buildings” to “less than or equal to 30 feet” as story height is ambiguous. Changed “four or more stories in height” to “exceeding 30 feet” as story height is ambiguous. At 30 feet or less, a 35-foot hand ladder can be used to access the roof. Above 30 feet, only an arial truck ladder can be used to access the roof.
at least two remote sides of the building” and replaced with the following including a new figure (for buildings over 30 feet high):
• Along the longest side for rectangular buildings with the smaller width no greater than 75 feet. Other building shapes will require further review. • Along at least two opposite sides of the building for rectangular buildings with the larger width no greater than 150 feet. Other building shapes will require further review.
• For buildings that don’t meet the previous criteria, fire lanes shall be provided in another manner approved by the fire code official that optimizes firefighter access to the roof. Optimization often includes fire lanes that allow for aerial truck ladder capability to most building outside corners, multiple building sides, and ladder angles between 60 to 75 degrees (a 92 foot ladder at an 8 foot high bottom pivot point can be used to determine this angle).
These changes provide two prescriptive methods for determining laddering for a building and a non-prescriptive method for more complex buildings. A new figure was provided to clarify the bullet points above. Changes are not more restrictive than the previous version.
Pages 7 and 8: Section 2.7. Added two administrative changes to fire lanes so vehicle grade and angle of approach and departure do not exceed OCFA vehicle capabilities.
Pages 10, 13 and 14: Section 3.5. The fire lane – no parking signs maximum interval has been increased from 50 feet to 100 feet. Signage at 50 feet is too numerous and visually unappealing.
warns the applicant that the plan will not be approved if it requires a water availability evaluation.
952
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
258
out all forms.
only.
understanding of hose pull length.
953
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
259
ATTACHMENT 6
954
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
260
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO GUIDELINE C-05
The following is a summary of the significant changes to Guideline C-05 (page references are to the final
strikeout version). Deletions are in red strikeouts and additions are in blue underlines.
No changes were made to this guideline that are more restrictive except for reference to the State requirements in Local Responsibility Area (LRA) High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (HFHSZ) and several areas where OCFA needed to match minimum State requirements. To make an easier to follow and readable guideline, significant changes were made that do not impact design or construction (basic clarification, documentation of current practice, administrative or process requirements, etc.) throughout the first 29 pages of this guideline.
Changes that impact design or construction are identified below.
Pages 5 and 14: Referenced additional requirements in the LRA HFHSZ. (State required)
(State required)
increased the vertical separation from vegetation below from 2 feet to 6 feet. (State required)
trees increased from 3 times the height to 4 times the height. For slopes exceeding 40%, spacing between shrubs and trees increased from 3 times the height to 6 times the height. (State required)
955
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
261
ATTACHMENT 7
956
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
262
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
Orange County Fire Authority
Community Risk Reduction
Fire Authority Road, Building A, Irvine, CA 92602 www.ocfa.org 714-573-6100 1 Fire Master Plans
for Commercial &
Residential Development
Guideline B-01
Serving the Cities of Aliso Viejo • Buena Park • Cypress • Dana Point • Garden Grove • Irvine • Laguna Hills • Laguna Niguel • Laguna Woods Lake Forest • La Palma • Los Alamitos • Mission Viejo • Rancho Santa Margarita • San Clemente • San Juan Capistrano Seal Beach • Santa Ana • Stanton • Tustin • Villa Park • Westminster • Yorba Linda • and Unincorporated Areas of Orange County 957
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
263
Guideli
ne B-01 January 01 , 20263
Fire Master Plans for Commercial & Residential Development
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................... 2 PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................. 3 SCOPE .................................................................................................................................. 3 HOW TO USE THIS GUIDELINE ........................................................................................... 3 SECTION 1: SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS ......................................................................... 3 SECTION 2: FIRE LANES ..................................................................................................... 4 SECTION 3: FIRE LANE IDENTIFICATION ........................................................................ 10 SECTION 4: PREMISES IDENTIFICATION ........................................................................ 16 SECTION 5: HYDRANT AND WATER AVAILABILITY REQUIREMENTS ............................ 17 SECTION 6: ACCESS TO STRUCTURES .......................................................................... 22 ATTACHMENTS ................................................................................................................... 28 Attachment 1 - Fire Master Plan Submittal Checklist ................................................ 28 Attachment 2 – CVC, Fire Lane Parking Violations ................................................... 29 Attachment 3 – Hydrant Quantity and Spacing in OCFA Jurisdiction ........................ 30 Attachment 4 – Minimum Required Fire Flow and Flow Duration ............................. 32 Attachment 5 – Definitions ........................................................................................ 33 Attachment 6 - Apparatus Data for Swept Path Analysis ........................................... 34 APPENDIX A - ACCESS DURING CONSTRUCTION ......................................................... 35 APPENDIX B – GATES AND BARRIERS ............................................................................ 38 APPENDIX B, ATTACHMENT 1 - OCFA Notes for Electric Vehicle Gates ................ 44 APPENDIX C - RESIDENTIAL AND TRACT DEVELOPMENTS ......................................... 45 APPENDIX C, ATTACHMENT 1 – Residential Site Plan Checklist............................ 49 APPENDIX C, ATTACHMENT 2 - Sample Parking Enforcement Letter .................... 50 958
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
264
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
3 Fire Mas
ter Plans
for Commercial & Residential Development
PURPOSE
The effectiveness of emergency response and firefighting operations is directly related to the proper installation and maintenance of fire access roadways, proper location of hydrants, adequate water supply, and access to buildings and facilities. This document is a general guideline pertaining to the creation and maintenance of fire department access roadways, access walkways to and around buildings, and hydrant quantity and placement as required by the 20252 California Fire and Building Codes (also known as CFC and CB C, respectively)
and as amended by local ordinance.
SCOPE
This guideline applies to fire apparatus access roads which provide access to new, reconstructed, relocated residential or commercial structures, developments, and facilities.
Note: In addition to the requirements of OCFA Guideline B-01, for buildings and facilities located within State Responsibility Area (SRA) or the High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (HFHSZ and VHFHSZ) in the Local Responsibility Area (LRA), refer to Cali fornia Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 14 from CA Board of Forestry & Fire Protection site:
https://bof.fire.ca.gov/.
HOW TO USE THIS GUIDELINE
The guideline consists of two main parts: Guideline B-01 and a series of lettered appendices:
Appendix A, B, and C. The first part, Guideline B-01, provides instructions on how to prepare and submit a generic Fire Master Plan. The second part, the appendices to Guideline B-01, contain additional information that may be applicable based on the type of project submission.
To prepare a Fire Master Plan, provide the information and comply with the requirements in both B-01 and all pertinent appendices.
Example: SECTION 1: SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
1. Universal Submittal Requirements - Refer to Guideline A-02 from OCFA Planning and Development website (www.ocfa.org). Complete the Fire Master Plan Submittal Checklist (Attachment 1) and verify that basic project information has been provided and that general access and water requirements have been addressed on the plan.
Project Plans
include
Gates and
Barriers
GUIDELINE B - 01
APPENDIX B
GATES AND
BARRIERS
New
Residena l Tract
Development with Single -
Family
Homes or
Duplexes
GUIDELINE B - 01
APPENDIX C
RESIDENTIAL TRACT
DEVELOPMENTS
959
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
265
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
4 SECTION 2: FIRE LANES
2. Fire Lanes - On-site private fire lanes shall be provided for every facility or building when any portion of an exterior wall of the first story is located more than 150 feet from a public roadway, as measured along an approved route. Extenuating circumstances, increased hazards, and additional fire safety features may affect these requirements.
2.1. Loading – Fire lanes shall be designed, constructed, and maintained to provide allweatherall-weather driving capabilities and support the imposed load of 94,000 - pound fire apparatus with weight distributed as follows:
• No more than 32,000 -pounds per axle.
• Bridges and underground vaults, culverts, and other features beneath fire access roadways shall be designed, at a minimum, to the AASHTO H-17 standard. • A letter or statement, signed by a registered engineer, shall be provided on the plans certifying that any new roadway meets these loading and all-weather criteria.
Natural or artificial turf products, and road base without an approved topping material does not satisfy the all-weather requirement and may not be approved.
2.2. Number Required - One fire lane is required if any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of a building is located more than 150 feet from a fire lane. The hose pull distance is to be measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building.
EXCEPTION: Hose-pull distance to the most remote exterior portion of a detached single-family home or duplex or related accessory structure (e.g., pool house, casita, garage, workshop, barn, etc.) may be up to 300 feet when protected throughout by a fire sprinkler system or as approved by the fire code official.
EXCEPTION: When approved by the fire code official, this distance may be increased up to 300 feet for open parking garages that comply with the following:
The structure is protected throughout with an NFPA 13 sprinkler system, or the structure meets the below requirements:
• Two stairways, both directly accessible from the exterior. • Both stairways provide direct access to all tiers of the parking structure. • Both stairways are equipped with Class I Wet Standpipe Outlets at each floor or intermediate landing.
• Access to both stairways is within 40-feet walking distance from a fire lane. • The stairways are sufficiently separated from each other and located in a manner that facilitates firefighting operations within the structure, as determined by the fire code official.
2.2.1. More than one fire lane is required when access to a single r oad may be
insufficient due to the following: terrain, location, travel distance, potential fire, lifesafetylife-safety hazards, vehicle congestion, railways, weather condition tha t
may impair single-entry point, or other factors that could limit access.
Supplementary access points shall be located to facilitate evacuation and 960
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
266
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
5 emergency
operations and minimize congestion or obstruction during an emergency incident. At least two of
2.2.2.2.2.1 . the access points shall be separated by a distance of at leas t one-half of the longest dimension, as measured between the two points of the development that are furthest from one another, when any of the following conditions exist. • A minimum of two vehicle access points is required for any area containing 150 or more residential dwelling units, including new and existing dwelling units.
• A minimum of two vehicle access points is required for any multi-family residential structure containing 200 or more dwelling units. Each entry point shall provide access to at least one of two (or more) required vehicle laddering areas. Laddering areas shall be remotely located on at least two sides of the structure in locations that facilitate fire department access to the roof as well as interior firefighting.
• A secondary access point is required for commercial projects with a cumulative building area of more than 124,000 square feet.
2.3. Location - For purposes of determining the suitability of public roads and private roads for staging fire apparatus and facilitating fire suppression operations for a particular structure, the following criteria shall apply:
2.3.1. The edge of fire access roadways serving two and three-story buildings up to and including 30 feet in height should be located no closer than 10 to 30 feet from the building. The edge of fire lanes serving structures four or more stories in height exceeding 30 feet shall be located between 20 to 40 feet from the building. The setback is measured from the face of the building to the top edge of the curb face or rolled curb flow line nearest the building. The distance and the amount of fire lane serving the structure that is required to meet these criteria are a function of overall building height, construction, presence of openings, and other potential hazards and considerations. These fire lane setbacks provide a distance of safety from the involved building and optimum laddering angles to the roof that maximizes vertical ladder reach and ladder loading capacity. 961
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
267
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
6 2.3.1.1. Fi
re lanes serving buildings with contiguously traversable roofs that are over 30’ feet high as measured from
grade to the roof parapet or eave
shall be provided, at a minimum, per
one of the following (Figure 1):
• Aalong the longest sidefaç ade
of the building for rectangular
buildings with the smaller width no
greater than 75 feet. Other building
shapes will require further review.
• ,A or a long at least two
oppositeremote sides of the building for
rectangular buildings with the larger width no
greater than 150 feet. Other building shapes
will require further review.
• For buildings that don’t meet the
previous criteria, fire lanes shall be provided
or in another manner approved by the fire
code official that optimizes firefighter access
to the roof. Optimization often includes fire
lanes that allow for aerial truck ladder
capability to most building outside corners,
multiple building sides, and ladder angles
between 60 to 75 degrees (a 92-foot ladder
with an 8-foot high bottom pivot point can be
used to determine this angle).
2.3.1.1.2.3.1.2. For location of access
roads serving high-rise structures, see
Guideline H-01.
2.3.2. To ensure that vehicular traffic from
dead-end fire lanes serving buildings greater
than 30 -feet in height, is always maintained,
staging areas at least 25 -feet wide, and 60 -
feet long with a 25--foot taper on each end (for
110 -feet total length) shall be provided along the roadway to per mit fire apparatus to pass ladder aerial trucks that have the outriggers extended. Consideration should be given to the length of the roadway, roof and building design, obstructions to laddering, and other operational factors in determining the number, location, and configuration of such staging areas.
2.3.3. A fire lane may be an on-site private fire lane or a public road with a projected average daily trip (ADT) count below 30,000, or as approved by the Fire Code Official. Contact the city or County Traffic Engineer’s office or Public Works Department for ADT information.
Figure 1 -
Aerial Truck
Laddering
962
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
268
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
7 2.3.4. A
fire lane on an adjacent property may only be considered as a fire lane for the project property if an emergency access easement is in place. has been The easement shall be granted by the adjacent property owner (“GRANTOR”) to the benefit of the city or county (“GRANTEE”) for the purpose of emergency access to the project property and recorded by the Orange County Clerk-Recorder Department. Evidence of the recorded easement may need to be provided to OCFA.
2.4. Width – The minimum width of a fire lane is 20 feet (Figure 2). If a center median is included, the required width shall be provided on both sides of the median.
2.5. Parking
Restrictions -–
No parking
is permitted
along fire lanes
that are
narrower than 28 feet
in width (Figure 21).
Width is measured
from top face of curb
to top face of curb for
standard vertical
curbs or flow line to
flow line for rolled,
ramped, or other curb
types. Parking on
one side is permitted
on a fire lane that is
at least
2.6.2.5. 28 -fe
et in
width. Parking
on two sides is
permitted on a
roadway 36 -feet or
more in width.
2.7.2.6. Vertical Clearance - Fire lane s shall have an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 -feet 6 -inches. If trees are located adjacent to the fire lanes, place a note on the plans stating that all vegetation overhanging the fire lane shall be maintained to provide a clear height of 13 -feet, 6 -inches at all times (Appendix B, Figure B1).
2.7. Grade - The grade for fire lanes shall not exceed 10%. When all structures served by the fire lane are protected by automatic fire sprinkler systems, the grade may be increased to a maximum of 15% for approved sections of roadway where fire apparatus may drive but will not likely stopped during an emergency. The cross-slope of fire lanes shall not be greater than 2%.
For fire l
anes serving aerial truck laddering locations, the grade shall not exceed 6%.
Figure 1 – Minimum Road
Widths
963
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
269
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
8 The angle
of approach and departure for fire lanes shall not exceed 14% (8 degrees).
2.8. Turni
ng Radii - The insid e turning radius for a fire lane shall be 20 feet. The outside turning radius for an fire lane shall be 40 feet or greater. A 60-foot straight section of roadway must be provided between a turn in one direction and another turn in the opposite direction (Figure 32). For additional requirements related to minimum turning radii, please refer to CCR Title 14.
2.9. Dead-ends - Dead-end roadways more than 150 feet shall be designed and constructed with approved hammerheads or turnarounds (Figure 43, Figure C1 in Appendix C). Turnarounds shall meet the turning radius requirements identified above. The minimum cul-de-sac radius is 40 feet with no parking allowed. The maximum length of a cul-de-sac or other dead-end road without mid-way turnarounds or other mitigating features is 800 feet.
Fi g ure 2 – “S” Turns
964
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
270
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
9 2.10. Bridge
s - When a bridge is required as part of a fire lane, the driveable surface shall be a minimum of 20 feet’ in width and the bridge shall be designed and constructed at a minimum to AASHTO H-17 standards to accommodate a total weight of 94,000 pounds.
2.11. Median breaks - Where medians or raised islands are proposed that prevent emergency apparatus from crossing over into opposing traffic lanes, breaks or passthroughs may be required. The location and design specifications for the passthroughs shall be coordinated with the city/county public works or engineering department.
2.12. Continuity of Fire Lanes – Where roadways serving structures are not required fire lanes but may still appear to be usable by fire apparatus, they shall be designed to the applicable fire lane criteria. This shall include, but not be limited to, adequate turning radii and turnarounds necessary to prevent fire apparatus entrapment or undue delays.
965
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
271
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
10 SECTION 3: FIRE LANE IDENTIFICATION
3. Fire Lane Identification - Fire Lane identification is required to maintain the required width of fire lanes for emergency vehicle use. Unlawful use of fire lanes will be enforced by the local law enforcement agency in accordance with the California Vehicle Code (CVC) on public roadways. Enforcement of fire lane no-parking restrictions on private roadways is the responsibility of the property owner, HOA, or their designated agent (Attachment 2).
3.1. Sign and Curb Marking options – Areas designated as a fire lane require an acceptable method of marking that shall be approved prior to installation. Select either option 3.1.1. OR option 3.1.2. below.
3.1.1. Specific areas designated by the OCFA as fire lanes must be marked with red curbs meeting the specifications below (Figure 54). In addition, where the number of entrances into the area marked with fire lanes is limited, all such vehicle entrances to the designated area shall be posted with approved fire lane entrance signs.
Figure 4 5 – Fire
Lane Identification, Red Curbs
• Curbs shall be painted OSHA safety red.
• “FIRE LANE – NO PARKING” shall be painted on top of curb in 3” white lettering at a spacing of 30’ on center or portion thereof.
3.1.2. “Fi
re Lane – No Parking” signs
(Figure 65) meeting the appropriate
specifications shall be posted
immediately adjacent to each
designated fire lane and
at intervals not to exceed 50 100
feet, unless otherwise approved by
the fire code official. In areas where
fire lane parking restrictions
are enforced by the California
Highway Patrol, “NO STOPPING -
FIRE LANE” signs meeting
Caltrans standards shall be
used. In addition, where the
number of entrances into the area
marked
Figure 65 – Fire Lane No Parking Signs
966
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
272
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
11 with fire
lanes is limited, all such vehicle entrances to the designated area shall be posted with approved fire lane entrance signs (Figure 76).
3.2. Fire Lane Entrance Signs - Fire lane entrance signs must meet the following specifications:
• Fire lane entrance signs are to
be used only at vehicle entry
points to areas that contain
“Fire Lane – No Parking” signs
or red curbs.
• The sign shall be posted at all
vehicle entrances to areas
marked with either red curbs or
fire lane “No Parking” signs.
Signs shall be
securely mounted facing the
direction of travel and clearly
visible to oncoming traffic
entering the designated area.
• Signs sh
all be installed per
OCFA mounting specifications
for fire lane signs.
3.3. Towing Company Information -
Towing company contact information is required for all properties with a standing written agreement for services with a towing company per the California Vehicle Code.
To facilitate periodic changes in towing
company contracts, the towing company
contact information may be posted on a
separate sign mounted directly below the
fire lane entrance sign instead of on the
Figure 7 – Alternate Location of entrance
sign itself (Figure 87). The method of
attachment to the post shall not obscure the
wording on either sign.
3.4. Alternative “Fire Lane – No Parking” -
Alternative “Fire Lane – No Parking” signs
may be allowed with approval from the fire
code official. Signs shall be securely
mounted facing the direction of travel and
clearly visible to oncoming traffic entering
the designated area. Signs shall be made
of durable material and installed per OCFA
mounting specifications for fire lane signs.
Figure 76 – Fire Lane Entrance Signs
Figure 8 – Alternate Location of Towing
Company Information
967
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
273
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
12 Note: All
alternative signs must be approved through the OCFA and by the city/County engineer and/or policy agency, as
applicable. In areas where fire lane parking restrictions are enforced by the California Highway Patrol, “NO STOPPING – FIRE LANE” signs meeting Caltrans standards shall be used.
3.4.1. “Fire Lane – No Parking Beyond This Point Except in Designated Stalls” sign may be approved for use in limited areas up to 100 -feet in length, such as motor courts or dead-end roads, when permitted by the Fire Code Official. Where parking stalls are not present, sign may omit “except in designated stalls” and sign height may be reduced to 18”. The specifications for the rest of the sign shall match the standard fire lane no parking signs (Figure 98).
3.4.2. “Fire Lane – No Parking in Cul-De-Sac” signs may be approved for use on the right side of a roadway. Signs shall be securely mounted facing the direction of travel and clearly visible to oncoming traffic entering the designated area.
Figure 98 – Specifications for Alternative
Fire Lane No Parking Signs
968
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
274
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
13 For a stan
dard cul-de-sac, the “begin”
and “end” signs shall be located at the
point where the street begins to widen
into the bulb (Figure 109).
A cul-de-sac with an offset radius shall
have signs located at the point where
the street begins to widen into the bulbs
and at a point 40 feet’ from where the
cul-desac and street are tangent
(Figure 110).
Additionally, a minimum 2 inch ” red
lettering on white reflective background
must be provided for the “BEGIN” sign
at entry into cul-de-sac and “END” sign
when leaving cul-de-sac.
“BEGIN” or “END” sign may be omitted
where cul-de-sac is the continuation
of a no parking zone on streets less
than 36 feet’ wide (Figure 121).
3.5. Fire Lane No Parking Sign Locations -
Signs are required within 3 feet ’ at the
end of the curb return at the beginning of
each “block” along the fire lane and
spaced a maximum of 50’ 100 feet along
the entire designated lane (Figure 132).
A sign shall be located within a
reasonable distance of the end of each
block as necessary to clearly identify the
extend of the no parking zone. Signs
shall be securely mounted facing the
direction of travel and clearly visible to
oncoming traffic entering the designated
area. Signs shall be made of durable
material and installed per OCFA
mounting specifications. Where
signposts are not practical, signs may be mounted on a wall or fence and are allowed to be oriented parallel to the length of the fire lane. OCFA inspectors will determine if additional signs or sign locations are required.
Figure 109
Standard 40’
Radius Cul-De-Sac
Figure 110
Offset 40’ Radius
Cul-De-Sac
Figure 121 – Specifications for Cul-de-Sac
Fire Lane No Parking Signs
969
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
275
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
14 Figure 13
– Fire Lane No Parking Sign Locations
3.6. Mounti
ng Spe
cifications for Fire Lane Entrance and No Parking Signs - Signs shall be mounted facing the direction of vehicular travel. They may be mounted on existing posts or buildings where the centerline of the sign is no more than 24 inches” from the edge of the roadway. The sign post depth of bury shall be a minimum of 24 inches” and
rebar, a concrete footing, or another method to prevent removal is recommended (Figure 143). Footings for signs located in the public right-of-way shal l be per the local jurisdiction’s requirements.
Fi g
ure 1 2 Si
970
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
276
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
15 Figure 143 – Mounti ng Specifications for Fire Lane Entrance and No Parking Signs
971
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
277
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
16 SECTION 4: PREMISES IDENTIFICATION
4. Premises Identification - Approved numbers or letters shall be placed on the front elevation of all new and existing buildings in such a position that is plainly visible and legible from the street or the road to which the property is addressed. Addresses shall not be located where there is potential of being obstructed by signs, awnings, vegetation, or other building/site elements. Where only a single building with a single street address is present (and no other structures are accessible from the fire lane serving that structure), an address monument at the vehicle entrance or other location clearly visible and legible from the public road may be provided in lieu of an address on the building.
4.1. The numbers shall contrast with their background. In SRA and in LRA HFHSZ and VHFHSZ, addresses for residential buildings shall be reflectorized per CCR Title 14.
4.2. The address characters shall be a minimum of 4 inches in height for single-family residential structures/duplexes, or individual unit numbers in multi-family residential structures. The 4-inch numbers shall have a ½-inch stroke, or as required by local ordinance, whichever is more restrictive. Building setbacks, elevation, and landscaping can affect these minimum size requirements.
4.3. The address characters shall be a minimum of 6 inches in height for commercial structures, or the primary building address or address range posted on multi-family residential structures. The 6-inch numbers shall have a one-inch stroke, or as required by local ordinance, whichever is more restrictive. Building setbacks, elevation, and landscaping can affect these minimum size requirements.
4.4. Address numbers may be required to be internally or externally illuminated by the local jurisdiction’s security code. While not required by the OCFA, illumination of addresses is recommended to facilitate rapid location of a site or building.
4.5. Where it is unclear as to which street a building is addressed to (e.g., a building is accessed only from a street other than the one it is addressed to; multiple main entrances to the site, or building itself, front different streets), the name of the street shall also be identified as part of the posted address.
4.6. Multi-Unit Buildings - Suite/apartment numbers shall be placed on or adjacent to the primary entrance for each suite/apartment and any other door providing access to fire department personnel during an emergency. Multiple residential and commercial units having entrance doors not visible from the street or road shall, in addition, have approved numbers grouped for all units within each structure and positioned to be plainly visible from the street or road.
4.7. Multi-Building Clusters - Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on the front elevation(s) of all buildings that form the cluster. If all building addresses are not clearly visible or legible from the public road serving the structures, an address monument shall also be provided at the entry point(s) to the site indicating the range of addresses accessible from that entrance.
972
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
278
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
17 SECTION 5: HYDRANT AND WATER AVAILABILITY REQUIREMENTS
5. Hydrant
and Water Availability Requirements - Appli cants must provide documentation that hydrants are provided in the quantity and spacing described in the Hydrant Quantity and Spacing in OCFA Jurisdiction table (Attachment 3). They must also show that the hydrant is capable of delivering the amount of water required in the Minimum Required Fire Flow and Flow Duration for Buildings in OCFA Jurisdiction table (Attachment 4). The quantity and spacing of hydrants are governed by the fire flow required for the structure(s) served. The required fire flow is dependent upon the size of the structure, type of construction, and whether the building is equipped with fire sprinklers. This information must be shown clearly on the plans to assist in the determination of the fire flow requirement.
5.1. Water Availability – To facilitate the review process and avoid untimely delays in project approval, applicants are strongly encouraged to arrange a hydrant flow test with the local water department prior to submitting plans to the OCFA if the project includes a new structure or increase in the floor area of an existing structure. Water availability information may not be required to be submitted for every project, and plans may be submitted with a hydrant flow test pending, but the applicant should understand that project approval may be delayed if it is determined during review that this information is required. If the project requires evaluation of the available fire flow , it will not be approved without a completed OCFA Water Availability form or equivalent data sheets from a water district. Water availability information must not be older than six months.
5.1.1. Obtain a Water Availability form from OCFA Planning & Development Services Section.
5.1.2. Fill out the project and building information in the first section of the Water Availability form. Care should be taken when determining the applicable fire area for the project. As stated above, fire flow is dependent on several factors, so the largest building or group of structures is not necessarily the most demanding in terms of fire flow.
5.1.3. Determine the required fire flow from Minimum Required Fire Flow and Flow Duration for Buildings in OCFA Jurisdiction (Attachment 4), as applicable. A 50% reduction in fire flow (but not duration) may be taken when the fire-flow calculation area consists only of buildings equipped with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. If you are unsure of how to calculate the fire flow requirement for your project, you may email or fax the form tocontact the OCFA, and we will determine the fire flow for you tech line at (714)573-6108 for assistance.
5.1.4. Contact the local water company to request a hydrant flow test or fire flow modeling calculation and have a representative of the water company complete and sign the last section on the form. In some cases, the water company may allow or require a qualified third party to perform the flow test for you. • In newly developed areas without water infrastructure, the water department may issue a “will-serve” letter indicating the expected fire flow and duration 973
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
279
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
18 of water
that will be delivered once the water system is installed and operational.
• If multiple hydrants are located within the maximum distance allowed in Hydrant Quantity and Spacing in OCFA Jurisdiction (Attachment 4). The amount of water available from each hydrant may be combined, provided that the hydrants are flowed simultaneously.
5.1.5. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that the following information is provided at a minimum on either the water company’s test data sheet and/or the OCFA Water Availability form:
Static pressure and residual pressure in PSI and observed flow in GPM; or Calculated flow in GPM at 20 PSI
5.1.6. Scan or photocopy the completed form or data sheets onto your plans or include the original with your plan submittal.
5.1.7. Please ensure that the fire area, building size, cons t ruction type, and flow data are complete and accurate. Errors or omissions in this information may result in plans having to be resubmitted or fire flow testing to be redone.
5.2. Fire-Flow Calculation Area - The fire-flow calculation area shall be the total floor area of all floor levels within the exterior walls, and under the horizontal projections of the roof of a building, except as modified in the following two conditions:
• Portions of buildings which are separated by fire walls without openings, constructed in accordance with the California Building Code are allowed to be considered as separate fire-flow calculation areas.
• The fire-flow calculation area of buildings constructed of Type IA and Type IB construction shall be the area of the three largest successive floors. CFC Appendix B Section B104
5.3. Hydrant Location - Hydrants shall be provided along the length of the fire access roadway in the quantities and up to the maximum distances prescribed in Hydrant Quantity and Spacing in OCFA Jurisdiction table (Attachment 3).
5.3.1. Hydrants must be located within three 3 feet of the edge of a fire lane and cannot be located in areas where it may be visually or operationally obstructed . (behind fences, walls, in bushes, behind parking spaces, etc.). Clearance A clear space of 3 feet shall be provided to a distance no less than three feet from the perimeter of thearound each hydrant. Hydrants located in landscapes areas may require a 4 foot ’x 4 foot’ concrete pad and the OCFA inspector will ensure that vegetat ion does not encroach on this clear space.
5.3.2. The hydrant s 4 inch outlets shallmust face the fire lane. In areas where the outlets cannot face the fire lane (e.g., the hydrant is located on a landscape peninsula or island in a parking lot; the hydrant has three outlets, etc.), the 4” outlet(s) shall take precedence.
974
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
280
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
19 5.3.3. The
hydrant shall be located at least 40 -feet from the building it serves. Where it is impractical to locate the hydrant 40 -feet from adjacent structures, additional hydrants may be provided, or the hydrant may be located closer if nearby walls do not contain openings and the hydrant is not in a location where it may be rendered inoperable due to damage from collapsed walls, debris, or excessive heat.
5.3.4. Hydrants shall be located so that a hose line running between the hydrant and the fire department connection(s) (FDCs) served by that hydrant does not cross driveways, obstruct roads or fire lanes, or otherwise interfere with emergency vehicle response and evacuation of a site.
5.3.5. Hydrants and fire department connections shall not be located behind parking stalls or in other locations where they are likely to be blocked by vehicles or other objects. Whenever possible, hydrants shall be placed at street and drive aisle intersections in preference to mid-block locations. Where on-street parking is allowed, hydrants should be placed in the shortest parkways between adjacent driveways, at corners and chokers where parking is not normally allowed, and in similar areas where impact to space available for parking and the potential for hydrants to be obstructed is minimized.
5.3.6. Hydrants and fire department connections should not be located where apparatus staged at these locations would then encroach on minimum fire apparatus turning radii unless alternative routes are available. Hydrants shall not be placed in the “bulb” end of a cul-de-sac where apparatus staged at the hydrant would prevent the cul-de-sac from being used as a turnaround.
5.4. Protection of Hydrants - Hydrants in locations that are exposed or susceptible to potential damage from vehicular collision need to be protected by curbs and/or bollards (Figure 154).
Figure 154 - Protection of Hydrants
Protect
ion of Hydrants, Detector Checks, Fire Department Connections, Post Indicator Valves, and other Similar Devices.
975
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
281
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
20 5.4.1. If
vehicles can approach the hydrant from more than one direction, the hydrant shall be protected by four bollards of concrete-filled pipe four inches in diameter and mounted in concrete in a square around the hydrant. The bollards need to be spaced a minimum of three feet from the perimeter of the hydrant. The bollards must be placed so that their location does not impede access to or use of the hydrant. Two bollards may protect hydrants that can be approached from only one side.
5.4.2. Hydrants may not require protection by bollards if they are located such that the potential for collision is minimal or if they are sufficiently protected by a standard concrete curb of at least six inches in height.
5.5. Hydrant Markers and Color
5.5.1. Blue reflective pavement markers (“blue dots”) shall be used to identify fire hydrant locations (Figure 165). Blue reflective markers used for any other purpose should be removed. The developer may contact the local water company to arrange the installation of the blue dot/hydrant marker. If the water agency does not participate in the blue dot program, the developer is still responsible to install the dots in an approved manner.
Figure 165 - “B
lue Dot” Reflective Hydrant Marker Location
976
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
282
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
21 5.5.2. Tw
o-way streets and roads – Markers shall be placed six inches from the edge of the painted centerline or from the approximate center of streets without a painted centerline on the side nearest the hydrant.
5.5.3. Streets with left turn lanes at the intersection – Markers shall be placed six inches from the edge of the painted white line on the side nearest the hydrant.
5.5.4. Streets with continuous two-way left turn lanes – Markers shall be placed six inches from the edge of the painted yellow line on the side nearest the fire hydrant.
5.5.5. Hydrant Color – Private hydrants (hydrants separated from the city main by and located downstream from a backflow prevention device) shall be painted OSHA safety red.
977
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
283
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
22 SECTION 6: ACCESS TO STRUCTURES
6. Access
to Structures
6.1. Hos
e pull – The dimension of 150 -feet in relation to fire department access is commonly referred to as “hose pull distance”. As the name implies, this is the maximum distance that fFirefighters can effectively efficiently pull a fire hose or carry other equipment to effectively combat a fire (Figure 17). The hose pull distance is set at 150 feet due to a variety of factor, including standard hose lengths, weight of equipment, hydraulic properties, and accepted operational procedures (Figure 16).
Figure 176 – Hose Pull
For the hose pull example below, assume that the parking lot is not accessible to fire apparatus due to turning radii and fire lane widths less than the required minimums. • Building A – All portions of the buildings are within 150 fee t of the public road as measured along the path of firefighter travel. This building is in access. •
• Buildi
ng B – The building is in access despite the obstruction presented by the planter and hedges due to its
proximity to the road.
• Building C – The building
is out of access; the
presence of a chain-link
fence forces firefighters to
backtrack once they pass
through the gate,
increasing their travel
distance to the dashed
part of the
perimeter beyond 150’.
On-site fire access
roadways and/or a change
in the location of the
gate w would be
necessary to
provide access to Building “C”.
6.1.1. Hose pull is measured along a path that simulates the routeof travel a fFirefighter may take to access all portions of the exterior of a structure from the nearest public road or fire lane. Under most circumstances, hose pull will not be a straight-line distance and should not be measured “as the crow flies”. 978
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
284
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
23 6.1.2. Al
l obstructions, such as fences, planters, vegetation, and other structures must be considered when determining whether a building is accessible from a particular location on the fire lane. Topography may also affect the potential access route and any significant changes in elevation must be accounted for when measuring hose pull distances.
6.2. Access walkways – CFC 504 .1 provides for the installation of approved access walkways from fire access roadways to exterior openings required by either the CBC or CFC. The OCFA may require the construction of such walkways depending upon particular site conditions or project parameters. These conditions include, but are not limited to, building use or occupancy, topography, vegetation, and surface conditions.
Design professionals must carefully consider these issues when developing a project site. When required:
6.2.1. Access walkways must be provided to all required egress doors from a building, all firefighter access doorways in buildings with high-piled storage, and the area beneath each rescue window, at a minimum. Access walkways will typically be required around the entire perimeter of a structure to facilitate control of a fire through any other available openings.
6.2.2. Access walkways must be a minimum of 5five feet in width.
6.2.3.6.1.1. Access walkways shall consist of a surface that lends itself to safe use during building evacuation, firefighting, and rescue efforts.
6.2.3. Where elevation change is present, indicate the grade as a pe rcentage on the plans.
Access walkways shall consist of a surface that lends itsel fp rovides to safe use during building evacuation, firefighting, and rescue efforts.
6.2.4. 6.2.5. The type of material provided for the access walkway and/or other specifications shall be indicated on the fire master plan and are subject to approval by the OCFA.
6.3. Access to Interior Courtyards - Firefighter access and water supply as described below shall be provided for interior courtyards of R-occupancy buildings and buildings of other occupancies where the main entry to a suite is accessed via the courtyard.
6.3.1. Number of Access Routes
• A minimum of two means of access via “firefighter tunnels” shall be provided between each courtyard and the fire lane. A single tunnel may be allowed for smaller courtyards, as determined by the fire code official. • A tunnel interconnecting courtyards may suffice as a second means of access, provided that each courtyard so connected has at least one other tunnel leading directly to a fire lane.
6.3.2. Design of Firefighter Tunnels
• The outer entrance to the tunnel shall front on a fire lane. 979
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
285
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
24 • Tunnels
shall be a minimum 10 feet wide, and when possible, at least 10 feet tall (but no less than 8 feet).
• Doorways and gate openings in the path of firefighter travel to, through, and from the tunnel shall provide a minimum 44 -inch clear width. • Where the tunnel intersects with corridors or other interior spaces, doors shall be provided to separate the tunnel from those spaces in a manner that provides an uninterrupted path of travel through the tunnel, from one end to the other.
• At least 1 tunnel shall provide a straight path of travel between the fire lane and the courtyard to ensure access by a firefighter’s 35-foot’ ladder. • Landscape and hardscape features such as trees, shrubs, light poles, raised planters, walls, fences, and gates near the openings to the tunnel shall not hinder or delay movement of firefighters carrying a ladder. • Where there is an elevation change between the fire lane and courtyard, code-compliant ramps or stairs with a minimum clear width of 44 inches ” between handrails shall be provided. Only straight-run stairs shall be provided, no stair returns are allowed along the path of firefighter travel.
6.3.3. Tunnel Construction
• Tunnels shall be separated from adjacent construction by minimum 2 hour fire barriers and 2 hour ceiling/floor assemblies.
• Interior door openings into the tunnel may be equipped with mag-holds, but other doorstops are not allowed.
• Wall and ceiling finishes within the tunnel shall be non-combustible. Where allowed by CBC/CFC Chapter 8, floors may be carpeted.
6.3.4. Use of Firefighter tunnels – Tunnels are permitted to be used for other purposes provided that the use does not obstruct the clear path required or otherwise interfere with use of the tunnel for emergency purposes. Combustible furnishings and fixtures within the tunnel shall be kept to a minimum, and such items shall be fixed in place. Where the tunnel is also an exit component of the egress system (e.g., exit enclosure, passageway, exit stair, horizontal exit) or functions as an egress court per CBC 1029.1, no other non-emergency use shall be allowed within the tunnel.
6.3.5. Courtyard Standpipes
• At least one standpipe outlet shall be provided in the courtyard when hose pull from fire apparatus in the fire lane to any portion of t he inner façade
within the courtyard exceeds 200 feet’.
• If standpipes are required, outlet(s) shall be provided within the firefighter tunnel at the opening of the firefighter tunnel(s) into the courtyard and at other approved locations as required by the fire code official. The hose-pull to all portions of the courtyard shall be less than 150 -feet as measured from the standpipe outlet.
980
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
286
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
25 • The syst
em shall be designed to not send a waterflow signal.
• The standpipe may be wall mounted or standalone. If standalone, it shall be located no more than 18 inches” from the edge of a primary walkway in the courtyard in a position where it is immediately visible and accessible to firefighters. Access to and use of standpipes shall not be hindered by planter walls, vegetation, or other features; 18-inch” clearance shall be provided on all sides.
6.4. Rescue Openings - Group-R occupancies that are required by CBC 1031.1 to have rescue openings shall have a walkable path free of obstructions between the fire lane and each rescue opening.
6.4.1. An approved access walkway must be provided to enable firefighters to easily and safely reach a clear, flat space beneath each rescue opening. Obstructions including but not limited to shrubs, trees, trellises, carports, raised planters, walls, fences, pools, steeply sloped roofs, overhangs, vegetation, and similar building and site elements shall not impede the use of or access to the walkway or rescue opening.
6.4.2. Walkways may consist of hardscape, decomposed granite, grass, or other similar walkable material that does not inhibit access to or use of the area.
6.4.3. Trees that encroach on walkways shall provide a minimum 7-foot clearance underneath to allow unhindered passage by firefighters, however, trees and shrubs shall not encroach on areas outside the rescue opening.
6.5. Laddering Pad and Setback at Rescue Openings of Group R-1, R-2, and R-2.1 Occupancies - A clear, flat space for laddering rescue openings shall be provided beneath each rescue opening. The distance between the nearest edge of this laddering pad and the structure is based on standardized operational procedures and safe practice to achieve a proper laddering angle (next page, next page, Figure 187).
The plan provided must demonstrate that the vegetation (at fully-grown sizes), buildings, and site features will not obstruct the access walkways or laddering operations. It is incumbent upon the developer, architect, landscape architect, and facility maintenance personnel to collaborate on a design and plant palette that complies with these requirements through the life of the building.
6.5.1. Proper laddering angle calculation: d = (h/5) + 2 Where h = The height of the window sill or balcony railing d = The distance in feet from the edge of the pad nearest the building to a point on the ground directly beneath the rescue window sill or balcony edge.
6.5.2. Dimensions for placement of ladders:
981
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
287
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
26 Figure 187 -
Ladde
r Pad Setback at Rescue Openings
982
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
288
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
27 983
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
289
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
28 ATTACHMENTS
Attachment
1 - Fire Master Plan Submittal Checklist
984
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
290
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
29 Attachment 2
– CVC, Fire Lane Parking Violations
The Califo
rnia Fire Code (CFC) and California Vehicle Code (CVC) specify rules of the road for stopping, standing, and parking in fire lanes or near fire hydrants.
A. Section 22500.1 states that no person shall stop, park, or leave standing any vehicle whether attended or unattended, in any location designated as a fire lane by the Fire Authority except when necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the direction of a peace officer or official traffic control device. Vehicles illegally parked in a fire lane may be towed per CVC 22953(b).
B. There shall be no parking of any vehicles other than fire department vehicles within 15 feet of either side of a fire hydrant in accordance with CVC 22514(c). Such vehicles may be towed per CVC 22651(e).
C. CVC 22658(a) permits the owner or person in lawful possession of any private property, subsequent to notifying local law enforcement, to cause the removal of a vehicle parked on such property to the nearest public garage, if a sign is displayed in plain view at all entrances to the property specifying:
1. The ordinance prohibiting public parking, a notation indicating that vehicles will be removed at the owner’s expense, and the telephone number of the local traffic law enforcement agency, or;
2. The lot or parcel upon which the vehicle is parked has a single-family dwelling.
D. CFC 503.4 states that the required width of a fire apparatus access road shall not be obstructed in any manner, including parking of vehicles. Minimum required widths and clearances shall be maintained at all times.
E. CFC 507.5.4 states that vehicles and other obstructions shall not be placed or kept near fire hydrants, fire department inlet connections or fire-protection system control valves in a manner that would prevent such equipment or fire hydrants from being immediately discernible. The fire department shall not be deterred or hindered from gaining immediate access to fire-protection equipment or hydrants. 985
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
291
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
30 Attachment 3
– Hydrant Quantity and Spacing in OCFA Jurisdiction
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES/DUPLEXES/TOWNHOUSES with SPRIN KLERS Flow
Requiremen
t
Minimum
Number of
Hydrants
Maximum Distance to
a Hydrant
Maximum Distance
between Hydrants 1
Average Di
stance
between Hydrants1
Thru road Dead-end Thru road Dead-end Thru road Dead-end 500 - 1750 1 300 250 600 500 600 500
1751+ Use the table below
ALL OTHER STRUCTURES
Flow
Requiremen
t
Minimum
Number of
Hydrants
Maximum Distance to
a Hydrant
Maximum Distance
between Hydrants 1,2
Average Di
stance
between Hydrants1,2
Thru road Dead-end Thru road Dead-end Thru road Dead-end 1000 - 1750 1 250 200 500 400 500 400
1751 - 2250 2 225 175 450 350 450 350
2251 - 2500 3 225 175 450 350 450 350
2501 - 3000 3 225 175 450 350 400 300
3001 - 4000 4 210 160 420 320 350 250
4001 - 5000 5 180 130 360 260 300 200
5001 - 5500 6 180 130 360 260 300 200
5501 - 6000 6 150 100 300 200 250 150
6001 - 7000 7 150 100 300 200 250 150
7001+ 1 per 1000 gpm or
fraction
thereof
120 70 240 140 200 100
All distances are in feet.
1 Where streets are provided with median dividers which cannot be crossed by fire fighters pulling hose lines, or where arterial streets are provided with four or more traffic lanes and have a traffic count of more than 30,000 vehicles per day, hydrant spacing shall average 500 feet on each side of the street and be arranged on an alternating basis. 2 Where new water mains are extended along streets where hydrants are not needed for protection of structures or similar fire problems, fire hydrants shall be provided at spacing not to exceed 1,000 feet to provide for transportation hazards.
A: HOSE PULL – In the diagram, firefighters would be able to reach the entire perimeter of the building by pulling no more than 150’ of hose from one or more fire engines staged in the shaded portion of the fire lane; the unshaded roadway has a hose pull distance greater than 150 feet’ and would be considered “out of access” relative to this buil ding.
B: HOSE LAY – No point along the portion of the fire lane serving the structure (the shaded road) may be farther from a hydrant than the distance specified in the table above. The hydrant may be located along portions of the fire lane that exceed the hose pull distance (unshaded roadway) provided that it is:
1. On the same property,
2. On an adjacent property where an emergency access
easement has
been obtained, or
3. On a public road leading to the fire lane serving the property.
C: HYDRANT SPACING – Hydran ts located on portions of the fire lane that do not serve the building (unshaded road) do not need to be evaluated for spacing relative to each other, only with respect to hydrants that do serve the structure. Example: C1 may exceed hydrant spacing requires. However, C2 and C3 cannot. “Average spacing” from the table above shall be maintained to prevent multiple hydrants from being concentrated in only one portion of the fire lane.
986
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
292
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
31 987
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
293
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
32 Attachment 4
– Minimum Required Fire Flow and Flow Duration
FIRE
FLOW CALCULATION AREA
(square feet)
DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENCE
/DUPLEX
OTHER BUILDINGS
FIRE FLOW
(gallons per minute
at 20 p
si residual) DURATION
(hours)
FIRE FL
OW (gallons
per minut
e at 20 psi
residual) DURATION
(hours)
Type IA/IB Type IIA/IIIA Type IV/VA Type IIB/IIIB Type VB NS S NS S 0-22700 0-12700 0-8200 0-5900 0-3600 1000 500 1 1500 1500 2 22701-30200 12701-17000 8201-10900 5901-7900 3601-4800 1750 875 NS: 2
S: 1
175
0 1500
30201-38700 17001-21800 10901-12900 7901-9800 4801-6200 2000 1000 2000 1500 38701-48300 21801-24200 12901-17400 9801-12600 6201-7700 2250 1125 2250 1500 48301-59000 24201-33200 17401-21300 12601-15400 7701-9400 2500 1250 2500 1500 59001-70900 33201-39700 21301-25500 15401-18400 9401-11300 2750 1375 2750 1500 70901-83700 39701-47100 25501-30100 18401-21800 11301-13400 3000 1500 NS: 3
S: 1
300
0 1500
3 83701-97700 47101-54900 30101-35200 21801-25900 13401-15600 3250 1625 3250 1625 97701-112700 54901-63400 35201-40600 25901-29300 15601-18000 3500 1750 3500 17 50 112701-
128700
63401-72400 40601-46400 29301-33500 18001-20600 3750 1875 3750 1875 128701-
145900
72401-82100 46401-52500 33501-37900 20601-23300 4000 2000 NS: 4
S: 1
400
0 2000
4 145901-
164200
82101-92400 52501-59100 37901-42700 23301-26300 4250 2125 4250 2125 164201-
183400
92401-103100 59101-66000 42701-47700 26301-29300 4500 2250 4500 2250 183401-
203700
103101-
114600
66001-73300 47701-53000 29301-32600 4750 2375 4750 2375 203701-
225200
114601-
126700
73301-81100 53001-58600 32601-36000 5000 2500 5000 2500 225201-
247700
126701-
139400
81101-89200 58601-65400 36001-39600 5250 2625 5250 2625 247701-
271200
139401-
152600
89201-97700 65401-70600 39601-43400 5500 2750 5500 2750 271201-
295900
152601-
166500
97701-106500 70601-77000 43401-47400 5750 2875 5750 2875 295901+ 166501+ 106501-115800 77001-83700 47401-51500 6000 3000 6000 3000 115801-
125500 83701-90600 51501-55700 6250 3125 6250 3125
125501-135500 90601-97900 55701-60200 6500 3250 6500 3250 135501-145800 97901-106800 60201-64800 6750 3375 6750 3375 145801-156700 106801-113200 64801-69600 7000 3500 7000 3500 156701-167900 113201-121300 69601-74600 7250 3625 7250 3625 167901-179400 121301-129600 74601-79800 7500 3750 7500 3750 179401-191400 129601-138300 79801-85100 7750 3875 7750 3875 191401+ 138301+ 85101+ 8000 4000 8000 4000
NS: The b
ui
lding is not protected throughout with an approved fire sprinkler system S: The building is protected throughout with an approved fire sprinkler system.
Construc
tion Types: Types of construction are based on the California Building Code 988
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
294
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
33 Attachment 5
– Definitions
Access Walkways - An app roved walking surface leading from fire access roadways to exterior doors, the area beneath rescue windows, and other required openings in structures.
Bollards - Permanent or removable poles that are placed across a roadway for the purpose of restrict
ing vehicular access or to protect a piece of equipment from potential vehicular damage.
Breakaway Lock - A lock that features a scored shackle that will break when struck by a hammer or other substantial object.
Fire Lane – A road or other passageway developed to allow the passage of fire apparatus which may or may n
ot be intended for vehicular traffic other than fire apparatus.
Fire Lane Identification - Signs or curb markings that allow fire apparatus access roads to be readily recognized so that they will always remain unobstructed and available for emergency use.
Gate – A movable barrier, usually on hinges or wheels, located at an opening in a fence, wall, or other enclosur
e, that can be opened to allow the passage of pedestrians or vehicles, and closed to restrict passage.
High Fire
Hazard Severity Zone (HFHSZ) - A designated area in which the type and condition of vegetation, topography, fire history, and other relevant factors increase the possibility of uncontrollable wildland fire. Structures within a HFHSZ require special construction features to protect against wildfire hazards; please consult with the local building department. (Refer to CCR Title 14) Hose Pu
ll - The distance between the fire engine and a building, represented by the amount of fire hose tha
t firefighters must pull from the engine to reach the structure and conduct fire suppression operations. Hose pull is measured along the firefighter’s path of travel from the fire lane to the building, accounting for any obstructions along that path.
Hose Lay - The distance between the fire engine and a hydrant, represented by the amount of hose laid out
from the engine to supply water from the hydrant to the engine. Hose lay is measured along the engine’s path of travel on a fire lane.
Hydrant Spacing – The di s tance between two hydrants that could supply water to fire apparatus engaged in firefighting operations. Hydrant spacing is measured along the fire lane.
Local Responsibility Area (LRA) - Land w here a city/county has primary financial responsibility for the prevention and suppression of wildland fires. LRA land is generally located within city boundaries. (Refer to CCR Title 14)
Premises Identification – A meth
od of recognizing and visual means (e.g., address numbers) used to readily identify a property or facility street address. It may also be used to distinguish separate buildings within a single facility or property.
Rescue Openings – An ope
rable window, door, or other similar device that provides for a means of escape and access for rescue in the event of an emergency.
State Responsibility Area (SRA) - Land w here the State of California has primary financial responsibility for the prevention and suppression of wildland fires. All SRA land is located within County unincorporated areas; SRA does not include lands within city boundaries or in federal ownership. (Refer to CCR Title 14)
Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) - A desi gnated area in which the type and condition of vegetation, topography, fire history, and other relevant factors increase the possibility of uncontrollable wildland fire. Structures within a VHFHSZ require special construction features to protect against wildfire hazards; please consult with the local building department. (Refer to CCR Title 14)
989
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
295
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
34 Wildfire Risk Area - Land t hat is covered with vegetation, which is so situated or is of such an inaccessible location that a fire originating upon it would present an abnormally difficult job of suppression or would result in great or unusual damage through fire, or such areas designated by the fire code official.
Attachment 6
- Apparatus Data for Swept Path Analysis
Use the following inputs for analyzing the swept path of a “typical” OCFA fire aerial truck. To improve maneuverability for all OCFA apparatus, increase the speed of apparatus navigation through tight turns, and reduce the potential for property damage and resulting delays to emergency response, projections such as light poles, sign posts, mailboxes, planter walls, and vegetation shall not be placed near the edge of the fire lane where they can obstruct or be struck by portions of the vehicle that may overhang the curb.
Weight 94,000 lbs
Width (Cab) 8.50 feet
Width (Outrigger) 15.00 feet
Height Clearance 13.50 feet
990
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
296
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
35 APPENDIX A - ACCESS DURING CONSTRUCTION
HOW TO
US
E THIS APPENDIX
This appendix contains information related to access during construction. In addition to the generic information listed in Guideline B-01, the information in this appendix must be provided with your plan for projects where access or water supply may impact emergency response during construction. Note: This information may not stand alone and must be used in conjunction Guideline B-01.
A1. Access During Construction - Access and water supply during construction shall comply with CFC Chapter 33 and the provisions listed in this section. Construction activities at job sites that do not comply with these requirements may be suspended at the discretion of the fire code official until a reasonable level of compliance is achieved.
At no time shall construction projects impair/obstruct existing fire lanes or access to the operation of an existing fire hydrant(s) serving other structures.
The developer shall provide alternative access routes, fire lanes, and other mitigation features when existing roadways or hydrants may need to be moved or altered during construction to ensure adequate fire and life-safety protection. Such alternatives and features shall be submitted to the OCFA for review and approval prior to alteration of existing conditions.
A1.1. Lumber Drop Inspection - An inspection shall be scheduled with an OCFA inspector to verify that access roadways, fire lanes, and operable hydrants have been provided for buildings under construction and prior to bringing combustible building materials on site.
A1.1.1. The street address of the site shall be posted at each entrance. Projects on streets without names or street signs posted at the time of construction shall include the project name, tract number, or lot number for identification.
A1.1.2. Gates through construction fencing shall be equipped with a Knox padlock or breakaway lock/chain.
A1.1.3. When required by the OCFA inspector, fire lanes shall be posted with “Fire Lane – No Parking” signs or ‘No Parking Areas’ will be identified to maintain obstruction free areas during construction.
A1.1.4. Provisions shall be made to ensure that hydrants are not blocked by vehicles or obstructed by construction material or debris. A three-foot clear space shall be provided around the perimeter of the hydrant and no parking or similar obstructions shall be allowed along the adjacent road within 15 feet of the hydrant.
Inoperable hydrants shall be bagged.
A1.2. Temporary Fire Access Roads - Temporary access roads (construction roads that do not match the final location and configuration of permanent roads as approved on a Fire Master Plan) and temporary hydrants may be permitted for single family residential model construction or a single detached custom home less than 5500 991
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
297
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
36 square fe
et in area with the conditions listed below. They may be allowed on a caseby- case basis for other structures with additional requirements, as determined by the fire code official.
A1.2.1. Plans for temporary access shall be submitted to the OCFA Planning and Development Services Section. Plans will show proposed temporary roadway locations, location of models, space dedicated to storage of construction materials, and parking for work crews and construction vehicles. The plans shall clearly state that they have been submitted for temporary access and hydrants.
A1.2.2. Plans shall be stamped and signed by a licensed civil engineer stating that the temporary access road can support 94,000 pounds of vehicle weight in all-weather conditions. Plans will also provide manufacturer’s documentation that demonstrates suitability of the material, specifically as a road stabilizer.
A1.2.3. Parking plans will include details on how the construction site will enforce fire lanes and no parking zones.
A1.2.4. Aboveground invasion lines are acceptable for water supply. • Drawings show detail how the line will be secured in place (e.g., size, depth, and interval of rebar tie-downs) and protected from vehicular damage (e.g., K-rails or bollards).
• An invasion line may be run underground if the depth of bury can support the 94,000-pound weight of a fire apparatus.
• The temporary water line must provide the required fire flow; calculations may be required.
• The pipe shall be listed for fire service.
• Fire hydrants shall consist of a minimum 6” barrel with one 2-1/2” outlet and a 4” outlet. Note this on the plan.
A1.2.5. All other access and water requirements shall apply (e.g., width, approach clearance, premises identification, locks, gates, barriers, etc.).
A1.2.6. The approved plan for temporary access and water supply shall be available at the construction site prior to bringing combustible building materials on-site.
A1.2.7. An inspection by OCFA personnel is required to verify adherence to the approved plan prior to bringing combustible materials on-site.
A1.3. Phased Access - Incremental installation of permanent access roadways as shown on a fire master plan may be permissible for commercial and residential developments.
If phased installation is anticipated, the site superintendent or designee shall review the installation process with an OCFA inspector during the lumber drop inspection or pre-construction meeting. Depending on the complexity of the installation, size of the project, and other project-specific factors, the inspector may allow phased installation to proceed immediately or may first require that all or some of the following items are satisfied:
• The extent of building construction.
• Location of operable hydrants serving all buildings under construction. 992
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
298
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
37 • The loca
tion of construction fencing, barriers, and vehicle access gates. • The location of all temporary or permanent “fire lane—no parking” signs. • Equipment/materiel staging locations.
• Worker parking areas.
A1.3.1. Phasing plans shall be stamped and signed by a licensed civil engineer stating that the access road can support 94,000 pounds of vehicle weight in all-weather conditions. The final road section less the final lift of asphalt topping may be acceptable if certified by the engineer.
A1.3.2. The phasing plan shall identify any anticipated areas where fire department access roadways may be temporarily inaccessible due to trenching, slurry coating, striping, or other construction activities after they have been installed and inspected. The plan shall indicate the anticipated period of impairment and include provisions for providing plating over trenches and alternative access routes, notification to the fire department, and/or other forms of mitigation when such roadways are impaired.
A1.3.3. Provide a parking plan for the construction site detailing how the fire lane no parking regulations will be enforced. Include a clause stating that “the job-site superintendent is responsible for informing the work crews of parking requirements and that the entire job-site is subject to shut down by the OCFA inspector if parking is in violation of fire lane posting.” A1.3.4. The approved phasing plan shall be available at the construction site prior to bringing combustible building materials on-site. A lumber drop inspection by an OCFA inspector will be required prior to the commencement of each phase; additional inspection fees will be due for each phase.
A1.3.5. All other access and water requirements shall apply (e.g., width, approach clearance, premises identification, locks, gates, barriers, etc.). 993
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
299
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
38 APPENDIX B – GATES AND BARRIERS
HOW TO
US
E THIS APPENDIX
This appendix contains information related to gates and barriers shown on the Fire Master Plan. In addition to the generic information listed in Guideline B-01, the information in this appendix must be provided with your plan if your plan incorporates gates and barriers. Note:
This information may not stand alone and must be used in conjunction Guideline B-01.
B1. Obstructions to Emergency Vehicle Access - Existing or proposed gates and barriers crossing fire lanes must be shown on the plans. Information such as the location, type of gate (e.g., swinging, sliding), dimensions, and method of operation (manual, electric) must also be provided. Note or identify the following on the fire master plan:
B1.1. Clear Width – Gated openings for vehicle egress and ingress of vehicles shall have at least 13-feet of clear width when serving a single 13-foot-wide fire lane designed for traffic travelling in one direction and 20-feet clear for a 20-foot-wide fire lane serving traffic travelling in two directions. The vertical clearance shall not be less than 13 -feet 6 -inches, including landscaping and/or foliage (Figure B1 and n ext page, Figure B2).
In SRA and LRA HFHSZ and VHFHSZ, gate openings shall be at least two feet wider than the roadway and a minimum of 14’ wide in accordance with CCR Title 14.
FIGURE B1- Fire Apparatus Access Roadway Clearance for Typical Gated Community Guard House 994
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
300
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
39 Figure B2– F ire Apparatus Access Roadway Clearance
B1.2. Turning Radii – The inside turning radius shall be at least 20 -feet with an outside radius of 40 -feet or greater for both the exterior and the interior approa ch to the gate.
B1.3. Setbacks from the Street – Gates
and barriers shall be located a
minimum of 60 -feet from any street
with average daily trip (ADT) greater
than 30,000 (Figure B3). A private
driveway serving only one
singlefamily residence is exempt from
this requirement. In SRA and in LRA
HFHSZ and VHFHSZ, all setbacks
shall be a minimum of 30 feet per
CCR Title 14.
B1.4. Setbacks from First Interior Turn –
A 30-foot minimum setback is
required from a gate to the first turn.
B1.5. Manually Operated Gate Design –
Typical gate designs may include
sliding gates, swinging gates, or a
chain traversing the opening.
B1.5.1. Permanent or removable bollards
are not permitted to be placed
across fire lanes.
B1.5.2. Permanent signage constructed of 18-gauge steel or equivalent shall be attached on each face of the gate that reads “NO PARKING – FIRE LANE” or similar (next page, Figure B4).
Fi g
ure B 3 –
Minimum Gate Setbacks
995
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
301
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
40 B1.5.3.
Figure B4– Fi re Lane No Parking Signs for Manually Operated Gates and Barriers
B1.5.34. W
here the gate will be used for purposes other than emerge n cy vehicle access, installation of a Knox box containing a key to operate an owner-supplied padlock is recommended. If the gate can be reached by emergency personnel from both sides (such as for a secondary emergency access roadway serving a residential tract), the lock shall also be capable of being accessed from both sides. Knox boxes shall be provided as necessary to ensure that the lock can be accessed and opened from any direction of approach available to emergency personnel.
B1.6. Electrically Operated Gates and Barriers CFC 503.6 B1.6.1. In the event of loss of normal power to the gate operating mechanism, it shall be automatically transferred to a fail-safe mode allowing the gate to be pushed open by a single Firefighter without any other actions, knowledge, or manipulation of the operating mechanism being necessary and without the use of battery back-up power, except as noted below . The manufacturer’s specification sheet demonstrating compliance with this method of operation during power loss shall be provided or scanned directly onto the plan. Should the gate be too large or heavy for a single firefighter to open manually, a secondary source of reliable power by means of emergency generator or a capacitor with enough reserve to automatically, immediately, and completely open the gate upon loss of primary power shall be provided for fail-open operation. A capacitor, but not a battery, may also be used for fail-open operation where the gate operating mechanism does not have a fail-safe mode.
B1.6.1.1. A battery may only be used in place of fail-safe manual operation when the gate operator has a fail-open mode that will automatically, immediately, and completely open the gate and keep it open upon reaching a low power threshold, regardless of the presence of normal power.
All sign and lettering dimensions shown are minimums.
Signs shall be securely mounted on the front and back face of the gate clearly visible to traffic entering the designated area.
Signs shall be made of a durable material.
996
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
302
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
41 B1.6.2. Fo
r electrically operated gates, the type of remote gate opening device that will be installed shall be noted on the plan. The remote opening device is required in addition to the Knox key switch. A gate serving an individual single-family residence or duplex is exempt from this requirement. Please see below for the currently approved gate opening systems:
• 3M Opticom
• Click2Enter (system shall be configured in single-pulse mode with 1.5 second transmission window)
• Fire Strobe Access Products, Inc.
• Tomar
B1.6.3. Upon activation of the key switch, the gate shall open and remain open until returned to normal operation by means of the key switch. Where a gate consists of two leaves, the key switch shall open both simultaneously if operation of a single leaf of the ingress side does not provide for the width, turning radii, or setbacks necessary for fire apparatus to navigate the vehicle entry point.
B1.6.4. The key switch shall be labeled with a permanent red sign with not less than ½” contrasting letters reading “FIRE DEPT” or with a “Knox” decal.
B1.6.5. Place the OCFA notes for electric gates on the plan verbatim (Appendix B, Attachment 1).
B1.7. Gate Locks – Gate locks shall be reviewed and approved prior to their installation on any new and/or existing gate. Authorization for Knox products is processed through the Knox Box company website at www.knoxbox.com . Knox key switches and key boxes serving only vehicle gates and not buildings shall be sub-mastered for use by both the fire and sheriff/police department. Call the OCFA Planning and Development Services Section at 714-573-6100 for any questions regarding the need for key boxes or switches.
B2. Path of travel obstructions – Fences, planters, and vegetation may not interfere with access and egress routes.
B2.1. Key boxes and key switches – Knox devices shall be provided where necessary to ensure that immediate access for firefighting, rescue, and other emergency purposes is possible. The location, at a minimum, for the Knox device(s) shall be provided for the following locations:
• Gates along the paths of firefighter travel from the fire lane to all points along the perimeter of the structure.
• Gates to pool enclosures.
• Building gates or doors leading to interior courtyards containing rescue windows. • Building gates or doors leading to exterior hallways or balconies providing access to residential units or tenant suites.
• Gates in exterior enclosures containing hazardous or combustible material storage.
997
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
303
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
42 • Buildin
gs using hazardous materials or processes where such warrants immediate access.
• Exterior doors to rooms containing main alarm panels or annunciators. • Doors and gates providing access to parking structures. • Within the fire command center in high-rises and other large buildings. • Main entry to buildings equipped throughout with an alarm system and not staffed 24/7.
• Facilities where a high-volume of after-hours calls is expected or experienced. • Doors and gates to other areas identified by the fire department.
Breakaway Lock – When approved by the OCFA, a breakaway lock or a Knox padlock may be used in lieu of a key box for exterior hazardous or combustible material storage areas. Manually operated vehicle or pedestrian access gates that are not commonly used or not required to be openable from the egress side may also be provided with a breakaway padlock.
B2.2. Knox Device Location - Knox boxes or switches shall be located adjacent to and clearly visible from the gate or door served. Gates in walls and fences up to six feet in height shall be securely mounted at a height of four to five feet above grade; on buildings they shall be mounted six feet above grade and in a location that is easily accessible to firefighters. Where the potential for vandalism or tampering is significant, key boxes that are not submastered may be mounted higher with OCFA approval.
Boxes and switches are not required to be electronically monitored; if they are, they shall not initiate an alarm signal that requires a response by the fire department.
B2.3. Key box Contents - The key used to unlock the gate or door shall be kept in the key box. When the key unlocks more than the individual adjacent gate or door, a label or tag shall be attached to the key identifying the gates or doors it operates. Where multiple gates or doors are served by a single box, two or more copies of the key(s) are recommended so that a copy will be available to each engine company responding to the site.
B2.4. Electric Locks – Electromagnetically or electromechanically locked pedestrian gates and doors shall be equipped either with a Knox box containing a key to open the lock or, if the door lock cannot be operated with a key from the exterior, a Knox key switch shall be provided adjacent to the door. Where key switches are provided, the door or gate lock shall remain disengaged until the key switch is returned to the “normal” closed or locked position.
B2.5. Manual Vehicle Gates – Manually operated gates shall have breakaway padlocks, Knox padlocks, or weather-resistant Knox key boxes. The key box shall be placed four to five feet above the roadway surface at the right side of the access gate in a conspicuous location that is readily visible and accessible. In Irvine, the key boxes shall be located on the left side. The key box must be clearly labelled “FIRE DEPT”.
B2.6. Electric Vehicle Gates – The gate control for electronic gates shall be operable by a Knox emergency override key switch (with dust cover), readily visible and unobstructed from the fire lane leading to the gate, and clearly labelled “FIRE DEPT”.
The key switch shall be placed between 42 inches” and 48 inches” above the roadway 998
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
304
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
43 surface a
t the right side of the access gate within two feet of the roadway edge. In Irvine, the key switches shall be located on the left side of the access gate.
B2.7. Master and Submaster Keying – Knox devices that provide access only to the perimeter of buildings and exterior common areas shall be submastered for dual use by the fire and police departments. Where access to interior common areas of buildings is mandated by the local security or municipal code, Knox devices shall also be submastered. Knox boxes containing keys to access any interior private spaces, such as the interior of single tenant buildings or individual suites in a multi-tenant building, shall be mastered for use by the fire department only.
Where additional devices beyond those required by the fire department are called for in the local municipal or security code, they shall also be accessible for use by the fire department to facilitate emergency response.
B2.8. Ordering Knox Devices – Knox products are ordered through the Knox Box company website at www.knoxbox.com . If you have questions, please contact OCFA Community Risk Reduction by email at [email protected] or by phone at 714-573-6100.
999
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
305
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
44 APPENDIX B
, ATTACHMENT 1 - OCFA Notes for Electric Vehicle Gates
All of the notes listed below shall be placed on the plan verbatim, under the heading “OCFA Notes for Electric Vehicle Gates.” Indicate the type of remote gate operator under Note #1.
1) A remote opening device is required. The remote gate opening device that will be installed is (check one):
3M Opticom
Click2Enter* (single-pulse mode with 1.5 second transmission window) Fire Strobe Access Products, Inc.
Tomar
2) In the
event of loss of normal power to the gate operating mechanism, it shall be automatically transferred to a fail-safe mode allowing the gate to be pushed open by a single firefighter without any other actions, knowledge, or manipulation of the operating mechanism being necessary.
a) A battery may only be used in place of fail-safe manual operation when the gate operator has a fail-open mode that will automatically, immediately, and completely open the gate and keep it open upon reaching a low power threshold, regardless of the presence of normal power.
b) Should the gate be too large or heavy for a single firefighter to open manually, a secondary source of reliable power by means of an emergency generator or a capacitor with enough reserve to automatically, immediately, and completely open the gate upon loss of primary power shall be provided for fail-open operation. 3) In addition to the remote operator, the gate control shall be operable by a Knox emergency override key switch equipped with a dust cover. Upon activation of the key switch, the gate shall open and remain open until returned to normal operation by means of the key switch.
Where a gate consists of two leaves, the key switch shall open both simultaneously if operation of a single leaf on the ingress side does not provide for the width, turning radii, or setbacks necessary for fire apparatus to navigate the vehicle entry point. 4) The key switch shall be placed between 42 inches” and 48 inches” above the roadway surface at the right side of the access gate within two feet of the edge of the roadway. In Irvine, the switch shall be on the left side in accordance with Irvine’s Uniform Security Ordinance.
5) The key switch shall be readily visible and unobstructed from the fire lane leading to the gate.
6) The key switch shall be labeled with a permanent red sign with not less than ½ -inch” contrasting letters reading “FIRE DEPT” or with a “Knox” decal. 1000
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
306
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
45 APPENDIX C - RESIDENTIAL AND TRACT DEVELOPMENTS
HOW TO
US
E THIS APPENDIX
This appendix contains information related to fire master plans for residential tract developments. These requirements may also be applied to individual single-family homes or duplexes (Appendix C, Attachment 1) or to multi-family housing projects as approved by the fire code official. In addition to the generic information listed in Guideline B-01, the information in this section of the appendix must be provided with your plan if your plan incorporates residential developments. Note: This information may not stand alone and must be used in conjunction Guideline B-01.
C3. Residential Tract Developments - The following requirements apply to all new residential tract developments with single-family homes or duplexes.
C3.1. Cul
-de-sacs – Cul-de-sacs shall comply with the following requirements:
C3.1.1. A
ny street that is a required fire lane and greater than 150 feet in length shall be provided with a 40-foot minimum outside turning radius or other approved turnaround within 150 feet’ of the end of the fire lane (Figure C1). Where a spur road or private driveway that is a required fire lane is accessed via the cul-de-sac road, the driveway or spur shall be no more than 150 -feet in length unless an approved turnaround has been provided within the 150 -feet at the end of the spur or driveway.
Figure C1 -
Cul-de-Sacs
and Dead-End
Roadways
1001
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
307
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
46 C3.1.2. Th
e cul-de-sac shall be identified as a fire lane with red curbs or include “Fire Lane – No Parking” signs (Figure C2) unless the radius, with parking, is a minimum of 48 feet.
C3.1.3. Cul-de-sacs longer than 150 -feet that are required to be designated as fire lanes may contain a center island provided the following requirements are met:
• A minimum 20-foot-wide drive lane with a minimum 40-foot outside turning radius is provided around the island.
• Island landscaping will not intrude into the drive lane. • The island is designated a no parking area with red curbs or fire lane signs.
C3.2. When there are not more than two Group R3 and two Group U occupancies on a single- family residential lot, the fire lane serving a detached single-family home or duplex, or related accessory structure (pool house, casita, garage, workshop, barn, etc.) is protected through by an approved NFPA 13-D, 13-R, or 13 fire sprinkler system, shall extend to within 300 -feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the first stor y of the
building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building.
C3.3. In residential tracts with private roads, parking enforcement plans shall include:
• Detailed information specifically identifying who will be responsible for enforcing the plan.
• Powers granted to the entity including vehicle towing information for parking violations (needs to include similar language provided in CVC). • The aforementioned information needs to be integrated into the fire master plan.
Evidence that the enforcement plan is permanently incorporated into the Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CCRs) and/or recorded against the deed shall be provided prior to OCFA approval of the final map or print of linen.
Once approved, these provisions cannot be amended without written approval by the OCFA. See Appendix C, Attachment 2 for a sample enforcement letter.
Standard 40’ radius cul-de-sac:
“no-parking in cul-de-sac begin” and “end”
signs shall be located at the point where the
street begins to widen into the bulb.
Offset 40’ radius cul-de-sac:
“no-parking in cul-de-sac begin” and “end” signs
shall be located at the point where the street
begins to widen into the bulb and at a point 40’
from where the cul-de-sac and street are tangent.
Figure C2 – Fire Lane No Parking Sign Locations for Cul-de-sacs/Bulbs 1002
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
308
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
47 C3.4. Short
Cul-de-sacs and
Dead-End Roads - If
hose-pull distance can be
satisfied without
fire apparatus
enterin
g the cul-
de-sac or dead-end road,
and the road is not
otherwise required to be a
fire lane as determined by
the fire code official, the
street is not required to
have a bulb or
hammerhead with
minimum OCFA turning
radii or meet
other standard
fire lane
requirements. (Figure C3)
C3.5. Eyebrows - If the eyebrow does not meet OCFA’s minimum turning radius and width requirements, fire department access will be measured from the nearest available fire lane around the island
and any other
obstructions. If
hosepull to the most
remote area of a
sprinklered home
exceeds 300 feet’ (or
150 feet’ to the most
remote point
around the
perimeter for
unsprinklered homes),
the eyebrow shall be
designed as a fire lane
or other mitigating
features shall be
provided. (Figure C4)
Figure C3 – Short Cul-de-sacs and
Dead-End Roads
Figure C4 – Eyebrows
1003
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
309
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
48 C3.6. Cul
-de-Sacs up to 150’ with Islands - Cul-de-sacs up to 150 -feet in l ength containing an island (Figure C5) will have access to the homes measured along an approved route around the island and any other obstructions in the path of travel from the point of where the island begins to impede fire apparatus.
C3.6.1. If
all homes are in access from the area preceding the island, the portion of the bulb beyond the islan
d is not required to comply with OCFA fire lane requirements.
C3.6.2. If
the hose-pull to the
most remo
te point of a
sprinklered home
exceeds 300 feet’ (or
150 feet’ to the most
remote point around
the perimeter for
unsprinklered
homes), the portion of
the bulb beyond the
island shall be
designed as a fire lane
or other mitigating
features shall be
provided.
Figure C5 – Cul-de-sacs up to 150’ with
Islands
1004
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
310
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
49 APPENDIX C
, ATTACHMENT 1 – Residential Site Plan Checklist
ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY
Plan Checkl
ist for SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (Fee Code PR 160)
For ADU or SB9 Projects, refer to OCFA information bulletin 01-21
INSTRUCTI
ONS: Return this completed form with the plans to be submitted. This worksheet is provided for your convenience and is a listing of the required information and content needed for residential site plan review. Providing the items listed is not a guarantee of plan approval. Please note that additional information or requirements may apply depending on the project and that some of the items listed will not be applicable to every project. If you need help completing this form or have questions regarding requirements for review, please contact the OCFA [email protected] or visit us at 1 Fire Authority Road, Irvine, CA for assistanc e.
You can verify where to submit plans based upon the submittal routing form or by calling the plans counter (714) 573-6100.
Address (Street Number/Name, City):
Project
Service Request #:
☐ 1. Complete OCFA Residential Cover sheet with Submittal scaled plan sheets showing the vicinity map, site plan, building footprint, stories, property lines and elevations of the project. Show any fences, walls, or gates. ☐
2. Provide
the project scope on the plans. Include the building summary, building occupancy, construction type and square footage (existing & proposed) of the residence, garage and any other accessory structures. Note if fire sprinklers are existing or not. Complete fillable area on OCFA Residential coversheet ☐
3. If an auto
matic fire sprinkler system is required, note on the plan that “a fire sprinkler plan shall be installed per NFPA 13D 2025”. Separate plan review and approval of a fire sprinkler plan by the OCFA is required prior to installation. Complete fillable area on OCFA Residential coversheet ☐ 4. Provid e a project directory with the property owner information, project address and city. Include the tract map number or parcel map number for the property. Complete fillable area on OCFA Residential coversheet ☐ 5. Show the location and distance of any proposed or existing fire hydrant(s) within 300 feet of property lines ☐ 6. Indicate all surrounding property uses. If the project adjoins an open space, fuel modification area or a wild-land interface, a
fuel modification plan may be required separately for a new structure. See Guideline C-05 ☐ 7. Indicate if the project is located near an oil well, oilfield or landfill. A methane plan for soil gas mitigation may be required separately. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/calgem/Pages/WellFinder.aspx ☐
8. If applicable complete, signed “ Water Ava ilability” form and place onto plan. To obtain the form, see www.ocfa.org under the Planning and Development homepage. Complete fill able area on OCFA Residential coversheet. For additional information, see OCFA Plan Submittal Criteria Form – Residential Projects Question #5 and Guideline B-01, Appendix D, Table 2.
☐ 9. Specify the width of street or road to which the property is addressed. ☐
10. Please state on the plans if the project resides within a High or Very High Fir e Severity Zone (VHFSZ) or State Responsibility Area (SRA). If unsure, see ocfa.org to obtain information. Indicate with a note if the design requires CBC Chapter 7A/Residential Code R337. Complete fillable area on OCFA Residential coversheet Print name: Signature :
Phone Nu
mber: Date:
Serving the Cities of Aliso Viejo • Buena Park • Cypress • Dana Point • Garden Grove • Irvine • Laguna Hills • Laguna Niguel • Laguna Woods Lake Forest • La Palma • Los Alamitos • Mission Viejo • Rancho Santa Margarita • San Clemente • San Juan Capistrano Seal Beach • Santa Ana • Stanton • Tustin • Villa Park • Westminster • Yorba Linda • and Unincorporated Areas of Orange County
RESIDENTIAL SPRINKLERS AND SMOKE DETECTORS SAVE LIVES
1005
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
311
Guideline B-01 January 01, 20263
50 APPENDIX
C
, ATTACHMENT 2 - Sample Parking Enforcement Letter
Date
Planning and Development Services Section
Orange County Fire Authority
1 Fire Authority Road
Irvine, CA. 92602
Re: ( Project Name, Location, and Service Request Number) Parkin
g Enforcement Plan
The fire
lane parking enforcement plan for the above referenced project is stated as follows:
All fire lanes within (list development address or tract information) shall be maintained and in no event shall parking be permitted along any portion of a street or drive that required fire lanes or any area designated as a fire lane for turn-around purposes either during construction or after occupancy.
(Association name) shall adopt reasonable rules and regulations regarding the parking of vehicles along the streets, roads and or drives within the project that are not in conflict with applicable law.
In furtherance thereof, ( Association name), through its officers, committees and agents, will establish the “parking” and “no parking” areas within the property in accordance with Section 22658 of the California Vehicle Code and OCFA Guideline B-01. The law shall be enforced through such rules and regulations by all lawful means, including, written warnings, citing, levying fines and towing vehicles in violation.
(Association name) will contract with a certified patrol and towing company to remove vehicles that violate no parking restrictions. First time violators will receive a written warning and with subsequent violations, the vehicle shall be subject to towing. The vehicle owner shall be responsible for all costs incurred in remedying such violation, including without limitation towing cost, citations, and legal fees.
Company Name
Authorized Agent Signature
Cc:
1006
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
312
ATTACHMENT 8
1007
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
313
Orange County Fire Authority
Community Risk Reduction
1 Fire Authority Road, Building A, Irvine, CA 92602 • www.ocfa.org • 714-573-6100 Vegetation Management Guideline:
Technical Design
for New Construction
Fuel Modification Plans and
Maintenance Program
Guideline C-05
Serving the Cities of Aliso Viejo • Buena Park • Cypress • Dana Point • Garden Grove • Irvine • Laguna Hills • Laguna Niguel • Laguna Woods • Lake For
est • La Palma • Los Alamitos • Mission Viejo • Rancho Santa Margarita • San Clemente • San Juan Capistrano • Seal Beach • Santa Ana • Stanton • Tustin • Villa Park • Westminster • Yorba Linda • and Unincorporated Areas of Orange County 1008
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
314
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
2 Vegetation Management Guideline:
Technical Design f
or New
Construction Fuel Modification Plans
and Maintenance Program
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTIO
N ........... .............................................................................................. 4343 PURPOSE ................................................................................................................... 4343 SCOPE ........................................................................................................................ 4343 FUEL MODIFICATION PLAN OVERVIEW & SEQUENCING ......................................... 34 FUEL MODIFICATION ZONES ................................................................................... 7564
1. Zone AZone AZone “A” .............................................................. ....................... 8574
2. Zone BZone BZone “B” ................................................ ......................................... 46
2. Zone “C/D” .............................................................. ............................................ 546
3. Zone A .................................................................................................................... 6
3.4. ............................................................ ..................................................................... Z one D ................................................................................................................... 56
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE AREAS AND ROADSIDE PROTECTION ZONESTYPES OF INTERIOR SLOPES: RESIDENTIAL TRACT .................................................................... 657
1. Special Maintenance Area (SMA)
................................................. 7)...…….……………………………………………….5
1. Roadside Protection Zones (RPZ)SMA Interior
Slopes……………………………………………………………………….6
2. Roadside Protection Zones (RPZ) .............................................................. ........ 657 FUEL MODIFICATION PLANS: REQUIRED INFORMATIONFUEL MODIFICATION PLANS: REQUIRED INFORMATIONFUEL MODIFICATION PLANS: REQUIRED INFORMATION .............................................................. ............................................... 768 Section 1: Conceptual Fuel Modification Plans ........................................................ 768 Section 2: Precise Fuel Modification Plans........................................................... 71010 Section 3: Plant Palette InformationSection 3: Plant Palette Information ............. 91112 Section 4: Alternative Materials & Methods Construction Features, & Fire Protection PlansSection 4: Alternative Materials & Methods Construction Features, and Fire Protection Plans .............................................................. ....... 10113 Section 5: Special Maintenance Areas and Roadside Protection Zones .................... 14
ATTACHMENTS
1. New Construction Inspection RequirementsNew Construction Inspection RequirementsNew Construction Inspection Requirements ............................... 1235
2. Introductory Maintenance InformationIntroductory Maintenance InformationIntroductory Maintenance Information ............................................. 1356
3. Incline Measurement for Selected SlopesIncline Measurement for Selected January 1,
202623
1009
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
315
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
3 SlopesIncline Measurement for Selected Slopes .............................................. 1467
4. Zone Marker Details .......................................................................................... 1 578
5. Sample CC&R Maintenance LanguageSample CC&R Maintenance LanguageSample CC&R Maintenance Language ............................................ 1689
6. Requirements for Planting Installation in Fuel Modification Z onesRequirements for Planting Installation in Fuel Modification ZonesRequirements for Planting Installation in Fuel Modification Zones .......................................................... 201 821
7. Undesirable and Invasive Plant Species ....................................................... 192222
8. Fuel Modification Zone Plant List ...................................................................... 2 033 January 1,
202623
1010
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
316
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
4 Technical Design for New Construction Fuel Modification Plans and Maintenance Program
INTRODUCTION
Vegetation management has proven to be a major factor in reducing the probability of buildi
ngs igniting from wildfires. When combined with special building construction features, the potential for ignition is further reduced.
PURPOSE
Fuel Modification Plans help control vegetation design and placement around new structures to limit wildfire impact. These plans ensure that landscaped areas next to buildings are maintained permanently for fire safety.
This gui
deline provides:
• Design and maintenance requirement for Fuel Modification Zones (FMZ), Special Maintenance Areas (SMA) and Roadside Protection Zones (RPZ) • Standards for both Conceptual an d Precise Fuel Modification Plans • Steps to integrate fire-safe landscaping with construction features for long-term protection
Design
and maintenance requirements for Fuel Modification Zone s (FMZ), Special Maintenance Areas (SMA) and Roadside Protection Zones (RPZ) Standards for both Conceptual and Precise Fuel Modification Plans Steps to integrate fire-safe landscaping with construction features for long-term • protectionManaging the design and placement of vegetation in and around new structures will reduce the effects of a wildfire. For this reason, codes are adopted that require vegetation management and special construction features. The Fuel Modification Plan is a vegetation management code that requires landscaped areas adjacent to new structures be dedicated for permanent vegetation management activities.
The Fuel Modification Program brings fire-safe landscaping and construction features together to improve community safety and reduce property loss during wildfire emergencies. This guideline provides you with the information and steps needed to prepare a Fuel Modification Plan and maintain vegetation in Fuel Modification areas for a successful long-term outcome. Furthermore, it covers the timing of plans for construction, plan criteria needed for approval, plant lists for the zones, new construction inspection requirements, and introductory maintenance information.
Note: For existing structures that were not developed with a fuel modification plan, maintenance shall be completed as required in the Vegetation Management Recommendations/Requirements for Homeowners document found at: OCFA.org SCOPE
All new single-family homes, multi-family residential, Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU), utility,
and commercial structures built in, or adjacent to, a wildfire-risk area or such areas January 1,
202623
1011
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
317
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
5 designated by the fire code official, require a Fuel Modification Plan in conjunction with the 202 52 California Wildland Urban Interface Fire Code (C WUIFC)., Chapter 49.
However, a Fuel Modification Plan may or may not be required based on lot size, configuration, or your property’s connection and proximity to grass, brush, and ornamental vegetation. For questions regarding the Fuel Modification requirements and your project, contact the OCFA RSG line at (714) 573-6774. • Required for State Responsibility Area (SRA) or Local Responsibility Area – Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (LRA-VHFHSZ) and High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (LRA-HFHSZ)
• Required per 2025 California Wildland Urban Interface Code, Government Code Section 51175 – 51189, and the California Code of Regulations, Title 14 Required for State Responsibility Area (SRA) or Local Responsibility Area – Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (LRA-VHFHSZ) and High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (LRA- HFHSZ)
Require
d per 2025 California Wildland Urban Interface Code, G overnment Code Section 51175 – 51189, and the California Code of Regulations, Title 14 To confi
rm if your property requires fuel modification, conta ct the OCFA tech line at (714) 573-6108.The plan requires permanent vegetation management in dedicate d land areas and is used indefinitely to facilitate on-going maintenance requirements. For existing structures that were not developed with a fuel modification plan or condition, maintenance shall be completed as required in the Vegetation Management Maintenance Guideline for Property Owners.
For new
structures proposed within the State Responsibility Area (SRA), as defined in the Public Resource Code Sections 4126-4127 or within the Local Responsibility Area (LRA) - Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ), as defined in the Government Code Section 51175 – 51189, and the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division
1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, Articles 1-5, a 30-foot setback from the structures to the property line shall be required.
Regulat
ion
s for wildfire safety are dynamic and new requirements may be enacted by the State of California and its regulatory agencies at any time. Projects must comply with all state requirements for vegetation management and wildfire safety, in addition to the requirements in this guideline, in place at the time of plan submittal. Where a conflict between this guideline and other applicable regulations exists, the more stringent or specific requirement will apply.
FUEL MODIFICATION PLAN OVERVIEW & SEQUENCING
There are two types of fFuel mModification pPlans, submitted at different stages of the development process:conceptual and precise. Each type is submitted at a different time during the development and construction process.
1. Concept
ual Fuel Modification Plan* (see Section 1: Conceptual Fuel Modification January 1,
202623
1012
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
318
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
6 Plans for requirements)
• Submitted before tentative tract map, parcel map, or fire master plan approval • Shows zone layouts, widths, and program intent
• Includes land-use restrictions, tract boundaries, and property lines • Typically reviewed during the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process and prior to approval of any Tentative Maps
*Note: C
onceptual fuel modification plans and precise fuel modification plans can be combined into one submittal when planting plans, final specifications, and inspection information are known.
2. Preci
se Fuel Modification Plan
• Submitted before grading permit or building permit issuance (whichever comes first) and prior to fire master plan approval
• Includes conceptual fuel modification details and planting plans, final specifications, and inspection information
• May require approval from other permitting agencies (e.g., Coastal Commission, Army Corps, Habitat Management Plan) before OCFA final sign-off
3. Requir
ed Inspections (OCFA must be contacted at 714-573-6150 to schedule) • Vegetation Clearance – Before dropping lumber, remove all combustible vegetation within 100 feet of structures, lumber stockpiles, generators, and fuel tanks.
• Final Fuel Modification Inspection – Before occupancy, ensure all zones, irrigation, planting, and access features match approved plans. • Turnover Inspection – When HOA or owner takes over maintenance, meet with OCFA to confirm maintenance responsibility and review requirements.
Infrastructure of the zone widths and program
Land use restrictions
Tract and property line information
When to submit
Concurrent with Environmental Impact Report (EIR) processing Prior to tentative tract map, parcel map, or final tract map approval Prior to fire master plan submittal
Precise
January 1,
202623
1013
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
319
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
7 (see Section 2: Precise Fuel Modification Plans for requireme nts)
A. Approval of planting plans
B. Final details
C. Inspection information
D. When to submit
1) Prior to approval of planting plans from other permitting agencies 2) Prior to precise grading or building permit issuance, whichever comes first
3) Prior to Fire Master Plan approval
FUEL MODIFICATION ZONES
The standard FMZ is 170 feet wide, measured horizontally from the structure outward in all directions. It is divided into Zones A (minimum 20 feet ’), B, C, and D (minimum 50 feet ’ each), with specific design and maintenance requirements for each zone. The width of a more stringent zone may be increased, pushing a less stringent zone farther from the structure or even completely replacing it. For example, an FMZ may be comprised of a 20 foot’ A zone, a 100 foot’ B zone, and a 50 foot’ C or D zone. Some developments may also have Special Maintenance Areas (SMA) or Roadside Protection Zones (RPZ) in addition to the FMZ.
Any project where the entire 170 foot’ FMZ does not fit on the property, or where any FMZ, SMA, or RPZ does not meet the requirements listed in this guideline, will require an Alternate Materials and Methods (AM&M) request (see Section 4).
The Fuel Modification area is comprised of three zones with specific design criteria. The standard Fuel Modification area is 170 feet in width, measured out horizontally from the structure in all directions on the site (see Attachment 3: Incline Measurement for Selected Slopes). Many developments have interior slopes with Special Maintenance Areas (SMA). See below for specific unique requirements for each zone. The fuel modification plan may be altered if conditions change. Any alterations to the fuel modification areas shall have prior approval from the fire code official.
Note:
Additional planting restrictions may be required for certain plant species (see Approved Plant Palette Qualification Statements for Select Plant Species on page 31).
January 1,
202623
1014
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
320
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
8 Zone “A”
Width: 20 feet minimum with first 5 feet as the “Immediate Zone” (20-foot minimum width, with the first 5 feet as the Immediate Zone) Immediate Zone (0–5 feet):
• No combustible bark or mulch
• Remove all dead and dying plants
• Plants: Irrigated, naturally low growing (2 feet or less), non-woody • Additional Zone A Area Requirements listed below
No combustible bark or mulch
Remove all dead and dying plants
Plants: Irrigated, naturally low growing (2 feet or less), non-woody Additional Zone A Area Requirements listed below
Zone A Area (0-20 feet):
• Flat level ground (Slopes shall be labeled as B, C or D zone) • No combustible construction allowed
• No grouping of shrubs
• Single specimen shrubs shall be spaced 15 feet apart
• Trees limbs shall be minimum of 10 feet from structures • Irrigated zone (shall have automatic irrigation to maintain high-moisture vegetation) • Plants must be highly fire-resistant, selected from the Fuel Modification Zone Plant List (Attachment 8) or similar species (See Section 3 – Plant Palette Information) • No undesirable and invasive plant species (Attachment 7) Flat level ground requirement
Building foundation setback (no design alternatives allowed) Zone “A” (20 feet wide – measured from the structure out) Setback from the slope nearest the foundation
No combustible construction is allowed within Zone “A”
Automatic irrigation systems to maintain healthy vegetation with high moisture content and to be regularly irrigated
Plants in this zone shall be highly fire resistant and selected from Attachment 8: Fuel Modification Zone Plant List (also refer to Section 3: Plant Palette Information)
If all Zones “A-D” are to be maintained by the structure owner, then Zone “A” shall begin at the wall of the structure
Immedia
te Zone (First 5 feet measured from the structure out, in all directions)
No combustible bark or mulch
Plants in this area to be irrigated, naturally low growing (below 2 feet in height), and non-woody
No combustible construction is allowed, fencing, gates, patio covers, etc.
Zone B
Width: 50 feet minimum
• Irrigated zone (shall have automatic irrigation to maintain high-moisture vegetation) • Planted with approved species from the Fuel Modification Zone Plant List January 1,
202623
1015
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
321
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
9 (Attachment 8) or similar species (See Section 3 – Plant Palette Information) • Must comply with planting and maintenance requirements from:
•
o Attachment 6 – Planting Installation Requirements
o
• No combustible construction is allowed
•
• No undesirable and invasive plant species (Attachment 7) Note: Zone B may be dry if plant selection and design are appropriate Zone “B” (50 -150 feet in width): Slope design requires a minimum 50-foot irrigated zone Note: A d
ry
Zone “B” may be used if plants and design are appropriate Required at the nearest slope adjoining Zone “A”
Irrigated and planted per Attachment 6: Requirements for Planting Installation in Fuel Modification Zones
May replace Zones “C/D” when grading plans require larger replanted areas All plant species designed for Zone “B” shall be selected from Attachment 8:
Fuel Modification Zone Plant List. Existing fuel modification maintenance programs are limited to the plants listed on the approved plans unless a revision is requested. Planting and maintenance shall be in accordance with planting restrictions from Attachment 6: Requirements for Planting Installation in Fuel Modification Zones, Attachment 7: Undesirable and Invasive Plant Species, and Attachment 8: Fuel Modification Zone Plant List.
No combustible construction is allowed within Zone “B”
Zone C
Width: 50 feet minimum
• Non-irrigated
• Shrub and tree coverage up to 50% throughout
• Spacing and clearance per Attachment 6 within 100 feet of structures • Planted with approved species from the Fuel Modification Zone Plant List (Attachment 8) or similar species (See Section 3 – Plant Palette Information) • No combustible construction allowed
• No undesirable and invasive plant species (Attachment 7) Zone D
Width: 50 fee t minimum
• Non-irrigated
• Shrub and tree coverage up to 70% throughout
• Planted with approved species from the Fuel Modification Zone Plant List (Attachment 8) or similar species (See Section 3 – Plant Palette Information) • No combustible construction allowed
• No undesirable and invasive plant species (Attachment 7) Zone “C/D” (0-100 feet in width)
Note: A
dditional planting restrictions may be required for certain plant species (see January 1,
202623
1016
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
322
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
10 Approved Plant Palette Qualification Statements for Select Pl ant Species on page 31). a. One n
atural vegetation thinning (Zone “C”) or two thinning zones (Zone “ C/D”) 1) Zone “C” shall be 50% thinning of vegetation
2) Zone “D” shall be 30% thinning of vegetation
b. Planting installation per Attachment 6, if installing plants 1) Existing plants that will remain shall be in accordance with Attachment 6: Requirements for Planting Installation in Fuel Modification Zones and Attachment 7: Undesirable and Invasive Plant Species (see Section 3: Plant Palette Information)
c. See Section 4 : Alternative Material & Methods
d. Plant species introduced into Zone “ C” and “ D” shall be selected from Attachment 8: Fuel Modification Zone Plant List. Maintenance shall be in accordance with Attachment 6: Requirements for Planting Installation in Fuel Modification Zones and Attachment 7: Undesirable and Invasive Plant Species (see Section 3: Plant Palette Information)
e. No combustible construction is allowed within Zone “C” and “D” Note: A
clear, brush-free area of 10 feett shall beis required around the perimeter of the ground-mounted photovoltaic arrays. An approved non-combustible base , approved by the fire code official, shall be installed and maintained under the photovoltaic arrays and associated electrical equipment installations, , per the 20252 CFC Chapter 1205.5.1.
January 1,
202623
1017
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
323
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
11 SPECIAL MAINTENANCE AREAS AND ROADSIDE PROTECTION ZONES TYPES OF INTERIOR SLOPES: RESIDENTIAL TRACT
Interio
r landscaped areas and roadside plantings inside a community can present a significant hazard during a wildfire. They are subject to planting restrictions, irrigation, and maintenance requirements to protect structures from vegetation fires started by windblown embers and to ensure roadways are available for evacuation and emergency vehicle use during a wildfire.
TYPES O
F INTERIOR SLOPES
Special
Maintenance Areas (SMA)
• Are areas typically located within a residential community outside of the individual private lots. They are often common areas, and landscaped slopes interior to the residential community perimeter.
• Comply with Zone B requirements
• Start at the property line of privately owned lots
• Minimum of 50 feet irrigated zone
Roadside P
rotection Zones (RPZ)
• Width: 50 feet from road edge
• Provides a buffer at roadways for safe evacuation and limits fuel load within residential developments and at neighborhood perimeters. • Streetscapes not on the perimeter may not be regulated unless a hazard exists • Comply with Zone B requirements
1. SMA Interior Slopes
a. 100 feet maximum width
b. Slopes and common areas interior from the community perimeter (see Section 5: Special Maintenance Areas and Roadside Protection Zones) c. Located in commonly owned land areas , beginning at the property lines of the privately owned lot
d. Areas shall be irrigated
2. Roadside Protection Zones (RPZ)
a. 50 feet maximum width measured from the edge of the roadway b. Can be designed as RPZ or SMA, depending if the road is at the perimeter or interior of the community
c. Streetscape designs that are not community perimeter edges may not be regulated unless a distinct hazard is created
d. Areas shall be irrigated
When an
SMA or RPZ is within 100 feet of a structure, the SMA or RPZ will be considered a defensible space area. The defensible space area shall comply with Attachment 2:
Introductory Maintenance Information, Attachment 6: Requirements for Planting Installation in Fuel Modification Zones, and Attachment 7: Undesirable and Invasive Plant Species.
Alternative design methods may be approved through the Alternate Materials & Methods process.
January 1,
202623
1018
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
324
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
12 Maintenance Recording Requirement
Fuel Modification Zones (FMZ), Special Maintenance Areas (SMA), and Roadside Protection Zones (RPZ) must have maintenance responsibilities recorded in CC&Rs or deed restrictions.
• When Zone “A” is on private lots and other zones are HOA/common, a signed homeowner disclosure is required.
• Maintenance must be permanent and consistent with approved plans.
Defensible Space Requirement*
If an SMA or RPZ is within 100 feet of a structure, the first 100 feet is treated as defensible space and must comply with state regulations.
*Note: Alternative designs may be considered through the AM&M process January 1,
202623
1019
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
325
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
13 FUEL MODIFICATION PLANS: REQUIRED INFORMATION
Submittal
s
• All plans shall be submitted electronically through OCFA’s Public Services Portal.
See the OCFA website and Guideline A-02 for more information on plan submittals. • A licensed landscape architect or equivalent qualified design professional should prepare fuel modification plans.
All plans shall be submitted electronically through OCFA’s Public Services Portal.
See the OCFA website and Guideline A-02 for more information on plan submittals.
A licensed landscape architect or equivalent qualified design professional should prepare fuel modification plans
Submittal
Sequence
• For an individual residential home lot, the Precise Fuel Modification Plan must be approved prior to approval of the Residential Site Plan. • For commercial or residential developments:
o The Conceptual Fuel Modification Plan must be approved prior to approval of the Tentative Map.
o The Precise Fuel Modification Plan must be approved prior to approval of the Fire Master Plan or, where a Conceptual Fuel Modification Plan is not submitted, prior to approval of the Tentative Map.
For an
individual residential home lot, the Precise Fuel Modi fication Plan must be approved prior to approval of the Residential Site Plan.
For commercial or residential developments:
The Conceptual Fuel Modification Plan must be approved prior to approval of the Tentative Map.
The Precise Fuel Modification Plan must be approved prior to approval of the Fire Master Plan or, where a Conceptual Fuel Modification Plan is not submitted, prior to approval of the Tentative Map.
Section 1: Conceptual Fuel Modification Plans
Plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape a rchitect or other design professional with equivalent credentials. First submittal requires only two sets of plans. Each subsequent submittal shall include an electronic PDF copy of the plan and three sets of paper plans.
Note: If the designer is prepared to submit Precise Fuel Modification Plans with the planting plans, conceptual plans are not required to be submitted. If the designer forgoes the conceptual submittal and submits the precise plan, the required conceptual plan information shall be provided on the precise plan.
The foll
owing information shall beChecklist - Iincluded the following applicable information on your plans, as applicable:on Conceptual Fuel Modification Plans:
January 1,
202623
1020
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
326
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
14 Project Details
☐ Show total development size with tract boundary lines, property lines, slope contour lines, and structure foundation footprints.
☐ Identify adjoining land uses on all sides (e.g., existing structures, HOA maintained properties, open space, vacant lots, natural vegetation, roads, parks). ☐ Identify each fuel modification zone within your property (A, B, C & D) as it applies to your project.
☐ State whether the project is in an LRA–VHFHSZ, LRA–HFHSZ or SRA. ☐ Note on plan: “Structures in these zones must meet CWUIC standards.” ☐ Note on plan: “Combustible fencing is prohibited in all Fuel Modification Zones.” Topography &
Setbacks
☐ Show contour lines for slopes and valleys.
☐ Identify slopes 20% or greater
Plant Se
lection
☐ All plants must be from the Fuel Modification Zone Plant List (Attachment 8) or follow Section 3 for alternate species.
☐ Show the name and location of any retained existing plants (if none, remove all existing vegetation from the plan).
☐ Label all interior slopes and common areas as “SMA” or “RPZ.”. ☐ If SMA planting plans are not yet designed, note that they require review and approval before installation.
RPZ Speci
fications
☐ Delineate RPZ areas with either:
• Max 50-foot-wide irrigated Zone “B” (if on community perimeter) • SMA designation (if interior to the community)
Legend & Ma
intenance Notes
☐ Clearly symbol and reference each FMZ, SMA, and RPZ in a legend. ☐ Note each area is irrigated (automatic irrigation) or non-irrigated as required. ☐ Identify who is responsible for the maintenance of FMZ, SMA, and RPZ.
Access
& Covenants
☐ Design emergency/maintenance access paths from street frontage to lettered lots:
• At least every 500 feet of FMZ/SMA length
• 7-foot clear width, flat path
☐ Record covenants for FMZ/SMA access and maintenance with planning maps and CC&Rs.
☐ Note: FMZ, SMA, and RPZ on private lots require recorded easements before plan approval.
Required P
lan Inserts
☐ Include:
January 1,
202623
1021
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
327
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
15 • Attachment 1: New Construction Inspection Requirements • Attachment 2: Introductory Maintenance Information
• Attachment 3: Incline Measurement for Selected Slopes • Attachment 6: Planting Installation Requirements
• Attachment 7: Undesirable/Invasive Plant Species
Special
Conditions
☐ If Fuel
Modification distance requirements cannot be met, follow Alternate Materials & Methods submittal instructions (Section 4).
☐ If oth
er agencies restrict vegetation management (e.g., Coastal Commission, Army Corps, Habitat Management Plan), provide their name, maintenance scope, and management plan.
Required N
otes to Copy onto Plans (1–6)
1. The owner/developer will obtain planting plan approval from OCFA before final approval from any other permitting agency.
2. FMZ, SMA, and RPZ areas are purchased/dedicated for wildfire maintenance, beautification, and erosion control.
3. The developer must ensure the HOA dues cover future maintenance costs.
4. If Zone “A” is on homeowner land but other maintenance areas are on HOA/common land, the homeowner must sign a disclosure referencing the lot number in CC&Rs.
5. FMZ, SMA, and RPZ must be maintained in perpetuity for fire safety per CC&Rs, property titles and recorded easements.
6. Prior to dropping lumber, call for a Vegetation Clearance Inspection; combustible vegetation must be removed at least 100 feet from structures and lumber stockpiles.
Additional
Requirements
☐ Provide CC&Rs confirming maintenance responsibilities before conceptual plan approval.
☐ Provide photographs of existing vegetation.
☐ Show slope degree/percentage at zone markers to determine actual distance (per Attachment 3).☒ Check each box, after providing the information on your design plans:
☐ Identi
fy the total size of the development by showing all tract boundary lines, property lines, slope contour lines, and structure foundation footprints.
☐ Place
descriptive notes of the land uses adjoining the development property on all sides (e.g., future construction, existing structures, natural vegetation, restoration plans, roads, parks, etc.).
☐ Add a
note on the plan stating the project is or is not located in a LRA - VHFHSZ or in an SRA. ☐ Add a
note stating the structure(s) shall be built to the California Building Code (CBC) January 1,
202623
1022
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
328
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
16 Chapter 7A standard if the project is located in a LRA - VHFHS Z or in an SRA area. ☐ Add a
note stating combustible fencing is not allowed within any Fuel Modification Zone.
☐ Contou
r lines shall be provided on the plan to show valleys and hills, and the steepness or gentleness of slopes for all Fuel Modification Zones. ☐ Ensure
all foundations have a minimum 20-foot setback from edge of slope. ☐ Select
an on-slope option from the choices of Fuel Modification Zones from pages 4 and 5. Delineate the width as described.
☐ All pla
nts in fuel modification zones shall be selected from Attachment 8: Fuel Modification Zone Plant List.
☐ Label all
interior slopes and all common areas as “Special Maintenance Areas” and/or “Roadside Protection Zones”, if applicable. If SMA planting plans are designed, they shall be submitted with the conceptual FMZ plans. If not designed yet, place a note that all planting plans require plan review and approval (see Section 5: Special Maintenance Areas and Roadside Protection Zones for more information).
When a SMA or RPZ is within 100 feet of a structure, the SMA or RPZ will be considered a defensible space area. The defensible space area shall comply with Attachment 2: Introductory Maintenance Information, Attachment 6: Requirements for Planting Installation in Fuel Modification Zones, and Attachment 7:
Undesirable and Invasive Plant Species. Alternative design methods may be approved through the Alternate Materials & Methods process (see Section 4: Alternate Materials & Methods). ☐ SMA and
RPZ shall not have plants from Attachment 7: Undesirable and Invasive Plant Species. ☐ Delineate
RPZ with either a maximum irrigated 50-foot wide FMZ “B” when located on community perimeter areas or SMA when roads are interior to perimeter. ☐ Each FM
Z, SMA, and RPZ shall be symbolized and referenced on the plan clearly and on a distinct legend.
☐ Notate
all FMZ, SMA, and RPZ as irrigated or non-irrigated landscaping. ☐ Provid
e the name of the entity/entities responsible for the maintenance of all FMZ, SMA, and RPZ. ☐ Show t
he name and location of any existing plant species you are proposing to retain on the plan (If no existing plant species are shown, existing vegetation shall be removed from the plan entirely).
☐ Design
dedicated emergency and maintenance access paths on commonly owned property, from the street frontage to lettered lots, to facilitate access behind the homes. This requires:
Paths every 500 lineal feet of FMZ or SMA length to have access, with a minimum 7-foot clear width and a dedicated flat path.
Covenants for FMZ and SMA access and maintenance to be recorded concurrently with all planning maps and referenced in Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (CC&Rs).
January 1, 202623
1023
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
329
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
17 ☐ Covenants will be required to be recorded for FMZ, SMA, and RPZ located on private homeowner lots prior to Precise Fuel Modification Plan approval (place as a note on plan if applicable). ☐ Copy A
ttachment 1: New Construction Inspection Requirements, Attachmen t 2: Introductory Maintenance Information, Attachment 3: Incline Measurement for Selected Slopes, Attachment 6:
Requirements for Planting Installation in Fuel Modification Zones, and Attachment 7: Undesirable and Invasive Plant Species on the plans for on-going maintenance requirements. ☐ If ther
e are limited areas in which you cannot meet Fuel Modification distance requirements, follow the plan submittal requirement directions in Section 4: Alternate Materials & Methods. ☐ If the
project has an area within the project boundary or adjacent areas affecting the project which would fall under the restriction of an agency (e.g., Army Corps of Engineers, California Coastal Commission, a Specific Plan, a Habitat Management & Monitoring Plan, etc.), the agency name; along with the maintenance, scope of work and management plan for those restricted areas shall be provided on the plan and documentation to support the management plan and maintenance allowed in the restricted areas provided at the time of submittal. If an area is discovered at any point in the submittal process, which would limit the design and/or maintenance requirements of the plan, the project will need to be re-evaluated to determine whether the limitations will impact the Fuel Modification design. If there are no restricted areas, make a note stating to the fact on the plans.
☐ The fo
llowing notes (1-6) shall be copied on the plans:
The owner/developer will obtain planting plan approval from OCFA prior to receiving final approval from all other landscape permitting agencies within FMZ, interior slopes/common area landscaping SMA, and RPZ.
FMZ, SMA, and RPZ land areas were purchased and dedicated for the purposes of wildfire maintenance activities, beautification, and erosion control. Protected plants and habitat identified after Fuel Modification Plan approval through surveys or other biological programs cannot be retrofitted back within the limits of these areas.
The developer is responsible for ensuring that the calculated revenue from homeowner dues is sufficient to cover the cost of future maintenance, based on the originally approved design. After the final landowner has accepted the long-term maintenance responsibility, changes to the fuel modification areas or interrupted maintenance activities by the final landowner become the responsibility of the final landowner.
When a required maintenance area is located on commonly owned land, while the required Zone “A” is located on homeowner’s land, a written disclosure regarding the Zone “A” and vegetation requirement is required to be signed by the homeowner and the lot number referenced in the CC&Rs.
The FMZ, SMA, and RPZ shall be maintained in perpetuity for fire safety purposes, in accordance with recorded covenants, CC&Rs, and property title restrictions.
Prior to dropping of lumber, call for a Vegetation Clearance Inspection. The developer/builder shall provide a separation of combustible vegetation for a minimum distance of 100 feet from the location of the structures and lumber stock-pile.
☐ A copy of the CC&Rs shall be provided to ensure the language regarding maintenance and responsibility is clearly defined, prior to approval of a conceptual plan. ☐ For ce
rtain projects, photographs of existing vegetation may be required. ☐ Provid
e the degree or percentage of slope on the plan at the location of the zone markers to indicate the January 1, 202623
1024
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
330
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1, 202623 18 actual distance. T he marker shall be placed when using Attachment 3: Incline Measurement for Selected Slopes.
1025
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
331
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
19 Section 2: Precise Fuel Modification Plans
Plans sha
ll be prepared by a licensed landscape architect or other design professional with equivalent credentials. First submittal requires only two sets of plans. Subsequent plan submittals shall include an electronic PDF copy of the plans and minimum of three sets of paper plans.
Checkli
st – Include t he following on your Precise Plan:
☐ Include Conc
eptual Plan requirements if no Conceptual Fuel Modification Plan was previously approved, provide additional details from section 1 listed above. ☐ Show permanent zone marker locations:
• Install the minimum number needed to clearly define side property lines and where Zone D ends
• See Attachment 4 – Zone Marker Details for reference
☐ Copy onto the plans:
• Attachment 4 – Zone Marker Details (if applicable)
• Attachment 5 – Sample CC&R Maintenance Language (if applicable) Note: Attachments 4 & 5 are in addition to Attachments required on Conceptual Plan ☐ Provide written proof that CC&Rs reference fuel modification areas, maintenance responsibilities, and restrictions (see Attachment 5).
☐ Provide recorded documentation showing Fuel Modification Zones, SMAs, RPZs, and access/maintenance points are recorded on Tentative Tract Maps. ☐ Provide note indicating “irrigated” or “non-irrigated” zones ☐ Submit planting plans for FMZ, SMA, and RPZ (see Section 5). ☐ Plant Palette Legend:
For each plant category, provide the information indicated in the Sample #1: Plant Legend below. See Attachment 8 for plant # and Symbol Code.
•
• The following information shall be included on the Precise Fuel Modification Plan:
☒ Check
each box, after providing the information on your design plans:
A. ☐ If th
ere was not a Conceptual Fuel Modification Plan approved, the Precise Fuel Modification Plans shall include all criteria required for the Conceptual Fuel Modification Plans (refer to Section 1: Conceptual Fuel Modification Plans).
B. ☐ Show t
he location of permanent zone markers. (The goal is to install the lowest number of markers possible to ensure maintenance workers stay within the correct property lines when performing vegetation management. Generally, markers are only required to indicate side property lines and where zones end).
C. ☐ Copy
Attachment 4: Zone Marker Details and Attachment 5: Sample CC&R Maintenance Language on the plans, if applicable.
January 1,
202623
1026
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
332
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
20 D. ☐ Submit written proof that the CC&R’s reference the fuel modification areas and associated maintenance and restrictions (see Attachment 5: Sample CC&R Maintenance Language), if applicable.
E. ☐ Provi
de supporting documentation that demonstrates the Fuel Modification Zones, SMA, RPZ, access and maintenance points have been legally recorded on the Tentative Tract Maps.
F. ☐ Irriga
tion plan sheets shall be submitted to demonstrate the wet zones are irrigated.
G. ☐ The pl
anting plans for FMZ, SMA, and RPZ are required to be reviewed and approved (see Section 5: Special Maintenance Areas and Roadside Protection Zones for more information).
H. ☐ Plant P
alette Legend for FMZ, SMA, RPZ:
Provide a separate plant palette legend for each bulleted point below:
1. Trees
2. Shrubs
3. Ground Cover (maximum natural growth height shall be no taller than 2 feet)
4. Grasses
5. If proposing plant species not on the Attachment 8: Fuel Modification Zone Plant List, follow the submittal directions from Section 3.B.
I. ☐ Each le
gend shall include:
1. Plant Symbol (separate symbol for each plant)
2. Plant Form
3. Botanical Name
4. Common Name
5. Plant # from Attachment 8: Fuel Modification Zone Plant List
6. Symbol Code from Attachment 8: Fuel Modification Zone Plant List
7. Expected Max Growth Height
8. Expected Max Growth Width
a. *See Sample #1: Plant Legend
J. ☐ Planting Plans:
1. On the installation Planting Plans, all plants shall be horizontally and vertically spaced to meet the formula from Attachment 6: Requirements for Planting Installation in Fuel Modification Zones of this guideline, using the heights and widths in your legend.
2. Refer to the Attachment 8: Fuel Modification Zone Plant List code symbols and qualification statements for design installation before you place plants on the plan.
3. See Section 3: Plant Palette Information for plant species not on the OCFA list and follow directions.
K. ☐ For al
ternative proposals that do not meet minimum requirements, see Section 4:
Alternate Materials & Methods and follow the plan submittal requirements.
January 1,
202623
1027
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
333
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
21 L. ☐ Create a heading titled “Required Inspections,” then copy Attachment 1: New Construction Inspection Requirements on the plans underneath the heading.
Sample #
1: Plant Legend
Planting Plans
☐ Use Attachment 8 codes and qualification notes before placing plants on plans. ☐ Space plants per Attachment 6 using max heights and widths from your legend. ☐ For plants not on the OCFA list, follow Section 3 – Plant Palette Information. ☐ Alternate designs: (not meeting minimum requirements) must follow Section 4 – Alternate Materials & Methods.
If required distances, plant species, or irrigation requirements cannot be met, an AM&M request is required. See Section 4.
• Submit technical justification and compensating measures per OCFA Guideline A-01. • AM&M approval must be obtained before plan approval.
☐ Required Inspections: Create a heading titled “Required Inspections” on the plan and copy Attachment 1 – New Construction Inspection Requirements under it.
Section 3: Plant Palette Information
Requirements:
• The Fuel Modification Zone Plant List (Attachment 8) was approved by resource agencies responsible for environmental protection. All plants must be selected from Attachment 8 or following the “Proposing Alternate Plant Species” below. • Group and space plants according to Attachment 6 – Planting Installation Requirements.
• Existing plants must be proposed for approval on fuel modific ation plans. •
• If planting within 300 feet of reserve lands, written concurrence from the relevant resource agency is required unless prior approval already exists.
January 1,
202623
1028
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
334
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
22 Proposing Alternate Plant Species
If proposing species not on the approved list, provide the following information for review:
• Photographs
• Size and growth characteristics
• Species must be equal to or superior to the Attachment 8 approved list in fire-resistive properties
• Maximum: 10 alternate species per project
Photographs
• Size and growth characteristics
• Species must be equal to or superior to the Attachment 8 approved list in fire-resistive properties
Maximum: 10 alternate species per project
Prohibited Plants
• All plants from Attachment 7 – Undesirable and Invasive Plant Species • Plant species with:
o High oil/resin content
o High flammability
o Invasive growth habits
o Excessive litter or deadwood retention
January 1, 202623
1029
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
335
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
23 Section 3: Plant Palette Information
A. The pl
ant list from Attachment 8: Fuel Modification Zone Plant List was approved by various resource agencies responsible for environmental protection. All plants installed shall be selected from Attachment 8: Fuel Modification Zone Plant List and be grouped and spaced for initial installation in accordance with Attachment 6: Requirements for Planting Installation in Fuel Modification Zones of this guideline. Specific installation requirements are included for various plant species (see plant code, legend, and qualification statements in Attachment 8: Fuel Modification Zone Plant List). Retained plants shall be proposed for approval on the conceptual FMZ plans or on the precise plan (see above for plant palette legends demonstrated for plan design).
B. Propo
sing Alternate Species:
If alternate plant species are proposed, the landscape architect shall provide photographs and data on the size, fire resistive characteristics, and invasiveness for installation criteria. A maximum of 10 alternate species may be proposed per project.
Alterna
tive species need to have similar/equal properties to the plants from Attachment 8:
Fuel Modification Zone Plant List). OCFA will make a case-by-case determination as to the acceptability of the proposed species. Some species that are equal in combustibility to pre-approved species on the list may not be allowed due to the invasiveness of the species. The proposed species must be spaced based on size and characteristics.
If the
plant materials are proposed to be planted within 300 feet of reserve lands (except plants on the interior of the tract), concurrence from the permitting resource agencies shall be required. If the proposed plants have received previous resource-agency approval, no concurrence letter will be required, but supporting documentation shall be provided. Contact OCFA prior to your submittal if needed.
January 1,
202623
1030
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
336
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
24 Section 4: Alternative Materials & Methods Construction Features, and & Fire Protection Plans
When to Apply for AMMAM&M
• Any FMZ, SMA or RPZ unable to achieve the minimum requirements due to lot size, topography, or existing structures
• Site conditions require modified vegetation management strategies (e.g., cultural, environmental, or historic preservation areas)
Perform
ance Based Design
Project
s with insufficient fuel modification zone width(s) may be given consideration for building and site features that reduce the susceptibility of structures to ignition. Such alternative proposals include, but are not limited to:
• Non-combustible walls
•
• Increased setbacks
•
• Reduced planting/increased hardscape
•
• Additional home hardening features exceeding minimum CWUIC requirements If there are limits to areas in which you cannot meet fuel modification width distance requirements or if you are proposing a non-irrigated FMZ, follow the performance based design direction below for conceptual FMZ plans:
Requirements for AMMAM&M proposal
1. Submit an OCFA AMMAM&M request with proposed compensating factors.
1. Performance Based Design:
2. Follow OCFA Guideline A-01 for AMMAM&M letter format.
3. If approved, copy the AMMAM&M letter directly onto the plans
4. A detailed technical fire behavior analysis by a wildland fire behavior professional may be required on a case by casecase-by-case basis.
5. For commercial and multi-lot residential developments, submit a Fire Protection Plan
AMMAM&M
Appli
cation Checklist
☐ Cover letter describing the request and justification ☐ Fire resistance data or research on proposed plant materials ☐ Maintenance plan and responsible party identification ☐ Comparative safety analysis to standard FMZ requirements ☐ Environmental or site-specific justification (if applicable) ☐ Fire Behavior Analysis (if applicable)
☐ Draft CC&R language for long-term maintenance obligations Fire Prot
ection Plan Requirements:
• Submit with Fuel Modification Plan.
January 1, 202623
1031
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
337
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
25 • Fee Code: PR 146 (Fire Protection Plan)
• Does not replace PR 145 (Fire Master Plan).
• Must include special CWUIC screening forms indicating which lots/buildings meet each code section.
• OCFA provides approved plan copies to the Building Department for reference Offsite
Landowner Recorded Easements:
A standard fuel modification requires 170 feet of space measured out from the structure.
Where insufficient space is available on the property, it may be possible arrangeto arrange an easement with adjacent landownerlandowners to extend the fuel modification onto their property. If this approach is used:
• Obtain recorded easements from adjoining landowners.
• Include easement details on plans.
Obtain recorded easements from adjoining landowners.
Include easement details on plans.
Note: Plans will not be approved without recorded agreements attached (if applicable) January 1,
202623
1032
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
338
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
26 a. A detailed technical fire behavior analysis report by a q u alified wildland fire behavior professional is required (qualifications of the professional must be approved by OCFA prior to their design). The report shall include BehavePlus fuel modeling outputs at a minimum.
b. A one to two-page Alternative Materials & Methods (AM&M) request letter to OCFA must be submitted with the detailed technical report. The report and letter shall be drafted by the fire behavior professional and submitted with the plans.
c. The applicant shall propose compensating factors to demonstrate equivalency to the distance required (see building construction features and fire protection plans below).
d. Locate OCFA Guideline A-01 at www.ocfa.org. Use the information within A- 01 as a model for d r a f t i n g your letter. If an alternative means of protection is approved by the OCFA, copy the OCFA signed AM&M request letter onto the plans. You will be required to resubmit the plans again for review and final approval with the letters incorporated into the plans.
1. Building Construction Features and Fire Protection Plans:
a. Building Construction Features designed in accordance with Chapter 7A of the California Building Code (CBC)/Residential Code Section 337 are required for all structures.
b. Additional compensating factors will also be required. These include but are not limited to: additional building construction features, solid block wall or block wall with tempered glass measuring a minimum of 6 feet on both sides of the wall, increased structure setbacks, special planting designs, rockscapes and plant restrictions, and reduced planting and increased hardscape areas. If a maintenance/ fire access gate is being shown along a solid block wall or block wall with tempered glass, a gate detail shall be provided on the plan that demonstrates the same applied effect as the solid wall.
2. A Fire Protection Plan (OCFA Fee Code PR 146) shall be submitted with or prior to the conceptual FMZ plan and does not take the place of the Fire Master Plan (OCFA Fee Code PR 145). Special 7A code section screening forms are available by request from the OCFA Community Wildfire Mitigation section and shall be placed on the plan to indicate which buildings and lots will meet specific Chapter 7A code sections. OCFA does not review the architectural plans for one- and two-family dwellings. Approved Fire Protection Plans are provided to the applicant and to the Building Department by OCFA, for design and plan review approval of the construction features.
3. Offsite Landowner Recorded Easements (for extreme cases):
a. All fuel modification should be located within the property or tract of the protected structure(s).
b. Proper on-site Fuel Modification design should be set back from the tract or property boundary lines for a distance of 170 feet.
c. When the required distance is not within the property, as a last option, a legally recorded easements shall be signed by the adjoining property owner and integrated into fuel modification plans, giving rights to the beneficiary to maintain the recorded area in perpetuity. The easement shall show the distance designed on the plans.
d. The conceptual FMZ plans will not be approved until the legally January 1,
202623
1033
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
339
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
27 recorded agreements are copied on the plans.
January 1,
202623
1034
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
340
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
28 Section 5: Special Maintenance Areas and Roadside Protection Zones The interior landscaped portions of a community and roadsides may not be standard FMZs but are subject to planting restrictions, irrigation, and maintenance requirements.
This is to ensure structures are reasonably protected from fire continuing into interior areas of the community and from flying embers that may land and start spot fires.
The Plan
ting Plans submitted with the Fuel Modification Plans shall indicate the plant palette and planting design for these areas. The plans will be evaluated to determine if the areas have the potential to increase the hazard to structures or if they will lessen the hazard.
1. The SM
A determination will occur during the Conceptual Fuel Modification review.
The review will use the following OCFA initial hazard assessment criteria:
a. Roadside planting does not sufficiently protect vital main evacuation routes b. There are no proposed planting restrictions on lots
c. Proximity between structures and slopes is such that fire travel is probable d. The area/slope is not proposed to be irrigated
e. Plant palette contains plant species from the OCFA undesirable plant list f. Plant spacing arrangement creates “Ladder Fuels”
g. Slope/area is contiguous with community perimeter FMZs h. Use of special construction features on all structures throughout the community as required in CBC Chapter 7A and California Residential Code 337
2. When
it is determined by the OCFA that the design of an SMA may contribute to an increased wildfire risk, the first 100 feet of the SMA, measured from the structure out, is considered defensible space. The defensible space area shall comply with Attachment 2: Introductory Maintenance Information, Attachment 6: Requirements for Planting Installation in Fuel Modification Zones, Attachment 7: Undesirable and Invasive Plant Species and Attachment 8: Fuel Modification Zone Plant List).
January 1,
202623
1035
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
341
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
29 ATTACHMENT 1
New Construction Inspection Requirements
The Builder or Developer shall call OCFA Inspection Scheduling at (714) 573-6150 for the three new
construction inspections listed below:
Vegetat
ion Clearance Inspection:
Prior t
o dropping of lumber on the site, all combustible vegetation must be cleared at least 100 feet from:
• Structures under construction
• Lumber stockpiles
• Generators
• Fuel tanks and dispensers
Prior to dropping of lumber: Schedule a Vegetation Clearance Inspection – the developer/builder shall provide a separation of combustible vegetation for a minimum distance of 100 feet from the location of the structures and lumber stock-pile, generators, and fuel tanks/dispensers. An inspection sign-off and/or release letter to the building department is required.
Note: A
n inspection sign-off or release letter must be issued to the Building Department before construction proceeds.
Final Fuel
Modification Inspection:
Prior to occupancy:
• All FMZ, SMA, and RPZ adjacent to structures must:
o Be fully installed
o Have functional irrigation
o Match the approved Fuel Modification Plan specifications • Physical installation includes:
o Zone markers
o Required planting
o Access paths
o Hardscape features
Inspect
ion Notes:
• The developer/builder is responsible for scheduling all inspections. • Any deviation from approved plans must be corrected before final sign-off. • Inspections will not be passed if undesirable/invasive species (Attachment 7) are found present.
1. Prior to occupancy of the building: Schedule a Final Fuel Modification Inspection – the FMZ, SMA, and RPZ adjacent to structures must be installed, irrigated, and inspected. This includes physical installation of features identified in the approved precise fuel modification plans including, but not limited to, plant establishment, thinning, irrigation, zone markers, special mitigation measures, and access easements. An OCFA Inspector will provide written approval of completion at the time of this final inspection on the building card. A written disclosure will be requested by the OCFA Inspector indicating that the landowner is aware of the FMZ on their land.
January 1,
202623
1036
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
342
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
30 Prior to Homeowners Association (HOA) or Landowner Maintenance Accepta nce from Developer/Builder:
Schedule an Owner Turnover Inspection – This inspection/ meeting must happen with OCFA staff prior to accepting the maintenance responsibility from the developer or builder.
1. The inspection/meeting must include the following representatives:
1.1. Landscape architect
1.2. Community manager or homeowner
1.3. HOA board member
1.4. Installing landscape company
1.5. HOA landscape company
2. At the time of turnover, the Fuel Modification areas shall be maintained by the developer or builder as originally installed and approved.
3. The accepting landowner is responsible for ensuring the developer or builder sufficiently calculated the amount of revenue needed to perform the on-going maintenance of the FMZs and any SMAs per the approved plans.
4. A copy of the approved plans must be provided to the HOA representatives or homeowner at this time.
5. The Landscape Architect must convey ongoing maintenance requirements to HOA representatives or homeowner and provide OCFA a document stating the fuel modification has been installed per plan.
6. An OCFA written disclosure will be required to be signed by t he HOA
representatives or homeowner indicating that the HOA or homeowner is aware of the FMZ on their land and that they are aware of the importance of retaining the plans and the ongoing maintenance.
7.6. The responsibility and necessary language for maintenance mus t also be stated within the CC&Rs (Refer to Attachment 5: Sample CC&R Maintenance Language).
January 1,
202623
1037
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
343
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
31 ATTACHMEN
T 2
Introductory Maintenance Information
The FMZ, SMA
, RPZ shall be maintained in perpetuity for fire safety purposes and shall cause a covenant to be recorded and referenced in the CC&Rs or on the property title when there is no HOA involvement.
Emergency access covenants shall be identified on the tract map indicating the reservation and restriction for permanent entry by the HOA or Fire Authority.
On-going maintenance shall occur to preserve the originally a pproved design found on the approved Fuel Modification Plans. Select either Option #1 or #2 below a. Spacing shall be maintained in accordance with
b. Option #1 Maintenance Method:
a. On-going maintenance shall occur to preserve the originally a pproved design found on the approved plans. Attachment 6: Requirements for Planting Installation in Fuel Modification Zones. spacing is required and only approvedPlant planting species and arrangements shown on the plans are shall be perpetually preserved. Distances of FMZ, SMA, and RPZ will always remain required and will be specific to the approved Fuel Modification Plan.
c.
d. The property owner is responsible for all maintenance of FMZ, SMA, and RPZ. b.
e. Two maintenance activities shall be performed each year , t. f.c. The first during middle- to late-Spring and the second in earl y- to middle-Fall:. g. Other activities include:
1) Grasses cut to 4 inches after annual seeding
2) Dead and dying, all vegetation litter, and Attachment 7: Undesirable and Invasive Plant Species removed from all zones
3) Maintenance of irrigation systems
4) Replacement of dead or dying vegetation with approved species (proposed changes shall be approved by OCFA)
5) Removal of trees and shrubs not on the approved plans h.d. If
maintained by an HOA, the landscape maintenance company an d/or property manager shall inspect the FMZ , SMA & RPZ’s s throughout the year to identify where specific maintenance activities need to take place.
i.e. The OCFA may conduct inspections of established fuel modifica tion areas. Ongoing maintenance shall be conducted a minimum of twice each year regardless of the dates of these inspections.
j.f. The property owner shall retain all approved Fuel Modificatio n Plans. The design and
information on the plans shall be used as the basis for maintenance.
Where there is no approved fuel modification plan, o Option #2 Maintenance Method (when approved by OCFA):
Ongoing maintenance of vegetation in wildfire risk areas shall occur perbe in accordance with the current ly posted OCFA Vegetation Management Recommendations/Requirements for Homeowners document Vegetation Management Maintenance Guidelines at January 1,
202623
1038
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
344
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
32 www.ocfa.orgwww.ocfa.org. Distances of FMZ, SMA, and RPZ will always remain required and will be specific to the approved Fuel Modification Plan.
January 1, 202623
1039
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
345
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
33 Slope (Grade)
60° (173%)
50° (119%)
45° (100%)
40° (84%)
35° (70%)
30° (58%)
25° (47%)
20° (36%)
15° (27%)
10° (18%)
Zone A
Zone B
Zone C
Zone D
ATTACHM
ENT 3
Incline Measurement for Selected Slopes
(See Atta
chment 4: Zone Marker Details)
Zone widths described in this guideline are measured horizontally. When zones occur on a slope, the distance measured along the ground will be increased—see the diagram below for examples of effective zone widths at various slopes.
Slope Zone Width
A B C D
0° 20’ 50’ 50’ 50’
10° 20’ 51’ 51’ 51’
15° 20’ 52’ 52’ 52’
20° 20’ 53’ 53’ 53’
25° 20’ 55’ 55’ 55’
30° 20’ 58’ 58’ 58’
35° 20’ 61’ 61’ 61’
40° 20’ 65’ 65’ 65’
45° 20’ 71’ 71’ 71’
50° 20’ 78’ 78’ 78’
60° 20’ 100’ 100’ 100’
January 1,
202623
1040
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
346
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1, 202623
34 2'-0'' ABOVE MATURE PLANT
GROWTH (4'-0'' MIN.)
ATTACHM
ENT 4
Zone Marker Details
Provide zo
ne markers near the property line at the end of each zone and along each zone boundary within the property where needed to provide a clear line-of-sight delineation of the extent of each zone.
(Marker Distances Shall Be Increased on Slopes to Accommodate Incline Measurements in Accordance with Attachment 3: Incline Measurement for Selected Slopes) Note: An
alternate design may be proposed and approved on a case-by-case basis (e.g., using a large boulder,
existing fencing, permanent fixtures, etc.).
1 1041
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
347
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1, 202623
35 1. POST CAP
2. 2”X5” ZONE INDICATOR
3. 1 ½” DIAMETER GALVANIZED POST
4. CONCRETE FOOTING 2500 PSI @ 28 DAYS
5. FINISH GRADE
6. COMPACTED SUBGRADE
2 4
3 5
1’-0”
4’-0”
1”
2’-6”
6”
1042
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
348
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
36 ATTACHMEN
T 5
Sample CC&R Maintenance Language
It is recommended that the following language be included in the CC&Rs recorded for a common in
terest development:
“The duty of the homeowners’ association to perform ‘Fire Prevention Maintenance’ (as defined below) for all Fuel Modification Zones, Special Maintenance Areas, Roadway Protection Zone, and manufactured interior slopes within the development shall be included as an express obligation in the recorded CC&Rs for the development. Similarly, each Owner whose Lot (or Condominium) is subject to FMZ restrictions (e.g., non- combustible structure setback, etc.) shall be obligated to comply with such restrictions.”
1. The OCFA will be designated as a third-party beneficiary of an HOA’s duty to perform “Fire Prevention Maintenance” (as defined below) for all portions of the Association Property or Common Area that constitute FMZs and designated interior/manufactured slopes to be maintained by the H O A , and of any Owner’s duty to comply with any FMZ restrictions applicable to their lot or condominium.
Additionally, OCFA shall have the right, but not the obligation, to enforce the HOA’s duty to perform such Fire Prevention Maintenance, and to enforce compliance by any owner with any FMZ restrictions applicable to their lot or condominium. In furtherance of such right, the OCFA shall be entitled to recover its costs of suit, including its actual attorneys’ fees, if it prevails in an enforcement action against an HOA and/or an individual owner (a sample third-party beneficiary provision to be incorporated into the CC&Rs is attached hereto as Addendum "1").
2. As used herein, "Fire Prevention Maintenance" shall mean the following:
a. All portions of the Association Property or Common Area that constitute FMZs or designated interior/manufactured slopes shall be regularly maintained by the HOA on a year-round basis in accordance with the fuel modification plan on file with the property manager for the development. b. The irrigation system for FMZs or designated interior/manufactured slopes shall be kept in good condition and proper working order at all times. The irrigation system shall not be turned off except for necessary repairs and maintenance.
January 1,
202623
1043
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
349
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05
37 ADDENDUM “1”
Enforcement by the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA): The OCFA is hereby designated as an intended third-party beneficiary of the Association’s duties to perform “Fire Prevention Maintenance” for all portions of the Association Property or Common Areas consisting of FMZs or designated interior/manufactured slopes in accordance with the fuel modification plan, and of each owner’s duty to comply with any FMZ or designated interior/manufactured slopes restrictions applicable to their lot or condominium as set forth in the fuel modification plan. In furtherance thereof, the OCFA shall have the right, but not the obligation, to enforce the performance by the association of its duties and any other fire prevention requirements which were imposed by the OCFA or other public agency as a condition of approval for the development (e.g., prohibition of parking in fire lanes, maintenance of the blue reflective markers indicating the location of fire hydrants, etc.). The OCFA shall also have the right, but not the obligation, to enforce compliance by any owner with any FMZ or designated interior/manufactured slopes restrictions applicable to their lot or condominium as set forth in the fuel modification plan. If in its sole discretion, the OCFA shall deem it necessary to take legal action against the association or any owner to enforce such duties or other requirements, and prevails in such action, the OCFA shall be entitled to recover the full costs of said action including its actual attorneys' fees, and to impose a lien against the association property, or an owner’s lot or condominium, as the case may be, until said costs are paid in full.
January 1,
202623
1044
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
350
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1,
20263
38 ATTACHMENT 6
Requirements for Planting Installation in Fuel Modification Zones (For ongoing requirements, see Attachment 2: Introductory Maintenance Information and the OCFA Vegetation Management Recommendations/Requirements for Homeowners document Maintenance Guidelines)
Vertical
Separation
Vegetation
Underneath
10’ min
2’ max
Horizontal Spacing
Shrub Height
-3x(h) or 15’min for
Shrubss
-30’ min for Trees
6’ max
Shrub and
Tree Form Shrub Horizontal Grouping and Spacing
(when > 2 feet in height) as measured from the edge of the group 15 feet or 3 times
the talle
st in any
of the groups
6’ min
Vertical
Clearance
2’ max.
10’ min.
Vertical
Separatio
n
Vegetation
under tre
es
6’ max
10’ max.
diameter
SPACING BETWEEN
SHRUBS AN
D TREES
3 x Shrub Height,
15’ min.
10’ min. between
trees in
the same
group
3 x Shrub Height,
15’ min
30’ min. between
each grou
p
SPACING BETWEEN
SHRUBS or
SHRUB
GROUPS
SPACING BETWEEN TREES
& TREE GR
OUPS
SHRUB & TREE SPACING
Flat to mi
ld slope: < 20%
1045
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
351
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1,
20263
39 Horizontal Spacing for Slopes less than 20%
Vegetation Less than 2 Feet in Height :
• Classified as ground cover.
• Horizontal spacing and vertical separation not required for ground cover less than 2 feet in height.
Vegetation
2–6 Feet in Height:
• Classified as shrubs.
• Groups of shrubs are limited to a maximum aggregate diameter of 10 feet. • Groups of shrubs shall be separated from other shrubs or trees by 15 feet or 3x the height of the tallest specimen. The greater distance shall take precedence.
• Groups of shrubs shall be spaced a minimum of 30 feet from structures. • No shrubs allowed within 5 feet of combustible structures. • No shrubs allowed within 15 feet of the edge of a tree canopy.
Vegetation
exceeding 6 feet in Height:
• Classified as trees
• 3 trees maximum may be grouped with a minimum 10 foot separation between driplines. • Groups of trees shall be separated from other tree groups by 30 feet measured from the edge of the dripline.
Vertical
Separation
• A vertical separation of 6 feet shall be maintained between gro und cover and the lowest branches of trees. 1046
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
352
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1,
20263
40 1047
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
353
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1,
20263
41 2’ max.
10’ min Vertical
Separatio
n
Vegetation
under tre
es
6’ max
10’ max.
diameter
SPACING BETWEEN
SHRUBS AN
D TREES
4 x Shrub Height*,
15’ min.
20’ min. between trees
in the sa
me group**
4 x Shrub Height*,
15’ min
30’ min. between
each group**
SPACING BETWEEN
SHRUBS or
SHRUB
GROUPS
SPACING
BETWEEN T
REES &
TREE GROUPS
** when slope exceeds 40%:
30’ min.
between all trees
* when slope exceeds 40%:
6 x Shrub
Height, 15’ min.
SHRUB & TREE SPACING
Moderate
to Steep Slope:
20% or greater
Vertical
Clearance
6’ min
1048
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
354
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1,
20263
42 Horizo
ntal
Spacing for Slopes 20% and greater
Vegetation Less than 2 Feet in Height:
• Classified as ground cover.
• Horizontal spacing and vertical separation not required for ground cover less than 2 feet in height.
Vegetation
2–6 Feet in Height:
• Classified as shrubs.
• Groups of shrubs are limited to a maximum aggregate diameter of 10 feet. • Groups of shrubs shall be separated from other shrubs or trees by 4x the height of the tallest specimen.
Note: when slope exceeds 40%, spacing shall be 6x shrub height • Groups of shrubs shall be spaced a minimum of 30 feet from structures. • No shrubs allowed within 5 feet of combustible structures. • No shrubs allowed within 15 feet of the edge of a tree canopy.
Vegetation
exceeding 6 feet in Height:
• Classified as trees
• 3 trees maximum may be grouped with a minimum 20 foot separation between driplines. • Groups of trees shall be separated from other tree groups by 30 feet measured from the edge of the dripline.
Note: when slope exceeds 40%, all trees shall be spaced at 30’ Vertical
Separation
• A vertical separation of 6 feet shall be maintained between ground cover and the lowest branches of trees.
ATTACHM
ENT 7
Undesirable and Invasive Plant Species
Certain plants are considered to be undesirable and invasive due to their physical or chemical character
istics. Physical properties that would contribute to high flammabili ty include large amounts of dead material retained within the plant, rough or peeling bark, and the production of copious amounts of litter. Chemical properties include the presence of volatile substances such as oils, resins, wax, and pitch. Certain native plants are notorious for containing these volatile substances.
Plants with these characteristics shall not be planted in any fuel modification zones or anywhere within the area covered by Alternate Methods & Materials agreements (see Section 4: Alternate Materials & Methods). Should these species already exist within these areas, they shall be removed because of their invasiveness or potential threat they pose to structures.
PLANT SPECIES (MANDATORY REMOVAL)
Botanical Name Common Name
Adenostoma Fasciculatum Chamise
Adenostoma Sparsifolium Red Shanks
Anthemix Cotula Mayweed
Artemisia Californica California Sagebrush
Brassica Nigra Black Mustard
Brassica Rapa Wild Turnip, Yellow Mustard, Field Mustard Cardaria Draba Hoary Cress, Perennial Peppergrass
1049
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
355
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1,
20263
43 Cirsium Vulgare Wild Artichoke
Conyza Canadensis Horseweed
Cynara Cardunculus Artichoke Thistle
Eriogonum Fasciculatum Common Buckwheat
Heterothaca Grandiflora Telegraph Plant
Lactuca Serriola Prickly Lettuce
Nassella/Stipa tenuissima Mexican Feathergrass
Nicotiana Bigelevil Indian Tobacco
Nicotiana Glauca Tree Tobacco
Pennisetum alopecuroides Fountain Grass
Ricinus Communis Castor Bean Plant
Sacsola Austails Russian Thistle/Tumbleweed
Salvia Mellifera Black Sage
Silybum Marianum Milk Thistle
Tamarix Ramosissima Salt Cedar
Urtica Urens Burning Nettle
Ornamental:
Arecaceae *(all palm species) (all
palm species)
Palms * exception: King Palms
Cycas Revoluta Sago Palms
Cortaderia Pampas Grass
Cupressus sp Cypress
Eucalyptus sp Eucalyptus
Juniperus sp Juniper
Pinus sp Pine
1050
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
356
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1,
20263
44 ATTACHM
ENT 8
Fuel Modification Zone Plant List
Symbol Lege
nd
X = Plant species prohibited in wet and dry FMZs adjacent to reserve lands. Acceptable on all other f
uel modification locations and zones.
W = Plant species appropriate for use in wet FMZs adjacent to reserve lands. Acceptable in all other wet
and irrigated dry (manufactured slopes) fuel modification locations and zones. o = Plant species native to Orange County. Acceptable in all fuel modification wet and dry zones in
all locations.
N = Plant species acceptable on a limited basis (maximum 30% of the area) in wet FMZs adjacent to
reserve lands. Acceptable on all other FMZs.
* = If locally collected.
** = Not na
tive but can be used in all zones.
n = Plant species acceptable on a limited use basis. Refer to qualification requirements following plant palette.
Yellow row = Plant species susceptible to Invasive Shot Hole Borers (ISHB) infestation.
Code Botanical Name Common Name Plant Form
1. W Abelia x grandiflora Glossy Abelia Shrub
2. n Acacia redolens desert carpet Desert Carpet Ground Cover
3. o Acer macrophyllum Big Leaf Maple Tree
4. X Achillea millefolium Common Yarrow Low Shrub
5. W Achillea tomentosa Woolly Yarrow Low Shrub
6. X Aeonium decorum Aeonium Ground cover
7. X Aeonium simsii no common name Ground cover
8. W Agave attenuata Century Plant Succulent
9. W Agave shawii Shaw’s Century Plant Succulent
10. N Agave victoriae-reginae no common name Ground Cover
11. X Ajuga reptans Carpet Bugle Ground Cover
12. W Alnus cordata Italian Alder Tree
13. o Alnus rhombifolia White Alder Tree
14. N Aloe arborescens Tree Aloe Shrub
15. N Aloe aristata no common name Ground Cover
16. N Aloe brevifoli no common name Ground Cover
17. W Aloe Vera Medicinal Aloe Succulent
18. W Alogyne huegeii Blue Hibiscus Shrub
19. o Ambrosia chammissonis Beach Bur-Sage Perennial
1051
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
357
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1,
20263
45 Code Botanical Name Common Name Plant Form
Code Botanical Name Common Name Plant Form
20. o Amorpha fruticosa Western False Indigobush Shrub
21. W Anigozanthus flavidus Kangaroo Paw Perennial/accent 22 o Antirrhinum nuttalianum ssp. no common name Subshrub
23. X Aptenia cordifolia x ‘Red Apple’ Red Apple Aptenia Ground cover
24. W Arbutus unedo Strawberry Tree Tree
25. W Arctostaphylos ‘Pacific Mist’ Pacific Mist Manzanita Ground Cover
26. W Arctostaphylos edmundsii Little Sur Manzanita Ground Cover
27. o Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. Eastwood Manzanita Shrub
28. W Arctostaphylos hookeri ‘Monterey
Carpet’ Monterey Carpet Manzanita Low Shrub
29. N Arctostaphylos pungens no common name Shrub
30. N Arctostaphylos refugioensis Refugio Manzanita Shrub
31. W Arctostaphylos uva-ursi Bearberry Ground Cover
32. W Arctostaphylos x ‘Greensphere’ Greensphere Manzanita Shrub
33. N Artemisia caucasica Caucasian Artesmisia Ground Cover
34. X Artemisia pycnocephala Beach Sagewort Perennial
35. X Atriplex canescens Four-Wing Saltbush Shrub
36. X Atriplex lentiformis ssp. breweri Brewer Saltbush Shrub
37. o Baccharis emoyi Emory Baccharis Shrub
38. W o Bacharis pilularis ssp. Consanguinea Chaparral Bloom Shrub
39. X Baccharis pilularis var. pilularis Twin Peaks #2 Ground Cover
40. o Baccharis salicifolia Mulefat Shrub
41. N Baileya Multiradiata Desert Marigold Ground Cover
42. N n Bougainvillea spectabilis Bougainvillea Shrub
43. o Brickellia californica no common name Subshrub
44. W o Bromus carinatus California Brome Grass
45. o Camissonia cheiranthifiloa Beach Evening Primrose Perennial Shrub
46. N Carissa macrocarpa Green Carpet Natal Plum Ground Cover/Shrub
46. N Carissa macrocarpa Green Carpet Natal Plum Ground Cover/Shrub
47. X Carpobrotus chilensis Sea Fig Ice Plant Ground Cover
48. W Ceanothus gloriosus ‘Point Reyes’ Point Reyes Ceanothus Shrub
49. W Ceanothus griseus ‘Louis Edmunds’ Louis Edmunds Ceanothus Shrub
50. W Ceanothus griseus horizontalis Yankee Point Ground Cover
51. W Ceanothus griseus var. horizontalis Carmel Creeper Ceanothus Shrub
52. W Ceanothus griseus var. horizontalis Yankee Point Ceanothus Shrub
53. o Ceanothus megarcarpus Big Pod Ceanothus Shrub
54. W Ceanothus prostratus Squaw Carpet Ceanothus Shrub
55. o Ceanothus spinosus Green Bark Ceanothus Shrub
56. W Ceanothus verrucosus Wart-Stem Ceanothus Shrub
1052
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
358
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1,
20263
46 Code Botanical Name Common N ame Plant Form
57. W Cerastium tomentosum Snow-in-Summer Ground cover/Shrub
57. W Cerastium tomentosum Snow-in-Summer Ground cover/Shrub
58. W Ceratonia siliqua Carob Tree
59. W Cercis occidentalis Western Redbud Shrub/Tree
Code Botanical Name Common Name Plant Form
60. X Chrysanthemum leucanthemum Oxeye Daisy Ground Cover
61. W Cistus Crispus no common name Ground Cover
62. W Cistus hybridus White Rockrose Shrub
63. W Cistus incanus no common name Shrub
64. W Cistus incanus ssp. Corsicus no common name Shrub
65. W Cistus salviifolius Sageleaf Rockrose Shrub
66. W Cistus x purpureus Orchid Rockrose Shrub
67. W Citrus species Citrus Tree
68. o Clarkia bottae Showy Fairwell to Spring Annual
69. o Cneoridium dumosum Bushrue Shrub
70. o Collinsia heterophyllia Chinese Houses Annual
71. W o Comarostaphylis diversifolia Summer Holly Shrub
72. N Convolvulus cneorum Bush Morning Glory Shrub
73. W Coprosma kirkii Creeping Coprosma Ground Cover/Shrub
72. N Convolvulus cneorum Bush Morning Glory Shrub
73. W Coprosma kirkii Creeping Coprosma Ground Cover/Shrub
74. W Coprosma pumila Prostrate Coprosma Low shrub
75. o Coreopsis californica Califiornia Coreopsis Annual
76. W Coreopsis lanceolata Coreopsis Ground Cover
77. N Corea pulchella Australian Fuscia Ground Cover
78. W Cotoneaster buxifolius no common name Shrub
79. W Cotoneaster congestus ‘Likiang’ Likiang Cotoneaster Ground Cover/Vine
80. W Cotoneaster aprneyi no common name Shrub
81. X Crassula lactea no common name Ground Cover
82. X Crassula multicava no common name Ground Cover
83. X Crassula ovata Jade Tree Shrub
84. X Crassula tetragona no common name Ground Cover
85. W o Croton californicus California Croton Ground Cover
86. X Delosperma ‘alba’ White trailing Ice Plant Ground Cover
87. o Dendromecon rigida Bush Poppy Shrub
88. o Dichelostemma capitatum Blue Dicks Herb
89. N Distinctis buccinatoria Blood-Red Trumpet Vine Vine/Climbing vine
90. N Dodonaea viscosa Hopseed Bush Shrub
91. X Drosanthemum floribundum Rosea Ice Plant Ground Cover
92. X Drosanthemum hispidum no common name Ground Cover
93. X Drosanthemum speciosus Dewflower Ground Cover
1053
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
359
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1,
20263
47 Code Botanical Name Common N ame Plant Form
94. o Dudleya lanceolata Lance-leaved Dudleya Succulent
95. o Dudleya pulverulenta Chalk Dudleya Succulent
96. W Elaeagnus pungens Silverberry Shrub
97. o Encelia californica California Encelia Small Shrub
98. o * Epilobium canum [Zauschneria
californica] Hoary California Fuschia Shrub
99. o Eriastrum Sapphirinum Mojave Woolly Star Annual
100. N Eriobotrya japonica Loquat Tree
Code Botanical Name Common Name Plant Form
101. o Eriodictycon trichocalyx Yerba Santa Shrub
102. W o Eriophyllum confertiflorum no common name Shrub 103. W Erythrina species Coral Tree Tree
104. N Escallonia species Several varieties Shrub
105. W o Eschscholzia californica California Poppy Flower 106. X Eschscholzia mexicana Mexican Poppy Herb
107. N Euonymus fortunei Winter Creeper Euonymus Ground Cover 108. N Feijoa sellowiana Pineapple Guava Shrub/Tree
109. N Fragaria chiloensis Wild Strawberry/Sand Strawberry Ground Cover 109. N Fragaria chiloensis Wild Strawberry/Sand Strawberry Ground Cover 110. o Frankenia salina Alkali Heath Ground Cover
111. W Fremontondendron californicum California Flannelbush Shrub 112. X Gaillardia x grandiflora Blanketflower Ground Cover 113. W Galvezia speciosa Bush Snapdragon Shrub
114. W Garrya ellipta Silktassel Shrub
115. X Gazania hybrids South African Daisy Ground Cover 116. X Gazania rigens leucolaena Training Gazania Ground Cover 117. o Gilia capitata Globe Gilia Perennial
118. W Gilia leptantha Showy Gilia Perennial
119. W Gilia tricolor Bird’s Eyes Perennial
120. W Ginkgo biloba Maidenhair Tree Tree
121. o Gnaphalium californicum California Everlasting Annual 122. W Grewia occidentalis Starflower Shrub
123. o Grindelia stricta Gum Plant Ground Cover
124. N n Hakea suaveolens Sweet Hakea Shrub
125. W Hardenbergia comptoniana Lilac Vine Shrub
126. N Heliathemum muutabile Sunrose Ground Cover/Shrub 126. N Heliathemum muutabile Sunrose Ground Cover/Shrub 127. o Helianthemum scoparium Rush Rose Shrub
128. o Heliotropium curassavicum Salt Heliotrope Ground Cover 129. X Helix Canariensis English Ivy Ground Cover
130. W Hesperaloe parviflora Red Yucca Perennial
1054
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
360
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1,
20263
48 Code Botanical Name Common Name Plant Form
131. o n Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon Shrub
132. X Hypericum calycimum Aaron’s Beard Shrub
133. N Iberis sempervirens Edging Candytuft Ground Cover 134. N Iberis umbellatum Globe Candytuft Ground Cover
135. o Isocoma menziesii Coastal Goldenbush Small Shrub 136. o Isomeris arborea Bladderpod Shrub
137. W Iva hayesiana Poverty Weed Ground Cover
138. N Juglans californica California Black Walnut Tree 139. o Juncus acutus Spiny Rush Perennial
140. o Keckiella antirrhinoides Yellow Bush Penstemon Subshrub 141. o Keckiella cordifolia Heart Leaved Penstemon Subshrub Code Botanical Name Common Name Plant Form
142. o Keckiella ternata Blue Stemmed Bush Penstemon Subshrub 143. W Kniphofia uvaria Red Hot Poker Perennial
144. W Lagerstroemia indica Crape Myrtle Tree
145. W Lagunaria patersonii Primrose Tree Tree
146. X Lamprathus aurantiacus Bush Ice Plant Ground Cover 147. X Lampranthus filicaulis Redondo Creeper Ground Cover 148. X Lampranthus spectabilis Trailing Ice Plant Ground Cover 149. W Lantana camara cultivars Yellow Sage Shrub
150. W Lantana montevidensis Trailing Lantana Shrub
151. o Lasthenia californica Dwarf Goldfields Annual
152. W Lavandula dentata French Lavender Shrub
152. W Leptospermum laevigatum Australian Tea Tree Shrub 154. W Leucophyllum frutescens Texas Ranger Shrub
155. o Leymus condensatus Giant Wild Rye Large Grass
156. N Ligustrum japonicum Texas privet Shrub
157. X Limonium pectinatum no common name Ground Cover
158. X Limonium perezii Sea Lavender Shrub
159. W n Liquidambar styraciflua American Sweet Gum Tree 160. W Liriodendron tulipfera Tulip Tree Tree
161. X Lonicera japonica ‘Halliana’ Hall’s Japanese Honeysuckle Vining Shrub 162. o Lonicera subspicata Wild Honeysuckle Vining Shrub 163. X Lotus corniculatus Bird’s Foot Trefoil Ground Cover 164. o Lotus hermannii Northern Woolly Lotus Perennial
165. o Lotus scoparius Deerweed Shrub
166. W Lupinus arizonicus Desert Lupine Annual
167. W Lupinus benthamii Spider Lupine Annual
168. o Lupinus bicolor Sky Lupine Flowering annual
169. o Lupinus sparsiflorus Loosely Flowered Annual Lupine or Coulter’s Lupine Annual
Item: 12
1055
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
361
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1,
20263
49 Code Botanical Name Common Name Plant Form
170. W Lyonothamnus floribundus
ssp. Asplenifolius Fernleaf Ironwood Tree
171. W Macadamia integrifolia Macadamia Nut Tree
172. W Mahonia aquifolium ‘Golden
Abundance’ Golden Abundance Oregon Grape Shrub
173. W Mahonia nevenii Nevin Mahonia Shrub
174. o Malacothamnus fasciculatus Chapparal Mallow Shrub 175. X Malephora luteola Training Ice Plant Ground Cover 176. W Maytenus boaria Mayten Tree Tree
177. W Melaleuca nesophila Pink Melaleuca Shrub
178. N Metrosideros excelsus New Zealand Christmas Tree Tree 179. o * Mimulus species Monkeyflower Flower
180. o Mirabilis californica Wishbone Bush Perennial
181. N Myoporum debile no common name Shrub
Code Botanical Name Common Name Plant Form
182. W Myoporum insulare Boobyalla Shrub
183. W Myoporum parvilfolium no common name Ground Cover 184. W Myoporum ‘Pacificum’ no common name Ground Cover 185. o Nassella (stipa) lepidra Foothill Needlegrass Ground Cover 186. o Nassella (stipa) pulchra Purple Needlegrass Ground Cover 187. o Nemophilia menziesii Baby Blue Eyes Annual
188. X Nerium Oleander Oleander Shrub
189. o Nolina cismontana Chapparal Nolina Shrub
190. N Nolina species Mexican Grasstree Shrub
191. W Oenothera belandieri Mexican Evening Primrose Ground Cover 192. N Oenothera hookeri California Evening Primrose Flower 193. W Oenothera speciosa Show Evening Primrose Perennial 194. X Ophiopogon japonicus Mondo Grass Ground Cover
195. o * Opuntia littoralis Prickly Pear Cactus
196. o * Opuntia oricola Oracle Cactus Cactus
197. o * Opuntia prolifera Coast Cholla Cactus
198. W Osmanthus fragrans Sweet Olive Shrub
199. X Osteospermum fruticosum Training African Daisy Ground Cover 200. X Parkinsonia aculeata Mexican Palo Verde Tree
201. W Pelargonium peltatum Ivy Geranium Ground Cover
202. X Penstemon species Beard Tongue Shrub
203. W Photinia fraseria no common name Shrub
204. W Pistacia chinesis Chinese Pistache Tree
205. X Pittosporum undulatum Victorian Box Tree
206. o Plantago erecta California Plantain Annual
207. ** Plantago insularis Woolly Plantain Annual
208. X Plantago sempervirens Evergreen Plantain Ground Cover 1056
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
362
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1,
20263
50 Code Botanical Name Common Name Plant Form
209. W Plantanus racemosa California Sycamore Tree
210. W Plumbago auritulata Plumbago Cape Shrub
211. o Popolus fremontii Western Cottonwood Tree
212. X Portulacaria afra Elephant’s Food Shrub
213. o Potentilla glandulosa Sticky Cinquefoil Subshrub 214. X Potentilla tabernaemontanii Spring Cinquefoil Ground Cover 215. X Prunus caroliniana Carolina Cherry Laurel Shrub/Tree 216. o Prunus ilicifolia ssp. Ilicifolia Holly Leafed Cherry Shrub 217. X Prunus lyonii Catalina Cherry Shrub/Tree
218. N Punica granatum Pomegranate Shrub/Tree
219. W Puya species Puya Succulent/Shrub
220. W Pyracantha species Firethorn Shrub
221. o Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak Tree
222. o n * Quercus berberdifolia California Scrub Oak Shrub 223. o n * Quercus dumosa Coastal Scrub Oak Shrub
Code Botanical Name Common Name Plant Form
224. X Quercus engelmannii Engelmann Oak Tree
225. X Quercus suber Cork Oak Tree
226. X Rhamnus alaternus Italian Buckthorn Shrub
227. o Rhamnus californica California Coffee Berry Shrub 228. o Rhamnus crocea Redberry Shrub
229. o Rhamnus crocea ssp. Ilicifolia Hollyleaf Redberry Shrub 230. N Rhaphiolepis species Indian Hawthorne Shrub
231. o Rhus integrifolia Lemonade Berry Shrub
232. N Searsia Lancea African Sumac Tree
233. o n Rhus ovata Sugar bush Shrub
234. o Ribes aureum Golden Currant Shrub
235. o Ribes indecorum White Flowering Currant Shrub
236. o Ribes speciosum Fuschia Flowering Gooseberry Shrub 237. W Ribes viburnifolium Evergreen currant Shrub
238. o * Romneya coulteri Matilija Poppy Shrub
239. X Romneya coulteri ‘White Cloud’ White Cloud Matilija Poppy Shrub 240. W n Rosmarinus officinalis Rosemary Shrub
241. W n Salvia greggii Autums Sage Shrub
242. W n Salvia sonomensis Creeping Sage Ground Cover
243. o Sambucus mexicana Mexican Elderberry Tree
244. W Santolina chamaecyparissus Lavender Cotton Ground Cover 245. W Santolina virens Green Lavender Cotton Shrub
246. o Satureja chandleri San Miguel Savory Perennial
247. o Scirpis scutus Hard Stem Bulrush Perennial
248. o Scirpus californicus California Bulrush Perennial 249. X Sedum acre Goldmoss Sedum Ground Cover
1057
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
363
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1,
20263
51 Code Botanical Name Common Name Plant Form
250. X Sedum album Green Stonecrop Ground Cover
251. X Sedum confusum no common name Ground Cover
252. X Sedum lineare no common name Ground Cover
253. X Sedum x rubrotinctum Pork and Beans Ground Cover 254. X Senecio serpens no common name Ground Cover
255. o Sisyrinchium bellum Blue Eyed Grass Ground Cover 256. o Solanum douglasii Douglas Nightshade Shrub
257. o Solanum xantii Purple Nightshade Perennial
258. W Stenicarpus sinuatus Firewheel Tree Tree
259. W Strelitzia nicolai Giant Bird of Paradise Perennial 260. W Strelitzia reginae Bird of Paradise Perennial
261. o Symphoricarpos mollis Creeping Snowberry Shrub
262. W Tecoma stans (Stenolobium stans) Yellow Bells Shrub/Small Tree 263. X Tecomaria capensis Cape Honeysuckle Ground Cover 264. N Teucarium chamedrys Germander Ground Cover
265. N Thymus serpyllum Lemon Thyme Ground Cover
Code Botanical Name Common Name Plant Form
266. N Trachelospermum jasminoides Star Jasmine Shrub
267. o Trichosstems lanatum Woolly Blue Curls Shrub
268. X Trifolium hirtum ‘Hyron’ Hyron Rose Clover Ground Cover 269. X Trifolium fragerum ‘O’Connor’s’ O’Connor’s Legume Ground Cover 270. o Umbellularia californica California Laurel Tree
271. o Verbena lasiostachys Western Vervain Perennial
272. N Verbena peruviana no common name Ground Cover
273. X Verbena species Verbena Ground Cover
274. X Vinca minor Dwarf Periwinkle Ground Cover
275. o Vitis girdiana Desert Wild Grape Vine
276. X Vulpia myuros ‘Zorro’ Zorro Annual Fescue Grass
277. W Westringia fruticosa no common name Shrub
278. W Xannithorrhoea species Grass Tree Perennial, Accent shrub 279. W Xylosma congestum Shiny Xylosma Shrub
280. X Yucca Species Yucca Shrub
281. o Yucca whipplei Yucca Shrub
1058
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
364
Fuel Modification Plans Design: C-05 January 1,
20263
52 Approved
Pla
nt Palette Qualification Statements for Select Plant Species
2. Acacia redolens desert carpet: May be used in the furthest ½ of the “B” FMZ from the structure, and no closer than 25 feet from the edge of the zone nearest the structure. The plants may be planted with a minimum spacing at 10 feet on center, maximum spacing in meandering zones not to exceed a mature width of 24 feet and mature height of 24 inches.
If acacia redolens desert carpet is used in the roadway protection zone, it shall be maintained at a minimum of 25 feet from the curb face. At the time of precise plan review, the mature spacing shall be accounted for.
42. Bougainvillea spectabilis (procumbent varieties): Procumbent t o mounding varieties
may be used in the mid “B” FMZ. The plants may be planted in groups at 6 feet on center spacing not to exceed eight plants per group. Mature spacing between individual plants or groups shall be at a 30 foot minimum.
125. Hakea suaveolens: May be use
d in the mid “B” FMZ. The plants shall be used as single specimens with mature spacing between plants of 30 feet minimum. 132. Heteromeles arbutifolia: May be used in the mid to lower “B” FMZ. The plants may be planted in groups of up to 3 plants per group. Mature spacing between individual plants or groups shall be at a 30 foot minimum.
160. Liquidambar styraciflua: May be used
in the mid “B” FMZ. The plant shall be used as
single specimens with mature spacing between trees and a 30 foot minimum. 223. Quercus berberdifolia: Additional i nformation may be required as directed by the OCFA unless approved on the plan as shown.
224. Quercus dumosa: May be used in the mid to lower “B” FMZ. The plants may be planted in groups of up to 3 plants per group. Mature spacing between individual plants or groups shall be at a 30 foot minimum.
234. Rhus ovata & Rhus integrifolia: May be used
in the mid to lower “B” FMZ of inland areas
only. The plants may be planted in groups of up to 3 plants per group. Mature spacing between individual plants or groups shall be at a 30 foot minimum. 241. Rosmarinus officinalis: When used as
a ground cover, it shall be maintained at 2 feet in
height. Additional information may be required as directed by the OCFA. 242. Salvia greggii: Additional i nformation may be required as directed by the OCFA unless approved on the plan as shown.
243. Salvia sonomensis: May be used in the mid to upper “B” FMZ. The plants may be planted in groups of up to 3 plants per group. Mature spacing between individual plants or groups shall be at a 15 foot minimum.
1059
NOVEMBER 4, 2025 STAFF REPORT
Item: 8
365
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 11/18/2025
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT:
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS WITH CITY OF IRVINE FOR LAKE FOREST
TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION PROGRAM AND NORTH IRVINE
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM PROJECTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
1. Approve the Cooperative Agreement with the City of Irvine finalizing the Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program and North Irvine Transportation Mitigation Program fair-share contributions and closing out the shared intersection improvement projects.
2. Authorize the Mayor to sign, and the City Clerk to attest, the Cooperative Agreement with the City of Irvine, substantially in the form attached.
3. Adopt a Resolution entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING 2025-2027 OPERATING BUDGET; AMENDING REVENUE ESTIMATES FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26”
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In June 2025, City Council approved the 2024 Five-Year Update of the Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation (“LFTM”) Program, as required under Ordinance No. 186 (Attachment 1). The update reassessed traffic impacts, land use changes, roadway network adjustments, and program costs, ensuring that necessary circulation improvements are identified and appropriately funded.
In parallel, the cities of Lake Forest and Irvine have negotiated a proposed Cooperative Agreement (Attachment 2) to finalize their respective fair-share obligations for the following shared intersection improvements under the LFTM and North Irvine Transportation Mitigation (“NITM”) Programs:
1. Lake Forest Drive and Jeronimo Road
2. Ridge Route Drive and Rockfield Boulevard
3. Los Alisos Boulevard and Rockfield Boulevard
4. Alton Parkway and Irvine Boulevard
Item: 9
366
Under this agreement:
Irvine will contribute $301,706 to Lake Forest for improvements at Intersections 1, 2, and 3 within the City of Lake Forest. Lake Forest will contribute $676,214 to Irvine for improvements at the Alton Parkway/Irvine Boulevard intersection, which is referred to as Intersection 4.
This proposed Cooperative Agreement (“Agreement”) establishes finality of contributions, ensuring that both agencies’ obligations are fulfilled, and no additional funds will be requested beyond these amounts.
Therefore, staff recommend the City Council approve the proposed Cooperative Agreement with the City of Irvine, authorize the Mayor to execute the proposed Cooperative Agreement, and to close out the shared intersection improvement projects in the LFTM Program. In addition, staff recommend the City Council adopt the proposed Budget Resolution to reflect the expected revenues the City would receive from Irvine, totaling $301,706 (Attachment 3).
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 to provide 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.
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 reduced the planned intersection improvements from 18 to 15 intersections, resulting in a new total cost of $9,881,000 for the updated LFTM Program. These costs include the total base costs of improvements and associated administration, and environmental costs related to project delivery.
The LFTM Ordinance stipulates that the City shall prepare 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 Item: 9
367
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.
In June 2025, the City Council approved the 2024 LFTM Program Five-Year Update, which updated program costs, revised the LFTM fee structure, identified alternative improvements for the intersections of Los Alisos Boulevard and Rockfield Boulevard, Lake Forest Drive and Rockfield Boulevard, and Lake Forest Drive and I-5/Avenida de la Carlota, and removed the intersection improvement at Bake Parkway and Rockfield Boulevard as it will operate at an adequate level of service in the build-out years.
DISCUSSION:
The LFTM Program provided the financial mechanism to mitigate traffic impacts from the City’s Opportunities Study Area (“OSA”) developments. Since its adoption in 2008, the program has delivered or initiated improvements at multiple intersections, with several projects completed, others under construction, and some revised or eliminated based on updated traffic conditions. The 2024 update ensured that the program reflects current traffic forecasts, development patterns, and construction costs, while reducing unnecessary right-of-way acquisitions and minimizing community impacts.
Following the City Council’s approval of the 2024 LFTM Program Five-Year Update, staff coordinated with the City of Irvine to review several shared intersections that fall under both the LFTM and North Irvine Transportation Mitigation (“NITM”) Programs. The City of Irvine, through its NITM Program, identified intersection improvements intended to mitigate traffic impacts generated by development projects within its jurisdiction. Several of these intersections are located within Lake Forest and overlap with improvements identified in the LFTM Program.
Item: 9
368
To ensure consistency and avoid redundant construction, both cities evaluated the overlapping intersections to determine the most effective improvements.
Based on the Lake Forest Traffic Analysis Model (“LFTAM”) and the findings of the 2024 LFTM Five-Year Update (see Attachment 1 Appendix C page C.5 Item 105), Lake Forest’s proposed improvements were determined to provide an adequate level of service and will therefore supersede the corresponding NITM improvements at the shared locations.
As a result of this coordination, the City of Irvine will contribute $301,706 toward the LFTM Program, representing the construction cost of Irvine’s originally proposed NITM improvements at the following intersections:
Lake Forest Drive and Jeronimo Road ($219,505)
Ridge Route Drive and Rockfield Boulevard ($16,202)
Los Alisos Boulevard and Rockfield Boulevard ($65,999) In turn, the City of Lake Forest will contribute $676,214 toward Irvine’s NITM improvement at Alton Parkway and Irvine Boulevard, consistent with Lake Forest’s LFTM obligation. This contribution has previously been approved by the City Council and is allocated in the Fiscal Year 2025–27 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) budget.
Under the proposed Cooperative Agreement, the cities of Lake Forest and Irvine will exchange contributions of $301,706 (Irvine to Lake Forest) and $676,214 (Lake Forest to Irvine) to close out their respective obligations for these shared intersection improvements. This agreement ensures finality between both agencies, prevents future disputes over cost fluctuations, and provides flexibility for each city to apply funds within its program parameters if specific improvements are later deemed infeasible.
Staff also recommend that the City Council adopt the accompanying Budget Resolution to reflect the anticipated revenue from Irvine in the amount of $301,706 (Attachment 3). The proposed Cooperative Agreement and Budget Resolution have been reviewed by the City Attorney and approved as to form.
On October 6, 2025, the Traffic and Parking Commission considered the Cooperative Agreement during its regularly scheduled meeting. Following discussion, the Commission voted unanimously (5-0) to recommend that the City Council approve the Cooperative Agreement.
Therefore, staff recommend the City Council approve the proposed Cooperative Agreement with the City of Irvine and adopt the associated Budget Resolution.
Item: 9
369
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed action will generate $301,706 in revenue for the Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Fund. Additionally, the City will contribute $676,214 as its fair share toward the City of Irvine’s North Irvine Transportation Mitigation Program. The proposed Budget Resolution includes the expected revenues the City would receive through Irvine’s contribution.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 2024 – LFTM Five-Year Update
2. Proposed Cooperative Agreement with the City of Irvine
3. Budget Resolution
Initiated By: Tran Tran, Traffic Engineering Manager
Submitted By: Douglas Erdman, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer Approved By: Debra Rose, City Manager
Item: 9
370
Attachment 1
Item: 9
371
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: 9
372
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 b
y:
Eric Mazzella, TE
Maria Morris, AICP, PTP
Reviewed by:
Daryl Zerfass, TE, PTP
Maria Morris AICP PTP
03/31/2026
EXP. 6/30/2027
Item: 9
373
LAKE FOREST TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION PROGRAM 5-YEAR UPDATE
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ ES.1 1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1.1
1.1 Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 1.1
1.2 Methodology ............................................................................................................................... 1.2
1.3 Performance Standards.............................................................................................................. 1.2
1.4 Committed Roadway System ..................................................................................................... 1.3
1.5 Future Roadway System ............................................................................................................ 1.6
1.6 Land Use Assumptions............................................................................................................... 1.8 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS............................................................................................. 2.1 3 TRAFFIC FORECASTS AND LEVEL OF SERVICE .................................................. 3.1 4 COST ALLOCATIONS AND LFTM FEE CALCULATION .......................................... 4.1
4.1 Cost Allocation Methodology ...................................................................................................... 4.1
4.2 LFTM Fee Calculation Methodology .......................................................................................... 4.3 5 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 5.1
Item: 9
374
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: 9
375
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update Executive Summary
Project Number: 2042547210 ES.1
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
4. KB Homes (Whisler
Ridge)
75 single family dwelling units Complete
5. Pacific Heritage
(Teresina)
85 single family dwelling units Complete
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 Item: 9
376
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update Executive Summary
Project Number: 2042547210 ES.2
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.
Item: 9
377
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update Executive Summary
Project Number: 2042547210 ES.3
Table ES-2 LFTM Program Improvement 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 1 3 22 Bake Pkwy & Jeronimo Rd LF/Irvine $ 2,846,788 2 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 Ba ke Pkwy & Portola Pkwy LF $ 72,240
10 12 El Toro Rd & Portola Pkwy/Santa Margarita Pkwy LF $ 2,627,022 11 32 R idge Route Dr & Rockfield Blvd LF $ 1,144
12 37 P aseo de Valencia & Avenida de la Carlota LH $ 79,000 13 39 E l 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
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 Item: 9
378
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update Executive Summary
Project Number: 2042547210 ES.4
Table ES-3 LFTM Program Cost Summary
Cost Item
2018 5-Year Update
Cost Summary1
2024 5-Year Update
Cost Summary
Total Cost of Improvements $ 9,222,000 $ 11,733,603 Payments from NITM (Not assumed) $ 0 $ 0 Payments from FCPP (Not assumed) $ 0 $ 0 Administration & Environmental (25%) $ 2,306,000 $ 2,933,400 Total Allocated Costs $ 11,528,000 $ 14,667,003 Difference +27%
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 Unpaid Program Costs2 $ 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.
Item: 9
379
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update Executive Summary
Project Number: 2042547210 ES.5
Table ES-4 LFTM Fee Calculation
Land Use
Land Use
Units
Land Use
Amount
ADT Trip
Generation
Trip
Length
Factor
Fee
Fee/ADT
Fee/Land
Use Unit
SDU DU 121 1,141 1.00 $2,519,251 $2,208 $20,820
Total LFTM Program Spent to Date and Cash Balance $12,147,752 Total LFTM Program $14,667,003
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 Cost
Portola Center 1,141 $2,519,251
Total Remaining Unpaid 1,141 $2,519,251
LFTM Program Spent to Date and Cash Balance to Date $12,147,752 Total LFTM Program $14,667,003
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.
Item: 9
380
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 1 Introduction
Project Number: 2042547210 1.1
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. Updates to the Citywide land use data
2. Updates to the committed roadway network
3. Updates to the City’s travel demand model
4. Updates to the identified transportation improvements
5. Updates to the total cost of the program
6. 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 Item: 9
381
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 1 Introduction
Project Number: 2042547210 1.2
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.
Item: 9
382
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 1 Introduction
Project Number: 2042547210 1.3
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.
Item: 9
383
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 1 Introduction
Project Number: 2042547210 1.4
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
Slight delay to vehicles.
0.61 – 0.70
C
Moderate vehicle delays, traffic flow remains stable.
0.71 – 0.80
D
More extensive delays at intersections.
0.81 – 0.90
E
Long queues create lengthy delays.
0.91 – 1.00
F
Severe delays and congestion.
> 1.00
Sources: HCM 7th Edition
V/C = Volume to Capacity ratio; ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization
Item: 9
384
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 1 Introduction
Project Number: 2042547210 1.5
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 6T TCA CIP Constructed SR-133 Irvine Blvd to SR-
241
Caltrans/TCA 6T 8T 8T 8T TCA CIP Constructed
SR-241 SR-133 to SR-261 Caltrans/TCA 5T 5T 5T 6T TCA CIP Not Constructed
SR-241 Lake Forest Dr to
Los Alisos Blvd
Caltrans/TCA 5T 5T 5T 8T TCA CIP Not
Constructed
SR-241 Portola Pkwy
(Irvine) to Lake
Forest Dr
Caltrans/TCA 6T 6T 6T 8T
TCA CIP Not
Constructed
Summary of Committed Intersection Lane Improvements
Intersection Improvement Source(s) Status
6. Alton (N/S) & SR-241
Ramps (E/W)
Add 3rd SB (Alton) through lane and
3rd NB (Alton) through lane
County/Irvine/
Lake Forest
Constructed
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)
Add 2nd NB (Los Alisos) left-turn lane,
2nd SB (Los Alisos) left-turn lane and
2nd EB (Muirlands) left-turn lane
FCPP
Not Constructed
41. Alton (N/S) & Rancho
South (E/W)
Convert SB (Alton) right-turn lane to
3rd SB through lane, striping of a
second NB left turn
Shea/Baker
Constructed
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
Item: 9
385
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 1 Introduction
Project Number: 2042547210 1.6
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) o 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 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). o 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
Item: 9
386
CITY OF LAKE FOREST
CITY OF IRVINE
CITY OF MISSION VIEJO
CITY OF LAKE FOREST
LOS
ALISOS
BLVD
IRVINE BLVD
ALICIA PKWY
LA PAZ RD
LAKEFORESTDR
TRABUCO RD
GLENNRANCH RD
ALTON
PKWY
SANTIAGO CANYO N RD
STA MARGARITA PKWY
TOLEDO WY
JER ONIMO
RD
O LYMPIAD RD
MELINDA RD
CABOT RD
RIDGELIN E RD
MUIRLANDS BLVD
ELTORO
SADDLEBACK
RANCH
RD
ROCKFIELD BLVD
DIMENSIO N DR
PORTOLA PKWY
IRVINE CENTER DR
ALICIA
RANCHO PKWY
AVENIDA DE LA CARLOTAMOULTON PKWY
MARGUERITEPKWY
ADA
TECHNOLOGY DR
BAKE PKWY
COMMERCENTRE DR
PASEO DE VALENCIA
EL TORO RD
RIDGE ROUTE DR
BAKE
PKWY
PORTOLAPKWY
LAKE FOREST DR
JERONIMO RD
MELINDA RD
RANCHO PKWY
\\us0300-ppfss01\workgroup\2042\active\2042547200\gis\2024update\Figure1-1.mxd Legend
Future Roadway (MPAH) (included in
committed network)
City of Lake Forest limits
241
5 Figure 1-1
Committed Roadway Network
LFTM PROGRAM
5-YEAR UPDATE
1.7 FCPP Intersection Improvements
(included in committed network)
SR-241 Widening
Future TCA CIP roadway
(included in committed network)
Item: 9
387
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 1 Introduction
Project Number: 2042547210 1.8
• 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
4. KB Homes (Whisler
Ridge) 75 single family dwelling units
Complete
5. Pacific Heritage
(Teresina) 85 single family dwelling units
Complete
1 Status as of June 2024
Source: City of Lake Forest
See Figure 1-2 for the location of each participating property.
Item: 9
388
LOS ALISOS BLVD
LAKE FOREST DR
TRABUCO RD
GLENN RANCH RD
ALTONPKWY
DIMENSION DR
SADDLEBACK RANCH RD
PORTOLA PKWY
RANCHO PKWY
STA MARGARITA PKWY
BAKE PKWY
COMMERCENTRE DR
EL TORO RD
RANCHO PKWY
\\us0300-ppfss01\workgroup\2042\active\2042547200\gis\2024update\Figure1-2.mxd 241
Figure 1-2
Properties Part of the LFTM Program
1.9 SHEA/BAKER
(Baker Ranch)
IRWD
(Serrano
Summit)
KB HOMES
(Whisler Ridge)
PORTOLA
CENTER
Pacific
Heritage
(Teresina)
MARGUERITE PKWY
LFTM PROGRAM
5-YEAR UPDATE
Item: 9
389
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 2 Existing Conditions
Project Number: 2042547210 2.1
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.
Item: 9
390
CITY OF LAKE FOREST
CITY OF IRVINE
CITY OF MISSION VIEJO
CITY OF LAKE FOREST
6 4
5 8
2 4
6 8
6 4
4 4
4 4
4 4
4 6
4 6
4 6
6 4
4 4
4 6
5 6
6 2
6 44
4 4
6 4
6 6
5 4
4 6
4 4
6 6
6 6
6 4
4 4
4 4
6 6
4 4
4 4
4 6
6 4
4 4
4 6
4 4
LOS
ALISOS
BLVD
IRVINE BLVD
LA PAZ RD
LAKEFORESTDR
TRABUCO RD
GLENNRANCH RD
ALTON
PKWY
ALICIA PKWY
TOLEDO WY
STAMARGARITA PKWY
JER O NIMORD
OLYMPIAD RD
MUIRLANDSBLVD
ROCKFIELD BLVD
D IMENSION DR
PORTOLA PKWY
SADDLEBACK
RANCH
RD
IRVINE CENTER DR
RANCHO PKWY
AVENIDA DE LA CARLOTA
MELINDA RD
MARGUERITEPKWY
MOULTON PKWY
CABOT RD
ALICIA
ADA
BAKE PKWY
SCIENTIFIC
WAY
EL TORO RD
PASEO DE VALENCIA
MELINDA RD
JERONIMO RD
LAKE FOREST DR
\\us0300-ppfss01\workgroup\2042\active\2042547200\gis\2024update\Figure1-2.mxd Legend
Mid-block lanes
City of Lake Forest limits
241
5 Figure 2-1
Existing Mid-block Lanes
2.2 X
6 4
5 4
RANCHO PKWY
COMMERCENTRE DR
LFTM PROGRAM
5-YEAR UPDATE
Item: 9
391
9 8
7 6
5 432
1 42
41 40
39 38
37 36
35 34
33 32
31 30
2928
27 26
2524
2322
212019
18 17
16 15
14 13
1211
10 125
117
105
LOS
ALISOS
BLVD
IRVINE BLVD
LA PAZ RD
LAKEFORESTDR
TRABUCO RD
GLENNRANCH RD
ALTON
PKWY
ALICIA PKWY
TOLEDO W Y
STAMARGARITA PKWY
JER O NIMORD
OLYMPIAD RD
MUIRLANDSBLVD
ROCKFIELD BLVD
DI MENSIO N DR
P ORTOLA PKWY
SADDLEBACK
RANCH
RD
IRVINE CENTER DR
RANCHO PKWY
AVENIDA DE LA CARLOTA
MELINDA RD
MARGUERITEPKWY
MOULTON PKWY
CABOT RD
ALICIA
ADA
BAKE PKWY
SCIENTIFIC
WAY
EL TORO RD
PASEO DE VALENCIA
RIDGE ROUTE DR
JERONIMO RD
LAKE FOREST DR
RANCHO PKWY
MELINDA RD
\\us0300-ppfss01\workgroup\2042\active\2042547200\gis\2024update\Figure1-2.mxd Legend
Intersection locations
City of Lake Forest limits
241
5 Figure 2-2
Intersection Location Map
2.3 LFTM PROGRAM
5-YEAR UPDATE
COMMERCENTRE DR
Item: 9
392
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 2 Existing Conditions
Project Number: 2042547210 2.4
Figure 2-3 Intersection Volume Count Comparison (2018 versus 2022) – AM Peak Hour
Item: 9
393
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 2 Existing Conditions
Project Number: 2042547210 2.5
Figure 2-4 Intersection Volume Count Comparison (2018 versus 2022) – PM Peak Hour
Item: 9
394
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 2 Existing Conditions
Project Number: 2042547210 2.6
Table 2-1 Intersection LOS Comparison (2018 versus 2022)
Intersection
2018 2022 Difference
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM PM
ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS
1. Alton & Portola 0.41 A 0.29 A 0.38 A 0.30 A -0.03 0.01
2. Bake & Portola 0.44 A 0.50 A 0.44 A 0.47 A 0.00 -0.03
3. Lake Forest & Portola 0.39 A 0.46 A 0.39 A 0.46 A 0.00 0.00
4. Glenn Ranch & Portola 0.41 A 0.50 A 0.41 A 0.49 A 0.00 -0.01
5. Portola & SR-241 Ramps 0.34 A 0.35 A 0.32 A 0.35 A -0.02 0.00
6. Alton & SR-241 Ramps 0.35 A 0.36 A 0.29 A 0.30 A -0.06 -0.06
7. Lake Forest & SR-241 NB 0.23 A 0.26 A 0.22 A 0.26 A -0.01 0.00
8. Lake Forest & SR-241 SB 0.29 A 0.33 A 0.27 A 0.28 A -0.02 -0.05
9. Bake & Rancho N 0.47 A 0.59 A 0.37 A 0.49 A -0.10 -0.10
10. Lake Forest & Rancho* 0.44 A 0.55 A 0.43 A 0.58 A -0.01 0.03
11. Bake & Rancho S 0.56 A 0.53 A 0.43 A 0.43 A -0.13 -0.10
12. El Toro & Portola/Sta. Margarita 0.69 B 0.67 B 0.62 B 0.66 B -0.07 -0.01
13. Bake & Commercentre* 0.50 A 0.70 B 0.41 A 0.48 A -0.09 -0.22
14. Bake & Irvine/Trabuco* 0.65 B 0.67 B 0.59 A 0.61 B -0.06 -0.06
15. Lake Forest & Trabuco 0.59 A 0.58 A 0.54 A 0.57 A -0.05 -0.01
16. Ridge Route & Trabuco 0.43 A 0.50 A 0.40 A 0.48 A -0.03 -0.02
17. El Toro & Trabuco 0.62 B 0.60 A 0.63 B 0.58 A 0.01 -0.02
18. Bake & Toledo 0.73 C 0.62 B 0.60 A 0.51 A -0.13 -0.11
19. Lake Forest & Toledo 0.53 A 0.53 A 0.51 A 0.49 A -0.02 -0.04
20. Ridge Route & Toledo 0.34 A 0.27 A 0.33 A 0.26 A -0.01 -0.01
21. El Toro & Toledo 0.54 A 0.46 A 0.56 A 0.44 A 0.02 -0.02
22. Bake & Jeronimo 0.91 E 0.84 D 0.65 B 0.65 B -0.26 -0.19
23. Lake Forest & Jeronimo 0.65 B 0.72 C 0.53 A 0.63 B -0.12 -0.09
Item: 9
395
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 2 Existing Conditions
Project Number: 2042547210 2.7
Table 2-1 Intersection LOS Comparison (2018 versus 2022) (Continued)
Intersection
2018 2022 Difference
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM PM
ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS
24. Ridge Route & Jeronimo 0.46 A 0.45 A 0.45 A 0.37 A -0.01 -0.08
25. El Toro & Jeronimo 0.67 B 0.81 D 0.62 B 0.71 C -0.05 -0.10
26. Los Alisos & Jeronimo 0.64 B 0.67 B 0.58 A 0.62 B -0.06 -0.05
27. Lake Forest & Muirlands 0.49 A 0.69 B 0.44 A 0.64 B -0.05 -0.05
28. Ridge Route & Muirlands 0.42 A 0.55 A 0.37 A 0.49 A -0.05 -0.06
29. El Toro & Muirlands 0.61 B 0.71 C 0.56 A 0.69 B -0.05 -0.02
30. Los Alisos & Muirlands 0.67 B 0.70 B 0.67 B 0.73 C 0.00 0.03
31. Lake Forest & Rockfield 0.54 A 0.65 B 0.54 A 0.65 B 0.00 0.00
32. Ridge Route & Rockfield* 0.35 A 0.44 A 0.35 A 0.39 A 0.00 -0.05
33. El Toro & Rockfield 0.57 A 0.61 B 0.44 A 0.55 A -0.13 -0.06
34. Los Alisos & Rockfield 0.69 B 0.52 A 0.66 B 0.62 B -0.03 0.10
35. Lake Forest & I-5 NB 0.42 A 0.57 A 0.40 A 0.54 A -0.02 -0.03
36. Lake Forest & I-5/Carlota 0.72 C 0.78 C 0.65 B 0.69 B -0.07 -0.09
37. Paseo De Valencia & Carlota 0.47 A 0.49 A 0.43 A 0.41 A -0.04 -0.08
38. El Toro & Bridger/I-5 NB 0.56 A 0.65 B 0.47 A 0.52 A -0.09 -0.13
39. El Toro & Avd Carlota 0.57 A 0.62 B 0.45 A 0.58 A -0.12 -0.04
40. Portola & Rancho 0.47 A 0.52 A 0.43 A 0.48 A -0.04 -0.04
41. Alton & Towne Centre Dr 0.51 A 0.39 A 0.45 A 0.38 A -0.06 -0.01
42. Alton & Commercentre 0.42 A 0.51 A 0.33 A 0.44 A -0.09 -0.07 * Intersection improvements were completed between 2018 and 2022 Bold – exceeds acceptable LOS D
Item: 9
396
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
Project Number: 2042547210 3.1
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.
Item: 9
397
CITY OF LAKE FOREST
CITY OF IRVINE
CITY OF MISSION VIEJO
CITY OF LAKE FOREST
8 33
36 5
43 39
51 31
26 18
66 30
22 71
23 24
28 15
14 27
38 16
20 29
7 40
19 50
10 42
11 72
32 13
63 54
41 12 46
45 13
22 19
12 22
42 8
39 30
22 36
43 15
16 11
24 23
31 15
38 26
10 18
23 27
23 28
29 26
29 32
LOS
ALISOS
BLVD
IRVINE BLVD
LA PAZ RD
LAKEFORESTDR
TRABUCO RD
GLENNRANCH RD
ALTON
PKWY
ALICIA PKWY
TOLEDO WY
STAMARGARITA PKWY
JER O NIMORD
OLYMPIAD RD
MUIRLANDSBLVD
ROCKFIELD BLVD
DIME NSIONDR
P ORTOLA PKWY
SADDLEBACK
RANCH
RD
IRVINE CENTER DR
RANCHO PKWY
AVENIDA DE LA CARLOTA
MELINDA RD
MARGUERITEPKWY
MOULTON PKWY
CABOT RD
ALICIA
ADA
BAKE PKWY
SCIENTIFIC
WAY
EL TORO RD
PASEO DE VALENCIA
MELINDA RD
LAKE FOREST DR
\\us0300-ppfss01\workgroup\2042\active\2042547200\gis\2024update\Figure1-2.mxd Legend
ADT volumes (000s)
City of Lake Forest limits
241
5 Figure 3-1
Future (Year-2040) ADT Volumes
LFTM PROGRAM
5-YEAR UPDATE
XX
3.2 COMMERCENTRE DR
Item: 9
398
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
Project Number: 2042547210 3.3
Table 3-1 Future-Year (2040) Intersection LOS Summary – Baseline Committed Network
Intersection
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LFTM
Program
LFTM Program
Status ICU LOS ICU LOS
1. Alton & Portola 0.49 A 0.43 A No n/a
2. Bake & Portola 0.50 A 0.62 B Yes Completed
3. Lake Forest & Portola 0.55 A 0.64 B No n/a
4. Glenn Ranch & Portola 0.65 B 0.89 D No n/a
5. Portola & SR-241 Ramps 0.62 B 0.68 B No n/a
6. Alton & SR-241 Ramps 0.57 A 0.59 A No n/a
7. Lake Forest & SR-241 Northbound 0.41 A 0.44 A No n/a
8. Lake Forest & SR-241 Southbound 0.41 A 0.54 A No n/a
9. Bake & Rancho North 0.53 A 0.71 C No n/a
10. Lake Forest & Rancho 0.59 A 0.89 D Yes1 Construction
11. Bake & Rancho South 0.77 C 0.81 D No n/a
12. El Toro & Portola/Santa Margarita 0.66 C 0.73 C Yes Completed
13. Bake & Commercentre 0.69 B 0.72 C No n/a
14. Bake & Irvine/Trabuco 0.67 B 0.78 C Yes1 Construction
15. Lake Forest & Trabuco 0.66 B 0.64 B No n/a
16. Ridge Route & Trabuco 0.54 A 0.62 B No n/a
17. El Toro & Trabuco 0.65 B 0.67 B Yes Completed and
Removed (2011)
18. Bake & Toledo 0.73 C 0.72 C No n/a
19. Lake Forest & Toledo 0.66 B 0.64 B No n/a
20. Ridge Route & Toledo 0.52 A 0.35 A No n/a
21. El Toro & Toledo 0.62 B 0.50 A No n/a
22. Bake & Jeronimo 0.75 C 0.83 D Yes1 Pre-Construction
23. Lake Forest & Jeronimo 0.64 B 0.77 C Yes1 Construction
24. Ridge Route & Jeronimo 0.57 A 0.48 A No n/a
25. El Toro & Jeronimo 0.71 C 0.78 C No n/a
26. Los Alisos & Jeronimo 0.69 B 0.67 B Yes2 Removed (2011)
27. Lake Forest & Muirlands 0.49 A 0.73 C No n/a
28. Ridge Route & Muirlands 0.44 A 0.53 A No n/a
29. El Toro & Muirlands 0.65 B 0.78 C No n/a
30. Los Alisos & Muirlands 0.71 C 0.72 C Yes2 Removed (FCPP)
31. Lake Forest & Rockfield 0.67 B 0.84 D Yes1 Planning
32. Ridge Route & Rockfield 0.44 A 0.67 B Yes Completed
Item: 9
399
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
Project Number: 2042547210 3.4
Table 3-1 Future-Year (2040) Intersection LOS Summary – Baseline Committed Network (Continued)
Intersection
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LFTM
Program
LFTM Program
Status ICU LOS ICU LOS
33. El Toro & Rockfield 0.68 B 0.66 B No n/a
34. Los Alisos & Rockfield 0.78 C 0.73 C Yes1 Construction
35. Lake Forest & I-5 Northbound 0.50 A 0.68 B No n/a
36. Lake Forest & I-5/Avenida de la
Carlota
0.78 C 0.91 E Yes Planning
37. Paseo De Valencia & Avenida de la
Carlota 0.53 A 0.57 A Yes Completed
38. El Toro & Bridger/I-5 Northbound 0.61 B 0.73 C No n/a
39. El Toro & Avenida de la Carlota 0.66 B 0.86 D Yes Completed
40. Portola & Rancho 0.61 B 0.65 B No n/a
41. Alton & Towne Centre Dr 0.59 A 0.54 A Yes2 Removed (2011)
42. Alton & Commercentre 0.49 A 0.69 A No 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.
Item: 9
400
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
Project Number: 2042547210 3.5
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
Intersection
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
LFTM
Program
LFTM
Improvement
Status ICU LOS ICU LOS
2. Bake & Portola 0.74 C 1.05 F Yes Completed
32. Ridge Route & Rockfield 0.85 D 1.25 F Yes Completed 105. Alton & Irvine 0.90 D 1.01 F Yes1 Planning
117. Alton & Toledo 0.72 C 0.92 E Yes1 Completed
125. Bake & Rockfield 0.69 B 0.92 E Yes1 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
Item: 9
401
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
Project Number: 2042547210 3.6
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.
Item: 9
402
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
Project Number: 2042547210 3.7
Table 3-3 Summary of Deficient Intersections and Proposed Improvements Intersection
(N/S & E/W)
ICU With No
Improvements
ICU With
Improvements Improvements Funding
Source(s) Additional Notes
AM PM AM PM
Committed Network – Intersection Improvements in Pre-Construction Phase
10. Lake Forest
(N/S) & Rancho
(E/W)
0.59 0.89 0.59 0.86
Restripe WB (Rancho) approach to add 2nd WB left-turn lane (Completed).
Convert WB (Rancho) right-turn lane to a defacto right-turn lane (Not needed per acceptable LOS).
Add a 2nd EB (Rancho) through lane (Completed). Add an EB (Rancho) defacto right turn lane (In pre-construction).
LFTM City of Lake Forest
is the lead agency.
14. Bake (N/S)
& Irvine/Trabuco
(E/W)
0.67 0.78 0.65 0.78
Add a 2nd NB (Bake) left-turn lane (In pre-construction).
Convert the 3rd EB (Bake) through lane to a shared through/right-turn lane (Not needed).
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).
LFTM City of Lake Forest
is the lead agency.
Co-operative
agreement in place
between Irvine and
Lake Forest.
22. Bake (N/S)
& Jeronimo
(E/W)
0.75 0.83 0.63 0.81
Add a 2nd NB (Bake) left-turn lane (In pre-construction).
Add 2nd WB (Jeronimo) left-turn lane (In pre-construction, per City of Irvine improvements).
WB (Jeronimo) right turn defacto lane (In pre-construction, per City of Irvine improvements).
NITM and
LFTM
City of Irvine is the
lead agency. Co-
operative
agreement in place
between Irvine and
Lake Forest.
23. Lake Forest
(N/S) &
Jeronimo(E/W)
0.64 0.77 0.64 0.73 Add a defacto EB (Jeronimo) right-turn lane (In pre-construction).
NITM and
LFTM
City of Lake Forest
is the lead agency.
34. Los Alisos
(N/S) &
Rockfield (E/W)
0.78 0.73 0.64 0.65 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).
NITM and
LFTM
City of Lake Forest
is the lead agency.
Committed Network – Intersection Improvements in the Planning Phase
31. Lake Forest
(N/S) &
Rockfield(E/W)
0.67 0.84 0.67 0.82
Convert the 2nd WB (Rockfield) through lane to a shared left-turn/through lane (Not needed per analysis).
Convert traffic signal phasing for EB and WB (Rockfield) approaches to split phase operation (Not needed per analysis).
In lieu of the above: Modify signal to include EB (Rockfield) right-turn overlap phasing.
NITM and
LFTM
--
Item: 9
403
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
Project Number: 2042547210 3.8
Table 3-3 Summary of Deficient Intersections and Proposed Improvements (Continued) Intersection (N/S
& E/W)
ICU With No
Improvements ICU With Improvements
Improvements Funding
Source(s)
Additional
Notes
AM PM AM PM
Committed Network – Intersection Improvements in the Planning Phase (Cont.)
36. Lake Forest
(N/S) & I-5/Carlota
(E/W)
0.78 0.91 0.73 0.86
Convert the shared EB (I-5 ramp) left- turn/through lane to a 3rd left-turn 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).
NITM and
LFTM
Shared City of
Irvine, City of
Laguna Hills
intersection. Add a 2nd EB (I-5 ramp) through lane (Not needed). LFTM In lieu of the above: restripe WBR (Carlota) to a shared left/right turn lane. LFTM Committed Network – Intersection Improvements that are Completed
12. El Toro (N/S)
& Portola/Santa
Margarita (E/W)
Improvements
Completed 0.66 0.73 Add a 2nd NB (El Toro) left-turn lane (Completed).
Add a 2nd SB (El Toro) right-turn lane (Completed).
LFTM
Program
--
37. Paseo de
Valencia (N/S) &
Avenida de la
Carlota (E/W)
Improvements
Completed
0.53 0.57 Restripe 2nd SB (Paseo de Valencia) through to a shared 3rd left/2nd through (Completed).
NITM,
LFTM, and
Laguna
Hills
City of Laguna
Hills intersection.
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).
Restripe WB (Avenida de la Carlota) to shared left/through, through, and 2 right turn lanes with overlap phasing (Completed).
NITM,
LFTM, and
Laguna
Hills
City of Laguna
Hills intersection.
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
Program Baseline Adjustment Study.
In lieu of a defacto NB (El Toro) right turn and defacto WB (Trabuco) right turn, a NB (El Toro) dedicated right turn land and WB (Trabuco) dedicated right turn lane was completed.
LFTM
Program
--
26.Los Alisos
(N/S) & Jeronimo
(E/W)
Removed from LFTM Program in the 2011
LFTM Program Baseline Adjustment Study
due to acceptable LOS.
Restripe WB (Jeronimo) approach to 2 left turn lanes, 2 through lanes, and a defacto right turn lane, and add a 2
nd EB (Jeronimo) left turn lane.
NITM and
LFTM
--
30. Los Alisos
(N/S) & Muirlands
(E/W)
Removed from list in the 2014 5-Year
Update due to fully committed
improvements by the FCPP.
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) &
Rancho (E/W)
Removed from LFTM Program in the 2011
LFTM Program Baseline Adjustment Study
due to acceptable LOS
Add 2nd WB (Rancho) left turn lane. LFTM
Program
--
Item: 9
404
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 3 Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service
Project Number: 2042547210 3.9
Table 3-3 Summary of Deficient Intersections and Proposed Improvements (Continued) Intersection
(NS & EW)
ICU Without
Improvements
ICU With
Improvements Improvements
Funding
Source(s)
Additional Notes
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.
In lieu of the above, the City implemented a dedicated NB right-turn lane (Completed).
NITM and
LFTM
Programs
--
105. Alton (N/S) &
Irvine (E/W)
1,2
0.903 1.013 0.65 0.53 Reconfigure the EB (Irvine) approach to add a 3rd 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
due to acceptable LOS (2024
Update).
Reconfigure the WB (Rockfield) approach to add a 3rd WB left-turn lane, remove dedicated WB free-flow (No longer needed) right-turn lane and provide a defacto WB right-turn lane (No longer needed).
LFTM
Program
City of Irvine
intersection
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 Item: 9
405
2 41
3937
36 3432
31 30
26 2322
17 14
12 10
125
117
105
IRVINE BLVD
LOSALISOS BLVD
LAKE FOREST DR
TRABUCO RD
GLENNRANCH RD
ALTON
PKWY
TOLEDO W Y
ROCKFIELD BLVD
DI MENSIO N DR
PORTOLA PKWY
SADDLEBACK
RANCH
RD
JERONIMO RD
IRVINE CENTER DR
T ECHNOLOGY DR
RANCHO PKWY
AVENIDA DE LA CARLOTAMOULTON PKWY
STA MARGARITA PKWY
PACIFICA
ADA
ALICIA
MERIDIAN
BAKE PKWY
COMMERCENTRE DR
SCIENTIFIC
W
AY
GATEWAY
EL TORO RD
ENTERPRISE DR
RIDGE ROUTE DR
PORTOLA PKWY
RANCHO PKWY
LAKE FOREST DR
ALTONPKWY
TECHNOLOGY DR
\\us0300-ppfss01\workgroup\2042\active\2042547200\gis\2024update\Figure1-2.mxd Legend
Pre-construction
Planning
Completed
Removed
241
5 Figure 3-2
LFTM Program Status
3.10 LFTM PROGRAM
5-YEAR UPDATE
Item: 9
406
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
Project Number: 2042547210 4.1
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.
Item: 9
407
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
Project Number: 2042547210 4.2
Table 4-1 LFTM Properties Land Use and Trip Generation Summary Property/Land Use Description Amount ADT
NOT COMPLETED
Portola Center
Single Family Detached 617 DU 5,820
Condominium 251 DU 2,030
Apartment 58 DU 390
Commercial 12.6 TSF 1,190
Total Portola Center 9,430
COMPLETED
Irvine Ranch Water District (Serrano Summit)
Single Family Detached 101 DU 950
Condominium (Attached and Detached) 212 DU 1,720
Apartments 224 DU 1,510
Total Irvine Ranch Water District 4,180
KB Homes (Whisler Ridge)
Single Family Detached 75 DU 710
Total KB Homes 710
Pacific Heritage (Teresina)
Single Family Detached 85 DU 800
Total Pacific Heritage 800
Shea/Baker (Baker Ranch)
Single Family Detached 1,402 DU 13,220
Condominium 348 DU 2,820
Apartment 619 DU 4,170
Commercial 17.5 TSF 1,650
Total Shea/Baker 21,860
Total Completed 27,550
TOTAL
Single Family Detached 2,280 DU 21,500
Condominium 811 DU 6,570
Apartment 901 DU 4,560
Commercial 30.1 TSF 2,840
Total 35,470
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 Item: 9
408
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
Project Number: 2042547210 4.3
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
2011 to 2012: +1.50%
2012 to 2013: +1.55%
2013 to 2014: +2.31%
2014 to 2015: +1.29%
2015 to 2016: +2.19%
2016 to 2017: +4.34%
2017 to 2018: +3.50%
2018 to 2019: +1.33%
2019 to 2020: +3.6%
2020 to 2021: +2.8%
2021 to 2022: +13.4%
2022 to 2023: +9.3%
2023 to 2024: +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.
Item: 9
409
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
Project Number: 2042547210 4.4
Table 4-3 LFTM Program Improvement 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 $ 2,226,2511 3 22 Bake Pkwy & Jeronimo Rd LF/Irvine $ 2,846,7882 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
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 Item: 9
410
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
Project Number: 2042547210 4.5
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
Cost Item
2018 5-Year Update
Cost Summary1
2024 5-Year Update
Cost Summary
Total Cost of Improvements $ 9,222,000 $ 11,733,603 Payments from NITM (Not assumed) $ 0 $ 0 Payments from FCPP (Not assumed) $ 0 $ 0 Administration & Environmental (25%) $ 2,306,000 $ 2,933,400 Total Allocated Costs $ 11,528,000 $ 14,667,003 Difference +27%
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 Unpaid Program Costs2 $ 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 Item: 9
411
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
Project Number: 2042547210 4.6
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.
Item: 9
412
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
Project Number: 2042547210 4.7
Table 4-5 LFTM Fee Calculation
Land Use
Land Use
Units
Land Use
Amount
ADT Trip
Generation
Trip
Length
Factor
Fee
Fee/ADT
Fee/Land
Use Unit
SDU DU 121 1,141 1.00 $2,519,251 $2,208 $20,820
Total LFTM Program Spent to Date and Cash Balance $12,147,752 Total LFTM Program $14,667,003
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 $2,208 and is applied to the remaining property as shown in the previously referenced Table 4-5.
Of the five participating properties, four have completed construction and have paid their share of costs under the applicable prior fee structure. KB Homes (Whisler Ridge) completed their payment obligations in 2011 under the prior fee structure and Shea/Baker (Baker Ranch), Pacific Heritage (Terisina), and IRWD (Serrano Summit), completed their payment obligations as of June 2024. Portola Center is the only remaining property with pending fee payment obligations for 121 units.
The LFTM Program cost shares for the participating properties are summarized in Table 4-6. Shown here are the land uses within each project area and the corresponding cost allocation to that land use Program. As shown in Table 4-6, four of the five properties have no unpaid units remaining.
Item: 9
413
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
Project Number: 2042547210 4.8
Table 4-6 LFTM Participating Properties LFTM Fee Calculation Land Use Description Unpaid Units Fee per Unit Cost ($) Shea/Baker (Baker Ranch)
Single Family Detached 0 DU NA2 $0
Condominium 0 DU NA2 $0
Apartment 0 DU NA2 $0
Commercial 0 TSF NA2 $0
Total $0
Portola Center
Single Family Detached 121 DU $20,8204 $2,519,251
Condominium 0 DU NA3 $0
Apartment 0 DU NA3 $0
Commercial 0 TSF NA3 $0
Total $0
Irvine Ranch Water District (Serrano Summit)
Single Family Detached 0 DU NA3 $0
Condominium Detached (DU) 0 DU NA3 $0
Condominium Attached (DU) 0 DU NA3 $0
Multi-family Attached (DU) 0 DU NA3 $0
Total $0
KB Homes (Whisler Ridge)
Single Family Detached 0 DU NA1 $0
Pacific Heritage (The Pinnacle at Serrano Highlands)
Single Family Detached 0 DU NA2 $0
Total
Single Family Detached 121 DU $20,8204 $2,519,251
Condominium 0 DU -- $0
Apartment 0 DU -- $0
Commercial 0 TSF -- $0
Total $2,519,251
Abbreviations: DU – Dwelling Unit; TSF – Thousand Square Feet 1 All payment obligations for this participating property were completed in 2011 under the prior fee structure. 2 All payment obligations for this participating property were paid before June 30, 2019 under a prior fee structure. 3 All 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.
Item: 9
414
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 4 Cost Allocations and LFTM Fee Calculation
Project Number: 2042547210 4.9
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 Cost
Portola Center 1,141 $2,519,251
Total Remaining Unpaid 1,141 $2,519,251
LFTM Program Spent to Date and Cash Balance to Date $12,147,752 Total LFTM Program $14,667,003
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.
Item: 9
415
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update 5 References
Project Number: 2042547210 5.1
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 7th 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.
Item: 9
416
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update ICU Calculation Worksheets
Project Number: 2042547210 A.1
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 Item: 9
417
2 41
3937
36 3432
31 30
26 2322
17 14
12 10
125
117
105
IRVINE BLVD
LOSALISOS BLVD
LAKE FOREST DR
TRABUCO RD
GLENNRANCH RD
ALTON
PKWY
TOLEDO W Y
ROCKFIELD BLVD
DI MENSIO N DR
PORTOLA PKWY
SADDLEBACK
RANCH
RD
JERONIMO RD
IRVINE CENTER DR
T ECHNOLOGY DR
RANCHO PKWY
AVENIDA DE LA CARLOTAMOULTON PKWY
STA MARGARITA PKWY
PACIFICA
ADA
ALICIA
MERIDIAN
BAKE PKWY
COMMERCENTRE DR
SCIENTIFIC
W
AY
GATEWAY
EL TORO RD
ENTERPRISE DR
RIDGE ROUTE DR
PORTOLA PKWY
RANCHO PKWY
LAKE FOREST DR
ALTONPKWY
TECHNOLOGY DR
\\us0300-ppfss01\workgroup\2042\active\2042547200\gis\2024update\Figure1-2.mxd Legend
Pre-construction
Planning
Completed
Removed
241
5 Figure A-1
LFTM Program Status
A.2
LFTM PROGRAM
5-YEAR UPDATE
Item: 9
418
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update ICU Calculation Worksheets
Project Number: 2042547210 A.3
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)
Item: 9
419
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update ICU Calculation Worksheets
Project Number: 2042547210 A.4
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.
Item: 9
420
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 1 1700 70 .04 120 .07 │ │ NBL 1 1700 220 .13* 210 .12 │ │ NBT 2 3400 40 .01* 150 .04* │ │ NBT 2 3400 30 .01 260 .08* │ │ NBR f 350 460 │ │ NBR f 390 500 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 170 .10* 110 .06* │ │ SBL 1 1700 200 .12 140 .08* │ │ SBT 2 3400 140 .04 60 .02 │ │ SBT 2 3400 290 .09* 100 .03 │ │ SBR d 1700 10 .01 10 .01 │ │ SBR d 1700 30 .02 20 .01 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 10 .00 10 .00 │ │ EBL 2 3400 20 .01 30 .01 │ │ EBT 2 3400 270 .08* 150 .04* │ │ EBT 2 3400 370 .11* 310 .09* │ │ EBR f 120 70 │ │ EBR f 210 210 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 480 .14* 360 .11* │ │ WBL 2 3400 360 .11* 430 .13* │ │ WBT 3 5100 130 .03 150 .03 │ │ WBT 3 5100 400 .08 160 .03 │ │ WBR f 110 140 │ │ WBR f 150 210 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .38 .30 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .49 .43
A.5
Item: 9
421
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 1 1700 50 .03 180 .11* │ │ NBL 1 1700 110 .06 170 .10 │ │ NBT 1.5 5100 250 {.07}* 180 {.06} │ │ NBT 1.5 5100 280 {.09}* 240 {.07}* │ │ NBR 1.5 140 270 │ │ NBR 1.5 300 300 {.05} │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 150 .09* 160 .09 │ │ SBL 1 1700 290 .17* 340 .20* │ │ SBT 2 3400 380 .11 200 .06* │ │ SBT 2 3400 380 .11 230 .07 │ │ SBR d 1700 300 .18 170 .10 │ │ SBR d 1700 230 .14 60 .04 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 280 .08* 230 .07* │ │ EBL 2 3400 350 .10* 160 .05* │ │ EBT 3 5100 440 .09 670 .13 │ │ EBT 3 5100 420 .08 680 .13 │ │ EBR d 1700 60 .04 100 .06 │ │ EBR d 1700 50 .03 130 .08 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 280 .08 350 .10 │ │ WBL 2 3400 360 .11 490 .14 │ │ WBT 2 3400 520 .15* 620 .18* │ │ WBT 2 3400 310 .09* 860 .25* │ │ WBR d 1700 70 .04 30 .02 │ │ WBR d 1700 130 .08 80 .05 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .44 .47 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .50 .62
A.6
Item: 9
422
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 1 1700 50 .03 80 .05 │ │ NBL 1 1700 130 .08* 260 .15* │ │ NBT 2 3400 140 .04* 180 .05* │ │ NBT 2 3400 210 .06 320 .09 │ │ NBR d 1700 150 .09 180 .11 │ │ NBR d 1700 330 .19 470 .28 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 200 .12* 180 .11* │ │ SBL 1 1700 200 .12 160 .09 │ │ SBT 2 3400 160 .05 180 .05 │ │ SBT 2 3400 360 .11* 300 .09* │ │ SBR d 1700 10 .01 30 .02 │ │ SBR d 1700 20 .01 30 .02 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 20 .01 20 .01 │ │ EBL 2 3400 30 .01 10 .00 │ │ EBT 3 5100 600 .12* 940 .18* │ │ EBT 3 5100 780 .15* 990 .19* │ │ EBR d 1700 80 .05 90 .05 │ │ EBR d 1700 240 .14 290 .17 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 200 .06* 190 .06* │ │ WBL 2 3400 500 .15* 390 .11* │ │ WBT 3 5100 810 .16 900 .18 │ │ WBT 3 5100 740 .15 1200 .24 │ │ WBR d 1700 240 .14 140 .08 │ │ WBR d 1700 240 .14 150 .09 │ │ │ │ │ │ Right Turn Adjustment NBR .01* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment NBR .01* NBR .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .39 .46 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .55 .64
A.7
Item: 9
423
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 1 1700 70 .04 90 .05 │ │ NBL 1 1700 70 .04 80 .05 │ │ NBT 2 3400 40 .02* 40 .02* │ │ NBT 2 3400 80 .05* 80 .05* │ │ NBR 0 0 60 .04 70 .04 │ │ NBR 0 0 100 .06 140 .08 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 2 3400 340 .10* 250 .07* │ │ SBL 2 3400 860 .25* 690 .20* │ │ SBT 2 3400 70 .02 30 .01 │ │ SBT 2 3400 140 .04 70 .02 │ │ SBR f 630 480 │ │ SBR f 750 670 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 290 .09* 730 .21* │ │ EBL 2 3400 310 .09* 820 .24* │ │ EBT 3 5100 570 .11 870 .17 │ │ EBT 3 5100 880 .17 1160 .23 │ │ EBR 1 1700 90 .05 80 .05 │ │ EBR 1 1700 110 .06 80 .05 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 140 .04 70 .02 │ │ WBL 2 3400 230 .07 110 .03 │ │ WBT 3 5100 750 .15* 690 .14* │ │ WBT 3 5100 890 .17* 1020 .20* │ │ WBR 1 1700 290 .17 270 .16 │ │ WBR 1 1700 790 .46 930 .55 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment WBR .04* WBR .15* │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for WBR │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for WBR │ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .41 .49 └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .65 .89
A.8
Item: 9
424
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 2 3400 260 .08 130 .04* │ │ NBL 2 3400 330 .10* 120 .04 │ │ NBT 3 5100 850 .17* 750 .15 │ │ NBT 3 5100 1240 .24 1330 .26* │ │ NBR f 80 120 │ │ NBR f 80 100 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 2 3400 120 .04* 210 .06 │ │ SBL 2 3400 220 .06 370 .11* │ │ SBT 3 5100 670 .13 900 .18* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1250 .25* 1420 .28 │ │ SBR f 190 110 │ │ SBR f 350 270 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 1 1700 100 .06* 130 .08* │ │ EBL 1 1700 380 .22* 440 .26* │ │ EBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBR f 180 270 │ │ EBR f 200 260 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 160 .05 130 .04 │ │ WBL 2 3400 220 .06 160 .05 │ │ WBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBR f 230 180 │ │ WBR f 310 280 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .32 .35 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .62 .68
A.9
Item: 9
425
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 1 1700 110 .06* 160 .09* │ │ NBL 1 1700 350 .21* 370 .22* │ │ NBT 3 5100 380 .07 780 .15 │ │ NBT 3 5100 520 .10 1050 .21 │ │ NBR f 80 150 │ │ NBR f 120 10 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 40 .02 60 .04 │ │ SBL 1 1700 60 .04 80 .05 │ │ SBT 3 5100 560 .11* 520 .10* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1040 .20* 710 .14* │ │ SBR f 190 200 │ │ SBR f 680 480 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 130 .04 210 .06* │ │ EBL 2 3400 380 .11* 600 .18* │ │ EBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBR f 320 90 │ │ EBR f 540 340 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 250 .07* 60 .02 │ │ WBL 2 3400 10 .00 50 .01 │ │ WBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBR f 40 50 │ │ WBR f 80 40 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .29 .30 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .57 .59
A.10
Item: 9
426
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 2 3400 120 .04* 160 .05* │ │ NBL 2 3400 130 .04 230 .07 │ │ NBT 2 3400 490 .14 640 .19 │ │ NBT 2 3400 960 .28* 1330 .39* │ │ NBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ SBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ SBT 2 3400 440 .13* 540 .16* │ │ SBT 2 3400 810 .24 910 .27 │ │ SBR 1 1700 80 .05 120 .07 │ │ SBR 1 1700 540 .32 450 .26 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment SBR .08* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .22 .26 └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .41 .44
A.11
Item: 9
427
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 VOL V/C │ │ │ │ │ │ NBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBT 2 3400 510 .15* 720 .21* │ │ NBT 2 3400 840 .25 1290 .38* │ │ NBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ SBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ SBT 2 3400 440 .13 540 .16 │ │ SBT 2 3400 860 .25* 980 .29 │ │ SBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ SBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 100 .03* 80 .02* │ │ EBL 2 3400 340 .10* 370 .11* │ │ EBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBR 1 1700 160 .09 100 .06 │ │ EBR 1 1700 190 .11 120 .07 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ │ │ │ │ Right Turn Adjustment EBR .04* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment EBR .01* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .27 .28 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .41 .54
A.12
Item: 9
428
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 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBT 2 3400 560 .16* 780 .23* │ │ NBT 2 3400 690 .20* 890 .26* │ │ NBR d 1700 290 .17 490 .29 │ │ NBR d 1700 430 .25 720 .42 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 90 .05* 210 .12* │ │ SBL 1 1700 180 .11* 350 .21* │ │ SBT 2 3400 660 .19 610 .18 │ │ SBT 2 3400 800 .24 720 .21 │ │ SBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ SBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 370 .11* 300 .09* │ │ WBL 2 3400 570 .17* 480 .14* │ │ WBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBR 2 3400 90 .03 180 .05 │ │ WBR 2 3400 140 .04 300 .09 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment NBR .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .37 .49 └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .53 .71
A.13
Item: 9
429
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 1 1700 130 .08* 170 .10 │ │ NBL 1 1700 70 .04 170 .10 │ │ NBT 2 3400 450 .13 600 .18* │ │ NBT 2 3400 600 .18* 850 .25* │ │ NBR d 1700 150 .09 280 .16 │ │ NBR d 1700 230 .14 270 .16 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 100 .06 170 .10* │ │ SBL 1 1700 230 .14* 320 .19* │ │ SBT 2 3400 520 .15* 550 .16 │ │ SBT 2 3400 710 .21 670 .20 │ │ SBR d 1700 50 .03 60 .04 │ │ SBR d 1700 160 .09 220 .13 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 1 1700 20 .01 20 .01 │ │ EBL 1 1700 80 .05* 180 .11 │ │ EBT 2 3400 260 .09* 530 .20* │ │ EBT 2 3400 410 .14 940 .31* │ │ EBR 0 0 50 140 │ │ EBR 0 0 50 100 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 220 .06* 170 .05* │ │ WBL 2 3400 240 .07 290 .09* │ │ WBT 2 3400 370 .11 330 .10 │ │ WBT 2 3400 580 .17* 490 .14 │ │ WBR 1 1700 40 .02 80 .05 │ │ WBR 1 1700 140 .08 190 .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 1 1700 70 .04 170 .10 │ │ NBT 2 3400 600 .18* 850 .25* │ │ NBR d 1700 230 .14 270 .16 │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 230 .14* 320 .19* │ │ SBT 2 3400 710 .21 670 .20 │ │ SBR d 1700 160 .09 220 .13 │ │ │ │ EBL 1 1700 80 .05* 180 .11 │ │ EBT 2 3400 410 .12 940 .28* │ │ EBR d 1700 50 .03 100 .06 │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 240 .07 290 .09* │ │ WBT 2 3400 580 .17* 490 .14 │ │ WBR 1 1700 140 .08 190 .11 │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .59 .86
A.14
Item: 9
430
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 1 1700 170 .10* 120 .07* │ │ NBL 1 1700 310 .18* 330 .19* │ │ NBT 2 3400 710 .21 1010 .30 │ │ NBT 2 3400 910 .27 1270 .37 │ │ NBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBR 1 1700 380 .22 120 .07 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ SBL 1 1700 150 .09 70 .04 │ │ SBT 2 3400 830 .24* 840 .25* │ │ SBT 2 3400 1060 .31* 1050 .31* │ │ SBR 1 1700 200 .12 140 .08 │ │ SBR 1 1700 280 .16 180 .11 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 150 .04* 200 .06* │ │ EBL 2 3400 200 .06 340 .10* │ │ EBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBT 1 1700 360 .21* 60 .04 │ │ EBR 1 1700 140 .08 130 .08 │ │ EBR d 1700 350 .21 370 .22 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBL 2 3400 80 .02* 300 .09 │ │ WBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBT 1 1700 70 .04 280 .16* │ │ WBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBR 1 1700 50 .03 140 .08 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .43 .43 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .77 .81
A.15
Item: 9
431
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 1 1700 250 .15* 270 .16* │ │ NBL 2 3400 320 .09* 530 .16* │ │ NBT 3 5100 190 .04 420 .08 │ │ NBT 3 5100 210 .04 440 .09 │ │ NBR f 450 610 │ │ NBR f 450 530 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 40 .02 20 .01 │ │ SBL 2 3400 10 .00 30 .01 │ │ SBT 3 5100 530 .10* 210 .04* │ │ SBT 3 5100 590 .12* 200 .04* │ │ SBR 1 1700 230 .14 160 .09 │ │ SBR 2 3400 370 .11 220 .06 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 90 .03 290 .09 │ │ EBL 2 3400 170 .05 410 .12 │ │ EBT 3 5100 900 .18* 1420 .28* │ │ EBT 3 5100 1410 .28* 1850 .36* │ │ EBR 1 1700 280 .16 360 .21 │ │ EBR 1 1700 400 .24 600 .35 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 480 .14* 450 .13* │ │ WBL 2 3400 420 .12* 410 .12* │ │ WBT 4 6800 1320 .19 970 .14 │ │ WBT 4 6800 1690 .25 1410 .21 │ │ WBR d 1700 30 .02 50 .03 │ │ WBR d 1700 30 .02 50 .03 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .62 .66 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .66 .73
A.16
Item: 9
432
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 1 1700 80 .05* 70 .04 │ │ NBL 1 1700 220 .13* 130 .08* │ │ NBT 2 3400 740 .22 910 .27* │ │ NBT 2 3400 1000 .29 1240 .36 │ │ NBR d 1700 270 .16 130 .08 │ │ NBR d 1700 380 .22 380 .22 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 10 .01 10 .01* │ │ SBL 1 1700 10 .01 10 .01 │ │ SBT 2 3400 690 .20* 800 .24 │ │ SBT 2 3400 990 .29* 1090 .32* │ │ SBR d 1700 80 .05 130 .08 │ │ SBR d 1700 170 .10 240 .14 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 1 1700 100 .06 90 .05 │ │ EBL 1 1700 160 .09* 150 .09 │ │ EBT 2 3400 130 .06* 100 .05* │ │ EBT 2 3400 110 .06 290 .15* │ │ EBR 0 0 80 80 │ │ EBR 0 0 220 .13 230 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 1.5 130 280 │ │ WBL 1.5 380 400 .12* │ │ WBT 1.5 5100 90 .05* 210 .10* │ │ WBT 1.5 5100 240 .13* 160 .09 │ │ WBR 0 10 10 │ │ WBR 0 0 30 0 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .41 .48 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .69 .72
A.17
Item: 9
433
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 1 1700 290 .17* 290 .17* │ │ NBL 1 1700 240 .14* 240 .14 │ │ NBT 3 5100 1260 .25 1060 .21 │ │ NBT 3 5100 1830 .36 1720 .34* │ │ NBR 1 1700 140 .08 440 .26 │ │ NBR 1 1700 140 .08 530 .31 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 50 .03 210 .12 │ │ SBL 1 1700 100 .06 320 .19* │ │ SBT 3 5100 810 .16* 1090 .21* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1500 .29* 1680 .33 │ │ SBR 1 1700 60 .04 110 .06 │ │ SBR 1 1700 120 .07 190 .11 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 120 .04 110 .03 │ │ EBL 2 3400 210 .06* 260 .08 │ │ EBT 3 5100 240 .05* 410 .08* │ │ EBT 3 5100 280 .05 500 .10* │ │ EBR 1 1700 260 .15 340 .20 │ │ EBR 1 1700 170 .10 340 .20 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 530 .16* 330 .10* │ │ WBL 2 3400 430 .13 330 .10* │ │ WBT 3 5100 400 .08 410 .08 │ │ WBT 3 5100 670 .13* 480 .09 │ │ WBR 1 1700 120 .07 120 .07 │ │ WBR 1 1700 250 .15 210 .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 2 3400 240 .07 240 .07 │ │ NBT 3 5100 1830 .36* 1720 .34* │ │ NBR 1 1700 140 .08 530 .31 │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 100 .06* 320 .19* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1500 .29 1680 .33 │ │ SBR 1 1700 120 .07 190 .11 │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 210 .06 260 .08 │ │ EBT 3 5100 280 .05* 500 .10* │ │ EBR 1 1700 170 .10 340 .20 │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 430 .13* 330 .10* │ │ WBT 4 6800 670 .10 480 .07 │ │ WBR d 1700 250 .15 210 .12 │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .65 .78
A.18
Item: 9
434
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 2 3400 200 .06* 240 .07 │ │ NBL 2 3400 190 .06* 250 .07 │ │ NBT 3 5100 670 .13 880 .17* │ │ NBT 3 5100 800 .16 1090 .21* │ │ NBR 1 1700 160 .09 450 .26 │ │ NBR 1 1700 190 .11 490 .29 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 2 3400 310 .09 330 .10* │ │ SBL 2 3400 400 .12 350 .10* │ │ SBT 3 5100 970 .21* 760 .17 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1300 .29* 880 .20 │ │ SBR 0 0 90 110 │ │ SBR 0 0 190 160 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 170 .05 300 .09 │ │ EBL 2 3400 220 .06 410 .12 │ │ EBT 3 5100 520 .10* 720 .14* │ │ EBT 3 5100 630 .12* 930 .18* │ │ EBR 1 1700 230 .14 120 .07 │ │ EBR 1 1700 230 .14 120 .07 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 420 .12* 230 .07* │ │ WBL 2 3400 490 .14* 280 .08* │ │ WBT 3 5100 520 .10 520 .10 │ │ WBT 3 5100 670 .13 620 .12 │ │ WBR 1 1700 350 .21 320 .19 │ │ WBR 1 1700 320 .19 380 .22 │ │ │ │ │ │ Right Turn Adjustment NBR .04* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment NBR .02* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .54 .57 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .66 .64
A.19
Item: 9
435
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 1 1700 180 .11* 170 .10* │ │ NBL 1 1700 270 .16* 210 .12* │ │ NBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBR 1 1700 230 .14 220 .13 │ │ NBR 1 1700 320 .19 430 .25 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ SBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ SBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ SBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ SBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ SBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBT 3 5100 750 .15* 1380 .27* │ │ EBT 3 5100 810 .16* 1520 .30* │ │ EBR d 1700 250 .15 140 .08 │ │ EBR d 1700 410 .24 290 .17 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 1 1700 150 .09* 110 .06* │ │ WBL 1 1700 290 .17* 150 .09* │ │ WBT 3 5100 1040 .20 860 .17 │ │ WBT 3 5100 1140 .22 1020 .20 │ │ WBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment NBR .06* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .40 .48 └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .54 .62
A.20
Item: 9
436
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 2 3400 220 .06* 300 .09* │ │ NBL 2 3400 130 .04* 290 .09* │ │ NBT 3 5100 670 .13 1030 .20 │ │ NBT 3 5100 770 .15 1110 .22 │ │ NBR 1 1700 190 .11 250 .15 │ │ NBR 1 1700 180 .11 250 .15 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 2 3400 230 .07 240 .07 │ │ SBL 2 3400 290 .09 310 .09 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1560 .31* 930 .18* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1780 .35* 1100 .22* │ │ SBR 1 1700 260 .15 160 .09 │ │ SBR 1 1700 580 .34 260 .15 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 200 .06 340 .10 │ │ EBL 2 3400 310 .09* 430 .13 │ │ EBT 3 5100 430 .13* 810 .21* │ │ EBT 3 5100 530 .13 1020 .26* │ │ EBR 0 0 220 .13 270 │ │ EBR 0 0 140 290 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 270 .08* 160 .05* │ │ WBL 2 3400 270 .08 160 .05* │ │ WBT 3 5100 600 .12 470 .09 │ │ WBT 3 5100 630 .12* 560 .11 │ │ WBR 1 1700 170 .10 190 .11 │ │ WBR 1 1700 200 .12 230 .14 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for SBR NBR │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for SBR NBR │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .63 .58 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .65 .67
A.21
Item: 9
437
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 1 1700 210 .12* 50 .03 │ │ NBL 1 1700 180 .11* 120 .07* │ │ NBT 3 5100 1570 .31 1690 .33* │ │ NBT 3 5100 1990 .39 2280 .45 │ │ NBR d 1700 70 .04 240 .14 │ │ NBR d 1700 100 .06 310 .18 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 50 .03 60 .04* │ │ SBL 1 1700 80 .05 80 .05 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1530 .30* 1650 .32 │ │ SBT 3 5100 2060 .40* 2220 .44* │ │ SBR d 1700 100 .06 40 .02 │ │ SBR d 1700 110 .06 40 .02 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 30 .01 80 .02 │ │ EBL 2 3400 40 .01* 150 .04 │ │ EBT 2 3400 40 .01* 140 .04* │ │ EBT 2 3400 70 .02 370 .11* │ │ EBR 1 1700 40 .02 160 .09 │ │ EBR 1 1700 60 .04 190 .11 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 1 1700 210 .12* 60 .04* │ │ WBL 1 1700 130 .08 80 .05* │ │ WBT 2 3400 150 .07 40 .02 │ │ WBT 2 3400 400 .16* 80 .05 │ │ WBR 0 0 100 90 .05 │ │ WBR 0 0 150 130 .08 │ │ │ │ │ │ Right Turn Adjustment EBR .01* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .73 .72 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .60 .51
A.22
Item: 9
438
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 1 1700 50 .03* 70 .04 │ │ NBL 1 1700 100 .06* 130 .08 │ │ NBT 3 5100 860 .17 1590 .31* │ │ NBT 3 5100 1010 .20 1870 .37* │ │ NBR d 1700 90 .05 130 .08 │ │ NBR d 1700 120 .07 160 .09 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 50 .03 30 .02* │ │ SBL 1 1700 50 .03 40 .02* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1420 .28* 900 .18 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1670 .33* 1060 .21 │ │ SBR d 1700 60 .04 30 .02 │ │ SBR d 1700 150 .09 30 .02 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 1 1700 30 .02 70 .04 │ │ EBL 1 1700 40 .02 70 .04 │ │ EBT 2 3400 120 .06* 180 .07* │ │ EBT 2 3400 180 .10* 360 .15* │ │ EBR 0 0 90 60 │ │ EBR 0 0 150 140 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 1 1700 160 .09* 60 .04* │ │ WBL 1 1700 210 .12* 80 .05* │ │ WBT 2 3400 180 .08 90 .04 │ │ WBT 2 3400 310 .12 110 .04 │ │ WBR 0 0 90 40 │ │ WBR 0 0 90 40 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .51 .49 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .66 .64
A.23
Item: 9
439
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 1 1700 50 .03 20 .01 │ │ NBL 1 1700 80 .05 40 .02 │ │ NBT 2 3400 200 .10* 230 .08* │ │ NBT 2 3400 370 .17* 360 .12* │ │ NBR 0 0 130 40 │ │ NBR 0 0 220 60 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 120 .07* 60 .04* │ │ SBL 1 1700 210 .12* 80 .05* │ │ SBT 2 3400 330 .12 190 .07 │ │ SBT 2 3400 580 .22 370 .12 │ │ SBR 0 0 90 40 │ │ SBR 0 0 160 50 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 1 1700 40 .02* 40 .02 │ │ EBL 1 1700 50 .03 120 .07 │ │ EBT 2 3400 180 .06 230 .07* │ │ EBT 2 3400 220 .09* 320 .10* │ │ EBR 0 0 40 10 │ │ EBR 0 0 70 20 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 1 1700 90 .05 30 .02* │ │ WBL 1 1700 150 .09* 50 .03* │ │ WBT 2 3400 230 .09* 110 .05 │ │ WBT 2 3400 280 .10 140 .06 │ │ WBR 0 0 60 70 │ │ WBR 0 0 60 70 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .33 .26 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .52 .35
A.24
Item: 9
440
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 1 1700 140 .08* 80 .05 │ │ NBL 1 1700 140 .08* 80 .05 │ │ NBT 3 5100 970 .19 1570 .31* │ │ NBT 3 5100 940 .18 1680 .33* │ │ NBR d 1700 10 .01 20 .01 │ │ NBR d 1700 0 .00 30 .02 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 10 .01 10 .01* │ │ SBL 1 1700 20 .01 20 .01* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1780 .35* 1310 .26 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1920 .38* 1380 .27 │ │ SBR d 1700 230 .14 50 .03 │ │ SBR d 1700 260 .15 80 .05 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 1.5 110 150 │ │ EBL 1.5 210 250 │ │ EBT 0.5 3400 10 .04* 20 .05* │ │ EBT 0.5 3400 40 .07* 50 .09* │ │ EBR 1 1700 200 .12 120 .07 │ │ EBR 1 1700 260 .15 130 .08 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 0 0 20 10 │ │ WBL 0 0 20 10 │ │ WBT 1 1700 10 .02* 10 .02* │ │ WBT 1 1700 10 .02* 20 .02* │ │ WBR 0 0 10 10 │ │ WBR 0 0 10 10 │ │ │ │ │ │ Right Turn Adjustment EBR .02* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment EBR .02* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .56 .44 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .62 .50
A.25
Item: 9
441
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 1 1700 180 .11* 60 .04 │ │ NBL 1 1700 210 .12* 50 .03 │ │ NBT 3 5100 1710 .34 1740 .34* │ │ NBT 3 5100 2150 .42 2280 .45* │ │ NBR d 1700 90 .05 280 .16 │ │ NBR d 1700 100 .06 310 .18 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 60 .04 160 .09* │ │ SBL 1 1700 80 .05 230 .14* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1610 .32* 1700 .33 │ │ SBT 3 5100 2100 .41* 2190 .43 │ │ SBR d 1700 100 .06 40 .02 │ │ SBR d 1700 150 .09 80 .05 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 30 .01 110 .03 │ │ EBL 2 3400 60 .02 240 .07 │ │ EBT 2 3400 70 .02* 380 .11* │ │ EBT 2 3400 80 .02* 490 .14* │ │ EBR 1 1700 50 .03 200 .12 │ │ EBR 1 1700 50 .03 160 .09 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 1 1700 260 .15* 110 .06* │ │ WBL 1 1700 260 .15* 90 .05* │ │ WBT 2 3400 230 .10 160 .08 │ │ WBT 2 3400 300 .14 210 .10 │ │ WBR 0 0 110 100 │ │ WBR 0 0 160 130 │ │ │ │ │ │ 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 2 3400 210 .06* 50 .01 │ │ NBT 3 5100 2150 .42 2280 .45* │ │ NBR d 1700 100 .06 310 .18 │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 80 .05 230 .14* │ │ SBT 3 5100 2100 .41* 2190 .43 │ │ SBR d 1700 150 .09 80 .05 │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 60 .02* 240 .07 │ │ EBT 2 3400 80 .02 490 .14* │ │ EBR 1 1700 50 .03 160 .09 │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 260 .08 90 .03* │ │ WBT 2 3400 300 .09* 210 .06 │ │ WBR d 1700 160 .09 130 .08 │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .63 .81
A.26
Item: 9
442
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 1 1700 50 .03* 80 .05 │ │ NBL 1 1700 60 .04* 90 .05 │ │ NBT 3 5100 790 .15 1510 .30* │ │ NBT 3 5100 950 .19 1810 .35* │ │ NBR 1 1700 150 .09 250 .15 │ │ NBR 1 1700 190 .11 290 .17 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 130 .08 60 .04* │ │ SBL 1 1700 180 .11 110 .06* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1380 .27* 810 .16 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1670 .33* 980 .19 │ │ SBR 1 1700 150 .09 150 .09 │ │ SBR 1 1700 170 .10 180 .11 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 1 1700 80 .05* 220 .13 │ │ EBL 1 1700 100 .06* 260 .15 │ │ EBT 2 3400 170 .06 550 .18* │ │ EBT 2 3400 170 .06 640 .23* │ │ EBR 0 0 30 60 │ │ EBR 0 0 30 130 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 1 1700 100 .06 100 .06* │ │ WBL 1 1700 100 .06 130 .08* │ │ WBT 2 3400 300 .13* 260 .10 │ │ WBT 2 3400 370 .16* 300 .12 │ │ WBR 0 0 130 70 │ │ WBR 0 0 160 110 │ │ │ │ │ │ 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 1 1700 60 .04* 90 .05 │ │ NBT 3 5100 950 .19 1810 .35* │ │ NBR 1 1700 190 .11 290 .17 │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 180 .11 110 .06* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1670 .33* 980 .19 │ │ SBR 1 1700 170 .10 180 .11 │ │ │ │ EBL 1 1700 100 .06* 260 .15* │ │ EBT 2 3400 170 .05 640 .19 │ │ EBR d 1700 30 .02 130 .08 │ │ │ │ WBL 1 1700 100 .06 130 .08 │ │ WBT 2 3400 370 .16* 300 .12* │ │ WBR 0 0 160 110 │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .64 .73
A.27
Item: 9
443
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 1 1700 70 .04 40 .02 │ │ NBL 1 1700 130 .08* 60 .04 │ │ NBT 2 3400 190 .06* 170 .05* │ │ NBT 2 3400 350 .10 290 .09* │ │ NBR d 1700 130 .08 100 .06 │ │ NBR d 1700 150 .09 30 .02 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 120 .07* 50 .03* │ │ SBL 1 1700 130 .08 150 .09* │ │ SBT 2 3400 280 .08 150 .04 │ │ SBT 2 3400 490 .14* 290 .09 │ │ SBR d 1700 150 .09 40 .02 │ │ SBR d 1700 310 .18 40 .02 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 1 1700 110 .06* 60 .04 │ │ EBL 1 1700 130 .08* 110 .06 │ │ EBT 2 3400 340 .13 640 .20* │ │ EBT 2 3400 360 .15 700 .23* │ │ EBR 0 0 90 40 │ │ EBR 0 0 140 70 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 1 1700 100 .06 60 .04* │ │ WBL 1 1700 150 .09 40 .02* │ │ WBT 2 3400 630 .21* 340 .12 │ │ WBT 2 3400 560 .22* 420 .14 │ │ WBR 0 0 100 70 │ │ WBR 0 0 180 70 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .45 .37 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .57 .48
A.28
Item: 9
444
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 1 1700 80 .05* 120 .07 │ │ NBL 1 1700 70 .04 140 .08 │ │ NBT 3 5100 870 .17 1390 .27* │ │ NBT 3 5100 870 .17* 1600 .31* │ │ NBR 1 1700 290 .17 270 .16 │ │ NBR 1 1700 340 .20 290 .17 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 260 .15 220 .13* │ │ SBL 1 1700 370 .22* 110 .06* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1500 .29* 1060 .21 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1590 .31 1120 .22 │ │ SBR d 1700 250 .15 70 .04 │ │ SBR d 1700 210 .12 40 .02 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 1 1700 110 .06 180 .11 │ │ EBL 1 1700 80 .05 20 .01 │ │ EBT 2 3400 320 .14* 560 .19* │ │ EBT 2 3400 430 .17* 790 .26* │ │ EBR 0 0 140 90 │ │ EBR 0 0 160 100 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 310 .09* 240 .07* │ │ WBL 2 3400 330 .10* 340 .10* │ │ WBT 2 3400 410 .12 290 .09 │ │ WBT 2 3400 530 .16 390 .11 │ │ WBR 1 1700 190 .11 260 .15 │ │ WBR 1 1700 200 .12 250 .15 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for NBR │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for NBR │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .62 .71 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .71 .78
A.29
Item: 9
445
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 1 1700 190 .11* 220 .13 │ │ NBL 1 1700 210 .12* 310 .18 │ │ NBT 3 5100 610 .12 1110 .22* │ │ NBT 3 5100 710 .14 1230 .24* │ │ NBR 1 1700 240 .14 220 .13 │ │ NBR 1 1700 250 .15 300 .18 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 210 .12 150 .09* │ │ SBL 1 1700 250 .15 160 .09* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1010 .20* 600 .12 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1280 .25* 650 .13 │ │ SBR 1 1700 270 .16 140 .08 │ │ SBR 1 1700 230 .14 160 .09 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 210 .06 290 .09 │ │ EBL 2 3400 220 .06 310 .09 │ │ EBT 2 3400 560 .16* 610 .18* │ │ EBT 2 3400 670 .20* 660 .19* │ │ EBR 1 1700 170 .10 160 .09 │ │ EBR 1 1700 320 .19 220 .13 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 200 .06* 260 .08* │ │ WBL 2 3400 240 .07* 340 .10* │ │ WBT 2 3400 460 .14 470 .14 │ │ WBT 2 3400 480 .14 510 .15 │ │ WBR 1 1700 90 .05 120 .07 │ │ WBR 1 1700 100 .06 130 .08 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .58 .62 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .69 .67
A.30
Item: 9
446
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 2 3400 40 .01* 50 .01 │ │ NBL 2 3400 50 .01* 10 .00 │ │ NBT 3 5100 730 .14 1490 .29* │ │ NBT 3 5100 870 .17 1760 .35* │ │ NBR 1 1700 170 .10 350 .21 │ │ NBR 1 1700 320 .19 510 .30 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 2 3400 130 .04 160 .05* │ │ SBL 2 3400 120 .04 250 .07* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1160 .23* 810 .16 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1430 .28* 980 .19 │ │ SBR 1 1700 90 .05 60 .04 │ │ SBR 1 1700 110 .06 80 .05 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 40 .01* 210 .06 │ │ EBL 2 3400 50 .01* 240 .07 │ │ EBT 2 3400 210 .06 670 .20* │ │ EBT 2 3400 240 .07 630 .19* │ │ EBR 1 1700 30 .02 80 .05 │ │ EBR 1 1700 10 .01 90 .05 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 240 .07 170 .05* │ │ WBL 2 3400 280 .08 250 .07* │ │ WBT 2 3400 480 .14* 270 .08 │ │ WBT 2 3400 490 .14* 340 .10 │ │ WBR 1 1700 150 .09 130 .08 │ │ WBR 1 1700 180 .11 170 .10 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for EBR │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for EBR │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .44 .64 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .49 .73
A.31
Item: 9
447
28. Ridge Route & 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 1 1700 50 .03 80 .05 │ │ NBL 1 1700 80 .05 100 .06 │ │ NBT 2 3400 150 .04* 160 .05* │ │ NBT 2 3400 280 .08* 220 .06* │ │ NBR d 1700 90 .05 130 .08 │ │ NBR d 1700 110 .06 130 .08 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 100 .06* 110 .06* │ │ SBL 1 1700 160 .09* 160 .09* │ │ SBT 2 3400 210 .06 120 .04 │ │ SBT 2 3400 350 .10 190 .06 │ │ SBR d 1700 90 .05 40 .02 │ │ SBR d 1700 240 .14 100 .06 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 1 1700 40 .02* 40 .02 │ │ EBL 1 1700 80 .05* 150 .09 │ │ EBT 2 3400 450 .13 1000 .29* │ │ EBT 2 3400 560 .16 1030 .30* │ │ EBR 1 1700 40 .02 40 .02 │ │ EBR 1 1700 70 .04 60 .04 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 1 1700 110 .06 70 .04* │ │ WBL 1 1700 100 .06 50 .03* │ │ WBT 2 3400 670 .20* 470 .14 │ │ WBT 2 3400 570 .17* 510 .15 │ │ WBR 1 1700 80 .05 70 .04 │ │ WBR 1 1700 140 .08 140 .08 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .37 .49 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .44 .53
A.32
Item: 9
448
29. El Toro & 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 2 3400 100 .03* 220 .06 │ │ NBL 2 3400 120 .04* 240 .07 │ │ NBT 3 5100 780 .15 1350 .26* │ │ NBT 3 5100 840 .16 1630 .32* │ │ NBR 1 1700 130 .08 330 .19 │ │ NBR 1 1700 150 .09 330 .19 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 2 3400 250 .07 290 .09* │ │ SBL 2 3400 210 .06 230 .07* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1310 .26* 1000 .20 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1520 .30* 1170 .23 │ │ SBR 1 1700 330 .19 150 .09 │ │ SBR 1 1700 220 .13 170 .10 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 230 .07* 230 .07 │ │ EBL 2 3400 250 .07* 170 .05 │ │ EBT 2 3400 350 .10 720 .21* │ │ EBT 2 3400 490 .14 930 .27* │ │ EBR 1 1700 180 .11 270 .16 │ │ EBR 1 1700 220 .13 340 .20 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 290 .09 270 .08* │ │ WBL 2 3400 410 .12 250 .07* │ │ WBT 2 3400 520 .15* 350 .10 │ │ WBT 2 3400 660 .19* 450 .13 │ │ WBR 1 1700 240 .14 190 .11 │ │ WBR 1 1700 90 .05 200 .12 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .56 .69 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .65 .78
A.33
Item: 9
449
30. Los Alisos & 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 1 1700 240 .14* 200 .12 │ │ NBL 2 3400 260 .08* 220 .06 │ │ NBT 3 5100 700 .14 1100 .22* │ │ NBT 3 5100 720 .14 1230 .24* │ │ NBR 1 1700 260 .15 290 .17 │ │ NBR 1 1700 290 .17 340 .20 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 250 .15 170 .10* │ │ SBL 2 3400 380 .11 200 .06* │ │ SBT 3 5100 890 .17* 660 .13 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1080 .21* 820 .16 │ │ SBR d 1700 240 .14 170 .10 │ │ SBR d 1700 400 .24 150 .09 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 1 1700 160 .09 270 .16 │ │ EBL 2 3400 190 .06 360 .11 │ │ EBT 2 3400 500 .20* 760 .29* │ │ EBT 2 3400 590 .23* 790 .29* │ │ EBR 0 0 180 210 │ │ EBR 0 0 200 200 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 1 1700 190 .11* 120 .07* │ │ WBL 1 1700 230 .14* 130 .08* │ │ WBT 2 3400 450 .13 420 .12 │ │ WBT 2 3400 400 .12 500 .15 │ │ WBR 1 1700 120 .07 130 .08 │ │ WBR 1 1700 220 .13 190 .11 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .67 .73 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .71 .72
A.34
Item: 9
450
31. Lake Forest & Rockfield
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 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 2 3400 460 .14* 380 .11 │ │ NBL 2 3400 440 .13* 370 .11 │ │ NBT 3 5100 940 .18 1780 .35* │ │ NBT 3 5100 1210 .24 2290 .45* │ │ NBR 1 1700 260 .15 550 .32 │ │ NBR 1 1700 370 .22 610 .36 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 2 3400 110 .03 170 .05* │ │ SBL 2 3400 350 .10 350 .10* │ │ SBT 4 6800 1230 .19* 1040 .17 │ │ SBT 4 6800 1720 .29* 1390 .23 │ │ SBR 0 0 90 90 │ │ SBR 0 0 260 180 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 60 .02 150 .04 │ │ EBL 2 3400 140 .04 360 .11* │ │ EBT 2 3400 130 .04* 300 .09* │ │ EBT 2 3400 240 .07* 290 .09 │ │ EBR 2 3400 290 .09 490 .14 │ │ EBR 2 3400 280 .08 480 .14 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 420 .12* 380 .11* │ │ WBL 2 3400 440 .13* 390 .11 │ │ WBT 2 3400 240 .07 190 .06 │ │ WBT 2 3400 430 .13 330 .10* │ │ WBR 1 1700 90 .05 130 .08 │ │ WBR 1 1700 220 .13 360 .21 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment WBR .03* │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for EBR │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for EBR │ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .54 .65 └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .67 .84
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 2040 General Plan with LFTM Program Imp │ │ 2040 General Plan w/ alt. LFTM Program Imp │ │ │ │ │ │ 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 2 3400 440 .13* 370 .11 │ │ NBL 2 3400 440 .13* 370 .11 │ │ NBT 3 5100 1210 .24 2290 .45* │ │ NBT 3 5100 1210 .24 2290 .45* │ │ NBR 1 1700 370 .22 610 .36 │ │ NBR 1 1700 370 .22 610 .36 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 2 3400 350 .10 350 .10* │ │ SBL 2 3400 350 .10 350 .10* │ │ SBT 4 6800 1720 .29* 1390 .23 │ │ SBT 4 6800 1720 .29* 1390 .23 │ │ SBR 0 0 260 180 │ │ SBR 0 0 260 180 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 140 .04 360 .11* │ │ EBL 2 3400 140 .04 360 .11* │ │ EBT 2 3400 240 .07* 290 .09 │ │ EBT 2 3400 240 .07* 290 .09 │ │ EBR 2 3400 280 .08 480 .14 │ │ EBR 2 3400 280 .08 480 .14 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2.5 440 390 │ │ WBL 2 3400 440 .13* 390 .11 │ │ WBT 1.5 6800 430 .13* 330 .11* │ │ WBT 2 3400 430 .13 330 .10* │ │ WBR 1 1700 220 .13 360 .21 │ │ WBR 1 1700 220 .13 360 .21 │ │ │ │ │ │ Right Turn Adjustment WBR .02* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment WBR .01* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for WBR EBR │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for EBR │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .67 .82 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .67 .84
A.35
Item: 9
451
31. Lake Forest & Rockfield
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 2040 General Plan (MPAH Network) w/ LFTM Progra │ │ │ │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │ │ │ NBL 2 3400 390 .11* 330 .10 │ │ NBT 3 5100 1110 .22 2230 .44* │ │ NBR 1 1700 220 .13 250 .15 │ │ │ │ SBL 2 3400 420 .12 440 .13* │ │ SBT 4 6800 1580 .27* 1290 .21 │ │ SBR 0 0 240 170 │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 140 .04* 290 .09 │ │ EBT 2 3400 260 .08 500 .15* │ │ EBR 2 3400 260 .08 420 .12 │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 330 .10 310 .09* │ │ WBT 2 3400 480 .14* 370 .11 │ │ WBR 1 1700 260 .15 420 .25 │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for WBR EBR │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .61 .86
A.36
Item: 9
452
32. Ridge Route & Rockfield
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 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 0.5 50 .03 30 .02* │ │ NBL 0.5 60 .04* 120 .07* │ │ NBT 1.5 3400 50 .03* 20 .01 │ │ NBT 1.5 3400 50 .03 20 .01 │ │ NBR 1 1700 30 .02 20 .01 │ │ NBR 1 1700 20 .01 70 .04 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 0.5 100 .06* 90 .05* │ │ SBL 0.5 120 .07* 100 .06* │ │ SBT 1.5 3400 30 .02 20 .01 │ │ SBT 1.5 3400 70 .04 70 .04 │ │ SBR d 1700 220 .13 110 .06 │ │ SBR d 1700 320 .19 190 .11 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 1 1700 60 .04* 230 .14 │ │ EBL 1 1700 70 .04 540 .32* │ │ EBT 2 3400 330 .10 820 .26* │ │ EBT 2 3400 600 .19* 940 .29 │ │ EBR 0 0 20 60 │ │ EBR 0 0 60 30 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 1 1700 10 .01 20 .01* │ │ WBL 1 1700 40 .02* 60 .04 │ │ WBT 2 3400 390 .13* 330 .12 │ │ WBT 2 3400 410 .14 490 .17* │ │ WBR 0 0 50 80 │ │ WBR 0 0 50 100 │ │ │ │ │ │ Right Turn Adjustment SBR .04* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment SBR .07* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Note: Assumes N/S Split Phasing │ │ Note: Assumes N/S Split Phasing │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .35 .39 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .44 .67
A.37
Item: 9
453
33. El Toro & Rockfield
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 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 2 3400 220 .06* 390 .11* │ │ NBL 2 3400 380 .11* 600 .18* │ │ NBT 4 6800 770 .11 1140 .17 │ │ NBT 4 6800 900 .13 1650 .24 │ │ NBR d 1700 120 .07 160 .09 │ │ NBR d 1700 160 .09 550 .32 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 2 3400 170 .05 190 .06 │ │ SBL 2 3400 170 .05 260 .08 │ │ SBT 4 6800 1340 .20* 1100 .18* │ │ SBT 4 6800 1820 .28* 1240 .20* │ │ SBR 0 0 50 90 │ │ SBR 0 0 110 90 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 90 .03 280 .08 │ │ EBL 2 3400 70 .02 170 .05 │ │ EBT 2 3400 200 .06* 420 .12* │ │ EBT 2 3400 260 .08* 250 .07* │ │ EBR f 180 230 │ │ EBR f 350 380 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 240 .07* 300 .09* │ │ WBL 2 3400 550 .16* 530 .16* │ │ WBT 2 3400 300 .09 250 .07 │ │ WBT 2 3400 270 .08 270 .08 │ │ WBR 1 1700 160 .09 150 .09 │ │ WBR 1 1700 170 .10 160 .09 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .44 .55 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .68 .66
A.38
Item: 9
454
34. Los Alisos & Rockfield
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 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 1 1700 230 .14* 250 .15* │ │ NBL 1 1700 300 .18* 340 .20* │ │ NBT 2 3400 900 .26 1270 .37 │ │ NBT 2 3400 860 .26 1180 .35 │ │ NBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBR 0 0 10 10 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 20 .01 20 .01 │ │ SBL 1 1700 30 .02 30 .02 │ │ SBT 2 3400 810 .36* 690 .29* │ │ SBT 2 3400 940 .42* 710 .29* │ │ SBR 0 0 410 290 │ │ SBR 0 0 480 260 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 1.5 270 330 │ │ EBL 1.5 360 540 │ │ EBT 0.5 3400 20 .09* 40 .11* │ │ EBT 0.5 3400 10 .11* 40 .17* │ │ EBR 1 1700 230 .14 250 .15 │ │ EBR 1 1700 260 .15 230 .14 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 0.5 10 10 │ │ WBL 0.5 10 10 │ │ WBT 1.5 3400 40 .02* 20 .02* │ │ WBT 1.5 3400 40 .02* 30 .02* │ │ WBR 0 30 30 │ │ WBR 0 30 40 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .66 .62 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .78 .73
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 2040 General Plan with LFTM Program Imp │ │ │ │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │ │ │ NBL 1 1700 300 .18* 340 .20* │ │ NBT 2 3400 860 .26 1180 .35 │ │ NBR 0 0 10 10 │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 30 .02 30 .02 │ │ SBT 2 3400 940 .28* 710 .21* │ │ SBR d 1700 480 .28 260 .15 │ │ │ │ EBL 1.5 360 540 │ │ EBT 0.5 3400 10 .11* 40 .17* │ │ EBR 1 1700 260 .15 230 .14 │ │ │ │ WBL 0.5 10 10 │ │ WBT 1.5 3400 40 .02* 30 .02* │ │ WBR 0 30 40 │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .64 .65
A.39
Item: 9
455
35. Lake Forest & I-5 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 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBT 4 6800 1340 .20 2480 .36* │ │ NBT 4 6800 1820 .27* 3110 .46* │ │ NBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ SBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1010 .20* 990 .19 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1250 .25 1080 .21 │ │ SBR f 930 910 │ │ SBR f 1210 1230 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 450 .13* 220 .06* │ │ WBL 2 3400 610 .18* 400 .12* │ │ WBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBR 2 3400 500 .15 440 .13 │ │ WBR 2 3400 610 .18 580 .17 │ │ │ │ │ │ Right Turn Adjustment WBR .02* WBR .07* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment WBR .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .40 .54 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .50 .68
A.40
Item: 9
456
36. Lake Forest & I-5/Carlota
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 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 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBL 0 0 0 0 │
│ NBT 4 6800 610 .10 1020 .17* │ │ NBT 4 6800 810 .13 1620 .26* │ │ NBR 0 0 50 120 │ │ NBR 0 0 60 170 │ │ │ │ │
│ SBL 2 3400 210 .06 210 .06* │ │ SBL 2 3400 310 .09 370 .11* │ │ SBT 3 5100 890 .17* 630 .12 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1380 .27* 880 .17 │ │ SBR f 360 360 │ │ SBR f 450 420 │
│ │ │ │
│ EBL 2.5 780 1460 │ │ EBL 2.5 1140 .22* 1710 .34* │ │ EBT 1.5 6800 320 .16* 540 .29* │ │ EBT 1.5 6800 310 .18 410 .24 │ │ EBR 1 1700 610 .36 460 .27 │ │ EBR 1 1700 590 .35 600 .35 │ │ │ │ │
│ WBL 1 1700 120 .07* 200 .12* │ │ WBL 1 1700 190 .11* 260 .15* │ │ WBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBT 0 0 0 0 │
│ WBR 2 3400 120 .04 250 .07 │ │ WBR 2 3400 250 .07 400 .12 │ │ │ │ │
│ Right Turn Adjustment EBR .20* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment EBR .13* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .65 .69 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .78 .91 ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 2040 General Plan with LFTM Program Imp │ │ 2040 General Plan w/ alt. LFTM Program Imp │ │ │ │ │
│ 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 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBL 0 0 0 0 │
│ NBT 4 6800 810 .13 1620 .26* │ │ NBT 4 6800 810 .13 1620 .26* │ │ NBR 0 0 60 170 │ │ NBR 0 0 60 170 │ │ │ │ │
│ SBL 2 3400 310 .09 370 .11* │ │ SBL 2 3400 310 .09 370 .11* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1380 .27* 880 .17 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1380 .27* 880 .17 │ │ SBR f 450 420 │ │ SBR f 450 420 │
│ │ │ │
│ EBL 3 5100 1140 .22* 1710 .34* │ │ EBL 2.5 1140 .22* 1710 .34* │ │ EBT 2 3400 310 .09 410 .12 │ │ EBT 1.5 6800 310 .18 410 .24 │ │ EBR 1 1700 590 .35 600 .35 │ │ EBR 1 1700 590 .35 600 .35 │ │ │ │ │
│ WBL 2 3400 190 .06 260 .08 │ │ WBL 1.5 190 .06* 260 │ │ WBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ WBT 0 5100 0 0 {.10}* │ │ WBR 2 3400 250 .07 400 .12 │ │ WBR 1.5 250 {.04} 400 │ │ │ │ │
│ Right Turn Adjustment EBR .19* WBR .01* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment EBR .13* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for WBR │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .73 .77 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .73 .86 A.41
Item: 9
457
37. Paseo De Valencia & Carlota
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 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 2 3400 120 .04* 180 .05* │ │ NBL 2 3400 100 .03* 150 .04 │ │ NBT 1 1700 30 .02 70 .04 │ │ NBT 1 1700 40 .02 90 .05* │ │ NBR 1 1700 20 .01 100 .06 │ │ NBR 1 1700 30 .02 130 .08 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 2.5 720 650 │ │ SBL 2.5 760 .22 980 │ │ SBT 1.5 6800 710 .21* 360 .15* │ │ SBT 1.5 6800 900 .27* 510 .22* │ │ SBR 0 30 30 │ │ SBR 0 30 20 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 2 3400 120 .04* 210 .06 │ │ EBL 2 3400 130 .04* 190 .06 │ │ EBT 2 3400 180 .05 470 .14* │ │ EBT 2 3400 280 .08 750 .22* │ │ EBR 1 1700 100 .06 300 .18 │ │ EBR 1 1700 80 .05 300 .18 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 1 1700 10 .01 30 .02* │ │ WBL 1 1700 10 .01 30 .02* │ │ WBT 2 3400 250 .07* 250 .07 │ │ WBT 2 3400 450 .13* 410 .12 │ │ WBR 1 1700 430 .25 340 .20 │ │ WBR 1 1700 580 .34 450 .26 │ │ │ │ │ │ Right Turn Adjustment WBR .02* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment WBR .01* NBR .01* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Note: Assumes N/S Split Phasing │ │ Note: Assumes N/S Split Phasing │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .43 .41 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .53 .57
A.42
Item: 9
458
38. El Toro & Bridger/I-5 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 1 1700 50 .03* 50 .03 │ │ NBL 1 1700 60 .04* 60 .04 │ │ NBT 2.5 6800 830 {.19} 1210 {.27}* │ │ NBT 2.5 6800 1070 {.22} 2310 {.45}* │ │ NBR 1.5 610 810 │ │ NBR 1.5 610 870 {.39} │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 0 0 10 40 {.02}* │ │ SBL 0 0 0 40 {.02}* │ │ SBT 5 8500 1790 .22* 1640 .21 │ │ SBT 5 8500 2970 .36* 2220 .28 │ │ SBR 0 0 80 90 │ │ SBR 0 0 90 110 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 1 1700 20 .01 60 .04* │ │ EBL 1 1700 30 .02* 80 .05* │ │ EBT 1 1700 10 .01* 10 .01 │ │ EBT 1 1700 10 .01 10 .01 │ │ EBR 1 1700 120 .07 120 .07 │ │ EBR 1 1700 170 .10 160 .09 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 1.5 390 310 │ │ WBL 1.5 340 .10* 300 │ │ WBT 0 5100 30 {.13}* 30 {.14}* │ │ WBT 0 5100 40 30 .16* │ │ WBR 1.5 310 450 │ │ WBR 1.5 360 {.10} 530 │ │ │ │ │ │ Right Turn Adjustment EBR .03* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment EBR .04* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for EBR │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for EBR │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .47 .52 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .61 .73
A.43
Item: 9
459
39. El Toro & Avd Carlota
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 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 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBT 4 6800 810 .12 1720 .25* │ │ NBT 4 6800 900 .13 2250 .33* │ │ NBR d 1700 40 .02 70 .04 │ │ NBR d 1700 40 .02 90 .05 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 2 3400 110 .03 260 .08* │ │ SBL 2 3400 120 .04 330 .10* │ │ SBT 3 5100 860 .17* 1050 .21 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1090 .21* 1270 .25 │ │ SBR 1 1700 600 .35 550 .32 │ │ SBR 1 1700 860 .51 740 .44 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 3 5100 580 .11* 640 .13* │ │ EBL 3 5100 750 .15* 1250 .25* │ │ EBT 2 3400 210 .06 420 .12 │ │ EBT 2 3400 210 .06 580 .17 │ │ EBR 1 1700 100 .06 120 .07 │ │ EBR 1 1700 70 .04 10 .01 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 0.5 20 40 │ │ WBL 0.5 30 70 │ │ WBT 0.5 1700 70 .05* 80 .07* │ │ WBT 0.5 1700 140 .10* 150 .13* │ │ WBR 2 3400 290 .09 400 .12 │ │ WBR 2 3400 290 .09 470 .14 │ │ │ │ │ │ Right Turn Adjustment SBR .07* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment SBR .15* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for SBR WBR │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for SBR WBR │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .45 .58 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .66 .86
A.44
Item: 9
460
40. Portola & 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 2 3400 620 .18* 490 .14* │ │ NBL 2 3400 820 .24* 740 .22* │ │ NBT 3 5100 1110 .22 880 .17 │ │ NBT 3 5100 1480 .29 1360 .27 │ │ NBR d 1700 10 .01 10 .01 │ │ NBR d 1700 0 .00 0 .00 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 2 3400 10 .00 30 .01 │ │ SBL 2 3400 10 .00 30 .01 │ │ SBT 3 5100 870 .17* 1160 .23* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1370 .27* 1530 .30* │ │ SBR 1 1700 130 .08 100 .06 │ │ SBR 1 1700 70 .04 50 .03 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 1.5 80 130 │ │ EBL 1.5 140 220 │ │ EBT 0.5 3400 10 .03* 30 .05* │ │ EBT 0.5 3400 10 .04* 30 .07* │ │ EBR f 390 810 │ │ EBR f 630 1240 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 1.5 10 10 .01 │ │ WBL 1.5 0 0 │ │ WBT 1 6800 10 .00* 20 .01* │ │ WBT 1 6800 20 .01* 20 .01* │ │ WBR 1.5 10 20 │ │ WBR 1.5 10 20 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ │ Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for SBR WBR │ │ Note: Assumes Right-Turn Overlap for SBR WBR │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .43 .48 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .61 .65
A.45
Item: 9
461
41. Alton & Rancho South
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 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 1 1700 80 .05* 130 .08 │ │ NBL 2 3400 80 .02* 150 .04 │ │ NBT 3 5100 520 .10 1000 .20* │ │ NBT 3 5100 820 .16 1390 .27* │ │ NBR 1 1700 140 .08 100 .06 │ │ NBR 1 1700 200 .12 150 .09 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 2 3400 120 .04 40 .01* │ │ SBL 2 3400 250 .07 70 .02* │ │ SBT 3 5100 980 .19* 590 .12 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1350 .26* 940 .18 │ │ SBR d 1700 40 .02 30 .02 │ │ SBR d 1700 50 .03 40 .02 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 1 1700 20 .01 20 .01 │ │ EBL 1 1700 30 .02 10 .01 │ │ EBT 2 3400 30 .01* 30 .01* │ │ EBT 2 3400 70 .02* 100 .03* │ │ EBR 1 1700 150 .09 140 .08 │ │ EBR 1 1700 160 .09 150 .09 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 1 1700 190 .11* 190 .11* │ │ WBL 1 1700 320 .19* 290 .17* │ │ WBT 2 3400 20 .01 30 .01 │ │ WBT 2 3400 70 .02 60 .02 │ │ WBR d 1700 30 .02 90 .05 │ │ WBR d 1700 90 .05 110 .06 │ │ │ │ │ │ Right Turn Adjustment EBR .04* │ │ Right Turn Adjustment EBR .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .45 .38 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .59 .54
A.46
Item: 9
462
42. Alton & 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 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ NBT 3 5100 540 .15 1120 .26* │ │ NBT 3 5100 780 .23* 1480 .39* │ │ NBR 0 0 250 190 │ │ NBR 0 0 460 .27 510 │ │ │ │ │ │ SBL 1 1700 90 .05 30 .02* │ │ SBL 1 1700 170 .10* 120 .07* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1190 .23* 790 .15 │ │ SBT 3 5100 1570 .31 1100 .22 │ │ SBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ SBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ │ │ │ │ EBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBL 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBT 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ EBR 0 0 0 0 │ │ │ │ │ │ WBL 1.5 170 .05* 360 .11* │ │ WBL 1.5 380 .11* 600 .18* │ │ WBT 0 5100 0 0 │ │ WBT 0 5100 0 0 │ │ WBR 1.5 30 100 .06 │ │ WBR 1.5 110 200 .12 │ │ │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .33 .44 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .49 .69
A.47
Item: 9
463
105. Alton & Irvine
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 2040 General Plan (MPAH Network) w/ LFTM Progra │ │ │ │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │ │ │ NBL 2 3400 130 .04* 490 .14 │ │ NBT 3 5100 550 .11 1360 .27* │ │ NBR f 40 100 │ │ │ │ SBL 2 3400 220 .06 90 .03* │ │ SBT 3 5100 1540 .30* 640 .13 │ │ SBR f 240 700 │ │ │ │ EBL 3 5100 460 .09* 280 .05* │ │ EBT 3 5100 600 .12 400 .08 │ │ EBR d 1700 480 .28 110 .06 │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 50 .01 90 .03 │ │ WBT 3 5100 350 .07* 640 .13* │ │ WBR 1 1700 50 .03 160 .09 │ │ │ │ Right Turn Adjustment EBR .10* │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .65 .53
A.48
Item: 9
464
125. Bake & Rockfield
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 2040 General Plan (MPAH Network) w/ LFTM Progra │ │ │ │ AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR │ │ LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C │ │ │ │ NBL 2 3400 200 .06* 70 .02 │ │ NBT 4 6800 2790 .41 3390 .50* │ │ NBR f 660 590 │ │ │ │ SBL 2 3400 80 .02 90 .03* │ │ SBT 4 6800 3070 .45* 2760 .41 │ │ SBR 1 1700 10 .01 10 .01 │ │ │ │ EBL 1 1700 10 .01 10 .01 │ │ EBT 2 3400 20 .01* 40 .01* │ │ EBR f 50 430 │ │ │ │ WBL 2 3400 290 .09* 840 .25* │ │ WBT 2 3400 60 .02 30 .01 │ │ WBR f 100 80 │ │ │ │ Clearance Interval .05* .05* │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .66 .84
A.49
Item: 9
465
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update LFTM Intersection Comparison Table
Project Number: 2042547210 B.1
Appendix B LFTM Intersection Comparison Table
The number of intersections with improvements funded by the LFTM Program has evolved over time as updated analyses have been prepared. Table B-1 provides a comparison that shows past, current, and proposed intersections improvement locations under the LFTM program.
Table B-1 LFTM Intersection Comparison Table
Intersection Ordinance 186
LFMC 7.19
2011 Baseline
Adjustment/
Ordinance 236
2014
5 Year
Update
2018
5 Year
Update
2024
Proposed
Update
Bake and Irvine/Trabuco
Bake and Portola (a) (a)
Lake Forest & Rancho (a)
El Toro & Portola/Santa
Margarita
(a)
Bake & Jeronimo
Lake Forest & Jeronimo
Los Alisos & Jeronimo
Los Alisos & Muirlands
Lake Forest & Rockfield
Los Alisos & Rockfield
Lake Forest & I-5/Carlota
PD Valencia & Carlota (a)
El Toro & Carlota (a)
Alton & Towne Centre
Alton & Irvine
Alton & Toledo (a) (a)
Bake & Rockfield (r)
Ridge Route & Rockfield (a)
El Toro & Trabuco
Total 18 18 16 15 15 14
(a) The LFTM improvement was implemented. The intersection improvements remain on the list for cost allocation purposes. (r) Proposed to be removed from the LFTM Program due to acceptable LOS.
The original LFTM Program (Ordinance 186) and LFMC 7.19 included the 18 intersections shown in Table B-1, above. As part of the 2011 Baseline Adjustment and Ordinance 236, three intersections were removed from the program and one intersection was added. Both the Los Alisos/Jeronimo intersection and the Alton/Town Center intersection were removed due to traffic forecasts showing those intersections had an ICU value at an acceptable LOS. Improvements at the El Toro/Trabuco intersection was completed and removed from the LFTM Program. The Ridge Route/Rockfield intersection was added due to traffic forecasts showing deficient intersection LOS.
In the 2014 Five-Year Update the Los Alisos/Muirlands intersection was removed due to fully committed improvements by the FCPP program.
Item: 9
466
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update LFTM Intersection Comparison Table
Project Number: 2042547210 B.2
In the 2018 Five-Year Update five intersections under the updated baseline conditions had an acceptable LOS. Recent LFTM Program improvements were constructed at Bake/Portola, Lake Forest/Rancho, and Alton/Toledo intersections, which was a part of the Baker Ranch development. The Lake Forest/Jeronimo, Lake Forest/Rockfield, and Los Alisos/Rockfield intersections have traffic forecasts showing the intersections at an acceptable LOS. Based on discussions with City staff, the intersections remain part of the LFTM Program due to either being on the LOS D/LOS E cusp or intersection sensitivity, and therefore improvements are maintained as part of the LFTM program.
In this 2024 Five-Year Update, LFTM Program improvements at El Toro/Portola, Paseo De Valencia/Avenida de la Carlota, and El Toro/Avenida de la Carlota have been completed. The following five intersections are in the pre-construction phase: Lake Forest/Rancho, Bake/Irvine, Bake/Jeronimo, Lake Forest/Jeronimo, and Los Alisos/Rockfield. Bake/Rockfield is proposed to be removed from the LFTM Program due to an acceptable LOS.
Item: 9
467
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update LFTM Program Improvements Summary
Project Number: 2042547210 C.1
Appendix C LFTM Program Improvements Summary
The following provides a detailed discussion on each LFTM Program intersection.
LFTM Program Locations in Pre-construction Phase
10. Lake Forest Drive & Rancho Parkway
This intersection is in the City of Lake Forest. The LFTM Program included the following improvements:
- Restripe westbound (Rancho Parkway) approach to add 2nd westbound left-turn lane and convert dedicated westbound right-turn lane to a defacto right-turn lane - Add a 2nd eastbound (Rancho Parkway) through lane
In 2014 the City completed the 2nd eastbound (Rancho Parkway) through lane and in 2016 completed the 2nd westbound left-turn lane. The dedicated westbound right-turn lane was not converted to a defacto right-turn lane. A westbound right-turn defacto is not needed because there is a westbound right-turn lane in place.
The City is in the pre-construction phase of implementing the following improvement:
- Restripe eastbound (Rancho Parkway) lanes to include a defacto right-turn lane.
The implementation of the eastbound defacto right-turn lane would complete the LFTM Program at this location.
Estimated Cost (before Admin & Environmental): $627,448
14. Bake Parkway & Irvine Boulevard/Trabuco Road
This location is partially in the City of Lake Forest and partially in the City of Irvine (west leg of intersection is in Irvine). The City of Lake Forest is the lead agency that will implement the following improvements (CIP PW2019-02):
- Add a 2
nd northbound left turn lane (Bake Parkway)
- Convert the westbound right-turn lane to a 4th through lane (Trabuco Road) - Add a westbound right turn defacto (Trabuco Road)
The above improvements are both a part of the LFTM program and the NITM program. A cooperative agreement for the “Bake Parkway/Irvine Boulevard/Trabuco Road Intersection Improvement Project” was made and entered on September 14, 2021. Per the cooperative agreement, the City of Irvine will contribute 50% of the preliminary engineering and final design phases of the Project. The City of Irvine will also contribute 50% toward right-of-way and construction phases of the Project.
The following improvement is in the LFTM program but the City does not wish to construct at this time:
- Convert the 3
rd eastbound through lane to a shared through/right-turn lane Item: 9
468
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update LFTM Program Improvements Summary
Project Number: 2042547210 C.2
The ICU and LOS analysis carried out for this LFTM 5-Year Update shows that the intersection is at a LOS B and would not need the conversion of the 3rd eastbound through lane to a shared through/right- turn lane.
The following improvement is in the NITM program but the City of Irvine does not wish to pursue the improvements at this time:
- Ultimate lane configuration for eastbound Irvine Boulevard to be 2.5 through lanes and a 1.5 right turn lane)
Per the cooperative agreement, Irvine agrees that additional improvements to the eastbound Irvine Boulevard will be their sole responsibility and expense in the future if deemed by appropriate by Irvine.
Estimated Cost (before Admin & Environmental): $4,452,502 Estimated Lake Forest Cost Share (before Admin & Environmental): $2,226,251
22. Bake Parkway and Jeronimo Road
This intersection is partially in the City of Lake Forest and partially in the City of Irvine (west leg). The City of Irvine is the lead agency that will implement the following improvements:
- 2nd northbound left-turn lane (Bake Parkway)
The above is a joint LFTM program and NITM program improvement.
The City of Irvine does not want to proceed with the following NITM program improvements:
- Add 4th southbound through lane (Bake Parkway)
- Add 3rd westbound through lane (Jeronimo Road)
In lieu if the NITM program improvements above, City of Irvine and City of Lake Forest agree to substitute the above improvements with the following:
- Add 2nd westbound left-turn lane (Jeronimo Road)
- Add a westbound right turn defacto lane (Jeronimo Road) The City of Irvine will contribute 100% of costs for the above listed substitute NITM program improvements. Therefore, the improvements at this intersection include:
- 2nd northbound left-turn lane (Bake Parkway)
- 2nd westbound left-turn lane (Jeronimo Road)
- Westbound right turn defacto lane (Jeronimo Road)
A cooperative agreement for the “Bake Parkway/Jeronimo Intersection Improvement Project” was made and entered on September 14, 2021. Lake Forest will contribute 50% towards preliminary engineering and final design phases of the Project for the joint LFTM and NITM improvement. Irvine and Lake Forest will each contribute 50% towards right-of-way and construction phases.
Estimated Cost (before Admin & Environmental): $9,489,294 Estimated Lake Forest Cost Share (before Admin & Environmental): $2,846,788
Item: 9
469
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update LFTM Program Improvements Summary
Project Number: 2042547210 C.3
23. Lake Forest Drive & Jeronimo Road
This intersection is in the City of Lake Forest. The City is currently in the pre-construction stage (CIP 2022-10).
The LFTM program includes:
- Add a defacto eastbound right turn lane (Jeronimo Road) (LFTM program) The NITM program includes additional improvements, however there are no plans to implement them at this time:
- Add 2nd southbound (Lake Forest Drive)
- Add dedicated eastbound and westbound right turn lanes (Jeronimo Road)
An ICU and LOS analysis under 2040 General Plan conditions shows that the intersection will be at LOS C with the defacto eastbound right turn lane and no additional improvements are needed.
Estimated Cost (before Admin & Environmental): $1,392,922
34. Los Alisos Boulevard and Rockfield Boulevard
This intersection is in the City of Lake Forest. The City is currently in the pre-construction stage (CIP 2022-11).
The LFTM program includes:
- Add a southbound right-turn lane (Los Alisos Boulevard) (LFTM program and NITM program) In 2017, the City of Lake Forest has implemented:
- Extend northbound left turn lane (Los Alisos Boulevard) The City of Lake Forest is currently in the pre-construction phase of implementing the following:
- Add a southbound defacto right -turn lane (Los Alisos Boulevard) A southbound defacto right-turn would be in lieu of the dedicated southbound right-turn lane because of physical constraints. Widening of the roadway would impact adjacent homes, sidewalk, and on-street bike lanes. An ICU and LOS analysis under 2040 General Plan conditions shows that the intersection would be at LOS B with the southbound defacto right-turn lane and a dedicated right turn lane is not needed.
The defacto right turn lane meets the requirements of the LFTM program as the intersection is at an acceptable LOS and the improvements would not cost more than the dedicated right-turn lane.
The NITM program includes additional improvements, however there are no plans to implement them at this time:
- Add 2
nd northbound (Los Alisos) left turn lane
- Add southbound (Los Alisos) right turn lane
As noted above, the intersection would be at a LOS B with the southbound defacto and no additional improvements are needed.
Estimated Cost (before Admin & Environmental): $906,678
Item: 9
470
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update LFTM Program Improvements Summary
Project Number: 2042547210 C.4
LFTM Program Intersections in the Planning Phase
31. Lake Forest Drive & Rockfield Boulevard
This intersection is in the City of Lake Forest. Improvements in the LFTM program include:
- Restripe 2nd westbound through to shared 3rd westbound left/2nd westbound through (Rockfield Boulevard)
- Eastbound and westbound split phasing traffic signal operation (Rockfield Boulevard) This location is also a part of the NITM program and includes the following improvements, however there are no plans to implement them at this time:
- Restripe westbound (Rockfield Boulevard) to provide 3 left turn lanes, 2 thru lanes, and no right turn lane
The intersection is at an acceptable LOS D under the 2040 committed network scenario and at a LOS D/LOS E cusp under a scenario where the Ridge Route extension over the I-5 freeway is built (per MPAH buildout). The City of Lake Forest does not wish to pursue the split phase traffic signal modification due to unbalanced lane utilization. An ICU and LOS analysis was conducted using General Plan MPAH buildout forecast volumes and is summarizes in Table C-1. The analysis shows that the intersection would be at an LOS E with the LFTM program improvements and at a LOS E with the NITM program improvements.
Table C-1: Lake Forest Drive & Rockfield Boulevard ICU and LOS Analysis – General Plan Buildout with MPAH Buildout Scenario
Peak Hour
No Intersection
Improvements
With LFTM
Improvements
With NITM
Improvements
With Alternative
Improvements
LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU
AM Peak Hour B 0.61 B 0.65 B 0.69 B 0.61
PM Peak Hour D 0.86 E 0.92 E 0.93 D 0.86
In lieu of the LFTM program improvements that involve modifying the eastbound/westbound (Rockfield) traffic signal to split phasing, the following traffic signal modifications would improve the traffic operations at the intersection:
- Westbound (Rockfield) right turn overlap phasing
- No right turns on red when there are pedestrian calls (safety improvement for pedestrians) Removal of the west crosswalk was also considered, however, since this intersection is adjacent to a busy shopping center removal of a crosswalk would not be ideal.
A westbound right turn overlap phasing would require a prohibited U-turn for the northbound (Lake Forest) movement). Vehicles would need to make a U-turn at Lake Forest Drive and Aspan Street intersection, which is under signal control with a protected left-turn light. An eastbound right turn overlap phasing would require a prohibited U-turn for the southbound (Lake Forest Drive) movement. There is no available U-turn until past the freeway in Irvine. An option would be to make a U-turn at Centre Drive and Rockfield Boulevard intersection.
Estimated Cost (before Admin & Environmental): $59,980
Item: 9
471
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update LFTM Program Improvements Summary
Project Number: 2042547210 C.5
36. Lake Forest Drive & I-5 Off Ramp/Avenida de la Carlota
This intersection is shared between the City of Laguna Hills and the City of Irvine.
LFTM program improvements include:
- Convert the shared eastbound left- turn/through lane to a 3rd left-turn lane (I-5 Off Ramp) (LFTM and NITM improvement)
- Add a 2
nd westbound left-turn lane (Avenida de la Carlota) (LFTM and NITM improvement) - Add right-turn overlap phasing for westbound right-turn lane (Avenida de la Carlota) (LFTM and NITM improvement)
- Add a 2nd eastbound through lane (I-5 Off Ramp) (LFTM Only) The improvements above are joint NITM and LFTM program improvements, except for adding a 2nd eastbound through lane, which is only in the LFTM program.
An ICU and LOS analysis was carried out for this location under 2040 General Plan (with committed network) conditions. The following alternative improvements would improve the LOS to an acceptable LOS D.
- Restripe the westbound approach (Avenida de la Carlota) to include one left-turn lane, one shared left/right turn lane, and one dedicated right turn lane Estimated cost (before Admin & Environmental): $120,360
105. Alton Parkway & Irvine Boulevard
This intersection is located in the City of Irvine and the City of Lake Forest would like to make a payment to the City of Irvine to implement their preferred improvements.
LFTM program improvements at this intersection include:
- Reconfigure the eastbound approach to add a 3rd eastbound left-turn lane (Irvine Boulevard) - Remove dedicated eastbound right-turn lane and provide a defacto eastbound right-turn lane (Irvine Boulevard)
The City of Irvine is planning to implement the following NITM program improvements:
- Restripe eastbound approach to provide 2.5 left-turn lanes, 2.5 through lanes, and 1 right turn lane (Irvine Boulevard)
- Modify Traffic study to provide for east/west split phasing. - Designate LOS “E” as acceptable
- In lieu of constructing additional NITM improvements, the City of Irvine will make a contribution to their TMSOS in an amount equal to the construction cost of adding a 4 th westbound through lane
and a third eastbound left-turn lane.
At this time there is no cooperative agreement between the two cities for improvements at this intersection.
Estimated cost (before Admin & Environmental): $676,214
Item: 9
472
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update LFTM Program Improvements Summary
Project Number: 2042547210 C.6
LFTM Program Locations that are Complete
2. Bake Parkway & Portola Parkway
The intersection is in the City of Lake Forest and LFTM program improvements include:
- Add 3rd westbound through lane (Portola Parkway)
- Or 2nd eastbound left turn lane (Portola Parkway)
In 2017, the City constructed the 2nd eastbound left turn lane on Portola Parkway. This improvement completed the LFTM program at this location.
Final Cost: $72,240 (Source: City of Lake Forest)
12. El Toro Road & Portola Parkway/Santa Margarita Parkway
This intersection is in the City of Lake Forest and construction on the LFTM improvements started in March 2023 (CIP PW2019-03). Construction was completed on December 2023. The city implemented the following improvements:
- Add a 2nd northbound left-turn lane (El Toro Road)
- Add a 2nd southbound right-turn lane (El Toro Road)
- Add a 2nd southbound left-turn lane (El Toro Road) (note: not a LFTM program improvement) The LFTM Improvements for this intersection are complete.
Final Cost: $2,627,022 (Source: City of Lake Forest)
17. El Toro Road & Trabuco Road
This intersection is in the City of Lake Forest and LFTM program improvements include:
- Add defacto northbound right turn lane (El Toro Road) - Add defacto westbound right turn lane (Trabuco Road)
In 2009 the construction of a northbound dedicated right turn lane (El Toro Road) and westbound dedicated right turn lane (Trabuco Road) was completed.
The implementation of the above improvements completed the LFTM program improvements at this intersection and was removed from the LFTM program in the 2011 LFTM program Baseline Adjustment Study.
Estimated Cost: $280,000 (Source: 2006 LFTM program Update)
32. Ridge Route Drive & Rockfield Boulevard
This location is in the City of Lake Forest. Improvements in the LFTM program include:
- Add defacto northbound right turn lane (Ridge Route Drive) In 2020 the City finished construction on a dedicated northbound right turn lane (Ridge Route).
Item: 9
473
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update LFTM Program Improvements Summary
Project Number: 2042547210 C.7
This location is also a part of the NITM program, however there are no plans to implement them at this time:
- Improve southbound (Ridge Route Drive) to 1.5 left turn lanes, 1.5 thru lanes, and defacto right turn lane.
- Restripe northbound (Ridge Route Drive) to1.5 left turn lanes, 1.5 through lanes, and defacto right turn lane
- Modify signal to split phase (northbound/southbound only).
Final Cost: $1,144 (Source: City of Lake Forest)
37. Paseo De Valencia & Avenida de la Carlota
This location is in the City of Laguna Hills. The City of Lake Forest contributed funds for the implementation of improvements. LFTM program improvements are complete at this location.
Final Contribution Cost: $79,000 (Source: City of Lake Forest)
39. El Toro Road & Avenida de la Carlota
This location is in the City of Laguna Hills. The City of Lake Forest contributed funds for the implementation of improvements. LFTM program improvements are complete at this location.
Final Contribution Cost: $78,000 (Source: City of Lake Forest)
117. Alton Parkway & Toledo Way
This location is in the City of Irvine. The City of Lake Forest completed the following improvement:
- Westbound right turn overlap phasing (Toledo Way)
LFTM program improvements are complete at this location.
Final Cost: $19,555 (Source: City of Lake Forest)
Item: 9
474
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update LFTM Program Improvements Summary
Project Number: 2042547210 C.8
LFTM Program Locations Proposed to be Removed
125. Bake Parkway & Rockfield Boulevard
The intersection is in the City of Irvine. LFTM Program improvements include the following:
- Restripe shared 3rd westbound (Rockfield) left/2nd westbound through to full 3rd westbound left turn lane and remove free westbound right turn, add defacto westbound right turn.
Forecast volumes from the City of Irvine’s traffic model (ITAM TC) was used obtained and an ICU analysis showed that the intersection would be at an acceptable LOS (LOS D) without the LFTM Program improvements. The City of Irvine has removed this location from its NITM program and does not intend to make any physical improvements to the lane configuration. Since the City of Irvine does not plan to implement any improvements, the intersection is proposed to be removed from the LFTM program.
Estimated Cost Removed from Program: $1,626,800 (Source: 2018 LFTM 5-Year Update)
Item: 9
475
Lake Forest Transportation Mitigation Program 5-Year Update Cost Estimates
Project Number: 2042547210 D.1
Appendix D Cost Estimates
Item: 9
476
Unit
Description Unit Quantity Price Amount
Remove ex. and Furnish and Install Sign on Signal Mast ArmEA 1 1,300.00$ 1,300.00$ Remove and Salvage Existing Signal Head EA 2 750.00$ 1,500.00$ 5-12" Vehicle Head (LED), visors, and mounting hardwareEA 2 4,000.00$ 8,000.00$ 5-12" Backplate EA 2 800.00$ 1,600.00$
Wiring (Slip pull 5-CSC) LF 200 40.00$ 8,000.00$ Modify Cabinet for New Overlap Phasing LS 1 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$ Traffic Control LS 1 10,000.00$ 10,000.00$
Mobilization LS 1 4,900.00$ 4,900.00$
Contingency (20%) LS 1 4,680.00$ 4,680.00$
44,980.00$
Right of Way LS 0 -$ -$
Environmental LS 0 -$ -$
Design LS 1 8,000.00$ 8,000.00$
Construction Support/Administration LS 1 4,000.00$ 4,000.00$ Bid Support/Administration LS 1 3,000.00$ 3,000.00$ Traffic Signal Modification ImprovementsTotal = 59,980.00$ Estimate of Probable Construction Cost
Lake Forest Drive and Rockfield Boulevard
Traffic Signal Modification
City of Lake Forest , LFTM 5-Year Update
Construction Subtotal
Item: 9
477
DETAIL "A"
DETAIL "A"
DETAIL "A"
DETAIL "A"
v:\2042\active\2042547200\drawing\exhibit_files\concept_plans_lake-forest_rockfield.dwg ´
Lake Forest Drive at Rockfield Boulevard Conceptual Intersection Improvements DETAIL "A"
GRAPHIC SCALE
ROCKFIELD BLVD
(45 MPH)
LAKE FOREST DR
(45 MPH)
ALL SECTIONS 12-INCH
R73-5(CA)
R73-6(CA)
Item: 9
478
Unit
Description Unit Quantity Price Amount
Clear and Grubbing LS 1 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $
Remove Existing Striping LF 1807 2.00 $ 3,614.00$ Reconstruct Raised Island/Pedestrian Passageways SF 705 20.00 $ 14,100.00$ Remove Thermoplastic Markings E A 7 150.00$ 1,050.00$ Remove and Salvage Existing TS Mast Arm LS 1 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ Relocate Ex. ISNS to New Mast Arm/Pole LS 1 1,200.00 $ 1,200.00 $ Type "E" Loop (6'x6') E A 3 500.00$ 1,500.00$ Traffic Signal Modification LS 1 86,625.00 $ 86,625.00 $ Roadway Striping LF 3510 3.00 $ 10,530.00$ Thermoplastic Markings SF 30 20.00 $ 600.00 $ Excavation (raodway widening) CY 340 15.00 $ 5,100.00$ Curb and Gutter LF 480 75.00 $ 36,000.00$
PCC Sidewalk and Landing SF 2160 15.00 $ 32,400.00$ Modify Existing Irigation System LS 1 7,500.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 14' Catch Basin E A 1 20,000.00$ 20,000.00 $
21" Concrete Collar EA 1 2,500.00$ 2,500.00 $
21" RCP LF 10 300.00 $ 3,000.00$
Traffic Control LS 1 14,023.14 $ 14,023.14 $
Mobilization LS 1 11, 685.95$ 11,685.95 $
256,428.09$
Right of Way SF 2400 135.00 $ 324,000.00$
Temporary Construction Easement SF 2500 15.00 $ 37,500.00$ Design LS 1 51,285.62 $ 51,285.62 $
Construction Support/Administration LS 1 4,000.00 $ 4,000.00 $ Bid Support/Administration LS 1 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ Intersection Improvements Total = 676,214.00$
Estimate of Probable Construction Cost
Alton Parkway and Irvine Boulevard
Intersection Improvements
City of Lake Forest , LFTM 5-Year Update
Construction Subtotal
Item: 9
479
Item: 9
480
Unit
Description Unit Quantity Price Amount
Remove Thermoplastic Markings LS 1 1,500.00$ 1,500.00$ Remove ex. And Furnish and Install Sign on Signal Mast ArmEA 1 1,300.00$ 1,300.00$ Thermoplastic Markings SF 30 20.00$ 600.00$ Lane Line Extension Striping LF 130 5.00$ 650.00$ Traffic Control LS 1 3,000.00$ 3,000.00$
Mobilization LS 1 2,500.00$ 2,500.00$
Contingency (20%) EA 1 -- 810.00$
10,360.00$
Design LS 1 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$
Construction Support/Administration LS 1 2,500.00$ 2,500.00$ Bid Support/Administration LS 1 2,500.00$ 2,500.00$ Traffic Signal Modification ImprovementsTotal = 20,360.00$ Estimate of Probable Construction Cost
Lake Forest Drive and Avenida De La Carlota
Intersection Modifications
City of Lake Forest , LFTM 5-Year Update
Construction Subtotal
Item: 9
481
Item: 9
482
Attachment 2
Item: 9
483