Q SEW Pp�T
CITY OF
z NEWPORT BEACH
c�<,FORN'P City Council Staff Report
February 13, 2024
Agenda Item No. 14
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Seimone Jurjis, Assistant City Manager/Community Development Director - 949-644-3232, [email protected]
PREPARED BY: Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner - 949-644-3234, [email protected]
TITLE: Resolution No. 2024-9: Intent to Override Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency for the Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
ABSTRACT:
Pursuant to Section 4.3 of the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) and Section 21676(b) of the California Public Utilities Code, the City of Newport Beach is required to submit the Residences at 1400 Bristol Street Project, a development of 229 for -rent apartment units atop a 422-space parking structure (Project), to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for a consistency determination with the AELUP. ALUC conducted a hearing on the matter on January 18, 2024, and found the Project to be inconsistent with the AELUP.
For the City Council's consideration is a request to consider overriding the ALUC's finding of inconsistency. This action would authorize staff to formally provide notice, pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676 (b), to the ALUC and the State Department of Transportation of Aeronautics Program of the City's intention to override ALUC's inconsistency finding.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
a) Conduct a public hearing;
b) Find that the proposed overriding action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and
c) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-9, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Notifying the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission and State Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program of the City's Intention to Find that the Residences at 1400 Bristol Project is Consistent with the Purpose of the State Aeronautics Act and Overrule the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination that the Project is Inconsistent with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan (PA2022-0296). 14-1
Intent to Override Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency for the Residences at 1400 Bristol Street February 13, 2024
DISCUSSION:
The subject property is located at the northwest corner of Bristol Street and Spruce Street (Figure 1, below) and currently improved with two, two-story office buildings totaling 38,764-square feet and a surface parking lot. The project site is one of the 62 new housing opportunity sites in the Airport Area Environs (Airport Area), per the certified 6th Cycle Housing Element and located within the 60 dBA noise contour as shown in the updated noise contour maps adopted as part of the Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments. The Property is also located adjacent to the proposed Residences at 1401 Quail Project and across the street of the entitled Residences at 1300 Bristol Street Project.
70 C N E�
01 / ,•65 CNEL
o
uptowc.
Park
•, IRVINE AVER NELQ
`�
,p ors
Project Site
Lmesa Birch-Pa
Lt�,P '
.1
BAYVffw� "�
8 nyview Park
Figure 1: Project Location
Proposed Protect
The Applicant, the Picerne Group, is proposing to demolish the two existing office buildings and construct a 229-unit for -rent apartment project atop a 422-space parking structure. The parking structure includes one level on -grade (podium level) and two levels below grade with five levels of residential above the podium. The building height would be approximately 85 feet, including architectural elements, parapet, rooftop mechanical equipment, and roof access.
14-2
Intent to Override Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency for the Residences at 1400 Bristol Street February 13, 2024
The application consists of the following components:
• General Plan Amendment (GPA) - A request to change the existing General Plan land use designation from General Commercial Office (CO-G) to Mixed Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) and add 64 dwelling units above the General Plan allowance to Anomaly 16 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations); • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment - An amendment to the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) to include the project site within the Residential Overlay;
• Major Site Development Review - A site development review in accordance with the Newport Place Planned Community and Section 20.52.80 (Site Development Reviews) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC), for the construction of the Project;
• Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) - A plan specifying how the Project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, in exchange for a request of a 50% increase in density. The Applicant seeks six development standard waivers related to park land dedication, building setbacks, building height, private open space for each residential unit, common open space for the entire Project, and overall residential project density pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC and Government Code Section 65915 (Density Bonus Law). The Applicant also seeks one development concession related to the mix of affordable units, pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC and Government Code Section 65915;
• Traffic Study -A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the NBMC;
• Development Agreement — A Development Agreement between the Applicant and the City, pursuant to Section 15.45.020(A)(2)(a) (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, which would provide the Applicant with the vested right to develop the Project for a term of 10 years and to provide negotiated public benefits to the City; and
• Addendum to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental Impact Report (Addendum) - Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the Project.
The Project would include a modern, contemporary architectural style with articulated fagades composed of a mix of stucco, fiber cement board siding, and tile veneer fagade accents. The color scheme would be white, dark grey, blue, and beige. Metal awnings and metal railings on the private decks would further provide fagade articulation (Figure 2, below).
14-3
Intent to Override Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency for the Residences at 1400 Bristol Street February 13, 2024
Figure 2: Rendering from the Intersection of Bristol Street and Spruce Street The 229 apartment units include 40 studio units,126 one -bedroom units, and 63 two -bedroom units. The studio units would be 515 square feet, the one -bedroom units would range from 613 to 896 square feet, and the two -bedroom units are proposed to range from 1,049 to 1,469 square feet.
Of the 229 units, 23 units would be affordable and restricted to very -low-income households. The remaining 206 units would be market -rate, for -rent apartment units.
Plannina Commission Review and Recommendation
On December 7, 2023, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the proposed Project. One member of the public addressed the Planning Commission regarding the Project. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve the Project, by a majority vote (6-0 with one Commissioner absent). The December 7, 2023, Planning Commission Staff Report, Planning Commission minutes excerpts, and Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043 are attached as Attachments B, C and D respectively.
Airport Land Use Commission Review
Section 4.3 of the AELUP and Section 21676(b) of the Public Utilities Code require the City to submit General Plan and Zoning Code amendments to the ALUC for a consistency determination with the AELUP. ALUC conducted a hearing on the matter at its January 18, 2024, meeting with city staff in attendance, and found the Project is inconsistent with the AELUP. The January 18, 2024, ALUC staff report is attached as Attachment E, and the ALUC inconsistency determination is attached as Attachment F. 14-4
Intent to Override Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency for the Residences at 1400 Bristol Street February 13, 2024
ALUC Override Process
As a final review authority on legislative acts, the City Council may choose to override ALUC's determination by following a two-step process, which is established in Public Utilities Code Section 21676. The first step in the process is to conduct a public hearing to adopt a resolution of intention to override, a copy of which would be sent to ALUC and the State Division of Aeronautics to provide formal notification of the City's intent.
The second step in the process is that not less than 45-days after notification has been sent to ALUC and State Department of Transportation of Aeronautics Program, the City Council may conduct a second public hearing to consider adoption of a resolution to override the ALUC. At this time, the Council may also consider the project entitlements and take final action on the application.
The following points are important to consider:
• The Council's adoption of the attached notification resolution does not constitute the project's approval, nor does it predispose the City Council's future action on either the project or the consistency determination;
• The attached resolution notifying ALUC and the State Department of Transportation of Aeronautics Program of the City's intent, and the resolution to overrule ALUC, which will be presented at a future hearing, must be adopted by a two-thirds vote. Since there are seven City Council members, five affirmative votes are needed to pass the resolution.
Public Utilities Code Section 21678 states that if the City overrides ALUC's action or recommendation, the operator of the airport shall be immune from liability from damages to property or personal injury caused by or resulting directly or indirectly from the City's decision to overrule the ALUC determination.
Importance of Project Toward Housing Needs
As an alternative to overriding the ALUC findings, the Council can direct the applicant to redesign the project in a manner that the ALUC would find consistent with the AELUP. In this case, staff believes there may not be an alternative given that the ALUC simply does not want residential uses within this proximity to John Wayne Airport, despite the project's apparent consistency with the AELUP. The project site is ideal for the development of a residential project as it is identified as a housing opportunity site. Figure B-3 of the certified 6th Cycle Housing Element (below) displays the capacity and opportunity within the Airport Area which can help accommodate a portion of the City's RHNA. Ultimately, the Project implements the certified 6th Cycle Housing Element and aids the City in its goal to provide new housing opportunities.
14-5
Intent to Override Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency for the Residences at 1400 Bristol Street February 13, 2024
Figure B-3: Airport Area Environs —Sites Inventory
Site Inventory:
Airport Area Environs
LEGEND
Llty Boundary
Sth Cycle Sites
Pipeline Projects
u opportunity Sites
Key Map
—F-
NO H 0 500 1,000
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Final action on the Project is not being considered at this time. A complete environmental analysis of the Project is contained in the attached December 7, 2023 Planning Commission Staff Report for which an addendum to an environmental impact report (EIR) is being proposed. The addendum concludes that the Project is no more impactful to the City than what was studied with the 2006 General Plan Program EIR and the 2013 Housing Element Update Initial Study/Negative Declaration. Nevertheless, the action that is currently before the City Council is consideration of adopting a resolution of intent to override the ALUC's finding that the project is not consistent with the AELUP.
The City Council finds the adoption of this resolution is not subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
Specifically, the resolution does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment because it is limited to the notification of the City's intent to overrule the ALUC determination and it does not authorize the development of the property or commit the City to approve the Project. Potential project impacts will be analyzed when the City Council considers the Project.
14-6
Intent to Override Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency for the Residences at 1400 Bristol Street February 13, 2024
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact related to this item.
NOTICING:
Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights -of -way and waterways) including the applicant, and posted on the subject property at least 10 days before the scheduled meeting, consistent with the provisions of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Additionally, the agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the meeting at which the City Council considers the item).
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Resolution No. 2024-9
Attachment B — December 7, 2023 Planning Commission Staff Report (no attachments) Attachment C — December 7, 2023 Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt Attachment D — Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043 Attachment E — January 18, 2024 ALUC Staff Report
Attachment F — January 23, 2024 ALUC Determination Letter 14-7
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 2024- 9
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, NOTIFYING THE
ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
AND STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,
AERONAUTICS PROGRAM OF THE CITY'S INTENTION
TO FIND THAT THE RESIDENCES AT 1400 BRISTOL
PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSE OF
THE STATE AERONAUTICS ACT AND OVERRULE THE
ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE
COMMISSION'S DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT
IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE 2008 JOHN WAYNE
AIRPORT ENVIRONS LAND USE PLAN (PA2022-0296)
WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City of Newport Beach ("City") Charter vests the City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules, and regulations with respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in the Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to any and all rights, powers, and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any law of the State of California;
WHEREAS, an application was filed by The Picerne Group ("Applicant"), with respect to the property located at 1400 Bristol Street, and legally described in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference ("Property"); WHEREAS, the Applicant is requesting approval to demolish two existing office buildings and develop 229 apartment units including a 422 space parking structure ("Project") which require the following approvals:
• General Plan Amendment ("GPA") — An amendment to the existing General Plan Land Use designation from General Commercial Office (CO-G) to Mixed Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2), to increase the General Plan allowance for the additional 64 dwelling units, and revise Anomaly 16 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) to allow 64 residential dwelling units; • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment ("PCDP Amendment") —An amendment to the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) Development Plan to include the Property within the Residential Overlay; WN
Resolution No. 2024-
• Major Site Development Review ("SDR") — A site development review in accordance with the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) and Section
20.52.080 (Site Development Reviews) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"), to construct the Project;
• Affordable Housing Implementation Plan ("AHIP") — A program specifying how the Project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements in exchange for a request of a 50% increase in density; and including a request for six development standard waivers related to park land dedication, building setbacks, building height, private open space, common open space along with a development concession related to the mix of affordable units pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC and Government Code Section 65915 et seq.;
• Development Agreement ("DA") — A Development Agreement between the Applicant and the City, pursuant to Section 15.45.020 (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, which would provide the Applicant with the vested right to develop the Project while also providing negotiated public benefits to the City; • Addendum to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental Impact Report ("Addendum") —An Addendum to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental Impact Report pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), which addresses the reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the Project; and
• Traffic Study — A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the NBMC;
WHEREAS, the Property is designated General Commercial Office (CO-G) by the City of Newport Beach General Plan ("General Plan") Land Use Element and is located within the Newport Place Planned Community — Industrial Site 3A (PC-11) Zoning District; WHEREAS, the Project is not located in the coastal zone; therefore, amending the Local Coastal Program or a coastal development permit is not required; WHEREAS, the Property is located in the Airport Area Environs ("Airport Area") of the 6th Cycle Housing Element as one of the 62 new housing opportunity sites allocated in the certified 6th Cycle Housing Element to meet the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment ("RHNA") allocation of 4,845 new housing units, 14-9
Resolution No. 2024-
WHEREAS, on November 14, 2023, the City Council approved Resolution Nos. 2023-20 and 2023-21 and Ordinance Nos. 2023-20 and 2023-21, authorizing amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element of the General Plan, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) ("Title 20") of the NBMC, Newport Place Planned Community Development Plan (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC-60) to update the noise contours identified by the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 ("EIR No. 617"), allowing residential units identified by the certified 6th Cycle Newport Beach Housing Element to be located within the 65 decibel ("65 dBA") Community Noise Equivalent Level ("CNEL") noise contour maps analyzed in EIR No. 617, and incorporating additional noise attenuation measures for future housing units proximate to John Wayne Airport ("6th Cycle Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments");
WHEREAS, the Property is located within the 60 dBA noise contour as shown on the updated noise contour maps adopted as part of the 6th Cycle Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments;
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on December 7, 2023, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California.
A notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with Government Code Section 54950 of seq. (Ralph M. Brown Act), and Chapter 15.45 (Development Agreements), Chapter 20.56 (Planned Community District Procedures), and Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this hearing; WHEREAS, at the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
PC2023-043 by a majority vote (6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent) recommending that the City Council approve the Project;
WHEREAS, California Public Utilities Code ("PUC") Section 21676(b) requires the City to refer the Project to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission ("ALUC") to review for consistency with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP");
14-10
Resolution No. 2024-
WHEREAS, on January 18, 2024, ALUC determined (6 ayes, 0 nays) the Project is inconsistent with the following provisions of the AELUP:
a. Section 2.1.1 (Aircraft Noise), which provides that the "aircraft noise emanating from airports may be incompatible with the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an airport";
b. Section 2.1.2 (Safety Compatibility Zones), which provides "the purpose of these zones is to support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near JWX; and
c. Section 3.2.1 (General Policy), which provides that "[w]ithin the boundaries of the AELUP, any land use may be found to be Inconsistent with the AELUP [if it] ... (1) [p]laces people so that they are affected adversely by aircraft noise [or] (2) concentrates people in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents..."; WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 21670 and 21676 of the PUC, the City Council may, after a public hearing, propose to overrule ALUC by a two-thirds vote, if it makes specific findings that the Project is consistent with Section 21670 of the PUC's purpose of protecting the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on February 13, 2024, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with PUC Section 21676(b) and the Ralph M. Brown Act. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing. 14-11
Resolution No. 2024-
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as follows:
Section 1: The City Council finds the Project consistent with the purposes of Section 21670 of the PUC and the AELUP of protecting the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses.
Findings and Facts in Support of Findings
A. The Project is consistent with the noise standards of the AELUP.
The AELUP guides development proposals to provide for the orderly development of John Wayne Airport ("JWA") and the surrounding area through implementation of the standards in Section 2 (Planning Guidelines) and Section 3 (Land Use Policies). Implementation of these standards are intended to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise, ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents, and ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable airspace.
Section 2.1.1 of the AELUP sets forth the CNEL standards, and Sections 3.2.3 and 3.2.4 of the AELUP defines the noise exposure in the 60 dBA to 65 dBA CNEL noise contour (Noise Impact Zone 2) as "Moderate Noise Impact" and in the 65 dBA to 70 dBA CNEL noise contour (Noise Impact Zone 1) as "High Impact." Section 3, Table 1 (Limitations on Land Use Due to Noise) of the AELUP identifies residential use as "conditionally consistent" within the 60 dBA to 65 dBA CNEL noise contour and "normally inconsistent" within the 65 dBA to 70 dBA CNEL noise contour. However, residential uses are not outright prohibited. Instead, Section 3.2.3 of the AELUP requires the residential uses be developed with advanced insulation systems to bring the sound attenuation to no more than 45 dBA within the interior of the building. In addition, residential uses within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area are required to be "indoor -oriented" to preclude noise impingement on outdoor living areas.
14-12
Resolution No. 2024-
The Project is located within the updated 60 dBA CNEL noise contour, consistent with the approved 6th Cycle Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments.
Additionally, the Project has been conditioned to provide an acoustical report which describes the best design features of the structure that will satisfy noise standards, be attenuated to provide a maximum interior noise level of 45 dBA and provide advanced air filtration systems to promote cleaner air without the opening of windows. These conditions of approval mitigate noise issues for the Project and is consistent with the 45 dBA interior noise standards of the AELUP.
B. The proposed Amendments are consistent with the safety standards of the AELUP.
Section 2.1.2 (Safety Compatibility Zones) of the AELUP sets forth zones depicting which land uses are acceptable in various portions of JWA environs. Allowed uses in Safety Zone 6 include residential and most nonresidential uses, excepting outdoor stadiums and similar uses with very high intensities. Uses that should be avoided include children's schools, large day-care centers, hospitals, and nursing homes. Risk factors associated with Safety Zone 6 generally include a low likelihood of accident occurrence.
The Project is located within Safety Zone 6 and residential uses are allowed in the zone.
The City's General Plan Safety Element Policy S 8.6 demonstrates that the City acknowledges the importance of the JWA Safety Zones in providing, "S 8.6 John Wayne Airport Traffic Pattern Zone - Use the most currently available John Wayne Airport (JWA) Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) as a planning resource for evaluation of land use compatibility and land use intensity in areas affected by JWA operations. In particular, future land use decisions within the existing JWA Clear Zone/Runway Protection Zone (Figure S5) should be evaluated to minimize the risk to life and property associated with aircraft operations."
The Project complies with the policies and regulations within the JWA Airport Planning Area and follows the safety standards of the AELUP as it is located within Safety Zone 6 and is not within the JWA Clear Zone/Runway Protection Zone. 14-13
Resolution No. 2024-
C. The Project is consistent with the height standards of the AELUP.
Section 2.1.3 (Building Height Restrictions) of the AELUP sets forth building height restrictions. Section 2.1.3 provides that ALUC consider only one standard as provided in 14 Code of Federal Regulations ("C.F.R.") Part 77 (also referred to as the Federal Aviation Regulations). Section 2.1.3 provides that the Federal Aviation Regulations are the only definitive standard available and the standard most generally used. Section 2.1.3 identifies the FAA as the single "Authority" for analyzing project impact on airport or aeronautical operations, or navigational -aid siting, including interference with navigational -aids or published flight paths and procedures along with reporting results of such studies and project analysis.
The FAA conducted an aeronautical study for the Project consistent with the Federal Aviation Regulations. The FAA issued a Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation on January 17, 2023, thereby finding the development does not exceed obstruction standards and would not be a hazard to air navigation. The FAA reviewed the proposed height of the project assuming an existing site elevation of 54 feet, with a proposed building that is 85 feet above ground level, and 139 feet above mean sea level ("AMSL" ).
The FAA further found that marking and lighting of the Project are not necessary for aviation safety. Any increase in height of the structure above the proposed 85-foot building height would require a revised Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation from the FAA. Additionally, there are other buildings in the vicinity of the project that are taller than the Project including the building at 1500 Quail Street that is approximately 144 feet AMSL.
Section 2: Based on the foregoing findings, the City Council provides this notice of intention to overrule the ALUC's determination that the Project is inconsistent with the AELUP.
Section 3: The City Council hereby directs City staff to provide ALUC and State Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program, with notice of the City's intention to overrule ALUC's determination that the Project is inconsistent with the AELUP.
Section 4: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this resolution. 14-14
Resolution No. 2024-
Section 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Section 6: The City Council finds the adoption of this resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
Specifically, the resolution does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment because it is limited to the notification of the City's intent to overrule the ALUC determination and it does not authorize the development of the Property or commit the City to approve the Project. Potential project impacts will be analyzed when the City Council considers the Project.
14-15
Resolution No. 2024-
Section 7: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution.
ADOPTED this 13th day of February, 2024.
Will O'Neill
Mayor
ATTEST:
Leilani I. Brown
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Aaron. Harp
City ,fit orney
Attachment(s): Exhibit A — Legal Description
14-16
Exhibit "A"
Legal Description
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH, IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 50 OF IRVINE'S SUBDIVISION, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 1, PAGE 88 OF MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS MAPS,
RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF TRACT 706, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 21, PAGE 25 OF
MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PARCEL 2 IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 54, PAGE 11 OF PARCEL MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
EXCEPT THE FULL RIGHTS TO ALL MINERALS, PETROLEUM, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES EXISTING BELOW FIVE HUNDRED (500) FEET
FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE, PROVIDED,
HOWEVER, THAT GRANTOR HEREBY EXPRESSLY WAIVES THE RIGHT TO ENTER
UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF
EXPLORING FOR, OR PRODUCING THE MINERALS, PETROLEUM, GAS AND
OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES SO RESERVED IN DEED RECORDED JULY 1, 1977.
14-17
Attachment B
Planning Commission Staff Report, dated December 7, 2023 (no attachments) 14-18
SUBJECT:
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
December 7, 2023
Agenda Item No. 4
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
■ General Plan Amendment
■ Planned Community Development Plan Amendment
■ Major Site Development Review
■ Affordable Housing Implementation Plan
■ Traffic Study
■ Development Agreement
■ Environmental Impact Report Addendum
SITE LOCATION: 1400 and 1420 North Bristol Street
APPLICANT: The Picerne Group
OWNER: BCD Newport Beach II, LLC.
PLANNER: Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
949-644-3234, Westmoreland(a).newportbeachca.gov
PROJECT SUMMARY
The Residences at 1400 Bristol Street project includes the demolition of two existing two- story office buildings and surface parking and the construction of 229 apartment units atop of 422-space parking structure. The project is located in the Newport Place Planned Community, at the northwest corner of Bristol Street North ("Bristol Street") and Spruce Street in the Airport Area. The project includes the construction of a pedestrian bridge that would connect to the approved residential apartment project at 1300 Bristol Street, across the Spruce Street right-of-way.
RECOMMENDATION
1) Conduct a public hearing;
2) Find that potential environmental impacts have been previously mitigated through the implementation of the policies of the General Plan as evaluated in Program Environmental Impact Report for the 2006 General Plan Update (SCH No. 2006011119), and the City of Newport Beach Housing Element Initial Study/Negative Declaration (collectively, the PEIR); therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an addendum to the previously adopted PEIR is the appropriate environmental documentation for the project; and
1 14-19
2 Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
3) Adopt Resolution No. PC2023-043 (Attachment No. PC 1) recommending the City Council adoption of Environmental Impact Report Addendum, and approval of General Plan Amendment, Planned Community Development Plan Amendment, Major Site Development Review, Affordable Housing Implementation Plan, Traffic Study, and Development Agreement, for the Residences at 1400 Bristol Street Project locatea at 14UU ana 142U Nortn Bristol Street ( F'A2U22-U2 1.
LOCATION
ON -SITE
GENERAL PLAN
General Commercial
Office CO-G
ZONING
PC-11
CURRENT USE
Office buildings
NORTH
CO-G
PC-11
Office building
SOUTH
EAST
I N/A
Mixed -Use Horizontal
(MU-H2)
N/A
PC-11
California State Route 73
Office building (future
Residences at 1300 Bristol)
WEST
CO-G
PC-11
Office buildings
3 14-21
4 Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
INTRODUCTION
Project Setting
The subject property is located in the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11)and approximately 2.38 acres in size. The site is currently designated for office uses by the General Plan and PC-11. The property is rectangular in shape, located at the northwest corner of Bristol Street and Spruce Street, and adjacent to existing office buildings and surface parking. The north office property located at 1401 Quail Street is currently being considered for residential development (Residences at 1401 Quail Street Project (PA2023-0040). The subject property is currently improved with two two-story, office buildings consisting of 38,764-square-foot and a surface parking lot.
Project Description
The Applicant, the Picerne Group, is proposing to demolish the two existing office buildings and construct a 229-unit for -rent project atop a 422-space parking structure ("Project"). The parking structure includes one level on -grade (podium level) and two levels below grade with five levels of residential above the podium. Given that the site is designated for office use by the General Plan, the applicant requests a General Plan Amendment from General Commercial Office (CO-G) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU-H2) to allow residential use. The base density allotted to the property if designated MU-H2 is 89 dwelling units. This density is based on the conversion of the existing 38,764 square foot office buildings, consistent with the City's adopted land use conversion factors. The General Plan Amendment includes a request to increase the project's base density by 64 dwelling units for a total base of 153 dwelling units. The applicant also proposes a 50% density bonus to increase the total unit count to 229 pursuant to Government Code Section 65915 (Density Bonus Law) and Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20. 32 (Density Bonus). The dwelling unit calculations are summarized below in Table 1.
Table 1: Dwelling Unit Summary
Units Based on Existing Nonresidential Uses
89 Additional Units Per Proposed General Plan
Amendment
64 Total Base Units
153
Density Bonus (50%)
77 Total Units Permitted
230
Total Units Provided
229
The project includes a proposed pedestrian bridge that would extend from the project over the Spruce Street right-of-way to the approved residential apartment project at 1300 Bristol Street (Figure 1).
15 14-23
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
r
■Ur
n
Figure 1: Pedestrian Bridge
The Applicant's full project description is provided as Attachment No. PC 2.
The following approvals are requested to implement the Project as proposed - General Plan Amendment (GPA)- A request to change the existing General Plan land use designation from General Commercial Office (CO-G) to Mixed Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) and add 64 dwelling units above the General Plan allowance to Anomaly 16 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations); • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment- An amendment to the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) to include the project site within the Residential Overlay;
• Major Site Development Review - A site development review in accordance with the Newport Place Planned Community and Section 20.52.80 (Site Development Reviews) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"), for the construction of the Project;
• Affordable Housing Implementation Plan ("AHIP") - A plan specifying how the Project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, in exchange for a request of 50 percent increase in density. The Applicant seeks six (6) development standard waivers related to park land dedication, building setbacks, 0 14-24
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
building height, private open space for each residential unit, common open space for the entire Project, and overall residential project density pursuant to Chapter
20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC and Government Code Section 65915 (Density Bonus Law). The Applicant also seeks one development concession related to the mix of affordable units, pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC and Government Code Section 65915;
• Traffic Study - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the NBMC;
• Development Agreement — A Development Agreement between the Applicant and the City, pursuant to Section 15.45.020(A)(2)(a) (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, which would provide the Applicant with the vested right to develop the Project for a term of 10 years and to provide negotiated public benefits to the City; and
• Addendum to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental Impact Report ("Addendum") - Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the Addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the Project.
Project Components:
Residential Development
The proposed multi -unit residential building is designed as a "podium style" structure that consists of five stories over one level of on -grade parking and two levels of subterranean parking. The building height would be approximately 85 feet, including architectural elements, parapet, rooftop mechanical equipment, and roof access.
The 229 apartment units include 40 studio units,126 one -bedroom units, and 63 two - bedroom units. The studio units would be 515 square feet, the one -bedroom units would range from 613 to 896 square feet, and the two -bedroom units are proposed to range from 1,049 to 1,469 square feet.
Of the 229 units, 23 units would be affordable and restricted to very -low-income households. The remaining 203 units would be market -rate, for -rent apartment units.
While there is an overall unit mix of studio (17.5%), one -bedroom (55%), and two - bedroom (27.5%) units, almost all of the affordable units are one -bedroom or studio units (refer to Table 2 below). This does not meet the standards of Section 20.32.110 (Design and Distribution of Affordable Units) of the NBMC, which requires affordable units in a density bonus project to reflect the same range of unit types in the development as a 7 14-25
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
whole. However, the applicant is requesting relief through an incentive/concession' from State Density Bonus Law, further discussed below.
Table 2: Unit Mix
Very Low
Unit Type
'Total Units
Income Units
Studio
40 14
1 Bedroom
126
8 2 Bedroom
63 1
Total
229
23 The Project would include a modern contemporary architectural style with articulated facades composed of a mix of stucco, fiber cement board siding, and tile veneer fagade accents. The color scheme would be white, dark grey, and beige. Metal awnings and metal railings on the private decks would further provide fagade articulation. The architectural design of the Project reflects the surrounding office context. Its contemporary forms complement the existing office buildings to create a building that respects the current condition while creating a distinctly unique identity. The Project corners are enhanced with rich materials to bring attention to and articulate the prominent areas of the Project. The applicant's approach to the building site orientation was to create a sheltered refuge in the center of the project by enclosing the courtyards shielding them from the busy roadways of Bristol Street and Spruce Street.
Figure 2: Rendering from Bristol Street
' The terms incentive and concession are used interchangeably. 2 14-26
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
Vehicular Access, Parking, and Pedestrian Bridge
Vehicular access to the project site is currently and would continue to be provided from one driveway on Bristol Street and one driveway on Spruce Street. Vehicular access and circulation are shown below on Figure 3. Because Bristol Street is a one-way roadway, the driveway will only allow right turns in and out. The driveway at Spruce Street will provide full access (i.e., right and left turns in and out). The driveway entrance on Bristol Street North would be relocated approximately 65 feet to the northwest (further away from the intersection at Spruce) and it will provide controlled access to the resident garage entry. The driveway entrance on Spruce Street would lead to another gated entry for residents and guests. The gated entry on Spruce Street would remain open during business hours for guests. After business hours, guests would use a free-standing call box for entry. A designated turn out area is proposed within the Bristol Street North entry for loading, deliveries, and trash pick-up. Separately, a turnout area on Spruce Street will be provided for ride share pick up and drop offs.
�\IMMEMIN
ti
II1 j111'i�llll ,111
'�
1�111111�
1 1111111111111 1
�` 11111\1` 1�=i� 111` 11 Il�ilillll\\
�! 111 \�=�=ili 11111�i=�=j11111\III 11\\�1111�111
MENEMEMMEN
Figure 3 Vehicular Circulation
Guest parking would be provided on the ground level from the Spruce Street entrance.
All guest parking would be separated from resident parking by roll up gates. The Bristol Street entrance leads to a resident only access with assigned parking. Subterranean parking would be restricted to residents with key -card access. 9 14-27
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
As a Density Bonus project, the Project is required to provide 261 parking spaces. The Project proposes to provide 422 parking spaces. The parking ratio would be 1.84 parking spaces per dwelling unit inclusive of guest parking, which would exceed Government Code Section 65915(p) and NBMC Section 20.32.060 (Parking Requirements in Density Bonus Projects) requirements as summarized in Table 3.
Table 3: Parking Summary
Level
Resident
Guest
Total
Resident
Accessible
EV
Guest
Accessible
EV
Ground Level
57 3
3 42
3 1
109
Subterranean
Level 1
131
5 17
0 0
0 153
Subterranean
Level2
160
0 0
0 0
0 160
Total
348
8 20
42 3
1 Total Resident: 376
Total Guest: 46
422
EV=Electric Vehicle
Source: TCA Architects, 2023.
The project includes a steel truss pedestrian bridge that extends from the proposed project over the Spruce Street right-of-way to the approved residential apartment project at 1300 Bristol Street. The pedestrian bridge would be located on the second story, at the southern corner of the building. The bridge would include a 9-foot-wide pathway and span approximately 108 feet and provide a minimum 17-foot clearance for emergency vehicles.
The pedestrian bridge is intended to provide connectivity between the two residential projects and allow sharing of amenities between the sites. The properties are owned and will be operated by the same entity. The applicant will be required to enter into a lease agreement with the City of Newport Beach subject to the payment of fees for the use of air- space over the City's right-of-way. The pedestrian bridge has been conditioned to comply with Caltrans standards for bridge construction.
Project Amenities
The proposed project includes a variety of private on -site recreation and amenities for residents and guests including a clubroom, pool deck, roof deck, and other uses summarized below:
1 D 14-28
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
I apse +-. rroject Hmenitles
PROVIDED
Business Center
3,400 SF
Mail Room
1,004 SF
Club Room
3,282 SF
California Room
1,850 SF
Media Center
1,469 SF
Pool RR/Showers
960 SF
Roof Lounge Area
817 SF
Roof deck
1,510 SF
IlDog Spa
463 SF
TOTAL 14,�55 SF
Construction Phasing
Implementation of the proposed Project occur over an approximately 24-month period.
Demolition and construction activities are assumed to commence in Summer 2024 and conclude in Spring 2026. The applicant has submitted a draft construction management plan, subject to staff approval that will be finalized prior to the issuance of a building permit and is included as Attachment No. PC 3.
Off -Site Improvements
The Sewer Capacity Study prepared by Tait & Associates, Inc. dated August 11, 2023, concludes that there is insufficient capacity in a downstream segment of pipe to support the project along with other approved and planned residential development in the area.
Figure 4 below shows the location of a 435-foot long segment of pipe near the intersection of Newport Place and Dove Street where an existing 10-inch vitrified clay pipe (VCP) pipe will need to be replaced by a 12-inch main. As conditioned, the applicant will either replace the existing segment of pipe (and be potentially reimbursed by future applicants and the City), or the City will replace the line and all applicants will pay their fair share of the costs.
Alternatively, the City may choose a different method to finance the cost of the improvement. No other off -site improvements other than typical utility connections are proposed or required as part of the project (other than the pedestrian bridge that would cross the public right-of-way).
11 14-29
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
Off -site Sewery PLACE OR
Line Segment_`°-
x
Subject Property
r
rc,
Figure 4: Off -Site Sewer Improvements
DISCUSSION
General Plan Amendment
The subject property is located in the Airport Area and is currently designated as General Commercial Office (CO-G) by the General Plan Land Use Element. The applicant is requesting to change the land use designation of the subject property from the CO-G designation to Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2), which provides for a horizontal intermixing of uses that may include regional commercial office, multifamily residential, vertical mixed -use buildings, industrial, hotel rooms, and ancillary neighborhood commercial uses.
The MU-H2 designation applies to a majority of properties in the Airport Area and allows a maximum of 2,200 residential units as replacement of existing office, retail, and/or industrial uses at a maximum density of 50 units per net acre. Any eligible density bonus allowed by Government Code Section 65915 (State density bonus law) and NBMC Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) and the requested 64 GPA units are not included in the 2,200-unit policy allowance. Presently, there are a total of 353 units remaining and available to be entitled. With the approval of this project, there would be 264 (353-89=264) dwelling units remaining (exclusive of density bonus units and units authorized through General Plan Amendments).
Residential units approved, proposed and remaining within the MU-H2 designation of the Airport Area are listed in the table below.
12 14-30
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
Airport Area Residential Units
Residential Development Allocation
Base Units
Density
Bonus
Units
Project
Totals with
Density
Bonus
Replacement
Units
Additive
Units
Transferred
Units
Total Units
General Plan Unit Limit (MU-H2)
1,650
550
0 2,200
Approved Projects
Uptown Newport
632
290
-77
845
322
1,167
Newport Crossings
259
0 0
259
91 350
Newport Airport Village
329
0 0
329
115
444
Residences at 4400 Von Karman
260
0 260
52 312
Residences at 1300 Bristol
77 0
+77
154
39 193
Projects Under Review
Residences at 1400 Bristol
89 0
0 89
77 229*
Remaining Development Allocation
264
0 264
*Project total reflects actual proposed project inclusive of density bonus units and GPA units. However, the density bonus units and GPA units are not restricted by the 2,200 residential unit limit identified in the 2006 General Plan.
The GPA also includes a revision to Anomaly 16 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) to allow 64 additional residential dwelling units at the Property. Conversions of existing commercial space to dwelling units and density bonus units are not tracked within Table LU2.
The GPA and the resulting land use change are compatible with the existing surrounding uses and planned land uses identified by the General Plan, because the project would introduce additional residential land uses in the Airport Area which includes a diverse mix of land uses including the gradual development of residential multiunit dwellings.
Additionally, even with the conversion from CO-G to MU-H2, the building will be compatible with adjacent commercial properties architectural style and pedestrian connectivity. Additional residential development would support commercial properties within the Airport Area.
Furthermore, the GPA does not eliminate existing or future land uses to the overall detriment of the community given the subject property's size, location, and surrounding uses. The existing office buildings on -site were built in the 1970's and there are sufficient office facilities in the Airport Area to support the business needs of the community. The proposed change to allow residential uses would increase the City's housing stock including the provision of 23 units that will be affordable to lower incomes. is 14-31
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
The General Plan contains a number of policies that provide for the orderly evolution of the Airport Area, from a business park, to a mixed -use district with cohesive residential villages integrated within the existing fabric of office, industrial, retail, and airport -related businesses. Residential opportunities are to be developed as clusters of residential villages centering on neighborhood parks and interconnected by pedestrian walkways.
These would contain a mix of housing types and buildings that integrate housing with ground level convenience retail uses and would be developed at a sufficient scale to achieve a complete neighborhood. While this specific site was not identified as a site for mixed -use development due to noise from the airport, actual noise from the airport is less than predicted due to changes in flying patterns and improved technology. As a result, it is appropriate to consider housing at the project site.
Housing Element
The Housing Element identifies adequate sites to accommodate its fair share allocation for the Sixth Cycle Housing Element to accommodate housing growth needs by income categories. The project site is identified as a housing inventory site. Figure B-3 of the Housing Element (below) displays the capacity and opportunity within the Airport Area which can help accommodate a portion of the City's RHNA. Ultimately, the project implements the certified Housing Element and aids the City in its goal to provide new housing opportunities.
Figure B-3: Airport Area Environs —Sites Inventory
Site Inventory:
Airport Area Environs
LEGEND
-- City Boundary
sth Cycle 51tes
Pipeline Projects
Opportunity Sites
Key Map
•f
MMMMME--= Feet
NO N 0 500 1 000
i4 14-32
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
Noise Element and Airport Environs Land Use Plan
The Project is within the boundaries of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP"), therefore, the overseeing agency, Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), must review the proposed GPA and PCDP Amendment pursuant to Government Code Section 65302.3 and Public Utilities Code Section 21676. The purpose of ALUC's review is to determine whether the Project is consistent with the AELUP prior to the City Council acting on the Project. Staff anticipates review of the project by the ALUC on December 21, 2023.
The Project is consistent with the policies of the Noise Element and the safety standards of the AELUP. With respect to noise, the City adopted noise -related amendments to the General Plan Noise and Land Use Elements, the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) and Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) contours to implement the 6t" Cycle Housing Element. The Project is located within the updated 60 decibel ("dBA") community noise equivalent level ("CNEL") contour as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan, where residential development is allowed. As a result, the Project will be required to comply with the development standards set forth in Section 20.30.080(F) of the NBMC. The Project site is outside of any safety zones set forth in the AELUP. The AELUP includes noise contours from the 1985 Master Plan and the site is bisected by the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour. The AELUP indicates that housing within this noise contour would not be compatible, but it does not prohibit residential use. These outdated AELUP noise contour maps do not reflect changes in aviation technology and current air traffic patterns. In other words, the noise contours do not reflect current and future noise contours and the site will not be subject to aircraft noise that exceeds 65 dBA CNEL under current approved conditions.
The draft Planning Commission resolution (Attachment No. PC 1) includes facts in support of a finding of consistency of relevant Airport Area policies. Furthermore, the EIR Addendum includes a comprehensive analysis of all relevant General Plan policies. The project, as proposed, is consistent with all relevant General Plan policies.
Charter Section 423 Analysis
Charter Section 423 requires voter approval of any major General Plan amendment to the General Plan. A major General Plan amendment is one that significantly increases allowed density or intensity by 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor area, increases traffic by more than 100 peak hour vehicle trips (AM/PM), or increases residential dwelling units by 100 units. These thresholds apply to the total of increases resulting from the amendment itself, plus 80% of the increases resulting from other amendments affecting the same neighborhood (defined as a Statistical Area as shown in the General Plan Land Use Element) and adopted within the preceding ten years.
Council Policy A-18 (Guidelines for Implementing Charter Section 423) requires that proposed amendments to the General Plan be reviewed to determine if a vote of the 15 14-33
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
Newport Beach electorate would be required. This policy includes a provision that all General Plan amendments be tracked as "Prior Amendments" for ten (10) years to determine if minor amendments in a single Statistical Area cumulatively exceed the thresholds indicated above.
The Project is the first General Plan Amendment in Statistical Area L1 within the last 10 years that includes additional dwelling units or non-residential floor area. The proposed amendment results in 64 additional dwelling units and no change in the square footage of non-residential floor area. Conversions of existing commercial development is allowed by the current General Plan, as discussed previously. Reductions in commercial floor area are not tracked as part of the Charter Section 423 analysis. Density bonus units are not included in Charter Section 423 analysis because it is mandated by State law and allowed at any site designated for housing.
The 64 additional dwelling units allocated by the requested general plan amendment result in a net increase of 24 a.m. peak hour trips and 25 p.m. peak hour trips based on the "Multifamily Housing (Mid Rise) Not Close to Rail" ITE 11th Edition trip rate for the proposed use, as provided in Council Policy A-18. No credit is given to the existing non- residential uses on -site because the existing office floor area was converted to residential dwelling units so that the proposed project (less the density bonus and GPA units) is traffic neutral. Therefore, the Project individually does not exceed the Charter Section 423 thresholds to require a vote of the electorate should the City Council approve the requested GPA. Furthermore, since there have been no other applicable projects in the last 10-years, there is no need to analyze the cumulative development of 80% of prior General Plan amendments from the last 10 years with the proposed project (i.e., cumulative analysis). As none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are exceeded, no vote of the electorate is required if the City Council chooses to approve the requested GPA. 80% of the increases in units and peak hour trips related to this project will be tracked as a prior amendment for 10 years from the date of approval of the proposed GPA.
Tribal Consultation (SB-18)
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65352.3 (SB18), a local government is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission ("NAHC") each time it considers a proposal to adopt or amend the General Plan. If requested by any tribe, the City must consult for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural resources. The City received a response from the NAHC indicating that 12 tribal contacts should be provided notice regarding the proposed amendment. The tribal contacts were provided notice on January 26, 2023. California Government Code Section 65352.3 requires notification 90 days prior to Council action to allow tribal contacts to respond to the request to consult. Three tribal contacts requested consultation within the 90-day period: the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation, the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians, Acjachemen Nation-Belardes, and the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California. Although consultation with the participating 10 14-34
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
Native American Tribes is ongoing, draft conditions of approval have been included to address potential concerns regarding the protection of Tribal Cultural Resources. The conditions of approval require on -site monitoring during ground disturbing activities by tribal representatives as well as appropriate conditions should tribal cultural resources be discovered.
Newport Place Planned Community (Zoning Code) Amendment The property is currently located within Industrial Site 3A of PC11 and not within the Residential Overlay of PC11. The industrial zoning designation was established in 1972 with the adoption of the planned community text. Office development is and remains allowed. A request to allow the subject property to be added to the Residential Overlay of PC11 is necessary to accommodate the proposed residential development. Further change to PC11 is not necessary as the intent of the residential overlay is to allow housing regardless of the underlying zoning category. The property is located within 85 feet of properties subject to the Residential Overlay.
The Overlay allows for multiple residential development as a stand-alone use provided that it includes a minimum of 15% of the base density for lower income households. The project provides this minimum number of affordable units by provide 23 dwelling units as affordable for very -low income households (153 base units x 15% = 22.95 = 23 units).
The Overlay also contains development standards for multi -residential development, including density, height, setbacks, parking, signage, airport noise compatibility, amenities, and landscaping. The Overlay limits the density for a residential development to be between 30 and 50 dwelling units per acre. The Project includes 89 base units or
37.4 dwelling units per acre, not including density bonus units or the requested units through the requested GPA. The base density with the requested GPA results in a density of 64.3 dwelling units per acre. The overall density of the project including the density bonus units is 96.2 units per acre. Both the base density and density bonus units are not consistent with the PC Text density requirement; however, the Applicant is requesting a development standard waiver pursuant to the NBMC and State Density Bonus Law.
Additionally, the Overlay requires that residential dwellings are to be permitted as replacement of existing nonresidential uses consistent with General Plan policy, and the number of peak hour trips generated by the Project is not to exceed the number of trips of the underlying permitted nonresidential use. A detailed discussion of the proposed project and conversion of existing office space is provided in the prior sections.
Although the Project includes waivers or reductions of the development standards specified in the Overlay pertaining building height and setbacks, the overall intent of providing residential opportunities in the proposed Residential Overlay are being met. z7 14-35
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
Site Development Review
Residential development pursuant to the Residential Overlay of PC11 requires a site development review, consistent with NBMC Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Review). In accordance with Section 20.52.080(F), the Planning Commission may approve or conditionally approve a site development review application, only after first finding that the proposed development is:
1. Allowed within the subject zoning district;
2. In compliance with all of the applicable criteria identified in 20.52.080(C)(2)(c) below:
i. Compliance with this section, the General Plan, this Zoning Code, any applicable specific plan, and other applicable criteria and policies related to the use or structure;
ii. The efficient arrangement of structures on the site and the harmonious relationship of the structures to one another and to other adjacent developments; and whether the relationship is based on standards of good design;
iii. The compatibility in terms of bulk, scale, and aesthetic treatment of structures on the site and adjacent developments and public areas; iv. The adequacy, efficiency, and safety of pedestrian and vehicular access, including drive aisles, driveways, and parking and loading spaces; V. The adequacy and efficiency of landscaping and open space areas and the use of water efficient plant and irrigation materials; and
vi. The protection of significant views from public right(s)-of-way and compliance with Section 20.30.100 (Public View Protection).
3. Not detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the City, nor endangers, jeopardizes, or otherwise constitutes a hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed development.
The project seeks to implement the proposed MU-H2 General Plan designation and Residential Overlay of PC-11 by providing 229 new residential units to an existing major employment center (the Airport Area and Irvine Business Complex), including setting aside 23 residential units for very -low income households.
The proposed project plans (Attachment No. PC 7) show the configuration of the proposed residential building, including driveways, location of open spaces, landscaping, and private amenities. The building is proposed to be six stories tall and approximately 85 feet in height including all architectural elements and rooftop mechanical equipment.
The architecture would be high -quality and incorporate neutral colors with stone/tile, metal, and glass features. The proposed pedestrian bridge is designed to match the 12 14-36
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
architectural style of the proposed building and the approved, but not yet constructed apartment building at 1300 Bristol Street. The parking is largely screened from public view, with two of the three levels located entirely below grade and landscaping buffers around the first -floor parking structure. The project includes enhanced landscaping along Bristol Street North in compliance with PC-11 and the project is conditioned to widen sidewalks, which will improve the pedestrian experience in the area.
The pedestrian bridge includes "see -through" elements that reduce its mass and scale.
The Project's building mass including the pedestrian bridge are compatible with the surrounding office developments and anticipated future development. The project's building mass and scale are similar to the nearby existing office developments in the Airport Area and includes pedestrian connectivity to public sidewalks along Bristol Street and Spruce Street and pedestrian -scale landscaped areas around the apartment building.
The property at 1451 Quail Street is developed with an approximately 37-foot tall office building. The 1400 Quail Street property, located across Quail Street, is developed with an approximately 30-foot tall office building. Furthermore, a 78-foot tall residential apartment building has been approved to be constructed at 1300 Bristol Street, which is located across Spruce Street. Finally, 1401 Quail Street which is the adjacent property, is proposing a 67-unit condominium project that is approximately 86 feet in height. The height and scale of pending and approved development in the immediate vicinity, the proposed project at 85 feet high will be compatible with the planned urban village planned for the Airport Area.
The project includes 422 onsite parking spaces located on a podium level parking structure which includes a two subterranean parking levels below. The project includes adequate onsite parking exceeding the minimum required residential standard pursuant to Density Bonus Law.
NBMC Section 20.40.040, Off -Street Parking Requirements, identifies that multi -family developments with more than four dwelling units are required to provide two covered parking spaces per unit and 0.5 space per unit for guest parking. Based on these criteria, the proposed Project, if it were not a project requesting consideration pursuant to Density Bonus Laws, would be required to provide 458 resident parking spaces and 115 guest parking spaces for a total of 573 parking spaces. As provided for in Government Code Section 65915 Density Bonus Law and NBMC Section 20.32.060 (Parking Requirements in Density Bonus Projects), the applicant is requesting a reduction in the number of required parking spaces for the project. NBMC Section 20.32.060, reflects the language of Government Code Section 65915 provision of 1.0 parking spaces for studio and one - bedroom units and 1.5 parking spaces for units with two bedrooms. Parking for the project is based on application of regulatory standards for density bonus projects and under these regulatory standards, the proposed Project is required to provide a minimum of 261 parking spaces. The project as presently designed includes 422 parking spaces, with 376 for resident spaces and 76 for guest. The parking ratio of the proposed project would be
1.84 parking spaces per dwelling unit inclusive of guest parking, which exceeds the 1-9 14-37
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
minimum parking requirement specified by the Density Bonus parking requirements. This excess parking is necessary in recognition that mass transit in the area is not as robust, and residents will rely on the automobile. As the area transitions, transit and walkability will improve as new uses are developed to provide services and goods for future residents.
The City's General Plan does not identify any scenic vistas or viewpoints on or proximate to the Project site. The nearest public viewpoint to the Project site identified in the City's General Plan is approximately 0.5 mile south at Bayview Park. The nearest coastal view designated portion of Jamboree Road is approximately 2,000 feet south of the site. Due to the distance and highly urbanized nature of the Project area, public coastal views along this view corridor would not be impacted by the Project.
As discussed above, the project has been designed to ensure that potential conflicts with surrounding land uses are minimized to the extent possible to maintain a healthy environment for both businesses and residents by providing an architecturally pleasing project with articulation and building modulations to enhance the urban environment. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan as it would integrate residential uses into the existing surroundings, which are primarily nonresidential, as anticipated by the General Plan. Staff believes facts to support the required findings exist to approve the Site Development Review, and they are included in the attached draft resolution for approval (Attachment No. PC 1).
Affordable Housing Implementation Plan
The applicant has prepared a draft Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP), dated August 11, 2023 (Exhibit C of Attachment No. PC 1) to illustrate compliance with the affordable housing requirements of the Residential Overlay of Newport Place Planned Community and density bonus allowances pursuant Government Code Section 65915- 65918 (Density Bonus Law) and NBMC Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus Code).
Consistent with the affordable housing requirements of the Residential Overlay, 15% or 23 units of the project's 153 base units would be set aside as affordable units to very -low income households for 55 years.
Incentive/Concession Request. -
The 15% allocation of very -low-income households makes the project entitled to a density bonus of 50% (77 units) above the maximum number of units allowed by the General Plan.
In addition to the 77 density bonus units requested, the project is entitled to receive three incentives or concessions that would result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions. The applicant requests the following incentive:
20 14-38
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
a. Affordable unit mix that does not meet NBMC Section 20.32.110 (Design and Distribution of Affordable Units). This section requires affordable units in a density bonus project reflect the same range of unit types in the residential development as a whole. See previous discussion regarding unit mix. Granting this incentive will result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual project cost reductions by reducing the long-term rental subsidy costs associated with the two -bedroom units and affording additional rental income for the project to ensure financial feasibility.
Development Standard Waivers
In addition to the density bonus units, parking reductions, and financial concessions, the Project is entitled to receive unlimited waivers or reductions of development standards if the development standard would physically prevent the project from being built at the permitted density. In this case, the Applicant requests waivers of the following development standards:
a. Park dedication requirement. General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.13 requires a public park equal to eight percent of the gross land area of the development, or a minimum one-half acre, whichever is greater, be provided. In this case, the 2.28- acre project site is too small to feasibly accommodate a half -acre park. The City has granted this dedication waiver twice previously with the Newport Airport Village planned community and the Residences at 1300 Bristol Street project. b. Residential density. General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.7 limits residential density between 30-50 units per acre. Inclusive of only the conversion units, the density would comply at 37.4 dwelling units per acre. Including the proposed GPA units, the resulting base density would be 64.3 units per acre exceeding the limit and a waiver is necessary to implement the project. Again, the City has previously granted this policy waiver allowing excess density twice with the Newport Airport Village planned community and the 1300 Bristol Street projects. c. Street setbacks. The Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) requires street setbacks of 30 feet from property lines. In this case, 30-foot setbacks along Bristol Street and Spruce Street would substantially decrease the development of the footprint of the Project. The Project is designed with 8-foot setbacks to Spruce Street and 18-foot setbacks to Bristol Street similar to the setback reduction with the Residences at 1300 Bristol project.
d. Building height. The Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) limits building height to 55 feet from established grade. In this case, a higher building height is necessary to accommodate 229 residential units. The Project is designed with a height of approximately 85 feet from established grade. The City granted a similar waiver with the Residences at 1300 Bristol Street project. e. Private open space. NBMC Section 20.18.030 (Residential Zoning Districts General Development Standards) requires a minimum of 5% of the gross floor area of each unit to be provided as open space. The Project's studio dwelling units and 21 14-39
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
nine of the two -bedroom units (including four units which provide only 2 square feet less than the private open space requirement) are unable to achieve these minimum private open space standards given their size and location. f. Common open space. NBMC Section 20.18.030 (Residential Zoning Districts General Developments Standards) requires a minimum of 75 square feet per unit be provided as common open space area. In this case, the requirement is 17,175 square feet (75 square feet per unit x 229 units). The Project as designed provides approximately 13,800 square feet of common open space due to space limitations on the 2.38-acre lot.
Fiscal Impact Analysis and Development Agreement
Pursuant to General Plan Implementation Program 12.1, a fiscal impact analysis was prepared for the project by Applied Development Economics dated August 14, 2023 (Attachment PC 5). The fiscal impact model used in the report calculates public service impacts for specific land uses that support the residential population, the employment base and the visitor population in Newport Beach. It also calculates the public revenues that each type of land use typically generates for the City, including property taxes, sales taxes and other taxes as well as a variety of user charges and fees.
The report concludes that the proposed residential rental project would generate a negative fiscal impact for the City, substantially higher than the negative fiscal impact of the existing office use of the site. Annually, the existing office use generates a negative fiscal impact of about $56,000 per year and the project would generate a negative fiscal impact of approximately $173,824. This is consistent with the original fiscal analysis of residential uses in the 2006 General Plan, although in recent years some very high value luxury residential projects have shown a positive fiscal benefit. The net impact of the growth in land uses at buildout of the General Plan compared to existing land uses in 2006 when the plan was adopted, would result in a positive fiscal impact for the General Fund of $21.7 million per year. Additionally, the project will be required to pay public benefit fees as part of the Development Agreement, which would offset some of the impacts. The project would also provide much needed housing opportunities in the City in furtherance of the certified Housing Element including 23 rental units affordable to very - low income households.
In accordance with Section 15.45.020.A.2.a (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, a development agreement is required as the proposed project includes an amendment to PC11 and a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation which include the development of 50 or more residential units.
The applicant requests a 10-year term of agreement. The agreement provides assurance that the applicant may proceed with the proposed project in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, and conditions of approval. Additionally, the agreement helps the applicant avoid a waste of resources and escalated costs of the proposed 22 14-40
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
project while encouraging a commitment to private participation in comprehensive planning. Staff supports the requested 10-year term.
The DA provides vested rights to develop the project and the City is currently negotiating public benefit fees per each residential dwelling unit. The final negotiated fees will be presented to the City Council and are based on prior development agreements including the Newport Airport Village project. These fees are subject to annual adjustments, based on the CPI Index and would be payable at building permit issuance or prior to occupancy.
Finally, the agreement includes all mandatory elements, including public benefits that are appropriate to support conveying the vested development rights consistent with the City's General Plan, NBMC, and Government Code Sections 65864 et seq.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO)
NBMC Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) requires a traffic study to be prepared prior to issuance of building permits if a proposed project generates in excess of 300 new average daily trips (ADT).
Ganddini Group Inc. has prepared a traffic study dated June 28, 2023 (Exhibit D of Attachment No. PC 1), under the supervision of the City Traffic Engineer, pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) and its implementing guidelines. The focus of a TPO traffic study is the conditions one year after project occupancy, or five years after project approval for larger projects not expected to be complete within five years. Baseline traffic conditions for a TPO traffic study include previously approved projects in the City. The entire project is anticipated to be complete by the end of 2026, well within the five year criteria.
The Traffic Study provides an evaluation of morning and evening peak hours at 13 existing intersections that are located in the City and the adjoining City of Irvine. The Project is projected to generate an additional (i.e. net increase of) 624 daily trips, including 26 peak AM trips and 34 peak PM trips. When these trips are distributed to these studied intersections, the analysis concludes that there is no significant impact as the project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of service at any impacted primary intersection, and all intersections are forecasted to continue to operate at acceptable Levels of Service (LOS). Additionally, the Traffic Study includes vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis for informational purposes only. An analysis of VMT was not required as a part of the CEQA Addendum because the adopted Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR), adopted in 2006, did not utilize VMT analysis. Nonetheless, the informational analysis concludes that the project is in an area mapped with low residential VMT per capita. Therefore, the project is presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT since it satisfies the City established screening criteria.
Furthermore, the TPO requires findings that, based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the traffic study, the proposed project complies with the 2S 14-41
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
TPO. Findings related to the preparation of the traffic study are provided in the draft resolution for project approval (Attachment No. PC 1).
Environmental Review
On July 25, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006-75, thereby certifying the adequacy and completeness of the Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the General Plan 2006 Update (SCH No. 2006011119). The EIR was prepared in compliance with the CEQA set forth in the California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. and its implementing State regulations set forth in the California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines") and City Council Policy K-3. Additionally, in accordance with Section 15168(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, the City prepared the EIR as a Program Environmental Impact Report ("PEIR"). This PEIR analyzed the potential impacts of a citywide land use plan, and the goals and policies of 10 general plan elements.
Additionally, on November 22, 2011, the City Council adopted General Plan Amendment No. GP2008-003, thereby approving the City of Newport Beach Housing Element Update (2008-2014) and its associated Housing Element Initial Study/Negative Declaration.
Pursuant to Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, when an EIR or prior Negative Declaration has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR or other analysis is required unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects,
2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR,-
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
24 14-42
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
C. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
The City contracted with an environmental consultant (Kimley Horn and Associates) to prepare an Addendum to the PEIR. The entire Addendum and its technical appendixes are available online at the City's website at: www.newportbeachca.gov/cega . The conclusion of the Addendum analysis supports the finding that no additional environmental documentation is required by CEQA.
On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the project will not result in any new significant impacts that were not previously analyzed in the PEIR for the General Plan 2006 Update (SCH No. 2006011119) or the Housing Element Initial Study/Negative Declaration. All potential impacts associated with this Project would either be the same or less than those described in either the PEIR or Negative Declaration that have been appropriately mitigated. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in either the PEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an addendum to the previously adopted PEIR is the appropriate environmental document for the project.
Summary
Staff believes the findings for project approval can be made, with specific conditions of approval. The proposed project is consistent with the proposed MU-H2 General Plan Land Use designation and its land use policies related residential developments in the Airport Area. The proposed project is also consistent with the recently updated Noise Element.
The proposed application of the Newport Place Residential Overlay will provide for the project as it allows multi -family uses subject to approval of a site development review and facts support approval of the application request. The site development review will ensure the project will be implemented consistent with the approved development standards. The applicant proposes to redevelop the underperforming office development with a for rent multi -unit development with affordable units consistent with the Overlay and in furtherance of the Certified Housing Element. The proposed development with on -site 25 14-43
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
recreation amenities and adequate provisions of parking, allowed by the density bonus provisions, will create a suitable urban living environment integrated into the existing nonresidential area.
The proposed pedestrian bridge will create connectivity between the approved project at 1300 Bristol and the subject project. Conditions of approval are included in the draft resolution that will require the applicant to enter a lease agreement with the City of Newport Beach and pay the fair market value for rent of the City's airspace over the Spruce Street right-of-way. The construction drawings will be reviewed by all City departments including the City Traffic Engineer, Building Division, and Life Safety Services Divisions (Fire Department) to ensure the design meets height, accessibility, and other applicable standards.
Alternatives
The Planning Commission has the following alternatives:
1. The Planning Commission may require or suggest specific design changes that are necessary to alleviate any areas of concern. If the requested changes are substantial, staff will return with a revised resolution incorporating new findings and/or conditions; or
2. If the Planning Commission chooses to deny the project, findings must be made consistent with the Housing Accountability Act (Government Code Section 65589.5) and Density Bonus Law (Government Code Section 65915). Therefore, if after consideration of all written and oral evidence presented, the Planning Commission desires to either disapprove or impose a condition that the project be developed at a lower density or with any other conditions that would adversely impact feasibility of the proposed project, the Planning Commission must articulate the factual basis for making the following findings and direct staff to return with a revised resolution incorporating the articulated findings and factual basis for the decision:
a. The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety. As used in this paragraph, a "specific, adverse impact" means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.
b. There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to affordable households financially infeasible.
Public Notice
20 14-44
Residences at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296)
Planning Commission, December 7, 2023
Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights -of -way and waterways) including the applicant, and posted on the subject property at least 10 days before the scheduled meeting, consistent with the provisions of the Municipal Code.
Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the city website.
Prepared by:
Submitted by:
4v-
Liz W tmoreland Jim Campbell
Senior Planner Deputy Community Development Director
ATTACHMENTS
PC 1 Draft Resolution with Findings and Conditions
PC 2 Applicant's Project Description
PC 3 Construction Management Plan
PC 4 Addendum to the 2006 General Plan EIR
PC 5 Fiscal Impact Analysis
PC 6 Public Comments
PC 7 Project plans
27 14-45
Attachment C
Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt dated December 7, 2023 14-46
DocuSign Envelope ID: F2563D7B-A495-4A61-9AB6-234A281FB870 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
December 7, 2023
median, landscaping and lighting proposals, CEQA exemptions for Class 1 and 14, and staff recommendations.
Ex parte communications revealed that Commissioner Rosene spoke with the applicant's representative, while the other Commissioners disclosed none.
Chair Ellmore opened the public hearing.
Shawna Schaffner, CEO of CAA Planning and representative to the applicant, thanked City staff for working together on the project and used a presentation to review the background, proposed project, requested approvals, school site views and elevations, materials board, photo renderings, view from Newport Coast Drive, traffic study, offset school hours, and biological resources study. She stated that the applicant agrees with the conditions of approval.
An unidentified student at Sage Hill supported the project.
Mike Baldwin, Sage Hill trustee and Chairman of the Board, supported the project and asked the Council for approval.
Jim Mosher noted that the specific approval and PA number are missing in part 2 of the decision on handwritten page 34.
Deputy Community Development Director Campbell concurred with Mr. Mosher's note and asked that the PA number be added, and the Commission accepted staff's recommendation with the minor change.
Chair Ellmore closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Lowrey thought the addition is nice and will fit in well.
Secretary Harris liked the proposal and thought the queueing and traffic issues have been resolved.
Commissioner Langford thanked the public for attending the City Council meeting and encouraged graduated students to return to Newport Beach if they leave the area for studies.
Chair Ellmore thought the project is fantastic.
Motion made by Chair Ellmore and seconded by Vice Chair Rosene to approve staff's recommendation with the modification to condition of approval number 34 and the minor insertion into the recommendation.
AYES:
Ellmore, Lowrey, Langford, Harris, Rosene, and Salene
NOES:
None
ABSTAIN:
None
ABSENT:
Barto
ITEM NO. 4
RESIDENCES AT 1400 BRISTOL STREET (PA2022-0296)
Site Location: 1400 and 1420 Bristol Street (North)
Summary:
Request for the demolition of two existing office buildings and the development of 229 apartment units atop a 422-space parking structure and a pedestrian bridge that extends from the proposed project over the Spruce Street right-of-way to the approved residential apartment project at 1300 Bristol Street (Project). The following approvals are requested to implement the Project as proposed:
• General Plan Amendment (GPA) - A request to change the existing General Plan land use designation of subject property from General Commercial Office (CO-G) to Mixed Use Horizontal 2
14-47
DocuSign Envelope ID: F2563D7B-A495-4A61-9AB6-234A281FB870 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
December 7, 2023
(MU-H2) and add 64 dwelling units to Anomaly 16 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) to accommodate the Project;
Planned Community Development Plan Amendment - An amendment to the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) Development Plan (PC Text) to include the project site within the Residential Overlay;
Major Site Development Review - A site development review in accordance with the Newport Place Planned Community and Section 20.52.80 (Site Development Reviews) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC), for the construction of the Project; Affordable Housing Implementation Plan - A plan specifying how the Project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, in exchange for a request of 50% increase in density. The Applicant seeks six development standard waivers related to park land dedication, building setbacks, building height, private open space for each residential unit, common open space for the entire Project, and overall residential project density pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC and Government Code Section 65915 (Density Bonus Law), and two development concessions related to the mix of affordable units and partial park in -lieu fee payment, pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC and Government Code Section 65915;
Development Agreement — A Development Agreement between the Applicant and the City, pursuant to Section 15.45.020 (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, which would provide the Applicant with the vested right to develop the Project for a term of 10 years and to provide negotiated public benefits to the City;
Traffic Study - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the NBMC; and
Addendum to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental Impact Report (Addendum) - Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the Project.
Recommended Actions:
1. Conduct a public hearing;
Find that potential environmental impacts have been previously mitigated through the implementation of the policies of the General Plan as evaluated in Program Environmental Impact Report for the 2006 General Plan Update (SCH No. 2006011119), and the City of Newport Beach Housing Element Initial Study/Negative Declaration (collectively, the PEIR); therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an addendum to the previously adopted PEIR is the appropriate environmental documentation for the project; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2023-043 recommending the City Council adoption of Environmental Impact Report Addendum, and approval of General Plan Amendment, Planned Community Development Plan Amendment, Major Site Development Review, Affordable Housing Implementation Plan, Traffic Study, and Development Agreement, for the Residences at 1400 Bristol Street Project located at 1400 and 1420 North Bristol Street (PA2022-0296).
Senior Planner Liz Westmoreland used a presentation to review the project location and description, entitlements requested, dwelling unit count summary, Charter Section 423 Analysis, site plan overview, pedestrian bridge, renderings (Bristol/Spruce intersection), density bonus and affordable housing implementation plan (AHIP), development agreement, CEQA addendum and traffic study, revisions to the conditions of approval, revision to "Exhibit C" of the resolution, recommendation, and next steps.
In response to Commissioner Langford's inquiry, Deputy Community Development Director Campbell confirmed the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has accepted all the units as part of Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) requirement and they are included in the Housing Element.
14-48
DocuSign Envelope ID: F2563D7B-A495-4A61-9AB6-234A281FB870 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
December 7, 2023
In response to Secretary Harris' question, Senior Planner Westmoreland stated that the cost of the sewer line improvement is roughly $750,000 and noted different forms of cost sharing.
In response to Vice Chair Rosene's questions, Senior Planner Liz Westmoreland noted that other approved projects contribute to the sewer line excess along with this project and 1401 Quail with a cumulative impact over time. Assistant City Manager Jurjis stated that the City identified development agreement fees with three different property owners and will, most likely, use the funds to replace the sewer line. He noted that the City will eventually have to replace the sewer line once all the projects are done.
Ex parte communications with the applicant's representative were disclosed by Commissioners Salene, Harris, and Ellmore. Vice Chair Rosene disclosed no ex parte communications.
Chair Ellmore opened the public hearing.
Greg Nakahira, applicant, thanked City staff for working together and congratulated Deputy Community Development Director Campbell on his retirement. He used a presentation to review the project at 1400 Bristol, project team, and The Picerne Group background.
Satish Lion, The Picerne Group, reviewed One Uptown Newport and the project advancements.
Corey Bitting, TCA Architects, discussed the design highlights, reviewed the ground level, podium level, and roof deck maps, renderings for Bristol and Spruce, Spruce entry, Bristol entry, and layout and community support and project commitments.
Mr. Nakahira noted the support from the community, letters of support, and their commitment to the community.
He noted no issues with the revisions to the conditions of approval and stated that the applicant will agree with the conditions of approval.
In response to Commissioner Salene's question, Mr. Nakahira noted the different amenities at each property connected by the bridge.
In response to Vice Chair Rosene's question, Mr. Nakahira stated that Elevator Two is full size and is dedicated to move -ins and the loading and unloading zone will accommodate lease up and move ins.
In response to Secretary Harris' question, Mr. Lion relayed that affordable units are spread throughout the project.
Jim Mosher thought the bonus units will count toward the RHNA at market rate, relayed challenges with meeting the RHNA quota for middle, low, and very low-income units, questioned the unlimited waivers of development standards, and expressed concern for lack of sun exposure in the center courtyard, traffic noise relevant to local roadways, and energy neutral standards.
Senior Planner Westmoreland noted the condition of approval that addresses noise issues and requires a noise analysis by the applicant, energy analysis is for information only, and project will be subject to Cal Green standards. She clarified that the density bonus law and NBMC allows the applicant to request as many development standard waivers as needed to make the project physically fit.
Assistant City Attorney Summerhill noted legal cases that interpreted the development standard waivers very generously and the City has followed those precedents.
Chair Ellmore closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Lowrey thought the findings seem right on, building is a nice addition, and project will help chip away at the RHNA numbers.
14-49
DocuSign Envelope ID: F2563D7B-A495-4A61-9AB6-234A281FB870 VIII
IX.
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
December 7, 2023
Vice Chair Rosene thought the project is a great addition to the airport area and findings can be made and supported the project.
Commissioner Langford applauded The Picerne Group, and everyone involved, liked local investment, and appreciated a well thought out project.
Secretary Harris expressed excitement for the project and appreciation for a good operator.
Chair Ellmore noted that the airport area will be a different place in the future, the quality of the project is trailblazing, and an interest in the project setting a precedent, and applauded the applicant for bringing forward a thoughtful project.
Motion made by Secretary Harris and seconded by Commissioner Salene to approve staff's recommendation with the revisions to the conditions of approval stated by staff.
AYES:
Ellmore, Lowrey, Langford, Harris, Rosene, and Salene
NOES:
None
ABSTAIN:
None
ABSENT:
Barto
STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS
ITEM NO. 5 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
None
ITEM NO. 6 REPORT BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OR REQUEST FOR MATTERS
WHICH A PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA
Chair Ellmore announced Jim Campbell's retirement and recapped his career history with the City, thanked him for his service, and noted his professionalism. Mr. Campbell expressed gratitude and pleasure for his time working for the City of Newport Beach and thanked staff for the opportunity. He noted that the December 14 Planning Commission meeting is canceled, and four items are scheduled for the December 21 meeting.
Jim Mosher expressed appreciation for Mr. Campbell's professionalism.
Jack Campbell, son to Jim Campbell, relayed pride in his dad's accomplishments.
ITEM NO. 7 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES
None
ADJOURNMENT - With no further business, the meeting was adjourned by Chair Ellmore at 6:52 p.m.
14-50
DocuSign Envelope ID: F2563D7B-A495-4A61-9AB6-234A281FB870 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
December 7, 2023
The amended agenda for the December 7, 2023, Planning Commission meeting was posted on Friday, December 01, 2023, at 3:30 p.m. in the Chambers binder, on the digital display board located inside the vestibule of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, and on the City's website on Friday, December 01, 2023, at 4:15 p.m.
Curtis Ellmore, Chair
TVisfa,v, RA.V'VtS
Tristan Harris, Secretary
14-51
Attachment D
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
14-52
RESOLUTION NO. PC2023-043
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL
ADOPTION OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, PLANNED
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT, SITE
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, AFFORDABLE HOUSING
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT,
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM, AND
TRAFFIC STUDY FOR THE 1400 BRISTOL STREET
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT LOCATED AT 1400 BRISTOL STREET
(PA2022-0296)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
An application was filed by The Picerne Group (Applicant), concerning property located at 1400 Bristol Street and legally described in Exhibit "A," which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference (Property).
2. The Applicant is requesting approval for the demolition of two existing office buildings and the development of 229 apartment units, including a 422-space parking structure (Project).
The following approvals are requested to implement the Project as proposed:
• General Plan Amendment (GPA)-A request to amend the existing General Plan land use designation from General Commercial Office (CO-G) to Mixed Use Horizontal 2 (MU-1-12), and an additional 64 dwelling units above the General Plan allowance. The GPA includes a revision to Anomaly 16 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) to allow 64 residential dwelling units at the Property; • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment (PCDP Amendment)- An amendment to the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) Development Plan to include the project site within the Residential Overlay; Major Site Development Review (SDR) - A site development review in accordance with the Newport Place Planned Community and Section 20.52.80 (Site Development Reviews) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC), for the construction of the Project;
Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) - A plan specifying how the Project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, in exchange for a request of 50% increase in density. The Applicant seeks six development standard waivers related to park land dedication, building setbacks, building height, private open space for each residential unit, common open space for the entire Project, and overall residential project density pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC and 14-53
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 2 of 42
Government Code Section 65915 (Density Bonus Law). The Applicant also seeks a development concession related to the mix of affordable units pursuant to Chapter
20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC and Government Code Section 65915; • Development Agreement (DA)— A Development Agreement between the Applicant and the City, pursuant to Section 15.45.020 (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, which would provide the Applicant with the vested right to develop the Project for a term of 10 years and to provide negotiated public benefits to the City; • Addendum to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental Impact Report (Addendum) - Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the Project; and
• Traffic Study - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the NBMC.
3. The Property is designated General Commercial Office (CO-G) by the General Plan Land Use Element and is located within the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11 Newport Place) Zoning District in the Industrial Site 3A sub -area.
4. The Property is not located within the coastal zone.
5. A public hearing was held on December 7, 2023, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with Government Code Section 54950 et seq. (Ralph M. Brown Act), and Chapter 15.45 (Development Agreements), Chapter 20.56 (Planned Community District Procedures), and Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC.
Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by, the Planning Commission at this hearing.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION.
1. On July 25, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006-75, thereby certifying the adequacy and completeness of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General Plan Update (SCH No. 2006011119). The EIR was prepared in compliance with CEQA Guidelines set forth in the California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. and its implementing State regulations set forth in the California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines) and City Council Policy K-3. Additionally, in accordance with Section 15168(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, the City prepared the EIR as a Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR). This PEIR analyzed the potential impacts of a citywide land use plan, and the goals and policies of 10 general plan elements.
2. Additionally, on November 22, 2011, the City Council adopted General Plan Amendment No. GP2008-003, thereby approving the City of Newport Beach Housing Element Update (2008-2014) and its associated Housing Element and Initial Study/Negative Declaration 14-54
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 3 of 42
under CEQA. The PEIR and Initial Study/Negative Declaration are collectively referred to herein as the "PEIR".
3. Pursuant to Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, when an EIR has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR is required unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
a. Substantial changes are proposed in the Project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; b. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or c. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following:
The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR;
Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
iii. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the Project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
iv. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
4. An Addendum to PEIR was prepared pursuant to Section 15162 (Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations) and 15164 (Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration) of the CEQA Guidelines.
5. The following environmental topics were analyzed for the Project: Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, Tribal Cultural Resources, Utilities and Service Systems, and Wildfire. The Addendum includes analysis of new topics that were 14-55
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 4 of 42
not included in the previous EIRs; specifically, it includes a new Energy, Wildfire, and Tribal Cultural Resources section. These additional analyses are appropriate for inclusion in the Addendum, but none result in new or increased significant impacts that would require preparation of a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines.
6. On the basis of the PEIR and entire environmental review record, the Project will not result in any new significant impacts that were not previously analyzed in the PEIR. The Addendum confirms and provides substantial evidence that the potential impacts associated with this Project would either be the same or less than those described in the PEIR, as reduced by applicable General Plan Policies in the PEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the PEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an addendum to the previously adopted PEIR is the appropriate environmental document for the Project. In taking action to approve any of the requested applications for the Project, the data presented in the PEIR, as augmented by the Addendum for this Project, are considered as part of the record.
7. The Addendum to the PEIR, is hereby recommended for adoption by the City Council given its analysis and conclusions. The Addendum to the PEIR and related and referenced documentation, constitute the administrative record upon which this decision was based, are on file with the Planning Division, City Hall, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California.
8. The Planning Commission finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time-consuming. In addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges.
As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages that may be awarded to a successful challenger.
SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS.
General Plan Amendment
An amendment to the 2006 Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element is a legislative act. Neither Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) nor California Government Code Section 65000 et seq., set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments.
Finding and Facts in Support of Findings:
The request is to amend the General Plan Land Use designation from General Commercial Office (CO-G) to Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2). The MU-H2 designation applies to properties located in the Airport Area. It provides for a horizontal intermixing 14-56
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 5 of 42
of uses that may include regional commercial office, multifamily residential, vertical mixed -use buildings, industrial, hotel rooms, and ancillary neighborhood commercial uses.
2. The GPA and the resulting land use change are compatible with the existing surrounding uses and planned land uses identified by the General Plan, because the Project would introduce additional residential land uses in the Airport Area which includes a diverse mix of land uses including the gradual development of residential multifamily dwellings.
Additionally, even with the conversion from CO-G to MU-H2, the building will be compatible with adjacent commercial properties architectural style and pedestrian connectivity. Additional residential development would support commercial properties within the Airport Area.
3. The requested GPA from CO-G to MU-H2 does not eliminate existing or future land uses to the overall detriment of the community given the site's size, location, and surrounding uses. The existing office buildings on -site were built in the 1970's and there are sufficient office facilities in the Airport Area to support the business needs of the community. The proposed change to allow residential uses would increase the City's housing stock including the provision of 23 units that will be affordable to lower incomes.
4. The Property is located in an area of the City that has sufficient utility systems to serve the Project once the Applicant completes a necessary upgrade to an off -site sewer line.
As conditioned, applicant will replace the existing 10-inch vitrified clay pipe (VCP) pipe with a 12-inch sewer main, which is located near the intersection of Newport Place and Dove Street. This off -site improvement would result in approximately 435 linear feet of sewer line replacement. No off -site improvements other than typical utility connections are proposed or required as part of the Project (other than the pedestrian bridge that would cross the public right-of-way).
5. The Project is consistent with the following City of Newport Beach General Plan policies that establish fundamental criteria for the formation and implementation of new residential villages in the Airport Business Area (additional policy analysis is included in the EIR Addendum attached hereto as Exhibit "B"):
a. Land Use Element Policy LU 1.1 (Unique Environment): Maintain and enhance the beneficial and unique character of the different neighborhoods, business districts, and harbor that together identify Newport Beach. Locate and design development to reflect Newport Beach's topography, architectural diversity, and view sheds.
The Project enhances the distinct, urban character of the Airport Area by providing a means for replacing parking lots and 1970's era office buildings with attractive and functional residential development, in line with the General Plan goal of transitioning the Airport Area to a mixed -use community. The Property is not in or near any of the City's areas that feature the harbor, unique topography, or view sheds. The proposed project would introduce residential units to the Property consistent with the uses and urbanized character of the Airport Area and the proposed MU-H2 designation. 14-57
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 6 of 42
b. Land Use Element Policy LU 2.3 (Range of Residential Choices). Provide opportunities for the development of residential units that respond to community and regional needs in terms of density, size, location, and cost. Implement goals, policies, programs, and objectives identified within the City's Housing Element.
The Project establishes 229 multi -family residential units, including 23 affordable units for very low-income households. The Project responds to market needs and diversifies the City's housing stock by adding additional dwelling units to the Airport Area.
c. Land Use Element Policy LU 3.8 (Project Entitlement Review with Airport Land Use Commission) - Refer the adoption or amendment of the General Plan, Zoning Code, specific plans, and Planned Community development plans for land within the John Wayne Airport planning area, as established in the JWA Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP), to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for Orange County for review, as required by Section 21676 of the California Public Utilities Code. In addition, refer all development projects that include buildings with a height greater than 200 feet above ground level to the ALUC for review.
The Project is within the boundaries of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP), therefore, the overseeing agency, ALUC, must review the proposed GPA and PCDP Amendment pursuant to Government Code Section 65302.3 and Public Utilities Code Section 21676. The purpose of ALUC's review is to determine whether the Project is consistent with the AELUP prior to the City Council taking action on the Project. The Project is consistent with the noise and safety standards of the AELUP.
With respect to noise, the City adopted noise -related amendments to the General Plan Noise and Land Use Elements, the Newport Place Planned Community (PC- 11) and Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) contours to implement the 6th Cycle Housing Element. The Project is located within the updated 60 decibel (dBA) community noise equivalent level (CNEL) contour as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan, where residential development is allowed. As a result, the Project will be required to comply with the development standards set forth in Section
20.30.080(F) (Noise -Airport Environs Land Use Plan) of the NBMC. The Project sites is outside of any safety zones set forth in the AELUP, therefore, is consistent with the noise standards of the AELUP.
d. Land Use Element Policy 6.15.3 (Airport Compatibility). Require that all development be constructed in conformance with the height restrictions set forth by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, and Caltrans Division of Aeronautics, and that residential development shall be allowed only on parcels with noise levels of less than John Wayne Airport 65 d8A CNEL noise contour area as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within the 65 d8A CNEL noise contour shown in Figure N5 are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Nonresidential uses are, however, encouraged on parcels located wholly within the 65 d8A CNEL contour area.
14-58
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 7 of 42
The Project is located at 1400 Bristol Street and approximately 85 feet in height. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) conducted an aeronautical study of the Project pursuant to applicable Federal regulations and has determined no hazard to air navigation for the Project.
The Project is located within the updated 60 dBA CNEL contour as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan, where residential development is allowed, subject to the development standards set forth in Section 20.30.080(F) (Noise -Airport Environs Land Use Plan).
e. Land Use Element Policy LU 6.15.5 (Residential and Supporting Uses).
Accommodate the development of a maximum of 2,200 multi -family residential units, including work force housing, and mixed -use buildings that integrate residential with ground level office or retail uses, along with supporting retail, grocery stores, and parklands. Residential units may be developed only as the replacement of underlying permitted nonresidential uses. When a development phase includes a mix of residential and nonresidential uses or replaces existing industrial uses, the number of peak hour trips generated by cumulative development of the site shall not exceed the number of trips that would result from development of the underlying permitted nonresidential uses. However, a maximum of 550 units may be developed as infill on surface parking lots or areas not used as occupiable buildings on properties within the Conceptual Development Plan Area depicted on Figure LU22 provided that the parking is replaced on site.
General Plan Land Use Policy 6.15.5 established a development limit of 2,200 maximum dwelling units for the Airport Area. Of the 2,200 residential units allowed, 1,650 units may be developed as replacement of existing office, retail, and/or industrial uses. The remaining 550 units are classified as additive units meaning they are not required to replace other units and they may be constructed as "in -fill" units to existing commercial or office development within the Conceptual Development Plan Area (CDPA) of the Airport Area. Any eligible density bonus allowed by Government Code Sections 65915 (Density Bonus Law) and Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC are not included in the 2,200-unit allowance.
The 550 additive units have been previously allocated to the Uptown Newport and Residences at 4400 Von Karman projects. Considering the dwelling unit sum of the previously approved projects, the remaining and available development allocation within the Airport Area would be 353 dwelling units. With the development of this Project, there would be 264 dwelling units (353-89=264) exclusive of density bonus units and units authorized through a GPA.
The Property is developed with existing two-story commercial office buildings totaling 38,764 square feet. Since the Project can be developed only as the replacement of the underlying nonresidential use (office)', and the number of peak hour trips Without a GPA.
14-59
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 8 of 42
generated by cumulative development of the Property shall not exceed the number of trips that would result from development of the underlying permitted nonresidential uses, a conversion rate of 2.29 dwelling units per 1,000 square feet of commercial floor area is required. This results in a total of 89 dwelling units. The Project includes a request for a GPA to increase the base units by 64 dwelling units, which results in a total base unit count of 153 dwelling units. With a 50% density bonus, a maximum of 230 units could be constructed and a total of 229 dwelling units are proposed.
Presently, there are a total of 353 remaining and available dwelling units in the Airport Area. Considering the dwelling unit sum of the previously approved projects and the proposed Project, the remaining development allocation within the Airport Area would be 264 (353-89) dwelling units excluding any density bonus units. f. Land Use Element Policy LU 6.15.6 (Size of Residential Villages). Allow development of mixed -use residential villages, each containing a minimum of 10 acres and centered on a neighborhood park and other amenities (as conceptually illustrated in Figure LU23). The first phase of residential development in each village shall encompass at least 5 gross acres of land, exclusive of existing rights -of -way.
This acreage may include multiple parcels provided that they are contiguous or face one another across an existing street. At the discretion of the City, this acreage may also include part of a contiguous property in a different land use category, if the City finds that a sufficient portion of the contiguous property is used to provide functionally proximate parking, open space, or other amenity. The "Conceptual Development Plan" area shown on Figure LU22 shall be exempt from the 5-acre minimum, but a conceptual development plan described in Policy LU 6.15.11 shall be required.
The Property is 2.38 acres in size. The Residential Overlay of PC-11 allows residential development on sites containing less than 10 acres, if housing units affordable to lower income households are provided. The Project includes 23 dwelling units that will be affordable for very -low-income households. If the Planned Community Development Plan is amended to include the Project within the Residential Overlay, as requested by the Applicant, the Project will be exempt from General Plan Policy 6.15.6 (Size of Residential Villages). g. Land Use Policy LU 6.15.7 (Overall Density and Housing Types). Require that residential units be developed at a minimum density of 30 units and maximum of 50 units per net acre averaged over the total area of each residential village. Net acreage shall be exclusive of existing and new rights -of -way, public pedestrian ways, and neighborhood parks. Within these densities, provide for the development of a mix of building types ranging from townhomes to high-rises to accommodate a variety of household types and incomes and to promote a diversity of building masses and scales.
The Project proposes 153 base units at a density of 64 dwelling units per acre on the
2.38-net-acre site. A waiver from Policy 6.15.7 regarding maximum density has been requested by the Applicant as a part of the Project. The base density does not include the 50% density bonus of 77 units that is allowed by the State Bonus Density law 14-60
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 9 of 42
which includes 23 units set aside for affordable housing. Altogether, the Project has an overall density of 96 dwelling units per acre, which is exclusive of rights -of -ways, public pedestrian ways, and neighborhood parks.
The Project is a for rent apartment building with 229 units. There is a mixture of unit types, ranging from studios to two -bedroom units, accommodating a variety of household types and incomes. Of the 229 units, 23 units will be affordable to very low-income households and 206 units will be market -rate housing, which will increase the City's overall housing stock for various household income levels. h. Land Use Policy LU 6.15.8 (First Phase Development Density). Require a residential density of 45 to 50 units per net acre, averaged over the first phase for each residential village. This shall be applied to 100 percent of properties in the first phase development area whether developed exclusively for residential or integrating service commercial horizontally on the site or vertically within a mixed -use building.
On individual sites, housing development may exceed or be below this density to encourage a mix of housing types, provided that the average density for the area encompassed by the first phase is achieved.
The Project would be developed in one phase on an individual site with a density of 96 units per acre. The Project provides a mixture of residential unit types that include 23 units of affordable housing to very -low-income households. The proposed density is above the required minimum of 45 units per acre and the Applicant is requesting a development standard waiver allowed by State Density Bonus Law to exceed the maximum density of 50 units per acre.
Land Use Policy LU 6.15.9 (Subsequent Phase Development Location and Density). Subsequent phases of residential development shall abut the first phase or shall face the first phase across a street. The minimum density of residential development (including residential mixed -use development) shall be 30 units per net acre and shall not exceed the maximum of 50 units per net acre averaged over the development phase.
See finding LU 6.15.9 First Phase Development Density above.
Land Use Policy LU 6.15.13 (Neighborhood Parks Standards). To provide a focus and identity for the entire neighborhood and to serve the daily recreational and commercial needs of the community within easy walking distance of homes, require dedication and improvement of at least 8 percent of the gross land area (exclusive of existing rights -of -way) of the first phase development in each neighborhood, or acre, whichever is greater, as a neighborhood park. This requirement may be waived by the City where it can be demonstrated that the development parcels are too small to feasibly accommodate the park or inappropriately located to serve the needs of local residents, and when an in -lieu fee is paid to the City for the acquisition and improvement of other properties as parklands to serve the Airport Area. 14-61
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 10 of 42
In every case, the neighborhood park shall be at least 8 percent of the total Residential Village Area or one acre in area, whichever is greater, and shall have a minimum dimension of 150 feet. Park acreage shall be exclusive of existing or new rights -of -way, development sites, or setback areas. A neighborhood park shall satisfy some or all of the requirements of the Park Dedication Ordinance, as prescribed by the Recreation Element of the General Plan.
The Project includes a waiver from Land Use Policy LU 6.15.13, as allowed by the policy, due to a 2.38-acre parcel size that is too small to feasibly accommodate a park.
k. Land Use Policy LU 6.15.14 (Location). Require that each neighborhood park is clearly public in character and is accessible to all residents of the neighborhood.
Each park shall be surrounded by public streets on at least two sides (preferably with on -street parking to serve the park),and shall be linked to residential uses in its respective neighborhood by streets or pedestrian ways.
See finding LU 6.15.13 above.
Land Use Policy LU 6.15.16 (On -Site Recreation and Open Space Standards).
Require developers of multi -family residential developments on parcels 8 acres or larger to provide on -site recreational amenities. For these developments, 44 square feet of on -site recreational amenities shall be provided for each dwelling unit in addition to the requirements under the City's Park Dedication Ordinance and in accordance with the Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan. On -site recreational amenities can consist of public urban plazas or squares where there is the capability for recreation and outdoor activity. These recreational amenities may also include swimming pools, exercise facilities, tennis courts, and basketball courts.
Where there is insufficient land to provide on -site recreational amenities, the developer shall be required to pay cash in -lieu that would be used to develop or upgrade nearby recreation facilities to offset user demand as defined in the City's Park Dedication Fee Ordinance.
The acreage of on -site open space developed with residential projects may be credited against the parkland dedication requirements where it is accessible to the public during daylight hours, visible from public rights -of -way, and is of sufficient size to accommodate recreational use by the public. However, the credit for the provision of on -site open space shall not exceed 30 percent of the parkland dedication requirements.
The Project is located on a 2.38-acre site and is not subject to Policy LU 6.15.16, as the policy only applies to properties consisting of eight acres or larger. However, the Project exceeds the 44 square feet per unit minimum by providing approximately 60 square feet per unit (approximately 13,800 square feet) of on -site recreational amenities including a large central courtyard, clubroom, media center, a roof deck, and a lounge area.
14-62
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 11 of 42
m. Land Use Policy LU 6.15.17 (Street and Pedestrian Grid). Create a pattern of streets and pedestrian ways that breaks up large blocks, improves connections between neighborhoods and community amenities, and is scaled to the predominantly residential character of the neighborhoods.
The Project is a podium style development with two driveways for vehicular circulation to the garage entries, accessed from Spruce Street and Bristol Street.
Pedestrian connections are provided to public sidewalks along Spruce Street and Bristol Street. The Project retains the curb -to -curb dimension of both Bristol Street and Spruce Street and will include sidewalk easements to provide 10-foot-wide sidewalks.
n. Land Use Policy 6.15.18 (Walkable Streets). Retain the curb -to -curb dimension of existing streets, but widen sidewalks to provide park strips and generous sidewalks by means of dedications or easements. Except where traffic loads preclude fewer lanes, add parallel parking to calm traffic, buffer pedestrians, and provide short term parking for visitors and shop customers.
See finding Land Use Policy 6.15.17 above.
o. Land Use Policy 6.15.19 (Connected Streets). Require dedication and improvement of new streets as shown on Figure LU23. The illustrated alignments are tentative and may change as long as the routes provide the intended connectivity. If traffic conditions allow, connect new and existing streets across Macarthur Boulevard with signalized intersections, crosswalks, and pedestrian refuges in the median.
See finding Land Use Policy 6.15.17 above.
p. Land Use Policy 6.15.20 (Pedestrian Improvements). Require the dedication and improvement of new pedestrian ways as conceptually shown on Figure LU23. The alignment is tentative and may change as long as the path provides the intended connectivity. For safety, the full length of pedestrian ways shall be visible from intersecting streets. To maintain an intimate scale and to shade the path with trees, pedestrian ways should not be sized as fire lanes. Pedestrian ways shall be open to the public at all times.
The Project includes conditions of approval requiring the reconstruction of all broken and/or damaged curb, gutter, and sidewalk along Spruce and Bristol Street frontages to preserve and improve all existing sidewalks for pedestrian access. q. Land Use Policy LU 6.15.22 (Building Massing). Require that high-rise structures be surrounded with low- and mid -rise structures fronting public streets and pedestrian ways or other means to promote a more pedestrian scale.
The Project is approximately 85 feet in height and is compatible with nearby properties as well as the larger pattern of development in the Airport Area, with building mass and scale similar to the nearby existing office developments and the 14-63
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 12 of 42
approved, but not yet construction 78-foot-tall residential apartment building at 1300 Bristol Street. The nearby property at 1451 Quail Street is developed with an approximately 37-foot tall office building. The property located across the street at 1400 Quail Street, is developed with an approximately 30-foot-tall office building. A project is currently being reviewed for an approximately 86-foot-high condominium project at 1401 Quail Street, which is adjacent to the site. The Project includes pedestrian connectivity to public sidewalks along Bristol Street and Spruce Street and pedestrian -scale landscaped areas around the apartment building. Lastly, the Project includes a pedestrian bridge across the Spruce Street right-of-way that would connect to the approved project at 1300 Bristol. The bridge would be connected to and accessible from the second level of both buildings, which would reduce the appearance of bulk and scale from the street level.
r. Land Use Policy LU 6.15.23 Sustainability Development Practices. Require that development achieves a high level of environmental sustainability that reduces pollution and consumption of energy, water, and natural resources. This may be accomplished through the mix and density of uses, building location and design, transportation modes, and other techniques. Among the strategies that should be considered are the integration of residential with jobs -generating uses, use of alternative transportation modes, maximized walkability, use of recycled materials, capture and re -use of storm water on -site, water conserving fixtures and landscapes, and architectural elements that reduce heat gain and loss.
The Project is required to comply with the provisions of the Building and Energy Efficiency Standards (CCR, Title 24, Parts 6 and 11) and the Green Building Standards Code (CCR, Title 24, Part 11 - CALGreen). Additionally, the Project would implement water -efficient landscaping, water quality best management practices to treat surface runoff from the project site, and low impact development practices.
The Project is also adjacent to office developments in the Airport Area and would provide housing near employment opportunities. The Project includes pedestrian linkage to public sidewalks that would provide connections throughout the site and to adjacent and surrounding uses, thereby providing an alternative mode of public transportation for the residents and their visitors. The Project would also provide alternative forms of transportation to residents by locating close to the existing Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) bus routes provided along Bristol Street and Birch Street.
Tribal Consultation (SB 18)
6. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65352.3 (SB18), a local government is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) each time it considers a proposal to adopt or amend the General Plan. If requested by any tribe, the local government must consult for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural resources. The City received comments from the NAHC indicating that 12 tribal contacts should be provided notice regarding the proposed amendment. The tribal contacts were provided notice on January 26, 2023. 14-64
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 13 of 42
California Government Code Section 65352.3 requires notification 90 days prior to Council action to allow tribal contacts to respond to the request to consult. The Project will not be heard by the City Council until after the 90-day period, which expired on April 26, 2023. The City participated in consultations with three tribes: the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation, the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians, Acjachemen Nation-Belardes, and the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California. Based on consultation with the participating Native American Tribes, conditions of approval have been included to address potential concerns regarding the protection of Tribal Cultural Resources.
Charter Section 423 Analysis
Finding:
Charter Section 423 requires voter approval of any major General Plan amendment to the General Plan. A major General Plan amendment is one that significantly increases allowed density or intensity by 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor area, increases traffic by more than 100 peak hour vehicle trips (AM/PM), or increases residential dwelling units by 100 units.
These thresholds apply to the total of increases resulting from the amendment itself, plus 80% of the increases resulting from other amendments affecting the same neighborhood (defined as a Statistical Area as shown in the General Plan Land Use Element) and adopted within the preceding 10 years.
Council Policy A-18 (Guidelines for Implementing Charter Section 423) requires that proposed amendments to the General Plan be reviewed to determine if a vote of the Newport Beach electorate would be required. This policy includes a provision that all General Plan amendments be tracked as "Prior Amendments" for 10 years to determine if minor amendments in a single Statistical Area cumulatively exceed the thresholds indicated above.
Facts in Support of Findings:
1. The Project is the first General Plan Amendment in Statistical Area L1 within the last 10 years that included additional dwelling units or non-residential floor area. The proposed amendment results in 64 additional dwelling units and no change in the square footage of non-residential floor area. Conversions of existing commercial development is allowed by the current General Plan (2,200 in -fill units maximum in the Airport Area based on conversion of existing commercial floor area). Reductions in commercial floor area are not tracked as part of the Charter Section 423 analysis. Density bonus units are not included in Charter Section 423 analysis nor the General Plan Anomaly calculations.
2. The 64 additional dwelling units result in a net increase of 24 a.m. peak hour trips and 25 p.m. peak hour trips based on the "Multifamily Housing (Mid Rise) Not Close to Rail" ITE 11t" Edition trip rate for the proposed use, as provided in Council Policy A-18. No credit is given to the existing non-residential uses on -site because the existing office floor area was converted to residential dwelling units so that the proposed Project (less the density bonus and GPA units) is traffic neutral. Therefore, the Project individually does not exceed the Greenlight thresholds. Furthermore, since there have been no other applicable projects in the last 10 years, there is no need to analyze the cumulative development of 80% of prior 14-65
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 14 of 42
General Plan amendments from the last 10 years with the proposed project (i.e., cumulative analysis). As none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are exceeded, no vote of the electorate is required if the City Council chooses to approve the requested GPA.
Planned Community Development Plan Amendment
An amendment to the Newport Place Planned Community Development Plan (PC-11), which is the zoning document for the Property, is a legislative act. Neither PC-11, Chapters 20.66 (Amendments), nor 20.56 (Planned Community Development District Procedures) of Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC, or Article 2 (Adoption of Regulations) of Chapter 4 (Zoning Regulations) of Division 1 (Planning and Zoning) of Title 7 (Planning and Land Use) of the California Government Code set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments to the NBMC.
However, the proposed amendment complies with the intent of Part III Residential Overlay of PC-11 as follows:
The proposed Project allocates 15% of the base units (23 dwelling units) as affordable for very -low-income households.
2. Given the location of subject property in the Airport Area which includes a mixture of service uses, hotels, Airport and commercial support services, professional offices, and new residential developments that cumulatively contain the ingredients of a planned community, the proposed PC Amendment would not disrupt the existing uses within the Planned Community and would add to this diversity of uses, assisting the City in larger scale community planning and the provision of additional housing opportunities.
3. The Property is located within 85 feet of the Residential Overlay. The property nearest to the site within the Residential Overlay is 1300 Bristol Street, across Spruce Street. The property at 1300 Bristol has been approved but not yet constructed as a residential apartment project. The proposed project at 1400 Bristol Street includes a pedestrian bridge that would extend from the subject site to the approved residential project at 1300 Bristol Street. The Project would be consistent with the anticipated future development of 1300 Bristol Street as well other adjacent properties within the Residential Overlay of PC-11. The proposed pedestrian bridge would support pedestrian connectivity that integrates the Project into the existing community and larger residential development that may occur in the future pursuant to Section F (Amenities and Neighborhood Integration) of the PCDP Amendment.
4. The Project would be subject to the appropriate site and project specific setbacks, density, and height limits for this urban location. All required parking is provided on -site. The Project compiles with the development standards identified for the Residential Overlay, except as modified by the allowed development standard waivers identified in the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan. The Residential Overlay provides a density range for proposed projects and references the Section 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC that prescribes the 14-66
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 15 of 42
maximum density bonus and incentives allowed. Although the PCDP Amendment references a maximum density bonus of 35%, the project requests a 50% density bonus, which is consistent with Section 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC that allows up to 80% density bonus depending on the percentage of affordable units being provided. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with the intent of the density bonus assumptions in the Residential Overlay and within the maximum allowed by the density bonus provisions.
5. The PCDP Amendment requires a site development review in accordance with Section
20.52.080 of the NBMC. The Project includes a site development review, and all required findings are addressed below (Findings A through C below).
6. The PCDP Amendment requires the density for a residential development to be between 30 and 50 dwelling units per acre. The Project includes 153 base units, not including density bonus units. Since the Property is 2.28 acres in size, there is a base density of 67 dwelling units per acre. With the density bonus, there is a total of 229 dwelling units, which results in 96 units per acre. Both the base density and density bonus units are not consistent with the PCDP Amendment density requirement; however, the Applicant is requesting a development standard waiver which is required under California Government Code Section 65915(e) and Section 20.32.080 where application of the development standard would physically preclude construction of a density bonus project.
7. The Property is located near existing office buildings within the Airport Area and is not negatively impacted by noise, dust, smoke, vibration, odor, toxic or noxious matter that may be generated by existing commercial or industrial uses nearby.
8. Residential dwellings are to be permitted as replacement of existing nonresidential uses, and the number of peak hour trips generated by the Project is not to exceed the number of trips of the underlying permitted nonresidential use. The Property is developed with existing two-story commercial office buildings totaling 38,764 square feet. A standardized conversion rate of 2.29 dwelling units per 1,000 square feet of commercial floor area, as provided by the City Traffic Engineer, is required. This results in a total of 89 dwelling units, which is the proposed based density of the Project less the GPA units requested. The Applicant is requesting a GPA to increase the base units for the Project by 64 dwelling units.
With a 50% density bonus or 77 dwelling units requested, a total of 229 dwelling units are proposed for the Project.
9. The Property is fully developed and does not support any natural resources and all potential environmental impacts associated with the Project are appropriately addressed through standard building permit procedures, conditions of approval, and the General Plan Policies identified in the 2006 General Plan EIR and summarized in Attachment B (EIR Addendum).
Major Site Development Review
In accordance with Section 20.52.080(F) (Site Development Reviews — Findings and Decisions) of the NBMC, the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth as follows:
14-67
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 16 of 42
Finding:
A. The proposed development is allowed within the subject zoning district.
Fact in Support of Finding:
The Property is located within Industrial Site 3 of PC-11. The Project includes a request to amend Property's land use designation to be included as a part of the Residential Overlay of PC-11. The residential overlay allows for residential development consistent with the requested MU-H2 land use designation and subject to site development review.
Finding:
B. The proposed development is in compliance with all of the following applicable criteria:
Compliance with this section, the General Plan, this Zoning Code, any applicable specific plan, and other applicable criteria and policies related to the use or structure;
ii. The efficient arrangement of structures on the site and the harmonious relationship of the structures to one another and to other adjacent developments; and whether the relationship is based on standards of good design;
iii. The compatibility in terms of bulk, scale, and aesthetic treatment of structures on the site and adjacent developments and public areas;
iv. The adequacy, efficiency, and safety of pedestrian and vehicular access, including drive aisles, driveways, and parking and loading spaces; v. The adequacy and efficiency of landscaping and open space areas and the use of water efficient plant and irrigation materials; and
vi. The protection of significant views from public right(s)-of-way and compliance with NBMC Section 20.30.100 (Public View Protection).
Facts in Support of Finding:
Refer to Facts under General Plan Amendment and Planned Community Development Plan Amendment, above that discuss the Project's consistency with the proposed Mixed Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) General Plan land use designation and the PC-11 (Newport Place Planned Community Development Plan) Zoning District including the Residential Overlay.
2. The proposed six -story residential building would be approximately 85 feet in height inclusive of architectural elements and rooftop mechanical equipment. The architecture would be high -quality and incorporate neutral colors with stone/tile, metal, and glass features. The proposed pedestrian bridge is designed to match the architectural style of the proposed building and the approved, but not yet constructed apartment building at 1300 14-68
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 17 of 42
Bristol Street. The pedestrian bridge includes "see -through" elements that reduce its mass and scale. The Project's building mass including the pedestrian bridge are compatible with the surrounding office developments and anticipated future development.
3. The Project includes a variety of enhanced amenities such as private balconies for most of the units, an outdoor courtyard with pool and spa, a clubroom, a fitness center, roof deck, lounge area, and media room.
4. The Project includes 422 onsite parking spaces located in a gated parking structure.
Therefore, upon completion of the Project, there would be adequate onsite parking exceeding the minimum required residential standard pursuant to State Density Bonus Law.
The parking is largely screened from public view, with two of the three levels located entirely below grade and landscaping buffers around the first floor parking structure.
5. The Project site is generally flat and bordered by existing office buildings and developed roadways. The City's General Plan does not identify any scenic vistas or view points on or proximate to the Project site. The nearest public view point to the Project site identified in the City's General Plan is approximately 0.5 mile south at Bayview Park. The nearest coastal view designated portion of Jamboree Road is approximately 2,000 feet south of the site. Due to the distance and highly urbanized nature of the Project area, public coastal views along this view corridor would not be impacted by the Project.
Finding:
C. The proposed development is not detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the City, nor will it endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare of person residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed development.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The Project has been designed to ensure that potential conflicts with surrounding uses are minimized to the extent possible to maintain a healthy environment for both surrounding businesses and residents by providing an architecturally pleasing project with articulation and building modulations to enhance the urban environment.
2. The proposed residential building has been designed to accommodate and provide safe access for emergency vehicles, delivery trucks, and refuse collections vehicles, as determined by the City Traffic Engineer. A Fire Department turnaround area is provided on - site at the rear of the property. Refuse collection is accommodated via an on -site staging area along the private driveway (accessed from Bristol Street) to ensure safe maneuvering by refuse vehicles. As conditioned, the project will also be required to accommodate sufficient queuing for vehicles onsite, so that vehicles waiting to enter the garage will not cause impacts to the Spruce Street right-of-way.
3. The Project site is located approximately 0.45-mile of the southernmost John Wayne Airport runway and is within the notification area of the AELUP for John Wayne Airport. However, the Project is below the maximum transitional imagery surface heights, and thus the Project 14-69
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 18 of 42
is within the building height limits of the AELUP. The property is located partially within the updated 65dBA CNEL noise contours for John Wayne Airport and Safety Zone 6 (Traffic Pattern Zone), where the likelihood of an accident is low. Consistent with the residential overlay, the Project shall be required to comply with conditions specified in Section
20.30.080(F) (Noise -Airport Environs Land Use Plan), including provisions of noise study, sound attenuation design features, and notice to all future residents of potential annoyances or inconveniences associated with residing in proximity to airport operations.
4. The Project will comply with all Building, Public Works, Fire Codes, City ordinances, and all conditions of approval.
5. As conditioned, the proposed pedestrian bridge shall be required to comply with standards of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, which includes a minimum vertical clearance above the Spruce Street right-of-way. The final design of the bridge will be subject to City review, which will ensure that the bridge is constructed in a manner that will not obstruct views for motorists, cyclists, or pedestrians in the vicinity.
Affordable Housing Implementation Plan
The AHIP is consistent with the intent to implement affordable housing goals within the City pursuant to Government Code Sections 65915-65918 (State Density Bonus Law), and Title 20, Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC for the following reasons:
Consistent with the requested 50% density bonus, 23 units (15% of the base units) would be set aside as affordable units to lower income households. Lower income households are defined as households with 80% or less of the area median income, adjusted for family size for minimum term of 55 years for very low-income households. The Project is consistent the provisions of the Residential Overlay of Newport Place Planned Community, which requires a minimum of 15% of base units to be set aside for lower income households.
2. The State Density Bonus Law and the City's Density Bonus Code (NBCM Section 20.32 Density Bonus) provide for an increase in the number of units above General Plan and zoning limits for projects that include a minimum of 15% of the base units affordable to very - low -income households earning 50% or less of area median income. The Project's inclusion of 23 very -low-income units, which is 15% of the base unit count of 153 units makes the Project eligible for 77 additional units. Inclusive of all base units, density bonus units, and affordable units the total project includes 229 units.
3. In addition to the 77 density bonus units and parking reductions, the Project is entitled under California Government Code Section 65915(d), Section 20.32.070, to receive up to three incentives or concessions that would result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions. The Project includes a development concession for the proposed affordable unit mix that does not meet Section 20.32.070 (Design and Distribution of Affordable Units) of the NBMC.
Section 20.32.070 (Design and Distribution of Affordable Units) of the NBMC requires affordable units in a density bonus project reflect the same range of unit types in the 14-70
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 19 of 42
residential development as a whole. In this case, the Project provides a higher percentage of affordable studio units and fewer affordable two -bedroom units compared to market rate units. Granting this incentive will result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual project cost reductions by reducing the long-term rental subsidy costs associated with the two - bedroom units and affording additional rental income for the project to ensure financial feasibility.
The reduction in park in -lieu fees would allow the applicant to contribute to the overall fund for parks in the Airport Area, while providing identifiable cost reduction that make the provision of affordable units feasible.
4. In addition to the density bonus units, parking reductions, and concessions, the Project is entitled under California Government Code Section 65915(e), Section 20.32.080, and recent caselaw to receive waivers or reductions of development standards where application of the development standard would physically preclude construction of a density bonus project. In this case, the following development standards are entitled to waiver:
a. Park dedication requirement. General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.13 requires a public park equal to 8% of the gross land area of the development, or a minimum one-half acre, whichever is greater, be provided. In this case, the 1.97-acre Project site is too small to feasibly accommodate a half -acre park.
b. Residential density. General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.7 requires residential density between 30-50 units per acre. Inclusive of only the conversion units, the density would comply at 37 dwelling units per acre. Including the proposed GPA units, conversion units, and density bonus units, the Project would not comply at a density of 96 dwelling units per acre and a waiver is necessary to implement the project. c. Street setbacks. The Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) requires street setbacks of 30 feet from property lines. In this case, 30-foot setbacks along Bristol Street and Spruce Street would substantially decrease the development of the footprint of the Project. The Project is designed with 8-foot setbacks to Spruce Street and 18-foot setbacks to Bristol Street.
d. Building height. The Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) limits building height to 55 feet from established grade. In this case, a higher building height is necessary to accommodate 229 residential units. The Project is designed with a height of approximately 85 feet from established grade.
e. Private open space. NBMC Section 20.18.030 (Residential Zoning Districts General Development Standards) requires a minimum of 5 percent of the gross floor area of each unit to be provided as open space. The Project's studio dwelling units and nine of the two -bedroom units (including 4 units which provide only 2 square feet less than the private open space requirement) are unable to achieve these minimum private open space standards given their size and location.
f. Common open space. NBMC Section 20.18.030 (Residential Zoning Districts General Developments Standards) requires a minimum of 75 square feet per unit be provided as common open space area. In this case, the requirement is 17,175 square feet (75 14-71
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 20 of 42
square feet per unit x 229 units). The Project as designed provides approximately 13,800 square feet of common open space due to space limitations on the 2.38-acre lot.
Traffic Study
In accordance with Section 15.40.030 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance- Standards for Approval - Findings -Exemptions) of the NBMC, the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth:
Finding:
A. That a traffic study for the project has been prepared in compliance with this chapter and Appendix A (NBMC Chapter 15.401,
Fact in Support of Finding:
1. A traffic study, entitled 1400 Bristol Street North Residences Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by Ganddini Group, Inc., dated June 28, 2023, was prepared for the Project in compliance with Municipal Code Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance and Appendix A).
Finding:
B. That, based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the traffic study, one of the findings for approval in subsection 15.40.030(B) can be made:
Construction of the project will be completed within 60 months of project approval in accordance with Section 15.40.030(B)(1) of the NBMC. ii. Additionally, the project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted intersection in accordance with Section
15.40.030(B)(1)(a) of the NBMC.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. Based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the Traffic Study, and the conditions of approval, all of the findings for approval in Section 15.40.030(B)(1)(a) can be made in that:
a. The Project is anticipated to be completed by the end of 2026, well within the 60-month criteria. Therefore, the Traffic Study addresses the entire project development. b. The Traffic Study provides an evaluation of morning and evening peak hours at 13 existing intersections that are located in the City and the adjoining City of Irvine. c. The Project is projected to generate an additional (i.e. net increase of) 624 daily trips, including 26 peak AM trips and 34 peak PM trips. When these trips distributed to these studied intersections, the analysis concludes that there is no significant impact as the 14-72
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 21 of 42
Project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of service at any impacted primary intersection, and all intersections are forecasted to continue to operate at acceptable Levels of Service.
Finding:
C. That the project proponent has agreed to make or fund the improvements, or make the contributions, that are necessary to make the findings for approval and to comply with all conditions of approval.
Fact in Support of Finding:
1. No improvements or mitigation are necessary because implementation of the Project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection within the City of Newport Beach. The applicant will be required to pay any applicable Traffic Fair Share fees for the net increase in vehicles trips, which will be used to fund future planned improvements to the City's circulation system. The Applicant will also be subject to the payment of San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Fees.
Development Agreement
In accordance with Section 15.45.020(A)(2)(a) (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, a development agreement is required as the Project requires an amendment to the General Plan and PC-11 that includes the development of more than fifty residential units. In this case the Project has a total of 229 residential units. The proposed development agreement satisfies the requirements of Chapter 15.45 (Development Agreements) of the NBMC as follows:
1. A development agreement is requested by the Applicant, as the Project would include a total of 229 residential units and a General Plan amendment. The development agreement includes all the mandatory elements including a term of 10 years and public benefits that are appropriate to support conveying the vested development rights consistent with the City's General Plan, the NBMC, and Government Code Sections 65864 et seq.
2. Public benefits include the payment of a public safety fee to satisfy any obligation the Project could have to provide new emergency response services or Fire Department equipment to serve the Airport Area whether a Community Facilities District is formed or not. The Applicant has also agreed to pay a separate public benefit fee to be used by the City Council as it deems appropriate.
SECTION 4. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends the following to the City Council:
14-73
DocuSign Envelope ID: F3F5DDE6-A5A0-44CA-9ACD-A1AC9CA2AF26 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 22 of 42
1. Adopt Environmental Impact Report Addendum to the 2006 General Plan Update (SCH2006011119), as depicted in Exhibit "B" which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference;
2. Approve General Plan Amendment as depicted in Exhibit "C" which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference;
3. Approve Planned Community Development Plan Amendment as depicted in Exhibit "D" which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference;
4. Approve Development Agreement, as depicted in Exhibit "E" which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference;
5. Approve Affordable Housing Implementation Plan, including requested development standard waivers related to park land dedication, building setbacks, building height, density, private open space, common open space, and development concession for the mix of affordable units as depicted in Exhibit "F" which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference;
6. Approve Traffic Study, as depicted in Exhibit "G" which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference; and
7. Approve Major Site Development Review with conditions of approval, as depicted in Exhibit "H" which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference (PA2022-0296).
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 7T" DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023.
AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Langford, Lowrey, Rosene, and Salene NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Barto
BY:
Curtis Ellmore, Chairman
BY: Tiisfav, RA.v'v'iS
Tristan Harris, Secretary
Attachment(s): Exhibit A — Legal Description
Exhibit B — Addendum to the 2006 General Plan Update
(SCH NO. 2006011119)
Exhibit C — General Plan Amendment
Exhibit D — Planned Community Development Plan Amendment Exhibit E — Development Agreement
Exhibit F — Affordable Housing Implementation Plan
14-74
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 23 of 42
Exhibit G — Traffic Study
Exhibit H — Conditions of Approval
14-75
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 24 of 42
EXHIBIT "A"
Legal Description
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT
BEACH, IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 50 OF IRVINE'S SUBDIVISION, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 1, PAGE 88 OF MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF TRACT 706, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 21, PAGE 25 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PARCEL 2 IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 54, PAGE 11 OF PARCEL MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
EXCEPT THE FULL RIGHTS TO ALL MINERALS, PETROLEUM, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES EXISTING BELOW FIVE HUNDRED (500) FEET FROM
THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE, PROVIDED, HOWEVER,
THAT GRANTOR HEREBY EXPRESSLY WAIVES THE RIGHT TO ENTER UPON THE
SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXPLORING FOR, OR
PRODUCING THE MINERALS, PETROLEUM, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES SO RESERVED IN DEED RECORDED JULY 1, 1977.
14-76
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-043
Paae 25 of 42
1WN:11319":
ADDENDUM TO THE 2006 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE (SCH NO. 2006011119) Available separately due to bulk at:
www.newportbeachca.gov/cega
14-77
ADDENDUM TO THE
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN 2006 UPDATE
FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Prepared by:
City of Newport Beach
Community Development Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92658-8915
November 2007
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Paqe
Section1.0 Introduction..........................................................................................................1-1
1.1 Purpose of Addendum............................................................................1-1
1.2 Previous Environmental Documentation and discretionary actions ........ 1-2 Section 2.0 Project Description..............................................................................................2-1
2.1 Project Location......................................................................................2-1
2.2 Project Characteristics............................................................................2-1
2.2.1 North Newport Center PC Text...................................................2-1
2.2.2 Transfer of Development Rights.................................................2-3
2.2.3 Phased Land Use Development and Circulation Improvement Plan (TPO Approval)...................................................................2-3
2.2.4 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP)........................2-4
2.2.5 Development Agreement............................................................2-4
2.2.6 Discretionary Actions..................................................................2-4 Section 3.0 Environmental Analysis......................................................................................3-1
3.1 Aesthetics...............................................................................................3-1
3.2 Agricultural Resources............................................................................3-4
3.3 Air Quality...............................................................................................3-4
3.4 Biological Resources..............................................................................3-8
3.5 Cultural Resources...............................................................................3-10
3.6 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources................................................3-12
3.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials.......................................................3-14
3.8 Hydrology and Water Quality................................................................3-17
3.9 Land Use and Planning........................................................................3-20
3.10 Noise....................................................................................................3-24
3.11 Population and Housing........................................................................3-27
3.12 Public Services.....................................................................................3-28
3.13 Recreation and Open Space................................................................3-31
3.14 Transportation/Traffic............................................................................3-33
3.15 Utilities and Service Systems...............................................................3-45 F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc i Table of C
Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR TABLES
Table Page
1 Development Area Summary .........................................................................................2-3 2 Trip Generation Summary............................................................................................3-35 3 One Percent Analysis...................................................................................................3-36 4 ICU Summary...............................................................................................................3-40 5 Converted Uses...........................................................................................................3-42
EXHIBITS
Exhibit Follows Page
1 Local Vicinity Map..........................................................................................................2-2 2 Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, San Joaquin Boundaries...................................2-2 3 Existing and Proposed Zoning Designations.................................................................2-2 F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc Table of C
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR SECTION 1.0
INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE OF ADDENDUM
This document, prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), constitutes an Addendum to the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Program Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Screencheck No. 2006011119 certified on July 25, 2006. This Addendum was prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code §§21000, et seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations §§15000, et seq. CEQA Guidelines §15164(a) states that "the lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred." Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15162(a), a subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Negative Declaration is only required when:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
(3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 1-1 Introductic
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR The proposed North Newport Center Project includes the following City actions to implement the 2006 General Plan:
1. Approval of a zoning amendment to adopt the North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan (herein referred to as the North Newport Center PC Text), including the reclassification of property to the Planned Community (PC) District and amendment to two existing Planned Community Development Plans;
2. Approval of a transfer of development rights, pursuant to General Plan policy, to convert unbuilt hotel entitlement to office entitlement and to relocate this entitlement and existing office and commercial development from Block 600 to Block 500;
3. Approval of a traffic study of the North Newport Center Phased Land Use Development and Circulation System Improvement Plan pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance (herein referred to as the TPO approval);
4. Approval of an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (herein referred to as the AHIP) pursuant to the 2006 General Plan Housing Element; and
5. Approval of a Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and The Irvine Company Concerning North Newport Center (herein referred to as the Development Agreement) pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 15.45, Development Agreements
The purpose of this Addendum is to analyze the potential differences between the impacts evaluated in the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final EIR, hereafter referred to as the General Plan EIR, and those that would be associated with the North Newport Center Project. As described in detail herein, there are no new significant impacts resulting from these changes nor is there any substantial increase in the severity of any previously identified environmental impacts. The potential impacts associated with these proposed changes would either be the same or less than the anticipated levels ascribed in the certified General Plan EIR.
In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which future development projects subject to the 2006 General Plan and PC Text would be undertaken.
Therefore, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15164, this Addendum to the certified General Plan Final EIR is the appropriate environmental documentation for the North Newport Center PC Text.
Pursuant to §15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach (City) is the lead agency for the project. The lead agency is the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project that may have a significant effect upon the environment.
Newport Beach has the authority for project approval and certification of the accompanying environmental documentation. In taking action on any of the approvals outlined in Section 2.0, Project Description, the City, as the lead agency and decision making body, must consider the whole of the data presented in the General Plan EIR and this Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
1.2 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION AND DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS The General Plan EIR was certified
adequately addressing the potential
City of Newport Beach, inclusive of
Plaza (North Newport Center). The
actions being addressed as part i
addressed in Section 2.0, Project
by the Newport Beach City Council on July 25, 2006, as
environmental impacts associated with the buildout of the Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin
ocation of North Newport Center, approvals granted, and )f this Addendum to the General Plan EIR are further
)escription. The adopted 2006 General Plan placed the
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 1-2 Introductic
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR following designations on the four sub -areas included in the Project and analyzed full implementation of entitlements for Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza.
Fashion Island Regional Commercial (CR)
Block 500 Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU-H3) and Open Space (OS) Block 600 Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU-H3) and Open Space (OS) San Joaquin Plaza Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU-H3) and Open Space (OS) When a project is large and complex, such as a General Plan update, and will be implemented over a multi -year period, a Program EIR enables the lead agency to approve the overall program. When individual activities within the program are proposed, the agency is then required to examine the individual activities to determine if their effects were adequately analyzed in the Program EIR. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines §15162, the lead agency can approve the activities as being within the scope of the project covered by the Program EIR.
The State CEQA Guidelines §15168(a) defines a Program EIR as:
...an EIR which may be prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and are related either:
(1) Geographically,
(2) A logical parts in the chain of contemplated actions, (3) In connection with issuance of rules, regulations, plans, or other general criteria to govern the conduct of a continuing program, or (4) As individual activities carried out under the same authorizing statutory or regulatory authority and having generally similar environmental effects which can be mitigated in similar ways.
The State CEQA Guidelines §15168(c)(2) states:
(2) If the agency finds that pursuant to Section 15162, no new effects could occur or no new mitigation measures would be required, the agency can approve the activity as being within the scope of the project covered by the program EIR, and no new environmental document would be required.
As previously noted, CEQA Guidelines §15162(a) states that a subsequent EIR is not necessary in the absence of the following: (1) substantial changes to the project, (2) substantial changes to the project circumstances, or (3) new information of substantial importance.
Use of a Program EIR for the update of the General Plan afforded the City many advantages that would not be realized if projects had been evaluated on an action -by -action basis. These advantages are outlined in CEQA Guidelines §15168(b), which states: "The Program EIR can:
(1) Provide an occasion for a more exhaustive consideration of effects and alternatives than would be practical in an EIR on an individual action, (2) Ensure consideration of cumulative impacts that might be slighted in a case - by -case analysis,
(3) Avoid duplicative reconsideration of basic policy considerations, FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 1-3 Introductic
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR (4) Allow the Lead Agency to consider broad policy alternatives and program - wide mitigation measures at an early time when the agency has greater flexibility to deal with basic problems or cumulative impacts, and (5) Allow reduction in paperwork."
pursuant to Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines... This EIR will review the existing conditions of the City of Newport Beach and the Planning Area, analyze potential environmental impacts from implementation of the proposed General Plan Update, identify policies from the proposed General Plan Update that serve to reduce and minimize impacts, and identify additional mitigation measures, if necessary, to reduce potentially significant impacts of the General Plan Update."
significant environmental impacts associated with future development resulting from implementation of the proposed General Plan Update, and also addresses appropriate and feasible mitigation measures or project alternatives that would minimize or eliminate these impacts." Page 1-5 states: "The proposed General Plan Update will serve as a comprehensive document that will guide future potential growth and development within the City ... The EIR will analyze all aspects of the proposed General Plan Update to determine whether any aspect of the project, either individually or cumulatively, may cause a significant effect on the environment with regards to the environmental issues [identified in the EIR]." As such, the General Plan Final EIR assessed potential impacts associated with the implementation of land uses set forth in the General Plan, including land use changes due to full implementation of entitlements for Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza under the General Plan Update.
Fashion Island, including an additional anchor department store and ancillary shops, another hotel or additions to existing hotels, and 600 additional housing units." The Draft EIR for the City of Newport Beach General Plan Update analyzed 600 housing units in Newport Center, which includes Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Through Planning Commission and City Council hearings the 600 housing units were reduced to a maximum of 450 units. This reduction is reflected in Volume IA -Final Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR Changes and Responses to Comments).
The 2006 General Plan also documented the approval of these 450 residential units for Newport Center.a Of the 450 units permitted in Newport Center by the adopted 2006 General Plan, 430 units are incorporated into this proposed PC Text Amendment.
Previous Discretionary Actions
The following City of Newport Beach Ordinances and Resolutions related to development of the four sub -areas are listed below and incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof:
Fashion Island Planned Community Development Plan (adopted November 23, 1987) Amendment No. 632, Ordinance No. 87-45, November 23, 1987 Amendment No. 699; Resolution No. 90-7, February 12, 1990 Amendment No. 701, Resolution No. 91-22, March 11, 1991 Amendment No. 811, Resolution No. 94-102, November 14, 1994 City of Newport Beach, General Plan, July 25, 2006, Table LU-2, pages 3-18 to 3-20.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 1-4 Introductic
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Amendment No. 825, Resolution No. 95-115, October 9, 1995 Amendment No. 889, Ordinance No. 99-27, November 8, 1999 PD 2002-002, Ordinance No. 2003-001, January 28, 2003
Block 500
Amendment No. 827, Ordinance No. 95-32, August 28, 1995 San Joaquin Plaza
Ordinance No. 1649, adopted by the City of Newport Beach on December 22, 1975 (Amendment No. 455)
Amendment No. 1: March 12, 1979, P.C. Amendment No. 527; Resolution No. 9517 Amendment No. 2: November 23, 1987, P.C. Amendment No. 653; Resolution No. 87-164 Amendment No. 3: January 13, 1992, P.C. Amendment No. 729; Resolution No. 92-5 Amendment No. 4: April 27, 1992, P.C. Amendment No. 755; Resolution No. 92-33 Amendment No. 5: October 9, 1995, P.C. Amendment No. 825, Resolution No. 95-115 Amendment No. 6: March 22, 2005, Code Amendment No. 2004-013; Resolution No. 1656, Ordinance 2005-3
Block 600
Ordinance No. 1719, adopted by the City of Newport Beach on March 28, 1977 (Amendment No. 483)
Ordinance No. 92-45, adopted by the City of Newport Beach on November 9, 1992 (Amendment No. 771)
GPA 97-3 (D), adopted by the City of Newport Beach on June 22, 1998 (Resolution No. 98- 48)
F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 1-5 Introductic
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR SECTION 2.0
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION
Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are located in Newport Center in the City of Newport Beach, California. As depicted in Exhibit 1, Newport Center is generally bound by San Joaquin Hills Road to the northeast, MacArthur Boulevard to the southeast, Jamboree Road to the northwest, and Coast Highway to the southwest.
Fashion Island is an approximate 75-acre regional shopping center located in the center of Newport Center; Newport Center Drive is a ring road that connects to a roadway system providing access to the various blocks that form Newport Center. Block 500 (approximately 15 acres) is generally bound by San Joaquin Hills Road to the northeast, an internal access road and Avocado Avenue to the south, Newport Center Drive to the southwest, and Santa Rosa Drive to the west. Block 600 (approximately 25 acres) is generally bound by San Joaquin Hills Road to the northeast, Santa Rosa Drive to the southeast, Newport Center Drive to the southwest, and Santa Cruz Drive to the west. San Joaquin Plaza (approximately 23 acres) is generally bound by San Joaquin Hills Road to the northwest, San Clemente Drive to the south, Santa Cruz Drive to the east, and Santa Barbara Drive and internal access roads to the west.
The four sites are depicted on Exhibit 2.
The areas surrounding Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are developed. To the north of Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza across San Joaquin Hills Road, land uses include residential and a golf course within The Big Canyon Planned Community (PC 8). Uses to the south of Fashion Island are predominately commercial. To the south of Block 500 are medical and commercial office uses. To the south of San Joaquin Plaza are multi -family residential and commercial office uses. To the west are commercial uses, residential uses, the Marriott Hotel, and the Newport Beach Country Club. To the east, across MacArthur Boulevard are residential uses.
2.2 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
2.2.1 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PC TEXT
The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code allows a "Planned Community District" to address land use designation and regulations in Planned Communities. The proposed project is the adoption of the North Newport Center PC Text, which incorporates Fashion Island, Block 600, and portions of Block 500 and San Joaquin Plaza owned by The Irvine Company (Applicant) into a single Planned Community District. Concurrently, the existing Block 500 PC Text and the San Joaquin Plaza PC Text would be amended to remove identified portions of Block 500 and San Joaquin Plaza from their respective Planned Community Districts, and the Newport Beach Zoning Code would be amended to remove Block 600 from the Administrative Professional Financial zoning district.
The purposes of a Planned Community District, as stated in the Municipal Code are as follows:
20.35.10 Specific Purposes
The PC district is intended to:
A. To provide for the classification and development of parcels of land as coordinated, comprehensive projects so as to take advantage of the FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 2-1 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR superior environment which can result from large-scale community planning;
B. To allow diversification of land uses as they relate to each other in a physical and environmental arrangement while insuring substantial compliance with the spirit, intent and provisions of this Code; C. To include various types of land uses, consistent with the General Plan, through the adoption of a development plan and text materials which set forth land use relationships and development standards.
The PC Text has been prepared to implement and be consistent with the adopted 2006 City of Newport Beach General Plan (General Plan) and City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final EIR (General Plan EIR). The proposed PC Text reflects the uses and designations permitted under the 2006 General Plan. No changes to the existing 2006 General Plan land use designations are required. The existing General Plan land uses designations for the four sub- areas are as follows:
Fashion Island Regional Commercial (CR)
Block 500 Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU-H3) and Open Space (OS) Block 600 Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU-H3) and Open Space (OS) San Joaquin Plaza Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU-H3) and Open Space (OS) The existing zoning designations for the four sub -areas are as follows. Adoption of the North Newport Center PC Text would incorporate Fashion Island, Block 600, and portions of Block 500 and San Joaquin Plaza owned by The Irvine Company (Applicant) to create the North Newport Center PC Text. The existing and proposed zoning designations are shown on Exhibit 3.
Fashion Island Planned Community (PC-35 Fashion Island) Block 500 Planned Community (PC-46 Block 500)
Block 600 Administrative, Professional, Financial (APF); Open Space (OS) San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC-19 San Joaquin Plaza) As identified on Table 1, the proposed amendment to the PC Text would incorporate the intensities set forth in the adopted 2006 General Plan. Future implementation of entitlements for Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza would not allow for any increase in development intensities beyond that permitted by the General Plan for these sub -areas. The PC Text identifies the permitted land uses and development standards that will be used to guide future development.
As previously noted, Fashion Island is a regional shopping center located in the center of the larger Newport Center area. The proposed PC Text envisions Fashion Island to incorporate uses including retail, restaurants, bars, theater/nightclubs and services. The proposed PC Text provides that Blocks 500 and 600 and San Joaquin Plaza may be developed as a regional mixed use center incorporating administrative, professional, and financial uses together with hotel and residential uses and retail and other commercial uses.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 2-2 Environma
V, y 1 k 'aia hb 5-
�-
x
:+• 4Y _:,
ti-
lock
- u "fir -. - '''. Z. - ti - � r' �•� � � �r
San Joaquin y}���`.:�rr..�•: -,._r �'��- - +��,: �, �'" ;9� are � - x i `•� �','-�°}�
r. 3
• • - _ Fashion Island
_ �Block;500. ..{ .
ri:3IL
.�.,
,
ter
'?r�Y•4J •'4. i ,.Y'' rr, ::. v"xy.ry.i - T'.t
r��# Aika
�
p�IM
'"
Newport Bay - _ � �:'�� '� �`` -� ,' ;� - •��� -%'.
4 '
� 6'.] i� ' '•'� ' "� � - k���,,�•�s-s• L',^�� 9S.y, :+� j'4. .. }•. �� �tj4h..�k 'i Project Location
ME
Local Vicinity Exhibit 1
North Newport Center Addendum
N
`"-<�e 1,500 750 0 1,500
s Feet
R:/Projects/Newport/J011 /Gmphics/Ex1 _LV_110907.pdf
'� PC-56
PC-56 �SANTACRUZ DR.
IDS-
PC-56
a CL
� 9pG
PC-5fi {
�s
PC-5fi
SANTA ROSA DR-
J
PC-56 PC-56 PC-56
}
G
.,PC-56
N
�^ a
a
nw
x
u ap'
AqC'
�NO a z
TQ�
a
gsr��c� � �q
o�
v
❑S - Open Space
AP -Administrative, Professional, Financiai
PC-56 - Fashion Island Planned Community
text- Proposed Zoning
text - Current Zoning
4ex4- Proposed to be changed
Source: CAA Planning 2007
Existing and Proposed Zoning Designations Exhibit 3
North Newport Center Addendum
R:/Projects/Newport/J011/Graphics/Ex3 Zone 110907.pdf
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR TABLE 1
DEVELOPMENT AREA SUMMARY
San Joaquin
Fashion Island
Block 500
Block 600
Plaza
Land Use
(75 acres)
(15.29 acres)
(25 acres)
(23.2 acres)
Total
Regional
Commercial
1,619,525 sf
0 0
0 1,619,525 sf
Movie Theatre
1,700 seats
1,700 seats
(27,500 sf)
(27,500 sf)
Hotel
(a)
(b)
425 rooms (b)
(b)
490 rooms
Residential
0 (c)
(c)
(c)
430 du
Office/Commercial
0 285,142 sf
1,001,634 sf
1 337,261 sf
1 1,746,979 sf
sf: square feet
du: dwelling unit
a Hotel rooms are permitted in Fashion Island through the transfer of available square footage. b 65 hotel rooms may be relocated in either Block 500, Block 600, or San Joaquin Plaza. In no case shall the total number of hotel rooms in the Fashion Island/Block 500/Block 600/San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community exceed 490. c. Residential units are permitted in Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. In no case shall the total number of dwelling units exceed 430.
2.2.2 TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS
The 2006 General Plan also allows a transfer of development rights within Newport Center in accordance with the following Land Use Element policy:
LU 6.14.3 Transfers of Development Rights
Development rights may be transferred within Newport Center, subject to the approval of the City with the finding that the transfer is consistent with the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts.
As part of the Project, The Irvine Company, herein referred to as Applicant, is proposing to transfer a portion of the existing development rights from Block 600 to Block 500. The transfer includes the conversion of 165 unbuilt hotel rooms to office space, and the transfer of this entitlement to Block 500. It also includes the removal of the following existing uses from Block 600, and transfer of this entitlement to Block 500: 17,300 square feet (sf) of health club, 16,444 sf of restaurant, and 8,289 sf of office. Up to 72,000 sf of the transferred development rights could be used for a new City Hall in Block 500.
2.2.3 PHASED LAND USE DEVELOPMENT AND CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN (TPO APPROVAL)
The Project is not expected to be completed within 60 months of approval, and it includes a circulation improvement plan, explained in detail in the Development Agreement. The Project therefore qualifies as a Phased Land Use Development and Circulation Improvement Plan under the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance, Municipal Code §15.40.030.B.2. A traffic study has been prepared pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, and "feasible mitigation" (consistent with the 2006 General Plan Circulation Element) is part of the Project. This mitigation is that the Applicant will construct a third eastbound turn lane at the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road. Consistent with the TPO, this improvement will be completed early in the development phasing (i.e., before issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first building [other than a parking structure]) constructed as part of the Project, but in no event later than 60 months from the operative date of the Development Agreement. In addition, the Applicant will work with the City on design and development of circulation enhancements in the FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 2-3 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR North Newport Center area, consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element, including widening of Avocado Avenue between San Miguel Drive and San Nicolas Drive, dedication of public right-of-way and enhancement of San Miguel Drive between MacArthur Boulevard and Avocado Avenue, and installation of traffic signals on Newport Center Drive.
2.2.4 AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (AHIP)
The 2006 General Plan Housing Element requires an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) for any development including more than 50 dwelling units. The North Newport Center AHIP describes how the Applicant would provide affordable housing to meet the Housing Element goal of 15 percent. The Applicant may build new affordable units, restrict income and rent levels for existing apartments in the vicinity of North Newport Center, or a combination of these methods. The exact number of units may vary, depending on the income levels served, and all units must be affordable for a period of 30 years.
2.2.5 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
As a part of the project, a Development Agreement is proposed between the City of Newport Beach and The Irvine Company. Key provisions of the proposed Development Agreement are as follows.
• Cancellation of Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement and Bonita Canyon Annexation and Development Agreement
• Vesting of North Newport Center development rights for 20 years • Payment of in -lieu park fees for 430 residential units, including early payment of a portion of fees as matching grant for OASIS Senior Center • Payment of public benefit fee to fund construction of new City Hall building or other municipal purpose
• Circulation enhancements in the North Newport Center area • Four-year option for the City to purchase a site in Block 500 for City Hall as well as the use of 375 parking spaces.
• Dedication of the site north of San Miguel Drive, west of MacArthur Boulevard, south of San Joaquin Hills Road and east of Avocado Avenue for open space, if a new City Hall is constructed on a site in Newport Center other than Block 500 • Limit on future increases in development fees
• Limit on future amendments to Municipal Code pertaining to development of the North Newport Center property
2.2.6 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
The City of Newport Beach, as the lead agency for the Project, would rely on the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Program Final EIR and this Addendum as the primary environmental documentation for the approval of the discretionary actions discussed below.
F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 2-4 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Approval of the Addendum to the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR: The North Newport Center Project requires the acceptance of the environmental document as having been prepared in compliance with CEQA and the State and City CEQA Guidelines, as well as certification that the information contained in the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR and this Addendum was considered in the final decisions on the Project.
Approval of the Planned Community Development Plan and Design Regulations Amendment No. PD2007-003 as the North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan and Design Regulations: The Project includes the adoption of the North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan to incorporate Fashion Island, Block 600, and portions of Block 500 and San Joaquin Plaza owned by The Irvine Company into one PC District, and to provide consistency between the 2006 General Plan and the zoning designation for the four sub -areas of North Newport Center. Additionally, the Block 500 and San Joaquin Plaza PC Texts would be modified to remove areas to be included in the North Newport Center PC Text. • Code Amendment CA2007-007: An amendment to Municipal Code is required to change the zoning classification of Block 600 from Administrative Financial Professional (APF) to Planned Community (PC) District and the open space corner lots in Block 500 and Block 600 from the Open Space (OS) District to the Planned Community (PC) District.
• Approval of Transfer of Development Rights: The project includes the transfer of development rights from Block 600 to Block 500 pursuant to General Plan policy. The transfer of development rights requires approval of the City Council. • Traffic Study No. TS2007-001: In accordance with Municipal Code Title 15, Chapter
15.40, the project is a Comprehensive Phased Land Use Development and Circulation System Improvement Plan as all phases of construction are not anticipated to be completed within 60 months of approval and the project is subject to a Development Agreement. As such, a Traffic Phasing Ordinance study has been prepared. • North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan: An Affordable Housing Implementation Plan is required by the 2006 General Plan Housing Element, and is included in the Project.
• Development Agreement No. DA2007-002: The Development Agreement between the City and Applicant would vest development rights and establish public benefits to the City.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 2-5 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR SECTION 3.0
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The analysis in this document will evaluate if the potential impacts associated with the subsequent approvals outlined in Section 2.0, Project Description, are substantially the same as those addressed in City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR. This evaluation includes a determination as to whether Project implementation would result in any new significant impacts or a substantial increase in a previously identified significant impact. If the comparative analysis identifies that there would be no change in impact from that identified in the General Plan EIR, a determination of "No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis" has been made.
This analysis provides the City of Newport Beach with the factual basis for determining whether any changes in the project, any changes in circumstances, or any new information since the General Plan EIR was certified require additional environmental review or preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR.
3.1 AESTHETICS
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project would have a significant adverse impact on aesthetic/visual quality if it would result in any of the following:
• Have a substantial adverse effect a scenic vista
• Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway • Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings
• Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area"
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Aesthetic and visual impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
Summary Analysis
Have a Substantial Adverse Effect a Scenic Vista
(General Plan EIR) identifies that there are no officially designated scenic highways within the City. As such, Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are not designated as scenic vistas or located within a scenic preservation zone. Page 4.1-9 of the General Plan EIR identifies a public coastal view is located along Newport Center Drive from Newport Center Drive east to west extending to Farallon Drive/Granville Drive, the beginning of which is located approximately 0.45 miles south of Block 600 and at the southern edge of Fashion Island. The General Plan EIR states that "...existing and future development would be regulated by the FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-1 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR proposed General Plan Update policies, and scenic vistas would not be adversely affected.
Therefore, impacts to scenic vistas would be less than significant." Substantially Damage Scenic Resources, Including, but not Limited to, Trees, Rock Outcroppings, and Historic Buildings within a State Scenic Highway The General Plan EIR identifies that there are no officially designated scenic highways in the City. State Route 1 (Coast Highway) is eligible for State Scenic Highway designation. Coast Highway is not contiguous to the Project. The General Plan EIR further states "Consequently, because no scenic highways are currently designated within the City, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would have no impact."
Substantially Degrade the Existing Visual Character or Quality of the Site and Its Surroundings
The General Plan EIR identifies Newport Center/Fashion Island as an area of high overall visual quality (see page 4.1-18). It further states "In these areas, new development allowed under the proposed General Plan Update would be done in such a way as to fit into the existing visual setting. Policy LU 1.1 requires that new development `maintain and enhance' existing development." Policy LU 1.1 states:
Maintain and enhance the beneficial and unique character of the different neighborhoods, business districts, and harbor that together identify Newport Beach. Locate and design development to reflect Newport Beach's topography, architectural diversity, and view sheds (See page 4.1-24) Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are within the City's high-rise height limitation zone. Fashion Island height limits range from 40 feet to 125 feet as detailed in Section 5d. Development within Block 500 and Block 600 is permitted up to 375 feet high. The height limit for San Joaquin Plaza is 65 feet. Fashion Island is currently developed with retail, entertainment, services and supporting uses that serve local and regional residents. Block 500 is developed with general office and medical uses. Block 600 is currently developed with high- rise office and hotel buildings. San Joaquin Plaza contains business and professional office uses.
Full implementation of entitlements for Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza would be required to comply with the City's high-rise height limitations, compliment the height of existing buildings in Newport Center, and not create a significant shadow, or shading, impact. Shading describes the effect of shadows cast on adjacent areas by proposed structures.
The proposed PC Text requires a that shade and shadow study be prepared for any structure over 200 feet in height that has the potential to affect the residential area located north of San Joaquin Hills Road (Big Canyon). The purpose of the study is to ensure that new development will not result in added shade and shadow to the residential area beyond existing conditions for more than three hours between the hours of 9 AM and 3 PM Pacific Standard Time, or for more than four hours between the hours of 9 AM and 5 PM Pacific Daylight Time.
The General Plan EIR notes that the 2006 General Plan includes policies associated with aesthetic improvements such as landscaping, pedestrian amenities, and design standards for architecture and lighting. Future development projects in North Newport Center would be required to conform to these General Plan standards as well as standards set forth in the PC Text and its Design Regulations. The General Plan EIR states "Thus, the visual character would change as development intensity increased, but the impacts would not be considered FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-2 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR significantly adverse.... Therefore, the proposed General Plan Update would have a less -than - significant impact on the visual character of developed urban areas." (See page 4.1-19) Create a New Source of Substantial Light or Glare, Which Would Adversely Affect Day or Nighttime Views in the Area
The General Plan EIR notes that the city is primarily built out and currently has significant amounts of ambient light. It further notes that new development could create new sources of light and glare from uses such as exterior building lighting, parking lots and structures, reflective building surfaces, and vehicular headlines. Sources of light and glare could affect adjacent sensitive land uses generally considered to be undeveloped land and residential uses adjacent to commercial or industrial uses. The 2006 General Plan includes policies to address potential nighttime lighting impacts. These include policies to prevent lighting spillage onto adjacent properties while other policies allow the integration of land uses with requirements for addressing lighting for land use compatibility. The General Plan EIR states "Therefore, with implementation of the above -mentioned policies, nighttime lighting impacts and potential spillover would be les than significant." (See page 4.1-22) The proposed Planned Community Development Plan and Design Regulations also contain lighting provisions to implement these General Plan policies.
Mitigation Program
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. The following condition is included in the North Newport Center PC Text relating shade and shadow:
Prior to issuance of a building permit for a structure over 200 feet in height that has the potential to shade residential areas north of San Joaquin Hills Road, a shade study shall be prepared by the Applicant and submitted to the City. The shade study shall demonstrate that the new development will not add shade to the designated residential areas beyond existing conditions for more than three hours between the hours of 9 AM and 3 PM Pacific Standard Time, or for more than four hours between the hours of 9 AM and 5 PM Pacific Daylight Time.
The shade study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and the Planning Director shall determine conformance with the standards identified herein as part of the plan review process.
Level of Sianificance After Mitiaation
Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR states "...all other project impacts associates with aesthetics and visual resources would be less than significant under the proposed Newport Beach General Plan Update."2 Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR
3.2 PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162 OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES, THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH HAS DETERMINED, ON THE BASIS OF SUBSTANTIAL
EVIDENCE IN THE LIGHT OF THE WHOLE RECORD, THAT THE NORTH NEWPORT
CENTER PROJECT DOES NOT PROPOSE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO THE 2 Visual impacts associated with Banning Ranch were found to be unavoidable. Banning Ranch is not a part of the North Newport Center Project.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-3 Environma
Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR PROJECT; NO SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES WOULD OCCUR WHICH WOULD
REQUIRE MAJOR REVISIONS TO THE GENERAL PLAN EIR DUE TO THE
INVOLVEMENT OF NEW SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OR A
SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN THE SEVERITY OF PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS; AND NO NEW INFORMATION OF SUBSTANTIAL
IMPORTANCE HAS BEEN REVEALED SINCE THE CERTIFICATION OF THE GENERAL PLAN EIR.AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
The General Plan EIR identifies that the topic of Agricultural Resources was focused out because the City of Newport Beach contains no designated farmland by the California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping Program, s no land designated Farmland would be converted to non-agricultural use as a result of implementation of the 2006 General Plan, no sites in the City are zoned for agricultural use, and no sites would be affected by a Williamson Act contract. (See page 6-4)
3.3 AIR QUALITY
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project would have a significant adverse impact on air quality if it would result in any of the following:
• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan • Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation
• Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project is in non -attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard
• Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations • Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Air quality impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
Summary Analysis
Conflict With or Obstruct Implementation of the Applicable Air Quality Plan Result in a Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase of any Criteria Pollutant for Which the Project Is In Non -Attainment Under An Applicable Federal Or State Ambient Air Quality Standard
The General Plan EIR identifies that projects that are consistent with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) 2003 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) are those whose use and activities are consistent with the applicable assumptions used in the 3 California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping Program, Important Farmland in California 2004 Map (2004)
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-4 Environmf
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR development of the AQMP. Because the growth projections assumed for buildout of the 2006 General Plan are higher than what would have been assumed in the AQMP, the "...proposed General Plan Update would not be consistent with the AQMP attainment forecasts and attainment of the standards could be delayed.... this impact would be significant." This was identified as a project and cumulative unavoidable impact.
As previously identified in Table 1 of this Addendum, total development (existing and future) for Fashion Island is 1,619,525 sf of regional commercial uses and 1,000 movie theatre seats; hotel uses are permitted through a transfer of development rights. Total development (existing and future) for Block 600 is 1,001,634 sf of office/commercial and 425 hotel rooms. Total office/commercial development is 285,142 sf for Block 500 and 337,261 sf for San Joaquin Plaza. In addition, 430 residential units and 65 hotel rooms may be developed in Blocks 500 or 600 or San Joaquin Plaza. Through the transfer of development rights included in the Project, the entitlement for 165 new hotel rooms and 42,036 sf of office/commercial use allocated to Block 600 is to be transferred to Block 500 for the development of 205,161 sf of office/commercial use in Block 500.The Project does not propose any new land uses, nor any additional intensity of development, not previously permitted and contemplated in the 2006 General Plan for the four sub -areas.
As such, the Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR.
Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Violate Any Air Quality Standard or Contribute Substantially to an Existing or Projected Air Quality Violation
The General Plan EIR identifies that construction related emissions could be mitigated but would be expected to remain significant and unavoidable. Future development in North Newport Center consistent with the assumptions of the 2006 General Plan may involve excavation, grading operations, building construction, and demolition of existing structures and pavement.
All development will be required to comply with standard construction practices as set forth in the SCAQMD Handbook, including best management practices (BMPs) for the control of emissions. BMPs include control of fugitive dust through watering exposed surfaces, covering exposed ground, and sweeping streets. Additional measures involve construction traffic emission control including ensuring all vehicles and equipment are operating efficiently. It is anticipated that standard control measures would reduce potential impacts of air emissions and odors.
Update would result in construction emissions that would contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation." The General Plan EIR evaluated the effects of full implementation of entitlements for Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza on air quality and accounted for construction impacts. The General Plan EIR concluded that despite implementation of General Plan Policies NR 8.1 through NR 8.5, which would help to reduce construction -related air quality impacts, the development contemplated in the General Plan would result in a significant and unavoidable air quality impact. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Expose Sensitive Receptors to Substantial Pollutant Concentrations FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-5 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR The General Plan notes that the implementation of General Plan land uses is not expected to expose existing or future sensitive uses within the City to substantial carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations. This impact was determined to be less than significant for all uses in the City.
As such, this conclusion would also be applicable to the North Newport Center Project.
Create Objectionable Odors Affecting a Substantial Number of People Odors can occur from construction activities related to the operation of construction vehicles and the application of architectural coatings. Odors can also occur from operation of uses such as restaurants, manufacturing facilities, etc. The General Plan EIR notes uses such as restaurants are typically required to have ventilation systems; trash receptacles are required by City and Health Department regulations. The General Plan EIR states that "Consequently, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people within the City and potential impacts would be less than significant." (See page 4.2-17). No land uses or activities would be permitted in the North Newport Center District that would result in changes in the conclusions set forth in the General Plan EIR.
Climate Change
The proposed North Newport Center Project serves to implement the principal goals of the 2006 General Plan. These goals and policies include the following:4 • A successful mixed -use district that integrates an economic and commercial center serving the needs of Newport Beach residents and the subregion, with expanded opportunities for residents to live close to jobs, commerce, entertainment, and recreation, and is supported by a pedestrian -friendly environment.
• Provide the opportunity for limited residential, hotel, and office development in accordance with the limits specified by Tables LU1 and LU2. • Provide the opportunity for an additional anchor tenant, other retail, and/or entertainment and supporting uses that complement, are integrated with, and enhance the economic vitality of existing development.
• Encourage that some new development be located and designed to orient to the inner side of Newport Center Drive, establishing physical and visual continuity that diminishes the dominance of surface parking lots and encourages pedestrian activity.
• Encourage that pedestrian access and connections among uses within the district be improved with additional walkways and streetscape amenities concurrent with the development of expanded and new uses. • Encourage that new development in Fashion
equivalent or higher design quality than existing
promenades by encouraging retail expansion
visibility to the promenades and provides an
experience.
4 Ibid., pages 3-97 to 3-98.
Island complement and be of
buildings. Reinforce the existing
that enhances the storefront
enjoyable retail and pedestrian
F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-6 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Full implementation of entitlements for Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza consistent with the 2006 General Plan will assist the City in achieving its General Plan goals. Regarding long- term air quality impacts, the General Plan EIR states that the nature of Newport Center has the capacity to contribute to decreases in vehicle miles traveled because the project area promotes a mixed -use, pedestrian -friendly district.5 The Project is not expected to result in any climate change impacts due to greenhouse gas emissions beyond the impacts of the development set forth in the General Plan EIR.
The General Plan EIR analyzed air quality impacts associated with buildout of future development in the City, inclusive of Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. The analysis included carbon dioxide (COZ) and other greenhouse gas emissions. As discussed above, the Project would not generate any new air quality impacts not already identified in the General Plan EIR. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
With respect to global climate change resulting from greenhouse gas emissions, no "new information of substantial importance" on climate change is now available that was not known and could not have been known when the City approved the General Plan EIR in 2006. For example, in 1979, the National Research Council published "Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Scientific Assessment," which concluded that climate change was an accelerating phenomenon partly due to human activity. Numerous studies conducted before and after the National Research Council report reached similar conclusions. The State of California adopted legislation in 2002 requiring the California Air Resources Board to develop regulations limiting greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles.
Consideration of strategies to control emissions of greenhouse gases which may contribute in some manner to global climate change is under consideration at all regulatory levels; however, there is no one agency responsible for regulating greenhouse gases, and there are no established standards to evaluate the significance of greenhouse gas emissions. However, the most common greenhouse gas emissions are from vehicle emissions (both construction and operational) and operational emissions from energy consumption. These issues have been addressed in General Plan EIR.
Analyses prepared for or by California State Agencies on climate change issues do not provide for the provision of specific measures to incorporate into particular projects to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, except for generalized recommendations about such matters as encouraging jobs/housing proximity. The California Energy Commission recently explained that accessibility and mixed use are two factors that reduce vehicles trips, which are a major source of greenhouse gas emissions in California.6
The Project's incremental contribution to any cumulative global climate change impact is mitigated by various characteristics of the Project that serve to render its contribution less than cumulatively considerable. One of the main concerns raised by those concerned about the effect of greenhouse gases on climate change is that "leap frog" -type development would serve to potentially increase the number of vehicle miles traveled and consequently increase those vehicular emissions (i.e., COZ that contribute to greenhouse gases). The Project would allow for City of Newport Beach, Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119), July 26, 2006, page 4.2-12.
s California Energy Commission, The Role of Land Use in Meeting California's Energy and Climate Change Goals, Draft, June 26, 2007, pages 7, 17-19.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-7 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR in -fill, mixed use development in an urbanized setting thereby providing opportunities to reduce vehicle trips.
Mitiaation Proaram
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that there are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce the impact of increased population on implementation of the AQMP; to reduce cumulative impacts associated with construction emissions; or to reduce operational activities. These impacts would be significant and unavoidable.
Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR.
3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project would have a significant adverse impact on biological resources if it would result in any of the following:
• Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or the CDFG or USFWS • Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the CDFG or USFWS
• Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means
• Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites • Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-8 Environma
Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR • Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan"
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Biological resources impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
Summary Analysis
Have a Substantial Adverse Effect, Either Directly or Indirectly Through Habitat Modifications, On Any Species Identified as a Candidate, Sensitive, or Special Status Species in Local or Regional Plans, Policies, or the CDFG or USFWS Have a Substantial Adverse Effect on Any Riparian Habitat or Other Sensitive Natural Community Identified in Local or Regional Plans, Policies, Regulations or By the CDFG or USFWS
Have a Substantial Adverse Effect on Federally Protected Wetlands as Defined By Section 404 Of The Clean Water Act (Including, But Not Limited To, Marsh, Vernal Pool, Coastal, Etc.) Through Direct Removal, Filling, Hydrological Interruption, or Other Means Interfere Substantially With the Movement of Any Native Resident or Migratory Fish or Wildlife Species or With Established Native Resident or Migratory Wildlife Corridors, or Impede the Use of Native Wildlife Nursery Sites
Conflict with Any Local Policies or Ordinances Protecting Biological Resources, Such As a Tree Preservation Policy or Ordinance
Conflict with the Provisions of an Adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or Other Approved Local, Regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan
Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are located within Newport Center, a built urban environment. Landscaped areas within Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza include non-native landscape materials including turf, trees, and plants. No wetlands or riparian habitat community exist in the sub -areas. The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any species identified by the California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as a species for concern because the site has been developed for the past 40 years and contains no habitat suitable for wildlife. Landscaping may be removed as a result of future development. The General Plan EIR notes that development could result in the removal of mature trees that may be used as perching and nesting sites for migratory birds and raptors. The General Plan EIR identifies mitigation associated with this potential impact and states "With compliance with these policies, impacts would be less than significant...."
The County of Orange Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) and the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) surveyed and mapped habitat vegetation and species throughout the County, including the four sub -areas. No candidate, sensitive or special status species were F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-9 Environmf
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR identified in the vicinity of the site.' Additionally, North Newport Center is identified as having no conservation value and is not included in the NCCP or HCP.
The General Plan EIR analyzes the potential biological effects associated with buildout of the 2006 General Plan, including Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza.
These sites would be required to comply with applicable 2006 General Plan policies regarding biological resources. Pages 4.3-22, 4.3-24, and 4.3-27 of the Biological Resources Analysis in the General Plan EIR address development in Newport Center, inclusive of Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Page 4.3-27 identifies that that the 2006 General Plan policies ensure that build -out consistent with the General Plan would not impact native, resident, or migratory wildlife species or corridors.
Mitigation Program
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that compliance with existing federal, State, and local regulations would mitigate biological resources impacts to a level considered less than significant.
Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR.
3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project would have a significant adverse impact on cultural resources if it would result in any of the following:
• Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5
• Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5
• Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature
• Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries"
7 U.S. Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service, Natural Community Conservation Plan, Habitat Conservation Plan, EIR, and EIS -County of Orange Central and Coastal Subregion, May 1996.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-10 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Cultural resources impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
Summary Analysis
Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of a Historical Resource as Defined In Section 15064.5
The four sub -areas of the North Newport Center PC District are not identified as a historic area or an area containing historical resources by the City of Newport Beach General Plan. The Project would not result in any adverse physical or aesthetic effects to any building, structure, or object having historical, cultural, or religious significance. As such, no historic resources would be impacted by the Project.
Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of an Archaeological Resource Pursuant To Section 15064.5
Disturb Any Human Remains, Including Those Interred Outside of Formal Cemeteries The General Plan EIR notes that ground -disturbing activities can damage or destroy archaeological and/or Native American cultural resources. The 2006 General Plan contains policies to ensure the protection of such resources. The General Plan EIR states that "...implementation of the proposed General Plan Update policies would ensure that impacts to archaeological and Native American cultural resources would be less than significant...." (See page 4.4-16) The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Directly or Indirectly Destroy a Unique Paleontological Resource or Site or Unique Geologic Feature
Paleontological resources may be present in fossil -bearing soils and rock formations below the ground surface. Ground -disturbing activities in these soils and formations have the potential to damage or destroy these resources. The General Plan EIR states that compliance with General Plan policies "...would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level by ensuring that paleontological resources would be subject to scientific recovery and evaluation..." (See page
4.4-17) The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR.
Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Program
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza.
F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-11 Environma
Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Level of Significance After Mitigation
Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources, and human remains could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant.
Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR.
3.6 GEOLOGY. SOILS. AND MINERAL RESOURCES
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states:
"Implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would result in a significant impact if the project would:
• Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving
- Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault - Strong seismic ground shaking
- Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction - Landslides
• Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of top soil • Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse • Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 1 B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property • Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State
• Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Geology, soils, and mineral resources impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-12 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Summary Analvsis
Expose People or Structures to Potential Substantial Adverse Effects, Including the Risk of Loss, Injury, or Death Involving the Rupture of a Known Earthquake Fault, Strong Ground Shaking, Seismic -Related Ground Failure, or Landslides The General Plan EIR notes that there are no Alquist-Priolo zones in the City; no impact would result. Policies are provided in the 2006 General Plan to ensure that adverse effects caused by seismic and geologic hazards are minimized. Moderate to large earthquakes would cause ground shaking in Newport Center, inclusive of Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Compliance with regulations and policies of the General Plan EIR would "...ensure that impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking remain at a less -than - significant level." With respect to seismic -related ground failure, none of Newport Center is in an identified liquefaction area.
Result In Substantial Soil Erosion or the Loss of Top Soil With respect to top soil, the General Plan EIR notes that most of the City is built out and top soil is not an issue. With respect to soil erosion, shoreline areas and coastal bluffs are highly susceptible to erosion from wave action and stream erosion. The four sub -areas are not located near the coast or bluff areas. All demolition and construction activities are required to comply with the California Building Code and other regional and local regulations (e.g., State Water Resources Control Board provisions) that require the implementation of measures to reduce soil erosion. The General Plan EIR identifies that potential impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Be Located on Expansive Soil, as Defined In Table 18 1 B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), Creating Substantial Risks to Life or Property
The General Plan EIR considered buildout of the City, inclusive of Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza in its geology analysis. Page 4.5-13 of the General Plan EIR discusses the General Plan Update's concentration of development in areas including Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza, and notes that the impact is considered less than significant. All four sub -areas have been subject to development which has required the analysis of soil conditions.
With respect to soil characteristics, the certified Final EIR for the Island Hotel (formerly Four Seasons), dated October 21, 1983, discussed geology and soils in Newport Center. The Final EIR states that Newport Center is:
...part of an uplifted marine terrace of Pleistocene age. The marine terrace soils are composed essentially of weakly cemented to loose sands and silty sands which in parts of Newport Center reach a depth of as much as 50 feet. The upper one to two feet of this material have weathered to form a moderately expansive, clayey soil. The Pleistocene sediments are underlain by clay shales, clay siltstones, and sandstones of Miocene age, Monterey Formation.
Because policies of the General Plan require that development not be located on unstable soils or geologic units, the General Plan EIR found that the potential impact was less than significant.
The Uniform Building Code and California Building Code include regulations governing FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-13 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR seismically resistant construction and construction to protect people and property from construction and building hazards.
Result in the Loss of Availability of a Known Mineral Resource That Would Be Of Value to the Region and the Residents of the State
Result in the Loss of Availability of a Locally Important Mineral Resource Recovery Site Delineated on a Local General Plan, Specific Plan, or Other Land Use Plan The General Plan EIR notes that implementation of the 2006 General Plan would not result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources of value to the region or the State. No impacts would occur.
Mitiaation Proaram
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to geology and soils could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. No mineral resources were identified.
Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR.
3.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states:
"Implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact to the public or the environment through hazards and hazardous materials if it would result in any of the following:
Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials
Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment
• Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-14 Environma
Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR • Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials site compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment • For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been developed, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area • Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan
• Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands"
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Hazards and hazardous material -related impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
Summary Analysis
Create a Significant Hazard to the Public or the Environment through the Routine Transport, Use, or Disposal of Hazardous Materials
Emit Hazardous Emissions or Handle Hazardous or Acutely Hazardous Materials, Substances, or Waste within One -Quarter Mile of an Existing or Proposed School Be Located on a Site Which Is Included On A List Of Hazardous Materials Site Compiled Pursuant To Government Code Section 65962.5, and as a Result, Would Create a Significant Hazard To The Public Or The Environment
Impair Implementation Of or Physically Interfere With an Adopted Emergency Response Plan or Emergency Evacuation Plan
The General Plan EIR acknowledges that implementation of the 2006 General Plan land uses would result in an increase in commercial development that could increase the routine transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials. The General Plan also notes that construction activities can result in the exposure of hazardous materials (e.g., lead -based paint and asbestos). The City contains sites that have been identified as being contaminated by the release of hazardous substances into the soil; sites containing leaking underground storage tanks; and large and small generators of hazardous materials.
The General Plan EIR notes that projects are required to comply with existing regulations and General Plan policies to protect construction workers and the public. Potential impacts were determined to be less than significant. Future development in North Newport Center could require the demolition of structures. Demolition and construction activities on the four sub -areas would also be subject to compliance with these regulations and policies.
The Island Hotel (formerly Four Seasons) in Block 600 is listed as having a leaking underground storage tank (LUST).$ A remediation plan has been submitted to the Orange County Local Ibid., Table 4.6-5.
F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-15 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Oversight Program (Local Lead Agency) and to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. The conclusion of this effort is pending. The contaminant identified is diesel fuel. None of the leaks that have been reported in the City have impacted a drinking source of groundwater.
As with all development in the City, the Project must comply with existing regulations and General Plan policies regarding hazardous materials. General Plan Policy S 7.3 educates residents and businesses about reducing or eliminating their use of hazardous materials. Policy S 7.6 requires that all users, producers, and transporters of hazardous materials and wastes clearly identify the materials and comply with applicable law.
The General Plan EIR notes that increased population and development could result in congested traffic conditions. The 2006 General Plan identifies policies to ensure that the city's Emergency Management Plan is regularly updated, provides for efficient and orderly citywide evacuation, and ensures that emergency service personnel are knowledgeable of the relevant response plans for the City. Such information is also distributed through the community. General Plan policies for handling emergencies would reduce hazardous materials impacts due to growth to a less than significant level. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Expose People or Structures to a Significant Risk of Loss, Injury or Death Involving Wildland Fires, Including Where Wildlands Are Adjacent To Urbanized Areas or Where Residences Are Intermixed With Wildlands
North Newport Center is not susceptible to wildland fires; the four sub -areas are completely surrounded by existing urban development.
For a Project Located Within an Airport Land Use Plan, or Where Such a Plan has Not Been Developed, Within Two Miles Of a Public Airport Or Public Use Airport, Result In a Safety Hazard For People Residing Or Working In The Project Area The four sub -areas are identified in the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport. The Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) has found the City of Newport Beach to be a consistent agency with the AELUP. However, the AELUP requires that zone changes for consistent agencies be referred to the ALUC for a determination prior to City action. Therefore, the zone change has been forwarded to the ALUC, and a hearing is scheduled prior to public hearings before the City's Planning Commission and City Council.
Additionally, the four sub -areas are within the AELUP Height Restriction Zone. Within this zone, notice to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is required for construction or alteration to any building more than 200 feet above ground level. Prior to construction or alteration of a building more than 200 feet above ground level a Determination of No Hazard must be obtained from the FAA. A determination of No Hazard is the FAA's independent finding that a proposed structure will not pose a hazard to air navigation. The PC Text requires that any structure above 200 feet will be forwarded to the FAA for their independent analysis.
Mitigation Program
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. The following conditions are included in the North Newport Center PC Text relating the adherence to the AELUP and FAA restrictions:
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-16 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR For development of structures that exceed 200 feet in height above ground level at a development site, applicants shall file a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration with the FAA (FAA Form 7460-1). Following the FAA's Aeronautical Study of a project, the project must comply with conditions of approval imposed or recommended by the FAA. Subsequent to the FAA findings, the City shall refer the project to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) of Orange County for consistency analysis.
2. No buildings within the Fashion Island/Block 500/Block 600/San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community area should penetrate the FAA FAR Part 77 imaginary obstruction surface for John Wayne Airport.
3. Applicants shall file a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration with the FAA (Form 7460-1) for any construction cranes that exceed 200 feet in height above ground level.
Level of Sianificance After Mitiaation
Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to hazards and hazardous materials relevant to the Project could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant.
Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR.
3.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states:
"Implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on hydrology and water quality, as well as the City's storm drain system, if it would result in any of the following:
• Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements • Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table.
• Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site
• Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff
• Require or result in the construction and/or expansion of new storm drain infrastructure that would cause significant environmental effects FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-17 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006
EIR
• Otherwise substantially degrade water quality
• Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map
• Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flows
• Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of a levee or dam • Expose people or structures to significant risk or loss, injury or death involving inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow"
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Hydrology and water quality impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
Summary Analysis
Violate Any Water Quality Standards or Waste Discharge Requirements Create or Contribute Runoff Water Which Would Exceed the Capacity of Existing or Planned Stormwater Drainage Systems or Provide Substantial Additional Sources of Polluted Runoff
Otherwise Substantially Degrade Water Quality
The General Plan EIR notes that the implementation of development set forth in the 2006 General Plan could result in an increase in pollutants in storm water and wastewater. However, water quality standards and waste discharge requirements would not be violated with compliance with regulations including but not limited to the State Water Resources Control Board Construction General Permit and preparation and implementation of Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans required for compliance with the NPDES General Construction Stormwater Activity Permit. Permit and regulation compliance would be required for future development projects within Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza.
The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code ensures compliance with federal water quality standards. The Municipal Code also regulates grading, fill, drainage, and erosion control. All construction and development must comply with applicable federal, State, and City laws. Also, General Plan Update policies "would reduce the risk of water degradation from the operation of new developments to the maximum extent practicable."9 The impact of development under the General Plan Update would be less than significant.
As identified in the General Plan EIR, Policy NR 3.16 Street Drainage Systems states "Require all street drainage systems and other physical improvements created by the City, or developers of new subdivisions, to be designed, constructed, and maintained to minimize adverse impacts on water quality. Investigate the possibility of treating or diverting street drainage to minimize 9 Ibid., page 4.7-32.
F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-18 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR impacts to water bodies."10 General Plan Policy LU 2.8, Adequate Infrastructure, states "Accommodate the types, densities, and mix of land uses that can be adequately supported by transportation and utility infrastructure (water, sewer, storm drainage, energy, and so on) and public services (schools, parks, libraries, seniors, youth, police, fire, and so on)." The General Plan EIR concludes that impacts are less than significant. General Plan Update Policies "would ensure that new development can be adequately supported by utilities such as storm drainage infrastructure.02 Impacts are less than significant. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Substantially Deplete Groundwater Supplies or Interfere Substantially With Groundwater Recharge Such That There Would Be A Net Deficit in Aquifer Volume or a Lowering of the Local Groundwater Table
The General Plan EIR notes that implementation of the General Plan could create additional impervious surfaces which could interfere with groundwater recharge. The General Plan EIR goes on to note that, however, intensification of development would not affect groundwater recharge. As the four sub -areas are currently developed, there would be no substantive change in the amount of impervious surfaces. The EIR finds that "new development would not substantially affect groundwater recharge. Potential impacts to groundwater recharge would be less than significant." 13 The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Require or Result In the Construction and/or Expansion of New Storm Drain Infrastructure That Would Cause Significant Environmental Effects On a citywide basis, the General Plan EIR notes that buildout may require the expansion of storm drains or the construction of new storm drain infrastructure. The existing site drainage has been designed to handle run off from existing structures on the four sub -areas. As future site - specific development is proposed, drainage plans will be developed. The General Plan EIR contains policies that ensure that new development can be adequately supported by utilities such as storm drain infrastructure. The General Plan EIR states "It is not anticipated that this construction of necessary storm drainage upgrades in and of itself would result in impacts separate from the General Plan Update." (See page 4.7-37) The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Substantially Alter The Existing Drainage Pattern Of The Site Or Area, Including Through The Alteration of The Course Of A Stream Or River, Or Substantially Increase The Rate Or Amount Of Surface Runoff In A Manner Which Would Result In Flooding On- Or Off -Site Place Housing within a 100-Year Flood Hazard Area as Mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or Other Flood Hazard Delineation Map 10 Ibid., page 4.14-45.
11 Ibid., page 4.14-34.
12 Ibid., page 4.7-36.
13 Ibid., page 4.7-33.
F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-19 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Place Within a 100-Year Flood Hazard Area Structures Which Would Impede or Redirect Flows
Expose People or Structures to A Significant Risk or Loss, Injury or Death Involving Flooding, Including Flooding As A Result Of A Levee or Dam Expose People or Structures to Significant Risk or Loss, Injury or Death Involving Inundation by Seiche, Tsunami, or Mudflow
While the General Plan EIR identifies areas of the City that would be vulnerable to flooding and coastal wave systems, the Project is not located in a flood hazard zone14 nor is it proximate to the Pacific Ocean. No impacts are anticipated.
Mitigation Program
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to hydrology and water quality could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant.
Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR.
3.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states:
"Implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on land use and planning if it would result in any of the following:
• Intensify development within the Planning Area that creates incompatibilities with adjacent land uses
Physically divides an established community
• Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect
14 Ibid., Figure 4.7-3 Flood Zones.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-20 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan"
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Land use impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
Summary Analvsis
Intensify Development within the Planning Area that Creates Incompatibilities with Adjacent Land Uses
Conflict with any Applicable Land Use Plan, Policy, Or Regulation Of An Agency With Jurisdiction Over The Project (Including, But Not Limited To The General Plan, Specific Plan, Local Coastal Program, Or Zoning Ordinance) Adopted For The Purpose Of Avoiding Or Mitigating An Environmental Effect
The General Plan EIR notes that buildout of the 2006 General Plan land uses may result in new uses and structures at an increased intensity that creates incompatibilities with adjacent land uses. These incompatibilities can result from factors including differences in scale of development, noise and traffic levels, and hours of operation. Conflicts can also occur where mixed use development occurs. Newport Center/Fashion Island is a location in the City identified for mixed use development. The General Plan EIR describes this area as:
Newport Center/Fashion Island is a regional center of business and commerce that includes major retail, professional office, entertainment, hotel, and residential uses in a master planned mixed use development. Fashion Island, a regional shopping center, forms the nucleus of Newport Center, and is framed by this mixture of office, entertainment, and residential. New land uses in this subarea include additional commercial uses (approximately 430,000 square feet), approximately 600 multi -family residential units [reduced to 450 units in Final Program EIR] and approximately 250 additional hotel rooms. Residential units have existed in this area since the 1970's, and increased through the 1990s. No conflicts of use between the residential and commercial uses have existed previously in this area, as evidenced by the lack of complaints by area residents. Goals and policies contained in the proposed General Plan Update would serve to promote a mixed use, pedestrian -friendly district for this subarea that would continue commercial and residential uses. Policy LU 6.14.5 encourages improved pedestrian connections and streetscape amenities connecting the area's diverse districts. Goals contained in the proposed General Plan Update related to mixed use development (Goal 5.3) specifically articulate that such development should promote compatibility among uses. General Plan Policy LU 5.3.1 calls for the consideration of compatibility issues in project design of mixed use development. Thus, mixed use development under the proposed General Plan Update would be, by design, compatible with adjacent non-residential uses.15
As previously noted in this Addendum, Fashion Island is a regional commercial center with retail uses, restaurants, bars, and theater/nightclubs. Block 500 includes office, administrative, professional, and financial uses. Block 600 includes hotel, office, administrative, professional and financial uses, and accessory uses. San Joaquin Plaza includes business and professional 15 Ibid., page 4.8-11.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-21 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR office uses. In addition to these four sub -areas, Newport Center includes the following sub- areas and land uses:
Block
Land Use
100
administrative and professional offices, limited accessory retail, financial, service, and entertainment uses
200
administrative and professional offices, limited accessory retail, financial, service, and entertainment uses
300
administrative and professional offices, limited accessory retail, financial, service, and entertainment uses
400
medical -related offices, short-term convalescent and long-term care services, professional offices, retail and other similar uses.
700
regional commercial office and multi -family residential 800
regional commercial office and multi -family residential 900
multi -family housing, visitor serving land uses
Land uses outside of Newport Center include single-family and multi -family residences and a golf course in Big Canyon located north of Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza and across San Joaquin Hills Road. Single-family and multi -family residences and general commercial land uses are located east of Newport Center across MacArthur Boulevard.
Parks/recreational land uses and single-family residences are located south of Newport Center, across Coast Highway. Open space, single-family residences, visitor -serving commercial and parks/recreational land uses are located west of Newport Center, across Jamboree Road.
The General Plan land use designation for Fashion Island is Regional Commercial (CR). Page 3-13 of the 2006 General Plan states that the CR designation "...is intended to provide retail, entertainment, service, and supporting uses that serve local and regional residents." The land use designations for Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU-H3) and Open Space (OS). As identified in the 2006 General Plan, "The MU-H3 designation applies to properties located in Newport Center. It provides for the horizontal intermixing of regional commercial office hotel, multi -family residential and ancillary commercial uses."16 Page 3-16 of the 2006 General Plan states that the OS designation "...is intended to provide areas for a range of public and private uses to protect, maintain, and enhance the community's natural resources."
As a part of the proposed project, Block 600 would be rezoned from Administrative, Professional, and Financial (APF) and Open Space (OS) to Planned Community (PC). The North Newport Center PC Text would be adopted to incorporate Fashion Island, Block 600, and portions of Block 500 and San Joaquin Plaza owned by the Applicant into a single Planned Community District. The PC Text would reflect the land uses permitted for these sub -areas under the 2006 General Plan.
The General Plan EIR states the following with respect to changes in land use for Newport Center and Fashion Island under the General Plan Update:
The Plan allows for expanded retail opportunities at Fashion Island, including an additional anchor department store and ancillary shops, another hotel or additions to existing hotels, and 600 additional housing units [reduced to 450 in Final 16 City of Newport Beach, General Plan, July 25, 2006, page 3-15.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-22 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Program EIR]... Plan policies encourage improved pedestrian connections and streetscape amenities connecting the area's diverse districts.17 Areas where mixed use development is currently located (e.g., Balboa Peninsula, Mariners' Mile and Newport Center/Fashion Island), would be allowed to develop with more mixed use ... In many locations, the addition of uses similar to existing uses would occur. For instance, additional retail facilities would be permitted in the Fashion Island/Newport Center Area... Where additional development that is the same as or similar to existing development could occur, these uses would be compatible.18
As previously addressed, the four sub -areas are identified in the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport. The Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) has found the City of Newport Beach to be a consistent agency with the AELUP. However, the AELUP requires that zone changes for consistent agencies be referred to the ALUC for a determination prior to City action. Therefore, the zone change has been forwarded to the ALUC, and a hearing is scheduled prior to public hearings before the City's Planning Commission and City Council.
As noted, the General Plan EIR does not identify land use incompatibilities for Newport Center, inclusive of the four sub -areas of the Project. The Project is proposed to provide for zoning consistent with the 2006 General Plan land use designations for the four sub -areas. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Physically Divides an Established Community
The General Plan EIR notes that the 2006 General Plan allows for "...limited infill development in select subareas within the City ... These types of proposed development would not divide established communities. Impacts would be less than significant." (See 4.8-16) With respect to the Project, future development in the four sub -areas would not require the extension of roadways or other development features through developed areas that could physically divide the established community. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Conflict with Any Applicable Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan
As previously addressed, North Newport Center is identified as having no conservation value and is not included in the NCCP or HCP.
Mitigation Program
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. 17 City of Newport Beach, Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan 2006 Update, July 26, 2006, page 3-15.
18 Ibid., page 4.8-9.
F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-23 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Level of Sianificance After Mitiaation
Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to land use impacts pertaining to the Project could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant.
Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR.
3.10 NOISE
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states "...implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse noise impact if it would result in any of the following:
• Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies
• Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels
• A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project
• A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project
• For a project within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Noise impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-24 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Summary Analvsis
Exposure of Persons to or Generation of Noise Levels In Excess Of Standards Established In the Local General Plan or Noise Ordinance, or Applicable Standards of Other Agencies
A Substantial Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise Levels in the Project Vicinity Above Levels Existing Without The Project
The General Plan EIR identifies that locations throughout the City would experience changes in noise levels as a result of increased motor vehicles and development. Where existing land uses would be exposed to noise levels exceeding the City's noise standards as a result of future growth, the General Plan EIR identifies this as a significant impact. (See 4.9-22) Figure 4.9-5 of the General Plan EIR identifies that the four sub -areas would be located within 60 CNEL to 65 CNEL future noise contours. These noise contours do not account for any intervening structures or other noise -attenuating features. Additionally, measures for noise attenuation where needed to comply with the City's noise standards are available and include the use of walls, berms, building insulation, double paned windows, etc.
Traffic -related noise in the project vicinity has the potential to impact the four sub -areas. The General Plan EIR accounts for noise impacts due to new development under the General Plan Update. The EIR states that new development, "...would result from adoption of the proposed General Plan and regional growth would create noise that would affect new and existing receptors. Most of this noise would be produced by increased traffic on local roads. Many of the proposed General Plan policies, especially those associated with Goal N-2 (Transportation Noise) would reduce this impact."19 The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Exposure of Persons to or Generation of Excessive Groundborne Vibration or Groundborne Noise Levels
The General Plan EIR notes that vibration levels during construction that would exceed 72 vibration decibels (VdB) are considered significant. Such an impact would be specific to a construction site and would be dependent on the types of construction equipment in use and proximity to sensitive receptors and uses. Where construction activities that generate high levels of vibration could not be buffered from sensitive receptors and/or uses by approximately 150 feet, the General Plan EIR identifies that a significant impact would occur. With respect to the four sub -areas, there is a potential for such construction activities to occur under these conditions. As such, consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, such an impact would be significant. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
A Substantial Temporary or Periodic Increase in Ambient Noise Levels in the Project Vicinity above Levels Existing Without the Project
Potential noise impacts are commonly divided into two groups: temporary and long term.
Temporary impacts are usually associated with noise generated by construction activities. 19 City of Newport Beach, Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119), July 26, 2006, page 4.9-42.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-25 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Generally, construction noise represents a short-term impact on ambient noise levels. Noise generated by construction equipment (including trucks, graders, bulldozers, concrete mixers, and portable generators) and construction activities can reach high levels. The greatest construction noise levels are typically generated by heavy construction equipment.
The City's Noise Ordinance exempts construction activities from the noise level limits during specific hours of the day. Noise -generating construction activities are permitted during the hours between 7:00 AM and 6:30 PM Monday through Friday, between 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM on Saturdays, and at no time on Sundays or federal holidays. Compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance is considered to result in no significant short-term noise impacts.
For A Project Within An Airport Land Use Plan, Or Where Such A Plan Has Not Been Adopted, Within Two Miles Of A Public Airport Or Public Use Airport, Exposure Of People Residing Or Working In The Project Area To Excessive Noise Levels As previously noted, Newport Center, inclusive of the four sub -areas, is located within the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport. However, the site is not within the either the AELUP 60 or 65 CNEL Noise Contour, and flight operations would not contribute significantly to the overall existing noise exposure on the site. No significant impacts on persons residing or working in the project area are anticipated as a result of project implementation because land use within the planning area boundaries of the AELUP must conform to noise standards, safety, and height restriction standards. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Program
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to noise impacts related to John Wayne Airport and construction activities could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. Groundborne construction vibrations and long-term exposure to increased noise levels were identified to remain significant and unavoidable.
Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR.
F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-26 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR
3.11 POPULATION AND HOUSING
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states "...implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on population and housing if it would result in any of the following:
Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through the extension of roads or other infrastructure)
• Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere
• Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere"
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Population and housing impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
Summary Analysis
Induce Substantial Population Growth in
Proposing New Homes and Businesses)
Extension of Roads or Other Infrastructure)
an Area, Either Directly (For Example, By
or Indirectly (For Example, Through the
The General Plan EIR finds that implementation of the 2006 General Plan would induce substantial growth either directly or indirectly. On a citywide basis, residential development would increase the number of units by 9,549 units (24 percent) over 2002 residential unit counts with a related population increase of 20,912 residents. These increases would exceed the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) projections. On a citywide basis, the City's projected population growth was considered significant. On a cumulative basis (countywide), the General Plan EIR noted that "...the proposed project would not result in substantial population growth beyond projections, and would not induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly." (See pages 4.10-5 and -6) Buildout of the 2006 General Plan was found to have a less than significant cumulative contribution to growth in the County. (See pages 4.10-6 and -7)
The General Plan EIR analysis was based on a project with 600 units in Newport Center. The adopted 2006 General Plan allows for the development of 450 residential units within the MU- H3 designation.20 Of the 450 units, 430 units are proposed for the North Newport PC District.
Residential uses are permitted in Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. The Project does not include a request for site -specific development, including any residential development.
As such, the Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR.
Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
20 City of Newport Beach, General Plan, July 25, 2006, page 3-97.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-27 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Displace Substantial Numbers of Existing Housing, Necessitating the Construction of Replacement Housing Elsewhere
Displace Substantial Numbers of People, Necessitating the Construction of Replacement Housing Elsewhere
The General Plan EIR states that the 2006 General Plan would not displace a substantial number of existing homes or residents and that no impact would occur. Development on the four sub -areas would not require the displacement of any existing homes or residents. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Program
No policies were identified in the 2006 General Plan to reduce the substantial increase in growth in the City. Measures were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with resource impacts with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to population and housing would remain significant and unavoidable.
Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR.
3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It identifies that implementation of the proposed General Plan Update may have a significant adverse impact on public services if it would result in any of the following:
• Result in substantial adverse environmental impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire or police protection facilities, or schools or libraries; the need for new or physically altered fire or police protection facilities, or schools or libraries; the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, and other performance objectives
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Public service impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-28 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Summary Analysis
Result in Substantial Adverse Environmental Impacts Associated with the Provision of New or Physically Altered Fire or Police Protection Facilities, or Schools or Libraries; the Need For New or Physically Altered Fire or Police Protection Facilities, or Schools or Libraries; The Construction of Which Could Cause Significant Environmental Impacts, in Order to Maintain Acceptable Service Ratios, Response Times, And Other Performance Objectives
Fire Protection
Fire stations are located throughout the City to provide prompt assistance to area residents.
Each fire station operates within a specific district that comprises the immediate geographical area around the station. As identified on page 4.11-3 of the General Plan EIR, Station 3 serves Newport Center. Station 3 has the following equipment and manpower: one Fire Chief; one fire engine with one Captain, one Engineer, and one Firefighter; one ladder truck with one Captain, one Engineer, and one Firefighter; and one paramedic van with two Firefighter Paramedics. The General Plan EIR states that in 2004, "eight fire stations serving the City of Newport Beach responded to a total of 8,863 incidents, which results in an average of about 1,107 incidents per station... These numbers are well within the number of calls recommended by the Insurance Service Office (ISO) when rating a community for fire insurance rates. Specifically, the ISO recommends that a second company be put in service in a fire station if that station receives more than 2,500 calls per year."
The General Plan EIR identifies that implementation of the 2006 General Plan could increase the demand for fire protection services which could result in the need for additional fire facilities.
Policies of the General Plan require that adequate infrastructure be provided with new development. As such, the General Plan EIR found that compliance with applicable regulations and policies of the 2006 General Plan would ensure that project -specific and cumulative impacts would be less than significant. All new development that would occur under the 2006 General Plan would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations governing the provision of fire protection services, including adequate fire access, fire flows, and number of hydrants. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Police Protection
The General Plan EIR identifies that implementation of the 2006 General Plan could increase the demand for police protection services which could result in the need for additional police facilities. The General Plan EIR states that, "The NBPD provides local police services to the City of Newport Beach. Centrally located at 870 Santa Barbara Drive, the NBPD provides services in crime prevention and investigation, community awareness programs, and other services such as traffic control ."21 The EIR also states that the City of Newport Beach currently maintains an acceptable level of service and there are currently no immediate or near -future plans for expansion of police facilities, staff, or equipment inventory. Impacts to police services as a result of General Plan build -out would be less than significant because the "General Plan Update contains policies to ensure that adequate law enforcement is provided as the City experiences future development. For example, Policy LU 2.8 ensures that only land uses that can be adequately supported by the City's Public Services should be accommodated. Compliance with 21 City of Newport Beach, Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan 2006 Update, July 26, 2006, page
4.11-13.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-29 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR this policy would ensure that adequate service ratios are maintained."22 Therefore, adequate service ratios are currently being provided and would be maintained as a result of General Plan policies. As such, the General Plan EIR found that compliance with applicable regulations and policies of the 2006 General Plan would ensure that project -specific and cumulative impacts would be less than significant. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Schools
The Newport -Mesa Unified School District (NMUSD) provides educational services to the City of Newport Beach. The General Plan EIR identifies that the School District serves the majority of the City and has 32 public schools including 22 elementary schools, 2 junior high schools, 5 high schools, 2 alternative education centers, and 1 adult school. There are also several private schools in the City or local area that are available to the City's residents for educational services. According to NMUSD administrators, current school capacity is adequate. NMUSD does not currently identify any projected needs.
The General Plan EIR states:
In the City, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would result in the construction of approximately 14,215 dwelling units over existing conditions within the City. The increase in dwelling units would increase enrollment in the local schools serving Newport Beach. Using California Department of Finance population projections, and assuming that approximately 20 percent of the potential increase in population would represent children attending grades K through 12, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would result in an enrollment increase of approximately 6,230 students (3,115 elementary school students, 1,557 students for middle schools, and 1,558 high school students).23
The General Plan EIR identifies that implementation of the 2006 General Plan would likely result in the construction of new school facilities for NMUSD; these impacts would be less than significant on a project and cumulative basis.24 The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Library Facilities
The Newport Beach Public Library provides library services and resources to the City of Newport Beach. The Central Library, which occupies four acres on Avocado Avenue near Newport Center, is a 15,305 square foot building that serves as a school library as well as a public library. As stated in the General Plan EIR,
Upon full build -out of the proposed General Plan Update, the population in the Planning Area would increase by 31,131. This increase in residents would increase the demand for library services and facilities. Policy LU 2.8 of the proposed General Plan Update would help ensure that adequate library facilities 22 Ibid., page 4.11-16.
23 Ibid., page 4.11-23.
24 Ibid., page 4.11-24.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-30 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR are provided to the City's residents and that public services can adequately support new development... Due to the growing need for electronic resources, former service standards (e.g., a certain number of volumes per thousand residents) are no longer appropriate when assessing the needs of the NBPL.
Therefore, increased development in the City does not necessarily immediately equate to an increase in total volumes or square feet of library space.25 The General Plan EIR identifies that the increase in population associated with the 2006 General Plan, inclusive of uses in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza, would not result in a significant impact to library services. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Program
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to public services would be less than significant.
Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR.
3.13 RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states that"... implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on parks and recreational facilities if it would result in any of the following:
• Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated
• Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment
• Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government services, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant 25 Ibid., page 4.11-28.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-31 Environma
Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives for parks
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Park and recreational facility impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
Summary Analysis
Increase the Use of Existing Neighborhood and Regional Parks or Other Recreational Facilities Such That Substantial Physical Deterioration of the Facility Would Occur or Be Accelerated
Include Recreational Facilities or Require the Construction or Expansion of Recreational Facilities That Might Have an Adverse Physical Effect on the Environment Result in Substantial Adverse Physical Impacts Associated With the Provision of New or Physically Altered Government Services, Need for New or Physically Altered Government Facilities, the Construction of Which Could Cause Significant Environmental Impacts, in Order to Maintain Acceptable Service Ratios or Other Performance Objectives for Parks The General Plan EIR identifies that the City has a deficiency of approximately 38.8 acres of park acreage, with 7 of 12 service areas experiencing a deficit of recreational acreage. Newport Center is in Service Area 9 and has 19 acres of existing parks, an excess of 8.1 acres of parks over the City standard of 5 acres per 1,000 persons. Page 4.12-3 of the General Plan EIR identifies that a planned park in Newport Center "would help alleviate the citywide park deficit" although Newport Center has a park surplus. The Back Bay View Park was completed in 2005, and a new passive park, Newport Center Park, is planned for development. The General Plan EIR states that "the construction and enhancement of park and recreational facilities and implementation of the goals and policies proposed in the General Plan would ensure that increased demand and use resulting from an increase in citywide population would not significantly accelerate the deterioration of existing recreational facilities."Z6 The General Plan EIR notes the open space benefits that the Applicant has provided through the Circulation and Improvement and Open Space Agreement (CIOSA). Page 4.12-4 states:
Some of the City's parks and open space areas consist of dedicated lands through the Circulation and Improvement and Open Space Agreement (CIOSA).
This agreement is between the City of Newport Beach and The Irvine Company, and has allowed building entitlements for The Irvine Company in exchange for payments for circulation projects, an interest free loan, and land for open space and potential senior housing sites for the City. The amount of open space land dedication was substantially more than what would have been required under the City's Park Dedication Ordinance.
Six sites have been dedicated under CIOSA in Newport Beach, and include:
Back Bay View Park, Newport Center Park (formerly Newport Village), Newporter Knoll, Freeway Reservation, Upper Castaways, and Harbor Cove. Another site, located at Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard, has been offered for 26 Ibid., page 4.12-15.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-32 Environmf
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR dedication and will be dedicated upon issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for final CIOSA project.
The Applicant did not implement all of the development that was allowed pursuant to CIOSA, and provided more park and open space dedication than required for the development that was completed. Through the Development Agreement, the Project includes cancellation of CIOSA.
The demand for park facilities that would have resulted from unbuilt entitlement in CIOSA would not be realized.
As with new development projects throughout the City, future development in the four sub -areas would be required to comply with the 2006 General Plan Update policies on open space.
Through the Development Agreement, the Project includes the payment of park in -lieu fees for 430 residential units, with half the total amount ($5,600,000) to be paid earlier than required.
The General Plan EIR finds that compliance with General Plan Update would result in less than significant impacts to parks and recreational facilities. These policies include the requirement that future development dedicate land or pay in -lieu fees at a minimum of 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 persons, and require the use of funding from the City's Park Dedication Fee Ordinance to enhance existing parks and recreation facilities (General Plan Update Policies R1.1 and R2.1).27 General Plan Policy R 1.10 includes three planned parks in West Newport, Newport Center, and Newport Coast. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Program
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to parks and recreation facilities would be less than significant.
Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR.
3.14 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states that"... implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on transportation or circulation if it would result in any of the following:
27 Ibid., page 4.12-17.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-33 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR • Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)
• Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways
• Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in locations that results in substantial safety risks • Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment) • Result in inadequate emergency access
• Result in inadequate parking capacity
• Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)"
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Transportation impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
Summary Analysis
Cause an Increase in Traffic Which is Substantial in Relation to the Existing Traffic Load and Capacity of The Street System (i.e., Result In A Substantial Increase in Either the Number of Vehicle Trips, the Volume to Capacity Ratio on Roads, or Congestion at Intersections)
The General Plan EIR identifies that implementation of the 2006 General Plan could result in a substantial increase in the number of vehicle trips, volume to capacity on roadways, and congestion at intersections when compared to existing conditions in the City. Deficiencies could also occur at freeway segments and ramps. Volume 1A of the General Plan Final EIR identifies that the traffic study accounts for use of currently unused development entitlements. On page
4.13-1 of the General Plan EIR, the traffic analysis assumes buildout of the City, inclusive of Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza, consistent with the 2006 General Plan.
However, improvements are identified in the General Plan Circulation Element to mitigate citywide impacts to a level that is considered less than significant. However, the City's roadway system must also accommodate regional cumulative vehicular traffic. With improvements identified in the Circulation Element, cumulative impacts to intersection operations can be mitigated to a less than significant level. However, the City's contribution to cumulative impacts associated with freeway segments and ramps would remain significant and unavoidable.
The Project is not expected to be completed within 60 months of approval, and it includes a circulation improvement plan, explained in detail in the Development Agreement. The Project therefore qualifies as a Phased Land Use Development and Circulation Improvement Plan F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-34 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR under the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance, Municipal Code §15.40.030.B.2. A traffic study has been prepared pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, and "feasible mitigation" (consistent with the 2006 General Plan Circulation Element) is part of the Project.
The following provides a summary of the North Newport Center Traffic Phasing Ordinance Study prepared by Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. in November 2007. The study is included in its entirety as Appendix A. The Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) traffic study included the analysis of 40 intersections in the City including 5 intersections on Newport Center Drive using the City's required TPO procedure. This procedure includes both a one percent test and, where necessary, an intersection capacity utilization (ICU) analysis.
Consistent with the City's TPO analysis guidelines, the Project is analyzed under short-range conditions (existing volumes plus a regional growth factor and approved projects) without and with cumulative projects (i.e., projects reasonably expected to be complete within one year after project completion which are located within the City of Newport Beach or its Sphere of Influence).
Trip Generation Distribution and Analysis. The applicable trip rates and incremental trip generation for the Project is presented in Table 2. The increase in traffic includes a credit for the removal of existing uses. The Project is forecast to generate a net increase over existing of 348 trips in the AM peak hour, 311 trips in the PM peak hour, and 2,399 daily trips.
TABLE 2
TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
Land Use
Amount
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
ADT
In Out Total
In Out Total
TRIP RATES (ITE)
Residential
DU
0.06 0.28
0.34 0.24
0.14 0.38
4.18 Quality Restaurant
TSF
0.66 0.15
0.81 5.02
2.47 7.49
89.95 Shopping Center
TSF
0.19 0.12
0.31 0.77
0.84 1.61
16.79 Office (Regression Eq)a
TSF
0.95 0.13
1.08 0.19
0.93 1.12
7.07 Health Club
TSF
0.51 0.70
1.21 2.07
1.98 4.05
32.93 TRIP GENERATION
Existing Uses to be Removed
Block 600
Quality Restaurant
16.4 TSF
11 2
13 83
41 123
1,479
Office
8.3 TSF
8 1
9 2
8 10
59 Health Club
17.3 TSF
9 12
21 36
34 70
570
Total Credit
-28
-15
-43
-121
-83
-203
-2,108
Proposed Uses
Block 500
Office 205.2 TSF 195 27 222 39 191 230 1,451
Block 600
Residential
430 DU
26 120
146
103
60 163 1,797
Fashion Island
Shopping Center
75.0 TSF
14 9
23 58
63 121
1,259
Total Proposed Trips
235
156
391
200
314
514
4,507
NET INCREASE
207
141
348
79 231
311
2,399
Trip rates per TSF determined from applying the ITE office regression equations to the existing (408 TSF) and proposed future (614 TSF) office use, and calculating the rates based on the square footage increment (206 TSF).
F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-35 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 2007
For trip distribution, an internal capture rate of 10 percent was used for residential and retail uses. This rate was determined based on ITE's recommended procedure and is consistent with the City's General Plan EIR traffic study, which used a 10 percent capture rate for mixed use areas. For the office space, a five percent internal capture rate was used.
A separate trip assignment was prepared for each of the three separate uses (retail/shopping center, residential, and office) in the Project. These assignments, shown by individual uses in Figures A-1 through A-3 in Appendix A, are as follows:
1. North on MacArthur Boulevard
20-40 percent
2. North on Jamboree Road
15-30 percent
3. West on Coast Highway
15-30 percent
4. East on Coast Highway
10 percent
One Percent Analysis. The results of the TPO One Percent Analysis are presented in Table 3.
This analysis identifies the intersections where the Project adds one percent or more to the background peak hour volume, in which case a more vigorous capacity analysis is performed.
Opening year for the Project is assumed to be 2009; therefore, the project year for this analysis is 2010. Table 3 identifies that 39 traffic study area intersections have increases of one percent or greater of existing -plus -approved or existing -plus -approved -plus -cumulative volumes during the AM or PM peak hour. As a result, further analysis is required and a peak hour ICU analysis was conducted for the 39 locations.
TABLE 3
ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS
Intersection
AM Peak Hour
Project Volumes
Less Than 1% of Peak Hour
Volumes
NB
SB
EB
WB
w/o Cumulative
w/Cumulative
1. MacArthur & Campus
8 20
0 0
No
No
2. MacArthur & Birch
8 20
20 0
No
No
3. MacArthur & Von Karman
8 20
0 0
No
No
4. Jamboree & Campus
8 20
0 0
Yes
Yes
5. Jamboree & Birch
8 20
0 0
Yes
Yes
6. MacArthur & Jamboree
8 20
8 20
No
No
7. Bayview & Bristol South (EB)
0 0
32 0
No
No
8. Jamboree & Bristol North (WB)
29 20
0 0
No
No
9. Jamboree & Bristol South (EB)
26 20
31 0
No
No
10. Jamboree & Bayview
30 52
0 0
No
No
11. Jamboree & Eastbluff/University
35 52
0 0
No
No
12. Jamboree & Bison
42 53
0 1
No
No
13. Jamboree & Eastbluff/Ford
42 54
0 0
No
No
14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills
0 54
0 42
No
No
15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara
1 0
0 17
No
No
16. Jamboree & Coast Highway
0 17
30 15
No
No
17. MacArthur & Bison
33 61
6 21
No
No
18. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon
39 80
0 0
No
No
19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills
1 0
1 82
1 40
0 1 No
No
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-36 Environmf
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR TABLE 3 (Continued)
ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS
Intersection
AM Peak Hour
Project Volumes
Less Than 1% of Peak Hour
Volumes
NB
SB
EB
WB
w/o Cumulative
w/Cumulative
20. MacArthur & San Miguel
1 0
11 7
No
No
21. MacArthur & Coast Highway
0 11
2 19
No
No
22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills
35 0
54 7
No
No
23. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills
36 0
49 4
No
No
24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills
0 9
0 0
No
No
25. Avocado & San Miguel
49 8
10 9
No
No
26. Balboa/Superior & Coast Highway
0 0
11 18
No
No
27. Newport & Coast Highway
0 10
11 18
No
No
28. Riverside & Coast Highway
0 0
22 26
No
No
29. Tustin & Coast Highway
0 0
22 26
No
No
30. Dover/Bayshore & Coast Highway
0 9
22 32
No
No
31. Bayside & Coast Highway
0 0
31 32
No
No
32. Newport Center & Coast Highway
0 9
29 1
No
No
33. Avocado & Coast Highway
0 7
28 18
No
No
34. Goldenrod & Coast Highway
0 0
14 19
No
No
35. Marguerite & Coast Highway
0 0
14 19
No
No
36. Newport Center & Santa Barbara
0 0
2 1
No
No
37. Santa Cruz & Newport Center
1 2
0 0
No
No
38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa
6 30
0 0
No
No
39. Newport Center & San Miguel
3 17
2 0
No
No
40. Fashion Island & Newport Center
0 1
0 10
No
No
Intersection
PM Peak Hour
Project Volumes
Less Than 1% of
Peak Hour Volumes
NB
SB
EB
WB
w/o Cumulative
w/Cumulative
1. MacArthur & Campus
21 6
0 0
No
No
2. MacArthur & Birch
21 6
0 0
No
No
3. MacArthur & Von Karman
21 6
0 0
No
No
4. Jamboree & Campus
21 6
0 0
Yes
Yes
5. Jamboree & Birch
21 6
0 0
No
No
6. MacArthur & Jamboree
21 6
21 6
No
No
7. Bayview & Bristol South (EB)
0 0
18 0
Yes
Yes
8. Jamboree & Bristol North (WB)
58 6
0 0
No
No
9. Jamboree & Bristol South (EB)
28 6
15 0
No
No
10. Jamboree & Bayview
57 25
0 0
No
No
11. Jamboree & Eastbluff/University
59 25
0 2
No
No
12. Jamboree & Bison
62 27
0 5
No
No
13. Jamboree & Eastbluff/Ford
62 32
0 0
No
No
14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills
0 32
0 62
No
No
15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara
6 0
0 5
Yes
Yes
16. Jamboree & Coast Highway
0 5
13 31
No
No
17. MacArthur & Bison
84 21
3 11
No
No
18. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon
86 28
0 2
No
No
19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills
0 30
87 0
No
No
20. MacArthur & San Miguel
4 0
9 0
Yes
Yes
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs-2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-37 Environmf
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR TABLE 3 (Continued)
ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS
Intersection
AM Peak Hour
Project Volumes
Less Than 1% of Peak Hour
Volumes
NB
SB
EB
WB
w/o Cumulative
w/Cumulative
21. MacArthur & Coast Highway
0 3
15 2
Yes
Yes
22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills
14 0
32 48
No
No
23. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills
59 0
10 14
No
No
24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills
6 0
0 0
Yes
Yes
25. Avocado & San Miguel
10 58
1 0
No
No
26. Balboa/Superior & Coast Highway
0 0
8 15
Yes
Yes
27. Newport & Coast Highway
0 4
8 15
Yes
Yes
28. Riverside & Coast Highway
0 0
13 27
Yes
Yes
29. Tustin & Coast Highway
0 0
13 27
No
Yes
30. Dover/Bayshore & Coast Highway
0 1
13 37
No
Yes
31. Bayside & Coast Highway
0 0
13 37
No
No
32. Newport Center & Coast Highway
0 0
7 17
Yes
Yes
33. Avocado & Coast Highway
0 48
2 0
No
No
34. Goldenrod & Coast Highway
0 0
18 2
Yes
Yes
35. Marguerite & Coast Highway
0 0
18 2
No
Yes
36. Newport Center & Santa Barbara
0 0
9 9
No
No
37. Santa Cruz & Newport Center
9 9
0 0
No
No
38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa
26 15
0 0
No
No
39. Newport Center & San Miguel
10 0
16 0
No
No
40. Fashion Island & Newport Center
1 9
0 0
No
No
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc., 2007
ICU Analysis. The results of the ICU analysis are presented in Table 4. A significant project impact is defined as an increase of 0.01 or more in the ICU value at an intersection that reaches LOS E or F. Examination of the results shows that the Project would result in a significant impact at three locations under existing -plus -approved -plus -cumulative conditions. These three locations with their respective with -project ICU values are:
Intersection
AM
Project
Increment
PM
Project
Increment
19. MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road
0.73 0.040
0.93 0.027
34. Goldenrod Avenue and Coast Highway
0.91 0.006
0.85 0.005
34. Marguerite Avenue and Coast Highway
1 0.98
1 0.006
1 0.92
1 0.006
In summary, the Project would cause three traffic study area locations to exceed the TPO standard of LOS D. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
The Project would also allow for the transfer of some existing and entitled uses in Block 600 and replace it with office uses in Block 500. As part of the proposed transfer of uses, the Applicant and the City wish to reserve 72,000 sf of the office use for a possible new City Hall in Block 500.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-38 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR The transfer of development rights within Newport Center is allowed in accordance with the City of Newport Beach General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3 provided the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. A Trip Transfer Study was prepared by Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. in November 2007 to examine the conversion and transfer of the entitled uses into equivalent office uses on the basis of a PM peak hour trip generation equivalency basis. The study is summarized below and included in Appendix A.
The transfer would allow for existing uses including a health club, restaurant, and office as well as remaining, but as yet unused entitlement for hotel uses in Block 600, with office use in Block 500. Existing uses in Block 600 equal 42,036 sf of office, restaurant and, health club uses. The unused entitlement in Block 600 is 195 hotel rooms. These entitled uses in Block 600 could be replaced in Block 500 with office use, 72,000 sf of which may be used for a new City Hall.
The analysis is based upon use of the worst -case PM peak hour trip rates. Rates for the analysis were taken from the ITE 7t" Edition Trip Generation publication. The trips generated by the uses proposed to be eliminated are presented in Table 5. As indicated, the uses included as the basis of the proposed transfer are projected to generate 339 PM peak hour trips.
A potential new City Hall of 72,000 sf would generate 108 peak hour trips (based on a rate of
1.5 trips per 1,000 square feet [TSF]) leaving 231 trips, which can be allocated toward other uses. These 231 PM peak hour trips equate to 206,000± sf of office use based on a trip rate of
1.12 trips/TSF. The Project consists of 205,161 sf of office space in Block 500. Therefore, the total PM peak hour trip generation associated with the converted uses proposed for Block 500 would be 338 trips.
F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-39 Environma
Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR TABLE 4
ICU SUMMARY
Location
Existing
Existing + Growth
+ Approved
Existing + Growth +
Approved + Project
Existing + Growth +
Approved +
Cumulative
Existing + Growth +
Approved +
Cumulative + Project
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
1. MacArthur & Campus
.50
.74
.51
.74
.51
.74
.53
.74
1 .53
.74
2. MacArthur & Birch
.62
.75
.64
.77
.64
.77
.67
.79
.67
.79
3. MacArthur & Von Karman
.32
.74
.33
.76
.33
.76
.38
.80
.38
.81
5. Jamboree & Birch
.56
.64
.58
.67
.58
.67
.60
.70
.60
.71
6. MacArthur & Jamboree
.68
.76
.71
.79
.71
.80
.78
.85
.78
.86
7. Bayview & Bristol South (EB)
.57
.66
.59
.67
.59
.67
.59
.67
.59
.67
8. Jamboree & Bristol North (WB)
.57
.53
.58
.56
.59
.56
.59
.59
.60
.59
9. Jamboree & Bristol South (EB)
.66
.67
.68
.70
.68
.71
.70
.74
.70
.75
10. Jamboree & Bayview
.36
.51
.38
.54
.39
.54
.40
.56
.41
.57
11. Jamboree & University
.57
.59
.60
.63
.61
.63
.64
.69
.64
.69
12. Jamboree & Bison
.50
.56
.52
.60
.53
.61
.57
.64
.58
.65
13. Jamboree & Ford
.65
.69
.68
.73
.69
.74
.72
.80
.73
.81
14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills
.57
.58
.60
.63
.61
.64
.64
.67
.65
.68
15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara
.49
.70
.51
.73
.52
.73
.55
.77
.56
.77
16. Jamboree & Coast Hwy
.66
.69
.69
.74
.69
.75
.77
.89
.77
.89
17. MacArthur & Bison
.60
.66
.61
.67
.62
.68
.64
.71
.65
.71
18. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Cyn
.72
.78
.73
.79
.74
.81
.78
.86
.78
.87
19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills
.65
.82
.67
.85
.69
.87
.71
.90
.73
.93*
20. MacArthur & San Miguel
.44
.71
.44
.73
.45
.73
.47
.77
.47
.77
21. MacArthur & Coast Hwy
.71
.64
.73
.66
.74
.66
.84
.79
.85
.79
22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills
.29
.28
.29
.28
.31
.29
.29
.28
.32
.30
23. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills
.31
.44
.32
.46
.34
.47
.35
.50
.37
.51
24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills
.38
.61
.38
.62
.38
.62
.40
.65
.40
.65
25. Avocado & San Miguel
.48
.76
.48
.77
.51
.78
.48
.78
.52
.79
26. Superior/Balboa & Coast Hwy
.70
.72
.73
.79
.73
.79
.75
.86
.75
.86
27. Newport & Coast Hwy
.77
.68
.80
.73
.80
.73
.82
.77
.83
.77
28. Riverside & Coast Hwy
.73
.79
.79
.84
.79
.85
.82
.88
.82
.89
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PXs\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-40 Environmental Analysis
Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR TABLE 4 (Continued)
ICU SUMMARY
Existing + Growth +
Existing + Growth +
Existing + Growth
Existing +
Growth +
Approved +
Approved +
Existing
+ Approved
Approved
+ Project
Cumulative
Cumulative
+ Project
Location
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
29. Tustin & Coast Hwy
.73
.59
.79
.63
.80
.63
.82
.69
1 .83
.70
30. Dover & Coast Hwy
.67
.74
.70
.79
.71
.79
.73
.84
.74
.85
31. Bayside & Coast Hwy
.73
.64
.79
.72
.79
.73
.81
.76
.82
.77
32. Newport Center & Coast Hwy
.36
.53
.37
.55
.37
.55
.46
.62
.46
.62
33. Avocado & Coast Hwy
.49
.60
.50
.62
.53
.62
.60
.72
.62
.73
34. Goldenrod & Coast Hwy
.73
.68
.75
.70
.76
.71
.91
.87
.92*
.87
35. Marguerite & Coast Hwy
.79
.73
.81
.75
.82
.76
.97
.91
.98
.92*
36. Newport Center & Santa Barbara
.14
.23
.14
.23
.14
.23
.14
.23
.14
.23
37. Santa Cruz & Newport Center
.12
.21
.12
.21
.12
.22
.12
.21
.12
.22
38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa
.15
.25
.15
.25
.16
.24
.16
.26
.16
.26
39. Newport Center & San Miguel
.22
.41
.22
.41
.22
.41
.22
.42
.23
.42
40. Fashion Island & Newport Center
.22
.43
.22
.43
.22
.43
.22
.43
.22
.43
* Indicates significant project impact
Level of service ranges: .00 - .60 A
.61 - .70 B
.71 - .80 C
.81 - .90 D
91 - 1.00 E
Above 1.00 F
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 2007.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PXs\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-41 Environmental Analysis
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR TABLE 5
CONVERTED USES
PM
PM
Use (Entitled in Block 600)
Peak Hour Rate
Peak Trips
Hotel (195 Rooms) — Unbuilt Entitlement
0.70 (ITE 310)a
136
Family Fitness (17,300b sf) — Existing
4.05 (ITE 492)c
70 Palm Gardens (16,447b sf) — Existing
7.49 (ITE 931)d
123
Eliminated Office (6,789b sf) — Existing
1.12 (ITE 710)e
8 Eliminated Office (1,500 sf) — Existing
1.12 (ITE 710)e
2 Total
339
Use (Proposed in Block 500)
Office (205,161 sf)
1.12 (ITE 710)e
230
City Hall (72,000 sf)
1.50 (ITE 750)f
108
Total
338
a Hotel (rates applied for each occupied room)
b Per building permit information
c Health Club (rates per TSF)
d Quality Restaurant (rates per TSF)
e Trip rate per TSF determined from applying the ITE office regression equation to the existing (408 TSF) and proposed future (614 TSF) office use, and
calculating the rate based on
the square footage
increment (206 TSF)
f Closest ITE rate (in both function and magnitude) to match the GP assumption for City Hall trip
generation.
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 2007
In summary, the currently entitled uses in Block 600 (i.e., 195 hotel rooms and 42,036 sf of health club, retail, and office uses) proposed for transfer to Block 500 equate to 339 PM peak hour trips. These 339 trips would match the amount of PM peak hour trips projected to be generated by a new 72,000 sf City Hall plus another 205,161 sf of office use. Therefore, the proposed transfer of development rights would not result in any adverse traffic impacts. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Exceed, Either Individually or Cumulatively, a Level of Service Standard Established By the County Congestion Management Agency for Designated Roads or Highways The General Plan EIR identifies that all Congestion Management Plan arterials in the City would continue to operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS E or better) with implementation of the 2006 General Plan. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Result In A Change In Air Traffic Patterns, Including Either An Increase In Traffic Levels Or A Change In Locations That Results In Substantial Safety Risks As previously addressed in this Addendum, the four sub -areas are in the AELUP for the John Wayne Airport. The ALUC has found the City of Newport Beach to be a consistent agency with the AELUP. Additionally, the four sub -areas are within the AELUP Height Restriction Zone.
Within this zone, notice to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is required for construction or alteration to any building more than 200 feet above ground level. Prior to construction or alteration of a building more than 200 feet above ground level a Determination of No Hazard FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-42 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR must be obtained from the FAA. A determination of No Hazard is the FAA's independent finding that a proposed structure will not pose a hazard to air navigation. The PC Text requires that any structure above 200 feet will be forwarded to the FAA for their independent analysis. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. As set forth in the General Plan EIR, impacts to John Wayne Airport operations with implementation of the 2006 General Plan are less than significant.
Substantially Increase Hazards Due To A Design Feature (e.g., Sharp Curves Or Dangerous Intersections) Or Incompatible Uses (e.g., Farm Equipment) The General Plan EIR notes that site -specific projects are not addressed in the 2006 General Plan. As such, it would speculative to determine if any particular project would be designed in a manner to cause safety hazards. The General Plan EIR does identify that none of the circulation improvements identified in the EIR would introduce safety hazards and would not result in significant impacts. With respect to the four sub -areas, as currently developed areas, it is expected that future development consistent with the 2006 General Plan would use the existing roadway system and as such would not cause safety hazards. Any traffic improvements for the Project are consistent with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR, and as noted above, would not result in significant impacts. . The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Result in Inadequate Emergency Access
As previously addressed in this Addendum, the General Plan EIR notes that increased population and development could result in congested traffic conditions. The 2006 General Plan identifies policies to ensure that the city's Emergency Management Plan is regularly updated, provides for efficient and orderly citywide evacuation, and ensures that emergency service personnel are knowledgeable of the relevant response plans for the City. Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that traffic impacts related to emergency access would be less than significant with mitigation. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Result In Inadequate Parking Capacity
The General Plan EIR does not identify Newport Center as an area of the City with limited parking availability. The North Newport Center Project, as with other projects in the City, would be required to comply with parking requirements identified in the City's Municipal Code. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Conflict with Adopted Policies, Plans, Or Programs Supporting Alternative Transportation (e.g., Bus Turnouts, Bicycle Racks)
The 2006 General Plan Circulation Element includes policies related to transportation systems management, transportation demand management, etc. These policies encourage alternative modes of transportation. The General Plan EIR notes that implementation of the 2006 General Plan will not result in significant impacts. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-43 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Program
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. The following mitigation would also be required for the Project:
At MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road, the Applicant shall construct a third eastbound left -turn lane. The intersection would operate at LOS D with the recommended improvement. This improvement is consistent with the General Plan. Consistent with the TPO, this improvement will be completed early in the development phasing (i.e., before issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first building [other than a parking structure]) constructed as part of the Project, but in no event later than 60 months from the operative date of the Development Agreement.
2. The Applicant shall work with the City on design and development of circulation enhancements in the North Newport Center area, consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element, including widening of Avocado Avenue between San Miguel Drive and San Nicolas Drive, dedication of public right-of-way and enhancement of San Miguel Drive between MacArthur Boulevard and Avocado Avenue, and installation of traffic signals on Newport Center Drive.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
At the two other impacted intersections (Goldenrod Avenue at Coast Highway and Marguerite Avenue at Coast Highway), there are no feasible improvements available, a fact which has been recognized and accepted in the 2006 General Plan and General Plan EIR which accepts LOS E at these two intersections. Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that traffic impacts related to intersections, Congestion Management Plan arterials, air traffic patterns, design hazards, emergency access, and parking would be less than significant with mitigation. No feasible mitigation has been identified in the General Plan EIR to reduce impacts to freeway mainlines and ramps; this impact remains significant and unavoidable.
Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-44 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR
3.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It identifies that implementation of the proposed General Plan Update may have a significant adverse impact on utilities and service systems if it would result in any of the following:
• Require or result in the construction and/or expansion of water supply or wastewater facilities, or new energy or natural gas production or transmission facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts • Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new and expanded entitlements needed • Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board
• Would the project be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs
• Would the project fail to comply with applicable federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Utility and service system impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
Summary Analvsis
Require or Result in the Construction and/or Expansion of Water Supply or Wastewater Facilities, or New Energy or Natural Gas Production or Transmission Facilities, the Construction of Which Could Cause Significant Environmental Impacts Have Sufficient Water Supplies Available To Serve the Project from Existing Entitlements and Resources, or Are New and Expanded Entitlements Needed Water Supply and Treatment
The General Plan EIR notes that buildout of the 2006 General Plan could require the construction of new and/or expanded water treatment plants or water conveyance systems, and that water demand may exceed existing water entitlements.
Three sources provide water service to the City of Newport Beach: the City, Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD), and Mesa Consolidated Water District (MCWD). Water supplied by the City is purchased from two sources. Groundwater is purchased from the Orange County Water District (OCWD) and imported water is purchased from the Metropolitan Water District of Orange County (MWDOC). The water supply assessment conducted for the General Plan EIR assumed full buildout of the 2006 General Plan land uses, inclusive of Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Page 4.14-20 of the General Plan EIR states:
MWDOC, the City's provider of imported water, IRWD, and Mesa have each indicated they can accommodate the additional demand from the proposed General Plan Update in addition to future growth assumed in the respective FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-45 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR UWMPs [Urban Water Management Plans]. In addition, the implementation of conservation measures would be required on a project -specific basis and water shortage contingency plans would further reduce additional water demand.
Finally, future development is required to adhere to Section 10910 of the California Water Code. Therefore, the cumulative impact to water supply would be less than significant.
In addition to MWDOC, IRWD and Mesa, OCWD projects that there would be sufficient groundwater supplies to meet any future demand requirements in Newport Beach.28 The General Plan EIR concluded that there is sufficient water supply to meet the needs of the City.
The General Plan EIR also addressed potential affects of new development on groundwater supplies and concluded that impacts will be less than significant due to conservation policies in the 2006 General Plan. The City's Water Supply Plan accounted for the demand associated with buildout of the 2006 General Plan land uses. The 2006 General Plan includes policies to conserve water and reduce potential impacts to groundwater supply.
Citywide, projects inclusive of development in the four sub -areas are required to comply with the City's fair share requirements and with General Plan Update policies on water conservation.
Compliance makes impacts less than significant. The General Plan EIR states: "...any request for service resulting from new development would be subject to a site -specific evaluation of the existing water system's capacity to service the development. If improvements to the existing water system are required or additional facilities are needed, the property developer would be required to pay its fair share of the cost of all or portions of the needed improvements."29 General Plan Update goals and policies promote water conservation and limit water consumption. As such, impacts were found to be less than significant. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
The General Plan EIR states that
Additional development accommodated under the proposed General Plan Update would increase water use within the City, thus increasing the need for water treatment services... [the Metropolitan Water District] MWD can meet 100 percent of the City's imported water needs until the year 2030... any request for service resulting from new development would be subject to a site -specific evaluation of the existing water system's capacity to service the development. If improvements to the existing water system are required or additional facilities are needed, the property developer would be required to pay its fair share of the cost of all or portions of the needed improvements.so
Impacts of the proposed project would be less than significant because General Plan Update Policy LU 2.8 directs the City to accommodate land uses that can be adequately supported by infrastructure, including water treatment and conveyance facilities. As such, adequate water infrastructure would be provided for all development assumed in the 2006 General Plan, inclusive of the four sub -areas. The General Plan EIR finds that "...because future development under the proposed General Plan Update would be required to adhere to existing regulations and the proposed policies identified above, no impact would result." (See 4.14-30) The Project 28 Ibid., page 4.14-8.
29 Ibid., page 4.14-17.
30 City of Newport Beach, Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan 2006 Update, July 26, 2006, page
4.14-17.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-46 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Natural Gas
Southern California Gas Company (SCGC) provides natural gas service for the City of Newport Beach. The General Plan EIR states:
Any expansion of service necessitated by implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would be in accordance with SCGC's policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at the time contractual agreements are made. Because the natural gas demand projected for the proposed General Plan Update would not exceed available or planned supply, new infrastructure would not be required to serve the proposed project.
Therefore, no impact would result.31
The Project is expected not to have a significant impact on natural gas supplies because natural gas demand projected for General Plan buildout, inclusive of the four sub -areas, would not exceed available or planned supply and because new infrastructure would not be needed to serve the four sub -areas. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Exceed Wastewater Treatment Requirements of the Applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board
Require or Result in the Construction and/or Expansion of Water Supply or Wastewater Facilities, or New Energy or Natural Gas Production or Transmission Facilities, the Construction of Which Could Cause Significant Environmental Impacts Have Sufficient Water Supplies Available To Serve the Project from Existing Entitlements and Resources, or Are New and Expanded Entitlements Needed Sewer Systems
Wastewater from the City's sewer system is treated by the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). The General Plan EIR identifies that a majority of the City's sewage flow is pumped to the OCSD Plant No. 2; flows from the portion of the City north of the Corona del Mar Freeway (State Rout 73) are pumped to Plant No. 1. The General Plan EIR states:
...policies under the proposed General Plan Update require the renovation of all older sewer pump stations and the installation of new plumbing according to most recent standards, and implementation of the Sewer System Management Plan and Sewer Master Plan. Implementation of the proposed General Plan Update policies requires adequate wastewater facilities and conveyance systems to be available to the City residents. Therefore, impacts to the wastewater treatment facilities associated with increased growth in the City would be less than significant.32
31 Ibid., page 4.14-50.
32 Ibid., page 4.14-32.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-47 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Impacts from implementation of the 2006 General Plan, inclusive of the Project, are expected to have a less than significant impact to sewer systems because implementation of the Sewer System Management Plan and Sewer Master Plan, in conjunction with General Plan policies relating to sewer systems, would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Would the Project be Served by a Landfill with Insufficient Permitted Capacity to Accommodate the Project's Solid Waste Disposal Needs
Would the Project Fail to Comply With Applicable Federal, State, and Local Statutes and Regulations Related to Solid Waste
Solid Waste Disposal
As noted in the General Plan EIR, the Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill serves the City, and states:
The increase in solid waste generated by the development under the proposed General Plan Update would not exceed capacity of the landfill. In addition, AB 939 mandates the reduction of solid waste disposal in landfills. Consequently, this analysis assumes a worst -case scenario, as it is anticipated that at least approximately 50 percent of the estimated increase in solid waste generation could be diverted (or approximately 10,830 tons/year). Therefore, the Frank R.
Bowerman Sanitary Landfill would have sufficient capacity to serve the increased development within the City under the proposed General Plan Update.ss Citywide buildout under the 2006 General Plan assumptions would not have an impact on solid waste generation or disposal at the Bowerman Landfill. However, on a cumulative basis, the General Plan EIR "without approved specific plans for substantial expansion of the landfill facilities that serve the County, solid waste generation from approved and foreseeable cumulative projects in the project area vicinity would exacerbate regional landfill capacity issues in the future."34 Cumulative impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Program
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that all utility and service system impacts can be mitigated to a level of less than significant with the exception of cumulative impacts to landfill capacity; this impact remains significant and unavoidable.
33 Ibid., page 4.14-44.
34 Ibid., page 4.14-45.
FAUSERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-48 Environma
Addendum to Citv of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR.
F:\USERS\PLN\Shared\PA's\PAs - 2007\PA2007-151\2007-12-11 CC\Draft Addendum-1 1 1907.doc 3-49 Environma
APPENDIX A
TRAFFIC STUDIES
FINAL
City of Newport Beach
NORTH NEWPORT CENTER
TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE TRAFFIC STUDY
Prepared by:
Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
2223 Wellington Avenue, Suite 300
Santa Ana, California 92701-3161
(714) 667-0496
November 6, 2007
NORTH NEWPORT CENTER
TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE TRAFFIC STUDY
A project comprised of 430 residential dwelling units in Block 600, 205,161 square feet (sf) of office space in Block 500, and 75,000 sf of retail shopping center space in Fashion Island is proposed within Newport Center. In addition, a total of 42,036 sf of existing office, restaurant, and health club uses will be removed from Block 600.
ANALYSIS
A Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) traffic study was conducted for the proposed project. A total of 40 intersections within the City including five intersections on Newport Center Drive (the interior ring road around Fashion Island) were examined using the City's required TPO procedure. This procedure includes both a one percent test and, where necessary, an intersection capacity utilization (ICU) analysis.
Consistent with the City's TPO analysis guidelines, the project is analyzed under short-range conditions (existing volumes plus a regional growth factor and approved projects) without and with cumulative projects (i.e., projects reasonably expected to be complete within one year after project completion which are located within the City of Newport Beach or its sphere of influence).
Trip Generation Distribution and Analysis
The applicable trip rates and incremental trip generation for the proposed project is presented in Table 1. The increase in traffic includes a credit for the proposed removals of existing uses. The proposed project is forecast to generate a net increase over existing of 348 trips in the AM peak hour, 311 trips in the PM peak hour, and 2,399 trips daily.
For trip distribution, an internal capture rate of 10 percent was utilized for the residential and retail uses. This rate was determined based on ITE's recommended procedure (see calculations in Appendix) and is consistent with the City's General Plan traffic study, which also utilizes 10 percent for mixed use areas. For the office space, a five percent internal capture rate was utilized.
North Newport Center 1 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpo.doc
Table 1
TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
Land Use
Amount
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
ADT
In Out I Total
In Out Total
TRIP RATES (ITE)
Residential
DU
0.06 0.28
0.34 0.24
0.14 0.38
4.18 Quality Restaurant
TSF
0.66 0.15
0.81 5.02
2.47 7.49
89.95 Shopping Center
TSF
0.19 0.12
0.31 0.77
0.84 1.61
16.79 Office (Regression E )*
TSF
0.95 0.13
1.08 0.19
0.93 1.12
7.07 Health Club
TSF
0.51 0.70
1.21 2.07
1.98 4.05
32.93 TRIP GENERATION
Existing Uses to be Removed
Block 600
Quality Restaurant
16.4 TSF
11 2
13 83
41 123
1,479
Office
8.3 TSF
8 1
9 2
8 10
59 Health Club
17.3 TSF
9 12
21 36
34 70
570
Total Credit
-28
-15
-43
-121
-83
-203
-2,108
Proposed Uses
Block 500
Office 205.2 TSF 195 27 222 39 191 230 1,451
Block 600
Residential 430 DU 26 120 146 103 60 163 1,797
Fashion Island
Shopping Ctr 75.0 TSF 14 9 23 58 63 121 1,259
Total Proposed Trips 235 156 391 200 314 514 4,507
NET INCREASE
207
141
348
79 231
311
2,399
* Trip rates per TSF determined from applying the ITE office regression equations to the existing (408 TSF) and proposed future (614 TSF) office use, and calculating the rates based on the square footage increment (206 TSF).
North Newport Center 2 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpo.doc
A separate trip assignment was prepared for each of the three separate uses (retail/shopping center, residential, and office) in the proposed project.
These assignments, shown by individual uses in Figures A-1 through A-3 in the Appendix, are basically as follows:
1. North on MacArthur Boulevard 20-40 percent
2. North on Jamboree Road 15-30 percent
3. West on Coast Highway 15-30 percent
4. East on Coast Highway 10 percent
One Percent Analysis
The results of the TPO One Percent Analysis are listed in Table 2. This analysis identifies the intersections where the project adds one percent or more to the background peak hour volume, in which case a more vigorous capacity analysis is performed. Opening year for the project is assumed to be 2009; therefore, the project year for this analysis is 2010. Examination of Table 2 reveals that 39 study intersections showed increases of one percent or greater of existing -plus -approved or existing -plus - approved -plus -cumulative volumes during the AM or PM peak hour. As a result, further analysis is required and a peak hour ICU analysis was conducted for the 39 locations.
ICU Analysis
The results of the ICU analysis are presented in Table 3. A significant project impact is defined as an increase of .01 or more in the ICU value at an intersection that reaches LOS "E" or "F".
Examination of the results shows that the project causes a significant impact at three locations under existing -plus -approved -plus -cumulative conditions. These three locations with their respective with - project ICU values are:
Intersection
AM
Project
Increment
PM
Project
Increment
19. MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road
.73
.040
.93
.027
34. Goldenrod Avenue and Coast Highway
.91
.006
.85
.005
34. Marguerite Avenue and Coast Highway
.98
.006
.92
.006
North Newport Center 3 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpo.doc
Table 2
SUMMARY OF ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS
Intersection
AM Peak Hour
Project Volumes
Less Than 1% of
Peak Hour Volumes
NB
SB
EB
WB
w/o Cumulative
w/Cumulative
1. MacArthur & Campus
8 20
0 0
No
No
2. MacArthur & Birch
8 20
20 0
No
No
3. MacArthur & Von Karman
8 20
0 0
No
No
4. Jamboree & Campus
8 20
0 0
Yes
Yes
5. Jamboree & Birch
8 20
0 0
Yes
Yes
6. MacArthur & Jamboree
8 20
8 20
No
No
7. Bayview & Bristol South (EB)
0 0
32 0
No
No
8. Jamboree & Bristol North (WB)
29 20
0 0
No
No
9. Jamboree & Bristol South (EB)
26 20
31 0
No
No
10. Jamboree & Bayview
30 52
0 0
No
No
11. Jamboree & Eastbluff/Universi
35 52
0 0
No
No
12. Jamboree & Bison
42 53
0 1
No
No
13. Jamboree & Eastbluff/Ford
42 54
0 0
No
No
14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills
0 54
0 42
No
No
15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara
1 0
0 17
No
No
16. Jamboree & Coast Highway
0 17
30 15
No
No
17. MacArthur & Bison
33 61
6 21
No
No
18. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon
39 80
0 0
No
No
19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills
0 82
40 0
No
No
20. MacArthur & San Miguel
1 0
11 7
No
No
21. MacArthur & Coast Highway
0 11
2 19
No
No
22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills
35 0
54 7
No
No
23. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills
36 0
49 4
No
No
24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills
0 9
0 0
No
No
25. Avocado & San Miguel
49 8
10 9
No
No
26. Balboa/Superior & Coast Highway
0 0
11 18
No
No
27. Newport & Coast Highway
0 10
11 18
No
No
28. Riverside & Coast Highway
0 0
22 26
No
No
29. Tustin & Coast Highway
0 0
22 26
No
No
30. Dover/Ba shore & Coast Highway
0 9
22 32
No
No
31. Ba side & Coast Highway
0 0
31 32
No
No
32. Newport Center & Coast Highway
0 9
29 1
No
No
33. Avocado & Coast Highway
0 7
28 18
No
No
34. Goldenrod & Coast Highway
0 0
14 19
No
No
35. Marguerite & Coast Highway
0 0
14 19
No
No
36. Newport Center & Santa Barbara
0 0
2 1
No
No
37. Santa Cruz & Newport Center
1 2
0 0
No
No
38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa
6 30
0 0
No
No
39. Newport Center & San Miguel
3 17
2 0
No
No
40. Fashion Island & Newport Center
0 1
0 10
No
No
Cont.
North Newport Center 4 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpo.doc
Table 2 (Cont.)
SUMMARY OF ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS
Intersection
PM Peak Hour
Project Volumes
Less Than 1% of
Peak Hour Volumes
NB
SB
EB
WB
w/o Cumulative
w/Cumulative
1. MacArthur & Campus
21 6
0 0
No
No
2. MacArthur & Birch
21 6
0 0
No
No
3. MacArthur & Von Karman
21 6
0 0
No
No
4. Jamboree & Campus
21 6
0 0
Yes
Yes
5. Jamboree & Birch
21 6
0 0
No
No
6. MacArthur & Jamboree
21 6
21 6
No
No
7. Bayview & Bristol South EB
0 0
18 0
Yes
Yes
8. Jamboree & Bristol North WB
58 6
0 0
No
No
9. Jamboree & Bristol South EB
28 6
15 0
No
No
10. Jamboree & Bayview
57 25
0 0
No
No
11. Jamboree & Eastbluff/Universi
59 25
0 2
No
No
12. Jamboree & Bison
62 27
0 5
No
No
13. Jamboree & Eastbluff/Ford
62 32
0 0
No
No
14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills
0 32
0 62
No
No
15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara
6 0
0 5
Yes
Yes
16. Jamboree & Coast Highway
0 5
13 31
No
No
17. MacArthur & Bison
84 21
3 11
No
No
18. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon
86 28
0 2
No
No
19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills
0 30
87 0
No
No
20. MacArthur & San Miguel
4 0
9 0
Yes
Yes
21. MacArthur & Coast Highway
0 3
15 2
Yes
Yes
22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills
14 0
32 48
No
No
23. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills
59 0
10 14
No
No
24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills
6 0
0 0
Yes
Yes
25. Avocado & San Miguel
10 58
1 0
No
No
26. Balboa/Superior & Coast Highway
0 0
8 15
Yes
Yes
27. Newport & Coast Highway
0 4
8 15
Yes
Yes
28. Riverside & Coast Highway
0 0
13 27
Yes
Yes
29. Tustin & Coast Highway
0 0
13 27
No
Yes
30. Dover/Ba shore & Coast Highway
0 1
13 37
No
Yes
31. Ba side & Coast Highway
0 0
13 37
No
No
32. Newport Center & Coast Highway
0 0
7 17
Yes
Yes
33. Avocado & Coast Highway
0 48
2 0
No
No
34. Goldenrod & Coast Highway
0 0
18 2
Yes
Yes
35. Marguerite & Coast Highway
0 0
18 2
No
Yes
36. Newport Center & Santa Barbara
0 0
9 9
No
No
37. Santa Cruz & Newport Center
9 9
0 0
No
No
38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa
26 15
0 0
No
No
39. Newport Center & San Miguel
10 0
16 0
No
No
40. Fashion Island & Newport Center
1 9
0 0
No
No
North Newport Center 5 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpo.doc
Location
1. MacArthur & Campus
2. MacArthur & Birch
3. MacArthur & Von Karman
5. Jamboree & Birch
6. MacArthur & Jamboree
7. Bayview & Bristol South (EB)
8. Jamboree & Bristol North (WB)
9. Jamboree & Bristol South (EB)
10. Jamboree & Bayview
11. Jamboree & University
12. Jamboree & Bison
13. Jamboree & Ford
14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills
15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara
16. Jamboree & Coast Hwy
17. MacArthur & Bison
18. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Cyn
19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills
20. MacArthur & San Miguel
21. MacArthur & Coast Hwy
22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills
23. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills
24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills
25. Avocado & San Miguel
26. Superior/Balboa & Coast Hwy
27. Newport & Coast Hwy
28. Riverside & Coast Hwy
29. Tustin & Coast Hwy
AM
.50
.62
.32
.56
.68
.57
.57
.66
.36
.57
.50
.65
.57
.49
.66
.60
.72
.65
.44
.71
.29
.31
.38
.48
.70
.77
.73
.73
PM
.74
.75
.74
.64
.76
.66
.53
.67
.51
.59
.56
.69
.58
.70
.69
.66
.78
.82
.71
.64
.28
.44
.61
.76
.72
.68
.79
.59
Table 3
ICU SUMMARY
Existing + Growth
+ Annroved
AM
PM
.51
.74
.64
.77
.33
.76
.58
.67
.71
.79
.59
.67
.58
.56
.68
.70
.38
.54
.60
.63
.52
.60
.68
.73
.60
.63
.51
.73
.69
.74
.61
.67
.73
.79
.67
.85
.44
.73
.73
.66
.29
.28
.32
.46
.38
.62
.48
.77
.73
.79
.80
.73
.79
.84
.79
.63
Existing + Growth +
Annroved + Proiect
AM PM
.51 .74
.64 .77
.33 .76
.58 .67
.71 .80
.59 .67
.59 .56
.68 .71
.39 .54
.61 .63
.53 .61
.69 .74
.61 .64
.52 .73
.69 .75
.62 .68
.74 .81
.69 .87
.45 .73
.74 .66
.31 .29
.34 .47
.38 .62
.51 .78
.73 .79
.80 .73
.79 .85
.80 .63
Existing + Growth
+ Approved +
Cumulative
AM
PM
.53
.74
.67
.79
.38
.80
.60
.70
.78
.85
.59
.67
.59
.59
.70
.74
.40
.56
.64
.69
.57
.64
.72
.80
.64
.67
.55
.77
.77
.89
.64
.71
.78
.86
.71
.90
.47
.77
.84
.79
.29
.28
.35
.50
.40
.65
.48
.78
.75
.86
.82
.77
.82
.88
.82
.69
Existing + Growth +
Approved +
Cumulative + Pro'eci
AM
PM
.53
.74
.67
.79
.38
.81
.60
.71
.78
.86
.59
.67
.60
.59
.70
.75
.41
.57
.64
.69
.58
.65
.73
.81
.65
.68
.56
.77
.77
.89
.65
.71
.78
.87
.73
.93 *
.47
.77
.85
.79
.32
.30
.37
.51
.40
.65
.52
.79
.75
.86
.83
.77
.82
.89
.83
.70
Cont.
North Newport Center 6 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpo.doc
Table 3 (cont)
ICU SUMMARY
Location
AM
PM
30. Dover & Coast H
.67
.74
31. Ba side & Coast Hwy
.73
.64
32. Newport Center & Coast Hwy
.36
.53
33. Avocado & Coast H
.49
.60
34. Goldenrod & Coast Hwy
.73
.68
35. Marguerite & Coast H
.79
.73
36. Newport Center & Santa Barbara
.14
.23
37. Santa Cruz & Newport Center
.12
.21
38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa
.15
.25
39. Newport Center & San Miguel
.22
.41
40. Fashion Island & Newport Center
.22
.43
* Indicates significant project impact
Level of service ranges: .00 - .60 A
.61 - .70 B
.71 - .80 C
.81 - .90 D
.91 - 1.00 E
Above 1.00 F
Existing + Growth
+ Aunroved
AM
PM
.70
.79
.79
.72
.37
.55
.50
.62
.75
.70
.81
.75
.14
.23
.12
.21
.15
.25
.22
.41
.22
.43
Existing + Growth +
Aunroved + Proiect
AM PM
.71 .79
.79 .73
.37 .55
.53 .62
.76 .71
.82 .76
.14 .23
.12 .22
.16 .24
.22 .41
.22 .43
Existing + Growth
+ Approved +
Cumulative
AM
PM
.73
.84
.81
.76
.46
.62
.60
.72
.91
.87
.97
.91
.14
.23
.12
.21
.16
.26
.22
.42
.22
.43
Existing + Growth +
Approved +
Cumulative + Pro'eci
AM
PM
.74
.85
.82
.77
.46
.62
.62
.73
.92*
.87
.98
.92*
.14
.23
.12
.22
.16
.26
.23
.42
.22
.43
North Newport Center 7 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpo.doc
CONCLUSION
In summary, it is concluded that the project causes three study locations to exceed the TPO standard of LOS "D". At MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road, the addition of a third eastbound left -turn lane is recommended as mitigation. The intersection will operate at LOS "D" with the recommended improvement. This improvement is consistent with the General Plan.
At the two other impacted intersections (Goldenrod Avenue at Coast Highway and Marguerite Avenue at Coast Highway), there are no feasible improvements available, a fact which has been recognized and accepted in the General Plan which accepts LOS "E" at these two intersections.
The intersections along Newport Center Drive currently operate at LOS "A" during the AM and PM peak hours. With the addition of project traffic, these intersections will continue to operate at LOS "A"
North Newport Center 8 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpo.doc
APPENDIX A
North Newport Center A-1 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpo.doc
Table A-1
APPROVED AND CUMULATIVE PROJECTS SUMMARY
Approved Projects
Fashion Island Expansion
Newport Lexus
Tem lebat Yahm Expansion
Birch Medical Office Complex
Ford Redevelopment
Saafar Fine Indian Cuisine
CIOSA — Irvine Project
St. Mark Presbyterian Church
Newport Dunes
St. Andrews Presbyterian Church
1401 Dove Street
Corporate Plaza West
494/496 Old Newport Boulevard
Mariner's Mile Gateway
401 Old Newport Boulevard
Land Rover NB Service Center
Newport Technology Center
OL A Church Expansion
1901 Westcliff Surgical Center
2300 Newport Boulevard
Hoag Hospital Phase III
Cumulative Projects
Mariners Church
Newport Ridge
Exodus Community Center and Tarbut V'Torah Expansion
Hoag Health Center
Newport Coast
North Newport Center A-2 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpo.doc
Cq�A�
a
S
BIRCH
ti
no scale
W
2 SR' 73
BRISTOL
pAUFpRN
A
O�
o
Q.)
m
MESA
SJHTG
m
m
Li9
Cy
22ND
25%
S'
30%
z
SAN JOAQUIN
HILLS
—
BLOCK 600
BLOCK 500
FASHION
19TH
'ISLAND�
/yp0 T GHQ
Internal
10%
17TH
S� HIGHWAY
P
o
10%
A
25%
gA`(S1UE
Figure A-1
GENERAL PROJECT DISTRIBUTION
RESIDENTIAL
Newport Center Development A-3 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpoFigA-l.dwg
Cq�A�
a
S
BIRCH
ti
no scale
W
2 SR' 73
BRISTOL
pAUFpRN
A
O�
o
Q.)
m
MESA
SJHTG
m
m
Li9
Cy
FORD �Ty�'�i'
22ND
20%
w
c�
15%
z
SAN JOAQUIN
—
BLOCK 600 HILLS
BLOCK 500
1 5%
FASHION
19TH
'ISLAND�
/yp0 T GHQ
Internal
10%
17TH
S� HIGHWAY
P
o
G�
10%
A
30%
gAY51DE
Figure A-2
GENERAL PROJECT DISTRIBUTION
RETAIL
Newport Center Development A-4 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpoFigA-2.dwg
Cq�A�
a
S
BIRCH
ti
no scale
W
2 SR' 73
BRISTOL
pAUFpRN
A
O�
o
Q.)
m
MESA
SJHTG
m
m
Li9
Cy
�Ty�'�i'
FORD
22ND
40%
c�
25%
z
SAN JOAQUIN
HILLS
—
BLOCK 600
BLOCK 500
5%
FASHION
19TH
'ISLAND�
/yp0 T GHQ
Internal
5%
17TH
S� HIGHWAY
P
o
10%
A
15%
gAY51DE
Figure A-3
GENERAL PROJECT DISTRIBUTION
OFFICE
Newport Center Development A-5 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpoFigA-3.dwg
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 1. MacArthur & Campus
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1000 40 16 0 1056
11 8
Southbound
1478 59 25 0 1562
16 20
Eastbound
1323 0 10 0 1333
13 0
Westbound
368 0 2 0 370
4 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1361 54 30 0 1445
14 21
Southbound
1905 76 26 0 2007
20 6
Eastbound
993 0 5 0 998
10 0
Westbound
1367 0 6 0 1373
14 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-6
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 2. MacArthur & Birch
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1892 57 11 0 1960
20 8
Southbound
1094 33 26 0 1153
12 20
Eastbound
554 0 7 0 561
6 0
Westbound
232 0 0 0 232
2 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1318 40 17 0 1375
14 21
Southbound
2306 69 28 0 2403
24 6
Eastbound
525 0 14 0 539
5 0
Westbound
937 0 2 0 939
9 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-7
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 3. MacArthur & Von Karman
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1903 76 9 0 1988
20 8
Southbound
627 25 14 0 666
7 20
Eastbound
155 0 5 0 160
2 0
Westbound
302 0 3 0 305
3 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1014 41 16 0 1071
11 21
Southbound
1097 44 18 0 1159
12 6
Eastbound
640 0 15 0 655
7 0
Westbound
899 0 8 0 907
9 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-8
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 4. Jamboree & Campus
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1520 61 26 0 1607
16 8
Southbound
2134 85 46 0 2265
23 20
Eastbound
290 0 4 0 294
3 0
Westbound
845 0 3 0 848
8 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2025 81 45 0 2151
22 21
Southbound
2413 97 42 0 2552
26 6
Eastbound
1086 0 2 0 1088
11 0
Westbound
769 0 5 0 774
8 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-9
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 5. Jamboree & Birch
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1648 66 28 0 1742
17 8
Southbound
2051 82 57 0 2190
22 20
Eastbound
194 0 0 0 194
2 0
Westbound
7 0 0 0 7
0 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1844 74 52 0 1970
20 21
Southbound
2346 94 45 0 2485
25 6
Eastbound
509 0 1 0 510
5 0
Westbound
14 0 0 0 14
0 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-10
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 6. MacArthur & Jamboree
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1648 49 28 0 1725
17 8
Southbound
2051 62 42 0 2155
22 20
Eastbound
194 6 35 0 235
2 8
Westbound
7 0 56 0 63
1 20
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1844 55 36 0 1935
19 21
Southbound
2346 70 77 0 2493
25 6
Eastbound
509 15 47 0 571
6 21
Westbound
14 0 45 0 59
1 6
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 7. Bayview & Bristol South (EB)
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
480 0 0 0 480
5 0
Southbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Eastbound
3107 0 78 0 3185
32 32
Westbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
641 0 0 0 641
6 0
Southbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Eastbound
3057 0 80 0 3137
31 18
Westbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-12
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 8. Jamboree & Bristol North (WB)
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
3370 135 52 0 3557
36 29
Southbound
1050 42 51 0 1143
11 20
Eastbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Westbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2849 114 70 0 3033
30 58
Southbound
1971 79 54 0 2104
21 6
Eastbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Westbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-13
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 9. Jamboree & Bristol South (EB)
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2187 87 75 0 2349
23 26
Southbound
675 27 51 0 753
8 20
Eastbound
2831 0 78 0 2909
29 31
Westbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1958 78 118 0 2154
22 28
Southbound
1241 50 52 0 1343
13 6
Eastbound
3273 0 80 0 3353
34 15
Westbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-14
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 10. Jamboree & Bayview
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1935 58 75 0 2068
21 30
Southbound
2006 60 51 0 2117
21 52
Eastbound
88 0 0 0 88
1 0
Westbound
100 0 0 0 100
1 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1758 53 118 0 1929
19 57
Southbound
2383 71 52 0 2506
25 25
Eastbound
399 0 0 0 399
4 0
Westbound
170 0 0 0 170
2 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-15
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 11. Jamboree & Eastbluff/University
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1718 52 70 0 1840
18 35
Southbound
1669 50 113 0 1832
18 52
Eastbound
534 0 1 0 535
5 0
Westbound
618 0 5 0 623
6 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1678 50 123 0 1851
19 59
Southbound
2477 74 109 0 2660
27 25
Eastbound
351 0 0 0 351
4 0
Westbound
438 0 10 0 448
4 2
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-16
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 12. Jamboree & Bison
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1547 46 60 0 1653
17 42
Southbound
1993 60 105 0 2158
22 53
Eastbound
187 0 0 0 187
2 0
Westbound
319 0 5 0 324
3 1
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1807 54 108 0 1969
20 62
Southbound
2302 69 107 0 2478
25 27
Eastbound
102 0 1 0 103
1 0
Westbound
464 0 6 0 470
5 5
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-17
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 13. Jamboree & Eastbluff/Ford
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1762 53 70 0 1885
19 42
Southbound
1769 53 105 0 1927
19 54
Eastbound
742 0 9 0 751
8 0
Westbound
522 0 12 0 534
5 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2355 71 125 0 2551
26 62
Southbound
2225 67 94 0 2386
24 32
Eastbound
533 0 4 0 537
5 0
Westbound
373 0 4 0 377
4 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-18
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1313 39 163 0 1515
15 0
Southbound
1929 58 275 0 2262
23 54
Eastbound
350 0 0 0 350
4 0
Westbound
182 0 38 0 220
2 42
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1800 54 243 0 2097
21 0
Southbound
2415 72 255 0 2742
27 32
Eastbound
253 0 12 0 265
3 0
Westbound
295 0 98 0 393
4 62
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-19
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1554 47 53 0 1654
17 1
Southbound
1392 42 123 0 1557
16 0
Eastbound
73 0 6 0 79
1 0
Westbound
146 0 6 0 152
2 17
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1246 37 91 0 1374
14 6
Southbound
2100 63 88 0 2251
23 0
Eastbound
38 0 3 0 41
0 0
Westbound
974 0 8 0 982
10 5
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-20
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 16. Jamboree & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
488 15 1 0 504
5 0
Southbound
1101 33 106 0 1240
12 17
Eastbound
3049 91 89 0 3229
32 30
Westbound
1252 38 33 0 1323
13 15
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
398 12 3 0 413
4 0
Southbound
2060 62 85 0 2207
22 5
Eastbound
2438 73 121 0 2632
26 13
Westbound
2323 70 63 0 2456
25 31
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-21
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 17. MacArthur & Bison
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2817 85 2 0 2904
29 33
Southbound
2357 71 5 0 2433
24 61
Eastbound
604 0 7 0 611
6 6
Westbound
694 0 2 0 696
7 21
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2829 85 19 0 2933
29 84
Southbound
3252 98 28 0 3378
34 21
Eastbound
597 0 8 0 605
6 3
Westbound
770 0 1 0 771
8 11
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-22
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 18. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2108 63 8 0 2179
22 39
Southbound
2465 74 11 0 2550
26 80
Eastbound
426 0 4 0 430
4 0
Westbound
1775 0 10 0 1785
18 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2877 86 33 0 2996
30 86
Southbound
3151 95 23 0 3269
33 28
Eastbound
387 0 2 0 389
4 0
Westbound
992 0 12 0 1004
10 2
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-23
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1652 50 19 0 1721
17 0
Southbound
2520 76 43 0 2639
26 82
Eastbound
591 0 8 0 599
6 40
Westbound
750 0 8 0 758
8 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2016 60 46 0 2122
21 0
Southbound
2628 79 54 0 2761
28 30
Eastbound
1062 0 55 0 1117
11 87
Westbound
878 0 8 0 886
9 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-24
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 20. MacArthur & San Miguel
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1883 56 8 0 1947
19 1
Southbound
1765 53 7 0 1825
18 0
Eastbound
190 0 5 0 195
2 11
Westbound
426 0 1 0 427
4 7
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1376 41 11 0 1428
14 4
Southbound
2017 61 11 0 2089
21 0
Eastbound
1535 0 29 0 1564
16 9
Westbound
478 0 12 0 490
5 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-25
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 21. MacArthur & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Southbound
908 27 3 0 938
9 11
Eastbound
1842 55 10 0 1907
19 2
Westbound
1986 60 12 0 2058
21 19
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Southbound
1832 55 4 0 1891
19 3
Eastbound
1864 56 13 0 1933
19 15
Westbound
1929 58 10 0 1997
20 2
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-26
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
72 0 4 0 76
1 35
Southbound
55 0 2 0 57
1 0
Eastbound
748 0 2 0 750
8 54
Westbound
495 0 2 0 497
5 7
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
469 0 0 0 469
5 14
Southbound
72 0 2 0 74
1 0
Eastbound
578 0 2 0 580
6 32
Westbound
586 0 2 0 588
6 48
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-27
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 23. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
108 0 26 0 134
1 36
Southbound
115 0 0 0 115
1 0
Eastbound
428 0 20 0 448
4 49
Westbound
1032 0 26 0 1058
11 4
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
567 0 67 0 634
6 59
Southbound
98 0 0 0 98
1 0
Eastbound
729 0 26 0 755
8 10
Westbound
580 0 64 0 644
6 14
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-28
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
322 0 0 0 322
3 0
Southbound
485 0 0 0 485
5 9
Eastbound
729 0 2 0 731
7 0
Westbound
936 0 4 0 940
9 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
720 0 28 0 748
7 6
Southbound
423 0 15 0 438
4 0
Eastbound
959 0 0 0 959
10 0
Westbound
1115 0 16 0 1131
11 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-29
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 25. Avocado & San Miguel
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2003 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
392 0 0 0 392
4 49
Southbound
118 0 0 0 118
1 8
Eastbound
208 0 0 0 208
2 10
Westbound
1089 0 0 0 1089
11 9
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
891 0 0 0 891
9 10
Southbound
372 0 0 0 372
4 58
Eastbound
724 0 22 0 746
7 1
Westbound
742 0 16 0 758
8 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-30
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 26. Balboa/Superior & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
618 0 31 0 649
6 0
Southbound
479 0 26 0 505
5 0
Eastbound
3468 139 168 0 3775
38 11
Westbound
849 34 28 0 911
9 18
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
535 0 10 0 545
5 0
Southbound
1138 0 162 0 1300
13 0
Eastbound
1649 66 73 0 1788
18 8
Westbound
2446 98 62 0 2606
26 15
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-31
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 27. Newport & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Southbound
653 20 49 0 722
7 10
Eastbound
2562 77 7 0 2646
26 11
Westbound
1098 33 27 0 1158
12 18
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Southbound
1087 33 118 0 1238
12 4
Eastbound
1534 46 77 0 1657
17 8
Westbound
2411 72 14 0 2497
25 15
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-32
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 28. Riverside & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
8 0 0 0 8
0 0
Southbound
401 0 2 0 403
4 0
Eastbound
2392 96 94 0 2582
26 22
Westbound
1309 52 130 0 1491
15 26
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
47 0 0 0 47
0 0
Southbound
524 0 2 0 526
5 0
Eastbound
1817 73 181 0 2071
21 13
Westbound
2523 101 134 0 2758
28 27
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-33
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 29. Tustin & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Southbound
52 0 0 0 52
1 0
Eastbound
2268 91 86 0 2445
24 22
Westbound
1276 51 55 0 1382
14 26
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
7 0 0 0 7
0 0
Southbound
85 0 0 0 85
1 0
Eastbound
1587 63 91 0 1741
17 13
Westbound
2509 100 103 0 2712
27 27
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-34
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 30. Dover/Bayshore & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
74 0 0 0 74
1 0
Southbound
976 0 24 0 1000
10 9
Eastbound
2421 73 81 0 2575
26 22
Westbound
1720 52 61 0 1833
18 32
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
119 0 0 0 119
1 0
Southbound
1310 0 41 0 1351
14 1
Eastbound
1630 49 118 0 1797
18 13
Westbound
3341 100 92 0 3533
35 37
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-35
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 31. Bayside & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
446 0 4 0 450
5 0
Southbound
46 0 62 0 108
1 0
Eastbound
3170 127 71 0 3368
34 31
Westbound
1483 59 39 0 1581
16 32
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
523 0 5 0 528
5 0
Southbound
68 0 100 0 168
2 0
Eastbound
2419 97 91 0 2607
26 13
Westbound
3129 125 56 0 3310
33 37
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-36
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 32. Newport Center & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Southbound
128 0 9 0 137
1 9
Eastbound
1905 57 10 0 1972
20 29
Westbound
1447 43 16 0 1506
15 1
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Southbound
680 0 34 0 714
7 0
Eastbound
1874 56 26 0 1956
20 7
Westbound
2041 61 13 0 2115
21 17
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-37
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 33. Avocado & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
305 0 0 0 305
3 0
Southbound
143 0 0 0 143
1 7
Eastbound
1480 59 6 0 1545
15 28
Westbound
1398 56 15 0 1469
15 18
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
362 0 0 0 362
4 0
Southbound
705 0 1 0 706
7 48
Eastbound
1684 67 11 0 1762
18 2
Westbound
1603 64 7 0 1674
17 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-38
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 34. Goldenrod & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
133 0 0 0 133
1 0
Southbound
59 0 1 0 60
1 0
Eastbound
1187 47 6 0 1240
12 14
Westbound
1990 80 10 0 2080
21 19
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
135 0 0 0 135
1 0
Southbound
75 0 0 0 75
1 0
Eastbound
1782 71 8 0 1861
19 18
Westbound
1742 70 7 0 1819
18 2
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-39
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 35. Marguerite & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
249 0 0 0 249
2 0
Southbound
243 0 0 0 243
2 0
Eastbound
1233 49 5 0 1287
13 18
Westbound
1821 73 10 0 1904
19 2
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
241 0 0 0 241
2 0
Southbound
254 0 0 0 254
3 0
Eastbound
1799 72 7 0 1878
19 14
Westbound
1460 58 7 0 1525
15 19
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-40
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 36. Newport Center & Santa Barbara
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
223 0 0 0 223
2 0
Southbound
126 0 0 0 126
1 0
Eastbound
227 0 0 0 227
2 2
Westbound
13 0 0 0 13
0 1
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
291 0 0 0 291
3 0
Southbound
289 0 0 0 289
3 0
Eastbound
267 0 0 0 267
3 9
Westbound
91 0 0 0 91
1 9
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-41
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 37. Santa Cruz & Newport Center
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
69 0 0 0 69
1 1
Southbound
166 0 0 0 166
2 2
Eastbound
117 0 0 0 117
1 0
Westbound
181 0 0 0 181
2 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
274 0 0 0 274
3 9
Southbound
255 0 0 0 255
3 9
Eastbound
235 0 0 0 235
2 0
Westbound
299 0 0 0 299
3 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-42
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2003 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
122 0 0 0 122
1 6
Southbound
313 0 0 0 313
3 30
Eastbound
85 0 0 0 85
1 0
Westbound
274 0 0 0 274
3 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
278 0 0 0 278
3 26
Southbound
392 0 0 0 392
4 15
Eastbound
214 0 0 0 214
2 0
Westbound
298 0 0 0 298
3 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-43
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 39. Newport Center & San Miguel
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
322 0 0 0 322
3 3
Southbound
130 0 0 0 130
1 17
Eastbound
69 0 0 0 69
1 2
Westbound
377 0 0 0 377
4 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
376 0 0 0 376
4 10
Southbound
388 0 0 0 388
4 0
Eastbound
390 0 0 0 390
4 16
Westbound
685 0 0 0 685
7 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-44
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 40. Newport Center/Fashion Island & Newport Center Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
501 0 0 0 501
5 0
Southbound
15 0 0 0 15
0 1
Eastbound
229 0 0 0 229
2 0
Westbound
121 0 0 0 121
1 10
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
431 0 0 0 431
4 1
Southbound
156 0 0 0 156
2 9
Eastbound
342 0 0 0 342
3 0
Westbound
511 0 0 0 511
5 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-45
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 1. MacArthur & Campus
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1000 40 16 150 1206
12 8
Southbound
1478 59 25 58 1620
16 20
Eastbound
1323 0 10 0 1333
13 0
Westbound
368 0 2 0 370
4 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1361 54 30 101 1546
15 21
Southbound
1905 76 26 155 2162
22 6
Eastbound
993 0 5 0 998
10 0
Westbound
1367 0 6 0 1373
14 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-46
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 2. MacArthur & Birch
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1892 57 11 150 2110
21 8
Southbound
1094 33 26 58 1211
12 20
Eastbound
554 0 7 0 561
6 0
Westbound
232 0 0 0 232
2 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1318 40 17 101 1476
15 21
Southbound
2306 69 28 155 2558
26 6
Eastbound
525 0 14 0 539
5 0
Westbound
937 0 2 0 939
9 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-47
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 3. MacArthur & Von Karman
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1903 76 9 168 2156
22 8
Southbound
627 25 14 58 724
7 20
Eastbound
155 0 5 0 160
2 0
Westbound
302 0 3 25 330
3 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1014 41 16 125 1196
12 21
Southbound
1097 44 18 155 1314
13 6
Eastbound
640 0 15 0 655
7 0
Westbound
899 0 8 21 928
9 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-48
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 4. Jamboree & Campus
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1520 61 26 173 1780
18 8
Southbound
2134 85 46 71 2336
23 20
Eastbound
290 0 4 0 294
3 0
Westbound
845 0 3 0 848
8 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2025 81 45 119 2270
23 21
Southbound
2413 97 42 179 2731
27 6
Eastbound
1086 0 2 0 1088
11 0
Westbound
769 0 5 0 774
8 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-49
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 5. Jamboree & Birch
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1648 66 28 173 1915
19 8
Southbound
2051 82 57 71 2261
23 20
Eastbound
194 0 0 0 194
2 0
Westbound
7 0 0 0 7
0 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1844 74 52 119 2089
21 21
Southbound
2346 94 45 179 2664
27 6
Eastbound
509 0 1 0 510
5 0
Westbound
14 0 0 0 14
0 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-50
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 6. MacArthur & Jamboree
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1648 49 28 166 1891
19 8
Southbound
2051 62 42 82 2237
22 20
Eastbound
194 6 35 174 409
4 8
Westbound
7 0 56 71 134
1 20
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1844 55 36 138 2073
21 21
Southbound
2346 70 77 176 2669
27 6
Eastbound
509 15 47 106 677
7 21
Westbound
14 0 45 179 238
2 6
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-51
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 7. Bayview & Bristol South (EB)
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
480 0 0 0 480
5 0
Southbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Eastbound
3107 0 78 0 3185
32 32
Westbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
641 0 0 0 641
6 0
Southbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Eastbound
3057 0 80 0 3137
31 18
Westbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-52
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 8. Jamboree & Bristol North (WB)
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
3370 135 52 173 3730
37 29
Southbound
1050 42 51 51 1194
12 20
Eastbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Westbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2849 114 70 107 3140
31 58
Southbound
1971 79 54 177 2281
23 6
Eastbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Westbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-53
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 9. Jamboree & Bristol South (EB)
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2187 87 75 173 2522
25 26
Southbound
675 27 51 51 804
8 20
Eastbound
2831 0 78 0 2909
29 31
Westbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1958 78 118 107 2261
23 28
Southbound
1241 50 52 177 1520
15 6
Eastbound
3273 0 80 0 3353
34 15
Westbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-54
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 10. Jamboree & Bayview
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1935 58 75 173 2241
22 30
Southbound
2006 60 51 51 2168
22 52
Eastbound
88 0 0 0 88
1 0
Westbound
100 0 0 0 100
1 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1758 53 118 107 2036
20 57
Southbound
2383 71 52 177 2683
27 25
Eastbound
399 0 0 0 399
4 0
Westbound
170 0 0 0 170
2 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-55
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 11. Jamboree & Eastbluff/University
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1718 52 70 248 2088
21 35
Southbound
1669 50 113 51 1883
19 52
Eastbound
534 0 1 0 535
5 0
Westbound
618 0 5 22 645
6 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1678 50 123 155 2006
20 59
Southbound
2477 74 109 177 2837
28 25
Eastbound
351 0 0 0 351
4 0
Westbound
438 0 10 80 528
5 2
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-56
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 12. Jamboree & Bison
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1547 46 60 2112 3765
38 42
Southbound
1993 60 105 73 2231
22 53
Eastbound
187 0 0 0 187
2 0
Westbound
319 0 5 37 361
4 1
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1807 54 108 132 2101
21 62
Southbound
2302 69 107 257 2735
27 27
Eastbound
102 0 1 0 103
1 0
Westbound
464 0 6 23 493
5 5
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-57
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 13. Jamboree & Eastbluff/Ford
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1762 53 70 212 2097
21 42
Southbound
1769 53 105 62 1989
20 54
Eastbound
742 0 9 18 769
8 0
Westbound
522 0 12 117 651
7 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2355 71 125 168 2719
27 62
Southbound
2225 67 94 220 2606
26 32
Eastbound
533 0 4 63 600
6 0
Westbound
373 0 4 71 448
4 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-58
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1313 39 163 178 1693
17 0
Southbound
1929 58 275 103 2365
24 54
Eastbound
350 0 0 0 350
4 0
Westbound
182 0 38 34 254
3 42
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1800 54 243 148 2245
22 0
Southbound
2415 72 255 232 2974
30 32
Eastbound
253 0 12 0 265
3 0
Westbound
295 0 98 20 413
4 62
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-59
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1554 47 53 178 1832
18 1
Southbound
1392 42 123 94 1651
17 0
Eastbound
73 0 6 0 79
1 0
Westbound
146 0 6 0 152
2 17
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1246 37 91 148 1522
15 6
Southbound
2100 63 88 194 2445
24 0
Eastbound
38 0 3 0 41
0 0
Westbound
974 0 8 0 982
10 5
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-60
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 16. Jamboree & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
488 15 1 0 504
5 0
Southbound
1101 33 106 94 1334
13 17
Eastbound
3049 91 89 120 3349
33 30
Westbound
1252 38 33 471 1794
18 15
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
398 12 3 0 413
4 0
Southbound
2060 62 85 194 2401
24 5
Eastbound
2438 73 121 390 3022
30 13
Westbound
2323 70 63 317 2773
28 31
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-61
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 17. MacArthur & Bison
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2817 85 2 151 3055
31 33
Southbound
2357 71 5 49 2482
25 61
Eastbound
604 0 7 11 622
6 6
Westbound
694 0 2 52 748
7 21
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2829 85 19 93 3026
30 84
Southbound
3252 98 28 170 3548
35 21
Eastbound
597 0 8 37 642
6 3
Westbound
770 0 1 32 803
8 11
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-62
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 18. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2108 63 8 183 2362
24 39
Southbound
2465 74 11 45 2595
26 80
Eastbound
426 0 4 15 445
4 0
Westbound
1775 0 10 222 2007
20 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2877 86 33 145 3141
31 86
Southbound
3151 95 23 155 3424
34 28
Eastbound
387 0 2 54 443
4 0
Westbound
992 0 12 169 1173
12 2
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-63
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1652 50 19 145 1866
19 0
Southbound
2520 76 43 99 2738
27 82
Eastbound
591 0 8 46 645
6 40
Westbound
750 0 8 191 949
9 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
2016 60 46 183 2305
23 0
Southbound
2628 79 54 190 2951
30 30
Eastbound
1062 0 55 100 1217
12 87
Westbound
878 0 8 139 1025
10 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-64
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 20. MacArthur & San Miguel
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1883 56 8 182 2129
21 1
Southbound
1765 53 7 142 1967
20 0
Eastbound
190 0 5 12 207
2 11
Westbound
426 0 1 0 427
4 7
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
1376 41 11 205 1633
16 4
Southbound
2017 61 11 182 2271
23 0
Eastbound
1535 0 29 37 1601
16 9
Westbound
478 0 12 0 490
5 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-65
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 21. MacArthur & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Southbound
908 27 3 152 1090
11 11
Eastbound
1842 55 10 145 2052
21 2
Westbound
1986 60 12 474 2532
25 19
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Southbound
1832 55 4 220 2111
21 3
Eastbound
1864 56 13 456 2389
24 15
Westbound
1929 58 10 286 2283
23 2
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-66
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
72 0 4 0 76
1 35
Southbound
55 0 2 10 67
1 0
Eastbound
748 0 2 9 759
8 54
Westbound
495 0 2 41 538
5 7
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
469 0 0 0 469
5 14
Southbound
72 0 2 9 83
1 0
Eastbound
578 0 2 38 618
6 32
Westbound
586 0 2 30 618
6 48
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-67
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 23. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
108 0 26 11 145
1 36
Southbound
115 0 0 15 130
1 0
Eastbound
428 0 20 19 467
5 49
Westbound
1032 0 26 91 1149
11 4
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
567 0 67 42 676
7 59
Southbound
98 0 0 12 110
1 0
Eastbound
729 0 26 47 802
8 10
Westbound
580 0 64 69 713
7 14
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-68
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
322 0 0 0 322
3 0
Southbound
485 0 0 0 485
5 9
Eastbound
729 0 2 63 794
8 0
Westbound
936 0 4 191 1131
11 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
720 0 28 0 748
7 6
Southbound
423 0 15 0 438
4 0
Eastbound
959 0 0 216 1175
12 0
Westbound
1115 0 16 137 1268
13 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-69
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 25. Avocado & San Miguel
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2003 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
392 0 0 0 392
4 49
Southbound
118 0 0 0 118
1 8
Eastbound
208 0 0 12 220
2 10
Westbound
1089 0 0 37 1126
11 9
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
891 0 0 0 891
9 10
Southbound
372 0 0 0 372
4 58
Eastbound
724 0 22 37 783
8 1
Westbound
742 0 16 22 780
8 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-70
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 26. Balboa/Superior & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
618 0 31 14 663
7 0
Southbound
479 0 26 52 557
6 0
Eastbound
3468 139 168 102 3877
39 11
Westbound
849 34 28 231 1142
11 18
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
535 0 10 15 560
6 0
Southbound
1138 0 162 221 1521
15 0
Eastbound
1649 66 73 219 2007
20 8
Westbound
2446 98 62 142 2748
27 15
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-71
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 27. Newport & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Southbound
653 20 49 17 739
7 10
Eastbound
2562 77 7 67 2713
27 11
Westbound
1098 33 27 235 1393
14 18
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Southbound
1087 33 118 85 1323
13 4
Eastbound
1534 46 77 238 1895
19 8
Westbound
2411 72 14 145 2642
26 15
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-72
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 28. Riverside & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
8 0 0 0 8
0 0
Southbound
401 0 2 5 408
4 0
Eastbound
2392 96 94 89 2671
27 22
Westbound
1309 52 130 281 1772
18 26
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
47 0 0 0 47
0 0
Southbound
524 0 2 4 530
5 0
Eastbound
1817 73 181 327 2398
24 13
Westbound
2523 101 134 195 2953
30 27
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-73
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 29. Tustin & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Southbound
52 0 0 0 52
1 0
Eastbound
2268 91 86 94 2539
25 22
Westbound
1276 51 55 280 1662
17 26
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
7 0 0 0 7
0 0
Southbound
85 0 0 0 85
1 0
Eastbound
1587 63 91 332 2073
21 13
Westbound
2509 100 103 197 2909
29 27
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-74
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 30. Dover/Bayshore & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
74 0 0 0 74
1 0
Southbound
976 0 24 28 1028
10 9
Eastbound
2421 73 81 94 2669
27 22
Westbound
1720 52 61 360 2193
22 32
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
119 0 0 0 119
1 0
Southbound
1310 0 41 83 1434
14 1
Eastbound
1630 49 118 332 2129
21 13
Westbound
3341 100 92 248 3781
38 37
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-75
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 31. Bayside & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
446 0 4 0 450
5 0
Southbound
46 0 62 5 113
1 0
Eastbound
3170 127 71 116 3484
35 31
Westbound
1483 59 39 351 1932
19 32
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
523 0 5 0 528
5 0
Southbound
68 0 100 4 172
2 0
Eastbound
2419 97 91 385 2992
30 13
Westbound
3129 125 56 238 3548
35 37
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-76
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 32. Newport Center & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Southbound
128 0 9 0 137
1 9
Eastbound
1905 57 10 156 2128
21 29
Westbound
1447 43 16 469 1975
20 1
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Southbound
680 0 34 0 714
7 0
Eastbound
1874 56 26 513 2469
25 7
Westbound
2041 61 13 317 2432
24 17
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-77
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 33. Avocado & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
305 0 0 0 305
3 0
Southbound
143 0 0 0 143
1 7
Eastbound
1480 59 6 156 1701
17 28
Westbound
1398 56 15 469 1938
19 18
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
362 0 0 0 362
4 0
Southbound
705 0 1 0 706
7 48
Eastbound
1684 67 11 513 2275
23 2
Westbound
1603 64 7 317 1991
20 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-78
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 34. Goldenrod & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
133 0 0 0 133
1 0
Southbound
59 0 1 0 60
1 0
Eastbound
1187 47 6 159 1399
14 14
Westbound
1990 80 10 502 2582
26 19
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
135 0 0 0 135
1 0
Southbound
75 0 0 0 75
1 0
Eastbound
1782 71 8 527 2388
24 18
Westbound
1742 70 7 317 2136
21 2
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-79
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 35. Marguerite & Coast Hwy
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
249 0 0 0 249
2 0
Southbound
243 0 0 3 246
2 0
Eastbound
1233 49 5 159 1446
14 14
Westbound
1821 73 10 515 2419
24 19
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
241 0 0 0 241
2 0
Southbound
254 0 0 13 267
3 0
Eastbound
1799 72 7 527 2405
24 18
Westbound
1460 58 7 324 1849
18 2
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-80
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 36. Newport Center & Santa Barbara
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
223 0 0 0 223
2 0
Southbound
126 0 0 0 126
1 0
Eastbound
227 0 0 0 227
2 2
Westbound
13 0 0 0 13
0 1
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
291 0 0 0 291
3 0
Southbound
289 0 0 0 289
3 0
Eastbound
267 0 0 0 267
3 9
Westbound
91 0 0 0 91
1 9
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-81
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 37. Santa Cruz & Newport Center
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
69 0 0 0 69
1 1
Southbound
166 0 0 0 166
2 2
Eastbound
117 0 0 0 117
1 0
Westbound
181 0 0 0 181
2 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
274 0 0 0 274
3 9
Southbound
255 0 0 0 255
3 9
Eastbound
235 0 0 0 235
2 0
Westbound
299 0 0 0 299
3 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-82
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2003 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
122 0 0 0 122
1 6
Southbound
313 0 0 0 313
3 30
Eastbound
85 0 0 0 85
1 0
Westbound
274 0 0 0 274
3 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
278 0 0 0 278
3 26
Southbound
392 0 0 0 392
4 15
Eastbound
214 0 0 0 214
2 0
Westbound
298 0 0 0 298
3 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-83
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 39. Newport Center & San Miguel
Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
322 0 0 0 322
3 3
Southbound
130 0 0 0 130
1 17
Eastbound
69 0 0 0 69
1 2
Westbound
377 0 0 0 377
4 0
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
376 0 0 0 376
4 10
Southbound
388 0 0 0 388
4 0
Eastbound
390 0 0 0 390
4 16
Westbound
685 0 0 0 685
7 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-84
1 % Traffic Volume Analysis
Intersection: 40. Newport Center/Fashion Island & Newport Center Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative
Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected
1 % of Projected
Project
Approach
Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Peak 1 Hour
Direction
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Volume
Volume
AM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
501 0 0 0 501
5 0
Southbound
15 0 0 0 15
0 1
Eastbound
229 0 0 0 229
2 0
Westbound
121 0 0 0 121
1 10
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PM PEAK PERIOD
Northbound
431 0 0 0 431
4 1
Southbound
156 0 0 0 156
2 9
Eastbound
342 0 0 0 342
3 0
Westbound
511 0 0 0 511
5 0
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.
PROJECT:
North Newport Center TPO
FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:
2010
A-85
1. MacArthur & Campus
Existing
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
53 .033
155
. M*
NBT
4 6400
897
.140*
1171
.183
NBR
1 1600
50 .031
35 .022
SBL
1 1600
261
.163*
131
.082
SBT
4 6400
918
.143
1108
.173*
SBR
1 1600
299
.187
666
.416
EBL
2 3200
458
.143
336
.105*
EBT
3 4800
778
.180*
455
.137
EBR
0 0
87 202
WBL
2 3200
43 .013*
132
.041
WBT
3 4800
225
.047
1080
.225*
WBR
f
100
155
Right
Turn Adjustment
SBR
.164*
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
55 .034
157
.098*
NBT
4 6400
947
.148*
1244
.194
NBR
1 1600
50 .031
37 .023
SBL
1 1600
261
.163*
131
.082
SBT
4 6400
978
.153
1175
.184*
SBR
1 1600
301
.188
669
.418
EBL
2 3200
461
.144
338
.106*
EBT
3 4800
782
.181*
475
.141
EBR
0 0
89 204
WBL
2 3200
44 .014*
135
.042
WBT
3 4800
227
.047
1082
.225*
WBR
f
100
156
Right
Turn Adjustment
SBR
.154*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .496 .764 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .506 .767 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
55 .034
157
.098*
NBT
4 6400
955
.149*
1265
.198
NBR
1 1600
50 .031
37 .023
SBL
1 1600
261
.163*
131
.082
SBT
4 6400
998
.156
1181
.185*
SBR
1 1600
301
.188
669
.418
EBL
2 3200
461
.144
338
.106*
EBT
3 4800
782
.181*
475
.141
EBR
0 0
89 204
WBL
2 3200
44 .014*
135
.042
WBT
3 4800
227
.047
1082
.225*
WBR
f
100
156
Right
Turn Adjustment
SBR
.153*
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
55 .034
157
.098*
NBT
4 6400
1097
.171*
1345
.210
NBR
1 1600
50 .031
37 .023
SBL
1 1600
261
.163*
131
.082
SBT
4 6400
1036
.162
1330
.208*
SBR
1 1600
301
.188
669
.418
EBL
2 3200
461
.144
338
.106*
EBT
3 4800
782
.181*
475
.141
EBR
0 0
89 204
WBL
2 3200
44 .014*
135
.042
WBT
3 4800
227
.047
1082
.225*
WBR
f
100
156
Right
Turn Adjustment
SBR
.130*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .507 .767 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .529 767
A-86
1. MacArthur & Campus
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative + Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
55 .034
157
.098*
NBT
4 6400
1105
.M*
1366
.213
NBR
1 1600
50 .031
37 .023
SBL
1 1600
261
.163*
131
.082
SBT
4 6400
1056
.165
1336
.209*
SBR
1 1600
301
.188
669
.418
EBL
2 3200
461
.144
338
.106*
EBT
3 4800
782
.181*
475
.141
EBR
0 0
89 204
WBL
2 3200
44 .014*
135
.042
WBT
3 4800
227
.047
1082
.225*
WBR
f
100
156
Right
Turn Adjustment
SBR
.129*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .531 .767
A-87
2. MacArthur & Birch
Existing
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 47 .029 113 .071*
NBT 3 4800 1741 .363* 1183 .246
NBR f 104 22
SBL 1 1600 146 .091* 69 .043
SBT 4 6400 771 .148 2067 .350*
SBR 0 0 177 170
EBL 0 0 123 294
EBT 3 4800 372 .115* 207 .109*
EBR 0 0 59 24
WBL 1 1600 21 .013 103 .064
WBT 2 3200 164 .051* 694 .217*
WBR f 47 140
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 48 .030 113 .071*
NBT 3 4800 1803 .376* 1235 .257
NBR f 104 22
SBL 1 1600 146 .091* 69 .043
SBT 4 6400 815 .156 2150 .364*
SBR 0 0 182 177
EBL 0 0 128 306
EBT 3 4800 372 .117* 208 .113*
EBR 0 0 61 26
WBL 1 1600 21 .013 103 .064
WBT 2 3200 164 .051* 696 .218*
WBR f 47 140
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .620 .747 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .635 .766 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 48 .030 113 .071*
NBT 3 4800 1811 .377* 1256 .262
NBR f 104 22
SBL 1 1600 146 .091* 69 .043
SBT 4 6400 835 .159 2156 .363*
SBR 0 0 182 177
EBL 0 0 128 306
EBT 3 4800 372 .117* 208 .113*
EBR 0 0 61 26
WBL 1 1600 21 .013 103 .064
WBT 2 3200 164 .051* 696 .218*
WBR f 47 140
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
48 .030
113
.071*
NBT
3 4800
1953
.407*
1336
.278
NBR
f
104
22 SBL
1 1600
146
.091*
69 .043
SBT
4 6400
873
.165
2305
.388*
SBR
0 0
182
177
EBL
0 0
128
306
EBT
3 4800
372
.117*
208
.113*
EBR
0 0
61 26
WBL
1 1600
21 .013
103
.064
WBT
2 3200
164
.051*
696
.218*
WBR
f
47 140
Note:
Assumes
E/W Split
Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .636 .767 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .666 790
A-88
2. MacArthur & Birch
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 48 .030 113 .071*
NBT 3 4800 1961 .409* 1357 .283
NBR f 104 22
SBL 1 1600 146 .091* 69 .043
SBT 4 6400 893 .168 2311 .389*
SBR 0 0 182 177
EBL 0 0 128 306
EBT 3 4800 372 .117* 208 .113*
EBR 0 0 61 26
WBL 1 1600 21 .013 103 .064
WBT 2 3200 164 .051* 696 .218*
WBR f 47 140
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .668 .791
A-89
3. MacArthur & Von Karman
Existing
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
129
.081
71 .044*
NBT
3 4800
974
.203*
788
.164
NBR
f
800
155
SBL
1 1600
36 .023*
34 .021
SBT
3 4800
394
.082
962
.200*
SBR
f
197
101
EBL
1 1600
35 .022
137
.086
EBT
2 3200
84 .026*
222
.069*
EBR
f
36 281
WBL
1 1600
102
.064*
682
.426*
WBT
2 3200
184
.058
152
.048
WBR
f
16 65
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
130
.081
75 . W*
NBT
3 4800
1021
.213*
832
.173
NBR
f
801
155
SBL
1 1600
36 .023*
34 .021
SBT
3 4800
421
.088
1014
.211*
SBR
f
199
105
EBL
1 1600
38 .024
144
.090
EBT
2 3200
86 .027*
228
.071*
EBR
f
36 283
WBL
1 1600
104
.065*
686
.429*
WBT
2 3200
185
.058
156
.049
WBR
f
16 65
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .316 .739 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .328 .758 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
130
.081
75 .047*
NBT
3 4800
1029
.214*
853
.178
NBR
f
801
155
SBL
1 1600
36 .023*
34 .021
SBT
3 4800
441
.092
1020
.213*
SBR
f
199
105
EBL
1 1600
38 .024
144
.090
EBT
2 3200
86 .027*
228
.071*
EBR
f
36 283
WBL
1 1600
104
.065*
686
.429*
WBT
2 3200
185
.058
156
.049
WBR
f
16 65
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
130
.081
75 .047*
NBT
3 4800
1171
.244*
933
.194
NBR
f
819
179
SBL
1 1600
36 .023*
34 .021
SBT
3 4800
479
.100
1169
.244*
SBR
f
199
105
EBL
1 1600
38 .024
144
.090
EBT
2 3200
86 .027*
228
.071*
EBR
f
36 283
WBL
1 1600
129
.081*
707
.442*
WBT
2 3200
185
.058
156
.049
WBR
f
16 65
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .329 .760 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .375 804
A-90
3. MacArthur & Von Karman
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative + Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
130
.081
75 . W*
NBT
3 4800
1179
.246*
954
.199
NBR
f
819
179
SBL
1 1600
36 .023*
34 .021
SBT
3 4800
499
.104
1175
.245*
SBR
f
199
105
EBL
1 1600
38 .024
144
.090
EBT
2 3200
86 .027*
228
.071*
EBR
f
36 283
WBL
1 1600
129
.081*
707
.442*
WBT
2 3200
185
.058
156
.049
WBR
f
16 65
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .377 .805
A-91
5. Jamboree & Birch
Existing
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 275 .172* 216 .135*
NBT 3 4800 1372 .286 1625 .339
NBR 0 0 1 3
SBL 1 1600 4 .003 6 .004
SBT 3 4800 1589 .331* 1857 .387*
SBR f 458 483
EBL 0 0 148 349
EBT 2 3200 5 .048* 6 .111*
EBR f 41 154
WBL 0 0 1 0
WBT 1 1600 2 .004* 14 .009*
WBR 0 0 4 0
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 275 .M* 216 .135*
NBT 3 4800 1455 .303 1742 .364
NBR 0 0 1 3
SBL 1 1600 4 .003 6 .004
SBT 3 4800 1709 .356* 1976 .412*
SBR f 459 483
EBL 0 0 148 349
EBT 2 3200 5 .048* 6 .111*
EBR f 41 155
WBL 0 0 1 0
WBT 1 1600 2 .004* 14 .009*
WBR 0 0 4 0
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .555 .642 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .580 .667 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 275 .172* 216 .135*
NBT 3 4800 1463 .305 1763 .368
NBR 0 0 1 3
SBL 1 1600 4 .003 6 .004
SBT 3 4800 1729 .360* 1982 .413*
SBR f 459 483
EBL 0 0 148 349
EBT 2 3200 5 .048* 6 .111*
EBR f 41 155
WBL 0 0 1 0
WBT 1 1600 2 .004* 14 .009*
WBR 0 0 4 0
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 275 .172* 216 .135*
NBT 3 4800 1628 .339 1861 .388
NBR 0 0 1 3
SBL 1 1600 4 .003 6 .004
SBT 3 4800 1780 .371* 2155 .449*
SBR f 459 483
EBL 0 0 148 349
EBT 2 3200 5 .048* 6 .111*
EBR f 41 155
WBL 0 0 1 0
WBT 1 1600 2 .004* 14 .009*
WBR 0 0 4 0
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .584 .668 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .595 704
A-92
5. Jamboree & Birch
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 275 .172* 216 .135*
NBT 3 4800 1636 .341 1882 .393
NBR 0 0 1 3
SBL 1 1600 4 .003 6 .004
SBT 3 4800 1800 .375* 2161 .450*
SBR f 459 483
EBL 0 0 148 349
EBT 2 3200 5 .048* 6 .111*
EBR f 41 155
WBL 0 0 1 0
WBT 1 1600 2 .004* 14 .009*
WBR 0 0 4 0
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .599 .705
A-93
6. MacArthur & Jamboree
Existing
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
214
.067
250
.078*
NBT
3 4800
1689
.352*
539
.112
NBR
1 1600
482
.301
333
.208
SBL
2 3200
85 .027*
208
.065
SBT
3 4800
304
.063
1479
.308*
SBR
f
97 256
EBL
2 3200
432
.135
199
.062
EBT
3 4800
989
.206*
864
.180*
EBR
f
215
51 WBL
2 3200
313
.098*
612
.191*
WBT
3 4800
632
.132
1026
.214
WBR
f
183
103
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
222
.069
262
.082*
NBT
3 4800
1759
.366*
579
.121
NBR
1 1600
483
.302
333
.208
SBL
2 3200
93 .029*
230
.072
SBT
3 4800
334
.070
1557
.324*
SBR
f
110
276
EBL
2 3200
446
.139
216
.068
EBT
3 4800
1039
.216*
920
.192*
EBR
f
215
51 WBL
2 3200
313
.098*
613
.192*
WBT
3 4800
693
.144
1092
.228
WBR
f
197
113
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .683 .757 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .709 .790 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
222
.069
262
.082*
NBT
3 4800
1767
.368*
600
.125
NBR
1 1600
483
.302
333
.208
SBL
2 3200
93 .029*
230
.072
SBT
3 4800
354
.074
1563
.326*
SBR
f
110
276
EBL
2 3200
446
.139
216
.068
EBT
3 4800
1047
.218*
941
.196*
EBR
f
215
51 WBL
2 3200
313
.098*
613
.192*
WBT
3 4800
713
.149
1098
.229
WBR
f
197
113
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
222
.069
262
.082*
NBT
3 4800
1907
.397*
693
.144
NBR
1 1600
501
.313
357
.223
SBL
2 3200
93 .029*
230
.072
SBT
3 4800
410
.085
1715
.357*
SBR
f
116
294
EBL
2 3200
465
.145
227
.071
EBT
3 4800
1194
.249*
1015
.211*
EBR
f
215
51 WBL
2 3200
338
.106*
634
.198*
WBT
3 4800
739
.154
1250
.260
WBR
f
197
113
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .713 .796 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .781 848
A-94
6. MacArthur & Jamboree
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative + Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
222
.069
262
.082*
NBT
3 4800
1915
.399*
714
.149
NBR
1 1600
501
.313
357
.223
SBL
2 3200
93 .029*
230
.072
SBT
3 4800
430
.090
1721
.359*
SBR
f
116
294
EBL
2 3200
465
.145
227
.071
EBT
3 4800
1202
.250*
1036
.216*
EBR
f
215
51 WBL
2 3200
338
.106*
634
.198*
WBT
3 4800
759
.158
1256
.262
WBR
f
197
113
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .784 .855
A-95
7. Bayview & Bristol South (EB)
Existing
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0
NBR 2 3200 480 .150 641 .200
SBL 0 0 0 0
SBT 0 0 0 0
SBR 0 0 0 0
EBL 0 0 0 0
EBT 4 6400 2709 .423* 2913 .455*
EBR 1 1600 398 .249 144 .090
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 0 0 0 0
WBR 0 0 0 0
Right Turn Adjustment NBR .150* NBR .200*
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0
NBR 2 3200 480 .150 641 .200
SBL 0 0 0 0
SBT 0 0 0 0
SBR 0 0 0 0
EBL 0 0 0 0
EBT 4 6400 2787 .435* 2994 .468*
EBR 1 1600 398 .249 144 .090
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 0 0 0 0
WBR 0 0 0 0
Right Turn Adjustment NBR .150* NBR .200*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .573 .655 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .585 .668 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0
NBR 2 3200 480 .150 641 .200
SBL 0 0 0 0
SBT 0 0 0 0
SBR 0 0 0 0
EBL 0 0 0 0
EBT 4 6400 2819 .440* 3012 .471*
EBR 1 1600 398 .249 144 .090
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 0 0 0 0
WBR 0 0 0 0
Right Turn Adjustment NBR .150* NBR .200*
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0
NBR 2 3200 480 .150 641 .200
SBL 0 0 0 0
SBT 0 0 0 0
SBR 0 0 0 0
EBL 0 0 0 0
EBT 4 6400 2787 .435* 2994 .468*
EBR 1 1600 398 .249 144 .090
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 0 0 0 0
WBR 0 0 0 0
Right Turn Adjustment NBR .150* NBR .200*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .590 .671 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .585 668
A-96
7. Bayview & Bristol South (EB)
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0
NBR 2 3200 480 .150 641 .200
SBL 0 0 0 0
SBT 0 0 0 0
SBR 0 0 0 0
EBL 0 0 0 0
EBT 4 6400 2819 .440* 3012 .471*
EBR 1 1600 398 .249 144 .090
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 0 0 0 0
WBR 0 0 0 0
Right Turn Adjustment NBR .150* NBR .200*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .590 .671
A-97
8. Jamboree & Bristol North (WB)
Existing
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 2 3200 1287 .402* 723 .226*
NBT 2 3200 1391 .435 1293 .404
NBR f 692 833
SBL 0 0 0 0
SBT 2.5 6400 645 .164* 1216 .308*
SBR 1.5 405 755
EBL 0 0 0 0
EBT 0 0 0 0
EBR 0 0 0 0
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 0 0 0 0
WBR 0 0 0 0
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
1304
.408*
745
.233*
NBT
2 3200
1483
.463
1393
.435
NBR
f
692
833
SBL
0 0
0 0
SBT
2.5 6400
721
.176*
1317
.324*
SBR
1.5 406
757
EBL
0 0
0 0
EBT
0 0
0 0
EBR
0 0
0 0
WBL
0 0
0 0
WBT
0 0
0 0
WBR
0 0
0 0
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .566 .534 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .584 .557 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
1304
.408*
745
.233*
NBT
2 3200
1491
.466
1414
.442
NBR
f
713
870
SBL
0 0
0 0
SBT
2.5 6400
741
.M*
1323
.325*
SBR
1.5 406
757
EBL
0 0
0 0
EBT
0 0
0 0
EBR
0 0
0 0
WBL
0 0
0 0
WBT
0 0
0 0
WBR
0 0
0 0
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
1304
.408*
745
.233*
NBT
2 3200
1656
.518
1500
.469
NBR
f
692
833
SBL
0 0
0 0
SBT
2.5 6400
772
.184*
1494
.352*
SBR
1.5 406
757
EBL
0 0
0 0
EBT
0 0
0 0
EBR
0 0
0 0
WBL
0 0
0 0
WBT
0 0
0 0
WBR
0 0
0 0
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .587 .558 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .592 585
A-98
8. Jamboree & Bristol North (WB)
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative + Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
1304
.408*
745
.233*
NBT
2 3200
1664
.520
1521
.475
NBR
f
713
870
SBL
0 0
0 0
SBT
2.5 6400
792
.187*
1500
.353*
SBR
1.5 406
757
EBL
0 0
0 0
EBT
0 0
0 0
EBR
0 0
0 0
WBL
0 0
0 0
WBT
0 0
0 0
WBR
0 0
0 0
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .595 .586
A-99
9. Jamboree & Bristol South (EB)
Existing
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 5 8000 2127 .273* 1843 .245
NBR 0 0 60 115
SBL
0 0
0 0
SBT
3 4800
675
.141
1241
.259*
SBR
0 0
0 0
EBL
1.5 1229
.384*
973
{.414}*
EBT
1.5 4800
434
.M
1015
.414
EBR
2 3200
1168
.365
1285
.402
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 0 0 0 0
WBR 0 0 0 0
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .657 .673
Existing + Growth + Approved + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 5 8000 2313 .297* 2063 .272
NBR 0 0 60 115
SBL 0 0 0 0
SBT 3 4800 773 .161 1349 .281*
SBR 0 0 0 0
EBL 1.5 1232 .385* 981 {.417}*
EBT 1.5 4800 443 .277 1020 .417
EBR 2 3200 1265 .395 1368 .428
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 0 0 0 0
WBR 0 0 0 0
Right Turn Adjustment EBR .011*
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 5 8000 2287 .293* 2035 .269
NBR 0 0 60 115
SBL 0 0 0 0
SBT 3 4800 753 .157 1343 .280*
SBR 0 0 0 0
EBL 1.5 1232 .385* 981
EBT 1.5 4800 444 .278 1023 .418*
EBR 2 3200 1233 .385 1350 .422
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 0 0 0 0
WBR 0 0 0 0
Right Turn Adjustment EBR .004*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .678 .702
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 5 8000 2460 .315* 2142 .282
NBR 0 0 60 115
SBL 0 0 0 0
SBT 3 4800 804 .168 1520 .317*
SBR 0 0 0 0
EBL 1.5 1232 .385* 981
EBT 1.5 4800 444 .278 1023 .418*
EBR 2 3200 1233 .385 1350 .422
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 0 0 0 0
WBR 0 0 0 0
Right Turn Adjustment EBR .004*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .682 .709 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .700 739
A-100
9. Jamboree & Bristol South (EB)
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 5 8000 2486 .318* 2170 .286
NBR 0 0 60 115
SBL 0 0 0 0
SBT 3 4800 824 .172 1526 .318*
SBR 0 0 0 0
EBL 1.5 1232 .385* 981 {.417}*
EBT 1.5 4800 443 .277 1020 .417
EBR 2 3200 1265 .395 1368 .428
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 0 0 0 0
WBR 0 0 0 0
Right Turn Adjustment EBR .011*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .703 .746
A-101
10. Jamboree & Bayview
Existing
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
119
.074
57 .036
NBT
4 6400
1760
.284*
1650
.266*
NBR
0 0
56 51
SBL
1 1600
79 .049*
191
.119*
SBT
4 6400
1658
.259
2111
.330
SBR
1 1600
269
.168
81 .051
EBL
2 3200
34 .011
162
.051*
EBT
1 1600
12 .008*
11 AV
EBR
1 1600
42 .026
226
.141
WBL
1 1600
17 .011*
37 .023
WBT
1 1600
4 .003
3 .002*
WBR
1 1600
79 .049
130
.081
Right
Turn Adjustment
WBR
.004*
EBR
.070*
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
119
.V4*
57 .036
NBT
4 6400
1888
.304
1818
.292*
NBR
0 0
56 51
SBL
1 1600
79 .049
191
.119*
SBT
4 6400
1824
.285*
2291
.358
SBR
1 1600
269
.168
81 .051
EBL
2 3200
34 .011
162
.051*
EBT
1 1600
12 .008*
11 AV
EBR
1 1600
42 .026
226
.141
WBL
1 1600
17 .011*
37 .023
WBT
1 1600
4 .003
3 .002*
WBR
1 1600
79 .049
130
.081
Right
Turn Adjustment
EBR
.071*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .356 .508 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .378 .535 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
119
.074*
57 .036
NBT
4 6400
1918
.308
1875
.301*
NBR
0 0
56 51
SBL
1 1600
79 .049
191
.119*
SBT
4 6400
1876
.293*
2316
.362
SBR
1 1600
269
.168
81 .051
EBL
2 3200
34 .011
162
.051*
EBT
1 1600
12 .008*
11 .007
EBR
1 1600
42 .026
226
.141
WBL
1 1600
17 .011*
37 .023
WBT
1 1600
4 .003
3 .002*
WBR
1 1600
79 .049
130
.081
Right
Turn Adjustment
EBR
.067*
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
119
.074
57 .036
NBT
4 6400
2061
.331*
1925
.309*
NBR
0 0
56 51
SBL
1 1600
79 .049*
191
.119*
SBT
4 6400
1875
.293
2468
.386
SBR
1 1600
269
.168
81 .051
EBL
2 3200
34 .011
162
.051*
EBT
1 1600
12 .008*
11 .007
EBR
1 1600
42 .026
226
.141
WBL
1 1600
17 .011*
37 .023
WBT
1 1600
4 .003
3 .002*
WBR
1 1600
79 .049
130
.081
Right
Turn Adjustment
WBR
.004*
EBR
.079*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .386 .540 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .403 560
A-102
10. Jamboree & Bayview
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative + Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
119
.074
57 .036
NBT
4 6400
2091
.335*
1982
.318*
NBR
0 0
56 51
SBL
1 1600
79 .049*
191
.119*
SBT
4 6400
1927
.301
2493
.390
SBR
1 1600
269
.168
81 .051
EBL
2 3200
34 .011
162
.051*
EBT
1 1600
12 .008*
11 AV
EBR
1 1600
42 .026
226
.141
WBL
1 1600
17 .011*
37 .023
WBT
1 1600
4 .003
3 .002*
WBR
1 1600
79 .049
130
.081
Right
Turn Adjustment
WBR
.004*
EBR
.076*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .407 .566
A-103
11. Jamboree & University
Existing
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 71 .044 38 .024*
NBT 3 4800 1457 .304* 1386 .289
NBR 1 1600 190 .119 254 .159
SBL 2 3200 61 .019* 155 .048
SBT 3 4800 1295 .270 1896 .395*
SBR 1 1600 313 .196 426 .266
EBL 1.5 393 223
EBT 0.5 3200 108 .157* 102 .102*
EBR f 33 26
WBL 1.5 295 216
WBT 1.5 4800 158 .094* 129 .072*
WBR f 165 93
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
71 .044
38 .024*
NBT
3 4800
1570
.327*
1544
.322
NBR
1 1600
191
.119
261
.163
SBL
2 3200
61 .019*
157
.049
SBT
3 4800
1447
.301
2060
.429*
SBR
1 1600
313
.196
426
.266
EBL
1.5 393
223
EBT
0.5 3200
109
.157*
102
.102*
EBR
f
33 26
WBL
1.5 296
224
WBT
1.5 4800
159
.095*
129
.074*
WBR
f
169
95 Note:
Assumes
E/W Split
Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .574 .593 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .598 .629 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 71 .044* 38 .024*
NBT 3 4800 1600 .333 1601 .334
NBR 1 1600 196 .123 263 .164
SBL 2 3200 61 .019 157 .049
SBT 3 4800 1499 .312* 2085 .434*
SBR 1 1600 313 .196 426 .266
EBL 1.5 393 223
EBT 0.5 3200 109 .157* 102 .102*
EBR f 33 26
WBL 1.5 296 226
WBT 1.5 4800 159 .095* 129 .074*
WBR f 169 95
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
71 .044
38 .024*
NBT
3 4800
1743
.363*
1651
.344
NBR
1 1600
266
.166
309
.193
SBL
2 3200
61 .019*
157
.049
SBT
3 4800
1498
.312
2237
.466*
SBR
1 1600
313
.196
426
.266
EBL
1.5 393
223
EBT
0.5 3200
109
.157*
102
.102*
EBR
f
33 26
WBL
1.5 318
.099
304
.095*
WBT
1.5 4800
159
.099*
129
.081
WBR
f
169
95 Note:
Assumes
E/W Split
Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .608 .634 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .638 687
A-104
11. Jamboree & University
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 71 .044 38 .024*
NBT 3 4800 1773 .369* 1708 .356
NBR 1 1600 271 .169 311 .194
SBL 2 3200 61 .019* 157 .049
SBT 3 4800 1550 .323 2262 .471*
SBR 1 1600 313 .196 426 .266
EBL 1.5 393 223
EBT 0.5 3200 109 .157* 102 .102*
EBR f 33 26
WBL 1.5 318 .099 306 .096*
WBT 1.5 4800 159 .099* 129 .081
WBR f 169 95
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .644 .693
A-105
12. Jamboree & Bison
Existing
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
0 0
NBT
3 4800
1346
.322*
1669
.376*
NBR
0 0
201
138
SBL
2 3200
196
.061*
181
.057*
SBT
3 4800
1601
.334
2003
.417
SBR
1 1600
196
.123
118
.074
EBL
1 1600
116
.073*
67 .042
EBT
0 0
0 0
EBR
f
71 35
WBL
2 3200
144
.045
273
.085*
WBT
0 0
0 0
WBR
2 3200
175
.055
191
.060
Right
Turn Adjustment
WBR
.009*
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
0 0
NBT
3 4800
1444
.343*
1824
.409*
NBR
0 0
202
141
SBL
2 3200
200
.063*
196
.061*
SBT
3 4800
1750
.365
2155
.449
SBR
1 1600
196
.123
118
.074
EBL
1 1600
116
.073*
67 .042
EBT
0 0
0 1
EBR
f
71 35
WBL
2 3200
145
.045
276
.086*
WBT
0 0
0 0
WBR
2 3200
179
.056
194
.061
Right
Turn Adjustment
WBR
.009*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .465 .518 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .488 .556 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
0 0
NBT
3 4800
1480
.352*
1883
.422*
NBR
0 0
208
144
SBL
2 3200
200
.063*
196
.061*
SBT
3 4800
1803
.376
2182
.455
SBR
1 1600
196
.123
118
.074
EBL
1 1600
116
.073*
67 .042
EBT
0 0
0 1
EBR
f
71 35
WBL
2 3200
146
.046
281
.088*
WBT
0 0
0 0
WBR
2 3200
179
.056
194
.061
Right
Turn Adjustment
WBR
.009*
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
0 0
NBT
3 4800
1656
.387*
1956
.437�
NBR
0 0
202
141
SBL
2 3200
211
.066*
233
.073*
SBT
3 4800
1812
.378
2375
.495
SBR
1 1600
196
.123
118
.074
EBL
1 1600
116
.073*
67 .042
EBT
0 0
0 1
EBR
f
71 35
WBL
2 3200
145
.045
276
.086*
WBT
0 0
0 0
WBR
2 3200
216
.068
217
.068
Right
Turn Adjustment
WBR
.018*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .497 .571 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .544 596
A-106
12. Jamboree & Bison
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative + Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
0 0
NBT
3 4800
1692
.396*
2015
.450*
NBR
0 0
208
144
SBL
2 3200
211
.066*
233
.073*
SBT
3 4800
1865
.389
2402
.500
SBR
1 1600
196
.123
118
.074
EBL
1 1600
116
. M*
67 .042
EBT
0 0
0 1
EBR
f
71 35
WBL
2 3200
146
.046
281
.088*
WBT
0 0
0 0
WBR
2 3200
216
.068
217
.068
Right
Turn Adjustment
WBR
.018*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .553 .611
A-107
13. Jamboree & Ford
Existing
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 2 3200 364 .114* 362 .113*
NBT 3 4800 1300 .291 1785 .415
NBR 0 0 98 208
SBL 1 1600 61 .038 44 .028
SBT 3 4800 1541 .321* 2132 .444*
SBR 1 1600 167 .104 49 .031
EBL 1.5 232 66 .041
EBT 1.5 4800 239 .098* 212 .066*
EBR f 271 255
WBL 1.5 131 .082 181
WBT 1.5 4800 358 .112* 157 .070*
WBR 1 1600 33 .021 35 .022
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
367
.115*
366
.114*
NBT
3 4800
1405
.313
1955
.452
NBR
0 0
99 213
SBL
1 1600
61 .038
45 .028
SBT
3 4800
1691
.352*
2289
.477*
SBR
1 1600
168
.105
49 .031
EBL
1.5 233
66 .041
EBT
1.5 4800
244
.099*
212
.066*
EBR
f
274
259
WBL
1.5 133
.083
185
WBT
1.5 4800
368
.115*
157
.071*
WBR
1 1600
34 .021
35 .022
Note:
Assumes
E/W Split
Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .645 .693 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .681 .728 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 2 3200 367 .115* 366 .114*
NBT 3 4800 1447 .322 2017 .465
NBR 0 0 99 213
SBL 1 1600 61 .038 45 .028
SBT 3 4800 1745 .364* 2321 .484*
SBR 1 1600 168 .105 49 .031
EBL 1.5 233 66 .041
EBT 1.5 4800 244 .099* 212 .066*
EBR f 274 239
WBL 1.5 133 .083 185
WBT 1.5 4800 368 .115* 157 .071*
WBR 1 1600 34 .021 35 .022
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
376
.118*
371
.116*
NBT
3 4800
1595
.356
2074
.486
NBR
0 0
112
257
SBL
1 1600
67 .042
67 .042
SBT
3 4800
1747
.364*
2487
.518*
SBR
1 1600
168
.105
49 .031
EBL
1.5 233
66 .041
EBT
1.5 4800
259
.103*
266
.083*
EBR
f
277
268
WBL
1.5 177
.111
210
WBT
1.5 4800
419
.131*
190
.083*
WBR
1 1600
56 .035
48 .030
Note:
Assumes
E/W Split
Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .693 .735 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .716 800
A-108
13. Jamboree & Ford
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 2 3200 376 .118* 371 .116*
NBT 3 4800 1637 .364 2136 .499
NBR 0 0 112 257
SBL 1 1600 67 .042 67 .042
SBT 3 4800 1801 .375* 2519 .525*
SBR 1 1600 168 .105 49 .031
EBL 1.5 233 66 .041
EBT 1.5 4800 259 .103* 266 .083*
EBR f 277 268
WBL 1.5 177 .111 210
WBT 1.5 4800 419 .131* 190 .083*
WBR 1 1600 56 .035 48 .030
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .727 .807
A-109
14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills
Existing
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 41 .026 67 .042
NBT 3 4800 1143 .238* 1598 .333*
NBR f 129 135
SBL 2 3200 665 .208* 443 .138*
SBT 3 4800 1227 .256 1855 .386
SBR f 37 117
EBL 1.5 258 .081* 162 .051*
EBT 1.5 4800 33 .021 34 .021
EBR f 59 57
WBL 1.5 128 .040* 189 .059*
WBT 1.5 4800 12 .008 39 .024
WBR 1 1600 42 .026 67 .042
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
41 .026
68 .043
NBT
3 4800
1253
.261*
1760
.367*
NBR
f
134
145
SBL
2 3200
670
.209*
472
.148*
SBT
3 4800
1407
.293
2012
.419
SBR
f
37 117
EBL
1.5 258
.081*
163
.051*
EBT
1.5 4800
33 .021
39 .024
EBR
f
59 57
WBL
1.5 144
.045*
205
.064*
WBT
1.5 4800
12 .008
39 .024
WBR
1 1600
54 .034
112
.070
Note:
Assumes
E/W Split
Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .567 .581 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .596 .630 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 41 .026 68 .043
NBT 3 4800 1253 .261* 1760 .367*
NBR f 134 145
SBL 2 3200 724 .226* 504 .158*
SBT 3 4800 1407 .293 2012 .419
SBR f 37 117
EBL 1.5 258 .081* 163 .051*
EBT 1.5 4800 33 .021 39 .024
EBR f 59 57
WBL 1.5 144 .045* 205 .064*
WBT 1.5 4800 12 .008 39 .024
WBR 1 1600 96 .060 174 .109
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
41 .026
68 .043
NBT
3 4800
1431
.298*
1908
.398*
NBR
f
134
145
SBL
2 3200
679
.212*
510
.159*
SBT
3 4800
1501
.313
2206
.460
SBR
f
37 117
EBL
1.5 258
.081*
163
.051*
EBT
1.5 4800
33 .021
39 .024
EBR
f
59 57
WBL
1.5 144
.045*
205
.064*
WBT
1.5 4800
12 .008
39 .024
WBR
1 1600
88 .055
132
.083
Note:
Assumes
E/W Split
Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .613 .640 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .636 672
A-110
14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 41 .026 68 .043
NBT 3 4800 1431 .298* 1908 .398*
NBR f 134 145
SBL 2 3200 733 .229* 542 .169*
SBT 3 4800 1501 .313 2206 .460
SBR f 37 117
EBL 1.5 258 .081* 163 .051*
EBT 1.5 4800 33 .021 39 .024
EBR f 59 57
WBL 1.5 144 .045* 205 .064*
WBT 1.5 4800 12 .008 39 .024
WBR 1 1600 130 .081 194 .121
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .653 .682
A-111
15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara
Existing
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 6 .004 9 .006*
NBT 3 4800 1225 .255* 1118 .233
NBR 1 1600 323 .202 119 .074
SBL 2 3200 560 . M* 291 .091
SBT 3 4800 809 .169 1781 .371*
SBR 1 1600 23 .014 28 .018
EBL 1 1600 62 .039* 26 .016*
EBT 1 1600 3 .007 8 .008
EBR 0 0 8 4
WBL 1.5 51 307
WBT 0.5 3200 2 .017* 5 .098*
WBR 1 1600 93 .058 662 .414
Right Turn Adjustment WBR .208*
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 6 .004 9 .006*
NBT 3 4800 1315 .274* 1242 .259
NBR 1 1600 323 .202 120 .075
SBL 2 3200 574 .M* 295 .092
SBT 3 4800 941 .196 1911 .398*
SBR 1 1600 24 .015 34 .021
EBL 1 1600 68 .043* 28 .018*
EBT 1 1600 3 .007 9 .008
EBR 0 0 8 4
WBL 1.5 52 308
WBT 0.5 3200 2 .017* 6 .098*
WBR 1 1600 98 .061 669 .418
Right Turn Adjustment WBR .211*
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .486 .699 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .513 .731 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 6 .004 9 .006*
NBT 3 4800 1315 .274* 1242 .259
NBR 1 1600 324 .203 126 .079
SBL 2 3200 574 .179* 295 .092
SBT 3 4800 941 .196 1911 .398*
SBR 1 1600 24 .015 34 .021
EBL 1 1600 68 .043* 28 .018*
EBT 1 1600 3 .007 9 .008
EBR 0 0 8 4
WBL 1.5 69 313
WBT 0.5 3200 2 .022* 6 .100*
WBR 1 1600 98 .061 669 .418
Right Turn Adjustment WBR .209*
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 6 .004 9 .006*
NBT 3 4800 1493 .311* 1390 .290
NBR 1 1600 323 .202 120 .075
SBL 2 3200 574 .179* 295 .092
SBT 3 4800 1035 .216 2105 .439*
SBR 1 1600 24 .015 34 .021
EBL 1 1600 68 .043* 28 .018*
EBT 1 1600 3 .007 9 .008
EBR 0 0 8 4
WBL 1.5 52 308
WBT 0.5 3200 2 .017* 6 .098*
WBR 1 1600 98 .061 669 .418
Right Turn Adjustment WBR .204*
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .518 .731 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .550 765
A-112
15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1600 6 .004 9 .006*
NBT 3 4800 1493 .311* 1390 .290
NBR 1 1600 324 .203 126 .079
SBL 2 3200 574 .M* 295 .092
SBT 3 4800 1035 .216 2105 .439*
SBR 1 1600 24 .015 34 .021
EBL 1 1600 68 .043* 28 .018*
EBT 1 1600 3 .007 9 .008
EBR 0 0 8 4
WBL 1.5 69 313
WBT 0.5 3200 2 .022* 6 .100*
WBR 1 1600 98 .061 669 .418
Right Turn Adjustment WBR .202*
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .555 .765
A-113
16. Jamboree & Coast Hwy
Existing
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
20 .013
37 .023
NBT
2 3200
374
.146*
265
.113*
NBR
0 0
94 96
SBL
1 1600
137
.086*
176
.110*
SBT
2 3200
206
.064
431
.135
SBR
f
758
1453
EBL
3 4800
1228
.256*
778
.162*
EBT
4 6400
1808
.285
1635
.259
EBR
0 0
13 25
WBL
2 3200
94 .029
202
.063
WBT
4 6400
1069
.167*
1952
.305*
WBR
f
89 169
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
20 .013
38 .024
NBT
2 3200
375
.147*
266
.114*
NBR
0 0
94 98
SBL
1 1600
147
.092*
189
.118*
SBT
2 3200
207
.065
434
.136
SBR
f
880
1571
EBL
3 4800
1314
.274*
887
.185*
EBT
4 6400
1900
.299
1719
.273
EBR
0 0
14 25
WBL
2 3200
94 .029
205
.064
WBT
4 6400
1134
.177*
2068
.323*
WBR
f
89 173
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .655 .690 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .690 .740 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
20 .013
38 .024
NBT
2 3200
375
.147*
266
.114*
NBR
0 0
94 98
SBL
1 1600
147
.092*
189
.118*
SBT
2 3200
207
.065
434
.136
SBR
f
897
1576
EBL
3 4800
1315
.274*
893
.186*
EBT
4 6400
1929
.304
1726
.274
EBR
0 0
14 25
WBL
2 3200
94 .029
205
.064
WBT
4 6400
1149
.180*
2099
.328*
WBR
f
89 173
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
20 .013
38 .024
NBT
2 3200
375
.147*
266
.114*
NBR
0 0
94 98
SBL
1 1600
197
.123*
358
.224*
SBT
2 3200
207
.065
434
.136
SBR
f
924
1596
EBL
3 4800
1327
.276*
931
.194*
EBT
4 6400
2007
.316
2065
.327
EBR
0 0
14 25
WBL
2 3200
94 .029
205
.064
WBT
4 6400
1440
.225*
2281
.356*
WBR
f
254
277
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .693 .746 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .771 888
A-114
16. Jamboree & Coast Hwy
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative + Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
20 .013
38 .024
NBT
2 3200
375
.147*
266
.114*
NBR
0 0
94 98
SBL
1 1600
197
.123*
358
.224*
SBT
2 3200
207
.065
434
.136
SBR
f
941
1601
EBL
3 4800
1328
.277*
937
.195*
EBT
4 6400
2036
.320
2072
.328
EBR
0 0
14 25
WBL
2 3200
94 .029
205
.064
WBT
4 6400
1455
.227*
2312
.361*
WBR
f
254
277
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .774 .894
A-115
17. MacArthur & Bison
Existing
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 2 3200 197 .062 192 .060*
NBT 4 6400 2466 .385* 2454 .383
NBR f 154 183
SBL 2 3200 76 .024* 224 .070
SBT 4 6400 2018 .315 2707 .423*
SBR 1 1600 263 .164 321 .201
EBL 2 3200 224 .070 192 .060
EBT 2 3200 218 .068* 191 .060*
EBR f 162 214
WBL 2 3200 383 .120* 363 .113*
WBT 2 3200 217 .068 266 .083
WBR 1 1600 94 .059 141 .088
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
198
.062
196
.061*
NBT
4 6400
2542
.397*
2542
.397
NBR
f
154
184
SBL
2 3200
76 .024*
224
.070
SBT
4 6400
2081
.325
2802
.438*
SBR
1 1600
266
.166
335
.209
EBL
2 3200
229
.072
198
.062
EBT
2 3200
219
.068*
191
.060*
EBR
f
163
216
WBL
2 3200
384
.120*
363
.113*
WBT
2 3200
218
.068
267
.083
WBR
1 1600
95 .059
141
.088
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .597 .656 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .609 .672 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
198
.062
196
.061*
NBT
4 6400
2567
.401*
2605
.407
NBR
f
162
205
SBL
2 3200
76 .024*
224
.070
SBT
4 6400
2142
.335
2823
.441*
SBR
1 1600
266
.166
335
.209
EBL
2 3200
229
.072
198
.062
EBT
2 3200
225
.070*
194
.061*
EBR
f
163
216
WBL
2 3200
404
.126*
369
.115*
WBT
2 3200
219
.068
272
.085
WBR
1 1600
95 .059
141
.088
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
198
.062
196
.061*
NBT
4 6400
2693
.421*
2635
.412
NBR
f
154
184
SBL
2 3200
80 .025*
239
.075
SBT
4 6400
2126
.332
2957
.462*
SBR
1 1600
266
.166
335
.209
EBL
2 3200
229
.072
198
.062
EBT
2 3200
230
.072*
228
.071*
EBR
f
163
216
WBL
2 3200
384
.120*
363
.113*
WBT
2 3200
255
.080
290
.091
WBR
1 1600
110
.069
150
.094
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .621 .678 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .638 707
A-116
17. MacArthur & Bison
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative + Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
198
.062
196
.061*
NBT
4 6400
2718
.425*
2698
.422
NBR
f
162
205
SBL
2 3200
80 .025*
239
.075
SBT
4 6400
2187
.342
2978
.465*
SBR
1 1600
266
.166
335
.209
EBL
2 3200
229
. M
198
.062
EBT
2 3200
236
.074*
231
.072*
EBR
f
163
216
WBL
2 3200
404
.126*
369
.115*
WBT
2 3200
256
.080
295
.092
WBR
1 1600
110
.069
150
.094
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .650 .713
A-117
18. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon
Existing
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
107
.033
61 .019
NBT
4 6400
1918
.300*
2348
.367*
NBR
f
83 468
SBL
2 3200
529
.165*
774
.242*
SBT
4 6400
1923
.300
2328
.364
SBR
f
13 49
EBL
2 3200
39 .012
27 .008
EBT
2 3200
266
.083*
299
.093*
EBR
1 1600
121
.076
61 .038
WBL
2 3200
552
.173*
232
.073*
WBT
2 3200
323
.101
280
.088
WBR
f
900
480
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
108
.034
63 .020
NBT
4 6400
1979
.309*
2436
.381*
NBR
f
87 481
SBL
2 3200
529
.165*
775
.242*
SBT
4 6400
1992
.311
2420
.378
SBR
f
13 50
EBL
2 3200
40 .013
27 .008
EBT
2 3200
267
.083*
300
.094*
EBR
1 1600
123
.077
62 .039
WBL
2 3200
561
.175*
243
.076*
WBT
2 3200
323
.101
281
.088
WBR
f
901
480
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .721 .775 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .732 .793 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
108
.034
63 .020
NBT
4 6400
2013
.315*
2520
.394*
NBR
f
92 483
SBL
2 3200
529
.165*
775
.242*
SBT
4 6400
2072
.324
2448
.383
SBR
f
13 50
EBL
2 3200
40 .013
27 .008
EBT
2 3200
267
.083*
300
.094*
EBR
1 1600
123
.077
62 .039
WBL
2 3200
561
.175*
245
.077*
WBT
2 3200
323
.101
281
.088
WBR
f
901
480
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
108
.034
63 .020
NBT
4 6400
2090
.327*
2506
.392*
NBR
f
159
556
SBL
2 3200
540
.169*
815
.255*
SBT
4 6400
2026
.317
2535
.396
SBR
f
13 50
EBL
2 3200
40 .013
27 .008
EBT
2 3200
282
.088*
354
.111*
EBR
1 1600
123
.077
62 .039
WBL
2 3200
625
.195*
318
.099*
WBT
2 3200
441
.138
352
.110
WBR
f
941
503
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .738 .807 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .779 857
A-118
18. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative + Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
108
.034
63 .020
NBT
4 6400
2124
.332*
2590
.405*
NBR
f
164
558
SBL
2 3200
540
.169*
815
.255*
SBT
4 6400
2106
.329
2563
.400
SBR
f
13 50
EBL
2 3200
40 .013
27 .008
EBT
2 3200
282
.088*
354
.111*
EBR
1 1600
123
.077
62 .039
WBL
2 3200
625
.195*
320
.100*
WBT
2 3200
441
.138
352
.110
WBR
f
941
503
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .784 .871
A-119
19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills
Existing
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
133
.042*
111
.035
NBT
3 4800
1327
.276
1879
.391*
NBR
1 1600
192
.120
26 .016
SBL
2 3200
272
.085
498
.156*
SBT
3 4800
1761
.367*
1882
.392
SBR
f
487
248
EBL
2 3200
449
.140*
551
.172*
EBT
3 4800
105
.030
348
.106
EBR
0 0
37 163
WBL
1 1600
9 .006
47 .029
WBT
2 3200
322
.101*
306
.096*
WBR
f
419
525
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
143
.045*
122
.038
NBT
3 4800
1376
.287
1965
.409*
NBR
1 1600
192
.120
26 .016
SBL
2 3200
275
.086
503
.157*
SBT
3 4800
1843
.384*
1954
.407
SBR
f
494
263
EBL
2 3200
453
.142*
579
.181*
EBT
3 4800
108
.030
350
.107
EBR
0 0
37 163
WBL
1 1600
9 .006
47 .029
WBT
2 3200
329
.103*
313
.098*
WBR
f
419
525
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .650 .815 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .674 .845 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
143
.045*
122
.038
NBT
3 4800
1376
.287
1965
.409*
NBR
1 1600
192
.120
26 .016
SBL
2 3200
275
.086
503
.157*
SBT
3 4800
1843
.384*
1954
.407
SBR
f
576
293
EBL
2 3200
493
.154*
666
.208*
EBT
3 4800
108
.030
350
.107
EBR
0 0
37 163
WBL
1 1600
9 .006
47 .029
WBT
2 3200
329
.103*
313
.098*
WBR
f
419
525
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
143
.045*
122
.038
NBT
3 4800
1492
.311
2046
.426*
NBR
1 1600
221
.138
128
.080
SBL
2 3200
291
.091
549
.172*
SBT
3 4800
1897
.395*
2068
.431
SBR
f
523
293
EBL
2 3200
481
.150*
611
.191*
EBT
3 4800
126
.034
418
.121
EBR
0 0
37 163
WBL
1 1600
97 .061
115
.072
WBT
2 3200
392
.123*
353
.110*
WBR
f
459
556
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .686 .872 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .713 899
A-120
19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative + Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
143
.045*
122
.038
NBT
3 4800
1492
.311
2046
.426*
NBR
1 1600
221
.138
128
.080
SBL
2 3200
291
.091
549
.172*
SBT
3 4800
1897
.395*
2068
.431
SBR
f
605
323
EBL
2 3200
521
.163*
698
.218*
EBT
3 4800
126
.034
418
.121
EBR
0 0
37 163
WBL
1 1600
97 .061
115
.072
WBT
2 3200
392
.123*
353
.110*
WBR
f
459
556
Exist
+ Growth + Appr +
Cumul +
Project
w/Mitigation
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
143
.045*
122
.038
NBT
3 4800
1492
.311
2046
.426*
NBR
1 1600
221
.138
128
.080
SBL
2 3200
291
.091
549
.172*
SBT
3 4800
1897
.395*
2068
.431
SBR
f
605
323
EBL
3 4800
521
.109*
698
.145*
EBT
3 4800
126
.034
418
.121
EBR
0 0
37 163
WBL
1 1600
97 .061
115
.072
WBT
2 3200
392
.123*
353
.110*
WBR
f
459
556
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .726 .926 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .672 .853 A-121
20. MacArthur & San Miguel
Existing
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
87 .027
98 .031*
NBT
3 4800
1514
.315*
1000
.208
NBR
1 1600
282
.176
278
.174
SBL
2 3200
7 .002*
9 .003
SBT
3 4800
1209
.252
1500
.313*
SBR
1 1600
549
.343
508
.318
EBL
2 3200
86 .027
909
.284*
EBT
2 3200
73 .033*
472
.196
EBR
0 0
31 154
WBL
2 3200
224
.070*
217
.068
WBT
2 3200
164
.063
232
.082*
WBR
0 0
38 29
Right
Turn Adjustment
SBR
.023*
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
87 .027
100
.031*
NBT
3 4800
1567
.326*
1039
.216
NBR
1 1600
282
.176
278
.174
SBL
2 3200
9 .003*
13 .004
SBT
3 4800
1247
.260
1549
.323*
SBR
1 1600
551
.344
511
.319
EBL
2 3200
88 .028
916
.286*
EBT
2 3200
75 .033*
484
.203
EBR
0 0
31 164
WBL
2 3200
224
.070*
217
.068
WBT
2 3200
165
.063
244
.085*
WBR
0 0
38 29
Right
Turn Adjustment
SBR
.012*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .443 .710 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .444 .725 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
88 .028
104
.033*
NBT
3 4800
1567
.326*
1039
.216
NBR
1 1600
282
.176
278
.174
SBL
2 3200
9 .003*
13 .004
SBT
3 4800
1247
.260
1549
.323*
SBR
1 1600
551
.344
511
.319
EBL
2 3200
88 .028
916
.286*
EBT
2 3200
75 .037*
490
.205
EBR
0 0
42 167
WBL
2 3200
224
.070*
217
.068
WBT
2 3200
172
.066
237
.083*
WBR
0 0
38 29
Right
Turn Adjustment
SBR
.012*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .448 .725
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
124
.039
122
.038*
NBT
3 4800
1712
.357*
1222
.255
NBR
1 1600
282
.176
278
.174
SBL
2 3200
9 .003*
13 .004
SBT
3 4800
1389
.289
1731
.361*
SBR
1 1600
551
.344
511
.319
EBL
2 3200
88 .028
916
.286*
EBT
2 3200
75 .037*
484
.214
EBR
0 0
43 201
WBL
2 3200
224
.070*
217
.068
WBT
2 3200
165
.063
244
.085*
WBR
0 0
38 29
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .467 .770
A-122
20. MacArthur & San Miguel
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative + Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
125
.039
126
.039*
NBT
3 4800
1712
.357*
1222
.255
NBR
1 1600
282
.176
278
.174
SBL
2 3200
9 .003*
13 .004
SBT
3 4800
1389
.289
1731
.361*
SBR
1 1600
551
.344
511
.319
EBL
2 3200
88 .028
916
.286*
EBT
2 3200
75 .040*
490
.217
EBR
0 0
54 204
WBL
2 3200
224
.070*
217
.068
WBT
2 3200
172
.066
237
.083*
WBR
0 0
38 29
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .470 .769
A-123
21. MacArthur & Coast Hwy
Existing
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
0 0
NBT
0 0
0 0
NBR
0 0
0 0
SBL
2 3200
571
.178*
829
.259*
SBT
0 0
0 0
SBR
f
337
1003
EBL
2 3200
954
.298*
515
.161*
EBT
3 4800
888
.185
1349
.281
EBR
0 0
0 0
WBL
0 0
0 0
WBT
3 4800
1099
.229*
1058
.220*
WBR
f
887
871
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
0 0
NBT
0 0
0 0
NBR
0 0
0 0
SBL
2 3200
590
.184*
858
.268*
SBT
0 0
0 0
SBR
f
348
1033
EBL
2 3200
988
.309*
535
.167*
EBT
3 4800
921
.192
1397
.291
EBR
0 0
0 0
WBL
0 0
0 0
WBT
3 4800
1141
.238*
1096
.228*
WBR
f
917
900
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .705 .640 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .731 .663 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
0 0
NBT
0 0
0 0
NBR
0 0
0 0
SBL
2 3200
601
.188*
861
.269*
SBT
0 0
0 0
SBR
f
348
1033
EBL
2 3200
988
.309*
535
.167*
EBT
3 4800
923
.192
1412
.294
EBR
0 0
0 0
WBL
0 0
0 0
WBT
3 4800
1159
.241*
1094
.228*
WBR
f
918
904
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
0 0
NBT
0 0
0 0
NBR
0 0
0 0
SBL
2 3200
640
.200*
992
.310*
SBT
0 0
0 0
SBR
f
450
1119
EBL
2 3200
1036
.324*
654
.204*
EBT
3 4800
1029
.214
1791
.373
EBR
0 0
0 0
WBL
0 0
0 0
WBT
3 4800
1508
.314*
1327
.276*
WBR
f
1052
986
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .738 .664 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .838 790
A-124
21. MacArthur & Coast Hwy
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative + Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
0 0
NBT
0 0
0 0
NBR
0 0
0 0
SBL
2 3200
651
.203*
995
.311*
SBT
0 0
0 0
SBR
f
450
1119
EBL
2 3200
1036
.324*
654
.204*
EBT
3 4800
1031
.215
1806
.376
EBR
0 0
0 0
WBL
0 0
0 0
WBT
3 4800
1526
.318*
1325
.276*
WBR
f
1053
990
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .845 .791
A-125
22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills
Existing
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
60 .019*
413
.129*
NBT
1 1600
2 .008
12 .035
NBR
0 0
10 44
SBL
1 1600
21 .013
22 .014
SBT
2 3200
11 .007*
5 .003*
SBR
0 0
23 .014
45 .028
EBL
1 1600
30 .019
55 .034*
EBT
3 4800
494
.150*
324
.101
EBR
0 0
224
199
.124
WBL
1 1600
181
.113*
54 .034
WBT
3 4800
286
.065
495
.111*
WBR
0 0
28 37
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
61 .019*
413
.129*
NBT
1 1600
2 .008
12 .035
NBR
0 0
11 44
SBL
1 1600
21 .013
23 .014
SBT
2 3200
12 .008*
5 .003*
SBR
0 0
23 .014
45 .028
EBL
1 1600
30 .019
55 .034*
EBT
3 4800
495
.150*
324
.101
EBR
0 0
224
200
.125
WBL
1 1600
182
.114*
54 .034
WBT
3 4800
286
.065
496
.111*
WBR
0 0
28 37
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .289 .277 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .291 .277 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
96 .030*
427
.133*
NBT
1 1600
2 .008
12 .035
NBR
0 0
11 44
SBL
1 1600
21 .013
23 .014
SBT
2 3200
12 .008*
5 .003*
SBR
0 0
23 .014
45 .028
EBL
1 1600
30 .019
55 .034*
EBT
3 4800
544
.161*
334
.104
EBR
0 0
229
222
.139
WBL
1 1600
182
.114*
54 .034
WBT
3 4800
293
.067
544
.121*
WBR
0 0
28 37
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
61 .019*
413
.129*
NBT
1 1600
2 .008
12 .035
NBR
0 0
11 44
SBL
1 1600
31 .019
32 .020
SBT
2 3200
12 .008*
5 .003*
SBR
0 0
23 .014
45 .028
EBL
1 1600
30 .019
55 .034*
EBT
3 4800
504
.152*
362
.113
EBR
0 0
224
200
.125
WBL
1 1600
182
.114*
54 .034
WBT
3 4800
320
.074
516
.117*
WBR
0 0
35 47
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .313 .291 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .293 283
A-126
22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
+ Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2 3200
96 .030*
427
.133*
NBT
1 1600
2 .008
12 .035
NBR
0 0
11 44
SBL
1 1600
31 .019
32 .020
SBT
2 3200
12 .008*
5 .003*
SBR
0 0
23 .014
45 .028
EBL
1 1600
30 .019
55 .034*
EBT
3 4800
553
.163*
372
.116
EBR
0 0
229
222
.139
WBL
1 1600
182
.114*
54 .034
WBT
3 4800
327
.V5
564
.M*
WBR
0 0
35 47
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .315 .297
A-127
23. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills
Existing
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
35 .022
167
.104*
NBT
1 1600
6 .004*
28 .018
NBR
1 1600
67 .042
372
.233
SBL
1 1600
66 .041*
67 .042
SBT
1 1600
13 .008
7 .004*
SBR
1 1600
36 .023
24 .015
EBL
1 1600
33 .021
36 .023
EBT
3 4800
253
.079*
597
.144*
EBR
0 0
142
.089
96 WBL
2 3200
531
.166*
250
.078*
WBT
3 4800
445
.104
244
.069
WBR
0 0
56 86
Right
Turn Adjustment
NBR
.108*
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
46 .029
175
.109*
NBT
1 1600
6 .004*
28 .018
NBR
1 1600
70 .044
398
.249
SBL
1 1600
66 .041*
67 .042
SBT
1 1600
13 .008
7 .004*
SBR
1 1600
36 .023
24 .015
EBL
1 1600
34 .021
36 .023
EBT
3 4800
258
.081*
602
.148*
EBR
0 0
149
.093
106
WBL
2 3200
538
.168*
274
.086*
WBT
3 4800
463
.108
269
.074
WBR
0 0
56 86
Right
Turn Adjustment
NBR
.113*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .290 .438 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .294 .460 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
53 .033
223
.139*
NBT
1 1600
6 .004*
28 .018
NBR
1 1600
99 .062
409
.256
SBL
1 1600
66 .041*
67 .042
SBT
1 1600
13 .008
7 .004*
SBR
1 1600
36 .023
24 .015
EBL
1 1600
34 .021
36 .023
EBT
3 4800
258
.081*
602
.150*
EBR
0 0
198
.124
116
WBL
2 3200
542
.169*
288
.090*
WBT
3 4800
463
.108
269
.074
WBR
0 0
56 86
Right
Turn Adjustment
EBR
.015*
NBR
.087*
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
46 .029
175
.109*
NBT
1 1600
6 .004*
28 .018
NBR
1 1600
81 .051
440
.275
SBL
1 1600
81 .051*
79 .049
SBT
1 1600
13 .008
7 .004*
SBR
1 1600
36 .023
24 .015
EBL
1 1600
34 .021
36 .023
EBT
3 4800
277
.087*
649
.157*
EBR
0 0
149
.093
106
WBL
2 3200
577
.180*
299
.093*
WBT
3 4800
504
.119
299
.083
WBR
0 0
67 100
Right
Turn Adjustment
NBR
.141*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .310 .470 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .322 504
A-128
23. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
+ Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
53 .033
223
.139*
NBT
1 1600
6 .004*
28 .018
NBR
1 1600
110
.069
451
.282
SBL
1 1600
81 .051*
79 .049
SBT
1 1600
13 .008
7 .004*
SBR
1 1600
36 .023
24 .015
EBL
1 1600
34 .021
36 .023
EBT
3 4800
277
.087*
649
.159*
EBR
0 0
198
.124
116
WBL
2 3200
581
.182*
313
.098*
WBT
3 4800
504
.119
299
.083
WBR
0 0
67 100
Right
Turn Adjustment
EBR
.002*
NBR
.114*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .326 .514
A-129
24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills
Existing
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
2 .001
11 .007
NBT
2 3200
229
.100*
499
.222*
NBR
0 0
91 210
SBL
1 1600
67 .042*
85 .053*
SBT
2 3200
316
.131
241
.106
SBR
0 0
102
97 EBL
2 3200
214
.067
514
.161*
EBT
3 4800
492
.107*
431
.093
EBR
0 0
23 14
WBL
1 1600
213
.133*
264
.165
WBT
3 4800
663
.151
784
.177*
WBR
0 0
60 67
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
2 .001
11 AV
NBT
2 3200
229
.100*
505
.226*
NBR
0 0
91 218
SBL
1 1600
67 .042*
85 .053*
SBT
2 3200
316
.131
249
.108
SBR
0 0
102
97 EBL
2 3200
214
.067
514
.161*
EBT
3 4800
493
.108*
431
.093
EBR
0 0
23 14
WBL
1 1600
215
.134*
272
.170
WBT
3 4800
663
.151
784
.177*
WBR
0 0
60 67
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .382 .613 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .384 .617 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
2 .001
11 .007
NBT
2 3200
229
.100*
514
.228*
NBR
0 0
90 215
SBL
1 1600
67 .042*
85 .053*
SBT
2 3200
325
.133
248
.108
SBR
0 0
102
97 EBL
2 3200
214
.067
514
.161*
EBT
3 4800
493
.108*
431
.093
EBR
0 0
23 14
WBL
1 1600
213
.133*
266
.166
WBT
3 4800
663
.151
784
.177*
WBR
0 0
60 67
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
2 .001
11 .007
NBT
2 3200
229
.100*
505
.226*
NBR
0 0
91 218
SBL
1 1600
67 .042*
85 .053*
SBT
2 3200
316
.131
249
.108
SBR
0 0
102
97 EBL
2 3200
214
.067*
514
.161*
EBT
3 4800
556
.121
647
.138
EBR
0 0
23 14
WBL
1 1600
215
.134
272
.170
WBT
3 4800
854
.190*
921
.206*
WBR
0 0
60 67
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .383 .619 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .399 646
A-130
24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
+ Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
2 .001
11 .007
NBT
2 3200
229
.100*
514
.228*
NBR
0 0
90 215
SBL
1 1600
67 .042*
85 .053*
SBT
2 3200
325
.133
248
.108
SBR
0 0
102
97 EBL
2 3200
214
.067*
514
.161*
EBT
3 4800
556
.121
647
.138
EBR
0 0
23 14
WBL
1 1600
213
.133
266
.166
WBT
3 4800
854
.190*
921
.206*
WBR
0 0
60 67
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .399 .648
A-131
25. Avocado & San Miguel
Existing
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
123
.077
176
.110*
NBT
1 1600
148
.093*
60 .038
NBR
1 1600
121
.076
655
.409
SBL
1 1600
51 .032*
222
.139
SBT
1 1600
51 .032
129
.081*
SBR
1 1600
16 .010
21 .013
EBL
1 1600
7 .004
182
.114*
EBT
2 3200
148
.063*
444
.169
EBR
0 0
53 98
WBL
1 1600
467
.292*
174
.109
WBT
2 3200
435
.194
492
.178*
WBR
0 0
187
76 Right
Turn Adjustment
NBR
.265*
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
123
.077
176
.110*
NBT
1 1600
148
.093*
60 .038
NBR
1 1600
121
.076
655
.409
SBL
1 1600
51 .032*
222
.139
SBT
1 1600
51 .032
129
.081*
SBR
1 1600
16 .010
21 .013
EBL
1 1600
7 .004
182
.114*
EBT
2 3200
148
.063*
466
.176
EBR
0 0
53 98
WBL
1 1600
467
.292*
174
.109
WBT
2 3200
435
.194
508
.183*
WBR
0 0
187
76 Right
Turn Adjustment
NBR
.266*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .480 .748 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .480 .754 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
123
.077
176
.110*
NBT
1 1600
197
.123*
70 .044
NBR
1 1600
121
.076
655
.409
SBL
1 1600
52 .033*
232
.145
SBT
1 1600
58 .036
177
.111*
SBR
1 1600
16 .010
21 .013
EBL
1 1600
7 .004
182
.114*
EBT
2 3200
158
.066*
467
.177
EBR
0 0
53 98
WBL
1 1600
467
.292*
174
.109
WBT
2 3200
434
.197
502
.181*
WBR
0 0
197
78 Right
Turn Adjustment
NBR
.244*
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
123
.077
176
.110*
NBT
1 1600
148
.093*
60 .038
NBR
1 1600
121
.076
655
.409
SBL
1 1600
51 .032*
222
.139
SBT
1 1600
51 .032
129
.081*
SBR
1 1600
16 .010
21 .013
EBL
1 1600
7 .004
182
.114*
EBT
2 3200
160
.067*
503
.188
EBR
0 0
53 98
WBL
1 1600
467
.292*
174
.109
WBT
2 3200
472
.206
530
.189*
WBR
0 0
187
76 Right
Turn Adjustment
NBR
.271*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .514 .760 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .484 765
A-132
25. Avocado & San Miguel
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
+ Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1600
123
.077
176
.110*
NBT
1 1600
197
.123*
70 .044
NBR
1 1600
121
.076
655
.409
SBL
1 1600
52 .033*
232
.145
SBT
1 1600
58 .036
177
.111*
SBR
1 1600
16 .010
21 .013
EBL
1 1600
7 .004
182
.114*
EBT
2 3200
170
.070*
504
.188
EBR
0 0
53 98
WBL
1 1600
467
.292*
174
.109
WBT
2 3200
471
.209
524
.188*
WBR
0 0
197
78 Right
Turn Adjustment
NBR
.247*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .518 .770
A-133
26. Superior/Balboa & Coast Hwy
Existing
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1.5 202 261
NBT 1.5 4800 327 .129* 209 .111*
NBR 0 89 65
SBL 1.5 170 163
SBT 1.5 4800 122 .061* 237 .083*
SBR 2 3200 187 .058 738 .231
EBL 2 3200 988 .309 255 .080*
EBT 3 4800 2242 .467* 1169 .244
EBR 1 1600 238 .149 225 .141
WBL 1 1600 61 .038* 147 .092
WBT 4 6400 582 .121 2165 .359*
WBR 0 0 206 .129 134
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .088*
Note: Assumes N/S Split Phasing
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1.5 203 261
NBT 1.5 4800 357 .135* 218 .114*
NBR 0 89 66
SBL 1.5 170 163
SBT 1.5 4800 128 .062* 269 .090*
SBR 2 3200 207 .065 868 .271
EBL 2 3200 1111 .347 293 .092*
EBT 3 4800 2377 .495* 1248 .260
EBR 1 1600 238 .149 228 .143
WBL 1 1600 61 .038* 147 .092
WBT 4 6400 633 .131 2314 .383*
WBR 0 0 206 134
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .112*
Note: Assumes N/S Split Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .695 .721 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .730 .791 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1.5 203 261
NBT 1.5 4800 357 .135* 218 .114*
NBR 0 89 66
SBL 1.5 170 163
SBT 1.5 4800 128 .062* 269 .090*
SBR 2 3200 207 .065 868 .271
EBL 2 3200 1111 .347 293 .092*
EBT 3 4800 2388 .498* 1256 .262
EBR 1 1600 238 .149 228 .143
WBL 1 1600 61 .038* 147 .092
WBT 4 6400 651 .134 2329 .385*
WBR 0 0 206 134
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .112*
Note: Assumes N/S Split Phasing
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1.5 203 261
NBT 1.5 4800 371 .138* 233 .117*
NBR 0 89 66
SBL 1.5 193 242
SBT 1.5 4800 134 .068* 297 .112*
SBR 2 3200 230 .072 982 .307
EBL 2 3200 1167 .365 354 .111*
EBT 3 4800 2423 .505* 1406 .293
EBR 1 1600 238 .149 228 .143
WBL 1 1600 61 .038* 147 .092
WBT 4 6400 788 .164 2409 .405*
WBR 0 0 282 .176 181
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .112*
Note: Assumes N/S Split Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .733 .793 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .749 857
A-134
26. Superior/Balboa & Coast Hwy
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1.5 203 261
NBT 1.5 4800 371 .138* 233 .117*
NBR 0 89 66
SBL 1.5 193 242
SBT 1.5 4800 134 .068* 297 .112*
SBR 2 3200 230 .072 982 .307
EBL 2 3200 1167 .365 354 .111*
EBT 3 4800 2434 .507* 1414 .295
EBR 1 1600 238 .149 228 .143
WBL 1 1600 61 .038* 147 .092
WBT 4 6400 806 .168 2424 .407*
WBR 0 0 282 .176 181
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .112*
Note: Assumes N/S Split Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .751 .859
A-135
27. Newport & Coast Hwy
Existing
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0
NBR 0 0 0 0
SBL 2 3200 384 .120* 617 .193*
SBT 0 0 0 0
SBR 1 1600 269 .168 470 .294
EBL 0 0 0 0
EBT 2 3200 2075 .648* 1267 .396*
EBR f 487 267
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 3 4800 979 .204 1848 .385
WBR f 370 563
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .093*
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0
NBR 0 0 0 0
SBL 2 3200 409 .128* 728 .228*
SBT 0 0 0 0
SBR 1 1600 313 .196 510 .319
EBL 0 0 0 0
EBT 2 3200 2140 .669* 1375 .430*
EBR f 506 282
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 3 4800 1035 .216 1917 .399
WBR f 381 580
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .068*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .768 .682 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .797 .726 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0
NBR 0 0 0 0
SBL 2 3200 419 .131* 732 .229*
SBT 0 0 0 0
SBR 1 1600 313 .196 510 .319
EBL 0 0 0 0
EBT 2 3200 2151 .672* 1383 .432*
EBR f 506 282
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 3 4800 1053 .219 1932 .403
WBR f 381 580
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .068*
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0
NBR 0 0 0 0
SBL 2 3200 426 .133* 813 .254*
SBT 0 0 0 0
SBR 1 1600 313 .196 510 .319
EBL 0 0 0 0
EBT 2 3200 2207 .690* 1613 .504*
EBR f 506 282
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 3 4800 1266 .264 2058 .429
WBR f 385 584
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .009*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .803 .729 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .823 767
A-136
27. Newport & Coast Hwy
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0
NBR 0 0 0 0
SBL 2 3200 436 .136* 817 .255*
SBT 0 0 0 0
SBR 1 1600 313 .196 510 .319
EBL 0 0 0 0
EBT 2 3200 2218 .693* 1621 .507*
EBR f 506 282
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 3 4800 1284 .268 2073 .432
WBR f 385 584
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .008*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .829 .770
A-137
28. Riverside & Coast Hwy
Existing
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 2 1.0011* 26
NBT 1 1600 6 .005 7 .029*
NBR 0 0 0 14
SBL 0 0 85 84 1.0521*
SBT 1 1600 15 .063* 7 .057
SBR 1 1600 301 .188 433 .271
EBL 1 1600 280 .175 268 .168*
EBT 2 3200 2094 .660* 1528 .484
EBR 0 0 18 21
WBL 1 1600 9 .006* 28 .018
WBT 3 4800 1232 .257 2430 .506*
WBR 1 1600 68 .043 65 .041
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .038*
Note: Assumes Right -Turn Overlap for SBR
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 2 1.0011* 26
NBT 1 1600 6 .005 7 .029*
NBR 0 0 0 14
SBL 0 0 87 86 1.0541*
SBT 1 1600 15 .064* 7 .058
SBR 1 1600 301 .188 433 .271
EBL 1 1600 280 .175 268 .168*
EBT 2 3200 2272 .716* 1770 .560
EBR 0 0 18 21
WBL 1 1600 9 .006* 28 .018
WBT 3 4800 1410 .294 2658 .554*
WBR 1 1600 69 .043 68 .043
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .036*
Note: Assumes Right -Turn Overlap for SBR
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .730 .793 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .787 .841 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 2 1.0011* 26
NBT 1 1600 6 .005 7 .029*
NBR 0 0 0 14
SBL 0 0 87 86 1.0541*
SBT 1 1600 15 .064* 7 .058
SBR 1 1600 301 .188 433 .271
EBL 1 1600 280 .175 268 .168*
EBT 2 3200 2294 .723* 1783 .564
EBR 0 0 18 21
WBL 1 1600 9 .006* 28 .018
WBT 3 4800 1436 .299 2685 .559*
WBR 1 1600 69 .043 68 .043
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .036*
Note: Assumes Right -Turn Overlap for SBR
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
2 1.0011*
26 NBT
1 1600
6 .005
7 .029*
NBR
0 0
0 14
SBL
0 0
92 90
1.0561*
SBT
1 1600
15 .067*
7 .061
SBR
1 1600
301
.188
433
.271
EBL
1 1600
280
. M
268
.168*
EBT
2 3200
2361
.743*
2097
.662
EBR
0 0
18 21
WBL 1 1600 9 .006* 28 .018
WBT 3 4800 1687 .351 2849 .594*
WBR 1 1600 73 .046 72 .045
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .034*
Note: Assumes Right -Turn Overlap for SBR
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .794 .846 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .817 881
A-138
28. Riverside & Coast Hwy
Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 2 1.0011* 26
NBT 1 1600 6 .005 7 .029*
NBR 0 0 0 14
SBL 0 0 92 90 1.0561*
SBT 1 1600 15 .067* 7 .061
SBR 1 1600 301 .188 433 .271
EBL 1 1600 280 .175 268 .168*
EBT 2 3200 2383 .750* 2110 .666
EBR 0 0 18 21
WBL 1 1600 9 .006* 28 .018
WBT 3 4800 1713 .357 2876 .599*
WBR 1 1600 73 .046 72 .045
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .034*
Note: Assumes Right -Turn Overlap for SBR
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .824 .886
A-139
29. Tustin & Coast Hwy
Existing
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
0 1 1.0011*
NBT
1 1600
0 .000
0 .004
NBR
0 0
0 6
SBL
0 0
36 45
SBT
1 1600
0 .033*
0 .053*
SBR
0 0
16 40
EBL
1 1600
27 .017
32 .020*
EBT
2 3200
2241
.700*
1548
.486
EBR
0 0
0 7
WBL
1 1600
1 .001*
0 .000
WBT
3 4800
1236
.258
2462
.513*
WBR
1 1600
39 .024
47 .029
Existing + Regional Growth + Approved
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
0 1
1.0011*
NBT
1 1600
0 .000
0 .004
NBR
0 0
0 6
SBL
0 0
36 45
SBT
1 1600
0 .033*
0 .053*
SBR
0 0
16 40
EBL
1 1600
27 .017
32 .020*
EBT
2 3200
2417
.755*
1701
.534
EBR
0 0
0 7
WBL
1 1600
1 .001*
0 .000
WBT
3 4800
1340
.279
2663
.555*
WBR
1 1600
39 .024
47 .029
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .734 .587 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .789 .629 Existing + Growth + Approved +
Project
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
0 1 1.0011*
NBT
1 1600
0 .000
0 .004
NBR
0 0
0 6
SBL
0 0
36 45
SBT
1 1600
0 .033*
0 .053*
SBR
0 0
16 40
EBL
1 1600
27 .017
32 .020*
EBT
2 3200
2439
.762*
1714
.538
EBR
0 0
0 7
WBL
1 1600
1 .001*
0 .000
WBT
3 4800
1366
.285
2690
.560*
WBR
1 1600
39 .024
47 .029
Existing + Growth + Approved +
Cumulative
AM PK
HOUR