Lake Forest City Council
June 17, 2025

March 3, 2025
Lake Forest Chamber of Commerce Annual Report
Reporting period July 1, 2024 - June 30, 2025
The Annual Report for the Lake Forest Chamber of Commerce (“LFCC” or the “Chamber”) highlights key initiatives, accomplishments, and financial highlights for the reporting period from July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025.

Executive Board and Office Staff Organization:
• The annual executive board elections were held, which led to the addition of new board members and changes in some of the board position titles. • The Chamber created a new paid staff position to enhance membership growth and outreach. This position has been filled by the hiring of Shauna Garcia. • The Chamber's Bylaws were reviewed. No changes were made to the Bylaws. 2024-2025 LFCC Executive Board:
• CEO/President: Mary Visconte
• Chairman of the Board: Steve Smith
• Treasurer: Connie Visconte
• Secretary: Janet Berger
• Board Directors
o Randy Weiskittel
o Sue Kobuki
o Peter Frankudakis
o Christine Hill Meyer
o Jeff Patrick
o Jeff Bott
o Diana Ramirez
LFCC Paid Staff:
• CEO/President: Mary Visconte
• Executive Director: Shauna Garcia
• Membership Services: Lisa Allen & Patrick Cooper as needed • Events Staff: Tuley, Tasha, Aidan and Robbie as needed Membership:
• Membership is currently 286 members as of February 27, 2025 Item: 16
795

• Economic programs, such as the BOGO Money Match, have helped the Chamber grow its membership base
Digital Media:
• Social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, and the website are used to increase engagement
• Chamber’s Instagram has grown to 1.4K followers and Facebook is approaching 2.1K • 52 CEO/Chairman e-Blasts are sent annually, sharing business tips, resources, and upcoming events
Chamber Events:
• The Chamber hosted 71 successful events in 2024,
including:
o 24 Ribbon Cuttings
o 23 Coffee Chats
o 6 Mega Mixers
o 4 Summer Concerts in the Park
o New Business Reception
o Career Fair
o Social Media Workshop
o State of the City/Meet the Mayor
o Business Expo
o Taste of Lake Forest
o National Night Out
o Meet Your Assemblymember Diane Dixon
o Meet Your Congresswoman Young Kim
o Leading Ladies
o Law & Order
o Business Appreciation Luncheon
o Elf Yourself 5K
o Tree Lighting
Ribbon Cuttings:
• A benefit to new members and businesses celebrating key accomplishments, helping to promote the business, Chamber, and the City of Lake Forest Mixers and Networking Events:
• Representatives from over 300 businesses attended networking mixers and events, offering members visibility and opportunities for generation of leads • Event benefits for hosts included: logo recognition, marketing support, and a company spotlight
Item: 16
796

Digital Media Events:
• The Chamber hosted events focused on digital media to help businesses with marketing strategies, such as:
o Social Media Workshops
o Marketing Tool Kit Workshop at the Business Expo
o Business Strategy Seminars
o SCORE and SDBC Seminars
Contracted Collaborative Annual Events Between LFCC and the City of Lake Forest:
• The Chamber continued to collaborate with the City of Lake Forest to host the following popular events:
o Elf Yourself Charity 5K
o Taste of Lake Forest
o Meet the Mayor/State of the City
o Business Seminar & Expo
o Legislative Luncheons
o Career Workshop/Job Fair
o New Business Reception
o Social Media Workshop
o Leading Ladies
Financial Summary:
• Financial emphasis will be on increasing membership and event sponsorships • As of February 28, 2025, the Chamber had a current profit of $6,355.68 and a fiscal year profit of $21,665.19
• This represents an improvement from the prior year
• Challenges due to the current uncertain economic environment affect membership acquisition, especially among small businesses
• The Chamber anticipates growth in membership and participation as economic conditions improve
• The Chamber’s goal is to create additional large-scale community events to generate income (e.g., Oktoberfest)
This report reflects the Chamber's continued efforts to expand its membership, host meaningful events, and contribute to the community, while combating financial constraints due to current economic conditions.

Prepared by:

Mary Visconte, CEO
Item: 16
797

Lake Forest Chamber of Commerce
Item: 16
798

ATTACHMENT 3
Item: 16
799

Business Community Development Proposal
March 3, 2025

The Lake Forest Chamber of Commerce (“Chamber”) is incorporated under the Nonprofit Mutual Benefit Corporation Laws of the State of California, 501(c)(6). It is organized under the Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law for Public Purposes.

Mission & Purpose:

The Chamber's mission is to support and foster the growth of member businesses and the free-enterprise system. The Chamber’s mission is to promote economic development and business opportunities in Lake Forest and the surrounding communities by:
• Supporting member businesses and advocating for a competitive, thriving free- enterprise system
• Encouraging economic growth and development in the Lake Forest area by:
o Implementing Chamber-led economic initiatives designed to expand membership and increase income opportunities across various business sectors
o Offering informative programs and resources to enhance member knowledge and success
o Expanding the "Loyal Locals" program through seasonal networking events and business development forums
o Partnering with the City of Lake Forest to co-host large-scale business, governmental, and community events
o Creating signature community events such as the Elf Yourself 5K and Taste of Lake Forest
Goals & Impact:
• The primary objectives of the Chamber are to develop programs, host events, and sponsor activities that encourage active business participation and development within the community. Through enhanced marketing efforts and expanding local Item: 16
800

Business Community Development Proposal
outreach, the Chamber aims to increase business opportunities and support member growth.

As part of its investment in member engagement, the Chamber has strategically focused on increasing involvement and adding value to the membership experience. The ongoing efforts are aimed at supporting members by boosting their business visibility, offering exposure through various events, and using digital platforms to reach a wider audience.

Additionally, the Chamber has successfully organized and executed networking events, legislative initiatives, and City-related events, creating a stronger, more interconnected business community.

Focus for Fiscal Year 2025-2026:

The Chamber’s top priorities for the upcoming fiscal year are growth and sustainability.

There are 286 current Chamber members. Our goal is to reach 300 members by the end of FY 2025-2026 and 350 members over the next two years. To achieve this, we are investing heavily in strategies for membership growth and retention. The Chamber has hired Shauna Garcia to assist Mary Visconte in achieving these goals.

Continued Support for Member Success:

The Chamber remains committed to providing invaluable support to its members by facilitating networking opportunities, hosting ribbon-cutting events for new businesses and anniversaries, and offering essential resources for business growth. Members have consistently expressed their appreciation for the Chamber's dedication to fostering a supportive environment for local businesses, and we will continue to prioritize their success.

Partnership With The City of Lake Forest:

Looking ahead, the Chamber is eager to maintain and strengthen its partnership with the City of Lake Forest, which plays a critical role in supporting the Chamber's initiatives for growth and expanded outreach. The following events are considered essential to the City/Chamber collaboration, and we request that these events and programs continue for Fiscal Year 2025-2026. Below, we provide a table outlining each event, estimated costs, and a breakdown of previously awarded City funds:

Item: 16
801

Business Community Development Proposal
Table 1: Events Listed in Current Chamber Agreement:

Event/Service FY 2024-25
Approximate Cost Per Event
(Actuals)
City Funding
Breakdown1
Multi-Chamber Mega Mixer $2,100
Legislative Luncheon $3,800
Elf Yourself 5K Charity Run Use of Sports Bark & Barricades; Approval of B&W Joint City-Chamber promotion
Business Appreciation Luncheon $15,000
B&W Garden at Tree Lighting Bar Rental
New Business Reception $1,700
Career Workshop/Job Fair $3,700
Meet the Mayor/State of the City $8,500
Business Seminar & Expo $4,500
Social Media Workshop $1,700
Women in Business Event Rooms/Approval of B&W
B&W Gardens at Concerts (1) Canopy Rental & Barricades B&W Gardens at Concerts (2) Canopy Rental & Barricades B&W Gardens at Concerts (3) Canopy Rental & Barricades Coffee Chat (twice monthly) $1,000
Chamber Board Meetings Quarterly Use of Hickory Conference Room

TOTAL $42,000

The Chamber respectfully requests the City to continue providing free room rentals, as applicable, for the events listed above free of charge. By utilizing the Civic Center and its conference rooms, the Chamber promotes, showcases and encourages the rental use of these wonderful spaces by both the local business community and residents.

The Chamber also requests City partnership and funding on the events set forth herein to minimize the cost needed for promoting and sponsoring these events.

1 Each of these figures are calculated based upon the figures from the prior year’s budget (FY 2024- 2025). In Table 3, set forth below, the Chamber requests to increase these budgets to adjust for inflation, utilizing the Consumer Price Index.

Item: 16
802

Business Community Development Proposal
Most events listed in the City/Chamber Agreement are free of charge for members of the business public to attend. The exceptions are: Meet the Mayor/State of the City, Taste of Lake Forest, Elf Yourself 5K and the twice-monthly Coffee Chats. These events require payment to attend. Charging a participation fee allows the Chamber to recover costs not covered by sponsors.

Table 2: Pilot Agreements/Anticipated New Event(s):

The Chamber is proposing to add the flowing event(s) to the City/Chamber agreement:

Event/Service FY 2025-26
Approximate Cost Per Event
(Actuals)
City Funding
Breakdown
Oktoberfest TBD TBD
The Chamber requests continuing partnership with and support from the City of Lake Forest to increase value, community outreach and governmental engagement for the Chamber, the City, Chamber members, the local business community and local residents.

Table 3: Proposed Fiscal Year 2025-26 City/Chamber Agreement Funding Request2:

Event/Service Proposed Location Funding Request
Multi-Chamber Mega Mixer Civic Center Campus (unless Offsite) $2,140 Legislative Luncheon Community Center – 3 Rooms & Courtyard $3,865 Elf Yourself 5K Charity Run Use of Sports Park & Barricades, Approval of B&W; Joint City-Chamber Promotion, including Ad in City Leaflet Business Appreciation Luncheon Community Center – 3 Rooms & Courtyard $15,260 B&W Garden at Tree Lighting Civic Center Bar Rental
New Business Reception Community Center – 2 Rooms & Courtyard $1,730 Career Workshop/Job Fair Community Center – 3 Rooms, Courtyard & Maple Conference Room
$3,765
Meet the Mayor/State of the City Community Center – 3 Rooms & Courtyard $8,645 Business Seminar & Expo Community Center – 3 Rooms & Courtyard $4,580 Social Media Workshop Community Center – 2 Rooms & Courtyard $1,730 Women In Business Event Community Center or TBD Use of Rooms/Approval of B&W
B&W Gardens at Concerts (1) TBD Canopy Rental & Barricades B&W Gardens at Concerts (2) TBD Canopy Rental & Barricades

2 Each of these budget figures is based upon the budget for the prior fiscal year, adjusted for inflation, utilizing the CPI. The adjustment for inflation increases the Chamber’s budget for the itemized events from $42,000 to $42,735. See, https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm.

Item: 16
803

Business Community Development Proposal
Event/Service Proposed Location Funding Request
B&W Gardens at Concerts (3) TBD Canopy Rental & Barricades Coffee Chats (twice monthly) Offsite (Hosted by Rotating Chamber Members)
$1,020
Chamber Board Meetings Hickory Conference Room – Quarterly Use

TOTAL $42,735

The Lake Forest Chamber of Commerce extends our heartfelt gratitude for your unwavering support and partnership throughout the years. We eagerly anticipate continuing this successful and mutually beneficial collaboration to strengthen and support the local business community in future years.

Sincerely,

Mary Visconte
CEO Lake Forest Chamber of Commerce
Item: 16
804

ATTACHMENT 4

Item: 16
805

55136.00121\24840082.3 1

CITY OF LAKE FOREST

CONTRACTUAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

This CONTRACTUAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made this day of _________, 2025, (“Effective Date”) by and between the City of Lake Forest (the “City”), a California municipal corporation, with its principal place of business at 100 Civic Center Dr., Lake Forest, California, and the Lake Forest Chamber of Commerce (the “Chamber”), a California nonprofit corporation, with its principal place of business at 26239 Enterprise Court, Lake Forest, California. The City and the Chamber are sometimes individually referred to as “Party” and collectively referred to as the “Parties”.

RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City is desirous of promoting business, residential, and economic development opportunities within the City, disseminating information relative thereto, and of properly following up and giving consideration to inquiries made relative to the various activities of the City, and its business, residential, and economic development opportunities; and

WHEREAS, the Chamber has special knowledge, experience, and facilities for disseminating such information, is organized for and equipped to carry on promotional activities on behalf of the City, and to publicize and market the economic and regional advantages that the City has to offer to business, residential, and industrial interests.

NOW, THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE CITY AND THE

PROMISES THE CITY AND THE CHAMBER SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT, THE CITY AND THE CHAMBER AGREE, AS FOLLOWS:

1. Term.

The term (“Term”) of this Agreement shall be from July 1, 2025, to June 30, 2027, unless earlier terminated in accordance with Section 10.1.

2. Scope of Services

2.1 The Chamber shall diligently advertise and promote the City in such a manner as to assist the City in its efforts to attract and retain business enterprises and promote the City’s positive business environment, which will enhance the general welfa re and well -being of the citizens and businesses in the City.

2.2 The Parties shall provide the General and Specific Scope of Services outlined in the Scope of Services, Exhibit “A”, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

3. Consideration

3.1 In consideration of the Scope of Services to be performed by the Chamber for the City, as set forth herein, the City hereby agrees to pay the Chamber during the Term of this Agreement, the sum of EIGHTY-EIGHT THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED SIXTY-ONE DOLLARS FORTY-FIVE CENTS ($88,461.45) (“City Investment”). The Chamber shall receive FORTY-TWO THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED THIRTY-FIVE DOLLARS ($42,735) Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
806

55136.00121\24840082.3 2

for FY 2025-26, and a CPI adjustment for the same services for FY 2026-27. The CPI adjustment for FY 2026-27 will be based on the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index, All Urban Consumers, Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, using the December to December CPI rate of the most recent year available. The Chamber shall receive quarterly payments in the amount of ten thousand, five hundred dollars ($10,683.75) in FY 2025-26. The Chamber shall submit quarterly invoices and reports as provided for in Section 4.1 below, to the City fifteen (15) days prior to the scheduled payment, as provided for in Section 3.2.

3.2 Payments will follow the quarterly schedule provided below:

FY 2025-26
September 4, 2025
December 4, 2025
March 5, 2026
June 4, 2026

FY 2026-27

September 3, 2026
December 3, 2026
March 4, 2027
June 3, 2027

3.3 Each payment by the City shall be conditioned upon the following:

3.3.1 The Chamber is not in default of any material terms of this Agreement; and

3.3.2 The Chamber maintains its nonprofit 501(c)(6) status.

4. Reports

4.1 The Chamber shall provide the City with quarterly reports (8) setting forth the receipt and disbursement of funds consistent with industry standards and principles for record- keeping and accounting. The report shall identify the expenditure of the City’s Investment for the previous quarter and demonstrate the Chambe r’s full compliance with the requirements of this Agreement. The reports shall also include the total cost of the events that took place during the reporting quarter. Costs should be broken down by line item and should include, but not limited to: costs for catering, decorations, staff, marketing, etc. The Chamber shall work cooperatively in resolving the City’s inquiries or questions regarding the services provided. The report shall include a summary of accomplishments achieved during the reporting period. The Chamber shall file reports with the City within fifteen (15) days prior to the end of the respective quarter throughout the Term of this Agreement.

4.2 The Chamber shall maintain complete and accurate financial records, including but not limited to, receipts and disbursements, with respect to all costs and expenses incurred by the Chamber during the Term of this Agreement. All such records shall be clearly identifiable. The Chamber, upon the City’s request, shall allow a representative of the City during normal business hours to examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of such records and any other documents Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
807

55136.00121\24840082.3 3

created pursuant to this Agreement.

4.3 The Chamber shall present an Annual Report to the City toward the end of each FY. The Annual Reports shall be presented by April 3, 202 6 and April 1, 2027, and provide an update on the obligations covered under this Agreement and the Chamber’s activity through its fiscal years ending September 30. The Annual Report shall include:
- a summary of the prior year’s activities;
- a list of officers and Board Members;
- a copy of the annual Financial Statements as prepared at that time; and

4.4 a breakdown of the budget and actual costs for each event listed in the contract. The Chamber shall also maintain and update annual budgets. The Chamber’s Annual Budgets shall be provided as part of the Annual Reports. The Chamber shall give due and fair consideration to the City’s comments, if any, on the Chamber’s budgets.

4.5 Bylaws. The Chamber shall provide the City with a copy of the Chamber’s adopted Bylaws and Code of Ethics. The Chamber shall provide the City with thirty (30) days advance written notice of the Chamber’s desire to amend or update its Bylaws and Code of Ethics.

5. Political Activities

5.1 No portion of the City’s Investment shall be used for political purposes and shall only be used for those services provided for in the Scope of Services required of the Chamber by the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

5.2 The Chamber shall not use any portion of the City’s Investment to advocate or oppose any local municipal election issue or candidate. The Chamber shall not display any political material, sign, advertisement or similar material in, on or about its offices.

5.3 The Chamber shall be entitled to continue presentations and advance the purposes of the business community in general on civic issues except as provided for herein.

6. Chamber Responsibilities for Costs and Expenses
Except as otherwise expressly stated herein, the Chamber shall be responsible for all costs and expenses incurred relative to the Chamber, personnel of the Chamber and subconsultants of the Chamber in connection with the performance of the Scope of Services, including, without limitation, payment of salaries, fringe benefits contributions, payroll taxes, withholding taxes and other taxes or levies, office overhead expense, travel expenses, telephone and other telecommunication expenses, and document reproduction expenses.

7. Independent Contractor
The Scope of Services shall be performed by the Chamber or under its supervision. The Chamber shall determine the means, methods and details of performing the Scope of Services subject to the requirements of this Agreement. The Chamber represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel required to per form the Scope of Services. The City retains the Chamber on an independent contractor basis and not as an employee of the City. The personnel performing the Scope of Services on behalf of the Chamber shall at all times be under the Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
808

55136.00121\24840082.3 4

Chamber's exclusive direction and control.

8. Personnel; License; Conformance to Applicable Requirements/Insurance The Chamber represents and warrants that it and all personnel engaged in performing the Scope of Services are and shall be fully qualified, authorized and permitted under state and local law to perform such Scope of Services. The Chamber represents and warrants that it and all personnel and subconsultants engaged in performing the Scope of Services have and keep all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Scope of Services under this Agreement.

8.1 All aspects of the provision of the Scope of Services by the Chamber shall conform to all applicable city, county, state, and federal laws, rules and regulations in effect at the time the services are provided. The Chamber shall keep itself fully informed of and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in any manner affecting the performance of the Scope of Services, i ncluding all Cal/OSHA requirements, and shall give all notices required by law. The Chamber shall be liable for all violations of such laws and regulations in connection with its Scope of Services. If the Chamber performs any work knowing it to be contrary to such laws, rules and regulations, the Chamber shall be solely responsible for all costs arising therefrom. The Chamber shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnifi cation provisions of this Agreement, from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or failure to comply with such laws, rules or regulations.

8.2 The Chamber shall obtain separate special event and liquor liability coverage on a per-event basis as outlined below through the Term of the Agreement. This approach ensures that each event is individually protected with dedicated coverage limits —thereby preventing any one claim from eroding the overall liability limits.

8.2.1 General Liability Insurance: $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate.

8.2.2 Professional Liability Insurance (Errors and Omissions): $1,000,000 per claim and $2,000,000 aggregate.

8.2.3 Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability Insurance : Statutory limits for Workers' Compensation and $1,000,000 for Employers' Liability.

8.2.4 Automobile Liability Insurance: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident.

8.2.5 Special Event Insurance: $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate per event.

8.2.6 Liquor Liability Coverage: $2,000,000 per occurre nce and $ 3,000,000 aggregate per event. For larger, multi -day events with thousands of attendees, coverage of $5,000,000 per occurrence with a $10,000,000 aggregate is recommended.

8.2.7 Additional Insured: The City should be named as an additional insured on Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
809

55136.00121\24840082.3 5

the General Liability, Auto Liability, Special Event, and Liquor Liability policies.

8.2.8 Waiver of Subrogation: Include a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City on all policies.

8.2.9 30-Day Notice of Cancellation: Endorsements should ensure that the coverage cannot be canceled or materially altered without at least 30 days’ notice to the City on all policies.

8.2.10 Primary and Non -Contributory Coverage: The liability policies should include an endorsement stating that the Chamber’s insurance is primary and any insurance maintained by the City is non-contributory.

9. Representatives and Notices

9.1 City’s Representative. The City hereby designates the City Manager/Executive Director, or his/her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement (“City’s Representative”). The City’s Representative shall have the power to act on behalf of the City for all purposes under this Agreement. The Chamber shall not accept direction or orders from any person other than the City’s Representative or his/her designee.

9.2 Chamber’s Representative. The Chamber hereby designates its Chief Executive Officer or his/her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement (“Chamber’s Representative”). The Chamber’s Representative shall have full authority to represent and act on behalf of the Chamber for all purposes of this Agreement. The Chamber’s Representative shall supervise and direct the Scope of Services, using his/her best skill and attention, and shall be responsible for all means, meth ods, techniques, sequences and procedures and for the satisfactory coordination of all portions of the Scope of Services under this Agreement.

9.3 All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be given to the respective Parties at the following address, or at such other address as the respective Parties may provide in writing for this purpose:

Chamber: Lake Forest Chamber of Commerce
26239 Enterprise Court
Lake Forest, CA 92630

City: Debra Rose
City Manager
100 Civic Center Dr.

Lake Forest, CA 92630

10. General Provisions

10.1 Termination of Agreement.

10.1.1 Grounds for Termination. Either Party may, by written notice to the other Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
810

55136.00121\24840082.3 6

Party, terminate the whole or any part of this Agreement at any time and without cause by giving written notice to the non-terminating Party of such termination, and specifying the effective date thereof, at least ninety (90) days before the effective date of such termination. Upon termination, the Chamber shall be compensated only for the Scope of Services that has been adequately rendered to the City, or to compensate for any events or services previously committed which are consistent with the Scope of Services, and the Chamber shall be entitled to no further compensation.

10.1.2 Effect of Termination. If this Agreement is terminated as provided herein, the City may require the Chamber, and the Chamber may require the City, upon request to provide all finished or unfinished documents and data and other information of any kind prepared by the Chamber, or the City, in connecti on with the performance of the Scope of Services under this Agreement. The Chamber, or the City shall be required to provide such documents and data and other information within thirty (30) days of the request.

10.1.3 Additional Scope of Services. In the event this Agreement is terminated in whole or in part as provided herein, the City may procure, upon such terms and in such manner as it may determine appropriate, services similar to those terminated.

10.2 Confidentiality. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other documents and data either created by or provided to the Chamber in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by the Chamber. Such materials shall not, without the prior written consent of the City, be used by the Chamber for any purposes other than the performance of the Scope of Services. Nor shall such materials be disclosed to any person or entity not connected with the performance of the Scope of Services. Nothing furnished to the Chamber which is otherwise known to the Chamber or is generally known, or has become known, to the related industry shall be deemed confidential. The Chamber shall not use the City’ s name or insignia, photographs of any product of the Scope of Services, or any publicity pertaining to the Scope of Services in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper, television or radio production or other similar medium without the prior written consent of the City.

10.3 Cooperation; Further Acts. The Parties shall fully cooperate with one another and shall take any additional acts or sign any additional documents as may be necessary, appropriate or convenient to attain the purposes of this Agreement.

10.4 Attorneys’ Fees. If either Party commences an action against the other Party, either legal, administrative, or otherwise, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing Party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover fro m the losing Party reasonable attorney's fees and all other costs of such action.

10.5 Indemnification. The Chamber shall defend, indemnify and hold the City and its members, officials, officers, employees, volunteers and agents free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any actual, alleged or negligent acts, omissions or wi llful misconduct of the Chamber, its officials, officers, employees, agents, the consultants and contractors arising out of the performance of the Scope of Services, or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages a nd attorneys’ fees and other related costs and expenses. The Chamber shall defend, at the Chamber’s own cost, expense and risk, any and all such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against the Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
811

55136.00121\24840082.3 7

City and its directors, officials, officers, employees, volunteers or agents. The Chamber shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against the City and its members, officials, officers, employees, volunteers or agents, in any such aforesaid suit, action or other legal proceeding. The Chamber shall reimburse the City and its directors, officials, officers, employees, volunteers and/or agents, for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. The Chamber’s obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by the City and its members, officers, employees, volunteers or agents.

10.6 Eligibility. All members of the Chamber shall certify that the member is in compliance with local, state, and federal laws. Noncompliance with local, state, or federal laws shall be grounds for membership disqualification.

10.7 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings or agreements. This Agreement may only be modified by a writing signed by both Parties.

10.8 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Orange County.

10.9 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement.

10.10 City's Right to Employ Other Consultants. The City reserves right to employ other consultants in connection with this Agreement.

10.11 Assignment or Transfer. The Chamber shall not assign, hypothecate, or transfer, either directly or by operation of law, this Agreement or any interest herein without the prior written consent of the City. Any att empt to do so shall be null and void, and any assignees, hypothecates or transferees shall acquire no right or interest by reason of such attempted assignment, hypothecation, or transfer.

10.12 Amendment; Modification. No supplement, modification, or amendment of this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing and signed by both Parties.

10.13 Waiver. No waiver of any default shall constitute a waiver of any other default or breach, whether of the same or other covenant or condition. No waiver, benefit, privilege, or service voluntarily given or performed by a Party shall give the other Party any contractual rights by custom, estoppel, or otherwise.

10.14 No Third-Party Beneficiaries. There are no intended third -party beneficiaries of any right or obligation assumed by the Parties.

10.15 Invalidity; Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is declared invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect.

10.16 Labor Certification. By its signature hereunder, the Chamber certifies that it is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
812

55136.00121\24840082.3 8

employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Scope of Services.

10.17 Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original.

10.18 Subcontracting. The Chamber shall not subcontract any portion of the work required by this Agreement, except as expressly stated herein, without prior written approval of the City. Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement. The Chamber may utilize vendors to complete the Scope of Services as reasonably necessary.

[Signatures on following pages]
Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
813

55136.00121\24840082.3 9

SIGNATURE PAGE TO

CITY OF LAKE FOREST

CONTRACTUAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
CITY:

CITY OF LAKE FOREST
a California municipal corporation

By:

Scott Voigts
Mayor

Dated:

ATTEST:

Thy Merrit
Acting City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:

BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP

By:

Matthew Richardson
City Attorney
Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
814

55136.00121\24840082.3 10

SIGNATURE PAGE TO

CITY OF LAKE FOREST

CONTRACTUAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

CHAMBER:

LAKE FOREST CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
a California non-profit corporation

By:

Steve Smith, Chairman of the Board

Its: Chairman of the Board

By:

Its:

Mary Visconte, CEO
CEO

Dated:

Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 6/10/2025
Item: 16
815

55136.00121\24840082.3 11

EXHIBIT “A”

CITY OF LAKE FOREST

CONTRACTUAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

SCOPE OF SERVICES
A. General Services

1. The Chamber shall maintain suitable quarters and employ competent personnel either as volunteers, paid staff, or consultants, easily accessible to the public and fully equipped for the purpose of disseminating information and answering correspondence and i nquiries regarding the City.

2. The Chamber shall provide information and assistance to individual business members with respect to promotion and advertising for the purpose of enhancing the City’s business image and encourage business patronage in the City.

3. The Chamber shall respond in a timely and professional manner to written and verbal inquiries received at its offices regarding residential, commercial, industrial, tourist, and business matters as they relate to the City and/or refer such inquiries to the City as appropriate.

4. The Chamber shall coordinate with the City on activities of mutual community interest.

5. The Chamber shall actively promote the City and the City’s Business Development and Attraction Program. Services shall include, but not be limited to:

a. Prominently feature brief information on the City’s Business Development and Attraction Program on the Chamber website with a corresponding link to the City’s Economic Development website.
c. The Chamber shall provide the City with its schedule for Quarterly Board meetings at minimum one (1) month in advance.
d. Provide the City with a directory of Chamber members and corresponding mailing lists upon request for the City’s promotion of business events and seminars.

6. The City shall generally promote the Chamber through the following:

a. Prominently feature brief information on the Chamber with a corresponding link to the Chamber’s website directly from the City’s Economic Development website. b. Include information about the Chamber’s services and resources in Welcome Emails to new businesses.
c. Provide the Chamber with a mailing list of Lake Forest businesses as appropriate for the promotion of Chamber/City business events and seminars. d. Include the Chamber’s information and prominently feature the Chamber’s name, logo, and website in the City’s Economic Development e-newsletter. e.

7. The City shall provide the Hickory Room for the Chamber’s quarterly board meetings at the Civic Center at no cost to the Chamber.

Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
816

55136.00121\24840082.3 12

8. The City shall provide the Chamber with funding, not to exceed $1,000 for its Coffee Chat with the Chamber Series.

B. Specific Services: Events and Programs
In addition to the General Services outlined above, the Chamber shall provide the specific services outlined below under Events and Programs. In doing so, the Chamber shall coordinate and provide business events and programs that promote the City’s positive business climate and offer professional development opportunities. Certain program components may be carried over into a subsequent contract based on mutual agreement by the City and the Chamber.

The Chamber shall coordinate with the City on scheduling all events so that they do not conflict with the City’s master calendar of business seminars and events. Unless otherwise approved by the City in advance and in writing, all events must be held in the City at a venue suitable for the event. Venues outside of the City will only be considered when it is determined that no other suitable venue could be located in the City.

All events and programs must prominently feature the City’s logo on related marketing materials.

Unless otherwise stated in this contract, any event held at a City facility must be open to the public and no admission fee shall be charged to members of the public for entrance to the event.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Chamber may charge its normal and customary fees to vendors, exhibitors, and other participants obtaining services or materials from the Chamber for the events.

If the Chamber provides opportunities for table sponsors, the Chamber will give first priority to sponsors that are Lake Forest businesses and/or provide services directly related to the nature of the events. Required events include, but are not limited to:

1. Event Roles and Responsibilities:

Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
817

55136.00121\24840082.3 13

All events/programs within the Scope of Services must, at minimum, incorporate the roles and responsibilities outlined below. Further details regarding additional roles and responsibilities specific to each event/program are provided in subsequent sections.

The Chamber’s roles and responsibilities will include:

a. Meet with the City a minimum of one (1) time no later than thirty (30) days prior to the date of the event. The Chamber shall outline all event details and deliverables in regard to its responsibilities for the event and shall give due and fair consideration to the City’s comments regarding the plan for the event;
b. Produce draft invitation and all additional marketing materials for the City’s review. The City will have final approval on all marketing materials for distribution; c. Market the event to Chamber members and the general Lake Forest business community including but not limited to: emailing the Chamber’s list of members, posting the event on social media, advertising it in the Chamber e -newsletter, and distributing flyers at related events when appropriate;
d. The Chamber shall, on all promotional, marketing, and advertising materials, including mailers, flyers, signs, banners, and other su ch materials, prominently feature the City’s name and logo thereon, and identify the City as a primary sponsor of the event. e. The Chamber shall be responsible for creating the art and producing or arranging the production of additional marketing materials, including but not limited to large banners, step and repeats, etc., with approval by the City. This shall be inclusive of the City’s investment;
f. The Chamber shall be responsible for providing all materials it would like included in the presentations, and as reviewed and approved by the City, at minimum three (3) days prior to the event;
g. Provide catered food suitable and appropriate for the event from a Lake Forest vendor(s) and be responsible for paying the cost of the food, which shall be inclusive of the City’s Investment. The City will provide final approval on the selection of food vendor(s); h. If rentals are deemed appropriate by both the City and Chamber, the Chamber will be responsible for coordinating with the vendor and acquiring the rentals. The Cham ber will be responsible for covering the associated expenses, which shall be inclusive of the City’s investment;
i. If a n opportunity drawing is to be conducted, the Chamber will be responsible for its organization and ensure that Lake Forest businesses are given priority for participation in providing the prizes;
j. If an event program and/or agenda is deemed necessary, the Chamber will be respon sible for constructing the content and art and providing it to the City for printing. k. The Chamber is responsible for securing coverage for all events as referenced in Section

8.3. The City’s roles and responsibilities will include:
a. Provide a City facility as a venue with no cost to the Chamber. Requests for additional venues/times with no cost to the Chamber are at the discretion of the City; b. Provide the Chamber with approval on all event details and deliverables; c. Develop the room layout for the event with review and approval from the Chamber and provide it to Community Center staff, ensuring the room is setup day-of as discussed; d. Provide the Chamber with final approval on all marketing materials produced for the Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
818

55136.00121\24840082.3 14

event;
e. Provide the Chamber with final approval on selection of food vendor(s). f. Market the event via pathways including but not limited to: calendar invites to staff and elected officials, social media platforms, the Economic Development e -newsletter, prominently featuring the Chamber’s n ame and logo, and identifying the Chamber as the event presenter;
g. The City will be responsible for providing review and approval, and printing the agenda and/or event program if deemed appropriate;
h. The City will provide review and final approval on request s for additional vendors, initiatives, City staff, or other items as deemed appropriate; i. The City will assume responsibility for notifying Community Center staff of the Chamber’s vendor list in a timely manner and ensuring that all vendors meet the City’s requirements, including but not limited to insurance obligations;

2. State of the City:

The Chamber will develop and hold two business events that feature a discussion on the “Meet the Mayor/State of the City”. The Chamber may charge an entrance fee for the Meet the Mayor portion of the event. The events should be held in Spring 2026 and Spring 2027. The events should bring together the business community and political leaders, providing an opportunity for interaction between businesspeople and elected officials.

The Chamber’s roles and responsibilities will include:
a. The City reserves the authority to grant approval for the provision of alcohol at the event, contingent upon its suitability. In the event alcohol is to be served, the Chamber shall procure an ABC permit, cover all expenses related to the purchase of alcohol and necessary serving equipment, arrange for two security guards from the City’s approved vendor list , and ensure compliance with all relevant county or regulatory requirements pertaining to alcohol service. This will be inclusive of the City’s investment; b. If a seating chart is required, the Chamber will provide the City with an opportunity to review and approve it, allowing the City to designate seating arrangements for City officials, including but not limited to: Commissioners, Council Members, and City staff; c. The Chamber shall be responsible for acquiring and tracking RSVPs, and shall provide the RSVP list to the City upon request;
The City’s role and responsibilities for the State of the City shall include:
a. The City will maintain sole responsibility for coordinating with City staff to develop a script, speech, and video for the State of the City portion as appropriate; b. The City will provide the Chamber with a contact list of elected officials and City staff for distribution of the formal invitation once approved;
c. Any additional event costs for equipment, props, or other items deemed necessary and appropriate for the video/speech by City staff for the State of the City will be incurred by the City;
d. If alcohol is agreed upon to be provided, the City will provide an Authorization of Use letter to the Chamber in a timely manner;

3. Signature Business Event:

Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
819

55136.00121\24840082.3 15

The Chamber will develop and hold two business events that focus on professional development through education. The events should be held in Spring 202 6 and Spring 2027 . The event has historically been known as the “Lake Forest Seminar & Business Expo”. The name and focus may change upon mutual written consent of the Parties. The events should bring together the business community.

The Chamber’s role and responsibilities will include:

a. Limit table sponsors to Lake Forest businesses providing a direct service to other Lake Forest businesses;
b. The Chamber will be responsible for securing speakers or presenters for the events and will obtain approval from the City regarding both the speakers and the content of their presentations;

The City’s role and responsibilities for the Signature Business Event shall include:

a. The City will be responsible for developing the City/Chamber presentation for the event s as reviewed and approved by the Chamber;
b. Provide the Chamber with review and final approval on speakers and related presentations;

4. New Business Reception:

The Chamber shall partner with the City on two New Business Receptions during the Term of the Agreement. The events should be held in January 2026 and January 2027.

The Chamber’s role and responsibilities will include:

a. Limit table sponsors to Lake Forest businesses providing a direct service to other Lake Forest businesses;

The City’s role and responsibilities for the New Business Reception(s) shall include:
a. Provide the Chamber with a list of new Lake Forest businesses from its existing sources to be invited to the reception(s);
b. The City shall be responsible for acquiring and coordinating with relevant resource partners to attend the event;
c. The City will be responsible for creating and producing an informational flyer, as reviewed by the Chamber, that outlines resource partner information;

5. Business Mixer:

The Chamber shall host two multi-chamber Business Mixers in Lake Forest during the Term of the Agreement.

The Chamber’s role and responsibilities will include:

a) The Chamber shall fulfill the requirements as specified in section B, subsection 1.

The City’s roles and responsibilities will include:

Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
820

55136.00121\24840082.3 16

b) The City shall fulfill the requirements as specified in section B, subsection 1.

6. Social Media Workshop:

The Chamber shall partner with the City on two Social Media Workshops that provide current and prospective business owners with effective social media strategies and tips to ensure timely and informative content that can generate more customers. These events may be held with a regional partner if deemed in the best interest of Lake Forest businesses.

The Chamber’s role and responsibilities will include:

a. The Chamber will be responsible for securing speakers or presenters for the events and will obtain approval from the City regarding both the speakers and the content of their presentations;
The City’s roles and responsibilities will include:

a. Provide the Chamber with review and final approval on speakers and related presentations;

7. Legislative Luncheon
The Chamber shall host two Legislative Luncheon s, featuring Orange County’s top elected officials. These events may be held with a regional partner if deemed in the best interest of Lake Forest businesses.

The Chamber’s role and responsibilities will include:

a. The City reserves the authority to grant approval for the provision of alcohol at the event, contingent upon its suitability. In the event alcohol is to be served, the Chamber shall procure an ABC permit, cover all expenses related to the purchase of alcohol and necessary serving equipment, arrange for a security guard, and ensure compliance with all relevant county or regulatory requirements pertaining to alcohol service. This will be inclusive of the City’s investment;
b. The Chamber will be responsible for securing speakers or presenters for the event and will obtain approval from the City regarding both the speakers and the content of their presentations;
The City’s roles and responsibilities will include:

b. If alcohol is agreed upon to be provided, the City will provide an Authorization of Use letter to the Chamber in a timely manner;
c. Provide the Chamber with review and final approval on speakers and related presentations;

8. Lake Forest Career Workshop/Job Fair:

The Chamber shall partner with the City on two Lake Forest Career Workshops that provide Lake Forest job seekers with access to resume reviews by industry professionals, and direct and practical advice for the interview process. These events may be held with a regional partner, if Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
821

55136.00121\24840082.3 17

deemed in the best interest of Lake Forest businesses.

The Chamber’s role and responsibilities will include:

a. If a regional partner is deemed in the best interest of Lake Forest businesses to partner with on the La ke Forest Career Workshop, the Chamber will be responsible for attending all mandatory meetings with the regional partner to ensure full knowledge of their responsibilities and day-of-event details;
b. If a regional partner does not take the lead on tracking RSVPS, the Chamber shall be responsible for acquiring and tracking RSVPs, and subsequently providing the RSVP list to the City upon request.

The City’s roles and responsibilities will include:

a. Market the event via emails and outreach to local universities.

9. Elf Yourself 5K Charity Run
The Chamber shall host the annual Elf Yourself 5K at the Lake Forest Sports Park and Recreation Center. The events shall take place November 22, 2025, and November 21, 2026.

Event registration is open to the public.

The Chamber’s role and responsibilities will include:

a. The Chamber will ensure that all event details, vendors, and actions day -of the event comply with the requirements of Sports Park regulations; b. If the Chamber requires additional city staff support for its events, excluding the economic development team, a minimum 30-day notice must be provided; c. The Chamber shall be responsible for inviting and acquiring local businesses to have booths at the event, giving priority to Lake Forest businesses; d. The City reserves the authority to grant approval for the provision of alcohol at the event, contingent upon its suitability. In the event alcohol is to be served, the Chamber shall procure an ABC permit, cover all expenses related to the purchase of alcohol and necessary serving equipment, arrange for a security guard, and ensure compliance with all relevant county or regulatory requirements pertaining to alcohol service. This will be inclusive of the City’s investment;
e. The Chamber shall submit a complete list of all participating vendors to the City at least one (1) week prior to the event. The City will assume responsibility for notifying Community Services staff of its vendor list in a timely manner; f. The Chamber will provide one (1) table for a City booth at the event at no cost to the City. g. If the Chamber requests city-owned equipment, it will be at the discretion of Community Services staff for approval;
h. The Chamber, as the host of the 5k race, shall be responsible for ensuring the safety of all participants and spectators, and shall meet all safety requirements mandated for the event; i. The Chamber shall be responsible for cleaning up the event afterwards and ensuring that the venue is left clean;
j. If a n op portunity drawing is to be conducted, the Chamber will be responsible for its organization and ensure that Lake Forest businesses are given priority for participation in providing the prizes.

Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
822

55136.00121\24840082.3 18

The City’s roles and responsibilities will include:

a. Provide the Chamber use of the entire Lake Forest Sports Park and Recreation Center the Saturday before Thanksgiving at no cost to the Chamber with the understanding no other activities or events take place on that day;
b. Provide the Chamber use of City-owned barricades;
a. Provide the Chamber with final approval on selection of vendor(s); b. If alcohol is agreed upon to be provided, the City will provide an Authorization of Use letter to the Chamber in a timely manner;

10. Business Appreciation Luncheon:

The Chamber shall partner with the City on two Business Appreciation Luncheons. The events will take place in the winter of 2025 and 2026.

The Chamber’s roles and responsibilities will include:
a. The Chamber shall be responsible for securing a Keynote Speaker and will take the lead on coordinating all event details and meetings;
b. The Chamber will coordinate with City staff to ensure the event date does not conflict with the City’s master calendar or other City events on that date; c. Produce a formal invitation and all additional marketing materials for the City’s review.

The City will have final approval on all marketing materials for distribution; d. The City reserves the authority to grant approval for the provision of alcohol at the event, contingent upon its suitability. In the event alcohol is to be served, the Chamber shall procure an ABC permit, cover all expenses related to the purchase of alcohol and necessary serving equipment, arrange for a secu rity guard, and ensure compliance with all relevant county or regulatory requirements pertaining to alcohol service. This will be inclusive of the City’s investment;
e. The Chamber shall be responsible for acquiring and tracking RSVPs, and shall provide the RSVP list to the City upon request;
The City's roles and responsibilities will include:

a. The City shall have review and approval of the Keynote Speaker. b. The City will provide the Chamber with a contact list of elected officials and City staff for distribution of the formal invitation once approved;
c. If alcohol is agreed upon to be provided, the City will provide an Authorization of Use letter to the Chamber in a timely manner;

11. Beer & Wine Garden(s) at Concerts in the Park:

The Chamber will host Beer and Wine Gardens at each Concert in the Park for Fiscal Year 2025- 26 and FY 2026-27.

Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
823

55136.00121\24840082.3 19

The Chamber’s roles and responsibilities will include:

a. The Chamber shall procure an ABC permit, cover all expenses related to the purchase of alcohol and necessary serving equipment, arrange for a security guard, and ensure compliance with all relevant county or regulatory requirements pertaining to alcohol service. This will be inclusive of the City’s investment;

The City’s role and responsibilities for the Beer and Wine Gardens shall include:

a. Secure a venue at the Lake Forest Sports Park free of charge. b. Provide the Chamber with final approval on all marketing materials produced for the event;
c. Provide the Chamber use of City-owned barricades. Staff will coordinate with Public Works for the drop-off of barricades.
d. The City will provide a 20 x 30 tent, tables, and chairs, and barriers as deemed necessary and appropriate to fit the needs of the event.
e. The City will provide an Authorization of Use letter to the Chamber in a timely manner;

12. Beer & Wine Garden(s) at Annual Tree Lighting:

The Chamber will host Beer and Wine Gardens at the annual Tree Lighting in December 2025 and 2026. The Chamber’s roles and responsibilities will include:

a. The Chamber shall procure an ABC permit, cover all expenses related to the purchase of alcohol and necessary serving equipment, arrange for a security guard, and ensure compliance with all relevant county or regulatory requirements pertaining to alcohol service. This will be inclusive of the City’s investment;

The City’s role and responsibilities for the Beer and Wine Gardens shall include:

a. Secure a venue at the Lake Forest Civic Center free of charge. b. The City shall be responsible for renting a bar and providing the Chamber with tables, and chairs, as deemed necessary and appropriate to fit the needs of the event. c. The City shall be responsible for providing the Chamber with a location at the event that is suitable and appropriate for the event.
d. The City will provide an Authorization of Use letter to the Chamber in a timely manner;

13. Women in Business Event
The Chamber will host two Women in Business Events in the Fall of 2025 and 2026.

The Chamber’s roles and responsibilities will include:

Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
824

55136.00121\24840082.3 20

a. The City reserves the authority to grant approval for the provision of alcohol at the event, contingent upon its suitability. In the event alcohol is to be served, the Chamber shall procure an ABC permit, cover all expenses related to the purchase of alcohol and necessary serving equipment, arrange for a security guard, and ensure compliance with all relevant county or regulatory requirements pertaining to alcohol service. This will be inclusive of the City’s investment;
b. The Chamber will be responsible for securing speakers or presenters for the event and will obtain approval from the City regarding both the speakers and the content of their presentations;

The City’s roles and responsibilities will include:

a. If alcohol is agreed upon to be provided, the City will provide an Authorization of Use letter to the Chamber in a timely manner;
b. Provide the Chamber with review and final approval on speakers and related presentations; Docusign Envelope ID: 46815A6C-4FA7-426C-95BD-3820033EFFD1 Item: 16
825

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 6/17/2025
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT:

LAKE FOREST TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION PROGRAM FIVE-YEAR REVIEW
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):

Staff recommends the City Council to:

1. Approve alternative improvements for the following Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program intersection projects:
a. Los Alisos Boulevard and Rockfield Improvement Project b. Lake Forest Drive and Rockfield Improvement Project
c. Lake Forest Drive and I-5/Avenida de la Carlota Improvement Project

2. Approve the removal of the Bake and Rockfield Improvement Project from the Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program.

3. Approve the adjusted project cost estimates for the remaining Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program projects and revised Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program Fee Schedule.

4. Approve the Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program Five-Year Update.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program (“LFTM”) requires the City to review and reassess the development impacts associated with participating properties every five years. The most recent update was completed in 2019 and approved by the City Council in 2020, prompting the need to conduct a new five- year update. This update includes a comprehensive traffic analysis, incorporating revised land use data, changes to the roadway network, and updates to the Lake Forest Traffic Analysis Model (“LFTAM”). With the support of the City’s traffic modeling consultant, Stantec, staff has completed the LFTM Five-Year Update for the City Council’s review and approval.

The LFTM Five-Year Update did not identify any major intersection improvement changes, except for the following proposed intersection adjustments:

Item: 17
826

•Los Alisos Boulevard and Rockfield: A proposed alternative improvement would involve restriping Los Alisos Boulevard to create a 19- foot eastbound de-facto through-right turn lane.
•Lake Forest Drive and Rockfield: A proposed alternative improvement would modify the signal timing to include overlap phasing for the southbound Rockfield Boulevard right-turn movement.
•Lake Forest Drive and I-5 / Avenida de la Carlota: A proposed alternative improvement would restripe the northbound Avenida de la Carlota middle lane to serve as a shared left- and right-turn lane. •Bake Parkway and Rockfield Boulevard: Proposed no intersection improvements due to the intersection's current adequate level of service.

These proposed revisions to the LFTM Program are designed to minimize community impacts, avoid unnecessary widenings, and eliminate improvements that are no longer required.

In addition, the LFTM Five-Year Update includes revised cost estimates for the remaining LFTM Intersection Improvement Projects that reflect the 2024 California Construction Cost Index (“CCCI”) and current construction cost trends, driven by inflation and rising labor costs. The increase in project costs correlates with the increase in the LFTM Program Fee Schedule.

Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council approve alternative improvements for three intersection projects, remove the Bake and Rockfield project from the LFTM Program, adopt updated cost estimates and a revised fee schedule, and receive and file the 2024 LFTM Five-Year Update.

BACKGROUND:

In July 2008, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 186, which amended Chapter 7.19 of the Lake Forest Municipal Code as the Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program. LFTM was established for the purposes of providing funding for the coordinated and phased installation of traffic and transportation improvements to serve, benefit, and mitigate the impacts of development in the area of the City referred to as the “Opportunities Study Area” (“OSA”). The LFTM Program established a list of citywide transportation improvements at 18 intersections throughout the community to mitigate the impacts of development, and to maintain adequate levels of service on the City’s arterial street system.

Item: 17
827

In 2011, the City Council approved the one-time Baseline Adjustment to the LFTM Program that analyzed trip generation and traffic patterns based on actual land uses and unit counts at the time, as compared to those forecasts in 2008.

The Baseline Adjustment Study resulted in a reduction of intersection improvements from 18 intersections to 15 intersection locations at a cost of $9,881,000. These costs include the total base costs of improvements and associated administration, and environmental costs related to project delivery.

The LFTM Ordinance stipulates a Five-Year Update of the LFTM Program. The requirement for a Five-Year Update was included in the LFTM Ordinance to ensure that the LFTM Program continues to address the City’s future roadway improvement needs. The Five-Year Update is a complete review of the LFTM Program to be conducted by the City in five (5) year intervals after the effective date of the LFTM Program. The purpose of the review is to update cost estimates, update allocations, propose alternative mitigation measures costing no more than the original mitigation measures as adjusted pursuant to the formulas within the LFTM Ordinance, or eliminate specific traffic and/or transportation improvements that are no longer necessary.

In 2014, the City Council approved the 2014 LFTM Program Five-Year Update which resulted in no change to the approved intersection improvement locations.

In 2020, the City Council approved the 2019 LFTM Program Five-Year Update which updated program costs, adjusted the calculation of the required annual escalator/deflator for 2019, and revised the LFTM fee structure based upon the updated information.

DISCUSSION:

Staff has completed the 2024 LFTM Five-Year Update to the LFTM Program and proposes to incorporate the following:
•Updates to the Citywide land use data
•Updates to the committed roadway network
•Updates to the Lake Forest Traffic Analysis Model (“LFTAM”) •Updates to the identified transportation intersection improvements •Updates to the total cost of the program
•Revises the LFTM fee structure based on the above
•Annual Escalator/Deflator for 2024
The LFTM Program considers the following parts of the “committed” or “baseline” roadway:

Item: 17
828

1. New roadways or roadway improvements directly related to new development, and

2. Signalized intersections that provide project access.

The Five-Year Update of the LFTM Program focuses on the roadway improvements to augment the committed roadway system.

Subsequent to the 2019 Five-Year Update, the El Toro Road and Portola Parkway intersection widening improvement project was completed. Also, several LFTM Program improvements are currently under construction: Lake Forest Drive and Jeronimo Road widening, Lake Forest Drive and Rancho Parkway improvements, and Los Alisos Boulevard and Rockfield Boulevard improvements. These roadway improvements are included in the Five-Year Update.

Traffic forecasts for the Five-Year Update are prepared and evaluated based on the future land uses in the city. Future-year (2040) traffic forecasts on the City’s arterial street system identify the transportation improvements that need implementation over time. The City’s future traffic volume forecasts are based on the allowable land uses specified by the General Plan, including land use updates based on recent development project approvals. For the remainder of the County, traffic volume growth is based on 2040 demographic projections for the County of Orange.

Future traffic forecasts use the City’s Lake Forest Traffic Analysis Model. LFTAM was originally developed in 2005 as a transportation planning tool for preparing long-range traffic forecasts and estimating future transportation needs in the city.

LFTAM is a sub-area derivative of the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (“OCTAM”), maintained and operated by the Orange County Transportation Authority (“OCTA”). LFTAM is developed according to the OCTA sub-area traffic modeling guidelines and certified as being consistent with the OCTAM parent model. For the purpose of the update, the revised LFTAM includes the most current land use projections and roadway network assumptions for the City of Lake Forest.

The Five-Year Update includes analysis of forty-two major intersections within the City and some locations within adjacent jurisdictions. This is the same study area utilized in the original LFTM study, the 2011 Baseline Adjustment study, the 2014 Five-Year Update study, and the 2019 Five-Year Update study. Evaluations use future traffic volume demand and capacity needs for a future year that is based on build out of the City’s General Plan and regional growth projections for the year 2040. In accordance with the LFTM Ordinance, the Five-Year Update does not add any new LFTM improvements.

Item: 17
829

The analysis led to the following proposed revisions to remaining LFTM Program improvements, aiming to reduce community impacts, avoid unnecessary widenings, and eliminate unnecessary improvements:
•Los Alisos Boulevard and Rockfield – Proposes an alternative improvement by restriping Los Alisos Boulevard to create a 19-foot eastbound de-facto through-right turn lane that will provide an acceptable level of service. The previous improvement was to add a dedicated right- turn lane, which would require the full or partial right-of-way acquisition of four single-family homes and relocation of overhead utilities. •Lake Forest Drive and Rockfield – Proposes an alternative improvement to modify the signal timing to include an overlap phasing for the southbound Rockfield Boulevard right-turn movement. The previous improvement was to add a shared left-turn/through lane and permanently change the signal timing operations to a split-phased operation, which is an operation that gives each direction of traffic their own green light one after the other potentially causing further delays at the intersection. •Lake Forest Drive and I-5 / Avenida de la Carlota – Proposes an alternative improvement to restripe the northbound Avenida de la Carlota middle lane, allowing it to serve as a shared left and right-turn lane. The previous improvement was to convert the shared I-5 off-ramp left- turn/through lane to a third left-turn lane, widen the intersection to add a second left turn lane for Carlota, and widen the intersection to add a second through lane for the I-5 off-ramp.
•Bake Parkway and Rockfield Boulevard – Proposes no intersection improvements due to the intersection's current adequate level of service.

The previous improvement was to reconfigure the westbound Rockfield approach to add a third left-turn lane, remove the free-flow right-turn lane and provide a de-facto right-turn lane.

All other LFTM Program improvements remain unchanged from the previous update. However, the 2024 LFTM Five-Year Update includes revised improvement costs, which have been adjusted according to the 2024 California Construction Cost Index (“CCCI”), in accordance with the LFTM Ordinance. The annual escalator/deflator for 2024 is 9.3%, and this adjustment has been applied to the estimated improvement costs for 2024. These costs encompass administration, design, environmental, right-of-way, and construction expenses.

In addition to the CCCI adjustment, each remaining LFTM Program improvement has been updated to reflect current construction cost trends, driven by inflation and rising labor costs. As such, the revised LFTM Program costs are shown below:

Item: 17
830

Table 1 – LFTM Program Improvement Project Costs
Item Int.

No. Intersection Jurisdiction Total Cost
On-Going Projects (Pre-Construction and Planning)
1 10 Lake Forest Dr & Rancho Pkwy LF $ 627,448
2 14 Bake Pkwy & Irvine Blvd/Trabuco
Rd LF/Irvine $ 2,226,251
3 22 Bake Pkwy & Jeronimo Rd LF/Irvine $ 2,846,788
4 23 Lake Forest Dr & Jeronimo Rd LF $ 1,392,922
5 34 Los Alisos Blvd & Rockfield Blvd LF $ 906,678
6 31 Lake Forest Dr & Rockfield Blvd LF $ 59,980
7 105 Alton Pkwy & Irvine Blvd Irvine $ 676,214
8 36 Lake Forest Dr & I-5 Fwy SB Off-
Ramp/Carlota LH/Irvine $ 120,360
Completed Projects
9 2 Bake Pkwy & Portola Pkwy LF $ 72,240
10 12 El Toro Rd & Portola Pkwy/Santa
Margarita Pkwy LF $ 2,627,022
11 32 Ridge Route Dr & Rockfield Blvd LF $ 1,144
12 37 Paseo de Valencia & Avenida de la
Carlota LH $ 79,000
13 39 El Toro Rd & Avenida de la Carlota LH $ 78,000
14 117 Alton Pkwy & Toledo Way Irvine $ 19,555
Summary
Total Cost of Improvements $ 11,733,603
Administration & Environmental (25%) $ 2,933,400
TOTAL PROGRAM COST $ 14,667,003
As this is a developer fee-based program, the participating properties are obligated to pay the balance of the LFTM Program. Four of the five participating properties including KB Homes (Whisler Ridge), Shea/Baker (Baker Ranch), Pacific Heritage (the Pinnacle at Serrano Summit) and Irvine Ranch Water District (Serrano Summit) have completed their payment obligations as of June 2024. Based upon the revised LFTM Program costs and spent to date costs and cash balance (which totaled $12,147,752 as of June 30, 2024), the remaining LFTM Fee Schedule is calculated to be $2,519,251 which will be distributed among the last remaining participating property. Currently, Portola Center is the last remaining participating property in the LFTM program.

Conclusion
The original LFTM program analyzed 42 intersections and identified 19 intersections as requiring potential improvements. Since that time, seven projects have been completed, four projects are no longer necessary, four projects are Item: 17
831

under construction, and one project is under design. LFTM represents an investment of $14.7 million in traffic improvements for the community.

The Five-Year Update of the LFTM Program identifies the improvements needed and associated costs to mitigate the transportation/traffic impacts of participating development projects. In accordance with the LFTM Ordinance, the LFTM fee has been reevaluated and recalculated based on updated land use information, recent circulation improvements, and the updated LFTAM. Sufficient funds have been identified to cover the improvements in the LFTM Program.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program is a developer fee-based program. The proposed action will provide an additional $2.5 million in revenue, which will be used to fund the LFTM program.

ATTACHMENTS:
2024 LFTM Five-Year Update
Initiated By: Tran Tran, Traffic Engineering Manager
Submitted By: Douglas A. Erdman, P.E., Acting Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Approved By: Debra Rose, City Manager
Item: 17
832

ATTACHMENT
Item: 17
833

LAKE FOREST TRANSPORTATION
MITIGATION PROGRAM 5-YEAR UPDATE
2024 Update
May 20, 2025
Prepared for:

City of Lake Forest
Prepared by:

Stantec
Project Number:
2042547210
Item: 17
834

LAKE FOREST TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION PROGRAM 5-YEAR UPDATE The conclusions in the Report titled Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update are Stantec’s professional opinion, as of the time of the Report, and concerning the scope described in the Report. The opinions in the document are based on conditions and information existing at the time the scope of work was conducted and do not take into account any subsequent changes. The Report relates solely to the specific project for which Stantec was retained and the stated purpose for which the Report was prepared. The Report is not to be used or relied on for any variation or extension of the project, or for any other project or purpose, and any unauthorized use or reliance is at the recipient’s own risk.

Stantec has assumed all information received from City of Lake Forest (the “Client”) and third parties in the preparation of the Report to be correct. While Stantec has exercised a customary level of judgment or due diligence in the use of such information, Stantec assumes no responsibility for the consequences of any error or omission contained therein.

This Report is intended solely for use by the Client in accordance with Stantec’s contract with the Client.

While the Report may be provided by the Client to applicable authorities having jurisdiction and to other third parties in connection with the project, Stantec disclaims any legal duty based upon warranty, reliance or any other theory to any third party, and will not be liable to such third party for any damages or losses of any kind that may result.

Prepared by:

Eric Mazzella, TE
Maria Morris, AICP, PTP
Reviewed by:

Daryl Zerfass, TE, PTP
Item: 17
835

LAKE FOREST TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION PROGRAM 5-YEAR UPDATE Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................ES.1 1 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................1.1 Overview.....................................................................................................................................1.1 Methodology...............................................................................................................................1.2 Performance Standards..............................................................................................................1.2 Committed Roadway System.....................................................................................................1.3 Future Roadway System............................................................................................................1.6 Land Use Assumptions...............................................................................................................1.8

1.1 1.2

1.3 1.4

1.5 1.6
2 3
EXISTING CONDITIONS.............................................................................................2.1 TRAFFIC FORECASTS AND LEVEL OF SERVICE ..................................................3.1 4 4.1

4.2 COST ALLOCATIONS AND LFTM FEE CALCULATION..........................................4.1 Cost Allocation Methodology......................................................................................................4.1 LFTM Fee Calculation Methodology ..........................................................................................4.3 5 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................5.1 Item: 17
836

LAKE FOREST TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION PROGRAM 5-YEAR UPDATE

LIST OF TABLES
Table ES-1 Properties Participating in the LFTM Program..................................................................... ES.1 Table ES-2 LFTM Program Improvement Costs.....................................................................................ES.3 Table ES-3 LFTM Program Cost Summary............................................................................................ES.4 Table ES-4 LFTM Fee Calculation.......................................................................................................... ES.5 Table ES-5 LFTM Participating Properties LFTM Fee Summary...........................................................ES.5 Table 1-1 Performance Criteria..................................................................................................................1.3 Table 1-2 Level of Service Descriptions – Signalized Intersections..........................................................1.4 Table 1-3 Committed Roadway Improvements in Lake Forest and Immediate Vicinity............................1.5 Table 1-4 Properties Participating in the LFTM Program ..........................................................................1.8 Table 2-1 Intersection LOS Comparison (2018 versus 2022) ...................................................................2.6 Table 3-1 Future-Year (2040) Intersection LOS Summary – Baseline Committed Network.....................3.3 Table 3-2 OSA Analysis Intersection LOS Summary – Full MPAH Roadway Network Scenario .............3.5 Table 3-3 Summary of Deficient Intersections and Proposed Improvements ...........................................3.7 Table 4-1 LFTM Properties Land Use and Trip Generation Summary......................................................4.2 Table 4-2 California Construction Cost Index Summary............................................................................4.3 Table 4-3 LFTM Program Improvement Costs ..........................................................................................4.4 Table 4-4 LFTM Program Cost Summary..................................................................................................4.5 Table 4-5 LFTM Fee Calculation ...............................................................................................................4.7 Table 4-6 LFTM Participating Properties LFTM Fee Calculation...............................................................4.8 Table 4-7 LFTM Remaining Participating Properties LFTM Fee Summary...............................................4.9 Table B-1 LFTM Intersection Comparison Table.......................................................................................B.1

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1 Committed Roadway Network..................................................................................................1.7 Figure 1-2 Properties Part of the LFTM Program ......................................................................................1.9 Figure 2-1 Existing Midblock Lanes...........................................................................................................2.2 Figure 2-2 Study Area Intersections ..........................................................................................................2.3 Figure 2-3 Intersection Volume Count Comparison (2018 versus 2022) – AM Peak Hour.......................2.4 Figure 2-4 Intersection Volume Count Comparison (2018 versus 2022) – PM Peak Hour.......................2.5 Figure 3-1 Future ADT Volumes................................................................................................................3.2 Figure 3-2 LFTM Program Status ............................................................................................................3.10 Figure A-1 Study Area Intersections..........................................................................................................A.2

LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A ICU CALCULATION WORKSHEETS............................................................ A.1 APPENDIX B LFTM INTERSECTION COMPARISON TABLE............................................ B.1 APPENDIX C LFTM PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS SUMMARY......................................... C.1 APPENDIX D COST ESTIMATES ........................................................................................ D.1 Item: 17
837

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update Executive Summary
Executive Summary
The Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation (LFTM) Program establishes a list of citywide transportation improvements to maintain adequate levels of service (LOS) on the City’s arterial street system. The LFTM Program was adopted by the City Council in 2008 and Chapter 7.19 was added to the Lake Forest Municipal Code (LFMC). In accordance with LFMC Chapter 7.19.070.A(3), the LFTM Program is reviewed every five years to ensure that the LFTM Program continues to adequately address the City’s future roadway improvement needs. Improvements are funded through the payment of LFTM Program fees paid by developers in accordance with their development agreements with the City.

The LFTM Program has previously been reviewed in 2011, 2013, and 2018, and was reviewed most recently in 2024. This report discusses the 2024 review and provides the status of each LFTM Program location (completed, planning, pre-construction, removed), the updated cost of the LFTM Program, and the estimated allocated cost for the remaining unpaid development units.

Five properties have taken part in the LFTM Program as shown in Table ES-1. As shown, four of the five participating properties have completed construction, with Portola Center being the remaining property with unconstructed units.

Table ES-1 Properties Participating in the LFTM Program LFTM Properties Description Status1

1. Shea/Baker (Baker
Ranch)
1,402 single family dwelling units; 348 condominium units; 619 apartment units; 17,500 sq. ft of retail commercial; public park Complete

2. Portola Center 617 single family dwelling units; 251 condominium units; 58 senior mixed-use units; 12,600 sq. ft. of retail commercial; public park Not
Complete

3. Irvine Ranch Water
District (Serrano Summit)
101 single family dwelling units; 146 detached condominium units; 66 attached condominium units; 224 attached multi-family units Complete
Complete
Complete

4. KB Homes (Whisler
Ridge)
75 single family dwelling units

5. Pacific Heritage
(Teresina)
85 single family dwelling units
1 Complete as of June 30, 2024
See Figure 1-2 for the location of each participating property.

Source: City of Lake Forest

INTERSECTION LOS ANALYSIS
Existing conditions peak hour intersection counts were collected in 2022 and all locations meet the acceptable LOS “D” performance standard. It should be noted that some intersections may not perform as well as indicated by the theoretical intersection capacity utilization (ICU) value due to operational constraints such as closely spaced intersections, turn pocket length constraints, etc. Also, the traffic counts used to calculate the ICU value represent vehicles passing through the intersection. When Project Number: 2042547210 ES.1
Item: 17
838

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update Executive Summary
demand volumes approach or exceed capacity, upstream queues may form causing significant delays and low levels of service, occurrences that are not accounted for in ICU values based on the intersection counts.

Future-year (2040) traffic forecasts for the City’s arterial street system are used to identify transportation improvements that need to be implemented over time. Within the City, future traffic volume forecasts are based on the allowable land uses specified by the City General Plan (including land use updates based on recent development project approvals). For the remainder of the County, 2040 demographic projections prepared for the County of Orange are used as the basis for calculating traffic volume growth.

Traffic forecasts are derived using the City’s travel demand model, referred to as the Lake Forest Traffic Analysis Model (LFTAM). For the purpose of this study, the LFTAM has been updated to include the most current land use projections and roadway network assumptions for the City of Lake Forest. The committed roadway improvements are those that are fully or partially funded and are expected to be constructed in the near future.

The LOS analysis shows that all study area intersections operate at a LOS D or better, with exception to one intersection that is at a LOS E. Intersections that were previously forecast to operate at LOS E or worse in prior LFTM Program updates are forecast to operate at LOS D or better under the baseline scenario in this report. This is due to the implementation of planned improvements at intersections and refinements to the LFTAM land use and network. However, although locations are at a LOS D or better, the intersection and the corresponding identified improvements, remain part of the LFTM Program due to the ICU/LOS being at the cusp of LOS D/LOS E, or intersection sensitivity.

LFTM PROGRAM COST ANALYSIS
Table ES-2 lists the LFTM Program locations and the estimated construction costs. For each LFTM Project location, costs from the completed improvements are shown and engineering estimates for locations in pre-construction or in the planning phase are shown.

For locations involving the construction of physical improvements, the cost estimates include planning and engineering costs (preliminary project development, public hearings, design engineering, and construction engineering costs), right-of-way acquisition costs (land acquisition, demolition, severance, business goodwill, right-of-way engineering, consultant and legal costs), and construction costs (construction of project improvements, permit and inspection fees, resolution of construction issues, and preparation of record drawings). Cost related to administration and environmental clearances are added separately.

The total program cost is listed in Table ES-3 and comprises the improvement costs, plus a 25% cost for administration and environmental clearances. In addition, estimated credits are shown based on existing cooperative agreements with the City of Irvine. The final credit amounts will be based upon the completion of the improvement projects.

The total estimated cost for the LFTM Program is approximately $14.7 million.

Project Number: 2042547210 ES.2
Item: 17
839

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update Executive Summary
Table ES-2 LFTM Program Improvement Costs
Int.

No.

On-Going Projects (Pre-Construction and Planning)
Item Intersection Jurisdiction Total Cost
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
10 14
22 23
34 31
Lake Forest Dr & Rancho Pkwy
Bake Pkwy & Irvine Blvd/Trabuco Rd
Bake Pkwy & Jeronimo Rd
LF
LF/Irvine
LF/Irvine
LF
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
627,448
2,226,2511
2,846,7882
1,392,922
906,678
Lake Forest Dr & Jeronimo Rd
Los Alisos Blvd & Rockfield Blvd
Lake Forest Dr & Rockfield Blvd
LF
LF 59,980
105 Alton Pkwy & Irvine Blvd
36 Lake Forest Dr & I-5 Fwy SB Off-Ramp/Carlota
Irvine
LH/Irvine
676,214
120,360
Completed Projects
9 2 Bake Pkwy & Portola Pkwy LF
LF
$
$
$
$
$
$
72,240
2,627,022
1,144
10 11
12 13
14 12
32 37
39 El Toro Rd & Portola Pkwy/Santa Margarita Pkwy
Ridge Route Dr & Rockfield Blvd LF
Paseo de Valencia & Avenida de la Carlota
El Toro Rd & Avenida de la Carlota
LH 79,000
LH 78,000
117 Alton Pkwy & Toledo Way Irvine 19,555
Summary
Total Cost of Improvements $ 11,733,603
Notes:
1 Per the Bake at Irvine/Trabuco Cooperative Agreement, City of Irvine’s share is assumed to be 50% ($2,226,251) and the City of Lake Forest’s share is assumed to be 50% ($2,226,251). Final shared cost will be determined per the Cooperative Agreement.
2 Per the Bake/Jeronimo Cooperative Agreement, City of Irvine’s share is assumed to be 70% ($6,642,506) and the City of Lake Forest’s share is assumed to be 30% ($2,846,788). Final shared cost will be determined per the Cooperative Agreement.

LF = Lake Forest; LH = Laguna Hills; Irvine = City of Irvine; NA = not applicable Project Number: 2042547210 ES.3
Item: 17
840

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update Executive Summary
Table ES-3 LFTM Program Cost Summary
2018 5-Year Update
Cost Summary1
2024 5-Year Update
Cost SummaryCost Item
Total Cost of Improvements
Payments from NITM (Not assumed)
Payments from FCPP (Not assumed)
Administration & Environmental (25%)
Total Allocated Costs
$
$
$
$
$
9,222,000 $
$
$
11,733,603
00 0 0
2,306,000
11,528,000
$ 2,933,400
14,667,003
+27%
$
Difference
LFTM Program Spent to Date (as of June 30, 2024)
LFTM Program Cash Balance to Date (as of June 30, 2024) Unpaid Program Costs2
$
$
$
3,991,299
8,156,453
2,519,251
1 Source: 2018 5-Year Update provided for comparison purposes only. 2 Unpaid Program Costs = Total allocated cost minus spent to date minus cash balance to date.

The LFTM Program shows an approximately 27% increase when compared to the prior update. The increasing costs of construction is consistent with a memorandum prepared by the City of Lake Forest Public Works department to the City of Lake Forest Council. The memorandum discusses the rising costs in the construction industry over the past three to four years, specifically annual increases up to 13.4% and a compounded increase of 35.6% from 2020-20241. The memorandum describes a variety of factors that have contributed to the cost increases, including material prices, labor costs, and a surge in construction activity. Due to significant increases, the City’s roadway infrastructure projects, such as those in the LFTM Program, show an increase in cost.

Alternative improvements were investigated for locations in the planning phase. In some instances, the future intersection LOS is at an acceptable LOS, therefore, the LFTM Program improvement is no longer necessary. This was done to help keep the LFTM Program cost increase to a minimal amount.

The City of Lake Forest and City of Irvine currently have a cooperative agreement in place for Bake at Jeronimo and Bake at Irvine/Trabuco intersections and the cost summary listed above captures the City’s assumed share of cost for the two intersections.

Table ES-4 shows the cost allocation according to land use and the resulting fee per unit of land use. The trip length factors used in the table are relative, using dwelling units as the comparative base. 1 Construction Cost Increases for Roadway and Infrastructure Projects Memorandum to City Council, City of Lake Forest, July 11, 2024.

Project Number: 2042547210 ES.4
Item: 17
841

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update Executive Summary
Table ES-4 LFTM Fee Calculation
Trip
Length
Amount Generation Factor
Land Use Land Use Land Use ADT Trip Fee/Land
Use UnitUnits Fee Fee/ADT
SDU DU 121 1,141 1.00 $2,519,251
$12,147,752
$14,667,003
$2,208 $20,820
Total LFTM Program Spent to Date and Cash Balance
Total LFTM Program
Baseline ADT Fee = $2,208/trip
LFTM Program Spent to Date (as of June 30, 2024) = $3,991,299 LFTM Program Cash Balance to Date (as of June 30, 2024) = $8,156,453 (Fee/ADT = Baseline ADT Fee x Trip Length Factor)
Abbreviations: ADT – Average Daily Trips; SDU – Single Family Detached Dwelling Unit The resulting fee/ADT is $2,208 and is applied to the remaining property. Table ES-5 summarizes the remaining participating property with unpaid units and the corresponding LFTM Program fee.

Table ES-5 LFTM Participating Properties LFTM Fee Summary Landowner ADT
1,141
1,141
Cost
Portola Center $2,519,251
$2,519,251
$12,147,752
$14,667,003
Total Remaining Unpaid
LFTM Program Spent to Date and Cash Balance to Date
Total LFTM Program
1All payment obligations for KB Homes (Whisler Ridge), Shea/Baker (Baker Ranch), Pacific Heritage (Teresina), IRWD (Serrano Summit), and a portion of Portola Center were completed under prior fee structures.

Project Number: 2042547210 ES.5
Item: 17
842

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 1 Introduction
1 Introduction
This report describes the 2024 update to the City of Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation (LFTM) traffic analysis in support of the City’s five-year review of the LFTM Program. It thereby updates the report that established the current LFTM Program for transportation improvements in the City and the LFTM fees.

1.1 Overview
The LFTM Program was adopted by the City Council in 2008. Chapter 7.19 was added to the Lake Forest Municipal Code (LFMC) and established a list of citywide transportation improvements to maintain adequate levels of service on the City’s arterial street system. The LFTM Program improvements are funded through the payment of LFTM fees paid by developers in accordance with their development agreements with the City. The LFTM Program originally included transportation improvements at 18 intersections, 10 are in the City, 5 are partially in the City, and 3 are fully in neighboring jurisdictions (Irvine and Laguna Hills).

The LFTM Program was updated in 2011 (“2011 Baseline Adjustment”) to incorporate land use assumptions from the approved Opportunities Study Area (OSA), including an update of the latest development plans for the vacant lands as well as the Sports Park at Glass Creek. The 2011 Baseline Adjustment removed three (3) locations from the LFTM Program and added one intersection, for a total of 16 LFTM Program locations. The locations were removed due to traffic forecasts showing those intersections at an acceptable LOS, had completed improvements, or had fully committed improvements by the Foothill Circulation Phasing Plan (FCPP).

This 2024 update is prepared in accordance with LFMC Chapter 7.19.070.A(3) requiring review of the LFTM Program every 5 years and incorporates the following changes:

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6.

Updates to the Citywide land use data
Updates to the committed roadway network
Updates to the City’s travel demand model
Updates to the identified transportation improvements
Updates to the total cost of the program
Revised fee structure based on the above
A requirement for a five-year review was included in the LFTM Program to ensure that the LFTM Program continues to adequately address the City’s future roadway improvement needs. Similar to prior updates in 2013 and 2018, this update contains refinements to the land use assumptions utilized by the Lake Forest Traffic Analysis Model (LFTAM). The land use assumed for this analysis is consistent with the Lake Forest 2040 General Plan that was adopted by City Council on June 2020. This land use database is then used as the basis for forecasting future traffic volumes on City roadways.

Interim reviews were conducted in between the five-year reviews in 2016 and 2017. The 2016 interim review of the LFTM Program updated land use for the Shea Baker development area, re-divided the costs of the improvements, and updated LFTM Program fees for participating properties. In 2017 a Feasibility Project Number: 2042547210 1.1
Item: 17
843

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 1 Introduction
Analysis was conducted to evaluate the effects of a capacity constrained roadway network and determine the feasibility of modifying certain LFTM Program improvements.

The 2018 update did not add or remove any LFTM Program improvements. Four intersections that previously did not meet the established LOS criteria in earlier LFTM Program updates were at an acceptable LOS. However, those intersections remained in the LFTM Program per the direction of City staff, due to the intersection LOS being at a LOS D cusp or other known sensitivities.

This report summarizes the LFTM Program intersections, the current status (completed, planning, pre- construction, removed), and the cost of the LFTM Program.

1.2 Methodology
To prepare the updated transportation improvement program, traffic forecasts based on the future land uses in the City were evaluated and potential deficiencies identified. These future land uses are consistent with the buildout of the City’s 2040 General Plan Update (Modified General Plan), and the traffic forecasts also include regional growth projections for the year 2040. A long-range buildout horizon such as the year 2040 is used so that the investments made to improve the City’s roadway network will accommodate not just the current needs, but the future traffic demand as well. For this analysis committed roadway improvements are those that are fully or partially funded and are expected to be constructed in the near future.

LFTM Program improvements to alleviate the traffic deficiencies were reevaluated and refined, where applicable. In accordance with the LFTM Ordinance, the five-year review does not add any new LFTM Program locations. These LFTM Program improvements form the basis for the updated citywide transportation improvement program and associated LFTM fees.

Transportation improvements in the program are implemented over time using fees paid by future development in the City. These improvements were identified by analyzing conditions in year 2040 assuming only committed improvements, and then identifying the additional improvements that will be needed to serve the future traffic. Since the improvements are identified for the 2040 time frame, the timing and priority for improvement implementation is based on actual traffic demand and analysis, citywide performance standards, and available funds to complete the improvements.

The information presented in this report includes a cost analysis with transportation improvement costs allocated according to the trips generated by various land uses. An average fee per land use type is calculated, and this is intended as the updated fee for the participants.

1.3 Performance Standards
The performance criteria used for evaluating volumes and capacities on the City street system are based on peak hour intersection volumes. Using peak hour intersection turn movement volumes and the intersection lane geometry, intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values are calculated for each of the AM and PM peak hours. Table 1-1 summarizes the criteria used for the intersection performance calculations.

Project Number: 2042547210 1.2
Item: 17
844

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 1 Introduction
Table 1-1 Performance Criteria
The following are the performance criteria used for comparing volumes and capacities on the study area street system:

I. Peak Hour Intersection Volumes
ICU values calculated as follows:

Saturation Flow Rate: 1,700 vehicles per hour (VPH).

Clearance Interval: 0.05 ICU
II. Performance Standard
Arterial intersections to achieve LOS D or better (ICU not to exceed .90) CMP intersections outside the City of Lake Forest, and the following non-CMP intersections within the City of Irvine to achieve LOS E or better (ICU not to exceed 1.00):

Bake Parkway/I-5 northbound and southbound ramps
Alton Parkway/I-5 northbound ramps
Irvine Center Drive/Lake Forest Drive
Table 1-2 describes traffic flow quality levels of service (LOS) for signalized intersections. Traffic LOS is designated A through F, with LOS A representing free flow conditions and LOS F representing severe traffic congestion. As listed in the previously referenced performance criteria table, LOS D (ICU not to exceed .90) is the performance standard that has been adopted by the City of Lake Forest. For County of Orange Congestion Management Program (CMP) intersections outside the City of Lake Forest, and for select intersections within the City of Irvine, LOS E (ICU not to exceed 1.00) is the adopted performance standard.

1.4 Committed Roadway System
The LFTM Program does not include new roadways or roadway improvements directly related to new development (i e., on-site roadways that would be built or widened as part of standard subdivision requirements). Signalized intersections that are for the purpose of providing project site access are likewise excluded. For this analysis, committed roadway improvements are those that are fully or partially funded and are expected to be constructed in the near future. These improvements are part of the “Committed” or “Baseline” roadway. The focus of this five-year review of the LFTM Program is on roadway improvements to augment the committed roadway system.

Table 1-3 summarizes the committed roadway and intersection improvements for the City of Lake Forest and immediate vicinity.

Project Number: 2042547210 1.3
Item: 17
845

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 1 Introduction
Table 1-2 Level of Service Descriptions – Signalized Intersections LOS Traffic Flow Description V/C or ICU
A Minimal or no vehicle delay. 0.00 – 0.60
B
C
Slight delay to vehicles. 0.61 – 0.70

0.71 – 0.80Moderate vehicle delays, traffic flow remains stable.

D
E
More extensive delays at intersections.

Long queues create lengthy delays.

Severe delays and congestion.

0.81 – 0.90

0.91 – 1.00
> 1.00F
Sources: HCM 7th Edition
V/C = Volume to Capacity ratio; ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization Project Number: 2042547210 1.4
Item: 17
846

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 1 Introduction
Table 1-3 Committed Roadway Improvements in Lake Forest and Immediate Vicinity Summary of Committed Roadway Segment Improvements
Roadway Limits Jurisdiction 2014 2018 2024 2040 Source(s) Status Alton
Pkwy
Monarch to
Rancho Pkwy
South
Lake Forest 4D 6D 6D 6D Shea/Baker Constructed
SR-133 I-5 to Irvine Blvd Caltrans/TCA 4T
6T
6T
8T
6T
8T
6T
8T

TCA CIP

TCA CIP
Constructed
ConstructedSR-133 Irvine Blvd to SR- Caltrans/TCA
241
SR-241 SR-133 to SR-261 Caltrans/TCA 5T
5T
6T
5T
5T
6T
5T
5T
6T
6T
8T
8T

TCA CIP

TCA CIP

TCA CIP
Not
Constructed
SR-241 Lake Forest Dr to Caltrans/TCA
Los Alisos Blvd
Not
Constructed
SR-241 Portola Pkwy
(Irvine) to Lake
Forest Dr
Caltrans/TCA Not
Constructed
Summary of Committed Intersection Lane Improvements
Intersection Improvement Source(s) Status

6. Alton (N/S) & SR-241
Ramps (E/W)
rd
Add 3 SB (Alton) through lane and
County/Irvine/
Lake Forest
Constructed
rd3 NB (Alton) through lane

11. Bake (N/S) & Rancho
South (E/W)
Construction of the east leg of the
intersection (Rancho)
Nakase/Meadows Constructed
30 Los Alisos (N/S) &
Muirlands (E/W)
nd FCPP Not ConstructedAdd 2 NB (Los Alisos) left-turn lane, nd2
2 SB (Los Alisos) left-turn lane and
EB (Muirlands) left-turn lanend

41. Alton (N/S) & Rancho
South (E/W)
Convert SB (Alton) right-turn lane to
rd
Shea/Baker Constructed
3 SB through lane, striping of a
second NB left turn
Lane abbreviations:

D = Divided Roadway Lane; T = Toll Road Lane; SB = Southbound; NB = Northbound; EB = Eastbound; N/S = North/South direction; E/W = East/West direction Other abbreviations:

TCA = Transportation Corridor Agencies; CIP = Capital Improvement Program; FCPP – Foothill Circulation Phasing Plan; NITM – North Irvine Transportation Mitigation Program Project Number: 2042547210 1.5
Item: 17
847

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 1 Introduction
Figure 1-1 illustrates the committed roadway network, which comprises of existing roadways plus committed improvements as noted above.

Subsequent to the LFTM Program 2011 Baseline Adjustment Study, several key roadways have been constructed and opened to traffic. These new roadways are as follows:
• Alton Parkway from Irvine Boulevard to Rancho Parkway South/Towne Centre Drive (6- lane Divided
•
•
Rancho Parkway from Hermana Circle to Portola Parkway (4-lane Divided) Rancho Parkway South from Alton Parkway to Bake Parkway (4-lane Divided)

1.5 Future Roadway System
Unfunded future roadways are excluded from the future baseline roadway condition utilized for this analysis, including unfunded roadways that are part of the County of Orange Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH). Without funding, the following future improvements are not a part of the committed network:
• El Toro Road Improvements
o Live Oak Canyon Road to Glenn Ranch Road: Existing roadway is two lanes (one lane in each direction) and on the MPAH it is designated as six lanes (three lanes in each direction) Glenn Ranch Road to Marguerite Parkway: Existing roadway is five lanes (two southbound and northbound varies from 1 to 3 lanes) and on the MPAH it is designated as six lanes (three lanes in each direction)
o
o
o
Raintree Lane to Montcliff Drive: Existing roadway is 5 lanes (3 southbound, 2 northbound) and on the MPAH it is designated as 6 lanes (three lanes in each direction).

Trabuco Road to Muirlands Boulevard: Existing roadway is six lanes (three lanes in each direction) and on the MPAH it is designated as eight lanes (four lanes in each direction). •
•
Portola Parkway Improvements (from Market Street to Lake Forest Drive). Existing roadway is 5 lanes (3 eastbound, 2 westbound) and on the MPAH it is designated as six lanes (3 lanes in each direction)
Los Alisos Boulevard Improvements (from Rockfield Boulevard to Paseo De Valencia). Existing roadway is four lanes (two lanes in each direction) and on the MPAH it is designated as six lanes (three lanes in each direction). The segment of the roadway from Rockfield Boulevard to I-5 is in the City of Lake Forest and the segment of the roadway from I-5 to Paseo De Valencia is in the City of Laguna Hills.
• Portola Parkway Gap Closure (from just west of Paloma to the SR 241 toll road). The MPAH shows a new four-lane roadway (two lanes in each direction) in unincorporated Orange County between the Lake Forest and Irvine city limits
Project Number: 2042547210 1.6
Item: 17
848

LFTM PROGRAM
5-YEAR UPDATE
Legend
Future Roadway (MPAH) (included in
committed network)
City of Lake Forest limits
241
SR-241 Widening
Future TCA CIP roadway
(included in committed network)
ALI
FCPP Intersection Improvements
(included in committed network)
5 Figure 1-1
Committed Roadway Network

1.7 Item: 17
849

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 1 Introduction
•
•
Ridge Route Drive Gap Closure at I-5 freeway (from Gowdy Avenue to Avenida de la Carlota). The MPAH designates a four-lane roadway and bridge over the freeway (two lanes in each direction) between the Lake Forest and Laguna Hills city limits
Widening and grade separation improvements of Ridge Route Drive at the railroad crossing (between Jeronimo Road and Muirlands Boulevard). Existing roadway is two lanes (one lane in each direction) and on the MPAH it is designated as four lanes (two lanes in each direction).

The exclusion of the above roadway segment improvements helps ensure that the LFTM Program can achieve its goals in the event that such improvements are not built within the 2040 horizon year addressed by this study.

1.6 Land Use Assumptions
Figure 1-2 illustrates the properties in the City of Lake Forest that are currently in, or have taken part in, the LFTM Program, which includes the OSA participating properties and the development plans for the vacant lands. These properties include the five LFTM Program participants listed in Table 1-4.

Table 1-4 Properties Participating in the LFTM Program
LFTM Properties Description Status1

1. Shea/Baker (Baker
Ranch)
1,402 single family dwelling units; 348 condominium units; 619 apartment units; 17,500 sq. ft of retail commercial; public park Complete

2. Portola Center 617 single family dwelling units; 251 condominium units; 58 senior mixed-use units; 12,600 sq. ft. of retail commercial; public park Not
Complete

3. Irvine Ranch Water
District (Serrano Summit)
101 single family dwelling units; 146 detached condominium units; 66 attached condominium units; 224 attached multi-family units Complete
Complete
Complete

4. KB Homes (Whisler
Ridge) 75 single family dwelling units
85 single family dwelling units

5. Pacific Heritage
(Teresina)
1 Status as of June 2024
Source: City of Lake Forest
See Figure 1-2 for the location of each participating property.

Project Number: 2042547210 1.8
Item: 17
850

LFTM PROGRAM
5-YEAR UPDATE

PORTOLA
CENTER
241

KB HOMES
(Whisler Ridge)SHEA/BAKER
(Baker Ranch)
IRWD
(Serrano
Summit)Pacific
Heritage
(Teresina)
Figure 1-2
Properties Part of the LFTM Program

1.9 Item: 17
851

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 2 Existing Conditions
2 Existing Conditions
The existing circulation system within the study area is illustrated in Figure 2-1 together with existing midblock lanes on arterial roadways freeway/toll mainline segments. Peak hour intersection counts were collected in 2022 for the intersections shown in Figure 2-2.

A comparison between the 2022 intersection count data (post-pandemic conditions) and 2018 intersection count data (pre-pandemic conditions) was made to identify potential post-pandemic changes in travel patterns. The 2022 data shows a decrease in traffic of approximately 9% citywide, based on the peak hour counts. The decrease could be due to changes in commuting patterns such as by an increase in remote work and alternative work schedules. Figure 2-3 and Figure 2-4 illustrate a comparison between the 2022 and 2018 AM and PM peak hour intersection counts, respectively. A few observations are noted below:
•
•
In the 2022 peak hours, 6 intersections show an increase in traffic volume and 36 intersections experience a decrease in traffic volume compared to 2018 counts.

In the AM peak hour, the following intersections show the biggest decrease in traffic volume:

6. Alton & SR-241 Ramps

13. Bake & Commercentre

22. Bake & Jeronimo

23. Alton & Commercentre
• In the PM peak hour, the following intersections show the biggest decrease in traffic volume:

13. Bake & Commercentre

22. Bake & Jeronimo

38. El Toro & Bridger/I-5 NB
ICU values based on the intersection counts are summarized in Table 2-1 for 2018 and 2022 conditions (ICU worksheets are provided in Appendix A). As shown, the Bake and Jeronimo intersection improved from LOS E to LOS B in the AM peak hour. The improvement in LOS is attributed to a reduction in volume on Bake Parkway for both the southbound through and northbound through movements (300 vph decrease in the southbound direction and 400 vph decrease in the northbound direction). The northbound left-turn decreased from 410 vph in 2018 to 180 vph in 2022, and the westbound left-turn decreased from 400 vph in 2018 to 260 vph in 2022. In 2022, all locations meet the LOS “D” performance standard.

It should be noted that some intersections may not perform as well as indicated by the theoretical ICU value due to operational constraints such as closely spaced intersections, turn pocket length constraints, traffic signal timing, etc. Also, the traffic counts used to calculate the ICU value represent vehicles passing through the intersection. When demand volumes approach or exceed capacity, upstream queues may form causing significant delays and low levels of service, occurrences that are not accounted for in the ICU calculations.

Project Number: 2042547210 2.1
Item: 17
852

LFTM PROGRAM
5-YEAR UPDATE
6R
241

RANCHO PKWY
D

ALICIA PKWY
5 Legend
X Mid-block lanes
City of Lake Forest limits
Figure 2-1
Existing Mid-block Lanes

2.2 Item: 17
853

LFTM PROGRAM
5-YEAR UPDATE
1 2
9 3
7 4
5241
6 8 40
10 41 11 12
42 13

ALICIA PKWY
105
15 14 16
17 117
18 19 20 21
23 27
22 24 25
26 28 29125
5 30
31 35 32 34
Legend 33
38 37 39
36 Intersection locations
City of Lake Forest limits
E
Figure 2-2
Intersection Location Map

2.3 Item: 17
854

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 2 Existing Conditions
Figure 2-3 Intersection Volume Count Comparison (2018 versus 2022) – AM Peak Hour Project Number: 2042547210 2.4
Item: 17
855

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 2 Existing Conditions
Figure 2-4 Intersection Volume Count Comparison (2018 versus 2022) – PM Peak Hour Project Number: 2042547210 2.5
Item: 17
856

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 2 Existing Conditions
Table 2-1 Intersection LOS Comparison (2018 versus 2022) 2018 2022 Difference
PMIntersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM

ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS

1. Alton & Portola 0.41 A 0.29 A 0.38

0.44 0.39

0.41 0.32

0.29 0.22

0.27 0.37

0.43 0.43

0.62 0.41

0.59 0.54

0.40 0.63

0.60 0.51

0.33 0.56

0.65 0.53
A 0.30 A -0.03

0.00 0.01
-0.03

0.00 2. Bake & Portola 0.44

0.39 0.41

0.34 0.35

0.23 0.29

0.47 0.44

0.56 0.69

0.50 0.65

0.59 0.43

0.62 0.73

0.53 0.34

0.54 0.91

0.65 A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
B
C
A
A
A
E
B

0.50 0.46

0.50 0.35

0.36 0.26

0.33 0.59

0.55 0.53

0.67 0.70

0.67 0.58

0.50 0.60

0.62 0.53

0.27 0.46

0.84 0.72
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
D
C
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A

0.47 0.46

0.49 0.35

0.30 0.26

0.28 0.49

0.58 0.43

0.66 0.48

0.61 0.57

0.48 0.58

0.51 0.49

0.26 0.44

0.65 0.63
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B

3. Lake Forest & Portola

4. Glenn Ranch & Portola

5. Portola & SR-241 Ramps

6. Alton & SR-241 Ramps

7. Lake Forest & SR-241 NB

8. Lake Forest & SR-241 SB

9. Bake & Rancho N

0.00 0.00 -0.01

0.00-0.02
-0.06
-0.01
-0.02
-0.10
-0.01
-0.13
-0.07
-0.09
-0.06
-0.05
-0.03

0.01 -0.06

0.00 -0.05
-0.10

0.0310. Lake Forest & Rancho*

11. Bake & Rancho S -0.10
-0.01
-0.22
-0.06
-0.01
-0.02
-0.02
-0.11
-0.04
-0.01
-0.02
-0.19
-0.09

12. El Toro & Portola/Sta. Margarita

13. Bake & Commercentre*

14. Bake & Irvine/Trabuco*

15. Lake Forest & Trabuco

16. Ridge Route & Trabuco

17. El Toro & Trabuco

18. Bake & Toledo -0.13
-0.02
-0.01

0.02 19. Lake Forest & Toledo

20. Ridge Route & Toledo

21. El Toro & Toledo

22. Bake & Jeronimo -0.26
-0.1223. Lake Forest & Jeronimo
Project Number: 2042547210 2.6
Item: 17
857

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 2 Existing Conditions
Table 2-1 Intersection LOS Comparison (2018 versus 2022) (Continued) 2018 2022 Difference
PMIntersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM

ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS

24. Ridge Route & Jeronimo

25. El Toro & Jeronimo

0.46 A 0.45 A 0.45

0.62 0.58

0.44 0.37

0.56 0.67

0.54 0.35

0.44 0.66

0.40 0.65

0.43 0.47

0.45 0.43

0.45 0.33
A 0.37 A -0.01
-0.05
-0.06
-0.05
-0.05
-0.05

0.00 -0.08
-0.10
-0.05
-0.05
-0.06
-0.02

0.03 0.67

0.64 0.49

0.42 0.61

0.67 0.54

0.35 0.57

0.69 0.42

0.72 0.47

0.56 0.57

0.47 0.51

0.42 B
B
A
A
B
B
A
A
A
B
A
C
A
A
A
A
A
A

0.81 0.67

0.69 0.55

0.71 0.70

0.65 0.44

0.61 0.52

0.57 0.78

0.49 0.65

0.62 0.52

0.39 0.51
D
B
B
A
C
B
B
A
B
A
A
C
A
B
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A

0.71 0.62

0.64 0.49

0.69 0.73

0.65 0.39

0.55 0.62

0.54 0.69

0.41 0.52

0.58 0.48

0.38 0.44
C
B
B
A
B
C
B
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A

26. Los Alisos & Jeronimo

27. Lake Forest & Muirlands

28. Ridge Route & Muirlands

29. El Toro & Muirlands

30. Los Alisos & Muirlands

31. Lake Forest & Rockfield

32. Ridge Route & Rockfield*

33. El Toro & Rockfield

0.00 0.00

0.00 -0.05
-0.06

0.10 -0.13
-0.03
-0.02
-0.07
-0.04
-0.09
-0.12
-0.04
-0.06
-0.09

34. Los Alisos & Rockfield

35. Lake Forest & I-5 NB

36. Lake Forest & I-5/Carlota

37. Paseo De Valencia & Carlota

38. El Toro & Bridger/I-5 NB

39. El Toro & Avd Carlota

40. Portola & Rancho
-0.03
-0.09
-0.08
-0.13
-0.04
-0.04
-0.01
-0.07

41. Alton & Towne Centre Dr

42. Alton & Commercentre
* Intersection improvements were completed between 2018 and 2022 Bold – exceeds acceptable LOS D
Project Number: 2042547210 2.7
Item: 17
858

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
Future-year (2040) traffic forecasts for the City’s arterial street system are used to identify transportation improvements that need to be implemented over time. Within the City, traffic volume forecasts are based on the allowable land uses specified by the City General Plan (including land use updates based on recent development project approvals). For the remainder of the County, 2040 demographic projections prepared for the County of Orange are used as the basis for calculating traffic volume growth.

Future-year traffic forecasts are derived using LFTAM, the City’s travel demand model. The LFTAM was originally developed in 2005 as a transportation planning tool for preparing long-range traffic forecasts and estimating future transportation needs in the City. The LFTAM is a sub-area derivative of the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM) maintained by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). The LFTAM was developed according to the OCTA sub-area traffic modeling guidelines and the OCTA has certified the traffic model as being consistent with the OCTAM parent model.

For this study, the LFTAM has been updated to include the most current land use projections and roadway network assumptions for the City of Lake Forest. In January 2020, the Lake Forest City Council certified the Meadows Residential Community (also referred to as the “Nakase Planned Community”) environmental impact report (EIR). In June 2020, the Lake Forest City Council adopted the Lake Forest 2040 General Plan and established a new land use designation, “mixed-use”, to encourage additional opportunities for residential development in the future. Since then, a City-initiated Zoning Code Amendment was approved by the City Council in August 2022 and established mixed-use zoning in five select areas throughout the City. The amendment established allowable uses such as residential and open space, and development standards such as building height, building setbacks, for five focus areas.

The LFTAM roadway network incorporates several key roadways that have recently been constructed and opened to traffic. These new roadway segments include:
•
•
•
Alton Parkway from Irvine Boulevard to Towne Centre Drive Rancho Parkway from Hermana Circle to Portola Parkway
Rancho Parkway South from Alton Parkway to Bake Parkway Figure 3-1 illustrates the forecast future citywide average daily traffic (ADT) volumes based on the land use and demographic projections noted above, along with the committed roadway network described in the previous sections. Intersections included in this future-year analysis are the same as previously shown in Figure 2-2. Table 3-1 lists the peak hour ICU and LOS for each location. Detailed ICU calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix A.

Project Number: 2042547210 3.1
Item: 17
859

LFTM PROGRAM
5-YEAR UPDATE
42 241

ALICIA PKWY
5 Legend
XX ADT volumes (000s)
City of Lake Forest limits
Figure 3-1
Future (Year-2040) ADT Volumes

3.2 Item: 17
860

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
Table 3-1 Future-Year (2040) Intersection LOS Summary – Baseline Committed Network AM Peak Hour
LOS
PM Peak Hour
LOS
LFTM
Program
LFTM Program
StatusIntersection ICU

0.49 0.50

0.55 0.65

0.62 0.57

0.41 0.41

0.53 0.59

0.77 0.66

0.69 0.67

0.66 0.54
ICU

0.43 0.62

0.64 0.89

0.68 0.59

0.44 0.54

0.71 0.89

0.81 0.73

0.72 0.78

0.64 0.62

1. Alton & Portola A
A
A
B
B
A
A
A
A
A
C
C
B
B
B
A
A
B
B
D
B
A
A
A
C
D
D
C
C
C
B
B
No
Yes
No
n/a

2. Bake & Portola Completed

3. Lake Forest & Portola n/a

4. Glenn Ranch & Portola

5. Portola & SR-241 Ramps

6. Alton & SR-241 Ramps

7. Lake Forest & SR-241 Northbound

8. Lake Forest & SR-241 Southbound

9. Bake & Rancho North
No n/a
No n/a
No n/a
No n/a
n/aNo
No n/a

10. Lake Forest & Rancho

11. Bake & Rancho South

12. El Toro & Portola/Santa Margarita

13. Bake & Commercentre

14. Bake & Irvine/Trabuco

15. Lake Forest & Trabuco

16. Ridge Route & Trabuco
Yes1
No
Construction
n/a
Yes
No
Completed
n/a
Yes1
No
Construction
n/a
No n/a
Completed and
Removed (2011)17. El Toro & Trabuco 0.65 B 0.67 B Yes

18. Bake & Toledo 0.73

0.66 0.52

0.62 0.75

0.64 0.57

0.71 0.69

0.49 0.44

0.65 0.71

0.67 0.44
C
B
A
B
C
B
A
C
B
A
A
B
C
B
A

0.72 0.64

0.35 0.50

0.83 0.77

0.48 0.78

0.67 0.73

0.53 0.78

0.72 0.84

0.67 C
B
A
A
D
C
A
C
B
C
A
C
C
D
B
No
No
n/a

19. Lake Forest & Toledo

20. Ridge Route & Toledo

21. El Toro & Toledo
n/a
No n/a
No n/a
Pre-Construction
Construction
n/a

22. Bake & Jeronimo Yes1
Yes1
No

23. Lake Forest & Jeronimo

24. Ridge Route & Jeronimo

25. El Toro & Jeronimo

26. Los Alisos & Jeronimo

27. Lake Forest & Muirlands

28. Ridge Route & Muirlands

29. El Toro & Muirlands

30. Los Alisos & Muirlands

31. Lake Forest & Rockfield

32. Ridge Route & Rockfield
No n/a
Yes2
No
Removed (2011)
n/a
No n/a
No n/a
Yes2
Yes1
Yes
Removed (FCPP)
Planning
Completed
Project Number: 2042547210 3.3
Item: 17
861

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
Table 3-1 Future-Year (2040) Intersection LOS Summary – Baseline Committed Network (Continued)
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LFTM
Program
LFTM Program
StatusIntersection ICU

0.68 0.78

0.50 LOS ICU

0.66 0.73

0.68 LOS

33. El Toro & Rockfield B
C
A
B
C
No
Yes1
No
n/a
Construction
n/a

34. Los Alisos & Rockfield

35. Lake Forest & I-5 Northbound B

36. Lake Forest & I-5/Avenida de la
Carlota 0.78

0.53 C
A

0.91 E Yes
Yes
Planning

37. Paseo De Valencia & Avenida de la
Carlota 0.57 A Completed

38. El Toro & Bridger/I-5 Northbound

39. El Toro & Avenida de la Carlota

40. Portola & Rancho

0.61 0.66

0.61 0.59

0.49 B
B
B
A
A

0.73 0.86

0.65 0.54

0.69 C
D
B
A
A
No
Yes
No
n/a
Completed
n/a

41. Alton & Towne Centre Dr

42. Alton & Commercentre
Yes2
No
Removed (2011)
n/a
1 These locations were forecasted to have an ICU/LOS deficiency in earlier LFTM Program updates. Due to recent intersection improvements and refinements to the LFTAM land use, this location is no longer forecast to have a deficient ICU/LOS. The intersection remains part of the LFTM program due to either being on the LOS D/LOS E cusp or variabilities in the LFTAM forecasts and, therefore, improvements are maintained as part of the LFTM Program. 2 These locations were removed from the LFTM Program in prior LFTM updates due to acceptable LOS or improvements are included as part of another program.

Table 3-1 shows that one study area intersection is forecast to be at LOS E in the future-year (2040) conditions; however, the intersection is outside of the City limits. In comparison to the prior LFTM 5-year update, there are three fewer intersections that exceed the City’s LOS D performance standard (the 2018 5-year update reported four total intersections worse than LOS D).

Intersections that were previously forecast to operate at LOS E or worse in prior LFTM 5-year updates are forecast to operate at LOS D or better under the baseline scenario in this report. This is due to the implementation of planned improvements at intersections and refinements to the LFTAM land use and network. However, although locations are at LOS D or better, the intersections and the corresponding identified improvements remain part of the LFTM Program due to the ICU/LOS being at the cusp of LOS D/LOS E or due to variabilities in the LFTAM model forecasts.

Project Number: 2042547210 3.4
Item: 17
862

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
Included in the LFTM Program are two intersections in the City of Lake Forest and three locations in the City of Irvine that were identified in the OSA analysis (Vacant Land Opportunities Phase III Alternative 7 (Hybrid Alternative) Traffic Study, May 2008) as needing improvements. The intersections are listed below and in Table 3-2:

2. Bake Parkway/Portola Parkway (City of Lake Forest)

32. Ridge Route Drive/Rockfield Boulevard (City of Lake Forest) 105. Alton Parkway/Irvine Boulevard (City of Irvine)
117. Alton Parkway/Toledo Way (City of Irvine)
125. Bake Parkway/Rockfield Boulevard (City of Irvine)
The conditions evaluated in the OSA analysis were based on the non-committed MPAH roadway system described previously in Section 1.5, and in that regard differ from the analysis that is based on the committed roadway network (see Section 1.4for committed roadway network description) utilized for this analysis.

Table 3-2 OSA Analysis Intersection LOS Summary – Full MPAH Roadway Network Scenario AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

ICU LOS
LFTM
Improvement
Status
LFTM
Program
Intersection ICU LOS

2. Bake & Portola 0.74

0.85 0.90

0.72 0.69
C
D
D
C
B

1.05 1.25

1.01 0.92

0.92 F
F
F
E
E
Yes
Yes
Completed
Completed
Planning

32. Ridge Route & Rockfield
105. Alton & Irvine Yes1
Yes1
Yes1
117. Alton & Toledo
125. Bake & Rockfield
Completed
Proposed to be
Removed
Notes:

ICUs presented in this table are from the May 2008 Alternative 7/Hybrid Alternative traffic impact analysis (See Reference 2 in Section 5).

These locations were identified as not meeting the performance criteria in the Alternative 7/Hybrid Alternative traffic impact analysis therefore is impact by the OSA project. Improvements identified from that traffic impact analysis are part of the LFTM Program.

Each of these locations are impacted under conditions assuming the completion of the roadway system according to the County of Orange MPAH. The improvements for these locations would be implemented as presented here should the Portola gap connection and Ridge Route Drive/I-5 Freeway Overcrossing be constructed. 1 These are City of Irvine intersections.

Abbreviations:

MPAH – Master Plan of Arterial Highways; OSA – Opportunities Study Area Project Number: 2042547210 3.5
Item: 17
863

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
Identifying suitable improvements for the intersection deficiencies noted in Table 3-2 above, which are partially due to future conditions based on buildout of the properties participating in the LFTM program, is the basis for the LFTM Program. Table 3-3 summarizes the improvements in the LFTM Program. Each location is categorized as pre-construction phase, planning phase, completed, or proposed to be removed from the program (also see Figure 3-2). The improvements for some of the intersections are fully funded by the LFTM Program while others are funded by a combination of the LFTM Program and the North Irvine Transportation Mitigation (NITM) Program. The improvements for nine intersections (#2, #10, #12, #17, #22, #41, #105, #117, #125) are fully funded by the LFTM Program while seven intersections (#14, #23, #26, #31, #32, #34, #36) are funded by the LFTM Program and the NITM Program. Two intersections (#37 and #39) are funded by the LFTM Program, NITM Program, and the City of Laguna Hills. One intersection (#30) is funded by the FCPP.

Fully committed improvements under the FCPP are excluded from the LFTM Program. The number of intersections with improvements funded by the LFTM Program has evolved over time as updated analyses have been prepared. Appendix B provides a comparison table showing past and current locations under the LFTM program. Appendix C describes the LFTM Program improvements at each location in detail.

Project Number: 2042547210 3.6
Item: 17
864

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
Table 3-3 Summary of Deficient Intersections and Proposed Improvements ICU With No
Improvements Improvements
ICU With
Intersection
(N/S & E/W)
Funding
Source(s)Improvements Additional Notes

AM PM AM PM
Committed Network – Intersection Improvements in Pre-Construction Phase Restripe WB (Rancho) approach to add 2nd WB left-turn lane (Completed). LFTM LFTM
City of Lake Forest
is the lead agency.10. Lake Forest
(N/S) & Rancho
(E/W)
Convert WB (Rancho) right-turn lane to a defacto right-turn lane (Not needed per acceptable LOS).0.59

0.67 0.89

0.78 0.59

0.65 0.86

0.78 Add a 2nd EB (Rancho) through lane (Completed). Add an EB (Rancho) defacto right turn lane (In pre-construction).

Add a 2nd NB (Bake) left-turn lane (In pre-construction). City of Lake Forest is the lead agency.

Co-operative
agreement in place
between Irvine and
Lake Forest.

Convert the 3rd EB (Bake) through lane to a shared through/right-turn lane (Not needed).

14. Bake (N/S)
& Irvine/Trabuco
(E/W) Convert the WB (Bake) right-turn lane to a 4th through lane (In pre-construction).

Provide a defacto WB (Bake) right-turn lane (In pre-construction).

NITM and
LFTM
City of Irvine is the
lead agency. Co-
operative
agreement in place
between Irvine and
Lake Forest.

Add a 2nd NB (Bake) left-turn lane (In pre-construction).

22. Bake (N/S)
& Jeronimo
(E/W)
Add 2nd WB (Jeronimo) left-turn lane (In pre-construction, per City of Irvine improvements).0.75 0.83 0.63 0.81
WB (Jeronimo) right turn defacto lane (In pre-construction, per City of Irvine improvements).

23. Lake Forest
(N/S) &
Jeronimo(E/W)
NITM and
LFTM
City of Lake Forest
is the lead agency.0.64

0.78 0.77

0.73 0.64

0.64 0.73

0.65 Add a defacto EB (Jeronimo) right-turn lane (In pre-construction).

34. Los Alisos
(N/S) &
Rockfield (E/W)
NITM and
LFTM
City of Lake Forest
is the lead agency.Add a SB (Los Alisos) right-turn lane (not feasible due to physical constraints).

In lieu of the above: Add a SB defacto right-turn lane (In pre-construction).

Committed Network – Intersection Improvements in the Planning Phase Convert the 2nd WB (Rockfield) through lane to a shared left-turn/through lane -- (Not needed per analysis). NITM and
LFTM

31. Lake Forest
(N/S) &
Rockfield(E/W)
Convert traffic signal phasing for EB and WB (Rockfield) approaches to split phase operation (Not needed per analysis).0.67 0.84 0.67 0.82 In lieu of the above: Modify signal to include EB (Rockfield) right-turn overlap phasing.

Project Number: 2042547210 3.7
Item: 17
865

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
Table 3-3 Summary of Deficient Intersections and Proposed Improvements (Continued) ICU With No ICU With ImprovementsIntersection (N/S
& E/W)
Funding Additional
Source(s) Notes
Improvements Improvements

AM PM AM PM
Committed Network – Intersection Improvements in the Planning Phase (Cont.) Convert the shared EB (I-5 ramp) left- turn/through lane to a 3rd left-turn NITM and LFTM
Shared City of
lane (Not needed). Add a 2nd WB (Carlota) left-turn lane and add a right- turn overlap phasing for WB right-turn lane (Not needed).

Irvine, City of
Laguna Hills
intersection.

36. Lake Forest
(N/S) & I-5/Carlota 0.78
(E/W)

0.91 0.73 0.86
Add a 2nd EB (I-5 ramp) through lane (Not needed). LFTM LFTMIn lieu of the above: restripe WBR (Carlota) to a shared left/right turn lane.

Committed Network – Intersection Improvements that are Completed

12. El Toro (N/S)
& Portola/Santa
Margarita (E/W)
LFTM
Program
--Add a 2nd NB (El Toro) left-turn lane (Completed).

Add a 2nd SB (El Toro) right-turn lane (Completed).

Improvements
Completed 0.66

0.53 0.73

0.5737. Paseo de
Valencia (N/S) &
Avenida de la
Carlota (E/W)
Improvements
Completed
Restripe 2nd SB (Paseo de Valencia) through to a shared 3rd left/2nd through (Completed).

NITM, City of Laguna
LFTM, and Hills intersection.

Laguna
Hills

39. El Toro Road
(N/S) & Avenida
de la Carlota
(E/W)
Improvements
Completed

0.66 0.86 Restripe EB (Avenida de la Carlota) to shared 3rd left/2nd through and shared through/right (Completed).

NITM, City of Laguna
LFTM, and Hills intersection.

Laguna
Hills
Restripe WB (Avenida de la Carlota) to shared left/through, through, and 2 right turn lanes with overlap phasing (Completed).

Committed Network – Intersection Improvements that are Removed from the Program

17. El Toro Rd
(N/S) & Trabuco
(E/W)
Improvements completed and removed
from the LFTM Program in the 2011 LFTM turn, a NB (El Toro) dedicated right turn land and WB (Trabuco) dedicated Program Program Baseline Adjustment Study.

In lieu of a defacto NB (El Toro) right turn and defacto WB (Trabuco) right LFTM -- --
--
--
right turn lane was completed.

26.Los Alisos Removed from LFTM Program in the 2011 NITM and LFTMRestripe WB (Jeronimo) approach to 2 left turn lanes, 2 through lanes, and a defacto right turn lane, and add a 2nd EB (Jeronimo) left turn lane.(N/S) & Jeronimo LFTM Program Baseline Adjustment Study (E/W) due to acceptable LOS.

30. Los Alisos
(N/S) & Muirlands Update due to fully committed
(E/W) improvements by the FCPP.

Removed from list in the 2014 5-Year Add 2nd NB (Los Alisos) left turn lane, add 2nd SB (Los Alisos) left turn lane, add 2nd EB (Muirlands) left turn lane, and convert NB (Los Alisos) dedicated right turn lane to a defacto right turn.

FCPP

41. Alton (N/S) & Removed from LFTM Program in the 2011 Add 2 nd WB (Rancho) left turn lane. LFTM Rancho (E/W) LFTM Program Baseline Adjustment Study
due to acceptable LOS
Program
Project Number: 2042547210 3.8
Item: 17
866

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
Table 3-3 Summary of Deficient Intersections and Proposed Improvements (Continued) ICU Without
Improvements Improvements
ICU WithIntersection
(NS & EW) Improvements Funding Additional Notes
Source(s)AM PM AM PM
Deficient Locations under MPAH Network

2. Bake (N/S) &
Portola (E/W)
Improvements
Completed
Add a 3rd WB (Portola) through lane or add a 2nd EB (Portola) left-turn lane (Completed).

LFTM
Program
--
--32. Ridge Route
(N/S) & Rockfield
(E/W)
Improvements
Completed
Add a defacto NB (Ridge Route) right-turn lane. NITM and LFTMIn lieu of the above, the City implemented a dedicated NB right-turn lane (Completed). Programs
105. Alton (N/S) & 0.90 3
Irvine (E/W)1,2

1.013 0.65 0.53 Reconfigure the EB (Irvine) approach to add a 3 rd EB left-turn lane, remove dedicated EB right-turn lane, and provide a defacto EB right-turn lane.

LFTM
Program
City of Irvine
intersection
117. Alton (N/S) &
Toledo (E/W)1
Improvements
Completed
Add right-turn overlap signal phasing for WB (Toledo) right-turn lanes (Completed).

LFTM
Program
City of Irvine
intersection
125. Bake (N/S) &
Rockfield (E/W)1
Improvements no longer needed Reconfigure the WB (Rockfield) approach to add a 3 rd WB left-turn lane, remove LFTM Program
City of Irvine
intersectiondue to acceptable LOS (2024
Update).
dedicated WB free-flow (No longer needed) right-turn lane and provide a defacto WB right-turn lane (No longer needed).

Notes:
1 These are City of Irvine locations identified in the Vacant Land Opportunities traffic impact analysis as being impacted by the OSA Alternative 7/Hybrid Alternative project, and the improvements included in the LFTM Program at these locations are included to address the impact of the OSA project. 2 This location is impacted under conditions assuming the completion of the roadway system according to the County of Orange MPAH. The improvements for this location would be implemented as presented here should the Portola gap connection and Ridge Route Drive/I-5 Freeway Overcrossing be constructed. 3 ICUs for conditions without improvements are from the May 2008 OSA Alternative 7/Hybrid Alternative traffic impact analysis. The ICUs with Improvements are from the current ITAM TC v7.1.

Abbreviations:

ICU – Intersection Capacity Utilization, LFTM – Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program, NITM – North Irvine Transportation Mitigation Program, EB – Eastbound, WB – Westbound, NB – Northbound, SB – Southbound Project Number: 2042547210 3.9
Item: 17
867

LFTM PROGRAM
5-YEAR UPDATE
2 241
10 41 12
105
14 17
117
2322
26 Legend 125
30Pre-construction
31 Planning
5 32 34
36Completed
Removed
37 39
Figure 3-2
LFTM Program Status

3.10 Item: 17
868

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
As discussed in the previous sections, the LFTM Program was identified based on traffic forecasts from LFTAM, the City’s traffic demand forecasting model. The evaluation has been prepared for a future year horizon that is based on buildout of the City’s General Plan and regional growth projections for the year 2040. In the following sub-sections, the methodology that was applied to allocate the cost of the improvement program is described. Cost estimates for the intersection improvements are presented and the corresponding cost for each property that participates in the LFTM Program is determined.

4.1 Cost Allocation Methodology
The cost allocation methodology uses ADT trip generation as the basis for deriving traffic shares. The total cost of the LFTM Program (presented in Section 4.2, below) is allocated according to the amount of traffic generated by the properties that participate in the LFTM Program and the impact that traffic has on the roadway system. Since the amount of traffic that a particular land use places on the roadway system is a function of trip generation and trip length, both of these factors are considered in deriving the LFTM fee. Simply stated, roadway system usage, as measured in vehicle miles of travel, is as follows:

Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT) = Trip Generation x Trip Length Since trip generation and trip length vary by land use, VMT estimates for each land use form the basis of the share formula. This creates an equitable means whereby each unit of a given type of land use is assigned a corresponding fee. The land uses are defined according to the following three basic categories that represent the land uses included in the properties that participate in the LFTM Program:

1. Single Family Detached Residential Dwelling (SDU)

2. Multi-Family Residential Dwelling (MDU)

3. Commercial (i.e., office and retail)
These three categories generally reflect the major differences in trip generation and/or trip length inherent in different types of land use. The SDU category represents the typical freestanding single-family home while the MDU category includes attached multi-family dwellings such as apartments and condominiums.

Public benefit uses, such as trips generated by parks and the Civic Center, are not included in the share calculations, but the traffic generated by these uses is included in the traffic model.

Table 4-1 summarizes the land use data associated with each property that participates in the LFTM Program. The amount of development shown in the tables represents the current approved entitlements of each property, which differs from the amounts in Ordinance 236 that implemented the LFTM Program 2011 Baseline Adjustment (the 2011 analysis occurred prior to the City Council approval of the Baker Ranch, Teresina, Serrano Summit and Portola Center projects). The traffic model forecasts that are based on these land uses formed the basis of the roadway improvements discussed in the previous section.

Project Number: 2042547210 4.1
Item: 17
869

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
Table 4-1 LFTM Properties Land Use and Trip Generation Summary Property/Land Use Description

NOT COMPLETED
Portola Center
Amount ADT
Single Family Detached
Condominium
617 DU
251 DU
58 DU
5,820
2,030
390Apartment
Commercial 12.6 TSF 1,190
9,430Total Portola Center

COMPLETED
Irvine Ranch Water District (Serrano Summit)
Single Family Detached
Condominium (Attached and Detached)
Apartments
101 DU
212 DU
224 DU
950
1,720
1,510
4,180Total Irvine Ranch Water District
KB Homes (Whisler Ridge)
Single Family Detached
Total KB Homes
75 DU
85 DU
710
710
Pacific Heritage (Teresina)
Single Family Detached
Total Pacific Heritage
Shea/Baker (Baker Ranch)
Single Family Detached
Condominium
800
800
1,402 DU
348 DU
13,220
2,820
Apartment 619 DU 4,170
Commercial 17.5 TSF 1,650
Total Shea/Baker 21,860
27,550Total Completed
TOTAL
Single Family Detached
Condominium
2,280 DU
811 DU
21,500
6,570
4,560
2,840
35,470
Apartment 901 DU
Commercial 30.1 TSF
Total
The amount of development shown above represents the most current entitlements of each property, which differs from the amounts in Ordinance 236, which implemented the LFTM Program 2011 Baseline Adjustment.

Trip Rates: ITE 11th Edition
Abbreviations:

ADT – Average Daily Trips; DU – Dwelling Unit; TSF – Thousand Square Feet ITE 210 Single Family Detached Housing = 9.43 trips/DU; ITE 220 Apartment = 6.74 trips/DU; Condominium trip rate is the average of Single Family and Apartment rates = 8.09 trips/DU; ITE 821 Shopping Plaza rate = 94.49 trips/TSF Project Number: 2042547210 4.2
Item: 17
870

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
Also shown in Table 4-1 are ADT trip generation estimates (calculated using current land use-based ADT trip generation rates) for each property participating in the LFTM Program. As noted in the table, four of the five properties have completed construction.

4.2 LFTM Fee Calculation Methodology
In prior LFTM Program updates, the California Department of General Services (DGS) California Construction Cost Index (CCCI) was used to estimate the annual inflator or deflator. The annual inflator or deflator was applied to the 2011 cost estimates to bring costs to current levels. For information purposes, Table 4-2 summarizes the CCCI historical trend from 2011 to 2024. The CCCI shows an annual increase of approximately 1% to 2% from 2011 to 2016, an approximately 3% to 4% increase from 2016 to 2021, then an increase of approximately 9% to 13% from 2021-2024. For this update, the 2011 cost estimates have not been adjusted to 2024 dollars, but rather new cost estimates and final costs for projects that have been completed are used.

Table 4-2 California Construction Cost Index Summary
Year Annual Adjustment
+1.50%
+1.55%
+2.31%
+1.29%
+2.19%
+4.34%
+3.50%
+1.33%
+3.6%
2011 to 2012:
2012 to 2013:
2013 to 2014:
2014 to 2015:
2015 to 2016:
2016 to 2017:
2017 to 2018:
2018 to 2019:
2019 to 2020:
2020 to 2021:
2021 to 2022:
2022 to 2023:
2023 to 2024:
+2.8%
+13.4%
+9.3%
+9.4%
Source: State of California Department of General Services - Real Estate Services Division – California Construction Cost Index
Table 4-3 lists the LFTM Program and the estimated construction costs. For each LFTM Program location, costs from completed improvements are shown and engineering estimates are shown for locations in pre-construction and planning phases.

Project Number: 2042547210 4.3
Item: 17
871

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
Table 4-3 LFTM Program Improvement Costs
Int.

No.

On-Going Projects (Pre-Construction and Planning)
Item Intersection Jurisdiction Total Cost
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
10 14
22 23
34 31
Lake Forest Dr & Rancho Pkwy
Bake Pkwy & Irvine Blvd/Trabuco Rd
Bake Pkwy & Jeronimo Rd
LF
LF/Irvine
LF/Irvine
LF
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
627,448
2,226,2511
2,846,7882
1,392,922
906,678
Lake Forest Dr & Jeronimo Rd
Los Alisos Blvd & Rockfield Blvd
Lake Forest Dr & Rockfield Blvd
LF
LF 59,980
105 Alton Pkwy & Irvine Blvd
36 Lake Forest Dr & I-5 Fwy SB Off-Ramp/Carlota
Irvine
LH/Irvine
676,214
120,360
Completed Projects
9 2 Bake Pkwy & Portola Pkwy LF
LF
$
$
$
$
$
$
72,240
2,627,022
1,144
10 11
12 13
14 12
32 37
39 El Toro Rd & Portola Pkwy/Santa Margarita Pkwy
Ridge Route Dr & Rockfield Blvd LF
Paseo de Valencia & Avenida de la Carlota
El Toro Rd & Avenida de la Carlota
LH 79,000
LH 78,000
117 Alton Pkwy & Toledo Way Irvine 19,555
Summary
Total Cost of Improvements $ 11,733,603
Notes:
1 Per the Bake at Irvine/Trabuco Cooperative Agreement, City of Irvine’s share is assumed to be 50% ($2,226,251) and the City of Lake Forest’s share is assumed to be 50% ($2,226,251). Final shared cost will be determined per the Cooperative Agreement.
2 Per the Bake/Jeronimo Cooperative Agreement, City of Irvine’s share is assumed to be 70% ($6,642,506) and the City of Lake Forest’s share is assumed to be 30% ($2,846,788). Final shared cost will be determined per the Cooperative Agreement.

LF = Lake Forest; LH = Laguna Hills; Irvine = City of Irvine; NA = not applicable For locations involving the construction of physical improvements, the cost estimates include planning and engineering costs (preliminary project development, public hearings, design engineering, and construction engineering costs), right-of-way acquisition costs (land acquisition, demolition, severance, business goodwill, right-of-way engineering, consultant and legal costs), and construction costs (construction of project improvements, permit and inspection fees, resolution of construction issues, and preparation of record drawings). Cost related to administration and environmental clearances are added separately.

At the intersection of Paseo de Valencia at Avenida de la Carlota, and the intersection of El Toro Road at Avenida de la Carlota, the City of Lake Forest has paid $157,000 towards the improvement of these two Project Number: 2042547210 4.4
Item: 17
872

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
intersections based on the City of Laguna Hills’ Urban Village Fee Program. For other “completed” improvements, the final cost was provided by the City. Locations that are in the “pre-construction” phase or “planning” phase, the engineer’s probable estimate of cost and/or construction bids include the following: engineering costs, right-of-way acquisition costs, and construction costs. The pre-construction phase costs were provided by the City. In addition, estimated credits are shown based on existing cooperative agreements with the City of Irvine. The final credit amounts will be based upon the completion of the improvement projects.

The actual program cost is listed in Table 4-4 and comprises the improvement costs, plus 25% for administration and environmental costs. As shown, the total estimated cost for the LFTM Program is approximately $14.7 million.

Table 4-4 LFTM Program Cost Summary
2018 5-Year Update
Cost Summary1
2024 5-Year Update
Cost SummaryCost Item
Total Cost of Improvements
Payments from NITM (Not assumed)
Payments from FCPP (Not assumed)
Administration & Environmental (25%)
Total Allocated Costs
$
$
$
$
$
9,222,000 $
$
$
11,733,603
00 0 0
2,306,000
11,528,000
$ 2,933,400
14,667,003
+27%
$
Difference
LFTM Program Spent to Date (as of June 30, 2024)
LFTM Program Cash Balance to Date (as of June 30, 2024) Unpaid Program Costs2
$
$
$
3,991,299
8,156,453
2,519,251
1 Source: 2018 5-Year Update provided for comparison purposes only. 2 Unpaid Program Costs = Total allocated cost minus spent to date minus cash balance to date.

As shown, there is an approximately 27% increase when compared to the prior update. The increase in costs could be attributed to an overall increase in construction costs, materials, labor, and inflation for each individual improvement project. The 25% added for administration and environmental include costs associated with administration, environmental clearance, and construction support and administration.

In addition, the City of Lake Forest and the City of Irvine currently have a cooperative agreement in place for Bake at Jeronimo and Bake at Irvine/Trabuco intersections. The cost summary shown above captures the City’s assumed share of cost for the two intersections. For all other locations with both LFTM and NITM as sources, the full cost of the improvement will be included in the LFTM Program until an agreement is reached with the City of Irvine on an equitable contribution, in which case the overall cost shown here will be reduced. The Ordinance also allows for possible contribution from the FCPP, and coordination will be established with the County to determine what, if any, funds may be available.

As mentioned above, the LFTM Program shows an approximately 27% increase when compared to the prior update. The increasing costs of construction is consistent with a memorandum prepared by the City Project Number: 2042547210 4.5
Item: 17
873

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
of Lake Forest Public Works department for the City of Lake Forest Council, which discusses the rising costs in the construction industry over the past three to four years. Specifically, annual increases up to

13.4% and a compounded increase of 35.6% from 2020 to 20232. The memorandum describes a variety of factors that have contributed to the cost increases, including material prices, labor costs, and a surge in construction activity. Due to significant increases, the City’s roadway infrastructure projects, such as those in the LFTM Program, show an increase in cost.

There are increases in cost when compared to the prior update at the following locations:

10. Lake Forest Drive & Rancho Parkway

14. Bake Parkway & Irvine Boulevard/Trabuco Road

22. Bake Parkway & Jeronimo Road

23. Lake Forest Drive & Jeronimo Road

34. Los Alisos Boulevard & Rockfield Boulevard
105. Alton Parkway & Irvine Boulevard
Alternative improvements were investigated for locations in the planning phase. In some instances, the future intersection LOS is at an acceptable LOS, therefore, the LFTM Program improvement is no longer necessary. Updates to the following locations include:

31. Lake Forest Drive & Rockfield Boulevard – an alternate improvement results in a reduction to the cost

36. Lake Forest Drive & I-5 Freeway Southbound Off-Ramp/Avenida de la Carlota – an alternative improvement results in a reduction to the cost 125. Bake Parkway & Rockfield Boulevard – proposed to be removed from the LFTM Program due to acceptable LOS
Updates to the three locations noted above help keep the LFTM Program cost increase to a minimal amount.

Table 4-5 shows the cost allocation according to land use and the resulting fee per unit of land use. 2 Construction Cost Increases for Roadway and Infrastructure Projects Memorandum to City Council, City of Lake Forest, July 11, 2024.

Project Number: 2042547210 4.6
Item: 17
874

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
Table 4-5 LFTM Fee Calculation
Trip
Length
Amount Generation Factor
Land Use Land Use Land Use ADT Trip Fee/Land
Use UnitUnits Fee Fee/ADT
SDU DU 121 1,141 1.00 $2,519,251
$12,147,752
$14,667,003
$2,208 $20,820
Total LFTM Program Spent to Date and Cash Balance
Total LFTM Program
Baseline ADT Fee = $2,208/trip
LFTM Program Spent to Date (as of June 30, 2024) = $3,991,299 LFTM Program Cash Balance to Date (as of June 30, 2024) = $8,156,453 (Fee/ADT = Baseline ADT Fee x Trip Length Factor)
Abbreviations: ADT – Average Daily Trips; SDU – Single Family Detached Dwelling Unit The resulting fee/ADT is $2,208 and is applied to the remaining property as shown in the previously referenced Table 4-5.

Of the five participating properties, four have completed construction and have paid their share of costs under the applicable prior fee structure. KB Homes (Whisler Ridge) completed their payment obligations in 2011 under the prior fee structure and Shea/Baker (Baker Ranch), Pacific Heritage (Terisina), and IRWD (Serrano Summit), completed their payment obligations as of June 2024. Portola Center is the only remaining property with pending fee payment obligations for 121 units.

The LFTM Program cost shares for the participating properties are summarized in Table 4-6. Shown here are the land uses within each project area and the corresponding cost allocation to that land use Program. As shown in Table 4-6, four of the five properties have no unpaid units remaining.

Project Number: 2042547210 4.7
Item: 17
875

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
Table 4-6 LFTM Participating Properties LFTM Fee Calculation Land Use Description
Shea/Baker (Baker Ranch)
Single Family Detached
Condominium
Unpaid Units Fee per Unit Cost ($)
0 DU
0 DU
0 DU
0 TSF
NA2
NA2
NA2
NA2
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Apartment
Commercial
Total
Portola Center
Single Family Detached
Condominium
121 DU
0 DU
$20,8204
NA3
$2,519,251
$0
$0
$0
$0
Apartment 0 DU NA3
Commercial 0 TSF NA3
Total
Irvine Ranch Water District (Serrano Summit)
Single Family Detached 0
0 0
0 DU
DU
DU
DU
NA3
NA3
NA3
NA3
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Condominium Detached (DU)
Condominium Attached (DU)
Multi-family Attached (DU)
Total
KB Homes (Whisler Ridge)
Single Family Detached 0 DU
DU
NA1
NA2
$0
$0
Pacific Heritage (The Pinnacle at Serrano Highlands)
Single Family Detached
Total
0 Single Family Detached
Condominium
Apartment
121 DU
0 DU
$20,8204 $2,519,251
-- $0
$0--
--
0 DU
Commercial 0 TSF $0
Total $2,519,251
Abbreviations: DU – Dwelling Unit; TSF – Thousand Square Feet 1All payment obligations for this participating property were completed in 2011 under the prior fee structure. 2All payment obligations for this participating property were paid before June 30, 2019 under a prior fee structure. 3All payment obligations for this participating property were paid before June 30, 2024 under a prior fee structure. 4 Full amount is $21,756.61 without rounding.

Project Number: 2042547210 4.8
Item: 17
876

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
Table 4-7 summarizes the remaining participating property with unpaid units and the corresponding LFTM Fee.

Table 4-7 LFTM Remaining Participating Properties LFTM Fee Summary Landowner ADT
1,141
1,141
Cost
Portola Center $2,519,251
$2,519,251
$12,147,752
$14,667,003
Total Remaining Unpaid
LFTM Program Spent to Date and Cash Balance to Date
Total LFTM Program
1All payment obligations for KB Homes (Whisler Ridge), Shea/Baker (Baker Ranch), Pacific Heritage (Teresina), IRWD (Serrano Summit), and a portion of Portola Center were completed under prior fee structures.

Project Number: 2042547210 4.9
Item: 17
877

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 5 References
5 References

1. Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation (LFTM) Program 2006 Transportation Report, Austin- Foust Associates, Inc., February 2006.

2. Vacant Land Opportunities Phase III Alternative 7 (Hybrid Alternative) Traffic Study, Austin-Foust Associates, Inc., May 2008

3. Highway Capacity Manual 7 th Edition, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, 2022.

4. Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation (LFTM) Program 2011 Baseline Adjustment Study, Austin- Foust Associates, Inc., August 2011.

5. Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation (LFTM) 5-Year Review (2014 Update), Stantec Consulting Services Inc, May 2014.

6. Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation (LFTM) 5-Year Review (2018 Update), Stantec Consulting Services Inc, October 2019.

Project Number: 2042547210 5.1
Item: 17
878

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update ICU Calculation Worksheets
Appendix A ICU Calculation Worksheets
Peak hour intersection volume/capacity ratios are calculated by means of intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values. ICU calculations were performed for the intersections shown in Figure A-1.

The procedure is based on the critical movement methodology, and shows the amount of capacity utilized by each critical move. A "de-facto" right-turn lane is used in the ICU calculation for cases where a curb lane is wide enough to separately serve both through and right-turn traffic (typically with a width of 19 feet from curb to outside of through-lane with parking prohibited during peak periods). Such lanes are treated the same as striped right-turn lanes during the ICU calculations, but they are denoted on the ICU calculation worksheets using the letter "d" in place of a numerical entry for right-turn lanes.

The methodology also incorporates a check for right-turn capacity utilization. Both right-turn-on- green (RTOG) and right-turn-on-red (RTOR) capacity availability are calculated and checked against the total right-turn capacity need. If insufficient capacity is available, then an adjustment is made to the total capacity utilization value. The following example shows how this adjustment is made.

Example of Right-turn Capacity Utilization for Northbound Right

1. Right-Turn-On-Green (RTOG)
If NBT is critical move, then:

RTOG = V/C (NBT)
Otherwise,
RTOG = V/C (NBL) + V/C (SBT) - V/C (SBL)

2. Right-Turn-On-Red (RTOR)
If WBL is critical move, then:

RTOR = V/C (WBL)
Otherwise,
RTOR = V/C (EBL) + V/C (WBT) - V/C (EBT)

3. Right-Turn Overlap Adjustment
If the northbound right is assumed to overlap with the adjacent westbound left, adjustments to the RTOG and RTOR values are made as follows:

RTOG = RTOG + V/C (WBL)
RTOR = RTOR - V/C (WBL)

4. Total Right-Turn Capacity (RTC) Availability For NBR RTC = RTOG + factor x RTOR
Where factor = RTOR saturation flow factor (typically 75%)

5. Right-turn Adjustment for ICU Calculation
Right-turn adjustment is then as follows: Additional ICU = V/C (NBR) - RTC Project Number: 2042547210 A.1
Item: 17
879

LFTM PROGRAM
5-YEAR UPDATE
2 241
10 41 12
105
14 17
117
2322
26 Legend 125
30Pre-construction
31 Planning
5 32 34
36Completed
Removed
37 39
Figure A-1
LFTM Program Status
A.2
Item: 17
880

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update ICU Calculation Worksheets
A zero or negative value indicates that adequate capacity is available and no adjustment is necessary. A positive value indicates that the available RTOR and RTOG capacity does not adequately accommodate the right-turn V/C, therefore the right-turn is essentially considered to be a critical movement. In such cases, the right-turn adjustment is noted on the ICU worksheet and it is included in the total capacity utilization value. When it is determined that a right-turn adjustment is required for more than one right- turn movement, the word "multi" is printed on the worksheet instead of an actual right-turn movement reference, and the right-turn adjustments are cumulatively added to the total capacity utilization value. In such cases, further operational evaluation is typically carried out to determine if under actual operational conditions, the critical right-turns would operate simultaneously, and therefore a right-turn adjustment credit should be applied.

Shared Lane V/C Methodology
For intersection approaches where shared usage of a lane is permitted by more than one turn movement (e.g., left/through, through/right, left/through/right), the individual turn volumes are evaluated to determine whether dedication of the shared lane is warranted to any one given turn movement. The following example demonstrates how this evaluation is carried out:

Example of Shared Lane Utilization for Shared Left/Through Lane

1. Average Lane Volume (ALV)
ALV = Left-Turn Volume + Through Volume .

Total Left + Through Approach Lanes (including shared lane)

2. ALV for Each Approach
ALV (Left) = Left-Turn Volume .

Left Approach Lanes (including shared lane)
ALV (Through) = Through Volume .

Through Approach Lanes (including shared lane)

3. Lane Dedication is Warranted
If ALV (Left) is greater than ALV then full dedication of the shared lane to the left-turn approach is warranted.

Left-turn and through V/C ratios for this case are calculated as follows:

V/C (Left) = Left-Turn Volume .

Left Approach Capacity (including shared lane)
V/C (Through) = Through Volume .

Through Approach Capacity (excluding shared lane)
Similarly, if ALV (Through) is greater than ALV then full dedication to the through approach is warranted, and left- turn and through V/C ratios are calculated as follows:

V/C (Left) = Left-Turn Volume .

Left Approach Capacity (excluding shared lane)
Project Number: 2042547210 A.3
Item: 17
881

Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update ICU Calculation Worksheets
V/C (Through) = Through Volume .

Through Approach Capacity (including shared lane)

4. Lane Dedication is not Warranted
If ALV (Left) and ALV (Through) are both less than ALV, the left/through lane is assumed to be truly shared and each left, left/through or through approach lane carries an evenly distributed volume of traffic equal to ALV. A combined left/through V/C ratio is calculated as follows:

V/C (Left/Through) = Left-Turn Volume + Through Volume .

Total Left + Through Approach Capacity (including shared lane) This V/C (Left/Through) ratio is assigned as the V/C (Through) ratio for the critical movement analysis and ICU summary listing.

If split phasing has not been designated for this approach, the relative proportion of V/C (Through) that is attributed to the left-turn volume is estimated as follows:

If approach has more than one left-turn (including shared lane), then:

V/C (Left) = V/C (Through)
If approach has only one left-turn lane (shared lane), then:

V/C (Left) = Left-Turn Volume .

Single Approach Lane Capacity
If this left-turn movement is determined to be a critical movement, the V/C (Left) value is posted in brackets on the ICU summary printout.

These same steps are carried out for shared through/right lanes. If full dedication of a shared through/right lane to the right-turn movement is warranted, the right-turn V/C value calculated in step three is checked against the RTOR and RTOG capacity availability if the option to include right-turns in the V/C ratio calculations is selected. If the V/C value that is determined using the shared lane methodology described here is reduced due to RTOR and RTOG capacity availability, the V/C value for the through/right lanes is posted in brackets.

When an approach contains more than one shared lane (e.g., left/through and through/right), steps one and two listed above are carried out for the three turn movements combined. Step four is carried out if dedication is not warranted for either of the shared lanes. If dedication of one of the shared lanes is warranted to one movement or another, step three is carried out for the two movements involved, and then steps one through four are repeated for the two movements involved in the other shared lane.

Project Number: 2042547210 A.4
Item: 17
882

1. Alton & Portola
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
f
1700
3400
70 40
.04 120
150
460
.07 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
f
1700
3400
220
30 .13*
.01
210
260
500
.12
.01* .04* .08*
350 390
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
170
140
10 .10*
.04
110
60 .06*
.02
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
200
290
30 .12 140
100
20 .08*
.03.09*
.02.01 10 .01 .01
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 2
f
3400
3400
10 270
120
.00 10
150
70 .00 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 2
f
3400
3400
20 370
210
.01 30
310
210
.01
.08* .04* .11* .09*
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 3
f
3400
5100
480
130
110
.14*
.03
360
150
140
.11*
.03
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 3
f
3400
5100
360
400
150
.11*
.08
430
160
210
.13*
.03
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* └─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .38 .30
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .49 .43
A.5
Item: 17
883

2. Bake & Portola
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 1700
5100
50 .03 180 .11* │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 1700
5100
110 .06 170 .10

1.5 1.5
250 {.07}*
140
180 {.06}
270

1.5 1.5
280 {.09}*
300
240 {.07}*
300 {.05}
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
150
380
300
.09*
.11
160
200
170
.09 │ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
290
380
230
.17*
.11
340
230
60 .20*
.07.06*
.10.18 .14 .04
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 3
d
3400
5100
1700
280
440
60 .08*
.09
230
670
100
.07*
.13
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 3
d
3400
5100
1700
350
420
50 .10*
.08
160
680
130
.05*
.13
.04 .06 .03 .08
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 2
d
3400
3400
1700
280
520
70 .08 350
620
30 .10 │ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 2
d
3400
3400
1700
360
310
130
.11 490
860
80 .14
.15*
.04
.18*
.02
.09*
.08
.25*
.05
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* └─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .44 .47
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .50 .62
A.6
Item: 17
884

3. Lake Forest & Portola
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
50 140
150
.03 80
180
180
.05 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
130
210
330
.08*
.06
260
320
470
.15*
.09.04*
.09
.05*
.11 .19 .28
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
200
160
10 .12*
.05
180
180
30 .11*
.05
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
200
360
20 .12 160
300
30 .09
.11*
.01
.09*
.02.01 .02
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 3
d
3400
5100
1700
20 600
80 .01 20
940
90 .01 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 3
d
3400
5100
1700
30 780
240
.01 10
990
290
.00
.12*
.05
.18*
.05
.15*
.14
.19*
.17
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 3
d
3400
5100
1700
200
810
240
.06*
.16
190
900
140
.06*
.18
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 3
d
3400
5100
1700
500
740
240
.15*
.15
390
1200
150
.11*
.24
.14 .08 .14 .09
│ Right Turn Adjustment
│ Clearance Interval
NBR .01*
.05*
│ Right Turn Adjustment
│ Clearance Interval
NBR .01*
.05*
NBR .05*
.05*.05*
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .39 .46
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .55 .64
A.7
Item: 17
885

4. Glenn Ranch & Portola
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 70
40 60
.04 90
40 70
.05 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 70
80 .04 80
80 .05
.02*
.04
.02*
.04
.05*
.06
.05*
.08100 140
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
2 2
f
3400
3400
340
70 .10*
.02
250
30 .07*
.01
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
2 2
f
3400
3400
860
140
750
.25*
.04
690
70 .20*
.02
630 480 670
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
290
570
90 .09*
.11
730
870
80 .21*
.17
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
310
880
110
.09*
.17
820
1160
80 .24*
.23
.05 .05 .06 .05
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
140
750
290
.04 70
690
270
.02 │ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
230
890
790
.07 110 .03
.15*
.17
.14*
.16
.17* 1020 .20*
.55.46 930
WBR│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Right Turn Adjustment │ Clearance Interval
WBR .04*
.05*
.15*
.05*│ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for WBR
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .41 .49
│ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for WBR
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .65 .89
A.8
Item: 17
886

5. Portola & SR-241 Ramps
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
2 3
f
3400
5100
260
850
80 .08 130
750
120
.04*
.15
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
2 3
f
3400
5100
330
1240
80 .10*
.24
120
1330
100
.04
.17* .26*
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
2 3
f
3400
5100
120
670
190
.04*
.13
210
900
110
.06 │ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
2 3
f
3400
5100
220
1250
350
.06 370 .11*
.28.18* .25* 1420
270
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 0
f
1700
0 100
0 .06*
.05
130
0 .08*
.04
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 0
f
1700
0 380
0 .22* 440
0 .26*
.05
180 270 200 260
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 0
f
3400
0 160
0 130
0 │ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 0
f
3400
0 220
0 .06 160
0 230 180 310 280
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* └─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .32 .35
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .62 .68
A.9
Item: 17
887

6. Alton & SR-241 Ramps
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
f
1700
5100
110
380
80 .06*
.07
160
780
150
.09*
.15
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
f
1700
5100
350
520
120
.21*
.10
370
1050
10 .22*
.21
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
f
1700
5100
40 560
190
.02 60
520
200
.04 │ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
f
1700
5100
60 1040
680
.04 80
710
480
.05
.11* .10* .20* .14*
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 0
f
3400
0 130
0 .04 210
0 .06*
.02
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 0
f
3400
0 380
0 .11*
.00
600
0 .18*
.01
320 90 540 340
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 0
f
3400
0 250
0 .07*
.05*
60 0
2 0
f
3400
0 10
0 50
0 40 50 80 40
│ Clearance Interval .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* └─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .29 .30
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .57 .59
A.10
Item: 17
888

7. Lake Forest & SR-241 NB
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
2 2
0 3400
3400
0 120
490
0 .04*
.14
160
640
0 .05*
.19
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
2 2
0 3400
3400
0 130
960
0 .04 230 .07
.28* 1330
0 .39*
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
0 2
1 0
3400
1700
0 440
80 0
540
120
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
0 2
1 0
3400
1700
0 810
540
0 .13*
.05
.16*
.07
.24
.32
910
450
.27
.26
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
│ Clearance Interval
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .22 .26
.05* .05* │ Right Turn Adjustment
│ Clearance Interval
SBR .08*
.05* .05*
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .41 .44
A.11
Item: 17
889

8. Lake Forest & SR-241 SB
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │
│

LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C
.25

VOL V/C
│
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
0 2
0 0
3400
0 0
510
0 0
720
0 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
0 2
0 0
3400
0 0
840
0 0
1290
0 .15* .21* .38*
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
0 2
0 0
3400
0 0
440
0 0
540
0 │ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
0 2
0 0
3400
0 0
860
0 0
980
0 .13 .16 .25* .29
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 0
1 3400
0 100
0 .03*
.09
80 0
.02*
.06
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 0
1 3400
0 340
0 .10*
.11
370
0 .11*
.071700 160 100 1700 190 120
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
│ Right Turn Adjustment
│ Clearance Interval
EBR .04*
.05*
│ Right Turn Adjustment
│ Clearance Interval
EBR .01*
.05*.05* .05*
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .27 .28
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .41 .54
A.12
Item: 17
890

9. Bake & Rancho N
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
0 2
d
0 3400
1700
0 560
290
0 780
490
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
0 2
d
0 3400
1700
0 690
430
0 890
720
.16*
.17
.23*
.29
.20*
.25
.26*
.42
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 90
660
0 .05*
.19
210
610
0 .12*
.18
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 180
800
0 .11*
.24
350
720
0 .21*
.21
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 0
2 3400
0 370
0 .11*
.03
300
0 .09*
.05
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 0
2 3400
0 570
0 .17*
.04
480
0 .14*
.093400 90 180 3400 140 300
│ Clearance Interval
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .37 .49
.05* .05* │ Right Turn Adjustment
│ Clearance Interval
NBR .05*
.05*.05*
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .53 .71
A.13
Item: 17
891

10. Lake Forest & Rancho
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
130
450
150
.08*
.13
170
600
280
.10 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
70 600
230
.04 170
850
270
.10
.18*
.16
.18*
.14
.25*
.16.09
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
100
520
50 .06 170
550
60 .10*
.16
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
230
710
160
.14*
.21
320
670
220
.19*
.20.15*
.03 .04 .09 .13
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 20
260
50 .01 20
530
140
.01 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 80
410
50 .05*
.14
180
940
100
.11
.09* .20* .31*
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
220
370
40 .06*
.11
170
330
80 .05*
.10
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
240
580
140
.07 290
490
190
.09*
.14.17*
.08.02 .05 .11
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* └─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .43 .58
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .59 .89
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ 2040 General Plan with LFTM Program Imp
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
│
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
70 600
230
.04 170
850
270
.10
.18*
.14
.25*
.16
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
230
710
160
.14*
.21
320
670
220
.19*
.20
.09 .13
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
80 410
50 .05*
.12
180
940
100
.11
.28*
.06.03
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
240
580
140
.07 290
490
190
.09*
.14.17*
.08 .11
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05*
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .59 .86
A.14
Item: 17
892

11. Bake & Rancho S
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 170
710
0 .10*
.21
120
1010
0 .07*
.30
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
1 1700
3400
1700
310
910
380
.18*
.27
330
1270
120
.19*
.37
.22 .07
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
0 2
1 0
3400
1700
0 830
200
0 840
140
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
1 1700
3400
1700
150
1060
280
.09 70 .04
.24*
.12
.25*
.08
.31* 1050 .31*
.11.16 180
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 0
1 3400
0 150
0 .04*
.08
200
0 .06*
.08
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 1
d
3400
1700
1700
200
360
350
.06 340
60 .10*
.04.21*
.211700 140 130 370 .22
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 1
1 3400
1700
1700
80 70
50 .02*
.04
300
280
140
.09
.16*
.08.03
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* └─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .43 .43
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .77 .81
A.15
Item: 17
893

12. El Toro & Portola/Santa M
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
f
1700
5100
250
190
450
.15*
.04
270
420
610
.16*
.08
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
2 3
f
3400
5100
320
210
450
.09*
.04
530
440
530
.16*
.09
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
40 530
230
.02 20
210
160
.01 │ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
2 3
2 3400
5100
3400
10 590
370
.00 30
200
220
.01
.10*
.14
.04*
.09
.12*
.11
.04*
.06
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
90 900
280
.03 290 .09 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
170
1410
400
.05 410 .12
.18* 1420 .28*
.21
.28* 1850 .36*
.35.16 360 .24 600
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 4
d
3400
6800
1700
480
1320
30 .14*
.19
450
970
50 .13*
.14
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 4
d
3400
6800
1700
420
1690
30 .12*
.25
410
1410
50 .12*
.21
.02 .03 .02 .03
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* └─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .62 .66
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .66 .73
A.16
Item: 17
894

13. Bake & Commercentre
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
80 740
270
.05*
.22
70 910
130
.04 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
220
1000
380
.13*
.29
130
1240
380
.08*
.36.27*
.08.16 .22 .22
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
10 690
80 .01 10
800
130
.01*
.24
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
10 990
170
.01 10 .01
.20*
.05
.29* 1090 .32*
.14.08 .10 240
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 100
130
80 .06 90
100
80 .05 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 160
110
220
.09*
.06
150
290
230
.09
.06* .05* .15*
.13
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│

1.5 1.5
0 130
90 280
210
10 │ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│

1.5 1.5
0 380
240
30 400
160
0 .12*
.095100 .05*
.05*
.10*
.05*
5100
0 .13*
10 │ Clearance Interval
│ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .41 .48
│ Clearance Interval
│ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .69 .72
.05* .05*
A.17
Item: 17
895

14. Bake & Irvine/Trabuco
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
290
1260
140
.17*
.25
290
1060
440
.17*
.21
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
240
1830
140
.14*
.36
240
1720
530
.14
.34*
.31.08 .26 .08
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
50 810
60 .03 210 .12 │ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
100
1500
120
.06 320 .19*
.33.16* 1090 .21*
.06
.29* 1680
.04 110 .07 190 .11
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
120
240
260
.04 110
410
340
.03 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
210
280
170
.06*
.05
260
500
340
.08
.05*
.15
.08*
.20
.10*
.20.10
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
530
400
120
.16*
.08
330
410
120
.10*
.08
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
430
670
250
.13 330
480
210
.10*
.09.13*
.15.07 .07 .12
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* └─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .59 .61
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .67 .78
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ 2040 General Plan with LFTM Program Imp
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
│
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
240
1830
140
.07 240 .07
.36* 1720 .34*
.31.08 530
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
100
1500
120
.06*
.29
320
1680
190
.19*
.33
.07 .11
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
210
280
170
.06 260
500
340
.08
.05*
.10
.10*
.20
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 4
d
3400
6800
1700
430
670
250
.13*
.10
330
480
210
.10*
.07
.15 .12
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05*
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .65 .78
A.18
Item: 17
896

15. Lake Forest & Trabuco
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
200
670
160
.06*
.13
240
880
450
.07 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
190
800
190
.06*
.16
250
1090
490
.07
.17*
.26
.21*
.29.09 .11
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
2 3
0 3400
5100
0 310
970
90 .09 330
760
110
.10*
.17
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
2 3
0 3400
5100
0 400
1300
190
.12 350
880
160
.10*
.20.21* .29*
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
170
520
230
.05 300
720
120
.09 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
220
630
230
.06 410
930
120
.12
.10*
.14
.14*
.07
.12*
.14
.18*
.07
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
420
520
350
.12*
.10
230
520
320
.07*
.10
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
490
670
320
.14*
.13
280
620
380
.08*
.12
.21 .19 .19 .22
│ Right Turn Adjustment
│ Clearance Interval
NBR .04*
.05*
│ Right Turn Adjustment
│ Clearance Interval
NBR .02*
.05*.05* .05*
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .54 .57
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .66 .64
A.19
Item: 17
897

16. Ridge Route & Trabuco
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 0
1 1700
0 180
0 .11*
.14
170
0 .10*
.13
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 0
1 1700
0 270
0 .16*
.19
210
0 .12*
.251700 230 220 1700 320 430
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
0 3
d
0 5100
1700
0 750
250
0 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
0 3
d
0 5100
1700
0 810
410
0 .15* 1380 .27*
.08
.16* 1520 .30*
.17.15 140 .24 290
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
1 3
0 1700
5100
0 150
1040
0 .09*
.20
110
860
0 .06*
.17
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
1 3
0 1700
5100
0 290
1140
0 .17*
.22
150
1020
0 .09*
.20
│ Clearance Interval
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .40 .48
.05* .05* │ Right Turn Adjustment
│ Clearance Interval
NBR .06*
.05*.05*
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .54 .62
A.20
Item: 17
898

17. El Toro & Trabuco
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
220
670
190
.06*
.13
300
1030
250
.09*
.20
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
130
770
180
.04*
.15
290
1110
250
.09*
.22
.11 .15 .11 .15
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
230
1560
260
.07 240
930
160
.07 │ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
290
1780
580
.09 310 .09
.31*
.15
.18*
.09
.35* 1100 .22*
.15.34 260
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 3
0 3400
5100
0 200
430
220
.06 340
810
270
.10 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 3
0 3400
5100
0 310
530
140
.09*
.13
430
1020
290
.13
.13*
.13
.21* .26*
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
270
600
170
.08*
.12
160
470
190
.05*
.09
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
270
630
200
.08 160
560
230
.05*
.11.12*
.12.10 .11 .14
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for SBR NBR
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .63 .58
│ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for SBR NBR
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .65 .67
A.21
Item: 17
899

18. Bake & Toledo
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
210
1570
70 .12*
.31
50 1690
240
.03 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
180
1990
100
.11*
.39
120
2280
310
.07*
.45.33*
.14.04 .06 .18
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
50 1530
100
.03 60 .04*
.32
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
80 2060
110
.05 80 .05
.30* 1650 .40* 2220 .44*
.02.06 40 .02 .06 40
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
30 40
40 .01 80
140
160
.02 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
40 70
60 .01*
.02
150
370
190
.04
.01*
.02
.04*
.09
.11*
.11.04
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 210
150
100
.12*
.07
60 40
90 .04*
.02
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 130
400
150
.08 80
80 .05*
.05.16*
.05 130 .08
│ Right Turn Adjustment
│ Clearance Interval
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .60 .51
EBR .01*
.05*
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05*
.05* └───────────────────────────────────────────────── ────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .73 .72
A.22
Item: 17
900

19. Lake Forest & Toledo
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
50 860
90 .03*
.17
70 1590
130
.04 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
100
1010
120
.06*
.20
130
1870
160
.08
.31*
.08
.37*
.09.05 .07
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
50 1420
60 .03 30
900
30 .02*
.18
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
50 1670
150
.03 40 .02*
.21.28*
.04
.33* 1060
.02 .09 30 .02
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 30
120
90 .02 70
180
60 .04 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 40
180
150
.02 70
360
140
.04
.06* .07* .10* .15*
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 160
180
90 .09*
.08
60 90
40 .04*
.04
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 210
310
90 .12*
.12
80 110
40 .05*
.04
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* └─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .51 .49
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .66 .64
A.23
Item: 17
901

20. Ridge Route & Toledo
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 50
200
130
.03 20
230
40 .01 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 80
370
220
.05 40
360
60 .02
.10* .08* .17* .12*
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 120
330
90 .07*
.12
60 190
40 .04*
.07
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 210
580
160
.12*
.22
80 370
50 .05*
.12
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 40
180
40 .02*
.06
40 230
10 .02 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 50
220
70 .03 120
320
20 .07
.07* .09* .10*
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 90
230
60 .05 30
110
70 .02*
.05
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 150
280
60 .09*
.10
50 140
70 .03*
.06.09*
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* └─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .33 .26
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .52 .35
A.24
Item: 17
902

21. El Toro & Toledo
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
140
970
10 .08*
.19
80 1570
20 .05 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
140
940
0 .08*
.18
80 1680
30 .05
.31*
.01
.33*
.02.01 .00
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
10 1780
230
.01 10 .01*
.26
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
20 1920
260
.01 20 .01*
.27.35* 1310 .38* 1380
.14 50 .03 .15 80 .05
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│

1.5 0.5
1 110
10 150
20 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│

1.5 0.5
1 210
40 250
503400
1700
.04*
.12
.05*
.07
3400
1700
.07*
.15
.09*
.08200 120 260 130
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
0 1
0 0
1700
0 20
10 10
10 10
10 │ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
0 1
0 0
1700
0 20
10 10
10 20
10 .02* .02* .02* .02*
│ Right Turn Adjustment
│ Clearance Interval
│ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .56 .44
EBR .02*
.05*
│ Right Turn Adjustment
│ Clearance Interval
EBR .02*
.05*.05* .05*
│ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .62 .50
A.25
Item: 17
903

22. Bake & Jeronimo
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
180
1710
90 .11*
.34
60 1740
280
.04 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
210
2150
100
.12*
.42
50 2280
310
.03
.34*
.16
.45*
.18.05 .06
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
60 1610
100
.04 160 .09*
.33
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
80 2100
150
.05 230 .14*
.43.32* 1700 .41* 2190
.06 40 .02 .09 80 .05
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
30 70
50 .01 110
380
200
.03 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
60 80
50 .02 240
490
160
.07
.02*
.03
.11*
.12
.02*
.03
.14*
.09
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 260
230
110
.15*
.10
110
160
100
.06*
.08
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 260
300
160
.15*
.14
90 210
130
.05*
.10
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* └─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .65 .65
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .75 .83
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ 2040 General Plan with LFTM Program Imp
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
│
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
2 3
d
3400
5100
1700
210
2150
100
.06*
.42
50 2280
310
.01
.45*
.18.06
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
80 2100
150
.05 230 .14*
.43.41* 2190
.09 80 .05
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
60 80
50 .02*
.02
240
490
160
.07
.14*
.09.03
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 2
d
3400
3400
1700
260
300
160
.08 90
210
130
.03*
.06.09*
.09 .08
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05*
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .63 .81
A.26
Item: 17
904

23. Lake Forest & Jeronimo
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
50 790
150
.03*
.15
80 1510
250
.05 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
60 950
190
.04*
.19
90 1810
290
.05
.30*
.15
.35*
.17.09 .11
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
130
1380
150
.08 60
810
150
.04*
.16
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
180
1670
170
.11 110
980
180
.06*
.19.27*
.09
.33*
.10.09 .11
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 80
170
30 .05*
.06
220
550
60 .13 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 100
170
30 .06*
.06
260
640
130
.15
.18* .23*
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 100
300
130
.06 100
260
70 .06*
.10
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 100
370
160
.06 130
300
110
.08*
.12.13* .16*
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* └─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .53 .63
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .64 .77
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ 2040 General Plan with LFTM Program Imp
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
│
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
60 950
190
.04*
.19
90 1810
290
.05
.35*
.17.11
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
180
1670
170
.11 110
980
180
.06*
.19.33*
.10 .11
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
100
170
30 .06*
.05
260
640
130
.15*
.19
.02 .08
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 100
370
160
.06 130
300
110
.08
.16* .12*
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05*
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .64 .73
A.27
Item: 17
905

24. Ridge Route & Jeronimo
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
70 190
130
.04 40
170
100
.02 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
130
350
150
.08*
.10
60 290
30 .04
.06*
.08
.05*
.06
.09*
.02.09
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
120
280
150
.07*
.08
50 150
40 .03*
.04
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 2
d
1700
3400
1700
130
490
310
.08 150
290
40 .09*
.09.14*
.18.09 .02 .02
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 110
340
90 .06*
.13
60 640
40 .04 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 130
360
140
.08*
.15
110
700
70 .06
.20* .23*
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 100
630
100
.06 60
340
70 .04*
.12
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 150
560
180
.09 40
420
70 .02*
.14.21* .22*
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* └─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .45 .37
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .57 .48
A.28
Item: 17
906

25. El Toro & Jeronimo
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
80 870
290
.05*
.17
120
1390
270
.07 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
70 870
340
.04 140 .08
.27*
.16
.17* 1600 .31*
.17.17 .20 290
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
260
1500
250
.15 220 .13*
.21
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
d
1700
5100
1700
370
1590
210
.22*
.31
110
1120
40 .06*
.22.29* 1060
.15 70 .04 .12 .02
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 110
320
140
.06 180
560
90 .11 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
1 2
0 1700
3400
0 80
430
160
.05 20
790
100
.01
.14* .19* .17* .26*
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
310
410
190
.09*
.12
240
290
260
.07*
.09
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
330
530
200
.10*
.16
340
390
250
.10*
.11
.11 .15 .12 .15
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for NBR
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .62 .71
│ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for NBR
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .71 .78
A.29
Item: 17
907

26. Los Alisos & Jeronimo
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
190
610
240
.11*
.12
220
1110
220
.13 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
210
710
250
.12*
.14
310
1230
300
.18
.22*
.13
.24*
.18.14 .15
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
210
1010
270
.12 150
600
140
.09*
.12
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
1 3
1 1700
5100
1700
250
1280
230
.15 160
650
160
.09*
.13.20*
.16
.25*
.14.08 .09
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
210
560
170
.06 290
610
160
.09 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
220
670
320
.06 310
660
220
.09
.16*
.10
.18*
.09
.20*
.19
.19*
.13
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
200
460
90 .06*
.14
260
470
120
.08*
.14
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
240
480
100
.07*
.14
340
510
130
.10*
.15
.05 .07 .06 .08
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* └─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .58 .62
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .69 .67
A.30
Item: 17
908

27. Lake Forest & Muirlands
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┐│ Existing Counts (2022)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│ 2040 General Plan (Committed Network)
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
│
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
│ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │
│ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
40 730
170
.01*
.14
50 1490
350
.01 │ NBL
│ NBT
│ NBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
50 870
320
.01*
.17
10 1760
510
.00
.29*
.21
.35*
.30.10 .19
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
130
1160
90 .04 160
810
60 .05*
.16
│ SBL
│ SBT
│ SBR
│
2 3
1 3400
5100
1700
120
1430
110
.04 250
980
80 .07*
.19.23*
.05
.28*
.06.04 .05
│ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
40 210
30 .01*
.06
210
670
80 .06 │ EBL
│ EBT
│ EBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
50 240
10 .01*
.07
240
630
90 .07
.20*
.05
.19*
.05.02 .01
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
240
480
150
.07 170
270
130
.05*
.08
│ WBL
│ WBT
│ WBR
│
2 2
1 3400
3400
1700
280
490
180
.08 250
340
170
.07*
.10.14*
.09
.14*
.11.08 .10
│ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for EBR
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .44 .64
│ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for EBR
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────┘
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .49 .73
A.31
Item: 17
909