The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPC RES 4071RESOLUTION N0.4071 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPTING THE FINAL MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 07-001, ZONE CHANGE 07-002, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 07-011 AND DESIGN REVIEW 07-02, A PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP A 201- UNIT ASSISTED LIVING/CONGREGATE CARE FACILITY AGE RESTRICTED TO 62 YEARS OR OLDER AT 13841 RED HILL AVENUE The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application has been submitted by American Senior Living Development, LLC to change the General Plan land use designation from Public and Institutional to Planned Community Commercial/Business, change the zoning designation from Public and Institutional (P&I) to Central .Commercial (C-2), demolish an existing church building, and construct an age-restricted (62 years or older) assisted living/congregate care facility. The project site is a 2.882 acres lot located at 13841 Red Hill Avenue; B. That the requested general plan amendment, zone change, conditional use permit, and design review are considered a "project" by the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Pub. Resources Code §21000 et. seq.); C. That City staff prepared an Initial Study to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with General Plan Amendment 07-001, Zone Change 07-002, Conditional Use Permit 07-011, and Design Review 07-02 that concluded, with mitigation measures, potential significant impacts can be reduced to a level of insignificance and a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared; D. That a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was published and the Negative Declaration and Initial Study were made available fora 20-day public review and comment period from October 4, 2007, to October 23, 2007, in compliance with Sections 15072 and 15105 of the State CEQA Guidelines; E. That the City Council is the final authority for the project and will consider the MND prior to approval of the proposed general plan amendment and zone change applications; Resolution No. 4071 Page 2 F. The Planning Commission considered the Initial Study and the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Exhibit A) and finds it sufficient for the proposed Zone Change 07-002, Conditional Use Permit 07-011 Tentative Tract Map 17096, and Design Review 07-02. II. The Planning Commission hereby adopts Final Mitigated Negative Declaration attached hereto as Exhibit A and Mitigation Monitoring Report attached hereto as Exhibit B for General Plan Amendment 07-001, Zone Change 07-002, Conditional Use Permit 07-011, and Design Review 07- 02 for the construction of an age-restricted (62 years or older) assisted living/congregate care facility at 13841 Red Hill Avenue. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 13th day of November, 2007. JO IELSEN Chairperson ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 4071 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 13t" day of November, 2007. ~--/~f~~~ ~~i~~~ ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary E E ~. I1~TITIAL STUDY A. i BACKGROUND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 Project Title: General Plan Amendment 07-001 Zone Change 07-002 Conditional Use Permit 07-011 Design Review 07-012 Monarch Village -Tustin . Lead Agency: Lead Agency Contact Person: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California 92780 Justine Wilkom Phone: (714) 573-3115 p~j~ Location: 13841 Redhill Avenue Project Sponsor's American Senior Living Development, LLC Name and Address: 1740 E. Garry, Suite 104 Samoa Ana, CA 92705 General Plan Designation: Existing: Public and Institutional (PdtI) Proposed: Planned CommerciaUBusiness Zoning Designation: Existing -Public and Institutional (PBcT) Proposed -Central Commercial (C-2) . Project Description: A request by American Senior Living Developme~, LLC to change the General Plan land use designation from Public and Institutional to Planned Community CommercialBusiness, change the zoning designation from Public and Institutional (P&n to Central Commercial (C-2), demolish an existing church building, and construct an age-restricted (62 years or older) assisted/independent living. - Surrounding Uses: North: Office Use (C-1) and Multifamily Residential (R-3 2200) East: Redhill Avenue and Commercial Shopping Center (100 C1 10000) South: Commercial Uses (C-2) West: Tustin High School (PBr~ _ Other public agencies whose approval is required: ® Orange County Fire Authority ^ City of Irvine ^ Orange County Heahh Care Agency ^ City of Santa Ana ~] South Coast Air Quality Management ^ Orange County District ~ EMA ^ Other B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist in Section D below. ^Land Use and Planning ^Population and Housing ^Geological Problems ^Water [~~ Q~ri ^Transportation & Circulation ^Biological Resources ^Energy and Mineral Resources C. DETERMINATION: ^Hazards ^Noise ^Public Services ^Utilities and Service Systems ^Aesthetics ^Cultural Resources ^Recreation ^Mandatory Findings of Significance On the basis of this initial evaluation: ^ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ® I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ^ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and ENVIRONMENTAL IlvIPACT REPORT is required. ^ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately .analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IlvIPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ^ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed pro~eet. ^ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions o mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Preparers Justina Willkom _ Title Senior Planner Date ~~~ ~f f Q 7 Elizabeth A. Binsack, Community Development Duector the ro•ect: i AESTAETICS -Would p 1 a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenrc resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the areal lI AGRICULTiJRE RES4 TRCES' In determining whether impacts to agncultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland- Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Uni flue Farmland, or Farmland s of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps piep~d pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring _ grain of the California Resources Agency, to nom cultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment; which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? ~. AIR nU~,~'y; Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district maybe relied upon to make the following determinations- Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air q„atity plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contnbute substantiaily to an existing or projected air quahty violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of and criteria pollutant for which the project ngion is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air € quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed } :quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ~icentrations7 e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact o a o ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ~ ^ ® ^ p ~ ~ o~ o o ^ ^ o ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ® ^ a ^ ® o ^ ® ^ IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: -Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian.habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological intemiption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: -Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI GEOLOGY AND SOILS: -Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Less Than Significant Potentially With Less. Than Sign cant Mitigation Sign cant Im act Inco oration Im act No Im ^ ^ ^ ® . ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ o ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ ~ D ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18.1-B of the Uniform Building Code (2001), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of ' septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where ers are not available for the disposal of waste water? ~, HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a ublic airport or public use airport, would the project result in fety hazard for people residing or working in the project .f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would tbe project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Less Than Sign~ant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Sign~nt Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ ~~ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ D ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation Pte? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: -Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contnbute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoffl f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? k) Potentially impact stormwater runoff from construction activities? Less Than Sign cant Potentially With Less Than Sign cant Mitigation Significant Im act Inco oration Im act No Im ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ®,. ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ E o a ® a ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ® ^ 1) Potentially impact stormwater runoff from post- construction activities? m) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? n) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater to affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters? o) Create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff to cause , environmental harm? p) Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? IX LAND USE AND PLAi.'NING -Would the project: ~) Physically divide an established community? Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or } lation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project luding, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X MINERAL RESOURCES -Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and tbe residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land-use plan? XI. NO - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or poise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? f Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ndborne vibration or groundborne rroise levels? Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ ® ^ D ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ r ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ^ ~. ^ c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excess noise levels? XII POPULATION AND ROUSING -Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X_7II PUBLIC SERVICF„S a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered govenvnental facilities, need for new or physically altered goven~mental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? Less Than Sign scant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Im ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ o ~ ^ o ^ ~r- o ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ~,. .RECREATION - k- - a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occw or be accelerated?. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV TRA HSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project: a) Cause. an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. resuh in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results 'in substantial safety risks? Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? fj Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? ,) Require or result in the construction of new storm water I irainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the struction of which could cause significant environmental ~cts? Less Than Sign cant Potentially With Less Than Sign cant Mitigation Sign cant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ ^ ~ ® ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve-the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill wi'b sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistoryrl b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the. effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have enviromnental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 51cddJUSTiNAlwnaw pf~1GPA10PA 07-001. ZC 07.007. CUP 0701 i. DR 07-0I2U~o~rb V®~{e- ~iri~l ~udf ~bedc lin.dae Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Sign~nt Mitigation Significant Im act Inco oration Im act No Im (~ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ® , ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ ~ ~. ^ 0 ^ D E EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 07-001, ZONE CHANGE 07-002 DESIGN REVIEW 07-012, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 07-011 AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT 13841 REDHII,L AVENUE BACKGROUND The project is a request by American Senior Living Development, LLC to change the General Plan land use designation from Public and Institutional to Planned Community CommerciaUBusiness, change the zoning designation from Public and Institutional (P&I) to Central Commercial (C-2), demolish an existing church building, and construct anage-restricted (62 years or, older) assisted living/congregate care facility. The project site is a 2.882 acres lot located at 13841 Redhill Avenue (west of Redhill Avenue between El Camino Real and San Juan Street) and is currently occupied by the Main Place Church. The proposed project involves a construction of a subterranean parking garage and three story buildings interconnected with breezeways. A ~ total of 201 units consisting of one- and two- bedroom units along with 204 parking spaces will be provided for tenants, employees, and visitors. Of the 204 parking spaces, 171 spaces will be assigned to the units and 33 spaces will be available to employees and guests (30 spaces in the subterranean parking garage and 3 spaces ~ at grade/street level). A pool, spa, outdoor courtyard and community center is also proposed that includes a fitness center, game room, dining room, business center, family conference room, living room, lobby and management offices,. The assisted living/congregate care facility will provide a combination of housing, personalized supportive services, and health care designed to meet the needs of those who need help with daily living as follows: • Three meals a day served in a common dining area • Housekeeping services and personal laundry services • Transportation • Assistance with eating, bathing, dressing, toileting, and walking • Access to heal and medical services • 24-hour security and staff availability • Emergency call systems for each resident's unit • Health promotion and exercise programs • . Medication management • Social and recreational activities To allow for the proposed development, a zone change and general plan amendment to commercial designations would be required. In addition, pursuant to Section 9233.c.(p) of the Tustin City Code, rest homes (the proposed assisted living/congregate care facility has been J determined to be similar to a rest home) are conditionally permitted within the Central Commercial (C-2) zoning districts. Pursuant to the Section 9272 of the Tustin City Code, approval of a Design Review is required for site design and improvement of new structures. Monarch Village Tustin GPA 07-001, ZC 07-002, CUP 07-011, and DR 07-012 Page 2 I. II. TICS AESTHE Items a, & b - No Impact: The subject property is not located on a scenic vista. The property is a 2.882-acre parcel currently developed with a church building and is surrounded by developed parcels. The proposed project would not disturb any trees, rock outcroppings, or historical buildings, and the site is not located on a State scenic highway. Items c & d -Less than Significant Impact: The project site is currently improved with an existing two-story church building that was constructed in 1963. The replacement of the church building with a new three-story assisted living/congregate care facility would change the visual character of the site and its surrounding. The site is surrounded with developed one and two-story commercial, institutional, and multifamily residential uses (a U-Haul parking lot and a carwash facility . to the south, Tustin High School sports field to the west, an office building and two-story apartments to the north, and a commercial shopping center across Redhill Avenue to the east). The project has been designed with both residential and commercial in mind and consistent with the development standards and the landscaping standards for the area. In addition, the project's approval will include a Design Review consideration by the Planning Commission which will ensure that the project does not have negative aesthetics impacts. Consequently, the project's impact would be less than significant. The proposed facility would also generate new light sources with the installation of new exterior lighting for the proposed walkway, landscape areas, patios and/or balconies. However, the new sources of light would not adversely affect day- or night-time views in the area since the number of lights would be compatible with a typical quasi residentiaUcommercial project and would be required to comply with the City's security code standards. In addition, all lights would be required to be arranged so that no direct rays would shine onto adjacent properties. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Section 8103(w)15 Construction Standards for Private Streets, Storm Drain, and On-Site Private Improvements (April 1989) Tustin Security Ordinance AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES i Items a. b & c - No Impact: The project site is currently improved with a church building and is surrounded by other developed residential, commercial and institutional buildings. The proposed project will Monarch Village Tustin GPA 07-001, ZC 07-002, CUP 07-011, and DR 07-012 Page 3 have no impact on any farmland, nor will it conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use ~ or a Williamson Act contract. The proposed project will not result in the conversion of farmland to anon-agricultural use. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Requved Sources: Tustin General Plan Field Inspection Submitted Plans III. AIR QUALITY Items a. b c d & e -Less Than Siunificant Impact: The project will temporarily increase the amount of short-term emissions to the area due to the proposed demolition, grading, and construction activities at the property. Since the site. is relatively .flat, only minor grading will be required. Redevelopment of the site would result in a 201-unit senior assisted living/congregate care facility that is below the thresholds of significance established by Tables 6-2 (operation thresholds) and 6-3 (construction thresholds) of the Air Quality Management District's CEQA Air Quality Handbook. In addition, cumulative construction within the area does not exceed the established AQMD thresholds. Less than significant short-term emissions assoc~at vvi demolition, grading, construction, and operation of the proposed project will comply with the regulations of the South Coast Air Quality Management District and the City of Tustin Grading Manual, which include requirements for dust control. As such, the proposed project will not create a significant impact related to air quality. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing -rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required. Sources: South-Coast Air Quality Management District Rules & Regulations Air Quality Management District's CEQA Air Quality Handbook City of Tustin Grading Manual Project Application rv. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Items a. b c d e& f- No Impact: The project site is currently improved with a church building and surrounded by other developed residential and commercial buildings. The site is not inhabited by any sensitive species of animals and would have no impacts on animal populations, diversity of species, or migratory patterns. No wetlands exist within the project site. No impacts to any unique, rare, or endangered species of plant or animal life identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would occur as a result of this project. Mitigation Measures/Morvtoring Required: None Required Monarch Village Tustin GPA 07-001, ZC 07-002, CUP 07-011, and DR 07-012 Page 4 Sources: Field Inspection Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Items a - No .Impact: The project site is currently improved with a church building built in the 1963 and surrounded by other developed residential and commercial buildings. The property is not located in an area where any cultural or historic resources have been previously identified on the site. Mitigation MeasureslMonitoring Required: None Items b c & d -Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorooration The proposed project involves a redevelopment of an existing church site and is not located in an area with undisturbed land. However, as a standard grading condition of approval, if buried resources are found during grading within the project area, a qualified archaeologist would need to assess the resource and recommend appropriate mitigation. The Native American viewpoint would be considered during this process. With the mitigation measures listed below, potential impacts to archeological resources would be ~.' reduced to less than significant. Mitigation MeasureslMonitoring Required: • If buried resources are found during grading within the project area, a qualified archaeologist would' need to assess the site significance and perform the appropriate mitigation. The Native American viewpoint shall be considered during this process. This could include testing or data recovery. Native American consultation shall also be. initiated during this process. Sources: ' Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan VI. GEOLOGY & SOILS Items a-ii a-iii, b & d -Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project will be located within an area of the City that is known to contain expansive soils which may subject people or structures to strong seismic ground shaking and seismic-related ground failure including liquefaction. However, a soils report is required to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits per the 2001 California Building Code to demonstrate compliance with Chapter 18 which requires proper excavation and fills for buildings, structures, foundations, and retaining structures. Depending upon the site's soils or geological concerns, the applicable Code also requires Monarch Village Tustin GPA 07-001, ZC 07-002, CUP 07-01 1, and DR 07-012 Page 5 appropriate construction techniques be implemented to ensure seismic stability. No x__ _,:, significant impact is anticipated since the project must comply with the 2001 Uniform Building Code related to Chapter 18. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required Sources: Tustin General Plan Tustin Grading Manual 2001 California Building Code Chapter 16 and 18 Items.. a-i a-iv, c, & e - No Impact: The project site is not located within an area identified as a fault zone on the Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map. However, a soils report is required to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits per the 2001 California Building Code to demonstrate compliance with Chapter 18, which requires proper excavation and fills for buildings, structures, foundations, and retaining structures, and appropriate construction techniques to ensure seismic stability in sites depending on their soils or geological concerns. The project will be required to be engineered to withstand unstable soils, possible landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse as they relate to this specific site. Since all new buildings in the City are required to operate on the existing sewer ~ ~ system, the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems will not be necessary. Mitigation MeasureslMonitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required Sources: Tustin General Plan Tustin City Code 2001 California Building Code Chapter 16 and 18 California Seismic Hazard Zone Map, Tustin Quadrangle, January 17, 2001 ~, gAZ,ARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Items a b~ d e f g, and h- No Impact: The proposed project involves the construction of a 201 unit assisted living/congregate care facility. No storage or transport of hazardous materials is anticipated from the . proposed development.. The project would not result in exposure to hazardous substances other than the possibility of household hazardous waste which tenants/clients could properly dispose of at approved County drop-off locations. The proposed project is not anticipated to store or emit hazardous materials which could create a hazard to adjacent properties, schools, or the general public if released into the environment. However, the 4 existing building built in 1963 may contain asbestos and/or lead based paint. Proper removal of these materials will be required during the demolition process. Monarch Village Tustin GPA 07-001, ZC 07-002, CLIP 07-011, and DR 07-012 Page 6 The scope and location of the project has no potential to interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The site is in an urbanized area and has no potential to expose people or structures to a significant risk due to wildland fires. All grading and construction is subject to compliance with all applicable Uniform Building and Fire Codes. As such, the project is not anticipated to result in any significant hazards. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan Approved Fire Master Plan VIII. HYDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY Items a, b £ g, h. i, j. and p - No Impact: The project site is relatively flat, and the proposed project will continue to maintain a relatively flat site with improved site drainage and additional landscaping; A significant amount of stormwater received on-site will percolate into the soil where landscaping is provided and the remaining stormwater will be conveyed through a fossil filter prior to entering a City stonmdrain. City stormwater infrastructure is currently available to accommodate storm water from the project. The applicant must provide a drainage and -- hydrology report to the City and demonstrate that the private storm water drainage system will be able to handle the capacity of any storm water directed into the system. Best Management Practices are required to be implemented during construction to deter water from flowing off-site. Best Management Practices will also be implemented to ensure that, once the project is constructed, storm water leaving the site -will be filtered prior to entering the storm drain. As such, the project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or degrade water quality in the area. The project by nature would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. The project is located within Zone X (areas of 0.2 percent annual chance flood), as mapped on a Flood Insurance Rate Map. Accordingly, the project will be designed and graded with an appropriate drainage system to avoid any potential flood hazards. The project site will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death as a result of the failure of a levee or dam, or by inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Nor would the project increase significant erosion at the project site or surrounding areas. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required. Sources: Field Verification ~y Submitted Plans Tustin City Code 4900 et al Monarch Village Tustin GPA 07-001, ZC 07-002, CUP 07-011, and DR 07-012 Page 7 Federal Flood Insurance Rate Map 06059C0277H, February 18, 2004 Items c d e k l m n& o -Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is relatively flat, and the proposed project will continue to maintain a relatively flat site with improved site drainage, including drive aisles, curbs and gutters, and additional landscaping. With new construction, there is the potential to impact stormwater runoff from construction and post-construction activities with stonmwater pollutants from landscaped areas and trash enclosures. There is also the potential for the discharge of storniwater that could affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters and changes in the flow `velocity or volume of storm water runoff. However, the project proponent will be required to submit a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and the project will be required to comply with the City's Water Quality Ordinance and most recently adopted NPDES permit (Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Boazd (RWQCB) Order R8-2002-0010), thus reducing any potential impacts to a level of insignificance. Together, these regulations minimize water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into local waters. As such, the project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or degrade water quality in the area. Mitigation Measures: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation g under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required Sources: 'Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Section 4900 et al IX. LAND USE PLANNING Items a & c - No Impact: The proposed project would not divide an established community since the project is proposed to have a similar zoning designation as the commercial uses to the south and across Redhill Avenue. In addition, the use as an assisted living/congregate care facility would be compatible to the existing residential uses to the north of the project site. The proposed project is not located in a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. The proposed project .would not conflict with any applicable conservation plan. Item h Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation: The property is designated by the General Plan Land Use Map as Public and Instutional and is currently located within the Public and Institutional (P&)) zoning district. To g redevelop the site with a 201 unit assisted living/congregate care facility, the applicant has requested a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to Planned Community CommerciaUBusiness land use designation and Central Commercial (C-2} District, respectively. If approved, the proposed project would provide a senior facility with urban design that would improve and complement existing structures and the overall vicinity Monarch Village Tustin GPA 07-001, ZC 07-002, CUP 07-011, and DR 07-012 Page 8 consistent with Goa16 of the City's Land Use Element which encourage improvement of urban design in Tustin to ensure development that is both architecturally and functionally compatible, and to create uniquely identifiable neighborhoods, commercial, and business park districts. The project 'as designed is accessible through the City's current street system, and the project also could be accessed through existing transportation and public facilities. Mitigation Measures Required: • Prior to issuance of any permit, approval of a General Plan Amendment to Planned Community Commercial/Business and a Zone Change to Central Commercial (C-2) district shall be obtained." Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan Tustin Zoning Code Tustin Zoning Map X. MINERAL RESOURCES Items a & b - No Impact: The proposed project is not located on a mineral resource recovery site. The construction of a senior facility on a lot which is improved with existing church building will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan XI. NOISE Item a -Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation The project site is located to the west of Redhill Avenue between El Camino Real and San Juan Street. The project site is in close proximity of the Interstate 5 Freeway and is identified in Table N-1 of the Noise Element as an area within the 65 dB to 70 dB Community Equivalent Noise Level (CNEL) contours. Consequently, the project site is exposed to significant traffiic related noise. The City's noise ordinance requires a maximum 45 dB value for interior noise and 65 dB for exterior noise. The City's General Plan recognizes that residents adjacent to major and secondary arterials are typically exposed to a CNEL over 65 dB. Table N-2 of the Tustin Noise Element identifies potential conflicts between the land uses and the noise environment. Per Table N-2, the project site falls within Zone B through Zone C. Zone B requires minor soundproofing while Zone C requires a detailed noise reduction analysis be conducted and needed noise insulation features be included in the project's design. Monarch Village Tustin GPA 07-001, ZC 07-002, CUP 07-0I 1, and DR 07-012 Page 9 An acoustical study was submitted by the project proponent which indicated that the project southeast building line will be exposed with an exterior noise level of 66.5 CNEL (Exhibit 1 -Acoustical Analysis, Monarch Village by Davy and Associates, Inc.). The report recommends certain improvements be made to the building design to reduce the noise level to acceptable level as required by the Building Code and the General Plan Noise Element. These recommendations are included as mitigation measures and will be made as conditions of approval of the project. With the identified mitigation measures, potential noise impact would be reduced to less than significant. Mitigation Measwes/Monitoring Required: Roof ceiling construction shall be roofing on 1/2" plywood. Batt insulation shall be installed in joist spaces. The- ceilings shall be on layer 5/8" gypboard nailed direct. • All exterior walls shall be 2X4 studs 16" o.c. with Batt insulation in the stud spaces. Exterior walls shall be stucco or other approved exterior plaster. Interior walls shall be made with 5/8"gypboard. All other windows and glass doors shall be double glazing. . All southeast facing perimeter windows and glass doors shall be glazed with STC 32 glazing. STC 32 glazing may be provided with either '/." laminated glass or a dual pane assembly with a %" airspace. In either case, the glazing supplier shall be prepared in an independent, accredited testing laboratory in accordance with ASTM E-90. • All entry doors shall be 1-3/4" solid core doors with weather stripping seals on the sides and top. Glazing in entry doors shall not be accepted. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code 4611 et al Tustin General Plan Acoustical Analysis, Monarch Village, Tustin Califonua, by Davy and Associates, Inc., Febnzary 2006) (Exhibit 1) Items_b c & d- Less Than Significant Impact: Although -the grading and construction of the site may result in typical temporary construction noise impacts, the Tustin Noise Ordinance only allows construction activities to occur between the bows of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. The proposed project will not create excessive ground vibrations, nor will it create a permanent increase in the existing ambient noise levels beyond the City's established standards. xi rules and re lotions Mitigation Measures/Monitonng Required: Compliance with a sting gu is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required Sowces: Submitted Plans Monarch Village Tustin GPA 07-001, ZC 07-002, CUP 07-011, and DR 07-012 Page 10 Tustin City Code Section 4611 et al Tustin General Plan Item e & f - No Impact: The site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two (2) miles of a public or private airportJairstrip. The proposed project is three stories in height consistent with the City's maximum height limit and similar to other structures in the vicinity. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan XII. POPULATION & HOUSING Items a, b, and c - No Impact: The proposed project would remove and replace the existing church building with the construction of a 201-unit senior assisted living/congregate caze facility which would not result in significant population growth in the area. The project will not displace substantial numbers of existing housing necessitating the construction or replacement housing elsewhere. In addition, no displacement of substantial numbers if people would occur necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The project will result in the possible elocution of the church congregation to an alternate location. The project applicant has indicated that the church is currently on a month to month lease and the site is anticipated to be vacated at end of 2007. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES Item a-Less Than Si~ificant Impact: The proposed project is in an existing urbanized area where fire and police protection are currently provided. While police patrols to the area maybe needed from time to time to ensure safety, no new additional police protection would be required as a result of the proposed project. The Police Department has recommended measures to reinforce safety and effective patrol the area, which will be included as conditions of approval. The project would utilize existing infrastructure and is not anticipated to increase the need for new streets, public services, or infrastructure. The proposed project is located within the Tustin Unified School District (TUSD). Since the project is intended for seniors over 62 years or older, the project will not cause a t Monarch Village Tustin GPA 07-001, ZC 07-002, CLIP 07-011, and DR 07-012 Page 11 E significant rise in the number of students served by local schools. The project will be subject to the statutory school impact fees per Senate Bi1150. The project is designed with interior recreational facility such as pool, spa, and garden area for the seniors to congregate. In addition, each unit is equipped with private patio or balcony No increased demand in new parks facilities is anticipated as a result of the project. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code XIV. RECREATION Items a & b - No Impact: The project would include a private community pool recreation area to benefit the clientltenant of the project. While the residents of the project may use existing City parks, the increased use of these parks would not be such that substantial deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated, nor does the project propose recreational facilities that would have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Items a and f Less Than Si~ificant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation: A traffic study was submitted and reviewed by the City's Engineering Division (Exhibit 2). The study concluded that the proposed project is expected to generate approximately 406 new vehicle daily trips, which in comparison with the existing development, would be an increase of 56 daily trips. t~ The project has been analyzed for on-site circulation. Due to close proximity of the project site to intersections of Redhill Avenue and San Juan Street, access to the project site will be through one two-way driveway by either a right turn movement for the southbound traffic or a left turn movement for northbound traffic from Redhill Avenue. Exiting traffic will be restricted to right turns only. Thus, impact to traffic along Redhill Avenue and San Juan Street is reduced to less than significant. These on-site circulation restrictions will be included as mitigation measures and conditions of approval of the Pr'oj~• Monarch Village Tustin GPA 07-001, ZC 07-002, CLIP 07-011, and DR 07-012 Page 12 The level of service analysis was also performed for Redhill Avenue and El Camino Real and Redhill Avenue and San Juan Street. The study determined that no significant impact will result from the proposed project and that the level of service will remain the same. A parking study was also conducted at three comparable senior living communities to determine the parking ratio for the facility along with parking occupancy rate. The study found a maximum parking ratio of 0.68 spaces per dwelling unit and the proposed project will provide 1.01 parking ratio. Although it should be noted that of the 204 parking spaces, only 171 spaces or .85 ratio per unit will be, assigned to the units and remaining 33 spaces will be available for guests and employees. A valet service at grade level will also be provided to assist seniors with groceries or shopping bags and delivering their vehicles to the subterranean parking garage. The assigned parking will be allotted by permit process, requiring each tenant to apply for a parking space. As proposed, the parking analysis determined that the project will have an adequate number of parking spaces to accommodate the proposed project. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: • The existing two way left turn lane will remain on Redhill Avenue to allow northbound Redhill Avenue traffic to turn into the facility. Since only a right turn exit is allowed from the facility, a directional median is recommended along with a directional sign (Right Turn Only) at the two way driveway access to restrict the drivers from turning left. =_ • Large semi-trailers and moving vans shall be prohibited from entering the site. Move-in conditions along with other terms and conditions for residency at the complex shall be included in the signed Tenant Agreement. • Count-down pedestrian heads are recommended at the intersection of Redhull and San Juan Street. • The project shall maintain a total of 204 parking spaces with a minimum of 0.85 parking ratio per unit at all times. Any reduction. of on-site parking shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. • If in the future the City determines that parking or traffic problems exist on the site or in the vicinity, the Community Development Director may require that the property owner prepare an analysis and bear all associated costs. If the study indicates that there is a parking or traffic impact, the applicant/property owner shall provide interim and permanent mitigation measures to alleviate the problem Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Traffic Impact Report and Parking Analysis for Monarch Village- Tustin, CA by W.G. Zimmerman Engineering, Inc., August 2007 (Exhibit 2) Monarch Village Tustin GPA 07-001, ZC 07-002, CUP 07-011, and DR 07-012 Page 13 Items b, c, d, e, and g - No Impact: The project will not exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. The proposed project will not induce substantial population or growth, result in changes to air traffic patterns, or conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation such as bus turnouts or bicycle racks. The project has been reviewed by the Orange County Fire Authority and has been determined to have adequate emergency access. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Traffic Impact Report and Parking Analysis for Monarch Village- Tustin, CA by W.G. Zimmerman Engineering, Inc., August 2007 (Exhibit 2) XVI. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS Items a, b, c, d, e, f & g - No Impact: The proposed project will not exceed the requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Boazd or require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities. If approved, the proposed project will utilize the existing sewer and storm drain systems and thus will not require construction of a new storm water drainage facility or solid waste facility. The project proponent. would be required to submit a hydrology report to ensure proper grading, drainage, and connection of planned sewer systems. The project will be served by the City's existing trash hauler contract, thus will not require a new trash hauler. While, adequate water supply from existing resources will be available to serve the proposed project, the existing 6-inch water main on Red Hill is insufficient to provide fire flows for the new facilities. Based on OCFA fire flow demands and requirements, it may be necessary to construct a new 8-inch water main on Redhill to provide current water flow requirements. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Tustin General Plan XVII. MANDATORY FIlVDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Items a, b & c - No Impact: i The proposed project design, construction, and operation will comply with applicable City codes .and regulations. The project, by nature of its location and as designed, does not have the potential to: degrade the quality of the environment; reduce the habitat of Monarch Village Tustin GPA 07-001, ZC 07-002, CUP 07-011, and DR 07-012 Page 14 fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal; or, eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. The project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of the long-term. The proposed project does not have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable or that would cause substantial adverse impacts on human beings. Sources: Submitted )'Tans Tustin General Plan 5.4CddJlls'III~IA1t~l,aq OI~C,ipAWPA 07-0OI. ZC 07-0117 CIA 07-011, OR W-0IN.MD (A51.) ~lyahdoe L E Exhibit 1 i ~~ Acoustical Analysis For Monarch Village Tustin, California By Davy and Associates, Inc. February 2006 Davy ~' Associates, [nc. Consultants in Acoustics 2627 Manhattan Brach Blvd., Suitt 212 • Rcdondo Beach, CA 927&1604 • Tcl: 310.643-5761 • Fax: 310-643-5364 • Email:DiovyAaaoc~aol.com ' JN2006-09 ACOUSTICAL ANALYSIS Monarch Village Tustin, California DECEIVED .lUN Z ~ 2006 COMMUNt1Y DEVELOPMENT Blf ~~~ 7 American Senior Development, Inc. Tustin, California February, 2006 t t r E ~, 1 ~ ' 1.0 introduction At the direction of American Senior Development, Inc., Davy 8~ Associates, Inc. has completed an acoustical analysis of the Monarch Village project in Tustin, Califomia. The California Administrative Code (f'~tle 24) as enforced by the City of Tustin specifies maximum allowable interwr noise levels of CNEL 45 for ail habitable spaces in residential buildings where exterior noise from transportation sources exceeds CNEL 60. ' Section 2.0 of this report contains the results of measurements and calculations of the ~ future exterior noise environment at the site to determine compliance with these ~ requirements. ~ Section 3.0 of this report contains recommendations for complying with the City of Tustin ~ interior noise level requirements. ' Section 4.0 of this report contains the requirements of the State Building Code ~ concerning ventilation. ~; ~ ` 2.0 Exterior and Fu ur Acoustical Environ ~~ Environmental noise levels were monitored at the site in Tustin. Calffomia on 2006 between the hours of 3:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. The location of the site ~ February 8. is shown in Figure 1. Noise measurements were made at the southeast building line. ' ~ Noise levels at the site are dominated by traffic on Red Hill Avenue to the southeast. Traffic on the Flt. 5 Freeway to the southwest was not audible at the site. No other ' significant sources of noise were noted during the site visit. ~ Environmental noise levels were measured with a precision integrating LD 820 sound that had been calibrated with a B8K 4230 Acoustical Calibrator immediately ' level meter The sound level meter measures and displays the equivalent noise lei r to use i . o pr (LEQ). as well as the maximum and the minimum noise levels during the measurem pew, q copy of the analysis of the acoustical data is attached to this report. /€ 4 1 ~~ t Figure 1. Site Location 2 r ~, ~.. f The data thus collected were analyzed to determine the CNEL level at the measurement location. The CNEL value was determined by measuring the equivalent noise level (LEQ) directly, and then calculating the equivalent noise level for each of the other 23 hours in the day.' This CNEL approach has been utilized extensively. The accuracy of this procedure has been established with automatic 24-hour measurements at the same location. The procedure has always been within acceptable accuracy limits. The results of the monitoring and calculations are summarized below in Table 1. Table 1 Measured Ambient Noise Levels in dB Location Peak Hour LEQ CNEL SE Building Line 64.6 dB 65.6 dB Section 3501.(c) of the State Building Code states the following: Worst-case noise levels either existing or future, shall be used as the basis for determining compliance with this Section. Future noise levels shall be predicted for period of at least 10 years from the time of building permit application. CALTRANS, Division of Traffic Operations publishes an annual traffic volume book that contains previous traffic trends. The 2000 traffic volumes on the California State Highway System Book (the latest edition available) lists an average annual increase of 2.2% per year in annual trafftc volumes for the years 1994 through 1999. Assuming that this annual growth of 2.2% would hold.for this site. it was projected that traffic volumes would increase by a factor 1.24 by the year 2016. This traffic volume increase over the next 10 years would result in a 0.9 dB traffic noise increase. Therefore, the projectee future year noise level is summarized in Table 2. Table 2 Exterior 2016 CNEL Value at the Site in dB Location CNEL SE Building Line 66.5 dB E Seems ,for example. "Insulation of Buildings Against Highway Noise,' Bn~e Davy and Steven Skale. Federal Highway Administration FHWA-TS-77-202. 3 With an exterior noise level of CNEL 66.5, the building must provide an A-weighted noise reduction value of at least 21.5 dB to achieve an interior CNEL 45 value. Standard consfruction consisting of 2x4 studs with R-11 insulation, exterior stucco, interior gypboard, and standard glazing provides a minimum A-weighted noise reduction of 20 d6. If all southeast facing perimeter windows and glass doors are glazed with STC 32 glazing, the noise reduction of the building will be a minimum of 30 dB. This means that with the use of standard construction and STC 32 glazing in all southeast facing perimeter windows and glass doors, interior noise levels should not exceed CNEL 45. Therefore, the Building will comply with the California Noise Insulation Standards as enforced by the City of Tustin. STC 32 glazing can be provided with either 1/4" laminated glass or a dual pane assembly with a 1/2" airspace. In either case, the glazing supplier should submit a test report documenting the STC 32 rating. The test report should be prepared in an independent, accredited testing laboratory in accordance with ASTM E-90. 3 0 Construction Recommendations 3,1 Roof ceiling construction will be roofing on 1/2" plywood. Batt insulation will be installed in joist spaces. The ceilings will be one layer of 5/8" gypboard nailed ~' direct. 3.2 All exterior walls will be 2x4 studs 16" o.c. with Batt insulation in the stud spaces. Exteriors will be exterior plaster or stucxo. The .interiors will be 5/8" gypboard. 3.3 All southeast facing perimeter windows and glass doors will be glazed with STC 32 glazing. STC 32 glazing can be provided with either 1/4" laminated glass or a dual pane assembly with a 1/2" airspace. In either case, the glazing supplier should submit a test report documenting the STC 32 rating. The test report should be prepared in an independent, accredited testing laboratory in accordance with ASTM E-90. 3.4 All other windows and glass doors may be standard glazing. 3.5 All entry doors should be 1-3/4" solid core doors with weather stripping seals on the sides and top. Glazing in entry doors should not be accepted. 4 ,r ~v !, 4 0 Ventilation Re~uiremen The California Noise Insulation Standards (Tie 24) states the following paragraph concerning ventilation: "If interior allowable noise levels are met by requiring that windows be unop~nable or closed, the design for the structure must also specify a ventilation or air-conditioning system to provide a habitable interior environment. The ventilation system must not compromise the dwelling unit or guest room noise reduction." 1 1, ' 4 1 1 S 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1~ '~ 1 1 1 With windows open, typical noise reduction values will be in the 12 dB range. This means that a ventilation system must be provided for all habitable rooms. This can normally be supplied with an FAU (forced air unit) with a summer switch. Outside air intake must be in compliance with Section 12.03.3 of the 1997 edition of the Unifom- Building Code. C. Bruce A. Davy, P.E. LN.C.E. Board Certfied Davy & Associates, Inc. 5 SITE MONITORING NOISE ANALYSIS JN2006-09 PROJECT: MONARCH VILLAGE LOCATION: SOUTHWEST BUILDING LINE , TEST DATE: FEBRUARY 8, 2006 START TIME: 3:00 P.M. END TIME: 4:00 P.M. EQUIPMENT USED: LD 820 SLM 1/2" RANDOM INCIDENCE MIC WINDSCREEN B8~K 4230 CALIBRATOR TRIPOD WIND SPEED INDICATOR MICRONTA THERMOMETER/HYGROMETER TEMPERATURE: 72°f RELATIVE HUMIDITY: 55°~ WIND: 0-2 mph LEQ: 64.6 L90: 52.8 LMAX: 74.5 L50: .60.1 LMIN: 49.4 L25: 64.5 CNEL: 65.6 L8: 67.4 LDN: 65.6 L2: 70.5 L1: 71.8 DAVY 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. Consultants ~n Acoustics ~ i ~. ,~ Exhibit 2 i E Traffic Impact Report and Parking Analysis For Monarch Village-Tustin By W.G. Zimmerman Engineering, Inc. August 2007 i TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT AND PARKING ANAYLSIS FOR MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN TUSTIN, CA Prepared for: American Senior Living Development Prepared by: W.G. Zimmerman Engineering, Inc. 801 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 200 Seal Beach, CA 90740 Phone: (562) 594 - 8589 Fax: (562) 594 - 8549 August 2007 E F ~ ~ ~~ ~,w-- 3, I ~ i ~ ~ e i ~' ;~ F CONTENTS TABLE O . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................. .......................................1 ' Section 1: INTRODUCTION ......................................... .......................................2 Section 2: PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................... .......................................4 Section 3: TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION . .......................................6 ' Section 4: PROJECT SETTING .................................... .......................................9 Section 5: LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS ...........:..... .....................................10 ' Section 6: .................................. PARKING ANALYSIS .....................................13 Section 7: SYSTEM DEFICIENCIES ............................ .....................................17 Section 8: PROJECT MITIGATION MEASURES ......... .....................................17 APPENDIX ' APPENDIX A ...........................................19 APPENDIX B .................................................. ....................................................20 NDIX C ..................................................23 APPE i APPENDIX D .................................................. ....................................................28 ' LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Intersection Capacity Utiliza#ion (ICU) ..... .....................:.........................6 ' Table 2: Trip Generation ........................................ ...............................................7 Table 3: Project Trip Assignment ..........................................................................8 ' Table 4: Level of Service ....................................... .............................................11 Table 5: Parking Study °Independent Senior Living Communities" .....................14 t Table 6: Amenities Comparison Table ................................................................14 Table 7: Parking Requirement "ITE Manua!" .......... .............................................15 RECEIVED AUG 0 82007 _ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BY R K EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following provides a summation of this traffic impact report for the proposed Monarch Village Assisted Living/Congregate Care facility located within the City of Tustin. 1. The project site is located on the western side on Red Hill Avenue between San Juan Street and EI Camino Real. 2. The project proposes to construct an age-restricted assisted living/congregate care facility comprised of 201 units over one subterranean parking level consisting of 201 parking spaces with a parking ratio of 1.00. 3. Two intersections were identified for study in this analysis: • Red Hill Avenue and San Juan Street • Red Hill Avenue and EI Camino Real 4. Trip generations were developed and analyzed without taking into consideration allowable trip credits for the church which currently occupies the project site. 5. Proposed vehicle turning movements will be restricted to right turn only from the complex onto Red Hill Avenue. Left turns from Red Hill Avenue will be maintained. 6. The total of AM peak trip generated is 28 with 40 generated during the PM peak hour. 7. Existing conditions for EI Camino Real and Red Hill is at an acceptable intersection capacity utilization (ICU) level of service (LOS) "C' and "B° respectively during the AM and PM peak hours based upon existing turning movement counts. 8. Existing conditions for San Juan and Red Hill is at an acceptable intersection capacity utilization (ICU) level of service (LOS) "C" and "B" respectively during the AM and PM peak hours based upon existing turning movement counts. 9. Existing condition with project traffic for the study intersections will be at an acceptable ICU LOS "C° and "B° respectively during the AM and PM peak hours. 10. Post condition 2020 projected traffic with project traffic was compared to post condition without project for both intersections and showed no significant impacts of proposed development on study intersections. 11. Post condition 2020 projected ICU difference with project and without project for San Juan and EI Camino is .001 and .003 respectively during the critical AM peak hour which is less then CMP requirement 0.1 and City requirement 0.01. 12. Mitigation measures are proposed for this project. TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT I MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT ~~~ I~ i~ Section 1: INTRODUCTION This report presents the results from a traffic impact and parking analysis for the proposed Monarch Village assisted living/congregate care facility located in the City of Tustin. This project proposes to construct 201 units along Red Hill Avenue. The project is located on the west side of Red Hill Avenue between San Juan Street and EI Camino Real as shown on the map below. It is in close proximity to Tustin High School, Tustin Auto Center, and the Santa Ana Freeway (I-5). The 1-5 freeway can be accessed via Red Hill, which is approximately 0.2 miles southwest of the proposed project. `\ ``~` ;, ~ ~'~~~ \~ `„ ~ ~\ ~/ ~~~ <~ .~ ~; ._-, ,, ~, ~ fronh~cr Prat ~ f~ ~~ ~ ,~ ~ - ~~' ~ __ \ ~~~ Not to'~cale ., ,..~.a Y...en CO.v. >MM.u ,M tesetvW. \.- I t ' TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT ~ MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT ~_ LL Z a w v W O OC a ~~~ ~~ -a- ~~ V uV c ~~ ~"' C ,~ CQ a r ~~ ~~ ~ Z ~ _~= 4 3~ J U~ J ~. N r~ i M fU Z Z ~H, W ~~ a ~w U ~ ~ I ~} w. V ~ • ~~ ~_ Section 2: PROJECT DESCRIPTION ' A two-story church consisting of classrooms, a gymnasium, and a sanctuary located north of the intersection of Red Hill Avenue and EI Camino Real currently occupies the project site. The project proposes amulti-story age restricted assisted living/congregate ' .care facility over a subterranean parking structure consisting of 201 units on the site which is illustrated in Figure 1. The proposed development will also include the construction of a community center, pool, and recreational area on the 125,538 square ' foot lot. Facility Description ' Assisted Living/Congregate Care - 62 years or older: A special combination of housing, personalized supportive services and health care designed to meet the needs of those ' who need help with activities of daily living. The resident may contract additional medical services or personal assistance. Services provided in Assisted Living/Congregate Care residences shall include: ' Three meals a day served in a common dining area Housekeeping services and personal laundry services ' Transportation Assistance with eating, bathing, dressing, toileting, and walking Access to health and medical services 24-hour security and staff availability Emergency call systems for each residents unit Health promotion and exercise programs ' Medication management Social and recreational activities ' Zone Description The proposed General Plan designation would need to be PC CommerciaUBusiness which would allow fora 1.5 Floor Area Ratio. Proposed zoning would be C-2. Please ' see Section 9233 of the Tustin City Code for C-2 development standards. Please note that a CUP will be required for an assis#ed living/congregate care facility in C-2 district. ' Driveway Description Red Hill Avenue will provide direct access to the proposed development and will act as ' the main entrance for the community. A 26-foot wide driveway from Red Hill Avenue will provide two-way traffic to the subterranean parking structure. The driveway will be designated as a "Fire Lane" and will prohibit parking on ~. The existing two way tum lane on Red Hill Avenue will allow northbound Red Hill Avenue traffic to tum into the facility as shown in the Figure 2. The "Right Tum Only" (Designated as letter "A" in the figure) sign will be installed as per MUTCD (R3-5R). ~E TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT 4 MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING ~EVELOPME:NT Red I3i11 Avenue ------------------------------------------------------- S• 3' E Directional t ~ ~ A Median ONLY Project Site 13' 1' 13' Not to Scale Figure 2 Parking Description The parking facility will be accessed through a two lane access ramp located on the north side of the proposed. development. It will provide two-way vehicular access to the subterranean parking/garage level as shown in Figure 5. A gate located inside the parking structure separates guest parking from resident. parking. The location of the gate is set back sufficiently from the entrance to allow additional off-street vehicle stacking capability. The gate will be designed in conformance with Orange County Standard 1107 for a minimum of 24 ft. clear travel way when gate is opened. Data Collection Traffic and turning counts were performed to determine the number of cars using Red Hill at various times of the day in order to establish the peak traffic demand. Traffic data was obtained by placing a tube on Red Hill between San Juan and EI Camino and the numbers of cars that ran over the tube were recorded during a 24-hour period. Turning count data was obtained by individuals manually collecting vehicle movements at the intersection. Newport Traffic Studies, a vehicle counting service, performed the data collection on Thursday, November 17, 2005. It should be noted that no construction activities occurred adjacent to the project when traffic counts were conducted. Traffic and turning counts were compiled and summarized in Appendix A. Capacity Analysis TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT S MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. 21MMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT I; ~ I 7 1 1~ t 1 A~ f The intersection capacity utilization (ICU) level of service determines how well an intersection is functioning and how much extra capacity is available if there was an influx of traffic. The ICU LOS of an i asrshown in Table 1. bThettCU worksheethwas associated with a capacity percentage used to determine both the current and future intersection capacity utilization LOS of the two intersections. The existing ICU LOS at Red Hill and San Juan currently operate at a Level of Service of "C° and "B" respectively for the AM and PM peak periods. The ICU LOS for existing traffic with the added. project traffic is "C" and "B" respectively for the AM and PM peak periods. At the intersection of EI Camino and Red Hill, the ICU. LOS currently operates at a Level of Service of "C° and "B" respectively during the AM and PM peak periods, with the added project traffic, the ICU LOS remains the same as the existing condition. Table 1: Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) ICU.LOS ICU LOS Definition A In the ran a of 0 to 60% ca ac' B In the ran a of 60% and 70% ca a ' C in the ran a of 70% and 80% ca ac' D In the ran a of 80% and 90% ca ac' E In the ran a of 90% and 100% ca ac' F In the ran a of 100% and 110% ca ac' Section 3: TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION Trip Generation The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) informational report, Trip Generation, 7"' Edition, was used to develop the traffic generated by the project based on the land use. The ITE code 253, Congregate Care Facility, was used to determine the ingress and egress peak hour trips generated by the new development. By using the Trip Generation, 7d' Edition, the generated daily trip rate of the project is 2.02. When multiplied by the number of new units, the .proposed 201 unit project would generate a total of 406 new vehicle trips. For the AM Peak hour the trip ra#e is 0.14. To determine the AM peak hour trips 0.14 was multiplied by the number of proposed units (201) which totaled 28 AM peak trips. The same method was used to determine the PM peak trips with a trip rate of 0.20. It was estimated that there are 28 morning and 40 evening peak hour trips generated as shown in Table 2. AM peak trips has a direction distribution of 50% entering and 50% exiting. By multiplying 50% by the trip rate 0.14, .the total was 0.07. Then 0.07 was multiplied by 201 to obtain the number of AM peak trips entering the development which was 14. The exiting AM peak trips were calculated the same way using 50% and was calculated that there would be 14 exiting AM peak trips. PM peak trips were calculated the same way using a trip rate of 0.20, 60% entering, and 40% exiting. It was estimated that there would be 24 entering and 16 exiting during the PM peak hour. TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT C) MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, tNC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT ^ Trip credits for the existing facility were applied to the project trip generation and the net total project trips were estimated for the project. The ITE code 560, Church, was used to determine the existing ingress and egress peak hour trips generated by the existing facility. The average daily traffic added to Red Hill Avenue was estimated to be 56 vehicles per day (VPD). A total of 0 morning and 2 evening peak hour trips was determined from the difference between the traffic generated from the new development and the existing development as seen in Table 2. However, trip credits for the existing facility were not applied to the project trip generation and the total project trips were analyzed for the project. Table 2: Trip. Generation CONGREGATE CARE FACILITY LAND USE: (253) AM Peak PM Peak Use Dail Total In Out Total In Out ITE Code: 253 2.02 0.14 0.07 0.07 0.20 0.12 0.08 New Develo ment - 201 Units 406 28 14 14 40 24 16 Trip Credits -ITE Code: 560, Church Existing GFA* - 38,434 SQ. FT. (350) (49) (25) (24) (38) (23) (15) Net Total Pro ect Trips 56 0** 0** 0** 2 1 1 Note: 1. Rates represent average trip generation rates per congregate care facility land use in ITE's Trip Generation ( dwelling units of 7~' Edition). 'GFA -Gross Floor Area °ROUrt°eo to renecx new traps generates Trip Distribution The distribution of traffic based upon the ADT and the Trip Generation, ~ 7"' Edition, of the 28 new trips in AM peak hour is distributed with 50% (14 vehicles) entering and 50% (14 vehicles) exiting the project site. A percentage trip distribution on the map is presented in Figure 3. From the 50% of traffic entering, it was estimated that 4 vehicles would be entering from the north and 10 vehicles entering from the south. From the 50% of traffic exiting, it was estimated that all 14 vehicle would be heading south, because of a left turn restriction from the project site. Based on the facility type, drivers going northwest or northeast direction will avoid making a "U' tum on Red Hill Avenue and will take a conservative approach making a right tum or left tum to go towards the west or the east direction. Whereas driver intended to go north on Red Hill Avenue will make a "U' turn at the intersection of EI Camino and Red Hill Avenue. 20% of the total exiting vehicles from the project site during peak period are estimated to make a "U' tum on Red Hill Avenue at EI Camino real. During PM peak hour, 40 newly generated trips is distributed with 60% (24 vehicles) entering and 40% (16 vehicles) exiting the project site. From the 60% of traffic entering, it was estimated that 7 vehicles would be entering from the north and 17 vehicles entering from the south. From the 40% of traffic exiting, it was estimated that all 16 vehicle will be heading south, because of a left tum TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT 7 MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LNING DEVELOPMENT t t ~~l i restriction from the project site. It is estimated that a majority of vehicles will turn right at EI Camino Real, since a community center as well as shopping centers are located along Newport Avenue. The proximity of the project to this intersection makes it a viable traffic movement. Table 3: Project Trip Assignment Kett n ni FwC~iua v~ ~~ ..o.... Red Hill Avenue ..., .....». EL Camino Real Red Hill Avenue EL Camino Real Southbound estbound` Northbound Eastbound Left+ U" Tum hru Right Left hru Right Left hcu Right Left hru Right AM 6 3 6 0 0. 1 0 4 0 5 0 0 PM 6 4 7 0 0 3 0 6 0 8 0 0 'E ~~ !~ Kea n n~ r-vC~~~.+a ~* VQ~~ VM Red HII Avenue (i~~ va~vv~ San Juan Street Red Hill Avenue San Juan Street SouthSound estbound Northbound. ~ Eastbound Left hru Right Left hru Right Left hru Right Left hru Right AM 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 PM 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT S MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT ~~ ,_ ~% ~e;T ee. ' ~~~ Park ~ ~~ r- f ~p(2p) :. ~~~_ ~~ Figure 3: Trip Distribution Section 4: PROJECT SETTING Presently the existing site contains 1 main building, 2 driveways and a parking lot as shown in Figure 4. Adjacent to the project site along Red Hill Avenue, mainly consists of business and residential facilities along with accessibility to the I-5 freeway. Red Hill Avenue is a two-way major street with a total of 6 travel lanes; 3 lanes northbound, 3 lanes southbound, and a two way left-tum median. Red Hill Avenue is approximately 110 feet wide with a parkway and sidewalk on the west side of the street and a shopping center on the east side of the street. Red Hill Avenue has aright-of- TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT 9 MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LMNG DEVELOPMENT r XX (X~ _ % In (Out) Trip Distribution } ' way of 120 feet. The average daily traffic (ADT) along Red Hill Avenue between San Juan Street and EI Camino is 23,500 VPD with a peak hour of volume 1,151 vehicles i northbound and 1,329 vehicles southbound. San Juan Street is an east-west collector street north of the proposed development. ' San Juan Street is mainly residential with businesses adjacent to the street south of the Red Hill Avenue intersection. The intersection of San Juan and Red Hill is a signalized intersection which is located approximately 160 feet north of the proposed development ' and is located approximately 0.2 miles north of the Santa Ana Freeway (I-5). C.E. Utt Middle School which is located east of Red Hill Avenue can be accessed by San Juan. ' EI Camino Real is an east-west secondary road south of the proposed development. The intersection of EI Camino and Red Hill is a signalized intersection which is located approximately 325 feet south of the proposed development and is located ' approximately 270 feet north of the Santa Ana Freeway (I-5). Businesses mainly surround the intersection and are frequently used by students walking to/ftom school. Tustin High School can be accessed via EI Camino which is west of the intersection and ' to the east of the intersection is The Tustin Auto Center. Major destinations for this development includes; grocery stores along Newport Avenue and Holt Avenue, medical facilities along Newport Avenue and Tustin Avenue, ' pharmacies along Newport Avenue,. and community center at C Road along with a dinner theater on EI Camino Real. E On-Site Circulation The "Project" has been analyzed for on-site circulation. Access to the project site will be through one two-way driveway by either a right turn movement for the southbound traffic or a left turn movement for northbound traffic from Red Hill Avenue. Exiting traffic will ' be restricted to right turns only. Garage access turn radii meet minimum design standards. Delivery truck turning radii for the loading docks also meet minimum turning radii. Large moving vans and semi- ' trailer truck will be prohibited from the project site. Move-in conditions along with other terms and conditions for residency at the complex with each tenant will be highlighted in ' the signed Tenant Agreement. Trash containers are located in the garage. Trash containers will be moved to above ground areas for trash pick-up. This method has been successfully implemented in the ' City of Pasadena. Section 5: LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS ' of service anal sis was performed for Red Hill Avenue & EI Camino Real and The level Y ` Red Hill Avenue & San Juan Street based upon turning movement counts taken in November of 2005. A Level of Service analysis was performed using ICU worksheet TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT I O MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT ~a based upon the project generated traffic without trip credits applied for the existing, baseline, and 2020 projection. LOS calculation is attached as Appendix D. Table 4 summar'IZes these results. Table 4: Level of Service _ry: , ~., ~;~ RedFiill Avenue a - ~ ~: Existing (2005) Existing with Project AM PM AM PM LOS % ICU LOS % ICU LOS % ICU LOS % ICU C 74.2 B 67.1 C 74.4 B 67.8 2020 Projection 2020 Projection with Project AM* PM AM* PM LOS % ICU LOS % ICU LOS % ICU LOS % ICU E 93.9 _~ .. Existin D 84.4 '=Reii'HllAven, ~~n ._. _. g {2005) E 94.2 ~ ' u Existing w D 85.4 ith Project - AM PM AM PM LOS % ICU LOS % ICU LOS % ICU LOS % ICU C 75.2 B 60.8 C 75.3 B 67.0 2020 Projection 2020 Projection with Project AM* PM AM* PM LOS °k ICU LOS % ICU LOS °k ICU LOS °lo ICU E 97.6 D 83.4 E 97.7 D 83.6 * Critical condition Notes: 1. Level of service is based on the V/C ratio. 2. Level of service reported from ICU worksheet. TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT I I MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT f ~~ E , W ~~ I ;W ~ Z N E i ~. 1 ~ ! !. 1 ' ~~. . ~H ~ ~ ' ! !: ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ !4 ~ ~r~~.ii1'S1i12 !~ ~ t r~ ~~ !~ ', '~~iw~'i 5~i '1~ <~-iw~'r i%M~ ~~ 1'" W ~' ': ~~ ~o IW t 1 5t ~i ~' rl ~~f' ii ~liii~ ~ii~~t ! taiii~ ~~11~! ~1~! 1~1!!!l~~iil~il~Ir~~l ~ F4,~.Jtoe=iL ~~ ~:~~w r 1! 1 !!~ ~ ~ , t! I' t ~~~~i! ~~ ~i~~~~~~1~ .i~ll.~llil....~~lu~.f~.eil~ ~' ° ~~ ~~ ~ , ~! ~ ~ ~~ t ~' I ~,, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~ ! ~~ o I Section 6: PARKING ANALYSIS A ramp located on the north side of the proposed development will provide two- way vehicular access to the subterranean parking/garage level as shown in Figure 5. The parking level ramp can be accessed by a two-way passage that runs along the north side of the building. As proposed, the vehicular access driveway is 26 feet wide and allows both inbound and outbound traffic. There are 3 stairways along with 3 elevators located at the north and south ends of the parking level which leads to the main complex. Monarch Village will provide a total of 204 parking spaces, which includes 33 guest and 7 handicap spaces. The total number of employees of Monarch Village is projected to be approximately 60 people and a maximum of 20 employees, will be at the site at any one time. Many of the employees of Monarch Village will utilize public transportation and/or carpooling to get to and from the work on a daily basis. Parking spaces measure approximately 20 feet long by 9 feet wide. The width of the driving aisle in the underground parking facility is approximately 25 feet which allows for two-way traffic. The parking ratio for a development is determined by dividing the total number of parking spaces by the total numbers of units. Parking ratio 1.0 including the guest; ADA, and staff is recommended for this project based upon various parking studies and The Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE), Parking E Generation Manual, 3`d Edition. Note that the Parking Generation Manual does not specifically separate out guest, ADA, and employees parking unless the facility generates turnover such as churches, theaters, and convention Centers. These parking studies are discussed below. A Parking Study was conducted by Newport Traffic Studies for three independent senior living communities to determine the parking ratio for the facility along with a parking occupancy rate. These three independent senior communities are similar to this project community as compared in Table 5. In Appendix C, summary of a related ITE Journal article is attached and trip generation rates and parking demand is compared with this facilities. As shown in Table 6, the three independent living communities have a mean parking ratio of 0.64 and a median ratio of 0.63. Monarch Village's proposed parking ratio of 1.0 exceeds this parking ratio and the average for the two independent living communities presented in ITE journal in Illinois. According to Table 5, the percentage of occupied parking spaces ranges from 85% to 100% of the three independent living communities surveyed. ~ 'SENIOR HOUSING TRIP GENERATION AND PARKING DEMAND CHARACTERISTICS by Stephen B. Corcoran, P.E. presented at Institute of Transportation Engineers 66th Annual Meeting. ~~ TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT I3 MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT ~' 1 I Table 5: Parking Study "Independent Senior Living Communities" Pro ect j COY Number Parking ** Occu arc P y Parking Ratio of Units S aces S aces/Unit Springs of Escondido 103 62 85% 0.60 Escondido Valencia Rancho 114 72 100% 0.63 Commons Cucamon a Ventura 115 78 100% 0.68 Bonaventure 'Occupancy at the time of counting. " Parking Spaces include guest and AuA spaces. Source: Newport Traffic Studies. Table 6: Amenities Comparison Table I Amenities Monarch ASL *Springs of Escondido "Valencia Commons *The Bonaventure '*Mayslake, Oakbrook IL **Glenvtew Terrace IL Care T I I I I I I A e 62 80 8 6 62 Valet Parkin / Concie e / / Trans nation / / / / / / Dinnin / / / / / / Housekee i / / / ./ Social and Recreational Activities / / / / J Care Counselor / / / / Grocery and Pharmacy Delive / / / / Chauffer Senrice / / Units 201 103 114 115. 630 243 Parkin Ratio 1.00 0.60 0.63 0.68 0.408 0.214 I -Independent Senior Living Community, 'Newport Traffic Studies "ITE journal article presented in 66°'' annual meeting, a- Minimum Age, b-Average Age i ~~ The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) informational report, Parking Generation, 3'd Edition, ITE code 253, Congregate Care Facility, .states that the existing parking ratio (Based on Oregon parking study, 2000) is 0.5 spaces per unit. Based on this parking ratio, the number of parking spaces required is calculated by multiplying number of units to parking ratio 0.5 as shown in Table 7. The definition of Congregate Care Facility most closely matches the Monarch Villa -Tustin facility. Land Use Code: 253 Congregate Care Facility is defined as: "Congregate care facilities are independent living developments that provide centrali2ed amenities such as dining, housekeeping, transportation and organized sociaUrecreafional activities. Limited medical services (such as nursing and dental) may or may not be provided. The resident may contract additional medical services or personal assistance. TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT 14 MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT Table 7: Parking Requirement "ITE Manual" Land Use Group:253 Land Use Number of Units Parking Ratio S aces/Unit Space Required Con re ate -Care Facili 201 0.5 100 Total 100 Source: "Parking Generation, 3" tda~on~~ ~ ~ t -vranua~ Based up~n this analysis of similar existing development, a parking ratio of 1.0 exceeds the ITE recommended parking ratio and should provide adequate parking facilities for visitors and residents. Conclusion Three Southern California senior housing complexes and two Illinois senior housing developments were analyzed for parking needs. The maximum parking ratio of 0.68 for dwelling units compared to parking spaces is provided by "The Bonaventure° in Ventura. However, it should be noted that the parking utilization for this c~irlplex is 100%. All other studies Independent senior communities range from a parking ratio of 0.214 to 0.68. The parking spaces included visitor, handicap, and resident. The percent utilization ranged from 65% to 100%. Since this development is an age restricted facility with the ages ranging from 62 to 85+, residents mobility will be dependant upon public and private transportation services reducing the need for vehicle ownership. It is reasonable to assume residents with vehicles will occupy parking spaces in the age group of 62 to 68 with less vehicle ownership in the age group of 70+. The new facility will provide the Valet Car Services located on the 3 stalls on the surface. Valet services will assist residents parking vehicles and driving cars up and down the garage ramp. This Valet Service will also provide assistance to the residents by taking their groceries or shopping bags out of their vehicles and delivering them to their residence. The total number of resident parking spaces will be allotted by permit process, requiring each tenant to apply for a parking space. The complex management will limit the amount of parking permits. TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT Z S MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT t i f I ~1/ I I I I Ivy ~; 1 ~` ~ 1 n 1 1 1 1 1~ M ' ~ _~~ :~ E ~` ~ Fl 1 I 8 ~ ~ -~- ~ .~_ -~- ~' -~ (In v ;- - -fit !~ 1 __ .~__ ~' .~" - ~ v -i--- -I--- ii~~ ~.- ~ ~ n,; . ~~~~ -- i ~ 1~~~ aww~~ T~ 1 ~. ~_ ~ ~ C .~._- ~ ~ _ (~„ a J Z~ ~ W ~o W 3 J ~ 5~ U Z W W `° V Z 2 ~~ F- a a~ ~w U~ ~+. N n ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Section 7: SYSTEM DEFICIENCIES Operationally, the adjacent roadway system is operating at an above minimum level of service. Site ingress/egress has been revised to improve access without impacting Red Hill Avenue. Planned development adjacent to the project may require further monitoring of the alley, south of the project site. Section 8: PROJECT MITIGATION MEASURES • The existing two way left tum lane will remain on Red Hill Avenue to allow northbound Red Hill Avenue traffic to tum into the facility.. Since only a right turn exit is allowed from the facility, a directional median is recommended along with the guide sign (Right Turn Only) at the two way driveway access to restrict the drivers from turning left as shown in Figure 2. • Large semi-trailer and moving van will be prohibited from entering the site. Move-in condition along with other terms and conditions for residency at the complex with each tenant will be highlighted in the signed Tenant Agreement. • Count-down pedestrian heads are recommended at the intersection of Red Hill Avenue and San Juan. TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT 17 MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LNING DEVELOPMENT • Reference: ~_ ' "Senior Housing Trip Generation And Parking Demand Characteristics" by Stephen B. Corcoran, P.E. presented at Institute of Transportation Engineers 66th Annual Meeting. ' "Tri Generation Characteristics of Age-Restricted Housing" by Thomas E. p Flynn, P.E., PTOE and Andrew E. Boenau, E.I.T. presented in February ' 2007. 0 ~N ii n 1 TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT 18 MONARCH VIU~4GE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMEf21CAN SENIOR LMNG DEVELOPMENT t APPENDIX A Traffic Summary Results I ~_... TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT I9 MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT ~r !~ e 24 HOUR VOLUMES STREET REDHILL TUSTIN LOCATION SAN JUAN/EL CAMINO DATE 11-17-05 NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND TOTAL -12:00 131 81 212 l:oo 84 55 139 2:00 55 33 88 3:00 49 ~ 31 80 4:00 44 58 102 5:00 64 186 250 6:00 190 463 653 7:00 582 1,329 1,911 8:00 539 1,208 1,747 9:00 553 747 1,300 10:00 516 571 1,087 11:00 633 548 1,181 AM 12:00 751 637 1,388 PM 1:00 675 671 1,346 2:00 826 690 1,516 3:00 800 776 1,576 4:00 030 1 640 1,670 , 5:00 151 1 758 1,909 , 6:00 859 651 1,510 7:00 870 520 1,390 8:00 503 350 853 9:00 417 348 765 1Os00 315 199 514 11:00 206. 107 313 12:00 11 843 11,657 23,500 , Prepared by NEWPORT TRAFFIC: STUDIES q 15 MINUTE COUNTS STREET REDHILL TUSTIN LOCATION SAN JUAN/EL CAMINO DATE 11-17-05 PM NORTH SOUTH TOTAL NORTH SOUTH TOTAL BOUND BOUND TOTAL BOUND BOUND TOTAL 37 27 64 12:00 172 148 320 34 22 56 203. 161 364 36 18 54 184 179 363 24 14 38 192 149 341 25 15 40 1:00 154 186 340 26 16 42 164 175 339 lg 15 33 171 152 323 15 9 24 186 158 344 17 12 29 2:00 187 152. 339 15 10 25 198 159 357 12 5 17 217 174 391 11 6 17 224 205 429 16 8 24 3:00 201 198 399 14 3 17 197 191 388 12 10 22 208 202 410 7 10 17 ~ 194 185 379 13 12 25 4:00 219 151 370 7 10 17 221 162 383 9 7 16 294 158 452 15 29 44 296 169 465 16 31 47 5:00 311 215 526 15 23 38 291 178 469 15 57 72 280 181 461 1g 75 93 269 184 453 44 96 140 6:00 261 183 444 31 90 121 221 176 397 47 115 162 184 152 336 6g 162 230 193 140 333 116 222 338 7:00 209 180 389 119 292 411 184 128 312 171 406 577 268 105 373 176 409 585 209 107 316 .157 331 488 8:00 lb9 87 256 134 326 460 119 91 2 10 137 275 412 108 88 196 111 276 387 107 84 191 123 246 .369 9:00 111 91 202 153 181 334 105 82 187 145 167 312 101 70 1?1 132 153 285 100 105 205 123 158 281 10:00 97 51 148 132 146 _278 79 62 141 135 130 265 82 52 134 126 137 263 57 34 91 134 146 280 11:00 63 39 102 150 129 279 61 24 85 180 132 312 47 23 70 169 141 310 35 21 56 . Prepared by NEWP ORT TRAFFIC STUDIES ,_, z . INTERSECTION TURN COUN'P PEAR HOUR NORTH-SOUTH STREET: REDHILL EAST-WEST STREET: EL CAMINO REAL JURISDICTION: TUSTIN PEAK HOUR: 07:15AM NORTH LEG I I• 1 1 1 1 1 1 !'+ 1 TOTAL: 1,407 129 1271 ? 34 251 1 64 327 3 17 3 84 2 14 309 1 Rt Thru Lt Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 81 10 36 26 9 116 29 34 35 18 i87 45 47 50 45 WEST LLG TOTALS 384 Lt Thru Rt Rt Thru Lt PEAR HOUR FACTORS Total let 2nd 3rd 4th DATE: 11-17-05 EAST LEG TOTAL: 530 4 5 8 5 22 46 67 54 29 196 65 89 86 72 312 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total Lt Thru Rt HOUR TOTAL: 3,240 lst 2nd 3rd 4th Total NORTIi LEG 0.87 SOUTH LE(3 = 0.85 EAST LEG = 0.82 WEST LEG = 0.82 ALL LEGS = 0.86 TOTAL: 919 SOUTH LEG Prepared by NEWPORT TRAFFIC STUDIES 67 104 40 100 125 45 72 139 41 40 133 13 279 501 139 INTERSECTION TURN COUNT PEAR HOUR NORTH-SOUTH STREETz REDHILL EAST-WEST STREET: EL CAMINO REAL JURISDICTION: TUSTIN PEAK HOURs 05:00PM NORTH LEG TOTAL: 774 DATE: 11-17-05 Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Rt Thru Lt EAST LEG TOTAL: 521 61 684 29 20 194 9 12 140 4 11 171 7 18 179 9 9 7 6 4 26 78 71 74 70 293 59 47 52 44 202 lst tad 3rd 4th Total PEAR HOIIR FACTORS Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 80 28 14 15 23 173 51 44 46 32 169 46 39 51 33 WEST LEG TOTAL: 422 HOUR TOTALS 3,239 Lt Thru Rt 1st 69 278 47 2nd 58 276 51 3rd 93 252 50 4th 68 240 40 Total 288 1046 188 Rt Thru Lt Lt Thru Rt NORTH LEG = 0.87 SOUTH LEG = 0.96 EAST LEG = 0.89 WEST LEG = 0.84 ALL LEGS 0.91 TOTAL: 1,522 SOUTFI LEG Prepared by NEWPORT TRAFFIC STUDI f, E ~r i i I 1 1 I ~r I INTERSECTION TURN COUNT PEAR HOUR NORTH-SOUTH STREET: REDHILL EAST-WEST STREET: SAN JUAN JURISDICTZONs TUSTIN PEAR HOUR: 07:30AM NORTH LEG TOTAL: 1,148 48 1060 40 22 268 5 7 270 11 11 267 7 8 255 17 Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 22 5 14 2 1 80 43 23 4 10 155 55 56 17 27 Rt Thru Lt Rt -Thru Lt Lt Thru Rt DATE: 11-17-05 Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th EAST LEG TOTAL: 338 14 21 10 3 48 19 34 19 7 79 69 72 36 34 211 ~~ ~~ 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total WEST LEG TOTAL: 257 PEAR HOUR FACTORS NORTIi LEG = 0.97 Lt Thru Rt SOUTH LEG 0.85 EAST LEG = 0.67 1st 11 115 35 WEST LEG 0.62 2nd 14 110 49 ALL LEGS 0.86 ~ 3rd 4 129 7 4th 7 102 8 ' Total 36 456 99 TOTAL: 591 SOUTH LEG HOUR TOTAL: 2,334 Prepared by NEWPORT TRAFFIC STUDIES INTERSECTION TURN COUNT PEAK HOUR NORTH-SOiTTH STREET: REDHILL EAST-WEST STREET: SAN JITAN JURISDICTION: TUSTIN PEAK HOURS O4:45PM TOTAL: 731 NORTH LEG 33 645 53 8 148 9 6 185 15 4 165 14 15 147 15 Rt Thru Lt Lt Thru Rt Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Rt Thru Lt EAST LEG TOTAL: 245 Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 13 2 4 3 4 75 18 19 14 24 44 6 13 13 12 WEST LEG TOTAL: 132 12 22 10 24 68 19 19 18 24 8Q~ 30 21 20 26 97 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total PEAK HOUR FACTORS Lt Thru Rt HOtTR TOTAL : 2 , 2 9 3 lst 2nd 3rd 4th Total 13 265 18 30 273 25 14 228 48 8 214 49 65 980 140 t DATE: 11-17-OS NORTH LEG = 0.89 SOUTH LEG a 0.90 EAST LEG 0.83 WEST LEG Q 0.83 ALL LEGS 0.91 TOTAL: 1,185 SOUTH LEG Prepared by NEWPORT TRAFFIC S ~~l 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 !'~~ I INTERSECTION TURNING COUNT NORTH-SOUTH STREET: REDHILL EAST-WEST STREET: EL CAMINO REAL TIMES 07:OOAM-08:OOAM DATE: 11-17-OS NORTH LSG Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Rt Thru Lt ~, n Rt Thru Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Lt Lt 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total Thru Rt Lt Thru Rt 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total Prepared by NEWPORT TRAFFIC STUDIES 88 16 10 36 26 129 31 29 34 35 190 48 45 47 50 134 1163 9 19 201 3 34 251 1 64 327 3 17 384 2 62 92 3 8 67 104 40 100 125 45 72 139 41 301 460 164 7 4 5 8 24 39 46 67 54 206 59 65 89 86 299 INTERSBCTION TURNING COUNT NORTH-SOUTH STREET: REDHILL EAST-WEST STREET: EL CAMINO REAL TIME: 08:OOAM-09:OOAM DATE: 11-17-05 NORTH LEG Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 43 9 6 16 12 82 18 19 24 21 153 45 24 41 43 64 14 1102 309 6 l 13 301 2 17 251 1 20 241 2 Rt Thru Lt Lt Thru Rt 1st 2nd 3rd 4 th Total Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Rt 5 4 4 2 15 Thru 29 36 26 34 125 Lt 72 54 45 53 224 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total Lt Thru Rt 40 133 13 51 113 9 46 110 21 44 93 19 181 449 62 Prepared by NEWPORT TRAFFIC STUD I I~ ~ I I I I I 1 I I~ 1 1 1 !+ INTERSECTION TURNING COUNT NORTH-SOUTH STREETS REDHILL EAST-WEST STREETS EL CAMINO REAL TIME: 04:OOPM-05:OOPM DATE: 11-17-05 NORTH LEG Total lat 2nd 3rd ' 4th Rt Thru Lt Rt Thru Total 1st tad 3rd 4th Lt Lt 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total Thru Rt Lt Thru Rt 1st 51 194 39 tad 53 198 33 3rd 63 262 59 4th 61 274 42 Total 228 928 173 Prepared by NEWPORT TRAFFIC STUDIES 54 __.~- 15 --- 13 13 13 155 36 29 44 46 153 37 35 45 36 73 556 32 15 122 4 8 146 11 18 144 12 32 144 5 9 7 11 7 34 48 60 71 56 235 46 58 50 42 196 INTERSECTION TURNING COUNT NORTH-SOUTH STREET: REDHILL EAST-WEST STREFsT: EL CAMINO REAL TIME: 05:OOPM-06:OOPM DATES 11-17-05 NORTH LEG Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 80 28 14 15 23 173 51 44 46 32 169 46 39 51 33 61 684 29 20 194 9 12 14 0 4 11 171 7 '18 179 9 Rt Thru Lt Lt Thru Rt Total lst 2nd 3rd 4th Rt 9 7 6 4 26 Thru 78 71 74 70 293 Lt 59 47 52 44 202 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total Lt Thru Rt 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total 69 278 47 58 276 51 93 252 50 68 240 40 288 1046 188 Prepared by NEWPORT TRAFFIC STUDI 1 Ir I I I I I I ~~ I INTERSECTION TURNING COUNT NORTH-SOUTH STREET: REDHILL EAST-WEST STREET: SAN JUAN TIME: 07:OOAM-08:OOAM DATE: 11-17-05 NORTH LEG Total lst 2nd 3rd 4th Rt Thru Lt N Rt Thru Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Lt Lt lst 2nd 3rd 4th Total Thru Rt Lt Thru Rt 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total Prepared by NEWPORT TRAFFIC STUDIES 24 3 2 5 14 125 28 31 43 23 183 39 33 55 56 47 918 33 11 167 9 7 213 8 22 268 5 7 270 11 14 75 31 16 66 33 11 115 35 14 110 49 55 366 148 6 2 14 21 43 16 17 19 34 86 26 36 69 72 203 INTERSECTION TURNING COUNT NORTH-SOUTH STREET: REDHILL EAST-WEST STREET: SAN JUAN TIME: 08:OOAM-09:OOAM DATE: 11-17-05 NORTH LEG Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 9 2 1 2 4 36 4 10 17 5 79 17 27 17 18 37 952 33 11 267 7 8 255 17 13 223 4 5 207 5 Rt Thru Lt Lt Thru Rt Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Rt 10 3 12 4 29 Thru 19 7 13 6 45 Lt 36 34 35 27 132 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total Lt Thru Rt 4 12 9 7 7 102 8 23 99 8 6 87 9 40 417 32 Prepared by NEWPORT TRAFFIC STUD ~r ~~ INTERSECTION TURNING COUNT NORTH-SOUTH STREF3T: REDHILL EAST-WEST STREET: SAN JUAN TIME: 04:O OPM-05:OOPM DATE: 11-17-05 NORTH LEG 17 562 27 Total 3 122 6 1st 4 145 7 2nd 2 147 5 3rd 8 148 9 4th Rt Thru Lt Rt Thru Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Lt Lt 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total Thru Rt Lt Thru Rt 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total Prepared by NEWPORT TRAFFIC STUDIES 14 6 3 3 2 34 7 3 6 18 25 9 5 5 6 12 195 16 10 188 18 10 259 10 13 265 18 45 907 62 11 13 7 12 43 6 4 10 19 39 16 15 20 30 81 INTERSECTION TURNING COUNT NORTH-SOUTH STREET: REDHILL EAST-WEST STREET: SAN JUAN TIME: 05:OOPM-06:OOPM DATE: 11-17-05 NORTH LEG Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 15 4 3 4 4 74 19 14 24 17 56 13 13 12 18 29 653 60 6 185 15 4 165 14 15 147 15 4 156 16 Rt Thru Lt Lt Thru Rt Total lst 2nd 3rd 4th Rt 22 10 24 17 73 Thru 19 18 24 15 76 Lt 21 20 26 21 88 lst 2nd 3rd 4th Total Lt Thru Rt 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total 30 273 25 14 228 48 8 214 49 25 213 29 77 928 151 Prepared by NEWPORT TRAFFIC STUDI i~ i APPENDIX B rr ii 1 ~+ Site Photographs TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT 2O MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. 21MMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT Existing Site Existing Site TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT Z 1 MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTiN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT i ~, ~ i ~. ~J C 0 C! r i ~~ E- TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT Z2 MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SEN10R LNING DEVELOPMENT 0 -Red Hiil Avenue and San Juan Street Red Hiil Avenue and EI Camino Reai APPENDIX C Reference L TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT 23 MONARCH VILLAGE•TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT Trip Generation Characteristics of Age-Restricted Housing By Thomas E. Flynn, P.E., PTOE and Andrew E. Boenau, E.I.T. Summary: "age-restricted° housing, essentially for persons 55 and older, has become a popular component of many new residential .developments. This feature presents study methodology and findings of a traffic data collection effort to quantify peak hour trip generation characteristics of age-restricted housing. These findings will strengthen the database for this increasingly important land use. The Four Seasons at Historic Virginia The development studied was the Four Seasons at Historic Virginia, an age restricted, 55-plus, active adult community located in Prince William County in suburban northern Virginia. The Four Seasons at Historic Virginia has the following characteristics: • It is situated along State Route 234, an arterial providing a direct connection I to Interstate 95. No transit, bike, or pedestrian facilities connect the development with other area land uses. • In addition to requiring at least one resident to be age 55 or older, no ` person under 19 may reside for more than 90 days in any consecutive 12 months. • At full development, it will have approximately 800 detached residential units. It currently has approximately 460 age-restricted residential units that are fully built and occupied (full time or seasonally). • The only non-residential development is the 12,000-square-foot community clubhouse. • It is estimated by the developer that perhaps half of the residences include at least one adti~lt who is still working, either part time or full time. The ' authors' opinion is that this is high compared to the typical age restricted community, which often is a more retirement oriented environment mountain area or water oriented-where the job market is not as strong. ' Along the same lines, ~ is estimated that perhaps only several percent of the units are seasonal or second homes-again, a characteristic more common with resort related retirement communities. ' Residences sell in the general range of $300,000-$650,000. Because the development is only several years old, a relatively high percentage of the additional site work is being undertaken by the owners. This includes patios and additional landscaping. The month prior to the study included 50 site work applications to the homeowners association. This activity contributes to a higher level of traffic generation as compared to normal conditions at I full development. • A #airiy small staff of employees works at the clubhouse, with a significant development sales staff of about 30. Once the lo#s are sold, this sales activity will be eliminated. Currently, additional traffic is generated by these ~€ TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT 24 MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT sales personnel, which is reflected in the trip generation data presented herein. Time Period Vehicle trips per dwelling units Percent Enter/Exit AM eak hour 0.18 20/80 PM eak hour 0.33 67/33 24 Hour 3.71 50/50 Conclusion The trip rates generated by the Four Seasons are very much in line .with similar data sources. Furthermore, the mathematical differences even can be accounted for. Accordingly, it is the opinion of the authors that the Four Seasons trip rates summarized in Table are appropriate for use on other age-restricted residential projects, with perhaps the actual values being marginally on the high side. Until actual 24-hour data for age-restricted developments are obtained, the 3.71 trips of Code 251 is recommended. Discussion: This "ITE Journal° article "Trip generation characteristics of age- restricted housing° by Thomas E. Flynn and Andrew E. Boenau related to the proposed facility is published in the February 2007. This article presents the trip generation rates for age-restricted housing based in Virginia. The land use type presented in the article is similar to senior adult housing-detached (Code-251) because minimum age restriction is 55 and also developer estimated that half of the residents include at least one adult who is still working. While the project site presented in this report has minimum age restriction of 62 and assisted living/congregate care facility with dining facilities which is similar to congregate care facility (Code-253) in the 7"' edition ITE trip generation manual. So the average trip generation rate 2.02 is used for this facilities based on ITE trip generation Code-253. TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORTlS MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT t i t • , SENIOR HOUSING TRIP CHARACTERISTICS ' By Stephen B. Corcoran, P.E. Engineers 66th Annual Meeting GENERATION AND PARKING DEMAND (M) presented at the Institute of Transportation ' Summary As the baby boomer generation ages, special housing projects have been developed for them in lieu of the traditional single-family home or apartment. ' Congregate care facilities, independent living apartments, assisted-care units, and senior apartments are being marketed, developed, and built to handle the needs of older adults. ' The changing lifestyle of older adults affects their transportation needs and usage as well. Trip generation and parking demand within this age group vary nificantly from traditional residential usr s because residents no longer have to si ' g be at work, pick up their children, or do their shopping at specific times. Also senior communities provide on-site services to meet their residents' needs. n ' y ma This paper will present the author's experiences with senior housing and its trip and parking characteristics along with data on projects in suburban Chicago, Illinois and around the United States. ' ° PARKING DEMAND SURVEYS I Parking demand ~ characteristics were obtained from a number of surveys d "` conducted in the Chicago metropolitan area. The peak parking demand occurre during the mid-day between 11:00 AM to 3:00 PM corresponding, in part, with the largest employee shift on-site. Table summarizes those surveys. The peak day of ' the year is Mother's Day when many facilities run out of visitor parking, according to the on-site staff. ' The peak parking demand rates varied between 0.214 and 0.579 vehicles per unit/bed with a weighted average rate of 0.404 vehicles per unit/bed. Employee, resident, and visitor parking is included. This rate is one third to one half the parking rates of other residential uses. Readers should note that the survey sites ' with the higher parking rates generally have more nursing beds which requires more employees than the residential units. ~+ T~LI_. 0.,~4 D~rlrinn 1lcmanri S11NBV 1 CIVIC. rcc^n ^ r... Development ... ....... . Location ~. - - Dwelling Units Nursing Beds Total UnitsBeds Peak Parking Rate Peak Parking Demand Covenant Villa a Northbrook IL 220 151 371 0.490 182 Beacon Hill Lombard IL 235 23 258 0.565 146 Friendshi Villa a Schaumbu - 620 100 720 0.390 281 Presb Brian Home Evanston, IL 312 166 478 0.579 277 Glenview Terrace Glenview, IL 243 243 0.214 52 Ma slake Oakbrook IL 630 630 0.408 257 EJM En ineerin Studies Lilac Lode Wauke an, IL 203 203 0.315 64 TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT 26 MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT Dee~etd Place Deerfield IL 98 98 0.230 23 ITE Parkin Manual, 2" Edition Retirement Community (Land Use Code 250 500 500 0.270 135 3061 440 3501 1417 Wei hted Avera a 0.404 Discussion: This article presented in 1996 ITE conference calculate the trip rates and parking demands for the various senior facilities in Illinois. Author categorized the senior housing f~lcilities into five different category includes Senior single-family housing, Senior apartments, independent living units, Assisted-care units, and Congregate care facilities. Author collected trip data from senior housing facilities from different states and found to be 4.52 to 5.64 trips end a day for senior housing development. But the collected data does not classify the senior housing category and hard to justify the trip rate data with this study. In this study, senior housing facility is similar to independent living units and can not compare the trip rates calculated by this paper to this study. While parking demand characteristics were obtained from a number of surveys conducted in the Chicago metropolitan area. The peak parking demand varied between 0.214 and 0.579 vehicles per unit/bed with a weighted average rate of 0.404 vehicles per unit/bed as summarized in the table above. Employee, resident and visitor parking is included. From the table, Mayslake and Glenview Terrace development is similar to this project site. Other development listed in the table contains nursing beds which require more employees than the residential units. This study does not provide the nursing facilities. The parking demand ratio for the Mayslake and Glenview Terrace development is lonely 0.214 and 0.408 which is less then the 1.00 provided for this study. TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT Z7 MONARCH VILLAGE-Tl1STIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT t • I, ~ I APPENDIX D it 0 C a~ i ICU Worksheet TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT ZS MONARCH VILLAGE-TUSTIN W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. AMERICAN SENIOR LNING DEVELOPMENT Intersection Capacity Utilization Worksheet Interseedon Location: Red HN 8 EI Camino _ Clty: Tustin Analyzed by: _ Atternatlve: l)ate.and Time of Data. Project: AM Peak Hour Exlsimg Movement ~ --- 'i t •-- L '1 ~'' ~,- 1 Moverttent E81. E8T EBR Y1iBL WBT WBR. tt81 tVBT NBR SBL SBT . SBR. 2 Lanes 1 : 11 1j 1 1 0 2 2 1. 1 3 0 3 Stiated tT Lane n Yes Yes Yes _ Yes 4 Volume 81 : 116 1$7 ~ 312 1961 22 279 5011 138 7 127't 92.9 b PedesMians 10 0 0 0 6 RBd Hutton. n ~ Yes Yes Yes Yes 7 Pedestrian Timm Re wired 16 1fi 16 16 8 Free Ri ht /n 1 yes Yes Yes' Yes 9 Ideal Flow 1900 9800 1900 1900 1900 1904 1900 1900 1900. 1900 1900 1900 10 LosfThna .. 4 4 4 4 41 4 4 4 4 . 4 4 4 11 iviinimum;Graen 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 12 Reference C e:tength 120 13 Volume:lombined - 81,0 116A 787.0) 392.0 1 218.0 0:0 279.0 '501:0.1 139.0 7:0 1400.0- 0:0 14 Volume Se raie Left 81.0 '116:0' 312:0 218.0 279.4 501.0 7:0 1400.0 15 Lane Utifizaifon.Faotor . 1A00 1:000 1.000 1.006 1:000 1:404 0.971 0:952 1.000 °1.000, 0.908 1.000 16 Tum Factor Ad usf . 0.950 1:000 0.850 0:9511 . 0.985 0:850 0,950 1.000 0.850 0:950 0.986 4:850 17 Saturated Fiow Combined 1805.0. 1900.0: 7615.0 1805:0 1871...2 0.0 :3505:3 3617:6: 1615.0 1805:0 5104:1. D. . 18 Saturated Flow Se'n`ate 1805.0 1900:0 1805:0 1871:2 3505:3 3617.6 1805:0 5:104.1 19 Pedestrian interference"Time 0>0 1.2, 0;0 0:0' 0.4 O.p 0:0 0: 20 Pedestrian'Freque 28.3°~ D:0% QD°!o Ot0% 21 Protected:0 onAliovved TRUE TRUE- TRUE. TRUE 22 Reference Time b.4 7.3 93.9 20:7 14:0 00 8:6 16.6 10:3 Q:5 32;8 0,0 23 Ad'usled Reference Time ;9:4 13:8 17:9 24.7 .1. 18:0 8~0 13:6 2q.6 14::3 8;0 36:9 $.0 Permuted tlorr 24 Rro orilori.tefts 1 O.DO 9 0:00 t 0:00: 1.1 0.00. 25 Volume Left Lshe 81: 116 392 j 218 139:5 251. 7 467 26 Pro rtiomLxfls Geft i 0:00 1 O.OD T D.DO 1 0.00 27 Left tum E uivalenis 15.0 15:0 13.0 15.0 _15:0. 15:0 0:9j 15.0: 28 Lefl tum Fadcc _ . 0.07 1;00 0;07 1 A0 0.07 1:40 1.07 ( 1.00 29 Pennltted Sat Fio+At . 120:3 1900.0 120.3 1871.2 116:8 1808:8 1925.3 1701.4'. 3D Reference Tkne.A 80:8 7.3 311.1 14.0 143:3 18:6 0.5 32:9 31 Ad waled Saturetion 8 '1900.0 1871:2' 3617.8 5704:1 32 t3eference l'knie.B ~ NA 14:0 1JA NA 33 Reference T~iie:L:eRis t±lA 28.7 NA' NA 34 Reference Tirime 80x3 28.7 143:3 32:9. 35 Ad'usted Reference Time 84:8 32:7 147:3., 36:9:' S fit T1 36 Ref Time Comtrined 7:3 14.0 16:6 32.9: 37 Ref Time B'":Movement 5:4 7.3 20,7 14.0 9:6 16.fi 0;5 32.9 38 Reference Tkne. 7.3 20:7 1fi:6; 32.9 39 Ad usted :Reference Time 13:8 13:8 24:? X4.7 20.6 20:fi 38;9) 36.9 Summa Eeat West 'North°South 40 Proteclad ~~. 50:5 41 Fersnftted . 84.8 947.3 42 S itt.. 38:5- 5715 43 M-n6ra~tti 38.5 50:5 44 Comt~d . 89.0 R- ht-Tuns EHR WBR.. NBR SBR . 45 waled Referencre Titire 17.9 S:0 °14.3 S:0 `46 Crosfi'Thm i3irec8on NHT SH7 WBT E8T 47 CroasThro h`Ad Ref Time 24;6 36.9 1'8.0 13.8 48 Oncorni Left Diteci3on :' NtHL fBL SBL t!~L 49 Oncomi Left Ad Ref Tinre` 24.7 9:4 80 I i3.6 50 Combined 17.9 54:3. 40.3 35.9 511ntersectlonCa aci Udltxatlon 74:2'X. 52 Levef tN Service. G Revision 2003A Lave) of Service is based on Orange County CMP Guidelines ~k i ~?~ i i i i i i ~J Intersection Capacity Utllizatlon Worksheet Intersection Location: Red Htl S to Camino City: Tustl~ Analyzed Liy: --- Alternative: Date arrd Time of Data: Project: PM Peak Hour Existh-g Movement 1 Moverca3rft EBL EBT EBR WBL WB7 WBR NBi N87 NBR SBi. SBT SBR 2 L,aruss 1 1` 1 1 1 0 2 r2, 9 t 3) 0 3 Shared LT lane 7n Yes Yes ^ Yes Yes 4 Volume 80; 173 1Ei8 202. 2931 2$ 288 1048 188 29 6841 61 5 Pedestrians 10 0 0 0 6 Pad"Button In ~ Yes Yes. Yes Yes 7 PedestrienTlmin Reouired 1fi 16 i.Ei ifi_ 8 Free Ri ht !n 1 Yts Yes Yes Yes 8 Ideal Fbw 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 191 1900 1900 1900 1900 10 Lost T'Nne 4,1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4: 4 4: 4. 4 11 Minimum Green:. 9 4 4 4 4' 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 12 Reference C e Length 120 13 Volume Combined: 80:0 973:0 188.0 202:D 319:01 0:0 .288.0' 1048:0 188.0" 29.0 745.0 0:0 14 VotumeSe rate Lett 80.0- 179.0 202:0 319.0 .288.0. 1046.0 29.0 7"45.0 15 l.nrie ~Utilirat}onl~at4or' . 1.000- i.D00 1:0001 1:D00 1.ODOI 1:000 0.97'1 0.952 1.Oti01 1..000. 0.808 1.000 16 Tumin FactorAd'ust 0:950. 1.000 0:850 0:950 0.988 0;850) .0.950 9;000 0.850 0:950 -0:988' 0.850 17 Satviated FlowCombinad 1805.0 1900:0. 1615.0. 7805.0 1878:8 OA 3505.9 3817.6 1fr15.0 1805.0 5112.0 0:0 18 Saturated Flow Se state 1805.0 1900.0. 1805:0 1876:8 3505.9 3617.6; 1805:0 5112.0 18 Pedestrian lntedetence Time 0,0: 12. 0.0 050. 0.U 0.0 0.0 0:0 20 Pedestrian Fn3qua 28:3°k 0:0°~ 0.0°k 0.096 21 Protected 0 on Allowed TRUE ?RUE TRUE. TRUE 22 Reference-Time 5;S 10.8 12:6 13A 20.4 0:0 9:9 .34.7 94,0 ~ 8 17~ 0.0 23 Ad usted'Reference Time 9.3 18.4. 18.8 17.4 ; 24.+1. 6:0 1.3:9 38.7 18.0 6.0 21:5 8.0 Permitted 0 on 24 Prci onion Lefts 1' 0.00 '! . O:OD i 0:00 1. 0.00 25 Volume Lefl l:atre 80 173: 202 319 '1.44 523: 29 248 28 Pro rtion Lefts l.efl 1 O.OD: 1: 0.00 1 0:00 t 0.00 27 Lefl turn E uivatetds. 15:0 15.0 15.0 15:0 15.0 15.0 0.9 15:0 28 Lefl tuni~Farxrx 0.07 1.D0 0.07 1.D0 0.07 1:OD 1:07, 1:00. 28 Pemittied Sat Fiow 120.3 19D0.0 120:3 1875:8 116.8 180$:8. 1825.$ 1704:0 30 Reference Time A 79:8 10.9 201,4 2D:4" i~l?:9 34.Z 1.9 17,5. 31 Ad usted Saturatlon;B 19DOA 1876:8 3617:6 5112:0 32 Refanence"Time:B NA NA NA tVA' 33 Reference Tune"Lefts NA ~ ~ ~ 34 Reference Thne 79:8 209.4 147:9 17:5 9S Ad usted Reference Time 83:8 205:4- 15'1;9 21,5: S lh Timm 3fr R$iTime`Combkied 10;9 20:4 34:7 17e5. 37 f2ef l7me B' -Movement 5.3 1D:9 13:4 .20..4 9:91 34.7 tfi 17.5. 38 Refere¢ice Titres 10:9 20.4 34.71 17:5 39 Aid listed Reference Tame 16:4" 16.4 24.4 24.4 x8,71 38.7 21:51 21.5 Sum East West ,Nor3h;South 40 rroterded 33:8 46 41; P_errtiitled 205 i" 151.9 42 S Ni' 40:8 6112 43' Minirnurtr 33:8' 48:7 44 Combined 80:5 RI M:Turrts' EBR WBR NBR ; SBR 45 Ad listed Reference Time fr.6 8 0 1$A 8:0 46 Cross 7hroti b Direction NBT S8T t!YBT EBT 47 Cross Ttiro "hAd Ref Thee 38:7 21:5 29>4 16:4 48 Oncomin 1:efl Direction WBi. 6BL SBL tJB1 49 Onccrnin " Left Ad RefTirt~: 17.4 8:3 8.0 13:9 50 Combined 16.8 38,8 50.4 38":2 51 intersection Ca a Utlliza8osl 67A 521Level tJf Service B Revision 2003.0 Level of'Service is based an Orange-County CMP GuideOnes Intersection Capacity Utilization Worksheet Intersection Location: Red HFJI 8 EI Camino _ City: Tustin Analyzed by: Altemadve: Date and Time of Dsta: ., Pro~ct: AM Peak Hau Existing vdth Projed Movement ~~ f~ 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR iNBL WBT W8R NBL NBT NBR SBL 5BT SBR 2 ~,~ ; 1 1 1 1 1 0 2 2, 1 1 3( ~ 3 Shared LT Lane !n Yg Yes Yes Yes 4 Volume 88 11& 187( 312 188( 23 2791 5D51 139 13( 1274 135 5 Pedestrians 1D D 0 d 6 Ped Button.. !n ~ Yes Yes Yes Yes 7 Pedestrian Tunin " Re wired 16 16 18 16 8 Free: Ri ht !n ^~ yes Yes ,Yes Yes 9 ldeat;F~r•' 19~ 1900 1.800 1900'. 1900 1900 1900 1900 .1900 1900. 1900 1900 1D Lost:Tlnre 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 11. Minimum Gn~n 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 121 Reference Gycte Length` 120 13 Volume,Combined 86:0 116.0: 187:0( .312.0 219:0 0.01 279:0 .505.0 139:0: 13:D 1409:0 0.0 14 Volume Se " rate Left ,_ 88:0 118.0 312.0 219:0. 279'.0 50.5.0 13.0 1409:0 15 Lane"Utiiliatiori Fades : 1.000 1.000 1:000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.971 0.952 1:000 1:000 0:908 1.000 16 Tumin Factor Ad ust. ? 0:950 1.000 0.850. 0.950 D:984 0.850 0.950 1:000 O:85D 0.950) 0:988 .0.850 17 Saturated Fiovi::Combined 1805:0 1900.0 1815.fl 1805.0 187D1 0.4 3505':3 3517:6( 1615.0 .9805:0 5'10'1. : O:t) 18 Saturated Flavi Se ~ raNe 1805,0 1900:0: 1805:D 1870.1 3505:3 3817:ti. 1$05.0 5101.2 19 Pedestrlan:Interfen;nce Time 0,0 1.2 0:0' 0.0' 0:0 D.D, 0:0 0:0 20 PedestdanFreque 28.3a~ 0.0% O.D% 0:0°k 21 Protected O Lion Atiovrad ` TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE. ` 22 RefierienceTir`rie . 5:7: 7:3 13:9(. 20:7.. 14:1 D;0 9: 16:8 10:3 09 33..1 0:0 23 Ad irstedReference'lirtie 9.7 93:11 17.9 24:7 18.1 8:0 19:8 20:8 14:9 8:t) 3T 1 8:0 24 Permitted O Pro ortlon t:efts: - `- 1 0:00 1 Di00 1 O:DD 1 0.00 25 Volume~Left-Lane' 86 115 312 219 199:5 253. 13 470 26 Pro" rUon.Leftseft 1 0:00 7 0.:00 .1 0:00 1 0:00 27 Left=tim E trivalents 15.0 1.5.0. 15:0 1 -15.0: .15.0. 15:0, 0.9 15.0 28 Left tum FadoE 0.07 1.04' 0:07 1.00 0:07 1.00; 1.07- 1.00 29 Pemtiitled "sat Flow 120.3 1900:0. 120:3 1870.1 116:8 1808:8: 1925:3 1700.4 30 Reference Tirrie:A . 85.8: 73 311.1- 14.1 143.3 16'8 0;8. 33.1 31 Ad waled 5atunsti~ B 1900:0 1870.1' 3697:8 5101:2 32 Reference Tane.B NA 14.1' NA NA 33 Referer~ Time: Lafta ~ NA 28:7 NA NA 39 Referier;ce'iiims 85:8 28.7:: 143:3: 33:'t 35 Ad usted_Referance Tirne - 89.8 32:? 1473 97.1. '38 S Itt7imt Refi TNne'Gomt~rred 7.'3 19.1. 16:8. 93:1:. 97 Ref Time B'` Movement ~;7 7.3 20 T 14:1. .9:6 18:8: 0.9 33:1; ' 98 Refier+enceSUne 7:3 20.7 16:8 33:1 39 Ad usied:Refenence lime - 19ai 13.8'- 24,7( 24.7 20:8( 20:8 97A 37:1. -. Sum EastWast ~NOrth~SouBt _ 40 Pnofecteif:0 - 38.5 5D:7 41 Permitted" ~ 89,8 14.7:3 A2 S iii:, 88:5 57 9 49 Min"tnum 38:5 ~:Z 44 Combined • ' . .: 89':2 R! M Turns .' _ ,:EBR WBTt " ' NBR SBR 45 ustedfielerenca:Tarte '17:9 8:0 94;3 8A' 48 Cross Thro h Diredtort NBT SBT YVBT EBT 47 Gross~hro "fi`Ad Ref:Tirne. 20.8 37.1 t&1 13.8 48 Oncomi "Left Direction WBL EBL SBL NBL A9 Oncimi "Left'. RefiTlme 24;7 9:7 8.0 13.6 50 Combined ~ 17:8 5+3.9 40:9 35.3 51 i ntersecUOn Ca c Utllizet iotf 74.4X 52 Levet'Of Siervias~ G Rev[sioh 2003.0 Levei.or sernce is oaseo v....~a.~a~ .,~.,,..r .,...r u..,.,e... i • i~ Intersection Capacity Utilization Worksheet ~~ 1 { Intersection Location: Red HN d El Camkso City: Tustin Analyzed by: Altemalive: Date and Time o- Data: PcoJeett PM Peak Hour Existing with Pro)ect Movement ~ ~~ ~ ~ '•~ 1 Movement !!!! EBL EBT E8R W8L WBT t+VBR NBt: N67 NBR SBL SBT SBR 2 ~~ 1 1 1_ ! 1 0' 2 2 1 7 3 0 3 SFiated LT Lane: /n Yes Yes Yes Yes 4 Volume 881 173 169 202 2931 29 288 10531 188.) 35~ 688 68 5 PedesUiens 10 0 0 0 6 Pad Button: 1n ' 'Yes Yes Yes. Yes 7 PedesUien Timm Re: aired 16 16 16' 16 $ Free.R1 ht 7n 'Yes Yes Yes errs . 9 IdeaFFloxr 1900 1900 1900: 1900 .1900 1900 1900 1900 1840 1900 1900 1900 10 Loss Time: '. 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 11; Fairiir»um' Green: 4 4 4 4 41 A 4 4 4 4 4 4 12 Reference:. a Lie 120 13 Voiume'Gombined. r 88:0 173:0 169.0 202: 0 322.0 D:01 288.0. 1052:0 188.0 35:0 758,9) 0.0 14 Volume:Se reie le8_ 88.0 173.0. 202: 0 322.0 288.0 1052.0 35.4 756:0 15 LsneUUitzatio» Factor ; 1.000 1;ODD 1,000 1.00 0. 9.000 1:000 0.971- 0:952. l.OOOJ 1:000: .0.908 `1.000 i6 Tumi FaciorAd 0.950 1.000 0.850 0.95 0 0.986 0:850: 0:950 1.000 A:850 0:950 .0.987 0:850 17 Saturated Fiow Combtned. 18D5A 1900:0. !615.0 1805:0 1874.3 0.01 3505:3 .3617.6 1615;0 1805:0 5105.$ 0.0 18 Ssiurated;F,lowSe"`arete 1805.0 1900:0 !805.0 ` 1874.3 . 3505,3 3617.6 1805.0 5105:8 19 Pedestria» Interference Time 0:0 1.2 0.0 0.0` 0:0" 0.0 D.0 0:0 20 Pedestslari Prague 28.3°k 0.091; 0.D°fo OA% 21 Protected 0 tion Ailovved ° TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE. 22 Reference'Tiirie .5:9 10:6 12:6.1 13:4 20.8 OQ 8:9 94:9 1'4,0 2:3 17:8 0.0 29 Ad usted Reterence Troia 9.9 16:4 . 16:8` 17:4 24.8 8 0 13:91 X8.9 18:D 8:0 21.8 8A Permttted O on 24 Pro ortioii.lbfls .: 1 0.00- 1 1 0.00 t OOD 1 .0.00 25 Volume L'•eft•Lane 88 -173 202 322. 944. 526- 35 252 26 Pro rUorflett5"LeR~... 1 0.00. 'I 0.00 i D:00 '! 0.00. 27 Leff ium E uilraierils 15.0 15,0 15.0 15;D 15.0 15.0 0.9 15.0. 28 Lefiitum Fad 0:07 tDD '0:07 1.OD 0.07 1.00 1A7 1:00 29 Pertnttted Sai Fbw 120:3 !900.0 120.3 1874:3 196:8 1808:8 .1925.3 1701.9 30 Refeienca'17rnePa' $?:8 l0:9 209.4 20:6 147.9 34:9 2.3 17:8 31 Ad'usted Saturatbn B 1900.0 1874:3. 3617.6 5105.8 32 Referenee Time B N,4 NA NA NA. 33 Reference Time Lefts NA lVA. NA 1+IA 34 Reference TNne ° 87:8 201:4 14T9 17.8`: 35 Ad usted.ReferericeTlme 91:8 205.4; 151.3 21.8 S 1nTiml 36 Rei:Time":Combined 10.9: 2D6s 34x9 17.B- 37 Ret'Time?B Movement 5:91 10:9 13:4 -20:6 9,9 X34:9 23 17.8 38~Refereni:e Time 10:9 20:6 34:9 17,8: 39 Ad usied.Reference Time 16:41' 18:4 24:61 24.6: 38.9 38:9 >21:8 21.8. Su East<Wett North-Soutlt 40 Protected: tlon 34~ 46:9 41 Permltied" uorl 205:4; 151:.9" 42 S lit' "lion 41.0 SOa 48 Mbiimum 34:5 48:9 44 Combined 8`1.4 Rf" ht~Tume . EBR WBR NBR - SBR. 45 Ad , ed Refe-ersce Time 16.6. $:0 18.0 _8:0 4b Cress.7hrn h Drcection NBT SBT iNBT EBT 47 Gross.Throu "h Ad'RetTime- 38:9 X1.8 24.6 .- T6:4 48 flnoom Left,Directlon WBL EBL SBL NBL 49 Oncomin 'Ceti Ad'. Ref Time. '17:4 919 8A 19:9 50 Combined ` . ' 16;6 1 39.6 - 50:6 38.2 51 Intersection Ca act UtigzaUon 69.896 52' L.evetOf Ser@Ict B Retrision 2008:0 Level of Serviix is based on Orange GountyCMP.Guidellrt~ Y [t[~ Intersection Capacity Utilization Worksheet Intersection Location: Red f116 & EI Cartdrro City: Tuslin Analyzed by: Altemativa: Date and Time of"Data: ~ Project: AM Peak Bout Future Wlthoul Proled ~ ~ ~ ~ •~ 4 Movement E5L EB7' tBR 1NBL tfi-e'f WBR NBL N8T N8R 3Bt SBT SBR 2 Lanes ~ 1{ 1 Y 1~ i 0 2 Yes ~2 1 1 Yes 3 0 3 Skated LT Lane n es Yes . 4 volume 1oe.{ 1T,>Q 252. 420{ 264 30 375 674 187 9 1T'f1 i 174 5 Pedesbierrs 10 0 0 0 6 Pad $Utton h1 '' Yea Yes Yes Yes 7 Pedestrian Timin Re wired 16 16 16. 16 8 Free Rl ht ~ Yes Yes. Yes Yes 9 ideal Ftow 7900. 1900. 1900 1900 ie~i 190D 19D0 1900 1900 19~ 1900 1900 10 ;:ast'Tirrie ' 4 4 4 4 4i 4 4. 4 4 4 ai' 4 11 Minimum Gne~t- 4 4 4 4 4 4. 4 4 4 4 4' 4 12 Reference<:CyGe Length. 120 13 Volume Combined 109.0 156D1 252.01 420.0 . .294.0 0:0 375.0! 674.01 187,0 9:0 1885.DJ 0,0 14 Volume Se arste Deft 109:0 156:0 42D.0 294.0 375.0 674,0 9:D 1885.0 15 Lane Utilization F.aclor ~ 1:000 '1.000 1:000 1:000 . 1.000 4.0D0 D.9T9 0.952 1:000 1:D00 0.908 1.060 16 Tumi Factor Ad list: 0:950 1.000 . D.850 0:950 .0:985 0.850 0:950 1.000 0:85D 0:950 0:988 0:850 17 Saturated Ffow Combined' 1805.0 18D0.0: 1615.0 18D5A 1870.9 0:0 3505:3 3617:6 1645:0 1805:0 5103?8 0.0 18 Saturated FiowSe araie 1805,01 1900.0 1805.0 1870.9 3505.3 3617.6 1805:0. 5103x9 19 Pedestrian Interference lime 0,0 1:2 0:0 D:0 0.0 0;0 0:0 0.0 20 Pedestdan:F 28:3°l0 0,0°l0 0;0% 0:0°h 21 Protected O lion Allowed TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE 22 Reference Three... 1.2 9.9 18:7 27:9 18:9 0.0 12:8 ' 22,4.. i~39 0:8 44~ ' OA 23 Ad'usied Refererrce:7lme 14>2 15.6; 22:7 31.9 1 "22;9 8,0 1 6:$ 26:4 17;9 B U 48 :3 8:0 Pemittxed O " 24 Pro rUon Lsfis #. 0:00' 1 0.04 1 ODt) 1, D.0C1 25 Volume tefl Esne3 109' 156 420 294 187.5 337 _ 9 ' 628 26 Pro rUonleflsaefl 1 0:D0, 1 D.00 1 0.0D 1 { O.OD 27 Leftlum-E ulvalents 13:0 15:0 15:0 15:0 15.0. 15:t) 0:9 15.0 28 LeR tum;Factor 0:07 1.00 0:07 4:00.. :0.07 1.00 1.07. 1:00 29 Permitted Sal Flow. 120.3 1900.0 120.3 1870.9: 116.81 1808:8 1925.9 1701.3 30 Reference Time"A 108:7{ 9:9 418.8 18.9. 192.6 22.4 D.6 94.3 31 Ad listed Sahrration B 1900:0 1870:9. 3617.6 5103.9 32 Rafererrce Time-B NA NA: NA NA 33 Reference Trme Lefts NA NA 34 Refeirence Tkne 108,? 918.8 192.b 44.3 95 Ati listed Reference Time 42;7: 922.8 196:5 48.3- 5 tit Tirrdn '36 Fief Tyne Combined _ _ 9:9 18.9 22:4.: 44;3 37 Ref Tkne B Movement 7 2 9:9 27:9: 18.9- 12,8 22:4 0:6. 44.3 38 Reference Tin1e 9.9` 27.8 22.4 44:3 39 Ad listed Reference Time 15:6 15:6 9iA{ 31.9 25:4{ 26>d 48:3 48:3 Sum is eatWesf Notth'Souffi 40 Protectied O 47:5 65.2 41 Permitte8. 422:8 196:5 42 S Fd O 47.5 7±4;7 43 Minirr-run. 47:5 6$.2 44 Com6metl 11Z? - Ri htTurt~ EBR WBR NBR SBR 45 Ad listed Reference: Tine 22;7 8A 179 8x0 4fi CrossT'hrou Dtrectlorr NBT SBT W8T Ef3T 47 Cross Theo h Ref Tana 26A 48:3 :22.8 15.6 48 Oncomi" Gefl Dirertloit WBL EBL SBL NBL 49 Oncomi Leff Ref Time: "31.9 1'1.2 8:0 16.8 50 Comb'alad Z2.T 67.8. 48:8 40.4 51 i ntersection Ca a Udfizet) on 93.9'x, 52 Level Of 5ervfee. E Revidign 2003A Le vei`of Service isbased on Orange Colin.. CMP Guidelines ~~ 1 i I ~~ 1 1 i ~J ~~ ii i i 1 Intersection Capacity UtiUzatfon Worksheet Intersection Location: Red HIII 8 EI Carnlno Citir. Tustin Analyzed thy: Altemetive: Date and Time of Dafa: Project: PM Peak kiorx Future Without Pmiact ~ ~~ ~ ~ 4~ '~ ~ ~ ~ ~- j 1 Mavemattt > EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR. SBL SBT SBR 2 Lanes. 9 i{ 1 1 1 0 2 2 j `! 1 3 0 Stmred LT Lane /n 3 Yes Yes Yes Yes . 4llohune 108 233 227j 272{ 394 35 3881 1408j 253 39: 92"1 13't 5 Pedestria»s 10 0 0 S Ped Button ht •r yes Yes Yes Yes 7 Pedestria» Timin R' oin3d Ili 16 16 16 8 Free ht' ht ~ Yes Yts 'les Yes 9ldeai.Ficiw - 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 190D; 1900. 1900 ' 1900. 1900. 1900 1900 10 last Time- 4' 4: 4 4 K 4 4` 4 4 4 4 4 11 Mlnlmum;Gree» 4 4 d: +1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 12 Reference'Cycle;Lenglh` 120 Combir~d 13 Vnfume 108a 233:0) 227:0.1. .:272:0 . 429:0!. 0:0 388.0 1408:0 253:0_ 39.0 1003:0' 0:0 . 14 Valum"e 5e arete"LeR 108.0 233.0 272.0 429.0' 388.0 1408.0 39.0 10D3.0 95 Larye.Utlitzatio» Facts 1.000: 1.000. 1.DOD : .1.000 1.OOD 1:OOD 0:971 0.952 1.OOD 1:000{ 0:908 1:000 16 Turritn Factor:Ad ust; 0:950. 1 AOO 0:850 0.950 . 0.988 0:850 0:950 "I `:OOO 0:850 D>950 0:988 .0:850 17 Saturated:FiowCombi»ed 1805:0 1900:0 1615;0 1805.0 . 1876:? 0.0. 3505.3 3617,6 1fi15.0. 1805,0 5112:1 0:0 18 Saititateii Fiow Se crate 1805:0" 1900.0. '1805.0 187fi.7 3505.3 3697.6 1805.0 5112.1 i9 F?edestrie» Interference Time 0:0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0:0 O.D 0:0 0.0 2O Pedestrian Fr'eque" 28:3%0 0:0°k: 0:0%: Oi096 21 Proteebed 0 tio» Ailovred TRUE TRUE; TRUE TRUE 22 Reference Thtre 73 14.7 "16.9. 18:'I j 27:4' O Q 13.3 46.7' 18~ 2.5 23.5 0.0 29 Ad usled Reference Tirrre 11..2. 19.1. . 2D.8 22:1: 31.41 8:4 17.3 ;5Dr7 22.8 8:0 27.5 8.0 Permitted O tion 24 Fro ortioriLefta 1 Oc00! 1 j 0:00 1 { .0.00; 1. 0:00 25 Volume LeftLede 108 233" 272 429- 194 1 704.' 39 334 26 Pro " riio».Cefts Lett_ 1 0:00:. 1 0:00 1 0.00: 1 0.00 27 Left turd E uivalents 15:0 15:0 15:0 : 1:5:0 15.0 15.0 0;9 15:0 28 Leff tum Facxor D.07 1.00 O.OT 1.00 0:07 1:00. 1.07 1.00 29 Permitted -sat Flow. 120.3.. 19D0:0 120.3 1876.7 .116.8 1808:8' '1925.3 1709.0 3O Referer>ce.TimeA 107sy 14:7' 27.1.2 27.4: 199.2 96.7. 2:8 23.5 31 Ad'usied 5aturetic».B 1900.0 1876.7 3617.fi` 5112:1 32 f2efersrrce T'xne B NA; NA NA NA' 33 Refereru~ Time Lefts NA' NA iJA NA 34 Reference'fhna tOZ.:3" 271:2 999.2` 23:5 95 Pldjustied f2efererice Time 111,7 275.2 X03.2': 27:5 5 l1t"i'tinl 36 ~;~~ Combbred 14.7 27.4` 46.7: 23:5 Etaf Time H Movemerd 3T 7:2 14_?. 18.1 2?_4' 'l3,3 48,7 :2.6 23:5; . 38 Reference Th»a 14:7: 27:A 46.7 23:5` 3g Adju"sled Reference'fime 19.1' ~ 19:'f 31.%f 31:4 `$0.7 ' 50.7 2T:5 27:5 Sum . Last:- West North South 40 rrotectetl'D 42: 5 58:7 41 Perrr-itied` 275 :2 203:2. 42 S "Nt " ~ " 50: 5. 782 43 Mirhntart 42: 6: 58.7 44 t;ombkrsd 10'1:3 Rf M Turns:. EBR WBR NBR Sit 45 Atl'usted Reference Time " 20,9 8.0 22;8' ] 8:0 4fi Cross Throu "h DirecBrsr _NBT SBT WB7 E8T 47 Cross Tti . h Ad' Ref Tkne 50.7. 275 j 31 A. 1#1:1 48 Or-comin :Left"Directior! YVBL EBL Ste. -~IBI 49 Oncom " LeflAd ":Ref--Tkne 22.1 11Z 8:D I i7:3 5O{Comt 20.9:. A8:7 62.2 44.4 51 ilrrtersection Gapacl Utilizati on 84.49fr 52 {Level t3f Service ~+ Leve! of Service>is based on Orange County GMP Guidelines Intersection Capacity Utilization Worksheet IntersectMn Location: Red HN & EI Cartdno Clty: Tustin Analyzed by: ARernatlve: .Date snd Time of Date: ~ Project: AM Peak Hour Futile 1Ntth Project ~~ ~ ~ ~~ 1 Movement ~ EBC EB7 E9R WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL S8T SBR: 2 {,egg 1 i 1 1 1 1. 0 7 2~ 1~ 1 S Q 3 Sharied;lT tine n Yes yes Yes _ Yes. 4 Voiume 1161 956. 252 4201 264 31 375) 88vI 187. 1T 1715 182 5 Pedestrigns 10 0 0 0 6 Ped L3utton ~ Yes Yes Yes Yes 7 Redestrign Timm Re wired i6' 1S 1.6' 16 $ Free tit /n : f Yes Yes -Yes Yes 9 IdealFbw 1800 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900: 1900 1900 ' 1900 1900 1900 10. t.ost Time ' 4 4 4 4 4: 4 d 4 4. 4 4. 4 11 Minimum Green 4' 4 4 4 4 4 4' 4 4 4 4 4 12 Reference C .Length 120 13 Voiume Combined 116:0 156.01 252.0:1 . 420.0 295A 0.0 375:0 680:0 187.:0 17.0 1897:Oj 0:0 14 Volume.5e rate Leff 116:0 156.0 420:0 295A 375:0 680:0 17.ti 1897:0 15 Lene:UUiization Factor' 1.000 _1:000 1.000 1.000 1:000. -1.000 0.979 0:952.. 1.000 1.000. D:908 1.000 16 Turnin FactorAd'u~ 0:950 1:000 0.850. 0.950 - 0:984 .0:850 0.95fl 1:000 0,8'50 Oc950 ~0.986 0.850 ~ 17 Saturated F1ow:Combined _ 1805:0~ 1900.0 1615:0 1805.0 1870.1 0:0 3505:3 3617:6 1fi15,0. 1805.0 51:01.1 0:0 18 Saturated FiotirSe erase 1805.0 1800.0 1805;0 1 1870.1 350'5:3 36'17:6 1805:0 510'1.1 i9 Pedestrian Inietierence Time 0:01 1.2 0.0 0:0 0:0 0:0 0.0 0:0 20 Pedestrian Fneque " 28.3°k 0.0°h 0:0°,fi 0:09 21 Protected 0 tlon Allovr+ed . TRUE TRUE- TRUE TRUE 22 Reference Tune.: 7,7 9:9 18.71 27:9 18.9 O;D 9.2.8 22:6 13:9. 1:1 44.6: 0 29 Ad usted,Reference"Time 11.7 15:6 22.7 319 32.9 8.0' 18:8 26,6 17:9 S:d 48.8 8:D Bermltted Q 24 Pro ~oiironl.efts' 1 0:00. 1 0.00: 1. ;0.00' 1 0:00 25 Voiume Left.Larre 116 156 420 295' 187:5 340. 17 637 26 Pro onion Lefts LeR 1 O:DO + 1 D:00 9 0.00. 1 0:00 27 Leftlum uiv8lerds' 15:0: 15.0 '15:0 1 15:0 15A 15:0 09 15:0 28 Left:tum Factor O.D7 1:00: '0.07- 1:00. 0,071 1:00 1:07 1.00 29 PerrnRted Se6:Fbw 120:3 1900:0. 120:3 1870.1 118:8 1808:8 1925:3 (700:4 30 Reference Time A 115 T) 9.9 418;8 18.9 192:6 22:6 1:1 44:6 31 Ad'usted Saturation B 1900A 1870..1. 3617:6` 510'1 a 92 Reference TNne B NA NA NA. NA 33 Refererce Time Leit,i NA NA t+lA f~14 34 Reference Tirue 115.1 418:8 192.6" 44;6. 35 Adjusted.Rei+en3nce 7lme 119:7 42248 186:6 48:6 S IH 17m 36 Ref'Timt t:ombined 9.9: 18:9 22:6. 44:6 37 Ref Time B Movement 7`>7' 9.9 27:91 18:9 12;5 22:5 1.9 44:6: 98 Reterenas Tkns 9:9 27.9 22:fi 44.6 99 Ad trsied Referenoe Time 18:8 95:6 31:9: 31:9 26:8 26:6 48.8 -46:6 Summa . East West Nord( South 40 Priotected +37:5 -65:5 41 Psrrriltteii 422:8 198:5 92 S lit t) Uon` 47:5 -75:2. 49 Minimum 4?:5 85: 44 Combh~ed 119:0 R htTuma t=BR WBR NBR SBR 45 Ad ueted Referenxe lime 22:7 '8: 0 I "17:9 8.0 48 Goss Th h DirecUar~ NB7 SBT W8T . + EBT 47 Cross Thra Ad Ret Tmu 26.8 _ 4S9 22.9. i5:6 48 Oncom ~ Left Dhecikn WBL EBL SBL hl9l 49 t?ncom ~ Left Ad `Ref Tune. 3;1.9. t 1:7 8:0 16:8 50 Combined 22.7 88:3 48.8 40:4 51 Intersection-Can Udiization 94.296 52 Level Of 3ertiilce E Revfsbn 2003.0 t.evel olService is-based on:Orange.County CMP Guidelines !i I ~/ I 1 1 ~. IJ 0 C~ C i L (~ Intersection Capacity Utilization Worksheet Intersection Location: Red Hd18 d Camino City: Tustin Analyzed by: Altamstive: Date and time of Data: Projed» PIiA Peek Hou Future WUh PtnJect ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ 1 Movement E81 EBT EBR WBL 4.NBT 1iV8R NBL NBT , NBR SBL. SBT SBR 2 Lanes. 1I 11 1 1 1 Q 2 .. 21 1 i 3 0 3 Shared LT Lane. /n Ya Yes Yes. Yes 4 Volurna. 178) 233 227 272 394 39 388 '1418. 253 471 926 92 5 Pedeshle~ 10 0 Q 6 Ped Button' fi 'Yes Yes Yes Yes 7 Pedestrian Timi wired 16 16 16 16 8 Free" "M 7n ~ vzs Yes ltes: .Yes 8 ideal Flow 1900 1900` 1900 1900. 1900) 1900 1900 1900 1900' 1900 1900 1900: 10 grist 7inie :: 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4. 4: 4 4 11 1VOnimum Greed " 4 4 d 4 4 4: ~ 4 4 4 41 4 12 Reference de Lengdh 120 13 Volurme.Cornbined 118'.0 233.0 227;01 272.0 43310 0.0:1 38$A 1416.0 233:U 47.0 1018:0 D. 14 Volume Se Grate Left 118.0 233.0 272.0 433:0 388.0 1416.0 47.01 1018:0 15 lane UBliietlon Fader 1:000 1.000 1:000 1.000 1:00.0 1.000 0:971. 0.952 1:0001 1:000 0.908. 1,000 18 Turrilri Eectoi Ad ust 0:950:- 1.000 0:854 0.950 0.986 0.850 0:950 1.000 0:850' 0.950 0:988- 0.850 17 Saiurated'FIow;Combinei! . 1805:0 1900.0 1615:0 `1845:0 1874:3 0.0. ,3505:3 3617:6 "1615.0 1805,0 5105A. 4. 18 Saturated .Flow Se ante 1805.0 1904.0 1845.0 1874.3 3505:3 3617:6 1805.4 b105.4 19 Pedestrian irrterierence Time 0:0 7;7 0:01 0:0 O:D D.O: 0 0 a1.0 20 Pedestrian Freque" 28:3°~: 4.0°~ 00°~' 0:0°x. 21 Protected 0 tion Allowed' TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE 22 Refererrcti Time 7,@ 1+4:71 16:9 i8:1 27:7 0:0 13:3. 47.0 `18.8. 3.1: 23:9 0:0 23 Adjusted Reference Time 1'1.8: 19.1 20:9 22.:1 . 31,7 8:0 17,3. 51:0 22.8 8:0 27:9. 8:0 IP.ermitted 0 on 24 P,ro ortlonliefts 1 0.00 1 ,1 O:OD 1. O:DO 1. 0.00 25 Voiume.lxfl"Lane 118 233 272 433 19# 748 47 338 26" Pm oriton Letts L.eR: 1 0,00 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 O:Oo 27 left tum"E uivalents 15:0 15:D i5:tt 15A 95 ti 15.0 4.9 15.0 28 tail"1um Facer' 0:07 1..00. 0.07 1.:00' 0:fl9 1,00: 1:OZ 1.00. 29 Pe"rrnitted 5a1 Fbw 120.3 1900.,0_ 120;3 1874.3 116.8 " 1808:8 1925;3' 1701.8 30 Reference Time A 117,3' 14.7 271:2 27.7 199:2 47.0 3.1 23:9 31 Ad waled Ssturatiorl B 1900.0 1874:3 3617.6.: 5105:4: 32 Reference Tir-re.B NA' tdA NA NA 33 Reteter~e.TimaLegs NA NA t!ll4 NA' 34. Refererriiel'hrie 117:7 271;2 199:2:: 23:9 35 Ad'usted~#2eference Tama 12:7.] 275:2 203:2' 27:9 S Nt"Tlmi 36 Rat--Time:Combhted 14.7 27:7 47:0. 23:9 37 Re'flme B';fNovement 78' 14:7 18.'I` 27:7 13;3 47;D. 3.'1 23:9 38 Refert:rrceTUne 14.?" '27:7 47.0 23>9 39 usbed Reference TNse 19:1. 19.1 31.7 31.7 -51,0 5,1.0 21.91 27:9 Su _ EastWes3 ' North South 40 i?roterded 43~ 59:0 41 Pemailted 295.:2 203;2 42 S. ~, 50:8 78,9 93 MlntriusTr. 43.8 59; 44 Co'mbfiect 102.5 RI M Turns FAR WBR NBR SBR 45 usted Reference T#ne 20.9' 1 8.0 1 22.8. I 8.0 46 Cross ~" fi Dliadiorr Nl3i' SBT VVHT EBT 47 Croons Tiro ""h Ref:'Tkne 51,0 27:9 3i.7 19.1 48 Oncom Left Direction W8L EBL :581 I NBL 49 Oncomiri Left Ad' IRef Time 22.`1 11'8 8:D 17:3 50 Combined 20,9. 47:8. 62.5. 44:4 51 IntersecUon.Ca ad Udltza8ort : 85.494 52 Level Of Service D (R evision 21103.0 Level of Service 1s based on Orange County CMP Guidelines Intersection Capacity Utlpzation Worksheet Intensectlon Location: Red HIO 8 San Juan City: Tust~ Analyzed by: Alfernatlve: Date and Time of DstB: RroJect: AM Peak MourEzisting Movements E8L EBT EBR. iNBL WBT 1NBR NSL NBT N8R S8L SBT SBR 2~ 0 1 0 0. 7 0 1 2 9 "f 2 0 3 Shared LT' Lane 7ri ' Yg ~ Yes Ya Yes 4 Volume 22 80 155- 299"1 79 48 36a 458'{ 99 40 1060 48 5 Pedestrians 10 0 0 A 6 Pad Button: hl ~ Yes Yes Yes- Yes 7PedeatrianTSnin Re ulred ° i6' 16` 16 "i6. 8 Free RIM hr ~ Yes `` Yes Yes Yes 9 ldeai;i=low 1900 1900 19001 1900 1900 1900 1900 1800 1900 1900. 1900 9800 10 Lost Tnre 41 4 d +~ 4 4: 4 4 4 4 41 4 7i Minimurrr:Green 4 4~ 4 4 4 4 ~} 4 41 4 4 4 12 Refererice.C e'Length 120 13 Volume Combined fl:0 257:0 OA _0.0 338:0. OAi 3610: 456.01 - 99;0) 40.0 1108:0) 0.0 14 Volume Se ardie heft 22:0 235,0 211..0 127:0 36:0. 456. 0 ~ _ R0,0 7108:0 15 Lane UUlizatlon Facto.. 1:000 1.000 t:~0 7.000 1..0001 1.000 9.000 0.852 1.000 1.000 0.952 ' 1.000 16 Tum)n Factor 0.95.0. 0:906 0:850 -0:950 9:948 0:850 0.950 1.000 0.850 0.950 0 .994 0.850 17 Saturated FiowCombinetl 0.0 1720.7 OU 0.0 1801.5 0.0 1805:fl 3617:6 1615=0. 1805.0 3594:1 0.0 78 Saturated FIow:Se stale 1.805:01 1712:0. 1805D J 1792.3 1805:0 8612:6 1805.0 3594.'1' 19 Pedestriartlnterference lime 0:7:1 . 12 0.0 0:0 U.0 00 0:0 0.0 20 Pede5tiian`FTe9Ue 28:3% 0.0.% 0>0°l0 0.0% 21 P,rotecbed 0 onAilowed FALSE ' FALSE. TRUE TRUE 22 Reference Tk»e NA NA 00 NA 1 IVA O:D 2:4 75:9- 7,4. '2;7 37.,0 0.0 23 Ad usted Reierence"Time -+lA NR 8.0 f+lA NA 8:0 8:0. -19.9 ~ 91.4. 6.0 .49:0. 8:0 Permitted tJ lion 24 Pro- onion Legs' 71 0.09 1 7):62' 1 O.fiO' ! .0;00: 25 Volurrre l:ett Lane 0 257 0. 838: 36 228 40 554 261Pro cifon"LeRstlefi' 1 0:09 i ~ 0:67 1 Di00 1 0:00" 27 Left rum E ' uivaterrts 2.4 0:9 15::0, 16:3: 15.0 15:0: 0:9 15:0 26 Lefl trim Faraot :0.49 1.01 0:07 0.09 0:07 1.00' 1.07. 1:00 28 Permitted-Sat"Flow-_ 0.0 1742:0' Q:0 170:7 120.3 1808;8 1925.3 1797.0: 30 Reference Tme,A Q.0 18.7- 0:0 237.6" 3.5:9 15:9 2:7" 37.0 91 Ad usted Saturation"a 0<0 0.0 3617..6: 3584:1. 32 Referience Titre B. tJA t1,4; NA, NA 39 Reference Time Lefts NA' NA NR AIA 34 Reference Tirtire 18.7'. 237:6'. '35:8 3~ 0 35 Ad uatetl~Retererx:e Tama- 22.7` 249.6 '39;9: 41:0 S fit Trrrrf 36 Ref Tln-e Gombirasd ^I8~7 23.5 75"c1` 97:0 37 P,ef T+rne 8 'Movement 1:5 17:2 94:0' 8:5 2:4 15:1 2.7 37.0' 38 Refererxie'liine 18:7 22.5: 15:1 37.0 39 i4d'ustea Reference lime 22:71 22.7 26;51 26.5 19:11 7.9.1 41.0: 41:0 Sum East West I+lorth South 40 Protected PIA 49;0 41: c~~ 249.6 4120 42 g t0;p ... 49:2 ~ 60,1 A+linlr~rttlir . 49.2 47'.0 44 Comfrhied 90.2 Ri fit Tu>'tis EBR W8R " 'NBR SBft 4s Aa•r,csted Reference--rime e;o s;o 99.4 a:o 48 Gross Ttuou D)rectk>!n N8T SBT WBT EB7 47 Crass T1uo" Ad''Ref Time 99:7 41.0 26 ~ 22.7 48 Oncoml Lefl Directigrt W8L EBL SBL NBL 49 Orrcomin left'Ad -Ref Tkne 26:5 22.7 8.0 8.0 50 Combkied 8 D 1 71'.7 45'f9 38:7 51 irrteraection Ca aci t1NlizaNon ?5:2% 52ltever:Of Service: G Revis1on2003.0 Level.af Service is based on Orange Coun CMP Guldeflnes D Ik f t ~1 i i~ 1 Intersection Capacity Utilization Worksheet Intersection Location: Red HiA 8 San Juan _ City: Tta~ Analyzed by: Akernative: Date and Tines. of Darts: Pro~ct: PIiA Peak Hour Existk>8 Movements J --- "~ ,` ~- L ''~ -- ~'' ~- 1 f~Aovernent EBL tBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NB't NBR SBL S8T SBR 2~ 0 1 0 0 1 Oj 1) 2 1 1 2 0 3 Steered LT Lane n ~ Yes + Yes Yes Yes 4 Volume 13j 7S 441 97 { 80 68 651 980 140 53~ 645 33 5 Pedestrians 10 0 0 0 6 Ped BUtton /n ~ Yes Yes Yes Yes 7 Pedestrian Timm Re aired 16 36 16 1fi 8 Free' ht /ti ~ yes Yes Yes Yes 8 ldeeiFlow i 19001 1900 1900 1,900 . 1900- -1900 1900 1900 1900 19D0 1900 1900 10 Lost Tirri® 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 9 4 4 4 4 91 Mlnirtiurn Green di d 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 12 Reference Length 20 13 Volume CombUied 0:0 132.0) 0:0' 0.0 245:01 O:Dj 65:0 988,0 140:0 53.01 878:01 0,0 14 Volume Se state Leff 13.Di 119:4 9T.0 148,0 65.0 980.0 53:D 678A 15 Lane Utilization Factor i D00 1:000 1.000 1.800 1.000 1:Dt101 1.000. 8.952 1.,000 1.:800 0:952 1OOD 16 Turnip Factor.Ad asst 0.950 .0.945 8:850 A.954 0.939 .0.850 0:9501 1:008 0:850 0:950 0:993 A.850 17 Saturated FlowGombined OA 1796.1 0.0 0.0 1784.9.. 0:0 1805:D 3637.6 1615.0 1805.0 .359'1.2 D:0 18 Saturated FiowSe state i805.Oj 1794:6 18D5:0 17fi9.1 1805.0 3617,fi 1805:D 3591.2 19 Pedestrian interference Time 0.4) 1:2 0.0 0;0 O:t) D.0 0:0 00 20 Pedestrian Fn:que" 28:3°~ 0.0°~6 0:0°~ 0:096 21 Protected O on Allowed FALSE FALSE TRUE TRUE 22 Refererrce:Tlme NA NAl 0:4. Ni4 NA 00. 4.3 32.5 10.4' :5:5 22.7 0.0 23 Adjusied'Reference Time: NA NA 8,0 NA NA 8:0 8.3 35:5 14:4 6:0 28.7 8.0 Permitted 0 on 24 Pm ottion Lefts 11 4.10 1 8:40' 1 4:OD 1. 0.00 25 Volume Left Later 0 132 0 245. 65. 490 53. 339 26 Pro onion Lefts Left 1 4:10 1 i 0:44 1 8.40: 1 0.00 27 LeR Wtn E uNalerns 3,8 1:3 15:0 16:5 1510 15.0. 0.9 15.0 28 Leflaum Facxor 0.27 0:97 8.071 0.14 0:07 :1:00. 1,D? 1.00 29 Permitted Sat.Fiow 0.0 1739:3 0:0 249:5. '120.3 1808:8. 1925.3 1795.6 30 Referer~e Thr-e A O:tf 9.5 0.0 1'17:8 64:8 32.5: 3:5 22.7 31 Ad usted t3eturation $ O:D; D,0 3617.8. 3591.2 32 Reference Tien; B tJA 24:5 NA NA 33 Refetence Tfine Lefts tNA 14:4 NA NA 34 Reference'fime 9.5 24:5. 64.8 22.7- 35 Adjusted,Reference TMne 15.4 28:5 68.8:: 28:Z 5 llt7imUr 36 Ret7ime Combined 9.2 16.5 32:5 22:7 37 RetTme'B Movement 0:9: 8.4 6:4 1D.0 413 32,5. 3.S .22:7' 38 Refen:nce Time 9.2 1fis5 32:5 22:7- 98 Adjusted Reference Time 15:2 15.2 20,5 20:5 38.51 36.5 26:7, 26.7 Summa Eeai West North South 40rmie"dsd Ni4 4415 41 Perrnitied 28:5 68:8 42 S ii! tion 35~ 63,2 43 Nlinimurtr_ 28;5 44:5 44ICombitt~ 73A ~ M T EBR WBR NBR SBR. 45 Ad listed Reference Tirrnt 8,D t3.0 14.4 8A 48 Cross Thro h Din:dlon N87 SBT WBT E8T 47 Goss li-rou h Ad ':Ref 'Time '38.5 26.7 :20.5. 15:2 48 Oncom Lefl Dired~- WBL EBL SBL ~ NBL 49 Oncorri Left Ad ..Ref Time 2D:5 15;2 8:0 8:3 5D Comtiitted.: 6:0 49;6 '42.9. 31.5 51 intersection Capatt Utilizati on 60:8% 52 LeveltN Service Level of Service is based An Orange County CMP Guidelines f~aVWM1 LWJ.V ~~, Intersection Capacity Utilization Worksheet Intersection Location: Red Htn 8 San Juan City: Tubdn Analysed by: Alternattve3 Date and Time of Data: Protect: PM Peak Hour Existing with PmJecl Movements EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT tAiBli NB'L NBT NBR S8t §BT SBR 2 ~ 0 9 0 0 1 0 1 2 9 1 2 0 3 l.T Lane !n Shated ~ Yes _ ~ Yes Yes Yes 4 . Vokrme 18 75I 45 98~ ~I BS 85 9831 1401 53 650) 33 5 Pedestrians 10. 0 0 0 6 Ped Button hi ~ Yes Yes Yes' Yes 7 Pedestrian Ttmin Re uin:d 16 16: i6' 16 8 Fn:e ht 'Yes Yes Yes Yes 9 ldeal:F~w 19001 1900 1900. 1900. '1900 1900 1.900 1900 1900 4900 1800 490ft 10 Lost`Tlrime 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4. 4 11 M)nimum"Green - 4. 4 4. 4 4 4:~ 4 41 4 4 4 4 12i i'teierence C e Le 120 13 Volume Combined 0.0j 133:0) O:OI 0.0 246.0 0.0 65.0 983a1 140.0) 53:0 683.0 0:0. 14 Volume Se state Left 13.0 120:0 98:D 148.0 85.0 983.0 53:0 6133.0 15 Lane U#Itizaiion,Facioi' .: 1.000 1..000. 1:000 1.OOD 1.000 1.0~ 1-.000 0:952. 1:000 1.000 0:952 1..000 18 Tumi FactorAd ust~ 0.950 0.945 0.850 0.950 0.939 0:850. '0.950 1:000 0:850. 0:950 0:993. 0;850 17 Saturated Flew Co"rt-bined 0.0 17.94.8 0.0 O.Q 1789:9 0.0 1805.0 3617:6 181.5..0 1805.0 3599:4 0:0 18 Seturaled FloviSe state 1805:0 1793:1- 1805:0 1759.1 1805:0. 3647.6: 1805.0 3581:4 19 Pedestrian.Inieitererice''firr-e ~ 0;4 1:2 0.0 0.0 0:0 0.0: D:0 tl:0 20 Pedesirian;F.regoe ' 28.3°!° 0:0°~ 0:0°k 0.0% 21 Protected O lion Allowed FALSE' FALSE . TRUE TRUE 22 Rafe°°r®nce Tki~ W,4 NA 0.0 NA I ~ 0.01 4.3 32:6 10:4' 3.5 22:8. 0.0 23 Ad iested.Refe'rence Time Ni4 NA 8;0 NA 1+tA 8.0 8:3 36:$ 14:4" 8:0 26:8 6:0 Permittded O lion 24 Pro' `rpon t~ifta 1 0:10 1 0.40 1 0:00. 1 0.00 25 Volume Left Lane 0 133 0 246 85 492 53 392 26 Pro " rtion :eRs" tefi 4 0:10. 1 0.40 i O.OD 9 D.Oo 27 Left"tum 1:' i3iva~nts 3:7 i:3 15.0 16:5 1510 15:0 0:9. _15:0. 28 LefttumFactor. 0.27 0:97 0:07 0:1a 0:07 1.:00 1:071 4:00 29 Permitted"Sat:Fiotiv 0,0 1739:9 D.0 248:Z 120,3 1808:8 1925:3 '17.95:7 ' 30 Reference T'ime:A 0.0 9e6 0.0 118:9 64.8, 32:6 3:5 22.8 31 Ad"usted Saturation B 0.0 O.Q 3647:6. 3591:4.. 32 Refereence Tine B NA t~1A NA NA 33 Reference Time. Lefts NA t+lA NA NA 34 Reference:Time ~_ 9c6` 118:9 64:8 23.13 35 Ad ustecl`Reference Time _ 15:4 122;9 68.8- 26:8 3fi S Itt Tirrd Ref Time Combined 9;3 16:5.. 32:6 22.8 97 Ref'ftri-e`B .Movement .0.9 8.5 6.51 10.0 4:3 32:6 9:5 22.8 88 Reference Tom' 9:3 16.5 32:6' 22.8 99 Ad usted;ReferenceTime- .: 15.2) 15.2 .20;5 20.5 36.8 36.6 26.8. 28:8 " Summa. ,, _ East West North f>outlr 40 Protected - NA 49:6. 41 Permitted' 122:9 68:8. 42 ~ 5t'... . _ 35:7 83:4 43 Minimurli~ 95.7 44,8 44 Combirretf .. 80at Ry M'T~-, EHR WBR NBR SBR 45 ui;ted'Reference T&ne 8.0 8:0 14.4 8:0 48 Cros's;Thro b':DiredEon NB'f SBT WBT EBT 47 Cross ~'ihra h •1-d Ref T'ime` 88:fi 26x8 20.5 15x2 48 £3nco t.efl Diret4k+r iNBt ESL ~ SBL tVBI 4g O Left Ad .Ref Time 20:5 1.5.2 8A 8.3 " 50 Comb&rerl 8:0 ( 50,0 42:9 31.5 51 I rrtersecUon Ca ac .Utiilzaitf on 67:09L 52 Level taf:Senilci - :. B Revision 2003.0 Le vel of Service is based on Orange County CMP Guideifnes L i I it Utilization Worksheet Intersection Capac y ~~ i 7 C~ ~I !~ Intersection Location: Red Hfll 8 Sen Juan _ __ City: TusBn Analyzed by: Alternative: Date end Time of Data' Project: ANI Peek Hour Exlstit>Q vvfih Project Movements 1 Movement l.13L E8T EeR WBL WBT WBR. NBL NBT NBR ~ SBL SBT SBR 0 1 0 A 1) 0: 1 2j 1 1 21 0 2~~ 3 SharedtT Lane in ~ ra 22 SO 158( ~ Yes 212 79 48 Yes 35 459 991 Yes 40) 10521 48 4 Volume 10 . 0 0 0 5 Pedestrians 6 Ped Button /n ' Yer -Yes Yes Yes 16 2 Padestrien Timm wired 16 16 16 Pies Yes 8 Free RI M; /n 1900 1900 r Yes 19()01 1900 1900 Yes 1900. 19001 1900 . 1904 1900 1900 1900 9 Ideal Flotiv 4 4 4 4' 9 4 4 4 4 4 d 10 Lost Time - 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Green Minimum 11 , '12 Reierence;Cycie.Length 20 0{ 0 1110 0 0 0 13 Volume Combined 0:0{ 258.0( 0:0 O.D 339.01 0.01 36.0) 458:0 99:0. . 4 . : 14 Volume Se arate~t:efi 22.0 236.0 212.0 127:0 1 000 36.0 000 1 459.0 0:952 1:000 40.0 1.000 1110:0 0.952 1.000 15 Lane UUiliation Factor' 1:000 0 950 1.0001 905' 0 1.000 850 0 1.000 0:950 1.000 948 1 0 . 0.850 : 0.950 1:000 0:850 . 0:950 0:894 0.850 16 Tumi Factor Ad ust FlowCombined 1T Saturated : 0:0 . 1720,3, . 0:0 0.0 . 1801:5- 0.0 1805.0 3617.5 1515.0 1805.0 3594.1 0:0 : 18 SaUireie3 Flow Se agate 1805A 1711.6 1805.0 1792.3. 1805:0 3617.6 0 1805.0 3594.1 0 01 0 0 19 Pedestrian interienence'Tlrne 0:8 1.2 0,0. OA 0:0 0: . . . 20 PedestrlanFreGue 28:3°~ 0.0°h 0:0°~ TRUE D.0% TRUE 21 Protected 4 tion ABov+ed N FALSE. NA O D NA FALSE NA 0:0 2.4 15:2 7.:4 2:3 37:1 A:0 22 Refererii~~Tiine _ 23 Ad'usted;Refenence'Time A. NAI MA : B:{i NA NA 8:0 8:0 '19.2 11:4j 5:01 4:1.1( 8.0 Permitted O on n L':efts ti r 1 0:09 1 -~ 0.63 1 `0:00. 1. 0:00 o o r 24 P. 25 Volume Leff Lane.... 0' 258 - 0 339 38 230. 40 1 555 00 0 26 Ego ortlon!LeftaLeft 'i 0.09 1 0.63 1 0 15 0.00 15.0 09 . 15.0 27 Left tu-ii Equivalents c 2.4 42 Q 0 ~ 01 1 15:0 0.07 16.3 0.09 : 0.07 1:00. 1.07 1.00 tor _ 28 Left tum Fa : OA . 1741 8 08 170.5. 120.31 1848:8. 1925:3 1797:1 29 Permltted.Sai Fbw . 0 0 . 18:7 . 0.0 238.6 358- 15.2 2.7( 37.1 30. ReferenceTlme:A . 0 0 0:0 3617.6 3594.1 31 Ad usied SaluretlonB . NA NA 32 ReTerence Tirtue:8 NA NA. NA , NA 33 Referarice Time Lefts -~ NA 35 9 97:1 34 Reference?Inte 18.T 22:7` 238.6. 242:6. : 39.9: 41.:9 85 usletl Referer~e Time S " lit Tlnii 36 Ref Time Combined- . 18.7' 22:6 15.2. 37:"L: 37 Ref Time. B, Movement '1:5 1Z.3 14:1. 8.5 2:4 15.2 15 2 2.7 97.1 37:1 38 Reference TMre 39 Ad u.,1ed Reference Time 22.71 18:7 22.7 26:5 22.6 26.6 18:2 . 192 4"1.1.) 91:1 5u 'East West Norfh South 40 Protecled:fl NA .,,49,1 41 Permitted: 242:9 _ 41.1 42 S 'Ift 49:3 60:3 d3 Minimum 49:3 41:1 44 Combined .: ~ 90:4 Rt trt'fums EBR WBR NBR SBR 45 Ad'usted IZetererrce'Tline 8:0 8.0 11.4 I 8:0 46 Gross Throe ti DlrecNort N8T 5BT _ WBT E8T 47 Cross Thro'; Ad Ref Time 19:2 41.1 26:6 22.7 48 Oncomi ~ Left DirecUbn WBL EBL SBL tit. 49 Oncomi Left Ref lime: :26:5 22:1 8:0 8.0 50 CornbMed 8:0 71.8 45:9 I 38:7 51 intersection Ca act .UUlizet 3on: 75.3 Reviab 2003 0 52 Levei Of Serviee . _ .._~ n : Level trt service is paacu .,.....~..~...,.,....., _.... --•----°~. intersection Capacity Utiilzation Worksheet Intersection Location: Red Hid d San Juan City: Tub Analyzed by: Altematfxs: Date and Time of Data: Project: AM Peak Hour Future Without ProJeq ~ 1 .-~ ~«- t t""' o~ , EBt: EBT EBR WBL trlBT VYBR f~iBt. NBT NBR SBt. SBT SBR 2~ _0 i 0 0 1 0 1 2 7 1 2 0 3 Shared L7 Lane In ~ Yes ~ ~ Yes Yes _ Yes 4 VoHm~e 30) 108 209 284 108 65 4e1 1314 133. 54 1427`. 65 5 Pedesirierre 10' D 0 0 6 Ped Button: ~ Yes Yes Yes :Xes 7 Pedestrian Tlmin R wired 16 16 16 16' 8 Free Ri ht fi ~ Yes Yes ~ Yes Yes 8 Ideal Fiow 1900 1900 1909 1900 1900 1i~0. 1900- 1900. 1900 1900. 1900 1900 10 Last"time _ 4 9 ~4: 4 d 4 # 4 4 4 4 4 11 jMinimum green 4 4 d 4 4} 4 4. 4 4 4 4 4 12~Reference C e Length 120 19 Volume Combned 0.0} 347:0 0.01 0.0 455:0} 0;0 48x0} 614:0} 133.0 54.0 _ 1 1492:0 O:f3 14 Valume,Se state Lett 30.0 317.9 284:0 } 179.0 48:0 614:0 54.0 1992,0 15 Lane'tltTiizaUonFactor 1A00 9:000 '1.000 1:000 1.000 1;000 1.000 0.952 1:000 1:000 0.952 1:090 16 Tumin Factor ust 0:859 0.996 9.850 0:950 .0:948 0:850 0.950 1.090 0:850 0:950 0.99.3 "0:850 17 Saturated Flow Combined 0.0 1720:9 0.0 0.0 1801.3. 0.0 1805.9 3617:8 1615.0 1805.0 3594.1) 0.0 18 Saturated Flow Se rate: 1805;0 1712.1. 18:05:0 1791.7 •1;805.0 361?:6 1805:0 3594.0 19 RedesUlahlnierierence'fiime D:7~ 1.2' 0.0 i).D 0:0 0.0 0:0 OA 20 f edestrien Freitu 28.39'0 0:09'e D.09b 0.0% 1 Protecled.Q cnAllowed FALSE FALSE TRUE TRUE' ?2 Reference:TMe . NA NA 0,0:} NA NA 0:0 3.2 <20;4 9:9 3a8 49.8. O:D 23 Adjustetl'Reference Thee NA NA 8.0. NA /+IA 8:0 8a0 24:4: 13:f) BA 53:11 8:0 Permitted 0 on 24 Pro orllon Left9' 1 0.99 1 } O:fit '1) O.pO 9 0:00 25 Uolume:Lefl Lane : 0 347 0 455 48 397 54 -746 26 Pro rtion Lefts Left 1 0:09 1 0.62 1 .0:00- 1. O.DO 27 Leff tum E uMeler>ie 24 0.9 15:D 16:3 13:0 15:0: 0.9 15:0 28 Left-tum Fe%Mor 0.42 1:01- 9:07 0:09 0.07 1:00 1.07 1.00 29 Rerrnitted'Sat Flow D.0 1742:2 0:0 170.7 120:3 1808.6 1925:3 1797:0 30 Reference fiane A 0~1 24.9. O:D 3:19;5 47:9 20.4 3.6 49:8 31 Ad'usteil.Saturation B 0.0 0.0 3617:6 3594":0 32 Refenence:TUnaB ' NA' NA NA; NA 33 Reference Time Lefts. NA NA taA NA 34 Reference Tflne 24:9. 3.1.9:6 47.9 49;8: 35 listed Reference Tkne 28.9 323:8.. b1.9 53:8` S Iit Tim! 36 Ref T}me'Comblrr~f 24:9 30:3 20:4 49.8: 37 Ref Time 8 : Movement. 2:0 23:0 18,9 11:5. 33 20.4 3,8 49:8 38 Reference Tkns 24:9 30:3 20:4 49:8- 39 Ad'ustec Reference Time 28:9 28.9 34.31 34:3' 24.4 24:9: 53:8 53:6 Su East-West North South 40 Protected.:.:. aVA 61:8 41 Ferrnflted 323.8 53:8 42 S flt Q" fton` 63;3 19:2 43 Mmimtnt' 83.3 53.8. 44 Gomb~d. 117:1 ~ ht`iums EBR WBR HBR f3B1<; ' 45 Adusied.Reference Tirrro 8:0 8:0 13:9- _ 8:0 • 46 Cross:Throu h Diradion T+~T SBT I WBT , EtST 4? Cross Throw h Ad Re(Time 24.4: 53:8 34.3. ~ 8:9 48 flnc»mf ` Lefl D'riacfion tNBL EBi St3L t+t8t. 49 Oncom Leff Ad' Ref fiane 34.3 28:9 8.0 BA 50 Combined.. 8:0 90:5 56.2.. M4:9 51IMersection-Ca id Utiiizetton 97:696 52 t.evei OiSenrice Revlsbn 2008:0 Level of Service is based on"13range Caun GMP Guidelines. L G ~~ i ~'r i• Intersection Capacity Utilization Worksheet Intersection Location: Red Hil b San Jusn City: Tustin Analyzed by: Alternative: Date and Timm otData: Project: PM'Pesk Hour Future 1NNhoul Proied 1 Movement EBL EB7 EBR WBL WST WBR NBL NtiT NBtt SBL St3'f SBR 2 ~~ D 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 9i 2~ 0 3 Sheted;LT Lane in ~ Yes ~ Yes Yes Yes 4 Volume 97~ 901 59 131 108 92~ 871 1319. 1881 71F 668 44 5 Pedestrians 10 0 0 0 6 Pad Butiorr n ~ Yes Yes. Yes Yes 7 Pedestrian Tlmin Re aired . 16 16 16 16 8 Free:Ri hi n ~ Yes. Yes Yes Yes 9 IdealFiow ~190~0 1900 1800. 1900 i9D0 1900 1900. 19~ 1900 1900 1900 1900 t0,i.asfTitne 41 A 4 4 ~4 4 4 4 4 # 4 4 11 Minimum'f;reen 41 4i 4 4 4. 4 4i 4( 4, 4 d 4 12 Refenence'C ck Length 120 13 Volume Gambiraed 0.0 177.0 O:Oi 0: 01 331.01 0.0 87.0 1349:0 188.0. 74:0 9120i 0.0 14 Votume:Se -crate LeR, 17.0 160:0 131:0 200.0 87.0 1319.0 T1:0 912.0 i5 Lane`UUilr~tion Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 7:000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0:952 1.0001 1.000 0:852 1.000 16 urn FactorAd'ust 0.950. 0:945 0.850. 0.950 1 0:939 0:850 0.950 1.000 0.850 0:950 0.993: 0;850 17 Saturated Flow Gomblr~ed 0.0 1796:3. 0:0 0:0 1789.8 0.0 1805.0 3617:8 1895:0 1805:0. 3591:4 0.0 18 Satnrsted FlowSe an3te 1805:0 1794:9 1805.0 1768.9. '1805.0 3617:6 1805:0. 359:1:4 19 Pedesirien interference Time 0:4 1,2 0.0 0:0. 0:0 0.0 0:0 0:0 20 Pedestrfan'Freq 28.3°.6 0.0% 0.0% 0:0°,5 21' Protected 0 on Allowed FALSE FALSE TRUE: TRUE 22 Reference 7ltne NA NPi 00 NA NA OA . 5s8 43:8 14:0 4:T 30:5 00 29 Ad usted;Refer+ence:Tmue NAB NA 8:0 NA Q7A 8.i? 8:$ 4?.8. 1$A 8.7 34.5 8.0 Permkted 12 on 24 Pra ' rUwr L`etls 9 0.10 1 . 0.40 1 j. O.OD 1 O:OD 25 Voluirre Lett Eane 0 177 0 331 87: 6ti0 71 456 26 P Rion Lefls't:eft 1 0.10 1 0.40 t 0.00 1 0:00- 27 Lefl-.tam E` uivalerrts 3.8 1,3 15.0 1fi.5 15:0 15.0 0:9 15:0 28 Leff tam Factor 0.2.8 0.97 0:07 0:14 0.07 1.OD 1:07. 1.00 28 Permitted SekFIoW 0.0 1741.5 0.0 249:6 120.3 1808.8. 7925.3 1795.7 90 Reference a1+ne A OA 12.6 0:0 159:1 86.8 43.8 4.7" 30:5 31 Ad usted Saturafbn 8 0.0 O:D 361).6 3591:4.. 32 RefertoCe TMie NA NA NA NA 33 Referonce Tana txfls NA NA NA NA 34 Referer~e Tirrrts 12.6. 159.1 86:8 80:5 35 Ad usted Reference Tlrrm 1?:6. 763:1 90:8' 34.5 5 Ilt 98 Ret Time Gomtik~ 12:2 X2:3 43:8 30:5 37 R~tT}me;8 tdbvement t.1 11:1 8:7 93.6 5.8 43:8 4:2 30.5 38` Refen:n~Time 12.2 22:3 43:8 30:5. 39 Ad usted Reference Time '17:3 17:3 28~) 26.3 47.8 47:8 34.5 '34.5 Summa EastWest . :NorthSouih 40 Fmteded NA 56:5 41 Permitted.. 163:1 90:8. 42 S 'lit:: tilt - 43:6 82:2 49 Mkdnuutt 43:6- v6:5 44 Combfie?d t00>0 Ri in 7ums EBR WBR NBR St3R 45 Ad ` ed Reference Time 8.0 8:0 I 98.0 8.0 46 Cross"ihro h Diredbn l+ft3T SBT WBT E8T 97 Cross Thm h Ad Ref =Time . 4?;8 I 3A:5 28.3. 1T:3 48 t9r>comvr Lefl Direction V1fBL EBL S8L Nt3L 49 Oncbm LaflAd Ref-Time 26.3 17:3 8.7 9:8 50 Comte 8:0 59:8 52.9 ' 35:1 51 trttersecflon Ca ci Utilization . 83A'J. 52 Level Of Service D Revision 2003:0 Level of 5ervice3s based on Orange County CMP Guidelines intersection Capacity Utilization Worksheet Intersection Location: Red Hi8 b Sen .bran City: Tustin Analyzed by: _ AiUen~atfve: Date and Time of Llats: ~ Project: AM-fleck Hour Future Wilh Project: v M ~ tsata~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ j 1 ement o EBL EBT EBR tNBL WBT WBR NBL N8T NBR 3t3L SBT SBR s Lames 4 1 0 0 ~ o ~' 2 11 1 2. o 3 Stransd LT Lane fi ~ Yes: ~ Yea Yes .Yes. 4 Volume 30 108{ 210 285{ 106 85 48j Biel 133 54 1428 85 5 Pedestrtat~s 16 0 0. 0 8 Ped:Buttari !n - ~ Yes Yes Yes Yes 7 PedesUianTirrii R wired 16 16 16 16 8 Free: RI ht M 'Yes.. fifes . Yes Iles 9 1deal;Flow 1900- 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 19l>Q. 1900: 19001 '1900 1900 10 LosK lime 4 4 4 4 4 9. 9 4 4 4 4. 4 11 Minimum.Greea 41 d 4 4 4 9{ 4 4 3 4 4 4 12 Reference G e :Length . 120 13 Volume Combhred D.01 -348:0 0:4j 0.0 458:0 d:01 48.0 818.0 133:0- 54.0 1494:0{ 0,0 14 Volume Se rate Lett 30.0 318:0 285A 121:0 48.0 818:0 54.0 1494:0 18 Lane UUi'~tion Factor 1.000 1:000 . 1.000 1..000 1.000 1,000 1.000 0.352. 1:000 1.000( 4:952 1:000 18 Tumin Factrrr-Ad list 0.850 0:906 0:850 0:950 { 0:948 0_850 0.950 1.000 0.850 0.950 0:998 0:850 17 Saturated Flow Combined 0.6 1720:8 0:0 OA 1801:3 0:0 1805.0 3817:6 1615:0 1805:D 3399.0 0:0 18 Saturated F~wSe rate 1805.0 1711:8 1805:0 1791.7 1805.0 3817.:8 1:805,0 3594.0. i9 Pedestrian interference Tlme 0.7) 1.2 0:0 0.0 0:0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20 Pedestrian Fre" 28.3°k: 0.0°!d 0.0°k" 0.0°~ 21 Protected O on Allowed -FALSE FALSE. TRUE: TRUE 22 Refe(eriae Tfitle NA NA 0:0 NA NA 0.0 . 3~ 20:5 `8:9 3:6 49.9 OA 23 ,Ad listed Reference Time NA NF1 '8.0 NA NIA 8:0 83i 24:5- 13:9 8:0: 55.9 8.0 24 Permitted O on Pro ort~n Latta' 1 0:09 1 4:83. 1 0.00. 1 0.00 25 Volume Left :ane 0 348" 0 456' 48 309 54. 747 28 Pro `rUon Lefts Leta 1 0:09 1 0:63` 1 0.04 1 0.00 27 Left'tum E uivalents 2:4 0.9 15:0 16:3 15.0 15:0 0.9 15.0 28 LeR tum Factor 4.92{ 1.01 0.07 0:09 0:07 1:00:. 1:07 1.00 29 Permrited Sat-Fbw D:4 1742.0 0.1? . i70:fi 120:3 18086. 1925:3 1787.0 30 Reference Time A 0.0 25:0.- 0,0: 320:8 4];9 20.5:. 3:$ 98:8 31 Ad listed Saturation"B 0:0. 0.4 3617.6 3594:0 32 Reference.Tbne$ NR NA NA, Nf+ 33 Reference Time:letts NA NA NA NA 34 Reference Thtt- 25:0 320.8 97:9 98t8; 35 Ad listed Reference Time 29:0 324:8 51,9 53:9 36 5 lit Ti Ret:Tfine Combined . 23:0 30.4 24:3 49:9 '37 Ref Time 6 :Movement 2:0 ?3:0 ~Ss1 11.5 .32 20.5 3,8 49:8 98 Refereno TMtte 25.0 30.4 20.5 49t9 39 Adjusted ReienenceTime 2960 29.0 3d.4 39.4 24:5 29.5 53.9,1 :53:9 Summa EasYa+Vest :North South 40 Protected` NA 81.:9 41: F;arrrritted 324:$. :53:9 42 S lit O lbri 83:4 78:±f 43 Miniamtutl 63:4 55.9 44 Corribirtt+d 117:3 Rt ht7urns EBR. WBR NBR SBR 45 Ad usted:Refen;rke Tirtas 8i0' 8:0 13:9 8A 46 Cross Throw h_Ditectbrt NBT SBT J tNBT E8T 47 Cross Throe h.Ad' Ref Time 29.5 53:9 :34:4 29:0 48 Oncom "Left Diracikut tiMBL EBL SBL _ N8L 49 t ?ncomfn° Leff Ad Ref Tim 3x1:4 29:4 8:0 ~$.0 50 t ,ot»birted 8:0 90.9 58.3 45:0 51l ntensection-Ca UUltzad ott 97.T°K 52 Level Of Service E Revfslon 2009.9 _ ....~ ,.r ea..,r,.e t~ hAead on O ranae County G MP Guidelines. U i I ~~ r [] t~ I_ ii P ~w Intersection Capacity Udllzation Worksheet Interseetlon Location: Red Nil 8 San Juan _ CHy: Tustin Analyzed by: _ AltemaNve: Date and Time of Data: ProJacC PM Peak Hax Future Wlth ProJact Moved .~ -- z r •- z ~ ~- ~- t~L EBT EBR WBL tfiiBT WBR NBL NBT NBti SBL St37 8BR 2 t ads 0 i 0 0 4 0 1 2{ 1 11 2 fI 3 Shared tT Lane fi ~ Yes ~ Yes Yes Yes 4 Volume 171 101 61 132.) '108 92 87 1323 188 71 875 44 5 Pedestrians 10. 0' 0 0 6 Ped Burton. M ~ Yes Yes Yes Yes 9 Pedestrian Tani Required 16 16 16 16 8 Free Ri ht. In 1 Yes res Yes Yes 9 ldeeiFbw 1900 1900 19001 4900 1900. 1900 1900 1900. 1900: 1900 1800 .1900 1tt,t:ostTime 4 4 41 4 4 4 4 4 9 4 4 1.1 Minimum Green 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4, 4 121Reference,Gycle'Length 120 '13 Volume Combined 0.0~ 179:0 0>01 0.0 332.01 0.0 87:0' 1323.0 188:0 71.0 999:0 0.0 14 Volume Se crate Leit 17:0 162.0 132.0 204.0 870 1323.0 ?1.0 919:0 15 Lane Utiitzatton Facttrr 1.00(1 1.00(1 1:000 1.00 0 1:OOD 1.040 1:000 0.952 1.000 1.000 0:952 1.000 48 Tuml " Factor Ad us/ 0.950 0.944 0:850 0.950 0.939 0.850 0:950 1:000. 0:850' 0.950 0;993 Q.850 17 Saturateii flow;t^,ombined, D:0 1794.3 0:0 0.0 1984:8 0:0 1805:0 3817.8 1$15.0 1805A 3591:6 0. 18 Satumted!Efow;Se arafe 'i80S:0 1792:7 1805:0 1768:9 1805.0 3fi17.6 1805.0 3581.6 19 Pedestrian"Interference Time 0:4 1;2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4' 00 0.0 20 Pedestrian Fre "ue 28:3°h 0.0°e6 0:0°J; 0.0% 21 Protected 0 on Allowed FALSE FALSE TRUE TRUE 22 Reference'Time NA NA 0:0 NA NA. 0:0 5:8 43:9 '14:0 4.7) 30.7- OA 23 fuf usted ReferenceTime WA NA iii. Ni4 NA' 'B,0 9,$ :47,13 18: 8:9 94.7 8:0 Permitted O tiorl 24. P,to ortlon'Lefts. 1 0:09 1 0:4D 1 0:00. 1 0.00 25 Volume Left Lane 0 178 0 332: 87 :662 71 460. 26 Pro ortion:Cefls Left 1 O:D9 t 0.40 ~ O.DO 1 0.00 27 Leff turn' E uivalents 3.7 L3 15.0 16.5 15.0 15:0 0.9 15.0 28 Left"tum Factor 0.27 0:97 0.07 0.14 0:07` 1.00: 1.07 1:00 29 Permitted SaC Flow 0.0 1741.3 D.0 248.6 120.3 " 1808(8 1925.3 1795:8 3D Reference Time A 0.0 12;8 0.0 160.3 86:81 43.9 4:7 30.7 31 Ad'usled Saturation`B D;0 D.D 3617.6. 3591.6 32 Reference Tune B NA NH Nf NA 33 Reference Time. Lefts tJA NA NA N71: 84 ReferericeThrre 12:8 i60c3 86:8' 3D7 35 Ad'usted;Reiererx:e Tirr» 17.7 164:3.' "90.8: 34:7 S II! Ti ' 36 Ref Time Combined 12.9. 22;3 43.9 30:7 37 Ref Time:B Movamerit '1.1 11.3 8.8 '13.fi 5.8 43.9 A.7 30.7 38 RetercnceTtino 12.4 22:3 93,9 30.7 39 usted Reference Tgrie 17:4 17.4 2$.3 26:3 47:91 47.9 39.T 34.T 5u East West : North-Barth 4G. i?rotedeil: NA 56:6 41 Permitted _ 16413 90;8 42 S 'Ill 43.7 82.6 43 Minhrainr 43:a 55;6 44 Combine0 100.3 " RI_ IrtTutns EBR WBR NBT+(. Si3R 45 Ad usled Refererxse 9lrrre SA 8A: 18.11 8:0 48: Gross Ttxo Oiredion -NBT I SBT tNBT EBT 47 Cross throe .Ref Time- .47:9' 34:7 ' 26:3 17c4 48 Oncorri ' :Leff Direclioti N78L I Ef3L SBt: NBL 49 Oncbmi ` LeR f3efTime. 26:3 77:4 8:7 19:8 50 Combined.. SA 60.f 53;0 85:2 51 Intersection l.a a Udlizetlon 83.fi9G 52 Level Of'Servlcs -. 0 _ Revision 2003.0 Level of Service is based on Orange County CMP Guidelines. G'