXED USE
COMM.
SF)
GENERAL
COMM.
(TSF1
COMM./
RECREATION
GENERAL
OFFICE
YOUTH CTR/
SERVICE
SF
=TR=IPS
RES-LOW
(SFD)
DU
RES-MEDIUM
(SFA)
DU
APARTMENT
DU
AM PM DAILY
TAZ 1449
Option 1
opte
95
192
86.445
0
0
363
444
4.810
General
Plan--T
95
0
74.9
20.02
264
334
3,601
TP Z 1454
Option 1
Adopted
0
0
4141
53.270
0.85
0
4.65
830
1,061
11,457
General
Plan
Option 2
41
0
172
152
0
0
0
165.528
201.78
53.27
0.85
0.85
101.5
0
4.65
4.65
764
231
950
280
10,239
3,029
U.1UcJobsl 01200\012321Exceh[01232-18.x1s)T2-10
a -0 0 0
generates fewer trips than Option 1. Trip generation for AM peak hour
• and daily traffic follow the same pattern as for the PM peak hour (currently
adopted General Plan is the minimum and Alternative is the maximum).
For TAZ 1454, PM peak hour trip generation ranges from 280 peak hour
trips for option 2 to 1061 peak hour trips for option 1. The currently
adopted General Plan falls into the middle, with 950 PM peak hour trips
generated. Trip generation for AM peak hour and daily traffic follow the
same pattern as for the PM peak hour (option 2 is the minimum and option
1 is the maximum).
2.2.5 Corona Del Mar
For Corona Del Mar, two alternative scenarios (in addition to the currently
adopted General Plan) have been presented. For Option 1, the 181 mixed
use dwelling units have been represented as 45 mixed use units and 136
• coastal units (depending on location). The same is true for Option 2.
Options 1 and 2 each also include 90,256 square feet of mixed use
commercial. Additional (non -mixed use) coastal apartments are included
in Option 2. Table 2-11 summarizes the results of the analysis. PM peak
hour trip generation ranges from 4,058 peak hour trips to 4,500 peak hour
trips. The currently adopted General Plan generates the highest number
of trips, while option 2 generates the fewest PM peak hour trips. Option 2
also generates the fewest AM peak hour and daily trips, and the currently
adopted General Plan generates the most AM peak hour and daily trips.
2.2.6 Lido Isle
Table 2-12 summarizes the results of the Lido Isle analysis. Two land use
options, have been evaluated (adopted General Plan and option 1). No
trip generation adjustments have been made. Option 1 is equivalent to
• the existing condition. PM peak hour trip generation ranges from 718
2-17
>`1
N
OD
TABLE 2-11
CORONA DEL MAR
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
ALT
RES-LOW SFD '
APARTMENT
MIXED
USE
APT.
DU
MIXED
USE
COMM.
S
I GEN.
COMM.
SF
THEATER
SEA
GEN.
OFFICE
F
LIBRARY
SF
POST
OFFICE
SF
CHURCH
S
PARK
AC
TRIPS
COASTAL
DU
I OTHER
DU
I COASTALZ
DU
OTHER
DU
AM
I PM
I DAILY
Adopted
General
Plan
1629
1564
0
54
0
0
538.63
500
148.06
3.8
5.0
12.34
6.11
4,075
4.5001
48,807
Option 1
1629
15B4
1351
54
41
81.185
428.839
500
129.6
3.8
5.0
12.34
6.1
4.070
4,468
48,476
O 8on 2
1629
15841
2111
79
411
81.185
335.411
500
4.879
3.81
5.0
12.34
6.1
2.205
4,058
44.087
' Land use inclues land use outside Corona del Mar but in overall Traffic Analysis Zones (rAZs).
2 Some Coastal apartments also quality as mixed use, but the coastal attributes are used.
U.%UcJobsl 012001012321Exceh[01232-18As)T2-11
16 16 0 0
TABLE 2-12
•
LIDO ISLE
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
COASTAL RESIDENTIAL
RES-LOW (SFD)
RES-MEDIUM (SFA)
APARTMENT
TRIPS
ALT
DU
(DU)
DU
AM
PM
DAILY
Adopted
General Plan
1040
102
26
885
916
10,021
Option 1
797
98
26
694 718 71858
U:\UcJ obs\_01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xls]T2-12
•
•
2-1 9
11�
peak hour trips to 916 peak hour trips. The adopted General Plan
generates the most trips, and the option 1 generates the fewest PM peak •
hour trips. Trip generation for AM peak hour and daily traffic follow the
same pattern as for the PM peak hour (option 1 generates the fewest trips
and the currently adopted General Plan generates the most trips).
2.2.7 Lido Village
Lido Village is composed of two Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs), each of
which is analyzed individually, as the options are not related and can be
considered separately in the overall minimum and maximum intensity
alternatives. TAZ 1452 is located northeast of Via Lido. TAZ 1453 is
located between Via Lido, 32nd Street, and Newport Boulevard. Table 2-
13 summarizes the results of the analysis. Scenarios for TAZ 1452
include the currently adopted General Plan and options 1, 2, and 3.
Option 1 contains 250 mixed use dwelling units represented as coastal
and Option 3 contains 312 mixed use dwelling units represented as
coastal. Options 1 and 3 for TAZ 1452 each contain 187,199 square feet .
of mixed use commercial. For TAZ 1453, the currently adopted General
Plan is considered, in addition to options 1 and 2. Option 2 contains 61
mixed use dwelling units represented as coastal, and 30,274 square feet
of mixed use commercial.
For TAZ 1452, PM peak hour trip generation ranges from 579 peak hour
trips to 874 peak hour trips. The currently adopted General Plan
generates the fewest trips, and option 1 generates the most trips. Trip
generation for AM peak hour and daily traffic follow the same pattern as
for the PM peak hour (currently adopted General Plan is the minimum and
option 1 is the maximum).
For TAZ 1453, PM peak hour trip generation ranges from 558 peak hour
trips for the currently adopted General Plan to 711 peak hour trips for
option 2. Trip generation for AM peak hour and daily traffic follow the •
2-20
?/2
TABLE 2-13
LIDO VILLAGE
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
COASTAL RESIDENTIAL
RES-MEDIUM
GENERAL
MIXED USE
GENERAL
YOUTH CTRI
ALT
(SFA)
(DU)
APARTMENT
(DU)
HOTEL
(ROOM)
COMMERCIAL
(TSF)
COMMERCIAL
(TSF)
THEATER
(SEAT)
OFFICE
(TSF)
SERVICE
(TSF)
CHURCH
(TSF)
TRIPS
AM
I PM
DAILY
TAZ 1452
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
opte
0
0
0
250
0
312
200
200
0
0
199.679
0
168.479
0
168.479
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
6
6
0
0
0
707
699
600
874
867
761
9,420
9,325
8,224
General
Plan
12
0
0
130.510
0
0
90.22
6
0
459
579
6,229
TAZ 1453
Option 2
Option 1
opte
0
0
61
120
01
01
125.762
125.762
27.199
0
685
685
98.0041
98.004
01
0
26.011
26.01
5671
525
7111
642
7,644
6,907
General
Plan
0
0
0
111.58
0
685
119.900
0
26.01
455
558
5,989
U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xis]T2-13
same pattern as for the PM peak hour (option 2 is the maximum and
currently adopted General Plan is the minimum). •
2.2.8 Mariner's Mile
For Mariner's Mile, two alternative scenarios (in addition to the currently
adopted General Plan) have been presented. For traffic modeling
purposes, options 1 and 2 are identical, as the model does not
differentiate between different types of commercial uses ("marine -related"
vs. "typical" commercial uses in this case). Mariner's Mile has not been
represented as having coastal residential characteristics, so the mixed use
apartments in Opions 1 and 2 are represented as mixed use. The mixed
use commercial has been factored as well. Table 2-14 summarizes the
results of the analysis. PM peak hour trip generation ranges from 4,599
peak hour trips to 5,304 peak hour trips. The currently adopted General
Plan generates the fewest trips, while option 1 or 2 generates the most
PM peak hour trips. The AM peak hour and daily trip generation follow the
same pattern as the PM peak hour (adopted General Plan trip generation
is less than option 1 or 2).
2.2.9 McFadden Square
McFadden Square is composed of two Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs),
each of which is analyzed individually, as the options are not related and
can be considered separately in the overall minimum and maximum
intensity alternatives. TAZs 1450 and 1451 have been analyzed
separately, with each having a currently adopted General Plan scenario
and option 1. TAZ 1450 located east of Newport Boulevard in the vicinity
of the intersection of Balboa Boulevard and Newport Boulevard. TAZ
1451 is located west of TAZ 1450. Table 2-15 summarizes the results of
this analysis.
•
2-22 .
0
C�
•
•
TABLE 244
MARINER'S MILE
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
RES-
USE
MIXED
JUNIOR
NURSING
YOUTH
LOW
APART-
APART-
USE
GEN.
GEN.
/HIGH
POST
/CONV.
CTR./
(SFD)
MENT
MENT
HOTEL
COMM.
COMM.
MARINA
OFFICE
SCHOOL
OFFICE
HOME
CHURCH
SERVICE
PARK
TRIPS
ALT
DU
DU
DU
ROOM)
(TSF)
(TSF)
(SLIP)
(TSF)
(STU)
(TSF)
(BED
TSF
SF
AC
AM
I PM
I DAILY
Option 1 or 2
Adopted
1 8371
2741
5431
2041
157.1891
758.9211
1301
363.5571
21841
01
68
59.68
35.68
0.4
4,720
5,304
1 57,493
General Plan
1 837
188
0
204
0
779.8
130
466.19
2184
9.9
68
59.68
35.68
0.4
4,122
4,594
49,783
N
N
W
U:\UcJobs\_01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xis]T2-14
1.
0�
N
I
N
,P
TABLE 245
McFADDEN SQUARE
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
COASTAL RESIDENTIAL
RES-LOW
(SFD)
(DU)
RES-MEDIUM
(SFA)
(DU
APARTMENT
(DU)
ALT
MOTEL
ROOM
HOTEL
ROOM
GENERAL
COMMERCIAL
SF
MIXED USE
OFFICE
TSF)
GENERAL
OFFICE
SF
YOUTH
CTR/
SERVICEFAM
TSF)
S
DAILY
TAZ
1450
Option 1
01
159
134
901
74
81.79
103.185
-01
01
529
601
6,481
Adopted
General Plan
0
159
3
16
0
67.53
0
35,75
0
305
366
3,955
TAZ
1451
Option 1 22
110 5 31 1831
93.2181
01
457 550 5,926
Adopted
ff-1
GeneralPlan 22
110 5 3 22
82.75
0
313 391 4,221
U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xis]T2-15
TAZ 1450 contains mixed use residential (represented as coastal) and
is from
use office. For TAZ 1450, PM peak hour trip generation ranges
from 366 peak hour trips for the currently adopted General Plan to 601
peak hour trips for option 1. Trip generation for AM peak hour and daily
traffic follow the same pattern as for the PM peak hour (currently adopted
General Plan is the minimum and option 1 is the maximum).
Only the coastal residential adjustment applies to TAZ 1451. For TAZ
1451, PM peak hour trip generation ranges from 391 peak hour trips for
currently adopted General Plan to 550 peak hour trips for option 1. Trip
generation for AM peak hour and daily traffic follow the same pattern as
for the PM peak hour (currently adopted General Plan is the minimum and
option 1 is the maximum).
2.2.10 Newport Center / Fashion Island
For Newport Center / Fashion Island, three alternative scenarios (in
• addition to the currently adopted General Plan) have been presented. All
new apartments in Newport Center are High Rise apartments. Table 2-16
summarizes the results of the analysis. PM peak hour trip generation
ranges from 10,178 peak hour trips to 12,289 peak hour trips. The
currently adopted General Plan generates the lowest number of trips,
while option 1 generates the most PM peak hour trips. AM peak hour trip
generation follows the same pattern as for the PM peak hour (currently
adopted General Plan has the minimum and option 1 has the maximum).
Daily minimum and maximum trip generation is in the same pattern as PM
peak hour, but the two in the middle (Option 3 and Option 2) are switched.
2.2.11 Old Newport Boulevard
Three land use options, in addition to the General Plan scenario, have
been evaluated for Old Newport Boulevard. Although there is a true
• mixed use development in Old Newport Boulevard for Options 1, 2, and 3,
2-25
0
TABLE 2-16
NEWPORT CENTERIFASHION ISLAND
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
RE -
H RISE
C T RALI
MEDIUM
APART-
APART-
GEN.
TENNIS
GEN.
GOLF
(SFA)
MENT
MENT
HOTEL
REG.
COMM.
CLUB
THEATER
OFFICE
IMEDJGOV-LEARNING
OFFICE
CENTER
LIBRARY
COURSE
TRIPS
ALT
SU
DU
DU
ROOM
COMM.
S(CRT)
SEA
S
S
S
S
AC
AM
PM
DAILY
Option 1
4191
2451
861
1513
1559
501.2481
221
3850
3570.803
530.002
98
65
99A
11,098
12.289
131,908
Option 3
419
245
981
1036
1633.84
302.98
22
38501
3283.72
351.95
40
65
99A
9.789
10,818
116.168
option 2
419
245
120
1036
1464
312.98
22
3850
4167.652
351.95
40
65
99A
9.929
10.839
116,216
Aoopte
General
Plan
419
245
0
1036
1633.84
302.98
22
3850
3283.72
351.95
40
65
99.4
9;129
10.178
109.174
N
I
N
Ol
U:\UcJobs\ 01200101232VExceP401232-18.xlsjT2-16
the size of the development precludes it from qualifying for mixed use
• factoring. Table 2-17 summarizes the results of this analysis. PM peak
hour trip generation ranges from 830 peak hour trips to 1,471 peak hour
trips. Option 1 generates the most trips, while the currently adopted
General Plan generates the fewest PM peak hour trips. Trip generation
for AM peak hour and daily traffic follow the same pattern as for the PM
peak hour (option 1 generates the most trips and the currently adopted
General Plan generates the fewest trips).
2.2.12 West Newport Highway And Adjoining Residential
West Newport Highway and Adjoining Residential is composed of three
blocks (A, B, and C), and one non -study area, each of which is analyzed
individually, as the options are independent of one another, and no land
use allocation by block for the currently adopted General Plan is available.
The currently adopted General Plan scenario contains all of the areas.
. Block B contains only one option, as does the non -study area. Blocks A
and C each have four options. Options have been defined for the 16
combinations of Block A and C options (with Block B and non -study area
included in each for total TAZ options). The only mixed use development
is in Option 1 for Block C (348 mixed use dwelling units and 86,902
square feet of commercial). Table 2-18 summarizes the results of the
analysis. PM peak hour trip generation for the TAZ ranges from 665 peak
hour trips to 981 peak hour trips. The highest traffic generator for the PM
peak hour is option 5. Option 5 contains option 2 (special needs housing)
for Block A and option 1 (mixed use) for Block C (in addition to Block B
and non -study area). Option 5 also generates the most AM peak hour
trips and the most daily traffic. The lowest traffic generator is Option 16.
Option 16 contains option 4 for both Block A (parking lot) and Block C
(limited retail, housing, and hotel) (in addition to Block B and non -study
area). Option 16 also generates the lowest AM peak hour and daily traffic,
• of all the options.
2-27
fit
TABLE 2-17
OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
ALT
RES•LOW
(SFD)
DU
RES•MEDIUM
(SFA)
DU
APARTMENT
DU
HOTEL
ROOM
GENERAL
COMMERCIAL
SF
GENERAL
OFFICE
SF
MEDICAL
OFFICE
SF
TRIPS
AM
PM
DAILY
Option 1
200
379
297
53
169.786
0
169.231
1.337
1.471
15,899
Option 3
200
379
416
53
120.879
0
0
1,024
1,089
11,816
Option 2
200
459
250
53
120.879
0
0
978
1,045
11.333
Adopted General Plan
205
379
8
53
66.38
135.73
11.29
808
830
8.980
U:tUcJobsl 012001012321ExceI1[01232-18.x1s)T2-17
0
TABLE 2-18
WEST NEWPORT HIGHWAY AND ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
RES-LOW
MIXED USE
GENERAL
MIXED USE
ALT
(SFD)
DU
APARTMENT
DU
APARTMENT
DU
HOTEL
ROOM
[jj[:
OMMERCIAL
SF
COMMERCIAL
(TSF
PARK
AC
TRIPS
AM
I PM
I DAILY
Option 5
Ado ted General Plan
O tion 16
462F
462
462
2911
293
273
313
0
0
ol
0
0
01
90
190
50.03
18.105
78212
0
0
0
0
0
956
743
678
981
759
665
10,676
8,241
7,233
U:\UcJobs\_01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xis]T2-18
J
2.2.13 West Newport Industrial
For West Newport Industrial, three options (in addition to the currently •
adopted General Plan) have been presented. No adjustments have been
made for this subarea. Table 2-19 summarizes the results of the analysis.
PM peak hour trip generation ranges from 5,146 for Option 3 to 6,238 for
Option 2. AM peak hour and daily trip generation follow the same pattern
as the PM peak hour traffic.
2.3 Conclusions
On Table 2-20, we have presented options for each subarea that will generate the
fewest PM peak hour trips, the option for each subarea that will generate the most
PM peak hour trips and the options for each subarea (excluding the currently
adopted General Plan) that will generate the fewest trips. Table 2-21 provides an
overview of trip generation minimum, maximum, and currently adopted General
Plan for all subareas selected for evaluation. Table 2-21 does not include the entire •
City of Newport Beach.
•
2-30
`1z
u
C�
TABLE 2-19
WEST NEWPORT INDUSTRIAL
SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
ALT
RES•LOW
(SFD)
DU
APARTMENT
DU
NURSING
HOME
BEDS
GENERAL
COMMERCIAL
TS
GENERAL
OFFICE
TSF
MEDICAL
OFFICE
TS
HOSPITAL
BEDS
INDUSTRIAL
SF
ppy
CARE
TSF
SCHOOL
STU
PARK
AC
TRIPS
AM
PM
DAILY
Option 2
98
2818
593
121.021
306.67
1023. 33
1265
888 882
7.7
622
0.17
6.518
6.238
67.039
Option 1
Adopted
98
2649
593
72.17
373.73
410.55
1265
1191.72
7.7
622
0.17
5.620
5.206
55,961
General
981
2649
593
72.17
373.73
410.55
1265
1191.72
7.7
622
0.17
5,620
5,206
55,961
rPlan
Optlo
98
3172
534
72.17
602.03
348.92
12651
499.457
7.7
622
0
5,530
5,146
55,396
U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\FxceB[01232-18.xis)T2.19
kP
TABLE 2-20
OVERALL GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT ALTERNATIVES SUMMARY
SUBAREA
TRUE MINIMUM
SUBAREA OPTIONS
ONLY MINIMUM
I SUBAREA OPTIONS
ONLY MAXIMUM
Airport Area
Adopted General Plan
Option
2
Option
3
Balboa Village
Option 3
Option
3
Option
4
Banning Ranch
Option 1
Option
1
Option
2
Cannery Village TAZ 1449
Adopted General Plan
Option
1
Option
1
Cannery Village TAZ 1454
Option 2
Option
2
Option
1
Corona Del Mar
Option 2
Option
2
Option
1
Lido Isle
Option 1
Option
1
Adopted -General Plan'
Lido Village TAZ 1452
Adopted General Plan
Option
3
Option
1
Lido Village TAZ 1453
Adopted General Plan
Option
1
Option
2
Mariner's Mile
Adopted General Plan
Option
1 or 2
Option
1 or 2
McFadden Square TAZ 1450
Adopted General Plan
Option
1
Option
1
McFadden Square TAZ 1451
Adopted General Plan
Option
1
Option
1
Newport Center / Fashion Island
Adopted General Plan
O
tton 2
Option
1
Old Newport Boulevard
Adopted General Plan
Option
2
Option
1
West Ne ort Highway and AdjoiningResidential
O tion 16
Option
16
Option
5
We st New or'Industrial
I Option 3
Option 3
Option
2
' Only alternatives considered are option 1 (existing densities) and currently adopted General Plan
U.\UcJobs\_01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xis]T2-20
•
11
N
i
w
w
TABLE 2-21
OVERALL ALTERNATIVES SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY'
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
GP
MAXIMUM
AM
PM
DAILY
AM
PM
DAILY
AM
PM
DAILY
Airport Area
9.692
10,168
108,7711
9,692
10,168
108,771
13,181
13,556
145,765
Balboa Village
1,481
1,677
18,1801
1,513
1,708
18,504
1,714
1,932
20,964
Banning Ranch
13
12
1341
2,163
2,057
22,335
2,163
2,057
22,335
CanneryVillage TAZ 1449
264
334
3,601
264
334
3,601
363
444
4,810
CanneryVillage TAZ 1454
231
280
3,029
764
950
10,239
830
1,061
11,457
Corona Del Mar
3,730
4,042
43,915
4,061
4,484
48,635
4,061
4,484
48,635
Lido Isle
694
718
7,858
885
916
10,021
885
916
10,021
Lido Village TAZ 1452
459
579
6,229
4591
579
6,2291
707
874
9,420
Lido Village TAZ 1453
455
558
5,9891
455
558
5,989
567
711
7,644
Mariner's Mile
4,100
4,566
49,4731
4,100
4,566
49,473
4,698
5,275
57,183
McFadden Square TAZ 1450
305
366
3,955
305
366
3,955
529
601
6,481
McFadden Square TAZ 1451
313
391
4,221
313
391
4,221
457
550
5,926
Newport Center/ Fashion Island
9,129
10,178
109,174
9,129
10,178
109,174
11,098
12,289
131,908
Old Newport Boulevard
8081
830
8,980
808
830
8,980
1,337
1,471
15,899
West Newport Highway and Adjoining Residential
6781
665
71233
743
759
8,241
956
981
10,676
West Newport Industrial
5,530
5,146
55,398
5,620
5,206
55,961
6,518
6,238
67,039
TOTAL
1 37,8821
40,5101
436,140
41,274
44,050
474,329
50,064
53,440
576,163
' Summary includes subareas only and not the entire City of Newport Beach
U.\U cJobs\_01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xl s]T2-21
J
J\
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
n
•
2-34
jLo
3 0 CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (POST-2025) WITH
CONSTRAINED NETWORK SCENARIO
This chapter presents currently adopted General Plan Buildout (Post-2025) with
constrained network conditions. General Plan Buildout model inputs are discussed and
refined forecast volumes are presented. Data are compared to existing conditions to
show reasonable growth and to previously published currently adopted General Plan
Baseline Conditions results to show differences.
3.1 Land Use and Socioeconomic Data (SED)
This section discusses the land use and socioeconomic data inputs.
3.1.1 Existing Land Use Data
The existing conditions land use data has changed slightly from the
previously published data. The total existing land use for the City is
shown in Table 3-1. The Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) containing Hoag
• Hospital has been disaggregated to five smaller TAZs which (combined)
contain the same total land use quantities. Government offices have been
represented as medicaVgovernment offices, rather than the general office
designation used before. Some specific land uses have been reallocated
to more general categories consistent with the updated General Plan data
to reduce the potential for unexplained differences from existing to
buildout conditions. Appendix 'B" contains study area land use by TAZ.
The disaggregated TAZ structure for the Hoag Hospital area is also
included in Appendix "B".
3.1.2 General Plan Buildout Land Use Data
The General Plan Buildout land use data was provided to Urban
Crossroads, Inc. staff by City of Newport Beach staff. Appendix "C" of this
report documents the explicit land use data included in NBTM 3.1 for
• currently adopted General Plan Buildout conditions in this analysis.
3-1
TABLE 3-1
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH EXISTING
LAND USE SUMMARY
NBTM
CODE'
DESCRIPTION
UNITS2
PREVIOUSLY
PUBLISHED
QUANTITY
REVISED
QUANTITY
CHANGE
CHANGE
1
Low Density Residential
DU
14.841
17,124
2,283
15.38%
2
Medium DensityResidential
DU
12,939
9,535
3,404
-26.31%
3
Apartment
DU
7.622
9.199
1.577
20.69%
4
Elderly Residential
DU
348
200
148
-42.53%
5
Mobile Home
DU
894
600
-294
-32.89%
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS
DU
36,644
36,658
14
0.04%
6
Motel
ROOM
210
134
76
-36.19%
7
Hotel
ROOM
2,745
2,821
76
2.77%
9
Regional Commercial
TSF
1,259.000
1,259.000
0.00%
10
General Commercial
TSF
2.926.160
3,696,781
770.621
26.34°/a
11
Commercial/Recreation
ACRE
5.100
5.100
0.00%
13
Restaurant
TSF
640.520
99.370
541.150
-84.49%
15
Fast Food Restaurant
TSF
78.031
13.940
64.091
-82.14%
16
Auto Dealer/Sales
TSF
288.320
172.420
115.900
-40.20%
17
1 Yacht Club
TSF
54.580
51.830
2.750
-5.04%
18
Health Club
TSF
63.500
16.770
46.730
-73.59%
19
Tennis Club
CRT
60
60
0.00%
20
Marina
SLIP
1,055
1,055
0.00%
21
Theater
SEAT
5,489
5.489
0
0.00%
22
Newport Dunes
ACRE
64.00
64.00
0.00%
23
General Office
TSF
10,900.190
10,865.733
34.457
-0.32%
24
Medical/Government Office
TSF
761.459
795.926
34.467
4.53%
25
Research & Development
TSF
327.409
81.730
245.679
-75.04%
26
Industrial
TSF
1.042.070
1,291:079
1 249.009
23.90%
27
Mini-Storage/Warehouse
TSF
199.750
196.420
3.330
-1.67%
28
Pre-school/Day Care
TSF
55.820
55.820
0.00%
29
Elementary/Private School
STU
4,399
4.399
0
0.01%
30
Junior/High School
STU
4,765
4,765
0.00%
31
CulturailLearnlng Center
TSF
35.000
35.000
0.00%
32
Library
TSF
78.840
78.840
0.00%
33
Post Office
TSF
53.700
53,700
0.00%
34
Hospital
BED
351 1
351
0.00%
35
Nursin /Conv. Home
BEDS
661
661
0.00%
36
Church
TSF
377.760
377.760
0.00%
37
Youth Ctr./Service
TSF
149.560
149.560
0.000
0.00%
38
Park
ACRE
113.970
113,970
0.000
0.00%
39
Regional Park
ACRE
N/A
40
Golf Course
ACRE
305.330
305.330
0.000
0.00%
' Uses 8, 12, and 14 are part of the old NBTAM model structure and are not currently utilized in
the City land use datasets.
2 Units Abbreviations:
DU = Dwelling Units
TSF =Thousand Square Feel
CRT = Court
STU = Students
U:1UcJobsl 012001012321E wP401232.18. IslT3.1
•
•
0
3-2
Appendix "D" contains the land use changes by TAZ compared to the
• previously published Baseline Report. Table 3-2 summarizes the overall
currently adopted General Plan Buildout land uses for the City of Newport
Beach. An overall comparison to previously published currently adopted
General Plan land use is also shown in Table 3-2. Land uses have been
updated based on more detailed information available, to provide better
detail in the vicinity of Hoag Hospital, and to provide more flexibility on
certain sites by using more general land use categories. The medical
office land use category has been re -identified as medical/government
office; however, no changes have been made to the characteristics of the
category
Table 3-3 shows currently adopted General Plan Buildout land use growth
from existing conditions. Medium density residential and apartments each
grow by more than 3,000 dwelling units. Non-residential categories that
grow by more than 500,000 square feet include general commercial,
• general office, and industrial land uses.
3.1.3 Existing Socioeconomic Data (SED)
Land use data has been converted into socioeconomic data (SED). Table
3-4 shows SED for existing conditions. Changes are primarily caused by
the generalization of land use categories.
3.1.4 General Plan Buildout Socioeconomic Data (SED)
General Plan Buildout SED that has been converted from land use is
summarized in Table 3-5. Table 3-5 also contains a comparison of
currently adopted General Plan Buildout SED to existing SED for the City
of Newport Beach. The total number of dwelling units are projected to
grow by 7,893 units (23 %) from existing conditions. The residential units
• growth has increased by around 2,400 dwelling units compared to
3-3
TABLE 3.2
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
LAND USE COMPARISON
•
NBTM
CODE'
DESCRIPTION
UNITS 2
PUBLISHED
QUANTITY
REVISED
QUANTITY
I GROWTH
% GROWTH
1
Low Density Residential
DU
15,213
18,347
3,134
20.60%
2
Medium Density Residential
DU
17,723
12,859
4,864
27.44%
3
A artment
DU
8,468
13,374
4,906
57.94%
4
Elderly Residential
DU
348
200
148
-42.53%
5
Mobile Home
DU
749
455
-294
-39.253%
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS
DU
42,501
45,235
2.734
6.43%
6
Motel
ROOM
256
139
117
-45.70%
7
Hotel
ROOM
3,270
3,367
117
3.58%
9
Re Tonal Commercial
TSF
1,633.850
1,633.840
0.010
0.00%
10
General Commercial
TSF
3,692.980
4.627.760
934.780
25.31%
11
Commercial/Recreation
ACRE
5.100
5.100
0.00%
13
Restaurant
TSF
869.800
198.780
-661.020
-76.88%
15
Fast Food Restaurant
TSF
94.540
13.940
80.600
-85.25%
16
Auto Dealer/Sales
TSF
323.290
227.170
95.120
-29.73%
17
1 Yacht Club
TSF
73.060
70.310
2.750
-3.76%
18
Health Club
TSF
108.070
61.330
46.740
-43.25%
19
Tennis Club
CRT
60
59
1
-1.67%
20
Marina
SLIP
1,055
1,055
-
'0.00%
21
Theater
SEAT
5,475
5,475
0
0.00%
22
Newport Dunes
ACRE
64.00
64.00
0.00%
23
General Office
TSF
12,153.473
12,305.620
152.147
1.25%
24
Medical/Government Office
TSF
895.420
910.616
15.196
1.70%
25
Research & Development
TSF
809.330
81.730
727.600
-89.90%
•
26
Industrial
TSF
1,060.762
1,956.092
895.330
84.40%
27
Mini-Storage/Warehouse
TSF
199.750
196A20
3.330
-1.67%
28
Pre-schoot/Day Care
TSF
56.770
56.770
-
0.00%
29
Elementary/Private School
STU
4,455
4.455
-
0.00%
30
Junior/High School
STU
4,765
4,765
-
0.00%
31
Cultural/Leaming Center
TSF
40.000
40.000
0.00%
32
Library
TSF
78.840
78.840
0.0000
33
Post Office
TSF
73.700
73.700
0.00%
34
Hospital
BED
1,265
1,265
-
0.00%
35
Nursin /Conv. Home
BEDS
661
661
0.00%
36
Church
TSF
467.210
467.210
0.00%
37
Youth Ctr./Service
TSF
166.310
166.310
0.000
0.00%
38
Park
ACRE
94.910
94.920
0.010
0.01%
39
Regional Park
ACRE
45.910
45.910
N/A
40
Golf Course
ACRE
298.330
298.290
-0.040
-0.01%
' Uses 8, 12, and 14 are part of the old NBTAM model structure and are not currently utilized in
the City land use datasets.
2 Units Abbreviations:
DU = Dwelling Units
TSF = Thousand Square Feet
CRT = Court
STU = Students
U:1UcJobs\ 01200%012321Exce8(01232-18.xis]T3.2 •
3-4
•
•
TABLE 3-3
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING
NBTM
CODE'
DESCRIPTION
UNITS 2
2002
QUANTITY
BUILDOUT
QUANTITY
I GROWTH
% GROWTH
1
Low Density Residential
DU
17,124
18,347
1,223
7.14%
2
Medium Density Residential
DU
9,535
12,859
3,324
34.86%
3
Apartment
DU
91199
13,374
4,175
45.39%
4
Elderly Residential
DU
200
200
-
0.00%
5
Mobile Home
DU
600
455
-145
-24.17%
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS
DU
36,658
45,235
8,577
23.40%
6
Motel
ROOM
134
139
5
3.73%
7
Hotel
ROOM
2,821
3,387
566
20.06%
9
Re ionai Commercial
TSF
1,259.000
1,633.840
374.840
29.77%
10
General Commercial
TSF
3,696.781
4,627.760
930.979
25.18%
11
Commercial/Recreation
ACRE
5.100
5.100
0.00%
13
Restaurant
TSF
99.370
198.780
99.410
100.04%
15
Fast Food Restaurant
TSF
13.940
13.940
-
0.00%
16
Auto Dealer/Sales
TSF
172.420
227.170
54.750
31.75%
17
Yacht Club
TSF
51.830
70.310
18.480
35.66%
18
Health Club
TSF
16.770
61.330
44.560
265.71%
19
Tennis Club
CRT
60
59
1
-1.67%
20
Marina
SLIP
1,055
1,055
-
0.00%
21
Theater
SEAT
5,489
5,475
-14
-0,26%
22
Newport Dunes
ACRE
64.00
64.00
-
0.06%
23
General Office
TSF
10,865.733
12,305.620
1,439.887
13.25°/u
24
Medical/Government Office
TSF
795.926
910.616
114.690
14.41%
25
Research & Development
TSF
81.730
81.730
-
0.00%
26
Industrial
TSF
1,291.079
1,956.092
665.013
51.51%
27
Mini-Storage/Warehouse
TSF
196.420
196.420
-
0.00%
28
Pre-school/Day Care
TSF
55.820
56.770
0.950
1.76%
29
Elementary/Private School
STU
4,399
4,455
56
1.28%
30
Junior/High School
STU
4,765
4,765
-
0.00%
31
Cultural/Leaming Center
TSF
35.000
40.000
5.000
14.29%
32
Library
TSF
78.840
78.840
-
0.00%
33
Post Office
TSF
53.700
73.700
20.000
37.24%
34
Hospital
BED
351
1,265
914
260.40%
35
Nursin /Conv. Home
BEDS
661
661
0.00%
36
Church
TSF
377.760
467.210
89.450
23.68%
37
Youth Ctr./Service
TSF
149.560
166.310
16.750
11.20%
38
Park
ACRE
113.970
94.920
-19.050
-16.71%
39
Regional Park
ACRE
-
45.910
45.910
NIA
40
Golf Course
ACRE
305.330
298.290
-7.040
-2.31%
Uses 8, 12, and 14 are part of the old NBTAM model structure and are not currently utilized in
the City land use datasets.
2 Units Abbreviations:
DU = Dwelling Units
TSF = Thousand Square Feet
CRT = Court
STU = Students
• U:1UoJobs% 012001012321Excell[01232-18.xis]T3.3
3-5
a
TABLE 3.4
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH' LAND USE BASED
EXISTING SOCIOECONOMIC DATA SUMMARY
VARIABLE
PREVIOUSLY
PUBLISHED
QUANTITY
REVISED
QUANTITY
I CHANGE
% CHANGE
Occupied Single Family Dwelling Units
13,8421
15,9701
2,128
15%
Occupied Multi -Family Dwelling Units
20,4091
18,294
-2,115
-10%
TOTAL OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS
34.2511
34,2641
13
0%
Group Quarters Population
6611
661
01
0%
Population
75,8171
75,211
-606
-1%
Employed Residents
44,3791
44,635
2561
101,
Retail Employees
1 11.2111
10.970
-241
-2%
Service Employees
17,150
17,295
145
1%
Other Employees
37,077
36,990
-87
0%
TOTAL EMPLOYEES
65.4381
65.255
-183
0%
Elem/Hi h School Students
9,164
- 9,164
0
no/,
1 Includes data converted from land use only. Excludes Newport Coast and recent annexation areas.
U:1UcJobs1 01200101232Mxce11t01232-1 BAlsIT3.4
•
0
Qti
•
0
TABLE 3-5
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LAND USE BASED
SOCIOECONOMIC DATA GROWTH FROM EXISTING
VARIABLE
2002
QUANTITY
1 BUILDOUT
QUANTITY
GROWTH
% GROWTH
Occupied Single Family Dwelling Units
1 15,9701
17,1651
1,195
7%
Occu ied Multi -Family Dwelling Units
1 18,2941
24,9921
6,698
37%
TOTAL OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS
1 34,2641
42,1571
7,893
23%
Group Quarters Population
1 6611
6611
01
0%
Po ulation
75,2111
91,0951
15,884
21%
Em Io ed Residents
1 44,6351
54,6571
10,022
22%
Retail Employees
10,9701
13,6521
2,682
24%
Service Employee
17,295
21,149
3,854
22%
Other Employees
36,9901
45,3841
8,394
23%
TOTAL EMPLOYEES
65,2551
80,1851
14,930
23%
Elem/High School Students
9,1641
9,2201
56
1%
1 Includes data converted from land use only. Excludes Newport Coast and recent annexation areas.
• U:\UoJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.x1s]T3-5
3-7
Q3
previously published data, due to explicit representation of Banning Ranch
in the , land use database (adopted County projections were used •
previously). For total employment, an increase of 14,930 employees (23
%) is anticipated. This is also slightly higher than the previously published
Baseline data.
Socioeconomic data for the remainder of the primary modeling area (and
for Newport Coast, where land use data was unavailable) has been
unchanged from the previously published data.
3.2 Trip Generation
Existing trip generation by NBTM TAZ is contained in Appendix "E". Table 3-6
summarizes the updated existing trip generation in the City of Newport Beach.
The updated input data results in minor changes to the citywide existing trip
generation (less than 1 % difference).
Table 3-7 summarizes the overall trip generation for General Plan Buildout •
conditions for the City of Newport Beach and compares it to existing conditions
trip generation. Appendix "F" contains a report of trip generation by NBTM TAZ
for the City of Newport Beach. Most of these trips have been calculated from the
final General Plan Buildout SED presented previously. Supplemental trips
(additional trips representing very specific land uses, such as marina) are
unchanged from the previously published data.
The overall trip generation for the City of Newport Beach currently adopted
General Plan is an estimated 879,759 daily vehicle trips. Table 3-8 compares
currently adopted General Plan Buildout trip generation to previously published
currently adopted General Plan Buildout trip generation. Total trip generation
increases by approximately 19,501 daily trips. The primary cause of this increase
in trip generation is Banning Ranch. Previously, land use data was not provided
on the Banning Ranch property, so supplemental SED (based on County
adopted forecasts) was used. Now that the adopted Newport Beach General 0
MKI
TABLE 3-6
• CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH EXISTING TRIP GENERATION
•
TRIP PURPOSE
PRODUCTIONS
ATTRACTIONS
PRODUCTIONS-
ATTRACTIONS
PRODUCTIONS /
ATTRACTIONS
Home Based Work
57,819
81,964
-24,145
0.71
Home Based School
11,336
8,730
2,606
1.30
Home Based Other2
127,338
109,815
17,523
1.16
Work Based Other
52,152
57,035
-4,883
0.91
Other -Other
91,218
89,734
1,484
1.02
TOTAL
339,8631
347,278
.7,415
0.98
OVERALL TOTAL 687,141
PREVIOUS TOTAL 689,848
DIFFERENCE 2,707
% DIFFERENCE 0.4%
1 Home -Work includes Home -Work and Home -University trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output.
2 Home -Other includes Home -Shop and Home -Other trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output.
• U:\UcJobs101200\012321Exce1\[01232-18.xlsjT3.6
3-9
'LtJ
TABLE 3.7
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRIP GENERATION GROWTH •
TRIP PURPOSE
DAILY TRIP ENDS
GROWTH
PERCENT
GROWTH
EXISTING
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED GENERAL
PLAN BUILDOUT
Home Based Work Productions
57,819
73,968
16,149
27.93%
Home Based Work Attractions
81,964
102,230
20,266
24.73%
Home Based School Productions
11,336
14,475
3,139
27.69%
Home Based School Attractions
8,730
8,845
115
1.32%
Home Based Other Productions2
127,338
174,257
46,919
36.85%
Home Based Other Attractions
109,815
138,334
28,519
25.97%
Work Based Other Productions
52,152
65,482
13,330
25.56%
Work Based Other Attractions
57,035
71,335
14,300
25.07%
Other -Other Productions
91,218
116,275
25,0571
27.47%
Other - Other Attractions
89,7341
114,5581
24,8241
27.66%
TOTAL PRODUCTIONS
339,863
444,4571
104,5941
30.78%
TOTAL ATTRACTIONS
347,2781
435,3021
88,0241
25.35%
OVERALL TOTAL
687,1411
879,7591
192,618
28.03%
1 Home -Work includes Home -Work and Home -University trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output.
2 Home -Other includes Home -Shop and Home -Other trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output.
U:1UcJobs% 01200\01232\ExceR[01232-18.xisIT3-7
3-1 0
a
TABLE 3-8
is
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON
•
TRIP PURPOSE
DAILY TRIP ENDS
GROWTH
PERCENT
GROWTH
PREVIOUSLY
PUBLISHED
ADOPTED
REVISED
ADOPTED
Home Based Work Productions
70,469
73,968
3,499
4.97%
Home Based Work Attractions
100,684
102,230
1,546
1.54%
Home Based School Productions
14,125
14,475
350
2.48%
Home Based School Attractions
8,845
8,845
0
0.00%
Home Based Other Productions2
167,202
174,257
7,055
4.22%
Home Based Other Attractions
136,553
138,334
1,781
1.30%
or Based Other Productions
64,755
65,482
727
1.12%
Work Based Other Attractions
70,186
71,Mj
1,1491
1.64%
Other - Other Productions
114,5571
116,2751
1,7181
1.50%
Other - Other Attractions
112,8821
114,5581
1,6761
1.48%
TOTAL PRODUCTIONS
431,1081
444,4571
13,3491
3.10%
TOTAL ATTRACTIONS
429,1501
435,3021
6,1521
1.43%
OVERALL TOTAL
860,2581
879,759
19,501 j
2.27%
1 Home -Work includes Home -Work and Home -University trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output.
2 Home -Other includes Home -Shop and Home -Other trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output.
• U:\UCJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xIsIT3.8
3-1 1
Plan for Banning Ranch has been included, trip generation in that area has
increased. Appendix "G shows the zone by zone trip generation comparison. .
3.3 Traffic Assignment
Exhibit 3-A shows constrained General Plan Buildout through lanes on Newport
Beach roadways. Appendix "H" contains a letter prepared by Urban Crossroads
to document changes to the currently adopted roadway system for the
constrained network. The General Plan Buildout model network matches these
configurations. The network outside the Tier 3 area is unchanged from before.
Key roadway changes reflected in the new constrained (versus Baseline)
analysis include:
• No extension of SR-55
• No widening of Coast Highway through Mariner's Mile
• No extension of 19th Street across the Santa Ana River
• No widening of Jamboree Road north of Ford Road
Exhibit 3-B summarizes the NBTM 3.1 refined General Plan Buildout with •
constrained network daily traffic volumes throughout the City of Newport Beach.
Changes from the currently adopted General Plan Baseline forecasts are shown on
Table 3-9. Volume changes occur primarily because of roadway system
constraints (for example, volume increases on Coast Highway are caused by the
removal of the Santa Ana River bridge at 19th Street).
Table 3-10 compares these refined forecasts to existing counted volumes
(presented in the General Plan Baseline document). The highest daily traffic
volume increase occurs on Coast Highway. Between Dover Drive and the west
City boundary, traffic increases by up to 15,000 vehicles per day (VPD). This
increase is caused partly by land use increases in the Banning Ranch area, as well
as ongoing growth outside the City of Newport Beach. Volumes on Coast Highway
throughout the study area increase. Volumes on Coast Highway near Bayside and
in Corona Del Mar generally increase by 7,000-13,000 VPD. is
3-12
&PORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN B• RAINED THROUGH LANE
DOUT CONSTRAINED EIR
�B�T S
S
40
40
4D
4D
6D
LEGEND:
4 = NUMBER OF THROUGH LANES
D = DIVIDED
PACIFIC U = UNDIVIDED
OCEAN 0
EXHIBIT 3-B
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK
3, ;9z 8224 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT)
51 22 47
39 20 18
6 Is
183 28 54
°rrs 32 1 1 Y7 9 32 ! U»1a
32 28 27 ew .1843 5 //•
98 /
27 /
27 32 23 22 30 37 5
3 }g 5' 66 �; // 8� 18 19
38 18 j , 15� mw
rcc+m � + - yoaraiov
7 e i I 1 1W125 29
40 41 �
i' 74 27
0 � . 10 11
17 10 3 2 18
/ 74 10
40
1 3 3bs 4
ts
W $ , 13 p wN s
q 33 a
.P fat 14 >m tt e ss 60 14 s� 19
4 4 -
10 t2 4 31 I 17 2 12 3 28 8 ,.
dJr 42 123 7 7 1 3 �� 2�0+ l 43 9 14 5 3 22 3 19
11 sx nrx rt. 25 32 5 18 24
17 11 c 19
9 � �brr 1 20 iuu
8qq 41 1 $[ 38 r
33 y 3 17
? Lk 32 51 �rrn er, wcnan 10 g 45 II 7
` •i
rnx ar, t3 Is.
22811 6 84 i 15 48 3 2
35 // 5 8 . m.+ ...� __. __ 34 44
v r1m n 42
9 2 78 12 -
`�` 19 S 48 i
4
t8 11 10 0 3 53,i _ J
28 t9 p
? 54 �.
13 �8 57 10 �e ` 58 = LEGEND:
».
\ ` 41 22 4/ 5 10 - VEHICLES PER DAY (1000'S)
st k. 9 33 ,�) , PACIFIC AN
OCEAN--------------- —. &
NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN UPDATE New ort Beach Califomla-01232:BO06.mxd AmkLURBAN
• ossw
G
•
is
TABLE 3-9 (PAGE 1 OF 4)
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON
LOCATION
BUILDOUT FORECAST
CHANGE
%CHANGE
(BASELINE)
(CONSTRAINED)
15th St. (Coast Hwy. to Bluff Rd.)
9,000
0
-9,000
-100%
15th St. (Bluff Rd, to Monrovia Ave.)
8,000
0
-8,000
-1000/0
16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.)
6,000
6,000
0
0%
17th St. (Bluff Rd. to east city limit)
10,000
0
-10,000
-100%
32nd St. (west of Newport Blvd.)
8,000
9,000
1,000
13%
32nd St. (east of Newport Blvd.)
5,000
5,000
0
0%
Avocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.)
5,000
5,000
0
0%
Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.)
11,000
12,000
1,000
9%
Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
10,000
10,000
0
0%
Balboa Blvd. (south of Coast Hwy.)
21,000
22,000
1,000
5%
Bayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.)
13,000
12,000
-1,000
-8%
Birch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Kerman Ave.)
18,000
18,000
0
0%
Birch St. (Von Kerman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
20,000
20,000
0
0%
Birch St. (west of MacArthur Blvd.)
20,000
20,000
0
0%
Birch St. (north of Bristol St. North)
27,000
27,000
0
0%
Birch St. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
20,000
20,000
0
0%
Birch St. (south of Bristol St. South)
16,000
16,000
0
0%
Bison Ave. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
17,000
17,000
0
0%
Bison Ave. (MacArthur Blvd. to SR-73 Fwy.)
11,000
11,000
0
0%
Bluff Rd. (Coast Hwy, to 19th St.)
13,000
12,000
-1,000
-8%
Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.)
33,000
34,000
1,000
3°/u
Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR-73 Fwy.)
25,000
27,000
2,000
8%
Bristol St. North (west of Campus Dr.)
32,000
32,000
0
0%
Bristol St. North (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
28,000
28,000
0
0%
Bristol St. North (east of Birch St.)
27,000
27,000
0
0%
Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd.)
18,000
18,000
0
0%
Bristol St. South (west of Campus DrA vine Ave.)
32,000
32,000
0
0%
Bristol St. South (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
22,000
23,000
1,000
5%
Bristol St. South (east of Birch St.)
21,000
22,000
1,000
5%
Bristol St. South (west of Jamboree Rd.)
37,000
37,000
0
0%
Campus Dr. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Kaman Ave.)
21,000
22,000
1,000
5%
Campus Dr. (Von Kaman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
31,000
31,000
0
0%
Campus Dr. (west of MacArthur Blvd.)
38,000
39,000
1,000
3%
Campus Dr. (north of Bristol St. North)
38,000
39,000
1,000
3%
Campus Dr. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
39,000
40,000
1,000
3%
Coast Hwy. (west of Bluff Rd.)
51,000
60,000
9,000
18%
Coast Hwy. (Bluff Rd. to Superior Ave./Balboa Blvd.)
49,000
61,000
12,000
24%
Coast Hwy. (Superior Ave. to Newport Blvd.)
38,000
41,000
3,000
8%
Coast Hwy. (Newport Blvd. to Riverside Ave.)
72,000
68,000
-4,000
-6%
Coast Hwy. (Riverside Ave. to Tustin Ave.)
63,000
59,000
-4,000
-6%
Coast Hwy. (Tustin Ave. to Dover Dr.)
59,000
55,000
-4,000
-7%
Coast Hwy. (Dover Dr. to Bayside Dr.)
77,000
78,000
1,000
1%
Coast Hwy. (Bayside Dr. to Jamboree Rd.)
62,000
64,000
2,000
3%
Coast H Jamboree Rd. to Newport Center Dr.
51,000
51,000
0 1
0%
3-15
TABLE 3-9 (PAGE 2 OF 4)
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON
LOCATION
BUILDOUT FORECAST
CHANGE
%CHANGE
(BASELINE)
(CONSTRAINED)
Coast Hwy. (Newport Center Dr. to Avocado Ave.)
42,000
43,000
1,000
2%
Coast Hwy. (Avocado Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
45,000
45,000
0
0%
Coast Hwy. (MacArthur Blvd. to Goldenrod Ave.)
47,000
48,000
1,000
2%
Coast Hwy. (Goldenrod Ave. to Marguerite Ave.)
46,000
46,000
0
0%
Coast Hwy. (Marguerite Ave. to Poppy Ave.)
42,000
42,000
0
0%
Coast Hwy. (Poppy Ave, to Newport Coast Dr.)
35,000
35,000
0
0%
Coast Hwy (east of Newport Coast Dr.)
45,000
44,000
.1,000
-20/0
Dover Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Westcliff Dr.)
11,000
11,000
0
0%
Dover Dr. (Westcliff Dr. to l60r St.)
24,000
24,000
01
0%
Dover Dr. (16th St. to Cliff Dr.)
28,000
28,000
0
0%
Dover Dr. (Cliff Dr. toCoast Hwy.)
31,000
33,000
2,000
60%
Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at University Dr.)
10,000
10,000
0
0%
Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at Ford Rd.)
15,000
15,000
0
0%
Ford Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
12,000
13,000
1,000
8%
Goldenrod Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
4,000
2,000
1000/1
Highland Dr. (cast of Irvine Ave.)
2,000
2,000
0
0%
Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.)
23,000
18,000
-5,000
.22%
Hospital Rd. (east of Newport Blvd.)
9,000
10,000
1,000
11%
Irvine Ave. (Bristol St. South to Mesa Dr.)
36,000
38,000
2,000
6%
Irvine Ave. (Mesa Dr, to University Dr.)
38,000
41,000
3,000
8%
Irvine Ave. (University Dr. to Santa Isabel Ave.)
34,000
40,000
6,000
18%
Irvine Ave. (Santa Isabel Ave. to Santiago Dr.)
27,000
33,000
6,000
22%
Irvine Ave. (Santiago Dr. to Highland Dr.)
25,000
32,000
7,000
28%
Irvine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.)
25,000
32,000
7,000
28%
Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr. to Westcliff Dr.)
19,000
28,000
9,000
47%
Irvine Ave. (WeslcliffDr. to16thSt.)
10,000
13,000
3,000
30%
Jamboree Rd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
47,000
47,000
0
0%
Jamboree Rd. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.)
54,000
54,000
0
0%
Jamboree Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to Bristol St. North)
44,000
43,000
-1,000
-2%
Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
52,000
51,000
.1,000
-2%
Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. South to Bayview Wy.)
58,000
56,000
-2,000
-3%
amboree Rd. (Bayview Wy. to University Dr.)
47,000
56,000
9,000
19%
amboree Rd. (University Dr. to Bison Ave.)
42,000
41,000
-1,000
-2%
Jamboree Rd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.)
45,000
45,000
0
0%
Jamboree Rd. (Ford Rd, to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
53,000
55,000
2,000
4%
Jamboree Rd. (SareJoaquin Hills Rd. to Santa Barbara Dr.)
40,000
43,000
3,000
8%
Jamboree Rd. (Santa Barbara Dr. to Coast Hwy.)
39,000
42,000
3,000
8%
Jamboree Rd. ( Coast Hwy. to Bayside Dr.)
14,000
15,000
1,000
7%
MacArthur Blvd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
33,000
33,000
0
0%
MacArthur Blvd. (Birch St. to Von Korman Ave.)
26,000
26,000
0
0%
MacArthur Blvd. (Von Korman Ave, to Jamboree Rd.)
32,000
32,000
0
0%
MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.)
35,000
35,000
0
0%
MacArthur Blvd. (north of Bison Ave.)
71,000
74,000
3,000
4%
MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.)
72,000
74,000
2,000
3%
MacArthur Blvd. Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.
58,000
60.000
2,000 1
3%
•
•
•
3-16
Ati
TABLE 3.9 (PAGE 3 OF 4)
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON
•
BUILDOUT FORECAST
LOCATION
(BASELINE)
(CONSTRAINED)
CHANGE
%CHANGE
MacArthur Blvd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to San Miguel Rd.)
37,000
39,000
2,000
5%
MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
37,000
38,000
1,000
3%
Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
8,000
8,000
0
0%
Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
7,000
7,000
0
0%
Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
13,000
13,000
0
0%
Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.)
49,000
46,000
-3,000
-6%
Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd, to Coast Hwy.)
54,000
54,000
0
0%
Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido)
55,000
57,000
2,000
4%
Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.)
40,000
41,000
1,000
3%
Newport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.)
32,000
33,000
1,000
3%
Newport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.)
17,000
17,000
1 0
0%
Newport Coast Dr. (SR-73 Fwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
28,000
29,000
1,000
4%
Newport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
24,000
24,000
0
0%
Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.)
18,000
19,000
1,000
601c
Placentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.)
12,000
16,000
4,000
33%
Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave. to Hospital Rd.)
13,000
I1,000
-2,000
-15%
Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
2,000
0
0%
Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
9,000
10,000
1,000
11%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.)
18,000
17,000
-1,000
-6%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.)
12,000
12,000
0
0%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
25,000
26,000
1,000
4%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to San Miguel Rd.)
22,000
22,000
0
0%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (San Miguel Rd. to Marguerite Ave.)
23,000
24,000
1,000
4%
•
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to Spyglass Hill Rd.)
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.)
18,000
18,000
19,000
19,000
1,000
1,000
6%
6%
San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.)
10,000
10,000
0
0%
San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.)
10,000
10,000
0
0%
San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
14,000
14,000
0
0%
San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
16,000
16,000
0
0%
San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.)
19,000
20,000
1,000
5%
San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.)
11,000
11,000
0
0%
Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.)
11,000
11,000
0
0%
Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
9,000
9,000
0
0%
Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
14,000
14,000
0
0%
Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave. to Irvine Ave.)
5,000
6,000
1,000
20%
Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
2,000
4,000
2,000
100%
Spyglass Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
5,000
4,000
-1,000
-20%
SR-55 Freeway (north of SR-75 Fwy.)
185,000
183,000
-2,000
-1%
SR-55 Freeway (22nd St. to 19th St.)
156,000
123,000
-33,000
-21%
SR-73 Freeway (SR-55 Fwy. to Campus Dr.)
133,000
134,000
1,000
1%
SR-73 Freeway Jamboree Rd. to University Dr.
96,0001
98,0001
2,000 1
2%
3-17
All
TABLE 3.9 (PAGE 4 OF 4)
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON
LOCATION
BUILDOUT FORECAST
CHANGE
%. CHANGE
(BASELINE)
(CONSTRAINED)
SR-73 Freeway (Bonita Canyon Rd. to Newport CoastOr.)
124,000
125,000
1,000
1%
SR-73 Freeway (cast of Newport Coast Dr.)
118,000
119,000
1,000
1%
Superior Ave. (north of Placentia Ave.)
21,000
19,000
-2,000
-10%
Superior Ave. (Placentia Ave. to Hospital Rd.)
17,000
28,000
11,000
65%
Superior Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
21,000
28,000
7,000
33%
Tustin Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
3,000
1,000
50%
University Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
3,000
3,000
0
0%
University Dr. (cast of Jamboree Rd.)
16,000
15,000
.1,000
-6%
Via Lido (cast of Newport Blvd.)
10,000
10,000
0
0%
Von Kerman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
18,000
18,OD0
0
0%
Von Kennon Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.)
15,000
16,000
1,000
7%
Westeliff Dr. Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.
17,000
16,000
-11000
-6%
U:1UeJobsl 012001012321Exmh[01232-1 B.z[s]T3.9
0
•
3-18
(V
TABLE 3.10 (PAGE 1 OF 4)
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH
CONSTRAINED NETWORK AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH
•
COUNT
BUILDOUT
EXISTING
ADOPTED
LOCATION
(2001/2002)
(CONSTRAINED)
CHANGE
%CHANGE
16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.)
5,000
6,000
1,000
20%
32ndSt.(west ofNewport Blvd.)
8,000
9,000
1,000
130/c
32nd St. (east of Newport Blvd.)
3,000
5,000
2,000
67%
Avocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.)
5,000
5,000
0
0%
Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.)
12,000
12,000
0
0%
Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
11,000
10,000
-1,000
-9%
Balboa Blvd. (south of Coast Hwy.)
18,000
22,000
4,000
22%
Bayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.)
10,000
12,000
2,000
20%
Birch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Kaman Ave.)
12,000
18,000
6,000
50%
Birch St. (Von Kaman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
15,000
20,000
5,000
33%
Birch St. (west of MacArthur Blvd.)
16,000
20,000
4,000
25%
Birch St. (north of Bristol St. North)
23,000
27,000
4,000
17%
Birch St. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
19,000
20,000
1,000
5%
Birch St. (south of Bristol St. South)
15,000
16,000
1,000
7%
Bison Ave. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
13,000
17,000
4,000
31%
Bison Ave. (MacArthur Blvd. to SR-73 Fwy.)
7,000
11,000
4,000
57%
Bluff Rd. (Coast Hwy. to 15th St.)
0
13,000
13,000
N/A
Bluff Rd. (15th St. to 17th St.)
0
13,000
13,000
N/A
Bluff Rd. (17th St. to 19th St.)
0
12,000
12,000
N/A
Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.)
26,000
34,000
8,000
31%
Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR-73 Fwy.)
17,000
27,000
10,000
59%
Bristol St. North (west of Campus Dr.)
28,000
32,000
4,000
14%
Bristol St. North (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
23,000
28,000
5,000
22%
Bristol St. North (east of Birch St.)
22,000
27,000
5,000
23%
Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd.)
16,000
18,000
2,000
13%
•
Bristol St. South (west of Campus Dr./Irvine Ave.)
28,000
32,000
4,000
14%
Bristol St. South (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
17,000
23,000
6,000
35%
Bristol St. South (east of Birch St.)
16,000
22,000
6,000
38%
Bristol St. South (west of Jamboree Rd.)
31,000
37,000
6,000
19%
Campus Dr. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Korman Ave.)
16,000
22,000
6,000
38%
Campus Dr. (Von Korman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
20,000
31,000
11,000
55%
Campus Dr. (west of MacArthur Blvd.)
26,000
39,000
13,000
50%
Campus Dr. (north of Bristol St. North)
28,000
39,000
11,000
39%
Campus Dr. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
30,000
40,000
10,000
33%
Coast Hwy. (west of Bluff Rd.)
46,000
60,000
14,000
30%
Coast Hwy. (Bluff Rd. to Superior Ave./Balboa Blvd.)
46,000
61,000
15,000
33%
Coast Hwy. (Superior Ave. to Newport Blvd.)
28,000
41,000
13,000
46%
Coast Hwy. (Newport Blvd. to Riverside Ave.)
53,000
68,000
15,000
28%
Coast Hwy. (Riverside Ave. to Tustin Ave.)
45,000
59,000
14,000
31%
Coast H (Tustin Ave. to Dover Dr.
42,000
55,000
13,000
31°/a
•
3-19
`1'
TABLE 3.10 (PAGE 2 OF 4)
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH
CONSTRAINED NETWORK AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH
LOCATION
COUNT
EXISTING
(2001/2002)
BUILDOUT
ADOPTED
(CONSTRAINED)
CHANGE
%CHANGE
Coast Hwy. (Dover Dr. to Baysidc Dr.)
63,000
78,000
15,000
24%
Coast Hwy. (Bayside Dr. to Jamboree Rd.)
51,000
64,000
13,000
25%
Coast Hwy. (Jamboree Rd. to Newport Center Dr.)
42,000
51,00D
9,000
21%
Coast Hwy. (Newport Center Dr. to Avocado Ave.)
35,000
43,000
8,000
23%
Coast Hwy. (Avocado Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
36,000
45,000
9,000
25%
Coast Hwy. (MacArthurBlvd. to Goldenrod Ave.)
40,000
48,000
8,000
200/c
Coast Hwy. (Goldenrod Ave. to Marguerite Ave.)
39,000
46,000
7,000
18%
Coast Hwy. (Marguerite Ave. to Poppy Ave.)
35,000
42,000
7,060
20%
Coast Hwy. (Poppy Ave. to Newport Coast Dr.)
28,000
35,000
7,000
25%
Coast Hwy (cast of Newport Coast Dr.)
35,000
44,000
9,000
26%
Dover Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Westcliff Dr.)
9,000
11,000
2,000
22%
Dover Dr. (WestcliffDr.tol6thSL)
22,000
24,000
2,000
9%
Dover Dr. (I 6th SL to Cliff Dr.)
25,000
28,000
3,000
12%
Dover Dr. (Cliff Dr. to Coast Hwy.)
29,000
33,000
4,000
14%
EastbluffDr. (West ofJamboree Rd. atUniversity Dr.)
10,000
10,000
0
0%
EastblufiDr.(west of Jamboree Rd. at Ford Rd.)
15,000
15,000
0
0%
Ford Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
9,000
13,000
4,000
44%
Goldenrod Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
4,000
2,000
100%
Highland Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
2,000
2,000
0
0'/a
Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.)
13,000
18,000
5,OOD
38%
Hospital Rd. (cast of Newport Blvd.)
7,000
10,000
3,000
43%
Irvine Ave. (Bristol SL South to Mesa Dr.)
27,000
38,000
11,000
41%
Irvine Ave, (Mesa Dr. to University Dr.)
31,000
41,000
10,000
32%
Irvine Ave, (University Dr. to Santa Isabel Ave.)
33,000
40,000
7,000
21%
Irvine Ave. (Santa Isabel Ave. to Santiago Dr.)
29,000
33,000
4,000
14%
Irvine Ave. (Santiago Dr. to Highland Dr.)
27,000
32,000
5,000
19%
Irvine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.)
27,000
32,000
5,000
19%
Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr. to Weslcliff Dr.)
22,000
28,000
6,000
27%
Irvine Ave. (WestcliffDr. to 16th SL)
12,000
13,000
1,000
8%
amborec Rd. (Campus Dr. to Birch SL)
36,000
47,000
11,000
31%
Jamboree Rd. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd,)
42,000
54,000
12,000
29%
amborce Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to Bristol SL North)
36,000
43,000
7,000
19%
amborec Rd. (Bristol SL North to Bristol SL South)
47,000
51,000
4,000
9%
amboree Rd. (Bristol St South to Bayview Wy.)
47,000
56,000
9,000
19%
amboree Rd. (Bayview Wy. to University Dr.)
47,000
56,000
9,000
19%
amborec Rd. (University Dr. to Bison Ave.)
37,000
41,000
4,000
11 %
amborec Rd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.)
39,000
45,000
6,000
1501,
Jamboree Rd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
46,000
55,000
9,000
20%
Jamboree Rd: (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to Santa Barbara Dr.)
34,000
43,000
9,000
26%
Jamboree Rd. (Santa Barbara Dr. to Coast Hwy.)
32,000
42,000
10,000
31%
Jamboree Rd. ( Coast Hwy. to Baysidc Dr.)
12,000
15,000
3,000
25%
MacArthur Blvd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
27,000
33,000
6,000
22%
MacArthur Blvd. (Birch SL to Von Karman Ave.)
22,000
26,000
4,000
18%
MacArthur Blvd. on Korman Ave. to Jamboree Rd.
26.000
32,000
6,000
23%
r1
•
C, J
3-20
ot�
TABLE 3-10 (PAGE 3 OF 4)
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH
CONSTRAINED NETWORK AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH
•
COUNT
BUILDOUT
EXISTING
ADOPTED
LOCATION
(2001/2002)
(CONSTRAINED)
CHANGE
%CHANGE
MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.)
27,000
35,000
8,000
30%
MacArthur Blvd. (north of Bison Ave.)
61,000
74,000
13,000
21%
MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.)
63,000
74,000
I1,000
17%
MacArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
54,000
60,000
6,000
I10/0
MacArthur Blvd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to San Miguel Rd.)
35,000
39,000
4,000
11%
MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
31,000
38,000
7,000
23%
Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
7,000
8,000
1,000
140%
Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
6,000
7,000
1,000
17%
Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
12,000
13,000
1,000
8%
Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.)
36,000
46,000
10,000
28%
Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
43,000
54,000
11,000
26%
Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido)
48,000
57,000
9,000
19%
Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.)
36,000
41,000
5,000
14%
Newport Blvd. (south of 32nd SQ
29,000
33,000
4,000
14%
Newport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.)
14,000
17,000
3,000
21%
Newport Coast Dr. (SR-73 Fwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
17,000
29,000
12,000
71%
Newport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
15,000
24,000
9,000
60%
Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.)
12,000
19,000
7,000
58%
Placentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.)
12,000
16,000
4,000
33%
Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave. to Hospital Rd.)
7,000
11,000
4,000
57%
Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
2,000
0
0%
Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
9,000
10,000
1,000
11%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.)
16,000
17,000
1,000
601.
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.)
11,000
12,000
1,000
9%
•
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
21,000
26,000
5,000
24%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to San Miguel Rd.)
19,000
22,000
3,000
16%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (San Miguel Rd. to Marguerite Ave.)
18,000
24,000
6,000
33%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to Spyglass Hill Rd.)
12,000
19,000
7,000
58%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.)
12,000
19,000
7,000
58%
San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.)
7,000
10,000
3,000
43%
San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.)
7,000
10,000
3,000
43%
San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
12,000
14,000
2,000
17%
San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd, to MacArthur Blvd.)
12,000
16,000
4,000
33%
San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.)
19,000
20,000
1,000
5%
San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.)
10,000
11,000
1,000
10%
Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.)
10,000
11,000
1,000
10%
Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
8,000
9,000
1,000
13%
Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
11,000
14,000
3,000
27%
Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave, to Irvine Ave.)
5,000
6,000
1,000
20%
Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
3,000
4,000
1,000
33%
Spyglass Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
4,000
4,000
0
0%
SR-55 Freeway (north of SR-75 Fwy.)
155:000
183:000
28,000
18%
SR-55 Freeway (22nd St. to 19th St.)
94,000
123,000
29,000
31%
SR-73 Freeway SR-55 Fwy to Campus Dr.
94,000
134,000
40,000
43%
3-21
TABLE 3-90 (PAGE 4 OF 4)
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH
CONSTRAINED NETWORK AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH
LOCATION
COUNT
EXISTING
(20D112002)
BUILDOUT
ADOPTED
(CONSTRAINED)
CHANGE
%CHANGE
SR-73 Frccway (Jamboree Rd. to University Dr.)
59,000
98,000
39,000
6601c
SR-73 Freeway (Bonita Canyon Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.)
62,000
125,000
63,000
1020/c
SR-73 Freeway (cast of Newport Coast Dr.)
56,000
119,000
63,000
113%
Superior Ave. (north of Placentia Ave.)
17,000
19,000
2,000
12%
Superior Ave. (Placentia Ave. to Hospital Rd.)
22,000
28,000
6,000
27%
Superior Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
24,000
28,000
4,000
17%
Tustin Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
3,000
1,000
50%
University Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
3,000
3,000
0
0%
University Dr. (cot ofJamborce Rd.)
11,000
15,000
4,000
36%
Via Lido (cast of Newport Blvd.)
8,000
10,000
2,000
25%
Von Korman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
14,000
18,000
4,000
29%
Von Kerman Ave. (Birch SL to MacArthur Blvd.)
12,000
16,000
4,000
33%
Westcliff Dr. arvine Ave. to Dover Dr.
16,000
16.000
0
02
U:1UcJobsl 012001012321 OA[01232.18.xlsIT340
•
•
�J
3-22
q`1
Land use increases in the Newport Coast area (from 2002 to buildout) cause
• Newport Coast Drive to have large volume increases that grow approaching the
SR-73 tollway. Increased traffic from Bonita Canyon and Harbor View
Hills/Newport Ridge cause volumes on Jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard, and
Bonita Canyon Drive to go up. Increased capacity on Irvine Avenue south of Bristol
Street draws traffic to Campus Drive/Irvine Avenue. The increase is about 2,000
VPD greater than the previously published results, most likely caused by
eliminating the SR-55 Freeway extension from 19th Street to south of 17th Street.
3.4 Daily Capacity Analysis
Daily roadway segment
capacity analysis
has
been performed
at study area
roadways, and is shown
on Exhibit 3-C.
The
following roadway
segments are
expected to operate with daily V/C greater than 0.90:
• Newport Boulevard north of Via Lido
• • Jamboree Road north of Campus Drive
• Jamboree Road north of Birch Street
• Irvine Avenue north of University Drive
• Irvine Avenue north of Santiago Drive
• Irvine Avenue north of Highland Drive
• Irvine Avenue north of Dover Drive
• Dover Drive north of Westcliff Drive
• Dover Drive north of Coast Highway
• Jamboree Road north of Bayview Way
• Jamboree Road north of University Drive
• Jamboree Road north of San Joaquin Hills Road
• MacArthur Boulevard north of Bison Avenue
• MacArthur Boulevard north of Ford Road
• MacArthur Boulevard north of San Joaquin Hills Road
• • Newport Coast Drive north of SR-73 NB Ramps
3-23
qA I
Lo
1
N
EXHIBIT 3-C
GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK
VOLUME/CAPACITY (WC) RATIOS
1 0.76 30.56A 11.22 v
.75 .47 a / - 1.10 .35(ID
0.82 �
r
.80 �^
1.0 22
T
.26
' 0.29 10.23 0.31
.18 .09
1.0
a 88
d `0.44 .r
0.38
6.40
yp{unav
1.81
•`l
0.33
'p 0.30
.�
xa�wmoa
.84
0b1
28
020
•'.•�
.52
.410.
037
L94
32
.76
aar.
J
v 0.3 .47
0.47
10
Py 32 59
1
$
382
L
80
'3 .75
14
0.
1.00 .8
.70
4 x
•-
Noxwrr 0.84
.40
�
.47
f
1.4
35
i OBw�
.44
0.18
55�\ I
_._-
'
1.24
.9. 1.31
035
\ � 1.20 0.66 0.8 022 `
Cll` a.ba k'o.3 .65,
PACIFIC
OCEAN
LEGEND:
0.88 - VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO
.
Newport Boulevard south of Hospital Road
.
is
Jamboree Road south of Birch Street
0
Irvine Avenue south of University Drive
.
Hospital Road east of Newport Boulevard
.
Campus Drive east of MacArthur Boulevard
.
Bristol Street North east of Birch Street
.
Bristol Street South east of Birch Street
.
Coast Highway east of Dover Drive
.
Coast Highway east of Bayside Drive
.
Coast Highway east of Jamboree Road
.
Ford Road east of MacArthur Boulevard
.
Coast Highway east of MacArthur Boulevard
.
Coast Highway east of Goldenrod Avenue
.
Coast Highway east of Marguerite Avenue
.
Coast Highway east of Poppy Avenue
. .
Coast Highway west of Superior Avenue/Balboa Boulevard
.
Coast Highway west of Riverside Drive
.
Bristol Street North west of Campus Drive
.
Bristol Street South west of Campus Drive
.
Dover Drive west of Irvine Avenue
.
Bristol Street South west of Jamboree Road
•
3.5 Peak Hour Forecasts
The final data required to evaluate the constrained currently adopted General
Plan Buildout scenario was intersection volume and geometric data for the 63
intersections selected for analysis. The geometric data was provided by City
staff and was used to calculate existing General Plan Buildout intersection
capacity utilization values (ICUs) at all 63 analysis intersections. Modifications
have been made to reduce lanes consistent with the constrained roadway
3-25
:v�
system. Table 3-11 summarizes the constrained currently adopted General Plan
Buildout ICUs based on the AM and PM peak hour intersection turning
movement volumes and the intersection geometric data as compared with
General Plan Baseline ICUs. Appendix "I" contains the detailed ICU calculation
worksheets. The worksheets in Appendix "I" summarize the intersection
geometric data and the AM and PM peak intersection turning movement
volumes.
As shown in Table 3-11, ICU values generally increase in the General Plan Buildout
conditions compared to existing conditions. The exceptions occur where new
parallel facilities are available, or where an increase in lanes results in increased
capacity. A comparison of currently adopted General Plan Buildout ICUs to
previously published Baseline ICUs is shown on Table 3-12. Most of the large
differences are caused by a change in the number of lanes for the constrained
roadway system. Table 3-13 summarizes intersection analysis for buildout
conditions. Deficient intersections are shown on Exhibit 3-D. Intersections with
ICU values greater than 0.90 (LOS "E" or worse) in either peak period are: •
• Bluff Road (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM/PM)
• Superior Avenue (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM/PM)
• Newport Boulevard (NS)/Hospital Road (EW) (PM)
• Riverside Drive (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM/PM)
• Tustin Avenue (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM)
• MacArthur Boulevard (NS)/Campus Drive (EW) (PM)
• Von Karman Avenue (NS)/Campus Drive (EW) (PM)
• Jamboree Road (NS)/Campus Drive (EW) (AM/PM)
• Campus Drive (NS)/Bristol Street North (EW) (AM/PM)
• Birch Street (NS)/Bristol Street North (EW) (AM)
• Campus Drive (NS)/Bristol Street South (EW) (AM)
• Irvine Avenue (NS)/University Drive (EW) (AM/PM)
• Bayside Drive (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (PM) •
3-26
0
•
TABLE 3-11 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU)
COMPARISON TO EXISTING
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM
PEAK HOUR
I PM
PEAK HOUR
EXISTING
COUNT
FUTURE
I FORECAST
I
I DELTAI
1EXISTING1FUTURE
COUNT
I FORECASTI
DELTA
1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw.
DNE'
1.27
1.27
DNE
1.29
1.29
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.66
0.72
0.06
0.67
0.82
0.15
3. Su erior Av. & Coast Hw.
0.84
1.01
0.17
0.90
0.99
0.09
. Ne ort BI. & Hosvital Rd.
0.54
0.79
0.25
0.70
0.97
0.27
5. Newport BI. & Via Lido
0.41
0.54
0.13
0.37
0.46
0.09
6. Newport BI. & 32nd St.
0.73
0.52
-0.21
0.78
0.71
-0.07
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
0.841
1.03
0.191
0.931
1.12
0.19
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
080
1.02
0.22
0.67
0.85
0.18
9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr.
0.61
0.76
0.15
0.85
1.25
0.40
10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St.
0.49
0.71
0.22
0.66
0.80
0.14
11. Von KammAv. & Campus Dr.
0.55
0.66
0.11
0.79
0.93
0.14
12. MacArthur BI. & Von Karman Av.
0.46
0.54
0.08
0.53
0.64
0.11
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.70
0.92
0.22
0.85
1.24
0.39
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.61
0.79
0.18
0.60
0.80
0.20
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St.
0.77
0.96
0.19
0.94
1.08
0.14
16. Birch St. & Bristol St.
0.66
0.92
0.26
0.61
0.72
0.11
17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S
0.72
0.93
0.21
0.58
0.77
0.19
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S
0.46
0.52
0.06
0.44
0.53
0.09
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.70
0.68
-0.02
0.94
0.90
-0.04
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
0.82
1.14
0.32
0.89
1.19
0.30
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.66
0.70
0.04
0.72
0.78
0.06
22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr.
0.57
0.61
0.04
0.60
0.63
0.03
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.72
0.78
0.06
0.64
0.70
0.06
24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr.
0.57
0.671
0.10
0.771
0.82
0.05
25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr.
0.38
0.39
0.01
0.48
0.56
0.08
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.55
0.64
0.09
0.57
0.64
0.07
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.70
0.86
0.16
0.74
0.90
0.16
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.69
0.83
0.14
0.70
0.94
0.24
29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd.
0.88
0.96
0.08
0.91
0.99
0.08
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St.
0.55
0.70
0.15
0.59
0.69
0.10
31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. S
0.48
0.60
0.121
0.561
0.63
0.07
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
0.75
0.96
0.21
0.72
0.85
0.13
33. Jamboree Rd. & Ba iew W .
0.41
0.48
0.07
0.57
0.70
0.13
34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr.
0.60
0.64
0.04
0.64
0.69
0.05
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.45
0.51
0.06
0.51
0.58
0.07
36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd.
0.69
0.78
0.09
0.65
0.72
0.07
37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.80
0.61
-0.19
1.00
0.65
-0.35
3-27
110
TABLE 3-11 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU)
COMPARISON TO EXISTING
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM
PEAK HOUR
I PM
PEAK HOUR
EXISTING
COUNT
FUTURE
FORECASTIDELTAl
EXISTING
COUNT
FUTURE
FORFrASTI
DELTA
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.47
0.55
0.08
0.63
0.71
0.08
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.68
0.85
0.17
0.74
0.89
0.15
0. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.36
0.36
0.00
0.36
0.34
.0.02
1. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.32
0.39
0.07
0.52
0.71
0.19
2. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
OAO
0.50
0.10
0.52
0.63
0.11
44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr.
0.33
0.37
0.04
0.72
0.79
0.07
5. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.58
0.771
0.19
0.66
0.80
0.14
6. SR-73 NB Rams & Bison Av.
0.31
0.47
0.16
0.37
0.56
0.19
7. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.26
0.38
0.12
0.17
0.29
0.12
8. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av.
0.63
0.78
0.15
0.60
0.80
0.20
9. MacArbturBI. & Ford RdJBonita Canyon Dr.
0.71
0.77
0.06
0.90
1.06
0.16
50. MacArtburBl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.64
0.77
0.13
0.93
1.04
0.11
51. MacArthur Bl. & San Miguel Dr.
0.56
0.63
0.071
0.65
0.77
0.12
52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw.
0.60
0.74
0.14
0.71
0.83
0.12
53. SR-73 NB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.55
0.69
0.14
0.43
0.53
0.10
54. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.30
OAS
0.15
0.41
0.59
0.18
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.28
0.30
0.02
0.31
0.38
0.07
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.44
0.52
0.08
0.54
0.68
0.14
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
0.99
1.08
0.09
0.69
0.79
0.10
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.31
0.381
0.07
0.351
0.51
0.16
59.Mar trite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.83
0.90
0.07
0.82
0.91
0.09
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.44
0.60
0.16
0.30
0.46
0.1 G
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hrv.
0.61
0.67
0.06
0.65
0.76
0.11
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
0.45
0.54
0.09
0.31
0.40
0.09
64. Ne ort Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.37
0.63
0.26
0.29
0.47
0.18
65. Ne ort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw.
.471
0.57
0.10
0.50
0.60
0.10
'DNE= Does Not Exist
U:1UcJobsl 012001012321Excell[01232-18.)ds]T3-11
•
•
3-28
•
•
Pi
TABLE 3-12 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO BASELINE
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
ADOPTED
(BASELINE)
ADOPTED
(CONSTRAINED)
DELTA
ADOPTED
(BASELINE)
ADOPTED
(CONSTRAINED)
I DELTA
1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw.
1.01
1.27
0.26
0.76
1.29
0.53
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.65
0.72
0.07
0.55
0.82
0.27
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
1.01
1.01
0.00
0.80
0.99
0.19
4. Newport Bl. & Hospital Rd.
0.87
0.79
-0.08
0.93
0.97
0.04
5. Newport Bl. & Via Lido
0.52
0.54
0.02
0.44
0.46
0.02
6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St.
0.67
0.52
-0.15
0.76
0.71
-0.05
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
0.83
1.03
0.20
1.12
1.12
0.00
S. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
0.76
1.02
0.26
0.87
0.85
-0.02
9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr.
0.72
0.76
0.04
1.21
1.25
0.04
10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St.
0.71
0.71
0.00
0.80
0.80
0.00
11. Von Karman Av. & Campus
Dr.
0.67
0.66
-0.01
0.94
0.93
-0.01
12. MacArthur BI. & Von Kaman
Av.
0.54
0.54
0.00
0.64
0.64
0.00
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.93
0.92
-0.01
1.23
1.24
0.01
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.90
0.79
-0.11
0.89
0.80
-0.09
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St.
0.971
0.96
-0.01
1.091
1.08
-0.01
16. Birch St. & Bristol St.
0.931
0.92
-0.01
0.71
0.72
0.01
17. Campus DrArvine Av. &
Bristol St. (S)
0.91
0.93
0.02
0.76
0.77
0.01
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S
0.52
0.52
0.00
0.53
0.53
0.00
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.68
0.68
0.00
0.90
0.90
0.00
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
1.15
1.14
-0.01
1.06
1.19
0.13
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.58
0.70
0.12
0.62
0.78
0.16
22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr.
0.51
0.61
0.10
0.55
0.63
0.08
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.75
0.78
0.03
0.651
0.70
0.05
24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr
0.49
0.67
0.18
0.74
0.82
0.08
25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr.
0.26
0.39
0.13
0.48
0.56
0.08
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.471
0.64
0.17
0.55
0.64
0.09
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.71
0.86
0.15
0.74
0.90
0.16
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.85
0.83
-0.02
0.94
0.94
0.00
29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree
Rd.
0.97
0.96
-0.01
0.98
0.99
0.01
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St.
0.69
0.70
0.01
0.701
0.69
-0.01
31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. (S)
0.61
0.60
-0.01
0.631
0.63
0.00
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
0.951
0.96
0.01
0.83
0.85
0.02
33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W .
0.45
0.48
0.03
0.68
0.70
0.02
34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr.
fUniversity Dr.
0.58
0.64
0.06
0.61
0.69
0.08
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.46
0.51
0.05
0.54
0.58
0.04
36. Jamboree Rd. & Easlbluff
Dr./Ford Rd.
0.74
0.78
0.04
0.70
0.72
0.02
37. Jamboree R . & an Joaquin
Hills Rd. 1
0.641
0.61
-0.03
0.65
0.65
0.00
3-29
TABLE 3.12 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO BASELINE
AM
PEAK HOUR
I PM
PEAK HOUR
ADOPTED
I ADOPTED
ADOPTED
ADOPTED
INTERSECTION NS/EW
(BASELINE)
(CONSTRAINED)
DELTA
(BASELINE)
(CONSTRAINED)IIDELTA
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara
Dr.
0.52
0.55
0.03
0.69
0.71
0.02
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.84
0.85
0.01
0.87
0.89
0.02
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San'Jdaquirr
Hills Rd.
0.40
0.36
-0.04
0.38
0.34
-0.04
1. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin
Hills Rd.
0.34
0.39
0.05
0.66
0.71
0.05
2. Newport Center Dr. & Coast
Hw.
0.51
0.50
-0.01
0.621
0.63
0.01
4. Avocado Av. & San Miguel
Dr.
0.35
0.37
0.02
0.77
0.79
0.02
5. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.76
0.77
0.01
0.771
0.80
0.03
46. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bison
Av.
0.46
0.47
0.01
0.56
0.56
0.00
7. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.40
0.38
-0.02
0.29
0.29
0.00
S.MacArthur BI. & Bison Av.
0.771
0.78
0.01
0.77
0.80
0.03
9. MacArbtur BI. & Ford
RdJBonita Canyon Dr.
0.76
0.77
0.01
1.07
1.06
-0.01
50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin
Hills Rd.
0.71
0.77
0.06
0.961
1.04
0.08
51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel
Dr.
0.55
0.63
0.08
0.70
0.77
0.07
52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw.
0.72
0.74
0.02
0.81
0.83
0.02
53. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bonita
Canyon Dr.
0.62
0.69
0.07
0.47
0.53
0.06
54. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bonita
Canyon Dr.
0.44
0.45
0.01
0.56
0.59
0.03
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass
Hill Rd.
0.31
0.30
-0.01
0.391
0.38
.0.01
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San
Miguel Dr.
0.50
0.52
0.02
0.65
0.68
0.03
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
1.08
1.08
0.00
0.76
0.79
0.03
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin
Hills Rd.
0.37
0.38
0.01
0.50
0.51
0.01
59.Mar erite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.92
0.90
-0.02
0.95
0.91
-0.04
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San
Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.57
0.60
0.03
0.44
0.46
0.02
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw.
0.71
0.67
-0.04
0.75
0.76
0.01
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73
NB Ramps
0.52
0.54
0.02
0.36
0.40
0.04
64. Newport Coast Dr. & San
oa uin Hills Rd.
0.60
0.63
0.03
0.46
0.47
0.01
ewpott oast Dr. & oast
Hw.
1 0.591
0.57
.0.02
0.61
0.60
-0.01
U:\UcJobs\ 01200101232\Excel\[01232-18.xls]T3-12
•
•
•
3-30
\\,P
TABLE 3-13 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
11
0
•
TABLE 3-13 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.55
A
0.71
C
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.85
D
0.89
D
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.36
A
0.34
A
41. Santa Rosa Dr. & Sah Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.39
A
0.71
C
42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.50
A
0.63
B
44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr.
0.37
A
0.79
C
5. Avocado Av. & Coast Htv.
0.771
C
0.801
C
46. SR-73 NB Romps & Bison Av.
0.47
A
0.56
A
47. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.38
A
0.29
A
48. MacArthur Bl. & Bison Av.
0.78
C
0.80
C
49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd.Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.77
C
1.06
F
50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.77
C
1.04
F
51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel.Dr.
0.63
B
0.77
C
52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw.
0.741
C
0.831
D
53. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.69
B
0.53
A
54. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.45
A
0.59
A
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.30
A
0.38
A
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.52
A
0.68
B
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
1.08
F
0.79
C
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.38
A
0.51
A
59.Mar erite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.901
D
0.91
E
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.60
A
0.46
A .
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw.
0.67
B
0.761
C
62. Nei ort Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
0.54
A
0.40
A
64. Nei ort Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.63
B
0.471
A
65. Nei ort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.57
A
0.60
A
'DNE = Does Not Exist
U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xls]T3-13
•
•
3-32
W
W
W
QXHIBIT 3-D
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN
WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK DEFICIENCIES
LEGEND:
= AM LOS
"E''
'
= PM LOS
"E"
•
= LOS "E"
= AM LOS
"F"
— PM LOS
"F"
PACIFIC OCEAN , "
-= LOS "F
NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN UPDATE TRAFFIC STUDY, Newport Beach, California - 01232:85 rev.04/25/05 URBAN
R
• MacArthur Boulevard (NS)/Jamboree Road (EW) (AM/PM)
• Jamboree Road (NS)/Bristol Street South (EW) (AM)
• MacArthur Boulevard (NS)/Ford Road/Bonita Canyon Drive (EW) (PM)
• MacArthur Boulevard (NS)/San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) (PM)
• Goldenrod Avenue (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM)
• Marguerite Avenue (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (PM)
The only intersection that experiences a deficiency with the constrained network
that did not experience one before is Tustin Avenue (NS) at Coast Highway
(EW). The new deficiency is caused by the reduction in lanes on Coast Highway
in Mariner's Mile. Three additional locations experience deficiencies in the other
peak hour (although for one location, the AM peak hour deficiency goes away),
and one changes from LOS "E" to LOS "F".
intersection analysis has been, performed to determine the additional
improvements necessary to provide acceptable levels of service. ICU
worksheets are included in Appendix "J". Table 3-14 compares the ICU results
with and without additional improvements. Additional improvements necessary
to provide acceptable levels of service are shown in Table 3-15.
Improvements have been developed that provide acceptable operations at all
potentially deficient intersections. The feasibility of the necessary improvements
is questionable at some locations (particularly where additional through lanes are
necessary).
E
3-34
IND
TABLE 3.14 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY
•
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
ADOPTED
FORECAST
WITH
IMPROVEMENTS
DELTA
ADOPTED
FORECAST
WITH
IMPROVEMENTS
I DELTA
1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw.
1.27
0.76
-0.51
1.29
0.88
-0.41
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.72
0.72
0.00
0.82
0.82
0.00
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
1.01
0.84
-0.17
0.99
0.87
-0.12
4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd.
0.79
0.85
0.06
0.97
0.84
-0.13
S. Newport Bl. & Via Lido
0.54
0.54
0.00
0.46
0.46
0.00
6. Newport BI. & 32nd St.
0.52
0.52
0.00
0.71
0.71
0.00
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
1.03
0.71
-0.321
1.12
0.77
-0.35
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
1.02
0.71
-0.311
0.85
0.85
0.00
9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr.
0.76
0.73
-0.03
1.25
0.88
-0.37
10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St.
0.71
0.71
0.00
0.80
0.80
0.00
11. Von Kaman Av. & Campus Dr.
0.66
0.62
-0.04
0.93
0.89
-0.04
12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Karman Av.
0.54
0.54
0.00
0.64
0.64
0.00
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.92
0.89
-0.03
1.24
0.86
-0.38
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.79
0.79
0.00
0.80
0.80
0.00
IS. Campus Dr. & Bristol St.
0.96
0.89
-0.071
1.08
0.85
-0.23
16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N)
0.92
0.78
.0.141
0.72
0.71
-0.01
17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. (S)
0.93
0.87
-0.061
0.77
0.77
0.00
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S
0.52
0.52
0.00
0.531
0.53
0.00
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.68
0.68
0.00
0.90
0.901
0.00
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
1.14
0.74
-0.40
1.19
0.83
-0.36
•
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.70
0.70
0.00
0.78
0.78
0.00
22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr.
0.61
0.61
0.00
0.63
0.63
0.00
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.78
0.78
0.00
0.70
0.70
0.00
24.IrvineAv. &WestcliffDr.
0.67
0.67
0.001
0.82
0.82
0.00
25. Dover Dr. & WestcliffDr.
0.39
0.39
0.001
0.561
0.56
0.00
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.64
0.64
0.00
0.64
0.64
0.00
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.86
0.86
0.00
0.90
0.90
0.00
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.83
0.81
-0.02
0.94
0.88
-0.06
29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd.
0.96
0.75
-0.21
0.99
0.82
-0.17
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St.
0.70
0.70
0.00
0.69
0.69
0.00
31. Bayview PI. & Bristol St. S
0.601
0.60
0.00
0.63
0.63
0.00
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
0.96
0.74
-0.221
0.851
0.80
-0.05
33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W .
0.48
0.48
0.00
0.70
0.70
0.00
34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr.
0.64
0.64
0.00
0.69
0.69
0.00
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.51
0.51
0.00
0.58
0.58
0.00
36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd.
0.78
0.78
0.00
0.72
0.72
0.00
37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.61
0.61
0.00
0.65
0.65
0.00
•
3-35
TABLE 3-14 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
ADOPTED
FORECAST
WITH
IMPROVEMENTS
DELTA
ADOPTED
FORECAST
WITH
IMPROVEMENTS
DELTA
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbam Dr.
0.55
0.55
.0.01
0.71
0.71
0.00
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.85
0.85
0.00
0.89
0.89
0.00
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.36
0.36
0.00
0.34
0.34
0.00
I. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.39
0.39
0.00
0.71
0.71
0.00
2. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.50
0.50
0.00
0.63
0.63
0.00
. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr.
0.37
0.37
0.00
0.79
0.79
0.00
45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.77
0.77
0.001
0.80
0.80
0.00
46. SR-73 NB Rams & Bison Av.
0.47
0.47
0.00
0.56
0.56
0.00
47. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.38
0.38
0.00
0.29
0.29
0.00
8. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av.
0.78
0.78
0.00
0.80
0.80
0.00
49. MacArthur 331. & Ford RdJBonita Canyon Dr.
0.77
0.72
-0.05
1.06
0.86
-0.20
50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.77
0.66
.0.11
1.04
0.84
.0.20
51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr.
0.63
0.63
0.00
0.77
0.77
0.00
52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw.
0.74
0.74
0.001
0.83
0.83
0.00
53. SR-73 NB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.69
0.69
0.00
0.53
0.53
0.00
54. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.45
0.45
0.00
0.59
0.59
0.00
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.30
0.30
0.00
0.38
0.38
0.00
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.52
0.52
0.00
0.68
0.68
0.00
57. Goldenrod Av. & CoastHw.
1.08
0.80
.0.28
0.79
0.79
0.00
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.38
0.38
0.00
0.51
0.51
0.00
59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.90
0.90
0.001
0.91
0.80
.0.11
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.60
0.60
0.00
0.46
0.46
0.00
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw.
0.67
0.67
0.00
. 0.76
0.76
0.00
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
0.54
0.54
.0.00
0.40
0.40
0.00
64. Ncwport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.63
0.63
0.00
0.47
0.47
0.00
65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.57
0.57
0.00
O.GO
0.601
0.00
U:1UcJobsl 01200101232\Excel\[01232-18.xis)T3-14
•
3-36
NY"
TABLE 3-15 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS
INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENT
Bluff Rd. (NS) at Coast Hw. (EW)
Provide 1st SB right turn lane.
Continue to allow right turn movement from SB through lane.
Change N/S phasing to Split.
Provide 2nd EB left turn lane.
Provide 4th and 5th EB through lane.
Provide 4th WB through lane.
Superior Av. (NS) at Coast Hw. (EW)
Provide 1st NB right turn lane.
Provide 4th EB through lane.
Provide 5th WB through lane.
Newport Bl. (NS) at Hospital Rd. (EW)
Provide 2nd NB left turn lane. Eliminate 1st NB right turn lane.
Restripe 2nd WB through lane to shared through left lane.
Change E/W phasing to Split.
Riverside Av. (NS) at Coast Hw. (EW)
Provide SB free right turn lane.
Provide 2nd EB left turn lane.
Provide 3rd EB through lane.
Provide 4th WB through lane. Eliminate WB right turn lane.
Tustin Av. (NS) at Coast Hw. EW
Provide 3rd EB through lane.
MacArthur Bl. NS at Campus Dr. EW
Provide SB free right turn lane in unincorporated County).
Von Karmen Av. (NS) at Campus Dr. (EW)
Provide 1st WB right turn lane (in Irvine).
Jamboree Rd. (NS) at Campus Dr. (EW)
Provide NB free right turn lane.
Provide 4th SB through lane (in Irvine).
Provide 1st SB right turn lane (in Irvine).
Provide 3rd EB left turn lane (in Irvine).
Provide WB free right turn lane.
Campus Dr. (NS) at Bristol St. N (EW)
Provide SB shared through right lane.
Provide 5th WB through lane.
Provide 1st WB right turn lane.
Birch St. (NS) at Bristol St. N (EW)
Provide 3rd NB through lane.
Provide list WB right turn lane.
Campus DrArvine Av. NS at Bristol St. S (EW)
Provide 1st NB right turn lane.
r
l%
w
w
m
TABLE 3-15 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS
INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENT
Irvine Av. (NS) at University Dr. (EW)
Provide 3rd NB through lane.
Provide 3rd SB through lane.
Restripe 2nd EB through lane to shared through left lane.
Change EfW phasing to Split.
Bayside Dr. (NS) at Coast Hw. (EW)
Restripe SB through lane to shared through left lane.
Convert-SB defacto to 1st SB right turn lane.
Install SB right turn overlap phasing.
Provide 1st WB right turn lane.
MacArthur Bl. (NS) at Jamboree Rd. (EW)
Provide 4th NB through lane.
Provide 4th-EB through lane.
Provide 3rd WB left turn lane.
Jamboree Rd. (NS) at Bristol St. S EW
Provide 2nd EB left turn lane.
MacArthur Bl. (NS) at Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. (EW)
Provide 3rd SB left turn lane.
Eliminate SB free right turn lane.
Restripe 2nd EB left turn lane to through lane.
MacArthur Bl. (NS) at San Joaquin Hills Rd. (EW)
Eliminate 2nd NB left turn lane. Provide 4th NB through lane.
Provide 3rd EB left turn lane.
Goldenrod Av. (NS) at Coast Hw. EW
Provide 3rd WB throw ti lane. Elminate WB defacto right turn lane.
Marguerite Av. (NS)
at Coast Hw. EW
Provide 3rd EB throw h lane. Eliminate EB right turn lane.
U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xis]T3-15
I= •
0 0)
4 0 TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (POST-2025) ALTERNATIVE
• WITH OPEN SPACE NETWORK SCENARIO
This chapter presents true minimum alternative (as defined in the General Plan
Advisory Committee (GPAC) alternatives) General Plan Buildout (Post-2025)
conditions. General Plan Buildout model inputs are discussed and refined forecast
'volumes are presented. Data are compared to existing conditions to show reasonable
growth and to currently adopted General Plan conditions (as defined in Chapter 3 of this
report) results to show differences from the currently adopted General Plan. The only
roadway system change occurs in Banning Ranch where the roadway system has been
removed, consistent with the open space land use designation.
4.1 Land Use and Socioeconomic Data (SED)
This section discusses the land use and socioeconomic data inputs.
4.1.1 True Minimum General Plan Buildout Land Use Data
• The True Minimum General Plan Buildout land use data was provided to
Urban Crossroads, Inc. staff by City staff and the City's General Plan
consultant, EIP Associates. Appendix "K" of this report documents the
explicit land use data included in NBTM 3.1 for true minimum General
Plan Buildout conditions in this analysis. Table 4-1 summarizes the
overall true minimum General Plan Buildout land uses for the City of
Newport Beach. Appendix "L" contains the land use changes by TAZ
compared to the currently adopted General Plan scenario. Land uses
have changed based on data provided by the City. The largest reductions
in land use, compared to currently adopted General Plan conditions, occur
in Banning Ranch and Cannery Village.
Table 4-2 shows true minimum General Plan Buildout land use growth
from existing. Medium density residential and apartments each grow by
more than 2,000 dwelling units. Categories that grow by more than
• 500,000 square feet include general commercial and general office.
4-1
;J5
TABLE 4-1
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
LAND USE COMPARISON
NBTM
CODE'
DESCRIPTION
UNITS
ADOPTED
QUANTITY
TRUE MINIMUM
QUANTITY
CHANGE
%CHANGE
1
Low Density Residential
DU
18,347
17,838
509
-2.77%
2
Medium Density Residential
DU
12,859
12,835
24
-0.19%
3
Apartment
DU
13,374
11,657
1,717
-12.84°/u
4
Elderly Residential
DU
200
200
0.00%
5
Mobile Home
DU
455
455
0.00%
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS
DU
45,235
42,986
(2,250)
.4.97%
6
Motel
ROOM
139
194
55
39.57%
7
Hotel
ROOM
3,387
3,387
0.00%
9
Regional Commercial
TSF
T.633.840
1,633.840
0.00%
10
General Commercial
TSF
4,627.760
4,270.152
357.608
-7.73%
11
Commercial/Recreation
ACRE
5.100
5.100
0.00%
13
Restaurant
TSF
198.780
198.780
0.00%
15
Fast Food Restaurant
TSF
13.940
13.940
0.00%
16
Auto Dealer/Sales
TSF
227.170
227.170
0.00%
17
Yacht Club
TSF
70.310
70.310
0.00%
18
Health Club
TSF
61.330
61.330
0.00%
19
Tennis Club
CRT
59
59
0.00%
20
Marina
SLIP
1,055
1,055
0.00%
21
Theater
SEAT
5,475
5,475
0.00%
22
Newport Dunes
ACRE
64.00
64.00
0.00%
23
General Office
TSF
12,305.620
11,924.379
381.241
-3.10%
24
Medical/Government Office
TSF
910.616
848.986
61.630
-6.77%
251
Research & Development
TSF
81.730
81.730
0.00%
26
1 Industrial ITSF
1,956.092
1,099A27
856.665
-43.79%
27
Mini-Stora e/Warehouse
TSF
196A20
196.420
0.00%
28
Pre-schoolJDay Care
TSF
56.770
56.770
0.00%
29
Elementary/Private School
STU
4,455
4,455
0.00%
30
Junior/High School
STU
4.765
4,765
0.00%
31
Cultural/Leaming Center
TSF
40.000
40.000
0.00%
32
Library
TSF
78.840
78.840
0.00%
33
Post Office
TSF
73.700 1
73.700
0.00%
34
Hospital
BED
1,265
1,265
0.00%
35
Nursin /Conv. Home
BEDS
661
602
59
-8.93%
36
Church
TSF
467.210
467.210
0.00 a
37
Youth Ctr./Service
TSF
166.310
166.310
0.00%
38
Park
ACRE
94.920
92.250
2.670
-2.81%
39
Regional Park
ACRE
45.910
45.910
0.00%
40
Golf Course
ACRE
298.290
298.290
0.00%
' Uses 8,12, and 14 are part of the old NBTAM model structure and are not currently utilized In
the City land use datasets.
2 Units Abbreviations:
DU = Dwelling Units
TSF = Thousand Square Feet
CRT = Court
STU = Students
U:IUcJobsl 012001012321Exceh[01232-18.xlsIT4-1
•
•
4-2
ti�u
11
•
TABLE 4-2
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING
NBTM
CODE'
DESCRIPTION
UNITS'
2002
QUANTITY
TRUE MINIMUM
QUANTITY
GROWTH
%GROWTH
1
Low Density, Residential
DU
17,124
17,838
714:24
7%
2
Medium DensityResidential
DU
9,535
12,835
3,300TF/0
3
Apartment
OU
9,199
11,657
2,45872%
4
ElderlyResidential
DU
200
200
0%
5
Mobile Home
DU
600
455
1457%
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS
DU
36,658
42,985
6,32726%
6
Motel
ROOM
134
194
60
44.78%
7
Hotel
ROOM
2,821
3,387
566
20.06%
9
Regional Commercial
TSF
1,259.000
1,633.840
374.840
29.77%
10
General Commercial
TSF
3,696.781
4,270.152
573.371
15.51%
11
Commercial/Recreation
ACRE
5.100
5.100
-
0.00%
13
Restaurant
TSF
99.370
198.780
99.410
100.04%
15
Fast Food Restaurant
TSF
13.940
13.940
-
0.00%
16
Auto Dealer/Sales
TSF
172.420
227.170
54.750
31.75%
17
Yacht Club
TSF
51.830
70.310
18.480
35.66%
18
Health Club
TSF
16.770
61.330
45
265.71%
19
Tennis Club
CRT
60
59
1
-1.67%
20
Marina
SLIP
1,055
1,055
0.00%
21
Theater
SEAT
5,489
5,475
14
-0.26%
22
Newport Dunes
ACRE
64.00
64.00
-
0.00%
23
General Office
TSF
10,865.733
11,924.379
1,058.646
9.74%
241
Medical/Government Office
TSF
795.926
848.986
53.060
6.67%
25 1
Research & Development
TSF
81.730
81.730
-
0.00%
26
Industrial
TSF
1,291.079
1,099.427
191.652
-14.84%
27
Mini-Storage/Warehouse
TSF
196.420
196.420
-
0.00%
28
Pre-school/Day Care
TSF
55.820
56.770
0.950
1.70%
29
Elementary/Private School
STU
4,399
4,455
56
1.28%
30
Junior/High School
STU
4,765
4,765
-
0.00%
31
Cultural/Learning Center
TSF
35.000
40.000
5.000
14.29%
32
Library
TSF
78.840
78.840
-
0.00%
33
Post Office
TSF
53.700
73.700
20.000
37.24%
34
Hospital
BED
351
1,265
914
260.40%
35
Nursin /Conv. Home
BEDS
661
602
59
-8.93%
36
Church
TSF
377.760
467.210
89.450
23.68%
37
Youth Ctr./Service
TSF
149.560
166.310
16.750
11.20%
38
Park
ACRE
113.970
92.250
21.720
-19.06%
39
Regional Park
ACRE
45.910
45.910
N/A
40
Golf Course
ACRE
305.330
298.290
7.04
-2.31%
' Uses 8, 12, and 14 are part of the old NBTAM model structure and are not currently utilized in
the City land use datasets.
' Units Abbreviations:
DU = Dwelling Units
TSF = Thousand Square Feet
CRT = Court
STU = Students
• U:1UrJobs101200101232kExcen[01232-18.xls]T4-2
4-3
�,C)
4.1.2 General Plan Buildout Socioeconomic Data (SED)
General Plan Buildout SED that has been converted from land use is
summarized in Table 4-3. Table 4-3 also contains a comparison of true
minimum General Plan Buildout SED to existing SED for the City of
Newport Beach. The total number of dwelling units are projected to grow
by 5,897 units (17 %) from existing conditions. For total employment, an
increase of 10,999 employees (17%) is anticipated.
Socioeconomic data for the remainder of the primary modeling area (and
for Newport Coast, where land use data was unavailable) has been
unchanged from the currently adopted General Plan data.
4.2 Trio Generation
Table 4-4 summarizes the overall trip generation for the True Minimum
Alternative General Plan Buildout conditions for the City of Newport Beach and
compares it to existing conditions trip generation. Appendix "M" contains a report •
of trip generation by NBTM TAZ for the City of Newport Beach. Most of these
trips have been calculated from the final General, Plan Buildout SED presented
previously. Supplemental trips are unchanged from the previously published
data.
The overall trip generation for the City of Newport Beach is an estimated 842,368
daily vehicle trips. Table 4-5 compares true minimum General Plan buildout trip
generation to currently adopted General Plan buildout trip generation. Total trip
generation decreases by approximately 37,391 daily trips (4.25%). Trip
generation has decreased primarily in Banning Ranch and Cannery Village.
Appendix "N" shows the zone by zone trip generation comparison.
4.3 Traffic Assignment
The roadway system for the True Minimum General Plan alternative is almost
identical to the constrained roadway system presented in Chapter 3 of this report.
Eff
•
•
TABLE 4-3
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH' LAND USE BASED
SOCIOECONOMIC DATA SUMMARY/COMPARISON
VARIABLE
2002
QUANTITY1
ITRUEMINIMUM
QUANTITY
GROWTH
% GROWTH
Occupied Single Family Dwelling Units
1 15,970
16,707
737
5%
Occu ied Multi -Family Dwelling Units
18,294
23,4541
5,160
28%
TOTAL OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS
1 34,2641
40,1611
5,897
17%
Group Quarters Population
661
661
0
0%
Po ulation
1 75,2111
87,343
12,132
16%
Em to ed Residents
1 44,6351
51,9931
7,356
16%
Retail Employees 1
10,9701
12,9421
1,972
18%
Service Employees 1
17,2951
20,7061
3,411
20%
Other Employees 1
36,9901
42,6061
5,616
15%
TOTAL EMPLOYEES 1
65,2551
76,2541
10,999
17%
Elem/High School Students 1
9,1641
9,2201
56
1%
1 Includes data converted from land use only. Excludes Newport Coast and recent annexation areas.
• U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\t01232-18.xlsIT4-3
4-5
TABLE 4-4
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRUE MINIMUM TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY •
TRIP PURPOSE
DAILY TRIP ENDS
GROWTH
PERCENT
GROWTH
EXISTING
TRUE MINIMUM
GENERALPLAN
BUILDOUT
Home Based Work Productions
57,819
70,754
12.935
22.37%
Home Based Work Attractions
81,964
97,510
15,546
18.97%
Home Based School Productions
11,336
13,949
2,613
23.05%
Home Based School Attractions
8,730
8,845
115
1.32%
Home Based Other Productions2
127,338
168,175
40,837
32.07%
Home Based Other Attractions
109,815
131,960
22,145
20.17%
Work Based Other Productions
52,152
62.537
10.385
19.91%
Work Based Other Attractions
57,035
68,034
10,999
19.28%
Other-OtherProductions
91,218
111,105
19,887
21.80%
Other - Other Attractions
89,7341
109A991
19,7651
22.03%
TOTAL PRODUCTIONS
—339,8631
426,5201
86,5571
25.50%
TOTAL ATTRACTIONS
347,2781
415,8481
68,5701
19.74%
OVERALL TOTAL 1
—687,1411
842,3681
155,227
22.59%
•
1 Home -Work includes Home -Work and Home -University trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output.
2 Home -Other includes Home -Shop and Home -Other trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output.
U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\t01232-18.xlsIT4.4 •
\2U
TABLE 4-5
• CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRUE MINIMUM TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON
•
TRIP PURPOSE
DAILY TRIP ENDS
GROWTH
PERCENT
GROWTH
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED GENERAL
PLAN BUILDOUT
TRUE MINIMUM
GENERAL PLAN
BUILDOUT
Home Based Work Productions
73,968
70,754
-3,214
-4.35%
Home Based Work Attractions
102,230
97,510
-4,720
-4.62%
Home Based School Productions
14,475
13,949
-526
-3.63%
Home Based School Attractions
8,845
8,845
0
0.00%
Home Based Other Productionsz
174,257
168,175
-6,082
-3.49%
Home Based Other Attractions
138,334
131,960
-6,374
-4.61 %
or Based Other Productions
65,482
62,537
-2,945
-4.50%
Work Based Other Attractions
71,3351
68,034
-3,301
-4.63%
Other - Other Productions
116,275
111,105
-5,170
-4.45%
Other - Other Attractions
114,5581
109,499
-5,059
-4.42%
TOTAL PRODUCTIONS
444,4571
426,620
-17,937
-4.04%
TOTAL ATTRACTIONS
435,3021
415,848
-19,454
-4.47%
OVERALL TOTAL
879,7591
842,368
-37,391
-4.25%
Home -Work includes Home -Work and Home -University trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output.
2 Home -Other includes Home -Shop and Home -Other trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output.
• U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Exce11t01232-18.xlsiT4-5
Iw
The only change is the removal of the roadway system in Banning Ranch,
consistent with the open space designation included in the true minimum
alternative.
Exhibit 4-A summarizes the NBTM 3.1 refined True Minimum General Plan
Alternative with open space network daily traffic volumes throughout the City of
Newport Beach. ' Changes from the currently adopted General Plan Baseline
forecasts are shown on Table 4-6. Volume changes occur primarily because of
land use changes in Banning Ranch and Cannery Village. Roadways that
experience the largest decreases (other than roads eliminated altogether) include
Coast Highway and Newport Boulevard.
Table 4-7 compares these refined forecasts to existing counted volumes (presented
in the General Plan Baseline document). The highest daily traffic volume increases
occur on Campus Drive, Coast Highway, Jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard,
and Newport Center Drive. Each of these facilities experience an increase in
excess of 10,000 vehicles per day, although none experiences the 15,000 VPD •
increase anticipated for currently adopted General Plan conditions.
4.4 Daily Capacity Analysis
Daily roadway segment capacity analysis has been performed at study area
roadways, and is shown on Exhibit 4-B. The following roadway segments are
expected to operate with daily V/C greater than 0.90:
• Newport Boulevard north of Via Lido
• Jamboree Road north of Campus Drive
• Jamboree Road north of Birch Street
• Irvine Avenue north of University Drive
• Irvine Avenue north of Santiago Drive
• Irvine Avenue north of Highland Drive
• Irvine Avenue north of Dover Drive •
UK
?�1
62
24
27
22 21 33 � 37 56
5_
37 18 d 15
uw ora
i 6 8 \
40 `41
up v 0
16 10 3 2
40
3 c
`w
g � 3 75
32
14 �y It 8
10 12 4 31
6 7 Haw.wooa y ( ,
3 2
121 F
tam IT. 25 32
17 17
28
32 nm ar wrsrairr i
19 15 ar —
3 24 ,
,em I
5 6 B 63
28 wS
m sr
3 . `76 12
199 452
" 10 4
17 11
WEXHIBIT 4-A
TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT)
k N \ ,
\I 18
- `. rsµseoW�nw
•+ 124
14
20
m
ax,µ
m
i0 44 3
pG Wqv 42 2
46 45
it 2 35 44
42
—
52 66s'56
199 37 93
5s PACIFIC
LEGEND:
10 — VEHICLES PER DAY (1000'5)
I&
URBAN
TABLE 4.6 (PAGE 1 OF 4)
TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON
LOCATION
ADOPTED
(CONSTRAINED)
BUILDOUT
I FORECAST
I CHANGE
%
CHANGE
16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.)
6,000
6,000
0
0.0%
32n&St (west of Newport Blvd.)
9,000
8,000
-1,000
-11.1%
32nd St (east of Newport Blvd.)
5,000
3,000
-2,000
40.0%
Avocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.)
5,000
5,000
0
0.0%
Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.)
12,000
11,000
-1,000
-8.3%
Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
10,000
10,000
0
0.0%
Balboa Blvd. (south of Coast Hwy.)
22,000
19,000
-3,000
-13.6%
Bayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.)
12,000
12,000
0
0.0%
Birch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Karman Ave.)
18,000
18,000
0
0.0%
Birch St. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
20,000
20,000
0
0.0%
Birch St. (west of MacArthur Blvd.)
20,000
20,000
0
0.0%
Birch St. (north of Bristol St North)
27,000
27,000
0
0.0%
Birch St. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
20,000
20,000
. 0
0.0%
Birch St. (south of Bristol St. South)
16,000
16,000
0
0.0%
Bison Ave. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
17,000
17,000
0
0.0%
Bison Ave. (MacArthur Blvd, to SR-73 Fwy.)
11,000
11,000
0
0.0%
Bluff Rd. (Coast Hwy. to 15th St.)
13,000
0
-13,000
-100%
Bluff Rd. (15th St. to 17th St.)
13,000
0
-13,000
-100%
Bluff Rd. (17th St to 19th St)
12,000
0
-12,000
-100%
Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.)
34,000
34,000
0
0.0%
Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR-73 Fwy.)
27,000
27,000
0
0.0%
Bristol St. North (west of Campus Dr.)
32,000
32,000
0
0.0%
Bristol St North (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
28,000
28,000
0
0.0%
Bristol St. North (east of Birch St.)
27,000
27,000
0
0.0%
Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd.)
18,000
18,000
0
0.0%
Bristol St. South (west of Campus DrArvine Ave.)
32,000
32,000
0
0.0%
Bristol St. South (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
23,000
22,000
-1,000
-4.3%
Bristol St. South (east of Birch St.)
22,000
21,000
-1,000
-4.5%
Bristol St. South (west of Jamboree Rd.)
37,000
37,000
0
0.0%
Campus Dr. (Jamboree Rd. to Van Karman Ave.)
22;000
21,000
-1,000
4.5%
Campus Dr. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
31,000
31,000
0
0.0%
Campus Dr. (west of MacArthur Blvd.)
39,000
39,000
0
0.0%
Campus Dr. (north of Bristol St. North)
39,000
38,000
-1,000
-2.6%
Campus Dr. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
40,000
40,000
0
0.0%
Coast Hwy. (west of SuperiorAve.Balboa Blvd.)
61,000
55,000
-6,000
-9.8%
Coast Hwy. (Superior Ave. to Newport Blvd.)
41,000
39,000
-2,000
4.9%
Coast Hwy. (Newport Blvd. to Riverside Ave.)
68,000
66,000
-2,000
-2.9%
Coast Hwy. (Riverside Ave, to Tustin Ave.)
59,000
56,000
-3,000
-5.1%
Coast Hwy. (Tustin Ave. to Dover Dr.)
1 55,000
54,000
-1,000
1 -1.8%
•
•
is
4-10
L`
•
TABLE 4-6 (PAGE 2 OF 4)
TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON
LOCATION
Coast Hwy. (Doves
Coast Hwy. (Baysi
Coast Hwy. (Jamb(
Coast Hwy. (Newp
Coast Hwy. (Avoca
Coast Hwy. (MacA
Coast Hwy. (Golde
Coast Hwy. (Marge
Coast Hwy. (Popp}
Coast Hwy (east of
Dover Dr. (Irvine F
Dover Dr. (Westcli
Dover Dr. (16tb St.
Dover Dr. (Cliff Di
Eastbluff Dr. (west
Eastbluff Dr. (west
Ford Rd. (Jamboree
Goldenrod Ave. (m
Highland Dr. (east
Hospital Rd. (Place
Hospital Rd. (east c
Irvine Ave. (Bristo:
Irvine Ave. (Mesa I
Irvine Ave. (Univei
Irvine Ave. (Santa
Irvine Ave. (Santia;
Irvine Ave. (Highla
Irvine Ave. (Dover
Irvine Ave. (Westd
Jamboree Rd. (Can
Jamboree Rd. (Birc
Jamboree Rd. (Mac
Jamboree Rd. (Bris
Jamboree Rd. (Bris
Jamboree Rd. (Bay
Jamboree Rd. (Uni,
Jamboree Rd. (Bisc
Jamboree Rd. (Fora
Jamboree Rd. (San
Jamboree Rd. (Sant
Jamboree Rd. (Coe
MacArthur Blvd. ((
MacArthur Blvd. (I
MacArthur Blvd. (�
TABLE 4-6 (PAGE 3 OF 4)
TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON
LOCATION
ADOPTED
(CONSTRAINED) I
BUILDOUT
FORECAST
CHANGE
%
CHANGE
MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.)
35,000
35,000
0
0.0%
MacArthur Blvd, (north of Bison Ave.)
74,000
74,000
0
0.0%
MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.)
74,000
73,000
-1,000
-IA%
MacArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
60,000
60,000
0
0.00A
MacArthur Blvd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to San Miguel Rd.)
39,000
38,000
-1,000
-2.6%
MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
38,000
38,000
0
0.0%
Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
8,000
7,000
-1,000
-12.5%
Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
7,000
6,000
-1,000
-14.3%
Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
13,000
13,000
0
0.0%
Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.)
46,000
45,000
-1,000
-2.2%
Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
54,000
52,000
-2,000
-3.7%
Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido)
57,000
52,000
-5,000
-8.8%
Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.)
41,000
37,000
-4,000
-9.8%
Newport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.)
33,000
30,000
-3,000
-9.1%
Newport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.)
17,000
17,000
0
0.0%
Newport Coast Dr. (SR-73 Fwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
29,000
29,000
0
0.0%
Newport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
24,000
24,000
0
0.0%
Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.)
19,000
18,000
-1,000
-5.3%
Placentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.)
16,000
17,000
1,000
6.3%
Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave, to Hospital Rd.)
11,000
11,000
0
0.00/0
Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
2,000
0
0.0%
Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
10,000
10,000
0
0.0%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.)
17,000
17,000
0
0.0%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.)
12,000
12,000
0
0.0%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
26,000
26,000
0
0.0%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to San Miguel Rd.)
22,000
22,000
0
0.0%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (San Miguel Rd. to Marguerite Ave.)
24,000
24,000
0
0.0%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to Spyglass Hill Rd.)
19,000
18,000
-1,000
-5.3%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.)
19,000
18,000
-1,000
-53%
San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.)
10,000
10,000
0
0.0%
San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.)
10,000
10,000
0
0.0%
San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
14,000
14,000
0
0.0%
San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
16,000
16,000
0
0.0%
San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.)
20,000
20,000
0
0.0%
San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.)
11,000
11,000
0
0.0%
Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.)
11,000
11,000
0
0.0%
Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
9,000
8,000
-1,000
-11.1%
Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
14,000
14,000
0
0.0%
Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave, to Irvine Ave.)
6,000
6,000
0
0.0%
Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
4,000
4,000
0
0.0%
Spyglass Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
4,000
4,000
0
0.0%
Superior Ave. (north of Placentia Ave.)
19,000
19,000
0
0.0%
Superior Ave. (Placentia Ave. to Hospital Rd.)
28,000
28,000
0
0.0%
Superior Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
1 28,000
28,000
0
1 0.0%
•
9
4-12
•
TABLE 4-6 (PAGE 4 OF 4)
TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON
LOCATION
ADOPTED
(CONSTRAINED)
BUILDOUT
FORECAST
CHANGEFANGE
Tustin Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
3,000
3,000
0
0.0%
University Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
3,000
3,000
0
0.0%
University Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.)
15,000
15,000
0
0.0%
Via Lido (east of Newport Blvd.)
10,000
10,000
0
0.0%
Von Karman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
18,000
I8,000
0
0.0%
Von Karman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.)
16,000
16,000
0
0.0%
Westcliff Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.)
16,000
16,000
0
0.0%
U.WWo bs\_01200\01232\Excell(01232-18.xls]T4-6
4-13
TABLE 4-7 (PAGE 1 OF 4)
TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH
LOCATION
EXISTING
(200112002)
COUNT
BUILDOUT
I FORECAST
I GROWTH
%
GROWTH
16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.)
5,000
6,000
1,000
20.0%
32nd St. (west of Newport Blvd.)
8,000
8,000
0
0.0%
32nd St. (east of Newport Blvd.)
3,000
3,000
0
0.0%
Avocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.)
5,000
5,000
0
0.0%
Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.)
12,000
11,000
-1,000
-8.3%
Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
11,000
10,000
-1,000
-9.1%
Balboa Blvd. (south of Coast Hwy.)
18,000
19,000
1,000
5.6%
Bayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.)
10,000
12,000
2,000
20.0%
Birch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Karman Ave.)
12,000
18,000
6,000
50.0%
Birch St. (Von Kalman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
15,000
20,000
5,000
33.3%
Birch St. (west of MacArthur Blvd.)
16,000
20,000
4,000
25.0%
Birch St. (north of Bristol St. North)
23,000
27,000
4,000
17.4%
Birch St. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
19,000
20,000
1,000
5.30/a
Birch St. (south of Bristol St. South)
15,000
16,000
1,000
6.7%
Bison Ave. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
13,000
17,000
4,000
30.8%
Bison Ave. (MacArthur Blvd. to SR-73 Fwy.)
7,000
11,000
4,000
57.1%
Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.)
26,000
34,000
8,000
30.8%
Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR-73 Fwy.)
17,000
27,000
10,000
58.8%
Bristol St. North (west of Campus Dr.)
28,000
32,000
4,000
14.3%
Bristol St. North (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
23,000
28,000
5,000
21.7%
Bristol St. North (east of Birch St.)
22,000
27,000
5,000
22.7%
Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd.)
16,060
18,000
2,000
12.5%
Bristol St. South (west of Campus Dr./Irvine Ave.)
28,000
32,000
4,000
14.3%
Bristol St. South (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
17,000
22,000
5,000
29.4%
Bristol St. South (east of Birch St.)
16,000
21,000
5,000
31.3%
Bristol St. South (west of Jamboree Rd.)
31,000
37,000
6,000
19.4%
Campus Dr. (Jamboree Rd, to Von Karman Ave.)
16,000
21,000
5,000
31.3%
Campus Dr. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
20,000
31,000
11,000
55.0%
Campus Dr. (west of MacArthur Blvd.)
26,000
39,000
13,000
50.0%
Campus Dr. (north of Bristol St. North)
28,000
38,000
10,000
35.7%
Campus Dr. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
30,000
40,000
10,000
33.3%
Coast Hwy. (west of Superior Ave./Balboa Blvd.)
46;000
55,000
9,000
19.6%
Coast Hwy. (Superior Ave. to Newport Blvd.)
28;000
39,000
11,000
39.3%
Coast Hwy. (Newport Blvd, to Riverside Ave.)
53,000
66,000
13,000
24.5%
Coast Hwy. (Riverside Ave. to Tustin Ave.)
45,000
56,000
11,000
24A%
Coast Hwy. (Tustin Ave. to Dover Dr.)
42,000
541000
12,000
28.6%
Coast Hwy. (Dover Dr. to Bayside Dr.)
63,000
76,000
13,000
20.6%
Coast Hwy. (Bayside Dr. to Jamboree Rd.)
51,000
63,000
12,000
23.5%
Coast Hwy. (Jamboree Rd. to Newport Center Dr.)
42,000
50,000
8,000
19.00
Coast H (Newport Center Dr. to Avocado Ave.
35,000
42,000
7,000
1 20.00
•
0
4-14
6
•
0
TABLE 4-7 (PAGE 2 OF 4)
TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH
LOCATION
Coast Hwy. (Avocado j
Coast Hwy. (MacArthu
Coast Hwy. (Goldenroc
Coast Hwy. (Margueriti
Coast Hwy. (Poppy Av,
Coast Hwy (east of Nev
Dover Dr. (Irvine Ave.
Dover Dr. (Westcliff Di
Dover Dr. (16th St. to
Dover Dr. (Cliff Dr. to
Eastbluff Dr. (west of J
Eastbluff Dr. (west of J
Ford Rd. (Jamboree Rd
Goldenrod Ave. (north
Highland Dr. (east of Ir
Hospital Rd. (Placentia
Hospital Rd. (east of M
Irvine Ave. (Bristol St.
Irvine Ave. (Mesa Dr. t
Irvine Ave. (University
Irvine Ave. (Santa Isabc
Irvine Ave. (Santiago D
Irvine Ave. (Highland I
Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr.
Irvine Ave. (WestcliffI
Jamboree Rd. (Campus
Jamboree Rd. (Birch St
Jamboree Rd. (MacArtl
Jamboree Rd. (Bristol
Jamboree Rd. (Bristol
Jamboree Rd. (Bayview
Jamboree Rd. (Universi
Jamboree Rd. (Bison A
Jamboree Rd. (Ford Rd
Jamboree Rd. (San Joac
Jamboree Rd. (Santa B:
Jamboree Rd. ( Coast H
MacArthur Blvd. (Cami
MacArthur Blvd. (Bircl
MacArthur Blvd. (Von
MacArthur Blvd. (soutt
MacArthur Blvd. (norti
MacArthur Blvd. (Bisoi
MacArthur Blvd. (Ford
MacArthur Blvd. (San J
MacArthur Blvd. San l
TABLE 4-7 (PAGE 3 OF 4)
TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH
EXISTING
(2001/2002)
BUILDOUT
I
%
LOCATION
COUNT
FORECAST
GROWTH
GROWTH
Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
7,000
7,000
0
0.0%
Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
6,000
6,000
0
0.0%
Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
12,000
13,000
1,000
8.3%
Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.)
36,000
45,000
9,000
25.0%
Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
43,000
52,000
9,000
20.9%
Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido)
48,000
52,000
4,000
8.3%
Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.)
36,000
37,000
1,000
2.8%
Newport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.)
29,000
30,000
1,000
3.4%
Newport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.)
14,000
17,000
3,000
21.4%
Newport Coast Dr. (SR-73 Fwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
17,000
29,000
12,000
70.6%
Newport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
15,000
24,000
9,000
60.0%
Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.)
12,000
18,000
6,000
50.0%
Placentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.)
12,000
17,000
5,000
41.7%
Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave. to Hospital Rd.)
7,000
11,000
4,000
57.1%
Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
2,000
0
0.0%
Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
9,000
10,000
1,000
11.1%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.)
16,000
17,000
1,000
6.3%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.)
11,000
12,000
1,000
9.1%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
21,000
26,000
5,000
23.8%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to San Miguel Rd.)
19,000
22,000
3,000
15.8%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (San Miguel Rd. to Marguerite Ave.)
18,000
24,000
6,000
33.3%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to Spyglass Hill Rd.)
12,000
18,000
6,000
50.0%
•
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.)
12,000
18,000
6,000
50.0%
San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.)
7,000
10,000
3,000
42.9%
San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.)
7,000
10,000
3,000
42.9%
San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
12,000
14,000
2,000
16.7%
San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
12,000
16,000
4,000
33.3%
San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.)
19,000
20,000
1,000
5.3%
San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.)
10,000
11,000
1,000
10.0%
Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.)
10,000
11,000
1,000
10.0%
Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
8,000
8,000
0
0.0%
Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
11,000
14,000
3,000
27.3%
Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave. to Irvine Ave.)
5,000
6,000
1,000
20.0%
Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
3,000
4,000
1,000
33.3%
Spyglass Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr, to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
4,000
4,000
0
0.0%
Superior Ave. (north of Placentia Ave.)
17,000
19,000
2,000
11.8%
Superior Ave. (Placentia Ave. to Hospital Rd.)
22,000
28,000
6,000
27.3%
Superior Ave. (Hospital Rd.. to Coast H
24,000
28,000
4,000
16.7%
4-16
1�P
11
•
0
TABLE 4-7 (PAGE 4 OF 4)
TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH
LOCATION
EXISTING
(2001/2002)
COUNT
BUILDOUT
FORECAST
GROWTH
%
GROWTH
Tustin Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
3,000
1,000
50.0%
University Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
3,000
3,000
0
0.0%
University Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.)
11,000
15,000
4,000
36A%
Via Lido (east of Newport Blvd.) '
8,000
10,000
2,000
25.0%
Von Karman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
14,000
18,000
4,000
28.6%
Von Karman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.)
12,000
16,000
4,000
33.3%
Westcliff Dr. Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.
16,000
16,000
0
0.0%
U:\UcJobs\_01200\01232\Exce I\[01232-18.xls]T4-7
3
d� d
4>
co
EXHIBIT 4-13
TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
2T_VOLUME/CAPACITY (WC) RATIOS
h . x r
L73 P.47 ' ' .t•'� 35
J f
!3 I.
I
� , a
r'O.S
.94
{
0.40 -
91 -'
rwrwmw. � `1
1 0.20
.94
70
82 i
wenarr
0.44 0
.38 .47
r
0.18 cc
PACIFIC
OCEAN
arot
LEGEND:
0.88- VOLUME/ CAPACITY RATIO
0
_` URBAN
Dover Drive north of Westcliff Drive
•
•
Dover Drive north of Coast Highway
•
Jamboree Road north of Bayview Highway
Jamboree Road north of University Drive
•
Jamboree Road north of San Joaquin Hills Road
•
MacArthur Boulevard north of Bison Avenue
•
MacArthur Boulevard north of Ford Road
•
MacArthur Boulevard north of San Joaquin Hills Road
•
Newport Coast Drive north of SR-73 Northbound Ramps
•
Newport Boulevard south of Hospital Road
•
Jamboree Road south of Birch Street
•
Irvine Avenue south of University Drive
•
Hospital Road east of Newport Boulevard
•
Campus Drive east of MacArthur Boulevard
•
Bristol Street North east of Birch Street
•
•
Bristol Street South east of Birch Street
•
Coast Highway east of Dover Drive
•
Coast Highway east of Bayside Drive
Coast Highway east of Jamboree Road
Ford Road east of MacArthur Boulevard
Coast Highway east of MacArthur Boulevard
Coast Highway east of Goldenrod Avenue
•
Coast Highway east of Marguerite Avenue
•
Coast Highway east of Poppy Avenue
Coast Highway west of Superior Avenue/Balboa Boulevard
Coast Highway west of Riverside Drive
•
Bristol Street North west of Campus Drive
•
Bristol Street South west of Campus Drive
•
Dover Drive west of Irvine Avenue
Bristol Street South west of Jamboree Road
•
4-19
Lj
4.5 Peak Hour Forecasts
The final data evaluated for the True Minimum General Plan Buildout scenario
was intersection volume and geometric data for the 62 intersections selected for
analysis (Bluff Road has been removed from this scenario, as there is no
development on Banning Ranch). The same intersection configurations have
been used as for the currently adopted General Plan Buildout with constrained
network intersection capacity utilization values (ICUs). Table 4-8 summarizes
the True Minimum General Plan Buildout ICUs based on the AM and PM peak
hour intersection turning movement volumes and the intersection geometric data
as comparedwith currently adopted General Plan with constrained network
ICUs. Appendix "O" contains the detailed ICU calculation worksheets. The
worksheets in Appendix "O" summarize the intersection geometric data and the
AM and PM peak intersection turning movement volumes.
A comparison of true minimum General Plan Buildout ICUs to existing ICUs is
shown on Table 4-9. Table 4-10 summarizes intersection analysis for buildout •
conditions. Deficient intersections are shown on Exhibit 4-C. Intersections with
ICU values greaterthan,0.90 (LOS "E" or worse) in either peak period are:
• Superior Avenue (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM/PM)
• Newport Boulevard (NS)/Hospital Road (EW) (PM)
• Riverside Drive (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM/PM)
• Tustin Avenue (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM/PM)
• MacArthur Boulevard (NS)/Campus Drive (EW) (PM)
• Von Karman Avenue (NS)/Campus Drive (EW) (PM)
• Jamboree Road (NS)/Campus Drive (EW) (AM/PM)
• Campus Drive (NS)/Bristol Street North (EW) (AM/PM)
• Birch Street (NS)/Bristol Street North (EW) (AM)
• Campus Drive (NS)/Bristol Street South (EW) (AM)
• Irvine Avenue (NS)/University Drive (EW) (AM/PM) •
4-20
�VJ,
TABLE 4-8 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU)
• - COMPARISON TO CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN
•
11
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK
HOUR
PM PEAK
HOUR
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
FORECAST
TRUE
MINIMUM
DELTA
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
FORECAST
TRUE
MINIMUM
DELTA
1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw.
1.27
DNEi
N/Al
1.29
DNE
N/A
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.64
0.74R-O.02
068
0.86
0.18
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
1.01
0.98
0.99
0.94
-0.05
4. Newport Bl. & Hospital Rd.
0.79
0.79
0.97
0.96
-0.01
5. Newport BI. & Via Lido
0.54
0.52
0.46
0.41
-0.05
6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St.
0.52
0.46
0.71
0.58
-0.13
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
1.03
1.01
1.12
1.10
-0.028
Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
1.02
1.01
0.85
0.93
-0.02
9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr.
0.76
0.75
-0.01
1.25
1.25
0.00
10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St.
0.71
0.70
-0.01
0.80
0.80
0.00
11. Von Kansan Av. & Campus Dr.
0.66
0.64
-0.02
0.93
0.94
0.01
12. MacArthur BI. & Von Kansan Av.
0.54
0.54
0.00
0.64
0.64
0.00
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.92
0.93
0.01
1.24
1.23
-0.01
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.79
0.80
0.01
0.801
0.80
0.00
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St.
0.96
0.96
0.00
1.081
1.08
0.00
16. Birch St. & Bristol St.
0.92
0.93
0.01
0.721
0.72
0.00
17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. S
0.93
0.91
-0.02
0.77
0.76
-0.01
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S
0.52
0.52
0.00
0.53
0.53
0.00
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.68
0.68
0.00
0.90
0.90
0.00
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
1.14
1.15
0.01
1.19
1.16
-0.03
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.70
0.69
-0.01
0.78
0.76
-0.02
22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr.
0.61
0.61
0.001
0.63
0.63
0.00
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr,
0.78
0.78
0.00
0.70
0.71
0.01
24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr.
0.67
0.66
-0.01
0.821
0.80
-0.02
25. Dover Dr. & WestcliffDr.
0.39
0.40
0.01
0.561
0.57
0.01
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
064
0.64
0.00
0641
0.65
0.01
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.86
0.84
-0.02
0.90
0.88
-0.02
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.83
0.82
-0.01
0.94
0.93
-0.01
29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd
0.96
0.97
0.01
0.99
0.99
0.00
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St.
0.70
0.71
0.01
0.69
0.68
-0.01
31. Ba iew Pl. & Bristol St. S
0.60
0.59
-0.01
0.63
0.63
0.00
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bnsto] St. S
0.96
0.97
0.01
0.85
0.84
-0.01
33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W .
0.48
0.48
0.00
0.70
0.70
0.00
34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr.
0.64
0.65
0.01
0.69
0.68
-0.01
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.51
0.50
-0.01
0.58
0.58
0.00
36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd.
0.78
0.76
-0.02
0.72
0.73
0.01
37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.61
0.60
-0.01
0.65
0.65
0.00
4-21
13i
TABLE 4.8 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU)
COMPARISON TO CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN •
INTERSECTION NSJEW
AM PEAK
HOUR
PM PEAK
HOUR
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
FORECAST
TRUE
MINIMUM
DELTA
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
FORECAST
TRUE
MINIMUM
DELTA
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.55
0.54
.0.01
0.71
0.71
0.00
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.85
0.85
0.00
0.89
0.87
.0.02
0. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.36
0.34
-0.02
0.34
0.34
0.00
41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.39
0.39
0.00
0.71
0.70
-0.01
42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.50
0.50
0.00
0.63
0.62
-0.01
44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr.
0.37
0.38
0.01
0.79
0.78
-0.01
45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.77
0.781
0.01
0.80
0.79
-0.01
46. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.47
0.47
0.00
0.56
0.56
0.00
47. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.38
0.39
0.01
0.29
0.29
0.00
S. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av.
0.78
0.77
-0.01
0.80
0.80
0.00
9. MacArhtur Ell. & Ford Rd.Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.77
0.77
0.00
1.06
1.06
0.00
50. MacArthur BI. &San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.77
0.77
0.00
1.04
1.02
-0.02
51. MacArthur BI. & Son Miguel Dr.
0.63
0.62
-0.01
0.77
0.76
.0.01
52. MacArthur BI. &Coast Hw.
0.74
0.74
0.00
0.83
0.80
-0.03
53. SR-73 NB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.69
0.69
0.00
'0.53
032
-0.01
54. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
OAS
0.45
0.00
0.59
0.57
-0.02
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.30
0.30
0.00
0.38
0.38
0.00
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.52
0.51
.0.01
0.68
0.68
0.00
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
1.08
1.06
-0.02
0.79
0.75
.0.04
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.38
0.38
0.00
0.51
0.49
.0.02
59.Mar ueriteAv.&CoastHw.
0.90
0.88
.0.02
0.91
0.90
.0.01
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.60
0.59
-0.01
0.46
0.45
-0.01
61. Po Av. & Coast Hw.
0.67
0.68
0.01
0.76
0.75
.0.01
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Ramps
0.54
0.54
0.00
0.40
0.39
.0.01
64. Newport Coast Dr. & Snn loa uin Hills Rd.
0.63
0.63
0.00
0.47
0.46
-0.01
65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. i
0.57
0.57
0.00
0.60
0.60
0.00
tDNE = Does Not Exist
U:1UcJobs% 01200101232tExcen[01232-18.xis)T4-8
•
LJ
4-22
1��
TABLE 4-9 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU)
. COMPARISON TO EXISTING
•
•
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM
PEAK HOUR
PM
PEAK HOUR
EXISTING
COUNT
FUTURE
I FORECAST
DELTA
EXISTING
COUNT
FUTURE
I FORECAST
DELTA
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.66
0.74
0.08
0.67
0.86
0.19
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
0.84
0.98
0.14
0.90
0.94
0.04
4. Newport DI. & Hospital Rd.
0.54
0.79
0.25
0.70
0.96
0.26
5. Newport Bl. & Via Lido
0.41
0.52
0.11
0.37
0.41
0.04
6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St.
0.73
0.46
-0.27
0.78
0.58
-0.20
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
0.84
1.01
0.17
0.93
1.10
0.17
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
0.801
1.01
0.211
0.671
0.83
0.16
9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr.
0.61
0.75
0.141
0.851
1.25
0.40
10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St.
0.49
0.70
0.21
0.66
0.80
0.14
11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr.
0.55
0.64
0.09
0.79
0.94
0.15
12. MacArthur BI. & Von Kartnan Av.
0.46
0.54
0.08
0.53
0.64
0.11
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.70
0.93
0.23
0.85
1.23
0.38
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.61
0.80
0.19
0.60
0.80
0.20
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St.
0.77
0.96
0.19
0.94
1.08
0.14
16. Birch St. & Bristol St.
0.66
0.93
0.271
0.611
0.72
0.11
17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. S
0.72
0.91
0.191
0.581
0.76
0.18
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S
0.46
0.52
0.06
0.44
0.53
0.09
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.70
0.68
-0.02
0.94
0.90
-0.04
20. hrvine Av. & University Dr.
0.82
1.15
0.33
0.89
1.16
0.27
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.66
0.69
0.03
0.72
0.76
0.04
22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr.
0.57
0.61
0.04
0.60
0.63
0.03
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.72
0.78
0.06
0.64
0.71
0.07
24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr.
0.57
0.66
0.091
0.771
0.80
0.03
25. Dover Dr. & W estcliff Dr.
0.38
0.40
0.02
0.48
0.57
0.09
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.55
0.64
0.09
0.57
0.65
0.08
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.70
0.84
0.14
0.74
0.88
0.14
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.69
0.82
0.13
0.70
0.93
0.23
29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd.
0.88
0.97
0.09
0.91
0.99
0.08
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St.
0.55
0.71
0.16
0.59
0.68
0.09
31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. S
0.48
0.591
0.11
0.561
0.63
0.07
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
0.75
0.97
0.22
0.72
0.84
0.12
33. Jamboree Rd. & Ba iew W .
0.41
0.48
0.07
0.57
0.70
0.13
34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /Universi Dr.
0.60
0.65
0.05
0.64
0.68
0.04
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.45
0.50
0.05
0.51
0.58
0.07
36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd.
0.69
0.76
0.07
0.65
0.73
0.08
37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.80
0.60
-0.20
1.00
0.65
-0.35
4-23
tO
TABLE 4-9 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU)
COMPARISON TO EXISTING •
INTERSECTION NSIEW
AM
PEAK HOUR
PM
PEAK HOUR
EXISTING
COUNT
FUTURE
FORECAST
DELTA
EXISTING
COUNT
FUTURE
FORECAST
DELTA
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.47
0.54
0.07
0.63
0.71
0.08
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.68
0.85
0.17
0.74
0.87
0.13
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.36
0.34
.0.02
0.36
0.34
-0.02
41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.32
0.39
0.07
0.52
0.70
0.18
42. N ort Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.40
0.50
0.10
0.52
0.62
0.10
44. Avocado Av. & San Mi uel Dr.
0.33
0.38
0.05
0.72
0.78
0.06
45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.58
0.781
0.20
0.661
0.79
0.13
46. SR-73 NB Rams & Bison Av.
0.31
0.47
0.16
0.37
0.56
0.19
47. SR-73 SS Rams & Bison Av.
0.26
0.39
0.13
0.17
0.29
0.12
48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av.
0.63
0.77
0.14
0.60
0.80
0.20
49. MacArhtur Bl. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.71
0.77
0.06
0.90
1.06
0.16
50. MacArthur Bl, & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.64
0.77
0.13
0.93
1.02
0.09
51. MacArthur Bl. & San MiRuel Dr.
0.56
0.62
0.06
0.65
0.76
0.11
52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw.
0.60
0341
0.14
0.711
0.80
0.09
53. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.55
0.69
0.14
0.431
0.52
0.09
54. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.30
0.45
0.15
0.41
0.57
0.16
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.28
0.30
0.02
0.31
0.38
0.07
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.44
0.51
0.07
0.54
0.68
0.14
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
0.99
1.06
0.07
0.69
0.75
0.06
58. Mar ucrite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.311
0.38
0.07
0.35
0.49
0.14
59.Mar ueriteAv.&CoastHw.
0.83
0.88
0.05
0.82
0.90
0.08
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.44
0.591
0.151
0.301
0.45
0.15
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw.
0.61
0.68
0.07
0.65
0.75
0.10
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
0.45
0.54
0.09
0.31
0.39
0.08
64. Ne ort Coast Dr. & San Joa uin Hills Rd.
0.37
0.63
0.2G
0.29
0.46
0.17
65. Ne on Coast Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.47
0.57
0.10
0.50
0.60
0.10
U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\[01232-1B.xls]T4-9
•
4-24
IT,
•
CJ
TABLE 4-10 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
IC
LOS
IUU
LS
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.74
C
0.86
D
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
0.98
E
0.94
E
4. Newport Bl. & Hospital Rd.
0.79
C
0.96
E
5. Newport Bl. & Via Lido
0.52
A
0.41
A
6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St.
0.46
A
0.58
A
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
1.011
F
1.10
F
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
1.01
F
0.83
D
9. MacArthur Bl. & Campus Dr.
0.75
C
1.25
F
10. MacArthur Bl. & Birch St.
0.70
B
0.80
C
11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr.
0.64
B
0.94
E
12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Kamman Av.
0.54
A
0.64
B
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.931
E
1.23
F
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.801
C
0.80
C
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N)
0.96
E
1.081
F
16. Birch St. & Bristol St.
0.93
E
0.72
C
17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S
0.91
E
0.76
C
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S
0.52
A
0.53
A
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.68
B
0.90
D
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
1.15
F
1.16
F
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.69
B
0.76
C
22. Irvine Av. & Hi bland Dr.
0.61
B
0.63
B
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.78
C
0.71
C
24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr.
0.66
B
0.80
C
25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr.
0.401
A
0.57
A
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.64
B
0.65
B
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.84
D
0.88
D
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.82
D
0.93
E
29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd.
0.97
E
0.99
E
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St.
0.71
C
0.68
B
31. Dayview Pl. & Bristol St. (S)
0.591
A
0.63
B
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S)
0.97
E
0.84
D
33. Jamboree Rd. & Ba iew W .
0.48
A
0.70
B
34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr.
0.65
B
0.68
B
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.50
A
0.58
A
36. Jamboree Rd. & EastbluffDr./Ford Rd.
0.76
C
0.731
C
37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 1
0.601
Al0.65
B
4-25
h��
TABLE 4-10 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.54
A
0.71
C
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.85
D
0.87
D
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joa uin Hills Rd.
0.34
A
0.34
A
41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.39
A
0.70
B
42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.50
A
0.62
B
44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr.
0.381
A
0.78
C
45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.781
C
0.79
C
46. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.471
A
0.56
A
47. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.39
A
0.29
A
48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av.
0.77
C
0.80
C
49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.77
C
1.06
F
50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.77
C
1.02
F
51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr.
0.62
B
0.76
C
52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw.
0.74
C
0.80
C
53. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.69
B
0.52
A
54. SR-73 SB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.45
A
0.57
A
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.30
A
0.38
A
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.51
A
0.68
B
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
1.06
F
0.75
C
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.381
A
0.49
• A
59.Maz erite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.881
D
0.90
D
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.591
A
0.45
A
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw.
0.681
B
0.75
C
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Ramps
0.541
A
0.39
A
64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.63
B
0.46
A
65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.571
Al0.60
A
U:\UcJobs\_01200\012321Excel\[01232-18.xis]T4-10
•
•
0
4-26
R
NEWPORT
WIBIT 4-C
TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE
WITH OPEN SPACE NETWORK DEFICIENCIES
PACIFIC OCEAN
LEGEND:
= AM LOS "E"
' = PM LOS "E"
• = LOS "E"
= AM LOS "F"
,= PM LOS "F"
-= LOS "F"
iL
• Bayside Drive (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (PM)
• MacArthur Boulevard (NS)/Jamboree Road (EW) (AM/PM)
• Jamboree Road (NS)/Bristol Street South (EW) (AM)
• MacArthur Boulevard (NS)/Ford Road/Bonita Canyon Drive (EW) (PM)
• MacArthur Boulevard (NS)/San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) (PM)
• Goldenrod Avenue (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM)
The only intersections that do not now experience a deficiency that did
experience one before are Bluff Road (NS) at Coast Highway (EW) and
Marguerite Avenue (NS) at Coast Highway (EW). Additional locations
experience changes in levels of service. The change at Marguerite Avenue (NS)
at Coast Highway (EW) is caused by land use changes, while Bluff Road (NS) at
Coast Highway (EW) has been removed from the list because Bluff Road does
not exist in this scenario.
Intersection analysis has been performed to determine improvements necessary •
to provide acceptable levels of service. ICU worksheets are included in
Appendix "P". Table 4-11 compares the ICU results with and without
improvements. Improvements necessary to provide acceptable levels of service
are shown in Table 4-12.
Improvements have been developed that provide acceptable operations at all
potentially deficient intersections. The feasibility of the necessary improvements
is questionable at some locations (particularly where additional through lanes are
necessary).
Om
TABLE 4-11 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
TRUE
MINIMUM
WITH
IMPROVEMENTS
I DELTA
TRUE
MINIMUM
WITH
IMPROVEMENTS
DELTA
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.74
0.74
0.00
0.86
0.86
0.00
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
0.98
0.85
-0.13
0.94
0.83
-0.11
4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd.
0.79
0.79
0.00
0.96
0.88
-0.08
5. Newport BI. & Via Lido
0.52
0.52
0.00
0.41
0.41
0.00
6. Newport BI. & 32nd St.
0.46
0.46
0.00
0.58
0.58
0.00
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
1.01
0.70
-0.31
1.10
0.85
-0.25
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
1.01
0.70
-0.31
0.831
0.83
0.00
9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr.
0.75
0.73
-0.02
1.25
0.87
-0.38
10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St.
0.70
0.70
0.00
0.80
0.80
0.00
11. Von Karmen Av. & Campus Dr.
0.64
0.61
-0.03
0.94
0.89
-0.05
12. MacArthur BI. & Von Karmen Av.
0.54
0.54
0.00
0.64
0.64
0.00
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.93
0.90
-0.03
1.23
0.95
-0.28
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.80
0.80
0.001
0.80
0.80
0.00
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St.
0.96
0.88
-0.08
1.08
0.85
-0.23
16. Birch St. & Bristol St.
0.93
0.78
-0.15
0.72
0.70
-0.02
17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. (S)
0.91
0.85
-0.06
0.76
0.76
0.00
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S
0.52
0.52
0.00
0.53
0.53
0.00
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.68
0.62
-0.06
0.90
0.85
-0.05
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
1.15
0.74
-0.41
1.16
0.83
-0.33
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.69
0.54
-0.151
0.76
0.57
-0.19
•
22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr.
0.61
0.61
0.001
0.63
0.63
0.00
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.78
0.78
0.00
0.71
0.71
0.00
24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr.
0.66
0.66
0.00
0.80
0.80
0.00
25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr.
0.40
0.40
0.00
0.57
0.57
0.00
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.64
0.64
0.00
0.65
0.65
0.00
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.84
0.84
0.00
0.88
0.881
0.00
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.82
0.81
-0.01
0.93
0.89
-0.04
29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd.
0.97
0.84
-0.13
0.99
0.89
-0.10
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St.
0.71
0.71
0.00
0.68
0.68
0.00
31. Bayview PI. & Bristol St. S
0.59
0.59
0.00
0.63
0.63
0.00
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
0.97
0.74
-0.23
0.84
0.80
-0.04
33. Jamboree Rd. & Ba "ew W .
0.48
0.48
0.00
0.70
0.70
0.00
34. Jamboree Rd. & Easibluff Dr. /University Dr.
0.65
0.65
0.00
0.68
0.681
0.00
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.50
0.50
0.00
0.58
0.581
0.00
36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd.
0.76
0.76
0.00
0.73
0.731
0.00
37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.60
0.60
0.00
0.65
0.65
0.00
•
4-29
1.13
TABLE 4-11 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NSIEW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
TRUE
MINIMUM
WITH
IMPROVEMENTS
DELTA
TRUE
MINIMUM
WITH
IMPROVEMENTS
DELTA
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.54
0.54
0.00
0.71
0.71
0.00
39. Jamboree Rd. & Cast Hw.
0.85
0.85
0.00
0.87
0.87
0.00
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joa uid Hills Rd:
0.34
0.34
0.00
0.34
0.34
0.00
41'. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joag uin Hills Rd.
0.39
039
0.00
0.70
0.70
0.00
42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.50
0.50
0.00
0.62
0.62
0.00
44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr.
0.38
0.38
0.00
0.78
0.78
0.00
45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.78
0.78
0.001
0.79
0.79
0.00
46. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.47
0.47
0.00
0.56
0.56
0.00
47. SR-73 SB Rams & Bison Av.
0.39
0.39
0.00
0.29
0.29
0.00
48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av.
0.77
0.77
0.00
0.80
0.80
0.00
49. MacArhtur Bl. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.77
0.71
-0.06
1.06
0.86
-0.21
50. MacArthur Bl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.77
0.66
-0.11
1.02
0.83
-0.19
51. MacArthur Bl. & San Miguel Dr.
0.62
0.62
0.00
0.76
0.76
0.00
52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw.
0.74
0.74
0.001
0.80
0.80
0.00
53. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.69
0.69
0.00
0.52
0.52
0.00
54. SR-73 SB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr.
OAS
0.45
0.00
0.57
0.57
0.00
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.30
0.30
0.00
0.38
0.38
0.00
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.51
0.51
0.00
0.68
0.68
0.00
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
1.06
0.77
-0.29
0.75
0.75
0.00
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.38
0.38
0.00
0.49
0.49
0.00
59.Mar erite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.88
0.88
0.001
0.90
0.90
0.00
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San.Joa uin Hills Rd.
0.59
0.59
0.00
0.45
0.45
0.00
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw.
0.68
0.68
0.00
0.75
0.75
0.00
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
0.54
0.54
0.00
0.39
0.39
0.00
64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joa uin Hills Rd.
0.63
0.63
0.00
0.46
0.46
0.00
65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.57
0.57
0.00
0.60
0.601
0.00
U:1UcJobsl 012001012321ExceR[01232-18.xis]T4-11
r�
is
4-30
t'�A
0
r
al
TABLE 4-12 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE WITH OPEN SPACE NETWORK ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS
INTERSECTION
I IMPROVEMENT
MacArthur Bl. (NS) at Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. (EW)
Construct 3rd SB left turn lane.
Eliminate SB free right turn lane.
Construct 3rd EB through lane.
MacArthur BI. (NS) at San Joaquin Hills Rd. (EW)
Construct4th NB through lane.
Construct 3rd EB left turn lane.
Goldenrod Av. NS at Coast Hw. EW
Construct 3rd WB through lane. Elminiate WB defacto right turn lane.
UAUcJobsl 012001012321Excell[01232-18.xis]T4-12
I� •
is •
5.0 SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (POST-2025)
• ALTERNATIVE WITH OPEN SPACE NETWORK SCENARIO
This chapter presents subarea minimum (as defined in the General Plan Advisory
Committee (GPAC) alternatives) General Plan Buildout (Post-2025) with open space
network conditions. General Plan Buildout model inputs are discussed and refined
forecast volumes are presented. Data are compared to existing conditions to show
reasonable growth and to currently adopted General Plan conditions (as defined in
Chapter 3 of this report) results to show differences.
5.1 Land Use and Socioeconomic Data (SED
This section discusses the land use and socioeconomic data inputs.
5.1.1 Subarea Minimum General Plan Buildout Land Use Data
The Subarea Minimum General Plan Buildout land use data was provided
to Urban Crossroads, Inc. staff by City staff and the City's General Plan
• consultant, EIP Associates. Appendix "Q" of this report documents the
explicit land use data included in NBTM 3.1 for subarea minimum General
Plan Buildout conditions in this analysis. Table 5-1 summarizes the
overall subarea minimum General Plan Buildout land uses for the City of
Newport Beach. Appendix "R" contains the land use changes by TAZ
compared to the currently adopted General Plan scenario. An overall
comparison to currently adopted General Plan land use is also shown in
Table 5-1. Land uses have changed based on data provided by the City.
The largest reductions in land use compared to currently adopted General
Plan conditions occur in Banning Ranch and Cannery Village. For
subareas in which the currently adopted General Plan is the least intense,
the land use of the subarea minimum alternative of GPAC is used, instead
of the currently adopted General Plan.
Table 5-2 shows subarea minimum General Plan Buildout land use growth
• from existing. Medium density residential and apartments each grow by
5-1
TABLE 5-1
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
LAND USE COMPARISON
NBTM
CODE'
DESCRIPTION
UNITS 2
ADOPTED
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
I QUANTITY
CHANGE
% CHANGE
1
Low Density Residential
DU
18.347
17.833
514
-2.80%
2
Medium Density Residential
DU
12,859
12,903
44
0.34%
3
Apartment
DU
13,374
15,281
1,907
14.26%
4
Elderly Residential
DU
200
200
0.00%
5
Mobile Home
DU
455
455
0.00%
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS
DU
46,235
46,672
1,437
3.18%
6
Motel
ROOM
139
1941
55
39.57%
7
Hotel
ROOM
3,387
4.069
682
20.14%
9
Regional Commercial
TSF
1.633.840'
1,464.000
169.840
-10.40%
10
General Commercial
TSF
4,627.760
4,547.128
80.632
-1.74%
11
Commercial/Recreation
ACRE
5A00
5.100
0.00%
13
Restaurant
TSF
198.780
198.780
0.00%
15
Fast Food Restaurant
TSF
13.940
13.940
0.06%
16
Auto Dealer/Sales
TSF
227.170
227.170
0.00%
17
Yacht Club
TSF
70.310
70.310
0.00%
18
Health Club
TSF
61.330
61.330
0.00%
19
Tennis Club
CRT
59
59
0.00%
20
Marina
SLIP
1,055
1,055
0.00%
21
Theater
SEAT
5,475
5,475
0.00%
22
Newport Dunes
ACRE
64.00
64.00
0.00%
23
General Office
TSF
12,305.620
12,614.019
308.399
2.51%
24 1
Medical/GovemmentOffice
TSF
910.616
837.696
72.920
-8.01%
25
Research & Development
TSF
81.730
81.730
0.00%
26
Industrial
TSF
1,956.092
1,153.867
802.225
-41.01%
27
Mini-Storage/Warehouse
TSF
196.420
196.420
-
0.00%
28
Pre-school/Day Care
TSF
56.770
56.770
0.00%
29
Elementary/Private School
STU
4,455
4,455
0.00%
30
Junior/High School
STU
4,765
4,765
0.00%
31
Cultural/Learning Center
TSF
40.000
40.000
0.00%
32
Library
TSF
78.840
78.840
0.00%
33
Post Office
TSF
73.700
63.800
9.900
-13.43%
34
Hos ital
BED
1,265
1.265
-
0.00%
35
Nursin /Conv. Home
BEDS
661
602
59
-8.93%
36
Church
TSF
467.210
441.200
26.010
-5.57%
37
Youth Ctr./Service
TSF
166.310
166.310
0.00%
38
Park
ACRE
94.920
112.250
17.330
18.26%
39
Re lonal Park
ACRE
45.810
45.910
-
0.00%
40
Goif Course
ACRE
298.290 1
298.290 I
I
0.00%
Uses 8, 12, and 14 are part of the old NBTAM model structure and are not currently utilized in
the City land use datasets.
2 Units Abbreviations:
DU = Dwelling Units
TSF = Thousand Square Feet
CRT = Court
STU = Students
U:\UcJobs\ 012001012321Exce0j01232-18.xlsITS-1
•
•
0
5-2
,aq
TABLE 5-2
•
0
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING
NBTM
CODE'
DESCRIPTION
UNITS'
2002
QUANTITY
bub
MINIMUM
QUANTITY
GROWTH
% GROWTH
1
Low Density Residential
DU
17,124
17,833
7091
4.14%
2
Medium DensityResidential
DU
9,535
12,903
3,368
35.32%
3
Apartment
DU
9,199
15,281
6,082
66.12%
4
Elderly Residential
DU
200
200
0.00%
5
Mobile Home
DU
600
455
145
-24.17%
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS
DU
36,658
46,672
10,014
27.32%
6
1 Motel
ROOM
134
194
60
44.78%
7
Hotel
ROOM
2,821
4,069
1,248
44.24%
9
Regional Commercial
TSF
1,259.000
1,464.000
205.000
16.28%
10
General Commercial
TSF
3,696.781
4,547.128
850.347
23.00%
11
Commercial/Recreation
ACRE
5.100
5.100
0.00%
13
Restaurant
TSF
99.370
198.780
99.410
106.04%
15
Fast Food Restaurant
TSF
13.940
13.940
-
0.00%
16
Auto Dealer/Sales
TSF
172.420
227.170
54.750
31.75%
17
Yacht Club
TSF
51.830
70.310
18.480
35.66%
18
Health Club
TSF
16.770
61.330
45
265.71%
19
Tennis Club
CRT
60
59
1
-1.67%
20
Marina
SLIP
1,055
1,055
0.00%
21
Theater
SEAT
5,489
5,475
14
-0.26%
22
Newport Dunes
ACRE
64.00
64.00
0.00%
23
General Office
TSF
10,865.733
12.614.019
1,748.286
16.09%
24
Medical/Government Office
TSF
795.926
837.6951
41.770
5.25%
25
Research & Development
TSF
81.730
81.730
0.00%
26
Industrial
TSF
1,291.079
1,153.867
137.212
-10.63%
27
Mini-Storage/Warehouse
TSF
196.420
196A20
-
0.00%
28
Pre-school/Day Care
TSF
55.820
56.770
0.950
1.70%
29
Elementary/Private School
STU
4,399
4,455
56
1.28%
30
Junior/High School
STU
4,765
4,765
-
0.007%
31
Cultural/Learninq Center
TSF
35.000
40.000
5.000
14.29%
32
Library
TSF
78.840
78.840
0.00%
33
Post Office
TSF
53.700
63.800
10.100
18.81%
34
Hospital
BED
351
1,265
914
260.40%
35
Nursin /Conv. Home
BEDS
661
602
59
-8.93%
36
Church
TSF
377.760
441.200
63.440
16.79%
37
Youth Ctr./Service
TSF
149.560
166.310
16.750
11.20%
38
Park
ACRE
113,970
112.250
1.720
.1.51%
39
Re ional Park
ACRE
45.910
45.910
NIA
40
Golf Course
ACRE
305.130
298.290
7.04
-2.31%
' Uses 8, 12, and 14 are part of the old NBTAM n
the City land use datasets.
2 Units Abbreviations:
DU = Dwelling Units
TSF = Thousand Square Feet
CRT = Court
STU = Students
0
U:\UcJobs1 012001012321ExceII01232-18.xls]T5.2
more than 3,000 dwelling units. Categories that grow by more than •
500,000 square feet include general commercial and general office.
5.1.2 General Plan Buildout Socioeconomic Data (SED)
General Plan Buildout SED that has been converted from land use is
summarized in Table 5-3. Table 5-3 also contains a comparison of
subarea minimum General Plan Buildout SED to existing SED for the City
of Newport Beach. The total number of dwelling units are projected to
grow by 9,357 units (27 %) from existing conditions. For total
employment, an increase of 14,587 employees (22%) is anticipated.
Socioeconomic data for the remainder of the primary modeling area (and
for Newport Coast, where land use data was unavailable) has been
unchanged from the currently adopted General Plan data.
5.2 Trip Generation
Table 5-4 summarizes the overall trip generation for General Plan Buildout
conditions for the City of Newport Beach and compares it to existing conditions
trip generation. Appendix "S" contains a report of trip generation by NBTM TAZ
for the City of Newport Beach. Most of these trips have been calculated'from the
final General Plan Buildout SED presented previously. Supplemental trips are
unchanged from the previously published data.
The overall trip generation for the City of Newport Beach is an estimated 880,085
daily vehicle trips. Table 5-5 compares subarea minimum General Plan buildout
trip generation to currently adopted General Plan buildout trip generation. Total
trip generation increases by approximately 326 daily trips (0.04%). Appendix "T"
shows the zone by zone trip generation comparison.
5-4
R
TABLE 5-3
• CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MINIMUM LAND USE BASED
SOCIOECONOMIC DATA SUMMARY/COMPARISON
0
VARIABLE
2002
IQUANTITYJ
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
QUANTITY
JGROWTI-11016GROWTFIJ
Occupied Single Family Dwelling Units
1 15,9701
16,702
732
5%
Occu ied Multi -Family Dwelling Units
18,294
26,9191
8,625
47%
TOTAL OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS
34,264
43,621
9,357
27%
Group Quarters Population
1 6611
602
-59
-9%
Population
1 75,211
93,271
18,060
24%
Employed Residents
1 44,6351
56,1691
11,534
26%
Retail Em to ees
1 10,9701
13,398
2,428
22%
Service Employee
17,295
21,750
4,455
26%
Other Employees
1 36,9901
44,694
7,704
21%
TOTAL EMPLOYEES
1 65,2551
79,842
1 871
22%
Elem/High School Students
1 9,1641
9,2201
56
1%11
1 Includes dal
0 U:\UcJobs\_0121
TABLE 5.4
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MINIMUM TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY •
TRIP PURPOSE
DAILY TRIP ENDS
GROWTH
PERCENT
GROWTH
EXISTING
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
GENERALPLAN
BUILDOUT
Home Based Work Productions
57,819
75,795
17,976
31.09%
Home Based Work Attractions
81,964
101,982
20,018
24.42%
Home Based School Productions
11,336
14,779
3,443
30.37%
Home Based School Attractions
8,730
8,845
115
1.32%
Home Based Other Productions2
127,338
175,256
47,918
37.63%
Home Based Other Attractions
109,815
137,098
•27,283
24.84%
or Based Other Productions
52,152
65,124
12,972
24.87%
Work Based Other Attractions
57,035
71,209
14,174
24.85%
Other - Other Productions
91,218
115,843
24,625
27.00%
Other -Other Attractions
89,7341
114,1541
24,4201
27.21%
TOTAL PRODUCTIONS
1 339,8631
446,797
106;9341
31.46%
TOTAL ATTRACTIONS
347,2781
433,2881
86,0101
24.77%
OVERALL TOTAL
687,141
—80,0851
192,944
28.08%
•
1 Home -Work Includes Home -Work and Home -University trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output.
2 Home -Other Includes Home -Shop and Home -Other trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output.
U:1UcJobs\ 01200101232\ExceA[01232-18.xis]T5d 0
5-6
611
TABLE 5-5
• CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MINIMUM TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON
TRIP PURPOSE
DAILY TRIP ENDS
GROWTH
PERCENT
GROWTH
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED GENERAL
PLAN BUILDOUT
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
GENERAL PLAN
BUILDOUT
Home Based Work Productions
73,968
75,795
1,827
2.4700
Home Based Work Attractions
102,230
101,982
-248
-0.24%
Home Based School Productions
14,475
14,779
304
2.10%
Home Based School Attractions
8,845
8,845
0
0.00%
Home Based Other Productions2
174,257
175,256
999
0.57%
Home Based Other Attractions
138,334
137,098
-1,236
-0.89%
or Based Other Productions
65,482
65,124
-358
-0.55%
Work Based Other Attractions
11,335
11,209
-126
-0.18%
Other - Other Productions
116,275
115,843
-432
-0.37%
Other - Other Attractions
114,558
114,154
-404
-0.35%
TOTAL PRODUCTIONS
444,4571
446.7971
2,3401
0.53%
TOTAL ATTRACTIONS
435,3021
433,288
-2,014
-0.46%
OVERALL TOTAL
879,7591
880,0851
3261
0.04%
P
1 Home -Work includes Home -Work and Home -University trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice out
2 Home -Other includes Home -Shop and Home -Other trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output.
U:\UcJobs\_01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xis]T5-5
C J
5-7
if.
3
5.3 Traffic Assignment
The roadway system for the Subarea Minimum General Plan is almost identical
to the constrained roadway system presented in Chapter 3 of this report. The
only change is the removal of the roadway system in Banning Ranch, consistent
with the land use removal.
Exhibit 5-A summarizes the NBTM 3.1 refined Subarea Minimum General Plan
Builddut with open space network daily traffic volumes throughout the City of
Newport Beach. Changes from the currently adopted General Plan Baseline
forecasts are shown on Table 5-6. Only Coast Highway experiences a change in
excess of 2,000 vehicles per day (VPD).
Table 5-7 compares these refined forecasts to existing counted volumes (presented
in the General Plan Baseline document). The highest daily traffic volume increases
occur on Coast Highway (an increase of up to16,000 VPD).
5.4 Daily Capacity Analysis
Daily roadway segment capacity analysis has been performed at study area
roadways, and is shown on Exhibit 5-B. The following roadway segments are
expected to operate with daily V/C greater than 0.90:
• Newport Boulevard north of Hospital Road
• Newport Boulevard north of Via Lido
• Jamboree Road north of Campus Drive
• Jamboree Road north of Birch Street
• Irvine Avenue north of University Drive
• Irvine Avenue north of Santiago Drive
• Irvine Avenue north of Highland Drive
• Irvine Avenue north of Dover Drive
5-8
P
el I
33
29
3
16
7
s
t7
t,00
33
14
mAa
4
4
31
10
12
7
7
MOM
17
29
20 1814 24
e .,
4OXHIBIT 5-A
SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT)
18 �axa
�ypn ATi
124 91
t3 � U5
56 61 14
17 2 13 322 28 A
45 9 18 23 3 f19
13 38 e n
6 16 24
i
20
S 42 1 38
Z 6 50 45
waxvuv 43 46 c 2
15 46
LEGEND:
19
28 40 56 19
s 10 -VEHICLES PER DAY (1000'5)
zo at 3 PACIFIC
`[R 5B aµ,Nk 5 3a OCEAN
tit
NEWPORTBEACH GENERALPLAN UPDATE.Newuort Beach.California-01232:SAmin2.mxd _ URBAN
�n
.S
TABLE 5.6 (PAGE 1 OF 4)
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON
LOCATION
ADOPTED
(CONSTRAINED)
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
FORECAST
CHANGE
%
CHANGE
16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.)
6,000
6,000
0
0.0%
32nd St. (west of Newport Blvd.)
9,000
8,000
-1,000
-11.1%
32nd St. (east of Newport Blvd.)
5,000
3,000
-2,000
40.0%
Avocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.)
5,000
6,000
1,000
20.0%
Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.)
12,000
12,000
0
0.0%
Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
10,000
11,000
1,000
10.0%
Balboa Blvd. (south of Coast Hwy.)
22,000
20,000
-2,000
-9.1%
Bayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.)
12,000
12,000
0
0.0%
Birch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Karman Ave.)
18,000
19,000
1,000
5.6%
Birch St. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
20,000
21,000
1,000
5.0%
Birch St. (west of MacArthur Blvd.)
20,000
23,000
3,000
15.0%
Birch St. (north of Bristol St. North)
27;000
29,000
2,000
7.4%
Birch St. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
20,000
22,000
2,000
10.0%
Birch St. (south of Bristol St. South)
16,000
16,000
0
0.0%
Bison Ave. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
17,000
18,000
1,000
5.9%
Bison Ave. (MacArthur Blvd. to SR-73 Fwy.)
11,000
11,000
0
0.0%
Bluff Rd. (Coast Hwy. to 15th St.)
13,000
0
-13,000
-100.0%
Bluff Rd. (15th St. to 17th St.)
13,000
0
-13,000
-100.0%
Bluff Rd. (17th St, to 19th St.)
12;000
0
-12,000
-100.0%
Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.)
34,000
34,000
0
0.0%
Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR-73 Fwy.)
27,000
27,000
0
0.0%
Bristol St. North (west of Campus Dr.)
32,000
33,000
1,000
3.1%
Bristol St. North (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
28,000
29,000
1,000
3.6%
Bristol St. North (east of Birch St.)
27,000
28,000
1,000
3.7%
Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd.)
18,000
18,000
0
0.0%
Bristol St. South (west of Campus Dr./Irvine Ave.)
32,000
32,000
0
0.0%
Bristol St. South (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
23,000
23,000
0
0.0%
Bristol St. South (east of Birch St.)
22,000
22,000
0
0.0%
Bristol St. South (west of Jamboree Rd.)
37,000
37,000
0
0.0%
Campus Dr. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Karman Ave.)
22,000
22,000
0
0.0%
Campus Dr. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
31,000
31,000
0
0.0%
Campus Dr. (west of MacArthur Blvd.)
39,000
40,000
1,000
2.6%
Campus Dr. (north of Bristol St. North)
39,000
39,000
0
0.0%
Campus Dr. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
40,000
40,000
0
0.0%
Coast Hwy. (west of Bluff Rd.)
60,000
56,000
-4,000
-6.7%
Coast Hwy. (Bluff Rd. to Superior Ave./Balboa Blvd.)
61,000
56,000
-51000
-8.2%
Coast Hwy. (Superior Ave. to Newport Blvd.)
41,000
40,000
-1,000
-2A%
Coast Hwy. (Newport Blvd. to Riverside Ave.)
68,000
69,000
1,000
1.5%
Coast Hwy. (Riverside Ave. to Tustin Ave.)
59,000
59,000
0
0.0%
Coast H Tustin Ave. to Dover Dr.
55,000
55,000
0
0.0%
•
0
0
5-10
t" v
TABLE 5-6 (PAGE 2 OF 4)
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON
•
SUBAREA
ADOPTED
MINIMUM
LOCATION
(CONSTRAINED)
FORECAST
CHANGE
CHANGE
Coast Hwy. (Dover Dr. to Bayside Dr.)
78,000
78,000
0
0.0%
Coast Hwy. (Bayside Dr. to Jamboree Rd.)
64,000
64,000
0
0.0%
Coast Hwy. (Jamboree Rd. to Newport Center Dr.)
51,000
50,000
-1,000
-2.0%
Coast Hwy. (Newport Center Dr. to Avocado Ave.)
43,000
43,000
0
0.0%
Coast Hwy. (Avocado Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
45,000
45,000
0
0.0%
Coast Hwy. (MacArthur Blvd. to Goldenrod Ave.)
48,000
46,000
-2,000
-4.2%
Coast Hwy. (Goldenrod Ave. to Marguerite Ave.)
46,000
46,000
0
0.0%
Coast Hwy. (Marguerite Ave. to Poppy Ave.)
42,000
42,000
0
0.0%
Coast Hwy. (Poppy Ave. to Newport Coast Dr.)
35,000
35,000
0
0.0%
Coast Hwy (east of Newport Coast Dr.)
44,000
44,000
0
0.0%
Dover Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Westcliff Dr.)
11,000
11,000
0
0.0%
Dover Dr. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.)
24,000
24,000
0
0.0%
Dover Dr. (16th St. to Cliff Dr.)
28,000
28,000
0
0.0%
Dover Dr. (Cliff Dr. to Coast Hwy.)
33,000
34,000
1,OD0
3.0%
Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at University Dr.)
10,000
10,000
0
0.0%
Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at Ford Rd.)
15,000
15,000
0
0.0%
Ford Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
13,000
13,000
0
0.0%
Goldenrod Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
4,000
2,000
-2,000
-50.0%
Highland Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
2,000
2,000
0
0.0%
•Hospital
Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.)
Hospital Rd. (east of Newport Blvd.)
18,000
10,000
19,000
11,000
1,000
1,000
5.6%
10.0%
Irvine Ave. (Bristol St. South to Mesa Dr.)
38,000
38,000
0
0.0%
Irvine Ave. (Mesa Dr. to University Dr.)
41,000
41,000
0
0.0%
Irvine Ave. (University Dr. to Santa Isabel Ave.)
40,000
40,000
0
0.0%
Irvine Ave. (Santa Isabel Ave. to Santiago Dr.)
33,000
33,000
0
0.0%
Irvine Ave. (Santiago Dr. to Highland Dr.)
32,000
32,000
0
0.0%
Irvine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.)
32,000
32,000
0
0.0%
Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr. to Westcliff Dr.)
28,000
29,000
1,000
3.6%
Irvine Ave. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.)
13,000
14,000
1,000
7.7%
Jamboree Rd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
47,000
48,000
1,000
2.1%
Jamboree Rd. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.)
54,000
54,000
0
0.0%
Jamboree Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to Bristol St. North)
43,000
44,000
1,000
2.3%
Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
51,000
53,000
2,000
3.9%
Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. South to Bayview, Wy.)
56,000
57,000
1,000
1.8%
Jamboree Rd. (Bayview Wy. to University Dr.)
56,000
57,000
1,000
1.8%
Jamboree Rd. (University Dr. to Bison Ave.)
41,000
41,000
0
0.0%
Jamboree Rd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.)
45,000
46,000
1,000
2.2%
Jamboree Rd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
55,000
56,000
1,000
1.8%
Jamboree Rd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to Santa Barbara Dr.)
43,000
45,000
2,000
4.7%
Jamboree Rd. (Santa Barbara Dr. to Coast Hwy.)
42,000
43,000
1,000
2.4%
Jamboree Rd. ( Coast Hwy. to Bayside Dr.)
15,000
15,000
0
0.0%
MacArthur Blvd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
33,000
35,000
2,000
6.1%
MacArthur Blvd. (Birch St. to Von Karman Ave.)
26,0001
27,0001
1,000
3.8%
MacArthur Blvd. (Von Karman Ave. to Jamboree Rd.)
32,0001
33,0001
1,000 1
3.1%
•
5-11
15�
TABLE 5.6 (PAGE 3 OF 4)
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON
LOCATION
ADOPTED
I (CONSTRAINED)
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
FORECAST
I CHANGE
%
I CHANGE
MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.)
35,000
36,000
1,000
2.9%
MacArthur Blvd. (north of Bison Ave.)
74,000
75,000
1,000
1.4%
MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.)
74,000
74,000
0
0.0%
MacArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
60;000
61,000
1,000
1.7%
MacArthur Blvd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to San Miguel Rd.)
39,000
38,000
-1,000
-2.6%
MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
38,000
38,000
0
0.0%
Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
8,000
7,000
-1,000
-12.5%
Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
7,000
6,000
-1,000
-14.3%
Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
13,000
13,000
0
0.0%
Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.)
46,000
47,000
1,000
2.2%
Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
54,000
54,000
0
0.0%
Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido)
57,000
56,000
-1,000
-1.8%
Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.)
41,000
41,000
0
0.0%
ewport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.)
33,000
34,000
1,000
3.0%
Newport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.)
17,000
16,000
-1,000
-5.9%
Newport Coast Dr. (SR-73 Fwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
29,000
29,000
0
0.0%
Newport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
24,000
24,000
0
0.0%
Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.)
19,000
19,000
0
0.0%
Placentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.)
16,000
17,000
1,000
6.3%
Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave. to Hospital Rd.)
11,000
12,000
1,000
9.1DA
Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
2,000
0
0.0%
Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
10,000
11,000
1,000
10.0%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.)
17,000
17,000
0
0.0%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd, to Santa Rosa Rd.)
12,000
13,000
1,000
8.3%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
26,000
28,000
2,000
7.7%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (MacArthur Blvd, to San Miguel Rd.)
22,000
23,000
1,000
4.5%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (San Miguel Rd, to Marguerite Ave.)
24,000
24,000
0
0.0%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to Spyglass Hill Rd.)
19,000
19,000
0
0.0%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.)
19,000
19,000
0
0.0%
San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.)
10,000
10,000
0
0.0%
San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.)
10,000
10,000
0
0.0%
San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
14,000
14,000
0
0.0%
San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
16,000
16,000
0
0.0%
San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.)
20,000
20,000
0
0.0%
San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.)
11,000
11,000
0
0.0%
Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.)
11,000
13,000
2,000
18.2%
Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
9,000
9,000
0
0.0%
Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
14,000
14,000
0
0.0%
Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave. to Irvine Ave.)
6,000
6,000
0
0.0%
Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
4,000
4,000
0
0.0%
Spyglass Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
4,000
4,000
0
0.0%
Superior Ave. (north of Placentia Ave.)
19,000
19,000
0
0.0%
Superior Ave. (Placentia Ave. to Hospital Rd.)
28,0001
28,000
0
0.0%
Superior Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
28,0001
28,000
0 1
0.0%
•
•
•
5-12
•
U
TABLE 5.6 (PAGE 4 OF 4)
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON
LOCATION
ADOPTED
(CONSTRAINED)
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
I FORECAST
I CHANGE[CHANGE
Tustin Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
3,000
3,000
0
0.0%
University Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
3,000
3,000
0
0.0%
University Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.),
15,000
15,000
0
0.0%
Via Lido (east of Newport Blvd.)
10,000
10,000
0
0.0%
Von Karman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
18,000
19,000
1,000
5.6%
Von Karman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.)
16,000
17,000
1,000
6.3%
Westcliff Dr. Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.
16,000
16,000
0
0.0%
U:\UcJobsl 0I2001012321Excell[01232-18.xls]T5-6
TABLE 5-7 (PAGE 1 OF 4)
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH
LOCATION
EXISTING
(2001/2002)
COUNT
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
FORECAST
GROWTH
GROWTH
16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.)
5,000
6,000
1,000
20.0%
32nd St. (west of Newport Blvd.)
8,000
8,000
0
0.0%
32nd St. (east of Newport Blvd.)
3,000
3,000
0
0.0%
Avocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.)
5,000
6,000
1,000
20.0%
Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.)
12,000
12,000
0
0.0%
Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
11,000
11,000
0
0.0%
Balboa Blvd. (south of Coast Hwy.)
18,000
20,000
2,000
11.1%
Bayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.)
10,000
12,000
2,000
20.0%
Birch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Karman Ave.)
12,000
19,000
7,000
58.3%
Birch St. (Von Kalman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
15,000
21,000
6,000
40.0%
Birch St. (west of MacArthur Blvd.)
16,000
23,000
7,000
43.8%
Birch St. (north of Bristol St. North)
23,000
29,000
6,000
26.1%
Birch St. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
19,000
22,000
3,000
15.8%
Birch St. (south of Bristol St. South)
15,000
16,000
1,000
6.7%
Bison Ave. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
13,000
18,000
5,000
38.5%
Bison Ave. (MacArthur Blvd. to SR-73 Fwy.)
7,000
11,000
4,000
57.1%
Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.)
26,000
34,000
8,000
30.8%
Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR 73 Fwy.)
17,000
27,000
10,000
58.8%
Bristol St. North (west of Campus Dr.)
28,000
33,000
5,000
17.9%
Bristol St. North (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
23,000
29,000
6,000
26.1%
Bristol St. North (east of Birch St.)
22,000
28,000
6,000
27.3%
Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd.)
16,000
18,000
2,000
12.5%
Bristol St. South (west of Campus Dr./Irvine Ave.)
28,000
32,000
4,000
14.3%
Bristol St. South (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
17,000
23,000
6,000
35.3%
Bristol St. South (cast of Birch St.)
16,000
22,000
6,000
37.5%
Bristol St. South (west of Jamboree Rd.)
31,000
37,000
6,000
19.4%
Campus Dr. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Kalman Ave.)
16,000
22,000
6,000
37.5%
Campus Dr. (VonKarman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
20,000
31,000
11,000
55.0%
Campus Dr. (west of MacArthur Blvd.)
26,000
40,000
14,000
53.8%
Campus Dr. (north of Bristol St. North)
28,000
39,000
11,000
39.3%
Campus Dr. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
30,000
40,000
10,000
33.3%
Coast Hwy. (west of Superior AveJBaIboa Blvd.)
46,000
56,000
10,000
21.7%
Coast Hwy. (Superior Ave. to Newport Blvd.)
28,000
40,000
12,000
42.9%
Coast Hwy. (Newport Blvd. to Riverside Ave.)
53,000
69,000
16,000
30.2%
Coast Hwy. (Riverside Ave. to Tustin Ave.)
45,000
59,000
14,000
31.1%
Coast Hwy. (Tustin Ave. to Dover Dr.)
42,000
55,000
13,000
31.0%
Coast Hwy. (Dover Dr, to Bayside Dr.)
63,000
78,000
15,000
23.8%
Coast Hwy. (Bayside Dr. to Jamboree Rd.)
51,000
64,000
13,000
25.5 0
Coast Hwy. (Jamboree Rd. to Newport Center Dr.)
42,000
50,000
8,000
19.0%
Coast Hwy. (Newport Center Dr. to Avocado Ave.)
35,000
43,000
8,000
22.9%
Coast H Avocado Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.
36,000
45,000
9,000
25.0%
•
•
n
LJ
5-14
%V9
TABLE 5-7 (PAGE 2 OF 4)
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH
•
EXISTING
SUBAREA
(200112002)
MINIMUM
%
LOCATION
COUNT
FORECAST
GROWTH
GROWTH
Coast Hwy. (MacArthur Blvd. to Goldenrod Ave.)
40,000
46,000
6,000
15.0%
Coast Hwy. (Goldenrod Ave. to Marguerite Ave.)
39,000
46,000
7,000
17.9%
Coast Hwy. (Marguerite Ave. to Poppy Ave.)
35,000
42,000
7,000
20.0%
Coast Hwy. (Poppy Ave. to Newport Coast Dr.)
28,000
35,000
7,000
25.0%
Coast Hwy (east of Newport Coast Dr.)
35,000
44,000
9,000
25.7%
Dover Dr. (Irvine Ave. to WestcliffDr.)
9,000
11,000
2,000
22.2%
Dover Dr. (WestcliffDr. to 16th St.)
22,000
24,000
2,000
9.1%
Dover Dr. (16th St. to Cliff Dr.)
25,000
28,000
3,000
12.0%
Dover Dr. (Cliff Dr. to Coast Hwy.)
29,000
34,000
5,000
17.2%
Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at University Dr.)
10,000
10,000
0
0.0%
Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at Ford Rd.)
15,000
15,000
0
0.0%
Ford Rd. (Jamboree Rd, to MacArthur Blvd.)
9,000
13,000
4,000
44.4%
Goldenrod Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
2,000
0
0.0%
Highland Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
2,000
2,000
0
0.0%
Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.)
13,000
19,000
6,000
46.2%
Hospital Rd. (east of Newport Blvd.)
7,000
11,000
4,000
57.1%
Irvine Ave. (Bristol St. South to Mesa Dr.)
27,000
38,000
11,000
40.7%
Irvine Ave. (Mesa Dr. to University Dr.)
31,000
41,000
10,000
32.3%
Irvine Ave. (University Dr. to Santa Isabel Ave.)
33,000
40,000
7,000
21.2%
Irvine Ave. (Santa Isabel Ave. to Santiago Dr.)
29,000
33,000
4,000
13.8%
•
Irvine Ave. (Santiago Dr. to Highland Dr.)
27,000
32,000
5,000
18.5%
Irvine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.)
27,000
32,000
5,000
18.5%
Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr. to WestcliffDr.)
22,000
29,000
7,000
31.8%
Irvine Ave. (WestcliffDr. to 16th St.)
12,000
14,000
2,000
16.7%
Jamboree Rd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
36,000
48,000
12,000
33.3%
Jamboree Rd. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.)
42,000
54,000
12,000
28.6%
Jamboree Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to Bristol St. North)
36,000
44,000
8,000
22.2%
Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
47,000
53,000
6,000
12.8%
Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. South to Bayview Wy.)
47,000
57,000
10,000
21.3%
Jamboree Rd. (Bayview Wy. to University Dr.)
47,000
57,000
10,000
21.3%
Jamboree Rd. (University Dr. to Bison Ave.)
37,000
41,000
4,000
10.8%
Jamboree Rd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.)
39,000
46,000
7,000
17.9%
Jamboree Rd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
46,000
56,000
10,000
21.7%
Jamboree Rd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to Santa Barbara Dr.)
34,000
45,000
11,000
32.4%
Jamboree Rd. (Santa Barbara Dr. to Coast Hwy.)
32,000
43,000
11,000
34.4%
Jamboree Rd. ( Coast Hwy. to Bayside Dr.)
12,000
15,000
3,000
25.0%
MacArthur Blvd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
27,000
35,000
8,000
29.6%
MacArthur Blvd. (Birch St. to Von Karman Ave.)
22,000
27,000
5,000
22.7%
MacArthur Blvd. (Von Karman Ave. to Jamboree Rd.)
26,000
33,000
7,000
26.9%
MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.)
27,000
36,000
9,000
33.3%
MacArthur Blvd. (north of Bison Ave.)
61,000
75,000
14,000
23.0%
MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.)
63,000
74,000
11,000
17.5%
MacArthur Blvd. Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
54,000
61,000
7,000
13.0%
•
5-15
t��
TABLE 5-7 (PAGE 3 OF 4)
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH
EXISTING
SUBAREA
(2001/20)2)
MINIMUM
LOCATION
COUNT
FORECAST
GROWTH
GROWTH
MacArthur Blvd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd, to San Miguel Rd.)
35,000
38,000
3,000
8.6%
MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
31,000
38,000
7,000
22.6%
Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
7,000
7,000
0
0.0%
Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
6,000
6,000
0
0.0%
Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
12,000
13,000
1,000
8.3%
Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.)
36,000
47,000
11,000
30.6%
Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
43,000
54,000
11,000
25.6%
Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido)
48,000
56,000
8,000
16.7%
Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.)
36,000
41,000
5,000
13.9%
Newport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.)
29,000
34,000
5,000
17.2%
Newport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.)
14,000
16,000
2,000
14.3%
Newport Coast Dr. (SR-73 Fwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
17,000
29,000
12,000
70.65eo
Newport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
15,000
24,000
9,000
60.0%
Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.)
12,000
19,000
7,000
58.3%
Placentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.)
12,000
17,000
5,000
41.7%
Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave. to Hospital Rd.)
7,000
12,000
5,000
71A%
Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
2,000
0
0.0%
Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
9,000
11,000
2,000
22.2%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.)
16,000
17,000
1,000
6.3%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.)
11,000
13,000
2,000
18.2%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
21,000
28,000
7,000
333%
•
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (MacArthur Blvd, to San Miguel Rd.)
19,000
23,000
4,000
21.1%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (San Miguel Rd. to Marguerite Ave.)
18,000
24,000
6,000
33.3%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to. Spyglass Hill Rd.)
12,000
19,000
7,000
58.3%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd, to Newport Coast Dr.)
12,000
19,000
7,000
58.3%
San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.)
7,000
10,000
3,000
42.9%
San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.)
7,000
10,000
3,000
42.9%
San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
12,000
14,000
2,000
16.7%
San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
12,000
16,000
4,000
33.3%
San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.)
19,000
20,000
1,000
5.3%
San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.)
10,000
I1,000
1,000
10.0%
Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.)
10,000
13,000
3,000
30.0%
Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
8,000
9,000
1,000
12.5%
Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
11,000
14,000
3,000
27.3%
Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave. to Irvine Ave.)
5,000
6,000
1,000
20.0%
Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
3,000
4,0001
1,000
33.3%
Spyglass Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
4,000
4,000
0
0.0%
Superior Ave. (north of Placentia Ave.)
17,000
19,000
2,000
11.8%
Superior Ave. (Placentia Ave. to Hospital Rd.)
22,000
28,000
6,000
27.3%
Superior Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast H
24,000
28,000
4,000
16.7% 11
5-16
,bv
•
r1
U
•
TABLE 5-7 (PAGE 4 OF 4)
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH
LOCATION
EXISTING
(200112002)
COUNT
I SUBAREA
MINIMUM
FORECAST
GROWTH
%
GROWTH
Tustin Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
3,000
1,000
50.0%
University Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
3,000
3,000
0
0.0%
University Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.)
11,000
15,000
4,000
36.4%
Via Lido (east of Newport Blvd.)
8,000
10,000
2,000
25.0%
Von Karman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
14,000
19,000
5,000
35.7%
Von Karman Ave. (Birch St, to MacArthur Blvd.)
12,000
17,000
5,000
41.7%
Westcliff Dr. Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.
16,000
16,000
0
0.0%
U:\UcJobs\-01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xls)T5-7
5-17
\Up
0.29
U1
OD
0.59
EXHIBIT 5-13
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
VOLUME/CAPACITY (V/C) RATIOS
0.15
0.35
;�W0.51
qsl "m
LEGEND:
0.88 - VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO
t.to os9 �^ 0.13 PACIFIC
"`°aa, 8 QOCEAN
NEWPORTAMCH
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE.Newport Beach Callfomla. 01232:samin2 vcmxd
URBAN
•
Dover Drive north of Westcliff Drive
•
•
Dover Drive north of Coast Highway
•
Jamboree Road north of Bayview Highway
•
Jamboree Road north of University Drive
•
Jamboree Road north of San Joaquin Hills Road
•
MacArthur Boulevard north of Bison Avenue
•
MacArthur Boulevard north of Ford Road
•
MacArthur Boulevard north of San Joaquin Hills Road
•
Newport Coast Drive north of SR-73 Northbound Ramps
•
Newport Boulevard south of Hospital Road
•
Jamboree Road south of Birch Street
•
Irvine Avenue south of University Drive
•
Hospital Road east of Newport Boulevard
•
Campus Drive east of MacArthur Boulevard
•
Bristol Street North east of Birch Street
•
•
Bristol Street South east of Birch Street
•
Coast Highway east of Dover Drive
•
Coast Highway east of Bayside Drive
•
Coast Highway east of Jamboree Road
•
Ford Road east of MacArthur Boulevard
•
Coast Highway east of MacArthur Boulevard
•
Coast Highway east of Goldenrod Avenue
•
Coast Highway east of Marguerite Avenue
•
Coast Highway east of Poppy Avenue
•
Coast Highway west of Superior Avenue/Balboa Boulevard
•
Coast Highway west of Riverside Drive
•
Bristol Street North west of Campus Drive
•
Bristol Street South west of Campus Drive
•
Dover Drive west of Irvine Avenue
•
Bristol Street South west of Jamboree Road
•
5-19
5.5 Peak Hour Forecasts
The final data required to evaluate the Subarea Minimum General Plan Buildout •
scenario was intersection volume and geometric data for the 62 intersections
selected for analysis (Bluff Road has been removed from this scenario, as there
is no development. on Banning Ranch). The same intersection configurations
have been used, as for the currently adopted General Plan Buildout with
constrained network intersection capacity utilization values (ICUs). Table 5-8
summarizes the Subarea Minimum General Plan Buildout ICUs based on the AM
and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes and the intersection
geometric data as compared with currently adopted General Plan with
constrained network ICUs. Appendix "U" contains the detailed ICU calculation
worksheets. The worksheets in Appendix "U" summarize the intersection
geometric data and the AM and PM peak intersection turning movement
volumes.
A comparison of currently adopted General Plan Buildout ICUs to existing ICUs is •
shown on Table 5-9. Most of the large differences are caused by a change in the
number of lanes causing additional capacity. Table 5-10 summarizes intersection
analysis for buildout conditions. Deficient intersections are shown on Exhibit 5-C.
Intersections with ICU values greater than 0.90 (LOS "E" or worse) in either peak
period are:
• Superior Avenue (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM/PM)
• Newport Boulevard (NS)/Hospital Road (EW) (PM)
• Riverside Drive (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM/PM)
• Tustin Avenue (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM)
• MacArthur Boulevard (NS)/Campus Drive (EW) (PM)
• Von Karman Avenue (NS)/Campus Drive (EW) (PM)
• Jamboree Road (NS)/Campus Drive (EW) (AM/PM)
• Campus Drive (NS)/Bristol Street North (EW) (AM/PM)
• Birch Street (NS)/Bristol Street North (EW) (AM) •
5-20
0
•
•
•
TABLE 5.8 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU)
COMPARISON TO CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
FORECAST
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
DELTA
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
FORECAST
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
DELTA
L Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw.
1.27
DNE
N/A
1.29
DNE
N/A
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.64
0.73
009
0.68
0.86
0.18
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
1.01
1.00
-0.01
0.99
0.95
-0.04
4. Newport Bl. & Hospital Rd.
0.79
0.84
0.05
0.97
1.01
0.04
5. Newport Bl. & Via Lido
0.54
0.55
0.01
0.46
0.45
-0.01
6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St.
0.52
0.48
-0.04
0.71
0.63
-0.08
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
1.03
1.02
-0.01
1.12
1.15
0.03
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
1.02
1.04
0.02
0.85
0.87
0.02
9. MacArthur Bl. & Campus Dr.
0.76
0.77
0.01
1.25
1.29
0.04
10. MacArthur Bl. & Birch St.
0.71
0.75
0.04
0.80
0.86
0.06
11. Von Kannan Av. & Campus Dr.
0.66
0.69
0.03
0.93
0.98
0.05
12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Karman Av.
0.54
0.51
-0.03
0.64
0.64
0.00
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
092
0.93
0.01
1.24
1.25
0.01
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.79
0.81
0.02
0.80
0.80
0.00
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St.
0.96
0.97
0.01
I.08
1.08
0.00
16. Birch St. & Bristol St
0.92
0.92
0.00
0.72
0.73
0.01
17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. S
0.93
0.93
0.00
0.77
0.78
0.01
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S
0.52
0.54
0.02
0.53
0.54
0.01
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.68
0.70
0.02
0.90
0.91
0.01
20.IrvineAv. &Univemi Dr.
1.14
1.15
0.01
1.19
1.17
-0.02
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.70
0.70
0.00
0.78
0.78
0.00
22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr.
0.61
0.62
0.01
0.63
0.65
0.02
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.78
0.79
0.01
0.70
0.72
0.02
24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr.
067
0.69
0.02
0.82
0.80
-0.02
25. Dover Dr. & WmtclitiDr.
0.39
0.40
0.01
0.56
0.58
0.02
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.64
0.64
0.00
0.64
0.65
0.01
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.86
0.87
0.01
0.90
0.91
0.01
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw,
0.83
0.831
0.00
0.94
0.95
0.01
29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd.
0.96
0.96
0.00
0.99
1.00
0.01
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St.
0.70
0.71
0.01
0.69
0.69
0.00
31. Ba iew PI. & Bristol St. S
0.60
0.61
0.01
0.63
0.63
0.00
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
0.96
0.97
0.01
0.85
0.86
0.01
33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W .
0.48
0.48
0.00
0.70
0.71
0.01
34. Jamboree Rd. & Fastbluff Dr. /University Dr.
0.64
0.66
0.02
0.69
0.70
0.01
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.51
0.51
0.00
0.58
0.59
0.01
36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd.
0.78
0.79
0.01
0.72
0.73
0.01
37. Jamboree Rd. & San loa uin Hills Rd.1
0.611
0.60
-0.01
0.65
0.68
0.03
5-21
NV�
TABLE 5.8 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU)
COMPARISON TO CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
FORECAST
AREA
MINIMUM
DELTA
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
FORECAST
AREA
MINIMUM
I DELTA
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.55
0.58
0.03
0.71
0.78
0.07
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.85
0.87
0.02
0.89
0.86
-0.03
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.36
0.38
0.02
0.34
0.36
0.02
1. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.39
0.39
0.00
0.71
0.68
-0.03
42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.50
0.50
0.00
0.63
0.62
.0.01
44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr.
0.37
0.39
0.02
0.79
0.79
0.00
45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.77
0.80
• 0.03
0.80
0.83
0.03
46. SR-73 NB Ramps &Bison Av.
0.47
0.47
0.00
0.56
0.56
0.00
47. SR-73 SB Rams & Bison Av.
0.38
0.38
0.00
0.29
0.29
0.00
48. MacArthurB1. & Bison Av.
0.78
0.79
0.01
0.801
0.81
0.01
49. MacArttur BI. & Ford RdJBonita Canyon Dr.
0.77
0.78
0.01
I.06
1.06
0.00
50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.77
0.81
0.04
1.04
1.06
0.02
51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr.
0.63
0.63
0.00
0.77
0.76
-0.01
52. MacArthur BL & Coast Hw.
0.74
0.73
-0.01
0.83
0.79
-0.04
53. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.69
0.69
0.00
0.53
0.53
0.00
54. SR-73 SB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.45
0.46
0.01
0.59
0.59
0.00
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.30
0.30
0.00
0.381
0.38
0.00
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.52
0.55
0.03
0.68
0.68
0.00
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
1.09
1.06
.0.02
0.79
0.75
-0.04
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.38
0.38
0.00
0.51
0.50
-0.01
59.Mar erite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.90
0.89
-0.01
0.91
0.92
0.01
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joa uin Hills Rd.
0.60
0.60
0.00
0.46
0.46
0.00
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw.
0.67
0.67
0.00
0.76
0.75
-0.01
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
0.54
0.53
.0.01
0.40
0.40
0.00
64. Ne ort Coast Dr. &San Joa uin Hills Pd.
0.63
0.63
0.00
0.47
0.48
0.01
65. Net ort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.571
0.56
•0.01
0.60
0.60
0.00
rDNE - Does Not Exist
U,.WcJobsl 0120M012321Excell[01232-18.xls]T5-8
•
•
•
5-22
01
•
r1
L
n
U
TABLE 5-9 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU)
COMPARISON TO EXISTING
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM
PEAK HOUR
I PM
PEAK HOUR
EXISTING
COUNT
SUBAREAl
MINIMUM
IDELTAI
I EXISTING
COUNT
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
IDELTA
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.66
0.73
0.071
0.671
0.86
0.19
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
0.84
1.00
0.16
0.90
0.95
0.05
4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd.
0.54
0.84
0.30
0.70
1.01
0.31
5. Newport BI. & Via Lido
0.41
0.55
0.14
0.37
0.45
0.08
6. Newport BI. & 32nd St.
0.73
0.48
-0.25
0.78
0.63
-0.15
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
0.84
1.02
0.18
0.93
1.15
0.22
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
0.801
1.04
0.24
0.67
0.87
0.20
9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr.
0.61
0.77
0.161
0.851
1.29
0.44
10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St.
0.49
0.75
0.26
0.66
0.86
0.20
11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr.
0.55
0.69
0.14
0.79
0.98
0.19
12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Kansan Av.
0.46
0.51
0.05
0.53
0.64
0.11
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.70
0.93
0.23
0.85
1.25
0.40
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.61
0.81
0.20
0.60
0.80
0.20
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N)
0.77
0.97
0.20
0.94
1.08
0.14
16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N
0.66
0.92
0.261
0.61
0.73
0.12
17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S
0.72
0.93
0.211
0.58
0.78
0.20
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S)
0.46
0.54
0.08
0.44
0.54
0.10
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.70
0.70
0.00
0.94
0.91
-0.03
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
0.82
1.15
0.33
0.89
1.17
0.28
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.66
0.70
0.04
0.72
0.78
0.06
22. Irvine Av. & Hi land Dr.
0.57
0.62
0.05
0.601
0.65
0.05
23.Irvine Av. &Dover Dr.
0.72
0.79
0.07
0.64
0.72
0.08
24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr.
0.57
0.69
0.12
0.77
0.80
0.03
25. Dover Dr. & WestcliffDr.
0.38
0.40
0.02
0.48
0.58
0.10
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.55
0.64
0.09
0.57
0.65
0.08
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.70
0.87
0.17
0.74
0.91
0.17
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.69
0.83
0.14
0.70
0.95
0.25
29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd.
0.88
0.96
0.081
0.91
1.00
0.09
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St.
0.55
0.71
0.16
0.59
0.69
0.10
31. Ba iew Pl. & Bristol St. S
0.48
0.61
0.13
0.56
0.63
0.07
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
0.75
0.97
0.22
0.72
0.86
0.14
33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W .
0.41
0.49
0.07
0.57
0.71
0.14
34. Jamboree Rd. & EastbluffDr. [University Dr.
0.60
0.66
0.06
0.64
0.70
0.06
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.45
0.51
0.06
0.51
0.59
0.08
36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd.
0.69
0.79
0.101
0.65
0.73
0.08
37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.80
0.60
-0.201
1.00
0.68
-0.32
TABLE 5.9 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU)
COMPARISON TO EXISTING
INTERSECTION NSIEW
AM
PEAK HOUR
PM
PEAK HOUR
EXISTING
COUNT
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
DELTA
EXISTING
COUNT
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
DELTA
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.471
0.58
0.11
0.63
0.78
0.15
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.68
0.87
0.19
0.74
0.86
0.12
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.36
0.38
0.02
0.36
0.36
0.00'
41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joa uin Hills Rd.
0.32
0.39
0.07
0.52
0.68
0.161
42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.40
0.50
0.10
0.52
0.62
0.10
44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr.
0.33
0.39
0.06
0.72
0.79
0.07
45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.58
0.80
0.221
0.661
0.83
0.17
46. SR-73 NB Ramps &Bison Av.
0.31
0.47
0.16
0.37
0.56
0.19
47. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.26
0.38
0.12
0.17
0.29
0.12
48. MacArthur DI. & Bison Av.
0.63
0.79
0.16
0.60
0.81
0.21
49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.71
0.78
0.07
0.90
1.06
0.16
50. MacArthur Bl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.64
0.81
0.17
0.93
1.06
0.13
51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr,
0.56
0.63
0.07
0.65
0.76
0.11
52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw.
0.60
0.731
0.13
0.711
0.79
0.08
53. SR-73 NB Ram s & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.55
0.69
0.14
OA31
0.53
0.10
54. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.30
0.46
0.16
0.411
0.59
0.18
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.28
0.30
0.02
0.311
0.38
0.07
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.44
0.55
0.11
0.541
0.68
0.14
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
0.99
1.06
0.07
0.691
0.75
0.06
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.31
0.38
0.07
0.351
0.50
0.15
59.Mar critc Av. & Coast Hw.
0.83
0.89
0.06
0.82
0.92
0.10
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.44
0.60
0.16
0.30
0.46
0.16
61. Po Av. & Coast Hw.
0.61
0.67
0.06
0.65
0.75
0.10
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
0.45
0.53
0.08
0.31
0.40
0.09
64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.37
0.63
0.26
0.29
0.48
0.19
65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw.
1 0.471
0.56
0.09
0.50
0.60
0.10
U:IUcJohs\ 012001012321Excell[01232-18.xls)T5-9
•
0
C , J
5-24
o0
•
TABLE 5-10 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
IC
LOS
ICU
L OS
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.731
C
0.86
D
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
1.00
E
0.95
E
4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd.
5. Newport Bl. & Via Lido '
0.84
0.55
D
A
1.01
0.45
F
A
6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St.
0.48
A
0.63
B
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
1.02
F
1.15
F'
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
1.04
F
0.87
D
9. MacArthur Bl. & Campus Dr.
0.77
C
1.29
F
10. MacArthur Bl. & Birch St.
0.75
C
0.86
D
11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr.
0.69
B
0.98
E
12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Karman Av.
0.51
A
0.64
B
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.93
E
1.25
F
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.811
C
0.80
C
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St.
0.97
E
1.09
F
16. Birch St. & Bristol St.
0.92
E
0.73
C
17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. S)
0.93
E
0.78
C
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S
0.54
A
0.54
A
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.70
B
0.91
E
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
1.151
F
1.17
F
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.70
B
0.78
C
22, Irvine Av. & Hi hland Dr.
0.62
B
0.65
B
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.79
C
0.72
C
24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr.
0.69
B
0.80
C
25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr.
0.40
A
0.58
A
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.641
B
0.65
B
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.871
D
0.91
E
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.831
D
0.95
E
29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd.
0.96
E
1.00
E
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (N)
0.71
C
0.69
B
31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. (S)
0.61
B
0.63
B
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S)
0.97
E
0.86
D
33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W .
0.48
A
0.71
C
34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr.
0.661
B
0.70
B
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.511A
0.59
A
36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd.
0.79
C
0.73
C
37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.601
Al0.68
B
5-25
TABLE 5-10 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK
HOUR
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.58
A
0.78
C
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.87
D
0.86
D
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.38
A
0.36
A
41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joa uin Hills Rd.
0.39
A
0.68
B
42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.50
A
0.62
B
44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr.
0.391
A
0.79
C
45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.801
C
0.83
D
46. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.47
A
0.56
A
47. SR-73 SB Rams & Bison Av.
0.38
A
0.29
A
48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av.
0.79
C
0.81
D
49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford RdJBonita Canyon Dr.
0.78
C
1.06
F
50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.81
D
1.06
F
51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr.
0.631
B
0.76
C
52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw.
0.73
C
0.79
C
53. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.69
B
0.53
A
54. SR-73 SB Rams & Bonita Can on Dr.
0.46
A
0.59
A
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.30
A
0.38
A
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.55
A
0.68
B
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
1.06
F
0.75
C
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.38
•A
0.50
A
59.Maz erite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.89
D
0.92
E
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.60
A
0.46
A
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw.
0.67
B
0.75
C
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
0.53
A
0.40
A
64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.63
B
0.48
A
65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.56
A
0.60
A
U.\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xis]T5-10
is
0
0
5-26
i •
SUBAREA
WITH OPEN SPACE
In
N
J
iHIBIT 5-C
MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE
NETWORK DEFICIENCIES
LEGEND:
AM LOS "E"
4' `''`• �r ' = PM LOS "E"
= AM LOS"
I'
`., PACIFIC OCEAN
NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN UPDATE TRAFFIC STUDY, Newport Beach, Califomia - 01232:87 rev. 050429 URBAN
�w
• Campus Drive (NS)/Bristol Street South (EW) (AM)
• Irvine Avenue (NS)/Mesa Drive (EW) (PM) •
• Irvine Avenue (NS)/University Drive (EW) (AM/PM)
• Dover Drive (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (PM)
• Bayside Drive (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (PM)
• MacArthur Boulevard (NS)/Jamboree Road (EW) (AM/PM)
• Jamboree Road (NS)/Bristol Street South (EW) (AM)
• MacArthur Boulevard (NS)/Ford Road/Bonita Canyon Drive (EW) (PM)
• MacArthur Boulevard (NS)/San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) (PM)
• Goldenrod Avenue (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM)
• Marguerite Avenue (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (PM)
The only intersection that does not now experience a deficiency that did
experience one before is Bluff Road (NS) at Coast Highway (EW). Bluff Road is
not included in this scenario, as there is no development on Banning Ranch.
Two additional intersections experience deficiencies (Irvine Avenue (NS) at Mesa
Drive (EW) and Dover Drive (NS) at Coast Highway (EW)). Additional locations
experience changes in levels of service.
Intersection analysis has been performed to determine improvements necessary
to provide acceptable levels of service. ICU worksheets are included in
Appendix W". Table 5-11 compares the ICU results with and without
improvements. Improvements necessary to provide acceptable levels of service
are shown in Table 5-12.
Improvements have been developed that provide acceptable operations at all
potentially deficient intersections. The feasibility of the necessary improvements
is questionable at some locations (particularly where additional through lanes are
necessary).
0
5-28
•
•
0
TABLE 5-11 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY
IF INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
FUTURE
FORECAST
WITH
IMPROVEMENTS
DELTA
FUTURE
FORECAST
WITH
IMPROVEMENTS
DELTA
2.Superior Av.&PlacentiaAv.
0.73
0.31
0.0011
0.861
0.86
0.00
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
1.00
0.85
-0.151
0.951
0.84
-0.11
4. Newport BI. & Hos ital Rd.
0.84
0.89
0.05
1.01
0.80
-0.12
5. Newport BI. & Via Lido
0.55
0.55
0.00
0.45
0.45
0.00
6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St.
0.48
0.48
0.00
0.63
0.63
0.00
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
1.02
0.71
-0.31
1.15
0.78
-0.37
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
1.04
0.73
-0.31
0.87
0.87
0.00
9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr.
0.77
0.75
.0.02
1.29
0.82
-0.47
10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St.
0.75
0.75
0.001
0.86
0.86
0.00
11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr.
0.69
0.67
-0.021
0.98
0.86
-0.12
12. MacArthur BI. & Von Karman Av.
0.51
0.51
0.001
0.64
0.64
0.00
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.93
0.89
-0.04
1.25
0.87
-0.39
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.81
0.81
0.00
0.80
0.80
0.00
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St.
0.97
0.86
-0.11
1.08
0.86
-0.22
16. Birch St. & Bristol St.
0.92
0.77
-0.15
0.73
0.71
-0.02
17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S
0.93
0.89
-0.04
0.78
0.78
0.00
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S
0.54
0.54
0.00
0.54
0.54
0.00
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.70
0.70
04001
0.91
0.86
-0.05
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
1.15
0.74
-0.41
1.17
0.83
-0.34
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.70
0.70
0.00
0.78
0.78
0.00
22. Irvine Av. & Hi Wand Dr.
0.62
0.62
0.00
0.65
0.65
0.00
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.79
0.79
0.00
0.721
0.72
0.00
24. Irvine Av. & Westeliff Dr.
0.69
0.69
0.00
0.80
0.80
0.00
25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr.
0.40
0.40
0.00
0.58
0.58
0.00
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.64
0.64
0.00
0.65
0.65
0.00
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.87
0.87
0.00
0.91
0.81
-0.10
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.83
1 0.81
-0.02
0.95
0.89
-0.06
29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd.
0.96
0.78
-0.181
1.00
0.83
-0.17
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St.
0.71
0.71
0.001
0.691
0.69
0.00
31. Ba 'ew Pl. & Bristol St. S
0.61
0.61
0.00
0.631
0.63
0.00
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
0.97
0.75
-0.22
0.86
0.81
-0.05
33. Jamboree Rd. & Ba 'ew W .
0.48
0.48
0.00
0.71
0.71
0.00
34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr.
0.66
0.66
0.00
0.70
0.70
0.00
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.511
0.51
0.00
0.59
0.59
0.00
36, Jamboree Rd. & EastbluffDr./Ford Rd.
0.791
0.79
0.00
0.73
0.73
0.00
37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.60
0.60
0.00
0.68
() 81
0.00
TABLE 5-11 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
FUTURE
FORECAST
I WITH
IMPROVEMENTS
I
DELTA
FUTURE
FORECAST
WITH
WITH
DELTA
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.58
0.58
0.00
0.78
0.78
0.00
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.87
0.87
0.00
0.86
0.86
0.00
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.38
0.38
0.00
0.36
0.36
0.00
41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.39
0.39
0.00
0.68
0.68
0.00
2. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.50
0.50
0.00
0.62
0.62
0.00
44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr.
0.39
0.39
0.00
0.79
0.79
0.00
45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.80
0.80
0,001
0.83
0.831
0.00
6. SR-73 NB Rams & Bison Av.
0.47
0.47
0.00
0.56
0.56
0.00
47. SR-73 SB Rams & Bison Av.
0.38
0.38
0.00
0.29
0.29
0.00
48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av.
0.79
0.79
0.00
0.81
0.81
0.00
9. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.78
0.73
.0.05
1.06
0.86
-0.20
50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.81
0.70
.0.11
1.06
0.85
.0.21
5 t. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr.
0.63
0.63
0.00
0.76
0.76
0.00
52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw.
0.73
0.731
0.00
0.79
0.79
0.00
53. SR-73 NB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.69
0.69
0.00
0.53
0.53
0.00
54. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.46
0.46
0.00
0.59
0.59
0.00
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spy&lass Hill Rd.
0.30
0.30
0.00
0.38
0.38
0.00
56, San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Mi ucl Dr.
0.55
0.55
0.00
0.68
0.68
0.00
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
1.06
0.77
-0.29
0.75
0.75
0.00
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.381
0.38
0.001
0.50
0.50
0.00
59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.891
0.89
0.001
0.92
0.80
-0.12
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.60
0.60
0.00
0.46
0.46
0.00
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw.
0.67
0.67
0.00
0.75
0.75
0.00
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
0.53
0.53
0.00
0.40
0.40
0.00
64. N ort Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.63
0.63
0.00
0.48
0.48
0.00
65. Nc ort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.56
0.56
0.00
0.601
0.601
0.00
tDNE = Does Not Exist
U:1UcJobs\ 012001012321Excell(01232-1B.xls)T5-11
•
Cl
5-30
TABLE 5-12 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS
INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENT
Superior Av. (NS) at Coast Hw. (EW)
Construct 1st NB right turn lane.
Install SB right turn overlap phasing.
Construct 4th EB through lane.
Construct 5th WB through lane.
Newport Bl. (NS) at Hospital Rd. (EW)
Construct 2nd NB left turn lane.
Restripe 2nd WB through lane to shared through left lane.
Change ENV phasing to Split.
Riverside Av. (NS) at Coast Hw. (EW)
Construct SB free right turn lane.
Construct 2nd EB left turn lane.
Construct 3rd EB through lane.
Construct 4th WB through lane. Eliminate WB right turn lane.
Tustin Av. (NS) at Coast Hw. EW
Construct 3rd EB through lane.
MacArthur Bl. (NS) at Campus Dr. (EW)
Construct 2nd NB left turn lane.
Construct SB free right turn lane.
Von Karman Av. (NS) at Campus Dr. (EW)
Construct 1st SB right turn lane.
Construct 1st WB right turn lane.
Jamboree Rd. (NS) at Campus Dr. (EW)
Construct NB free right turn lane.
Construct 4th SB through lane.
Construct 1 st SB right turn lane.
Construct 3rd EB left turn lane.
Construct WB free right turn lane.
Campus Dr. (NS) at Bristol St. N (EW)
Construct SB shared through right lane.
Construct 5th WB through lane.
Construct 1st WB right turn lane.
Birch St. (NS) at Bristol St. N (EW)
Construct 3rd NB through lane.
Construct 1st WB right turn lane.
Campus DrArvine Av. (NS) at Bristol St. S EW
Construct 1st NB right turn lane.
Irvine Av. (NS) at University Dr. (EW)
Construct 3rd NB through lane.
Construct 3rd SB through lane.
Restripe 2nd EB through lane to shared through left lane.
Change E/W phasing to Split.
TABLE 5-12 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS
INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENT
Bayside Dr. (NS) at Coast Hw. (EW)
Restripe SB through lane to shared through left lane.
Convert SB defacto to 1st SB right turn lane.
Install SB right turn overlap phasing.
Construct 1st WB right turn lane.
MacArthur BI. (NS) at Jamboree Rd. (EW)
Construct 4th NB through lane.
Construct 4th EB through lane.
Construct 3rd WB left turn lane.
Jamboree Rd. NS at Bristol St. S EW
Construct 2nd EB left turn lane.
MacArthur BI. (NS) at Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. (EW)
Construct 3rd SB left turn lane.
Construct 3rd EB through lane.
MacArthur Bl. (NS) at San Joaquin Hills Rd. (EW)
Construct 4th NB through lane.
Construct 3rd EB left turn lane.
Goldenrod Av. NS at Coast Hw. EW
Construct 3rd WB through lane. Eliminate WB defacto right turn lane.
Mar uerite Av. NS at Coast Hw. EW
Construct 3rd EB through lane. Eliminate EB right turn lane.
Ln
i
M U.\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xis]T5-12
6.0 SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (POST-2025)
• ALTERNATIVE WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK SCENARIO
This chapter presents subarea maximum (as defined in the General Plan Advisory
Committee (GPAC) alternatives) General Plan Buildout (Post-2025) with constrained
network conditions. General Plan Buildout model inputs are discussed and refined
forecast volumes are presented. Data are compared to existing conditions to show
reasonable growth and to currently adopted General Plan Conditions (as defined in
Chapter 3 of this report) results to show differences.
6.1 Land Use and Socioeconomic Data (SED)
This section discusses the land use and socioeconomic data inputs.
6.1.1 Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout Land Use Data
The Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout land use data was provided
• to Urban Crossroads, Inc. staff by City staff and the City's General Plan
consultant, EIP Associates. Appendix "W" of this report documents the
explicit land use data included in NBTM 3.1 for subarea maximum General
Plan Buildout conditions in this analysis. Table 6-1 summarizes the
overall subarea maximum General Plan Buildout land uses for the City of
Newport Beach. Appendix "X" contains the land use changes by TAZ
compared to the currently adopted General Plan scenario. An overall
comparison to currently adopted General Plan land use is also shown in
Table 6-1. Land uses have changed based on data provided by the City.
The largest increases in land use compared to currently adopted General
Plan conditions occur in the Airport Area and in Newport Center/Fashion
Island.
Table 6-2 shows subarea maximum General Plan Buildout land use
growth from existing. Apartments grow substantially (by more than 12,000
• dwelling units). Categories that grow by more than 500,000 square feet
6-1
01
TABLE 6.1
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT •
LAND USE COMPARISON
NBTM
CODE'
DESCRIPTION
UNITS
ADOPTED
QUANTITY
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
QUANTITY
CHANGE
J%CHANGE
1
Low Density Residential
DU
18.347
18.936
589
3.21%
2
Medium Density Residential
DU
12,859
12,675
184
-1.43%
3
Apartment
DU
13,374
21,489
8,115
60.68%
4
Elderly Residential
DU
200
200
0.00%
5
Mobile Home
DU
455
455
0.000/c
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS
DU
45,235
53,755
8,520
18.83%
6
Motel
ROOM
139
49
90
-64.75%
7
Hotel
ROOM
3.387
4.330
943
27.84%
9
Regional Commercial
TSF
1,633.840
1,559.000
74.840
-4.5B%
10
General Commercial
TSF
4.627.760
5.377.611
749.851
16.20%
11
Commercial/Recreation
ACRE
5.100
5.100
0.00%
13
Restaurant
TSF
198.780
198.780
0.00%
15
Fast Food Restaurant
TSF
13.940
13.940
0.00%
16
Auto Dealer/Sales
TSF
227.170
227.170
0.00%
17
Yacht Club
TSF
70.310
70.310
1
0.00%
18
Health Club
TSF
61.330
61.330
0.000
19
Tennis Club
CRT
59
59
0.00%
20
Marina
SLIP
1,055
1,055
0.00%
21
Theater
SEAT
5.475
5.475
0.00%
22
Newport Dunes
ACRE
64.00
64.00
0.007%
23
General,Office
TSF
12.305.620
11,518.013
787.607
-6.40%
24
Medical/Government Office
TSF
910.616
1,859.090
948.474
104.16%
25
Research & Development
TSF
81.730
81.730
0.00%
26
Industrial
TSF
1,956.092
936.922
1,019.170
-52.10%
27
Mini-Stora elWarehouse
TSF
196A20
196.420
0.00%
28
Pre-school/Day Care
TSF
56.770
56.770
0.00%
29
Elementary/Private School
STU
4,455
4,955
500
11.22%
30
Junior/High School
STU
4,765
4,765
0.00%
31
Cultural/Learning Center
TSF
40.000
98.000
58.000
145.00%
32
Library
TSF
78.840
78.840
0.00%
33
Post Office
TSF
73.700
63.800
9.900
-13.43%
34
Hospital
BED
1,265
1,265
0.00%
35
Nursin /Conv. Home
BEDS
661
661
0.000
36
Church
TSF
467.210
441.200
26.010
-5.57%
37
Youth Ctr./Service
TSF
166.310
172.310
6.000
3.610%
38
Park
ACRE
94.920
171.920
77.000
81.120
39
Regional Park
ACRE
45.910
45.910
0.000
40
Golf Course
ACRE
298.290
298.290
0.000
' Uses 8, 12, and 14 are part of the old NBTAM model structure and are not currently utilized in
the City land use dalasets.
2 Units Abbreviations:
DU = Dwelling Units
TSF =Thousand Square Feet
CRT = Court
STU = Students
U:tUwobs\_012oow1239Exce*1232.1exislT 6.1
•
•
6-2
TABLE 6.2
• CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING
LJ
NBTM
CODE'
DESCRIPTION
UNITS 2
2002
QUANTITY
MAXIMUM
QUANTITY
GROWTH
% GROWTH
1
Low Density Residential
DU
17,124
18,936
1.812
10.58%
2
Medium Density Residential
DU
9,535
12,675
3,140
32.93%
3
Apartment
DU
9,199
21,489
12,290
133.60%
4
Elderly Residential
DU
200
200
0.00%
5
Mobile Home
DU
600
455
145
-24.17%
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS
DU
36,658
53,755
17,097
46.64%
6
Motel
ROOM
134
49
85
-63.43%
7
Hotel
ROOM
2,821
4,330
1,509
53.49%
9
Regional Commercial
TSF
1.259.000
1,559.000
300.000
23.83%
10
General Commercial
TSF
3,696.781
5,377.611
1,680.830
45.47%
11
Commercial/Recreation
ACRE
5.100
5.100
0.00%
13
Restaurant
TSF
99.370
198.780
99.410
100.04%
15
Fast Food Restaurant
TSF
13.940
13.940
-
0.00%
16
Auto Dealer/Sales
TSF
172420
227.170
54.750
31.75%
17
Yacht Club
TSF
51.830
70.310
18.480
35.66%
18
Health Club
TSF
16.770
61.330
45
265.71%
19
Tennis Club
CRT
60
59
1
20
Marina
SLIP
1,055
1,055
21
Theater
SEAT
5,489
5,475
14
-
g26
22
Newport Dunes
ACRE
64.00
64.00
23
General Office
TSF
10,865.733
11,518.013
652.280
.
24
Medical/Government Office
TSF
795.926
1,859.090
1,063.164
133.58%
25
Research & Development
TSF
81.730
61.730
0.00%
26
Industrial
TSF
1,291.079
936.922
354.157
-27.43%
27
Mini-Storage/Warehouse
TSF
196.420
196.420
-
0.00%
28
Pre-school/Day Care
TSF
55.820
56.770
0.950
1.70%
29
Elementary/Private School
STU
4,399
- 4,955
556
12.65%
30
Junior/High School
STU
4,765
4,765
0.00%
31
Cultural/Leaming Center
TSF
35.000
98.000
63.000
180.00%
32
Library
TSF
78.840
78.840
0.00%
33
Post Office
TSF
53.700
1 63.800
10.100
18.81%
34
Hospital
BED
351
1,265
914
260.40%
35
Nursin /Conv. Home
BEDS
661
661
-
0.00%
36
Church
TSF
377.760
441.200
63.440
16.79%
37
Youth Ctr./Service
TSF
149.560
172.310
22.750
15.21%
38
Park
ACRE
113.970
171.920
57.950
50.85%
39
Regional Park
ACRE
-
45.910
45.910 1
N/A
40
Golf Course
ACRE
305.330
298.290
7.04
2.31%
' Uses 6, 12, and 14 are part of the old NBTAM model structure and are not currently utilized in
the City land use datasets.
2 Units Abbreviations:
DU = Dwelling Units
TSF = Thousand Square Feet
CRT = Court
STU = Students
• U:\UcJobs\_01200\01232\Excel\101232-18.xls1T 6-2
6-3
4 �t
include general commercial, general office, and medical/government
office. Quantities that decrease in one category correlate to an increase in •
another category.
6.1.2 Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout Socioeconomic Data (SED)
Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout SED that has been converted
from land use is summarized in Table 6-3. Table 6-3 also contains a
comparison of Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout SED to existing
SED for the City of Newport Beach. The total number of dwelling units are
projected to grow by 15,973 units (47 %) from existing conditions. For
total employment, an increase of 17,312 employees (27%) is anticipated.
Socioeconomic data for the remainder of the primary modeling area (and
for Newport Coast, where land use data was unavailable) has been
unchanged from the currently adopted General Plan data.
6.2 Trip Generation •
Table 6-4 summarizes the overall trip generation for Subarea Maximum General
Plan Buildout conditions for the City of Newport Beach and compares it to
existing conditions trip generation. Appendix "Y" contains a report of trip
generation by NBTM TAZ for the City of Newport Beach. Most of these trips
have been calculated from the final General Plan Buildout SED presented
previously. Supplemental trips are unchanged from the previously published
data.
The overall trip generation for the City of Newport Beach is an estimated 961,043
daily vehicle trips. Table 6-5 compares subarea maximum General Plan buildout
trip generation to currently adopted General Plan buildout trip generation. Total
trip generation increases by approximately 81,284 daily trips (9.24%). Trip
generation has increased primarily in the Airport Area and Newport
Center/Fashion Island. Appendix "Z" shows the zone by zone trip generation
comparison.
•
go
TABLE 6-3
• CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MAXIMUM LAND USE BASED
SOCIOECONOMIC DATA SUMMARY/COMPARISON
•
VARIABLE
2002
QUANTITY
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
QUANTITY
JGROWTHJ%GROWTH
Occu [ed Single F mily Dwelling Units
1 15,970
17,738
1,768
11%
Occupied Multi -Family Dwelling Units
1 18,2941
32,499
14,205
78%
TOTAL OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS
1 34,2641
50,2371
15,973
47%
Group Quarters Po ulation
661
661
0
00
Population
1 75,2111
105,240
30,029
40%
Employed Residents
1 44,6351
64,711
20,076
45%
Retail Em to ees
1 10,9701
15,1711
4,201A
Service Employees
17,295
24,413
7,118
Other Employees
36,990
42,983
5,993
TOTAL EMPLOYEES
65,255
82,567
17,312
Elem/High School Students 1
9,1641
9,6701
506
6%
1 Includes data converted from land use only. Excludes Newport Coast and recent annexation areas.
• U:tUcJobst_012001012321Excell[01232-18.xis]T 6-3
6-5
TABLE 6-4
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MAXIMUM TRIP GENERATION GROWTH FROM EXISTING .
TRIP PURPOSE
DAILY TRIP ENDS
GROWTH
PERCENT
GROWTH
EXISTING
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
GENERALPLAN
BUILDOUT
Home Based Work Productions
57,819
86,096
28,277
48.91%
Home Based Work Attractions
81,964
105,777
23,813
29.05%
Home Based School Productions
11,336
16,455
5,119
45.16%
Home Based School Attractions
8,730
9,241
511
5.85%
Home Based Other Productions
127,338
190,690
63,352
49.75%
Home Based Other Attractions
109,815
153,318
43,503
39.61%
or Based Other Productions
52,152
68,900
16,748
32.11 %
Work Based Other Attractions
57,035
76,043
19,008
33.33%
Other - Other Productions
91,218
128,072
36,854
40A0%
Other - Other Attractions
89,734
126,4511
36,7171
40.92%
TOTAL PRODUCTIONS
1 339,8631
490,2131
150,3501
44.24%
TOTAL ATTRACTIONS
1 347,2781
470,8301
123,5521
35.58%
OVERALL TOTAL
1 687,1411
961,0431
273,902
39.8611:6
Home -Work includes Home -Work and Home -University trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output.
2 Home -Other Includes Home -Shop and Home -Other trips, consistent with OCTAM,mode choice output.
U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xls]T 6.4
•
10
•
TABLE 6-5
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MAXIMUM
TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON
TRIP PURPOSE
DAILY TRIP ENDS
GROWTH
PERCENT
GROWTH
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED GENERAL
PLAN BUILDOUT
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
GENERAL PLAN
BUILDOUT
Home Based Work Productions'
73,968
86,096
12,128
16.40%
Home Based Work Attractions
102,230
105,777
3,547
3.47%
Home Based School Productions
14,475
16,455
1.980
13.68%
Home Based School Attractions
8,845
9,241
396
4.48%
Home Based Other Productions2
174,257
190,690
16,433
9.43%
Home Based Other Attractions
138,334
153,318
14,984
10.83%
Work Based Other Productions
65,482
68,900
3,418
5.22%
Work Based Other Attractions
71,335
76,043
4,708
6.60%
Other - Other Productions
116,275
128,072
11,797
10.15%
Other - Other Attractions
114,558
126,451
11,893
10.38%
TOTAL PRODUCTIONS
444,4571
490,2131
45,7561
10.29%
TOTAL ATTRACTIONS
435,3021
470,8301
35,5281
8.16%
OVERALLTOTAL
879,7591
961,0431
81,2841
9.24%
' Home -Work includes Home -Work and Home -University trips, consistent with OCTAM mode
choice output.
2 Home-OtheMncludes Home -Shop and Home -Other trips, consistent with OCTAM mode
choice output.
• U:\UcJobs\_01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xls]T 6-5
6-7
110
6.3 Traffic Assignment
The roadway system for the Subarea Maximum General Plan is identical to the •
constrained roadway system presented in Chapter 3 of this report.
Exhibit 6-A summarizes the NBTM 3.1 refined Subarea Maximum General Plan
Buildout with constrained network daily traffic volumes throughout the City of
Newport Beach. Changes from the currently adopted General Plan Baseline
forecasts are shown on Table 6-6. Volume changes occur primarily because of
land use changes in the Airport Area and Newport Center/Fashion Island.
Roadways that experience the most change include Coast Highway, Jamboree
Road and Newport Boulevard.
Table 6-7 compares these refined forecasts to existing counted volumes (presented
in the General Plan Baseline document). The highest daily traffic volume increases
occur on Coast Highway, MacArthur Boulevard, and Newport Boulevard. Each of
these facilities experience an increase of 15,000 vehicles per day or more. •
6.4 Daily Capacity Analysis
Daily roadway segment capacity analysis has been performed at study area
roadways, and is shown on Exhibit 6-13. The following roadway segments are
expected to operate with daily V/C greater than 0.90:
• Newport Boulevard north of Hospital Road
• Newport Boulevard north of Via Lido
• Riverside Avenue north of Coast Highway
• Jamboree Road north of Campus Drive
• Jamboree Road north of Birch Street
• Irvine Avenue north of University Drive
• Irvine Avenue north of Santiago Drive
Alt,
I
29
26 aunaa
T
22 31
3
16
4
32
10
12
12533
7
6
F
4
wawa
2
vma
25
17
30
ar
wrara
20
18
em n
14
5
i 6
11 vo ISO
10
67
XHIBIT 6-A
SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALT NATIVE
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT)
33 13 �
i�
15
"5
5
62 15 �
13 3 22 29�sa
9 23 g fl 20
15 3 40 ux
3 6 17 24
ibyr 4 23
1 3s
54
0 >
12` 7
46 ><
wonvur 44 3 46 i
48
Y�� �` 42
LEGEND:
10 -VEHICLES PER DAY (1000'S)
' 23 46 6 \) / PACIFIC
°�aaa 10 38 C/ / OCEAN
URBAN
NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN UPDATE Newport Beach Califomia-01232'SAmax1 mxd
L
TABLE 6.6 (PAGE 1 OF 4)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON
LOCATION
ADOPTED
(CONSTRAINED)
BUILDOUT
I FORECAST
I CHANGE
%
CHANGE
16th St. (Irvine Ave, to Dover Dr.)
6,000
6,000
0
0.0%
32nd St. (west of Newport Blvd.)
9,000
10,000
1,000
11.1%
32nd St. (east of Newport Blvd.)
5,000
6,000
1,000
20.0%
Avocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.)
5,000
6,000
1,000
20.0%
Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.)
12,000
13,000
1,000
8.3%
Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
10,000
12,000
2,000
20.0%
Balboa Blvd. (south of Coast Hwy.)
22,000
23,000
1,000
4.5%
Bayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.)
12,000
13,000
1,000
8.3%
Birch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Korman Ave.)
18,000
21,000
3,000
16.7%
Birch St. (Von Korman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
20,000
22,000
2,000
10.0%
Birch St. (west of MacArthur Blvd.)
20,000
22,000
2,000
10.0%
Birch St. (north of Bristol St. North)
27,000
29,000
2,000
7.4%
Birch St. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
20,000
21,000
1,000
5.0%
Birch St. (south of Bristol St. South)
16,000
16,000
0
0.0%
Bison Ave. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
17,000
18,000
1,000
5.9%
Bison Ave. (MacArthur Blvd. to SR-73 Fwy.)
11,000
11,000
0
0.0%
Bluff Rd. (Coast Hwy. to 15th St.)
13,000
11,000
-2,000
-15.4%
Bluff Rd. (15th St, to 17th St.)
13,000
11,000
-2,000
-15.4%
Bluff Rd. (17th St. to 19th St.)
12,000
11,000
-1,000
-8.3%
Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.)
34,000
34,000
0
0.0%
Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR-73 Fwy.)
27,000
27,000
0
0.0%
Bristol St. North (west of Campus Dr.)
32,000
33,000
1,000
3.1%
Bristol St. North (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
28,000
29,000
1,000
3.6%
Bristol St. North (east of Birch St.)
27,000
28,000
1,000
3.7%
Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd.)
18,000
19,000
1,000
5.6%
Bristol St. South (west of Campus Dr./Irvine Ave.)
32,000
33,000
1,000
3.1%
Bristol St. South (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
23,000
23,000
0
0.0%
Bristol St. South (east of Birch St.)
22,000
22,000
0
0.0%
Bristol St. South (west of Jamboree Rd.)
37,000
38,000
1,000
2.7%
Campus Dr. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Korman Ave.)
22,000
23,000
1,000
4.5%
Campus Dr. (Von Korman Ave, to MacArthur Blvd.)
31,000
32,000
1,000
3.2%
Campus Dr. (west of MacArthur Blvd.)
39,000
40,000
1,000
2.6%
Campus Dr. (north of Bristol St. North)
39,000
39,000
0
0.0%
Campus Dr. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
40,000
41,000
1,000
2.5%
Coast Hwy. (west of 15th St.)
60,000
63,000
3,000
5.0 %
Coast Hwy. (Bluff Rd. to Superior Ave./Balboa Blvd.)
61,000
64,000
3,000
4.9%
Coast Hwy. (Superior Ave. to Newport Blvd.)
41,000
42,000
1,000
2.4%
Coast Hwy. (Newport Blvd. to Riverside Ave.)
68,000
73,000
5,000
7A%
Coast Hwy. (Riverside Ave. to Tustin Ave.)
59,000
63,000
4,000
6.80
Coast Hwy, (Tustin Ave. to Dover Dr.)
1 55,000
59,000
4,000
7.30
•
n
U
6-10
,a0
TABLE 6-6 (PAGE 2 OF 4)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON
•
ADOPTED
BUILDOUT
%
LOCATION
(CONSTRAINED)
FORECAST
CHANGE
CHANGE
Coast Hwy. (Dover Dr. to Bayside Dr.)
78,000
83,000
5,000
6A%
Coast Hwy. (Bayside Dr. to Jamboree Rd.)
64,000
67,000
3,000
4.7%
Coast Hwy. (Jamboree Rd. to Newport Center Dr.)
51,000
54,000
3,000
5.9%
Coast Hwy. (Newport Center Dr. to Avocado Ave.)
43,000
44,000
1,000
2.3%
Coast Hwy. (Avocado Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
45,000
46,000
1,000
2.2%
Coast Hwy. (MacArthur Blvd. to Goldenrod Ave.)
48,000
48,000
0
0.0%
Coast Hwy. (Goldenrod Ave. to Marguerite Ave.)
46,000
46,000
0
0.0%
Coast Hwy. (Marguerite Ave. to Poppy Ave.)
42,000
42,000
0
0.0%
Coast Hwy. (Poppy Ave. to Newport Coast Dr.)
35,000
35,000
0
0.0%
Coast Hwy (east of Newport Coast Dr.)
44,000
45,000
1,000
2.3%
Dover Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Westcliff Dr.)
11,000
11,000
0
0.0%
Dover Dr. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.)
24,000
25,000
1,000
4.2%
Dover Dr. (16th St. to Cliff Dr.)
28,000
28,000
0
0.0%
Dover Dr. (Cliff Dr. to Coast Hwy.)
33,000
34,000
1,000
3.0%
Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at University Dr.)
10,000
10,000
0
0.0%
Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at Ford Rd.)
15,000
15,000
0
0.0%
Ford Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
13,000
13,000
0
0.0%
Goldenrod Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
4,000
3,000
-1,000
-25.0%
Highland Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
2,000
2,000
0
0.0%
Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.)
18,000
22,000
4,000
22.2%
Hospital Rd. (east of Newport Blvd.)
10,000
13,000
3,000
30.0%
Irvine Ave. (Bristol St. South to Mesa Dr.)
38,000
39,000
1,000
2.6%
•
Irvine Ave. (Mesa Dr. to University Dr.)
41,000
42,000
1,000
2.4%
Irvine Ave. (University Dr. to Santa Isabel Ave.)
40,000
41,000
1,000
2.5%
Irvine Ave. (Santa Isabel Ave, to Santiago Dr.)
33,000
33,000
0
0.0%
Irvine Ave. (Santiago Dr. to Highland Dr.)
32,000
33,000
1,000
3.1%
Irvine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.)
32,000
33,000
1,000
3.1%
Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr. to Westcliff Dr.)
28,000
30,000
2,000
7.1%
Irvine Ave. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.)
13,000
14,000
1,000
7.7%
Jamboree Rd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
47,000
49,000
2,000
4.3%
Jamboree Rd. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.)
54,000
55,000
1,000
1.9%
Jamboree Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to Bristol St. North)
43,000
46,000
3,000
7.0%
Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
51,000
54,000
3,000
5.9%
Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. South to Bayview Wy.)
56,000
57,000
1,000
1.8%
Jamboree Rd. (Bayview Wy. to University Dr.)
56,000
57,000
1,000
1.8%
Jamboree Rd. (University Dr. to Bison Ave.)
41,000
43,000
2,000
4.9%
Jamboree Rd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.)
45,000
49,000
4,000
8.9%
Jamboree Rd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
55,000
59,000
4,000
7.3%
Jamboree Rd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to Santa Barbara Dr.)
43,000
48,000
5,000
11.6%
Jamboree Rd. (Santa Barbara Dr. to Coast Hwy.)
42,000
44,000
2,000
4.8%
Jamboree Rd. ( Coast Hwy. to Bayside Dr.)
15,000
15,000
0
0.0%
MacArthur Blvd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
33,000
36,000
3,000
9.1%
MacArthur Blvd. (Birch St. to Von Karman Ave.)
26,000
27,000
1,000
3.8%
MacArthur Blvd. (Von Karman Ave. to Jamboree Rd.)
32,000
33,000
1,000
1 3.1%
6-11
t44
TABLE 6.6 (PAGE 3 OF 4)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON
LOCATION
ADOPTED
(CONSTRAINED)
BUILDOUT
FORECAST
CHANGE
%
CHANGE
MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.)
35,000
36,000
1,000
2.9%
MacArthur Blvd. (north of Bison Ave.)
74,000
76,000
2,000
2.7%
MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.)
74,000
75,000
1,000
I A%
MacArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
60,000
62,000
2,000
3.3%
MacArthur Blvd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to San Miguel Rd.)
39,000
40,000
1,000
2.6%
MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
38,000
38,000
0
0.0%
Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
8,000
7,000
-1,000
-12.5%
Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
7,000
7,000
0
0.0%
Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
13,000
13,000
0
0.0%
Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.)
46,000
50,000
4,000
8.7%
Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
54,000
59,000
5,000
9.3%
Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido)
57,000
64,000
7,000
12.3%
Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.)
41,000
46,000
5,000
12,2%
Newport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.)
33,000
38,000
5,000
15.2%
Newport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.)
17,000
20,000
3,000
17.6%
Newport Coast Dr. (SR-73 Fwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
29,000
30,000
1,000
3.4%
Newport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
24,000
24,000
0
0.0%
Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.)
19,000
19,000
0
0.0%
Placentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.)
16,000
18,000
2,000
12.5%
Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave. to Hospital Rd.)
11,000
13,000
2,000
18.2%
Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
2,000
0
0.0%
Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
10,000
12,000
2,000
20.0%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.)
17,000
18,000
1,000
5.9%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd, to Santa Rosa Rd.)
12,000
13,000
1,000
8.3%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
26,000
29,000
3,000
11.5%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to San Miguel Rd.)
22,000
23,000
1,000
4.5%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (San Miguel Rd. to Marguerite Ave.)
24,000
24,000
0
0.0%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to Spyglass Hill Rd.)
19,000
20,000
1,000
5.3%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.)
19,000
19,000
0
0.0%
San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.)
10,000
10,000
0
0.0%
San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.)
10,000
10,000
0
0.0%
San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
14,000
15,000
1,000
7.1%
San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
16,000
18,000
2,000
12.5%
San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.)
20,000
23,000
3,000
15.0%
San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.)
11,000
14,000
3,000
27.3%
Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.)
11,000
15,000
4,000
36.4%
Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
9,000
9,000
0
0.0%
Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
14,000
15,000
1,000
7.1%
Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave. to Irvine Ave.)
6,000
6,000
0
0.0%
Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
4,000
4,000
0
0.0%
Spyglass Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
4,000
4,000
0
0.0%
Superior Ave. (north of Placentia Ave.)
19,000
20,000
1,000
5.3%
Superior Ave. (Placentia Ave. to Hospital Rd.)
28,000
29,000
1,000
3.6%
Superior Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast H�
28,000
30,000
2,000
7.1%
11
•
•
6-12
NP
•
TABLE 6.6 (PAGE 4 OF 4)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON
LOCATION
ADOPTED
(CONSTRAINED)
BUILDOUT
FORECAST
I CHANGE
%
CHANGE
Tustin Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
3,000
3,000
0
0.0%
University Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
3,000
3,000
0
0.0%
University Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.)
15,000
15,000
0
0.0%
Via Lido (east of Newport Blvd.)
10,000
12,000
2,000
20.0%
Von Karman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
18,000
20,000
2,000
11.1%
Von Karman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.)
16,000
17,000
1,000
6.3%
Westcliff Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.)
16,000
16,000
0
0.0%
U:\UcJobs\_01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xls]T 6-6
6-13
`t"
TABLE 6-7 (PAGE 1 OF 4)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH
LOCATION
EXISTING
(2001/2002)
COUNT
BUILDOUT
FORECAST I
GROWTH
%
GROWTH
16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.)
5,000
6,000
1,000
20.0%
32nd St (west of Newport Blvd.)
8,000
10,000
2,000
25.0%
32nd St (east of Newport Blvd.)
3,000
6,000
3,000
100.0%
Avocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.)
5,000
6,000
1,000
20.0%
Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.)
12,000
13;000
1,000
8.3%
Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
11,000
12,000
1,000
9.1%
Balboa Blvd. (south of Coast Hwy.)
18,000
23,000
5,000
27.8%
Bayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.)
10,000
13,000
3,000
30.0%
Birch St (Jamboree Rd. to Von Karman Ave.)
12,000
21,000
9,000
75.0%
Birch St. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
15,000
22,000
7,000
46.7%
Birch St. (west of MacArthur Blvd.)
16,000
22,000
6,000
37.5%
Birch St. (north of Bristol St. North)
23,000
29,000
6,000
26.1%
Birch St. (Bristol St North to Bristol St. South)
19,000
21,000
2,000
10.5%
Birch St. (south of Bristol St. South)
15,000
16,000
1,000
6.7%
Bison Ave. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
13,000
18,000
5,000
38.5%
Bison Ave. (MacArthur Blvd. to SR-73 Fwy.)
7,000
11,000
4,000
57.1%
Bluff Rd. (Coast Hwy. to 15th St.)
0
11,000
11,000
-
Bluff Rd. (15th St. to 17th St.)
0
11,000
11,000
Bluff Rd. (17th St. to 19th St.)
0
11,000
I1,000
-
Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.)
26,000
34,000
8,000
30.8%
Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR-73 Fwy.)
17,000
27,000
10,000
58.8%
Bristol St. North (west of Campus Dr.)
28,000
33,000
5,000
17.9%
Bristol St. North (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
23,000
29,000
6,000
26.1%
Bristol St. North (east of Birch St)
22,000
28,000
6,000
27.3%
Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd.)
16,000
19,000
3,000
18.8%
Bristol St. South (west of Campus Dr./Irvine Ave.)
28,000
33,000
5,000
17.9%
Bristol St. South (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
17,000
23,000
6,000
35.3%
Bristol St. South (east of Birch St.)
16,000
22,000
6,000
37.5%
Bristol St. South (west of Jamboree Rd.)
31,000
38,000
7,000
22.6%
Campus Dr. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Karman Ave.)
16,000
23,000
7,000
43.8%
Campus Dr. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
20,000
32,000
12,000
60.0%
Campus Dr. (west of MacArthur Blvd.)
26,000
40,000
14,000
53.8%
Campus Dr. (north of Bristol St. North)
28,000
39,000
11,000
39.3%
Campus Dr. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
30,000
41,000
11,000
36.7%
Coast Hwy. (west of Bluff Rd.)
46,000
63,000
17,000
37.0%
Coast Hwy. (Bluff Rd. to SuperiorAve./Balboa Blvd.)
46,000
641000
18,000
39.1%
Coast Hwy. (Superior Ave. to Newport Blvd.)
28,000
42,000
14,000
50.0%
Coast Hwy. (Newport Blvd. to Riverside Ave.)
53,000
73,000
20,000
37.7%
Coast Hwy. (Riverside Ave. to Tustin Ave.)
45,000
63,000
18,000
40.0%
Coast H Tustin Ave. to Dover Dr.
42,000
59,000
17,000
40.5%
•
6-14
TABLE 6-7 (PAGE 2 OF 4)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH
•
EXISTING
(2001/2002)
BUILDOUT
%
LOCATION
COUNT
FORECAST
GROWTH
GROWTH
Coast Hwy. (Dover Dr. to Bayside Dr.)
63,000
83,000
20,000
31.7°/u
Coast Hwy. (Bayside Dr. to Jamboree Rd.)
51,000
67,000
16,000
31.4%
Coast Hwy. (Jamboree Rd. to Newport Center Dr.)
42,000
54,000
12,000
28.6%
Coast Hwy. (Newport Center Dr. to Avocado Ave.)
35,000
44,000
9,000
25.7%
Coast Hwy. (Avocado Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.)
36,000
46,000
10,000
27.8%
Coast Hwy. (MacArthur Blvd. to Goldenrod Ave.)
40,000
48,000
8,000
20.0%
Coast Hwy. (Goldenrod Ave. to Marguerite Ave.)
39,000
46,000
7,000
17.9%
Coast Hwy. (Marguerite Ave. to Poppy Ave.)
35,000
42,000
7,000
20.0%
Coast Hwy. (Poppy Ave. to Newport Coast Dr.)
28,000
35,000
7,000
25.0%
Coast Hwy (east of Newport Coast Dr.)
35,000
45,000
10,000
28.6%
Dover Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Westcliff Dr.)
9,000
11,000
2,000
22.2%
Dover Dr. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.)
22,000
25,000
3,000
13.6%
Dover Dr. (16th St. to Cliff Dr.)
25,000
28,000
3,000
12.0%
Dover Dr. (Cliff Dr. to Coast Hwy.)
29,000
34,000
5,000
17.2%
Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at University Dr.)
10,000
10,000
0
0.0%
Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at Ford Rd.)
15,000
15,000
0
0.0%
Ford Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
9,000
13,000
4,000
44.4%
Goldenrod Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
3,000
1,000
50.0%
Highland Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
2,000
2,000
0
0.0%
Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.)
13,000
22,000
9,000
69.2%
•
Hospital Rd. (east of Newport Blvd.)
7,000
13,000
6,000
85.7%
Irvine Ave. (Bristol St. South to Mesa Dr.)
27,000
39,000
12,000
44.4%
Irvine Ave. (Mesa Dr. to University Dr.)
31,000
42,000
11,000
35.5%
Irvine Ave. (University Dr. to Santa Isabel Ave.)
33,000
41,000
8,000
24.2%
Irvine Ave. (Santa Isabel Ave. to Santiago Dr.)
29,000
33,000
4,000
13.8%
Irvine Ave. (Santiago Dr. to Highland Dr.)
27,000
33,000
6,000
22.2%
Irvine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.)
27,000
33,000
6,000
22.2%
Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr. to Westcliff Dr.)
22,000
30,000
8,000
36.4%
Irvine Ave. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.)
12,000
14,000
2,000
16.7%
Jamboree Rd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
36,000
49,000
13,000
36.1%
Jamboree Rd. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.)
42,000
55,000
13,000
31.0%
Jamboree Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to Bristol St. North)
36,000
46,000
10,000
27.8%
Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South)
47,000
54,000
7,000
14.9%
Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. South to Bayview Wy.)
47,000
57,000
10,000
21.3%
Jamboree Rd. (Bayview Wy. to University Dr.)
47,000
57,000
10,000
21.3%
Jamboree Rd. (University Dr. to Bison Ave.)
37,000
43,000
6,000
16.2%
Jamboree Rd. (Bison Ave, to Ford Rd.)
39,000
49,000
10,000
25.6%
Jamboree Rd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
46,000
59,000
13,000
28.3%
Jamboree Rd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to Santa Barbara Dr.)
34,000
48,000
14,000
41.2%
Jamboree Rd. (Santa Barbara Dr. to Coast Hwy.)
32,000
44,000
12,000
37.5%
Jamboree Rd. ( Coast Hwy. to Bayside Dr.)
12,000
15,000
3,000
25.0%
MacArthur Blvd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
27,000
36,000
9,000
33.3%
MacArthur Blvd. (Birch St. to Von Karman Ave.)
22,000
27,000
5,000
22.7%
MacArthur Blvd. (Von Karman Ave. to Jamboree Rd.)
26,000
33,0001
7,000
26.9%
•
6-15
`y3
e
TABLE 6-7 (PAGE 3 OF 4)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH
LOCATION
EXISTING
(200112002)
COUNT
BUILDOUT
FORECAST
GROWTH
%
GROWTH
MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.)
27,000
36,000
9,000
33.3%
MacArthur Blvd, (north of Bison Ave.)
61,000
76,000
15,000
24.6%
MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.)
63,000
75,000
12,000
19.0%
MacArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
54,000
62,000
8,000
14.8%
MacArthur Blvd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to San Miguel Rd.)
35,000
40,000
5,000
14.3%
MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd, to Coast Hwy.)
31,000
38,000
7,000
22.6%
Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
7,000
7,000
0
0.0%
Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
6,000
7,000
1,000
16.7%
Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
12,000
13,000
1,000
8.3%
Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.)
36,000
50,000
14,000
38.9%
Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.)
43,000
59,000
16,000
37.2%
Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido)
48,000
64,000
16,000
33.3%
Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.)
36,000
46,000
10,000
27.8%
Newport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.)
29,000
38,000
9,000
31.0%
Newport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.)
14,000
20,000
6,000
42.9%
Newport Coast Dr. (SR-73 Fwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
17,000
30,000
13,000
76.5%
Newport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
15,000
24,000
9,000
60.0%
Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.)
12,000
19,000
7,000
58.3%
Placentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.)
12,000
18,000
6,000
50.0%
Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave, to Hospital Rd.)
7,000
13,000
6,000
85.7%
Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
2,000
0
0.0%
Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
9,000
12,000
3,000
33.3%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.)
16,000
18,000
2,000
12.5%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.)
11,000
13,000
2,000
18.2%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
21,000
29,000
8,000
38.1%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to San Miguel Rd.)
19,000
23,000
4,000
21.1%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (San Miguel Rd. to Marguerite Ave.)
18,000
24,000
6,000
33.3%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to Spyglass Hill Rd.)
12,000
20,000
8,000
66.7%
San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.)
12,000
19,000
7,000
58.3%
San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.)
7,000
10,000
3,000
42.9%
San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.)
7,000
10,000
3,000
42.9%
San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
12,000
15,000
3,000
25.0%
San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.)
12,000
18,000
6,000
50.0%
San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.)
19,000
23,000
4,000
21.1%
San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.)
10,000
14,000
4,000
40.0%
Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.)
10,000
15,000
5,000
50.0%
Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
8,000
9,000
1,000
12.5%
Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
11,000
15,000
4,000
36.4%
Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave. to Irvine Ave.)
5,000
6,000
1,000
20.0%
Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
3,000
4,000
1,000
33.3%
Spyglass Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.)
4,000
4,000
0
0.0%
Superior Ave. (north of Placentia Ave.)
17,000
20,000
3,000
17.6"/u
Superior Ave. (Placentia Ave. to Hospital Rd.)
22,000
29,000
7,000
31.8%
Superior Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast H
24,000
30,000
6,000
1 25.0%
•
6-16
Rqv
TABLE 6-7 (PAGE 4 OF 4)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH
EXISTING
(200112002)
BUILDOUT
%
LOCATION
COUNT
FORECAST
GROWTH
GROWTH
Tustin Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.)
2,000
3,000
1,000
50.0%
University Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.)
3,000
3,000
0
0.0%
University Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.)
11,000
15,000
4,000
36.4°/o
Via Lido (east of Newport Blvd.) '
8,000
12,000
4,000
50.0%
Von Karman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.)
14,000
20,000
6,000
42.9%
Von Karman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.)
12,000
17,000
5,000
41.7%
Westcliff Dr. Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.
16,000
16,000
0
0.0%
U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\[01232-16.xis]T 6-7
•
6-17
EXHIBIT 6-13
9
C
I
SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
I— • VOLUME/CAPACITY (WC) RATIOS
0.18
0.38
82
LEGEND:
0.88 -VOLUME/ CAPACITY RATIO
s.sa °•�.75
PACIFIC
125„"OCEAN
NEWPO CN GENERAL PLAN UPOATENe ort Beach Califomia-01232s- maxi vcmxd URBAN
IJRB e
•
Irvine Avenue north of Highland Drive
.
•
Irvine Avenue north of Dover Drive
•
Dover Drive north of Westcliff Drive
•
Dover Drive north of Coast Highway
•
Jamboree Road north of Bayview Way
•
Jamboree Road north of University Drive
•
Jamboree Road north of Ford Road
•
Jamboree Road north of San Joaquin Hills Road
•
Jamboree Road north of Santa Barbara Drive
•
MacArthur Boulevard north of Bison Avenue
•
MacArthur Boulevard •north of Ford Road
•
MacArthur Boulevard north of San Joaquin Hills Road
•
Newport Coast Drive north of SR-73 Northbound Ramps
•
Newport Boulevard south of Hospital Road
•
Jamboree Road south of Birch Street
•
•
Irvine Avenue south of University Drive
•
Hospital Road east of Newport Boulevard
•
Campus Drive east of MacArthur Boulevard
•
Bristol Street North east of Birch Street
•
Bristol Street South east of Birch Street
•
Coast Highway east of Dover Drive
•
Coast Highway east of Bayside Drive
•
Coast Highway east of Jamboree Road
•
Coast Highway east of Avocado Avenue
•
Ford Road east of MacArthur Boulevard
•
Coast Highway east of MacArthur Boulevard
•
Coast Highway east of Goldenrod Avenue
•
Coast Highway east of Marguerite Avenue
•
Coast Highway east of Poppy Avenue
•
Coast Highway west of Superior Avenue/Balboa Boulevard
•
6-19
`17
• Coast Highway west of Riverside Drive
• Bristol Street North west of Campus Drive
• Bristol Street South west of Campus Drive
• Dover Drive west of Irvine Avenue
• Bristol Street South west of Jamboree Road
6.5 Peak Hour Forecasts
The final data required to evaluate the Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout
scenario was intersection volume and geometric data for the 63 intersections
selected for analysis. The same intersection configurations have been used as
for the currently adopted General Plan Buildout with constrained network
intersection capacity utilization values (ICUs). Table 6-8 summarizes the
Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout ICUs based on the AM and PM peak
•
hour intersection turning movement volumes and the intersection geometric data •
as compared with currently adopted General Plan with constrained neetwork
ICUs. Appendix "AA" contains the detailed ICU calculation worksheets. The
worksheets in Appendix "AA" summarize the intersection geometric data and the
AM and PM peak intersection turning movement volumes.
A comparison of subarea maximum General Plan Buildout ICUs to existing ICUs is
shown on Table 6-9. Table 6-10 summarizes intersection analysis for buildout
conditions. Deficient intersections are shown on Exhibit 6-C. Intersections with
ICU values greater than 0.90 (LOS "E" or worse) in either peak period are:
• Bluff Road (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM/PM)
• Superior Avenue (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM/PM)
• Newport Boulevard (NS)/Hospital Road (EW) (AM/PM)
• Riverside Drive (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM/PM) .
6-20
TABLE 6-8 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU)
. COMPARISON TO CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN
L J
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
FORECAST
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
FORECAST
DELTA
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
FORECAST
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
FORECAST
DELTA
1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw.
1.27
1.28
0.011
1.29
1.28
-0.01
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.64
0.72
0.08
0.68
0.831
0.15
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
1.01
1.03
0.02
0.99
1.04
0.05
4. Newport Bl. & Hospital Rd.
0.79
0.93
0.14
0.97
1.18
0.21
5. Newport Bl. & Via Lido
0.54
0.60
0.06
0.46
0.52
0.06
6. Newport BI. & 32nd St.
0.52
0.57
0.05
0.71
0.81
0.10
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
1.03
1.04
0.01
1.12
1.19
0.07
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
1.02
1.06
0.041
0.85
0.92
0.07
9. MacArthur Bl. & Campus Dr.
0.76
0.81
0.051
1.25
1.291
0.04
10. MacArthur Bl. & Birch St.
0.71
0.79
0.08
0.80
0.861
0.06
11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr.
0.66
0.74
0.08
0.93
1.02
0.09
12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Kalman Av.
0.54
0.52
-0.02
0.64
0.65
0.01
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.92
0.98
0.06
1.24
1.25
0.01
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.79
0.87
0.08
0.80
0.81
0.01
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N)
0.96
1.00
0.04
1.08
1.08
0.00
16. Birch St. & Bristol St.
0.92
0.91
-0.01
0.72
0.72
0.00
17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S)
0.93
0.93
0.00
0.77
0.77
0.00
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S)
0.52
0.53
0.01
0.53
0.54
0.01
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.68
0.73
0.05
0.90
0.94
0.04
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
1.14
1.14
0.00
1.19
1.18
-0.01
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.70
0.71
0.01
0.78
0.77
-0.01
22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr.
0.61
0.63
0.021
0.63
0.66
0.03
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.78
0.82
0.041
0.70
0.72
0.02
24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr.
0.67
0.70
0.031
0.82
0.83
0.01
25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr.
0.39
0.41
0.021
0.56
0.59
0.03
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.64
0.64
0.001
0.64
0.64
0.00
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.86
0.89
0.03
0.90
0.94
0.04
28. Bayside Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.83
0.84
0.01
0.94
0.98
0.04
29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd.
0.96
0.96
0.00
0.99
1.08
0.09
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (N)
0.70
0.69
-0.01
0.69
0.72
0.03
31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. S)
0.60
0.61
0.01
0.63
0.64
0.01
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S)
0.96
0.94
-0.02
0.85
0.87
0.02
33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayvicw W .
0.48
0.48
0.001
0.70
0.71
0.01
34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. fUniversity Dr.
0.64
0.65
0.011
0.69
0.71
0.02
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.511
0.52
0.01
058
0.621
0.04
36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd.
0.781
0.81
%j
0.761
0.04
37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.61
0.64
651
0.711
0.06
6-21
TABLE 6.8 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU)
COMPARISON TO CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN •
INTERSECTION NSIEW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
FORECAST
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
FORECAST
DELTA
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
FORECAST
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
I FORECAST
I DELTA
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.55
0.69
0.14
0.71
0.87
0.16
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.85
0.88
0.03
0.89
0.91
0.02
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.36
0.39
0.03
0.34
036
0.02
41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.39
0.43
0.04
0.71
0.73
0.02
42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.50
0.55
0.05
0.63
0.66
0.03
44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr.
0.37
0.43
0.06
0.79
0.84
0.05
45. Avocado Av. & CoasvHw.
0.77
0.81
0.04
0.80
0.83
0.03
46. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.47
0.47
0.00
0.56
0.56
0.00
47. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.38
0.38
0.00
0.29
0.29
0.00
48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av.
0.78
0.81
0.03
0.80
0.81
0.01
49. MacArhtur Bl. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.77
0.79
0.02
1.06
1.09
0.03
50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.77
0.83
0.06
1.04
1.08
0.04
51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr.
0.63
0.71
0.08
0.77
0.80
0.03
52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw.
0.74
0.74
0.00
0.83
0.81
-0.02
53. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.69
0.72
0.03
0.53
0.54
0.01
54. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.45
0.46
'0.01
0.59
0.60
0.01
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.30
0.31
0.01
0.38
0.39
0.01
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.52
0.54
0.02
0.68
0.71
0.03
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
1.08
1.08
0.00
0.79
0.77
.0.02
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.38
0.39
0.01
0.51
0.53
0.02
59.Marerite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.90
0.90
0.00
0.91
0.91
0.00
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.60
0.62
0.02
0.46
0.50
0.04
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw.
0,671
0.68
0.01
0.76
0.74
-0.02
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
0.54
0.55
0.01
0.40
0.41
0.01
64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.63
0.66
0.03
0.471
0.51
0.04
65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.571
0.571
0.001
0.601
0.61
0.01
U:\UcJobs\ 012001012321Excell[01232-18.x1s]T 6-12
•
6-22
ID
TABLE 6.9 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU)
• COMPARISON TO EXISTING
E
0
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM
PEAK HOUR
I PM
PEAK HOUR
EXISTING
COUNT
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
DELTA
EXISTING
COUNT
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
I DELTA
1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw.
DNE'
1.28
N/A
DNE
1.28
N/A
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.66
0.72
0.06
0.67
0.83
0.16
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
0.84
1.03
0.19
0.90
1.04
0.14
4. Newport Bl. & Hospital Rd.
0.54
0.93
0.39
0.70
1.18
0.48
5. Newport Bl. & Via Lido
0.41
0.60
0.19
0.37
0.52
0.15
6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St.
0.73
0.57
-0.16
0.78
0.81
0.03
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
0.84
1.04
0.201
0.93
1.19
0.26
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
0.80
1.06
0.26
0.67
0.92
0.25
9. MacArthur Bl. & Campus Dr.
0.61
0.81
0.20
0.85
1.29
0.44
10. MacArthur Bl. & Birch St.
0.49
0.79
0.30
0.66
0.86
0.20
11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr.
0.55
0.74
0.19
0.79
1.021
0.23
12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Kannan Av.
0.46
0.52
0.06
0.53
0.65
0.12
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.70
0.98
0.28
0.85
1.25
0.40
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.61
0.87
0.261
0.60
0.81
0.21
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St.
0.77
1.00
0.231
0.94
1.08
0.14
16. Birch St. & Bristol St. N
0.66
0.91
0.251
0.61
0.72
0.11
17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S
0.72
0.93
0.211
0.58
0.77
0.19
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S
0.46
0.53
0.071
0.44
0.54
0.10
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.701
0.73
0.03
0.94
0.94
0.00
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
0.82
1.14
0.32
0.89
1.18
0.29
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.66
0.71
0.05
0.72
0.77
0.05
22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr.
0.57
0.63
0.06
0.60
0.66
0.06
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.72
0.82
0.10
0.64
0.72
0.08
24. Irvine Av. & WestclifiDr.
0.57
0.70
0.13
0.77
0.83
25. Dover Dr. & WesteliffDr.
0.38
0.41
0.03
0.48
0.59E2106
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.55
0.64
0.09
0.57
0.64
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.70
0.89
0.19
0.74
0.94
0.20
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.69
0.84
0.15
0.70
0.98
0.28
29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd.
0.88
0.96
0.081
0.91
1.08
0.17
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St.
0.55
0.69
0.14
0.59
0.72
0.13
31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. S
0.48
0.61
0.13
0.56
0.64
0.08
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
0.75
0.94
0.19
0.72
0.87
0.15
33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W .
0.41
0.48
0.07
0.57
0.71
0.14
34. Jamboree Rd. & EastblufiDr. /University Dr.
0.60
0.65
0.05
0.64
0.71
0.07
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.45
0.52
0.07
0.51
0.62
0.11
36. Jamboree Rd. & EastbluffDr./Ford Rd.
0.69
0.811
0.121
0.65
0.76
0.11
37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.801
0.64
-0.161
1.001
0.71
-0.29
6-23
,2,0t
TABLE 6.9 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU)
COMPARISON TO EXISTING •
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM
PEAK HOUR
PM
PEAK HOUR
EXISTING
COUNT
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
DELTA
EXISTING
COUNT
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
DELTA
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.47
0.69
0.22
0.63
0.87
0.24
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.68
0.88
0.20
0.74
0.9I
0.17
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin -Hills Rd.
0.36
0.39
0.03
0.36
0.36
0.00
41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.32
0.43
0.11
0.52
0.73
0.21
42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.40
0.55
0.15
0.52
0.66
0.14
44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr.
0.33
0.43
0.10
0.72
0.84
0.12
5. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.58
0.81
0.23
0.661
0.83
0.17
46. SR-73 NB Rams & Bison Av.
0.31
0.47
0.16
0.37
0.56
0.19
47. SR-73 SB Rams & Bison Av.
0.26
0.38
0.12
0.17
0.29
0.12
48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av.
0.63
0.81
0.18
0.60
0.81
0.21
49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd,/Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.71
0.79
0.08
0.90
1.09
0.19
50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.64
0.83
0.19
0.93
1.08
0.15
51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr.
0.561
0.71
0.15
0.65
0.80
0.15
52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw.
0.60
0.74
0.14
0.711
0.81
0.10
53. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.55
0.72
0.17
0.43
0.54
0.11
54. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.30
0.46
0.16
0.41
0.60
0.19
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.28
0.31
0.03
0.31
0.39
0.08
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.44
0.54
0.10
0.54
0.71
0.17
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
0.99
1.08
0.09
0.69
0.77
0.08
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.31
0.39
0.08
0.35
0.53
0.18
59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.83
0.90
0.07
0.821
0.91
0.09
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & Son Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.44
0.62
0.18
0.30
0.50
0.20
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw.
0.61
0.68
0.07
0.65
0.74
0.09
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
0.45
0.55
0.10
0.31
0A l
0.10
64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.37
0.66
0.29
0.29
0.51
0.22
65. NLyMort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. J
0.471
0.57
0.10
0.50
0.61
0.11
'DNE = Does Not Exist
U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xis)T 6-9
0
6-24
10
Z
•
•
0
TABLE 6.10 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN ALTERNATIVE
INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw.
1.28
F
1.281
F
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.72
C
0.831
D
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
1.03
F
1.041
F
4. Newport Bl. & Hospital Rd.
0.93
E
1.181
F
5. Newport Bl. & Via Lido
0.60
A
0.521
A
6. Newport BI. & 32nd St.
0.57
A
0.81
D
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
1.041
F
1.19
F
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
1.06
F
0.92
E
9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr.
0.81
D
1.29
F
10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St.
0.79
C
0.86
D
11. Von Kalman Av. & Campus Dr.
0.74
C
1.02
F
12. MacArthur BI. & Von Kalman Av.
0.52
A
0.65
B
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.98
E
1.25
F
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.871
D
0.81
D
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St.
1.00
E
1.08
F
16. Birch St. & Bristol St.
0.91
E
0.72
C
17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S
0.93
E
0.77
C
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S
0.53
A
0.541
A
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.73
C
0.941
E
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
1.14
F
1.18
F
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.711
C
0.77
C
22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr.
0.63
B
0.66
B
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.82
D
0.72
C
24. Irvine Av. & WestcliffDr.
0.70
B
0.83
D
25. Dover Dr. & WestclifrDr.
0.41
A
0.59
A
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.64
B
0.641
B
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.89
D
0.94
E
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.841
D
0.98
E
29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd.
0.96
E
1.08
F
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St.
0.69
B
0.72
C
31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. (S)
0.61
B
0.64
B
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
0.94
E
0.87
D
33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W .
0.48
A
0.71
C
34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. [University Dr.
0.65
B
0.71
C
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.52
A
0.62
B
36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd.
0.81
D
0.76
C
37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.64
B
0.71
C
TABLE 6.10 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN ALTERNATIVE
INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NSIEW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
38: Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.69
B
0.87
D
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.88
D
0.91
E
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.39
A
0.36
A
41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.43
A
0.73
C
42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.55
A
0.66
B
44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr.
0.43
A
0.84
D
45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.811
D
0.831
D
46. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.471
A
0.56
A
47. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.38
A
0.29
A
48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av.
0.81
D
0.81
D
49. MacArhtur Bl. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.79
C
1.09
F
50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.83
D
1.08
F
51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr.
0.71
C
0.80
C
52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw.
0.74
C
0.811
D
53. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.721
C
0.541
A
54. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.46
A
0.601
A
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.31
A
0.391
A
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.54
A
0.711
C
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
1.08
F
0.77
C
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.39
A
0.53
A
59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.90
D
0.91
E
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.621
B
0.50
A
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw.
0.68
B
0.74
C
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
0.55
A
0.41
A
64. Nei ort Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.66
B
0.51
A
65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.57
Al0.61
B
'DNE = Does Not Exist
U:\UcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excell[01232-16.x1s]T 6-10
•
•
6-26
WIBIT 6-C
SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN
WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK DEFICIENCIES
LEGEND:
= AM LOS "E"
' = PM LOS "E"
• = LOS "E"
= AM LOS "F"
,= PM LOS F
PACIFIC OCEAN
LOS -F-
NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN UPDATE TRAFFIC STUDY, Newport Beach, Califomia-01232:42 rev. 050429 uRSAN
'S.
• Tustin Avenue (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM/PM) •
• MacArthur Boulevard (NS)/Campus Drive (EW) (PM)
• Von Karman Avenue (NS)/Campus Drive (EW) (PM)
• Jamboree Road (NS)/Campus Drive (EW) (AM/PM)
• Campus Drive (NS)/Bristol Street North (EW) (AM/PM)
• Birch Street (NS)/Bristol Street North (EW) (AM)
• Campus Drive (NS)/Bristol Street South (EW) (AM)
• Irvine Avenue (NS)/Mesa Drive (EW) (PM)
• Irvine Avenue (NS)/University Drive (EW) (AM/PM)
• Dover Drive (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (PM)
• Bayside Drive (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (PM)
• MacArthur Boulevard (NS)/Jamboree Road (EW) (AM/PM)
• Jamboree Road (NS)/Bristol Street South (EW) (AM)
• Jamboree Road (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (PM)
• MacArthur Boulevard (NS)/Ford Road/Bonita Canyon Drive (EW) (PM)
• MacArthur Boulevard (NS)/San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) (PM)
• Goldenrod Avenue (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (AM)
• Marguerite Avenue (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (PM)
Intersections experiencing a deficiency for subarea maximum conditions that do
not experience a deficiency in the currently adopted General Plan scenario
include:
• Irvine Avenue (NS)/Mesa Drive (EW) (PM)
• Dover Drive (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (PM)
• Jamboree Road (NS)/Coast Highway (EW) (PM)
Intersection analysis has been performed to determine improvements necessary
to provide acceptable levels of service. ICU worksheets are included in
ME
Appendix 'BB". Table 6-11 compares the ICU results with and without
• improvements. Improvements necessary to provide acceptable levels of service
are shown in Table 6-12.
Improvements have been developed that provide acceptable operations at all
potentially deficient intersections. The feasibility of the necessary improvements
is questionable at some locations (particularly where additional through lanes are
necessary).
n
L.J
0
TABLE 6-11 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
FUTURE
FORECASTI
I WITH
IMPROVEMENTS
DELTA
FUTURE
FORECASTI
I WITH
IMPROVEMENTS
DELTA
1. Bluff Rd. &.Coast H%i.
1.28
0.77
-0.51
1.28
0.88
-0.40
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.72
0.72
0.00
0.83
0.83
0.00
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
1.03
0.89
-0.14
1.04
0.89
-0.15
4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd.
0.93
0.81
-0.12
1.18
0.90
-0.28
5. Newport BI. & Via Lido
0.60
0.60
0.00
0.52
0.52
0.00
6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St.
0.57
0.57
0.00
0.81
0.81
0.00
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
1.041
0.73
-0.311
1.19
0.82
-0.37
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
1.06
0.75
-0.32
0.92
0.75
-0.17
9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr.
0.81
0.78
-0.03
1.29
0.82
-0.47
10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St
0.79
0.79
0.00
0.86
0.86
0.00
11. Von Kannan Av. & Campus Dr.
0.74
0.72
-0.02
1.02
0.90
-0.12
12. MacArthur BI. & Von Kartnan Av.
0.52
0.52
0.00
0.65
0.65
0.00
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.98
0.89
-0.09
1.25
0.87
-0.38
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.87
0.81
-0.06
0.81
0.81
0.00
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St
1.00
0.90
-0.11
1.08
0.85
-0.23
16. Birch St. & Bristol St.
0.91
0.67
.0.24
0.72
0.71
-0.01
17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. S
0.93
0.87
-0.06
0.77
0.77
0.00
18. Birch SL & Bristol St. S
0.53
0.53
0.00
0.54
0.54
0.00
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.73
0.73
0.00
0.94
0.86
-0.08
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
1.14
0.75
-0.39
1.18
0.83
-0.35
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.71
0.71
0.00
0.77
0.77
0.00
22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr.
0.63
0.63
0.00
0.66
0.66
0.00
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.82
0.82
0.00
0.72
0.72
0.00
24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr.
0.70
0.70
0.00
0.83
0.83
0.00
25. Dover Dr. & WestcliffDr.
0.41
0.41
0.00
0.59
0.59
0.00
26. Dover Dr. & 16th SL
0.64
0.64
0.00
0.64
0.64
0.00
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.89
0.89
0.00
0.94
0.85
-0.10
28. Bayside Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.84
0.82
-0.02
0.98
0.78
-0.20
29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd.
0.96
0.84
-0.12
1.08
0.90
-0.18
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St.
0.69
0.69
0.00
0.72
0.72
0.00
31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St.. S
0.61
0.61
0.00
0.64
0.64
0.00
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
0.94
0.73
-0.22
0.87
0.80
-0.07
33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W .
0.48
0.48
0.00
0.71
0.71
0.00
34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr.
0.65
0.65
0.00
0.71
0.71
0.00
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.52
0.52
0.00
0.62
0.62
0.00
36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd.
0.81
0.81
0.00
0.76
0.76
0.00
37. Jamboree EA. _& San Joa uin Hills Rd.
0.64
0.641
0.001
0.711
0,711
0.00
0
1]
0
ME
Cry
TABLE 6-11 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY
•
INTERSECTION NS/EW
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
FUTURE
FORECAST
WITH
IMPROVEMENTS
DELTA
FUTURE
FORECASTI
WITH
IMPROVEMENTS
DELTA
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.69
0.69
0.00
0.87
0.87
0.00
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.88
0.84
-0.04
0.91
0.89
-0.03
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.39
0.39
0.00
0.36
0.36
0.00
41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.43
0.43
0.00
0.73
0.73
0.00
42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.55
0.55
0.00
0.66
0.66
0.00
44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr.
0.43
0.43
0.00
0.84
0.84
0.00
45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.81
0.81
0.00
0.83
0.83
0.00
46. SR-73 NB Rams & Bison Av.
0.47
0.47
0.00
0.56
0.56
0.00
47. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.38
0.38
0.00
0.29
0.29
0.00
48. MacArthur Bl. & Bison Av.
0.81
0.81
0.00
0.81
0.81
0.00
49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.79
0.76
-0.04
1.09
0.89
-0.20
50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.83
0.71
-0.12
1.08
0.87
-0.21
51. MacArthur Bl. & San Miguel Dr.
0.71
0.71
0.001
0.80
0.80
0.00
52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw.
0.74
0.74
0.001
0.81
0.81
0.00
53. SR-73 NB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.72
0.72
0.001
0.54
0.54
0.00
54. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.46
0.46
0.001
0.60
0.60
0.00
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.31
0.31
0.00
0.39
0.39
0.00
AlIk
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.54
0.54
0.00
0.71
0.71
0.00
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
1.08
0.79
-0.29
0.77
0.77
0.00
58. Mar uci to Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.39
0.39
0.00
0.53
0.53
0.00
59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.90
0.90
0.00
0.91
0.79
-0.12
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.62
0.62
0.00
0.50
0.50
0.00
6I.PoppyAv. & Coast Hw.
0.68
0.68
0.001
0.741
0.74
0.00
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
0.55
0.55
0.00
0.41
0.41
0.00
64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 1
0.66
0.66
0.00
0.51
0.51
0.00
65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 1
0.571
0.57
0.001
0.611
0.61
0.00
'DNE = Does Not Exist
U:\UcJobs\_01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xis]T 6-11
•
6-31
Vy
TABLE 6-12 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS
INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENT
Bluff Rd. (NS) at Coast Hw. (EW)
Construct 1st SB right turn lane. Restripe through lane to shared through right lane.
Change N/S phasing to Split.
Construct 2nd EB left turn lane.
Construct 4th and 5th EB through lane.
Construct 4th WB through lane.
Superior Av. (NS) at Coast Hw. (EW)
Construct 1st NB right turn lane.
Construct SB free right turn lane.
Construct4th EB through lane.
Construct 5th WB through lane.
Convert-WB defacto to 1st WB right turn lane.
Install-WB right turn overlap phasing.
Newport Bl. (NS) at Hospital Rd. (EW)
Construct 2nd NB left turn lane.
Construct 2nd EB through lane.
Restripe 2nd WB through lane to shared through left lane.
Change ENV phasing to Split.
Riverside Av. (NS) at Coast Hw. (EW)
Construct SB free right turn lane.
Construct 2nd EB left -turn lane.
Construct 3rd EB through lane.
Construct 4th WB through lane. Eliminate WB right turn lane.
Tustin Av. (NS) at Coast Hw. (EW)
Construct 3rd EB through lane.
Construct 4th WB through lane.
MacArthur BI. (NS) at Campus Dr. (EW)
Construct 2nd NB left turn lane.
Construct SB free right turn lane.
Von Karman Av. (NS) at Campus Dr. (EW)
Construct 1st SB right turn lane.
Construct 1st WB right turn lane.
Jamboree Rd. (NS) at Campus Dr. (EW)
Construct -NB free right turn lane.
Construct 4th SB through lane.
Construct 1st SB right turn lane.
Construct 3rd EB left turn lane.
Construct WB free right turn lane.
a 0
TABLE 6-12 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS
INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENT
Campus Dr. (NS) at Bristol St. N (EW)
Construct SB shared through right lane.
Construct 5th WB through lane.
Construct 1st WB right turn lane.
Birch St. (NS) at Bristol St. N (EW)
Construct WB free right turn lane.
Campus Dr./Irvine Av. NS at Bristol St. S (EW)
Construct 1st NB right turn lane.
Irvine Av. (NS) at Mesa Dr. (EW)
Restripe 2nd WB through lane to shared through left lane.
Change E/W phasing to Split.
Irvine Av. (NS) at University Dr. (EW)
Construct 3rd NB through lane.
Construct 3rd SB through lane.
Restripe 2nd EB through lane to shared through left lane.
Change E/W phasing to Split.
Dover Dr. (NS) at Coast Hw. EW
Construct 4th WB through lane.
Bayside Dr. (NS) at Coast Hw. (EW)
Construct 1st NB through lane.
Restripe SB through lane to shared through left lane.
Convert SB defacto to 1st SB right turn lane.
Install SB right turn overlap phasing.
Construct 5th WB through lane.
Construct 1st WB right turn lane.
MacArthur BI. (NS) at Jamboree Rd. (EW)
Construct 4th NB through lane.
Construct 4th EB through lane.
Construct 3rd WB left turn lane.
Jamboree Rd. NS at Bristol St. S EW
Construct 2nd EB left turn lane.
Jamboree Rd. (NS) at Coast Hw. EW
Construct 1st NB right turn lane.
MacArthur BI. (NS) at Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. (EW)
Construct 3rd SB left turn lane.
Eliminate SB free right turn lane.
Restripe 2nd EB left turn lane to through lane.
MacArthur BI. (NS) at San Joaquin Hills Rd. (EW)
Construct 4th NB through lane.
Construct 3rd EB left turn lane.
Goldenrod Av. NS at Coast Hw. EW
Construct 3rd WB through lane. Elminiate WB defacto right turn lane.
Marguerite Av. (NS) at Coast Hw. (EW)
Construct 1st NB right turn lane.
Construct 3rd EB through lane. Eliminate EB right turn lane.
Construct 1st WB right turn lane.
U:\UcJobs\_01200\01232\Excel\[01232-18.xls]T 6-12
GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Monday, May 9, 2005
Roger Alford
Ronald Baers
Patrick Bartolic
Phillip Bettencourt
Carol Boice
Elizabeth Bonn
Gus Chabre
John Corrough
Lila Crespin
Laura Dietz
Grace Dove
Nancy Gardner
Gordon Glass
Louise Greeley
Ledge Hale
Bob Hendrickson
Tom Hyans
Mike, Ishikawa
Kim Jansma
Mike Johnson
Bill Kelly
Donald Krotee
Lucille Kuehn
Philip Lugar
William Lusk
Barbara Lyon
0'
1
•
•
Marie Marston
Tim Naval
Catherine O'Hara
Charles Remley
Larry Root
7ohn Saunders
Hall Seely
Tan Vandersloot
Tom Webber
Ron Yeo
Raymond Zartler
'• GENERAL PLAN MVISORY COMMITTEE
Monday, May 9, 2005
PUBLIC SIGN -IN
NAME ADDRESS/PHONE
n
�J
E-MAIL ADDRESS
&oral /42�iO
�- l(q 4*4/l
I��G1V�t�i��� Chao.
M1 kf-FrIa,4 n
KP-(t(cKsc,) QR/$A_, 4Y k
�rctYl�fa/1 �ri�l7jc✓i
bjclA,7S,lv) ddcnb,/lgt�14'
LaLt/uC% C L,[,t/1�
Cora �� Q YI etop h qn
Ga,,L_O_rY) w/S� �'1C .
G�Rge yov sus . caw
�:G�rlil
GENERAL PLAN MVISORY COMMITTEE
Monday, May 9, 2005
PUBLIC SIGN -IN
NAME ADDRESS/PHONE
E-MAIL ADDRESS
S1
• GENERAL PLAN MVISORY COMMITTEE
Monday, May 9, 2005
PUBLIC SIGN -IN
NAME ADDRESS/PHONE
E-MAIL ADDRESS
0
L
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Minutes of the General Plan Advisory Committee Meeting held on Monday,
May 9, 2005, at the OASIS Senior Center.
Members Present:
Roger Alford,
Patrick Bartolic
Phillip Bettencourt
Carol Boice
Elizabeth Bonn
Gus Chabre
John Corrough
Lila Crespin
Laura Dietz
Members Absent:
Ronald Baers
Nancy Gardner
Louise Greeley
Tom Hyans (sick leave)
Staff Present:
Grace Dove
Gordon Glass
Ledge Hale
Bob Hendrickson
Mike Ishikawa
Mike Johnson
Bill Kelly
Donald Krotee
Lucille Kuehn
Philip Lugar
Marie Marston
Jim Naval
Charles Remley
Larry Root
Jan Vandersloot
Ron Yeo
Raymond Zartler
Kim Jansma John Saunders
William Lusk Hall Seely
Barbara Lyon Tom Webber
Catherine O'Hara (sick leave)
Sharon Wood, Assistant City Manager
Patty Temple, Planning Director
Rich Edmonston, Transportation/Development Services Manager
Debbie Lektorich, Executive Assistant
Woodie Tescher, EIP Consultant
Carleton Waters, Urban Crossroads
Members of the Public Present:
Allan Beek Kelly Hillman Coralee Newman
Laura Curran Brandon Johnson Sharon Wright
Mike Erickson Carol Martin
I. Call to Order
Phillip Lugar called the meeting to order.
• II. General Plan Traffic Study Preliminary Alternatives Analysis
Carleton Waters reviewed the Traffic Study report provided with the agenda packets.
Jan Vandersloot asked about the number of current deficient intersections existing
today. Mr. Waters indicated he would provide that to the committee next week. Laura
Dietz pointed out that existing would be as of 2002. Mr. Waters agreed, that was when
the data was collected.
Lucille Kuehn asked about signal synchronization and the intersections at Avocado/San
Miguel/MacArthur. Mr. Waters agreed that the intersection of MacArthur and San
Miguel is showing up as a problematic one, the short distance between the intersections
doesn't leave a lot of room to stack vehicles there and synchronization may help. Patty
Temple added that efforts to synchronize signals on Coast Highway are adversely
affected by the attitude of CalTrans.
Gordon Glass asked if the City would be willing to redesign intersections, for example
Newport and 17th Street, to improve the flow. Ms. Wood pointed out that the
intersection of Newport and 17th Street is not within the City limits. Mr. Glass then
pointed out that on Table ES-6, the data shows 1 out of 5 intersections are currently
deficient and using the maximum alternative will drop that to 1 out of 4, so what is
being gained with the increases. Ms. Wood reminded everyone that the alternatives are
• proposals for further study, if impacts are not acceptable then the proposals will not be
recommended.
Charles Remley pointed out that the general public's perception of the airport area is
that we can increase development; however the fact is that currently there are four
unacceptable intersections.
Carol Boice asked about a study of the noise pollution with regard to traffic and what
mitigation efforts will be recommended. Mr. Tescher stated that part of the process will
include going back and looking at the that issue again based on the decisions made for
land uses.
Phillip Bettencourt asked about Table ES-3 and indicated the intersection of Bluff Road
and Coast Highway is listed as LOS F under the currently adopted general plan and the
Subarea Maximum, he asked if it should be listed as does not exist instead. Mr. Waters
indicated the DNE under the True Minimum and Subarea Minimum assumes the
intersection will not be constructed under those options.
Mr. Glass asked if the improvements requiring additional lanes were suggested
irregardless of existing right of ways. Mr. Waters indicated the improvements may not
be acceptable, but they would be necessary to increase the LOS in the intersections
listed.
• Patrick Bartolic asked how making some areas more people friendly fit into the traffic
model. Mr. Waters said it fits in well, during the decision making process the
2
committee will decide what is acceptable for each portion of the community. For
example, LOS F for one hour a day might not be considered a bad thing in return for
preserving the community character.
Ms. Kuehn asked how we can convey all the information we have been provided to the
public to help them understand the methodology behind the decisions the committee
will be making. Ms. Wood indicated that at the Public Workshop we will share the
information with everyone who attends and get their feedback. Ms. Kuehn thought it
would take more than one meeting to get the word out. Ms. Wood added that there
will also be a newsletter sent out soon and when we have a preferred land use plan
more information will be sent out to residents. Mr. Tescher stated we will also be
talking more about committee members taking the information out to
homeowners/business association meetings.
Ms. Boice asked where the students in the high rise residential in the airport area would
attend school. Ms. Wood indicated they would be in the Santa Ana School District. Mr.
Tescher pointed out that when contacting other cities he found the number of students
is much less for the high rise residential than the typical single family residential
environment, so the impacts are different.
Don Krotee asked about Irvine Avenue as it turns into residential, he suggested maybe
a different standard should be applied to neighborhood traffic to help retain the
• character of the neighborhood. Ms. Wood asked if it was possible to establish and
measure a standard in intersections that aren't signal controlled. Mr. Waters indicated
it was possible. John Corrough felt that if the committee was going to get down to that
level of detail Balboa Island needed to be considered also. Mr. Waters stated that this
topic would be considered when we get to the policies and Circulation Element of the
General Plan.
Marie Marston asked about Mariner's Mile and how can we weigh the difference
between the economic boost the area needs and the traffic. Ms. Wood pointed out that
in that area there is a lot of pass through traffic.
Philip Lugar asked how different LOS standards would be applied in the City. Mr.
Waters indicated that in Irvine they have a tiered LOS standard where they apply LOS E
in the business complex and spectrum areas and in residential areas they want LOS D.
He added that in other cities they draw boundaries in parts of the city.
Lila Crespin asked if there was a way to address the traffic problems on Coast Highway
in Corona del Mar that is being transferred into the neighborhoods making it difficult for
residents to get around. Mr. Waters agreed that was a tough question. Mr. Bartolic
stated he has seen other cities block roads to make it harder to cut through residential
areas. Mr. Waters indicated that if the major arterial roads were kept at acceptable
LOS standards there would be less neighborhood intrusion.
3
Mr. Bettencourt stated he hoped we would not reject road alternatives because they
may involve condemnation because this city has condemned property in the public
interest for at least half a century.
Mr. Vandersloot asked about the number of deficient intersections/locations under
existing conditions. Mr. Waters indicated he could provide that data next week. Mr.
Vandersloot asked if we could develop an alternative that improves upon the existing
conditions. Mr. Waters indicated that they developed improvements that would provide
acceptable conditions at every intersection which is better than existing conditions. Mr.
Vandersloot stated that some of the improvements were unacceptable. Ms. Wood
pointed out that if he was talking about land uses instead of intersection improvements,
it would require demolishing some existing development. Mr. Vandersloot thought that
is something that should be discussed if it can improve existing intersection capacity.
Mr. Tescher added that even if we were to freeze everything as it is today traffic would
still increase due to visitors coming into and through the City.
III. Discussion of Future Agenda Items
Ms. Wood stated at the next meeting there would be additional discussions of the traffic
impacts.
IV. Public Comments
• Kelly Hillman, Newport Beach, asked how the Level of Service standards were
established. Mr. Waters indicated that LOS C was the common standard in the early
1980's, moving to LOS D in the late 1980's. The City of Newport Beach moved to LOS
D in the 1990's and now more jurisdictions are accepting LOS E. Ms. Hillman stated
Irvine is a planned community with very few places where shortcuts through
neighborhoods make sense, so comparing Irvine to Newport Beach is not a good
model.
Brandon Johnson, Corona del Mar, stated the theory of two different LOS standards
won't work because people will follow the path of least resistance, so they will
eventually equal out. He also commented on trying to stop growth in Newport to
improve traffic, he asked how much traffic was generated by residents and how much is
generated by the visitors. He added that if there was no growth in Newport Beach,
how much growth would then occur in Irvine, Huntington Beach, etc. and still increase
traffic here. Mr. Waters indicated that approximately 20% of vehicles drive straight
through the city without stopping, approximately 25-30% of the traffic is generated by
residents who stay within the City.
Laura Curran, Corona del Mar, asked if OCTA future plans were considered in the
model, because they are working on a general plan for the next 20 years which includes
adding train service and more buses. Mr. Waters indicated the model is based directly
on the OCTA travel demand.
Id
0
0
Alan Beek, Newport Beach, stated he had talked to Mr. Waters earlier about the affects
from the rest of Orange County and was told that all of the examples are run through
based on regional traffic at 2025 levels. So the differences are those we do to
ourselves. He also stated that LOS D is when you start waiting for the red light to turn
twice.
5