The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTraffic Study0 0 0 V1/ILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS • PLANNERS 3dx1 ume steer, SWte'1'Lb .Riverside, CA 92501 (714) 274-0566 e FAX (71C) 274-9220 June 15, 1992 Mr. Barry Burnell Principal Turrini & Brink 3242 Halladay Street, Suite 100 Santa Ana, California 92705 Re: Campos Verdes S.P. No. 1/EIR On-site Circulation Modifications Dear Barry, Wilbur Smith Associates (WSA) has carefully reviewed the recently proposed modifications O to the Campos Verdes on-site circulation plan (attached Exhibit A). The on-site circulation modifications essentially involve the following: 1.) The principal on-site circulation loop road (referred to as Campos Verdes Loop in the completed traffic study) has been re-configured to include three 90 degree bends; 2.) The connector street (referred to as North "C"' Street in the traffic study) which provided minor access between Planning Area 5 and Roripaugh Road (via Starling Street) has been eliminated; and 3.) A right in and right out only access driveway is proposed on Margarita Road for the commercial Office use in Planning Area 2. It is our understanding that these modifications have been brought about as a result of a series of meetings between Turrini & Brink, Mesa Homes, and City of Temecula staff. The principal issue of concern which has been addressed by modifications 1 and 2, was the potential for non-site traffic to use the Campos Verdes Loop and North "C" street as "short- cuts" around some of the busy intersection located along Margarita Road. ~l .LBANY, NY • ALLIANCE. OH • CAIRO. EGYPT • CHARLESTON. SC COLUMBIA, SC • COLUMBUS, OH a Des MOINES. IA e FALLS CHG3:-~- ONG KONG • HOUSTON, TX • KNOXVILLE, TN LEXINGTON. KV LONDON, ENGLAND LOS ANGELES. CA MIAMI, FL NEcF~. ~~ - ;EW HAVEN, CT e OAKLAND, CA ORLANDO, FL PiiiSBUIiGH. PA PORTSMOUTH. NH PROVIDENCE. RI RAL6~ - ICHMOND. VA e RIVERSIDE, CA e ROSELLE. IL • SAN FRANCISCO. CA .SAN JOSE, CA • SINGAPORE e TORONTO. CANADA e WASHINGTG'. EMPLOYEE-OWNED COMPANY a 0 U C U % s 3 ~gc~~g ~~ y ~ ~ ~` d e ~ B ~~a~g~' s p ~~~~~ ~~ <~o ~~ /- ~.- r.~' ~ ``~. ~IL I, I ~- L~ ~~ -, - - ,~ ,. ..1 ° . ~ ~' ~.. I'~ ~ ~' . /. -cs ., ~ ., j .4 I / . :.. ~ ~ A~ADS'+ ~~~~'.: ~ ~ 1 . ;ice ~FJ iii. '~/ ~ ~ ~ ~\ '> ` JiY {~ 1 •, \ '~ ., ~ , rg ' ~ z ~ ~ ~ ` t- YY-. d. G ~ '.~d z ~~; ' 4 ~'?`~N ,~ \`..~ - e~ x 3 ~ z ~'. 8~ ¢.g aSk N ~f3t P3 x r y ~ _ _ k{ y C ~d ~! O ~+ ~~,@# ~ Qo t LL v av .d W z ~.I `-' U O o_ O Q Mr. Barry Burnell O Campos Verdes Modifications June 15, 1992 Page 2 These recent changes in the on-site circulation plan have precipitated the need to prepare the following addendum material which supplements the current traffic study document. The following sections discussed some of the subtle implications which these changes have on the findings of the earlier study. Project Trip Generation Although the proposed on-site circulation system changes have resulted in minor re- configuration of residential lots within Planning Area 6, the total number of dwelling units for this Planning Area remains the same (141 medium density dwelling units). Dwelling unit counts within the other project Planning Area have also remained the same, therefore O project trip generation estimates used in the original traffic study are still valid. Project Trip Distribution While the "meandering" design of the proposed realignment of Campos Verdes Loop road will have a discouraging effect on "short cut" trips through the project, it should not have any significant impact on the assumed distribution of project trips. Elimination of the North "C" Street connection would, however, result in a minor redistribution in site traffic. As shown in Exhibit B, only 2.5 percent of the total daily project trips have been estimated to use North "C" Street to access Roripaugh Road. This represents approximately 400 vehicle trips per day. At Roripaugh Road and Winchester Road, approximately one half of the trips are distributed to and from the north (primarily on Winchester) and the remaining half are destined to and from the southwest on Winchester. Elimination of the North "C" Street connection to Roripaugh Road would result in a small increase in the number of project trips assigned to Margarita Road (primarily) to gain access to and from Winchester Road. A small portion of the traffic using North "C" Street included trips between the Roripaugh Estates residential development and the Campos Verdes neighborhood retail center. A review of the earlier projected traffic volumes also revealed some through traffic being O assigned to "C" Street. These trips were traveling through project, to and from General Kearny Road as well as the Regional Center (via Campos Verdes Loop Road). f 0 t 6 a ~ m s o e ~ °o a` s of ~1 N m .. _A C Q d ® H m .y ~ v ~ ~ O ~`° a .~+ N a ~s e} C u+ Of L~ ~ Y"' ~ ~ 9 ~ . ~® ~ d ~ C W r m ~ C ~ C U1 O LEI 'o m tl! W m v .\~ m e+ ~_ L X W ~~~ ~o~~ O O O Mr. Barry Burnell O Campos Verdes Modifications June 15, 1992 Page 3 Analysis of Traffic Impacts WSA has evaluated the re-distribution of project traffic which would result from the elimination of North "C' Street. Figure A-8 depicts the resulting Year 2000 Projected Daily Traffic (with the elimination of North "C" Street). Adjusted AM and PM peak-hour projections are illustrated in Figures A-9a and A-l0a respectively. Study intersections affected by the redistribution of traffic (along the perimeter of the project) were re-analyzed to assess the impact of the new street configuration on traffic operation. The results of the analysis are summarized in Table A-1. The "key" map in Table A-1 is attached as Figure A-14. Findings of the analysis indicate that with the new on-site street configuration: O o Level of Service for the intersection of Margarita Road/General Kearny Road would change from LOS A (ICU = 60) to LOS B (ICU = 67) during the PM peak hour; o Level of Service for the intersection of Margarita Road/Winchester Road would improve slightly from LOS C (ICU = 7~1) to LOS B (ICU = 70) during the PM peak hour; o Levels of Service for all other intersections would remain the same and would operate at LOS C or better; and o A]] but one of the off-site intersections would operate at LOS B or better. Recommended Improvements Revisions to the recommended roadway improvements in the vicinity of the project are depicted in Figures A-20a and A-20b. It is important to note that no significant "new' O improvements are being recommended. The revised improvements depicted in these 5gures are all on-site and are the direct result of the on-site street system configuration changes described earlier. No new signal requirements would result from these changes. O 3 o a w m a ~ a a a a a a a a a ~ .°v a a ~ U M ~ ~ ~O ~ a M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q M h C ° Y o a a v a ¢ ¢ a a a ¢ a a a a 3 ~ a a Z E s E ~ ~ ~ 00 N N ti a 7 v a .. a d a d ° O ~~ ~ ~ , F r o 3 E a U ° o o N ~' T L ~ L y ~ C ~ c X `~ ~ s ' ~ d ~ ° a o o ~_ ~ ~ ~ a ~ v C C ~ ` 4~ ` i~ T ~ L ~ t N R ~ dS E ~S ~ C C E ° 1r 1C > ~ V 3 r i . ~ 9 ' 9 .Y. `.L ~ 3 c~ ~ ~ H L o L ~ ~ ~ ' ' E E C /~ O o U V V V `~ Ca N c ~ N c C ~ 0 0 0 ( C7 V a x x ~ aS as ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ai ~ . . . . CO N d U U U v t0 ~ ~ .L.. L L h N `~ . ~ in ~ E y ti ~ ~ o ~ ~ ? a € ~ ~ ~ x ~ ~ ~ x . c c ci ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 { I ~ I I N ~ ~ I N ~ N I N I N ~ N ~ I II O ~ y I, a , `t Mr. Barry Burnell O Campos Verdes Modifications June 15, 1992 Page 4 Roadway Implementation Issues In response to the City's request to provide general guidelines regarding the implementation schedule needs for Margarita Road (between Solana Way and Winchester Road) and General Kearny Road (from Margarita Road to Nicolas Road) WSA has developed the following recommendations: o Construct interim two-lane section of Margarita Road and related realignment of General Kearny Road prior to occupation of Campos Verdes Phase I. o Complete construction of Margarita Road section by fourth quarter of 1995 or prior to occupation of Campos Verdes Phase II. O o Construct extension/widening of General Kearny Road from the project site to Nicolas Road by the fourth quarter of 1996 or prior to 75 percent build-out and occupation of Campos Verdes Phase II. These guidelines are based on a previous assessment of implementations needs which had been prepared for the Temecula Regional Center project. These guidelines should be reviewed in more detailed at the time that building permits are processed for both projects. Please note the following levels of project impact on Margarita Road and General Kearny Road which has been expressed as the precent of total Year 2000 daily traffic (contributed by Campos Verdes). o Margarita Road - Solana Way to General Kearny Road - 14 to 21 percent - General Kearny Road to Winchester Road - 18 to 31 percent O Mr. Barry Burnell Campos Verdes Modifications June 15, 1992 Page 5 o General Kearny Road - Margarita Road to project "A" Street - 5 to 17 percent - Project "A" Street to Nicolas Road - 7 percent a a a a a o a a a Wilbur Smith Associates trusts that this addendum analysis will assist City of Temecula staff in their ongoing review of the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. Please fell free to contact me at any time if you have questions regarding this material. Sincerely yours, Wilbur Smith Associates ~~Q ~~ Robert A. Davis Associate Transportation Engineer RAD:tj Campos Verdes Update\CAMVEDMD.LE7~27t290 O O O O O i a d 5 o~ A 7 r U a. lp p.. W H d L N O d m U N m N b W Q ~o (~ A 7 w b ~ ~ t1 ® a a" ~ W m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O. ~_ E •® V b O O ~o O W w ®.® s 20 tiQ J a J <,~ 4~ . y ~? o 2 ,I ,' • ~ =~18 ~ W ~' o o~ ~~~ Htl~ t9O/ °• ^ ° i' ~ ~~ tr ~j1i~~' Z ~, N ~\\ 1\~ . 1 \0 / ~ ~ ~ Z~ B q O ~ ~ ,'(® \ 0 ~/ \~~ I ~ rOL 0 ~ tr - dl 0 F o ~ o W ~ Q - 9 Nl c 1 !0 a ti° ` ~ ~ a c a n ~ ~ O~~`. ~ ° 1 '~ ~ 1~'° •• ' ~ ~ri z g ~. '`' ,,'~ o~ ~ < 6 - c ^ v .O j ~ 6 j ' Pl~r-0 : \~ r e\ M1 1 ~ o 0 z_ ~r ~~ ~z ~o > /. 10 O J tll W D W a ~+ t,\im 6 ~ Q r~T ~.+ Or 19 A ~ 4 \l^ M10' \ m m ~ O 0 u ~ a Q oFa z W ' Q J ~, N (p N 0 ~ P 6 ~ S+L~ r ~ 6 N ®~ m~m ~ pp`tl tS C~ Ry m ~ ~ ~ 8 w A U d ts`r Q dd C O /P `\ ~ J\ ^. _~ A 9 7 W N U o. W r W m d O a E v O O O O n C m J V ~ ~ C F ~ p m o u m a a o rn ~ ~ 2 ~ o N 2 ~-. 6 ~ x v~ _ 2 0 _I/I ~~ 0 J l J w O 's ®. Z ',' . ~ x ~ ® r~ ~ ~ ° p ^ `O o ,, ~% z L e r ,~ ,~ . A ! ~ ~' rl ~ n" a 1 I ,O~ ~ / ® Y /~ oQ 1®~ ya O aU ~Y C~ a a0 20 tiQ r 'J ~ ¢ N C7 ~ SL--p ~ .-2 g Lp 1r7 iN^ ~--~ t-~ O~YN i $ J N N W 0 W ~ 9 ~+ O 6 ~t(~ $ 0 y w ~~; Ks,~~ V N ~ pQ •y d11 6 ; a ; t 0 S / '~ r u , f ~ ,-~ `.,--. D U ~~ ® o ~ 1 ®® ,( ~ T. g ~ s eo , ~ 9 % . < ~ 5 . B .O o 0, L1 ' 4 O, ~ t !' t ~ o ~ 0 . ~, Y L , ~ v ~ ® ~' ~ ~' 5 o~ 0 z i> ~? z ~o/ O N (fl ~ O ~ N m Q 6 ~ N LL J ~ V o r~ ~ W b W ~ ~ A ~ 'O ® N '~ ~ U w ~ N ero H '~ Q W ~ N d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .p.+ ~ ~ L~ N n 0 -~~E ~ ~ U C ~U ~ ~ O~ v ~1 ~~ 000 ~pp~~ ~ . t a 5v ~ J ` ~ O ~1 r^ q ~' = w , \V r ^ . L ~ . S~ f W ~ te rl ~j ^ L ~% O r ~ mN Z is ~ J ~ 1, r~ ~ J L o.. ~~t o' a i. o .7 OI --~lo'Z ~~~rr Z ~1~ ~~ =P ~ e ~. ~ --, N l7 r 7 ! J e„ ~ ~2 ~P J Z f ` ~ -_' ~ ° C ~j r~, z _` r _ I II 26 ~ ~ °~ v0 2 J r" p M• ~ ~ p8 L, ~r~`' '1~2 _ ~ .J j 1, r~~ ~ J 1, ~ ~ " ~ ~Z t ~ of ~~ ~ t r Z z ~ ~ °~ f. Cd Z~ ., (~ \ ! 2~ r~r` S !! ~o ~ ~ J ~>> ~ r ~ ~ ~ t" .. s ~ ~ ~1 1~ W Ll a ~ ~~ t°' r\ ~ V J 1 ~ : L O N ~ r~ ~ _ y Na . ` ~ ~ 1 W yZ 1: f R ~ y ® <~1 ran r v \ ~,y~ .~2 \ O ~ ~„ J L 1 !" r~ ~ r ~ t7 y Q> z r' " r ~ ~ ,rs ~ S el ~ ovN '-z o ~~ ~ --e l ~ ~ o ®, J l 1. r-z J 1 ~. a J L r-. • e ~" "f / ~ ` ~ ~~ Z-. rr r NOS Z~ E`-Y •,tr z NCO r ~ fc" ~~ C f ~ W ~1 ~ ~ ~ ems. z F..O ~ ~ ~ 1 .~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ N p <!W ra J ~ Li f Nl IN \f a e Ee o z J f~ 3 1 Z pb ?gti~ t~ NI TN 1 j r' ~1 r~ U L~ ,J i ~ ~~ ~ N Li SI 31 b1S z t-~ •1r(" J1~ b31Nl r~ z-. 0~ N_ Z Z, •~ ~ r '3AV NOStl3dj3f O O ZN O Z-. p~ NN Q O~ Nl I ~ C N 1 ~ ~OD~ bD INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT IDATE: Jun-92 I O (LOCATION: I N/S Street 6 E/V Street I Camino Campo s Verdes 8 General Kearny Rd. ISCenari o: I Total future Volumes Vith Project d With New On-Si te Circulation Syst em I ~ ID: 1138 • - - - ~ AM Peak Xour I PN Peak Nour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I Lane Neavy Conf lictingl I (Capacity Vo lume V/C (Capacity Volune V/C I Yidth Veh. Grade Psrkirg Bus Pedestriens~ I Movements ~ Lanes l (vphg) I I (Whg) I (f t) (XNV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) INORTXBWND I I I I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0° I 0 0 0° I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn O I 0 0 0• I 0 0 0° I 0 0.0 0.0 p I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I ISWTNBWND I I I I I Thru 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I I Right Turn 1 ~ 1445 16 1 ~ 1445 18 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 I Left Turn 1 ~ ,1615 20 3 • I 1615 90 6 • I 12 0.0 0.0 I IEASTBWND I I I I I Thru 2 ~ 3400 233 7 I 3400 1102 32 • I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0• I 0 0.0 0.0 D I Left Turn 1 I 1615 5 3• I 1615 17 1 I 12 X0.0 0.0 I ~VESTBWND I I I I Thru 2 I 3388 1044 32 • I 3375 492 15 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 25 0° I 0 25 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 p I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0• ~ 0 0.0 0.0 -------------- ----- -----------.- ----- °_-__-____-.------_------___-- ---__--__-.-____--- __---- ------_-----_ ______-----___---I IW (X) _ ~ 38 38 LEVEL OF SERYICE _ - A A Notes: 1. • Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement VI LBUR SNITN ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT DATE: Jun•92 I I (LOCATION: N/S Street d E/W Street I M argarita Rd . 8 General Kearny Rd. (Scenario: I T otal Future Volunes ui th Project d With New On-Si te Circulation System I I ID: 1139 I AM Peak Nour I PM Peak Nour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I lane Heavy Conflict irgl (Capacity Volume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I width Veh. Grade Perkirp Bus Pedestrians I Movements I Lane s (vphg) I I (vphg) I '(fU (XNV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I INORTNBOUND I I I I I I I ~ Thru 2 I 3366 536 16 I 3366 570 17 • I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 61 0 I 1245 298 0' ~ 8 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 65 4 • I 1599 23 1 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 I ISOUTNBWND I I ~ I I Thru 2 I 3366 526 16 • I 3366 572 17 - I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn t I 1245 154 0 •. I 1245 112 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 7 I 1599 64 4 I 1599 239 15 • I 12 2.0 0.0 I (EASTBOUND I I I Thru 2 I 3338 160 5 I 3317 534 19 • ~ 12 ~ 0.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 22 0 I 0 104 0' I 12 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 130 8 * I 1599 321 20 I 12 2.0 0.0 WESTBOUND Thru 2 I I 3338 695 24 • i I 3387 352 11 I ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 97 0` I 0 9 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 I Left Turn 1 I 1615 352 22 ~ 1615 260 16 • I 12 0.0 0.0 ICU (X) 52 67 LEVEL OF SERVICE = A B Notes: 1. • Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Nunber of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Nunber of buses per Hour NI LBUR SNITN ASSOCIATES 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT DATE: Jun-92 LOCATION: N/S Street E E/W Street Margarita Rd. 8 Yirxhester Rd. ~Seenario: Total future Yolunes With Project 8 Mith New On-Site Circulation System ~ F.__... Movements ~NORTXBOUND Thru Right Turn Left Turn ISOUTXBd1ND Thru Right Turn Left Turn EASTBOUND Thru Right Turn Left Turn WESTBOUND O Thru Right Turn Left Turn ID: 1198 AM Peek Nour ~ PM Peak Nour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Neavy Capacity Vo lume V/C . ~Capaeity Volume V/C ~ Width Yeh. Grade Parking Lanes) (Wh9) ~ ("ph9) ~ (f t) (XXV) (X) (Nm) 2 ~ 3366 335 10 ~ 3366 615 18 ° ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 1 ~ 1245 337 B ~ 1245 327 0` ~ 8 2.0 0.0 1 ~ 1599 119 7 • ~ 1599 108 7 ~ 12' 2.0 0.0 2 ~ 3366 611 18 ° ~ 3366 432 13 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 1 ~ 1245 400 5• ~ 1245 215 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 1 ~ 1599 132 8 ~ 1599 173 11 ` ~ 12 2.0 0.0 3 ~ 5049 768 15 ~ 5049 1259 25 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 1 ~ 1245 95 0 ~ 1245 180 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 2 ~ 3097 281 9 • ~ 3097 610 20 • ~ 12 2.0 0.0 3 ~ 5049 1602 32 * ~ 5049 1072 21 • ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 1 ~ 1245 58 0• ~ 1245 62 0` ~ 8 2.0 0.0 2 ~ 3004 260 9 ~ 3004 415 14 ~ 11 2.0 0.0 ICU (x) = 7z 70 LEVEL OF SERVICE = C 8 Notes: 1. • Indicates cri ticaL lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Xour 5. Three percent minimum green to Lyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement Cantlicting~ Sus Pedestrians (Nb) 0 0 0 0~ 0 0 0 0 O WIL9UR SMITH ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT (DATE: Jun-92 I I ILOGTION: N/S Street 8 E/Y Street I Margarita Rd. E Reg. Ctr. Or./Cempos V. Ln. ISCenario: Total Future Volumes Vith Project b Vith New On-Site Circulation System I I I ID: 1199 . ...................._...._..............__...... ~....__-.. _......... .._..__..a.._....".".........._...____.___....___...... I I AM Peak Xour I PM Peak Hour IType of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conflietingl I (Capacity Volume Y/C ICapecity Volume V/C I Nidth Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestri erssl I Movements I Lanesl I (vphg) I ("Phg) I CfU (XNV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I INO0.TNBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 688 20 ° I 3366 828 - 25 ° I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1330 .39 0 I 1330 53 0° I 10 2.0 0.0 0 I I left Turn 1 ( 1599 36 2 I 1599 19 1 I 12 2.0 0.0 ~ I ISOUTNBOUND I Thru 2 I 3366 603 18 I 3366 655 19 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn l I 1245 184 0 I 1245 121 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 0 1 I Left Turn 1 I 1599 179 11 • I 1599 251 16 • I 12 2.0 0.0 I (EASTBOUND I I I I I Thru 1 1 1683 4 0 I 1683 17 3° I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1330 39 1 I 1330 172 11 ° I 10 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Lef[ Turn 1 I 1599 21 ~ 3 • I 1599 79 5 I 12 2.0 0.0 I ILIESTBOUND I Thru 1 1 7315 11 7` I 1345 13 4 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn D I 0 79 0• I 0 38 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I Left Turn 1 I 1599 102 6 I 1599 96 6 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 I ICU (X) = 41 LEVEL Of SERVILE Notes: 1. • Irdicetes critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where Lhere is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Nudxr of Maneuvers per Nour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn nwvement A 60 A NILBUR SMITN ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT (DATE: Jun-92 I O (LOCATION: I N/S Street 8 E/4 Street I I I Rori paugh Rd . 8 Winch ester Rd. I (Scenario: I Total Future Volumes With Project 8 Nith New On-S ite Ci rculation System I I ID: 2019 ~_..._._m_-.____.-_ ~-' .......... ..... .............___......._......_.._ ....___.--__... ._..__ .......___..__. ....._....__..._. I I AN Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I Movements I Lanes I (Capacity Vo ) (vphg) I lume V/C I (Capacity I (vphg) Yo fume V/ C I Lane I Width I (fU Heavy Veh. (xxV) Grade Parking (X) (Nm) Canf lietingl Bus Pedestrians) (Nb) I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I Thru 1 I 1700 19 1 I 1700 11 1 ( 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1257 • 18 0 I 1257 10 0 I B 0.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1615 B4 5 ° I 1615 219 14 ^ I 12 0.0 0.0 (SOUTHBOUND I I I I Thru t I 1700 11 3' I 1700 53 3° I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 40 0' I 1245 184 9° I 8 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 29 2 I 1599 102 6 I 12 2.0 0.0 I IEASTBWND I I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 1026 20 I 5049 1642 33 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1330 160 0 I 1330 75 0' I 10 0.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 S1 3 ' I 1599 42 3 I 12 2.0 0.0 I WESTBOUND I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 1796 36 * I 5049 1146 23 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I fight Turn 1 I 1330 148 0 ' I 1330 23 0 I 10 2.0 0.0 0 I Left Turn 1 I 1615 25 2 I 1615 78 5 ' I 12 0.0 0.0 I ICU (X) = 47 64 LEVEL OF SERVICE A g Notes: 1. * Indicates critical Lane v/e 2. Turning vol ones are added [o thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Nunber of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour YILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT (DATE: Jun-92 I (LOCATION: N /S Street 8 E/W Street O I " N" Street d General K earny Rd. ISeenari o: T otal Future Volumes Nith Project 8 Yi th New On-S ite Circulation System I I I ID: 2060 I I AM Peak Hour ~ PM Peak Nour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl I ICapecity Volume V/C ([specify Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I (f t) (zxY) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I INORTNBOUND ~ I I I I I I I I I Thru 1 I 1287 0 0 I 1267 0 1 I 12' 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 2 0 I 0 16 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 16 3 * I 1599 58 4 • I 12 2.0 0.0 I SOUTHBOUND I Thru t I 1291 1 S° I 1294 1 3* I' 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 62 0• I 0 34 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 O I Left Turn 1 I 1599 0 0 I 1599 2 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 I IEASTBWND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3265 245 9 I 3359 1081 33 ' I 12 2.0 6.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 61 0 I 0 16 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 13 3 ~ I 1599 35 2 I 12 2.0 0.0 I IWESTBOUNO ~ I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 1066 32 • I 3364 529 16 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 1 0• I 0 2 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 ~ 0 Left Turn 1 I 1599 30 2 I 1599 4 3 ' ~ 12 2.0 0.0 ICU (%) = 43 LEVEL OF SERVILE _ Notes: 1. ' Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is ra separate turning lane 3. Nm - NunSer of Maneuvers per Xour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Xour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left turn movement A 43 A WILBUR SNITH ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILl UT -....• y............" .................................................................................... DATE: Jun-92 ' LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street O "A" St. d General Kearny Rd. Scenario: Total future Volumes With Project 8 With New On-Site Circulation System [D: 2062 AM Peak Hour I PN Peak Xour (Type of Aree: NON-CBD Capacity Movements Lenes~ (vphg) NORTHBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 ~SOUTNBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1445 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 EASTBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3400 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 (WESTBOUND hru 2 ~ 3400 fight Turn 0 ~ 0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 Lane Heavy .. ~ C~nfli~tingl Yolume V/L Capacity Volume V/C ~ Nidth Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (vphg) ~ (ft) (XXV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 0 0 ~ 0 0 0• ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0• ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0• ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0• ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 14 1• ~ 14as 6 0 ~ 1z o.o o.o o ~ 0 0 ~ 161s zz 3• ~ 1z o.o o.o ~ 248 7 ~ 3400 1186 35 ° ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0• ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 5 3• ~ 1615 6 0 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 1055 31 • ~ 3400 sit 15 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0• ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~~ 0 0 0• ~ 0 0.0 0.0 ICU (X) = 35 LEVEI OF SERVICE c A 38 A Notes: 1. • Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume Nhere there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Nour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Xour s. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement YILBUR SM ITN ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT y---------------•---------------------•_---------------------------------------_-------------___-------_i DATE: Jun-92 LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/N Street "C" St. 8 Campos Verdes Ln. ~SCenario: Total Future Volumes With Proj eat 8 Yi th New On-Site Circular ion Systas ID: 2212 AM I ~Capecity Movements Lanes (vphg) NORTHBOUND Thru 1 ~ 7530 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 ~SOUTX80UND Thru 1 ~ 1700 Right Turn 1 ~ 1445 left Turn 0 ~ 0 EASTBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1445 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 ~wESTBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 left Turn 0 ~ 0 eak Nour ~ PM Peak Nour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Neavy Contlictirg~ Volume V/C Capacity Volume V/C ~ Fli dth Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (vPhg) ~ (fU (XNV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 2 0 ~ 1530 8 1 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 ~ 0.0 0 101 6 • ~ 1615 17 3 • ~ 12 0.0 0.0 5 ~ 3• ~ 1700 2 ,. 3° ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 60 3, • ~ 1445 22 0 • ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0° ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 25 0 ~ 1445 135 8° ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 13 3 ° ~ 1615 60 4 ~ 12 ' 0.0 0.0 0 0° ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0* ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 D 0 ~ D D 0• ~ D 0.0 0.0 • - • - ~ ICU (X) = 16, IEVEL OF SERVICE _ A 14 A Notes: 1. • Indicates erit feel lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to eyle ratio assumed for critical left•turn movement NI LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT DATE; Jun-92 ~LOCATI ON: N/S Street d E/W Street "C" Stree[ d "D" Street ~SCeneri o: ToCal Future Vol ones With Project d With New On-Site Ci rcula[ion System ID: 2214 AM Peak Xour ~ PM Peak Xour Capacity Movements Lanes (vphg) ~NORTNBWND Thru 1 ~ 1683 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 .~ Left Turn 0 ~ 0 ISWTNBWND Thru 1 ~ 1515 Righ[ Turn 0 ~ 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 ~EASTBWND Thru 0 ~ 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 IVESTBWND Thru 0 ~ 0 fight Turn 1 ~ 1431 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 .__.___--°--.-.._.t._.-___.. Volume V/C Capacity Volume V/C (vphg) 38 3 ° ~ 1683 4 0 1 0° ~ 1245 1 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0° 10 1 ~ 1515 73 S ° 0 0 ~ 0 0 0• 20 3 ~ 1599 64 4 D 0 ~ D D 0° 0 0 ~ 0 0 0° 0 0° ~ 0 0 0 D 0° ~ D D 0 65 3 ° ~ 1431 21 0 0 0 ~ 1599 1 3 ICU (X) = 9 LEVEL Of SERVICE A 8 Type of Area: NON-Cg0 Lane Heavy Width Veh. Grade Parking (f t) (XXV) (X) (Nm) 12 2.0 0,0 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 2.0 0.0 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 2.0 0.0 12 2.0 0.0 0 2.0 0.0 0 0 2.0 0.0 0 2.0 0.0 0 2.0 0.0 0 12 2.0 0.0 12 2.0 0.0 A Notes: 1. ° Indicates critical lane v/e 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning Lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Xour 5. Three percent mini mim green to cyle ratio assumed for eri tical Left-turn movement Conflicting Bus Pedes[rians~ (Nb) o ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NILBUR SNITN ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT t .......................................................................................................~ DATE: Jun-92 LOCATION: N/S Street 8 £/W Street / 1 Camino Campos Verdes 8 °D" St. I\`~/ ~Seenari o: Total Future Volumes With Project 8 With New On-Site Circular Tan System ID: 2215 AN Peak Xour ~ PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Neavy Conf lieting~ ~ Capaeity Vo lume V/C ~Capaeity Volume V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians Movements Lanes (vphg) ~ (vphg) ~ (f ty (XNV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) ~NORTXBWND Thru 1 ~ 1484 4 0 ~ 1366 4 7 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 1 0 ~ 0 10 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 left Turn 7 ~ 1615 13 3 ° ~ 7615 6 3 ° ~ 12 0.0 0.0 ~SOUTN80UND Thru 7 ~ 1308 1 3• ~ 1341 3 3° ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 31 0• ~ 0 14 0° ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 Lett Turn 1 ~ 1615 1 0 ~ 1615 0 0 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 EASTBOUND Thru t ~ 7700 1 0 ~ 1700 16 3° ~ t2 0.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn l ~ 1257 t4 0 ~ 1257 30 1° ~ 8 0.0 0.0 0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 5 3 • ~ 1615 20 1 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 WESTBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1700 14 3• ~ 1700 6 0 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 ~ Right Turn 1 ~ 1257 0 0° ~ 1257 1 0 ~ 8 0.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 11~ 1 ~ 1615 3 3 ° ~ 72 0.0 0.0 ICU (X) = 12 13 LEVEL OF SERVICE = A A Notes: 7. • Indicates critical lane v/e 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour WILBUR SMITN ASSOCIATES 5. Three percent minimum green to eyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT (DATE: Jun-92 I I t .............................................................. (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I "N° Street 8 Campos Verdes Ln. (Scenario: Total future Vol ones With Project b With New On-Site Circulation System I I I ID: 2216 I I AN Peak Hour I PM Peak Nour (Type of Area: NON•cBD I I I I I Lane Xeavy Conflietingl ~Capatity Volune V/C (Capacity Volume V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements I LaneS l (vphg) I ~ (vphg) ~ I (tt) (xxY) (X) (Nm) <Nb) I ~NORTNBOUND I I I I I I I Thru t I 1700 2 0 ~ 7700 3 3' I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I ( Right Turn t I 7257 0 0 I 1257 1 0° I 8 0.0 0.0 p I I Lett Turn 7 I 1615 33 3 ° I 1675 70 ) ~ 12 0.0 0.0 I ISOUTNBWND I I I I I Thru t I 1700 7 3° I 7700 4 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 ~ 1257 15 0' I 1257 716 1 I 8 0.0 0.0 p i left Turn 1 I 1615 4 0 I 7615 51 3 ' I 72 0.0 0.0 I (EASTBOUND I I I I I Thru t I 7700 34 2 I 1700 143 8 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn 1 I 1257 7 0 I 7257 51 0 I 8 0.0 0.0 0 0 I Left Turn 7 I 7615 181 11 • I 7675 127 8 ' I 12 0.0 0.0 I IWESTBWND I I I I /"~ Thru 1 I 7700 144 8 ' I t700 2i 3 ' I 72 0.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn t I 1257 17 0 ' I 1257 18 0 * I 8 0.0 0.0 0 Left Turn t I 7675 0 0 I 1615 1 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 I ICU (X) 25 17 LEVEL OF SERVICE = A p Notes: 1. ' Indicates critical Lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume Nhere there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour L. Nb - Number of buses per Nour 5. Three percent mi nimm green to cyle ratio assumed for critical lef t-turn movement WILBUR SMITN ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT (DATE: Jun-92 I (LOCATION: N!S Street t E/N Street I °l" Street & General Keerny Rd. (Scenario: Total Future Volumes With Project d With New On-S ite Circulation System ( ID: 3001 ~ .................. s-__...._..-_ _.__.._-.._...... ~.._-.... ........__.._._.... _....____ ....___ ...__._....___-__..._.__._____• I I AM Peak Nour ( PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I ( Lane Heavy Conf lietingl ( (Capacity Volume V/C Capacity Yolume V/C I Nidth Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians( ( Movements I Lanes( (vphg) I ( (vphg) ( (ft) (XXV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I (NORTHBOUND ( I I I I I ( ( Thru 1 I 1530 0 0 I 1530 1 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 0' 0 I I -Right Turn O I '0 0 0 I 0 0 0 ( 0 0.0 0.0 O I ( Left Turn 1 ( 1b15 0 0 • I 1615 1 3 • ( 12 0.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I I I ~ I Thru 1 I 1700 0 0• ~ 1700 1 3• I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 ( Right Turn 7 I 1257 39 3 ' ~ 1257 25 7 • 'I 8 0.0 0.0 0 ( ( left Turn 1 I 1615 1 0 ( 7615 1 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 I (EASTBOUND ( I I I Thru 2 ( 3400 240 7 I 3400 1118 33 • I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I ( Right Turn O I 0 0 0 ~ 0 1 0• I 0 0.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1675 7 3 ' I 1615 23 1 ( 12 0.0 0.0 ~ I WESTBOUND I I ( ( ( Thru 2 ( 3400 1058 31 ° ~ 3398 509 75 I 12 0~.0 0.0 0 0 ( Right Turn O I 0 1 0• ~ 0 2 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 p O ( Left Turn t I 7615 0 0 ~ 1615 0 0• I 12 0.0 0.0 I I[U (S) = 37 40 LEVEL OF SERVICE A p Notes: 1. Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volunes are added to thru vol une where there is rw separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Nanewers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Xour S. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-[urn movement N[LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILt2AT (DATE: Jun-92 I O (LOCATION:- I N/S S[reei 8 E/W Street I I I "J" Street 8 Genera( Kearny Rd. I (Scenario: I Total Future Volumes Mith Project d With New On-S ite Circulation System I I ID: 3002 _ I I AM Deak Nour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBO I I I I Movements I I (Capacity Vo Lanes) (vphg> I l une V/C I (Capacity I (vphg) I Volume V/C I Lane I Width I (ft> Xeavy Veh. (XHV) Grade Perking (X) (Nm) Bus (Nb) Conf lictingl Pedestrians) I INORTHBNND I I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn 1 I 7445 0 0 I 1445 1 0 . I 12 0.0 0.0 p I I left Turn 1 I 7675 0 0 I 1615 2 3° I 12 0.0 0.0 I ISNTXBNND I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0• I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0• I 0 0.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn O I -0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I IEASTBNND I I I I Thru 2 I 3400 238 7 I 3400 1118 33 • I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1257 2 0 I 7257 7 0• I 8 0.0 0.0 0 p I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0• I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I (WESTBOUND I I I I Thru 2 I 3400 7059 31 * I 3400 509 15 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 0 0• I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 p I Left Turn t I 7615 1 0 I 1615 1 3' I 72 0.0 0.0 I IN (X) = 31 LEVEL OF SERVILE = A rotes: 1. • Indicates cri ciao) lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Nanewers per Mour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Xour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical lef t•turn movement 39 A WILBUR SMITX ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT r .......................................................................................................~ IOATE: Jun•92 ~ I I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/N Street I Camino Campos Verdes 8 "C" St. (Scenario: Total Future Vol ones Nith Projec[ 8 Vi th New On-Site Circulation System I 1D: 2217 I I AM Peak Nour I PM Peak Nour (Type of Area• NON-C80 I I (Capacity I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I INORTXBOUND I I I Thru 1 I 1530 I Right Turn 0 I 0 I Left Turn 1 I 1615 ISOUTXBOUND I I Thru 1 I 1700 I Right Turn 1 I 1257 I Left Turn 0 I 0 (EASTBOUND I I Thru 0 I 0 I Right Turn 1 I 1257 I Left Turn 1 I 1615 IVESTBOUNO I I Thru 0 I 0 I Right Turn 0 I 0 I Left Turn 0 I 0 I I Lane xeavy Volume V/C (Capacity Volune Y/O I Width Veh. G rade Parking I Cvphg> I I (ft) I (XNV) (X) <Nm) 18 1 I I 1530 20 1 I I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 12 3 ° I 1615 22 3 • I 12 0.0 0.0 20 3 ° I 1700 35 3 ' I 12 0.0 0.0 0 5 0' I 1257 0 0° I 8 0.0 0.0 0 0 I 0 0 I 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 D D I D 0 0° I I D 0.0 ~ 0.0 0 6 0 I 1257 70 4° I 8 0.0 0.0 0 0 I 1615 0 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I 0 0 0 I I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I 0 0 0° I 0 0.0 0.0 I[U (X> 6 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ A 10 A Notes: 1. ° Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Xour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Xour 5. Three percent mininun green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement I Canflietingl Bus Pedestrians) (Nb) I I I o I OI I I o I 0 I I I 0 I 0 OI I I 0 /~~ 0 ('~/1 I VILBUR SNITN ASSOCIATES O WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS • PLANNERS 3600 Lime Street, Suite 226 • Riverside, CA 92501 • (714) 274-0566 • FAX (7 i 4) 2?4-9220 December 02, 1991 Mr. Doug Stewart Deputy City Engineer City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Mr. Stewart: Wilbur Smith Associates (WSA) has prepared the following Campos Verdes Traffic Study Addendum material which is focused on responding to the City's traffic study-related comments set forth in the Department of Public Work's (Mr. Robert Righetti) letter to the Planning Department dated September 12, 1991. A copy of this letter is attached. O We have a made sincere effort to respond to all comments which appear to solicit a response. Please note that several of the comments appear to be directed to the planning department and deal with Engineering Department recommendations or comments pertaining to the formulation of conditions of approval for the project (e.g. comment numbers 2, 3, 8, 12 and 18). Based on the outcome of November 6th meeting we have eliminated the need to address comment number 4. As we discussed, virtually all principal access roadways which would be used by this project are already programmed for improvement as part of Assessment District 161 or Community Facilities District No. 88-12 (and are included in the City's, five year Capital Improvement Program). While a five year project build-out analysis could be performed, it would only confirm that five-year development levels and associated traffic increases would warrant implementation of the programmed improvements. It was also recognized in our meeting that Bedford Properties is a key participant in both A.D. 161 and CFD 88-12. These already established Districts will ultimately be responsible for implementing most of the off-site improvements in the immediate vicinity of the Campos Verdes project. Comments 19 through 22 are not related to the traffic study, and therefore are not adddressed our responses. It is our understanding that these comments will be addressed O in the Final Draft EIR document. _BANY. NY • ALLIANCE. OH • CAIRO. EGYPT • CHARLESTON, SC • COLUMBIA. SC • COLUMBUS, OH • DES MOINES. IA FALLS CHURCH, VA LNG KONG • HOUSTON, TX • KNOXVILLE. TN LEXINGTON, KY LONDON. ENGLAND LOS ANGELES. CA MIAMI, FL NEENAH. WI .W HAVEN, CT OAKLAND. CA . ORLANDO, FL PITTSBURGH, PA • PORTSMOUTH, NH • PROVIDENCE. RI • RALEIGH, NC CHMOND, VA • RIVERSIDE, CA • ROSELLE, IL • SAN FRANCISCO, CA • SAN JOSE. CA • SINGAPORE • TORONTO, CANADA • WASHINGTON, DC EMPLOYEE-OWNED COMPANY Doug Stewart City of Temecula O Page 2 November 21, 1991 Comment No. 1 Response The traffic counts used in the study were based on recent (mot more than one year old) peak hour intersection counts and existing improvement information was current in April 1991 when the major portion of the study was performed. Factoring of volumes was only used to estimate the less critical daily link volumes where current daily volumes were not available. This not with standing WSA has prepared an updated summary of existing conditions in the attached Exhibit A. It should be noted that due to the nature of the modeling procedure used in the analysis, revisions to the existing conditions documentation in not way affects the study traffic forecasts or analysis conclusions. Comment No. 5 Response O The neighborhood park in Planning Area 1 was considered to be a very passive use which would primarily serve the immediate Campos Verdes community and to a very nominal degree the adjacent residential areas within Meadowview. These kinds of neighborhood parks tend to promote trips made by favorable transportation modes such as walking and bicycling. For the most part, trips to and from the park would be internal to the project. It could be argured that by not modeling the neighborhood park site trips we forced all project-related recreation trips to off-site recreation destinations which resulted in higher off- site traffic impacts for the project. Based on current Institute of Transportation Engineers trip rates, a 13.5 acre City or County park site would only generate approximately 30 to 40 daily vehicle trips, most of which would be made during off-peak periods. A neighborhood park which is typically far less structured, in terms of available facilities (e.g. sports facilities and picnic facilities), would be expected to generate even less trips and more of the trips would likely be non-vehicle trips. The number of vehicle trips likely to be generated during the adjacent highway peak is in our opinion neglegably low. O Campos Verda~Responx to Comments~271290 O Doug Stewart City of Temecula Page 3 November 21, 1991 Comment No. 6 Response The Tranplan forecasting mode uses the typical four-step procedure including: 1) trip generation; 2) trip distribution; 3) mode choice; and 4) traffic assignment. Steps 1 and 3 are preformed manually. Step 2) trip distribution, is performed by the model software using the gravity model procedure. The gravity model establishes a trip table which represents how trips are distributed between zones in the model study area. Step 4 is also performed by the software and in this case a capacity restraint assignment was used. The mode] assigns study area traffic to the network according to minimum travel time paths between traffic analysis zones (TAZ's). The initial assignment is not capacity restrained. The modeling software performs volume capacity comparisons on the initial assignment and adjusts travel speeds on links which are over capacity and/or are approaching capacity. The assignment procedures is repeated several times until the assignments reach an equilibrium state. The nature of this procedure process does not allow vehicle trips associated with individual TAZ's to be "tracked" through the assignment process. It is therefor not possible to report the actual distribution/assignment of projected related trips on the roadway network as they appear in the final cumulative development traffic assignment. It is possible, however, to determine how the gravity mode] has distributed the project trip and the minimum travel time routings of project trips by running an assignment of "project trips only". WSA has performed this "project only" assignment and has reported the result in project traffic distribution on area street in Exhibit B. It should be recognized that this type .of traffic assignment does not reflect the natural alternative route selection process which occurs when drivers encounter or expect congestion along some of the more direct routes. It should also be noted that percentages shown on roadways depicted in Exhibit B in many instances do not add up due to round and the absorption of trips by TAZ's with in the study area. O Campos VerdaUtaponsc to Comments~271290 Doug Stewart City of Temecula O Page 4 November 21, 1991 Comment No. 7 Response Elosting turning movement counts are provided in the attached technical Appendix along with ICU worksheets for the study area intersections. ICU worksheets for area build-out conditions with and without the project are provided in the Technical Appendix. Comment No. 9 Re~onse WSA has reported analysis results for on-site intersections ranging from intersections involving an Arterial and Secondary to those involving Collector with Local streets. ICU analysis results reported in Table 4b for all Local street intersections along the Campos Verdes Loop Road (a Collector) indicated ICU values 26 percent or lower. These intersections had projected peak hour volumes entering the intersection which totaled less than 500 vehicles per hour (in some cases less than 250 vehicles per hour). Since it was determined that traffic volumes at these intersection could easily be accommodated with standard minor street stop controls, the ICU analysis was not carried to the level of intersections involving two local streets with lesser traffic flows. Based on our professional assessent of the traffic volumes which would be generated at these minor intersections, all could be controled in a safe and efficient manner with stop sign control] at of the minor street approach. If there are specific local strees intersection locations which are of particular concern to the City we would be happy to address them. Comment No. 10 Response It is WSA's understanding that the final layout of circulation within severs] of the planning areas has not yet been established. O Campos VerdesUtesponx to Commenis~271290 O Doug Stewart City of Temecula Page 5 November 21, 1991 Comment No. Il Response Recommended improvements for intersections requested by City Staff are depicted in Exhibit C. Comment No. 13 Response Existing daily traffic volume information is depicted in Exhibit A and peak hour intersection counts are included in the Technical Appendix. O Comment No. 14 Response ICU calcuations are included in the Technical Appendix. Comment No. IS Response The labeled TAZ roadway network is provided in the Technical Appendix. Comment No. l6 Response The location of other approved and planned projects within the immediate study area in Exhibit D. It should be noted that the model used to forecast study area build-out (year 2000) traffic voulmes actually encompases the entire Southwest Area of Riverside County. O Campos VetdtsVtaponse to Comments~271290 Doug Stewart City of Temecula O Page 6 November 21, 1991 Comment No. l7 Response Signal warrant worksheets for all recommended new signal locations are provided in the Technical Appendix. We trust that these responses will help you complete your review of the Campos Verdes project. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Sincerely yours, Wiblur Smith Associates /Q ~~ O Robert A. Davis Assosiate Engineer RAD:tj attachment O Campos Verda~Rtsponse to Commrnts~271290 Q /}/~! ~I t K W O V ~~ N ~L . ~ A V ~ ~ e~+ ~ ~ ~ U O O w U " co A~ R ~ w fC N ~ ~ U_ N ~ ~ a= E ~ U .a+ Ni '~ LJJ ~~ ~g~ ~ N 9 T C N m O O O d ~p ~ 6 O N Q C d V N V O O O 0 t a e a a ~ 0 m~ "_ e u o .o 6 ~ O~ I ~I a .. 0 ~ a 9 ~ ~, o ~, a N "' m o ® c U ~ ~. c ~ _rn LL~ N 1~ ~_ ~ d V ~ Q ~® ~ b ~ C l0 w N d ~ C ~ L ~ ~ 'C Ql N l0 1n v ,~~ m r x w ~o~ `~D~~ Z! y~" Q 1 N~ y ~ ~~ ~ YDYY9YJOW E T r'~ ~ N - Q~tl, Q N N e ~ J V ~ ~ 0 _ ~ V ~ y ~i • ~~ 1~ ~' ti 11 '~' 1') ~ ~ . Z'~ ` N QI~ Q ~ ~a ~ J V N V "~ 0 ~ V~~ 0 Q M~ DEL Z ~y~ ~ o ~9 ~ ~ n1 N ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~' ~ l v 'C ~ ~~ Q ~ y ~- d- ~ s r i z' ~ N ~ ~Op to O N O ' z V ` O ~ V ~h nl - O . yy~ ~ ~ t~-r ~~~ M~ ~~ J O 41 N ~~ ! ~, j ~ U ~' N V V a~ .O d y co '~ C V C N v C V d N a.~ C cfl C ~_ a+ N ti. O t0 O O N s. t0 U L ft W O d r+ l9 fl. d 'n y0 N O Q U QOgO ~ O QO~s~ € ~pp~ € d0 WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS a PLANNERS 3ti00 Lime Street, ~uii< 226 Riverside, Cr. 92~G i p ld) 274 ~Sbo rA;( (7 i4) 274-9220 June 15, 1992 Mr. Barry Burnell Principal Turrini & Brink 3242 Halladay Street, Suite 100 Santa Ana, California 92705 Re: Campos Verdes S.P. No. 1/EIR On-site Circulation Modifications Dear Barry, Wilbur Smith Associates (WSA) has carefully reviewed the recently proposed modifications O to the Campos Verdes on-site circulation plan (attached Exhibit A). The on-site circulation modifications essentially involve the following: 1.) The principal on-site circulation loop road (referred to as Campos Verdes Loop in the completed traffic study) has been re-configured to include three 90 degree bends; 2.) The connector street (referred to as North "C" Street in the traffic study) which provided minor access between Planning Area 5 and Roripaugh Road (via Starling Street) has been eliminated; and 3.}Aright in and right out only access driveway is proposed on Margarita Road for the commercial Office use in Planning Area 2. It is our understanding that these modifications have been brought about as a result of a series of meetings between Turrini & Brink, Mesa Homes, and City of Temecula staff. The principal issue of concern which has been addressed by modifications 1 and 2, was the potential for non-site traffic to use the Campos Verdes Loop and North "C" street as "short- cuts" around some of the busy intersection located along Margarita Road. O ALBANY, NV • ALLIANCE. OH • CAIRO, EGYPT • CHARLESTON. SC • CO! UMBIA, SC • COLUMBUS, OH • DES MOINES. IA FALLS CHL-, HCNG KONG • HOUSTON. TX • KNOXVILLE. TN LEXINGTON. KY LONDON. ENGLAND LOS ANGELES. CA MIAMI. FL NE='. N 21J HAVEN. CT OAKLAND. CA ORLANDO. FL PIiiSBURG;i, PA PORTSMOUTH. NH PROVIDENCE. RI RAL_ G~ RICHMOND, VA • RIVERSIDE. CA • ROSELLE, I! • SAN FRANCISCO, CA • SAN JOSE. CA • SINGAPORE e TORONTO. CANADA • WASHING'S ~EMPLOYEE•OWNED COMPANY Z ~ ~ ~ = ~ " G a~d~p~ ~ 'a ~ ~~o c W p~q~q~$z++g~y~+<>> U W ~ ~ ~ ® ® 2<~<fi.o ~~~ T ~, r /' i• ~.:: g E F ``J ; a' CE i~ 3~. ~w~. 3~S N `~Ti g3 a~~a j~ ~ ~O ~ t~Q~ ?- a Qo ~ W v av . c~ W Y 2 -i ~` Q~ e O O V 1 Mr, Barry Burnell O Campos Verdes Modifications June 15, 1992 Page 2 These recent changes in the on-site circulation plan have precipitated the need to prepare the following addendum material which supplements the current traffic study document. The following sections discussed some of the subtle implications which these changes have on the findings of the earlier study. Project Trip Generation Although the proposed on-site circulation system changes have resulted in minor re- configuration of residential lots within Planning Area 6, the total number of dwelling units for this Planning Area remains the same (141 medium density dwelling units). Dwelling unit counts within the other project Planning Area have also remained the same, therefore O project trip generation estimates used in the original traffic study are still valid. Project Trip Distribution While the "meandering' design of the proposed realignment of Campos Verdes Loop road will have a discouraging effect on "short cut" trips through the project, it should not have any significant impact on the assumed distribution of project trips. Elimination of the North "C" Street connection would, however, result in a minor redistribution in site traffic. As shown in Exhibit B, only 2.5 percent of the total daily project trips have been estimated to use North "C" Street to access Roripaugh Road. This represents approximately 400 vehicle trips per day. At Roripaugh Road and Winchester Road, approximately one half of the trips are distributed to and from the north (primarily on Winchester) and the remaining half are destined to and from the southwest on Winchester. Elimination of the North "C" Street connection to Roripaugh Road would result in a small increase in the number of project trips assigned to Margarita Road (primarily) to gain access to and from Winchester Road. A small portion of the traffic using North "C" Street included trips between the Roripaugh Estates residential development and the Campos Verdes neighborhood retail center. A review of the earlier projected traffic volumes also revealed some through traffic being O assigned to "C" Street. These trips were traveling through project, to and from General Kearny Road as well as the Regional Center (via Campos Verdes Loop Road). u 0 O 4 ~~ S m u n e ~ 0 `o 6 D O~ 1 I ~ N P M m A C ~ a ®F ._ ~ ~ ~ ~ .e o d a .~+ N O ® r C V E ~ c ~ rn N ~_ ~" m V 9 ~_ ~O ~ b ~ C N r v r~ c ~ ~ ~+ c ~ O !aJ- ~ d a~ m .ti m ~_ ~_ t u w O O O ~•~~ ~8ov~ ~ Mr. Barry Burnell O Campos Verdes Modifications June 15, 1992 Page 3 Analysis of Traffic Impacts WSA has evaluated the re-distribution of project traffic which would result from the elimination of North "C" Street. Figure A-8 depicts the resulting Year 2000 Projected Daily Traffic (with the elimination of North "C" Street). Adjusted AM and PM peak-hour projections are illustrated in Figures A-9a and A-l0a respectively. Study intersections affected by the redistribution of traffic (along the perimeter of the project) were re-analyzed to assess the impact of the new street configuration on traffic operation. The results of the analysis are summarized in Table A-1. The "key" map in Table A-1 is attached as Figure A-14. Findings of the analysis indicate that with the new on-site street configuration: O o Level of Service for the intersection of Margarita Road/General Kearny Road would change from LOS A (ICU = 60) to LOS B (ICU = 67) during the PM peak hour; o Level of Service for the intersection of Margarita Road/Winchester Road would improve slightly from LOS C (ICU = 71) to LOS B (ICU = 70) during the PM peak hour; o Levels of Service for all other intersections would remain the same and would operate at LOS C or better; and o All but one of the off-site intersections would operate at LOS B or better. Recommended Improvements Revisions to the recommended roadway improvements in the vicinity of the project are depicted in Figures A-20a and A-20b. It is important to note that no significant "new" O improvements are being recommended. The revised improvements depicted in these figures are all on-site and are the direct result of the on-site street system configuration changes described earlier. No new signal requirements would result from these changes. 3~ o a m m a ~, a a a a a a a a a A a a n' U_ M ~ ~ ~ ~ v n v ~ M r o O M e ~ Y O ~ a a U a a a a a a a a a a a ~ 0. z E 'L. ~ = ~ ~ U 00 M N h N t~ ...i Q r < M ? h M ~ ~ N ~ N ~ [~ M M ~ .7 'QO U ~ ~ ~ v < w ' ` ~ a ~ y ~ a ~. ~ 3 E a U v a N L d [[ T ~" o L y`~ Y ~ ~ a° ~ C ,~ S ~ c ~ o a ai ~ ~ ° ~ a a m ac' ~ ~ ~ `i' ~ ~ ~ ti v o v 0 CJ ~ Y y y ~ °i y N T ` T O y U U y U U R% T a T C °~ ayi ~ c U t c_ O C E L U ~ w U Y q V ~G ~ U ~ ~ o~ n`3 ? U ~ ~ `ai ` N °~ ~C SC ~ > U dS 3 d1 U °'S 3 .. .. ° ° E rn ~ > ~' E v > .. c ~ EE ''c o ~ v ~ C v C7 d a i V C~ ~ y c E ~ y c E ~ Cj C7 c: a C S dS a1 aS ~ aS vS A ~ ~ ~ C~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ fn S ~ Q in U ~ U E ~ N x E ~ in in ~, Cl ' 00 M O~ M 00 ~ .Ci N .Nr 'ct Vl ~ h ~ N 8 U -~ ~ O O O ~ ~ . . N N N N N c~1 Z. 0 O O 1 1 i, ~•A Mr. Barry Burnell O Campos Verdes Modifications June 15, 1992 Page 4 Roadway Implementation Issues __ In response to the City's request to provide general guidelines regarding the implementation schedule needs for Margarita Road (between Solana Way and Winchester Road) and General Kearny Road (from Margarita Road to Nicolas Road) WSA has developed the following recommendations: o Construct interim two-lane section of Margarita Road and related realignment of General Kearny Road prior to occupation of Campos Verdes Phase I. o Complete construction of Margarita Road section by fourth quarter of 1995 or prior to occupation of Campos Verdes Phase II. O o Construct extension/widening of Genera] Kearny Road from the project site to Nicolas Road by the fourth quarter of 1996 or prior to 75 percent build-out and occupation of Campos Verdes Phase II. These guidelines are based on a previous assessment of implementations needs which had been prepared for the Temecula Regional Center project. These guidelines should be reviewed in more detailed at the time that building permits are processed far both projects. Please note the following levels of project impact on Margarita Road and General Kearny Road which has been expressed as the precent of total Year 2000 daily traffic (contributed by Campos Verdes). o Margarita Road - Solana Way to General Kearny Road - 14 to 21 percent - General Kearny Road to Winchester Road - 18 to 31 percent O Mr. Barry Burnell Campos Verdes Modifications June 15, 1992 Page 5 o General Kearny Road - Margarita Road to project "A" Street - 5 to 17 percent - Project "A" Street to Nicolas Road - 7 percent e s s r a ~ a a a Wilbur Smith Associates trusts that this addendum analysis will assist City of Temecula staff in their ongoing review of the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. Please fell free to contact me at any, time if you have questions regarding this material. Sincerely yours, Wilbur Smith A~(s~sociates ~'D'~'wi (~ ~,1lLtl~ Robert A. Davis Associate Transportation Engineer RADaj Campos Verdes Update\CAMVEDMD.LE'I~27129U O O O O O i a d 5 m A 'O 7 r N V w a. l9 ~_ W d S N O a m U N (~ m N YI I ~ ~ ' O I•I• ~ r ~ /•I• '/ • a Y .I. O Z Z ,I.I Z j ¢~ o m 5 W •I QZ w o I.I zo~a o0 Y j •I,I• f 2 Q = F a V Q I`I tll Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 I•I, S~._.g1 Q J 04e 0 Z .I m .-2~.5 m ~ ~~ t LZ ~ ~ W ~ ~-°z,~ " i ~, r73 ~ i -oe~ ~ ~ r .~ , J ~. ~--oei .. F 0 '" 4 ° L` t ~ 3pJ 1 T N tss_J '1 t r. ~ V ~ r ^ ~. ,fig,) o •1 a o ~osg-. m see ~~ ~ ® a 50 ~ ~ g ~ f ~. ~} 'O~~~Ya ~ H .~ o o C C , z5~ y @s w ~. ~ W m o ~ m _Im _N g 0~ + ~ ~O ~ "e Y~ g o~~ t2~ ~ A 1 F; o s, r~51 .~ J ~ ~~ ~ ~ 9 ~ o ~J~; ~ ~ o,~ oar ~ ~ 1 f 1 /5 (' g5~ 1p11 ^~ 6 fi ,~ ~ ~ g5 ~ 1 = ~ ~M~. j !~ t ~0.~ 2 g y~C' ~ ~~ ,,.s V s0 i~ ~~, t2,~ tii ~uy,~ L o i Z ~, ~ , r~`a 1 r ~' i ~~. 1 _ ~ I ~~ z ncPq. r. •_ ~ 1 I •C ~, _ ~ ,~ ~ !ii a y r 'oa H~~ba '~` ~ i ~ 0 r X60 ~~. y b ~ ~~~m ,,• e" r~ ti~g e v ^~,`~ e~ `l. y3l M1 0 /-. QO• ^10,~~ ~Q O 5~ G ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oD ~ N (Q ~ ' ~ Q ~ P O ,,.0.® '~d S ~ O ~~, ~ i' .o ~. LL ,I~ f/ m a Q ,B~® O Z D A O} ¢Q` ~ m 0: Z .I~ <J w m W ~ ,,I~~ 20 ~~ m o Q ~~ b (7 ~ ~ W .~~' 2`-18 m 2 Q J 0 tl_ Z ~.~ ad .-1081 m °n~' ~ A L ~ r r ,~ ~' ye x o ^ t, ~s~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~, zse~ 1 r r o ?~ Z ~,~'! N r,, 0, ~ N 2~, 8 ^~ m ~ m ~,~ 2r g~ ~ 2 ~ ~ fr6 ~, - 2e~ y ~ uw ~, e W ~, N N ~ 60.7 an LOC W ~ S9 d 4 r~ ®` I r p 4,12 ~ ~ 0 11 ~ ~ o ~~ R ~Na (" 19 ~ O ,~ J '~ N ~ ~ m w ti° G~21 ~ 9gJ ~~' ~ ~ W U a > . `1 .-. e! a :.• ^~ iDy,3e~ ACS m ,~o ~} 'm ~ 1 ) ,n ~ 9. y ~ O e~ ~~~ O /1 ` t 1 0 •-• j 1 0 ( Z `.~, ~ ., r, g y~' ~ ~ 1 ~ T! j •~ ~ NN ~ !2A ~ n N062 ~ j r j ~ < e~\ ~ e!` ~ F ~O ~M1 ~" r M1~, o, 1~ ' ~i \J R~0%'~ ~O. ,1p10 ~~ O ~Q, ~~ Q•~^p ~~ 6 ~q0~ 1~~ ~~jOO~dj 5 Vb0[~ 5 s C O r O 1 a rn A 9 a w N v h W m m '~ N O a l0 U O O O 0 O B / ~, 1 P m u a :°. a F- c ~ _ o m u u m a n m O rn ~ ~ Q ¢ H z ~ a z o ~ Q W ~ A Y m Jl1.~ ~ ,.s J J a i•~~ S ~~ w Z ',~. , ~ C7 H ` rN O z ® :~`t .2t ! N (y W O ~ N m I > Q iy Q1 7 01 N lL C t9 J C U ~ ~ ~ ~ Q1 A ~ ~ C ~ N .~ V ._. ~ N m U V ~ ~ U OC '0 ~ W ~, N d ~ ~ d ~e7+ ~ N ~ G a ~ Q ~ ~ ~ U C ~ ~U ~~ ~ c O~ v t~ g~ 7 t L y o N N1 i~ ~' _ t~ <" ~ O ~ Jr ^.-Z L~ ~ c c t t ~ ^Z J 14 !~' ~ ~ o' J t ~ - J ~ i a Q ` ~ ~ ~ ~ t O ~ r ~ ' ~ ~1 s 1~, ~ 2 Pe W ~ /I \ m .l ~? ~ ~ ~ l ~ Y ~ U J . _ - i o ~ ~ v0 ~'_ r `, ~ ,~ /„ o~ ~ ~ l~ ri ~ N Z NN J 1 ~ Z t ~~ r~ ~ ~ L~ `~ ~2 ~ j ~ ~ a , , _Z t ~ t ~ ~ r Z z~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ; ~~ oZ ^ t,' .~ f ,~ ~ N, o~`a C _ Y N1 i W O N~ a 2 ~ ~ ~. r O `~ L1 ~~ N~tN a ° w Jli. : ~ ` ° l`~ ~~ ~ o ~~ 1 t f j a ,J '" ~ : ~ H o , , L r r , • ~ ® ip F~ l iM v \N 1 Bryn .~2 r~. ~ O W u~ ~ L /ry 2~ / d 41 . M1 r ~ ~ ~ ~ `'•' ~ e 1 ~ ~ 1. 1 ~ N l U 3 ry oyN Jll LZ o~- .-e l l ti l ~z Z J~ ~ ~ d E . r ~, . r_ ,ti r J: . ~ ~ q (~ M ~~ I • f A' t 'N1 ~• Z ~ e. 1 ~ 6 ~ V 1~ U it N ~ ! Z ~ ~ C ~ ~ •) j ~ N ~ L L N vl W ~ V ^ n I Z l ~N •~f •/ /mil J e~ U Z 3 ~ Z N ~~ ZdA•~f N1 tN W T ~~ Pll Its ~ N~ ~~ U Z Ot~N .~ 1 ~. .-.Z r~ Q ? `~ s~ 31 bl S z ' • . .J ! 1 _ N3 1N1 i z, Z-. 1 1 r ~N~- , • r ~ 0~ Z J Z ~ I i~ '3AV NOStl3d331' 3 O O z Z--. 01 NNO ~ ~OO~ f Mj o Nl I CQOa Y F'N e v ed ~ INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTIL I2AT t_______________________________________________________________________________________________________~ (DATE: Jun-92 I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I O I I I Camino Canpos Verdes 8 General Kearny Rd. I ISCenari o: Tota( Future Volumes With Project S Vith Neu On-Site Circulation system I I I ID: 1138 I I AN Peak Hour I PM Peak Nour (Type of Area: NON •CBD I I I I Lane Meavy I (Capacity Vol une V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade P I Movements Lanesl (vphg) I (vphg) I (fU <XXY) (X) I INORTXBOUND i I I I I I i Tnru o I o 0 0` I o 0 0' I o o.o o.o I Right Turn O I 0 0 0` I 0 0 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 ISWTHBOUND I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 f 0 0.0 0.0 I Righ[ Turn 1 I 1445 16 1 I 1445 18 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 I Left Turn 1 I 1615 20 3 • I 1615 90 6 * I 12 0.0 0.0 (EASTBOUND I I I I Thru 2 I 3400 233 7 I 3400 1102 32 • I 12 0.0 0.0 I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 I Left Turn 1 I 1615 5 3` I 1615 17 1 I 12 0.0 0.0 WESTBOUND Thru 2 I 3388 1044 32 ` I 3375 492 15 I 12 0.0 0.0 Right Turn O I 0 25 0* I 0 25 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 Icu (X> = 3E LEVEL OF SERVICE _ A 38 A Notes: 1. • Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm Number of Maneuvers per Nour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical lef t-turn movement I Conf lictingl ~rki ng Bus Pedest riensl (Nm) (Nb) I I I 0 o I OI I I o I 0 I I I 0 0 I 0 I I I 0 0 I 0 I I VILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT (DATE: Jun-92 I (LOCATION: N/S SireeC 8 E/Y Street I Margarita Rd. 8 General Kearny Rd. (Scenario: Total Future Volumes With Project 8 With New On-Site Circulation System I I I ID: 1139 I I AM Peak Xour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON•CBD I I I I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl I (Capacity Vol one V/C (Capacity Volume Y/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements Lanes) (vph9) I (vphg) I I (fU I (XNV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I I INORTNBOUND I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 536 16 I 3366 570 17 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 ( I Right Turn 1 I 1245 61 0 I 1245 298 0• I 8 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 65 4 • I 1599 23 1 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I I ~ I I Thru 2 ~ 3366 526 16 * ~ 3366 572 17 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 7245 154 0• I 1245 112 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 64 4 I 1599 239 15 • I 12 2.0 0.0 I (EASTBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 ~ 3338 160 5 I 3317 534 14 • I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 22 0 I 0 104 0• I 12 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 130 8 ' I 1599 321 _ 20 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (WESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3338 695 24 ' I 3387 352 11 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 97 0• I 0 9 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 I Left Turn 1 I 1615 352 22 I 1675 260 16 • I 12 0.0 0.0 I t------------------~ ________ _____---_ --__----.- --~-------. -______--- ----_____ -~---__-- --_--_ -------- _____- -_--- -__-_____---~ ICU (X) = 52 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ Notes: 1. • Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning val ones are added to thru volute where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Nunber of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left turn movement A 67 B WiLBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT DATE: Jun-92 O LOCATION: N/S Streec 8 E/H Street Margarita Rd . 8 Ninthe ster Rd. ~SCenario: Total Future Volumes Yich Project 8 Yich New On-Si te Circulaf ion System ID: 1198 ~ .................. ~...___.... -..._-......-.-..__- ~.-_-......___.__.___ _-..._. .t.____........__ ....___-..... --.._ ______-----~ AM Peak Hour ~ PM Peak Xour I7ype of Area: NON-CBD lane Heavy Conf litting~ Capacity Volume V/C Capacity Volume V/C ~ Width Veh. G rade Parking Bus Pedestri ans~ Movements Lanes (vphg) ~ (vphg) ~ (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) NORTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 335 10 ~ 3366 615 18 ' ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 337 8 ~ 1245 327 0' ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 left Turn 1 ~ 1599 119 7 * ~ 1599 108 7 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 (SOUTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 611 18 ' ~ 3366 432 13 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 400 5* ~ 7245 215 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 7599 132 8 ~ 7599 173 11 ' ~ 72 2.0 ~0.0 EASTBOUND Thru 3 ~ 5049 768 15 ~ 5049 1259 25 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 95 0 ~ 1245 780 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 0 Lett Turn 2 ~ 3097 281 9 ' ~ 3097 610 20 * ~ 72 2.0 0.0 ILIESTBOUND Thru 3 ~ 5049 1602 32 ' ~ 5049 7072 21 ' ~ 72 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 58 0* ~ 1245 62 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 260 9 ~ 3004 475 14 ~ 11 2.0 0.0 ICU (X) = 72 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ Notes: 1. • Indicaces critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to th ru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimun green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement C 70 B YILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT {DATE: Jun-92 { {LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Scree[ { Margarita Rd. 8 Reg. Ctr. Dr./Campus V. Ln. {Scenario: Totat Future Volunes Yith Project 6 With New On-Site Li rculation Sys [em ~.-..... ID: 1199 AM Peak Xour ~ PM Peak Nour {Type of Area: NON-CBD Capacity Movements Lanes (vphg) ~' {NORTHBOUND { Thru 2 ~ 3366 Right Turn 7 ~ 1330 Lett Turn 1 ~ 1599 ISOUTNBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 Left Turn 1 { 1599 {EASTBWNO { Thru 1 { 7683 { Right Turn 1 { 7330 { left Turn 1 { 1595 {LIESTBC!UND { Thru 7 ~ 1315 { Right Turn 0 ~ C { Lef[ Turn 1 ~ 7595 { Lane Heavy { Contl itting~ Yol une V/C ~Capaeity Volume Y/C ~ Yid[h Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (vphg) ~ (ft) (XNV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) { { ~ { { 688 20 ° ~ 3366 828 25 ° ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 39 0 ° { 1330 53 0 ° ~ 10 2.0 0.0 0 36 2 { 1599 19 1 { 12 2.0 0.0 603 18 ~ 3366 655 19 { ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 { 0 { 184 0 ~ 1245 121 0 { 8 2.0 0.0 0 { 179 17 ' ~ 1599 251 16 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 { 4 0 ~ 1683 17 3° { { 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 39 1 { 1330 172 11 ' ~ 10 2.0 0.0 0 0 21 3 * { 1599 79 5 { 12 2.0 0.0 { 71 7 ' ~ 1345 13 4 { 12 2.0 0.0 0 { 0 79 0' ~ 0 38 0 { 0 0.0 0.0 702 6 ~ 1599 96 6 • ~ 12 2.0 0.0 Icu <x> _ LEVEL OF SERVICE _ 41 A 60 A Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to th ru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour G. Nb Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement NI LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT (DATE: Jun-92 I O I (LOCATION: N/S StreeC 8 I E/W Street I I Roripaugh Rd. & Winchester Rd. I (Scenario: Total Future Vol ones With ProjecC 8 With New On-Site Circulation System I I I ID: 2019 t ..................a ___...--____--._______. -__.._~-._--_.._...--.-.-_------___~--__--_ .--__-_------__ .____-___.. ..__.______~ I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON•C8D I I I I I Lane Neavy Conflicting) I ( Capacity Vo lume Y/C (Capacity Volume Y/C I Width Veh. Grade Pa rking Bus Peaest ri ansl I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I (fU (XNV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I INORTNBWND I I I I I I I I I Thru t I 1700 19 1 I 1700 11 1 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1257 - 18 0 I 1257 10 0 I 8 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1615 84 5 • I 1615 219 14 * I 12 0.0 0.0 I ISOUTNBWND I Thru 1 I 1700 11 3' I 1700 53 ~ 3* I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 40 0• I 1245 184 9` I 8 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 29 2 I 1599 102 6 I 12 2.0 0.0 I IEASTBWND I I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 1026 20 I 5049 1642 33 • I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1330 160 0 I 1330 75 0* I 10 0.0 0.0 0 O I I Lett Turn 1 I 1599 51 3 • I 1599 42 3 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (WESTBOUND I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 1796 36 * I 5049 1146 23 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn 1 I 1330 148 0 • I 1330 23 0 I 10 2.0 0.0 0 I I Left Turn 1 I 7615 25 2 I 1615 78 5 * I 12 0:0 0.0 I y .. -i - .. - { .. • i iCU (X) 47 64 LEVEL OF SERVICE = A 8 NOtes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to th ru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour WILBUR SM [TH ASSOCIATES 5. Three percent mininwn green to cyle ratio assumed for critical lef t•turn movement O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT (DATE: Jun-92 I I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I "H" Street 8 General Kearny Rd. (Scenario: Total Future Vol ones With Project 8 With New On-Site Circulation System I I I 1D: I I AM Peak Xour I I I (Capacity Volume I- Movements Lanes) (vphg) 2060 _...._-___-a_________________________ ___.__._.____-__.._____.__...__ I PM Peak Xour (Type of Area: NON-CBO I I Lane Heavy V/C ICapeeity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking I (vphg) I (ft) (XXV) (X) (Nm) I I I I (NORTHBOUND I I I I Thru t I 1287 0 0 I 1287 0 .- 1 I 12 2.0 0.0 I Right Turn O I 0 2 0 I 0 16 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I left Turn 1 I 1599 16 3 • I 1599 58 ~ 4 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 ISWTXBOUND I I I Thru T I 1291 1 5` I 1294 1 3• I 12 2.0 0.0 I Right Turn O I 0 62 0~ I 0 34 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 I Left Turn 1 I 1599 0 0 I 1599 2 0 I 12 2.0 0.0 (EASTBOUND I I I I Thru 2 I 3265 245 9 I 3359 1081 33 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 I Right Turn O I 0 61 0 I 0 16 0• I D 0.0 0.0 I Left Turn 1 I 1599 13 - 3 * I 1599 35 2 I 12 2.0 0.0 (WESTBOUND I I ( I Thru 2 I 3366 1066 32 * I 3364 529 16 I 12 2.0 0.0 I Right Turn O I 0 1 0' I 0 2 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I Left Turn 1 I 1599 30 2 I 1599 4 3• I 12 2.0 0.0 ICU (X) = 43 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ A 43 A Noes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimm green to cyte ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement 0 0 0 0 I Conf lietingl Bus Pedestrians) cNb) I I I o I OI I o I oI I I 0 I D I I I 0 icy W[LBUR SNITH ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT IOATE: Jun-92 I O ILOCATtON: I N/S Street 8 E/N Street I I I "A" St. 8 Ge neral Kearny Rd. I ISCenario: Tot al Future Volumes With Project 8 Vi th Neu On-Site Circulation System I I I iD: 2062 I I AM Peak Hour I PM Deak Hour IType of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy tonf lictingl I Rapacity Vo lume V/C ICapatity Vo lume V/C I Vidth Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestriansl I Movements Lanesl (vphg) I (vphg) I I (ft) I (XHY) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I I INORT HBWND I Thru I I O I 0 0 0 I I 0 0 0' I I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 D 0° I' 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0• I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I ISWTHBWND I I Thru O I 0 0 0" I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1445 14 1* I 1445 6 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1615 0 0 I 1615 22 3' I 12 0.0 0.0 I IEASTBWND I ~ I I I I Thru 2 I 3400 248 7 I 3400 1186 35 • I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 D I 0 0 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I left Turn t I 1615 5 3* I 1615 6 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 I IVESTBWND I I I I Thru 2 I 3400 1055 31 • I 3400 511 15 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I O Right Turn O I 0 0 0' I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 I ICU CX) = 35 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ - Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Nudxr of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for cri [ical lef t•[urn movement A 38 A VILBUR SMiTN ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT (DATE: Jun-92 ( (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/Y Street I "C" St. 8 Campos Verdes Ln. IScenari o: Total Future Volunes With Project 8 With New On-Site Circulation System I I I AN P I ( I (Capacity I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (NORTHBOUND I I I Thru 1 I 7530 I Right Turn 0 I 0 I Left Turn 1 I 7615 (SOUTHBOUND I I Thru 1 I 1700 I Right Turn 1 I 1445 I Left Turn 0 I 0 (EASTBOUND I I Thru 0 I 0 I Right Turn 1 I 1445 I Left Turn 1 I 1615 (WESTBOUND I I Thru 0 I 0 I Right Turn 0 I 0 I left Turn 0 I 0 ~------------- -----t ______-__ ID: 2212 I I I ----------- --------- -----------------------------a----_-____---- __---_--_-___----___---_-__--.. eak Hour I~ PN Peak Nour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I lane Heavy Cmflietingl Volume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I (vphg) I I (f t) I (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I 2 0 I I 1530 8 1 I I 12 0.0 0.0 0 I 0 I 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 - 0.0 0 1 101 6 * I 1615 17 3 ' I 12 0.0 0.0 I 5 3* I I 1700 2 3• I I 12 0.0 0.0 0 I 0 I 60 3 * I 1445 22 0 • I 72 0.0 0.0 0 I 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I 0 0 I I 0 0 0* I I 0 0-0 0.0 0 I 0 I 25 0 I 1445 735 8• I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 1 13 3 * I 1615 60 4 I 12 0.0 0.0 I 0 0* I I 0 0 0 I I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I 0 0 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 [CU (X) = 16 LEVEL OF SERVICE A 14 A Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Xour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WI LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT • ............. .... ............ .............. ............... ......... ....... ............. ......... .......i (DATE: Jun-92 I O (LOCATION: I N/S Street 8 E/N Street I I I "C" Street 8 "D" Street I (Scenario: Total Future Volumes With Project 8 Yith New On-Site Circulation System I I I ID: 2214 ~ ......:.:..:. .....~.__._...-_....... ..._..._._._ ~...__......__ _......__ .___.. t...__._ .___.... __...._____._ ___........____-. I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Nour (Type of Area: NON -CBD I I I I I lane Xeavy Conf lictingl I ICapacicy Vo lume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestr iansl I Movements Lanesl (vph9) I <vphg) i I (ft) I CxxV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I Thru l I 1683 38 3' I 1683 4 0 I 12 2.0 0.0 ~ 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 1 0° I 1245 1 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0` I 0 2.0 0.0 I ISOUT HBOUND I I I I I Thru l I 1515 10 1 I 1515 73 5• I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0• I 0 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 20 3 • I 1599 64 4 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (EASTBOUND I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0' I 0 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0• I 0 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0 I 0 2.0 0.0 I IwESTBOUND I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0' I 0 0 0 I 0 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn 1 I 1431 65 3 ' I 1431 21 0 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 I I Left Turn l I 1599 0 0 I 1599 1 3' I 12 2.0 0.0 I Icu tz) = 9 B LEVEL Of SERVICE A A Notes: 1. 'Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Nour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour NI LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical lef t-turn movement O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT DATE: Jun-92^/` ~LOCATtON: Nf5 Street 8 E/W Street Cemi no Campos Verdes 8 "D" St. l~-~ Scenario: Total Future Volumes With Proj eet 8 With Neu On•Site Circulation System ~_______________________________________________________________________________________________________t ID: ~__________________t__.._..__.....__. AM Peak Nour Capacity Movements Lanes (vphg) NORTHBOUND Thru t ~ 1404 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 ~ Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 ~SOUTHBWND , Thru 1 ~ 1308 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 EASTBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1700 Right Turn 1 ~ 1257 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 WESTBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1700 Right Turn 1 ~ 1257 left Turn 1 ~ 1615 2215 .__.__._.._a ........................... .~___......___......__.._..___ PM Peak Nour Type of Area: NON•CBD Lane Xeavy Volume V/C Capacity Volume V/C ~ Width Yeh. Grade Parking (vphg) ~ (fU (XHY) (X) (Nm) 4 0 ~ 1366 4 1 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 1 0 ~ 0 10 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 t3 3 * ~ 1615 6 3 ' ~ 12 0.0 0.0 1 3* ~ 1341 3 3` ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 31 0* ~ 0 74 0` ~ 0 0.0 0.0 1 0 ~ 1615 0 0 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 1 0 ~ 1700 16 3* ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 14 0 ~ 1257 30 i` ~ 8 0.0 0.0 5 3` ~ 1615 20 1 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 14 3` ~ 1700 6 0 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 0` ~ 1257 1 0 ~ 8 0.0 0.0 11~ 1 ~ 1615 3 3` ~ 12 0.0 0.0 ICU (X) = 12 13 LEVEL OF SERVICE = A A Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm Nu~er of Maneuvers per Nour 4. Nb - Nudxr of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimun green to cyle ratio assumed for cri Beal left-turn movement Lonf licting~ Bus Pedestrians (Nb) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J--~ WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O INTERSEC710N DATE: LOCATION: O ~SCenario: I..___._.-__ CAPACITY UTILIZAT Jun-92 N/S Street 8 E/W Street aH" Street 8 Campos Verdes Ln. Total Fu[ure Volumes With Project 8 With Neu On-Site Circulation System ID: I I AM Peak Hour Capacity Movements Lanesl (vphg) NORTHBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1700 Right Turn 1 ~ 1257 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 SOUTHBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1700 Right Turn 1 ~ 1257 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 EASTBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1700 Right Turn 1 ~ 1257 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 (WESTBOUND Thru 1 I 170C Right Turn 1 ~ 1257 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 2216 PM Peak X Volume V/C Capacity Volume (vphg) 2 0 ~ 1700 3 0 0 ~ 1257 1 33 3 ~ 1615 10 1 3 • ~ 1700 15 0 * ~ 1257 11 4 0 ( 1615 51 34 2 ~ 1700 14 7 0 ~ 1257 51 181 11 ` ~ 1615 12 144 8 • ~ 1700 21 17 0 ~ 1257 1 0 0 ~ 1615 tCU (X) = 25 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ A our Type of Area: NON-CBD lane Xeavy Conf licting~ V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (tU (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 3 • ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 * ~ 8 0.0 0.0 0 1 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 4 0 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 6 1 ~ 8 0.0 0.0 0 3 • ~ 12 0.0 0.0 3 8 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 8 0.0 0.0 0 0 7 8 ` ~ 12 0.0 0.0 3 * ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 8 0` ~ 8 0.0 0.0 0 1 0 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 17 A Notes: 1. ` Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning vo limes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Xour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY U7ILIZAT (DATE: Jun-92 I (LOCATION: I N/S Street 8 E/N Street _ I "I" Street 8 General Kearny Rd. (Scenario: Total Future Volumes With Project & With New On•Site Circulation System I I I ID: 3001 I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl I (Capacity Volans V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Nidth Veh. Grade Parking Bus PedesCriansl I Movements Lanesl (vphg) I (vph6) I (ft) (XNV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I I INORT HBOUND I I I I I I I I Thru 1 I 1530 0 0 I 1530 1 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 6 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1615 0 0` I 1615 1 3` I 12 0.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I I Thru 1 I 1700 0 0` I 1700 1 3` I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1257 39 3` I 1257 25 1` I 8 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn t I 1615 1 0 I 1615 1 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 I (EASTBOUND I I I I Thru 2 I 3400 240 7 I 3400 1118 33 * I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 1 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1615 7 3 ' I 1615 23 1 ( 12 0.0 0.0 - I INESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3400 1058 31 ` I 3398 509 15 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 1 0` I 0 2 D I 0 D.0 0.0 I Left Turn 1 I 1615 0 0 I 1615 0 0` I 12 0.0 0.0 y------------ ------t ______.__ _._...... ........... +........ ...._._.. _.......-__ ~_._.... ...... ...-._ ___--__- .._.. ......._____~ ICU (X) = 37 40 LEVEL OF SERVIC E = A A Notes: 1. `Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate Turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Nour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT (DATE: Jun-92 I O (LOCATION: I N/S Street 8 E/W Street I I I "J" Street 8 General K earny Rd. I (Scenario: I Total Future Volumes With Project 8 With Neu On-S ite Circulation System I • ............ ..... ........................................................ .............. ..... I ...........t ID: 3002 I I AM Peak Hour I PN Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Neavy Conf lictingl I (Capacity Vo lume V/C (Capacity Yol une V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I Cvphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1445 _ 0 0 I 1445 1 0 _I 12 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn t I 1615 0 0 I 1615 2 3` I 12 0.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0° I 0 0.0 0.0 0. I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0° I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I (EASTBOUND I - I I I I Thru 2 I 3400 238 7 I 3400 1118 33 ` I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1257 2 0 I 1257 1 0° I 8 0.0 0.0 0 O I I left Turn O I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I IWESTBWND I /~ Thru 2 I 3400 1059 31 * I 3400 509 15 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I 'v) Right Turn 0 I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I I Left Turn 1 I 1615 1 0 I 1615 1 3° I 12 0.0 0.0 I ICU (X) = 31 LEVEL OF SERVICE Noes: 1. * lydicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to th ru vol une where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Xour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Xour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement A 39 A WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT (DATE: Jun-92 I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/Y Street I Camino Campos Verdes 8 "C" St. (Scenario: Total future volumes Mith Project 8 Nith New On-Si to tircu lation System I I I ID: 2217 ~ ..................a-___._...... .......___._.... .~.._______._...._........._. ..___._. _ ._.__._ .-_.____ __.-.. I I AN Peak Hour I PM Peak Mour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I Lane Heavy I (Capacity Vo lume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Nidth Veh. Grade Parking I NovemenTS Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I I <ft) i (XHV) (X) (Nm) I INORTXBOUND I I I I I Thru t I 1530 18 1 I 1530 20 1 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I left turn 1 I 1615 12 3 ` I 1615 22 3 * I 12 0.0 0.0 ISOUTNBOUND I I I Thru 1 I 7700 20 3 I 1700 35 3 • I 12 0.0 0.0 0 I Right Turn t I 1257 5 0' I 1257 0 0• I 8 0.0 0.0 I Left Turn O( 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 (EASTBOUND I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I Right Turn 1 I 1257 6 0 I 1257 70 4* I 8 0.0 0.0 I Left Turn 1 I 1615 0 0 I 1615 0 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 WESTBOUND I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 ICU (X) = b LEYEL OF SERVICE A 10 A Notes: 1. ' Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Xour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Nour 5. Three percent minimm green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement I Conf lictingl Bus Pedestrians) CNb) I I I D I 0 I I ( 0 I OI I I o I 0 0 I I i 0 NI LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS • PLANNERS 3600 Lime Street, Suite 226 • Riverside, CA 92501 • (714) 274-0566 FAX (7 i ») 2?4-9220 December 02, 1991 Mr. Doug Stewart Deputy City Engineer City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Mr. Stewart: Wilbur Smith Associates (WSA) has prepared the following Campos Verdes Traffic Study Addendum material which is focused on responding to the City's traffic study-related comments set forth in the Department of Public Work's (Mr. Robert Righetti) letter to the Planning Department dated September 12, 1991. A copy of this letter is attached. O We have a made sincere effort to respond to all comments which appear to solicit a response. Please note that several of the comments appear to be directed to the planning department and deal with Engineering Department recommendations or comments pertaining to the formulation of conditions of approval for the project (e.g. comment numbers 2, 3, 8, 12 and 18). Based on the outcome of November 6th meeting we have eliminated the need to address comment number 4. As we discussed, virtually all principal access roadways which would be used by this project are already programmed for improvement as part of Assessment District 161 or Community Facilities District No. 88-12 (and are included in the City's five year Capital Improvement Program). While a five year project build-out analysis could be performed, it would only confirm that five-year development levels and associated traffic increases would warrant implementation of the programmed improvements. It was also recognized in our meeting that Bedford Properties is a key participant in both A.D. 161 and CFD 88-12. These already established Districts will ultimately be responsible for implementing most of the off-site improvements in the immediate vicinity of the Campos Verdes project. Comments 19 through 22 are not related to the traffic study, and therefore are not adddressed our responses. It is our understanding that these comments will be addressed O in the Final Draft EIR document. ALBANY. NV • ALLIANCE. OH • CAIRO. EGYPT • CHARLESTON. SC • COLUMBIA. SC • COLUMBUS, OH • DES MOINES. IA FALLS CHURCH, VA HONG KONG • HOUSTON. TX • KNOXVILLE. TN LEXINGTON, KV LONDON, ENGLAND LOS ANGELES. CA MIAMI, FL NEENAH, WI NEW HAVEN, CT OAKLAND, CA ORLANDO. FL PITTSBURGH, PA PORTSMOUTH, NH PROVIDENCE. RI RALEIGH. NC RICHMOND, VA • RIVERSIDE. CA • ROSELLE. IL • SAN FRANCISCO, CA • SAN JOSE, CA • SINGAPORE • TORONTO, CANADA • WASHINGTON, DC EMPLOYEE-OWNED COMPANY Doug Stewart City of Temecula O Page 2 November 21, 1991 Comment No. 1 Response The traffic counts used in the study were based on recent (mot more than one year old) peak hour intersection counts and existing improvement information was current in April 1991 when the major portion of the study was performed. Factoring of volumes was only used to estimate the less critical daily link volumes where current daily volumes were not available. This not with standing WSA has prepared an updated summary of existing conditions in the attached Exhibit A. It should be noted that due to the nature of the modeling procedure used in the analysis, revisions to the existing conditions documentation in not way affects the study traffic forecasts or analysis conclusions. Comment No. 5 Response O The neighborhood park in Planning Area 1 was considered to be a very passive use which would primarily serve the immediate Campos Verdes community and to a very nominal degree the adjacent residential areas within Meadowview. These kinds of neighborhood parks tend to promote trips made by favorable transportation modes such as walking and bicycling. For the most part, trips to and from the park would be internal to the project. It could be argured that by not modeling the neighborhood park site trips we forced all project-related recreation trips to off-site recreation destinations which resulted in higher off- site traffic impacts for the project. Based on current Institute of Transportation Engineers trip rates, a 13.5 acre City or County park site would only generate approximately 30 to 40 daily vehicle trips, most of which would be made during off-peak periods. A neighborhood park which is typically far less structured, in terms of available facilities (e.g. sports facilities and picnic facilities), would be expected to generate even less trips and more of the trips would likely be non-vehicle trips. The number of vehicle trips likely to be generated during the adjacent highway peak is in our opinion neglegably low. O Campos VerdesU2esponse to Comments~271290 O Doug Stewart City of Temecula Page 3 November 21, 1991 Comment No. 6 Response The Tranplan forecasting mode uses the typical four-step procedure including: 1) trip generation; 2) trip distribution; 3) mode choice; and 4) traffic assignment. Steps 1 and 3 are preformed manually. Step 2) trip distribution, is performed by the mode] software using the gravity model procedure. The gravity model establishes a trip table which represents how trips are distributed between zones in the model study area. Step 4 is also performed by the software and in this case a capacity restraint assignment was used. The model assigns study area traffic to the network according to minimum travel time paths between traffic analysis zones (TAZ's). The initial assignment is not capacity restrained. The modeling software performs volume capacity comparisons on the initial assignment and adjusts travel speeds on links which are over capacity and/or are approaching capacity. The assignment O procedures is repeated several times until the assignments reach an equilibrium state. The nature of this procedure process does not allow vehicle trips associated with individual TAZ's to be "tracked" through the assignment process. It is therefor not possible to report the actual distribution/assignment of projected related trips on the roadway network as they appear in the final cumulative development traffic assignment. It is possible, however, to determine how the gravity model has distributed the project trip and the minimum travel time routings of project trips by running an assignment of "project trips only". WSA has performed this "project only" assignment and has reported the result in project traffic distribution on area street in Exhibit B. Ii should be recognized that this type of traffic assignment does not reflect the natural alternative route selection process which occurs when drivers encounter or expect congestion along some of the more direct routes. It should also be noted that percentages shown on roadways depicted in Exhibit B in many instances do not add up due to round and the absorption of trips by TAZ's with in the study area. O Campos VerdesUtesponse to Comments~271290 Doug Stewart City of Temecula O Page 4 November 21, 1991 Comment No. 7 Response Existing turning movement counts are provided in the attached technical Appendix along with ICU worksheets for the study area intersections. ICU worksheets for area build-out conditions with and without the project are provided in the Technical Appendix. Comment No. 9 Response WSA has reported analysis results for on-site intersections ranging from intersections involving an Arterial and Secondary to those involving Collector with Local streets. ICU analysis results reported in Table 4b for all Local street intersections along the Campos Verdes Loop Road (a Collector) indicated ICU values 26 percent or lower. These intersections had projected peak hour volumes entering the intersection which totaled less than 500 vehicles per hour (in some cases less than 250 vehicles per hour). Since it was determined that traffic volumes at these intersection could easily be accommodated with standard minor street stop controls, the ICU analysis was not carried to the level of . intersections involving two local streets with lesser traffic flows. Based on our professional assessent of the traffic volumes which would be generated at these minor intersections, all could be controled in a safe and efficient manner with stop sign controll at of the minor street approach. If there are specific local strees intersection locations which are of particular concern to the City we would be happy to address them. Comment No. IO Response It is WSA's understanding that the final layout of circulation within several of the planning areas has not yet been established. O t'ampos VerdesUtesponse to Comments~271290 O Doug Stewart City of Temecula Page 5 November 21, 1991 Comment No. lI Resnonse Recommended improvements for intersections requested by City Staff are depicted in Exhibit C. Comment No. I3 Response Existing daily traffic volume information is depicted in Exhibit A and peak hour intersection counts are included in the Technical Appendix. O Comment No. 14 Resnonse ICU calcuations are included in the Technical Appendix. Comment No. IS Response The labeled TAZ roadway network is provided in the Technical Appendix. Comment No. 16 Response The location of other approved and planned projects within the immediate study area in Exhibit D. It should be noted that the model used to forecast study area build-out (year 2000) traffic voulmes actually encompases the entire Southwest Area of Riverside County. O Campos VerdesUtesponu to Commenls~271290 Doug Stewart City of Temecula O Page 6 November 21, 1991 Comment No. l7 Response Signal warrant worksheets for all recommended new signal locations are provided in the Technical Appendix. We trust that these responses will help you complete your review of the Campos Verdes project. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Sincerely yours, Wiblur Smith Associates Robert A. Davis O Assosiate Engineer RAD:tj attachment O Campos Verdes~Responu to Commentst271290 Q O V T C N N ~ v 0 `w ,~ ~ a ¢° c a v H v .. ~_ K W V 'C . ~ A U ~ f~ .y (C N t v O O V w A c9 ~ lil ~ ~ O ~ ~ U ~ y c9 a H ~ ~ U N~ '~ W ~~ C~~ u 0 Z a a 'm °c F 'o m ~ u ~ o ~ o .m a` a C~ I ~I e .. 0 ~ a A F ¢+ .. ~ °' ,~ o ~,,, a N ~ ® C V ~ C ~.- m (LL~ ~N 1~' ~_ ~ N V ~ ~_ ~A ~ b ~ C A w N d '~ C d~+ C ~ ~ L~1 v d N A CG v ~~~~ m :c r x to A ~~Dv~ ao ~ O O O O O t ~ ~ ^ 2 1 nl y y ~~ Yoy ygp2oN/ ~ ~ T r~ ~S Q N - QIV~ Q N N ~ J t ,~ v ~ ~ v ~M Q F ~ _ _ ~ y ~i ~' ~ d' ,~ 1/ b ~as~Tr~ ~ ~ ~~ z~ N_ el"~ Q _ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V v to £ C~W ' O M ~ ~ E- ~ Z ~yy ~ yo ,~ ~9 Z~G NN• ~ O ~ 1~ i ~ v o ~` V 2 ~ ~~ e ~ y ~ ~~ ~ ~ dcvd i-z' ~ N ~ ~q m 0 N O ~ 11 ~ v o v CI S o n4 -. o y y~ ey s s~-r ~,~ ' ~ .JOp O ~r1 N ~~ c ~ 1 ~ ~ N v U L W N O co C ~ ~' v E~ V ~O ~ d ~ s a, ~ = o ~~ a ~d N ~ ~ O ~ N = 'n ~x V t9 N G a o. E ~~ U N ~y L L .}r (~ cv C ~_ '~ ~o Be$D~ Y p b L' h °. „ „^, n p u ~' \~r u Y Y ° ~ E a: E E a n p. ~ o ~ o ? Y 2 U> w Y w >> a Y n q E O ro- ,: a C G c G °~ ~ V ro L 3 a L c n m o U . ~ - U 1. G 'Y' Y V m Y W Y a V' Y V a Y V ° Y° n e a° ° •° c ° ~ •~ p L L GL •~ ~ O y u U u p "' ., Y y u q ? a °u < w m° Y e a d Y m m a ~ c K 0.a ~~ m u c e Y a d a 0. ~ e Y y o ~ m G a y p 0 ~ ~ _° ° q a O p ~ G r°. Y O~_ ae .O a C a .+ Y o d o 0 o d o ~ ci Y o ^ v ° ~ w° U o o U^ ` u o ''~~JJ a p a fl a d ~ ro '°° '~° ~ 6 p. 6 _ if U 0. W E E 0. C W C 0 0 0 F p 0` ~ p ^1 Y O a 'O Y p.0 Y O !r 4.. V ~° Y Ir Y L a 4 w ~ 0. a. a U O o p u u u e o n .°. °a C~ u A U V < ~ O. < 2. F < m m m W -. 6: m oC < < m p: I I I ~ j ~ ° < m U O w w 0 '1 ~- ~+ X~ f X O a O X a I I a 5 '' VY' ~ ~° des ~ ..:..... / --- 1 ~ i 1 ~\ 1. .1 ~ I i ~ ~ ~! C = ,ALA "' ° y 1 N y ~y 1 1 p. ~ 7 1 I - d 1 I rn N X 1 I u 0: J I ° __ / ~~ n ', #~% ~ # ~, 3 // a° I s lullwry._ ,N /l OA / ____ .. ~-~I .. r 1 uN I # ~.1 pYm Y~ -N I >^' I fa ,cd ~N ~ U K # ~ # Y.~ M ,• ,` / ~~ ~ NyM O ~ n LO ` ~ 's~~' ~ - L.L}~ Y Y .r I # • n Y MYO ~ iii q~~,J, __.1TUa~ ~ 1` a nN '•~•~ .~I. ~ ~ m V,)(, IS _ , 8 C, Vd # K4Y; , ~ Y ~ , w of4 >o ° •° r 9 x N pr # ~ ~ # / ..„ a 4 p .n+ 0 7 6 y ~ a y ~ ~ Y 1.. «04to: u° aq-' y •Cu e°~/ ° < "x' :Ifo#U v~'• ~# w YAy Np; NGa 2 Nm co/`/)oval ., ~i u Y ~ G 4H V oYl S pL4~ aN \•°•~, ,I(,~ ~ ~r~P ~ .-Y. / \ ~ ° I ° _ ° u Q O ~ n 71 40 ~M1 ,j p, O J O^' LN ~ N ° a < ~°. ~'a w j'~ T ~N YN oe Q ~' I/ ~ 4 ~ YN ° ~Sr i• y ~-~ Y ~\ `e o D, ~ < Y ~ N r ~0~ ~ ~ C O- y - a = /~ ~ . I` ~ y a 0 N U O 'J p ~ Y m a Y •m m y m ~'" a o s a Y F F° \\/ ~ o / ~ z O !"I 1 ~: 0 0 Table 1 Assumed Land Use Campos Verdes A. BY PLANNING AREA Development Planning AIea Tentative Tract No. Gross Acres Approx. Size Unit Land Use 25213 Area 1 Pace18 & 9 13.5 -Open Space Area 2 Parcel ? 10.4 9.3 Net Ac Commercial Office Area 3 Parcel 4,S & 6 22.2 377 D.U.'s" Multi Family Residential Area 4 Pacel 1 13.5 10 Net Ac Neighborhood Retail Center Area S Parcel 2 & 3 15.7 267 D.U.'s Multi Family Residential Area 6 25214 27.1 141 D.U.'s Single Family Residential Area 7 25215 21 6S D.U.'s Single Family Residential Total 123 • D.U. • Dwelling Unit Note: An additional9.S gross auu are involved in on-site roads B. BY LAND USE CATEGORY Land Use Size Unit Single Family Residential 206 D.U.'s Multi Family Residential 644 D.U.'s Neighborhood Retail Center 13.5 Ac. Commercial Office 10.4 Ac. O o Primary on-site access and circulation would be provided by Campos Verdes Loop O Road. This principal project road is proposed as a two-lane residential collector street which would provide an on-site connection between Margarita Road and General Kearny Road. Full movement intersections are planned at the Campos Verdes Loop Road intersection with Margarita Road and General Kearny Road as well as at several other on-site minor street intersections. o Primary on-site access would also be provided by.:General Kearny.Road which F traverses the southern portion of the site. General Kearny is planned to be realigned to forma 'T' intersection with the Margarita Road extension. Full movement intersections are assumed along General Kearny Road at Margarita Road, "A" Street Campos Verdes Loop Road, and three other locations between _ Margarita Road and Campos Verdes Loop Road (access to Parcels 5, 6, 7, and 8 of P.M.25213). o Secondary on-site access would be provided by Starling Street and Sanderling Way which both would provide indirect access to Winchester Road via Roripaugh Road (within Roripaugh Estates -Specific Plan 164). o On Margarita Road, three access points are proposed. Full-movement access O intersection would be located at the Campos Verdes Loop Road and General Kearny Road. These two intersections are proposed as four-way intersections, providing access to both Campos Verdes and the proposed Temecula Regional Center (Specific Plan 263). One limited access driveway (right-in and right-out) is proposed to serve the neighborhood retail center (Planning Area4). o No intersections are proposed along Winchester Road. D. Zoning and Land Use Existing zoning for the site is a combination of Rural Residential (R-R) and Heavy Agriculture (A-2-20). The land uses proposed for the Campos Verdes site are consistent with the uses designated in the Southwest Area Community Plan. The project site is located in an area currently designated as Land Use Category 1 (Heavy Urban). 6 O E. Phasing and Timing O According to Mesa Homes, the entire Campos Verdes project could be developed within a four to five-year period. Future area market trends could, however, have an influence on the actual project development schedule. Given the uncertainties in the project development schedule, the traffic impact study conservatively addresses development conditions which include a full build-out of the Campos Verdes project as well as all other approved and planned projects in the surrounding area. Assumptions regarding other area development included in the traffic analysis are discussed later in the report. O O 7 ~o lea conditions O This section descnbes the traffic impact study area for the Campos Verdes project in terms of coverage, land use, and existing and planned transportation system. A. Study Area Under Riverside County guidelines, the area of significant traffic impact is defined to include al] intersections which would experience an increase of five percent (5%) or more in existing peak-hour traffic volumes as a result of the project. These "typical case" guidelines could not be used in defining the Campos Verdes study area for the following reasons: o The addition of new planned area roadways will drastically change eadsting travel patterns; and o Many new intersections will be formed by the expanded roadway network. For the purpose of this traffic impact assessment, the area of detailed study was essentially O defined by the roadway corridor which would provide primary access to and from the project. The following primary access corridors were designated for detailed study: o The Winchester Road corridor from Diaz Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road; o The Ynez Road corridor from Date Street to Solana Way; o The Margarita Road corridor from Date Street to Solana Way; and o Apricot Avenue from Jefferson Avenue to Margarita Road. B. Study Area Land Use The project site is situated in the northern Temecula area, which is currently under development. Existing zoning in the area is a combination of IP, M-SC, C-P-S, R-R and A- 8 O 2-20 (Heavy Agriculture). The Southwest Area Plan designates the Campos Verdes site as O a combination of commercial, commercial office, and residential (2-5 D.U./Ac. and &16 D.U./Ac.). Existing land use development in the immediate area is very limited with most nearby development occurring in the Ynez Road corridor. This development includes a mix of light manufacturing, auto sales and service, office, and retail centers. Existing residential development in the area is limited to the recently completed projects of Roripaugh Hills, Winchester Collection, and Woodcrest Country. These _residential areas are located northeast and south of the Campos Verdes site respectively. In order to simulate worst case cumulative development traffic conditions, all approved development projects in the area were assumed to be completed in the development of future background traffic forecasts at project build-out. It should be noted the nearby planned projects identified in Figure 1 were assumed to be built-out by the completion of the Campos Verdes project. Other approved and planned projects within an approximate two-mile radius were also included. More remote planned but not approved projects were ' assumed to be 50 percent developed. Approved and planned development included in this study is tabulated in the Technical Appendix. O C. Site Access The existing roadway network serving the project site is depicted in Figure 2. The roadway facilities providing access to and from the project site include: o Escondido Freeway~I-15) -The Escondido Freeway is a major north-south freeway serving the Temecula area, linking it to Riverside, the Los Angeles metropolitan area (via the Corona Freeway) and San Diego. In the vicinity of the proposed project, I-15 has eight through travel lanes. Project site access to and from I-15 is provided via a "modified diamond" type interchange with a "loop" ramp in the northwest quadrant. The interchange is located on Winchester Road (State Route 79) west of the project site. o Winchester Road (State Route 791-Winchester Road is a regional State highway which provides regional access to and from the HemetBanning area (northeast of Temecula) as well as local access to and from I-15. Winchester Road is a four- O 9 a a r C q 0 ~ 7 V O d d 6 O M ¢ C d 9 N _U N d L O ~ N O O C ~ ond9or na ¢O=Occoo OHO ~ n ~N IA C dl-~~N ~. ~.q 'c ~. E a n'a n x_q~mo33 ca awaoz~N<~in Z o u om~~3~r10 a ~N` W \ V m ~ ~_ W N U N 'C ~ ~ U ~ f9 w ~ N ~ U U "' A ~ t0 ~ W f4 ~ O ~ ~ ~ d V > w N ~ ~ a Q~ ~ ~ U N X W ~~~~ O O O stages of desrgn review: O O o Ynez Road -Ynez Road, which is located west of the project site, is currently a four-lane road in the vicinity of Rancho California Road, but narrows to two lanes north of Rancho California Plaza. North of S6Iana Wav YnezRoad widens fn v~cinty of Palm Plaza':: North of Winchester Road, Ynez has been improved to a full four-lane ajor) cross-section up tq its present termnus near ;gutty Dive The,wtdenmg-of YnezRoad to six lanes;frbm Palm Plaza south #o Rancho o Margarita Road/General Kearny Road - is a two to four-lane Arterial street which currently becomes North Genera] Kearny north of Solana Way. Margarita Road will ultimately be extended north across Winchester Road and continue north to Murrieta Hot Springs Road. It rs our understanding that tfie extension of o Solana Wav -Solana Way is a two-lane Major road which connects Ynez Road with Margarita Road (a north-south Arterial located east of Ynez Road). East of Margarita Road, Solana Way becomes a Secondary road serving residential areas in the vicinity of the project site. t0 '' o Rancho California Road - is a principal east-west roadway which provides access to I-15 and the Plaza and downtown Temecula business areas from residential O areas east and west of the I-15 freeway business corridor. East of Front Street, Rancho California Road is an Arterial roadway providing four travel lanes to a point east of Ynez Road and the Town Shopping Center 21te tvvo Ia3te sectlo between ,Lle Tawri, Shappag Center ad ACosm~a Drive is ,currently, index o Nicolas Road - is a two-lane east-west roadway which intersects with Winchester Road northeast of the project site. Nicolas Road, a designated Arterial, currently serves the nearby developing residential area located east of Winchester Road. o Roripaugh Road - is a two-lane collector road which extends from Winchester Road to Nicolas Road. This road currently serves the Roripaugh Hills O development. Traffic controls at many of the principal intersections along major access road serving the protect area are currently limited to "stop" sign control. Most of tote exsttn st ahzed tntersechons ;are loca#ed on Winchester Road near the I-15 freeway and along Ynez Road Signals along Ynez Raad are :located at Palm Plaza {rtam access), Motor Car Parkway; <.. Solana Way,:and Rancho Cahforma Road: Four-way stop controls currently exist at the intersection of Winchester RoadjD~az Road and Margarita Road/Solana Way. The currently planned circulation element for the area (as reflected in the Riverside County General Plan) is depicted in Figure 3. Some of the key features of the planned c~rrulatton system in the; immediate v~cmiry of the;prolect which do not ex~sttoday ae 11 O O O O °os- r~,~ M d LL w~ W ~ A N ~ A w ~ ~ C ~ O ~ w '°+ ~ e.. O OC N W C N ~ ~ F- ~ N 91 0 er p, f~ C) U C qg~ i J O LL O j J J O m LL LL w 3 ~ O ~J~ J3 a 3 3 JLL^LLJmaLLO y 6 uo;onm~mo o . o~¢^c3010¢ m ~i 3° ° o ¢oQ3s:p~ ~ to °0 0 p ea Jmo_yy` pzNm miae `o o~_uLL g~ 0 0 aO°toio oo b; c° p21LL~«m~Vm~ IQJS p IVLLJ<'~mpUy °< # I W I J o The extension of Margarita Road north across Winchester Road to Mum~ta Hot It sltauld'be rto#ed fltat the an#tctpated transport~tton system depited ui Figure 3 uicIudes O Typical cross-sections for the various street classifications designated in the circulation O element and a summary of planned travel lanes and estimated daily vehicle design capacities (by roadway classification) are provided in the Appendix attached to this report. D. Traffic Conditions Estimated 15;90J~99I! average daily traffic volumes are depicted in Figure 2. Actual 1990 evening peak-hour traffic volumes are included in the Technical Appendix. Information on 199~/~991 traffic conditions was prepared using recent traffic counts obtained through field investigations, recent traffic studtes from Caltrans District 8, and from the Riverside County Trazsportatiat3 Department. The evaluation of 19g011g91 traffic volumes and roadway capacities in the project study area indicated: o All existing roadway se ments in the study area are currently operating at Level of Service C or better except for the follnwm 12 O Winchester Read betwee~t Margarita Raaci and Mtirneta Host Sprtng5 Road O '"Winchester Road between Jefferson Avenue and T' 15 Level of ~ervtce D SIC 08~ ,,...: .__ .. .......... ... Winchester Raarl/Ynez Road Borderline:.: Level of Semce'CI17 Suring PIv1 peak hour,; peak ~Ititrrs. O E. Transit Service Local transit service approxunate one hour headways; Although area population at project build-out could ,:. support a higher degt•ee of transit service, none has been assumed in the traffic analysis. F. Transportation System Management (TSM) Programs At the present time, TSM programs in the Temecula area are limited to car pool incentive programs which have been implemented by a few of the major employers. ~/' 13 1[~I. ]Projected ']Craffic This section descn'bes the methodology used for projecting traffic generated by the proposed Campos Verdes project (site traffic) and other non-site related traffic in the study area. For the purpose of the traffic impact assessment, traffic volumes have been projected for the following four study year/development scenarios: - o Existing plus project (to satisfy EIR requirements); ~I o Year 2000 without project; o Year 2000 with project and without the planned Temecula Regional Center; and o Year 2000 with project and with the planned Temecula Regional Center (representing area "build-out"). 0 The year 2000 has been designated to represent development conditions which would include the development of many approved and planned projects which will likely take much longer O to complete than the Campos Verdes project. The year 2000 has been selected to represent this condition for purposes of convenience only. The actual date of project completion would likely occur before the year 2000. A. Traffic Forecasting Methodology Traffic volumes were estimated using the TranPlan traffic forecasting model previously developed by Wilbur Smith Associates for the Rancho California Regional Transportation Planning Study. The regional forecasting model consists of approximately 400 transportation analysis zones (TAZ's) and over 4,500 street links. The TAZ's were expanded to include the special land uses proposed in the Campos Verdes project as well as the planned Winchester Hills development, Winchester Meadows Industrial Park, and Temecula Regional Center project. The street network was also re-coded to reflect the anticipated on-site circulation network and off-site roadway access for these projects. A copy of the detailed link-node/I'AZ network developed for the Campos Verdes study area is provided in the Appendix attached to this report. 14 O Socioeconomic data was estimated for the TAZ's within the Southwest Area Community Plan (with the exception of the immediate study area TAZ's) based on the existing, approved, planned, and unplanned land uses within the Southwest Area. Socioeconomic data which was estimated included the number of dwelling units, population, retail employment, and non-retail employment. Trips generated from TAZ's outside the immediate study area were estimated as a function of dwelling units, retail employment, and non-retail employment. The residential trip rates for Riverside County from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) forecasting model were used to estimate residential trip productions. Trip attractions for retail and industrial uses were estimated ~ using equations cited in NCHRP 187 Quick-Response Urban Travel Estimation Techniques and Transferable Parameters. 1978. The TAZ's which defined the Campos Verdes project and other major planned developments within the immediate study area (including the Ynez corridor) were treated as special traffic generators and the vehicle trips generated by these TAZ's were estimated using site specific trip generation rates. A detailed summary of vehicle trip production and attraction estimated to be generated within the project study area TAZ's is included in the attached Appendix. O Vehicle trips were distributed between the TAZ's using the Gravity Model trip distribution method. The Gravity Model estimates trips between TAZ's as a function of the trip production, trip attractions, and travel time friction factors between TAZ's. The Friction Factors included in the Gravity Model were obtained from the SCAG traffic forecasting model. The Gravity Model produced a daily trip table of daily productions and attractions between TAZ's. The production and attraction trip table was then converted to a daily vehicle trip origin/destination table. An evening peak-hour vehicle trip table was developed by factoring the daily origin/destination trip table. The vehicle trip table was then assigned to the street network using an equilibrium traffic assignment model. The traffic volumes were assigned in five iterations. For each iteration, the travel time on each street link was recomputed as a function of the volume-capacity ratio on that link. The vehicle trips were then reassigned to other travel paths based on the new travel times. The resulting traffic volumes on the network are therefore capacity restrained volumes. Vehicle trips were assigned for all day and evening peak hours. Traffic assignments were also developed for the network without the Campos Verdes project to simulate traffic conditions for the "no build" scenario. O 15 B. Site Traffic O The estimation of peak-hour and daily traffic to and from the project site involved four different procedures: (1) trip generation, (2) trip distribution, (3) mode split, and (4) trip assignment. Trip Generation is the procedure used to estimate the number of vehicle trips entering and leaving the project site during peak periods and on a daily basis. Trip generation for the ~ Campos Verdes development assumes the detailed land use identified in Table 1. Daily vehicle trip rates used for the Campos Verdes land uses are based on information developed and published by the Institute of transportation Engineers (tI'E) in the Trip Generation Manual, 4th Edition. Daily vehicle trip rates used in the study are summarized in Table 2. Application of the trip generation rates presented in Table 2 to the specific land uses - proposed for the Campos Verdes project results in the daily vehicle trip generation summarized in Table 3. Based on the proposed land use mix, approximately 16,184 vehicle trips would be generated daily. O Existing peak-hour trip generation for the project (also summarized in Table 3) has been developed using the TranPlan model which essentially factors the daily vehicle trip production and attractions according to trip purpose (e.g., home-based work, home-based other and non-home based). The factors used to develop peak-hour trip generation are based on NCHRP average factors which have been adjusted according to SCAG/RIVSAN mode characteristics. Peak hour factors are summarized in the separate Technical Appendix. TranPlan model estimates for the peak-hour project trip generation were found to be reasonably comparable when compared to manually estimated trip generation using standard ITE peak-hour trip rates. Trip Distribution is the procedure used to identify the roadways used in traveling to and from the project site, and the percentage of site-related travel that will use each roadway. The traffic forecasting methodology used in the study does not require assumption to be made regarding the distribution of trips. The distribution of project trips was performed using the Gravity Model method which distributes trips between area traffic zones based on 16 O O Table 2 ~Iehicle Trip Generation Rates Campos ~Ierdes O LAND USE UNIT DAILY ! i LOCATION OF TRIl' RATE LAND USE Residential: Single Family D.U.* 10.0 Planning Areas 6 & 7 Multi-Famil D.U. 6.6 Plannin Areas 3 & 5 Retail: Nei hborhood Center A rox.110 ksf ** Net Ac 500.....' Plannin Area 4 Office: Office Park Net Ac _ 200_ __'_ _ Plannine Area 2 Source: ITE Trip Generation, Fourth Edition • - D.U. denotes Dwelling Unit ' • - ksC denotes Thousand Square Feet O y i cC ~" O M ~~ ~ ~ C~ ~" r~ .~ E~ a~ U O '~ ~. O C~ U ;a ~ [~ ~ M O ~ [~ p f"' .~ .--i v~ .-y .~ .~ ~-i . w .--i M ~O .se ., ~ a ~a ;°. h ~ oo ~ rn ° N ~ o ~ M ~ n a U ~• o H v W ~ 7 ~ „ ~ ~ ~ ~ OMi M ~ ~ x O j W acOi y O Qr ~ ti ~ ~ C1 M h N ~ N ~ .--~ ~ ti O a d a oo v o ~ ~ ~c .-, O d •--i N 00 .-+ .ti ~p ~ ~ Q ~ z Q z a Q Q m c ~ U ~ R m W Q~+ d N d ~ ~ M d c ~ N 7 d c~~C ~ ~n d a ~ h ~O d c ~ ; l~ d c ~ z a . o rx a a ~ / ~ a x z '~ a ~ w ~ C7 'c C7 8 C7 ~ C7 E C7 ~ C7 ~ o ~ p z ; z w z ~ z w z w z w ~' P a z ~ z •~ z •~ z •~ z ^ z ~ ~ Q W a U a ~ a Z ~ ~ a n a n a , c c . .a (~ a. a a, a a a. m d 0 0 O O the magnitude of trip productions and trip attractions in each zone and the travel times O between traffic zones. Modal Solit is the procedure used to reduce the estimated number of site-related vehicle trips to reflect: (1) public transit access to the site; and (2) higher than normal car pool, bicycle or pedestrian access to the site. In the case of the Campos Verdes project, standard ITE daily trip rates were used directly and no additional modal split factors were applied. Trip Assignment is the procedure used to allocate the vehicle trips generated by the project to roadways within the study area based on the trip generation, trip distnbution, and modal split procedures described above. The methodology used in this study employed the use of the TranPlan model to assign project-related vehicle trips to the area network. For the purpose of illustrating "project only" traffic, project-related trips were assigned to the area roadway network in an isolated fashion using the distribution generated by the Gravity Model. This method reflects the desired distribution of project traffic without the affects of capacity constraints. The analysis of future traffic conditions 'with the project" (discussed later) reflects traffic assignments (including project and non-project trips) which are capacity restrained. O Project site traffic (daily) is depicted in Figure 4. C. Existing Plus Project Traffic E~sting plus project traffic projections have been developed only for the purpose of satisfying the EIR documentation requirement for this scenario. Any conclusion or interpretation drawn from the information should carefully consider the following factors: o New shopping and employment opportunities offered by the project would have an influence on e~sting area travel patterns; and o The post-project roadway system (availability of new routes) would influence the distnbution of e~sting traffic. O 17 m .. o~ ,. A 7 U w w l0 W N d d H O a E ~o U O O r m~ .°°=_o ~ SENT BY:WILLDAN TEMECULA ~ 5-12-91 ~ 1012 O AAEANORANDUAA TO: Planning Department O O WILLDAN M, V, ^ 6o8tla7u'f ~~ Robert Rlghetti, Senior Protect Manager DATE: September 12, 7991 SUBJECT: Department of Public Works Pre-Development Review Committee for Specific Plan No. 1 FROM: Department of Public Works The following are the comments of the Department of Public Works which must be addressed or responded to by the applicant. Ali information and/or revised plans must be submitted to the Department of Public Works no later than two weeks prior to Formal Development Review Committee. Our comments are as follawa: 1. Submit a revised traffic study which is based on updated volume Counts (not factored) and utilizes existing improvement information (i.e., signalized locations, intersection improvements, etc. ). 2. The traffic study Identifies several intersections which will operate at LOS "E" or worse; this project shall be responsible for mitigating to LOS "D" at those Intersections. 3. There are no "fair share" mechanisms in place, and all improvements for intersections Impacted by this development shall be the responsibility of the development. 4. The traffic study identifies a four to five year buildout of the project, however, the study is based on year 2000 conditions within the study area. The study should be based on year of project opening with a further analysis of buildout conditions under the proposed Change of Zone. 5. The trip generation table Identifies trips for all the planning area uses except Planning Araa 1, a proposed park. Please provide trip generation rates and include in the analysis. 6. The traffic study shall include en exhibit identifying trip distribution from the site and trip assignments to the roadway network. ENG\SPI.STF SENT BY~WILLDAN TEMECULA ~ 5-12-91 ~ 1013 ~ WILLUAN M,V, ~ iiBn6~10'1~~ a 7. The study shall include an exhibit identifying existing turning movement / counts. Additionally, the following Intersections shall be Included in the (\ analysis: ~ Solana Road at Ynez Road Solana Road at Margarita Roed Rancho California Road at Ynez Road Rancho California Road at Margarita Roed Margarita Road at Moraga Road Rancho California Roed at Interstate 15 NB/SB Ramps. 8. Additional improvements are identified In ICU summary..table.and throughout the analysis, however, responsibility for implementation of these Improvements is not identified. 9. Provide an Intersection analysis for all on-site intersections which are Identified on the Specific Plan and provide mitigation measures. 10. Identify on the site plan the proposed circulation between and within the planning areas identified on the Specific Plan. 11. Figure 20a and 206 Identify recommended Improvements for roadways in the study area and should Include the intersections listed above in Item 7. 12. The study identifies TSM opportunities in this study area. .The development shall Include In the Specific Plan Document a requirement to Implement TSM programs with the development of the planning areas. 13. Include existing traffic count information in the appendix. 14. Include ICU calculations in the appendix. 15. Label TAZ roadway network in the appendix. 16. Provide an exhibit identifying the approximate location of "other" development. 17. Provide signal warrants for all intersections identified in the study area. 18. Specific Plan needs to more specific about mitigation of LOS "E" and "F" intersections; e.g., by whom, when, etc. 19. Property Owners Association also needs to be responsible for on-site drainage and should be noted (n all maintenance sections. 20. All exhibits should be clear and have streets properly labeled. 21. On page I I I-21, no street shell exceed 12$ gradient unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Also, conceptual grading plans should be reviewed and approved by Engineering and Planning Departments. ENC\SPI.STF SENT l3Y~WILLDAN TEMECULA ; 9-12-91 ; 1013. ; WILLDAN M,V,~ BBBo;,107;~ 4 O 22. Figure I I-12, no brick or Interlocking stones are allowed where intersections mlcaht be signalized now or In the future. O ENG\SPI.STF ._..._.____......~__~... __-_____.-..... .. ..... .. __. ~___.. .. _. .___ _..._L._..._ 'o Mesa Homes Specific I~~a~ ~T®.l Campos ~Ierdes )E~1~ 7['raffic impact Study ooa~oo aaaoaa aaaooD oovvvo Wilbur Smith Associates 3600 Lime Street, Suite 226 Riverside, California 92501 Contact Person Robert A. Davis O O Mesa Homes S]~eCflfflC ~~a~ ~®. ~ Campos ~Ierdes EIR 'Traffic Impact Study 0 oaa~oo ODO~DD ~aOODD ®oavvv Wilbur Smith Associates May, 1991 (Revised 6-3-92) O CorrrErras ,. 0 Pace I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMIVIARY .................................. 1 A. Purpose of Report and Study Objectives .......................... 1 B. Executive Summary ......................................... 2 II. PROPOSED PROJECT DEVELOPMENT .............................. 5 A. Location .................................................. 5 B. Proposed Land Use ......................................... 5 C. Site Plan Layout ............................................ 5 D. Zoning and Land Use ........................................ 6 E. Phasing and Timing ......................................... 7 O III. AREA CONDITIONS ............................................ 8 A. Study Area ................................................ 8 B. Study Area Land Use ....................................... 8 C. Site Access ............................................... 9 D. Traffic Conditions ......................................... 11 E. Transit Service ........................................... 12 F. Transportation System Management (TSM) Programs .............. 13 1V. PROJECTED TRAFFIC .......................................... 14 A. Traffic Forecasting Methodology .............................. 14 B. Site Traffic .............................................. 16 C. Existing Plus Project Traffic .................................. 17 D. Non-Site Traffic ........................................... 18 E. Tota] Traffic Projections .................................... 19 F. Total Traffic Projections Without Regional Center ................. 20 O CONTENTS (continued) O Pace V. EXISTING PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ..................... 20 A. Roadway Segment Service Levels .............................. 20 h- B. F~dsting Plus Project Roadway Needs ........................... 22 :_ VI. YEAR 2000 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS .................................. 23 A. Project Vehicle-Miles of Travel ............................... 23 B. Site Access .............................................. 24 C. Off-Site Capability and Level of Service Analysis .................. 25 VII. FINDINGS .................................................. 29 A. Site Accessibility .......................................... 29 O B. Traffic Impacts ........................................... 30 C. Roadway Improvement Needs ................................ 31 D. Compliance With General Plan Circulation Policies ................ 31 VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................ 34 A. Site Access/Circulation Plan .................................. 34 B. Off-Site Roadway Improvements .............................. 35 C. Transportation System Management Actions ..................... 35 IX. CONCLUSIONS ............................................... 37 APPENDIX ..................................................... 38 O ILLUST`RAT'IO1VS O O Follows FiQUre pave 1. Development Area and Sub-Areas ................................... 5 2. Existing Traffic/Roadway Characteristics .............................. 9 3. Anticipated Transportation System ........................... 11 ...... 4. Existing Plus Project Daily Traffic .................................. 17 5. Projected Daily Traffic (Year 2000 Without Project) .................... 19 6. Projected AM Peak-Hour Traffic (Year 2000 Without Project) ............. 19 7. Projected PM Peak-Hour Traffic (Year 2000 Without Project) ............. 19 8. Projected Daily Traffic (Year 2000 With Project) ....................... 19 9a/b. Projected AM Peak-Hour Traffic (Year 2000 With Project) ............... 19 l0a/b. Projected PM Peak-Hour Traffic (Year 2000 With Project) ............... 19 11. Projected Daily Traffic (Year 2000 W/Project W/O Regional Ctr.) .......... 20 12. Projected AM Peak-Hour Traffic (Year 2000 W/Project W/O Regional Ctr.) .. 20 13. Projected PM Peak-Hour Traffic (Year 2000 W/Project W/O Regional Ctr.) ... 20 14. ICU Analysis Intersections ........................................ 23 15. Roadway Segment Service Levels (Year 2000 Without Project) ............ 26 16. Year 2000 AM Peak-Hour Service Levels (With and Without Project) ....... 26 17. Year 2000 PM Peak-Hour Service Levels (With and Without Project) ....... 26 18. Roadway Segment Service Levels (Year 2000 With Project) ............... 27 19. Roadway Segment Service Levels (Year 2000 W/Project W/O Regional Ctr.) .. 28 20a. Recommended Future Project Vicinity Traffic Lanes and Campos Verdes Access Configuration ............................................ 31 20b. Recommended Future Off-Site Traffic Lanes .......................... 31 21. Recommended Future Circulation System ............................ 31 O 0 O TABULATIONS Follows Table pave 1. Assumed Land Use ........................................... 5 2. Vehicle Trip Generation Rates ................................. 16 3. Vehicle Trip Generation Summary ............................... 16 4A. ICU Summary (Year 2000 Without Project) ........................ 23 4B. ICU Summary (Year 2000 With Project) .......................... 23 4C. ICU Summary (Year 2000 With Project and Without Regional Center) .... 23 5. ICU Summary (Year 2000 With Improvements) ..................... 28 O ' ~. ][ntroduction end summary 0 Mesa Homes plans to develop a 132.9-gross-acre parcel of land located south of Winchester Road and immediately east of Margarita Road. As planned, the 132.9-acre Campos Verdes development (Specific Plan No. 1) would include a mix of residential and commercial land uses. A. Purpose of Report and Study Objectives The purpose of this report is to document the Campos Verdes Trafflc Impact Study. The study was performed for Mesa Homes by Wilbur Smith Associates. The objectives of the study were: o to review existing roadway and traffic conditions; o to identify the probable traffic increase related to the proposed Campos Verdes O project and other development in the area; and o to assess the ability of existing and planned roadways to accommodate projected post-project traffic; and o to provide traffic-related inputs to the General Plan Amendment Environmental Impact Report (GPA-EIR). The scope of the study included: o Collection and assembly of inventories of existing roadway conditions and current traffic flow. o Evaluation of projected traffic impacts, including: (1) projections of growth for area background traffic; (2) anticipated project trip-generation; (3) assignment of project-related traffic to the area roadway network; and (4) volume-capacity analyses of primary access roadways and intersections. O 1 ~. o Identification of appropriate measures to mitigate anticipated project-related traffic impacts and other area roadway deficiencies. O o Evaluation of area build-out traffic conditions with the project and long-range transportation system needs to meet minimum level of service requirements. B. Executive Summary This section presents an overview of the Campos Verdes Traffic Impact Study. More specifically, it briefly summarizes the development proposal and the key findings, conclusions -- and recommendations from the traffic impact analysis. Site Location and Study Area -The proposed Campos Verdes project site is located in the northern part of the Temecula urban core area. The project site abuts the east side of Margarita Road, immediately south of Winchester Road. As we proposed, the fully developed site would be bounded by Winchester Road and Margarita Road (new roadway). The southern portion of the project site is divided by General Kearny Road. The area of primary impact generally includes: o The Winchester Road corridor from Jefferson Avenue to Nicolas Road; O o The Margarita Road corridor from Date Street to Solana Way; o The Ynez Road corridor from Date Street to Solana Way; o General Kearny Road from Margarita Road to the eastern limit of the project; and o Apricot Avenue from Jefferson Avenue to Margarita Road. Development Description - As proposed, the Campos Verdes development would include the following uses: o Single family detached residential (appro~dmately 206 dwelling units); o Multi-family attached residential (appro~dmately 644 dwelling units); 2 O `: o Neighborhood retail shopping center (13.5 gross acres); O o Commercial office (10.4 gross acres); and o Open Space/Retension Basin (13.5 gross acres). The project site is located within an area which is designated as Land Use Category 1 (Heavy Urban). Existing zoning is R-R (Rural Residential) for the northern one-third of the project site and A-2-20 (Heavy Agriculture) for the southern two-thirds of the project site. The Southwest Area Plan designates this site as residential with a density of 8 to 16 ~.' dwelling units per acre for the western half of the project site and 2 to 5 dwelling units per acre for the eastern half of the site. Principal Findings -Since the Campos Verdes project is located in an area designated as Land Use Category 1 (Heavy Urban), minimum roadway service levels of "D" must be maintained during peak traffic periods. The traffic impact assessment performed for the project indicates: o Total trip generation is estimated to be approximately 16,184 daily vehicle trips Q with 997 trips occurring during the AM peak and 1,179 trips during the PM peak. o The project will generate 113,288 vehicle-miles of travel daily with an average trip length of approximately 7.0 miles: o The proposed site access plan would provide service level "C" or better at all on- site intersections, with the exception of Genera] Kearny Road/"H" street which with an assumed two-way stop sign control would result in level of service "D" for the ]eft-turn movement exiting the office park and residential development south of General Kearny Road. o With the assumed year 2000 development conditions, two intersections would operate at service level "E" or worse with or without the project. o The following intersections were assessed to operate at Level of Service E or worse during the AM and/or PM peak hour(s): - Winchester Road/Jefferson Avenue; and O 3 ,_, - Winchester Road/Ynez Road. O o With the additional roadway/intersection improvements identified in the study, all study area intersections would operate at Level of Service D or better. Conclusions -The year 2000 improvement needs identified in this study address problems which would be caused by already approved and other planned development projects in the area. The introduction of the Campos Verdes project would add a small increment of traffic relative to the total projected traffic volumes on the adjacent street network. A comparison of improvement needs with and without the project indicates marginal differences which are primarily related to access considerations at the perimeter of the project and,on-site circulation. The developer should be responsible for direct project access improvements along the site boundaries and on-site improvements as well as a "fair-share" amount towards the implementation of needed off-site improvements. Fair-share responsibilities should consider the incremented contribution of the project to the need for the improvement in terms of ICU and service level impacts as well as added traffic demand during the critical peak traffic periods. O Recommendations -The recommended roadway and intersection improvements for achieving Level of Service D or better are depicted in Figure 20A (site access and circulation plan) and Figures 20B and 21 (off-site roadway plan). 4 O 0 ~. ]Proposed ]Project ~evelopinent This section describes the proposed Campos Verdes project in terms of location, land use, zoning, site plan and implementation schedule. A. Location The proposed Campos Verdes site is located within the City of Temecula, immediately east of Margarita Road;,and south of Winchester Road (see Figure 1). The proposed future alignment of Margarita Road would ultimately bound the project on the west. B. Proposed Land Use As proposed, the Campos Verdes Specific Plan consists of approximately 132.9 gross acres. For the purpose of the traffic study, the project was divided into seven development O planning areas. These project planning areas are depicted in Figure 1 and proposed land uses are summarized in Table 1. As reflected in Table 1, single family residential units would be located in development Planning Areas 6 and 7 (refer to Figure 1) which are adjacent to existing low density residential development. The proposed higher density multi-family residential development in Planning Areas 3 and 5 is, for the most part, arranged in a manner which would buffer the lower density residential development from commercial uses proposed along Ynez Road. The Campos Verdes neighborhood retail center and office park are planned to be located adjacent to Ynez Road at the Winchester Road and General Kearny Road intersections respectively. A park/retention basin is proposed for Planning Area 1. C. Site Plan Layout The proposed site plan for the Campos Verdes project is presented in the Appendix attached to this report. Proposed access for the Campos Verdes site is described below: O 5 r d 7 C O V ~= '++ C d '_fl t0 d ~ ~ c O ~ w •C ~ W ~ ~ d ~ z w !~S M ~ n N A ~ ~ ~+ ~ ~ ~ fn ~ ~ L '~ ~ ~ N O a ~ E ® ~ A U m ~pap~0 0O°G ~ ~°o°o~ ~ Net impact conclusions typically drawn from a comparison of existing traffic volumes with O existing plus project traffic volumes do not take these factors into account and therefore tend to distort and generally overestimate the net impact of the project. These notwithstanding, existing plus project daily traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 4. D. Non-Site Traffic Non-site related traffic volumes have been projected for the following two forecast scenarios: o Year 2000 -representing full build-out of all land within the study influence area (including the Temecula Regional Center); o Year 2000 Without Regional Center -representing full build-out of all land within the project influence area with the exception of the planned Temecula Regional Center; and O Year 2000 Non-Site Traffic projections represent traffic generated by existing, and other approved, and planned land uses within the project influence area. Area development assumptions represented by this scenario include: o Existing land uses; o Build-out of county-approved project land uses; o Build-out of all planned but not yet approved projects within an approximate two- mile radius of the Campos Verdes project including Margarita Meadows, Winchester Hills, Temecula Regional Center, Winchester Meadows, and proposed projects in the Ynez corridor; and o Fifty percent build-out of all other major projects within the Southwest Area Community Plan which have been identified as having plans "in progress" and most of which are in some stage of formal review by area planning agencies. O 18 The methodology used for developing traffic increases associated with other local development projects was essentially the same as that used for developing site-related traffic O projections: o Trip generation for nearby existing planned and approved development projects was based on previous project specific traffic studies where available. Standard ITE or City of San Diego trip factors were used where earlier studies were not readily available. Trip generation for other more remote existing approved and planned projects was based on the following: - residential trip rates (productions) from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) forecasting model; and - retail and non-retail employment rates from NCHRP 187 Quick-Response Urban Travel Estimation Technique and Transferrable Parameters 1978. o Non-site traffic distribution was developed using the Gravity Model method. - Estimated Total Non-Site Traffic Volumes for study area roadways are depicted in Figure O 5 (daily) and Figures 6 and 7 (AM and PM peak hours). E. Total Traffic Projections Total traffic projections for the study area roadways were developed by adding in the vehicle trip generation (trip production for residential and trip attractions for commercial) for the Campos Verdes traffic analysis zones and modifying the roadway network to include principal on-site roadways. The TranPlan modeling process was then repeated and a new set of traffic forecasts was developed. The resulting year 2000 traffic projections for the "with project" scenario are depicted in Figure 8 (daily) and Figures 9 and 10 (AM and PM peak hours). 19 O F. Total Traffic Projections Without Regional Center O This scenario assumes year 2000 non-site development conditions but without the proposed Regional Center. Total traffic projections for the study area roadways were developed again by adding the project vehic]e trip generation to non-site area trip generation without the ...Regional Center. The TranPlan process was repeated and new traffic projects developed. The resulting year 2000 traffic projections for the "with project and without Regional Center" scenario are illustrated in Figure 11 (daily) and Figures 12 and 13 (AM and PM peak hours). O O 20 O O O n a m r P V A 7 w+ N U w w H _~ W N d fA O a E ~o U Lei_'. 1 ~ J 1 1. ~ S4L~ ~'Nn LZl-~r a ESE ~ I a O6Z-~ N 4E J eL ~ ,. ~m J1 cEJ l 1 N Z41 m o LzJ oLZ ~~ J1 o~ '1 1 zLZ mm m~ m a m L r n Lts ~S2g m U P~ ro e2 D F ~4ir W U• N I J N d O rn I1 .a {, `e ~ g 0 6 $ ~ g d ~E R~ ® ~ (~ _ A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N d ~ ® U A ;w ~s •~ 1 °e e 1 ^ O, ~ ~ S y ~ " 0~ ~ ~ ~_ ,ao ti ~ O ~ W o, ~ ~ N ~ ~ 06ry/ V d ,® ~ ~ a ~ ~ t V ~~~` • ~ ~ U o p J Ib RI Oy7 ~ N Nm " t$el v i .°-v '-B6S --lL£l J 1 rest TeLL r6g S99 --~ 8611 nN X 0 0 b^Nm' 0417 N m N ~ N C p F 6; ~t ¢ ¢ m '~ ~~ ~ LS£ S ~ j L C-LLe~ U 1 ~ LLJ S~ mNa m~~ J!l lLl, DSS -• 411 ~ Nvumi L6S S~ 31b N ^6L4 JSb3LM. !- Lge, O , ~ 3AV NOStl3di3f O ZLZ ~Oed4 ~ ~~o~~ O O O »Z N A N 1A LSF:~ IOON s{t~ rm~ z{ J 9{ N ~1 L4l-~ , t 992-1 {{J ze -~ d J1 ss ~ '1 1 LZ1 MN r mm mNm J 1 1, 49 -~ OZL --~ LE6 -~ ~ L SZ4 n .-9E9 1. rsz 4E m p ^ ~ .J ( L ys . ~s v e~ z4 s~ ~ Qi = ~ rev w ~ ~~ ~~ w J t 2 ~ Slj! s 7 pr ~~ 9921 rss{ i-9~ ~ZO4l-~ me ~ ~' L{{~ N~ T N S ~1 ~0~ e i L[!g l~ZZI 1 ~ 4{J e~ e{- M ~- 01 7 Qf b S~ U ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ® ® V ~... ~ g 09`9 \ ~ "" c`o V ~ g N ~ ~ B ~ ~~ ~ N Q ~ •® ~ ~ ~ U I.S d W NNN `9{E SI 1 .~ ~ ~, `L4L ~ yJ Jtl~1M OZS, 1 ~ (~ '3nb NOStl {Z9~ NN(~ 3jj3f }}~~ BSS NtDm y ^^a~/j~`y{5 <oo~ e°O~ ~ ~I. ]Bxisting ]Plus ]Project O 'T'raffic Analysis Analysis of the "existing plus project" scenario has been performed specifically for the purpose of satisfying EIR requirements. The analysis of this scenario is often used as a means of identifying the incremental impacts of a project and usually provides a good approximation of project impacts when applied in an area which already has an established arterial street network. In the cast of the Campos Verdes project, the surrounding street network will be significantly improved (whether or not the Campos Verdes project is implemented) and current travel patterns will change dramatically. Existing traffic volumes do not reflect the future roadway configuration or the influences of the project. These new facilities must be assumed to exist, however, in order to realistically distribute trips to and rom the project. Considering these factors, it is very difficult to draw any logical conclusions regarding incremental project-related impacts from the existing plus project scenario analysis. A. Roadway Segment Service Levels O Volume-capacity comparisons were made for all roadways which would provide primary access to the Campos Verdes project. Roadway capacities used in this analysis are based on Riverside County "standard" capacities developed for General Plan Circulation Element roads (refer to Appendix A) and reflect the available traffic lanes assumed in the anticipated area roadway network (see Figure 3). Findings of the existing plus project roadway service level analyses indicate that all roadway segments in the area would operate at service level "B" or better assuming the anticipated roadway network is implemented. It should be noted that this does not suggest that the anticipated roadway network improvements would need to be implemented "in their entirety" to accommodate existing plus project traffic volumes. Based on the magnitude of the traffic volumes, a far less extensive roadway network with fewer traffic lanes than those assumed in the analysis would adequately serve the combined total of existing plus project traffic flows. Several of the planned new roadway facilities (e.g., Margarita Road and Jackson Avenue north of Winchester Road) will be needed primarily to serve new already approved residential projects in the area. 21 O B. Existing Plus Project Roadway Needs O Given the location and site layout of Campos Verdes, it is clear that at a minimum, Margarita Road would have to be improved along its new alignment between General Kearny Road and Winchester Road in order to provide adequate access for the project site. Based on existing plus project traffic volumes, an interim two-lane roadway would provide sufficient capacity to accommodate the project traffic at Iae eI qF Servace A This would also provide reserve capacity for existing traffic which would use the new extension. ii S The assessment of cumulative development impacts with and without the project (addressed in the following chapter) provides a more realistic evaluation of the project-related impacts and ultimate roadway needs in the study area. O 22 B. Existing Plus Project Roadway 1Veeds O Given-the location and site layout of Campos Verdes, it is clear that at a minimum, Margarita Road would have to be improved along its new alignment between General Kearny Road and Winchester Road in order to provide adequate access for the project site. Based on existing plus project traffic volumes, an interim two-lane roadway would provide sufficient capacity to accommodate the project traffic. This would also provide reserve capacity for existing traffic which would use the new extension. The combined traffic flows would likely warrant a signal at the Winchester Road/Margarita .Road intersection. As -- demonstrated in this analysis, the minimum improvement needs would be far less, but yet consistent with, roadway improvements which are either under design or planned. Furthermore, the developer is currently a major participant in two Assessment/Community Facilities Districts which will ultimately fund most of the planned roadway improvements in the area. The assessment of cumulative development impacts with and without the project (addressed in the following chapter) provides a more realistic evaluation of the project-related impacts and ultimate roadway needs in the study area. 22 O d ~a Fear 2000 ']['raffic Analysis Traffic analyses were performed for the proposed project access driveways, on-site roadways, and at key locations along primary access routes (off-site) serving the project. This analysis addresses future (year 2000) traffic conditions both with and without the project. The methodology used in the traffic operations analysis follows the requirements set forth in the 'Traffic Impact Study Report Preparation Guide" developed by Riverside County __ Road Department. The analyses include volume/capacity comparisons for: (1) key roadway segments; and (2) intersections that would be used by site-related traffic. The analyses focus more on the evaluation of study area intersections since intersections are typically the - limiting capacity factor when determining a roadway's traffic carrying ability. The analysis of peak-hour signalized intersection operating conditions was performed using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. Highway Capacity Manual traffic flow rate adjustment factors assumed in the ICU analysis are documented on the ICU O worksheets provided in the separate Technical Appendix. The results of the ICU analyses are summarized in Table 4A (without project) Table 4B (with project) and Table 4C (with project and without Regional Center). Also included in Tables 4A, B and C are the intersection approach lane configuration required to achieve the service level indicated. The locations of intersections included in the ICU analysis are illustrated in Figure 14. Intersection identification numbers shown in Figure 14 are referenced in Tables 4A, B and C. A. Project Vehicle-Miles of Travel Total vehicle-miles of travel (VMT) generated by the Campos Verdes project was estimated by multiplying the total daily project vehicle trips by the average trip lengths estimated for trips made within the Southwest Community Ptan Area and for project trips which would have an origin or destination located outside the Southwest Community area, Based on an estimated average trip length of 7.0 miles, the 16,184 total project trips would generate an 'estimated 113,288 vehicle-miles of travel daily. O 23 W E~ ~1 /~~11 ~1~~'I1I '••^•1 V l U Y U •~ •~~ O a~ o~ b.~ W U O 0 N cwc\i W , • r O N r N N O N N O r N N N r r r N N r r N r O•• O O r••••• r ([Y~~• j a i~ • O O ••• O r r r r r O r r r N r.r .r r r .~ r r ..1 O•• .y O r • • • • • r F • N O O N N ••1 N PI PI O r N N r ~• •..• N N g r PI •A N O • • n •q •y • • • • • •y •.~ • r r O N r N r r N r r r N r r r N N r ..1 r N N r•• O O r••••• r• N G W a e N o r N r e r r r r r r r r r r r r e r e r r err r. J.. J F N O O r r P1 N P! q O r •7 N N r r N N PI r O1 N N O • q h r r• Q~ / ••• ~.] • r O r r N r N r r O r N N N r r r r r r r N r O •• O N r • • • • • r• O /y~ W a • r r O r r r r O r r r O O O r r r r O r r O r r•• O r r h H N F • N N MI N g N O r N N ••i N N N N N N N r N r N N N •• O O N • • • • • N• G ., • r N O N N N O r r r r r r r r r N N r r r r r r•• r O r••••• r• a F- • r O N O r r O r r O r ..• r r r r O r r r r r r O•• N O r••••• r F • N N N N •9 N O r N N 'I N N N N N N N r N r N N N • • O O N • • • •• N N N N •q N O r N N '1 N N N N N N N r N r N N N • • O O N • • • • N U7 ~ Q << U U U k7 < U C<< O U<< tl U tl tl< tl U<<•< g q~•< C a. U • 1Nry O n r n a O r b •P'f •yry P n V••Il VrI •O r b V! 0 n O N •' •Nq V V ~ • r • a .. •a<ctlUm<~~<a~.c~<atlma « c « qp<<• ~ a a ~1 ~ • T P •O b N b O g O •O ~ O •O 1~ N O W V r b N P • •~ •O •O • • • • W ~ •! yl W b [~ P! [~ n N N r O n •7 V1 n b N •7 O YO Vi •~1 O O • N Q H 5 'd ,d >• a ~ 5t a r 'd d L aaa E ° : ~~ S d :, a ~ . m ~~ V X > '' ZV" ~ ~ O a ~ ~ m r S' Y < < '' ~ ~ rV V G VJ U] VJ S' L L 9 ° ' E a ° 'd ` _ .: ~ m o a m a ~ a a'! h d G < 3 C ~, ~~ O < ~~~ a ~i~ Din ~~ E m ~>~ ~ °~E3~~=h-~ E ~ ~" mLasasa~ 3 ~X ~~°z EZ ~ ~ ~zuz ~~~° ~ ` ~ y , , y qq `~ Ga~g ' at,~ 9a7 ~ ~ ~ _at~n`~~aat _ G ~ ~ v~ V L m y v V N= V ' P ~ ~~ '~~3 <3 ~ ~ a~ a a>3 ' ~o E°sec c>za EEE9~a9°E955 d o ~~~ V 9~ S U U~ ~ N y C C~~ 4 T .O. C 9 W C~ g y V a a U S NP PD >> 7 U U U ' {j ~ 'd ' ' ` 9~ ~ U Z 9 6 r. [ . Y QQ 0 9 V 9 ~i Y r. ''~ O ~. Z' Mi ~ m V 9 m Vi N m 6 C 0 m a m a a C C m m L L' C' a a a a L U m m m m~ ~ C m g g$ C G G ° ° ° ~ m m , ., ~ C E C E E E-e a ..~ E u u G ero C°= E°E°~m~.: ~e'oL 6E E E mm~ o ~e o~~ ~ , u f f>°• F>°•a°•a"Gif~3~ ~c> .> °•>°•3 ~~s ~~ = < zvtl,Gizrtciuu zryso i '[~ pp O• ppry• y ~ ~r ~p p p. p p 8 r r r r~ r r r r r~ N N N N^ raj h O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N O 8 O r r r r r r r r r r r N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ••1 •7 ••1 O z 111 C B 3 3 O B V O C L q % y C VV B y L 0 O y z~ tl • Z N ~O E F .a c E~ E? ,-^ _zm W~ ~ze i`~ h 2 a pL. 0 3F~o V O z O O yam` V ~ ~~ Q ~--+ U 4~-, ~ L O O ~, a U O O ~1 c~ ~..~ O J O N r N N O N N r r N N N r'..1 r N N J r N r O r O O O J r O r J O J O r QI. O O O r O r r r r r O J r r N r .N r r r r r r r O O O J O r ~+ O r r O J r O [r N N O O N N Ml N PI MI r r N N r r r N N '1 r I1 r N O N N A ^! r r O O r O J N N J r r r O N J N r r N r r J N r r r N N r J J N N J J r O O r r r O r r r J O W ~.(. O O N O r r r O r r r J r r r r .+ J r r O r O r r O O O r r r r O r J J O r [~ N N O O J N n N '1 n r r r1 N N r en N N rl r ri N N O N N h r1 r r O O r O r N N N ( y' J r J O r r N J N r r nl J N N N J r r J r r r N r O r r O N r r O J r O r r O R 1~1 ~ ry~ W ~[ r r r O J J J r O r r r O O O r r J r O r n1 O J r O r O r r O r O r r J J O Q F O N N Pl N P1 N O r N N eq N N N N N N N r N r N N N J O O O N r r r r r N O O a ~y ~ O J N O N N N O r r r r r r r r r N N r J r r r J r O r O J J r O r r J O r N y m G rr j f-~ (( O r O N O r r O r r r r J r r r r O J J r r r J O O O N O r O O w, r O r O r [~ O N N N N PI N O r N N N1 N N N N N N N r N r N N N J O O O N r r r r r N O O Q «eUU~maU~nec~a«nnnanU«<aenU<e««« m ~ a ~ v n$a~n~a'. 1°~I n ne 1~im«h~inve °r $v e°e 1yi 1~ a din $ ~ «~~.~a ~n.Qi .pi a < 6< U n n c< U U< n W U U< n U n«< U U«< U U«<<<« a< ~ ~ a U °~ih ~ine a °ae nnn °r~nns lane e a a °~ o1~i a nn n a.~.1«~` N ~«n n ~i ~ C a, % OC i ~ ~ ~ v o ~ ..a E~ z-0 < Y m> Ya cs ~ N~~ o ~ ~~ a~ J ,~ ~a 8 E E o C~ ~ =` ~ u pa( Z n n n ~ J J U< 'Y~ L y c ..1 C V Y V 3 'd L q J Y G L W n ii SI . „VY~ L y VJ V! h f C CG a~ ~Y 9 ~ o9=O Y< ~~n= m ~ ~ ~d 3 ~o.~t ~o2~'CEE < Y'i ~' ~ u J OC ~ Y C C J p ~ L V i C 'dL c '~E t e ~ V V. m L C 3 tQ ~mW Y E C Y rd}.iQ V V V 0 C> ~y Y V r Y C ~ C L y m_ C hS S L ~ Y 6 C Z ¢< C~ b v n C . ~ . O N ~ci<`~r~ =z~~3oi~3cs ~ r ~~~~3~03 ~~3;o~c °Z~ ~&s E ~df di adS ae~~dl dl ,d di dJ ~ eN ~~.^J °a ~df Y ~ ~ a°~ .`l~°a u m ~",3 u E o O'~cs.~y E m Euys~ ~o'~co~c~~~~c~c~~a~`«~~~~m3ai~ °~E u ~m ~ E U QQ ee p 3nh O 66 6 ".~ m n n e D O 0L G' ~Y C.Sni (~ m y C m C~ ~ ~ 8 G 0 L 6 pp `` p N N N V V V1 y y~ fA V~~ C ~ m ~ C~~ O m 0 N ~ ~= 0 C C C ~/ Y Y` G G C n n 0 0 n 0 V~ Y Uff i~~iiC SY'f~3.,-..cr~r3a~s-,E~=<zm sYzsu-uz-~ H q 1011 1NIl O p N ~~ N N Vl ~Op ~ Np Opp r P~ h Vl y y O N ~~ p ~ P P ~P P~ N 0 '[~ O n i i y N H y y y O O O O O O O O O O N N N N 8 S r J r r J J J J J J N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 1~1 1~1 n z C 8 V 3 3 C B C 8 e to n ~ Y 9 S~ S a O z~ n, Z y e ~ G E F .] G 3~ F :' t m C m m n U C e r q~ C A ~ a ~E= a_t=-• F J ? F U e U ~ ~~ U ^~I W ^~ W U O . r~y^ w~+l W Q~ O~ ~ a 3~ ~~ U '- N j • ~.' Oo a n e -~ U •1--+ 3 O t~ c~ J r O N r w1 N N N r ..~ N N r r r .y r N O r ..~ N r O O O /[/[VV''~~~~ 3 m r e r e e N e r r r r r N r r r O nn r r r r r O r O F O O O N n r f n O r N N r r r N N N n r n r N O n n J O r O N N r N N O r r N r ...1 r N O N r r ..1 N N r O O N (i M w m O N e .-i .+ r r r e r r r ..i ..~ d r .w r e e r e r r O r W .t U F O O O .4 N N n n O r n N N r .r N N N n .M n N N O n n Q ~ r 0 ~+ r N N r r .r r N N N r ...I r O r ...1 ..~ r N r O O N •O ~ ~ O r O r r r ..~ r O r O O O r r r Orr r r O r r O r h N N F N N n N N n N N N n N N N N N N O N O N r N N N O O G H ~..~ O N O N N N N r O .+ r r r .r r N N N O r 'i r an r ..~ O ~. r O N O O r .J .~ r r r r r r r O 'r r O r r ..I r O N O F N N N N n n N N N n N N N N N N O N O N r N N N O O p n<mUt)c)G«ao~«<e<a<e<m«<m ~ a U Pr C. V v v°pi~n ~°m me a Siw °n via vNih °a n.°~ia ~i va nvni°v a ~.. mmv~vvw~amwmm«u«<a<naac~ a a a Q V r N N N VI O n r N m~ P n m P Vr N Vl r V1 ! q O W P ~eunnnm an n e~ e e nnn~n Yl fN a ~e ~i a mn s a yQ CyD ~ y G G 'L' ~ Q Y t 6K r E m s ~ N`~e~'zz `~~~ ~ Ye 3v ~~c~~ a° o~9r~y< ~~"„ ~ ~ a. . m e i~ r U~ L y~ c '~ ? t 3 s a y ._~. ~ i ~ ° Y " - .`, 8 2 e < ~ et _ c .Y U u > p ° .'~ a ~ a 3 . e ~<•~,r'gr3~iz3o ~rE<E~ ~F3bca3'+3 dS a! m8 e'C ea~df `~a1 e77 a a~ ee'Q '~Od!°~.7S aS d3 `a 0a o zs ~OL~«3~~ 4am3aaaao~c m E V a~as •~ . afat ~ ~ .d 9 ~ ~ 'd ~ ~ N C C ~ dS i{ ~ 9 ~' ~ 9 m C ~ 9 m ~ SS Z St ddd'd ' ' • ' ~ Y t ~ Y C ~ e C C~ m pmpm .xmm ..z ~ ~Rmmocm .tom m . ~ m m r m a p p p ~p p Y~ V Y V g m C V~ m Y V Y~ G m G` K m~ ff}f ``~ ° ~ ° `f E ° F . a > ~Sf 3 .a ~c> ~> 3a ~~ ~zy 'CI g o ~~~ ~ y r= nP.l P O Vl YI V T P Vl VI n O p N m P N N V1 e T ~ y y ~ y y y y O O O O O O O O O y r r r •4 r r r r N N N N N N N ry z QC "j Y 3 3 B w e n m V C T~ S c`= e Z~ O , Z Qy G3 .~ E F ~~ .7 C qy O .d Eo F q4 = m V x °~ '~ m eo C r Y L E3_q y ~ r m ?_ F J £ 3 F U o Z O O ,O r d 7 OI LL A 'O 7 r V w w l0 ~"' ~_ Ill N d V •. d N O a E m U ~, C ~ O o u B. Site Access On-site access would essentially consist of local street connections with the on and off-site General Plan circulation roadways as well as a network of on-site local streets. Major Access Intersections Along Margarita Road would be located at General Kearny Road and Campos Verdes Loop Road. While Campos Verdes Loop-Road would not e~dst without the project, an access driveway to the Regional Center would still exist forming a 'T" intersection. Genera] Kearny Road, which is a General Plan road, would eventually be built even if the Campos Verdes project were not to proceed. In the scenario "without the Regional Center;' both intersections are assumed to be '"I" intersections instead of four- legged intersections. The Margarita Road/Campos Verdes Loop Road intersection would operate at service level "B" or better during peak periods (based on ICU analysis) for year 2000 development conditions with the groject and both with and without the Regional Center. 0 The Margarita Road/General Kearny Road intersection would operate at: o Level of Service (LOS) A without the project; o LOS A or better with the project; and o LOS B or better with the project and without the Regional Center. Intersections Along General Kearny Road are assumed at "H" Street, "I" Street, "J" Street, Campos Verdes Loop Road, and "A" Street. The intersection at "H" Street would be a four- ]egged intersection serving traffic for project development both north and south of General. Kearny Road. The remaining four project streets were assumed in the analysis to form 'T' intersections with General Kearny Road. All five intersections are project-related and would not e~dst without the project. Based on the ICU analysis results, all five intersections would operate at service level "A" during peak periods. Using the Highway Capacity Manual non-signalized intersection analysis method, all movements at these intersections would operate at an service level C 24 O or better except the northbound lefr-turn movement from "H" Street. Here, the traffic O existing on a left turn from the office park development located south of General Kearny Road would experience relativley long delays (Level of Service D). This lefr-turn movement is projected to be approximately 95 vehicles during the PM peak hour. Since this intersection would be located only 430 feet east of the Margarita Road/General Kearny .Road intersection, it may not be desirable to signalize the intersection. A four-way stop control would decrease outbound delays during peak periods but would cause unnecessary delays to through traffic on General Kearny during off-peak periods. The provision of a "right turn out" only driveway from the office park onto Margarita Road could be considered and would significantly reduce outbound delays during the heavier PM peak period. Intersections Along Campos Verdes Loop Road are planned at "H" Street, North "C" Street, "D" Street, and East "C" Street (see Figure 9a). The Campos Verdes Loop Road intersections at "H" Street and North "C" Street are assumed to befour-legged intersections. The two intersections at "D" Street and East "C" Street would be '"T" intersections. According to the ICU analysis, all four of the Campos Verdes Loop Road intersections would operate at service level "A." Using the HCM non-signalized method, all traffic movements at these intersections should operate at service level "C" or better during peak O periods with stop sign controls on the minor street. C. Off-Site Capacity and Level of Service Analyses Future year 2000 off-site traffic conditions were analyzed for three scenarios: o Future traffic without the project on planned roadways; o Future traffic with the project on planned roadways; o Future traffic with the project and without the proposed Regional Center on planned roadways; and o Future traffic with the project on planned roadways with additional improvements. O 25 ` The comparison of with and without project conditions on area roadways provides a measure ;: of the relative impact of the proposed project. Conditions with the project and without the O Regional Center were also evaluated to assess the differences in cumulative impacts with development of the adjacent Regional Center project. Year 2000 Levels of Service Without Project for roadway segments within the project study area reflect future traffic conditions with all planned area roadways except those which would be internal to the Campos Verdes project. The realignment and improvement of General Kearny Road was assumed in the scenario. As shown in Figure 15, all of the area roadway segments would operate at level of service "C" or better without the project except for the following seven roadway segments: o Winchester Road between I-15 and Ynez Road -Level of Service F (V/C = 1.09); o Ynez Road between Winchester Road and Santa Gertrudis Creed -Level of Service D (V/C = 0.82); o Jefferson Avenue between Winchester Road and Santa Gertrudis Creek -Level O of Service D (V/C = 0.89); o Date Street between Jefferson Avenue and Jackson Avenue -Level of Service D (V/C = 0.82 to 0.83); and o Washington Avenue between Cherry Street and Date Street -Level of Service D (V/C = 0.90). As summarized in Table 4A, ICU analyses of the principal intersections in the study area indicate that year 2000 peak-hour traffic without the project would result in service level "D" at six intersections and service level "E" or worse at two intersections. These ten intersections and corresponding "without project" service levels are identified in Figures 16 and 17 for the morning and evening peak hour respectively. Intersections which would experience service level "E" or worse during the AM and/or PM peak hour(s) include: 26 O O O d rn LL A '~ 7 .. N V w w A f- W N d .6 N O a E ~o U 0 t .. 3 rn u. O A 7 U w w A H ~_ W N d •. d N O a E m U O O s O O O s 0 r x ti d 4 LL A 'D 7 r.+ N V w •.. F- _~ W 0 d m N O a ~v U P o Winchester Road/Jefferson Avenue; and o Winchester Road/Ynez Road. O -Year 2000 Levels of Service With Project reflect all planned area roadways including new on-site project roadways. As illustrated in Figure 18, all roadway segments in the study area would operate at service level "C" or better except for the following: o Winchester Road betweenI-15 and Ynez Road -Level of Service E/F (V/C = 1.11); o Ynez Road between Winchester Road and Santa Gertrudis Creek -Level of Service D (V/C = 0.82); o Jefferson Avenue between Winchester Road and Santa Gertrudis Creek -Level of Service D (V/C = 0.90); o Date Street between Jefferson Avenue and"Jackson Avenue -Level of Service D (V/C = 0.81 to 0.84); and O o Washington Avenue between Cherry Street and Date Street -Level of Service D (V/C = 0.90). _ The ICU analysis results summarized in Table 4B indicate that year 2000 peak-hour conditions with the project would result in service level "D" at two intersections and service level "E" or worse at two intersections. These intersections and corresponding "with project" service levels are depicted in Figures 16 and 17~for the morning and evening peak hour respectively. The two intersections operating at service level "E" or worse with the project are the same as those listed for the "without project" scenario. The ICU analysis indicates that conditions with the project would generally result in slightly worse conditions (ICU values) at the major intersections which are in close proximity to the project. Intersections further away from the project showed little change or in some cases an improvement in ICU values and service levels with the project. 27 O r O O O d 7 1 A V 7 w N U w w l0 H W N d 'D H O a U Year 2000 Levels of Service With Project and Without Regional Center reflect future traffic conditions with al] planned area roadways except those which would be implemented as part O of the proposed Regional Center. As shown in Figure 19, all of the area roadway segments would operate at Level of Service C except for the following four roadway segments: o Winchester Road between I-15 and Ynez Road -Level of Service E/F (V/C = 1.02); and o Jefferson Avenue between Winchester.Road and_Santa Gertrudis Creek -Level of Service D (V/C + 0.88); and o Date Street between Jefferson Avenue and Business Park Street -Level of Service D (V/C = 0.81); and o Washington Avenue between Date Street and Cherry Street -Level of Service D (V/C = 0.90). As summarized in Table 4C, ICU analyses of the principal intersections in the study area indicate that year 2000 peak-hour traffic with the project and without the Regional Center would result in service level "D" at three intersections and service level "E" or worse at two O intersections. These intersections and corresponding "without project" service levels are identified in Figures 16 and 17 for the morning and evening peak hour respectively. Year 2000 Levels of Service With Additional Improvements were evaluated for all intersections found to operate at service level "E" or worse with the project. For comparison purposes, these intersections were also analyzed for the "without project" scenario and the "with project and without Regional Centel' scenario. Service Levels and ICU values for critical intersections with additional improvements are summarized in Table 5. The analyses indicate that with additional intersections improvements, peak-hour service levels for the scenarios which include the project could be improved to "D" or better at all intersections. As shown in Table 5, the Jefferson Avenue/Winchester Road intersection would still operate at service level "E" conditions during the AM peak hour for the scenario without the project. The ICU value for the "without project" (ICU = 0.93) was assessed to be moderately worse than for the "with project" condition (ICU = 0.85) and Significantly worse than the "with project and without Regional Centel' scenario (ICU = 0.83). 28 O 0 O O w d .. rn A M V W W LL r LLI N d y O Q (9 U ~_. O ~. ~1 ~~~11 i~l ~U ..fl ~ c~ ~ ~ b i--i /O~ /'1 U C d E 0 c E 0 9 3 N U c W 3 , a N e N e c .J F e n U m O W a .. ~y Q W F '' n .. n N ~ (n a .. o I'^ N N U (~ z '~ a N - ~+ ri E N N O w..~ ^ .~. .~4 a ~ U ~ & O m x a ~ U ~ a Q r-~ a d a u ~ L c O - V N z ~ 3 C 3 °Z U yv a ~ `~ 4 U 5 ~" ^ F_I .-~ N P. N N C 0. c 3 G C N Q V ~ C ~ .] a N o N 0 c ..1 F < e+ U o M W W .~ a N .r ~' n. F ~„~ r+ .r n N Q C /y~ W ~ a .. e O . [-~ N N ~ U ~ W Z ..] a N r C 1-I (--~ N N O ~ C X a ~ U m ~ a -- Q ~ C .-~ x m a. ~ ~ U Q ~ C 9 a Y tl L Y V 3 ~ - c 3 ~' U U I.n ~v C ~ ~ ~ Y ~ ` ; ^ LI N ~`+ N V U C 3 C C N ~ ..] N N ~ ~ 3 a e e c Q .J F a "+ 'I ~ U ~ ...~ N .~ o W a .. ~"' a F n ~ a ~ C~/I .] a •n -- N ° O F N N U Oa .~ N .. Z a ~ [-~ N N C Iti O U ~ ~ w U .. '' ~ ~ O O O Y a ~ W Q U -i 9 a ~' Y a ~ V ~ O U V Y g s c 3 q'~ 3 Q e z ~ ~ ~ C } _ Y -., ^ i--i = N `~ a 2 F V Z 0 .~ T .qV O. 0 .~ U 0 N Y v H `o O O ~ ~I][~. ]Findings A. Site Accessibility The planned area circulation system offers a number of major roadway facilities which would serve as access routes for the Campos Verdes project. These off-site facilities -range from regional Freeway facilities to local Secondary streets. Based on the analysis, the proposed project street connections to the General Plan circulation system would generally provide good access. One of the project development areas, however, would have difficulties with traffic exiting the site. Traffic from the proposed project office park (Planning Area 2 in Figure 1) would be subjected to Significant delays during the PM peak period while attempting to turn ]eft onto westbound General Kearny Road. A signal on General Kearny Road at "H" Street would solve this problem, but "H" Street may be too close to Margarita Road to allow a signal. A four-way stop would solve the exiting problem but would result in excessive delays to the heavier traffic flows on General Kearny Road. Aright-turn out only driveway could be provided on Margarita Road to serve project traffic exiting the office park. This would decrease the amount of left-turn traffic and delays at the "H" Street intersection and would have minimal impact on northbound Margarita Road traffic flows. It should be noted that the intersection of Campos Verdes Loop and "H" Street may be a candidate location for a signal in the future. The TranPlan model generated relativley heavy left-turn movements in and out of the neighborhood commercial center during the peak period. A signal is not being recommended at this time since the forecasting model tends to overestimate commercial center trips during the morning peak. Most neighborhood commercial center businesses typically don't open until after 9:00 a.m. and most patrons would arrive after that time. It is suggested that this intersection be monitored after the opening of the neighborhood center to assess whether signal warrants would be met. On-site access recommendations (in terms of intersection approach lanes and signalization needs) are depicted in Figure 20a. O 29 B. Traffic Impacts Traffic generated by Campos Verdes would have little to moderate impact (when compared O to "without project" conditions) at the following nearby intersections: o Winchester Road/Margarita Road - PM ICU = 0.63 without project and 0.71 with project; o Margarita Road/Genera] Kearny Road - AM ICU = 0.44 without project and 0.52 with project, PM ICU = 0.57 without project and 0.60 with project; o Ynez Road/Apricot Avenue - PM ICU = 0.74 without project and 0.78 with project; o Ynez Road/Solana Way - PM ICU = 0.71 without project and 0.78 with project; o Margarita Road/Campos Verdes Loop Road - AM ICU = 0.20 without project and 0.36 with project, PM ICU = 0.34 without project and 0.62 with project; o Winchester Road/Nicolas Road - AM ICU = 0.55 without project and 0.70 with O project; o Margarita Road/Date Street - AM ICU = 0.52 without project and 0.80 with project; o Margarita Road/Winchester Hills "B" Street - AM ICU = 0.39 without project and 0.54 with project, PM ICU = 0.26 without project and 0.34 with project; and o Regional Center Road/General Kearny Road - PM ICU = 0.63 without project and 0.73 with project. As can be noted, although the project would result in measurable impacts at these intersections, all would operate at service level "C" or better "with the project". 30 O C. Roadway Improvement Needs O Year 2000 traffic conditions with the project reflect significant increases in area traffic volumes due to other approved and planned development projects in the study area. The cumulative non-site traffic flows would have a maior influence on future off-site roadway and intersection needs for the area. Some of these improvements are currently under design as part of the Winchester Assessment District 161. Other needed improvements would be included in the recently approved Community Facilities District 88-12. Improvements identified in this study (either as part of the 'base" improvements or "added" improvements) may not be totally consistent with improvements currently being designed or proposed as part of area assessment/community facilities districts. For the purpose of this study, recommendations include the ultimate improvements which would be needed to accommodate projected traffic with the project. Other than those improvements related to direct project site access and on-site circulation roadways, virtually al] of the recommended improvements would be needed to accommodate traffic conditions without the project. Specific recommendations regarding the recommended approach lane configuration for intersections in the study are presented in Figure 20a (for project site vicinity) and Figure O 20b (for off-site intersections). Recommendations for the basic roadway network configuration, roadway classifications, and number of travel lanes are illustrated in Figure 21. These improvements would result in post-project peak-hour service levels of "D" or better at al] study area intersections. D. Compliance With General Plan Circulation Policies The project would comply with minimum service level "D" policy for peak-hour intersection operation at area intersections. This assumes that recommended improvements are implemented. Several of the recommendations would require increased in the number of standard travel lanes typically provided for the street classification and also increases in right-of-way requirements. O 31 -~ i ~ I i i m m J U 0 F `o m a E z 0 N d V LL y d C J ~ V w ~ ~ ~ fII ~ L ~ y: A y~ C ~ V N .U N ~ y w d ~ ~' (~ F'• ~ V ~ •~~ W d ~ d V d ~ d b. Ql ~~ O u'oE $ ~' U d '~ lC ~U d ~~ ~ c o~ m t~ O O O ¢ $ 9 O Nl .`rte , L { ~ iN h ~ ~y f L{ h 2` {~ r{ ~ J! ~ ~~ ~ J L ~_.. ~~{ Z-. Nw~ /J~ 2 OI 1 M / + ^ Z` ~~ .J o r r1 ~ £ ~{ %ry ~ ~ ( pa ! ~ NN Za .J 1 ~ ~{ r{ ~ j ~ L L{ 1 ~ ~ v ~ ~ , Z ~_ {.~ 0 ..N.. y~ 2 `If ~ .. ~ ~ / . ~ N~ < \ L ~ ~ ~% r .-~~ , O O O \N N~ N1 1 M S H U ANN ~-{ ~{ J {- sir w ~ ~ {~ _~.. ~ ~1 ye. zp! o i F Z r t~ a! L{ ~{ O.p N J1l ry o__ -e J:L~y J L . . ,F N ~ Z •I ? ~~ r' E~'~? ~' z / 1 ry r C ' - N o C {-~ { z..• e ~. / . 6 w r yI W 10 J m 2 Ni 1N 2 u i ,J 3 i ~ N J U f O ` ~ w P~ ~ i ~ c m e z ~P 1 r t- m O / " W INI I^ ® W / C ~ ~ . y4 J J Z O O 1- Z ~, ~N~ J ~l ,^ v r ~~ ~'r .~ 9 M1 1 l til i ~ of ~z ~ .J N + l \e e~ a 0 N lL N C ~b 4~ L~ ~ r r N .'eA U ~+ ~ i `° ~ ~ ® W ~~ ~ ~ ~, y '~ 4 '~ coo ~ U V ~, "! iN W 1 (' nl iN < ~ ~~ ~ ' ~ O _{ U _ N ~y 1Sy31 NI y-. -n- Z. 0'~ y', 1 1 r "3Atl NOStl3333f y~ NNO y~ o~ QOgO~ N, <~ o~~~ 1~ ~N ea ~ ~ 3 e 11 e J O i Y. O J J tl ; WQ LL P '~ 6 O C e Y ; \ 1 tl G GJn J\ ~ a3oE JW'4 We;LL a e ¢LL O YO;pLL0 ~~e0 C CT T~NC'O Ytl6 G "J'-epN p 0 O; ~; Y C .N. C G GF3 a;DSO\~ p a0 TC~ -LL= e °-EoYe$ouaSe v oe°cG p621L~«O~UNO =' JOfN V ;tJVLLj<INUUy p~MU~ W ~ YYY"'''' J N OI N A ~ A A ~ b+ ~+ _~ N ~ v w V" e. ~ ~~ ~ lL ~ N ¢+ d ~ ~ ~. N ~ O .~ a ~ ~ U O V 3 O O O ~; The intersection spacing provided along Margarita Road would be slightly sub-standard for O an arterial roadway. The elimination of the proposed Campos Verdes Loop Road full movement intersection would severely restrict access to and from the planned neighborhood retail center and would force all project-related residential traffic to use either General Kearny Road or Roripaugh Road. The added traffic demand on Genera] Kearny Road would require: o the provision of at least one signal (possibly two) along General Kearny Road to safely accommodate left turns into .the project development area; and o the provision of a double left turn bay at either the southbound or westbound approach to the Margarita Road/Genera] Kearny Road intersection. Assuming that the currently proposed Campos Verdes Loop Road is acceptable, the location of "H" Street should be at ]east 330 feet from Margarita Road or appro~dmately midway between Margarita Road and "C" Street. M- O O 33 ~. ]E~ecommendations O The year 2000 improvement needs identified in this study address problems which would be caused by already approved and other planned development projects in the area. This is demonstrated in the analysis of 'without project" conditions. The introduction of the Campos Verdes project would add a relatively small increment of traffic to the adjacent street network. A comparison of improvement needs with and without the project indicates marginal differences which are primarily related to access considerations at the perimeter of the project and on-site circulation. The developer should be responsible for direct project access improvements along the site boundaries and on-site improvements as well as a "fair-share" amount towards the implementation of needed off-site improvements. Bedford Properties is a principal participant in the Ynez Corridor Community Facilities District 88-12. The developer is also a current participant in Winchester Assessment District 161. Additional "fair-share" participation could be warranted in the implementation of some of the identified off-site improvements which are not addressed in the current improvement districts. A. Site Access/Circulation Plan The recommended site access and circulation plan is depicted in Figure 20A. Key features of the site access and circulation plan are listed below: o Improve Margarita Road as an Arterial roadway along the project frontage. o Improve General Kearny Road (with proposed realignment at Margarita Road) as a Secondary roadway. o Improve Campos Verdes Loop Road as a Collector street except as follows: - Provide an Industrial Collector street section from Margarita Road to "C" Street. o Improve all other on-site roads as Local streets. O 34 O o Provide an access driveway designed to allow "right turn out only" on Margarita O Road for the proposed Office Park development. This exit only driveway should be located as far south from General Kearny Road as the site constraints will allow. o Provide a limited access driveway (right-in and right-out) on Margarita Road for the neighborhood commercial center. o Provide signals at: - Margarita Road/General Kearny Road; and - Margarita Road/Campos Verdes Loop Road. B. Off-Site Roadway Improvements Recommendations for the future area circulation system are identi£ed in Figures 20B and 21. O Recommended off-site improvements which exceed standard improvements included in the Southwest Area Community Plan Circulation Element are listed below: o Winchester Road - Provide a Modified Urban Arterial section with four eastbound and westbound through lanes between I-15 and Ynez Road. o Winchester Road -Provide three through lanes at the eastbound approach to the Jefferson Avenue intersection. C. Transportation System IVlanagement Actions The primary transportation system management opportunities iri the study area appear to be: o The continued enforcement of the South Coast Air Quality Management District's Trip Reduction Plan (for other major employees in the area); and O 35 o Encourage the implementation of transit service in the Temecula area where: - express transit into and out of the area during the morning and evening O commuter peaks; - fixed route local bus service between higher density residential areas and major activity centers; and - demand responsive transit services such as.-dial-a-ride. for. the. lower density and more remote areas. o Promotion of future public transit through the adoption of appropriate local planning ordinances which would require special transit-oriented design features to be incorporated into future development projects. o The adoption of local ordinances which would require larger employers in the area to implement car pool or van pool programs. Large employers could also be encouraged to implement staggered work hours or flex time programs for their employees. It should be noted that the implementation of a neighborhood-type retail center as part of O the predominantly residential-oriented Campos Verdes project would help reduce the number of off-site shopping trips made by project residents. 36 O O ][X. Conclusions The year 2000 improvement needs identified in this study address problems which would be caused by already approved and other planned development projects in the area. The introduction of the Campos Verdes project would add a small. increment of traffic relative to the total projected traffic volumes on the adjacent street network. A comparison of ~_ improvement needs with and without the project indicates marginal differences which are primarily related to access considerations at the perimeter of the project and on-site circulation. The developer should be responsible for direct project access improvements along the site boundaries and on-site improvements as well as a "fair-share" amount towards the implementation of needed off-site improvements. Fair-share responsibilities should consider the incremented contributions of the project to the need for the improvement in terms of ICU and service level impacts as well as added traffic demand during the critical peak traffic O periods. O 37 O Appendix 0 O 38 0 O O s. d rn A 7 iN U w w l9 F W N d r. y O Q U ,_ N roy ~ ~. L6S2 ~-sez _~g Ls~ 2~~ ~-s J 1 ~.: z n~ 'ro s91~ 1i ase-. °g, Lse7 Nm; 9Z/ 01~ LZ9 /'S6t Ny^ '~. ~ bOl .J 1 ~ .~09/ ~-ooe hN i .J 1. ,, °u ei~ 1m OB sL~ 9 se7 8 „_ Lcz-. ..i • s ~r°ti Sl~ tee ~~ Oll ~. LZ d r u mN LZe N ~0 J 1 1. ; szl o y E w 1~ Zl~ mu~n ^~ , ll.J tR s, ~zs m n,n ° =~ ~_-~ w LOeC V ~-ZCOI ~ ,p m Jll. Tiia i N J1~.~9s1~ L rss s91~ 1 i ~ r zce~ 1 1 ~' N Z (- Y99Qr ~ N N R 0 ZOII~ ^Nb 0 O~ OZZ1 ' '' ~ S91~ m c a ~ w ne ~^ w 1 I .Lt ll LS~I~ tr ~~ ~3 '1 f ~~ 9` ../ of ^~e i;ar Oa~LL "~ moo. i 0 ~~ E r ~ >° _O t 0 F O 2 W ~ V, N W J mz _.. mNb W~h ,~ ! ~, .-L99 N (-S6Z ~~a `OS SI 31 561, '~ 1 (' .J 1, 9 x691 1Sb31Nl Lam--. Eller ;'~ OCII~ ~ 1 ~ 3AV NOStl333 SBA 3f co m ~ O LL V ~~ ~ b~q,,w b V A~ w g ZS ® ~ ~~w 0 N ® ~ ~®> BN H ~ ~ a ~' U ~ooC O °oo°O~ ~ b~ ti ~. ~:~. O m .. a, LL V ~. A ~ 7 r ~ •~ fA g ~ t9 ~® F ~~ ~ ~~ w ® ~ ~, ® y N ~ e O 4 ~ ~ c0 .~ U O e.. QaD ~pp~~ g W V C m O W d L LL O A 7 w V w w l0 H W N d N O Q V O O O d o~ A II 7 «+ U w f0 L L ~_ N d fl 01 N O 4 W U ~ ~ w q ~ ~N m ~~ c 07 Jl ~'~i> N~N ~~ ~ o ~ sr <<y ~o« J LS8 0 ~,` eE a W si ~ ? r r' zee, 1 1 (' ~ ! ~ t_ac~a iP c ~ ~~ ~^mm 9y~~ c W.N- 7 Fby~ 'r/" t~ C7 CP J ~f.J ~ Ll i L> U~2 ~ r'e[t vYg06 M10P ~ / J 1 ~ r~sz J 1. ~~> o, ~'v +'°go ~ a~ 1ir' s1s ) ~ ay LL--. ~'o bOh~ .J'~•P~ rv ~ r{ ° °~ 6'd°6 `~°N /' p OZ.I tEE 1 yAO ~ J 26 (~ `~ ~C e~ r80 0 ,° ~,a ,z : ~ ~ ~ ~ Q .~,~re ~, a qin v ~ 1 t ~ ® C1 `lE ~ ~ pa0 _NnH .-p 6 1~ s Na ® d V~ _ J I ~ r-SZl Z ~ ~ W O • C~ q2'"1 /3 ~ ly ~ I ~ K • 1 ~~~'r ~ gyp, q~p ~ ~M Zl~ b u{~ p°~ 4 r~ `~~~ g2 °' Ptl a sb B q~ `~ p~0 2f t/ 'b~/. qqlY ~j e • 10 i' ~ ~~ •p PO NS e~ r. SOt jn ~ ® ~ <S V r'~ ) yry el ~ ~ N m ^1 LtS `yy2 '91` "~ ry1' ~ (bQ ~ w _Y, N ~SL9 m N a ^LL°l l0 0 ~ t '„r5! \N a J 1 1, r--o1s J 1 L ~ss~ .) L r-1s vy'y^0, ^, °, () ~ 569-. ;,~• o•s~o~-- '-a r c '•~~yyf,of •® c.) EIZ~ v n u OSl : m in g a °°(2J '~lg'9! 6 ~2 \' ~ / .J W Z N ry /' W O b Nm mN ~~ w ~ i Lss~ t x ACC = N i ?"/ J ~~ ~ s~ 'a Ob?g ~, H~ 0 U N 6 ml. Q G~~ i ~. Zb91 n N e~ ~~m LBBZ m m ~ .- ZCf •~ l ~. rY$Z m~W `YSZ S~ 31b io nN .-SBl 1Sb31 901-+ ~~a ,p~~ O 9>~~ " ESt~ 1 I r 3nV NOStl33j3p ~/QJ see-. ~S ~ ODs os~ .- O O O ~o 0 T d V LL A 7 r+ N V w w eo F- W y d N O a E U 0 pWH Q P m . ~ ?. 0 P V V V `} A ~ ~ ~ ~ .~. b '~ y ® ® w g ~ t0 ~ ~y~/J~\ t~J ® ~ ~ b O a E ~ U 6 Q~Op~ VtidO ~ ov . ~ ' , • ~'i ' I ~ ; • ~ •~ U i~ a . ,- . Q N N ~ i~ Q n ( ~~ C ~ ~ ~ • 1, ~ '_ i w ~'Z _ ~~ r ~ I i~ - '• t ~ LL uP' Z W p g~g ,. ooaooo~ ~ ~ , . __ - : _ ago _ -, 1 ~I .-~ ~ ~ g . <~- ~ .. ~ _ EpP ,~W. .. ~ ~,'M BEN _ I .. ..i ~ ~~ 1 -. 'I I r. ' \ ~(~l(~'! ~I 'I~ ~' It ~(~~~}~ i I' ' - ;l,i l ~!' rl , ~i.' 1 ~ i l'.'' ~~ \ 1 ``11`~~ r J~(r ~ .. .r ;I ~ '',~ ~. ~~.~ Qom„ }~ I ~~~ i/-~ r i~il 3' ~~-• ~ ' rR ~ ~. ~I ~ ~~i S ~~ ~ ~ ` ~-~r ~ fJ~~ ~ S~ I I+ I O ~ 1 I . ' / I ~ • I l ~ , , p ';• , x < ~ i ., ( , • . ~.: ~.I~ L. p'.`I`. .' .. . ./~ i i i •' , ': 'i ~ r ;, o . .r•, -~ ~ r • I ' I ' • r .. O O Year 2000 Southwest Area Plan Land Use Data OJ•Apr•9l ~TAZ LOCATION LAND USE Dwelling Units DEMOGRAPHICS Non-Res Acres ret nret P&As Total sf mf ret nret pop emp emp From P&As 370 External Station: 0 0 0 E 131,926 371 External Station: 0 0 0 E 107,652 372 External Station: 0 0 0 E 108,971 373 External Station: 0 0 0 E 1,277 374 External Station: 0 0 0 E 2,SS3 375 External Station: 0 0 0 E 5,409 376 External Station: 0 0 0 E 18,865 377 External Station: 0 0 0 E 11,478 378 External Station: 0 0 0 E 11,478 379 External Station: 0 0 0 E 12,767 380 External Station: 0 0 0 E 9,575 381 External Station: 0 0 0 E 638 382 External Station: 0 0 0 E 1,915 383 External Station: 0 0 0 E 638 384 External Station: 0 0 0 E 213 385 External Station: 0 0 0 E 213 386 0 0 0 S 0 387 0 0 0 P 0 O 388 0 0 0 P 8,563 389 0 0 0 P 0 390 0 0 0 P 2,031 391 0 0 0 P 1,193 392 0 0 0 P 0 393 0 0 0 P 0 394 0 0 0 P 5,140 395 0 0 0 P 211 396 0 0 0 P 7,972 397 0 0 0 P 0 398 0 0 0 P 2,072 399 0 0 0 P 2,071 400 0 0 0 P 9,653 401 0 0 0 P 2,619 402 0 0 0 P 2,391 403 0 0 0 P 2,338 404 0 0 0 P 2,021 405 0 0 0 P 0 406 0 0 0 P 0 O Wilbur Smith Associates .~ /LL v 1 r-,:--- 1 _-7___...1 1 1 1 1 1 1 DI vi 1 ~~ of L- `1 1 I 1 1 1 1 ~ snu imnil : i I 1 1 -~T-- 1 1 1 _ 1 +1 ~ AtllYriBPnl i 1 1 ! :~ ax BrDY OY 1 1 I Y ~o f 1 Ob s Wa.~ 1 - o~ ~ 1 ~. W F_ V ~ P~ ; W W r0 ~ 1 ,1 ~ ' ^-1 ~~ CI 1 ~'°-, u ~•~ ~~ Oy 1 ~ '~. / ` al \0 4Y] 4pf4l.y~ rOQ DO ~~' O In - p X11 OD ~ I P\ I it ~ r t ~ i~ V 3~ V Y ` ' V r ra \1~0^ U.u• "~>Ih~ ra ~ '~N3ntbre3a aroa uxnoo 3NI 0103btl3f3b 3B dln[wSSBbY0NY1f 1N3n3AOtldnlbnlN3nN9I1I35/J3tld pMBtlY03tl sNOlIf3/b ANY 'IIx/10'J 3x1 M S3bIlN'MOtlON1 O3fC/Otld ONl9NbfIX3 fONpL IJ[IISSr1J pNY - AVLLI]OllItl3N393Nt 9NUi11/I3WN(NLYlx353tld3a awera9Y3bY earn NOLLYInJMJ :3t ON _w._ BONY1lYtl303i WIY 31Y15 :., dtlW SIH1011N3WON3Wtl S31tlOlONI • .:... ;.;,,. 30N3nliNl i03tl3Hd5 ~~}~3~ l)1~~~ R`~3* /l~}~ 11T. _/{1~' I~IL L`1~ BBYD9 GLI-W• ~~' .... •..• 3001tl0 ~ V` ~LLl.l ~Y [11 x111, U'~I"lY tB4Z41 9SC-18 318YItlYA OYOtl NY'Id Olig3d9 Laxls ycl ~ce Q 3lerltlrA ArM33tli ~q®II~~f71 /~IT~II~ 98~12'OL Ky-9ps AMY u1ll JJ 99'$1'L LIC -984 m~[I~ 3lBWtlYA AYM553tldX3 6861"21 619~68~ SB~tCil OSC'SB a: 00001 .KL 1Y1tl31tlYNYBtlf1 ^_~~~ ~.r.~~~,x-.~ 68-61'El 519~6B• SB~6Z~81 ZBL~SB• 11``Q' \}V`y ~•Jl.ll 68'8241 9[5 ~68. SB-825 IEx-58 ~O~ All 1Y1tl31tlY NIYtHBOW W61"zl sM~BB• re9141 L25~re4 , c~o-o All lYItl31tlY A.II.l~f11®~ ~~II~~II~Il11II~iI BB9'01 SB..BB. re-1141 2S.. rea ^~ A81 tlOltlll 31x0 NOIlOl093tl 31Y0 NOIt-1053H 31Y0 NOIlOlOS3N .~--- ,p8 AtlY0N0039 'Ntlld ltlH3N303MSN3H3HdW003111 i0 LN3W3135301Atl3S ONV 5311111Otli Welfle Arw, eONlOm Nouravlroru OIl00d 3H1 iO 1Htld tl Stl LCY9'ON NOIlOl053H HOOOHHl9N0$IAH3dOS d0 OHtl00 A1Nf1003015tl3AIH 3HL A0 0861'9 HOHVW 031dO0V StlM dtlW SIHl QN 3 N1110• f a alMf x.Ot L V'3 [lV MLI10r p! ( eINf MM01 ~ NLIIOL • YIMf Y.Oa °~ /per'' `o 4a l,tu O~PP•] , o a • o O o - O:eN/,.v,GM%<'Fili. :n:ne!i,.M,./fe :Y,.iiin..:. .i~H'lin:.. ~:.:%../.,..'/. .)~~.~ - '= O av p ~ n 4ei O ~ O Z ' O j1 o p /~ / al ya ~o ~o p~o 1 tnx]nr 1 ~~oY 0 1 a I Y~ O ~~t.4 p \ 11) wI ~o \ / o Q ° ~1 oxon 0 O ~ ~---------~ - j \\I W I~~S1~. sl ~ `O 1~~0 ~O ~ avov oorxm s ~\`` / ~i r--1 '1"~ o ~^~ Q I 1 ~ ::FZGa~w~.~:~s: n l Id «1 / JY :'- i / ; j 1 iY` r ° 'a4 1 i! a 1 I ti 'bT65M1 of \ /~a o ;•<q" 1 \p of of 1 Pao ta' oy` 1 °\ \ ... l"xouwn ` ,Y 9_~O ~ ~\ of '`` 1 O o~ `~ , ~ - O O g :_~ I ~~ : '1 81 for I \ O ,\ ° I ° . ~ .1 3~ .. ,,,~\ o ~,~ 1 p bo 1 p .1 0 ~- L--- p 1 tlExr ~~i -Bnv iw limy,nl 1 aroY laf ,tp 1 _- ~~J 1 1 s\ z '1 ? 1 0 oa 1 DO ^ \\\ al \ a x of e, O o\ Y- ~ x;l :f 1 ~b 1 JN 1 ~ :. aamo is '~~i / ( o mxB(x 1,Yra ..'1 >I \° a P' 1 Q ePaDb iQ rA '3 u r 'rnCl-- •~ r- nasyiuv ~_` 1 \ 1 I p° WI Q Q N Y / ~ V V 0 O O n rv m/ Qo m rv o N N n O m N \p m N N P \. ap / p n ~~ T - Oi / O 1 ^ n O m \N~ O Ow \ ~ O ® W 1 A n N O `N ~ ~ C YO O • o w N ' O T 1 i ~ ry w N O N N N ^O • N p / m m\ n fS'N ~ \ ~(~ N P /// _ ~' ~ `N O n N \ P n / o __ ` b \ N • n p m `` ` n_ 1 w / / n / / :/ _/ p m ~ '9 ^ o n m / ~ m ~ m w / 0 m I ~ ` \ / N / / n O N p/ ` rj " / m n ' \ a ~ 'n rv \ \ ao n \ ~ w \ a ~ a. O ry \\ V ~/ry N 4 O \ n \N n ip 0 n O _ ~ / P `N / ~ _ , Om m O m P / ' '^ o e P w, n O ° ~ n ~ ^ ' p rv w p \ O N n -_ Q \w P O w ,~ N O n ~ \ n n n l n - - ~ w pi p d / o p P o ~ n // p / ~ n N o O n m n Ol rv p \b ^ m . ! ' n / q O ~ ' N I O O ' 0 w' O N O O n p n n O P p D p w 1 1 ry On ry 1 n 1 1 p m ~ N N n w ^ P O n N n p N 1 1 ^ O ~ n o ~ p °' n 1 O ~ p P N o _ N Q 1 1 n n f N~ d c c p • / o n N rv p__ / o N , N 1 n n ., . 1 . ` M1I a D N n p rp+ ryp ^ N n g VE ~M ® E ^ ' ~ ' D D MA O ~ 022.3 6 TATS w 1 PI A :a= ~ O V I c=E:~'eaSt a ~ W ' 1~~~= y e~]~a:...`e."E~ r I. w __..^i.::_a: y ~ O =a'3Y ~E9-` ~ ~ LL $..c j _ W ~ J w aa~ o J - p 0 w > s:i~ o U _ O W . .;:i. O ip Q > ~ J _: e5 .. ac w °e.. O a`. a-.~ e e: c°c°: LL :aV~:~.p: _~zYa ; ILJI .~~a.. - ~ .~~ - :r= :3 =-e- :i; •o:-~~ O W - - - ~l°-..._..°_- O _......._.- e~vE ~ ~ ~ CO gY.~?•08•';7 - ...__ W .E°. - e~ a. = I~ W a-!_ . Q > ,_ • U ~~ V a . W =1 Q Q~ W =ei J p O~ W i~~4 U ? ~ ~ ` e ~~® ~ U g y r-~-`-:"E` w Y~~ O .~:i9:==-=~= a ~®~ J .I-0..-.~-_~ O J w tce;=:==.ea ~ u J 'If : 3 ~ `. i: e~ i O J O ~7ll llj~ll ~ II ll `VHtSd II ~j~ jl((''il~1R.~~~~7ll (~~ li.ll:.~~~~ ®~ ~~!!11 ~Y ll~11e O O O ~, TYPE HIGHWAY CAPACITY POR RIVERSIDE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN ROADS NUMHER DESIGNI) CAPACITY FREEWAY 4 60,000 86,000 6,000 6,880 FREEWAY 6 96,000 138,000 9,600 11,040 FREEWAY 8 132,000 190,000 13,200 15,200 FREEWAY 10 168,000 240,000 16,800 19,200 EXPRESSWAY 4 50,000 80,000 5,000 6,400 EXPRESSWAY 6 78,000 120,000. 7,800 9,600 ARTERIAL 4 24,000 38,000 2,400 3,040 ARTERIAL .(Urban) 6 38,000 59,000 3 800 , k1AJOR 4 4,720 24,000 38 000 2 400 3,040 SECONDARY 4 20,000 30,000 2,000 2 400 COLLECTOR4) , O 2 12,000 18,000 1,200 1,400 1) "Level of Service C" is used for analysis and evaluation, defined as a stable fl and is ow condition in which volume and restrict the freedom to select s eed h density p , c ange lanes or pass. indicate Average Daily Traffic. Values 2) "Level of Service E". This value reflects the absolute volume under ideal conditio maximum ns. This level is characterized by unstable flow, extremely high volumes and limit d e operating speed with intermittent vehicle queuing. Values indicate Average Daily Traffic. 3) Peak Hour Volume is assumed to be 10 percent for Level of C and 8 Service percent for Level E, based on higher volumes spread longer time period. over a 4) Capacities are for initial stage two-lane arterials; majo and secondaries will b i rs e s milar. NOTE: All capacities are based on improvement to full standards unde i County r opt mum operating conditions. Capacity significantly reduced b a hi h i can be y g ncidence of ped traffic and turning moveme t estrian n s. Substandard vertic horizontal alignment, or any condition whi h i al and O c m ght r sight distance will also reduce capacity. estrict 03/24/88 Bedford Properties Campos ~Ierdes ~E~~ Specific flan l~To. 1 't'echnical Appendix for O 't'raffic impact Study oaa~~o DDaooo ~~ODDD ooavoo Wilbur Smith Associates O November, 1991 0 n m : , s m n " ' n _ ~ A / n m / m ~ ` ~ / \ ~ ~ ^ / ` / / ` / Y ~ / Y N F O P N P / ° n m m : d \ ° "~ o q~ ~ n oy 4 n d31S3/Jhi \ ' ~ \rv O O " ~ \ O , N " o \ '~Y N A _ ~ A / = \ N . ~ a d \ n rv m ~ ^ S \N n O '^/ ~ ~ O ~ O 1 ^ ° ry l "~{ , o *. m n °rv m n " n 0 o " " O m N = oY \n d w : / " m \ n O _m ___ m "I e / ^ o o a` O ° • P ' ° ~ V 1 ^ .Q vI n n rv o ~^ ' \- ~ ~' ~ ~ tl O ~ O N m T N N N N m m n @ \~ ~ \ ° ~~ \\rv n O ° en n \ \e a • Y O,-• YUEL~. .b \ p m N N/ O__ N \ P \~ n c I ' - \" .. ` ~ Y n M/ o n o n i Y n _ n // n m rv n° ~ ^ b m ^ = "/ n m m n ' m N ~ ~ 0 0~ y D• m ° n w n n o o D m n I 1 1 n n n~ 1 n 1 n n n ~ m n ^ N n o n n m ry rv n ~ n n N ~ rv O N D p / nl 1 = ~ O ~ O P ry ~ ry ~ ry O J ~ N " (y I I f N SS. f n n ^ . / YI N f O A ~ p N m o O N N ^ ~ p / / OI ° ~~ p rv , ~f\ N ~ / N I i5 J ' _ 1 . 1 ~ <0 ~ _I ~ nl y. _ 'o ' m ~ n n N a ~ O B ^ o n n ~ " n g ~o ~~° J CAMPOS VERDES NODES b TATS g Campos Verdes Update Southwest Area Plan -Approved and Planned Projects Project Land Use Sub Quantity TAZ Name Area Land Use # type Ili (TM23316) ReslMF 28/ dos 160 (7T23335) Retell 6 acres L10 ACS E<panslon Mfg Dai fl Daily Vehicle Trip Rate Veh # Source Trips 6.6 1,874 400.0 2,J00 3,280 161 Carts Jr Cenkr Retell 1.5 acre 400.0 1,800 394 Enkrprlse Circle North Bus Park 35 acres 200 7,000 2 ExislhrPJFu/urc Res Res/MF l36 dos 6.6 898 162 Ind Park 4 Earl (PM23561) Bus Park 9,950 162 Ind Park /Fast (PM23561) Retell 10 acres 6,000 138 Ind Park / Wesl (PML9582) Retail 5 acres 600 3,000 l38 Ind Park 4 Wesl (PM19582) Ind Park 150 70 10,500 194 Ind Park 5 Phan II Ind Park 31 acres 70.0 2,L70 81 North Plem (PP11374) ~ ReUOff 172 ksf 15,700 1 Offim Towers 1&2 Office 2,000 139 Palm Plara (PPI1222) Retell 455 ksf 40.0 18,200 1 Plain Shopping Cenkr Retell l85 ksf 40 7,400 2 Q ueBly Bolles HokUResl 2,200 ll8 r~~ l~untan BLLS Cenkr Ind Perk 97 acres 70 5,000 136 Ranson Bus Cenkr Ind Perk 3l acres 70 5,00 117 Renton Bus Cenkr Ind Park 180 acres 70 5,0~ 136 Ranson Bas Cenkr Bus Park 16.4 acres 200 5,0 137 Renton Bus Cenkr Bus Park 16.4 acres 200 3,280 136 Ranson Bus Cenkr Office 3.5 acres 200 5,000 137 Renton Bus Cenkr Office 3.5 acres 200 700 113 Solana Shopping Cenkr Recall 5 acres 800 4,000 136 TAZ136 (- Rmcoo Bus Ctr) lodTlfg 10 acres 60 5,000 137 TAZ137 (- Ranson Bus Clr) Ind/hffg 58 acres 60 3,480 391 Temecula Regional Ck 1 Retell l3 ksf /0.0 [TE 820 520 19l Temecula RegionalCk 1 Offim 00 ksf 24A ITE 710 976 140 Temecula Regional Ck 3 Office 300 ksf 10.4 ITE 710 J,120 388 Margarita Meadows Cenkr Retail 173.78 ksf 60.1 ITE 820 8,881 388 SUB REGIONAL AREAI Ho41 125 rooms 8.7 1,088 388 SUB REGIONAL AREA 1 Office 97 ksf 14.0 1,358 L58 Temecula Regional Ctr 1 RdaB 250 kaf 35.0 ITE 820 (mall rclekd) 8,750 159 Temecula Regional Clr 2 Retell 250 ksf 320 ITE 820 (meB related) 8,000 l59 Temecula RegiomlCk 2 Mall 1,125 Icsf 3L0 ITE 820 36,000 IIO Temecula Regional Ck 3 Retell 6l ksf 350 ITE 820 (meB relnkd) 2,135 158 Temecula Regional Ctr l Office 350 ksf 10.0 ITE 710 3,500 158 Temecula Regional Ctr l Hokl 250 rooms 8.7 ITE 3l0 (85%occupancy) 1,849 82 Towne Cenkr Retell 565 ks[ 38 21,470 195 Wincheskr Highlmds (PM21361) fod Park 30 acres 70.0 2,100 195 Wlncheskr Highlands (PM21361) Bus Park 30 acres 200.0 6,000 398 Wlncheskr Hills Rcs/h1F 235 dos 6.6 I,SSI 401 Wincheskr HBIs Office 248 ksf 1L1 based on two story on IL4 2,753 403 Wineheskr Hills Res/SF 175 dos 10.0 1,150 101 Wincheskr Hills RaJMF 297 dos 6.6 1,960 100 Wlntheskr Hills Relall 170 ksf 620 10,540 002 Wincheskr Hills RWSF 179 dos (0.0 1,790 399 WincheskrHWs Res/SF 155 dos 10.0 1,5$0 2L5 Wlncheskr HBk Bus Perk 19.6 acres 130.0 6,0' 2l6 Wlncheskr Hills Res/MF 3l8 dos 5.5 1,~ 214 Wincheskr Hills Bus Park 705 acre 13L0 9,2 212 Wincheskr Hills School&Park 29.8 acres 40.0 1,192 Wilbur Smith Associates Campos Verdes Update Southwest Area Plan -Approved and Planned Projects O Project Land Use Daily Sub Quantity Daily Vehicle Trip Rate Veh TAZ Name ~ Area Land Use # type # Source Trips 213 Winchesler Hills Res/SF 258 dus 10.0 2,580 395 Winchester HWs Park 7.2 ecra 40.0 288 390 Winchesttr Hills Res/SF 152 dus 10.0 1,520 2l7 Winchester Hills RWSF 179 dus L0.0 1,790 1% Winchester Meadows RelaR 17.57 ksf 66.6 3,166 L% Winchester Meadows Offl<e 67.42 ksf t1.8 738 1% Winchester Meadows LL Indus 1.82 arras 186.7 330 1% Winchester Meadows lod. Perk 27.57 a<res 737 1,729 7% Winchester Meadows RelaR 89.4/ ksf 66.6 5,957 3% Winchester Meadows Offim 119.24 ksf 1L.8 1,407 3% Win<heser Meadows LL Indus 3.38 acres 119.1 407 7% Wln<hesler Meadows Ind. Park 21.38 acres 75.9 1,622 Ill Yn<z Auto Park Auto S&S 3,000 O O Wilbur Smith Associates Year 2000 Southwest Area Plan Land Use Data a•nP~•vt TAZ LOCATION LAND USE Dwelling Units sf mf 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 136 104 64 45 157 204 Non-Res Acres ret nret 32 2 2 10 21 12 795 600 85 47 94 366 60 1174 16 674 1120 270 8 16 110 16 16 46 DEMOGRAPHICS ret nret P&As Total O pop emp emp From P&As 0 512 0 P 8,246 326 32 0 P 2,815 250 32 0 S 1,093 154 160 0 S 1,869 108 336 0 S 3,220 866 192 0 S 4,485 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 3348 1360 0 S 22,601 113 0 0 S 371 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 226 0 0 S 742 878 0 0 S 2,887 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 144 0 0 S 473 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 O 3466 128 0 S 12,483 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 38 0 0 S 126 1618 256 0 S 7,500 264 256 272 S 4,005 2688 0 0 S 8,836 O 0 736 0 S 6,276 Wilbur Smith Associates Year 2000 Southwest Area Plan Land Use Data Oi•Apr-91 TAZ LOCATION LAND USE DEMOGRAPHICS O Dwelling Units Non-Res Acres ret nret P&As Total sf mf ret nret pop emp emp From P&As 42 44 18 106 288 0 S 2,803 43 334 2 802 32 0 S 2,908 44 0 0 0 S 0 45 0 0 0 S 0 46 0 0 0 S 0 47 596 1430 0 0 S 4,702 48 0 0 0 S 0 49 0 0 0 S 0 50 0 0 0 S 0 51 222 290 10 1229 160 0 S 5,403 52 66 162 8 547 128 0 S 2,890 53 0 0 0 S 0 54 93 223 0 0 S 734 55 238 571 0 0 S 1,878 56 66 0 1056 0 S 9,004 57 16 43 38 688 0 S 5,993 58 10 34 24 544 0 S 4,717 59 0 148 0 0 2516 S 8,829 60 0 0 0 S 0 61 140 336 0 0 S 1,104 62 142 341 0 0 S 1,120 63 204 490 0 0 S 1,609 64 0 0 0 S 0 65 1370 16 3288 256 0 S 12,991 66 0 0 0 S 0 67 0 0 0 S 0 68 0 0 0 S 0 69 0 0 0 S 0 70 0 0 0 S 0 71 637 1529 0 0 S 5,025 72 278 19 667 304 0 S 4,785 73 238 80 18 571 1280 306 S 13,865 74 54 130 0 0 S 426 75 82 4 197 64 0 S 1,193 76 12 29 0 0 S 95 77 134 322 0 0 S 1,057 78 78 0 1248 0 S 10,641 79 156 0 0 2652 S 9,306 80 74 62 0 1184 1054 S 13,794 O 81 56 0 896 0 P 14,378 82 101 0 1616 0 P 19,663 Wilbur Smith Associates Year 2000 Southwest Area Plan Land Use Data 07-Apr-91 TAZ LOCATION LAND USE Dwelling Units sf mf 83 2623 84 48 85 952 656 86 263 775 87 88 1300 89 104 90 664 91 184 92 255 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 19 102 21 103 126 104 24 105 177 106 107 234 108 182 109 15 110 945 111 112 537 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 67 120 773 121 263 122 494 123 150 342 DEMOGRAPHICS Non-Res Acres ret nret P&As Total O ret nret pop emp emp From P&As 6295 0 0 S 20,693 4 115 64 0 S 924 18 3859 288 0 S 15,141 2491 0 0 S 8,189 0 0 0 S 0 2 3120 32 0 S 10,528 1070 0 0 S 3,518 1594 0 0 S 5,238 442 0 0 S 1,452 612 0 0 S 2,012 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 46 0 0 S 150 50 0 0 S 166 302 0 0 S 994 58 0 0 S 189 425 0 0 S 1,396 8 0 128 0 S 1,091 562 0 0 S 1,846 437 0 0 S 1,436 36 0 0 S 118 2268 0 0 S 7,455 10 0 160 0 S 1,364 1289 0 0 S 4,236 57 0 912 0 P 8,915 29 0 0 493 P 5,779 132 48 0 2112 816 S 20,871 565 0 0 9605 S 33,704 120 0 0 2032 P 3,672 138 0 0 2346 P 3,672 255 161 0 4335 S 15,740 1855 0 0 S 6,098 631 0 0 S 2,075 6 1186 96 0 S 4,716 O 360 0 0 S 1,183 Wilbur Smith Associates Year 2000 Southwest Area Plan Land Use Data 0~-Apr-9L OTAZ LOCATION LAND USE Dwelling Units sf mf 124 589 12S 98 O O 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 1S9 160 161 162 163 164 4813 379 336 437 343 2028 Non-Res Acres ret nret 8 9 91 11 25 37 25 10 2173 1000 198 97 296 34 4 62 78 194 73 S1 1205 234 86 12 8 12 956 184 510 48 168 140 113 85 DEMOGRAPHICS ret nret pop emp emp 1414 128 0 235 0 0 0 0 0 11551 144 629 5777 1456 0 806 176 0 1049 400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 823 400 0 0 0 1054 0 0 1326 0 160 3298 0 0 0 0 0 0 5215 0 0 2400 0 0 475 0 0 0 0 0 233 64 0 710 0 0 82 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 175 0 0 122 0 0 2892 0 0 768 192 136 0 0 0 29 0 0 2294 0 0 1666 0 0 0 768 0 0 2680 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2380 0 0 1921 0 0 1445 P&As From S S S S S S S S S S S S P P P P P S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S P P P P P S Total P&As 5,738 773 0 41,404 31,403 4,151 6,858 0 0 0 0 6,117 14,686 5,478 10,458 16,668 4,246 17,143 7,889 1,562 0 1,311 2,335 268 0 0 S76 402 9,506 4,639 0 95 7,542 5,475 11,941 40,296 2,198 1,648 12,801 6,741 5,071 Wilbur Smith Associates Year 2000 Southwest Area Plan Land Use Data OJ•AprAL TAZ LOCATION LAND USE Dwelling Units sf mf 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 3164 174 238 175 176 1901 177 129 178 216 179 809 180 181 182 183 46 184 11646 185 3523 186 1453 187 1418 188 1420 189 2912 190 46 191 46 192 888 193 951 194 195 196 197 156 198 199 566 200 201 202 400 203 1182 204 1958 205 274 322 469 95 765 Non-Res Acres ret nret 12 24 153 22 27 30 43 30 24 102 106 77 54 13 9 31 22 13 1 4 4 2 2 51 44 37 110 79 44 28 217 173 56 56 85 62 310 2 746 8 14 6 DEMOGRAPHICS ret nret P&As Total O pop emp emp From P&As 0 192 408 S 3,069 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 2593 S 9,097 0 352 0 S 3,001 0 424 0 S 3,615 773 0 0 S 2,540 1126 472 0 S 7,724 228 680 0 S 6,548 7594 480 0 S 29,053 571 384 0 S 5,152 0 0 0 S 0 4562 1632 867 S 31,955 310 1696 0 S 15,479 518 1232 0 S 12,209 3778 864 0 S 19,784 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 110 0 0 S 363 O 27950 208 748 S 96,273 8455 144 629 S 31,228 3487 496 1870 S 22,254 3403 352 1343 S 18,900 3408 208 748 S 15,601 6989 16 476 S 24,779 110 64 3689 S 13,853 110 64 2941 S 11,229 2131 32 952 S 10,619 ` 2282 32 952 S 11,116 0 0 0 P 1,593 0 0 0 P 5,948 0 0 0 P 4,968 374 0 1445 S 6,301 0 0 1054 S 3,698 1358 0 0 S 4,465 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 1704 32 0 S 5,874 4627 128 238 S 17,136 4699 0 0 S 15,447 O 658 96 0 S 2,980 Wilbur Smith Associates Year 2000 Southwest Area Plan Land Use Data 04-Apr-91 TAZ LOCATION LAND USE DEMOGRAPHI CS O Dwelling Un its Non-Res Acres ret nret P&As Tota] sf mf ret nret pop emp emp From P&As 206 92 138 552 0 0 S 1,814 207 42 0 0 714 S 2,505 208 348 301 6 1555 96 0 S 5,931 209 170 8 408 128 0 S 2,433 210 467 9 1121 144 0 S 4,912 211 0 0 0 0 S 0 212 6 66 0 96 1122 P 941 213 82 0 0 1394 P 3,447 214 28 0 0 476 P 6,782 215 6 0 0 102 P 4,735 216 50 0 0 850 P 2,337 217 0 0 0 P 2,391 218 435 1044 0 0 S 3,432 219 582 1397 0 0 S 4,591 220 214 54 7 643 112 0 S 3,069 221 71 20 170 320 0 S 3,289 222 16 24 0 256 408 S 3,614 223 17 100 0 272 1700 S 8,285 224 96 0 0 1632 S 5,727 O 225 1117 14 2681 224 0 S 10,722 226 90 20 18 264 0 306 S 1,942 227 112 0 0 1904 S 6,681 228 102 0 0 1734 S 6,085 229 42 0 0 714 S 2,505 230 372 893 0 0 S 2,935 231 1058 2539 0 0 S 8,347 232 465 1116 0 0 S 3,668 233 318 180 5 1195 82 0 S 4,624 234 314 10 752 152 0 S 3,769 235 40 0 640 0 S 5,457 236 439 18 68 1054 288 1156 S 9,975 237 40 0 640 0 S 5,457 238 391 938 0 0 S 3,085 239 222 200 27 1013 432 0 S 7,013 240 0 0 0 S 0 241 200 336 14 1286 224 0 S 6,138 242 648 13 1555 208 0 S 6,886 243 590 262 25 2045 403 0 S 10,159 244 643 224 18 2081 288 0 S 9,295 O 245 1397 3353 0 0 S 11,021 246 378 370 18 1795 288 0 S 8,357 Wilbur Smith Associates Year 2000 Southwest Area Plan Land Use Data 03-Apr-91 TAZ LOCATION LAND USE Dwelling Units sf mf 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 134 605 6 296 1660 74 306 1614 870 426 3184 740 128 718 1202 DEMOGRAPHICS Non-Res Acres ~ ret nret P&As Tota] o ret nret pop emp emp From P&As 32 0 512 0 S 4,366 16 322 256 0 S 3,240 0 0 0 S 0 1452 0 0 S 4,773 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 46 14 0 782 S 2,791 0 0 0 S 0 710 0 0 S 2,335 3984 0 0 S 13,096 0 0 0 S 0 4 912 64 0 S 3,544 19 5962 298 0 S 22,134 0 0 0 S 0 18 9 1022 288 153 S 6,353 0 0 0 S 0 30 9418 480 0 S 35,049 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 O 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 198 307 0 3366 S 12,821 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 16 1723 256 0 S 7,847 0 0 0 S 0 16 2885 256 0 S 11,665 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 S O 0 0 0 S 0 O 0 0 0 S 0 Wilbur Smith Associates Year 2000 Southwest Area Plan Land Use Data OJ-Apr-91 TAZ LOCATION LAND USE DEMOGRAPHI CS O Dwelling Units Non-Res Acres ret nret P&As Total sf mf ret nret pop emp emp From P&As 288 0 0 0 S 0 289 0 0 0 S 0 290 0 0 0 S 0 291 0 0 0 S 0 292 0 0 0 S 0 293 0 0 0 S 0 294 0 0 0 S 0 295 0 0 0 S 0 296 0 0 0 S 0 297 0 0 0 S 0 298 0 0 0 S 0 299 415 996 0 0 S 3,274 300 0 0 0 S 0 301 0 0 0 P 0 302 0 0 0 S 0 303 0 0 0 S 0 304 0 0 0 S 0 305 0 0 0 S 0 306 0 0 0 S 0 O 307 0 0 0 S 0 308 0 0 0 S 0 309 0 0 0 S 0 310 0 0 0 S 0 311 0 0 0 S 0 312 0 0 0 S 0 313 0 0 0 S 0 314 0 0 0 S 0 315 0 0 0 S 0 316 0 0 0 S 0 317 0 0 0 S 0 318 0 0 0 S 0 319 0 0 0 S 0 320 0 0 0 S 0 321 0 0 0 S 0 322 0 0 0 S 0 323 0 0 0 S 0 324 0 0 0 S 0 325 0 0 0 S 0 326 0 0 0 S 0 O 327 918 3 19 2203 48 -323 S 8,785 328 2213 5 34 5311 80 578 S 20,169 Wilbur Smith Associates Year 2000 Southwest Area Plan Land Use Data OJ-Apr•91 TAZ LOCATION LAND USE DEMOGRAPHI CS Dwelling Units Non-Res Acres ret nret P&As Total O sf mf ret nret pop emp emp From P&As 329 2119 1 3 5086 16 51 S 17,032 330 0 0 0 S 0 331 0 0 0 S 0 332 0 0 0 S 0 333 0 0 0 S 0 334 0 0 0 S 0 335 0 0 0 S 0 336 0 0 0 S 0 337 0 0 0 S 0 338 0 0 0 S 0 339 0 0 0 S 0 340 0 0 0 S 0 341 0 0 0 S 0 342 0 0 0 S 0 343 0 0 0 S 0 344 0 0 0 S 0 345 0 0 0 S 0 346 0 0 0 S 0 347 0 0 0 S 0 O 348 0 0 0 S 0 349 0 0 0 S 0 350 0 0 0 S 0 351 0 0 0 S 0 352 0 0 0 S 0 353 0 0 0 S 0 354 0 0 0 S 0 355 0 0 0 S 0 356 0 0 0 S 0 357 0 0 0 S 0 358 0 0 0 S 0 359 0 0 0 S 0 360 0 0 0 S 0 361 0 0 0 S 0 362 0 0 0 S 0 363 0 0 0 S 0 364 0 0 0 S 0 365 0 0 0 S 0 366 0 0 0 S 0 367 0 0 0 S O 368 0 0 0 S 0 O 369 0 0 0 S 0 Wilbur Smith Associates II~II~~~~IIIIDI~ cC®blfii'II°SY IHIIICG~il~filq~~ O t10TE: FOR ADDITIONAL STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS, P.EFER TO COUNTY ORDIlIA2ICE NO. 461. 134' A/W 110' 1?.' 3'-t-12 -x°12 -f-14 I 18 -t° 14' i 12'1`12' i 8' 12' URBAN ARTERIAL HIGHWAY 110' R/W a6' 12' a'~--12'-1-12'--~Z2' median-~- 1Z'-~- 12'~-' 8' 12' ARTERIAL HIGHWAY O ~ ~ n ~ D / IA/ MOUNTAIN ARTERIAL HIGHWAY 100' F/W 76' 12' 8~-- 12'x-12'-f-12~ ~-12'-j- 12'x-' 8' 12' MAJOR HIGHWAY 88' A/W 64' 12' 8'~--12 ~-; 12' -r 12'-t-12'--t O SECONDARY HIGHWAY 66' R/W X14 ' 11 0' 12' 2' 10' 1' COLLECTOR 2' 0 0 intersection rapacity ~Jtilization ~lorksheets ]Existing conditions 0 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ~_________ ___________________ ______________________________ _________ ______ ________ ______ _____ ___________t (DATE: Oct-91 I I (LOCATION: Ynei Rd. 8 Solana (lay I I I (Scenario: I Existing Conditions I I I ID: 1143 I I AM P eak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane xeavy Conf lictingl I (Capacity Volume V/C IGapacity Volume V/C I Nidth Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I INORTHBWND I I I I I I I I I Thru 1 I 1683 161 10 * I 1683 417 25 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1445 60 0 * I 1445 247 0 * I 12 0.0 0.0 0 I I Left Turn O I 0 3 0 I 0 4 0 I 12 2.0 0.0 I ISWTHBWND I Thru 1 I 1658 266 17 I 1662 502 31 I 15 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 9 0 I 0 8 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 O I Q Left Turn 1 I 1599 144 9 ' I 1599 448 28 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I ASTBWND I I I I I Thru O I 0 3 0 I 0 6 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 6 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn O I 0 2 0' I 0 10 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I INESTBWND I I I I I Thru O I 0 1 0' I 0 2 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1431 382 18 * I 1431 268 0 I 12 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 143 9 I 1599 130 8 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 I Icu (X) = 37 LEVEL OF SERVILE _ Notes: 1. ' Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Menewers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement A bt B NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION DATE: Ott-91 LOCATION: Margarita Rd. 8 Solana Nay Scenario: Existing Conditions Movements NORT HBW ND Thru Right Turn Left Turn ~SWTHBWND Thru Right Turn Left Turn EASTB WND Thru Right Turn Left Turn INESTBWND Thru Right Turn Left Turn ID: AM Peak Hour Capacity Lanes (vphg) 1 ~ 1287 0 ~ 0 1 I 1599 1 ~ 1295 0 ~ 0 1 I 1599 1 I 1683 1 ~ 1431 1 I 1599 1 ~ 1515 0 ~ 0 1 ~ 1599 IW (X) LEVEL OF SERVi CE _ Volume 1144 PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy V/C Capacity Volume V(C ~ Nidth Veh.~ Crade Parking (vphg) ~ (f t) (XNV) (X) (Nm) 0 1 ~ 1347 6 2 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 9 0 ~ 0 17 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 248 16 ' ~ 1599 203 13 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 2 5' ~ 1334 7 3* ~ 12 2.0 0.0 60 D' ~ 0 27 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 ~ 1599 0 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 72 4 ~ 1683 279 17 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 103 0 ~ 1431 341 0 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 14 3 ' ~ 1599 42 3 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 252 17 * ( 1515 t54 50 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0* ( 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 15 1 ~ 1599 30 3 ' ~ 12 2.0 0.0 41 36 A A Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement 0 0 0 0 Conflitting~ Bus Pedestrians (Nb) 0 0 0 0 ~O 0 0 0 0 0 NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION IDpTE: Nov-91 I (PROJECT: I (LOCATION: Margarita Rd. 8 Rancho California Rd. I (Scenario: I Existing Conditions I I ID: 1154 I AM Peak Hour I PN Peak Xour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl I (Capacity Vo lume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Nidth Veh. G rade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements I Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 90 3 I 3366 230 7* I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 9 0 I 1245 28 0* I 8 2.0 0.0 p I left Turn 1 I 1599 109 7 * I 1599 135 8 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 129 4* I 3366 239 7 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 158 6* I 1245 130 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 p I Q Left Turn 1 I 1599 37 2 I 1599 163 10 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I ASTBOUND ( I I I I Thru 2 I 3189 154 7 I 3225 385 17 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 83 0 I 0 149 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 p I Left Turn 1 I 1599 37 3 * I 1599 236 15 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I NESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3318 381 13 * I 3282 295 11 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Ri 9ht Turn O I 0 40 0* I 0 59 0* I 8 2.0~ 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 15 1 I 1599 23 1 I 12 2.0 0.0 I iCU (X) = 33 43 LEVEL OF SERVICE = A p Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to th ru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Nunber of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Nu~ber of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION DATE: Nov-91 (PROJECT: LOCATION: Ynez Rd. 8 Rancho Cali fornia Rd. ~SCenario: Existing Conditions 1D: 1186 AM Peak Hour ~ PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Capacity Vo lume V/C Capacity Volume V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Movements Lanes (vphg) ~ (vphg) ~ (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) NORTHBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1683 138 8 ~ 1683 218 13 ` ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ ~ 1431 116 0 ~ 1431 180 0 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 350 22 * ~ 1599 169 11 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 ~SOUTHBWND ~ I ' Thru 1 ~ 1683 163 10 ` ~ 1683 214 13 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1416 232 0 * ~ 1416 367 0 ~ 12 4.0 0.0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 64 4 ~ 1599 178 11 ` ~ 12 2.0 0.0 ~EA5780UND Thru 2 ~ 3332 512 15 ~ 3332 1297 39 ` ~ 12 4.0 0.0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1317 246 0 ~ 1317 312 0 * ~ 10 2.0 0.0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1535 164 11 * ~ 1535 378 25 ~ 11 4.0 0.0 ~UE STBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3332 869 26 * ~ 3332 828 25 ~ 12 4.0 0.0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1330 105 0 * ~ 1330 166 0 ~ 10 2.0 0.0 left Turn 1 ~ 1551 134 9 ~ 1551 192 12 * ~ 11 2.0 0.0 a__________________t___.._____-- ---_ -_____.______._...--__-__-_....__ ______... ~..-____ _...-_ ___...._ ____.. ICU (X) = 69 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ B 75 C Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to th ru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimun green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement ______________t Conf Licting~ Bus Pedest rians~ (Nb) 0 0~ 0 0 0 0 0 ~O 0 0 WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION •------------ ---- -------------------------------- ------------------------- -------------- ----- -----------t IDATE: Oct-97 I I ILOCgT10N: Ynez Rd. 8 Winchester Rd. I I (Scenario: I Existing Conditions I ID: 1192 I I AM Peak Hou r I PN Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I Lane Heavy Conflicting) (Capacity Vo lume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements I Lanes) (vphg) I I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 55 2 I 3366 107 3 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1402 82 0 I 7402 247 5 I 77 0.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 2 I 3097 354 77 * I 3097 558 78 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I I I I I Thru ~ 1 I 1683 45 3* I 1683 775 7* I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1431 702 0 * I 1431 784 0 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 I Left Turn 1 I 1599 16 1 I 7599 46 3 I 72 2.0 0.0 I cA$TBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3332 272 8 * I 3332 494 15 * I 12 4.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1437 388 8 * I 1431 678 14 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 155 10 I 1599 245 15 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (WESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3332 554 17 I 3332 360 71 I 72 4.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 7330 35 0 I 1330 25 0 I 10 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 210 13 * I 1599 150 9 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I ICU (X) = 43 LEVEL OF SERVICE = q 64 B Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimm green to tyc le ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTIL12AT1 ON (DATE: Oct-91 ( ( LOCATION: Ninchester Rd. & Nicolas Rd. ( ( ( ~Scenari o: Existing Conditions ~ ( ( ( ID: ( AM Peak ( (CapacitY Vo Movements Lanes( (vphg) ( NORTHBOUND ( Thru 1 ( 1666 Right Turn 1 ( 1245 Left Turn 0 ( 0 (SOUTHBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1499 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 EASTBOUND Thru 0 ( 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 ( Left Turn 0 ( 0 (WESTBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 Left Turn 1 ~ 1487 1201 _______________ __~_______........_....__._____ ~__..__-_._______.._._ ___..__ ____. -_______.._t Hour ( PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD ( ~ Lane Heavy Conflicting) fume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians ( (vphg) ( ~ (ft) ( (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) ( ( 269 16 ( ( 1666 621 37 * ( ( 12 4.0 0.0 0 0 ( ( 56 0 ( 1245 128 0 * ( 8 2.0 0.0 0 ( 0 0* ( 0 0 0 ( 0 0.0 0.0 ( 447 30 * ( ~ 1499 418 28 ( ( 12 4.0 0.0 0 0 ( ( 0 0* ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0( 52 3 ~ 1615 100 6 * ( 12 0.0 0.0 ( 0 0* ~ 0 0 0* ( ( 0 0.0 0.0 D 0 ( ( 0 0* ( 0 0 0* ( 0 0.0 0.0 0( 0 0 I 0 0 0 ( 0 0.0 0.0 ( 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ( ( 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 80 3 ~ 7245 63 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 156 10 * I 1487 75 5 * ~ 10 2.0 0.0 ______ _________ __~__--.._. .-._____________--.. +_________.__._______. _____...._____-.._-____t ICU (X) = 40 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ A 49 A Notes: 1. * ]ndicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for Critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: Oct-91 I I I (LOCATION: Jefferson Ave. 8 Winchester Rd. I I I (Scenario: Existing Conditions I I I ID: 1252 y_____________ _____+_ .___-___ ____________________ t_____-_. ........... ._...-.. .a--._...-....____-__________ _..._ ____________~ I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Nour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Neavy Conf lictingl I (C apacity Volume V/C ILapaci ty Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedest riansl I Movements I Lanesl (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 102 3 I 3366 350 10 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 246 0 I 1245 688 34 * I 8 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 89 6 * I 1599 90 6 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 165 8* ~ I 3366 228 7 I 72 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1431 158 3 * I 1431 65 0 I 12 2.0 0.0 p I ^ Left Turn 1 I 1551 123 8 I 1551 290 79 * I 11 2.0 0.0 ASTBOUND I I Thru 2 I 3366 236 7 I 3366 709 21 * I 72 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 68 0 I 1245 82 0* I 8 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn t I 7599 53 3 ' I 1599 142 9 I 12 2.0 0.0 I WESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 1 ( 7717 684 40 • I 1717 274 16 I 12 2.0 -4.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 7269 766 0* I 1269 725 0 I 8 2.0 -4.0 O I I Left Turn 2 I 3159 569 78 I 3159 334 11 * I 12 2.0 -4.0 I ICU (X) 57 LEVEL OF SERVILE Notes: i. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm -"Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent mininun green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement A 95 E WILBUR SM ITN ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: Nov-91 I I I (LOCATION: 4inchester Rd. & Murrieta Hot Springs Rd. I (Scenario: Existing Conditions I I t-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ID: 1442 ----~ I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conf lic[ingl I (Capacity Volume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Nidth Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I I I I I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I Thru 1 I 1515 240 16 I 1515 488 32 I 12 ~2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 126 8 ' I 1599 236 15 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I I I I I Thru 1 I 1478 357 29 ' I 1460 333 30 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 69 0' I 0 106 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 p I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 U EAST80UND I I I I I Tnr~ o f o -o o I o 0 o I o o.o o.0 0 0 I Right Turn t I 1431 139 2 I 1431 200 0 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 96 6 ' I 1599 121 8 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 I INESTBOJND I I i ' Thru o I o a o' I o 0 0* ~ o o.o o.0 0 0 ~-~ I I Right turn o I o 0 0' I o 0 0' I o o.o o.o D I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I .__________________r___-__--------___--____.--___t_--_-___--._______-.-__-_---~-___---_--_--.-_-_-_---____--___-___-___-.-_y ICU (X) = 43 52 LEVEL OF SERVICE A A Notes: 1. ' Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning vol woes are added [o th ru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minirtrum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left turn movement VILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: Nov-91 I (PROJECT: I (LOCATION: Jefferson Ave. 8 Overland Rd. I I I (Scenario: Existing Conditions I I I ~ .......................................................................................................t ID: 2023 • ..................4 ________-_________________-__4__.__-___...._.-_-...__..._-t._................__.._...... _......._.. _...~ I I AM P eak Nour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy conftiotingl I ( Capacity Volume V/C ICapatity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedest riansl I Movements Lanesl (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I INORTHBWND I I I I J I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 392 12 I 3366 836 25 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0• I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I left Turn 1 I 1615 53 3 * I 1615 57 4 I 12 0.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I Thru 2 I 3366 535 16 • I 3366 641 19 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn 1 I 1445 83 0 • I 1445 57 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0• I 0 0.0 0.0 I EASTBOUND I I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I Righ[ Turn 1 I 1431 42 0 I 1431 72 2 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 26 3 * I 1599 92 6 • I 12 2.0 0.0 I IWESTBOUNO I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0• I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0• I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I ICU (X) _ LEVEL OF SERVICE _ Notes: 1- * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimun green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement 22 A 31 A WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPAC ITY UTILI2AT I ON (DATE: Nov-91 I (PROJECT: I (LOCATION: I-15 N.B. 8 Rancho Cal ifornia Rd. I I (Scenario: I Existing Conditions I I ID: 2084 I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Xeavy Conf lictingl I (Capacity Vol ume V/C (Capacity Volume V( C I width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedest riensl I Movements Lanesl (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I INORTHBWND I I I I I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1416 189 13 I 1416 406 29 ' I 12 4.0 0.0 0 I I Left Turn 1 I 1583 288 18 ' I 1583 112 7 I 12 4.0 0.0 I ISWTHBWND I Thru O I 0 0 0• I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0' I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 IEASTBWND I I Thru 2 I 3332 788 24 I 3332 1365 41 I 12 4.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1583 218 14 * I 1583 366 23 ' I 12 4.0 0.0 I IwESTBWND I I I I Thru 3 I 4998 973 19 * I 4498 737 15 • I 12 4.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1416 462 14 ' I 1416 556 24 ' I 12 4.0 0.0 0 I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I ~____________ _____ _t__--.--...-. --_- _........... .t-.______ ___-.--______-_____ _r_____-_ .-.--. --_______--...--___ ____.--._...• ICU (X) = 65 91 LEVE L OF SERVICE = B E Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c - 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical Left-turn ngvement NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECT ION CAPACITY UTILI2AT10N DATE: Nov-91 PROJECT: LOCATION: I-75 S.B. 8 Rancho Ca lifornia Rd. ~SCenario: Existing Corxfitions t____________ _____ ____________ _________ ___________________ _________ _______ _______ _______ ________________• ID: 2085 _ AM Peak Hour ~ PN Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Conf litting~ Capacity Yo lume V/C Capacity Yolume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedest rians~ Movements Lanes (vphg) ~ (vphg> ~ (ft) CXHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb> NORTHBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0' ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn O I 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0' ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0' ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 (SOUTHBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 0 0' ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 -I Right Turn 1 ~ 1317 483 37 * ~ 7317 228 i7 ~ 10 4.0 0.0 0 rn `/ \ J 1 ~ 1472 421 29 ~ 1472 554 38 • ~ 10 4.0 0.0 ~.q E ASTBWND Thru 2 ~ 3332 532 16 * ~ 3332 1148 34 ' ~ 12 4.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1402 117 0 ' ~ 7402 251 0 * ~ 11 4.0 0.0 0 0 Left Turn O I 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 ~NESTBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3332 984 30 ~ 3332 759 23 ~ 72 4.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 ~ Left Turn 1 ~ 1583 224 14 * ~ 1583 280 18 * ~ 72 4.0 0.0 ICU (X) = 67 LEVEL OF SERVICE = B 89 D Notes: 7. ' Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of. Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Nour 5. three percent mi nimun green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SM ITN ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTIL RATION DATE: Oct•91 LOCATION: I-15 N.B. & Ninchester Rd. ~Scenari o: Existing Conditions ID: 2090 AM Peak Hour ~ PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Lonf lictingl Capacity Vol ume V/C Capacity Volume V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians Movements Lanesl (vphg) ' (vphg) ~ (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) ' NORTHBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 2 0* ~ 0 ~ 1 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1360 213 16 * ~ 1360 406 0 ~ 11 4.0 2.0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1520 222 15 ~ 1520 167 11 * ~ 11 4.0 2.0 SOUTHBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 EASTBOUND I I I ' Thru 1 ~ 1514 615 41 * ~ 1514 1129 75 * ~ 12 4.0 -2.0 0 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 271 17 ~ 1599 576 36 ~ 12 4.0 -2.0 ~NESTBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3232 620 79 ~ 3232 545 17 ~ 11 4.0 2.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1444 276 0 ~ 1444 545 21 ~ 13 4.0 2.0 0 Lef[ Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 ICU (X) = 57 86 LEVEL OF SERVICE A D Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical Left-turn movement NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION DATE: Oct-91 LOCATION: I-15 S.B. & Winchester Rd. ISCenario: Existing Conditions ID: 2091 AM P eak Hour ~ PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD Capacity Volume V/C Capacity Volume V/C lane ~ Width Heavy Veh. Grade Parking Bus Conf licting~ Pedestrians Movements Lanes (vphg) ~ (vphg) ( (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) NORTHBOUND I ' Thru 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 O Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0' ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 SOUTHBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 0 0' ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 -I Right Turn 1 ~ 1500 677 45 * ~ 1500 508 34 * ~ 14 4.0 2.0 0 l~ I J Left Turn 1 ~ 1567 349 22 ~ 1567 489 31 ~ 12 4.0 2.0 `.r E ASTBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3161 324 13 ~ 3196 1151 42 * ~ 12 4.0 4.0 0 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 88 0 ~ 0 191 0* ~ 12 4.0 4.0 0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0• ( 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 ~WESTBWND I ' Thru 2 ~ 3332 579 17 * ~ 3332 542 16 ~ 12 4.0 -2.0 0 0 Right Turn 0 ! 0 0 0• ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 p Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0' ~ 0 0.0 O.0 ICU (X) = 62 LEVEL OF SERVICE = B 76 C Notes: 1. * indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Nunber of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumetl for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION , t .......................... ............. ............. ...... ......... ...... ........ ...... ..... .... .......~ IDATE: Nov-91 I (PROJECT: I (LOCATION: Margarita Rd. 8 Moraga Rd. I I (Scenario: I ~ Existing Conditions i I I ID: 2223 I I AN Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-LBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Lonf lictingl I (Capacity Volume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Nidth Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1445 30 0 I 1445 85 3 I 12 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1615 48 3 ' I 1615 185 11 ' I 12 0.0 0.0 I ISOUTHBWND I Thru O I 0 0 0 * I 0 0 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 * I 0 0 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 (EASTBOUND I ih ru 1 I 1700 46 3 • I 1700 207 12 ' I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1445 97 1 ' I 1445 137 0' I 12 0.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I I1IESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3400 106 3 I 3400 153 5 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1615 61 4 • I 1615 52 3 • I 12 0.0 0.0 I ~____________ _____ _~_____-______ _____._-...... ._-~_____________.-....... -.____a____--______- _.______ __.___ _____ __.-._______~ ICU (X) = 11 27 LEVE L OF SERVILE = A A Notes: 1. • Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour S. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement 4I LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES 0 intersection rapacity ~Ttilization O Worksheets Fear 2000 Without ]Project 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION DATE: Nay-91 LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street Margarita Rd. 8 General Kearny Rd. ~SCenario: Traffic Volumes Without Campos Verdes ID: AN Peak Hour Capacity Volume Movements Lanes (vphg) NORTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 599 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 92 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 63 ISOUTNBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 474 Ri ght Turn 1 ~ 7245 54 ~ Left Turn 1 ~ 7599 49 ASTBWND Thru 2 ~ 3292 701 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 27 Left Turn 1 ~ 7599 2 WESTBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3364 690 Righ[ Turn 0 ~ 0 53 Left Turn 1 ~ 7615 303 r_____________ _____~ .-_______ _-__..... ICU (X) LEVEL OF SERVICE _ 1139 .....__._ ~__________________ __________ ~_..__.. __.______.--._ .-____ __--. _.-______...t PN Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Conf licting~ V/C Capacity Volume V/C I Wid[h Veh. Grade P arking Bus Pedestrians (vphg) ~ (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 18 * ~ 3366 502 15 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0' ~ 1245 304 0* ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 4 ~ 1599 25 2 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 72 ~ 3366 572 17 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 1245 11 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 3 ' ~ 1599 221 14 ' ~ 12 2.0 0.0 4 * ( 3307 505 19 * ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 0* ~ 0 113 0' ~ 0 2.0 0.0 0 0 ~ 1599 174 11 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 22 ~ 3302 224 8 ~ t2 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 0 53 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 19 * ~ 1615 148 9 * ~ 12 0.0 0.0 _____-... ~__________________ __________ a_______ __.-.-______._ ...___ ___-. -_________.-~ 44 57 A A Noes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Nenewers per Hour 4. Nb - Nunber of buses per Xour 5. Three pereent mi nimun green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 2NTERSECT ION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: May-91 I I I ILOCATI ON: N/S S[reet 8 E/w Street I I Margarita Rd. 8 Apricot Ave. I (Scenario: Traffic Volumes Nithout Campos Verdes I I I ID: 1140 I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conflicting) I (Capacity Volume V/C (Capacity Yolume V/C I Nidth Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vph9) I (f t) (xxY) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I I I I I INORTHBWND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 578 17 I 3366 746 22 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn o f 0 0 o I o 0 o I o o.o o.o o f I Left Turn 2 I 3004 776 26 • I 3004 - 314 to * I n z.o o.o I ISWTHBWND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 584 17 * I 3366 812 24 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1330 109 0 • I 1330 55 0 * I 10 2.0 0.0 p I~ I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I ~ IEASTBWND I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 2 i 3097 173 0 I 3097 580 8* I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 1 I Left Turn 1 i 1599 176 11 * I 1599 85 5 I 12 2.0 0.0 I INESTBWND I I I I i Tnru o f 0 0 0• I o 0 o I o o.o o.0 0 o I I Right Turn 0 1 0 0 0* I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 p l I left Turn 0 1 0 0 0 I 0 0 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 I ICU (X) = 54 - 43 LEVEL OE. SERVICE = A p ' Notes: 1. • Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for Critical left-turn movement HILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT ~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4 IDATE: Nov-91 I I LOCATION: N/S Street & E/N Street I Ynez Rd. 8 Solana Way ~SCenario: Traffic Volumes Nithout Campos Verdes ID: 1143 ~__________________~ -__-___---....--__________--- ~--_-__-____------. _._-.-.__.t---_-________-------___----_--____-------___~ AM Peak Hour ~ PM Peak Hour IType of Area: NON-CBD i I I Lane Heavy Conflicting) Capacity Volume V/C ILapatity Volume V/C ~ width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestriensl Movements ~ Lanesl I (vphg) I (vphg) I (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I NORTHBOUND I I I I ~ i I Th ru 2 ~ 3366 1701 51 * I 3366 725 22 ' ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 2 I 3097 303 0 • I 3097 969 0 * ~ 12 0.0 0.0 p Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 SOUTHBOUND I I I I Th ru 3 ~ 5049 481 10 ~ 5049 1356 27 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn Q Left Turn O I 1 ~ - 0 1615 0 15 0 3 * I 0 I 1615 0 496 0 31 * I 0 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 p i i ASTBOUND I I I I ThrU 0 ~ 0 0 0 I 0 0 0" ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 I 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 p I Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0• I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I ~NESTBWND I I I I Th ru O I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn 1 ~ 1445 526 35 ~ I 1445 92 0 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 p I Left Turn 2 I 3128 828 26 I 3128 584 19 • I 12 0.0 0.0 I ICU (X) = 89 LEVEL OF SERVICE = D 71 C NoTes: 1. • Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning Lane 3. Nm - Nunber of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Numher of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn ngvement YILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTIL[ZATI ON t____________ _____ ___________ _____________ _______ __________ _________ ______ _______ ______ _________________~ (DATE: Nay-91 I I LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/Y Street I I I Margarita Rd. 8 Solana Wy. I Scenario: ~ Traffic Vol umes Without Campos Verdes I I ID: 1144 I AM Peak Nour I PM Peak Nour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I ~ ~ I Lene Heavy Conf lictingl ICapaeity Vo lume V/L (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements ~ Lanes) (vphg) I I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) INORTHBWND I I I ~ I I I Thru 2 I 3366 1127 34 ~ 3362 453 14 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 1 0 ~ 0 4 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 p I Left Turn 2 I 3034 575 19 * ~ 3034 154 5 * I 11 0.0 0.0 SOUTHBOUND I I Thru 2 I 3366 267 8 * I 3366 960 29 • I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1344 454 18 * I 1344 431 0 * I 10 0.0 0.0 0 I Left Turn 1 ~ 1675 4 0 I 1615 11 1 I 12 0.0 0.0 O I EASTBOUND ~ I ~ I Thru 1 ~ 1649 42 3 I 1649 315 19 • I 11 0.0 0.0 0 0 I Righ[ Turn 1 I 1402 44 0 I 1402 583 18 * I 11 0.0 0.0 0 0 Left Turn 2 ~ 3034 231 8 * I 3034 567 19 I 11 0.0 0.0 ~11ESTBOUND I I I I Thru 2 ~ 3388 324 10 • I 3364 91 3 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 8 0• I 0 7 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 Lett Turn 1 I 1615 2 0 I 1615 3 3* I 12 0.0 0.0 4 - - • -} - - i -• ICU (X) = 63 74 LEVEL OF SERVICE = B C Notes: 1. • Indicates Critical lane v/e 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume Nhere there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent mininun green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement VILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT ~_________________________••-..--_-___....--__-.--_•_..-_--_-_--_--_-___.__..---______..--__. _.._--_____t (DATE: Nov-91 I I I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Stree[ I I Ynez Rd. 8 Apricot Ave. I (Scenario: Traffic Volumes Without Campos Verdes I I I ID: 1190 ~__________________~._.________________.....--___ ~___.....-_-___-..____..-__-_t_______ -_.-_.....____ ..._--_ __-.....______..t I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl I ( Capacity Vol une V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements I Lanes) I (vphg) I (vph9) I (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I Th ru 3 I 5049 1111 22 I 5049 858 17 • I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 295 0 I 1245 67 0' I 8 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 740 25 ' I 3004 146 5 I 11 2.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I I I i I ihru 3 I 5049 586 12 ' I 5049 712 14 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1257 304 5' I 1257 113 0 I 8 0.0 0.0 p I Left Turn 2 I 3004 227 g I 3004 451 * 15 I 11 2.0 0.0 I STBOUND I I I I I Th ru 1 I 1683 145 9 I 1683 503 30 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 2 I 3097 102 0 I 3097 803 0' I 10 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 110 7 ' I 1599 303 19 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (WESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 465 14 ' I 3366 456 14 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1330 467 14 * I 1330 213 0 I 10 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 67 2 I 3004 353 12 * I 11 2.0 0.0 I ICU (X) = 76 LEVEL Of SERVICE = C 74 C Notes: 1. * Indicates critical Lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to th ru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITN ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT DATE: Nov-91 LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street Ynez Rd. 8 Winchester Rd. ~SCenario: Traffic Vol umes Without Canpos Verdes ID: 1192 AM Peak Hour ~ PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Conf lieting~ ~Capac ity Volume V/C ~Capecity Volume V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians Movements Lanes (vphg) ~ (vphg) ~ (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) NORTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 472 14 ~ 3366 892 27 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1388 68 0 ~ 1388 139 0 ~ 11 2.0 0.0 p Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 811 27 ` ~ 3004 786 26 * ~ 11 2.0 0.0 (SOUTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 664 20 ' ~ 3366 662 20 ' ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 ~ Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 220 _ 0 ' ~ 1245 439 5 ' ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 149 9 ~ 1599 106 7 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 (EASTBOUND Thru 3 ~ 5049 1616 32 ~ 5049 1506 30 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1431 883 3 ~ 1431 640 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Left ~TUrn 2 ~ 3004 502 17 * ~ 3004 294 10 ` ~ 11 2.0 0.0 (WESTBOUND Thru 3 ~ 5049 1573 31 * ~ 5049 1596 32 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1330 148 0 • ( 1330 256 0 ` ~ 10 2.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 235 8 ~ 3004 122 4 ~ 11 2.0 0.0 ~__________________t______... .______________.... -~________..-....___ __...... ..~.______ _....._ ___._..-____. .____ __....-_.___~ ICU (X) 95 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ Notes: 1. 'Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour S. Three pereent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement E 93 E WI LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION t___________ ______ ___________ ____________________ __________ ________ ______ ________ _______ ___ __ ___________~ (DATE: May-91 I I ILOCATfON: N/S Street 8 E/w Street I I I ~ Regional Center (E) Rd. & Winchester Rd. I ISCenario: I Traffic Vol umes without Campos Verdes I I ID : 1196 I I AM Pea k Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I ~ I ICepacity Volume V/C I (Capacity Volume V/C I Lene I width Heavy Veh. Grade P arking Bus Conf lictingl Pedestrians) I Movements I Lanes) (vphg) I I (vphg) I (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I Thru t I 1683 160 10 I 1683 60 4 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 p I I Right Turn t I 1388 84 0 I 1388 139 0 I 11 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 7 I 1599 300 19 ` I 1599 190 12 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I I I I I Thru 1 I 7344 13 4 ' I 1321 53 27 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 39 0' I 0 308 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 p I Left Turn 1 I 7599 28 2 I 1599 102 6 I 12 2.0 0.0 I ASTBWND ( I I Thru 3 I 5049 1185 23 I 5049 7481 29 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 i I Right Turn 1 I 7330 103 0 I 1330 217 0' I 10 2.0 0.0 0 O I I left Turn 1 I 1599 311 19 ' I 1599 88 6 I 12 2.0 0.0 I WESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 1632 32 • I 5049 7177 23 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1330 75 0* I 1330 32 0 I 10 2.0 0.0 p i I Left Turn 2 I 3004 196 7 I 3004 236 8 ' I 11 2.0 0.0 i LEVEL OF SERVICE = C C Notes: 1. 'Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning vol~nes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Nunber of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimm green to cyle ratio assumed for cri lice( left turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: May-91 i I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Sheet I I I Margarita Rd. 8 Winchester Rd. I Scenario: Traffic Volumes Without Campos Verdes ID: 1198 AM Peak Hour I PM Peek Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I ~ I Lane Heavy Conf licti ngl Capacity Vo lume V/C Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) Movements ~ Lanes) (vphg) ~ (vphg) ~ (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I NORTHBOUND I I ~ ~ I Thru 2 I 3366 183 5 ' ~ 3366 430 13 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 I 1245 426 19 * ~ 1245 332 0 * I 8 2.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 1 I 1599 12 1 ~ -1599 30 2 I 12 2.0 0.0 I ~SOUTHBWND I ~ I I I Thru 2 I 3366 356 11 ~ 3366 219 7 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 I 1245 397 11 ~ 1245 198 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 1 I 1599 149 9 * ~ 1599 163 10 * I 12 2.0 0.0 (EASTBOUND I ~ I Thru 3 I 5049 856 17 ~ 5049 1282 25 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 150 0 ~ 1245 45 0* I 8 2.0 0.0 0 0 Left Turn 2 I 3004 294 10 * ~ 3004 480 16 I ~11 2.0 0.0 I WESTBOUND I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 1504 30 ' ~ 5049 1210 24 i 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 I 1245 31 0' ~ 1245 81 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 p I Left Turn 2 I 3004 306 10 ~ 3004 451 15 ' ~ 11 2.0 0.0 ----~ ICU (X) 73 63 LEVEL OF SERVILE = C B Notes: 1. * Irdicetes eritical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Nour 4. Nb - Nuiber of buses per Hour , 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI ZAT y ............ ................. ................... ......... ......... ............... ...... .......... ......~ IDATE: Nov91 I I ILOCATI ON: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I I I Margarita Rd . 8 Reg. Ctr. Dr./Cenpos V. Rd. I ISCenario: i Traffic Volumes ui thout Canpos Verdes I I ID: 1199 ._ ............ ..... ~__..-....... ._......________. ~.........________. ..___.... .t_______ _.__.._....____ _._.. _ . ____.........._~ I I AN Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour IType of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Neavy Conf lictingl I ICepacity Vo lume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Uidth Veh. Grade Pa rking Bus Pedest riensl I Movements I Lanes l (vphg) I I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 15 0 I 3366 710 21 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 15 3 * I 1599 19 1 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 478 14 * I 3366 622 18 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn Q Left Turn 1 O I 1245 I 0 199 0 1' 0 I 1245 I 0 93 0 0 0' I 8 I 0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 p I I ASTBOUND I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0' I 0 0 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I ( Right Turn 1 I 1330 41 2 ' I 7330 182 12 ' I 10 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 21 1 I 1599 82 5 I 12 2.0 0.0 I IwESTBOUND I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0' I 0 0 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 I ICU (%) = 20 34 LEVEL OF SERVICE = p p Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Xour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement III LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION y-------------------~___..-...-•----•_____.....--__...--•---_....-____•- DATE: May-91 LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/4 Street Winchester Rd. & Nicolas Rd. ~Seenario: Traffic Volumes Without Campos Verdes ID: 1201 ~__________________~..-_--__.____.....---___-__--~..-___....--_-_--__.--_..-__r_....____...--___....-.____.____.-.-.__.-._-t AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour Type of Aree: NON-CBD Capacity Volume V/C Movements Lanes (vphg) ~NORTH80UND I - Thru 3 ~ 5049 901 18 ~ Right Turn 1 ~ 1330 137 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1551 79 5 * ~SWTHBOUND Thru 3 ~ 5049 1483 29 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 181 0 * Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 230 14 EASTBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1683 10 3 * Right Turn 1 ~ 1431 21 0 * Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 40 3 (WESTBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1683 46 3 Right Turn 1 ~ 1431 199 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 288 18 ICU (X) = 55 LEVEL OF SERVICE A ~Capaeity Volume (vphg) 5049 1381 1330 276 1551 46 5049 1078 1245 78 1599 224 1683 45 1431 86 1599 168 Lane Heavy Conf lictingl Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians V/C (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 27 ' ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 * ~ 10 2.0 0.0 0 3 ~ 11 2.0 0.0 21 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 p 14 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 3 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 11 * ~ 12 2.U 0.0 O 1683 22 3 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 1431 223 1 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 1599 140 9 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 55 A Noes: 1. 'Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to thru volune where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Mour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for Brit ical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT IDATE: I (LOCATION: ISCenari o: Nov-91 N/S Street 8 E/W Street Winchester Rd. Traffic Vol ones 4ithout Campos Verdes Jefferson Ave. 8 ID: 1252 I I AM Peak Hour I PN Peak H I I I (Capacity Volume V/C I (Capacity Volume I Movements Lanesl (vphg) I (vphg) I INORTHBWND I I I I I Th ru 2 I 3366 447 13 I 3366 693 I Right Turn t I 1245 231 0 I 1245 498 I Left Turn 1 I 1599 295 18 * I 1599 27 ISOUT HBOUND I Th ru 2 I 3309 887 30 * I 3343 559 I. Right Turn O I 0 113 0* I 0 27 Left Turn 2 I 3097 195 6 I 3097 993 -ASTBIXIND I Th ru 3 I 5049 151 3 I 5049 834 I Right Turn 1 I 1245 38 0 I 1245 171 I Left Turn 1 I 1599 32 3 ' I 1599 175 I4ESTBOUND I I I Th ru 2 I 3433 1021 30 * I 3433 360 I Right Turn 1 I 1357 946 32 ' I 1357 343 I Left Turn 2 I 3159 526 17 I 3159 543 1CU (X) = 113 LEVEL OF SERVICE = F ~r (Type of Area: NON-CBD I Lane Xeavy V/C 14i dth Veh. Grade Parking I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) I I 21 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 0 2 ' I 8 2.0 0.0 2 I 12 2.0 0.0 I 18 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I 8 0.0 0.0 32 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I 17 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 ' I 8 2.0 0.0 11 I 12 2.0 0.0 I 10 I 12 2.0 -4.0 0 0 I 10 2.0 -4.0 17 * I 12 2.0 -4.0 89 D Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Nour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement _______________t I I I I I Conflietingl Bus Pedest riansl (Nb) I I I o I OI I I 0 I 0 I I 0 I 0 0 I I I o I OI I WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UT ILI2AT (DATE: Nov-91 I I I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/N Street I I Jefferson Ave. 8 Date S[. I IScenari o: Traffic Volumes Nithou[ Campos Verdes ~ ID: 1256 I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Nour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I lane Heavy Conf lictingl I ( Capacity Vo lume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. G rade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements I Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 375 11 I 3366 796 24 ` I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 25 0 I 1245 276 0` I 8 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 325 20 * I 1599 129 8 I 12 2.0 0.0 I ISOUT HBWND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3350 772 24 * I 3307 417 14 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 26 0* I 0 55 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 2 I 3097 278 9 I 3097 276 9 • I 12 2.0 0.0 IO (EASTBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 234 7 I 3366 1143 34 ` I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1431 80 0 I 1431 310 0* I 12 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 2 I 3097 27 3 * I 3097 ~87 3 I 12 2.0 0.0 I WESTBOUND I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 1359 40 ` I 3366 442 13 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Righ[ Turn 1 I 1245 196 0` I 1245 125 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 2 I 3097 541 17 I 3097 73 3 ` I 12 2.0 0.0 I ._____________ _____t ..____-_____ _...-____-_____.. ~._______....._____ -_.-..____ ~___.....____-.. _._____....____.._____.....__4 ICU (X) _ E8 71 LEVEL OF SERVICE = D C Notes: 1. ` IMicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green xo tyle ratio assumed for critical left•turn movement NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTIL)ZATION IDATE: May-91 I I I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/w Street I I Diaz Rd. 8 Minchester Rd. I I Scenari o: Traffic Volumes Nithout Canpos Verdes I I I ID: 1263 I I AN Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Capaeity Volume V/C I (Capacity Volume V/C I Lane I Nidth Heavy Veh. Grade Parking Bus Conflicting) Pedestrians) I Movements I Lanes) I <vph9) I (vphg) I (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 304 9 I 3366 380 11 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1431 39 0 I 1431 231 2* I 12 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 457 29 * I 1599 166 11 I 12 2.0 0.0 I ISWTHBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 356 11 * I 3366 682 20 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 '0 0* I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 p I Left Turn 2 I 3097 197 6 I 3097 671 22 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I ASTBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 42 1 I 3366 313 9 I 12 2.0 0.0 D 0 I I Right Turn t I 1245 30 0 I 1245 114 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 0 0* I 1599 0 0* I 12 2.0 0.0 I INESTBWND I I I i I Thru 1 I 1683 641 38 * I 1683 300 18 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 2 I 3097 739 0 * I 3097 211 0 * I 12 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 2 I 3097 311 10 I 3097 97 3 I 12 2.0 0.0 ~ I ICU (X) = 78 LEVEL OF SERVICE C 53 A Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru Vol une where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Nanewers per Hour 4. Nb - Nunber of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement HILBUR SM ITN ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION IOATE: May91 I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I Ynez Rd. & County Center Dr. (Scenario: Traffic Volumes Without Canpos Verdes I ID: 1349 I I AM Peak Hour I PN Peak Hour I I I (Capacity Volume V/C I (Capacity Volume I Movements I Lanesl (vphg) I (vphg) (NORTHBOUND i I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 725 22 I 3366 1315 I Right Turn t I 1245 268 0 I 1245 84 I Left Turn 1 I 1599 85 5 * I 1599 25 (SOUTHBOUND I Thru 2 I 3366 982 29 ' I 3366 887 I Right Turn 1 I 1245 65 0 ' I 1245 20 I Left Turn 1~ 1599 0 0 I 1599 0 (EASTBOUND I I I Thru 1 I 1683 0 0* I 1683 0 I Right Turn 1 I 1431 12 0 * I 1431 73 I Left Turn 1 I 1599 8 1 I 1599 59 IWESTBWND I I I Thru 1 I 1683 0 0 I 1683 0 I Right Turn 1 I 1431 0 0 I 1431 0 I Left Turn 1 I 1599 39 3 ' I 1599 235 ICU (X) = 37 LEVEL OF SERVICE = A (Type of Area: NON-CBD I Lene Heavy V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking I (fU (XNV) (X) (Nm) I I 39 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 ' I 8 2.0 0.0 2 I 12 2.0 0.0 I 26 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 I 0 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 4 * I 12 2.0 0.0 4 I 12 2.0 0.0 I 0 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I 12 2.0 0.0 15 * I 12 2.0 0.0 57 A Notes: 1. ' Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to thru volume Where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Nour 5. Three percent mini mm green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement i I I I I I I Lonf licti ngl Bus Pedestri ensl (Nb) I I I D I OI I 0 0I~ I 0 I 0 0 I o I OI I ....-°---°-t WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION DATE: May-91 (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street Ynez Rd. 8 "C" Street Scenario: Traffic Volumes Nithout Campos Verdes ID: 1350 AM Peak Hour Capacity Volume V/C Movements Lanes (vphg) NORTHBOUND Th ru 2 ~ 3366 432 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 100 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 201 ISOUTNBOUND Th ru 2 ~ 3366 831 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 355 ASTBOUND Th ru 1 ~ 1683 S Right Turn 1 ~ 1431 29 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 0 IIIESTBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1683 21 Right Turn 1 ~ 1431 119 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 188 ICU (X) _ LEVEL OF SERVICE PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Conf lieting~ Capacity Volume V/C ~ Nidth Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (vphg) ~ (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 13 ~ 3366 1106 33 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 1245 212 0* ~ 8 2.0 0.0 p 13 * ~ 1599 55 3 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 28 * ~ 3366 611 18 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0* ~ 1245 0 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 p 22 ~ 1599 160 10 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 3* ~ 1683 21 3* ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0* ~ 1431 176 8* ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 1599 0 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 1 ~ 1683 13 1 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 1431 295 10 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 p l 12 * ~ 1599 120 8 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 52 67 A B Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru vol une where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimun green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement YILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION DATE: May-91 ~LOCAT ION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street Ynez Rd./Jackson Ave. 8 Date St. (Scenario: Traffic Volumes Without Campos Verdes ID: 1352 }__________________} -----_------ ----.. ---.-.-_-__y________ ___-_.--.- ..-__-..-. AM Peek Hour ~ PM Peak Nour Capacity Vo lume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C Movements Lanes (vphg) ~ (vphg) INORTH80UND Thru 2 ~ 3343 275 9 ~ 3332 960 31 + Right Turn 0 ~ 0 13 0 ~ 0 70 0+ left Turn 2 ~ 3097 158 5 + ~ 3097 384 12 (SOUTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 919 27 * ~ 3366 446 13 Right Turn 1 ~ 1431 528 7 + ~ 1431 143 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 146 9 ~ 1599 173 11 + EASTBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 179 5' ~ 3366 895 27 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 256 10 ~ 1245 191 0 Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 88 3 + ~ 3004 452 15 WESTBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 959 28 + ~ 3366 355 11 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 127 0 + ~ 1245 171 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 60 4 ~ 1599 27 3 + ICU (x> = 7o rz LEVEL OF SERVICE = B C f____________________________________________} (Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Conf Licting~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 12 0 12 12 12 12 12 8 11 12 8 12 Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/e 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Nour 4. Nb - Humber of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minincm green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement 2.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0 0 2.0 0.0 0 ~ 2.0 0.0 O 2.0 0.0 0 0 2.0 0.0 0 0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0 0 2.0 0.0 0 ~ 2.0 0.0 WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION t____________________________________________________________________________________ DATE: May-91 LOCATION: N/S Street & E/W Street Winchester Rd. 8 Murrieta Hot Springs Rd. ~SCenario: Traffic Volumes Without Campos Verdes ID: 1442 AM Peak Nour + Capacity Yolume V/C Movements Lanes (vphg) ~NORT HBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 667 20 Right Turn 1 ~ 1330 320 0 left Turn 2 ~ 3004 170 b ' SOUTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 1171 35 ' Right Turn 1 ~ 1330 492 0 ' Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 28 2 ASTBOUND Thru 2 ( 3366 563 17 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 287 0 Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 266 9 IWESTBWND Thru 2 ~ 3366 613 18 ' Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 22 0 Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 280 9 ICU (X) = 68 LEVEL OF SERVICE = B PM Peak Hour (Capacity Volume (vphg) 3366 1025 1330 292 3004 283 3366 789 1330 315 1599 0 3366 563 1245 206 3004 553 3366 559 1245 0 3004 368 Type of Area: NON-C8D Lane Heavy V/C ~ Nidth Veh. Grade Parking (tt) (XHV) (X) (Nm) 30 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 ~ 10 2.0 0.0 9 * ~ 11 2.0 0.0 23 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 * ~ 10 2.0 0.0 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 17 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 18 ` ~ 11 2.0 0.0 17 ` ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 ` ~ 8 2.0 0.0 12 ~ 11 2.0 0.0 ____..___4____________________________ B Notes: 1. ` Indicates critical lane v/e 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume Nhere there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Nunber of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to Lyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement Conf licting~ Bus Pedes trians~ (Nb) 0 0 0 0~ 0 0 0 0 0 WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION t ......................................................................... DATE: May-91 LOCATION: N/S Street & E/4 Street Reg. Center W. Dr. & Winchester Rd. ~SCenario: Traffic Volumes Without CanQos Verdes ID: 2002 AM Peak Hour ~ PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Capacity Movements Lanes (vphg) NORTHBOUND ~ ` Thru 1 ~ 1683 Right Turn 1 ~ 1388 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 (SOUTHBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1305 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 EASTBOUND Thru 3 ~ 5049 Right Turn 1 ~ 1330 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 WESTBOUND Thru 3 ~ 5049 Right Turn 1 ~ 1330 Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 Lane Neavy Volume V/C Capacity Volume Y/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking (vphg) ~ (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) 0 0 ~ 1683 1 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 32 0 ~ 1388 141 4 ~ 11 2.0 0.0 125 8 ' ~ 1599 400 25 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 1 3* ~ 1301 2 3* ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 12 0* ~ 0 32 0' ~ 0 2.0 0.0 6 0 ~ 1599 41 3 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 1554 31 ~ 5049 1542 31 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 135 0 ~ ~ 1330 130 0 ' ~ 10 2.0 0.0 63 4 * ~ 1599 44 3 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 1825 36 * ~ 5049 1513 30 ~ 12 Z.0 0.0 0 12 0 * ~ 1330 16 0 ~ 10 2.0 0.0 128 4 ~ 3004 170 6 ' ~ 11 2.0 0.0 ICU (X) 51 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ A 65 B Noes: 1. ' Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is rw separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent mininun green to eyle ratio assumed for critical lef t-turn movement Conf lict ing~ Bus Pedestrians (Nb) 0 0 0 0 ~ O 0 0 0 0 0 WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: May-91 (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street Margarita Rd. 8 Marg/Win Nead. Scenario: Traffic Volumes Without Canpos Verdes ID: 2018 AM Peak Hour Capacity Volume Movements Lanes (vphg) INORTXBWND Thru 2 ~ 3366 235 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 269 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 5 ~SOUTHBWND Thru 2 ~ 3366 887 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 145 left Turn 1 ~ 1599 12 EASTBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1269 1 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 10 Left Turn 1 ~ 1557 8 (WESTBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1683 2 Right Turn 1 ~ 1330 28 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 5 ' PM Peak Xour Type of Area: NON-LBD Lene Heavy Conf lict ingl V/C ~Lapacity Volume V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (vphg) I (ft) (XNV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 7 ~ 3366 874 26 * ' 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 14 ~ 1245 115 0* ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 3' ~ 1599 2 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 26 • ~ 3366 436 13 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0* ~ 1245 33 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 1 ~ 1599 6 3 • ' 12 2.0 0.0 1 ~ 1252 2 10 * ~ 11 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 0 126 0• ~ 0 2.0 0.0 0 3 * ~ 1551 12 1 ~ 11 2.0 0.0 3• + 1683 4 0 ~ 12 2,0 0.0 0 0 1* ~ 1330 119 9 ~ 10 2.0 0.0 0 0 ~ 1599 24 3 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 ICU (X) : 36 LEVEL OF SERVICE A 42 A Notes: 1. 'Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent mininun green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION r------------------------------------------------------. (DATE: May-91 (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/N Street Roripaugh Rd. 8 Winchester Rd. (Scenario: Traffic Volumes Without Campos Verdes ID: 2019 AM Peak Hour ~ ~ PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD lane Heavy Conflicting (Capacity Volume V/C Capacity Volume Y/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians Movements Lanes (vphg) ~ (vphg) ~ (ft) (XNV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) ~NORTNBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1700 2 0 ~ 1700 4 0 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1257 0 0 ~ 1257 0 0 ~ 8 0.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 104 6 ' ~ 1615 288 18 ' ~ 12 0.0 0.0 (SOUTHBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1700 1 3* ~ 1700 4 3* ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 7245 50 0 ' ~ 1245 217 15 * ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 33 2 ~ 1599 109 7 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 EASTBOUND Thru 3 ~ 5049 1084 21 ~ 5049 1594 32 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1330 273 0 ~ 1330 148 0 ' ~ 10 0.0 0.0 0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 74 5 * ~ 1599 34 2 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 ~NESTBOUND j Thru 3 ~ 5049 1687 33 • ~ 5049 1238 25 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1330 106 0 * ~ 1330 66 0 ~ 10 2.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 0 0 ~ 1615 0 0* ~ 12 0.0 0.0 ICU (X) = 47 LEVEL OF SERVILE _ Notese 1. • Indicates critical lane v/e 2. Turning volumes ere added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent mini mim green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement A 68 B NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O O INTERSECTION CAPAC77Y UTILIZAT (DATE: Nov-91 I I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street i I I Jefferson Ave. 8 Overl and Apricot Ave. I (Scenario: I Traffic Volumes Without CartQos Ve rdes I I ID: 2023 I I AN P eak Hour I PM Peak Nour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Neavy Conflicting) I (Capacity Volume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedest riansl I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I (NORTHBOUND I I I ( I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 165 5 I 3366 743 22 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1287 50 0 I 1287 338 0* I 9 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1551 79 5 * I 1551 47 3 I 11 2.0 0.0 I ISOUT HBOUND I Thru 2 I 3331 1130 36 * I 3313 490 17 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 85 0* I 0 58 0 I 0 2.0 0.0 O I Left Turn 2 I 3004 215 7 I 3004 739 25 * I 11 2.0 0.0 I ASTBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3153 91 4 I 3190 512 19 * I 11 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 27 0 I 0 93 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 123 4 ' I 3004 241 8 I 11 2.0 0.0 I IWESTBWND I I I I ~ I Thru 1 I 1683 530 31 * I 1683 132 8 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1431 685 10 * I 1431 234 0 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 278 9 I 3004 355 12 * I 11 2.0 0.0 ~ I r____________ _____ _~----____________ ____--_----.- ~_------- __._-______________ _~____-_- --_--- --_---_- -_---- -----_----_------~ ICU CX) = 86 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ Noes: 1. * Irdicetes critical Cane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Nour 5. Three percent minimim green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement D n C WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTI LI2ATION IDATE: May-97 I I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I I I Margarita Rd. 8 Date St. I (Scenario: I Traffic Volumes Without Campos Verdes I I ID: 2027 I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy conf lictingl I Rapacity Vo lume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 163 5 I 3366 581 17 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 7245 23 0 I 1245 92 0` I 8 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 55 3 ` I 7599 77 1 I 12 2.0 0.0 I ISWTHBOUND I I Thru 2 I 3366 683 20 * I 3366 250 7 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1287 238 0' I 1287 79 0 I 9 2.0 0.0 0 ~^ I Left Turn 1 I 7551 23 1 I 1557 46 3 • I 11 2.0 0.0 ~j( /~ (EASTBOUND ~~ I Thru 2 I 3366 186 6 I 3366 838 25 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1245 9 0 I 1245 57 0' I 8 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 54 3 * I 3004 237 8 I 11 2.0 0.0 I (WESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 868 26 ' I 3366 334 10 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 7245 27 0` I 1245 30 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 43 3 I 1599 43 3 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I ICU (X) = 52 LEVEL OF SERVICE A 48 A Notes: 1. • Ird icetes critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume Where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Nunber of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WI LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: LOCATION: ~SCenario: ID: AM Peak Hour Capacity Volume Movements Lanes (vphg) ~NORTH80UND Thru 2 ~ 3366 145 Right Turn 0 I 0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 125 (SOUTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 848 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 7 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 ASTBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 0 Right Turn t ~ 1431 196 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 15 IWESTBOUNO Thru 0 ~ 0 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 May-91 N/S Street 8 E/W Street Margarita Rd. & Win. Mills/"B" Street Traffic Volumes Without Cartpos Verdes 2051 PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD -~ Lane Heavy Conflicting V/C (Capacity Volune V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (vphg) ~ (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 4 ~ 3366 788 23 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 p 8 ^ ~ 1599 216 14 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 25 • ~ 3366 290 9 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0* ~ 1245 20 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 p 0 ~ 0 0 0' ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0* ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 b* ~ 1431 179 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 7 ~ 1599 11 3 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 o ~ 0 0 0* ~ o o.o o.0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 p l 0* ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 ICU (X) = 39 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ A 26 A Notes: 1. ' Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Nanewers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT t_______________________________________________________________________________________________________~ DATE: Nov-91 LOCATION: N/S-Street 8 E/N Street NB [-15 Ramps 8 Ninchester Rd. Scenario: Traffic Volumes Mithout Lanpos Verdes ID: 2090 AM Peak Hour Capacity Volume V/C Movements Lanes (vphg) NORTHBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 0 ~ Right Turn 2 ~ 3097 1112 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 783 SOUTHBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 IEASTBWND Thru 3 ~ 5049 1889 Right Turn 0 I 0 0 left Turn O I 0 0 INESTBWND Thru 3 ~ 5049 1766 Right Turn 1 ~ 1431 843 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 ICU (X) _ LEVEL OF SERVICE _ PM Peak Hour Capacity Vol one V/L (vphg) 0 ~ 0 0 0• 36 ~ 3097 695 22 49 • ~ 1599 144 9 0* ~ 0 0 0 0* ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0• 37 ~ 5049 1746 35 " 0 ~ 0 0 0• 0" ~ 0 0 0• 35 " ~ 5049 1394 28 24 ~ 1431 1458 74 0 ~ 0 0 0 84 57 D p Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Conf licting~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (ft) (XNV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 2.0 0.0 0 12 2.0 0.0 ` 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 I O 0 0.0 0.0 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 12 0.0 0.0 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 h -~ Notes: 1. • Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning vol ones are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Nunber of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Nu~er of buses per Hour 5. Three percent mininun green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT IOATE: Nov-91 I I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I I SB I-15 RanQs & Winchester Rd. I (Scenario: Traffic Volumes Without Campos Verdes I I I ID: 2091 I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peek Hour (Type of Area: NON-C8D I I I I I Lene xeavy Conf lictingl I (Capacity Volume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I (fU (XHY) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I I I ~ I INORTHBWND I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0' I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I I I I I Tnr~ o I o 0 o i D o o' I o o.o o.o o I Right Turn 1 I 1431 668 G7 I 1431 582 41 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 I Left Turn 2 I 3097 1604 52 * I 3097 816 26 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I (EASTBOUND I I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 480 10 I 5049 1722 34 " I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1445 96 0 I 1445 602 8* I 12 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I (WESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 1725 34 ' I 5049 669 13 I 12 2.0 0,0 0 0 -I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0' I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0,0 O I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0' I 12 2.0 0,0 I ICU (X) = 86 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ Notes: 1. ' Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to Thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement D 68 B 41LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: Mey-91 LOCATION: N/S Street & E/W Street Regional Center Rd. 8 General Kearny Rd. Scenario: Traffic Volumes Without Campos Verdes ID: 2209 AN Peak Hour (Capacity Yo Lome V)C Novements Lanes (vphg) NORTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 226 7 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 33 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 12 3 SOUTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 8 3 Right Turn 1 ~ 1257 200 12 Lett Turn 1 ~ 1599 29 2 EASTBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1700 30 2 Right Turn 1 ~ 1344 13 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 65 4 ~UESTBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1700 45 3 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 309 20 * Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 380 24 ICU (%) 45 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Capacity Volume <"Phg) ~ 3366 136 1245 570 I 1615 22 3366 188 1257 108 I 1599 188 ~ 1700 30 1344 76 1615 118 1700 32 1245 35 1599 236 A Lane Heavy Conf Litt ing~ V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (fU (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 4 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 27 * ~ 8 2.0 0.0 1 ( 12 0.0 0.0 b ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 ~ 8 0.0 0.0 12 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 3 * ~ 12 0.0 0.0 2 * ~ 10 0.0 0.0 7 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 2 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 15 ' ~ 12 2.0 0.0 63 B Notes: 1. " Ird icates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~. NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O O Movements INORTHBWND Thru Right Turn Left Turn ~SWTHBWND Thru Right Turn Left Turn EASTBW ND Thru Right Turn Left Turn ~NESTBWND Thru Right Turn Left Turn INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: May-91 LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/N Street Regional Center Rd. 8 South Access Rd. ~SCenario: Traffic Volumes Without Lampos Verdes ID: AM Peak Hour Capacity Volume Lanes (vphg) 2 ~ 3366 1 1 ~ 1245 3 1 ~ 7599 7 2 ~ 3366 0 1 ~ 1245 22 1 ~ 7599 5 1 ~ ~~ 1683 367 7 ~ 1330 91 7 ~ 1599 23 1 ~ 1683 363 1 ~ 7330 27 1 ~ 1599 0 ]CU (X) _ LEVEL OF SERVICE _ 3000 PM Peak Hour V/C Capacity Volume (vphg) 0 ~ 3366 1 0 ~ 1245 23 3 * ~ 1599 34 0 * ~ 3366 1 0 * ~ 1245 54 0 ~ 7599 48 22 ~ 1683 572 0 ~ 1330 29 3 * ~ 1599 20 22 * ( 1683 615 0 * ~ 1330 24 0 ~ 1599 1 28 A Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy V/C ~ Nidth Veh. Grade Parking (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 2 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 3 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 3 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 3 * ~ 8 2.0 0.0 3 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 34 ( 12 2.0 0.0 0 ~ 70 2.0 0.0 3 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 37 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 * ~ 10 2.0 0.0 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 49 A Notes: 1. 'Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour S..Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement Conf licting~ Bus Pedestriens~ (Nb> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NI LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 0 intersection rapacity ~Jtilization ~lorksheets wear 2000 ~T+I ith lProj ect 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT DATE: Nov-91 LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street Margarita Rd. 8 Win. Nills/"B" Street Scenario: Total future Volumes With Project ID: 2051 AM P eak Hour ~Cepacity Vol une V/C Movements Lanes (vphg) NORTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 203 6 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 265 17 SOUTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 888 26 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 68 0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 ASTBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1431 394 11 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 20 1 ~WESTBWND Thru 0 ~ 0 0 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 • - .4 . ICU (X) = 54 LEVEL OF SERVICE = A PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Conf licting~ Capacity Votume V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (%) (Nm) (Nb) 3366 1018 30 • ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0. 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 1599 291 18 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 3366 396 12 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 1245 14 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 1431 321 4 ' ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 1599 11 1 ~ 12 ~2.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 D 0• ~ D 0.0 0.0 # -4 - { 34 A No[ea: 1. ' Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to thru volume where there is no separate [urnin9 lane 3. Nm Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green [o cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITN ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: May-91 i ~ I (LOCATION: N/S Street & E/W Street _ "H" Street 8 General Kearny Rd. I Igcenario: Total Future Volumes With Project I I ID: 2060 I AM Peak Nour I PM Peak Nour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I ~ Lane Heavy Conf lictingl Capacity Volume V/C ICapatity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements Lanes) (vphg) ~ (vphg) ~ (f t) ~ (XHV) (X) ~ (Nm) (Nb) I ~ ~ NORTHBOUND ~ ~ I I Thru t I 1287 0 0 I 1287 0 1 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 2 0 ~ 0 16 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0~ 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 16 3 • I 1599 93 6 * I 12 2.0 0.0 (SOUTHBOUND I Thru 1 I 1291 1 5' ~ 1294 1 3' I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn 0 ~ 0 62 0* I 0 34 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 0 0 I 1599 2 0 I 12 2.0 0.0 ' (EASTBOUND I ~ I Thru 2 I 3237 245 10 ~ 3353 986 30 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn 0 ~ 0 84 0 I 0 26 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 O I Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 13 3 * ~ 1599 35 2 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 IWESTBWND I ~ I I I Thru 2 ~ 3366 1066 32 * I 3364 529 16 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 0 ~ 0 1 0' I 0 2 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 1 I 1599 30 2 ~ 1599 4 3' I 12 2.0 0.0 I ~_________________ _+____________ _--- ----_________t________ _______-___________ _~_____________ ________ -_---- _____ ____________+ ICU (X) = 43 42 LEVEL OF SERVICE = A A Notes: 1. ' Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Nanewers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assured for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION DATE: May-91 (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/N Street "A" St. 8 General Kearny Rd. Scenario: Total Future Vol ones With Project ID: 2062 AM Peak Hour Capacity Volume V/C Movements Lenes~ (vphg) (NORTHBOUND ~ ' Thru 0 ~ 0 0 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 ISWTHBOUND ~ Thru 0 ~ 0 0 0* Right Turn /~-I 1 ~ 1445 14 1 d Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 0 0 \ ASTBWND -IC Thru 2 ~ 3400 248 7 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 5 3 * ~NESTBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3400 1055 31 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 t____________ ______~__-_-____ ________- ---------. ICU (%) = 35 LEVEL Of SERVICE = A PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Conf licting~ Rapacity Volume V/C ~ Nidth Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (vphg) ~ (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 1445 6 0* ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 ~ 1615 0 0 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 3400 1144 34 * ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0* ~ 0 D.0 0.0 0 1615 6 0 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 3400 511 15 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 •________ __________ _________ _t_-_-_-_ ------ -------_ ---_-_ ___-_ ________.__-~ 34 A Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to thru volune where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimm green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION DATE: September 1991 N/S Street & E/W Street LOCATION: N8 I-15 Ramps 8 Winchester Rd. ~SCenario: Future Traffic Volumes With Project ID: 2090 AM P eak Hour ~ PH Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Capacity Volume V/C ~Cepacity Volume V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Movements Lanes (vphg) ~ (vphg) ~ (ft) (XHV) (X) INORTHBWND Thru 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 Right Turn 2 ~ 3097 1155 37 ~ 3097 733 24 + ~ 12 2.0 0.0 Left Turn 7 ~ 1599 731 46 + ~ 7599 118 7 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 SOUTHBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0+ ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 D ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 EASTBOUND Thru 3 ~ 5049 1643 33 ~ 5049 1751 35 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0+ ~ 0 0.0 0.0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 WESTBOUND Thru 3 ~ 5049 1682 33 * ~ 5049 1425 28 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1431 709 0 ~ 1431 1504 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 ~__________________~ ________. _._...__ ____________ ~__________________ _________ _r_______ ____.________ ICU (X) = 79 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ C 59 A Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to th ru vot une Where there is no separate turning Lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green fo cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement Conf licting~ Parking Bus Pedestrians (Nm) (Nb) 0 0 0 0 0 ~O 0 0 0 0 0 0 ________________________y NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: September 1991 I I N/S Street 8 E/w Street I (LOCATION: SB I-15 Ramps 8 Winchester Rd. I I I (Scenario: Future Traffic Volumes With Project I I I ._..._..__-------° ................f 1D: 2091 I I AM P eak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-LBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conf lict ingl I ICapacity Volume V/C ICapacity Volume V/C I width Veh. G rade Perking Bus Pedest ri ansl I Movements Lanesl (vphg) I (vphg) I (fU (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I Thru O I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I I Right Turn 1 i 1431 661 46 * I 1431 529 37 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 I Left Turn 2 I 3097 1400 45 I 3097 829 27 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I ASTBOUND Thru 3 I 5049 427 8 I 5049 1690 33 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1445 171 4 I 1445 613 9* I 12 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I IwESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 1575 31 * I 5049 633 13 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 I Icu (X> = n LEVEL OF SERVICE _ Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement C 69 8 wILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT DATE: Nov-91 LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/N Street Regional Center Rd. 8 General Kearny Rd. ISCenari o: Total Future Volunes Nith Project ID: 2209 AM Peak Hour Capacity Vol une V/C Movements Lanes (vphg) (NORTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 230 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 226 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 20 (SOUTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 149 Right Turn 1 ~ 1257 212 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 46 EASTBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1700 40 Right Turn 1 ~ 1344 14 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 63 ~NE STBWND Thru 1 ~ 1700 54 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 300 Left Turn 1 I 1599 468 ICU (X) _ LEVEL OF SERVICE _ .___-_ ~ ............................t-....... _-_... -..__.._..._______.__.._-.___.4 PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Conf licting~ Capacity Volume V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestriens~ (vphg> ~ (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 7 ~ 3366 120 4• ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 1245 697 28 ' ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 3 • ~ 1615 23 1 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 4• ~ 3366 100 3 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 9' ~ 1257 106 0 ~ 8 0.0 0.0 0 3 ~ 1599 182 11 • ~ 12 2.0 0.0 3• ~ 1700 76 4• ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 0` ~ 1344 90 1* ~ 10 0.0 0.0 0 0 4 ~ 1615 122 8 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 3 ~ 1700 51 3 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 18 ~ 1245 82 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 29 * ~ 1599 395 25 • ~ 12 2.0 0.0 48 73 A C Noes: 1. • Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement NILBUR SMITN ASSOCIATES O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTI LI2ATION (DATE: May-91 I I I (LOCATION: N/S Stree[ 8 E/N Street I I North ^C" St- 8 Campos Verdes Loop I (Scenario: Total Future Volumes Vith Project I I I ID: 2212 I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl I - (Capacity Volume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements I Lanes) I (vphg) I (vphg) I (fU (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I INORT HBOUND I I I I I I I I Thru 1 I 1530 10 1 I 1530 4 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1615 51 3 * I 1615 13 3 • I 12 0.0 0.0 I ISOUTHBWND I Thru 1 I 1301 0 9* I 1304 2 11 * I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 ( I Right Turn O I 0 118 0• I 0 144 0• I 0 0.0 0.0 O I Left Turn 1 I 1615 5 0 I 1615 32 2 I 12 0.0 0.0 I ASTBOUND I Thru 1 I 1700 25 1 I 1700 202 ~ 12 • I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1344 0 0 I 1344 38 0• I 10 0.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1615 54 3 • I 1615 111 7 I 12 0.0 0.0 I I1IESTBOUND I I I , I I Thru 1 I 1700 45 3• I 1700 26 2 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1344 12 0• I 1344 7 0 I 10 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1615 0 0 I 1615 0 0* I 12 0.0 0.0 I F__________________y __-_----_--------------- ---- -+---_----- -__-__-_----_-__- --4-----~- ------ ---___-_ _-__-- -------------_---a tCU CX) = 19 LEVEL OF SERVICE = A 26 A Notes: 1. * lydicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimun green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O O lNTERSECTiON CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: May-91 I I I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I I Roripaugh Rd. 8 North "C" St. I (Scenario: Total Future Volumes With Project I t_______________________________________________________________________________________________________t ID: 2213 I I AM Peak Nour I PM Peak Hour I I I (Capacity Volume V/C (Capacity Volume I Movements Lanesl (vphg) I (vphg) I I I (NORTHBOUND I I I Thru 1 1 1530 98 6 I 1530 214 I Right Turn 0 1 0 ~0 0 I 0 0 I left Turn 1 I 1615 23 3 * I 1615 47 (SOUTHBOUND I I I Thru 1 I 1700 196 12 • I 1700 121 I Right Turn 1 I 1445 70 0 * I 1445 124 I Left Turn 0 1 0 0 0 I 0 0 (EASTBOUND I I I Thru 0 1 0 0 0 I 0 0 I Right Turn 1 1 1257 41 2 I 1257 26 I left Turn 1 I 1615 47 3 * I 1615 40 (WESTBOUND I I I Thru 0 1 0 0 0* I 0 0 I Right Turn 0 1 0 0 0* I 0 0 I Left Turn 0 1 0 0 0 I 0 0 ICU CX) = 18 LEVEL OF SERVICE = A (Type of Area: NON-CBD I Lane Heavy V/C I Width Veh. Grade P I (ft) I (XHV) (X) 14 * I I 12 0.0 0.0 0 * I 0 0.0 0.0 '3 I 12 0.0 0.0 7 I I 12 0.0 0.0 o I 1z o.o o.o 0 * I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I 8 0.0 0.0 3 * I 12 0.0 0.0 0 * I I 0 0.0 0.0 0 * I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 17 A Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume Where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Nudxr of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement I Conf Lictingl arking Bus Pedes triansl (Nm) (Nb) I I I 0 0 I 0 I I I 0 0 I o~ I 0 0 I 0 0 I I I 0 0 I 0 I i .-------------------'---y NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: May-91 I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/N Street I Campos Verdes Loop 8 "D" St. (Scenario: Total Future Volumes Nith Proj ett I t ........................................ .... ............... ID: 2215 I I AM Peak Hour I PN Peek Hour I I I (Capacity Yol ume V/C I Rapacity Volume V/C I Movements I Lanes) (vphg) I I (vphg) (NORTHBOUND I I I I Thru 1 I 1700 77 3* I 1700 19 1 I Right Turn 1 I 7257 1 0* I 1257 1 0 I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 (SOUTHBOUND I i I Thru 1 I 1530 74 1 I 1530 797 12 I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0* Left Turn t I 1615 2 3* I 1615 9 1 ASTBOUND I I Thru o I o 0 0* I o 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0 I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 NESTBWND I I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I Right Turn t I 7445 15 7 I 1445 2 1 I Left Turn t I 1615 11 3* I 1615 0 0 ICU (X) = 9 73 LEVEL OF SERVICE A A Noes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to thru volume where there is no separate turning Lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Nudxr of buses per Nour 5. Three percent minimum green to Lyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement (Type of Area: NON-CB I Lane Heavy I Nidth Veh. Grade i (ft) (XHV) (X) I I I 12 0.0 0.0 I 8 0.0 0.0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I I 72 0.0 0.0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I 12 0.0 0.0 i I o o.o o.o I 0 0.0 0.0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I I 0 0.0 0.0 I 12 0.0 0.0 I 12 0.0 0.0 I I I I I I D I Conf lictingl Parking Bus Pedestrians) (Nm) (Nb) ( I I 0 0 I OI I I 0 0 i OI I 0 o I OI I I 0 0 I 0I I NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION t________________ ____________________________________________ IDATE: Nay-91 I (LOCATION: N)S Street 8 E/N Street I "H" Street 8 Campos Verdes Loop (Scenario: Total Future Volumes With Project I ID: 2216 I I AN Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour I I I (Capacity Yol ume V/C I (Capacity Volume V/C I Movements I Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) INORT HBWND I I I I I Thru t I 1700 2 0 I 1700 3 I Right Turn 1 I 1257 5 0 I 1257 1 I Left Turn 1 I 1615 28 3 * I 1615 10 (SOUTHBOUND I I I Thru 1 I 1700 1 3• I 1700 4 I Right Turn 1 I 1257 15 0 * I 1257 101 I Left Turn 1 I 1615 16 1 I 1615 76 (EASTBOUND I Thru 1 I 1700 58 3 I 1700 274 I Right Turn 1 I 1257 4 0 I 1257 49 I Left Turn 1 I 1615 126 8 * I 1615 94 INESTBOUND I I I Thru 1 I 1700 141 8' I 1700 129 I Righi Turn 1 I 1257 72 0 • I 1257 51 I Left Turn 1 I 1615 1 0 I 1615 3 ICU (X) = 22 LEVEL OF SERVICE = A I I I I I I (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I Lane Heary Conf lictingl I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I (ft) (XHY) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I I I I 3* I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I 0• I 8 0.0 0.0 O I 1 I 12 0.0 0.0 I i I 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I 2 I 8 0.0 0.0 O I 5 * I 12 0.0 0.0 I I I 16 • I 12 0.0 0.0 0 ~ 0 I 0~ I 8 0.0 0.0 0 O I 6 I 12 0.0 0.0 I I i 8 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I 0 I 8 0.0 0.0 O I 3 ~ I 12 0.0 0.0 I 27 A Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/e 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Nunber of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minima green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement NI LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: May-91 I I i ILOCATI ON: N/S Stree[ 8 E/W S[reet I I Campos Verdes Loop 8 East "C" St. I ISCenario: Total Future Volumes With Proj ett I I I ID: 2217 I I AN Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conf Licti ngl I ~ (Capacity Vo lume V/C (Capacity Vol une V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I I Thru 1 I 1530 18 1 I 1530 20 1 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1615 12 3 * I 1615 22 3 * I 12 0.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I Thru 1 I 1700 20 3* I 1700 150 9* I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1257 5 D` I 1257 41 0* I 8 0.0 0.0 p I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I ASTBOUND I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1257 16 1` I 1257 16 1* I 8 0.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn I I 1615 0 0 I 1615 0 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 I (WESTBOUND I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 I ICU (X) = 7 LEVEL OF SERVILE Notes: 1. ` Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume Where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent mininiun green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement A 13 A MI LBUR SMITN ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTiLIZAT DATE: Nov-91 LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street Regional Cen[er Rd. & South Access Dr. Scenario: Total Future Volumes With Project ID: 3000 AM P eak Hour ~ PM Peak Hour Capacity Volume V/C ~Capetity Volume Movements Lanes (vphg) ~ (vphg) INORTHBWND Thru 2 ~ 3366 564 17 ~ 3366 652 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 87 0 ~ 1245 26 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 31 3 * ~ 1599 20 ~SWTHBWND Thru 2 ~ 3366 566 17 ' ~ 3366 676 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 30 0 ' ~ 1245 30 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 0 0 ~ 1599 3 ~EASTBWND Thru 1 ~ 1683 0 0 ~ 1683 1 Right Turn 1 ~ 1330 20 0 ~ 1330 50 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 10 3 ' ~ 1599 52 (WESTBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1683 1 3* ~ 1683 1 Right Turn 1 ~ 1330 3 0* ~ 1330 33 Leff Turn 1 ~ 1599 7 0 ~ 1599 21 .__________________a ____-____ _________ _________-_ ~---_.-.- -._______. Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Conf licting~ V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 19 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 3 ' ~ 12 2.0 0.0 20 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 * ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 3 ~ 10 2.0 0.0 0 0 3 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 3 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 2 ' ~ ~ 10 2.0 0.0 0 1 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 ICU (%) 26 LEVEL OF SERVICE = A A 32 Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION t ............................................................. DATE: May-91 LOCATION: N/S Street & E/W Street "I" Street 8 General Kearny Rd. ~Scenar io: Total future Volumes With Project t_____________________________________________________________ Movements (NORTHBOUND Thru Right Turn Left Turn SOUTHBOUND Thru Righ[ Turn Left Turn ASTBOUND Thru Right Turn Left Turn WESTBOUND Thru Right Turn Left Turn 3D: 3001 Conf lict ing~ Bus Pedes trians~ (Nb) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 AM P eak Hour ~ PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Capacity Volume V/C ~Capatity Volume V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Lanes (vphg) ~ (vphg) ~ (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm> 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 i 0 0.0 0.0 0 ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 1 ~ 7445 39 2 * ~ 7445 25 0 * ~ 72 0.0 0.0 1 ~ 1615 7 0 ~ 7675 _ 1 0 ~ 72 0.0 0.0 2 ~ 3400 240 7 ~ 3400 7024 30 * ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 1 ~ 1675 7 3* ~ 1615 23 1 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 2 ~ 3400 1058 31 * ~ 3400 570 15 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 1 ~ 1257 7 0* ~ 1257 2 0 ~ 8 0.0 0.0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 ICU (X) = 36 LEVEL OF SERVICE = A 30 A Notes: 7. * Indicates erit ical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Nunber of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WI LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION y----------------- ~DATE: (LOCATION: Scenario: May-91 N/S Street 8 E/N Street "J~~ Street & General Kearny Rd. Total Future Volumes With Project iD: AM Peak Hour Capacity Volume Movements Lenes~ (vphg) (NORTHBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1445 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 0 ~SOUT HBWND Thru 0 ~ 0 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 (EASTBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3400 238 Right Turn 1 ~ 1257 2 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 ~wESTBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3400 1059 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 1 ICU (X) _ LEVEL OF SERVICE _ 3002 PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Conf licting~ V/C (Capacity Volume V/C ~ Nidth Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians ~ (vphg) ~ (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 1445 1 0 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 ~ 1615 3 3* ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 ~ 0 0 0' ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 ( 0 0 0' ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 7 ~ 3400 1024 30 * ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 1257 1 0' ~ 8 0.0 0.0 0 0 0' ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 31 ' ~ 3400 509 15 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 0* ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 ~ 1615 1 3' ~ 12 0.0 0.0 --------- }-------- ---------- --------- -4-~----. __---- -------_ ------- _--- ------------} 31 36 A A Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimm green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement wILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 intersection rapacity ~Jtilization O ~Iorksheets wear 2000 ~Iith Additional improvements 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTIL RATION (DATE: Mey-91 i (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I Campos Verdes Loop & General Kearrry Rd. (Scenario: Total Future Volunes With Project I I I I I I I tD: 1138 I I AM Peak Hour I PN Peek Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I Lane Heavy I ( Capacity Vo lume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Nidth Veh. Grade Parking I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I I (f t) I (XHV) (X) (Nm) INORTHBDUND I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0• I 0 0 0" I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 0 0* I 0 0 0 '~ I 0 0.0 0.0 I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 ISOUTHBDUND I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0 10 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 Right Turn 1 I 1445 16 1 I 1445 18 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 Left Turn 1 I 1615 20 3 * I 1615 142 9 * I 12 0.0 0.0 IEASTBDUND I I I I Thru 2 I 3400 233 7 I 3400 1008 30 * I 12 0.0 0.0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 I Left Turn t I 1615 5 3• I 1615 17 1 I 12 0.0 0.0 INESTBOUND I I I I Thru 2 I 3388 1044 32 * I 3375 492 15 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 25 0* I 0 25 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 ICU (X) LEVEL OF SERVICE 38 A 39 A Notes: 1. ' tndice [es critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to Thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Nudxr of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement I Conf lictingl Bus Pedestrians) (Nb) I I 0 I 0 I I I 0 I I 0 I 0 I I I 0 I 0 I t WILBUR SMITN ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION IDATE: September 1991 N/S Streex & E/W Street (LOCATION: Margarita Rd. & General Kearny Rd. I (Scenario: Future Traffic Volumes Nith Proj ett I a---------------°--.-----------------°--------°--- SD: 1139 AM Peak Hour ~ PM Peak Hour I ( Capacity Volume V/C Capacity Volume Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) ~NORT HBWND Thru 2 I 3366 536 16 ~ 3366 535 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 128 0 I 1245 308 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 65 4 * I 1599 23 ISWTHBWND Thru 2 ~ 3366 526 16 * I 3366 572 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 154 0 * I 1245 112 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 64 4 ~ 1599 144 IEASTBWND I Thru 2 I 3305 160 6 I 3284 534 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 22 0 ~ 0 104 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 130 8 * ~ 1615 321 ~wESTBWND I Thru 2 ~ 3338 695 24 * ~ 3343 352 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 97 0' I 0 44 Left Turn 1 ~ 1615 352 22 ~ 1615 260 Icu (x> = sz LEVEL' OF SERVICE = A I I I I I (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl V/C ~ Nidth Veh. Grade Parking Ous Pedestrians) I (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I i 16 * ~ 72 2.0 0.0 0 0 0* I 8 2.0 0.0 p I 1 I 12 2.0 0.0 I I I 77 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 O I 9 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 I O I I 19 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 ( 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 D I 20 I 12 0.0 0.0 I I 12 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 ~ I 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 p I 76 * ~ 12 0.0 0.0 I 60 A Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Nour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILSZA77ON DATE: September 1991 N/S Street 8 E/Y Street LOCATION: Margarita Rd. & Apricot Ave. ~SCenari o: Future traffic Volumes Nith Project ID: 1140 AM Peak Hour ~ PM Peak Hour Type of Area• NON-CBD Capacity Movements Lanes (vphg) ~NORTNBWND ' Thru 2 ~ 3366 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 ~SWTNBWND Thru 2 ~ 3366 Right Turn 1 ~ 1330 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 ASTBWND Thru 0 ~ 0 Right Turn 2 ~ 3097 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 ~UESTBWND Thru 0 ~ 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 Lane Heavy Conflicting Volume V/C Capacity Volume V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (~'phg) ~ (ft) (%HV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 588 17 ~ 3366 693 21 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 p 826 27 * ~ 3004 271 9 * ~ 11 2.0 0.0 727 22 * ~ 3366 731 22 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 111 0 * ~ 1330 243 0 * ~ 10 2.0 0.0 p 0 0 i 0 0 0 i 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 149 0 ~ 3097 602 10 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 143 9 * ~ 1599 172 11 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0* ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0* ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 p l 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 ICU (X) = 58 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ A 42 A Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning vo limes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Nanewers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn navemen[ WILBUR SNITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT IDATE: Nov-91 I LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/N Street Ynez Rd. 8 Apricot Ave. ISCenario: Total Future Voluras With Projeet t-------------------------------------------------------- ID: 1190 I I I AN Peak Nour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I Lene Heavy IGapacity Volume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Nidth Veh. Grade Parking Movements Lanesl (voh9) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) NORTHBOUND Thru 3 ~ 5049 1003 20 ~ 5049 950 19 ' ~ 12 2.0 0.0 I Right Turn t I 1245 303 1 I 1245 182 0' I 8 2.0 0.0 Left Turn 2 I 3004 551 18 • I 3004 248 8 I 11 2.0 0.0 ISOUTNBOUND I ( Thru 3 I 5049 570 11 ' I 5049 901 18 I 12 2.0 0.0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1257 268 2 * ~ 1257 136 0 I 8 0.0 0.0 Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 210 7 ~ 3004 460 15 • ~ 11 2.0 0.0 (EASTBOUND I Thru 2 ~ 3366 282 8 ~ 3366 531 16 * I 12 2.0 0.0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 92 0 i 1245 466 13 ' I 8 2.0 0.0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 136 9 * I 1599 323 20 I 12 2.0 0.0 WESTBOUND I I Thru 2 I 3366 670 20 * ~ 3366 518 15 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 Right Turn 1 ( 1245 452 9 * I 1245 181 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 Left Turn 2 I 3004 111 4 ~ 3004 407 14 • ~ 11 2.0 0.0 .______________ ____a -__-______ ___---_-_ ________--~ .--_.____ __________-_-----__a__ ______ __---. _-____. ICU (X) = LEVEL OF SERVICE _ 69 B n C Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour S. Three percent minimum green to Lyle ratio assumed for critical left turn movement 0 0 0 0 Conf licting~ Bus Pedest rians~ <Nb> I I 0 OI I I 0 i OI lO o I 0 OI I 0 I OI I NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: September 1991 I I N/S Street & E/W Street I (LOCATION: Ynez Rd. & Ninchester Rd. I I IStenario: I Future Traffic Volumes With Pro ject I I i ID: 1192 I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area; NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conf Lictingl I (Capacity Vo lume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I width Veh. Grade Pa rking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements I Lanes ) (vphg) I (vphg) I (tt) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 625 19 I 3366 867 26 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1388 51 0 I 1388 167 0 I 11 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 674 22 + I 3004 767 26 * I 11 2.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 695 21 * ~ 3366 795 24 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 213 0* I 1245 418 2* I 8 2.0 0.0 O I Left Turn 1 I 1599 186 12 I 1599 97 6 I 12 2.0 0.0 ASTBOUND I I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 1587 31 I 5049 1623 32 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1431 714 0 I 1431 634 0 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 p I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 497 17 + I 3004 227 8 * I 11 2.0 0.0 I INESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 1503 30 * I 5049 1744 35 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1330 139 0 * I 1330 171 0 * I 10 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 201 7 I 3004 134 4 I 11 2.0 0.0 I ICU (X) = 90 9G LEVEL OF SERVICE = D E Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Mour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement 111LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES r O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT t_______________________________________________________, (DATE: Nov-91 I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I Regional Center Rd. 8 Apricot Overpass (Scenario: Total Future Volumes With Project I ID: 1794 f ------------- -----i --_----------•-_-_--__------_4_-------- _-------- I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour I I ( Capacity Vol ume V/C I (Capacity Volume I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 I Left Turn O I 0 0 0• I 0 0 (SOUTHBOUND I I I Thru o I o 0 0• I o 0 I Right Turn 1 I 1431 527 4 ` I 1431 549 I Left Turn 2 I 3097 bb 2 I 3097 198 (EASTBOUND I I I Thru 2 I 3366 226 7 I 3366 516 I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 I Left Turn 1 I 1599 528 33 ' I 1599 614 (WESTBOUND I I I Thru 2 I 3366 762 23 * I 3366 452 I Right Turn t I 1245 154 0 * I 7245 83 I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I 0 0 {_---_-••--__- -_--•4 ------------------ ---------- -4_--__--_ -•-------• ICU (X) = 60 LEVEL OF SERVICE A I I i I I I (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I I I I 0• I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I 0• I 0 0.0 0.0 p I 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I I I o ~ o o.o o.o o I , 0 I 12 2.0 0.0 p I 6 • I 12 2.0 0.0 I I I 15 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 o I 38 • I 12 2.0 0.0 I I I 13 • I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I 0* I 8 2.0 0.0 p I 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I A 58 Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning vol ones are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimm green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES ~/ 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTIL12AT1 ON (DATE: September 7991 I I N/S Street 8 E/W Street I (LOCATION: Regional Center (E) Rd. & Winchester Rd. I I I (Scenario: Future Traffic Volumes With Project I I I ID: 1796 I I AM P eak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl I (Capacity Volume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I (fU (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I I Thru 1 I 1683 173 10 I 1683 64 4 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 7 I 1388 95 0 I 1388 165 5 I 11 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 261 16 * I 1599 232 15 * I 12 2.0 0.0 ISOUTHOOUND I I I ~ I I Thru 1 I 1392 23 4 * I 1357 102 24 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 27 0* I 0 230 0* I 0 0.0 0.0 O I Q Left Turn 1 I 1599 30 2 I 1599 117 7 I 12 2.0 0.0 I EASTBOUND I I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 1155 23 I 5049 1683 33 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1330 119 0 I 133() 206 0* I 10 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 285 18 * I 1599 83 5 I 12 2.0 0.0 I INESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 1669 33 * I 5049 1254 25 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn 1 I 1330 83 0* I 1330 29 0 I 10 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 337 71 I 3004 102 3 * I 11 2.0 0.0 I ICU (X) = 71 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume Where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Nour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement C 75 C WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION DATE: September 1991 Xj5 Street & E/Y Stree t LOCATION: Margarita Rd. 8 Winchester Rd. Scenario: Future Traffic Vol ones with Project ID: 1198 ~_____________ _____ ~-_--_-___ -_----________------~______-._ --_____-------____ _t__--__-_ __----_ ____--- ___-_- ___-- --_-_-----_~ AM P eak Hour ~ PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heary Conf litting~ 4Capacity Volume ~V/C Capacity Volume V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians Movements Lanes (vphg) ~ (vphg) ~ (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) INORTNBWND Thru 2 ~ 3366 335 10 ~ 3366 615 18 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 323 8 ~ 1245 305 0 * ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 110 7 * ~ 1599 90 6 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 ISWTHBWND Thru 2 ~ 3366 611 18 * ~ 3366 432 13 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 400 5' ~ 1245 215 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 132 8 ~ 1599 17i ~ 11 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 ~EASTBWND Thru 3 ~ 5049 781 15 ~ 5049 1299 26 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 82 0 ~ 1245 140 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 0 Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 281 9 ' ~ 3004 610 20 ' ~ 11 2.0 0.0 ~NESTBWND ~ I f Thru 3 ~ 5049 1602 32 * ~ 5049 1090 22 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 58 0 * ~ 1245 62 0 * ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 239 8 ~ 3004 333 11 ~ 11 2.0 0.0 ICU (X) = 71 LEVEL OF SERVICE = C 71 C Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning vol~nes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement VILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT t ...................................................................................................... .t IDATE: Nov-9t I I I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street ( I Margarita Rd. & Reg. Ctr. Dr./Campus V. Rd. I (Scenario: Total Future Volumes Nith Project I I I t_______________________________________________________________________________________________________~ ID: 1199 I I AM P eak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Aree: NON-CBO I I I I I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl I (Capacity Volume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements I Lanes) (vphg) I (vph9) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I INORTHBWND I I I I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 603 18 * I 3366 798 24 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1330 39 0 * I t330 83 0 * I 10 2.0 0.0 0 I I Left Turn t I 1599 36 2 I 1599 19 1 I 12 2.0 0.0 I ISWTHBWND I I Thru 2 I 3366 603 18 I 3366 506 15 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 184 0 I 1245 117 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 O I Left Turn 1 I 1599 145 9 ~ I 1599 282 18 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I ASTBWND I Thru 1 I 1683 4 0 I 7683 52 3• I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 7330 39 1 I 1330 137 6 ~ I 10 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 21 3 * I 1599 79 5 I 72 2.0 0.0 I INESTBWND I I I I I Thru 1( 1378 11 6• I 7358 17 4 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 71 0~ I 0 38 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 102 6 I 1599 185 12 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I 4__________________~ -________ ______--_ -______... .~....______--_-_-__ _-__...... ~..........-_________. ....-_________........_t Icu tX> = 36 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ Notes: t. • Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volune where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Nour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement A 62 B WILBUR SM[TH ASSfKIATES O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT (DATE: Nov-91 I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/N Street I Winchester Rd. 8 Nicolas Rd. (Scenario: Total Future Vol ones Nith Project I ID: 1201 I I I I I I I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-LBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conflittingl I (Capacity Volume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh- Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians 1, I Movements Lanesl (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I INORT HBOUND I I I I I I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 845 17 I 5049 1366 27 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 112 0 I 1245 348 0* I 8 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 94 6 * I 1599 41 3 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 1441 29 * I 5049 1003 20 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 152 0' I 1245 68 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 183 11 I 1599 2b1 16 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 (EASTBOUND I I I I Thru 1 I 1683 13 3 * I 1683 55 3 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 0, 0 I I Right Turn t I 1431 20 0* I 1431 91 1' I 12 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 39 2 I 1599 155 10 I 12 2.0 0.0 I INESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 1 I 1683 57 3 I 1683 25 1 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1431 283 5 I 1431 203 0 I 12 2.0 0.0 O I Left Turn 1 I 1599 507 32 ' I 1599 145 9 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I ~__________________t _________ _________ ___________~___----- -.---.-_-- ------__ __t_______ ____-_-_--_--- ______ ___-- _-__________~ ICU (X) = 70 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ NOtes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c , 2. Turning volumes ere added to th ru volune Nhere there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement B 56 A NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTIL32ATION DATE: September 1991 N/S Street 8 E/W Street LOCATION: Jefferson Ave. 8 Winchester Rd. Scenario: Future Traffic Volumes With Project ...-+ ID: 1252 AM Peak Hour ~ PM Peak Hour ~7ype of Area; NON-CBD Lane Neavy Conf lictingl Capacity Vo lume V/C Capacity Volume V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedest ri ans~ Movements Lanes (vphg> ~ (vphg) ~ (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) ~NORT HBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 432 13 ~ 3366 814 24 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 289 0 ~ 1245 480 0* ~ 8 2.0 0.0 0 ~ Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 254 16 * ~ 1599 10 1 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 SOUTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3180 706 27 ' ~ 3233 427 14 ~ 71 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 148 0*- ~ 0 30 0 ~ 0 2.0 0.0 ~ p Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 177 6 ~ 3004 1001 33 * ~ 11 2.0 0.0 ASTBOUND Thru 3 ~ 5049 132 3 ~ 5049 823 16 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1330 39 0 ~ 1330 200 0 * ~ 10 2.0 0.0 0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ T599 33 3 * ~ 1599 172 11 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 WESTBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3433 899 26 * ~ 3433 343 10 ~ 12 2.0 -4.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1357 935 37 ' ~ 1357 327 0 ~ 10 2.0 -4.0 0 Left Turn 2 ~ 3159 403 13 ~ 3159 492 16 * ~ 12 2.0 -4.0 ICU (X) = 109 89 LEVEL OF SERVICE = F D Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour _ 4. Nb Number of buses per Nour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT (DATE: Nov-97 I I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Stree t I I I Jefferson Ave. & Date St. I (Scenario: I Total Future Volumes 4ith Project I I ID: 1256 ~_____________ _____+-___________ ---_________-----r_____-_-- --__-.______- __---_ 4____-----_____- ---__-- -___- ---___ ---_____---~ I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I ~ I I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl I (Capacity Volume V/C ICapatity Vol uaE V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I I (vphg) I (fU (XHY) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I l I I Th ru 2 I 3265 306 9 I 3265 505 15 ' I 17 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1388 75 0 I 7388 644 29 * I 11 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1551 339 22 • I 1551 123 8 I 11 2.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I Th ru 2 I 3347 602 19 • I 3292 3l5 11 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 23 0' I 0 54 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 190 6 I 3004 200 7* I 11 2.0 0.0 I (EASTBOUND I I I O I I Thru 2 I 3366 259 8 I 3366 749 22 I 72 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1330 73 0 I 1330 308 0 I 10 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 SD 3 ` I 3004 301 10 ' I 77 2.0 0.0 I UESTBOUND I I I i I Thru 2 I 3366 7124 33 * I 3366 438 73 * I 72 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 7330 202 0 * I 1330 293 2 * I 10 2.0 0.0 0 I I Left Turn 2 I 3097 460 15 I 3097 67 2 I 72 2.0 0.0 I Icu (x) = n LEVEL OF SERVICE _ Notes: 1. + Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement C 76 C WILBUR SMITN ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACI7Y UTI LIZAT (DATE: Nov-91 I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I Diaz Rd. 8 Winchester Rd. (Scenario: Total Future Volumes With Project ID: 1263 I I AM Peak Hour I PN Peak Nour I I ~ I (Capacity Vo lume V/C I (Capacity Volume V/C I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I INORT HBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 382 11 I 3366 301 I Right Turn t I 1431 42 0 I 1431 283 I Left Turn 1 I 1599 534 33 ' I 1599 150 ISOUTHBWND I I I Thru 2 I 3366 288 9* I 3366 759 I Right Turn O I 0 0 0* I 0 0 Left Turn 2 I 3097 209 7 I 3097 661 ASTBOl1ND I Thru 2 I 3366 56 2 I 3366 332 I Right Turn t I 1245 39 0 I 1245 165 Left Turn 1 I 1599 0 0* I 1599 0 (WESTBOUND I I I Thru 1 I 1683 577 34 ' I 1683 266 Right Turn 2 I 3097 777 0 ' I 3097 221 I Left Turn 2 I 3097 255 8 I 3097 88 ICU (X) = 76 LEVEL OF SERVICE = C I I I I I I (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I (fU (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I I I I 9' I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I 6 * I 72 2.0 0.0 0 I 9 I 12 2.0 0.0 I I I 23 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 O I 21 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I I I 10 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 0 O I 0 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I I I 16 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I 0 * I ' 12 2.0 0.0 0 I 3 I 12 2.0 0.0 I A 52 Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimun green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT t_________ ________ ______________________ ____________ ______ ________________________ ______ _____ ___________~ (DATE: Nov-91 I I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I I I Ynez Rd. & County Center Dr. I ISCenari o: I Total Future Volumes With Project I I ID: 1349 .------------------~----.---- ---...-- -------__-__~______-_-_---------__ ----_- -t--_____ _____-_- -_-____ ___--- ______---.--____y I I AN Peak Hour I PM Peak Nour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Contl ictingl I (Capacity Vol une V/C (Capacity Volume V/ C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedest riansl I Movements Lanesl (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I (NORTHBOUND I I I ~ I ~ I I Thru 2 ( 3366 906 27 I 3366 1117 33 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 238 0 I 1245 108 0' I 8 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 75 5 * I 1599 31 2 I 12 2.0 0.0 I ISOUT HBOUND I Thru 2 I 3366 1019 30 * I 3366 974 29 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 76 0* I 1245 18 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 73 5 I 1599 54 3 • I 12 2.0 0.0 IO (EASTBOUND I I I I I Thru 1 I 1683 1 3* I 1683 10 3' I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1245 11 0* I 1245 69 3* I 8 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 8 1 I 1599 52 3 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (WESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 1 I 1683 7 0 I 1683 3 0 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 44 0 I 1245 76 3 I 8 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 66 4 * I 1599 225 14 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I .__________________a-________ _______ ____-_-__..__ +___-__-__----_-___________- -~_---___ _______- _--_____--_-_____ _--_________+ ICU (X) 42 LEVEL OF SERVICE = A 56 A Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Nunber of Maneuvers per Xour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Nour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WlLBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT (DATE: Nov-91 I I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I I I Ynez Rd. & "C" Street I (Scenario: I Total Future Volumes With Project I I ID: 1350 I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Aree: NON-CBD I I I I I Lene Heavy Conf lict irgl (Capacity Volume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) Movements I Lanes) (vphg) ~ I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I Th ru 2 I 3366 731 22 * I 3366 966 29 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 88 0* I 1245 239 0* I 8 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 139 9 I~ 1599 40 3 I 12 2.0 0.0 I ISWTHBWND I I I I I Th ru 2 I 3366 793 24 I 3366 828 25 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 ( I Right Turn t I 1245 28 0 I 1245 8 0 I 8 2,0 0,0 O I left Turn 1 I 1599 220 14 * I 1599 161 10 * I 12 2.0 0.0 ASTBOUND I Th ru t I 1683 5 3* I 1683 70 4* I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1245 20 0* I 1245 120 2* I 8 2.0 0.0 0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 4 0 I 1599 24 2 I 12 2.0 0.0 I IWE STBOUNO I I I I I Thru 1 I 1683 65 4 I 1683 11 1 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 -0 I I Righ[ Turn 1 I 1245 131 0 I 1245 228 7 I 8 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 356 22 * I 1599 98 6 • I 12 2.0 0.0 I ~_____________ ____ _~-„-,---,-,- ----_ __-_________~_______-_-,--,-,---_-- ---_-_ t________ __________--,- -„_- ______ ___--,-,-,-t ICU (X) = 61 51 LEVE L OF SERVICE = B p Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT (DATE: Nov-91 I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/N Street I Ynez Rd./Jackson Ave. 8 Date St. (Scenario: Total Future Volumes Nith Projeet I a______________________________________________________________________________ iD: 1352 ~__________________~.._._________.......__.-_....+.______........__._____.._..t.___.._....___...___. I ( AN Peak Hour I PN Peak Nour (Type of Area: NON-C8D I I I (Capacity Volume Y/L I (Capacity Volume I Movements 1 Lanesl I (vphg) I (vphg) (NORTHBOUND I I I I Thru 2 I 3357 486 15 I 3339 759 I Right Turn O I 0 9 0 I 0 43 I Left Turn 2 I 3097 227 7 • I 3097 380 ~SOUTHBWND I Thru 2 I 3366 687 20 ' I 3366 600 I Right Turn 1 I 1245 531 20 ' I 1245 127 I Left Turn t I 1599 116 7 I 1599 165 I EASTBW NO I I I Thru 2 I 3366 249 7 I 3366 859 I Right Turn t I 1245 295 9 I 1245 231 I Left Turn 2 I 3097' 94 3 * I 3097 406 INESTBOUND I I I Thru 2 I 3366 949 28 ' I 3366 411 I Right Turn 1 I 1245 150 0 ` I 1245 148 Lett Turn 1 I 1599 75 5 I 1599 25 ICU (X) = 78 LEVEL OF SERVICE = L I Lane Heavy I I I I I I I Conf lictingl V/C I Nidth Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedest riansl I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I I 24 ` I 12 2.0 0.0 0 " I 8 0.0 0.0 12 I 12 2.0 0.0 I 18 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 10 * I 12 2.0 0.0 26 ` I 12 2.0 0.0 0 ' I 8 2.0 0.0 13 I 12 2.0 0.0 12 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 3 • I 12 2.0 0.0 63 B Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/e 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no Separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement I I 0 0 I OI I I 0 0 I OI lO 0 0 I 0 0 I i I 0 0 I 0 I I .____ _________________t N[LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION DATE: September 1991 N/S Street & E/N Street LOCATION: uinchester Rd. 8 Murrieta Hot Springs Rd. ~SCenario: Future Tratf is Volumes Vith Project ID: 1442 AM Peak Hour Capacity Yolume Movements Lanes (vphg) NORTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 672 Right Turn 1 ~ 1330 245 Lett Turn 2 ~ 3004 165 SOUTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 1157 Right Turn 1 ~ 1330 476 Q Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 31 ASTBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 438 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 261 left Turn 2 ~ 3004 229 ~NESTBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 502 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 24 Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 223 ICU (X) _ LEVEL OE SERVICE _ V/C 20 0 5 34 * 0 2 13 * 2 8 15 0 7 ` 62 PN Peak Nour (Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy ~Capatity Volume V/C ~ Nidth Veh. Grade Parking (vphg) ~ (ft) (XHV) (X> (Nm) 3366 1063 32 ` ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 1330 281 0 * ~ 10 2.0 0.0 3004 220 7 ~ 11 2.0 0.0 3366 830 25 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 1330 273 0 ~ 10 2.0 0.0 1599 20 3 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 3366 519 15 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 1245 142 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 3004 414 14 * ~ 11 2.0 0.0 3366 458 14 ` ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 1245 28 0 * ~ 8 2.0 0.0 3004 260 9 ~ 11 2.0 0.0 62 B B Noes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no sepe rate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Nour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement _________________4 Conflicting Bus Pedestrians (Nb) 0 0 o I 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 NI LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT DATE: Nov-91 LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/N Street ~ Reg. Center N. Dr. & Ninchester Rd. ISCenerio: Total Future Volumes Nith Project t__________ ID: 2002 AM Peak Hour Capacity Volume V/C Movements Lanes (vphg) WORT HBOUND ' Thru 1 ~ 1683 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1388 31 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 125 8 • ~SWTHBOUND Thru 1 ~ 1305 1 3 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 12 0 • Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 7 D EASTBOUND Thru 3 ~ 5049 1535 30 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 144 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 51 3 ILIESTBOUND Thru 3 ~ 5049 1714 34 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 15 0 Left Turn 2 ~ 3097 216 7 .__________________t____..... ._.__--_______.... ICU (X) = 48 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ __~____________________________ t_____.___..__.______.._____. PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heevy Capacity Volume V/C ~ Ili dth Veh. Grade Parking (vphg) ~ (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) 1683 1 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 1388 150 5 ~ 11 2.0 0.0 1599 429 27 • ~ 12 2.0 0.0 1304 2 3 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 25 0 • ~ 0 2.0 0.0 1599 60 4 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 5049 1697 34 • ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 1245 130 0 • ~ 8 2.0 0.0 1599 31 2 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 5049 1564 31 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 1245 15 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 3097 172 6 • ~ 12 2.0 0.0 ._+___________________ _________ t...____ ______ ..______ ...____ 69 A B Notes: 1. • Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume Nhere there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical Left-turn movement Conf licting~ Bus Pedestrians (Nb) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTIt IZAT (DATE: Nov-91 ~LOLATION: N/S Street 8 E/N Street Margarita Rd. 8 Marg/Win Mead. ~SCenario: iota( Future Volunes With Project ID: 2018 Movements WORT HBOUND Thru Right Turn Left Turn SOUTHBOUND Thru Right Turn Left Turn ASTBOUND Thru Right Turn Left Turn WESTBOUND Thru ~. Right Turn Left Turn Notes: 1. * indicates critics( lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Nour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Nour 5. Three percent minimum green to Lyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement O AM Peak Hour Capacity Volume Lanes (vphg) 2 ~ 3366 429 1 ~ 1245 243 1 ~ 1599 5 2 ~ 3366 1125 1 ~ 1245 145 1 ~ 1599 12 1 ~ 1267 1 0 ( 0 77 1 ~ 1551 9 1 ~ 1683 2 1 ( 1330 30 1 ~ 1599 6 ICU (X) _ LEVEL OF SERVILE PN Peak Hour V/C Capacity Volume (vphg) 13 ~ 3366 1101 6 ( t245 104 3 * ~ 1599 2 33 * ~ 3366 666 0 * ~ 1245 44 1 ~ 1599 7 1 ~ 1255 4 0 ~ 0 131 3 • ~ 1551 16 3 * ~ 1683 3 2 * ~ 7330 112 0 ~ 1599 23 44 A ----_-__-.____________________________________________t Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heevy Confl icting~ V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 33 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0' ~ 8 2.0 0.0 p l 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 20 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 8 2.0 0.0 p l 3 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 11 * ~ 11 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 * ~ 0 2.0 0.0 p 1 ~ 11 2.0 0.0 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 8 ~ 10 2.0 0.0 p 3 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 50 A WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTIL IZAT (DATE: Nov-91 I I I (LOCATION: N/S Street & E/W Street I I Roripaugh Rd. 8 Winchester Rd. I (Scenario: Total Future Volunes With Project I t .......................................................................................................y ID: 2019 I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I Lane Heavy Conf Lictingl I (Capacity Volume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Perking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm> (Nb) I I INORTHBWND I I I I I I I I I Thru 1 I 1700 22 1 ( 1700 15 1 I 12 D.0 D.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1257 29 0 I 1257 28 0 I 8 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1615 94 6 * I 1615 210 13 * I 12 0.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I Thru 1 I 1700 12 3' I 1700 53 3' I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 39 0° I 1245 184 9* I 8 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 29 2 I 1599 102 6 ( 12 2.0 0.0 I IEASTBWND I I I O I I Thru 3 I 5049 994 20 I 5049 1624 32 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1330 194 0 I 1330 115 0° I 10 0.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 48 3 ' I 1599 38 2 I 12 2.0 0.0 I , INESTBWND I I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 1761 35 ' I 5049 1091 22 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn t I 1330 148 0* I 1330 71 0 I 10 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1615 60 4 -I 1615 78 5 ' I 12 0.0 0.0 I ~__________________. ......____......_ _______._.._~__.___.. .....____. _...______ ~__..... _____. ..______ ..____ __.. _ _....._.._..t ICU (X) = 47 LEVEL OF SERVICE B A 62 Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning vol ones are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Nour WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: September 1991 I N/S Street 8 E/N Street ILOCAT ION: Jefferson Ave. 8 Overland Dr./Apricot Ave. ISCenario: Future Traffic Volumes Nith Project I I I I I I I ID: 2023 I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl I (Capacity Volume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements I Lanes) I (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 185 5 I 3366 897 27 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1287 254 5 I 1287 226 0* I 9 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1551 78 5 • I 1551 46 3 I 11 2.0 0.0 I ISWTHBOUND I Thru 2 I 3228 919 31 * I 3209 482 17 I 11 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 75 0* I 0 62 0 I 0 2.0 O.D O I Left Turn 2 I 3004 153 5 I 3004 575 19 * I 11 2.0 0.0 I ASTBWND I Thru 2 I 3167 104 4 I 3191 519 19 * I 11 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 26 0 I 0 92 0* I 0 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 118 4 * I 3004 230 8 I 11 2.0 0.0 I INESTBg1ND I I I I Thru 1 I 1683 535 32 * I 1683 250 15 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1431 651 8* I 1431 177 0 I 12 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 292 10 I 3004 459 15 * I 11 2.0 0.0 I ICU (X) = 80 LEVEL OF SERVICE = Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to th ru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assured for critical left-turn movement C SD C NI LBUR SM [TH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT (DATE: Nov-97 I I (LOCATION: N/S Stree[ 8 E/W Street I I I Margarita Rd . 8 Daie St. I (Scenario: I Total Future Volumes With Project I I ID: 2027 I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl (Capacity Vo lume V/C (Capacity Vol ume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Pa rking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements I Lanes ) (vphg) I I (vphg) I I (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I INORTHBOUNO I I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 207 6 I 3366 826 25 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 36 0 I 1245 78 0* I 8 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 52 3 ` I 1599 17 1 I 12 2.0 0.0 I ISWTHBOUND I I Thru 2 I 3366 775 23 ` I 3366 343 10 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 7 I 1245 647 26 • I 1245 99 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 18 1 I 1599 20 3 • I 72 2.0 0.0 I (EASTBOUND I I I O I I Thru 2 I 3366 225 7 I 3366 762 23 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Righ[ Turn t I 1245 5 0 I 1245 47 0* I 8 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 2 I 3097 58 3 • I 3097 360 12 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (WESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 851 25 * I 3366 363 77 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 , 21 0* I 1245 25 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 7 I 1599 77 5 I 1599 46 3 * I 12 2.0 0.0 I I[U (X) _ ~ 80 54 LEVEL OF SERVICE = C A Notes: 1. * [rdicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning Lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SHITH ASSOCIATES O 0 A~I~IIl~fl®~~~ IE~e~~~s~e~l ][Il~~e~sec~~®~ ~~~~~~~y ~J~IlIL~~~~®~ ~1®~llkss~ee~ 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION t____________ ___________________________ _________ __________ _______________ ______________ _____ ___________~ (DATE: September 1991 I I N/S Street 8 E/N Stree t I (LOCATION: Ynez Rd. 8 Solana Nay I I (Scenario: I Future Traffic Volumes Nith Pro ject I I I ID: 1143 I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conflicting) I (Capacity Vo lume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Nidth Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedest riansl I Movements lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHY) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3298 1353 41 * I 3298 832 25 * I 11 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 2 I 3097 366 0 * ( 3097 874 0 * I 11 0.0 0.0 0 I I Left Turn 1 I 1567 4 0 I 1567 5 0 I 11 0.0 0.0 I ISOUT HBOUND I I ih ru 3 I 5084 512 10 I 5100 1144 22 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 11 0 I 0 0 0 I 8 0.0 0.0 O I Left Turn 1 I 1615 67 4 * I 1615 573 35 * I 12 0.0 0.0 ASTBWND I I Thru 1 I 1415 4 1* I 1530 14 1* I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 4 0* I 0 0 0* I 8 0.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn t I 1615 3 3 I 1615 11 1 I 12 0.0 0.0 I INESTBOUND I I I I I Thru t I 1700 2 0 I 1700 3 0 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1257 522 0 I 1257 202 0 I 8 0.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 2 I 3128 811 26 * I 3128 571 18 * I 12 0.0 0.0 I ICU (X) = 72 LEVEL OF SERVICE = C BD C Notes: 1. * [rdicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement NILBUR SN ITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT - ~_________ ________ ____________ _______________________ ______ _________ ______________ ___________ ___________t IDATE: Nov-91 I I ILOCATI ON: N/S Street & E/W S[reet I I I Margarita Rd . 8 Solana Wy. I (Scenario: I Total Future Volumes With Project I I } ......... ........ ............ ....................... ...... ................ ....... ........... ...........y ID: 7144 ~_____________ _____ t..__.-___ ___-____ __.......__- ~______________-__._..- _..___~_____........__ ______. .--__._...- _____-_... _t I I AM P eak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Lonf lictingl I (Capacity Volume V/C ICapatity Volume V/C I Width Veh. G rade Parking Bus Pedestriensl I Movements Lanesl (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (%HV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I INORT HBOUND I I I I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 1181 35 I 3363 444 13 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 1 0 I 0 3 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 2 I 3034 Sib 17 * I 3034 217 7 ' I 77 0.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I Thru 2 I 3366 256 8 ` I 3366 996 30 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 7344 555 27 * I 1344 324 0 * I 10 0.0 0.0 0 I I Left Turn 1 I 7615 4 0 I 7675 17 1 I 12 0.0 0.0 I IEASTBWND I Thru 1 I 7649 43 3 I 1649 283 17 ` I 17 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1402 87 0 I 7402 536 14 ` I 11 D.0 0.0 0 0 I I Left Turn 2 I 3034 2D6 7 " I 3034 466 15 I 11 0.0 0.0 I (WESTBOUND I ~ I I I I Thru 2 I 3335 296 10 ' I 3355 93 3 I 12 0.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 43 0' I 0 9 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1615 2 0 I 1675 2 3* I 12 D.0 0.0 I iCU (X) = 68 LEVEL OF SERVICE = B 71 C Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT t------------ --------------------------- ----------------- ---------- ------- ------- ------ -----------------~ (DATE: Nov-91 I I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I I I Margarita Rd . & Rancho California Rd. I (Scenario: I Total Future Volumes With Project I I ID: 7154 t__________________ ~___-__--__-- .--- -.-------.-__~-_-_---__ ________-________ __~____--- ------- ------- -_____ _________________t I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conflicting) I (Capacity Volume V/C Rapacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade P arking Bus Pedest riansl I Movements Lanes) (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (%) (Nm) (Nb) I I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 160 5 I 3366 116 3' I 72 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 ) 1251 5 0 I 1251 738 7' I 8 1.0" 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 257 76 * I 1599 128 8 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I Thru 2 I 3366 99 3* I 3366 112 3 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn rrr 1 I 1245 19 0' I 1245 35 0 I 8 2.0 0.0 O I ,,, ~~~ Left Turn 1 I 1607 25 2 I 1607 70 4 ' I 12 1.0 0.0 I ASTBOUND I Thru 2 I 3366 152 5 I 3366 541 16 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Righ[ Turn 1 I 1245 161 0 I 7245 235 0' I 8 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 18 3 * I 1599 74 5 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (WESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 584 77 * I 3366 264 8 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1251 99 0' I 7257 59 0 I 8 1.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1607 76 5 I 7607 12 3 ' ( 12 1.0 0.0 I ICU (X) = 39 LEVEL OF SERVICE = A 34 A Notes: 1. 'Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume Where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITN ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTI LI ZAT IDATE: Nov-91 I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I Ynez Rd. 8 Rancho California Rd. (Scenario: Total future Volumes With Project I t-----------------------------------------------------. I I I I I I ID: 1186 I I AM Peak Nour _ I PM Peek Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lene Heavy Conf lictingl I (Capacity Volume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade P arking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements Lanes) Cvphg) I (vphg) I I (ft) I (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I i I INORT HBOUND I I I I I I Thru 3 I 4853 1143 26 * I 4873 374 8 I 11 1.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 118 0' I 0 27 0 I 0 1.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 2 I 3019 306 10 I 3019 181 6 • I 11 1.0 0.0 I ISWTHBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3383 466 14 I 3383 858 25 ' I 12 1.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1330 391 0 I 1330 737 6' I 10 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 78 3 * I 3004 135 4 I 11 2.0 0.0 I ~ (EASTBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 623 19 I 3366 1237 37 • I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1431 135 0 I 1431 366 0* I 12 1.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 770 26 • I 3004 742 25 I 11 2.0 0.0 I (WESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 3 I 4854 1294 28 " I 4799 745 18 I 11 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 81 0* I 0 115 0 I 0 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1559 23 1 I 1559 132 8 • I 11 1.0 0.0 I ~ -F - - -~ - - f - - -} ICU (X) = 83 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ Noes: 1. • Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent min(mm green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement D 82 D WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT (DATE: Nov-91 (LOCATION: (scenario: I I i ____-~ ID: 1186 ._____________ _____~ ___--__-_ -_----_____-------_ _~______-_- -_--___--- ---_____ -*_-_____ -..---- ---_____ __-__ _----- ---________t I I AM Peak Hour I PN Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I ~ I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl Capacity Volume V/C (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Crade Pa rking Bus Pedest rians~ Movements Lanesl (vphg) ~ (vphg) ~ I ~ (f t) I (XHY) (X) (Nm) (Nb) ( ~ ~ INORTHBWND I I I I I Thru 3 I 4863 1277 27 ' I 4825 217 5 ~ 11 1.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 707 0* ~ 0 32 0 I 0 1.0 0.0 O I Left Turn 2 I 3019 460 15 I 3019 184 6 ' I 11 1.0 0.0 I SOUTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3383 361 11 ~ 3383 7112 33 ' I 12 1.0 0.0 0 0 Right Turn 1 I 1330 310 0 _I 7330 694 0 * ~ 10 2.0 0.0 0 I Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 69 3 ' ~ 3004 113 4 ~ I 11 2.0 0.0 I EASTBOUND ~ I Thru 2 I 3366 623 19 I 3366 1126 33 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn 1 ~ 1437 129 0 ~ 1431 390 0 ~ 12 1.0 0.0 0 O I Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 970 32 * I 3004 826 27 * I 11 2.0 0.0 (WESTBOUND Thru 3,~ 4861 1419 31 ' I 4810 767 78 * I 11 2.0 0.0 0 0 I Right Turn O I 0 - 75 0* I 0 104 0* I 0 2.0 0.0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1559 27 2 ~ 1559 154 10 I 11 1.0 0.0 ICU (X) = 93 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ E 85 D Notes: 1. ' Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement N/S Street 8 E/W Street Ynez Rd. & Rancho California Rd. Future Volunes W/0 Project WI LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTIL22AT DATE: Nov-91 LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/N Street NB I-15 Ramps 8 Rancho California Rd. (Scenario: Total Future Volumes Nith Project lN1T?lLUT LOCP /,'~ryp Movements ~NORT HBOUND Thru Right Turn Left Turn (SOUTHBOUND Thru Right Turn Left Turn EASTBOUND Thru Right Turn Left Turn ~NESTBOUND Thru Right Turn Left Turn ID: 2084 AM Peak Hour ~Capatity Lanes (vphg) 0~ 0 1 ~ 1445 1 ~ 1599 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 2 ~ 336E 0 ~ C 1 ~ 1615 3 ~ 5049 1 ~ 733C 0 ~ C PM Peak Xour Volume V/C Capacity Volume V/C (vphg) 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 687 48 ~ 1445 1017 70 978 61 ' ~ 1599 253 ;Ea16 ~* 0 0' ~ 0 0 0 0 0* ~ 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0' 841 25 ~ 3366 1328 39 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 116 7 * ~ 1615 487 30 ' 1365 27 ' ~ 5049 1239 25 625 20 ~ 1330 424 7 0 0 I 0 0 0 ICU (X) LEVEL OF SERVICE 95 E _____________________________t t____________________________________________+ Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Conf licting~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) - 0 2.0 0.0 0 0 12 0.0 0.0 0 12 2.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 2.0 0.0 0 12 0.0 0.0 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 10 2.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 71 L~.icuc ~: LI ~_Ly ~E ~~/GfIF_/~' ~~E 7o C R~Gf/TTu'ii_ Znl~vHti'E~ Lrf-Ri Lq.~/C Noes: t. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Xour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour S. Three percent mininun green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION t_________________________________________________________________________________ DATE: September 7991 N/S Street 8 E/W Street LOCATION: Ynez Rd. 8 Winchester Rd. ~SCenari o: Future Volumes Without Project 8 With Additional Improvements ID: ~ ~ AN Peak Hour Capacity Movements Lanes Cvphg) NORTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 Right Turn 1 ~ 1388 Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 SOUTHBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 Right Turn 1 ~ 1245 Left Turn 1 ~ 1599 ASTBOUND Thru 3 ~ 5049 Right Turn 1 ~ 1431 Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 WESTBOUND Thru 4 ~ 6674 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 Left Turn 2 ~ 3004 Volume 1192 -______--t__________________________ __+--_-__-----______-____-_--- PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy V/C ~Capac ity Volume V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking (vphg) ~ (f t) (XHV) (X) (Nm) 377 11 ~ 3366 829 25 ~ 12 2.0 0,0 0 60 0 ~ 1388 135 0 ~ 17 2.0 0.0 841 28 ' ~ 3004 852 28 * ~ 11 2.0 0.0 869 26 * ~ 3366 679 20 * ~ 72 2.0 0.0 0 97 0 * ~ 1245 257 0 ' ~ 8 2.0 0.0 140 9 ~ 1599 128 8 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 1904 38 ' ~ 5049 1579 31 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 804 0 * ~ 1431 875 2 * ~ 12 2.0 0.0 281 9 ~ 3004 157 5 ~ 11 2.0 0.0 1600 25 ~ 6554 1691 31 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 98 0 ~ 0 361 0 ~ 0 2.0 0.0 145 5 * ~ 3004 123 4 ' ~ 11 2.0 0.0 ICU (X) _ LEVEL OF SERVICE _ 97 E 85 D Noes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Nunber of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimm green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement Conf licting~ Bus Pedestrians <N6> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 I NTERSECTIDN CAPACITY UTILIZATION (DATE: September 1991 I I N/S Street 8 E/U Street I (LOCATION: Jefferson Ave. 8 Winchester Rd. I (Scenario: Future Volumes Yithou[ Project 8 With Additional Improvements I I I ]D: 1252 I I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Nour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl I ICapac ity Volume V/C ICapac ity Volume V/C I Nidth Veh. Grade Pa rking Bus Pedest riansl I Movements Lanesl (vphg) I (vphg) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I INORTHBIXIND I I I I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 323 10 I 3366 654 19 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I 1245 192 0 I 1245 455 5* I 8 2.0 0.0 O I I Lett Turn 1 I 1599 346 22 ' I 1599 30 2 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I Thru 2 I 3225 7856 63 * I 3239 542 18 I 11 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 166 0' I 0 31 0 I 0 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 208 7 I 3004 986 33 * I 11 2.0 0.0 I IEASTBWND I Thru 3 I 5049 755 3 I 5049 807 16 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1330 41 0 I 1330 342 8' I 10 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 14 3 * I 1599 181 11 I 12 2.0 0.0 I INESi80UND I I I I I Thru 3 I 4732 1146 53 * I 4766 378 16 I 12 2.0 -4.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 1351 0' I 0 374 0 I 0 2.0 -4.0 O I I left Turn 2 I 3064 519 17 I 3064 378 12 ' I 11 2.0 -4.0 I ICU (X) = 141 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ Notes: 1. ' Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour S. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement F 93 E NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION t______________________________________________________________________________________ IDATE: September 1991 N/S Street & E/N Street ~LOLATION: Ynez Rd. & Yinchester Rd. ~Stenario: future Tratfis Yolumes Nith Project & With Additional Improvements Movements (NORTHBOUND Thru Right Turn Left Turn SOUTHBOUND Thru Right Turn Left Turn ASTBOUND Thru Right Turn Left Turn WESTBOUND Thru Right Turn Left Turn ID: AM Peak Hour Capacity Lanes (vphg) 2 ~ 3366 1 ~ 1388 2 ~ 3004 2 ~ 3366 1 ~ 1245 1 ~ 1599 3 ~ 5049 1 ~ 1431 2 I 3004 Volume 625 51 674 695 213 186 1587 714 497 4 ~ 6647 0 ~ 0 2 ~ 3004 1503 139 201 ICU (X) _ LEVEL OF SERVICE _ 1192 PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Conf lict ing~ V/C ~Capaeity Volume V/C I Vidth Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedes trians~ (vphg) ~ (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) 19 ~ 3366 867 26 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~. 1388 167 0 ~ 11 2.0 0.0 p 22 * ~ 3004 767 26 ` ~ 11 2.0 0.0 21 * ~ 3366 795 24 ` ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0` ~ 1245 418 2` ~ 8 2.0 0.0 p 12 ~ 1599 97 6 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 31 ~ 5049 1623 32 ~ 12 2.0 ~ 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 1431 634 0 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 p l 17 * ~ 3004 227 8 * ~ 11 2.0 0.0 25 * ~ 6642 1744 29 ' ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0* ~ 0 171 0* ~ 0 2.0 0.0 p l 7 ~ 3004 134 4 ~ 11 2.0 0.0 85 89 D D Notes: 1. * Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume Nhere there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to Cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTIL12AT10N (DATE: September 1991 I I N/S Street 8 E/W Street I (LOCATION: Jefferson Ave. 8 Winchester Rd. I I I I Scenario: Future Traffic Volumes With Project & With Addit ionaL Improvements I I I ID: 1252 I I AM P eak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-LBD I I I I I Lane Heavy ConfLictingl I ( Capacity Volume V/C Rapacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestriansl I Movements Lanesl (vphg) I (vphg) ` I (f [) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 432 13 I 3366 814 24 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1245 289, ~ 0 I 1245 480 0 * I 8 2.0 0.0 0 ( I Left Turn 1 I 1599 254 16 * I 1599 10 1 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I Thru 2 I 3780 706 27 * I 3233 427 14 I 11 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 148 0* I 0 30 0 I 0 2.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn 2 I 3004 177 6 I 3004 1001 33 * I 11 2.0 0.0 I (EASTBOUND I I I O I I Thru 3 I 5049 132 3 I 5049 823 16 * I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1330 39 0 I 1330 200 0* 110 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 33 3 ' I 1599 172 11 I 12 2.0 0.0 I (WESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 3 I 4756 899 39 ' I 4773 343 14 I 12 2.0 -4.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 935 0* I 0 327 0 I 0 2.0 -4.0 O I I Left Turn 2 I 3064 403 13 I 3064 492 16 * I 11 2.0 -4.0 I ICU (X) =, 85 LEVEL OF SERVICE _ Notes: 1. * Indicates erit ical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Nour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cycle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement D 89 D WI LBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT (DATE: Nov-91 i (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/N Street NB I-15 Ramps 8 Rancho California Rd. (Scenario: Total Future Volumes Nith Project I With EB To NB Loop Ramp iD: 2084 }------------------4- AM Peak Nour I I I ~ (Capacity Volume V/C I I Movements Lenes~ (vphg) I I I I (NORTHBOUND I Thru 0 ~ 0 0 0 I Right Turn 1 I 1445 687 48 I Left Turn 1 I 1599 978 61 ' SOUTHBOUND I I Thru O I 0 0 0' I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0* I Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 I EASTBOUND I Thru 2 I 3366 841 25 Right Turn 1 ~ 1445 itb 0 I I Left Turn O I 0 0 0' I ~NESTBOUND I Thru 3 ~ 5049 1365 27 ' I Right Turn 1 I 1330 625 20 I left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 0 ________________________a I I I I I I t_____________________________________________ (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I Lene Heavy Conf lictingl I Wid[h Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I I I I I 0 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I 12 0.0 0.0 0 I I 12 2.0 0.0 I I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I I 0 0.0 0.0 I I I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 ~ I I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I I I I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I 10 2.0 0.0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I t----'------°--'-- ICU (X) = 88 LEVEL OF SERVICE = D Notes: 1. • Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning vol ones are added to thru volume Nhere there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent mininrm green. to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement NILBUR SNITN ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILI2AT IDATE: Nov-91 I I I ILOCAT ION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I I ~ NB I-15 Ramps 8 Rancho California Rd. I ISCenario: Total Future Volumes Nith Project I I With EB To NB Loop Ramp ~. I ~_______________________________________________________________________________________________________t ID: 2084 I I I PN Peak Hour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lene Heavy Conf lict ingl I I (Capacity Volume V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements Lanes) I (vphg) I I (ft) I (XXV) (X) (Nm) (Nb> I I I (NORTHBOUND I I I I I I Th ru 2 I I 2861 0 44 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Righ[ Turn O I I 0 1017 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Left Turn O I I 0 253 9 I 0 2.0 0.0 I (SOUTHBOUND I I I I I I Th ru O I I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 0 I I Right Turn O I I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 O I I Lef[ Turn O I I 0 0 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 I O IEASTBWND I I I I I Th ru 2 I I 3366 1328 39 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn t I I 1445 487 0* I 12 2.0 0.0 0 O I I Left Turn O I I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I (WESTBOUND I I I I I Th ru 3 I - I 5049 1239 25 I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I~ I 1330 424 7 I 10 2.0 0.0 ~ O I I Left Turn O I I 0 0 0• I 0 0.0 0.0 I :__________________a_--..---__- ..____---_--______~__..---- ---_______ _-.----__ _~____--- ___--- -.-_____ ______ _____ ____________• ICU (X) _ LEVEL OF SERVICE _ 83 D Notes: 1. • Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical Left-turn movement WILBUR SNITN ASSOCIATES O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT ~____________ _____ __________________________________ ________________ _______ __________________ ___________r (DATE: Nov-91 I I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street I I I SB I.15 Ramps & Rancho California Rd. I (Scenario: I Total Fu[ure Volumes With Project I t____________ _______________________________________ ________________ _______ ____________ I _________________~ ID: 2085 y - } - -} - } - - •• -} I I AN Peak Hour I (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conf littingl I (Capacity Vo lume V/C I' I Width Veh. G rade Parking Bus Pedestrians) I Movements I Lanes ) (vphg) I I I (ft) (XHY) (%) (Nm) (Nb) I INORTHBWND I I I I I Thru O I 0 0 0 I I 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I I 0 0.0 0.0 D I I left Turn O I 0 0 0* I I 0 0.0 0.0 I ISOUTHBWND I I I I I Thru 3 I 4292 0 25 * I ~ I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn Left Turn O O I 0 I 0 571 494 0 I 12 I I 0 I 0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 p I ASTBOUND I I I I Thru 3 I 5049 463 9• I I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn 1 I 1344 239 9 I I 10 2.0 0.0 0 O I Left Turn O I 0 0 0 I I 0 0.0 0.0 I (WESTBOUND I I I I I Thru 2 I 3366 1577 47 I I 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 I I Right Turn O I 0 0 0 I I 0 0.0 0.0 p I I Left Turn 1 I 1599 766 48 • I I 12 2.0 0.0 ( ICU (X> 82 LEVEL OF SERVICE = D Notes: 1. • Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent minimum green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn movement WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O O INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZAT (DATE: Nov-91 I (LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/N Street I SB 1-15 Ramps 8 Rancho California Rd. (Scenario: Total Future Volumes Nith Project I ID: 2085 I I I I I I ----------------------------------------t ~__________________~-_----.-----_.-.--________-__t____----------------------- -a----___-_____-_---_------___ __----_--------_~ I I I PM Peak Xour (Type of Area: NON-CBD I I I I I Lane Heavy Conf lictingl I I (Capacity Vol une V/C I Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestri ansl I Movements Lanese ~ (vphR) ~ (ft) (XHV) (X) (Nm) (Nb) I I (NORTHBOUND I Thru O I I 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 I Right Turn O I I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 I Left Turn O I I 0 0 0' I 0 0.0 0.0 ISWTHBWND I I I I Thru O I I 0 0 0' I 0 2.0 0.0 I Right Turn 1 I I 1431 442 31 I 12 2.0 0.0 I Left Turn 2 I I 3097 591 19 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 IEASTBWND I I I I Thru 3 I I 5049 1225 24 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 I Right Turn 1 I I 1344 574 19 I 10 2.0 0.0 I Left Turn O I I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 IwESTBWND I Thru 2 I I 3366 750 22 I 12 2.0 0.0 I Right Turn O I I 0 0 0 I 0 0.0 0.0 Left Turn 1 I I 1599 742 46 ' I 12 2.0 0.0 ICU (X) _ LEVEL OF SERVICE _ 89 D Notes: 1. 'Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes ere added to th ru volume where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent mininiun green to cyle ratio assumed for critical left-turn pavement I I 0 0 I OI I I o I DIO I 0 0 I 0 0 I I I 0 0 I OI I NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES O 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZA7 DATE: Nov-91 LOCATION: N/S Street 8 E/W Street Moraga Rd. 8 Margarita Rd. ~SCenario: Total Future Vol ones With Project ~_______________________________________________________________________________________________________r ID: 2223 AM Peak Hour ~Capecity Vo lume Movements Lanes (vphg) NORTHBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 0 Right Turn 1 ~ 1438 66 Left Turn 1 ~ 1607 351 ISOUIHBOUND Thru 0 ~ 0 0 Right Turn 0-~ 0 0 Lefi Turn 0 I 0 0 EASTBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 158 Right Turn 1 ~ 1344 62 Left Turn 0 ~ 0 0 (WESTBOUND Thru 2 ~ 3366 615 Right Turn 0 ~ 0 0 Left Turn 1 ~ 1607 303 ICU (X) _ LEVEL OF SERVICE _ PM Peak Hour Type of Area: NON-CBD Lane Heavy Conf licting~ Capacity Votume V/C ~ Width Veh. Grade Parking Bus Pedestrians (~.phg) ~ (tt) (XHV) (X) (Nm> (Nb) 0 ~ 0 0 0' ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 1438 275 13 ' ( 12 1.0 0.0 0 22 ' ~ 1607 132 8 ~ 12 1.0 0.0 0* ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 p' ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0* ~ 0 0.0 0.0 5 * ~ 3366 527 16 • ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0' ~ 1344 320 0' ~ 10 1.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 12 0.0 0.0 18 ~ 3366 279 8 ~ 12 2.0 0.0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0.0 0.0 0 19 ' ~ 1607 94 6 * ~ 12 1.0 0.0 V/C 46 35 p A Notes: 1. ~• Indicates critical lane v/c 2. Turning volumes are added to thru volume Where there is no separate turning lane 3. Nm - Number of Maneuvers per Hour 4. Nb - Number of buses per Hour 5. Three percent mininun green to cyle ratio assumed for Critical left-turn pavement WILBUR SMITN ASSOCIATES O O Signal Tarrant ~Iorksheets 0 wear 2000 ]Ply ]Peak ]H[our 9-90 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual iaiees O ~ O O Q M~ li y~ ~~ 7 N W N ~ ~ 01 ~ a m J ~ COQ LL C+ 0 X 1 ~, 0 ~. ~ ~ W Z Q J N r W Q ~ Z W J Q 2 W J Q J O eb w o a N 'a J W W O z ~ J O W N O f z O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 to O N N .- -P~Sb^~~ t~l-1 ~-~-a,aa~vu HdA-HOtlOtlddtl 3Wf110A HOIH 133tl1S klONIW - ~ c5 0 0 0 2 O O O U Q Q Q a ~ a a - o r u O N LL Q r f V. Q C O O = ~ ~ a e h W ~ LL O = LL Q O = a ~ Q ~ °o' ~ ~ ~ 61 ~ u LL. o ° ~ O J F O V.~ F" --T U _ O J F o l U u F ~~ ~' N 2 O i ~ ~ ~ i o 0 N W H O 2 ~ ~ O O 0 1 W Z 1 J I W ~ z O 2 H ~~ 1 Z 1 = Q ' O ~ a ' a i 1 W W Q N O z f O • LL 9-90 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AIVD LIGHTING Traffic Manual ~z-~9es X ~ ~ p.. Q ~. W N m~~ m J ~ Q LL ~ m ~ ~ O~ ~. LL W z Q N ~ W 2 W ~ J W J W Q T J OC G w ¢ o N a °a J W w o Z J ~ O W ¢ r 0 O N A O O trJ O D p O OV M ~ N 4 O ~m 0 0 Q U Q w 7 ~ ~ a p a > ~ ~ J O ~ v w ¢ 2 H ~ (A W ~ ~ O = ~ o = z w ~ a f ~ ¢ O y ¢ J W ~ w ° W o ¢ ~ N w .- Q Z J J a O vl a > W w o Q ~ J a Z J p p rn r- ¢ f° w a F- 3 LL > O O = r o C7 Z J ~ _ ~ ~ Q ¢ p S 1 - v~o 3 a a ~ ~ w ~ a w z a ~'Q ~ ~ a F F ^ H ~ ~ O ~ /O w f ~ ~ ¢ ~ ~ a p O ¢ O z = ~ ~ a > ¢ o 0 ~ F o ~ ~ ~ LL W H O O Z a ~ O O M O O O ~ se~~ ~~ HdA-HOtlONddV 3Wf110A HJIH 133!!1S HONIW X90 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual tzases O - O k - m ~~ O O Z f~ W N Of o J ~ O LL ~ m V ~_ Ci LL W 2 J H w „~ J Q 2 W ~ ¢ Q J O E etl w ¢ O Q N J '~ W Z ~ 1 f O Q N O Q O N i °O o ~ °o °o ° 1n ~ (Y~ M N ~ ~~ y v~Or~L~o~ HdA-HOtlOtlddV 3Wf1lOA HOIH 133H1S !lONIW 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O S a fq W O U O ¢ ~- O a a O°i H O y m LL ° ~ 0 O J ~ ~ F" V ~ I '.. O W 3¢ F N Q 0 o ¢ m ~ 0 0 ° 0 0 v << o ~ - a ~ a . a • w O z 0 0 M 0 9-90 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual tzaees J -~ t•() x ^~ ~~ }- '^ W N ~ ~ m J ~ ' a~~ iL ~/ 0 ° °o °o o °o a ~ V f7 N ~J etUs~,~ HdA-HOtlO!ldd7 3WOl0A H`JIH 133H1S HONIW W 2 J N ~ w „ti z w w J a W ~ 6 r J O r ~ W Q O Z N Q J °~ W w o 2 ~ J O W 6 N O Q N ° 0 O O O O N O = a N w 2 °o a O ti a a Q ~ O m w O O J O OD ~ H O -~ F- ~F OJ ° v~ Y N 'Q O ~ G °m g 0 0 N 0 0 a 0 0 of 0 U w Q ,~ O ~ J a ~ a > ~ ~ J w O 2 2 H N fA 2 Q = O r- Z ~ ~ W 3 ~ O O w w F ~ ~ 111 Z ~ fn J > w w J Z ~ a O O ¢ H Q > 2 ~ H m _Z S W Z Q ~ Q O w J d S Q Q ~ J F- Q !r W O O ~ W ~ ~ J ~ a O O O z a 3 ~ > _ ~ ~ O LL W H O Z O O 9-90 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AMD LIGHTING Traffic Manual tz•t~ _ ~ O ~ ~ ~ O /~ K ~. ~„~ N W N ~ ~ O) ~ m ~ O LL ~•,~ ~~ C+ g v ds.. W 2 J H ~ W Z W ~ J W J ¢ ¢ r J O g ,~ y ¢ w o a N J °~ W W O Z ~ J O W ¢ N O g 6 ' O N ~+~ p O O O p WT V (h N .- O .~ ~a+u~~ ~euo,~ad HdA-HOtlOtlddtl 3Wf1lOA HOIH 133H1S klONIW 0 0 v 0 0 0 0 N O O 2 a N W O = O U o ¢ O a a a °' o C1 LL o U O '~ c9 ¢ LO ~~ 0 0 n J2 /~SQ~ O g O O I W z Q 1 J ~ w i Z O S H Z 1 = U Q i ¢ a a i I W W Q O O Z ¢ Q O • LL O O 7 O O O O 9-90 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual 92-9986 u ~c F- W N 01 m J O Q LL ~ m V 0 ~. O O ~ ;t W Z Q J w z w y~ ~ Z W µJ J Q ¢ -.a O f ~ ¢ w O Z N Q J '8 W W O Z J ~ ¢ ~ W ¢ N O ¢ O - N O O O O 7 (7 N ~ /~~n7n/b4 '~tlv!'7b/YOi93'j/ /''I HdA-HOtlOtjddtl 3Wf110A HOIH 133!!1S HONIW - J~ 0 0 K O O M O O N O O S a N W o U o O a a a rn ~O m LL ~~ J ~ ~-'`~ Q /~F V ,i ~F o ~w O W 1~ ~ ¢ N ¢ F O O Q O ~ O O N ~ W Z ~ J ~ W i Z H i ~ 1 ? 1 = Q a a 1 F ~ W - ~ ¢ O Z - Q Q O - LL O O O O (7 O O O O r x i ~~p TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual izasas O ~ O Q W N ~ a' ~ = Q m ,J ~ COQ LL ~ (1] ~~ Sv 0 [~I vJ ~ O O O p V t7 N O O ~ ~.3dy ~':(b ~l HdA-HOtlO!lddtl 3W(1lOA HOIFI 133tl1S HONIW * ~ W Z J M ~ W Z W py w J w J ¢ .- O ~ ~ N o N J a8 W W O z J ~ O W Q N 0 f O N 0 0 c 2 U Q w Q ~ a O a ~ N, o J O Y Q S ~ F' N In W 2 = O F- Z w a ~ ~ G N ~ O J O = W O Q ~ ~ W Q Z c O ~ ~ a > w w Q Q J Z O J C ~ rn ~ ~ _ ~ ~ 3 o = o c~ O ~ , F ~ Z O ~ w O 0 3 < U a ~ ~ ~ ~ w a w z a r ~ ~ G F J ~H y W W Q Q W N O O w ~ N 00 ¢ Ja ¢ ¢ co ~ a O O O Z x 3 ~ > ~ o 0 ~ F ¢ ~ ~ > O LL W H O O Z O O O (7 O 9-90 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual oases - ~., ~ ~ h Q Fx f.``~ `~h W ~~ m J ~ ~ O LL ~ LO v ~. Q V.. W Z Q J N ~ W ~ J Z 2 w ~ a J O ve W 6 O Z N Q J °a W W ~ z J ~ O 6 N O f 6 0 N 0 0 c O O 0 0 N U ~ Q O a ~ a • I O O O O O N ~ M N ~ - /~er~ ~U~los HdA-HOtlOtlddV 3Wf1~0A HOIH 133N1S HONIW O O 2 a N W o U O Q O a a rn ~O m ~LL O ~ ~ O J y~ ccp o ~pw o ~w N Q 0 O O O O O 1 w Z ~ J ~ w i Z O _H 7 Z ~_ U Q ~ O a a i ~ W W Q a ~ Z i Q O ~ LL W H O Z O O p O O O O 9-90 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traftic Manual u-~sas O ~ •--- ~. x ~~ O r ~~ W N m J ~ ~O~ LL ~ Ln `.. O 0 o 0 O W 2 a J N r W yt 2 W W W J J O g ,a H w o a N J °~ W a ~ J O w 2 N 0 2 O N 0 0 0 °o e/ f~ .~/N an Y ~~I V HdA-HOtlOtlddtl 3Wf110A HOIH 133tl1S tlONIW 0 p O Q W ~ ¢ a J ~ a ~ ~ J N Q N (n W Q ~ N O = ~ W Q W ~ O ~ W O _ a W _ o f ~ ui z a O ~ ~ °' > ~ z o a ~ a p rn ~ ~ = O --d °~ w a F ~ DL O = ~ c7 p J r ~ Z `A N~ w Z U -r~ 3 a a o Lr ~ w a o caw w z a O ,{ill i r Q J Q NY ¢ ¢ ~ W CO N Q W ~O f y ~ Q a O O g p z 2 ~ ~ > ~ o 0 ,n ~ ~O ~ ~ 3 W W 0 o z 00 ~ 0 0 0 9-90 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual u•~ees X ~ ~ ~y 7 ~ ldJ n~~ o J ~ LL 1~ m ~../ v 0 g 0 i W 2 J _N W y. Q J = W W J Q 6 ~ J g ~ N O N Q J ~ W a ~ J S W 0 N s 0 N ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ ar l'7 N N ~U~~a~, ~eaau~ HdA-HOtlOtlddtl 3Wfri0A HOIH 133tl1S tlONIW .___. S 0 0 0 7 V 7 = _ a N W ~ _ U ~ Q r Q a a o = ~ ~ ~ `m LL O O J ~ R{a m + f ~ I 2~ o ~ N ~¢ O O ~ 0 f 0 0 0 0 v U W O ~ J a O a ~ ~ ~ J 2 O= H ~ fn W Q O = Z_ ~ ~ W a 3 ~ ~ ~ W W F ~ ~ LLI Z J Q Q Q (n J w J Z ~ a O O Q F > 3 2 ~ F m Z >w z > Q O ~ w a w z a x a ~' -' r ~ O w ~ h J ~ a O O O z x 3 f ~ ~ a ,n ~ ¢O .- 3 w ui O z 0 0 ro 0 O O O 9-90 TRAFFIC SIG INALS AIVD LIGHTING Traffic Manual un9es O ~ ~ x ~ ~ F- ~. I~w~ W "~M1 O N ~ ~^ Oi ~~ oJ~ LL ~ GI ~ ~ ... C! g 0 O W 2 Q J N ~ W ~ J W Z J 2 J Q r O ~ ,y N 6 W o a N J °ti W W O 2 J g O W N O g O N 1 O ~ ~ ~ N ~ N P~ d°~sal~~ ~~`'`''~J HdA-HOVOHddV 3Wf1lOA HJIH 133H1S tlONIW 0 0 v 0 0 M 0 0 N O = a H W O Q O Q a a a °' o ¢1 LL O O J m ~ F -j- o ~I CZ+~- 0 o ~¢ ~jN ~¢ O ~ f 0 0 1 W Z Q ~ J ~ w ;Z ~o 2 H > C7 1 = Q i ~ a a i J W W H N O z g O LL O O V O O (7 O 9-90 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual 92-1986 X' ~ ~ I- Q y~ 7 N W N ~ Q' Of ~~ m J ~ ~ O LL ~ m C1 ~ 2 ~. W Z Q J N •' W Z W ~ J W Q Z W J J Q r Q ~ ~ N w O Q N °~ J W w o Z ~ J 0 W N O f O N l O e (7 N V1 O - f4" O O- 2 O () Q O .~- 2 a a o f w o w N Q F- a_ ~ a ~ ~ Q H ~ W 2 ~ o O U w ~ ~ a J O a > Q 0 m 0 J ¢1 W W ~ ~~ _ O l?d^ ~-.. ~ ~ W O F X O F~ J w = ~ v¢ t - ` a 6 O w ~ ii a a x a ~ o o W 1- O Z ~ ~ O O (") O ~w Z J ~ w i Z - ~ - H 3 Z U i C ~ ¢ ~ a ~ F¢F ~ W Q '> ~ C ~ ~ o ~ z '> g r o > LL O O HdA-HOVOtlddV 3WfIl0A HJIH 133tl1S tlONIW 9-10 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual tzasas O O O Iy"' L Q a W n ~~ m ~ Q m J ~ COQ LL ~ O7 v O= LL X I ~ ~ w Z a N ~ w ,~ Q Z W J Q Z w J J Q ~- O ~ ap N w o a N J a}J W O w a ~ J ~ w O Q N 0 s Q O N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O ~ V <7 N ~ . T s 0 0 c HdA-HOtlOHddtl 3Wf1lOA HJIH 133tl1S 1lONIW x U W a ~ a > F. O ° o ~- ~ m w = O w ~ a f ~ a ~ H ¢ J = LL W O Q ~ ~ W 2 Z J ~ O ~ a > w w Q 0 J Z o ~ a ~ O F.• O 4 = a ~ w . O ¢ > ~ = o /I t -~ F- cp Z O w ~ w ~ 0 3 z a 0 ~ ~1 ~~ z w a O ;~ W ~ J Q ~ ^ ~ F / , 1 ~" H Q ~ W 6 ~ O Q O ... w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f a ~ O O z a 3 ~ > a o 0 N F ~' 3 O ~ w iii 0 o z ov 0 0 ro 0 gyp TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual ~iasas N- _ ~ x ~ ~ ~ ~~ W r ~~ W o J ~ww ~ O K LL ~ m ~~. g .... r~ W Z Q J W °ti z w ~ J W Q 6 J O ~ yy N o a N J 'a W O Z J 0 Q N g s O N ~ ~ ~ N ~ 0 0 v O O 0 0 N x U Q 2 a a O = a N W S o U O Q 0 a a a 0 ~ O m LL ~ J o Q ¢7 1-- /1- o / e F N 6 0 O O 0 0 v LLJ z J w z O 2 F- 3 C7 _Z 2 Q a a a W W Q I 0 I Z_ Q I Q O LL ui 0 z 0 0 r~ O O O HdA-HOtlOtlddtl 3Wnl0A HOIH 133tl1S !lONIW 9-10 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AiVD LIGHTING Traffic Manual u•tsac O `~ X ~ ~ O O Q Q W N ^~ Q1 ~/ Q m J ~ O Q LL ~ 01 ~~ _ ... a 0 w W z Q J N ~- W ~ J W J Z J r O y7 ~' Q W o a N J °ti W W ~ z J ~ 0 W 6 N O f 0 N I p O O O p o T o o O ~ V .~.y,,,,CJ, N C~ -a~~ ~~ HdA-HOVOHddV 3Wf1lOA HJIH 133d1S HONIW 0 0 v 0 0 0 0 N 2 O a ~ a a O O S a N W O Q O a a a rn ~ O fL LL O J ~ ~a o ~w o s 0 o 0 0 O O O i W Z i J ~ W i Z O 1 1 ? I = U ~ O i a a ,W W s~ :~ .~ >¢ 0 > z g O • LL W F O Z O O (~ O 9-10 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual ~zasac t{ ?' K - ry ~ ~ o 0 1~ Q •~ ''^^ V/ W a N ~ (~ m J ~ =OQ LL ~^^ m ~..I Z LL w z J N '- W 2 W ~ J Q W z W J J ¢ r O ~ N ¢ w o N J °~ W W O z J ~ 0 W ¢ N O N v ~j M N °o (/ HdA-HOtlOHddtl 3Wf110A HJIH 133tl1S !lONIW x ~ U Q W 7 7 ¢ d ~ d ~ F- o J ~ W O u ¢ _ F- ~ y w ¢ ~ O = ~ ~ z w a ~ r i Q O ¢ J W ~ LL W = = W O Q ~ N W < Z J d O ~ d > W w Q O J Z O O J d O i c ' F- O ¢ O ~ = _ t- 3. ~ W ¢ O = O O O J F O Z ~ ~~" W O U ~ 3 Q Q ~ I O - ~ r- J w z a O W = J 4 1~ 6 F- ~ . r m ¢ ¢ w ¢ ~ O ~ O w f O ~ f J d ~ ~ d O O ¢ O z S ~ ~ j ~ Q O O N F O ~' ~ 3 w w r O o z ° v ~ 0 0 c7 0 O O O 9-10 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AIVD LIGHTING Trattic Manual 12-9986 O ' \ O H a W N Ql m J ~ COQ W ~ m ~ ~ ~. 0 t9 O ~ N J O O O O V (7 N ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ' HdA-HOVOtlddV 3Wf1~0A HOIH 133tl1S tlONIW 4 ~ w Z a J w ,a J Z W J w Q ¢ J ~ M w ¢ O Q N J °b W W O z f J 0 w ¢ N O f O N -_ O O v 2 Q O ~ O ~ O ' ~ - a S a O I~i O N LL f v. C Oo a a 7 I ~ w C °o CU LL u O ~ Q O v ¢a ~ 2 < C rn \ O ] m ~ O . w O o ~ m V J ~V a F ~ r - O I ~ o ~ w ~ o ~ ~ f 1- tq < ¢ O u O O ~ [ C O O i W H O O Z ~ ~ O O M O W Z - J J i Z - O - F- 3 ~ ~ ~ _ U C Q O ~ a [ ¢ J F- ~ W Q > ~ O Z C Q _ CL > ~ > LL 9-90 TRAFFIC SIGRIALS AIVD LIGHTIING Traffic Manual oases X ~ ~ r ~. ~. ldl N ~ d' m LL ~(~ ~. ~' g v LL ,,~ V" w z a J 4f ~ W W J W J Q .- J O g ,ti N w o a N J ~ W W Q 2 ~ J O W K N G O N ~ O (7 N ~ a~ IJ -~ O~ ~.~ c~.L/ HdA-HOVOtlddV 3Wf1lOA HJIH 133tl1S tlONIW ^~ `X 0 0 0 o a o ~ a a a O LL O LL N [( r v a C ~ =a ~ ~ d H W ~ LL LL O Q O a C ~ < c ~ ~ .o ~ m ~ ~ LL o ° ~ O ~ J F F ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ W ~ o wQ i M ~• Q 0 t t0 ~ O O i W 0 2 o v ~ 0 0 O W Z w z O H Z_ 2 Q (] a a 2 Z_ Q O O O 9-90 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual 72-9986 O X (~ ~ ~ O O O W N O! = a m J ~ 7 Q LL ~ m ~ ~ 0 2v LL ~ N .9' (~ O w Z Q J N r W Z W ~ ~ < Z w ~ a 6 .- '-a O ,y •- 6 W O d N ~ J W W O z J ~ ~ O W Q N O f O N O O O O 7 (7 N ~ ,n~ uoSJd~~~'~ HdA-HOtlOHddtl 3Wf1lOA HOIH 133H1S NONIW Q 2 ooj U O a e W ~ J ~ > O LL O N LL Q F v C O O = 2 ~ a a N W R LL O 2 V u O O _ i G a a ~ rn O ~ m ~ LL O ~ 7 O ~ J F + ~ ~ O ~" u o ~~ F N ~} ~ < Q O i ~ ~ ~ t o 0 ~ 1 W . Z J ~ W i Z O 2 f- (3 _Z ~ _ . U O ~ a a i Q N O > z a O ~ LL W F O o Z a ~ O O M 0 9-90 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AMD LIGHTING Traffic Manual ~z•~ses O a ~ X •~ N ~ ~ Ol m J O LL ~•~ v O t O `( I N V W 2 Q J w z w ,~ ~ w W ¢ J z J Q ~ O as Q W O Q N J ~ W W O Z J g O W Q N O 6 O N O O O O O M N ~ 1'?I ~~~~/ f e'sa(,~ HdA-HOVOtlddV 3WnlOA HJIH 133tl1S tlONIW 0 0 v 0 0 m ,~ o 0 N O O 2 a w 2 o U O a0 a a rn ~ O 0] CO O O{ J O v Q ~ F .O ~~ O Q W o w ~ ~~ fn Q O O Q ~ f O O W Z J w Z O S H C7 Z 2 Q O 2 n. a w W O ¢° O Z_ Q O LL O O O O O c7 O O O 9-90 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual izaeas O . ~ x _ ~+- ~~ o 0 ~/ O r '^ w W "~ N o J ~ O ~ ~In 7 O Z v I 1 ~ y~- 1 1 W Z Q J H .- W 2 W ~ J w Q J w Z J Q r ~ ~ 6 W O N J °D W w O 2 J ~ Q W 6 N x 0 N ~ '7 (7 N ~ HdA-HOVOtlddV 3Wf110A HOIH 133tl1S tlONIW o o a ~ Q n Q a o O N u LL Q F U Q O O S a ~ ' > a ° N w = Q ~ u o .- a a C ; °' a ~ o m C ~ ~ O LL O ~ r ~ O ~ "a a -{" O F c O I ~ o v_ ~ ~ - ~ ¢ h ~'~ i °o 6 O ~ g i o 0 N ~ W f O Z ~ ~ O O (~ O i W Z 1 J I i Z 2 ~_ r ~ 1 Z I = Q 1 O ~ a a i ~ W 1 i O > z g O • LL