The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSS3 - Traffic & Environmental Analysis of General Plan Update Land Use Alternatives0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT SSA Agenda Item No. o� June 14, 2005 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL 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 City Council received limited results of the traffic analysis and the full fiscal impact analysis at its meeting of May 24, 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 shared with the community at a public workshop on Saturday, June 25, and we will seek input from the community 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: 07 1110 ..d Assistant City Manager Attachments: 1. General Plan Traffic Study — Preliminary Alternatives Analysis 2. Environmental Impacts Comparative Summary • URB AN 41 Corporate Park, Suite 300 Irvine, CA 92606 Prepared by: Carleton Waters, P.E. Marlie P.E. �OFESS /p .�_cZONk�I_ 521!i6 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 0 SECTION PAGE ES.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................. ............................... ES -1 ES.1 GPAC Subarea Trip Generation Anaysis ES.2 Preliminary Alternatives 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY ........................ ............................... 1 -1 1.1 Goals and Objectives 1.2 Methodology Overview 1.2.1 Data and Analysis Methodology 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) 7 0 n LJ 0 3.2 Trip Generation 3.3 Traffic Assignment 3.4 Daily Capacity Analysis 3.5 Peak Hour Forecasts 4.0 TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (POST -2025) ALTERNATIVE WITH OPEN SPACE NETWORK SCENARIO ...................... 4 -1 4.1 Land Use and Socioeconomic Data (SED) 4.1.1 True Minimum General Plan Buildout Land Use Data 4.1.2 General Plan Buildout Socioeconomic Data (SED) 4.2 Trip Generation 4.3 Traffic Assignment 4.4 Daily Capacity Analysis 4.5 Peak Hour Forecasts 5.0 SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (POST -2025) ALTERNATIVE WITH OPEN SPACE NETWORK SCENARIO ...................... 5 -1 5.1 Land Use and Socioeconomic Data (SED) 5.1.1 Subarea Minimum General Plan Buildout Land Use Data 5.1.2 General Plan Buildout Socioeconomic Data (SED) 5.2 Trip Generation 5.3 Traffic Assignment 5.4 Daily Capacity Analysis 5.5 Peak Hour Forecasts 6.0 SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (POST -2025) ALTERNATIVE WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK SCENARIO ................... 6 -1 6.1 Land Use and Socioeconomic Data (SED) 6.1.1 Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout Land Use Data 6.1.2 Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout Socioeconomic Data (SED) 6.2 Trip Generation 6.3 Traffic Assignment 6.4 Daily Capacity Analysis 6.5 Peak Hour Forecasts 5 9 APPENDICES 0 MIXED USE TRIP GENERATION INFORMATION ....................... ............................... A EXISTINGLAND 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 ................................................................. ............................... J TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE= ......... ............................... K TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE CHANGE FROM CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BY TAZ .......... ............................... L TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRIP GENERATION ......................... M TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRIP GENERATION CHANGE FROM CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BY TAZ ........................ N TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) WORKSHEETS ........................... ............................... O TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) WORKSHEETS WITH IMPROVEMENTS .................. P SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE ... ............................... O SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE CHANGE • FROM CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BY TAZ .......... ............................... R no 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 ......................................................................... ............................... 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 n vi LIST OF EXHIBITS 0 EXHIBIT PAGE 1 -A INTERSECTION ANALYSIS LOCATIONS ............. ............................... 1 -5 3 -A NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT CONSTRAINED THROUGH LANES ...................... ............................... 3 -13 3 -B CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT) ......... 3 -14 3 -C GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK VOLUME /CAPACITY (V /C) RATIOS ... ............................... 3 -24 3 -D CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK DEFICIENCIES ............................. 3 -33 4 -A TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ( ADT) ......................... ............................... 4 -9 4 -B TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT VOLUME/CAPACITY (V /C) RATIOS ...................... ............................... 4 -18 4 -C TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE WITH OPEN SPACE NETWORK DEFICIENCIES .................................... ............................... 4 -27 5 -A SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ( ADT) ......................... ............................... 5 -9 5 -B SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT VOLUME /CAPACITY (V /C) RATIOS ...................... ............................... 5 -18 5 -C SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE WITH OPEN SPACE NETWORK DEFICIENCIES ........... ............................... 5 -27 6 -A SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE AVERAGE 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 9 I 19 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE ES -1 RECOMMENDED OVERALL GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT ALTERNATIVES SUMMARY ............................ ............................... ES -2 ES -2 TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ...................... ............................... ES -3 ES -3 AM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY ................... ............................... ES -5 ES-4 PM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY ................... ............................... ES -8 ES -5 DEFICIENT INTERSECTION SUMMARY ....... ............................... ES -10 ES -6 OVERALL LOS SUMMARY .............................. ............................... ES -11 1 -1 ROADWAY SEGMENT CAPACITIES ................... ............................... 1-4 2 -1 MODEL TRIP GENERATION RATES ................... ............................... 2 -2 2 -2 MODEL RESIDENTIAL TRIP GENERATION RATE REVIEW ................ 2-4 2 -3 CONVERSION FACTORS BASED ON PM TOTAL ONLY ..................... 2 -6 2-4 OVERALL MIXED USE CONVERSION FACTORS ......... :...................... 2 -8 2 -5 ABSOLUTE WORST CASE CONVERSION FACTORS ......................... 2 -9 2 -6 APARTMENT TRIP GENERATION RATE COMPARISON ................... 2 -10 2 -7 AIRPORT AREA SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ............. 2 -12 2 -8 BALBOA VILLAGE SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY......... 2 -13 2 -9 BANNING RANCH SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY......... 2 -15 2 -10 CANNERY VILLAGE SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY...... 2 -16 2 -11 CORONA DEL MAR SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ...... 2 -18 2 -12 LIDO ISLE SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ...................... 2 -19 2 -13 LIDO VILLAGE SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ............... 2 -21 � � I 2 -14 MARINER'S MILE SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY.......... 2 -23 2 -15 MCFADDEN SQUARE SUBAREA 3-4 3 -3 TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ............................ ............................... 2 -24 2 -16 NEWPORT CENTER/ FASHION ISLAND 3 -5 3-4 SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY .......... ............................... 2 -26 2 -17 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD 3 -6 3 -5 SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY .......... ............................... 2 -28 2 -18 WEST NEWPORT HIGHWAY AND ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL 3 -7 3 -6 SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY .......... ............................... 2 -29 2 -19 WEST NEWPORT INDUSTRIAL 3 -10 3 -8 SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY .......... ............................... 2 -31 2 -20 RECOMMENDED OVERALL GENERAL PLAN 3 -11 BUILDOUT ALTERNATIVES SUMMARY ............... ............................... 2 -32 2 -21 OVERALL ALTERNATIVES SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY .......... ............................... 2 -33 3 -1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH EXISTING 0 LAND USE SUMMARY ........................................... ............................... 3 -2 3 -2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE COMPARISON ................. ............................... 3-4 3 -3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING ........................... 3 -5 3-4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LAND USE BASED EXISTING SOCIOECONOMIC DATA SUMMARY . ............................... 3 -6 3 -5 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LAND USE BASED SOCIOECONOMIC DATA GROWTH FROM EXISTING ...................... 3 -7 3 -6 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH EXISTING TRIP GENERATION ............ 3 -9 3 -7 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRIP GENERATION GROWTH ............. 3 -10 3 -8 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON ............................... ............................... 3 -11 Ll 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 t9 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 0 f �. 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 13 2°' 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 I N W J m H Y Q U) N N w Q Z w W J Q F O J 7 m g IL Df J Q w z w J J w > O W Z W O U W Ir N Z m a m m � N C m � N 0 O a m C a � U m N y O yJ c rn c w N � V Q r N O c 0 N N N O m W � J c`') V N w Q) �� (� � N O - � � � � l0 N mZ c 0 c 0 c 0 c 0 c 0 c 0 _N �I c O c O c O c O c O c O c O c O c O O 7 O O N OOOOOOQO00000000 N Z O a � � Z WO N Q N N � M � � � � N N� M Z m 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 C 0 O a CL CL _ _ _ _ _ N 0000000000000000 a a a n. n. n. n. n. n. g m m m m m m m m m C C C C C C C C C w W r r O O O p p p p p r 0 0 H O O rL O aOOao00aaaaa$a00 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m C N _p y N all C C Q p O w Q Q p p y 0) V It V C m 7 (n C V p C H H m m L y C Q) y LL y c L p p m N Q N N m> O mrr 2 C °a c m m� HH N _ c -� 0 0 m Q) m = m d' =_ >> 2 c c Lj o cl Q i cn ❑ p m m` -00 -00 r 3 N N 0 m 0 C C y c y c p y i p c 'p m 'p m O N Z Z Z m m m m O 'p0 "00 '00 m U U y 'p N Q m m 0 0 0 J J J Z O>> > ES -2 c m a m N C m N 0 O m m C U m N y c rn c w N � r N O N O N N O m Q) X w Q) N y r> c _N U y Q) O _N �I c N v � 0 o 7 O 15 `L'v TABLE ES -2 TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVE' DAILY TRIP GENERATION EXISTING ALTERNATIVE EXISTING %D EXISTING A(ADOPTED) %Q ADOPTED 1. CURRENTLY ADOPTED 687,141 879,759 192,618 28.03% 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 1 961,043 273,902 39.86% 81,284 9% ' Alternative = General Plan buildout scenario. U: \UcJ obs \- 01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xls] ES -2 • • • ES -3 11 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 ES-4 r i= i TABLE ES -3 (PAGE 1 OF 2) AM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY . INTERSECTION NS/EW CURRENTLY ADOPTED TRUE MINIMUM SUBAREA MINIMUM SUBAREA MAXIMUM ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. 1.27 F DNE DNE DNE DNE 1.28 F 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.72 C 0.74 C 0.73 C 0.72 C 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 1.01 F 0.98 E 1.00 E 1.03 F 4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. 0.79 C 0.79 C 0.84 D 0.93 E 5. Newport Bl. & Via Lido 0.54 A 0.52 A 0.55 A 0.60 6. Newport BI. & 32nd St. 0.52 A 0.47 A 0.48 A 0.57 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.03 F 1.01 F 1.02 F 1.04 F 8. Tustin Av. &Coast Hw. 1.021 F1 1.01 F1 1.041 F 1.06 F 9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr. 0.761 Cl 0.75 Cl 0.77 C 0.81 D 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0.71 C 0.70 B 0.75 C 0.79 C 11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.66 B 0.64 B 0.69 B 0.74 C 12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Karman Av. 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.51 A 0.52 A 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.92 E 0.93 E 0.93 E 0.98 E 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. 0.79 C 0.80 C 0.81 D 0.87 D 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N) 0.96 E 0.96 E 0.97 E 1.00 E 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N) 0.92 E 0.93 E 0.92 E 0.91 E 17. Campus Dr.11rvine Av. &Bristol St. (S) 0.93 E 0.91 E 0.93 E 0.93 E 118. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S) 0.52 A 0.52 Al 0.541 A 0.531 A 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.68 B 0.68 B 0.70 B 0.73 C 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.141 F 1.15 F 1.15 F 1.14 F 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.70 B 0.69 B 0.70 B 0.71 C 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.61 B 0.61 B 0.62 B 0.63 B 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.78 C 0.78 C 0.79 C 0.82 D 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.67 B 0.66 B 0.69 B 0.70 B 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 0.39 A 0.40 A 0.40 A 0.41 A 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.64 B 0.64 BI 0.641 B 0.641 B 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.86 D 0.84 D 0.87 D 0.89 D 28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.83 D 0.82 D 0.83 D 0.84 D 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. 0.96 E 0.97 E 0.96 E 0.96 E 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (N) 0.70 B 0.71 C 0.71 C 0.69 B 31. Bayview PI. & Bristol St. (S ) 0.60 A 0.59 A 0.61 B 0.61 B 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S ) 0.96 E 0.97 E 0.97 E 0.94 E 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W . 0.481 Al 0.48 A 0.48 A 0.48 A 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr. 0.64 B 0.65 BI 0.661 B 0.651 B 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.51 A 0.501 A 0.51 A 0.52 A 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /Ford Rd. 0.78 C 0.761 C 0.791 C 0.81 D 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.61 B 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.64 B 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.55 A 0.54 A 0.581 A 0.69 B 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.85 D 0.85 D 0.87 D 0.88 D 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 A 0.34 A 0.38 A 0.39 A 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd, 0.39 A 0.39 A 0.39 A 0.43 A 42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 A 0.50 Al 0.50 Al 0.55 A 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.37 A 0.38 A 0.39 A 0.43 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.77 C 0.78 C I 0.80 C 0.81 D ES -5 J 0 Ig. 1 �` TABLE ES -3 (PAGE 2 OF 2) 0 AM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY 0 INTERSECTION NSIEW CURRENTLY ADOPTED TRUE MINIMUM SUBAREA MINIMUM SUBAREA MAXIMUM ICU I LOS ICU LOS ICU I LOS ICU I LOS 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.47 A 0.47 A 0.47 A 0.47 47. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.38 A 0.39 A 0.38 A 0.38 Al 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.78 C 0.77 C 0.79 C 0.81 D 49. MacArthur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.77 C 0.77 C 0.78 C 0.79 C 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.77 C 0.77 C 0.81 D 0.83 D 51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.63 B 0.62 BI 0.63 B 0.71 C 52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw. 0.74 C 0.74 C 0.73 C 0.74 C 53. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.691 B1 0.69 B 0.69 B 0.721 C 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.45 A 0.45 A 0.46 A 0.46 A 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.30 A 0.30 A 0.30 A 0.31 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.52 A 0.51 A 0.55 A 0.54 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.08 F 1.06 F 1.06 F 1.08 F 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.38 A 0.38 A 0.38 A 0.39 59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.90 D 0.88 DI 0.89 D 0.90 D 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.60 A 0.59 A 0.60 0.62 B 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.67 B 0.68 B 0.67 0.68 B 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Ramps 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.53 EA 0.55 A 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joa uin Hills Rd. 0.63 B 0.63 B 0.63 0.66 B 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.57 A 0.57 A 0.56 0.57 U: \UcJobs \- 01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xls) ES -3 ES -6 Iq aD i • No extension of 19th Street across the Santa Ana River • No widening of Jamboree Road north of Ford Road In general, most intersections experience a maximum change of 1 level of service (LOS), for instance from LOS "C to LOS "D ". A few intersections (Newport Boulevard at Hospital Road, for example) experience a greater range (LOS "C" to LOS "E" for the example cited). Table ES-4 provides a similar summary for the PM peak hour. Table ES -5 highlights those intersections projected to experience deficient operations. From Table ES -5, individual intersection performance across scenarios can be evaluated for the key intersections where deficient operations are anticipated for 1 or more of the preliminary alternatives. For instance, the intersections where the true minimum alternative results in improved levels of service compared to the adopted General Plan are Superior Avenue (NS) at Coast Highway (EW) and Marguerite Avenue (NS) at Coast Highway (EW). Table ES -6 provides an overview of the number and percentage of intersections experiencing each level of service by time of day (AM /PM) and overall (AM +PM). The subarea maximum alternative experiences the most overall deficiencies (34) and the true minimum alternative experiences fewer deficiencies (24) than the remaining two alternatives, which experience an equal number of deficiencies (26). Improvements have been developed that provide acceptable operations at all potentially deficient intersections (outlined within the body of the report). The feasibility of the necessary improvements is questionable at some locations (particularly where additional through lanes are necessary). ES -7 ao 0 9 TABLE ES-4 (PAGE 1 OF 2) PM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY INTERSECTION NSIEW CURRENTLY ADOPTED TRUE MINIMUM SUBAREA MINIMUM SUBAREA MAXIMUM ICU LOS ICU I LOS ICU I LOS ICU 1 OS 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. 1.29 F DNE DNE DNE DNE 1.28 F 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.82 D 0.86 D 0.86 D 0.83 D 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 0.99 E 0.94 E 0.95 E 1.04 F 4. Newport Bl. & Hospital Rd. 0.97 E 0.96 E 1.01 F 1.18 F 5. Newport Bl. & Via Lido 0.46 A 0.41 A 0.45 A 0.52 6. Newport BI. & 32nd St. 0.71 C 0.58 A 0.63 B 0.81 D 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.12 F 1.10 F 1.15 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 Bl. & Birch St. 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.86 D 0.86 D 11. Von Karmen Av. & Campus 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 ) 1.08 F 1.08 F 1.08 F 1.06 F 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N ) 0.72 C 0.72 Cl 0.73 Cl 0.72 C 17. Campus Dr. /Irvine Av. & Bristol St. (S) 0.77 C 0.76 C 0.78 C 0.771 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 DI 0.91 E 0.94 E 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.19 F 1.16 F 1.17 F 1.18 F 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.78 C 0.76 C 0.78 C 0.77 C 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.63 B 0.63 B 0.65 B 0.66 B 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.70 B 0.71 C 0.72 C 0.72 C 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Or 0.82 D 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.83 D 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 0.56 A 0.57 A 0.58 A 0.59 A 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.64 B 0.65 B 0.65 B 0.64 B 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.90 D 0.88 D 0.91 E 0.94 E 28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.94 E 0.931 El 0.95 E 0.98 E 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. 0.99 E 0.99 El 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. Bayview Pl. & 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 DI 0.871 D 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W . 0.701 BI 0.70 B 0.71 C 0.71 C 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr. 0.691 BI 0.68 B 0.70 B 0.71 C 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.581 Al 0.58 A 0.59 A 0.62 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 B 0.65 BI 0.68 B 0.71 C 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.71 C 0.71 C 0.78 C 0.87 D 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.89 D 0.87 D 0.86 D 0.91 E 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.34 A 0.34 A 0.36 Al 0.36 A 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.71 C 0.70 B 0.68 B .73 0.731- C 42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.63 B 0.62 B 0.62 B 0.661 B 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.79 C 0.78 C 0.79 C 0.841 D 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.801 C 0.79 C 0.83 D 0.831 D ES -8 a� zz TABLE ES-4 (PAGE 2 OF 2) PM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY 0 INTERSECTION NSIEW CURRENTLY ADOPTED TRUE MINIMUM SUBAREA MINIMUM SUBAREA MAXIMUM ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU I LOS ICU I LOS 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.561 A 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.56 47. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.29 A 0.29 A 0.29 A 0.29 48. MacArthur Bl. & Bison Av. 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.81 D 0.81 D 49. MacArhtur Bl. & 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 Bl. & San Miguel Dr. 0.77 C 0.76 C 0.76 C 0.80 C 52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw. 0.83 D 0.80 C 0.79 C 0.81 D 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.53 A 0.52 A 0.53 A 0.541 A 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.59 A 0.57 Al 0.59 A 0.601 A 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.38 A 0.38 A 0.38 A 0.39 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.68 B 0.68 B 0.68 B 0.71 C 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 0.79 Cl 0.75 C 0.75 C 0.77 C 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.51 A 0.49 A 0.50 A 0.53 59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.91 E 0.90 DI 0.92 E 0.91 E 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.46 A 0.45 A 0.46 A 0.50 A 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.76 C 0.75 C 0.75 C 0.74 C 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Rams 0.40 A 0.39 A 0.40 A 0.41 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.47 A 0.46 A 0.48 A 0.51 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.60 Al 0.61 B U: \UcJobs \_ 01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xls] ES -4 ES -9 as 0 • • TABLE ES -5 DEFICIENT INTERSECTION SUMMARY INTERSECTION NSIEW CURRENTLY ADOPTED TRUE MINIMUM SUBAREA MINIMUM SUBAREA MAXIMUM AM I PM I AM I PM AM PM AM I PM 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. F1 F DNE DNEj DNE DNEj F F 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. F1 E E E E E F 4. New ort BI. & Hos ital Rd. C E C E D F E IF 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. F F F F F F F 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. F D F D F D F E 9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr. C F C F C F D F 11. Von 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) E F E F1 E F El F 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N) E C E C E C E C 17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. (S) E C E C E C E C 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. B D B D B E C E 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. F F F F F F F 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. D D D D D E D E 28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw. D E D E DI E D E 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. E E E E E E E F 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S) E D E DI E D El D 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. D D D D D D D E 49. MacArthur Bl. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. C F C F C F C F 50. MacArthur Bl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. C F C F D F D F 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. F C F C F C F C 59.Marguerite Av. & Coast Hw. D E D D D E D E U: \U cJ obs\ -01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xls] ES -5 ES -10 b✓ 3"t \ � § § » ) LLI 3 w, Lli Lli K � 0 � � 7, y m »«Mpw -;a @ llR „ ,2 \Nm $ »// // * a!a //a ;/$334 a <)2 \2 =, , r/D u22 )LLI 00M ® ; = /,eq§ ! _ tom/ \� R` <!2 ^-, , mm 5!<f <® „ ® , ,_ \ \ \ 72 ®££ f ( 5!f & /!�\_,_� ED , C) „ )a 6�u!#a@< \�© a D # =2a /a, m K,,, C) e ƒ0 /@ MM /@ 5!<«aa a \( $ ;33§/ § , al,,,= ` < © a! woo (\ !ul;2a- i$&[J Q ~` ;a ! §/ a R / :§§k m \LLI tON §[ § §!2 R R` � LU w, Lli Lli K � 0 � � 7, y m »«Mpw a \Nm $/3 »// * a!a //a ;/$334 a 2@@,,,, )LLI 00M ® ; = /,eq§ _ tom/ §0 R` 5!<f <® ® ®££ f ( 5!f & 2 ED C) „ )a 6�u!#a@< a # =2a /a, m K,,, C) e tgmvm« /@ 5!<«aa a $ ;33§/ § © 5!£/«« woo (\ i\)&[J ! !/22* a R / :§§k m tON § §!2 R` � j( ; <mo0°)u� 0w w, Lli Lli K � 0 � � 7, y 0 • THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ES -12 WE 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 City 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 to Z1 1.1 Goals and Obiectives • The goals of the General Plan Update preliminary alternatives analysis are to analyze future General Plan buildout alternative daily and peak hour volume forecasts and provide comparisons of the four buildout alternatives selected for analysis. 1.2 Methodoloqv 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 development/improvement 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� 3� Existing conditions data has been collected by field verification. Analysts . have identified existing roadway network characteristics, and vehicles have been counted at locations throughout the study area. Existing conditions land use data has been provided by City of Newport Beach staff. The existing land use data is combined with the existing roadway system in the Newport Beach Traffic Model (NBTM) development validation scenario. Minor adjustments have been made to the existing input data to retain consistency with buildout conditions. Future land use and roadway data has been provided by City of Newport Beach staff and the City's planning consultant, EIP Associates. Raw forecasts from the General Plan Buildout scenario of the NBTM have been refined using existing count data and validation model results. Daily roadway segment analysis (including freeways) requires calculating the daily traffic volume divided by the roadway segment capacity. The City • of Newport Beach daily roadway capacities used in this analysis are presented in Table 1 -1. For analysis purposes, the upper end of the 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 32 0 TABLE 1 -1 ROADWAY SEGMENT CAPACITIESI CLASSIFICATION I RIGHT -OF -WAY CURB TO CURB WIDTH # OF LANES MEDIAN WIDTH APPROXIMATE DAILY CAPACITY 8 Lane Divided 158 Variable 8 14 -18 60- 68,000 Major Au mented Variable Variable 6 -8 Variable 52- 58,000 Major 128 -134 106 -114 6 14 -18 45- 51,000 Primary Augmented Variable Variable 4 -6 Variable 35- 40,000 Prima 104 -108 84 4 16 -20 30- 34,000 Secondary 84 64 4 0 20- 23,000 Commuter 60 -70 40 -50 2 0 7- 10,000 is 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. U: \UcJobs \_01 NOV 2MExcer\10 I 232-18.xis]T 1 .1 1-4 �� Q WA Z H O m � wa O b � i O ~ 6 U d� N pµ. W Z b� \ m Z \� 0 \ V E�f�RH\P W o Jh 0 1 -5 d 0 a z W a W J z 0 s O z 7 U e M., OR W W N N S' G W W z Z 1 0 • e OZ U w U ao Of 0 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 Jl �ti 2.0 MODEL TRIP GENERATION FOR GPAC SUBAREA LAND USE ALTERNATIVES This chapter documents trip generation for the subarea land use buildout alternatives identified by the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC). Full analysis with the traffic model has been run on four comprehensive alternatives derived from the subarea data and overall City -wide data for the remainder of the City. Thirteen subarea land use tables were provided to Urban Crossroads, Inc. staff. Each table contains land use data quantities and comparisons for each option being considered for the subarea, as well as for the currently adopted General Plan. Several of the subareas are further segmented into individual Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) or even blocks. In some cases, the TAZ is larger than the study area. A total of 67 discrete alternatives have been evaluated. Urban Crossroads, Inc. staff has performed calculations on each subarea (or TAZ or block) to determine the approximate trip generation from the Newport Beach Traffic Model (NBTM). A separate sketch planning tool has been developed specifically for this task. Daily and peak hour trips have been computed. The resulting trip generation is used to determine the minimum and maximum intensity alternative from a traffic standpoint. The identification of minimum and maximum land use alternatives is based on the PM peak hour, as the PM peak hour is the timeframe in which the highest number of operational deficiencies has been identified under the currently adopted General Plan. 2.1 Trip Generation Rates and Adjustments This section provides information on trip generation issues (including adjustments to some standard /typical rates). Coastal trip generation for residential land use is compared with general residential trip generation by type. Mixed use trip rate refinements are discussed. High -rise apartments trip generation rates are evaluated in comparison to typical apartments. Overall model trip generation rates are included as Table 2 -1. These are typical trip rate calculations which change slightly based on changes in input variables such as median income. These rates have been derived from the NBTM and underlying 2 -1 E TABLE 2 -1 MODEL TRIP GENERATION RATES NBTM LAND USE CODE NBTM LAND USE DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS TRIP RATE AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR IN OUT TOTAL IN I OUT TOTAL DAILY 1 Res -Low (SFD )- Coastal 1 DU 1 0.19 LO.50 1 0.69 0.41 0.27 0.69 7.50 1 _Res -Low (SFD) 1 _ DU _ 1 0.21 0.64 0.84 0.49 0.30 0.79 8.63 2 Res - Medium (SFA)-Coastal 1 DU 1 0.12 LO.41 1 0.53 0.32 0.19 0.52 5.64 2 Res - Medium (SFA) 1 DU 0.13 0.55 1 0.68 0.40 0.21 0.61 6.66 3 Apartment-Coastal 1 DU 0.11 0.38 0.49 0.31 0.19 0.49 5.37 3 Apartment 1 DU 0.12 0.48 0.60 0.36 0.20 0.56 6.12 4 Elderly Residential 1 DU 0.11 0.29 0.40 0.27 0.18 0.45 4.90 5 Mobile Home - Coastal 1 DU 0.10 0.34 0.44 0.29 0.18 1 0.46 1 5.06 5 Mobile Home 1 DU 0.11 0.45 0.56 0.34 0.20 1 0.54 5.92 6 Motel 1 ROOM 0.40 0.13 0.53 0.23 0.34 0.57 6.08 7 Hotel 1 ROOM 0.51 0.17 0.68 0.28 0.43 0.71 7.58 9 1 Regional Commercial 1 TSF 1.14 0.49 1.64 0.93 1.25 2.18 23.48 10 General Commercial 1 TSF 1.76 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 51.16 15 Fast Food Restaurant 1 TSF 2.94 1.32 1 4.25 2.51 3.32 5.83 62.78 16 Auto Dealer /Sales 1 TSF 1.74 0.74 2.48 1.38 1.86 3.24 34.84 17 Yacht Club 1 TSF 1.30 0.49 1.79 0.87 1.25 2.12 22.71 18 Health Club 1 TSF 1.30 0.49 1.79 0.87 1.25 2.12 22.71 19 Tennis Club 1 CRT 1.35 0.54 1.89 0.98 1.37 2.35 25.26 20 Marina 1 SLIP 0.12 0.05 0.17 0.09 0.13 0.22 2.39 21 Theater 1 SEAT 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.01 1 0.02 0.03 0.34 22 Newport Dunes 1 _LqREJ 0.96 0.42 1.39 0.80 1 1.06 1.86 20.02 23 General Office 1 TSF 11 0.84 1 0.26 1.10 0.39 0.65 1.04 11.08 24 Medical /Government Office 1.14 0.39 1.53 0.64 0.98 1.63 17.38 25 R&D At 0.57 0.17 0.74 0.25 0.42 0.67 7.10 26 Industrial 0.48 0.13 0.62 0.18 0.33 0.52 5.48 27 Mini- Storage/Warehouse 1 TSF 1 0.40 0.11 0.51 0.16 0.28 0.43 4.61 28 Pre - School /Day 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 0.02 0.20 0.04 0.07 0.11 130 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 Nursing /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 40 Golf Course 1 ACRE 0.27 0.10 0.37 0.17 0.25 0.42 41 Resort Golf Course 1 ACRE 0.27 0.10 0.37 0.17 025 0.42 U: \UcJobsl iTO , 2 -2 33 4A subregional model data (i.e. these rates closely represent actual model trip generation). 2.1.1 Coastal Trip Generation As the Newport Beach Traffic Model (NBTM) was developed, Urban Crossroads, Inc. staff determined (during model validation) that the traffic patterns /trip generation rates in the coastal areas were different from elsewhere in the City of Newport Beach. The existing traffic model volumes were higher in the coastal areas than the count data. Occupancy factors and trip rates were developed for residential uses in the coastal areas during the validation process. The shoulder season (spring /fall) occupancy rate for typical City of Newport Beach residential uses is 95 %. For Coastal areas, the occupancy rate is 90 %. Trip generation rates from the model have been provided as part of Table 2 -2. The trip rates in Table 2 -2 include the occupancy factor. For total AM, total PM, and Daily trip rates, the trip generation range in Coastal areas is between 79% and 88% • of typical residential trip rates. The PM peak hour is the timeframe in which the highest number of operational deficiencies has been identified, and in the PM peak hour, the coastal trip rates are between 85% and 87% of typical trip rates. 2.1.2 Mixed Use Developments Mixed use trip generation information and research compiled by Urban Crossroads, Inc. has been included as Appendix "A ". Information has been gathered from sampling done by ITE and documented in Trip Generation, 5th 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 3`I uS r 1 LJ • TABLE 2 -2 MODEL RESIDENTIAL TRIP GENERATION RATE REVIEW NBTM LAND USE CODE NBTM LAND USE DESCRIPTION UNITS TRIP RATE AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL DAILY 1 es R-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 0.40 0.27 0.18 0.45 4.90 5 Mobile Home - Coastal DU 0.10 0.34 0.44 0.29 0.18 0.46 5.06 5 Mobile Home DU 0.11 0.45 0.56 0.34 0.20T 0.54 5.92 Mobile Home Ratio 0.90 0.76 0.79 1 0.83 1 0.89 I 0.85 0.85 U : \ U cJ ob s \_0120 0 \012 32 \ E x ce I \ [012 32 -18. x I s] T 2 -2 2 -4 A(, 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 is 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 • 25 3l Lit f TABLE 2 -3 CONVERSION FACTORS BASED ON PM TOTAL ONLY STARTING LAND USE I UNITS ENDING LAND USE I UNITS1 CONVERSION FACTOR Res -Low (SFD ) DU General Commercial TSF 0.22 Res - Medium (SFA ) DU General Commercial TSF 0.17 [Apartment DU General Commercial TSF 0.16 General Commercial TSF Res -Low (SFD) DU 4.49 General Commercial TSF Res - Medium (SFA) DU 5.82 General Commercial TSF Apartment DU 6.32 TSF = thousand square feet DU =Dwelling Units 0 U: \UcJobs \_ 01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xls]T2 -3 0 2 -6 37 41 an increase in trip generation. A transfer the other direction (from + commercial to single - family detached residential) could be performed to increase dwelling units by 4.49 for every thousand square feet of commercial lost. Similar conversion factors are included for single - family attached and apartment residential uses. The factors presented in Table 2 -3 are related to the PM peak period (consistent with other trip generation calculations for Newport Beach modeling purposes). Conversion factors could potentially be related to daily traffic or AM peak hour, or a subset of AM or PM peak hour total. These factors are included in Table 2 -4. The worst case conversion for each type of residential use is included in Table 2 -5. To provide the most conservative conversion, AM peak hour inbound rates should govern for converting residential uses to commercial (approximately 70 to 120 square feet per dwelling unit). To convert from commercial to residential using the worst case conversion factor, the AM outbound should be used (and 1.25 to 1.67 units would result from a reduction of 1 thousand square feet of commercial). 2.1.3 High -Rise Apartments High -rise apartments are a special apartment use. As defined by ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7th edition (2003), high -rise apartments have more than 10 floors and typically include one or two elevators. Trip Generation rates for high -rise apartments are compared to general apartment trip generation rates in Table 2 -6. As shown in Table 2 -3, the ratio of trip generation for high -rise apartments to apartments ranges from 0.56 to 0.63 trips, depending on the time period. Because the ITE rates show a trip reduction of 37 to 43% the factor of 20% used for high -rise apartments in this General Plan analysis is conservative. 2 -7 30 :�1 0 r-I LJ TABLE 2.4 OVERALL MIXED USE CONVERSION FACTORS STARTING LAND USE UNITS` ENDING LAND USE I UNITS PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN I OUT I TOTAL i IN OUT I TOTAL Res -Low (SFD) DU General Commercial TSF 0.12 0.80 0.33 0.32 0.15 0.22 0.23 Res - Medium (SFA) DU General Commercial TSF 0.07 0.68 0.26 0.26 0.11 0.17 0.17 Apartment DU General Commercial TSF 0.07 0.60 0.23 0.24 0.10 0.16 0.16 General Commercial TSF Res -Low (SFD) DU 8.68 1.25 3.06 3.12 6.71 4.49 4.43 General Commercial TSF Res - Medium (SFA) DU 13.94 1.46 3.83 3.87 9.42 5.82 5.74 General Commercial TSF Apartment DU 14.66 1.67 4.29 4.25 10.05 6.32 6.24 2 TSF = thousand square feet DU =Dwelling Units U: \UcJ obs \_ 01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xls]T2 -4 M 3q �, TABLE 2 -5 ABSOLUTE WORST CASE CONVERSION FACTORS ISTARTING LAND USET UNITSZ I ENDING LAND USE UNITS DIRECTION FACTOR Res -Low (SFD) DU lGeneral Commercial TSF AM IN 0.12 Res - Medium (SFA) DU lGeneral Commercial I TSF AM IN 0.07 Apartment DU lGeneral Commercial I TSF AM IN 0.07 General Commercial TSF Res -Low SFD DU AM OUT 1.25 General Commercial TSF Res - Medium (SFA ) DU AM OUT 1.46 General Commercial TSF Apartment DU AM OUT 1.67 2 TSF = thousand square feet DU =Dwelling Units U: \U cJ obs\ -01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232 -18. xls]T2 -5 • 2 -9 0 r'l 0 TABLE 2 -6 APARTMENT TRIP GENERATION RATE COMPARISON' LAND USE ITE CODE UNITS' PEAK HOUR DAILY AM I PM IN I OUT I TOTAL I IN I OUT I TOTAL Apartment 220 DU 0.10 0.41 0.51 0.40 0.22 0.62 6.72 High-Rise Apartment 222 DU 0.08 0.23 0.30 0.21 0.14 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 r� L� U : \U cJ o b s\ -01200 \01232 \Excel\ [01232 -18. xl s] T2 -6 2 -10 III 9�y 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 ' 5� 0 n . N w J [O H • Q M U) N Z W O R' Q Q H w a(3 oa Q F- H Q w Q m U) N 2_,2 H N X C6 N N C\l O N U X w N th N O O O N 0 I N O V q3 LO 0 } r- n J (D O O of O7 N N O N LO co a Lvrn (DD 2 v,oq � H a cis o CO Co rn a F F- w o 0 o d U U w W ~ j O N J O M M Q C� O O N N (D (D LO Or Z O O O O 0 w o 0 0 0 U U ti ED ED ED cD CO CO co O LL H CO w O ` �w co rn w ti N t� ro ui o ~ U O LO (DD LO LO a) a) LO LO LO Z ti Lq 7lr� O H C) a) co U w N o o O N N O D LL N rD N W O H X_U ` J 0 M 7 r cD ! m co O _ 0 co m w w _ M D a. oQ w N X QO O O O C C 000 C�a 2_,2 H N X C6 N N C\l O N U X w N th N O O O N 0 I N O V q3 m J m a r C a m W Z 00 5� aZ O W CO 0 J d_ m r a W C a m m 2 -13 m r N m N N 0 d X W N N O O N 0 J N O 3 N O J tp0 Ci O N V V m � Q cc G2 G2 O2 m ° N N m d o rn m o m m rd S V rn V rn V rn rn q rn v r a LL v v v O U h y w m S N N N N N N � LL m � r S U W y U LL m w 4 r O m m m m m m m y V V V V V V J r W O O m m m O = U LL N m N O N m m LL F m m m O m cc Coco F Q a W lh lh lh lh lh lh W m r a <a <a<a =d <m i N N N N N N N N N N N N 2 W U v v v v v v O C S U cc _ LL m h m V m m h N N N N c o U r N N N N J cc m V m V m V m V m W 0 S n N 0000 i m n (") m m W w m V m 0 0 U m W m m 00010 Q W M N d2° a V V V V V V a a N N N N N N z W Z d�° W a m N N N N N N W m a m m m m m m J�Wym r m cc m m m c^'�cm'�c^'�M ° U w J y N m Q O O O C C O O AMMO sUO 2 -13 m r N m N N 0 d X W N N O O N 0 J N O 3 same pattern as for the PM peak hour (option 4 generates the most trips • and option 3 generates the fewest trips). 2.2.3 Banninq Ranch For Banning Ranch, four alternative scenarios (in addition to the currently adopted General Plan) have been presented. Banning Ranch has not been analyzed as part of the coastal area. Table 2 -9 summarizes the results of the analysis. PM peak hour trip generation ranges from 12 peak hour trips to 2,057 peak hour trips. The currently adopted General Plan generates the highest number of trips, while option 1 generates the fewest PM peak hour trips. Trip generation for AM peak hour and daily traffic follow the same pattern as for the PM peak hour (currently adopted General Plan has the maximum and option 1 has the minimum). 2.2.4 Cannery Village • Cannery Village is composed of two Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs), each of which is analyzed individually, as the options are not related and can be considered separately in the overall minimum and maximum intensity alternatives. TAZ 1449 is located west of Newport Boulevard south of 32nd Street while TAZ 1454 is east of Newport Boulevard south of 32nd Street. Because of the location, the mixed use residential in Option 1 of TAZ 1449 may be represented as coastal residential. The same is true of mixed use residential in TAZ 1454. In both cases, coastal representation has been used. TAZ 1449 also includes 96,050 square feet of mixed use commercial. TAZ 1454 contains 206,910 square feet of mixed use commercial. Table 2 -10 summarizes the results of the analysis. Scenarios for TAZ 1449 include only the currently adopted General Plan and Option 1. For TAZ 1454, the currently adopted General Plan is considered, in addition to options 1 and 2. For TAZ 1449, PM peak hour trip generation ranges from 334 peak hour trips to 444 peak hour trips. The currently adopted General Plan 2 -14 X15 m N W J m Q F Q N 2 Z U O Z F Ur W Z Z _ W Z Z 0. Q a-a, m F Q W C' Q m 7 N 2 -15 0 u �l b • O N W J Q H 0 } K a N W Z O O SF- } W W W Z O Za am U 1- a W K Q GD N 2 -16 O N X W N M N 0 W N M N O 0 O N OI N a O 73 D r o � n rn rn N O J cD cc V a a � a � 0 i F- CL tip � M (�O (7 (7 N N n N a �O 0D 00 aW U U LL c a v H L H Lu O N } O N O N O J Q W U LL N O W Z LL F- W O U Z �� O oq oq m 0 00 W U Ora U U W K o rn o co n W W OU ~ Q Q W n rn o co N N_ V N N LL co ~ X U i H W ~ � J a z Q W O w W � rn rn n N a awyo ~ N ` Q W O U v O N N W Q oad ' o I =0 o ao .= o c c O (D 0- OQ C9a0 2 -16 O N X W N M N 0 W N M N O 0 O N OI N a O 73 D r 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 (�� `i N J Q r } 7 fn Q 2 0 J Q W 1i � W Q W 00 Ma U Q W 7 N Q r H a N m C N o N p ?� N � N N T m Q 9 U m m r n u i m o t c � a a - n m N N � a G1 . a E � N C @ O O U � m � a o l o vi O m m N � c m c E N L m y a m � U c w m o a 61 c E cn 2 -18 �q r N r C a C < N a� O mD N � a a a v o a N O N O O N Q < < N Y aQ U y U LL h N N O LL fN a 0 } w m w LL� LL ri Ni ri a K FN- Gl J W Z U LL N N m m O m N 0 C � f• N O � N Q Q W W N 2 F- � Z n N rn m r ll O N 0 0 F n N m a N n U Q O QI m 7 m `N U FN- 0 o v a w ui� Qo w� w O � O N CL Q ¢ Q 0 U LL0 W ] N N N N O O J O m N m N 7 W Q U d N r N Q a m , c o o _o - a 0 a O O Q r H a N m C N o N p ?� N � N N T m Q 9 U m m r n u i m o t c � a a - n m N N � a G1 . a E � N C @ O O U � m � a o l o vi O m m N � c m c E N L m y a m � U c w m o a 61 c E cn 2 -18 �q TABLE 2 -12 LIDO ISLE SUBAREA TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ALT COASTAL RESIDENTIAL TRIPS RES -LOW (SFD) (DU) RES- MEDIUM (SFA) (DU) APARTMENT (DU) AM PM I DAILY Adopted General Plan 1040 102 26 885 916 10,021 Option 1 797 98 26 694 7181 7,858 U: \UcJ obs\ -01200 \01232 \Excel \(01232- 18.xis]T2 -12 2 -19 0 0 Is 50 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 M N W J m F Y D fD Z W C) F J w J_ W 5. W 00 J �' F W C m V) N 2 -21 1] y IA X 0 M N O U X W N N O O N of 0 O JV ( M N N (D_ 03 03 Q co rn m n (d 16 V n 01 N 07 Lco c LO n m u07 c o. N Ocn cn O 100 ((00 n (0 (D v 1n 0 a = coo O U LL o 0 0 F N N N 2 U (0 (0 (0 (D 00 O U U LL W ~ j 0� r J 000 N O ¢ W O N O O O W EL- Do' co rn 0) Z LL H O` � 0: 000 o co co co FH o 0 0 ¢W W N H J O) O O) O O) O O W¢ V n a n V O V) V v O C li N W ~ ~ W H xa a0 U J O O) O O Q (D (ND J D U� ¢ U C C l L 0) N N N W W (0 ZaH OO- U 000 O 00 O J W O 00 00 H O N O N O i0 (D J¢ W N M � 7 H W Q ❑ a ¢ w LL ' 0 0 0 N 00 O (0 W LL � y ❑ O U W C H N M N J ¢ c c c O C c O_ c oz. 0 .0 .0 O c r0 � c OOr t7d < C7 as 2 -21 1] y IA X 0 M N O U X W N N O O N of 0 O same pattern as for the PM peak hour (option 2 is the maximum and currently adopted General Plan is the minimum). 2.2.8 Mariner's Mile For Mariner's Mile, two alternative scenarios (in addition to the currently adopted General Plan) have been presented. For traffic modeling purposes, options 1 and 2 are identical, as the model does not differentiate between different types of commercial uses ( "marine- related" vs. "typical' commercial uses in this case). Mariner's Mile has not been represented as having coastal residential characteristics, so the mixed use apartments in Opions 1 and 2 are represented as mixed use. The mixed use commercial has been factored as well. Table 2 -14 summarizes the results of the analysis. PM peak hour trip generation ranges from 4,599 peak hour trips to 5,304 peak hour trips. The currently adopted General • Plan generates the fewest trips, while option 1 or 2 generates the most PM peak hour trips. The AM peak hour and daily trip generation follow the same pattern as the PM peak hour (adopted General Plan trip generation is less than option 1 or 2). 2.2.9 McFadden Square McFadden Square is composed of two Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs), each of which is analyzed individually, as the options are not related and can be considered separately in the overall minimum and maximum intensity alternatives. TAZs 1450 and 1451 have been analyzed separately, with each having a currently adopted General Plan scenario and option 1. TAZ 1450 located east of Newport Boulevard in the vicinity of the intersection of Balboa Boulevard and Newport Boulevard. TAZ 1451 is located west of TAZ 1450. Table 2 -15 summarizes the results of . this analysis. 2 -22 53 4� a w J m Q r Q In In W Z J O y a jrW W Z Z W K O ¢a �Ir r Ir K ¢ m 7 N 2 -23 H h m N m N O N w N m 0 0 0 0 I h 11 I 0 5q � J } m m J <_ n_ � a vi v O r N r Q < < Y a v. K V o 0 ¢4 CL Ir v j S j y m m O V K r } w jr N =r L) z vziz2p K O O w :)QS z w C') o rn O LL v 1 LL r O S O O , 0 O N N r 7 = V N y W r O Z V LL W LL f: cJ o �O 0 Z a m m K J Z � LL rn m m H O m V r � rn m o V W O ro N N S � cl �r m < o ?aWO� Q r r m ¢ W N amp v,3o�m m W O N p N C m r o d 0 la m = O¢C�J o � 2 -23 H h m N m N O N w N m 0 0 0 0 I h 11 I 0 5q � J 0 0 u7 N W J m a W N Ix z QO H N < Z W W Z W D (% as U � Q W m 7 2 -24 M, H x c6 N N O G U X W N c`7 N O O O N OI a 0 U 7 c 6� Q tD th � V O Fa F- < W U o O n O 0 w~ N J �W Uµ O U) r O co Z H ro L W 0 CD W u7 CD O O O N W U —LL o W H U_ _X0 J a o) o) 00 N U') J co r (D M O N of S S LL Z 2 (U 2 O V a U 1 -j WO 00 S S LLJ 00 Z W a i O Q Z Q Q LLJ O 0) 0 0 W W LL 7 W v Q � O O N N O 0 7 U. V) V W S N d m m Q C: 0 o d o a Q (D I lo o 2 -24 M, H x c6 N N O G U X W N c`7 N O O O N OI a 0 U 7 c 6� 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 rr„ J 1� ^' j 0 • 2 -26 N F N X N O N O N U X w N N O O O N O I O U 56 Pi T 2 5� 19 � 2 � O 2 = O � y N LL W ID W � w a U � O w a Z j IA • 2 -26 N F N X N O N O N U X w N N O O O N O I O U 56 Pi the size of the development precludes it from qualifying for mixed use • factoring. Table 2 -17 summarizes the results of this analysis. PM peak hour trip generation ranges from 830 peak hour trips to 1,471 peak hour trips. Option 1 generates the most trips, while the currently adopted General Plan generates the fewest PM peak hour trips. Trip generation for AM peak hour and daily traffic follow the same pattern as for the PM peak hour (option 1 generates the most trips and the currently adopted General Plan generates the fewest trips). 2.2.12 West Newport Highway And Adioining 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. B Block 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, 0 N J m F- } Q p � K � WN O OQ mK W ir w a O W W� z� oa J W 0 I m N 2 -28 5� J OJ OJ M O� a O rn w o Fa 5 M O O� OJ Q N W p U LL LL rn N F W iO J O O O M Q W U LL W W LL N Z LL !- wp U m rn rn � J a N av tN0 N N W W N z 1- W 00 U Jg N N N N WO 00 2 v z w �n O � Q Q 7 W LL 2 N p Vl `� W K N N 3 0 0 N N 7 N y 0 W K C m CL JO m Q y p c h N O O O O 2 -28 5� m N w J GI a J a z z w 0 y > Wa z z_ y Oz °ateQ O W z y W a0 is x� cv r- K a om w Wy z F- y W w N F- N X N M N O z U X W N M N O O N O N d O t� 2 -29 0 59 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. 10 2 -30 W� I N W Q r a J � a� r O1 Nz Z)o 2 r rW a 0 z 3° W n 2 LL' rr N W W 3� a m N 2 -31 0 9 0 ) 15 > J n O N 01 N 01 m C1 Q p n N N N N N N N N y m n N o N o N N N N F 4 N N N N m N O � O O N a N N N Ip Y n n n O K U o 0 0 as a J N N N O� r S N U N Y W LL LL' n n n n n n n n ° U r n n J m Q H m O) LL N m < N �r p z J N N N N N N N N rN a° N W Om S J M O N N N N N O Q W V U LL o o 0 a 0 a m n LL r W J n N n n n n n O Q W K U m o C1 n C1 n N o LL LL C1 C1 C1 N z r oo J Ja N O n N n N n N w K LL N W W N z2r W 0 00 U N N N N 2 W N Z wow > S m z m O m N n r $ m N N N N N M W LL' ° a a a 3 OJ LL J N N ° K J c c d O c Q O O p N O O O Q(Sd O 2 -31 0 9 0 ) 15 0 O N N W m H Y Q N N w Q Z w W J Q H m O J_ m Z J a w W z W O J Q w W > O ❑ W Z w O U W w N Z � m a (0 f� N c O v O a 0 a N a C d a� U a C m m N O � c 0 o m N y H X y Q X .U,. r N C � O N N O N O U O G m N X w N O w co c C N J M [Y N O r' O N — — — — — LO N mZ C 0 C 0 C 0 C 0 C 0 C 0 a C O C O C O C O C O C O C O C O C O 0 O N 0 0 0 0 0 0¢ 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N z 2 O H a. O _z N w w J Q N M - -N N —M - o -- �- N N- M m Z c 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 c 0 .o .0 .0 N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C N C m C m C m C N C m C N C N C N �a a aaaaaaa Z N t0 (0 t0 (0 tO N (O iU N N N N N N N N N N N N w c9 N c9 N 0000000,0 N N N N � c c c c ' "'" c c o 5M) O Z o o 0' I '' �' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'= :- 0 0 O O O Q Q Q 4 Q Q 0 0 lD C N N C C w C O O w O 2 Q Q m m V Lo H C ❑ N C) " N N Lo Lr) ¢¢ H H m m m 3 m N N LL N L O L (0 (9 7 � � = b C U C N =__ N (c (c N m O 0 'C O m m m m 0 a CL Q >c»0 0 m mvvU 3 CL a3 a3 0 o c c c c 0 �' > c m coo 0 Z Z Z 0.� m c m c m c m O� 0 0 -0 0'- � m W U LL U 'D a) a) Q c7 0] U U U- :J .J 2 M� Z O>? 2 -32 c m a (0 N c O v a 0 v N a C d U a C m m N c 0 o m N y H X y X .U,. r N C O N O N O U O G m N X w N w co c C N O U CD O Ln O CI C m cc 0 E 7 O V� N N W J m a H 2 -33 • • N N H f/) x C6 N M N O N U X W N M N O O O N O n O ti 63 J 1n v u7 o r 0 O v M (o M m (o m M (o M O M N N O O N O m r M O � rM M M v (oo v c o vmrnm(oo 00 C4-v- 0iooir r co0—LO0( m V N N V O M— , (o r a � O O (o N r V V (o V O O m 07 O 1nM117vco00 r ro0m(-mM O m O V O V O) CO r N (o O N V m N M N V O N (o M n to vcoco o Or r w rwrco07 v 07 (o (o M cow O (o m N O MM O— O ��Mmomru7(ou7voMmu7 ;: 0 QCO N V V (o C LO V O m 0 m m M O V O Q) r 0 M O M M N N r O N r 07 V O 0 CO `') Co. (o O N C3 m V m N � m N m M 4. J O O N M O o7 O (o O m M V m o7 07 O V O N V NT O O r cc W H a p mmrvov(omm(o(o mom(o 0 (o 0oco om m r0co comrm00 0 a O n O N (`') m v V O O 1f) V M M r O M r N O O } z z W V , Lo m O O O co m 07 (`') O V m (o O (o (o N (o r to 0 07 07 O V O O O N V N r U< m N V V co M r m COO r (o O N a :; O V m O o7 m m M O V O (`') 07 O r 07 M O N O N m r O N r o7 (`� m y } r- r 10 O m 07 N m N m N m N M r of of c'i c'i c'i r (D O m m V of of r u7 m O� 07 r N'IT 0 N 07 m o7 (o to 07 O (o O co r- A my (r 117(0 (om�COO (o� Z(L O V V O O O Z a N M V O V m O O O M m o7 07 O N 0,m�2 M Mm000 omNOrC W (o V N N h (o V V M M 07 (o 11i W Mf co v of y r a ") f0 c 0) 0) cm c C a O � O m a a m v c c uT) y N M rrf I� yP M, .2 �Y �Y LOT LOT a H a H (0 > L f/) H H d N LL EM L 0) 0) N N f0 f0 0 = C W y y L 0 0 f0 f0 (cp _ O O a> y -o -moo L 3 a3) a3) L m j o z z W 0 CO m m fcQ m o -o° -o° -o° m cWi cWi -o 2 a�'i 0] 0]U UUJJ J2m� � z 3: 3: H 2 -33 • • N N H f/) x C6 N M N O N U X W N M N O O O N O n O ti 63 J 0 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 2 -34 G `f -�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 • 0 65 -I') 0 u TABLE 3 -1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH EXISTING LAND USE SUMMARY NBTM CODE' DESCRIPTION UNITS PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED QUANTITY REVISED QUANTITY CHANGE % . CHANGE 1 Low Densit Residential DU 14,841 17,124 2,283 15.380 2 Medium Density Residential DU 12,939 9.535 3,404 - 26.31% 3 Apartment DU 7,622 9,199 1,577 1 20.69% 4 Elderly Residential DU 348 200 148 - 42.530 5 Mobile Home DU 894 600 -294 - 32.89% TOTAL DWELLING UNITS DU 36,644 36.658 14 1 0.04% 6 Motel ROOM 210 134 (76) - 36.19% 7 Hotel ROOM 2,745 2,821 76 2.77% 9 Regional Commercial TSF 1,259.000 1,259.000 - 0.00% 10 General Commercial TSF 2,926.160 3,696.781 770.621 26.34% 11 Commercial /Recreation ACRE 5.100 5.100 - 0.00% 13 Restaurant TSF 640.520 99.370 541.150) - 84.49% 15 Fast Food Restaurant TSF 78.031 13.940 (64.091) - 82.14% 16 Auto Dealer /Sales TSF 288.320 172.420 (115.900 ) - 40.20% 17 Yacht Club TSF 54.580 51.830 1 (2.750) - 5.04% 18 Health Club TSF 63.500 16.770 46.730 - 73.59% 19 Tennis Club CRT 60 60 - 0.00% 20 Marina SLIP 1,055 1,055 - 0.00% 21 Theater SEAT 5,489 5,489 0 0.00% 22 Newport Dunes ACRE 64.00 64.00 - 0.00% 23 General Office TSF 10,900.190 10,865.733 34.457 -0.32% 24 Medical /Government Office TSF 761.459 795.926 34.467 4.53% 25 Research & Development TSF 327.409 81.730 (245.679 - 75.04% 26 Industrial TSF 1,042.070 1,291.079 249.009 23.90% 27 Mini-Storage/Warehouse TSF 199.750 196.420 (3.330 ) - 1.67% 28 Pre - school /Day Care TSF 55.820 55.820 - 0.00% 29 Elements /Private School STU 4,399 4,399 (0) - 0.01% 30 Junior/High School STU 4,765 4,765 - 0.00% 31 Cultural /Learning Center TSF 35.000 35.000 - 0.00% 32 Library TSF 78.840 78.840 - 0.00% 33 Post Office TSF 53.700 53.700 - 0.00% 34 Hospital BED 351 351 35 Nursin /Conv. Home BEDS 661 661 - 0.00% 36 Church TSF 377.760 377.760 - 0.00% 37 Youth Ctr. /Service TSF 149.560 149.560 0.000 0.00% 38 Park ACRE 113.970 113.970 0.000 0.00% 39 Regional Park ACRE - N/A 40 Golf Course ACRE 305.330 305.330 0.000 0.00% ' Uses 8, 12, and 14 are part of the old NBTAM model structure and are not currently utilized in the City land use datasets. 2 Units Abbreviations: DU = Dwelling Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet CRT = Court STU = Students U:1UCJ0b5\_ 01200 \01232\ExceR[01232 -18. x1s]T3 -1 3 -2 W� ^I'/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 �7 10 0 TABLE 3 -2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE COMPARISON NBTM CODE' DESCRIPTION UNITS 2 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 Apartment DU 8,468 13,374 4,906 57.94% 4 Elderl Residential DU 348 200 148 - 42.53% 5 Mobile Home DU 749 455 -294 - 39.25% TOTAL DWELLING UNITS DU 42,501 45,235 1 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 Dealer /Sales 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 Manna 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-school/Day 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 0.00% 38 Park ACRE 94.910 94.920 0.0101 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 pan 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 WUCJobs \- 01200 \01232\ExceR[01232- 18.x1s]T3.2 3 -4 % Q VqO, TABLE 3 -3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING Is NBTM CODE' DESCRIPTION UNITS Z 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 45,235 8,577 23.40% 6 Motel ROOM 134 139 5 3.73% 7 Hotel ROOM 2,821 3,387 566 20.06% 9 Regional Commercial TSF 1,259.000 1,633.840J 374.840 29.77% 10 General Commercial TSF 3,696.781 4,627.760 930.979 25.183/6 11 Commercial /Recreation ACRE 5.100 5.100 - 0.00% 13 Restaurant TSF 99.370 198.780 99.410 100.04% 15 Fast Food Restaurant TSF 13.940 13.940 - 0.00% 16 Auto Dealer /Sales TSF 172.420 227.170 54.750 31.75% 17 Yacht Club TSF 51.830 70.310 18.480 35.66% 18 Health Club TSF 16.770 61.330 44.560 265.71% 19 Tennis Club CRT 60 59 (1 ) - 1.67% 20 Marina SLIP 1,055 1,055 - 0.00% 21 Theater SEAT 5,489 5,475 -14 - 0.26% 22 Newport Dunes ACRE 64.00 64.00 - 0.000/ 23 General Office TSF 10,865.733 12,305.620 1,439.887 13.25% 24 Medical /Government Office TSF 795.926 910.616 114.690 14.41% 25 Research & Development TSF 81.730 81.730 - 0.00% 26 Industrial TSF 1,291.079 1,956.092 665.013 51.51% 27 Mini -Stora e/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 1.28% 30 Junior/High School STU 4,765 4,765 - 0.00% 31 Cultural /teaming Center TSF 35.000 40.000 5.000 14.29% 32 Libra TSF 78.840 78.840 0.00% 33 Post Office TSF 53.700 73.700 20.000 37.24% 34 Hospital BED 351 1,265 914 260.406/6 35 Nursin /Conv. Home BEDS 661 661 - 0.00% 36 Church TSF 377.760 467.210 89.450 23.68% 37 Youth Ctr. /Service TSF 149.560 166.310 16.750 11.20% 38 Park ACRE 113.970 94.920 - 19.050 - 16.71% 39 Regional Park ACRE - 45.910 45.910 N/A 40 Golf Course ACRE 305.330 298.290 -7.040 - 2.31% Uses 8, 12, and 14 are part of the old NBTAM model structure and are not currently utilized in the City land use datasets. 2 Units Abbreviations: DU = Dwelling Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet CRT = Court STU = Students U:1UcJohsl 012001012321ExceNO1232- 18.xisIT3 -3 0 0 3 -5 (� 0 9 TABLE 3-4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH' LAND USE BASED EXISTING SOCIOECONOMIC DATA SUMMARY VARIABLE PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED QUANTITY REVISED QUANTITY CHANGE %CHANGE Occupied Single Family Dwelling Units 13,8421 15,970 2,128 15% Occupied Multi-Family Dwelling Units 20,4091 18,294 -2,115 -100/t TOTAL OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS 1 34,2511 34,2641 13 0% lGroup Quarters Po ulation 6611 6611 0 0% Po ulation 1 75,817 75,211 -606 -1% !Employed Residents 1 44,3791 44,6351 2561 10 Retail Employees 11,2111 10,970 -241 -2% Service Employees 17,1501 17,2951 145 1% Other Employees 37,077 36,990 -87 0% TOTAL EMPLOYEES 65,438 65,255 183 0% Elem /High School Students 1 9,1641 9,164 01 0% Includes data converted from land use only. Excludes Newport Coast and recent annexation areas. U AUcJcbs \_ 01200 \01232 \ExceR[01232.18.xls1T34 3 -6 l D 2% TABLE 3 -5 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH' LAND USE BASED SOCIOECONOMIC DATA GROWTH FROM EXISTING VARIABLE 2002 QUANTITY 1 BUILDOUT QUANTITY I GROWTH %GROWTH Occu ied Sin le F mily Dwelling Units 15,970 17,165 1,195 7% Occupied Multi-Family Dwelling Units 18,2941 24,992 6,698 37% TOTAL OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS 34,2641 42,1571 7,893 23% Group Quarters Population 661 661 0 0% Po ulation 75,211 91,095 15,884 21% Emplo ed Residents 44,635 54,6571 10,022 22% Retail Employees 10,970 13,652 2,682 24% Service Employees 17,295 21,149 3,854 229/6 Other Employees 36,990 45,3841 394 23% TOTAL EMPLOYEES 1 65,255 80,1851 14,930 23% jElem /High School Students 1 9,1641 9,2201 56 1% ' Includes data converted from land use only. Excludes Newport Coast and recent annexation areas. UA UWabs %- 01200%012321Exce11t01232 -1 BAs]T3 -5 0 11 3 -7 II 4 ;. . 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 38 t-7 � `µ 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 Othe 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 1 339,8631 347,278 -7,415 0.98 OVERALL TOTAL 687,141 PREVIOUS TOTAL 689,848 DIFFERENCE 2,707 DIFFERENCE 0.4% 1 Home -Work includes Home -Work and Home - University trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output. 2 Home -Other includes Home -Shop and Home -Other trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output. U: \UCJobs \_ 01200 \01232\Excel \[01232- 16.x1s]T3 -6 3 -9 • 73 t5 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 73,9681 16,149 27.93% Home Based Work Attractions 81,964 102,2301 20,266 24.73% Home Based School Productions 11,336 14,475 3,139 27.69% Home Based School Attractions 8,730 8,845 115 132% Home Based Other Productions2 127,338 174,257 46,919 36,85% Home Based Other Attractions 109,815 138,334 28,519 25,97% Work Based Other Productions 52,1521 65,482 13,330 25,560 Work Based Other Attractions 57,035 71,335 14,300 25A7% Other - Other Productions 1 91,218 116,275 25,057 27.47% Other - Other Attractions 1 89,7341 114,5581 24,8241 27,66% TOTAL PRODUCTIONS 1 339,8631 444,4571 104,6941 30.78% TOTAL ATTRACTIONS 1 347,2781 435,3021 88,0241 25.35% OVERALL TOTAL 1 687,1411 879,7591 192,618 28.03% 0 ' Home -Work includes Home -Work and Home - University trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output. 2 Home -Other includes Home -Shop and Home -Other hips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output. U: \UcJobs \_01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232 -18. x IsIT3 -7 L� 3-10 0 Ita TABLE 3 -8 . CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON TRIP PURPOSE DAILY TRIP ENDS GROWTH PERCENT GROWTH rRE OUSLYISHED PTED REVISED ADOPTED Home Based Work Productions' 70,469 73,968 3,499 4.97% Home Based Work Attractions 100,684 102,230 1,546 1.54% Home Based School Productions 14,125 14,475 350 2.48% Home Based School Attractions 8,845 8,845 0 0.00% Home Based Other Productions2 167,202 174,257 7,055 4.22% Home Based Other Attractions 136,553 138,334 1,781 1.30% 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 1,7181 1.50% Other - Other Attractions 112,882 114,558 1,6761 1.48% TOTAL PRODUCTIONS 431,108. 444,4571 13,349 1 3.10% TOTAL ATTRACTIONS 429,150 435,302 6,152 1.43% OVERALL TOTAL 860,258 879,759 19,501 2.27% 0 ' 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.xis]T3 -8 . 3 -11 75 't? Plan for Banning Ranch has been included, trip generation in that area has iincreased. 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 ,tt IA ch W tz Z mQ X =a W =! 0 W Z 0 V 0 0 J m .a IL mma W Z W V Q MW/y� CW i� a W Z i r� e g e E411 /s i 00 O m a o C o 30 - � t�v xr rurs o 3-13 or Q nr 0 Z ,W V ui J rkal z g x 0 z x o w cW < O z zo > > z 1 1 v ❑ =) U L Q U W U a O o � 6 f+ + r W o� i I 4`� m RPM moa AAA Z L6 \ Q {� W 9 e NV F.. W h, 1 cc c a en ep n o, n W FM CL 0 la Z� 6� N V o 0 U LL Q y � N y 3 p cneN.o cn o ml �n "I . C n if3 n N Im YxuVU � ' �N 0 " f O P P ¢o � nYYxYYaNK � w w r P b' C F N N O j 4 N p i n ... aoN.4o P ip - •i m t n 153 rn W1bOw3x 0 V " 3 i m i a, H'� r'P rO'r in n i c 3 -14 Z qJ c m: N o O �fi 1 0 � Oy m r W 6 CI w Z 4 N W _Li W Ll1 i F' 33in3nov..� YN VWIEI O O Ai •iIN P OW 3GlJ9 m O U LL Q y � N y 3 p cneN.o cn o ml �n "I . C n if3 n N Im YxuVU � ' �N 0 " f O P P ¢o � nYYxYYaNK � w w r P b' C F N N O j 4 N p i n ... aoN.4o P ip - •i m t n 153 rn W1bOw3x 0 V " 3 i m i a, H'� r'P rO'r in n i c 3 -14 Z qJ TABLE 3 -9 (PAGE 1 OF 4) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON LOCATION BUILDOUT FORECAST CHANGE I %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 -100% 16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.) 6,000 6,000 0 0% 17th St. (Bluff Rd. to east city limit) 10,000 0 - 10,000 -100% 32nd St. (west of Newport Blvd.) 8,000 9,000 1,000 13% 32nd St. (east of Newport Blvd.) 5,000 5,000 0 0% Avocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.) 5,000 5,000 0 0% Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.) 11,000 12,000 1,000 9% Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 10,000 10,000 0 0% Balboa Blvd. (south of Coast Hwy.) 21,000 22,000 1,000 5% Bayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.) 13,000 12,000 -1,000 -8% Birch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Kaman Ave.) 18,000 18,000 0 0% Birch St. (Von Kaman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 20,000 20,000 0 0% Birch St. (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 20,000 20,000 0 0% Birch St. (north of Bristol St. North) 27,000 27,000 0 0% Birch St. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 20,000 20,000 0 0% Birch St. (south of Bristol St. South) 16,000 16,000 0 0% Bison Ave. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 17,000 17,000 0 0% Bison Ave. (MacArthur Blvd. to SR -73 Fwy.) 11,000 11,000 0 0% Bluff Rd. (Coast Hwy. to 19th St.) 13,000 12,000 -1,000 -8% Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.) 33,000 34,000 1,000 3% Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR -73 Fwy.) 25,000 27,000 2,000 8% Bristol St. North (west of Campus Dr.) 32,000 32,000 0 0% Bristol St. North (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 28,000 28,000 0 0% Bristol St. North (east of Birch St.) 27,000 27,000 0 0% Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd.) 18,000 18,000 0 0% Bristol St. South (west of Campus DrArvine Ave.) 32,000 32,000 0 0% Bristol St. South (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 22,000 23,000 1,000 5% Bristol St. South (east of Birch St.) 21,000 22,000 1,000 5% Bristol St. South (west of Jamboree Rd.) 37.000 37,000 0 0% Campus Dr. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Kaman Ave.) 21,000 22,000 1,000 5% Campus Dr. (Von Kaman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 31,000 31,000 0 0% Campus Dr. (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 38,000 39,000 1,000 3% Campus Dr. (north of Bristol St. North) 38,000 39,000 1,000 3% Campus Dr. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 39,000 40,000 1,000 3% Coast Hwy. (west of Bluff Rd.) 51,000 60,000 9,000 18% Coast Hwy. (Bluff Rd. to Superior Ave./Balboa Blvd.) 49,000 61,000 12,000 24% Coast Hwy. (Superior Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 38,000 41,000 3,000 8% Coast Hwy. (Newport Blvd. to Riverside Ave.) 72,000 68,000 -4,000 -6% Coast Hwy. (Riverside Ave. to Tustin Ave.) 63,000 59,000 -4,000 -6% Coast Hwy. (Tustin Ave. to Dover Dr.) 59,000 55,000 -4,000 -7% Coast Hwy. (Dover Dr. to Bayside Dr.) 77,000 78,000 1,000 1 % Coast Hwy. ( Bayside Dr. to Jamboree Rd.) 62,000 64,000 2,000 3% Coast Hwy. (Jamboree Rd. to Newport Center Dr. ) 1 51,000 51,000 0 0% 3 -15 0 J 19 oli `J u L] TABLE 3 -9 (PAGE 2 OF 4) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON LOCATION BUILDOUT FORECAST CHANGE %CHANGE (BASELINE) (CONSTRAINED) Coast Hwy. (Newport Center Dr. to Avocado Ave.) 42,000 43,000 1,000 2% Coast Hwy. (Avocado Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 45,000 45,000 0 0 °% Coast Hwy. (MacArthur Blvd. to Goldenrod Ave.) 47,000 48,000 1,000 2% Coast Hwy. (Goldenrod Ave. to Marguerite Ave.) 46,000 46,000 0 0% Coast Hwy. (Marguerite Ave. to Poppy Ave.) 42,000 42,000 0 0% Coast Hwy. (Poppy Ave. to Newport Coast Dr.) 35,000 35,000 0 0% Coast Hwy (east of Newport Coast Dr.) 45,000 44,000 -1,000 -2% Dover 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 28,000 0 0% Dover Dr. (Cliff Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 31,000 33,000 2,000 6°/ Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at University Dr.) 10,000 10,000 0 0°/ Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at Ford Rd.) 15,000 15,000 0 0% Ford Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 12,000 13,000 1,000 8% Goldemod Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 4,000 2,000 100°/ Highland Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 2,000 2,000 0 0% Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 23.000 18,000 -5,000 -22% Hospital Rd. (east of Newport Blvd.) 9,000 10.000 1,000 11% Irvine Ave. (Bristol St. South to Mesa Dr.) 36.000 38,000 2,000 6% Irvine Ave. (Mesa Dr. to University Dr.) 38,000 41,000 3,000 8% Irvine Ave. (University Dr. to Santa Isabel Ave.) 34,000 40,000 6,000 18% Irvine Ave. (Santa Isabel Ave. to Santiago Dr.) 27,000 33,000 6,000 22% Irvine Ave. (Santiago Dr. to Highland Dr.) 25,000 32,000 7,000 28% Irvine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.) 25,000 32,000 7,000 28% Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr. to Westcliff Dr.) 19,000 28,000 9,000 47% Irvine Ave. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.) 10,000 13,000 3,000 30% Jamboree Rd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 47,000 47,000 0 0% Jamboree Rd. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 54,000 54,000 0 0% Jamboree Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to Bristol St. North) 44,000 43,000 -1,000 -2% Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 52,000 51,000 -1,000 -2% Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. South to Bayview Wy.) 58,000 56,000 -2,000 -3% Jamboree Rd. (Bayview Wy. to University Dr.) 47,000 56,000 9,000 19% Jamboree Rd. (University Dr. to Bison Ave.) 42,000 41,000 -1,000 -2% Jamboree Rd. (Bison Ave. to Fond Rd.) 45,000 45,000 0 0% Jamboree Rd. (Fond Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 53,000 55,000 2,000 4% Jamboree Rd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to Santa Barbara Dr.) 40,000 43,000 3,000 8% Jamboree Rd. (Santa Barbara Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 39,000 42,000 3,000 8% Jamboree Rd. ( Coast Hwy. to Bayside Dr.) 14,000 15,000 1,000 7% MacArthur Blvd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 33,000 33,000 0 0% MacArt hur Blvd. (Birch St. to Von Kaman Ave.) 26,000 26,000 0 0% MacArthur Blvd. (Von Kaman Ave. to Jamboree Rd.) 32,000 32,000 0 0% MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.) 35,000 35,000 0 0% MacArthur Blvd. (north of Bison Ave.) 71,000 74,000 3,000 4% MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 72,000 74,000 2,000 3% MacArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 58,000 60,000 2,000 1 3% 3 -16 (fL i TABLE 3 -9 (PAGE 3 OF 4) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON 3 -17 0 E 9 SI q2 BUILDOUT FORECAST AU LOCATION (BASELINE) (CONSTRAINED) CHANGE %CHANGE MacArthur Blvd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to San Miguel Rd.) 37,000 39,000 2,000 5 % MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 37,000 38,000 1,000 3 % Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 8,000 8,000 0 0% Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 7,000 7,000 0 0% Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 13,000 13,000 0 0 % Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.) 49,000 46,000 -3,000 -6% Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 54,000 54,000 0 0% Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido) 55,000 57,000 2,000 4% Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.) 40,000 41,000 1,000 3% Newport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.) 32,000 33,000 1,000 3% Newport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 17,000 17,000 0 0% Newport Coast Dr. (SR -73 Fwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 28,000 29,000 1,000 4% Newport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 24,000 24,000 0 0% Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 18.000 19.000 1,000 6% Placentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.) 12,000 16,000 4,000 33% Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 13,000 11,000 -2,000 -15% Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 2,000 0 0% Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 9,000 10,000 1,000 11% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.) 18,000 17,000 -1,000 -6 % San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.) 12,000 12,000 0 0% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 25,000 26,000 1,000 4% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to San Miguel Rd.) 22.000 22,000 0 0% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (San Miguel Rd. to Marguerite Ave.) 23,000 24,000 1,000 4% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to Spyglass Hill Rd.) 18,000 19,000 1,000 6% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.) 18,000 19,000 1.000 6% San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 10,000 10,000 0 0% San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 10,000 10,000 0 0% San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 14,000 14,000 0 0% San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 16,000 16,000 0 0% San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.) 19,000 20,000 1,000 S% San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.) 11,000 11,000 0 0% Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 11,000 11,000 0 0% Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 9,000 9,000 0 0% Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 14,000 14,000 0 0% Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave. to Irvine Ave.) 5,000 6,000 1,000 20% Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 2,000 4,000 2,000 100% Spyglass Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 5,000 4,000 -1,000 -20% SR -55 Freeway (north of SR -75 Fwy.) 185,000 183,000 -2,000 -1% SR -55 Freeway (22nd St. to 19th St.) 156,000 123,000 - 33,000 -21% SR -73 Freeway (SR -55 Fwy. to Campus Dr.) 133,000 134,000 1,000 1% SR -73 Freeway (Jamboree Rd. to University Dr.) 1 96.0001 98,0001 2,000 1 20 3 -17 0 E 9 SI q2 0 TABLE 3.9 (PAGE 4 OF 4) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON • U'WCJObs \_ 01200 \01232 \Excel\101232- 18.xIsIT3 -9 3 -18 q�, BUILDOUT FORECAST ADUPTED LOCATION (BASELINE) (CONSTRAINED) CHANGE %CHANGE SR -73 Freeway (Bonita Canyon Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.) 124,000 125,000 1,000 1% SR -73 Freeway (east of Newport Coast Dr.) 118,000 119,000 1,000 1% Superior Ave. (north of Placentia Ave.) 21,000 19,000 -2,000 -10% Superior Ave. (Placentia Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 17,000 28,000 11,000 65% Superior Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 21,000 28,000 7,000 33% Tustin Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 3,000 1,000 50% University Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 3,000 3,000 0 0% University Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 16,000 15,000 -1,000 -6% Via Lido (east of Newport Blvd.) 10,000 10,000 0 0 % Von Kaman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 18,000 18,000 0 0% Von Kaman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 15,000 16,000 1,000 7% Westcliff Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.) 1 17,000 16,000 -1.000 -6% • U'WCJObs \_ 01200 \01232 \Excel\101232- 18.xIsIT3 -9 3 -18 q�, 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 I %CHANGE 16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.) 5,000 6,000 1,000 20% 32nd St. (west of Newport Blvd.) 8,000 9,000 1,000 13% 32nd St. (east of Newport Blvd.) 3,000 5,000 2,000 67% Avocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.) 5,000 5,000 0 00/1 Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.) 12,000 12,000 0 0% Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 11,000 10,000 -1,000 -9% Balboa Blvd. (south of Coast Hwy.) 18,000 22,000 4,000 22% Bayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.) 10,000 12,000 2,000 20% Birch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Kaman Ave.) 12,000 18,000 6,000 5001. Birch St. (Von Kaman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 15,000 20,000 5,000 33% Birch St. (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 16,000 20,000 4,000 25% Birch St. (north of Bristol St. North) 23,000 27,000 4,000 17% Birch St. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 19,000 20,000 1,000 S% Birch St. (south of Bristol St. South) 15,000 16,000 1,000 7% Bison Ave. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 13,000 17,000 4,000 31% Bison Ave. (MacArthur Blvd. to SR -73 Fwy.) 7,000 11,000 4,000 57% Bluff Rd. (Coast Hwy. to 15th St.) 0 13,000 13,000 N/A Bluff Rd. (15th St. to 17th St.) 0 13,000 13,000 N/A Bluff Rd. (I 7th St. to 19th St.) 0 12,000 12,000 N/A Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.) 26,000 34,000 8,000 31% Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR -73 Fwy.) 17,000 27,000 10,000 59% Bristol St. North (west of Campus Dr.) 28,000 32,000 4,000 14% Bristol St. North (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 23,000 28,000 5,000 22% Bristol St. North (east of Birch St.) 22,000 27,000 5,000 23% Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd.) 16,000 18,000 2,000 130/. Bristol St. South (west of Campus Dr. /In ine Ave.) 28.000 32,000 4,000 14% Bristol St. South (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 17,000 23,000 6,000 35% Bristol St. South (east of Birch St.) 16,000 22,000 6,000 38% Bristol St. South (west of Jamboree Rd.) 31,000 37,000 6,000 1994. Campus Dr. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Kaman Ave.) 16,000 22,000 6,000 38% Campus Dr. (Von Kaman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 20,000 31,000 11,000 55% Campus Dr. (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 26,000 39,000 13,000 500A Campus Dr. (north of Bristol St. North) 28,000 39,000 11,000 39% Campus Dr. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 30,000 40,000 10,000 33% Coast Hwy. (west of Bluff Rd.) 46,000 60,000 14,000 30% Coast Hwy. (Bluff Rd. to Superior Ave./Balboa Blvd.) 46,000 61,000 15,000 33% Coast Hwy. (Superior Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 28,000 41,000 13,000 46% Coast Hwy. (Newport Blvd. to Riverside Ave.) 53,000 68,000 15,000 28% Hwy. (Riverside Ave, to Tustin Ave.) 45,000 59,000 14,000 31% 11Coast Coast Hwy. (Tustin Ave. to Dover Dr. 42,000 55,000 13,000 31% 3 -19 • • 0 ;1c 0 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 Newpon 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 20^/0 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 20% Coast Hwy. (Poppy Ave. to Newport Coast Dr.) 28,000 35,000 7,000 25% Coast Hwy (east of Newpon Coast Dr.) 35,000 44,000 9,000 26% Dover Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Westcliff Dr.) 9,000 11,000 2,000 22% Dover Dr. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.) 22,000 24,000 2,000 9% Dover Dr. (I 6th St. to Cliff Dr.) 25,000 28,000 3,000 12% Dover Dr. (Cliff Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 29,000 33,000 4,000 14% Bastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at University Dr.) 10,000 10,000 0 0% Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at Ford Rd.) 15,000 15,000 0 0% Ford Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 9,000 13,000 4,000 44% Goldenrod Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 4,000 2,000 100% Highland Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 2,000 2,000 0 0% Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 13,000 18,000 5,000 38% 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 32% Irvine Ave. (University Dr. to Santa Isabel Ave.) 33,000 40,000 7,000 21% Irvine Ave. (Santa Isabel Ave. to Santiago Dr.) 29.000 33,000 4,000 14% Irvine Ave. (Santiago Dr. to Highland Dr.) 27,000 32,000 5,000 19% Wine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.) 27,000 32,000 5,000 19% Wine Ave. (Dover Dr. to Westcliff Dr.) 22,000 28,000 6,000 27% 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 29% Jamboree Rd, (MacArthur Blvd. to Bristol St. North) 36,000 43,000 7,000 19% Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 47,000 51,000 4,000 9% Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. South to Bayview Wy.) 47,000 56,000 9,000 19% Jamboree Rd. ( Bayview Wy. to University Dr.) 47,000 56,000 9,000 19% Jamboree Rd. (University Dr. to Bison Ave.) 37,000 41,000 4,000 11% Jamboree 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 9,000 200/6 Jamboree Rd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to Santa Barbara Dr.) 34,000 43,000 9,000 260/. 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 Birch St.) 27,000 33,000 6,000 22% MacArthur Blvd. (Birch St. to Von Kaman Ave.) 22,000 26,000 4,000 18% MacArthur Blvd. (Von Kaman Ave. to Jamboree Rd. ) 1 26.000 32,000 6.000 23% 3 -20 `tb TABLE 3.10 (PAGE 3 OF 4) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILOOUT WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION COUNT EXISTING (2001/2002) BUILDOUT ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) CHANGE I %CHANGE MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.) 27,000 35,000 8,000 3001. MacArthur Blvd. (north of Bison Ave.) 61,000 74,000 13,000 21% MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 63,000 74,000 11,000 17% MacArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 54,000 60,000 6,000 11% MacArthur Blvd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to San Miguel Rd.) 35,000 39,000 4,000 11% MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 31,000 38,000 7,000 23% Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 7,000 8,000 1,000 14% Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 6,000 7,000 1,000 170% Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 12,000 13,000 1,000 8% Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.) 36,000 46,000 10,000 28% Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 43,000 54,000 11,000 260% ,Newport Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido) 48,000 57,000 9,000 19 %' Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.) 36,000 41,000 5,000 14% Newport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.) 29,000 33,000 4,000 14% Newport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 14,000 17,000 3,000 21% Newport Coast Dr. (SR -73 Fwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 17,000 29,000 12,000 71% Newport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 15,000 24,000 9,000 60% Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 12,000 19,000 7,000 58% Placentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.) 12,000 16,000 4,000 33% Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 7,000 11,000 4,000 57% Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 2,000 0 01/0 Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 9,000 10,000 1,000 11% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.) 16,000 17,000 1,000 6% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.) 11,000 12,000 1,000 9% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 21,000 26,000 5,000 24% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to San Miguel Rd.) 19,000 22,000 3,000 16% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (San Miguel Rd. to Marguerite Ave.) 18,000 24,000 6,000 33% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to Spyglass Hill Rd.) 12,000 19,000 7,000 58% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.) 12,000 19,000 7,000 58% San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 7,000 10,000 3,000 43% San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 7,000 10,000 3,000 43% San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 12,000 14,000 2,000 17% San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 12,000 16,000 4,000 33% San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.) 19,000 20,000 1,000 5% San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.) 10,000 11,000 1,000 l0' /° Santa Barbara Dr. (cast of Jamboree Rd.) 10,000 11,000 1,000 10% Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 8,000 9,000 1,000 13% Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 11,000 14,000 3,000 27% Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave. to Irvine Ave.) 5,000 6,000 1,000 200/b Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 3,000 4,000 1,000 33% Spyglass Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr, to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 4,000 4,000 0 0°h SR -55 Freeway (north of SR -75 Fwy.) 155,000 183,000 28,000 18% SR -55 Freeway (22nd St, to 19th St.) 94,000 123,000 29,000 31% SR -73 Freewav (SR -55 Fwv. to Campus Dr.) 1 94.000 134,000 40,000 43% 3 -21 9 i 65 h-1 TABLE 3 -10 (PAGE 4 OF 4) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH - CONSTRAINED NETWORK AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION COUNT EXISTING (20011`2002) 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 17% Tustin Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 3,000 1,000 50% University Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 3,000 3,000 0 0% University Dr. (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 Kaman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 14,000 18,01X1 4,000 29% Von Kaman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 12,000 16,000 4,000 33% Westcliff Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.) 16.000 16,000 0 0% �r11 1 WUU0OS\ 01200 \01232 \Excea @1232 - 18.x18]73.10 0 3-22 ((rn U wkti, 3.4 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. 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 � t Y = %h moo Lu Z � 4 aa..EH,a I H a _° I OV \ \ W � � I en pa O N N _ rs lA1 n n � axgiMra N m O 0 n O it v}b�0 q P n Yo m.Hn � a ° NI/ W LU Z a F N Q 4J .i e O P m - n ` o O 4 n ry e.o n; n o. �a4�P m v N IP AIO m IN m/ s bl Irn'. � O nY Yrn YiHR nY 3oHYp .sR'ia umw.aH nIr o.wi r n 6 Z W W J 0 a r a W O O rill i> U LL Q U W a O N UU 3 -24 \\\ X =I 3.5 • Newport Boulevard south of Hospital Road 40 • 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 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 gC� v` I system. Table 3 -11 summarizes the constrained currently adopted General Plan Buildout ICUs based on the AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes and the intersection geometric data as compared with General Plan Baseline ICUs. Appendix "I" contains the detailed ICU calculation worksheets. The worksheets in Appendix "I" summarize the intersection geometric data and the AM and PM peak intersection turning movement volumes. As shown in Table 3 -11, ICU values generally increase in the General Plan Buildout conditions compared to existing conditions. The exceptions occur where new parallel facilities are available, or where an increase in lanes results in increased capacity. A comparison of currently adopted General Plan Buildout ICUs to previously published Baseline ICUs is shown on Table 3 -12. Most of the large differences are caused by a change in the number of lanes for the constrained roadway system. Table 3 -13 summarizes intersection analysis for buildout conditions. Deficient intersections are shown on Exhibit 3 -D. Intersections with ICU values greater than 0.90 (LOS "E" or worse) in either peak period are: • Bluff Road (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (AM /PM) • Superior Avenue (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (AM /PM) • Newport Boulevard (NS) /Hospital Road (EW) (PM) • Riverside Drive (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (AM /PM) • Tustin Avenue (NSYCoast 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 90 .<v t" TABLE 3 -11 (PAGE 1 OF 2) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO EXISTING 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. FUTURE COUNT IFORECASTIDELTAIECOUNT IFORECASTIDELT DNE'i 1.271 1.271 DNEI 1.29 1.: 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.66 0.72 0.06 0.67 0.82 O.1S 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 0.84 1.01 0.17 0.90 0.99 0.09 . Ne ort BI. & Hospital Rd. O.S4 0.79 0.25 0.70 0.97 0.27 S. Newport Bl. & Via Lido 0.41 O.S4 0.13 0.37 0.46 0.09 6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St. 0.73 0.52 -0.21 0.78 0.71 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 3 -27 E 1) 1� 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 PM PEAK HOUR EXISTING COUNT FUTURE FORECAST I DELTA EXISTING COUNT FUTURE I FORECAST DELTA 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.47 0.55 0.08 0.63 0.71 0.08 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.68 0.85 0.17 0.74 0.89 0.15 0. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 0.36 0.00 0.36 0.34 -0.02 1. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.32 0.39 0.07 0.52 0.71 0.19 2. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.40 0.50 0.10 0.52 0.63 0.11 4. 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 TT Ramps & Bison Av. 0.31 0.47 0.16 0.37 0.56 0.19 7. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.26 0.38 0.12 0.17 0.29 0.12 8. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.63 0.78 0.15 0.60 0.80 0.20 49. MacArhtur BI, & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.71 0.77 0.06 0.90 1.06 0.16 50. MacArthur BI, & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.64 0.77 0.131 0.931 1.04 0.11 51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.56 0.63 0.071 0.651 0.77 0.12 52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw. 0.60 0.74 0.14 0.71 0.83 0.12 53. SR -73 NB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.55 0.69 0.14 0.43 0.53 0.10 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.30 0.45 0.15 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 0.52 0.08 0.54 0.68 0.14 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 0.99 1.08 0.09 0.69 0.79 0.10 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.31 0.38 0.07 0.35 0.51 0.16 59.Marttuerite 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 0.60 016 0.30 0.46 0.16 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.61 0,67 0.061 0.651 0.76 0.11 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Ramps 0.45 0.54 0.091 0.31 0.40 0.09 64. New ort Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.37 0.63 0.26 0.29 0.47 0.18 65. Ne ort Coast Dr. &Coast Hw. 0.47 0.57 0.101 0.501 0.60 0.10 'DNE = Does Not Exist U:1U cJ obsl- 012001 012321Excell[01232- 18.xis)T3 -11 3 -28 l� oil TABLE 3 -12 (PAGE 1 OF 2) GENERAL PLAN BUILDOU7 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 I (BASELINE) ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) DELTA I. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. 1.01 1.27 0.26 0.761 1.29 0.53 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.65 0.72 0.07 0.55 0.82 0.27 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 1.01 1.01 0.00 0.80 0.99 0.1 . Newport Bl. & Hospital Rd. 0.87 0.79 -0.08 0.93 0.97 0.04 5. Newport BI. & Via Lido 0.52 0.54 0.02 0.44 0.46 0.02 6. Newport BI. & 32nd St. 0.67 0.52 -0.15 0.76 0.71 -0.05 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 0.83 1.03 0.20 1.12 1.12 0.00 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 0.76 1.02 0.26 0.87 0.85 -0.02 9. MacArthur Bl. & Campus Dr. 0.721 0.76 0.04 1.21 1.25 0.04 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0.711 0.71 0.00 0.801 0.80 0.00 11. Von Kaman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.67 0.66 -0.01 0.94 0.93 -0.01 12. MacArthur BI. & Von Kaman Av. 0.54 0.54 0.00 0.64 0.64 0.00 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.93 0.92 -0.01 1.23 1.24 0.01 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. 0.90 0.79 -0.11 0.89 0.80 -0.09 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N) 0.97 0.96 -0.01 1.09 1.08 -0.01 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N) 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. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S) 0.521 0.52 0.00 0.531 0.53 0.00 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.681 0.68 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.15 1.14 -0.01 1.06 1.19 0.13 21. Uvine 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. & WestclifT Dr. 0.26 0.39 0.13 0.48 0.56 0.08 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.47 0.64 0.17 0.55 0.64 0.09 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.71 0.86 0.15 0.74 0.90 0.16 28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw. 0,85t 0.83 -0.02 0.94 0.94 0.00 29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd. 0.97 0.96 -0.01 0.98 0.99 0.01 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (N 0.69 0.70 0.01 0.70 0.69 -0.01 31. Bayviev, Pl. & Bristol St. (S) O.611 0.60 -0.01 0.63 0.63 0.00 32. 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 34. Jamboree Rd. & EasiblufT Dr. niversity Dr. 0.58 0.64 0.06 0.61 0.69 0.08 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.46 0.51 0.05 0.54 0.58 0.04 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd. 0.74 0.78 0.04 1 0.701 0.72 0.02 37. Jamboree Rd. San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.64 0.61 -0.03 0.65 0.65 0.00 3 -29 0 q3 F Il- 0 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- 18.xls)T3 -12 3 -30 9y W AM PEAK HOUR I PM PEAK HOUR ADOPTED I ADOPTED I ADOPTEDI ADOPTED INTERSECTION NS /EW (BASELINE) I (CONSTRAINED) I DELTA (BASELINE) I (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 40. 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 0.62 0.63 0.01 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.35 0.37 0.02 0.771 0.79 0.02 5. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.76 0.77 0.01 0.77 0.80 0.03 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.46 0.47 0.01 0.56 0.56 0.00 47. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.40 0.38 -0.02 0.29 0.29 0.00 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.77 0.78 0.01 0.77 0.80 0.03 49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd.Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.76 0.77 0.01 1.07 1.06 -0.01 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.71 0.77 0.06 0.961 1.04 0.08 51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.55 0.63 0.08 0.70 0.77 0.07 52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw. 0.72 0.74 0.02 0.81 0.83 0.02 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.62 0.69 0.07 0.47 0.53 0.06 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.441 0.45 0.01 0.56 0.59 0.03 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.31 0.30 -0.01 0.391 0.38 -0.01 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.50 0.52 0.02 0.65 0.68 0.03 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw, 1.08 1.08 0.00 0.76 0.79 0.03 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.37 0.38 0.01 0.50 0.51 0.01 59.Mar erite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.92 0.90 -0.02 0.95 0.91 -0.04 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.57 0.60 0.03 0.44 0.46 0.02 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.71 0.67 -0.041 0.75 0.76 0.01 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Ramps 0.52 0.54 0.02 0.36 0.40 0.04 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San oa uin Hills Rd. 0.60 0.63 0.03 0.46 0.47 0.01 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.59 0.57 -0.02 0.61 0.60 -0.01 • U: \UCJobs \_ 01200\ 01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xls)T3 -12 3 -30 9y W TABLE 3 -13 (PAGE 1 OF 2) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY INTERSECTION (NS /EW ) AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR IC.0 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. 1.27 F 1.29 F 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.72 C 0.82 D 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 1.01 F 0.99 E 4. Newport Bl. & Hospital Rd. 0.79 C 0.97 E 5. Newport Bl. & Via Lido 0.54 A 0.46 A 6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St. 0.52 A 0.71 C 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.03 F 1.12 F 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.02 F 0.85 D 9. MacArthur Bl. & Campus Dr. 0.76 C 1.25 F 10. MacArthur Bl. & Birch St. 0.71 C 0.80 C 11. Von Kaman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.66 B 0.93 E 12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Karman Av. 0.54 A 0.64 B 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.92 E 1.24 F 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. 0,791 C 0.80 C 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N ) 0.96 E 1.08 F 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N ) 0.92 E 0.72 C 17. Campus Dr. /Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S) 0.93 E 0.77 C 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S) 0.52 A 0.53 A 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.68 B 0.90 D 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.14 F 1.19 F 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.701 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 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.67 B 0.82 D 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 0.39 A 0.561 A 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.64 B 0.64 B 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.86 D 0.90 D 28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.831 D 0.94 E 29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd. 0.96 E 0.99 E 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 0.70 B 0.69 B 31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. (S) 0.60 A 0.63 B 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S) 0.96 E 0.851 D 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W . 0.48 A 0.70 B 34. Jamboree Rd. & EastbluffDr. /Universi Dr. 0.64 0.511 B A 0.69 0.58 B A 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd. 0.78 C 0.72 C 1137. Jamboree Rd. & San Joa uin Hills Rd. 0.61 B 0.65 B 3 -31 • 619 1� • C� TABLE 3 -13 (PAGE 2 OF 2) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY INTERSECTION NS /E N AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR LO 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.55 A 0.711 C 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.85 D 0.891 D 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 A 0.34 A I41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 A 0.71 C 2. Neu ort Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 A 0.63 B 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.37 A 0.79 C 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.771 C 0.80 C 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.47 A 0.56 A 47. SR -73 SB Rams & Bison Av. 0.38 A 0,291 A 48. MacArthur Bl. & Bison Av. 0.78 C 0.80 C 49. MacArhtur Bl. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.77 C 1.06 F 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.77 C 1.04 F 51. MacArthur Bl. & San Miguel Dr. 0.63 B 0.77 C 52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw. 0.74 C 0.83 D 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0,691 B 0.53 A 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.45 A 0,591 A 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 030 A 0.381 A 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.52 A 0.68 B 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.08 F 0.79 C 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 038 A 0.51 A 59. Marguerite Av. & Coast Hw, 0.90 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 Rams 0.54 A 0.40 A 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.63 B 0.47 A 65. Neu ort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.57 A 0.60 A IDNE = Does Not Exist U: \U cJobs \_ 01200\ 01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xls]T3 -13 3 -32 t "' t ch W V LU LU 00 u OP �(P 1 0 W ' I �L G Z LU ao V V 'ua snenrn !1� y- "' —j 1 1 ��cr«;nerma�i 3 -33 0 LY ,Y ra \ W W IL IL O p W O p Q J J C J J C Z a a° a a° W 1 w \�1 /I Z W U O U LL U a m C :C V F IA V LL LL a f W H Q i aaZ I 17 , J� • 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). 0 3 -34 „c TABLE 3 -14 (PAGE 1 OF 2) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY INTERSECTION NSlEW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ADOPTED FORECAST WITH I IMPROVEMENTS DELTA ADOPTED FORECAST WITH I IMPROVEMENTS DELTA I. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. 1.271 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. 1.011 0.84 -0.17 0.99 0.87 -0.12 4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. 0.791 0.85 0.06 0.97 0.84 -0.13 S. 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 0.00 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.03 0.71 -0.32 1.121 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 1.251 0.88 -0.37 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0.71 0.71 0.00 0.801 0.80 0.00 I I. Von Kaman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.66 0.62 -0.04 0.93 0.89 -0.04 12. MacArthur BI. & Von Kaman Av. 0.54 0.54 0.00 0.64 0.64 0.00 I3. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.92 0.89 -0.03 1.24 0.86 -0.38 14. Jamboree Rd. &Birch St. 0.79 0.79 0.00 0.g0 0.80 0.00 I5. Cam us Dr. & Bristol St. (N ) 0.96 0.89 -0.071 1.08 0.85 -0.23 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N) 0.92 0.78 -0.14 0.72 0.71 -0.01 17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. (S ) 0.93 0.87 -0.06 0.77 0.77 0.00 18. Birch 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. Inane Av. & University Dr. 1.14 0.74 -0.40 1.19 0.83 -0.36 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.781 0.781 0.00 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.63 0.63 0.00 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.70 0.70 0.00 24. Inane Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.67 0.67 0.00 0.82 0.82 0.00 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 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 0.001 0.90 0.90 0.00 28. Bayside Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.83 0.81 -0.02 0.941 0.88 -0.06 29. MacArthur B1. & Jamboree Rd. 0.96 0.75 -0.21 0.99 0.82 -0.17 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (N ) 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.00 31. Bayview PI. & Bristol St. (S ) 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.63 0.63 0.00 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S) 0.96 0.74 -0.22 0.85 0.80 -0.05 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W . 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.70 0.70 0.00 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr. 0.64 0.64 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.00 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.58 0.58 0.00 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd. 0,7g 0,78 0.00 0.72 0.72 0.00 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.611 0.61 0.001 0.651 0.651 0.00 3 -35 0 E 161, 0 0 TABLE 3 -14 (PAGE 2 OF 2) CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY INTERSECTION NSIEW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ADOPTED FORECAST WITH IMPROVEMENTS DELTA ADOPTED FORECAST WITH IMPROVEMENTS DELTA 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.55 0.55 -0.01 0.711 0.71 0.00 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.85 0.85 0.00 0.891 0.89 0.00 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 0.36 0.00 0.341 0.34 0.00 1. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.711 0.71 0.00 2. Ncwport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.63 0.63 0.00 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.37 0.37 0.00 0.79 0.79 0.00 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.77 0.77 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.47 0.47 0.00 0.56 0.56 0.00 47. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.29 0.29 0.00 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 49. MacArthur Bl. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.77 0.72 -0.05 1.06 0.86 -0.20 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.77 0.66 -0.11 1.04 0.84 -0.20 51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.77 0.77 0.00 52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw. 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.83 0.83 0.00 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.00 54. SR -73 SB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.45 0.451 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.00 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.30 0.30 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.00 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.52 0.52 0.00 0.68 0.68 0.00 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.08 0.80 -0.28 0.79 0.79 0.00 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.00 59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.91 0.80 -0.11 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.60 0.60 0.001 0.46 0.46 0.00 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.67 0.671 0.00. 0.76 0.761 0.00 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Ramps 0.54 0.54 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.00 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 1 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.47 0.47 0.00 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 1 0.57 0.571 0.00 0.60 0601 0.00 UAUcJobs\ D1200\ 01232 \Excel \[D 1232- 18.x)s)T3 -14 3 -36 101 j; L N LL O W Q a W) M w J m Q H 3 -37 le 11 101 ,2 1�.J c c 0) 0 1= = = U 0 L L co ttl o) =O H U) Z m m o Z w E N cx a ° o°` w E o aa)) o) W W c v — o a E= te a° a a) a c a) c ai a a) c a) c ai mac—. c a 0) ai c a c ai c ai N c O. C N N C N N— fa C C C N C L c m c m — U) f0 — m -- L �%% c— m m c c c m— m e o) — c M c- c O C m O y C L �cr, L ) j C)) L 7 w 7 0) ),z 0� O) m °- y O O ) == O 0 L C)) j " L o O °) y p C .L O) O O OL Q] . m m m L mm mQ]Q]p]m �Q] m =CL mm 0m m �m'D mm m m � m m� Z W 3' Z W w� W.��.�(n(n ui N°(\J LL ;yL '0C [0 '0- L�Q]Nm N-0>>mmLN Z y N '7 V - Lo N N w (n N M V M (n Z "t M> (n w `N M" a) 7 a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) m a) a) a) a) a) . -0 O° L O O O a a a O O O a a a O L a U O O O O a a a` . O a` O a O a O O O O O O O O O O O W (n W U) W W W W O w ._. w W_. . N Z w w W m` of v = 3 m a U) Z m 2 m = m U ° Z H Z m ° CL o `°U m v) f) N p = U fa mU ° fa co m m o u) Q U m m U m m m Z co co m U) Z > Z co a) � Z co Q z Z Q Q Z 0 � Z c . �- m a) > > € of 0 N co N a 3 V; a c E E E Li 1 m � Z E H� j' U 4] U 3 -37 le 11 101 ,2 1�.J E 0 11 CN 6 \ / C3 6 l -la RF - �) \ % Cp - `Z 2 0 $ -\ /m - \ 0 0 C E ƒƒ a� /ktaa§°ak \cm 0 CL \ \� \ \� \\�\ }� \0 }� \r / �� ; §222 2m§ \2@ \EU) LLJ m 2a[k\ \7§377 Cl) yz�Cl) 23 t ° #5» § * § §gg) °§ § ** 77\)\ / *} iiƒ /ƒ / /ƒ£ii±a2Jui a- aa- \ LU 0 �= ®7 (^ ! / g LLj (� - \\ E9 } )) U) k J ) e m � } )) 2\ ! - / { \ \ \ . a ma a mm ` z & -E & -z z f - ) @ @ # / / - ° / \ \ ) ) ] £ ) A 2 l -la RF - �) \ % 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 I TRUE MINIMUM QUANTITY CHANGE %CHANGE 1 LLow Density Residential DU 1 18,347 1 17,838 509 -2.77% 2 Medium Density Residential DU 12,859 12,835 24 -0.19% 3 Apartment DU 13,374 11,657 1,717 12.84% 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% 10 General Commercial TSF 4,627.760 4,270.152 357.608 -7.73% 11 Commercial /Recreation ACRE 5.100 5.100 0.00% 13 Restaurant TSF 198.780 198.780 0.00% 15 Fast Food Restaurant TSF 13.940 13.940 0.00% 16 Auto Dealer /Sales TSF 227.170 227.170 0.00% 17 Yacht Club TSF 70.310 70.310 0.00% 18 Health Club TSF 61.330 61.330 0.00% 19 Tennis Club CRT 59 59 0.00% 20 Marina SLIP 1,055 1,055 0.00% 21 Theater SEAT 5,475 5,475 0.00% 22 Newport Dunes ACRE 64.00 64.00 0.00% 23 General Office TSF 12,305.620 11,924.379 (381.241 ) -3.10% 24 Medical /Government Office TSF 910.616 848.986 (61.630). -6.77% 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-school/Day 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 78.840 40.000 78.840 0.00% 0.00% 32 Library TSF 33 Post Office TSF 73.700 73.700 0.00% 34 Hospital BED 1,265 1,265 0.00% 35 Nursin /Conv. Home BEDS 661 602 (59 ) -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 0.00% 40 Golf Course ACRE 298.290 298.290 1 0.000 Uses 8, 12, and 14 are part of the old NBTAM model structure and are not currently utilized in the City land use datasets. 2 Units Abbreviations: DU = Dwelling Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet CRT = Court •STU = Students W( JcJobs\_01200\01232iEzcel \(01232- 18.x1sIT4 -1 4 -2 I�� TABLE 4 -2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT . LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING NBTM CODE' DESCRIPTION UNITSZ 2002 QUANTITY TRUE MINIMUM QUANTITY GROWTH 1% GROWTH 1 LOW Density Residential DU 17,124 17,836 714 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 600 455 145 - 24.17% TOTAL DWELLING UNITS DU 36,658 42.985 6.327 17.26% 6 Motel ROOM 134 194 60 1 44.78/9. 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 MedicallGovemmentOffce TSF 795.926 848.986 53.060 6.67% 25 Research & Development TSF 81.730 81.730 0.00% 26 Industrial TSF 1,291.079 1,099.427 191.652 - 14.84% 27 Mini-Storage/Warehouse TSF 196.420 196.420 0.00% 28 Pre - school /Da 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 0.00% 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% Nursin /Conv. Home BEDS 661 602 (59 - 8.93% Church TSF 377.760 467.210 89.450 23.68% 09 Youth Ctr. /Service TSF 149.560 166.310 16.750 11.20% Park ACRE 113.970 92.250 21.720 - 19.06% 39 Regional Park ACRE 45.910 45.910 N/A. 40 I Golf Course ACRE 305.330 298.290 (7.04) -2.3t/ 0 Uses 8, 12, and 14 are part of the old NBTAM model structure and are not currently utilized in the City land use datasets. 2 Units Abbreviations: DU = Dwelling Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet CRT =Court . STU = Students U:\UcJobs\_012001012321ExceR [01232- 18.xisIT4 -2 4 -3 I�5 • 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 l to i t,� TABLE 4 -3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH' LAND USE BASED SOCIOECONOMIC DATA SUMMARY /COMPARISON VARIABLE 2002 QUANTITY TRUE MINIMUM QUANTITY GROWTH % GROWTH Occupied Single Family Dwelling Units 1 15,970 16,707 737 5% Occupied Multi - Family Dwelling Units 1 18,2941 23,4541 5,160 28% TOTAL OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS 1 34,2641 40,161F 5,897 17% IGroup Quarters Population 661 661 01 0% Population 1 75,2111 87,3431 12,132 16% Employed Residents 1 44,6351 51,9931 7,358 16% Retail Employees 1 10,9701 12,9421 1,972 18% Service Employees 17,295 20,706 3,411 20% Other Employees 1 36,9901 42,6061 5,616 15% TOTAL EMPLOYEES T 65,2551 76,2541 10,999 17% Elem /Hi h School Students 1 9,1641 9,2201 561 1% • ' Includes data converted from land use only. Excludes Newport Coast and recent annexation areas. U AU cJobsl_01200\01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.x1s]T4 -3 4 -5 107 0 TABLE 4-4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRUE MINIMUM TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY TRIP PURPOSE DAILY TRIP ENDS GROWTH PERCENT GROWTH EXISTING TRUE MINIMUM GENERALPLAN BUILDOUT Home Based Work Productions' 57,8191 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 Productions 127,338 168,175 40,837 32.07% Home Based Other Attractions 109,815 131,960 22,145 20.17% or Based Other Productions 52,152 62,537 10,385 19.91% Work Based Other Attractions 57,035 68,0341 10,999 19.28% Other - Other Productions 91,2181 111,1051 19,887 21.80% Other - Other Attractions 89,7341 109,4991 19,765 22.03% TOTAL PRODUCTIONS 339,8631 426,5201 86,6571 25.50% TOTAL ATTRACTIONS 347,2781 415,8481 68,5701 19.74% OVERALL TOTAL 1 687,1411 842,3681 155,2271 22.59% ' Home -Work includes Home -Work and Home - University trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output. Z Home -Other includes Home -Shop and Home -Other trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output. 0 U: \UcJ0bs \_ 01200 \01232 \Ezcel\i01232- 18,x1s)T44 4 -6 TABLE 4 -5 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TRUE MINIMUM TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON TRIP PURPOSE DAILY TRIP ENDS GROWTH PERCENT GROWTH CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT Home Based Work Productions' 73,968 70,754 -3,214 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 Productions' 174,257 168,175 -6,082 - 3.49% Home Based Other Attractions 138,334 131,960 -6,374 -4.61% or Based Other Productions 65482 62,537 - 2,945 -4.50% Work Based Other Attractions 71,,335 68,034 -3,301 -4.63% Other - Other Productions 116,2751 111,105 - 5,170 -4.45% Other - Other Attractions 114,5581 109,499 - 5,059 -4.42% TOTAL PRODUCTIONS 1 444,4571 426,520 - 17,937 -4.04% TOTAL ATTRACTIONS 435,302L 415,848 - 19,454 -4.47% OVERALL TOTAL 879,7591 842,368 - 37,391 -4.25% 0 ' Home -Work includes Home -Work and Home - University trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output. ' Home -Other includes Home -Shop and Home -Other trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output. U:\UcJobs\ -01200 \01232 \Excel\101232.18.xls)T4.5 . 4 -7 I�� 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 48 I�� J, X / N/ NN m ;1 m m -Y m m m^ ma xivya � P ME I ao Q W� N O 0 ° i Q M iwwl a N � Z� C W (, = 7 W J nY XLLOLL m O LLE IM MYNYYIXR Lam �t # M a eMQ R m € [ - G m nrioxYq m a J.:�\ m YN Mi01¢y a - N m "o'v � WocroO �y J, X / N/ NN m ;1 m m -Y m m m^ ma xivya � P 4-9 ME I ao N O 0 Q M iwwl a N � Z� C W (, = 7 W J nY XLLOLL m O MYNYYIXR # eMQ R m € [ - G m nrioxYq m 4-9 U Z LL Q U W U a o m : nrtldtlielG N pl III z l� ME I ao N O 0 Q a N � Z� W (, = 7 W J ° U Z LL Q U W U a o m : nrtldtlielG N pl III z l� TABLE 4 -6 (PAGE 1 OF 4) 0 TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON u CI LOCATION ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) BUILDOUT I FORECAST CHANGE % CHANGE 16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.) 6,000 6,000 0 0.0% 32nd St. (west of Newport Blvd.) 9,000 8,000 -1,000 -11]% 32nd St. (east of Newport Blvd.) 5,000 3,000 -2,000 40.0% Avocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.) 5,000 5,000 0 0.0% Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.) 12,000 11,000 -1,000 -8.3% Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.0% Balboa Blvd. (south of Coast Hwy.) 22,000 19,000 -3,000 -13.6% Bayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.) 12,000 12,000 0 0.0% Birch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Kalman Ave.) 18,000 18,000 0 0.0% Birch St. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 20,000 20,000 0 0.0% Birch St. (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 20,000 20,000 0 0.0ya 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 0.0ya Birch St. (south of Bristol St. South) 16,000 16,000 0 0.0% Bison Ave. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 17,000 17,000 0 0.0% Bison Ave. (MacArthur Blvd. to SR -73 Fwy.) 11,000 11,000 0 0.0% Bluff Rd. (Coast Hwy. to 15th St.) 13,000 0 - 13,000 -100% Bluff Rd. (15th St. to 17th St.) 13,000 0 - 13,000 -100% Bluff Rd. (17th St. to 19th St.) 12,000 0 - 12,000 -100% Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.) 34,000 34,000 0 0.0% Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR -73 Fwy.) 27,000 27,000 0 0.0% Bristol St. North (west of Campus Dr.) 32,000 32,000 0 0.0% Bristol St. North (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 28,000 28,000 0 0.0% Bristol St. North (east of Birch St.) 27,000 27,000 0 0.0% Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd.) 18,000 18,000 0 0.0% Bristol St. South (west of Campus DrArvine Ave.) 32,000 32,000 0 0.0% Bristol St. South (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 23,000 22,000 -1,000 4.3% Bristol St. South (east of Birch St.) 22,000 21,000 -1,000 -4.5% Bristol St. South (west of Jamboree Rd.) 37,000 37,000 0 0.0ya Campus Dr. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Karman Ave.) 22,000 21,000 -1,000 4.5% Campus Dr. (Von Kaman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 31,000 31,000 0 0.0% Campus Dr. (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 39,000 39,000 0 0.0% Campus Dr. (north of Bristol St. North) 39,000 38,000 -1,000 -2.6% Campus Dr. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 40,000 40,000 0 0.0% Coast Hwy. (west of 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 1.80/0 4 -10 �1a 1% 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 -2.6% 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 0.0% Dover Dr. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.) 24,000 24,000 0 0.0% Dover Dr. (16th St. to Cliff Dr.) 28,000 28,000 0 0.0 %I 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 %i Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at Ford Rd.) 15,000 15,000 0 0.0% Ford Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 13,000 13,000 0 0.0% Goldenrod Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 4,000 2,000 -2,000 -50.0% Highland Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 2,000 2,000 0 0.0% Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 18,000 18,000 0 0.0% Hospital Rd. (east of Newport Blvd.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.0% 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 0.00/0 Irvine Ave. (Santa Isabel Ave. to Santiago Dr.) 33,000 32,000 -1,000 -3.0 %I Irvine Ave. (Santiago Dr. to Highland Dr.) 32,000 32,000 0 0.0 %' Irvine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.) 32,000 32,000 0 0.0% Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr. to Westcliff Dr.) 28,000 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% Jamboree Rd. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 54,000 54,000 0 0.0% Jamboree Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to Bristol St. North) 43,000 43,000 0 0.0% Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 51,000 52,000 1,000 2.0% Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. South to Bayview Wy.) 56,000 56,000 0 0.0% Jamboree Rd. (Bayview Wy. to University Dr.) 56,000 56,000 0 0.0% Jamboree 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 0.0% Jamboree Rd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to Santa Barbara Dr.) 43,000 43,000 0 0.0% 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 Kansan Ave.) 26,000 26,000 0 0.0% MacArthur Blvd. (Von Kansan Ave. to Jamboree Rd.) 32,000 32,000 0 0.0% 4 -11 • (13 G -L TABLE 4-6 (PAGE 3 OF 4) 0 TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON 0 • LOCATION ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) BUILDOUT I FORECAST I CHANGE % CHANGE MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.) 35,000 35,000 0 0.0% MacArthur Blvd. (north of Bison Ave.) 74,000 74,000 0 0.0% MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 74,000 73,000 -1,000 -1.4% MacArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 60,000 60,000 0 0.0% MacArthur Blvd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to San Miguel Rd.) 39,000 38,000 -1,000 -2.60/6 MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 38,000 38,000 0 0.0% Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 8,000 7,000 -1,000 - 12.5% Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 7,000 6,000 -1,000 - 14.3% Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 13,000 13,000 0 0.0% Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.) 46,000 45,000 -1,000 -2.2% Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 54,000 52,000 -2,000 -3.7% Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido) 57,000 52,000 -5,000 -8.8% Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.) 41,000 37,000 -4,000 -9.8% Newport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.) 33,000 30,000 -3,000 -9.1% Newport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 17,000 17,000 0 0.0% Newport Coast Dr. (SR -73 Fwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 29,000 29,000 0 0.0% Newport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 24,000 24,000 0 0.0% Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 19,000 18,000 -1,000 -5.3% Placentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.) 16,000 17,000 1,000 6.3% Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 11,000 11,000 0 0.0% Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 2,000 0 0.0% Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.0% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.) 17,000 17,000 0 0.0% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.) 12,000 12,000 0 0.0% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 26,000 26,000 0 0.0% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to San Miguel Rd.) 22,000 22,000 0 0.0% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (San Miguel Rd. to Marguerite Ave.) 24,000 24,000 0 0.0% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to Spyglass Hill Rd.) 19,000 18,000 -1,000 -5.3% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.) 19,000 18,000 -1,000 -5.3% San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.0% San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.0% San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 14,000 14,000 0 0.0% San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 16,000 16,000 0 0.0% San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.) 20,000 20,000 0 0.0% San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.) 11,000 11,000 0 0.0% Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 11,000 11,000 0 0.0% Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 9,000 8,000 -1,000 -11.1% Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 14,000 14,000 0 0.0% Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave. to Irvine Ave.) 6,000 6,000 0 0.0% Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 4,000 4,000 0 0.0% Spyglass Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 4,000 4,000 0 0.0% Superior Ave. (north of Placentia Ave.) 19,000 19,000 0 0.0% Superior Ave. (Placentia Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 28,000 28,000 0 0.0% Superior Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 28,000 28,000 0 0.0% 4 -12 jjl TABLE 4-6 (PAGE 4 OF 4) TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT 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% Via 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% Von Karman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 16,000 16,000 0 0.0% Westcliff Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.) 16,0001 16,000 0 0.0% U. \UcJobs\ -01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232 -18.xl s]T4 -6 0 • 4 -13 U5 0 TABLE 4.7 (PAGE 1 OF 4) TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION EXISTING (200112002) COUNT BUILDOUT I FORECAST GROWTH % GROWTH 16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.) 5,000 6,000 1,000 20.0% 32nd St. (west of Newport Blvd.) 8,000 8,000 0 0.0% 32nd St. (east of Newport Blvd.) 3,000 3,000 0 0.0% Avocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.) 5,000 5,000 0 0.0% Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.) 12,000 11,000 -1,000 -8.3% Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 11,000 10,000 -1,000 -9.1% Balboa Blvd. (south of Coast Hwy.) 18,000 19,000 1,000 5.6% Bayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.) 10,000 12,000 2,000 20.0% Birch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Karman Ave.) 12,000 18,000 6,000 50.0% Birch St. (Von 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% Bison Ave. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 13,000 17,000 4,000 30.8% Bison Ave. (MacArthur Blvd. to SR -73 Fwy.) 7,000 11,000 4,000 57.1% Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.) 26,000 34,000 8,000 30.8% Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR -73 Fwy.) 17,000 27,000 10,000 58.8% Bristol St. North (west of Campus Dr.) 28,000 32,000 4,000 14.3% Bristol St. North (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 23,000 28,000 5,000 21.7% Bristol St. North (east of Birch St.) 22,000 27,000 5,000 22.7% Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd.) 16,000 18,000 2,000 12.5% Bristol St. South (west of Campus Dr.11rvine Ave.) 28,000 32,000 4,000 143% Bristol St. South (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 17,000 22,000 5,000 29A% Bristol St. South (east of Birch St.) 16,000 21,000 5,000 313% 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 5,000 313% Campus Dr. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 20,000 31,000 11,000 55.0% Campus Dr. (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 26,000 39,000 13,000 50.0% Campus Dr. (north of Bristol St. North) 28,000 38,000 10,000 35.7% Campus Dr. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 30,000 40,000 10,000 33.3% Coast Hwy. (west of Superior Ave./Balboa Blvd.) 46,000 55,000 9,000 19.6% Coast Hwy. (Superior Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 28,000 39,000 11,000 39.3% Coast Hwy. (Newport Blvd. to Riverside Ave.) 53,000 66,000 13,000 24.5% Coast Hwy. (Riverside Ave. to Tustin Ave.) 45,000 56,000 11,000 24.4% 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 19.0% Coast Hwy. (Newport Center Dr. to Avocado Ave.) 1 35,000 42,000 7,000 1 20.0% 4 -14 1 (0 TABLE 4 -7 (PAGE 2 OF 4) TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH Is LOCATION EXISTING (200112002) COUNT BUILDOUT I 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 15.4% 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 29.0% 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 Btistol St. North) 36,000 43,000 7,000 19.4% Jamboree 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 15.4% 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 23.10/a MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.) 27,000 35,000 8,000 29.6% MacArthur Blvd. (north of Bison Ave.) 61,000 74,000 13,000 21.3% MacArthur Bivd. (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% MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 31,000 38,000 7,000 1 22.6% 4 -15 0 07 TABLE 4 -7 (PAGE 3 OF 4) 0 TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH 0 0 LOCATION EXISTING (200112002) COUNT I BUILDOUT FORECAST I GROWTH % GROWTH Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 7,000 7,000 0 0.0% Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 6,000 6,000 0 0.0% Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 12,000 13,000 1,000 8.3% Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.) 36,000 45,000 9,000 25.0% Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 43,000 52,000 9,000 20.9% Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy, to Via Lido) 48,000 52,000 4,000 8.3% Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.) 36,000 37,000 1,000 2.8% Newport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.) 29,000 30,000 1,000 3.4% Newport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 14,000 17,000 3,000 21.4% Newport Coast Dr. (SR -73 Fury. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 17,000 29,000 12,000 70.6% Newport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 15,000 24,000 9,000 60.0% Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 12,000 18,000 6,000 50.0% Placentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.) 12,000 17,000 5,000 41.7% Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 7,000 11,000 4,000 57.1% Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 2,000 0 0.0% Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 9,000 10,000 1,000 11.10/0 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.) 16,000 17,000 1,000 6.30/a San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.) 11,000 12,000 1,000 9.1% San Joaquin Hills Rd, (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 21,000 26,000 5,000 23.8% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to San Miguel Rd.) 19,000 22,000 3,000 15.8% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (San Miguel Rd. to Marguerite Ave.) 18,000 24,000 6,000 33.3% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to Spyglass Hill Rd.) 12,000 18,000 6,000 50.0% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.) 12,000 18,000 6,000 50.0% San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 7,000 10,000 3,000 42.9% San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 7,000 10,000 3,000 42.9% San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 12,000 14,000 2,000 16.7% San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 12,000 16,000 4,000 33.3% San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.) 19,000 20,000 1,000 5.3% San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.) 10,000 11,000 1,000 10.0% Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 10,000 11,000 1,000 10.0% Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 8,000 8,000 0 0.0% Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 11,000 14,000 3,000 27.3% Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave. to Irvine Ave.) 5,000 6,000 1,000 20.0% Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 3,000 4,000 1,000 33.3% Spyglass Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 4,000 4,000 0 0.0% Superior Ave. (north of Placentia Ave.) 17,000 19,000 2,000 11.8% Superior Ave. (Placentia Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 22,000 28,000 6,000 27.3% Superior Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 1 24,000 28,000 4,000 1 16.7% 4 -16 I�D TABLE 4 -7 (PAGE 4 OF 4) TRUE MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH 0 LOCATION EXISTING (200112002) I COUNT BUILDOUT FORECAST GROWTH GROWTH Tustin Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 3,000 1,000 50.0% University Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 3,000 3,000 0 0.0% University Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 11,000 15,000 4,000 36.4% Via Lido (east of Newport Blvd.) 8,000 10,000 2,000 25.0% Von Karman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 14,000 18,000 4,000 28.6% Von Karman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 12,000 16,000 4,000 333% Westcliff Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr. ) 16,000 16,000 0 0.0% U: \U cJ ob s \_01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232 -18. xl s ]T4 -7 Ll 0 4 -17 Ilq l� m 1_ H m 4 =C) POP cwn pn C;, O ii�,,...� w < u Z Q`. z a ON r O X ry Z O (yivEnpa I o ' BT IS m nr ieeoIIf - W i V a o V m W CO %% I 314AIIpMT Mip�� ' moa N �a.pp.x o °i W a m m <a 0 .7 ° 0^ _Y m m ^ .. mew ° 6 20 ^0 is xpne m ^ i °v � fro y o m nr exiPoI ' '°O q °n v`Oi tmV ° O wOj nr xu m o m o v o h F o m o g � nrrxrrix.s 5 a [ wrepxrw S G mxeX ° Y � Witlpavdx P W O gtl]e1e ° 1pM "q Ltt1N�iN VI m r4Y3 n O W b A in r. o I I* iy m ss C 3 Ida a -is Z • 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 0 4 -19 ' 4 / 0 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) (AM /PM) • Tustin Avenue (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (AM /PM) • MacArthur Boulevard (NS) /Campus Drive (EW) (PM) • Von Karman Avenue (NS) /Campus Drive (EW) (PM) • Jamboree Road (NS) /Campus Drive (EW) (AM /PM) • Campus Drive (NS) /Bristol Street North (EW) (AM /PM) • Birch Street (NS) /Bristol Street North (EW) (AM) • Campus Drive (NS) /Bristol Street South (EW) (AM) • Irvine Avenue (NS) /University Drive (EW) (AM /PM) 4 -20 I as ,Iv, TABLE 4-8 (PAGE 1 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' I N/A 1.29 DNE N/A 2. Superior Av. & Placentta Av. 0.641 1 0.10 0.68 0.86 0.18 3. 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. N ort Ell. & 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 Ell. & 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 0.00 11. Von Kam n Av. & Campus 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. 0.921 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 0.00 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. ) 0.96 0.96 0.00 1.08 1.08 0.00 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. 0.92 0.93 0.01 0.72 0.72 0.00 17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. S 0.93 0.91 -0.02 0.77 0.76 -0.01 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S 0.52 0.52 0.00 0,531 0.53 0.0 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.68 0.68 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.14 1.15 0.01 1,191 1.16 -0.03 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.70 0.69 -0.01 0.78 0.76 -0.02 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.63 0.63 0. 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.70 0.71 0.01 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.67 0.66 -0.01 0.82 0.80 -0.02 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 1 0.39 0.40 0.01 0.56 0.57 0.01 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.64 0.64 0.00 0.64 0.65 0.01 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.86 0.84 -0.021 0.90 0.88 -0.02 28. Bayside Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.83 0.82 -0.01 0.94 0.93 -0.01 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. 0.96 0.97 0.01 0,991 0.99 0.00 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 0.70 0,71 0,01 0,691 0.68 -0.01 31. Ba iew PI. & Bristol St. (S ) 0.60 0.59 -0.01 0.63 0.63 0.0 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 0.00 34. Jamboree Rd. & Fastbluff Dr. /University Dr. 0.64 0.65 0.01 0.69 0.68 -0.01 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.511 0.50 -0.01 0.58 0.58 0.00 36. Jamboree Rd. & Fastbluff Dr./Ford Rd. 0.78 0.76 -0.021 0,721 0.73 0.01 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.611 0.60 -0.011 0.651 0.65 O.DO 4 -21 0 0 I t/V 0 0 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 DELTA CURRENTLY ADOPTED FORECAST TRUE I MINIMUM DELTA 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.55 0.54 -0.01 0.71 0.71 0.00 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.85 0.85 0.00 0.89 0.87 -0.02 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 0.34 -0.02 0.34 0.34 0. 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.71 0.70 -0.01 42. Newpon Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.63 0.62 -0.01 4. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr, 0.37 0.38 0.01 0.79 0.78 401 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.77 0.78 0.01 0.801 0.79 -0.01 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.47 0.47 0.00 0.561 0.56 0.00 47. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.38 0.39 0.01 0.291 0.29 0,00 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.78 0.77 -0.01 0.801 0.80 0.00 49. MacArbmr BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canvon Dr. 0.77 0.77 0.00 1.06 1.06 0.00 50. MacArthur Bl. & 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 Bl. & 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 Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.30 0.30 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.00 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.52 0.51 -0.01 0.68 0.68 0.00 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.08 1.06 -0.02 0.79 0.75 -0.04 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.51 0.49 -0,02 59.Marguerite Av. & Coact 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 -O.OI 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.67 0.681 0.01 0.76 0.75 -0.01 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Ramps 0.54 0.541 0.00 0.401 0.39 -0.01 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.47 0.46 .0.01 65. New on Coast Dr. &Coast Hw. 0.57 0.571 0.001 0.601 0.60 0.00 'DNE = Does Not Exist U: \U cJobs \- 01200 \01232 \Excel\[01232- 18.xls]T4 -8 4 -22 i a� TABLE 4.9 (PAGE 1 OF 2) TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO EXISTING INTERSECTION NS /EW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR EXISTING COUNT FUTURE I FORECAST DELTA EXISTING COUNT FUTURE FORECAST DELTA 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.66 0.74 0.08 0.67 0,86 0.19 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 0.84 0.98 0.14 0.90 0.94 0.04 . 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 0.76 0.58 -0.20 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 0.84 1.01 0.17 0.93 1.10 0.17 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 0.801 1.01 0.21 0.67 0.83 0.16 9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr. 0.611 0.75 0.14 0.85 1.25 0.40 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0.49 0.70 0.21 0.66 0.80 0.14 11. Von Kaman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.55 0.64 0.09 0.79 0.94 0.15 12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Kaman Av. 0.46 0.54 0.08 0.53 0.64 0.11 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.70 0.931 0.23 0.851 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. (N) 0.77 0.96 0.19 0.94 1.08 0.14 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N) 0.66 0.93 0.27 0.61 0.72 0.11 17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. (S) 0.72 0.91 0.19 0.58 0.76 0.18 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S ) 0.46 0.52 0.06 0.44 0.53 0.09 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.70 0.68 -0.02 0.94 0.90 -0.04 20. Irvine Av. & Univmity Dr. 0.82 1.151 0.33 0.89 1.16 0.27 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.66 0.69 0.03 0.72 0.76 0.04 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.57 0.61 0.04 0.60 0.63 0.03 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.72 0.78 0.06 0.64 0.71 0.07 24. Irvine Av. & Westcli((Dr. 0.57 0.66 0.09 0.77 0.80 0.03 25. Dover Dr. & Wmtcliff Dr. 0.38 0.40 0.02 0.48 0.57 0.09 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.55 0.64 0.09 0.57 0.65 0.08 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.70 0.84 0.14 0.74 0.88 0.14 28. Bayside Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.69 0.82 0.13 0.70 0.93 0.23 29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd. 0.88 0.97 0.09 0.91 0.99 0.08 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (N ) 0.55 0.71 0.16 0.59 0.68 0.09 31. Bayview PI. & Bristol St. S 0.48 0.59 0.11 0.56 0.63 0.07 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S ) 0.75 0.97 0.22 0.72 0.84 0.12 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W . 0.41 0.48 0.07 0.57 0.70 0.13 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. (Universi Dr. 0.60 0.65 0.05 0.64 0.681 0.04 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.45 0.50 0.05 0.51 0.58 0.07 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd. 0.69 0.76 0.07 0.65 0.73 0.08 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.80 0.60 -0.20 1.001 0.65 -0.35 4 -23 1 11 U5 t %O TABLE 4 -9 (PAGE 2 OF 2) is TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO EXISTING 0 INTERSECTION NSlEW AM PEAK HOUr�j PM PEAK HOUR EXISTING COUNT FUTURE FORECAST DELTA EXISTING COUNT FUTURE I FORECAST DELTA 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbam Dr. 0.471 0.54 0.07 0.631 0.71 0.08 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.681 0.85 0.17 0.741 0.87 0.13 0. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 0.34 -0.02 0.361 0.34 -0.02 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.32 0.39 0.07 0.521 0.70 0.1 8, 42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.40 0.50 0.10 0.521 0.62 0.10 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.33 0.38 0.05 0.721 0.78 0.06 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.58 0.78 0.20 0.66 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 Ramps & Bison Av. 0.261 0.39 0.13 0.17 0.29 0.12 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.63 0.77 0.14 0.60 0.80 0.20 49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.71 0.77 0.06 0.90 1.06 0.16 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.64 0.77 0.13 0.93 1.02 0.09 51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.56 0.62 0.061 0.651 0.76 0.11 52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw. 0.60 0.74 0.14 0.71 0.80 0.09 53. SR -73 NB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.55 0.69 0.14 0.43 0.52 0.04 54. SR -73 SB Rams & Bonita Can on 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 0.381 0.07 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.44 0.51 0.07 0.54 0.68 034 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 0.071 0.351 0.49 0.14 59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.83 0.88 0.05 0.82 0.90 0.08 60. S pyglass Hill Rd. &San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.44 0.59 0.15 0.30 0.45 0.15 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.61 0.68 0.07 0.65 0.75 0.10 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Rams 0.45 0.54 0.09 0.31 0.39 0.08 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.37 0.63 0.26 0.29 0.46 0.17 65. New ort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.47 0.57 0.10 0.50 0.60 0.10 U: \UcJobs \_Ot 200 \01232 \Excel \[01232 -1 B.xls]T4 -9 4 -24 rz; TABLE 4.10 (PAGE 1 OF 2) TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY • INTERSECTION NS /EW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ICU LUS ICU L 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.74 C 0.86 D 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 0.98 E 0.94 E 4. Newport Bl. & Hospital Rd. 0.79 C 0.96 E 5. Newport BI. & Via Lido 0.52 A 0.41 A 6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St. 0.46 A 0.58 A 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.01 F 1.10 F 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.01 F 0.83 D 9. MacArthur Bl. & Campus Dr. 0.75 C 1.25 F 10. MacArthur Bl. & Birch St. 0.70 B 0.80 11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.64 B 0.94 E 12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Karman Av. 0.54 A 0.64 B 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.931 E 1.23 F 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. 0.80 C 0.80 C 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N) 0.96 E 1.08 F 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N ) 0.93 E 0.72 C 17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. (S) 0.91 E 0.76 C 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S) 0.52 A 0.53 A 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.681 B 0.90 D 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.15 F 1.16 F 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.69 B 0.76 C 22. Irvine Av. & Hi and Dr. 0.61 B 0.63 B 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.78 C 0.71 C 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.66 B 0.80 C 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 0.401 A 0.57 A 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.641 B 0.65 B 27. Dover Dr. &: Coast Hw. 0.84 D 0.88 D 28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.82 D 0.93 E 29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd. 0.97 E 0.99 E 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (N) 0.71 C 0.68 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 A 0.58 A 36. Jamboree Rd. &: Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd. 0.76 C 0.731 C 37. Jamboree Rd. &: San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.60 A 0.65 1 B 4 -25 is 1 a� TABLE 4 -10 (PAGE 2 OF 2) • TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY 0 • INTERSECTION NSIEW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR IC LU6 I U LOS 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.54 A 0.71 C 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.85 D 0.87 D 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.34 A 0.34 A 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 A 0.70 B 42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 A 0.62 B 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.381 Al 0.78 C 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.78 C 0.79 C 46. SR -73 NB Rams & Bison Av. 0.47 A 0.56 A 47. SR -73 SB Rams & Bison Av. 0.39 A 0.29 A 48. MacArthur Bl. & Bison Av. 0.77 C C 0.80 1.06 C F 49. MacArhtur Bl. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.771 50. MacArthur Bl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.77 C 1.02 F 51. MacArthur Bl. & San Miguel Dr. 0.62 B 0.76 C 52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw. 0.74 C 0.80 C 53. SR -73 NB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.69 B 0.52 A 54. SR -73 SB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.45 A 0.57 A 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.301 A 0.38 A 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.511 A 0.68 B 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.061 F 0.75 C 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.381 A 0.49 A 59.Mar erite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.881 D 0.90 D 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.59 A 0.45 A 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.68 B 0.75 C 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Ramps 0.54 A 0.391 A 64. Newport Coast Dr. _&, San Joa uin Hills Rd. 0.63 B 0.46 A 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.57 A 0.601 A U :\ U cJ obs \_01200 \01232\ Ex ce I \[01232 -18. xl s)T4 -10 4 -26 la� UWy =az XZLU W W W Cam G C =0 ? W E Z W V �a � H W 0. 0 2 aaa� Wa \ W W LL IL e ° e O N W O N L N c C N W Q a OJ Q a OJ .J w `y L "B SIH MtiUEI °A AV U.}' fN3. z § a LLI R �Qa o A U d 1 15Y3161W0 . 4 -27 a N O N O R G O t V Z a J Q L' W • 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 %vv TABLE 4 -11 (PAGE 1 OF 2) TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY INTERSECTION NS /EW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR TRUE MINIMUM WITH IMPROVEMENTS DELTA TRUE I MINIMUM WITH IMPROVEMENTS DELTA 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.74 0.74 0.001 0.861 0.86 0.00 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 0.98 0.85 -0.13 0.94 0.83 -0.11 4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. 0.79 0.79 0.00 0.96 0.88 -0.08 5. cwport BI. &Via Lido 0.52 0.52 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.00 6. Newport BI. & 32nd St. 0.46 0.46 0.00 0.58 0.58 0.00 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.01 0.70 -0.31 1.10 0.85 -0.25 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.01 0.70 -0.31 0.83 0.83 0.00 9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr. 0.75 0.73 -0.021 1.25 0.87 -0.38 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 11. Von Kaman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.64 0.61 -0.03 0.94 0.89 -0.05 12. MacArthur BI. & Von Kaman Av. 0.54 0.54 0.00 0.64 0.64 0.00 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.93 0.90 -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. Cam us Dr. & Bristol St. (N) 0.96 0.88 -0.08 1.08 0.85 -0.23 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N) 0.93 0.78 -0.15 0.72 0.70 -0.02 17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. (S) 0.91 0.85 -0.06 0.761 0.76 0.00 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S) 0.52 0.52 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.00 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.68 0.62 -0.06 0.90 0.85 -0.05 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.15 0.74 -0.41 1.16 0.83 -0.33 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.69 0.54 -0.15 0.76 0.57 -0.19 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.63 0.63 0.00 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.71 0.71 0.00 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff DT. 0.66 0.66 0.00 0.801 0.80 0.00 25. Dover Dr. & V, cstcliff Dr. 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.57 0.57 0.00 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.64 0.64 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.00 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.84 0.84 0.00 0.88 0.88 0.00 28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.82 0.81 -0.01 0.93 0.89 -0.04 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. 0.97 0.84 -0.13 0.99 0.89 -0.10 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (N) 0.71 0.71 0.00 0.68 0.68 0.00 31. Bayvicw PI. & Bristol St. (S ) 0.59 0.59 0.001 0.631 0.63 0.00 32. Jamboree Rd. &Bristol St. S) 0.97 0.74 -0.23 0.84 0.80 -0.04 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayvim Wy. 0.481 0.48 0.00 0.70 0.70 0.00 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr. 0.65 0.65 0.00 0.68 0.68 0.00 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.58 0.58 0.00 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Pord Rd. 0.76 0.76 0.00 0.73 0.73 0.00 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.00 4 -29 9 • • 131 l,k?, 0 11 0 TABLE 4 -11 (PAGE 2 OF 2) TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY INTERSECTION (NS /EW) AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR TRUE MINIMUM WITH IMPROVEMENTS DELTA TRUE MINIMUM WITH IMPROVEMENTS DELTA 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.541 0.54 0.001 0.71 0.71 0.00 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.851 0.85 0.00 0.87 0.87 0.00 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.341 0.34 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.00 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.70 0.70 0.00 42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.501 0.50 0.00 0.62 0.62 0.00 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.78 0.78 0.00 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.791 0.79 0.0 46. SR -73 NB Rams & Bison Av. 0.47 0.47 0.001 0.561 0.56 0.00 47. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.39 0.39 0.001 0.29J 0.29 0.00 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.77 0.77 0.001 0,801 0.80 0.00 49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.77 0.71 -0.06 1.06 0.86 -0.21 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.771 0.66 -0.11 1.02 0.83 -0.19 151. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.62 0.62 0.00 0.76 0.76 0.00 52. MacArthur BI. & 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 Ramps & 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 0.001 0.381 0.38 0.00 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.68 0.68 0.00 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.06 0.77 -0.29 0.75 0.75 0.00 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.49 0.49 0.00 59.Mar¢uerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.88 0.88 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. &S an Joaquin Hills Rd, 0.59 0.59 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.00 61. Pop y Av. & Coast Hw. 0.68 0.68 0.00 0.75 0.75 0.0 62. Netiti on Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Rams 0.54 0.54 0.00 0.39 0.39 0.00 64. Ne ort Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. !N 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.46 0.46 0.00 65. ort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.57 0.57 0.001 0.601 0.60 0.00 U: \U cJ o bs \_ 01200\ 01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xls]T4 -11 4 -30 13O- N LL O W Q a N r 'V W 00 0] H 4 -31 9 0 Ll 133 c L — m W 0 m _- W N '0 O c > o _ =� O O L L y 00 N c C N C O U) N j L 7 L O y N L= 7 O 7 7 O O .0. 7 L O) O) 0 7 j '--' O - L O OO l L O L O O O � 0> O - 0]0]mL��Z�ZZfn O`m"'Z> ZW�Z W W �m W . W y O] L W N L L �c 00' L 9 m N m L.. N m L N N N E E 'O r L �c N U) M '7 M U) Z M (!J In M M M c m 00 .c .L. t{ M N U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U N W W U) 00 U U U 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 °) o.r 2 2 2 c N c c c c c y c c c c y c c N N c c c c c c 0>) N N N C C C G C G C G G C C C G G C c C C C G G C N f0 N C ... G C C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N L d O y 0 0 0 W U) Z �w� U) W OLU wW wQ V w o� w U w �Q ' y LU ,= W W � U) W 3 w y wO 7 Z .wi m._. 2 (n U) DER in Z' mQ 3 0 w y SEUE o N'H 5 E 9 Z U Cl O U N V y U W Z; p 07 _ 2 o 6 m p H > � U m m m m� vU) U) m m W� U) U) Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Q Z Z j m > Z 0] C `EF U) z Z m Q >> Q Q" Q = `O .� r Q t N y y> , Q n i H Y c n E CL E E a V) Z Fr F > 40 U m _c lco 2 4 -31 9 0 Ll 133 0 0 0 N LL O N W i� Q a N w J ffl Q F N_ 4 F N X co N co N O U X W N co N_ O O O _N O I N O 4 -32 13u l4✓ co E L O U N 9 m W N W m C o E � w C C ai C C C co (0 C (0 f0 (p O E 0 0 L O O p N wc m m _N m m m fn W Z W m L -2 M U) M 7 M M U O D U U U C 0 E 0 0 0 0 U w U U U U W O a <0 CL U N Z co O c = w F O c U m U) of of V; W o C O ~ Z _ li v) U Z5 N Z Z Z m m Q O L L C U U) U � � � O N_ 4 F N X co N co N O U X W N co N_ O O O _N O I N O 4 -32 13u l4✓ 5.0 SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (POST -2025) ALTERNATIVE WITH OPEN SPACE NETWORK SCENARIO This chapter presents subarea minimum (as defined in the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) alternatives) General Plan Buildout (Post -2025) with open space network conditions. General Plan Buildout model inputs are discussed and refined forecast volumes are presented. Data are compared to existing conditions to show reasonable growth and to currently adopted General Plan conditions (as defined in Chapter 3 of this report) results to show differences. 5.1 Land Use and Socioeconomic Data (SED) This section discusses the land use and socioeconomic data inputs. 5.1.1 Subarea Minimum General Plan Buildout Land Use Data The Subarea Minimum General Plan Buildout land use data was provided to Urban Crossroads, Inc. staff by City staff and the City's General Plan is 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 -1 135 TABLE 5 -1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT •LAND USE COMPARISON • NBTM CODE' DESCRIPTION UNITS' ADOPTED QUANTITY SUBAREA MINIMUM QUANTITY CHANGE %CHANGE 1 Low Density Residential DU 18,347 17,833 514 - 2.80% 2 Medium Density Residential DU 12,859 12,903 44 0.34% 3 Apartment DU 13,374 15,281 1,907 14.26% 4 Elderly Residential DU 200 200 - 0.00% 5 Mobile Home DU 455 455 - 0.00% TOTAL DWELLING UNITS DU 45,235 46,672 1,437 3.180 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) - 10.45% 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 - 0.00% 17 Yacht Club TSF 70.310 70.310 - 0.00% 18 Health Club TSF 61.330 61.330 0.00% 19 Tennis Club CRT 59 59 0.05% 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 1 0.0031. 23 General Office TSF 12,305.620 12,614.019 308.399 2.51% 24 1 Medical /Government Office TSF 910.616 837.696 (72.220)1 8.01% 25 Research & Development TSF 81.730 81.730 0.00% 26 Industrial TSF 1,956.092 1,153.867 802.225 41.01% 27 Mini-Storage/Warehouse TSF 196.420 196.420 - 0.00% 28 Pre - school /Day Care TSF 56.770 56.770 - 0.00% 29 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 78.640 - 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 Re Tonal Park ACRE 45.910 45.910 - 0.00% 40 GOIf Course JACRE 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. ' Units Abbreviations: DU = Dwelling Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet CRT = Court STU = Students U9UCJobs\_ 01200 \01232 \&x 1 01232- 18.xISIT5 -1 5 -2 136 k'1 TABLE 5 -2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING NBTM CODE' DESCRIPTION UNITS 2 2002 QUANTITY BAREA MINIMUM QUANTITY I GROWTH 1%GROWTH 1 Low Density Residential DU 17,124 17,833 709 4.14% 2 Medium Density 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 44.78% 7 Hotel ROOM 2,821 4,069 1,248 44.24% 9 Regional Commercial TSF 1,259.000 1,464.000 205.000 16.28% 10 General Commercial TSF 3,696.781 4,547.128 850.347 23.00% 11 Commercial /Recreation ACRE 5.100 5.100 - 0.00% 13 Restaurant TSF 99.370 198.780 99.410 100.04% 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 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 -Stara e/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 1.28% 30 Junior/High School STU 4,765 4,765 - 0.00% 31 Cultural/Learning Center TSF 35.000 40.000 5.000 14.29% 32 Libra TSF 78.840 78.840 - 0.00% 33 Post Office TSF 53.700 63.800 10.100 18.81% 34 Hospital BED 351 1,265 914 260.40% 35 Nursin /Conv. Home BEDS 661 602 (59 ) - 8.93% 36 Church TSF 377.760 441.200 63.440 16.79% 37 Youth Ctr. /Service TSF 149.560 166.310 16.750 11.20% 38 Park ACRE 113.970 112.250 1.720 - 1.51% 39 Regional Park ACRE 45.910 45.910 N! 40 Golf Course I ACRE 305.330 298.290 (7.04 - 2.31% Uses 8, 12, and 14 are part of the old NBTAM model structure and are not currently utilized in the City land use datasets. 2 Units Abbreviations: DU = Dwelling Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet CRT = Court STU = Students U: \UcJobs \_01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232.18.xlsTTS -2 5 -3 • • 0 137 t'1 I* more than 3,000 dwelling units. Categories that grow by more than 500,000 square feet include general commercial and general office. 5.1.2 General Plan Buildout Socioeconomic Data (SED) General Plan Buildout SED that has been converted from land use is summarized in Table 5 -3. Table 5 -3 also contains a comparison of subarea minimum General Plan Buildout SED to existing SED for the City of Newport Beach. The total number of dwelling units are projected to grow by 9,357 units (27 %) from existing conditions. For total employment, an increase of 14,587 employees (22 %) is anticipated. Socioeconomic data for the remainder of the primary modeling area (and for Newport Coast, where land use data was unavailable) has been • unchanged from the currently adopted General Plan data. 5.2 Trip Generation Table 5-4 summarizes the overall trip generation for General Plan Buildout conditions for the City of Newport Beach and compares it to existing conditions trip generation. Appendix "S" contains a report of trip generation by NBTM TAZ for the City of Newport Beach. Most of these trips have been calculated from the final General Plan Buildout SED presented previously. Supplemental trips are unchanged from the previously published data. The overall trip generation for the City of Newport Beach is an estimated 880,085 daily vehicle trips. Table 5 -5 compares subarea minimum General Plan buildout trip generation to currently adopted General Plan buildout trip generation. Total . trip generation increases by approximately 326 daily trips (0.04 %). Appendix "TT" shows the zone by zone trip generation comparison. 5-4 ) 7W TABLE 5 -3 • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH1 SUBAREA MINIMUM LAND USE BASED SOCIOECONOMIC DATA SUMMARY /COMPARISON VARIABLE 2002 QUANTITY -SUBAREA MINIMUM QUANTITY G Occu ied Sin le Family Dwelling Units 15,970 16,702 732 5 °!0 Occupied Multi_ Dwelling Units 18,294 26,919 8,625 47% TOTAL OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS 1 34,2641 43,6211 9,357 27% Group Quarters Population 661 602 -59 -9% Population 75,211 93,271 18,060 24% Employed Residents 44,6351 56,169 11,534 26% Retail Employees 10,970 13,398 2,428 22 °!0 Service Employees 17,295 21,750 4,455 26% Other Employees 36,9901 44,694 7,704 21% TOTAL EMPLOYEES 1 65,2551 79,8421 14,587 22% Elem /Hi h School Students 9,1641 9,2201 56 1%1 u Includes data converted from land use only. Excludes Newport Coast and recent annexation areas. U:\UWDbs \_ 01200 \01232 \Excel\ 01232- 18.xisIT5 -3 • 5 -5 ' �/q • TABLE 5-4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MINIMUM TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY 0 TRIP PURPOSE DAILY TRIP ENDS GROWTH PERCENT GROWTH EXISTING SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERALPLAN BUILDOUT Home Based Work Productions' 57,819 75,795 17,9761 31.09% Home Based Work Attractions 81,964 101,982 20,0181 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 Productions' 127,338 175,256 47,918 37.63% Home Based Other Attractions 109,815 137,098 27,283 24.84% Work Based Othher er Productions 52,152 65,124 12,972 24.87% Work Based Ot Attractions 570351 71,209 14,174 24.85% Other - Other Productions 91,2181 115,843 24,625 27.00% Other -Other Attractions 89,734 114,154 24,420 27.21% TOTAL PRODUCTIONS 1 339,8631 446,7971 106,9341 31.46% TOTAL ATTRACTIONS 347,2781 433,2881 86,0101 24.77% OVERALL TOTAL 687,1411 880,0851 192,944 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. 0 U1UCJobs \_01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xlsJT5 -4 5 -6 I �U 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 73.9681 75,795 1,8271 2.47% Home Based Work Attractions 102,2301 101,982 -248 - 0.24% Home Based School Productions 14.4751 14,779 304 2.10% Home Based School Attractions 8,845 8,845 0 0.00% Home Based Other ProductionS2 174,257 175,256 999 0.57% Home Based Other Attractions 138,334 137,098 -1,236 - 0.89% 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 1 - 115,843 432 0.37% Other - Other Attractions 114,5581 114,154 -404 - 0.35% TOTAL PRODUCTIONS 444,4571 446,7971 2,340 TOTAL ATTRACTIONS 1 435,3021 433,288 -2,014 -0.46% OVERALL TOTAL 1 879,7591 880,0851 3261 0.04% 9 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. U: \UCJobs \_ 01200 \01232 \Exce1\[01232- 18.xis]T5 -5 • 5 -7 M 0 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 5-8 ' /,� Fn cc x z Uw 60 LU 1= i • za O C) Ito O wo *IV i • 5 -9 \,� •� za C) Ito O wo *IV O o 11 0 x LLU r) > LU No OAV. v 5 -9 \,� •� C) O Aw 3NIml vm A, NI. X AI3oN. 5 -9 \,� •� 11 0 TABLE 5 -6 (PAGE 1 OF 4) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON LOCATION I ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) SUBAREA MINIMUM FORECAST CHANGE % CHANGE 16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.) 6,000 6,000 0 0.0% 32nd St. (west of Newport Blvd.) 9,000 8,000 -1,000 -11.1% 32nd St. (east of Newport Blvd.) 5,000 3,000 -2,000 40.0% Avocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.) 5,000 6,000 1,000 20.0% Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.) 12,000 12,000 0 0.0% Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 10,000 11,000 1,000 10.0% Balboa Blvd. (south of Coast Hwy.) 22,000 20,000 -2,000 -9.1% Bayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.) 12,000 12,000 0 0.0% Birch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Karman Ave.) 18,000 19,000 1,000 5.6% Birch St. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 20,000 21,000 1,000 5.0% Birch St. (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 20,000 23,000 3,000 15.0% Birch St. (north of Bristol St. North) 27,000 29,000 2,000 7.4% Birch St. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 20,000 22,000 2,000 10.0% Birch St. (south of Bristol St. South) 16,000 16,000 0 0.0% Bison Ave. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 17,000 18,000 1,000 5.9% Bison Ave. (MacArthur Blvd. to SR -73 Fwy.) 11,000 11,000 0 0.0% Bluff Rd. (Coast Hwy. to 15th St.) 13,000 0 - 13,000 - 100.0% Bluff Rd. (15th St. to 17th St.) 13,000 0 - 13,000 - 100.0% Bluff Rd. (17th St. to 19th St.) 12,000 0 - 12,000 - 100.0% Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.) 34,000 34,000 0 0.0% Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR -73 Fwy.) 27,000 27,000 0 0.0% Bristol St. North (west of Campus Dr.) 32,000 33,000 1,000 3.1% Bristol St. North (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 28,000 29,000 1,000 3.6% Bristol St. North (east of Birch St.) 27,000 28,000 1,000 3.7% Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd.) 18,000 18,000 0 0.0% Bristol St. South (west of Campus Dr./Irvine Ave.) 32,000 32,000 0 0.0% Bristol St. South (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 23,000 23,000 0 0.0% Bristol St. South (east of Birch St.) 22,000 22,000 0 0.0% Bristol St. South (west of Jamboree Rd.) 37,000 37,000 0 0.0% Campus Dr. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Karman Ave.) 22,000 22,000 0 0.0% Campus Dr. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 31,000 31,000 0 0.0% Campus Dr. (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 39,000 40,000 1,000 2.6% Campus Dr. (north of Bristol St. North) 39,000 39,000 0 0.0% Campus Dr. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 40,000 40,000 0 0.0% Coast Hwy. (west of Bluff Rd.) 60,000 56,000 4,000 -6.7% Coast Hwy. (Bluff Rd. to Superior Ave./Balboa Blvd.) 61,000 56,000 -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 1.50/6 Coast Hwy. (Riverside Ave. to Tustin Ave.) 59,000 59,000 0 (100/0 Coast Hwy. (Tustin Ave. to Dover Dr.) 55,000 55,000 0 0.00/0 5 -10 lq 16V TABLE 5 -6 (PAGE 2 OF 4) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON LOCATION ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) SUBAREA MINIMUM FORECAST CHANG E CHANGE Coast Hwy. (Dover Dr. to Bayside Dr.) 78,000 78,000 0 0.0% Coast Hwy. (Bayside Dr. to Jamboree Rd.) 64,000 64,000 0 0.0% Coast Hwy. (Jamboree Rd. to Newport Center Dr.) 51,000 50,000 -1,000 -2.0% Coast Hwy. (Newport Center Dr. to Avocado Ave.) 43,000 43,000 0 0.0% Coast Hwy. (Avocado Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 45,000 45,000 0 0.0% Coast Hwy. (MacArthur Blvd. to Goldenrod Ave.) 48,000 46,000 -2,000 4.2% Coast Hwy. (Goldenrod Ave. to Marguerite Ave.) 46,000 46,000 0 0.0% Coast Hwy. (Marguerite Ave. to Poppy Ave.) 42,000 42,000 0 0.0% Coast Hwy. (Poppy Ave. to Newport Coast Dr.) 35,000 35,000 0 0.0% Coast Hwy (east of Newport Coast Dr.) 44,000 44,000 0 0.0% Dover Dr. (Irvine Ave. to WestcliffDr.) 11,000 11,000 0 0.0% Dover Dr. (WestcliffDr. to 16th St.) 24,000 24,000 0 0.0% Dover Dr. (16th St. to Cliff Dr.) 28,000 28,000 0 0.0% Dover Dr. (Cliff Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 33,000 34,000 1,000 3.0% Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at University Dr.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.0% Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at Ford Rd.) 15,000 15,000 0 0.0% Ford Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 13,000 13,000 0 0.0% Goldenrod Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 4,000 2,000 -2,000 -50.0% Highland Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 2,000 2,000 0 0.0% Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 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% Irvine Ave. (University Dr. to Santa Isabel Ave.) 40,000 40,000 0 0.0% Irvine Ave. (Santa Isabel Ave. to Santiago Dr.) 3 3,000 33,000 0 0.0% Irvine Ave. (Santiago Dr. to Highland Dr.) 32,000 32,000 0 0.0% Irvine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.) 32,000 32,000 0 0.0% Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr. to WestcliffDr.) 28,000 29,000 1,000 3.6% Irvine Ave. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.) 13,000 14,000 1,000 7.7% Jamboree Rd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 47,000 48,000 1,000 2.1% Jamboree Rd. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 54,000 54,000 0 0.0% Jamboree Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to Bristol St. North) 43,000 44,000 1,000 2.3% Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 51,000 53,000 2,000 3.9% Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. South to Bayview Wy.) 56,000 57,000 1,000 1.8% Jamboree Rd. ( Bayview Wy. to University Dr.) 56,000 57,000 1,000 1.8% Jamboree Rd. (University Dr. to Bison Ave.) 41,000 41,000 0 0.0% Jamboree Rd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 45,000 46,000 1,000 2.2% Jamboree Rd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 55,000 56,000 1,000 1.8% Jamboree Rd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to Santa Barbara Dr.) 43,000 45,000 2,000 4.7% Jamboree Rd. (Santa Barbara Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 42,000 43,000 1,000 2.4% Jamboree Rd. ( Coast Hwy. to Bayside Dr.) 15,000 15,000 0 0.0% MacArthur Blvd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 33,000 35,000 2,000 6.1% MacArthur Blvd. (Birch St. to Von Karman Ave.) 26,000 27,000 1,000 3.8% MacArthur Blvd. (Von Karman Ave. to Jamboree Rd.) 32,000 33,000 1,000 3.1% 0 5 -11 /5 151) TABLE 5 -6 (PAGE 3 OF 4) . SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON LOCATION ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) SUBAREA MINIMUM 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 75,000 1,000 1.4% MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 74,000 74,000 0 0.0% MacArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 60,000 61,000 1,000 1.7% MacArthur Blvd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to San Miguel Rd.) 39,000 38,000 -1,000 -2.6% MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 38,000 38,000 0 0.0% Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 8,000 7,000 -1,000 - 12.5% Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 7,000 6,000 -1,000 - 14.3% Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 13,000 13,000 0 0.0% Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.) 46,000 47,000 1,000 2.2% Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 54,000 54,000 0 0.0% Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido) 57,000 56,000 -1,000 -1.8% Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.) 41,000 41,000 0 0.0% 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% Newport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 24,000 24,000 0 0.0% Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 19,000 19,000 0 0.0% Placentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.) 16,000 17,000 1,000 6.3% Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 11,000 12,000 1,000 9.1% 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 10.00/0 San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.) 17,000 17,000 0 0.0% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.) 12,000 13,000 1,000 8.3% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 26,000 28,000 2,000 7.7% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to San Miguel Rd.) 22,000 23,000 1,000 4.5% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (San Miguel Rd. to Marguerite Ave.) 24,000 24,000 0 0.0% an Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to Spyglass Hill Rd.) 19,000 19,000 0 0.0% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.) 19,000 19,000 0 0.0% San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.0% San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.0% San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 14,000 14,000 0 0.0% San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 16,000 16,000 0 0.00/0 San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.) 20,000 20,000 0 0.0% San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.) 11,000 11,000 0 0.0% Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 11,000 13,000 2,000 18.2% Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 9,000 9,000 0 0.0% Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 14,000 14,000 0 0.0% Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave. to Irvine Ave.) 6,000 6,000 0 0.0y° 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% Su erior Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 28,000 28,000 0 0.0% 5 -12 14 c1q, TABLE 5-6 (PAGE 4 OF 4) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON • LOCATION ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) SUBAREA MINIMUM 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% Via Lido (east of Newport Blvd.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.0% Von Karman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 18,000 19,000 1,000 5.6% Von Karman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 16,000 17,000 1,000 6.3% Westcliff Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr. ) 16.000 16,000 0 0.0% U: \UcJobs\ 01200 \01232\Excel \[01232- 18.xls]T5 -6 0 5 -13 rq7 \6`^ TABLE 5 -7 (PAGE 1 OF 4) . SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH fr� LOCATION EXISTING (2001/2002) COUNT SUBAREA MINIMUM FORECAST GROWTH GROWTH 16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.) 5,000 6,000 1,000 20.0% 32nd St. (west of Newport Blvd.) 8,000 8,000 0 0.0% 32nd St. (east of Newport Blvd.) 3,000 3,000 0 0.0% Avocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.) 5,000 6,000 1,000 20.0% Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.) 12,000 12,000 0 0.0% Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 11,000 11,000 0 0.0% Balboa Blvd. (south of Coast Hwy.) 18,000 20,000 2,000 11.1% Bayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.) 10,000 12,000 2,000 20.0% Birch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Karman Ave.) 12,000 19,000 7,000 58.3% Birch St. (Von 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% Bristol 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 22.9% Coast Hwy. (Avocado Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 36,000 45,000 9,000 25.0% 5 -14 /1 / iV7 TABLE 5 -7 (PAGE 2 OF 4) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH • LOCATION EXISTING (2 0 0112 0 0 2) COUNT SUBAREA MINIMUM FORECAST GROWTH % GROWTH Coast Hwy. (MacArthur Blvd. to Goldenrod Ave.) 40,000 46,000 6,000 15.001c 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 20.00/c 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% Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at University Dr.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.0 %. Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at Ford Rd.) 15,000 15,000 0 0.0% Ford Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 9,000 13,000 4,000 44.4 %'' Goldenrod Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 2,000 0 0.0% Highland Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 2,000 2,000 0 0.0% Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 13,000 19,000 6,000 46.2% Hospital Rd. (east of Newport Blvd.) 7,000 11,000 4,000 57.1% Irvine Ave. (Bristol St. South to Mesa Dr.) 27,000 38,000 11,000 40.7% Irvine Ave. (Mesa Dr. to University Dr.) 31,000 41,000 10,000 32.3% Irvine Ave. (University Dr. to Santa Isabel Ave.) 33,000 40,000 7,000 21.2% Irvine Ave. (Santa Isabel Ave. to Santiago Dr.) 29,000 33,000 4,000 13.8% Irvine Ave. (Santiago Dr. to Highland Dr.) 27,000 32,000 5,000 18.5% Irvine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.) 27,000 32,000 5,000 18.5% Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr. to 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 28.6% Jamboree Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to Bristol St. North) 36,000 44,000 8,000 22.2% Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 47,000 53,000 6,000 12.8% Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. South to Bayview Wy.) 47,000 57,000 10,000 21.3% Jamboree Rd. (Bayview Wy. to University Dr.) 47,000 57,000 10,000 21.3% Jamboree Rd. (University Dr. to Bison Ave.) 37,000 41,000 4,000 10.8% Jamboree Rd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 39,000 46,000 7,000 17.9% Jamboree Rd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 46,000 56,000 10,000 21.7% Jamboree Rd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to Santa Barbara Dr.) 34,000 45,000 11,000 32.4% Jamboree Rd. (Santa Barbara Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 32,000 43,000 11,000 34.4% Jamboree Rd. ( Coast Hwy. to Bayside Dr.) 12,000 15,000 3,000 25.0% MacArthur Blvd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 27,000 35,000 8,000 29.6% MacArthur Blvd. (Birch St. to Von Karman Ave.) 22,000 27,000 5,000 22.7% MacArt hur Blvd. (Von Karman Ave. to Jamboree Rd.) 26,000 33,000 7,000 26.9% MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.) 27,000 36,000 9,000 33.3% MacArthur Blvd. (north of Bison Ave.) 61,000 75,000 14,000 23.0% MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 63,000 74,000 11,000 17.5% MacArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 54,0001 61,0001 7,000 1 13.0% 5 -15 • 0 I qq 10 TABLE 5 -7 (PAGE 3 OF 4) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH • • is [LOCATION EXISTING (2001/2002) 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 22.6% Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 7,000 7,000 0 0.0% Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 6,000 6,000 0 0.0% Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 12,000 13,000 1,000 8.3% Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.) 36,000 47,000 11,000 30.6% Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 43,000 54,000 11,000 25.6% Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido) 48,000 56,000 8,000 16.7% Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.) 36,000 41,000 5,000 13.9% Newport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.) 29,000 34,000 5,000 17.2% Newport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 14,000 16,000 2,000 14.3% Newport Coast Dr. (SR -73 Fwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 17,000 29,000 12,000 70.6% 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 0.0% Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 9,000 11,000 2,000 22.2% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.) 16,000 17,000 1,000 6.3% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.) 11,000 13,000 2,000 18.2% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 21,000 28,000 7,000 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 16.7% San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 12,000 16,000 4,000 33.3% San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.) 19,000 20,000 1,000 5.3% San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.) 10,000 11,000 1,000 10.0% Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 10,000 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 19,0001 2,000 11.8% Superior Ave. (Placentia Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 22,000 28,000 6,000 27.3% Superior Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast H 24,000 28,000 4,000 16.7% 5 -16 /9 ;dl TABLE 5 -7 (PAGE 4 OF 4) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH • LOCATION EXISTING (200112002) I 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 0.0% University Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 11,000 15,000 4,000 36.4% Via Lido (east of Newport Blvd.) 8,000 10,000 2,000 25.0% Von Karman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 14,000 19,000 5,000 35.7% Von Karman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 12,000 17,000 5,000 41.7% Westcliff Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr. ) 16,000 16,000 0 0.00 U: \UcJob s \_01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232 -18. xl s]T5 -7 5_17 0 151 �o =tea m V a� 9 IL Z v W (� SW i� M O Z W ! N KI lira' \G ItlOWVx x.Yptl3YlG � 0 O i q m V O m o I L O O � m m I Y 0 � � W 4 Q ftl � Z 5 a Q o: W Z W ai V W m F' O 3 5-18 1 1✓ i GMYT � o a m o � V W i n o I Z O N ° W dG5 T.YOI i /IG � 1 ty{ t1� Y4 O I LU m 1 1 vm�rroYln �. j 1 1 o m Q Q O tt N N O N xf°'�J N m p O d O Wo�1 N m 11 `�O %� a Dtl 33b>0nrr l m lYxJtl�G T T O! f O T m S � 4 O m' lira' \G ItlOWVx x.Yptl3YlG � 0 O i q m V O m o I L O O � m m I Y 0 � � W 4 Q ftl � Z 5 a Q o: W Z W ai V W m F' O 3 5-18 1 1✓ i Dover Drive north of Westcliff Drive Highway Dover Drive north of Coast 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 0 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 -19 153 �„S 0 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 i��J I TABLE 5.8 (PAGE 1 OF 2) SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN INTERSECTION NS /EW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR CURRENTLY ADOPTED FORECAST SUBAREA MINIMUM DELTA CURRENTLY ADOPTED FORECAST SUBAREA MINIMUM DELT 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 0.861 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 6. Newport BI. & 32nd St. 0.52 0.48 -0.04 0.71 0.63 -0.08 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.03 1.02 -0.01 1.12 1.15 0.03 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.02 1.04 0.021 0.85 0.87 0.02 9. MacArthur BI. & Ca us Dr. 0.76 0.77 0.011 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 Karman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.66 0.69 0.03 0.93 0.98 0.05 12. MacArthur B1. & Von Karman Av. 0.54 0.51 -0.03 0.64 0.64 0.0 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus 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 0.0 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. 0.96 0.97 0.01 1.08 1.08 0.00 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N ) 0.921 0.92 0.00 0.72 0.73 0.01 17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S 0.931 0.93 0.00 0.771 0.78 0.01 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S 0.521 0.54 0.02 0.53 0.54 0.01 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.681 0.70 0.02 0.90 0.911 0.01 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. L141 1.15 0.01 1.19 1.17 -0.02 I. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.78 0.781 0.0 22. Irvine Av. & Hi hland Dr. 0.61 0.62 0.01 0.63 0.65 0.02 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.78 0.79 0.01 0.70 0.72 0.02 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.67 0.69 0.02 0.821 0.80 -0.02 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliti Dr. 039 0.40 0.01 0.56 0.58 0.02 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.64 0.64 0.00 0.64 0.65 0.01 7. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.86 0.87 0.01 0.901 0.91 0.01 28. Bayside Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.83 0.83 0.00 0.94 0.95 0.01 29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd. 0.96 0.96 0.00 0.99 1.00 0.01 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 0.70 0.71 0.01 0.69 0.69 0. 31. Ba iew PI. & Bristol St. S 0.60 0.61 0.01 0.63 0.63 0. 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S 0.96 0.97 0.01 0.65 0.86 0.01 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bawiew W . 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.70 0.71 0.01 34, 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 0.00 0.58 0.59 0.01 36. Jamboree Rd. &Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd. 0.78 0.79 0.01 0.72 0.73 0.01 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.61 0.60 -0.01 0.651 0.68 0.03 5 -21 0 I� ti,f u 1 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 MINIMU M 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 40. Santa Cm Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0,361 0.38 0.02 0.341 0.36 0.02 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.711 0.68 -0.03 42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.631 0,62 -0.01 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.37 0.39 0.02 0.791 0.79 0.0 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.77 0.80 0.03 0.80 0.83 0.03 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.47 0.47 0,00 0.56 0.56 0.0 47. 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 49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd.Bonim Canyon Dr. 0.77 0.78 0.01 1.06 1.06 0.00 50. MacArthur Bl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.77 0.81 0.04 1,04 1.06 0.02 51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.77 0.76 -0.01 52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw. 0.74 0.73 -0.01 0.83 0.79 -0.04 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.0 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canvon Dr. 0.45 0.46 0.01 0.59 0.59 0.0 55. San Mieuel 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 0.55 0.03 0.68 0.68 0.0 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.08 1.06 -0.02 0.79 0.75 -0.04 58. Mareuerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.51 0.50 -0.01 59.Mar eriie Av. &Coast Hw. 0.90 0.89 -0.01 0.91 0.92 0.01 60. 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 0.76 0.75 -0.01 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Rams 0.541 0.53 -0.01 0.40 0.40 0.00 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.47 0.48 0.01 65. Ne ort Coast Dr. &Coast Hw. 0.571 0.56 -0.01 0.60 0.60 0.00 'DNE = Does Not Exist U: \U W obs \_ 01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xls]T5 -8 5_22 15� ;Jk- TABLE 5 -9 (PAGE 1 OF 2) SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO EXISTING INTERSECTION NS /EW AM PEAK HOUR I PM PEAK HOUR EXISTING COUNT SUBAREA MINIMUM DELTA 1EXISTING1 COUNTI SUBAREA MINIMUM DELTA 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.66 0.73 0.07 0.67 0.86 0.19 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 0.84 1.00 0.16 0.90 0.95 0.05 4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. 0.54 0.84 0.30 0.70 1.01 0.31 5. Newport Bl. & 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 1.04 0.241 0.671 0.87 0.20 9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr. 0.611 0.77 0016 0.851 1.29 0.44 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0.49 0.75 0.26 0.661 0.86 0.2 11. Von Karm n Av. & Campus Dr. 0.55 0.69 0.14 0.79 0.98 0.19 12. MacArthur BI. & Von Karman Av. 0.46 0.51 0.05 0.53 0.64 0.11 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.70 0.93 0.23 0.85 1.25 0.40 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. 0.61 0.81 0.20 0.60 0.80 0.20 I5. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N) 0.77 0.97 0.20 0.94 1.08 0.14 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N) 0.66 0.92 0.26 0.61 0.73 0.12 17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. (S) 0.72 0.931 0.211 0.581 0.78 0.20 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S) 0.46 0.54 0.08 0.44 0.54 0.10 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.94 0.91 -0.03 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 0.82 1.15 0.33 0.89 1.17 0.28 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.66 0.70 0.04 0.721 0.78 0.06 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.57 0.62 0.05 0.601 0.65 0.05 23. Irvine Av. & Dova Dr. 0.72 0.79 0.07 0.64 0.72 0.08 24. Irvine Av.& Westcliff Dr. 0.57 0.69 0.12 0.77 0.80 0.03 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 0.38 0.40 0.02 0.48L 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 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. 0.88 0.96 0.08 0.91 1.00 0.09 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (N) 0.55 0.71 0.16 0.59 0.69 0.10 31. Bayview PI. &: Bristol St. (S) 0.48 0.61 0.13 0.56 0.63 0.07 32. Jamboree Rd. &: Bristol St. (S) 0.75 0.97 0.22 0.721 0.86 0.14 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W . 0.41 0.48 0.07 0.57 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 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 1 0.801 0.60 -0.20 1.00 0.68 -0.32 5 -23 E 0 t5� �h 0 • TABLE 5 -9 (PAGE 2 OF 2) SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO EXISTING INTERSECTION NS /EW AM PEAK HOUR I PM PEAK HOUR EXISTING COUNT SUBAREA MINIMUM DELTA EXISTING COUNT SUBAREA MINIMUM DELT 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.471 0.58 0.11 0.63 0.78 0.15 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.681 0.87 0.19 0.74 0.86 0.12 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 0.38 0.02 0.36 0.36 0.00 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.32 0.39 0.07 0.52 0.68 0.16 42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.40 0.50 0.10 0.52 0.62 0.10 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.33 0.39 0.06 0.72 0.79 0.07 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.58 0.80 0.221 0.66 0.83 0.17 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.31 0.47 0.16 0.37 0.56 0.19 47. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.26 0.38 0.12 0.17 0.29 0.12 48. MacArthur Bl. & Bison Av. 0.63 0.79 0.16 0.60 0.81 0.21 49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr, 0.71 0.78 0.07 0.90 1.06 0.16 50. MacArthur Bl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.64 0.81 0.17 0.93 1.06 0.13 51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.56 0.63 0.07 0.651 0.76 0.11 52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw. 0.60 0.73 0.131 0.71 0.79 0.08 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.55 0.69 0.14 0.43 0.53 0.1 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.30 0.46 0.16 0.41 0.59 0.18 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.28 0.30 0.02 0.31 0.38 0.07 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.44 0.55 0.11 0.54 0.68 0.14 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 0.50 0.15 59.Mar eriteAv. &CoastHw. 0.83 0.89 0.061 0.82 0.92 0.10 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.44 0.60 0.16 0.30 0.46 0,16 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.61 0.67 0.06 0.65 0.75 0.1 62. New ort Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Rams 0.45 0.53 0.08 0,31 0.40 0.09 64. New on Coast Dr. &San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.37 0.63 0,26 0.29 0.48 0.19 1165. WN2ort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 1 0.47 0.56 0.09 0.50 0.60 0.10 U: \UcJob s \- 01200 \01232 \Exce 1 \[01232 -18. xl s]T5 -9 5 -24 l5� t�. TABLE 5 -10 (PAGE 1 OF 2) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY INTERSECTION NS /EW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR L06 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 F 5. Newport Bl. & Via Lido 0.55 A 0.45 A 6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St. 0.48 A 0.63 B 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.021 F 1.15 F 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.04 F 0.87 D 9. MacArthur Bl. & Campus Dr. 0.77 C 1.29 F 10. MacArthur Bl. & Birch St. 0.75 C 0.86 D 11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.69 B 0.98 E 12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Kamian Av. 0.511 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. (N) 0.97 E 1.08 F 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N) 0.92 E 0.73 C 17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. (S) 0.93 E 0.78 C 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S) 0.541 A 0.54 A 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.701 B 0.91 E 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.15 F 1.17 F 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.70 B 0.78 C 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.62 B 0.65 B 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.79 C 0.72 C 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.69 B 0.80 C 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 0.401 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. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.83 D 0.95 E 29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd. 0.96 E 1.00 E 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (N) 0.71 C 0.69 B 31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. (S) 0.611 B 0.63 B 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S) 0.97 E 0.86 D 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W . 0.48 A 0.71 C 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr. 0.66 B 0.70 B 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd. 0.51 A 0.59 A 0.79 C 0.73 C 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0601 A 0.68 B 5_25 9 i5q 0 is TABLE 5 -10 (PAGE 2 OF 2) SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY INTERSECTION NS /EW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR I LOS 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.58 A 0.78 C 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.87 D 0.86 D 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.38 A 0.36 A 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 A 0.68 B 42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 A 0.62 B 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.39 Al 0.79 C 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.801 C 0.83 D 46. SR -73 NB Rams & Bison Av. 0.471 Al 0.56 A 47. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.381 Al 0.29 A 48. MacArthur Bl. & Bison Av. 0.79 Cl 0.81 D 49. MacArhtur Bl. & 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 BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.63 B 0.76 C 52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw. 0.73 C 0.791 C 53. SR -73 NB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.691 B 0.53 A 54, SR -73 SB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.46 A 0.59 A 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.30 A 0.38 A 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.55 A 0.68 B 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.06 F 0.75 C 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.38 A 0.50 A 59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.891 D 0.92 E 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.60 A 0.46 A 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.67 B 0.75 C 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Rams 0.53 A 0.40 A 64. New ort Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.63 B 0.481 A 65. New ort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.56 Al 0.60 A U:\ U cJ o bs \_01200 \01232 \Exce I \[01232 -18. xl s] T5 -10 5 -26 !bD U W LL�::Ilw maz wI=V W W a� ZW Z a� =a cc CL W y W 0. O loom Wa \ W W LL fL e e e 9 O O w O H L J0 e W Q a Q a � �� \�1 `1 LroB SIH NIGUFL oR � nY pOtlN3QW 4 .Y Bl. Ja�pp W. W oe a LyY3'IB ItlP1MiN 5 -27 \/ I�I 1 ^� • Campus Drive (NS) /Bristol Street South (EW) (AM) • Irvine Avenue (NS) /Mesa Drive (EW) (PM) • Irvine Avenue (NS) /University Drive (EW) (AM /PM) • Dover Drive (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (PM) • Bayside Drive (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (PM) • MacArthur Boulevard (NS) /Jamboree Road (EW) (AM /PM) • Jamboree Road (NS) /Bristol Street South (EW) (AM) • MacArthur Boulevard (NS) /Ford Road /Bonita Canyon Drive (EW) (PM) • MacArthur Boulevard (NS) /San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) (PM) • Goldenrod Avenue (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (AM) • Marguerite Avenue (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (PM) The only intersection that does not now experience a deficiency that did experience one before is Bluff Road (NS) at Coast Highway (EW). Bluff Road is not included in this scenario, as there is no development on Banning Ranch. Two additional intersections experience deficiencies (Irvine Avenue (NS) at Mesa Drive (EW) and Dover Drive (NS) at Coast Highway (EW)). Additional locations experience changes in levels of service. Intersection analysis has been performed to determine improvements necessary to provide acceptable levels of service. ICU worksheets are included in Appendix "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). 0 5 -28 1 a 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 FORECASTI I WITH IMPROVEMENTS I DELTA FUTURE FORECASTJ I WITH IMPROVEMENTS DELTA 2. Superior Av. & Placmtia Av. 0.73 0.73 0.00 0.86 0.86 0.00 3. 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. Ne ort BI. &Via Lido 0.55 0.55 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.00 6. Ne ort BI. & 32nd St. 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.63 0.63 0. 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.02 0.71 -0.31 1.15 0.78 -0.37 S. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.04 0.73 -0.311 0.871 0.87 0.00 9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr. 0.77 0.75 -0.02 1.29 0.82 -0.47 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.861 0.86 0.00 11. Von Kaman 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 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.0 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N) 0.97 0.86 -0.11 1.08 0.86 -0.22 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N ) 0.92 0.77 -0.15 0.73 0.71 -0.02 17. Campus DrArvine Av. & Bristol St. (S) 0.93 0.89 -0.04 0.781 0.78 0.00 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S) 0.54 0.54 0.001 0.541 0.54 0.00 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.91 0.86 -0.05 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.15 0.74 -0.41 1.17 0.83 -0.34 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.78 0.78 0.00 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.62 0.62 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.00 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.79 0.79 0.00 0.72 0.72 0.00 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.581 0.58 0.00 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.64 0.64 0.001 0.651 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. 0.83 0.81 -0.02 0.95 0.89 -0.06 29. 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. Bayvim Pl. & Bristol St. (S ) 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.63 0.63 0.00 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S 0.97 0.75 -0.22 0.86 0.81 -0.05 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayvim 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 0.701 0.00 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.511 0.511 0.001 0.59 0.591 0.00 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd. 0.79 0.791 0.731 0.00 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.601 0.601 0.001 0.68 0.681 0.00 5 -29 9 9 � b3 r 1�� TABLE 5 -11 (PAGE 2 OF 2) I* SUBAREA MINIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY 0 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 0.001 0.781 0.78 0.00 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.87 0.87 0.001 0.861 0.86 O.DO 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.361 0.36 0.00 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.66 0.68 0.00 42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.62 0.62 0.00 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.79 0.79 0.00 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.83 0.83 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 Rams & Bison Av. 0.38 0.38 0.001 0.29 0.29 0.00 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.79 0.79 0.00 0.811 0.81 0.00 49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.78 0.73 0.70 -0.05 -0.11 1.06 1.06 0.86 0.85 -0.20 -0.21 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.81 51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.76 0.76 0.00 52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw. 0.73 0.73 0.00 0.79 0.79 0.00 53. SR -73 NB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.00 54. SR -73 SB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.46 0.46 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.00 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.30 0.30 0.001 0.38 0.38 0.00 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.55 0.55 0.00 0.68 0.68 0.00 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.06 0.77 -0.29 0.75 0.75 0.00 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.38 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 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. &San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.46 0.46 0.00 61. Po Av. & Coast Hw. 0.67 0.67 0.00 0.75 0.75 0.00 62. Newport Coast Dr. &. SR -73 NB Ram s 0.53 0.53 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.00 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joa uin Hills Rd. 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.00 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.561 0.561 0.001 0.60 0.60 0.00 IDNE = Does Not Exist U: \UcJ obs \_01 200 \01232 \Excel \[01 232 -18. xls]T5-11 5 -30 ,-, to LL. } / s -a, � � � � §\ co co co \ co \ § \co (a \aaa� ` § \aN. /a..\ - k ® } /kf \ / {){ {k *o c :- Tjkkkkj _-- - °2E =� =E_;)- =RE- eka =2 {kk =o /2 ƒ \ {#t 7 /2£»2§7>#£2» {t /7& =22 {§ 2=E727f ƒmE\E2aE3: / {7\z3:zz 0w we - 7[[ CO$5NE332$327EA3233277[ JC0(0) /000 / / / / / / / / / / / / / /C)/ / // E E co \ ) } / / � \ / \ / m 6 a 2 \±- 2- \ E ! CL & ) k [ E ( z § 0 co J CO CO w G o f £ o \ ) - 0 2 6j f § .� 4± co \ / z / 2 \ \ \ \ / §f f [z ) } ! ! LZQ300:) k } )) § E E E >] 0 I o 2 s -a, � � � � §\ 0 • C� N LL O N W Q IL N LC) W J [0 Q F F a X O N M N O U X W N Cl) N 0 'o O N O 'a 0 O 7 U 5 -32 I W W of c C co C 7 L y C CO — O E N N 0 y L -0 .- F _ m m Z a) � W W cn c O f0 N N W O C m m C i O = o _C E o .E a .y w w m .` CO a L L C N N O U N N N N O N o m m m m m m U) n E _m _m _m _m y� m 5 L L C E C L cr. L E L L O> O 01 O C" =— = B O O N ... p CO Co m m m m m m m m M- m _z 3: Z W�: W In W Z W3: W ,J "O Lm-0 L L -2 � UO UO = UO UO UO S m' V M N M M V M M M m m U U U U U U U U U U N CL "U) 2 U 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 > ip in in in in in in in Tn in Tn in W C C 4 0 0 C C C 0 0 0 C 0 C C 0 0 C C 0 0 C 0 C 0 K U 5 0 0 0 U U U U U U U U LU W c LU G W O T U W pW '0 G W W F W m m O E ui U) v (D U '0 cr m = M: 2 S o m a s w N E a c o 0 Z o Li U) U U U 76 _m m m m m m Z U) Z Z Z Z Z Z m -0 m m Q Q N ? ? ' O` N — N L t O L L N N Q .0 Q Q N O T U E U U F a X O N M N O U X W N Cl) N 0 'o O N O 'a 0 O 7 U 5 -32 I W W of 6.0 SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (POST -2025) ALTERNATIVE WITH CONSTRAINED NETWORK SCENARIO This chapter presents subarea maximum (as defined in the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) alternatives) General Plan Buildout (Post -2025) with constrained network conditions. General Plan Buildout model inputs are discussed and refined forecast volumes are presented. Data are compared to existing conditions to show reasonable growth and to currently adopted General Plan Conditions (as defined in Chapter 3 of this report) results to show differences. 6.1 Land Use and Socioeconomic Data (SED) This section discusses the land use and socioeconomic data inputs. 6.1.1 Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout Land Use Data The Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout land use data was provided to Urban Crossroads, Inc. staff by City staff and the City's General Plan consultant, EIP Associates. Appendix "W" of this report documents the explicit land use data included in NBTM 3.1 for subarea maximum General Plan Buildout conditions in this analysis. Table 6 -1 summarizes the overall subarea maximum General Plan Buildout land uses for the City of Newport Beach. Appendix "X" contains the land use changes by TAZ compared to the currently adopted General Plan scenario. An overall comparison to currently adopted General Plan land use is also shown in Table 6 -1. Land uses have changed based on data provided by the City. The largest increases in land use compared to currently adopted General Plan conditions occur in the Airport Area and in Newport Center /Fashion Island. Table 6 -2 shows subarea maximum General Plan Buildout land use growth from existing. Apartments grow substantially (by more than 12,000 dwelling units). Categories that grow by more than 500,000 square feet 6 -1 0 E 0 `�1 • TABLE 6 -1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE COMPARISON NBTM CODE' DESCRIPTION UNITS z ADOPTED QUANTITY SUBAREA MAXIMUM QUANTITY CHANGE % CHANGE 1 Low Density Residential DU 18.347 18.936 589 1 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 0.00% TOTAL DWELLING UNITS DU 45,235 53,755 8,520 6 Motel ROOM 139 49 (90 ) - 64.75% 7 Hotel ROOM 3.387 4.330 943 27.84% 9 Regional Commercial TSF 1.633.840 1,559.000 74.840 - 4.58% 10 General Commercial TSF 4.627.760 5.377.611 749.851 16.20% 11 Commercial /Recreation ACRE 5.100 5.100 0.00% 13 Restaurant TSF 198.780 198.780 0.00% 15 Fast Food Restaurant TSF 13.940 13.940 0.0031. 16 Auto Dealer /Sales TSF 227.170 227.170 0.00% 17 Yacht Club TSF 70.310 70.310 0.00% 18 Health Club TSF 61.330 61.330 1 - 0.00% 19 Tennis Club CRT 59 59 1 - 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 11,518.013 787.607 - 6.40% 24 Medical /Government Office TSF 910.616 1.859.090 948.474 104.16% 25 Research & Development TSF 81.730 81.730 0.00% 26 Industrial TSF 1.956.092 936.922 1,019.170 - 52.10% 27 Mini-Storage/Warehouse TSF 196.420 196.420 0.00% 28 Pre-school/Day Care TSF 56.770 56.770 0.00% 29 Elements /Private School STU 4,455 4.955 500 11.22% 30 Junior/High School STU 4.765 4.765 0.00% 31 Cultural/Learning Center TSF 40.000 98.000 58.000 145.00% 32 Library TSF 78.840 78.840 0.00% 33 Post Office TSF 73.700 63.800 9.900 - 13.43% 34 Hospital BED 1.265 1.265 0.00% 35 Nursin /Conv. Home BEDS 661 661 - 0.00% 36 Church TSF 467.210 441.200 26.010 - 5.57% 37 Youth Ctr. /Service TSF 166.310 172.310 6.000 3.61% 38 Park ACRE 94.920 171.920 77.000 81.12% 39 Regional Park ACRE 45.910 45.910 0.00% 40 Golf Course ACRE 298.290 298.290 ' 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: \U W obsl 01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xls]T 6.1 6 -Z `fib TABLE 6 -2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT LAND USE GROWTH FROM EXISTING NBTM CODE' DESCRIPTION UNITS' 2002 QUANTITY SUBAREA MAXIMUM QUANTITY GROWTH %GROWTH 1 Low Density Residential DU 17,124 18,936 1,812 10.58% 2 Medium Density Residential DU 9,535 12,675 3,140 32.93% 3 Apartment DU 9,199 21,489 12,290 133.60% 4 Elderly Residential DU 200 200 - 0.00% 5 Mobile Home DU 600 455 145 - 24.17% TOTAL DWELLING UNITS DU 36,658 53,755 17,097 46.64% 6 Motel ROOM 134 49 (85 )1 - 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 23.633/6 10 General Commercial TSF 3,696.781 5,377.611 1,680.830 45.47% 11 Commercial /Recreation ACRE 5.100 5.100 - 0.00% 13 Restaurant TSF 99.370 198.780 99.410 100.04% 15 Fast Food Restaurant TSF 13.940 13.940 - 0.00% 16 Auto Dealer /Sales TSF 172.420 227.170 54.750 31.75% 17 Yacht Club TSF 51.830 70.310 18.480 35.666/6 18 Health Club TSF 16.770 61.330 45 265.71% 19 Tennis Club CRT 60 59 1,1 -1.67% 20 Marina SLIP 1,055 1,055 - 0.00% 21 Theater SEAT 5,489 5,475 ?14)1 -0.26% 22 Newport Dunes ACRE 64.00 64.00 1 0.00 %'. 23 General Office TSF 10,865.733 11,518.013 652.2801 6.00% 24 Medical /Government Office TSF 795.926 1,859.090 1,063.164 133.58% 25 Research & Development TSF 81.730 81.730 0.00% 26 Industrial TSF 1,291.079 936.922 354.157 - 27.43% 27 Mini-Storage/Warehouse TSF 196.420 196.420 - 0.00% 28 Pre-schooi/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 Cultural/Learning 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 Hos ital BED 351 1,265 914 260.40% 35 Nursin /Conv. Home BEDS 661 661 - 0.00% 36 Church TSF 377.760 441.200 63.440 16.79% 37 YouthCtr./Service TSF 149.560 172.310 22.750 15.21% 38 Park ACRE 113.970 171.920 57.950 50.85% 39 R ional Park ACRE - 45.910 45.910 N/A 40 Golf Course ACRE 305.330 298.290 {7.04 - 2.31% ' Uses 8, 12, and 14 are part of the old NSTAM model structure and are not currently utilized in the City land use datasets. ' Units Abbreviations: DU = Dwelling Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet CRT = Court STU = Students U'. \UWObs\ 01200 01232 \ExceN01232.18.xls1T 6.2 6 -3 r] coq • include general commercial, general office, and medical /government office. Quantities that decrease in one category correlate to an increase in another category. 6.1.2 Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout Socioeconomic Data (SED) Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout SED that has been converted from land use is summarized in Table 6 -3. Table 6 -3 also contains a comparison of Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout SED to existing SED for the City of Newport Beach. The total number of dwelling units are projected to grow by 15,973 units (47 %) from existing conditions. For total employment, an increase of 17,312 employees (27 %) is anticipated. Socioeconomic data for the remainder of the primary modeling area (and for Newport Coast, where land use data was unavailable) has been unchanged from the currently adopted General Plan data. 0 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. ME qb TABLE 6-3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH' SUBAREA MAXIMUM LAND USE BASED SOCIOECONOMIC DATA SUMMARY /COMPARISON VARIABLE 2002 QUANTITY S BAKFA MAXIMUM QUANTITY 1GROWTHI-16 GROWTH Occupied Single F mily Dwelling Units 1 15,9701 17,7381 1,768 11% Occupied Multi-Family Dwelling Units 1 18,294 32,499 14,205 78% TOTAL OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS 1 34,2641 50,2371 15,973 47% Group Quarters Population 661 661 0 0% Population 75,211 105,240 30,029 AN Employed Residents 1 44,6351 64,7111 20,076 45% Retail Employees 1 10,9701 15,1711 4,201 38% Service Employees 17,2951 24,413 7,118 41% Other Employees 36,990 42,983 5,993 16% TOTAL EMPLOYEES 1 65,2551 82,5671 17,3121 27 %1 Elem /High School Students 9,164 9,670 5061 6 °k ' Includes data converted from land use only. Excludes Newport Coast and recent annexation areas. U:kUWObs1 01200 \01232 \Excel \[01 2 3 2- 1 8.xls]T 6 -3 11 • 6 -5 1 7 1 f•_J 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 Productions2 127,338 190,6901 63,352 49.75% Home Based Other Attractions 109,815 153,3181 43,503 39,61% Work Based Other Productions 52,152 68,9001 16,748 32.11% Work Based Other Attractions 57,0351 76,043 19,008 33.33% Other - Other Productions 91,218 128,072 36,854 40.40% Other - Other Attractions 1 89,7341 126,4511 36,7171 40.92% TOTAL PRODUCTIONS 339,863 490,213 150,350 44.24% TOTAL ATTRACTIONS 347,278 470,830 123,5521 35.58% OVERALL TOTAL 1 687,1411 961,043 273,9021 39.86% 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. 0 U: \UCJobs \- 01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xlslT 64 6 -6 7'a �4° TABLE 6 -5 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBAREA MAXIMUM TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON TRIP PURPOSE DAILY TRIP ENDS GROWTH PERCENT GROWTH CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT Home Based Work Productions' 73,968 86,096 12,128 Home Based Work Attractions 102,230 105,777 3,547 Home Based School Productions 14,475 16,455 1,980 Home Based School Attractions 8,845 9,241 396 q4.4 Home Based Other Productions' 174,257 190,690 16,433 Home Based Other Attractions 138,334 153,318 14,984 Work Based Other Productions 65,482 68,900 3,418 Work Based Other Attractions 71,335 76,0431 4,708 Other - Other Productions 116,275 128,072 11,797 a Other - Other Attractions 114,558 126,451 11,893 TOTAL PRODUCTIONS 444,4571 490,2131 45,7561 10.29°!0 TOTAL ATTRACTIONS 435,3021 470,8301 35,5281 8.16°!0 OVERALL TOTAL 1 879,7591 961,0431 81,2841 9.24°!0 Home -Work includes Home -Work and Home - University trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output. Home -Other includes Home -Shop and Home -Other trips, consistent with OCTAM mode choice output. U1UcJobs \_01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 16.xls)T 6 -5 6 -7 11 (73 f tt , 6.3 Traffic Assignment is The roadway system for the Subarea Maximum General Plan is identical to the constrained roadway system presented in Chapter 3 of this report. Exhibit 6 -A summarizes the NBTM 3.1 refined Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout with constrained network daily traffic volumes throughout the City of Newport Beach. Changes from the currently adopted General Plan Baseline forecasts are shown on Table 6 -6. Volume changes occur primarily because of land use changes in the Airport Area and Newport Center /Fashion Island. Roadways that experience the most change include Coast Highway, Jamboree Road and Newport Boulevard. Table 6 -7 compares these refined forecasts to existing counted volumes (presented in the General Plan Baseline document). The highest daily traffic volume increases occur on Coast Highway, MacArthur Boulevard, and Newport Boulevard. Each of these facilities experience an increase of 15,000 vehicles per day or more. 6.4 Daily Capacity Analysis Daily roadway segment capacity analysis has been performed at study area roadways, and is shown on Exhibit 6 -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 .: i� q ,tip O Na menV] (V q nr iN1.Wl 1 � I N p ni NLLCI N N o s c N� � ni iN NN,.,t m i € € N oNS•w Ey N 'ni tONYVJ N � 1t13 TltlOGWN � � r N MtlMliellt " N � � t4tlt ^ O � i L � LS3M It 1tlO YA3N O [J m � 1' . 3 , �Y� gio. m Q i i m Immm Q ce N Z N N o F Y y o N = d" g Y y o 8 3 gs F a FM 8 a W D {Y f f W W a i m z �_yt.ON � m N N K N N M N W W W W J O O W N M M O N tpyl30W P / / �. Y e e O n c c U U Z Q a r a o N T r a °ti.. A tl' w A" m m t wt3aotmr O f fie. 'b M3iMK � �-- On N 11N [ [J O O Cl N N N N N N..tl No N O O e O O O N q e N li N�Ils p p� N . 3 , �Y� • • TABLE 6-6 (PAGE 1 OF 4) SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COMPARISON LOCATION ADOPTED (CONSTRAINED) BUILDOUT FORECAST I CHANGE % CHANGE 16th St. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr.) 6,000 6,000 0 0.0% 2nd St. (west of Newport Blvd.) 9,000 10,000 1,000 11.1% 32nd St. (east of Newport Blvd.) 5,000 6,000 1,000 20.0% Avocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.) 5,000 6,000 1,000 20.0% Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.) 12,000 13,000 1,000 8.3% Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 10,000 12,000 2,000 20.0% Balboa Blvd. (south of Coast Hwy.) 22,000 23,000 1,000 4.5% Bayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.) 12,000 13,000 1,000 8.3% Birch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Karman Ave.) 18,000 21,000 3,000 16.7% Birch St. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 20,000 22,000 2,000 10.0% Birch St. (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 20,000 22,000 2,000 10.0% Birch St. (north of Bristol St. North) 27,000 29,000 2,000 7.4% Birch St. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 20,000 21,000 1,000 5.0% Birch St. (south of Bristol St. South) 16,000 16,000 0 0.0% Bison Ave. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 17,000 18,000 1,000 5.9% Bison Ave. (MacArthur Blvd. to SR -73 Fwy.) 11,000 11,000 0 0.0% Bluff Rd. (Coast Hwy. to 15th St.) 13,000 11,000 -2,000 - 15.4 %'I Bluff Rd. (15th St. to 17th St.) 13,000 11,000 -2,000 - 15.4 %' Bluff Rd. (17th St. to 19th St.) 12,000 11,000 -1,000 -8.3% Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.) 34,000 34,000 0 0.0% Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR -73 Fwy.) 27,000 27,000 0 0.0% Bristol St. North (west of Campus Dr.) 32,000 33,000 1,000 3.1% Bristol St. North (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 28,000 29,000 1,000 3.6% Bristol St. North (east of Birch St.) 27,000 28,000 1,000 3.7% Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd.) 18,000 19,000 1,000 5.6% Bristol St. South (west of Campus 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 0.0% 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% Campus Dr. (north of Bristol St. North) 39,000 39,000 0 0.00/0 Campus Dr. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 40,000 41,000 1,000 2.5% Coast Hwy. (west of 15th St.) 60,000 63,000 3,000 5.0% Coast Hwy. (Bluff Rd. to Superior Ave./Balboa Blvd.) 61,000 64,000 3,000 4.9% Coast Hwy. (Superior Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 41,000 42,000 1,000 2.4% Coast Hwy. (Newport Blvd. to Riverside Ave.) 68,000 73,000 5,000 7.4% Coast 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 4,000 7.3% 6 -10 `tip 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 0.0% 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 0.00/0 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.) 1 1,000 11,000 0 0.0% Dover Dr. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.) 24,000 25,000 1,000 4.2% Dover Dr. (16th St. to Cliff Dr.) 28,000 28,000 0 0.0% Dover Dr. (Cliff Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 33,000 34,000 1,000 3.0% Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at University Dr.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.0% Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at Ford Rd.) 15,000 15,000 0 0.0% Ford Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 13,000 13,000 0 0.0% Goldenrod Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 4,000 3,000 -1,000 -25.0% Highland Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 2,000 2,000 0 0.0"/0 Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 18,000 22,000 4,000 22.2% iospital Rd. (east of Newport Blvd.) 10,000 13,000 3,000 30.0% Irvine Ave. (Bristol St. South to Mesa Dr.) 38,000 39,000 1,000 2.6% Irvine Ave. (Mesa Dr. to University Dr.) 41.000 42,000 1,000 2.4% Irvine Ave. (University Dr. to Santa Isabel Ave.) 40:000 41,000 1,000 2.5% Irvine Ave. (Santa Isabel Ave. to Santiago Dr.) 33:000 33,000 0 0.0 "/0 Irvine Ave. (Santiago Dr. to Highland Dr.) 32.000 33,000 1,000 3.1% Irvine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.) 32.000 33,000 1,000 3.1% Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr. to Westcliff Dr.) 28.000 30,000 2,000 7.1% Irvine Ave. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.) 11000 14,000 1,000 7.7% Jamboree Rd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 47.000 49,000 2,000 4.3% Jamboree Rd. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 54,000 55,000 1,000 1.9% Jamboree Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to Bristol St. North) 43,000 46,000 3,000 7.0% Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 51,000 54,000 3,000 5.9% Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. South to Bayview Wy.) 56,000 57,000 1,000 1.8% Jamboree Rd. ( Bayview Wy. to University Dr.) 56,000 57,000 1,000 1.8% Jamboree Rd. (University Dr. to Bison Ave.) 41,000 43,000 2,000 4.9% Jamboree Rd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 45,000 49,000 4,000 8.9% Jamboree Rd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 55,000 59,000 4,000 7.3% Jamboree Rd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to Santa Barbara Dr.) 43,000 48,000 5,000 11.6% Jamboree Rd. (Santa Barbara Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 42,000 44,000 2,000 4.8% Jamboree Rd. ( Coast Hwy. to Bayside Dr.) 15,000 15,000 0 0.0% MacArthur Blvd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 33,000 36,000 3,000 9.10 MacArthur Blvd. (Birch St. to Von Karman Ave.) 26,000 27,000 1,000 3.80 MacArthur Blvd. (Von Kalman Ave. to Jamboree Rd.) 32,000 33,000 1,000 3.10 6 -11 J • 0 (77 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 2.93/. 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 1.4% MacArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 60,000 62,000 2,000 3.3% MacArthur Blvd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to San Miguel Rd.) 39,000 40,000 1,000 2.6% MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 38,000 38,000 0 0.0% Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 8,000 7,000 -1,000 -12.5% Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 7,000 7,000 0 0.0% Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 13,000 13,000 0 0.0% Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.) 46,000 50,000 4,000 8.7% Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 54,000 59,000 5,000 9.3% Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido) 57,000 64,000 7,000 12.3% Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.) 41,000 46,000 5,000 12.2% Newport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.) 33,000 38,000 5,000 15.2% Newport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 17,000 20,000 3,000 17.6% Newport Coast Dr. (SR -73 F)vy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 29,000 30,000 1,000 3.4% Newport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 24,000 24,000 0 0.0% Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 19,000 19,000 0 0.0% Placentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.) 16,000 18,000 2,000 12.5% Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 11,000 13,000 2,000 18.2% Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 2,000 0 0.0% Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 10,000 12,000 2,000 20.0% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.) 17,000 18,000 1,000 5.9% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.) 12,000 13,000 1,000 8.3% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Rosa Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 26,000 29,000 3,000 11.5% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to San Miguel Rd.) 22,000 23,000 1,000 4.5% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (San Miguel Rd. to Marguerite Ave.) 24,000 24,000 0 0.0% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Marguerite Ave. to Spyglass Hill Rd.) 19,000 20,000 1,000 5.3% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.) 19,000 19,000 0 0.0% San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.0% San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.0% San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 14,000 15,000 1,000 7.1% San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 16,000 18,000 2,000 12.5% San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.) 20,000 23,000 3,000 15.0% San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.) 11,000 14,000 3,000 27.3% Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 11,000 15,000 4,000 36.4% Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 9,000 9,000 0 0.0% Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 14,000 15,000 1,000 7.1% Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave. to Irvine Ave.) 6,000 6,000 0 0.0% Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 4,000 4,000 0 0.0% Spyglass Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 4,000 4,000 0 0.0% Superior Ave. (north of Placentia Ave.) 19,000 20,000 1,000 5.3% Superior Ave. (Placentia Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 28,000 29,000 1,000 3.6% Superior Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 28,000 30,000 2,000 7.1% 6 -12 cot; TABLE 6.6 (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% Via Lido (east of Newport Blvd.) 10,000 12,000 2,000 20.00/c Von Karman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 18,000 20,000 2,000 11.1% Von Karman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 16,000 17,000 1,000 6.30/c Westcliff Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr. ) 16,000 16,000 0 0.00% U:1UcJobsl_ 01200 \012321Excel%101232- 18.xls)T 6 -6 6 -13 • 0 I7 I TABLE 6 -7 (PAGE 1 OF 4) SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION EXISTING (2001/2002) COUNT I 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 25.0% 32nd St. (east of Newport Blvd.) 3,000 6,000 3,000 100.0% Avocado Ave. (north of San Miguel Dr.) 5,000 6,000 1,000 20.0% Avocado Ave. (south of San Miguel Dr.) 12,000 13,000 1,000 8.3% Avocado Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 11,000 12,000 1,000 9.1% Balboa Blvd. (south of Coast Hwy.) 18,000 23,000 5,000 27.8% Bayside Dr. (south of Coast Hwy.) 10,000 13,000 3,000 30.0% Birch St. (Jamboree Rd. to Von Kalman Ave.) 12,000 21,000 9,000 75.0% Birch St. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 15,000 22,000 7,000 46.7% Birch St. (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 16,000 22,000 6,000 37.5% Birch St. (north of Bristol St. North) 23,000 29,000 6,000 26.1% Birch St. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 19,000 21,000 2,000 10.5% Birch St. (south of Bristol St. South) 15,000 16,000 1,000 6.7% Bison Ave. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 13,000 18,000 5,000 38.5% Bison Ave. (MacArthur Blvd. to SR -73 Fwy.) 7,000 11,000 4,000 57.1 %', Bluff Rd. (Coast Hwy. to 15th St.) 0 11,000 11,000 -- Bluff Rd. (15th St. to 17th St.) 0 11,000 11,000 Bluff Rd. (17th St. to 19th St.) 0 11,000 11,000 -- Bonita Canyon Dr. (east of MacArthur Blvd.) 26,000 34,000 8,000 30.8% Bonita Canyon Dr. (west of SR -73 Fwy.) 17,000 27,000 10,000 58.8% Bristol St. North (west of Campus Dr.) 28,000 33,000 5,000 17.9% Bristol St. North (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 23,000 29,000 6,000 26.1% Bristol St. North (east of Birch St.) 22,000 28,000 6,000 27.3% Bristol St. North (west of Jamboree Rd.) 16,000 19,000 3,000 18.8% Bristol St. South (west of Campus DrArvine 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 Kalman Ave.) 16,000 23,000 7,000 43.8% Campus Dr. (Von Karman Ave. to MacArthur Blvd.) 20,000 32,000 12,000 60.0% Campus Dr. (west of MacArthur Blvd.) 26,000 40,000 14,000 53.8% Campus Dr. (north of Bristol St. North) 28,000 39,000 11,000 39.3% Campus Dr. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 30,000 41,000 11,000 36.7% Coast Hwy. (west of Bluff Rd.) 46,000 63,000 17,000 37.0% Coast Hwy. (Bluff Rd. to Superior Ave./Balboa Blvd.) 46,000 64,000 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 40.0% Coast Hwy. (Tustin Ave. to Dover Dr. ) 42,000 59,000 17.000 40.5% 6-14 I ?0 TABLE 6 -7 (PAGE 2 OF 4) SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION EXISTING (2001/2002) COUNT BUILDOUT 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 Westcliff Dr.) 9,000 11,000 2,000 22.2% Dover Dr. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.) 22,000 25,000 3,000 13.6% Dover Dr. (16th St. to Cliff Dr.) 25,000 28,000 3,000 12.0% Dover Dr. (Cliff Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 29,000 34,000 5,000 17.2% Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at University Dr.) 10,000 10,000 0 0.0% Eastbluff Dr. (west of Jamboree Rd. at Ford Rd.) 15,000 15,000 0 0.0% Ford Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 9,000 13,000 4,000 44.4% Goldenrod Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 3,000 1,000 50.0% Highland Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 2,000 2,000 0 0.0% Hospital Rd. (Placentia Ave. to Newport Blvd.) 13,000 22,000 9,000 69.2% Hospital Rd. (east of Newport Blvd.) 7,000 13,000 6,000 85.7% Irvine Ave. (Bristol St. South to Mesa Dr.) 27,000 39,000 12,000 44.4% Irvine Ave. (Mesa Dr. to University Dr.) 31,000 42,000 11,000 35.5% Irvine Ave. (University Dr. to Santa Isabel Ave.) 33,000 41,000 8,000 24.2% Irvine Ave. (Santa Isabel Ave. to Santiago Dr.) 29,000 33,000 4,000 13.8% Irvine Ave. (Santiago Dr. to Highland Dr.) 27,000 33,000 6,000 22.2% Irvine Ave. (Highland Dr. to Dover Dr.) 27,000 33,000 6,000 22.2% Irvine Ave. (Dover Dr. to Westcliff Dr.) 22,000 30,000 8,000 36.4% Irvine Ave. (Westcliff Dr. to 16th St.) 12,000 14,000 2,000 16.7% Jamboree Rd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 36,000 49,000 13,000 36.1% Jamboree Rd. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 42,000 55,000 13,000 31.0% Jamboree Rd. (MacArthur Blvd. to Bristol St. North) 36,000 46,000 10,000 27.8% Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. North to Bristol St. South) 47,000 54,000 7,000 14.9% Jamboree Rd. (Bristol St. South to Bayview Wy.) 47,000 57,000 10,000 21.3% Jamboree Rd. ( Bayview Wy. to University Dr.) 47,000 57,000 10,000 21.3% Jamboree Rd. (University Dr. to Bison Ave.) 37,000 43,000 6,000 16.2% Jamboree Rd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 39,000 49,000 10,000 25.6% Jamboree Rd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 46,000 59,000 13,000 28.3% Jamboree Rd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to Santa Barbara Dr.) 34,000 48,000 14,000 41.2% Jamboree Rd. (Santa Barbara Dr. to Coast Hwy.) 32,000 44,000 12,000 37.5% Jamboree Rd. ( Coast Hwy. to Bayside Dr.) 12,000 15,000 3,000 25.0% MacArthur Blvd. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 27,000 36,000 9,000 33.3% MacArthur Blvd. (Birch St. to Von Karman Ave.) 22,000 27,000 5,000 22.7% MacArthur Blvd. (Von Kamian Ave. to Jamboree Rd.) 26,0001 33,0001 7,000 26.9% 6 -15 0 0 (Q I �3 0 0 TABLE 6 -7 (PAGE 3 OF 4) SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION I EXISTING (2001/2002) COUNT BUILDOUT FORECAST GROWTH % GROWTH MacArthur Blvd. (south of Jamboree Rd.) 27,000 36,000 9,000 33.3% MacArthur Blvd. (north of Bison Ave.) 61,000 76,000 15,000 24.6% MacArthur Blvd. (Bison Ave. to Ford Rd.) 63,000 75,000 12,000 19.0% MacArthur Blvd. (Ford Rd. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 54,000 62,000 8,000 14.8% MacArthur Blvd. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to San Miguel Rd.) 35,000 40,000 5,000 14.3% MacArthur Blvd. (San Miguel Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 31,000 38,000 7,000 22.6% Marguerite Ave. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 7,000 7,000 0 0.0% Marguerite Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 6,000 7,000 1,000 16.7% Mesa Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 12,000 13,000 1,000 8.3% Newport Blvd. (north of Hospital Rd.) 36,000 50,000 14,000 38.9% Newport Blvd. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 43,000 59,000 16,000 37.2% Newport Blvd. (Coast Hwy. to Via Lido) 48,000 64,000 16,000 33.3% Newport Blvd. (Via Lido to 32nd St.) 36,000 46,000 10,000 27.8% Newport Blvd. (south of 32nd St.) 29,000 38,000 9,000 31.0% ewport Center Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 14,000 20,000 6,000 42.9% Newport Coast Dr. (SR -73 Fwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 17,000 30,000 13,000 76.5% Newport Coast Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 15,000 24,000 9,000 60.0% Newport Coast Dr. (north of Coast Hwy.) 12,000 19,000 7,000 58.3% Placentia Ave. (north of Superior Ave.) 12,000 18,000 6,000 50.0% Placentia Ave. (Superior Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 7,000 13,000 6,000 85.7% Poppy Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 2,000 0 0.0% Riverside Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 9,000 12,000 3,000 33.3° San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Jamboree Rd. to Santa Cruz Rd.) 16,000 18,000 2,000 12.5% San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Santa Cruz Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd.) 1 1,000 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% an Joaquin Hills Rd. (Spyglass Hill Rd. to Newport Coast Dr.) 12,000 19,000 7,000 58.3% San Miguel Dr. (north of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 7,000 10,000 3,000 42.9% San Miguel Dr. (south of Spyglass Hill Rd.) 7,000 10,000 3,000 42.9% San Miguel Dr. (north of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 12,000 15,000 3,000 25.0% San Miguel Dr. (San Joaquin Hills Rd. to MacArthur Blvd.) 12,000 18,000 6,000 50.0% San Miguel Dr. (MacArthur Blvd. to Avocado Ave.) 19,000 23,000 4,000 21.1% San Miguel Dr. (west of Avocado Ave.) 10,000 14,000 4,000 40.0% Santa Barbara Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 10,000 15,000 5,000 50.0% Santa Cruz Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 8,000 9,000 1,000 12.5% Santa Rosa Dr. (south of San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 11,000 15,000 4,000 36.4% Santiago Dr. (Tustin Ave. to Irvine Ave.) 5,000 6,000 1,000 20.0% Santiago Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 3,000 4,000 1,000 33.3% Spyglass Hill Rd. (San Miguel Dr. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.) 4,000 4,000 0 0.0% Superior Ave. (north of Placentia Ave.) 17,000 20,000 3,000 17.6% Superior Ave. (Placentia Ave. to Hospital Rd.) 22,000 29,000 7,000 31.8% Su erior Ave. (Hospital Rd. to Coast Hwy.) 24,000 30,000 1 6.000 25.00/. 6 -16 I�0 ��4 TABLE 6 -7 (PAGE 4 OF 4) SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GROWTH LOCATION EXISTING (200112002) COUNT BUILDOUT I FORECAST I GROWTH % GROWTH Tustin Ave. (north of Coast Hwy.) 2,000 3,000 1,000 50.0% University Dr. (east of Irvine Ave.) 3,000 3,000 0 0.0% University Dr. (east of Jamboree Rd.) 11,000 15,000 4,000 36.4% Via Lido (east of Newport Blvd.) 8,000 12,000 4,000 50.0% Von Karman Ave. (Campus Dr. to Birch St.) 14,000 20,000 6,000 42.90 Von Karman Ave. (Birch St. to MacArthur Blvd.) 12,000 17,000 5,000 41.70 Westcliff Dr. (Irvine Ave. to Dover Dr. ) 16,000 16,000 0 0.0% U: \UcJobs\ -01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xls]T 6 -7 0 0 6-17 S5 m W z zip cc 'cc WLU 9L Z CC LU LU 20 R zip LU i7 o aln wao . ow "UM w. 1; z LU CD I W, w , 1 (<L o og aln wao . ow "UM w. 1; z LU CD I W, w (<L o A' 9K„xl aln wao . ow "UM w. 1; z LU CD I W, w (<L 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 9 6 -19 I �G U `J� • Coast Highway west of Riverside Drive • Bristol Street North west of Campus Drive • Bristol Street South west of Campus Drive • Dover Drive west of Irvine Avenue • Bristol Street South west of Jamboree Road 6.5 Peak Hour Forecasts The final data required to evaluate the Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout scenario was intersection volume and geometric data for the 63 intersections selected for analysis. The same intersection configurations have been used as for the currently adopted General Plan Buildout with constrained network intersection capacity utilization values (ICUs). Table 6 -8 summarizes the Subarea Maximum General Plan Buildout ICUs based on the AM and PM peak • hour intersection turning movement volumes and the intersection geometric data as compared with currently adopted General Plan with constrained neetwork ICUs. Appendix "AA" contains the detailed ICU calculation worksheets. The worksheets in Appendix "AA" summarize the intersection geometric data and the AM and PM peak intersection turning movement volumes. A comparison of subarea maximum General Plan Buildout ICUs to existing ICUs is shown on Table 6 -9. Table 6 -10 summarizes intersection analysis for buildout conditions. Deficient intersections are shown on Exhibit 6 -C. Intersections with ICU values greater than 0.90 (LOS "E" or worse) in either peak period are: • Bluff Road (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (AM /PM) • Superior Avenue (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (AM /PM) • Newport Boulevard (NS) /Hospital Road (EW) (AM /PM) . • Riverside Drive (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (AM /PM) 6 -20 TABLE 6 -8 (PAGE 1 OF 2) SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN INTERSECTION NS/EW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR CURRENTLY ADOPTED FORECAST SUBAREA I MAXIMUM FORECAST DELTA CURRENTLY ADOPTED FORECAST SUBAREA MAXIMUM FORECAST DELTA 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. 1.277 1.28 0.01 1.29 1.28 -0.01 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.641 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 0.71 0.81 0.10 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.03 1.04 0.01 1.121 1.191 0.07 S. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.02 1.06 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 BI. & Birch St. 0.71 0.79 0.08 0.80 0.86 0.06 11. Von Kaman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.66 0.74 0.08 0.93 1.02 0.09 12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Kaman Av. 0.54 0.52 -0.02 0.64 0.65 0.01 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.92 0.98 0.06 1.24 1.25 0.01 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. 0.791 0.87 0.08 0.80 0.81 0.01 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N) 0.96 1.00 0.04 1.08 1.08 0.00 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N) 0.921 0.91 -0.01 0,721 0.721 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 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.14 1.14 0.00 1.19 1.18 401 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 1 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.67 0.70 0.03 0.821 0.83 1:20z, 25. Dover Dr. & WestcliffDr. 0.39 0.41 0.02 0.56 0.59 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.64 0.64 0.00 0.641 0.64 0.00 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.86 0.89 0.03 0.90 0.94 0.04 28. Bayside Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.83 0.84 0.01 0.94 0.98 0.04 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. 0.96 0.96 0.00 0.99 1.08 0.09 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (N ) 0.70 0.69 -0.01 0.69 0.72 0.03 31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. (S) 0.60 0.61 0.01 0.63 0.64 0.01 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S) 0.96 0.94 -0.02 0.85 0.87 0.02 33. Jamboree Rd. & 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 0.71 0.02 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.51 0.52 0.01 0.58 0.62 0.04 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /Ford Rd. 0.78 0.81 0.03 0.72 0.76 0.04 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.61 0.64 0.03 0.65 0.71 0.06 • 6 -21 /V 01, E TABLE 6.8 (PAGE 2 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 I DELTA 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.551 0.69 0.14 0.71 0.87 0.16 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.85 0.88 0.031 0.89 0.91 0.02 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 0.39 0.03 0.34 0.36 0.02 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 0.43 0.04 0.71 0.73 0.02 42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.50 0.55 0.05 0.63 0.66 0.03 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 0.83 0.03 46. SR -73 NB Rams & Bison Av. 0.471 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 0.00 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.78 0.81 0.03 0.80 0.81 0.01 9. NlacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd.Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.77 0.79 0.02 1.06 1.09 0.03 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.77 0.83 0.06 1.04 1.08 0.04 51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.63 0.71 0.08 0.77 0.80 0.03 52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw. 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.83 0.81 -0.02 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.69 0.72 0.03 0.53 0.54 0.01 54. SR -73 SB Rams & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.45 0.46 0.01 0.59 0.60 0.01 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.30 0.31 0.01 0.38 0.39 0.01 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.52 0.54 0.02 0.68 0.71 0.03 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.08 1108 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.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.90 0.90 oml 0.91 0.91 0.00 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.60 0.62 0.021 0.46 0.50 0.04 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.67 0.68 0.01 0.76 0.74 -0.02 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Rams 0.54 0.55 0.01 0.40 0.41 0.01 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.63 0.66 0.03 0.47 0.51 0.04 L5 .Ne ort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw, 0.57 0.57 0.00 0.60 0.61 0.01 U: \UcJobs \_01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xis]T 6 -12 6 -22 1 0$ duo TABLE 6.9 (PAGE 1 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 DELTAI 1EXISTING1 COUNT SUBAREA I MAXIMUM DELTA 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. DNEt 1.28 N/A DNE 1.28 N/A 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.66 0.72 0.06 0.67 0.83 0.16 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 0.84 1.03 0.19 0.90 1.04 0.141 4. Newport Bl. & Hospital Rd. 0.54 0.93 0.39 0.70 1.18 0.481, 5. Newport BI. & Via Lido 0.41 0.60 0.19 0.37 0.52 0.15 6. Newport Bl. & 32nd St. 0.73 0.57 -0.16 0.78 0.81 0.03 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw: 0.84 1.04 0.20 0.931 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 Bl. & Birch St. 0.49 0.79 0.30 0.66 0.86 0.20 11. Von Kaman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.55 0.74 0.19 0.79 1.02 0.23 12. MacArthur BI. & Von Kaman Av. 0.46 0.52 0.06 0.53 0.65 0.12 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.701 0.981 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 F15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N) 0.77 1.00 0.23 0.94 1.08 0.14 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N ) 0.66 0.91 0.25 0.61 0.72 0.11 FIT Cam us Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. (S) 0.72 0.93 0.21 0.58 0.77 0.19 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S) 0.46 0.53 0.07 0.44 0.54 010 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.70 0.73 0.03 0.94 0.94 0.00 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 0.82 1.14 0.32 0.89 I.18 0.29 21. Irvine Av. & Santiaeo Dr. 0.66 0.71 0.05 0.72 0.77 0.05 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.57 0.63 0.06 0.60 0.66 0.06 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.72 0.82 0.10 0.64 0.72 0.08 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.57 0.70 0.13 0.77 0.83 0.06 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 0.38 0.41 0.03 0.48 0.59 0.11 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.55 0.64 0.09 0.57 0.64 0.07 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw, 0.70 0.89 0.19 0.74 0.94 0.20 8. Bayside Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.69 0.84 0.15 0.70 0.98 0.28 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. 0.88 0.96 0.08 0.91 1.08 0.17 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (N) 0.55 0.69 0.14 0.59 0.721 0.13 31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. (S) 0.48 0.61 0.13 0.56 0.64 0.08 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S) 0.75 0.94 0.19 0.721 0.87 0.15 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W . 0.41 0.48 0.07 0.57 0.71 0.14 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /Universi Dr. 0.60 0.65 0.05 0.64 0.71 0.07 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.451 0.52 0.07 0.51 0.62 0.11 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd. 0.69 0.81 0.12 0.65 0.76 0.11 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.801 0.64 -0.16 1.00 0.71 -0.29 6 -23 • 804 -2pt TABLE 6 -9 (PAGE 2 OF 2) • SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) COMPARISON TO EXISTING 0 • 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 0.221 0.63 0.871 0.24 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.68 0.88 0.201 0.74 0.91 0.17 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 0.39 0.031 0.36 0.361 0.00 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.32 0.43 0.11 0.52 0.73 0.21 42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.40 0.55 0.15 0.52 0.66 0.14 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.33 0.43 0.10 0.72 0.84 0.12 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.58 0.81 0.23 0.66 0.83 0.17 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.31 0.47 0.16 0.37 0.56 0.19 47. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.26 0.38 0.12 0.17 0.29 0.12 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.63 0.81 0.18 0.60 0.81 0.21 49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.71 0.79 0.08 0.90 1.09 0.19 50. MacArthur Bl. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.641 0.83 0.19 0.93 1.08 0.15 51. MacArthur Bl. & San Miguel Dr. 0.56 0.71 0.15 0.65 0.80 0.15 52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw. 0.60 0.74 0,141 0.71 0.81 0.10 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.55 0.72 0.17 0.43 0.54 0.11 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.30 0.46 0.16 0.41 0.60 0.19 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.28 0.31 0.03 0.31 0.39 0.08 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.44 0.54 0.10 0.54 0.71 0.17 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 0.991 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.Marquerite Av. & Coast Hw. O.83 0.90 0.071 0.82 0.91 0.09 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.44 0.62 0.18 0.30 0.50 0.20 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.61 0.65 0.07 0.65 0.74 0.09 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Rams 0.45 0.55 0.10 0.31 0.41 0.10 64. New ort Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.37 0.66 0.29 0.29 0.51 0.22 65. Neu ort Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.471 0.57 0.10 0.50 0.61 0.11 IDNE = Does Not Exist U: \UcJobs\ -01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232 -1 B.xls]T 6 -9 6 -24 IG� f �y ti TABLE 6 -10 (PAGE 1 OF 2) SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY INTERSECTION NS(EW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ICU LU5 lUtJ LUti 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 F . Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. 0.93 E 1.18 F 5. Newport BI. & Via Lido 0.60 A 0.52 A 6. Newport BI. & 32nd St. 0.57 A 0.81 D 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 1.041 F 1.19 F 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.06 F 0.92 E 9. MacArthur Bl. & Campus Dr. 0.81 D I 29F F 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0.79 C 0.86 D 11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.74 C 1.02 F 12. MacArthur Bl. & Von Kaman Av. 0.52 A 0.65 B 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.98 E 1.25 F 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. 1 0.87 D 0.81 D 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N) I 1.00 E 1.08 F 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N) 0.911 E 0.72 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 A 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.73 C 0.94 20. Irvine Av. & Universitv 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 1 0.66 B 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.821 D 0.721 C 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.70 B 0.83 D 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 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 28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.84 D 0.98 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. 0.961 E 1.08 F 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 0.69 B 0.72 31. Bayview PI. & Bristol St. (S ) 0.611 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 C 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.52 A 0.62 B 36. Jamboree Rd. & EastbluffDr./Ford Rd. 0.81 D 0.76 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.64 B 0.71 C 6 -25 • 0 u M -LO • TABLE 6 -10 (PAGE 2 OF 2) SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY INTERSECTION NSIEW AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR LOS ICU LO 38: Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.691 B 0.871 D 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.881 D 0.911 E 40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.391 A 0.36 A 41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.43 A 0.73 C 2. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.55 A 0.66 B 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.43 A 0.84 D 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.81 D 0.83 D 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.47 A 0.56 A 47. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 038 A 0.291 A 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.811 D 0.81 D 49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr. Ow791 C 1.09 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.83 D 1.08 F 51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr. 0.71 C 0.80 C 52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw. 0.74 C 0.81 D 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.72 C 0.54 A 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.46 A 0.60 A 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 031 A 0.39 A 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. Ow541 A 0.71 C 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 1.08 F 0.77 C 58. Mareuerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd, 0.39 A 0.53 A 59.Mareuerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.90 D 0.91 E 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd, 0.62 B 0.50 A 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.68 B 0.74 C 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Rams 0.55 A 0.41 A 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.66 B 0.51 A 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0,571 A 0.61 B 'DNE = Does Not Exist U: \UcJobs\ 01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xls]T 6 -10 6 -26 1U c,6 Q W �JV 00dZ wQV W W W LU CG Q G 5�z Q W W Z 9 a� m y H 5 V H 1. 0 W W 0 o W o o O Ul ¢ a ¢ a 1 A 1 1 1 1 .d g 'nr vxr nxrs a q a R nr Telxroo uv3 �B 1UOax.3x 6 -27 \ ° tiv� , 1 3ytl311 Ar Tj ,F U � LL g 'nr vxr nxrs a q a R nr Telxroo uv3 �B 1UOax.3x 6 -27 \ ° tiv� , 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 19q • Tustin Avenue (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (AM /PM) • MacArthur Boulevard (NS) /Campus Drive (EW) (PM) • Von Karman Avenue (NS) /Campus Drive (EW) (PM) • Jamboree Road (NS) /Campus Drive (EW) (AM /PM) • Campus Drive (NS) /Bristol Street North (EW) (AM /PM) • Birch Street (NS) /Bristol Street North (EW) (AM) • Campus Drive (NS) /Bristol Street South (EW) (AM) • Irvine Avenue (NS) /Mesa Drive (EW) (PM) • Irvine Avenue (NS) /University Drive (EW) (AM /PM) • Dover Drive (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (PM) • Bayside Drive (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (PM) • MacArthur Boulevard (NS) /Jamboree Road (EW) (AM /PM) • Jamboree Road (NS) /Bristol Street South (EW) (AM) • Jamboree Road (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (PM) • MacArthur Boulevard (NS) /Ford Road /Bonita Canyon Drive (EW) (PM) • MacArthur Boulevard (NS) /San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) (PM) • Goldenrod Avenue (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (AM) • Marguerite Avenue (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (PM) Intersections experiencing a deficiency for subarea maximum conditions that do not experience a deficiency in the currently adopted General Plan scenario include: • Irvine Avenue (NS) /Mesa Drive (EW) (PM) • Dover Drive (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (PM) • Jamboree Road (NS) /Coast Highway (EW) (PM) Intersection analysis has been performed to determine improvements necessary to provide acceptable levels of service. ICU worksheets are included in 6 -28 19q 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). E 1] 6 -29 195 110 11 TABLE 6 -11 (PAGE 1 OF 2) SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY INTERSECTION (NS/EW)-- AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR FUTURE I FORECAST WITH IMPROVEMENTS DELTAI FUTURE FORECASTI I 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 0.831 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. Newport Bl. & Via Lido 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.52 0.52 0.0 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 -0.311 1.19 0.82 -0.37 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 1.061 0.75 -0.32 0.92 0.75 -0.17 9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr. 0.81 0.78 -0.03 1.29 0.82 -0.47 10. MacArthur Bl. & Birch St. 0.79 0.79 0.00 0.86 0.86 0.00 11. Von Kartnan Av. & Campus Dr. 0.74 0.72 -0.02 1.02 0.90 -0.12 12. MacArthur BI. & Von Kaman Av. 0.52 0.52 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.00 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.98 0.89 -0.09 1.25 0.87 -0.38 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. 0.87 0.81 -0.06 0.81 0.81 0.00 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N) 1.00 0.90 -0.11 1.08 0.85 -0.23 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N) 0.91 0.67 -0.24 0.72 0.71 -0.01 17. Campus Dr./lrvine Av. & Bristol St. (S) 0.93 0.87 -0.06 0.77 0.77 0.00 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S ) 0.53 0.53 0.00 0.54 0.54 0.00 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.73 0.73 0.00 0.94 0.86 -0.08 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 1.14 0.75 -0.39 1.18 0.83 -0.35 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.71 0.71 0.00 0.77 0.77 0.00 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.66 0.66 0.00 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.82 0.82 0.00 0.72 0.72 0.0 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.70 0.70 0.001 0.83 0.83 0.00 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 -0.10 28. Bayside Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.84 0.82 -0.02 0.98 0.78 -0.20 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. 0.96 0.84 -0.12 1.08 0.90 -0.18 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. ) 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.72 0.72 0.00 31. Bayview Pl. & Bristol St. (S ) 0.61 0.61 0.001 0.64 0.64 0.00 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S ) 0.94 0.73 -0.221 0.87 0.80 -0.07 33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W . 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.71 0.71 0.00 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr. 0.65 0.65 0.00 0.71 0.71 0.00 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.52 0.52 0.001 0.62 0.62 0.00 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr.lFord Rd. 0.81 0.81 0.00 0.76 0.76 0.0 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.64 0.641 0.001 0.71 0.71 0.00 6 -30 f la TABLE 6 -11 (PAGE 2 OF 2) SUBAREA MAXIMUM GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) SUMMARY . INTERSECTION NS /EW1 AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR FUTURE FORECAST WITH IMPROVEMENTS I DELTAI FUTURE I FORECASTI WITH IMPROVEMENTS I DELTA 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.87 0.87 0. 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.88 0.84 -0.04 0.91 0.69 -0.03 0. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.36 0.361 0.0 I. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.43 0.43 0.00 0.73 0.73 0. 42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.55 0.55 0.00 0.66 0.66 0. 44. Avocado AV. & San Miguel Dr. 0.43 0.43 0.00 0.84 0.84 0.00 45. Avocado AV. & Coast Hw. 0.81 0.81 0.00 0.83 0.83 0.00 6. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.47 0.47 0.00 0.56 0.56 0.0 47. SR -73 SB Ram s & Bison Av. 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.29 0.29 0. 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.81 0.61 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.00 9. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd. /Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.79 0.76 -0.04 1.09 0.89 -0.20 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.63 0.71 -0.12 1.08 0.87 -0.21 51. MacArthur Bl. & San Miguel Dr. 0.71 0.71 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.0 52. MacArthur Bl. & Coast Hw. 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.0 53. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.72 0.72 0.00 0.541 0.54 0.0 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 0.0 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.54 0.54 0.00 0.71 0.71 0. 57. 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 0.00 59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.91 0.79 -0.12 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.62 0.62 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.0 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 0.55 0.55 0.00 0.41 0.41 0. 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.66 0.66 0.00 0.51 0.511 0.00 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.57 0.571 0.001 0.611 0.611 0.00 'DNE = Does Not Exist U: \UcJobs \- 01200 \01232 \Excel \[01232- 18.xls]T 6-11 6 -31 i q 7 . 0 0 0 § } LU k 6 -32 1// CD \ LU § [ . Lu \ \\ \. \ / E E - D F a �M��)t§\ @ /@@# „ /\# /@ ®k ^/E {EQQ,sy{�/ \tea,; |- c;, ;u)Eco =CD E��E CD CD a -;) 5;E- :z 2§W :Ww \E \2 ƒ \\ ƒG(Ek $ \E]3 )Ew 4t {227 -0 e\ 7U)04 U)«A} ~ /m22£C N0 2£, \\ \ {� { \ «ee «I22e &2 £2 2 2£££fk2\`22 2 2 2 2 2 2 )2 2 2 2 2 2 { / / / / / / / / / / / / /i / / / / / / / / / / / / / //) / \ / \ E f LU \ / ƒ J g ( g Of K G z - - ) 0 / \ o « ) ! f - @ « / « ` U) \ / \ $ / \ 2 - & \ § \ J ) ) 5 i 0 ` ) k k _ 2 ¥ ( J r z 4 2* a 6 -32 1// LL } cm § F- 6 -33 CN � 0 0 co CN � I qq w _ co & E ( - ( 0) W \ § co \ D Co _ co co § : - - t E } \ a = _ 0) 0 . . )0 . 2f ®k\\ ®)k \ik)k ch {)k = /G /) {k {\kk)}k{ - =W = =ym =, #_ka = =EE5E2E \E C, m- /55 {j�� co 2§2a /)- E� /a §j2}a2 co LLJa 2 \;2E2E2;"LLj i\ ;�22L « «D zE; r6 'm1 ` `nc)222# &73 -IT2 -I—m - W U�uuu�u,� �)a u -mm UUU -U )) k§"- CT 2 ® 3 £22>22222 2]2 c}0m> 7 +ccc § r[[ r[ r[a ) r[rrr[ 6af mG /JJG o JoJ00000 2§JJJGJm0o & E ® / § » k o ( § � ( / E > E] + E/ ee ;i� E \ - ;} ( \f E 6 �\ 9ƒ\ I) 0 0 ># 1; (® e26 9 =- f m� : /) za _ q 2Jz G \ /2\ \ \\ \ \ƒ _ co \ \ z V) -f« ; ;a 6 ��z z ƒƒ@ 6 2& 6 zam .a ® V) / 6D ) ; &) 2 E 5E/ !t ) ja ) \\\ / _e \\ a ±a2 6 -33 CN � 0 0 co CN � I qq w N W w J m H • a N N w Q Z W H J Q H 0 _J m Z a J a J Q Q' W Z W C7 J J a W O W z w 0 U w of z� 2 a_ p X o a a N N w o < cD _ jj M C N -- — 'o N - - - -- InN m Z c O c O c O c O c O c O 0 c O c O c O c O c O c O c O c O c O O 000000a000000000 N Z O H = IL _ Oz WO N O J N CO N N CO) N N CO 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 0 0 N a oa oa oa oa oa oa a oa oa oa oa a oa oa oa O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C C C C C C C C C E N N m m m m m m m c c c c c c c c c _Z W O CJ CJ CD O CJ C7 C7 w (") O N N r 'O 'O 'O 'O 'O 'O 'O M 0.0 o ao 0 o aaaaaaa0 0 O O '= _ '- �.�� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ :- < a 0.a�0 0 0 a as 0 0 0 a a <as a a a a a a a as 0 0 m c N a N U CD C C a O W m Q a Lo In N �o Go rn Ir v LO v v- c W � LO N NN N N N Q HH Q y (o >= y c W CD �a t N 0 N N co Q m a =O m = C OI c N@ H H - v) v� c r o 0 Of>> _ oI C oI c c j O a U<GO a> w ❑ Q) 19 a o 3 m m O C C C 0 j j CD C a N s W o O" Q) Z z z C. _ C C C O O O '� LL LL y N (0 N@ W O 'o 'o 'o N U U m U U U J J J 2 2 2 Z O m a_ m a� N c� a N a 0 a m C U a c m N a� �N C N a c .N X CD C O a O N m a m 0 a N c O U y 7 m m T C I .5 TABLE ES -2 TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVE' DAILY TRIP GENERATION EXISTING ALTERNATIVE JA EXISTING %A EXISTING A (ADOPTED) %A (ADOPTED 1. CURRENTLY ADOPTED 687,141 8791 759 192,618 28.03% 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% 81,284 9% ' Alternative = General Plan buildout scenario. C: \Documents and Settings \soborny \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files\ OLKAE\[ ESforPresentationMay16052 .xis]ES -2 is 0 ao( a TABLE ES -3 (PAGE 1 OF 2) AM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY INTERSECTION (NS /EW ) EXISTING CURRENTLY ADOPTED TRUE MINIMUM SUBAREA1 MINIMUM SUBAREA I MAXIMUM ICU I LOS I ICU LOS ICU I LOS ICU I LOS I ICU I LOS 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. DNE DNE 1.27 F DNE DNE DNEIDNE1 1.281 F 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.66 B 0.72 C 0.74 C 0.73 C 0.72 C 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 0.84 D 1.01 F 0.98 E 1.00 E 1.03 F 4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. 0.54 A 0.79 C 0.79 C 0.84 D 0.93 E 5. Newport BI. & Via Lido 0.41 A 0.54 A 0.52 A 0.55 A 0.60 A 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 1.011 F1 1.04 F 1.06 F 9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr. 0.61 B 0.76 C 0.751 Cl 0.77 Cl 0.811 D 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0.49 A 0.71 C 0.701 B1 0.75 C1 0.791 C 11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.55 A 0.66 B 0.641 BI 0.69 BI 0.741 C 12. MacArthur BI. & Von Karman Av. 0.46 A 0.54 A 0.54 Al 0.51 A 0.52 A 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.74 C 0.92 E 0.93 El 0.93 E 0.98 E 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. 0.55 A 0.79 C 0.80 Cl 0.81 D 0.87 D 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N) 0.77 Cl 0.961 E 0.96 E 1 0.97 E 1.00 E 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N) 0.66 B 0.92 E 0.93 E 0.92 E 0.91 E 17. Campus Dr. /Irvine Av. & Bristol St. (S) 0.72 C 0.93 E 0.91 E 0.93 E 0.93 E 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S) 0.46 A 0.52 A 0.52 A 0.54 A 0.53 A 19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.70 B 0.68 B 0.68 B 0.70 B 0.73 C 20. Irvine Av. & University Dr. 0.82 D 1.14 F 1.15 F 1.15 F 1.14 F 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.66 B 0.70 B 0.69 B 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 Cl 0.78 C 0.78 Cl 0.79 C 0.82 D 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.57 Al 0.67 B 0.66 B 0.69 B 0.70 B 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 0.38 Al 0.391 A 0.40 Al OAR A 0.41 A 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.55 Al 0.641 B 0.64 BI 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 El 0.961 E 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (N) 0.55 A 0.70 B 0.71 C 0.71 C 0.69 B 31. Ba view PI. & Bristol St. (S) 0.48 A 0.60 A 0.59 A 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 Al 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 A 0.51 A 0.52 A 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /Ford Rd. 0.69 B 0.78 C 0.76 C 0.791 C 0.81 D 37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.56 A 0.61 B 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.64 B 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.47 A 0.55 A 0.54 A 0.58 A 0.69 B 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.68 B 0.85 D 0.85 D 0.87 D 0.881 D 40. Santa Cruz Dr. &San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 A 0.36 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 A 44. Avocado Av. & San Mi ueI Dr. 0.33 A 0.37 A 0.38 Al 0.39 A 0.43 A 45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw. 0.58 A 0.77 C 1 0.781 C 1 0.80 C 0.81 D r o' �a 7 TABLE ES -3 (PAGE 2 OF 2) AM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY INTERSECTION NS /EW ) EXISTING CURRENTLY ADOPTED TRUE MINIMUM SUBAREA MINIMUM SUBAREA MAXIMUM OSI ICU I LOS I ICU I LOS I ICU LOSI ICU I LOS 46. SR -73 NB Ram s & Bison Av. 0.31 A 0.47 A 0.47 A 0.47 Al 0.47 47. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.26 A 0.38 A 0.39 A 0.38 Al 0.38 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.63 B 0.78 C 0.77 C 0.79 Cl 0.81 D 49. MacArthur BI. & Ford Rd. /Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.71 C 0.77 C 0.77 C 0.78 Cl 0.79 C 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.64 B 0.77 C 0.77 C 0.81 DI 0.83 D 51. MacArthur Bl. & 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 0.69 B 0.691 B 0.69 B 0.72 C 54. SR -73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr. 0.30 A 0.45 A 0.45 Al 0.46 A 0.46 A 55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd. 0.28 A 0.30 A 0.30 A 0.30 A 0.31 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.44 A 0.52 A 0.51 A 0.55 A 0.54 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 0.99 E 1.08 F 1.06 F 1.06 F 1.08 F 58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.31 A 0.38 A 0.38 A 0.38 A 0.39 A 59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw. 0.83 D 0.901 D 0.88 D 0.89 D 0.90 D 60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.44 A 0.60 A 0.59 A 0.60 A 0.62 B 61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw. 0.61 B 0.67 B 0.68 B 0.67 B 0.68 13 62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR -73 NB Ramps 0.45 A 0.54 Al 0.541 Al 0.53 A 0.55 64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.37 A 0.63 BI 0.631 BI 0.63 B 0.66 65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.47 A 0.571 Al 0.571 Al 0.56 A 0.57 C: \Documents and Settings \soborny \Local Setting s\Tem po rary Internet Files\ OLKAE\[ ESforPresentationMay16053 .xls]ES c 03 N TABLE ES-4 (PAGE 1 OF 2) PM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY � r q INTERSECTION NS /EW EXISTING CURRENTLY I ADOPTED TRUE MINIMUM I SUBAREA MINIMUM SUBAREA MAXIMUM ICU ILOSI ICU I LOS ICU I LOS ICU ILOSI ICU I LOS 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. DNE DNE 1.29 F DNE DNE DNE DNE 1.26 F 2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av. 0.67 B 0.82 D 0.86 D 0.86 D 0.63 D 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. 0.90 D 0.99 E 0.94 E 0.951 El 1.04 F 4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. 0.70 B 0.97 E 0.96 E 1.011 F1 1.18 F 5. Newport BI. & Via Lido 0.37 A 0.46 A 0.41 A 0.451 Al 0.52 6. Newport Bi. & 32nd St. 0.78 C 0.71 C 0.58 A 0.631 131 0.81 D 7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw. 0.93 E 1.12 F 1.10 F 1.151 F1 1.19 F 8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw. 0.67 B 0.851 D 0.83 D 0.871 DI 0.92 E 9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr. 0.85 D 1.251 1.251 F 1.291 F1 1.29 F 10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St. 0.66 B 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.86 D 0.86 D 11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr. 0.79 C 0.93 E 0.94 E 0.98 E 1.02 F 12. MacArthur BI. & Von Karman Av. 0.53 A 0.64 B 0.64 B 0.64 B 0.65 B 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. 0.85 D 1.24 F 1.23 F 1.25 F 1.25 F 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. 0.60 A 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.81 D 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N) 0.94 E 1.08 F 1.08 F 1.08 F 1.08 F 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. N) 0.61 B 0.72 C 0.72 C 0.73 C 0.72 C 17. Campus Dr. /Irvine Av. & Bristol St. (S) 0.58 A 0.77 C 0.76 C 0.78 C 0.77 C 18. Birch St. & Bristol St. (S) 0.44 A 0.53 A 0.53 A 0.54 A 0.54 Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr. 0.94 E 0.90 D 0.90 D 0.91 E 0.94 E Irvine Av. & University Dr. 0.89 D 1.19 F 1.16 F 1.17 F 1.18 F 21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr. 0.72 Cl 0.781 C 0.761 C 0.78 C 0.77 C 22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr. 0.60 A 0.631 B 0.63 B 0.65 B 0.66 B 23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr. 0.64 B 0.701 B 0.71 C 0.72 C 0.72 C 24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr. 0.77 C 0.82 D 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.83 D 25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr. 0.48 A 0.56 A 0.57 A 0,58 Al 0.59 A 26. Dover Dr. & 16th St. 0.57 A 0.64 B 0.65 B 0.65 BI 0.64 B 27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.74 C 0.90 D 0.88 D 0.91 El 0.941 E 28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.70 B 0.94 E 0.93 E 0.95 El 0.981 E 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. 0.91 E 0.99 El 0.991 L E 1.00 0.69 El B 1.081 0.72 F C 30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (N) 0.59 A 0.69 B 31. Ba view PI. & Bristol St. (S) 0.56 A 0.63 B 0.631 BI 0.63 B 0.64 B 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S) 0.72 C 0.85 D 0.84 D 0.86 D 0.87 D 33. Jamboree Rd. & Ba view W 0.57 A 0.70 B 0.70 B 0.71 C 0.71 C 34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr. 0.64 B 0.69 B 0.68 B 0.70 B 0.71 C 35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av. 0.51 A 0.58 A 0.58 A 0.59 A 0.62 B 36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /Ford Rd. 0.65 B 0.72 C 0.73 C 0.73 C 0.76 C 37. Jamboree Rd. &San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.57 A 0.65 B 0.65 B 0.68 B 0.71 C 38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.63 B 0.71 C 0.71 C 0.78 C 0.87 D 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 0.74 C 0.89 D 0.87 D 0.86 D 0.91 E 40. Santa.Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.36 A 0.34 A 0.34 A 0.36 A 0.36 A 41. Santa Rosa Dr. &San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.52 A 0.71 C 0.70 B 0.68 B 0.73 C 42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw. 0.52 A 0.63 B 0.62 B 0.62 B 0.66 B 44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr. 0.72 C 0.79 C 0.78 C 0.79 C 0.84 D Avocado Av. &Coast Hw. 0.66 B 0.80 C 0.79 Cl 0.83 D 0.83 D � r q TABLE ES-4 (PAGE 2 OF 2) PM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY is INTERSECTION NSIEW EXISTING CURRENTLY ADOPTED TRUE MINIMUM SUBAREA MINIMUM I SUBAREA MAXIMUM ICU ILOSI ICU I LOS I ICU I LOS ICU ILOSI ICU I LOS 46. SR -73 NB Ramps & Bison Av. 0.37 A 0.561 A 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.56 47. SR -73 SB Rams & Bison Av. 0.17 A 0.29 A 0.29 A 0.29 A 0.29 48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av. 0.60 A 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.81 DI 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 Bl. & 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. 0.43 A 0.53 A 0.52 A 0.53 A 0.54 A 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 Al 0.38 A 0.38 A 0.38 A 0.39 A 56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.54 A 0.68 B 0.68 B 0.68 B 0.71 C 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. 0.69 B 0.79 C 0.75 C 0.75 Cl 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 Al 0.46 Al 0.45 Al 0.46 A 0.50 61. Popp 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 65. Newport Coast Dr. &Coast Hw. 0.50 Al 0.60 A 0.60 Al 0.60 A 0.61 OW C: \Documents and Settings \soborny \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files\ OI- KAE\[ ESforPresentation May 16053 .xls]ES -4 9 10 r1 \J E TABLE ES -5 DEFICIENT INTERSECTION SUMMARY ION INTERSECT NS /EW EXISTING ICURRENTL ADOPTED TRUE MINIMUM SUBAREA MINIMUM SUBAREA MAXIMUM AM PM AM PM AMI PM I AMI PM I AM I PM 1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw. DNE DNE F F DNE DNE DNE DNE F F 3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw. D D F E E E E E F F 4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd. A B 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 Bl. & Campus Dr. B D C F C F C F D F 11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr. A Cl B I E BI E B E C F 13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. C D E F E F E F E F 14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St. A A DI D D D D DI E E 15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. (N) C E E F E F E F E F 16. Birch St. & Bristol St. (N) B B E C E C E C E C 17. Campus Dr. /Irvine Av. & Bristol St. (S) C A El 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 D E D E D E 29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd. D E E E E E E E E F 32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. (S) C C E D E D E D E D 39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw. 6 C D D D D D D D E 49. MacArthur-Bl. & Ford Rd. /Bonita C n. Dr. C1 D C F C F C F C F 50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 8 E C F C F D F D F 57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw. El BI F1 C1 F1 C F C F C 59.Marguerite Av. & Coast Hw. DI DI DI El DI D D E D E C: \Documents and Setting s \soborny \Local Setting s\Tem porary Internet Files \OLKAE \[ESforPresentationMay160 r( } 4' Q y � W y W 0 J � Gi J Q J r J W O • Id ¢ N MITI N N N O W� m A 0 N Ol M N V [� N {p O a V of n n 0< m N N O D a W M N N 0 M 0 I N N m N V O N Cf 2 fOD O Co Z_ O O 0 y N N n N O Z o 0 0 0 0 o a Q Z) V N N nW , Z_ V (OD N O r N N cJ rW OI cJ cJ 00 r � Z M 2 th N N O N N W O V Z M N M N O r N O O m f 6 of 0 N n N O of Q a U U Z o000 N 0 od° o N r y X O th N N 46 p 0 le W N N E O O a th ti V N ID N N th W r 0 0 0 e 0 0 p W� th N ID M N N n 0 of 2 O N V V N O N O m N N n Ol 0 y O !� N ¢ W V N = of e, o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W D P n N N N N Co Z N O Oz y n N n N Z M Z N N O Q O CO U D 0000 0 o 2° o 0 O of n N O N M O a IOD O � m N n N f O LL Oar Z N N N Q O N V O m J z Z Z F- 7 r W N V N n n NV� N O Z of O N n N N n O N W D °a N O LL O U O Namur N.no in U 0 y IUD O IUD O XZ •- N N O Ol O O O O W a� K N O W a 2'00 2' 2' oo 0 0 Z) m Q D V N V M N t00 O OI O ¢ N O W N N r O y a 0000 o00 00 Co Z_ U) p a M'' OI V N O W D M N r O J y 2 o 0 o 0 T 0 0 0 0 a r O N N V n 0 �N, nN, V a i N th N p N O (p (p N th J Q N Z H N th N N O N N N N O w(if a O O M N N O O a N t0 a OI Qi OI OO (If p M N w a U Z) Q U � H 0 o yZ M IR O X O M OOi o �0 0 W Ol Cl W m 0 00 y m N a _ a W d ¢ ii A � r amUOr°¢ W a o00 O • Id O N O W D 0 O N Ol O V [� N {p O V of n n 0< m X N N O to � a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m N V O N Cf 2 fOD O O O 0 M Z_ N N n N O Z o 0 0 0 0 o a Z) V N N nW Q W V (OD N O r N N cJ rW OI cJ cJ 00 O � Z M 2 0 0 0 O V r W M N M N O r N O O m f 6 W N n N O mO of a U U' o000 0 od° o y O th N N 46 p 0 le X N N E O O W ¢ 2 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 W� th N ID M N N n 0 of 2 O N V V N O N O m N N n Ol 0 X O !� N a y a e, o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W D P n N N N N N O y ¢ n N n N Z M Z N N O O CO U 0000 0 o 2° o 0 O Z) n N O N M O IOD � m N n N f O LL Oar Z O z Z U r W N V N n n NV� N O of z N n N N n O N W W d N O LL O of ° Z) ¢ U 0 IUD O IUD O H •- N N O Ol O O O O y X K N O W a 2'00 2' 2' oo 0 0 Z) LL' V N V M N t00 O OI O mm N O y a 0000 o00 00 Z) � p a �() OI m N O m Z M N O J y 2 o 0 o 0 o 0 0 0 0 W Z) O N N V n 0 �N, nN, V a r _Z N Ol OI t0 N O l0 n 00 J N th N N O N N N N O r W w O O M N N O O a N t0 a OI Qi OI OO W d M N w of O Z) Q U 0 o M IR O F O M OOi o �0 0 Ol Cl W m 0 00 y W m m m c J O m ¢ �0 Or a m UGHQ wLL • Id • E TABLE ES -7 NUMBER OF DEFICIENT INTERSECTIONS BY ALTERNATIVE C: \Documents and Setting s \soborny \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files\ OLKAE \[ESforPresentation May 160,1 NUMBER OF DEFICIENT INTERSECTIONS SCENARIO AM ONLY I PM ONLY I AM &PM I TOTAL EXISTING 1 5 0 6 CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN 5 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 Setting s \soborny \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files\ OLKAE \[ESforPresentation May 160,1 LL O N W W J G1 H • E 0 l j I q z C 9 W w � O W N m C t C C L 1 N O O N C 0 ti - c o c E ° E ° � Jo t> c c c o p ` 'o o E c ° 6 t m e o Jo O1 0 'o t m E nw °cm m vmm o t z w 3c n m vW mm3 mm m yo y 3 z ,tw3 r 3 d 3 z_ Q (yf N C N C S S L A Z ^ m S S C m C C N N N m C '2-5 C E S C m N a. N Q Q N Q N C 3 N N nL o N N M Q' E {7 Q N N O m o Olt o 00 Y o00 0 o o :2 0 o 0 0 0 o 000o W o 0 0 o E' 00 > > > > O > > > > > > > > > > > > > > N O 0 0 0 Q O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 O ` O O S armv-o aaa a aaav a a V a 6- a. v a. a. aaa � z°v w f m c W C N L O N C C y C C C 10 C — � i J ° °I J OI B C O J .J. J ❑ L •.. _ r N S L m t O 3C5a m z L w z m w w 3 m w z m a w S L °c O" m °c ° 6 c (Y m Q Iti N N = 411 N N <' E n N N O n Q y N o 0 o pL o OI o C OI . W :2:2:2 N 19 O N O O O L 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 a u a a` a` ar u a` a s z z w wc ? di m A c = c 9 c = !° m c z w 3 z z w 3 w = d Y L L 9 03 O L O m N W D O O O O O O O O C O a` a` CL r L a` a` a`. a` a` z W , y _ W > N o ti C - E c �" c o E VO 2 JO O _ ~ .J. W C .J. 01 q O m z 8 Q L> Z L 2 L C E N =z O mJ p °IN N 4A e °I V U^ r= mm3 m cm °cm m mm m? 7i c a wym m ya r N °W �3 z w3 z !� : W w3 °' w d V cN °c S m °c °S c 2 m z L N z N Q Q Q N NE N W N N M V t7 N O w o .0 O o o o 0 0 0 ° '- 61 L O W a o o o E o o° CL o m > o 0o W o o > 0 > > 0 0 > > > > > O > o C - u d QS Uad a.aaaci a` L z m w yw � mo Zw mw zw w y 3 zi zc m'3 zw � U o 'nU 3= 0 o m • to N • E 0 l j I q 0 a N z w w LL Q O • C a zO w w F J U m w F N w z Z J a z O F O a • z z W c N c N d W 2 2 2 A N L _Z N N N C :r c y' c L c c o a c = = v c v n ti c ti c c =' ai ai c = ti ry c ry c— c ry L c ry ry n c c n n = _ E '-° '-° E !� c °' 1p c E L v) A A v) A o L E _' = 5 0' L j o E m o L L m o L 'o m rn m o' m c .LCm r m ° m m r 5 m o o z E' y _N CJ •. m N V y z =n ° 3 0 QN N N N N N N N N N N N N N QL N N N S L d N m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 m m o ° m o > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'o Cm > > J > N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 L O O y O t O a` a` a` a` a` a` a` ¢ E v a` a` v a` z z w = v c v v w Z Z N = C Q "" C :C y' L 0 a3 o d m Sc a m 0 y c m c c L= !a c n n ti ai c c c A n V) 3 L c .�.. O L 3 L L L m o .`�.. m m m m m m r L m o r rn 9 E m o m r o' o z =m° avmi 3 `' vmi vmi w=' X33 z3 z z09_ w m L z o 3 M N K Z v c%i to in M m OW > > > > > > > > > > 2 fn O O O O O O O 2 O O 12 O 2 O 2 v Q L a a a> a a a a a a L) Z w C W = 0 0 C m ai c° ai 0 w „33 z3 z Z0 Z C ci fn h th th th d W N N N N N N N N N N N LI N F L N '> '> '0 > 0 > o 0 > 0 0 0 O 2 '0 > > O t aO ` ao ` ` IL a a a a a m v z w v ^y o 2 2 0 W fL v c m c 10 C c� ti c ti c c y ti ti c = m m e L C N m A C N m N C C N 6 m m N O c c C c e C W h y L C 2 O L y m L m.R L L m o CL m R mm� O m C m m ait L33 N z3 z zm9= z Z ' m L ' 9 m Z S n 3 m L 9^ ' 9 9 N NW w N N N N O N (nN N N N n N N N n n N N O L N > > > > > > > > > > > > > > O O O O O O O O O O O O O O p L m ? o � M 0 Do Z 2 in N3 W ~ cm J K o K N N N N Z N� Z N ? N O 6-6 Z o D o 0 n O O o n p = c 7= Q N a C p Y a m N m oU Ev E Em um E c -� c� > n n U m U Z Z m r_ 10 15 LL O M w W W J co H r w c ° J _ o = 0 > U L r c a L r ti c m c c ai c c m 0 c ai m E m u c = E rn 10 0 OJ m E u rn rp = O J O N JC O O = O O L L ¢ ;S m m L C m m m m m m W m m m m m w m y z my �35� zw3 w z .0 mm9 zw 3 N z 3 .N- Q N N .w_ y N vN v w v 9 o o o 0 0 0 0 0 > O o 0 E 0 0 0 0 0 0 m rrn Uv � !� ` (L (L a U r ti Z c = w m w v o c w m r 5 O m m L N L ai c a N o h ¢ = c c 0 0 c c 0 u c c c c y V o L L = rn = j c L rn L c rn w L r > t rn> JO °O JO Jo 0 rn rn O o c c 'J' o rn Z p y 2 3 r c m m m m m m m m m m m w m y r 3 Z W 3 w h w z w 3 w ¢ Nv LLv v v Lv v v h m .VN- e e n N Oi ci a ci ci 'E cj 'E v v v v v v v v v v w a w h m N c > 0 N y O > > > 0 0 0 > O > > O O > > 0 0 > _ > O > O O O= m m ti r = c W w v o+ N L C V w r ° L c r N S N m C = C .2 di C C C C a' D. C 12.2 m ° > m f0 0 _� v rn ° _ J u ° .. r `v •� v r ° 0 y r ° r y L`. m ° ai =° m m �' m 3 o z � w h m w z w N m v v m v r o v Ma w O N m V th N th N M C th th N O O O O C 9 O_ O X11 v° oc'a o 0 0 o f o 00 > a' £ U m = a` a a` m LLl a a a` a` U z ` L d w w m o c > v y r c r V a CL m N N O C L N C m d = O N m N N d = N m C N ai ` 'u N m D• = C= C C m C C m m m ° c C m ` L •°mmm .J. L JO a o r E c O J u V rn =£ v y y y V y m = m w w CO t o L 3 z w h z O w r mr m O1 ;� LLv � vm °c Lv v c E c w pL C m d v d d d d d o d d d w- N m rn _ v vvv v v c° v v v w w a w v° oc a 0 000 0 o.E vc 00 0 0 U x Lam. U f0 a a` a` a` w m m d� a U a U w w z o 0 3 wZ3incw h 3 h 3 N N W Z� Z w N c z w z w m — z o z. w z 3 y m Q i 3 > 3 m o ¢ x x ZON JL NOdN J�.T J1 ON v L E d y m L a c L c y o °U ru°. U in a U 2 U • 0 �I1 Sri`' 1 Ib 9 ` V a) c W un U m �t O Q N • Z W CL L U) O U U) L. w O �U O 0 U) A, u m .U) U) O 0. • E E VJ O -1--+ U) L U LLI :D m r2< � X � Q 2 � N-2:t Z :D p2 Z W 2 p W :D d Z 2 Q —J 02 Z W d W d � Q � Q Q � W Z C d Z o p W W (� Q p O U ca = p 2 w QQ M) �cn o c Z Z OZ 3= cu -' 3 U E cLi w> -, = 2 w c`�a o CU CU 2 cc6 �� p= cc606Um N� a) w - mUtLC) U) C W % Cj oNU 06 �U >��m �•� �•� oU06060606o6°6oiS 0 06 O�tS0606 -0 -0 2�0�mXXcaca W U> m E N NQ06 Q Q N N N 06 06 Z Q m m j N N !p LO a) L q 7 7 Q Q V- o Q Y a) a) °— Q Q Q .� a� ° w Q c E b E c c >� O E E M O 6 cu omcnZZ > > )-)L) �Om2��221 M � O O O O 6) N 6) 6) O r O (61416. f, o6 6) � � � � � � � N N N N M M d LO LO LO �J U) 0 m 00 (1) w .V) U) 0 n V. 0 � Q S.. O L U m U) U o x x x U= L C6 C - p m CL C Z 0 ' E E -1--i o C: m ?>> Z Q • 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 I, 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 I 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) Nvould 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 I and 3 would produce substantially similar demands, although for different service categories. Option 1 �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 I would represent the least intensive land use alternative under these three scenarios. Corona Del Mar In general, implementation of Option I, 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 I 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 I. Option 2 would also gcucrafc a greater amount of criteria air pollutants. Lido Village -% 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 I, 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 I 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 • a17 • 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 I 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 because this alternative would generate the greatest demand for electricity, solid waste, wastewater, and water services. Implementation of Option I 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 1 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, E / 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 I 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 ]cast 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. I lowcver, it should be noted that Option 3 would generate the least demand for solid Nvastc services. Meanwhile, implementation of Option I (no change from existing conditions) would fall in between the other two alternatives with regard`to increased service demand; however. Option could generate the smallest amount of criteria air pollutants but the highest electricity usage. Overall, Option 2 would represent the least intensive land use alternative. • I • u 0 aa[l E N LL X ZZZ Z Z Z Z Z Z , OI N n N NON Z Z Z Z Z Z Z � O W I d x m EE-60 OOiOI�m min �'n nnn O1OONN wooOOm Om OON- M L4OO❑11 Z � m d a m e.N a a a a mC) mNmm Q a a a „aaaa F a a a L U LL x Z Z'ZIZ ZZZZZ Q N N NON Z Z Z Z Z Z Z c e W O j � N m�L C j j O Im N m 000 n n 01 m 01 m m O Q O OI mm Q � Q m Q N m QmQm O m O 00 N O m o o__ m M I f C) C) C) OZ N I � m alaaa nnln;nl�I� as «g NI Nm o aaaa aaa y ALL% I Z Zi ZIZ ,I ,i ,, ZIZ Z Z Z w pm N N m OIN Z Z Z Z Z Z Z W ° m a -, I J e d I d I I d E E O : jQlm : 0 0 0 m � :O C)IQ C) C)'m:01 M' � �! �� O.O N tO O O N'N n O m I Q O �1m m 0000 I f f O• O O' J � I fIfF Q• N n � I n•n I I mlm I I N.N N'N � I I III 1 Oi0 11;1 <, <:< O OIO O jIl d o L N �i .n °I�:��f1010'Q'ON 10 Oi0'O a.¢ I Z Z Z'Z O OI ' n .0.010 :O1i00 nmQ OI�iO ° n Oio OII O.N m:� 'O10 'm O 0101 V LL X ;m Z I I W i I 1 I I I j t 3 Im•o:ni n,rn ImI nIN: e'�.Oln I M Imlm Ifl I nlml�: m m n m m m pIm IA'n I n Qn Q _ N O IA NO I m;m m 1 q X c �. Ip E iM.O Q'mIN •m, :m•�i� n.(O (O.lh - ''rIhII m 'm!�: n'NIQIM M. MI m �i Ol n lh m 10 �Im nlm m.N N n O.N 1 OiN Olm'Om IQtn O N 'm�0; 110: n'm: m'ni Ni n'ml p; 0!m I'I_OI Qmt") m.lA I'NT10:h10 i0n 01 C'C y f 0 m N 0 �n_ .. .N�d0 M Oi N';O th Ih Q IO� N!n m I M I !I m'O 0 1 O) Q 'mt"0 I -1-1 I Q n t") m Q �m '{0Q 1 ") I I m n Q Qn t") m n Q �1+0 1 mQ 1 QM I nn Q 1 N tm ") 1 ¢ 6N E m C `C _ If I Z ZIZ Z:Z i m 4W. Qo m 'e � ,C II^ m l") L m Q rn N W =dyd G C j N 9. I'll ! .O 0 . .. O 0 n � OR N N:Q:m IOi;N Clp,p m O Al, m Q n mm , E NM o� m .� rn .mOO O.�c Qml IQ 'Q n l 1A 1A 1A 1A 1A 1A 1A 1A N t") Q:l") Q M : Qi:10 1A Q �,N N flll ,(O I1A z I cEc ;�i IZI IIII 3 U LL W If Niniu� I nlni mjmi Nl i Z. Z'Zlz miN I�Ip�N n mIN NiO N mIN m IN ° n 9 •O'y��IM p m � T N O 1 �.lh m:0 m'nl N'O N'm: m'm C) OIO �+1 O MI mn m NI �n Ipl ml�lnm. m•1A In.1A N OI �. NO C) � C) p m m.1Al°N.1 C) �.M Nlm nlmnlnQ C) 01n 0 E f%i .C) n t")IN �'N. N'N Nm Q O'Ol. �'�. c; '� O.N m m n. N'N N NIN i Q QL iQm moll O:� t") ,NININ N'N N'N N Q't")m l")l")Q m.m'O1•t") Q 1(J 1A 1A Q Q d 5 I I I E c O I lr e �Ii0m0O ON� ' 0m 1 �� ° a a p e mT 0 00' n ° �n 0N M 0 NQ O LL X N� -I- i i iZ 1Q m 1O N On N10 N , m N Q n I ii i l I T m � 1QQQ(, ..i NQn Q °n ! m f �l '1 OMf n . ! ! m m QQm : I: n .l !l mm1 l :: mm0f 1t0 tClOhm)i 1p0 mN A Im OM l IN p Na -.1d. p mm :I l p n00n1 o n 1 : 0° OO Oi- 10 O 40M U0N Q m p NOlh n mH° n m M • m OE Y O Ii0 m 10m Q N0n C�f OM ") I 0Imlmlm OVo Mill d m n nl0 QImIQ m pj mi Mi OI �I mI Oiln h . i I I iI I0nQ1 IN I I � I I. I I I I rn I• .N. N I i l �o �o L a1 j ' d3 d I d1° d :2 �m cvm,!LLI mHLL cv,LL m�cm �= iH „LL m� �= dy,. IN L J OI OI N M CI,C CC. mi mi N t") Q %gCCC 1m mi ml N t") Q% r 0_ L�C�C N m N q q N q N CC t") CCCC L� Q 1m N C C?••y',y:0:C0:C 0 1 CC dCCCCCN 0 d0 J n mjKw j i I N N . - y _ d J � �. 1 y x d1� m w 00l 0 0� 0 W OO OO WO c 00OOO q4c w Q a! I m m U U J J f aa[l COO C N O B C d N N m d N A UU J J NN m m E E vv m 0 0 m d m � i4 O O J J N N v v N N O O O O O O d d A A C C O O 1` N d Or O1, L O E J., C C N d rnm m ' t vv . J J S n N d d v n 9 O ry zz ;p O O t Q Q Q c i - N ❑ E E E o } oo o =U ry ry p p C') = � � N A A d L L �oi O O p W g L mZ 0 �,qri a� c d O e I I mOE`p?M.NjN Nm0{nnn NN Np MMO00 NNNNOONNNON mmtOD tmOn ts m d rn rn m ` e e 3f n : e e �- 3f e a° a e e a° ae e e 3E a e e e (E1 m N .. m n N N • O ETA° Ol m m N N O M M N N N N T N T N N n n N l y X N. N d v e m mc `�dNNN E J E o v n e e oil OI O1 �jNp Nm'm OI Ol OlmmnnmOmnm mmmmN NZ J m m m ES LQN veie pp ve M!ml ee e. O'm'O ele ee,ee NNNm e.e ve,vevee ppONnpn er veee N U ly W X00 flf NO{ CIO NN O' mI r � � 1 n n OI O I? r r N r m m Om ry I v_e I 1 � I m A L d E E `o m: m �'n m 1 n mlm'rn.'U, O{: N a e� n m.m 'f;nl� rnim nm:°'1 I m I m °'1•N - m,m � N'N n n'neolNnN n N n O n O m V V ennom I t7 t7 d J v �,N'N .n.�.�� f fl' I- II - - - O V. ViN N y ❑? m i j r l ' If 1 In le N E` O Z; I m 1 O \ a a _ � a � e a N N a N a O m a m fa 0 0 m p : :.m C) N N �N m OI 'O �'�I•NIN'�tN r� N �'O,O . pnNN1 O Mn 'NON I1 "N " m m O N N N m O m O m m A X A d m N O N m O m n : p. N N N0' nOnI1: ! O N O O N n M n m m n n N n p mp y O m C •. E� m 'mN ' m � m 1N N ,: n N m' O p C C"Mmn . '. .n m 1M01 m O tOh 0N O N N N N O O NNNNNNt")NNN N 0 p:p d N ❑1C v nmm . O .0. n m m'� p1 mm"th; JN n1Ai O N II 6 N E m dl m E ` N e e� 1 e I ie ej Ive Io el elm Ie ewe i� va°'vie �I� e e e a°'� eye mI C - q A d �. A m U LL X W O .m. . m . O I I .: m;{vj' N N O Ip1 N m O N'N •- I r I r r• N to r t7 j I u E H 0 0 N : �A1 IO!m C)'m.N O'OIN 01 mIN N 01 mlm'O O.n OIm mi0 O O t7 nffW m C' > 7i A O E ¢ C)r OHO .! '�jNiMIC)'Ojp N N nm.N m!m. N.m N N: O: N:M 4m'1 x.01: NN:NI01I0 01:n t7i nyN! O c ¢W d v N m'm IN�N•N.n arm O'm mnm M'y m m n nim: 10 ❑ mmm - ^NNml") NNNNNN[VNN'NN .n1m'm WO{ 2 y q d c c A L N U IL % I 3'e ;e m!m I e° eee° ex piN Ol ry le I I e °e °e �il"): �•N 1\ le °I° 01. N'i")j(O :e:� Ornin'n. ryl �In 011 °m n y W e I I I iOl�mi01 m A O A N . m f n O N Ol n m O .I m O O 01 IN I nN •On.. n 'N Om.01 N1 V O mN 1N.Nmm m V E n :m 01 mi ,C) N m0 ' RA IM O N ' 0 N i N -O n O'Nn- 1-101 n n 17:1 m'm mm N m m m d m m, m U LL W I II a°l egIe Ni0i0 \ N� �IO1 m mIN N NIA e e�'m n AR O O N eeE m C N O N l7 N O N ee eev y V V e p 0 N N N W [Op L j• m N.N O m m I: M Im'N p•N•m'ONii m OrnO') p1,N m'N O m�O N OIn c! I I ��sl� pI M N N O O NIN N WI'N m10 E 3 A ❑ !Nlm M'pI N,m iNiNININ mIoq m!N,m W 01 d,la N'thIO �. C)'O �n m O N nm p Q Y � �.� I! p1 NiN ['!10 I I I I aI 171 I q 2; r0. O N 11 qI A N i J. JI I I 'Mm. ' hlm, �I J p = C O C C O O C O C C O O C C O= V C dl O. Cry: AI Oq A. m. J LL J' LL' C NILL I m NLL CI m NLL O= Ci O O O O O O O O O NLL Ci N c::.c (} 01! O•I rc, cic N cc N O cic N cc I N cc¢¢¢mC ry l7 J O;'Ni �nN!. �r000 X X 'SI'„� NNOOO='N 2' '% 'NY YVYYY??{{ � 8 M 2 YY ,8 N N m 0�I u'5;00 1 du'S �C�SIU'SOO 1 Pr0009u'S u'S000 ywwmmmmmmmmm %� St yu'Sw0 �. z o 3 3 COO C N O B C d N N m d N A UU J J NN m m E E vv m 0 0 m d m � i4 O O J J N N v v N N O O O O O O d d A A C C O O 1` N C C N d rnm ' t vv . J J S N N N d d v n 9 O ry zz d G N n O O t Q Q Q O O N N C "C L G OI O1 L L lMi d d E E A A N N ' t J J ! N N S C .0 N d d 8 9 O ry d G N n t Q c i - N ❑ E E E o } oo o =U ry ry O O = � � N A A d L L �oi O O p g L mZ 0 �,qri a� n 0 0 w E" Q A a a z Q a a a z w x U Q w H O a W z 1 H Q H U Q a Q a- a 4 �I 0 0 N 0 0 3 0 0 N � N N � 7 � � G cd ,� 00 � O N y U• � U 7 N G o � t. U cd '� 7 a� v a0 w 'O O o G Nfn0 M E � G G a a U w. N N a C7 ,rte N av 3 0° o M cI N � N � OCA U U N O p, w � Y � O O O N o� 6 E. I 1 I m Cl) m 00cimf- Off - cl V f- f- m im nm ci Of N(Q a? a N COf- 00f m In N C M M 00 af- 0f-cl a n M 0 c1 U a a0 f- f- m ci 0 N y op a a m n vm oo s m o .in0 im z f-f- °9 ci Om 0 ciO N hONyT N0N V 0.t?O O ci O f- I0 i i ma x M a�W O? 7:W, z;:FH,, C C w.Q - - E , d g W•'O m mo v � vv= E E f0 iy,• .,, �p U N C N U y y E U O O O E O V .;•n: E C C O U o U E E N f0 C U U « V 'O X d X 0 0 Z N m o o d >? wa r •w '°C G « N N G O O 0 Q `c Z " 'ma - ° J d Jd m r aco 0 0 y : yo: cc i - I �N7 0 m d 0'A N In AC4M4 N f0 QU N c c c `c c c c7 c 0 0 o o o o o :O O OA o a o 0 0 0i 0 •Q a a a a a c a a a a m O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O N o� 6 E. I 1 I 0 M a aaa O N O) l0 N (O V O Cl) N 00 (O N N n N 00 l0 O O y Q N V) V N cl N ci n l0 ci (O N N N N ci ' OA U e m C O cl 00 V N N V O l0 N ci (O N N 00 N 00 V O O (l ci U a a N l0 V N ci N ci n V ci (O N N N N ci ' N C K O N N V V W N O l0 N 00 w N N 00 V) (3) V (3) O (O cl Q N V V N cl N ci n f0 ci w N N N cl ci _z a O N O) N Cl) V w O f- c) 00 m cf m ci ci m f- N O Cl) N p" as N w V Cl) N N cl 00 Cl) ci w Cl) Cl) N cf cf � m v = N J O � N a;! N U v O v Afi{� W C E J 0 v O C 0 l0 .,o r� v AR o VA z U p H U x rw� o UsA m v O v cm iL O m J C N V w O 0 s U O 0 O E C N N O O E O J E O 1 lE w K dI J J C m O O O O C W t _ C O U m m N E v N U N U d N N N t0 O O E E N N E O > O C C F= J 4 p E .V .. O O U U U N > O U Q N rl a 0 r ts .lei EO f0 N d d EO O E > > >> EO V p ',� fb fh dN, N U U N U O O U`E¢E d K v L� O O �2U`mm O p y O O C C t O O O L O L O O C K z N mmtt V-r _C I om MM 3QQ 3z _W r j rl NC7O N .-1N 'iN t.-1N 3'i Nf7 yrlN y'iN C7 C C C C C C C C C b C C O C C C d C C C Z C C Z C C C b.2 O b 0 0 0 0 0` 0 0 0 0 O O O Z O 0 0 O O O O O r 'eR.i,Ya a�aaaaa b as z aaa Z; o3iaaa� aaa H 01 r aaj h 'r aaa .00�00000�oo�ooZ00000003oo' -Ooo 0 M a aaa 1 L� 2 U Q W m 0 W Z w Q 0 z CL Q J J a w z w (D Z n J Q ry W Z W CD ry Q _z J W ry n U W Q z ry W J Q O 0 m IA Z O O ma VA a z cc Z O V W fA W F N CQ x LU un I b z Z !W LJ u 0 0 &V 9 13� 0/000 I b z Z !W LJ u 0 0 &V 9 13� 0/000 Ez x Lu Ch 41, I % I l I-L.-Th: I., X.a 2 1u c z 11, z 0 C.) LL L L 11, z 0 C.) LL Q f0 W Z C7 O J J_ i W Q W m U IL m Q� W GQO f0 Q N N m m m N IL N M b N m O r O O Oi F a Q A t0 N N N = W rn rn rn rn rn a> y v v v v a = U O W f0 = N N N N N � LL f0 2 C. U W A A A A A ~ U i 10 LL N IL LL H 0 m m m m m C6 y v v v a a J H W O O w 0 t0 Z U LL N N N W ti N 0 LL F of m of m of m O HQ Q M M M M Ih = yyWWW H Q vv a a a z a J Q f0 N N N N N O U Z�aav 0 N� rva S O H N N N U J O M M W 0 n 00 LL A b W 0 ry V uj W X 0 0 N O O O WZ Q p Qy ~ N N N N N W p H Z W IL J LL � W N � H C C „d,. A C C J Q 0 0 6 C O O O 6 6 9 W A 6 6 ooa0aoo Q N Z 0 F- 9 W Z LU LU Q Q m N W H Q w W H LUJ Q J J 0 r U m m m r O CL 3 m z 0 U a) c m m 0 c c m T c O N m m a7 N a) 'D 7 U c m E E N LCD -tt LCD O r• LCD — O -tt M TZ CO 00 O CO CA M >- CO CO M e- LCD M N N It W W N O CA r• M CO J_ r• O M 00 4t CO O et CO e- et O CA 00 CO O e- Q LCD O N 4 V-� 00 O CA r• r• CO LCD e- LCD O r• CO Rtt N N T- -tt e- LC) M � e- CO r• T- � LCD CO N r• 't r CO 't � U) e— O CA � e- 00 O Lf') M LC) et CO 00 T" r• T- r• O LC) 00 r• 00 M � LCD CA O � O et CA 00 r• N CO LCD N It CA N It a M e- N r et Ltd N CO M � e- LCD T- et M M O r Lt's r• r• 00 CA r• 00 r• CO a0 et 00 e- CO CO M CO 00 O CO O N LC) O M LCD e— CO T— r• e- M 00 O 00 r• LCD CO LCD O M O LC) O Q M r N et et r r CO O � r LCD T- Rtt LCD e- O LCD � O O M LCD e- Nt O e- e- CA >- r• O M O M M N N 00 r• LC) N r• 00 4T CO N J r• LC) M co N CO O N CA It CA N � CA N CA M 00 00 N M C7 00 O CC LCD O M 4 (7 00 00 LCD 4 J O e- N e- 4t e- et O L') r• C7 T- T 00 00 r� It O Rtt CO Cn 00 0 0 T- 00 O Cn c0 O W W CO O LO M LCD 00 r ti LCD CO CO CA r• M LCD O LCD T7, r� O M CA IT CA Lf') LC) LC) M M r 00 r• N O d d 0 e- N O ui 4 o T- V N M M 4T Rtt e- LCD CA LCD O LCD M CA 00 M O 4T Q CA T- CO CO CO CO 00 LCD LCD O O e- N O It N r• QCO LC) r N r• O 00 Rtt I M M e- 00 r• CO N CA r N et CA Lt's T- T- O -tt e- CA LCD 00 CA CA M LCD e- -tt O M 00 O >- r• 00 M O N e- U) N 00 r• LCD N r• 00 M CA Itt J_ r• e- � CO O CA 00 N CA 4T 0 N e- 0 N M e- Q 00 00 M M M r• CO LCD CA M 4 CA 00 r• u CO O O LCD M 00 r• N "T O N 00 0 00 CO CO r 00 O LCD CO O CO r• e- M 00 it e- r• LCD CO CO CA r• M CO 4T e- Cc M N O r� LCD LCD LC! M M e- 00 CO e- LCD ui O N e- M It e- O It CA 0 O LCD M CA 00 00 O N CA 00 Rtt r CO M M 0 U) Rtt LCD O O e- N O r• M 00 QCO N N r w CO -tt T- M M e- 00 CO LCD 00 CA e- M CA U r• M M q a Lo c O m v v m > 3 o to Q Q Q d m c m v c m m �_ F F d cr c m m m N N c r O C O CL N Q r C d d ur > > d 'O 'O O aa)i z 'O z J M a c c c O` _ O O o C Li G li e' ; C z to „a0 ' F m cg D D D m U U Q m U U U J J I J 12 2 r r U m m m r O CL 3 m z 0 U a) c m m 0 c c m T c O N m m a7 N a) 'D 7 U c m E E N N N w H z w W H J Q Q Z J W w IL H O p J_ 5 m Z Q J a J W Z W J QJ W > O C l6 IL m c m O CL O C i i 7 V c N d N c d O) c_ X N r c O r CL O N i R i d .y c O V N d > R c l6 c O c N 0 = a O c N C7 O J M� N r r r 'a r N r r r r r In N mZ c c c c c c +d,, c c c c c c c c c O o 0 0 0 0 o a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cn C C C C C C °a C 0.10.10. C 0.1 C. C CLI 0101010010 Q O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N Z E O IL Z O N O J C C C C C C c c c c c c c c c c mZ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o C. co 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a a a a a a a a Z C C C C C C C C C d d N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 o w c c d d d d d d d c c Q' L O O C. O O O C. C. C. C. C. C. C. O O H O ++ ++ O —Z = —z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I= ++ Q O O Q 00 O Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 010 c d .y rn c c O O tcv Q Q O r fq 01 � c t6 Q � LO r r r _ m r N M m m N H H m> S LL 7 7 N N i l6 l6 i 0 2 C l6 l6 r2_ l6 l6 c d d r2 N N C O O Q >> d O) O) C C V Q. Q 3 Q 3 p q y y N O C N N O y» d O Z Z CL 0 O O O 'C U. IL 3 Z y :2 l6 c l6 c m c m O 'O 'O 'O t6 V V y Q m m U U U J J 1-112 mu mu Z O C l6 IL m c m O CL O C i i 7 V c N d N c d O) c_ X N r c O r CL O N i R i d .y c O V N d > R c l6 c O a z O F- 9 w z w O IL 2 F- 0 .r m c m r 0 c m a �a m c m O m r �a c m r O Z F S m d S W W z W W r O 0 a P o� �e V i =i 49 m� ma W� W F J a W F Om L6 rx,ol LU IL w 3Q e 0 I R LL OZ cc) gL Z X LU zo rw %u lu L L L mo L W 000&eo 0 Y I - �,W_m E E �/3 V♦ r. ■0 V N i i V 0 w�� ;` O� W l ;.. a JU0 na V: Q W �a w. Z ``. a z m aa- ova a -- av cam a WZ) C a w'vi. z` •./� '$.�'' '• v a' a ��a a ' uiaa a G a .'.�' 4.r z w z ; ' ` .» aco 0m a m as aaa a 00 0 a,', as waa C� za w m000 M<. a.0m VVO: may ammo C/) w. wQ Z040000O40 awUmammaamam a Q U) c-0 C U w Q $ a C/) o c _- C/) 0 6� z m z _ 6. E z aoiin=� O o 0=2 O .ccn pF U 5 � Q L- � � � o U 6 = E co •` n mLLCCu O U O U W co U O N U CC U> S S m � O U 06 06 06 0 6 0 6 06 0 6 O OH °6j c��= m � Z) 06 — � Q W U Q Q0.m o 0 oQ0SQ Z0 m m N N N to to >> Q Q Q N C N N •� O CL Cl ` Q E E Q V -0-0 Q V Q V N m '� ,_ N cn O c O E E Cu o .� CCS c c> E E —° OOCnZZ�I�� cu >��UmU r C6 tY 6 ti C+0 C7 �t CC) CO ti d) CO N ti N Co N a) N N C'7 O) C'7 O) tY O C.C� N- C.C� d) C.C� a z LU w O W z O H 2 H z `O r U W `W r z f- z LU LL W 0 rn Q U D D U U U U n D m fl U U D D D U D U U U D w d Q D U D D Do D 00,00000000 D U U Q_ mz w D� Q ZZ D D.0 U U m D D U D m U D D U U D U m U D WD d w zoo D D D D D D m U D D D D D U D D D U D Z) z W Zp coa40 i70UDDDU.DUco �Q D xUQQ lcl) UDnUUUmflDUDmoommod cD w z ZpDm mDUD mQ. DUm. UUD mfl cn W x Q Zp n Q D U m Q U U m U m D m m D U m U m D L D cn /^ N U W L p O x C o Z L L Z (n L a) n O p E 7 .r Z m � L p a) L C/) c6 Z cL u) _ _2 to '6 2 E U m in Q p O O E L O 0 0 0 U 2 a) O .r a) �$ U L O O co O O M U LL U U W O OU �U >�m O•� OU�S°�O��S�S°60S x O Y = 06 U C m ui C) 0rt l.L L L W -•• l.L l.L W W< Q Z W , L U �+ U > > p "�� OL _ 'r- -0 Q L a$ 0 0 (n 7 Q Q 0 o V- V- 0 L a) � •� m O 5 L V < Y-0 C E cl E U CL E a) C a) C> L' a) �5 U -0 Q U Q U� a) O cn a) ;_, O V O >�UmU a) .i a) �pm O (6 a3 C' C' a) a3 2(D� O L mcnz�� M f CO ' ') O f� N O) N O) O) O f� O) � CO �t f� N O) � � � � � � N N N N M M �t �� H LLI Q w W H Q m U) O H U W U) w W H z z LLI U LL LLI 0 LL O w m z J N O ti O ti O N 0 0 N N H � w a O Ln ti cc cc 0) w a _z ~ J Z W Z 0 Lo CD I` CD 0) 0) V � w a o � LL J O z O cc Ln Ln Ln � a J Y J w > LU a�a > � W O W W a a > Z Z w ~ O Z Lu O W Z Z W H Q w W w W a aaaF- J o 0 O y a °ate °ao a Z < 0 F- F- � =Y F- Z a a a -ZLu�Lu 0 W m y Q Q� an u X J J W W> cn 11 LU IU (LIU M ZI F- I cn c/) Q U O a w J o 0 0 0 0 0 z 0 O O O O O O O H U LLI r w LL O N N N M v M Z LL ON N o %OR o o a� ti ti m J ZO CD LO CD LO CD CD CD LO CD OF- F- w U) J Q O ti r O r ti r O N N N w LL F- :? LL � Q v a H H Y 0 H H am O O am O Q Q Q Q D w w Q w JaZ JIL_Z LLI x_2:2— _Z — O O F-J0 HJQYZQQQQQ LLI LLJ Q Z w H w P O 2" w W R W z� w N wwa W z 0 wwcnywwQwQw Wzz��F- U x w0 OLLJOw J:)J:)J to w U CD Q U CD U Z H <U) Q to Q W 1M .C/) O am o U Q o UQ- U m (n (n — +-0 U) p x U= (� Q. co N