The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTraffic & Environmental Analysis-GP Update-Land Use AlternativesCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Page 1 of 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 6 June 9, 2005 TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: City Manager's Office Sharon Wood, Assistant City Manager 949 -644 -3222, swood@city.newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: Traffic and Environmental Analysis of General Plan Update Land Use Alternatives RECOMMENDATION: Review and comment on reports. DISCUSSION: The Planning Commission received limited results of the traffic analysis and the full fiscal impact analysis at its meeting of May 19, 2005. Analysis of the General Plan land use alternatives will continue at this meeting with presentations of the full traffic analysis and analysis of environmental issues. Written reports on these analyses are attached. The results of the land use alternatives analysis will be presented to the City Council on June 14, and shared with the community at a public workshop on Saturday, June 25. The workshop will provide an opportunity for the community to provide input on their land use preferences for the special study areas. Staff and the consultant team will then assimilate all the information and use it to develop a land use plan for consideration by the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC). The recommendations of GPAC will then be considered by the Planning Commission and City Council at the end of the summer. The Council will be asked to provide direction on a preferred land use plan, which will be the project description for the purpose of EIR preparation. This will not be a final decision on the land use plan, as findings of the EIR, further policy development and testimony at public hearings could result in modifications before formal action by the Planning Commission and City Council next year. Submitted by: Sharon Wood Assistant City Manager Attachments: 1. General Plan Traffic Study — Preliminary Alternatives Analysis 2. Environmental Impacts Comparative Summary http: / /www. city .newport- beach. ca. us /PlnAgendas /2005/i060905- 06.htm 02/09/2006 41 Corporate Park, Suite 300 Irvine, CA 92606 Prepared by: Carleton Waters, P.E. 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) '1 5 M 5.0 .I 3.2 Trip Generation 3.3 Traffic Assignment 3.4 Daily Capacity Analysis 3.5 Peak Hour Forecasts TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (POST -2025) ALTERNATIVE WITH OPEN SPACE NETWORK SCENARIO ...................... 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 SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (POST -2025) ALTERNATIVE WITH OPEN SPACE NETWORK SCENARIO ...................... 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 SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (POST -2025) ALTERNATIVE WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK SCENARIO ................... 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 4-1 5 -1 6 -1 n APPENDICES MIXED USE TRIP GENERATION INFORMATION ....................... ............................... A EXISTING LAND USE ..................................................................... ............................... B CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE .......................... C CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE CHANGE BY TAZ ............... D EXISTING TRIP 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 ................................................................ ............................... 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 BUILDOUT BY TAZ ......................................................................... ................I.............. 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 7 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 -13 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 DAILY TRAFFIC (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 r 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 ES4 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 ...I ..................... 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 q 1; 2 -14 2 -15 2 -16 2 -17 2 -18 2 -19 2 -20 2 -21 3 -1 3 -2 3 -3 3-4 3 -5 MARINER'S MILE SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY.......... 2 -23 MCFADDEN SQUARE SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY .................. ......................................... 2 -24 NEWPORT CENTER / FASHION ISLAND SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY .......... ............................... 2 -26 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY .......... ............................... 2 -28 WEST NEWPORT HIGHWAY AND ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY .......... ............................... 2 -29 WEST NEWPORT INDUSTRIAL SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY .......... ............................... 2 -31 RECOMMENDED OVERALL GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT ALTERNATIVES SUMMARY ............... I ............................ .. 2 -32 OVERALL ALTERNATIVES SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY .......... ............................... 2 -33 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH EXISTING LAND USE SUMMARY ........................................... ............................... 3 -2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE COMPARISON ................. ............................... 3-4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING ........................... 3 -5 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LAND USE BASED EXISTING SOCIOECONOMIC DATA SUMMARY .. 3 -6 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 10 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 ANALYSIS SUMMARY ........................................... ............................... 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 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 ANALYSIS SUMMARY ........................................... ............................... 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 [ 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 n ", CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY 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 2�' W W J Q U) Z co a N d 0 a d «d o a m T c d 3 U a � c m m �N O � G m H W Q tl X co C N O N N co G N O m O ca N a x W m V 0 n M N C U J M R N r r r a r N r r r r r LO N mZ C 0 c 0 C 0 c 0 c 0 c 0 d c 0 c 0 c 0 c 0 c 0 c 0 C 0 c 0 C 0 0 0 N 000000¢000000000 z z2 o� 0 Z N Q L s- J N M r r N N r M r r N N r M m Z C 0 c 0 C 0 C 0 C 0 C 0 c 0 c 0 C 0 c 0 c 0 C 0 c 0 C 0 c 0.2 C = p _ _ _ _ - _ y CL 0000000000000000 cl CL c c c c c c c c c m m m m m m m m m a. a a a a a a a a m g m m m m m m m m L L L L L 0 0 C7 0 ouO co W � aM r � N N r � � V� m m O O ` 0 0 0« « 2 0 O O- - 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 0' aooaoo0aaaaaaaaoo m a N cr C C a O N m LOO LO a C W Nr Qt-¢I L v m m IV N �� m >t 7 Q� QF- N LL 0 c L O O M �L�II Q 11��II C 7 3 Y 0 = m c m m H F- d O C m 0 o m (a w» == d a) cr. mg CF. c c a' U o L Q (a (a N au d N N O C C C N> C N N O z Z Z O C c c c O o o o '— `m LL LL v N d 0 N m Q m m m m m U m U o U J a J a J 2 U Z> v 2 a3 Z O 7 ES -2 m O a 73 C m O 15 2G co a N d 0 a d «d o a m T c d 3 U a c m m �N a m H W X tl X co C � O N — co G N O m O ca N a x W m V N n M N C U � O W O m N � O I Lro a m O a 73 C m O 15 2G TABLE ES -2 TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ' Alternative = General Plan buildout scenario. U;\UcJobsl_ 01200101232 1ExceR[01232- 18.xis]ES -2 ES -3 I )iI 1_ GENERATION PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVE' DAILY TRIP EXISTING ALTERNATIVE A EXISTIN OPTED) %D ADOPTED 1. CURRENTLY ADOPTED 687,141 879,759 192,618 28.03% 0 D% 2. TRUE MINIMUM 3. SUBAREA MINIMUM SUBAREA MAXIMUM 687,141 687,141 687,141 842,368 880,085 961,043 155,227 192,944 273,902 22.59% 28.08% 39.86 °h 37,391 326 81,284 4% 0% 9% ' Alternative = General Plan buildout scenario. U;\UcJobsl_ 01200101232 1ExceR[01232- 18.xis]ES -2 ES -3 I )iI 1_ 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 ESQ l� TABLE ES -3 (PAGE 1 OF 2) AM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY INTERSECTION (NS /EW) 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. 1.27 F 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.72 C 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 1.01 F 4. Newport Bt. & Hospital Rd. 0.79 C 5. Newport BI. & Via Lido 0.54 A 6. Newport BI. & 32nd St. 0.52 A 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.031 F 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.02 F 9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr. 0.76 C 10. MacArthur St. & Birch St. 0.71 C 11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.66 B 12. MacArthur BI. & Von Kerman Av. 0.54 A 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.92 E 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. 0.79 C 15. Cam us Dr. & Bristol St. N E 16. Birch St. &Bristol St. N E 17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. S E 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S t0.68 A 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. B 20. Irvine Av. & Universit Dr. F 21. Irvine Av. & Santia o Dr. B 22, Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.61 B 3. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.78 C 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.671 B 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 0.39 A 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.64 B 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.86 D 28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.83 D 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. 0.96 E 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. N 0.70 B 31. Bayview PI. & Bristol St. S 0.60 A 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S 0.96 E 33. Jamboree Rd. & Ba iew W . 0.48 A 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr. 0.64 B 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison AV. 0.51 A 6. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /Ford Rd. 0.78 C 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.61 B 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.55 A 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.85 D 0. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joa uin Hills Rd. 0.36 A 1. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 A 42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 A 4. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.37 A 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.77 C ES -5 i TABLE ES-3 (PAGE 2 OF 2) AM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY INTERSECTION NS /EW CURRENTLY ADOPTED TRUE MINIMUM SUBA MINID ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.47 A 0.47 A 0.47 7, SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.38 A 0.39 A 0.38 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.78 C 0.77 C 0.79 49. MacArthur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.77 C 0.771 C 0.78 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.77 C 0.77 C 0.81 51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.63 B 0.62 BI 0.63 52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw. 0.74 C 0.74 C 0.73 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.69 B 0.69 B 0.69 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.45 A 0.45 A 0.46 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.30 A 0.30 A 0.30 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.521 Al 0.51 A 0.55 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.08 F 1.06 F 1.06 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.38 A 0.38 A 0.38 59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.90 D 0.881 01 039 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.60 A 0.591 Al 0.60 61, Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.67 B 0.68 131_ 0.67 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Rams 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.53 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.63 B 0.63 B 0.63 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.57 AE 0.57 A 0.56 U: \UcJobs\ 01200 \01232 \Excel\ [01232- 18.xis]ES -3 ES -6 IC 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 (AMIPM) 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 at TABLE ES4 (PAGE 1 OF 2) PM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY ES -8 TRUE MINIMUM SUBAREA MINIMUM SUBAREA MAXIMUM INTERSECTION NS /EW CURRENTLY ADOPTED ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. 1.29 F DNE DNE DNE DNE 1.28 F 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 3. Superior Av, & Coast Hw. 4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd, 0.82 0.99 0.97 D E E 0.86 0,94 0.96 D E E 0.86 0.95 1.01 D E F 0.831-__g 1.04 1.18 F F 5. Newport BI. & Via Lido 6. Newport BI. & 32nd St. 0.46 0.71 A C 0.41 0.58 A A 0.45 0.63 A B 0.52 0.81 D 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.12 F 1.10 F 1.15 F 1.19 F 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 0.85 D 0.83 D 0.87 D 0.92 E 9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr. 1.25 F 1.25 F 1.29 F 1.29 F 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0.80 CL 0.80 C 0.86 D 0.86 D 11. Von Kerman Av. & Cam us Dr. 0.93 E 0.94 E 0.98 E 1.02 F 12. MacArthur BI. & Von Karmen 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 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. N 17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. 5 1.08 0.72 0.77 F C C 1.08 0.72 0.76 F C C 1.08 0.73 0.78 F C C 1.08 0.72 0.77 F C 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. 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 1.19 0.78 F C 1.16 0.76 F C 1.17 0.78 F Cl 1.18 0.77 F C 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.63 0.70 B B 0.63 0.71 B C 0.65 0.72 B C 0.66 0.72 B C 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.82 D D.80 C 0.80 C 0.83 D 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.56 0.64 0.90 A B D 0.57 0.65 0.88 A B D 0.58 0.65 0.91 A B E 0.59 0.64 0.94 B E 28. Ba ide 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 0.69 B 0.72 C 31. Ba iew PI. & Bristol St. S 0.63 B 0.63 B 0.63 B 0.64 B 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S 0.85 D 0.84 D 0.86 D 0.87 D 3. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W . 0.70 B 0.70 B 0.71 C 0.711 C 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr. 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.69 0.58 B A 0.68 0.58 B A 0.70 0.59 B A 0.71 0.62 C B 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /Ford Rd. 0.72 C 0.73 C 0.73 C 0.76 C 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.65 B1 0.65 B 0.68 B 0.71 C 38, Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0,71 Cl 0.71 C 0.78 C 0.87 D 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.89 D I 0.87 D 0.86 D 0.91 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.34 A 0.34 A 0.36 A 0.36 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.71 C 0.70 B B 0.73 C 2. New ort Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 44. Avocado Av. &San Mi ueI Dr. 0.63 0.79 B C 0.62 0.78 B C ±0.68 tE 0.66 0.84 D 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.80 C 0.79 C 0.83 D 0.83 D ES -8 TABLE ES-4 (PAGE 2 OF 2) PM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY U:kUcJobs \_ 01200 1012321Excel\[01232- 18.xls] ES-4 ES -9 n� 4 TRUE MINIMUM SUBAREA MINIMUM SUBAREA MAXIMUM INTERSECTION NS /EW 50---R- L ADOPTED ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 6. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.56 Al 0.56 7. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 8. MacArthur BI. &Bison Av. 0.29 0.80 -Al C 0.29 0.80 A C 0.29 0.81 A D 0.29 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 63. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0,53 Al 0.53 A 0.54 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.59 A 0.59 A 0.60 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.38 A 0.38 A 0.39 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.68 B 0.68 B 0.71 C' 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 0.79 5 EAO.49 C 0.75 C 0.77 C 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.51 9 A 0.50 A 0.53 59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.91 0 D 092 E 0.91 E 60. S lass Hill Rd. & San Joa uin Hills Rd. 0.46 5 A 0.46 61. Po Av. & Coast Hw. 0.76 5 C 0.75 C 62. Ne ort Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Rams 0.40 9 A 0.40 AAO. 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.47 A 0.46 Al 0.48 65. New ort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.60 B U:kUcJobs \_ 01200 1012321Excel\[01232- 18.xls] ES-4 ES -9 n� 4 TABLE ES -5 DEFICIENT INTERSECTION SUMMARY INTERSECTION NS /EW CURRENTLY ADOPTED TRUE MINIMUM SUBAREA MINIMUM SUBAREA MAXIMUM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. F1 F1 DNE DNE DNEI DNEI F IF 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw, F E E E E E F 4. New ort BI. & Hos ital Rd. 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. C F E F C F E F D F F F E 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 Karman Av. & Campus Dr. B E B E B E C F 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. E F E F E F E F 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. N) 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. N E El F Cl E E F C E E F C E E F C 17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. (S ) 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. El Bi C D E B C D E B C E E C C E 20. Irvine Av. & Univers4 Dr. F1 F F F F F F F 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. D I D D D D E D E 28. Bayside Dr. & Coast Hw. 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd, 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S) 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. DI E E D E E D D D E E D E E D D D E E D E E D D D E E D E F D E 49. MacArthur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. C F C F C F C F 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd, C F C F D F D F 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 59.Marguerite Av. & Coast Hw. F D C E F D C D F D C E F D C E U:1UcJ obsl 012001012325Excell [01232- 18.xls]ES -5 ES -10 /10 3 m � N N W N J � J J r a K W O ES -11 3 N NO N (N•iON m M O m oo W M N N M D I ems- N N N ¢ Z gg* e m Z O W M mm m o w T W N aye O D N N T O T N N r� j � Z .ee ion e,ee in w �gao t: p } nd' NO O NO OO p J � M N N< N O T N N 2Wr W a Al 0 aE o o a° e o a, ^ p W co M IN T (D O U¢ m0 d' Q � Q U Z M,N0 m LO rO m (D <N R 't 400 (O O ¢ O <(V n O)M aCO CD N T N T N O O T � z m g a a °o aEo o �a° Z_ of n W W N T O O N N LL a L O�(On N r n lfJn N O O wDT *n" (O < O �g W Z LLa F a'�� aQo(ppo o aP W N m N M O Zc(') co T (D 00 a O a0 st Z Z T T N W W r O r p O U W <y w } O 6 O a" S D O IL J❑ (o 'o T o 0 N 0 N O zW m V Con n 0i NO Ua D) N aU a C,4 N N O 4.2 D1�OT T �nO (lam p U W 2 NN <(p M(Nfi nv �N p zco N (MO pOp m� M�� n r•O N O C0{T W N T O Q 0 0 o B°• T aE a' en' � Z (D (D Q o0 co O O V1 7 O p'� d; 61 M1�(D N roZ Di `W T C_ cc N m C o W W �6a, O wra u�0 to N Na n O MM oiw Cl U¢ at0aA CDOM m FF- N O 0 O i D i O i 0 m J n J m U m t¢" o O ¢m00o¢ Wu_ ES -11 3 O oo gg* e 12-im; O W M mm m o w T W N .ee ion e,ee in w �gao t: p NO TO QlO OO p v Al 0 aE o o a° e o a, ^ p W co M IN T (D O r m0 d' Q � Q U W M,N0 m LO rO (D <N R 't 400 (O O ¢ O <(V n O)M aCO CD N T N T N O T � z ¢go a a °o aEo o �a° n W W N T O N N ¢ m N N r n N O U Z *n" < O �g LLa �o a'�� aQo(ppo o aP W N m N M O F- co O Z Z N n < N W W r O r p O U <y w } O 6 O a" S D O IL J❑ (o 'o T o 0 N 0 N O zW m V Con n 0i NO D) N aU a C,4 N N O p U W� M(Nfi p N (MO pOp m� M�� n r•O N O !A Q 0 0 o B°• eE aE a' en' W (D (D Q o0 co O O V1 7 O p'� d; 61 M1�(D N roZ Di `W T C_ C o ae W �6a, O 1l'1 MME u�0 to N Na n O MM oiw at0aA CDOM FF- N O 0 O i D i O i 0 m a O m m wry F 0g °[j O moo wLL ES -11 3 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ES -12 n� 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 Ci of 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 �(o 1.1 Goals and Obiectives The goals of the General Plan Update preliminary aftematives analysis are to analyze future General Plan buildout alternative daily and peak hour volume forecasts and provide comparisons of the four buildout aftematives selected for analysis. 1.2 Methodoloav Overview This section provides a broad overview of the analysis methodology. 1.2.1 Data and Analysis Methodology 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 a 34 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 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 O 3 TABLE 1 -1 ROADWAY SEGMENT CAPACITIES' ' 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 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. UAUWabs\_ 01200 \01232\Excel \t01232- 18.xIS1T1 -1 1 -4 X #OF LANES MEDIAN WIDTH I APPROXIMATE DAILY CAPACITY CLASSIFICATION RIGHT -OF -WAY CURB TO CURB WIDTH 8 Lane Divided 158 Variable 8 14 -18 60- 68,000 Major Augmented Variable Variable 6-8 Variable 52- 58,000 Maor 128 -134 106 -114 6 14-18 45- 51,000 Prima Augmented Variable Variable 4 -6 Variable 35-40,D00 Prima 104 -108 84 4 16 -20 30- 34,000 Seconds 84 - 64 4 0 20- 23,000 Commuter 60 -70 4050 2 0 7- 10,0011 ' 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 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. UAUWabs\_ 01200 \01232\Excel \t01232- 18.xIS1T1 -1 1 -4 X a%A ~O m_ O H a z a z 0 V W H 09 W 1= z 5 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. 1 -6 5) 41- 2.0 MODEL TRIP GENERATION FOR GPAC SUBAREA LAND USE ALTERNATIVES This chapter documents trip generation for the subarea land use buiidout 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 LT TABLE 2 -1 MODEL TRIP GENERATION RATES LAND USE CODE NBTM LAND USE DESCRIPTION 1 Res -Low (SFD)-Coastal 1 1 Res -Low SFD I I- 1GnA %1 ......1..1 AM PEAK I UNITS I IN I OUT c■111111cni TRIP RATE PM PEAK IN I OUT ,111112-ki Nil DAILY 2 Res - Medium SFA vy 1 DU 0.13 0.55 0.68 0.40 0.21 0.61 6.66 3 A artment- Coastal 1 DU 0.11 0.38 0.49 0.31 0.19 0.49 5.37 3 4 Apartment Elderly Residential 1 1 DU DU 0.12 0.11 0.48 0.29 0:60 0.40 0.36 0.27 0.20 0.18 0.56 0.45 6.12 4.90 5 Mobile Home - Coastal 1 DU 0.10 0.34 0.44 0.29 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 D.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 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 3.46 2.05 2.70 4.75 51.18 15 Fast Food Restaurant 1 TSF 2.94 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 1.30 0.49 1.79 0.87 1.25 2.12 22.71 18 Health Club 1 TSF 1.30 0.49 1.79 0.87 1.25 1 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 0.84 0.26 1.10 0.39 0.65 1.04 11.08 24 Medical /Government Office 1 TSF 1.14 0.39 1.53 0.64 1 0.98 1.63 17.38 25 R&D 1 TSF 0.57 0.17 0.74 6725T0.42 0.67 7.10 26 Industrial 1 TSF 0.48 0.13 0.62 0.18 0.33 0.52 5.48 27 Mini-Storage/Warehouse 1 TSF 0.40 0.11 0.51 0.16 0.28 0.43 4.61 28 Pre - School /Da Care 1 TSF 2.08 0.65 2.73 1.04 1.68 2.72 29.05 29 Elements /Private School 1 STU 0.18 0.02 0.20 0.04 0.07 0.11 1.30 30 Junior/High School 1 STU 0.18 1 0.02 0.20 0.04 0.07 0.11 1.30 31 Cultural/Learning Center 1 TSF 1.13 1 0.35 1.48 0.54 0.89 1.43 15.22 32 Library 1 TSF 1.13 0.35 1.48 0.54 0.89 1.43 15.22 33 Post Office 1 TSF 1.54 0.49 2.03 0.78 1.25 2.03 21.63 34 Hos ital 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 2.72 29.05 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 2.49 40 Golf Course 1 ACRE 0.27 0.10 0.37 0.17 0.25 0.42 4.55 41 Resort Golf Course 1 ACRE 0.27 0.10 0.37 j 0.17 1 0.25 1 0.42 4.55 U: \UcJobs \_01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xlsIT2 -1 2 -2 35 ok 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 pattems /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'" 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 5q LK TABLE 2 -2 MODEL RESIDENTIAL TRIP GENERATION RATE REVIEW U: kUGJobsi_ 01200401232kExcelg OI232- 18.xts]T2 -2 2 -4 46 TRIP RATE N8TM LAND USE CODE NBTM LAND USE DESCRIPTION UNITS 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 0.11 0.29 0.27 0.18 0.45 5 Mobile Home - Coastal DU 0.10 0.34 t0.40 0.29 0.18 0.46 5.06 5 Mobile Home DU 0.11 0.45 0.34 0.20 0.54 5.92 Mobile Home Ratio 0.90 0.76 0.79 0.83 0.89 1 0.85 0.85 U: kUGJobsi_ 01200401232kExcelg OI232- 18.xts]T2 -2 2 -4 46 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 TABLE 2 -3 CONVERSION FACTORS BASED ON PM TOTAL ONLY ' TSF = thousand square feet DU =Dwelling Units U:tUcJobst 012001012321Excell [01232- 18.xis]T2 -3 2 -6 3/ 45 CONVERSION FACTOR STARTING LAND USE UNITS ENDING LAND USE UNITS Res -Low SFD DU General Commercial TSF 022 Res - Medium SFA DU General Commercial TSF 0.17 Apartment DU General Commercial TSF 0.16 General Commercial TSF Res -Low (SFD) DU 4.49 General Commercial TSF Res - Medium (SFA ) DU 5.82 General Commercial TSF A partment DU 6.32 ' TSF = thousand square feet DU =Dwelling Units U:tUcJobst 012001012321Excell [01232- 18.xis]T2 -3 2 -6 3/ 45 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, 7"' 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 38 TABLE 2-4 OVERALL MIXED USE CONVERSION FACTORS 2 TSF = thousand square feet DU =Dwelling Units U:1 Uciobs l_012001012321Excell[01232 -1 B.xls]T2 -4 2 -8 J� PEAK HOUR DAILY STARTING LAND USE UNITS` ENDING LAND USE UNITS AM PM IN OUT TOTAL IN I OUT I TOTAL Res -Low (SFD) DU General Commercial TSF 1 0.12 1 0.801 0.331 0.32 1 0.15 1 0.22 0.23 Res - Medium (SFA) DU General Commercial TSF 1 0.07 1 0.68 1 0.26 j 0.261 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 1.461 3.83 3.87 9.42 5.82 5.74 General Commercial I TSF Apartment DU 14.66 _1.674.29 4.25 10.05 6.32 6.24 2 TSF = thousand square feet DU =Dwelling Units U:1 Uciobs l_012001012321Excell[01232 -1 B.xls]T2 -4 2 -8 J� TABLE 2 -5 ABSOLUTE WORST CASE CONVERSION FACTORS STARTING LAND USE UNITS2 ENDING LAND USE UNITS DIRECTION FACTOR Res -Low SFD DU General Commercial TSF AM IN 1 0.12 Res - Medium (SFA) DU General Commercial TSF AM IN I 0.07 Apartment DU General Commercial TSF AM IN I 0.07 General Commercial TSF Res -Low (SFD) DU AM OUT 1 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: \UcJ obs \_ 01200 \01232\Excel\[01232- 18.xls]T2 -5 2 -9 �I TABLE 2 -6 APARTMENT TRIP GENERATION RATE COMPARISON' LAND USE I ITE CODE UNITSZ PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN I OUT TOTAL IN I OUT I TOTAL Apartment 220 DU 0.10 0.41 0.51 1 0.40 FO.22 L 0.62 6.72 Hi h -Rise Apartment 222 DU 0.08 0.23 0.30 0.21 10.14 1 0.35 4.20 Ratio (High -Rise Apt. Apartment) 0.59 0.56 0.63 Source: ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition, 2003. Z DU =Dwelling Units U: \UcJobs \_01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232 -18. xis]T2 -6 2 -10 �lI �T 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 5b n N W J Q F Q N Z LuO Q� KZ Q � F Q �a m N 2 -12 N F N X 00 Cl) N O U W N P7 N O O O N 0 i N 0 O 7 W, q3 S`+ co M ti J r.- Q G O T tD N r O N r OD O r M for l0 00 a n `r° g to i� a M : Cl O O N co 00 CO V co CD co Q (prr 01 r r r a O� O� O� F W 000 r O U V U- W ~ m Oy O M 'A Q Cl? W U. co to co r In H O h' z Z co co O co 0 W 0 mmco 0 0 O m pU LL co m 00 QLM0co w coM W 00i ZU L Ou1� W w f2 U. 00"0CDll� �n � U-> g , Z U. wv�rn U') v In 9 co n rn n W 1 O O O vi N O O LL r M cm 0 W O F r X U W r O M "T co M Oi 00 r r _ M O Z O 0 W LO 2 � W R 4f 7 Q � W W X N CO r N C1 N 0 O 0 0 o O _O c c OOOoC7a 2 -12 N F N X 00 Cl) N O U W N P7 N O O O N 0 i N 0 O 7 W, q3 S`+ N mJ 6 r 2 Q .7 N sOQQ SW aW m �= ow r a W LL' m 7 N 2 -13 I� J yy in m a no oW Q O O C1 W C1 � � N N N 1 MN 00 r CR n � W ra 2 W m m m m Q evve =ajyvv O cri r 'K Y N 2 N N N N N N � LL 7 F 2 U V LL N 6 LLO W W W W W W myv?V'v < v J r W on N N N O Z V LL LL m W w O fQ M m W W W W H 2 r e e e e e it J �N N N N N v N v Cl! e v e W U d' a e V _ LL e e V V Ih N N A o t N N N N U J 0 O N n n n Wrt M C h N O O O O U O o000 K Fr �W C N W p Q Q 2 Q Z S N N N N N N awo r z W a� G � In 1[l 4A N N IA KW ala^LC WaD m W o0� Q H arii3o�M� o0 w�Wn Munn e U N C 0 C 0 0 C C c O C C c 0 0 Q 0 D O¢ C7 a 0 0 D' 2 -13 I� same pattern as for the PM peak hour (option 4 generates the most trips and option 3 generates the fewest trips). 2.2.3 Bannino 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 �r N J r x g U) N 2 = �z} O a K W z z z W Z (9 z 0. m� r Q m W 2 -15 W r h N M N o_ l�l N 0 0 O N Oyu L 7 ub J7 J M O O N r N n W M m N m N N a g COMM za cli Nr r - g .-W o n a N r Y oA O�oN a' U Qa a 0000000 N ON Y O 2 a z W H � f J W C IL v,0000 f LL N F 0 z m0000 QJ W V LL N W y z LL F LU O o N N N o J Q Q U W W y W g f L7 O U OOn NOo N W O 2 a' O 00 W 0M z W g� Q CL a 00000 O N m V N M G W K p N N M V - 0 =0 C 0.92 C C C ac�aoo 0 2 -15 W r h N M N o_ l�l N 0 0 O N Oyu L 7 ub J7 O N W J a H N W Z a0 0 J P tu W uj W Z O a� a Q W Q f11 U) N 2 -16 0 X C6 N N 0 x W N M N O O N O �I N O J o � 01 01 aD �o V N O Q [n O M d 'd' O O co IL 7 001 M O oa m ° C-0 M N co 1� N a aW. m 0DN jW~ ON r o No o u10 J LUW ULL N O W u f Z H W 0 0 Z m C O O U owa U W a' ^ TM QJ eOe}}f O� K LL ui V V 0 N Z O F W U O O O co NN LL rD co WON X U g N O V O O O z W H a a IL z a W rn m o N N N W � aOa awN0 wv ON U 0 LL (A (A W N � a 0 N o CDa o¢0 2 -16 0 X C6 N N 0 x W N M N O O N O �I N O 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 u LLI § § ■ 2§ ow k) §k k k¥ )� kkSk ;e! /k §!(}\ k§ ■ ((§ !] �{ - ) ) ] § § 2: \ &J � \{ \ LLI ) gib \E b \\ \ § LLI � LUk 5§; k\\ %0 (�k� 0Ea . LU 2§� ) °!E \e S § §{ )ka �k 0 /, LU )k$\)j `«Moo k¥ )� /k k§ ;! !] �{ - )§ \ 2: \ &J � \{ \ \E \\ \ 2 -,a H) 2 TABLE 2 -12 LIDO ISLE SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ALT COASTAL RESIDENTIAL TRIPS RES -LOW (SFD) DU RES- MEDIUM (SFA) DU APARTMENT (DU) AM I PM I DAILY dopted General Plan 1040 102 2 885 916 10,021 Option 1 797 98 26 694 718 7,858 U:\UcJobs\ 01200\ 01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.x1s]T2 -12 2_19 5D J 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 51 `/y M N W J Q r K Q N Z LLIO J uj J_ W 7 W 00 O r a w a m w 2 -21 Cl) i F- N X W N N O c U X w N Cl) N O 0 N O f/) 9 O U l 0)OV CA rnr W w J It N Om) a 0) 0) c t- (d LO 0 V fD mco E m D) r N 00 SL � m Lr) is m n. r v ° w CD a U) Q z o00 0 oc c LL N N N f '= v U a CO to to 00 O UULLLU US W r Oy QJQ w 0 0 0 N O O O KULL oo rn o O � Ix O O o O W LO LO F r m m m W W ,,,� 0 00 O BOO O wa �� V c !00 g tmo N D W r a r X�r so U Q o o o m m co m 0 n n 0; o 0) M N N �- W W W " gr W 0 0 v 000 0 00 0 N N H 0 S d' r ,oa0� o � D o Q W N co W M O 0 N w Q 0 0 0 N O O O Q U) w LL Q "+-' fA C U W lz N M N N d Q O O O o C C 0 2 0 C C W 000 cad 00 tea 2 -21 Cl) i F- N X W N N O c U X w N Cl) N O 0 N O f/) 9 O U l 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 anaiyzea 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 53 r N W J CO f 7 N Z UJO M fg W W W Z U, q a f C r w S m 7 N 2 -23 V N f m C6 M N Oyy t) W N M N O 0 0 N o� 0 3 5�( } rn J V r a� f LL vi v � O n N Q v v Y C a aa 0 IL W = Z U m v SJ M 16 o W t N S LL m � ai N Q N h SO F V N Z 2 O N N woo m = U 2 Z LU W U O w O yyLL 0LLF CL LL O lz J W 0(=rj0 f N N U N CO) W 2 U LL r rn aw M V O � J N Z LL m W T U O r U r f rn m o XU) Ot r U Q N S Y W M O Q 6 ag H F N N a W p Q � 7 m W O LL K J N O ° N G 6 � o a a �d� oad o 0 O 0 ¢ C7 2 -23 V N f m C6 M N Oyy t) W N M N O 0 0 N o� 0 3 5�( N W J a K a 7 N a_o a ~ N Z W W Z p W �(D a a w 00 U) U) 2 -24 U) N N X o; co N O U X W N M N 0 'o O N O i 0 U 1p J 00 It O 0) N W N N a co Cl) I p m d o co to W M c0O U) a, co �a t- N O r- co g U') co V co w U O O OJ O OU�� y W N J ui U O O 00 a M Z YLL.H W O 0 w LO 0 0 0 co w pUa I mo WWLL0 X O m L r 07 co m ONo A�- a O O N _0 J 60i c0 M Cl) HO F Z Cl) M LO W W a 6 a� z Z a LLJ LO LO 0 0 h Lu � K J W LL m � V1p F N W K V? O O N N 0 Q LL fq U) p W R' N N F a f a m 0 L0) O o c ¢OC O o c ¢C7 2 -24 U) N N X o; co N O U X W N M N 0 'o O N O i 0 U 1p TAZ 1450 contains mixed use residential (represented as coastal) and mixed 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 55 m N J Q r } 5< y � 7 y Op Q W W = r W Wf7 6 U C C r u� R' W m Z V) V) 2 -26 5� Wmm � J Q tlf m N W O 4 N m W W a c v e O0¢ 00— U m W m m QK y m ~ J V• T < d V Z W 1- y r Wr W U J O A 00 M m n M l LL d% m O w W 2 U o n N o m F N Ap N l+l V Q a W Mg f y m N N N N N N N N W J U ry m e � m m W m lV lV fV n U v vi CO m m U J N pp c1 cm� n F O - r O O O 0 x tp a0 N O a� r r N N N N Q v • O Q= a v a W O N y (9 f-Iffiff-si-L 0 2 -26 5� 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 Hiahway 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 5 1 r N Jm F �0 V ? y Z WJ O 0~ mg W 0 W Q f7 ;a zr oQ 0� m y 2_28 N F- 06 N O d v x W N M N O 'o 0 N OI N 0 r� 5$ > rn0 m 0 m J ao ao M O o ag v o o m �a Pl O O W W N O O O1 N LL O LL m W 0 � W 0 0 0 W Y. N W LL F 00 M J 1�� Qq ro W Lu F4 Lu f- LU LU r2 0 V J M M M M W l 2 F N Q N W �m 2 M M R M W LL yyC W z p0 N 00 00 0 O N N N J LL 0 H y O a' v C N a_ F J � � Q d M N II d O O O o O O O 2_28 N F- 06 N O d v x W N M N O 'o 0 N OI N 0 r� 5$ z Z W O ca K � Z 2 D 2 y OZ 20 N J Q Z a ¢W 3a xg i� oa CLm 3� W N 2 F- N W 3 N F- N 67 N CJ N O G d U X W N M N O O O N O O D J 2 -29 59 ri 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 r W m f Q J � Q � y m 0 Z Q K W 0 W a0 3a Za r W W 3Q m CO CO 2 -31 y F- N W N N O G x M N °s 0 N O ai 0 7 �I 1� p W Glr0 � N y a n N o N o N v f y Ip N Yl Vppi f7 W N N Q {O 1[I 1H Ifl Y K U o 0 0 aQ of xy U y 5 �Uf r V J a ap ei rn m o yF O Z Q N N 1I1 N {Np N W N H O aW Q m S Q o H G N G 06 CI W O LL y cl O v Q M W � B U LL cY W M N Zw WU0 C4 J 0 lV r tV r fV n QQ U KKLL N W W y z 0 0 00 U N In I�H N Z W y Z m = m m Z W e e n Z N N N y W 0 Q' Q a 3 m m y O LL O W y O f. N tea- M O O °CDa O 2 -31 y F- N W N N O G x M N °s 0 N O ai 0 7 �I 1� N N W J a Q N a Z W J Q F O J m QZ CL I Z W J W O LU W Z W O W w N Z S` a N N C m O a 0 m CL 0 a m T c m ? V a m C m d .y m a O 01 N C N N D C N O M p N O m� m d W a x W N C7 O O O m0 N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 — 0 — 0 j O O ._ _ — — — — y OOOOOOQO00000000 cl U) Z O 2 ~a� O Z N w� >' co N m r r N N r M r r r r N N M Q Z C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C O O O O O O O D O 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 W OCL coo m m m m m m m 2 a a n.aaaaaa Z m (6 73 6 W N 5 l0 a W 0 0 wommoom C7 C� C7 C7 C7 C7 C9 m C Cl) M r A N N r N N N am N d N F, C C ... C C C ... .n. ... ... ..+ r ... C C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 QO0Q000 aQ¢QQQa¢Q00 75 .0 0) .6 N c C O r lfi N 'n Q a m 61 V ��Nj C W N �N INp` m N 04 0 Cl) Lo QL 7 QQ rNf N ca Nom_ m a) C L m m m Q (�� >> wmvr ° O C l0 m 2 H !/) N C r O O CO m m ==— m m 0) p aco f0 m 4D -0 4) r m a3i 'C p c m m C 6 7 7 C m m O Z Z Z °mcaa2 00-CLLLL3 0w mm QmmUVUJJJ222z5�� mmmmoa:pamvv%'8 2 -32 c a N C m O a m CL 0 a m T c m V a C m d .y m a O 01 N C N N D C N O M p N O m� m d a x W N a N O O N N N CO C mh O R T V j O M r N N W J y } K a �L U) U) Z Oq W z W 0 CL H Q m 7 M W 7 a F a J LU 0 O 2 -33 m m m r 4 Z O U m m d 0 c v c m E O 0 m 9 3 tll y N 'O U C m E E (n I 0 0 U 7 7 63 10710Or10 O7 M (O aD W (O W M to CD 117 MNN 71p DDN0 W fl- Cl) t0 r Q) M 07 (D O? (O 7 W W 4D (O O } 0 W I� cl) In 0 J a 1-t C -4 LO (r0 10- LO 0 (O M 10 (0O D7�10 W r 00 r x010 N(D 10 o (0 W NtY r CDM W aD N 0 V < aa` 10 MAN W 0707 �7 LD N� (D M N co 7MMpp (D0 M(O 10 wID r rN W W N rco 10 W rmcD co N 7 w rn M co O1b r10 (D 107OM W 10 O Q (OWN 7 V r � (O O N r � rOMOMMNN 7 c o 0 W 10 W W c0 M r 10 10NrG! 7 0 O N CL J t'% O(pNM0�0(01(i 10 (n ID N(DON 0 7 W N�O)N W al � r 1L V O O W F a W 00 r 7 M 0 10� (O W r c0 47(D (D (O W 01` N p f(1 1W0 0 1n 0 r-:0 (: Lf) O M W 7 W (O 10 1L7 M M W r N O N 1-,r 7 7 c 1(1 V V J a � H Z N W M M 0 7 (D 7 (D (O (O W W 10 10 10 O 0 10 0 M W N OD 0 M 7 0 N 7 h (D In Nr 0 OD 77 MM,(O r(D N U Q of �i e v 6 1ri v r NMO N l0(�1 W OD CO r 1 O 10Nr00M W N 7 �- 0 W Cl) N% N W O 7 I J r 06 Go �- (D c) O c) W M�Izf01fJ�M7�aDr(100 OD N W 7 M Q 7 D CO n NA0Nm �ru7 W M(D(O (D (D W OOn(D �M2 r O r 7 r (p Cl) N r l0 10 LL7 M M aD (O 0 1(i 0 z_ a N W C-0 M7 (D MM O� W 101000 u7O Lo W cq0r co OD OM N co c0 t N N1%(O V'It MM N(D 10 w a. Oi M O) 10 [r9 m a C eu v .N d K cm c W 'O 0 O Lo N 0 Q Q m V Y77 C LO LO ~~ m W F F IL d L .p G L N 0 m (N.f Q Q >> d 0= C m m F' I- (n (n y r O N O m m m= >> =– m m r- V p 3 Cl ` Q5 m m m 3 eu N: m c m m c'!'>> FA oz C 0�r M M o m Z Z Z Q 0 o.0 c c c 2 o o "O o 'O c m ii O u 0 3 N m "' d F 0 i 5 m m m m iJ m U O U a J J J m 2 rL y'0 Z O ji 2 -33 m m m r 4 Z O U m m d 0 c v c m E O 0 m 9 3 tll y N 'O U C m E E (n I 0 0 U 7 7 63 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 2 -34 / � I �0-�u 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 medical /government 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 r C� `I TABLE 3 -1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH EXISTING LAND USE SUMMARY NBTM CODE' DESCRIPTION UNITS' PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED QUANTITY 1 Low Density Residential DU 14,841 2 Medium Density Residential DU 12,939 3 Apartment DU 7,622 4 Elderly Residential DU 348 5 Mobile Home DU 894 TOTAL DWELLING UNITS DU 36,644 6 Motel ROOM 210 7 Hotel ROOM 2,745 9 Re ional Commercial TSF 1,259.000 10 General Commercial TSF 2,926.160 11 Commercial/Recreation ACRE 5.100 13 Restaurant TSF 640.520 15 Fast Food Restaurant TSF 78.031 16 Auto Dealer /Sales TSF 288.320 17 Yacht Club TSF 54.580 18 Health Club TSF 63.500 19 Tennis Club - CRT 60 20 Marina SLIP 1,055 21 Theater SEAT 5,489 22 Newport Dunes ACRE 64.00 23 General Office TSF 10,900.190 24 Medical /Govemment Office TSF 761.459 25 Research & Development TSF 1 327.409 26 Industrial TSF 1,042.070 27 Mini-Storage/Warehouse TSF 199.750 28 Preschool/Day Care TSF 55.820 29 Elements /Private School STU 4,399 30 Junior/High School STU 4,765 31 Guttural/Learning Center TSF 35.000 32 Library TSF 78.840 Office TSF 53.700 Has ital BED 351 Nursin /Conv. Home BEDS 661 Church TSF 377.760 P40Post Youth Ctr. /Service TSF 149.560 Park ACRE 113.970 R Tonal Park ACRE Golf Course ACRE 305.330 ' 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:1UcJob51_01200W 1232\Ezce8I01232- 18.xls]T3.1 3 -2 L b -�4 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 r Z� TABLE 3 -2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE COMPARISON NBTM CODE' DESCRIPTION UNITS' PUBLISHED QUANTITY REVISED QUANTITY GROWTH %GROWTH 1 Low Density Residential DU 15,213 18,347 1 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 1 4,906 57.94% 4 Elderly Residential DU 348 200 148 42.53% 5 Mobile Home DU 749 455 -294 - 39.25% 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 3,387 117 3.58% 9 Regional 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 859.800 198.780 - 661.020 - 76.88% 15 Fast Food Restaurant TSF 94.540 13.940 (80.600 ) - 85.25% 16 Auto DealedSales TSF 323.290 227.170 96.120 - 29.73% 17 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 199.750 196.420 3.330 -1.67% 28 Pre-schoolfDay Care TSF 56.770 56.770 - 0.00% 29 Elements /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 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 0.0030 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: W cJobs+_o 1200V 2321ExceR01232.1 8.xls1T3 -2 3 -4 69 qp TABLE 3 -3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING NBTM CODE' DESCRIPTION UNITS 2 2002 QUANTITY BUILDOUT QUANTITY 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 9,199 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 46,235 8,577 23.40 6 Motel ROOM 134 1391 5 3.73% 7 Hotel ROOM 2,821 3,3871 566 20.06% 9 Regional Commercial TSF 1,259.000 1,633.840 374.840 29.77% 10 General Commercial TSF 3,696.781 4,627.760 930.979 25.18% 11 Commercial /Recreation ACRE 5.100 5.100 - 0.000/0 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 1 - 0.00% 21 Theater SEAT 5,489 5,475 1 -14 -0.26% 22 Newport Dunes ACRE 64.00 64.00 1 - 0.00% 23 General Office TSF 10,865.733 12,305.620 1,439.887 13.25% 24 Medical /GovemmentOffice 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 1.70% 29 Elements /Private School STU 4,399 4,455 56 1.287. 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 661 661 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 Re Tonal Park ACRE - 45.910 45.910 N/A 40 1 Golf Course ACRE 305.3301 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 UAUCJ0bs1 01200101232 \Exce11101232.18.x1s]T3 -3 3 -5 TABLE 3-4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH' LAND USE BASED EXISTING SOCIOECONOMIC DATA SUMMARY VARIABLE PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED QUANTITY REVISED QUANTITY =CHANGE % CHANGE Oc=cupied Single Family Dwelling Units 13,842 15,970 21128 15% Occupied Multi-Family Dwelling Units 20,409 18,294 -2,115 -10% OTAL OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS 34,251 34,264 13 0% Quarters Po ulation 661 661 0 0% lGrou Population 75,817 75,211 -606 -1% Employed Residents 44,379 44,635 256 1% Retail Employees f 11,211 10,970 -241 -2% Service Em to ees 17,150 17,295 145 1% Other Employees 37,077 36,990 -87 0 °k TOTAL EMPLOYEES 65,438 65,255 -183 0 0 Elem1Hi h School Students 9,164 9,164 0 030 1 Includes data converted from land use only. Excludes Newport Coast and recent annexation areas. U AU W obs\_ 0I200NO1232 \Exceg01232- 18.xlsIT3 -4 3 -6 TABLE 3-5 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH' LAND USE BASED SOCIOECONOMIC DATA GROWTH FROM EXISTING VARIABLE 2002 QUANTITY BUILDOUT QUANTITY GROWTH % GROWTH Occupied Single Family Dwelling Units 15,970 17,1651 1,195 7% Occupied Multi-Family Dwelling Units 18,294 24,992 6,698 37% TOTAL OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS 34,264 42,157 7,893 23% Group Quarters Population 661 661 0 0% Population 75,211 91,095 15,884 21% Employed Residents 44,635 54,657 10,022 22% Retail Employees 10,970 13,652 2,682 24% Service Employee 17,295 21,149 3,854 22% Other Employees 36,990 45,384 8,394 23% TOTAL EMPLOYEES 65,255 80,185 14,930 23% Elem /Hi h School Students 9,1641 9,220 56 1% ' Includes data converted from land use only. Excludes Newport Coast and recent annexation areas. U: \UcJobs \_01200 \01232\Excel \[01232- 18As]T3 -5 3 -7 II g3 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 3-8 M 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 -7,4151 0.98 OVERALL TOTAL 687,141 PREVIOUS TOTAL 689,848 DIFFERENCE 2,707 % DIFFERENCE 0.4% ' 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. UAUcJobs \_ 01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xIsIT3.6 3 -9 73 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 Productions 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% ork Based Other Attractions 57,035 71,335 14,300 25.07% Other - OtherProductions 91,218 116,275 25,057 27.47% Other - Other Attractions 89,734 114,558 24,824 27.66% TOTAL PRODUCTIONS 339,863 444,457 1 F4,5941 30.78% TOTAL ATTRACTIONS 347,278 435,3021 88,0241 25.35% OVERALLTOTAL 687,141 879,7591 1921618 28.03% ' 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 \Exceh[01232- 18.x1s T3 -7 3 -10 q �1 TABLE 3 -8 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 3.4991 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 Productions' 167,202 174,257 7,055 4.22% Home Based Other Attractions 136,553 138,334 1,781 1.30% Work Based Other Productions 64,755 65,482 727 1.12%' Work Based Other Attractions 70,186 71,335 1,149 1.64% Other - Other Productions 114,557 116,275 1,718 1.50% Other - Other Attractions 112,882 114,558 1,676 1.48% TOTAL PRODUCTIONS 431,108 _ 444,457 13,349 3.10% TOTAL ATTRACTIONS 429 1021 6,1521 1.430/o OVERALL TOTAL 860,258 879,759 19,501 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. UAUcJobsl_01200\012321Excell01232- 18.xis]T3 -8 3 -11 15 4� 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. 3 -12 ¢N ch W m Q X w = O 0 W z H H z 0 V 0 O J m z a IL ma a o� W z W a= V a W m H 0 C. W z i 0 2 3-13 0 0 Z W W W J W Z g x W . 0 0 cc x O w W W G lea z i cz a n p v o :) 0 ri U z IL Q U uJ U a � I m oamq�. OC Mn x LU z IW6 NOR Z 6 Z x. m. z 3-14 :2 uj IL `T W11F MEN A v z 3-14 :2 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% 16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.) 6,000 6,000 0 0 - 10,000 00% -100% 17th St. (Bluff Rd. to east city limit) 10,000 9,000 1,000 139' 32nd St. (west of Newport Blvd.) 8,000 0 D°/ 32nd St. (east of Newport Blvd.) 5,000 5,000 0° vocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.) 5,000 5,000 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% I ayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.) 13,000 12,000 -1,000 -80/1 itch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Korman Ave.) 18,000 18,000 0 0% itch St. (Von Korman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 20,000 20,000 0 00 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% Birch St. (Bristol St. North o Bristol St. South) 20,000 20,000 0 Bitch St. (south of Bristol St. South) 16,000 16,000 0 0% ison 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 00% Bluff Rd. (Coast Hwy. to 19th St.) 13,000 12,000 -1,000 -80% Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.) 33,000 34,000 1,000 3% Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR -73 Fwy.) 25,000 27,000 2,000 80A 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 09' Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd -) 18,000 18,000 0 09' Bristol St. South (west of Campus Dr./Irvine Ave.) 32,000 32,000 0 00/ ristol St. South (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 22,000 23,000 1,000 5% ristol 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 Kannan Ave.) 21,000 22,000 1,000 5° Campus Dr. (Von Korman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 31,000 31,000 0 0°/ Campus Dr- (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 38,000 39,000 1,000 3% mpus Dr. (north of Bristol St. North) 38,000 39,000 1,000 3% pus Dr. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 39,000 40,000 1,000 30 Hwy. (west of Bluff Rd.) 51,000 60,000 9,000 18 /o st Hwy. (Bluff Rd. to Superior Ave.Balboa Blvd.) 49,000 61,000 12,000 24° st Hwy. (Superior Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 38,000 41,000 3,000 8° st Hwy. (Newport Blvd. to Riverside Ave.) 72,000 68,000 4,000 -6% [Coast st Hwy. (Riverside Ave. to Tustin Ave.) 63,000 59,000 -4,000 -6% st Hwy. (Tustin Ave. to Dover Dr.) 59,000 55,000 -4,000 -7% st Hwy. (Dover Dr. to Bayside Dr.) 77,000 78,000 1,000 19' st Hwy. (Bayside Dr. to Jamboree Rd.) 62,000 64,000 2,000 3% st H Jamboree Rd. to N tort Center Jh. 51,000 51,000 0 0% 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 0 2°/ 0 °/ Coast Hwy. (Avocado Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 45,000 45,000 48,000 1,000 2V, Coast Hwy. (MacArthur Blvd. to Goldenrod Ave.) 47,000 0 00/1 ast Hwy. (Goldenrod Ave. to Marguerite Ave.) 46,000 46,000 0 O°° Gast Hwy. (Marguerite Ave. to Poppy Ave.) 42,000 42,000 0 0/ Coast Hwy. (Poppy Ave. to Newport Coast Dr.) 35,000 35,000 44,000 -1,000 -2% Coast Hwy (east of Newport Coast Dr.) 45,000 0 0% ver Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Westcliff Dr.) 11,000 11,000 0 0% Dover Dr. ( Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.) 24,000 24,000 0 0% Dover Dr. (16th St. to Cliff Dr.) 28,000 31,000 28,000 33,000 2,000 6% Dover Dr. (Cliff Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 10,000 0 0% Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at University Dr.) 10,000 0 O° Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at Ford Rd.) 15,000 15,000 13,000 1,000 8% Ford Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 12,000 4,000 2,000 100% Goldenrod Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 0 0% ighland Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 2,000 23,000 2,000 18,000 -5,000 -22% Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 10,000 1,000 11% Hospital Rd. (east of Newport Blvd.) 9,000 36,000 38,000 2,000 6% Irvine Ave. (Bristol St. South to Mesa Dr.) -ne 38,000 41,000 3,000 8% Ave. (Mesa Dr. to University Dr.) 34,000 40,000 6,000 18% Irvine Ave. (University Dr. to Santa Isabel Ave.) 33,000 6,000 22% Irvine Ave. (Santa Isabel Ave. to Santiago Dr.) 27,000 32,000 7,000 28% Irvine Ave. (Santiago ➢r. to Highland Dr.) 25,000 32,000 7,000 28° Irvine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.) 25,000 28,000 9,000 47 ° Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr. to Westcliff Dr.) 19,000 10,000 13,000 3,000 30 °/ Irvine Ave. ( Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.) 47,000 0 0% amboree Rd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 47,000 0 0 °/ amboree Rd. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 54,000 54,000 43, 000 -1 000 -2% Jamboree Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to Bristol St. North) 44,000 51,000 , -1,000 -2 % Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 52,000 56,000 -2,000 -3°/ Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. South to Bayview Wy.) 58,000 56, 000 9 000 19°/ Jamboree Rd. ( Bayview Wy. to University Dr.) 47,000 41,000 , -1,000 -2 °/ Jamboree Rd. (University Dr. to Bison Ave.) 42,000 0 0% Jamboree Rd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 45,000 45,000 55,000 2,000 4% Jamboree Rd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 53,000 3,000 8° Jamboree Rd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to Santa Barbara Dr.) 40,000 43,000 3,000 8°/ amborm Rd. (Santa Barbara Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 39,000 42,000 15,000 1,000 ° 7/° Jamboree Rd. ( Coast Hwy. to Bayside Dr.) 14,000 0 O °�' MacArthur Blvd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 33,000 33,000 0° MacArthur Blvd. (Birch St. to Von Karmen Ave.) 26,000 26,000 0 0° acArthur Blvd. (Von Kaman Ave. to Jamboree Rd.) 32,000 32,000 0 0 0% MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.) 35,000 35,000 74,000 3,000 4% MacArthur Blvd. (north of Bison Ave.) 71,000 74,000 2,000 3% acArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 72,000 60,000 2,000 3% MacArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joa uin Hills Rd. 58,000 3 -16 TABLE 3 -9 (PAGE 3 OF 4) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON LOCATION BUILDOUT FORECAST (BASELINE) (CONSTRAINED) MacArthur Blvd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to San Miguel Rd.) 37,000 39,000 MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 37,000 38,000 Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 8,000 8,000 Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 7,000 7,000 Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 13,000 13,000 Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.) 49,000 46,000 Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 54,000 54,000 Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido) 55,000 57,000 Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.) 40,000 41,000 Newport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.) 32,000 33,000 Newport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 17,000 17,000 Newport Coast Dr. (SR -73 Fwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 28,000 29,000 Newport Coast D r. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 24,000 24,000 ewport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 18,000 19,000 lacentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.) 12,000 16,000 Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 13,000 11,000 Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 2,000 Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 9,000 10,000 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.) 18,000 17,000 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.) 12,000 12,000 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 25,000 26,000 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to San Miguel Rd.) 22,000 22,000 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (San Miguel Rd. to Marguerite Ave.) 23,000 24,000 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to Spyglass Hill Rd.) 18,000 19,000 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.) 18,000 19,000 San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 10,000 10,000 an Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 10,000 10,000 San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 14,000 14,000 San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 16,000 16,000 San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.) 19,000 20,000 San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.) 11,000 11,000 Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 11,000 11,000 Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 9,000 9,000 Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 14,000 14,000 Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave. to Irvine Ave.) 5,000 6,000 Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 2,000 4,000 Spyglass Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 5,000 4,000 SR -55 Freeway (north of SR -75 Fwy.) 185,000 183,000 SR -55 Freeway (22nd St. to 19th St.) 156,000 123,000 SR -73 Freeway (SR -55 Fwy. to Campus Dr.) 133,000 134,000 SR -73 Freeway (Jamboree Rd. to Universi Dr. 96,0001 98,000 2,000 1,000 0 0 0 -3,000 0 2,000 1,000 1,000 0 1,000 0 1,000 4,000 -2,000 0 1,000 -1,000 0 1,000 0 1,000 1,000 1,000 0 0 0 0 1,000 0 1,000 2,000 -1,000 -2,000 - 33,000 1,000 % CHANGE 3 -17 �1 q� TABLE 3 -9 (PAGE 4 OF 4) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON U: \UcJabs \_ 01200 \01232\Excel\j01232.18.XISIT3 -9 3 -18 U o1K BUILDOUT FORECAST (BASELINE) (CONSTRAINED) LOCATION CHANGE %CHANGE SR -73 Freeway (Bonita Canyon Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.) SR -73 Freeway (east of Newport Coast Dr.) Superior Ave. (north of Placentia Ave.) Superior Ave. (Placentia Ave. to Hospital Rd.) Superior Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) Tustin Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) University Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) University Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) Via Lido (east of Newport Blvd.) Von Karmen Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) Von Karman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) Westcliff Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr. ) 124,000 118,000 21,000 17,000 21,000 2,000 3,000 16,000 10,000 18,000 15,000 17,000 125,000 119,000 19,000 28,000 28,000 3,000 3,000 15,000 1 D,000 18,000 16,000 16,000 1,000 1,000 -2,000 11,000 7,000 1,000 0 -1,000 0 0 1,000 -16000 1 % 1% -10% 65% 33% 5001. 04' -6% 0% 00/ 7% -6% U: \UcJabs \_ 01200 \01232\Excel\j01232.18.XISIT3 -9 3 -18 U o1K TABLE 3.10 (PAGE 1 OF 4) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION COUNT EXISTING (2001/2002) BUILDOUT ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) CHANGE %CHANGE 16th SL (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.) 51000 6,000 1,000 20% 32nd St. (west of Newport Blvd.) 8,000 9,000 1,000 13% 32nd SL (east of Newport Blvd.) 3,000 5,000 2,000 67% vocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.) 5,000 5,000 0 OOA Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.) 12,000 12,000 0 0"A 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 200A Binh SL (Jamboree Rd. to Von Karman Ave.) 12,000 18,000 6,000 50° /a Birch SL (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 15,000 20,000 5,000 33% Birch St. (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 16,000 20,000 4,000 250/c Binh St. (north of Bristol SL North) 23,000 27,000 4,000 170K Binh St. (Bristol St. North to Bristol SL South) 19,000 20,000 1,000 50 Binh 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 SL to 17th SL) 0 13,000 13,000 N/A Bluff Rd. (17th SL to 19th SL) 0 12,000 12,000 N/ 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% ristol SL North (west of Campus Dr.) 28,000 32,000 4,000 14 °A Bristol St. North (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 23,000 28,000 5,000 22% Bristol St. North (east of Birch SL) 22,000 27,000 5,000 23% Bristol SL North (west of Jamboree Rd.) 16,000 18,000 2,000 13% Bristol SL South (west of Campus Dr./lrvine Ave.) 28,000 32,000 4,000 140 Bristol St. South (Campus Dr. to Binh SL) 17,000 23,000 6,000 350% . ristol St. South (east of Binh St.) 16,000 22,000 6,000 38% Bristol St. South (west of Jamboree Rd.) 31,000 37,000 6,000 190% Campus Dr. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Korman Ave.) 16,000 22,000 6,000 38% Campus Dr. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 20,000 31,000 11,000 55% Campus Dr. (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 26,000 39,000 13,000 50° (north of Bristol SL North) 28,000 39,000 11,000 39% Dr. (Bristol SL North to Bristol St. South) ra7u:Or. 30,000 40,000 10,000 33% Hwy. (west of Bluff Rd.) 46,000 60,000 14,000 300A Coast Hwy. (Bluff Rd. to Superior Ave./Batboa 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 15,000 289'0 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° 3 -1 9 R5 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 Bayside 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 51,000 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. (MacArthur Blvd. to Goldenrod Ave.) 40,000 48,000 8,000 200 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 7,000 200 Coast Hwy. (Poppy Ave. to Newport Coast Dr.) 28,000 35,000 7,000 250/ Coast Hwy (east of Newport Coast Dr.) 35,000 44,000 9,000 260A over Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Westcliff Dr.) 9,000 11,000 2,000 220% Dover Dr. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.) 22,000 24,000 2,000 90/u Dover Dr. (16th St. to Cliff Dr.) 25,000 28,000 3,000 120% Dover Dr. (Cliff Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 29,000 33,000 4,000 14% Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at University Dr.) 10,000 10,000 0 00% Eastbluff Dr. (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 1000/0 Highland Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 2,000 2,000 0 MA Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 13,000 18,000 5,000 380 Hospital Rd. (east of Newport Blvd.) 7,000 10,000 3,000 43% Irvine Ave. (Bristol St. South to Mesa Dr.) 27,000 38,000 11,000 41 Irvine Ave. (Mesa Dr. to University Dr.) 31,000 41,000 10,000 320/ 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 5,000 190/. Irvine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.) 27,000 32,000 5,000 19% Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr. to Westcliff Dr.) 22,000 28,000 6,000 270/. Irvine Ave. ( Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.) 12,000 13,000 1,000 8% Jamboree Rd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 36,000 47,000 11,000 31% Jamboree Rd. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 42,000 54,000 12,000 290% Jamboree Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to Bristol St. North) 36,000 43,000 7,000 19% Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. North to Bristol SL South) 47,000 51,000 4,000 99' Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. South to Bayview Wy.) 47,000 56,000 9,000 190A Jamboree Rd. (Bayview Wy. to University Dr.) 47,000 56,000 9,000 1995 Jamboree Rd. (University Dr. to Bison Ave.) 37,000 41,000 4,000 11°% amboree Rd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 39,000 45,000 6,000 15% Jamboree Rd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 46,000 55,000 9,000 200/. 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 Bayside Dr.) 12,000 15,000 3,000 25% MacArthur Blvd. (Campus Dr. to Binh St.) 27,000 33,000 6,000 220% MacArthur Blvd. (Binh St. to Von Kannan Ave.) 22,000 26,000 4,000 18% MacArthur Blvd. on Karman Ave. to Jamboree Rd. 26,000 32,000 6,000 1 239' 3 -20 Sq 3� TABLE 3 -10 (PAGE 3 OF 4) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION COUNT EXISTING (2001/2002) BUILDOUT ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) CHANGE MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.) 27,000 35,000 8,000 MacArthur Blvd. (north of Bison Ave.) 61,000 74,000 13,000 MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 63,000 74,000 11,000 MacArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 54,000 60,000 6,000 MacArthur Blvd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to San Miguel Rd.) 35,000 39,000 4,000 MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 31,000 38,000 7,000 Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 7,000 8,000 1,000 Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 6,000 7,000 1,000 Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 12,000 13,000 1,000 ewport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.) 36,000 46,000 10,000 ewport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 43,000 54,000 11,000 ewport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido) 48,000 57,000 9,000 Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.) 36,000 41,000 5,000 Newport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.) 29,000 33,000 4,000 Newport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 14,000 17,000 3,000 Newport Coast Dr. (SR -73 Fwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 17,000 29,000 12,000 ewport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 15,000 24,000 9,000 Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 12,000 19,000 7,000 Placentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.) 12,000 16,000 4,000 Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 7,000 11,000 4,000 Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 2,000 0 Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 9,000 10,000 1,000 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.) 16,000 17,000 1,000 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.) 11,000 12,000 1,000 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 21,000 26,000 5,000 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to San Miguel Rd.) 19,000 22,000 3,000 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (San Miguel Rd. to Marguerite Ave.) 18,000 24,000 6,000 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to Spyglass Hill Rd.) 12,000 19,000 7,000 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.) 12,000 19,000 7,000 San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 7,000 10,000 3,000 San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 7,000 10,000 3,000 San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 12,000 14,000 2,000 San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 12,000 16,000 4,000 San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.) 19,000 20,000 1,000 San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.) 10,000 11,000 1,000 Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 10,000 11,000 1,000 Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 8,000 9,000 1,000 Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 11,000 14,000 3,000 Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave. to Irvine Ave.) 5,000 6,000 1,000 Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 3,000 4,000 1,000 Spyglass Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 4,000 4,000 0 R -55 Freeway (north of SR -75 Fwy.) 155,000 183,000 28,000 SR -55 Freeway (22nd St. to 19th St.) 94,000 123,000 29,000 SR -73 Freeway SR -55 Fwy. to Campus Dr. 94,000 134,000 40,000 3 -21 65 00 TABLE 3 -10 (PAGE 4 OF 4) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION COUNT EXISTING (200112002) BUILDOUT ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) CHANGE %CHANGE SR -73 Freeway (Jamboree Rd. to University Dr.) 59,000 98,000 39,000 66% SR -73 Freeway (Bonita Canyon Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.) 62,000 125,000 63,000 102% SR -73 Freeway (east 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 1 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. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 11,000 15,000 4,000 36% Via Lido (east of Newport Blvd.) 8,000 10,000 2,000 25% Von Kamum Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St) 14,000 18,000 4,000 29% Von Karman Ave. (Birch SL to MacArthur Blvd.) 12,000 16,000 4,000 33% Westcliff Dr. Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr. 16,000 16,000 0 0% U:WWocs 012000123ZEXMA [01232- 18.,ia]r3 -10 3-22 �VJ 9`� 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 S7 q't C-.) to F-oo 5ER:m X LLI LU z za O 9 Z 16U 0 I i7 II 4,41 .m,� N 3-24 a) LU -q I ��, 5 /41 sbo z w .m,� N 3-24 a) LU -q I ��, 5 /41 sbo 4' .m,� N 3-24 a) LU -q I ��, 5 /41 • 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 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 RII ;J� 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 buiidout 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 -b0 %5v 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 PM PEAK HOUR EXISTING COUNT FUTURE FORECAST DELTA EXISTING COUNT FUTURE FORECAST 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. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 0.84 1.01 0.17 0.90 0.99 0.09 . Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. 0.54 0.79 0.25 0.70 0.97 0.27 . Newport BI. & Via Lido 0.41 0.54 0.13 0.37 0.46 0.0 . Newport BI. & 32nd St. 0.73 0.52 -0.21 0.78 0.71 -0.0 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 0.84 1.03 0.19 0.93 1.12 0.19 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 0.80 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 1 1. Von Kerman Av. & CarMus Dr. 0.55 0.661 0.11 0.79 0.93 0.14 12. MacArthur B1. & Von Kerman Av. 0.46 0.541 0.081 0.53 0.64 0.11 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.70 0.921 0.221 0.85 1.24 0.3 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. 0.61 0.79 0.1gi 0.60 0.80 0.20 15. Cam us Dr. & Bristol St. N 0.77 0.96 0.19 0.94 1.08 0.14 16. Binh St. & Bristol St. 0.66 0.92 0.26 0.61 0.72 0.11 17. Campus Dr.11rvine Av. & Bristol St. S 0.72 0.93 Oil 0.58 0.77 0.19 18. Binh St. & Bristol St. S 0.46 0.52 0.06 0.441 0.53 0. 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.70 0.68 -0.02 0.941 0.90 -0. 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 0.82 1.14 0.32 0.891 1.19 0.3 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.66 0.70 0.04 0.721 0.78 0.06 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.57 0.61 0.04 0.601 0.63 0.03 3. Irvine Av, & Dover Dr. 0.72 0.78 0.06 0.641 0.70 0.06 24. Irvine Av. & WesnliffDr. 0.57 0.67 0.10 0.771 0.82 0.05 5. Dover Dr. & Westchff Dr. 0.381 0.39 0.01 0.481 0.56 0.08 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.55 0.64 0.09 0.571 0.64 0.07 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.70 0.86 0.16 0,741 0.90 0.16 8. Bayside Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.69 0.83 0.14 0.701 0.94 0.24 29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd. 0.88 0.96 0.08 0.911 0.99 0.08 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. N 0.55 0.70 0.15 0.591 0.69 0.1 31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. S 0.48 0.60 0.12 0.561 0.63 0.0 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S ) 0.75 0.96 0.21 0.721 0.85 0.13 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W , 0.41 0.48 0.07 0.57 0.70 0.13 4. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /Universi ty Dr. 0.60 0.64 0.04 0.64 0.69 0.05 5. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.45 0.51 0.06 0.51 0.58 0.07 6. Samboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr.lFord Rd. 0.69 0.78 0.09 0.65 0.72 0.07 37. Jamboree Rd. & San J uin Hills Rd. 0.80 0.61 -0.19 1.00 0.65 -0.35 3 -27 qI 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 FORECAST DELTA EXISTING COUNT FUTURE FORECAST DELTA 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.47 0.55 0.08 0.631 0.71 0.08 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.68 0.85 0.17 0.741 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 0.1 2. N ort Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.40 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 0.77 0.19 0.66 0.80 0.14 6. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.31 0.47 0.16 0.37 0.56 0.19 7. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.26 0.381 0.12 0.171 0.29 0.12 8. MacArthur Bl. & Bison Av. 0.63 0.78 0.15 0.601 0.80 0.20 9. MwArhtur Bl. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.71 0.77 0.06 o.901 1.06 0.16 0. MacArthur BL & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.64 0.77 0.13 0.931 1.04 0.11 1. MacArthur Bl. & San Miguel Dr. 0.56 0.63 0.07 0,651 0.77 0.12 52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw. 0.60 0.74 0.14 0.711 0.83 0.12 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.55 0.69 0.14 0.431 0.53 0.10 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.301 0.45 0.15 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 0.52 0.08 0.541 0.68 0.14 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 0.99 1.08 0.09 0.69 0.79 0.1 58. Muguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.31 0.38 0.07 0.35 0.51 0.16 59.Muguerite 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 0.16 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.611 0.67 0.06 0.65 0.76 0.11 2. Nevvport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Ramps 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 5. N ort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.47 0571 0.101 0.501 0.60 0.1 ' DNE = Does Not Exist U: \UcJobs \_ 012001012321Exce11 [01232- 18.x1s]T3 -11 3 -28 V- \0A 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) DELTA 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. 1.011 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 0.2 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 1.01 1.01 0.00 0.80 0.99 0.1 . Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. 0.87 0.79 -0.08 0.93 0.97 0.04 5. Newpon Bl. & Via Lido 052 0.54 0.02 0.44 0.46 0.02 . Newport Bl. & 32nd St. 0.67 0.52 -0.15 0.76 0.71 -0.05 . Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 0.83 1.03 0.20 1.12 1.12 0.00 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 0.76 1.02 016 0.87 0.85 -0.02 9. MacArthur Bl. & Campus Dr. 0.72 0.76 0.04 1.21 1.25 0.04 10. MacArthur Bl. & Birch St. 0.711 0.71 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 11. Von Kamran Av. & Campus Dr. 0.67 0.66 -0.01 0.94 0.93 -0.01 12. MacArthur 131. & Von Kaman Av, 0.54 0.54 0.00 0.641 . 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. 0.97 0.96 -0.01 1.09 1.08 -0.01 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. 0.93 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. Binh St. & Bristol St. S 0.521 0.52 0.00 0.53 0.53 0. 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.. 0.681 0.68 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 0. twine Av. & University Dr. 1.15 1.14 -0.011 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 0.65 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 0.0 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.47 0.64 0.17 0.55 0.64 0.09 7. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.71 0.86 0.15 0.74 0.90 0.16 8. Ba s ide Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.851 0.83 -0.02 0.941 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 0.70 0.69 -0.01 31. Bayview PI. & Bristol St. S 0.61 0.60 -0.01 0.63 0.63 0. 2. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S 0.95 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 4. Jamboree Rd. & Easibluff Dr. (University Dr. 0.58 0.64 0.06 0.61 0.691 0.08 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.46 0.51 0.05 0.54 0.58 0. 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd. 0.74 0.78 0.04 0.70 0.72 0.02 7. Jamboree R . an Joaquin ills Rd. 0.64 0.61 -0.03 0.65 0.65 0.00 3 -29. /12 �F� TABLE 3 -12 (PAGE 2 OF 2) GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO BASELINE U: \UCJobs\- 01200\01232 \Excel\ [01232- 18xis]T3 -12 3 -30 qi Pi AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ADOPTED ADOPTED ADOPTED ADOPTED INTERSECTION NS /EW (BASELINE) (CONSTRAINED) DELTA (BASELINE) (CONSTRAINED)i DELTA 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 0. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin 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. 0.511 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 0.77 0.80 0.03 6. 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 8. MacArthur Bl. & Bison Av. 0.77 0.78 0.01 0.77 0.80 0.03 9. MacArhtur Bl. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.76 0.77 0.01 1.07 1.06 -0.01 50. MacArthur Bl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.711 0.77 0.06 0.96 1.04 0.0 51. MacArthur Bl. & San Miguel Dr. 0.55 0.63 0.08 0.70 0.77 0. 52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw. 0.72 0.74 0.02 0.81 0.83 0.0 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.62 0.69 0.07 0.47 0.53 0. 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. 0.311 0.30 -0.01 0.39 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 0.501 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 1. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.711 0.67 -0.04 0.75 0.76 0.01 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 B Ramps 0.52 0.54 0.02 0.36 0.40 0.04 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San o uin Hi11s Rd. 0.60 0.63 0.03 0.46 0.47 0.01 65. Newport oast Or. oast Hw. 0.59 0.57 -0.02 0.61 0.60 -0.01 U: \UCJobs\- 01200\01232 \Excel\ [01232- 18xis]T3 -12 3 -30 qi Pi TABLE 3 -13 (PAGE 1 OF 2) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY 12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Karman Av. 0.96 0.54 1.08 A 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. 0.64 E B 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S 0.92 E E A 1.24 0.521 F 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. A 0.79 0.68 C 0.90 0.80 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. C 15. CatnImis Dr. & Bristol St. 0.96 E 1.08 F 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. 0.92 E 0.72 C 17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S 0.93 E 0.77 A 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S 0.521 A 0,531 A 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.68 B 0.90 D 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.14 F 1.19 F 1. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.70 B 0.78 C 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.61 B 0.63 B 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.78 C 0.70 B 1125. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. I 0.491 M 0.561 All 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.641 B 0.641 B 7. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.861 DI 0.901 D Dr. & Coast Hw. mr BI. & Jamboree Rd. e Rd. & Bristol St. QN0 1132. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (Sl I 8961 al 0.R51 DA 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W . 0.481 Al 0.701 B 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /(Jniv=ity Dr. 0.64 B 0.69 B 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.511 A 0.58 A 36. Jamboree Rd. k Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd. 0.781 cl 0.721 C IL37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 1 0.611 131 0.651 1311 3 -31 I� 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 ICU LOS ICU LOS 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.55 A 0.71 C 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.85 D 0.89 D 0. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 A 0.34 1. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 A 0.71 C 2. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 A 0.63 B 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.37 A 0.791 C 5. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.771 C 0.801 C 46. SR -73 NB Rams & 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. 0.78 C 0.80 C 9. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.77 C 1.06 50. MacArthur Bl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.77 C 1.04 51. MacArthur Bl. & San Miguel Dr. 0.63 B 0.77 C 52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw. 0.741 C 0.83 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.69 B 0.53 A 54. SR -73 SB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.45 A 0.59 A 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.30 A 0.381 A 6. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.52 A 0.681 B 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.08 F 0.791 C 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.38 A 0.511 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 0.76 C 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Ramps 0.54 A 0.40 A 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.63 B 0.47 A 1165. Ne ort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.57 A 0.60 A IDNE = Does Not Exist U:\UcJobsl_012001012321Exceh [01232 -1 S.)dsjT3 -13 3 -32 " `pti OZ H m W W W W 0. 0 0 Qi eeJ Z W V 1� NY 'AV ral e W Alk J W •`'' 0 U LL U a m ¢ P 3 -33 a "000 z ��i • 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). 3 -34 b VD 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 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 BL & Hospital Rd. 0.79 0.85 0.06 0.97 0.84 -0.13 5. Newport BI. & 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. 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.03 0.71 -0.32 1.12 0.77 -0.35 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.02 0.71 -0.31 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 Bl. & Birch St. 0.71 0.71 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 11. Von Karmen Av. & Cam us Dr. 0.66 0.62 -0.04 0.93 0.89 -0.04' 12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Kaman Av. 0.54 0.54 0.00 0.64 0.64 0.00 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.92 '0.89 -0.03 1.241 0.86 -0.38 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. 0.79 0.79 0.00 0.801 0.80 0.00 15. Camp us Dr. & Bristol St. 0.96 0.89 -0.07 1.08 0.85 -0.23 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. 0.92 0.78 -0.14 0.72 0.71 -0.01 17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S 0.93 0.87 -0.06 0.77 0.77 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 0.68 0.00 0.90 0.90 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 0.701 0.00 0.781 0.78 0.00 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.61 0.611 0.00 0.631 0.63 0. 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.701 0.70 .0.0 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.67 0.67 0.00 0.82 0.82 0.00 25. Dover Dr. & WestclitPDr. 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.56 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. Bayside Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.83 0.81 -0.02 0.94 0.88 -0.06 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. 0.96 0.75 -0.21 0.99 0.82 -0.17 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 0.70 0.701 0.00 0.691 0.69 0.00 1. Bayvim Pl. & Bristol St. S 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.63 0.63 0.00 2. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S 0.96 0.74 -0.22 0.85 0.80 -0.05 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayvim 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 DrJFord Rd. 0178 0.78 0.001 0.72 0.72 0.00 1137. Jamboree Rd. & San loa uin Hills Rd. 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.65 0.651 0.00 3 -35 N�\ TABLE 3 -14 (PAGE 2 OF 2) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY ADOPTED FORECAST OVWITH ORECASTIIMPROVEMENTS 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.85 0.77 0.85 0.001 0.80 0.89 6. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.89 0.00 0. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 0.56 0.36 0.00 0.38 0.34 0.00 0.34 0.00 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 0.78 0.39 0.00 0.80 0.71 0.00 0.71 0.00 2. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 1.061 0.50 0.00 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.63 0.66 0.63 0.00 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.37 0.37 0.00 0.79 0.79 0.00 S. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.77 0.77 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.0 6. 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 0.381 0.00 0.291 0.29 0.00 8. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 49. MacArthur BI. & Ford Rd.Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.77 0.72 -0.05 1.061 0.86 -0.20 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.77 0.66 -0.11 1.041 0.84 -0.20 U:TUcJobsl 01200\ 01232TExcel\[01232- 18.As)T3 -14 3 -36 lOV � \2 LL. \ § 2 3 -37 1)1 cc :3 ca - q k | \% f § e k zM § § $ w / / a a .® . ) = I m 2 m .> 666§7 ■k§■k§a�mm■ n ` #�■m■k � c& z = f \ | / |) k / E,7/ 2 .\ -f� aa �k$1f�2f2 2 - ;��'�2r Z 2 _k�2Sf �02$§g422 22 CC 0.LLJ Mco cl MED LU �ƒ m %SSf)2Ca- ƒƒm3 k�z�z ; 4- -V 3) T,#§]&§m7MvA,0 z A Lo»Iff / /JJ£ / /ƒi£ƒJ /cLJ /££I££I2£ƒ /ƒ£££ E E— f F / L / 6 / / G— . §6q2 / z \/ 0 )E0E j \ z; ) / o - . ` «`2f c k G - ` \ \ j ® k E 2 z E . k k z§ c) 6 E < 6 6 .�ca z _ £ - 4{ ■2 : G § L # k § §{E E ® E ILJ £ 3 z & J]$* o § o mill 3 -37 1)1 LL � � LU Lu � � / 2 § e § k z § § \ k ■ � � § IL ■ LU � § z ) 8 3 -3B Lo / co cli \ j / ) 10- / \ /0 k . C / _ t / z aZ k_ § \) -% CO CO k E \ /) k/ ® a. Co \C � a)aj Wk�)6 _k /« /iƒ r -aE /�$ ca / / « \k /) / /�§j��)� /{ -- = ©2ne�- ��==�auzm(a -- - -a= ��_ z =2 %- Rz�R�� «Lu co 7 ##3]$ §� §723 4)0 k/`¥7±*2)a*2$ °�2 no - %) ®,a «�3s;,'\]$i2)77 /ƒx§23 /£ƒI /CL CL m02 waa. CL / / \ . G k §/ LU E / I§E § e / 0 f i - u; ` m� / kf ) §\ s2 2E # §o m )k en / zz \ \\ z U) m § y6 m /# § $ $ ® ] - (D \ / ca ] m]) $k 3 -3B Lo / co cli \ j / ) 10- / 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 �p3 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 1 Low Density Residential DU 18,347 17,838 509 - 2.77% 21 Medium Density Residential DU 12,859 12;835 24 -0.19% 3 Apartment DU 13,374 11,657 1,717 - 12.84% 4 Elderly Residential DU 200 200 0.00% 5 Mobile Home DU 455 455 0.00% TOTAL DWELLING UNITS DU 45,235 42,985 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 1,633.840 1,633.840 0.00 °A 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 DealerfSales TSF 227.170 227170 - 0.00% 17 Yacht Club TSF 70.310 1 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° 25 Research & Development TSF 81.730 81.730 0.00% 26 Industrial TSF 1,956.092 1,099.427 856.665 - 43.79% 27 Mini-Storage/Warehouse TSF 196.420 196.420 0.00% 28 Pre-schooVDay Care TSF 56.770 56.770 0.00% 29 Elements /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 78.8401 78.840 0.00% 33 Post Office TSF 73.700 73.700 0.00% 34 Hospital BED 1,265 1,265 -59 0.00% 35 Nursin /Conv. Home BEDS 661 602 -8.93% 36 Church TSF 467.210 467.210 0.00% 37 Youth Ctr. /Service TSF 166.310 166.310 0.00, 38 Park ACRE 94.920 92.250 2.670 -2.81% 39 Re ional Park ACRE 45.910 45.910 0.000 40 Goff 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:WcJobsl_012001012321Ex l\ [01232- 18.xls]T4 -1 4 -2 M ttt, TABLE 4-2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING NBTM CODE' DESCRIPTION UNITS 2 2002 QUANTITY TRUE MINIMUM QUANTITY GROWTH °k GROWTH 1 Low Density Residential DU 17,1241 17,838 714 4.17% 2 Medium Density Residential DU 9,535 12,835 3,300 34.61% 3 Apartment DU 9,199 11,657 2,458 26.72% 4 Elderly Residential DU 200 200 - 0.00% 5 Mobile Home DU 6001 455 145 - 24.17% TOTAL DWELLING UNITS DU 36,658 42,9851 6,327 17.26 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% 24 Medical/Government Office TSF 795.926 848.986 53.060 6.67% 25 Research & Development TSF 81.730 - 0.00% 26 Industrial TSF 1,291.079 191.652 - 14.84% 27 Mini-Storage/Warehouse TSF 196.420 - 0.00% 28 Pre--school Day Care TSF 55.820 E798."4840 0.950 1.70% 29 Elements /Private School STU 4,399 56 1.28% 30 Junior/High School STU 4,765 - 0.00% 31 Cultural /Learn Center TSF 35.000 5.000 14.29% 32 Libra TSF 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 NJ 40 Golf Course ACRE 305.330 298.290 7.04 _2.yj%Ji 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: W cJcbs�_012oow 1232 \Ezcen[0 1232.1 8.XisIT4-2 4 -3 {'D5 \,in 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 Trip 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. 4-4 lD� TABLE 4 -3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH' LAND USE BASED SOCIOECONOMIC DATA SUMMARYICOMPARISON VARIABLE 2002 QUANTITY TRUE MINIMUM QUANTITY GROWTH % GROWTH Occupied Single Family Dwelling Units 15,970 16,707 737 5% Occupied Multi-Family Dwelling Units 18,294 23,454 5,160 28% TOTAL OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS 34,264 40,161 5,897 17% Group Quarters Population 661 661 0 0% Population 75,211 87,343 12,132 16% Employed Residents 44,635 51,993 7,358 16% Retail Employees 10,970 12,942 1,972 18% Service Employees 17,295 20,706 3,411 20% Other Employees 36,990 42,606 5,616 15% TOTAL EMPLOYEES 65,255 76,254 10,999 17% Elem /Hi h School Students 9,164 9,220 56 1% ' Includes data converted from land use only. Excludes Newport Coast and recent annexation areas. U:\UCJobs\ 01 MOM 232\Exce1 \[01232- 18.x1s]T4 -3 4 -5 l �7 \�ti TABLE 4-4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRUE MINIMUM TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY TRIP PURPOSE DAILY TRIP ENDS GROWTH PERCENT GROWTH EXISTING TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN 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 - Other Productions 91,218 111,105 19,887 21.80% Other - Other Attractions 89,734 109,499 19,765 22.03% TOTAL PRODUCTIONS 339,8631 426,520 86,657 25.50% TOTAL ATTRACTIONS 347,2781 415,8481 68,570 19.74% OVERALL TOTAL 687,1411 842,3681 155,2271 22.59% / 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. WUcJobs \_ 01200 \01232 \Excel\[01232- 18.xls1T4 -4 4 -6 i N l2i 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 GENERALPLAN 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 ProduGtions2 174,257 168,175 -6,082 - 3.49% Home Based Other Attractions 138,334 131,960 -6,374 4.61% Work Based Other Productions 65,482 62,537 -2,945 -4.50% Work Based Other Attractions 71,335 68,034 -3,301 -4.63% Other - Other Productions 116,275 111,105 -5,170 -4.45% Other - Other Attractions 114,558 109,499 - 5,059 - 4.42% TOTAL PRODUCTIONS 444,457 426,520 17,937 4.04016 [TOTAL ATTRACTIONS 435,302 415,848 - 19,454 -4.476/0 OVERALL TOTAL 1 879,7591 842,368 - 37,397 -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 \Excel \[01232- 18.xlsIT4 -5 4 -7 ��1 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 4 -8 Q W #. M i 4 zy m N m � W Q W L OI O LL N W T fi W o LuO WL19U�GV p N Q 1LU N N N^ Cg L" y 41' N V n c V Z � V V o r e' ^ M , l ' y ry �' O V On23ao BWbT , ^ m m !1 N JV 'AbO tAt W � ^ � MAiM06 "..•m � m t7 £ Ol N m 'KKiNlAB M .. M i1.4W1 � fp N O m Ol N Oi'. h CC G � 'M HLLYLL ON N p� NW }W3'iB LMtlMi11 � � � r N 'WWMJx6 ^ N 1,: W 4 -9 z iti; TABLE 4-6 (PAGE 1 OF 4) TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON LOCATION ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) BUILDOUT FORECAST CHANGE % CHANGE 16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.) 6,000 6,000 0 0.00/0 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 5,000 0 0.00/0 vocado 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 0.00/0 Birch St. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 20,000 20,000 0 0.00/0 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 0.00/0 Bison Ave. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 17,000 17,000 0 0.00/0 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 - 1000/0 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 0.00/0 Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR -73 Fwy.) 27,000 27,000 0 0.00/0 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 Von Kalman Ave.) 22,000 21,000 -1,000 -4.5% Campus Dr. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 31,000 31,000 0 0.00/0 Campus Dr. (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 39,000 39,000 0 0.00/0 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 Superior Ave./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. ) 55,000 54,000 -1,000 1 -1.8 4 -10 U; TABLE 4-6 (PAGE 2 OF 4) TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON LOCATION ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) BUILDOUT FORECAST CHANGE % CHANGE Coast Hwy. (Dover Dr. to Bayside Dr.) 78,000 76,000 -2,000 -24°/ Coast Hwy. ( Bayside Dr. to Jamboree Rd.) 64,000 63,000 -1,000 -1.6% 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 42,000 -1,000 -2.3% Coast Hwy. (Avocado Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 45,000 44,000 -1,000 -2.2% Coast Hwy. (MacArthur Blvd. to Goldenrod Ave.) 48,000 46,000 - 2,000 4.2% Coast Hwy. (Goldenrod Ave. to Marguerite Ave.) 46,000 45,000 -1,000 -2.2° 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 0.00/0 Dover Dr. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.) 24,000 24,000 0 0.00/0 Dover Dr. (16th St. to Cliff Dr.) 28,000 28,000 0 0.00/0 Dover Dr. (Cliff Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 33,000 33,000 0 0.0% 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 - 50.00/0 Highland Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 2,000 2,000 0 0.0°!° Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 18,000 18,000 0 0.00/0 Hospital Rd. (east of Newport Blvd.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.00/0 Irvine Ave. (Bristol St. South to Mesa Dr.) 38,000 37,000 -1,000 -2.6% Irvine Ave. (Mesa Dr. to University Dr.) 41,000 40,000 -1,000 -2.4% 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 32,000 -1,000 -3.0% Irvine Ave. (Santiago Dr. to Highland Dr.) 32,000 32,000 0 0.00/0 Irvine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.) 32,000 32,000 0 0.00/0 Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr. to Westcliff Dr.) 28,000 28,000 0 0.0% Irvine Ave. (Westcliff Dr, to 16th St.) 13,000 13,000 0 0.0% Jamboree Rd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 47,000 47,000 0 0.0% (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 54,000 54,000 0 0.0% Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to Bristol St. North) 43,000 43,000 0 0.0% ERd. Rd. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 51,000 52,000 1,000 2.0% Rd. (Bristol St. South to Bayview Wy.) 56,000 56,000 0 0.0°/ Rd. ( Bayview Wy. to University Dr.) 56,000 56,000 0 0.0°/ Rd. (University Dr. to Bison Ave.) 41,000 41,000 0 0.0% Jamboree Rd. (Bison Ave, to Ford Rd.) 45,000 45,000 0 0.0% Jamboree Rd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 55,000 55,000 0 0.00/0 Jamboree Rd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to Santa Barbara Dr.) 43,000 43,000 0 0.00/0 Jamboree Rd. (Santa Barbara Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 42,000 42,000 0 0.0% Jamboree Rd. ( Coast Hwy. to Bayside Dr.) 15,000 15,000 0 0.0% MacArthur Blvd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 33,000 33,000 0 0.0% MacArthur Blvd. (Birch St. to Von Karman Ave.) 26,000 26,000 0 0.0% MacArthur Blvd. (Von Karman Ave. to Jamboree Rd. 32,000 32,000 0 0.0% 4 -11 t�3 1-15 TABLE 4-6 (PAGE 3 OF 4) TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON LOCATION ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) 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 0.00/0 MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 74,000 73,000 -1,000 -1.4% MacArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 60,000 60,000 0 0.0% IMacArthur 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 0.00/0 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% ewport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 17,000 17,000 0 0.00/0 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 0.0% Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 2,000 0 0.0% Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.00/0 ISan Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz. Rd.) 17,000 17,000 0 0.00/0 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.) 12,000 12,000 0 0.00/0 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 -5.3% San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.00/0 San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.00/0 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 0.00/0 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 0.00/0 Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave. to Irvine Ave.) 6,000 6,000 0 0.00/0 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.) 28,000 28,000 0 0.0% 4 -12 4/q' TABLE 4-6 (PAGE 4 OF 4) TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON OCATION ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) BUILDOUT FORECAST CHANGE % CHANGE ustin Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) [Via 3,000 3,000 0 0.0% niversity Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 3,000 3,000 0 0.0% niversity Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 15,000 15,000 0 0.0% Lido (east of Newport Blvd.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.0% Von Karman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 18,000 18,000 0 0.0°/ on Karman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 16,000 16,000 0 0.0% 'I tcliff Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr. 16,000 16,000 0 0.0% U:IUcJobsl 012001012325 Excell[01232- 18.xis]T4 -6 4 -13 4t" TABLE 4 -7 (PAGE 1 OF 4) TRUE MINIMUM 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 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 0.00/0 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 5.60/ 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 Karman 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 5.3% Birch St. (south of Bristol St. South) 15,000 16,000 1,000 6.7% ison 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 DrArvine 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 50.00/o 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 24.40/c Coast Hwy. (Tustin Ave. to Dover Dr.) 42,000 54,000 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 4 -14 6 \ vK TABLE 4 -7 (PAGE 2 OF 4) TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION EXISTING (200112002) COUNT BUILDOUT FORECAST GROWTH % GROWTH Coast Hwy. (Avocado Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 36,000 44,000 8,000 22.2% Coast Hwy. (MacArthur Blvd. to Goldenrod Ave.) 40,000 46,000 6,000 15.0% Coast Hwy. (Goldenrod Ave. to Marguerite Ave.) 39,000 45,000 6,000 15.40/ 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 Westcliff Dr.) 9,000 11,000 2,000 22.2% Dover Dr. (Westcliff Dr. 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 33,000 4,000 13.8% 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 18,000 5,000 38.5 %', Hospital Rd. (east of Newport Blvd.) 7,000 10,000 3,000 42.9% Irvine Ave. (Bristol St. South to Mesa Dr.) 27,000 37,000 10,000 37.0% Irvine Ave. (Mesa Dr. to University Dr.) 31,000 40,000 9,000 29.00/c 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 32,000 3,000 10.3% 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 Westcliff Dr.) 22,000 28,000 6,000 27.3% Irvine Ave. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.) 12,000 13,000 1,000 8.3% Jamboree Rd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St) 36,000 47,000 11,000 30.6% 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 43,000 7,000 19.40/ amboree Rd. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 47,000 52,000 5,000 10.6% Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. South to Bayview Wy.) 47,000 56,000 9,000 19.1% Jamboree Rd. ( Bayview Wy. to University Dr.) 47,000 56,000 9,000 19.1% Jamboree Rd. (University Dr. to Bison Ave.) 37,000 41,000 4,000 10.8% Jamboree Rd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 39,000 45,000 6,000 15.40/ Jamboree Rd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 46,000 55,000 9,000 19.6% Jamboree Rd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to Santa Barbara Dr.) 34,000 43,000 9,000 26.5% Jamboree Rd. (Santa Barbara Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 32,000 42,000 10,000 31.3% Jamboree Rd. ( Coast Hwy. to Bayside Dr.) 12,000 15,000 3,000 25.0% MacArthur Blvd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 27,000 33,000 6,000 22.2% MacArthur Blvd. (Birch St. to Von Karman Ave.) 22,000 26,000 4,000 18.2% MacArthur Blvd. (Von Karman Ave. to Jamboree Rd.) 26,000 32,000 6,000 23.1% MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.) 27,000 35,000 8,000 29.60/c MacArthur Blvd. (north of Bison Ave.) 61,000 74,000 13,000 21.3% MacArt hur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 63,000 73,000 10,000 15.9% MacArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 54,000 60,000 6,000 11.1% MacArthur Blvd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to San Miguel Rd.) 35,000 38,000 3,000 8.6 "/0 MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd. to Coast H 31,0 38 000 7,000 1 22.60 117 4 -15 R �L TABLE 4 -7 (PAGE 3 OF 4) TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION EXISTING (2001/2002) COUNT BUILDOUT FORECAST GROWTH % GROWTH Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 7,000 7,000 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 25.00/a Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 43,000 52,000 9,000 20.9% Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lida) 48,000 52,000 4,000 8.3% Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.) 36,000 37,000 1,000 2.8°/ ewport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.) 29,000 30,000 1,000 14% 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 50.00/0 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 0.00/0 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 42.90/6 Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 7,000 10,000 3,000 42.9 % ISan 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% Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.) 19,000 20,000 1,000 5.3°/ FSan an 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 % Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 41000 4,000 0 0.00/0 Superior Ave. (north of Placentia Ave.) 17,000 19,000 2,000 11.80/ ISpyglass Superior Ave. (Placentia Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 22,000 28,000 6,000 27.3 % SuperioT Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast H 24,000 28,000 4,000 1 16.7% 4 -16 Y�� TABLE 4 -7 (PAGE 4 OF 4) TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION EXISTING (200112002) COUNT BUILDOUT FORECAST GROWTH % GROWTH ustin Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 3,000 1,000 50.0°1 University Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 3,000 3,000 0 0.0% niversity Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 11,000 15,000 4,000 36.4% is Lido (east of Newport Blvd.) 8,000 10,000 2,000 Von Karman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 14,000 18,000 4,000 28.60 Von Kalman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 12,000 16,000 4,000 33.3% WestcliffDr. Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr. 16,000 16, 0 0.0°/ U:%UcJobsl 01200\012321Excell [01232- 18.xlsjT4 -7 4 -17 �� 1 m Ian to 00 MOP >< LU caw Zv om LU Z L" %D&u , II R C; 4-18 �2 O Lu Lu _j R C; 4-18 �2 O 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 419 I� 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 compared with 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 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) (AMIPM) • 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 TABLE 4.8 (PAGE t OF 2) TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN 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 DNE' N/A 1.29 DNE N/A 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.64 0.74 0.10 0.68 0.86 0.18 . Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 1.01 0.98 -0.03 0.99 0.94 -0.05 4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. 0.79 0.79 0.00 0.97 0.96 -0.01 5. Newport BI. & Via Lido 0.54 0.52 -0.02 0.46 0.41 -0.05 6. Newport BI. & 32nd St. 0.52 0.46 -0.06 0.71 0.58 -0.13 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.03 1.01 -0.02 1.12 1.10 -0.02 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.02 1.01 -0.01 0.85 0.83 -0.02 9. MacArthur Bl. & Campus Dr. 0.76 0.75 -0.01 1.25 1.25 0.0 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St 0.71 0.70 -0.01 0.80 0.80 0. 11. Von Karman Av. & Ca us Dr. 0.66 0.64 -0.02 0.93 0.94 0.01 12. MacArthur BI. & Von Karman 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 0.80 0.80 0.0 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. 0.96 0.% 0.00 1,08 1.08 0. 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. 0.92 0.93 0.01 0.72 0.72 0.0 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 0.00 053 0.53 0. 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.68 0.68 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 20. It Av. & LIniversity 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 -0.0 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.63 0.63 0. 3. 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 0.82 0.80 -0.02 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 0.39 0.40 0.011 0.56 0.57 0.01 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.64 0.64 0.001 0.64 0.65 0.01 7. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw, 0.86 0.84 -0.02 0.90 0.88 -0.02 28. Ba ide Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.83 0.82 -0.01 0.94 0.93 -0 -01 29. MacArthur BL & Jamboree Rd. 0.96 0.97 0.01 0.99 0.99 0. 30. Jamboree Rd. &Bristol St. 0.70 0.71 0.01 0.69 0.68 -0.01 31. Ba iew PI. & Bristol St. S 0.60 0.59 -0.01 0.63 0.63 0.00 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S 0.96 0.97 0.01 0.85 0.84 -0.01 33. Jamboree Rd. & Ba iew W . 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.70 0.70 0. 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 0.581 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 Jos uin Hills Rd. 0.61 0.60 -0.01 0.651 0.65 0.0 4 -21 G^3 tai TABLE 4.8 (PAGE 2 OF 2) TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN INTERSECTION NS /EW AM PEAK HOUR .PM PEAK HOUR CURRENTLY ADOPTED FORECAST TRUE MINIMUM I DELTA CURRENTL ADOPTED FORECAST I 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 -0.0 0. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 0.34 -0.02 0.34 0.34 0. 1. 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 5. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.77 0.791 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 0.01 029 0.29 0.00 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.78 0.77 -0.01 0.80 0.80 0. 9. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.77 0.77 0.00 1.06 1.06 0. 0. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.77 0.77 0.00 1.04 1.02 -0.02 51. MacArthur BI. & San 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 Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.53 0.52 -0.01 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.59 0.57 -0.02 55. San Nfiguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.30 0.30 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.0 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.52 0.51 -0.01 0.68 0.68 0. 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-Marguerite Av. & Coast Hw. 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. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.67 0.68 0.01 0.76 0.75 -0.01 2. N ort Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB s 0.54 0.54 O.00 0.40 0.39 -0.01 64. N rt Coast Dr. & San Joa uin Hills Rd. 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.47 0.46 -0.01 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.57 0.57 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.00 tDNE = Does Not Exist U:1UcJobsl_0 1 20 0101 2 3 21Exce11 [01232- 18.xis]T4 -8 4_22 1P %'p TABLE 4 -9 (PAGE 1 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 . Superior A, & Placentia Av. 0.66 0.74 0.08 0.671 0.86 0.19 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 0.84 0.98 0.14 0.901 0.94 0.0 4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. 0.54 0.79 0.25 0.70 0.96 0.26 5. Newport BI. & Via Lido 0.41 0.52 0.11 0.37 0.41 0.04 6. Newport BI. & 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. 0.80 1.01 0.21 0.67 0.83 0.16 9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr. 0.61 0.75 0.14 0.85 1.25 0.40 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0.49 0,701 0.21 0.661 0.80 0.1 11. Von Kaman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.55 0.64 0.09 0.791 0.94 0.15 12. MacArthur BI. & Von Karman Av. 0.46 0.54 0.08 0.531 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 0.27 0.61 0.72 0.11 17. Ca us Dr./Irvihe Av. & Bristol St. S 0.72 0.91 0.19 0.58 0.76 0.18 18. Biroh St. &Bristol St. S 0.46 0.52 0.06 0.44 0.53 0.0 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.70 0.68 -0.02 0.941 0.90 -0.04 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 0.82 1.15 0.33 0,891 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 0.09 0.77 0.80 0.03 5. Dover Dr. & W estcliff Dr. 0.38 0.40 0.02 0.48 0.57 0.0 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 0.741 0.88 0.14 28. Bayside Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.69 0.82 0.13 0.701 0.93 0.23 29. MacArthur BI. & 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. 31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. S 0 -48 0.59 0.11 0.56 0.63 0.0 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S 0.75 0.97 0.22 0.72 0.84 0.12 33. Jamboree Rd. & Ba 'ew W . 0.41 0.48 0.07 0.57 0.70 0.13 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr. 0.60 0.05 0.64 0.68 0.04 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.45 0.05 0.51 0.58 0.07 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff DrJFord Rd. 0.69 40.60 0.07 0.65 0.73 0.08 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.80 -0.201 1.001 0.65 -0.35 4 -23 U-5 11s, TABLE 4-9 (PAGE 2 OF 2) TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO EXISTING INTERSECTION NS/EW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR EXISTING COUNT FUTURE FORECAST DELTA EXISTING COUNT FUTURE FORECAST DELTA M. 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 0.1 0. 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. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.40 0.50 0.10 0.52 0.62 0.1 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0,33 0.38 0.05 0.72 0.78 0.0 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.58 0.78 0.20 0.661 0.79 0.13 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.31 0.47 0.16 0.37 0.56 0.19 47. SR -73 SB Ram p5 & Bison Av. 0.26 0.39 0.13 0.17 0.29 0.12 8. MacArthur Bl. & Bison Av. 0.63 0.77 0.14 0.60 0.80 0.2 49. MacArhtur Bl. & Ford Rd.Bomta Canyon Dr. 0.71 0.77 0.06 0.90 1.06 0.1 50. MacArthur Bl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.64 0.77 0.13 0.93 1.02 0.09 5 L MacArthur Bl. & San Miguel Dr. 0.56 0.62 0.06 0.65 0.76 0.11 52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw. 0.60 0.74 0.14 0.711 0.80 0.0 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.55 0.69 0.14 0.431 0.52 0. 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 0.1 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 0.99 1.06 0.07 0.69 0.75 0.06 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.31 0.38 0.07 0.35 0.49 0.14 59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw- 0.83 0.981 0.05 0.82 0.90 0.08 0. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.44 0.59 0.151 0.301 0.45 0.15 1. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 1 0.61 0.68 0.07 0.651 0.75 0.1 62. Ne ort Caast Dr. & SR -73 NB Ra s 0.45 0.54 0.09 0.31 0.39 0.08 64. N orl Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.37 0.63 0.26 0.29 0.46 0.17 1165. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw, 0.47 0.57 0.10 0.501 0.60 0.10 U:1UcJobsl 012001012321Excell [01232- 18,xls]T4 -9 4 -24 f3Y TABLE 4 -10 (PAGE 1 OF 2) TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY INTERSECTION (NSIEW) AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ICU LOS ICU LOS 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.74 C 0.86 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 6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St. 0.46 A 0.58 A 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.01 F 1.10 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 11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.64 B 0.94 12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Karman Av, 0.54 A 0.64 B 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.93 E 1.23 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch st. 0.80 C 0.80 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. 0.96 E 1.08 F 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. 0.93 E 0.72 17. Campus Dr. /Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S 0.91 E 0.76 18. Birch St. & Bristol St S 0.52 A 0.53 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.681 B 0.901 D 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.15 F 1.161 F 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.69 B 0.76 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.61 B 0.63 B 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr, 0.78 C 0.71 C 4. Irvine Av. & WestcliffDr. 0.66 B 0.80 25. Dover Dr. & WestciiffDr. 0.401 A 0.57 A 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St, 0,641 B 0.65 B 27, Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.84 D 0.88 D 28. Bayside 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 0.681 B 31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. S 0.59 A 0.63 B 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S 0.971 E 0.84 D 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview 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 Al 0.58 A 36. Jamboree Rd. & EastbluffDr./Ford Rd. 0.76 Cl 0.73 C 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.60 Al 0.65 B 4 -25 197 10 TABLE 4 -10 (PAGE 2 OF 2) TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY INTERSECTION (NS/EW) AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ICU I LOS ICU LOS 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.54 A 0.71 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.851 D 0.87 D 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.34 A 0.34 1. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 A 0.70 B 2. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 A 0.62 B 4. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.38 A 0.75 C 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.78 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 Bt. & Bison Av. 0.77 C 0.901 C 9. MacArhtur Bl. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.77 C 1.06 F 50. MacArthur Bl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.77 C 1.02 51. MacArthur Bl. & San Miguel Dr. 0.62 B 0.76 C 52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw. 0.741 C 0.80 53. SR -73 NB RanVs & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.69 B 0.52 A 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & 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 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.391 A 0.49 A 59.Mgguerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.88 D 0.90 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.59 A 0.45 A 61. Poppy Av, & Coast Hw. 0.68 B 0.75 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Ramps 0.54 A 0.39 A 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.63 B 0.46 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 1 0.571 Al 0.601 A U:1UcJobs\ 01200\012321Excel 1[01232- 18.x1s)T4 -10 4 -26 X00 ��0 UWVA =az w1V W li � W 2 W Z W W � V �IL F H Z' W CL 0 I l aatlUYA3N 4 -27 0 AV W W � �L N {/� {zN 6 d ¢ d LU w 0 -m U 0 U LL U a a N O 2 5 d l .41 • 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). 4 -28 130 AV . TABLE 4-11 (PAGE 1 OF 2) TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY INTERSECTION NSIEW 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 . 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 Bl. & 32nd St. 0.46 0.46 0.00 0.58 0.58 0.0 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 Bl. & Campus Dr. 0.75 0.73 -0.02 1.251 0.87 -0.38 10. MacArthur Bl. & Birch St. 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.801 0.80 0.00 11. Von Karman Av. & Cam us Dr. 0.64 0.61 -0.03 0.94 0.89 -0.05 12. MacArthur BI. & Von Karman Av. 0.54 0.54 0.00 0.64 0.64 0. 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 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. 0.96 0.88 -0.08 1.08 0.85 -023 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N ) 0.93 0.78 -0.15 0.72 0.70 -0.0 17. Campus Dr. /hvine Av. & Bristol St. S 0.91 0.85 -0.061 0.76 0.76 0.0 18. Birch St. & Bri stol St S 0.52 0.52 0.001 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 1.161 0.83 -0.33 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.69 0.54 -0.15 0.76 0.57 -0.1 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.631 0.63 0. 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.711 0.71 0.00 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.64 0.64 0.00 0.65 0.65 0. 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.84 0.84 0.00 0.88 0.88 0.00 28. Ba ide Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.82 0.81 -0.01 0.93 0.89 -0.04 9. 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. 31. Ba iew Pl. & Bristol SL 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 3. Jamboree Rd. & Ba iew W . 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.70 0.70 0.00 34. Jamboree Rd. & EastbluffDr. /University Dr. 0.65 0.65 0.00 0.68 0.68 0. 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.58 0.58 0.00 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd. 0.76 0.76 0.00 0.73 0.73 0.00 1137. Jamboree Rd. & San Joa vin Hills Rd. 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.65 0.65 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 4 -29 t� r ia5� 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. & Coast Hw. 0.85 0.85 0.00 0.87 0.87 0.00 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd, 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.0 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.70 0.70 0.00 2. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.62 0.62 0. 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.78 0.78 0.0 5. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.79 0.79 0.00 6. 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. 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.29 0.29 0.0 48. MacArthur Bl. & Bison Av. 0.77 0.77 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 9. MacArhtur Bl. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.77 0.71 -0.06 1.06 0.86 -0.21 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.77 0.66 -0.111 1.021 0.83 -0.19 51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.62 0.62 0.00 0.76 0.76 0.00 52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw. 0.74 0.74 0.00 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. 0.45 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 6. 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 0,751 0.75 .0.00 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.49 0.49 0.0 59.Mar erite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.88 0.88 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 0. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.59 0.59 0.00 0,45 0.45 0. 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 Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.46 0.46 0.00 65. N ort Coast Dr. &Coast Hw. 0.57 0.57 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.00 U: \UcJobst 01200\ 01232 \Excel\101232- iB.xls]T4 -11 4 -30 G lv(Y N LL O w Q a N a W J m a N z Z W 2 LU 0 a J z O H 0 Q Y S W z W a a N z W IL O S W F z w W J Q Z E W n 4 -31 iii`' ai m 0= N m Z m w O L Oi Cm � C d c E O m to a w m Oi 0) 0) 0> _� (D 01 O @ m m C C C N C C C W N 07 C 0i i C m L@ 0) m C C 01 C 0) ..: rLn ` L d C C c�mmy mfOmEEEm C OS c �"'cccc10m�m c =om mom cm Q1w C L O W.O. �� 7 �mLN 0) 0] =L E _ > L O r- > O` > O- .c 3 -a O Q L 7 L 7 7 O) O O c r m � > z— ._. 2 O C _c S- -m 0) p L O O O C .O 0) O per 0) N W�lmll dm r' ymmm Lmmmmmmmm a C p ��07In to Z W�Z �wwfnW HZi�Z3zzww z�w � o cm'2G'2 m��m�inv~~-p -p m '6 •c =� c R �f'iN co d'M0 Zv M m �I1 �M MM C m CO 21 2 2 CD N W N W c c c c Vi N to c c c N c uJ c c C c M C c N c O O O O D O 0 0 0 c 0 c c c c 0 0 0 0 c c c 0 0 0 c c 0 0 c 0 c c w m yr c cN c c c UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU�Ua'U 0 0 01 L 0) O 0 0 0 01 0 W N Z �jwW m W O w W W o3 v w W v W j � m W W U CO ��-' �_ 3 ur a Z m� 3 y _ � Z $ c Z ca O CU NU OfU ` co Z m U m =m co m as U m °in L) Uzi `° m �? m U z z Z z Q? z i6 Z m N z z Z 'o > Zap cm m cy z m It ? [Ugmo)� N =3 -a > of n Ey E E oai> z 2 F 2> U m v Z m 4 -31 iii`' N LL 0 N W 0 a IL N r a w J m a r N r z w w 0 a a J a z 0 OQ Q Y a 0 z Z W V a a N z W CL O x r 3 W Q Z 4S W J Q g Z 9 W F N r H N X ro N N N O m U W M N O O O N o� N a 0 U 4 -32 t3q to 5.0 SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (POST -20251 ALTERNATIVE WITH OPEN SPACE NETWORK SCENARIO This chapter presents subarea minimum (as defined in the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) aftematives) 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 ` iSe TABLE 5 -1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE COMPARISON NBTM CODE' DESCRIPTION UNITS 2 ADOPTED QUANTITY SUBAREA MINIMUM QUANTITY I CHANGE % CHANGE 1 Low Densi Residential DU 18,347 17,833 514 -2.80% 2 Medium Density Residential DU 12,859 12,9031 44 0.34% 3 Apartment DU 13,374 15,281 1 1,907 1426% 4 Elderly Residential DU 200 200 0.00% 5 Mobile Home DU 455 455 0.00% TOTAL DWELLING UNITS DU 45,235 46,6721 1,437 3.18% 6 Motel ROOM 139 194 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 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 0.000/0 17 Yacht Club TSF 70.310 70.310 - 0.00% 18 Health Club TSF 61.330 61.330 0.007% 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 Medical/GovemmentOffice TSF 910.616 837.696 72.920 - 8.01% 25 Research & Development TSF 81.730 61.730 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 ElementarylPrivate 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°1° 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 661 602 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 Regional Park IACRE 45.910 45.910 - 0.00% 40 Got[ Course ACRE 298.290 298.290 0.00 °k ' 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:%Lr o s%_0120001232sExcen [01232- 18.ws]T5.1 5_Z 136 �.t9 TABLE 5.2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING NBTM CODE' DESCRIPTION UNITS' 2002 QUANTITY MINIMUM QUANTITY GROWTH % GROWTH 1 Low Density Residential DU 17,124 17,833 709 4.14% 2 Medium DensitV Residential 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 Motel ROOM 134 194 60 44.780/6 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 99.410 100.04% 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 70.3101 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 - 0.000% 23 General Office TSF 10,865.733 12,614.019 1,748.286 16.09% 24 Medical /Government Office TSF 795.926 837.696 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 -Stour e/Warehouse TSF 196.420 196.420 0.00°% 28 Pre-srhool/Day Care TSF 55.820 56.770 0.950 1.70% 29 Elements /Private School STU 4,399 4,455 56 1.28% 30 Junior/High School STU 4,765 4,765 - 0.000% 31 Culturaill-earning Center TSF 35.000 40.000 5.000 14290% 32 Library TSF 78.840 78.840 0.00% 33 Post Office TSF 53.700 63.800 10.100 18.810% 34 Hospital BED 351 1,265 914 260.40% 35 Nursi /Conv. Home BEDS 661 602 59 -8.93% 36 1 Church ITS F 377.760 441.200 63.440 16.79°% 37 Youth Ctr. /Service ITS F 149.560 166.310 16.750 11.20°% 38 Park ACRE 113.970 112.250 1.720 - 1.51% 39 Regional Park JACRE - 45.910 45.910 N/ 40 Golf Course JACRE 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. 2 Units Abbreviations: DU = Dwelling Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet CRT = Court STU = Students UAW OM-0 NOI232.18ASITSz 5 -3 137 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 Trio 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 IV +� TABLE 5 -3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH' SUBAREA MINIMUM LAND USE BASED SOCIOECONOMIC DATA SUMMARYICOMPARISON VARIABLE 2002 QUANTITY MINIMUM QUANTITY GROWTH %GROWTH Occupied Single Fa ily Dwelling Units 15,970 16,702 732 5 °l0 Occupied Multi-Family Dwelling Units 18,294 26,919 8,625 47% TOTAL OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS 1 34,2641 43,621 9,357 27% Group Quarters Population 661 602 -59 -9% Population 75,211 93,271 18,060 24% Employed Residents 44,635 56,169 11,534 26% Retail Employees 10,970 13,398 2,428 22% Service Employees 17,295 21,750 4,455 26% Other Lrnployees 36,990 44,694 7,704 21% TOTAL EMPLOYEES 65,255 79,842 14,587 22% Elem /Hi h School Students 9,164 9,2201 56 1% ' Includes data converted from land use only. Excludes Newport Coast and recent annexation areas. U ,.\UcJohsl 01200\01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.XISIT5 -3 5 -5 137 1�� 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 27,263 24.84% Work 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 89,734 114,154 24,420 27.21 TOTAL PRODUCTIONS 339,8631 446,7971 106,934 1 31.460/c TOTAL ATTRACTIONS 347,2781 433,2881 86,0101 24.77% OVERALL TOTAL 1 687,1411 880,0851 192,9441 28.08% 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. WUcJobsl 01200101232 1Excell01232- 18.x1s]T5 -4 5 -6 �LJA i'�1� 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 2.47% 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 Productions 174,257 175,256 999 0.57% Home Based Other Attractions 138,334 137,098 -1,236 -0.89% Work Based Other Productions 65,482 65,124 -358 -0.55% Work Based Other Attractions 71,335 71,209 -126 -0.18% Other - Other Productions 116,275 115,843 -432 -0.37% Other - Other Attractions 114,558 114,154 -404 -0.35% OTAL PRODUCTIONS 444,4571 446,797 2,340 0.53% TOTAL ATTRACTIONS 435,3021 433,288 -2,014 -0.46% OVERALL TOTAL 879,7591 880,085 326 0.040/j 6 Home -Work includes Home -Work and Home - University trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice oul 2 Home -Other includes Home -Shop and Home -Other trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output. UAUcJobs\ 01200\01232\Excel \101 232-1 8.AsIT5.5 5 -7 3 4K 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 Buildout 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 w Z iz _V W W Ali aid � W W =a, N m z I e; w IXYSi -V W l N O ill O R @ r 6 G O N F W Z u W W IW N ! LU S. W s I J o 1 •i W \ t4i N � ^ m � •' a W a 0 it ^ R q ^ v nn�iuoerm' i 1\ <\ W W `n n it ^ j ov va Werin m -. W M 9w 1 p ;t / Z NI � 'M XLL91LL W N ^ asv91911gtl/nix W YNY@@GGn@ N I (Wp � 99M ' V N m R {7 193M1BJL06NiN p ' Z m � a o 6 $q7 y I ..1 z W � x O Q a W O 5 -9 TABLE 5 -6 (PAGE 1 OF 4) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON 11LOCATION ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) SUBAREA MINIMUM FORECAST CHANGE % I 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 0.00/0 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 15.00/c 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% Tuff 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 - 100.00/0 Bluff Rd. (17th St. to 19th St.) 12,000 0 - 12,000 - 100.00/0 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 0.00/0 Bristol St. South (east of Birch St.) 22,000 22,000 0 0.00/0 ristol 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 0.00/0 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 6 0.00/0 Coast Hwy. (west of Bluff Rd.) 60,000 56,000 4,000 -6.7% Coast Hwy. (Bluff Rd. to Superior AveJBalboa Blvd.) 61,000 56,000 -5,000 -8.2% Coast Hwy. (Superior Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 41,000 40,000 -1,000 -2.4% 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 Oj 0.0% 5 -10 j `76V TABLE 5-6 (PAGE 2 OF 4) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON LOCATION ADOPTED {CONSTRAINED) SUBAREA MINIMUM 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% t 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 0.00/0 Coast Hwy (cast of Newport Coast Dr.) 44,000 44,000 0 0.0% over Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Westcliff Dr.) 11,000 11,000 0 0.0% over Dr. (WestcliffDr. to 16th St.) 24,000 24,000 0 0.0% Dover Dr. (16th St. to Cliff Dr.) 28,000 28,000 0 OR°/ Dover Dr. (Cliff Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 33,000 34,000 1,000 3.0% astbluffDr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at University Dr.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.0° /u Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at Ford Rd.) 15,000 15,000 0 0.0 °/a 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 0.00/0 Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 18,000 19,000 1,000 5.6% Hospital Rd. (east of Newport Blvd.) 10,000 11,000 1,000 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° /a 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 0.00/0 Irvine Ave. (Santiago Dr. to Highland Dr.) 32,000 32,000 0 0.00/0 Irvine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.) 32,000 32,000 0 0.0% Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr. to WestcliffDr.) 28,000 29,000 1,000 3.6% Irvine Ave. (WestcliffDr. 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 1.80/0 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% amboree 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% acArthur Blvd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 33,000 35,000 2,000 6.1% acArthur 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 3.1% 5 -11 ' Lb k5" TABLE 5-6 (PAGE 3 OF 4) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON LOCATION ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) SUBAREA MINIMUM FORECAST CHANGE MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.) 35,000 36,000 1,000 F1.77E0% MacArthur Blvd. (north of Bison Ave.) 74,000 75,000 1,000 MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 74,000 74,000 0 acArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 60,000 61,000 1,000 MacArthur Blvd. (San Jo aquin Hills Rd. to San Miguel Rd.) 39,000 38,000 -1,000 -2.60/a 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 0.00/0 Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.) 46,000 47,000 1,000 2.2% ewport 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% Newport 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% ewport 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 9.1% 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 0.00/0 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 0.00/0 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 0.00/v 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 0.00/ San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.) 20,000 20,000 0 0.00/0 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 0.00/0 Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 4,000 4,000 0 0.00/0 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 H M l00 28,000 0 0.0% 5 -12 l �� TABLE 5 -6 (PAGE 4 OF 4) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON LOCATION ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) SUBAREA MINIMUM FORECAST CHANGE % I CHANGE ustin Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 3,000 3,000 0 0.0° University Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 3,000 3,000 0 0.00/0 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 Kerman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 18,000 19,000 1,000 5.6% on Karman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 16,000 17,000 1,000 6.3% estcliff Dr. Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr. 16,000 16,000 0 0.0 U:IUcJobsl_01200\012321ExceR [01232- 18.xls]T5 -6 5-13 �6" TABLE 5.7 (PAGE 1 OF 4) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION EXISTING (200112002) COUNT SUBAREA MINIMUM FORECAST GROWTH % I GROWTH 16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.) 5,000 6,000 1,000 20.00/a 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% vocado 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 0.00/0 Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 11,000 11,000 0 0.0° /a 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 Karman 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 DrArvine 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% ristol St. South (east 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 Karman Ave.) 16,000 22,000 6,000 37.5% Campus Dr. (Von Karman 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 Ave./Balboa 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% 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 22.99% Coast H Avocado Ave. to MacArthur Blvd. 36,000 45,000 9,000 1 25.0% 5 -14 l qtf w9 TABLE 5 -7 (PAGE 2 OF 4) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION EXISTING (200112002) COUNT SUBAREA MINIMUM FORECAST GROWTH % GROWTH Coast Hwy. (MacArthur Blvd. to Goldenrod Ave.) 40,000 46,000 6,000 15.0010 ast Hwy. (Goldenrod Ave. to Marguerite Ave.) 39,000 46,000 7,000 17.9°1 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 Westcliff Dr.) 9,000 11,000 2,000 22.2% Dover Dr. (Westcliff Dr. 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% astbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd, at University Dr.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.00/ 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 0.00/0 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 57.10/ 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 21.201 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 Westcliff Dr.) 22,000 29,000 7,000 31.8% Irvine Ave. (Westcliff Dr. 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 28.60 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 34A% 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 29.60/a MacArthur Blvd. (Birch St. to Von Karman Ave.) 22,000 27,000 5,000 22,7% acArthur Blvd. (Von Kamtan Ave. to Jamboree Rd.) 26,000 33,000 7,000 26.9% acArthur 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% acArthur Blvd. Ave. to Ford Rd.) 63,000 74,000 11,000 17.5% ((Bison MacArthur Blvd. Ford Rd. to San 7oa uin Hiils Rd. 54,000 61,000 7,000 13.0% 5 -15 T-q t'�s` TABLE 5 -7 (PAGE 3 OF 4) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION EXISTING (200112002) I COUNT SUBAREA MINIMUM 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 22.60/, Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 7,000 7,000 0 0.00/0 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 17.20/. 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 70.60! Newport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 15,000 24,000 9,000 60.0% ewport 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 71.4% Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 2,000 0 0.00/0 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 2,000 182°/ San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 21,000 28,000 7,000 33.3% 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 16.70/a 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 l 1,000 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 4,000 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 1 16.7% 5 -16 lUv TABLE 5 -7 (PAGE 4 OF 4) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION EXISTING (200112002) COUNT 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 0.00/0 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 25.001, Von Karman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 14,000 14,000 5,000 35.70 Von Karman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 12,000 17,000 5,000 41.7% WestciiffDr. Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr. 16,000 16,000 0 0.00 U:\U cJobs\-01 200\0 1 232\ExceP401232-1 8.x1s]T5-7 5 -17 151 mM0 F- C= En Q 2 m1 W CA V z 5`� I LU W 9 Qi W& %% �W. 20> ax Z W. N a m M fA O i i � N i N O � � M iXWll O O .101tlOMlill 5 -18 O R tlMtliM6 Z 'W V W J too m° 6 2 7V a Q6 I.i W 7 O U LL 'Q U a O r Wv1- a 0v I/ m� c e mm \ l N' O � � M iXWll O O .101tlOMlill 5 -18 O R tlMtliM6 Z 'W V W J too m° 6 2 7V a Q6 I.i W 7 O U LL 'Q U a O r Wv1- a 0v • 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 �53 �v 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 ►�5w TABLE 5-8 (PAGE 1 OF 2) SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN INTERSECTION NSlEW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR CURRENTLY ADOPTED FORECAST SUBAREA MINIMUM DELTA CURRENTLY ADOPTED FORECAST SUBAREA MINIMUM DELTA 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. 1.27 DNE N/A 1.29 DNE N/A 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.64 0.73 0.09 0.68 0.86 0.18 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 1.01 1.00 -0.01 0.99 0 -95 -0.04 . Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. 0.79 0.84 0.05 0.97 1.01 0.04 5. Newport BI. & Via Lido 0.54 0.55 0.01 0.46 0.45 -0.01 . Newport BI. & 32nd SL 0.52 0.48 70.04 0.71 0.63 -0.08 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.03 1.02 -0.01 1.12 1.15 0.03 S. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.02 1.04 0.02 0.85 0.87 0.0 9. MacArthur BI. & Carnpus Dr. 0.76 0.77 0.01 1.25 1.29 0.04 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0.71 0.75 0.04 0.80 0.86 0.06 11. Von Barman Av. & Ca us Dr. 0.66 069 0.03 0.93 0.98 0.05 12. MacArthur BI. & Von Kamgua Av. 0.54 0.51 -0.03 0.64 0.64 0.0 13. Jamboree Rd. & CarMus Dr. 0.92 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. Carripus Dr. & Bristol SL 0.96 0.97 0.01 1.08 1.08 0.0 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. 0.92 0.92 0.00 0.72 0.73 0.01 17. Ca us DrJ[22_ Av. &Bristol SL S 0.93 0.93 0.00 0.77 0.78 0.01 I8. 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. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.14 1.15 0.01 1.191 1.17 -0.02 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.70 0.701 0.00 0.78 0.78 acq 2. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.61 0-621 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. 0.67 0.69 0.02 0.82 0.80 -0.02 25. Dover Dr. & WesteliffDr. 0.39 OAO 0,01 0.56 OS8 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 'de Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.83 0.83 0.00 0.94 0.95 0.01 29. MacArthur BI, & 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. 31. Ba iew Pl. & 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 3. Jamboree Rd. & Bavview W . 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.70 0.71 0.01 3d. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr. 0.64 0.66 0.02 0.69 0.70 0.01 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.51 0.51 0.001 0.581 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 Joa uin Hills Rd. 0.61 0.60 -0.011 0.651 n ARI 0.03 5 -21 l J� 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 SUBAREA MINIMUM DELTA CURRENTLY ADOPTED FORECAST SUBAREA MINIMUM 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 0. Santa Craz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 0.38 0.02 0.34 0.36 0.02 I. 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, 037 0.39 0.02 0.79 0.79 OA 5. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.77 0.80 0.03 0.80 0.83 0.03 6. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.47 0.471 0.00 0.56 0.56 0.0 7. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.29 0.29 0.0 48. MacArthur BL & Bison Av. 0.78 0.79 0.01 0.80 0.81 0.01 9. MacArhtur B1. & Ford Rd./Bonita Can Dr. 0.77 0.78 0.01 1.06 1.06 0.0 50. MacArthur Bl. & San 1 uin 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 B1. & Coast Hw. 0.74 0.73 -0.01 0.83 0.79 -0.04 53. SR -73 NB s & Bonita Can Dr. 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.0 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.45 0.46 0.01 0 -59 0.59 0.0 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 0.55 0.03 0.68 0.68 0. 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.08 1.06 -0.02 0.79 0.75 -0.04 58. Mar mite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.51 0.50 -0.01 59.M 'te Av. & Coast Hw. 0.90 0.89 -0.01 0.91 0.92 0.01 60. S D ass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.46 0.46 0. 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.67 0.67 0.00 - 0.76 0.75 -0.01 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Ramps 0.54 0.53 -0.01 0.40 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.47 0.48 0.01 65. Ne rt Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.57 0.56 -0.01 0,60 0.60 0.00 tDNE = Does Not Exist UAUWobSL_ 0I 200 \012321Excel\[01232- 18.xls)T5 -9 5_22 (51P \�tJ� TABLE 5-9 (PAGE 1 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 EXISTING1 COUNTI SUBAREA MINIMUM DELTA 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.66 0.73 0.07 0.67 0A6 0.19 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 0.84 1.00 0.16 0.90 0.95 0.05 . 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. 0.80 1,041 0.24 0.671 0.87 0.20 9. MacArthur Bl. & Campus Dr. 0.61 0.77 0.16 0.85 1.29 0.44 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0.49 0.75 0.26 0.66 0.86 0.20 1 I . Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.55 0.69 0.14 0.79 0.98 0.19 12. MacArtbur BI. & Von Kerman Av. 0.46 0.51 0.05 0.53 0.64 0.11 13. Jamboree Rd. & C us 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. 0.77 0.97 0.201 0.941 1.08 0.14 16. Birch St. & Bristol St (N ) 0.66 0.92 0.26 O.611 0.73 0.12 17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. (S ) 0.72 0.93 0.21 0.581 0.78 0.20 18. Birch St & Bristol St. S 0.46 0.54 0.08 0.441 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. & Highland Dr. 0.57 0.62 0.05 0.60 0.65 0.05 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.72 0.791 0.07 0.64 0.72 0.08 4. Irvine Av. &WestcliffDr. 0.57 0.691 0.12 0.77 0.80 0.03 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 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. Bayside Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.69 0.83 0.14 0.70 0.95 0.25 9. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. 0.88 0.96 0.08 0.91 1.00 0.09 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St 0.55 0.71 0.16 0.59 0.69 0.10 31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. S) 0.48 0.61 0.13 0.561 0.63 0.07 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S 0.75 0.97 0.22 0.721 0.86 0.14 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W . 0.41 0.48 0.07 0.571 0.71 0.14 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr. 0.60 0.66 0.06 0.64 0.70 0.0 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 0.10 0.65 0.73 0.08 1137. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.801 0.60 -0.20 1.00 0.68 -0.3 5 -23 15 1 l�h 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 8. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.47 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 0. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 0.38 0.02 0.36 0.36 0.00 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.32 0.39 0.07 0.52 0.68 0.16 2. 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 0.721 0.79 0.07 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.58 0.80 0.22 0.661 033 0.17 6. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.31 0.47 0.16 0.371 0.56 0.19 47. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.26 0.38 0.12 0.17 0.29 0.1 8. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.63 0.79 0.16 0.60 0.81 0.21 9. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.71 0.78 0.07 0.90 1.06 0.16 50. MacArthur BI. & 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 0.73 0.13 0.71 0.79 0.08 53. SR -73 NB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.55 0.69 0.141 0.431 0.53 0.10 54. SR -73 SB Rums & 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 0.31 0.38 0.07 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.44 0.55 0.11 0.54 0.68 0.1 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 0.99 1.06 0.07 0.69 0.75 0.0 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.31 0.38 0.07 0.35 0.50 0.15 59.Muguerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.83 0.89 0.06 0.82 0.92 0.10 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San 3oaquin Hills Rd. 0.44 0.60 0.16 0.30 0.46 0.16 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.61 0.671 0.061 0.65 1 0.75 0.10 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Rams 1 0.45 0.53 0.081 0.3I 0.40 0.0 64. N ort Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.37 0.63 0.26 0.29 0.48 0.1 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.47 0.56 0.09 0.50 0.60 0.10 U:1UcJobsL012001012321Excell [01232- 18.x1s]T5 -9 5 -24 (�U' 6yD TABLE 5 -10 (PAGE 1 OF 2) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY INTERSECTION NS /EW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ICU LOS ICU LOS 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.73 C 0.86 D 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 1.00 E 0.95 E 4. Newport Bl. & Hospital Rd. 0.84 D 1.01 5. Newport Bl. & Via Lido 0.55 A 0.45 A 6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St. 0.48 A 0.63 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.021 F 1.15 F 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.041 F 0.87 9. MacArthur Bl. & Campus Dr. 0.771 C 1.29 F 10. MacArthur Bl. & Birch St. 0.75 C 0.86 D 11. Von Karman Av. & Canpus Dr. 0.69 B 0.98 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. 0.81 C 0.80 C 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. 0.97 E 1.08 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 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.15 F 1.17 F 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.701 B 0.78 C 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.621 B 0.65 B 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.79 C 0.72 4. 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. 0.64 B 0.65 B 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.87 D 0.91 E 28. Dayside Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.831 D 0.95 E 29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd. 0.96 E 1.00 E 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 0.71 C 0.69 B 31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. (S) 0.61 B 0.63 B 2. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S 0.97 E 0.86 D 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W . 0.48 A 0.711 C 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. (University Dr. 0,661 B 0.70 B 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.51 A 0.59 A 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./FOTd Rd. 0.79 C 0.73 C 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.601 A 0.68 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 L 8. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.58 A 0.78 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.87 D 0.86 D 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.38 A 0.36 1. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 A 0.68 B 2. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 A 0.62 B 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.391 A 0.79 5. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.8ol C 0.83 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.47 A 0.56 A 7. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av, 0.38 A 0.29 A 48. MacArthur RI. & Bison Av. 0.79 C 0.81 D 9. MacArhtur 131. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.78 C 1.06 F 50. MacArthur Bl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.81 D 1.06 F 51. MacArthur 131. & San Miguel Dr. 0.631 B 0.76 52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw. 0.73 C 0.79 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.69 B 0.53 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.46 A 0.59 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. 1.061 F 0.75 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.38 A 0.50 59.Maz erite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.89 D 0.92 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.60 A 0.46 A 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.67 B 0.75 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Ramps 0.53 A 0.40 All 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 1 0.63 B 0.48 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 1 0.561 A 0.60 A U:1UcJ obsl_01200\012321Excell [01232- 18.xls]T5 -10 5 -26 1 �� 4 0,1' 01m v � � W =QZ wgV MW W � MA W 4� ? W E Z W W mIL H IM 1Y uroa �ewodevn AV P] W W LL L N N e N N e W ¢ d ¢ d .jl w •,'' a w U 0 U LL U a 5 -27 ,^,3 • 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 (NSuJamboree Road (EW) (AM /PM) • Jamboree Road (NS) /Bristol Street South (EW) (AM) • MacArthur Boulevard (NSuFord 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 "V". 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). 5-28 TABLE 5-11 (PAGE 1 OF 2) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY INTERSECTION NS /EW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR FUTURE FORECAST WITH IMPROVEMENTS DELTAI FUTURE FORECAST WITH IMPROVEMENTS DELTA 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.73 0.73 0.00 0.86 0.86 0.00 . Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 1.00 0.85 -0.15 0.95 0.84 -0.11 . Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. 0.84 0.89 0.05 1.01 0.89 -0.12 5. Newport BI. & Via Lido 0.55 0.55 0.00 0.45 0.45 0. 6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St. 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.63 0.63 0.00 . 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 0.871 0.87 0.00 9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr. 0.77 0.75 -0.02 1.29 0.82 -0.4 l0- MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0.75 035 0.00 0.86 016 0.00 11. Von Kansan Av. & Campus Dr. 0.69 0.67 -0.02 0.98 0.86 -0.12 12. MacArthur BI. & Von Kaman Av. 0.51 0.51 0.00 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 0.001 0.80 0.80 0. 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 0.00 0.91 0.86 -0.05 0. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.15 0.74 -0.41 1.17 0.83 -0.34 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.70 0.701 0.00 0.781 0.78 0.00 22, Irvine Av. & Hi bland Dr. 0.62 0.62 0.00 0.65 0.65 0. 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.79 0.79 0.00 0.72 0.72 0.00 24. Irvine Av. &WestcliffDr. 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. Bayside Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.831 0.81 -0.021 0.95 0.89 -0.06 9. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. 0.96 0.78 -0.18 1.00 0.83 -0.17 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 0.71 0.71 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.00 31. Bayview PI. & Bristol St. S 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.63 0.63 0. 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 5 0.97 0.75 -0.22 0.86 0.81 -0.05 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W . 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.71 0.71 0.00 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. )University Dr. 0.66 0.66 0.00 0.70 0.70 0.0 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.59 0.59 0. 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd. 0.79 0.79 uo 0.73 0.73 0.00 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joa uin Hills Rd. 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.68 0.68 0.00 5 -29 ,�c 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 WITH IMPROVEMENTS DELTA FUTURE FORECAST WITH IMPROVEMENTS DELTA 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.58 0.58 0.00 0.781 0.78 0.00 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.87 0.87 0.00 0.86 0.86 0.0 0. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.36 0.36 0.0 1. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.68 0.68 0.00 2. N rt Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.62 0.62 0.00 . Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.79 0.79 0.0 5. Avocado Av. &Coast Hw. 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.83 0.83 0.00 6. SR -73 NB s &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 0.00 019 0.29 0.00 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.79 0.79 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.00 9. MacArhmr Bl. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.78 0.73 -0.05 1.06 0.86 -0.20 50. MacArthur Bl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.81 0.70 -0.11 1.06 0.85 -0.21 51. MacArthur Bl. & San Miguel Dr. 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.76 0.76 0.0 52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw. 0.73 0.73 0.00 0.79 0.79 0.00 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.69 0.69 0.001 0.53 0.53 0.00 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.46 0.46 0.00 0.591 0.59 0.00 55. San Miguel Dr. & SpyElass Hill Rd. 0.30 0.30 0.00 0.381 0.38 0.00 6. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.55 0.55 0.00 0.681 0.68 0.0 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.06 0.77 -0.29 0.751 0.75 0.00 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd, 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.00 59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.89 0.89 0.00 0.92 0.80 -0.12 0. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd, 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.46 0.46 0.0 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 0.0 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd, 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.00 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.56 0.56 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.00 tDNE = Does Not Exist U:\UrJobsl_01200101232\Excel\ [01232- 18.xisIT5 -11 5 -30 �.� "1 LL } -i � 5 -a, �(\ .: ILUca I \ di \ , { ƒ&j a)C §a�a. m{ /kk(•%maj / ® ■C§k#�keC ^f =)y yf- f { } \¥ ^� ��\ { / \)fnE E /\\ \��) /j \\ \ \ \ \ / / \) / \ / \ \ \� / § }} \ m e oCO om=mefca ca m=��in -= z2u« z� =(DW k «wz z -co 0)cnw &zRzz «m= «=£4; �- � # =�2 =22co— =&n'tMNCO zz2�� z��n��a�n��mm2# =,2«222 -2 {tab=�g2=�W mf22£# °MW25] /■2§222 §e,Be,:e2et� +\#(%+ /7kR7CCCCaCR /kk77tf#\7f«) G_Goo +u3GGou000GG3uuo3Go03u3G�o E 7 f ./ / f / 6 E_ ¥ / )® / ) 7/ E\ z / 6� §ƒ ) k§ m / z a° F- ® �2 ( 2 ® G { \ ) \ � e g/ c » . ` co \f / / z J � f 2 f z \ k 2 ` z co cc I 6 \ - 0 - & k ! < \ » v u \ E E § / z ) /£ g 3 m 2f o2 5 -a, �(\ .: U) / IL Az b 2 ( § IL § / LU LU k � 9 ■ \ k k s -a2 \ 1 §6 2 E . CD a cc e= } \§ /\■ k /ke \E §��0�,��a�� aG&- %§E;m;§%mm -- - - - - -- - �,e- - se \= 208=022Z 8((2 ;eeo \ka22 \�2 $] =?; LUcouzuaLu )/ /\\#7&73 #77\ i =n§5i))5))k)) aa« we= ;aamaaa2 ƒ /] / / / / / / / /) // / / L \ z § ) . 0 / 2 ƒ / 7 } 7 92 \ ƒƒ E} o / ) / ) ) -o \ sa o at z / �/ / z/ co k m @ 2 k 6 ; (D ■ _ k } \ ) \ } 2' ƒ ] a § ) ) s -a2 \ 1 §6 2 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 W1�q 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 1% 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 0.006/0 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 Re Tonal Commercial TSF 1,633.840 1,559.000 74.840 -4.5%- 10 General Commercial TSF 4,627.760 5,377.611 749.851 16.20% 11 CommerciallRecreation ACRE 5.100 5.109 0.005Z 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 70.3101 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 0.000/0 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 11,518.013 787.607 -6.40% 24 Medical /Government Office TSF 910.616 1,859.090 948.474 104.169'° 25 Research & Development TSF 81.730 81.730 0.00% TSF 1,956.092 936.922 1,019.170 - 52.10% Mini -Story e/Warehouse TSF 196.420 196.420 0.00% Pre - school /Da Care TSF 56.770 56.770 0.00% Elements /Private School STU 4,455 4,955 500 11.22% P34Industrial Junior/High School STU 4,755 4,765 0.00% Cultural /Learnin Center TSF 40.000 98.000 58.000 145.00% Libra TSF 78.840 78.840 0.00% Post Office TSF 73.700 63.800 9.900 - 13.43% Hospital BED 1,265 1,265 0.00% 35 Nursin /Conv. Home BEDS 661 661 0.00% 36 Church TSF 467.210 441.200 26.010 - 5.57% 37 Youth Ctr. /Service TSF 166.310 172.3101 6.000 3.61% 38 Park ACRE 94.920 171.9201 77.000 81.12% 39 Re ional Park ACRE 45.919 45.910 0.00% 40 1 Golf Course ACRE 298.290 298.290 9.00% ' 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:\UCJob55_01200501232\ExmV ,101232- 18.xis3T 5 -1 6 -Z lY U TABLE 6 -2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING NBTM CODE' DESCRIPTION UNITS 2002 QUANTITY MAXIMUM QUANTITY GROWTH %GROWTH I 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 A artment 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 36,6681 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 0k 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 1 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 11,518.013 652.280 6.00% 24 MedicallGovemmentOffice TSF 795.926 1,859.090 1,063.164 133.58% 251 Research & Development TSF 81.730 81.730 0.00% 26 Industrial TSF 1,291.079 936.922 354157 27.434x1 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 Elements /Private School STU 4,399 - 4,955 556 12.65% 30 Junior/High School STU 4,765 4,765 0.00% 31 Culturalti-earning 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 63.800 10.100 18.81% 34 Hospital BED 351 1 1,265 914 260.40% 35 Nursin Conv. Home BEDS 661 661 0.00% 35 Church TSF 76 377.0 441. 200 63.440 16.79% 37 YouthCtr. /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 N/ 40 Golf Course ACRE 305.330 298.290 7.04 - 2.31 °A ' 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_ 01200101232\ExceR[01232.18.xis]T e-2 6 -3 ([J� include general commercial, general office, and medical /government office. Quantities that decrease in one category correlate to an increase in another category. 61.2 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. m Ot 0v TABLE 6-3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH' SUBAREA MAXIMUM LAND USE BASED SOCIOECONOMIC DATA SUMMARY /COMPARISON VARIABLE 2002 QUANTITY SUBAREA MAXIMUM QUANTITY 1GROWTH1% GROWTH— Occupied Sin le Family Dwelling Units 15,970 17,738 1,768 11% Occupied Multi-Family Dwelling Units 18,294 32,499 14,205 78% TOTAL OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS 34,264 50,237 15,973 47% Group Quarters Population 661 661 0 0% Population 75,211 105,240 30,029 40% Employed Residents 44,635 64,711 20,076 45% Retail Employees 10,970 15,171 4,201 38% Service Employees 17,295 24,413 7,118 41% Other Employees 36,9901 42,983 5,993 16% TOTAL EMPLOYEES 1 65,2551 82,567 17,312 27% Elem /Hi h School Students 1 9,1641 9,670 506 Includes date converted from land use only. Excludes Newport Coast and recent annexation areas. U:1UcJobsl_012001012321Excel\ [01232- 18.xis]T 6 -3 6 -5 G 7 ` 111 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 Productonsz 127,338 190,690 63,352 49.75% Home Based Other Attractions 109,815 153,318 43,503 39.61% Work 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 40.40% Other - Other Attractions 89,734 126,451 36,717 40.92% TOTAL PRODUCTIONS 339,8631 490,213 150,350 44.24% TOTAL ATTRACTIONS 347,278 470,830 123,552 35.58% OVERALL TOTAL 687,1411 961,0431 273,9021 39.863% ' 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:%UcJobsl_012001012321Exoell [01232- 18.xls]T 6-4 6 -6 I V 1�a 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 GENERALPLAN 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 444,457 490,213 45,756 10.29% TOTAL ATTRACTIONS 435,3021 470,830 35,528 8.16% OVERALL TOTAL 879,7591 961,043 81,284 9.24% ' 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 1012321Exce11101232- 18.xls]T 6.5 6 -7 173 t�1 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 Caoacity Analysis Daily roadway segment capacity analysis has been performed at study area roadways, and is shown on Exhibit 6 -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 • 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 6 -8 C 7 q xzw LL1 I= W W Ii MA Qa �1 �a W W MR W ma, FA N i i m f`) N m S a m �v NQ < gOON!#Y)� p N m m m � r amnx N ml Iv O ai Z W C7 W J Yn uOMGana � m W zQ N O r a v 6 W V I 0 U LL Q W U a `d 6 W 1 m Y V Y M MLLtlLL O O m j 'MYMY1NYp M3�xYlq h � 16Y9lY JtlCIM3x � .N- � r .BM V llga.Nix p m � r amnx N ml Iv O ai Z W C7 W J Yn uOMGana � m W zQ N O r a v 6 W V I 0 U LL Q W U a `d 6 W 1 TABLE 6-6 (PAGE I OF 4) SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON LOCATION ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) BUILDOUT 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 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% vocado 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% ayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.) 12,000 13,000 1,000 8.3% irch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Karman Ave.) 1 5,000 21,000 3,000 16.7% Birch St. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 20,000 22,000 2,000 10.00/0 Birch St. (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 20,000 22,000 2,000 10.00/ Birch St. (north of Bristol St. North) 27,000 29,000 2,000 7.4% irch St. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 20,000 21,000 1,000 5.0% irch St. (south of Bristol St. South) [Bison 16,000 16,000 0 0.0% 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% Tuff 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 3.70A Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd.) 18,000 19,000 1,000 5.6% ristol St. South (west of Campus DrArvine 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 0.00/0 Bristol St. South (west of Jamboree Rd.) 37,000 38,000 1,000 2.7% Campus Dr. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Karman Ave.) 22,000 23,000 1,000 4.5% Campus Dr. (Von Karman 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°1 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 I Sth 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% ast Hwy. (Riverside Ave. to Tustin Ave.) 59,000 63,000 4,000 6.8% Coast Hwy. (Tustin Ave, to Dover Dr,) 55,000 59,000 41000 1 7.3% 6 -10 ( 0 TABLE 6-6 (PAGE 2 OF 4) SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON LOCATION ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) BUILDOUT FORECAST CHANGE % CHANGE Coast Hwy. (Dover Dr. to Bayside Dr.) 78,000 83,000 5,000 6.4% 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 0.00/ Coast Hwy. (Goldenrod Ave. to Marguerite Ave.) 46,000 46,000 0 0.00/0 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 4.20/a 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% astbluff 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 0.00/0 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 0.00/0 Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 18,000 22,000 4,000 22.2% ospital Rd. (east of Newport Blvd) 10,000 13,000 3,000 30.0% vine 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 25% Irvine Ave. (Santa Isabel Ave. to Santiago Dr.) 33,000 33,000 0 0.06% 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% amboree 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 9A% MacArthur Blvd. (Birch St. to Von Karman Ave.) 26,000 27,000 1,000 3.8% acArthur Blvd. (Von Karman Ave. to Jamboree Rd.) 32,000 33,000 1,000 3.1°/ 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 - 12.50/c Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 7,000 7,000 0 0.00/0 Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 13,000 13,000 0 010°/ 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 93% ewpw Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido) 57,000 64,000 7,000 12.3% ewport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.) 41,000 46,000 5,000 12.2% ewport 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°1 Newport Coast Dr. (SR -73 Fwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 29,000 30,000 1,000 3.4% ewport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 24,000 24,000 0 0.0% ewport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 19,000 19,000 0 0.00/0 lacentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.) 16,000 18,000 2,000 12.5% Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 11,000 13,000 21000 .18.2% Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 2,000 0 0.0% iverside 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% an 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% an Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to Spyglass Hill Rd.) 19,000 20,000 1,000 53% 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 0.00/0 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 36.40/ 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 ],000 3.6% Superior Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 28,000 30,0001 2,000 7.1% 6-12 ( 3 Q t OO> tc,. TABLE 8-6 (PAGE 4 OF 4) SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON LOCATION ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) BUILDOUT FORECAST 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 0h Via Lido (east of Newport Blvd.) 10,000 12,000 2,000 20.0% Von Kaman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 18,000 20,000 2,000 11.1°/ Von Kaman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 16,000 17,000 1,000 6.3°/u Westciiff Dr. Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr. 16,000 16,000 0 0.0% U:1UcJobs\_0 1 20 0101 2 3 21Excell [01232- 18.xls]T 6 -6 6 -13 (11? `�y TABLE 6 -7 (PAGE 1 OF 4) SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION EXISTING (200112002) COUNT BUILDOUT 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 10,000 2,000 25.00/a 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% ayside 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 Kalman 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% ison 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 11,000 -- Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.) 26,000 34,000 8,000 30.9% 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% ristol 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 Kamm Ave.) 16,000 23,000 7,000 43.8% Campus Dr. (Von Kalman 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 Superior Ave./Balboa Blvd.) 46,000 b4,000 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 40.00/c Coast H Tustin Ave. to Dover Dr. 42,000 59,000 17,000 1 40.5% 6 -14 U� ,t,a TABLE 6 -7 (PAGE 2 OF 4) SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION EXISTING (200112002) COUNT BUILDOUT I FORECAST GROWTH % GROWTH Coast Hwy. (Dover Dr. to Bayside Dr.) 63,000 83,000 20,000 31.7% 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 W estcliff Dr.) 9,000 11,000 2,000 22.2% Dover Dr. (WestcliffDr. 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% over 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 50.00/0 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% ospital 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°l 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 WestcliffDr.) 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 33,000 7,000 26.9% 6 -15 {g(. �,k3 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 ofBison Ave.) 61,000 76,000 15,000 24.6% MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 63,000 75,000 12,000 19.00/0 acArthur 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 7,000 216 %a 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 83% Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.) 36,000 50,000 14,000 38.9% ewport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 43,000 59,000 16,000 37.2% ewport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido) 48,000 64,000 16,000 333% ewport 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 60.0010 Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 12,000 19,000 7,000 583% 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 0A0/ 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°1 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 21A% 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 17.60/ 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 .a� TABLE 6 -7 (PAGE 4 OF 4) SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION EXISTING (200112002) COUNT BUILDOUT FORECAST GROWTH % GROWTH iAve . (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 3,000 1,000 50.0°/ versity Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) ria 3,000 3,000 0 0.0°/ versity Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 11,000 15,000 4,000 36.4% 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% estcliffDr. Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr. 16,000 16,000 0 0.0% U:1UcJobsl 012001012321Exce11 [01232- 18.xis]T 6 -7 6 -17 I O� m PWo op >< w— m V a� I IL ma — USi ZS. W %,% 0 W ME = ma S `c I — Wv v v u Vf C4 , , i a N N O 0 N 14V1'W lLOW3ry 2 C; M 9NIyl 0 m a c Z W 0 W J r a a 6 s J U Z {L U W a O' • 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 I qG (0 yJ� • 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 rVQ TABLE 6-8 (PAGE 1 OF 2) SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN 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 0.01 1.29 1.28 -0.01 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.64 0.72 0.08 0.68 0.83 0.15 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 1.01 1.03 0.02 0.99 1.04 0.05 4. Newport BI. & 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 0.05 031 0.81 0.10 7. Riverside Av, & Coast Hw. 1.03 1.041 0.01 1.12 1.19 0.07 S. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.02 1.061 0.04 0.85 0.92 0.07 9. MacArthur Bl. & Campus Dr. 0.76 0.81 0.05 1.25 1.29 0.04 10. MacArthur Bl. & Birch St. 0.71 0.79 0.08 0.80 0.86 0.06 11. Von Kamtan Av. & Campus Dr. 0.66 0.74 0.08 0.93 1.02 0.09 12. MacArthur BI. & Von Kant= Av. 0.54 0.52 -0.021 0.64 0.65 0.01 13. Jamboree Rd. & Carapus 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. 0.96 1.00 0.04 1.08 1.08 0. 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. 0.92 0.91 -0.01 0.72 0.72 0.00 17. Campus DrArvine 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 0. 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 0.02 0.63 0.66 0.03 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.78 0.82 0.04 0.70 0.72 0.02 24. Irvine Av, & Westcliff Dr. 0.67 0.70 0.03 0.82 0.83 0.01 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 0.39 0.41 0.02 0.56 0.59 0.03 6. Dover Dr. & 16th St 0.64 0.641 0.00 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.% 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. Rayview PI. & 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 3. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W . 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.70 0.71 0.01 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr. 0.64 0.65 0.01 0.69 0.711 0.02 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.51 0.52 0.01 0.58 0.62 0.04 6. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd. 0.78 0.81 0,03 0.72 0.76 0.0 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.61 0.64 0.03 0.65 0.71 0.06 6 -21 1 V7 \0ti TABLE 6-8 (PAGE 2 OF 2) SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN INTERSECTION NS1EW 138. AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR CURRENTLY ADOPTED FORECAST SUBAREA MAXIMUM FORECAST DELTA CURRENTLY ADOPTED FORECAST SUBAREA MAXIMUM FORECAST DELTA Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.55 0.69 0.14 0.71 0.87 0.16 9. 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 0.36 0.0 1. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 0.43 0.04 0.71 0.73 0.02 2. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 0.55 0.05 0.63 0.66 0.03 4. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.37 0.43 0.06 0.79 0.84 0.05 5. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.77 0.81 0.04 0.80 0.831 0.03 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.47 0.47 0.00 0.56 0.561 0.00 47. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.29 0.29 0.0 8. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.78 0.81 0.03 0.80 0.81 0.01 9. MacArttur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.77 0.79 0.02 1.06 1.09 0.03 50. MacArthur Bl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.77 0.83 0.06 1.04 1.08 0.0 1. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.63 0.71 0.08 0.77 0.80 0.03 52. MacArthur BL & 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 0.541 0.01 54. SR -73 SE Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.45 0.46 0.01 0.59 0.601 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 7. 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-Marguerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.91 0.91 0.0 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0A0 0.62 0.02 0.46 0.50 0.04 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.67 0.68 0.011 0.761 0.74 -0.0 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Rams 1 0.54 0.55 0.01 0.40 0.41 0.01 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.631 0.66 0.03 0.47 0.51 2.04Jj 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 1 0.571 0.57 0.001 0.601 0.61 0.01 U:1UWObs1- 01200101232 \Exoel1[01232- 18.xis]T 6-12 6 -22 Qg ,ypo TABLE 6 -9 (PAGE 1 OF 2) SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO EXISTING INTERSECTION NSIEW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR EXISTING COUNT SUBAREA MAXIMUM DELTA EXISTING COUNT SUBAREA MAXIMUM DELTA 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. DNE' 1.28 N/A DNEJ 1.28 N/A . Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.66 0.72 0.06 0.671 0.83 0.16 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 0.84 1.03 0.19 0.90 1.04 0.14 . Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. 0.54 0.93 0.39 0.70 1.18 0.48 . Newport BI. & Via Lido 0.41 0.60 0.19 0.37 0.52 0.15 6. Newport BI. & 32nd St. 0.73 0.57 -0.16 0.78 0.81 0.03 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 0.84 1.04 0.20 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 BI. & Campus Dr. 0.61 0.81 0.20 0.851 1.29 0.44 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0.49 0.79 0.30 0.66 0.86 0.20 1. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.55 0.74 0.19 0.79 1.02 0.23 12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Kansan 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 0.26 0.60 0.81 0.21 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. 0.77 1.00 0.23 0.94 1.08 0.14 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. 0.66 0.911 0.25 0.61 0.72 0.11 17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. 5 0.72 0.931 011 0.58 0.77 0.19 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S ) 0.46 0.53 0.07 0.44 0.54 0.1 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.70 0.73 0.03 0.941 0.94 0.00 0. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 0.82 1.14 0.32 0.891 1.18 0.29 1. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.66 0.71 0.05 0.721 0.77 0.05 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.57 0.63 0.06 0.601 0.66 0.06 3. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.72 0.82 0.10 0.641 0.72 0.08 24. Irvine Av. & WestcliffDr. 0.57 0.70 0.13 0.771 0.83 0.06 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 0.38 0.41 0.03 0.48 0.59 0.11 6. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.55 0.64 0.09 0.57 0.64 0.07 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.70 0.89 0.19 0.74 0.94 0.2 28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.69 0.84 0.15 0.70 0.98 0.28 9. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. 0.88 0.96 0.08 0.91 1.08 0.17 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 0.55 0.69 0.14 0.59 0.72 0.13 3l. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. S 0.48 0.61 0.13 O.561 0.64 0.08 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S 0.75 0.94 0.19 0.721 0.87 0.15 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W . 0.41 0.48 0.07 0.57 0.71 0.1 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /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. & EastbiuffDr./Ford Rd, 0.69 0.81 0.12 0.65 0.76 0.11 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Jo uin Hills Rd. 0.80 0.64 -0.16 1.00 0.71 -0.29 6 -23 { (� �t 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 0.2 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.68 0.88 0.20 0.74 0.91 0.17 Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 0.39 0.03 0.36 0.36 0. I. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.32 0.43 0.11 0.52 0.73 0.21 42. N ort Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.40 0.55 0.15 0.52 0.66 0.1 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 0.66 0.83 0.17 6. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.31 0.47 0.16 0.37 0.56 0.19 7. SR -73 SB Rams & Bison Av. 0.26 0.38 0.12 0.17 0.29 0.12 48. MacArthur 131. & Bison Av. 0.63 0.81 0.18 0.60 0.81 0.21 9. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.71 0,791 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 BL & San Miguel Dr. 0.56 0.71 0.15 0.651 0.80 0.15 52. MacArthur RI. & Coast Hw. 0.60 0.74 0.14 0.71 0.81 0.1 53. SR -73 NB Rams & Bonita Cm yon 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 0.0 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.44 0.54 0.10 0.54 0.71 0.1 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.Maz uerite 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 0.62 0.18 0.301 0.50 0.20 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.61 0.68 0.07 0.65 0.74 0.09 2. Nmpmt Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Ramps 0.45 0.55 0.10 0.31 0.41 0.1 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.37 0.66 0.29 0.29 0.51 0.22 1165. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.47 0.57 0.10 0.501 0.61 0.11 'DNE = Does Not Exist U:1UCJobsS_012001012321ExceI \[01232- 18.ids]T 6 -9 6 -24 I �� Z.52 TABLE 6 -10 (PAGE 1 OF 2) SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY INTERSECTION (NSIEW) AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ICU LOS ICU LOS 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. 1.28 F 1.28 F 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.72 C 0.83 D 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 1.03 F 1.04 . Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. 0.93 E 1.18 F 5. Newport BI. & Via Lido 0.60 A 0.52 Newport Bl. & 32nd St. 0.57 A 0.811 D 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.041 F 1.191 F 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.061 F 0.92 9. MacArthur BI. & Cam us Dr. 0.81 D 1.29 F 10. MacArthur 61. & Birch St. 0.79 C 0.86 11. Von Karma¢ Av. & C us Dr. 0.74 C 1.02 F 12, MacArthur Bl. & Von Karman Av. 0.52 A 0.65 B 13. Jamboree Rd. & us Dr. 0.98 E 1.25 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. 0.87 D 0.81 D 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. 1.00 E 1.081 F 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. 0,911 E 0.721 c 17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S 0.93 E 0.77 C 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S 0.53 A 0.54 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.73 C 0.94 E 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.14 F 1.18 F 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.71 C 0.77 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.63 B 0.66 B 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr, 0.821 D 0.721 C 24. Irvine Av. & WestcliffDr. 0.70 B 0.83 D 25. Dover Dr. & WestcliffDr. 0.41 A 0.59 A 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.64 B 0.64 B 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.89 D 0.94 E 8. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.84 D 0.98 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd, 0.96 E 1.08 F 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 0.691 B 0.721 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 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr. 0.65 B 0.71 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.52 A 0.62 6. Jamboree Rd. & EastbluffDr./FDrd Rd. 0.81 D 0,76 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.641 B 0.71 C 6 -25 1 1 TABLE 6 -10 (PAGE 2 OF 2) SUBAREA MAXIMUM. GENERAL PLAN ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY INTERSECTION (NS/EW) AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ICU LOS ICU LOS 38: Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.69 B 0.87 D 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.88 D 0.91 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 A 0.36 A 1. 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 5. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.811 D 0.83 D 46. SR -73 NB Rams & Bison Av. 0.47 A 0.56 A 7. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.38 A 0.29 A 8. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.81 D 0.81 D 49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.79 C 1.09 F 50. MacArthur Bl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.83 D 1.08 51. MacArthur Bl. & San Miguel Dr. 0.71 C 0,801 C 52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw. 0.741 C 0.81 D 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.72 C 0.54 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.46 A 0.60 A 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.31 A 0.39 A 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.54 A 0.71 C 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.08 F 0.77 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 A 0.531 A 59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw, 0.901 D 0.91 E 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.62 B 0.50 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.68 B 0.74 C 62. NE rt Coast Dr' & SR -73 NB R s 0.55 A 0.41 A 64. Ne ort Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.66 B 0.51 65. Ne ort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.57 A 0.61 B 'DNE = Does Not Exist U:\UcJobs\ 01200\ 01232 \Excel1[01232- t6.xls)T6 -10 6 -26 as OZ � u = IL WIu WW rZ ou E Q aa� ' E Q` W W Z M� W Z O V \l �� N ral W � W � IL N N c N N O 2 O W Q p o LU Q a M Q m M ID a e a a u a Im AL J .,', z 0 U LL 4 a T 6 -27 a �� • 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 (NSYBristol 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 (NSuCoast 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 6-28 I Iq 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). 6 -29 1q 5 2� TABLE 6 -11 (PAGE 1 OF 2) SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY INTERSECTION NSIEW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR FUTURE FORECAST WITH IMPROVEMENTS DELTA FUTURE FORECAST WITH IMPROVEMENTS DELTA 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. 1.28 0.77 -0.51 1.28 0.88 -0.4 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.72 0.72 0.00 0.83 0.83 0.0 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 1.03 0.89 -0.14 1.04 0.89 -0.15 4. Newport Bl. & Hospital Rd. 0.93 0.81 -0.12 1.18 0.90 -0.28 5. NewpoTt BI. & Via Lido 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.52 0.52 0. 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 -0.31 1.191 0.82 -0.37 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.06 0.75 -0.32 0.921 0.75 -0.1 9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr. 0.81 0.78 -0.03 1.291 0.82 447 10. MacArthur Bl. & Birch $t. 0.79 0.79 0.00 0.861 0. 11. Von Karman Av. &Campus Dr. 0.74 0.72 -0.02 1.02 0.90 -0.12 12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Karman Av. 0.52 0.52 0.00 0.65 0.65 ORG 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 SL N 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. Cam us DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. S 0.93 0.87 -0.06 0.77 0.77 0. 18, Birch St & Bristol St. S 0.53 0.53 0.00 0.54 0.54 0.0 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 I. Irvine Av. & Santiaszo Dr. 0.71 0.711 0.00 0.77 0.77 0. 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. 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.83 0.83 0. 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 0.41 0.41 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.0 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 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 -0.1 28. Ba side 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 0. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.72 0.72 0.00 31. Bayview PI. & 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 0.711 0.71 0.0 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. [University Dr. 0.651 0.65 0.00 0.71 0.711 0. 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.521 0.52 0.00 0.62 0.62 0. 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd. 0.81 0.81 0.00 0.76 0.76 0.00 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. O.641 0.64 0.00 0.711 0.711 0.00 6 -30 IV. 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 FORECAST WITH IMPROVEMENTS DELTA 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.. 0.69 0.69 0.001 0.87 0.87 0. 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.88 0.84 -0.04 0.91 0.89 -0.03 0. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.36 0.36 0.0 1. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.43 0.43 0.00 0.73 0.73 0. 2. NewpoTt 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 5. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.81 0.811 0.00 0.83 0.83 0. 6. SR -73 NB Rams & Bison Av. 0.47 0.47 0.00 0.56 0.56 0. 7. SR -73 SB Rams & Bison Av. 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.29 0.29 0.00 8. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.81 0.81 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.0 49. MacArhtur Ell. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.79 0.76 -0.04 1.09 0.89 -0.2 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.83 0.71 -0:12 1.08 0.87 -0.21 51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.71 0.71 0.00 0.801 0.80 0.0 52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw. 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.81 0.81. 0. 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.72 0.72 0.00 0.54 0.54 0. 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.46 0.46 0.00 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 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.54 0.54 0.00 0.71 0.71 0. 7. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.08 0.79 -0.29 0.77 0.77 0.0 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.53 0.53 0. 59.Mar erite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.91 0.79 -0.1 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.62 0.62 0.00 0.50 0.50 0. 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.68 0.68 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.00 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Rams 1 0.55 0.55 0.00 0.41 0. 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.66 0.66 0.00 0.51 0.51 D. 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.57 0.57 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.00 IDNE = Does Not Exist U:IUcJobsl_ 01 2 0 0 10 1 2 321Excell(01232- 18.xls]T 6 -11 6 -31 , q 7 ,yuS § / Ix a. J z b 2 \ ) z § 0: § ] 2 2� § � 6 -32. � co ca / LU �/ cm U. \� § 2. CD (_� c ) mc,.s §�§ ƒ%2) #§§�k § \6k%%�k�tk §k2m§kk E 2LLJ \�fk0 \ \�k \ \ /-k tm\E\ \ - 2= k0sLo - -r— —°g$e --cr —E {f# , \af a3-0c__ °b = =22 / 2)LuCm0)c « = =m■ ©=gym = : =22m ;—& n§�Q�z_u� =zw 7 =9Lu3: z�n�� =0L� 7®{3#f$#i� \k2 2m X22 =2 "qr#n«,1 =gym,* = =,, 14, 22C'4 « &2£a]J$a { / /ai`]$a ƒ# /]) /aa«ƒ£« vs kJ) / /)))kk)\kC2 co0800000k) /kk) E / LU § / / E LU ® ® \ 6 § E w 6 co E / ) ƒ - ; r k /) # ) E § r / / § Z _ m 0 5 G a 6 & / k \ \ ƒ / f < < J ` f k e - k ( - \ § k a _ 3 3. z c 2 a« £ i 6 -32. � zz LL } � � 6 -al \ co Iqq + E 2 � ) a $ ca - di t5 co $ ) / c 7 § ) « §k ca \.k�k� /ek��k�k��kj■ LU CM r- 2�di� ,- E•§�EES®=§- =a§ =§§E§2§ = @§c - "mc z!) {zAQZ- = =2{�fzE77-- SE c- =E)E�| E� - - \) : -E §2 § } /ak22kk /{ / /{k ƒa22 /v — ;RE— /( °£G'a E , �2£3c£ �a£at«�a)- ca = {a-- �_ = «£_39�= «kRaz« =m- =m z <m`az>«- =Jo�� =� k#zLu =�_- k:wzto �,- mm zw =G�� «zu# c =,M eL -0, 3: #= 372 #` ��c2,££=a,2m- \� #�_�t o 0 m2=,mn_c� o22a2a t - asa° 22_a§ e2- =2- «==e"22=t22 - Z@aaa }`£& ±°2) / °U)2= 22ee2a=2_2222a @f" \) ^§��, E0 GGJ\ /k\)k\\I0) /k/ /888)0 §`a§o /\\G\/ @j / ® in \ u c \ E / k §[ $. f E§§ 7 2J L/ ¥ E2¥ f E\ ) | )9 f`® K \±W .$ , as \_# 222 ! �! w /3/ \ )) j\\ k\ 2=a a !2 - 22/ 2/ E �.i 2 / 6 U) z a z z z _E ® +®f < § kkf r 4� ( tEz {! \ ) \ k/ IJ/ . ) ,» \k£ o a2 £ m 02 6 -al \ co Iqq + I Ch W W J m V) Zg Q a O Xm < N U O J t0 N Z C C C C C C C C C C C C C c c M Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cl 0 N 000000Q000000000 z Z O � o_z W � N O Q Z C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m ,0 CL _0 0000000000000000 c c c c c c c c c m m m m m m m m m a 0- n. a. a a.aaaa ro m m m m m m m m zm m a�ma�a�mmm ul C 0 C C OOc90000 C C C C C C (7 Wg _ 6 M .a ? N N `c o N N N N N N r co ... C O C O a0 C C C Oa a.a a"'" �.0 C C 0 F _o QOOQOOOQQQQQQQOO m c m p N Q1 c Q o m Q Q a in Lo m v Lo r `ro ro N N M "nZr Q F.. Q H N m > N m Q) ro m — =— O O _ _ m a) U a Q m> o m 3 U;Fc r Q C E cd c C ° �a) a s iZ000ci o 0 Z �m Z a � c6 m m m 0 a a a m U U � _ m m m U U U J _1 J 2 M 2i Z O c m CL m C m N 0. 0 a m T c 5 V a c M N Q) .y c m a CD c .N x C O 0 0 0 co d d W C O U 0 co N m T C r� a� .5 TABLE ES -2 TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVE' DAILY TRIP GENERATION EXISTING ALTERNATIVE EXISTING %0 EXISTING o (ADOPTED) %,& ADOPTED 1. CURRENTLY ADOPTED 687,141 879,759 192,618 28.03 °h 0 0% 2. TRUE MINIMUM 687,141 842,368 155,227 22.59% 37,391 -4% 3. SUBAREA MINIMUM 687,141 880,085 192,944 28.08% 326 0% 4. SUBAREA MAXIMUM 687,141 961,043 273,902 39.86 °,6 1 81,284 1 9% ' Alternative = General Plan buildout scenario. C:IDocuments and Settingslsobomy\Local SettingslTemporary Internet FilesI OLKAEI[ ESforPresentationMay16052 .xls]ES -2 ao i TABLE ES-3 (PAGE 1 OF 2) AM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY INTERSECTION NS /EW EXISTING CURRENTLY ADOPTED TRUE MINIMUM SUBAREA MINIMUM SUBAREA MAXIMUM ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU I LOS 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. DNE DNE 1.27 F DNE DNE DNE ONE 1.28 F 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.66 B 0.72 C 0.741 C 0.73 C 0.72 C 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 0.84 D 1.01 F 0.981 E 1.00 E 1.03 F 4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. 0.54 A 0.79 C 0.791 C 0.84 D 0.93 E 5. Newport Bl. & Via Lido 0.41 A 0.54 A 0.52 A 0.55 A 0.60 6. Newport BI. & 32nd St. 0.73 C 0.52 A 0.47 A 0.48 A 0.57 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 0.84 D 1.03 F 1.01 F 1.02 F 1.04 F 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 0.80 C 1.02 F 1.01 Ff 1.041 F 1.06 F 9. MacArthur BI. & Cam us Dr. 0.61 B 0.76 C 0.75 C1 0.77 C 0.81 D 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0,49 A 0.71 C 0.70 BI 0.75 C 0.79 C 11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.55 A 0.66 B 0.64 B 0.69 B 0.74 C 12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Karmart Av. 0.46 A 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.51 Al 0.521 A 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.74 C 0.92 E 0.93 E 0.93 El 0.981 E 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. 0.55 A 0.79 C 0.80 C 0.81 DI 0.871 D 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N ) 0.77 C 0.96 E 0.96 E 0.97 El 1.001 E 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. N) 0.66 B 0.92 E 0.93 E 0.92 El 0.911 E 17. Campus Dr. /Irvine Av. & Bristol St. (S) 0.72 C 0.93 E 0.91 E 0.93 El 0.931 E 18. Birch St, & Bristol St. (S) 0.46 A 0.52 A 0.521 Al 0.54 Al 0.53 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.70 B 0.68 B 0.68 131 010 B 0.73 C 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 0.82 D 1.14 F 1.15 F1 1.15 F 1.14 F 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.66 B 0.70 B 0.69 BI 0.70 B 0.71 C 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.57 A 0.61 B 0.61 B 0.62 B 0.63 B 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.72 C 0.78 C 0.78 C 0.79 C 0.82 D 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.57 A 0.67 B 0.66 B 0.69 B 0.70 B 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 0.38 A 0.39 A 0.40 A 0.4 A 0.41 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.55 A 0.64 B 0.64 B 0.64 B 0.64 B 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.70 B 0.86 D 0.84 D 0.87 D 0.89 D 28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.69 B 0.83 D 0.82 D 0.83 D 0.84 D 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. 0.88 D 0.96 E 0.97 E 0.96 E 0.96 E 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (N 0.55 A 0.70 B 0.71 Cl 0.71 C 0.69 B 31. Ba view Pi. & Bristol St. (S) 0.48 A 0.60 A 0.59 Al 0.61 B 0.61 B 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S 0.75 C 0.96 E 0.97 E 0.97 E 0.94 E 33. Jamboree Rd. & Ba view W . 0.41 A 0.48 A 0.48 A 0.48 A 0.48 A 34. Jamboree Rd, & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr. 0.60 A 0.64 B 0.65 B 0.66 B 0.65 B 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.45 A 0.51 A 0.50 Al 0.51 Al 0.52 A 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /Ford Rd. 0.69 B 0.78 C 0.76 Cl 0.79 C 0.811 D 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.56 A 0.61 B 0.60 Al 0.60 A 0.641 B 38, Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.47 A 0.55 A 0.54 Al 0.58 A 0.691 B 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.68 B 0.85 D 0.85 DI 0.87 D 0.88 D 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 Al 0,361 A 0.34 A 0.38 A 0.39 A 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.32 A 0.39 A 0.39 A 0.39 A 0.43 A 42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.40 A 0.50 A 0.50 A 0.50 A 0.55 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.33 A 0.371 A 0.38 Al 0.39 A 0.43 A 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.58 A 0.77 C 0.78 CF 0-801 C 0.81 D arv) I 7 TABLE ES3 (PAGE 2 OF 2) AM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY INTERSECTION (NS/EW= EXISTING ICURRENTLY1 I ADOPTED TRUE I MINIMUM SUBAREA MINIMUM SUBAREA MAXIMUM ICU LOSI ICU I LOS ICU I LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.31 A 0.47 Al 6.47 A 0.471 A 0.47 Al 47. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.26 A 0.38 A 0.39 A 0.38 A 0.38 8. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.63 B 0.78 C 0.77 C 0.79 C 0.81 D 49. MacArthur Bl. & Ford RdJBonita Canyon Dr. 0.71 C 0.77 C 0.77 C 0.78 C 0.79 C 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.64 B 0.77 C 0.77 C 0.81 D 0.83 D 51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.56 A 0.63 B 0.62 B 0.63 B 0.71 C 52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw. 0.60 A 0.74 C 0.74 C 0.73 C 0.74 C 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.55 A 0.691 B 0.69 Bj 0.69 B 0.72 C 54, SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.30 A 0.45 A 0.45 A 0.46 A 0.46 A 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.28 A 0.30 A 0.30 Al 0.30 A 0.31 A 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.44 A 0.52 A 0.51 Al 0.55 A 0.54 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 0.99 E 1.08 F 1.06 F1 1.06 F 1.08 F 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.31 A 0.38 A 0.38 Al 0.38 A 0.39 A 59.Marguerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.83 D 0.90 D 0.88 D 0.89 D 0.90 D 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.44 A 0.60 4 0.59 A 0.60 Al 0.62 B 61. Popp Av. & Coast Hw. 0.61 B 0.67 B 0.68 B 0.67 B 0.68 B 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NS Rams 0.45 A 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.53 A 0.55 A 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.37 A 0.631 B 0.63 B 0.63 B 0.66 B 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.47 A 0.57 A 0.57 A 0.56 A 0.57 C:\Documents and Settings\soborny\Local Settings\Temporary Internet FilesIOLKAEI[ ESforPresentationMay16053 .xls]ES- r N E'7 TABLE ES-4 (PAGE 1 OF 2) PM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY 9. MacArthur BI, & Campus Dr. 1 0.851 DI 1.251 F1 1.251 F1 1.291 F1 1.291 F 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 1 0.661 BI 0.801 Cl 0.801 Cl 0.861 D1 0.861 D o�,Cy 9 TABLE ES-4 (PAGE 2 OF 2) PM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY INTERSECTION NS /EW EXISTING CURRENTLY ADOPTED I TRUE MINIMUM SUBAREA MINIMUM I SUBAREA MAXIMUM ICU I LOS ICU I LOS ICU ILOSI ICU LOSI ICU I LOS 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.37 A 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.56 Al 0.561 A 47. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.17 A 0.29 A 0.29 A 0.29 Al 0,291 A 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.60 A 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.81 D 0.81 D 49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd. /Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.90 D 1.06 F 1.06 F 1.06 F 1.09 F 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.93 E 1.04 F 1.02 F 1.06 F 1.08 F 51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.65 B 0.77 C 0.76 C 0.76 C 0.80 C 52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw. 0.71 C 0.83 D 0.80 C 0.79 C 0.81 D 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.431 A 0.53 Al 0.52 A 0.53 A 0.54 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.41 A 0.59 A 0.57 A 0.59 A 0.60 A 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.31 A 0.38 A 0.38 A 0.38 Al 0.39 A 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.54 A 0.68 B 0.68 B 0.68 BI 0.71 C 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 0.69 B 0.79 C 0.75 C 0.75 C1 0.77 C 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.35 A 0.51 A 0.49 A 0.50 A 0.53 A 59.Marguerite Av. & Coast Hw, 0.82 D 0.91 E 0.90 D 0.92 E 0.91 E 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.30 A 0.46 A 0.45 A 0.46 A 0.50 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.65 B 0.76 C 0.75 C 0.75 C 0.74 C 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Ramps 0.31 A 0.40 A 0.39 A 0.40 A 0.41 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.29 A 0.47 A 0.46 A 0.48 A 0.51 A 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 A 0.60 Al 0.601 A 0.60 A 0.61 B C: \Documents and Settings \soborny \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files\ OLKAE\[ ESforPresentationMay16053 .xls]ES -4 a� �n TABLE ES -5 DEFICIENT INTERSECTION SUMMARY INTERSECTION NSIEW EXISTING CURRENTLY ADOPTED TRUff—T—SUBAREAJ MINIMUM MINIMUM SUBAREA MAXIMUM AM PM I AM I PM AM I PM AM I PM AM PM 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. DNE DNEI F F DNE DNE DNEI DNE F F 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. D D I F E E E E E F F 4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. A BI C E C E D F E F 6. Newport BI. & 32nd St. C C C D B C C C D E 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. D E F F F F F F F F 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. C B F D F D F D F E 9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr. B D C F C F C F D F 11. Von Karmen Av. & Campus Dr. A C BI E BI El B El Cl F 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. C D El F El F1 E Fl E 11 F 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. A A DI D D D D D E E 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N) C El El F E F E F E F 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N ) B B El C E C E C E C 17. Campus Dr. /Irvine Av. & Bristol St. (S ) C A E C E C E C E C 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. B E B D B D B E C E 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. D D F F F F F F F F 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. B C D D D D D E D E 28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw. B B D E DI El D El D E 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. D E E E El El E El E F 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S ) C C E D E D E D E D 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. B Cl DI D D D D D D E 49. MacArthur -Bl. & Ford Rd./Bonita C n. Dr. C DI Cl F C F C F C F 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. B E Cl F C F D F D F 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. E BI F1 C F C F C F C 59.Marguerite Av. & Coast Hw. D D D E D D D E D E C: \Documents and Settings \soborny \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \OLKAEI ESforPresentationMayl60 906 it A r r 1p n J, D W N W Q J J 07 J F JQ W 0 j mnfa° N W MN O wjM°DN%'i 0 Qe\'i y�y�� [�D O � N N V aT Cl N m O Q m co) N � N M N V N MM � O N a N N m O °e'er O si °o Z_ O O M1 N O D N N N O _Z (9 � M O N N N J W=1 e 0 < 101-1 m a� 0 M O Q YOI owlH ai 46 ad o0 O g M N M N O N E NN Z W 0 clU ° FwMoan K � N m N W A W N O 7 U af Q Z f0 N X e o o ue o �de W eat` <j ro r a m N� WO N O N N N M W < O 0 a� W m ea`e o e N Q tIl y r r r W N Ls W a� Z z m Z O N g ea°aa ee u��veve Q c O j O N O g e ems° A° e a e e o e O w n N O N M O a0 tOD z of r 0 W r 41 00 � Z W N N Z O t e e N O W D Q ( 0 0 H O W It of r r tt1 r N O r N 01 N O W Z N N r N o F- N X W 0 o e o e o A (O M e WOl W fO Of Uri LQ oo° 00 m x V N V O> W C N � W N N r fD A er W a a e rT° a° e o o tN0 K Q O N V M n � O M Z co N N N y N A V a�eeee eaQaE ve w V M n fmp N N a n 0 61 A T NO O A Q ~ M � 00 M a a A 00 M N N z a O K v aE aQ aQ e v a4 v e n 4 m nn q U �cMp OM wa N W 1p of O m N z Z c�i fr O y Q W c9 ve e e eee ee tm, O F O M OOI O M N (O �D QmciI W I j O N W O W 0 Qe\'i y�y�� [�D O N N V aT Cl N m O N � a 7u1pielv O °e'er O si °o O O M1 N O m N N N O _Z (9 � e 0 < ye�y��° N m a� 0 M O Q YOI ai 46 ad o0 O g 0 clU ° FwMoan W. d N m N W A W N O af Q U e o o ue o �de eat` Fro O� r m WO N O N N N M W < O 0 X W ea`e o e OM ea°aa ee u��veve Z O N Qj m e ems° A° e a e e o e O w n N O N M O a0 tOD of r 0 W r 41 00 LL Z N N oa` 2 t e e N O W J❑ ( 0 0 H O W It of r r tt1 r N O r N 01 N O W W 6. N N r N o O O U 0 o e o e o e o e e Z fO Uri LQ oo° 00 `j V N V O> W C X W w 2 a a e rT° a° e o o e O N V M n � O m co a�eeee eaQaE ve w V M n fmp N N a n 0 61 A T NO O A m Z M � 00 M a a A 00 M N N } v aE aQ aQ e v a4 v e m nn q Hw �cMp OM wa p'id of of m op c�i fr O Q U c9 ve e e eee ee O O F O M OOI O M N (O X W m d lwLL Q J � C F pp QmUO �� r0 TABLE ES -7 NUMBER OF DEFICIENT INTERSECTIONS BY ALTERNATIVE C: \Documents and Settings\sobomylLocal SettingslTemporary Internet FilesIOLKAEJESforPresentationMayl60: dog r� NUMBER OF DEFICIENT INTERSECTIONS SCENARIO AM ONLY I PM ONLY I AM &PM I TOTAL EXISTING 1 5 0 6 CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN 15 7 7 19 TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE 5 6 6 17 SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE 5 9 6 20 SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE 4 10 10 24 C: \Documents and Settings\sobomylLocal SettingslTemporary Internet FilesIOLKAEJESforPresentationMayl60: dog r� Q U) F Z w LL 0 K a. 0 g U) Z w _p LLI J ~ 03 LU U F N LU W F Z J a Z O F a Z W C a LD W m L C L N 0 E a ° m a c ,t r c 'b c c ai m 3 n ai ai c = ai c ai m m 10 ai ai c m n@ N $ 3 m c_ ' c c ss �° `-° = m c e c E @ @ c c @ c m @ m E L L N E c @ .2 c L @ L m r E Ef Mm ° -'yc5m .�2 �c m C L m a m N« n W `@ d Z W a irn m t Z W ry c' co y m m A W W }s w$ m Z .@. £' N tttllllll L t_CO Z N C< co) -E �i m C a N N % m c a L C V£ g m @ a' @ L @ @ @ @ @ d @ @ C N N @ @ aL d @ N N M V'C @ M V NU) O mQ >rn �a a v f6 S a,v_a g caiS a v •Y w a @ @ @ •e v_v a�q W 1C @ @ an '>> @ d O as O 3' W `� o Q o Q a �aaci �= mo @ a ate£ a aaaa.t`� c a` ¢£vaaa i as aa� za w L W � @ m 0 y @ O y c IL m @ @ @ @ N c @ @ c c @ L C @ Y @ Gr L O P C O Z C p_ L ` CO N O Co m@ £ m ¢ Z w 3 Z n @ w W }y W Z@ N p ¢ m V N N N O W @ N N M V M N N O N @ N N N L @ @ N w N E @ @ N E' N a a 8 O y o o O d r 0 0 0 0 ` p p> a= a` a a w o a a (L a 0 a a a� z W W S > Of c � L O� •� L O O o L Z g m m m Z w3 m z d m m °' w m w y a vd w 1' L m a£ a m@ Z) a ii1 N N M y n N Q a o a a o v a a a '0 0 0 o a o 0 0 si a` a` a a` a a a` a a wa `m w w y O � @ @ o o @ a c a ° d �� W Q,a �m p Z > > c O L C L L O Q -. y t OI C Q O O L> ¢ m L m m m m d L d m m da m m 3 D 2 W �N, N m? c t t ' t O C 9 V t m Z �rnrn C M N 0 a aa o` v v o a W im aO v.O a` c @ aaC n Z) > >O O @ O N O O O L) ¢£c>aaa a - 0 cE aaa a. Q_ a z 0 w .. w `°� mw m.- .:°.3 -3 Nw U) w m w Z� 3 z w N ? o y 3 3 3 Z Z Q = N Q= z m> o 0 o 0 U o-V 3= 3 > m in z z x g Rog Ili a 7 z z W 2 M W 0 0 Q v a C W U J ~ U F � W z Z J Q Z O F O O a o 15 WC m v w c Z c = L @ > s EEc e a G LO1 ° j3 y w 3 h w w w 3 z 3 3 c n m m w c ny m 3 z >� CO V M Z N N N M N 0 O 3 fl1 IA —0 th W Q a a a a v as as aas a a °Erna vo ��@ n m E 2 CL a ° Q Q a a a a o o a` 0- E Q a a a o a a Q c x 0 E@ a s C2 G u 6 F z w d @ a m v c c > C N@ C l0 C @ C L =@ C@ m c w �ki L L poi w '3 °� w w w °mm mm m mmwca Q m Ste' Z3: Z Z co Z M} N@ K V O N L 9 L [h 0 0 V M M W > > > > > > > 5' (/J O O O O O O O O O O O O Z v c m d w 2 > N c mac.. v N s ai N ai N @ C N G y G IV rn W rn rn 0 Q z (0 y 3 z z m w w In w m L a m v c w Z M N N W W a a a -@° .5 @@ m -aa v m@ o o @ a m Q L m -°-°.� h g rnrn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 a m m a a` aaa` as a as ttEcLi Z w > O Z 2 N O G m A E m z 3r £> > >> o rn O ,� rn m o E rn Q t E L L °° 5 In 3 m y w y33 zg z zIn m F Z Z m r o i7 �i m v Z5 D'2 m W K @ a V N d d @ N (n N 9 U U th V V 9 M M 9 C �' A@ a > > a :° j o 0 0 0 0 o O Q> D> > o y 0 t O M. a a` a` a a` a a a a` a a a« O io Z ., N O ~ m� @� @ Q W zw w �Q �w w @ w >y 3 ¢Q` Z o ? W Z Z .. N Z ..:.i G f/1 @ w N v @0 N @W y w= N N o._. _2 E —€ @ E O o o U d m L N > N > E Em E ° m @ C) U Z O m o 15 M LL 0 v W cn LLB W J m F z w E E ? ?� S E E O a a O m a a$ t a to ? m m m m E E m S S. m m i6 8 3 i ;ma a a . .2 � �tW� m mE O W m Q Q o' C C C L L t t� 1C W Q Q C 2 a t t p }° E ,L.. £ 2 m m U UI N N m • C 2 A m 0 0� W m C ry m m m mmm m m m W m •L„ u m 3 m m W m Z S m L m �i yi Z Z w w w Z m m m W m m m �i Z m m m N N ?oo< y m y Z Em a O cr N m M a r m Q v •c ah It t ? aN _ g g r a E ;m_o E a m E w O w= p m a K$vi Ea E �� a a W W K A 1 1d C3 0- z w E E m m w m m z c E N r r N m d m L L C C a o o v� c m m °i e m m a ai m a ai ai a ai ,c a ai w o- is c c c c c c c c c c c c c > 2 m mt 3 E E m m mE r rn m 3 o > o o ' o mr w c 2 2 o o ' o Q Q a ' •c Z r rte`. E E m 5 5 m t tm t c m m m m m m m m m m m m m E E� 3 m W m me L L r m w z z w •m c � y m m r.. a o a L L E • c ? ? c CL o m a e r N M M of e e M m oo m m0 Q -t L m v amama m a m a a m v m am s m o m > N m o > ` co� c - ` O 0-1 1 O a a . O E L) c a z m G m W a a W c c u u w m m L C > m m m m m L e e L C C L W O E 2 L L 2 o E 2 S m ° °—' d dm $ E Em m m E c° ° r z W W m mn m w 3 g E rn z w z z w 3 m N 'C L L a a a ' 'Q to p E E a a a m 7 C e m E L of L e w u u o o y w t U = d d a a o Q Q ,E o o o m m y z w L L E W W c c u u O m m s N r r 3 3 K a N N m Q m y y G G m O m m OI m m O w d m C C C C C C m m G m m C C m m L H - - E E c c o c `• m m e m m m r r w . c ' L c 'o v W n o c L o o' o' c . c ' c o o' ' v W o 8 o oai wE a $EE m m ° ° dm L L`m £ £ m E Em u m m mm m m m m 3 w a a a, 3 z zw w w v vmim q Z Zw 3 3 o w w.3 F y yc m •c L Ls,>ie E EN c L LE a a c a a m 'a W m m t C fm/1 m < e M N N M M y Q Q M a a! 'E t th 'E U m < > Q c > v 2 o ° ° o E o o � Q o � c O K K$ IL 0. o E v nil If ,Mn mc U N m if O OL N Z N (0 CL :D C co L cu CO O L N .0 N co Le -I �� .Q .Cl) U) O a. i ON < LU co X :D < U) 2 LL: LL. 4-0 1zeds,. C: LU O 0 1 1 Oaw z w U) ui 4-1 C: U) 4—j CO 0 _0 W ❑ L-: U) cr- ca Cl) U) ❑ Z ED : z OL U) (1) Cl) cc M X E OL (j) Z 06 ❑ § 0 3: 0 - Z n C/) --�) (o > TZ -0 U) 0 CD E 2 -a cc C/) L-: E . Lo 03 E c 0 0 0) , U) 0 0 0 T- E 0 co Cl) m a) co w CU co L) LL cn 0 M: cu CL -0 co oa 0 co 76 0 U) C 0 (n 0) m 0 06 06 L W co C) 0 N n 06 06 06 co 0000000 U) m Z: Cf) ad 0 06 06 - -0 -0 -- -- x 0 06 06 06 m � W mm F— atSQ> LU 0 - Q (D " -0 0 06 0 060 0 =3 In in . " E > < 0 0 0 o o o o V- -0 Z CL ID a) a CL -5 c a ? V, 0 E E tr_ ) E E E 0 CU CU CU Co M CU 0 D. 3: -D: > U) m cc cu co cc 2 =3 0 (D --) -..) 0 iTo 0 0 m 2 --.) —3 2 2 0 m co U) z z ik �3— . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cf) -q LO co D r� 0) C) I [�- 00 10) 04 [mm TW 0 1,— 'n -� fr; t,: mi ey; N C4 N N CO -- ILO Ln I A13 2 W D 2 LU z 0� < ❑ U) w z 0 Ew LU z E L u z U) LL: LL. 4-0 1zeds,. C: LU O 0 1 1 Oaw z w U) ui 4-1 C: U) 4—j CO 0 _0 W ❑ L-: U) cr- ca Cl) U) ❑ Z ED : z OL U) (1) Cl) cc M X E OL (j) Z 06 ❑ § 0 3: 0 - Z n C/) --�) (o > TZ -0 U) 0 CD E 2 -a cc C/) L-: E . Lo 03 E c 0 0 0) , U) 0 0 0 T- E 0 co Cl) m a) co w CU co L) LL cn 0 M: cu CL -0 co oa 0 co 76 0 U) C 0 (n 0) m 0 06 06 L W co C) 0 N n 06 06 06 co 0000000 U) m Z: Cf) ad 0 06 06 - -0 -0 -- -- x 0 06 06 06 m � W mm F— atSQ> LU 0 - Q (D " -0 0 06 0 060 0 =3 In in . " E > < 0 0 0 o o o o V- -0 Z CL ID a) a CL -5 c a ? V, 0 E E tr_ ) E E E 0 CU CU CU Co M CU 0 D. 3: -D: > U) m cc cu co cc 2 =3 0 (D --) -..) 0 iTo 0 0 m 2 --.) —3 2 2 0 m co U) z z ik �3— . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cf) -q LO co D r� 0) C) I [�- 00 10) 04 [mm TW 0 1,— 'n -� fr; t,: mi ey; N C4 N N CO -- ILO Ln I A13 (1) co AJ mo U) U) O m ab o �. L. ._ Q L O L L L c . o Q2: � U C.) oo a� M — 4-0 Cl) o x x x x U= U L. cu N C m Q N D' U tfw (1) Z O .c E _ -,--a Cl) Q p M W •L ab NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN UPDATE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS COMPARATIVE SUMMARY Airport Business Area Implementation of Option 3 under the Airport Business Area, which involves a significant increase in housing, would result in the highest demand for electricity, solid waste, schools, water, and wastewater services. Option 1, which involves an increase in commercial and office uses, would require the least demand of all three options. Similarly, Option 3 would also generate the highest amount of air pollutants related to reactive organic gases, nitrogen oxide, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide, while Option 1 would result in the least amount. Balboa Village Out of the five land use alternative options for the Balboa Village area, each alternative would require a variety of different service levels for electricity, solid waste, students, wastewater, and water demand. For example, implementation of Option 4, which involves new mixed -use within the subarea, would require the highest demand for electricity use and solid waste demand. Option 5, which would include new mixed -use with visitor serving accommodations, would require the greatest demand for water and wastewater use. Implementation of all land use options would result in approximately the same number of additional students within the subarea. Lastly, Option 4 would result in the highest.generation of air pollutants, while implementation of Option 3 (includes new water - related commercial uses) would generate the least amount. Options I and 2 both involve the reuse of existing commercial to residential uses, and would result in similar demand for public services and utilities. Banning Ranch Under the Banning Ranch land use alternatives, Option 1 (Open Space) would clearly represent the best -case scenario with regard to demand for public services and utilities, and generation of air pollutants. In addition, the entire subarea would be used as open space, and all biological resources onsite would be preserved. Conversely, implementation of Option 2 (Taylor Woodrow) would generate the most students and would result in the highest water and wastewater demand. Additionally, implementation of this land use option would also generate the highest amount of air pollutants, and disturb biological resources that have a rank value of 2 and 3. Options 3 (Reduced Taylor Woodrow) and 4 (Resort) would be substantially similar in their respective demands for electricity, solid waste, schools, water and wastewater use. However, Option 3 would generate fewer demands on electricity and solid waste services, but would generate higher demands in all other service categories (students, wastewater, and water) when compared to Option 4. Cannery Village Under the three land use alternatives for the Cannery Village area, Options 1 and 3 would produce substantially similar demands, although for different service categories. Option I �1� involves new mixed -use in Block A, while Option 3 would include new mixed -use in Block B. Option I would generate the fewest middle school and high school students as well as the least demand for water and wastewater. Similarly, Option 3 would generate the least electricity, solid waste, and water demands and would also generate the fewest elementary school students and air pollutants. However, it should be noted that Option 3 would generate the greatest wastewater demands of all three alternatives as well as the most middle school students. Conversely, Option 2 (new residential use in Block A) would have the greatest service demands since this alternative would generate the greatest electricity, solid waste, and water demands, as well as generate the greatest amount of air pollutants. In addition, Option 2 would also generate the most elementary and high school students. Consequently, overall, Option 1 would represent the least intensive land use alternative under these three scenarios. Corona Del Mar In general, implementation of Option 1, which includes mixed -use of commercial and residential uses, would result in higher demands for electricity, solid waste, wastewater, and water demand. Implementation of Option 2 would include intensifying the commercial nodes with residential uses, which would result in slightly less amounts of criteria air pollutants (reactive organic gases, nitrogen oxide, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide). Lido Isle Under the two land use alternative options for Lido Isle, Option 1 would result in no change from existing conditions. Implementation of Option 2, which is continuation of the existing General Plan, would result in greater demands for electricity, solid waste, schools, wastewater, and water when compared to Option 1. Option 2 would also generate a greater amount of criteria air pollutants. Lido Village '4 Option 5, which would involve infill development consisting of retail use and mixed retail and residential uses, would generally represent the least intensive development option. Although Option 5 would only correspond with the lowest demand for water and wastewater when compared to all five alternatives, this option would require nearly the lowest service demand for the other public services and utilities as well. Conversely, Options I and 3 would represent the most intensive development alternative scenarios. Option 1, which would include mixed -use with visitor accommodation uses, would generate the greatest electricity and solid waste demand. Option 3 (mixed retail and residential uses) would generate the greatest water demand as well as the highest number of elementary and high school students. In addition, both Options I and 3 would represent nearly the greatest demand for wastewater services. Options 2 and 4 would be substantially similar, with development intensities falling between those of Option 5 and of Options 1 and 3. Option 2, which would include retail and visitor accommodation uses, would generate the fewest students. Option 4, which would involve retail infill uses on Block B and residential uses on Block C, would result in the lowest generation of electricity and solid waste services. However, overall as discussed above, Option 5 a1� would generate the lowest increase in service demand compared to all five land use alternatives. Mariner's Mile The two land use alternatives proposed for the Mariner's Mile area would represent similar demand for electricity, solid waste, schools, wastewater, and water demand. Additionally, implementation of both alternatives would also generate similar amounts of criteria air pollutants as related to reactive organic gases, nitrogen oxide, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide as both options would result in the same extent of development. Specifically, Option I would represent no change from existing conditions, while Option 2 involves a conversion of 40 percent of existing uses to commercial - marine related uses. McFadden Square . There are two land use alternatives proposed for McFadden Square. Option 1 would allow lodging or overnight visitor accommodations to be included in the area, while Option 2 would include mixed residential and office uses. Option 2 would represent the least intensive development alternative, requiring the lowest demand for electricity, solid waste, schools, wastewater, and water demand, as well as generating the least amount of criteria air pollutants. Newport Center /Fashion Island Under the three land use development alternatives proposed for Newport Center /Fashion Island, Option 2 would result in the lowest generation and demand for solid waste, students, wastewater, and water, as well as criteria air pollutants. Conversely, Option 1 would represent the most intensive development under the proposed land use alternatives becausd this alternative would generate the greatest demand for electricity, solid waste, wastewater, and water services. Implementation of Option 1 would also generate the greatest amounts of criteria air pollutants (reactive organic gases, nitrogen oxide particulate matter, and carbon monoxide). It should be noted that Option 3, although it would represent the mid -point between the service demands of Options I and 2, would generate the most students. Old Newport Blvd. Implementation of land use Option 1 would include medical office and retail uses, and vertical mixed -use (commercial and residential) within the Old Newport Boulevard area. Option 2 would include vertical mixed -use (commercial and residential) and an intensification of residential uses. The third land use option for the area would include also vertical mixed -use of commercial and residential, and affordable workforce housing. Under the three land use development alternatives proposed for Old Newport Blvd., Option I would generate the fewest students as well as the least water and wastewater demand. However, the proposed uses would generate the greatest amount of criteria air pollutants when compared to the other two land use options for the subarea. Option 3 would represent the most intensive development alternative because this option would result in the greatest electricity, solid waste, water, and wastewater demand. In addition, 1 both Options 2 and 3 would generate the most elementary and high school students. Implementation of Option 2 would generate the least amount of criteria air pollutants (reactive organic gases, nitrogen oxide, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide) when compared to the other two land use alternatives. West Newport Hwy & Adjoining Residential Four land use alternatives are proposed for the West Newport Highway and Adjoining Residential uses. Option I would include new multi - family residential uses, as well as vertical mixed -use of commercial and residential uses. Option 2 would allow special needs housing and hotel uses. Park and open space, as well as new commercial uses with lot consolidation, would be incorporated under Option 3. Option 4 would retain a parking lot and include limited rental housing and hotel uses. Implementation of Option 1 would require the greatest demand for electricity, solid waste, and school services. Option 2 would generate the greatest demand for water and wastewater services, and the least demand for electricity and solid waste services. Demand for these public services and utilities for Options 3 and 4 would fall in between. West Newport Industrial Under the three West Newport Industrial alternatives, Option 2 (intensification of medical uses with additional commercial and residential uses) would generate the fewest students and the least demand for electricity, water, and wastewater services. However, Option 2 would generate the greatest demand for solid waste services, and result in the greatest amount of criteria air pollutants that include reactive organic gases, nitrogen oxide, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide. Conversely, Option 3 (expansion of existing mobile home uses) would generate the most students and demand for water and wastewater. However, it should be noted that Option 3 would generate the least demand for solid waste services. Meanwhile, implementation of Option I (no change from existing conditions) would fall in between the other two alternatives with regard@o increased service demand; however, Optionl would generate the smallest amount of criteria air pollutants but the highest electricity usage. Overall, Option 2 would represent the least intensive land use alternative. a � /' �o ?gglala ��MM T:gaaa¢ ..�mgaE �o a� gaga gaa ULL% ZZZZ Z�� 3Z f' - ^INpp N nN lag '�V NON ZZZ ZZZ G W ' N 9 _ J N c� E `p J 'mO 0 0 0 fmp� O NA�r rnA O n O'O ��p( 1 lm(1 N W tMV (MOM N N N O O O N O fO 0 0 N �- � Z N N m m V; V; _< _< e�°e`°:e 01 66Q¢Q a°3E\° °�2°d' mom QQQQ gQQ �Y N J Ut2 ZZZZ � � �- m m �� '9N am NON N N N O N Z ZZZ Z Z C W - H d c11qq E` m O j 000r°?r d'. No�oornOOii o[[pp o'pm� dd(O �n '^. dt0 m d do 0 oo- Omoo. -- �p N Z h m F O1 W N Q ULLX ZZZZ '�"' ZZZZZ NNa'fWN M d �� NON ZZZZ ZZZ C W _ 9 N y EE 0 E` EJO� OO,OM y N m d M M W W Op Ntq N;��ppM� N t 0 O `-'d�Nn.� O N N n! O I N Om�N f O Otp O(O M `d N O m N 00 0 N� 0 � M - N"!� NN'NIN NNN d C1� AAWW NtV [V ffVV t2 aj�le �e aaglga s :��xo nrov �� o�N xaE ULLx mld�,� :cO0.10d ON ryN _.ZZZ122'3h W.�N� NON .�Od� MVN = j C_ m c0 mM M ip 1[l r d Ad N O 10 N M f010 f0 c0 a% @ 10 r r 0 t0 m M (D d n n W N O d m N N— O I m h A o) M M W N N A O --.-;I O N O m O N O N �pp t0�0 f0 O n m O t p n N d M m h O O G YqM E O] m`' [p O iOANMd d N) OI(0 O 0 n 6lNNN' p N p:M .O� A d IM !m �O M t70 N N A ((pp mt00�01��A �I an d 10 O �fOp MO10 O1 rrrr N�Vn�MNNV M O �NNIM O OOOOinh 1 j h tOm MdMd f0 w e = @. Lo dEafpm I��d�dE 3°X 3E3°�� 9rnhs mmd i. n m,pm m LL N d M �p (p tp d M m 1, ZIP r o� t O m N $ N d M d N J C y q@ W o t 'N Ev w a d C Q ! K ... G@ p 6 Nd .OYlI W p M {y O! N:O n d N m A.I. N N mm mNMM O w BO p M0 O M p o tO O0 0.8 M 0 M Nd MONm Oy 1010 SO WM NO Nom �V:tm+fV M d d d O W N tD m ,N dth ©d� LL'1 d d Y1 10 t0 Y'!. yhj L c O m E ` L e N ; +�ae�a iri N A ��((11 {p °nom° °�h°�Ip N M 1� T10i�hmd w ULLW +i�N(H 1[] O Nr ZZZZ Z N N Y�]1N10 Nam c y 10 mmNrMm�pmm qm n1p �INn (O O v1mN :tmnrc4i !.N 10 t0 Ihl.- t0 r:N m'O 1�i mom mrr o1Orrnm A N N:O N O Mmp ryNN m mmmm �`�' o tp O'O M n W W N �d�d - m m m Y] n d N O d m INN NNN'NN N dt`N')N Mmd'(O fO pIM a�j 1p 1p dd( ww ddv �p E ` LL 4 `aaa¢¢ :e .. aE�e '(.WNNV e sego e,e e ° eg a°a°e ales eeetye a ;ems ULLX � Mmp1 � °N,1.� �ZZ�Z m� A�� WNW ' :NON �'0 V fniidn i .t' @LT iV NVNOth VINO IOO fAO MfD [00110�tr0rN OIONdN OOd AN01 t0 `OA)O O OON�N�Om AAm (O HE }J �n 'Vro00V yy pp�� c0 rlr m [O N t0 m NO)NINn� SIN N n W p1 d d:0 M Oi O! O) O O 1y Nj O N W$ N d Q` iNNmMM N�i�m (+�C'1 ryp� f�� N mlO� ddnc'idml� •'�I�- M10n0 (Onto d(Odm m'y'MO�OOIAA j N4 I 1 1 I O O O O �m �m �m 'Yw LI a �`m yam > �C7 � cmuC 9 (a @g CuC 9 cyC 7 S_{C N W m C �AOCI1I'_ N G 7 S �C ywC� C �C NC mC dC O m C L 1C 0 y .G p3 lIO _uONC L 0 :A q OC G w O OF p ' mc 4 w N wOw S S S 00 0 O' O a 7070L 'S0O 0�OC 0NC 0m x m 0d'O 0 b7 - 2 a Q Rm q G o V J J W��C Rq Cr � /' v� w w L L @ @ VU E E N N 9 ^ss _N N 8� sysp j = w w �tl C C as 3 J N M mm O O `0 0 d d 0 o g d d m w w 9 'O Q Q �c �c W 9 d ;O d LD 0 0 :C 'C 6 Lm Lm G G EE w 0 w W w w J J N A d d O 9 N T Z. Q w m Ytl 5 ,50 5,50 E E g O O V N N m O D rrD a a @ a � � w � � h ^ N M & a tE ell goo NQIQ lDN �� -NN o OID�N ��m xx�e a�ae OY: Z9 Y•R aeae°�oN QQ ULLW ^N.MM •Y ^N v a mEE0?Mmm a m N NmIW AAA NNINII� nmava NNppppO)Di ID IDQQmID O 1DOWpp IDQm OMMmM mmmmA � � m d �Ea L 2 rll •� "NN N O MA f0^ °�°o NN e N W Vml� p N Nj Nih ID mNFVM I�Dm NN N w U LL x NN N OmfmM ^NN L W O N @ d E E EEj Oa BIODNN d1Q V NmmtOAA W W QNA Mma Nmm� MMMQM W W V Q OJ [pA Q Q AtppMAtp V'QQ 1I1R V Q mmap f�l C]Cf �p (pN f7 V Od Z J N d L e w e1° V V +i.i : Mt e e "'::: ae �° aem N MtZ�I ° ° ° V V 0t°m{Vy°a° N ULL'if X00 mV.. "O WC? ^AAOI m� OA 1I^ ANA ^r mmMN -NN @n a d'OMM �� 0' m ^;Mr A AA y V Nm.m W AN A� W M AmMt`�ID vo [[ppA mmNm pM A A�DAp MMd'W III Ap MID ymyQ Q MM j�NN ^I VQQmN !i @ E "�laea4 L O M V ��:;_: N �; M N O tD N ae �j O� ° ° O aeae��aeae�o 0 N M A m N 10 M O m m OM m �N m iii;i Q N NI^ O] OI .IjL ^ N:N ^ (V ^ M n - Q N A'N lO1Q ^ Q IpD N N ID N N N ^ Q ' W��'...N OI NO 'O rmQMN (p gNtONW tNq pAQ ctnv: � �Op p^ .CF I. �NmVNV w`fmD {rmI Om1 C'] @M 0 WNMMM IN g AIM IIODW`n�n O., m(QO�mm NNNNNNMNNN Ol WW00 ... v EN a c@ E `e N RK sae m ., a °ae ae ae ae ae t ae O I. ae �e ae eae aeXX om � d C Wed d L e ULLXm Q W W !.i N Q. =i tD:Q N m O m .... N J d 3 aE W '7{ Lu E .2 yO'OWN OIN tNp':ao pm yO (OpmA WOO ymO WO NpM� NvW NMM YmomA OI mmmM pm °A'1 VIm'-' W^ �Yp] Q{N�OI yN C'I tAt�� W ^aID I(11D paO W A IDN�NOO�N��N C)yrN NNyM p ^M MN ;W 0 <D w t0 ;Aml(1N ^ N M M M N N N N:N N N N N N N A m m W W d z v T W C O q'I � t9"dEN ^m IO •N QN�WN I,_ -a : V W V thMMm V MW -:a2 perp°NA N V ra NNN W MM m V ^MAIN 110NNNI�N ^� 3 �LLWi IN a D M @ @IO.mm a pM HMO top m0e'IDWQ N y fO p NVmQ - M Oy A Wm NO m mlfN') V Am W Am N m A m m pQQJ E 'ANN Q W M Q A n"—mj yaN O m A ID °�i�O�f m (OOONmmIW �IOirANA m0f00 wwAwA MNm�m MMmNm 0 pmj `c ES' L !%°NWQIW a g-le ae9 ae ' a mN i4'i'.;mQA -1 NtD' Q m^ �ONMa° °: e� m yQQE at aN e ULLL Q � IO W mNN' ^ N A la� YJ t' U d W a� C I p TT E� I p 'm m 'ViQ N. m i N M. ym O N ^mNm m N W V M M W'mmIDN ID O IDQ m rID Q O A mQmQM r M r m r r m Q p O] M W WAm m M V A O$ O AID M O r t N^ M OJ :m N A N p V MWNmO Q I D IO I D m10 m W yO Q yy m ❑`-' I NNIN I NN C m I 1 as IQ� ttA�� C O a N LL ^ NM Q —"MV w,� ml 7w m 0 0 0 0 .2 .2 0 o c cal m�a 'tea mjCl Y» 0��0000 OOOOY�� @ N L d U D L ��2SII U U , U � y C N C M C w r� rs 2y TC Ii -y S -y b �� ?ayI 0O W Wu7070 00O 0O mmmmm ffi W v� w w L L @ @ VU E E N N 9 ^ss _N N 8� sysp j = w w �tl C C as 3 J N M mm O O `0 0 d d 0 o g d d m w w 9 'O Q Q �c �c W 9 d ;O d LD 0 0 :C 'C 6 Lm Lm G G EE w 0 w W w w J J N A d d O 9 N T Z. Q w m Ytl 5 ,50 5,50 E E g O O V N N m O D rrD a a @ a � � w � � h ^ N M w A 11 a� a� xH a �a a as a� w z b g� 0 0 U � y 00 .0 0 3 ?� � o v °q U � 0 O N y �Y C3 fl 0 O 00 0 o o �b O . x O 0� 0 0 V N r�� av � •s 0 N 0 ay. 3 v O c0 A CN y Sr R3 bD U O o n w v k H 0 7 0 0 N a; El / / / rnO0D OOei l(Zr TN�a v dO . W ?O V M LO a a RD (4) oo�r °N� r a ci o v�oo 9 G x N V 0] OO ei 0 a-I 100 GO 6107 ei 00 �O rrnGo vi C$ via _z a 0.O 00000 ai 0 ei Nw ONNO N w Na Q� �4°? 0 My d N 3� 0 V O O N v a 3 UCO U1 C 07 O L 0) E E N V N N V �aoS N EE° m t o o E E C: 0 O ir 3 o f EcD CCO i� i E V 0i C 'p '6 in 3 w x x e w c m a n d 'SOC 3 r 0 O O 0 V V ld d N x x fi N` g 0 O 0 0 X CN V7 �� II rCII Cp7� �ci a m FF ��-�1 006000 v� �rINM,.i NMd' 0) NM NM q.iN L 0 C 0 C C Q Q C C O C O C O C O fi C 0 C 0 C 0 C 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 C C 0 0 0 . O fi fi 2.2 a aa`es aaaaa caao.a d o.aa o as QOOO A000000 ro0000 c�000 c30o 0 0 N a; El / / / 0 0 N T .4 0. Q aa� O M aN Ofh rM w In Lo M NN N N yQ N cOiN d w ot [v O d CO -1cm C4 OM M OMIn CO Nm V' O O/D e1 a V M-f cm C4 ei r- It It N NN NN w O N N VC4t°C4 OM MCC mMM � CO ONN Cl) 01 0401 Ne-I ei C x �Q N d'•tN �•IN ei ISM _z 0 O N MMMa IC Oh Mm M.iO ei ai 67 rM O N d0N a. O V CV) NN ei 00 c) mMM C'4 vi N c v c X41 ;O i1 L N N 3 U O y E w N o a 3 ` @ � V CO aV C @ m N C 40 N i@ Cl E E @ N E O @ 0 U X° E c 0 E 0 � G � V p E V c y O @ 41 V m o a VI 4D p C C1 N 0 0 'O 0 O N O i m E O 3 4 o° 0 o 0 �E o nn Eo o c E �mO 03� U C V E CS L5 U 41 0 O N 401 "' °@ O 0 U C C E c X @ O O O a d '` l6 0 •O 9 ++ %°-O bC N L N m m N •N O �` Y O E u~OI O N O 0 E 0 'O E E C W N E ° .� 0 w ._ 0 3 N V O •C O •X 0 N_ C O� w 0 V m N v .NO. b V V 10 ei 0 2 0 0 3@ :°. m > '< :c c c t d m� m d .�. a1 m e q£ w d v E 0i >> c w e o ' 3 �Cb m n b tiamLL0 00 a@ @�@ u w e m .O V L C) O @@@ (D 0 ID �aaa O Y Y Y Z E E ti t o C C O C p X X U O O b° " O O `I O V U O fi U v 0 0 0 0% a_0+ .a+ L O r a X Z U b e 1 it 1 1 m m z 1 U 1 1 1 v l l m 1 m 1 m° 1 a° 1 Z 1 .-p. t R.7 i 1 NM 4 2 '(' .iN ci N lei N 3a NM ye�N yai NM c c j c c c c c c c c c O c c O c O b c O c O c O Z c 00 c Z c o c o c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 .2 .2 EZ 0 0 3 y y ?a at'o.aaaa° aab 00:`OO G aba�.a�a ZOOOOOOO aa°'O.ab 300 3000 aaa +i0 0.4 0000 0 0 N T .4 0. Q aa�