Document Anaheim_doc_314edf863d

5. Environmental Analysis SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-1 5.9 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC The analysis in this section is based in part on the following technical report: • Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Traffic Study Report, Parsons Brinckerhoff, August 2010. This traffic study is included in the Technical Appendices to this SEIR (Volume II, Appendix In addition, street improvement plans for all circulation improvements identified in the mitigation section are included as Appendix J. The traffic analysis contained in this section was performed based on the Proposed Project in addition to the previously approved developments for the Platinum Triangle. The traffic analysis for the Adopted MLUP is provided in the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332 (State Clearinghouse No. [PHONE REDACTED]) and the Traffic Study for The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc., April 5, 2005 and is hereby incorporated by reference. The Adopted MLUP represents build-out conditions of the Platinum Triangle per the City’s General Plan for Year 2025. The following analysis has been prepared to determine if the revised project would result in any new significant traffic impacts as compared to the Adopted MLUP, consistent with Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines and relevant case law. Methodology Model Background The analysis was performed by application of the Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model (ATAM) to develop future traffic forecast volumes throughout the Platinum Triangle and surrounding study area. ATAM is the traffic forecasting modeling tool for the City of Anaheim and has been certified as consistent with the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM) developed by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). ATAM relies on OCTAM for the regional component of traffic activity and OCTAM is based on and consistent with the Southern California Association of Governments’ (SCAG) regional transportation model, and therefore, incorporates adopted regional growth projections. In order to identify trips generated for use in the City of Anaheim’s model ATAM, an employment conversion rate is utilized for office and retail land uses. The rate is based on regional demographic information and converts land use quantities to number of employees. The total trip generation or number of trips is then calculated based on the trip purpose for each employee. Residential units do not require a conversion rate as they translate directly to dwelling units and residential based trips are calculated based on the trip purpose for each dwelling unit. Based on the citywide land use data and regional socioeconomic growth projections, future trip activity is estimated and assigned to the roadway circulation system. The internal trip capture is performed within the model and the outputs post- processed based on established post-processing methodologies. The post-processor applies the model’s projected growth to each turning movement of the existing counts for both 2030 No Project and 2030 With Project scenarios, forecasting a value that reflects future growth. Model Assumptions Roadway Network The base highway network used in this analysis remains consistent with networks adopted for various other traffic studies previously carried out for the City of Anaheim within the Platinum Triangle. The ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-2 • The Planning Center August 2010 existing and future year local circulation system was refined to provide further detail within the Platinum Triangle to accurately forecast travel activity. In addition, traffic analysis zones (TAZs) were refined and added to more accurately reflect traffic patterns and access of future development throughout the study area, as shown on Figure 5.9-1. Zonal connectors were reviewed and updated as appropriate to reflect appropriate development access to the surrounding circulation system. The TAZ and zonal connector refinements were incorporated into the No Project and Project alternatives for consistency purposes. The baseline 2030 No Project network is consistent with the Anaheim General Plan circulation network and includes the following key assumptions within the immediate project study area: • Orangewood Avenue, widen from State College Boulevard to SR-57 to 6-lane divided facility • Howell Avenue, improve to 4-lane secondary facility • Katella Avenue, widen to 8-lane facility between Sportstown and Walnut Street • Walnut Street (Orange), maintain existing classification • Glassell Street/Chapman Avenue (Orange), maintain existing classification through Historic Orange Plaza • Metropolitan Drive (Orange), provide connection between The City Drive and Chapman Avenue at Rampart Street • Main Street (Orange), improve to 6-lane major facility between Collins Avenue and Chapman Avenue • Taft Avenue (Orange), improve to 6-lane major facility between Tustin Avenue and City of Anaheim • Ball Road, improve to 6-lane major facility between Sunkist Street and State College Boulevard • Lewis Street, improve to 4-lane secondary facility between Katella Avenue and Gene Autry Way • Cerritos Avenue, improve to 4-lane primary facility between State College Boulevard and Anaheim Boulevard • Gene Autry Way, extend from current terminus at I-5 HOV ramps westerly to Harbor Boulevard To account for planned projects throughout the study area as development occurs, the localized circulation system was refined to incorporate further network assumptions as appropriate. The following specific circulation system assumptions were incorporated into the network to account for buildout of the study area: • Provision of a connection between Dupont Drive and Rampart Street parallel to Orangewood Avenue to provide additional access throughout the study area • Access provision from the Stadium District to State College Boulevard/Gene Autry Way, Orangewood Avenue, and Douglass Road • SR-57 direct connection with ARTIC • SR-57 HOV drop ramps at Cerritos Avenue. ---PAGE BREAK--- Source: PB 2010 5. Environmental Analysis Traffic Analysis Zone in The Platinum Triangle SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center • Figure 5.9-1 0 1,700 Scale (Feet) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-4 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-5 Internal Trip Capture Due to the nature of the mixed use developments incorporated into the City’s vision for the Platinum Triangle and consistent with other traffic studies in the area, mixed use internal capture rates for each District with the exception of the Office District were incorporated into the trip generation. The internal capture rates were estimated based on the recommended Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Multi-Use Development Trip Generation and Internal Capture Summary Methodology documented in Chapter 7 of the Trip Generation Handbook, Second Edition (ITE, 2004). ITE trip generation rates and ATAM trip generation rates are derived and applied for stand alone facilities. These rates are generally developed for suburban settings with limited transit service and free parking. Internally captured trips have the potential to be a significant component in the travel patterns associated with multi-use developments. The internal trip-making characteristics of multi-use sites are directly related to the mix of on-site land uses. The combination of residential, retail and office uses increases the interaction between the various on-site uses, hence reducing the amount of external site vehicular traffic generated as compared to each land use evaluated independently. ITE considers multi-use developments as developments consisting of two or more ITE land use classifications between which trips can be made without using the off-site road system. The internal capture rate methodology was applied in ATAM to more accurately account for vehicular trip generation throughout the Platinum Triangle due to the close proximity of residential, commercial, and office uses. The typical trip rates do not account for these internal trips, so an internal capture rate has been defined based on the methodology documented by ITE. Internal capture rates were determined for each individual District based on the proposed land uses within each district. Rates were determined at a District level because internal capture rates generally apply to land uses that promote walking trips, and many of the mixed use Districts are not within walking distance of each other. The methodology evaluates the reasonable share of internal trips that will be attracted between the various District developments to determine district-wide internal capture percentages. These percentages are applied to daily trip generation activity to reflect reduced vehicular trip activity within each District. Table 5.9-1 presents the percent trip reduction rate for each District. The capture rates range from 5.0 percent to 19.9 percent. Table 5.9-1 Internal Trip Capture Rates PTMU District Internal Trip Capture Rate Katella District 14.5% Gene Autry District 15.7% Gateway District 5.0% Orangewood District 8.1% Stadium District 16.6% Arena District 19.9% ARTIC District 7.8% Office District 0% Several projects have recently applied internal capture rates for mixed-use developments throughout the County. The Huntington Beach Downtown Parking Master Plan concluded that the downtown experienced a 30 to 40 percent overall trip reduction due to mixed use development. The Anaheim GardenWalk (formerly Pointe Anaheim project) in the City of Anaheim includes hotel, restaurant, retail and entertainment uses totaling 1.5 million square feet. The traffic analysis presented in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (City of Anaheim, 1999) applied internal capture rates ranging from 20 to 30 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-6 • The Planning Center August 2010 percent as well as mode shift ranges from 45 to 55 percent. Practical experience following project approval has demonstrated that applying these capture rates has been sound. Based on internal capture rates applied in other studies, a 5 to 20 percent reduction in vehicle activity seems reasonable based on the mix of uses expected to be implemented within the Platinum Triangle. Additionally, recent national studies have developed appropriate internal capture rates for use in transportation projects. One study, the Urban Land Institute’s, “Growing Cooler” has identified internal trip capture advantages to certain types of mixed-use development of up to 20-30 percent. Another study by the Transit Cooperative Research Program of the Transportation Research Board studied the effects of transit oriented development (TOD) on housing and travel. The characteristics of certain districts in the Platinum Triangle are above and beyond criteria established in the ITE Guidelines and the internal capture percentages applied to each district are reasonable, and even conservative by some standards. Transit Trip Reduction Transit trip reductions were applied to land use data in select TAZs to account for future transit activity associated with the proposed Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) project and increased transit accessibility throughout the Platinum Triangle. Metrolink and Amtrak have daily service at the existing Metrolink/Amtrak Station, located within the Stadium District. This station is proposed to be relocated to the ARTIC District as part of the ARTIC project. Metrolink service is anticipated to expand to more frequent headways throughout the day in the coming years under the Metrolink Service Expansion Program. In addition, the implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) has been approved on State College Boulevard with a stop at ARTIC. The State College Boulevard line will be one of the first three BRT lines deployed by OCTA and is tentatively scheduled for implementation in late 2010. Additional routes have been proposed for future approval, including a line on Katella Avenue. In addition to these transit services, the Platinum Triangle is also served by Anaheim Resort Transit and OCTA local bus lines. The transit reduction methodology applied to the Proposed Project is outlined in Appendix B of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook. The ARTIC project is proposed as a world class transit center, as it is anticipated to serve local buses, express buses, BRT routes as well as commuter and intercity rail. As such, the ARTIC District qualifies for a 20 percent vehicle trip reduction as the entire District is within walking distance of the facility. All Mixed Use Districts are within walking distance of a proposed BRT corridor, and some are within walking distance of ARTIC. Based on the distance from the high capacity transit, trips generated from certain TAZ’s have received a 3 to 7 percent reduction dependent upon the density of the zone, as outlined in Table B.2 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook. Although all districts are in relatively close proximity to major transit facilities, the distance between specific developments and transit opportunities do not fall into the 1/4 mile assumed walking distance between the development and the BRT or other high capacity transit opportunities. Figure 5.9-2 shows transit trip reduction by TAZ. Other proposed transit connections within the Platinum Triangle include the Anaheim Rapid Connection (ARC, formerly referred to as Anaheim Fixed Guideway) and high speed rail/maglev trains. The proposed ARC is intended to provide connectivity between the Anaheim Resort and the Platinum Triangle with a proposed station at or in close proximity to ARTIC. In addition, ARTIC is designed to accommodate potential future transit services, which include high speed rail/maglev train service to Los Angeles and Ontario. These projects are not fully funded and are therefore not included in the transit reduction estimates. ---PAGE BREAK--- Source: PB 2010 5. Environmental Analysis Transit Trip Reduction SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center • Figure 5.9-2 0 1,700 Scale (Feet) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-8 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-9 The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone strive to achieve the promotion of accessibility between mixed uses through non-vehicle related trip- making. Co-locating job and housing centers along transit corridors promote sustainable growth. Reducing transportation costs and impacts to the environment result from shorter trips to work and other destinations, opportunities to travel conveniently without having to drive, pedestrian-friendly sidewalks, and amenities like restaurants, entertainment and shops within walking distance. Research has documented that mixed-use community residents’ drive as little as one-fifth the distances of their counterparts in conventional sprawl developments. (“Location Efficiency: Neighborhood and Socio- Economic Characteristics Determine Auto Ownership and Use – Studies in Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco”, John Robert Clear, Hank Dittmar, David Goldstein, and Peter Haas, Transportation Planning and Technology Journal, Volume 25, Number 1, March 2002). California Department of Transportation’s (Caltrans) TOD database documents a 29 percent reduction in vehicles per household and a 31 percent reduction in average annual auto mileage per household. The Caltrans website documents five transit oriented development station areas in Los Angeles County and four TOD station areas in San Diego County, with zero TOD station areas in Orange County. The trip reduction strategy used for the Platinum Triangle is based on the recommended ITE Multi-Use Development Trip Generation and Internal Capture Summary Methodology. Level of Service Analysis In order to evaluate traffic impacts within the Platinum Triangle and its immediate vicinity, the following level of service (LOS) analyses were performed: • Peak hour arterial signalized intersection capacity utilization (ICU) analysis • Arterial segment daily analysis • Arterial segment peak hour analysis • Peak hour ramp-termini intersection analysis • Freeway ramp merge-diverge analysis • Freeway mainline segment analysis • Freeway mainline weaving analysis Intersection ICU Analysis The City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies requires a volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio of 0.90, or LOS D, as the lowest acceptable service level at intersections. Intersections that operate at a level of service below LOS D are deemed to be operating at insufficient levels. The City requires study area intersections to be evaluated through an ICU analysis which compares forecast peak hour traffic volumes to intersection capacity. A minimum clearance interval of 0.05 in association with lane capacities of 1,700 vehicles per hour of green time for through and turn lanes was assumed for the ICU calculations. The City of Orange ICU analysis is consistent with the City of Anaheim analysis as are the LOS thresholds, therefore the same assumptions were applied for intersection in both jurisdictions. Table 5.9-2 presents the ICU level of service thresholds utilized in this traffic study. A project is deemed to have a significant impact if the project results in deterioration of the LOS to an unacceptable LOS or an increase in the ICU value of 0.01 if the intersection currently operates at LOS E or F under without project conditions. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-10 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.9-2 Intersection Level of Service Thresholds LOS ICU A < 0.60 B 0.61 – 0.70 C 0.71 – 0.80 D 0.81 – 0.90 E 0.91 – 1.00 F > 1.00 Source: City of Anaheim, City of Orange As shown in Figure 5.9-3, peak hour ICU and LOS analyses were performed for 103 study intersections (67 intersections in the City of Anaheim, 5 shared intersections between Anaheim and Orange, and 31 in the City of Orange). Coordination with the City of Orange identified the preferred intersections for analysis within the City of Orange. For purposes of the traffic analysis, intersections identified for mitigation are those that are operating at a deficient level of service of LOS E or LOS F. Arterial Segment V/C Analysis The arterial roadway criteria for the City of Anaheim involve the use of average daily traffic (ADT) V/C ratios. LOS C (V/C not to exceed 0.80) is the performance standard that has been adopted for the study area circulation system by the City of Anaheim. If a road segment exceeds this daily threshold, then the peak hours are analyzed for this segment. If the peak hour v/c is greater than 0.90, then a deficiency exists on that segment. The City of Orange has utilized LOS D as the performance standard for arterials. The City of Orange applies a V/C analysis for daily traffic conditions similar to Anaheim although daily capacities for Orange arterials differ from those recognized by the City of Anaheim due to differences in the capacity assumptions contained in each city’s traffic study guidelines. City of Anaheim methodology was applied to all segments located in Anaheim, and City of Orange methodology was applied to all segments located in Orange. Although the arterial segment V/C analysis provides a general assessment of overall system performance, the performance is measured on the ability to serve peak hour traffic demands. To identify deficient arterial segments, the segments that are identified as deficient under daily conditions are evaluated under peak hour conditions to evaluate the capability of serving forecast peak hour throughput. Arterial segments that operate deficiently under peak hour conditions are candidates for mitigation improvements. It should be noted that the City of Orange does not provide provisions for peak hour segment analysis but rather uses daily V/C analysis as the basis for improvement requirements in accordance with their adopted traffic study guidelines. The City of Anaheim applies the Urban Streets analysis identified in Chapter 15 of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) to determine LOS under peak hour traffic volumes on deficient daily segments. The peak hour link analysis determines directional AM and PM peak hour V/C ratios for each link that exceeds the daily LOS threshold. The peak hour capacity is determined by using Equation 15-7 of the HCM, multiplying the mid-block number of lanes for each direction by a lane capacity of 1,900 vehicles per hour, then multiplied by the percentage of green time at the controlling signalized intersection for that arterial segment. The percentage of green time is estimated by dividing the directional V/C ratios by the total V/C ratio at signalized intersections along the arterial segment. The highest resulting percentage is the estimated percentage of green time for that arterial segment. If the V/C ratio of the arterial segment under peak hour conditions is LOS E or F, improvements should be considered to improve the segment to an acceptable LOS. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center • Figure 5.9-3 Existing (2008) Peak Hour Intersection LOS Source: PB 2010 0 2,800 Scale (Feet) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-12 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-13 LOS analysis of forecast daily traffic volumes was applied for the arterial segments throughout the Platinum Triangle and adjacent facilities. The segment analysis assumes roadway capacities for each jurisdiction as applied in the current General Plans for each City as noted in Table 5.9-3. The capacities in Table 5.9-3 reflect LOS E capacities and are consistent with those that are applied in daily V/C analysis, consistent with methodologies adopted for each jurisdiction. The City of Orange takes advantage of a capacity enhancement for Smart Streets as designated by the OCTA. For Katella Avenue, Orange increases daily capacity by five percent to account for Smart Street related improvements that enhance throughput along these key corridors. The City of Anaheim does not currently account for capacity enhancements to Smart Streets. For City of Anaheim segments, a project is deemed to have a significant impact if the project results in deterioration of the daily LOS to an unacceptable LOS or coupled with a continued deficiency under peak hour conditions. A significant impact is also determined by an increase in the daily ICU value of 0.01 if the segment currently operates at LOS E or F under daily “without project” conditions and the segment is found to be deficient under peak hour conditions. For City of Orange segments, a project is deemed to have a significant impact if the project results in deterioration of the daily LOS to an unacceptable LOS or or causes an increase in the daily ICU value of 0.01 if the segment currently operates at LOS E or F under daily without project conditions. Table 5.9-3 Arterial Segment Daily Capacity Assumptions Facility Type Anaheim Orange 8-lane Divided 75,000 75,000 6-lane Divided 56,300 56,300 4-lane Divided 37,500 37,500 4-lane Undivided 25,000 24,000 2-lane Undivided 12,500 12,000 Source: City of Orange Traffic Study Guidelines, City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines Caltrans Intersection Analysis Freeway ramp termini intersections were analyzed in (version 7.0) through the application of HCM 2000 methodology per Caltrans requirements. Lane configurations and various other parameters such as signal timing were based on current operating characteristics and future lane configurations were assumed per Anaheim General Plan build-out conditions. Table 5.9-4 presents Caltrans intersection delay and LOS standards. Table 5.9-4 Caltrans Intersection LOS Criteria LOS Intersection Delay (in Seconds) A ≤ 10.0 B > 10.0 and ≤ 20.0 C > 20.0 and ≤ 35.0 D > 35.0 and ≤ 55.0 E > 55.0 and ≤ 80.0 F ≥ 80.0 Source: Caltrans, HCM 2000 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-14 • The Planning Center August 2010 Caltrans Freeway and Ramp HCM Analysis The freeway mainline and freeway ramp segment criteria are based on peak hour HCM density analysis. The capacities are based on information contained in the HCM and the Caltrans Ramp Meter Design Manual. Existing count data was provided by Caltrans for the freeway mainline volumes. Ramp merge and diverge analysis was carried out by applying Highway Capacity Software (HCS), the electronic version of the HCM for freeway-to-arterial interchanges. According to HCM methodology, the ramp merge and diverge areas focus on an influential area of 1,500 feet, including the acceleration or deceleration lane and adjacent freeway lanes. The methodology incorporates three fundamental steps: • Determination of the traffic entering the freeway lanes upstream of the merge or at the beginning of the deceleration lane at diverge; • Determination of the capacity for the segment; and • Determination of the density of traffic flow within the ramp influence area and its level of service The LOS for freeway ramps is determined by traffic density based on criteria outlined in the HCM. Freeway mainline levels of service are similarly determined from segment density. Table 5.9-5 presents the correlation between LOS and density in terms of passenger cars per mile per lane (pc/mi/ln) for both freeway ramps and basic freeway segments. LOS D (density not to exceed 35.0 pc/mi/ln for mainline segments and freeway ramps), has been established by Caltrans District 12 as the operating standard for freeway mainline segments and freeway ramps. Caltrans has determined that freeway segments and ramps that operate below LOS D should be identified and improved to an acceptable LOS although specific criteria to identify project related impacts is not specified in the Caltrans Traffic Impact Study Guidelines. Table 5.9-5 Caltrans Freeway Mainline and Ramp HCM LOS Criteria LOS Freeway Ramp Density (pc/mi/ln) Basic Freeway Segment Density (pc/mi/ln) A ≤ 10.0 0-11.0 B > 10.0 and ≤ 20.0 11.0 – 18.0 C > 20.0 and ≤ 28.0 18.0 – 26.0 D > 28.0 and ≤ 35.0 26.0 – 35.0 E > 35.0 35.0 – 45.0 F Exceeds Capacity >45.0 Source: HCM 2000, Exhibit 25-4, Exhibit 23-2 Caltrans Freeway Weaving Analysis Freeway weaving is defined as the crossing of two streams of traffic traveling in the same direction along a significant length of highway without the aid of traffic control devices. Weaving analysis uses the most current version of the HCM and provides a density for the weaving area within the freeway segment and corresponding LOS. Table 5.9-6 specifies the LOS for associated freeway weaving densities. Caltrans operating standard is LOS ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-15 Table 5.9-6 Caltrans Freeway Weaving HCM LOS Criteria LOS Freeway Weaving Segment Density (pc/mi/ln) Multilane and Collector-Distributor Weaving Segments Density (pc/mi/ln) A ≤ 10.0 ≤ 12.0 B > 10.0 and ≤ 20.0 > 12.0 and ≤ 24.0 C > 20.0 and ≤ 28.0 > 24.0 and ≤ 32.0 D > 28.0 and ≤ 35.0 > 32.0 and ≤ 36.0 E 35.0 and ≤ 43.0 >36.0 and ≤ 40.0 F >43.0 >40.0 Source: HCM 2000, Exhibit 24-2 5.9.1 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions Intersection Analysis (Existing 2008) Previous Figures 5.9-1 and 5.9-3 show the updated TAZ boundaries and the 103 study intersections. Table 5.9-7 shows ICU and LOS for 103 study area intersections under existing conditions. Two intersections operate at an unacceptable LOS under existing conditions. 1) Euclid Street at Katella Avenue (PM Peak hour)/ I-1 2) Anaheim Boulevard at Ball Road (PM Peak hour)/ I-19 Table 5.9-7 Existing Peak Hour Intersection LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Intersection City ICU LOS ICU LOS I-1 Euclid Street/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.89 D 1.02 F I-2 Ninth Street/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.53 A I-3 Walnut Street/Ball Road Anaheim 0.57 A 0.55 A I-4 Walnut Street/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.44 A 0.53 A I-5 Disneyland Drive/Ball Road Anaheim 0.70 B 0.77 C I-6 Disneyland Drive/West Street/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.57 A I-7 Harbor Boulevard/Vermont Avenue Anaheim 0.56 A 0.58 A I-8 Harbor Boulevard/Ball Road Anaheim 0.73 C 0.68 B I-9 Harbor Boulevard/I-5 NB Ramps Anaheim 0.54 A 0.54 A I-10 Harbor Boulevard/I-5 SB Ramps Anaheim 0.32 A 0.34 A I-11 Harbor Boulevard/Disney Way Anaheim 0.33 A 0.41 A I-12 Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.55 A 0.63 B I-13 Harbor Boulevard/Convention Way Anaheim 0.29 A 0.35 A I-14 Harbor Boulevard/Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.55 A 0.57 A I-15 Clementine Street/Disney Way Anaheim 0.19 A 0.23 A I-16 Clementine Street/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.60 A I-17 I-5 SB Off Ramp/Disney Way Anaheim 0.20 A 0.24 A I-18 Anaheim Boulevard/Vermont Avenue Anaheim 0.58 A 0.61 B I-19 Anaheim Boulevard/Ball Road Anaheim 0.63 B 0.91 E ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-16 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.9-7 Existing Peak Hour Intersection LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Intersection City ICU LOS ICU LOS I-20 Anaheim Boulevard/Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.49 A 0.71 C I-21 Anaheim Boulevard/I-5 NB Ramps Anaheim 0.44 A 0.59 A I-22 Anaheim Boulevard/Disney Way Anaheim 0.44 A 0.49 A I-23 Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.47 A 0.58 A I-24 Haster Street/Gene Autry Way (future) Anaheim Not Applicable I-25 Haster Street/Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.54 A 0.65 B I-26 Manchester Avenue (I-5 SB Ramps)/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.55 A 0.52 A I-27 Anaheim Way (I-5 NB Ramps)/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.46 A 0.50 A I-28 East Street/Vermont Avenue Anaheim 0.48 A 0.58 A I-29 East Street/Ball Road Anaheim 0.51 A 0.67 B I-30 Lewis Street/Ball Road Anaheim 0.41 A 0.53 A I-31 Lewis Street/Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.28 A 0.31 A I-32 Lewis Street/North Connector Road (future) Anaheim Not Applicable I-33 Lewis Street/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.48 A 0.62 B I-34 Lewis Street/Anaheim Way Anaheim 0.09 0.25 A I-35 Lewis Street/Anaheim Connector (future) Anaheim Not Applicable I-36 Lewis Street/Gene Autry Way (future) Anaheim Not Applicable I-37 I-5 HOV Ramps/Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.07 A 0.07 A I-38 Lewis Street/Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.48 A I-39 Manchester Avenue/Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.52 A 0.37 A I-40 Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.36 A 0.50 A I-41 Market Street/Katella Avenue (future) Anaheim Not Applicable I-42 Market Street/Gene Autry Way (future) Anaheim Not Applicable I-43 Orange Center Drive/Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.30 A 0.38 A I-44 State College Boulevard/Vermont Avenue Anaheim 0.47 A 0.42 A I-45 State College Boulevard/Wagner Avenue Anaheim 0.50 A 0.49 A I-46 State College Boulevard/Ball Road Anaheim 0.57 A 0.65 B I-47 State College Boulevard/Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.46 A 0.40 A I-48 State College Boulevard/Howell Avenue Anaheim 0.29 A 0.40 A I-49 State College Boulevard/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.43 A 0.53 A I-50 State College Boulevard/Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 0.26 A 0.33 A I-51 State College Boulevard/Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.30 A 0.29 A I-52 State College Boulevard/Artisan Street (future) Anaheim Not Applicable I-53 State College Boulevard/Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/Orange 0.46 A 0.47 A I-54 State College Boulevard/Orange Center Drive Anaheim/Orange 0.21 A 0.21 A I-55 State College Boulevard/I-5 NB Ramps Orange 0.33 A 0.28 A I-56 State College Boulevard/I-5 SB Ramps Orange 0.43 A 0.28 A I-57 State College Boulevard/The City Drive/Chapman Avenue Orange 0.71 C 0.66 B I-58 Sunkist Street/Ball Road Anaheim 0.82 D 0.79 C I-59 Sunkist Street/Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.25 A 0.41 A I-60 Sunkist Street/Howell Avenue Anaheim 0.31 A 0.37 A I-61 Howell Avenue/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.38 A 0.55 A I-62 Sportstown/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.31 A 0.41 A I-63 Dupont Drive/Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.44 A 0.51 A I-64 Rampart Street/Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.51 A 0.44 A I-65 Rampart Street/Chapman Avenue Orange 0.31 A 0.31 A I-66 Ball Road/SR-57 NB Ramps Anaheim 0.43 A 0.41 A I-67 Ball Road/SR-57 SB Ramps Anaheim 0.69 B 0.57 A ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-17 Table 5.9-7 Existing Peak Hour Intersection LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Intersection City ICU LOS ICU LOS I-68 SR-57 NB Ramps/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.36 A 0.40 A I-69 SR-57 SB Ramps/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.40 A 0.40 A I-70 Orangewood Avenue/SR-57 NB Ramps Orange 0.52 A 0.49 A I-71 Orangewood Avenue/SR-57 SB Ramps Orange 0.61 B 0.68 B I-72 Phoenix Club Drive/Ball Road Anaheim 0.48 A 0.59 A I-73 Douglass Road/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.41 A 0.49 A I-74 Katella Avenue/Struck Avenue Orange 0.28 A 0.34 A I-75 Eckhoff Street/Collins Avenue Orange 0.42 A 0.47 A I-76 Eckhoff Street/Orangewood Avenue Orange 0.56 A 0.69 B I-77 Main Street/Taft Avenue Orange 0.68 B 0.73 C I-78 Main Street/Katella Avenue Orange 0.50 A 0.50 A I-79 Main Street/Struck Avenue Orange 0.53 A 0.48 A I-80 Main Street/Collins Avenue Orange 0.44 A 0.57 A I-81 Main Street/Orangewood Avenue Orange 0.54 A 0.58 A I-82 Main Street/Chapman Avenue Orange 0.52 A 0.67 B I-83 Batavia Street/Taft Avenue Orange 0.65 B 0.67 B I-84 Batavia Street/Katella Avenue Orange 0.50 A 0.50 A I-85 Batavia Street/Collins Avenue Orange 0.40 A 0.41 A I-86 Batavia Street/Walnut Avenue Orange 0.51 A 0.46 A I-87 Glassell Street/Katella Avenue Orange 0.55 A 0.60 A I-88 Glassell Street/Collins Avenue Orange 0.58 A 0.52 A I-89 Glassell Street/Walnut Avenue Orange 0.67 B 0.75 C I-90 Santiago Boulevard/Meats Avenue Orange 0.72 C 0.65 B I-91 Clementine Street/Gene Autry Way (future) Anaheim Not Applicable I-92 Clementine Street/Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.33 A 0.33 A I-93 Flower Street/Chapman Avenue Orange 0.38 A 0.49 A I-94 Harbor Boulevard/Chapman Avenue Anaheim 0.55 A 0.61 B I-95 I-5 Ramps/Chapman Avenue Orange 0.43 A 0.46 A I-96 Rampart Street/Town Center Place (South) Anaheim 0.14 A 0.18 A I-97 SR-22 EB Ramps/The City Drive Orange 0.57 A 0.58 A I-98 SR-22 WB Ramps/ Metropolitan Drive Orange 0.29 A 0.41 A I-99 SR-57 NB Ramps/Chapman Avenue Orange 0.40 A 0.39 A I-100 SR-57 SB Ramps/Chapman Avenue Orange 0.54 A 0.52 A I-101 State College Boulevard/Winston Road Anaheim 0.38 A 0.39 A I-102 The City Drive/Garden Grove Boulevard Orange 0.52 A 0.55 A I-103 The City Drive/Metropolitan Drive Orange 0.47 A 0.37 A Arterial Segment Daily LOS Analysis (Existing 2008) Table 5.9-8 presents ADT and LOS for study area arterial segments under existing conditions. Based on existing count volumes and number of lanes, there are four segments that operate at a deficient LOS under existing conditions. All other 91 segments are operating at acceptable levels of service. 1) Ball Road from State College Boulevard to Sunkist Street (City of Anaheim)/(A-13) 2) Ball Road from Sunkist Street to the SR-57 Freeway (City of Anaheim)/(A-14) 3) Orangewood Avenue from State College Boulevard to Rampart Street (City of Anaheim)/(A-77) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-18 • The Planning Center August 2010 4) Orangewood Avenue from Rampart Street to the SR-57 Freeway (City of Anaheim/City of Orange)/ (A-78) Table 5.9-8 Existing Arterial Segment Daily LOS ID Arterial From To Traffic Count Lanes Capacity V/C LOS A-1 Anaheim Blvd Katella Ave I-5 Freeway 19,380 6D 56,300 0.34 A A-2 Anaheim Blvd I-5 Freeway Cerritos Ave 33,160 6D 56,300 0.59 A A-3 Anaheim Blvd Cerritos Ave Ball Road 26,790 4D 37,500 0.71 C A-4 Anaheim Blvd Ball Road Vermont Street 25,230 4D 37,500 0.67 B A-5* Anaheim Way State College Blvd Orangewood Ave 3,220 3D 28,150 0.11 A A-6 Anaheim Way Orangewood Ave Katella Ave 18,190 3D 28,150 0.65 B A-7 Anaheim Way Katella Ave Anaheim Blvd 10,730 3D 28,150 0.38 A A-8 Ball Road Walnut Street Disneyland Drive 34,020 6D 56,300 0.60 A A-9 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Blvd 44,320 6D 56,300 0.79 C A-10 Ball Road Harbor Blvd Anaheim Blvd 36,890 6D 56,300 0.66 B A-11 Ball Road Anaheim Blvd East Street 35,280 6D 56,300 0.63 B A-12 Ball Road East Street State College Blvd 38,110 6D 56,300 0.68 B A-13 Ball Road State College Blvd Sunkist Street 40,500 4D 37,500 1.08 F A-14 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway 48,400 6D 56,300 0.86 D A-15* Ball Road SR-57 Freeway Main Street 32,740 6D 56,300 0.58 A A-16 Cerritos Ave Anaheim Blvd Lewis Street 11,710 4U 25,000 0.47 A A-17 Cerritos Ave Lewis Street State College Blvd 10,030 4U 25,000 0.40 A A-18 Cerritos Ave State College Blvd Sunkist Street 6,180 4U 25,000 0.25 A A-19 Cerritos Ave Sunkist Street Douglass Road 4,520 4U 25,000 0.18 A A-20* Chapman Ave State College Blvd SR-57 Freeway 30,740 6D 56,300 0.55 A A-21* Chapman Ave SR-57 Freeway Main Street 27,260 6D 56,300 0.48 A A-22* The City Drive SR-22 Freeway Chapman Ave 20,980 8D 75,000 0.28 A A-23 Clementine Street Orangewood Ave Gene Autry Way NA NA NA NA NA A-24 Clementine Street Gene Autry Way Katella Ave NA NA NA NA NA A-25 Clementine Street Katella Ave Manchester Ave 7,510 4U 25,000 0.30 A A-26* Collins Ave Eckhoff Street Main Street 6,620 4U 24,000 0.28 A A-27* Collins Ave Main Street Batavia Street 10,800 4U 24,000 0.45 A A-28* Collins Ave Batavia Street Glassell Street 14,710 4U 24,000 0.61 B A-29 Disney Way Harbor Blvd Clementine Street 7,770 6D 56,300 0.14 A A-30 Disney Way Clementine Street Anaheim Blvd 13,880 6D 56,300 0.25 A A-31 Douglass Road Katella Ave Cerritos Ave 6,910 4U 25,000 0.28 A A-32* Eckhoff Street Orangewood Ave Collins Ave 10,870 2D 18,750 0.58 A A-33 Gene Autry Way Harbor Blvd Clementine Street NA NA NA NA NA A-34 Gene Autry Way Clementine Street Haster Street NA NA NA NA NA A-35 Gene Autry Way Haster Street I-5 Freeway NA NA NA NA NA A-36 Gene Autry Way I-5 Freeway State College Blvd 2,220 4U 25,000 0.09 A A-37 Harbor Blvd Chapman Ave Orangewood Ave 35,560 6D 56,300 0.63 B A-38 Harbor Blvd Orangewood Ave Convention Way 35,870 6D 56,300 0.64 B A-39 Harbor Blvd Convention Way Katella Ave 40,430 6D 56,300 0.72 C A-40 Harbor Blvd Katella Ave Disney Way 38,410 6D 56,300 0.68 B A-41 Harbor Blvd Disney Way Manchester Ave 41,340 6D 56,300 0.73 C A-42 Harbor Blvd Manchester Ave I-5 Freeway 39,450 7D 65,625 0.60 A A-43 Harbor Blvd I-5 Freeway Ball Road 44,360 8D 75,000 0.59 A A-44 Harbor Blvd Ball Road Vermont Street 26,900 6D 56,300 0.48 A ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-19 Table 5.9-8 Existing Arterial Segment Daily LOS ID Arterial From To Traffic Count Lanes Capacity V/C LOS A-45 Haster Street Chapman Ave Orangewood Ave 18,190 4U 25,000 0.73 C A-46 Haster Street Orangewood Ave Katella Ave 19,760 4U 25,000 0.79 C A-47 Howell Ave State College Blvd Sunkist Street 4,390 4U 25,000 0.18 A A-48 Howell Ave Sunkist Street Katella Ave 5,830 4U 25,000 0.23 A A-49 Katella Ave Euclid Street Ninth Street 31,470 6D 56,300 0.56 A A-50 Katella Ave Ninth Street Walnut Street 29,270 6D 56,300 0.52 A A-51 Katella Ave Walnut Street Disneyland Drive 35,240 6D 56,300 0.63 B A-52 Katella Ave Disneyland Drive Harbor Blvd 37,440 6D 56,300 0.67 B A-53 Katella Ave Harbor Blvd Clementine Street 39,100 6D 56,300 0.69 B A-54 Katella Ave Clementine Street Anaheim Blvd 38,510 6D 56,300 0.68 B A-55 Katella Ave Anaheim Blvd I-5 Freeway 37,830 6D 56,300 0.67 B A-56 Katella Ave I-5 Freeway Lewis Street 35,040 6D 56,300 0.62 B A-57 Katella Ave Lewis Street State College Blvd 30,260 6D 56,300 0.54 A A-58 Katella Ave State College Blvd Sportstown 32,800 6D 56,300 0.58 A A-59 Katella Ave Sportstown Howell Ave 34,240 6D 56,300 0.61 B A-60 Katella Ave Howell Ave SR-57 Freeway 37,990 6D 56,300 0.67 B A-61 Katella Ave SR-57 Freeway Main Street 29,610 6D 56,300 0.53 A A-62* Katella Ave1 Main Street Batavia Street 30,280 6D 59,115 0.51 A A-63* Katella Ave1 Batavia Street Glassell Street 29,490 6D 59,115 0.50 A A-64 Lewis Street Gene Autry Way Katella Ave 1,440 2U 12,500 0.12 A A-65 Lewis Street Katella Ave Cerritos Ave 7,680 4U 25,000 0.31 A A-66 Lewis Street Cerritos Ave Ball Road 6,460 4U 25,000 0.26 A A-67* Main Street Chapman Ave Orangewood Ave 20,090 4U 24,000 0.84 D A-68* Main Street Orangewood Ave Collins Ave 16,900 4U 24,000 0.70 B A-69* Main Street Collins Ave Katella Ave 17,700 4U 24,000 0.74 C A-70* Main Street Katella Ave Taft Avenue 11,440 4U 24,000 0.48 A A-71 Manchester Ave Compton Ave Orangewood Ave 6,840 3D 28,150 0.24 A A-72 Manchester Ave Orangewood Ave Katella Ave 11,050 3D 28,150 0.39 A A-73 Manchester Ave Katella Ave Anaheim Blvd 1,410 3D 28,150 0.05 A A-74 Orangewood Ave Harbor Blvd Haster Street 15,540 4U 25,000 0.62 B A-75 Orangewood Ave Haster Street Manchester Ave 17,950 4U 25,000 0.72 C A-76** Orangewood Ave2 Manchester Ave State College Blvd 19,810 6D 56,300 0.35 A A-77 Orangewood Ave State College Blvd Rampart Street 24,490 4U 25,000 0.98 E A-78** Orangewood Ave2 Rampart Street SR-57 Freeway 23,490 4U 25,000 0.94 E A-79* Orangewood Ave SR-57 Freeway Eckhoff Street 27,720 4D 37,500 0.74 C A-80* Orangewood Ave Eckhoff Street Main Street 14,160 4D 37,500 0.38 A A-81 Phoenix Club Drive Honda Center Ball Road 3,880 2U 12,500 0.31 A A-82 Rampart Street Chapman Ave Orangewood Ave 2,770 2U 12,500 0.22 A A-83* State College Blvd Chapman Ave I-5 Freeway 26,980 8D 75,000 0.36 A A-84* State College Blvd I-5 Freeway Orangewood Ave 21,400 8D 75,000 0.29 A A-85 State College Blvd Orangewood Ave Gene Autry Way 22,160 6D 56,300 0.39 A A-86 State College Blvd Gene Autry Way Katella Ave 20,120 6D 56,300 0.36 A A-87 State College Blvd Katella Ave Howell Ave 23,980 6D 56,300 0.43 A A-88 State College Blvd Howell Ave Cerritos Ave 23,440 6D 56,300 0.42 A A-89 State College Blvd Cerritos Ave Ball Road 23,320 6D 56,300 0.41 A A-90 State College Blvd Ball Road Wagner Ave 24,020 6D 56,300 0.43 A A-91* Struck Ave Katella Ave Main Street 6,720 2U 12,000 0.56 A A-92 Sunkist Street Howell Ave Cerritos Ave 3,900 4U 25,000 0.16 A ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-20 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.9-8 Existing Arterial Segment Daily LOS ID Arterial From To Traffic Count Lanes Capacity V/C LOS A-93 Sunkist Street Cerritos Ave Ball Road 7,720 4U 25,000 0.31 A A-94* Walnut Ave Main Street Batavia Street 8,540 2U 12,000 0.71 B A-95* Walnut Ave Batavia Street Glassell Street 8,090 2U 12,000 0.67 B Note: All arterial segments are in the City of Anaheim jurisdiction except where noted * that are in the City of Orange and that are in both cities (Anaheim and Orange). Shared segments capacities are identified by the jurisdiction in which the traffic count was taken. 1 Smart Street segments in Orange include a 5 percent capacity enhancement. 2 Shared segments capacities are identified by the jurisdiction in which the traffic count was taken. Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS Analysis (Existing 2008) Table 5.9-9 shows the AM and PM peak hour arterial segment LOS for the deficient arterial segments identified in the City of Anaheim, which determined that there are no capacity inadequacies for any of the arterial segments during either the AM or PM peak hour. Table 5.9-9 Existing Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS ID Arterial From To Traffic Count Lanes Capacity V/C LOS AM Peak Hour A-13 Ball Road State College Blvd Sunkist Street 2,640 4D 3,268 0.81 D A-14 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway 3,420 6D 4,902 0.70 B A-77 Orangewood Ave State College Blvd Rampart Street 2,070 4U 4,940 0.42 A A-78 Orangewood Ave Rampart Street SR-57 Freeway 1,930 4U 4,940 0.39 A PM Peak Hour A-13 Ball Road State College Blvd Sunkist Street 2,900 4D 3,648 0.79 C A-14 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway 3,370 6D 5,472 0.62 B A-77 Orangewood Ave State College Blvd Rampart Street 2,280 4U 5,852 0.39 A A-78 Orangewood Ave Rampart Street SR-57 Freeway 2,130 4U 5,852 0.36 A Caltrans Ramp Termini Intersection Analysis (Existing 2008) Table 5.9-10 represents the peak hour delays and LOS for the ramp termini intersections under existing conditions. The analysis indicates that all of the Caltrans ramp intersections operate at acceptable LOS. Under all scenarios, freeway ramp termini intersections were evaluated according to both ICU and HCM methodology. The analysis under existing conditions is generally consistent in terms of LOS with the ICU analysis for the ramp termini intersections with the exception of the one deficient location for which the deficiency is generally the result of operational issues, such as insufficient or excessive signal timings for pedestrian crossings. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-21 Table 5.9-10 Existing Ramp Termini Intersection LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Intersection Delay LOS Delay LOS I-9 Harbor Boulevard/I-5 NB Ramps 10.8 B 14.4 B I-10 Harbor Boulevard/I-5 SB Ramps 7.9 A 7.5 A I-17 I-5 SB Off Ramp/Disney Way 26.2 C 25.5 C I-21 Anaheim Boulevard/I-5 NB Ramps 15.4 B 25.8 C I-22 Anaheim Boulevard/Disney Way 38.7 C 19.2 B I-26 Manchester Avenue (I-5 SB Ramps)/Katella Avenue 27.5 C 15.9 B I-27 Anaheim Way (I-5 NB Ramps)/Katella Avenue 17.9 B 20.2 C I-37 I-5 HOV Ramps/Gene Autry Way 6.0 A 6.3 A I-55 State College Boulevard/I-5 NB Ramps 12.8 B 12.5 B I-56 State College Boulevard/I-5 SB Ramps 17.4 B 12.5 B I-66 Ball Road/SR-57 NB Ramps 19.3 B 21.4 C I-67 Ball Road/SR-57 SB Ramps 32.1 C 17.6 B I-68 SR-57 NB Ramps/Katella Avenue 10.4 B 7.5 A I-69 SR-57 SB Ramps/Katella Avenue 11.3 B 8.5 A I-70 Orangewood Avenue/SR-57 NB Ramps 15.6 B 8.3 A I-71 Orangewood Avenue/SR-57 SB Ramps 19.4 B 28.7 C I-95 I-5 Ramps/Chapman Avenue 41.7 D 42.4 D I-97 SR-22 EB Ramps/The City Drive 28.5 C 29.6 C I-98 SR-22 WB Ramps/ Metropolitan Drive 38.4 D 29.6 C I-99 SR-57 NB Ramps/Chapman Avenue 19.1 B 19.7 B I-100 SR-57 SB Ramps/Chapman Avenue 36.4 D 36.1 D Caltrans Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis (Existing 2008) As shown in Table 5.9-11, an analysis of off-ramp queuing and control delay was performed for 19 area off-ramp termini intersections. The analysis indicated that no existing ramp termini intersections have a queue length that is greater than the existing off-ramp storage length. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-22 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-23 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-11 Existing Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis Off-Ramp Queue Length Off-Ramp Control Delay (sec) Off-Ramp # of Lanes Off-Ramp Storage Length (feet) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Ramp Termini Intersection L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R Deficient Storage Length I-9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 400 1,280 20 10 40 60 12.2 18.5 15.9 31.7 No I-10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 2 1 1,240 190 60 60 32.3 32.3 No I-17 I-5 SB Off Ramp / Disney Way 1.33 0.33 1.33 940 380 380 100 100 0 150 150 0 43.5 43.3 8.2 61.2 63.0 9.9 No I-26 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 1.5 1.5 720 720 1,710 40 0 0 40 0 64.0 27.4 4.9 60.9 23.9 No I-27 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 1.5 3 0.5 1,540 1,060 130 120 210 220 20.4 17.5 25.6 20.9 No I-5 HOV NB Ramps / Gene Autry Way 2 1,510 No I-37 I-5 HOV SB Ramps / Gene Autry Way 2 1,340 0 0 4.9 6.7 No I-55 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 2 1,580 690 690 70 70 0 70 70 0 52.7 48.6 7.9 54.5 49.8 8.7 No I-56 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 1.5 0.5 2 2,960 2,190 1,590 40 230 130 100 140 90 29.3 47.5 35.1 46.4 52.3 32.1 No I-66 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1 1 1,030 680 180 240 280 30 28.9 42.7 53.0 10.7 No I-67 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 0.5 1.5 1,290 570 390 400 250 250 35.3 45.0 39.5 46.4 No I-68 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 1.5 1.5 1,030 590 70 50 50 40 18.4 20.5 18.8 19.1 No I-69 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 1.5 1.5 930 600 80 70 60 60 19.5 23.1 18.8 23.4 No I-70 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 650 350 130 190 20 0 38.9 56.4 21.9 17.2 No I-71 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,050 630 340 210 110 0 140 60 247 66.3 33.4 8.4 68.5 26.0 23.9 No I-95 I-5 Ramps / Chapman Avenue 2 1 1,080 220 220 0 230 0 46.7 9.8 46.0 7.4 No I-97 SR-22 Eastbound Ramps / The City Drive 1.33 0.33 1.33 870 650 400 160 170 150 150 56.4 58.5 58.1 58.4 No I-98 SR-22 Westbound Ramps/ Metropolitan Drive 2 0 2 900 230 70 0 140 0 53.4 9.9 53.0 6.4 No ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-24 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-11 Existing Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis Off-Ramp Queue Length Off-Ramp Control Delay (sec) Off-Ramp # of Lanes Off-Ramp Storage Length (feet) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Ramp Termini Intersection L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R Deficient Storage Length I-99 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 1 1 1,240 760 20 0 10 0 14.8 3.5 13.8 3.0 No I-100 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 0.5 0.5 1 580 1,000 210 60 120 90 36.5 12.7 47.6 30.7 No ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-25 Caltrans Freeway Ramp HCM Analysis (Existing 2008) Table 5.9-12 summarizes HCM analysis results for the existing study area ramps for the AM and PM peak hours. The HCM reports a density based on the existing freeway mainline segment and ramp merge/diverge volumes. As shown, nine freeway ramps currently operate at a deficient LOS under PM peak hours. Based on the existing conditions analysis, several ramps currently operate at a deficient level of service and as a result are expected to continue to operate at deficient conditions under future with and without project conditions. There are currently no plans to address each of the current deficiencies on the State Highway System and as a result, these existing and cumulative impacts will carry forward into the future. 1) I-5 Northbound Connector from SR-22 Eastbound (PM Peak Hour)/(R-1) 2) I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard (PM Peak Hour)/(R-10) 3) I-5 Southbound Connector to SR-22 Westbound (PM Peak Hour)/(R-25) 4) SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road (PM Peak Hour)/(R-36) 5) SR-57 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road Westbound (PM Peak Hour)/(R-37) 6) SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(R-42) 7) SR-22 Eastbound On-Ramp from Fairview Street (PM Peak Hour)/(R-50) 8) SR-22 Eastbound Connector to I-5/SR-57/The City Drive/Bristol Street (PM Peak Hour)/(R-51) 9) SR-22 Eastbound Collector/Distributor Off-Ramp to The City Drive (PM Peak Hour)/(R-52) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-26 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-27 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-12 Existing Freeway Ramp HCM LOS A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane Mainline Volume Ramp Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Mainline Volume Ramp Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-1 I-5 NB Connector from SR-22 EB* 2 4,570 1,800 27.6 C 7,250 2,520 > Capacity F R-2 I-5 NB Off-Ramp to Chapman Avenue 1 6,370 270 23.2 C 9,770 370 33.6 D R-3 I-5 NB Off-Ramp to State College Boulevard 2 6,100 520 10.1 B 9,400 410 20.5 C R-4 I-5 NB HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way/Disney Way 1 710 10 6.5 A 1,170 20 10.3 B R-5 I-5 NB On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue 1 5,580 210 19.3 B 8,990 380 30.0 D R-6 I-5 NB Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue** 2 5,190 710 21.2 C 8,030 1,120 32.8 D R-7 I-5 NB On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue 1 4,480 230 19.9 B 6,910 320 28.0 C R-8 I-5 NB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 1 4,710 200 21.1 C 7,230 280 30.9 D R-9 I-5 NB HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 700 10 14.6 B 1,150 40 22.6 C R-10 I-5 NB On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 1 4,910 320 22.2 C 7,510 930 > Capacity F R-11 I-5 NB Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 1 5,160 760 23.1 C 8,120 930 33.2 D R-12 I-5 NB On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 1 4,400 230 19.6 B 7,190 530 32.2 D R-13 I-5 SB Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 1 6,420 540 25.1 C 7,880 640 30.7 D R-14 I-5 SB On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 1 5,880 1,120 32.4 D 7,240 790 34.6 D R-15 I-5 SB Off-Ramp to Disney Way/Anaheim Boulevard 1 7,000 450 26.6 C 8,030 440 30.2 D R-16 I-5 SB Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue** 2 5,590 540 22.8 C 6,930 200 28.3 D R-17 I-5 SB HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way 1 1,090 70 10.2 B 630 20 5.8 A R-18 I-5 SB On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 1 5,050 380 23.2 C 6,730 530 30.5 D R-19 I-5 SB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 1 5,430 310 24.0 C 7,260 370 31.1 D R-20 I-5 SB Off-Ramp to State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue 1 6,060 440 21.5 C 7,720 620 28.3 D R-21 I-5 SB HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 1,020 20 20.2 C 610 20 13.1 B R-22 I-5 SB On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue 1 5,620 280 24.4 C 7,100 390 30.7 D R-23 I-5 SB On-Ramp from State College Boulevard 1 5,900 170 18.7 B 7,490 290 23.5 C R-24 I-5 SB On-Ramp from Chapman Avenue 1 6,070 430 19.1 B 7,780 600 23.7 C R-25 I-5 SB Connector to SR-22 WB 1 6,500 840 26.8 C 8,380 1,180 35.2 E ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-28 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-12 Existing Freeway Ramp HCM LOS A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane Mainline Volume Ramp Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Mainline Volume Ramp Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-26 I-5 SB Connector to SR-22 EB 2 5,660 850 9.8 A 7,200 1,190 14.2 B R-27 SR-57 NB Off-Ramp to Chapman Avenue 1 3,430 120 22.9 C 4,800 170 30.2 D R-28 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Chapman Avenue WB 1 5,540 230 17.6 B 8,440 330 23.8 C R-29 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Chapman Avenue EB 1 5,340 200 19.1 B 8,160 280 27.1 C R-30 SR-57 NB Off-Ramp to Orangewood Avenue 1 5,770 630 25.1 C 8,770 280 32.5 D R-31 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue WB 1 5,410 160 18.9 B 8,760 280 29.3 D R-32 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue EB 1 5,140 270 19.1 B 8,490 270 28.2 D R-33 SR-57 NB Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 1 4,750 740 21.9 C 7,790 560 30.6 D R-34 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue WB 1 4,310 150 19.6 B 7,680 240 32.8 D R-35 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue EB 1 4,010 300 19.8 B 7,230 450 33.0 D R-36 SR-57 NB Off-Ramp to Ball Road 1 4,590 850 25.0 C 7,950 670 38.9 E R-37 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Ball Road WB 1 4,220 300 20.5 C 7,890 340 > Capacity F R-38 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Ball Road EB 1 3,740 480 20.3 C 7,280 610 34.5 D R-39 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp to Ball Road 1 6,580 1,510 31.8 D 7,370 920 31.2 D R-40 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Ball Road WB 1 5,070 220 23.0 C 6,450 410 29.7 D R – 42 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 1 6,360 870 33.0 D 7,380 690 36.5 E R – 43 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue WB 1 5,490 240 24.7 C 6,690 460 31.1 D R – 44 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue EB 1 5,730 160 24.9 C 7,150 360 31.9 D R – 45 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp to Orangewood Avenue 1 6,350 710 26.4 C 7,750 730 31.5 D R – 46 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue 1 5,640 200 19.3 B 7,020 570 25.8 C R – 47 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp to Chapman Avenue 1 5,840 450 24.4 C 7,590 640 30.4 D R – 48 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Chapman Avenue 1 1,157 380 16.3 B 1,621 530 21.9 C R – 49 SR-22 EB Off-Ramp to Fairview Street 1 5,890 200 25.4 C 8,000 280 34.7 D R – 50 SR-22 EB On-Ramp from Fairview Street 1 5,690 870 29.2 D 7,720 1,220 > Capacity F R – 51 SR-22 EB Connector to I-5/SR-57/The City Drive/Bristol Street** 3 6,090 4,470 23.9 C 8,310 6,260 > Capacity F ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-29 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-12 Existing Freeway Ramp HCM LOS A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane Mainline Volume Ramp Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Mainline Volume Ramp Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R – 52 SR-22 EB Collector/Distributor Off-Ramp to The City Drive 1 4,470 290 27.4 C 6,260 410 36.5 E R – 53 SR-22 EB Connector from I-5 SB/SR-57 SB 2 1,832 1,500 17.4 B 2,816 2,100 27.2 C R – 54 SR-22 WB Connector to I-5 SB/SR-57 SB 2 3,670 1,400 9.8 A 4,880 1,960 16.8 B R – 55 SR-22 WB On-Ramp from The City Drive 1 2,100 320 23.2 C 2,940 440 31.5 D R – 56 SR-22 WB Connector from I-5 SB/SR-57 SB 2 3,690 2,100 23.2 C 5,390 2,940 34.4 D R – 57 SR-22 WB Off-Ramp to Haster Street 2 6,110 600 10.7 B 8,770 840 17.6 B R – 58 SR-22 WB On-Ramp from Haster Street 1 5,510 430 25.0 C 7,930 600 34.8 D Source: City of Anaheim, Caltrans * Major Merge Analysis Utilized to calculate density Major Diverge Analysis Utilized to calculate density ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-30 • City of Anaheim August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-31 Caltrans Freeway Mainline HCM Analysis (Existing 2008) Table 5.9-13 summarizes HCS analysis results for the densities and levels of service for study area mainline segments for the AM and PM peak hours. Consistent with the existing ramp analysis, several segments currently operate at deficient levels of service. According to the analysis the following freeway mainline segments are deficient under the PM peak hour: 1) I-5 Southbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-3) 2) I-5 Northbound between SR-22 and 17th Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-8) 3) I-5 Southbound between SR-22 and 17th Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-8) 4) I-5 Northbound between 17th Street and Grand Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-9) 5) I-5 Southbound between 17th Street and Grand Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-9) 6) I-5 Southbound between Grand Avenue and 4th Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-10) 7) SR-57 Eastbound between Katella Avenue and Ball Road (PM Peak Hour)/(F-14) 8) SR-57 Westbound between Katella Avenue and Ball Road (PM Peak Hour)/(F-14) 9) SR-57 Eastbound between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-15) 10) SR-22 Eastbound between Harbor Boulevard and Fairview Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-19) 11) SR-22 Westbound between Harbor Boulevard and Haster Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-19) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-32 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-33 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-13 Existing Freeway Mainline HCM LOS Northbound / Eastbound Southbound / Westbound A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour ID Freeway Segment Freeway Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Freeway Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Freeway Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Freeway Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F-1 I-5 between SR-91 and Brookhurst Street 5,370 17.8 B 7,800 26.7 D 5,530 15.3 B 7,460 20.7 C F-2 I-5 between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street 5,630 18.7 C 8,560 30.5 D 6,120 20.3 C 7,890 27.1 D F-3 I-5 between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue 5,630 18.7 C 8,890 32.5 D 6,370 27.5 D 7,910 40.2 E F-4 I-5 between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard 5,780 19.2 C 9,200 34.5 D 6,420 21.4 C 7,880 27.1 D F-5 I-5 between Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue 5,160 17.1 B 8,120 28.3 D 5,590 18.5 C 6,930 23.2 C F-6 I-5 between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard 5,190 17.2 B 8,030 25.9 C 6,060 20.1 C 7,720 26.4 D F-7 I-5 between State College Boulevard and SR-22 6,100 16.7 B 9,400 26.6 D 7,000 19.2 C 8,940 24.9 C F-8 I-5 between SR-22 and 17th Street 7,570 20.7 C 11,520 36.5 E 9,630 27.2 D 12,560 44.8 E F-9 I-5 between 17th Street and Grand Avenue 8,130 22.3 C 11,680 37.6 E 8,670 23.9 C 11,840 38.7 E F-10 I-5 between Grand Avenue and 4th Street 7,970 21.8 C 11,240 34.8 D 8,580 22.3 C 11,930 39.4 E F-11 I-5 between 4th Street and SR-55 7,960 21.8 C 10,980 33.3 D 7,690 21.0 C 10,930 33.1 D F-12 SR-57 between SR-22 and Orangewood Avenue 5,770 16.3 B 8,770 25.2 C 5,530 18.7 C 7,050 24.2 C F-13 SR-57 between Orangewood Avenue and Katella Avenue 4,750 16.1 B 7,790 27.4 D 6,350 21.5 C 7,750 27.2 D F-14 SR-57 between Katella Avenue and Ball Road 4,590 19.4 C 7,950 42.7 E 6,360 28.2 D 7,380 36.1 E F-15 SR-57 between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue 4,670 19.7 C 8,380 > 45.0 F 6,580 22.4 C 7,370 25.5 C ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-34 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-13 Existing Freeway Mainline HCM LOS Northbound / Eastbound Southbound / Westbound A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour ID Freeway Segment Freeway Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Freeway Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Freeway Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Freeway Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F-16 SR-57 between SR-91 and Lincoln Avenue 4,930 16.7 B 8,640 32.0 D 6,520 18.4 C 7,390 20.9 C F-17 SR-22 between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street 5,140 20.5 C 7,030 29.8 D 4,860 19.3 C 6,970 29.5 D F-18 SR-22 between Euclid Street and Harbor Boulevard 5,410 21.6 C 7,300 31.7 D 5,190 20.7 C 7,540 33.5 D F-19 SR-22 between Harbor Boulevard and Fairview Street/Haster Street 5,890 23.7 C 8,000 37.6 E 5,510 22.0 C 7,960 37.2 E F-20 SR-22 between Fairview Street/Haster Street and The City Drive/I-5 6,090 19.4 C 8,310 27.5 D 6,110 19.4 C 8,770 29.7 D F-21 SR-22 between I-5 and Main Street 3,330 27.6 D 4,920 19.6 C 3,670 14.6 B 4,880 19.4 C F-22 SR-22 between Main Street and Glassell Street 3,110 12.4 B 5,120 20.4 C 3,790 15.1 B 4,540 18.1 C F-23 SR-22 between Glassell Street and SR-55 2,600 8.3 A 4,510 14.4 B 3,300 13.1 B 3,750 14.9 B Source: City of Anaheim, Caltrans ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-35 Caltrans Freeway Weaving HCM Analysis (Existing 2008) As shown in Table 5.9-14, the following weaving segments are deficient under the existing conditions. 1) I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)/(W-6) 2) I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)/(W-8) 3) I-5 Northbound between Main Street On-Ramp and SR-22 WB Connector (PM Peak Hour)/(W-9) 4) I-5 Northbound between 17th Street On-Ramp and Main Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)/(W-10) 5) I-5 Southbound between Main Street On-Ramp and 17th Street/Penn Way Off-Ramp (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(W-10) 6) I-5 Northbound between Grand Avenue On-Ramp and 17th Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)/(W-11) 7) I-5 Southbound between Penn Way On-Ramp and Santa Ana Boulevard Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)/(W-11) 8) I-5 Northbound between Fourth Street On-Ramp and Grand Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)/(W-12) 9) I-5 Southbound between Santa Ana Boulevard On-Ramp and Fourth Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)/(W-12) 10) I-5 Northbound between SR-55 Connector and First Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)/(W-13) 11) I-5 Southbound between First Street On-Ramp and SR-55 SB Connector (PM Peak Hour)/(W-13) 12) SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)/(W 16) 13) SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)/(W-16) 14) SR-57 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and SR-91 Eastbound Connector (PM Peak Hour)/(W-18) 15) SR-22 Westbound between Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off Ramp (PM Peak Hour)/(W-20) 16) SR-22 Eastbound between Fairview Street/Garden Grove Boulevard On-Ramp and Collector / Distributor The City Drive Off-Ramp (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(W-22) 17) SR-22 Eastbound Collector/Distributor between The City Drive On-Ramp and Bristol Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)/(W-23) 18) SR-22 Westbound between La Veta Avenue On-Ramp and Metropolitan Drive Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)/(W-23) 19) SR-22 Eastbound Collector/Distributor between Bristol Street On-Ramp and I-5 SB Connector (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(W-24) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-36 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.9-14 Existing Freeway Weaving AM and PM Peak Hours HCM LOS AM Peak Hours PM Peak Hours ID Weaving Segment Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS I-5 NB b/w Brookhurst Street On-Ramp and SR-91 EB Off-Ramp W-1 I-5 SB b/w SR-91 Connector / Magnolia Avenue On-Ramp and Brookhurst Street Off-Ramp I-5 NB b/w Euclid Street On-Ramp and Brookhurst Street Off-Ramp W-2 I-5 SB b/w Brookhurst Street On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp Not Applicable W-3 I-5 NB b/w Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp 20.6 B 33.6 D I-5 NB b/w Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 21.4 B 35.5 D W-4 I-5 SB b/w Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Disneyland Drive Off-Ramp Not Applicable W-5 I-5 SB b/w Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off- Ramp 27.6 C 35.8 D I-5 NB b/w Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off- Ramp 20.9 B 36.7 E W-6 I-5 SB b/w Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Disney Way Off-Ramp Not Applicable I-5 NB b/w State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off- Ramp 19.3 B 31.5 C W-7 I-5 SB b/w Katella Avenue On-Ramp and State College Boulevard Off- Ramp 20.0 C 32.4 D I-5 NB b/w SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp 22.7 B 37.2 E W-8 I-5 SB b/w State College Boulevard / Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector 24.3 C 33.6 D W-9 I-5 NB b/w Main Street On-Ramp and SR-22 WB Connector 25.0 C > Capacity F I-5 NB b/w 17th Street On-Ramp and Main Street Off-Ramp 28.4 C > Capacity F W-10 I-5 SB b/w Main Street On-Ramp and 17th Street / Penn Way Off- Ramp 34.1 D > Capacity F I-5 NB b/w Grand Avenue On-Ramp and 17th Street Off-Ramp 27.0 C > Capacity F W-11 I-5 SB b/w Penn Way On-Ramp and Santa Ana Boulevard Off-Ramp 31.6 C > Capacity F I-5 NB b/w Fourth Street On-Ramp and Grand Avenue Off-Ramp 26.4 C > Capacity F W-12 I-5 SB b/w Santa Ana Boulevard On-Ramp and Fourth Street Off-Ramp 26.2 C 37.7 E I-5 NB b/w SR-55 Connector and First Street Off-Ramp 31.0 C > Capacity F W-13 I-5 SB b/w First Street On-Ramp and SR-55 SB Connector 28.8 C > Capacity F SR-57 NB b/w Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off-Ramp 18.9 B 28.1 C W-14 SR-57 SB b/w Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp 23.5 B 33.5 D SR-57 NB b/w Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off- Ramp 18.7 B 30.6 C W-15 SR-57 SB b/w Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off- Ramp 26.6 C 32.8 D SR-57 NB b/w Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp 17.8 B 39.3 E W-16 SR-57 SB b/w Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 33.0 D 37.0 E SR-57 NB b/w Ball Road On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp W-17 SR-57 SB b/w Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp Not Applicable ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-37 Table 5.9-14 Existing Freeway Weaving AM and PM Peak Hours HCM LOS AM Peak Hours PM Peak Hours ID Weaving Segment Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS SR-57 NB b/w Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and SR-91 EB Connector 19.7 B 36.0 E W-18 SR-57 SB b/w SR-91 EB Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 26.7 C 34.1 D SR-22 EB b/w Brookhurst Street On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp W-19 SR-22 WB b/w Euclid Street On-Ramp and Brookhurst Street Off- Ramp Not Applicable SR-22 EB b/w Euclid Street On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp Not Applicable W-20 SR-22 WB b/w Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off- Ramp 24.6 C 37.6 E SR-22 EB b/w Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Fairview Street Off- Ramp W-21 SR-22 WB b/w Haster Street / Garden Grove Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp Not Applicable SR-22 EB b/w Fairview Street / Garden Grove Boulevard On-Ramp and Collect/Distributor The City Drive Off-Ramp > Capacity F > Capacity F W-22 SR-22 WB b/w Metropolitan Drive On-Ramp and Haster Street Off- Ramp 21.7 B 32.4 D SR-22 EB Collect/Distributor b/w The City Drive On-Ramp and Bristol Street Off-Ramp 34.9 D > Capacity F W-23 SR-22 WB b/w La Veta Avenue On-Ramp and Metropolitan Drive Off- Ramp 29.6 C > Capacity F W-24 SR-22 EB Collect/Distributor b/w Bristol Street On-Ramp and I-5 SB Connector > Capacity F > Capacity F SR-22 EB b/w SR-57 SB Connector and Town and Country Road Off- Ramp 20.1 B 32.2 D W-25 SR-22 WB b/w La Veta Avenue On-Ramp and I-5 / SR-57 NB Connector 20.6 B 29.9 C SR-22 EB b/w Town and Country Road On-Ramp and Glassell Street Off-Ramp 17.3 B 30.7 C W-26 SR-22 WB b/w Glassell Street On-Ramp and La Veta Avenue Off- Ramp 21.0 B 27.8 C SR-22 EB b/w Glassell Street On-Ramp and Tustin Street Off-Ramp W-27 SR-22 WB b/w Tustin Street On-Ramp and Glassell Street Off-Ramp Not Applicable Source: City of Anaheim, Caltrans Summary As noted in the analysis above, the local circulation system in the Platinum Triangle generally operates at an acceptable LOS. The regional circulation State Highway System has several components that currently operate at a deficient LOS. Locations that are deficient under existing conditions will be considered when determining future project related impacts and mitigation measures. The existing conditions assessment for the base year 2008 provides the framework for applying the General Plan future forecasts to both the No Project and With Project scenarios. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-38 • The Planning Center August 2010 Public Transportation OCTA operates five transit routes in the project area. These routes include regular bus service, station- link bus service, and express bus service. It is projected that demand for mass transit services will increase in the near future, especially when the ARTIC is built and fully operational. 5.9.2 Thresholds of Significance According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if the project could: T-1 Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections). T-2 Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. T-3 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. T-4 Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses farm equipment). T-5 Result in inadequate emergency access. T-6 Result in inadequate parking capacity. T-7 Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation bus turnouts, bicycle racks). The Initial Study, included as Appendix A, substantiates that impacts associated with the following thresholds would be less than significant: • Threshold T-3 • Threshold T-5 • Threshold T-6 Although impacts associated with Threshold T-3 were determined as having a less than significant impact, additional analysis was provided for clarification purposes. Impacts associated with Thresholds T-5 and T-6 will not be addressed in the following analysis. 5.9.3 Environmental Impacts The following impact analysis addresses thresholds of significance for which the Initial Study disclosed potentially significant impacts. The applicable thresholds are identified in brackets after the impact statement. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-39 IMPACT 5.9-1: PROJECT-RELATED TRIP GENERATION WOULD IMPACT LEVELS OF SERVICE FOR THE AREA ROADWAY SYSTEM. [THRESHOLDS T-1 AND T-2] Impact Analysis: Traffic impacts were determined using the Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model (ATAM). ATAM estimates that the existing land uses within The Platinum Triangle currently generate approximately 84,416 vehicle trips per day, which increases to 243,060 under buildout of the existing MLUP. ATAM projects that the proposed project would generate approximately 443,263 trips per day at buildout, for an increase of 200,203 trips over buildout of the existing MLUP. No Project (Year 2030) The analysis for the future forecast scenarios was performed through the application of the ATAM to develop future traffic forecast volumes throughout the Platinum Triangle study area. The forecasts that represent 2030 conditions are based on citywide land use data and regional socioeconomic growth projections. These forecasts incorporate the following future key project assumptions: • Currently adopted Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan • City of Orange General Plan Update • Revisions to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, including the Anaheim Convention Center Expansion • Disneyland Resort Specific Plan • ARTIC as is currently incorporated into the General Plan • Relocation of Kaiser Permanente hospital Intersection ICU Analysis (2030 No Project) The intersection analysis considers the effect that growth within the study area will have on the future circulation system. Figure 5.9-4 shows ICU and LOS results for the study intersections under 2030 No Project forecast conditions during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour. Future General Plan lane geometrics were assumed in the intersection analysis. In year 2030 under No Project conditions, the following intersections would operate at an unacceptable LOS in either or both AM and PM peak hours: 1) Ninth Street at Katella Avenue/(I-2) 2) Disneyland Drive at Ball Road/(I-5) 3) Disneyland Drive/West Street at Katella Avenue/(I-6) 4) Harbor Boulevard at Ball Road/(I-8) 5) Anaheim Boulevard at Ball Road/(I-19) 6) Anaheim Boulevard at Cerritos Avenue/(I-20) 7) Haster Street at Gene Autry Way/(I-24) 8) Lewis Street at Katella Avenue/(I-33) 9) Market Street at Katella Avenue/(I-41) 10) State College Boulevard/The City Drive at Chapman Avenue (City of Orange)/(I-57) 11) Rampart Street at Orangewood Avenue/(I-64) 12) Orangewood Avenue at SR-57 Southbound Ramps (City of Orange)/(I-71) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-40 • The Planning Center August 2010 13) Main Street at Collins Avenue (City of Orange)/(I-80) 14) The City Drive at Garden Grove Boulevard (City of Orange)/(I-102) Arterial Segment Daily LOS Analysis (No Project 2030) According to the arterial segment analysis, the following 30 arterial segments (26 in Anaheim and 4 in Orange) would operate at a deficient LOS under future No Project daily conditions. These arterial segments are shown in Table 5.9-15. Four segments in the City of Orange will operate at LOS E or F, deficient under the City of Orange guidelines. Segments operating at LOS D, E, or F under daily conditions within the City of Anaheim are further analyzed under AM and PM peak hour conditions below. One roadway segment is divided into two segments, as the current Circulation Element designation has different lane assumptions for different parts of the overall segment. If a deficient segment under daily conditions is also deficient under the AM and PM peak hour conditions then improvements will be necessary to return the segment to an acceptable LOS under peak hour conditions. The analysis indicates that the following arterial segments operate at a deficient LOS under future forecast No Project daily conditions. 1) Anaheim Boulevard from I-5 to Cerritos Avenue/(A-2) 2) Anaheim Way from Orangewood Avenue to Katella Avenue/(A-6) 3) Ball Road from Disneyland Drive to Harbor Boulevard/(A-9) 4) Ball Road from Harbor Boulevard to Anaheim Boulevard/(A-10) 5) Ball Road from State College Boulevard to Sunkist Street/(A-13) 6) Ball Road from Sunkist Street to SR-57/(A-14) 7) Ball Road from SR-57 to Main Street (City of Orange segment)/(A-15) 8) Cerritos Avenue from Sunkist Street to Douglass Road/(A-19) 9) Collins Avenue from Main Street to Batavia Street (City of Orange segment)/(A-27) 10) Douglass Road from Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue/(A-31) 11) Eckhoff Street from Orangewood Avenue to Collins Avenue (City of Orange segment)/(A-32) 12) Harbor Boulevard from Chapman Avenue to Orangewood Avenue/(A-37) 13) Harbor Boulevard from Orangewood Avenue to Convention Way/(A-38) 14) Harbor Boulevard from Convention Way to Katella Avenue/(A-39) 15) Harbor Boulevard from Katella Avenue to Disney Way/(A-40) 16) Harbor Boulevard from Disney Way to Manchester Avenue/(A-41) 17) Harbor Boulevard from Manchester Avenue to I-5/(A-42) 18) Katella Avenue from Euclid Street to Ninth Street/(A-49) 19) Katella Avenue from Ninth Street to Walnut Street/(A-50) 20) Katella Avenue from Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive/(A-51) 21) Katella Avenue from Disneyland Drive to Harbor Boulevard/(A-52) 22) Katella Avenue from Manchester Avenue to Anaheim Way/(A-56a) 23) Katella Avenue from Sportstown to Howell Avenue/(A-59) 24) Katella Avenue from Howell Avenue to SR-57/(A-60) 25) Katella Avenue from SR-57 to Main Street/(A-61) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center • Figure 5.9-4 No Project (2030) Peak Hour Intersection LOS Source: PB 2010 0 2,800 Scale (Feet) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-42 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-43 26) Lewis Street from Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue/(A-65) 27) Orangewood Avenue from Harbor Boulevard to Haster Street/(A-74) 28) Orangewood Avenue from Haster Street to Manchester Boulevard/(A-75) 29) Phoenix Club Drive from Honda Center to Ball Road/(A-81) 30) Struck Avenue from Katella Avenue to Main Street (City of Orange segment)/(A-91) Table 5.9-15 2030 No Project Deficient Arterial Segment Daily LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Vol V/C LOS A-2 Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 53,130 0.94 E A-6 Anaheim Way Orangewood Ave Katella Avenue Anaheim 25,230 0.90 D A-9 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 56,710 1.01 F A-10 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 45,610 0.81 D A-13 Ball Road State College Blvd Sunkist Street Anaheim 46,630 0.83 D A-14 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 58,790 1.04 F A-15 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 59,090 1.05 F A-19 Cerritos Ave Sunkist Street Douglass Road Anaheim 22,300 0.89 D A-27 Collins Ave Main Street Batavia Street Orange 23,270 0.97 E A-31 Douglass Road Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 24,550 0.98 E A-32 Eckhoff Street Orangewood Ave Collins Avenue Orange 27,340 1.14 F A-37 Harbor Boulevard Chapman Avenue Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 48,780 0.87 D A-38 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Ave Convention Way Anaheim 46,890 0.83 D A-39 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 49,980 0.89 D A-40 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 55,020 0.98 E A-41 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 53,490 0.95 E A-42 Harbor Boulevard Manchester Avenue I-5 Freeway Anaheim 55,420 0.84 D A-49 Katella Ave Euclid St Ninth St Anaheim 49,450 0.88 D A-50 Katella Avenue Ninth Street Walnut Street Anaheim 47,260 0.84 D A-51 Katella Avenue Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 55,400 0.98 E A-52 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 64,920 0.87 D A-56a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way Anaheim 58160 1.03 F A-59 Katella Avenue Sportstown Howell Avenue Anaheim 54380 0.97 E A-60 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR 57 Freeway Anaheim 60860 1.08 F A-61 Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Anaheim 54600 0.97 E A-65 Lewis Street Katella Ave Cerritos Ave Anaheim 22360 0.89 D A-74 Orangewood Ave Harbor Blvd Haster St Anaheim 20130 0.81 D A-75 Orangewood Ave Haster St Manchester Ave Anaheim 24480 0.98 E A-81 Phoenix Club Drive Honda Center Ball Rd Anaheim 13530 1.08 F A-91 Struck Avenue Katella Ave Main Street Orange 14100 1.18 F Note: Shared jurisdiction segments are identified by the jurisdiction where the existing traffic count was taken. Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS Analysis (No Project 2030) Segments operating at LOS D, E, or F under daily conditions within the City of Anaheim were further analyzed under AM and PM peak hour conditions. The analysis determined that one arterial segment (Lewis Street from Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue) is projected to operate deficiently during PM peak hour as shown in Table 5.9-16. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-44 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.9-16 2030 No Project Arterial Segment PM Peak Hour LOS ID Arterial From To City Traffic Volume Lanes Total Capacity V/C LOS A-65 Lewis St Katella Ave Cerritos Ave Anaheim 2,680 4U 2,660 1.01 F 2030 With Project Intersection ICU Analysis (With Project 2030) Intersection analysis describes the effect of future growth on the study area intersections, with the Proposed Project. As shown in Table 5.9-17 and Figure 5.9-5, the following intersections are forecast to operate at LOS E or F (five intersections in the City of Orange and one shared intersection between Anaheim and Orange). 1) Euclid Street at Katella Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(I-1) 2) Ninth Street at Katella Avenue (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(I-2) 3) Disneyland Drive at Ball Road (PM Peak Hour)/(I-5) 4) Disneyland Drive/West Street at Katella Avenue (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(I-6) 5) Harbor Boulevard at Ball Road (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(I-8) 6) Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(I-12) 7) Anaheim Boulevard at Vermont Avenue (AM Peak Hour)/(I-18) 8) Anaheim Boulevard at Ball Road (PM Peak Hour)/(I-19) 9) Anaheim Boulevard at Cerritos Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(I-20) 10) Anaheim Boulevard at I-5 NB Ramps (PM Peak Hour)/(I-21) 11) Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street at Katella Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(I-23) 12) Haster Street at Gene Autry Way (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(I-24) 13) Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue (AM Peak Hour)/(I-27) 14) Lewis Street at Cerritos Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(I-31) 15) Lewis Street at Katella Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(I-33) 16) Lewis Street at Anaheim Connector (future) (PM Peak Hour)/(I-35) 17) State College Boulevard at Cerritos Avenue (AM Peak Hour)/(I-47) 18) State College Boulevard at Katella Avenue (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(I-49) 19) State College Boulevard at Gateway Center Drive (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(I-50) 20) State College Boulevard at Gene Autry Way (AM Peak Hour)/(I-51) 21) State College Boulevard at Orangewood Avenue (Anaheim/Orange) (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(I-53) 22) State College Boulevard/The City Drive at Chapman Avenue (Orange) (PM Peak Hour)/(I-57) 23) Sunkist Street at Howell Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(I-60) 24) Howell Avenue at Katella Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(I-61) 25) Sportstown at Katella Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(I-62) 26) Rampart Street at Orangewood Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(I-64) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-45 27) Orangewood Avenue at SR-57 Southbound Ramps (Orange) (PM Peak Hour)/(I-71) 28) Douglass Road at Katella Avenue (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(I-73) 29) Main Street at Collins Avenue (Orange) (PM Peak Hour)/(I-80) 30) Glassell Street at Katella Avenue (Orange) (PM Peak Hour)/(I-87) 31) The City Drive at Garden Grove Boulevard (Orange) (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(I-102) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-46 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-47 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-17 Year 2030 Peak Hour Intersection Summary 2008 Baseline 2030 No Project 2030 With Project AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak ID Intersection Jurisdiction ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS Project Related Impact I-1 Euclid Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.89 D 1.02 F 0.85 D 0.90 D 0.87 D 0.94 E Yes I-2 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.53 A 0.92 E 0.88 D 0.95 E 0.97 E Yes I-5 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.70 B 0.77 C 0.86 D 0.91 E 0.87 D 0.92 E Yes I-6 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.63 B 0.60 A 0.90 D 0.92 E 0.96 E 0.94 E Yes I-8 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.73 C 0.68 B 1.05 F 0.91 E 1.10 F 0.96 E Yes I-12 Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.55 A 0.63 B 0.75 C 0.89 D 0.81 D 0.94 E Yes I-18 Anaheim Boulevard / Vermont Avenue Anaheim 0.58 A 0.61 B 0.89 D 0.82 D 0.92 E 0.89 D Yes I-19 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.63 B 0.91 E 0.88 D 0.92 E 0.88 D 1.01 F Yes I-20 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.49 A 0.71 C 0.74 C 0.99 E 0.86 D 1.03 F Yes I-21 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.41 A 0.59 A 0.79 C 0.87 D 0.66 B 0.95 E Yes I-23 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.47 A 0.58 A 0.84 D 0.87 D 0.90 D 0.92 E Yes I-24 Haster Street / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Not Applicable 0.86 D 0.98 E 0.95 E 1.16 F Yes I-27 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.46 A 0.50 A 0.74 C 0.82 D 0.95 E 0.90 D Yes I-31 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.28 A 0.31 A 0.72 C 0.81 D 0.85 D 0.95 E Yes I-33 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.48 A 0.62 B 0.67 B 0.95 E 0.85 D 1.28 F Yes I-35 Lewis Street / Anaheim Connector (future) Anaheim Not Applicable 0.58 A 0.79 C 0.74 C 1.07 F Yes I-47 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.49 A 0.50 A 0.81 D 0.82 D 0.96 E 0.87 D Yes I-49 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.43 A 0.53 A 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.94 E 0.99 E Yes I-50 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 0.26 A 0.33 A 0.66 B 0.80 C 1.04 F 1.19 F Yes ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-48 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-17 Year 2030 Peak Hour Intersection Summary 2008 Baseline 2030 No Project 2030 With Project AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak ID Intersection Jurisdiction ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS Project Related Impact I-51 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.30 A 0.29 A 0.78 C 0.75 C 1.02 F 0.84 D Yes I-53 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.46 A 0.47 A 0.83 D 0.83 D 0.91 E 0.97 E Yes I-57 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.71 C 0.66 B 0.84 D 0.93 E 0.88 D 0.96 E Yes I-60 Sunkist Street / Howell Avenue Anaheim 0.31 A 0.37 A 0.59 A 0.79 C 0.69 B 0.93 E Yes I-61 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.38 A 0.51 A 0.55 A 0.78 C 0.62 B 0.93 E Yes I-62 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.31 A 0.41 A 0.61 B 0.72 C 0.77 C 0.98 E Yes I-64 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.51 A 0.44 A 0.71 C 0.99 E 0.78 C 1.13 F Yes I-71 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.61 B 0.68 B 0.79 C 0.94 E 0.84 D 1.04 F Yes I-73 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.41 A 0.49 A 0.85 D 0.90 D 1.04 F 1.09 F Yes I-80 Main Street / Collins Avenue Orange 0.44 A 0.57 A 0.85 D 0.94 E 0.88 D 0.96 E Yes I-87 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.55 A 0.60 A 0.75 C 0.89 D 0.77 C 0.92 E Yes I-102 The City Drive / Garden Grove Boulevard Orange 0.42 A 0.48 A 0.86 D 0.93 E 0.88 D 0.96 E Yes * CMP Intersection ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center • Figure 5.9-5 With Project (2030) Peak Hour Intersection LOS Source: PB 2010 0 2,800 Scale (Feet) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-50 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-51 Table 5.9-18 provides a list of improvements for the deficient intersections within the Cities of Anaheim and Orange. Figure 5.9-6 illustrates the improvement locations and identified mitigation strategy. As shown, with mitigation, all intersections would operate at LOS D or better during AM and PM peak hours. It should be noted that although one intersection, Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue (I-12), is projected to operate at LOS E, no improvements were recommended because this intersection is identified in the OCTA CMP as a CMP location. Per CMP Guidelines and the City of Anaheim Growth Management Element, intersections, major arterials, and Caltrans facilities operating at LOS E indentified within the CMP are considered acceptable. Table 5.9-18 Year 2030 Peak Hour Intersection LOS With Mitigation With Mitigation AM PM ID Intersection City ICU LOS ICU LOS Recommended Mitigation I-1 Euclid St/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.87 D 0.89 D Restripe NBR to NBT, widen NB departure for 400 feet I-2 Ninth St/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.88 D 0.80 C Add 2nd NBL (Restripe #1 SB lane) I-5 Disneyland Dr/Ball Rd Anaheim 0.83 D 0.87 D Add NBL: Restripe NB to 2L, 2T, 1R and SB to 2L, 2T; Remove Split Phase I-6 Disneyland Dr/West Street/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.84 D 0.90 D Restripe EBR to EBT, Restripe WBR to WBT and add 4th WB lane to the Simba parking lot entrance I-8 Harbor Blvd/Ball Rd Anaheim 0.90 D 0.90 D Add NBT, SBT, EBT, EBR I-18 Anaheim Blvd/Vermont Ave Anaheim 0.76 C 0.89 D Add SBT I-19 Anaheim Blvd/Ball Rd Anaheim 0.82 D 0.90 D Add NBR, EBL, EBR I-20 Anaheim Blvd/Cerritos Ave Anaheim 0.68 B 0.86 D Add NBL, SBL, WBR, Restripe WB approach to 2L, 1TR, 1R I-21 Anaheim Blvd/I-5 NB Ramp Anaheim 0.55 A 0.85 D Add SBT (in median) I-23 Anaheim Blvd /Haster St/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.90 D 0.90 D Add WBR I-24 Haster St/Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.78 C 0.87 D Add WBL, SBL, SBR I-26 Manchester Ave (I-5 SB Ramps)/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.77 C 0.80 C Add EBT, WBT (part of mitigation measure to widen Katella under I-5) I-27 Anaheim Way (I-5 NB Ramp)/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.81 D 0.78 C Add EBT, WBT (part of mitigation measure to widen Katella under I-5) I-31 Lewis St/Cerritos Ave Anaheim 0.85 D 0.89 D Add WBR I-33 Lewis St/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.70 B 0.83 D Add NBL, NBT, SBL, SBR, WBT; Restripe SB to 2L, 1T, 1TR, 1R I-35 Lewis St/Anaheim Connector (future) Anaheim 0.60 A 0.85 D Add EBL I-47 State College Blvd /Cerritos Ave Anaheim 0.88 D 0.74 C Add NBL, SBL, EBL I-49 State College Blvd /Katella Ave Anaheim 0.90 D 0.85 D Add WBR, EBR; Restripe SB to 2L, 2T, 2R; EB to 3L, 3T, 1R I-50 State College Blvd /Gateway Center Dr Anaheim 0.89 D 0.78 C Add WBL and NBR I-51 State College Blvd /Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.90 D 0.73 C Add SBR ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-52 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.9-18 Year 2030 Peak Hour Intersection LOS With Mitigation With Mitigation AM PM ID Intersection City ICU LOS ICU LOS Recommended Mitigation I-53 State College Blvd /Orangewood Ave Anaheim/ Orange 0.88 D 0.90 D Add NBR and WBT I-57 State College Blvd /The City Dr/Chapman Ave Orange 0.83 D 0.80 C Restripe WBT to WBTR I-60 Sunkist St/Howell Avenue Anaheim 0.69 B 0.90 D Add SBL, restripe SB to 1L, 1LT, 1R I-61 Howell Ave/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.62 B 0.82 D Add WBR I-62 Sportstown/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.73 C 0.89 D Restripe NBTR to NBT, NBTL, Add Lane I-64 Rampart St/Orangewood Ave Anaheim 0.73 C 0.80 C Add NB Free Right, Add SBL I-71 Orangewood Avenue/SR- 57 SB Ramps Orange 0.79 C 0.89 D Add WBL (Restripe) I-73 Douglass Rd/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.78 C 0.87 D Add NBT and SBT; Reconfigure NBTR to NBT, Reconfigure SBTR to SBT; Add EBT and WBR I-80 Main St/Collins Ave Orange 0.88 D 0.87 D Add 2nd WBL I-87 Glassell St/Katella Ave Orange 0.76 C 0.90 D Restripe SBR to SBT and Widen SB departure for 400 feet I-102 The City Dr/Garden Grove Blvd Orange 0.67 B 0.90 D Add SBL by Restriping #1 NB lane; Restripe EBT to EBL City of Orange Facilities The Proposed Project results in cumulative impacts to seven intersections located within the City of Orange and includes one shared intersection with Anaheim and two ramp termini intersections. Some of the identified improvements are not included within the City of Orange development impact fee program. The Proposed Project would contribute the associated intersection fair-share percentage toward the costs of the recommended improvements. The fair-share calculations, presented in Table 5.9-19, show that the Proposed Project contributes between 8 percent and 27 percent of trips to Orange intersections and 34 percent of trips to the shared Anaheim and Orange intersection. The Cities of Orange and Anaheim will need to enter into or amend an existing cooperative agreement to determine the implementation of these improvements. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-53 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-19 Potential Intersection Mitigation and Fair-Share for Orange Facilities 2030 With Project 2030 With Project (Mitigated) AM PM AM PM ID Intersection Jurisdiction ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS Proposed Mitigation Strategy Possible Mitigation Issues Fair-Share Percentage I-53 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.91 E 0.97 E 0.88 D 0.90 D Add NBR and WBT Median, Corner business 34% I-57 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.88 D 0.96 E 0.83 D 0.80 C Restripe WBT to WBTR Within ROW 16% I-71 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 SB Ramps Orange 0.84 D 1.04 F 0.67 B 0.87 D Add WBL (Restripe) Within ROW 27% I-80 Main Street / Collins Avenue Orange 0.88 D 0.96 E 0.88 D 0.87 D Add 2nd WBL Parking, landscaping 8% I-87 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.77 C 0.92 E 0.69 B 0.90 D Restripe SBR to SBT and Widen SB departure for 400 feet Street parking 9% I-102 The City Drive / Garden Grove Boulevard Orange 0.88 D 0.96 E 0.69 B 0.89 D Add SBL by Restriping #1 NB lane; Restripe EBT to EBL Within ROW 9% ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-54 • City of Anaheim August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center • Figure 5.9-6 Recommended Mitigation Measures Source: PB 2010 0 2,800 Scale (Feet) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-56 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-57 Arterial Segment Daily LOS Analysis (With Project 2030) The following arterial segments operate at a deficient LOS with implementation of the Proposed Project. As shown in Table 5.9-20, the traffic analysis found that there are 42 arterial segments with significant impacts with implementation of the Proposed Project, including six segments in the City of Orange. These six arterial segments in the City of Orange will require mitigation to operate at an acceptable LOS through upgrading segment classification to provide additional capacity. For those deficient arterial segments in the City of Anaheim, a peak hour LOS analysis was performed for further analysis. 1) Anaheim Boulevard from I-5 to Cerritos Avenue/(A-2) 2) Anaheim Boulevard from Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road/(A-3) 3) Anaheim Way from Orangewood Avenue to Katella Avenue/(A-6) 4) Ball Road from Disneyland Drive to Harbor Boulevard/(A-9) 5) Ball Road from Harbor Boulevard to Anaheim Boulevard/(A-10) 6) Ball Road from Anaheim Boulevard to East Street/(A-11) 7) Ball Road from East Street to State College Boulevard/(A-12) 8) Ball Road from State College Boulevard to Sunkist Street/(A-13) 9) Ball Road from Sunkist Street to SR-57/(A-14) 10) Ball Road from SR-57 to Main Street (City of Orange segment)/(A-15) 11) Cerritos Avenue from Sunkist Street to Douglass Road/(A-19) 12) Collins Avenue from Main Street to Batavia Street (City of Orange segment)/(A-27) 13) Collins Avenue from Batavia Street to Glassell Street (City of Orange segment)/(A-28) 14) Douglass Road from Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue/(A-31) 15) Eckhoff Street from Orangewood Avenue to Collins Avenue (City of Orange segment)/(A-32) 16) Gene Autry Way from I-5 to State College Boulevard/(A-36) 17) Harbor Boulevard from Chapman Avenue to Orangewood Avenue/(A-37) 18) Harbor Boulevard from Orangewood Avenue to Convention Way/(A-38) 19) Harbor Boulevard from Convention Way to Katella Avenue/(A-39) 20) Harbor Boulevard from Katella Avenue to Disney Way/(A-40) 21) Harbor Boulevard from Disney Way to Manchester Avenue/(A-41) 22) Harbor Boulevard from Manchester Avenue to I-5/(A-42) 23) Howell Avenue from State College Boulevard to Sunkist Street/(A-47) 24) Katella Avenue from Euclid Street to Ninth Street/(A-49) 25) Katella Avenue from Ninth Street to Walnut Street/(A-50) 26) Katella Avenue from Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive/(A-51) 27) Katella Avenue from Disneyland Drive to Harbor Boulevard/(A-52) 28) Katella Avenue from Manchester Avenue to Anaheim Way/(A-56a) 29) Katella Avenue from Anaheim Way to Lewis Street/(A-56b) 30) Katella Avenue from Sportstown to Howell Avenue/(A-59) 31) Katella Avenue from Howell Avenue to SR-57/(A-60) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-58 • The Planning Center August 2010 32) Katella Avenue from SR-57 to Main Street/(A-61) 33) Katella Avenue from Main Street to Batavia Street (City of Orange segment)/(A-62) 34) Lewis Street from Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue/(A-65) 35) Manchester Avenue from Orangewood Avenue to Katella Avenue/(A-72) 36) Orangewood Avenue from Harbor Boulevard to Haster Street/(A-74) 37) Orangewood Avenue from State College Boulevard to Rampart Street/(A-77) 38) Orangewood Avenue from Rampart Street to SR-57 Freeway/(A-78) 39) Phoenix Club Drive from Honda Center to Ball Road/(A-81) 40) Rampart Street from Chapman Avenue to Orangewood Avenue /(A-82) 41) State College Boulevard from Katella Avenue to Howell Avenue/(A-87) 42) Struck Avenue from Katella Avenue to Main Street (City of Orange segment)/(A-91) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-59 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-20 2030 With Project Arterial Segment Daily LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V/C LOS A-1 Anaheim Boulevard Katella Avenue I-5 Freeway Anaheim 31,080 6D 56,300 0.55 A A-2 Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 55,320 6D 56,300 0.98 E A-3 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 46,190 6D 56,300 0.82 D A-4 Anaheim Boulevard Ball Road Vermont Street Anaheim 39,160 6D 56,300 0.70 B A-5 Anaheim Way State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Orange 15,130 3D 28,150 0.54 A A-6 Anaheim Way Orangewood Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 26,650 3D 28,150 0.95 E A-7 Anaheim Way Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 18,110 3D 28,150 0.64 B A-8 Ball Road Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 42,390 6D 56,300 0.75 C A-9 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 58,690 6D 56,300 1.04 F A-10 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 47,460 6D 56,300 0.84 D A-11 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard East Street Anaheim 46,390 6D 56,300 0.82 D A-12 Ball Road East Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 47,540 6D 56,300 0.84 D A-13 Ball Road State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 48,590 6D 56,300 0.86 D A-14 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 61,800 6D 56,300 1.10 F A-15 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 60,250 6D 56,300 1.07 F A-16 Cerritos Avenue Anaheim Boulevard Lewis Street Anaheim 30,130 4D 37,500 0.80 C A-17 Cerritos Avenue Lewis Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 29,510 4D 37,500 0.79 C A-18 Cerritos Avenue State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 19,870 4U 25,000 0.79 C A-19 Cerritos Avenue Sunkist Street Douglass Road Anaheim 26,820 4U 25,000 1.07 F A-20 Chapman Avenue State College Boulevard SR-57 Freeway Orange 38,400 6D 56,300 0.68 B A-21 Chapman Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 33,930 6D 56,300 0.60 A A-22 The City Drive SR-22 Freeway Chapman Avenue Orange 33,030 8D 75,000 0.44 A A-23 Clementine Street Orangewood Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim 9,010 4U 25,000 0.36 A A-24 Clementine Street Gene Autry Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 5,720 4U 25,000 0.23 A A-25 Clementine Street Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim 8,470 4U 25,000 0.34 A A-26 Collins Avenue Eckhoff Street Main Street Orange 20,830 4U 24,000 0.87 D A-27 Collins Avenue Main Street Batavia Street Orange 23,650 4U 24,000 0.99 E A-28 Collins Avenue Batavia Street Glassell Street Orange 21,820 4U 24,000 0.91 E A-29 Disney Way Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 17,040 6D 56,300 0.30 A A-30 Disney Way Clementine Street Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 26,660 6D 56,300 0.47 A ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-60 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-20 2030 With Project Arterial Segment Daily LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V/C LOS A-31 Douglass Road Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 28,540 4U 25,000 1.14 F A-32 Eckhoff Street Orangewood Avenue Collins Avenue Orange 27,760 4U 24,000 1.16 F A-33 Gene Autry Way Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 24,940 6D 56,300 0.44 A A-34 Gene Autry Way Clementine Street Haster Street Anaheim 30,800 6D 56,300 0.55 A A-35 Gene Autry Way Haster Street I-5 Freeway Anaheim 38,780 6D 56,300 0.69 B A-36 Gene Autry Way I-5 Freeway State College Boulevard Anaheim 45,660 6D 56,300 0.81 D A-37 Harbor Boulevard Chapman Avenue Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 50,300 6D 56,300 0.89 D A-38 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Convention Way Anaheim 47,440 6D 56,300 0.84 D A-39 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 50,350 6D 56,300 0.89 D A-40 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 56,730 6D 56,300 1.01 F A-41 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 54,500 6D 56,300 0.97 E A-42 Harbor Boulevard Manchester Avenue I-5 Freeway Anaheim 57,240 7D 65,625 0.87 D A-43 Harbor Boulevard I-5 Freeway Ball Road Anaheim 59,290 8D 75,000 0.79 C A-44 Harbor Boulevard Ball Road Vermont Street Anaheim 38,240 6D 56,300 0.68 B A-45 Haster Street Chapman Avenue Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 38,010 6D 56,300 0.68 B A-46 Haster Street Orangewood Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 39,830 6D 56,300 0.71 C A-47 Howell Avenue State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 22,000 4U 25,000 0.88 D A-48 Howell Avenue Sunkist Street Katella Avenue Anaheim 7,910 4U 25,000 0.32 A A-49 Katella Avenue Euclid Street Ninth Street Anaheim 50,900 6D 56,300 0.90 D A-50 Katella Avenue Ninth Street Walnut Street Anaheim 48,170 6D 56,300 0.86 D A-51 Katella Avenue Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 56,930 6D 56,300 1.01 F A-52 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 67,110 8D 75,000 0.89 D A-53 Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 59,070 8D 75,000 0.79 C A-54 Katella Avenue Clementine Street Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 59,650 8D 75,000 0.80 C A-55 Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway Anaheim 57,520 8D 75,000 0.77 C A-56a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way Anaheim 71,090 6D 56,300 1.26 F A-56b Katella Avenue Anaheim Way Lewis Street Anaheim 71,090 8D 75,000 0.95 E A-57 Katella Avenue Lewis Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 57,860 8D 75,000 0.77 C A-58 Katella Avenue State College Boulevard Sportstown Anaheim 51,920 8D 75,000 0.69 B A-59 Katella Avenue Sportstown Howell Avenue Anaheim 62,310 6D 56,300 1.11 F ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-61 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-20 2030 With Project Arterial Segment Daily LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V/C LOS A-60 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 71,190 6D 56,300 1.26 F A-61 Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Anaheim 62,900 6D 56,300 1.12 F A-62 Katella Avenue* Main Street Batavia Street Orange 51,570 6D 59,115 0.87 E A-63 Katella Avenue* Batavia Street Glassell Street Orange 49,250 6D 59,115 0.83 D A-64 Lewis Street Gene Autry Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 25,710 4D 37,500 0.69 B A-65 Lewis Street Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 32,900 4U 25,000 1.32 F A-66 Lewis Street Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 22,950 4D 37,500 0.61 B A-67 Main Street Chapman Avenue Orangewood Avenue Orange 40,550 6D 56,300 0.72 C A-68 Main Street Orangewood Avenue Collins Avenue Orange 29,410 6D 56,300 0.52 A A-69 Main Street Collins Avenue Katella Avenue Orange 31,360 4D 37,500 0.84 D A-70 Main Street Katella Avenue Taft Avenue Orange 21,730 4D 37,500 0.58 A A-71 Manchester Avenue Compton Avenue Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 16,050 3D 28,150 0.57 A A-72 Manchester Avenue Orangewood Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 23,810 3D 28,150 0.85 D A-73 Manchester Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 14,740 3D 28,150 0.52 A A-74 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard Haster Street Anaheim 21,480 4U 25,000 0.86 D A-75 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 25,910 4U 25,000 1.04 F A-76 Orangewood Avenue** Manchester Avenue State College Boulevard Anaheim/ Orange 34,410 6D 56,300 0.61 B A-77 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard Rampart Street Anaheim 50,380 6D 56,300 0.89 D A-78 Orangewood Avenue** Rampart Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim/ Orange 47,660 6D 56,300 0.85 D A-79 Orangewood Avenue SR-57 Freeway Eckhoff Street Orange 49,090 6D 56,300 0.87 D A-80 Orangewood Avenue Eckhoff Street Main Street Orange 19,610 6D 56,300 0.35 A A-81 Phoenix Club Drive Honda Center Ball Road Anaheim 13,510 2U 12,500 1.08 F A-82 Rampart Street Chapman Avenue Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 22,510 4U 25,000 0.90 D A-83 State College Boulevard Chapman Avenue I-5 Freeway Orange 45,860 8D 75,000 0.61 B A-84 State College Boulevard I-5 Freeway Orangewood Avenue Orange 48,060 8D 75,000 0.64 B A-85 State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim 46,900 8D 75,000 0.63 B A-86 State College Boulevard Gene Autry Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 34,920 6D 56,300 0.62 B A-87 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue Howell Avenue Anaheim 46,470 6D 56,300 0.83 D A-88 State College Boulevard Howell Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 31,130 6D 56,300 0.55 A A-89 State College Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 28,570 6D 56,300 0.51 A ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-62 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-20 2030 With Project Arterial Segment Daily LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V/C LOS A-90 State College Boulevard Ball Road Wagner Avenue Anaheim 35,100 6D 56,300 0.62 B A-91 Struck Avenue Katella Avenue Main Street Orange 15,500 2U 12,000 1.29 F A-92 Sunkist Street Howell Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 12,610 4U 25,000 0.50 A A-93 Sunkist Street Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 12,000 4U 25,000 0.48 A A-94 Walnut Avenue Main Street Batavia Street Orange 9,710 2U 12,000 0.81 D A-95 Walnut Avenue Batavia Street Glassell Street Orange 9,860 2U 12,000 0.82 D NA-Not Applicable * Smart Street segments in Orange include a 5% capacity enhancement Shared segments capacities are identified by the jurisdiction in which the traffic count was taken ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-63 Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS Analysis (With Project 2030) A peak hour LOS analysis was performed for 35 deficient arterial segments in the City of Anaheim as previously indicated and it determined that four arterial segments would have significant impact in either AM or PM peak hour as shown in Table 5.9-21. Table 5.9-22 compares these deficient segments under existing, No Project, and With Project conditions. The following lists deficient arterial segments that require improvements after the peak hour LOS analysis. 1) Cerritos Avenue from Sunkist Street to Douglass Road/(A-19) 2) Douglass Road from Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue/(A-31) 3) Katella Avenue from Manchester Avenue to Anaheim Way/(A-56a) 4) Lewis Street from Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue/(A-65) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-64 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-65 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-21 2030 With Project Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid-Block Lanes Total Capacity V/C LOS AM Peak Hour A-2 Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 3,320 6D 5,586 0.59 A A-3 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 2,870 6D 5,586 0.51 A A-6 Anaheim Way Orangewood Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 1,820 3D 4,370 0.42 A A-9 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 3,780 6D 5,358 0.71 C A-10 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 2,750 6D 5,358, 0.51 A A-11 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard East Street Anaheim 3,200 6D 4,788 0.67 B A-12 Ball Road East Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 3,310 6D 4,674 0.71 C A-13 Ball Road State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 3,250 6D 4,674 0.70 B A-14 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 4,520 6D 7,286 0.62 B A-19 Cerritos Avenue Sunkist Street Douglass Road Anaheim 2,380 4U 2,584 0.92 E A-31 Douglass Road Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 2,150 4U 1,824 1.18 F A-36 Gene Autry Way I-5 Freeway State College Boulevard Anaheim 3,300 6D 4,560 0.72 C A-37 Harbor Boulevard Chapman Avenue Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 2,550 6D 5,358 0.48 A A-38 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Convention Way Anaheim 2,560 6D 5,814 0.44 A A-39 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 2,730 6D 5,814 0.47 A A-40 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 2,990 6D 6,042 0.49 A A-41 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 3,140 6D 6,042 0.52 A A-42 Harbor Boulevard Manchester Avenue I-5 Freeway Anaheim 3,280 7D 8,911 0.37 A A-47 Howell Avenue State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 1,720 4U 2,508 0.69 B A-49 Katella Avenue Euclid Street Ninth Street Anaheim 3,550 6D 5,358 0.81 D A-50 Katella Avenue Ninth Street Walnut Street Anaheim 2,780 6D 7,980 0.53 A A-51 Katella Avenue Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 3,730 6D 10,640 0.43 A A-52 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 3,590 8D 7,600 0.71 C A-56a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way Anaheim 5,360 6D 5,586 0.96 E A-56b Katella Avenue Anaheim Way Lewis Street Anaheim 5,360 8D 7,448 0.72 C A-59 Katella Avenue Sportstown Howell Avenue Anaheim 4,020 6D 7,524 0.53 A A-60 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 4,530 6D 7,524 0.60 A A-61 Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Anaheim 4,960 6D 6,384 0.78 C A-65 Lewis Street Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 2,970 4U 3,040 0.99 E A-72 Manchester Avenue Orangewood Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 2,100 3D 2,508 0.84 D ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-66 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-21 2030 With Project Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid-Block Lanes Total Capacity V/C LOS A-74 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard Haster Street Anaheim 1,200 4U 3,800 0.32 A A-75 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 2,000 4U 5,168 0.39 A A-77 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard Rampart Street Anaheim 3,280 6D 6,156 0.53 A A-78 Orangewood Avenue Rampart Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 3,730 6D 6,612 0.56 A A-81 Phoenix Club Drive Honda Center Ball Road Anaheim 1,140 2U 1,482 0.77 C A-82 Rampart Street Chapman Avenue Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 2,010 4U 2,964 0.68 B A-87 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue Howell Avenue Anaheim 2,490 6D 3,762 0.66 B PM Peak Hour A-2 Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 5,090 6D 5,700 0.89 D A-3 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 4,300 6D 7,902 0.88 D A-6 Anaheim Way Orangewood Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 3,610 3D 4,180 0.86 D A-9 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 4,100 6D 5,130 0.80 C A-10 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 3,100 6D 3,990 0.78 C A-11 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard East Street Anaheim 3,550 6D 6,156 0.58 A A-12 Ball Road East Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 3,520 6D 6,156 0.57 A A-13 Ball Road State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 3,800 6D 5,814 0.65 B A-14 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 4,770 6D 7,296 0.65 B A-19 Cerritos Avenue Sunkist Street Douglass Road Anaheim 2,570 4D 3,268 0.79 C A-31 Douglass Road Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 2,290 4U 2,508 0.91 E A-36 Gene Autry Way I-5 Freeway State College Boulevard Anaheim 4,210 6D 5,358 0.79 C A-37 Harbor Boulevard Chapman Avenue Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 3,390 6D 3,876 0.87 D A-38 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Convention Way Anaheim 3,260 6D 4,446 0.73 C A-39 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 3,580 6D 4,104 0.87 D A-40 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 3,560 6D 4,902 0.73 C A-41 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 3,730 6D 4,902 0.76 C A-42 Harbor Boulevard Manchester Avenue I-5 Freeway Anaheim 3,810 7D 9,975 0.38 A A-47 Howell Avenue State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 2,130 4U 2,812 0.76 C A-49 Katella Avenue Euclid Street Ninth Street Anaheim 4,320 6D 5,358 0.81 D A-50 Katella Avenue Ninth Street Walnut Street Anaheim 4,260 6D 7,980 0.53 A A-51 Katella Avenue Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 4,540 6D 10,640 0.43 A A-52 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 5,380 8D 7,600 0.71 C ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-67 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-21 2030 With Project Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid-Block Lanes Total Capacity V/C LOS A-56a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way Anaheim 5,360 6D 5,586 0.96 E A-56b Katella Avenue Anaheim Way Lewis Street Anaheim 5,360 8D 7,448 0.72 C A-59 Katella Avenue Sportstown Howell Avenue Anaheim 4,020 6D 7,524 0.53 A A-60 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 4,530 6D 7,524 0.60 A A-61 Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Anaheim 4,960 6D 6,384 0.78 C A-65 Lewis Street Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 3,020 4U 3,040 0.99 E A-72 Manchester Avenue Orangewood Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 2,100 3D 2,508 0.84 D A-74 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard Haster Street Anaheim 1,520 4U 3,800 0.40 A A-75 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 2,000 4U 5,168 0.39 A A-77 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard Rampart Street Anaheim 3,280 6D 6,156 0.53 A A-78 Orangewood Avenue Rampart Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 3,730 6D 6,612 0.56 A A-81 Phoenix Club Drive Honda Center Ball Road Anaheim 1,140 2U 1,482 0.77 C A-82 Rampart Street Chapman Avenue Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 2,010 4U 2,964 0.68 B A-87 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue Howell Avenue Anaheim 4,390 6D 5,928 0.74 C NA-Not Applicable Note: Shared segments capacities are identified by the jurisdiction in which the traffic count was taken ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-68 • City of Anaheim August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-69 Table 5.9-22 With Project Arterial Segment LOS (Anaheim) 2008 Baseline 2030 No Project 2030 With Project ID Arterial From/To ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS Impact A-19 Cerritos Avenue Sunkist Street/ Douglass Road 4,520 0.18 A 22,300 0.89 D 26,820 1.07 F Yes A-31 Douglass Road Katella Avenue/ Cerritos Avenue 6,910 0.28 A 24,550 0.98 E 28,540 1.14 F Yes A-56a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue/ Anaheim Way 35,040 0.62 B 58,160 1.03 F 71,090 1.26 F Yes A-65 Lewis Street Katella Avenue/ Cerritos Avenue 7,680 0.31 A 22,360 0.89 D 32,900 1.32 F Yes The Proposed Project would result in significant impact to four arterial segments. However, with improvements as described in Table 5.9-23, all segments except for Lewis Street between Katella Avenue and Cerritos Avenue (A-65) would operate at acceptable levels. Although the arterial segment on Cerritos Avenue between State College Boulevard and Sunkist Avenue (A-18) was not identified as having a significant impact, improvements are necessary so that Cerritos Avenue has a consistent classification for its entire length and would be consistent with the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-70 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.9-23 Recommended Arterial Segment Mitigation Strategies 2030 With Project Scenario Without Mitigation 2030 With Project Scenario With Mitigation ID Arterial From To V/C LOS V/C LOS Mitigation Strategy City of Anaheim A-18 Cerritos Avenue State College Boulevard Sunkist Street 0.79 C 0.53 A Upgrade to 4 lane primary arterial w/ bike lanes A-19 Cerritos Avenue Sunkist Street Douglass Road 1.07 F 0.72 C Upgrade to 4 lane primary arterial w/ bike lanes A-31 Douglass Road Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue 1.14 F 0.76 C Upgrade to 4 lane primary arterial w/ bike lanes A-56a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way 1.26 F 0.95 E Upgrade to 8 lane Stadium A-65 Lewis Street Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue 1.32 F 0.88 D Upgrade to 4 lane primary arterial w/ bike lanes City of Orange A-15 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway Main Street 1.07 F No mitigation recommended A-27 Collins Avenue Main Street Batavia Street 0.99 E 0.63 B Upgrade to 4-lane divided arterial A-28 Collins Avenue Batavia Street Glassell Street 0.91 E 0.58 A Upgrade to 4-lane divided arterial A-32 Eckhoff Street Orangewood Avenue Collins Avenue 1.16 F 0.74 C Upgrade to 4-lane divided arterial A-62 Katella Avenue Main Street Batavia Street 0.92 E No mitigation recommended A-91 Struck Avenue Katella Avenue Main Street 1.29 F 0.65 B Upgrade to 4-lane undivided arterial Source: City of Anaheim City of Orange Facilities Table 5.9-24 compares the deficient arterial segments in the City of Orange under existing, No Project, and With Project conditions. Future forecasts for the arterial segments in Orange are generally consistent with the forecast volumes presented by the City of Orange in their General Plan Update Traffic Analysis (Revised June 2009). As such, the segments of Ball Road (A-15, referred to as Taft Avenue in the Orange analysis) and Katella Avenue (A-62) identified in Table 5.9-24 were identified as deficient in the Orange General Plan Update Traffic Analysis with no specific capacity enhancing mitigation proposed. Rather, the City of Orange recommended monitoring these segments through peak hour intersection performance to ensure acceptable peak hour operations. Therefore, no specific road improvements are proposed for these two arterial segments. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-71 Table 5.9-24 2030 With Project Arterial Segment LOS (City of Orange) 2008 Baseline 2030 No Project 2030 With Project ID Arterial From/To ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS Impact A-15 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway/ Main Street 32,740 0.58 A 59,090 1.05 F 60,250 1.07 F Yes A-27 Collins Avenue Main Street/Batavia Street 20,800 0.45 A 23,270 0.97 E 23,650 0.99 E Yes A-28 Collins Avenue Batavia Street/Glassell Street 14,710 0.61 B 21,360 0.89 D 21,820 0.91 E Yes A-32 Eckhoff Street Orangewood Avenue/Collins Avenue 10,870 0.45 A 27,340 1.14 F 27,760 1.16 F Yes A-62 Katella Avenue Main Street/Batavia Street 30,280 0.54 A 47,690 0.85 D 51,570 0.92 E Yes A-91 Struck Avenue Katella Avenue/Main Street 6,720 0.56 A 14,100 1.18 F 15,500 1.29 F Yes For arterial segment improvements within the City of Orange, the facilities identified in Table 5.9-25 would require improvements to ensure acceptable operations. Future forecasts for the arterial segments in Orange are generally consistent with the forecast volumes presented by the City of Orange in their General Plan Update Traffic Analysis (Revised June 2009). As such, the segments of Ball Road (referred to as Taft Avenue in the Orange analysis) and Katella Avenue identified in Table 5.9-25 were identified as deficient in the Orange General Plan Update Traffic Analysis with no specific capacity enhancing mitigation proposed. Rather, the City of Orange recommended monitoring these segments through peak hour intersection performance to ensure acceptable peak hour operations. For the segment of Collins Avenue between Batavia Street and Glassell Street, improvements to a four-lane divided facility was recommended. The segments of Eckhoff Street and Struck Avenue were not found to be deficient in the Orange General Plan Update. The City of Anaheim does not have jurisdiction over the deficient circulation system components in the City of Orange. Nevertheless, the City shall fund appropriate fair-shares of the identified improvements. The City shall endeavor to work with the City of Orange in developing a joint fee program whereby cross- municipal boundary impacts can be mitigated by development that is occurring in the adjoining jurisdiction. However, because the City of Anaheim cannot guarantee that the City of Orange will cooperate in the development of such a fee program or utilize funds collected by the City of Anaheim for City of Orange impacts for the intended purpose of such funds, a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be developed for the deficient Orange arterial segments in the Environmental Documentation.. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-72 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.9-25 Potential Arterial Segment Mitigation and Fair-Share for Orange Facilities ID Arterial From To With Project ADT V-C Daily LOS Proposed Mitigation Strategy Mit V/C Mit LOS Fair- Share A-15 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway Main Street 60,250 1.07 F No mitigation recommended 4.2% A-27 Collins Avenue Main Street Batavia Street 23,650 0.99 E Upgrade to 4-lane divided arterial 0.63 B 3.0% A-28 Collins Avenue Batavia Street Glassell Street 21,820 0.91 E Upgrade to 4-lane divided arterial 0.58 A 6.5% A-32 Eckhoff Street Orangewood Avenue Collins Avenue 27,760 1.16 F Upgrade to 4-lane divided arterial 0.74 C 2.5% A-62 Katella Avenue Main Street Batavia Street 51,570 0.92 E No mitigation recommended 18.2% A-91 Struck Avenue Katella Avenue Main Street 15,500 1.29 F Upgrade to 4-lane undivided arterial 0.65 B 15.9% IMPACT 5.9-2: THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD INCREASE TRAFFIC VOLUMES ON CALTRANS FACILITIES. [THRESHOLD T-1] Impact Analysis: No Project (Year 2030) Caltrans Ramp Termini Intersection Analysis (No Project 2030) As shown in Table 5.9-26, one Caltrans ramp intersection is projected to operate at an unacceptable LOS without the Proposed Project. The ramp termini intersections have previously been evaluated based on the ICU methodology and in general the analysis LOS results are consistent. However, this HCM analysis is provided in accordance with Caltrans methodology. For two locations, the ramp termini intersections of SR-22 Westbound at Metropolitan Drive (I-98) and Orangewood Avenue/SR-57 Southbound Ramps 71), operate at different levels of service when comparing the ICU and HCM analysis. Intersection #98, SR-22 Westbound at Metropolitan Drive is deficient only under the HCM analysis indicating that the deficiency is generally the result of operational issues, such as insufficient or excessive signal timings for pedestrian crossings. Intersection #71, Orangewood Avenue/SR-57 Southbound Ramps is forecast to operate at LOS E under PM peak hour ICU analysis while the analysis resulted in a forecast PM peak hour LOS D condition. 1) SR-22 Westbound Ramps/ Metropolitan Drive (PM peak hour)/ I-98 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-73 Table 5.9-26 2030 No Project Ramp Termini Intersection LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Intersection Delay LOS Delay LOS I-9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 10.5 B 21.6 C I-10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 15.2 B 7.8 A I-17 I-5 Southbound Off Ramp / Disney Way 22.5 C 20.7 C I-21 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 11.1 B 49.9 D I-22 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way 23.5 C 29.6 C I-26 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella 26.8 C 24.9 C I-27 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 16.3 B 27.7 C I-37 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 30.0 C 19.6 B I-55 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 21.8 C 22.7 C I-56 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 54.1 D 20.0 B I-66 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 16.3 B 16.7 B I-67 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 24.7 C 20.4 C I-68 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 16.0 B 12.2 B I-69 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 24.9 C 11.4 B I-70 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 13.2 B 6.5 A I-71 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 25.0 C 52.8 D I-95 I-5 Ramps / Chapman Avenue 29.0 C 36.4 D I-97 SR-22 Eastbound Ramps / The City Drive 24.3 C 27.0 C I-98 SR-22 Westbound Ramps/ Metropolitan Drive 46.5 D 65.1 E I-99 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 4.9 A 4.3 A I-100 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 43.9 D 42.4 D Caltrans Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis (No Project 2030) Caltrans ramp termini off-ramp queuing and control delay analysis was performed for 19 ramp termini intersections (I-9, I-10, I-17, I-26, I-27, I-37, I-55, I-56, I-66 through I-71, I-95, and I-97 through I-100). The analysis indicates that no Caltrans Ramp intersections are forecast to have a queuing length that is greater than the off-ramp storage length. Under No Project condition, off-ramp queuing length ranges from 2 feet (I-5 HOV Southbound Ramps/Gene Autry Way [I-37]) to 892 feet (State College Boulevard/I-5 Southbound Ramps Off-ramp storage length ranges from 220 feet (I-5 Ramps/Chapman Avenue [I-95]) to 2,960 feet (State College Boulevard/I-5 Northbound Ramps Caltrans Freeway Ramp HCM Analysis (No Project 2030) As shown in Table 5.9-27, the following freeway ramps would be deficient without the Proposed Project during either the AM or PM peak hour. Per the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, a 2-lane on or off-ramp should be provided where volumes exceed 1,500 vehicles per hour during either the AM or PM peak hour. The Southbound SR-57 Off-Ramp to Ball Road forecast volume exceeds these criteria during the AM peak hour under No Project conditions and should be monitored; however there is no difference between the No Project and With Project volumes at this location, therefore the project has no responsibility for improvements at this location. 1) I-5 Northbound Connector from SR-22 Eastbound (PM Peak Hour)/(R-1) 2) I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Chapman Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(R-2) 3) I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to State College Boulevard (PM Peak Hour)/(R-3) 4) I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(R-5) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-74 • The Planning Center August 2010 5) I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(R-6) 6) I-5 Northbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way (PM Peak Hour)/(R-9) 7) I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard (PM Peak Hour)/(R-10) 8) I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard (PM Peak Hour)/(R-11) 9) I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard (PM Peak Hour)/(R-12) 10) I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(R-16) 11) I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(R-22) 12) I-5 Southbound Connector to SR-22 Westbound (PM Peak Hour)/(R-25) 13) SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road (AM Peak Hour)/(R-39) 14) SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(R-42) 15) SR-22 Eastbound Off-Ramp to Fairview Street (PM Peak Hour)/(R-49) 16) SR-22 Eastbound On-Ramp from Fairview Street (PM Peak Hour)/(R-50) 17) SR-22 Eastbound Connector to I-5/SR-57/The City Drive/Bristol Street (PM Peak Hour)/(R-51) 18) SR-22 Eastbound Collector/Distributor Off-Ramp to The City Drive (PM Peak Hour)/(R-52) 19) SR-22 Westbound On-Ramp from Haster Street (PM Peak Hour)/(R-58) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-75 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-27 2030 No Project Freeway Ramp HCM LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane Mainline Volume Ramp Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Mainline Volume Ramp Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-1 I-5 NB Connector from SR-22 EB* 2 5,320 1,850 28.9 D 9,250 2,790 > Capacity F R-2 I-5 NB Off-Ramp to Chapman Avenue 1 7,170 340 25.0 C 12,040 420 > Capacity F R-3 I-5 NB Off-Ramp to State College Boulevard 2 6,830 1,130 11.9 B 11,620 840 > Capacity F R-4 I-5 NB HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way/Disney Way 1 1,400 50 12.4 B 1,950 140 17.4 B R-5 I-5 NB On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue 1 5,700 230 18.9 B 10,780 430 > Capacity F R-6 I-5 NB Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue** 2 5,810 950 22.5 C 9,360 1,600 36.2 E R-7 I-5 NB On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue 1 4,860 370 21.3 C 7,760 520 32.5 D R-8 I-5 NB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 1 5,230 260 22.4 C 8,280 400 33.9 D R-9 I-5 NB HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way** 1 1,170 170 22.9 C 1,710 810 36.7 E R-10 I-5 NB On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 1 5,490 440 24.1 C 8,680 1,140 > Capacity F R-11 I-5 NB Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 1 5,780 800 24.2 C 9,920 1,010 37.8 E R-12 I-5 NB On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 1 4,980 290 21.1 C 8,910 700 > Capacity F R-13 I-5 SB Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 1 7,760 670 28.9 D 8,830 690 32.5 D R-14 I-5 SB On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 1 7,090 1,260 29.1 D 8,140 990 29.7 D R-15 I-5 SB Off-Ramp to Disney Way/Anaheim Boulevard 1 8,350 660 30.8 D 9,130 530 32.7 D R-16 I-5 SB Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue 2 6,130 750 29.6 D 7,770 360 37.6 E R-17 I-5 SB HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way 1 2,760 620 24.7 C 2,690 380 24.1 C R-18 I-5 SB On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 1 5,380 430 23.6 C 7,410 560 31.6 D R-19 I-5 SB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 1 5,810 900 28.8 D 7,970 700 34.6 D R-20 I-5 SB Off-Ramp to State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue 1 6,470 630 22.6 C 8,640 840 30.9 D R-21 I-5 SB HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 2,070 220 21.0 C 2,260 270 23.0 C R-22 I-5 SB On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue 1 5,840 680 27.2 C 7,800 820 35.0 E R-23 I-5 SB On-Ramp from State College Boulevard 1 6,520 230 19.9 B 8,620 320 26.0 C R-24 I-5 SB On-Ramp from Chapman Avenue 1 6,750 480 20.1 C 8,940 670 25.1 C R-25 I-5 SB Connector to SR-22 WB 1 7,230 880 28.0 D 9,610 1,320 38.1 E ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-76 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-27 2030 No Project Freeway Ramp HCM LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane Mainline Volume Ramp Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Mainline Volume Ramp Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-26 I-5 SB Connector to SR-22 EB 2 6,350 1,040 11.1 B 8,290 1,330 16.1 B R-27 SR-57 NB Off-Ramp to Chapman Avenue 1 3,790 160 23.2 C 5,150 180 29.8 D R-28 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Chapman Avenue WB 1 6,270 260 17.8 B 9,710 420 25.2 C R-29 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Chapman Avenue EB 1 5,790 220 19.0 B 9,410 300 28.7 D R-30 SR-57 NB Off-Ramp to Orangewood Avenue 1 6,270 710 25.2 C 10,130 310 34.3 D R-31 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue WB 1 5,860 220 19.2 B 10,120 660 34.0 D R-32 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue EB 1 5,560 300 19.0 B 9,820 300 30.1 D R-33 SR-57 NB Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 1 5,320 970 23.2 C 9,020 750 33.0 D R-34 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue WB 1 4,750 220 16.6 B 8,760 500 28.2 D R-35 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue EB 1 4,350 400 17.0 B 8,270 490 26.4 C R-36 SR-57 NB Off-Ramp to Ball Road 1 4,780 910 22.0 C 9,300 860 34.5 D R-37 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Ball Road WB 1 4,390 420 17.3 B 9,090 900 32.5 D R-38 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Ball Road EB 1 3,870 520 16.7 B 8,440 650 28.3 D R-39 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp to Ball Road 1 8,430 1,770 36.5 E 8,250 1,150 32.6 D R-40 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Ball Road WB 1 6,660 240 26.8 C 7,100 500 30.3 D R-41 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Ball Road EB 1 6,900 670 31.0 D 7,600 560 32.5 D R-42 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 1 8,140 1,020 38.2 E 8,360 790 37.9 E R-43 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue WB 1 7,120 260 28.5 D 7,570 500 26.0 C R-44 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue EB 1 7,380 180 28.7 D 8,070 460 33.3 D R-45 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp to Orangewood Avenue 1 7,980 870 30.3 D 8,980 860 33.5 D R-46 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue 1 7,110 230 28.2 D 8,120 650 35.0 D R-47 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp to Chapman Avenue 1 7,340 530 26.4 C 8,770 680 31.9 D R-48 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Chapman Avenue 1 1,340 430 17.1 B 1,660 600 21.2 C R-49 SR-22 EB Off-Ramp to Fairview Street 1 6,970 230 29.2 D 8,530 300 35.8 E R-50 SR-22 EB On-Ramp from Fairview Street 1 6,740 980 32.8 D 8,230 1,360 > Capacity F R-51 SR-22 EB Connector to I-5/SR-57/The City Drive/Bristol Street** 3 6,990 5,010 33.1 D 8,680 6,690 > Capacity F ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-77 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-27 2030 No Project Freeway Ramp HCM LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane Mainline Volume Ramp Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Mainline Volume Ramp Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-52 SR-22 EB Collector/Distributor Off-Ramp to The City Drive 1 5,010 330 29.2 D 6,690 460 > Capacity F R-53 SR-22 EB Connector from I-5 SB/SR-57 SB 2 2,680 2,090 25.5 C 3,030 2,950 34.0 D R-54 SR-22 WB Connector to I-5 SB/SR-57 SB 2 4,340 1,830 13.8 B 6,470 2,300 22.2 C R-55 SR-22 WB On-Ramp from The City Drive 1 2,000 380 22.2 C 2,480 470 26.9 C R-56 SR-22 WB Connector from I-5 SB/SR-57 SB 2 4,660 2,000 24.1 C 7,200 2,480 33.0 D R-57 SR-22 WB Off-Ramp to Haster Street 2 7,040 640 11.7 B 10,150 870 20.9 C R-58 SR-22 WB On-Ramp from Haster Street 1 6,400 550 28.2 D 9,280 790 > Capacity F pc/mi/ln-Passenger Cars per Mile per Lane * Major Merge Analysis Utilized to calculate density Major Diverge Analysis Utilized to calculate density ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-78 • City of Anaheim August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-79 Caltrans Freeway Mainline HCM Analysis (No Project 2030) Table 5.9-28 indicates HCM analysis result for the densities and levels of service for deficient freeway mainline segments under No Project conditions (freeway mainline segments already perform deficiently under existing conditions are indicated by 1) I-5 Northbound between SR-91 and Brookhurst Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-1) 2) I-5 Northbound between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-2) 3) I-5 Northbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-3) 4) I-5 Southbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-3)* 5) I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard (PM Peak Hour)/(F-4) 6) I-5 Northbound between Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-5) 7) I-5 Northbound between SR-22 and 17th Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-8)* 8) I-5 Southbound between SR-22 and 17th Street (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(F-8)* 9) I-5 Northbound between 17th Street and Grand Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-9)* 10) I-5 Southbound between 17th Street and Grand Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-9)* 11) I-5 Northbound between Grand Avenue and 4th Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-10) 12) I-5 Southbound between Grand Avenue and 4th Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-10)* 13) I-5 Northbound between 4th Street and SR-55 (PM Peak Hour)/(F-11) 14) SR-57 Southbound between Katella Avenue and Ball Road (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(F-14)* 15) SR-57 Northbound between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-15)* 16) SR-57 Northbound between SR-91 and Lincoln Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-16) 17) SR-22 Eastbound between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-17) 18) SR-22 Westbound between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-17) 19) SR-22 Eastbound between Euclid Street and Harbor Boulevard (PM Peak Hour)/F-18) 20) SR-22 Westbound between Euclid Street and Harbor Boulevard (PM Peak Hour)/F-18) 21) SR-22 Eastbound between Harbor Boulevard and Fairview Street/Haster Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F- 19)* 22) 22) SR-22 Westbound between Harbor Boulevard and Haster Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-19)* 23) 23) SR-22 Westbound between Haster Street and The City Drive/I-5 (PM Peak Hour)/)(F-20) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-80 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-81 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-28 2030 No Project Freeway Mainline HCM LOS Northbound / Eastbound Southbound / Westbound AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Freeway Segment Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F-1 I-5 between SR-91 and Brookhurst Street 6,020 18.9 C 9,820 35.3 E 6,950 18.2 C 7,690 20.2 C F-2 I-5 between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street 6,300 19.8 C 10,230 38.4 E 7,110 22.5 C 8,840 29.5 D F-3 I-5 between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue 6,300 19.8 C 10,600 41.7 E 7,670 33.7 D 8,860 > 45.0 F F-4 I-5 between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard 6,460 20.3 C 11,010 > 45.0 F 7,760 24.8 C 8,830 29.5 D F-5 I-5 between Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue 5,780 18.2 C 9,920 36.0 E 6,130 19.3 C 7,770 24.9 C F-6 I-5 between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard 5,810 18.3 C 9,360 32.3 D 6,470 20.3 C 8,640 28.6 D F-7 I-5 between State College Boulevard and SR-22 6,830 17.7 B 11,620 33.8 D 8,180 21.3 C 10,020 26.6 D F-8 I-5 between SR-22 and 17th Street 8,350 21.6 C 14,380 > 45.0 F 12,120 36.3 E 14,470 > 45.0 F F-9 I-5 between 17th Street and Grand Avenue 8,760 22.8 C 13,700 > 45.0 F 10,230 27.5 D 12,870 41.5 E F-10 I-5 between Grand Avenue and 4th Street 8,620 22.4 C 13,310 > 45.0 F 9,950 26.5 D 12,710 40.2 E F-11 I-5 between 4th Street and SR-55 8,580 22.3 C 13,030 42.8 E 8,900 23.2 C 11,600 33.4 D ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-82 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-28 2030 No Project Freeway Mainline HCM LOS Northbound / Eastbound Southbound / Westbound AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Freeway Segment Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F-12 SR-57 between SR-22 and Orangewood Avenue 6,270 16.2 B 10,130 27.1 D 7,010 21.8 C 8,300 26.5 D F-13 SR-57 between Orangewood Avenue and Katella Avenue 5,320 16.5 B 9,020 29.8 D 7,980 25.2 C 8,980 29.6 D F-14 SR-57 between Katella Avenue and Ball Road 4,780 14.8 B 9,300 31.3 D 8,140 36.8 E 8,360 39.0 E F-15 SR-57 between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue 5,230 16.2 B 10,010 35.6 E 8,430 27.1 D 8,250 26.3 D F-16 SR-57 between SR-91 and Lincoln Avenue 5,090 15.8 B 10,640 40.6 E 9,060 23.6 C 8,720 22.7 C F-17 SR-22 between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street 6,700 26.7 D 8,090 36.0 E 5,640 21.8 C 8,580 40.9 E F-18 SR-22 between Euclid Street and Harbor Boulevard 7,130 29.0 D 8,630 41.6 E 6,210 24.3 C 9,240 > 45.0 F F-19 SR-22 between Harbor Boulevard and Fairview Street/Haster Street 6,970 28.1 D 8,530 40.4 E 6,370 25.0 C 9,390 > 45.0 F F-20 SR-22 between Fairview Street/Haster Street and The City Drive/I-5 6,990 21.6 C 8,680 28.0 D 7,040 21.8 C 10,150 36.3 E F-21 SR-22 between I-5 and Main Street 4,860 18.7 C 6,090 23.7 C 4,340 16.7 B 6,470 25.5 C ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-83 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-28 2030 No Project Freeway Mainline HCM LOS Northbound / Eastbound Southbound / Westbound AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Freeway Segment Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F-22 SR-22 between Main Street and Glassell Street 4,210 16.2 B 6,360 25.0 C 4,400 17.0 B 5,870 22.8 C F-23 SR-22 between Glassell Street and SR-55 3,320 10.2 A 5,310 16.4 B 4,440 17.1 B 5,180 20.0 C ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-84 • City of Anaheim August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-85 Caltrans Freeway Weaving HCM Analysis (No Project 2030) An HCM analysis was performed for freeway weaving segments, W-1 through W-27. Under the 2030 No Project conditions, the following weaving segments would be deficient during either AM or PM peak hours. 1) I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 2) I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 3) I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 4) I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 5) I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 6) I-5 Southbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and State College Boulevard Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 7) I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 8) I-5 Southbound between State College Boulevard / Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector (PM Peak Hour) 9) I-5 Northbound between Main Street On-Ramp and SR-22 WB Connector (PM Peak Hour) 10) I-5 Northbound between 17th Street On-Ramp and Main Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 11) I-5 Southbound between Main Street On-Ramp and 17th Street / Penn Way Off-Ramp (AM and PM Peak Hour) 12) I-5 Northbound between Grand Avenue On-Ramp and 17th Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 13) I-5 Southbound between Penn Way On-Ramp and Santa Ana Boulevard Off-Ramp (AM and PM Peak Hour) 14) I-5 Northbound between Fourth Street On-Ramp and Grand Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 15) I-5 Southbound between Santa Ana Boulevard On-Ramp and Fourth Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 16) I-5 Northbound between SR-55 Connector and First Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 17) I-5 Southbound between First Street On-Ramp and SR-55 Southbound Connector (PM Peak Hour) 18) SR-57 Southbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-86 • The Planning Center August 2010 19) SR-57 Southbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 20) SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp (AM and PM Peak Hour) 21) SR-57 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and SR-91 Eastbound Connector (PM Peak Hour) 22) SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Eastbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 23) SR-22 Westbound between Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 24) SR-22 Eastbound between Fairview Street / Garden Grove Boulevard On-Ramp and Collector / Distributor The City Drive Off-Ramp (AM and PM Peak Hour) 25) SR-22 Westbound between Metropolitan Drive On-Ramp and Haster Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 26) SR-22 Eastbound Collector / Distributor between The City Drive On-Ramp and Bristol Street Off- Ramp (AM and PM Peak Hour) 27) SR-22 Westbound between La Veta Avenue On-Ramp and Metropolitan Drive Off-Ramp (AM and PM Peak Hour) 28) SR-22 Eastbound Collector / Distributor between Bristol Street On-Ramp and I-5 Southbound Connector (AM and PM Peak Hour) 29) SR-22 Eastbound between SR-57 Southbound Connector and Town and Country Road Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 30) SR-22 Westbound between La Veta Avenue On-Ramp and I-5 / SR-57 Northbound Connector (PM Peak Hour) 31) SR-22 Eastbound between Town and Country Road On-Ramp and Glassell Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 32) SR-22 Westbound between Glassell Street On-Ramp and La Veta Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) With Project (Year 2030) Caltrans Ramp Termini Intersection Analysis (With Project 2030) The ramp termini intersections have previously been evaluated based on the ICU methodology as shown in Table 5.9-17, Year 2030 Peak Hour Intersection Summary, and in general, the analysis LOS results are consistent. However, two ramp termini intersections operate at different levels of service when comparing the ICU and HCM analysis: Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue (I-26) and SR-22 Westbound at Metropolitan Drive (I-98). These intersections are deficient only under the HCM analysis, indicating that the deficiency is generally the result of operational issues, such as insufficient or ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-87 excessive signal timings for pedestrian crossings. Three locations, I-21, Anaheim Boulevard at I-5 Northbound Ramps, I-27, Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue, and I-71, Orangewood Avenue at SR-57 Southbound Ramps correlate to intersection deficiencies already identified through the ICU analysis. Table 5.9-29 displays the freeway ramp termini locations where implementation of the Proposed Project results in a deficient LOS. The following five freeway ramp termini are deficient under HCM analysis. 1) Anaheim Boulevard at I-5 NB Ramps (PM peak hour)/(I-21) 2) Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue (PM peak hour)/(I-26) 3) Anaheim Way (I-5 Southbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue (PM peak hour)/(I-27) 4) Orangewood Avenue at SR-57 Southbound Ramps (PM peak hour)/(I-71) 5) SR-22 Westbound Ramps at Metropolitan Drive (PM peak hour)/(I-98) Table 5.9-29 2030 Project Related Freeway Ramp Termini Impacts 2030 No Project 2030 With Project AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak ID Intersection City Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Impact I-21 Anaheim Blvd / I-5 NB Ramps Anaheim 11.1 B 49.9 D 10.5 B 83.1 F Yes I-26 Manchester Ave (I-5 SB Ramps) / Katella Ave Anaheim 26.8 C 24.9 C 40.8 D 75.7 E Yes I-27 Anaheim Way (I-5 NB Ramps) / Katella Ave Anaheim 16.3 B 27.7 C 24.6 C 88.9 F Yes I-71 Orangewood Ave / SR- 57 SB Ramps Orange 25.0 C 52.8 D 30.0 C 81.1 F Yes I-98 SR-22 WB Ramps/ Metropolitan Drive Orange 46.5 D 65.1 E 51.9 D 68.2 E Yes Under future No Project conditions many Caltrans facilities operate at a deficient level of service. The implementation of the Platinum Triangle Overlay Zone results in continued deficient operations on the freeway ramp facilities within the study area. Table 5.9-30 displays the freeway ramp termini locations where implementation of the Proposed Project results in deficient operations as compared to acceptable operations under No Project conditions. Three locations, I-21, Anaheim Boulevard at I-5 Northbound Ramps, I-27, Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue, and I-71, Orangewood Avenue at SR-57 Southbound Ramps correlate to intersection deficiencies already identified through the ICU analysis. Improvements to these intersections should mitigate the identified deficiencies under both the capacity (ICU) and operational analysis methodology. Table 5.9-31 shows the freeway ramp termini intersection with the mitigation measures have been identified through the ICU analysis. Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue was not previously identified as deficient under the ICU analysis but is deficient under the HCM analysis under With Project conditions and acceptable under No Project conditions. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-88 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.9-30 Project Related Freeway Ramp Termini Impacts 2030 No Project 2030 With Project AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak ID Intersection Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Impact I-21 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 11.1 B 49.9 D 10.5 B 83.1 F Project I-26 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 26.8 C 24.9 C 40.8 D 75.7 E Project I-27 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 16.3 B 27.7 C 24.6 C 88.9 F Project I-71 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 25.0 C 52.8 D 30.0 C 81.1 F Project I-98 SR-22 Westbound Ramps/ Metropolitan Drive 46.5 D 65.1 E 51.9 D 62.8 E Cumulative Table 5.9-31 Recommended Freeway Ramp Termini Mitigation 2030 With Project With Proposed Mitigation AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Intersection Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Mitigation I-21 Anaheim Boulevard / I- 5 NB Ramps 10.5 B 83.1 F 14.1 B 51.6 D Add 4th SBT* I-26 Manchester Avenue 5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 40.8 D 75.7 E 39.2 D 42.0 D Add 4th EBT, Add 4th WBT I-27 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 24.6 C 88.9 F 17.3 B 54.4 D Add 4th EBT, Add 5th WBT* I-71 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 30.0 C 81.1 F 26.5 C 41.1 D Add WBL(Restripe)* I-98 SR-22 Westbound Ramps/ Metropolitan Drive 51.9 D 68.2 E 50.0 D 36.5 D Restripe WBT to 3rd WBL *Mitigation strategy identical to that proposed for ICU analysis As noted above, Katella Avenue is expected to be widened to eight lanes between Manchester Avenue, and Anaheim Way as part of the improvement for intersection #27, and upgraded to an eight-lane Stadium Smart Street to facilitate traffic operations. The proposed improvement for intersection #26, Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue would be affected by this arterial upgrade and the intersection widened to add a 4th Eastbound and 4th Westbound through lane. This improvement strategy returns the intersection to an acceptable LOS under the analysis. The implementation of the mitigation measures for these ramp termini intersections will return all to an acceptable LOS. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-89 For ramp termini intersections within the City of Orange, the facilities identified in Table 5.9-32 would require improvements to ensure acceptable operations. However, as the City of Orange did not utilize the HCM methodology in their General Plan, the operational deficiencies described were not addressed. Locations that operate at an acceptable LOS under the ICU analysis should be monitored to determine appropriate strategies toward improving flow through signal timing and coordination. The City of Anaheim does not have jurisdiction over the deficient circulation system components in the City of Orange. Should the City of Orange decide to improve the operational capacity of any of the locations above, the City of Anaheim will be subject to a fair-share contribution towards the improvement cost. Table 5.9-32 City of Orange Freeway Ramp Termini Mitigation AM Peak PM Peak ID Intersection Delay LOS Delay LOS Mitigation Fair- share I-71 Orangewood Avenue/SR- 57 Southbound Ramps 26.5 C 41.1 D Add WBL (Restripe)* 27% I-98 SR-22 Westbound Ramps/ Metropolitan Drive 50.0 D 36.5 D Restripe WBT to 3rd WBL 7% *Mitigation strategy identical to that proposed for ICU analysis. Caltrans Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing (With Project 2030) Table 5.9-33 presents the off-ramp queue and control delay determined by for the study area off-ramp termini intersections under 2030 With Project conditions. The analysis indicates that no Caltrans Ramp intersections are forecast to have a queuing length that is greater than the off-ramp storage length. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-90 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-91 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-33 2030 With Project Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Length Analysis Off-Ramp Queue Length Control Delay (sec) Off-Ramp # of Lanes Off-Ramp Storage Length (feet) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Ramp Termini Intersection L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R Deficient Storage Length I-9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 400 1,280 80 120 160 320 23.0 35.6 30.2 60.9 No I-10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 2 1 1,240 190 140 120 56.9 56.9 No I-17 I-5 SB Off Ramp / Disney Way 1.33 0.33 1.33 940 380 380 230 240 200 200 61.4 66.5 56.3 57.5 No I-26 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 1.5 1.5 720 720 1,710 100 10 200 100 70 68.7 19.1 79.1 39.4 26.9 No I-27 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 1.5 3 0.5 1,540 1,060 330 320 670 690 48.7 41.2 111.9 111.1 No I-5 HOV NB Ramps / Gene Autry Way 1 2 n/a 1,510 20 0 40 0 29.5 12.6 46.2 8.8 No I-37 I-5 HOV SB Ramps / Gene Autry Way 2 1 1,340 n/a 290 10 170 0 48.2 12.2 67.7 13.4 No I-55 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 2 1,580 690 690 230 240 150 80 84 160 103.6 86.0 40.5 54.0 50.4 64.4 No I-56 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 1.5 0.5 2 2,960 2,190 1,590 50 1,000 110 70 620 100 18.2 128.3 20.0 20.5 66.1 21.2 No I-66 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,030 680 240 240 230 220 45.9 58.2 45.0 56.7 No I-67 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 1 2 1,290 570 540 370 410 240 47.3 29.9 67.0 35.8 No I-68 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 1.5 1.5 1,030 590 250 250 200 200 41.9 51.3 49.5 59.2 No ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-92 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-33 2030 With Project Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Length Analysis Off-Ramp Queue Length Control Delay (sec) Off-Ramp # of Lanes Off-Ramp Storage Length (feet) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Ramp Termini Intersection L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R Deficient Storage Length I-69 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 1 2 930 600 240 310 170 240 41.3 48.8 43.9 53.6 No I-70 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 650 350 140 210 70 70 39.7 68.0 50.7 60.8 No I-71 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,050 630 340 240 200 150 310 270 247 91.2 72.5 47.6 162.2 139.5 127.2 No I-95 I-5 Ramps / Chapman Avenue 2 1 1,080 220 200 60 240 0 29.2 11.5 34.1 5.3 No I-97 SR-22 Eastbound Ramps / The City Drive 1.33 0.33 1.33 870 650 400 180 190 160 170 62.1 63.3 57.6 59.5 No I-98 SR-22 Westbound Ramps/ Metropolitan Drive 2 0 2 900 320 160 300 420 30 30.8 28.8 102.7 8.1 No I-99 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 1 1 1,240 760 70 0 40 0 63.3 14.4 60.9 17.8 No I-100 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 0.5 0.5 1 580 1,000 270 50 130 350 87.4 16.2 50.3 129.4 No ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-93 Caltrans Freeway Ramp HCM Analysis (With Project 2030) Table 5.9-34 summarizes HCM analysis results for the study area ramps for the AM and PM peak hours. Per the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, a 2-lane on or off-ramp should be provided where volumes exceed 1,500 vehicles per hour during either the AM or PM peak hour. The Southbound SR-57 Off-Ramp to Ball Road forecast volume exceeds these criteria during the AM peak hour and should be monitored; however there is no difference between the No Project and With Project volumes at this location, therefore the project has no responsibility for improvements at this location. According to the analysis the following freeway ramps are deficient under either the AM or PM peak hour 2030 With Project conditions: 1) I-5 Northbound Connector from SR-22 Eastbound (PM Peak Hour) 2) I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Chapman Avenue (PM Peak Hour) 3) I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to State College Boulevard (PM Peak Hour) 4) I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue (PM Peak Hour) 5) I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue (PM Peak Hour) 6) I-5 Northbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way (PM Peak Hour) 7) I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard (PM Peak Hour) 8) I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard (PM Peak Hour) 9) I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard (PM Peak Hour) 10) I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue (PM Peak Hour) 11) I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue (PM Peak Hour) 12) I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue (PM Peak Hour) 13) I-5 Southbound Connector to SR-22 Westbound (PM Peak Hour) 14) SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road (PM Peak Hour) 15) SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road (AM Peak Hour) 16) SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue (AM and PM Peak Hour) 17) SR-57 Southbound On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue (PM Peak Hour) 18) SR-22 Eastbound Off-Ramp to Fairview Street (PM Peak Hour) 19) SR-22 Eastbound On-Ramp from Fairview Street (PM Peak Hour) 20) SR-22 Eastbound Connector to I-5/SR-57/The City Drive/Bristol Street (PM Peak Hour) 21) SR-22 Eastbound Collector/Distributor Off-Ramp to The City Drive (PM Peak Hour) 22) SR-22 Westbound On-Ramp from Haster Street (PM Peak Hour) As compared to the No Project scenario, there are three additional deficient ramps under the With Project scenario. Operationally, adding a lane to either of these ramps does not result in acceptable ramp operations under 2030 With Project conditions. Impacts to freeway ramp facilities are the result of high forecast volumes on the ramps themselves coupled with high forecast volumes on the freeway mainline adjacent to the ramp facilities, therefore, the traffic on the mainline must be reduced or the ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-94 • The Planning Center August 2010 capacity of the mainline facility must be enhanced through the addition of an auxiliary lane to improve freeway ramp performance. • I-5 Southbound On-ramp from Katella Avenue (PM Peak) • SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road (PM Peak) • SR-57 Southbound On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue (PM Peak) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-95 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-34 2030 With Project Freeway Ramp HCM LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane Mainline Volume Ramp Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Mainline Volume Ramp Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-1 I-5 NB Connector from SR-22 EB* 2 5,320 2,020 30.2 D 9,390 2,800 > Capacity F R-2 I-5 NB Off-Ramp to Chapman Avenue 1 7,170 340 25.0 C 12,190 420 > Capacity F R-3 I-5 NB Off-Ramp to State College Boulevard 2 6,830 1,350 13.4 B 11,770 890 > Capacity F R-4 I-5 NB HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way/Disney Way 1 1,520 110 13.5 B 2,050 160 18.3 B R-5 I-5 NB On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue 1 5,700 230 18.9 B 10,880 440 > Capacity F R-6 I-5 NB Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue** 2 5,810 1,050 22.5 C 9,460 1,740 36.6 E R-7 I-5 NB On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue 1 4,860 370 21.3 C 7,760 570 32.9 D R-8 I-5 NB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 1 5,230 260 22.4 C 8,290 410 34.1 D R-9 I-5 NB HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 1,250 220 24.6 C 1,800 930 39.1 E R-10 I-5 NB On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 1 5,490 440 24.1 C 8,700 1,290 > Capacity F R-11 I-5 NB Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 1 5,780 820 24.3 C 10,090 1,010 38.4 E R-12 I-5 NB On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 1 4,980 290 21.1 C 9,080 740 > Capacity F R-13 I-5 SB Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 1 7,870 700 29.4 D 8,830 700 32.6 D R-14 I-5 SB On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 1 7,170 1,260 29.3 D 8,140 1,020 30.0 D R-15 I-5 SB Off-Ramp to Disney Way/Anaheim Boulevard 1 8,430 730 31.4 D 9,150 590 33.1 D R-16 I-5 SB Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue** 2 6,230 940 30.1 D 7,770 410 37.6 E R-17 I-5 SB HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way 1 2,910 800 26.1 C 2,690 450 24.1 C R-18 I-5 SB On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 1 5,380 440 23.7 C 7,410 590 31.8 D R-19 I-5 SB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 1 5,810 960 29.3 D 7,970 810 > Capacity F R-20 I-5 SB Off-Ramp to State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue 1 6,470 640 22.7 C 8,640 870 31.0 D R-21 I-5 SB HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 2,170 240 22.0 C 2,370 330 24.3 C R-22 I-5 SB On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue 1 5,840 700 27.3 C 7,800 900 35.6 E R-23 I-5 SB On-Ramp from State College Boulevard 1 6,530 240 20.0 B 8,670 320 26.2 C R-24 I-5 SB On-Ramp from Chapman Avenue 1 6,770 480 20.1 C 8,990 670 25.2 C R-25 I-5 SB Connector to SR-22 WB 1 7,250 950 28.4 D 9,610 1,320 38.1 E R-26 I-5 SB Connector to SR-22 EB 2 6,350 1,060 11.2 B 8,290 1,350 16.2 B R-27 SR-57 NB Off-Ramp to Chapman Avenue 1 3,890 160 23.7 C 5,340 180 30.6 D R-28 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Chapman Avenue WB 1 6,170 260 17.6 B 9,780 430 25.5 C R-29 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Chapman Avenue EB 1 5,950 220 19.4 B 9,460 320 29.1 D R-30 SR-57 NB Off-Ramp to Orangewood Avenue 1 6,430 720 25.8 C 10,210 320 34.6 D ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-96 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-34 2030 With Project Freeway Ramp HCM LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane Mainline Volume Ramp Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Mainline Volume Ramp Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-31 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue WB 1 6,010 340 19.9 B 10,240 690 34.7 D R-32 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue EB 1 5,710 300 19.4 B 9,890 350 30.8 D R-33 SR-57 NB Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 1 5,320 970 23.2 C 9,180 770 33.7 D R-34 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue WB 1 4,750 240 16.8 B 8,910 520 28.8 D R-35 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue EB 1 4,350 400 17.0 B 8,410 500 27.0 C R-36 SR-57 NB Off-Ramp to Ball Road 1 5,140 910 22.3 C 9,840 980 36.9 E R-37 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Ball Road WB 1 4,750 420 18.2 B 9,510 900 33.9 D R-38 SR-57 NB On-Ramp from Ball Road EB 1 4,230 520 17.6 B 8,860 650 29.7 D R-39 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp to Ball Road 1 8,720 1,770 37.4 E 8,250 1,210 32.9 D R-40 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Ball Road WB 1 6,950 240 27.8 C 7,100 520 30.5 D R-41 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Ball Road EB 1 7,190 670 32.0 D 7,600 580 32.7 D R-42 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 1 8,490 1,100 40.1 E 8,360 800 37.9 E R-43 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue WB 1 7,390 260 29.4 D 7,570 510 32.0 D R-44 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Katella Avenue EB 1 7,650 180 29.6 D 8,070 510 33.7 D R-45 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp to Orangewood Avenue 1 7,980 870 30.3 D 9,160 930 34.4 D R-46 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue 1 7,110 250 28.4 D 8,230 700 > Capacity F R-47 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp to Chapman Avenue 1 7,360 530 26.5 C 8,930 680 32.4 D R-48 SR-57 SB On-Ramp from Chapman Avenue 1 1,370 430 17.3 B 1,790 600 22.3 C R-49 SR-22 EB Off-Ramp to Fairview Street 1 7,130 260 30.0 D 8,530 300 35.8 E R-50 SR-22 EB On-Ramp from Fairview Street 1 6,870 980 33.2 D 8,230 1,360 > Capacity F R-51 SR-22 EB Connector to I-5/SR-57/The City Drive/Bristol Street** 3 7,000 5,010 33.2 D 9,110 6,690 > Capacity F R-52 SR-22 EB Collector/Distributor Off-Ramp to The City Drive 1 5,010 330 29.2 D 6,690 460 > Capacity F R-53 SR-22 EB Connector from I-5 SB/SR-57 SB 2 2,900 2,090 26.6 C 3,230 2,950 35.0 D R-54 SR-22 WB Connector to I-5 SB/SR-57 SB 2 4,460 1,940 14.8 B 6,630 2,400 23.2 C R-55 SR-22 WB On-Ramp from The City Drive 1 2,000 380 22.2 C 2,570 490 27.9 C R-56 SR-22 WB Connector from I-5 SB/SR-57 SB 2 4,720 2,000 24.3 C 7,280 2,570 33.9 D R-57 SR-22 WB Off-Ramp to Haster Street 2 7,040 650 11.7 B 10,340 870 21.5 C R-58 SR-22 WB On-Ramp from Haster Street 1 6,400 550 28.2 D 9,470 810 > Capacity F * Major Merge Analysis Utilized to calculate density Major Diverge Analysis Utilized to calculate density ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-97 Caltrans Freeway Mainline HCM Analysis (With Project 2030) Table 5.9-35 shows 2030 AM and PM peak hour LOS results for study area deficient mainline segments with project implementation. The following freeway mainline segments are deficient under either the AM and/or PM peak hours. When comparing the No Project and With Project scenarios, there are no additional deficiencies under With Project conditions. Caltrans currently does not have any additional improvements identified or planned for the identified deficient segments on the I-5, SR-57, and SR-22 freeways. According to the most current Route Concept Reports for I-5 and SR-22, and consistent with the future proposed improvements to SR-57, improvements to these facilities are contingent on the availability of revenue from regional, state, and federal transportation funding sources. In addition, the City does not have jurisdiction over the State Highway System and, therefore, cannot directly implement mitigation measures associated with project related impacts on mainline segments. 1) I-5 Northbound between SR-91 and Brookhurst Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-1) 2) I-5 Northbound between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-2)* 3) I-5 Northbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-3)* 4) I-5 Southbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(F-3)* 5) I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard (PM Peak Hour)/(F-4)* 6) I-5 Northbound between Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-5) 7) I-5 Northbound between SR-22 and 17th Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-8)* 8) I-5 Southbound between SR-22 and 17th Street (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(F-8)* 9) I-5 Northbound between 17th Street and Grand Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-9)* 10) I-5 Southbound between 17th Street and Grand Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-9)* 11) I-5 Northbound between Grand Avenue and 4th Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-10)* 12) I-5 Southbound between Grand Avenue and 4th Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-10)* 13) I-5 Northbound between 4th Street and SR-55 (PM Peak Hour)/(F-11)* 14) SR-57 Southbound between Katella Avenue and Ball Road (AM and PM Peak Hour)/(F-14)* 15) SR-57 Northbound between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-15)* 16) SR-57 Northbound between SR-91 and Lincoln Avenue (PM Peak Hour)/(F-16)* 17) SR-22 Eastbound between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F17)* 18) SR-22 Westbound between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-17)* 19) SR-22 Eastbound between Euclid Street and Harbor Boulevard (PM Peak Hour)/(F-18)* 20) SR-22 Westbound between Euclid Street and Harbor Boulevard (PM Peak Hour)/(F-18)* 21) SR-22 Eastbound between Harbor Boulevard and Fairview Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-19)* 22) SR-22 Westbound between Harbor Boulevard and Haster Street (PM Peak Hour)/(F-19)* 23) SR-22 Westbound between Haster Street and The City Drive/I-5 (PM Peak Hour)/(F-20)* ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-98 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-99 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-35 2030 With Project Freeway Mainline HCM LOS Northbound / Eastbound Southbound / Westbound AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Freeway Segment Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F-1 I-5 between SR-91 and Brookhurst Street 6,020 18.9 C 10,040 36.9 E 7,200 18.9 C 8,010 21.0 C F-2 I-5 between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street 6,300 19.8 C 10,420 40.0 E 7,360 23.4 C 8,840 29.5 D F-3 I-5 between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue 6,300 19.8 C 10,830 44.1 E 7,830 35.1 E 8,860 >45.0 F F-4 I-5 between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard 6,460 20.3 C 11,240 >45.0 F 7,870 25.3 C 8,830 29.5 D F-5 I-5 between Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue 5,780 18.2 C 10,090 37.3 E 6,230 19.6 C 7,770 24.9 C F-6 I-5 between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard 5,810 18.3 C 9,460 32.9 D 6,470 20.3 C 8,640 28.6 D F-7 I-5 between State College Boulevard and SR-22 6,830 17.7 B 11,770 34.6 D 8,210 21.4 C 10,020 26.9 D F-8 I-5 between SR-22 and 17th Street 8,470 22.0 C 14,590 >45.0 F 12,120 36.3 E 14,900 >45.0 F F-9 I-5 between 17th Street and Grand Avenue 8,800 22.9 C 13,780 >45.0 F 10,230 27.5 D 13,220 44.4 E F-10 I-5 between Grand Avenue and 4th Street 8,640 22.4 C 13,380 >45.0 F 9,950 26.5 D 13,050 42.9 E F-11 I-5 between 4th Street and SR-55 8,590 22.3 C 13,070 43.1 E 8,900 23.2 C 11,890 34.9 D F-12 SR-57 between SR-22 and Orangewood Avenue 6,430 16.6 B 10,210 27.4 D 7,010 21.8 C 8,550 27.6 D F-13 SR-57 between Orangewood Avenue and Katella Avenue 5,320 16.5 B 9,180 30.6 D 7,980 25.2 C 9,160 30.5 D F-14 SR-57 between Katella Avenue and Ball Road 5,140 15.9 B 9,840 34.5 D 8,490 40.4 E 8,360 39.0 E F-15 SR-57 between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue 5,230 16.2 B 10,390 38.5 E 8,720 28.4 D 8,250 26.3 D ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center Page 5.9-100 • City of Anaheim August 2010 Table 5.9-35 2030 With Project Freeway Mainline HCM LOS Northbound / Eastbound Southbound / Westbound AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Freeway Segment Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Volume Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F-16 SR-57 between SR-91 and Lincoln Avenue 5,090 15.8 B 10,940 43.6 E 9,410 24.7 C 8,720 22.7 C F-17 SR-22 between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street 6,870 27.6 D 8,090 36.0 E 5,640 21.8 C 8,720 42.6 E F-18 SR-22 between Euclid Street and Harbor Blvd. 7,310 30.2 D 8,630 41.6 E 6,210 24.3 C 9,490 >45.0 F F-19 SR-22 between Harbor Boulevard and Fairview Street/Haster Street 7,130 29.0 D 8,530 40.4 E 6,370 25.0 C 9,590 >45.0 F F-20 SR-22 between Fairview Street/Haster Street and The City Drive/I-5 7,000 21.7 C 9,110 30.0 D 7,040 21.8 C 10,340 37.7 E F-21 SR-22 between I-5 and Main Street 4,980 19.2 C 6,090 23.7 C 4,460 17.2 B 6,630 26.3 D F-22 SR-22 between Main Street and Glassell Street 4,290 16.5 B 6,360 25.0 C 4,580 17.6 B 5,880 22.8 C F-23 SR-22 between Glassell Street and SR-55 3,490 10.8 A 5,580 17.2 B 4,440 17.1 B 5,210 20.1 C ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-101 Caltrans Freeway Weaving HCM Analysis (With Project 2030) Table 5.9-36 shows deficient freeway weaving segments with the Proposed Project. The following weaving segments identified as being deficient in either the AM or PM peak hours. Coordination with Caltrans will be required for proposed capacity or operational improvements to the freeway mainline segments or ramps, which may improve the weaving LOS. 1) I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 2) I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 3) I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 4) I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 5) I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 6) I-5 Southbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and State College Boulevard Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 7) I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 8) I-5 Southbound between State College Boulevard / Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector (PM Peak Hour) 9) I-5 Northbound between Main Street On-Ramp and SR-22 WB Connector (PM Peak Hour) 10) I-5 Northbound between 17th Street On-Ramp and Main Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 11) I-5 Southbound between Main Street On-Ramp and 17th Street / Penn Way Off-Ramp (AM and PM Peak Hour) 12) I-5 Northbound between Grand Avenue On-Ramp and 17th Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 13) I-5 Southbound between Penn Way On-Ramp and Santa Ana Boulevard Off-Ramp (AM and PM Peak Hour) 14) I-5 Northbound between Fourth Street On-Ramp and Grand Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 15) I-5 Southbound between Santa Ana Boulevard On-Ramp and Fourth Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 16) I-5 Northbound between SR-55 Connector and First Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 17) I-5 Southbound between First Street On-Ramp and SR-55 Southbound Connector (PM Peak Hour) 18) SR-57 Southbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 19) SR-57 Southbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 20) SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 21) SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp (AM and PM Peak Hour) 22) SR-57 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and SR-91 Eastbound Connector (PM Peak Hour) 23) SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Eastbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-102 • The Planning Center August 2010 24) SR-22 Westbound between Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 25) SR-22 Eastbound between Fairview Street / Garden Grove Boulevard On-Ramp and Collector / Distributor The City Drive Off-Ramp (AM and PM Peak Hour) 26) SR-22 Westbound between Metropolitan Drive On-Ramp and Haster Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 27) SR-22 Eastbound Collector / Distributor between The City Drive On-Ramp and Bristol Street Off- Ramp (AM and PM Peak Hour) 28) SR-22 Westbound between La Veta Avenue On-Ramp and Metropolitan Drive Off-Ramp (AM and PM Peak Hour) 29) SR-22 Eastbound Collector / Distributor between Bristol Street On-Ramp and I-5 Southbound Connector (AM and PM Peak Hour) 30) SR-22 Eastbound between SR-57 Southbound Connector and Town and Country Road Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) 31) SR-22 Westbound between La Veta Avenue On-Ramp and I-5 / SR-57 Northbound Connector (PM Peak Hour) 32) SR-22 Eastbound between Town and Country Road On-Ramp and Glassell Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) Due to the high forecast mainline traffic activity, most freeway weaving segments are deficient under the 2030 No Project scenario. Two weaving segments become deficient under 2030 With Project conditions that were not forecast to be deficient under 2030 No Project conditions: • I-5 Southbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and State College Boulevard Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) • SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour) It should be noted that one weaving segment improves to acceptable levels under 2030 With Project conditions. Since freeway weaving segment operations are dependent upon mainline and ramp capacities, reducing congestion on these facilities contributes to higher weaving speeds and could lead to an improved weaving LOS. Improving weaving facilities through the addition of auxiliary lanes within the weaving area could provide additional capacity and reduce the weaving density. Operational improvements through improved signage or other ITS measures may also be developed in consultation with Caltrans in order to improve the weaving LOS. Table 5.9-36 2030 With Project Freeway Weaving AM and PM Peak Hour HCM LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Weaving Segment Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS I-5 NB b/w Brookhurst Street On-Ramp and SR-91 EB Off-Ramp W-1 I-5 SB b/w SR-91 Connector / Magnolia Avenue On-Ramp and Brookhurst Street Off-Ramp I-5 NB b/w Euclid Street On-Ramp and Brookhurst Street Off-Ramp W-2 I-5 SB b/w Brookhurst Street On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp Not Applicable ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-103 Table 5.9-36 2030 With Project Freeway Weaving AM and PM Peak Hour HCM LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Weaving Segment Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS W-3 I-5 NB b/w Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp 21.9 B 39.1 E I-5 NB b/w Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 22.9 B > Capacity F W-4 I-5 SB b/w Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Disneyland Drive Off-Ramp Not Applicable W-5 I-5 SB b/w Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off- Ramp 32.9 D 38.7 E I-5 NB b/w Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off- Ramp 24.1 C > Capacity F W-6 I-5 SB b/w Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Disney Way Off-Ramp Not Applicable I-5 NB b/w State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off- Ramp 21.1 B 37.0 E W-7 I-5 SB b/w Katella Avenue On-Ramp and State College Boulevard Off- Ramp 26.8 C 36.7 E I-5 NB b/w SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp 24.6 C > Capacity F W-8 I-5 SB b/w State College Boulevard / Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector 27.7 C 36.1 E W-9 I-5 NB b/w Main Street On-Ramp and SR-22 WB Connector 27.9 C > Capacity F I-5 NB b/w 17th Street On-Ramp and Main Street Off-Ramp 33.6 D > Capacity F W-10 I-5 SB b/w Main Street On-Ramp and 17th Street / Penn Way Off- Ramp > Capacity F > Capacity F I-5 NB b/w Grand Avenue On-Ramp and 17th Street Off-Ramp 27.8 C > Capacity F W-11 I-5 SB b/w Penn Way On-Ramp and Santa Ana Boulevard Off-Ramp 36.5 E > Capacity F I-5 NB b/w Fourth Street On-Ramp and Grand Avenue Off-Ramp 27.3 C > Capacity F W-12 I-5 SB b/w Santa Ana Boulevard On-Ramp and Fourth Street Off- Ramp 28.8 C 39.3 E I-5 NB b/w SR-55 Connector and First Street Off-Ramp 31.9 C > Capacity F W-13 I-5 SB b/w First Street On-Ramp and SR-55 SB Connector 31.8 C > Capacity F SR-57 NB b/w Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off-Ramp 19.4 B 30.3 C W-14 SR-57 SB b/w Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp 28.2 C 38.0 E SR-57 NB b/w Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off- Ramp 20.0 B 34.8 D W-15 SR-57 SB b/w Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off- Ramp 31.5 C 38.2 E SR-57 NB b/w Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp 18.3 B 36.2 E W-16 SR-57 SB b/w Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp > Capacity F 38.6 E SR-57 NB b/w Ball Road On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp W-17 SR-57 SB b/w Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp Not Applicable SR-57 NB b/w Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and SR-91 EB Connector 18.8 B > Capacity F W-18 SR-57 SB b/w SR-91 EB Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 35.2 D 36.5 E ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-104 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.9-36 2030 With Project Freeway Weaving AM and PM Peak Hour HCM LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Weaving Segment Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS SR-22 EB b/w Brookhurst Street On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off- Ramp W-19 SR-22 WB b/w Euclid Street On-Ramp and Brookhurst Street Off- Ramp SR-22 EB b/w Euclid Street On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off- Ramp Not Applicable W-20 SR-22 WB b/w Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off- Ramp 28.6 C > Capacity F SR-22 EB b/w Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Fairview Street Off- Ramp W-21 SR-22 WB b/w Haster Street / Garden Grove Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp Not Applicable SR-22 EB b/w Fairview Street / Garden Grove Boulevard On-Ramp and Collector/Distributor The City Drive Off-Ramp > Capacity F > Capacity F W-22 SR-22 WB b/w Metropolitan Drive On-Ramp and Haster Street Off- Ramp 24.5 C 37.2 E SR-22 EB Collector/Distributor b/w The City Drive On-Ramp and Bristol Street Off-Ramp 38.6 E > Capacity F W-23 SR-22 WB b/w La Veta Avenue On-Ramp and Metropolitan Drive Off- Ramp > Capacity F > Capacity F W-24 SR-22 EB Collector/Distributor b/w Bristol Street On-Ramp and I-5 SB Connector > Capacity F > Capacity F SR-22 EB b/w SR-57 SB Connector and Town and Country Road Off- Ramp 33.8 D > Capacity F W-25 SR-22 WB b/w La Veta Avenue On-Ramp and I-5 / SR-57 NB Connector 26.5 C > Capacity F SR-22 EB b/w Town and Country Road On-Ramp and Glassell Street Off-Ramp 24.1 C > Capacity F W-26 SR-22 WB b/w Glassell Street On-Ramp and La Veta Avenue Off- Ramp 26.2 C 35.5 D SR-22 EB b/w Glassell Street On-Ramp and Tustin Street Off-Ramp W-27 SR-22 WB b/w Tustin Street On-Ramp and Glassell Street Off-Ramp Not Applicable IMPACT 5.9-3: THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL USES WITHIN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO SEVERAL HELIPORTS. [THRESHOLD T-3] Impact Analysis: There are two heliports in the project vicinity: the North Net Training Facility and UC Irvine Medical Center. The Anaheim Police Department also uses the parking lot at the Angel Stadium of Anaheim for helicopter training exercises. There are no private airstrips within the City. Heliport safety hazards include hazards posed to aircraft from structures located within navigable airspace and crash hazards posed by aircraft to people and property on the ground. The primary risks associated with heliports are take-offs and landings. The City typically seeks to minimize public exposure to heliport-related risks primarily through minimizing the siting of incompatible land uses surrounding the City’s existing heliports. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-105 The Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) of Orange County assists local agencies to ensure that there are no direct conflicts with land uses, noise, or other issues that would impact the functionality and safety of heliport operations. Heliports that are required by building code as an Emergency Use Facility to be used only for emergency medical or evacuation purposes) are exempt from the State’s heliport permit requirements. Should any of the heliports be used for other than the type of emergency use, the heliport would require the issuance of a State heliport permit by the Division in accordance with Public Utility Code (PUC) Section 21663. PUC Section 21659 prohibits structural hazards on or near airports and heliports. Structures should not be at a height that will result in penetration of the approach imaginary surfaces. Per Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77 Section 77.13, the construction or alteration of a structure more than 200 feet above ground level (AGL) requires filing with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Structures meeting this threshold must comply with procedures provided by Federal and State law, with the referral requirements of ALUC, and with all conditions of approval imposed or recommended by the FAA and ALUC, including filing of a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration (7460-1) for certain project-specific activities in accordance with Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77 “Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace.” Proposals to develop new heliports would be required to be submitted through the City to the ALUC for review and action pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21661.5 and for consistency with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for Heliports (AELUP for Heliports). In addition, the ALUC requires that local jurisdictions’ general plans and zoning ordinances are consistent with Airport Environs Land Use Plans (AELUPs), which contain noise contours, restrictions for types of construction and building heights in navigable air space, as well as requirements impacting the establishment or construction of sensitive uses within close proximity to airports and heliports. Therefore, although implementation of the Platinum Triangle will allow development of various land uses, including high rise residential uses in proximity to the existing heliports, such development would initiate a review by the ALUC for compatibility. It is anticipated that following AELUP guidelines will help reduce hazards related to heliports within the project area and the impacts would be less than significant. IMPACT 5.9-4: THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE HAZARDS DUE TO A DESIGN FEATURE (SHARP CURVES, ETC.) OR POTENTIALLY CONFLICTING USES. [THRESHOLD T-4] Impact Analysis: Development of the Proposed Project would intensify the land uses in the project area. However, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to substantially alter the backbone circulation system and arterial connections compared to the Adopted MLUP. The proposed increase in development intensities is consistent with the visions of the Platinum Triangle and would not result in any potential conflicting uses. Furthermore, development of the Proposed Project would not create sharp curves, dangerous intersections, or any other inherently hazardous design features. It should be noted that delays caused by heavy turning movements, including the pedestrian component of the Proposed Project, are not factored into ICU calculations, and therefore are not reflected in the deficient LOS analysis performed in the traffic study. Heavy right-turn volumes without exclusive right-turn lanes are projected at several intersections with acceptable levels of service. With high pedestrian volumes expected within the project area, through movements and the right-turn movements are projected to be heavily delayed. The addition of a right- turn lane will result in increased pedestrian crossing times, but will improve pedestrian and vehicular safety. The identified right-turn movements at the following intersections have peak-hour right-turn volumes in excess of 300 vehicles without an exclusive right-turn lane and are located in mixed-use districts where heavy pedestrian volumes are expected: ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-106 • The Planning Center August 2010 • Lewis Street/ Gene Autry Way – Westbound right turn lane • Anaheim Way/ Orangewood Avenue – Westbound second right turn lane • State College Boulevard/ Howell Avenue – Northbound right turn lane • State College Boulevard/ Gateway – Westbound right-turn • State College Boulevard/ Artisan Court – Westbound right-turn • Dupont Drive/ Orangewood Avenue – Eastbound right-turn Additionally, heavy left-turn volumes are projected at intersections with only one left-turn lane. Excessive queue at left-turn lanes can result in through-moving vehicles being blocked by left-turning vehicles. An additional left-turn lane can accommodate about 180 percent of the volume that can be served by a single left-turn lane with the same amount of green time. The reduction in green time for the left turn allows for more time to be assigned to other movements. The second left-turn lane would result in fewer delays for all movements and a smaller left-turn pocket, increasing the length of the landscaped median. The following locations are recommended to have an additional left-turn lane: • State College Boulevard and Howell Avenue – Southbound second left turn lane • Orangewood Avenue/ Rampart Street – Westbound second left-turn lane Certain intersections will have an unbalanced share of turning volumes between the AM and PM peak hours. Additionally, events at Angel Stadium and Honda Center can generate traffic patterns that are unique for events only. Dynamic lane assignment signs will allow for some lanes to operate as through lanes during certain times and turn lanes during other times. The following locations will benefit from these signs in place of capacity enhancements: • State College Boulevard/Katella Avenue – Southbound and Eastbound approaches • State College Boulevard/Gene Autry Way – Eastbound approach • Orangewood Avenue/SR-57 SB Ramps – Eastbound approach • Douglass Road/ Katella Avenue – Eastbound and southbound approaches OCTA operates five transit routes in the project area. While there are no inherent safety hazards, construction of bus turnouts will be considered in addition to far side bus stops to minimize delay effects and provide a safe environment for pedestrians. Each development project within the Platinum Triangle would be reviewed per the planned circulation system and would be required to provide necessary improvements in accordance with the determination of the Traffic and Transportation Division. Furthermore, in coordination with OCTA, a railroad undercrossing is being planned along State College Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Howell Avenue to further improve traffic flow and safety. It should also be noted that in accordance with the proposed Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106C, the property owner/developer will dedicate, including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan adjacent to their property to maintain adequate levels of service and access with the Platinum Triangle. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature. IMPACT 5.9-5: THE PROPOSED PROJECT MAY RESULT IN INADEQUATE EMERGENCY ACCESS (THRESHOLD T-5) Impact Analysis: Development of the Proposed Project would intensify the land uses and alter the existing circulation patterns. However, as the Proposed Project is intended to proactively plan for future development in the Platinum Triangle, proposed roadway system within the Platinum Triangle has been ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-107 designed to accommodate the increased traffic volumes and the each development project is required to provide appropriate fire and emergency access, approved by the Anaheim Fire Department. All vehicle access will be designed and improved in accordance with the requirements of the City Engineer. Therefore, less than significant impacts to emergency access are associated with the Proposed Project. Temporary construction related access impacts may result from the Proposed Project. However, the property owner/developer is required to submit customary emergency access plans for review and approval of the Anaheim Fire Department prior to the issuance of building permits. This plan would ensure that sufficient accessibility for emergency vehicles is provided during all phases of construction. It should be noted that during construction, if any project work street widening, emergency access improvements, sewer connections, sound walls, storm drain construction, street connections, etc.) occurs in the vicinity of the Caltrans right-of-way, an encroachment permit would be required. However, it should also be noted that in accordance with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106C for the Platinum Triangle, the property owner/developer will dedicate, including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan in place at the time of project construction and consistent with the Adopted Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. Therefore, less than significant impact would result from project implementation. IMPACT 5.9-6: THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD PROMOTE ALTERNATIVE FORMS OF TRANSPORTATION (THRESHOLD T-7) Impact Analysis: The Proposed Project is consistent with the Compass Blueprint 2% Strategy, which is a part of the 2004 regional growth forecast policy that attempts to reduce emissions and increase mobility through strategic land use changes. The Proposed Project is a mixed-use development that will reduce vehicle miles traveled through locating housing near employment centers and entertainment uses. The Platinum Triangle MLUP integrates design standards for bus stops, pedestrian walkways, and bike system to promote alternative forms of transportation to residents and workers in the area. Additionally, development of ARTIC facility would directly support the alternative transportation policy as the Platinum Triangle will be served by Amtrak, Metrolink commuter rail, and Orange County Transportation Authority bus services. 5.9.4 Cumulative Impacts As described above, the Proposed Project and other cumulative development would increase traffic volumes in the area roadways, including state facilities at the 2030 General Plan Buildout time horizon. With planned and recommended improvements, deficient intersections are expected to operate at acceptable levels. However, not all impacted intersections, arterial segments, and freeways are within the jurisdiction of the City to provide improvements. Therefore, the Proposed Project would result in deficient intersections, segments, or freeway interchanges, and traffic impacts to local and state facilities are considered significant under cumulative conditions (2030 with Project). However, the Proposed Project is consistent with SCAG’s regional policy to reduce vehicle trips and the total distances traveled through providing high-density housing development closer to employment, commercial, and entertainment centers. The City of Anaheim is a jobs-rich area; therefore, providing additional housing development in an area where development opportunities exist is anticipated to result in reduction in commuting distances. Especially with the construction of the ARTIC project, which will provide enhanced access to existing bus, Amtrak, and Metrolink services, a link to both the proposed California High Speed Rail System and the California/Nevada maglev rail line would be enhanced. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-108 • The Planning Center August 2010 Providing additional opportunities for more modal choices would have a beneficial impact on transportation within the City of Anaheim and region. 5.9.5 Existing Regulations and Standard Conditions • Congestion Management Plan. OCTA is responsible for adopting the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) for Orange County. The CMP is designed to reduce traffic congestion and to provide a mechanism for coordinating land use and transportation decisions. Proposition 111, passed by California voters in June 1990, provides funds to those urbanized areas that adopt a CMP. In Anaheim, the CMP roadway system includes seven streets (Harbor Boulevard, State College Boulevard, Katella Avenue, Tustin Avenue, Orangethorpe Avenue, Beach Boulevard, and Imperial Highway) and 15 intersections. The intersections located within the Platinum Triangle are the SR- 57 Northbound and Southbound Ramps at Katella Avenue. A CMP standard of LOS E must be met at these locations. If it is not met, the City is responsible for developing a deficiency plan for these intersections. • Renewed Measure M. Orange County voters approved the renewal of Measure M with 69.7 percent on Nov. 7, 2006. The half-cent sales tax, administered by OCTA, will provide more than $11.8 billion to improve transportation in Orange County over a 30-year period beginning in 2011. The Renewed Measure M project includes construction of a new northbound lane between Orangewood Avenue and Lambert Road on the SR-57 freeway. In addition to the planned SR-57 improvements, regional plans include new carpool ramps at Cerritos Avenue using federal and state funds. The following improvements are currently in the design and environmental stages with dedicated funding from OCTA through the Measure M Program. o SR-57 Northbound between Orangethorpe Avenue to Lambert Road segment—addition of one general-purpose freeway lane from north of the SR-91 near Orangethorpe Avenue in Placentia to Lambert Road in Brea (The project is currently in the design phase and construction is scheduled to begin in fall 2010). o SR-57 Northbound from the Katella Avenue off-ramp to the Lincoln Avenue off-ramp— addition of auxiliary lane capacity--(entered the environmental phase in 2008 and construction is scheduled to follow approximately one year after the Orangethorpe Avenue to Lambert Road segment begins construction in late 2010 if project is approved). • Traffic Fee Program. Any development in the City of Anaheim is required to pay transportation impact fees per the Anaheim Municipal Code. These fees go towards the funding of the completion of the City of Anaheim Circulation Element. In addition, within the Platinum Triangle, any development shall participate in the Platinum Triangle Community Facilities District, which will fund infrastructure improvements throughout the Platinum Triangle, including transportation infrastructure requirements. As set forth above, the City shall sufficiently fund required Project related improvements. The City of Anaheim has historically utilized a variety of strategies to provide improvements to the citywide circulation system. The City currently has a traffic fee program in place to fund General Plan improvements assumed under build-out No Project and With Project conditions. The City has a long-standing policy that as development occurs throughout the City, traffic studies are prepared to demonstrate the need for implementation of the improvements identified in the General Plan, and developer fees and other local dedicated taxes will contribute to those ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-109 improvements as needed. The fee, initially developed in 1993 and updated as needed to include new facilities and updated Capital Improvement Programs, provides a proper nexus between increased development in the City and associated traffic impacts to the citywide circulation system. Developers contribute fees to the City, which uses the fund to implement circulation improvements in the City or as the City of Anaheim’s local match for leveraging funding from OCTA and Caltrans for circulation system improvements. Hence, the general plan improvements assumed in the build-out of the Platinum Triangle, prior to the approval of this plan, are expected to be paid for and implemented through the City’s existing traffic impact fee program. Community Facilities District. The City of Anaheim currently has a Community Facilities District (CFD) in place associated with development in the Platinum Triangle. All projects, regardless of size, are required to contribute to the CFD. The CFD is expected to contribute funds to all infrastructure needs in the Platinum Triangle, including transportation. Nearly all of the mitigation measures in this study within the Platinum Triangle and the City of Orange are already identified within the CFD. The CFD is programmed to provide funding for improvements in the Platinum Triangle identified previously and this study has identified additional improvements that will need to funded on a fair-share basis. Under this Traffic Study and EIR, the City will provide fair-share funding for all of the intersection improvements in the City of Orange and the additional deficient intersections within the City of Anaheim not currently identified within the CFD, as well as fair- share funding to implement appropriate Caltrans facility improvements. If the costs of identified improvements cannot be covered by the total funding allocation under the existing CFD, other fee programs or update of the existing fee programs may have to be implemented to complete the recommended improvements. For locations within the City of Anaheim and Orange, the fair- shares for improvements will dictate the fair-share cost, priorities, and timeframe of the improvements. For intersections or arterial segments where the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project contributes a higher share of traffic to the build-out of the area, those improvements will be a higher priority. The City has proposed improvement strategies that return all intersections to an acceptable LOS under the 2030 With Project scenario. The fair-share calculations identify that the Proposed Project contributes a range of 7 percent to 44 percent of trips to study area intersections. The Proposed Project would contribute that percentage toward the costs of the recommended improvements. Intersection and arterial segment improvements in the City of Orange will have fees contributed to them by the Proposed Project, commensurate with the fair-share analysis. Although these improvements will be overridden in this SEIR, because Anaheim does not have jurisdiction over the facilities, the project will be responsible for contributions for the appropriate fair-share toward the recommended improvements. • Fee Assessment and Fair-Share for Improvements: The City of Anaheim has applied a fair- share methodology to evaluate the financial responsibility of mitigating Platinum Triangle project impacts. The methodology is consistent with that outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. Appendix directing users to use a formula to calculate equitable share responsibility for the traffic impacts of proposed projects. For impacts that are located in adjacent cities where the intersection becomes deficient under the With Project condition, a fair-share to an improvement cost that achieves acceptable performance is warranted. The fair-share calculation is based on the difference between the Future With Project and Future No Project total intersection entering volumes divided by the total growth entering volume from Existing to Future With Project conditions. The fair-share proportion is based on the ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-110 • The Planning Center August 2010 value associated with the peak hour for which the deficiency has been identified. A computational example of the fair-share analysis is provided in the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Traffic Study Report, Parsons Brinckerhoff, August 2010. 5.9.6 Level of Significance Before Mitigation Upon implementation of regulatory requirements and standard conditions of approval, the Impacts 5.9-3, 5.9-5, and 5.9-6 would be less than significant. Without mitigation, the following impacts would be potentially significant: • Impact 5.9-1 Increased development intensities within the Platinum Triangle would have substantial impact on the area circulation system. • Impact 5.9-2 The Proposed Project would increase traffic volumes on Caltrans facilities. • Impact 5.9-4 The Proposed Project would increase pedestrian hazards due to a design feature. 5.9.7 Mitigation Measures Impact 5.9-1 Applicable Mitigation Measures from MMP No. 106A The following mitigation measures were included in the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A for the Platinum Triangle, adopted by the City Council on October 25, 2005, as part of the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332 and are applicable to the Proposed Project. Additions are shown in bold and deletions are indicated in strikeout format. The reference number for each measure from the MMP No. 106A is shown in (italics). 9-1 Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection for each building with commercial, office, and/or institutional uses, the property owners/developer shall record a covenant on the property requiring that ongoing during project implementation, Tthe property owner/developer shall implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for all employees. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office. Objectives of the TDM program shall be: (5.10-2) • Increase ridesharing and use of alternative transportation modes by guests. • Provide a menu of commute alternatives for employees to reduce project-generated trips. • Conduct an annual commuter survey to ascertain trip generation, trip origin, and Average Vehicle Ridership. 9-2 Prior to the first Final Building and Zoning inspection for each building with commercial, office, or institutional uses, and ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department for review and approval a menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-111 future employees’ commute options, to include, but not be limited to, the list below. The property owner/developer shall also record a covenant on the property requiring that the approved TDM strategies and elements be implemented ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. following: (5.10-2) • On-site services such as the food, retail, and other services be provided. • Ridesharing. Develop a commuter listing of all employee members for the purpose of providing a “matching” of employees with other employees who live in the same geographic areas and who could rideshare. • Vanpooling. Develop a commuter listing of all employees for the purpose of matching numbers of employees who live in geographic proximity to one another and could comprise a vanpool or participate in the existing vanpool programs. • Transit Pass. Southern California Rapid Transit District and Orange County Transportation Authority (including commute rail) passes be promoted through financial assistance and on-site sales to encourage employees to use the various transit and bus services from throughout the region. • Shuttle Service. A commuter listing of all employees living in proximity to the project be generated, and a local shuttle program offered to encourage employees to travel to work by means other than the automobile. • Bicycling. A Bicycling Program be developed to offer a bicycling alternative to employees. Secure bicycle racks, lockers, and showers be provided as part of this program, Maps of bicycle routes throughout the area be provided to inform potential bicyclists of these options. • Guaranteed Ride Home Program. A program to provide employees who rideshare, or use transit or other means of commuting to work, with a prearranged ride home in a taxi, rental car, shuttle, or other vehicle, in the event of emergencies during the work shift. • Target Reduction of Longest Commute Trip. An incentive program for ridesharing and other alternative transportation modes to put highest priority on reduction of longest employee commute trips. • Stagger work shifts. • Develop a “compressed work week” program, which provides for fewer work days but longer daily shifts as an option for employees. • Explore the possibility of a “telecommuting” program that would link some employees via electronic means computer with modem). • Develop a parking management program that provides incentives to those who rideshare or use transit means other than single-occupant auto to travel to work. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-112 • The Planning Center August 2010 • Access. Preferential access to high occupancy vehicles and shuttles may be provided. • Financial Incentive for Ridesharing and/or Public Transit. (Currently, federal law provides tax-free status for up to $65 per month per employee contributions to employees who vanpool or use public transit including commuter rail and/or express bus pools.) • Financial Incentive for Bicycling. Employees offered financial incentives for bicycling to work. • Special “Premium” for the Participation and Promotion of Trip Reduction. Ticket/passes to special events, vacation, etc. be offered to employees who recruit other employees for vanpool, carpool, or other trip reduction programs. • Design incentive programs for carpooling and other alternative transportation modes so as to put highest priority on reduction of longest commute trips. Every property owner and/or lessee shall designate an on-site contact who will be responsible for coordinating with the ATN and implementing all trip mitigation measures. The on-site coordinator shall be the one point of contact representing the project with the ATN. The TDM requirements shall be included in the lease or other agreement with all of the project participants. 9-3 Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection, for each building with office and/or commercial uses, Tthe property owner/developer shall join and financially participate in a clean fuel shuttle program, if established and, shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network/Transportation Management Association in conjunction with the on-going operation of the project. The property owner/developer shall also record a covenant on the property that requires participation in the program ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. (5.10-3) 9-4 Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each building, the property owner/developer shall pay the appropriate Appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees, Traffic Impact and Improvement Fees, and Platinum Triangle Impact Fees shall be paid by the property owner/developer to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City-authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer; and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts which have been established. (5.10-5) 9-5 Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, Tthe property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan adjacent to their property and consistent with the Adopted Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. (5.10-6) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-113 Additional Mitigation Measures 9-6 Prior to approval of a Development Agreement for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, property owner/developers shall prepare traffic improvement phasing analyses to identify when the improvements identified in the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Draft Traffic Study, Parsons Brinckerhoff, August 2010 (Appendix F of this SEIR) shall be designed and constructed. The Development Agreement Conditions of Approval shall require the property owner/developer to implement traffic improvements as identified in the project traffic study to maintain satisfactory levels of service as defined by the City’s General Plan, based on thresholds of significance, performance standards and methodologies utilized in SEIR No. 339, Orange County Congestion Management Program and established in City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. The improvement phasing analyses will specify the timing, funding, construction and fair-share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions. The Development Agreement Conditions of Approval shall require the property owner/developer to construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. 9-7 In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6, property owners/developers will analyze to determine when the intersection improvements shall be constructed, subject to the conditions identified in Mitigation Measure 9-6. The improvement phasing analyses will specify the timing, funding, construction and fair-share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions. At minimum, fair-share calculations shall include intersection improvements, rights-of-way, and construction costs, unless alternative funding sources have been identified to help pay for the improvement. The Development Agreement Conditions of Approval shall require the property owner/developer to construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. 9-8 In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6, the following actions shall be taken in cooperation with the City of Orange: a) The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall identify any impacts created by the project on facilities within the City of Orange. The fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts shall be calculated in this analysis. b) The City of Anaheim shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with the City of Orange. c) The Proposed Project shall pay the City of Anaheim the fair-share cost prior to issuance of a building permit. The City of Anaheim shall hold the amount received in trust, and then, once a mutually agreed upon joint program is executed by both cities, the City of Anaheim shall ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-114 • The Planning Center August 2010 allocate the fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow at the impacted locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to both cities. 9-9 In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6, and assuming that a regional transportation agency has not already programmed and funded the warranted improvements to the impacted freeway mainline or freeway ramp locations, property owners/developers and the City will take the following actions in cooperation with Caltrans: a) The traffic study will identify the Project’s proportionate impact on the specific freeway mainline and/or freeway ramp locations and its fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts based on thresholds of significance, performance standards and methodologies utilized in SEIR No. 339 and established in the Orange County Congestion Management Program and City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. b) The City shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with Caltrans. 9-10 Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map or issuance of a Building Permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall pay the identified fair-share responsibility as determined by the City as set forth in Mitigation Measure 9-9. The City shall allocate the property owners/developers fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow on the impacted mainline and ramp locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to Caltrans and the City. 9-11 Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan and consistent with the Adopted Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, regardless of the level of impacts generated by the project. Transportation Fee Program 9-12 Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each building, the property owner/developer shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees, Traffic Impact and Improvement Fees, Community Facilities District Fees, and Platinum Triangle Impact Fees to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City-authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer; and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts which have been established. 9-13 Subsequent to the certification of the FEIR, and prior to the approval of the first Development Agreement, if the costs of the identified improvements in this traffic study cannot be covered by the total funding allocation under the existing Community Facilities District (CFD), an or update of the existing City traffic fee program or other fee programs shall be developed by the City of Anaheim to ensure completion of the recommended improvements. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-115 Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program 9-14 Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection for each building with commercial, office, and/or institutional uses, the property owners/developer shall record a covenant on the property requiring that ongoing during project implementation, the property owner/developer shall implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for all employees. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office. Objectives of the TDM program shall be: • Increase ridesharing and use of alternative transportation modes by guests. • Provide a menu of commute alternatives for employees to reduce project-generated trips. • Conduct an annual commuter survey to ascertain trip generation, trip origin, and Average Vehicle Ridership. 9-15 Prior to the first Final Building and Zoning inspection for each building with commercial, office, or institutional uses, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department for review and approval a menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and future employees’ commute options, to include, but not be limited to, the list below. The property owner/developer shall also record a covenant on the property requiring that the approved TDM strategies and elements be implemented ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. Every property owner and/or lessee shall designate an on-site contact who will be responsible for coordinating with the ATN and implementing all trip mitigation measures. The on-site coordinator shall be the one point of contact representing the project with the ATN. The TDM requirements shall be included in the lease or other agreement with all of the project participants. • On-site services. On-site services such as the food, retail, and other services. • Ridesharing. Develop a commuter listing of all employee members for the purpose of providing a “matching” of employees with other employees who live in the same geographic areas and who could rideshare. • Vanpooling. Develop a commuter listing of all employees for the purpose of matching numbers of employees who live in geographic proximity to one another and could comprise a vanpool or participate in the existing vanpool programs. • Transit Pass. Promote Orange County Transportation Authority (including commuter rail) passes through financial assistance and on-site sales to encourage employees to use the various transit and bus services from throughout the region. • Shuttle Service. Generate a commuter listing of all employees living in proximity to the project, and a local shuttle program offered to encourage employees to travel to work by means other than the automobile. • Bicycling. Develop a Bicycling Program to offer a bicycling alternative to employees. Secure bicycle racks, lockers, and showers should be provided as part of this program. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-116 • The Planning Center August 2010 Maps of bicycle routes throughout the area should be provided to inform potential bicyclists of these options. • Guaranteed Ride Home Program. Develop a program to provide employees who rideshare, or use transit or other means of commuting to work, with a prearranged ride home in a taxi, rental car, shuttle, or other vehicle, in the event of emergencies during the work shift. • Target Reduction of Longest Commute Trip. Promote an incentive program for ridesharing and other alternative transportation modes to put highest priority on reduction of longest employee commute trips. • Work Shifts. Stagger work shifts. • Compressed Work Week. Develop a “compressed work week” program, which provides for fewer work days but longer daily shifts as an option for employees. • Telecommuting. Explore the possibility of a “telecommuting” program that would link some employees via electronic means computer with modem). • Parking Management. Develop a parking management program that provides incentives to those who rideshare or use transit means other than single-occupant auto to travel to work. • Access. Provide preferential access to high occupancy vehicles and shuttles. • Financial Incentive for Ridesharing and/or Public Transit. Offer employees financial incentives for ridesharing or using public transportation. Currently, federal law provides tax- free status for up to $65 per month per employee contributions to employees who vanpool or use public transit including commuter rail and/or express bus pools. • Financial Incentive for Bicycling. Offer employees financial incentives for bicycling to work. • Special “Premium” for the Participation and Promotion of Trip Reduction. Offer ticket/passes to special events, vacation, etc. be offered to employees who recruit other employees for vanpool, carpool, or other trip reduction programs. • Incentive Programs. Design incentive programs for carpooling and other alternative transportation modes so as to put highest priority on reduction of longest commute trips. Participation In the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) 9-16 Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection, for each building with office and/or commercial uses, the property owner/developer shall join and financially participate in a clean fuel shuttle program, if established and, shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network/Transportation Management Association in conjunction with the on-going operation of the project. The property owner/developer shall also record a covenant on the property that requires participation in the program ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-117 9-17 Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection, for each building with office and/or commercial uses, the property owner/developer shall submit proof to the Public Works, Transit Planning Division that the property owner/developer has entered into an agreement with the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) for the provision of a transit shuttle service between the project, the existing Metrolink Station and future Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) as well as major activity centers in between. The agreement shall be recorded in the Official Records of the Office of the County Recorder, Orange County, California. The form of the agreement shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. The agreement shall provide for the following: a. A shuttle route plan, approved by the Public Works Department, Transit Planning Division and ATN, shall be attached and incorporated into the agreement. The plan shall include co- location of stops with Orange County Transportation Authority bus stop locations and other properties in the Platinum Triangle where feasible and determined appropriate by the Public Works Transit Planning Division and ATN. The property owner/developer shall pay all costs associated with the preparation of the shuttle route plan. b. The property owner/developer shall provide the full cost associated with providing the shuttle, including, but not limited to, purchasing the shuttle vehicle and all costs associated with operating and marketing the shuttle route. c. The agreement shall provide a mechanism for the property owner/developer to request fair- share participation from other major activity centers to be served by this shuttle route. The mechanism shall be subject to the approval of the ATN. d. The agreement shall set forth a schedule for commencement of operation of the shuttle service. e. The agreement shall provide that the property owner/developer's obligations to fund the shuttle service may be cancelled only upon prior written approval from the Public Works Department, Transit Planning Division's once a new transit service has taken its place. f. That to the extent permitted by law the terms of this agreement shall constitute covenants which shall run with the property for the benefit thereof, and the benefits of this agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties and all successors in interest to the parties hereto. Impact 5.9-2 Three freeway ramps, I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue, SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road and SR-57 Southbound On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue, are deficient under 2030 With Project conditions in the PM Peak Hour and operate at acceptable levels of service under 2030 No Project conditions. Operationally, adding a lane to either of these ramps does not result in acceptable ramp operations under 2030 With Project conditions. Impacts to freeway ramp facilities are the result of high forecast volumes on the ramps themselves coupled with high forecast volumes on the freeway mainline adjacent to the ramp facilities, therefore, the traffic on the mainline must be reduced or the capacity of the mainline facility must be enhanced through the addition of an auxiliary lane to improve freeway ramp performance. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-118 • The Planning Center August 2010 The traffic on the State Highway System is regional in nature and the deficiencies are the result of expected regional growth. Caltrans has not entered into an agreement with the City and Caltrans has not adopted a program by which Caltrans can ensure that developer fair-share contributions will assist in the funding of potential capacity or operational improvements on the study area State Highway System. Because the I-5 and SR-22 are at their conceptual build-out, and OCTA and State funding is committed to the planned widening of SR-57, there is no guarantee that impact fees from the Proposed Project will be dedicated to the improvements of the study area State Highway System. Caltrans Ramp Termini Intersection Mitigation measures as shown below have been recommended for the impacted Caltrans ramp termini, which are the same mitigation measures identified for ICU analysis. However, the City of Anaheim does not have jurisdiction over the deficient circulation system components in the City of Orange. Should the City of Orange decide to improve the operational capacity of any of the impacted locations, the City of Anaheim will be subject to designated fair-share contribution towards the improvement cost. • Intersection I-21: Anaheim Boulevard/I-5 Northbound Ramps (Anaheim) – Add 4th Southbound Through Lane. • Intersection I-26: Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps)/Katella Avenue (Anaheim) – Add 4th Eastbound Through Lane and add 4th Westbound Through Lane. • Intersection I-27: Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/Katella Avenue (Anaheim) – Add 4th Eastbound Through Lane and add 5th Westbound through lane. • Intersection I-71: Orangewood Avenue/SR-57 Southbound Ramps (Orange) – Add 2nd Westbound Lane (fair-share contribution of 36.1 percent). • Intersection I-98: SR-22 Westbound Ramps/Metropolitan Drive (Orange) – Restripe Westbound Through Lane to 3rd Westbound Lane (fair-share contribution of 7.4 percent). Caltrans Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing No mitigation measures are necessary. Caltrans Freeway Ramp HCM Three freeway ramps, I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road (R-36), and SR-57 Southbound On-Ramp from Orangewood Avenue (R-46) during PM peak hour are deficient under 2030 With Project conditions. Standard capacity improvements, through the addition of one or more lanes on the freeway ramps, will not necessarily result in acceptable ramp operations for ramps that are forecast to operate deficiently. The density of the ramps is influenced by both the mainline and ramp volume, therefore, the traffic on the mainline must be reduced or the capacity of the mainline facility must be enhanced through the addition of an auxiliary lane to improve freeway ramp performance. Proposed project fair-share percentages for the ramps noted above range from 17 percent to 40 percent. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-119 Freeway ramp performance is directly related to the performance of the mainline segments for freeways, and as such, mitigation to increase ramp capacity likely would not mitigate cumulative traffic deficiencies, as the mainline volumes would still result in deficient operations. Caltrans Freeway Mainline HCM Analysis Proposed Project fair-share percentages have been computed for the two segments of I-5 that are deficient under 2030 With Project conditions and acceptable under No Project conditions. The shares have been computed per the methodology outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. Appendix of the guidelines directs users to use a formula to calculate equitable share responsibility for the traffic impacts of proposed projects. The guidelines are not intended to establish a legal standard for determining equitable responsibility, but rather to provide a starting point for discussions with Caltrans to address the traffic mitigation and fair-share responsibilities. The project shares for the two segments on I-5 are 10 percent and less than 0.5 percent, respectively. Caltrans Freeway Weaving HCM Analysis Two weaving segments are deficient under the Proposed Project. Potential improvements include implementation of an auxiliary lane within the weaving area to improve operations. The weaving analysis revealed that several weaving areas operate at deficient levels of service under 2030 With and No Project conditions as a result of high mainline forecast volumes and cumulative growth. To address cumulative deficiencies associated with the freeway mainline and weaving segments, freeway capacity enhancements such as widening the facilities by one lane in each direction would require consideration: • I-5 between SR-91 and SR-55 – widen by 1 lane each direction (fair-shares range from approximately 2-12%) • SR-57 Northbound between SR-91 and Katella Avenue – widen by 1 lane each direction (fair- shares range from approximately 13-19%) • SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 and SR-22 Ramps – widen by 1 lane each direction (fair- share approximately 16%) • SR-22 Westbound between Brookhurst Street and Main Street – widen by 1 lane each direction (fair-shares range from approximately 8-13%) • SR-22 Eastbound between Brookhurst Street and Glassell Street – widen by 1 lane each direction (fair-share negligible) Mitigation strategies have been recommended to reduce the level of impact to less than significant levels. Potential additional capacity enhancements include the implementation of auxiliary lanes within weaving areas to improve operations on the merge/diverge areas as well as the mainline and weaving areas. However, this does not satisfy the capacity needs of the corresponding and adjacent mainline segment and no additional improvements are feasible. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-120 • The Planning Center August 2010 Impact 5.9-4 9-18 In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6, property owners/developers will analyze to determine when the intersection improvements identified under Impact 5.9-4 shall be constructed, subject to the conditions identified in Mitigation Measure 9-6. 9-19 Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall meet with the Traffic and Transportation Manager to determine whether a bus stop(s) is required to be placed adjacent to the property. If a bus stop(s) is required, it shall be placed in a location that least impacts traffic flow and may be designed as a bus turnout or a far side bus stop as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager and per the approval of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). 5.9.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation Impact 5.9-1 Intersection and Arterial Segment Impacts Based upon the ICU methodology established by the Cities of Anaheim and Orange, the study determined that 31 intersections are impacted by the Proposed Project and require mitigation. As shown in Table 5.9-37, improvements have been proposed for all 31 locations and all intersections within the study area would operate at an acceptable LOS with the implementation of the mitigation strategies. Additionally, as shown in Table 5.9-37, mitigation measures have been provided for four arterial segments in the City of Anaheim and six arterial segments in the City of Orange that are impacted by the Proposed Project. One arterial segment (A-18, Cerritos Avenue between State College Boulevard and Sunkist Street) is recommended for improvement to allow for continuity on a key east-west corridor although no significant impact was identified. Implementation of Mitigation 9-1 through 9-13, in conjunction with the recommended improvements in Table 5.9-37 would reduce impacted intersections LOS to a less than significant level. However, as indicated in Table 5.9-37, mitigation measures recommended for 13 impacted intersections are infeasible and project impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Although recommended, not all identified improvements are feasible due to a number of reasons such as the inability to undertake right-of-way acquisitions as a matter of policy to preserve existing businesses, environmental constraints, or jurisdictional consideration. In addition, although cost estimates have not been completed at this time, it is anticipated that a number of improvements would be economically infeasible due to the anticipated costs of some of the improvements. Inasmuch as the primary responsibility for approving and/or completing certain improvements located outside of Anaheim lies with agencies other than the City of Anaheim City of Orange and Caltrans), there is the potential that significant impacts may not be fully mitigated if such improvements are not completed for reasons beyond the City of Anaheim’s control the City of Anaheim cannot undertake or require improvements outside of Anaheim’s jurisdiction or the City cannot construct improvements in the Caltrans right-of-way without Caltrans approval). Should that occur, the project’s traffic impact would remain significant. Table 5.9-37 presents mitigation measures identified through analysis of the Proposed Project traffic impacts, including those locations that are expected to remain significant due to infeasibility. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-121 Table 5.9-37 Recommended Mitigation Measures ID Location Jurisdiction Level of Impact Mitigation Comments Intersections I-1 Euclid Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Restripe NBR to NBT, widen NB departure for 400 feet Infeasible I-2 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Add 2nd NBL (Restripe #1 SB lane) I-5 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road Anaheim Project Add NBL: Restripe NB to 2L, 2T, 1R and SB to 2L, 2T; Remove Split Phase Infeasible I-6 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Restripe EBR to EBT, Restripe WBR to WBT and add 4th WB lane to the Simba parking lot entrance Partially Infeasible I-8 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim Project Add NBT, SBT, EBT, EBR Infeasible I-18 Anaheim Boulevard / Vermont Avenue Anaheim Project Add SBT I-19 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim Project Add NBR, EBL, EBR I-20 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim Project Add NBL, SBL, WBR, Restripe WB approach to 2L, 1TR, 1R I-21 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Anaheim Project Add SBT (in median) I-23 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Add WBR Infeasible I-24 Haster Street / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Project Add WBL, SBL, SBR I-27 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Anaheim Project Add EBT, WBT I-31 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim Project Add WBR I-33 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Add NBL, NBT, SBL, SBR, WBT; Restripe SB to 2L, 1T, 1TR, 1R I-35 Lewis Street / Anaheim Connector (future) Anaheim Project Add EBL I-47 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim Project Add NBL, SBL, EBL I-49 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Add WBR, EBR; Restripe SB to 2L, 2T, 2R; EB to 3L, 3T, 1R Partially Infeasible I-50 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim Project Add WBL and NBR I-51 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Project Add SBR I-53 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange Project Add NBR and WBT Infeasible I-57 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Orange Project Restripe WBT to WBTR Override I-60 Sunkist Street / Howell Avenue Anaheim Project Add SBL, restripe SB to 1L, 1LT, 1R I-61 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Add WBR I-62 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Restripe NBTR to NBT, NBTL, Add Lane I-64 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange Project Add NB Free Right, Add SBL I-71 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Orange Project Add WBL (Restripe) Override ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-122 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.9-37 Recommended Mitigation Measures ID Location Jurisdiction Level of Impact Mitigation Comments I-73 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Add NBT and SBT; Reconfigure NBTR to NBT, Reconfigure SBTR to SBT; Add EBT and WBR I-80 Main Street / Collins Avenue Orange Project Add 2nd WBL Override I-87 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange Project Restripe SBR to SBT and Widen SB departure for 400 feet Override I-102 The City Drive / Garden Grove Boulevard Orange Project Add SBL by Restriping #1 NB lane); Restripe EBT to EBL Override Ramp Termini Intersections I-21 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 NB Ramps Anaheim Project Add 4th SBT* I-26 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Anaheim Project Add 4th EBT, Add 4th I-27 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Anaheim Project Add 4th EBT, Add 5th I-71 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Orange Project Add WBL (Restripe)* Override I-98 SR-22 Westbound Ramps/ Metropolitan Drive Orange Cumulative Restripe WBT to 3rd WBL Override Arterial Segments A-18 Cerritos Avenue (between State College Boulevard and Sunkist Street) Anaheim Project Upgrade to 4 lane primary arterial w/ bike lanes A-19 Cerritos Avenue (between Sunkist Street and Douglass Road) Anaheim Project Upgrade to 4 lane primary arterial w/ bike lanes A-31 Douglass Road (between Katella Avenue and Cerritos Avenue) Anaheim Project Upgrade to 4 lane primary arterial w/ bike lanes A- 56a Katella Avenue (between Manchester Avenue and Anaheim Way) Anaheim Project Upgrade to 8 lane Stadium A-65 Lewis Street (between Katella Avenue and Cerritos Avenue) Anaheim Project Upgrade to 4 lane primary arterial w/ bike lanes A-15 Ball Road (between SR-57 Freeway and Main Street) Orange Project No mitigation Override A-27 Collins Avenue (between Main Street and Batavia Street ) Orange Project Upgrade to 4-lane divided arterial Override A-28 Collins Avenue (between Batavia Street and Glassell Street) Orange Project Upgrade to 4-lane divided arterial Override A-32 Eckhoff Street (between Orangewood Avenue and Collins Avenue) Orange Project Upgrade to 4-lane divided arterial Override A-62 Katella Avenue (between Main Street and Batavia Orange Project No mitigation Override A-91 Struck Avenue (between Katella Avenue and Main Street) Orange Project Upgrade to 4-lane undivided arterial Override Note: * Intersection identified as deficient under both ICU and HCM analysis. The following City of Anaheim intersection improvements are not feasible due to right-of-way or other constraints. 1) Intersection I-1: Euclid Street/Katella Avenue—Restripe Northbound Right turn lane to Northbound through lane The improvement at Euclid Street and Katella Avenue is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing and newly constructed businesses including a recently rebuilt mini-mall on the northeast corner of the intersection, which support economic development for the City of Anaheim. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-123 The potential right-of-way required for receiving lane on the northeast corner of the intersection would significantly impact the business and parking on the east side of Euclid Street, north of Katella Avenue. 2) Intersection I-5: Disneyland Drive/Ball Road—Add NBL: Restripe NB to 2L, 2T, 1R and SB to 2L, 2T; Remove Split Phase The improvement is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of Anaheim Resort supportive land uses that contribute to the economic development of the City. In order to accommodate the proposed improvement, the intersection would likely need to be expanded, potentially impacting the HOV ramp overpass to the Disneyland Resort. Both the City and Disney have invested heavily in supporting The Anaheim Resort and altering the street system in the area would be a cost prohibitive undertaking and disruptive to the effective operation of The Anaheim Resort. 3) Intersection I-6: Disneyland Drive/West Street/Katella Avenue—Restripe WBR to WBT and add 4th WB lane to the Simba parking lot entrance The improvement is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of immediately adjacent Anaheim Resort supportive land uses that contribute to the economic development of the City. This access to the Disneyland Resort has been significantly reconfigured in recent years to accommodate new development at the park and adjacent parking areas. The addition of lane capacity at this intersection would require substantial right-of-way and affect the attractive gateway that the Disneyland Resort has created through extensive landscaping. 4) Intersection I-8: Harbor Boulevard/Ball Road—Add Northbound Through lane, Southbound Through lane, Eastbound Through lane, and Eastbound Right-turn lane The improvements are infeasible due to the presence of a large number of immediately adjacent Anaheim Resort supportive land uses that contribute to the economic development of the City. To accommodate the proposed improvements, the intersection would have to be substantially expanded impacting the right-of-way of several hotel buildings including the Days Inn Suites and Hotel Ménage. Altering the street system in the area would be a cost prohibitive undertaking and disruptive to the effective operation of The Anaheim Resort. 5) Intersection I-23: Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street/Katella Avenue—Add Westbound Right-turn lane The City has invested heavily in supporting development in The Anaheim Resort and reconfiguring an intersection in this area would be disruptive to those goals. This improvement also serves a turning movement that could be considered redundant, as most of the vehicles using this movement would be better served using Anaheim Way to the east to access Anaheim Boulevard. 6) Intersection I-49: State College Boulevard/Katella Avenue—Restripe Eastbound to 3 left turn lanes, 3 through lanes, and 1 right turn lane This proposed restripe will reduce the number of through lanes on eastbound Katella Avenue from four lanes to three lanes. This proposed change will negatively affect signal coordination and timing for both streets. Katella Avenue is identified as an eight lane smart street by OCTA. All through lanes must be kept to ensure the higher capacities envisioned by OCTA on its smart street corridors. To add a third eastbound left turn lane without removing a through lane will significantly impact a ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-124 • The Planning Center August 2010 recently developed residential mixed-use development on the northwest corner and a gas station on the southwest corner. This widening will also make Katella Avenue difficult for pedestrians to cross, as with this improvement, pedestrian traffic would have to cross 12 lanes. 7) Intersection I-53: State College Boulevard/Orangewood Avenue—Add Northbound Right turn lane and Westbound Through lane. The improvement is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of immediately adjacent existing structures, including several high-density office buildings within close proximity to the public right-of-way. These types of higher density buildings are consistent with the goals of the Platinum Triangle of internal trip capture and promotion of transit use. Additionally, State College Boulevard is a designated BRT corridor. Improvements to the circulation system in this area should be consistent with the goals of promoting transit use and limiting increased auto trips to this area. All of these intersections have a project related impact under the 2030 With Project scenario. As set forth above, there are numerous physical constraints associated with the proposed improvements, including private properties, extensive circulation landscaping and mature trees, and a variety of hotels and other businesses that would likely be impacted. These physical constraints limit the ability to ensure that impacts at these locations can be mitigated to less than significant levels. Therefore, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. City of Orange Facilities The following intersections within the City of Orange have a project related impact under the 2030 With Project scenario. As noted, there are physical constraints associated with the proposed improvements, including impacts to private properties, businesses, and residences, and natural impediments such as the Santa Ana River. These physical constraints limit the ability to ensure that the improvements necessary to mitigate the project traffic impacts at these locations can be mitigated to level of less than significant. Since the City of Anaheim does not control the improvements that Orange chooses to implement in their City, the City of Anaheim will need to enter into or amend an existing agreement with Orange to contribute a fair-share to the improvements identified within the City of Orange. This fair-share would reflect an appropriate nexus between the additional traffic caused by the Proposed Project and the regional traffic contributing to future deficiencies in Orange. Intersections that are shared between the City of Anaheim and Orange will be dealt with in the same fashion. 8) Intersection I-53: State College Boulevard/Orangewood Avenue (shared intersection between Anaheim and Orange)—Add Northbound Right and Westbound through lanes (same as included in the City of Anaheim). As identified above, this improvement would significantly impact the high-density office buildings at the southeast and northwest corners of the intersection. These mitigation measures do not impact any area within the City of Orange. 9) Intersection I-57: State College Boulevard/The City Drive/Chapman Avenue—Restripe Westbound Through to Shared Westbound Through Right. Since the westbound right turn does not have an overlap right turn phase, this mitigation measure will cause no impact. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.9-125 10) Intersection I-71: Orangewood Avenue/SR-57 Southbound Ramps—Restripe intersection to add Westbound Left. The existing curb lines up with the curb of the new bridge that will cross the Santa Ana River. The number 1 lane will become a left turn lane at this intersection, leaving two through lanes without an offset. Only signal loops, striping, and timing changes are required at this intersection, and there are no impacts to right-of-way. 11) Intersection I-80: Main Street/Collins Avenue—Add 2nd Westbound Left Turn Lane The improvement may be infeasible due to the fact that there are significant right-of-way impacts to adding additional capacity at the intersection. Existing businesses on the east side of Main Street would be disrupted by construction and right-of-way impacts. The City of Anaheim would need to work with the City of Orange to determine the most appropriate strategy for future improvements at this location. 12) Intersection I-87: Glassell Street/Katella Avenue—Restripe Southbound Right to Southbound Through and Widen Southbound departure for 400 feet The improvement would require right-of-way and would likely disrupt existing businesses at the southwest corner of the intersection. Although the proposed improvement is a restriping, receiving lane accommodations may impact existing property. 13) Intersection I-102: The City Drive/Garden Grove Boulevard—Add Southbound Left by Restriping #1 Northbound Lane. Restripe Eastbound Through to Eastbound Left Turn Lane. This improvement will result in only two northbound through lanes on The City Drive until the southbound left turn pocket tapers to its standard cross section. No impacts to right-of-way are required at this intersection. Additionally, the following one intersection in the City of Orange was identified as deficient under the HCM methodology. This location should be monitored to determine appropriate strategies toward improving flow through signal timing and coordination. However, because the intersection falls under the jurisdiction of the City of Orange, although operational improvements may be feasible, the impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. 14) Intersection I-98: SR-22 Westbound Ramps at Metropolitan Drive—Restripe Westbound Through to 3rd Westbound Left Turn Lane. The following six arterial segments identified as deficient are located within corridors that are built out and right-of-way constraints include existing businesses, extensive landscaping, and in the case of Struck Avenue, several homes. The City of Orange has not included these segments in a current capital improvement program to fund construction of these improvements: but should the City of Orange decide to implement improvements along these corridors, the City of Anaheim will need to contribute a fair- share. The City of Anaheim will continue to work with the City of Orange to develop the most appropriate strategy toward improving the locations impacted by the Proposed Project. 15) Arterial Segment A-15: Ball Road from SR-57 Freeway to Main Street—No mitigation measures are recommended. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Page 5.9-126 • The Planning Center August 2010 16) Arterial Segment A-27: Collins Avenue from Main Street to Batavia Street—Upgrade to 4-lane divided arterial. 17) Arterial Segment A-28: Collins Avenue from Batavia Street to Glassell Street—Upgrade to 4-lane divided arterial. 18) Arterial Segment A-32: Eckhoff Street to Orangewood Avenue to Collins Avenue—Upgrade to 4- lane divided arterial. 19) Arterial Segment A-62: Katella Avenue from Main Street to Batavia Street—No mitigation measures are recommended. 20) Arterial Segment A-91: Struck Avenue from Katella Avenue to Main Street—Upgrade to 4-lane undivided arterial. Impact 5.9-2 Caltrans Mainline Segments, Ramps, and Weaving Segments Since the major freeway facilities within the study area, I-5, SR-22, and SR-57 have reached their design capacity or will have reached it by 2030 and the required physical improvements are largely the result of background regional traffic, consultation between the City of Anaheim and Caltrans will be necessary to reach consensus on any potential operational improvement measures. State highway facilities within the study area are not within the jurisdiction of the City of Anaheim. Improvements to State Highway Systems are deemed to be matters of federal, State, regional, and local concern and are planned, funded, and constructed by the State of California through a legislative and political process involving the State Legislature; the California Transportation Commission; the California Business, Transportation, and Housing Agency; Caltrans; and OCTA. Therefore, impacts to Caltrans facilities would remain significant and unavoidable. Impact 5.9-4 Construction of bus turnouts as recommended by the OCTA would further alleviate the safety impacts due to design features. In addition, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to substantially alter the backbone circulation system and arterial connections compared to the Adopted MLUP. Each development project within the Platinum Triangle would be reviewed per the planned circulation system and would be required to provide necessary improvements in accordance with the determination of the Traffic and Transportation Division. The project impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Mitigation measures 9-18 and 9-19 would reduce potential impacts related to traffic hazards to a less than significant level.