Document Anaheim_doc_532ba0830c

Appendices Honda Center Enhancement Project Draft EIR City of Anaheim Appendix A Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Planning Department Notice of Preparation DATE: September 2, 2011 TO: Responsible Agencies and State Clearinghouse FROM: City of Anaheim SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 344 for the Honda Center Enhancement Project The City of Anaheim is the Lead Agency responsible for preparing Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 344 (DEIR No. 344) to analyze the impacts of the Honda Center Enhancement Project. The proposed project includes an increase in the number of annual events at the Honda Center through the addition of another permanent tenant, as well as other permanent improvements described below. The 1990 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Honda Center (formerly the Arrowhead Pond) analyzed up to 162 events per year. The Honda Center currently averages up to 153 events per year with average attendance at an event of up to 11,264 people. The maximum number of events over the last five years was 162 events in 2008. The proposed project seeks to increase the maximum number of events by 60 from the previous high of 162 events for a total of 222 events per year. Currently, there are on average three events per week at the Honda Center, and the proposed project would result in four events per week on average. The purpose of the project would be to accommodate a National Basketball Association (NBA) franchise at the Honda Center. There are 3 pre- season games, 41 regular home games during the NBA season and up to 16 postseason games. Seating capacity of a basketball game is 18,336, and the proposed project would not result in a change in the maximum seating capacity of current events. In addition to an increase in the number of annual events at the Honda Center, the proposed project would involve other minor improvements to the existing facility including: • Addition of a 12,000 square foot exterior grand terrace • Construction of a 250 seat, 4,000 square foot restaurant to serve event attendees • Enlarged team store (from 1,800 square feet to 4,000 square feet) • Relocated 2,000 square foot box office (swings to the south to accommodate the enlarged team store) • Interior locker room renovation • Interior office space renovation • Interior bunker suite renovation • Interior electrical upgrades • Increase capacity of loading dock • Interior balcony suite renovation None of the proposed improvements would increase the permanent seating capacity of the existing arena; however, the improvements would result in the loss of approximately 15-20 ---PAGE BREAK--- parking spaces. The proposed project includes a zone reclassification for a portion of the project site from the Transition Zone/Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone to the Public Recreational (PR) Zone/PTMU Overlay Zone, consistent with the zoning for the remainder of the project site. A detailed project description, location, and the probable environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. A copy of the Initial Study is attached. The document may also be reviewed on the City of Anaheim Planning Department’s website at www.anaheim.net/planning (click on the link to “Planning and Zoning” followed by the link to Current Environmental Documents). The document will be identified as “The Honda Center Enhancement Project.” Responses: We would like to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information germane to your agency’s statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, please send your written response to the City of Anaheim at the address below at the earliest possible date but not later than October 4, 2011 at 5:00 p.m. Please include the name for the contact person in your agency. Responses may also be submitted by fax to (714) 765-5280 or by email to [EMAIL REDACTED]. Susan Kim, Senior Planner City of Anaheim, MS 162 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA, 92805 Scoping Meeting: The City will hold a public scoping meeting at 5:00 P.M. on Wednesday, September 21, 2011 in the Council Chamber, City Hall East, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California. Questions: Please contact Susan Kim, Senior Planner, at (714) 765-4958 or [EMAIL REDACTED]. Project Title: DEIR No. 344 Honda Center Enhancement Project Project Applicant: City of Anaheim ---PAGE BREAK--- Initial Study for the HONDA CENTER ENHANCEMENT PROJECT AND ASSOCIATED ACTIONS City of Anaheim, California Lead Agency: City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, California 92805 Prepared by: The Planning Center 3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100 Santa Ana, California 92707 (714) 966-9220 September 2011 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project i Initial Study TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 Introduction 1 Project Location 1 Operational Characteristics 9 Project Background 9 Project Description 10 Anticipated Additional Project Approvals 11 CITY OF ANAHEIM ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM 15 CITY OF ANAHEIM ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 19 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 19 Determination 19 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 23 I. Aesthetics 23 II. Agricultural Resources 23 III. Air Quality 24 IV. Biological Resources 25 V. Cultural Resources 25 VI. Geology and Soils 26 VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions 27 VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 28 IX. Hydrology and Water Quality 30 X. Land Use and Planning 32 XI. Mineral Resources 33 XII. Noise 33 XIII. Population and Housing 34 XIV. Public Services 34 XV. Recreation 35 XVI. Transportation/Traffic 35 XVII. Utilities and Service Systems 36 XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance 37 FISH AND GAME DETERMINATION 39 REFERENCES CITED 40 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project ii Initial Study LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Regional Location 3 2 Vicinity Map 5 3 Aerial Photograph 7 4 Existing Zoning and Property Ownership 13 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Honda Center Events And Event Population 10 2 Honda Center Event Attendance 10 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 1 Initial Study PROJECT DESCRIPTION Introduction The Honda Center is located within the City of Anaheim on property owned by the City of Anaheim. Adjacent parking lots to the south and west are also owned by the City of Anaheim. Parking areas to the east and northeast, along the Santa Ana River, are owned by the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD). The Honda Center is owned by the City of Anaheim and managed by Anaheim Arena Management, LLC (AAM). AAM is proposing to increase in the number of annual events at the Honda Center through the addition of another permanent tenant. In addition, AAM is proposing other permanent improvements to the Honda Center, including the addition of a grand terrace, a 250-seat restaurant, the expansion of the existing team store, as well as some minor interior modifications. The improvements are proposed to expand onto a portion of the properties owned by the OCFCD. The City is proposing to reclassify the zoning for the OCFCD properties from the Transition Zone to the Public Recreational (PR) Zone to be consistent with the zoning for the adjacent City properties and consistent with the development and operation of an arena. The entirety of the project area is within the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone, Arena District, which allows development of up to 100,000 square feet of commercial development; 100,000 square feet of office development and 425 residential units; in addition to the existing Honda Center arena. The overlay zone is consistent with the properties’ Mixed Use General Plan land use designation; and therefore, no General Plan Amendment is proposed in conjunction with the reclassification. The City of Anaheim, as lead agency for the project, is responsible for preparing environmental documentation in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as amended, to determine if approval of the discretionary actions requested and subsequent development could have a significant impact on the environment. As defined by Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines, an initial study is prepared primarily to provide the lead agency with information to use as the basis for determining whether an environmental impact report (EIR), negative declaration, or mitigated negative declaration would be appropriate for providing the necessary environmental documentation and clearance for the proposed project. Together with the Notice of Preparation (NOP) and the Environmental Checklist Form, this Initial Study has been distributed to all responsible agencies as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A notice has also been sent to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the Honda Center and interested parties indicating that these documents are available for a 30-day public review at the Planning Department within Anaheim City Hall at 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard in the City of Anaheim or on the Planning Department’s website (www.anaheim.net/planning, click on the link to “Planning and Zoning” followed by the link to “Current Environmental Documents”). Project Location The Honda Center is located at 2695 East Katella Avenue, in the south-central portion City of Anaheim (see Figure 1, Regional Location). The Honda Center and its adjacent surface parking lots are bound on the north by Stanley Cup Way and the Union Pacific Railroad, to the east by the Santa Ana River, to the south by Katella Avenue and to the west by State Route 57 (SR-57) freeway (see Figure 2, Local Vicinity). The Honda Center is within a half mile northeast of the Angel Stadium of Anaheim and the existing Anaheim Amtrak/Metrolink Station and the future Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC). An aerial photograph of the project site and its surroundings is shown on Figure 3. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 2 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 1. Introduction Honda Center Enhancement Project The Planning CenterIDC&E • Figure 1 Regional Location 0 5 Scale (Miles) SITE SITE 15 10 10 605 405 405 405 5 5 15 91 90 91 91 39 22 55 74 241 241 261 133 133 241 73 1 1 57 60 60 71 19 105 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 4 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project The Planning CenterIDC&E • Figure 2 Local Vicinity Map Orange Anaheim Garden Grove Santa Ana Orangewood Av Katella Av Gene Autry Way Ball Rd Chapman Av Lampson Av Garden Grove Bl Cerritos Av Harbor Bl Lewis St State College Bl Sunkist St Anaheim Bl East St Batavia St Glassell St Main St Angel Stadium of Anaheim Existing Amtrack/Metrolink Station Future ARTIC Santa Ana River SCE Easement 0 3,100 Scale (Feet) Site Site 22 22 57 5 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 6 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project The Planning CenterIDC&E • Figure 3 Aerial Photograph Orange Orange Anaheim Anaheim Katella Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Orangewood Ave Cerritos Ave Cerritos Ave Site Boundary Platinum Triangle Boundary City Boundary State College Blvd State College Blvd Eckhoff St Eckhoff St Douglass Rd Douglass Rd Existing Amtrack/Metrolink Station Existing Amtrack/Metrolink Station Honda Center Honda Center 0 1,000 Scale (Feet) 57 Source: Google Earth Pro 2011 Angel Stadium of Anaheim Angel Stadium of Anaheim Santa Ana River Santa Ana River Future ARTIC Future ARTIC ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 8 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Improvements to the Honda Center 9 Initial Study The Honda Center is located within the City of Anaheim’s Platinum Triangle. The Platinum Triangle encompasses the Angel Stadium of Anaheim, the Honda Center, the City National Grove of Anaheim, the Anaheim Amtrak/Metrolink Station and the future ARTIC, and surrounding residential and mixed use development, light industrial buildings, industrial parks, distribution facilities, offices, hotels, restaurants, and retail development Project Background In June of 1990, the Anaheim City Council approved documents that led to the construction of a new world-class arena and in 1993, the Anaheim Arena opened its doors to a sold-out performance by Barry Manilow. Later that same year, the NHL announced its fourth expansion team, the Mighty Ducks of Anaheim, who would make Anaheim its home. At the same time Arrowhead Water became the naming rights sponsor, thus the arena became the Arrowhead Pond of Anaheim. In 2003, the City approved and entered into the current Facility Management Agreement with Anaheim Arena Management, LLC (AAM) and, in 2006, Honda Motor Company became the title sponsor and the arena name was changed to the Honda Center. The success of the Honda Center is evident, as it is one of the premiere entertainment and sports venues in the country and has been the recipient of numerous industry awards over the years. It has been nominated for “Venue of the Year” in the United States by Pollstar Magazine on seven separate occasions and most recently was ranked fourth in the country by Billboard Magazine for 2010 concert and ticket sales. The Honda Center is proud to be home to the NHL’s Anaheim Ducks and to the prestigious John R. Wooden College Basketball Classic. Since 1993, the venue has hosted a significant number of world-class events and shows, including: NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament Western Regionals (1998, 2001, 2003, 2011), NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament First and Second Round (2008), 1999 NCAA Frozen Four, 2003 World Gymnastics Championships, 2004 U.S. Team Trials - Gymnastics, 2005 World Badminton Championships, four-time host to UFC Championship bouts, U2, Bette Midler, Paul McCartney, Eagles, Barbra Streisand, AC/DC, Gwen Stefani, Luis Miguel, Rod Stewart, David Bowie, Andrea Bocelli, Tim McGraw, Faith Hill, Phil Collins, Toby Keith, Alan Jackson, Madonna, Prince, Van Halen, Gloria Estefan, Jimmy Buffett, Bon Jovi, Billy Joel, Bruce Springsteen, and Elton John. Additionally, the current manager, Anaheim Arena Management, LLC, has continued to improve the facility, investing more than $22 million in capital improvements since 2003. As the venue was designed and constructed to be home to two professional sports franchises, the City and its facility management partners have worked throughout the years to bring a second professional sports franchise to the Honda Center. Operational Characteristics The 650,000-square-foot Honda Center opened on June 19, 1993, after two years of construction. It can accommodate a maximum of 18,900 spectators depending on seating configuration, and the parking lots surrounding the Honda Center have 3,775 parking spaces to accommodate visitors. Additional parking is provided off-site by agreement and/or by private operators. The Honda Center facilities are in operation on event days, although some functions ticket sales) are open on nonevent days. Maximum capacities for hockey, basketball, and other events concerts, circus, etc.) are shown in Table 1. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Improvements to the Honda Center 10 Initial Study TABLE 1 HONDA CENTER EVENTS AND EVENT POPULATION Event Type Seating Capacity Staff/ Employees Team Members/ Production1 Basketball Games2 18,336 950 200+3 Hockey Games4 17,174 950 200 Concerts and Other Events 18,325 – End Stage 1,000 (max) 200 18,900 – Center Stage Maximum Number of Events (last 5 years) 162 Nonevent Days 203 Source: Starkey 2011. 1 Team members and production staff include players, coaches, trainers, media, road crew, and others not included as spectators. 2 Basketball games include Lakers Preseason, the John Wooden Classic, the Big West Tournament, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Tournament, and University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), games. 3 For the purpose of this air quality and GHG technical report, up to 250 team members are assumed for a basketball game for a conservative modeling scenario. 4 The National Hockey League (NHL) has 41 home games during the regular season. During the Stanley Cup Playoffs and Stanley Cup, up to 20 additional games could occur. In 2010, the Honda Center welcomed more than 1.3 million guests, of which over 600,000 attended the Ducks’ hockey games (Starkey 2011). Table 2 identifies a five-year snapshot of attendance, number of events, and the average number of visitors during an event based on the annual attendance. Average attendance per event was calculated based on the highest 3-year average of attendance in order to provide a conservative estimate of future annual attendance. Based on the attendance history of the Honda Center over the last five years, there are, on average, 11,264 visitors per event and currently up to 153 events per year approximately three events per week). TABLE 2 HONDA CENTER EVENT ATTENDANCE Year Visitors Events Average Visitors per Event 2006 1,600,000 154 10,390 2007 1,760,000 144 12,222 2008 1,590,000 162 9,815 2009 1,460,000 136 10,735 2010 1,300,000 120 10,833 Highest 3-year Average 153 11,264 Source: Starkey 2011. Project Description The proposed project includes an increase in the number of annual events at the Honda Center through the addition of another permanent tenant, as well as other permanent improvements described below. The 1990 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Honda Center (formerly the Arrowhead Pond) analyzed up to 162 events per year. The Honda Center currently averages up to 153 events per year with average attendance at an event of up to 11,264 people. The maximum number of events over the last five years was 162 events in 2008. The proposed project seeks to increase the maximum number of events by 60 from the previous high of 162 events for a total of 222 events per year. Currently, there are on average three ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Improvements to the Honda Center 11 Initial Study events per week at the Honda Center, and the proposed project would result in four events per week on average. The purpose of the project would be to accommodate a National Basketball Association (NBA) franchise at the Honda Center. There are 3 pre-season games, 41 regular home games during the NBA season and up to 16 postseason games. Seating capacity of a basketball game is 18,336, and the proposed project would not result in a change in the maximum seating capacity of current events (see Table In addition to an increase in the number of annual events at the Honda Center, the proposed project would involve other minor improvements to the existing facility including: • Addition of a 12,000 square foot exterior grand terrace • Construction of a 250 seat, 4,000 square foot restaurant to serve event attendees • Enlarged team store (from 1,800 square feet to 4,000 square feet) • Relocated 2,000 square foot box office (swings to the south to accommodate the enlarged team store) • Interior locker room renovation • Interior office space renovation • Interior bunker suite renovation • Interior electrical upgrades • Increase capacity of loading dock • Interior balcony suite renovation None of the proposed improvements would increase the permanent seating capacity of the existing arena; however, the improvements would result in the loss of approximately 15-20 parking spaces. The proposed project includes a zone reclassification for a portion of the project site from the Transition Zone/Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone to the Public Recreational (PR) Zone/PTMU Overlay Zone, consistent with the zoning for the remainder of the project site (see Figure Additional implementation measures include, but are not limited to, building permits to allow the improvements listed above and agreements between the City of Anaheim and OCFCD, the City of Anaheim and AAM, and AAM and the NBA. Anticipated Additional Project Approvals Other agencies whose approval may be required include, but are not limited to: Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region; South Coast Air Quality Management District; and, Orange County Flood Control District. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Improvements to the Honda Center 12 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project The Planning CenterIDC&E • Figure 4 Existing Zoning and Property Ownership 0 500 Scale (Feet) Source: City of Anaheim 2008 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Improvements to the Honda Center 14 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 15 Initial Study CITY OF ANAHEIM ENVIRONMENTAL/PROJECT INFORMATION FORM Instructions for completing the Environmental/Project Information Form: This form is to be completed by the applicant/authorized agent and complies with the California Environmental Quality Act, CEQA. The Environmental Information Form is intended to provide initial, basic environmental information in order to determine whether the project may have any significant impacts upon the environment. Additional technical studies or information may be requested from you in order for staff to complete its review and make an environmental determination on your project. 1. Project Name: Honda Center Enhancement Project 2. Project Address or Location: 2695 East Katella Avenue, Anaheim, CA 3. Assessor’s Parcel Number 25352104, 25352116, 25352117, 25360102 and 37531111 4. Project Description (describe the entire project, including all phases of the project, and any off-site supporting improvements or features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary): See previous Project Description section of this document 5. Property Owner: City of Anaheim Address: 200 S Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 Property Owner: Orange County Flood Control District Address:300 N Flower St., 6th Floor Santa Ana, CA 92703-5000 6. Authorized Agent: City of Anaheim, Executive Director, Convention, Sports and Entertainment Address: 800 West Katella Avenue Anaheim, CA 92802 7. Provide a description of the existing site’s use and structures (including square footage): The entire project site is developed with the Honda Center and associated parking facilities. The Honda Center is a 650,000 square foot arena for sports and entertainment events and can accommodate a maximum of 18,900 spectators (depending on seating configuration). The parking lots surrounding the Honda Center have 3,775 parking spaces to accommodate visitors. The topography of the site is flat. 8. Is there any demolition proposed? † No ⌧ Yes 4,200 square feet 9. Site size: 42.61 acres 10. What is the approximate square footage of impervious surfaces? (parking areas, driveways, etc.) No new impervious areas are proposed. 11. Number of floors of proposed construction: The exterior modifications to the Honda Center include the addition of a 12,000 square foot terrace above a 4,000 square foot restaurant, a 4,000 square foot team store and a 2,000 square foot box office. 12. Number of trees to be removed: 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 16 Initial Study 13. Type of trees to be removed: N/a 14. Number of on-site parking spaces provided: 3,775 15. Is the site located on filled land or a slope of 10% grade or more? No 16. Is this an Affordable Housing Project? No 17. Square feet of new construction: The exterior modifications to the Honda Center include the addition of a 12,000 square foot terrace above a 4,000 square foot restaurant, a 4,000 square foot team store and a 2,000 square foot box office. 18. Proposed Maximum Building Height: The proposed project is a two story expansion of an existing building; the maximum building height will not change. 19. Zoning: The majority of the portion of the project site owned by the City of Anaheim is within the Public Recreational (PR) Zone; a small segment of the northern parking lot is within the Transition Zone. The portion of the project site owned by the Orange County Flood Control District is within the Transition Zone. The entire site is within the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone. See Figure 4 for existing zoning and property ownership. 20. Are any federal, state or regional permits needed? (List type): Other agencies whose approval may be required include, but are not limited to: Regional Water Quality Board, Santa Ana Region; South Coast Air Quality management District; and Orange County Flood Control District. 21. Proposed start date of construction:2012 22. Proposed date of construction completion: 2012 23. Is the project located on or adjacent to, any habitat conservation area? No 24. Is the project located within the Scenic Corridor? No (defined as that area lying easterly of the intersection of the State Route 55/Costa Mesa and State Route 91/Riverside Freeways, westerly of the Orange County line, southerly of the BNSF/Metrolink right-of-way, and northerly of the present or any future south city limits of the City of Anaheim). 25. Is the project located in a Federal, State, or Local (the Colony) Historic District? No 26. Water Assessment Yes No Residential development of more than 500 dwelling units? † ⌧ Proposed shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 square feet of floor space? † ⌧ Office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet of floor space? † ⌧ Hotel or motel having more than 500 rooms? † ⌧ Industrial manufacturing or processing plant occupying more than 40 acres or having more than 650,000 square feet of floor area? † ⌧ Mixed use project that includes one or more of the above-listed projects? † ⌧ If any of the above boxes were checked “yes”, you may need to submit a water supply assessment study. Please contact the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division at (714) 765-4238 for further information. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 17 Initial Study 27. Water Quality Management Plan Yes No New development project creating 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface? † ⌧ Commercial or industrial development (building square footage and paved parking areas) greater than 100,000 square feet? † ⌧ Construction of any automotive repair shop? † ⌧ Restaurant where the land area of the project site is 5,000 square feet or more? ⌧ † Hillside development that requires grading of 5,000 square feet or more of surface area or where existing slopes exceed 25%? † ⌧ Uncovered impervious parking lot that is 5,000 square feet or more in area? † ⌧ Redevelopment projects consisting of an addition or replacement of 5,000 or more square feet of impervious area? Replacement of impervious surfaces, buildings and/or structures when 5,000 or more square feet of soil is exposed during replacement construction? ⌧ † Gasoline outlets that are 5,000 square feet or more, or a projected Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 100 or more vehicles per day? † † If “yes” was checked in any of the above boxes, please contact the City of Anaheim Building Division at [PHONE REDACTED] regarding the need to prepare a Water Quality Management Plan. I hereby certify that the statements and information furnished above and in the attached exhibits, photos, etc., are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Name of Preparer: The Planning CenterIDC&E Relationship: Consultant Address: 3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100, Santa Ana, CA 92707 Phone No.: (714) 966-9220 Preparer’s signature: Date: 9-1-11 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 18 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 20 Initial Study The County of Orange requires that the City notify the County of certain zoning actions. The following checklist will determine the need for notification. The County will be notified of any “yes” responses to questions 1 through 4: 1. Does this zoning action involve adoption or amendment to either the Anaheim General Plan, a Specific Plan, or a Reclassification? Yes 9 No IF YES, COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: 2. Does this zoning action involve land located east of the alignment of Weir Canyon Road? Yes No 9 3. Does this zoning action involve a residential project over 99 acres or 99 units in size? Yes No 9 4. Does this zoning action involve a non-residential project over 29 acres or a non-residential project with more than 99 employees? Yes 9 No EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 2) A list of “Supporting Information Sources” must be attached and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the Narrative Summary for each section. 3) Response Column Heading Definitions: a) Potentially Significant Impact is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. b) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact”. The mitigation measures must be described, along with a brief explanation of how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. c) Less Than Significant Impact applies where the project creates no significant impacts, only Less Than Significant impacts. d) No Impact applies where a project does not create an impact in that category. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one proposed the project falls outside of a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 21 Initial Study 4) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to a tiering, program EIR, Master EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (Section 15062(c)(3)(D)). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated”, describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 5) Incorporate into the checklist any references to information sources for potential impacts the General Plan, zoning ordinance). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 6) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 22 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 23 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact I. AESTHETICS: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? R R R Q b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway or local scenic expressway, scenic highway, or eligible scenic highway? R R R Q c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? R R R Q d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? R R Q R Narrative Summary: Questions a and b – No Impact. The Honda Center is located west of the Santa Ana River channel and east SR 57. The project site is fully developed with a 650,000 square foot arena and associated parking areas and does not contain any natural or undisturbed areas. The SR-57 freeway in the vicinity of the project site is not designated as a scenic highway. The proposed project would not significantly alter the visual appearance of the existing Honda Center. As a result, no further analysis of these issues in the EIR is warranted. Question c – No Impact. Only minor changes will be made to the exterior of the existing Honda Center. These changes will be consistent with the existing architecture of the building. The proposed project will not result in changes to the visual character or quality of the site or its surroundings. As a result, no further analysis of this impact in the EIR is warranted. Question d – Less Than Significant Impact. The Honda Center holds events that require a certain level of after- hour nighttime lighting. Nighttime illumination of buildings, pedestrian walkways, parking areas, park facilities, and roadways internal to the project area are currently used to highlight building design features, emphasize prominent entrances, and create a feeling of security. The proposed project would allow for additional weekly events to be held at the Honda Center; this change will not modify the current level of illumination that typically occurs for individual events. Other features of the proposed project, including the expansion of the team store, a restaurant, a relocated box office and the addition of the 12,000 sq ft outdoor terrace above these uses are not expected to result in additional illumination/glare. Since the Honda Center already generates considerable nighttime illumination, the additional events and the minor exterior modifications generated by the project do not represent a significant increase in nighttime illumination or glare. No further analysis of this impact in the EIR is warranted. II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and the forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? R R R Q b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? R R R Q ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 24 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220 timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? R R R Q d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? R R R Q e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location of nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? R R R Q Narrative Summary: Questions a through e – No Impact. Based on the 2002 California Important Farmland Map, there are no areas designated as Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Local Importance within or in the vicinity of the project site. The project site is fully developed with a 650,000 square foot arena and associated parking areas and does not contain any agricultural uses, forest land or timberland. As a result, no impacts to agricultural resources, forest land or timberland are anticipated and no further analysis of this issue in the EIR is warranted. III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Q R R R b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Q R R R c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Q R R R d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Q R R R e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? R R Q R Narrative Summary: Questions a through d – Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project would increase the number of events held at the Honda Center and generate additional vehicle trips. The project would also require minor construction activities for the expansion of the store and addition of the outdoor terrace. These activities have the potential to generate short-term construction-related and long-term air emissions that could affect local and regional air quality. An air quality analysis will be prepared as part of the EIR to determine the project’s potential air quality impacts and appropriate mitigation measures will be developed. Question e – Less Than Significant Impact. No heavy equipment will be required to construct the proposed improvements. However, an occasional "whiff" of diesel exhaust from passing equipment and trucks accessing the site from public roadways may result. Such brief exhaust odors are an adverse, but not significant, air quality impact. Odors from food preparation in the restaurant would be controlled by adherence to SCAQMD Rule 402. In addition, the project site is surrounded by commercial/retail uses, which are not considered sensitive to odors Therefore, odor impacts would be less than significant and no further analysis of this issue in the EIR is warranted. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 25 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? R R R Q b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? R R R Q c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? R R R Q d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? R R R Q e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? R R R Q f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? R R R Q Narrative Summary: Questions a through d – No Impact. The project site is fully developed with a 650,000 square foot arena and associated parking areas and does not contain any natural resources on-site. Based on the City of Anaheim General Plan Green Element, no locally designated species or natural communities, wetland habitats, or wildlife corridors are known to exist within The Platinum Triangle, where the Honda Center is located. The project site is not part of the Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) and would not impact any resources within the NCCP area. The proposed changes to Honda Center would not result in any impacts to biological resources and no further analysis of this issue in the EIR is warranted. Question e – No Impact. The project site is not located in an area where trees are subject to a preservation ordinance. The proposed project would not increase the total area to be developed by the Honda Center. No further analysis of this issue in the EIR is warranted. Question f – No Impact. The project site is not part of any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. No further analysis in the EIR is warranted. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and/or identified on the Qualified Historic Structures list of the Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan (July 20, 1999)? R R R Q b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines? R R R Q ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 26 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature? R R R Q d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? R R R Q Narrative Summary: Question a through d – No Impact. The project site is fully developed with a 650,000 square foot arena and associated parking areas and does not contain any cultural resources on-site. The Honda Center was built in 1991 and is not considered historic. Also, there are no known prehistoric/historic archaeological sites located within the project area. No grading to an increased depth will be required as part of project implementation and the potential for impacting any subsurface cultural resources is considered remote. No further assessment of this issue in the EIR is warranted. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. R R R Q ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? R R Q R iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? R R Q R iv) Landslides? R R R Q b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? R R Q R c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? R R Q R d) Be located on expansive soil, as described by Section 1802.3.2 of the California Building Code (2007), creating substantial risks to life or property? R R Q R e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? R R R Q ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 27 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact Question a – No Impact. The project site does not lie on any active or potentially active earthquake faults (City of Anaheim 2004). Although no Alquist-Priolo fault zones run though the City of Anaheim, two major fault zones are in close proximity to the City boundaries. The Newport-Inglewood fault zone runs past the City on the southwest, and the Whittier-Elsinore fault zone runs past the City on the northeast. Potentially active fault zones, including the Norwalk, El Moderno, and Peralta Hills fault zones, also run in close proximity to the City. The closest fault to the project site is the El Moderno Fault. Although the exact location of this fault is not known, it is approximately three to five miles northeast of the proposed project site (City of Anaheim 2004). No active or potentially active faults run through the proposed project site and no impacts would occur. No further analysis in the EIR is warranted. Question a (ii, iii) – Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is in a seismically active area and the proposed project may be subject to seismic ground shaking. Although there are no Alquist-Priolo fault zones running through the City of Anaheim, there are a number of faults surrounding the City that could cause seismic ground shaking on the project site (City of Anaheim 2004). The City of Anaheim requires that all new construction and existing buildings meet building standards for earthquake safety through the provisions of Section 15.03, Building Standard Codes, and Section 15.07, Earthquake Hazard Reduction in Existing Buildings, of the Anaheim municipal code. Section 15.07 of the municipal code specifically requires that buildings not meeting earthquake safety requirements must either be demolished or altered in order to meet the standards (City of Anaheim Municipal Code Section 15.07.050.010). To ensure the proposed project meets building requirements, plans shall demonstrate compliance with the requirements of State of California Special Publication 117A or latest version (Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards). Specifically, the design of the proposed project will be based on a soils investigation and will include a foundation system to account for the potential effects of soil liquefaction to reduce the impacts of strong seismic groundshaking. No further analysis in the EIR is warranted. Question a (iv) – No Impact. The project area is already developed and does not contain any major slopes on or in the immediate vicinity. No impacts from landslides are anticipated. No further analysis in the EIR is warranted. Question b – Less Than Significant Impact. The Honda Center property is developed and covered with paved surfaces. Additionally, only minimal exterior additions to the Honda Center will be made. Based on these factors, no further grading or excavation activities are anticipated. The potential for loss of topsoil and/or erosion is therefore less than significant. No further evaluation in the EIR is warranted. Question c – Less Than Significant Impact. The Honda Center property is developed and covered with paved surfaces. The project site is not on an unstable geologic unit or soil base. The site is underlain with Holocene alluvium, deposited between 1,000 and 10,000 years ago (City of Anaheim 2004). The flat terrain, previous development, and compacting of the project site reduces the potential for landslides, lateral spreading, or collapse to occur. Due to these factors, the site is not susceptible to liquefaction. Subsidence would occur when large amounts of groundwater pumping or mineral extraction would cause a lowering of elevation. There are no oil or gas wells or water wells within the vicinity of the project site, and risk of subsidence is low (City of Anaheim 2004). Therefore, no significant geologic impacts are anticipated. No further evaluation in the EIR is warranted. . Question d – Less Than Significant Impact. According to the original Anaheim Arena EIR, the near-surface soils within The Honda Center consist of alluvium deposits of moderately compact, fine and fine-to-medium sand with occasional traces of gravel and infrequent seams of silt. As a result, the expansion potential for these soils is considered low. In addition, the design of the project would be in conformance with the California Building Code (CBC) and the Anaheim Municipal Code, Title 17 Land Development Resources. Application of the existing regulations identified in the Municipal Code and CBC and grading regulations would minimize the risk associated with any development proposed within areas containing expansive soils. This issue will not be analyzed further in the EIR. Question e – No Impact. The proposed project would not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative sewer disposal systems. The project would incorporate the use of City sewer lines and sewer disposal systems. Therefore, no impact would result from project implementation and no further analysis of this issue in the EIR is warranted. VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: Would the project a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Q R R R ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 28 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Q R R R Questions a and b – Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project would increase the number of events held at the Honda Center and generate additional vehicle trips. The project would also require minor construction activities for the expansion of the store and addition of the outdoor terrace. These activities have the potential to generate short-term construction-related and long-term greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that could affect local and regional air quality. An air quality analysis will be prepared as part of the EIR to determine the project’s potential GHG impacts and appropriate mitigation measures will be developed. VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? R R Q R b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? R R Q R c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter-mile of an existing or proposed school? R R Q R d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? R R Q R e) For a project located within an airport land use plan (Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center or Fullerton Municipal Airport), would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? R R R Q f) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, heliport, or helistop, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? R R Q R g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? R R Q R h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? R R R Q i) Include a new or retrofitted stormwater treatment control Best Management Practice (BMP), e.g., water quality treatment basin, constructed treatment wetlands, etc.), the operation of which could result in significant environmental effects increased vectors and noxious odors)? R R R Q ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 29 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact Narrative Summary: Question a – Less Than Significant Impact. Various hazardous materials are currently used and stored by the Honda Center. Such materials include cleaning chemicals, fuels, and other hydrocarbon products, solvents, etc, used during operations of the facilities and for maintenance purposes. Additional events would be expected to result in an small increase in use of these products. However, businesses are required to obtain permits and maintain records regarding the storage, use and disposal of hazardous material. Adhering to the existing permitting process would ensure that less than significant hazard to the public or the environment occur as result of project implementation. No further assessment of this issue in the EIR is warranted. Question b and d – Less Than Significant Impact. Database records searches were conducted as part of the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan FEIR No. 321 in 1999 and the FSEIR No. 332 in 2005 to identify properties that could potentially pose a variety of environmental hazards within the boundaries of The Platinum Triangle. The Honda Center property was not listed as a hazardous materials site. Action status on many of the identified properties were “closed” and required no further remediation and some were undergoing environmental remediation In addition, existing Federal and State regulations that govern hazardous material and waste management help to minimize the release of hazardous materials into the environment. As a result, implementation of the Honda Center improvements is not expected to result in the release of hazardous materials into the environment and no further discussion in the EIR is warranted. Question c – Less Than Significant Impact. There are no schools located within one-quarter mile of the Honda Center. Additionally, use or handling of hazardous materials or substances within the project site would comply with appropriate state and federal rules and regulations through permitting process. No unauthorized use of hazardous materials would be allowed. The project site is occupied by a 650,000 square foot arena and the proposed improvements would not result in substantial adverse impact to school population due to increased amount of hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste. No additional analysis in the EIR is warranted. Question e – No Impact. The project area is not within the adopted Airport Land Use Plan for the Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center or Fullerton Municipal Airport. Therefore, this issue will not be addressed further in the EIR. Question f – Less Than Significant Impact. The 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. There are two heliports in the project vicinity: the North Net Training Facility and UC Irvine Medical Center. The Anaheim Police Department (APD) also uses the parking lot at the Angel Stadium of Anaheim for helicopter training exercises. The primary risks associated with heliports and training areas are take-offs and landings. The North Net Training Center is approximately 1.5 miles south of the project site. The flight path for this facility is along the Santa Ana River channel; flights landing and taking-off head directly for the channel and continue north or south. The UC Irvine Medical Center heliport is approximately three miles south of the project site, across I-5. The flight pattern from this facility runs along the Santa Ana River channel and the project area is not within the overflight contours for the facility. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose future residents to hazards associated with operation of this heliport. The parking lot of Angel Stadium of Anaheim is used by the APD for helicopter training exercises. The general flight path is over the Santa Ana riverbed from the south side of the parking lot. The APD has used the western portion of the parking lot in the past but has discontinued this practice. The use of the stadium parking lot for training exercises does not pose a safety concern given the flight patterns currently used by the APD. The Honda Center is an existing structure; the minor improvements to the Honda Center proposed by the applicant would not present a risk greater than any already present. Additionally, as no heliports are located immediately adjacent to the Honda Center, risks associated with take-off and landing are less than significant. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose individuals working or attending events at the Honda Center to heliport safety hazards. No further discussion of this subject in the EIR is warranted. Question g – Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Anaheim has an emergency preparedness plan that complies with State law and interfaces with other cities and counties within Southern California. The plan outlines the operations that shall be taken in the event of a disaster. It also allows for coordination with other agencies in the event that Anaheim is affected by a disaster elsewhere. The plan addresses a warning system, emergency broadcast system (EBS), Emergency Operations Center (EOC), and shelter system. The plan provides a foundation to conduct operations and coordinate the management of critical resources during emergencies. It also provides the framework for which nongovernmental agencies and organizations that have resources needed to meet emergency requirements are integrated into the program. The City of Anaheim also participates in the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS). The Governor’s Office of Emergency Services administers SEMS and coordinates multi-agency responses to disasters. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 30 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact SEMS is required by the California Government Code and was developed to provide a “common language” for emergency response personnel to request resources and equipment from other agencies. In addition to resource allocation, SEMS was established to minimize the duplication of efforts during emergency response by defining common tactics and identifying a clear chain of command. The SEMS program is developed to respond to incidents as they occur, and does not provide long-term recovery guidelines. The proposed project would not alter the development patterns of the project area. Only minimal additions to the existing Honda Center structure will be made, and no additional parking spaces will be added. Therefore, while the additional events held will generate trips on additional days, these trips will be similar in character to those currently generated by the Honda Center. Consequently, no changes must be made to adopted emergency plans in order to accommodate the project; The project will not interfere with adopted emergency plans or escape routes and no further analysis in the EIR is necessary. Question h – No Impact. The project area is developed with commercial uses and no undeveloped wildland areas are adjacent to the project site. The proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. No further analysis in the EIR is necessary. Question i – No Impact. The project site is already developed with a 650,000 square foot arena and associated parking areas. Thus, the project would not increase the amount of impervious surface and the runoff rates are expected to remain approximately the same compared to the existing conditions. The proposed project would not increase the runoff volume from the project site and no upgrades to existing drainage facilities would be required. As such, the impacts related to increased vectors and noxious odors are not considered significant and no further analysis would be provided in the EIR. IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? R R Q R b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? R R Q R c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-site or off-site? R R R Q d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-site or off-site? R R R Q e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of pollutant runoff? R R R Q f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? R R R Q g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? R R R Q h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? R R R Q i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? R R R Q j) Inundation by seiche or mudflow? R R R Q ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 31 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact k) Substantially degrade water quality by contributing pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling, or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? R R R Q l) Substantially degrade water quality by discharge which affects the beneficial uses swimming, fishing, etc.) of the receiving waters? R R R Q m) Potentially impact stormwater runoff from construction activities? R R Q R n) Potentially impact stormwater from post construction activities? R R Q R o) Create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm? R R R Q p) Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? R R Q R Narrative Summary: Question a, m, and n – Less Than Significant Impact. Since the project area is already developed and entirely covered with paved surfaces, the proposed project would not increase the area of impervious surfaces. Although during construction activities there may be a potential for surface water runoff to carry sediment and small quantities of pollutants into the stormwater system, the State General Construction Permit would ensure that a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan is prepared and implemented at sites greater than one acre and the City’s Grading Ordinance requires an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan as part of that permit. A Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) is prepared in accordance with the City’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements and the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan. The in conjunction with the WQMP, will describe the structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be implemented during construction (short-term) within the project area as well as BMPs for long-term operation of the Honda Center. The proposed project would be required to comply with current water quality regulations associated with the City of Anaheim’s Local Implementation Plan, the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan and the County area-wide MS4 Storm Water Runoff Permit. Therefore, the potential for the proposed project to violate and water quality standards or waste discharge regulations is less than significant and no further analysis of this issue in the EIR is warranted. Question b – Less Than Significant Impact. The Honda Center is developed and completely paved. Project implementation would not require grading or paving beyond what is already in existence. Therefore, the proposed project will not cause any additional interference with ground water recharge. Additionally, the project would not install any groundwater wells, and would not otherwise directly withdraw any groundwater. The City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department currently meets the water needs of the Honda Center and it is unlikely that the additional events and minor facility improvements associated with this project would require the Honda Center to seek additional sources of water. Only one additional event per week is proposed and peak water demand would not exceed current conditions. Therefore, the potential for the proposed project to substantially deplete the groundwater table is less than significant. No further analysis of this issue is needed. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 32 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact Questions c, d and o – No Impact. The project site is already developed with a 650,000 square foot arena and associated parking areas. Thus, the project would not increase the amount of impervious surface and the runoff rates are expected to remain approximately the same compared to the existing conditions. The proposed project would not increase the runoff volume from the project site and no upgrades to existing drainage facilities would be required. As such, the impacts are not considered significant and no further analysis would be provided in the EIR. Questions e and f- No Impact. The Honda Center consists of a 650,000 square foot arena and associated parking areas. As discussed above, the project would not increase the amount of impervious surface and the runoff rates are expected to remain approximately the same compared to the existing conditions. Therefore, the additional events that would be held at the Honda Center and the minor improvements would not substantially add to the runoff already generated by the Honda Center, nor would they substantially degrade water quality. Impact to runoff volume and water quality would not be significant. No further discussion of this issue in the EIR is warranted. Questions g though i – No Impact. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM), the project site is located in the X Zone that is protected by levees (FIRM Map No. 06059C0142J). The levees located to the east of the project site along the Santa Ana River are designed to contain the 1% chance flood (100-year flood). While overtopping of the levee or failure of the levee is possible, the proposed project would not result in substantial modifications to the existing Honda Center or its parking lots and, thus, would not result in greater flooding impacts than existing conditions. No further analysis in the EIR is warranted. Question j – No Impact. The project site is developed with an arena and parking lots and exhibits flat topography. Therefore, the project site would not be subject to mudflow. No water bodies are located within the project area that could produce a seiche during a seismic event. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated and no further assessment of this issue is warranted in the EIR. Questions k and l – No Impact. The project involves one additional weekly event at the Honda Center, as well as some minor improvements to the existing structure, including: the addition of a terrace, the expansion of the team store, and the addition of a restaurant to serve patrons of the Honda Center. These uses typically do not include activities such as material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, or hazardous materials handling; and limited storage, delivery area, loading docks, or other outdoor work areas. Construction-related runoff may affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters. However, the project would be required to comply with current water quality regulations associated with the City of Anaheim’s Local Implementation Plan, the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan, and the County-wide MS4 Storm Water Runoff Permit. The project site is currently developed and implementation of the proposed project would not be greater than the current water quality conditions. No further analysis is necessary in the EIR. Question p – Less Than Significant Impact. The Honda Center property is developed and covered with paved surfaces. Additionally, only minimal exterior additions to the Honda Center will be made. Based on these factors, no further grading or excavation activities are anticipated. The potential for loss of topsoil and/or erosion is therefore less than significant. No further evaluation in the EIR is warranted. X. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project a) Physically divide an established community? R R R Q b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of any agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? R R Q R c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? R R R Q ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 33 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact Narrative Summary: Question a – No Impact. The proposed project would result in one additional weekly event at the Honda Center, as well as minor modifications to the existing building. No physical division of an established community would result from the proposed project. No further assessment of this issue is warranted in the EIR. Question b – Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will not result in changes to any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of any agency with jurisdiction of the project, with the exception of the proposed zone reclassification from the Transition Zone to the Public Recreational (PR) Zone for a portion of the project site. This reclassification would not remove the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone from the properties. The PTMU Overlay Zone is consistent with the properties’ Mixed Use General Plan Land Use Designation. The proposed Public Recreation (PR) Zone is consistent with the balance of the Honda Center properties. No further assessment of this issue is warranted in the EIR. Question c – No Impact. The project area is not part of a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Therefore, the project will not conflict with any conservation plans and no further analysis in the EIR is needed. XI. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? R R R Q b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use? R R R Q Narrative Summary: Questions a and b – No Impact. The project area does not contain any mineral resources. The project area is not identified in the City of Anaheim General Plan (Figure G-4, Mineral Resource Map) as Regionally Significant Aggregate Resource Area. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in the loss of the availability of mineral resources that would be of regional value. Therefore, no additional discussion of this issue in the EIR is necessary. XII. NOISE: Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Q R R R b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Q R R R c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Q R R R d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Q R R R e) For a project located within an airport land use plan (Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center or Fullerton Municipal Airport), would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? R R R Q f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, heliport or helistop, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? R R Q R ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 34 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact Narrative Summary: Questions a through d – Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project would increase the number of events held at the Honda Center and generate additional vehicle trips. The project would also require minor construction activities for the expansion of the store and addition of the outdoor terrace. These activities have the potential generate additional noise impacts. Potential noise impacts of the proposed project will be discussed in the EIR. Question e – No Impact. The project is not located within an airport land use plan or within the vicinity of a private airstrip. No further discussion warranted in the EIR. Question f – Less Than Significant Impact. The Honda Center site is within the vicinity of two heliports: the UCI Medical Center and the North Net Fire Training Center. The Anaheim Police Department also uses the parking lot at Angel Stadium of Anaheim for helicopter training exercises. However, the Honda Center is already in operation and the minor changes associated with the project would not expose a significant amount of additional persons to excessive noise levels due to these helicopter operations. No further discussion warranted in the EIR. XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through the extension of roads or other infrastructure)? R R Q R b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? R R R Q c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? R R R Q Narrative Summary: Question a – Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project does not include development of new housing. The proposed restaurant, expanded team store and relocated box office are not anticipated to induce substantial population growth in the area. No further discussion of this issue in the EIR is warranted. Questions b and c – No Impact. The proposed project will involve minor modifications to the existing Honda Center and additional events. Therefore, no people or housing units will be displaced. No further analysis of this issue is needed. XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? R R Q R b) Police protection? R R Q R c) Schools? R R R Q d) Parks? R R R Q e) Other public facilities? R R R Q ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 35 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact Narrative Summary: Questions a and b – Less Than Significant Impact. The additional events to be held at the center are similar to those already occurring at the facility. As a result, police and fire protection services are already being provided to the Honda Center. The addition of one additional event per week (on average) would not require additional police and fire facilities for staffing these events. Further analysis of this issue in the EIR is not necessary. Questions c through e – No Impact. The modifications to the Honda Center do not include housing units and thus will not generate permanent residents requiring the use of school or park services. Further analysis of this issue in the EIR is not necessary. XV. RECREATION: Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? R R R Q b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? R R R Q Narrative Summary: Questions a and b – No Impact. The proposed project will not increase the seating capacity of the Honda Center and average event attendance per event is not expected to increase substantially. Additionally, the proposed project will not generate permanent residents to the City of Anaheim. Therefore, the proposed project will not increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks, nor will it include or require the construction/expansion of recreational facilities. No further discussion of this issue is necessary. XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? Q R R R b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Q R R R c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or change in location that results in substantial safety risks? R R R Q d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses? Q R R R e) Result in inadequate emergency access? R R Q R f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance of such facilities? R R R Q ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 36 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact Narrative Summary: Questions a, b and d – Potentially Significant Impact. Implementation of the project would cause an increase in the number of vehicle trips during events on roads and at intersections. Pedestrian activity would increase during events due to the location of several smaller remote parking lots on adjacent parcels and the proximity of the Amtrak/Metrolink station. A traffic and circulation study will be prepared for the EIR to determine the project’s potential traffic and circulation impacts, including compliance with level of service standards established for designated roads and highways in the vicinity of the project. Mitigation measures will be identified, as necessary. Question c – No Impact. 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 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. 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. 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. 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. No further analysis in the EIR is warranted. Question e – Less Than Significant Impact. Although the proposed project would increase the number of events at the Honda Center, all vehicle access will be maintained in accordance with the requirements of the City Engineer to reduce any emergency access impacts at the Honda Center. The City currently implements a number of traffic management procedures for all events at the Honda Center. Therefore, less than significant impact would result from the project implementation and no further evaluation in the EIR is necessary. Question f – No Impact. The Honda Center is located within the Platinum Triangle. The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan promotes alternative forms of transportation by integrating design standards for bus stops, enhanced pedestrian walkways, and the regional bike system. In addition, the proposed Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) is located less than a half mile from the Honda Center, providing bus and train service to the project area when completed. The proposed project will continue to promote alternative mode of transportation and comply with the design standards of The Platinum Triangle. No additional analysis in the EIR is necessary XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? R R Q R b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities (including sewer (wastewater) collection facilities) or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Q R R R c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? R R Q R d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project (including large scale developments as defined by Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and described in Question No. 26 of the Environmental/ Project Information Form) from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Q R R R ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 37 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? Q R R R f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? R R Q R g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? R R Q R h) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to electricity? R R Q R i) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to natural gas? R R Q R j) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to telephone service? R R Q R k) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to television service/reception? R R Q R Narrative Summary: Questions a, c, h and i – Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project involves the addition of one event per week (on average) at the Honda Center. Peak stormwater generation and electrical and natural gas consumption would not be greater than existing conditions. The project would not require the implementation of new electrical, natural gas and/or stormwater drainage facilities that would connect to existing utility systems provided by the City of Anaheim and other agencies. The project will only include the relocation of such utilities. No additional analysis in the EIR is necessary. Questions b, d and e – Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project will increase annual water consumption and wastewater generation as compared to existing conditions, although peak conditions would not change. Based on coordination with utility/service providers, the EIR will evaluate impacts to utility/service systems, the EIR will determine the existing conditions and impacts of the project on utility/service systems, and assess environmental impacts. The EIR will also evaluate consistency of the project with applicable statutes and regulations related to public services and utilities and potential physical impacts associated with implementation of utility systems. Questions f and g – Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will increase solid waste generation. Solid waste collected within the City of Anaheim is processed through a material recovery facility. Any residue from processing is taken to the Olinda Alpha Landfill located in North Orange county. The landfill is scheduled to close in December, 2021; however, the County of Orange has short and long term plans to assure the availability of waste disposal locations. The project will comply with all Federal, State and/or local statues or regulations. No additional analysis in the EIR is necessary. Question j – Less Than Significant Impact. The Honda Center is already being served by telephone service, and the proposed project will not increase the demand on the telephone service system. Further discussion of this issue in the EIR is not warranted. Question k – Less Than Significant Impact. Time-Warner provides cable television service to the City of Anaheim and the existing Honda Center. No additional impacts are anticipated as a result of project implementation. Further discussion of this issue in the EIR is not warranted. XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? R R R Q ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 38 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Q R R R c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Q R R R Narrative Summary: Question A – No Impact. Because the project site is already developed, the additional events and building modifications to the Honda Center associated with the project would not impact biological and cultural resources as compared to current uses. No further discussion on this issue is warranted. Questions B – Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed above, development of the proposed project would result in potentially significant impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, transportation, and utilities. The project has the potential to result in cumulative impacts and affect the human environment. Because of this potential for significant adverse effects, an EIR will be prepared for the project. Question C – Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed above, development of the proposed project would result in potentially significant impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, transportation, and utilities. The project has the potential to result in cumulative impacts and affect the human environment. Because of this potential for significant adverse effects, an EIR will be prepared for the project. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 39 Initial Study Fish and Game Determination (Per Section 21089(b) of the Public Resources Code, all project applicants and public agencies subject to the California Environmental Quality Act shall pay a Fish and Game filing fee for each project that would adversely affect wildlife resources.)* Based on the responses contained in this Environmental Checklist, there is no evidence that the proposed project has a potential for a change that would adversely affect wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Has the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CCR 753.5 been rebutted by substantial evidence? X Yes (Certificate of Fee Exemption) No (Pay fee) *Note: Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)(2)(A) states that projects that are Categorically Exempt from CEQA are also exempt from filing fee. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Honda Center Enhancement Project 40 Initial Study REFERENCES CITED Anaheim, City of. 2004, May (amended). City of Anaheim General Plan. Anaheim, City of. 2004, May (amended). Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Anaheim, City of. 2004, August (amended). The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. California Department of Conservation. 2002 California Important Farmland Map. The Planning Center. 2004, May. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330. The Planning Center. 2005, May. The Platinum Triangle Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, No. 332. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices Honda Center Enhancement Project Draft EIR City of Anaheim Appendix B NOP Responses ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices Honda Center Enhancement Project Draft EIR City of Anaheim Appendix C Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Technical Study ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS TECHNICAL STUDY FOR: HONDA CENTER prepared for: CITY OF ANAHEIM Contact: Susan Kim, AICP Senior Planner prepared by: THE PLANNING CENTERIDC&E Contact: Nicole Vermilion Senior Planner NOVEMBER 2011 ---PAGE BREAK--- AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS TECHNICAL STUDY FOR: HONDA CENTER prepared for: CITY OF ANAHEIM 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 [PHONE REDACTED] Contact: Susan Kim, AICP Senior Planner prepared by: THE PLANNING CENTERIDC&E 1580 Metro Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Tel: [PHONE REDACTED] • Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] E-mail: [EMAIL REDACTED] Website: www.planningcenter.com Contact: Nicole Vermilion Senior Planner COA-56.0E NOVEMBER 2011 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table of Contents Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page i Section Page 1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 1 1.1 Project Location and Setting 1 1.2 Executive Summary 2 2. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 3 2.1 South Coast Air Basin 3 2.2 Air Pollutants of Concern 4 3. REGULATORY SETTING 13 3.1 Regulatory Framework 13 3.2 Sensitive Receptors 21 3.3 Baseline Air Quality 21 4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 23 4.1 Methodology 23 4.2 Thresholds of 24 4.3 Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Inventory 27 4.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory 30 5. MITIGATION MEASURES 34 5.1 Existing Regulations 34 5.2 Mitigation Measures 34 5.3 Level of Significance After Mitigation 35 6. REFERENCES 36 APPENDICES A. Summary of GHG and Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions B. Transportation Emissions C. Natural Gas and Purchased Energy Emissions D. Water and Wastewater Emissions E. Waste Disposal Emissions F. SCAQMD Local Rules and Regulations ---PAGE BREAK--- Table of Contents Page ii • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 List of Tables Table Page Table 1 Honda Center Events and Event Population 1 Table 2 Honda Center Event Attendance 2 Table 3 Greenhouse Gases and Their Relative Global Warming Potential Compared to CO2 8 Table 4 Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants 13 Table 5 Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin 16 Table 6 Scoping Plan Greenhouse Gas Reduction Measures and Reductions toward 2020 Target 19 Table 7 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Summary 22 Table 8 Honda Center Operational Characteristics 23 Table 9 Service Population of Honda Center 24 Table 10 SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 25 Table 11 Maximum Daily Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions on an Event Day 27 Table 12 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory 30 Table 13 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory with Scoping Plan Reductions 31 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1. Introduction and Summary Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 1 1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING Honda Center is located at 2695 East Katella Avenue in the City of Anaheim, east of State Route 57 (SR-57) freeway and west of the Santa Ana River. It is bound on the north by Cerritos Avenue and to the south by Katella Avenue. Honda Center is within a half mile northeast of the Angel Stadium of Anaheim and the Anaheim Metrolink Station. Operational Characteristics The 650,000-square-foot Honda Center opened on June 19, 1993, after two years of construction. It can accommodate a maximum of 18,900 spectators depending on seating configuration, and the parking lots surrounding Honda Center have 4,500 parking spaces to accommodate visitors. Honda Center facilities are in operation on event days, although some functions ticket sales) are open on nonevent days. Maximum capacities for hockey, basketball, and other events concerts, circus, etc.) are shown in Table 1. Table 1 Honda Center Events and Event Population Event Type Seating Capacity Staff/ Employees Team Members/ Production1 Basketball Games2 18,336 950 200+3 Hockey Games4 17,174 950 200 Concerts and Other Events 18,325 – End Stage 1,000 (max) 200 18,900 – Center Stage Maximum Events Permitted 162 Nonevent Days 200 Source: Starkey 2011. 1 Team members and production staff include players, coaches, trainers, media, road crew, and others not included as spectators. 2 Basketball games include Lakers Preseason, the John Wooden Classic, the Big West Tournament, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Tournament, and University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), games. 3 For the purpose of this air quality and GHG technical report, up to 250 team members are assumed for a basketball game for a conservative modeling scenario. 4 The National Hockey League (NHL) has 41 home games during the regular season. During the Stanley Cup Playoffs and Stanley Cup, up to 20 additional games could occur. In 2010, Honda Center welcomed more than 1.3 million guests, of which over 600,000 attended the Ducks’ hockey games (Starkey 2011). Table 2 identifies a five-year snapshot of attendance, number of events, and the average number of visitors during an event based on the annual attendance. Average attendance per event was calculated based on the highest 3-year average of attendance in order to provide a conservative estimate of future annual attendance. Based on the attendance history of Honda Center over the last five years, there are, on average, 11,264 visitors per event and currently up to 153 events per year approximately three events per week). ---PAGE BREAK--- 1. Introduction and Summary Page 2 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Table 2 Honda Center Event Attendance Year Visitors Events Average Visitors per Event 2006 1,600,000 154 10,390 2007 1,760,000 144 12,222 2008 1,590,000 162 9,815 2009 1,460,000 136 10,735 2010 1,300,000 120 10,833 Highest 3-year Average 153 11,264 Source: Starkey 2011. 1.2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Technical Study has been prepared to analyze potential impacts from an increase in the number of permitted annual events at Honda Center. The 1990 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Honda Center (formerly the Arrowhead Pond) capped the number of annual events at 162 per year. Honda Center averages up to 153 events per year with average attendance at an event of up to 11,264 people. The proposed project seeks to increase the maximum number of events by 60 from the permitted 162 events for a total of 222 events per year. Currently, there are on average three events per week at Honda Center, and the proposed project would result in four events per week on average. The purpose of the project would be to accommodate a second sports franchise at Honda Center. If a second professional sports franchise is a National Basketball Association (NBA) franchise, there are 44 regular games during the NBA season and up to 16 postseason games. Seating capacity of a basketball game is 18,336, and the proposed project would not result in a change in the maximum seating capacity of current events (see Table Furthermore, no construction activities would be necessary in order to accommodate an increase of events at Honda Center. Criteria air pollutant emissions generated by events at Honda Center include emissions from vehicle trips and natural gas used for heating the building interior. Because the proposed project would not increase the capacity of the stadium, the project would not generate an increase in the maximum daily emissions generated by the facility. Consequently, no impacts would occur. Annual GHG emissions generated by Honda Center include vehicle trips and natural gas used for heating and cooling as well as indirect emissions from offsite energy use, waste disposal, and water use. Unlike criteria air pollutants, GHG emissions are evaluated on an annual basis. Therefore, an increase in the number of events per year would result in an increase in annual GHG emissions. As analyzed in this technical study, increasing the number of events at Honda Center would result in a substantial increase in GHG emissions. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 3 2. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 2.1 SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN The project site lies within the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB), which includes all of Orange County and the nondesert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. The SoCAB is in a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills and is bounded by the Pacific Ocean in the southwest quadrant, with high mountains forming the remainder of the perimeter. The general region lies in the semipermanent high-pressure zone of the eastern Pacific. As a result, the climate is mild, tempered by cool sea breezes. This usually mild weather pattern is interrupted infrequently by periods of extremely hot weather, winter storms, and Santa Ana winds. (SCAQMD 2005). 2.1.1 Temperature and Precipitation The annual average temperature varies little throughout the SoCAB, ranging from the low to middle 60s, measured in degrees Fahrenheit With a more pronounced oceanic influence, coastal areas show less variability in annual minimum and maximum temperatures than inland areas. The climatological station nearest to the project site is the Santa Ana Station Monitoring Station (ID 049087). The average low is reported at 43.0°F in January while the average high is 84.7°F in August (WRCC 2011). In contrast to a very steady pattern of temperature, rainfall is seasonally and annually highly variable. Almost all rain falls from November through April. Summer rainfall is normally restricted to widely scattered thundershowers near the coast, with heavier shower activity in the east and over the mountains. Rainfall averages 13.79 inches per year in the project area (WRCC 2011). 2.1.2 Humidity Although the SoCAB has a semiarid climate, the air near the earth’s surface is typically moist because of the presence of a shallow marine layer. Except for infrequent periods when dry, continental air is brought into the SoCAB by offshore winds, the “ocean effect” is dominant. Periods of heavy fog, especially along the coast, are frequent. Low clouds, often referred to as high fog, are a characteristic climatic feature. Annual average humidity is 70 percent at the coast and 57 percent in the eastern portions of the SoCAB (SCAQMD 2005). 2.1.3 Wind Wind patterns across the south coastal region are characterized by westerly or southwesterly onshore winds during the day and by easterly or northeasterly breezes at night. Wind speed is somewhat greater during the dry summer months than during the rainy winter season. Between periods of wind, periods of air stagnation may occur, both in the morning and evening hours. Air stagnation is one of the critical determinants of air quality conditions on any given day. During the winter and fall months, surface high-pressure systems over the SoCAB, combined with other meteorological conditions, can result in very strong, downslope Santa Ana winds. These winds normally continue a few days before predominant meteorological conditions are reestablished. The mountain ranges to the east affect the transport and diffusion of pollutants by inhibiting their eastward transport. Air quality in the SoCAB generally ranges from fair to poor and is similar to air quality in most of coastal southern California. The entire region experiences heavy concentrations of air pollutants during prolonged periods of stable atmospheric conditions (SCAQMD 2005). ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Page 4 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 2.1.4 Inversions In conjunction with the two characteristic wind patterns that affect the rate and orientation of horizontal pollu- tant transport, there are two similarly distinct types of temperature inversions that control the vertical depth through which pollutants are mixed. These inversions are the marine/subsidence inversion and the radiation inversion. The height of the base of the inversion at any given time is known as the “mixing height.” The combination of winds and inversions are critical determinants in leading to the highly degraded air quality in summer and the generally good air quality in the winter in the project area (SCAQMD 2005). 2.2 AIR POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN 2.2.1 Criteria Air Pollutants The air pollutants emitted into the ambient air by stationary and mobile sources are regulated by federal and state law. Air pollutants are categorized as primary or secondary pollutants. Primary air pollutants are those that are emitted directly from sources. Carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse inhalable particulate matter (PM10), fine inhalable particulate matter (PM2.5), and lead (Pb) are primary air pollutants. Of these, CO, SO2, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 are “criteria air pollutants,” which means that ambient air quality standards (AAQS) have been established for them. VOC and NOx are criteria pollutant precursors that form secondary criteria pollutants through chemical and photochemical reactions in the atmosphere. Ozone (O3) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) are the principal secondary pollutants. A description of each of the primary and secondary criteria air pollutants and their known health effects is presented below. Other pollutants, such as carbon dioxide (CO2), a natural by-product of animal respiration that is also produced in the combustion process, have been linked to phenomena such as global climate change. These emissions are unregulated and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has not yet adopted thresholds for them applicable to residential and commercial development projects. GHG emissions that affect global climate change, including CO2, methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases, are discussed in Section 2.2.3 of this technical study. Carbon Monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless, toxic gas produced by incomplete combustion of carbon substances, such as gasoline or diesel fuel. CO is a primary criteria air pollutant. CO concentrations tend to be the highest during winter mornings with little to no wind, when surface-based inversions trap the pollutant at ground levels. Because CO is emitted directly from internal combustion, engines and motor vehicles operating at slow speeds are the primary source of CO in the SoCAB. The highest ambient CO concentrations are generally found near traffic-congested corridors and intersections. The primary adverse health effect associated with CO is interference with normal oxygen transfer to the blood, which may result in tissue oxygen deprivation (SCAQMD 2005). The SoCAB is designated under the California and National AAQS as being in attainment of CO criteria levels. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) are compounds composed primarily of atoms of hydrogen and carbon. Internal combustion associated with motor vehicle usage is the major source of hydrocarbons. Other sources of VOCs include evaporative emissions associated with the use of paints and solvents, the application of asphalt paving, and the use of household consumer products such as aerosols. Adverse effects on human health are not caused directly by VOCs, but rather by reactions of VOCs to forms of secondary pollutants such as ozone (SCAQMD 2005). There are no ambient air quality standards established for VOCs. However, because they contribute to the formation of O3, the SCAQMD has established a significance threshold for this pollutant (SCAQMD 2005). ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 5 Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) are a byproduct of fuel combustion and contribute to the formation of O3, PM10, and PM2.5. The two major forms of NOx are nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). The principal form of NO2 produced by combustion is NO, but NO reacts with oxygen to form NO2, creating the mixture of NO and NO2 commonly called NOx. NO2 acts as an acute irritant and, in equal concentrations, is more injurious than NO. At atmospheric concentrations, however, NO2 is only potentially irritating. There is some indication of a relationship between NO2 and chronic pulmonary fibrosis. Some increase in bronchitis in children (two and three years old) has also been observed at concentrations below 0.3 part per million (ppm). NO2 absorbs blue light; the result is a brownish-red cast to the atmosphere and reduced visibility. NO is a colorless, odorless gas formed from atmospheric nitrogen and oxygen when combustion takes place under high temperature and/or high pressure (SCAQMD 2005). The SoCAB is designated as an attainment area for NO2 under the National AAQS and nonattainment under the California AAQS. Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) is a colorless, pungent, irritating gas formed by the combustion of sulfurous fossil fuels. It enters the atmosphere as a result of burning high-sulfur-content fuel oils and coal and from chemical processes at chemical plants and refineries. Gasoline and natural gas have very low sulfur content and do not release significant quantities of SO2 (SCAQMD 2005). When sulfur dioxide forms sulfates (SO4) in the atmosphere, together these pollutants are referred to as sulfur oxides (SOx). Thus, SO2 is both a primary and secondary criteria air pollutant. At sufficiently high concentrations, SO2 may irritate the upper respiratory tract. At lower concentrations and when combined with particulates, SO2 may do greater harm by injuring lung tissue. The SoCAB is designated as attainment under the California and National AAQS. Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5 ) consists of finely divided solids or liquids such as soot, dust, aerosols, fumes, and mists. Two forms of fine particulates are now recognized and regulated. Inhalable coarse particles, or PM10, include the particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns 10 millionths of a meter or 0.0004 inch) or less. Inhalable fine particles, or PM2.5, have an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns 2.5 millionths of a meter or 0.0001 inch) or less. Particulate discharge into the atmosphere results primarily from industrial, agricultural, construction, and transportation activities. However, wind action on arid landscapes also contributes substantially to local particulate loading fugitive dust). Both PM10 and PM2.5 may adversely affect the human respiratory system, especially in people who are naturally sensitive or susceptible to breathing problems (SCAQMD 2005). The US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) scientific review concluded that PM2.5, which penetrates deeply into the lungs, is more likely than PM10 to contribute to health effects and at concentrations that extend well below those allowed by the current PM10 standards. These health effects include premature death and increased hospital admissions and emergency room visits (primarily the elderly and individuals with cardiopulmonary disease); increased respiratory and disease (children and individuals with cardiopulmonary disease such as asthma); decreased lung functions (particularly in children and individuals with asthma); and alterations in lung tissue and structure and in respiratory tract defense mechanisms. Diesel particulate matter (DPM) is classified by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) as a carcinogen. The SoCAB is a nonattainment area for PM2.5 and PM10 under California and National AAQS.1 Ozone (O3) is commonly referred to as “smog” and is a gas that is formed when VOCs and NOx, both by- products of internal combustion engine exhaust, undergo photochemical reactions in the presence of sunlight. O3 is a secondary criteria air pollutant. O3 concentrations are generally highest during the summer months when direct sunlight, light winds, and warm temperatures create favorable conditions for the formation of this pollutant. O3 poses a health threat to those who already suffer from respiratory diseases as well as to healthy people. Additionally, O3 has been tied to crop damage, typically in the form of stunted 1 CARB approved the SCAQMD’s request to redesignate the SoCAB from serious nonattainment for PM10 to attainment for PM10 under the National AAQS on March 25, 2010 because the SoCAB has not violated federal 24- hour PM10 standards during the period from 2004 to 2007. However, the USEPA has not yet approved this request. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Page 6 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 growth and premature death. O3 can also act as a corrosive, resulting in property damage such as the degradation of rubber products (SCAQMD 2005). The SoCAB is designated as extreme nonattainment under the California AAQS (1-hour and 8-hour) and National AAQS (8-hour). Lead (Pb) concentrations decades ago exceeded the state and federal AAQS by a wide margin, but have not exceeded state or federal air quality standards at any regular monitoring station since 1982 (SCAQMD 2005). However, in 2008 the USEPA and CARB adopted more strict lead standards and special monitoring sites immediately downwind of lead sources2 recorded very localized violations of the new state and federal standards. As a result of these localized violations, the Los Angeles County portion of the SoCAB was designated in 2010 as nonattainment under the California and National AAQS for lead (SCAQMD 2010). The project is not characteristic of industrial-type projects that have the potential to emit lead. Therefore, lead is not a pollutant of concern for the project. 2.2.2 Toxic Air Contaminants The public’s exposure to air pollutants classified as toxic air contaminants (TACs) is a significant environmental health issue in California. In 1983, the California Legislature enacted a program to identify the health effects of TACs and to reduce exposure to these contaminants to protect the public health. The California Health and Safety Code defines a TAC as “an air pollutant which may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or in serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health.” A substance that is listed as a hazardous air pollutant (HAP) pursuant to Section 112(b) of the federal Clean Air Act (42 United States Code §7412[b]) is a toxic air contaminant. Under state law, the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA), acting through CARB, is authorized to identify a substance as a TAC if it determines that the substance is an air pollutant that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or to an increase in serious illness, or may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. California regulates TACs primarily through Assembly Bill (AB) 1807 (Tanner Air Toxics Act) and AB 2588 (Air Toxics “Hot Spot” Information and Assessment Act of 1987). The Tanner Air Toxics Act sets forth a formal procedure for CARB to designate substances as TACs. Once a TAC is identified, CARB adopts an “airborne toxics control measure” for sources that emit designated TACs. If there is a safe threshold for a substance a point below which there is no toxic effect), the control measure must reduce exposure to below that threshold. If there is no safe threshold, the measure must incorporate toxics best available control technology to minimize emissions. To date, CARB has established formal control measures for 11 TACs, all of which are identified as having no safe threshold. Air toxics from stationary sources are also regulated in California under the Air Toxics “Hot Spot” Information and Assessment Act of 1987. Under AB 2588, toxic air contaminant emissions from individual facilities are quantified and prioritized by the air quality management district or air pollution control district. High priority facilities are required to perform a health risk assessment and, if specific thresholds are exceeded, are required to communicate the results to the public in the form of notices and public meetings. Since the last update to the TAC list in December 1999, CARB has designated 244 compounds as TACs (CARB 1999). Additionally, CARB has implemented control measures for a number of compounds that pose high risks and show potential for effective control. The majority of the estimated health risks from TACs can 2 Source-oriented monitors record concentrations of lead at lead-related industrial facilities in the SoCAB, which include Exide Technologies in the City of Commerce; Quemetco, Inc., in the City of Industry; Trojan Battery Company in Santa Fe Springs; and Exide Technologies in Vernon. Monitoring conducted between 2004 through 2007 identified that the Trojan Battery Company and Exide Technologies exceed the federal standards (SCAQMD 2010). ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 7 be attributed to relatively few compounds, the most important being particulate matter from diesel-fueled engines. In 1998, CARB identified particulate emissions from diesel-fueled engines (diesel PM) as a TAC. Previously, the individual chemical compounds in diesel exhaust were considered TACs. Almost all diesel exhaust particle mass is 10 microns or less in diameter. Because of their extremely small size, these particles can be inhaled and eventually trapped in the bronchial and alveolar regions of the lung. In 2000, SCAQMD conducted a study on ambient concentrations of TACs and estimated the potential health risks from air toxics. The results showed that the overall risk for excess cancer from a lifetime exposure to ambient levels of air toxics was about 1,400 in a million. The largest contributor to this risk was diesel exhaust, accounting for 71 percent of the air toxics risk. In 2008, the SCAQMD conducted its third update to its study on ambient concentrations of TACs and estimated the potential health risks from air toxics. The results showed that the overall risk for excess cancer from a lifetime exposure to ambient levels of air toxics was about 1,200 in one million. The largest contributor to this risk was diesel exhaust, accounting for approximately 84 percent of the air toxics risk (SCAQMD 2008). In the vicinity of the project site, excess cancer risk is 1,034 in a million (SCAQMD 2011). 2.2.3 Greenhouse Gases Climate change is a term that refers to the variation of Earth’s climate over time, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activities. The climate system is interactive, consisting of five major components: the atmosphere, the hydrosphere (ocean, rivers, and lakes), the cryosphere (sea ice, ice sheets, and glaciers), the land surface, and the biosphere (flora and fauna). The atmosphere is the most unstable and rapidly changing part of the system. It is made up of 78.1 percent nitrogen (N2), 20.9 percent oxygen (O2), and 0.93 percent argon (Ar). These gases have only limited interaction with the incoming solar radiation and do not interact with infrared (long-wave) radiation emitted by the Earth. However, there are a number of trace gases, such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and ozone (O3), that absorb and emit infrared radiation and therefore have an effect on climate. These are GHGs, and while they comprise less than 0.1 percent of the total volume mixing ratio in dry air, they play an essential role in influencing climate (IPCC 2001). Non-CO2 GHGs are those listed in the Kyoto Protocol3 (CH4, N2O, hydrofluorocarbons [HFC], perfluorocarbons [PFC], and sulfur hexafluoride [SF6])and those listed under the Montreal Protocol and its Amendments4 (chlorofluorocarbons [CFC], hydrochlorofluorocarbons [HCFC], and halons). Table 3 lists a selection of some of the GHGs and their relative global warming potentials (GWP) as compared to CO2. Although not included in this table, water vapor (H2O) is the strongest GHG, also the most variable in its phases (vapor, cloud droplets, ice However, water vapor is not considered a pollutant in the atmosphere (IPCC 2001). The major GHGs are briefly described below the table. 3 Kyoto Protocol: Established by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) and signed by more than 160 countries (excluding the United States) stating that they commit to reduce their GHG emissions by 55 percent or engage in emissions trading. 4 Montreal Protocol and Amendments: International Treaty signed in 1987 and subsequently amended in 1990 and 1992. Stipulates that the production and consumption of compounds that deplete ozone in the stratosphere (CFC, halons, carbon tetrachloride, and methyl chloroform) are to be phased out by 2000 (2005 for methyl chloroform). ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Page 8 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Table 3 Greenhouse Gases and Their Relative Global Warming Potential Compared to CO2 GHG Atmospheric Lifetime (years) Global Warming Potential Relative to CO2 1 Carbon Dioxide (CO2) 50 to 200 1 Methane (CH4)2 12 21 Nitrous Oxide (N2O) 120 310 Hydrofluorocarbons: HFC-23 264 11,700 HFC-32 5.6 650 HFC-125 32.6 2,800 HFC-134a 14.6 1,300 HFC-143a 48.3 3,800 HFC-152a 1.5 140 HFC-227ea 36.5 2,900 HFC-236fa 209 6,300 HFC-4310mee 17.1 1,300 Perfluoromethane: CF4 50,000 6,500 Perfluoroethane: C2F6 10,000 9,200 Perfluorobutane: C4F10 2,600 7,000 C6F14 3,200 7,400 Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) 3,200 23,900 Source: USEPA. 1 Based on 100-Year Time Horizon of the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of the air pollutant relative to CO2. 2 The methane GWP includes the direct effects and those indirect effects due to the production of tropospheric ozone and stratospheric water vapor. The indirect effect due to the production of CO2 is not included. • Carbon dioxide (CO2) enters the atmosphere through the burning of fossil fuels (oil, natural gas, and coal), solid waste, trees and wood products, respiration, and also as a result of other chemical reactions manufacture of cement). Carbon dioxide is also removed from the atmosphere (sequestered) when it is absorbed by plants as part of the biological carbon cycle. • Methane (CH4) is emitted during the production and transport of coal, natural gas, and oil. Methane emissions also result from livestock and other agricultural practices and by the decay of organic waste, including waste in solid waste landfills. • Nitrous oxide (N2O) is emitted during agricultural and industrial activities, as well as during combustion of fossil fuels and solid waste. • Fluorinated gases are strong greenhouse gases that are emitted from a variety of industrial processes. Fluorinated gases are sometimes used as substitutes for ozone-depleting substances. These gases are typically emitted in smaller quantities, but because they are potent greenhouse gases, they are sometimes referred to as High GWP gases.  Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are greenhouse gases covered under the 1987 Montreal Protocol and used for refrigeration, air conditioning, packaging, insulation, solvents, or aerosol propellants. Since they are not destroyed in the lower atmosphere (troposphere, stratosphere), CFCs drift into the upper atmosphere where, given suitable conditions, they break down ozone. These gases are also ozone-depleting gases and are therefore being replaced by other compounds that are also GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 9  Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) are a group of human-made chemicals composed of carbon and fluorine only. These chemicals (predominantly perfluoromethane [CF4] and perfluoroethane [C2F6]) were introduced as alternatives, along with HFCs, to the ozone-depleting substances. In addition, PFCs are emitted as by-products of industrial processes and are also used in manufacturing. PFCs do not harm the stratospheric ozone layer, but they have a high global warming potential.  Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) is a colorless gas that is soluble in alcohol and ether, and is soluble in water. SF6 is a strong greenhouse gas used primarily in electrical transmission and distribution systems as an insulator.  Hydrochlorofluorocarbons contain hydrogen, fluorine, chlorine, and carbon atoms. Although ozone-depleting substances, they are less potent at destroying stratospheric ozone than CFCs. They have been introduced as temporary replacements for CFCs and are also greenhouse gases.  Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) contain only hydrogen, fluorine, and carbon atoms. They were introduced as alternatives to ozone-depleting substances in serving many industrial, commercial, and personal needs. HFCs are emitted as by-products of industrial processes and are also used in manufacturing. While they do not significantly deplete the stratospheric ozone layer, they are strong greenhouse gases (USEPA 2008a, IPCC 2001, IPCC 2007). California’s GHG Sources and Relative Contribution California is the second largest emitter of GHG in the United States, only surpassed by Texas, and the tenth largest GHG emitter in the world (CEC 2005). This is due to both its physical land area and its population and employment base. However, because of more stringent air emission regulations, in 2001 California ranked fourth lowest in carbon emissions per capita and fifth lowest among states in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel consumption per unit of Gross State Product (total economic output of goods and services) (CEC 2006). In 2004, California produced 492 million metric tons (MMTons) of CO2-equivalent (CO2e)5 GHG emissions. Of these emissions, 81 percent were CO2 emissions produced by the combustion of fossil fuels, 2.8 percent were from other sources of CO2, 5.7 percent were from methane, and 6.8 percent were from N2O (CEC 2006). The remaining 2.9 percent of GHG emissions were from high global warming potential gases, which include hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride (CEC 2006). CO2 emissions from human activities make up 84 percent of the total GHG emissions (CEC 2006). California’s transportation sector is the single largest generator of GHG emissions, producing 40.7 percent of the state’s total emissions (CEC 2006). Electricity consumption is the second largest source, comprising 22.2 percent. While out-of-state electricity generation comprises 22 to 32 percent of California’s total electricity supply, it contributes 39 to 57 percent of the GHG emissions associated with electricity consumption in the state (CEC 2006). Industrial activities are California’s third largest source of GHG emissions, comprising 20.5 percent of state’s total emissions (CEC 2006). Other major sources of GHG emissions include mineral production, waste combustion and land use, and forestry changes. Agriculture, forestry, commercial, and residential activities compose the balance of California’s greenhouse gas emissions (CEC 2006). 5 CO2-equivalence is used to show the relative potential that different GHG have to retain infrared radiation in the atmosphere and contribute to the greenhouse effect. The global warming potential of a GHG is also dependent on the lifetime, or persistence, of the gas molecule in the atmosphere. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Page 10 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Human Influence on Climate Change For approximately 1,000 years before the Industrial Revolution, the amount of GHG in the atmosphere remained relatively constant (IPCC 2007). During the 20th century, however, scientists observed a rapid change in the climate and climate change pollutants that are attributable to human activities. The amount of CO2 has increased by more than 35 percent since preindustrial times and has increased at an average rate of 1.4 parts per million (ppm) per year since 1960, mainly due to combustion of fossil fuels and deforestation (IPCC 2007). These recent changes in climate change pollutants far exceed the extremes of the ice ages, and the global mean temperature is warming at a rate that cannot be explained by natural causes alone. Human activities are directly altering the chemical composition of the atmosphere through the buildup of climate change pollutants (CAT 2006). Climate-change scenarios are affected by varying degrees of uncertainty (IPCC 2007). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2007 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report projects that the global mean temperature increase from 1990 to 2100, under different climate-change scenarios, will range from 1.4 to 5.8 °C (2.5 to 10.4°F). In the past, gradual changes in the earth’s temperature changed the distribution of species, availability of water, etc. However, human activities are accelerating this process so that environmental impacts associated with climate change no longer occur in a geologic timeframe but within a human lifetime (IPCC 2007). Potential Climate Change Impacts for California Climate change is not a local environmental impact; it is a global impact. Unlike criteria pollutants, CO2 emissions cannot be attributed to a direct health effect. However, human-caused increases in GHG have been shown to be highly correlated with increases in the surface and ocean temperatures on Earth (IPCC 2007). What is not clear is the extent of the impact on environmental systems. Like the variability in the projections of the expected increase in global surface temperatures, the environmental consequences of gradual changes in the Earth’s temperature are also hard to predict. Likewise, there are varying degrees of uncertainty in environmental impact scenarios. Because of this uncertainty, the IPCC uses five different confidence levels to quantify climate change impacts on the environment: Very High Confidence (95 percent or greater), High Confidence (67 to 95 percent), Medium Confidence (33 to 67 percent), Low Confidence (5 to 33 percent), and Very Low Confidence (5 percent or less). In California and western North America, 1) observations in the climate have showed a trend toward warmer winter and spring temperatures, 2) a smaller fraction of precipitation is falling as snow, 3) there is a decrease in the amount of spring snow accumulation in the lower and middle elevation mountain zones, 4) there is an advance snowmelt of 5 to 30 days earlier in the spring, and 5) there is a similar shift (5 to 30 days earlier) in the timing of spring flower blooms (CAT 2006). According to the California Climate Action Team (CAT), even if actions could be taken to immediately curtail climate change emissions, the potency of emissions that have already built up, their long atmospheric lifetimes (see Table and the inertia of the Earth’s climate system could produce as much as 0.6°C (1.1°F) of additional warming. Consequently, some impacts from climate change are now considered unavoidable. CAT and Cal/EPA use the results from the recent analysis of global climate change impacts for California under three IPCC scenarios: lower emissions (B1), medium-high emissions (A2), and high emissions (A1F1); each is associated with an increasing rise in average global surface temperatures. According to the California Energy Commission’s (CEC) 2006 report, “Our Changing Climate, Assessing the Risks to California,” global climate change risks to California include public health impacts (poor air quality made ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 11 worse and more severe heat), water resources impacts (decreasing Sierra Nevada snow pack, challenges in securing adequate water supply, potential reduction in hydropower, and loss of winter recreation), agricultural impacts (increasing temperatures, increasing threats from pests and pathogens, expanded ranges of agricultural weeds, and declining productivity), coast sea level impacts (rising coastal sea levels, increasing coastal floods, and shrinking beaches), forest and biological resource impacts (increasing wildfires, increasing threats from pest and pathogens, declining forest productivity, and shifting vegetation and species distribution), and electricity impacts (increased energy demand). Specific climate change impacts that could affect the project include health impacts from a reduction in air quality, water resources impacts from a reduction in water supply, and increased energy demand. 2.2.4 Other Effects of Air Pollution Air pollution creates numerous impacts to our economy, including lost workdays due to illness, a desire on the part of businesses to locate in areas with a healthy environment, and increased expenses from medical costs. Pollutants may also lower visibility and cause damage to property. Certain air pollutants are responsible for discoloring painted surfaces, eating away at stones used in buildings, dissolving the mortar that holds bricks together, and cracking tires and other items made from rubber. In conformance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act Amendments, the federal EPA has prepared a monetary cost/benefit analysis related to implementation requirements. By the year 2010, the EPA estimates that its emissions- reduction programs would cost approximately 27 billion dollars. The programs are estimated to result in a savings benefit of 110 billion dollars, for a net benefit of 83 billion dollars. While these values are for the nation as a whole, a net benefit ratio of about 4:1 is noted, and a similar ratio could be expected for the California and its residents. Another direct cost/benefit issue relates to federal funding. Areas that do not meet the federal air quality standards may lose eligibility for federal funding for road improvements and other projects that require federal or California Department of Transportation approval. Cleaner air also yields benefits to ecological systems. Just as humans are affected by air pollution, so are plants and animals. Animals must breathe the same air and are subject to the same types of negative health effects. Certain plants and trees may absorb air pollutants that can stunt their development or cause premature death. The benefits of Clean Air Act Amendments programs that can be quantified within the overall monetary benefits include increased agricultural and timber yields, reduced effects of acid rain on aquatic ecosystems, and reduced effects of nitrogen deposited to coastal estuaries. Many ecological benefits, however, remain difficult or impossible to quantify, or can only be quantified for a limited geographic area. The magnitude of quantified benefits and the wide range of unquantified benefits nonetheless suggest that as we learn more about ecological systems and can conduct more comprehensive ecological benefits assessments, estimates of these benefits could be substantially greater. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Page 12 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 13 3. REGULATORY SETTING 3.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK AAQS have been promulgated at the local, state, and federal levels for criteria pollutants. The project site is in the SoCAB and is subject to the rules and regulations imposed by the SCAQMD, as well as the California CAAQS adopted by CARB and federal NAAQS. 3.1.1 Ambient Air Quality Standards The Clean Air Act (CAA) was passed in 1963 by the US Congress and has been amended several times. The 1970 Clean Air Act amendments strengthened previous legislation and laid the foundation for the regulatory scheme of the 1970s and 1980s. In 1977, Congress again added several provisions, including nonattainment requirements for areas not meeting National AAQS and the Prevention of Significant Deterioration program. The 1990 amendments represent the latest in a series of federal efforts to regulate the protection of air quality in the United States. The CAA allows states to adopt more stringent standards or to include other pollution species. The California Clean Air Act (CCAA), signed into law in 1988, requires all areas of the state to achieve and maintain the California AAQS by the earliest practical date. The California AAQS tend to be more restrictive than the National AAQS, based on even greater health and welfare concerns. These National AAQS and California AAQS are the levels of air quality considered to provide a margin of safety in the protection of the public health and welfare. They are designed to protect those “sensitive receptors” most susceptible to further respiratory distress such as asthmatics, the elderly, very young children, people already weakened by other disease or illness, and persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise. Healthy adults can tolerate occasional exposure to air pollutant concentrations considerably above these minimum standards before adverse effects are observed. Both California and the federal government have established health-based AAQS for seven air pollutants. As shown in Table 4, these pollutants include O3, NO2, CO, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and lead (Pb). In addition, the state has set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride, and visibility-reducing particles. These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of safety. Table 4 Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants Pollutant Averaging Time California Standard Federal Primary Standard Major Pollutant Sources Ozone (O3) 1 hour 0.09 ppm * Motor vehicles, paints, coatings, and solvents. 8 hours 0.070 ppm 0.075 ppm Carbon Monoxide (CO) 1 hour 20 ppm 35 ppm Internal combustion engines, primarily gasoline-powered motor vehicles. 8 hours 9.0 ppm 9 ppm Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Annual Average 0.030 ppm 0.053 ppm Motor vehicles, petroleum-refining operations, industrial sources, aircraft, ships, and railroads. 1 hour 0.18 ppm 0.100 ppm Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Annual Average * *1 Fuel combustion, chemical plants, sulfur recovery plants, and metal processing. 1 hour 0.25 ppm 0.075 ppm1 24 hours 0.04 ppm *1 ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Page 14 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Table 4 Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants Pollutant Averaging Time California Standard Federal Primary Standard Major Pollutant Sources Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10) Annual Arithmetic Mean 20 µg/m3 * Dust and fume-producing construction, industrial, and agricultural operations, combustion, atmospheric photochemical reactions, and natural activities wind- raised dust and ocean sprays). 24 hours 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3 Suspended Particulate Matter (PM2.5 ) Annual Arithmetic Mean 12 µg/m3 15 µg/m3 Dust and fume-producing construction, industrial, and agricultural operations, combustion, atmospheric photochemical reactions, and natural activities wind- raised dust and ocean sprays). 24 hours * 35 µg/m3 Lead (Pb) 1.5 µg/m3 * Present source: lead smelters, battery manufacturing & recycling facilities. Past source: combustion of leaded gasoline. Quarterly * 1.5 µg/m3 3-Month Average * 0.15 µg/m3 Sulfates (SO4) 24 hours 25 µg/m3 * Industrial processes. Visibility Reducing Particles 8 hours ExCo =0.23/km visibility of 10≥ miles1 No Federal Standard Visibility-reducing particles consist of suspended particulate matter, which is a complex mixture of tiny particles that consists of dry solid fragments, solid cores with liquid coatings, and small droplets of liquid. These particles vary greatly in shape, size and chemical composition, and can be made up of many different materials such as metals, soot, soil, dust, and salt. Hydrogen Sulfide 1 hour 0.03 ppm No Federal Standard Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) is a colorless gas with the odor of rotten eggs. It is formed during bacterial decomposition of sulfur- containing organic substances. Also, it can be present in sewer gas and some natural gas, and can be emitted as the result of geothermal energy exploitation. Vinyl Chloride 24 hour 0.01 ppm No Federal Standard Vinyl chloride (chloroethene), a chlorinated hydrocarbon, is a colorless gas with a mild, sweet odor. Most vinyl chloride is used to make polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic and vinyl products. Vinyl chloride has been detected near landfills, sewage plants, and hazardous waste sites, due to microbial breakdown of chlorinated solvents. Source: CARB 2010 ppm: parts per million; µg/m3: micrograms per cubic meter 1 When relative humidity is less than 70 percent. * Standard has not been established for this pollutant/duration by this entity. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 15 3.1.2 Air Quality Management Planning The SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) are the agencies responsible for preparing the air quality management plan (AQMP) for the SoCAB. Since 1979, a number of AQMPs have been prepared. The most recent comprehensive plan was adopted on June 1, 2007, and incorporates significant new scientific data, primarily in the form of updated emissions inventories, ambient measurements, new meteorological episodes, and new air quality modeling tools. The 2007 AQMP proposes attainment demonstration of the federal PM2.5 standards through a more focused control of SOx, directly emitted PM2.5, and focused control of NOx and VOC by 2015. The eight-hour ozone control strategy builds upon the PM2.5 strategy, augmented with additional NOx and VOC reductions to meet the standard by 2024, assuming an extended attainment date is obtained. 3.1.3 Area Designations The AQMP provides the framework for air quality basins to achieve attainment of the state and federal ambient air quality standards through the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Areas are classified as attainment or nonattainment areas for particular pollutants, depending on whether they meet ambient air quality standards. Severity classifications for ozone nonattainment range in magnitude from marginal, moderate, and serious to severe and extreme. Attainment classifications apply to individual pollutants: • Unclassified: the data are incomplete and do not support a designation of attainment or nonattainment for a pollutant • Attainment: the California AAQS were not violated at any site in the area during a three-year period for that pollutant • Nonattainment: there was at least one violation of a state AAQS for that pollutant in the area • Nonattainment/Transitional: a subcategory of the nonattainment designation; signifies that the area is close to attaining the AAQS for that pollutant The attainment status for the SoCAB is shown in Table 5. The SoCAB is also designated as attainment of the California AAQS for sulfates. According to the 2007 AQMP, the SoCAB will have to meet the new federal 8- hour O3 standard by 2024, PM2.5 standards by 2015, and the recently revised 24-hour PM2.5 standard by 2020. The SCAQMD has recently designated the SoCAB as nonattainment for NO2 (entire basin) and lead (Los Angeles County only) under the California AAQS. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Page 16 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Table 5 Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin Pollutant State Federal Ozone – 1-hour Extreme Nonattainment Extreme Nonattainment1 Ozone – 8-hour Extreme Nonattainment Severe-17 Nonattainment2 PM10 Serious Nonattainment Nonattainment3 PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment CO Attainment Attainment4 NO2 Nonattainment5 Attainment/Maintenance SO2 Attainment Attainment Lead Nonattainment6 Nonattainment6 All others Attainment/Unclassified Attainment/Unclassified Source: CARB 2010. 1 Under prior standard. 2 SCAQMD may petition for Extreme Nonattainment designation. 3 Annual standard revoked September 2006. CARB approved the SCAQMD’s request to redesignate the SoCAB from serious nonattainment for PM10 to attainment for PM10 under the National AAQS on March 25, 2010, because the SoCAB has not violated federal 24-hour PM10 standards from 2004 to 2007. However, the EPA has not yet approved this request. 4 The EPA granted the request to redesignate the SoCAB from nonattainment to attainment for the CO National AAQS on May 11, 2007 (Federal Register Volume 71, No. 91), which became effective June 11, 2007. 5 The state NO2 standard was made more stringent in 2007 from 0.25 ppm to 0.18 ppm. Under the revised standards, the entire SoCAB was designated nonattainment on March 25, 2010. In addition, the EPA adopted a new 1-hour NOx standard of 0.100 ppm on January 22, 2010. 6 The Los Angeles portion of the SoCAB was designated nonattainment for lead under the new federal and existing state AAQS as a result of large industrial emitters. Remaining areas within the SoCAB are unclassified. 3.1.4 Regulatory Framework for Global Climate Change Regulation of GHG Emissions on a National Level Currently there are no adopted regulations to combat global climate change on a national level. However, recent statutory authority has been granted to the EPA that may change the voluntary approach taken under our current administration to address this issue. On April 2, 2007, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the EPA has the authority to regulate CO2 emissions under the Federal Clean Air Act. After a thorough examination of the scientific evidence and careful consideration of public comments, the EPA announced on December 7, 2009, that GHG emissions threaten the public health and welfare of the American people. The EPA also finds that GHG emissions from on-road vehicles contribute to that threat. The EPA’s final findings respond to the 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision that GHG emissions fit within the Clean Air Act definition of air pollutants. The findings do not in and of themselves impose any emission reduction requirements, but allows the EPA to finalize the GHG standards proposed in 2009 for new light- duty vehicles as part of the joint rulemaking with the Department of Transportation. The EPA’s endangerment finding covers emissions of six key greenhouse gases—carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride—that have been the subject of scrutiny and intense analysis for decades by scientists in the United States and around the world. In response to the endangerment finding, the EPA issued the Mandatory Reporting of GHG Rule that requires substantial emitters of GHG emissions large sta-tionary sources, etc.) to report GHG emissions data. Facilities that emit more the 25,000 metric tons (MTons) or more per year are required to submit annual report. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 17 Regulation of GHG Emissions on a State Level Current State of California guidance and goals for reductions in GHG emissions are generally embodied in AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act, and Executive Order S-03-05. AB 32 was passed by the California state legislature on August 31, 2006, to place the state on a course toward reducing its contribution of GHG emissions. AB 32 follows the 2020 tier of emissions reduction targets established in Executive Order S-3-05, signed June 1, 2005. The Executive Order S-03-05 set the following GHG reduction targets for the State: • 2000 levels by 2010 • 1990 levels by 2020 • 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 AB 32 directed CARB to adopt discrete early action measures to reduce GHG emissions and outline additional reduction measures to meet the 2020 target. Based on the GHG emissions inventory conducted for the Scoping Plan by CARB, it is projected that GHG emissions in California by 2020 will be approximately 596 million metric tons (MMTons) of CO2e by 2020 (CARB 2008). In December 2007, CARB approved a 2020 emissions limit of 427 MMTons (471 million tons) of CO2e for the state (CARB 2008). The 2020 target requires emissions reductions of 169 MMTons, 28.5 percent of the projected emissions compared to business-as- usual (BAU) in year 2020 28.5 percent of 596 MMTons) (CARB 2008). CARB defines BAU in its Scoping Plan as emissions levels that would occur if California continued to grow and add new GHG emissions but did not adopt any measures to reduce emissions. Projections for each emission-generating sector were compiled and used to estimate emissions for 2020 based on 2002–2004 emissions intensities. Under CARB’s definition of BAU, new growth is assumed to have the same carbon intensities as was typical in 2002 through 2004. In order to effectively implement the cap, AB 32 directed CARB to establish a mandatory reporting system to track and monitor global warming emissions levels for large stationary sources that generate more than 25,000 metric tons (MTons) per year, prepare a plan demonstrating how the 2020 deadline can be met, and develop appropriate regulations and programs to implement the plan by 2012. The Climate Action Registry Reporting Online Tool was established through the Climate Action Registry to track GHG emissions. In June 2008, CARB released a draft of the Climate Change Scoping Plan, which was revised in October 2008. The final Scoping Plan was adopted by CARB on December 11, 2008. Key elements of CARB’s GHG reduction plan are: • Expanding and strengthening existing energy efficiency programs as well as building and appliance standards; • Increases the State’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) to 33 percent by 2020. Retail sellers of electricity are required to increase the portion of electricity they provide each year by renewable energy to achieve the 33 percent goal; • Developing a California cap-and-trade program that links with other Western Climate Initiative partner programs to create a regional market system for large stationary sources (however, as of the date of this DSEIR, implementation of this cap-and-trade portion of the Scoping Plan has been enjoined); • Establishing targets for transportation-related GHG emissions for regions throughout California, and pursuing policies and incentives to achieve those targets; ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Page 18 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 • Adopting and implementing measures pursuant to state laws and policies, including California’s clean car standards, goods movement measures, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard; • Creating target fees, including a public goods charge on water use, fees on high global warming potential gases, and a fee to fund the administrative costs of the state’s long-term commitment to AB 32 implementation. Table 6, Scoping Plan Greenhouse Gas Reduction Measures and Reductions toward 2020 Targets, shows the proposed reductions from regulations and programs outlined in the Scoping Plan. While local government operations were not accounted for in achieving the 2020 emissions reduction, CARB estimates that land use changes implemented by local governments that integrate jobs, housing, and services are estimated to result in a reduction of 5 MMTons of CO2e, which is approximately 3 percent of the 2020 GHG emissions reduction goal. In recognition of the critical role local government plays in successful implementation of AB 32, CARB is recommending GHG reduction goals of 15 percent of today’s levels by 2020 to ensure that municipal and community-wide emissions match the state’s reduction target. Measures that local governments take to support shifts in land use patterns are anticipated to emphasize infill and re-fill, compact, low-impact development over growth on undeveloped, greenfields areas, resulting in fewer vehicle miles traveled. According to the Measure Documentation Supplement to the Scoping Plan, local government actions and targets are anticipated to reduce vehicle miles travelled by approximately 2 percent through land use planning, resulting in a potential GHG reduction of 2 MMTons of CO2e (or approximately 1.2 percent of the GHG reduction target). SB 97 In addition to the requirements under AB 32 to address GHG emissions and global climate change in general plans and CEQA documents, Senate Bill 97 (Chapter 185, 2007) required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop CEQA guidelines for addressing global warming emissions and mitigating project-generated GHG emissions. OPR transmitted the proposed guidelines to the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) and the guidelines were adopted on December 30, 2009. The amended CEQA Guidelines became effective on March 18, 2010. The new CEQA Guidelines concerning GHG emissions do not include or recommend any particular threshold of significance; instead, they leave that decision to the discretion of the lead agency. However, with respect to adopting thresholds of significance, newly added CEQA Guidelines section 15064.7(c) provides:[A] lead agency may consider thresholds of significance previously adopted or recommended by other public agencies or recommended by experts, provided the decision of the lead agency to adopt such thresholds is supported by substantial evidence. The new CEQA Guidelines also do not suggest or recommend the use of any specific GHG emission mitigation measures. Instead, newly added CEQA Guidelines section 15126.4(c) provides that lead agencies shall consider feasible means, supported by substantial evidence and subject to monitoring or reporting, of mitigating the significant effects of greenhouse gas emissions. Among other things, CNRA noted in its public notice for these changes to the CEQA Guidelines that the impacts of GHG emissions should be considered in the context of a cumulative impact, rather than a project impact. The public notice states: While the Proposed Amendments do not foreclose the possibility that a single project may result in greenhouse gas emissions with a direct impact on the environment, the evidence before [CNRA] indicates that in most cases, the impact will be cumulative. Therefore, the Proposed Amendments emphasize that the analysis of greenhouse gas emissions should ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 19 center on whether a project’s incremental contribution of greenhouse gas emissions is cumulatively considerable. Table 6 Scoping Plan Greenhouse Gas Reduction Measures and Reductions toward 2020 Target Recommended Reduction Measures Reductions Counted toward 2020 Target of 169 MMT CO2e Percentage of Statewide 2020 Target Cap and Trade Program and Associated Measures California Light-Duty Vehicle GHG Standards 31.7 19% Energy Efficiency 26.3 16% Renewable Portfolio Standard (33 percent by 2020) 21.3 13% Low Carbon Fuel Standard 15 9% Regional Transportation-Related GHG Targets1 5 3% Vehicle Efficiency Measures 4.5 3% Goods Movement 3.7 2% Million Solar Roofs 2.1 1% Medium/Heavy Duty Vehicles 1.4 1% High Speed Rail 1.0 1% Industrial Measures 0.3 0% Additional Reduction Necessary to Achieve Cap 34.4 20% Total Cap and Trade Program Reductions 146.7 87% Uncapped Sources/Sectors Measures High Global Warming Potential Gas Measures 20.2 12% Sustainable Forests 5 3% Industrial Measures (for sources not covered under cap and trade program) 1.1 1% Recycling and Waste (landfill methane capture) 1 1% Total Uncapped Sources/Sectors Reductions 27.3 16% Total Reductions Counted toward 2020 Target 174 100% Other Recommended Measures – Not Counted toward 2020 Target State Government Operations 1.0 to 2.0 1% Local Government Operations To Be Determined NA Green Buildings 26 15% Recycling and Waste 9 5% Water Sector Measures 4.8 3% Methane Capture at Large Dairies 1 1% Total Other Recommended Measures – Not Counted toward 2020 Target 42.8 NA Source: CARB 2008. Note: the percentages in the right-hand column add up to more than 100 percent because the emissions reduction goal is 169 MMTons and the Scoping Plan identifies 174 MMTons of emissions reductions strategies. MMTCO2e: million metric tons of CO2e 1 Reductions represent an estimate of what may be achieved from local land use changes. It is not the SB 375 regional target. 2 According to the Measure Documentation Supplement to the Scoping Plan, local government actions and targets are anticipated to reduce vehicle miles by approximately 2 percent through land use planning, resulting in a potential GHG reduction of 2 million metric tons of CO2e (or approximately 1.2 percent of the GHG reduction target). However, these reductions were not included in the Scoping Plan reductions to achieve the 2020 target. Energy Conservation Standards Energy conservation standards for new residential and nonresidential buildings were adopted by the California Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission in June 1977 and most recently ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Page 20 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 revised in 2008 (Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations [CCR]).6 Title 24 requires the design of building shells and building components to conserve energy. The standards are updated periodically to allow for consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. The 2006 Appliance Efficiency Regulations (Title 20, CCR Sections 1601 through 1608) were adopted by the California Energy Commission on October 11, 2006, and approved by the California Office of Administrative Law on December 14, 2006. The regulations include standards for both federally regulated appliances and nonfederally regulated appliances. On July 17, 2008, the California Building Standards Commission adopted the nation’s first green building standards. The California Green Building Standards Code (proposed Part 11, Title 24) was adopted as part of the California Building Standards Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations). The green building standards that became mandatory in the 2010 edition of the code established voluntary standards on planning and design for sustainable site development, energy efficiency (in excess of the California Energy Code requirements), water conservation, material conservation, and internal air contaminants. The mandatory provisions of the California Green Building Code Standards became effective January 1, 2011. Renewable Power Requirements A major component of California’s Renewable Energy Program is the renewable portfolio standard (RPS) established under Senate Bills (SBs) 1078 (Sher) and 107 (Simitian). Under the RPS, certain retail sellers of electricity are required to increase the amount of renewable energy each year by at least 1 percent in order to reach at least 20 percent by December 30, 2010. CARB has now approved an even higher goal of 33 percent by 2020. Renewable sources of electricity include wind, small hydropower, solar, geothermal, biomass, and biogas. The increase in renewable sources for electricity production will decrease indirect GHG emissions from development projects because electricity production from renewable sources is generally considered carbon neutral. In addition to the States RPS, Senate Bill 1368 limits long-term investments in baseload generation by utility power plants to meet emissions performance standard established by CEC and the California Public Utilities Commission. New, or capital investment in, electricity generating facilities owned by or under contract to publically owned utilities are required to achieve an emissions standard of 1,100 lbs per megawatt-hour (MWh). Vehicle Emission Standards/Improved Fuel Economy Vehicle GHG emission standards were enacted under AB 1493 (Pavley I) and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS). Pavley I is a clean-car standard that reduces GHG emissions from new passenger vehicles (light duty auto to medium duty vehicles) from 2009 through 2016 and is anticipated to reduce GHG emissions from new passenger vehicles by 30 percent in 2016. The LCFS requires a reduction of 2.5 percent in the carbon intensity of California's transportation fuels by 2015 and a reduction of at least 10 percent by 2020.7 Regulation of GHG Emissions on a Regional Level In 2008, SB 375 was adopted and was intended to represent the implementation mechanism necessary to achieve the GHG emissions reductions targets established in the Scoping Plan for the transportation sector as it relates to local land use decisions that affect travel behavior. Implementation is intended to reduce GHG 6 Although new building energy efficiency standards were adopted in April 2008, these standards did not go into effect until 2009. 7 CARB’s user guide for the Pavley I + Low Carbon Fuel Standard Postprocessor provides more detail. Available at: (accessed August 2010). ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 21 emissions from light-duty trucks and automobiles (excludes emissions associated with goods movement) by aligning regional long-range transportation plans, investments, and housing allocations with local land use planning to reduce vehicle miles traveled and vehicle trips. Specifically, SB 375 requires CARB to establish GHG emissions reduction targets for each of the 17 regions in California managed by a metropolitan planning organization (MPO). Pursuant to the recommendations of the Regional Transportation Advisory Committee, CARB adopted per-capita reduction targets for each of the MPOs rather than a total magnitude reduction target. SCAG is the MPO for the southern California region, which includes the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino County, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial. SCAG's targets are an 8 percent per capita reduction from 2005 GHG emission levels by 2020 and a 13 percent per capita reduction from 2005 GHG emission levels by 2035. The 2020 targets are smaller than the 2035 targets because a significant portion of the built environment in 2020 has been defined by decisions that have already been made. In general, the 2020 scenarios reflect that more time is needed for large land use and transportation infrastructure changes. Most of the reductions in the interim are anticipated to come from improving the efficiency of the region's existing transportation network. The proposed targets would result in 3 MMTons of GHG reductions by 2020 and 15 MMTons of GHG reductions by 2035. Based on these reductions, the passenger vehicle target in CARB's Scoping Plan (for AB 32) would be met (CARB 2010). SB 375 requires the MPOs to prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) in their regional transportation plan. For the SCAG region, the first SCS is anticipated by May 2012. The SCS will set forth a development pattern for the region, which, when integrated with the transportation network and other transportation measures and policies, would reduce GHG emissions from transportation (excluding goods movement). The SCS is meant to provide growth strategies that will achieve the regional GHG emissions reduction targets. However, the SCS does not require that local general plans, specific plans, or zoning be consistent with the SCS, but provides incentives for consistency for governments and developers. If the SCS is unable to achieve the regional GHG emissions reduction targets, the MPO is required to prepare an Alternative Planning Strategy that shows how the GHG emissions reduction target could be achieved through other development patterns, infrastructure, and/or transportation measures. 3.2 SENSITIVE RECEPTORS Some land uses are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others due to the types of population groups or activities involved. Sensitive population groups include children, the elderly, the acutely ill, and the chronically ill, especially those with cardiorespiratory diseases. Residential areas are also considered to be sensitive receptors to air pollution because residents (including children and the elderly) tend to be at home for extended periods of time, resulting in sustained exposure to any pollutants present. Other sensitive receptors include retirement facilities, hospitals, and schools. Recreational land uses are considered moderately sensitive to air pollution. Although exposure periods are generally short, exercise places a high demand on respiratory functions, which can be impaired by air pollution. In addition, noticeable air pollution can detract from the enjoyment of recreation. Industrial, commercial, retail, and office areas are considered the least sensitive to air pollution. Exposure periods are relatively short and intermittent, as the majority of the workers tend to stay indoors most of the time. In addition, the working population is generally the healthiest segment of the public. 3.3 BASELINE AIR QUALITY Existing levels of ambient air quality and historical trends and projections in the vicinity of the project site and project area are best documented by measurements made by SCAQMD. The project site is located within ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Page 22 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Source Receptor Area (SRA) 17 – Central Orange County (Inland Orange County). The air quality monitoring station closest to the project is the Anaheim Monitoring Station. However, this station does not monitor SOx. Consequently, data was obtained from the Costa Mesa Monitoring Station for this criteria pollutant. Data from these stations are summarized in Table 7. The data show that the area occasionally exceeds the state and federal one-hour and eight-hour O3 standards and regularly exceeds the state PM10 and federal PM2.5 standards. The CO, SO2, and NO2 standards have not been exceeded in the last five years in the project vicinity. Table 7 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Summary Pollutant/Standard Number of Days Threshold Were Exceeded and Maximum Levels during Such Violations 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Ozone (O3)1 State 1-Hour ≥ 0.09 ppm State 8-hour ≥ 0.07 ppm Federal 8-Hour > 0.075 ppm Max. 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) Max. 8-Hour Conc. (ppm) 6 5 3 0.113 0.089 2 7 1 0.127 0.100 2 10 5 0.105 0.086 0 2 1 0.093 0.077 0 0 0 0.063 0.056 Carbon Monoxide (CO)1 State 8-Hour > 9.0 ppm Federal 8-Hour ≥ 9.0 ppm Max. 8-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0 0 2.90 0 0 2.91 0 0 3.44 0 0 2.73 0 0 0.191 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)1 State 1-Hour ≥ 0.18 ppm Max. 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0 0.114 0 0.086 0 0.093 0 0.068 0.066 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)2 State 1-Hour ≥ 0.04 ppm Max. 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0 0.005 0 0.004 0 0.003 0 0.004 0 0.002 Coarse Particulates (PM10)1 State 24-Hour > 50 µg/m3 Federal 24-Hour > 150 µg/m3 Max. 24-Hour Conc. (µg/m3) 7 0 104.0 6 13 489.03 3 0 61.0 1 0 63.0 NA 0 37.2 Fine Particulates (PM2.5)1 Federal 24-Hour > 35 µg/m3 Max. 24-Hour Conc. (µg/m3) 7 56.2 14 79.4 5 67.8 4 64.5 0 NA Source: CARB 2010. ppm: parts per million; µg/m3: or micrograms per cubic meter. 1 Data obtained from the Anaheim Monitoring Station. 2 Data obtained from the Costa Mesa Monitoring Station. 3 Statistic includes an exceptional event, such as a wildfire. The second-highest concentration reported is 75.0 ppm. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 23 4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 4.1 METHODOLOGY This air quality and GHG technical study has been prepared to analyze potential operational phase impacts related to an increase in the number of annual events at Honda Center to accommodate a second professional sports franchise. Honda Center is permitted to host up to 162 events per year. Over the last five years, Honda Center has averaged 11,264 visitors during an event and 153 events per year (see Table To estimate air quality and GHG emissions from increasing the number of events in a year, information on operation of the event center was obtained from Honda Center during surveys and follow-up conversations in June through July 2011, and is shown in Table 8. Table 8 Honda Center Operational Characteristics Source Information Energy Use • Winter: 1,217,583.90 kWH • Summer: 1,974,389.70 kWH Natural Gas Use • Winter: 16,666 Therms • Summer: 5,100 Therms Water Use1 • Winter: 1,530,000 gallons • Summer: 1,860,000 gallons Waste • 1.5 Tons of garbage per event • 0.5 Tons of recycling per event Transportation • Average one-way travel distance for event patrons is 31.1 miles based on Ticketmaster sales (main customer base is Orange, Riverside, and north San Diego counties)2 • Average 4,000 cars, 5 buses, and between 4 and 20 trucks per event.2 Source: Starkey 2011. 1 Modeling assumes 95 percent of water use is indoor water use because of the amount of surface parking and limited landscaping. 2 While cash sales and season ticket holders distance is unknown, it is probable that these purchases occur in a similar service area, close to Honda Center. Therefore, tickets purchased at will-call, via cash, or season tickets sales, which represent approximately 30 percent of ticket sales, are assumed to occur at a similar distance as Ticketmaster the 90th percentile distance. Based on Ticketmaster sales, over 90 percent of the ticket sales occur within 28.7 miles of Honda Center. Assumes ticket sales in locations farther than 4 hours away are “visitors” to the southern California region vacation trips which may coincide with other destinations in southern California) and trips were calculated from the Los Angeles International Airport. Therefore, a 31.1 mile trip length is considered a conservative estimate of average trip length for patrons of Honda Center. 3 Modeling assumes a conservative fleet mix of 98.4% passenger vehicles (62.7% LDA, 8.5% LDT1, 27.2% LDT2 based on EMFAC2007), 1% medium duty trucks, 0.5% heavy duty trucks, and 0.1% urban buses based on estimates provided by Honda Center of parked vehicles during an event. Assumes a similar fleet mix for both event and nonevent days. SCAQMD has published the CEQA Air Quality Handbook (Handbook) as well as updates included on SCAQMD’s website, which are intended to provide local governments with guidance for analyzing and mitigating project-specific air quality impacts. This Handbook provides standards, methodologies, and procedures for conducting air quality analyses in environmental impact reports and was used extensively in the preparation of this analysis. Modeling was conducted using emission factors and methodologies in the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 2011.1.1 and CalEEMod user’s guide (SCAQMD 2011). Criteria air pollutant and GHG modeling files are included as an appendix to this technical study. The following assumptions were utilized in the analysis: • Average attendance per event is assumed to be similar to historic levels (see Table 2) for future events held in Honda Center (11,264 visitors), based on the highest 3 years of attendance from 2006 to 2011. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Page 24 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 • Transportation emissions were modeled using CARB’s EMFAC2007 for year 2011. Both existing and project emissions are modeled for year 2011 because no construction is necessary for Honda Center to accommodate a second professional sports franchise and would result in a worst-case emissions inventory. Assumes a 5 percent reduction in trips as a result of proximity to the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC), transit service provided by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), and location within the Platinum Triangle mixed-use area. Additional assumptions on transportation emissions, including trip generation during an event, are included as Appendix A to this technical study. • While operation of Honda Center on nonevent days generates water and energy demand, the demand for these services is assumed to be proportional to the average annual population of the facility. Consequently, the increase in water demand and energy use (natural gas and purchased energy) is assumed to be proportional to the increase in the number of events. • The increase in waste disposal is based on existing estimates of waste disposal after an event and increased proportionately. • Service population is based on an average annual population at Honda Center. The traditional metric for service population is typically characterized as people who live or work at the project site residents and employees). However, defining the service population metric in this manner excludes other users of the facility who drive to the event, use water, generate waste, and contribute to the energy demand. Consequently, for an entertainment land use, the service population has been defined as staff/employees, team members/production members, and visitors to Honda Center (see Table Table 9 Service Population of Honda Center Existing Project Average Annual Visitors 1,723,333 2,500,523 Average Annual Employees/Staff and Team/Production Members 343,619 465,663 Average Number of People Onsite Per Day per year (Service Population) 5,663 8,127 Increase in the average number of people onsite per day per year 2,464 Source: Starkey 2011. Based on average annual attendance during an event and employees on nonevent days. 4.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Criteria Air Pollutants According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines a project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if it would: AQ-1 Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. AQ-2 Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 25 AQ-3 Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). AQ-4 Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. AQ-5 Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Greenhouse Gas Emissions According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if it would: GHG-1 Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. GHG-2 Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. 4.2.1 South Coast Air Quality Management District Significance Criteria The analysis of the proposed project’s air quality impacts follows the guidance and methodologies recommended in SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook and the significance thresholds on SCAQMD’s website.8 CEQA allows the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district to be used to assess impacts of a project on air quality. SCAQMD has established thresholds of significance for regional air quality emissions for construction activities and project operation. In addition to the daily thresholds listed above, projects are also subject to the AAQS. These are addressed though an analysis of localized CO impacts and localized significance thresholds (LSTs). Regional Significance Thresholds SCAQMD has adopted regional construction and operational emissions thresholds to determine a project’s cumulative impact on air quality in the SoCAB. Table 10 lists SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds. Table 10 SCAQMD Significance Thresholds Air Pollutant Construction Phase Operational Phase Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) 75 lbs/day 55 lbs/day Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 lbs/day 550 lbs/day Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) 100 lbs/day 55 lbs/day Sulfur Oxides (SOX) 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day Coarse Inhalable Particulates (PM10) 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day Fine Inhalable Particulates (PM2.5) 55 lbs/day 55 lbs/day 8 SCAQMD’s Air Quality Significance Thresholds are current as of March 2011 and can be found here: http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/hdbk.html. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Page 26 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Localized Significance Thresholds SCAQMD developed LSTs for emissions of NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 generated at the project site (offsite mobile-source emissions are not included the LST analysis). LSTs represent the maximum emissions at a project site that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent federal or state AAQS. LSTs are based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant within the project SRA and the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. LST analyses are applicable for all projects of five acres and less; however, they can be used as screening criteria for larger projects to determine whether or not dispersion modeling may be required. Projects larger than five acres can determine the localized significance for construction by performing dispersion modeling based on the AAQS. Because the project is not an industrial project that has the potential to emit substantial sources of stationary emissions and because construction activities would not occur, LSTs are not an air quality impact of concern associated with the project. CO Hotspots Localized CO impacts are determined based on the presence of congested intersections. The significance of localized project impacts depends on whether the project would cause substantial concentrations of CO. A project is considered to have significant impacts if project-related mobile-source emissions result in an exceedance the California one-hour and eight-hour CO standards. Draft GHG Thresholds To provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining significance for GHG emissions in their CEQA documents, SCAQMD has convened a GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group (Working Group). Based on the last Working Group meeting (Meeting No. 15) held in September 2010, SCAQMD is proposing to adopt a tiered approach for evaluating GHG emissions for development projects where SCAQMD is not the lead agency: Tier 1 If a project is exempt from CEQA, project-level and cumulative GHG emissions are less than significant. Tier 2 If the project complies with a GHG emissions reduction plan or mitigation program that avoids or substantially reduces GHG emissions in the project’s geographic area city or county), project-level and cumulative GHG emissions are less than significant. For projects that are not exempt or where no qualifying GHG reduction plans are directly applicable, SCAQMD requires an assessment of GHG emissions. SCAQMD is proposing a screening-level threshold of 3,000 MTons annually for all land use types or the following land-use-specific thresholds: 1,400 MTons for commercial projects, 3,500 MTons for residential projects, or 3,000 MTons for mixed-use projects. This bright-line threshold is based on a review of the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research database of CEQA projects. Based on their review of 711 CEQA projects, 90 percent of CEQA projects would exceed the bright-line thresholds identified above. Therefore, projects that do not exceed the bright-line threshold would have a nominal, and therefore, less than cumulatively considerable impact on GHG emissions: Tier 3 If GHG emissions are less than the screening-level threshold, project-level and cumulative GHG emissions are less than significant. Tier 4 If emissions exceed the screening threshold, a more detailed review of the project’s GHG emissions is warranted. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 27 SCAQMD is proposing to adopt an efficiency target for projects that exceed the screening threshold. The current recommended approach is per capita efficiency targets. SCAQMD is not recommending use of a percent emissions reduction target. Instead, SCAQMD proposes a 2020 efficiency target of 4.8 MTons per year per service population (MTons/year/SP) for project-level analyses and 6.6 MTons/year/SP for plan level projects program-level projects such as specific plans and general plans).9 If projects exceed these per capita efficiency targets, GHG emissions would be considered potentially significant in the absence of mitigation measures. 4.3 CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INVENTORY An inventory of Honda Center’s maximum daily criteria air pollutant emissions are shown in Table 11. Project-related air pollutants come from area-, energy-, and mobile-source emissions. It should be noted that the maximum daily criteria air pollutant emissions are based on a single event in a day at Honda Center. In the past 18 years of Honda Center a “double” two events on one day) has only occurred twice (Starkey 2011). Therefore, a scenario where there would be two events on one day may occur, but would be an extremely rare because a minimum of five to eight hours is needed to change over from an event (Starkey 2011). On these rare occasions where there would be two events in a day maximum daily criteria air pollutant emissions would be approximately double what is shown in Table 11. Table 11 Maximum Daily Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions on an Event Day (in pounds per day) Operations Phase VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Full Capacity Honda Center Event Natural Gas <1 4 3 <1 <1 <1 Transportation 301 359 3,021 4 39 39 Maximum Daily Emissions on an Event Day 301 363 3,024 4 39 39 SCAQMD Regional Significance Thresholds1 55 55 550 150 150 55 Average Attendance Honda Center Event Natural Gas <1 4 3 <1 <1 <1 Transportation 222 264 2,226 3 29 28 Maximum Daily Emissions on an Event Day 222 268 2,229 3 29 28 SCAQMD Regional Significance Thresholds1 55 55 550 150 150 55 Comparison of Sell Out and Average Attendance Events at Honda Center Difference Between a Sell Out Event & Average Attendance Event at Honda Center 79 95 795 1 10 11 SCAQMD Regional Significance Thresholds1 55 55 550 150 150 55 Difference Exceeds SCAQMD’s Threshold? Yes Yes Yes No No No Source: EMFAC2007 and SCAQMD 2011. 1 The project would not result in a net increase in the maximum daily emissions at Honda Center. However, for the purposes of this environmental assessment, impacts are based on the incremental increase between sold out events and average attendance events. 9 It should be noted that the Working Group also considered efficiency targets for 2035 for the first time in this Working Group meeting. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Page 28 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Regional Operational Impacts The project would not require construction activities to accommodate an increase in the number of events held at Honda Center. Consequently, construction-related regional significance thresholds are not applicable. Likewise, the proposed project would not increase seating capacity at Honda Center. Therefore, maximum daily emissions generated by events at Honda Center would not increase from baseline conditions as a result of the project. Although Honda Center currently generates both average attendance events and sell out events, for the purpose of the environmental assessment impacts are based on the incremental increase caused by sell out events at Honda Center. Significance is based on the comparison of Sell Out Honda Center Events vs. Average Attendance Honda Center Events. As shown in Table 11, sell out events generate substantially more traffic than average attendance events at Honda Center. As a result, these emissions exceed SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds for VOC, NOx, and CO and would cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the SoCAB. Localized Operational Impacts The project would not require construction activities to accommodate an increase in the number of events held at Honda Center. Consequently, construction-related LSTs are not applicable. For operational phase LSTs, SCAQMD only considers onsite stationary sources and mobile equipment. While regional daily emissions generated by operation of Honda Center are substantial, onsite emissions generation by stationary sources represent a fraction of total operational emissions. Operation of Honda Center does not generate substantial quantities of onsite, stationary-sources emissions. Land uses that have the potential to generate substantial stationary sources of emissions include industrial land uses, such as chemical processing. While not considered a “stationary” source of emissions, cars idling at Honda Center parking generate exhaust emissions after an event. The proposed project would not increase seating capacity at Honda Center nor cars generated by events. Therefore, the project would not result in an increase in emissions generated onsite. On site emissions generated at full event days and average event days would be similar. Consequently, no localized impacts would occur. Localized CO Hotspots Areas of vehicle congestion have the potential to create pockets of CO called hot spots. These pockets have the potential to exceed the state one-hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight-hour standard of 9.0 ppm. Because CO is produced in greatest quantities from vehicle combustion and does not readily disperse into the atmosphere, adherence to ambient air quality standards is typically demonstrated through an analysis of localized CO concentrations. Hot spots are typically produced at intersections, where traffic congestion is highest because vehicles queue for longer periods and are subject to reduced speeds. Typically, for an intersection to exhibit a significant CO concentration, it would operate at level of service (LOS) E or worse without improvements (Caltrans 1997). The 1993 CEQA Air Quality Handbook includes methodology to conduct localized CO modeling for traffic generated by a project. At the time of the 1993 Handbook, the SoCAB was designated as nonattainment under the California AAQS and National AAQS for CO. With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels and implementation of control technology on industrial facilities, CO concentrations in the SoCAB and in the state have steadily declined. In 2007, the SCAQMD was designated as in attainment for CO under both the California AAQS and National AAQS. As identified within SCAQMD's 2003 AQMP and the 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (1992 CO Plan), peak carbon monoxide concentrations in the SoCAB were a result of unusual ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 29 meteorological and topographical conditions and not a result of congestion at a particular intersection. A CO hot spot analysis was conducted for four busy intersections in Los Angeles10 at the peak morning and afternoon time periods and did not predict a violation of CO standards. Under existing and future vehicle emission rates, a project would have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection by more than 44,000 vehicles per hour—or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal air does not mix—in order to generate a significant CO impact (BAAQMD 2011). Event traffic at Honda Center does not accommodate this volume of traffic in a one-hour period; therefore, the project would not have the potential to substantially increase CO hotspots at intersections in the vicinity of the project site. Furthermore, the proposed project would not increase stadium capacity and would not increase air pollutant emissions at intersections in the vicinity of the project site. No localized air quality impacts related to mobile-source emissions would occur as a result of the project. AQMP Consistency A project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if it would conflict with or obstruct implementation of an air quality management plan. Review of project compliance with the AQMP provides the lead agency information for determining how individual projects fit into the local planning effort; informs decision makers about project-related environmental efforts under consideration at an early enough stage to ensure that air quality concerns are fully addressed; and project compliance with clean air goals contained in the AQMP. The regional emissions inventory for the SoCAB is compiled by the SCAQMD and the SCAG. Regional population, housing, and employment projections used by SCAG are based on the City’s General Plan land use designations and planned developments. The emissions inventory in the AQMP is based on these projections. These demographic trends are incorporated into the Regional Transportation Plan compiled by SCAG, to determine priority transportation projects determine the future efficiency of the transportation system within the SCAG region. If a project results in changes that affect the existing population, housing, or employment growth patterns and therefore SCAG’s demographic projections, it could affect the assumptions in SCAQMD’s AQMP. The proposed project is considered a regionally significant project because of the size of the facility and the extent of the proposed increase use of the facility. However, the Proposed Project would not increase capacity of Honda Center. Consequently, the project would not affect the southern California region’s demographic projections. Increasing the number of events held at Honda Center and the increase in emissions on sold out vs. average attendance event days would not conflict with the AQMP. Odors Current operations at Honda Center do not result in objectionable odors. The threshold for odor is if a project creates an odor nuisance pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 402, Nuisance, which states: A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. The provisions of this rule shall not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals. 10 The four intersections were: Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway; Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue; Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue; and La Cienega Boulevard and Century Boulevard. The busiest intersection evaluated (Wilshire and Veteran) had a daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day and LOS E in the morning peak hour and LOS F in the evening peak hour. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Page 30 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 The type of facilities that are considered to have objectionable odors include wastewater treatments plants, compost facilities, landfills, solid waste transfer stations, fiberglass manufacturing facilities, paint/coating operations auto body shops), dairy farms, petroleum refineries, asphalt batch plants, chemical manufacturing, and food manufacturing facilities (SCAQMD 1993). Existing operational odor sources associated with Honda Center would be kitchen or waste management activities. Proper maintenance and compliance with established waste management practices reduces the potential for objectionable odors during project operations. Any odors produced by Honda Center are not significant or highly objectionable and would be in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403. Increasing the number of events per year would likewise not result in odor impacts. No significant impacts would occur. 4.4 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY Global climate change is not confined to a particular project area and is generally accepted as the consequence of global industrialization over the last 200 years. A typical project, even a very large one, does not generate enough GHG emissions on its own to influence global climate change significantly; hence, the issue of global climate change is, by definition, a cumulative environmental impact. The analysis below provides the conclusions on the project-specific impact toward the cumulative impact of global climate change. The State of California, through its governor and its legislature, has established a comprehensive framework for the substantial reduction of GHG emissions over the next 10+ years. This will occur primarily through the implementation of AB 32 and SB 375, which address GHG emissions on a statewide cumulative basis. The proposed project would result in an increase in GHG emissions from transportation sources, offsite energy production required for onsite activities, natural gas used on site for heating and cooking, water use, and waste disposal. Life cycle emissions are not included in this analysis because not enough information is available for the proposed project, and therefore life cycle GHG emissions would be speculative.11 Project- related GHG emissions are shown in Table 12. Table 12 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Source GHG Emissions MTons/Year Existing Project Net Increase Transportation 23,755 32,926 9,171 Purchased Energy 12,342 17,712 5,370 Natural Gas 693 994 301 Total Energy 13,035 18,706 5,671 Water and Wastewater 151 220 68 Waste Disposal 126 183 57 Total All Sectors 37,068 52,035 14,967 GHG Emissions per Service Population1 6.5 6.4 -0.1 Notes: MTons: metric tons Sources: 1 Because of the type of regional event services provided by Honda Center, the traditional definition of Service Population is not directly applicable to Honda Center operations. Consequently, for the purpose of the GHG assessment. Service population is based on historical average daily spectators, 11 Life cycle emissions include indirect emissions associated with materials manufacture. However, these indirect emissions involve numerous parties, each of which is responsible for GHG emissions of their particular activity. Because the amount of materials consumed during the operation or construction of the proposed project is not known, the origin of the raw materials purchased is not known, and manufacturing information for those raw materials are also not known, calculation of life cycle emissions would be speculative. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR). A life-cycle analysis is not warranted (OPR 2008). ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 31 Table 12 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Source GHG Emissions MTons/Year Existing Project Net Increase staff/employee, and team/production member provided by Honda Center. GHG Emissions Impacts The proposed project would generate a net increase of 14,967 MTons of GHG per year compared to existing conditions. The total increase in GHG emissions onsite from the project would exceed SCAQMD’s proposed screening threshold of 3,000 MTons for all land use types.12 When the proposed screening threshold is exceeded, SCAQMD provides another tier of evaluation with the per capita threshold of 4.8 MTons per service population. The increase in GHG emissions cited above does not include gradual reductions in GHG emissions from an increase in fuel efficiency and higher utilization of renewable power in the local energy grid by year 2020 in accordance with AB 32, which is the efficiency target year. Table 13 presents GHG emissions of the project with Scoping Plan emission reductions and a comparison of total project emissions in comparison to SCAQMD’s proposed efficiency target of 4.8 MTons in 2020. For the purpose of this assessment, service population includes average daily employees and average daily visitors based on historic annual attendance at Honda Center (see Table The proposed project would result in annual emissions of 5.0 MTons per service population with the project. The project would result in a decrease in per capita emissions at Honda Center compared to existing conditions because the project would increase the use of the existing facility rather than construct a new sports arena to host basketball events. However, GHG emissions associated with the project would exceed SCAQMD’s proposed per capita significance threshold; and therefore, the proposed project’s cumulative contribution to GHG emissions would be potentially significant. A total of 1,819 MTons would need to be reduced in order to achieve a per capita efficiency goal of 4.8 MTons per service population in accordance with SCAQMD’s proposed efficiency metric. Table 13 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory with Scoping Plan Reductions Source Year 2020 GHG Emissions MTons/Year Project Percent of Inventory Transportation1 24,126 59% Purchased Energy2 15,303 37% Natural Gas 994 2% Total Energy 16,297 40% Water and Wastewater 220 Waste Disposal 183 Total All Sectors 40,826 100% GHG Emissions Per Service Population3 5.0 NA Notes: MTons: metric tons; Emissions may not add to 100% due to rounding. 1 Based on the EMFAC2007 Pavley I + LCFS Postprocessor Version 1.0. 2 SCE derives approximately 19.4 percent of its energy from renewable energy sources (SCE 2011). Assumes a similar percentage increase in renewable power for Anaheim Public Utilities between 2011 and 2020, in accordance with the state’s 33 percent RPS goal. 3 Because of the type of regional event services provided by Honda Center, the traditional definition of service population is not directly applicable to 12 This threshold is based on SCAQMD’s 3,000 MTons combined threshold proposed by SCAQMD’s Working Group, which is based on a survey of the GHG emissions inventory of CEQA projects. Approximately 90 percent of CEQA projects GHG emissions inventories exceed 3,000 MTons, which is based on a potential threshold approach cited in CAPCOA’s white paper, “CEQA and Climate Change.” ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Page 32 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Table 13 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory with Scoping Plan Reductions Source Year 2020 GHG Emissions MTons/Year Project Percent of Inventory Honda Center operations. Consequently, for the purpose of the GHG assessment, service population is based on historical average daily spectators, staff/employee, and team/production member provided by Honda Center. Consistency with GHG Reduction Goals and Policies A project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if it would conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. While actions taken in California alone cannot stabilize the climate, the state’s actions set an example and help to drive the global progress toward reduction of GHG. If the industrialized world were to follow the emission reduction targets established by California, and industrializing nations reduced emissions according to the lower emissions path (lower emissions IPPC scenario B1), medium or higher warming ranges of global temperature increases might be avoided, along with the most severe consequences of global warming (IPCC 2007). In 2007, the CEC published “The Role of Land Use in Meeting California’s Energy and Climate Change Goals” (CEC 2007). In this publication, the CEC acknowledged that California’s land use patterns shape energy use and the production of GHG. Transportation contributes a large percentage of the state’s GHG emissions, and research shows that increasing a community or development’s density and accessibility to job centers are the two most significant factors for reducing vehicle miles traveled through design (CEC 2007). In accordance with AB 32, CARB developed the Scoping Plan to outline the state’s strategy to achieve 1990 level emissions by year 2020. To estimate the reductions necessary, CARB projected statewide year 2020 BAU GHG emissions GHG emissions in the absence of statewide emission reduction measures). CARB identified that the state as a whole would be required to reduce GHG emissions by 28.5 percent from year 2020 BAU. Compliance with the federal and statewide GHG emissions reduction measures that are being implemented over the next 10 years, as outlined above, would reduce Honda Center’s GHG emissions. In addition, increasing the number of annual events results in a decrease in per capita GHG emissions since the building generates emissions regardless of whether it is in use or not (see Table 12). Thus, increase the number of events per year increases the intensity and efficiency and the existing land use. In addition, several modes of public transportation provide access to Honda Center, including passenger rail and bus service. The Anaheim Amtrak/Metrolink Station is at the north end of the Angel Stadium of Anaheim parking lot 0.4 mile southwest of Honda Center. Two passenger rail services serve the station. The Amtrak Pacific Surfliner operates between San Diego and San Luis Obispo seven days per week. Eleven trains in each direction, northbound and southbound, stop at Anaheim on weekdays (Amtrak 2011). Metrolink is a commuter rail service. One Metrolink line, the Orange County line, serves the Anaheim station seven days per week; on weekdays 13 northbound and 12 southbound trains stop at Anaheim (Metrolink 2011). Honda Center is a 0.5 mile walk from the Amtrak/Metrolink Station and a 0.5 walk from the proposed ARTIC Station. Public bus service is provided in Orange County by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). OCTA Route 50 operates on Katella Avenue past Honda Center. Route 50 provides east-west service between the City of Orange and Long Beach seven days per week; peak hour weekday frequency is about 30 minutes (OCTA 2011a). OCTA Route 153 operates on Katella Avenue between Struck Avenue and Main Street, providing north-south service between Anaheim and Brea seven days per week with hourly frequency (OCTA 2011b). The southern terminus of this route, on Katella Avenue, is approximately 0.3 mile east of Honda Center and is walkable using sidewalks. Routes 50 and 135 include regular bus service and station- link bus service. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 33 The project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions, and for this reason the project would have a less than significant impact under this second threshold. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Mitigation Measures Page 34 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 5. MITIGATION MEASURES 5.1 EXISTING REGULATIONS • CARB Rule 2485 – Airborne Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) • SCAQMD Rule 201 – Permit to Construct • SCAQMD Rule 402 – Nuisance Odors • SCAQMD Rule 403 – Fugitive Dust • City of San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code, Section 9-3.513. • SCAQMD Rule 1108 – Cutback Asphalt • SCAQMD Rule 1113 – Architectural Coatings • SCAQMD Rule 1301 – New Source Review • SCAQMD Rule 1403 – Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation Activities • 40 CFR Part 85 – Control of Air Pollution from Mobile Sources • 40 CFR Part 89 – Control of Emissions from New and In-Use Nonroad Compression-Ignition Engines • Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24) • Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 20) • Motor Vehicle Standards (AB 1493) 5.2 MITIGATION MEASURES Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Mitigation measures described below for GHG emissions would also reduce criteria air pollutant emissions generated on a day with a sold out Honda Center event. Greenhouse Gases GHG-1 Honda Center shall request a Comprehensive Energy Audit by the Anaheim Public Utilities, which is a free service offered by the utility. According to the Anaheim Public Utilities, customers can reduce energy by as much as 10 to 25 percent of month through efficiency reductions. Energy reductions can be accomplished through retrofits and/or offsets provided by renewable energy generation onsite. Potential combination of measures that could be taken to achieve a reduction in energy demand includes: a. Replacement of indoor and outdoor lighting fixtures with LED or compact fluorescent fixtures. b. Retrofitting air conditioning, heating, and ventilation systems and/or calibrating systems for efficiency increasing average indoor temperature settings in summer and during hockey events). c. Replacing restaurant refrigerators, freezers, and other appliances with Energy Star rated appliances to reduce plug-load. d. Installation of photovoltaic system carports with solar panels or rooftop-mounted solar panels) or wind-energy-system at Honda Center to offset energy use generated during an event. For example, a 750 kW-ac photovoltaic system is estimated to produce 1,242,163 kWh per year based on the California Public Utilities Commission’s Clean Power Estimator. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Mitigation Measures Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 35 GHG-2 The City of Anaheim shall continue coordinating with the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), which operates Metrolink service on Orange County Line in conjunction with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). The City of Anaheim shall coordinate with SCRRA to discuss the potential for providing special event service to Honda Center and the Angel Stadium of Anaheim on weekends and during the week. A list of events, including the day or the event, time of the event, and duration of the event at Honda Center and the Angel Stadium of Anaheim shall be provided to SCRRA to initiate these discussions. Barriers to implement Special Event Service on the Orange County Line shall be discussed. Potential funding options to overcoming barriers to implement special event Service on the Orange County line should be indentified and considered, including funding for additional train operators and trains that coincide with commuter service. GHG-3 To encourage use of transit by visitors to Honda Center, ticket holders shall be provided information on the Metrolink and Amtrak services available on the day of the event, including Metrolink and Amtrak scheduling. 5.3 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Measure GHG-1 through GHG-3 would reduce criteria air pollutant emissions to the extent feasible. However, the effectiveness of these mitigation measures is uncertain and cannot be quantified. Therefore, regional criteria air pollutant emissions impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Greenhouse Gas Emissions As described previously, Honda Center would need to reduce GHG emissions by 1,819 MTons in order to achieve an efficiency metric of 4.8 MTons per service population. Mitigation Measure GHG-1 through GHG-3 would reduce GHG emissions to the extent feasible. However, these mitigation measures do not yield quantifiable reductions as the degree of effectiveness is uncertain. Therefore, GHG emissions impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. ---PAGE BREAK--- 6. References Page 36 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 6. REFERENCES Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2011, Updated May. California Environmental Quality Act, Air Quality Guidelines. California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2009, June. Proposed Regulation to Implement the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Volume I, Initial Statement of Reasons. 2008a, October. Climate Change Proposed Scoping Plan, a Framework for Change. 2008b January. Comparison of Greenhouse Gas Reductions under CAFE Standards and ARB Regulations Adopted Pursuant to AB1493. 2008c February. Comparison of Greenhouse Gas Reductions for the United States and Canada Under US CAFÉ Standards and California Air Resources Board Greenhouse Gas Regulations. 2005, April. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. 1999, December. Final Staff Report: Update to the Toxic Air Contaminant List. California Air Pollution Control Officer’s Association (CAPCOA). 2010, August. Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures. California Climate Action Team (CAT). 2007, April 20. CAT Proposed Early Actions to Mitigate Climate Change in California. 2006, March. Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislature. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 1997, December. Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol. UCD-ITS-RR-97-21. Prepared by Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis. California Energy Commission (CEC). 2007. The Role of Land Use in Meeting California’s Energy and Climate Change Goals. Report CEC-600-2007-008-SD. 2006a, December. Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990 to 2004. Report CEC-600-2006-013-SF. 2006b. Our Changing Climate, Assessing the Risks to California, 2006 Biennial Report. California Climate Change Center, California Energy Commission Staff Paper, Sacramento, California, Report CEC-500-2006-077. 2005a, June. Climate Change Emissions Estimates from Bemis, Gerry and Jennifer Allen, Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990 to 2002 Update. California Energy Commission Staff Paper CEC-600-2005-025. Sacramento, California. 2005b, November. California's Water-Energy Relationship. CEC-700.2005-011-SF. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR). 2008, June. Technical Advisory, CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change Through CEQA Review Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001. Third Assessment Report: Climate Change ---PAGE BREAK--- 6. References Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 37 2001. New York: Cambridge University Press. 2007. Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007. New York: Cambridge University Press. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) User’s Guide. 2008, September. Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the South Coast Air Basin (MATES III). 2007, June. Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan. 2006, October. Final Methodology to Calculate PM2.5 and PM2.5 Significance Thresholds. 2003, June. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. 1993, April. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. State Water Resources Control Board 2010, February. Final 20X2020 Water Conservation Plan. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1999. The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. Personal Communications Dion Beckton, Senior Building Engineer, Honda Center. 2011, September. Personal Communications. Tanya S. La Soya, Convention, Sports & Entertainment Manager, Anaheim. 2011, June. Personal Communications. Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations, Honda Center. 2011, June. Personal Communications and Honda Center Operational Survey. Merit Tully, Director of Media & Communications, Honda Center. 2011, September. Personal Communications. Websites Amtrak. 2011, July 15. Timetables. http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer/Page/1237405732505/1237405732505. Anaheim Regional Transit (ART). 2011. Route 15 Schedule. http://www.rideart.org/schedules/route-15/ California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2011. Air Pollution Data Monitoring Cards (2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010). http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/index.html 2010, August. Ambient Air Quality Standards. http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf. 2010, March. Area Designations: Activities and Maps. http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm. ---PAGE BREAK--- 6. References Page 38 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 California Integrated Waste Management Board (now CalRecycle). Revised 2008. Contractor's Report to the Board, California 2008 Statewide Waste Characterization Study. http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1346 California Public Utilities Commission. 2011. Clean Power Estimator. http://www.gosolarcalifornia.org/tools/clean_power_estimator.php Metrolink. 2011, July 5. Schedules: Orange County Line. http://www.metrolinktrains.com/schedules/html.php?id=1111. Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). 2011, June 12. Route 50 Schedule. http://www.octa.net/pdf/pdf/feb2011/route050.pdf. 2011b, June 12. Route 153 Schedule. http://www.octa.net/pdf/pdf/june2011/route153.pdf. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). South Coast AQMD List of Current Rules. California Air Resources Board. http://www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/sc/cur.htm. Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the South Coast Air Basin (MATES III) Model Estimated Carcinogenic Risk. http://www2.aqmd.gov/webappl/matesiii/. Accessed 2011. SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. Air Quality Analysis Handbook. Updates to CEQA Air Quality Handbook. http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/hdbk.html. Southern California Edison (SCE). 2011. Renewable Energy. http://www.sce.com/powerandenvironment/renewables/default.htm Office of the California Attorney General (AG). 2008, May. The California Environmental Quality Act Addressing Global Warming Impacts at the Local Agency Level. http://ag.ca.gov/globalwarming/pdf/GW_mitigation_measures.pdf United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2009. Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetimes. Non CO2 Gases Economic Analysis and Inventory. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/glossary.html#GWP 2008, April. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/index.html 2008. Criteria Pollutants. Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC). Western U.S. Climate Historical Summaries. Santa Ana Monitoring Station (ID No. ID 049087). Accessed June 2011. ---PAGE BREAK--- 6. References Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 39 Models California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2006, November 1. EMFAC2007 Computer Model. Version 2.3. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2011.1.1. ---PAGE BREAK--- 6. References Page 40 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim Appendix A. Summary of GHG and Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- SUMMARY - GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY Tier 3 Analysis - Screening Threshold Without Project With Project Net Increase Category MTons/Year MTons/Year MTons/Year Transportation 23,755 64% 32,926 63% 9,171 61% Purchased Energy 12,342 33% 17,712 34% 5,370 36% Natural Gas 693 2% 994 2% 301 2% Total Energy 13,035 35% 18,706 36% 5,671 38% Water/Wastewater 151 0.4% 220 0.4% 68 0% Waste Disposal 126 0.3% 183 0.4% 57 0.4% Total 37,068 100% 52,035 100% 14,967 100% Percent increase in events: 45% [PHONE REDACTED] With Project GHG Reductions Tier 4 (Total Inventory w/Reductions) MTons/Year NEEDED for 4.8 Transportation 24,126 59% Purchased Energy 15,303 37% Natural Gas 994 2% Total Energy 16,297 40% Water/Wastewater 220 0.5% Waste Disposal 183 0.4% Total 40,826 100% -1,819 Tier 4 Analysis - Efficiency Target Without Project With Project 2020 With Project 2020 w/ Mitigation 2011 Increase Average Daily Service Population 5,663 8,127 8,127 2,464 MTons/Service Population 6.5 6.4 5.0 4.8 6.1 Average Annual Service Population Existing Project Average Annual visitors 1,723,333 2,500,523 Average Annual Employees & Team 343,619 465,663 Average People Onsite Per Year 2,066,952 2,966,185 Increase Average Population Per Day 5,663 8,127 2,464 Percent of Inventory Percent of Inventory Percent of Inventory Percent of Inventory Assumes the project would increase the number of events by 45% and annual emissions for non-transportation sectors (natural gas, purchased electricity, water/wastewater, and waste disposal) are increased proportionately. See transportation assumptions for the trip generation with and without the proposed project. See per-capita generation for natural gas and purchased energy forecasts. Transportation - Based on Pavley I + LCFS Post-Processor. SCE has derives approximately 19.4 percent of its energy from renewable energy sources (SCE 2011). The Scoping Plan calls for a 33 percent RPS by 2020. In the absence of data from Anaheim Public Utilities, assumes a similar percent increase in renewable energy generation for Anaheim Public Utilities 13.6 percent reduction in fossil fuel use) for 33 RPS. ---PAGE BREAK--- SUMMARY - CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INVENTORY Full Capacity Events ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Natural Gas 0.39 3.51 2.95 0.02 0.27 0.27 Transportation 301 359 3,021 4 39 39 Summary 301 363 3,024 4 39 39 Average Attendance Events ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Natural Gas 0.39 3.51 2.95 0.02 0.27 0.27 Transportation 222 264 2,226 3 29 28 Summary 222 268 2,229 3 29 28 Diff Btwn Sell Out & Avg Attendance Event 79 95 795 1 10 11 SCAQMD's Significance Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55 lbs/day lbs/day ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim Appendix B. Transportation Emissions ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Traffic Emission Factors See EMFAC2007 Model run for year 2011 Average Daily Vistors Year Vistors Events Average Daily Visitors/Event 2006 1,600,000 154 10,390 2007 1,760,000 144 12,222 2008 1,590,000 162 9,815 2009 1,460,000 136 10,735 2010 1,300,000 120 10,833 Highest 3-years averaged 153 11,264 Source: Email Correspondence (June 2011): The Honda Center Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations Events by Type 2010 Percent Basketball 15 13% Hockey 45 38% Other (Concerts) 60 50% 120 100% Source: Email Correspondence (June 2011): The Honda Center Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations Traffic Data Provided by The Honda Center Event Days 153 Staff Occupants per Vehicle Trip Rate Trips basketball: 950 1.2 2 1,583 Hockey: 950 1.2 2 1,583 Concerts: 1,000 1.2 2 1,667 Team Occupants per Vehicle Trip Rate Trips basketball: 250 1.2 2 417 Hockey: 200 1.2 2 333 Concerts: 200 1.2 2 333 Spectator Seats Occupants per Vehicle Trip Rate Trips basketball: 18,336 3.0 2 12,224 Hockey: 17,174 3.0 2 11,449 Concerts: 18,900 3.0 2 12,600 Trips by type Trips basketball: 14,224 Hockey: 13,366 Concerts: 14,600 Maximum Trips 14,600 With Trip Reductions 13,743 Maximum Event Trips ---PAGE BREAK--- Average Visitors Occupants per Vehicle Trip Rate Trips Average Visitors 11,264 3.0 2 7,509 Average Staff 1,625 1.2 2 2,708 Average Team 344 1.2 2 573 Average Daily Event Trips 10,790 With Trip Reductions (see assumptions below) 10,124 Non-Event Days 212 Staff Occupants per Vehicle Trip Rate Trips Employees (when dark) 200 1.2 4 667 Trip rate for non-event days 1.026 Fleet Mix Fleet Mix Percent * Passenger Vehicles 4,000 98.4% * Charter Buses 5 0.1% Medium Duty Trucks (assume 1% for food service) 1.0% * Heavy Duty Trucks 20 0.5% 4,025 * Source: Starkey 2011 Trip Reductions CHARTER BUSES. Assumes 40 occupants per bus and 5 buses: 200 133 trip reduction 723 trip reduction peak day 533 trip reduction average day Average Distance Average Distance One-Way: 31.1 miles Email Correspondence (June 2011): The Honda Center Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations The Honda Center Dion Beckton, Senior Building Engineer Average Daily Event Trips Based on TicketMaster Ticket Sales by Zip Code provided by the Honda Center. Assumed will-call, season ticketholder and cash sales occur within a similar distance of the 90th percentile of sales. Assumes 1.2 occupants per vehicle for staff and team and 3.0 occupants per vehicle for spectators (Honda Center). Assumes 2 trips per vehicle for events (home-to-other [event] and other-to-home). Note: because of retail/restaurant onsite and duration of events, no "dinner/lunch" trips are assumed for employees. Assumes 1.2 occupants per vehicle for staff. Assumes 4 trips per vehicle (home-to-work, work-to-other [lunch], other-to-work, work-to-home) TRANSIT RIDERSHIP: Assumes a 5% trip reduction in trips for proximity to the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) or other transit options provided by the Orange County Transporation Authority (OCTA) and location within the Platinum Triangle mixed-use area. ---PAGE BREAK--- Opening Year Without LCFS and Pavley Based on EMFAC2007 assumes PM2.5 is 99 percent of PM10 for mobile sources. SCAQMD 2006. Daily VMT Average Attendan ce Trip Length 314,856 10,124 31.1 Total Emissions LDA-TOT LDT1- TOT LDT2- TOT MDV-TOT HHDT- TOT UB-TOT lbs/day CO 1,254 211 689 31 33 7 2,226 PM10 14 2 9 0 2 0 29 PM2.5 14 2 9 0 2 0 28 NOx 101 18 81 4 50 10 264 ROG 131 20 63 3 5 1 222 CO2 174,801 29,181 94,486 4,734 6,349 1,507 311,058 SO2 2 0 1 0 0 0 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim Appendix F. SCAQMD Local Rules and Regulations ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- HondaCenterburden2.xls Pavley Page 2 Vehicle Category Vehicle Population Weekday VMT from EMFAC (VMT/day) Weekday CO2 Emissions from EMFAC (tons/day) Weekday CO2 Emission Reduction from Pavley I (tons/day) Weekday CO2 Emissions after adopting Pavley I (tons/day) % CO2 Emission Reduction from LCFS Weekday CO2 Emission Reduction from LCFS (tons/day) Weekday CO2 Emissions after adopting Pavley I & LCFS (tons/day) Annual CO2 Emissions after adopting Pavley I & LCFS (MMTCO2/year) LDA 1,349,516 43,002,112 18,634.82 3,846.20 14,788.62 10.00% 1,478.86 13,309.76 4.19 LDT1 182,793 6,258,834 3,395.40 633.21 2,762.19 10.00% 276.22 2,485.97 0.78 LDT2 604,613 20,590,234 11,340.18 1,515.23 9,824.95 10.00% 982.49 8,842.45 2.78 MDV 273,795 9,668,478 7,244.62 909.08 6,335.54 10.00% 633.55 5,701.98 1.79 Total 2,410,717 79,519,658 40,615.02 6,903.72 33,711.30 10.00% 3,371.13 30,340.17 9.55 CO2 Emission Reductions from the Pavley I Regulation & the Low Carbon Fuel Standard for Orange - 2020 (OC2020Burden) ---PAGE BREAK--- Opening Year Without LCFS and Pavley Based on EMFAC2007 assumes PM2.5 is 99 percent of PM10 for mobile sources. SCAQMD 2006. Daily VMT Max Event Trips Trip Length 427,407 13,743 31.1 Total Emissions LDA-TOT LDT1- TOT LDT2- TOT MDV-TOT HHDT- TOT UB-TOT lbs/day CO 1,703 286 936 42 44 10 3,021 PM10 20 3 13 0 3 0 39 PM2.5 19 3 13 0 3 0 39 NOx 138 24 110 5 67 14 359 ROG 177 27 85 4 7 1 301 CO2 237,286 39,612 128,262 6,427 8,619 2,046 422,252 SO2 2 0 1 0 0 0 4 Annual VMT Average Event Trips Event Days NonEvent Trips Non Event Days Trip Length 52,570,694 10,124 153 667 212 31.1 Based on EMFAC2007, using 2030 emission rates Total Emissions LDA-TOT LDT1- TOT LDT2- TOT MDV-TOT HHDT- TOT UB-TOT MTons/year CO 95 16 52 2 2 1 169 PM10 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 PM2.5 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 NOx 8 1 6 0 4 1 20 ROG 10 2 5 0 0 0 17 CO2 13,239 2,210 7,156 359 481 114 23,558 N2O 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 CO2e 23,755 SO2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N2O emissions were calculated using an off-model adjustment provided by CARB in AB 32 Technical Appendices. The off- model adjustment uses a linear regression correlating N2O with NOx. (N2O = 0.0167 + 0.0318 x NOx) ---PAGE BREAK--- Annual VMT w/Project Average Event Trips Event Days NonEvent Trips Non Event Days Trip Length 72,864,470 10,124 222 667 143 31.1 MTons/Year MTons/year CO 132 22 72 3 3 1 234 PM10 2 0 1 0 0 0 3 PM2.5 2 0 1 0 0 0 3 NOx 11 2 9 0 5 1 28 ROG 14 2 7 0 1 0 23 CO2 18,349 3,063 9,918 497 666 158 32,652 N2O 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 CO2e 32,926 SO2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N2O emissions were calculated using an off-model adjustment provided by CARB in AB 32 Technical Appendices. The off- model adjustment uses a linear regression correlating N2O with NOx. (N2O = 0.0167 + 0.0318 x NOx) ---PAGE BREAK--- 2020 With LCFS and Pavley Based on EMFAC2007 + LCFS/Pavley PostProcessor assumes PM2.5 is 99 percent of PM10 for mobile sources. SCAQMD 2006. Daily VMT Max Event Trips Trip Length 427,407 13,743 31.1 Total Emissions LDA-TOT lbs/day CO 774 134 563 26 18 7 1,522 PM10 20 3 14 1 1 0 39 PM2.5 20 3 14 1 1 0 38 NOx 57 11 56 3 26 11 163 ROG 99 17 71 3 3 1 194 CO2 165,979 28,734 99,864 5,042 8,847 1,928 310,394 N2O 2 0 2 0 1 0 5 CO2e 312,000 SO2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual VMT w/Project Average Event Trips Event Days NonEvent Trips Non Event Days Trip Length 72,864,470 10,124 222 667 143 31.1 MTons/Year MTons/year CO 60 10 44 2 1 1 118 PM10 2 0 1 0 0 0 3 PM2.5 2 0 1 0 0 0 3 NOx 4 1 4 0 2 1 13 ROG 8 1 6 0 0 0 15 CO2 12,835 2,222 7,722 390 684 149 24,002 N2O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO2e 24,126 SO2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N2O emissions were calculated using an off-model adjustment provided by CARB in AB 32 Technical Appendices. The off- model adjustment uses a linear regression correlating N2O with NOx. (N2O = 0.0167 + 0.0318 x NOx) N2O emissions were calculated using an off-model adjustment provided by CARB in AB 32 Technical Appendices. The off- model adjustment uses a linear regression correlating N2O with NOx. (N2O = 0.0167 + 0.0318 x NOx) ---PAGE BREAK--- Title : OrangeCounty2011 Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Run Date : 2011/06/30 09:40:24 Scen Year: 2011 All model years in the range 1967 to 2011 selected Season : Annual Area : Orange County I/M Stat : Enhanced Interim (2005) Emissions: Tons Per Day LDA-TOT LDT1-TOT LDT2-TOT MDV-TOT HHDT-TOT UB-TOT ALL-TOT Vehicles 1230350 165981 533516 [PHONE REDACTED] 1073 2328030 Honda Center 1230350 165981 533516 1929847 62.7% 8.5% 27.2% 1.00% 0.50% 0.10% 100.0% VMT/1000 40408 5899 19272 8978 848 117 79536 VMT 40,408,000 5,899,000 19,272,000 8,978,000 848,000 117,000 79,536,000 Trips 7731650 1040560 3366570 1508660 53503 4290 15858600 Percent VMT 51% 7% 24% 11% 1% 0% 100% Reactive Organic Gas Emissions Run Exh 2.67 0.6 1.49 1.11 1.07 0.15 9.58 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.1 0 0.17 Start Ex 3.33 0.43 1.67 1.05 0.15 0.01 8.04 Total Ex 6.01 1.04 3.16 2.15 1.32 0.15 17.79 Diurnal 0.99 0.12 0.39 0.16 0 0 1.81 Hot Soak 1.51 0.2 0.59 0.24 0 0 2.68 Running 4.2 0.8 2.65 1.06 0.03 0.01 10.1 Resting 0.64 0.08 0.26 0.11 0 0 1.18 Total 13.35 2.24 7.05 3.72 1.35 0.16 33.56 lbs/day 26700 4480 14100 7440 2700 320 lbs/VMT 6.61E-04 7.59E-04 7.32E-04 8.29E-04 3.18E-03 2.74E-03 corrected for %Fleet 4.15E-04 6.43E-05 1.99E-04 8.29E-06 1.59E-05 2.74E-06 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Run Exh 89.7 17.63 56.23 32.35 6.28 1.25 235.02 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.4 0 0.87 Start Ex 38.6 5.73 21.32 11.56 2.12 0.1 94.53 Total Ex 128.3 23.36 77.56 43.91 8.81 1.35 330.41 lbs/day 256600 46720 155120 87820 17620 2700 lbs/VMT 6.35E-03 7.92E-03 8.05E-03 9.78E-03 2.08E-02 2.31E-02 corrected for %Fleet 3.98E-03 6.70E-04 2.19E-03 9.78E-05 1.04E-04 2.31E-05 Oxides of Nitrogen Emissions Run Exh 7.66 1.6 7 4.39 12.18 1.89 49.28 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.95 0 1.18 Start Ex 2.71 0.38 2.14 1.16 0.24 0.01 9.48 Total Ex 10.37 1.98 9.14 5.56 13.37 1.9 59.95 lbs/day 20740 3960 18280 11120 26740 3800 lbs/VMT 5.13E-04 6.71E-04 9.49E-04 1.24E-03 3.15E-02 3.25E-02 corrected for %Fleet 3.22E-04 5.68E-05 2.58E-04 1.24E-05 1.58E-04 3.25E-05 ---PAGE BREAK--- Title : OrangeCounty2011 Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Run Date : 2011/06/30 09:40:24 Scen Year: 2011 All model years in the range 1967 to 2011 selected Season : Annual Area : Orange County I/M Stat : Enhanced Interim (2005) Emissions: Tons Per Day LDA-TOT LDT1-TOT LDT2-TOT MDV-TOT HHDT-TOT UB-TOT ALL-TOT Vehicles 1230350 165981 533516 [PHONE REDACTED] 1073 2328030 Honda Center 1230350 165981 533516 1929847 62.7% 8.5% 27.2% 1.00% 0.50% 0.10% 100.0% VMT/1000 40408 5899 19272 8978 848 117 79536 VMT 40,408,000 5,899,000 19,272,000 8,978,000 848,000 117,000 79,536,000 Trips 7731650 1040560 3366570 1508660 53503 4290 15858600 Percent VMT 51% 7% 24% 11% 1% 0% 100% Carbon Dioxide Emissions (000) Run Exh 17.26 3.13 10.3 6.55 1.66 0.28 42.71 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.06 0 0.08 Start Ex 0.62 0.1 0.33 0.21 0 0 1.33 Total Ex 17.88 3.23 10.63 6.75 1.71 0.28 44.13 lbs day 35760000 6460000 21260000 13500000 3420000 560000 lbs/VMT 8.85E-01 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.50E+00 4.03E+00 4.79E+00 corrected for %Fleet 5.55E-01 9.27E-02 3.00E-01 1.50E-02 2.02E-02 4.79E-03 PM10 Emissions Run Exh 0.51 0.09 0.58 0.27 0.53 0.03 2.31 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.01 0 0.02 Start Ex 0.05 0.01 0.05 0.02 0 0 0.14 Total Ex 0.56 0.1 0.63 0.29 0.55 0.03 2.47 TireWear 0.36 0.05 0.17 0.08 0.03 0 0.74 BrakeWr 0.56 0.08 0.27 0.12 0.03 0 1.11 Total 1.48 0.23 1.06 0.5 0.61 0.03 4.32 lbds/day 2960 460 2120 1000 1220 60 lbs/VMT 7.33E-05 7.80E-05 1.10E-04 1.11E-04 1.44E-03 5.13E-04 corrected for %Fleet 4.60E-05 6.60E-06 2.99E-05 1.11E-06 7.19E-06 5.13E-07 Lead 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SOx 0.17 0.03 0.1 0.07 0.02 0 0.43 lbds/day 340 60 200 140 40 0 lbs/VMT 8.41E-06 1.02E-05 1.04E-05 1.56E-05 4.72E-05 0.00E+00 corrected for %Fleet 5.28E-06 8.61E-07 2.82E-06 1.56E-07 2.36E-07 0.00E+00 Fuel Consumption (000 gallons) Gasoline 1850.81 329.59 1101.64 698.45 4.8 2.14 4157.14 Diesel 2.02 4.52 0.57 0.78 150.91 23.94 367.75 ---PAGE BREAK--- Title : OC2020Burden Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Run Date : 2011/09/19 10:10:10 Scen Year: 2020 All model years in the range 1976 to 2020 selected Season : Annual Area : Orange County I/M Stat : Enhanced Interim (2005) Emissions: Tons Per Day LDA-TOT LDT1-TOT LDT2-TOT MDV-TOT HHDT-TOT UB-TOT ALL-TOT Vehicles 1,349,520 182,793 604,613 273,795 5,834 1,218 2,596,980 Honda Center from 2011 62.7% 8.5% 27.2% 1.0% 0.5% 0.1% 100.0% VMT/1000 43,002 6,259 20,590 9,668 1,087 133 85,272 VMT 43,002,000 6,259,000 20,590,000 9,668,000 1,087,000 133,000 85,272,000 Trips 8,398,070 1,131,140 3,738,980 1,693,450 45,309 4,873 17,591,600 Percent VMT 50% 7% 24% 11% 1% 0% 100% Reactive Organic Gas Emissions Run Exh 1.43 0.26 1.2 0.86 0.58 0.15 6.82 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.1 0 0.19 Start Ex 1.46 0.22 1.03 0.69 0.07 0.01 4.58 Total Ex 2.89 0.48 2.24 1.55 0.75 0.16 11.59 Diurnal 0.64 0.09 0.39 0.18 0 0 1.45 Hot Soak 1.26 0.19 0.71 0.32 0 0 2.6 Running 2.62 0.67 2.62 1.16 0.01 0.01 8.32 Resting 0.53 0.08 0.35 0.16 0 0 1.2 Total 7.93 1.49 6.3 3.36 0.76 0.16 25.17 lbs/day 15860 2980 12600 6720 1520 320 50340 lbs/VMT 3.69E-04 4.76E-04 6.12E-04 6.95E-04 1.40E-03 2.41E-03 5.90E-04 corrected for %Fleet 2.31E-04 4.03E-05 1.66E-04 6.95E-06 6.99E-06 2.41E-06 5.90E-04 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Run Exh 43.25 8.41 36.07 21.83 3.09 0.94 134.74 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.43 0 0.96 Start Ex 18.79 3.2 13.81 8.03 0.94 0.1 55.55 Total Ex 62.05 11.61 49.88 29.87 4.47 1.04 191.25 lbs/day 124100 23220 99760 59740 8940 2080 382500 lbs/VMT 2.89E-03 3.71E-03 4.85E-03 6.18E-03 8.22E-03 1.56E-02 4.49E-03 corrected for %Fleet 1.81E-03 3.14E-04 1.32E-03 6.18E-05 4.11E-05 1.56E-05 4.49E-03 Oxides of Nitrogen Emissions Run Exh 3.38 0.73 3.74 2.4 5.25 1.66 25.2 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 1.23 0 1.5 Start Ex 1.17 0.2 1.23 0.72 0.13 0.01 6.3 Total Ex 4.54 0.93 4.97 3.12 6.6 1.67 33 lbs/day 9080 1860 9940 6240 13200 3340 66000 lbs/VMT 2.11E-04 2.97E-04 4.83E-04 6.45E-04 1.21E-02 2.51E-02 7.74E-04 corrected for %Fleet 1.32E-04 2.52E-05 1.31E-04 6.45E-06 6.07E-05 2.51E-05 7.74E-04 ---PAGE BREAK--- Title : OC2020Burden Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Run Date : 2011/09/19 10:10:10 Scen Year: 2020 All model years in the range 1976 to 2020 selected Season : Annual Area : Orange County I/M Stat : Enhanced Interim (2005) Emissions: Tons Per Day LDA-TOT LDT1-TOT LDT2-TOT MDV-TOT HHDT-TOT UB-TOT ALL-TOT Vehicles 1,349,520 182,793 604,613 273,795 5,834 1,218 2,596,980 Honda Center from 2011 62.7% 8.5% 27.2% 1.0% 0.5% 0.1% 100.0% VMT/1000 43,002 6,259 20,590 9,668 1,087 133 85,272 VMT 43,002,000 6,259,000 20,590,000 9,668,000 1,087,000 133,000 85,272,000 Trips 8,398,070 1,131,140 3,738,980 1,693,450 45,309 4,873 17,591,600 Percent VMT 50% 7% 24% 11% 1% 0% 100% Carbon Dioxide Emissions (000) Run Exh 17.98 3.29 10.97 7.02 2.18 0.3 45.72 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.07 0 0.1 Start Ex 0.65 0.11 0.37 0.23 0 0 1.45 Total Ex 18.63 3.4 11.34 7.24 2.25 0.3 47.27 lbs day 37260000 6800000 22680000 14480000 4500000 600000 94540000 lbs/VMT 8.66E-01 1.09E+00 1.10E+00 1.50E+00 4.14E+00 4.51E+00 1.11E+00 corrected for %Fleet 5.44E-01 9.19E-02 3.00E-01 1.50E-02 2.07E-02 4.51E-03 1.11E+00 PAVLEY POST PROCESSOR Total Ex 1.33E+04 2.49E+03 8.84E+03 5.70E+03 lbs day 26619522.98 4971943.107 17684904.87 11403967.64 4.50E+06 6.00E+05 9.45E+07 lbs/VMT 6.19E-01 7.94E-01 8.59E-01 1.18E+00 4.14E+00 4.51E+00 1.11E+00 corrected for %Fleet 3.88E-01 6.72E-02 2.34E-01 1.18E-02 2.07E-02 4.51E-03 1.11E+00 PM10 Emissions Run Exh 0.56 0.1 0.7 0.35 0.24 0.03 2.22 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.01 0 0.01 Start Ex 0.06 0.01 0.07 0.03 0 0 0.18 Total Ex 0.62 0.11 0.77 0.38 0.24 0.03 2.41 TireWear 0.38 0.06 0.18 0.09 0.04 0 0.8 BrakeWr 0.59 0.09 0.28 0.13 0.03 0 1.19 Total 1.59 0.25 1.24 0.6 0.32 0.03 4.4 lbds/day 3180 500 2480 1200 640 60 8800 lbs/VMT 7.40E-05 7.99E-05 1.20E-04 1.24E-04 5.89E-04 4.51E-04 1.03E-04 corrected for %Fleet 4.64E-05 6.76E-06 3.28E-05 1.24E-06 2.94E-06 4.51E-07 1.03E-04 Lead 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SOx 0.18 0.03 0.11 0.07 0.02 0 0.46 lbds/day 360 60 220 140 40 0 920 lbs/VMT 8.37E-06 9.59E-06 1.07E-05 1.45E-05 3.68E-05 0.00E+00 1.08E-05 corrected for %Fleet 5.25E-06 8.11E-07 2.91E-06 1.45E-07 1.84E-07 0.00E+00 1.08E-05 Fuel Consumption (000 gallons) Gasoline 1918.02 347.53 1169.42 746.49 2 3.17 4377.25 Diesel 0.5 1.83 0.2 0.39 200.9 24.01 435.19 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim Appendix C. Natural Gas and Purchased Energy Emissions ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- ANAHEIM PUBLIC UTILITIES - Emission Factors lbs/MWH lbs/KWH CO2 1416.74 1.41674 CH4 0.029 0.000029 N2O 0.011 0.000011 Global Warming Potentials (GWP) Anaheim Public Utilities (lbs/KWH) CO2 1 1.41674 CH4 21 0.00061 N2O 310 0.00341 Total CO2e 1.420759 lbs to Tons 2000 Tons to Mton 0.9071847 Energy Use Provided by The Honda Center Size of the Honda Center: 650,000 sqft Winter 1,217,583.90 KwH/Month Winter Summer 1,974,389.70 KwH/Month Summer Average Annual 19,151,841.60 KwH - Average Annual 29.46 kwh/sqft Email Correspondence (June 2011): The Honda Center Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations The Honda Center Dion Beckton, Senior Building Engineer 2011 GHG Emissions from Purchased Energy Use lbs CO2e MTons Summer Month 1,729,893 785 Winter Month 2,805,132 1,272 Average Annual 27,210,151 12,342 CPUC - Clean Power Estimator 1,764,814 801 Existing W/Project MTons/Average Population 2.2 17,712 *Increse in emissions based on increase in annual average per capita emissions Intensity factor Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2011.1.1. Based on the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Local Government Operations Protocol (LGO) for CO2 and E-Grid values for CH4 and N2O. Appendix D, Default Data Tables. Table 1.2, Electrical Utility Emission Factors of GHGs. Souce: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001. Third Assessment Report: Climate Change 2011. Source: California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2008. Local Government Operations Protocol. Appendix F, Standard Conversion Factors ---PAGE BREAK--- GHG Emissions Reductions from Energy Retrofits or Offsets GHG Reductions Needed Annual -1,819 Coorelates to KwH Reductions: Annual -2,822,138 Percent Energy Reduction from Existing -14.7% Percent Energy Reduction from Future Increase (estimate) -10.3% Residential Per-Capita 2,379 kwh/year* Single Family 3.3 Persons/Dwelling** Energy per Dwelling in Anaheim 7,851 kwh/year/house GHG Reductions Equivalent to Energy from: 359 houses *California Energy Commission. 2009. Energy Aware Planning Guide. CEC-600-2009-013. City of Anaheim. 2004. General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report. ---PAGE BREAK--- Natural Gas Emission Factors Heat Content Carbon Content Per Unit Energy Fraction Oxidized kg of CO2/MMBtU MTons of CO2/MMBtU Weighted US Average 1,029 14.47 1 53.06 0.053 Therm to BTU 100000 British Thermal Unit Therm to MMBTU 0.1 million Btu kg to MTons 0.001 metric Tons Natural Gas Use Provided by The Honda Center Therms MMBtu KBtu Winter 16,666 1,667 1,666,600 Summer 5,100 510 510,000 CalEEmod check Average Annual 130,596 13,060 13,059,600 10.05 35,780 average daily Email Correspondence (June 2011): The Honda Center Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations The Honda Center Dion Beckton, Senior Building Engineer 2011 GHG Emissions from Onsite Natural Gas Use Per-Capita MTons Existing W/Project Summer Month 88 Winter Month 27 Average Annual 693 0.12 994 *Increse in emissions based on increase in annual average per capita emissions 2011 Criteria Air Pollutants - Natural Gas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Non-Residential 0.01078431 0.09803922 0.08235294 0.00058824 0.00745098 0.00745098 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Honda Center 0.39 3.51 2.95 0.02 0.27 0.27 Source: California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2008. Local Government Operations Protocol. Appendix G, Default Emission Factors Source: California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2008. Local Government Operations Protocol. Appendix F, Standard Conversion Factors Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2011.1.1. Table 8.2 Natural Gas Emission Factors lbs/MBTu ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim Appendix D. Water and Wastewater Emissions ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Orange County Water and Wastewater Energy Intensity Water Supply Treatment Distribution Wastewater Treatment Total Orange County 9,727 111 1,272 1,911 13,021 Excluding wastewater treatment 11,110 Orange County Wastewater Direct Emissions Septic Aerobic Anaerobic (Lagoons) Anaerobic (Gas) Anaerobic (Cogeneration) Orange County 10.00% 84.69% 2.14% 3.17% 0.00% ajdusted 0.00% 84.69% 2.14% 3.17% 0.00% Modified 0.00% 94.10% 2.38% 3.52% 0.00% Southern California Edison - Emission Factors lbs/MWH lbs/KWH CO2 641.26 0.64126 CH4 0.29 0.00029 N2O 0.011 0.000011 Note: CalEEMod uses Anaheim Public Utilities Intensity Factors. SCE Intensity factors are for water used since OCSD is within their jurisdiction Global Warming Potentials (GWP) Anaheim Public Utilities (lbs/KWH) CO2 1 0.64126 CH4 21 0.00609 N2O 310 0.00341 Total CO2e 0.65076 lbs to Tons 2000 Tons to Mton 0.9071847 Intensity factor Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2011.1.1. Based on the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Local Government Operations Protocol (LGO) for CO2 and E-Grid values for CH4 and N2O. Appendix D, Default Data Tables. Table 1.2, Electrical Utility Emission Factors of GHGs. Souce: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001. Third Assessment Report: Climate Change 2011. Source: California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2008. Local Government Operations Protocol. Appendix F, Standard Conversion Factors Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) User's Guide. Appendix D, Default Data Tables. Table 9.3 Percent of Wastewater Distribution Types (assumes no septic). Aesrobic digestion, no methane or nitrous ocide emissions would occur (CARB's 2008 LGOP). Assumes no N2O emissions as treated wastewater is outfalled to ocean and not a river or estuary by the Orange County Sanitation District. Assumes no cogeneration. kWhr/million gallons Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) User's Guide. Appendix D, Default Data Tables. Table 9.2 Water and Wastewater Electricity Intensity ---PAGE BREAK--- Water Use Provided by The Honda Center Total Gallons Millon Gallons Indoor (Mgallons) Outdoor (Mgallons) Indoor (Liters) Winter Month 1,530,000 1.53 1.45 0.08 5,501,514 Summer Month 1,860,000 1.86 1.77 0.09 6,688,115 Average Annual 31,500,000 31.50 29.93 1.58 113,266,465 Email Correspondence (June 2011): The Honda Center Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations The Honda Center Dion Beckton, Senior Building Engineer Based on 650,000 sqft stadium (average annual) 48,462 1000 sqft gallons to Liters 3.785 2011 GHG Emissions from Water Use Energy from Water Use Indoor Outdoor Total Winter Month 18,926 850 19,776 Summer Month 23,008 1033 24,041 Average Annual 389,653 17,498 407,152 Indirect GHG Emissions lbs CO2e MTons Summer Month 12,869 5.84 Winter Month 15,645 7.10 Average Annual 264,958 120 Direct Emissions: Anaerobic Digestion (Lagoons) CH4 = wastewater = 2,693,225 Liters BOD5load = 200.00 mg/L of Wastewater 10^-6 = 0.00 conversion factor; kg/mg Fp = 0.00 assumes no primary treatment Bo = 0.60 kg//CH4/kg BOD5 removed MCFanaerobic = 0.80 correction factor from LGOP Fremoved = 1.00 from LGOP 10^-3 = 0.00 conversion factor: MTons/kg CH4 = 0 MTons of CH4 CO2e = 5 MTons of CO2e Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2011.1.1. User's Manual Wastewater x BOD5load x 10^-6 x(1-Fp) x Bo X MCFanaerobic x Fremoved x 10-3 Assumption: 95% of water is for indoor use as there is very little outdoor landscaping kWH ---PAGE BREAK--- Direct Emissions: Anaerobic Digesters (Gas) CH4 = Wastewater x Digester Gas x FCH4 x pCH4 x (1-DE) x 0.0283 x 10^-3 wastewater = 1,054,025 Gallons digester gas = 0.01 ft3 biogas/gallon wastewater F CH4 = 0.65 fraction of CH4 in biogas p CH4 = 622.00 g/m3 (density) DE = 0.99 CH4 desctruction from LGOP 0.0283 = 0.0283 conversion factor: m3/ft3 10^-3 = 0.00 conversion factor: MTons/kg CH4 = 1 MTons of CH4 CO2e = 25 MTons of CO2e CO2 = digerster Gas x FCH4 x EF / 2204.623 digester gas = 10540.25 0.1 ft3 per gallon of wastewater F CH4 = 0.65 fraction of CH4 in biogas EF = 0.12 lbs CO2/ft CH4 2204.623 2204.623 conversion factor: lbs/MTons CO2 0.373 MTons of CO2 Annual: 31 MTons of CO2e Indirect (energy intensity) Direct (wastewater) Total GHG Emissions Summer Month 6 2 8 Winter Month 7 3 10 Average Annual 120 31 151 MTons Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2011.1.1. User's Manual ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim Appendix E. Waste Disposal Emissions ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Biogenic Waste Disposal Emission Factos CO2e Mass CO2 0.13006 Emission Factors Collection Efficiency Destruction Efficiency Oxidation CO2 CH4 Total LFG Collect & Combust 0.75 0.98 0.1 0.229 0.011 0.467 Waste Generation Provided by The Honda Center 1.5 tons of garbage per event 0.5 tons of recycling per event Email Correspondence (June 2011): The Honda Center Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations The Honda Center Dion Beckton, Senior Building Engineer Waste Recycling Events Future Events per year 240 360 120 Existing Events per year 180 270 90 additional events 60 2011 GHG Emissions from Waste Generation (Biogenic) MTons Average Annual 126 Tons/Year Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) User's Guide. Appendix D, Default Data Tables. Table 10.2 Support for Solid Waste Emission Factors ---PAGE BREAK--- SCAQMD LOCAL RULES AND REGULATIONS In addition to federal and state requirements, new construction and operation in the SoCAB are governed by the rules and regulations of SCAQMD. SCAQMD Rule 201: Permit to Construct SCAQMD requires developers who build, erect, install, alter, or replace any equipment or agricultural permit unit, the use of which may cause the issuance of air contaminants or the use of which may eliminate, reduce, or control the issuance of air contaminants, to obtain a permit to construct from the Executive Officer. A permit to construct shall remain in effect until the permit to operate the equipment or agricultural permit unit for which the application was filed is granted or denied, or the application is canceled. SCAQMD Rule 402: Nuisance Odors SCAQMD prohibits quantities of air contaminants or other materials which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property to be emitted within the SoCAB. SCAQMD Rule 1403: Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation Activities The purpose of this rule is to specify work practice requirements to limit asbestos emissions from building demolition and renovation activities, including the removal and associated disturbance of asbestos-containing materials. The requirements for demolition and renovation activities include asbestos surveying, notification, removal procedures, and time schedules; handling and cleanup procedures; and storage, disposal, and landfilling requirements for asbestos-containing waste materials. All operators are required to maintain records, including waste shipment records, and are required to use appropriate warning labels, signs, and markings. SCAQMD Rule 403: Fugitive Dust According to SCAQMD, no person shall cause or allow the emissions of fugitive dust from any active operation, open storage pile, or disturbed surface area such that: a) the dust remains visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source; or b) the dust emission exceeds 20 percent opacity (as determined by the appropriate test method included in the Rule 403 Implementation Handbook), if the dust emission is the result of movement of a motorized vehicle. No person shall conduct active operations without utilizing the applicable best available control measures shown in Table 1 to minimize fugitive dust emissions from each fugitive dust source type within the active operation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 1 Fugitive Dust Best Available Control Measures (Applicable to All Construction Activity Sources) Source Category Control Measure Guidance Backfilling 01-1 Stabilize backfill material when not actively handling; and 01-2 Stabilize backfill material during handling; and 01-3 Stabilize soil at completion of activity. Mix backfill soil with water prior to moving. Dedicate water truck or high capacity hose to backfilling equipment. Empty loader bucket slowly so that no dust plumes are generated. Minimize drop height from loader bucket. Clearing and grubbing 02-1 Maintain stability of soil through pre-watering of site prior to clearing and grubbing; and 02-2 Stabilize soil during clearing and grubbing activities; and 02-3 Stabilize soil immediately after clearing and grubbing activities. Maintain live perennial vegetation where possible. Apply water in sufficient quantity to prevent generation of dust plumes. Clearing forms 03-1 Use water spray to clear forms; or 03-2 Use sweeping and water spray to clear forms; or 03-3 Use vacuum system to clear forms. Use of high-pressure air to clear forms may cause exceedance of Rule requirements. Crushing 04-1 Stabilize surface soils prior to operation of support equipment; and 04-2 Stabilize material after crushing. Follow permit conditions for crushing equipment. Prewater material prior to loading into crusher. Monitor crusher emissions opacity. Apply water to crushed material to prevent dust plumes. Cut and fill 05-1 Prewater soils prior to cut and fill activities; and 05-2 Stabilize soil during and after cut and fill activities. For large site, prewater with sprinklers or water trucks and allow time for penetration. Use water trucks/pull to water soils to depth of cut prior to subsequent cuts. Demolition – mechanical/ manual 06-1 Stabilize wind erodible surfaces to reduce dust; and 06-2 Stabilize surface soil where support equipment and vehicles will operate; and 06-3 Stabilize loose soil and demolition debris; and 06-4 Comply with AQMD Rule 1403. Apply water in sufficient quantities to prevent the generation of visible dust plumes. Disturbed Soil 07-1 Stabilize disturbed soil throughout the construction site; and 07-2 Stabilize disturbed soil between structures. Limit vehicular traffic and disturbances on soils where possible. If interior block walls are planned, install as early as possible. Apply water or a stabilizing agent in sufficient quantities to prevent the generation of visible dust plumes. Earth-moving activities 08-1 Preapply water to depth of proposed cuts; and 08-2 Reapply water as necessary to maintain soils in a damp condition and to ensure that visible emissions do not exceed 100 feet in any direction; and 08-3 Stabilize soils once earth-moving activities are complete Grade each project phase separately, times to coincide with construction phase. Upwind fencing can prevent material movement on site. Apply water or a stabilizing agent in sufficient quantities to prevent the generation of visible dust plumes. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 1 Fugitive Dust Best Available Control Measures (Applicable to All Construction Activity Sources) Source Category Control Measure Guidance Importing/ exporting of bulk materials 09-1 Stabilize material while loading to reduce fugitive dust emissions; and 09-2 Maintain at least six inches of freeboard on haul vehicles; and 09-3 Stabilize material while transporting to reduce fugitive dust emissions; and 09-4 Stabilize material while unloading to reduce fugitive dust emissions; and 09-5 Comply with Vehicle Code Section 23114. Use tarps or other suitable enclosures on haul trucks. Check belly-dump truck seals regularly and remove and trapped rocks to prevent spillage. Comply with track-out prevention/ mitigation requirements. Provide water while loading and unloading to reduce visible dust plumes. Landscaping 10-1 Stabilize soils, materials, slopes. Apply water to materials to stabilize. Maintain materials in a crusted condition. Maintain effective cover over materials. Stabilize sloping surfaces using soil binders until vegetation or ground cover can effectively stabilize the slopes. Hydroseed prior to rain season. Road shoulder maintenance 11-1 Apply water to unpaved shoulders prior to clearing; and 11-2 Apply chemical dust suppressants and/or washed gravel to maintain a stabilized surface after completing road shoulder maintenance. Installation of curbing and/or paving road shoulders can reduce recurring maintenance costs. Use of chemical dust suppressants can inhibit vegetation growth and reduce future road shoulder maintenance costs. Screening 12-1 Prewater material prior to screening; and 12-2 Limit fugitive dust emissions to opacity and plum length standards; and 12-3 Stabilize material immediately after screening. Dedicate water truck or high capacity hose to screening operation. Drop material through the screen slowly and minimize drop height. Install wind barrier with a porosity of no more than 50% upwind of screen to the height of the drop point. Staging areas 13-1 Stabilize staging areas during use; and 13-2 Stabilize staging area soils at project completion. Limit size of staging area. Limit vehicle speeds of 15 miles per hour Limit number and size of staging area entrances/exits. Stockpiles/ bulk material handling 14-1 Stabilize stockpiled materials. 14-2 Stockpiles within 100 yards of off-site occupied buildings must not be greater than eight feet in height; or must have a road bladed to the top to allow water truck access or must have an operational water irrigation system that is capable of complete stockpile coverage. Add or remove material from the downwind portion of the storage pile. Maintain storage piles to avoid steep sides or faces. Traffic areas for construction sites 15-1 Stabilize all off-road traffic and parking areas; and 15-2 Stabilize all haul routes; and 15-3 Direct construction traffic over established haul routes. Apply gravel/paving to all haul routes as soon as possible to all future roadway areas. Barriers can be used to ensure vehicles are only used on established parking areas/haul routes. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 1 Fugitive Dust Best Available Control Measures (Applicable to All Construction Activity Sources) Source Category Control Measure Guidance Trenching 16-1 Stabilize surface soils where trencher or excavator and support equipment will operate; and 16-2 Stabilize soils at the completion of trenching activities. Pre-watering of soils prior to trenching is an effective preventive measure. For deep trenching activities, pre-trench to 18-inches soak soils via the pre- trench and resuming trenching. Washing mud and soils from equipment at the conclusion of trenching activities can prevent crusting and drying of soil on equipment. Truck loading 17-1 Prewater material prior to loading; and 17-2 Ensure that freeboard exceeds six inches (CVC 23114). Empty loader bucket such that no visible dust plumes are created. Ensure that the loader bucket is closer to the truck to minimize drop height while loading. Turf overseeding 18-1 Apply sufficient water immediately prior to conducting turf vacuuming activities to meet opacity and plum length standards; and 18-2 Cover haul vehicles prior to exiting the site. Haul waste material immediately off-site. Unpaved roads/ parking lots 19-1 Stabilize soils to meet the applicable performance standards; and 19-2 Limit vehicular travel to established unpaved roads (haul routes) and unpaved parking lots. Restricting vehicular access to established unpaved travel path and parking lots can reduce stabilization requirements. Vacant land 20-1 In instances where vacant lots are 0.10 acre or larger and have a cumulative area of 500 square feet or more that are driven over and/or used by motor vehicles and/or off-road vehicles, prevent motor vehicles and/or off-road vehicle trespassing, parking and/or access by installing barriers curbs, fences, gates, posts, signs, shrubs, trees, or other effective control measures. Source: SCAQMD 2007. Additional Requirements for Large Operations Large operations are defined as project sites that are 50 acres or more or have earth-moving operations of 5,000 cubic yards or more per day three times in the most recent 365-day period. Any person who conducts or authorizes the conducting of a large operation subject to Rule 403 shall implement the applicable actions specified in Table 2 at all times and shall implement the applicable control measures specified in Table 3 when the applicable performance standards cannot be met through use of Table 2 actions. Due to the scale of grading activities associated with the proposed project, it is anticipated that grading activities would be subject to those measures listed in Tables 2 and 3. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2 Fugitive Dust Control Measures for Large Operations Fugitive Dust Source Category Control Actions Earth-moving (except construction cutting and filling area, and mining operations) 1a Maintain soil moisture content at a minimum of 12 percent, as determined by ASTM method D-2216, or equivalent method approved by the Executive Officer, CARB, and the USEPA. Two soil moisture evaluations must be conducted during the first three hours or active operations during a calendar day, and two such evaluations each subsequent four-hour period of active operations; or 1a-1 For any earth-moving which is more than 100 feet from all property lines, conduct watering as necessary to prevent visible dust emissions from exceeding 100 feet in length in any direction. Earth-moving: Construction fill areas 1b Maintain soil moisture content at a minimum of 12 percent, as determined by ASTM method D-2216, or other equivalent method approved by the Executive Officer, the California Air Resources Board, and the U.S. EPA. For areas which have an optimum moisture content for compaction of less than 12 percent, as determined by ASTM Method 1557 or other equivalent method approved by the Executive Officer and the California Air Resources Board and the U.S. EPA, complete the compaction process as expeditiously as possible after achieving at least 70 percent of the optimum soil moisture content. Two soil moisture evaluations must be conducted during the first three hours of active operations during a calendar day, and two such evaluations during each subsequent four hour period of active operations. Earth-moving: Construction cut areas and mining operations 1c Conduct watering as necessary to prevent visible emissions from extending more than 100 feet beyond the active cut or mining area unless the area is inaccessible to watering vehicles due to slope conditions or other safety factors. Disturbed surface areas (except completed grading areas) 2a/b Apply dust suppression in sufficient quantity and frequency to maintain a stabilized surface. Any areas which cannot be stabilized, as evidenced by wind-driven fugitive dust, must have an application of water at least twice per day to at least 80 percent of the unstabilized area. Disturbed surface areas: Completed grading areas 2c Apply chemical stabilizers within five working days of grading completion; or 2d Take actions (3a) or (3c) specified for inactive disturbed surface areas. Inactive disturbed surface areas 3a Apply water to at least 80 percent of all inactive disturbed surface areas on a daily basis when there is evidence of wind driven fugitive dust, excluding any areas which are inaccessible to watering vehicles due to excessive slope or other safety conditions; or 3b Apply dust suppressants in sufficient quantity and frequency to maintain a stabilized surface; or 3c Establish a vegetative ground cover within 21 days after active operations have ceased. Ground cover must be of sufficient density to expose less than 30 percent of unstabilized ground within 90 days of planting, and at all times thereafter; or 3d Utilize any combination of control actions (3a), (3b), and (3c) such that, in total, these actions apply to all inactive disturbed surface areas. Unpaved Roads 4a Water all roads used for any vehicular traffic at least once per every two hours of active operations [3 times per normal 8 hour work day]; or 4b Water all roads used for any vehicular traffic once daily and restrict vehicle speeds to 15 miles per hour; or 4c Apply a chemical stabilizer to all unpaved road surfaces in sufficient quantity and frequency to maintain a stabilized surface. Open storage piles 5a Apply chemical stabilizers; or 5b Apply water to at least 80 percent of the surface area of all open storage piles on a daily basis when there is evidence of wind driven fugitive dust; or 5c Install temporary coverings; or 5d Install a three-sided enclosure with walls with no more than 50 percent porosity which extend, at a minimum, to the top of the pile. This option may only be used at aggregate-related plants or at cement manufacturing facilities. All Categories 6a Any other control measures approved by the Executive Officer and the USEPA as equivalent to the methods specified in this Table may be used. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3 Fugitive Dust Contingency Control Measures for Large Operations Fugitive Dust Source Category Control Measures Earth-moving 1A Cease all active operations; or 2A Apply water to soil not more than 15 minutes prior to moving such soil. Disturbed surface areas 0B On the last day of active operations prior to a weekend, holiday, or any other period when active operations will not occur for not more than four consecutive days: apply water with a mixture of chemical stabilizer diluted to not less than 1/20 of the concentration required to maintain a stabilized surface for a period of six months; or 1B Apply chemical stabilizers prior to wind event; or 2B Apply water to all unstabilized disturbed areas 3 times per day. If there is any evidence of wind-driven fugitive dust, watering frequency is increased to a minimum of four times per day; or 3B Take the actions specified in this Table, Item (3c); or 4B Utilize any combination of control actions (1B), (2B), and (3B) such that, in total, these actions apply to all disturbed surface areas. Unpaved roads 1C Apply chemical stabilizers prior to wind event; or 2C Apply water twice per hour during active operation; or 3C Stop all vehicular traffic. Open storage piles 1D Apply water twice per hour; or 2D Install temporary coverings. Paved road track-out 1E Cover all haul vehicles; or 2E Comply with the vehicle freeboard requirements of Section 23114 of the California Vehicle Code for both public and private roads. All Categories 1F Any other control measures approved by the Executive Officer and the USEPA as equivalent to the methods specified in this Table may be used. Source: SCAQMD 2007. ---PAGE BREAK--- SANTA ANA FIRE STN, CALIFORNIA Period of Record General Climate Summary - Temperature Table updated on Mar 24, 2011 For and annual means, thresholds, and sums: Months with 5 or more missing days are not considered Years with 1 or more missing months are not considered Seasons are climatological not calendar seasons Station:(047888) SANTA ANA FIRE STN From Year=1906 To Year=2010 Averages Daily Extremes Extremes Max. Temp. Max. Min. Mean High Date Low Date Highest Mean Year Lowest Mean Year 90 F 32 F F F F dd/yyyy or F dd/yyyy or F - F - # Days # Day January 68.0 43.0 55.7 96 31/2003 22 01/1919 64.2 2003 45.0 1949 0.1 0 February 68.9 44.9 56.9 95 20/1995 25 14/1949 63.5 1995 48.8 1949 0.2 0 March 70.6 46.6 58.6 98 25/1988 29 02/1939 65.8 2004 51.8 1952 0.4 0 April 73.0 49.9 61.5 104 05/1989 31 11/1953 67.9 1992 55.1 1967 1.0 0 May 75.2 53.9 64.6 105 03/2004 35 04/1950 71.4 1997 58.9 1917 1.3 0 June 78.6 57.4 68.0 112 14/1917 39 08/1950 74.1 1981 63.7 1952 1.3 0 July 83.5 60.8 72.2 110 01/1985 39 05/1923 80.0 2006 67.0 1918 4.1 0 August 84.7 61.6 73.1 105 10/1935 45 17/1918 77.6 1983 67.4 1918 5.5 0 September 83.9 59.2 71.5 111 21/1939 40 09/1917 80.0 1984 65.7 1933 6.2 0 October 79.4 54.5 66.9 106 16/1958 34 12/1924 72.4 2008 58.9 1920 3.5 0 November 74.2 47.4 60.8 101 01/1966 24 28/1919 67.8 2008 55.0 1919 1.0 0 December 68.8 43.6 56.2 95 03/1958 22 31/1918 61.0 1977 50.5 1918 0.1 0 Annual 75.7 51.9 63.8 112 19170614 22 19181231 67.2 1997 60.7 1949 24.7 0 Winter 68.6 43.8 56.3 96 20030131 22 19181231 60.7 1986 50.9 1917 0.4 0 Spring 72.9 50.2 61.6 105 20040503 29 19390302 67.1 2004 57.2 1922 2.7 0 Summer 82.3 59.9 71.1 112 19170614 39 19230705 76.2 2006 67.1 1918 10.9 0 Fall 79.2 53.7 66.4 111 19390921 24 19191128 71.5 2008 60.2 1920 10.7 0 Winter = Dec., Jan., and Feb. Spring = Mar., Apr., and May Summer = Jun., Jul., and Aug. Fall = Sep., Oct., and Nov. Page 1 of 2 SANTA ANA FIRE STN, CALIFORNIA Period of Record General Climate Summary - 6/30/2011 ---PAGE BREAK--- SANTA ANA FIRE STN, CALIFORNIA (047888) Period of Record Climate Summary Period of Record : 4/ 1/1906 to 12/31/2010 Percent of possible observations for period of record. Max. Temp.: 97.9% Min. Temp.: 97.6% Precipitation: 99.6% Snowfall: 99.6% Snow Depth: 99.6% Check Station Metadata or Metadata graphics for more detail about data completeness. Western Regional Climate Center, [EMAIL REDACTED] Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual Average Max. Temperature 68.0 68.9 70.6 73.0 75.2 78.6 83.5 84.7 83.9 79.4 74.2 68.8 75.7 Average Min. Temperature 43.0 44.9 46.6 49.9 53.9 57.4 60.8 61.6 59.2 54.5 47.4 43.6 51.9 Average Total Precipitation (in.) 2.76 3.09 2.23 1.04 0.25 0.06 0.01 0.06 0.23 0.48 1.27 2.30 13.79 Average Total SnowFall (in.) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Average Snow Depth (in.) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Page 1 of 1 SANTA ANA FIRE STN, CALIFORNIA Period of Record Climate Summary 7/6/2011 http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliRECtM.pl?ca7888 ---PAGE BREAK--- DATE September 2011 TO CONTACT FROM Nicole Vermilion, Senior Planner SUBJECT The Honda Center PROJECT NO. COA-56.0E Construction Emissions Construction activities generate criteria air pollutant emissions from use of off-road construction equipment, on- road vehicles associated with construction employees and material deliveries, fugitive dust generated during grading, and off-gas emissions during application of architectural coatings and paving. Construction emissions associated with the proposed project would occur during construction of the 12,000 square foot exterior grand terrace. Interior renovations would not require use of large off-road construction equipment and therefore are not included in the modeling below. Construction phasing and equipment was provided by The Honda Center and modeled using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2011.1.1. As shown in the following tables, construction activities would not result in emissions that exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) regional (Table 1) or localized (Table 2) significance thresholds. No significant impacts would occur. Table 1 Maximum Daily Construction Emissions SOURCE POLLUTANTS (LB/DAY) VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Maximum Daily Construction Emissions 20 12 9 <1 2 1 SCAQMD Regional Significance Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No Source: CalEEMod Version 2011.1.1. Equipment list and phasing provided by the Honda Center. ---PAGE BREAK--- September 2011 Page 2 Table 2 Localized Offsite Construction Emissions SOURCE POLLUTANTS (LB/DAY) NO2 1 CO PM10 PM2.5 Maximum Daily Construction Emissions 8 8 1 1 SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold 103 1,313 161 87 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No Source: CalEEMod Version 2011.1.1. SCAQMD 2003, and SCAQMD 2006: Equipment list and phasing provided by the Honda Center. Based on LSTs for a project site in SRA 17 for a 1-acre site with sensitive receptors located at a distance of 1,675 feet for PM10 and PM2.5 and non-receptors at 390 feet for NOx and CO. Only onsite air pollutant emissions as per SCAQMD guidance. 1 The two principle NOx species are NO and NO2 with the vast majority (95 percent) of NOx emissions being NO. Adverse health effects are associated with NO2 and not NO. ---PAGE BREAK--- Attachment – Construction Modeling Files ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 12 1000sqft 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) Climate Zone 8 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 1.3 User Entered Comments 30 Project Characteristics - Land Use - Construction model run includes exterior construction only = 12,000 sqft exterior grand terrace Construction Phase - Construction Schedule provided by the Honda Center Off-road Equipment - Construction equipment provided by the Honda Center. CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007 Grading - Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Vehicle Trips - Construction only Water And Wastewater - Construction only Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Solid Waste - construction only Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - SCAQMD Rule 403 2.0 Emissions Summary PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Year lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 2012 19.56 12.06 8.58 0.01 0.65 0.95 1.52 0.01 0.95 0.95 0.00 1,339.26 0.00 0.16 0.00 1,342.67 Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total NA NA PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Year lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 2012 19.56 12.06 8.58 0.01 0.35 0.95 1.22 0.01 0.95 0.95 0.00 1,339.26 0.00 0.16 0.00 1,342.67 Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer 3.0 Construction Detail 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Replace Ground Cover Water Exposed Area Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads 3.2 1Grading - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 0.53 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 1.73 11.45 7.62 0.01 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 1,158.93 0.15 1,162.19 Total 1.73 11.45 7.62 0.01 0.53 0.87 1.40 0.00 1,162.19 0.87 0.87 1,158.93 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.15 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.05 0.05 0.58 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.01 99.50 0.01 99.62 Total 0.05 0.05 0.58 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.13 0.00 99.62 0.00 0.01 99.50 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.01 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust 0.23 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 1.73 11.45 7.62 0.01 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.00 1,158.93 0.15 1,162.19 Total 1.73 11.45 7.62 0.15 0.00 0.87 0.87 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 1,158.93 0.01 0.23 0.87 1.10 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 1,162.19 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.05 0.05 0.58 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.01 99.50 0.01 99.62 Total 0.05 0.05 0.58 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.13 0.00 99.62 0.00 0.01 99.50 0.01 2 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.3 2Trenching - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 1.01 7.58 5.31 0.01 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 895.84 0.09 897.74 Total 1.01 7.58 5.31 0.01 0.45 0.45 897.74 0.45 0.45 895.84 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.09 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.87 Total 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.87 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 1.01 7.58 5.31 0.01 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00 895.84 0.09 897.74 Total 1.01 7.58 5.31 0.01 0.45 0.45 897.74 0.45 0.45 0.00 895.84 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.09 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.87 Total 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.00 3 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.4 3Paving - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.95 6.37 4.33 0.01 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 680.84 0.09 682.63 Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.95 6.37 4.33 0.09 0.46 0.46 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 680.84 0.01 0.46 0.46 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 682.63 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.09 0.10 1.09 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.02 186.56 0.01 186.79 Total 0.09 0.10 1.09 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 186.79 0.01 0.02 186.56 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.01 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.95 6.37 4.33 0.01 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.00 680.84 0.09 682.63 Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.95 6.37 4.33 0.09 0.46 0.46 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 680.84 0.01 0.46 0.46 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 682.63 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.09 0.10 1.09 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.02 186.56 0.01 186.79 Total 0.09 0.10 1.09 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 186.79 0.01 0.02 186.56 0.01 4 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.5 4Concrete - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 1.75 11.69 7.99 0.01 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 1,223.40 0.16 1,226.69 Total 1.75 11.69 7.99 0.01 0.94 0.94 1,226.69 0.94 0.94 1,223.40 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.16 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.03 0.34 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.68 0.00 53.71 Worker 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 62.19 0.00 62.26 Total 0.06 0.37 0.58 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.00 115.97 0.01 0.02 115.87 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 1.75 11.69 7.99 0.01 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 1,223.40 0.16 1,226.69 Total 1.75 11.69 7.99 0.01 0.94 0.94 1,226.69 0.94 0.94 0.00 1,223.40 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.16 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.03 0.34 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.68 0.00 53.71 Worker 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 62.19 0.00 62.26 Total 0.06 0.37 0.58 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.00 115.97 0.01 0.02 115.87 0.00 5 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.6 5Structural - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.54 4.73 2.15 0.01 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 525.83 0.05 526.85 Total 0.54 4.73 2.15 0.01 0.21 0.21 526.85 0.21 0.21 525.83 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.05 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.03 0.34 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.68 0.00 53.71 Worker 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 62.19 0.00 62.26 Total 0.06 0.37 0.58 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.00 115.97 0.01 0.02 115.87 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.54 4.73 2.15 0.01 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.00 525.83 0.05 526.85 Total 0.54 4.73 2.15 0.01 0.21 0.21 526.85 0.21 0.21 0.00 525.83 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.05 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.03 0.34 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.68 0.00 53.71 Worker 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 62.19 0.00 62.26 Total 0.06 0.37 0.58 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.00 115.97 0.01 0.02 115.87 0.00 6 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.7 6Framing - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 1.36 4.64 4.33 0.01 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 500.19 0.12 502.77 Total 1.36 4.64 4.33 0.01 0.38 0.38 502.77 0.38 0.38 500.19 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.12 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.03 0.34 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.68 0.00 53.71 Worker 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 62.19 0.00 62.26 Total 0.06 0.37 0.58 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.00 115.97 0.01 0.02 115.87 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 1.36 4.64 4.33 0.01 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.00 500.19 0.12 502.77 Total 1.36 4.64 4.33 0.01 0.38 0.38 502.77 0.38 0.38 0.00 500.19 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.12 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.03 0.34 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.68 0.00 53.71 Worker 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 62.19 0.00 62.26 Total 0.06 0.37 0.58 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.00 115.97 0.01 0.02 115.87 0.00 7 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.8 7Architectural Coating & Plaster - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Archit. Coating 18.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 1.03 6.68 4.37 0.01 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 673.33 0.09 675.27 Total 19.55 6.68 4.37 0.09 0.53 0.53 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 673.33 0.01 0.53 0.53 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 675.27 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.44 0.00 12.45 Total 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 12.45 0.00 0.00 12.44 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Archit. Coating 18.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 1.03 6.68 4.37 0.01 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.00 673.33 0.09 675.27 Total 19.55 6.68 4.37 0.09 0.53 0.53 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 673.33 0.01 0.53 0.53 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 675.27 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.44 0.00 12.45 Total 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 12.45 0.00 0.00 12.44 0.00 8 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.9 8Roofing - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 1.17 8.47 4.32 0.01 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 821.44 0.10 823.64 Total 1.17 8.47 4.32 0.01 0.54 0.54 823.64 0.54 0.54 821.44 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.03 0.34 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.68 0.00 53.71 Worker 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 62.19 0.00 62.26 Total 0.06 0.37 0.58 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.00 115.97 0.01 0.02 115.87 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 1.17 8.47 4.32 0.01 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.00 821.44 0.10 823.64 Total 1.17 8.47 4.32 0.01 0.54 0.54 823.64 0.54 0.54 0.00 821.44 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.03 0.34 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.68 0.00 53.71 Worker 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 62.19 0.00 62.26 Total 0.06 0.37 0.58 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.01 0.02 115.87 0.00 115.97 9 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1 August/September 2010 Workshop Series September 3, 2010 Workshops on Information Regarding the Off-Road, Truck and Bus and Drayage Truck Regulations California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board Air Resources Board ---PAGE BREAK--- 50 Load Factor  Load varies by equipment type and usage  Collected engine load data from ARB testing programs and manufacturer provided data  Analysis indicates that OFFROAD load factors are 25-50% too high  Staff concluded load factors should be reduced 33% for the updated inventory  Consistent with findings for other off-road equipment. Off-Road Rule Inventory ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Modifications to Construction Defaults - Load Factors CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Default Equipment Mix PhaseName OffRoadEquip mentUnitAmo unt UsageHours HorsePower LoadFactor Modified Load Factor 1Grading Concrete/Industrial Saws 0 8 81 0.73 0.49 1Grading Crawler Tractors 1 8 82 0.64 0.43 1Grading Excavators 1 8 157 0.57 0.38 1Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 0 1 358 0.59 0.40 1Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6 75 0.55 0.37 2Trenching Excavators 1 8 157 0.57 0.38 2Trenching Forklifts 1 8 149 0.3 0.20 3Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 4 6 9 0.56 0.38 3Paving Forklifts 1 8 149 0.3 0.20 3Paving Pavers 0 7 89 0.62 0.42 3Paving Rollers 1 7 84 0.56 0.38 3Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 7 75 0.55 0.37 4Concrete Cranes 0 4 208 0.43 0.29 4Concrete Forklifts 1 6 149 0.3 0.20 4Concrete Plate Compactors 1 8 8 0.43 0.29 4Concrete Pumps 1 8 84 0.74 0.50 4Concrete Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8 75 0.55 0.37 5Structural Cranes 1 4 208 0.43 0.29 5Structural Forklifts 1 6 149 0.3 0.20 5Structural Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8 75 0.55 0.37 6Framing Cranes 0 4 208 0.43 0.29 6Framing Forklifts 1 6 149 0.3 0.20 6Framing Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8 75 0.55 0.37 6Framing Welders 2 8 46 0.45 0.30 7Architectural Coating & PlastAir Compressors 2 6 78 0.48 0.32 7Architectural Coating & PlastForklifts 1 8 149 0.3 0.20 8Roofing Cranes 1 4 208 0.43 0.29 8Roofing Forklifts 1 6 149 0.3 0.20 8Roofing Paving Equipment 1 8 82 0.53 0.36 8Roofing Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8 75 0.55 0.37 Source: California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2010, September. Workshops on Information Regarding the Off-Road, Truck and Bus, Drayage Truck Regulations. ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 12 1000sqft 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) Climate Zone 8 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 1.3 User Entered Comments 30 Project Characteristics - Land Use - Construction model run includes exterior construction only = 12,000 sqft exterior grand terrace Construction Phase - Construction Schedule provided by the Honda Center Off-road Equipment - Construction equipment provided by the Honda Center. CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007 Grading - Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Vehicle Trips - Construction only Water And Wastewater - Construction only Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Solid Waste - construction only Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - SCAQMD Rule 403 2.0 Emissions Summary PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 2012 0.23 0.58 0.42 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 60.19 60.19 0.01 0.00 60.35 Total 0.23 0.58 0.42 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.00 0.00 60.35 0.04 0.04 0.00 60.19 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 60.19 0.01 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 2012 0.23 0.58 0.42 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 60.19 60.19 0.01 0.00 60.35 Total 0.23 0.58 0.42 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.00 0.00 60.35 0.04 0.04 0.00 60.19 60.19 0.01 1 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual 3.0 Construction Detail 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Replace Ground Cover Water Exposed Area Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads 3.2 1Grading - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 0.01 0.09 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 7.88 7.88 0.00 0.00 7.91 Total 0.01 0.09 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 7.91 0.01 0.01 0.00 7.88 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 7.88 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.65 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.65 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.65 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 0.01 0.09 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 7.88 7.88 0.00 0.00 7.91 Total 0.01 0.09 0.06 7.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 7.88 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 7.91 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.65 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.00 2 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.3 2Trenching - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.12 8.12 0.00 0.00 8.14 Total 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.12 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 8.12 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.01 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.12 8.12 0.00 0.00 8.14 Total 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.12 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 8.12 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 3 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.4 3Paving - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.09 3.09 0.00 0.00 3.10 Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.03 0.02 3.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 3.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 3.10 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.81 Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.81 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.09 3.09 0.00 0.00 3.10 Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.03 0.02 3.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 3.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 3.10 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.81 Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.00 4 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.5 4Concrete - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.02 0.15 0.10 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 13.87 13.87 0.00 0.00 13.91 Total 0.02 0.15 0.10 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 13.91 0.01 0.01 0.00 13.87 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 13.87 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.61 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.67 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 1.28 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.02 0.15 0.10 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 13.87 13.87 0.00 0.00 13.91 Total 0.02 0.15 0.10 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 13.91 0.01 0.01 0.00 13.87 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 13.87 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.61 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.67 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 1.28 0.00 5 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.6 5Structural - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.01 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.96 5.96 0.00 0.00 5.97 Total 0.01 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.96 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 5.96 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.61 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.67 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 1.28 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.01 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.96 5.96 0.00 0.00 5.97 Total 0.01 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.96 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 5.96 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.61 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.67 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 1.28 0.00 6 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.7 6Framing - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.02 0.07 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 6.80 6.80 0.00 0.00 6.84 Total 0.02 0.07 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 6.84 0.01 0.01 0.00 6.80 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 6.80 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.73 0.00 0.00 0.73 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.81 Total 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.54 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 1.54 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.02 0.07 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 6.80 6.80 0.00 0.00 6.84 Total 0.02 0.07 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 6.84 0.01 0.01 0.00 6.80 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 6.80 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.73 0.00 0.00 0.73 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.81 Total 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.54 1.54 0.00 7 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.8 7Architectural Coating & Plaster - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Archit. Coating 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.58 4.58 0.00 0.00 4.59 Total 0.15 0.05 0.03 4.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 4.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 4.59 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.08 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.08 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Archit. Coating 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.58 4.58 0.00 0.00 4.59 Total 0.15 0.05 0.03 4.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 4.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 4.59 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.08 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 8 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.9 8Roofing - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.72 3.72 0.00 0.00 3.73 Total 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.72 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 3.72 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.24 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.27 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.51 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.51 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.72 3.72 0.00 0.00 3.73 Total 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.72 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 3.72 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.24 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.27 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.51 9 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- GHG Summary MTons/Year Total Construction 60 Amortized Construction Emissions 2 Total construction emissions are amortized over 30 years pursuant to draft SCAQMD methodology. ---PAGE BREAK--- LST Worksheet Grading NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Category Fugitive Dust 0.23 0 Off-Road 11.45 7.62 0.87 0.87 Total 11.45 7.62 1.1 0.87 Trenching NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Category Off-Road 7.58 5.31 0.45 0.45 Total 7.58 5.31 0.45 0.45 Paving NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Category Off-Road 6.37 4.33 0.46 0.46 Paving 0 0 Total 6.37 4.33 0.46 0.46 Concrete NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Category Off-Road 11.69 7.99 0.94 0.94 Total 11.69 7.99 0.94 0.94 Structural NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Category Off-Road 4.73 2.15 0.21 0.21 Total 4.73 2.15 0.21 0.21 Framing NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Category Off-Road 4.64 4.33 0.38 0.38 Total 4.64 4.33 0.38 0.38 Coating & Plaster NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Category Archit. Coating 0 0 Off-Road 6.68 4.37 0.53 0.53 Total 6.7 4.37 0.53 0.53 Roofing NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Category Off-Road 8.47 4.32 0.54 0.54 Total 8.47 4.32 0.54 0.54 Maximum 11.69 7.99 1.1 0.94 NOx to NO2 conversion 2.4 LST Threshold 103 1,313 161.4 87.2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Construction Localized Significance Thresholds - Non-Sensitive Land Uses SRA No. Acres Source Receptor Distance (meters) Source Receptor Distance (Feet) 17 1.00 119 390 Source Receptor Central Orange County Equipment Acres/8-hr Day Equipment Used Acres Distance (meters) 119 Tractors 0.5 2 1 NOx 103 Graders 0.5 0 0 CO 1313 Dozers 0.5 0 0 PM10 34.0 Scrapers 1 0 PM2.5 11.5 Acres 1 Acres 25 50 100 200 500 NOx 1 81 83 98 123 192 1 81 83 98 123 192 81 83 98 123 192 CO 1 [PHONE REDACTED] 2109 6841 1 [PHONE REDACTED] 2109 6841 [PHONE REDACTED] 2109 6841 PM10 1 4 12 28 60 158 1 4 12 28 60 158 4 12 28 60 158 PM2.5 1 3 4 9 22 85 1 3 4 9 22 85 3 4 9 22 85 Central Orange County 1.00 Acres 25 50 100 200 500 NOx 81 83 98 123 192 CO [PHONE REDACTED] 2109 6841 PM10 4 12 28 60 158 PM2.5 3 4 9 22 85 Acre Below Acre Above SRA No. Acres SRA No. Acres 17 1 17 1 Distance Increment Below 100 Distance Increment Above 200 Updated: 10/21/2009 - Table C-1. 2006 – 2008 ---PAGE BREAK--- NOx to NO2 Conversion Table 2-4: NO2-to-NOx Ratios as a Function of Downwind Distance Downwind Distance (Meters) NO2/NOx Ratio 20 0.053 50 0.059 70 0.064 100 0.074 200 0.114 500 0.258 1000 0.467 2000 0.75 3000 0.9 4000 0.978 5000 1 Interpolated for within 25 Meters: 390 0.2052 Source: SCAQMD 2003. South Coast Air Quality Management District. 2003, June (Revised July 2008). Final Localized Significance Methodology. The two principle NOx species are NO and NO2 with the vast majority (95 percent) of NOx emissions being NO. Adverse health effects are associated with NO2 and not NO. ---PAGE BREAK--- Construction Localized Significance Thresholds - Sensitive Land Uses SRA No. Acres Source Receptor Distance (meters) Source Receptor Distance (Feet) 17 1.00 511 1675 Source Receptor Central Orange County Equipment Acres/8-hr Day Equipment Used Acres Distance (meters) 511 Tractors 0.5 2 1 NOx 194 Graders 0.5 0 0 CO 7007 Dozers 0.5 0 0 PM10 161.4 Scrapers 1 0 PM2.5 87.2 Acres 1 Acres 25 50 100 200 500 NOx 1 81 83 98 123 192 1 81 83 98 123 192 81 83 98 123 192 CO 1 [PHONE REDACTED] 2109 6841 1 [PHONE REDACTED] 2109 6841 [PHONE REDACTED] 2109 6841 PM10 1 4 12 28 60 158 1 4 12 28 60 158 4 12 28 60 158 PM2.5 1 3 4 9 22 85 1 3 4 9 22 85 3 4 9 22 85 Central Orange County 1.00 Acres 25 50 100 200 500 NOx 81 83 98 123 192 CO [PHONE REDACTED] 2109 6841 PM10 4 12 28 60 158 PM2.5 3 4 9 22 85 Acre Below Acre Above SRA No. Acres SRA No. Acres 17 1 17 1 Distance Increment Below 500 Distance Increment Above 500 Updated: 10/21/2009 - Table C-1. 2006 – 2008 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices Honda Center Enhancement Project Draft EIR City of Anaheim Appendix D Noise Technical Study ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- NOISE TECHNICAL STUDY FOR: THE HONDA CENTER prepared for: CITY OF ANAHEIM Contact: Susan Kim, AICP Senior Planner prepared by: THE PLANNING CENTERIDC&E Contact: Fernando Sotelo Senior Planner JANUARY 2012 ---PAGE BREAK--- NOISE TECHNICAL STUDY FOR: THE HONDA CENTER prepared for: CITY OF ANAHEIM 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 [PHONE REDACTED] Contact: Susan Kim, AICP Senior Planner prepared by: THE PLANNING CENTERIDC&E 3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100 Santa Ana, CA 92707 Tel: [PHONE REDACTED]  Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] E-mail: [EMAIL REDACTED] Website: www.planningcenter.com Contact: Fernando Sotelo Senior Planner COA-56.0E JANUARY 2012 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table of Contents The Honda Center Noise Technical Study City of Anaheim  Page i Section Page 1. INTRODUCTION AND 1.1 Project Location and 1 1.2 Executive Summary 2 2. ENVIRONMENTAL 2.1 Noise 3 2.2 Physical Setting and Existing Land Uses 5 3. REGULATORY 3.1 State of California Building 9 3.2 City of Anaheim Noise 9 4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 4.1 13 4.2 Thresholds of Significance 13 4.3 The Honda 14 4.4 Existing Regulations 23 4.5 Level of Significance Before 23 4.6 Mitigation 23 4.7 Level of Significance After 23 5. REFERENCES APPENDIX A. FHWA Federal Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model Files ---PAGE BREAK--- Table of Contents Page ii  The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 List of Tables Table Page Table 1 Honda Center Events and Event 1 Table 2 Honda Center Event 2 Table 3 Change in Sound Pressure Level 4 Table 4 Typical Noise Levels from Noise Sources 5 Table 5 Existing Ambient Noise Environment 7 Table 6 Community Noise and Land Use 10 Table 7 Year 2030 Ambient Noise Error! Bookmark not defined. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Honda Center Noise Technical Study City of Anaheim  Page 1 1. Introduction and Summary 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING The Honda Center is located at 2695 East Katella Avenue in the City of Anaheim, east of the State Route 57 (SR-57) and west of the Santa Ana River. It is bound on the north by Cerritos Avenue and to the south by Katella Avenue. The Honda Center is within a half mile northeast of the Stadium of Anaheim and the Anaheim Metrolink Station. Operational Characteristics The 650,000-square-foot Honda Center opened on June 19, 1993, after two years of construction. It can accommodate a maximum of 18,900 spectators depending on seating configuration, and the parking lots surrounding the Honda Center have 4,500 parking spaces to accommodate visitors. The Honda Center facilities are in operation on event days, although some functions ticket sales) are open on non-event days. Maximum capacities for hockey, basketball, and other events concerts, circus, etc.) are shown in Table 1. Table 1 Honda Center Events and Event Population Event Type Seating Capacity Staff/ Employees Team Members/ Production1 Basketball Games2 18,336 950 200+3 Hockey Games4 17,174 950 200 18,325 – End Stage Concerts and Other Events 18,900 – Center Stage 1,000 (max) 200 Maximum Events Permitted 162 Nonevent Days 200 Source: Starkey 2011 1 Team members and production staff include players, coaches, trainers, media, road crew, and others not included as spectators. 2 Basketball games include Lakers Preseason, the John Wooden Classic, the Big West Tournament, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Tournament, and University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), games. 3 For the purpose of this air quality and GHG technical report, up to 250 team members are assumed for a basketball game for a conservative modeling scenario. 4 The National Hockey League (NHL) has 41 home games during the regular season. During the Stanley Cup Playoffs and Stanley Cup, up to 20 additional games could occur. ---PAGE BREAK--- 1. Introduction and Summary Page 2  The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 In 2010, the Honda Center welcomed more than 1.3 million guests, of which over 600,000 attended the Ducks’ hockey games (Starkey 2011). Table 2 identifies a five-year snapshot of attendance, number of events, and the average number of visitors during an event based on the annual attendance. Average attendance per event was calculated based on the highest 3-year average of attendance in order to provide a conservative estimate of future annual attendance. Based on the attendance history of the Honda Center over the last five years, there are, on average, 11,264 visitors per event and currently up to 153 events per year approximately three events per week). Table 2 Honda Center Event Attendance Year Visitors Events Average Visitors Per Event 2006 1,600,000 154 10,390 2007 1,760,000 144 12,222 2008 1,590,000 162 9,815 2009 1,460,000 136 10,735 2010 1,300,000 120 10,833 Highest 3-year Average 153 11,264 Source: Starkey 2011. 1.2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Honda Center Noise Technical Study has been prepared to analyze potential operation-related mobile- and stationary-source noise impacts from an increase in the number of permitted annual events at the Honda Center. The 1990 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Honda Center (formerly the Arrowhead Pond) capped the number of annual events at 162 per year. The Honda Center averages up to 153 events per year with average attendance at an event of 11,264 people. The proposed project seeks to increase the maximum number of events by 60 from the permitted 162 events for a total of 222 events per year. Currently, there are on average, three events per week at the Honda Center and the proposed project would result in four events per week on average. The purpose of the project would be to accommodate a new permanent tenent at the Honda Center. Implementation of the proposed project would not increase the capacity of the arena. Seating capacity of a sellout event is 18,336 and the proposed project would not result in a change in the maximum seating capacity of current events (see Table Because project-generated vehicle trips would be similar to the current events held at the Honda Center area, noise increases in the ambient environment attributable to project-related trips would be comparable to the existing events currently permitted. Similarly, the proposed project would not generate stationary sources mechanical systems, parking lots, etc.) of noise that would different from the events currently permitted at the arena. Therefore, no noise impacts would occur from implementation of the project. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting 2.1 NOISE SETTING Noise is most often defined as unwanted sound. Although sound can be easily measured, the perception of noise and the physical response to sound complicate the analysis of its impact on people. People judge the relative magnitude of sound sensation in subjective terms such as “noisiness” or “loudness.” 2.1.1 Terminology and Noise Descriptors The following are brief definitions of terminology used in this chapter:  Noise. Sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or otherwise undesirable.  Decibel (dB). A unitless measure of sound on a logarithmic scale.  A-Weighted Decibel (dBA). An overall frequency-weighted sound level in decibels that approximates the frequency response of the human ear.  Equivalent Continuous Noise Level (Leq). The mean of the noise level averaged over the measurement period, regarded as an average level.  Day-Night Level (Ldn). The energy average of the A-weighted sound levels occurring during a 24-hour period, with 10 dB added to the sound levels occurring during the period from 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM.  Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). The energy average of the A-weighted sound levels occurring during a 24-hour period with 5 dB added to the sound levels occurring during the period from 7:00 PM to 10:00 PM and 10 dB added to the sound levels occurring during the period from 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM. Ldn and CNEL values rarely differ by more than 1 dB. As a matter of practice, Ldn and CNEL values are considered to be equivalent and are treated as such in this assessment. 2.1.2 Characteristics of Sound When an object vibrates, it radiates part of its energy as acoustical pressure in the form of a sound wave. Sound can be described in terms of amplitude (loudness), frequency (pitch), or duration (time). Human hearing is not equally sensitive to sound at all frequencies. Therefore, to approximate a human response, the A-weighted filter system is used to adjust measured sound levels. In terms of loudness, the normal range of human hearing extends from approximately 0 dBA to 140 dBA. Unlike linear units such as inches or pounds, decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale, representing points on a sharply rising curve. Because of the physical characteristics of noise transmission and noise perception, the relative loudness of sound does not closely match the actual amounts of sound energy. Table 3, Change in Sound Pressure Level, presents the subjective effect of changes in sound pressure levels. The Honda Center Noise Technical Study City of Anaheim  Page 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Page 4  The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 Table 3 Change in Sound Pressure Level Change in Apparent Loudness ± 3 dB Threshold of human perceptibility ± 5 dB Clearly noticeable change in noise level ± 10 dB Half or twice as loud ± 20 dB Much quieter or louder Source: Bies and Hansen 2003. Sound is generated from a source and dissipates exponentially with distance from that source. This phenomenon is known as “spreading loss.” When sound is measured for distinct time intervals, the statistical distribution of the overall sound level during that period can be obtained. The energy-equivalent sound level (Leq) is the most common parameter associated with such measurements. The Leq metric is a single-number noise descriptor that represents the average sound level over a given period of time. For example, the L50 noise level represents the level that is exceeded 50 percent of the time. Half the time the noise exceeds this level and half the time it is less than this level. This level also represents the level that is exceeded 30 minutes in an hour. Similarly, the L02, L08 and L25 values represent the noise levels that are exceeded 2, 8, and 25 percent of the time or 1, 5, and 15 minutes per hour. Other values typically noted during a noise survey are the Lmin and Lmax. These values represent the minimum and maximum root-mean-square noise levels obtained over the measurement period. Because community receptors are more sensitive to unwanted noise intrusion during the evening and at night, state law requires that, for planning purposes, an artificial dB increment be added to quiet-time noise levels in a 24-hour noise descriptor, the CNEL or Ldn. 2.1.3 and Physiological Effects of Noise Physical damage to human hearing begins at prolonged exposure to noise levels higher than 85 dBA. Exposure to high noise levels affects the entire biological system, with prolonged noise exposure in excess of 75 dBA increasing body tensions, thereby affecting blood pressure and functions of the heart and nervous system. Extended periods of noise exposure above 90 dBA result in permanent cell damage. When the noise level reaches 120 dBA, a tickling sensation occurs in the human ear even with short-term exposure. This level of noise is called the threshold of feeling. As the sound reaches 140 dBA, the tickling sensation is replaced by the feeling of pain in the ear, called the threshold of pain. A sound level of 160 to 165 dBA will result in dizziness or loss of equilibrium. The ambient or background noise problem is widespread and generally more concentrated in urban areas than in outlying, less developed areas. Table 4 shows Typical Noise Levels from Noise Sources. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting The Honda Center Noise Technical Study City of Anaheim  Page 5 Table 4 Typical Noise Levels from Noise Sources Common Outdoor Activities Noise Level (dBA) Common Indoor Activities 110 Rock Band Jet Flyover at 1,000 feet 100 Gas Lawn Mower at three feet 90 Diesel Truck at 50 feet, at 50 mph Food Blender at three feet 80 Garbage Disposal at three feet Noisy Urban Area, Daytime 70 Vacuum Cleaner at ten feet Commercial Area Normal Speech at three feet Heavy Traffic at 300 feet 60 Large Business Office Quiet Urban Daytime 50 Dishwasher Next Room Quiet Urban Nighttime 40 Theater, Large Conference Room (background) Quiet Suburban Nighttime 30 Library Quiet Rural Nighttime Bedroom at Night, Concert Hall (background) 20 Broadcast/Recording Studio 10 Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing 0 Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing Source: Caltrans 1998, Table 9-2136.2. 2.2 PHYSICAL SETTING AND EXISTING LAND USES The project site currently is developed with the Honda Center arena in addition to the associated surface lots serving the arena. It is bordered by Katella Avenue to the south and Cerritos Avenue to the north. To the west ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Page 6  The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 is SR-57 and the Santa Ana River to the east. Douglass Road traverses through the site in a north/south orientation and separates the western surface lot from the arena and eastern surface parking lot. 2.2.1 Noise-Sensitive Receptors Certain land uses are particularly sensitive to noise and vibration, including residential, school, and open space/recreation areas where quiet environments are necessary for enjoyment, public health, and safety. The project site is primarily surrounded by commercial and light industrial land uses. Commercial and industrial uses are not considered noise sensitive. The Angel Stadium of Anaheim is located to the southwest. Information regarding sensitive receptors near the project site is provided below.  Westwood College. Generally located northwest of the project site across Douglass Road.  Ayres Hotel of Anaheim. Located south of the project site across Katella Avenue.  Sunkist Gardens Mobile Home Park. Located approximately 1,675 feet to the northwest of the project site. 2.2.2 Existing Noise Environment Noise from motor vehicles is generated by engine vibrations, the interaction between tires and the road, and the exhaust system. Reducing the average motor vehicle speed reduces the noise exposure of receptors adjacent to the road. Each reduction of five miles per hour reduces noise by about 1 dBA. In order to assess the potential for mobile-source noise impacts, it is necessary to determine the noise currently generated by vehicles traveling through the project area. Average daily traffic (ADT) volumes were based on the existing daily traffic volumes provided by Parsons Brinkerhoff (2012). Noise levels for existing conditions (without and with event) along analyzed roadways are presented in Table 5. The results of this modeling indicate that current average noise levels along arterial segments for a typical day without an event range from approximately 63 to 77 dBA CNEL at 50-feet from the roadway centerline. Average noise levels along the arterial segments range from 66 to 78 dBA CNEL at 50- feet from the roadway centerline on a day with an event (based on an average attendance event). ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting The Honda Center Noise Technical Study City of Anaheim  Page 7 Table 5 Existing Ambient Noise Environment Existing No Event Existing with Average Attendance Event Location ADT CNEL1 ADT CNEL1 Increase in CNEL (dBA) from Events Ball Road Between Sunkist St and SR-57 SB Ramp 50,970 77.2 52,630 77.3 0.1 Between SR-57 SB Ramp and Phoenix Club Dr 31,670 75.1 33,730 75.4 0.3 Cerritos Avenue Between Sunkist St and Douglass Rd 4,270 66.4 5,780 67.7 1.3 Douglass Road Between Katella Ave and Cerritos Ave 7,040 67.6 10,120 69.2 1.6 Katella Avenue Between Lewis Street and State College Blvd 33,500 75.4 34,120 75.4 0.0 Between State College Blvd and Howell Ave 34,130 75.4 35,310 75.6 0.2 Between Howell Ave and SR-57 SB Ramps 52,030 77.3 55,550 77.5 0.2 Between SR-57 SB Rmps and SR-57 NB Rmps 34,720 75.5 38,170 75.9 0.4 Between SR-57 NB Ramps and Douglass Rd 34,470 75.5 39,970 76.1 0.6 Between Douglass Rd and Struck Ave 29,480 74.8 32,820 75.3 0.5 Between Struck Ave and Main St 23,170 73.8 24,840 74.1 0.3 Between Main St and Batavia St 25,630 74.2 26,630 74.4 0.2 Main Street Between Katella Ave and Struck Ave 15,000 71.9 15,640 72.4 0.5 Phoenix Club Drive Between Honda Center and Ball Rd 3,470 63.4 5,220 65.3 1.9 State College Boulevard Between Howell Ave and Katella Ave 21,030 73.3 21,590 73.5 0.2 Sunkist Street Between Cerritos Ave and Ball Rd 6,790 68.4 7870 69.1 0.7 Source: FHWA, Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, based on traffic volumes obtained from the traffic analysis prepared by Parsons Brinkerhoff (2012) and speed limits obtained from Google Earth Street View. 1 Noise levels are calculated at 50 feet from the roadway centerline. 2 The “Increase from Existing No Event” is the difference in traffic noise between the existing year without event and average attendance event and represents the increase in noise attributable to event-related traffic. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Page 8  The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting To limit population exposure to physically and/or damaging as well as intrusive noise levels, the federal government, the State of California, various county governments, and most municipalities in the state have established standards and ordinances to control noise. The City of Anaheim regulates noise through the City of Anaheim Municipal Code and General Plan. Potential noise impacts were evaluated based on the City of Anaheim Municipal Code and General Plan to determine whether a significant adverse noise impact would result from the operation of the proposed project. 3.1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE The state of California’s noise insulation standards are codified in the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, California Building Code. These noise standards are applied to new construction in California for the purpose of interior noise compatibility from exterior noise sources. The regulations specify that acoustical studies must be prepared when noise-sensitive structures, such as residential buildings, schools, or hospitals, are located near major transportation noise sources, and where such noise sources create an exterior noise level of 60 dBA CNEL or higher. Acoustical studies that accompany building plans must demonstrate that the structure has been designed to limit interior noise in habitable rooms to acceptable noise levels. 3.2 CITY OF ANAHEIM NOISE STANDARDS 3.2.1 Land Use Compatibility Table 6 presents a land use compatibility chart for community noise adopted by the City of Anaheim’s General Plan Noise Element. This table provides urban planners with a tool to gauge the compatibility of new land uses relative to existing and future noise levels. This table identifies normally acceptable, conditionally acceptable, normally unacceptable, and clearly unacceptable noise levels for various land uses. A conditionally acceptable designation implies new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements for each land use is made and needed noise insulation features are incorporated in the design. By comparison, a normally acceptable designation indicates that standard construction can occur with no special noise reduction requirements. The Honda Center Noise Technical Study City of Anaheim  Page 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Page 10  The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 Table 6 Community Noise and Land Use Compatibility CNEL (dBA) Land Uses 55 60 65 70 75 80 Residential-Low Density Single Family, Duplex, Mobile Homes Residential- Multiple Family Transient Lodging – Motels, Hotels Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes Amphitheaters, Concert Hall, Amphitheaters Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports Playground, Neighborhood Parks Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation, Cemeteries Office Buildings, Businesses, Commercial and Professional Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agricultural Explanatory Notes Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements. Normally Unacceptable: New construction/development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made with needed noise insulation features included in the design. Outdoor areas must be shielded. Clearly Unacceptable: New construction/development should generally not be undertaken. Construction costs to make the indoor environment acceptable would be prohibitive and the outdoor environment would not be useable. Conditionally Acceptable: New construction/development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirement is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice. Outdoor environment will seem noisy. Source: City of Anaheim, City of Anaheim General Plan, Chapter 9, Noise Element. Adopted May 2004. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting The Honda Center Noise Technical Study City of Anaheim  Page 11 3.2.2 Municipal Code The City of Anaheim regulates noise through the City of Anaheim’s Municipal Code, Chapter 6.70, Sound Pressure Levels. Pursuant to the municipal code, the City restricts noise levels generated at a property from exceeding 60 dBA for extended period of time. The City applies these standards to nontransportation stationary noise sources. These standards do not gauge the compatibility of developments in the noise environment, but provide restrictions on the amount and duration of noise generated at a property, as measured at the property line of the noise receptor. The City’s noise ordinance is designed to protect people from objectionable nontransportation noise sources such as music, construction activity, machinery, pumps, and air conditioners. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Page 12  The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 This page left blank intentionally. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts 4.1 METHODOLOGY This noise technical study has been prepared to analyze potential operational phase noise impacts related to an increase in the number of annual events at the Honda Center to accommodate a NBA franchise. The Honda Center is permitted to host up to 162 events per year. The proposed project seeks to increase the maximum number of events by 60 for a total of 222 events per year. Currently, there are on average three events per week at the Honda Center (153 games per year) and the proposed project would result in four events per week on average. Seating capacity of a basketball game is 18,336 and the proposed project would not result in a change in the maximum seating capacity of current events (see Table No construction activities would be necessary in order to accommodate an increase of events at the Honda Center. 4.2 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 would result in: N-1 Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. N-2 Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. N-3 A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. N-4 A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. N-5 For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. N-6 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. 4.2.1 City of Anaheim Thresholds Noise There are two criteria for judging noise impacts used in this analysis. First, noise levels projected for the proposed project must comply with all relevant state and local standards and regulations. Noise impacts on the surrounding community are enforced through local noise ordinances, supported by nuisance complaints and subsequent investigation. The second measure of impact used in this analysis is whether the increase in noise above the ambient noise level, as a result of a new noise source (either through on-site emissions or through noise generated by project traffic), has the potential to adversely impact noise-sensitive land uses. The Honda Center Noise Technical Study City of Anaheim  Page 13 ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Page 14  The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 Substantial Increase in Traffic Noise Levels The traffic noise thresholds are based on human tolerance to noise (see Table 3, shown previously) and are widely used for assessing traffic noise impacts. In general, people tend to compare intruding noise with the existing background noise. If the new noise is readily identifiable or considerably louder than the background, it has the potential to be objectionable or annoying (Caltrans 2009). Noise impacts can be broken down into three categories. The first is audible impacts. Audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3 dBA or more, as this level has been found to be barely perceptible in exterior environments. The second category, potentially audible, refers to a change of between 1 and 3 dBA. This range of noise levels was found to be noticeable to sensitive people in laboratory environments. The last category, inaudible, includes changes of less than 1 dBA, which are typically inaudible to the human ear except under quiet conditions in controlled environments. In general, human sound perception is such that a change in sound level of 3 dB is just noticeable, a change of 5 dB is clearly noticeable, and a change of 10 dB is perceived as doubling or halving of sound level. Only audible changes of 3 dBA or greater in noise levels at sensitive receptors are considered potentially significant when noise levels exceed the compatibility criteria (see Table 6, shown previously). Based on the City of Anaheim’s noise compatibility criteria of 60 dBA CNEL for residential uses, the City considers audible dBA) increases in project-related traffic noise to be substantial when the ambient noise environment along the roadway segments within the project’s study area under with project conditions exceeds 60 dBA CNEL. Stationary-Source Noise The stationary noise thresholds are based on a combination of the human tolerance to noise (see Table 3) and local criteria for stationary noise sources as established by the City of Anaheim for noise control (Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 6.70, Sound Pressure Levels). Pursuant to the municipal code, the City restricts noise levels generated at a property from exceeding 60 dBA Leq for extended period of time. 4.3 THE HONDA CENTER Mobile-source noise generated by the proposed project includes noise from vehicles traveling to and from the project site. The proposed project would also result in generation of stationary-source noise which includes noise from heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems, landscaping activities, truck deliveries, and surface parking lots. 4.3.1 Non-Transportation (Stationary) Sources of Noise Unlike transportation noise sources, whose effects can extend well beyond the limits of the project site, stationary noise only impacts sensitive receptors adjacent to a project site. Stationary sources of noise include mechanical equipment (HVAC systems) and parking lots. The proposed project would not introduce any new or different stationary sources of noise at the project site compared to the types of noise currently generated during a permitted event at the Honda Center. Installation of additional mechanical systems or expansion of the parking lots would not be required. The City of Anaheim restricts stationary noise generated on a property from creating a nuisance to other offsite noise-sensitive receptors through implementation of the noise limits in the City’s municipal code. The proposed project would add approximately 15,000 square feet of restaurant and an approximately 5,000 square-foot team store. There would be no new HVAC units or an expansion of the parking lot as part of the project. While the project may increase parking utilization and cause a marginal increase in the utilization of existing HVAC units, these changes are minimal and therefore the project would not cause discernable noise increases to any noise-sensitive use. No mitigation measures would be required. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts The Honda Center Noise Technical Study City of Anaheim  Page 15 4.3.2 Transportation Sources of Noise The operations phase of the project would generate noise primarily associated with vehicular trips. Traffic noise modeling is based on average daily traffic volumes on roadway segments within the analysis conducted by Parsons Brinkerhoff (2012). 2011 Traffic Noise with Project (Sellout Event) Traffic noise modeling was compiled for year 2011No Event and 2011 Plus Project (sellout event), and shown in Table 7. The significance criteria for roadway noise impacts are based on whether the proposed project would result in a substantial increase (3 dB or more) in the ambient noise environment along the roadways when the ambient noise environment exceeds 60 dBA CNEL (daily noise levels). The proposed project would result in similar noise levels along the roadways within the study area of the project, and no traffic noise impacts due to the project would occur. Table 7 Year 2011 Traffic Noise Levels Year 2011 Plus Project (Sellout Event) Location Existing No Event CNEL ADT CNEL1 Increase 2 Ball Road Between Sunkist St and SR-57 SB Ramp 77.2 53,760 77.4 0.2 Between SR-57 SB Ramp and Phoenix Club Dr 75.1 35,140 75.6 0.5 Cerritos Avenue Between Sunkist St and Douglass Rd 66.4 6,800 68.4 2.0 Douglass Road Between Katella Ave and Cerritos Ave 67.6 12,220 70.0 2.4 Katella Avenue Between Lewis Street and State College Blvd 75.4 34,540 75.5 0.1 Between State College Blvd and Howell Ave 75.4 36,110 75.7 0.3 Between Howell Ave and SR-57 SB Ramps 77.3 57,930 77.7 0.4 Between SR-57 SB Ramps and SR-57 NB Ramps 75.5 40,500 76.2 0.7 Between SR-57 NB Ramps and Douglass Rd 75.5 43,690 76.5 1.0 Between Douglass Rd and Struck Ave 74.8 35,090 75.6 0.8 Between Struck Ave and Main St 73.8 25,970 74.2 0.4 Between Main St and Batavia St 74.2 27,310 74.5 0.3 Main Street Between Katella Ave and Struck Ave 71.9 16,080 72.2 0.3 Phoenix Club Drive Between Honda Center and Ball Rd 63.4 6,410 66.1 2.7 State College Boulevard Between Howell Ave and Katella Ave 73.3 21,970 73.5 0.2 Sunkist Street Between Cerritos Ave and Ball Rd 68.4 8,600 69.4 1.0 Source: FHWA, Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, based on traffic volumes obtained from the traffic analysis prepared by Parsons Brinkerhoff (2012) and speed limits obtained from Google Earth Street View. Bold: Audible dB) changes in the ambient noise environment from traffic noise. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Page 16  The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 Table 7 Year 2011 Traffic Noise Levels Year 2011 Plus Project (Sellout Event) Location Existing No Event CNEL ADT CNEL1 Increase 2 1 Noise levels are calculated at 50 feet from the roadway centerline. 2 The “Increase” is the difference in traffic noise between Existing No Event and Year 2011 Plus Project (sellout event) conditions and represents the change in traffic noise levels from the project. 2013 Traffic Noise with Project Event Traffic noise modeling was compiled for year 2013 without and with a Sellout Event, and shown in Table 8. The proposed project would increase the number of events from an average of 153 events to a maximum of 222 events per year. The significance criteria for roadway noise impacts are based on whether the proposed project would result in a substantial increase (3 dB or more) in the ambient noise environment along the roadways when the ambient noise environment exceeds 60 dBA CNEL (daily noise levels). As shown in Table 1, a full-capacity event at the Honda Center has the potential to generate between 17,174 spectators and 18,900 spectators, and the capacity of the arena would not increase as a result of the proposed project. The events under the proposed project would have similar operational characteristics and seating capacity (18,336) and would generate comparable vehicle trips as current events Anaheim Ducks hockey games, concerts, NCAA basketball games, and NBA exhibition games) at the Honda Center arena. While the number of Honda Center events would increase from an average of 3 events per week to an average of 4 events per week, average daily noise levels generated by an event would not change with the project. The proposed project would result in similar noise levels along the roadways within the study area of the project, and no traffic noise impacts would occur. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts The Honda Center Noise Technical Study City of Anaheim  Page 17 Table 8 Year 2013 Traffic Noise Levels Year 2013 Average Attendance Event Year 2013 with Project (Sellout Event) Increase in CNEL (dBA) Location 2013 No Event ADT CNEL1 ADT CNEL1 from Existing No Event 2 from AverageE vent3 Ball Road Between Sunkist St and SR-57 SB Ramp 77.2 57,730 77.7 58,860 77.8 0.6 0.1 Between SR-57 SB Ramp and Phoenix Club Dr 75.1 36,900 75.8 38,310 75.9 0.8 0.1 Cerritos Avenue Between Sunkist St and Douglass Rd 66.4 6,210 68.0 7,230 68.7 2.3 1.8 Douglass Road Between Katella Ave and Cerritos Ave 67.6 10,820 69.5 12,920 70.2 2.6 0.7 Katella Avenue Between Lewis Street and State College Blvd 75.4 37,470 75.8 37,890 75.9 0.5 0.1 Between State College Blvd and Howell Ave 75.4 38,720 76.0 39,520 76.1 0.7 0.1 Between Howell Ave and SR-57 SB Ramps 77.3 60,750 77.9 63,130 78.1 0.8 0.2 Between SR-57 SB Ramps and SR- 57 NB Ramps 75.5 41,640 76.3 43,970 76.5 1.0 0.2 Between SR-57 NB Ramps and Douglass Rd 75.5 43,420 76.5 47,140 76.8 1.3 0.3 Between Douglass Rd and Struck Ave 74.8 35,770 75.6 38,040 75.9 1.1 0.3 Between Struck Ave and Main St 73.8 27,160 74.4 28,290 74.6 0.8 0.2 Between Main St and Batavia St 74.2 29,190 74.8 29,870 74.9 0.7 0.1 Main Street Between Katella Ave and Struck Ave 71.9 17,140 72.4 17,580 72.6 0.7 0.2 Phoenix Club Drive Between Honda Center and Ball Rd 63.4 5,570 65.4 6,760 66.3 2.9 0.9 State College Boulevard Between Howell Ave and Katella Ave 73.3 23,690 73.8 24,070 73.9 0.6 0.1 Sunkist Street Between Cerritos Ave and Ball Rd 68.4 8,550 69.4 9,280 69.8 1.4 0.4 Source: FHWA, Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, based on traffic volumes obtained from the traffic analysis prepared by Parsons Brinkerhoff (2012) and speed limits obtained from Google Earth Street View. Bold: Audible dB) changes in the ambient noise environment from traffic noise. 1 Noise levels are calculated at 50 feet from the roadway centerline. 2 The “Increase from Existing No Event” is the difference in traffic noise between the existing year without event and Year 2013 with project (sellout event) and represents the overall increase in cumulative noise. 3 The “Increase from Average Event” is the difference in traffic noise between Year 2013 with average attendance event and Year 2013 with project (sellout event) conditions and represents the change in noise traffic noise levels from event traffic. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Page 18  The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 Year 2030 with Project Events Traffic noise increases associated with the proposed project was also assessed under future Year 2030 with the buildout of the General Plan and are shown in Table 9. Similar to the Existing with Project Event analysis, traffic noise impacts from project-generated traffic under Year 2030 conditions would be comparable to traffic noise impacts of events currently permitted at Honda Center. While audible dB) changes in the noise environment would occur on event days compared to existing non-event days, the project itself would not increase attendance during a Honda Center event and associated traffic levels. Therefore, no project-related traffic noise impacts would occur under Year 2030 conditions. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts The Honda Center Noise Technical Study City of Anaheim  Page 19 Table 9 Year 2030 Traffic Noise Levels Year 2030 Average Attendance Event Year 2030 with Project (Sellout Event) Increase in CNEL (dBA) Location Existing No Event CNEL ADT CNEL1 ADT CNEL1 from Existing No Event 2 Due to Project Ball Road Between Sunkist St and SR-57 SB Ramp 77.2 70,960 78.6 72,090 78.7 1.5 0.1 Between SR-57 SB Ramp and Phoenix Club Dr 75.1 78,310 79.0 79,720 79.1 4.0 0.1 Cerritos Avenue Between Sunkist St and Douglass Rd 66.4 28,880 74.7 29,900 74.9 8.5 0.2 Douglass Road Between Katella Ave and Cerritos Ave 67.6 32,000 74.2 34,100 74.4 6.8 0.2 Katella Avenue Between Lewis Street and State College Blvd 75.4 59,260 77.8 59,680 77.9 2.5 0.1 Between State College Blvd and Howell Ave 75.4 63,940 78.2 64,740 78.2 2.8 0.0 Between Howell Ave and SR-57 SB Ramps 77.3 75,280 78.9 77,660 79.0 1.7 0.1 Between SR-57 SB Ramps and SR-57 NB Ramps 75.5 70,690 78.6 73,020 78.7 3.2 0.1 Between SR-57 NB Ramps and Douglass Rd 75.5 68,570 78.5 72,290 78.7 3.2 0.2 Between Douglass Rd and Struck Ave 74.8 75,510 78.9 77,780 79.0 4.2 0.1 Between Struck Ave and Main St 73.8 65,510 78.3 66,640 78.3 4.5 0.0 Between Main St and Batavia St 74.2 53,950 77.4 54,630 77.5 3.3 0.1 Main Street Between Katella Ave and Struck Ave 71.9 35,480 75.6 35,920 75.7 3.8 0.1 Phoenix Club Drive Between Honda Center and Ball Rd 63.4 40,850 74.1 42,040 74.2 10.8 0.1 State College Boulevard Between Howell Ave and Katella Ave 73.3 48,140 76.9 48,520 77.0 3.7 0.1 Sunkist Street Between Cerritos Ave and Ball Rd 68.4 15,400 72.0 16,130 72.2 3.8 0.2 Source: FHWA, Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, based on traffic volumes obtained from the traffic analysis prepared by Parsons Brinkerhoff (2012) and speed limits obtained from Google Earth Street View. Bold: Audible dB) changes in the ambient noise environment from traffic noise. 1 Noise levels are calculated at 50 feet from the roadway centerline. 2 The “Increase from Existing” is the difference in traffic noise between the existing year without event and Year 2030 with project (sellout event) and represents the overall increase in cumulative noise. 3 The “Increase Due to Project” is the difference in traffic noise between Year 2030 with average attendance event and Year 2030 with project (sellout event) conditions and represents the change in noise traffic noise levels from event traffic. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Page 20  The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 4.3.3 Cumulative Impacts Traffic Noise modeling was conducted to identify cumulative impacts from concurrent scheduling of events at the Honda Center and the Angel Stadium of Anaheim for year 2013 and year 2030 (General Plan buildout) conditions shown in Table 10 and Table 11, respectively. While concurrent events at the Honda Center and the Angel Stadium of Anaheim generate audible dB) increase in noise levels in year 2030 conditions compared to existing conditions without events, the project would not result in a change in overall attendance at events held at the Honda Center and therefore would not contribute to increases in the ambient noise environment. No cumulative impact would occur due an increase in number of annual events held at the Honda Center. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts The Honda Center Noise Technical Study City of Anaheim  Page 21 Table 10 Cumulative Conditions - Year 2013 Traffic Noise Levels Year 2013 with Average Attendance Event plus Angels Stadium Event Year 2013 with Project (Sellout Event) plus Angels Stadium Event Increase in CNEL (dBA) Location Existing No Event CNEL ADT CNEL1 ADT CNEL1 Cumulative 2 Project3 Ball Road Between Sunkist St and SR-57 SB Ramp 77.2 57,730 77.7 58,860 77.8 0.6 0.1 Between SR-57 SB Ramp and Phoenix Club Dr 75.1 36,900 75.8 38,310 75.9 0.8 0.1 Cerritos Avenue Between Sunkist St and Douglass Rd 66.4 6,210 68.0 7,230 68.7 2.3 0.7 Douglass Road Between Katella Ave and Cerritos Ave 67.6 10,820 69.5 12,920 70.2 2.6 0.7 Katella Avenue Between Lewis Street and State College Blvd 75.4 38,810 76.0 39,230 76.0 0.6 0.0 Between State College Blvd and Howell Ave 75.4 41,130 76.2 41,930 76.3 0.9 0.1 Between Howell Ave and SR-57 SB Ramps 77.3 60,750 77.9 63,130 78.1 0.8 0.2 Between SR-57 SB Ramps and SR-57 NB Ramps 75.5 43,010 76.4 45,340 76.7 1.2 0.3 Between SR-57 NB Ramps and Douglass Rd 75.5 46,360 76.8 50,080 77.1 1.6 0.3 Between Douglass Rd and Struck Ave 74.8 36,550 75.7 38,820 76.0 1.2 0.3 Between Struck Ave and Main St 73.8 27,160 74.4 28,290 74.6 0.8 0.2 Between Main St and Batavia St 74.2 29,190 74.8 29,870 74.9 0.7 0.1 Main Street Between Katella Ave and Struck Ave 71.9 18,530 72.8 18,970 72.9 1.0 0.1 Phoenix Club Drive Between Honda Center and Ball Rd 63.4 5,710 65.5 6,900 66.4 3.0 0.9 State College Boulevard Between Howell Ave and Katella Ave 73.3 23,910 73.9 24,290 74.0 0.7 0.1 Sunkist Street Between Cerritos Ave and Ball Rd 68.4 8,550 69.4 9,280 69.8 1.4 0.4 Source: FHWA, Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, based on traffic volumes obtained from the traffic analysis prepared by Parsons Brinkerhoff (2012) and speed limits obtained from Google Earth Street View. Bold: Audible dB) changes in the ambient noise environment from traffic noise. 1 Noise levels are calculated at 50 feet from the roadway centerline. 2 The “Cumulative” increase is the difference in traffic noise between the existing year without event and Year 2013 with Project (sellout events) at the Honda Center plus the Angels Stadium of Anaheim, and represents the overall increase in cumulative noise. 3 The “Project” increase is the difference in traffic noise between Year 2013 with Honda Center sellout events plus Angeles Stadium of Anaheim event, and Year 2013 with average attendance Honda Center event plus Angels Stadium of Anaheim event conditions, and represents the project contribution to the overall cumulative noise increase. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Page 22  The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 Table 11 Cumulative Conditions - Year 2030 Traffic Noise Levels Year 2030 with Average Attendance Event plus Angels Stadium Event Year 2030 with Project (Sellout Event) plus Angels Stadium Event Increase in CNEL (dBA) Location Existing No Event CNEL ADT CNEL1 ADT ADT Cumulative 2 Project3 Ball Road Between Sunkist St and SR-57 SB Ramp 77.2 70,960 78.6 72,090 78.7 1.5 0.1 Between SR-57 SB Ramp and Phoenix Club Dr 75.1 78,310 79.0 79,720 79.1 4.0 0.1 Cerritos Avenue Between Sunkist St and Douglass Rd 66.4 28,880 74.7 29,900 74.9 8.5 0.2 Douglass Road Between Katella Ave and Cerritos Ave 67.6 32,000 74.2 34,100 74.4 6.8 0.2 Katella Avenue Between Lewis Street and State College Blvd 75.4 60,600 77.9 61,020 78.0 2.6 0.1 Between State College Blvd and Howell Ave 75.4 66,350 78.3 67,150 78.4 3.0 0.1 Between Howell Ave and SR-57 SB Ramps 77.3 75,280 78.9 77,660 79.0 1.7 0.1 Between SR-57 SB Ramps and SR- 57 NB Ramps 75.5 72,060 78.7 74,390 78.8 3.3 0.1 Between SR-57 NB Ramps and Douglass Rd 75.5 71,510 78.6 75,230 78.9 3.4 0.3 Between Douglass Rd and Struck Ave 74.8 76,290 78.9 78,560 79.1 4.3 0.2 Between Struck Ave and Main St 73.8 65,510 78.3 66,640 78.3 4.5 0.0 Between Main St and Batavia St 74.2 53,950 77.4 54,630 77.5 3.3 0.1 Main Street Between Katella Ave and Struck Ave 71.9 36,870 75.8 37,310 75.8 3.9 0.0 Phoenix Club Drive Between Honda Center and Ball Rd 63.4 40,990 74.1 42,180 74.2 10.8 0.1 State College Boulevard Between Howell Ave and Katella Ave 73.3 48,360 76.9 48,740 77.0 3.7 0.1 Sunkist Street Between Cerritos Ave and Ball Rd 68.4 15,400 72.0 16,130 72.2 3.8 0.2 Source: FHWA, Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, based on traffic volumes obtained from the traffic analysis prepared by Parsons Brinkerhoff (2012) and speed limits obtained from Google Earth Street View. Bold: Audible dB) changes in the ambient noise environment from traffic noise. 1 Noise levels are calculated at 50 feet from the roadway centerline. 2 The “Cumulative” increase is the difference in traffic noise between the existing year without event and Year 2030 with project (sellout events) at the Honda Center plus the Angels Stadium of Anaheim and represents the overall increase in cumulative noise. 3 The “Project” increase is the difference in traffic noise between Year 2030 with Honda Center sellout events plus Angeles Stadium of Anaheim event, and Year 2030 with average attendance Honda Center event plus Angels Stadium of Anaheim event conditions, and represents the project contribution to the overall cumulative noise increase. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts The Honda Center Noise Technical Study City of Anaheim  Page 23 4.4 EXISTING REGULATIONS  Community noise standards adopted by the City of Anaheim in the General Plan, Noise Element.  City of Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 6.20, Sound Pressure Levels: Stationary Noise Standards. 4.5 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Stationary Noise Stationary-source noise impacts from implementation of the proposed project would be less than significant. Traffic Noise A potentially significant cumulative noise impact to residential areas located east of Sunkist Street between Cerritos Avenue and Ball Road could occur with concurrent scheduling of events at the Honda Center and the Angel Stadium of Anaheim for year 2030 when added to future cumulative development. 4.6 MITIGATION MEASURES Stationary Noise No significant impacts were identified and no mitigation measures are necessary. Traffic Noise MM-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall contribute fair-share funding to repave Sunkist Street between Cerritos Avenue and Ball Road with rubberized asphalt. Studies have shown that asphalt rubber overlays resulted in a reduction in road noise in the order of 6 dB. (Rymer and Donavan, 2005) 4.7 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant project-related impacts have been identified. With implementation of MM-1, cumulative noise impacts would be less than significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Page 24  The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 This page left blank intentionally ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. References Anaheim, City of. 2011. City of Anaheim Municipal Code. 2004, May 25 (amended). City of Anaheim General Plan Update. Bies, David A. and Colin H. Hansen. 2003. Engineering Noise Control: Theory and Practice. 3rd ed. New York: Spon Press. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 1998, October. Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. Parsons Brinkerhoff, 2012, January. The Honda Center Draft Traffic Study Report. Personal Communications Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations, Honda Center. 2011, June. Personal Communications and Honda Center Operational Survey. Model Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 1978, December. Federal Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, U.S. Dept. of Transportation. Report No. FHWA-RD77-108. The Honda Center Noise Technical Study City of Anaheim  Page 25 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. References Page 26  The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix The Honda Center Noise Technical Study City of Anaheim Appendix A FHWA Federal Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model Files ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix The Planning Center I DC&E January 2012 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model Existing Conditions d Distance to CNEL from Roadway Centerline e e Existing Existing Existing Ex W/ Average Change Change p Without With 50.0 60 65 70 50.0 60 65 70 From due to Roadway Segment S Event Average Event Feet CNEL CNEL CNEL Feet CNEL CNEL CNEL Existing Project Ball Road btwn Sunkist St and SR-57 SB Ramps 40 50,970 52,630 77.2 698 324 150 77.3 713 331 154 0.1 0.1 btwn SR-57 SB Ramps and Phoenix Club Dr 40 31,670 33,730 75.1 508 236 110 75.4 530 246 114 0.3 0.3 Cerritos Avenue 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 btwn Sunkist St and Douglass Rd 40 4,270 5,780 66.4 134 62 29 67.7 164 76 35 1.3 1.3 Douglass Road 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 btwn Katella Ave and Cerritos Ave 35 7,040 10,120 67.6 160 74 35 69.2 204 95 44 1.6 1.6 Katella Avenue 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 btwn Lewis Street and State College Blvd 40 33,500 34,120 75.4 528 245 114 75.4 534 248 115 0.0 0.0 btwn State Colege Blvd and Howell Ave 40 34,130 35,310 75.4 534 248 115 75.6 547 254 118 0.2 0.2 btwn Howell Ave and SR-57 SB Ramps 40 52,030 55,550 77.3 708 328 152 77.5 739 343 159 0.2 0.2 btwn SR-57 SB Ramps and SR-57 NB Ramps 40 34,720 38,170 75.5 540 251 116 75.9 576 267 124 0.4 0.4 btwn SR-57 NB Ramps and Douglass Rd 40 34,470 39,970 75.5 538 250 116 76.1 594 276 128 0.6 0.6 btwn Douglass Rd and Struck Ave 40 29,480 32,820 74.8 485 225 104 75.3 521 242 112 0.5 0.5 btwn Struck Ave and Main St 40 23,170 24,840 73.8 413 192 89 74.1 432 201 93 0.3 0.3 btwn Main St and Batavia St 40 25,630 26,630 74.2 441 205 95 74.4 453 210 98 0.2 0.2 Main Street 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 btwn Katella Ave and Struck Ave 40 15,000 15,640 71.9 309 143 67 72.0 318 147 68 0.1 0.1 Phoenix Club Drive 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 btwn Honda Center and Ball Rd 25 3,470 5,220 63.4 84 39 18 65.2 110 51 24 1.8 1.8 State College Boulevard 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 btwn Howell Ave and Katella Ave 40 21,030 21,590 73.3 387 180 83 73.4 394 183 85 0.1 0.1 Sunkist Street 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 btwn Cerritos Ave and Ball Rd 40 6,790 7,870 68.4 182 85 39 69.1 201 93 43 0.7 0.7 Assumptions: Roadway volumes provided by Parson Brinkerhoff (2011) and posted speed limits. Federal Highway Administration Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, December, 1978. Baseline California vehicle noise levels from Caltrans, TAN 95-03, 1995 Simplified to 2 lanes meters= 20.0 future meters= 20.0 Noise path decay parameter for hard site 24-hour distribution of traffic volumes based o Day 73% Evening 13% Night 14% California base noise levels: Autos 5.2+38.8 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = -2.8 + 38.8 Log10 (speed, km/hr) Light trucks: 35.3 + 25.6 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = 30 + 25.6 Log10 (speed, km/hr) Heavy trucks: 25-31 mi/hr: 35-65 mi/hr: 31-35 mi/hr: ---PAGE BREAK--- Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model Existing Conditions: With Sellout Event, With Average Event and Angel Stadium, With Sellout Event and Angel Stadium. d 24-hour Traffic Volume Distance to CNEL from Roadway Centerline e e Existing Existing Existing Existing Ex w/ Av + Angels Ex w/ Sell + Angels p With With Average+ With Sellout+ 50.0 60 65 70 50.0 60 65 70 50.0 60 65 70 Roadway Segment S Sellout Angel Stadium Angel Stadium Feet CNEL CNEL CNEL Feet CNEL CNEL CNEL Feet CNEL CNEL CNEL Ball Road btwn Sunkist St and SR-57 SB Ramps 40 53,760 52,630 53,760 77.4 723 336 156 77.3 713 331 154 77.4 723 336 156 btwn SR-57 SB Ramps and Phoenix Club Dr 40 35,140 33,730 35,140 75.6 545 253 117 75.4 530 246 114 75.6 545 253 117 Cerritos Avenue 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Sunkist St and Douglass Rd 40 6,800 5,780 6,800 68.4 182 85 39 67.7 164 76 35 68.4 182 85 39 Douglass Road 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Katella Ave and Cerritos Ave 35 12,220 10,120 12,220 70.0 232 107 50 69.2 204 95 44 70.0 232 107 50 Katella Avenue 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Lewis Street and State College Blvd 40 34,540 35,460 35,880 75.5 539 250 116 75.6 548 254 118 75.6 552 256 119 btwn State Colege Blvd and Howell Ave 40 36,110 37,720 38,520 75.7 555 258 120 75.9 571 265 123 76.0 579 269 125 btwn Howell Ave and SR-57 SB Ramps 40 57,930 55,550 57,930 77.7 760 353 164 77.5 739 343 159 77.7 760 353 164 btwn SR-57 SB Ramps and SR-57 NB Ramps 40 40,500 39,540 41,870 76.2 599 278 129 76.1 589 274 127 76.3 612 284 132 btwn SR-57 NB Ramps and Douglass Rd 40 43,690 42,910 46,630 76.5 630 292 136 76.4 622 289 134 76.8 658 305 142 btwn Douglass Rd and Struck Ave 40 35,090 33,600 35,870 75.6 544 253 117 75.4 529 245 114 75.6 552 256 119 btwn Struck Ave and Main St 40 25,970 24,840 25,970 74.2 445 207 96 74.1 432 201 93 74.2 445 207 96 btwn Main St and Batavia St 40 27,310 26,630 27,310 74.5 461 214 99 74.4 453 210 98 74.5 461 214 99 Main Street 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Katella Ave and Struck Ave 40 16,080 17,030 17,470 72.2 324 150 70 72.4 336 156 72 72.5 342 159 74 Phoenix Club Drive 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Honda Center and Ball Rd 25 6,410 5,360 6,550 66.1 127 59 27 65.3 112 52 24 66.1 128 60 28 State College Boulevard 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Howell Ave and Katella Ave 40 21,970 21,810 22,190 73.5 398 185 86 73.5 396 184 85 73.6 401 186 86 Sunkist Street 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Cerritos Ave and Ball Rd 40 8,600 7,870 8,600 69.4 213 99 46 69.1 201 93 43 69.4 213 99 46 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 Assumptions: Roadway volumes provided by Parson Brinkerhoff (2011) and posted speed limits. Federal Highway Administration Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, December, 1978. Baseline California vehicle noise levels from Caltrans, TAN 95-03, 1995 Simplified to 2 lanes 6.1 meters= 20.0 future 6.1 meters= 20.0 Noise path decay parameter for hard site 24-hour distribution of traffic volumes based on: Day 73% LDA 92% Evening 13% MDT 3% Night 14% HDT 5% California base noise levels: Autos 5.2+38.8 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = -2.8 + 38.8 Log10 (speed, km/hr) Light trucks: 35.3 + 25.6 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = 30 + 25.6 Log10 (speed, km/hr) Heavy trucks: 25-31 mi/hr: 51.9 + 19.2 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = 47.9 + 19.2 Log10 (speed, km/hr) 35-65 mi/hr: 50.4 + 19.2 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = 46.4 + 19.2 Log10 (speed, km/hr) 31-35 mi/hr: straight line interpolation between above two curves ---PAGE BREAK--- Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model Year 2013 d 24-hour Traffic Volume Distance to CNEL from Roadway Centerline e e 2013 2013 2013 2013 Without Event 2013 w/ Average Event 2013 w/Sellout Event p Without W/Average W/Sellout 50.0 60 65 70 50.0 60 65 70 50.0 60 65 70 Roadway Segment S Event Event Sellout Even Feet CNEL CNEL CNEL Feet CNEL CNEL CNEL Feet CNEL CNEL CNEL Ball Road btwn Sunkist St and SR-57 SB Ramps 40 56,070 57,730 58,860 77.6 744 345 160 77.7 759 352 163 77.8 768 357 166 btwn SR-57 SB Ramps and Phoenix Club Dr 40 34,830 36,900 38,310 75.5 542 251 117 75.8 563 261 121 75.9 577 268 124 Cerritos Avenue 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Sunkist St and Douglass Rd 40 4,700 6,210 7,230 66.8 142 66 31 68.0 172 80 37 68.7 190 88 41 Douglass Road 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Katella Ave and Cerritos Ave 35 7,740 10,820 12,920 68.0 171 79 37 69.5 214 99 46 70.2 240 112 52 Katella Avenue 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Lewis Street and State College Blvd 40 36,850 37,470 37,890 75.8 562 261 121 75.8 569 264 123 75.9 573 266 123 btwn State Colege Blvd and Howell Ave 40 37,540 38,720 39,520 75.8 569 264 123 76.0 581 270 125 76.1 589 273 127 btwn Howell Ave and SR-57 SB Ramps 40 57,230 60,750 63,130 77.7 754 350 162 77.9 785 364 169 78.1 805 374 173 btwn SR-57 SB Ramps and SR-57 NB Ramps 40 38,190 41,640 43,970 75.9 576 267 124 76.3 610 283 131 76.5 633 294 136 btwn SR-57 NB Ramps and Douglass Rd 40 37,920 43,420 47,140 75.9 573 266 123 76.5 627 291 135 76.8 663 308 143 btwn Douglass Rd and Struck Ave 40 32,430 35,770 38,040 75.2 516 240 111 75.6 551 256 119 75.9 574 267 124 btwn Struck Ave and Main St 40 25,490 27,160 28,290 74.2 440 204 95 74.4 459 213 99 74.6 471 219 102 btwn Main St and Batavia St 40 28,190 29,190 29,870 74.6 470 218 101 74.8 481 223 104 74.9 489 227 105 Main Street 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Katella Ave and Struck Ave 40 16,500 17,140 17,580 72.3 329 153 71 72.4 338 157 73 72.6 343 159 74 Phoenix Club Drive 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Honda Center and Ball Rd 25 3,820 5,570 6,760 63.8 90 42 19 65.4 115 54 25 66.3 131 61 28 State College Boulevard 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Howell Ave and Katella Ave 40 23,130 23,690 24,070 73.7 412 191 89 73.8 419 194 90 73.9 423 196 91 Sunkist Street 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Cerritos Ave and Ball Rd 40 7,470 8,550 9,280 68.8 194 90 42 69.4 212 99 46 69.8 224 104 48 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 Assumptions: Roadway volumes provided by Parson Brinkerhoff (2011) and posted speed limits. Federal Highway Administration Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, December, 1978. Baseline California vehicle noise levels from Caltrans, TAN 95-03, 1995 Simplified to 2 lanes 6.1 meters= 20.0 future 6.1 meters= 20.0 Noise path decay parameter for hard site 24-hour distribution of traffic volumes based on: Day 73% LDA 92% Evening 13% MDT 3% Night 14% HDT 5% California base noise levels: Autos 5.2+38.8 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = -2.8 + 38.8 Log10 (speed, km/hr) Light trucks: 35.3 + 25.6 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = 30 + 25.6 Log10 (speed, km/hr) Heavy trucks: 25-31 mi/hr: 51.9 + 19.2 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = 47.9 + 19.2 Log10 (speed, km/hr) 35-65 mi/hr: 50.4 + 19.2 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = 46.4 + 19.2 Log10 (speed, km/hr) 31-35 mi/hr: straight line interpolation between above two curves ---PAGE BREAK--- Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model Year 2013 d e e 2013 2013 2013 With Average+Angels 2013 With Sellout+Angels p With Average Event+ With Sellout Event+ 50.0 60 65 70 50.0 60 65 70 Roadway Segment S Angel Stadium Angel Stadium Feet CNEL CNEL CNEL Feet CNEL CNEL CNEL Ball Road btwn Sunkist St and SR-57 SB Ramps 40 57,730 58,860 77.7 759 352 163 77.8 768 357 166 btwn SR-57 SB Ramps and Phoenix Club Dr 40 36,900 38,310 75.8 563 261 121 75.9 577 268 124 Cerritos Avenue 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Sunkist St and Douglass Rd 40 6,210 7,230 68.0 172 80 37 68.7 190 88 41 Douglass Road 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Katella Ave and Cerritos Ave 35 10,820 12,920 69.5 214 99 46 70.2 240 112 52 Katella Avenue 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Lewis Street and State College Blvd 40 38,810 39,230 76.0 582 270 125 76.0 586 272 126 btwn State Colege Blvd and Howell Ave 40 41,130 41,930 76.2 605 281 130 76.3 613 284 132 btwn Howell Ave and SR-57 SB Ramps 40 60,750 63,130 77.9 785 364 169 78.1 805 374 173 btwn SR-57 SB Ramps and SR-57 NB Ramps 40 43,010 45,340 76.4 623 289 134 76.7 646 300 139 btwn SR-57 NB Ramps and Douglass Rd 40 46,360 50,080 76.8 655 304 141 77.1 690 320 149 btwn Douglass Rd and Struck Ave 40 36,550 38,820 75.7 559 260 120 76.0 582 270 125 btwn Struck Ave and Main St 40 27,160 28,290 74.4 459 213 99 74.6 471 219 102 btwn Main St and Batavia St 40 29,190 29,870 74.8 481 223 104 74.9 489 227 105 Main Street 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Katella Ave and Struck Ave 40 18,530 18,970 72.8 356 165 77 72.9 361 168 78 Phoenix Club Drive 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Honda Center and Ball Rd 25 5,710 6,900 65.5 117 54 25 66.4 133 62 29 State College Boulevard 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Howell Ave and Katella Ave 40 23,910 24,290 73.9 421 196 91 74.0 426 198 92 Sunkist Street 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Cerritos Ave and Ball Rd 40 8,550 9,280 69.4 212 99 46 69.8 224 104 48 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 Assumptions: Roadway volumes provided by Parson Brinkerhoff (2011) and posted speed limits. Federal Highway Administration Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, December, 1978. Baseline California vehicle noise levels from Caltrans, TAN 95- Simplified to 2 lanes 6.1 20.0 future 6.1 20.0 Noise path decay parameter for hard site 24-hour distribution of traffic volumes based on: Day 73% LDA 92% Evening 13% MDT 3% Night 14% HDT 5% Distance to CNEL from Roadway Centerline 24-hour Traffic Volume ---PAGE BREAK--- Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model Year 2030 d 24-hour Traffic Volume Distance to CNEL from Roadway Centerline e e 2030 2030 2030 2030 No Event 2030 w/ Average Event 2030 w/ Sellout Avent p No Event With Average With 50.0 60 65 70 50.0 60 65 70 50.0 60 65 70 Roadway Segment S Event Sellout Even Feet CNEL CNEL CNEL Feet CNEL CNEL CNEL Feet CNEL CNEL CNEL Ball Road btwn Sunkist St and SR-57 SB Ramps 40 69,300 70,960 72,090 78.5 857 398 185 78.6 870 404 188 78.7 880 408 190 btwn SR-57 SB Ramps and Phoenix Club Dr 40 76,240 78,310 79,720 78.9 913 424 197 79.0 929 431 200 79.1 941 437 203 Cerritos Avenue 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Sunkist St and Douglass Rd 40 27,370 28,880 29,900 74.5 461 214 99 74.7 478 222 103 74.9 489 227 105 Douglass Road 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Katella Ave and Cerritos Ave 35 28,920 32,000 34,100 73.7 411 191 89 74.2 440 204 95 74.4 459 213 99 Katella Avenue 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Lewis Street and State College Blvd 40 58,640 59,260 59,680 77.8 766 356 165 77.8 772 358 166 77.9 775 360 167 btwn State Colege Blvd and Howell Ave 40 62,760 63,940 64,740 78.1 802 372 173 78.2 812 377 175 78.2 819 380 176 btwn Howell Ave and SR-57 SB Ramps 40 71,760 75,280 77,660 78.7 877 407 189 78.9 905 420 195 79.0 924 429 199 btwn SR-57 SB Ramps and SR-57 NB Ramp 40 67,240 70,690 73,020 78.4 840 390 181 78.6 868 403 187 78.7 887 412 191 btwn SR-57 NB Ramps and Douglass Rd 40 63,070 68,570 72,290 78.1 805 373 173 78.5 851 395 183 78.7 881 409 190 btwn Douglass Rd and Struck Ave 40 72,170 75,510 77,780 78.7 880 409 190 78.9 907 421 195 79.0 925 429 199 btwn Struck Ave and Main St 40 63,840 65,510 66,640 78.2 811 376 175 78.3 825 383 178 78.3 835 387 180 btwn Main St and Batavia St 40 52,950 53,950 54,630 77.3 716 332 154 77.4 725 337 156 77.5 731 339 158 Main Street 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Katella Ave and Struck Ave 40 34,840 35,480 35,920 75.5 542 251 117 75.6 548 254 118 75.7 553 257 119 Phoenix Club Drive 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Honda Center and Ball Rd 25 39,100 40,850 42,040 73.9 423 196 91 74.1 435 202 94 74.2 444 206 96 State College Boulevard 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Howell Ave and Katella Ave 40 47,580 48,140 48,520 76.9 667 309 144 76.9 672 312 145 77.0 676 314 146 Sunkist Street 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Cerritos Ave and Ball Rd 40 14,320 15,400 16,130 71.7 299 139 65 72.0 314 146 68 72.2 324 150 70 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 Assumptions: Roadway volumes provided by Parson Brinkerhoff (2011) and posted speed limits. Federal Highway Administration Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, December, 1978. Baseline California vehicle noise levels from Caltrans, TAN 95-03, 1995 Simplified to 2 lanes 6.1 meters= 20.0 future 6.1 meters= 20.0 Noise path decay parameter for hard site 24-hour distribution of traffic volumes based on: Day 73% LDA 92% Evening 13% MDT 3% Night 14% HDT 5% California base noise levels: Autos 5.2+38.8 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = -2.8 + 38.8 Log10 (speed, km/hr) Light trucks: 35.3 + 25.6 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = 30 + 25.6 Log10 (speed, km/hr) Heavy trucks: 25-31 mi/hr: 51.9 + 19.2 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = 47.9 + 19.2 Log10 (speed, km/hr) 35-65 mi/hr: 50.4 + 19.2 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = 46.4 + 19.2 Log10 (speed, km/hr) 31-35 mi/hr: straight line interpolation between above two curves ---PAGE BREAK--- Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model Year 2030 d e e 2030 2030 Existing Future No Project p With Average Event With Sellout Event 50.0 60 65 70 50.0 60 65 70 Roadway Segment S + Angel Stadium + Angel Stadium Feet CNEL CNEL CNEL Feet CNEL CNEL CNEL Ball Road btwn Sunkist St and SR-57 SB Ramps 40 70,960 72,090 78.6 870 404 188 78.7 880 408 190 btwn SR-57 SB Ramps and Phoenix Club Dr 40 78,310 79,720 79.0 929 431 200 79.1 941 437 203 Cerritos Avenue 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Sunkist St and Douglass Rd 40 28,880 29,900 74.7 478 222 103 74.9 489 227 105 Douglass Road 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Katella Ave and Cerritos Ave 35 32,000 34,100 74.2 440 204 95 74.4 459 213 99 Katella Avenue 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Lewis Street and State College Blvd 40 60,600 61,020 77.9 783 364 169 78.0 787 365 170 btwn State Colege Blvd and Howell Ave 40 66,350 67,150 78.3 832 386 179 78.4 839 389 181 btwn Howell Ave and SR-57 SB Ramps 40 75,280 77,660 78.9 905 420 195 79.0 924 429 199 btwn SR-57 SB Ramps and SR-57 NB Ramps 40 72,060 74,390 78.7 879 408 189 78.8 898 417 194 btwn SR-57 NB Ramps and Douglass Rd 40 71,510 75,230 78.6 875 406 188 78.9 905 420 195 btwn Douglass Rd and Struck Ave 40 76,290 78,560 78.9 913 424 197 79.1 931 432 201 btwn Struck Ave and Main St 40 65,510 66,640 78.3 825 383 178 78.3 835 387 180 btwn Main St and Batavia St 40 53,950 54,630 77.4 725 337 156 77.5 731 339 158 Main Street 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Katella Ave and Struck Ave 40 36,870 37,310 75.8 563 261 121 75.8 567 263 122 Phoenix Club Drive 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Honda Center and Ball Rd 25 40,990 42,180 74.1 436 202 94 74.2 445 206 96 State College Boulevard 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Howell Ave and Katella Ave 40 48,360 48,740 76.9 674 313 145 77.0 678 314 146 Sunkist Street 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 btwn Cerritos Ave and Ball Rd 40 15,400 16,130 72.0 314 146 68 72.2 324 150 70 4.8 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 Assumptions: Roadway volumes provided by Parson Brinkerhoff (2011) and posted speed limits Federal Highway Administration Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, December, 1978. Baseline California vehicle noise levels from Caltrans, TAN 95-03, 1995 Simplified to 2 lanes 6.1 20.0 future 6.1 20.0 Noise path decay parameter for hard site 24-hour distribution of traffic volumes based on: Day 73% LDA 92% Evening 13% MDT 3% Night 14% HDT 5% California base noise levels: Autos 5.2+38.8 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = -2.8 + 38.8 Log10 (speed, km/hr) Light trucks: 35.3 + 25.6 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = 30 + 25.6 Log10 (speed, km/hr) Heavy trucks: 25-31 mi/hr: 51.9 + 19.2 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = 47.9 + 19.2 Log10 (speed, km/hr) 35-65 mi/hr: 50.4 + 19.2 Log10 (speed, mi/hr) = 46.4 + 19.2 Log10 (speed, km/hr) 31-35 mi/hr: straight line interpolation between above two curves Distance to CNEL from Roadway Centerline 24-hour Traffic Volume ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices Honda Center Enhancement Project Draft EIR City of Anaheim Appendix E Traffic Study ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report i TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 8 1.1 BACKGROUND 8 1.2 TRAFFIC STUDY OBJECTIVE 9 1.3 STUDY AREA 11 1.4 TRANSPORTATION SETTING 14 Freeways and Arterials 14 Rail 14 Local Bus 14 Bicycle Trails 14 Pedestrian Access 15 1.5 REPORT ORGANIZATION 15 2.0 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY 16 2.1 FORECAST VOLUME DEVELOPMENT 16 2.2 MODEL ASSUMPTIONS 18 2.3 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION 19 2.4 PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION 19 2.5 LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS 25 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 30 3.1 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS 30 3.2 ARTERIAL SEGMENT ANALYSIS 38 3.3 CALTRANS FACILITY PEAK HOUR ANALYSIS 41 4.0 2013 OPENING YEAR CONDITIONS 45 4.1 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS 45 4.2 ARTERIAL SEGMENT ANALYSIS 53 4.3 CALTRANS FACILITY PEAK HOUR ANALYSIS 56 5.0 2030 FUTURE YEAR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 60 5.1 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS 60 5.2 ARTERIAL SEGMENT ANALYSIS 72 5.3 CALTRANS FACILITY PEAK HOUR ANALYSIS 78 ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report ii 6.0 PROJECT IMPACTS 84 6.1 INTERSECTIONS 85 6.1.1 2011 Baseline Conditions 85 6.1.2 2013 Opening Year Conditions 89 6.1.3 2030 Future Year Conditions 93 6.2 ARTERIAL SEGMENTS 99 6.2.1 2011 Baseline Conditions 99 6.2.2 2013 Opening Conditions 102 6.2.3 2030 Future Conditions 103 6.3 FREEWAY 108 6.3.1 2011 Baseline Conditions 108 6.3.2 2013 Opening Year Conditions 112 6.3.3 2030 Future Year Conditions 116 7.0 PROPOSED MITIGATION AND IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES 124 7.1 INTERSECTIONS 126 7.1.1 2011 Baseline Conditions 126 7.1.2 2013 Opening Year Conditions 128 7.1.3 2030 Future Year Conditions 129 7.2 ARTERIAL 142 7.2.1 2011 Baseline Conditions 142 7.2.2 2013 Opening Year Conditions 142 7.2.3 2030 Future Year Conditions 142 7.3 FREEWAY 150 7.3.1 2011 Baseline Conditions 150 7.3.2 2013 Opening Year Conditions 151 7.3.3 2030 Future Year Conditions 153 7.4 Unavoidable Impacts and Statement of Overriding Considerations 161 8.0 PARKING 162 8.1 PARKING DEMAND 162 8.2 PARKING SUPPLY 163 9.0 CONCLUSION 166 10.0 REFERENCES 175 11.0 GLOSSARY OF TRANSPORTATION TERMS 176 APPENDICES 181 ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report iii List of Figures Figure 1-1: Regional Context 12 Figure 1-2: Study Area 13 Figure 2-1: Project Trip Distribution 21 Figure 2-2: Daily Traffic Flow Profile – Douglas Road (North of Katella) 22 Figure 2-3: Daily Traffic Flow Profile – Phoenix Club Drive 22 Figure 2-4: Daily Traffic Flow Profile – Katella Avenue (SR-57 Northbound Ramps – Douglass Road) 23 Figure 2-5: Daily Traffic Flow Profile – Katella Avenue (Douglass Road – Struck Avenue) 23 Figure 2-6: Daily Traffic Flow Profile – Cerritos Avenue (East of Sunkist Avenue) 24 Figure 3-1: 2011 Baseline (No Events) Peak Hour Intersection LOS 33 Figure 3-2: 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS 34 Figure 3-3: 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS 35 Figure 3-4: 2011 Baseline with Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS 36 Figure 3-5: 2011 Baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS 37 Figure 4-1: 2013 Opening Year with No Events Peak Hour Intersection LOS 48 Figure 4-2: 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS 49 Figure 4-3: 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS 50 Figure 4-4: 2013 Opening Year with Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS 51 Figure 4-5: 2013 Opening Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS 52 Figure 5-1: 2030 Future Year (No Events) Peak Hour Intersection LOS 67 Figure 5-2: 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS 68 Figure 5-3: 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS 69 Figure 5-4: 2030 Future Year with Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS 70 Figure 5-5: 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS 71 Figure 8-1: Location of Tier 1 Parking Area 164 Figure 8-2: Location of Tier 2 Parking Area 164 ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report iv List of Tables Table 2-1: Project Trip Generation 19 Table 2-2: Intersection Level of Service Thresholds 25 Table 2-3: Significant Impact 26 Table 2-4: Arterial Segment Daily Capacity Assumptions 27 Table 2-5: Caltrans Intersection LOS Criteria 27 Table 2-6: Caltrans Freeway Mainline and Ramp LOS 28 Table 2-7: Caltrans Freeway Weaving LOS Criteria 29 Table 3-1: 2011 Baseline PM Peak Hour Intersection LOS 31 Table 3-2: 2011 Baseline Arterial Segment Daily LOS 39 Table 3-3: 2011 Baseline Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS 40 Table 3-4: 2011 Baseline PM Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection 41 Table 3-5: 2011 Baseline Freeway Weaving PM Peak Hour LOS 43 Table 3-6: 2011 Baseline Freeway Mainline PM Peak Hour LOS 43 Table 3-7: 2011 Baseline Freeway Ramp PM Peak Hour LOS 44 Table 4-1: 2013 Opening Year PM Peak Hour Intersection 46 Table 4-2: 2013 Opening Year Arterial Segment Daily LOS 54 Table 4-3: 2013 Opening Year Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS 55 Table 4-4: 2013 Opening Year PM Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS 56 Table 4-5: 2013 Opening Year Freeway Weaving PM Peak Hour LOS 58 Table 4-6: 2013 Opening Year Freeway Mainline PM Peak Hour LOS 58 Table 4-7: 2013 Opening Year Freeway Ramp PM Peak Hour LOS 59 Table 5-1: 2030 Future Year PM Peak Hour Intersection LOS 65 Table 5-2: 2030 Future Year Arterial Segment Daily LOS 76 Table 5-3: 2030 Future Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS 77 Table 5-4: 2030 Future Year PM Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS 79 Table 5-5: 2030 Future Year Freeway Weaving PM Peak Hour LOS 82 Table 5-6: Year 2030 Freeway Mainline PM Peak Hour LOS 82 Table 5-7: 2030 Future Year Freeway Ramp PM Peak Hour 83 Table 6-1: 2011 Baseline Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison 1) 85 Table 6-2: 2011 Baseline Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison 2) 86 Table 6-4: 2013 Opening Year Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison 1) 89 Table 6-6: 2013 Opening Year Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison 3) 92 Table 6-7: 2030 Future Year Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison 1) 93 Table 6-8: 2030 Future Year Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison 2) 95 Table 6-9: 2030 Future Year Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison 3) 97 Table 6-10: 2011 Baseline City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 1) 99 Table 6-11: 2011 Baseline City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 2) 100 Table 6-12: 2011 Baseline City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 3) 101 Table 6-13: 2013 Opening Year City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 1) 102 Table 6-14: 2013 Opening Year City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 2) 102 ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report v Table 6-15: 2013 Opening Year City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 3) 103 Table 6-16: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 1) 104 Table 6-17: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 1) 104 Table 6-18: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 2) 105 Table 6-19: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 2) 106 Table 6-20: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 3) 106 Table 6-21: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 3) 107 Table 6-22: 2011 Baseline Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 1) 108 Table 6-23: 2011 Baseline Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 1) 108 Table 6-24: 2011 Baseline Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 2) 109 Table 6-25: 2011 Baseline Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 2) 110 Table 6-26: 2011 Baseline Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 3) 111 Table 6-27: 2011 Baseline Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 3) 111 Table 6-28: 2013 Opening Year Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 1) 112 Table 6-29: 2013 Opening Year Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 1) 112 Table 6-30: 2013 Opening Year Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 2) 113 Table 6-31: 2013 Opening Year Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 2) 114 Table 6-32: 2013 Opening Year Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 3) 115 Table 6-33: 2013 Opening Year Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 3) 115 Table 6-34: 2030 Future Year Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 1) 117 Table 6-35: 2030 Future Year Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 118 Table 6-37: 2030 Future Year Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 120 Table 6-38: 2030 Future Year Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 3) 121 Table 6-39: 2030 Future Year Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison Table 7-1: 2011 Baseline Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 1) 126 Table 7-2: 2011 Baseline Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 2) 126 Table 7-3: 2011 Baseline Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 3) 127 Table 7-4: 2013 Opening Year Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 1) 128 Table 7-5: 2013 Opening Year Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 2) 128 Table 7-6: 2013 Opening Year Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 3) 129 Table 7-7: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 1) 130 ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report vi Table 7-8: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 1) 133 Table 7-9: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 2) 134 Table 7-10: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 2) 137 Table 7-11: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 3) . 138 Table 7-12: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 3) 141 Table 7-13: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Proposed Arterial Segments Mitigation (Comparison 1) 143 Table 7-14: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Proposed Arterial Segments Mitigation (Comparison 1) 144 Table 7-15: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Proposed Arterial Segments Mitigation (Comparison 2) 146 Table 7-16: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Proposed Arterial Segments Mitigation (Comparison 2) 147 Table 7-17: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Proposed Arterial Segments Mitigation (Comparison 3) 149 Table 7-18: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Proposed Arterial Segments Mitigation (Comparison 3) 150 Table 7-19: 2011 Baseline Proposed Ramp Termini Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 3) 150 Table 7-20: 2011 Baseline Proposed Freeway Facility Mitigation (Comparison 3) 151 Table 7-21: 2013 Opening Year Proposed Ramp Termini Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 3) . 152 Table 7-22: 2013 Opening Proposed Freeway Facility Mitigation (Comparison 3) 152 Table 7-23: 2030 Future Year Proposed Ramp Termini Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 1) Table 7-24: 2030 Future Year Proposed Freeway Facility Mitigation (Comparison 1) 154 Table 7-25: 2030 Future Year Proposed Ramp Termini Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 2) 156 Table 7-26: 2030 Future Year Proposed Freeway Facility Mitigation (Comparison 2) 157 Table 7-27: 2030 Future Year Proposed Ramp Termini Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 3) 158 Table 7-28: 2030 Future Year Proposed Freeway Facility Mitigation (Comparison 3) 160 Table 8-1: Honda Center Parking Demand 162 Table 9-1: Summary of the 2011 Baseline Project Impact and Mitigation Measures 170 Table 9-2: Summary of the 2013 Opening Year Project Impact and Mitigation Measures 170 Table 9-3: Summary of the 2030 Future Year Project Impact and Mitigation Measures 171 ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report vii Appendices Appendix A: Existing Traffic Counts for Honda Center Appendix B: Existing Traffic Counts for Angel Stadium Appendix C: Existing Peak Hour Volume and Speed on State Highway System Appendix D: Honda Center Event Trips Appendix E: Angel Stadium Event Trips Appendix F: Intersection Lane Configurations Appendix G-1: ICU Worksheets under 2011 Baseline Conditions Appendix G-2: ICU Worksheets under 2013 Opening Year Conditions Appendix G-3: ICU Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions Appendix G-4: ICU Worksheets under 2011 Baseline Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix G-5: ICU Worksheets under 2013 Opening Year Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix G-6: ICU Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix H-1: Caltrans Ramp Termini Worksheets under 2011 Baseline Conditions Appendix H-2: Caltrans Ramp Termini Worksheets under 2013 Opening Year Conditions Appendix H-3: Caltrans Ramp Termini Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions Appendix H-4: Caltrans Ramp Termini Worksheets under 2011 Baseline Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix H-5: Caltrans Ramp Termini Worksheets under 2011 Opening Year Conditions Appendix H-6: Caltrans Ramp Termini Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix I-1: Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2011 Baseline Conditions Appendix I-2: Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2013 Opening Year Conditions Appendix I-3: Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions Appendix J-1: HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2011 Baseline Conditions Appendix J-2: HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2013 Opening Year Conditions Appendix J-3: HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions Appendix J-4: HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix K-1: HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2011 Baseline Conditions Appendix K-2: HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2013 Opening Year Conditions Appendix K-3: HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions Appendix K-4: HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2011 Baseline Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix K-5: HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2013 Opening Year Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix K-6: HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions (Mitigated) ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES. 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Honda Center is located on a 42.6-acre site located within the City of Anaheim. Honda Center is a 650,000 square foot arena for sports and entertainment events and can accommodate a maximum of 18,900 spectators (depending on seating configuration). The parking lots surrounding the Honda Center have 3,775 parking spaces to accommodate visitors. Additional parking is provided off-site by agreement and/or by private operators. Land uses surrounding the Honda Center are primarily commercial and light industrial, including restaurants, offices, of some distribution facilities. The Honda Center and its adjacent surface parking lots are bound on the north by Stanley Cup Way and the Union Pacific Railroad, to the east by the Santa Ana River, to the south by Katella Avenue and to the west by State Route 57 (SR-57) freeway. The Honda Center is less than a half mile northeast of the Angel Stadium of Anaheim and the Anaheim Amtrak/Metrolink Station. In June of 1990, the Anaheim City Council approved documents that led to the construction of a new world-class arena and in 1993 the Anaheim Arena opened its doors to a sold-out performance by Barry Manilow. Later that same year, the NHL announced its fourth expansion team, the Mighty Ducks of Anaheim, who would make Anaheim its home. At the same time Arrowhead Water became the naming rights sponsor, thus the arena became the Arrowhead Pond of Anaheim. In 2003, the City approved and entered into the current Facility Management Agreement with Anaheim Arena Management, LLC (AAM) and, in 2006, Honda Motor Company became the title sponsor and the arena name was changed to Honda Center. The success of Honda Center is evident, as it is one of the premiere entertainment and sports venues in the country and has been the recipient of numerous industry awards over the years. It has been nominated for “Venue of the Year” in the United States by Pollstar Magazine on seven separate occasions and most recently was ranked fourth in the country by Billboard Magazine for 2010 concert and ticket sales. Honda Center is proud to be home to the NHL’s Anaheim Ducks and to the prestigious John R. Wooden College Basketball Classic. Since 1993, the venue has hosted a significant number of world-class events and shows, including: NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament Western Regionals (1998, 2001, 2003, 2011), NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament First and Second Round (2008), 1999 NCAA Frozen Four, 2003 World Gymnastics Championships, 2004 U.S. Team Trials - Gymnastics, 2005 World Badminton Championships, four-time host to UFC Championship bouts, U2, Bette Midler, Paul McCartney, Eagles, Barbra Streisand, AC/DC, Gwen Stefani, Luis Miguel, Rod Stewart, David Bowie, Andrea Bocelli, Tim McGraw, Faith Hill, Phil Collins, Toby Keith, Alan Jackson, Madonna, Prince, Van Halen, Gloria Estefan, Jimmy Buffett, Bon Jovi, Billy Joel, Bruce Springsteen, and Elton John. Additionally, the current manager, Anaheim Arena Management, LLC, has continued to improve the facility, investing more than $22 million in capital improvements since 2003. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 2 As the venue was designed and constructed to be home to two professional sports franchises, the City and its facility management partners have worked throughout the years to bring a second professional sports franchise to Honda Center. The proposed project includes an increase in the number of annual events at Honda Center through the addition of another permanent tenant, as well as other permanent improvements described below. The 1990 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Honda Center (formerly Arrowhead Pond) analyzed up to 162 events per year. Honda Center currently averages up to 153 events per year with average attendance at an event of up to 11,264 people. The maximum number of events, in any one year, over the last five years was 162 events in 2008. The proposed project seeks to increase the maximum number of events by 60 from the previous high of 162 events for a total of 222 events per year. Currently, there are on average three events per week at Honda Center, and the proposed project would result in four events per week on average. The purpose of the additional events would be to accommodate a second professional sports franchise at Honda Center without reducing the number of events currently held at the Honda Center. The Honda Center has a maximum seating capacity of 18,900, and the proposed project would not result in a change in the maximum seating capacity of events. In addition to an increase in the number of annual events at Honda Center, the proposed project would involve other minor improvements on the south side1 of the existing facility including an approximate 5,846 square foot restaurant to serve event attendees, 5,846 square foot team store, and 9,114 square feet open area on the main floor and a 9,518 square feet restaurant to serve event attendees and 12,436 square foot outdoor terrace on the club level. Other improvements include interior locker room, office space, bunker suite and balcony suite renovations; interior electrical upgrades and an increase in the capacity of the loading dock. None of the proposed improvements would increase the permanent seating capacity of the existing arena; however, the improvements would result in the loss of approximately 15-20 parking spaces. The proposed project includes a zone reclassification for a portion of the project site from the Transition Zone/Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone to the Public Recreational (PR) Zone/PTMU Overlay Zone, consistent with the zoning for the remainder of the project site. Additional implementation measures include, but are not limited to, building permits to allow the improvements listed above and agreements between the City of Anaheim and Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) and between the City of Anaheim and AAM. 1 Please note a previous proposal located the proposed improvements on the east side of the existing Honda Center. They have since been relocated to the south side facing Katella Avenue. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 3 ES.2 ANALYSIS SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY This traffic study has been prepared to address the potential impacts resulting from an increase in the maximum number of annual events at Honda Center the “Project”). These additional events are analyzed as a sold-out 18,900 seat event condition. The analysis is performed in accordance with City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies dated 1996, City of Orange Traffic Impact Study Guidelines dated August 15, 2007, and Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies dated December 2002 discussed in Chapter 2, Section 2.5. The key traffic study components are summarized as follows: · The project study area for the traffic study was defined using procedures outlined in the traffic study guidelines identified above; · Peak hour Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis for study area intersections; · Daily and peak hour arterial segment analysis for study area roadway segments; · Highway Capacity Software (HCS) analysis for study area freeway mainline segments and ramp locations; and · Peak hour intersection analysis for study area ramp termini intersections. A total of five traffic analysis scenarios were evaluated under each of the three analysis years, as outlined below: 2011 Baseline Analytical Project Direct Impacts Scenario: 1) 2011 Baseline (No Events) 2) 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event2 3) 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event3 4) 2011 Baseline with Project4 5) 2011 Baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 2013 Opening Year Analytical Impacts Scenario and Near-Term Impacts Scenario: 1) 2013 Opening Year (No Events) 2) 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2013 Opening Year with Project 5) 2013 Opening Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 2 Average Attendance Honda Center Event is assumed to be an average attendance event or 11,264 seats as described in the September 2, 2011 Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 344 for Honda Center Enhancement Project. Traffic forecasts are adjusted accordingly from April 6, 2011 event traffic counts. 3 Angel Stadium Event is assumed to be an average Angel Stadium baseball game attendance of 29,402, based on year 2010 season attendance figures provided by the City of Anaheim. Traffic conditions are adjusted accordingly from traffic counts taken for the August 24, 2011 event. 4 Project is assumed to be an 18,900 seat sold out capacity condition. Traffic forecasts are adjusted accordingly from April 6, 2011 event traffic counts. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 4 2030 Long-Term Impacts Scenario (General Plan Buildout): 1) 2030 Future Year (No Events) 2) 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2030 Future Year with Project 5) 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Parking Demand Analysis In addition to traffic impact analyses, an assessment of parking was conducted. The purpose of the parking assessment was to inventory the available on and off-site parking spaces that are within the control of the City of Anaheim and Anaheim Arena Management, LLC and to evaluate how that capacity compares to trip generation of Honda Center events. For this analysis, the trip generation factor for the event is assumed be a fair measure of parking demand for spectators, Honda Center staff, and staff of the event performers under sold-out conditions at a seating capacity of 18,900. While it is known that a significant capacity of additional entrepreneurial parking is regularly made available on private properties in the vicinity of the Honda Center on event days, an inventory of that type of parking was not performed as part of this study. ES.3 PROJECT RELATED IMPACTS AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES This study presents a comprehensive evaluation of the potential project impacts for each study year through a direct comparison of with and without Project conditions using the five traffic analysis scenarios. Using this approach, the project impacts and mitigation measures are identified for the following three comparisons: Comparisons 1) No Events vs. Project 2) Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project 3) Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Summary of Findings Please note that at findings have been made with consideration of the appropriate LOS standards and other traffic analysis guidelines set forth by each respective agency and discussed in detail within the body of this report (i.e. City of Anaheim, City of Orange, Caltrans). 2011 Baseline Conditions: Intersections: Two intersections were found to be impacted as a result of Comparisons 1 and 2 under the 2011 Baseline conditions. Comparison 3 indicates five intersections are significantly impacted, all of which are located in the City of Anaheim. Improvements have been identified for all five locations and implementation of the mitigation strategies would bring traffic conditions to less than significant conditions. See Chapter 9; Table 9-1 for impacted intersection locations and other details. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 5 Arterial Segments: No project related impacts on any study area arterial segments were identified under any of the Comparisons for the 2011 Baseline conditions. Freeway Facility: No project related freeway impacts were identified within the project study area under Comparisons 1 or 2 in the 2011 Baseline conditions. Under Comparison 3 one freeway ramp at southbound SR-57 and Katella is deficient in both with and without project scenarios. An improvement has been identified for this location. With implementation of the improvement, the ramp would operate at an acceptable Level of Service (LOS). See Chapter 9; Table 9-1 for impacted ramp location and other details. 2013 Opening Year Conditions: Intersections: Findings are very similar to the 2011 Baseline condition. Two intersections were found to be impacted as a result of Comparisons 1 and 2 under the 2013 Opening Year conditions. Comparison 3 indicates six intersections are significantly impacted, all of which are located in the City of Anaheim. Improvements have been identified for all six locations and implementation of the mitigation strategies would bring traffic conditions to less than significant conditions. See Chapter 9; Table 9-2 for impacted intersection locations and other details. Arterial Segments: No project related impacts on any study area arterial segments were identified under any of the Comparisons under the 2013 Opening Year conditions. Freeway Facility: Findings are very similar to the 2011 Baseline condition. No project related freeway impacts were identified within the project study area under Comparisons 1 or 2 under the 2013 Opening Year conditions. Under Comparison 3 one freeway ramp at southbound SR-57 and Katella is projected to be deficient in both with and without project scenarios. Improvement mitigation has been identified for this location; although, it already would be deficient under No Event scenario. With the implementation of the mitigation improvement, the ramp would operate at an acceptable Level of Service (LOS). See Chapter 9; Table 9-3 for impacted ramp location and other details. 2030 Future Year Conditions: Intersections: The results of Comparison 1 show twenty three (23) study area intersections are projected to be impacted under the 2030 Future Year conditions. Three of the intersections are located in the City of Orange; the other twenty (20) are located in the City of Anaheim. The results of Comparison 2 show twenty (20) study area intersections are projected to be impacted. Three of the intersections are located in the City of Orange; the other sixteen (17) are located in the City of Anaheim. The results of Comparison 3 show twenty four (24) study area intersections are projected to be impacted. Five of the intersections are located in the City of Orange; the other nineteen (19) are located in the City of Anaheim. Improvement mitigations have been identified for each project impact and implementation of the improvements would bring traffic conditions to less than significant conditions. See Chapter 9; Table 9-3 for impacted intersection locations and other details. Arterial Segments: The results of Comparison 1 show seven study area arterial segments will experience significant impact as a result of the project under 2030 Future Year conditions. Three of the arterial segments are located in the City of Orange; the other four are located in ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 6 the City of Anaheim. The same seven locations that are forecast to be significantly impact by the project under the Comparison 1 will continue occur under Comparison 2. The result of Comparison 3 show eleven (11) arterial segments will be significantly impacted by the project under 2030 Future Year conditions. Three of the arterial segments are located in the City of Orange; the other eight are located in the City of Anaheim. Improvement strategies have been identified for each impacted arterial. With implementation of the identified improvements the traffic impacts would be mitigated to less than significant conditions. See Chapter 9; Table 9-3 for impacted arterial segments and other details. Freeway Facility: The results of Comparison 1 show there are five freeway weaving segments with project related impacts, one of which experiences LOS deterioration from an acceptable to unacceptable LOS, the other four are already deficient under the No Event conditions. In addition, the project creates impacts at four ramps; two of which shows deterioration in LOS from acceptable to unacceptable LOS; the other two are already deficient under the No Event conditions. The results of Comparison 2 show there are nine locations (five freeway weaving segments and four ramps) with project related impacts. All of these freeway segments and ramps are already deficient under the No Events conditions. The results of Comparison 3 show that 10 locations (five freeway segments and five ramps) will experience significant impact as a result of the project. These locations already operate deficiently under the No Events conditions. Improvement mitigations have been identified for each impacted location. With implementation of the improvements the traffic impacts would be mitigated to without project conditions or less than significant conditions. See Chapter 9; Table 9-3 for impacted freeway facilities and other details. Concurrent Event Considerations Simultaneous events occurring at Honda Center due to the Proposed Project and at Angel Stadium known as “concurrent events” are anticipated to be infrequent and only occur a limited number of times throughout the year. Although, some of the physical traffic improvements/mitigation listed in Comparison 3 may be considered feasible; the mitigation necessary to maintain acceptable levels of service for Comparison 3 would require substantial right-of-way acquisition and funding, and result in numerous impacts to adjacent private properties and land uses. In addition, these improvements would conflict with the City's General Plan and Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan goals and policies to provide a pedestrian-friendly, transit-oriented environment within the Platinum Triangle. As a result, the City of Anaheim has determined that it is economically, socially, and technologically infeasible to implement the mitigation measures associated with Comparison 3. Traffic Management as Mitigation Honda Center event related traffic has been a common occurrence in the study area for the past eighteen years. As such local businesses, residents and regular area commuters are familiar with the event related traffic activity. To mitigate event related traffic the City has elected to employ active traffic management personnel, cones and signage to effectively manage arriving and departing event related traffic. This alternative traffic mitigation strategy has proved to be an effective tool for current events. Given the Honda Center is a special traffic generator that creates traffic outside of the normal peak hour conditions, given these traffic conditions already commonly occur, and given many of the physical mitigation improvements identified for the Honda Center Enhancement Project may be ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 7 practically infeasible due to right-of-way and other physical constrains, the continued use of active traffic management is recommended as mitigation for the Project. ES.4 PARKING ANALYSIS The primary scenario analyzed for parking demand is a sold-out Honda Center event with 18,900 attendees. Utilizing the trip generation estimates for a sold-out Honda Center Event, 6,877 parking spaces are estimated to be required. An inventory of parking spaces available shows 6,939 spaces are available. Comparing the demand of 6,877 spaces to the parking supply of 6,939 spaces, there is a surplus of 62 spaces. It is noted that as all of the inventoried parking spaces are assumed to be available for Honda Center for all events, the increased number of annual events at Honda Center will not required any additional parking. In addition, it is noted that many other entrepreneurial parking opportunities are available in the vicinity of Honda Center by private businesses during events. These entrepreneurial parking spaces were not formally inventoried as part of this study given the spaces inventoried that are under control by the City and/or AAM alone exceed the estimated demand. It can be concluded, factoring in entrepreneurial parking, there is an extensive surplus of parking available for Honda Center. The full parking analysis discussion is presented in Chapter 8. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 8 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 BACKGROUND Located at the northeast corner of Douglass Road and Katella Avenue and adjacent to the State Route (SR)-57 Freeway, Honda Center is recognized as one of the premier entertainment and sporting venues in the country. Opened in 1993, it is owned by the City of Anaheim and managed by Anaheim Arena Management, LLC. The venue has a maximum seating capacity of 18,900 seats and serves as home to the National Hockey League (NHL) Anaheim Ducks, regular concerts, and a variety of other special events. Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 299 was prepared for the Anaheim Arena in November 1989 and certified by the City of Anaheim in December 1989. The EIR assumed a total of 162 annual events and mitigated traffic impacts to the extent feasible. Transportation systems management elements were identified and incorporated as part of the traffic mitigation program for that project. Specifically, the following were strategies were recommended to reduce potential traffic congestion and air pollution impacts: · A discount carpool program for on-site parking facilities; · Transit service program to provide event service to the facility from different routes and areas and from park-and-ride lots; · An enforcement/traffic control program with the participation of the police department to direct, enforce, and re-route traffic before and after events; · Installation of overhead changeable message signage for directing entry traffic to available parking areas; · A program of group sales to encourage the use of charter buses to arena events to reduce the number of private auto trips; and · A marketing program to promote the above programs. Since Honda Center’s opening in 1993, use of traffic management plans to actively manage arrival and departure of event related traffic through operational and traffic control strategies has proved to be an effective tool. The traffic management plans are refined as necessary in the field to ensure efficient management of both pre- and post-event traffic operations. The proposed project includes an increase in the number of annual events at Honda Center. The additional events would accommodate the addition of a second professional sports franchise as a long-term tenant without a reduction in the number of various events that presently occur. Through an evaluation of multiple year event/attendance records, Honda Center currently averages 153 events per year with average attendance at an event of 11,264 people. The maximum number of events in any one year, during the past five years, was 162 events in 2008. The proposed project seeks to increase the maximum number of events approved under the 1989 EIR #299 by 60 for a new ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 9 maximum of 222 events per year. Currently, there are on average three events per week at Honda Center, and the proposed project would result in four events per week on average. The Honda Center has a maximum seating capacity of 18,900. The proposed project does not result in a change in the maximum seating capacity. 1.2 TRAFFIC STUDY OBJECTIVE Honda Center related event traffic has occurred in the area for the past 18 years and local businesses and area commuters are familiar with such traffic activity; however an increase in the number of annual events hosted at the venue might result in additional traffic impacts to the adjacent transportation circulation system. Therefore, the objectives of this traffic study are to 1) document the traffic conditions within the study area; and 2) to evaluate the potential project impacts associated with increasing the number of annual events from 162 to 222. This traffic impact study has been conducted in accordance with the City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies dated 1996, City of Orange Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines dated August 15, 2007, Caltrans Guide For The Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies dated December 2002, and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). While Honda Center events could occur any day of the week, most events occur on weekday evenings, generally from 7:00-10:00 PM, which is outside the normal peak PM period of the adjacent arterials and daily commuting. Research studies indicate traffic associated with events on the weekends tend to spread over a longer periods of the day than weekday events, which results in less intense peaking conditions. This coupled with generally non-existent daily commuters in the area provides sound basis that weekend traffic analysis is not warranted for the project. To capture the worst case scenario and highest volume scenario, the focus of this traffic analysis was on the weekday PM peak hour pre-event traffic conditions. Furthermore, it is noted that sporting venues are considered “special generators”. For this type of land use the normal am and pm peak hour traffic analysis is not necessarily applicable. To properly evaluate traffic for this special generator it was important to establish the typical event peak hour. To accomplish this, traffic counts were collected between 4:00-8:00 PM on an event day. This window coincides with the typical 7:00 PM opening faceoff for an Anaheim Ducks’ game. The traffic counts were collected on April 6, 2011. The counts reveal a peak hour for the pre-event condition was 6:00- 7:00 PM. This weekday PM peak hour of 6:00-7:00 PM was assumed to be typical for events and was therefore relied upon to evaluate project traffic impacts on the local and state highway system. Angel Stadium and Honda Center are the two major sporting venues in the City of Anaheim. While Honda Center is home to the NHL Anaheim Ducks, Angel Stadium is home to the Major League Baseball (MLB) Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. The regular baseball season typically extends from early April to late September. Should the team qualify for the post season, play-off games may extend through October. Typical NHL and National Basketball Association (NBA) seasons extend between late October and mid April, with playoffs extending into June. There is very limited overlap between baseball and basketball/hockey events. The primary concern for overlap events would be for a major concert to occur at Honda Center concurrently with an Angel game. Given the geographical location of the two venues, it is possible that dual event traffic conditions might result in additional significant impacts on the circulation system beyond the possible impacts one event could create. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 10 In order to accomplish the project objectives, five traffic condition scenarios were evaluated for three separate analysis timeframes (i.e. existing year 2011, opening year 2013, and 2030 Future conditions). Each traffic condition scenario, described in detail below, was developed in a collaborative effort with City staff and in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines. To measure project impacts and identify mitigation, if warranted, the five traffic condition scenarios were compared to each other in each timeframe. This comparative impact analysis is discussed fully in Chapter 6. Base Year or Baseline Scenarios (Without Project): 1) With No Events: This baseline scenario analyzes only background traffic conditions. For the 2011 Baseline conditions, the analysis was based on traffic counts collected during non-event day (April 7th, 2011). For 2013 Opening Year conditions, traffic volume was derived by applying 0.5% growth per year to the existing without event traffic volumes. For 2030 Future Year conditions, traffic volumes were taken from the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Final Traffic Study (October 2010) with the addition of a commercial land use proposal recently submitted by the Orange County Water District, north of Honda Center. 2) With Average Attendance Honda Center (HC) Event: This baseline scenario analyzes background traffic conditions for an average attendance event at Honda Center (i.e. with the addition of Honda Center event project-related trips on top of background traffic volumes based upon an average attendance event). This scenario represents the typical average usage of the facility using an average attendance figure of 11,264. This attendance figure was provided by AAM and was calculated from attendance statistics over the past five years. 3) With Average Attendance Honda Center (HC) Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium (AS) Event: This baseline scenario analyzes background cumulative traffic conditions on the circulation system when simultaneous events occur at both Honda Center and Angel Stadium. This scenario uses the 11,264 average attendees per event figure provided by AAM, along with a typical event at Angel Stadium. For Angel Stadium events an average of 29,402 attendees per event was used, which figure is based on Angel Stadium statistics collected over the past year. With Project Scenarios: 1) With Project: This scenario analyzes traffic conditions for the additional 60 annual events for Honda Center. It assumes each new event is attended at sold out conditions maximum utilization of 18,900 seats). This scenario represents highest usage at the venue which is a highly conservative approach. 2) With Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium (AS) Event: This second With Project scenario analyzes cumulative traffic conditions on the circulation system when simultaneous events occur at both Honda Center and Angel Stadium. This scenario uses the maximum utilization 18,900 attendees per event figure, along with a typical event at Angel Stadium. For Angel Stadium events an average of 29,402 attendees per event was used, which figure is based on Angel Stadium statistics collected over the past year. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 11 1.3 STUDY AREA The project study area for the traffic study was defined using procedures outlined in the City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies dated 1996, the City of Orange Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines dated August 15, 2007, and Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies dated December 2002. The City guidelines state if a proposed Project adds 51 or more peak hour trips to any monitored Congestion Management Program (CMP) intersections or 100 or more peak hour trips to non-CMP intersection then that intersection needs to be studied. For arterials, if a proposed project adds 1,600 trips or more to Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on a CMP roadway, or 2,400 trips or more on a non-CMP roadway, the arterial segment needs to be studied. Using these criteria, a study area boundary was drawn around a total of 44 study intersections and 16 study arterial segments. Figures 1-1 and Figures 1-2 depict the vicinity around Honda Center within the regional transportation context, and the defined study area, respectively. ---PAGE BREAK--- ? l ? ê ? k A » A » VILLA PARK SANTA ANA ORANGE ANAHEIM GARDEN GROVE PLACENTIA TUSTIN µ Figure 1-1: Regional Context V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Documentation\Figure 1-1-RegionalMap-051811.mxd HONDA CENTER FULLERTON ^ Katella Ave State College Blvd Ball Rd Main St Orangewood Ave Sunkist St Legend Roadway 0 1 0.5 Miles Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ? l ? ê ? k A » A » VILLA PARK SANTA ANA ORANGE ANAHEIM GARDEN GROVE PLACENTIA TUSTIN µ Figure 1-2: Study Area Boundary V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Documentation\Figure 1-1-RegionalMap-051811.mxd HONDA CENTER FULLERTON ^ Katella Ave State College Blvd Ball Rd Main St Orangewood Ave Sunkist St Legend Roadway 0 0.5 1 Miles Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area Study Area Boundary ! Study Intersection ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 14 1.4 TRANSPORTATION SETTING Freeways and Arterials Interstate 5 (I-5) and State Route 57 (SR-57) are the primary north-south freeway accesses to the City of Anaheim. State Route 91 (SR-91) and State Route 22 (SR-22) serves traffic flows from the east and the west. The major arterials that serve local east-west traffic in the study area include Lincoln Avenue, Ball Road, Katella Avenue, and Orangewood Avenue. The primary north-south arterials in the study area are Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim Boulevard, State College Boulevard, Sunkist Street, and Main Street. Honda Center is located on the north side of Katella Avenue east of the SR-57 freeway. Direct access from the SR-57 freeway is provided at Katella Avenue and at Ball Road. Rail The City of Anaheim and the study area are currently served by rail transit at the Anaheim Stadium station. Located on the north side of the Angel Stadium parking lot, across from Honda Center the station serves both Amtrak’s Pacific Surfliner from San Luis Obispo to San Diego and Metrolink’s Orange County Line from Los Angeles to Oceanside. There are 22 Amtrak and 33 Metrolink trains per day serving the Anaheim Station. Metrolink has recently added 4 more trains per day during Special event days at Angel Stadium. Plans are also underway by the City and OCTA to build the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) as a gateway transportation hub, south of Honda Center off of Douglass Road. ARTIC is envisioned to serve expanded shuttle, bus, commuter, and high-speed rail services. Local Bus In addition to Metrolink and Amtrak services, public transportation services operated by Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) are also available to patrons wishing to use public transit to attend events at Honda Center. Honda Center is currently served by OCTA bus route # 50 on Katella Avenue. Route #50 extends from the City of Orange, east of Honda Center, to the City of Long Beach, approximately 12 miles west of Honda Center. There are bus stops conveniently located along Katella Avenue in each of the six cities served by this route as well as stops immediately adjacent to the Honda Center. Bicycle Trails The City of Anaheim currently has three classifications of bikeways, Class I, Class II, and Class III. Class I Bikeways provide for bicycle travel on right-of-way completely separated from the street. Class II Bikeways provide striped and signed lanes within the street right-of-way. Class III Bikeways are commonly signed only bike routes. Adjacent to Honda Center is the Santa Ana River Trail, which is classified as a Class I Bikeway and connects with Orange County’s riding and hiking trails, providing a continuous path between Huntington Beach and Riverside County. Moreover, the Fourth Supervisorial District Bikeways Collaborative was initiated to identify, prioritize and implement regional bikeway improvements within this area of Orange County. The Collaborative includes OCTA, the County of Orange, Caltrans and the cities of Anaheim, Brea, Buena Park, Fullerton, La Habra, and Placentia. Over a nine month period, the Collaborative will ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 15 work together to identify opportunities and constraints associated with bicycle facilities in the Fourth District. Among the bikeway corridors proposed is a Class II bike lane along Douglass Road north of Katella Avenue and Katella Avenue east of Douglass Road. These proposed bike lanes are also shown on the City of Anaheim’s General Plan, Circulation Element, Existing and Proposed Bicycle Facilities Map. Pedestrian Access Pedestrian access to and from Honda Center is generally gained from Katella Avenue. Sidewalks are available on both side of Katella Avenue and extend uninterrupted into the City of Orange to the east and to parts of the City of Anaheim west of SR-57. Sidewalks are also available along Douglass Road. Pedestrian access to the Honda Center may also be gained using the Santa Ana River Trail which runs directly adjacent to Honda Center, however, pedestrians must exit the trail at Katella and transition onto the Katella Avenue sidewalk. 1.5 REPORT ORGANIZATION · Chapter 1: Introduction · Chapter 2: Analysis Methodology · Chapter 3: Existing Conditions · Chapter 4: Year 2013 Opening Conditions · Chapter 5: Year 2030 Future Conditions · Chapter 6: Project Impacts · Chapter 7: Proposed Mitigation And Mitigation Strategies · Chapter 8: Parking Analysis · Chapter 9: Conclusion · Chapter 10: References · Chapter 11: Glossary of Transportation Terms ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 16 2.0 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY 2.1 FORECAST VOLUME DEVELOPMENT In order to analyze and compare the performance of intersections and arterial roadway segments within the study area under event and non-event conditions, intersection turning movements and daily roadway traffic counts were collected on two separate days: April 6 and 7, 2011. Traffic count volumes taken on April 6, 2011 represent traffic conditions on a day in which the Anaheim Ducks hosted a regular season hockey game at Honda Center. Traffic counts taken on April 7, 2011 represent traffic conditions on a day in which no event was hosted at Honda Center. Intersection turning movement counts were collected between 4:00 PM and 8:00 PM to cover the broad arrival time for Honda Center employees, teams/performers and their staff, and event spectators. The 4:00 PM to 8:00 PM window coincides with the typical 7:00 PM opening faceoff for an Anaheim Ducks’ game at Honda Center. As most events at Honda Center occur in the evening, the focus of this traffic analysis is the PM peak period. The difference in traffic count volumes taken under event and non- event conditions is deemed to represent trips generated by an event at Honda Center. The estimated trip generation for this event serves as a basis in estimating trips generated by an Average Attendance Honda Center Event and the Project (a sellout Honda Center event). The existing traffic counts are included in Appendix A. It is noted that the actual attendance figure of the Anaheim Ducks game on April 6, 2011 was confirmed as 14,021 attendees. The combined number of Honda Center employees and team participants was assumed to be 1,200. Given the actual game attendance figure was higher than the assumed 11,264 Average Attendance Honda Center Event, and lower than the 18,900 attendee potential sell out condition assumed for each new Project event, a trip generation adjustment (or “growth”) factor was determined. The factor is the quotient resulting from division of the assumed attendance figure by the actual attendance figure (i.e. 14,021) on the event day traffic counts of April 6th. The maximum seating capacity of 18,900 was used as the numerator to determine the Project trip growth factor of 1.35 (see details below). The 1.35 growth factor was applied to the trips generated by the Anaheim Ducks hockey game on April 6, 2011 to calculate estimated event trips that would be generated by each of the proposed 60 new maximum capacity events at Honda Center (i.e. the Project): Attendance at Honda Center on April 6, 2011: 14,021 Maximum seating capacity at Honda Center: 18,900 Growth Factor = 18,900/14,021 = 1.35 The average attendance figure of 11,264 was used as the numerator to determine the Average Attendance Honda Center Event trip growth factor of 0.8 (see details below). The 0.8 growth factor was applied to the trips generated by the Anaheim Ducks hockey game on the traffic count date (April 6, 2011) to calculate estimated event trips that would be generated by an Average Attendance Honda Center Event. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 17 Attendance at Honda Center on April 6, 2011: 14,021 Average attendance at Honda Center: 11,264 Growth Factor = 11,264/14,021 = 0.8 The Honda Center event trips at each of the study intersections, for each traffic scenario, are present in Appendix D. In addition to the analysis of traffic impacts associated with an Average Attendance Honda Center Event and the Project, the traffic study also analyzed and evaluated cumulative traffic conditions for days when events occur at both Honda Center and Angel Stadium. In order to capture traffic conditions associated with these scenarios, study area intersection turning movement counts and daily roadway volumes were collected by the City of Anaheim for both event and non-event conditions at Angel Stadium. The traffic counts were collected on August 24 and 25, 2011, in similar fashion as was done on April 6 and 7, 2011 for an Anaheim Ducks hockey game. Traffic count volumes taken August 24, 2011 represent traffic patterns on a day in which Angels Baseball hosted a regular season game at Angel Stadium. Traffic counts taken on August 25, 2011 represent traffic patterns on a day in which no event was hosted at Angel Stadium. These traffic counts are included in Appendix B. The difference in traffic count volumes taken under event and non-event conditions is deemed to represent trips generated by the Angels Baseball game. In order to present a conservative evaluation of traffic conditions related to an Angel Stadium Event, it was determined that the representative Angel Stadium Event would be a baseball game with average attendance of 29,402. The 29,402 figure was provided by the City of Anaheim and is based on Angel Stadium attendance statistics collected over the past year. The actual attendance at the Angels Baseball game on August 24, 2011, when the traffic counts were collected was 25,642. To calibrate for the lower attendance than the average figure, an adjustment/growth factor of 1.15 was calculated using the same methodology as describe above for Honda Center events. The 1.15 growth factor was applied to the trips generated by the Angels Baseball game to calculate estimated event trips that would be generated by an average attendance event at Angel Stadium the “Angel Stadium Event”). Attendance at Angel Stadium on August 24th, 2011: 25,642 Average attendance at an Angels Baseball game: 29,402 Growth Factor = 29,402/25,642 = 1.15 The Angel Stadium event trips at each of the study intersections are presented in Appendix E. In addition to the peak hour intersection and arterial analysis, freeway mainline segments and ramp analysis was performed for this project. Peak hour traffic data (6:00–7:00 PM) on April 7th, 2011 including volumes and congested speeds were collected for the freeway mainline and ramp from the Freeway Performance Measurement System (PeMS) to represent the 2011 Baseline (No Events) conditions. The event trips on the freeway facility were derived from the August 24, 2011 event trips at corresponding ramp termini intersections and the Anaheim Transportation Analysis Model (ATAM) select link analysis. The freeway mainline and ramp volume adjustments and development for each scenario under 2013 Opening Year and 2030 Future Year are consistent with the procedures used for intersection and arterial segment volumes. The existing traffic volumes and congested speeds for the freeway mainline and ramps are included in Appendix C for Honda Center and Angel Stadium. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 18 For 2011 Baseline peak hour and daily analysis, Honda Center event trips at average and maximum seating capacity were added to the non-Honda Center Event traffic count volumes from April 7, 2011 to derive 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event , and 2011 Baseline with Project traffic volumes, respectively. Similarly, the average Angel Stadium event trips were added to the previous two scenarios to derive 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Angel Stadium Event, and 2011 Baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Events traffic volumes, respectively. For 2013 opening year analysis, a 0.5% annual growth factor, provided by City of Anaheim staff, was applied to 2011 With No Events traffic volumes to project 2013 with No Events traffic volumes (2013 baseline). Honda Center event trips at average and maximum seating capacity were added to the 2013 baseline to derive 2013 baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event, and 2013 baseline with Project traffic volumes, respectively. Similarly, the average Angel Stadium Event trips were added to the previous two scenarios to derive 2013 baseline Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event; and, 2013 baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event traffic volumes, respectively. For 2030 future analysis, future baseline (With No Events) traffic volumes were taken from the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Traffic Study (October 2010), and modified to include the addition of traffic volumes generated by a commercial development project on Orange County Water District (OCWD) property, located on Ball Road and Phoenix Club Drive. Estimated average attendance Honda Center Event trips, Project trips, and average Angel Stadium Event trips were added to the 2030 baseline (With No Events) model volumes to derive other four 2030 analysis scenarios. As a conservative approach, event related traffic activity was assumed to remain consistent with the existing condition scenario. It is noted that build out of The Platinum Triangle and implementation of the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) and its associated transit enhancements and opportunities, are adjacent and within convenient walking distance from Honda Center. This proximity could contribute to reduced vehicle trip generation for Honda Center Event in the future as the services at ARTIC develop. To present a conservative estimate of future traffic conditions, no vehicle trip reduction associated with shifts to alternative modes of transportation was assumed as part of the future traffic analysis. 2.2 MODEL ASSUMPTIONS The Anaheim Transportation Analysis Model (ATAM) was used to generate future forecast volumes for the Enhanced Honda Center Project Traffic Study. The model has been applied for various traffic studies throughout the Platinum Triangle and the ATAM future forecast volumes for the Platinum Triangle Expansion Traffic Study serve as the basis for future baseline non-Honda Center events, consistent with Anaheim City Council Action to approve the Expansion Environmental Impact Report. In addition, the commercial land use proposal on Orange County Water District (OCWD) property located southeast of Ball Road and Phoenix Club Drive was incorporated into the future baseline condition, as requested by OCWD. The base highway network used in this analysis remains consistent with networks assumed in other recent traffic studies previously carried out for the City of Anaheim within the Platinum Triangle. The 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. Zonal connectors were reviewed ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 19 and updated as appropriate to reflect appropriate development access to the surrounding circulation system. The baseline 2030 network is consistent with the Anaheim General Plan circulation network, and assumes all of the proposed capacity enhancements in the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project EIR, which was certified by the Anaheim City Council in October 2010, are in place. To account for planned projects throughout the study area the following circulation system assumptions were incorporated into the network to account for build out 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; and · SR-57 HOV drop ramps at Cerritos Avenue. 2.3 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION Project trip generation represents the amount of vehicle trips generated by the new events. The primary Project event scenario is the maximum capacity sold out event of 18,900 seats. In addition to event spectators, a combined total of 1,200 additional Honda Center employees and team members are assumed in the trip generation. For conservative estimating, a “no show” factor was not considered; meaning the venue is assumed to be fully filled. The daily vehicle trips (including inbound and outbound trips) made by the venue staff, team members, and spectators were estimated based on the average vehicle occupancy (AVO) rate provided by AAM staff. An AVO rate of 1.2 persons/vehicle is used for staff and team members, and an AVO rate of 3.0 persons/vehicle is used for spectators. The higher AVO rate for spectators recognizes the higher propensity for ridesharing/carpooling by spectators. The AVO rates used are consistent with other comparable relevant traffic studies and are within the AVO range of 2.5- 3.5 for patrons noted in a 1994 informational report by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) for Arenas. For purposes of this study, 95% of employees and patrons are assumed to arrive via auto, and 5% are expected to arrive via alternate modes including, but not limited to, Amtrak/Metrolink transit and OCTA buses. Table 2-1 summarizes the trip generation result for a sold out event at Honda Center. Table 2-1: Project Trip Generation Type No. of Participants No. of Participants arrive by auto * Vehicle Occupancy Rate Daily Trip Rate Daily Vehicle Trips Employees 1,000 950 1.2 2 1,583 Team Members 200 200 1.2 2 333 Spectators 18,900 17,755 3.0 2 11,837 Total 13,753 * Persons arriving by Transit and Charter Bus have been deducted 2.4 PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION Traffic counts collected on April 6, 2011 were used to determine the trip distribution for the Project. The key access routes to/from Honda Center include Katella Avenue east of the Santa Ana River; Katella Avenue west of SR-57; and SR-57 exit ramps at Ball Road. From Ball Road access to and ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 20 from Honda Center is available from Phoenix Club Drive, Sunkist Street, Cerritos Avenue, and Douglass Road. The findings reveal that approximately 49% of trips would arrive at the venue via Katella Avenue, 28% of trips via Phoenix Club Drive, and 23% of trips via Cerritos Avenue. The trip distribution is shown on Figure 2-1. Since sporting venues are a “special generator”, the normal am/pm peak hour analysis is not necessarily applicable. In order to determine the event peak hour for Honda Center, daily traffic profiles showing 24 hour traffic activities associated with an Anaheim Ducks hockey game on April 6, 2011 were prepared for five study arterial segments immediately adjacent to Honda Center. These are shown on Figure 2-2 through Figure 2-6. These profiles indicate that the patrons started coming to the game as early as three to four hours prior the opening faceoff time at 7:00 PM. The profiles also indicate that the highest peak hour for pre-game arriving traffic is from 6:00 PM -7:00 PM. If the standard weekday commute peak periods (7:00 to 9:00 AM and 4:00 to 6:00 PM) were analyzed for Honda Center, the venue would not generate enough traffic to show the full impact of an event. For purposes of this traffic study, this event peak hour is assumed to represent the typical event peak hour at Honda Center. ---PAGE BREAK--- HONDA CENTER µ 0 0.5 1 Miles Figure 2-1: Project Trip Distribution KATELLA AVE ? l BALL RD DOUGLASS RD CERRITOS AVE SUNKIST ST PHOENIX CLUD DR 49% 39% 1 9 23% 23% 2 14% 7 23% 28% 5 28% ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 22 Figure 2-2: Daily Traffic Flow Profile – Douglas Road (North of Katella) Figure 2-3: Daily Traffic Flow Profile – Phoenix Club Drive 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 Volume (Veh/Hr) Hour Daily Traffic Flow - Douglass Road( North of Katella) No Event With Anaheim Ducks Hockey Game 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Volume (Veh/Hr) Hour Daily Traffic Flow - Phoenix Club Drive No Event With Anaheim Ducks Hockey Game ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 23 Figure 2-4: Daily Traffic Flow Profile – Katella Avenue (SR-57 Northbound Ramps – Douglass Road) Figure 2-5: Daily Traffic Flow Profile – Katella Avenue (Douglass Road – Struck Avenue) 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 Volume (Veh/Hr) Hour Daily Traffic Flow - Katella Avenue ( SR-57 NB Ramps - Douglas Road) No Event With Anaheim Ducks Hockey Game 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 Volume (Veh/Hr) Hour Daily Traffic Flow - Katella Avenue ( Douglass Road - Struck Avenue ) No Event With Anaheim Ducks Hockey Game ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 24 Figure 2-6: Daily Traffic Flow Profile – Cerritos Avenue (East of Sunkist Avenue) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Volume (Veh/Hr) Hour Daily Traffic Flow - Cerritos Avenue (East of Sunkist Avenue ) No Event With Anaheim Ducks Hockey Game ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 25 2.5 LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS To evaluate traffic conditions and potential circulation system impacts within the vicinity of Honda Center associated with the proposed project various elements were evaluated. This evaluation included peak hour signalized intersection capacity utilization (ICU), arterial segment daily analysis, arterial segment peak hour analysis, and freeway mainline and ramp analysis. As noted in Chapter 1, Section 1.2, this traffic study is an evaluation of project related impacts with a principal focus on pre- event traffic conditions. This is a prudent conservative approach to capture the presumed worst case conditions. Intersection Analysis The City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies requires a volume-to-capacity ratio of 1.00, or LOS E as the lowest acceptable level of service at designated CMP intersections, and 0.90, or LOS D, as the lowest acceptable level of service for all other intersections. The City requires all study area intersections LOS be evaluated using the intersection capacity utilization (ICU) methodology. This methodology compares forecast peak hour traffic volumes by direction and critical moves to available intersection capacity based on actual configuration. A minimum clearance interval of 0.05, and lane capacities of 1,700 vehicles per hour of green time for through and turn lanes was used for the ICU calculations. For intersection analysis, the City of Orange Traffic Impact Guidelines is consistent with the City of Anaheim guidelines; therefore, the same analyses and standards were applied for intersections in both jurisdictions. Table 2-2 presents the ICU level of service thresholds utilized in this traffic study. Table 2-2: 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 Furthermore, within the City of Anaheim, an intersection impact is considered significant if the Project resulting V/C compared to the No Project V/C shows the project related increases meet criteria outlined in Table 2-3. For purposes of this calculation, the “Final V/C Ratio” includes the future v/c ratio at an intersection, considering traffic from existing conditions, ambient growth, approved/related projects, and the proposed project, but without any proposed mitigation. Mitigation measures sufficient to bring the level of service to a less than significant level are identified later in the report. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 26 Table 2-3: Significant Impact Criteria LOS Final V/C Ratio Project-Related Increase in V/C C >0.700 – 0.800 Equal to or greater than 0.050 D >0.800 – 0.900 Equal to or greater than 0.030 E, F > 0.900 Equal to or greater than 0.010 Source: City of Anaheim For the City of Orange intersections, a significant impact is deemed to occur if the Project results in deterioration of the level of service to LOS E or LOS F, or results in an increase in ICU value of 0.01 or greater at intersections already operating at LOS E or F under the No Project condition. Mitigation that would reduce Project impacts to less than significant levels are identified later in Chapter 7 of the report. Arterial Segment V/C Analysis The arterial roadway analysis criteria for the City of Anaheim involve the use of an average daily traffic (ADT) volume to capacity (V/C) evaluation. The City of Anaheim has established a LOS C (i.e. V/C not to exceed 0.80) or better as the adopted performance standard for the study area circulation system. The City of Orange has adopted LOS D (i.e. V/C not to exceed 0.90) or better as the performance standard for arterials within the City of Orange portions of the study area. The City of Orange applies a V/C analysis for daily traffic conditions similar to Anaheim although assumed capacities for Orange arterials differ from those used by the City of Anaheim. See Table 2-4. To identify deficient arterial segments the City of Anaheim employs a two step analysis approach. The arterial segment daily V/C analysis provides an initial general assessment of overall system performance. Where this assessment shows potential impacts the system performance is further measured on its ability to serve peak hour traffic demands. Arterial segments that are identified as deficient under daily V/C conditions are evaluated under peak hour conditions to evaluate the capability of serving forecast peak hour throughput. Arterial segments that operate deficiently under both daily and peak hour conditions become candidates for mitigation. It is noted that the City of Orange traffic analysis guidelines do not include provisions for peak hour segment analysis, and rely on daily V/C analysis as the basis for improvement requirements. The City of Anaheim applies the Urban Streets analysis identified in Chapter 15 of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) to determine level of service under peak hour traffic conditions. The peak hour capacity is determined by using Equation 15-7 of the HCM, which calls for multiplying the mid- block number of lanes for each direction by a lane capacity of 1,900 vehicles per hour, and then multiplied by the percentage of green time at the controlling signalized intersection for that arterial segment. For this Honda Center traffic analysis the percentage of green time along the arterial was applied consistent with typical peak hour green time ratios applied in the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Traffic Study. If the V/C ratio of the arterial segment under peak hour conditions is LOS E or F, improvements were considered to improve the segment to an acceptable LOS. 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 adopted in each jurisdiction’s current General Plans, which are noted in Table 2-4. The capacities in Table 2- 4 reflect LOS E capacities and are consistent with those that are applied in daily V/C analysis ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 27 consistent with methodologies adopted for each jurisdiction. It is noted here that the City of Orange takes advantage of a capacity enhancement allowed for Smart Streets designated by the Orange County Transportation Authority. Specifically, for Katella Avenue, the City of Orange increases the assumed daily capacity by five percent to account for Smart Street related improvements that can enhance throughput along this corridor. 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 level of service to LOS D or worse and coupled with a continued deficiency under peak hour conditions. A significant impact is also determined by an increase in the daily V/C 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 causes an increase in the daily V/C value of 0.01 if the segment currently operates at LOS E or F under daily without project conditions. Table 2-4: 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, City of Anaheim Caltrans Intersection Analysis Freeway ramp termini intersections were also analyzed using (version 7.0) through the application of Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 methodology, per Caltrans requirements consistent with the analysis presented in the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Traffic Study. Lane configurations and various other parameters such as signal timing were based on current operating characteristics. Table 2-5 presents Caltrans intersection delay and LOS standards. Table 2-5: 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 ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 28 Caltrans Freeway and Ramp Analysis The freeway mainline and freeway ramp evaluation is based on peak hour HCM density analysis. This methodology has been applied to the freeway analyses in the study area per Caltrans’s recommendation. The facility capacities are based on criteria outlined in the HCM and the Caltrans Ramp Meter Design Manual. Existing mainline count data was provided by Caltrans. Ramp merge and diverge analysis was carried out using Highway Capacity Software (HCS), which is an electronic version of the HCM for freeway-to-arterial interchanges. With the HCM methodology, the ramp merge and diverge areas focus on an influence area of 1,500 feet including the acceleration and deceleration lanes and adjacent freeway lanes. The methodology employs three fundamental steps: 1. Determination of the traffic volumes entering the freeway lanes upstream of the merge or at the beginning of the deceleration lane at diverge; 2. Determination of the capacity for the segment; and 3. Determination of the density of traffic flow within the ramp influence area and its level of service The level of service (LOS) for freeway ramps is determined by calculating traffic density using criteria outlined in the HCM. Freeway mainline levels of service are similarly determined from segment density. Table 2.6 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 factor that does not exceed 35.0 pc/mi/ln for mainline segments and 35.0 pc/mi/ln for 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. Table 2-6: Caltrans Freeway Mainline and Ramp LOS Criteria LOS Peak Hour 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 was performed using HCM methodology which provides density criteria by LOS for the weaving area within the freeway segment. In the study area, freeway mainline segments were analyzed as freeway weaving segments first. Freeway weaving segments longer than 2,500 feet were analyzed as the basic freeway segments using the HCM. Table 2-7 specifies the LOS for associated freeway weaving densities. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 29 Table 2-7: Caltrans Freeway Weaving 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 ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 30 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS The 2011 Baseline conditions analysis establishes the framework for future forecast scenarios. The analysis is based on traffic counts collected for intersection, arterial segments, and freeway segments within the study area. Counts were collected under both non-event and event conditions at both Honda Center and Angel Stadium. Non-event day counts for Honda Center were collected April 7, 2011. Event day counts for Honda Center were collected April 6, 2011 for the Anaheim Ducks hockey game. Non-event day counts for Angel Stadium were collected August 24, 2011. Event day counts for Angel Stadium were collected August 25, 2011 for the Angels’ baseball game. The count data are included in Appendix A and Appendix B. The existing conditions analysis reflects the count volumes as well as existing lane configurations for all circulation system elements in the study area. The intersection lane configurations are illustrated in Appendix F. 3.1 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS Table 3-1 presents LOS results for the 44 study intersections for the five 2011 Baseline traffic analysis scenarios during the PM peak hour. Existing lane geometries were assumed in the LOS analyses. The detailed existing ICU worksheets are presented in Appendix G-1. A review of Table 3-1 reveals that all of the study area intersections operate within acceptable LOS under the following four scenarios. 1) 2011 Baseline (No-Events) 2) 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2011 Baseline with Project One intersection location was found to operate at deficient conditions under the fifth scenario, 2011 Baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event: · Douglass Road/Katella Avenue The LOS service results under all analysis scenarios are also graphically presented in Figure 3-1 through Figure 3- 5. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 31 Table 3-1: 2011 Baseline PM Peak Hour Intersection LOS 2011 Baseline (Without Project) 2011 Baseline With Project ID Intersection Jurisdiction With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.59 A 0.60 A 0.61 B 0.61 B 0.62 B 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.53 A 0.53 A 0.53 A 0.53 A 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.55 A 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.56 A 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.54 A 0.55 A 0.57 A 0.55 A 0.57 A 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.50 A 0.50 A 0.50 A 0.50 A 0.50 A 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.52 A 0.50 A 0.52 A 0.56 A 0.57 A 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.44 A 0.46 A 0.49 A 0.56 A 0.59 A 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.33 A 0.33 A 0.34 A 0.33 A 0.34 A 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.23 A 0.23 A 0.23 A 0.24 A 0.24 A 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.43 A 0.45 A 0.46 A 0.46 A 0.50 A 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.07 A 0.07 A 0.08 A 0.10 A 0.11 A 12 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.41 A 0.41 A 0.41 A 0.41 A 0.41 A 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.49 A 0.49 A 0.49 A 0.54 A 0.55 A 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.27 A 0.28 A 0.30 A 0.38 A 0.40 A 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.38 A 0.48 A 0.56 A 0.72 C 0.79 C 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 0.25 A 0.28 A 0.30 A 0.39 A 0.39 A 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.23 A 0.25 A 0.27 A 0.75 C 0.77 C 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.32 A 0.34 A 0.35 A 0.50 A 0.52 A 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps * Orange 0.26 A 0.27 A 0.28 A 0.38 A 0.39 A 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps * Orange 0.26 A 0.26 A 0.27 A 0.32 A 0.32 A 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.48 A 0.49 A 0.49 A 0.58 A 0.59 A 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.33 A 0.41 A 0.49 A 0.55 A 0.63 B 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.56 A 0.61 B 0.65 B 0.63 B 0.69 B 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.20 A 0.26 A 0.31 A 0.28 A 0.33 A 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.35 A 0.42 A 0.50 A 0.47 A 0.54 A 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.46 A 0.61 B 0.72 C 0.62 B 0.73 C 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.37 A 0.51 A 0.61 B 0.71 C 0.84 D *CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 32 Table 3-1: 2011 Baseline PM Peak Hour Intersection LOS (Continued) 2011 Baseline (Without Project) 2011 Baseline With Project ID Intersection Jurisdiction With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.43 A 0.52 A 0.59 A 0.52 A 0.59 A 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.28 A 0.46 A 0.64 B 0.60 A 0.78 C 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.27 A 0.53 A 0.76 C 0.89 D 1.06 F 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.34 A 0.43 A 0.62 B 0.49 A 0.67 B 32 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Orange 0.24 A 0.32 A 0.39 A 0.40 A 0.47 A 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.42 A 0.43 A 0.43 A 0.42 A 0.43 A 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.32 A 0.40 A 0.46 A 0.46 A 0.52 A 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Orange 0.27 A 0.33 A 0.38 A 0.36 A 0.42 A 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.39 A 0.41 A 0.42 A 0.41 A 0.42 A 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.35 A 0.39 A 0.42 A 0.44 A 0.47 A 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.45 A 0.47 A 0.49 A 0.47 A 0.49 A 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.45 A 0.49 A 0.52 A 0.52 A 0.55 A 40 Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.38 A 0.38 A 0.38 A 0.39 A 0.41 A 41 Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.42 A 0.44 A 0.46 A 0.47 A 0.49 A 42 Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.62 B 0.62 B 0.65 B 0.64 B 0.63 B 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.80 C 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 0.77 C 0.78 C 0.79 C 0.80 C 0.81 D * CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! PHOENIX C L U B DR GENE AUTRY WY DOUGLASS RD KATELLA AVE EAST ST CLEMENTINE ST ORANGEWOOD AVE SR 55 HOV COSTA MESA FWY N TUSTIN ST STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD HARBOR BLVD E KATELLA AVE LA VETA AVE N CAMBRIDGE ST ANAHEIM BLVD TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE LEWIS ST LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE N COLLINS AVE HASTER ST WAGNER AVE S YORBA ST THE CITY DR MAIN ST STRUCK AVE SUNKIST ST GLASSELL ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE SPORTSTOWN CHAPMAN AVE MANCHESTER AVE 9 8 3 6 7 1 2 5 4 9 11 40 44 43 42 41 39 37 38 36 33 13 12 21 20 19 18 16 17 10 14 35 32 31 22 28 26 29 27 25 30 24 34 15 23 Figure 3-1: 2011 Baseline with No Events Peak Hour Intersection LOS ? ê ? l SANTA A NA RIVER GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM SANTA ANA ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Documentation\Fig3-1-Ext-NP-LOS-111411.mxd HONDA CENTER ^ µ Legend Roadway Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area PM LOS Acceptable LOS Deficient LOS ! ! 0 0.15 0.3 Miles ? k ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! PHOENIX C L U B DR GENE AUTRY WY DOUGLASS RD KATELLA AVE EAST ST CLEMENTINE ST ORANGEWOOD AVE SR 55 HOV COSTA MESA FWY N TUSTIN ST STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD HARBOR BLVD E KATELLA AVE LA VETA AVE N CAMBRIDGE ST ANAHEIM BLVD TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE LEWIS ST LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE N COLLINS AVE HASTER ST WAGNER AVE S YORBA ST THE CITY DR MAIN ST STRUCK AVE SUNKIST ST GLASSELL ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE SPORTSTOWN CHAPMAN AVE MANCHESTER AVE 9 8 3 6 7 1 2 5 4 9 11 40 44 43 42 41 39 37 38 36 33 13 12 21 20 19 18 16 17 10 14 35 32 31 22 28 26 29 27 25 30 24 34 15 23 Figure 3-2: 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS ? ê ? l SANTA A NA RIVER GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM SANTA ANA ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Documentation\Fig3-1-Ext-HC-LOS-111411.mxd HONDA CENTER ^ µ Legend Roadway Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area PM LOS Acceptable LOS Deficient LOS ! ! 0 0.15 0.3 Miles ? k ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! PHOENIX C L U B DR GENE AUTRY WY DOUGLASS RD KATELLA AVE EAST ST CLEMENTINE ST ORANGEWOOD AVE SR 55 HOV COSTA MESA FWY N TUSTIN ST STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD HARBOR BLVD E KATELLA AVE LA VETA AVE N CAMBRIDGE ST ANAHEIM BLVD TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE LEWIS ST LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE N COLLINS AVE HASTER ST WAGNER AVE S YORBA ST THE CITY DR MAIN ST STRUCK AVE SUNKIST ST GLASSELL ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE SPORTSTOWN CHAPMAN AVE MANCHESTER AVE 9 8 3 6 7 1 2 5 4 9 11 40 44 43 42 41 39 37 38 36 33 13 12 21 20 19 18 16 17 10 14 35 32 31 22 28 26 29 27 25 30 24 34 15 23 Figure 3-3: 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS ? ê ? l SANTA A NA RIVER GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM SANTA ANA ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Documentation\Fig3-3-Ext-HC+AS-LOS-111411.mxd HONDA CENTER ^ µ Legend Roadway Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area PM LOS Acceptable LOS Deficient LOS ! ! 0 0.15 0.3 Miles ? k ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! PHOENIX C L U B DR GENE AUTRY WY DOUGLASS RD KATELLA AVE EAST ST CLEMENTINE ST ORANGEWOOD AVE SR 55 HOV COSTA MESA FWY N TUSTIN ST STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD HARBOR BLVD E KATELLA AVE LA VETA AVE N CAMBRIDGE ST ANAHEIM BLVD TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE LEWIS ST LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE N COLLINS AVE HASTER ST WAGNER AVE S YORBA ST THE CITY DR MAIN ST STRUCK AVE SUNKIST ST GLASSELL ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE SPORTSTOWN CHAPMAN AVE MANCHESTER AVE 9 8 3 6 7 1 2 5 4 9 11 40 44 43 42 41 39 37 38 36 33 13 12 21 20 19 18 16 17 10 14 35 32 31 22 28 26 29 27 25 30 24 34 15 23 Figure 3-4: 2011 Baseline with Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS ? ê ? l SANTA A NA RIVER GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM SANTA ANA ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Documentation\Fig3-4-Ext-NewHC-LOS-111411.mxd HONDA CENTER ^ µ Legend Roadway Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area PM LOS Acceptable LOS Deficient LOS ! ! 0 0.15 0.3 Miles ? k ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! PHOENIX C L U B DR GENE AUTRY WY DOUGLASS RD KATELLA AVE EAST ST CLEMENTINE ST ORANGEWOOD AVE SR 55 HOV COSTA MESA FWY N TUSTIN ST STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD HARBOR BLVD E KATELLA AVE LA VETA AVE N CAMBRIDGE ST ANAHEIM BLVD TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE LEWIS ST LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE N COLLINS AVE HASTER ST WAGNER AVE S YORBA ST THE CITY DR MAIN ST STRUCK AVE SUNKIST ST GLASSELL ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE SPORTSTOWN CHAPMAN AVE MANCHESTER AVE 9 8 3 6 7 1 2 5 4 9 11 40 44 43 42 41 39 37 38 36 33 13 12 21 20 19 18 16 17 10 14 35 32 31 22 28 26 29 27 25 30 24 34 15 23 Figure 3-5: 2011 Baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS ? ê ? l SANTA A NA RIVER GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM SANTA ANA ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Fig3-5-Ext-NewHC+AS-LOS-111411.mxd HONDA CENTER ^ µ Legend Roadway Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area PM LOS Acceptable LOS Deficient LOS ! ! 0 0.15 0.3 Miles ? k ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 38 3.2 ARTERIAL SEGMENT ANALYSIS Daily Arterial Segment LOS Analysis Table 3-2 presents average daily traffic (ADT) V/C ratios and LOS results for the five 2011 Baseline Condition traffic analysis scenarios for all the study area roadway segments: 1) 2011 Baseline (No Events) 2) 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2011 Baseline with Project 5) 2011 Baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event The analysis is based on the traffic counts collected in April 2011 and August 2011. As shown in Table 3-2, 15 out of 16 study arterial segments were found to operate within acceptable LOS under the first three traffic analysis scenarios. Although the arterial segment on Katella Avenue between Howell Avenue and SR-57 Southbound Ramps was found to operate at LOS E, it is not considered deficient. Katella Avenue is identified in the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Congestion Management Plan (CMP) as a CMP arterial. Per CMP guidelines, arterial segments operating at LOS E identified within the CMP are considered operating at an acceptable level of service. One roadway segment was found to operate at deficient conditions under the first three scenarios: · Ball Road - Sunkist Street to SR-57 Southbound Ramps. In addition to the deficient segment above, a second deficient condition was found at Katella Avenue – Howell Avenue to SR-57 Southbound Ramps under the fourth and fifth scenario (2011 Baseline with Project, and 2011 Baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event). The two deficiencies, all within the City of Anaheim, are shown below: · Ball Road - Sunkist Street to SR-57 Southbound Ramps · Katella Avenue - Howell Avenue to SR-57 Southbound Ramps Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS Analysis In accordance with City of Anaheim procedures arterial segments found to be deficient under daily arterial LOS analysis are further evaluated under peak hour conditions to evaluate peak hour traffic operations. The peak hour analysis is often a more appropriate indicator of traffic operations as it considers the ability of the adjacent intersection configuration to accommodate throughput. This is a prudent step employed by the City that also helps identify specific improvement requirements, if warranted. A PM peak hour analysis was performed for each of the study segments identified as deficient under the daily arterial LOS analysis. The peak hour analysis was performed for each of the five 2011 Baseline traffic analysis scenarios. As shown in Table 3-3, all study segments were found to operate within acceptable LOS under the peak hour analysis. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 39 Table 3-2: 2011 Baseline Arterial Segment Daily LOS 2011 Baseline (Without Project) 2011 Baseline With Project ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid-Block Lanes Capacity With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS A - 1 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 SB Ramps Anaheim 6D 56,300 50,970 0.91 E 52,630 0.93 E 52,630 0.93 E 53,760 0.95 E 53,760 0.95 E A - 2 Ball Road SR-57 NB Ramps Phoenix Club Drive Anaheim 6D 56,300 31,660 0.56 A 33,730 0.60 A 33,730 0.60 A 35,140 0.62 B 35,140 0.62 B A - 3 Cerritos Avenue Sunkist Street Douglass Road Anaheim 4U 25,000 4,270 0.17 A 5,780 0.23 A 5,780 0.23 A 6,800 0.27 A 6,800 0.27 A A - 4 Douglass Road Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 4U 25,000 7,040 0.28 A 10,120 0.40 A 10,120 0.40 A 12,220 0.49 A 12,220 0.49 A A - 5 Katella Avenue** Lewis Street State College Blvd Anaheim 6D 56,300 33,500 0.60 A 34,120 0.61 B 35,460 0.63 B 34,540 0.61 B 35,880 0.64 B A - 6 Katella Avenue** State College Blvd Howell Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 34,130 0.61 B 35,310 0.63 B 37,720 0.67 B 36,110 0.64 B 38,520 0.68 B A - 7 Katella Avenue** Howell Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps Anaheim 6D 56,300 52,030 0.92 E 55,550 0.99 E 55,550 0.99 E 57,930 1.03 F 57,930 1.03 F A - 8 Katella Avenue** SR-57 SB Ramps SR-57 NB Ramps Anaheim 6D 56,300 34,720 0.62 B 38,170 0.68 B 39,540 0.70 B 40,500 0.72 C 41,870 0.74 C A - 9 Katella Avenue** SR-57 NB Ramps Douglass Road Anaheim 6D 56,300 34,470 0.61 B 39,970 0.71 C 42,910 0.76 C 43,690 0.78 C 46,630 0.83 D A - 10 Katella Avenue** Douglass Road Struck Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 29,480 0.52 A 32,820 0.58 A 33,600 0.60 A 35,090 0.62 B 35,870 0.64 B A - 11 Katella Avenue* Struck Avenue Main Street Orange 6D 56,300 23,170 0.41 A 24,840 0.44 A 24,840 0.44 A 25,970 0.46 A 25,970 0.46 A A - 12 Katella Avenue* Main Street Batavia Street Orange 6D 56,300 25,630 0.46 A 26,630 0.47 A 26,630 0.47 A 27,310 0.49 A 27,310 0.49 A A - 13 Main Street Katella Avenue Struck Avenue Orange 4U 24,000 15,000 0.40 A 15,640 0.42 A 17,030 0.45 A 16,080 0.43 A 17,470 0.47 A A - 14 Phoenix Club Drive Honda Center Ball Road Anaheim 2U 12,500 3,470 0.28 A 5,220 0.42 A 5,360 0.43 A 6,410 0.51 A 6,550 0.52 A A - 15 State College Blvd Howell Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 21,030 0.37 A 21,590 0.38 A 21,810 0.39 A 21,970 0.39 A 22,190 0.39 A A - 16 Sunkist Street Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 4U 25,000 6,790 0.27 A 7,870 0.31 A 7,870 0.31 A 8,600 0.34 A 8,600 0.34 A * Smart Street segment in Orange assumes a 5% capacity enhancement CMP arterial. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP arterial. AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 40 Table 3-3: 2011 Baseline Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS 2011 Baseline (Without Project) 2011 Baseline With Project ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid-Block Lanes With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS A - 1 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 SB Ramps Anaheim 6D 2,824 0.52 A 3,169 0.58 A 3,169 0.58 A 3,402 0.62 B 3,402 0.62 B A - 7 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps Anaheim 6D 2,772 0.42 A 3,599 0.54 A 4,495 0.68 B 4,159 0.63 B 5,055 0.76 C * Smart Street segment in Orange assumes a 5% capacity enhancement AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 41 3.3 CALTRANS FACILITY PEAK HOUR ANALYSIS Caltrans Ramp Termini Intersection Analysis Freeway ramp termini intersections were also analyzed using (version 7.0) through the application of Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 methodology, per Caltrans requirements consistent with the analysis presented in the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Traffic Study. Table 3-4 presents the analysis results of peak hour delays and level of service for the 11 ramp termini study area intersections. Detailed analysis worksheets are included in Appendix H-1. The analysis was conducted under the following five 2011 Baseline scenarios. 1) 2011 Baseline (No Events) 2) 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2011 Baseline with Project 5) 2011 Baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event As shown in the Table 3-4 all study area ramp termini intersections were found to operate at acceptable LOS under the first four scenarios. Under the fifth scenario (2011 Baseline with Project and Angel Stadium Event) the ramp termini intersection of SR 57 Northbound Ramps/Katella Avenue was found to operate at a deficient condition. Table 3-4: 2011 Baseline PM Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS ID Intersection 2011 Baseline (Without Project) 2011 Baseline With Project With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 16.80 B 16.90 B 22.60 C 18.70 B 23.80 C 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 21.80 C 22.80 C 25.20 C 23.20 C 27.80 C 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 6.20 A 5.40 A 4.40 A 5.00 A 4.30 A 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 20.90 C 21.30 C 22.60 C 21.70 C 22.70 C 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 14.90 B 15.30 B 16.50 B 15.30 B 17.10 B 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road 16.20 B 26.30 C 26.90 C 35.30 D 35.80 D 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 13.80 B 16.90 B 30.00 C 19.50 B 45.40 D 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road 17.60 B 19.00 B 20.40 C 21.90 C 21.90 C 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 11.00 B 20.80 C 32.90 C 53.90 D 79.30 E 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 37.70 D 38.70 D 39.90 D 40.10 D 42.00 D 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 28.90 C 31.00 C 32.60 C 32.20 C 34.00 C ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 42 Freeway Weaving Analysis Weaving analysis was performed using HCM methodology which provides density criteria by LOS for the weaving area within the freeway segment. Table 3-5 summarizes analysis results for the weaving areas during the PM peak hour. Detailed HCM weaving analysis worksheets are included in Appendix J-1. For any freeway weaving segment longer than 2,500 feet, HCM requires the segment to be analyzed as a basic freeway segment. As shown in Table 3-5 all of the study weaving segments were found to operate at LOS D or better under the five 2011 Baseline traffic analysis scenarios. Freeway Mainline Analysis The freeway mainline evaluation is based on peak hour HCM density analysis. This methodology has been applied to the freeway analyses in the study area per Caltrans’s recommendation. As noted in Chapter 2, freeway weaving segments with a weaving length exceeding 2,500 feet were analyzed as basic freeway segment using HCS. Table 3-6 summarizes the PM peak hour HCS analysis results for the densities and levels of service for the freeway mainline segments in the study area including those with weaving in excess of 2,500 feet. Detailed HCM mainline analysis worksheets are included in Appendix I-1. Similar to the freeway weaving analysis results, all the study freeway mainline segments were found to operate at an acceptable LOS under the five 2011 Baseline traffic analysis scenarios: Freeway Ramp Analysis The freeway ramp evaluation is based on peak hour HCM density analysis. This methodology has been applied to the freeway analyses in the study area per Caltrans’s recommendation. The facility capacities are based on criteria outlined in the HCM and the Caltrans Ramp Meter Design Manual. Table 3-7 summarizes HCM analysis results for the study ramps in the PM peak hours under 2011 Baseline conditions. The HCM reports a density based on the existing freeway mainline segment and ramp merge/diverge volumes. Detailed HCM analysis worksheets are included in Appendix K-1. According to the analysis, all the study ramps were found to operate at an acceptable LOS under the following scenarios: · 2011 Baseline (No Events) · 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event · 2011 Baseline with Project An existing deficiency occurs on the SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue during events at Angels Stadium under the following scenarios: · 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event · 2011 Baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 43 Table 3-5: 2011 Baseline Freeway Weaving PM Peak Hour LOS 2011 Baseline (Without Project) 2011 Baseline With Project ID Weaving Segment Weaving Length (Ft) With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS W - 1 I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Disneyland Drive Off-Ramp 3,060 Not Applicable W - 2 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 1,520 24.4 C 27.1 C 29.1 C 27.2 C 29.2 C W - 3 I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Disney Way Off-Ramp 2,650 Not Applicable W - 4 SR-57 Northbound between Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off-Ramp 1,230 22.0 B 23.0 B 23.0 B 23.9 B 23.9 B W - 5 SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 1,360 22.4 B 25.5 C 26.6 C 27.0 C 28.2 C W - 6 SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp 2,130 31.0 C 31.5 C 31.9 C 31.8 C 32.2 D SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 2,490 26.0 C 27.1 C 34.3 D 27.7 C 35.1 D W - 7 SR-57 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp 5,160 Not Applicable W - 8 SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 1,620 22.9 B 23.7 B 27.1 C 24.1 C 27.5 D Source: City of Anaheim, PeMS AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Not Applicable: weaving segment longer than 2,500 feet analyzed as basic freeway mainline Table 3-6: 2011 Baseline Freeway Mainline PM Peak Hour LOS 2011 Baseline (Without Project) 2011 Baseline With Project ID Freeway Segment With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F - 1 I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue and Disneyland Drive 20.3 C 20.5 C 21.2 C 20.6 C 21.2 C F - 2 I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way 21.4 C 21.6 C 22.7 C 21.6 C 22.8 C F - 3 SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue 22.5 C 23.1 C 25.4 C 23.3 C 25.6 C Source: City of Anaheim, Caltrans, PeMS AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 44 Table 3-7: 2011 Baseline Freeway Ramp PM Peak Hour LOS 2011 Baseline (Without Project) 2011 Baseline With Project ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-1 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* 2 26.9 C 26.9 C 26.9 C 26.9 C 26.9 C R-2 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 2 27.8 C 28.0 C 28.8 D 28.0 D 28.9 D R-3 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 1 24.5 C 28.9 D 30.8 D 30.9 D 32.7 D R-4 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 1 31.5 D 32.2 D 32.2 D 32.6 D 32.6 D R-5 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 1 26.9 C 29.9 D 32.3 D 31.2 D 33.6 D R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 1 26.9 C 28.6 D >Capacity F 29.4 D >Capacity F * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density Source: City of Anaheim, Caltrans, PeMS AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 45 4.0 2013 OPENING YEAR CONDITIONS The 2013 Opening Year non-event day traffic volumes were derived by applying an annual growth of 0.5% to the 2011 Baseline non-event traffic counts. The volumes developed for the remaining scenarios were described in Section 2.1 – Forecast Volume Development. The analysis assumed the 2013 transportation network consistent with the 2011 Baseline conditions. 4.1 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS Table 4-1 presents LOS results for the 44 study intersections for the following five analysis scenarios under the 2013 Opening Year conditions: 1) 2013 Opening Year (No Events) 2) 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2013 Opening Year with Project 5) 2013 Opening Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event The same existing lane geometries as the 2011 Baseline conditions were assumed in the LOS analyses. A review of the table reveals that despite the addition of ambient growth, the 2013 traffic conditions are generally similar to the existing traffic conditions in that all of the study area intersections operate within acceptable LOS under the first four scenarios. The only intersection was found to operate at deficient conditions under 2013 Opening Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario shown below: · Douglass Road/Katella Avenue Figure 4-1 through Figure 4-5 demonstrates the study intersections LOS during the PM peak hour under 2013 Opening Year conditions. The detailed 2013 Opening Year ICU worksheets are presented in Appendix G-2. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 46 Table 4-1: 2013 Opening Year PM Peak Hour Intersection LOS 2013 Opening Year (Without Project) 2013 Opening Year With Project ID Intersection Jurisdiction With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.65 B 0.65 B 0.66 B 0.67 B 0.68 B 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.58 A 0.58 A 0.58 A 0.58 A 0.58 A 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.61 B 0.60 A 0.61 B 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.59 A 0.60 A 0.61 B 0.60 A 0.61 B 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.54 A 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.57 A 0.54 A 0.57 A 0.60 A 0.61 B 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.48 A 0.50 A 0.53 A 0.60 A 0.63 B 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.36 A 0.36 A 0.37 A 0.36 A 0.37 A 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.25 A 0.25 A 0.25 A 0.25 A 0.26 A 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.48 A 0.49 A 0.50 A 0.49 A 0.53 A 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.07 A 0.07 A 0.08 A 0.10 A 0.11 A 12 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.44 A 0.44 A 0.45 A 0.44 A 0.45 A 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.53 A 0.53 A 0.53 A 0.59 A 0.60 A 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.28 A 0.30 A 0.32 A 0.40 A 0.42 A 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.41 A 0.51 A 0.59 A 0.75 C 0.82 D 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 0.27 A 0.30 A 0.32 A 0.41 A 0.41 A 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.24 A 0.26 A 0.28 A 0.77 C 0.79 C 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.35 A 0.37 A 0.38 A 0.53 A 0.54 A 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.29 A 0.30 A 0.30 A 0.40 A 0.40 A 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.28 A 0.28 A 0.29 A 0.34 A 0.34 A 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.52 A 0.53 A 0.54 A 0.63 B 0.63 B 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.36 A 0.44 A 0.51 A 0.58 A 0.66 B 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.61 B 0.66 B 0.69 B 0.67 B 0.73 C 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.21 A 0.27 A 0.32 A 0.29 A 0.34 A 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.38 A 0.45 A 0.52 A 0.49 A 0.56 A 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.50 A 0.66 B 0.76 C 0.67 B 0.77 C 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.40 A 0.54 A 0.64 B 0.73 C 0.86 D *CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 47 Table 4-1: 2013 Opening Year PM Peak Hour Intersection LOS, Continued 2013 Opening Year Without Project 2013 Opening Year With Project ID Intersection Jurisdiction With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.47 A 0.56 A 0.62 B 0.56 A 0.62 B 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.30 A 0.47 A 0.65 B 0.61 B 0.79 C 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.29 A 0.55 A 0.76 C 0.90 D 1.06 F 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.36 A 0.44 A 0.63 B 0.49 A 0.68 B 32 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Orange 0.26 A 0.34 A 0.41 A 0.42 A 0.49 A 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.46 A 0.47 A 0.47 A 0.46 A 0.47 A 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.35 A 0.43 A 0.49 A 0.49 A 0.54 A 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Orange 0.28 A 0.35 A 0.40 A 0.39 A 0.44 A 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.42 A 0.44 A 0.45 A 0.44 A 0.45 A 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.38 A 0.42 A 0.45 A 0.47 A 0.50 A 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.49 A 0.51 A 0.53 A 0.51 A 0.53 A 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.49 A 0.53 A 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.59 A 40 Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.41 A 0.41 A 0.41 A 0.42 A 0.44 A 41 Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.46 A 0.48 A 0.50 A 0.51 A 0.53 A 42 Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.67 B 0.67 B 0.71 C 0.71 C 0.70 B 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 0.88 D 0.88 D 0.88 D 0.88 D 0.88 D 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 0.84 D 0.85 D 0.86 D 0.87 D 0.88 D *CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! PHOENIX C L U B DR GENE AUTRY WY DOUGLASS RD KATELLA AVE EAST ST CLEMENTINE ST ORANGEWOOD AVE SR 55 HOV COSTA MESA FWY N TUSTIN ST STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD HARBOR BLVD E KATELLA AVE LA VETA AVE N CAMBRIDGE ST ANAHEIM BLVD TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE LEWIS ST LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE N COLLINS AVE HASTER ST WAGNER AVE S YORBA ST THE CITY DR MAIN ST STRUCK AVE SUNKIST ST GLASSELL ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE SPORTSTOWN CHAPMAN AVE MANCHESTER AVE 9 8 3 6 7 1 2 5 4 9 11 40 44 43 42 41 39 37 38 36 33 13 12 21 20 19 18 16 17 10 14 35 32 31 22 28 26 29 27 25 30 24 34 15 23 Figure 4-1: 2013 Opening Year with No Events Peak Hour Intersection LOS ? ê ? l SANTA A NA RIVER GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM SANTA ANA ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Documentation\Fig4-1-Y13-NP-LOS-111411.mxd HONDA CENTER ^ µ Legend Roadway Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area PM LOS Acceptable LOS Deficient LOS ! ! 0 0.15 0.3 Miles ? k ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! PHOENIX C L U B DR GENE AUTRY WY DOUGLASS RD KATELLA AVE EAST ST CLEMENTINE ST ORANGEWOOD AVE SR 55 HOV COSTA MESA FWY N TUSTIN ST STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD HARBOR BLVD E KATELLA AVE LA VETA AVE N CAMBRIDGE ST ANAHEIM BLVD TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE LEWIS ST LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE N COLLINS AVE HASTER ST WAGNER AVE S YORBA ST THE CITY DR MAIN ST STRUCK AVE SUNKIST ST GLASSELL ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE SPORTSTOWN CHAPMAN AVE MANCHESTER AVE 9 8 3 6 7 1 2 5 4 9 11 40 44 43 42 41 39 37 38 36 33 13 12 21 20 19 18 16 17 10 14 35 32 31 22 28 26 29 27 25 30 24 34 15 23 Figure 4-2: 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS ? ê ? l SANTA A NA RIVER GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM SANTA ANA ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Documentation\Fig4-2-Y13-HC-LOS-111411.mxd HONDA CENTER ^ µ Legend Roadway Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area PM LOS Acceptable LOS Deficient LOS ! ! 0 0.15 0.3 Miles ? k ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! PHOENIX C L U B DR GENE AUTRY WY DOUGLASS RD KATELLA AVE EAST ST CLEMENTINE ST ORANGEWOOD AVE SR 55 HOV COSTA MESA FWY N TUSTIN ST STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD HARBOR BLVD E KATELLA AVE LA VETA AVE N CAMBRIDGE ST ANAHEIM BLVD TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE LEWIS ST LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE N COLLINS AVE HASTER ST WAGNER AVE S YORBA ST THE CITY DR MAIN ST STRUCK AVE SUNKIST ST GLASSELL ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE SPORTSTOWN CHAPMAN AVE MANCHESTER AVE 9 8 3 6 7 1 2 5 4 9 11 40 44 43 42 41 39 37 38 36 33 13 12 21 20 19 18 16 17 10 14 35 32 31 22 28 26 29 27 25 30 24 34 15 23 Figure 4-3: 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS ? ê ? l SANTA A NA RIVER GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM SANTA ANA ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Documentation\Fig4-3-Y13-HC+AS-LOS-111411.mxd HONDA CENTER ^ µ Legend Roadway Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area PM LOS Acceptable LOS Deficient LOS ! ! 0 0.15 0.3 Miles ? k ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! PHOENIX C L U B DR GENE AUTRY WY DOUGLASS RD KATELLA AVE EAST ST CLEMENTINE ST ORANGEWOOD AVE SR 55 HOV COSTA MESA FWY N TUSTIN ST STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD HARBOR BLVD E KATELLA AVE LA VETA AVE N CAMBRIDGE ST ANAHEIM BLVD TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE LEWIS ST LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE N COLLINS AVE HASTER ST WAGNER AVE S YORBA ST THE CITY DR MAIN ST STRUCK AVE SUNKIST ST GLASSELL ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE SPORTSTOWN CHAPMAN AVE MANCHESTER AVE 9 8 3 6 7 1 2 5 4 9 11 40 44 43 42 41 39 37 38 36 33 13 12 21 20 19 18 16 17 10 14 35 32 31 22 28 26 29 27 25 30 24 34 15 23 Figure 4-4: 2013 Opening Year with Projec Peak Hour Intersection LOS ? ê ? l SANTA A NA RIVER GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM SANTA ANA ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Documentation\Fig4-4-Y13-NewHC-LOS-111411.mxd HONDA CENTER ^ µ Legend Roadway Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area PM LOS Acceptable LOS Deficient LOS ! ! 0 0.15 0.3 Miles ? k t ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! PHOENIX C L U B DR GENE AUTRY WY DOUGLASS RD KATELLA AVE EAST ST CLEMENTINE ST ORANGEWOOD AVE SR 55 HOV COSTA MESA FWY N TUSTIN ST STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD HARBOR BLVD E KATELLA AVE LA VETA AVE N CAMBRIDGE ST ANAHEIM BLVD TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE LEWIS ST LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE N COLLINS AVE HASTER ST WAGNER AVE S YORBA ST THE CITY DR MAIN ST STRUCK AVE SUNKIST ST GLASSELL ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE SPORTSTOWN CHAPMAN AVE MANCHESTER AVE 9 8 3 6 7 1 2 5 4 9 11 40 44 43 42 41 39 37 38 36 33 13 12 21 20 19 18 16 17 10 14 35 32 31 22 28 26 29 27 25 30 24 34 15 23 Figure 4-5: 2013 Opening Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS ? ê ? l SANTA A NA RIVER GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM SANTA ANA ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Documentation\Fig4-5-Y13-NewHC+AS-LOS-111411.mxd HONDA CENTER ^ µ Legend Roadway Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area PM LOS Acceptable LOS Deficient LOS ! ! 0 0.15 0.3 Miles ? k ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 53 4.2 ARTERIAL SEGMENT ANALYSIS Daily Arterial Segment LOS Analysis Table 4-2 presents average daily traffic (ADT), V/C ratio, and LOS for the 16 study arterial segments for the following five scenarios under the 2013 Opening Year conditions: 1) 2013 Opening Year (No Events) 2) 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2013 Opening Year with Project 5) 2013 Opening Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event The table indicates that the following arterial segments operate at a deficient LOS under all above scenarios under the 2013 Opening Year. · Ball Road - Sunkist Street to SR-57 Southbound Ramps · Katella Avenue - Howell Avenue to SR-57 Southbound Ramps Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS Analysis The City of Anaheim further evaluates deficient daily arterial segments during peak hours to evaluate peak hour traffic operations, which is often a more appropriate indicator of traffic operations and improvement requirements. Therefore, for each of the study segments that were deficient under the daily analysis, a PM peak hour analysis was prepared for the five analysis scenarios. Table 4-3 shows that all of the study segments operate within acceptable LOS. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 54 Table 4-2: 2013 Opening Year Arterial Segment Daily LOS 2013 Opening Year (Without Project) 2013 Opening Year With Project ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid-Block Lanes Capacity With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With AAHC Event and AS Event ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS A - 1 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 SB Ramps Anaheim 6D 56,300 56,070 1.00 E 57,730 1.03 F 57,730 1.03 F 58,860 1.05 F 58,860 1.05 F A - 2 Ball Road SR-57 NB Ramps Phoenix Club Drive Anaheim 6D 56,300 34,830 0.62 B 36,900 0.66 B 36,900 0.66 B 38,310 0.68 B 38,310 0.68 B A - 3 Cerritos Avenue Sunkist Street Douglass Road Anaheim 4U 25,000 4,700 0.19 A 6,210 0.25 A 6,210 0.25 A 7,230 0.29 A 7,230 0.29 A A - 4 Douglass Road Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 4U 25,000 7,740 0.31 A 10,820 0.43 A 10,820 0.43 A 12,920 0.52 A 12,920 0.52 A A - 5 Katella Avenue** Lewis Street State College Blvd Anaheim 6D 56,300 36,850 0.65 B 37,470 0.67 B 38,810 0.69 B 37,890 0.67 B 39,230 0.70 B A - 6 Katella Avenue** State College Blvd Howell Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 37,540 0.67 B 38,720 0.69 B 41,130 0.73 C 39,520 0.70 B 41,930 0.74 C A - 7 Katella Avenue** Howell Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps Anaheim 6D 56,300 57,230 1.02 F 60,750 1.08 F 60,750 1.08 F 63,130 1.12 F 63,130 1.12 F A - 8 Katella Avenue** SR-57 SB Ramps SR-57 NB Ramps Anaheim 6D 56,300 38,190 0.68 B 41,640 0.74 C 43,010 0.76 C 43,970 0.78 C 45,340 0.81 D A - 9 Katella Avenue** SR-57 NB Ramps Douglass Road Anaheim 6D 56,300 37,920 0.67 B 43,420 0.77 C 46,360 0.82 D 47,140 0.84 D 50,080 0.89 D A - 10 Katella Avenue** Douglass Road Struck Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 32,430 0.58 A 35,770 0.64 B 36,550 0.65 B 38,040 0.68 B 38,820 0.69 B A - 11 Katella Avenue* Struck Avenue Main Street Orange 6D 56,300 25,490 0.45 A 27,160 0.48 A 27,160 0.48 A 28,290 0.50 A 28,290 0.50 A A - 12 Katella Avenue* Main Street Batavia Street Orange 6D 56,300 28,190 0.50 A 29,190 0.52 A 29,190 0.52 A 29,870 0.53 A 29,870 0.53 A A - 13 Main Street Katella Avenue Struck Avenue Orange 4U 37,500 16,500 0.44 A 17,140 0.46 A 18,530 0.49 A 17,580 0.47 A 18,970 0.51 A A - 14 Phoenix Club Drive Honda Center Ball Road Anaheim 2U 12,500 3,820 0.31 A 5,570 0.45 A 5,710 0.46 A 6,760 0.54 A 6,900 0.55 A A - 15 State College Blvd Howell Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 23,130 0.41 A 23,690 0.42 A 23,910 0.42 A 24,070 0.43 A 24,290 0.43 A A - 16 Sunkist Street Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 4U 25,000 7,470 0.30 A 8,550 0.34 A 8,550 0.34 A 9,280 0.37 A 9,280 0.37 A * Smart Street segment in Orange assumes a 5% capacity enhancement CMP arterial. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP arterial AA HC: Average Attendance Honda Center ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 55 Table 4-3: 2013 Opening Year Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS 2013 Opening Year (Without Project) 2013 Opening Year With Project ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid-Block Lanes With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volum e V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS A - 1 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 SB Ramps Anaheim 6D 3,110 0.57 A 3,450 0.63 B 3,450 0.63 B 3,690 0.67 B 3,690 0.67 B A - 7 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps Anaheim 6D 3,050 0.45 A 3,880 0.57 A 4,780 0.70 B 4,440 0.65 B 5,340 0.78 C * Smart Street segment in Orange assumes a 5% capacity enhancement AA HC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 56 4.3 CALTRANS FACILITY PEAK HOUR ANALYSIS Caltrans Ramp Termini Intersection Analysis Freeway ramp termini intersections were also analyzed using (version 7.0) through the application of Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 methodology, per Caltrans requirements consistent with the analysis presented in the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Traffic Study. Table 4-4 presents the analysis results of peak hour delays and level of service for the 11 ramp termini intersections under the following five 2013 Opening Year analysis scenarios. Detailed analysis worksheets are included in Appendix H-2. 1) 2013 Opening Year (No Events) 2) 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2013 Opening Year with Project 5) 2013 Opening Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event The table indicates that all of the study intersections operate at acceptable LOS under the first four scenarios. The only location that operates at failing deficient condition is SR 57 Northbound Ramps/Katella Avenue which occurs under the fifth scenario (2013 Opening Year with Project and Angel Stadium Event scenario). Table 4-4: 2013 Opening Year PM Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS ID Intersection 2013 Opening Year (Without Project) 2013 Opening Year With Project With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 21.40 C 21.50 C 25.50 C 22.10 C 26.10 C 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 23.00 C 23.30 C 25.40 C 23.60 C 27.60 C 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 6.10 A 6.00 A 5.70 A 6.00 A 6.00 A 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 21.70 C 21.80 C 22.00 C 21.90 C 22.40 C 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 15.40 B 15.40 B 15.40 B 15.40 B 15.40 B 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road 17.30 B 29.00 C 29.00 C 33.20 C 33.40 C 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 13.80 B 16.60 B 27.40 C 19.30 B 40.60 D 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road 17.20 B 18.30 B 18.30 B 19.30 B 19.30 B 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 11.50 B 19.70 C 29.00 C 37.60 D 58.70 E 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 47.50 D 48.20 D 49.20 D 51.70 D 54.50 D 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 41.80 D 45.20 D 48.20 D 47.40 D 52.60 D ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 57 Freeway Weaving Analysis Weaving analysis was performed using HCM methodology which provides density criteria by LOS for the weaving area within the freeway segment. Table 4-5 presents analysis results for the weaving areas during the PM peak hour under the 2013 Opening Year conditions. For the freeway weaving segments that are longer than 2,500 feet, HCM requires the segments be analyzed as basic freeway segments. Detailed HCM weaving analysis worksheets are included in Appendix J-2. As indicated in Table 4-5, all the freeway weaving segments are forecast to operate at acceptable LOS in the following five scenarios under the 2013 Opening Year conditions: 1) 2013 Opening Year (No Events) 2) 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2013 Opening Year with Project 5) 2013 Opening Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Freeway Mainline Analysis The freeway mainline evaluation is based on peak hour HCM density analysis. This methodology has been applied to the freeway analyses in the study area per Caltrans’s recommendation. As noted in the Chapter 2, freeway weaving segments with a weaving length exceeding 2,500 feet were analyzed as basic freeway segment using HCS. Table 4-6 summarizes HCS analysis results for three freeway mainline segments in the PM peak hour under the 2013 Opening Year conditions. Detailed HCM mainline analysis worksheets are included in Appendix I-2. Similar to the freeway weaving analysis results, all the study freeway mainline segments operate at acceptable LOS in the five scenarios under the 2013 Opening Year conditions. Freeway Ramp Analysis The freeway ramp evaluation is based on peak hour HCM density analysis. This methodology has been applied to the freeway analyses in the study area per Caltrans’s recommendation. The facility capacities are based on criteria outlined in the HCM and the Caltrans Ramp Meter Design Manual. Table 4-7 demonstrates HCM analysis results for the freeway ramps in the PM event peak hour under the Opening Year 2013 conditions. The HCM reports a density based on the forecast Year 2013 freeway mainline segment and ramp merge/diverge volumes. Detailed HCM analysis worksheets are included in Appendix K-2. As indicated in Table 4-7, all the study ramps operate at acceptable LOS under the following scenarios: · 2013 Opening Year (No Events) · 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event · 2013 Opening Year with Project However, similar to the 2011 Baseline conditions, the SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue is forecast to operate at LOS F under the following scenarios: · 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event · 2013 Opening Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 58 Table 4-5: 2013 Opening Year Freeway Weaving PM Peak Hour LOS 2013 Opening Year (Without Project) 2013 Opening Year With Project ID Weaving Segment Weaving Length (Ft) With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS W - 1 I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Disneyland Drive Off-Ramp 3,060 Not Applicable W - 2 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 1,520 26.6 C 29.6 C 31.4 C 29.7 C 31.5 C W - 3 I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Disney Way Off-Ramp 2,650 Not Applicable W - 4 SR-57 Northbound between Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off-Ramp 1,230 22.2 B 23.4 B 23.4 B 24.0 B 24.0 B W - 5 SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 1,360 24.1 C 27.1 C 28.1 C 28.4 C 29.6 C W - 6 SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp 2,130 24.5 C 24.8 C 25.0 C 24.9 C 25.2 C SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 2,490 26.2 C 27.3 C 33.8 D 27.8 C 34.5 D W - 7 SR-57 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp 5,160 Not Applicable W - 8 SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 1,620 23.2 C 24.0 C 27.1 C 24.3 C 27.4 C AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Not Applicable: weaving segment longer than 2,500 feet analyzed as basic freeway mainline Table 4-6: 2013 Opening Year Freeway Mainline PM Peak Hour LOS 2013 Opening Year (Without Project) 2013 Opening Year With Project ID Freeway Segment With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F - 1 I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue and Disneyland Drive 22.2 C 22.4 C 23.1 C 22.5 C 23.2 C F - 2 I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way 23.5 C 23.7 C 24.8 C 23.8 C 24.9 C F - 3 SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue 24.0 C 24.6 C 26.8 D 24.8 C 27.0 D AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 59 Table 4-7: 2013 Opening Year Freeway Ramp PM Peak Hour LOS 2013 Opening Year (Without Project) 2013 Opening Year With Project ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-1 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* 2 28.1 D 28.1 D 28.1 D 28.1 D 28.1 D R-2 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 2 29.0 D 29.2 D 29.9 D 29.2 D 30.0 D R-3 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 1 24.7 C 28.8 D 30.4 D 30.5 D 32.2 D R-4 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 1 31.7 D 32.4 D 32.4 D 32.7 D 32.7 D R-5 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 1 27.1 C 29.8 D 32.0 D 31.0 D 33.2 D R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 1 27.1 C 28.7 D >Capacity F 29.4 D >Capacity F * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 60 5.0 2030 FUTURE YEAR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 2030 Future Year baseline traffic activity was defined in the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Traffic Study for the study area intersection analysis, arterial analysis, and freeway analysis. In addition, the future baseline traffic also includes the trips generated by the commercial land use proposal on property owned by the Orange County Water District (OCWD) located on Ball Road and Phoenix Club Drive. The baseline traffic activity represents Honda Center non-event related traffic conditions while event related activity was derived using the methodologies described in Section 2.1 – Forecast Volume Development. It should be noted that the 2030 baseline traffic forecast are based on a typical PM peak hour traffic (4:00-6:00 PM) which doesn’t reflect the event peak hour (6:00 - 7:00 PM). The intent of this approach is to capture the worst traffic scenario in the future conditions. The 2030 baseline network is consistent with the Anaheim General Plan circulation network and assumes all the proposed improvements in the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, which was adopted by the City Council in 2010, are built. The following scenarios are used for the 2030 Future Year analysis: 1) 2030 Future Year (No Events) 2) 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2030 Future Year with Project 5) 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 5.1 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS The intersection analysis considers the effect that growth within the study area will have on the future circulation system. Table 5-1 presents PM peak hour LOS results for the 44 study intersections for the five scenarios under the 2030 Future Year conditions. The detailed 2013 Opening Year ICU worksheets are presented in Appendix G-3. Future General Plan lane geometries as well as the proposed roadway capacity enhancements in the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Traffic Study were assumed in the intersection analysis. Scenario 1: 2030 Future Year (No Events) Table 5-1 shows that the high future traffic growth within study area is projected to deteriorate the circulation system with 12 out of 44 study intersections forecast to operate at an unacceptable LOS under the 2030 Future Year (No Events) scenario. Although the intersection Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue is forecast to operate at LOS E, it is not considered deficient. This intersection is identified in the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Congestion Management Plan (CMP) as a CMP intersection. Per CMP guidelines, intersections operating at LOS E identified within the CMP are considered operating at an acceptable level of service. All deficient intersections are listed below: ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 61 · Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road · Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue · State College Boulevard / Ball Road · Sunkist Street / Ball Road · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road · Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road · Main Street / Taft Avenue · Batavia Street / Taft Avenue · Glassell Street / Katella Avenue · Tustin Street / Katella Avenue · SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Scenario 2: 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event In addition to those deficient intersections above for Scenario 1, the LOS analysis results show 7 additional intersections that operate at unacceptable LOS under the 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario. The intersection SR-57 Northbound Ramps/Katella Avenue is also forecast to operate at LOS E; but it is not considered deficient as it is a CMP intersection. All deficient intersections are listed below: · Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road · Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue · Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue · State College Boulevard / Ball Road · State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue · State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue · Sunkist Street / Ball Road · Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road · Douglass Road / Katella Avenue · Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road · Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue · Main Street / Taft Avenue · Main Street / Katella Avenue · Batavia Street / Taft Avenue · Glassell Street / Katella Avenue · Tustin Street / Katella Avenue · SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 62 Scenario 3: 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event In addition to those deficient intersections under Scenarios 1 and 2, the 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario results in 6 additional deficient intersections. All deficient intersections are shown below: · Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road · Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue · Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue · Lewis Street / Katella Avenue · State College Boulevard / Ball Road · State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue · State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive · State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way · State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue · Sportstown / Katella Avenue · Sunkist Street / Ball Road · Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · Douglass Road / Katella Avenue · Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road · Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue · Main Street / Taft Avenue · Main Street / Katella Avenue · Batavia Street / Taft Avenue · Glassell Street / Katella Avenue · Tustin Street / Katella Avenue · SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Scenario 4: 2030 Future Year with Project The Table 5-1 reveals that the implementation of the project results in LOS deterioration of 5 intersections addition to those already operate at failing conditions under Scenarios 1 and 2. All deficient intersections are show in the following: · Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road · Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue · Lewis Street / Ball Road · Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue · State College Boulevard / Ball Road · State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue · State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 63 · Sunkist Street / Ball Road · Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue · Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · Douglass Road / Katella Avenue · Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road · Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue · Main Street / Taft Avenue · Main Street / Katella Avenue · Batavia Street / Taft Avenue · Glassell Street / Katella Avenue · Tustin Street / Katella Avenue · SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Scenario 5: 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event In addition to those deficient intersections under Scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4, the 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario results in one additional intersection that is deficient. The intersection of Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue is also forecast to operate at LOS E, but it is not considered deficient as it is a CMP intersection. All deficient intersections are shown below: · Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road · Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue · Lewis Street / Ball Road · Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue · Lewis Street / Katella Avenue · State College Boulevard / Ball Road · State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue · State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive · State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way · State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue · State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue · Sportstown / Katella Avenue · Sunkist Street / Ball Road · Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue · Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · Douglass Road / Katella Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 64 · Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road · Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue · Main Street / Taft Avenue · Main Street / Katella Avenue · Batavia Street / Taft Avenue · Glassell Street / Katella Avenue · Tustin Street / Katella Avenue · SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Figure 5-1 through Figure 5-3 demonstrates the study intersections LOS during the PM peak hour under 2030 Future Year conditions. The detailed 2030 Future Year ICU worksheets are presented in Appendix J, which also presents the assumed lane geometrics and PM peak hour turning movement volumes. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 65 Table 5-1: 2030 Future Year PM Peak Hour Intersection LOS 2030 Future Year (Without Project) 2030 Future Year With Project ID Intersection Jurisdiction With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.95 E 0.95 E 0.95 E 0.95 E 0.95 E 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.90 D 0.90 D 0.90 D 0.90 D 0.90 D 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.93 E 0.93 E 0.93 E 0.94 E 0.94 E 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.86 D 0.87 D 0.87 D 0.87 D 0.87 D 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.90 D 0.92 E 0.95 E 0.93 E 0.96 E 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.71 C 0.75 C 0.84 D 0.77 C 0.86 D 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.78 C 0.81 D 0.88 D 0.83 D 0.91 E 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.90 D 0.90 D 0.90 D 0.91 E 0.91 E 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.91 E 0.91 E 0.94 E 0.94 E 0.96 E 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.84 D 0.87 D 0.95 E 0.90 D 0.98 E 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.76 C 0.77 C 0.80 C 0.77 C 0.80 C 12 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.85 D 0.85 D 0.85 D 0.86 D 0.86 D 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.94 E 0.94 E 0.94 E 0.94 E 0.94 E 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.75 C 0.76 C 0.85 D 0.76 C 0.85 D 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.85 D 0.91 E 1.18 F 0.95 E 1.22 F 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 0.78 C 0.80 C 0.93 E 0.82 D 0.93 E 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.73 C 0.73 C 1.41 F 0.73 C 1.41 F 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.90 D 0.91 E 1.05 F 0.92 E 1.06 F 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.74 C 0.74 C 0.85 D 0.74 C 0.85 D 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.80 C 0.81 D 0.86 D 0.81 D 0.86 D 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.80 C 0.82 D 0.90 D 0.83 D 0.91 E 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.75 C 0.83 D 0.94 E 0.88 D 0.99 E 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.97 E 1.04 F 1.08 F 1.09 F 1.13 F 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.81 D 0.93 E 0.94 E 1.02 F 1.04 F 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.86 D 0.86 D 0.89 D 0.92 E 0.97 E 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 1.00 E 1.22 F 1.22 F 1.36 F 1.36 F 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 0.69 B 0.86 D 1.21 F 1.02 F 1.37 F *CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 66 Table 5-1: 2030 Future PM Peak Hour Intersection LOS, Continued 2030 Future Year (Without Project) 2030 Future Year With Project ID Intersection Jurisdiction With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.85 D 0.90 D 0.90 D 0.94 E 0.94 E 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.79 C 0.96 E 1.06 F 1.08 F 1.18 F 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.88 D 1.23 F 1.50 F 1.48 F 1.74 F 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 1.46 F 1.60 F 1.62 F 1.69 F 1.71 F 32 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Orange 0.81 D 0.92 E 1.00 E 0.99 E 1.08 F 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.97 E 0.97 E 0.97 E 0.98 E 0.98 E 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.85 D 0.91 E 0.96 E 0.97 E 1.02 F 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Orange 0.71 C 0.78 C 0.81 D 0.83 D 0.86 D 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.91 E 0.91 E 0.91 E 0.91 E 0.91 E 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.78 C 0.78 C 0.83 D 0.80 C 0.85 D 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.67 B 0.69 B 0.69 B 0.70 B 0.70 B 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.93 E 0.93 E 0.93 E 0.93 E 0.93 E 40 Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.83 D 0.83 D 0.83 D 0.83 D 0.83 D 41 Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.71 C 0.74 C 0.77 C 0.76 C 0.79 C 42 Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Orange 1.00 E 1.00 E 1.00 E 1.00 E 1.00 E 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 1.08 F 1.08 F 1.08 F 1.08 F 1.08 F 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 1.01 F 1.01 F 1.01 F 1.01 F 1.01 F * CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! PHOENIX C L U B D R GENE AUTRY WY GARDEN GROVE BLVD WINSTON RD DOUGLASS RD RAMPART ST EAST ST KATELLA AVE CLEMENTINE ST SR 55 HOV COSTA MESA FWY N TUSTIN ST STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD HARBOR BLVD E KATELLA AVE LA VETA AVE N CAMBRIDGE ST ANAHEIM BLVD TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE LEWIS ST LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE COLLINS AVE HASTER ST WAGNER AVE S YORBA ST THE CITY DR MAIN ST STRUCK AVE ECKHOFF ST SUNKIST ST GLASSELL ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE SPORTSTOWN CHAPMAN AVE MANCHESTER AVE 8 3 6 7 1 2 5 4 9 11 40 44 43 42 41 39 37 38 36 33 13 12 21 20 19 18 16 17 10 14 35 32 31 22 28 26 29 27 25 30 24 34 15 23 Figure 5-1: 2030 Future Year with No Events Peak Hour Intersection LOS ? ê ? l SAN TA AN A RIV ER GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM SANTA ANA ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Documentation\Fig5-1-Y30-NP-LOS-111411.mxd HONDA CENTER ^ µ Legend Roadway Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area PM LOS Acceptable LOS Deficient LOS ! ! 0 0.15 0.3 Miles ? k ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! PHOENIX C L U B D R GENE AUTRY WY GARDEN GROVE BLVD WINSTON RD DOUGLASS RD RAMPART ST EAST ST KATELLA AVE CLEMENTINE ST SR 55 HOV COSTA MESA FWY N TUSTIN ST STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD HARBOR BLVD E KATELLA AVE LA VETA AVE N CAMBRIDGE ST ANAHEIM BLVD TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE LEWIS ST LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE COLLINS AVE HASTER ST WAGNER AVE S YORBA ST THE CITY DR MAIN ST STRUCK AVE ECKHOFF ST SUNKIST ST GLASSELL ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE SPORTSTOWN CHAPMAN AVE MANCHESTER AVE 8 3 6 7 1 2 5 4 9 11 40 44 43 42 41 39 37 38 36 33 13 12 21 20 19 18 16 17 10 14 35 32 31 22 28 26 29 27 25 30 24 34 15 23 Figure 5-2: 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS ? ê ? l SAN TA AN A RIV ER GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM SANTA ANA ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Documentation\Fig5-2-Y30-HC-LOS-111411.mxd HONDA CENTER ^ µ Legend Roadway Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area PM LOS Acceptable LOS Deficient LOS ! ! 0 0.15 0.3 Miles ? k ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! PHOENIX C L U B D R GENE AUTRY WY GARDEN GROVE BLVD WINSTON RD DOUGLASS RD RAMPART ST EAST ST KATELLA AVE CLEMENTINE ST SR 55 HOV COSTA MESA FWY N TUSTIN ST STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD HARBOR BLVD E KATELLA AVE LA VETA AVE N CAMBRIDGE ST ANAHEIM BLVD TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE LEWIS ST LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE COLLINS AVE HASTER ST WAGNER AVE S YORBA ST THE CITY DR MAIN ST STRUCK AVE ECKHOFF ST SUNKIST ST GLASSELL ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE SPORTSTOWN CHAPMAN AVE MANCHESTER AVE 8 3 6 7 1 2 5 4 9 11 40 44 43 42 41 39 37 38 36 33 13 12 21 20 19 18 16 17 10 14 35 32 31 22 28 26 29 27 25 30 24 34 15 23 Figure 5-3: 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS ? ê ? l SAN TA AN A RIV ER GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM SANTA ANA ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Documentation\Fig5-3-Y30-HC+AS-LOS-111411.mxd HONDA CENTER ^ µ Legend Roadway Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area PM LOS Acceptable LOS Deficient LOS ! ! 0 0.15 0.3 Miles ? k ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! PHOENIX C L U B D R GENE AUTRY WY GARDEN GROVE BLVD WINSTON RD DOUGLASS RD RAMPART ST EAST ST KATELLA AVE CLEMENTINE ST SR 55 HOV COSTA MESA FWY N TUSTIN ST STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD HARBOR BLVD E KATELLA AVE LA VETA AVE N CAMBRIDGE ST ANAHEIM BLVD TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE LEWIS ST LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE COLLINS AVE HASTER ST WAGNER AVE S YORBA ST THE CITY DR MAIN ST STRUCK AVE ECKHOFF ST SUNKIST ST GLASSELL ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE SPORTSTOWN CHAPMAN AVE MANCHESTER AVE 8 3 6 7 1 2 5 4 9 11 40 44 43 42 41 39 37 38 36 33 13 12 21 20 19 18 16 17 10 14 35 32 31 22 28 26 29 27 25 30 24 34 15 23 Figure 5-4: 2030 Future Year with Project Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS ? ê ? l SAN TA AN A RIV ER GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM SANTA ANA ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Documentation\Fig5-4-Y30-NewHC-LOS-111411.mxd HONDA CENTER ^ µ Legend Roadway Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area PM LOS Acceptable LOS Deficient LOS ! ! 0 0.15 0.3 Miles ? k ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! PHOENIX C L U B D R GENE AUTRY WY GARDEN GROVE BLVD WINSTON RD DOUGLASS RD RAMPART ST EAST ST KATELLA AVE CLEMENTINE ST SR 55 HOV COSTA MESA FWY N TUSTIN ST STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD HARBOR BLVD E KATELLA AVE LA VETA AVE N CAMBRIDGE ST ANAHEIM BLVD TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE LEWIS ST LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE COLLINS AVE HASTER ST WAGNER AVE S YORBA ST THE CITY DR MAIN ST STRUCK AVE ECKHOFF ST SUNKIST ST GLASSELL ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE SPORTSTOWN CHAPMAN AVE MANCHESTER AVE 8 3 6 7 1 2 5 4 9 11 40 44 43 42 41 39 37 38 36 33 13 12 21 20 19 18 16 17 10 14 35 32 31 22 28 26 29 27 25 30 24 34 15 23 Figure 5-5: 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Peak Hour Intersection LOS ? ê ? l SAN TA AN A RIV ER GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM SANTA ANA ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\Documentation\Fig5-5-Y30-NewHC+AS-LOS-111411.mxd HONDA CENTER ^ µ Legend Roadway Adjacent Area City of Anaheim Water Area PM LOS Acceptable LOS Deficient LOS ! ! 0 0.15 0.3 Miles ? k ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 72 5.2 ARTERIAL SEGMENT ANALYSIS Daily Arterial Segment LOS Analysis Table 5-2 presents the average daily traffic (ADT), V/C ratios and LOS for all 16 study arterial segments for the following five scenarios under the 2030 Future Year conditions: 1) 2030 Future Year (No Events) 2) 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2030 Future Year with Project 5) 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Scenario 1: 2030 Future Year (No Events) With the high growth forecast in the study area, the table indicates the following twelve (12) arterial segments operate at a deficient LOS under the 2030 Future Year (No Events); nine of which are located within the City of Anaheim, while the other three are located within the City of Orange: · Ball Road - Sunkist Street to the SR-57 Southbound Ramps · Ball Road - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive · Katella Avenue - State College Boulevard to Howell Avenue · Katella Avenue - Howell Avenue to the SR-57 Southbound Ramps · Katella Avenue - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to the SR-57 Southbound Ramps · Katella Avenue - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Douglass Road · Katella Avenue - Douglass Road to Struck Avenue · Katella Avenue - Struck Avenue to Main Avenue · Katella Avenue - Main Avenue to Batavia Street · Main Street - Katella Avenue to Struck Avenue · Phoenix Club Drive - Honda Center to Ball Road · State College Boulevard- Howell Avenue to Katella Avenue Scenario 2: 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event In addition to those deficient segments above for Scenario 1 above, the LOS analysis results show one additional segments that operate at unacceptable LOS under 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario which is Douglass Road between Katella Avenue and Cerritos Avenue. All deficient segments are shown in the following, and 10 of which are located within the City of Anaheim, while the other three are within the City of Orange: · Ball Road- Sunkist Street to SR-57 Southbound Ramps · Ball Road - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive · Douglass Road - Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue · Katella Avenue - State College Boulevard to Howell Avenue · Katella Avenue - Howell Avenue to SR-57 Southbound Ramps · Katella Avenue - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to SR-57 Southbound Ramps ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 73 · Katella Avenue - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Douglass Road · Katella Avenue - Douglass Road to Struck Avenue · Katella Avenue - Struck Avenue to Main Avenue · Katella Avenue - Main Avenue to Batavia Street · Main Street - Katella Avenue to Struck Avenue · Phoenix Club Drive - Honda Center and Ball Road · State College Boulevard- Howell Avenue to Katella Avenue Scenario 3: 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Under the 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario, no more deficiency identified in addition to the deficient segments above for Scenario 1 and 2. All deficient segments are shown in the following, and 10 of which are located within the City of Anaheim, while the other three are within the City of Orange: · Ball Road- Sunkist Street to SR-57 Southbound Ramps · Ball Road - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive · Douglass Road - Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue · Katella Avenue - State College Boulevard to Howell Avenue · Katella Avenue - Howell Avenue to SR-57 Southbound Ramps · Katella Avenue - SR-57 Southbound Ramps to SR-57 Northbound Ramps · Katella Avenue - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Douglass Road · Katella Avenue - Douglass Road to Struck Avenue · Katella Avenue - Struck Avenue to Main Avenue · Katella Avenue - Main Avenue to Batavia Street · Main Street - Katella Avenue to Struck Avenue · Phoenix Club Drive - Honda Center and Ball Road · State College Boulevard- Howell Avenue to Katella Avenue Scenario 4: 2030 Future Year with Project The Table 5-2 indicates that those deficient segments above for Scenario 1 and 2 continue to operate at the failing conditions under the 2030 Future Year with Project scenario. All deficient segments are shown in the following: · Ball Road- Sunkist Street to SR-57 Southbound Ramps · Ball Road - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive · Douglass Road - Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue · Katella Avenue - State College Boulevard to Howell Avenue · Katella Avenue - Howell Avenue to SR-57 Southbound Ramps · Katella Avenue - SR-57 Southbound Ramps to SR-57 Northbound Ramps · Katella Avenue - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Douglass Road · Katella Avenue - Douglass Road to Struck Avenue · Katella Avenue - Struck Avenue to Main Avenue · Katella Avenue - Main Avenue to Batavia Street · Main Street - Katella Avenue to Struck Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 74 · Phoenix Club Drive - Honda Center and Ball Road · State College Boulevard- Howell Avenue to Katella Avenue Scenario 5: 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event The Table 5-2 reveals that those segments are forecast to operate at deficient LOS under Scenarios 1, 2,3 and 4 continue to operate at the failing conditions under the 2030 Future Year with Project scenario. All deficient segments are shown in the following: · Ball Road- Sunkist Street to SR-57 Southbound Ramps · Ball Road - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive · Douglass Road - Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue · Katella Avenue - State College Boulevard to Howell Avenue · Katella Avenue - Howell Avenue to SR-57 Southbound Ramps · Katella Avenue - SR-57 Southbound Ramps to SR-57 Northbound Ramps · Katella Avenue - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Douglass Road · Katella Avenue - Douglass Road to Struck Avenue · Katella Avenue - Struck Avenue to Main Avenue · Katella Avenue - Main Avenue to Batavia Street · Main Street - Katella Avenue to Struck Avenue · Phoenix Club Drive - Honda Center and Ball Road · State College Boulevard- Howell Avenue to Katella Avenue Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS Analysis The City of Anaheim further evaluates deficient daily arterial segments during peak hours to evaluate peak hour traffic operations, which is often a more appropriate indicator of traffic operations and improvement requirements. Therefore, a PM peak hour analysis for each of the study segments that were deficient under the daily analysis was prepared for the five analysis scenarios and the results are shown in the Table-5-3. Scenario 1: 2030 Future Year (No Events) Table 5-3 reveals that two arterial segment are forecast to operate at deficient LOS under the 2030 Future (No Events) scenario which are shown below: · Ball Road - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive · Phoenix Club Drive - Honda Center to Ball Road Scenario 2: 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event In addition to those deficient segments above for Scenario 1, the LOS analysis results show one additional segment that is forecast to operate at unacceptable LOS under the 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario. All deficient arterial segments are shown below: three scenarios below: · Ball Road - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive · Douglass Road - Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 75 · Phoenix Club Drive - Honda Center to Ball Scenario 3: 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Those deficient segments identified under Scenario 1 and 2 continue to operate at deficient LOS with additional deficient segment under the 2030 Future with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario. All deficiencies are the following: · Ball Road - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive · Douglass Road - Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue · Katella Avenue - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Douglass Road · Phoenix Club Drive - Honda Center to Ball Scenario 4: 2030 Future Year with Project Those deficient segments identified under Scenario 1, 2, and 3 continue to operate at failing conditions with the implementation of the project. All deficiencies under this scenario are the following: · Ball Road - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive · Douglass Road - Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue · Katella Avenue - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Douglass Road · Phoenix Club Drive - Honda Center to Ball Scenario 5: 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Those deficient segments identified under Scenario 1, 2, 3 and 4 continue to operate at failing conditions with four additional deficient segment under the 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario. All deficient segments are shown in the following: · Ball Road - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive · Douglass Road - Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue · Katella Avenue - State College Boulevard to Howell Avenue · Katella Avenue - Howell Avenue to SR-57 Southbound Ramps · Katella Avenue - SR-57 Southbound Ramps to SR-57 Northbound Ramps · Katella Avenue - SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Douglass Road · Katella Avenue - Douglass Road to Struck Avenue · Phoenix Club Drive - Honda Center to Ball ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 76 Table 5-2: 2030 Future Year Arterial Segment Daily LOS 2030 Future Year (Without Project) 2030 Future Year With Project ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid-Block Lanes Capacity With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS A - 1 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 SB Ramps Anaheim 6D 56,300 69,300 1.23 F 70,960 1.26 F 70,960 1.26 F 72,090 1.28 F 72,090 1.28 F A - 2 Ball Road SR-57 NB Ramps Phoenix Club Drive Anaheim 6D 56,300 76,240 1.35 F 78,310 1.39 F 78,310 1.39 F 79,720 1.42 F 79,720 1.42 F A - 3 Cerritos Avenue Sunkist Street Douglass Road Anaheim 4D 37,500 27,370 0.73 C 28,880 0.77 C 28,880 0.77 C 29,900 0.80 C 29,900 0.80 C A - 4 Douglass Road Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 4D 37,500 28,920 0.77 C 32,000 0.85 D 32,000 0.85 D 34,100 0.91 E 34,100 0.91 E A - 5 Katella Avenue** Lewis Street State College Blvd Anaheim 8D 75,000 58,640 0.78 C 59,260 0.79 C 60,600 0.81 D 59,680 0.80 C 61,020 0.81 D A - 6 Katella Avenue** State College Blvd Howell Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 62,760 1.11 F 63,940 1.14 F 66,350 1.18 F 64,740 1.15 F 67,150 1.19 F A - 7 Katella Avenue** Howell Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps Anaheim 6D 56,300 71,760 1.27 F 75,280 1.34 F 75,280 1.34 F 77,660 1.38 F 77,660 1.38 F A - 8 Katella Avenue** SR-57 SB Ramps SR-57 NB Ramps Anaheim 6D 56,300 67,240 1.19 F 70,690 1.26 F 72,060 1.28 F 73,020 1.30 F 74,390 1.32 F A - 9 Katella Avenue** SR-57 NB Ramps Douglass Road Anaheim 6D 56,300 63,070 1.12 F 68,570 1.22 F 71,510 1.27 F 72,290 1.28 F 75,230 1.34 F A - 10 Katella Avenue** Douglass Road Struck Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 72,170 1.28 F 75,510 1.34 F 76,290 1.36 F 77,780 1.38 F 78,560 1.40 F A - 11 Katella Avenue* Struck Avenue Main Street Orange 6D 56,300 63,840 1.13 F 65,510 1.16 F 65,510 1.16 F 66,640 1.18 F 66,640 1.18 F A - 12 Katella Avenue* Main Street Batavia Street Orange 6D 56,300 52,950 0.94 E 53,950 0.96 E 53,950 0.96 E 54,630 0.97 E 54,630 0.97 E A - 13 Main Street Katella Avenue Struck Avenue Orange 4U 37,500 34,840 0.93 E 35,480 0.95 E 36,870 0.98 E 35,920 0.96 E 37,310 0.99 E A - 14 Phoenix Club Drive Honda Center Ball Road Anaheim 2U 12,500 39,100 3.13 F 40,850 3.27 F 40,990 3.28 F 42,040 3.36 F 42,180 3.37 F A - 15 State College Blvd Howell Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 47,580 0.85 D 48,140 0.86 D 48,360 0.86 D 48,520 0.86 D 48,740 0.87 D A - 16 Sunkist Street Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 4U 25,000 14,320 0.57 A 15,400 0.62 B 15,400 0.62 B 16,130 0.65 B 16,130 0.65 B * Smart Street segment in Orange assumes a 5% capacity enhancement CMP arterial. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP arterial AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 77 Table 5-3: 2030 Future Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS 2030 Future Year (Without Project) 2030 Future Year With Project ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid-Block Lanes With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/ C LOS Volume V/C LOS A - 1 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 SB Ramps Anaheim 6D 5,520 0.76 C 5,860 0.80 C 5,860 0.80 C 6,100 0.8 4 D 6,100 0.84 D A - 2 Ball Road SR-57 NB Ramps Phoenix Club Drive Anaheim 6D 7,200 0.92 E 7,870 1.00 E 7,870 1.00 E 8,330 1.0 6 F 8,330 1.06 F A - 4 Douglass Road Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 4D N/A 3,450 1.38 F 3,480 1.39 F 4,210 1.6 8 F 4,240 1.69 F A - 5 Katella Avenue Lewis Street State College Blvd Anaheim 8D N/A N/A 5,290 0.85 D N/A 5,480 0.88 D A - 6 Katella Avenue State College Blvd Howell Avenue Anaheim 6D 4,120 0.72 C 4,530 0.79 C 5,080 0.89 D 4,810 0.84 D 5,360 0.94 E A - 7 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps Anaheim 6D 4,550 0.60 A 5,380 0.72 C 6,280 0.83 D 5,940 0.79 C 6,840 0.91 E A - 8 Katella Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps SR-57 NB Ramps Anaheim 6D 4,030 0.63 B 4,680 0.73 C 5,580 0.87 D 5,120 0.80 C 6,020 0.94 E A - 9 Katella Avenue SR-57 NB Ramps Douglass Road Anaheim 6D 4,970 0.78 C 6,190 0.97 E 7,060 1.11 F 7,010 1.10 F 7,880 1.23 F A - 10 Katella Avenue Douglass Road Struck Avenue Anaheim 6D 4,490 0.70 B 5,200 0.81 D 5,620 0.88 D 5,670 0.89 D 6,090 0.95 E A - 14 Phoenix Club Drive Honda Center Ball Road Anaheim 2U 3,290 2.22 F 3,780 2.55 F 3,830 2.58 F 4,120 2.78 F 4,170 2.81 F A - 15 State College Blvd Howell Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 6D 4,510 0.76 C 4,700 0.79 C 5,010 0.85 D 4,820 0.81 D 5,130 0.87 D N/A indicates the segment is not required in the peak hour arterial segment analysis as it is not deficient under daily analysis for the same scenario AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 78 5.3 CALTRANS FACILITY PEAK HOUR ANALYSIS Caltrans Ramp Termini Intersection Analysis Freeway ramp termini intersections were also analyzed using (version 7.0) through the application of Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 methodology, per Caltrans requirements consistent with the analysis presented in the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Traffic Study. Table 5-4 presents the analysis results of peak hour delays and level of service for the 11 ramp termini intersections under the following 2030 Future Year analysis scenarios. Detailed analysis worksheets are included in Appendix H-3. 1) 2030 Future Year (No Events) 2) 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2030 Future Year with Project 5) 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event The table indicates that while most of the study intersections operate at acceptable LOS there are two locations that are forecast to operate at failing conditions under the 2030 Future Year (No Events) scenario which are shown below: · Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/Katella Avenue · SR-55 Southbound Ramps/Katella Avenue Under the 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario, the same locations that are deficient under Scenario 1 remain deficient with one additional deficient intersection. All deficiencies are shown in the following: · Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/Katella Avenue · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-55 Southbound Ramps/Katella Avenue In addition to those deficient intersections under Scenarios 1 and 2, the 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario results in four additional deficient intersections. All deficient intersections are shown below · Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue · Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/Katella Avenue · State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-55 Southbound Ramps/Katella Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 79 In addition to those deficient intersections under Scenarios 1 and 2, the implementation of the project results in two additional deficient intersections. All deficient intersections under the 2030 Future Year with Project scenario are shown below: · Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/Katella Avenue · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Table 5-4 indicates that those deficient intersections under Scenario 1, 2, 3 and 4 continue to operate at the failing conditions under the 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario. All deficient intersections are listed below: · Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue · Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/Katella Avenue · State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Table 5-4: 2030 Future Year PM Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS ID Intersection 2030 Future Year (Without Project) 2030 Future Year With Project With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 49.00 D 50.20 D 75.30 E 54.70 D 100.90 F 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 69.10 E 70.00 E 79.80 E 70.70 E 84.60 F 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 27.20 C 28.80 C 32.00 C 28.90 C 33.00 C 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound R 37.50 D 37.60 D 61.80 E 37.90 D 62.50 E 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound R 40.10 D 42.20 D 47.60 D 44.40 D 48.20 D 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road 52.80 D 106.00 F 125.10 F 148.60 F 149.20 F 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 14.90 B 27.80 C 94.90 F 51.50 D 150.50 F 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road 33.20 C 45.10 D 46.00 D 56.50 E 57.00 E 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 16.10 B 51.50 D 76.70 E 76.90 E 79.30 E 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 105.70 F 108.60 F 113.30 F 110.00 F 115.60 F 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 38.30 D 42.60 D 44.60 D 50.00 D 50.30 D ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 80 Freeway Weaving Analysis Weaving analysis was performed using HCM methodology which provides density criteria by LOS for the weaving area within the freeway segment. Table 5-5 summarizes HCS analysis results for the weaving areas during the PM peak hour. For the freeway weaving segment that is longer than 2,500 feet, HCM requires the segment analyzed as the basic freeway segment. Detailed HCM weaving analysis worksheets are included in Appendix J-3. Under the 2030 Future Year (No Events) scenario, the following four freeway weaving segments are forecast to become deficient: · I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp · SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp · SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp · SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp In addition to those deficiencies above, Table-5-5 reveals that the SR-57 northbound weaving section between the Orangewood Avenue on-ramp and the Katella Avenue off-ramp is also deficient under all of the following four scenarios: · 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event · 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event · 2030 Future Year with Project · 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Freeway Mainline Analysis The freeway mainline evaluation is based on peak hour HCM density analysis. This methodology has been applied to the freeway analyses in the study area per Caltrans’s recommendation. As noted in the Chapter 2, freeway weaving segments with a weaving length exceeding 2,500 feet were analyzed as basic freeway segment using HCS. Table 5-6 presents HCS analysis results for the densities and levels of service for the freeway mainline segments in the PM peak hour under 2030 Future Year conditions. Detailed HCM mainline analysis worksheets are included in Appendix I-3. None of the freeway mainline segments are forecast to perform deficiently under any of the 2030 Future Year scenarios. Freeway Ramp Analysis The freeway ramp evaluation is based on peak hour HCM density analysis. This methodology has been applied to the freeway analyses in the study area per Caltrans’s recommendation. The facility capacities are based on criteria outlined in the HCM and the Caltrans Ramp Meter Design Manual. Table 5-7 summarizes HCM analysis results for the study area ramps in the PM peak hours under 2030 Future Year conditions. The HCM reports a density based on 2030 Future Year forecasted freeway mainline segment and ramp merge/diverge volumes. Detailed HCM analysis worksheets are included in Appendix K-3. According to the analysis, the following freeway ramps are deficient in the PM peak conditions under 2030 Future Year (No Events) scenario: ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 81 · I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue · SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road · SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue Table 5-7 indicates that those deficiencies above remain deficient throughout all the other four scenarios with two additional ramps that are deficient. All deficient ramps are shown in the following: · I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue · SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road · SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue · SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue · SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road . ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 82 Table 5-5: 2030 Future Year Freeway Weaving PM Peak Hour LOS 2030 Future Year (Without Project) 2030 Future Year With Project ID Weaving Segment Weaving Length (Ft) With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS W - 1 I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Disneyland Drive Off-Ramp 3,060 Not Applicable W - 2 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 1,520 38.7 E 39.1 E >Capacity F 39.2 E >Capacity F W - 3 I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Disneyland Drive Off-Ramp 2,650 Not Applicable W - 4 SR-57 Northbound between Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off-Ramp 1,230 30.6 C 31.9 C 31.9 C 32.5 D 32.5 D W - 5 SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 1,360 35.2 D 38.8 E >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F W - 6 SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp 2,130 >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 2,490 >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F W - 7 SR-57 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp 5,160 Not Applicable W - 8 SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 1,620 36.8 E 37.7 E >Capacity F 38.0 E >Capacity F AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Not Applicable: weaving segment longer than 2,500 feet analyzed as basic freeway mainline Table 5-6: Year 2030 Freeway Mainline PM Peak Hour LOS 2030 Future Year (Without Project) 2030 Future Year With Project ID Freeway Segment With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F - 1 I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue and Disneyland Drive 29.4 D 29.6 D 30.3 D 29.7 D 30.4 D F - 2 I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way 31.0 D 31.2 D 32.3 D 31.2 D 32.4 D F - 3 SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue 27.8 D 28.4 D 30.6 D 28.6 D 30.9 D AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 83 Table 5-7: 2030 Future Year Freeway Ramp PM Peak Hour LOS 2030 Future Year (Without Project) 2030 Future Year With Project ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane With No Events With AAHC Event With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project With Project and AS Event Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-1 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* 2 >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F R-2 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 2 30.1 D 30.2 D 31.0 D 30.2 D 31.0 D R-3 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 1 34.1 D 38.1 E 39.8 E 39.9 E >Capacity F R-4 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 1 >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F R-5 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 1 34.1 D 36.8 E 39.0 E >Capacity F >Capacity F R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 1 >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 84 6.0 PROJECT IMPACTS The purpose of this traffic study is to assess the traffic conditions associated with increasing the number of annual events at Honda Center and to identify potential traffic improvements to bring identified project related impacts to less than significant conditions. To present a comprehensive evaluation of the transportation conditions and potential project impacts, five traffic analysis scenarios were considered. The scenarios, described in greater detail in Chapter 1, Section 1.2, include the following: 2011 Baseline Analytical Project Direct Impacts Scenario: 1) 2011 Baseline (No Events) 2) 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2011 Baseline with Project 5) 2011 Baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 2013 Opening Year Analytical Impacts Scenario and Near-Term Impacts Scenario: 1) 2013 Opening Year (No Events) 2) 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2013 Opening Year with Project 5) 2013 Opening Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 2030 Future Year Long-Term Impacts Scenario (General Plan Buildout): 1) 2030 Future Year (No Events) 2) 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2030 Future Year with Project 5) 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event This study presents a comprehensive evaluation of potential project impacts for each study year, through direct comparisons of with and without Project conditions under the five analysis scenarios. Using this approach, Project impacts and mitigation measures are identified using the following three comparisons: Comparisons 1) No Events vs. Project 2) Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project 3) Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 85 Project impacts have been determined using the significant impact thresholds prescribed in the following guiding documents: City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies dated 1996; City of Orange Traffic Impact Study Guidelines dated August 15, 2007; and Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies dated December 2002 as discussed in Chapter 2. Mitigation measures have developed and recommends presented in Chapter 7. The recommended mitigation considers the specific traffic impact measurements reported in this chapter and are intended to mitigate project impacts to less than significant conditions when deficiencies are directly created by the project, or to the without project condition if a deficiency at that location is expected even without the project, whichever is appropriate. 6.1 INTERSECTIONS 6.1.1 2011 Baseline Conditions Comparison 1: No Events vs. Project As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-1, project related impacts were identified at two study intersections when the No Events scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2011 Baseline conditions: · SR-57 Southbound Ramps/Ball Road · Douglass Road/Katella Avenue Table 6-1: 2011 Baseline Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison 1) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With No Event With Project Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.59 A 0.61 B 0.01 No 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.53 A 0.00 No 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.55 A 0.56 A 0.02 No 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.54 A 0.57 A 0.03 No 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.50 A 0.50 A 0.00 No 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.52 A 0.52 A 0.00 No 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.44 A 0.49 A 0.05 No 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.33 A 0.34 A 0.01 No 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.23 A 0.23 A 0.00 No 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.43 A 0.46 A 0.03 No 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.07 A 0.08 A 0.01 No 12 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.41 A 0.41 A 0.01 No 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.49 A 0.49 A 0.00 No 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.27 A 0.30 A 0.03 No 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.38 A 0.56 A 0.18 No 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 0.25 A 0.30 A 0.05 No 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.23 A 0.27 A 0.04 No 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.32 A 0.35 A 0.03 No 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.26 A 0.28 A 0.02 No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.26 A 0.27 A 0.01 No 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.48 A 0.49 A 0.02 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 86 Table 6-1: 2011 Baseline Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison Continued ID Intersection Jurisdiction With No Event With Project Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.33 A 0.49 A 0.15 No 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.56 A 0.65 B 0.08 No 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.20 A 0.31 A 0.11 No 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.35 A 0.50 A 0.15 No 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.46 A 0.72 C 0.26 Yes 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 0.37 A 0.61 B 0.24 No 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.43 A 0.59 A 0.16 No 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.28 A 0.64 B 0.36 No 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.27 A 0.76 C 0.49 Yes 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.34 A 0.62 B 0.28 No 32 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Orange 0.24 A 0.39 A 0.15 No 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.42 A 0.43 A 0.00 No 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.32 A 0.46 A 0.14 No 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Orange 0.27 A 0.38 A 0.12 No 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.39 A 0.42 A 0.03 No 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.35 A 0.42 A 0.07 No 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.45 A 0.49 A 0.04 No 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.45 A 0.52 A 0.07 No 40 Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.38 A 0.38 A 0.00 No 41 Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.42 A 0.46 A 0.04 No 42 Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.62 B 0.65 B 0.03 No 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.00 No 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 0.77 C 0.79 C 0.02 No *CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Comparison 2: Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-2, project related impacts were identified at two study intersections when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2011 Baseline conditions: · SR-57 Southbound Ramps/Ball Road · Douglass Road/Katella Avenue Table 6-2: 2011 Baseline Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison 2) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event With Project Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.60 A 0.61 B 0.01 No 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.53 A 0.00 No 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.01 No 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.55 A 0.57 A 0.01 No 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.50 A 0.50 A 0.00 No 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.50 A 0.52 A 0.03 No 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.46 A 0.49 A 0.03 No 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.33 A 0.34 A 0.01 No 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.23 A 0.23 A 0.00 No 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.45 A 0.46 A 0.01 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 87 Table 6-2: 2011 Baseline Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison Continued ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event With Project Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.07 0.08 0.01 No 12 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.41 A 0.41 A 0.00 No 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.49 A 0.49 A 0.00 No 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.28 A 0.30 A 0.02 No 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.48 A 0.56 A 0.07 No 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 0.28 A 0.30 A 0.02 No 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.25 A 0.27 A 0.02 No 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.34 A 0.35 A 0.01 No 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.27 A 0.28 A 0.01 No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.26 A 0.27 A 0.00 No 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.49 A 0.49 A 0.01 No 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.41 A 0.49 A 0.07 No 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.61 B 0.65 B 0.03 No 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.26 A 0.31 A 0.05 No 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.42 A 0.50 A 0.08 No 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.61 B 0.72 C 0.11 Yes 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 0.51 A 0.61 B 0.10 No 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.52 A 0.59 A 0.07 No 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.46 A 0.64 B 0.18 No 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.76 C 0.23 Yes 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.43 A 0.62 B 0.19 No 32 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Orange 0.32 A 0.39 A 0.07 No 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.43 A 0.43 A 0.00 No 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.40 A 0.46 A 0.06 No 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Orange 0.33 A 0.38 A 0.05 No 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.41 A 0.42 A 0.01 No 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.39 A 0.42 A 0.03 No 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.47 A 0.49 A 0.01 No 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.49 A 0.52 A 0.03 No 40 Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.38 A 0.38 A 0.00 No 41 Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.44 A 0.46 A 0.02 No 42 Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.62 B 0.65 B 0.03 No 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.00 No 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 0.78 C 0.79 C 0.01 No *CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Comparison 3: Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-3, the traffic analysis found the project results in significant impacts at five study intersections when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario is compared to the Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario. The five locations impacted by the proposed project are: · State College Boulevard/Katella Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 88 · SR-57 Southbound Ramps/Ball Road · SR-57 Southbound Ramps/Katella Avenue · SR-57 Northbound Ramps/Katella Avenue · Douglass Road/Katella Avenue Table 6-3: 2011 Baseline Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison 3) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.61 B 0.62 B 0.01 No 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.53 A 0.00 No 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.02 No 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.55 A 0.57 A 0.01 No 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.50 A 0.50 A 0.00 No 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.56 A 0.57 A 0.01 No 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.56 A 0.59 A 0.03 No 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.33 A 0.34 A 0.01 No 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.24 A 0.24 A 0.01 No 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.46 A 0.50 A 0.04 No 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.10 A 0.11 A 0.01 No 12 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.41 A 0.41 A 0.00 No 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.54 A 0.55 A 0.01 No 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.38 A 0.40 A 0.02 No 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.72 C 0.79 C 0.07 Yes 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 0.39 A 0.39 A 0.00 No 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.75 C 0.77 C 0.02 No 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.50 A 0.52 A 0.01 No 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.38 A 0.39 A 0.01 No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.32 A 0.32 A 0.00 No 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.58 A 0.59 A 0.01 No 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.55 A 0.63 B 0.07 No 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.63 B 0.69 B 0.05 No 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.28 A 0.33 A 0.05 No 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.47 A 0.54 A 0.07 No 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.62 B 0.73 C 0.10 Yes 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 0.71 C 0.84 D 0.13 Yes 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.52 A 0.59 A 0.07 No 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.60 A 0.78 C 0.18 Yes 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.89 D 1.06 F 0.16 Yes 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.49 A 0.67 B 0.19 No 32 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Orange 0.40 A 0.47 A 0.07 No 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.42 A 0.43 A 0.00 No 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.46 A 0.52 A 0.06 No 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Orange 0.36 A 0.42 A 0.05 No 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.41 A 0.42 A 0.01 No 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.44 A 0.47 A 0.03 No 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.47 A 0.49 A 0.01 No 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.52 A 0.55 A 0.03 No 40 Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.39 A 0.41 A 0.02 No 41 Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.47 A 0.49 A 0.02 No 42 Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.64 B 0.63 B -0.01 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 89 Table 6-3: 2011 Baseline Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison Continued ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.00 No 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 0.80 C 0.81 D 0.01 No *CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium 6.1.2 2013 Opening Year Conditions Comparison 1: No Events vs. Project As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-4, project related impacts were identified at two study intersections when the No Events scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2013 Opening Year conditions: · SR-57 Southbound Ramps/Ball Road · Douglass Road/Katella Avenue Table 6-4: 2013 Opening Year Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison 1) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With No Event With Project Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.65 B 0.66 B 0.01 No 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.58 A 0.58 A 0.00 No 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.60 A 0.61 B 0.02 No 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.59 A 0.61 B 0.02 No 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.00 No 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.57 A 0.57 A 0.00 No 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.48 A 0.53 A 0.05 No 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.36 A 0.37 A 0.01 No 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.25 A 0.25 A 0.00 No 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.48 A 0.50 A 0.02 No 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.07 A 0.08 A 0.01 No 12 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.44 A 0.45 A 0.01 No 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.53 A 0.53 A 0.00 No 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.28 A 0.32 A 0.04 No 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.41 A 0.59 A 0.18 No 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 0.27 A 0.32 A 0.05 No 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.24 A 0.28 A 0.04 No 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ 0.35 A 0.38 A 0.03 No 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.29 A 0.30 A 0.02 No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.28 A 0.29 A 0.01 No 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.52 A 0.54 A 0.02 No 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.36 A 0.51 A 0.15 No 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.61 B 0.69 B 0.09 No 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.21 A 0.32 A 0.11 No 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.38 A 0.52 A 0.15 No 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.50 A 0.76 C 0.26 Yes ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 90 Table 6-4: 2013 Opening Year Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison Continued ID Intersection Jurisdiction With No Event With Project Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 0.40 A 0.64 B 0.24 No 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.47 A 0.62 B 0.16 No 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.30 A 0.65 B 0.35 No 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.29 A 0.76 C 0.47 Yes 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.36 A 0.63 B 0.26 No 32 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Orange 0.26 A 0.41 A 0.15 No 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.46 A 0.47 A 0.01 No 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.35 A 0.49 A 0.14 No 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Orange 0.28 A 0.40 A 0.11 No 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.42 A 0.45 A 0.03 No 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.38 A 0.45 A 0.07 No 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.49 A 0.53 A 0.04 No 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.49 A 0.56 A 0.07 No 40 Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.41 A 0.41 A 0.00 No 41 Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.46 A 0.50 A 0.04 No 42 Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.67 B 0.71 C 0.04 No 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 0.88 D 0.88 D 0.00 No 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 0.84 D 0.86 D 0.02 No *CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Comparison 2: Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-5, project related impacts were identified at two study intersections when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2013 Opening Year conditions. · SR-57 Southbound Ramps/Ball Road · Douglass Road/Katella Avenue Table 6-5: 2013 Opening Year Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison 2) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event With Project Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.65 B 0.66 B 0.01 No 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.58 A 0.58 A 0.00 No 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.60 A 0.61 B 0.01 No 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.60 A 0.61 B 0.01 No 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.00 No 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.54 A 0.57 A 0.03 No 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.50 A 0.53 A 0.03 No 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.36 A 0.37 A 0.01 No 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.25 A 0.25 A 0.00 No 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.49 A 0.50 A 0.01 No 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.07 A 0.08 A 0.01 No 12 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.44 A 0.45 A 0.00 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 91 Table 6-5: 2013 Opening Year Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison Continued ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event With Project Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.53 A 0.53 A 0.00 No 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.30 A 0.32 A 0.02 No 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.51 A 0.59 A 0.08 No 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 0.30 A 0.32 A 0.02 No 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.26 A 0.28 A 0.02 No 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.37 A 0.38 A 0.01 No 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.30 A 0.30 A 0.01 No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.28 A 0.29 A 0.01 No 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.53 A 0.54 A 0.01 No 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.44 A 0.51 A 0.08 No 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.66 B 0.69 B 0.03 No 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.27 A 0.32 A 0.05 No 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.45 A 0.52 A 0.08 No 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.66 B 0.76 C 0.10 Yes 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 0.54 A 0.64 B 0.10 No 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.56 A 0.62 B 0.07 No 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.47 A 0.65 B 0.18 No 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.55 A 0.76 C 0.22 Yes 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.44 A 0.63 B 0.19 No 32 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Orange 0.34 A 0.41 A 0.07 No 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.47 A 0.47 A 0.00 No 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.43 A 0.49 A 0.06 No 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Orange 0.35 A 0.40 A 0.05 No 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.44 A 0.45 A 0.01 No 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.42 A 0.45 A 0.03 No 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.51 A 0.53 A 0.01 No 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.53 A 0.56 A 0.03 No 40 Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.41 A 0.41 A 0.00 No 41 Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.48 A 0.50 A 0.02 No 42 Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.67 B 0.71 C 0.04 No 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 0.88 D 0.88 D 0.00 No 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 0.85 D 0.86 D 0.01 No *CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Comparison 3: Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-6, the traffic analysis found the project results in significant impacts at six study intersections when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario is compared to the Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario under the 2013 Opening Year conditions. The six locations impacted by the proposed project are: · State College Boulevard/Katella Avenue · Sunkist Street/Ball Road · SR-57 Southbound Ramps/Ball Road ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 92 · SR-57 Southbound Ramps/Katella Avenue · SR-57 Northbound Ramps/Katella Avenue · Douglass Road/Katella Avenue Table 6-6: 2013 Opening Year Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison 3) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.67 B 0.68 B 0.01 No 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.58 A 0.58 A 0.00 No 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.60 A 0.61 B 0.02 No 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.60 A 0.61 B 0.01 No 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.00 No 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.60 A 0.61 B 0.01 No 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.60 A 0.63 B 0.03 No 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.36 A 0.37 A 0.01 No 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.25 A 0.26 A 0.01 No 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.49 A 0.53 A 0.04 No 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.10 A 0.11 A 0.01 No 12 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.44 A 0.45 A 0.00 No 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.59 A 0.60 A 0.01 No 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.40 A 0.42 A 0.02 No 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.75 C 0.82 D 0.08 Yes 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 0.41 A 0.41 A 0.00 No 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.77 C 0.79 C 0.02 No 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ 0.53 A 0.54 A 0.01 No 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.40 A 0.40 A 0.01 No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.34 A 0.34 A 0.01 No 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.63 B 0.63 B 0.01 No 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.58 A 0.66 B 0.08 No 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.67 B 0.73 C 0.06 Yes 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.29 A 0.34 A 0.05 No 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.49 A 0.56 A 0.07 No 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.67 B 0.77 C 0.10 Yes 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 0.73 C 0.86 D 0.13 Yes 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.56 A 0.62 B 0.07 No 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.61 B 0.79 C 0.18 Yes 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.90 D 1.06 F 0.16 Yes 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.49 A 0.68 B 0.19 No 32 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Orange 0.42 A 0.49 A 0.07 No 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.46 A 0.47 A 0.01 No 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.49 A 0.54 A 0.06 No 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Orange 0.39 A 0.44 A 0.05 No 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.44 A 0.45 A 0.01 No 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.47 A 0.50 A 0.03 No 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.51 A 0.53 A 0.01 No 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.56 A 0.59 A 0.03 No 40 Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.42 A 0.44 A 0.02 No 41 Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.51 A 0.53 A 0.02 No 42 Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.71 C 0.70 B -0.01 No 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 0.88 D 0.88 D 0.00 No 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 0.87 D 0.88 D 0.01 No *CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 93 6.1.3 2030 Future Year Conditions Comparison 1: No Events vs. Project As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-7, the traffic analysis has found the project results in 22 study intersections being significantly impacted when the No Events scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. Two impacted intersections are within the City of Orange, one intersection is shared between the City of Orange and City of Anaheim, and the other 19 intersections are located in the City of Anaheim. The intersections with significant impact identified are: · Anaheim Boulevard/Ball Road · Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue · Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue · Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue · Lewis Street / Ball Road · Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue · Lewis Street / Katella Avenue · State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue · State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive · State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue (City of Orange/City of Anaheim location) · Sportstown / Katella Avenue · Sunkist Street / Ball Road · Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue · Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · Douglass Road / Katella Avenue · Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road · Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue (City of Orange location) · Main Street / Katella Avenue (City of Orange location) Table 6-7: 2030 Future Year Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison 1) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With No Event With Project Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.95 E 0.95 E 0.00 No 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.90 D 0.90 D 0.00 No 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.93 E 0.94 E 0.01 Yes 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.86 D 0.87 D 0.01 No 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.90 D 0.93 E 0.02 Yes 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.71 C 0.77 C 0.06 Yes 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.78 C 0.83 D 0.05 Yes 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.90 D 0.91 E 0.01 Yes 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.91 E 0.94 E 0.03 Yes ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 94 Table 6-7: 2030 Future Year Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison Continued ID Intersection Jurisdiction With No Event With Project Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.84 D 0.90 D 0.06 Yes 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.76 C 0.77 C 0.01 No 12 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.85 D 0.86 D 0.01 No 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.94 E 0.94 E 0.00 No 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.75 C 0.76 C 0.01 No 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.85 D 0.95 E 0.10 Yes 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 0.78 C 0.82 D 0.05 Yes 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.73 C 0.73 C 0.00 No 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.90 D 0.92 E 0.02 Yes 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.74 C 0.74 C 0.00 No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.80 C 0.81 D 0.01 No 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.80 C 0.83 D 0.02 No 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.75 C 0.88 D 0.14 Yes 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.97 E 1.09 F 0.12 Yes 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.81 D 1.02 F 0.21 Yes 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.86 D 0.92 E 0.06 Yes 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 1.00 E 1.36 F 0.36 Yes 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 0.69 B 1.02 F 0.33 Yes 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.85 D 0.94 E 0.08 Yes 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.79 C 1.08 F 0.29 Yes 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.88 D 1.48 F 0.61 Yes 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 1.46 F 1.69 F 0.23 Yes 32 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Orange 0.81 D 0.99 E 0.18 Yes 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.97 E 0.98 E 0.00 No 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.85 D 0.97 E 0.12 Yes 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Orange 0.71 C 0.83 D 0.12 No 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.91 E 0.91 E 0.00 No 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.78 C 0.80 C 0.03 No 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.67 B 0.70 B 0.02 No 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.93 E 0.93 E 0.00 No 40 Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.83 D 0.83 D 0.00 No 41 Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.71 C 0.76 C 0.05 No 42 Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Orange 1.00 E 1.00 E 0.00 No 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 1.08 F 1.08 F 0.00 No 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 1.01 F 1.01 F 0.00 No *CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Comparison 2: Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-8, the traffic analysis has found the project results in 18 study intersections being significantly impacted when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. Two impacted intersections are within the City of Orange, one intersection is shared between the City of Orange and City of Anaheim, and the other 15 intersections are located in the City of Anaheim. The intersections with significant impact identified are: ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 95 · Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road · Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue · Lewis Street / Ball Road · Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue · State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue · State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue (City of Orange/City of Anaheim location) · Sportstown / Katella Avenue · Sunkist Street / Ball Road · Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue · Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · Douglass Road / Katella Avenue · Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road · Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue (City of Orange location) · Main Street / Katella Avenue (City of Orange location) Table 6-8: 2030 Future Year Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison 2) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event With Project Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.95 E 0.95 E 0.00 No 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.90 D 0.90 D 0.00 No 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.93 E 0.94 E 0.01 Yes 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.87 D 0.87 D 0.01 No 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.92 E 0.93 E 0.01 Yes 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.75 C 0.77 C 0.03 No 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.81 D 0.83 D 0.02 No 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.90 D 0.91 E 0.01 Yes 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.91 E 0.94 E 0.02 Yes 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.87 D 0.90 D 0.02 No 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.77 C 0.77 C 0.01 No 12 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.85 D 0.86 D 0.00 No 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.94 E 0.94 E 0.00 No 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.76 C 0.76 C 0.00 No 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.91 E 0.95 E 0.04 Yes 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 0.80 C 0.82 D 0.02 No 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.73 C 0.73 C 0.00 No 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.91 E 0.92 E 0.01 Yes 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.74 C 0.74 C 0.00 No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.81 D 0.81 D 0.01 No 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.82 D 0.83 D 0.01 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 96 Table 6-8: 2030 Future Year Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison Continued ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event With Project Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.83 D 0.88 D 0.06 Yes 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 1.04 F 1.09 F 0.05 Yes 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.93 E 1.02 F 0.09 Yes 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.86 D 0.92 E 0.05 Yes 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 1.22 F 1.36 F 0.15 Yes 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 0.86 D 1.02 F 0.16 Yes 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.90 D 0.94 E 0.03 Yes 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.96 E 1.08 F 0.12 Yes 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 1.23 F 1.48 F 0.25 Yes 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 1.60 F 1.69 F 0.09 Yes 32 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Orange 0.92 E 0.99 E 0.07 Yes 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.97 E 0.98 E 0.00 No 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.91 E 0.97 E 0.06 Yes 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Orange 0.78 C 0.83 D 0.05 No 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.91 E 0.91 E 0.00 No 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.78 C 0.80 C 0.03 No 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.69 B 0.70 B 0.01 No 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.93 E 0.93 E 0.00 No 40 Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.83 D 0.83 D 0.00 No 41 Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.74 C 0.76 C 0.02 No 42 Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Orange 1.00 E 1.00 E 0.00 No 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 1.08 F 1.08 F 0.00 No 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 1.01 F 1.01 F 0.00 No *CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Comparison 3: Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-9, the traffic analysis has found the project results in 21 study intersections being significantly impacted when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario is compared with the Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. Three impacted intersections are within the City of Orange, one intersection is shared between the City of Orange and City of Anaheim, and the other 17 intersections are located in the City of Anaheim. The intersections with significant impact identified are: · Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road · Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue · Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue · Lewis Street / Ball Road · Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue · Lewis Street / Katella Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 97 · State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue · State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue (City of Orange/City of Anaheim location) · State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue (City of Orange location) · Sportstown / Katella Avenue · Sunkist Street / Ball Road · Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue · Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · Douglass Road / Katella Avenue · Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road · Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue (City of Orange location) · Main Street / Katella Avenue (City of Orange location) Table 6-9: 2030 Future Year Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison 3) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.95 E 0.95 E 0.00 No 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.90 D 0.90 D 0.00 No 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.93 E 0.94 E 0.01 Yes 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.87 D 0.87 D 0.01 No 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.95 E 0.96 E 0.01 Yes 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.84 D 0.86 D 0.02 No 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.88 D 0.91 E 0.02 Yes 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.90 D 0.91 E 0.01 Yes 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.94 E 0.96 E 0.02 Yes 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.95 E 0.98 E 0.02 Yes 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.01 No 12 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.85 D 0.86 D 0.00 No 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.94 E 0.94 E 0.00 No 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.85 D 0.85 D 0.00 No 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 1.18 F 1.22 F 0.04 Yes 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 0.93 E 0.93 E 0.00 No 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 1.41 F 1.41 F 0.00 No 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 1.05 F 1.06 F 0.01 Yes 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.85 D 0.85 D 0.00 No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.86 D 0.86 D 0.01 No 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.90 D 0.91 E 0.01 Yes 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.94 E 0.99 E 0.06 Yes 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 1.08 F 1.13 F 0.05 Yes 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.94 E 1.04 F 0.09 Yes 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.89 D 0.97 E 0.07 Yes 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 1.22 F 1.36 F 0.15 Yes ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 98 Table 6-9: 2030 Future Year Project Related Intersection Impacts (Comparison Continued ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event Significant Impact ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU Increase Yes/No 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 1.21 F 1.37 F 0.16 Yes 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.90 D 0.94 E 0.03 Yes 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 1.06 F 1.18 F 0.12 Yes 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 1.50 F 1.74 F 0.25 Yes 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 1.62 F 1.71 F 0.09 Yes 32 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Orange 1.00 E 1.08 F 0.07 Yes 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.97 E 0.98 E 0.00 No 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.96 E 1.02 F 0.06 Yes 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Orange 0.81 D 0.86 D 0.05 No 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.91 E 0.91 E 0.00 No 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.83 D 0.85 D 0.03 No 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.69 B 0.70 B 0.01 No 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.93 E 0.93 E 0.00 No 40 Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.83 D 0.83 D 0.00 No 41 Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.77 C 0.79 C 0.02 No 42 Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Orange 1.00 E 1.00 E 0.00 No 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 1.08 F 1.08 F 0.00 No 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Orange 1.01 F 1.01 F 0.00 No *CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 99 6.2 ARTERIAL SEGMENTS As discussed in Chapter 2, Section 2.5, the City of Anaheim uses a two step process to evaluate arterial segment performance. An initial arterial daily ADT V/C analysis provides a general assessment of overall system performance. Where potential for deficiencies are identified through this screening, the system performance is further evaluated and measured on the ability to serve peak hour traffic demands and throughput at the adjacent intersection(s). Arterial segments that are found to operate deficiently under both daily and peak hour conditions are identified as candidates for mitigation improvements. It is noted, for purpose of this study, the City of Orange does not call for the peak hour segment analysis but rather uses daily V/C analysis as the basis for identifying mitigation improvement requirements. For City of Anaheim segments, a project is deemed to have a significant impact if the project results in deterioration of the daily level of service to LOS D or worse, and continues to show deficiency under peak hour analysis conditions. A significant impact is also deemed to occur if a project causes an increase in the daily V/C value of 0.01 or greater if the segment currently operates at LOS E or F under daily without project conditions; and the segment continues to show deficiency under peak hour analysis 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 causes an increase in the daily V/C value of 0.01 or greater if the segment currently operates at LOS E or F under daily without project conditions. 6.2.1 2011 Baseline Conditions Comparison 1: No Events vs. Project As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-10, no study arterial segments are significantly impacted by the project when the No Events scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2011 Baseline conditions. Table 6-10: 2011 Baseline City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 1) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes Daily With No Events Daily With Project Peak Hour With Project Significant Impact ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS V/C LOS Daily V/C Increase Yes/ No A - 1 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 SB Ramps 6 50,970 0.91 E 53,706 0.95 E 0.62 B 0.04 No A - 7 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps 6 52,030 0.92 E 57,930 1.03 F 0.63 B 0.11 No AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 100 Comparison 2: Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-11, no study arterial segments are significantly impacted by the project when the Average Attendance Honda Center Events scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2011 Baseline conditions. Table 6-11: 2011 Baseline City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 2) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes Daily With AAHC Events Daily With Project Peak Hour With Project Significant Impact ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS V/C LOS Daily V/C Increase Yes/ No A - 1 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 SB Ramps 6 52,630 0.93 E 53,706 0.95 E 0.62 B 0.02 No A - 7 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps 6 55,550 0.99 E 57,930 1.03 F 0.63 B 0.04 No AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 101 Comparison 3: Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-12, no study arterial segments are significantly impacted by the project when the Average Attendance Honda Center Events and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario is compared to the Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario under the 2011 Baseline conditions. Table 6-12: 2011 Baseline City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 3) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event Peak Hour With Project and AS Event Significant Impact ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS V/C LOS Daily V/C Increase Yes/ No A - 1 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 SB Ramps 6 52,630 0.93 E 53,760 0.95 E 0.62 B 0.02 No A - 7 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps 6 55,550 0.99 E 57,930 1.03 F 0.76 C 0.04 No AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 102 6.2.2 2013 Opening Conditions Comparison 1: No Events vs. Project As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-13, no study arterial segments are significantly impacted by the project when the No Events scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2013 Opening Year conditions. Table 6-13: 2013 Opening Year City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 1) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes Daily With No Events Daily With Project Peak Hour With Project Significant Impact ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS V/C LOS Daily V/C Increase Yes/ No A - 1 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 SB Ramps 6 56,070 1.00 E 58,860 1.05 F 0.67 B 0.05 No A - 7 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps 6 57,230 1.02 F 63,130 1.12 F 0.65 B 0.10 No AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Comparison 2: Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-14, no study arterial segments are significantly impacted by the project when the Average Attendance Honda Center Events scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2013 Opening Year conditions. Table 6-14: 2013 Opening Year City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 2) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes Daily With AAHC Events Daily With Project Peak Hour With Project Significant Impact ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS V/C LOS Daily V/C Increase Yes/ No A - 1 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 SB Ramps 6 57,730 1.03 F 58,860 1.05 F 0.67 B 0.02 No A - 7 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps 6 60,750 1.08 F 63,130 1.12 F 0.65 B 0.14 No AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 103 Comparison 3: Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-15, no study arterial segments are significantly impacted by the project when the Average Attendance Honda Center Events and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario is compared to the Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario under the 2013 Opening Year conditions. Table 6-15: 2013 Opening Year City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 3) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event Peak Hour With Project and AS Event Significant Impact ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS V/C LOS Daily V/C Increase Yes/ No A - 1 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 SB Ramps 6 57,730 1.03 F 58,860 1.05 F 0.67 B 0.02 No A - 7 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps 6 60,750 1.08 F 63,130 1.12 F 0.78 C 0.04 No AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium 6.2.3 2030 Future Conditions Comparison 1: No Events vs. Project As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-16, the traffic analysis has found the project results in significant impact to four study arterial segments in the City of Anaheim when the No Events scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. The impacted arterial segments are: · Ball Road – SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive · Douglass Road - Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue · Katella Avenue – SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Douglass Road · Phoenix Club Drive - Honda Center to Ball Road ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 104 Table 6-16: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 1) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes Daily With No Events Daily With Project Peak Hour With Project Significant Impact ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS V/C LOS Daily V/C Increase Yes/ No A - 1 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 SB Ramps 6 69,300 1.23 F 72,090 1.28 F 0.84 D 0.05 No A - 2 Ball Road SR-57 NB Ramps Phoenix Club Drive 6 76,240 1.35 F 79,720 1.42 F 1.06 F 0.07 Yes A - 4 Douglass Road Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue 4 28,920 0.77 C 34,100 0.91 E 1.68 F 0.14 Yes A - 6 Katella Avenue** State College Blvd Howell Avenue 6 62,760 1.11 F 64,740 1.15 F 0.84 D 0.04 No A - 7 Katella Avenue** Howell Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps 6 71,760 1.27 F 77,660 1.38 F 0.79 C 0.11 No A - 8 Katella Avenue** SR-57 SB Ramps SR-57 NB Ramps 6 67,240 1.19 F 73,020 1.30 F 0.80 C 0.11 No A - 9 Katella Avenue** SR-57 NB Ramps Douglass Road 6 63,070 1.12 F 72,290 1.28 F 1.10 F 0.06 Yes A - 10 Katella Avenue** Douglass Road Struck Avenue 6 72,170 1.28 F 77,780 1.38 F 0.89 D 0.10 No A - 14 Phoenix Club Drive Honda Center Ball Road 2 39,100 3.13 F 42,040 3.36 F 2.78 F 0.23 Yes A - 15 State College Blvd Howell Avenue Katella Avenue 6 47,580 0.85 D 48,520 0.86 D 0.81 D 0.01 No CMP arterial. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP arterial AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-17, the traffic analysis has found the project results in significant impact to all study arterial segments in the City of Orange when the No Events scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. The impacted arterial segments are: · Katella Avenue – Struck Avenue to Main Street · Katella Avenue – Main Street to Batavia Street · Main Street – Katella Avenue to Struck Avenue Table 6-17: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 1) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes With No Events With Project Significant Impact ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS V/C Increase Yes/No A - 11 Katella Avenue* Struck Avenue Main Street 6 63,840 1.13 F 66,640 1.18 F 0.05 Yes A - 12 Katella Avenue* Main Street Batavia Street 6 52,950 0.94 E 54,630 0.97 E 0.03 Yes A - 13 Main Street Katella Avenue Struck Avenue 4 34,840 0.93 E 35,920 0.96 E 0.03 Yes * Smart Street segment in Orange assumes a 5% capacity enhancement AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 105 Comparison 2: Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-18, the traffic analysis has found the project results in significant impact to the same four study arterial segments in the City of Anaheim, as shown in Comparison 1 above, when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. The impacted arterial segments are: · Ball Road – SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive · Douglass Road - Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue · Katella Avenue – SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Douglass Road · Phoenix Club Drive - Honda Center to Ball Road Table 6-18: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 2) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes Daily With AAHC Event Daily With Project Peak Hour With Project Significant Impact ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS V/C LOS Daily V/C Increase Yes/ No A - 1 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 SB Ramps 6 70,960 1.26 F 72,090 1.28 F 0.84 D 0.02 No A - 2 Ball Road SR-57 NB Ramps Phoenix Club Drive 6 78,310 1.39 F 79,720 1.42 F 1.06 F 0.04 Yes A - 4 Douglass Road Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue 4 32,000 0.85 D 34,100 0.91 E 1.68 F 0.06 Yes A - 6 Katella Avenue** State College Blvd Howell Avenue 6 63,940 1.14 F 64,740 1.15 F 0.84 D 0.01 No A - 7 Katella Avenue** Howell Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps 6 75,280 1.34 F 77,660 1.38 F 0.79 C 0.04 No A - 8 Katella Avenue** SR-57 SB Ramps SR-57 NB Ramps 6 70,690 1.26 F 73,020 1.30 F 0.80 C 0.04 No A - 9 Katella Avenue** SR-57 NB Ramps Douglass Road 6 68,570 1.22 F 72,290 1.28 F 1.10 F 0.06 Yes A - 10 Katella Avenue** Douglass Road Struck Avenue 6 75,510 1.34 F 77,780 1.38 F 0.89 D 0.04 No A - 14 Phoenix Club Drive Honda Center Ball Road 2 40,850 3.27 F 42,040 3.36 F 2.78 F 0.09 Yes A - 15 State College Blvd Howell Avenue Katella Avenue 6 48,140 0.86 D 48,520 0.86 D 0.81 D 0.00 No CMP arterial. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP arterial AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-19, the traffic analysis has found the project results in significant impact to all of the same study arterial segments in the City of Orange as shown in Comparison 1 above, when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. The impacted arterial segments are: · Katella Avenue – Struck Avenue to Main Street · Katella Avenue – Main Street to Batavia Street · Main Street – Katella Avenue to Struck Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 106 Table 6-19: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 2) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes With AAHC Event With Project Significant Impact ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS V/C Increase Yes/ No A - 11 Katella Avenue* Struck Avenue Main Street 6 63,840 1.13 F 66,640 1.18 F 0.02 Yes A - 12 Katella Avenue* Main Street Batavia Street 6 52,950 0.94 E 54,630 0.97 E 0.01 Yes A - 13 Main Street Katella Avenue Struck Avenue 4 34,840 0.93 E 35,920 0.96 E 0.01 Yes * Smart Street segment in Orange assumes a 5% capacity enhancement AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Comparison 3: Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-20, eight study segments, including the four segments shown in Comparisons 1 and 2 above, are significantly impacted when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario is compared to the Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. The study arterial segments with significant impacts are: · Ball Road – SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive · Douglass Road - Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue · Katella Avenue – State College Boulevard to Howell Avenue · Katella Avenue – Howell Avenue to SR-57 Southbound Ramps · Katella Avenue – SR-57 Southbound Ramps to SR-57 Northbound Ramps · Katella Avenue – SR-57 Northbound Ramps to Douglass Road · Katella Avenue – Douglass Road to Struck Avenue · Phoenix Club Drive - Honda Center to Ball Road Table 6-20: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 3) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes Daily With AAHC Event and AS Event Daily With Project and AS Event Peak Hour With Project and AS Event Significant Impact ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS V/C LOS Daily V/C Increase Yes/ No A - 1 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 SB Ramps 6 70,960 1.26 F 72,090 1.28 F 0.84 D 0.02 No A - 2 Ball Road SR-57 NB Ramps Phoenix Club Drive 6 78,310 1.39 F 79,720 1.42 F 1.06 F 0.03 Yes A - 4 Douglass Road Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue 4 32,000 0.85 D 34,100 0.91 E 1.69 F 0.06 Yes A - 6 Katella Avenue** State College Blvd Howell Avenue 6 66,350 1.18 F 67,150 1.19 F 0.94 E 0.01 Yes A - 7 Katella Avenue** Howell Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps 6 75,280 1.34 F 77,660 1.38 F 0.91 E 0.04 Yes ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 107 Table6-20: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison Continued ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes Daily With AAHC Event and AS Event Daily With Project and AS Event Peak Hour With Project and AS Event Significant Impact ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS V/C LOS Daily V/C Increase Yes/ No A - 8 Katella Avenue** SR-57 SB Ramps SR-57 NB Ramps 6 72,060 1.28 F 74,390 1.32 F 0.94 E 0.04 Yes A - 9 Katella Avenue** SR-57 NB Ramps Douglass Road 6 71,510 1.27 F 75,230 1.34 F 1.23 F 0.07 Yes A - 10 Katella Avenue** Douglass Road Struck Avenue 6 76,290 1.36 F 78,560 1.40 F 0.95 E 0.04 Yes A - 14 Phoenix Club Drive Honda Center Ball Road 2 40,990 3.28 F 42,180 3.37 F 2.81 F 0.09 Yes A - 15 State College Blvd Howell Avenue Katella Avenue 6 48,360 0.86 D 48,740 0.87 D 0.87 D 0.01 No CMP arterial. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP arterial AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-21, the traffic analysis has found the project results in significant impact to all of the same study arterial segments in the City of Orange as shown in Comparisons 1 and 2 above, when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario is compared to the Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. The impacted arterial segments are: · Katella Avenue – Struck Avenue to Main Street · Katella Avenue – Main Street to Batavia Street · Main Street – Katella Avenue to Struck Avenue Table 6-21: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts (Comparison 3) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event Significant Impact ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS V/C Increase Yes/ No A - 11 Katella Avenue* Struck Avenue Main Street 6 65,510 1.16 F 66,640 1.18 F 0.02 Yes A - 12 Katella Avenue* Main Street Batavia Street 6 53,950 0.96 E 54,630 0.97 E 0.01 Yes A - 13 Main Street Katella Avenue Struck Avenue 4 36,870 0.98 E 37,310 0.99 E 0.01 Yes * Smart Street segment in Orange assumes a 5% capacity enhancement AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 108 6.3 FREEWAY FACILITY 6.3.1 2011 Baseline Conditions Comparison 1: No Events vs. Project As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-22 and Table 6-23, no project related impacts were identified on the freeway facilities when the No Events scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2011 Baseline conditions. Ramp Termini Intersection Table 6-22: 2011 Baseline Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 1) ID Intersection With No Event With Project Significant Impact Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 16.80 B 18.70 B No 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 21.80 C 23.20 C No 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 6.20 A 5.00 A No 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 20.90 C 21.70 C No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 14.90 B 15.30 B No 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road 16.20 B 35.30 D No 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 13.80 B 19.50 B No 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road 17.60 B 21.90 C No 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 11.00 B 53.90 D No 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 37.70 D 40.10 D No 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 28.90 C 32.20 C No Freeway Mainline, Weaving Segment and Ramp Table 6-23: 2011 Baseline Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 1) ID Locations With No Events With Project Significant Impact Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Weaving Segment W - 2 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 24.4 C 27.2 C No W - 4 SR-57 Northbound between Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off-Ramp 22.0 B 23.9 B No W - 5 SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 22.4 B 27.0 C No W - 6 SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp 31.0 C 31.8 C No SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 26.0 C 27.7 C No W - 8 SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 22.9 B 24.1 C No Mainline Segment F - 1 I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue and Disneyland Drive 20.3 C 20.6 C No F - 2 I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way 21.4 C 21.6 C No F - 3 SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue 22.5 C 23.3 C No ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 109 Table 6-23: 2011 Baseline Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison Continued ID Locations With No Events With Project Significant Impact Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Ramp Location R-1 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* 26.9 C 26.9 C No R-2 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 27.8 C 28.0 D No R-3 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 24.5 C 30.9 D No R-4 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 31.5 D 32.6 D No R-5 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 26.9 C 31.2 D No R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 26.9 C 29.4 D No * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density Comparison 2: Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project Similar to the Comparison 1, Table 6-24 and Table 6-25 summarize the freeway facility analyses results for Comparison 2. No project related impacts were identified at any freeway facilities in the study area when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2011 Baseline conditions. Ramp Termini Intersection Table 6-24: 2011 Baseline Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 2) ID Intersection With AAHC Event With Project Significant Impact Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 16.90 B 18.70 C No 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 22.80 C 23.20 C No 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 5.40 A 5.00 A No 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 21.30 C 21.70 C No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 15.30 B 15.30 B No 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road 26.30 C 35.30 C No 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 16.90 B 19.50 C No 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road 19.00 B 21.90 C No 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 20.80 C 53.90 C No 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 38.70 D 40.10 D No 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 31.00 C 32.20 C No AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 110 Freeway Mainline, Weaving Segment and Ramp Table 6-25: 2011 Baseline Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 2) ID Locations With AAHC Event With Project Significant Impact Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Weaving Segment W - 2 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 27.1 C 27.2 C No W - 4 SR-57 Northbound between Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off-Ramp 23.0 B 23.9 B No W - 5 SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 25.5 C 27.0 C No W - 6 SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp 31.5 C 31.8 C No SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 27.1 C 27.7 C No W - 8 SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 23.7 B 24.1 C No Mainline Segment F - 1 I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue and Disneyland Drive 20.5 C 20.6 C No F - 2 I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way 21.6 C 21.6 C No F - 3 SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue 23.1 C 23.3 C No Ramp Location R-1 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* 26.9 C 26.9 C No R-2 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 28.0 C 28.0 D No R-3 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 28.9 D 30.9 D No R-4 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 32.2 D 32.6 D No R-5 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 29.9 D 31.2 D No R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 28.6 D 29.4 D No * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density Comparison 3: Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-26, the traffic analysis found the project causes one freeway ramp termini intersection deficiency at SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue when the Average Attendance Honda Center Events and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario is compared to the Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario under the 2011 Baseline conditions. The deterioration in LOS is from LOS C to LOS E. As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-27, no project related impacts were identified on any freeway weaving section or mainline segment. One freeway ramp location, SR-57 Southbound Off- Ramp to Katella Avenue, is shown to operate in a deficient condition under both the 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario and the 2011 Baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario. The ramp deficiency is considered a cumulative impact as it is a pre-existing condition. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 111 Ramp Termini Intersection Table 6-26: 2011 Baseline Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 3) ID Intersection With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event Significant Impact Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 22.60 C 23.80 C No 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 25.20 C 27.80 C No 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 4.40 A 4.30 A No 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 22.60 C 22.70 C No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 16.50 B 17.10 B No 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road 26.90 C 35.80 D No 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 30.00 C 45.40 D No 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road 20.40 C 21.90 C No 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 32.90 C 79.30 E Yes 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 39.90 D 42.00 D No 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 32.60 C 34.00 C No AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Freeway Mainline, Weaving Segment and Ramp Table 6-27: 2011 Baseline Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 3) ID Locations With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event Significant Impact Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Weaving Segment W - 2 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 29.1 C 29.2 C No W - 4 SR-57 Northbound between Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off-Ramp 23.0 B 23.9 B No W - 5 SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 26.6 C 28.2 C No W - 6 SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp 31.9 C 32.2 D No SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 34.3 D 35.1 D No W - 8 SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 27.1 C 27.5 D No Mainline Segment F - 1 I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue and Disneyland Drive 21.2 C 21.2 C No F - 2 I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way 22.7 C 22.8 C No F - 3 SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue 25.4 C 25.6 C No Ramp Location R-1 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* 26.9 C 26.9 C No R-2 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 28.8 D 28.9 D No R-3 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 30.8 D 32.7 D No R-4 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 32.2 D 32.6 D No R-5 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 32.3 D 33.6 D No R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 112 6.3.2 2013 Opening Year Conditions Comparison 1: No Events vs. Project As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-28 and Table 6-29, no project related impacts were identified on the freeway facilities when the No Events scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2013 Opening Year conditions. Ramp Termini Intersection Table 6-28: 2013 Opening Year Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 1) ID Intersection With No Event With Project Significant Impact Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 21.40 C 22.10 C No 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 23.00 C 23.60 C No 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 6.10 A 6.00 A No 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 21.70 C 21.90 C No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 15.40 B 15.40 B No 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road 17.30 B 33.20 C No 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 13.80 B 19.30 B No 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road 17.20 B 19.30 B No 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 11.50 B 37.60 D No 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 47.50 D 51.70 D No 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 41.80 D 47.40 D No AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Freeway Weaving, Mainline and Ramp Table 6-29: 2013 Opening Year Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 1) ID Locations With No Events With Project Significan t Impact Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Weaving Segment W - 2 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 26.6 C 29.7 C No W - 4 SR-57 Northbound between Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off-Ramp 22.2 B 24.0 B No W - 5 SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 24.1 C 28.4 C No W - 6 SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp 24.5 C 24.9 C No SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 26.2 C 27.8 C No W - 8 SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 23.2 C 24.3 C No Mainline Segment F - 1 I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue and Disneyland Drive 22.2 C 22.5 C No F - 2 I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way 23.5 C 23.8 C No F - 3 SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue 24.0 C 24.8 C No ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 113 Table 6-29: 2013 Opening Year Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison Continued ID Locations With No Events With Project Significan t Impact Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Ramp Location R-1 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* 28.1 D 28.1 D No R-2 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 29.0 D 29.2 D No R-3 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 24.7 C 30.5 D No R-4 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 31.7 D 32.7 D No R-5 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 27.1 C 31.0 D No R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 27.1 C 29.4 D No * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density Comparison 2: Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project Similar to the Comparison 1 above, Table 6-30 and Table 6-31 summarize the freeway facility analyses results for Comparison 2. No project related impacts were identified at any freeway facilities in the study area when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2013 Opening Year conditions. Ramp Termini Intersection Table 6-30: 2013 Opening Year Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 2) ID Intersection With AAHC Event With Project Significant Impact Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 21.50 C 22.10 C No 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 23.30 C 23.60 C No 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 6.00 A 6.00 A No 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 21.80 C 21.90 C No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 15.40 B 15.40 B No 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road 29.00 C 33.20 C No 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 16.60 B 19.30 B No 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road 18.30 B 19.30 B No 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 19.70 C 37.60 D No 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 48.20 D 51.70 D No 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 45.20 D 47.40 D No AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 114 Freeway Mainline, Weaving Segment and Ramp Table 6-31: 2013 Opening Year Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 2) ID Locations With AAHC Event With Project Significant Impact Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Weaving Segment W - 2 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 29.6 C 29.7 C No W - 4 SR-57 Northbound between Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off-Ramp 23.4 B 24.0 B No W - 5 SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 27.1 C 28.4 C No W - 6 SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp 24.8 C 24.9 C No SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 27.3 C 27.8 C No W - 8 SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 24.0 C 24.3 C No Mainline Segment F - 1 I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue and Disneyland Drive 22.4 C 22.5 C No F - 2 I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way 23.7 C 23.8 C No F - 3 SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue 24.6 C 24.8 C No Ramp Location R-1 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* 28.1 D 28.1 D No R-2 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 29.2 D 29.2 D No R-3 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 28.8 D 30.5 D No R-4 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 32.4 D 32.7 D No R-5 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 29.8 D 31.0 D No R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 28.7 D 29.4 D No * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density Comparison 3: Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Ramp Termini Intersection As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-32, and similar to Comparison 3 in the 2011 Baseline condition, the traffic analysis found the project causes one freeway ramp termini intersection deficiency at SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue when the Average Attendance Honda Center Events and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario is compared to the Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario under the 2013 Opening Year condition. The deterioration in LOS is from LOS C to LOS E. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 115 Table 6-32: 2013 Opening Year Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 3) ID Intersection With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event Significant Impact Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 25.50 C 26.10 C No 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 25.40 C 27.60 C No 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 5.70 A 6.00 A No 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 22.00 C 22.40 C No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 15.40 B 15.40 B No 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road 29.00 C 33.40 C No 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 27.50 C 40.60 D No 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road 18.30 B 19.30 B No 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 29.00 C 58.70 E Yes 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 49.20 D 54.50 D No 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 48.20 D 52.60 D No AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Freeway Mainline, Weaving Segment and Ramp As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-33 and similar to the Comparison 3 under 2011 Baseline conditions, no project related impacts were identified on any freeway weaving section or mainline segment. One freeway ramp location, SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue, is shown to operate in a deficient condition under both the 2013 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario, and the 2013 Baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario. The ramp deficiency is considered a cumulative impact as it is a pre-existing condition. Table 6-33: 2013 Opening Year Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 3) ID Locations With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event Significant Impact Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Weaving Segment W - 2 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 31.4 C 31.5 C No W - 4 SR-57 Northbound between Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off-Ramp 23.4 B 24.0 B No W - 5 SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 28.1 C 29.6 C No W - 6 SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp 25.0 C 25.2 C No SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 33.8 D 34.5 D No W - 8 SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 27.1 C 27.4 C No ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 116 Table 6-33: 2013 Opening Year Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison Continued ID Locations With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event Significant Impact Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Mainline Segment F - 1 I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue and Disneyland Drive 23.1 C 23.2 C No F - 2 I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way 24.8 C 24.9 C No F - 3 SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue 26.8 D 27.0 D No Ramp Location R-1 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* 28.1 D 28.1 D No R-2 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 29.9 D 30.0 D No R-3 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 30.4 D 32.2 D No R-4 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 32.4 D 32.7 D No R-5 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 32.0 D 33.2 D No R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density 6.3.3 2030 Future Year Conditions Due to the regional growth under 2030 Future Year conditions, there are two ramp terminus, four freeway weaving sections, and three freeway ramps forecast to operate at deficient conditions under the 2030 Future Year (No Events) scenario. Comparison 1: No Events vs. Project Ramp Termini Intersection As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-34, the traffic impact analysis shows the project results in five deficient study ramp termini intersections when the No Events scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. The impacted locations are: · Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) Among the above deficiencies, the deficiencies at Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue and SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue are identified as cumulative impacts as they are already deficient under the 2030 Future Year No Event scenario. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 117 Table 6-34: 2030 Future Year Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 1) ID Intersection With No Event With Project Significant Impact Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 49.00 D 54.70 D No 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 69.10 E 70.70 E Cumulative 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 27.20 C 28.90 C No 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 37.50 D 37.90 D No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 40.10 D 44.40 D No 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road 52.80 D 148.60 F Yes 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 14.90 B 51.50 D No 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road 33.20 C 56.50 E Yes 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 16.10 B 76.90 E Yes 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 105.70 F 110.00 F Cumulative 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 38.30 D 50.00 D No Freeway Weaving, Mainline and Ramp As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-35, the traffic impact analysis shows the project results in five deficient freeway weaving sections and five ramp locations when the No Events scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year condition. The impacted weaving sections are: · I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off- Ramp · SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp (Cumulative Impact) The SR-57 Northbound segment between the Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp carries the majority of the event trips coming from the South, and is forecast to become deficient as a direct project impact. The remaining four deficiencies above are identified as cumulative impacts. The impacted ramp locations are: · I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue · SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road · SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 118 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue, the SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road, and the SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue are shown to be deficient already under the 2030 Future Year No Event scenario and would continue to operate deficiently under the with Project scenario, therefore, are identified as cumulative impacts. Table 6-35: 2030 Future Year Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 1) ID Locations With No Events With Project Significant Impact Densit y ( / i LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Weaving Segment W - 2 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 38.7 E 39.2 E Cumulative W - 4 SR-57 Northbound between Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off-Ramp 30.6 C 32.5 D No W - 5 SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 35.2 D >Capacity F Yes W - 6 SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative W - 8 SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 36.8 E 38.0 E Cumulative Mainline Segment F - 1 I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue and Disneyland Drive 29.4 D 29.7 D No F - 2 I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way 31.0 D 31.2 D No F - 3 SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue 27.8 D 28.6 D No Ramp Location R-1 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative R-2 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 30.1 D 30.2 D No R-3 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 34.1 D 39.9 E Yes R-4 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative R-5 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 34.1 D >Capacity F Yes R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 119 Comparison 2: Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project Ramp Termini Intersection As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-36, and similar to Comparison 1 in the 2030 Future Year condition, the traffic impact analysis shows the project results in five deficient study ramp termini intersections when the when the Average Attendance Honda Center Events scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. The impacted locations are: · Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue · SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) Among the above deficiencies, the deficiencies at Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue, SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road, and SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue are identified as cumulative impacts as they are already deficient under the 2030 Future Year Average Attendance Honda Center Events scenario. Table 6-36: 2030 Future Year Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 2) ID Intersection With AAHC Event With Project Significant Impact Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 50.20 D 54.70 D No 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 70.00 E 70.70 E Cumulative 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 28.80 C 28.90 C No 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 37.60 D 37.90 D No 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 42.20 D 44.40 D No 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road 106.00 F 148.60 F Cumulative 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 27.80 C 51.50 D No 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road 45.10 D 56.50 E Yes 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 51.50 D 76.90 E Yes 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 108.60 F 110.00 F Cumulative 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 42.60 D 50.00 D No AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Freeway Weaving, Mainline and Ramp As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-37, the traffic impact analysis shows the project results in five deficient freeway weaving sections and five ramp locations when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year condition. The impacted weaving sections are: · I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off- Ramp (Cumulative Impact) ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 120 · SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp (Cumulative Impact) The impacted ramp locations are: · I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) It is noted that all identified deficient weaving sections and ramp locations in this comparison are consistent with those shown for Comparison 1 in the 2030 Future Year condition. It is further noted that each weaving section and ramp location identified are shown to be deficient already under the 2030 Future Year Attendance Honda Center Event scenario and would continue to operate deficiently under the with Project scenario, therefore, all are identified as cumulative impact locations. Table 6-37: 2030 Future Year Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 2) ID Locations With AAHC Event With Project Significant Impact Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Weaving Segment W - 2 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 39.1 E 39.2 E Cumulative W - 4 SR-57 Northbound between Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off-Ramp 31.9 C 32.5 D No W - 5 SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 38.8 E >Capacity F Cumulative W - 6 SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative W - 8 SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 37.7 E 38.0 E Cumulative Mainline Segment F - 1 I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue and Disneyland Drive 29.6 D 29.7 D No F - 2 I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way 31.2 D 31.2 D No F - 3 SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue 28.4 D 28.6 D No Ramp Location R-1 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative R-2 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 30.2 D 30.2 D No R-3 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 38.1 E 39.9 E Cumulative R-4 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative R-5 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 36.8 E >Capacity F Cumulative R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 121 Comparison 3: Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Ramp Termini Intersection As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-38, the traffic impact analysis shows the project results in seven deficient study ramp termini intersections when the Average Attendance Honda Center Events and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario is compared to the Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. Five of the seven locations are consistent with both Comparisons 1 and 2 under 2030 Future Year Conditions. The impacted locations are: · Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) · Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) · State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) · SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) Among the above deficiencies, all except SR-57 Northbound Ramps /Ball Road are identified as cumulative impacts as they are each already deficient under the 2030 Future Year Average Attendance Honda Center Events and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario and would continue to be deficient under the 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario. Table 6-38: 2030 Future Year Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Project Related Impacts (Comparison 3) ID Intersection With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event Significant Impact Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 75.30 E 100.90 F Cumulative 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 79.80 E 84.60 F Cumulative 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 32.00 C 33.00 C No 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 61.80 E 62.50 E Cumulative 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 47.60 D 48.20 D No 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road 125.10 F 149.20 F Cumulative 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 94.90 F 150.50 F Cumulative 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road 46.00 D 57.00 E Yes 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 76.70 E 110.00 E Cumulative 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 113.30 F 114.50 F Cumulative 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 44.60 D 50.30 D No AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 122 Freeway Weaving, Mainline and Ramp As indicated by the results shown in Table 6-39, the traffic impact analysis shows the project results in five deficient freeway weaving sections and five ramp locations when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario is compared to the with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario under the 2030 Future Year condition. The impacted weaving sections are: · I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off- Ramp (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp (Cumulative Impact) The impacted ramp locations are: · I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road (Cumulative Impact) · SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue (Cumulative Impact) It is noted that all identified deficient weaving sections and ramp locations in this comparison are consistent with those shown for Comparisons 1 and 2 in the 2030 Future Year condition. It is further noted that each weaving section and ramp location identified is shown to be deficient already under the 2030 Future Year Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario and would continue to operate deficiently under 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario, therefore, all are identified as cumulative impact locations. Table 6-39: 2030 Future Year Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison 3) ID Locations With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event Significant Impact Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Weaving Segment W - 2 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative W - 4 SR-57 Northbound between Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and Orangewood Avenue Off-Ramp 31.9 C 32.5 D No W - 5 SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 123 Table 6-39: 2030 Future Year Conditions Freeway Facility Impacts (Comparison Continued ID Locations With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event Significant Impact Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS W - 6 SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative W - 8 SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative Mainline Segment F - 1 I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue and Disneyland Drive 30.3 D 30.4 D No F - 2 I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way 32.3 D 32.4 D No F - 3 SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue 30.6 D 30.9 D No Ramp Location R-1 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative R-2 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 31.0 D 31.0 D No R-3 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 39.8 E >Capacity F Cumulative R-4 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative R-5 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 39.0 E >Capacity F Cumulative R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue >Capacity F >Capacity F Cumulative * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 124 7.0 PROPOSED MITIGATION AND IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES The results of the traffic analysis indicate the proposed project would create some level of significant impact to the surrounding roadway system under each horizon year 2011 Baseline, 2013 Opening Year, and 2030 Future Year conditions. The more pronounced impacts by number of locations are identified in the 2030 Future Year scenarios. The following discussion is a presentation of recommended mitigation. The discussion includes details on mitigation methodology as well as detail on qualitative considerations taken. The principal objective of each recommended measure is to reduce each identified significant project impact to a less than significant level. Or, at a minimum for those locations that would already be or become deficient without the proposed project, improve the level of service at those impacted locations equivalent to the without project condition. Consistent with the impact analysis methodology presented in Chapter 6, the recommended mitigation are identified for the following three comparisons: 1) No Events vs. Project 2) Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project 3) Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event It is noted that two distinct mitigation strategies have been considered. One strategy includes implementation of physical capacity improvements (e.g. additional lanes, modified lane configurations). The second strategy includes operational improvements designed to improve traffic flow (e.g. ITS improvements, signal phasing, CCTV, adaptive traffic management systems, upgraded controllers and cabinets, changeable message signs, interconnect infrastructure upgrades). The second strategy generally applies to the intersections that, with the project, would operate at LOS C or D (or LOS E at CMP intersections) which typically would not be a capacity deficiency except under City criteria the project contribution is viewed a significant impact. These types of operational improvements do not increase capacity, but they can decrease the overall delay added at an intersection. Each strategy is consistent with industry practices as well as strategies previously accepted and employed in the project study area. Capacity improvements have been generally considered for locations where project related impacts are expected to deteriorate the volume to capacity ratio (i.e.V/C or LOS) of the facility to an unacceptable condition. Operational improvements have been considered for project impacts in which the volume to capacity ratio of the facility is reduced beyond City of Anaheim traffic impact analysis guideline tolerances but the facility is not deteriorated below the acceptable level of service standard. As the proposed project involves a “special generator” land use, operational improvements may also be considered most appropriate by the City if the identified traffic system impacts would be short in duration and/or outside of high peak traffic conditions. In addition, mitigation selected for this project should take into consideration the highly conservative project description assumptions (e.g. all new events at sold out conditions) taken in this study, which may result in an overestimation of realized project impacts. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 125 Intersection Mitigations Recommended intersection capacity improvements are generally based on a careful assessment of the calculated ICU, the projected volume of each critical movement (i.e. turns or through) by direction, and the available capacity of the facility for each movement and conflicting movements. Stated differently, a “critical movement” assessment is performed, where the critical movements are those conflicting movements with the combined highest V/C compared to the other set of opposing movements through the intersection. Since the sum of the V/C values of each critical movement defines the total ICU of an intersection, there could be more than one, or more than one combination, of improvement options that will mitigate an intersection impact. Selecting the additional through lane(s) and/or turning lanes as the appropriate mitigation is dependent upon whether the most impacted critical movement is a through or turning movement. In considering specific intersection improvement, the decision on where the additional lane capacities and should be confined to, such as the intersection itself or to be extended along the feeding or distributing arterial(s) is an important step. An arterial auxiliary lane, which adds capacity to an intersection and the relatively short approach segment of feeding arterial into the intersection may drop at the intersection as a turn lane or as a combined through/right-turn lane. Each option provides a distinct and measurable ICU benefit. These options may be compared to adding an additional through lane that involves a full widening of the street and which extends from and upstream intersections. Each improvement strategy should include consideration of the performance, proximity, and improvement needs of adjacent intersections. Mitigation Feasibility Consistent with the City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies date 1996, mitigation measures recommended have been evaluated for implementation feasibility. Some key preliminary feasibility assessments consider consistency with established City standards, the availability of right-of-way, and potential impact to adjacent structures/utilities/adjacent land uses/other significant features. The feasibility assessment in part can involve a cost-effectiveness criterion; however, that level of assessment was not performed due to the lack to preliminary sketch plans, material quantities or unit cost details. For public works capital improvement projects, the need to acquire right-of-way from adjacent private or public properties to perform the improvement is a significant factor and is typically not preferred as this can cause significant delay in project implementation, can result in significant unexpected relocation and compensation cost for displaced residents and businesses, and may result in negative political and/or community feedback due to the acquisition process performed (e.g. eminent domain, condemnation). To the extent possible consideration should be given to accomplishing capacity improvements within existing right-of-way through reconfiguration and/or re-striping. CEQA and Nexus It is noted that the mitigation measures identified and recommended are assumed to be in compliance with nexus and reasonableness requirements of CEQA. In particular, the mitigation recommended for currently deficient or projected deficient locations might not be sufficient to bring those locations to acceptable LOS but are intended to prevent further deterioration of the impact location. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 126 7.1 INTERSECTIONS 7.1.1 2011 Baseline Conditions Comparison 1: No Events vs. Project The Comparison 1 under 2011 Baseline conditions indicates that two intersections located in the City of Anaheim will be significantly impacted by the project when the No Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario. Table 7-1 provides details on the impacted intersection locations, ICU and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. Appendix G- 4 includes detailed mitigation ICU worksheets. Table 7-1: 2011 Baseline Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 1) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With No Event With Project With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.46 A 0.72 C N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.27 A 0.76 C N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Operational Improvements consist of ITS improvements, signal phasing, CCTV, adaptive traffic management systems, upgraded controllers and cabinets, changeable message signs. Comparison 2: Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project Table 7-2 provides details on the impacted intersection locations, ICU and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation under the Comparison 2. As shown in Table 7-2, two intersections identified as project related impact under the Comparison 1 are also significantly impacted by the project when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario. Appendix G-4 includes detailed mitigation ICU worksheets. Table 7-2: 2011 Baseline Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 2) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event With Project With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.61 B 0.72 C N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.76 C N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Operational Improvements consist of ITS improvements, signal phasing, CCTV, adaptive traffic management systems, upgraded controllers and cabinets, changeable message signs. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 127 Comparison 3: Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event The traffic analysis results show that under Comparison 3, Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event, the project would significantly impact five study intersections. Each impacted location is within the City of Anaheim. Table 7-3 provides details on the impacted intersection locations, ICU and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. Appendix G-4 includes detailed mitigation ICU worksheets. Table 7-3: 2011 Baseline Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 3) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event With Project and AS Event (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.72 C 0.79 C N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.62 B 0.73 C N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.71 C 0.84 D N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.60 A 0.78 C N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.89 D 1.06 F 0.78 C Add 1 EBR Infeasible *CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Operational Improvements consist of ITS improvements, signal phasing, CCTV, adaptive traffic management systems, upgraded controllers and cabinets, changeable message signs. A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation, the proposed improvements at Douglass Road and Katella Avenue is deemed not feasible. It is further noted that this improvement is fully funded under the Platinum Triangle Implementation Plan; however, construction of this improvement is not expected to occur before 2013. It is considered economically, socially, and technologically infeasible to require the project applicant to implement the mitigation measures in advance of the planned improvements. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 128 7.1.2 2013 Opening Year Conditions Comparison 1: No Events vs. Project Table 7-4 provides details on the impacted intersection locations, ICU and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation under 2013 Opening Year Comparison 1. Two intersections identified as project related impact under 2011 Baseline Comparison 1 conditions will be continually significantly impacted by the project when the 2013 Opening Year Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the 2013 Opening Year Project scenario. Appendix G-4 includes detailed mitigation ICU worksheets. Table 7-4: 2013 Opening Year Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 1) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With No Event With Project With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.50 A 0.76 C N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.29 A 0.76 C N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Operational Improvements consist of ITS improvements, signal phasing, CCTV, adaptive traffic management systems, upgraded controllers and cabinets, changeable message signs. Comparison 2: Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project As indicated in Table 7-5, the same project related impact locations under the 2013 Opening Year Comparison 1 are also significantly impacted by the project when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario. Appendix G-4 includes detailed mitigation ICU worksheets. Table 7-5: 2013 Opening Year Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 2) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event With Project With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.66 B 0.76 C N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.55 A 0.76 C N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Operational Improvements consist of ITS improvements, signal phasing, CCTV, adaptive traffic management systems, upgraded controllers and cabinets, changeable message signs. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 129 Comparison 3: Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event The traffic analysis results show that under Comparison 3, Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event, the project would significantly impact six study intersections. Each impacted location is within the City of Anaheim. Table 7-6 provides details on the impacted intersection locations, ICU and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. Appendix G-5 includes detailed mitigation ICU worksheets. Table 7-6: 2013 Opening Year Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 3) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event With Project and AS Event (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.75 C 0.82 D N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.67 B 0.73 C N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 0.67 B 0.77 C N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 27 SR-57 SB Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.73 C 0.86 D N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue * Anaheim 0.61 B 0.79 C N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.90 D 1.06 F 0.79 C Add 1 EBR Infeasible *CMP intersections. LOS E is considered acceptable for CMP intersections AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Operational Improvements consist of ITS improvements, signal phasing, CCTV, adaptive traffic management systems, upgraded controllers and cabinets, changeable message signs. A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation, the proposed improvements at the intersection of Douglass Road and Katella Avenue is deemed not feasible. It is further noted that this improvement is fully funded under the Platinum Triangle Implementation Plan; however, construction of this improvement is not expected to occur before 2013. It is considered economically, socially, and technologically infeasible to require the project applicant to implement the mitigation measures in advance of the planned improvements. 7.1.3 2030 Future Year Conditions Comparison 1: No Events vs. Project City of Anaheim The traffic analysis results indicate that 20 study intersections in the City of Anaheim would be significantly impacted by the project when the No Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future conditions. Table 7-7 provides details on the impacted intersection location, ICU and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. Detailed mitigation ICU worksheets are included in Appendix G-6. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 130 Table 7-7: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 1) ID Intersection Jurisdiction No Events With Project With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.93 E 0.94 E 0.86 D Add 1 WBT Infeasible 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.90 D 0.93 E 0.87 D Add 1 NBT Infeasible 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 0.71 C 0.77 C N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 0.78 C 0.83 D N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.90 D 0.91 E 0.83 D Add 1 EBR Infeasible 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.91 E 0.94 E 0.87 D Add 1 EBR, 1 EBL Infeasible 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.84 D 0.90 D N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.85 D 0.95 E 0.87 D Restripe EBL to EBT, Add 1 SBT Infeasible 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 0.78 C 0.82 D N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.90 D 0.92 E 0.87 D Restripe NBR to NBT Infeasible 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.75 C 0.88 D N/A N/A Operational Improvement Feasible 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.97 E 1.09 F 0.90 D Add 1NBT, 1EBT Infeasible 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.81 D 1.02 F 0.81 D Add 1 NBR, 1WBR Infeasible 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.86 D 0.92 E 0.88 D Add 1 EBT Infeasible `26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road / Anaheim 1.00 E 1.36 F 0.86 D Add 1 SBL,1 WBT Infeasible 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 0.69 B 1.02 F 0.72 C Add 1 SBL, 1 EBT, 1 WBT Infeasible 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.85 D 0.94 E 0.82 D Restripe NBLR to NBR, Add 1NBL, 1WBT Infeasible 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 0.79 C 1.08 F 0.78 C Add 1 NBR, 1 WBT Infeasible 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.88 D 1.48 F 0.90 D Add 1 NBL, 2 NBT, 1NBR, 2 SBT, 1 EBL, 1 WBT, 1WBR Infeasible 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 1.46 F 1.69 F 1.43 F Add 1 EBR Infeasible *CMP intersection. LOS E is considered acceptable AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Operational Improvements consist of ITS improvements, signal phasing, CCTV, adaptive traffic management systems, upgraded controllers and cabinets, changeable message signs. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 131 A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation many improvements identified may not be feasible due to right-of-way acquisition needs, impacts to established land uses, and environmental constraints. The following city of Anaheim intersection improvements are likely not feasible due to right-of-way or other constraints: · Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road – Add 1 WBT The improvement at this intersection appears to be infeasible due to right-of-way constraints. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the business on the north of Ball Road. · Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue – Add 1 NBT The improvement at this intersection appears to be infeasible due to right-of-way constraints. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the business on the north of Katella Avenue, and would require the demolition of an existing commercial building. · Lewis Street / Ball Road – Add 1 EBR The improvement at this intersection appears to be infeasible due to right-of-way constraints of an adjacent industrial parcel, and would involve significant utility relocation. · Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue - Add 1 EBR, 1 EBL The improvement at this intersection appears infeasible due to right-of-way constraints. The right-of-way required for capacity improvement could significantly impact the Southern California Edison sub-station on the south side of Cerritos Avenue. · State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue - Restripe EBL to EBT, Add 1 SBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the probable impact to a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for adding SBT lane would significantly impact a recently developed residential mixed-use development on the northwest corner and a gas station on the southwest corner. · State College Boulevard / Orangethorpe Avenue - Restripe NBR to NBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the probable impact of entitled land uses on the northeast corner of the intersection. The potential right-of-way required for adding the NBT lane may go through the footprint of entitled high rise residential towers. · Sunkist Street / Ball Road - Add 1 NBT, 1 EBT The improvement at this intersection appears infeasible due to the probable impact to a number of existing businesses and residences. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 132 · Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue - Add 1 NBR, 1 WBR The improvement at this intersection is likely infeasible due to proximity presence of the adjacent railroad. Adding WBR lane would likely require difficult right-of-way acquisition from the railroad, and may be infeasible based on presently unknown track clearance restriction. This mitigation measure will be feasible if the existing railroad right-of-way is abandoned by Union Pacific Railroad. · Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue – Add EBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the right of way necessary to provide the sufficient lane width and sidewalk width. Significant earthwork is required, which would likely result in impact and removal of parking and the probable impact including demolition of a multistory office tower. · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road - Add 1 SBL,1 WBT The improvement at this intersection is likely infeasible and non-cost effective due to high cost of widening the SR 57/Ball Road crossing bridge span to accommodate the additional WBT lane. · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue - Add 1 SBL, 1 EBT, 1 WBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible as the required right-of-way will significantly impact the existing business located along two sites of Katella Avenue. The improvement also requires the SR-57/Katella bridge span widened to accommodate the additional WBT and EBT receiving lane. · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road - Restripe NBLR to NBR, Add 1 NBL, 1 WBT The improvement at this intersection is likely infeasible and non-cost effective due to high cost of widening the SR 57/Ball Road crossing bridge span to accommodate the additional WBT lane. · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue - Add 1 NBR, 1 WBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible as the potential right-of-way required for adding additional WBT lane would significantly impact parking at Honda Center. The improvement also required the SR-57/Katella Avenue bridge span widened to accommodate the additional WBT receiving lane. · Douglass Road / Katella Avenue - Add 1 NBL, 2 NBT, 1NBR, 2 SBT, 1 EBL, 1 WBT, 1 WBR The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvements would significantly impact the businesses and hotel on the south of Katella Avenue and parking at Honda Center on the north of Katella Avenue. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 133 · Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road – Add 1 EBR These improvements are currently infeasible as as they would necessitate right of way acquisition of property currently designated as Open Space in the City’s General Plan. City of Orange Based on the traffic analysis results, there are two study intersections in the City of Orange significantly impacted by the project when the No Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. Table 7-8 provides details on the impacted intersection locations, ICU and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. Detailed mitigation ICU worksheets are included in Appendix G-6. Table 7-8: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 1) ID Intersection Jurisdiction No Events With Project With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue Orange 0.81 D 0.99 E 0.81 D Add 1 WBT Infeasible 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.85 D 0.97 E 0.87 D Restripe WBR to WBT, Add 1SBT Infeasible AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. The following city of Orange intersection improvements are likely not feasible due to right-of-way or other constraints: · Katella Avenue/Struck Avenue – Add 1 WBT The proposed improvement is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the businesses on the north of Katella Avenue. In addition, WBT receiving lane will require the bridge crossing Santa Ana River to be widened, which introduces potential significant environmental considerations, cost implications and implementation process. · Main Street / Katella Avenue – Restripe WBR to WBT, Add 1 SBT Significant right of way is required at the regional shopping center on the northwest corner of this intersection, resulting in a possible loss of parking and demolition of up to two retail buildings. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 134 Comparison 2: Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project City of Anaheim Based on the traffic analysis results, there are 16 study intersections in the City of Anaheim significantly impacted by the project when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future conditions. Table 7-9 provides details on the impacted intersection locations, ICU and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. Detailed mitigation ICU worksheets are included in Appendix G-6. Table 7-9: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 2) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event With Project With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.93 E 0.94 E 0.86 D Add 1 WBT** Infeasible 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.92 E 0.93 E 0.87 D Add 1 NBT** Infeasible 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.90 D 0.91 E 0.84 D Add 1 EBR** Infeasible 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.91 E 0.94 E 0.92 D Add 1 EBR Infeasible 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.91 E 0.95 E 0.89 D Add 1 SBT Infeasible 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.91 E 0.92 E 0.87 D Restripe NBR to NBT** Infeasible 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.83 D 0.88 D N/A N/A Operational Improvement** Feasible 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 1.04 F 1.09 F 1.00 D Add 1EBT Infeasible 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.93 E 1.02 F 0.89 D Add 1 WBR Infeasible 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.86 D 0.92 E 0.88 D Add 1 EBT** Infeasible 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 1.22 F 1.36 F 1.01 D Add 1 SBL Infeasible 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 0.86 D 1.02 F 0.87 C Add 1 SBL Infeasible 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.90 D 0.94 E 0.88 D Restripe NBLR to NBR, Add 1NBL Feasible 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 0.96 E 1.08 F 0.86 C Add 1 WBT Infeasible 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 1.23 F 1.48 F 1.12 D Add I EBL, 1 WBR Infeasible 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 1.60 F 1.69 F 1.43 F Add 1 EBR** Infeasible *CMP intersection. LOS E is considered acceptable Same improvement as provided in Comparison 1 AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation many improvements identified may not be feasible due to right-of-way acquisition needs, impacts to established land uses, and environmental constraints. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 135 The following city of Anaheim intersection improvements are likely not feasible due to right-of-way or other constraints: · Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road – Add 1 WBT (Same improvement as provided in the Comparison 1) The improvement at this intersection appears to be infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the business on the north of Ball Road. · Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue – Add 1 NBT The improvement at this intersection appears to be infeasible due to right-of-way constraints. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the business on the north of Katella Avenue, and would require the demolition of an existing commercial building. · Lewis Street / Ball Road – Add 1 EBR The improvement at this intersection appears to be infeasible due to right-of-way constraints of an adjacent industrial parcel, and would likely involve significant utility relocation. · Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue - Add 1 EBR The improvement at this intersection appears infeasible due to right-of-way constraints. The right-of-way required could significantly impact the Southern California Edison sub-station on the south side of Cerritos Avenue. · State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue - Add 1 SBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for adding SBT lane would significantly impact a recently developed residential mixed-use development on the northwest corner and a gas station on the southwest corner. · State College Boulevard / Orangethorpe Avenue - Restripe NBR to NBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the probable impact of entitled land uses on the northeast corner of the intersection. The potential right-of-way required for adding the NBT lane may go through the footprint of entitled high rise residential towers. · Sunkist Street / Ball Road - Add 1 EBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses and apartment complex within close proximity to the public right-of-way. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 136 · Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue - Add 1 WBR The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the presence of the railroad within close proximity to the public right-of-way. Adding WBR lane will require right-of-way acquisition from the railroad and potentially violate the railroad track clearance restriction. This mitigation measure will be feasible if the existing railroad right-of-way is abandoned by Union Pacific Railroad. · Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue – Add EBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the right of way necessary to provide the sufficient lane width and sidewalk width. Significant earthwork is required, which would likely result impact and removal of parking and probable impact including demolition of a multistory office tower. · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road - Add 1 SBL The improvement at this intersection is likely infeasible due to the extensive undesirable grading and earthwork required to add the lane, including the reconstruction of the adjacent southbound loop on-ramp. · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue - Add 1 SBL The improvement at this intersection is likely infeasible due to the extensive undesirable grading and earthwork required to add the lane, including the reconstruction of the adjacent southbound loop on-ramp. · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue - Add 1 WBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible as the potential right-of-way required for adding additional WBT lane would significantly impact parking at Honda Center. The improvement also required the SR-57/Katella Avenue bridge span widened to accommodate the additional WBT receiving lane. · Douglass Road / Katella Avenue - Add 1 EBL, 1 WBR The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvements would significantly impact the businesses and hotel on the south of Katella Avenue and parking at Honda Center on the north of Katella Avenue. · Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road – Add 1 EBR These improvements are currently infeasible and undesirable given the need for right of way acquisition of property currently designated as Open Space in the City’s General Plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 137 City of Orange Based on the traffic analysis results, there are two study intersections in the City of Orange significantly impacted by the project when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future conditions. Table 7-10 provides details on the impacted intersection locations, ICU and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. Detailed mitigation ICU worksheets are included in Appendix G-6. Table 7-10: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 2) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event With Project With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue Orange 0.92 E 0.99 E 0.81 D Add 1 WBT** Infeasible 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.91 E 0.97 E 0.91 E Restripe WBR to WBT Infeasible AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. The following city of Orange intersection improvements are likely not feasible due to right-of-way or other constraints: · Katella Avenue/Struck Avenue – Add 1 WBT The proposed improvement is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the businesses on the north of Katella Avenue. In addition, WBT receiving lane will require the bridge crossing Santa Ana River to be widened, which introduces potential significant environmental considerations, cost implications and implementation process. · Main Street / Katella Avenue – Restripe WBR to WBT Significant right of way is required at the regional shopping center on the northwest corner of this intersection, resulting in a possible loss of parking and demolition of up to two retail buildings. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 138 Comparison 3: Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event City of Anaheim Based on the traffic analysis results, there are 18 study intersections in the City of Anaheim significantly impacted by the project when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario is compared to the Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario under the 2030 Future conditions. Table 7-11 provides details on the impacted intersection locations, ICU and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. Detailed mitigation ICU worksheets are included in Appendix G-6. Table 7-11: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 3) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event With Project and AS Event (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.93 E 0.94 E 0.86 D Add 1 WBT** Infeasible 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.95 E 0.96 E 0.88 D Add 1 NBT** Infeasible 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 0.88 D 0.91 E N/A N/A Operational Improvement** Feasible 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.90 D 0.91 E 0.84 D Add 1 EBR** Infeasible 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.94 E 0.96 E 0.92 E Add 1 EBR** Infeasible 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.95 E 0.98 E 0.88 D Add 1 EBT Infeasible 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 1.18 F 1.22 F 1.12 F Add 1 SBT** Infeasible 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 1.05 F 1.06 F 0.99 E Restripe NBR to NBT** Infeasible 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.94 E 0.99 E 0.89 D Add 1 EBT Infeasible 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 1.08 F 1.13 F 1.03 F Add 1 EBT** Infeasible 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.94 E 1.04 F 0.90 D Add 1WBR** Infeasible 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.89 D 0.97 E 0.90 D Add 1 EBT** Infeasible 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim 1.22 F 1.36 F 1.01 F Add 1 SBL** Infeasible 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 1.21 F 1.37 F 1.02 F Add 1 SBL** Infeasible 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.90 D 0.94 E 0.88 D Restripe NBLR to NBR, Add 1NBL** Feasible 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue* Anaheim 1.06 F 1.18 F 0.94 E Add 1 WBT** Infeasible 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 1.50 F 1.74 F 1.42 F Add 1 EBL, WBR** Infeasible 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 1.62 F 1.71 F 1.37 F Add 1 EBR, WBL** Infeasible *CMP intersection. LOS E is considered acceptable Same improvement as provided in either Comparison 1 or 2, or in both AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 139 A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation many improvements identified may not be feasible due to right-of-way acquisition needs, impacts to established land uses, and environmental constraints. The following city of Anaheim intersection improvements are likely not feasible due to right-of-way or other constraints: · Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road – Add 1 WBT (Same improvement as provided in Comparison 1 and 2) The improvement at this intersection appears to be infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the business on the north of Ball Road. · Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue – Add 1 NBT The improvement at this intersection appears to be infeasible due to right-of-way constraints. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the business on the north of Katella Avenue, and would require the demolition of an existing commercial building. · Lewis Street / Ball Road – Add 1 EBR The improvement at this intersection appears to be infeasible due to right-of-way constraints of an adjacent industrial parcel, and would involve significant utility relocation. · Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue - Add 1 EBR The improvement at this intersection appears infeasible due to right-of-way constraints. The right-of-way required for capacity improvement could significantly impact the Southern California Edison sub-station on the south side of Cerritos Avenue. · Lewis Street / Katella Avenue – Add 1 EBT The improvement at this intersection appears to be infeasible due to right-of-way constraints. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the existing and future development on parcels on the south side of Katella Avenue. · State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue - Add 1 SBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for adding SBT lane would significantly impact a recently developed residential mixed-use development on the northwest corner and a gas station on the southwest corner. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 140 · State College Boulevard / Orangethorpe Avenue - Restripe NBR to NBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the probable impact of entitled land uses on the northeast corner of the intersection. The potential right-of-way required for adding the NBT lane may go through the footprint of entitled high rise residential towers. · Sportstown / Katella Avenue – Add EBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the probable demolition and replacement of the railroad overcrossing east of the Sportstown intersection, along with regarding that may affect properties on both sides of Katella Avenue. · Sunkist Street / Ball Road – Add 1 EBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses and apartment complex within close proximity to the public right-of-way. · Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue - Add 1 WBR The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the presence of the railroad within close proximity to the public right-of-way. Adding WBR lane will require right-of-way acquisition from the railroad and potentially violate the railroad track clearance restriction. · Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue – Add EBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the right of way necessary to provide the sufficient lane width and sidewalk width. Significant earthwork is required, which will result in impact including removal of parking and the probable impact or demolition of a multistory office tower. · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road - Add 1 SBL The improvement at this intersection is likely infeasible due to the extensive grading and earthwork required to add the lane, including the reconstruction of the adjacent southbound loop on-ramp. · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue - Add 1 SBL The improvement at this intersection is likely infeasible due to the extensive grading and earthwork required to add the lane, including the reconstruction of the adjacent southbound loop on-ramp. · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue - Add 1 WBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible as the potential right-of-way required for adding additional WBT lane would significantly impact parking at Honda Center. The improvement also required the SR-57/Katella Avenue bridge span widened to accommodate the additional WBT receiving lane. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 141 · Douglass Road / Katella Avenue - Add 1 EBL, 1 WBR (Same improvement as provided in Comparison 1 and 2) The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvements would significantly impact the businesses and hotel on the south of Katella Avenue and parking at Honda Center on the north of Katella Avenue. · Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road – Add 1 EBR, 1 WBL These improvements are infeasible and undesirable given the need for right of way acquisition of property currently designated as Open Space in the City’s General Plan. City of Orange Based on the traffic analysis results, there are three study intersections in the City of Orange significantly impacted by the project when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario is compared to the Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario under the 2030 Future conditions. Table 7-12 provides details on the impacted intersection locations, ICU and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. Detailed mitigation ICU worksheets are included in Appendix G-6. Table 7-12: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Proposed Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 3) ID Intersection Jurisdiction With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event With Project and AS Event (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.90 D 0.91 E 0.84 D Restripe 1 NBR to NBT Feasible 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue Orange 0.81 D 0.99 E 0.81 D Add 1 WBT** Infeasible 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.85 D 0.97 E 0.87 D Restripe WBR to WBT** Infeasible AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. The following city of Orange intersection improvements are likely not feasible due to right-of-way or other constraints: ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 142 · Katella Avenue/Struck Avenue – Add 1 WBT The proposed improvement is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the businesses on the north of Katella Avenue. In addition, WBT receiving lane will require the bridge crossing Santa Ana River to be widened, which introduces potential significant environmental considerations, cost implications and implementation process. · Main Street / Katella Avenue – Restripe WBR to WBT Significant right of way is required at the regional shopping center on the northwest corner of this intersection, resulting in a possible loss of parking and demolition of up to two retail buildings. 7.2 ARTERIAL SEGMENT 7.2.1 2011 Baseline Conditions The implementation of the proposed project does not result in significant impacts at any of the study arterial segments under all three Comparisons 1, 2 and 3 in either the City of Anaheim or City of Orange. 7.2.2 2013 Opening Year Conditions Similar to the 2011 Baseline conditions, the implementation of the proposed project does not result in significant impacts at any of the study arterial segments in either the City of Anaheim or City of Orange under the 2013 Opening Year conditions. 7.2.3 2030 Future Year Conditions Comparison 1: No Events vs. Project City of Anaheim Based on the traffic analysis results, there are four study arterial segments within the City of Anaheim significantly impacted by the project when the No Events scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. Table 7-13 provides details on the impacted segment locations, V/C and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation, improvements identified may not be feasible due to right-of- way acquisition needs, impacts to established land uses, and environmental constraints. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 143 The following city of Anaheim arterial segment improvements are likely not feasible due to right-of- way or other constraint: · Ball Road – SR-57 NB Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive: Upgrade to 8-lane arterial The proposed improvement at this arterial segment is infeasible due to probable and undesirable impact to the adjacent Orange County Water District Property to the north, which is currently designated as open space in the City of Anaheim General Plan. Any widening would require significant earthwork leading to the bridge over the SR-57 freeway. · Douglass Road – Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue: Upgrade to 8-lane arterial The proposed improvement at this arterial segment is infeasible due to the presence of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the surrounding office buildings with the removal of parking spaces. · Katella Avenue –SR-57 Northbound Ramps and Douglass Road: Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Providing additional lanes on Katella Avenue is infeasible since it will likely result in the removal of a significant number of existing Honda Center parking spaces and the possible demolition of the hotel south of Katella Avenue. · Phoenix Club Drive –Honda Center to Ball Road: Upgrade to 4-lane arterial These improvements are infeasible and undesirable given the need for right of way acquisition of property currently designated as Open Space in the City’s General Plan. Table 7-13: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Proposed Arterial Segments Mitigation (Comparison 1) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes Daily No Events Daily With Project Peak Hour With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C LOS A - 2 Ball Road SR-57 NB Ramps Phoenix Club Drive 6 1.35 F 1.42 F 0.79 C Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Infeasible A - 4 Douglass Road Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue 4 0.77 C 0.91 E 0.84 D Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Infeasible A - 9 Katella Avenue SR-57 NB Ramps Douglass Road 6 1.12 F 1.28 F 0.82 D Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Infeasible A - 14 Phoenix Club Drive Honda Center Ball Road 2 3.13 F 3.36 F 1.39 F Upgrade to 4-lane arterial Infeasible AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 144 City of Orange Based on the traffic analysis results, there are three study arterial segments within the City of Orange significantly impacted by the project when the No Events scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. Table 7-14 provides details on the impacted segment locations, ADT, V/C and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation many improvements identified may not be feasible due to right-of-way acquisition needs, impacts to established land uses, and environmental constraints. The following city of Orange arterial segment improvements are likely not feasible due to right-of- way or other constraint: · Katella Avenue – Struck Avenue to Main Street: Upgrade to 8-lane arterial The proposed improvement at this arterial segment is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the businesses on the north of Katella Avenue. In addition, this is also a very high cost improvement as it requires the bridge crossing Santa Ana River widened in order to accommodate additional WBT receiving lane and EBT approach lane. · Katella Avenue - Main Street to Batavia Street: Upgrade to 8-lane arterial The proposed improvement at this arterial segment is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the businesses and office building on the north and south of Katella Avenue. Table 7-14: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Proposed Arterial Segments Mitigation (Comparison 1) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes No Events With Project With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS V/C LOS A - 11 Katella Avenue* Struck Avenue Main Street 6 63,840 1.13 F 66,640 1.18 F 0.89 D Upgrade to 8- lane arterial Infeasible A - 12 Katella Avenue* Main Street Batavia Street 6 52,950 0.94 E 54,630 0.97 E 0.73 C Upgrade to 8- lane arterial Infeasible A - 13 Main Street Katella Avenue Struck Avenue 4 34,840 0.93 E 35,920 0.96 E 0.64 B Upgrade to 6- lane arterial Feasible *CMP intersection. LOS E is considered acceptable AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 145 Comparison 2: Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project City of Anaheim The four study arterial segments within the City of Anaheim identified with project related impacts under Comparison 1 continues to be significantly impacted by the project when the Average Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. Hence, the same mitigation measures are proposed and presented in Table 7-15. A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation improvements identified may not be feasible due to right-of- way acquisition needs, impacts to established land uses, and environmental constraints. The following city of Anaheim arterial segment improvements are likely not feasible due to right-of- way or other constraint: · Ball Road – SR-57 NB Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive: Upgrade to 8-lane arterial The proposed improvement at this arterial segment is infeasible due to probable and undesirable impacts to the adjacent Orange County Water District Property to the north, which is currently designated as open space in the City of Anaheim General Plan. Any widening would require significant earthwork leading to the bridge over the SR-57 freeway. · Douglass Road – Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue: Upgrade to 6-lane arterial The proposed improvement at this arterial segment is infeasible due to the presence of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the surrounding office buildings with the removal of parking spaces. · Katella Avenue –SR-57 Northbound Ramps and Douglass Road: Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Providing additional lanes on Katella Avenue is infeasible and undesirable since it would result in the removal of a significant number of existing Honda Center parking spaces and the possible demolition of the hotel south of Katella Avenue. · Phoenix Club Drive –Honda Center to Ball Road: Upgrade to 4-lane arterial These improvements are infeasible and undesirable given the need for right of way acquisition of property currently designated as Open Space in the City’s General Plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 146 Table 7-15: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Proposed Arterial Segments Mitigation (Comparison 2) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes Daily With AAHC Event Daily With Project Peak Hour With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C LOS A - 2 Ball Road SR-57 NB Ramps Phoenix Club Drive 6 1.39 F 1.42 F 0.79 C Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Infeasible A - 4 Douglass Road Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue 4 0.85 D 0.91 E 1.12 F Upgrade to 6-lane arterial Infeasible A - 9 Katella Avenue SR-57 NB Ramps Douglass Road 6 1.22 F 1.28 F 0.82 D Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Infeasible A - 14 Phoenix Club Drive Honda Center Ball Road 2 3.27 F 3.36 F 1.39 F Upgrade to 4-lane arterial Infeasible AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium City of Orange The three study arterial segments within the City of Orange identified with project related impacts under Comparison 1 continues to be significantly impacted by the project when the Average Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. Hence, the same mitigation measures are proposed and presented in Table 7-16. A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation many improvements identified may not be feasible due to right-of-way acquisition needs, impacts to established land uses, and environmental constraints. The following city of Orange arterial segment improvements are likely not feasible due to right-of- way or other constraint: · Katella Avenue – Struck Avenue to Main Street: Upgrade to 8-lane arterial The proposed improvement at this arterial segment is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the businesses on the north of Katella Avenue. In addition, this is also a very high cost improvement as it requires the bridge crossing Santa Ana River widened in order to accommodate additional WBT receiving lane and EBT approach lane. · Katella Avenue - Main Street to Batavia Street: Upgrade to 8-lane arterial The proposed improvement at this arterial segment is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the businesses and office building on the north and south of Katella Avenue. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 147 Table 7-16: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Proposed Arterial Segments Mitigation (Comparison 2) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes With AAHC Event With Project With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS V/C LOS A - 11 Katella Avenue* Struck Avenue Main Street 6 63,840 1.13 F 66,640 1.18 F 0.89 D Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Infeasible A - 12 Katella Avenue* Main Street Batavia Street 6 52,950 0.94 E 54,630 0.97 E 0.73 C Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Infeasible A - 13 Main Street Katella Avenue Struck Avenue 4 34,840 0.93 E 35,920 0.96 E 0.64 B Upgrade to 6-lane arterial Feasible *CMP intersection. LOS E is considered acceptable AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium Comparison 3: Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event City of Anaheim Table 7-17 presents proposed improvements for the eight City of Anaheim study arterial segments significantly impacted by the project when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event is compared to the Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. Four of these locations are also significantly impacted by the project as shown in Comparison 1 and 2 under the 2030 Future Year conditions the same improvements are proposed for these locations. A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation many improvements identified may not be feasible due to right-of-way acquisition needs, impacts to established land uses, and environmental constraints. The following city of Anaheim arterial segment improvements are likely not feasible due to right-of- way or other constraint: · Ball Road – SR-57 NB Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive: Upgrade to 8-lane arterial The proposed improvement at this arterial segment is infeasible due undesirable impact to the adjacent Orange County Water District Property to the north, which is currently designated as open space in the City of Anaheim General Plan. Any widening would require significant earthwork leading to the bridge over the SR-57 freeway. · Douglass Road – Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue: Upgrade to 6-lane arterial The proposed improvement at this arterial segment is infeasible due to the presence of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the surrounding office buildings with the removal of parking spaces. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 148 · Katella Avenue – State College Boulevard to Howell Avenue: Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Widening between Sportstown and Howell Avenue will require the demolition and reconstruction of an active commuter and freight railroad crossing, also affecting several adjacent properties due to grading. Please note that the segment between State College Boulevard and Sportstown will be widened to 8 lanes. · Katella Avenue –Howell Avenue to SR-57 Southbound Ramps: Upgrade to 8-lane arterial The proposed improvement at this arterial segment is infeasible due to the presence of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the surrounding retail and office buildings with the possible demolition of the retail building and a parking structure used for a multi story office building. · Katella Avenue –SR-57 Southbound Ramps and SR-57 Northbound Ramps Widening between SR-57 Southbound Ramps and Northbound Ramps will require the expansion of the bridge span. · Katella Avenue –SR-57 Northbound Ramps and Douglass Road: Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Providing additional lanes on Katella Avenue is infeasible and undesirable since it would likely result in the removal of a significant number of existing Honda Center parking spaces and the possible demolition of the hotel south of Katella Avenue. · Katella Avenue –Douglass Road to Struck Avenue: Upgrade to 8-lane arterial The proposed improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to the Santa Ana River Bridge. The bridge will require widening in both directions, and widening the bridge requires a process involving multiple agencies. · Phoenix Club Drive –Honda Center to Ball Road: Upgrade to 4-lane arterial These improvements are infeasible and undesirable given the need for right of way acquisition of property currently designated as Open Space in the City’s General Plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 149 Table 7-17: 2030 Future Year City of Anaheim Proposed Arterial Segments Mitigation (Comparison 3) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes Daily With AAHC Event and AS Event Daily With Project and AS Event Peak Hour With Project and AS Event (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C LOS A - 2 Ball Road SR-57 NB Ramps Phoenix Club Drive 6 1.39 F 1.42 F 0.79 C Upgrade to 8- lane arterial Infeasible A - 4 Douglass Road Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue 4 0.85 D 0.91 E 1.13 F Upgrade to 6- lane arterial Infeasible A - 6 Katella Avenue State College Bl d Howell Avenue 6 1.18 F 1.19 F 0.71 C Upgrade to 8- lane arterial Infeasible A - 7 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps 6 1.34 F 1.38 F 0.68 B Upgrade to 8- lane arterial Infeasible A - 8 Katella Avenue SR-57 SB Ramps SR-57 NB Ramps 6 1.28 F 1.32 F 0.71 C Upgrade to 8- lane arterial Infeasible A - 9 Katella Avenue SR-57 NB Ramps Douglass Road 6 1.27 F 1.34 F 0.93 E Upgrade to 8- lane arterial Infeasible A - 10 Katella Avenue Douglass Road Struck Avenue 6 1.36 F 1.40 F 0.72 C Upgrade to 8- lane arterial Infeasible A - 14 Phoenix Club Drive Honda Center Ball Road 2 3.28 F 3.37 F 1.41 F Upgrade to 4- lane arterial Infeasible AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium City of Orange Table 7-18 presents proposed improvements for the three study arterial segments significantly impacted by the project when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event is compared to the Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. These three locations are consistent with impacts shown in Comparison 1 and 2 under the 2030 Future Year conditions, and thus the same mitigation measures are proposed for these locations. A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation many improvements identified may not be feasible due to right-of-way acquisition needs, impacts to established land uses, and environmental constraints. The following city of Orange arterial segment improvements are likely not feasible due to right-of- way or other constraint: · Katella Avenue – Struck Avenue to Main Street: Upgrade to 8-lane arterial The proposed improvement at this arterial segment is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the businesses on the north of Katella Avenue. In addition, this is ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 150 also a very high cost improvement as it requires the bridge crossing Santa Ana River widened in order to accommodate additional WBT receiving lane and EBT approach lane. · Katella Avenue - Main Street to Batavia Street: Upgrade to 8-lane arterial The proposed improvement at this arterial segment is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing businesses. The potential right-of-way required for capacity improvement would significantly impact the businesses and office building on the north and south of Katella Avenue. Table 7-18: 2030 Future Year City of Orange Proposed Arterial Segments Mitigation (Comparison 3) ID Arterial From To Mid-Block Lanes With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event With Project and AS Event (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS V/C LOS A - 11 Katella Avenue* Struck Avenue Main Street 6 65,510 1.16 F 66,640 1.18 F 0.89 D Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Infeasible A - 12 Katella Avenue* Main Street Batavia Street 6 53,950 0.96 E 54,630 0.97 E 0.73 C Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Infeasible A - 13 Main Street Katella Avenue Struck Avenue 4 36,870 0.98 E 37,310 0.99 E 0.66 B Upgrade to 6-lane arterial Feasible AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium 7.3 FREEWAY FACILITY 7.3.1 2011 Baseline Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection The traffic analysis results show that under Comparison 3, Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event, in the 2011 Baseline conditions, the project would significantly impact one ramp termini intersection (SR-57 Northbound Ramps/Katella Avenue). The impacted location is within the City of Anaheim. Table 7- 19 provides details on the impacted location, Delay and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. The mitigation has been identified based on an HCM analysis. Detailed mitigation worksheets are included in Appendix H-4. Table 7-19: 2011 Baseline Proposed Ramp Termini Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 3) ID Intersection With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event With Project and AS Event (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 32.90 C 79.30 E 39.0 D Add 1 NBR Infeasible AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 151 A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation, the improvement at the intersection of SR-57 Northbound Ramp and Katella Avenue is infeasible as the right-of-way acquisition likely required for the improvements would significantly impact the hotel on the south of Katella Avenue, and possibly require the reconfiguration of the northbound loop on-ramp immediately adjacent to the off –ramp. Freeway Weaving, Mainline and Ramp The traffic analysis results show that under Comparison 3, Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event, in the 2011 Baseline conditions, the project would significantly impact one ramp (SR-57 Southbound to Katella Avenue). The impacted location is within the City of Anaheim. Table 7-20 provides details on the impacted location, Density and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. Detailed mitigation HCS worksheets are included in Appendix K-4. Table 7-20: 2011 Baseline Proposed Freeway Facility Mitigation (Comparison 3) ID Location With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event With Project and AS Event (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/l ) LOS R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue >Capacity F >Capacity F 21.1 C Add 1 freeway ramp lane Infeasible AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation, the improvement identified for SR-57 southbound off-ramp to Katella Avenue is infeasible. It is further noted that this improvement is fully funded under the Platinum Triangle Implementation Plan; however, construction of this improvement is not expected to occur before 2013. It is considered economically, socially, and technologically infeasible to require the project applicant to implement the mitigation measures in advance of the planned improvements. 7.3.2 2013 Opening Year Conditions Ramp Termini Intersection Similar to the 2011 Baseline conditions, the traffic analysis results show that under Comparison 3, Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event, in the 2013 Opening Year conditions, the project would significantly impact one ramp termini intersection (SR-57 Northbound Ramps/Katella Avenue). The impacted location is within the City of Anaheim. Table 7-21 provides details on the impacted location, Delay and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. The mitigation has been identified based on an HCM analysis. Detailed mitigation worksheets are included in Appendix H-5. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 152 Table 7-21: 2013 Opening Year Proposed Ramp Termini Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 3) ID Intersection With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event With Project and AS Event (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 29.00 C 58.70 E 26.3 C Add 1 NBR Infeasible AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation, the improvement at the intersection of SR-57 Northbound Ramp and Katella Avenue is infeasible as the right-of-way acquisition likely required for the improvements would significantly impact the hotel on the south of Katella Avenue, and possibly require the reconfiguration of the northbound loop on-ramp immediately adjacent to the off –ramp. Freeway Weaving, Mainline and Ramp Similar to the 2011 Baseline conditions, the traffic analysis results show that under Comparison 3, Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event, in the 2013 Opening Year conditions, the project would significantly impact one ramp (SR-57 Southbound to Katella Avenue). The impacted location is within the City of Anaheim. Table 7-22 provides details on the impacted location, Density and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. Detailed mitigation HCS worksheets are included in Appendix K-5. Table 7-22: 2013 Opening Proposed Freeway Facility Mitigation (Comparison 3) ID Location With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event With Project and AS Event (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/l ) LOS R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue >Capacity F >Capacity F 20.3 C Add 1 freeway ramp lane Infeasible AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation, the improvement at SR-57 Southbound Off Ramp to Katella Avenue is infeasible. It is further noted that this improvement is fully funded under the Platinum Triangle Implementation Plan; however, construction of this improvement is not expected to occur before 2013. It is considered economically, socially, and technologically infeasible to require the project applicant to implement the mitigation measures in advance of the planned improvements. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 153 7.3.3 2030 Future Year Conditions Comparison 1: No Events vs. Project Ramp Termini Intersection The traffic analysis results show that under Comparison 1, No Events scenario compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions, the project would significantly impact five ramp termini intersections. The impacted locations are all within the City of Anaheim. Table 7-23 provides details on the impacted locations, Delay and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. The mitigation has been identified based on an HCM analysis. Detailed mitigation worksheets are included in Appendix H-6. Table 7-23: 2030 Future Year Proposed Ramp Termini Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 1) ID Intersection No Events With Project With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 69.10 E 70.70 E 46.10 D Restripe NBLT to NBL, NBTR to NBT, Add 1 NBR Infeasible 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road 52.80 D 148.6 0 F 42.50 D Add 1 SBL, 1 WBT* Infeasible 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road 33.20 C 56.50 E 30.9 C Restripe NBLR to NBR, Add 1 NBL, 1 WBT* Infeasible 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 16.10 B 76.90 E 37.10 D Add 1 NBR, 1 WBT* Infeasible 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 105.70 F 110.0 0 F 48.40 D Add 1 WBL, Restripe EBTR to EBR, Add 1 EBT Infeasible *Same improvement as identified through ICU analysis AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation improvements identified may not be feasible due to right-of- way acquisition needs, impacts to established land uses, and environmental constraints. The following ramp termini intersections are likely not feasible due to right-of-way or other constraints: · Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue - Restripe NBTL to NBL, NRTR to NBT, Add 1 NBR This improvement would require vehicles exiting the freeway to change 3 lanes in less than 400 feet to make a right turn onto Katella Avenue, which does not meet Caltrans requirements. Also, this improvement would require right of way of an adjacent industrial parcel requiring the demolition of an existing building. · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road – Add 1 SBL, 1 WBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to high cost of widening the SR 57/Ball Road bridge to accommodate the additional WBT lane. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 154 · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road - Restripe NBLR to NBR, Add 1NBL, 1WBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to high cost of widening the SR 57/Ball Road crossing bridge span to accommodate the additional WBT lane. · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue - Add 1 NBR, 1 WBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible as the potential right-of-way required for adding additional WBT lane would significantly impact parking at Honda Center. The improvement also required the SR-57/Katella Avenue bridge span widened to accommodate the additional WBT receiving lane. · SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue - Add 1 WBL, Restripe EBTR to EBR, add 1 EBT The improvement to the off ramp is infeasible due to the need for, and the undesirable impacts of, a retaining wall to be added immediately adjacent to the SR-55 Freeway. Right of way constraints make improvements to Katella Avenue infeasible, given the acquisition would adversely affect the adjacent gas station and may require partial demolition of an existing strip retail building to the west. Freeway Weaving, Mainline and Ramp Table 7-24 presents a list of proposed improvements for freeway mainlines, weaving segments and freeway ramp locations that experience project impact when the No Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. Detailed mitigation HCS worksheets for weaving segments and ramp locations are included in Appendix J-3 and Appendix K-6, respectively. Table 7-24: 2030 Future Year Proposed Freeway Facility Mitigation (Comparison 1) ID Location With No Events With Project With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Freeway Weaving Segment W - 2 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On- Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 38.7 E 39.2 E 32.6 D Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible W - 5 SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 35.2 D >Capacity F 34.0 D Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible W - 6 SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On- Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp >Capacity F >Capacity F 39.1 E Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp >Capacity F >Capacity F 38.6 E Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible W - 8 SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 36.8 E 38.0 E 33.3 D Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 155 Table 7-24: 2030 Future Year Proposed Freeway Facility Mitigation (Comparison Continued ID Location With No Events With Project With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Freeway Ramp R-1 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* >Capacity F >Capacity F 41.0 E Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible R-3 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 34.1 D 39.9 E 20.6 C Add 1 freeway ramp lane Infeasible R-4 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road >Capacity F >Capacity F 40.6 E Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible R-5 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 34.1 D >Capacity F 20.9 C Add 1 freeway ramp lane Infeasible * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation improvements identified may not be feasible due to right-of- way acquisition needs, impacts to established land uses, and environmental constraints. All of the weaving segment and ramp improvements noted in Table 7-24 are likely not feasible due to right-of-way or other constraints. Caltrans has not identified any further improvements beyond those already assumed in the buildout analysis for I-5 and SR-57. The City has limited control over State facilities. Beyond jurisdictional limitation, additional capacity improvements are assumed infeasible due to physical, right-of-way, and environmental constraints. Comparison 2: Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project Ramp Termini Intersection Similar to Comparison 1, the traffic analysis results show that under Comparison 2, Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions, the project would significantly impact five ramp termini intersections. The impacted locations are all within the City of Anaheim. Table 7-25 provides details on the impacted locations, Delay and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. The mitigation has been identified based on an HCM analysis. Detailed mitigation worksheets are included in Appendix H-6. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 156 Table 7-25: 2030 Future Year Proposed Ramp Termini Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 2) ID Intersection With AAHC Event With Project With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 70.00 E 70.70 E 46.10 D Restripe NBLT to NBL, NBTR to NBT, Add 1 NBR Infeasible 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road 106.00 F 148.60 F 77.4 E Add SBL* Infeasible 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road 45.10 D 56.50 E 42.10 D Restripe NBLR to NBR, Add NBL * Feasible 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 51.50 D 76.90 E 37.10 D Add NBR, 1 WBT Infeasible 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 108.60 F 110.00 F 48.4 D Add 1 WBL, Restripe EBTR to EBR, Add 1 EBT Infeasible *Same improvement as identified through ICU analysis AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation improvements identified may not be feasible due to right-of- way acquisition needs, impacts to established land uses, and environmental constraints. The following improvements are likely not feasible: · Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue - Restripe NBTL to NBL, NRTR to NBT, Add 1 NBR This improvement would require vehicles exiting the freeway to change 3 lanes in less than 400 feet to make a right turn onto Katella Avenue, which does not meet Caltrans requirements. Also, this improvement would require right of way of an adjacent industrial parcel requiring the demolition of an existing building. · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road - Add 1 SBL The improvement at this intersection is likely infeasible due to the extensive grading and earthwork required to add the lane, including the reconstruction of the adjacent southbound loop on-ramp. · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue - Add 1 NBR, 1 WBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible as the potential right-of-way required for adding additional WBT lane would significantly impact parking at Honda Center. The improvement also required the SR-57/Katella Avenue bridge span widened to accommodate the additional WBT receiving lane. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 157 · SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue - Add 1 WBL, Restripe EBTR to EBR, add 1 EBT The improvement to the off ramp is infeasible due to the need for, and the undesirable impacts of, a retaining wall to be added immediately adjacent to the SR-55 Freeway. Right of way constraints make improvements to Katella Avenue infeasible, given the acquisition would adversely affect the adjacent gas station and possibly require partial demolition of an existing strip retail building to the west. Freeway Weaving, Mainline and Ramp Table 7-26 presents a list of proposed improvements for freeway mainlines, weaving segments, and freeway ramp locations that experience project impacts when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event scenario is compared to the Project scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions. Detailed mitigation HCS worksheets are included in Appendix J-3 and Appendix K-6, respectively. Table 7-26: 2030 Future Year Proposed Freeway Facility Mitigation (Comparison 2) ID Location With AAHC Event With Project With Project (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/l ) LOS Freeway Weaving Segment W - 2 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On- Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 39.1 E 39.2 E 32.6 D Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible W - 5 SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 38.8 E >Capacity F 34.0 D Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible W - 6 SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On- Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp >Capacity F >Capacity F 39.1 E Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp >Capacity F >Capacity F 38.6 E Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible W - 8 SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 37.7 E 38.0 E 33.3 D Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible Freeway Ramp R-1 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* >Capacity F >Capacity F 41.0 E Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible R-3 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 38.1 E 39.9 E 20.6 C Add 1 freeway ramp lane Infeasible R-4 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road >Capacity F >Capacity F 40.6 E Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible R-5 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 36.8 E >Capacity F 20.9 C Add 1 freeway ramp lane Infeasible * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation improvements identified may not be feasible due to right-of- way acquisition needs, impacts to established land uses, and environmental constraints. All of the weaving segment and ramp improvements noted in Table 7-26 are likely not feasible due to right-of-way or other constraints. Caltrans has not identified any further improvements beyond ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 158 those already assumed in the buildout analysis for I-5 and SR-57. The City has limited control over State facilities. Beyond jurisdictional limitation, additional capacity improvements are assumed infeasible due to physical, right-of-way, and environmental constraints. Comparison 3: Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Ramp Termini Intersection The traffic analysis results show that under Comparison 3, Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario is compared to the Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario under the 2030 Future Year conditions, the project would significantly impact eight ramp termini intersections. The impacted locations are all within the City of Anaheim. Five of the eight are consistent with impacts found in Comparisons 1 and 2 under the 2030 Future Year conditions. Table 7-27 provides details on the impacted locations, Delay and LOS, the identified mitigation strategies and an assessment of feasibility for each mitigation. The mitigation has been identified based on an HCM analysis. Detailed mitigation worksheets are included in Appendix H-6. Table 7-27: 2030 Future Year Proposed Ramp Termini Intersection Mitigation (Comparison 3) ID Intersection With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event With Project and AS Event (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 75.30 E 100.90 F 73.80 E Add 1 EBT Infeasible 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 79.80 E 84.60 F 54.40 D Restripe NBLT to NBL, NBTR to NBT, Add 1 NBR Infeasible 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 61.80 E 62.50 E 41.40 D Restripe WBT to WBTR Feasible 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road 125.10 F 149.20 F 78.90 E Add 1 SBL* Infeasible 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 94.90 F 150.40 F 82.50 F Add 1 SBL* Infeasible 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road 46.00 D 57.00 E 45.70 D Restripe NBLR to NBR, Add 1 NBL* Feasible 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 76.70 E 110.00 F 54.00 D Add 1NBR, 1 WBT Infeasible 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 113.30 F 114.50 F 49.5 D Add 1 WBL, Restripe EBTR to EBR, Add 1 EBT Infeasible *Same improvement as identified through ICU analysis AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation improvements identified may not be feasible due to right-of- way acquisition needs, impacts to established land uses, and environmental constraints. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 159 The following improvement are likely not feasible: · Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue – Add 1 EBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible due to present 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 expanded impacting the right-of-way several hotels. In addition, the improvement required the I-5/Katella Avenue bridge span expanded to accommodate EBT receiving lane. · Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue - Restripe NBTL to NBL, NRTR to NBT, Add 1 NBR This improvement would require vehicles exiting the freeway to change 3 lanes in less than 400 feet to make a right turn onto Katella Avenue, which does not meet Caltrans requirements. Also, this improvement would require right of way of an adjacent industrial parcel requiring the demolition of an existing building. · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road - Add 1 SBL The improvement at this intersection is likely infeasible due to the extensive grading and earthwork required to add the lane, including the reconstruction of the adjacent southbound loop on-ramp. · SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue - Add 1 SBL The improvement at this intersection is likely infeasible due to the extensive grading and earthwork required to add the additional lane, including the reconstruction of the adjacent southbound loop on-ramp. · SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue - Add 1 NBR, 1 WBT The improvement at this intersection is infeasible as the potential right-of-way required for adding additional WBT lane would significantly impact parking at Honda Center. The improvement also required the SR-57/Katella Avenue bridge span widened to accommodate the additional WBT receiving lane. · SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue - Add 1 WBL, Restripe EBTR to EBR, add 1 EBT The improvement to the off ramp is infeasible due to the need for, and undesirable impacts of, a retaining wall to be added immediately adjacent to the SR-55 Freeway. Right of way constraints make improvements to Katella Avenue infeasible, given the acquisition would adversely affect the adjacent gas station and possibly require partial demolition of an existing strip retail building to the west. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 160 Freeway Weaving, Mainline and Ramp Table 7-28 presents a list of proposed improvements for freeway mainlines, weaving segments and freeway ramp locations that experience project impacts when the Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario is compared to the Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario under the 2030 Future conditions. Detailed mitigation HCS worksheets are included in Appendix J-3 and Appendix K-6, respectively. Table 7-28: 2030 Future Year Proposed Freeway Facility Mitigation (Comparison 3) ID Weaving Segment With AAHC Event and AS Event With Project and AS Event With Project and AS Event (Mitigation) Mitigation Strategies Feasibility Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Freeway Weaving Segment W - 2 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On- Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 39.1 E 39.2 E 32.6 D Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible W - 5 SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 38.8 E >Capacity F 34.0 D Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible W - 6 SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On- Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp >Capacity F >Capacity F 39.1 E Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp >Capacity F >Capacity F 38.6 E Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible W - 8 SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 37.7 E 38.0 E 33.3 D Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible Freeway Ramp R-1 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* >Capacity F >Capacity F 41.0 E Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible R-3 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue 38.1 E 39.9 E 20.6 C Add 1 freeway ramp lane Infeasible R-4 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road >Capacity F >Capacity F 40.6 E Add 1 mixed- flow lane Infeasible R-5 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road 36.8 E >Capacity F 20.9 C Add 1 freeway ramp lane Infeasible R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue >Capacity F >Capacity F >Capacity F Add 1 mixed- flow lane & 1 freeway ramp Infeasible * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density AAHC: Average Attendance Honda Center AS: Angel Stadium A site visit and/or evaluation of aerial images of the impacted locations, as well as consideration of already anticipated future improvements, were used to evaluate feasibility of the recommended improvements. Based on the evaluation improvements identified may not be feasible due to right-of- way acquisition needs, impacts to established land uses, and environmental constraints. All of the weaving segment and ramp improvements noted in Table 7-28 are likely not feasible due to right-of-way or other constraints. Caltrans has not identified any further improvements beyond those already assumed in the buildout analysis for I-5 and SR-57. The City has limited control over State facilities. Beyond jurisdictional limitation, additional capacity improvements are assumed infeasible due to physical, right-of-way, and environmental constraints. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 161 7.4 UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Every effort was made to identify feasible mitigation. However, as noted above through site analyses and aerial imagery evaluation there are improvements identified in this study that may not be feasible due to high project cost, the inability to undertake right-of-way acquisitions as a matter of policy to preserve existing businesses, environmental constraints, or jurisdictional considerations. These improvements include locations within the City of Anaheim, the City of Orange, and Caltrans facilities, including freeway ramps, mainline segments, and weaving segments. A Statement of Overriding Considerations will be included in the Environmental Impact Report documenting why a particular improvement is infeasible as mitigation. Furthermore, it is noted with implementation of the improvements described in the mitigation discussion above, the significant project related impacts associated with the Proposed Project would be mitigated. However, 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. Concurrent Event Considerations Simultaneous events occurring at Honda Center due to the Proposed Project and at Angel Stadium known as “concurrent events” are anticipated to be infrequent and only occur a limited number of times throughout the year. Although, some of the physical traffic improvements/mitigation listed in Comparison 3 may be considered feasible; the mitigation necessary to maintain acceptable levels of service for Comparison 3 would require substantial right-of-way acquisition and funding, and result in numerous impacts to adjacent private properties and land uses. In addition, these improvements would conflict with the City's General Plan and Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan goals and policies to provide a pedestrian-friendly, transit-oriented environment within the Platinum Triangle. As a result, the City of Anaheim has determined that it is economically, socially, and technologically infeasible to implement the mitigation measures associated with Comparison 3. Traffic Management as Mitigation Honda Center event related traffic has been a common occurrence in the study area for the past eighteen years. As such local businesses, residents and regular area commuters are familiar with the event related traffic activity. To mitigate event related traffic the City has elected to employ active traffic management personnel, cones and signage to effectively manage arriving and departing event related traffic. This alternative traffic mitigation strategy has proved to be an effective tool for current events. Given the Honda Center is a special traffic generator that creates traffic outside of the normal peak hour conditions, given these traffic conditions already commonly occur, and given many of the physical mitigation improvements identified for the Honda Center Enhancement Project may be practically infeasible due to right-of-way and other physical constrains, the continued use of active traffic management is recommended as mitigation for the Project. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 162 8.0 PARKING ANALYSIS The parking analysis conducted for this study was a high-level assessment and comparison of the estimated trip generation of the proposed project to the available parking supply provided on-site at Honda Center and additional off-site parking available for Honda Center use through agreement. Agreements considered are those in which the City of Anaheim and/or Anaheim Arena Management LLC are principal parties and therefore have some level of influence or control over the parking supply. For purpose of this assessment, the estimated trip generation of the proposed project is assumed to also represent the parking demand. As a conservative measure, the project traffic generating scenario is for a sold-out 18,900 attendee event with an additional 1,200 persons assumed to represent Honda Center and team/perfomer staffing. This level of event represents the highest potential usage of the facility and thereby the presumed highest parking demand. 8.1 PARKING DEMAND The primary scenario analyzed for parking demand is a sold out event with 18,900 attendees. The key assumptions for the analysis are summarized as the following: · 95% of employees and patrons will arrive at Honda Center during the event by auto · 5% of employees and patrons will utilize public transit · Average vehicle occupancy (AVO) rate for patrons is 3.0 persons/vehicle · AVO rate for Honda Center staff and team member is 1.2 persons/vehicle · 5 private charter buses with AVO rate of 40 persons/vehicle will used by patrons Based on these assumptions, an estimate of the number of vehicles by patrons, staff, and team members was calculated. Table 8-1 presents the results of the calculation. The table shows a parking demand of 6,877. Table 8-1: Honda Center Parking Demand Type No. of Participants No. of Participants arrive by auto * Vehicle Occupancy Rate No. of Vehicle Employees 1,000 950 1.2 792 Team Members 200 200 1.2 167 Spectators 18,900 17,755 3.0 5,918 Total 6,877 * Persons arriving by Transit and Charter Bus have been deducted ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 163 8.2 PARKING SUPPLY Opened in 1993, Honda Center was developed with a significant parking supply both on-site and off- site in the proximity to the venue. An agreement, referred to as the 1993 Consent, Traffic and Parking, and Non-Disturbance and Attornment Agreement, between the City and Anaheim Arena Management, LLC established the parking requirements and parking areas for Honda Center. This agreement specially identifies that Honda Center parking will be provided in two defined geographical areas, defined as Tier 1 and Tier 2. Figure 8-1 and Figure 8-2 present the locations of Tier 1 and Tier 2 parking areas respectively. Tier 1 area includes parking areas surrounding Honda Center that are bounded between Cerritos Avenue to the north, the Santa Ana River to the east, and SR-57 to the west. Tier 1 is targeted to provide not less than 3,900 parking spaces. The City of Anaheim has fulfilled its obligation to date, and in fact provide a total of 4,239 parking spaces within the Tier 1 area. The 4,239 parking spaces are made up as follows: 3,775 spaces provided within six on-site parking lots on the north side of Katella Avenue immediately surrounding the Honda Center building; 464 additional spaces provided off-site on a lot presently owned by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) on the south side of Katella Avenue immediately across from the Honda Center. The parking on the OCTA property is secured through current leases and sublease agreements between the City, OCTA, and AAM. In addition to these 4,239 parking spaces, the City has indicated that AAM has secured a lease agreement with the adjacent Corporate Arena business park located just north of the venue for approximately 1,200 additional parking spaces. These additional spaces are assumed for use under peak event conditions. With this additional agreement, the total parking supply within Tier 1 is 5,439. The parking spaces are managed and available to patrons, event staff, and team members. Parking for the Tier 2 area consists of three off-site parking areas that are within a reasonable walking distance of the facility. As shown in Figure 8-2 the designated parking areas include portions of Angel Stadium parking lots, and two business/commercial centers. One center is located west of SR- 57 and generally bound by Katella Avenue on the north and the railroad tracks to the south. The second center is located immediately east of the Santa Ana River within the City of Orange and is generally bound by Katella Avenue on the south, the Santa Ana River on the west, Main Street on the east, and a private drive on the north. Under the Tier 2 requirement, the City shall not provide less than 1,500 spaces within the identified off-site parking lots. Pedestrian access between the Tier 2 off- site parking areas and Honda Center is provided by sidewalk along Katella Avenue and Douglass Road. Combining the Tier 2 area with those within Tier 1, there are approximately 6,939 parking spaces available to Honda Center. Not inventoried, but nonetheless important to the overall supply of parking available for Honda Center events, are the numerous privately-owned commercial/business area parking lots in the vicinity of Honda Center. As these lots have peak usage during typical weekday business hours (i.e. 7:00am – 5:00pm), they are generally underutilized during Honda Center evening events and weekend day events and therefore are being used as “entrepreneurial” parking lots for Honda Center. Pedestrian access between these lots and Honda Center is available along sidewalks on Katella Avenue. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 164 Figure 8-1: Location of Tier 1 Parking Area Figure 8-2: Location of Tier 2 Parking Area Note: These figures indicate location of Tier 1 and Tier 2 Parking Lots, but do not represent lot boundaries Source: Consent, Traffic and Parking and Non-Disturbance and Attorment Agreement between Ogden Facility Management Corporation of Anaheim, Disney Sports Enterprises Inc., and the City of Anaheim Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 165 Parking Conclusion Based on the parking demand of 6,877 spaces compared to the available parking supply of 6,939 spaces, there is a surplus of 62 parking spaces available for Honda Center. It is further noted that all inventoried parking spaces are assumed to be available for Honda Center for all additional events, therefore, the increase in number of annual events at Honda Center would not required any additional parking supply. Factoring in the regular practice and availability of additional entrepreneurial parking in the vicinity of Honda Center on event days, there is an extensive surplus of parking available for Honda Center. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 166 9.0 CONCLUSION Honda Center related event traffic has occurred in the area for the past 18 years and local businesses and area commuters are familiar with such traffic activity. The traffic analysis for the proposed increase in the number of annual events hosted at the venue indicates the potential for additional traffic impacts to the adjacent transportation circulation system. The objectives of the traffic study were to 1) document the traffic conditions within the study area; and 2) to evaluate the potential project impacts associated with increasing the number of annual events from 162 to 222; and 3) identify mitigation necessary to mitigate the impacts. This traffic impact study has been conducted in accordance with the following policy or procedural documents: · City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies date 1996 · City of Orange Traffic Impact Study Guidelines dated August 15, 2007 · Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies dated December 2002. To assess the traffic impacts associated with increasing the number of annual events from 162 to 222 at Honda Center, a total of five scenarios under three horizon years were considered, as outlined below: 2011 Baseline Analytical Project Direct Impacts Scenario: 1) 2011 Baseline (No Events) 2) 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event5 3) 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event6 4) 2011 Baseline with Project7 5) 2011 Baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 2013 Opening Year Analytical Impacts Scenario and Near-Term Impacts Scenario: 1) 2013 Opening Year (No Events) 2) 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2013 Opening Year with Project 5) 2013 Opening Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 5 Average Attendance Honda Center Event is assumed to be an average attendance event or 11,264 seats as described in the September 2, 2011 Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 344 for Honda Center Enhancement Project. Traffic forecasts are adjusted accordingly from April 6, 2011 event traffic counts. 6 Angel Stadium Event is assumed to be an average Angel Stadium baseball game attendance of 29,402 based on year 2010 season attendance figures provided by the City of Anaheim. Traffic conditions are adjusted accordingly from traffic counts taken for the August 24, 2011 event. 7 Project is assumed to be an 18,900 seat sold out capacity condition. Traffic forecasts are adjusted accordingly from April 6, 2011 event traffic counts. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 167 2030 Future Year Long-Term Impacts Scenario (General Plan Buildout): 1) 2030 Future Year (No Events) 2) 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2030 Future Year with Project 5) 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Upon completion of the traffic conditions assessment for each scenario above, Project impacts and mitigation were identified through an evaluation of the following three comparisons of with and without Project conditions: 1) No Events vs. Project 2) Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project 3) Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Parking In addition to traffic impact analyses, a high level assessment of parking demand and supply was conducted. The purpose of the parking assessment was to inventory the available on and off-site parking spaces that are within the control of the City of Anaheim and Anaheim Arena Management, LLC and to determine if that capacity is sufficient to meet Honda Center parking demand. The calculated trip generation of maximum capacity Honda Center events was used to represent the maximum parking demand. For this analysis, the trip generation factor for the event is assumed be a fair measure of parking demand for spectators, Honda Center staff, and staff of the event performers under sold-out conditions at a seating capacity of 18,900. Based on the quantified parking demand for 6,877 spaces compared to the available parking supply of 6,939 spaces, there is a surplus of 62 parking spaces available for Honda Center. Factoring in the regular practice and availability of additional entrepreneurial parking in the vicinity of Honda Center on event days, there is an extensive surplus of parking available for Honda Center. PROJECT RELATED IMPACTS AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES 2011 Baseline Conditions: The study determined that five intersections and one freeway ramp are significantly impacted by the proposed project under the 2011 Baseline conditions. Mitigation measures have been identified and proposed for these impacted locations under each of the comparison scenarios and are presented in Table 9-1. 2013 Opening Year Conditions: The study determined that the same five intersection locations and one freeway ramp location under the 2011 Baseline conditions continue to experience project impact under the 2013 Opening Year conditions. In addition, one additional intersection is identified. Mitigation measures have been identified and proposed for all these impacted locations under each of the comparison scenarios and are presented in Table 9-2. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 168 2030 Future Year Conditions The study determined that implementation of the proposed project results in significant impact at 25 study intersections, eleven study arterial segments, five study freeway weaving segments, and five study freeway ramps under the 2030 Future Year conditions. Mitigation measures have been identified and proposed for all these impacted locations under each of the comparison scenarios and are presented in Table 9-3. Simultaneous events occurring at Honda Center due to the Proposed Project and at Angel Stadium known as “concurrent events” are anticipated to be infrequent and only occur a limited number of times throughout the year. Although, some of the physical traffic improvements/mitigation listed in Comparison 3 may be considered feasible; the mitigation necessary to maintain acceptable levels of service for Comparison 3 would require substantial right-of-way acquisition and funding, and result in numerous impacts to adjacent private properties and land uses. In addition, these improvements would conflict with the City's General Plan and Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan goals and policies to provide a pedestrian-friendly, transit-oriented environment within the Platinum Triangle. As a result, the City of Anaheim has determined that it is economically, socially, and technologically infeasible to implement the mitigation measures associated with Comparison 3. Unavoidable Impacts and Statement of Overriding Considerations Every effort was made to identify feasible mitigation. However, as noted above through site analyses and aerial imagery evaluation there are improvements identified in this study that may not be feasible due to high project cost, the inability to undertake right-of-way acquisitions as a matter of policy to preserve existing businesses, environmental constraints, or jurisdictional considerations. These improvements include locations within the City of Anaheim, the City of Orange, and Caltrans facilities, including freeway ramps, mainline segments, and weaving segments. A Statement of Overriding Considerations will be included in the Environmental Impact Report documenting why a particular improvement is infeasible as mitigation. Furthermore, it is noted with implementation of the improvements described in the mitigation discussion above, the significant project related impacts associated with the Proposed Project would be mitigated. However, 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. Concurrent Event Considerations Simultaneous events occurring at Honda Center due to the Proposed Project and at Angel Stadium known as “concurrent events” are anticipated to be infrequent and only occur a limited number of times throughout the year. Although, some of the physical traffic improvements/mitigation listed in Comparison 3 may be considered feasible; the mitigation necessary to maintain acceptable levels of service for Comparison 3 would require substantial right-of-way acquisition and funding, and result in numerous impacts to adjacent private properties and land uses. In addition, these improvements ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 169 would conflict with the City's General Plan and Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan goals and policies to provide a pedestrian-friendly, transit-oriented environment within the Platinum Triangle. As a result, the City of Anaheim has determined that it is economically, socially, and technologically infeasible to implement the mitigation measures associated with Comparison 3. Traffic Management as Mitigation Honda Center event related traffic has been a common occurrence in the study area for the past eighteen years. As such local businesses, residents and regular area commuters are familiar with the event related traffic activity. To mitigate event related traffic the City has elected to employ active traffic management personnel, cones and signage to effectively manage arriving and departing event related traffic. This alternative traffic mitigation strategy has proved to be an effective tool for current events. Given the Honda Center is a special traffic generator that creates traffic outside of the normal peak hour conditions, given these traffic conditions already commonly occur, and given many of the physical mitigation improvements identified for the Honda Center Enhancement Project may be practically infeasible due to right-of-way and other physical constrains, the continued use of active traffic management is recommended as mitigation for the Project. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 170 Table 9-1: Summary of the 2011 Baseline Project Impact and Mitigation Measures ID Location Jurisdiction Comparison 1 Comparison 2 Comparison 3* Recommended Mitigations Feasibility Impact Mitigation Impact Mitigation Impact Mitigation Intersection 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim ─ ─ ─ ─ X Operational Improvement ─ ─ 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim X Operational Improvement X Operational Improvement X Operational Improvement Operational Improvement Feasible 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim ─ ─ ─ ─ X Operational Improvement ─ ─ 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim ─ ─ ─ ─ X Add 1 NBR ─ ─ 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim X Operational Improvement X Operational Improvement X Add 1 EBR Operational Improvement Feasible Freeway Ramp R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue Caltrans ─ ─ ─ ─ X Add 1 freeway ramp lane ─ ─ x: Indicates impact Mitigations under Comparison 3 are not recommended due to the infrequency of concurrent events at Honda Center and Angel Stadium and the conflicts such mitigation would have with other established City goals and policies. Table 9-2: Summary of the 2013 Opening Year Project Impact and Mitigation Measures ID Location Jurisdiction Comparison 1 Comparison 2 Comparison 3* Recommended Mitigations Feasibility Impact Mitigation Impact Mitigation Impact Mitigation Intersection 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim ─ ─ ─ ─ X Operational Improvement ─ ─ 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim ─ ─ ─ ─ X Operational Improvement ─ ─ 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim X Operational Improvement X Operational Improvement X Operational Improvement Operational Improvement Feasible 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim ─ ─ ─ ─ X Operational Improvement ─ ─ 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim ─ ─ ─ ─ X Add 1 NBR ─ ─ 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim X Operational Improvement X Operational Improvement X Add 1 EBR Operational Improvement Feasible Freeway Ramp R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue Caltrans ─ ─ ─ ─ X Add 1 freeway ramp lane ─ ─ x: Indicates impact Mitigations under Comparison 3 are not recommended due to the infrequency of concurrent events at Honda Center and Angel Stadium and the conflicts such mitigation would have with other established City goals and policies. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 171 Table 9-3: Summary of the 2030 Future Year Project Impact and Mitigation Measures ID Location Jurisdiction Comparison 1 Comparison 2 Comparison 3* Recommended Mitigations Feasibility Impact Mitigation Impact Mitigation Impact Mitigation Intersection 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim X Add 1 WBT X Add 1 WBT X Add 1 WBT Add 1 WBT Infeasible 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim X Add 1 NBT X Add 1 NBT X Add 1 NBT Add 1 NBT Infeasible 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim X Operational Improvement ─ ─ ─ Add 1 EBT Operational Improvement Feasible 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim X Restripe NBLT to NBL, NBTR to NBT, Add 1 NBR ─ Restripe NBLT to NBL, NBTR to NBT, Add 1 NBR X Restripe NBLT to NBL, NBTR to NBT, Add 1 NBR Restripe NBLT to NBL, NBTR to NBT, Add 1 NBR Infeasible 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim X Add 1 EBR X Add 1 EBR X Add 1 EBR Add 1 EBR Infeasible 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim X Add 1 EBR, 1 EBL X Add 1 EBR X Add 1 EBR Add 1 EBR, 1 EBL Infeasible 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim X Operational Improvement ─ ─ X Add 1 EBT Operational Improvement Feasible 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim X Restripe EBL to EBT, Add 1 SBT X Add 1 SBT X Add 1 SBT Restripe EBL to EBT, Add 1 SBT Infeasible 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim X Operational Improvement ─ ─ ─ ─ Operational Improvement Feasible 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange X Restripe NBR to NBT X Restripe NBR to NBT X Restripe NBR to NBT Restripe NBR to NBT Infeasible 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim X Operational Improvement X Operational Improvement X Add 1 EBT Operational Improvement Feasible 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim X Add 1NBT, 1EBT X Add 1EBT X Add 1 EBT Add 1NBT, 1EBT Infeasible 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim X Add 1 NBR, 1WBR X Add 1 WBR X Add 1 WBR Add 1 NBR, 1WBR Infeasible 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim X Add 1 EBT X Add 1 EBT X Add 1 EBT Add 1 EBT Infeasible 26 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim X Add 1 SBL,1 WBT X Add 1 SBL X Add 1 SBL Add 1 SBL,1 WBT Infeasible 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim X Add 1 SBL, 1 EBT, 1 WBT X Add 1 SBL X Add 1 SBL Add 1 SBL, 1 EBT, 1 WBT Infeasible 28 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Ball Road Anaheim X Restripe NBLR to NBR, Add 1NBL, 1WBT X Restripe NBLR to NBR, Add 1NBL X Restripe NBLR to NBR, Add 1NBL Restripe NBLR to NBR, Add 1NBL, 1WBT Infeasible x: Indicates impact Mitigations under Comparison 3 are not recommended due to the infrequency of concurrent events at Honda Center and Angel Stadium and the conflicts such mitigation would have with other established City goals and policies. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 172 Table 9-3: Summary of the 2030 Future Year Project Impact and Mitigation Measures, Continued ID Location Jurisdiction Comparison 1 Comparison 2 Comparison 3* Recommended Mitigations Feasibility Impact Mitigation Impact Mitigation Impact Mitigation 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim X Add 1 NBR, 1 WBT X Add 1 NBR, 1 WBT X Add 1 NBR, 1 WBT Add 1 NBR, 1 WBT Infeasible 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim X Add 1 NBL, 2 NBT, 1NBR, 2 SBT, 1 EBL, 1 WBT, 1WBR X Add I EBL, 1 WBR X Add 1 EBL, 1 WBR Add 1 NBL, 2 NBT, 1NBR, 2 SBT, 1 EBL, 1 WBT, 1WBR Infeasible 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim X Add 1 EBR X Add 1 EBR X Add 1 EBR, Add 1 WBL Add 1 EBR Infeasible 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange ─ ─ ─ ─ X Restripe WBT to WBTR ─ ─ 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange ─ ─ ─ ─ X Restripe 1 NBR to NBT ─ ─ 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue Orange X Add 1 WBT X Add 1 WBT X Add 1 WBT Add 1 WBT Infeasible 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange X Restripe WBR to WBT, Add 1SBT X Restripe WBR to WBT X Restripe WBR to WBT Restripe WBR to WBT, Add 1SBT Infeasible 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Orange X Add 1 WBL, Restripe EBTR to EBR, Add 1 EBT X Add 1 WBL, Restripe EBTR to EBR, Add 1 EBT X Add 1 WBL, Restripe EBTR to EBR, Add 1 EBT Add 1 WBL, Restripe EBTR to EBR, Add 1 EBT Infeasible Arterial Segment A - 2 Ball Road - SR-57 NB Ramps to Phoenix Club Drive Anaheim X Upgrade to 8-lane arterial X Upgrade to 8-lane arterial X Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Infeasible A - 4 Douglass Road - Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue Anaheim X Upgrade to 6-lane arterial X Upgrade to 6-lane arterial X Upgrade to 6-lane arterial Upgrade to 6-lane arterial Infeasible A - 6 Katella Avenue – State College Boulevard to Howell Avenue Anaheim ─ ─ ─ ─ X Upgrade to 8-lane arterial ─ ─ A - 7 Katella Avenue –Howell Avenue to SR-57 Southbound Ramps Anaheim ─ ─ ─ ─ X Upgrade to 8-lane arterial ─ ─ A - 8 Katella Avenue – SR-57 Southbound Ramps to SR-57 Northbound Ramps Anaheim ─ ─ ─ ─ X Upgrade to 8-lane arterial ─ ─ A - 9 Katella Avenue - SR-57 NB Ramps to Douglass Road Anaheim X Upgrade to 8-lane arterial X Upgrade to 8-lane arterial X Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Infeasible A - 10 Katella Avenue – Douglass Road to Struck Avenue Anaheim ─ ─ ─ ─ X Upgrade to 8-lane arterial ─ ─ x: Indicates impact Mitigations under Comparison 3 are not recommended due to the infrequency of concurrent events at Honda Center and Angel Stadium and the conflicts such mitigation would have with other established City goals and policies. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 173 Table 9-3: Summary of the 2030 Future Year Project Impact and Mitigation Measures, Continued ID Location Jurisdiction Comparison 1 Comparison 2 Comparison 3* Recommended Mitigations Feasibility Impact Mitigation Impact Mitigation Impact Mitigation A - 14 Phoenix Club Drive - Honda Center to Ball Road Anaheim X Upgrade to 4-lane arterial X Upgrade to 4-lane arterial X Upgrade to 4-lane arterial Upgrade to 4-lane arterial Infeasible A - 11 Katella Avenue - Struck Avenue to Main Street Orange X Upgrade to 8-lane arterial X Upgrade to 8-lane arterial X Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Infeasible A - 12 Katella Avenue - Main Street to Batavia Street Orange X Upgrade to 8-lane arterial X Upgrade to 8-lane arterial X Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Infeasible A - 13 Main Street n - Katella Avenue to Struck Avenue Orange X Upgrade to 6-lane arterial X Upgrade to 6-lane arterial X Upgrade to 6-lane arterial Upgrade to 6-lane arterial Feasible Freeway Weaving Segment W - 2 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp Caltrans X Add 1 mixed-flow lane X Add 1 mixed-flow lane X Add 1 mixed-flow lane Add 1 mixed-flow lane Infeasible W - 5 SR-57 Northbound between Orangewood Avenue On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp Caltrans X Add 1 mixed-flow lane X Add 1 mixed-flow lane X Add 1 mixed-flow lane Add 1 mixed-flow lane Infeasible W - 6 SR-57 Northbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and Ball Road Off-Ramp Caltrans X Add 1 mixed-flow lane X Add 1 mixed-flow lane X Add 1 mixed-flow lane Add 1 mixed-flow lane Infeasible SR-57 Southbound between Ball Road On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp Caltrans X Add 1 mixed-flow lane X Add 1 mixed-flow lane X Add 1 mixed-flow lane Add 1 mixed-flow lane Infeasible W - 8 SR-57 Southbound between SR-91 Westbound Connector and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp Caltrans X Add 1 mixed-flow lane X Add 1 mixed-flow lane X Add 1 mixed-flow lane Add 1 mixed-flow lane Infeasible Freeway Ramp R-1 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue Caltrans X Add 1 mixed-flow lane X Add 1 mixed-flow lane X Add 1 mixed-flow lane Add 1 mixed-flow lane Infeasible R-3 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue Caltrans X Add 1 freeway ramp lane X Add 1 freeway ramp lane X Add 1 freeway ramp lane Add 1 freeway ramp lane Infeasible R-4 SR-57 Northbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road Caltrans X Add 1 mixed-flow lane X Add 1 mixed-flow lane X Add 1 mixed-flow lane Add 1 mixed-flow lane Infeasible R-5 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Ball Road Caltrans X Add 1 freeway ramp lane X Add 1 freeway ramp lane X Add 1 freeway ramp lane Add 1 freeway ramp lane Infeasible R-6 SR-57 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue Caltrans ─ ─ ─ ─ X Add 1 mixed-flow lane & 1 freeway ramp lane ─ ─ x: Indicates impact Mitigations under Comparison 3 are not recommended due to the infrequency of concurrent events at Honda Center and Angel Stadium and the conflicts such mitigation would have with other established City goals and policies. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 174 PARKING ANALYSIS In addition to traffic impact analyses, a high level assessment of parking demand and supply was conducted. The purpose of the parking assessment was to inventory the available on and off-site parking spaces that are within the control of the City of Anaheim and Anaheim Arena Management, LLC and to determine if that capacity is sufficient to meet Honda Center parking demand. The calculated trip generation of maximum capacity Honda Center events was used to represent the maximum parking demand. For this analysis, the trip generation factor for the event was assumed be a fair measure of parking demand for spectators, Honda Center staff, and staff of the event performers under sold-out conditions at a seating capacity of 18,900. The primary scenario analyzed for parking demand is a sold-out Honda Center event with 18,900 attendees. Utilizing the trip generation estimates for the Enhanced Honda Center Event, 6,877 parking spaces are estimated to be required to accommodate a sold-out Honda Center event. An inventory of parking spaces available shows 6,939 spaces are available. Comparing the demand of 6,877 spaces to the parking supply of 6,939 spaces, there is a surplus of 62 spaces. It is noted that as all of the inventoried parking spaces are assumed to be available for Honda Center for all events, the increased number of annual events at Honda Center will not required any additional parking. Further factoring in of the regular practice and availability of additional entrepreneurial parking in the vicinity of Honda Center on event days, there is an extensive surplus of parking available for Honda Center. Pedestrian access from all available Honda Center parking is along paved sidewalks that are convenient and well defined paths. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT AS MITIGATION Honda Center event related traffic has been a common occurrence in the study area for the past eighteen years. As such local businesses, residents and regular area commuters are familiar with the event related traffic activity. To mitigate event related traffic the City has elected to employ active traffic management personnel, cones and signage to effectively manage arriving and departing event related traffic. This alternative traffic mitigation strategy has proved to be an effective tool for current events. Given Honda Center is a special traffic generator that creates traffic outside of the normal peak hour conditions, given these traffic conditions commonly already occur, and given that many of the physical mitigation improvements identified for the Honda Center Enhancement Project may be infeasible due to right-of-way and other physical constrains, continued use of active traffic management should be considered as an alternate mitigation strategy. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 175 10.0 REFERENCES City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. (City of Anaheim, 1996) City of Anaheim General Plan. (City of Anaheim, 2004, and as amended thereafter) City of Anaheim Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A for the Platinum Triangle, City Council Adopted 10/25/05 City of Anaheim Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Traffic Study (October 2010) City of Orange General Plan Update Traffic Analysis (June 2009) City of Orange Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines (City of Orange, August 15, 2007) Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). Transportation Research Board, (TRB, 2000) ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 176 11.0 GLOSSARY OF TRANSPORTATION TERMS COMMON ABBREVIATIONS ADT Average Daily Traffic ATAM Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Caltrans The California Department of Transportation HCM Highway Capacity Manual HCS Highway Capacity Software (Software package utilizing the formulae in the Highway Capacity Manual) HOV High Occupancy Vehicle lane ICU Intersection Capacity Utilization LOS Level of Service OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority OCTAM Orange County Transportation Analysis Model V/C Volume/Capacity TERMS ANAHEIM TRAFFIC ANALYSIS MODEL (ATAM): The subarea modeling tool developed for the City of Anaheim that has been determined to be consistent with the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM) for the purposes of forecasting future traffic activity throughout the City for land use and circulation system scenarios. AUXILIARY LANE: A non-capacity enhancing lane that provides operational benefits to the freeway mainline. Typically an auxiliary lane extends between an on-ramp and off-ramp to facilitate the weave movement between the interchange without detrimental effects to the mainline through lanes. AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: The total volume during a year divided by the number of days in a year. Usually only weekdays are included. BANDWIDTH: The number of seconds of green time available for through traffic in a signal progression. BOTTLENECK: A constriction along a travel-way that limits the amount of traffic that can proceed from its location. CAPACITY: The maximum number of vehicles that can be reasonably expected to pass over a given section of a lane or a roadway in a given time period. CHANNELIZATION: The separation or regulation of conflicting traffic movements into definite paths of travel by the use of pavement markings, raised islands, or other suitable means to facilitate the safe and orderly movements of both vehicles and pedestrians. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 177 CLEARANCE INTERVAL: Nearly same as yellow time. lf there is an all red interval after the end of a yellow, then that is also added into the clearance interval. COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD): For Platinum Triangle the District is authorized to incur bonded indebtedness and levy a special tax in accordance with a rate and method of apportionment in order to finance certain public facilities within the Platinum Triangle. The District is expected to contribute funds towards many of the intersection improvements identified in this study. CRITICAL MOVEMENT: Conflicting intersection turning movements that are found to have the highest ICU for opposing movements; i.e. each of the approaches at a four-legged intersection will contain a critical movement that conflicts with an opposing movement. DAILY CAPACITY: The daily volume of traffic that will result in a volume during the peak hour equal to the capacity of the roadway. DELAY: The time consumed while traffic is impeded in its movement by some element over which it has no control, usually expressed in seconds per vehicle. DEMAND RESPONSIVE SIGNAL: Same as traffic-actuated signal. DENSITY: The number of vehicles occupying in a unit length of the through traffic lanes of a roadway at any given instant. Usually expressed in vehicles per mile. DIRECTIONAL SPLIT: The percent of traffic in the peak direction at any point in time. DIVERGE AREA (HCM): the two right shoulder lanes plus the auxiliary lane for 1500 feet from the ramp gore point (location where the ramp intersects with the freeway mainline. DIVERSION: The rerouting of peak hour traffic to avoid congestion. FORCED FLOW: Opposite of free flow. FREE FLOW: Volumes are well below capacity. Vehicles can maneuver freely and travel is unimpeded by other traffic. GAP: Time or distance between successive vehicles in a traffic stream, rear bumper to front bumper. HEADWAY: Time or distance spacing between successive vehicles in a traffic stream, front bumper to front bumper. HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE (HOV) LANE: A lane restricted for use by vehicles with 2 or more persons. INTERCONNECTED SIGNAL SYSTEM: A number of intersections that are connected to achieve signal progression. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 178 LEVEL OF SERVICE: A qualitative measure of a number of factors, which include speed and travel time, traffic interruptions, freedom to maneuver, safety, driving comfort and convenience, and operating costs. LOOP DETECTOR: A vehicle detector consisting of a loop of wire embedded in the roadway, energized by alternating current and producing an output circuit closure when passed over by a vehicle. MERGE AREA (HCM): the two right shoulder lanes plus the auxiliary lane for 1500 feet from the ramp gore point (location where the ramp intersects with the freeway mainline. MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE GAP: Smallest time headway between successive vehicles in a traffic stream into which another vehicle is willing and able to cross or merge. MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT: The practice of allowing more than one type of lane use in a building or set of buildings. In planning terms, this can mean some combination of residential, commercial, industrial, office, institutional, or other land uses. MULTI-MODAL: More than one mode; such as automobile, bus transit, rail rapid transit, and bicycle transportation modes. OFFSET: the time interval in seconds between the beginning of green at one intersection and the beginning of green at an adjacent intersection. PLATOON; A closely grouped component of traffic that is composed of several vehicles moving, or standing ready to move, with clear spaces ahead and behind. ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS MODEL (OCTAM): The regional model developed and maintained by OCTA that is the parent model to the City of Anaheim subarea model, ATAM. ORIGIN-DESTINATION SURVEY: A survey to determine the point of origin and the point of destination for a given vehicle trip. PASSENGER CAR EQUIVALENTS (PGE): One car is one Passenger car Equivalent. A truck is equal to two or three Passenger car Equivalents in that a truck requires longer to start, goes slower, and accelerates slower. Loaded trucks have a higher Passenger Car Equivalent than empty trucks. PEAK HOUR: The 60 consecutive minutes with the highest number of vehicles. PEAK HOUR FACTOR: the period during which peak hour traffic volume is at its highest. Peak Hour factor is determined by calculating the hourly volume divided by the peak rate of flow within the hour, which is the highest 15 minute interval multiplied by four. PRETIMED SIGNAL: A type of traffic signal that directs traffic to stop and go on a predetermined time schedule without regard to traffic conditions. Also, fixed time signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 179 PROGRESSION: A term used to describe the progressive movement of traffic through several signalized intersections. SCREEN-LINE: An imaginary line or physical feature across which all trips are counted, normally to verify the validity of mathematical traffic models. SIGNAL CYCLE: The time in seconds required for one complete sequence of signal indications. SIGNAL PHASE: The part of the signal cycle allocated to one or more traffic movements. SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (CEQA): Projects can cause significant impacts by direct physical changes to the environment or by triggering reasonably foreseeable indirect physical changes. Physical changes caused by a project can contribute incrementally to cumulative effects that are significant, even if individual changes resulting from a project are limited. You must determine whether the cumulative impact is significant, as well as whether an individual effect is “cumulatively considerable.” This means “the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(1)). STARTING DELAY: The delay experienced in initiating the movement of queued traffic from a stop to an average running speed through a signalized intersection. A complete software package for modeling, optimizing, managing and simulating traffic systems. implements the HCM methodologies for intersection analysis and is applied for State Highway System ramp termini intersections. TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT: A mixed-use residential or commercial area designed to maximize access to public transport, and often incorporates features to encourage transit ridership. TRIP: The movement of a person or vehicle from one location (origin) to another (destination). For example, from home to store to home are two trips, not one. TRIP-END: one end of a trip at either the origin or destination; i.e. each trip has two trip-ends. A trip- end occurs when a person, object, or message is transferred to or from a vehicle. TRIP GENERATION RATE: The quality of trips produced and/or attracted by a specific land use stated in terms of units such as per dwelling, per acre, and per 1,000 square feet of floor space. TRUCK: A vehicle having dual tires on one or more axles, or having more than two axles. UNBALANCED Flow: Heavier traffic flow in one direction than the other. On a daily basis, most facilities have balanced flow. During the peak hours, flow is seldom balanced in an urban area. VEHICLE MILES OF TRAVEL: A measure of the amount of usage of a section of highway, obtained by multiplying the average daily traffic by length of facility in miles. WEAVING AREA: The area of a freeway where there is cross traffic from either an on or off-ramp or transition to another freeway. Typically weaving segments are formed when merge areas are ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 180 followed closely by diverge areas (within 2,500 feet) and the two are joined by an auxiliary lane requiring the crossing of two or more traffic streams traveling in the same general direction along a significant length of highway without the aid of traffic control devices. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report 181 APPENDICES ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report - Appendices List of Appendices Appendix A: Existing Traffic Counts for Honda Center Appendix B: Existing Traffic Counts for Angel Stadium Appendix C: Existing Peak Hour Volume and Speed on State Highway System Appendix D: Honda Center Event Trips Appendix E: Angel Stadium Event Trips Appendix F: Intersection Lane Configurations Appendix G-1: ICU Worksheets under 2011 Baseline Conditions Appendix G-2: ICU Worksheets under 2013 Opening Year Conditions Appendix G-3: ICU Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions Appendix G-4: ICU Worksheets under 2011 Baseline Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix G-5: ICU Worksheets under 2013 Opening Year Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix G-6: ICU Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix H-1: Caltrans Ramp Termini Worksheets under 2011 Baseline Conditions Appendix H-2: Caltrans Ramp Termini Worksheets under 2013 Opening Year Conditions Appendix H-3: Caltrans Ramp Termini Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions Appendix H-4: Caltrans Ramp Termini Worksheets under 2011 Baseline Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix H-5: Caltrans Ramp Termini Worksheets under 2013 Opening Year Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix H-6: Caltrans Ramp Termini Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix I-1: Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2011 Baseline Conditions Appendix I-2: Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2013 Opening Year Conditions Appendix I-3: Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions Appendix J-1: HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2011 Baseline Conditions Appendix J-2: HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2013 Opening Year Conditions Appendix J-3: HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions Appendix J-4: HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix K-1: HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2011 Baseline Conditions Appendix K-2: HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2013 Opening Year Conditions Appendix K-3: HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report - Appendices Appendix K-4: HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2011 Baseline Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix K-5: HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2013 Opening Year Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix K-6: HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2030 Future Year Conditions (Mitigated) ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX A: EXISTING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR HONDA CENTER ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report - Appendices EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR HONDA CENTER (NO EVENTS DAY) ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/7/11 NORTH & SOUTH: STATE COLLEGE LOCATION 1 THURSDAY EAST & WEST: KATELLA CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS STATE COLLEGE STATE COLLEGE KATELLA KATELLA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 2.5 1.5 2 3 1 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 54 145 41 35 142 35 34 162 20 75 267 15 1,025 4 0 2 8 14 4:15 PM 30 154 46 21 93 34 44 190 18 44 269 27 970 4 0 3 5 12 4:30 PM 39 141 52 28 155 53 51 211 23 69 258 18 1,098 3 0 1 15 19 4:45 PM 29 178 49 26 124 36 69 201 35 49 265 13 1,074 2 0 0 13 15 5:00 PM 51 211 52 28 208 76 48 170 33 80 270 13 1,240 5 1 0 15 21 5:15 PM 48 198 48 31 142 38 53 244 36 60 284 16 1,198 2 0 7 11 20 5:30 PM 53 170 51 33 154 50 45 165 33 80 261 24 1,119 3 0 2 13 18 5:45 PM 34 171 46 27 129 44 51 237 28 52 267 16 1,102 3 0 3 13 19 6:00 PM 35 136 42 21 118 28 35 171 27 58 240 16 927 5 1 3 16 25 6:15 PM 28 137 26 14 94 23 33 180 23 48 202 17 825 5 0 3 16 24 6:30 PM 24 109 28 14 101 29 25 165 16 59 169 18 757 4 0 2 19 25 6:45 PM 23 85 23 22 62 19 31 148 22 46 161 9 651 1 1 1 10 13 7:00 PM 15 66 30 22 72 20 22 166 16 61 138 14 642 1 1 3 12 17 7:15 PM 19 64 36 9 45 16 26 139 24 45 120 18 561 1 0 1 15 17 7:30 PM 14 52 20 18 58 23 18 154 16 27 120 8 528 2 0 2 9 13 7:45 PM 15 42 25 22 59 24 19 149 10 33 104 9 511 2 0 1 8 11 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 511 2,059 615 371 1,756 548 604 2,852 380 886 3,395 251 14,228 47 4 34 198 283 APPROACH % 16% 65% 19% 14% 66% 20% 16% 74% 10% 20% 75% 6% APPROACH % 16% 65% 19% 14% 66% 20% 16% 74% 10% 20% 75% 6% APP/DEPART 3,185 / 2,914 2,675 / 3,022 3,836 / 3,838 4,532 / 4,454 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 110 467 119 71 375 99 124 664 88 211 772 60 3,160 APPROACH % 16% 67% 17% 13% 69% 18% 14% 76% 10% 20% 74% 6% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.554 0.437 0.658 0.714 0.637 APP/DEPART 696 / 651 545 / 674 876 / 854 1,043 / 981 0 STATE COLLEGE NORTH SIDE KATELLA WEST SIDE EAST SIDE KATELLA SOUTH SIDE STATE COLLEGE PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/7/11 NORTH & SOUTH: SPORTSTOWN LOCATION 2 THURSDAY EAST & WEST: KATELLA CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS SPORTSTOWN SPORTSTOWN KATELLA KATELLA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 9 1 23 32 0 18 12 248 11 10 337 22 723 7 1 8 4:15 PM 7 1 18 32 2 28 11 215 6 9 285 31 645 5 0 5 4:30 PM 6 1 17 19 1 23 12 285 11 12 302 23 712 5 0 5 4:45 PM 11 1 23 19 1 19 12 228 12 14 301 22 663 8 0 8 5:00 PM 13 0 18 26 1 21 23 251 17 9 336 21 736 11 0 11 5:15 PM 13 1 30 44 1 25 12 260 10 8 323 38 765 5 1 6 5:30 PM 19 1 29 28 1 25 19 246 10 12 291 35 716 14 0 14 5:45 PM 11 1 29 28 2 20 19 239 8 18 309 19 703 8 0 8 6:00 PM 14 1 28 20 1 20 13 238 16 7 265 25 648 4 0 4 6:15 PM 13 1 41 28 1 13 7 176 7 7 233 33 560 2 1 3 6:30 PM 8 1 17 26 0 14 21 176 6 3 218 20 510 9 1 10 6:45 PM 5 0 5 19 1 33 11 187 3 1 151 22 438 5 0 5 7:00 PM 4 0 10 30 1 22 19 174 9 3 174 11 457 8 0 8 7:15 PM 13 3 28 26 0 20 12 185 2 3 166 26 484 6 0 6 7:30 PM 6 1 1 24 0 14 12 180 5 3 118 20 384 7 0 7 7:45 PM 2 1 10 23 0 22 9 172 7 4 131 14 395 3 1 4 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 154 15 327 424 13 337 224 3,460 140 123 3,940 382 9,539 0 0 107 5 112 APPROACH % 31% 3% 66% 55% 2% 44% 6% 90% 4% 3% 89% 9% APPROACH % 31% 3% 66% 55% 2% 44% 6% 90% 4% 3% 89% 9% APP/DEPART 496 / 621 774 / 276 3,824 / 4,211 4,445 / 4,431 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 40 3 91 93 3 80 52 777 32 18 867 100 2,156 APPROACH % 30% 2% 68% 53% 2% 45% 6% 90% 4% 2% 88% 10% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.684 0.629 0.740 0.667 0.705 APP/DEPART 134 / 155 176 / 53 861 / 961 985 / 987 0 SPORTSTOWN NORTH SIDE KATELLA WEST SIDE EAST SIDE KATELLA SOUTH SIDE SPORTSTOWN PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/7/11 NORTH & SOUTH: HOWELL LOCATION 3 THURSDAY EAST & WEST: KATELLA CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS HOWELL HOWELL KATELLA KATELLA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1 1 1 2 0.5 0.5 1 3 0 2 3 0 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 19 4 26 75 3 25 17 259 7 11 312 54 812 0 4 0 4 4:15 PM 7 3 32 67 6 18 20 257 5 16 311 20 762 0 7 1 8 4:30 PM 17 4 36 72 2 28 17 278 15 24 262 36 791 0 2 2 4 4:45 PM 11 5 32 48 2 12 16 256 10 19 311 50 772 0 1 1 2 5:00 PM 25 7 48 102 5 77 19 257 11 12 329 42 934 0 2 1 3 5:15 PM 18 11 19 67 2 20 16 311 10 15 331 38 858 0 4 0 4 5:30 PM 18 5 25 66 3 16 15 278 7 10 306 36 785 0 3 1 4 5:45 PM 10 6 23 44 5 15 18 280 15 15 307 46 784 0 2 2 4 6:00 PM 14 0 21 44 3 19 21 242 7 22 264 38 695 1 7 2 10 6:15 PM 10 3 23 38 2 12 20 230 8 13 247 40 646 0 3 1 4 6:30 PM 8 2 18 42 4 8 15 182 5 9 231 29 553 0 2 0 2 6:45 PM 6 4 14 35 4 5 17 196 10 7 170 25 493 0 2 1 3 7:00 PM 6 1 9 29 1 7 11 181 12 18 164 37 476 0 1 2 3 7:15 PM 5 3 13 31 3 6 21 214 15 10 156 42 519 1 1 0 2 7:30 PM 9 2 14 26 1 7 9 180 7 5 113 28 401 0 0 1 1 7:45 PM 7 2 11 24 2 7 13 196 4 14 136 21 437 0 2 2 4 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 190 62 364 810 48 282 265 3,797 148 220 3,950 582 10,718 2 0 43 17 62 APPROACH % 31% 10% 59% 71% 4% 25% 6% 90% 4% 5% 83% 12% APPROACH % 31% 10% 59% 71% 4% 25% 6% 90% 4% 5% 83% 12% APP/DEPART 616 / 909 1,140 / 416 4,210 / 4,971 4,752 / 4,422 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 38 9 76 159 13 44 73 850 30 51 912 132 2,387 APPROACH % 31% 7% 62% 74% 6% 20% 8% 89% 3% 5% 83% 12% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.384 0.293 0.707 0.713 0.639 APP/DEPART 123 / 214 216 / 94 953 / 1,085 1,095 / 994 0 HOWELL NORTH SIDE KATELLA WEST SIDE EAST SIDE KATELLA SOUTH SIDE HOWELL PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/7/11 NORTH & SOUTH: SR-57 NB RAMPS LOCATION 4 THURSDAY EAST & WEST: KATELLA CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS SR-57 NB RAMPS SR-57 NB RAMPS KATELLA KATELLA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1.5 X 1.5 X X X X 5 1 X 3 1 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 58 47 194 124 280 67 770 0 4:15 PM 59 50 210 106 277 60 762 0 4:30 PM 56 78 196 127 270 76 803 0 4:45 PM 51 63 206 105 254 48 727 0 5:00 PM 45 69 188 128 332 90 852 0 5:15 PM 52 84 217 119 280 68 820 0 5:30 PM 63 53 218 126 238 54 752 0 5:45 PM 61 76 200 101 215 52 705 0 6:00 PM 63 67 188 119 225 69 731 0 6:15 PM 60 64 146 96 186 50 602 0 6:30 PM 63 50 149 103 164 39 568 0 6:45 PM 41 52 122 96 140 39 490 0 7:00 PM 30 41 117 97 163 61 509 0 7:15 PM 37 54 135 99 139 45 509 0 7:30 PM 19 33 102 95 90 37 376 0 7:45 PM 32 28 112 108 114 46 440 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 790 0 909 0 0 0 0 2,700 1,749 0 3,367 901 10,416 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 46% 0% 54% 0% 0% 0% 0% 61% 39% 0% 79% 21% APPROACH % 46% 0% 54% 0% 0% 0% 0% 61% 39% 0% 79% 21% APP/DEPART 1,699 / 901 0 / 1,749 4,449 / 3,609 4,268 / 4,157 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 227 0 233 0 0 0 0 605 414 0 715 197 2,391 APPROACH % 49% 0% 51% 0% 0% 0% 0% 59% 41% 0% 78% 22% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.846 0.000 0.758 0.540 0.702 APP/DEPART 460 / 197 0 / 414 1,019 / 838 912 / 942 0 SR-57 NB RAMPS NORTH SIDE KATELLA WEST SIDE EAST SIDE KATELLA SOUTH SIDE SR-57 NB RAMPS PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/7/11 NORTH & SOUTH: SR-57 SB RAMPS LOCATION 5 THURSDAY EAST & WEST: KATELLA CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS SR-57 SB RAMPS SR-57 SB RAMPS KATELLA KATELLA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: X X X 1.5 X 1.5 X 3 1 X 3 1 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 45 153 275 87 238 104 902 0 4:15 PM 46 126 278 88 237 92 867 0 4:30 PM 33 141 268 99 201 118 860 0 4:45 PM 54 155 279 79 210 98 875 0 5:00 PM 46 124 267 129 260 121 947 0 5:15 PM 53 134 289 95 236 91 898 0 5:30 PM 49 127 298 101 225 88 888 0 5:45 PM 44 154 291 70 212 65 836 0 6:00 PM 46 120 229 78 199 78 750 0 6:15 PM 51 106 234 71 193 60 715 0 6:30 PM 37 106 198 46 161 69 617 0 6:45 PM 38 76 150 55 124 49 492 0 7:00 PM 24 82 190 54 135 48 533 0 7:15 PM 27 76 198 56 130 51 538 0 7:30 PM 33 68 158 42 76 42 419 0 7:45 PM 28 74 199 36 95 42 474 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 0 0 0 654 0 1,822 0 3,801 1,186 0 2,932 1,216 11,611 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 0% 0% 0% 26% 0% 74% 0% 76% 24% 0% 71% 29% APPROACH % 0% 0% 0% 26% 0% 74% 0% 76% 24% 0% 71% 29% APP/DEPART 0 / 1,216 2,476 / 1,186 4,987 / 4,455 4,148 / 4,754 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 0 0 0 172 0 408 0 811 250 0 677 256 2,574 APPROACH % 0% 0% 0% 30% 0% 70% 0% 76% 24% 0% 73% 27% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.000 0.694 0.665 0.612 0.680 APP/DEPART 0 / 256 580 / 250 1,061 / 983 933 / 1,085 0 SR-57 SB RAMPS NORTH SIDE KATELLA WEST SIDE EAST SIDE KATELLA SOUTH SIDE SR-57 SB RAMPS PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/7/11 NORTH & SOUTH: DOUGLASS LOCATION 6 THURSDAY EAST & WEST: KATELLA CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS DOUGLASS DOUGLASS KATELLA KATELLA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 0 2 0 1 0.5 1.5 2 3 1 2 3 1 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 15 3 3 35 1 80 28 212 13 5 281 21 697 4 0 4 4:15 PM 13 1 2 16 0 55 17 223 2 2 246 22 599 3 0 3 4:30 PM 16 1 6 33 0 55 21 250 9 7 272 22 692 2 1 3 4:45 PM 14 2 5 20 2 43 24 235 5 10 233 23 616 3 0 3 5:00 PM 14 3 2 38 5 107 29 228 11 7 306 34 784 5 1 6 5:15 PM 20 2 4 18 1 58 32 243 5 2 277 36 698 7 0 7 5:30 PM 10 0 8 22 1 53 31 228 6 1 213 25 598 2 1 3 5:45 PM 13 1 2 15 1 45 43 239 6 2 216 17 600 6 1 7 6:00 PM 9 1 3 14 0 59 28 227 4 4 219 21 589 8 2 10 6:15 PM 14 1 2 7 0 37 20 197 6 3 170 21 478 2 1 3 6:30 PM 7 0 4 13 1 29 7 177 6 1 162 9 416 6 0 6 6:45 PM 10 2 2 10 0 21 9 148 6 1 140 7 356 4 0 4 7:00 PM 14 2 2 8 1 25 13 140 13 4 174 16 412 6 0 6 7:15 PM 10 2 2 10 0 22 9 137 5 1 140 5 343 2 0 2 7:30 PM 11 1 3 13 1 18 5 130 3 2 102 10 299 1 0 1 7:45 PM 13 2 2 9 1 22 8 127 5 1 128 7 325 2 0 2 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 203 24 52 281 15 729 324 3,141 105 53 3,279 296 8,502 0 0 63 7 70 APPROACH % 73% 9% 19% 27% 1% 71% 9% 88% 3% 1% 90% 8% APPROACH % 73% 9% 19% 27% 1% 71% 9% 88% 3% 1% 90% 8% APP/DEPART 279 / 644 1,025 / 173 3,570 / 3,474 3,628 / 4,211 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 40 4 11 44 1 146 64 749 22 9 691 58 1,839 APPROACH % 73% 7% 20% 23% 1% 76% 8% 90% 3% 1% 91% 8% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.529 0.318 0.746 0.546 0.586 APP/DEPART 55 / 126 191 / 32 835 / 804 758 / 877 0 DOUGLASS NORTH SIDE KATELLA WEST SIDE EAST SIDE KATELLA SOUTH SIDE DOUGLASS PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/7/11 NORTH & SOUTH: STRUCK LOCATION 7 THURSDAY EAST & WEST: KATELLA CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS STRUCK STRUCK KATELLA KATELLA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1.5 X 0.5 X X X X 3 1 1 3 X X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 72 9 205 60 0 228 574 1 1 4:15 PM 56 1 192 46 7 205 507 1 1 4:30 PM 77 4 235 53 2 184 555 0 0 4:45 PM 46 6 218 48 3 215 536 1 1 5:00 PM 82 2 238 47 1 236 606 1 1 5:15 PM 71 4 203 43 3 229 553 0 0 5:30 PM 58 4 231 43 2 193 531 2 2 5:45 PM 51 3 213 42 3 171 483 0 0 6:00 PM 46 6 184 46 0 178 460 0 0 6:15 PM 46 3 185 29 6 149 418 1 1 6:30 PM 34 2 179 29 4 147 395 0 0 6:45 PM 25 1 136 30 2 116 310 1 1 7:00 PM 30 4 110 23 2 159 328 1 1 7:15 PM 20 1 138 20 2 145 326 2 2 7:30 PM 12 3 97 23 0 113 248 0 0 7:45 PM 15 0 108 18 1 124 266 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 741 0 53 0 0 0 0 2,872 600 38 2,792 0 7,096 0 0 0 11 11 APPROACH % 93% 0% 7% 0% 0% 0% 0% 83% 17% 1% 99% 0% APPROACH % 93% 0% 7% 0% 0% 0% 0% 83% 17% 1% 99% 0% APP/DEPART 794 / 0 0 / 638 3,472 / 2,925 2,830 / 3,533 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 151 0 12 0 0 0 0 684 134 12 590 0 1,583 APPROACH % 93% 0% 7% 0% 0% 0% 0% 84% 16% 2% 98% 0% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.485 0.000 0.710 0.635 0.653 APP/DEPART 163 / 0 0 / 146 818 / 696 602 / 741 0 STRUCK NORTH SIDE KATELLA WEST SIDE EAST SIDE KATELLA SOUTH SIDE STRUCK PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/7/11 NORTH & SOUTH: MAIN LOCATION 8 THURSDAY EAST & WEST: KATELLA CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS MAIN MAIN KATELLA KATELLA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 3 0 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 26 101 77 24 62 21 25 174 6 51 153 20 740 0 4:15 PM 36 79 59 21 51 29 18 155 11 58 173 38 728 0 4:30 PM 28 92 68 19 55 22 11 144 14 54 174 17 698 0 4:45 PM 42 94 73 23 46 21 15 165 18 37 184 24 742 0 5:00 PM 43 98 77 33 68 35 11 197 14 45 194 26 841 0 5:15 PM 48 83 68 19 64 21 15 149 11 53 192 26 749 0 5:30 PM 42 70 79 17 45 35 18 169 10 49 150 28 712 0 5:45 PM 34 72 79 31 30 32 12 134 10 32 168 15 649 0 6:00 PM 38 61 54 24 36 22 15 120 11 35 179 32 627 0 6:15 PM 20 50 42 15 31 15 24 119 7 42 152 13 530 0 6:30 PM 33 44 38 21 29 17 10 94 7 27 126 13 459 0 6:45 PM 23 40 38 20 30 15 14 89 7 26 103 23 428 0 7:00 PM 34 46 31 21 24 21 18 78 15 36 116 22 462 0 7:15 PM 18 37 37 12 22 9 11 110 16 22 100 20 414 0 7:30 PM 21 33 22 15 18 13 12 74 10 17 94 14 343 0 7:45 PM 12 24 29 18 18 17 12 76 3 25 89 5 328 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 498 1,024 871 333 629 345 241 2,047 170 609 2,347 336 9,450 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 21% 43% 36% 25% 48% 26% 10% 83% 7% 18% 71% 10% APPROACH % 21% 43% 36% 25% 48% 26% 10% 83% 7% 18% 71% 10% APP/DEPART 2,393 / 1,601 1,307 / 1,408 2,458 / 3,251 3,292 / 3,190 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 114 195 172 80 126 69 63 422 32 130 560 81 2,044 APPROACH % 24% 41% 36% 29% 46% 25% 12% 82% 6% 17% 73% 11% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.552 0.506 0.582 0.711 0.608 APP/DEPART 481 / 339 275 / 288 517 / 674 771 / 743 0 MAIN NORTH SIDE KATELLA WEST SIDE EAST SIDE KATELLA SOUTH SIDE MAIN PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/7/11 NORTH & SOUTH: MAIN LOCATION 9 THURSDAY EAST & WEST: STRUCK CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS MAIN MAIN STRUCK STRUCK NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 26 186 3 11 105 9 5 16 45 6 31 9 452 0 4:15 PM 26 157 3 5 112 6 6 15 40 9 18 12 409 0 4:30 PM 36 160 6 1 131 3 4 17 42 9 33 5 447 0 4:45 PM 21 201 4 3 102 1 9 16 31 6 10 9 413 0 5:00 PM 43 187 6 2 115 6 8 17 48 3 17 10 462 0 5:15 PM 33 172 1 2 115 7 8 9 31 5 19 4 406 0 5:30 PM 27 172 2 1 111 7 9 4 45 7 20 8 413 0 5:45 PM 27 167 1 3 83 2 6 13 30 3 13 3 351 0 6:00 PM 20 149 1 2 87 4 5 12 26 3 10 7 326 0 6:15 PM 24 98 0 1 72 4 3 11 21 3 8 5 250 0 6:30 PM 13 106 0 5 55 7 5 11 14 3 3 3 225 0 6:45 PM 13 91 2 2 54 4 4 6 24 1 7 3 211 0 7:00 PM 13 88 1 0 62 7 9 5 15 5 13 1 219 0 7:15 PM 10 92 0 3 57 4 1 4 16 0 10 2 199 0 7:30 PM 9 71 3 1 34 6 1 6 10 1 4 3 149 0 7:45 PM 7 61 0 3 45 3 1 3 12 3 8 3 149 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 348 2,158 33 45 1,340 80 84 165 450 67 224 87 5,081 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 14% 85% 1% 3% 91% 5% 12% 24% 64% 18% 59% 23% APPROACH % 14% 85% 1% 3% 91% 5% 12% 24% 64% 18% 59% 23% APP/DEPART 2,539 / 2,329 1,465 / 1,857 699 / 243 378 / 652 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 70 444 3 10 268 19 17 40 85 10 28 18 1,012 APPROACH % 14% 86% 1% 3% 90% 6% 12% 28% 60% 18% 50% 32% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.548 0.550 0.486 0.298 0.548 APP/DEPART 517 / 479 297 / 363 142 / 53 56 / 117 0 MAIN NORTH SIDE STRUCK WEST SIDE EAST SIDE STRUCK SOUTH SIDE MAIN PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/7/11 NORTH & SOUTH: SR-57 NB RAMPS LOCATION 10 THURSDAY EAST & WEST: BALL CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS SR-57 NB RAMPS SR-57 NB RAMPS BALL BALL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1 X 1 X X X X 3 1 X 3 1 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 137 66 185 124 295 117 924 0 4:15 PM 144 63 205 152 250 87 901 0 4:30 PM 139 48 212 150 279 92 920 0 4:45 PM 140 47 204 165 196 95 847 0 5:00 PM 130 51 213 160 371 144 1,069 0 5:15 PM 206 63 217 126 219 83 914 0 5:30 PM 191 60 221 138 231 84 925 0 5:45 PM 146 58 227 142 178 68 819 0 6:00 PM 105 34 176 127 210 87 739 0 6:15 PM 120 28 177 178 161 62 726 0 6:30 PM 110 31 141 146 155 57 640 0 6:45 PM 94 42 137 128 123 63 587 0 7:00 PM 82 31 155 200 150 69 687 0 7:15 PM 97 39 119 148 117 47 567 0 7:30 PM 84 27 117 127 139 48 542 0 7:45 PM 73 25 113 121 98 42 472 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 1,998 0 713 0 0 0 0 2,819 2,332 0 3,172 1,245 12,279 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 74% 0% 26% 0% 0% 0% 0% 55% 45% 0% 72% 28% APPROACH % 74% 0% 26% 0% 0% 0% 0% 55% 45% 0% 72% 28% APP/DEPART 2,711 / 1,245 0 / 2,332 5,151 / 3,532 4,417 / 5,170 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 429 0 135 0 0 0 0 631 579 0 649 269 2,692 APPROACH % 76% 0% 24% 0% 0% 0% 0% 52% 48% 0% 71% 29% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.524 0.000 0.811 0.446 0.630 APP/DEPART 564 / 269 0 / 579 1,210 / 766 918 / 1,078 0 SR-57 NB RAMPS NORTH SIDE BALL WEST SIDE EAST SIDE BALL SOUTH SIDE SR-57 NB RAMPS PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/7/11 NORTH & SOUTH: SR-57 SB RAMPS LOCATION 11 THURSDAY EAST & WEST: BALL CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS SR-57 SB RAMPS SR-57 SB RAMPS BALL BALL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: X X X 0.5 X 1.5 X 3 1 X 3 1 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 66 158 250 96 301 125 996 0 4:15 PM 66 154 297 92 346 66 1,021 0 4:30 PM 49 148 305 115 309 99 1,025 0 4:45 PM 65 167 275 88 270 70 935 0 5:00 PM 60 141 322 103 353 124 1,103 0 5:15 PM 58 134 324 113 375 73 1,077 0 5:30 PM 63 160 298 87 373 58 1,039 0 5:45 PM 74 165 292 79 297 46 953 0 6:00 PM 60 139 263 99 255 64 880 0 6:15 PM 50 124 294 82 243 49 842 0 6:30 PM 39 127 250 91 221 41 769 0 6:45 PM 33 121 247 70 193 23 687 0 7:00 PM 53 108 266 84 179 43 733 0 7:15 PM 41 101 239 67 183 27 658 0 7:30 PM 32 88 204 54 194 23 595 0 7:45 PM 34 70 194 38 134 29 499 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 0 0 0 843 0 2,105 0 4,320 1,358 0 4,226 960 13,812 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 0% 0% 0% 29% 0% 71% 0% 76% 24% 0% 81% 19% APPROACH % 0% 0% 0% 29% 0% 71% 0% 76% 24% 0% 81% 19% APP/DEPART 0 / 960 2,948 / 1,358 5,678 / 5,163 5,186 / 6,331 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 0 0 0 182 0 511 0 1,054 342 0 912 177 3,178 APPROACH % 0% 0% 0% 26% 0% 74% 0% 76% 24% 0% 84% 16% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.000 0.725 0.799 0.571 0.720 APP/DEPART 0 / 177 693 / 342 1,396 / 1,236 1,089 / 1,423 0 SR-57 SB RAMPS NORTH SIDE BALL WEST SIDE EAST SIDE BALL SOUTH SIDE SR-57 SB RAMPS PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/7/11 NORTH & SOUTH: SUNKIST LOCATION 12 THURSDAY EAST & WEST: BALL CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS SUNKIST SUNKIST BALL BALL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1 2 0 1 2 0 2 3 0 2 2 1 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 9 58 67 39 24 14 23 247 8 27 304 120 940 0 4:15 PM 11 46 46 44 32 19 35 291 8 43 328 120 1,023 0 4:30 PM 7 64 80 47 29 18 34 291 6 38 291 117 1,022 0 4:45 PM 8 52 50 44 27 34 36 283 6 40 280 111 971 0 5:00 PM 22 73 70 47 43 24 46 313 11 33 337 109 1,128 0 5:15 PM 11 75 62 57 33 25 49 305 2 40 310 148 1,117 0 5:30 PM 4 61 40 56 29 25 42 294 3 45 355 157 1,111 0 5:45 PM 9 42 48 73 42 28 32 243 10 40 272 127 966 0 6:00 PM 5 39 51 56 28 21 28 243 7 35 259 87 859 0 6:15 PM 9 19 41 50 24 17 32 290 5 36 221 97 841 0 6:30 PM 6 33 43 61 15 25 15 240 7 35 214 80 774 0 6:45 PM 5 29 30 55 18 14 28 232 2 42 209 69 733 0 7:00 PM 3 35 48 56 10 17 21 256 6 22 191 72 737 0 7:15 PM 4 13 35 36 8 13 14 222 5 20 189 74 633 0 7:30 PM 4 9 29 37 20 11 17 197 4 21 180 74 603 0 7:45 PM 5 14 22 23 17 15 10 191 4 18 143 41 503 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 122 662 762 781 399 320 462 4,138 94 535 4,083 1,603 13,961 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 8% 43% 49% 52% 27% 21% 10% 88% 2% 9% 66% 26% APPROACH % 8% 43% 49% 52% 27% 21% 10% 88% 2% 9% 66% 26% APP/DEPART 1,546 / 2,727 1,500 / 1,028 4,694 / 5,681 6,221 / 4,525 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 25 120 165 222 85 77 103 1,005 21 148 903 333 3,207 APPROACH % 8% 39% 53% 58% 22% 20% 9% 89% 2% 11% 65% 24% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.470 0.835 0.763 0.621 0.711 APP/DEPART 310 / 556 384 / 254 1,129 / 1,392 1,384 / 1,005 0 SUNKIST NORTH SIDE BALL WEST SIDE EAST SIDE BALL SOUTH SIDE SUNKIST PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/7/11 NORTH & SOUTH: SUNKIST LOCATION 13 THURSDAY EAST & WEST: CERRITOS CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS SUNKIST SUNKIST CERRITOS CERRITOS NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1 2 0 0 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 6 26 5 12 15 22 37 17 10 2 52 27 231 0 4:15 PM 3 23 1 8 21 25 26 12 7 0 24 24 174 0 4:30 PM 3 33 0 9 20 28 46 18 9 5 39 20 230 0 4:45 PM 4 32 1 13 12 22 38 12 4 0 22 21 181 0 5:00 PM 9 42 5 9 28 25 46 23 8 5 72 44 316 0 5:15 PM 3 46 4 7 18 19 31 14 8 1 43 31 225 0 5:30 PM 3 36 1 10 22 15 35 19 2 0 37 22 202 0 5:45 PM 2 35 4 7 25 15 21 22 6 1 23 13 174 0 6:00 PM 6 31 1 8 22 16 33 16 1 0 37 12 183 0 6:15 PM 2 13 0 6 13 21 14 14 4 1 24 14 126 0 6:30 PM 3 13 0 6 5 17 31 14 10 0 14 10 123 0 6:45 PM 2 10 0 11 12 11 21 13 1 0 8 9 98 0 7:00 PM 1 10 3 4 4 8 41 7 2 0 11 9 100 0 7:15 PM 1 12 1 4 7 10 12 3 0 0 9 10 69 0 7:30 PM 1 3 2 5 6 8 9 17 2 1 10 11 75 0 7:45 PM 2 4 4 4 5 11 15 6 0 0 11 11 73 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 51 369 32 123 235 273 456 227 74 16 436 288 2,580 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 11% 82% 7% 19% 37% 43% 60% 30% 10% 2% 59% 39% APPROACH % 11% 82% 7% 19% 37% 43% 60% 30% 10% 2% 59% 39% APP/DEPART 452 / 1,113 631 / 325 757 / 382 740 / 760 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 13 67 1 31 52 65 99 57 16 1 83 45 530 APPROACH % 16% 83% 1% 21% 35% 44% 58% 33% 9% 1% 64% 35% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.362 0.597 0.558 0.267 0.419 APP/DEPART 81 / 211 148 / 69 172 / 89 129 / 161 0 SUNKIST NORTH SIDE CERRITOS WEST SIDE EAST SIDE CERRITOS SOUTH SIDE SUNKIST PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/7/11 NORTH & SOUTH: PHOENIX CLUB LOCATION 14 THURSDAY EAST & WEST: BALL CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS PHOENIX CLUB PHOENIX CLUB BALL BALL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1.33 0.33 0.33 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 0 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 35 0 14 2 0 4 5 224 23 6 376 1 690 0 4:15 PM 19 0 11 1 0 2 5 235 19 10 329 0 631 0 4:30 PM 18 0 4 2 0 1 5 236 19 6 352 0 643 0 4:45 PM 24 0 8 1 0 4 2 237 21 6 265 0 568 0 5:00 PM 57 0 13 1 0 5 4 244 16 5 458 1 804 0 5:15 PM 30 0 12 1 0 6 6 266 24 5 265 1 616 0 5:30 PM 22 0 10 0 0 3 6 245 30 13 296 0 625 0 5:45 PM 28 0 9 2 0 7 6 248 23 8 227 0 558 0 6:00 PM 46 0 12 1 0 3 4 210 18 8 263 1 566 0 6:15 PM 30 0 9 1 1 2 2 166 19 3 184 1 418 0 6:30 PM 13 0 2 1 0 3 3 160 25 5 186 0 398 0 6:45 PM 18 0 6 0 0 5 2 154 32 4 165 0 386 0 7:00 PM 24 1 6 2 0 8 3 155 20 3 176 0 398 0 7:15 PM 13 0 6 1 0 4 3 130 20 5 147 0 329 0 7:30 PM 13 0 3 0 0 5 0 104 9 2 146 1 283 0 7:45 PM 12 0 3 0 0 4 5 129 4 3 115 0 275 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 402 1 128 16 1 66 61 3,143 322 92 3,950 6 8,188 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 76% 0% 24% 19% 1% 80% 2% 89% 9% 2% 98% 0% APPROACH % 76% 0% 24% 19% 1% 80% 2% 89% 9% 2% 98% 0% APP/DEPART 531 / 68 83 / 415 3,526 / 3,287 4,048 / 4,418 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 107 0 29 3 1 13 11 690 94 20 798 2 1,768 APPROACH % 79% 0% 21% 18% 6% 76% 1% 87% 12% 2% 97% 0% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.486 0.708 0.753 0.442 0.550 APP/DEPART 136 / 13 17 / 115 795 / 722 820 / 918 0 PHOENIX CLUB NORTH SIDE BALL WEST SIDE EAST SIDE BALL SOUTH SIDE PHOENIX CLUB PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 5:30 PM 52 203 67 25 248 48 59 199 60 104 331 43 1439 5:45 PM 53 181 75 18 198 56 56 221 65 97 321 24 1365 6:00 PM 55 183 81 25 227 57 44 180 66 125 333 22 1398 6:15 PM 59 226 92 24 225 58 50 198 48 116 334 32 1462 6:30 PM 63 205 94 26 232 64 56 205 72 106 256 37 1416 6:45 PM 59 172 101 23 189 48 80 187 70 122 277 43 1371 7:00 PM 85 162 93 26 224 57 80 179 53 93 203 36 1291 7:15 PM 60 162 59 23 178 51 80 200 55 83 228 57 1236 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 486 1494 [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] 294 10978 APPROACH : 18.40% 56.55% 25.06% 8.09% 73.23% 18.68% 19.70% 61.22% 19.08% 24.72% 66.70% 8.59% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 236 786 368 98 873 227 230 770 [PHONE REDACTED] 134 5647 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.969 CONTROL : Signalized Katella Ave NS/EW Streets: Katella Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.942 Project ID: CA11_1160_001 City: City of Anaheim 0.911 0.880 PM Harbor Blvd Harbor Blvd 0.976 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 5:30 PM 19 35 62 13 17 33 19 263 5 14 417 17 914 5:45 PM 17 29 68 10 15 33 15 275 8 16 415 18 919 6:00 PM 27 30 45 9 14 34 25 253 13 9 436 15 910 6:15 PM 32 36 58 5 17 40 12 261 17 7 424 23 932 6:30 PM 15 36 43 7 19 42 28 292 12 12 376 24 906 6:45 PM 15 30 40 15 22 34 17 273 10 8 387 24 875 7:00 PM 5 43 41 10 17 25 37 240 10 9 325 26 788 7:15 PM 20 32 33 11 20 45 41 212 12 13 281 25 745 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 150 271 390 80 141 [PHONE REDACTED] 87 88 3061 172 6989 APPROACH : 18.50% 33.42% 48.09% 15.78% 27.81% 56.41% 8.26% 88.04% 3.70% 2.65% 92.17% 5.18% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 89 132 186 36 72 150 82 1079 52 36 1623 86 3623 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.986 CONTROL : Signalized Katella Ave NS/EW Streets: Katella Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.952 Project ID: CA11_1160_002 City: City of Anaheim 0.978 0.909 PM Clementine St Clementine St 0.984 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 2 2 1 2 3 1 1 3 0 1 3 1 5:30 PM 52 227 33 15 178 32 14 181 22 43 282 37 1116 5:45 PM 64 190 26 13 132 32 33 203 40 40 271 35 1079 6:00 PM 57 233 32 19 161 34 32 171 41 43 229 34 1086 6:15 PM 53 181 35 22 137 24 19 147 36 35 230 26 945 6:30 PM 57 188 30 12 109 29 31 189 28 33 184 19 909 6:45 PM 46 174 26 13 119 23 22 190 27 36 179 27 882 7:00 PM 49 151 35 18 125 25 30 144 29 25 164 13 808 7:15 PM 31 111 26 11 109 25 38 155 19 40 156 11 732 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 409 1455 [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] 202 7557 APPROACH : 19.41% 69.06% 11.53% 8.68% 75.51% 15.81% 11.90% 74.96% 13.15% 13.46% 77.33% 9.22% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 213 776 123 66 526 110 104 697 132 147 [PHONE REDACTED] PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.947 CONTROL : Signalized Ball Rd NS/EW Streets: Ball Rd WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.888 Project ID: CA11_1160_003 City: City of Anaheim 0.851 0.918 PM Anaheim Blvd Anaheim Blvd 0.901 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 3 1 1 3 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 5:30 PM 7 231 55 24 185 6 3 1 8 111 3 37 671 5:45 PM 8 223 60 30 183 5 4 2 7 102 5 27 656 6:00 PM 3 245 51 16 189 2 3 4 3 101 2 32 651 6:15 PM 6 193 65 21 166 2 1 1 2 99 3 31 590 6:30 PM 3 206 56 13 157 5 6 1 4 107 4 21 583 6:45 PM 4 198 61 31 162 6 6 5 14 123 2 13 625 7:00 PM 14 141 41 9 170 2 2 7 8 144 1 22 561 7:15 PM 3 128 49 10 138 2 2 1 1 84 1 15 434 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 48 1565 [PHONE REDACTED] 30 27 22 47 871 21 198 4771 APPROACH : 2.34% 76.30% 21.36% 10.04% 88.01% 1.96% 28.13% 22.92% 48.96% 79.91% 1.93% 18.17% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 16 842 233 81 674 15 16 11 23 430 11 97 2449 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.957 CONTROL : Signalized Cerritos Ave NS/EW Streets: Cerritos Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.951 Project ID: CA11_1160_004 City: City of Anaheim 0.750 0.959 PM Anaheim Blvd Anaheim Blvd 0.916 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3.5 .5 2 3 1 5:30 PM 26 136 17 13 96 41 34 292 23 28 385 14 1105 5:45 PM 30 177 24 12 118 41 31 273 26 35 364 6 1137 6:00 PM 29 125 24 14 92 51 26 265 34 29 401 6 1096 6:15 PM 35 150 24 19 108 39 19 274 16 36 343 8 1071 6:30 PM 24 119 25 20 101 34 33 294 25 26 377 13 1091 6:45 PM 24 169 25 11 121 36 24 272 38 21 361 15 1117 7:00 PM 22 127 12 18 121 41 28 248 25 26 305 16 989 7:15 PM 29 114 14 19 88 30 15 219 21 14 227 6 796 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 219 1117 165 126 845 [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] 84 8402 APPROACH : 14.59% 74.42% 10.99% 9.81% 65.81% 24.38% 8.22% 83.64% 8.14% 7.02% 90.24% 2.74% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 112 563 98 64 422 [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] 42 4375 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.969 CONTROL : Signalized Katella Ave NS/EW Streets: Katella Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.942 Project ID: CA11_1160_005 City: City of Anaheim 0.941 0.863 PM Anaheim Blvd/Haster St Anaheim Blvd/Haster St 0.949 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1.5 0 1.5 2 2 1 0 3 1 2 3 0 5:30 PM 12 63 8 9 5 191 121 73 406 888 5:45 PM 8 48 6 9 3 196 123 56 432 881 6:00 PM 16 40 6 10 2 160 113 62 418 827 6:15 PM 25 39 4 13 2 177 124 52 401 837 6:30 PM 10 33 6 10 1 180 133 74 393 840 6:45 PM 7 54 6 9 2 157 114 40 353 742 7:00 PM 17 49 6 11 4 151 102 26 328 694 7:15 PM 13 39 10 14 3 162 100 34 252 627 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 108 0 365 52 85 22 0 1374 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 6336 APPROACH : 22.83% 0.00% 77.17% 32.70% 53.46% 13.84% 0.00% 59.64% 40.36% 12.26% 87.74% 0.00% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 58 0 166 22 42 7 0 674 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 3246 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.966 CONTROL : Signalized Katella Ave NS/EW Streets: Katella Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.875 Project ID: CA11_1160_006 City: City of Anaheim 0.944 0.837 PM Manchester Ave (I-5 SB Ramps) Manchester Ave (I-5 SB Ramps) 0.973 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1.5 3 .5 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 3.5 1.5 5:30 PM 166 250 27 10 239 316 20 1028 5:45 PM 167 199 24 11 223 323 29 976 6:00 PM 169 188 24 8 176 314 18 897 6:15 PM 170 180 34 14 199 275 19 891 6:30 PM 194 162 31 16 193 273 21 890 6:45 PM 182 132 38 10 195 213 15 785 7:00 PM 172 116 35 16 187 186 22 734 7:15 PM 116 111 23 7 189 170 17 633 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 1336 1338 236 0 0 0 92 1601 0 0 2070 161 6834 APPROACH : 45.91% 45.98% 8.11% #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 5.43% 94.57% 0.00% 0.00% 92.78% 7.22% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 715 662 127 0 0 0 48 763 0 0 1075 73 3463 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.922 CONTROL : Signalized Katella Ave NS/EW Streets: Katella Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.000 Project ID: CA11_1160_007 City: City of Anaheim 0.884 0.902 PM Anaheim Way (I-5 NB Ramps) Anaheim Way (I-5 NB Ramps) 0.933 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 5:30 PM 12 1 52 19 25 12 4 242 11 26 305 1 710 5:45 PM 11 3 41 25 18 17 7 234 10 23 291 4 684 6:00 PM 14 1 43 16 24 18 6 228 8 26 249 2 635 6:15 PM 12 0 35 15 8 15 2 189 8 14 234 5 537 6:30 PM 12 3 30 9 5 4 14 220 6 20 191 7 521 6:45 PM 4 6 25 15 6 17 12 207 3 12 203 14 524 7:00 PM 4 2 28 8 2 6 8 212 3 16 163 2 454 7:15 PM 6 2 20 5 2 7 3 194 1 6 157 6 409 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 75 18 274 112 90 96 56 1726 50 143 1793 41 4474 APPROACH : 20.44% 4.90% 74.66% 37.58% 30.20% 32.21% 3.06% 94.21% 2.73% 7.23% 90.69% 2.07% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 42 10 133 55 43 54 34 844 25 72 877 28 2217 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.904 CONTROL : Signalized Ball Rd NS/EW Streets: Ball Rd WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.883 Project ID: CA11_1160_008 City: City of Anaheim 0.923 0.865 PM Lewis St Lewis St 0.889 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 5:30 PM 2 45 18 9 42 12 13 79 3 11 106 4 344 5:45 PM 4 39 13 8 39 7 9 65 4 8 93 3 292 6:00 PM 6 30 23 5 38 15 11 53 6 11 85 2 285 6:15 PM 4 21 14 0 24 11 16 42 4 5 63 2 206 6:30 PM 4 14 18 3 31 12 14 51 4 11 74 2 238 6:45 PM 4 15 24 3 13 11 6 68 6 1 67 0 218 7:00 PM 4 17 11 2 20 6 12 56 8 4 37 0 177 7:15 PM 2 18 6 0 7 5 10 39 7 7 38 1 140 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 30 199 127 30 214 79 91 453 42 58 563 14 1900 APPROACH : 8.43% 55.90% 35.67% 9.29% 66.25% 24.46% 15.53% 77.30% 7.17% 9.13% 88.66% 2.20% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 18 80 79 11 106 49 47 214 20 28 289 6 947 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.819 CONTROL : Signalized Cerritos Ave NS/EW Streets: Cerritos Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.833 Project ID: CA11_1160_009 City: City of Anaheim 0.803 0.842 PM Lewis St Lewis St 0.812 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 .5 .5 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 5:30 PM 5 16 7 16 1 55 20 229 0 4 344 9 706 5:45 PM 3 23 13 3 0 58 31 197 1 1 347 10 687 6:00 PM 3 20 9 9 1 61 20 184 0 6 323 10 646 6:15 PM 3 14 6 5 2 43 24 188 2 2 306 7 602 6:30 PM 6 17 6 9 1 41 30 198 2 2 253 8 573 6:45 PM 5 10 3 2 0 24 34 180 4 6 272 5 545 7:00 PM 2 9 3 3 1 24 20 201 1 4 223 3 494 7:15 PM 3 4 5 1 1 12 24 183 1 3 195 3 435 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 30 113 52 48 7 [PHONE REDACTED] 11 28 2263 55 4688 APPROACH : 15.38% 57.95% 26.67% 12.87% 1.88% 85.25% 11.44% 87.94% 0.62% 1.19% 96.46% 2.34% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 17 61 24 25 4 169 108 750 8 16 1154 30 2366 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.935 CONTROL : Signalized Katella Ave NS/EW Streets: Katella Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.882 Project ID: CA11_1160_010 City: City of Anaheim 0.900 0.782 PM Lewis St Lewis St 0.956 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 5:30 PM 7 9 2 11 29 5:45 PM 9 6 5 6 26 6:00 PM 7 4 2 6 19 6:15 PM 12 6 4 6 28 6:30 PM 6 3 3 7 19 6:45 PM 4 6 0 4 14 7:00 PM 3 7 1 3 14 7:15 PM 5 3 0 4 12 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 53 44 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 47 161 APPROACH : 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 26.56% 0.00% 73.44% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 29 19 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 23 80 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.879 CONTROL : Signalized Gene Autry Way NS/EW Streets: Gene Autry Way WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.694 Project ID: CA11_1160_011 City: City of Anaheim 0.000 0.729 PM I-5 HOV Ramps I-5 HOV Ramps 0.808 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 3 0 0 3 0 5:30 PM 60 51 77 239 287 69 783 5:45 PM 32 46 82 238 269 76 743 6:00 PM 38 50 67 244 224 60 683 6:15 PM 26 36 56 226 215 43 602 6:30 PM 41 36 48 190 180 39 534 6:45 PM 26 34 37 203 197 34 531 7:00 PM 28 34 51 201 155 39 508 7:15 PM 30 17 43 200 144 26 460 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 0 281 0 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 1671 386 4844 APPROACH : #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 48.03% 0.00% 51.97% 20.94% 79.06% 0.00% 0.00% 81.23% 18.77% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 0 131 0 156 208 863 0 0 [PHONE REDACTED] PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.898 CONTROL : Signalized Ball Rd NS/EW Streets: Ball Rd WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.764 Project ID: CA11_1160_012 City: City of Anaheim 0.960 0.000 PM East St East St 0.873 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 2 3 1 2 3 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 5:30 PM 58 225 39 54 158 62 38 250 42 34 214 55 1229 5:45 PM 44 183 35 45 110 40 51 219 21 30 264 68 1110 6:00 PM 43 166 39 46 99 36 61 218 19 27 183 66 1003 6:15 PM 32 129 24 51 72 34 39 210 27 28 195 46 887 6:30 PM 22 131 36 55 85 40 33 176 26 31 150 49 834 6:45 PM 26 104 28 55 73 22 26 210 16 28 190 47 825 7:00 PM 26 101 23 38 81 26 27 179 16 16 114 43 690 7:15 PM 13 72 19 34 61 24 36 188 19 10 126 43 645 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 264 1111 243 378 739 [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] 417 7223 APPROACH : 16.32% 68.67% 15.02% 26.98% 52.75% 20.27% 14.49% 76.85% 8.66% 9.92% 69.81% 20.27% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 123 530 127 207 329 132 159 814 88 114 [PHONE REDACTED] PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.860 CONTROL : Signalized Ball Rd NS/EW Streets: Ball Rd WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.736 Project ID: CA11_1160_013 City: City of Anaheim 0.905 0.790 PM State College Blvd State College Blvd 0.836 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 5:30 PM 22 230 12 6 209 31 24 48 21 8 44 9 664 5:45 PM 19 242 10 10 153 30 12 39 28 5 46 15 609 6:00 PM 26 186 5 7 129 14 12 35 25 6 40 16 501 6:15 PM 19 147 4 2 110 12 14 24 21 5 26 2 386 6:30 PM 15 152 5 1 95 23 14 25 14 4 23 6 377 6:45 PM 12 113 1 1 91 9 18 29 20 5 33 3 335 7:00 PM 7 99 3 5 85 14 14 20 15 4 16 3 285 7:15 PM 11 91 4 1 66 9 21 18 18 2 12 1 254 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 131 1260 44 33 938 142 129 238 162 39 240 55 3411 APPROACH : 9.13% 87.80% 3.07% 2.96% 84.28% 12.76% 24.39% 44.99% 30.62% 11.68% 71.86% 16.47% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 72 598 15 11 425 58 58 113 80 20 122 27 1599 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.813 CONTROL : Signalized Cerritos Ave NS/EW Streets: Cerritos Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.725 Project ID: CA11_1160_014 City: City of Orange 0.815 0.851 PM State College Blvd State College Blvd 0.841 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 3 0 2 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 5:30 PM 237 3 5 196 8 10 459 5:45 PM 251 4 7 195 7 9 473 6:00 PM 247 6 4 171 8 19 455 6:15 PM 226 1 1 178 6 12 424 6:30 PM 187 3 1 171 5 7 374 6:45 PM 153 2 1 103 5 5 269 7:00 PM 125 0 3 126 6 7 267 7:15 PM 126 1 5 99 3 12 246 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 1552 20 27 1239 0 0 0 0 48 0 81 2967 APPROACH : 0.00% 98.73% 1.27% 2.13% 97.87% 0.00% #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 37.21% 0.00% 62.79% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 0 813 12 7 623 0 0 0 0 24 0 43 1522 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.957 CONTROL : Signalized Gateway Center Dr NS/EW Streets: Gateway Center Dr WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.937 Project ID: CA11_1160_015 City: City of Orange 0.000 0.956 PM State College Blvd State College Blvd 0.731 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 2 3 0 2 3 0 1.5 1.5 0 0 1 0 5:30 PM 9 228 1 0 206 3 13 11 6 0 2 479 5:45 PM 6 236 0 0 187 9 15 12 2 0 1 468 6:00 PM 2 250 0 1 178 6 6 14 0 0 0 457 6:15 PM 3 204 0 0 172 6 18 6 4 2 2 417 6:30 PM 2 173 0 0 163 6 8 9 0 0 1 362 6:45 PM 1 149 0 0 110 6 13 5 0 0 1 285 7:00 PM 2 108 0 0 121 5 10 5 0 0 0 251 7:15 PM 3 128 0 0 104 4 6 4 5 0 0 254 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 28 1476 1 1 1241 45 89 0 66 17 2 7 2973 APPROACH : 1.86% 98.07% 0.07% 0.08% 96.43% 3.50% 57.42% 0.00% 42.58% 65.38% 7.69% 26.92% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 8 776 0 1 623 24 45 0 34 4 2 4 1521 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.950 CONTROL : Signalized Gene Autry Way NS/EW Streets: Gene Autry Way WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.919 Project ID: CA11_1160_016 City: City of Orange 0.880 0.932 PM State College Blvd State College Blvd 0.594 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 2 4 0 2 3.5 .5 2 3 0 2 3 0 5:30 PM 16 222 33 22 195 48 70 94 14 60 207 29 1010 5:45 PM 23 157 26 29 149 38 38 102 14 41 208 26 851 6:00 PM 12 201 22 18 151 35 51 92 8 18 171 23 802 6:15 PM 13 140 14 21 122 46 39 92 12 30 127 17 673 6:30 PM 12 141 9 14 133 29 23 99 17 15 115 8 615 6:45 PM 13 115 15 15 81 27 27 92 8 33 116 16 558 7:00 PM 16 95 12 10 98 21 20 77 6 19 105 9 488 7:15 PM 10 100 12 14 72 25 21 85 6 14 84 7 450 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 115 1171 [PHONE REDACTED] 269 289 733 85 230 1133 135 5447 APPROACH : 8.05% 81.95% 10.01% 10.12% 70.84% 19.04% 26.11% 66.21% 7.68% 15.35% 75.63% 9.01% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 50 597 60 68 487 137 140 375 45 96 529 64 2648 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.826 CONTROL : Signalized Orangewood Ave NS/EW Streets: Orangewood Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.825 Project ID: CA11_1160_017 City: City of Orange 0.879 0.811 PM State College Blvd State College Blvd 0.808 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 2 4 1 1 4 1 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 2 5:30 PM 21 222 92 1 230 3 17 167 63 816 5:45 PM 9 228 91 1 196 3 20 151 80 779 6:00 PM 12 193 76 11 175 3 18 102 68 658 6:15 PM 13 158 70 6 189 6 21 125 57 645 6:30 PM 8 141 77 4 168 4 19 71 46 538 6:45 PM 6 139 81 11 138 3 23 45 35 481 7:00 PM 9 120 66 10 134 3 18 48 30 438 7:15 PM 6 114 60 3 117 1 18 44 47 410 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 84 1315 613 47 1347 26 0 0 0 154 [PHONE REDACTED] APPROACH : 4.17% 65.36% 30.47% 3.31% 94.86% 1.83% #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 11.55% 56.49% 31.96% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 39 631 304 32 670 16 0 0 0 81 [PHONE REDACTED] PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.888 CONTROL : Signalized I-5 NB Ramps NS/EW Streets: I-5 NB Ramps WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.880 Project ID: CA11_1160_018 City: City of Anaheim 0.000 0.884 PM State College Blvd State College Blvd 0.885 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 4.5 .5 0 4 1 1.5 .5 2 0 0 0 5:30 PM 315 0 194 50 12 43 82 696 5:45 PM 316 4 169 54 15 33 87 678 6:00 PM 267 2 142 43 11 40 78 583 6:15 PM 227 1 175 41 17 35 65 561 6:30 PM 217 5 147 44 14 26 99 552 6:45 PM 207 6 118 40 14 35 87 507 7:00 PM 180 1 122 32 16 31 62 444 7:15 PM 170 1 103 30 9 27 72 412 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 1899 20 0 1170 334 108 270 632 0 0 0 4433 APPROACH : 0.00% 98.96% 1.04% 0.00% 77.79% 22.21% 10.69% 26.73% 62.57% #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 0 918 14 0 582 168 56 136 329 0 0 0 2203 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.904 CONTROL : Signalized I-5 SB Ramps NS/EW Streets: I-5 SB Ramps WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.889 Project ID: CA11_1160_019 City: City of Anaheim 0.945 0.884 PM State College Blvd State College Blvd 0.000 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: THURSDAY Date: 10/20/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 2 3 2 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 5:30 PM 78 257 23 80 261 29 18 154 86 44 [PHONE REDACTED] 5:45 PM 67 220 31 78 293 26 35 129 79 40 [PHONE REDACTED] 6:00 PM 74 234 15 71 256 20 31 120 80 33 184 90 1208 6:15 PM 49 198 26 75 257 16 20 99 83 32 [PHONE REDACTED] 6:30 PM 50 204 24 79 194 14 36 138 64 34 158 91 1086 6:45 PM 57 226 24 70 190 20 35 112 55 31 133 82 1035 7:00 PM 49 146 17 44 151 16 20 105 47 37 119 76 827 7:15 PM 52 186 21 41 186 8 24 90 55 43 101 74 881 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 476 1671 [PHONE REDACTED] 149 219 947 [PHONE REDACTED] 751 8813 APPROACH : 20.45% 71.78% 7.77% 21.74% 72.24% 6.02% 12.77% 55.22% 32.01% 12.81% 54.47% 32.72% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 230 862 89 295 897 70 122 469 282 130 [PHONE REDACTED] PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.904 CONTROL : Signalized Chapman Ave NS/EW Streets: Chapman Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.921 Project ID: CA11_1160_020 City: City of Anaheim 0.905 0.888 PM State College Blvd/The City Dr State College Blvd/The City Dr 0.837 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: WEDNESDAY Date: 10/19/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1.5 .5 1 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 5:30 PM 104 3 44 3 2 9 8 212 22 32 170 2 611 5:45 PM 74 2 30 3 4 10 17 197 21 29 129 0 516 6:00 PM 80 4 48 0 2 24 7 176 26 21 170 0 558 6:15 PM 54 4 28 0 3 9 7 155 21 26 108 1 416 6:30 PM 73 0 31 0 2 12 8 137 22 24 155 0 464 6:45 PM 53 0 19 1 1 9 5 137 22 18 105 0 370 7:00 PM 42 0 13 0 2 5 4 94 23 13 111 1 308 7:15 PM 41 1 10 0 0 4 6 87 30 9 93 0 281 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 521 14 223 7 16 82 62 1195 [PHONE REDACTED] 4 3524 APPROACH : 68.73% 1.85% 29.42% 6.67% 15.24% 78.10% 4.29% 82.76% 12.95% 14.13% 85.54% 0.33% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 260 8 126 1 8 54 27 605 91 89 538 1 1808 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.860 CONTROL : Signalized Taft Ave NS/EW Streets: Taft Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.663 Project ID: CA11_1160_021 City: City of Orange 0.898 0.786 PM Main St Main St 0.843 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: WEDNESDAY Date: 10/19/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 5:30 PM 26 59 9 6 40 48 51 168 24 11 123 7 572 5:45 PM 23 68 11 5 51 37 39 162 15 3 136 6 556 6:00 PM 22 46 4 1 44 44 46 163 30 14 117 2 533 6:15 PM 29 41 15 9 44 27 21 110 29 21 101 3 450 6:30 PM 31 35 8 4 21 33 40 130 30 5 106 8 451 6:45 PM 18 15 8 3 16 26 31 146 12 6 103 2 386 7:00 PM 22 29 5 4 22 17 19 108 8 5 89 2 330 7:15 PM 10 21 4 7 13 17 19 93 8 1 64 1 258 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 181 314 64 39 251 [PHONE REDACTED] 156 66 839 31 3536 APPROACH : 32.38% 56.17% 11.45% 7.24% 46.57% 46.20% 17.71% 71.90% 10.39% 7.05% 89.64% 3.31% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 100 137 35 17 125 130 138 549 101 46 427 15 1820 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.923 CONTROL : Signalized Taft Ave NS/EW Streets: Taft Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.947 Project ID: CA11_1160_022 City: City of Orange 0.883 0.865 PM Batavia St Batavia St 0.938 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: WEDNESDAY Date: 10/19/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 5:30 PM 19 61 43 52 35 21 213 10 31 181 26 692 5:45 PM 17 59 37 26 20 22 264 10 23 160 23 661 6:00 PM 9 38 23 34 25 19 178 7 18 162 50 563 6:15 PM 14 53 29 25 22 29 162 9 20 126 62 551 6:30 PM 11 53 28 27 12 13 168 2 20 136 32 502 6:45 PM 4 25 30 28 12 9 139 4 20 130 26 427 7:00 PM 8 20 11 18 15 6 139 3 18 149 18 405 7:15 PM 6 22 11 13 9 7 127 4 12 119 9 339 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 88 331 0 212 223 [PHONE REDACTED] 49 162 1163 246 4140 APPROACH : 21.00% 79.00% 0.00% 36.24% 38.12% 25.64% 8.05% 88.82% 3.13% 10.31% 74.03% 15.66% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 38 169 0 110 114 71 70 647 22 78 [PHONE REDACTED] PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.891 CONTROL : Signalized Katella Ave NS/EW Streets: Katella Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.713 Project ID: CA11_1160_023 City: City of Orange 0.797 0.844 PM Batavia St Batavia St 0.926 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: WEDNESDAY Date: 10/19/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 3 0 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 1 5:30 PM 13 212 24 8 105 37 75 135 21 10 74 16 730 5:45 PM 7 185 25 4 119 28 55 103 14 13 73 21 647 6:00 PM 18 171 17 16 120 46 46 93 13 8 59 13 620 6:15 PM 17 134 24 13 93 29 47 101 23 17 56 17 571 6:30 PM 23 155 27 16 105 35 42 88 10 11 62 15 589 6:45 PM 16 101 37 18 96 21 38 87 19 11 54 20 518 7:00 PM 15 104 17 10 82 17 23 60 7 12 46 10 403 7:15 PM 7 103 24 12 67 19 23 52 9 14 36 3 369 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 116 1165 195 97 787 232 349 719 116 96 [PHONE REDACTED] APPROACH : 7.86% 78.93% 13.21% 8.69% 70.52% 20.79% 29.48% 60.73% 9.80% 14.31% 68.55% 17.14% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 74 561 105 63 414 131 173 369 65 47 231 65 2298 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.879 CONTROL : Signalized Taft Ave NS/EW Streets: Taft Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.849 Project ID: CA11_1160_024 City: City of Orange 0.786 0.850 PM Glassell St Glassell St 0.881 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: WEDNESDAY Date: 10/19/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 3 0 2 3 0 5:30 PM 30 127 36 48 92 45 87 267 24 40 170 32 998 5:45 PM 25 90 32 33 85 27 58 225 23 37 184 41 860 6:00 PM 36 96 37 31 108 40 72 209 17 37 190 32 905 6:15 PM 38 77 27 29 74 28 48 187 24 33 170 32 767 6:30 PM 24 91 28 26 77 24 50 163 16 49 147 35 730 6:45 PM 20 102 29 39 74 26 36 140 25 27 152 27 697 7:00 PM 17 77 33 20 68 22 34 116 20 29 118 30 584 7:15 PM 17 68 28 20 38 18 35 101 13 26 101 18 483 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 207 728 250 246 616 [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] 247 6024 APPROACH : 17.47% 61.43% 21.10% 22.53% 56.41% 21.06% 21.11% 70.75% 8.14% 15.82% 70.12% 14.06% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 118 366 121 125 333 118 206 699 82 146 [PHONE REDACTED] PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.884 CONTROL : Signalized Katella Ave NS/EW Streets: Katella Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.865 Project ID: CA11_1160_025 City: City of Orange 0.821 0.843 PM Glassell St Glassell St 0.952 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: WEDNESDAY Date: 10/19/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 5:30 PM 21 4 23 5 3 5 2 340 14 14 242 11 684 5:45 PM 17 9 16 4 9 7 4 288 12 18 245 7 636 6:00 PM 16 8 20 5 3 2 3 277 6 8 218 2 568 6:15 PM 19 5 20 1 6 8 3 220 14 12 210 7 525 6:30 PM 16 4 14 1 3 1 6 233 8 6 161 5 458 6:45 PM 8 7 21 3 3 3 1 205 6 12 174 5 448 7:00 PM 13 4 11 1 2 7 2 213 7 11 134 5 410 7:15 PM 7 5 9 3 2 5 2 165 8 4 145 2 357 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 117 46 134 23 31 38 23 1941 75 85 1529 44 4086 APPROACH : 39.39% 15.49% 45.12% 25.00% 33.70% 41.30% 1.13% 95.19% 3.68% 5.13% 92.22% 2.65% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 59 24 75 10 15 14 13 935 34 38 763 19 1999 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.882 CONTROL : Signalized Katella Ave NS/EW Streets: Katella Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.725 Project ID: CA11_1160_026 City: City of Orange 0.831 0.927 PM Schaffer St Schaffer St 0.920 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: WEDNESDAY Date: 10/19/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 5:30 PM 16 39 16 29 42 20 23 335 9 20 253 53 855 5:45 PM 12 42 33 31 54 9 31 284 15 24 221 46 802 6:00 PM 11 38 19 25 47 18 13 280 11 22 212 44 740 6:15 PM 10 32 23 31 29 10 9 199 14 20 207 57 641 6:30 PM 11 33 16 28 46 10 12 217 9 21 147 56 606 6:45 PM 16 35 16 16 49 6 17 202 14 19 179 54 623 7:00 PM 8 32 10 23 16 11 12 201 6 14 136 50 519 7:15 PM 9 27 8 21 17 8 4 163 7 15 135 40 454 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 93 278 141 204 300 92 121 1881 85 155 1490 400 5240 APPROACH : 18.16% 54.30% 27.54% 34.23% 50.34% 15.44% 5.80% 90.13% 4.07% 7.58% 72.86% 19.56% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 48 138 74 100 171 44 51 898 48 82 [PHONE REDACTED] PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.888 CONTROL : Signalized Katella Ave NS/EW Streets: Katella Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.918 Project ID: CA11_1160_027 City: City of Orange 0.833 0.836 PM Cambridge St Cambridge St 0.904 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: WEDNESDAY Date: 10/19/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 2 3 1 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 3 1 5:30 PM 52 228 104 110 196 34 75 286 48 105 [PHONE REDACTED] 5:45 PM 71 184 108 142 198 31 64 271 40 101 [PHONE REDACTED] 6:00 PM 54 226 105 105 167 34 65 262 37 105 [PHONE REDACTED] 6:15 PM 70 168 88 134 123 39 62 223 29 101 [PHONE REDACTED] 6:30 PM 46 165 97 127 166 27 43 215 25 98 [PHONE REDACTED] 6:45 PM 49 190 90 83 165 38 59 202 36 80 [PHONE REDACTED] 7:00 PM 51 166 82 99 140 38 48 207 25 68 [PHONE REDACTED] 7:15 PM 34 124 63 82 140 39 39 163 31 63 [PHONE REDACTED] NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 427 1451 [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] 1139 11010 APPROACH : 16.33% 55.49% 28.18% 35.90% 52.71% 11.40% 17.81% 71.59% 10.61% 21.31% 45.02% 33.67% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 219 749 380 449 621 138 229 902 127 384 [PHONE REDACTED] PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.950 CONTROL : Signalized Katella Ave NS/EW Streets: Katella Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.885 Project ID: CA11_1160_028 City: City of Orange 0.894 0.947 PM Tustin St Tustin St 0.947 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: WEDNESDAY Date: 10/19/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 2.5 1.5 1 3 0 5:30 PM 100 117 292 228 [PHONE REDACTED] 5:45 PM 94 105 298 219 [PHONE REDACTED] 6:00 PM 98 95 247 234 97 355 1126 6:15 PM 72 102 223 232 [PHONE REDACTED] 6:30 PM 87 76 245 189 [PHONE REDACTED] 6:45 PM 57 83 222 173 [PHONE REDACTED] 7:00 PM 67 70 221 179 80 296 913 7:15 PM 67 58 201 129 71 259 785 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 0 642 0 706 0 1949 1583 877 2828 0 8585 APPROACH : #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 47.63% 0.00% 52.37% 0.00% 55.18% 44.82% 23.67% 76.33% 0.00% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 0 314 0 356 0 937 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 4404 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.958 CONTROL : Signalized Katella Ave NS/EW Streets: Katella Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.902 Project ID: CA11_1160_029 City: City of Orange 0.949 0.000 PM SR-55 SB Ramps SR-55 SB Ramps 0.936 ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: WEDNESDAY Date: 10/19/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 1 0 3 0 5:30 PM 229 5 209 6 271 123 354 81 1278 5:45 PM 251 1 203 6 280 115 339 71 1266 6:00 PM 245 0 197 6 233 112 285 79 1157 6:15 PM 257 1 203 5 204 90 336 63 1159 6:30 PM 253 2 178 7 223 110 320 71 1164 6:45 PM 243 2 196 8 184 103 277 55 1068 7:00 PM 223 4 171 1 184 113 215 52 963 7:15 PM 194 1 177 8 175 92 172 42 861 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 1895 16 1534 0 0 47 0 1754 858 0 2298 514 8916 APPROACH : 55.01% 0.46% 44.53% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 67.15% 32.85% 0.00% 81.72% 18.28% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 6:00 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL : 998 5 774 0 0 26 0 844 415 0 1218 268 4548 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.951 CONTROL : Signalized Katella Ave NS/EW Streets: Katella Ave WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.958 Project ID: CA11_1160_030 City: City of Orange 0.904 0.977 PM SR-55 NB Ramps SR-55 NB Ramps 0.924 ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report - Appendices EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR HONDA CENTER (ANAHEIM DUCKS HOCKEY GAME DAY) ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/6/11 NORTH & SOUTH: STATE COLLEGE LOCATION 1 WEDNESDAY EAST & WEST: KATELLA CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS STATE COLLEGE STATE COLLEGE KATELLA KATELLA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 2.5 1.5 2 3 1 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 27 138 63 37 141 40 51 165 22 54 250 20 1,008 1 1 5 8 15 4:15 PM 33 175 60 21 129 38 40 270 22 41 282 20 1,131 1 1 0 4 6 4:30 PM 34 155 56 29 141 59 39 208 27 68 239 19 1,074 1 0 1 12 14 4:45 PM 40 215 55 26 127 33 60 232 34 50 249 10 1,131 0 2 3 6 11 5:00 PM 33 215 69 44 192 62 56 218 25 78 259 26 1,277 1 0 1 7 9 5:15 PM 48 222 75 33 127 55 53 251 23 76 299 31 1,293 0 1 3 11 15 5:30 PM 38 222 65 35 178 40 48 264 31 78 288 34 1,321 0 1 0 9 10 5:45 PM 41 191 63 29 123 28 65 291 27 56 245 17 1,176 1 0 0 17 18 6:00 PM 28 166 69 29 106 39 34 237 21 55 217 19 1,020 0 0 0 12 12 6:15 PM 34 176 68 26 98 26 45 266 19 53 189 24 1,024 0 0 0 16 16 6:30 PM 20 133 93 25 100 19 22 249 26 44 168 20 919 0 1 0 10 11 6:45 PM 25 95 64 33 87 22 43 241 11 64 200 14 899 1 1 0 7 9 7:00 PM 24 81 45 27 71 29 19 177 18 43 149 15 698 0 0 0 9 9 7:15 PM 20 79 23 12 70 17 27 142 24 34 159 14 621 1 0 0 9 10 7:30 PM 25 61 26 20 57 21 24 148 14 39 103 14 552 2 1 1 9 13 7:45 PM 27 57 28 14 68 13 15 144 13 30 117 10 536 2 2 0 9 13 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 497 2,381 922 440 1,815 541 641 3,503 357 863 3,413 307 15,680 11 11 14 155 191 APPROACH % 13% 63% 24% 16% 65% 19% 14% 78% 8% 19% 74% 7% APPROACH % 13% 63% 24% 16% 65% 19% 14% 78% 8% 19% 74% 7% APP/DEPART 3,800 / 3,329 2,796 / 3,035 4,501 / 4,865 4,583 / 4,451 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 107 570 294 113 391 106 144 993 77 216 774 77 3,862 APPROACH % 11% 59% 30% 19% 64% 17% 12% 82% 6% 20% 73% 7% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.704 0.512 0.792 0.657 0.731 APP/DEPART 971 / 791 610 / 684 1,214 / 1,400 1,067 / 987 0 STATE COLLEGE NORTH SIDE KATELLA WEST SIDE EAST SIDE KATELLA SOUTH SIDE STATE COLLEGE PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/6/11 NORTH & SOUTH: SPORTSTOWN LOCATION 2 WEDNESDAY EAST & WEST: KATELLA CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS SPORTSTOWN SPORTSTOWN KATELLA KATELLA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 12 1 24 21 3 13 15 288 8 6 331 29 751 0 4:15 PM 9 3 12 21 0 12 10 255 6 17 306 23 674 0 4:30 PM 11 0 18 24 0 16 15 288 7 10 294 28 711 0 4:45 PM 10 1 18 29 2 22 12 271 10 10 293 30 708 0 5:00 PM 17 4 9 36 3 27 14 318 9 12 321 25 795 0 5:15 PM 12 2 28 37 2 27 17 289 12 15 386 26 853 0 5:30 PM 19 4 30 26 3 32 23 356 17 19 334 28 891 0 5:45 PM 17 1 23 41 3 14 20 311 14 17 282 17 760 0 6:00 PM 7 1 16 40 2 24 12 332 13 8 253 23 731 0 6:15 PM 19 0 51 43 0 13 12 298 10 16 246 28 736 0 6:30 PM 10 1 14 28 0 22 12 324 10 5 210 19 655 0 6:45 PM 8 1 7 33 2 31 14 297 11 8 196 12 620 0 7:00 PM 17 3 33 39 2 28 15 249 6 4 174 23 593 0 7:15 PM 9 1 23 21 1 20 7 178 7 5 179 17 468 0 7:30 PM 6 1 7 23 0 12 10 173 8 4 113 11 368 0 7:45 PM 7 0 11 17 0 10 15 166 4 4 147 12 393 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 190 24 324 479 23 323 223 4,393 152 160 4,065 351 10,707 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 35% 4% 60% 58% 3% 39% 5% 92% 3% 3% 89% 8% APPROACH % 35% 4% 60% 58% 3% 39% 5% 92% 3% 3% 89% 8% APP/DEPART 538 / 598 825 / 335 4,768 / 5,196 4,576 / 4,578 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 44 3 88 144 4 90 50 1,251 44 37 905 82 2,742 APPROACH % 33% 2% 65% 61% 2% 38% 4% 93% 3% 4% 88% 8% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.637 0.902 0.849 0.600 0.769 APP/DEPART 135 / 135 238 / 85 1,345 / 1,483 1,024 / 1,039 0 SPORTSTOWN NORTH SIDE KATELLA WEST SIDE EAST SIDE KATELLA SOUTH SIDE SPORTSTOWN PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/6/11 NORTH & SOUTH: HOWELL LOCATION 3 WEDNESDAY EAST & WEST: KATELLA CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS HOWELL HOWELL KATELLA KATELLA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1 1 1 2 0.5 0.5 1 3 0 2 3 0 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 22 1 37 73 2 25 18 300 10 21 322 37 868 0 4:15 PM 9 6 40 66 2 28 15 277 10 20 310 38 821 0 4:30 PM 12 2 17 58 3 13 18 300 8 29 302 35 797 0 4:45 PM 12 6 31 60 9 13 21 287 14 24 310 42 829 0 5:00 PM 21 10 45 100 3 24 21 309 8 23 302 83 949 0 5:15 PM 19 3 34 71 6 29 22 321 22 33 391 116 1,067 0 5:30 PM 17 8 36 64 1 23 30 355 18 32 331 90 1,005 0 5:45 PM 15 3 28 44 4 24 23 335 23 47 257 63 866 0 6:00 PM 8 3 37 49 4 14 19 352 12 41 272 62 873 0 6:15 PM 9 3 27 43 1 11 18 351 16 50 276 73 878 0 6:30 PM 8 4 23 51 5 14 30 349 21 27 212 65 809 0 6:45 PM 5 1 17 42 3 4 25 306 16 28 205 53 705 0 7:00 PM 10 4 12 39 4 11 17 290 9 23 191 51 661 0 7:15 PM 6 1 20 32 1 16 12 198 8 19 181 31 525 0 7:30 PM 4 0 5 27 0 9 13 178 8 13 116 22 395 0 7:45 PM 3 1 14 20 1 5 4 185 5 13 160 15 426 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 180 56 423 839 49 263 306 4,693 208 443 4,138 876 12,474 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 27% 8% 64% 73% 4% 23% 6% 90% 4% 8% 76% 16% APPROACH % 27% 8% 64% 73% 4% 23% 6% 90% 4% 8% 76% 16% APP/DEPART 659 / 1,238 1,151 / 700 5,207 / 5,955 5,457 / 4,581 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 30 11 104 185 13 43 92 1,358 65 146 965 253 3,265 APPROACH % 21% 8% 72% 77% 5% 18% 6% 90% 4% 11% 71% 19% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.477 0.474 0.940 0.631 0.765 APP/DEPART 145 / 356 241 / 224 1,515 / 1,647 1,364 / 1,038 0 HOWELL NORTH SIDE KATELLA WEST SIDE EAST SIDE KATELLA SOUTH SIDE HOWELL PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/6/11 NORTH & SOUTH: SR-57 NB RAMPS LOCATION 4 WEDNESDAY EAST & WEST: KATELLA CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS SR-57 NB RAMPS SR-57 NB RAMPS KATELLA KATELLA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1.5 X 1.5 X X X X 5 1 X 3 1 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 50 112 235 115 324 73 909 0 4:15 PM 50 122 273 109 267 60 881 0 4:30 PM 64 136 263 115 312 55 945 0 4:45 PM 65 101 300 110 258 45 879 0 5:00 PM 111 162 286 119 345 82 1,105 0 5:15 PM 176 200 313 107 299 34 1,129 0 5:30 PM 95 152 313 122 244 40 966 0 5:45 PM 84 158 319 123 241 45 970 0 6:00 PM 91 199 363 101 185 40 979 0 6:15 PM 84 261 396 91 173 30 1,035 0 6:30 PM 62 257 386 117 197 29 1,048 0 6:45 PM 59 287 361 70 117 21 915 0 7:00 PM 45 237 238 113 207 43 883 0 7:15 PM 39 72 174 107 145 29 566 0 7:30 PM 27 51 140 83 116 44 461 0 7:45 PM 22 53 113 95 130 49 462 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 1,124 0 2,560 0 0 0 0 4,473 1,697 0 3,560 719 14,133 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 31% 0% 69% 0% 0% 0% 0% 72% 28% 0% 83% 17% APPROACH % 31% 0% 69% 0% 0% 0% 0% 72% 28% 0% 83% 17% APP/DEPART 3,684 / 719 0 / 1,697 6,170 / 7,033 4,279 / 4,684 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 296 0 1,004 0 0 0 0 1,506 379 0 672 120 3,977 APPROACH % 23% 0% 77% 0% 0% 0% 0% 80% 20% 0% 85% 15% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.864 0.000 1.066 0.464 0.881 APP/DEPART 1,300 / 120 0 / 379 1,885 / 2,510 792 / 968 0 SR-57 NB RAMPS NORTH SIDE KATELLA WEST SIDE EAST SIDE KATELLA SOUTH SIDE SR-57 NB RAMPS PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/6/11 NORTH & SOUTH: SR-57 SB RAMPS LOCATION 5 WEDNESDAY EAST & WEST: KATELLA CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS SR-57 SB RAMPS SR-57 SB RAMPS KATELLA KATELLA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: X X X 1.5 X 1.5 X 3 1 X 3 1 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 71 139 308 94 246 115 973 0 4:15 PM 71 136 301 72 230 103 913 0 4:30 PM 93 131 283 80 236 135 958 0 4:45 PM 82 141 315 73 235 104 950 0 5:00 PM 76 138 348 104 272 139 1,077 0 5:15 PM 74 142 319 99 379 86 1,099 0 5:30 PM 95 151 358 83 304 58 1,049 0 5:45 PM 111 167 333 69 235 82 997 0 6:00 PM 101 156 350 80 212 51 950 0 6:15 PM 132 144 367 65 254 53 1,015 0 6:30 PM 136 124 380 77 183 36 936 0 6:45 PM 102 124 334 55 166 41 822 0 7:00 PM 83 79 233 58 187 43 683 0 7:15 PM 48 67 242 56 154 46 613 0 7:30 PM 48 59 170 29 94 37 437 0 7:45 PM 21 83 193 42 100 55 494 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 0 0 0 1,344 0 1,981 0 4,834 1,136 0 3,487 1,184 13,966 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 0% 0% 0% 40% 0% 60% 0% 81% 19% 0% 75% 25% APPROACH % 0% 0% 0% 40% 0% 60% 0% 81% 19% 0% 75% 25% APP/DEPART 0 / 1,184 3,325 / 1,136 5,970 / 6,178 4,671 / 5,468 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 0 0 0 471 0 548 0 1,431 277 0 815 181 3,723 APPROACH % 0% 0% 0% 46% 0% 54% 0% 84% 16% 0% 82% 18% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.000 0.916 0.945 0.535 0.847 APP/DEPART 0 / 181 1,019 / 277 1,708 / 1,902 996 / 1,363 0 SR-57 SB RAMPS NORTH SIDE KATELLA WEST SIDE EAST SIDE KATELLA SOUTH SIDE SR-57 SB RAMPS PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/6/11 NORTH & SOUTH: DOUGLASS LOCATION 6 WEDNESDAY EAST & WEST: KATELLA CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS DOUGLASS DOUGLASS KATELLA KATELLA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 0 2 0 1 0.5 1.5 2 3 1 2 3 1 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 23 2 6 35 3 108 56 262 15 14 260 38 822 0 5 14 19 4:15 PM 23 4 11 32 3 46 60 322 13 21 264 24 823 0 0 12 12 4:30 PM 14 2 5 35 1 58 68 315 25 13 299 28 863 0 7 9 16 4:45 PM 13 3 6 29 0 39 66 327 21 14 250 28 796 1 3 5 9 5:00 PM 18 4 6 30 2 91 85 342 18 15 320 57 988 0 5 9 14 5:15 PM 8 15 7 22 2 51 122 376 29 17 262 52 963 0 5 9 14 5:30 PM 21 5 12 25 2 44 132 291 27 24 201 56 840 0 4 10 14 5:45 PM 11 7 8 15 3 36 149 309 40 17 238 61 894 0 0 7 7 6:00 PM 26 12 7 9 3 34 252 297 32 16 157 60 905 0 0 4 4 6:15 PM 23 12 10 14 1 30 275 319 30 15 157 75 961 0 0 8 8 6:30 PM 23 14 3 23 1 25 228 294 44 17 159 73 904 4 0 15 19 6:45 PM 11 11 3 16 1 22 322 299 52 18 134 90 979 3 0 9 12 7:00 PM 19 10 4 12 3 26 213 218 45 10 171 60 791 1 0 5 6 7:15 PM 16 2 5 14 2 26 80 160 24 4 136 30 499 2 5 0 7 7:30 PM 17 3 3 10 4 23 38 140 17 9 125 21 410 2 0 6 8 7:45 PM 22 2 5 3 1 31 29 131 7 5 137 14 387 0 2 3 5 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 288 108 101 324 32 690 2,175 4,402 439 229 3,270 767 12,825 0 13 36 125 174 APPROACH % 58% 22% 20% 31% 3% 66% 31% 63% 6% 5% 77% 18% APPROACH % 58% 22% 20% 31% 3% 66% 31% 63% 6% 5% 77% 18% APP/DEPART 497 / 3,050 1,046 / 700 7,016 / 4,827 4,266 / 4,248 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 83 49 23 62 6 111 1,077 1,209 158 66 607 298 3,749 APPROACH % 54% 32% 15% 35% 3% 62% 44% 49% 6% 7% 63% 31% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.861 0.913 0.908 0.975 0.957 APP/DEPART 155 / 1,424 179 / 230 2,444 / 1,294 971 / 801 0 DOUGLASS NORTH SIDE KATELLA WEST SIDE EAST SIDE KATELLA SOUTH SIDE DOUGLASS PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/6/11 NORTH & SOUTH: STRUCK LOCATION 7 WEDNESDAY EAST & WEST: KATELLA CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS STRUCK STRUCK KATELLA KATELLA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1.5 X 0.5 X X X X 3 1 1 3 X X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 78 4 204 68 4 230 588 0 0 4:15 PM 65 5 209 65 5 215 564 1 1 4:30 PM 77 9 213 56 5 230 590 0 0 4:45 PM 64 1 256 53 6 202 582 2 2 5:00 PM 116 9 284 57 3 259 728 0 0 5:15 PM 79 7 303 61 8 264 722 2 2 5:30 PM 52 7 275 62 6 246 648 1 1 5:45 PM 58 6 193 50 10 257 574 1 1 6:00 PM 55 4 191 47 12 258 567 0 0 6:15 PM 47 5 151 37 14 302 556 1 1 6:30 PM 41 5 177 36 12 310 581 0 0 6:45 PM 44 4 143 47 27 330 595 1 1 7:00 PM 26 1 137 24 6 214 408 0 0 7:15 PM 23 6 111 26 3 126 295 0 0 7:30 PM 13 4 101 29 2 144 293 1 1 7:45 PM 21 1 91 21 2 126 262 2 2 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 859 0 78 0 0 0 0 3,039 739 125 3,713 0 8,553 0 0 0 12 12 APPROACH % 92% 0% 8% 0% 0% 0% 0% 80% 20% 3% 97% 0% APPROACH % 92% 0% 8% 0% 0% 0% 0% 80% 20% 3% 97% 0% APP/DEPART 937 / 0 0 / 864 3,778 / 3,117 3,838 / 4,572 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 187 0 18 0 0 0 0 662 167 65 1,200 0 2,299 APPROACH % 91% 0% 9% 0% 0% 0% 0% 80% 20% 5% 95% 0% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.410 0.000 0.569 1.163 0.789 APP/DEPART 205 / 0 0 / 232 829 / 680 1,265 / 1,387 0 STRUCK NORTH SIDE KATELLA WEST SIDE EAST SIDE KATELLA SOUTH SIDE STRUCK PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/6/11 NORTH & SOUTH: MAIN LOCATION 8 WEDNESDAY EAST & WEST: KATELLA CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS MAIN MAIN KATELLA KATELLA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 3 0 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 34 87 68 16 56 23 12 169 15 53 166 27 726 0 4:15 PM 37 76 69 26 58 21 18 152 17 45 176 33 728 0 4:30 PM 36 97 71 26 72 37 15 173 10 38 172 21 768 0 4:45 PM 36 72 72 20 63 19 17 166 13 55 184 23 740 0 5:00 PM 51 120 76 22 71 26 19 198 13 45 199 32 872 0 5:15 PM 51 112 67 15 59 31 16 189 15 44 247 13 859 0 5:30 PM 48 92 63 23 45 34 29 210 10 41 215 22 832 0 5:45 PM 48 77 60 25 33 30 18 138 13 48 225 33 748 0 6:00 PM 34 86 56 23 51 38 22 116 13 33 246 19 737 0 6:15 PM 55 75 57 17 40 31 16 103 8 35 224 31 692 0 6:30 PM 53 72 43 18 43 31 14 120 12 37 217 22 682 0 6:45 PM 44 43 36 15 29 36 12 101 8 52 289 15 680 0 7:00 PM 29 40 36 17 41 16 11 114 11 29 155 23 522 0 7:15 PM 30 44 41 17 27 6 13 84 15 38 108 12 435 0 7:30 PM 21 27 36 13 17 14 11 78 5 29 107 6 364 0 7:45 PM 19 29 20 13 13 10 9 80 10 25 85 10 323 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 626 1,149 871 306 718 403 252 2,191 188 647 3,015 342 10,708 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 24% 43% 33% 21% 50% 28% 10% 83% 7% 16% 75% 9% APPROACH % 24% 43% 33% 21% 50% 28% 10% 83% 7% 16% 75% 9% APP/DEPART 2,646 / 1,743 1,427 / 1,553 2,631 / 3,368 4,004 / 4,044 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 186 276 192 73 163 136 64 440 41 157 976 87 2,791 APPROACH % 28% 42% 29% 20% 44% 37% 12% 81% 8% 13% 80% 7% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.662 0.782 0.547 0.997 0.800 APP/DEPART 654 / 427 372 / 361 545 / 705 1,220 / 1,298 0 MAIN NORTH SIDE KATELLA WEST SIDE EAST SIDE KATELLA SOUTH SIDE MAIN PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/6/11 NORTH & SOUTH: MAIN LOCATION 9 WEDNESDAY EAST & WEST: STRUCK CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS MAIN MAIN STRUCK STRUCK NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 29 179 6 9 99 14 7 22 49 9 32 5 460 0 4:15 PM 35 172 6 7 109 8 5 11 47 6 15 12 433 0 4:30 PM 36 187 3 2 119 6 11 19 45 7 25 7 467 0 4:45 PM 29 155 2 2 114 4 4 20 43 8 18 7 406 0 5:00 PM 48 214 3 6 118 9 11 15 49 6 27 10 516 0 5:15 PM 34 209 3 3 100 9 10 11 48 3 21 3 454 0 5:30 PM 31 184 3 2 86 4 9 16 42 5 13 6 401 0 5:45 PM 34 184 1 1 83 8 10 10 27 4 10 3 375 0 6:00 PM 36 159 0 4 77 12 4 9 43 6 19 2 371 0 6:15 PM 42 165 1 0 78 16 8 9 20 1 16 2 358 0 6:30 PM 47 157 1 3 73 13 2 17 15 1 11 4 344 0 6:45 PM 57 125 4 5 59 23 7 9 18 3 16 4 330 0 7:00 PM 17 89 0 1 70 7 2 5 20 3 13 4 231 0 7:15 PM 15 98 0 2 70 6 3 6 17 2 11 2 232 0 7:30 PM 8 75 1 3 43 3 2 9 14 0 6 3 167 0 7:45 PM 8 63 0 0 54 6 1 6 14 0 2 2 156 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 506 2,415 34 50 1,352 148 96 194 511 64 255 76 5,701 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 17% 82% 1% 3% 87% 10% 12% 24% 64% 16% 65% 19% APPROACH % 17% 82% 1% 3% 87% 10% 12% 24% 64% 16% 65% 19% APP/DEPART 2,955 / 2,587 1,550 / 1,927 801 / 278 395 / 909 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 182 606 6 12 287 64 21 44 96 11 62 12 1,403 APPROACH % 23% 76% 1% 3% 79% 18% 13% 27% 60% 13% 73% 14% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.749 0.682 0.537 0.494 0.680 APP/DEPART 794 / 639 363 / 394 161 / 62 85 / 308 0 MAIN NORTH SIDE STRUCK WEST SIDE EAST SIDE STRUCK SOUTH SIDE MAIN PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/6/11 NORTH & SOUTH: SR-57 NB RAMPS LOCATION 10 WEDNESDAY EAST & WEST: BALL CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS SR-57 NB RAMPS SR-57 NB RAMPS BALL BALL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1 X 1 X X X X 3 1 X 3 1 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 139 78 196 152 267 102 934 0 4:15 PM 156 54 225 149 250 101 935 0 4:30 PM 194 49 233 146 305 106 1,033 0 4:45 PM 199 76 216 131 192 84 898 0 5:00 PM 152 54 238 155 354 122 1,075 0 5:15 PM 165 43 246 137 227 89 907 0 5:30 PM 156 55 267 129 227 79 913 0 5:45 PM 153 51 228 136 182 76 826 0 6:00 PM 126 54 274 124 231 80 889 0 6:15 PM 131 64 284 130 196 72 877 0 6:30 PM 105 71 316 139 184 75 890 0 6:45 PM 118 79 218 190 170 66 841 0 7:00 PM 102 44 154 158 141 62 661 0 7:15 PM 105 25 122 139 117 48 556 0 7:30 PM 96 25 86 163 96 34 500 0 7:45 PM 86 25 74 150 86 35 456 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 2,183 0 847 0 0 0 0 3,377 2,328 0 3,225 1,231 13,191 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 72% 0% 28% 0% 0% 0% 0% 59% 41% 0% 72% 28% APPROACH % 72% 0% 28% 0% 0% 0% 0% 59% 41% 0% 72% 28% APP/DEPART 3,030 / 1,231 0 / 2,328 5,705 / 4,224 4,456 / 5,408 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 480 0 268 0 0 0 0 1,092 583 0 781 293 3,497 APPROACH % 64% 0% 36% 0% 0% 0% 0% 65% 35% 0% 73% 27% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.680 0.000 1.066 0.564 0.813 APP/DEPART 748 / 293 0 / 583 1,675 / 1,360 1,074 / 1,261 0 SR-57 NB RAMPS NORTH SIDE BALL WEST SIDE EAST SIDE BALL SOUTH SIDE SR-57 NB RAMPS PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/6/11 NORTH & SOUTH: SR-57 SB RAMPS LOCATION 11 WEDNESDAY EAST & WEST: BALL CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS SR-57 SB RAMPS SR-57 SB RAMPS BALL BALL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: X X X 0.5 X 1.5 X 3 1 X 3 1 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 75 148 266 174 309 95 1,067 0 4:15 PM 65 164 316 104 319 82 1,050 0 4:30 PM 66 179 311 118 380 96 1,150 0 4:45 PM 76 195 259 95 347 56 1,028 0 5:00 PM 66 147 337 98 364 126 1,138 0 5:15 PM 66 152 326 89 345 55 1,033 0 5:30 PM 86 192 309 91 322 62 1,062 0 5:45 PM 86 190 274 80 310 37 977 0 6:00 PM 147 184 281 104 293 57 1,066 0 6:15 PM 165 189 249 94 283 50 1,030 0 6:30 PM 172 207 267 82 242 46 1,016 0 6:45 PM 106 162 268 92 235 48 911 0 7:00 PM 58 114 277 82 214 36 781 0 7:15 PM 45 106 216 74 188 26 655 0 7:30 PM 37 108 205 62 170 24 606 0 7:45 PM 24 94 198 44 159 21 540 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 0 0 0 1,340 0 2,531 0 4,359 1,483 0 4,480 917 15,110 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 0% 0% 0% 35% 0% 65% 0% 75% 25% 0% 83% 17% APPROACH % 0% 0% 0% 35% 0% 65% 0% 75% 25% 0% 83% 17% APP/DEPART 0 / 917 3,871 / 1,483 5,842 / 5,699 5,397 / 7,011 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 0 0 0 590 0 742 0 1,065 372 0 1,053 201 4,023 APPROACH % 0% 0% 0% 44% 0% 56% 0% 74% 26% 0% 84% 16% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.000 1.229 0.826 0.640 0.875 APP/DEPART 0 / 201 1,332 / 372 1,437 / 1,655 1,254 / 1,795 0 SR-57 SB RAMPS NORTH SIDE BALL WEST SIDE EAST SIDE BALL SOUTH SIDE SR-57 SB RAMPS PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/6/11 NORTH & SOUTH: SUNKIST LOCATION 12 WEDNESDAY EAST & WEST: BALL CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS SUNKIST SUNKIST BALL BALL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1 2 0 1 2 0 2 3 0 2 2 1 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 15 55 46 49 37 16 37 328 8 31 332 108 1,062 0 4:15 PM 10 60 54 49 33 34 37 334 10 47 311 121 1,100 0 4:30 PM 16 62 85 61 27 25 51 282 7 56 346 145 1,163 0 4:45 PM 14 51 58 63 42 30 37 262 6 43 361 143 1,110 0 5:00 PM 24 122 78 51 43 18 28 313 13 40 328 129 1,187 0 5:15 PM 20 121 66 50 33 31 45 256 8 48 322 131 1,131 0 5:30 PM 13 117 53 47 44 29 51 308 11 51 324 153 1,201 0 5:45 PM 14 48 32 49 43 34 32 272 11 65 304 119 1,023 0 6:00 PM 4 41 46 56 34 24 27 294 10 74 293 106 1,009 0 6:15 PM 15 30 52 44 36 16 35 269 14 80 278 105 974 0 6:30 PM 6 38 51 57 40 24 18 236 21 111 240 81 923 0 6:45 PM 6 31 53 42 29 19 20 273 11 100 249 73 906 0 7:00 PM 8 24 53 51 20 19 25 248 7 37 215 77 784 0 7:15 PM 12 16 54 36 6 17 15 204 11 36 184 62 653 0 7:30 PM 10 17 30 34 19 21 13 204 9 38 182 71 648 0 7:45 PM 2 17 27 20 16 13 10 184 4 20 163 49 525 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 189 850 838 759 502 370 481 4,267 161 877 4,432 1,673 15,399 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 10% 45% 45% 47% 31% 23% 10% 87% 3% 13% 63% 24% APPROACH % 10% 45% 45% 47% 31% 23% 10% 87% 3% 13% 63% 24% APP/DEPART 1,877 / 3,004 1,631 / 1,540 4,909 / 5,864 6,982 / 4,991 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 31 140 202 199 139 83 100 1,072 56 365 1,060 365 3,812 APPROACH % 8% 38% 54% 47% 33% 20% 8% 87% 5% 20% 59% 20% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.416 0.780 0.830 0.818 0.794 APP/DEPART 373 / 605 421 / 560 1,228 / 1,473 1,790 / 1,174 0 SUNKIST NORTH SIDE BALL WEST SIDE EAST SIDE BALL SOUTH SIDE SUNKIST PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/6/11 NORTH & SOUTH: SUNKIST LOCATION 13 WEDNESDAY EAST & WEST: CERRITOS CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS SUNKIST SUNKIST CERRITOS CERRITOS NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1 2 0 0 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 6 28 4 20 25 25 28 19 9 2 48 30 244 0 4:15 PM 5 40 1 15 24 35 32 26 6 3 30 28 245 0 4:30 PM 8 25 3 16 29 25 53 17 5 2 40 27 250 0 4:45 PM 6 34 4 17 25 31 31 27 12 3 34 26 250 0 5:00 PM 11 85 4 13 30 27 59 29 2 5 69 64 398 0 5:15 PM 4 90 5 15 22 22 27 26 4 6 55 49 325 0 5:30 PM 5 74 6 24 25 19 31 22 10 3 26 40 285 0 5:45 PM 2 27 5 28 20 20 21 38 5 5 26 15 212 0 6:00 PM 4 20 8 40 24 12 26 28 6 9 29 16 222 0 6:15 PM 6 20 12 64 25 9 21 48 6 10 18 16 255 0 6:30 PM 2 22 11 89 25 16 19 48 8 11 21 13 285 0 6:45 PM 0 19 11 65 19 18 24 44 7 6 18 15 246 0 7:00 PM 3 16 4 25 14 11 35 29 4 4 17 14 176 0 7:15 PM 0 12 3 16 9 3 19 12 1 5 9 23 112 0 7:30 PM 2 8 2 10 13 13 19 7 2 7 11 11 105 0 7:45 PM 2 9 3 1 10 15 19 4 1 6 8 5 83 0 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 66 529 86 458 339 301 464 424 88 87 459 392 3,693 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 10% 78% 13% 42% 31% 27% 48% 43% 9% 9% 49% 42% APPROACH % 10% 78% 13% 42% 31% 27% 48% 43% 9% 9% 49% 42% APP/DEPART 681 / 1,385 1,098 / 514 976 / 968 938 / 826 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 12 81 42 258 93 55 90 168 27 36 86 60 1,008 APPROACH % 9% 60% 31% 64% 23% 14% 32% 59% 9% 20% 47% 33% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.338 1.390 0.792 0.330 0.633 APP/DEPART 135 / 231 406 / 156 285 / 468 182 / 153 0 SUNKIST NORTH SIDE CERRITOS WEST SIDE EAST SIDE CERRITOS SOUTH SIDE SUNKIST PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS PREPARED BY: PACIFIC TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES DATE: LOCATION: ANAHEIM PROJECT CA11-0408-05 4/6/11 NORTH & SOUTH: PHOENIX CLUB LOCATION 14 WEDNESDAY EAST & WEST: BALL CONTROL: SIGNAL NOTES: AM ▲ PM N MD ◄W E ► OTHER S OTHER ▼ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND U-TURNS PHOENIX CLUB PHOENIX CLUB BALL BALL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1.33 0.33 0.33 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 0 X X X X 3:30 PM 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 4:00 PM 29 0 14 3 1 4 5 250 24 4 334 2 670 0 1 1 4:15 PM 24 1 9 4 0 5 8 245 17 11 316 2 642 0 0 0 4:30 PM 21 1 9 2 0 7 5 251 25 9 387 1 718 0 0 0 4:45 PM 28 0 10 0 0 6 7 260 28 9 246 3 597 0 0 0 5:00 PM 33 0 15 1 0 3 8 244 39 10 429 1 783 0 1 1 5:15 PM 32 0 14 2 1 9 7 247 49 11 282 4 658 0 0 0 5:30 PM 43 0 11 1 0 6 5 247 54 10 262 3 642 0 1 1 5:45 PM 27 0 9 2 1 10 5 217 61 19 225 1 577 0 0 0 6:00 PM 43 1 16 1 0 10 11 182 115 22 253 1 655 0 1 1 6:15 PM 23 0 7 2 0 7 2 191 173 30 238 1 674 0 0 0 6:30 PM 25 0 6 1 0 4 4 183 198 40 235 2 698 0 1 1 6:45 PM 27 1 7 2 0 5 6 164 120 25 204 3 564 0 0 0 7:00 PM 20 0 8 1 0 5 4 157 52 13 179 0 439 0 0 0 7:15 PM 22 0 5 1 0 5 6 116 21 6 134 1 317 0 1 1 7:30 PM 17 0 5 1 0 3 4 92 21 3 103 0 249 0 1 1 7:45 PM 19 0 2 0 0 0 1 83 13 4 109 0 231 1 1 2 8:00 PM 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 VOLUMES 433 4 147 24 3 89 88 3,129 1,010 226 3,936 25 9,114 1 0 8 0 9 APPROACH % 74% 1% 25% 21% 3% 77% 2% 74% 24% 5% 94% 1% APPROACH % 74% 1% 25% 21% 3% 77% 2% 74% 24% 5% 94% 1% APP/DEPART 584 / 117 116 / 1,239 4,227 / 3,300 4,187 / 4,458 0 BEGIN PEAK HR VOLUMES 118 2 36 6 0 26 23 720 606 117 930 7 2,591 APPROACH % 76% 1% 23% 19% 0% 81% 2% 53% 45% 11% 88% 1% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.813 0.667 1.113 0.599 0.827 APP/DEPART 156 / 32 32 / 723 1,349 / 762 1,054 / 1,074 0 PHOENIX CLUB NORTH SIDE BALL WEST SIDE EAST SIDE BALL SOUTH SIDE PHOENIX CLUB PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 7:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report - Appendices EXISTING DAILY ARTERIAL SEGMENT TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR HONDA CENTER (NO EVENTS DAY & ANAHEIM DUCKS HOCKEY GAME DAY) ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : MAIN STREET Location: Date: : S/O KATELLA AVENUE Segment: 04/06/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: NB SB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 49 142 581 18 43 115 550 92 1,131 23 257 41 12:15 167 12 150 10 317 22 12:30 142 4 147 10 289 14 12:45 130 9 138 6 268 15 01:00 17 159 539 4 14 146 537 31 1,076 1 305 5 01:15 127 4 130 3 257 7 01:30 131 4 134 8 265 12 01:45 122 2 127 5 249 7 02:00 28 140 599 2 12 111 461 40 1,060 8 251 10 02:15 132 3 120 6 252 9 02:30 181 3 124 8 305 11 02:45 146 4 106 6 252 10 03:00 11 148 635 5 23 124 479 34 1,114 4 272 9 03:15 156 4 117 3 273 7 03:30 167 6 130 0 297 6 03:45 164 8 108 4 272 12 04:00 49 198 778 17 90 138 517 139 1,295 7 336 24 04:15 196 12 130 7 326 19 04:30 210 28 127 11 337 39 04:45 174 33 122 24 296 57 05:00 114 250 873 22 150 134 451 264 1,324 20 384 42 05:15 226 36 111 19 337 55 05:30 207 32 100 42 307 74 05:45 190 60 106 33 296 93 06:00 218 172 644 54 315 89 358 533 1,002 46 261 100 06:15 185 71 89 44 274 115 06:30 159 83 92 58 251 141 06:45 128 107 88 70 216 177 07:00 310 101 360 140 714 80 269 1,024 629 61 181 201 07:15 112 154 80 68 192 222 07:30 78 198 47 89 125 287 07:45 69 222 62 92 131 314 08:00 363 70 211 186 698 48 162 1,061 373 92 118 278 08:15 45 190 37 94 82 284 08:30 42 172 33 85 75 257 08:45 54 150 44 92 98 242 09:00 384 72 236 122 431 34 161 815 397 92 106 214 09:15 30 112 30 76 60 188 09:30 50 110 28 131 78 241 09:45 84 87 69 85 153 172 10:00 447 86 159 100 428 110 191 875 350 102 196 202 10:15 34 106 41 112 75 218 10:30 22 113 20 117 42 230 10:45 17 109 20 116 37 225 11:00 579 21 71 104 418 24 70 997 141 115 45 219 11:15 18 104 16 116 34 220 11:30 23 92 18 174 41 266 11:45 9 118 12 174 21 292 Totals 2,569 5,686 3,336 4,206 5,905 9,892 Split% 57.5 56.5 42.5 43.5 Day Totals 7,542 15,797 8,255 Day Splits 52.3 47.7 Peak Hour 11:00 05:00 07:30 12:15 07:30 04:30 Volume 579 873 796 581 1,163 1,354 Factor 0.83 0.87 0.90 0.97 0.93 0.88 Data File : D1104051 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : MAIN STREET Location: Date: : S/O KATELLA AVENUE Segment: 04/07/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: NB SB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 38 157 610 13 36 136 577 74 1,187 12 293 25 12:15 142 10 141 11 283 21 12:30 161 5 131 7 292 12 12:45 150 8 169 8 319 16 01:00 30 150 549 3 14 132 527 44 1,076 6 282 9 01:15 144 5 133 5 277 10 01:30 147 5 120 14 267 19 01:45 108 1 142 5 250 6 02:00 8 131 575 6 14 122 489 22 1,064 1 253 7 02:15 149 2 124 2 273 4 02:30 148 4 131 2 279 6 02:45 147 2 112 3 259 5 03:00 21 142 629 2 21 122 475 42 1,104 3 264 5 03:15 165 3 96 8 261 11 03:30 166 4 157 6 323 10 03:45 156 12 100 4 256 16 04:00 42 216 775 8 73 124 499 115 1,274 5 340 13 04:15 174 10 124 4 298 14 04:30 180 30 144 13 324 43 04:45 205 25 107 20 312 45 05:00 119 228 788 20 147 120 453 266 1,241 18 348 38 05:15 202 39 116 21 318 60 05:30 184 38 126 44 310 82 05:45 174 50 91 36 265 86 06:00 182 180 502 55 309 95 305 491 807 24 275 79 06:15 114 59 74 37 188 96 06:30 110 78 71 52 181 130 06:45 98 117 65 69 163 186 07:00 294 91 332 137 688 76 231 982 563 58 167 195 07:15 102 158 65 60 167 218 07:30 82 185 42 82 124 267 07:45 57 208 48 94 105 302 08:00 318 58 204 187 651 37 165 969 369 71 95 258 08:15 50 172 27 84 77 256 08:30 62 170 46 73 108 243 08:45 34 122 55 90 89 212 09:00 342 63 179 132 436 35 145 778 324 81 98 213 09:15 46 114 40 85 86 199 09:30 38 103 38 100 76 203 09:45 32 87 32 76 64 163 10:00 463 38 88 120 430 30 104 893 192 114 68 234 10:15 17 114 31 98 48 212 10:30 17 100 24 121 41 221 10:45 16 96 19 130 35 226 11:00 568 18 65 98 429 20 62 997 127 110 38 208 11:15 12 115 16 146 28 261 11:30 16 110 17 166 33 276 11:45 19 106 9 146 28 252 Totals 2,425 5,296 3,248 4,032 5,673 9,328 Split% 56.8 57.3 43.2 42.7 Day Totals 7,280 15,001 7,721 Day Splits 51.5 48.5 Peak Hour 11:00 04:45 07:30 12:00 07:30 04:30 Volume 568 819 752 577 1,083 1,302 Factor 0.86 0.90 0.90 0.85 0.90 0.94 Data File : D1104051 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : E/O MAIN STREET Segment: 04/06/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 82 231 899 25 70 241 1,019 152 1,918 28 472 53 12:15 216 14 244 22 460 36 12:30 240 16 262 16 502 32 12:45 212 15 272 16 484 31 01:00 42 236 918 10 48 274 970 90 1,888 11 510 21 01:15 261 17 228 9 489 26 01:30 214 12 240 14 454 26 01:45 207 9 228 8 435 17 02:00 35 214 834 5 27 230 947 62 1,781 17 444 22 02:15 204 9 239 5 443 14 02:30 218 8 270 7 488 15 02:45 198 5 208 6 406 11 03:00 26 229 898 11 38 246 952 64 1,850 14 475 25 03:15 227 7 244 3 471 10 03:30 228 12 246 1 474 13 03:45 214 8 216 8 430 16 04:00 87 244 1,008 14 80 254 1,028 167 2,036 12 498 26 04:15 218 17 252 10 470 27 04:30 284 26 260 28 544 54 04:45 262 23 262 37 524 60 05:00 231 282 1,043 30 214 281 1,149 445 2,192 28 563 58 05:15 273 44 281 43 554 87 05:30 274 66 296 70 570 136 05:45 214 74 291 90 505 164 06:00 363 196 688 84 495 286 1,246 858 1,934 87 482 171 06:15 170 106 324 78 494 184 06:30 170 145 286 84 456 229 06:45 152 160 350 114 502 274 07:00 548 165 534 195 907 212 629 1,455 1,163 104 377 299 07:15 139 212 157 118 296 330 07:30 130 254 122 162 252 416 07:45 100 246 138 164 238 410 08:00 622 102 360 272 991 122 376 1,613 736 150 224 422 08:15 91 286 98 166 189 452 08:30 79 210 92 155 171 365 08:45 88 223 64 151 152 374 09:00 657 108 586 210 720 78 270 1,377 856 165 186 375 09:15 94 175 56 166 150 341 09:30 110 186 62 174 172 360 09:45 274 149 74 152 348 301 10:00 692 385 654 159 717 60 182 1,409 836 152 445 311 10:15 136 178 58 184 194 362 10:30 78 196 32 190 110 386 10:45 55 184 32 166 87 350 11:00 862 54 166 198 858 51 108 1,720 274 202 105 400 11:15 50 191 26 211 76 402 11:30 30 235 20 239 50 474 11:45 32 234 11 210 43 444 Totals 4,247 8,588 5,165 8,876 9,412 17,464 Split% 49.2 54.9 50.8 45.1 Day Totals 14,041 26,876 12,835 Day Splits 47.8 52.2 Peak Hour 11:00 04:30 07:30 06:00 11:00 04:45 Volume 862 1,101 1,058 1,246 1,720 2,211 Factor 0.90 0.97 0.92 0.89 0.91 0.97 Data File : D1104036 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : E/O MAIN STREET Segment: 04/07/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 83 246 948 24 63 278 1,124 146 2,072 26 524 50 12:15 226 18 260 28 486 46 12:30 222 9 270 14 492 23 12:45 254 12 316 15 570 27 01:00 66 224 950 10 31 271 1,011 97 1,961 23 495 33 01:15 233 6 256 15 489 21 01:30 262 8 243 14 505 22 01:45 231 7 241 14 472 21 02:00 35 188 873 10 36 258 904 71 1,777 14 446 24 02:15 216 8 226 8 442 16 02:30 223 10 210 7 433 17 02:45 246 8 210 6 456 14 03:00 26 190 871 10 35 214 860 61 1,731 4 404 14 03:15 237 6 211 4 448 10 03:30 218 8 266 8 484 16 03:45 226 11 169 10 395 21 04:00 76 275 1,030 16 80 264 1,036 156 2,066 7 539 23 04:15 224 15 286 10 510 25 04:30 260 32 242 32 502 64 04:45 271 17 244 27 515 44 05:00 224 280 990 36 233 264 1,028 457 2,018 31 544 67 05:15 246 56 283 41 529 97 05:30 240 68 236 66 476 134 05:45 224 73 245 86 469 159 06:00 337 220 700 102 479 264 846 816 1,546 85 484 187 06:15 158 104 222 70 380 174 06:30 178 122 196 76 374 198 06:45 144 151 164 106 308 257 07:00 514 118 513 158 966 176 560 1,480 1,073 110 294 268 07:15 146 240 146 110 292 350 07:30 129 272 122 148 251 420 07:45 120 296 116 146 236 442 08:00 576 95 371 278 945 104 365 1,521 736 149 199 427 08:15 91 227 92 145 183 372 08:30 107 242 87 152 194 394 08:45 78 198 82 130 160 328 09:00 649 100 405 213 774 75 289 1,423 694 164 175 377 09:15 94 175 70 160 164 335 09:30 122 190 88 172 210 362 09:45 89 196 56 153 145 349 10:00 642 76 224 182 703 64 193 1,345 417 154 140 336 10:15 54 179 46 156 100 335 10:30 50 170 45 152 95 322 10:45 44 172 38 180 82 352 11:00 804 46 167 206 886 35 109 1,690 276 169 81 375 11:15 37 220 26 192 63 412 11:30 42 233 30 223 72 456 11:45 42 227 18 220 60 447 Totals 4,032 8,042 5,231 8,325 9,263 16,367 Split% 49.1 56.5 50.9 43.5 Day Totals 13,556 25,630 12,074 Day Splits 47.1 52.9 Peak Hour 11:00 04:30 07:15 12:00 11:00 04:30 Volume 804 1,057 1,086 1,124 1,690 2,090 Factor 0.90 0.94 0.92 0.89 0.93 0.96 Data File : D1104036 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : E/O STRUCK AVENUE Segment: 04/06/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 65 232 820 30 90 223 899 155 1,719 15 455 45 12:15 184 16 204 16 388 32 12:30 198 21 246 16 444 37 12:45 206 23 226 18 432 41 01:00 37 196 798 14 47 253 925 84 1,723 9 449 23 01:15 234 14 238 10 472 24 01:30 178 11 205 13 383 24 01:45 190 8 229 5 419 13 02:00 19 157 667 10 27 218 890 46 1,557 10 375 20 02:15 180 10 210 2 390 12 02:30 188 7 252 4 440 11 02:45 142 0 210 3 352 3 03:00 31 190 730 10 38 250 930 69 1,660 13 440 23 03:15 168 6 203 4 371 10 03:30 184 10 260 4 444 14 03:45 188 12 217 10 405 22 04:00 99 198 883 15 68 222 886 167 1,769 16 420 31 04:15 207 13 236 16 443 29 04:30 222 16 222 29 444 45 04:45 256 24 206 38 462 62 05:00 254 280 1,050 26 191 276 1,082 445 2,132 37 556 63 05:15 284 44 274 56 558 100 05:30 290 59 264 74 554 133 05:45 196 62 268 87 464 149 06:00 404 185 669 78 402 284 1,296 806 1,965 86 469 164 06:15 169 84 302 90 471 174 06:30 163 118 354 106 517 224 06:45 152 122 356 122 508 244 07:00 550 142 463 140 700 214 622 1,250 1,085 105 356 245 07:15 122 168 142 114 264 282 07:30 105 180 134 161 239 341 07:45 94 212 132 170 226 382 08:00 611 98 304 192 744 113 449 1,355 753 160 211 352 08:15 76 196 130 154 206 350 08:30 56 180 114 154 170 334 08:45 74 176 92 143 166 319 09:00 604 106 596 189 628 104 415 1,232 1,011 140 210 329 09:15 82 142 76 156 158 298 09:30 126 151 108 166 234 317 09:45 282 146 127 142 409 288 10:00 645 375 613 143 655 176 388 1,300 1,001 143 551 286 10:15 126 163 86 174 212 337 10:30 65 191 56 156 121 347 10:45 47 158 70 172 117 330 11:00 915 40 139 158 727 62 188 1,642 327 179 102 337 11:15 41 167 45 243 86 410 11:30 26 188 50 243 76 431 11:45 32 214 31 250 63 464 Totals 4,234 7,732 4,317 8,970 8,551 16,702 Split% 46.3 50.5 53.7 49.5 Day Totals 13,287 25,253 11,966 Day Splits 47.4 52.6 Peak Hour 11:00 04:45 07:30 06:00 11:00 05:00 Volume 915 1,110 780 1,296 1,642 2,132 Factor 0.92 0.96 0.92 0.91 0.88 0.96 Data File : D1104037 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : E/O STRUCK AVENUE Segment: 04/07/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 83 253 913 41 109 224 939 192 1,852 22 477 63 12:15 228 28 224 22 452 50 12:30 202 22 225 17 427 39 12:45 230 18 266 22 496 40 01:00 51 210 788 12 59 272 1,046 110 1,834 14 482 26 01:15 201 13 264 14 465 27 01:30 184 18 258 13 442 31 01:45 193 16 252 10 445 26 02:00 36 158 679 14 39 231 843 75 1,522 12 389 26 02:15 171 7 233 14 404 21 02:30 176 8 187 7 363 15 02:45 174 10 192 3 366 13 03:00 20 182 724 12 33 210 809 53 1,533 2 392 14 03:15 168 8 194 2 362 10 03:30 186 6 230 5 416 11 03:45 188 7 175 11 363 18 04:00 76 200 842 14 69 220 857 145 1,699 8 420 22 04:15 193 18 208 16 401 34 04:30 233 17 195 26 428 43 04:45 216 20 234 26 450 46 05:00 234 227 867 22 189 250 837 423 1,704 36 477 58 05:15 208 46 226 50 434 96 05:30 216 60 199 59 415 119 05:45 216 61 162 89 378 150 06:00 354 190 688 85 407 173 609 761 1,297 86 363 171 06:15 199 92 178 74 377 166 06:30 163 104 139 76 302 180 06:45 136 126 119 118 255 244 07:00 565 118 470 127 701 152 537 1,266 1,007 128 270 255 07:15 127 177 152 118 279 295 07:30 114 201 103 145 217 346 07:45 111 196 130 174 241 370 08:00 583 83 318 216 722 100 467 1,305 785 157 183 373 08:15 80 176 96 150 176 326 08:30 81 165 127 140 208 305 08:45 74 165 144 136 218 301 09:00 615 68 277 164 652 133 573 1,267 850 148 201 312 09:15 70 158 142 140 212 298 09:30 80 154 185 160 265 314 09:45 59 176 113 167 172 343 10:00 588 51 183 148 609 90 304 1,197 487 136 141 284 10:15 56 150 70 148 126 298 10:30 40 148 78 132 118 280 10:45 36 163 66 172 102 335 11:00 836 34 120 150 682 50 170 1,518 290 150 84 300 11:15 34 184 38 202 72 386 11:30 32 190 40 260 72 450 11:45 20 158 42 224 62 382 Totals 4,041 6,869 4,271 7,991 8,312 14,860 Split% 46.2 51.4 53.8 48.6 Day Totals 12,262 23,172 10,910 Day Splits 47.1 52.9 Peak Hour 11:00 12:00 07:15 12:45 11:00 12:45 Volume 836 913 790 1,060 1,518 1,885 Factor 0.80 0.90 0.91 0.97 0.84 0.95 Data File : D1104037 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : E/O DOUGLASS ROAD Segment: 04/06/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 73 290 1,050 34 110 256 1,099 183 2,149 19 546 53 12:15 240 25 275 16 515 41 12:30 254 19 294 18 548 37 12:45 266 32 274 20 540 52 01:00 42 248 1,042 22 65 322 1,157 107 2,199 12 570 34 01:15 298 14 280 8 578 22 01:30 230 17 295 14 525 31 01:45 266 12 260 8 526 20 02:00 26 220 894 16 40 310 1,199 66 2,093 12 530 28 02:15 236 12 271 3 507 15 02:30 244 9 338 7 582 16 02:45 194 3 280 4 474 7 03:00 49 230 936 10 48 291 1,206 97 2,142 13 521 23 03:15 218 6 277 9 495 15 03:30 247 20 346 7 593 27 03:45 241 12 292 20 533 32 04:00 156 257 1,079 17 92 341 1,316 248 2,395 24 598 41 04:15 258 20 333 27 591 47 04:30 272 23 328 41 600 64 04:45 292 32 314 64 606 96 05:00 450 344 1,374 34 255 410 1,403 705 2,777 59 754 93 05:15 348 60 364 90 712 150 05:30 354 77 304 120 658 197 05:45 328 84 325 181 653 265 06:00 635 278 1,168 102 519 307 1,291 1,154 2,459 132 585 234 06:15 288 110 324 126 612 236 06:30 324 144 326 181 650 325 06:45 278 163 334 196 612 359 07:00 913 236 664 174 861 250 760 1,774 1,424 176 486 350 07:15 166 202 184 212 350 414 07:30 142 237 160 253 302 490 07:45 120 248 166 272 286 520 08:00 937 116 378 248 961 159 603 1,898 981 256 275 504 08:15 88 239 152 228 240 467 08:30 74 230 140 229 214 459 08:45 100 244 152 224 252 468 09:00 843 107 508 205 782 200 1,154 1,625 1,662 196 307 401 09:15 92 198 156 217 248 415 09:30 120 194 328 232 448 426 09:45 189 185 470 198 659 383 10:00 870 208 494 204 858 434 793 1,728 1,287 190 642 394 10:15 150 202 189 232 339 434 10:30 78 242 76 224 154 466 10:45 58 210 94 224 152 434 11:00 1,109 52 170 217 971 86 236 2,080 406 238 138 455 11:15 50 210 52 288 102 498 11:30 30 260 64 307 94 567 11:45 38 284 34 276 72 560 Totals 6,103 9,757 5,562 12,217 11,665 21,974 Split% 44.4 47.7 55.6 52.3 Day Totals 17,779 33,639 15,860 Day Splits 47.1 52.9 Peak Hour 11:00 05:00 07:30 09:30 11:00 05:00 Volume 1,109 1,374 972 1,421 2,080 2,777 Factor 0.90 0.97 0.98 0.76 0.92 0.92 Data File : D1104038 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : E/O DOUGLASS ROAD Segment: 04/07/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 96 322 1,199 53 141 294 1,133 237 2,332 26 616 79 12:15 306 34 280 30 586 64 12:30 269 28 264 21 533 49 12:45 302 26 295 19 597 45 01:00 58 276 1,027 18 67 296 1,193 125 2,220 16 572 34 01:15 258 17 308 18 566 35 01:30 235 16 307 12 542 28 01:45 258 16 282 12 540 28 02:00 40 227 909 18 47 296 1,091 87 2,000 14 523 32 02:15 232 10 281 14 513 24 02:30 228 7 272 8 500 15 02:45 222 12 242 4 464 16 03:00 38 242 900 13 44 274 1,044 82 1,944 3 516 16 03:15 198 15 228 5 426 20 03:30 225 6 310 10 535 16 03:45 235 10 232 20 467 30 04:00 125 232 998 17 82 298 1,138 207 2,136 16 530 33 04:15 244 17 270 18 514 35 04:30 276 26 302 40 578 66 04:45 246 22 268 51 514 73 05:00 420 267 1,020 26 234 358 1,162 654 2,182 54 625 80 05:15 257 58 302 85 559 143 05:30 252 70 268 121 520 191 05:45 244 80 234 160 478 240 06:00 568 226 807 109 502 226 773 1,070 1,580 135 452 244 06:15 222 119 216 118 438 237 06:30 192 124 181 124 373 248 06:45 167 150 150 191 317 341 07:00 886 140 544 164 807 198 642 1,693 1,186 191 338 355 07:15 142 197 176 186 318 383 07:30 134 202 117 234 251 436 07:45 128 244 151 275 279 519 08:00 907 103 382 227 807 131 550 1,714 932 258 234 485 08:15 101 206 106 226 207 432 08:30 90 200 158 208 248 408 08:45 88 174 155 215 243 389 09:00 862 83 317 188 772 172 692 1,634 1,009 218 255 406 09:15 78 180 160 192 238 372 09:30 90 203 228 230 318 433 09:45 66 201 132 222 198 423 10:00 852 63 222 162 738 103 365 1,590 587 212 166 374 10:15 64 192 95 208 159 400 10:30 49 194 80 196 129 390 10:45 46 190 87 236 133 426 11:00 1,029 40 150 225 889 63 210 1,918 360 213 103 438 11:15 42 216 50 244 92 460 11:30 44 242 51 306 95 548 11:45 24 206 46 266 70 472 Totals 5,881 8,475 5,130 9,993 11,011 18,468 Split% 45.9 46.6 54.1 53.4 Day Totals 15,123 29,479 14,356 Day Splits 48.7 51.3 Peak Hour 11:00 12:00 11:00 04:30 11:00 12:00 Volume 1,029 1,199 889 1,230 1,918 2,332 Factor 0.84 0.93 0.92 0.86 0.88 0.95 Data File : D1104038 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location Date: : SR-57 NB RAMP TO DOUGLASS Segment 04/06/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 84 350 1,334 34 114 272 1,127 198 2,461 24 622 58 12:15 308 24 302 14 610 38 12:30 340 25 303 20 643 45 12:45 336 31 250 26 586 57 01:00 49 312 1,313 18 61 322 1,195 110 2,508 13 634 31 01:15 352 18 308 10 660 28 01:30 333 13 292 18 625 31 01:45 316 12 273 8 589 20 02:00 32 270 1,127 14 33 310 1,209 65 2,336 14 580 28 02:15 285 11 270 4 555 15 02:30 300 6 342 8 642 14 02:45 272 2 287 6 559 8 03:00 66 276 1,265 7 41 324 1,382 107 2,647 18 600 25 03:15 286 8 291 12 577 20 03:30 329 16 437 10 766 26 03:45 374 10 330 26 704 36 04:00 179 364 1,600 16 83 408 1,404 262 3,004 24 772 40 04:15 414 19 332 31 746 50 04:30 414 19 351 44 765 63 04:45 408 29 313 80 721 109 05:00 637 477 2,015 40 229 418 1,322 866 3,337 91 895 131 05:15 554 60 356 130 910 190 05:30 498 63 288 166 786 229 05:45 486 66 260 250 746 316 06:00 958 572 2,521 94 447 246 808 1,405 3,329 164 818 258 06:15 614 97 204 196 818 293 06:30 694 126 202 262 896 388 06:45 641 130 156 336 797 466 07:00 1,502 552 1,245 144 754 230 781 2,256 2,026 283 782 427 07:15 294 192 180 372 474 564 07:30 214 206 175 412 389 618 07:45 185 212 196 435 381 647 08:00 1,395 164 490 236 828 178 774 2,223 1,264 370 342 606 08:15 108 194 188 349 296 543 08:30 96 200 168 324 264 524 08:45 122 198 240 352 362 550 09:00 1,157 134 573 218 780 272 1,420 1,937 1,993 292 406 510 09:15 130 190 220 306 350 496 09:30 131 194 388 298 519 492 09:45 178 178 540 261 718 439 10:00 1,142 136 366 207 840 636 1,569 1,982 1,935 253 772 460 10:15 106 196 473 317 579 513 10:30 58 233 244 264 302 497 10:45 66 204 216 308 282 512 11:00 1,373 47 179 253 1,091 162 418 2,464 597 292 209 545 11:15 54 250 100 354 154 604 11:30 34 292 92 374 126 666 11:45 44 296 64 353 108 649 Totals 8,574 14,028 5,301 13,409 13,875 27,437 Split% 51.1 38.2 48.9 61.8 Day Totals 18,710 41,312 22,602 Day Splits 54.7 45.3 Peak Hour 07:15 06:00 11:00 09:30 11:00 05:00 Volume 1,589 2,521 1,091 2,037 2,464 3,337 Factor 0.91 0.91 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.92 Data File : D1104039 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location Date: : SR-57 NB RAMP TO DOUGLASS Segment 04/07/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 118 348 1,316 82 200 314 1,213 318 2,529 31 662 113 12:15 336 42 310 30 646 72 12:30 304 39 289 26 593 65 12:45 328 37 300 31 628 68 01:00 62 314 1,231 24 79 308 1,271 141 2,502 10 622 34 01:15 323 18 326 24 649 42 01:30 268 22 329 16 597 38 01:45 326 15 308 12 634 27 02:00 48 282 1,042 16 48 354 1,211 96 2,253 14 636 30 02:15 266 8 295 18 561 26 02:30 256 12 296 12 552 24 02:45 238 12 266 4 504 16 03:00 46 284 1,102 16 49 316 1,284 95 2,386 4 600 20 03:15 236 18 257 9 493 27 03:30 257 6 425 10 682 16 03:45 325 9 286 23 611 32 04:00 170 254 1,083 19 86 354 1,316 256 2,399 20 608 39 04:15 254 23 324 34 578 57 04:30 285 22 332 46 617 68 04:45 290 22 306 70 596 92 05:00 599 280 1,153 30 250 416 1,324 849 2,477 74 696 104 05:15 304 63 351 124 655 187 05:30 269 76 290 171 559 247 05:45 300 81 267 230 567 311 06:00 900 270 906 98 525 287 907 1,425 1,813 200 557 298 06:15 247 133 248 158 495 291 06:30 199 154 202 208 401 362 06:45 190 140 170 334 360 474 07:00 1,402 164 660 159 745 217 713 2,147 1,373 298 381 457 07:15 190 182 190 336 380 518 07:30 158 194 138 386 296 580 07:45 148 210 168 382 316 592 08:00 1,325 116 442 218 766 144 643 2,091 1,085 353 260 571 08:15 112 196 146 350 258 546 08:30 113 184 175 310 288 494 08:45 101 168 178 312 279 480 09:00 1,195 92 356 196 771 198 776 1,966 1,132 278 290 474 09:15 92 188 192 288 284 476 09:30 97 186 230 341 327 527 09:45 75 201 156 288 231 489 10:00 1,051 70 260 186 795 115 362 1,846 622 268 185 454 10:15 74 202 86 255 160 457 10:30 60 203 85 238 145 441 10:45 56 204 76 290 132 494 11:00 1,245 43 161 252 1,049 71 215 2,294 376 266 114 518 11:15 46 288 48 288 94 576 11:30 44 272 51 364 95 636 11:45 28 237 45 327 73 564 Totals 8,161 9,712 5,363 11,235 13,524 20,947 Split% 46.4 39.7 53.6 60.3 Day Totals 16,598 34,471 17,873 Day Splits 51.8 48.2 Peak Hour 07:30 12:00 11:00 04:30 11:00 04:30 Volume 1,471 1,316 1,049 1,405 2,294 2,564 Factor 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.84 0.90 0.92 Data File : D1104039 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : SR-57 NB TO SR-57 SB RAMPS Segment: 04/06/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 338 286 1,144 32 89 278 1,095 427 2,239 104 564 136 12:15 286 14 259 70 545 84 12:30 284 16 292 87 576 103 12:45 288 27 266 77 554 104 01:00 173 292 1,214 20 64 291 1,155 237 2,369 45 583 65 01:15 336 16 286 48 622 64 01:30 292 16 310 50 602 66 01:45 294 12 268 30 562 42 02:00 88 284 1,186 12 41 308 1,116 129 2,302 36 592 48 02:15 308 10 266 19 574 29 02:30 302 10 282 16 584 26 02:45 292 9 260 17 552 26 03:00 65 302 1,346 14 56 316 1,307 121 2,653 21 618 35 03:15 332 8 278 6 610 14 03:30 368 22 372 14 740 36 03:45 344 12 341 24 685 36 04:00 176 364 1,437 16 102 343 1,352 278 2,789 28 707 44 04:15 348 18 327 33 675 51 04:30 368 27 352 48 720 75 04:45 357 41 330 67 687 108 05:00 478 403 1,614 41 277 420 1,522 755 3,136 64 823 105 05:15 372 64 450 88 822 152 05:30 422 76 356 132 778 208 05:45 417 96 296 194 713 290 06:00 695 426 1,761 98 507 254 954 1,202 2,715 131 680 229 06:15 458 110 294 150 752 260 06:30 471 131 210 192 681 323 06:45 406 168 196 222 602 390 07:00 1,010 330 1,002 163 934 216 711 1,944 1,713 205 546 368 07:15 259 260 192 234 451 494 07:30 233 250 145 273 378 523 07:45 180 261 158 298 338 559 08:00 944 216 716 250 1,002 178 677 1,946 1,393 236 394 486 08:15 186 244 169 226 355 470 08:30 138 262 146 224 284 486 08:45 176 246 184 258 360 504 09:00 951 168 826 236 868 220 1,152 1,819 1,978 195 388 431 09:15 188 208 180 258 368 466 09:30 212 216 288 260 500 476 09:45 258 208 464 238 722 446 10:00 930 282 836 219 862 482 1,167 1,792 2,003 205 764 424 10:15 220 198 376 258 596 456 10:30 152 232 163 210 315 442 10:45 182 213 146 257 328 470 11:00 1,124 155 580 232 1,052 129 316 2,176 896 260 284 492 11:15 172 244 73 276 245 520 11:30 137 266 68 288 205 554 11:45 116 310 46 300 162 610 Totals 6,972 13,662 5,854 12,524 12,826 26,186 Split% 52.2 45.6 47.8 54.4 Day Totals 18,378 39,012 20,634 Day Splits 52.9 47.1 Peak Hour 11:00 05:45 11:00 09:30 11:00 05:00 Volume 1,124 1,772 1,052 1,610 2,176 3,136 Factor 0.94 0.94 0.85 0.84 0.89 0.95 Data File : D1104040 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : SR-57 NB TO SR-57 SB RAMPS Segment: 04/07/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 369 278 1,224 66 157 310 1,122 526 2,346 120 588 186 12:15 316 33 274 92 590 125 12:30 292 30 266 72 558 102 12:45 338 28 272 85 610 113 01:00 192 306 1,218 28 79 284 1,213 271 2,431 42 590 70 01:15 332 15 330 54 662 69 01:30 276 22 298 50 574 72 01:45 304 14 301 46 605 60 02:00 112 258 1,150 12 49 312 1,110 161 2,260 38 570 50 02:15 294 12 275 38 569 50 02:30 306 12 272 20 578 32 02:45 292 13 251 16 543 29 03:00 58 290 1,158 20 61 301 1,253 119 2,411 14 591 34 03:15 284 15 232 9 516 24 03:30 328 14 398 18 726 32 03:45 256 12 322 17 578 29 04:00 146 298 1,169 23 109 327 1,248 255 2,417 18 625 41 04:15 284 24 316 21 600 45 04:30 303 30 305 41 608 71 04:45 284 32 300 66 584 98 05:00 462 307 1,206 26 261 374 1,284 723 2,490 56 681 82 05:15 303 62 332 100 635 162 05:30 322 77 308 136 630 213 05:45 274 96 270 170 544 266 06:00 705 283 979 105 558 280 929 1,263 1,908 152 563 257 06:15 244 134 242 135 486 269 06:30 246 134 237 186 483 320 06:45 206 185 170 232 376 417 07:00 1,023 198 831 206 956 177 628 1,979 1,459 194 375 400 07:15 231 240 181 259 412 499 07:30 192 238 118 274 310 512 07:45 210 272 152 296 362 568 08:00 910 182 703 258 1,002 133 561 1,912 1,264 240 315 498 08:15 183 256 125 240 308 496 08:30 168 242 152 200 320 442 08:45 170 246 151 230 321 476 09:00 947 162 637 213 846 159 613 1,793 1,250 178 321 391 09:15 182 196 149 254 331 450 09:30 162 218 181 258 343 476 09:45 131 219 124 257 255 476 10:00 903 153 639 190 847 90 304 1,750 943 226 243 416 10:15 168 209 78 218 246 427 10:30 158 214 72 205 230 419 10:45 160 234 64 254 224 488 11:00 1,055 133 501 243 1,057 62 178 2,112 679 205 195 448 11:15 146 285 40 270 186 555 11:30 122 283 38 274 160 557 11:45 100 246 38 306 138 552 Totals 6,882 11,415 5,982 10,443 12,864 21,858 Split% 52.2 46.5 47.8 53.5 Day Totals 16,425 34,722 18,297 Day Splits 52.7 47.3 Peak Hour 07:15 12:30 11:00 03:30 11:00 04:45 Volume 1,069 1,268 1,057 1,363 2,112 2,530 Factor 0.90 0.94 0.93 0.86 0.95 0.93 Data File : D1104040 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : HOWELL AVE TO SR-57 SB RAMPS Segment: 04/06/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 613 554 1,920 38 105 332 1,290 718 3,210 183 886 221 12:15 393 17 304 126 697 143 12:30 508 24 318 188 826 212 12:45 465 26 336 116 801 142 01:00 308 500 1,998 24 85 338 1,360 393 3,358 78 838 102 01:15 496 24 336 98 832 122 01:30 522 19 376 75 898 94 01:45 480 18 310 57 790 75 02:00 156 514 2,085 19 74 338 1,346 230 3,431 54 852 73 02:15 515 18 344 33 859 51 02:30 584 17 354 32 938 49 02:45 472 20 310 37 782 57 03:00 94 542 2,213 28 105 356 1,346 199 3,559 30 898 58 03:15 521 23 220 15 741 38 03:30 620 30 388 19 1,008 49 03:45 530 24 382 30 912 54 04:00 239 612 2,364 29 246 368 1,445 485 3,809 52 980 81 04:15 573 46 354 41 927 87 04:30 583 76 358 70 941 146 04:45 596 95 365 76 961 171 05:00 581 726 2,691 105 692 420 1,716 1,273 4,407 76 1,146 181 05:15 663 142 495 118 1,158 260 05:30 672 207 436 175 1,108 382 05:45 630 238 365 212 995 450 06:00 987 664 2,509 179 889 362 1,292 1,876 3,801 172 1,026 351 06:15 604 194 359 213 963 407 06:30 683 240 298 274 981 514 06:45 558 276 273 328 831 604 07:00 1,591 488 1,659 248 1,183 260 817 2,774 2,476 322 748 570 07:15 479 291 220 373 699 664 07:30 322 291 153 469 475 760 07:45 370 353 184 427 554 780 08:00 1,678 397 1,254 358 1,394 188 701 3,072 1,955 462 585 820 08:15 300 346 179 388 479 734 08:30 256 354 156 406 412 760 08:45 301 336 178 422 479 758 09:00 1,531 370 1,920 330 1,325 170 761 2,856 2,681 370 540 700 09:15 384 338 140 379 524 717 09:30 486 323 168 428 654 751 09:45 680 334 283 354 963 688 10:00 1,467 797 1,923 296 1,260 278 763 2,727 2,686 350 1,075 646 10:15 452 338 242 360 694 698 10:30 295 304 121 389 416 693 10:45 379 322 122 368 501 690 11:00 1,779 270 1,064 294 1,319 107 270 3,098 1,334 436 377 730 11:15 336 308 68 391 404 699 11:30 234 351 48 512 282 863 11:45 224 366 47 440 271 806 Totals 11,024 23,600 8,677 13,107 19,701 36,707 Split% 64.3 44.0 35.7 56.0 Day Totals 21,784 56,408 34,624 Day Splits 61.4 38.6 Peak Hour 11:00 05:00 07:45 04:45 11:00 05:00 Volume 1,779 2,691 1,411 1,716 3,098 4,407 Factor 0.87 0.93 0.99 0.87 0.90 0.95 Data File : D1104041 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : HOWELL AVE TO SR-57 SB RAMPS Segment: 04/07/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 642 484 1,991 62 150 354 1,300 792 3,291 234 838 296 12:15 503 38 320 134 823 172 12:30 528 26 312 136 840 162 12:45 476 24 314 138 790 162 01:00 358 526 1,972 36 107 310 1,365 465 3,337 100 836 136 01:15 515 21 375 92 890 113 01:30 484 30 350 79 834 109 01:45 447 20 330 87 777 107 02:00 202 467 1,906 18 80 327 1,238 282 3,144 66 794 84 02:15 460 16 292 59 752 75 02:30 568 26 319 42 887 68 02:45 411 20 300 35 711 55 03:00 100 542 2,092 21 103 352 1,393 203 3,485 30 894 51 03:15 466 30 317 10 783 40 03:30 586 28 358 32 944 60 03:45 498 24 366 28 864 52 04:00 215 572 2,222 46 270 383 1,411 485 3,633 24 955 70 04:15 548 50 354 38 902 88 04:30 588 82 330 72 918 154 04:45 514 92 344 81 858 173 05:00 594 636 2,360 109 702 384 1,452 1,296 3,812 96 1,020 205 05:15 614 157 374 124 988 281 05:30 576 208 337 198 913 406 05:45 534 228 357 176 891 404 06:00 937 493 1,717 200 933 309 1,055 1,870 2,772 170 802 370 06:15 438 227 284 192 722 419 06:30 442 238 262 264 704 502 06:45 344 268 200 311 544 579 07:00 1,624 423 1,600 278 1,220 209 725 2,844 2,325 332 632 610 07:15 419 294 200 378 619 672 07:30 344 312 146 484 490 796 07:45 414 336 170 430 584 766 08:00 1,536 341 1,319 326 1,402 138 607 2,938 1,926 447 479 773 08:15 342 375 140 382 482 757 08:30 362 328 151 374 513 702 08:45 274 373 178 333 452 706 09:00 1,503 296 1,150 319 1,296 170 593 2,799 1,743 358 466 677 09:15 316 294 139 391 455 685 09:30 295 328 156 384 451 712 09:45 243 355 128 370 371 725 10:00 1,431 282 1,179 309 1,287 111 433 2,718 1,612 375 393 684 10:15 309 310 113 322 422 632 10:30 326 324 118 370 444 694 10:45 262 344 91 364 353 708 11:00 1,721 254 907 354 1,382 72 244 3,103 1,151 383 326 737 11:15 271 354 70 420 341 774 11:30 220 342 52 452 272 794 11:45 162 332 50 466 212 798 Totals 10,863 20,415 8,932 11,816 19,795 32,231 Split% 63.3 45.1 36.7 54.9 Day Totals 20,748 52,026 31,278 Day Splits 60.1 39.9 Peak Hour 07:30 05:00 08:00 03:30 11:00 05:00 Volume 1,743 2,360 1,402 1,461 3,103 3,812 Factor 0.90 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.97 0.93 Data File : D1104041 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : STATE COLLEGE TO HOWELL AVE Segment: 04/06/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 325 266 951 42 102 267 1,063 427 2,014 98 533 140 12:15 211 18 283 70 494 88 12:30 240 20 239 100 479 120 12:45 234 22 274 57 508 79 01:00 171 233 949 28 92 260 1,117 263 2,066 46 493 74 01:15 232 26 298 49 530 75 01:30 244 18 288 42 532 60 01:45 240 20 271 34 511 54 02:00 84 256 959 18 58 271 1,124 142 2,083 29 527 47 02:15 225 15 285 15 510 30 02:30 268 11 293 18 561 29 02:45 210 14 275 22 485 36 03:00 56 291 1,104 22 81 270 1,229 137 2,333 15 561 37 03:15 248 20 300 10 548 30 03:30 301 20 311 11 612 31 03:45 264 19 348 20 612 39 04:00 138 275 1,159 22 180 323 1,273 318 2,432 28 598 50 04:15 296 38 332 26 628 64 04:30 284 56 290 42 574 98 04:45 304 64 328 42 632 106 05:00 359 314 1,381 86 523 336 1,447 882 2,828 42 650 128 05:15 347 110 423 69 770 179 05:30 362 142 356 119 718 261 05:45 358 185 332 129 690 314 06:00 616 312 1,296 146 657 271 1,053 1,273 2,349 112 583 258 06:15 342 152 282 134 624 286 06:30 332 164 256 158 588 322 06:45 310 195 244 212 554 407 07:00 993 261 818 186 876 210 720 1,869 1,538 200 471 386 07:15 196 203 211 225 407 428 07:30 173 227 144 310 317 537 07:45 188 260 155 258 343 518 08:00 979 180 603 295 1,059 158 663 2,038 1,266 270 338 565 08:15 154 248 196 232 350 480 08:30 140 254 152 252 292 506 08:45 129 262 157 225 286 487 09:00 829 148 623 261 1,042 182 728 1,871 1,351 204 330 465 09:15 142 270 135 217 277 487 09:30 159 251 160 232 319 483 09:45 174 260 251 176 425 436 10:00 780 201 668 248 1,051 306 842 1,831 1,510 190 507 438 10:15 150 289 260 186 410 475 10:30 153 258 144 212 297 470 10:45 164 256 132 192 296 448 11:00 925 128 507 248 1,048 115 301 1,973 808 228 243 476 11:15 164 274 71 214 235 488 11:30 110 260 62 235 172 495 11:45 105 266 53 248 158 514 Totals 6,255 11,018 6,769 11,560 13,024 22,578 Split% 48.8 52.0 51.2 48.0 Day Totals 18,329 35,602 17,273 Day Splits 48.5 51.5 Peak Hour 07:30 05:00 08:00 05:00 07:30 05:00 Volume 1,070 1,381 1,059 1,447 2,100 2,828 Factor 0.86 0.95 0.90 0.86 0.93 0.92 Data File : D1104042 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : STATE COLLEGE TO HOWELL AVE Segment: 04/07/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 337 238 998 64 164 287 1,111 501 2,109 110 525 174 12:15 254 35 274 72 528 107 12:30 264 30 254 80 518 110 12:45 242 35 296 75 538 110 01:00 182 246 974 35 111 264 1,121 293 2,095 40 510 75 01:15 264 24 293 52 557 76 01:30 262 22 282 44 544 66 01:45 202 30 282 46 484 76 02:00 111 258 1,010 22 74 288 1,112 185 2,122 45 546 67 02:15 248 12 288 28 536 40 02:30 280 17 280 20 560 37 02:45 224 23 256 18 480 41 03:00 52 268 1,024 9 74 272 1,198 126 2,222 16 540 25 03:15 220 25 304 6 524 31 03:30 302 22 288 17 590 39 03:45 234 18 334 13 568 31 04:00 128 240 1,029 27 197 336 1,318 325 2,347 19 576 46 04:15 250 42 333 22 583 64 04:30 276 60 322 36 598 96 04:45 263 68 327 51 590 119 05:00 386 271 1,090 91 531 346 1,414 917 2,504 42 617 133 05:15 284 117 376 76 660 193 05:30 253 146 348 140 601 286 05:45 282 177 344 128 626 305 06:00 623 248 833 162 719 288 1,000 1,342 1,833 107 536 269 06:15 204 169 268 134 472 303 06:30 206 188 232 164 438 352 06:45 175 200 212 218 387 418 07:00 1,003 215 789 192 922 207 690 1,925 1,479 198 422 390 07:15 190 238 186 250 376 488 07:30 178 236 144 279 322 515 07:45 206 256 153 276 359 532 08:00 982 153 618 242 1,045 146 614 2,027 1,232 294 299 536 08:15 160 272 146 240 306 512 08:30 167 251 154 232 321 483 08:45 138 280 168 216 306 496 09:00 806 154 560 252 1,033 192 649 1,839 1,209 184 346 436 09:15 148 236 153 204 301 440 09:30 130 232 158 204 288 436 09:45 128 313 146 214 274 527 10:00 691 124 579 242 1,010 134 495 1,701 1,074 179 258 421 10:15 164 259 134 168 298 427 10:30 163 243 118 164 281 407 10:45 128 266 109 180 237 446 11:00 846 118 493 282 1,086 90 293 1,932 786 188 208 470 11:15 144 272 87 198 231 470 11:30 121 252 60 244 181 496 11:45 110 280 56 216 166 496 Totals 6,147 9,997 6,966 11,015 13,113 21,012 Split% 47.6 53.1 52.4 46.9 Day Totals 17,981 34,125 16,144 Day Splits 47.3 52.7 Peak Hour 07:15 04:30 11:00 05:00 07:30 05:00 Volume 1,099 1,094 1,086 1,414 2,095 2,504 Factor 0.93 0.96 0.96 0.94 0.98 0.95 Data File : D1104042 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANANEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location Date: : W/O STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD Segment 04/06/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 350 225 886 32 110 248 1,020 460 1,906 108 473 140 12:15 231 24 282 86 513 110 12:30 208 18 230 100 438 118 12:45 222 36 260 56 482 92 01:00 208 230 917 24 103 243 1,064 311 1,981 58 473 82 01:15 228 33 283 48 511 81 01:30 219 24 275 59 494 83 01:45 240 22 263 43 503 65 02:00 95 238 928 14 57 264 1,118 152 2,046 30 502 44 02:15 218 14 300 22 518 36 02:30 238 15 285 24 523 39 02:45 234 14 269 19 503 33 03:00 68 249 1,082 24 88 288 1,234 156 2,316 18 537 42 03:15 237 18 302 14 539 32 03:30 319 18 310 12 629 30 03:45 277 28 334 24 611 52 04:00 150 244 1,073 19 170 311 1,315 320 2,388 30 555 49 04:15 259 32 347 30 606 62 04:30 260 64 329 44 589 108 04:45 310 55 328 46 638 101 05:00 383 303 1,306 72 474 346 1,417 857 2,723 43 649 115 05:15 322 120 406 72 728 192 05:30 350 136 353 130 703 266 05:45 331 146 312 138 643 284 06:00 686 312 1,157 153 595 274 986 1,281 2,143 121 586 274 06:15 277 117 264 160 541 277 06:30 303 144 210 192 513 336 06:45 265 181 238 213 503 394 07:00 972 213 749 158 736 210 712 1,708 1,461 196 423 354 07:15 198 166 194 231 392 397 07:30 168 190 158 252 326 442 07:45 170 222 150 293 320 515 08:00 987 174 610 255 935 146 586 1,922 1,196 274 320 529 08:15 144 216 173 270 317 486 08:30 162 224 138 219 300 443 08:45 130 240 129 224 259 464 09:00 804 128 595 244 986 184 692 1,790 1,287 180 312 424 09:15 170 262 100 220 270 482 09:30 155 228 154 220 309 448 09:45 142 252 254 184 396 436 10:00 719 190 692 228 972 285 801 1,691 1,493 166 475 394 10:15 172 274 256 192 428 466 10:30 158 240 140 188 298 428 10:45 172 230 120 173 292 403 11:00 809 145 554 220 994 120 323 1,803 877 199 265 419 11:15 149 242 67 190 216 432 11:30 140 268 72 192 212 460 11:45 120 264 64 228 184 492 Totals 6,231 10,549 6,220 11,268 12,451 21,817 Split% 48.4 50.0 51.6 50.0 Day Totals 17,488 34,268 16,780 Day Splits 49.0 51.0 Peak Hour 07:30 05:15 09:45 04:45 07:45 05:00 Volume 1,089 1,315 994 1,433 1,973 2,723 Factor 0.93 0.94 0.91 0.88 0.93 0.94 Data File : D1104043 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANANEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location Date: : W/O STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD Segment 04/07/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 337 214 943 60 172 270 1,059 509 2,002 116 484 176 12:15 239 48 254 71 493 119 12:30 230 30 264 76 494 106 12:45 260 34 271 74 531 108 01:00 215 250 957 31 103 272 1,089 318 2,046 43 522 74 01:15 238 28 292 60 530 88 01:30 252 20 274 62 526 82 01:45 217 24 251 50 468 74 02:00 125 223 975 27 85 296 1,114 210 2,089 55 519 82 02:15 262 18 272 32 534 50 02:30 242 20 290 19 532 39 02:45 248 20 256 19 504 39 03:00 65 262 1,033 12 81 303 1,245 146 2,278 23 565 35 03:15 238 31 320 8 558 39 03:30 296 22 298 21 594 43 03:45 237 16 324 13 561 29 04:00 143 222 1,044 27 188 320 1,322 331 2,366 15 542 42 04:15 238 33 346 26 584 59 04:30 302 60 320 48 622 108 04:45 282 68 336 54 618 122 05:00 370 266 1,103 74 497 375 1,457 867 2,560 44 641 118 05:15 294 114 382 78 676 192 05:30 272 149 346 122 618 271 05:45 271 160 354 126 625 286 06:00 663 257 867 130 616 263 917 1,279 1,784 120 520 250 06:15 216 137 252 154 468 291 06:30 204 187 218 172 422 359 06:45 190 162 184 217 374 379 07:00 1,096 196 756 184 835 188 661 1,931 1,417 217 384 401 07:15 202 213 164 248 366 461 07:30 166 222 146 295 312 517 07:45 192 216 163 336 355 552 08:00 922 157 614 214 957 119 549 1,879 1,163 260 276 474 08:15 172 262 142 246 314 508 08:30 146 235 138 226 284 461 08:45 139 246 150 190 289 436 09:00 777 143 559 253 972 163 582 1,749 1,141 174 306 427 09:15 146 230 146 199 292 429 09:30 156 230 125 206 281 436 09:45 114 259 148 198 262 457 10:00 694 170 685 255 1,034 128 494 1,728 1,179 168 298 423 10:15 181 252 130 156 311 408 10:30 180 262 122 174 302 436 10:45 154 265 114 196 268 461 11:00 739 115 512 282 996 82 276 1,735 788 160 197 442 11:15 145 220 84 188 229 408 11:30 142 252 53 185 195 437 11:45 110 242 57 206 167 448 Totals 6,146 10,048 6,536 10,765 12,682 20,813 Split% 48.3 51.5 51.7 48.5 Day Totals 17,301 33,495 16,194 Day Splits 48.3 51.7 Peak Hour 07:15 04:30 10:15 05:00 07:30 05:00 Volume 1,139 1,144 1,061 1,457 2,051 2,560 Factor 0.85 0.95 0.94 0.95 0.93 0.95 Data File : D1104043 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : DOUGLASS ROAD Location Date: : N/O KATELLA AVENUE Segment 04/06/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: NB SB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 1 74 308 1 8 94 288 9 596 0 168 1 12:15 64 1 72 0 136 1 12:30 78 4 68 0 146 4 12:45 92 2 54 1 146 3 01:00 4 81 313 0 3 56 236 7 549 1 137 1 01:15 77 2 56 1 133 3 01:30 80 0 59 2 139 2 01:45 75 1 65 0 140 1 02:00 6 68 244 0 0 62 246 6 490 2 130 2 02:15 60 0 51 1 111 1 02:30 52 0 82 0 134 0 02:45 64 0 51 3 115 3 03:00 9 42 278 0 3 86 399 12 677 1 128 1 03:15 70 1 64 3 134 4 03:30 76 1 143 1 219 2 03:45 90 1 106 4 196 5 04:00 18 92 349 0 9 144 403 27 752 2 236 2 04:15 78 1 87 4 165 5 04:30 88 5 104 3 192 8 04:45 91 3 68 9 159 12 05:00 93 122 666 8 22 128 374 115 1,040 17 250 25 05:15 174 2 82 14 256 16 05:30 172 5 78 18 250 23 05:45 198 7 86 44 284 51 06:00 232 254 1,224 8 48 124 494 280 1,718 26 378 34 06:15 294 12 131 42 425 54 06:30 338 6 122 60 460 66 06:45 338 22 117 104 455 126 07:00 518 282 515 28 157 54 177 675 692 101 336 129 07:15 125 37 46 141 171 178 07:30 64 50 42 146 106 196 07:45 44 42 35 130 79 172 08:00 411 36 99 40 135 42 148 546 247 108 78 148 08:15 23 31 26 108 49 139 08:30 18 30 26 88 44 118 08:45 22 34 54 107 76 141 09:00 246 19 126 45 149 79 200 395 326 76 98 121 09:15 28 40 65 70 93 110 09:30 39 38 30 53 69 91 09:45 40 26 26 47 66 73 10:00 194 46 125 26 134 156 567 328 692 48 202 74 10:15 34 34 205 52 239 86 10:30 23 37 119 49 142 86 10:45 22 37 87 45 109 82 11:00 241 10 27 69 314 58 120 555 147 58 68 127 11:15 6 91 26 44 32 135 11:30 4 79 22 61 26 140 11:45 7 75 14 78 21 153 Totals 1,973 4,274 982 3,652 2,955 7,926 Split% 53.9 33.2 46.1 66.8 Day Totals 4,634 10,881 6,247 Day Splits 57.4 42.6 Peak Hour 07:15 06:15 11:00 10:00 07:15 06:00 Volume 525 1,252 314 567 694 1,718 Factor 0.90 0.93 0.86 0.69 0.89 0.93 Data File : D1104050 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : DOUGLASS ROAD Location Date: : N/O KATELLA AVENUE Segment 04/07/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: NB SB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 14 60 247 20 39 108 288 53 535 2 168 22 12:15 62 6 52 6 114 12 12:30 52 8 68 1 120 9 12:45 73 5 60 5 133 10 01:00 13 58 253 5 14 72 266 27 519 4 130 9 01:15 76 3 61 3 137 6 01:30 62 4 71 5 133 9 01:45 57 2 62 1 119 3 02:00 8 56 198 2 4 73 257 12 455 1 129 3 02:15 52 0 46 2 98 2 02:30 54 2 74 3 128 5 02:45 36 0 64 2 100 2 03:00 6 42 183 2 8 78 351 14 534 1 120 3 03:15 35 3 50 2 85 5 03:30 44 2 142 1 186 3 03:45 62 1 81 2 143 3 04:00 24 51 168 2 12 118 353 36 521 2 169 4 04:15 32 6 72 3 104 9 04:30 41 2 98 10 139 12 04:45 44 2 65 9 109 11 05:00 100 60 229 3 41 147 361 141 590 12 207 15 05:15 60 8 76 18 136 26 05:30 57 9 80 24 137 33 05:45 52 21 58 46 110 67 06:00 245 48 118 8 60 83 206 305 324 30 131 38 06:15 37 16 46 42 83 58 06:30 19 12 41 58 60 70 06:45 14 24 36 115 50 139 07:00 532 18 65 27 131 28 102 663 167 100 46 127 07:15 24 32 26 158 50 190 07:30 12 40 28 146 40 186 07:45 11 32 20 128 31 160 08:00 385 4 29 37 117 22 92 502 121 100 26 137 08:15 8 23 21 104 29 127 08:30 13 28 14 88 27 116 08:45 4 29 35 93 39 122 09:00 291 14 47 66 169 40 138 460 185 73 54 139 09:15 14 40 40 80 54 120 09:30 11 27 26 84 37 111 09:45 8 36 32 54 40 90 10:00 165 1 17 28 123 13 26 288 43 46 14 74 10:15 5 32 3 44 8 76 10:30 3 29 3 36 6 65 10:45 8 34 7 39 15 73 11:00 212 8 18 70 298 4 12 510 30 48 12 118 11:15 2 87 4 42 6 129 11:30 5 67 4 56 9 123 11:45 3 74 0 66 3 140 Totals 1,995 1,572 1,016 2,452 3,011 4,024 Split% 39.1 33.7 60.9 66.3 Day Totals 3,468 7,035 3,567 Day Splits 50.7 49.3 Peak Hour 07:00 12:45 11:00 03:30 07:15 03:30 Volume 532 269 298 413 673 602 Factor 0.84 0.88 0.86 0.73 0.89 0.81 Data File : D1104050 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD Location Date: : N/O KATELLA AVENUE Segment 04/06/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: NB SB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 75 198 744 28 69 166 681 144 1,425 22 364 50 12:15 170 18 160 18 330 36 12:30 193 9 191 20 384 29 12:45 183 14 164 15 347 29 01:00 43 176 726 3 31 169 714 74 1,440 12 345 15 01:15 178 17 181 9 359 26 01:30 184 8 190 14 374 22 01:45 188 3 174 8 362 11 02:00 41 194 691 1 16 164 649 57 1,340 12 358 13 02:15 148 4 153 8 301 12 02:30 188 1 168 10 356 11 02:45 161 10 164 11 325 21 03:00 50 190 767 8 56 160 676 106 1,443 14 350 22 03:15 174 12 162 10 336 22 03:30 201 24 184 14 385 38 03:45 202 12 170 12 372 24 04:00 80 231 930 18 75 214 839 155 1,769 8 445 26 04:15 221 10 192 16 413 26 04:30 218 26 235 28 453 54 04:45 260 21 198 28 458 49 05:00 155 304 1,135 32 146 292 987 301 2,122 24 596 56 05:15 314 40 236 25 550 65 05:30 281 30 259 44 540 74 05:45 236 44 200 62 436 106 06:00 307 216 781 49 322 196 648 629 1,429 42 412 91 06:15 230 54 157 65 387 119 06:30 172 87 141 80 313 167 06:45 163 132 154 120 317 252 07:00 491 112 397 182 970 124 446 1,461 843 120 236 302 07:15 114 198 104 99 218 297 07:30 92 306 116 118 208 424 07:45 79 284 102 154 181 438 08:00 602 106 327 248 936 86 301 1,538 628 156 192 404 08:15 79 250 76 150 155 400 08:30 72 238 72 168 144 406 08:45 70 200 67 128 137 328 09:00 481 82 294 156 538 70 432 1,019 726 139 152 295 09:15 79 138 61 118 140 256 09:30 70 132 102 112 172 244 09:45 63 112 199 112 262 224 10:00 520 86 223 147 513 244 390 1,033 613 118 330 265 10:15 52 128 68 134 120 262 10:30 38 117 38 140 76 257 10:45 47 121 40 128 87 249 11:00 608 38 117 156 578 38 128 1,186 245 135 76 291 11:15 22 112 32 148 54 260 11:30 34 168 32 172 66 340 11:45 23 142 26 153 49 295 Totals 3,453 7,132 4,250 6,891 7,703 14,023 Split% 50.9 55.2 49.1 44.8 Day Totals 11,141 21,726 10,585 Day Splits 48.7 51.3 Peak Hour 07:45 04:45 07:30 05:00 07:30 04:45 Volume 628 1,159 1,088 987 1,666 2,144 Factor 0.93 0.92 0.89 0.85 0.95 0.90 Data File : D1104044 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD Location Date: : N/O KATELLA AVENUE Segment 04/07/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: NB SB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 67 180 779 27 71 172 680 138 1,459 20 352 47 12:15 194 20 162 21 356 41 12:30 184 12 184 14 368 26 12:45 221 12 162 12 383 24 01:00 80 198 710 22 62 160 665 142 1,375 21 358 43 01:15 166 14 192 18 358 32 01:30 182 8 170 20 352 28 01:45 164 18 143 21 307 39 02:00 47 144 676 10 54 168 670 101 1,346 16 312 26 02:15 166 5 142 10 308 15 02:30 194 17 182 13 376 30 02:45 172 22 178 8 350 30 03:00 38 196 826 18 49 154 698 87 1,524 7 350 25 03:15 194 5 182 7 376 12 03:30 212 14 184 12 396 26 03:45 224 12 178 12 402 24 04:00 74 198 838 12 77 216 803 151 1,641 6 414 18 04:15 190 9 147 14 337 23 04:30 214 32 232 28 446 60 04:45 236 24 208 26 444 50 05:00 133 280 1,008 24 153 318 1,008 286 2,016 13 598 37 05:15 244 27 236 30 480 57 05:30 258 42 228 42 486 84 05:45 226 60 226 48 452 108 06:00 320 198 631 50 323 155 565 643 1,196 42 353 92 06:15 165 57 139 60 304 117 06:30 140 94 142 80 282 174 06:45 128 122 129 138 257 260 07:00 523 106 361 192 996 116 410 1,519 771 123 222 315 07:15 98 214 81 100 179 314 07:30 89 282 116 137 205 419 07:45 68 308 97 163 165 471 08:00 607 92 337 258 886 84 281 1,493 618 183 176 441 08:15 90 260 74 150 164 410 08:30 57 190 64 141 121 331 08:45 98 178 59 133 157 311 09:00 488 79 294 164 583 56 252 1,071 546 110 135 274 09:15 87 148 62 128 149 276 09:30 72 127 78 120 150 247 09:45 56 144 56 130 112 274 10:00 505 60 200 138 473 58 154 978 354 124 118 262 10:15 45 108 36 120 81 228 10:30 46 112 26 147 72 259 10:45 49 115 34 114 83 229 11:00 675 50 133 150 643 38 123 1,318 256 172 88 322 11:15 30 128 36 163 66 291 11:30 28 188 25 154 53 342 11:45 25 177 24 186 49 363 Totals 3,557 6,793 4,370 6,309 7,927 13,102 Split% 51.8 55.1 48.2 44.9 Day Totals 10,679 21,029 10,350 Day Splits 49.2 50.8 Peak Hour 11:00 04:45 07:30 05:00 07:30 05:00 Volume 675 1,018 1,108 1,008 1,741 2,016 Factor 0.91 0.91 0.90 0.79 0.92 0.84 Data File : D1104044 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : BALL ROAD Location: Date: : SUNKIST ST TO SR-57 SB RAMPS Segment: 04/06/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 436 388 1,511 42 173 374 1,506 609 3,017 108 762 150 12:15 398 50 386 119 784 169 12:30 371 39 375 113 746 152 12:45 354 42 371 96 725 138 01:00 202 406 1,569 33 120 374 1,476 322 3,045 56 780 89 01:15 372 24 370 46 742 70 01:30 424 34 372 42 796 76 01:45 367 29 360 58 727 87 02:00 117 438 1,748 26 117 348 1,552 234 3,300 43 786 69 02:15 412 28 376 30 788 58 02:30 482 23 434 20 916 43 02:45 416 40 394 24 810 64 03:00 155 396 1,532 24 168 418 1,778 323 3,310 28 814 52 03:15 381 38 415 47 796 85 03:30 380 46 459 34 839 80 03:45 375 60 486 46 861 106 04:00 277 376 1,665 50 374 436 1,937 651 3,602 56 812 106 04:15 433 82 452 54 885 136 04:30 446 134 517 86 963 220 04:45 410 108 532 81 942 189 05:00 729 445 1,669 112 762 475 1,921 1,491 3,590 96 920 208 05:15 454 190 486 152 940 342 05:30 420 220 492 203 912 423 05:45 350 240 468 278 818 518 06:00 1,235 406 1,527 244 1,123 432 1,726 2,358 3,253 236 838 480 06:15 369 255 464 258 833 513 06:30 376 274 440 337 816 611 06:45 376 350 390 404 766 754 07:00 1,678 359 1,187 319 1,477 318 1,115 3,155 2,302 355 677 674 07:15 296 354 278 452 574 806 07:30 297 386 285 470 582 856 07:45 235 418 234 401 469 819 08:00 1,509 265 1,084 450 1,647 250 849 3,156 1,933 396 515 846 08:15 272 427 218 376 490 803 08:30 282 400 189 377 471 777 08:45 265 370 192 360 457 730 09:00 1,337 266 1,228 362 1,529 205 838 2,866 2,066 355 471 717 09:15 268 371 202 322 470 693 09:30 300 396 208 336 508 732 09:45 394 400 223 324 617 724 10:00 1,273 472 1,255 384 1,452 251 662 2,725 1,917 345 723 729 10:15 302 348 185 314 487 662 10:30 240 364 120 328 360 692 10:45 241 356 106 286 347 642 11:00 1,322 164 676 364 1,478 114 338 2,800 1,014 311 278 675 11:15 192 376 86 330 278 706 11:30 174 372 76 381 250 753 11:45 146 366 62 300 208 666 Totals 10,270 16,651 10,420 15,698 20,690 32,349 Split% 51.5 50.4 48.5 49.6 Day Totals 26,118 53,039 26,921 Day Splits 50.8 49.2 Peak Hour 07:15 04:30 07:45 04:30 07:15 04:30 Volume 1,719 1,755 1,695 2,010 3,327 3,765 Factor 0.91 0.97 0.94 0.94 0.97 0.98 Data File : D1104052 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : BALL ROAD Location: Date: : SUNKIST ST TO SR-57 SB RAMPS Segment: 04/07/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 467 344 1,351 56 205 366 1,463 672 2,814 124 710 180 12:15 357 54 360 117 717 171 12:30 342 52 366 124 708 176 12:45 308 43 371 102 679 145 01:00 252 395 1,539 26 134 360 1,448 386 2,987 80 755 106 01:15 368 40 367 62 735 102 01:30 424 38 368 54 792 92 01:45 352 30 353 56 705 86 02:00 164 462 1,773 32 132 360 1,482 296 3,255 64 822 96 02:15 410 22 344 42 754 64 02:30 536 32 390 36 926 68 02:45 365 46 388 22 753 68 03:00 152 408 1,610 37 174 416 1,720 326 3,330 28 824 65 03:15 382 22 392 38 774 60 03:30 424 39 448 34 872 73 03:45 396 76 464 52 860 128 04:00 299 350 1,572 54 417 434 1,770 716 3,342 52 784 106 04:15 394 100 468 50 862 150 04:30 434 138 440 106 874 244 04:45 394 125 428 91 822 216 05:00 781 428 1,681 116 752 458 1,884 1,533 3,565 108 886 224 05:15 464 158 488 158 952 316 05:30 402 244 500 226 902 470 05:45 387 234 438 289 825 523 06:00 1,172 371 1,444 217 1,123 376 1,380 2,295 2,824 220 747 437 06:15 382 252 362 276 744 528 06:30 359 290 328 326 687 616 06:45 332 364 314 350 646 714 07:00 1,630 386 1,231 334 1,446 286 1,032 3,076 2,263 344 672 678 07:15 299 320 282 434 581 754 07:30 274 386 274 456 548 842 07:45 272 406 190 396 462 802 08:00 1,537 248 930 390 1,586 208 760 3,123 1,690 388 456 778 08:15 228 449 156 381 384 830 08:30 234 408 196 382 430 790 08:45 220 339 200 386 420 725 09:00 1,326 232 890 362 1,492 188 738 2,818 1,628 382 420 744 09:15 242 400 188 310 430 710 09:30 220 356 185 334 405 690 09:45 196 374 177 300 373 674 10:00 1,289 228 856 378 1,504 154 509 2,793 1,365 314 382 692 10:15 239 370 128 330 367 700 10:30 209 372 96 318 305 690 10:45 180 384 131 327 311 711 11:00 1,360 176 660 394 1,493 107 362 2,853 1,022 333 283 727 11:15 156 361 84 332 240 693 11:30 186 386 98 345 284 731 11:45 142 352 73 350 215 702 Totals 10,429 15,537 10,458 14,548 20,887 30,085 Split% 51.6 50.1 48.4 49.9 Day Totals 25,006 50,972 25,966 Day Splits 50.9 49.1 Peak Hour 07:15 02:00 07:45 05:00 07:30 05:00 Volume 1,674 1,773 1,653 1,884 3,252 3,565 Factor 0.92 0.83 0.92 0.94 0.97 0.94 Data File : D1104052 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : BALL ROAD Location Date: : SR-57 NB RAMPS TO PHOENIX CLUB Segment 04/06/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 75 238 1,052 52 134 290 1,052 209 2,104 16 528 68 12:15 276 22 248 18 524 40 12:30 248 30 248 22 496 52 12:45 290 30 266 19 556 49 01:00 38 248 1,030 13 52 266 1,044 90 2,074 8 514 21 01:15 265 12 262 12 527 24 01:30 253 15 276 12 529 27 01:45 264 12 240 6 504 18 02:00 47 254 967 9 58 275 1,212 105 2,179 12 529 21 02:15 182 12 268 4 450 16 02:30 246 12 399 11 645 23 02:45 285 25 270 20 555 45 03:00 68 236 1,020 16 58 344 1,407 126 2,427 12 580 28 03:15 258 8 283 10 541 18 03:30 261 15 466 16 727 31 03:45 265 19 314 30 579 49 04:00 263 274 1,077 15 120 380 1,408 383 2,485 32 654 47 04:15 257 15 340 26 597 41 04:30 264 58 396 80 660 138 04:45 282 32 292 125 574 157 05:00 792 285 1,117 77 407 454 1,332 1,199 2,449 88 739 165 05:15 266 104 314 150 580 254 05:30 294 110 306 216 600 326 05:45 272 116 258 338 530 454 06:00 938 272 1,286 123 579 300 1,071 1,517 2,357 198 572 321 06:15 344 132 270 159 614 291 06:30 370 152 269 211 639 363 06:45 300 172 232 370 532 542 07:00 1,169 211 563 170 834 196 612 2,003 1,175 279 407 449 07:15 142 208 160 294 302 502 07:30 114 228 128 279 242 507 07:45 96 228 128 317 224 545 08:00 1,100 78 358 224 905 157 562 2,005 920 298 235 522 08:15 102 247 130 292 232 539 08:30 82 226 115 266 197 492 08:45 96 208 160 244 256 452 09:00 961 92 312 204 830 160 1,109 1,791 1,421 264 252 468 09:15 72 204 144 241 216 445 09:30 59 196 288 242 347 438 09:45 89 226 517 214 606 440 10:00 922 105 275 203 823 601 938 1,745 1,213 228 706 431 10:15 71 221 179 212 250 433 10:30 58 192 94 230 152 422 10:45 41 207 64 252 105 459 11:00 945 28 131 240 959 82 228 1,904 359 237 110 477 11:15 48 243 38 220 86 463 11:30 31 244 66 250 97 494 11:45 24 232 42 238 66 470 Totals 7,318 9,188 5,759 11,975 13,077 21,163 Split% 43.4 44.0 56.6 56.0 Day Totals 17,734 34,240 16,506 Day Splits 48.2 51.8 Peak Hour 06:45 06:00 11:00 09:30 07:30 04:15 Volume 1,222 1,286 959 1,585 2,113 2,570 Factor 0.83 0.87 0.98 0.66 0.97 0.87 Data File : D1104055 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : BALL ROAD Location Date: : SR-57 NB RAMPS TO PHOENIX CLUB Segment 04/07/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 94 267 957 48 140 284 995 234 1,952 28 551 76 12:15 222 18 214 18 436 36 12:30 239 38 265 28 504 66 12:45 229 36 232 20 461 56 01:00 65 242 927 21 87 262 1,031 152 1,958 18 504 39 01:15 218 18 252 14 470 32 01:30 237 30 266 19 503 49 01:45 230 18 251 14 481 32 02:00 53 239 1,050 22 63 260 1,172 116 2,222 12 499 34 02:15 275 8 282 7 557 15 02:30 270 15 346 14 616 29 02:45 266 18 284 20 550 38 03:00 66 243 1,139 18 70 359 1,407 136 2,546 8 602 26 03:15 300 8 273 8 573 16 03:30 280 18 492 18 772 36 03:45 316 26 283 32 599 58 04:00 323 240 959 12 151 412 1,404 474 2,363 20 652 32 04:15 233 28 337 56 570 84 04:30 234 59 358 92 592 151 04:45 252 52 297 155 549 207 05:00 804 239 978 71 363 488 1,374 1,167 2,352 100 727 171 05:15 268 76 328 144 596 220 05:30 252 98 316 206 568 304 05:45 219 118 242 354 461 472 06:00 1,024 193 634 120 633 298 885 1,657 1,519 206 491 326 06:15 172 150 205 208 377 358 06:30 134 181 194 244 328 425 06:45 135 182 188 366 323 548 07:00 1,154 129 451 172 848 210 656 2,002 1,107 248 339 420 07:15 140 198 152 284 292 482 07:30 104 244 164 290 268 534 07:45 78 234 130 332 208 566 08:00 1,118 55 265 253 839 120 465 1,957 730 345 175 598 08:15 66 200 96 288 162 488 08:30 81 192 125 222 206 414 08:45 63 194 124 263 187 457 09:00 919 62 262 203 847 146 487 1,766 749 242 208 445 09:15 62 212 132 246 194 458 09:30 74 233 117 223 191 456 09:45 64 199 92 208 156 407 10:00 977 56 184 210 862 88 284 1,839 468 234 144 444 10:15 48 165 56 252 104 417 10:30 44 258 90 241 134 499 10:45 36 229 50 250 86 479 11:00 912 26 86 220 990 76 210 1,902 296 240 102 460 11:15 22 250 50 224 72 474 11:30 24 274 54 236 78 510 11:45 14 246 30 212 44 458 Totals 7,509 7,892 5,893 10,370 13,402 18,262 Split% 43.2 44.0 56.8 56.0 Day Totals 16,263 31,664 15,401 Day Splits 48.6 51.4 Peak Hour 07:30 03:00 11:00 03:30 07:30 03:15 Volume 1,255 1,139 990 1,524 2,186 2,596 Factor 0.91 0.90 0.90 0.77 0.91 0.84 Data File : D1104055 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : SUNKIST STREET Location Date: : N/O CERRITOS AVENUEQ Segment 04/06/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: NB SB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 28 69 231 3 10 49 197 38 428 10 118 13 12:15 66 1 52 4 118 5 12:30 54 3 44 8 98 11 12:45 42 3 52 6 94 9 01:00 13 42 221 3 5 51 195 18 416 8 93 11 01:15 69 2 52 1 121 3 01:30 52 0 48 3 100 3 01:45 58 0 44 1 102 1 02:00 5 50 252 0 1 44 189 6 441 1 94 1 02:15 64 0 43 1 107 1 02:30 77 0 51 0 128 0 02:45 61 1 51 3 112 4 03:00 7 72 334 2 11 56 262 18 596 2 128 4 03:15 67 4 60 0 127 4 03:30 105 2 73 2 178 4 03:45 90 3 73 3 163 6 04:00 8 85 383 6 41 64 268 49 651 3 149 9 04:15 100 6 74 0 174 6 04:30 108 7 70 3 178 10 04:45 90 22 60 2 150 24 05:00 59 196 593 11 135 74 267 194 860 9 270 20 05:15 172 34 58 10 230 44 05:30 155 26 67 12 222 38 05:45 70 64 68 28 138 92 06:00 74 62 242 31 236 75 408 310 650 14 137 45 06:15 58 46 96 24 154 70 06:30 56 64 134 14 190 78 06:45 66 95 103 22 169 117 07:00 121 64 193 92 492 49 138 613 331 26 113 118 07:15 56 115 28 27 84 142 07:30 38 134 38 32 76 166 07:45 35 151 23 36 58 187 08:00 141 36 97 132 433 19 55 574 152 38 55 170 08:15 20 134 17 38 37 172 08:30 28 82 13 32 41 114 08:45 13 85 6 33 19 118 09:00 132 34 398 46 209 12 55 341 453 42 46 88 09:15 40 62 15 26 55 88 09:30 100 51 14 38 114 89 09:45 224 50 14 26 238 76 10:00 145 154 230 27 170 19 44 315 274 46 173 73 10:15 42 49 17 35 59 84 10:30 16 44 4 28 20 72 10:45 18 50 4 36 22 86 11:00 175 16 36 36 178 6 15 353 51 36 22 72 11:15 6 58 2 50 8 108 11:30 9 42 4 43 13 85 11:45 5 42 3 46 8 88 Totals 908 3,210 1,921 2,093 2,829 5,303 Split% 60.5 67.9 39.5 32.1 Day Totals 4,014 8,132 4,118 Day Splits 50.6 49.4 Peak Hour 11:00 04:45 07:30 06:00 07:30 04:45 Volume 175 613 551 408 695 872 Factor 0.88 0.78 0.91 0.76 0.93 0.81 Data File : D1104053 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : SUNKIST STREET Location Date: : N/O CERRITOS AVENUEQ Segment 04/07/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: NB SB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 31 61 183 0 12 53 228 43 411 9 114 9 12:15 28 2 52 2 80 4 12:30 50 7 66 13 116 20 12:45 44 3 57 7 101 10 01:00 15 56 222 1 9 50 166 24 388 4 106 5 01:15 48 3 42 2 90 5 01:30 72 4 38 2 110 6 01:45 46 1 36 7 82 8 02:00 14 74 282 1 6 52 210 20 492 6 126 7 02:15 52 1 53 4 105 5 02:30 98 0 49 3 147 3 02:45 58 4 56 1 114 5 03:00 8 84 350 4 11 60 225 19 575 3 144 7 03:15 70 0 50 1 120 1 03:30 100 4 57 1 157 5 03:45 96 3 58 3 154 6 04:00 14 92 357 5 47 46 195 61 552 2 138 7 04:15 78 6 53 2 131 8 04:30 100 11 48 4 148 15 04:45 87 25 48 6 135 31 05:00 52 128 391 11 133 64 195 185 586 7 192 18 05:15 108 32 42 9 150 41 05:30 92 34 44 16 136 50 05:45 63 56 45 20 108 76 06:00 74 64 197 36 239 37 132 313 329 16 101 52 06:15 41 42 33 14 74 56 06:30 50 65 29 26 79 91 06:45 42 96 33 18 75 114 07:00 110 62 158 98 483 16 79 593 237 31 78 129 07:15 38 106 21 18 59 124 07:30 21 147 20 27 41 174 07:45 37 132 22 34 59 166 08:00 127 27 94 133 426 15 51 553 145 24 42 157 08:15 25 122 9 38 34 160 08:30 20 93 9 30 29 123 08:45 22 78 18 35 40 113 09:00 117 31 101 54 197 7 39 314 140 31 38 85 09:15 27 50 11 24 38 74 09:30 18 47 12 28 30 75 09:45 25 46 9 34 34 80 10:00 125 14 53 41 178 11 24 303 77 34 25 75 10:15 18 48 2 30 20 78 10:30 13 41 6 34 19 75 10:45 8 48 5 27 13 75 11:00 176 11 43 43 195 4 17 371 60 42 15 85 11:15 14 44 3 44 17 88 11:30 12 50 3 50 15 100 11:45 6 58 7 40 13 98 Totals 863 2,431 1,936 1,561 2,799 3,992 Split% 60.9 69.2 39.1 30.8 Day Totals 3,497 6,791 3,294 Day Splits 48.5 51.5 Peak Hour 11:00 04:30 07:30 12:00 07:30 04:30 Volume 176 423 534 228 657 625 Factor 0.88 0.83 0.91 0.86 0.94 0.81 Data File : D1104053 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : CERRITOS AVENUE Location Date: : E/O SUNKIST STREET Segment 04/06/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 5 28 140 3 8 52 167 13 307 1 80 4 12:15 23 1 39 1 62 2 12:30 47 2 36 2 83 4 12:45 42 2 40 1 82 3 01:00 2 48 176 1 2 38 154 4 330 0 86 1 01:15 44 0 48 1 92 1 01:30 41 1 39 0 80 1 01:45 43 0 29 1 72 1 02:00 1 33 111 2 5 47 174 6 285 0 80 2 02:15 21 1 44 1 65 2 02:30 29 1 43 0 72 1 02:45 28 1 40 0 68 1 03:00 3 32 140 1 6 47 238 9 378 0 79 1 03:15 29 2 44 2 73 4 03:30 39 1 82 1 121 2 03:45 40 2 65 0 105 2 04:00 13 37 160 1 7 79 266 20 426 1 116 2 04:15 44 0 62 3 106 3 04:30 38 2 66 3 104 5 04:45 41 4 59 6 100 10 05:00 53 46 206 5 29 140 364 82 570 3 186 8 05:15 43 5 111 9 154 14 05:30 55 5 65 14 120 19 05:45 62 14 48 27 110 41 06:00 138 74 464 3 39 54 177 177 641 20 128 23 06:15 123 11 42 34 165 45 06:30 142 11 43 34 185 45 06:45 125 14 38 50 163 64 07:00 308 57 125 24 111 34 119 419 244 51 91 75 07:15 38 32 40 79 78 111 07:30 22 26 29 82 51 108 07:45 8 29 16 96 24 125 08:00 256 14 43 25 109 32 94 365 137 71 46 96 08:15 11 30 25 72 36 102 08:30 8 22 18 53 26 75 08:45 10 32 19 60 29 92 09:00 120 6 27 18 69 23 698 189 725 39 29 57 09:15 10 24 37 34 47 58 09:30 3 12 238 25 241 37 09:45 8 15 400 22 408 37 10:00 81 4 15 21 89 224 330 170 345 14 228 35 10:15 5 21 61 23 66 44 10:30 2 26 22 23 24 49 10:45 4 21 23 21 27 42 11:00 140 3 7 25 142 9 20 282 27 20 12 45 11:15 3 38 5 44 8 82 11:30 1 34 4 38 5 72 11:45 0 45 2 38 2 83 Totals 1,120 1,614 616 2,801 1,736 4,415 Split% 36.6 35.5 63.4 64.5 Day Totals 3,417 6,151 2,734 Day Splits 44.4 55.6 Peak Hour 07:15 06:00 11:00 09:30 07:15 09:30 Volume 328 464 142 923 440 943 Factor 0.85 0.82 0.79 0.58 0.88 0.58 Data File : D1104054 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : CERRITOS AVENUE Location Date: : E/O SUNKIST STREET Segment 04/07/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 4 47 155 6 17 47 139 21 294 0 94 6 12:15 30 2 24 1 54 3 12:30 44 8 28 1 72 9 12:45 34 1 40 2 74 3 01:00 4 29 132 5 14 36 153 18 285 1 65 6 01:15 37 3 36 1 73 4 01:30 38 4 43 0 81 4 01:45 28 2 38 2 66 4 02:00 2 30 115 2 8 48 154 10 269 1 78 3 02:15 27 1 34 0 61 1 02:30 28 3 42 1 70 4 02:45 30 2 30 0 60 2 03:00 2 30 117 1 5 53 250 7 367 0 83 1 03:15 31 2 42 0 73 2 03:30 26 0 92 1 118 1 03:45 30 2 63 1 93 3 04:00 14 31 102 0 8 84 234 22 336 1 115 1 04:15 16 0 46 5 62 5 04:30 29 5 65 5 94 10 04:45 26 3 39 3 65 6 05:00 51 38 114 2 25 111 280 76 394 7 149 9 05:15 21 3 78 12 99 15 05:30 24 6 60 11 84 17 05:45 31 14 31 21 62 35 06:00 141 26 88 10 49 42 117 190 205 20 68 30 06:15 20 12 37 28 57 40 06:30 16 11 22 40 38 51 06:45 26 16 16 53 42 69 07:00 285 13 37 16 96 22 68 381 105 59 35 75 07:15 9 17 20 72 29 89 07:30 9 30 10 72 19 102 07:45 6 33 16 82 22 115 08:00 257 4 23 24 94 9 54 351 77 68 13 92 08:15 7 27 17 70 24 97 08:30 6 17 12 64 18 81 08:45 6 26 16 55 22 81 09:00 157 7 19 28 99 19 82 256 101 64 26 92 09:15 4 17 21 37 25 54 09:30 4 28 20 28 24 56 09:45 4 26 22 28 26 54 10:00 101 6 9 18 90 12 27 191 36 21 18 39 10:15 0 26 4 26 4 52 10:30 2 24 4 22 6 46 10:45 1 22 7 32 8 54 11:00 111 1 3 35 142 8 18 253 21 27 9 62 11:15 1 48 2 20 3 68 11:30 0 29 6 26 6 55 11:45 1 30 2 38 3 68 Totals 1,129 914 647 1,576 1,776 2,490 Split% 36.7 36.4 63.3 63.6 Day Totals 2,223 4,266 2,043 Day Splits 47.9 52.1 Peak Hour 07:15 12:00 11:00 04:30 07:30 04:30 Volume 294 155 142 293 406 407 Factor 0.90 0.82 0.74 0.66 0.88 0.68 Data File : D1104054 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : PHOENIX CLUB Location Date: : S/O BALL ROAD Segment 04/06/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: SB NB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 8 38 149 3 10 46 147 18 296 0 84 3 12:15 38 4 32 5 70 9 12:30 32 2 30 0 62 2 12:45 41 1 39 3 80 4 01:00 0 31 142 3 3 60 187 3 329 0 91 3 01:15 30 0 42 0 72 0 01:30 43 0 40 0 83 0 01:45 38 0 45 0 83 0 02:00 0 17 114 0 1 30 118 1 232 0 47 0 02:15 28 0 28 0 56 0 02:30 28 0 26 0 54 0 02:45 41 1 34 0 75 1 03:00 0 30 123 0 0 37 149 0 272 0 67 0 03:15 31 0 31 0 62 0 03:30 30 0 43 0 73 0 03:45 32 0 38 0 70 0 04:00 1 26 115 0 0 39 128 1 243 0 65 0 04:15 26 0 34 0 60 0 04:30 29 0 25 0 54 0 04:45 34 0 30 1 64 1 05:00 9 36 146 0 0 52 267 9 413 0 88 0 05:15 40 0 62 2 102 2 05:30 3 0 103 2 106 2 05:45 67 0 50 5 117 5 06:00 37 130 713 3 9 51 135 46 848 8 181 11 06:15 198 0 28 3 226 3 06:30 232 4 26 6 258 10 06:45 153 2 30 20 183 22 07:00 119 70 139 8 31 24 93 150 232 22 94 30 07:15 28 8 27 20 55 28 07:30 26 6 22 34 48 40 07:45 15 9 20 43 35 52 08:00 122 12 31 9 49 11 99 171 130 32 23 41 08:15 9 13 14 31 23 44 08:30 2 11 14 19 16 30 08:45 8 16 60 40 68 56 09:00 144 2 14 18 89 69 816 233 830 35 71 53 09:15 3 24 54 41 57 65 09:30 4 25 211 34 215 59 09:45 5 22 482 34 487 56 10:00 124 4 11 18 95 474 651 219 662 25 478 43 10:15 4 29 116 28 120 57 10:30 2 26 37 30 39 56 10:45 1 22 24 41 25 63 11:00 148 0 3 32 120 17 36 268 39 31 17 63 11:15 1 24 4 41 5 65 11:30 0 26 7 30 7 56 11:45 2 38 8 46 10 84 Totals 712 1,700 407 2,826 1,119 4,526 Split% 37.6 36.4 62.4 63.6 Day Totals 3,233 5,645 2,412 Day Splits 42.7 57.3 Peak Hour 08:45 06:00 11:00 09:30 11:00 09:30 Volume 150 713 120 1,283 268 1,300 Factor 0.91 0.77 0.79 0.67 0.80 0.67 Data File : D1104056 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2680 Walnut Avenue, Ste C Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : PHOENIX CLUB Location Date: : S/O BALL ROAD Segment 04/07/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: SB NB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 6 40 132 6 10 43 138 16 270 2 83 8 12:15 36 0 29 0 65 0 12:30 24 1 36 2 60 3 12:45 32 3 30 2 62 5 01:00 0 44 168 0 3 50 158 3 326 0 94 0 01:15 36 0 34 0 70 0 01:30 46 1 32 0 78 1 01:45 42 2 42 0 84 2 02:00 1 27 109 0 0 36 129 1 238 0 63 0 02:15 19 0 28 0 47 0 02:30 35 0 31 0 66 0 02:45 28 0 34 1 62 1 03:00 0 35 129 0 1 48 144 1 273 0 83 0 03:15 32 1 36 0 68 1 03:30 26 0 32 0 58 0 03:45 36 0 28 0 64 0 04:00 1 26 101 0 1 50 120 2 221 1 76 1 04:15 30 1 27 0 57 1 04:30 18 0 21 0 39 0 04:45 27 0 22 0 49 0 05:00 8 20 113 0 3 64 158 11 271 1 84 1 05:15 26 0 36 0 62 0 05:30 36 0 28 4 64 4 05:45 31 3 30 3 61 6 06:00 34 24 107 0 8 56 126 42 233 4 80 4 06:15 23 2 34 6 57 8 06:30 29 0 14 9 43 9 06:45 31 6 22 15 53 21 07:00 124 23 65 7 29 26 73 153 138 16 49 23 07:15 23 3 13 22 36 25 07:30 10 11 16 35 26 46 07:45 9 8 18 51 27 59 08:00 148 7 22 12 55 23 94 203 116 42 30 54 08:15 5 13 15 33 20 46 08:30 6 14 38 33 44 47 08:45 4 16 18 40 22 56 09:00 125 6 13 20 86 40 97 211 110 37 46 57 09:15 5 21 17 32 22 53 09:30 1 29 27 30 28 59 09:45 1 16 13 26 14 42 10:00 163 0 3 24 113 10 46 276 49 36 10 60 10:15 2 31 4 35 6 66 10:30 1 36 22 44 23 80 10:45 0 22 10 48 10 70 11:00 152 3 6 23 137 6 12 289 18 40 9 63 11:15 0 36 1 38 1 74 11:30 3 43 2 34 5 77 11:45 0 35 3 40 3 75 Totals 762 968 446 1,295 1,208 2,263 Split% 42.8 36.9 57.2 63.1 Day Totals 1,741 3,471 1,730 Day Splits 49.8 50.2 Peak Hour 10:30 01:00 11:00 01:00 11:00 01:00 Volume 170 168 137 158 289 326 Factor 0.89 0.91 0.80 0.79 0.94 0.87 Data File : D1104056 ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX B: EXISTING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR ANGEL STADIUM ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report - Appendices EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR ANGEL STADIUM (NO EVENTS DAY) ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h11080071 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/25/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: DOUGLASS ROAD E-W Direction: KATELLA AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements DOUGLASS ROAD Southbound KATELLA AVENUE Westbound DOUGLASS ROAD Northbound KATELLA AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left U-Turn Right Thru Left Right Thru Left U-Turn Int. Total 04:00 PM 80 1 31 27 290 3 1 5 1 6 4 223 19 3 694 04:15 PM 36 0 25 29 246 4 2 8 2 16 10 214 23 3 618 04:30 PM 70 0 27 31 291 6 3 5 5 15 6 251 28 10 748 04:45 PM 34 1 26 27 256 9 3 5 1 11 14 258 56 6 707 Total 220 2 [PHONE REDACTED] 22 9 23 9 48 34 946 126 22 2767 05:00 PM 99 2 42 40 293 3 2 4 2 14 21 316 56 4 898 05:15 PM 54 0 20 36 308 4 2 3 4 5 13 291 58 5 803 05:30 PM 63 0 33 31 228 5 4 3 6 22 18 265 70 3 751 05:45 PM 43 1 22 34 215 1 1 6 5 5 14 247 81 3 678 Total 259 3 [PHONE REDACTED] 13 9 16 17 46 66 1119 265 15 3130 06:00 PM 61 3 22 34 187 6 2 3 3 7 9 230 60 7 634 06:15 PM 28 1 17 18 183 5 0 1 1 13 7 170 28 3 475 06:30 PM 38 1 16 20 181 3 0 4 0 7 5 180 16 3 474 06:45 PM 24 1 10 13 154 1 0 1 1 8 5 136 12 2 368 Total 151 6 65 85 705 15 2 9 5 35 26 716 116 15 1951 07:00 PM 28 0 15 23 173 6 2 2 0 10 6 134 9 0 408 07:15 PM 32 0 3 7 139 3 0 1 0 14 15 133 9 3 359 07:30 PM 33 1 5 8 141 6 1 5 0 14 16 112 4 3 349 07:45 PM 22 0 8 10 162 6 0 1 0 14 9 112 1 3 348 Total 115 1 31 48 615 21 3 9 0 52 46 491 23 9 1464 Grand Total 745 12 [PHONE REDACTED] 71 23 57 31 [PHONE REDACTED] 530 61 9312 % 69 1.1 29.8 9.9 87.7 1.8 0.6 21.2 11.5 67.3 4.3 81.1 13.1 1.5 Total % 8 0.1 3.5 4.2 37 0.8 0.2 0.6 0.3 1.9 1.8 35.1 5.7 0.7 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h11080041 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/25/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: HOWELL AVENUE E-W Direction: KATELLA AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements HOWELL AVENUE Southbound KATELL AVENUE Westbound HOWELL AVENUE Northbound KATELL AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left U-Turns Right Thru Left U-Turns Right Thru Left Right Thru Left U-Turns Int. Total 04:00 PM 24 6 56 1 40 317 7 1 25 4 22 13 231 22 1 770 04:15 PM 17 4 55 0 52 268 6 2 26 6 13 10 201 10 1 671 04:30 PM 28 4 66 1 74 318 23 2 31 3 14 9 253 18 0 844 04:45 PM 28 4 72 0 115 306 8 3 25 2 10 10 234 11 2 830 Total 97 18 249 2 281 1209 44 8 107 15 59 42 919 61 4 3115 05:00 PM 33 0 83 0 119 322 12 0 54 9 20 4 297 13 3 969 05:15 PM 25 2 59 0 127 313 16 3 19 2 9 9 318 16 6 924 05:30 PM 27 3 54 0 143 312 15 3 17 3 15 9 280 18 3 902 05:45 PM 21 6 57 0 119 275 9 2 25 4 14 8 213 8 1 762 Total 106 11 253 0 508 1222 52 8 115 18 58 30 1108 55 13 3557 06:00 PM 30 1 37 0 92 327 7 3 22 3 13 9 248 12 3 807 06:15 PM 12 2 50 1 39 242 13 1 16 4 9 9 222 9 2 631 06:30 PM 17 2 45 2 33 219 10 2 18 5 14 10 238 12 3 630 06:45 PM 7 2 32 0 39 198 6 2 9 1 6 9 173 9 1 494 Total 66 7 164 3 203 986 36 8 65 13 42 37 881 42 9 2562 07:00 PM 7 2 27 0 33 184 5 0 11 0 7 4 204 12 0 496 07:15 PM 9 0 21 0 32 191 6 0 10 1 6 7 181 5 3 472 07:30 PM 6 1 19 0 20 164 8 1 5 2 7 7 178 12 0 430 07:45 PM 4 1 20 0 22 188 12 2 8 0 7 3 160 8 0 435 Total 26 4 87 0 107 727 31 3 34 3 27 21 723 37 3 1833 Grand Total 295 40 753 5 1099 4144 163 27 321 49 [PHONE REDACTED] 195 29 11067 % 27 3.7 68.9 0.5 20.2 76.3 3 0.5 57.7 8.8 33.5 3.3 91.1 4.9 0.7 Total % 2.7 0.4 6.8 0 9.9 37.4 1.5 0.2 2.9 0.4 1.7 1.2 32.8 1.8 0.3 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h11080091 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/25/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: MAIN STREET E-W Direction: KATELLA AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements MAIN STREET Southbound KATELLA AVENUE Westbound MAIN STREET Northbound KATELLA AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left U-Turn Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left U-Turn Int. Total 04:00 PM 16 49 26 2 21 170 41 66 104 37 15 184 12 3 746 04:15 PM 19 41 7 1 30 169 50 70 90 29 17 156 16 1 696 04:30 PM 29 67 23 1 24 174 44 82 100 34 14 153 20 1 766 04:45 PM 16 61 20 0 22 168 42 65 73 30 16 214 29 1 757 Total 80 218 76 4 97 681 177 283 367 130 62 707 77 6 2965 05:00 PM 25 71 26 1 34 204 45 72 91 32 13 226 25 3 868 05:15 PM 29 59 20 1 17 201 29 73 92 46 13 225 42 1 848 05:30 PM 35 42 16 2 24 157 39 60 91 31 14 220 31 3 765 05:45 PM 22 55 13 1 19 149 24 67 63 35 14 215 26 6 709 Total 111 227 75 5 94 711 137 272 337 144 54 886 124 13 3190 06:00 PM 14 53 19 0 22 141 39 71 75 31 17 150 20 3 655 06:15 PM 18 36 22 2 24 149 40 50 49 29 8 126 6 4 563 06:30 PM 10 40 22 1 10 136 30 41 55 20 10 151 14 2 542 06:45 PM 8 23 14 1 19 121 36 41 33 26 15 71 9 2 419 Total 50 152 77 4 75 547 145 203 212 106 50 498 49 11 2179 07:00 PM 14 34 16 0 25 128 24 46 51 34 9 87 8 0 476 07:15 PM 5 27 10 1 13 117 38 23 36 17 11 83 4 0 385 07:30 PM 8 18 21 1 19 91 28 26 37 12 8 87 8 2 366 07:45 PM 11 25 14 4 19 121 24 25 33 18 6 68 11 0 379 Total 38 104 61 6 76 457 114 120 157 81 34 325 31 2 1606 Grand Total 279 701 289 19 342 2396 [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] 281 32 9940 % 21.7 54.4 22.4 1.5 10.3 72.4 17.3 36.4 44.5 19.1 6.8 82.5 9.6 1.1 Total % 2.8 7.1 2.9 0.2 3.4 24.1 5.8 8.8 10.8 4.6 2 24.3 2.8 0.3 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h11080101 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/25/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: MAIN STREET E-W Direction: STRUCK AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements MAIN STREET Southbound STRUCK AVENUE Westbound MAIN STREET Northbound STRUCK AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 3 88 5 11 26 10 8 180 27 27 25 9 419 04:15 PM 11 85 4 9 23 8 6 130 21 40 12 8 357 04:30 PM 7 109 5 12 26 3 4 188 34 35 14 6 443 04:45 PM 3 101 4 9 20 1 1 161 32 31 18 4 385 Total 24 383 18 41 95 22 19 659 114 133 69 27 1604 05:00 PM 3 105 2 8 27 5 0 173 36 44 16 6 425 05:15 PM 6 104 2 9 16 5 1 177 27 38 9 11 405 05:30 PM 4 82 2 6 11 3 2 177 19 21 12 4 343 05:45 PM 2 74 5 0 9 6 3 166 22 20 8 3 318 Total 15 365 11 23 63 19 6 693 104 123 45 24 1491 06:00 PM 9 83 3 2 10 3 3 161 15 21 3 4 317 06:15 PM 4 87 4 3 8 2 2 100 15 12 7 4 248 06:30 PM 1 60 1 1 8 2 1 108 15 19 12 3 231 06:45 PM 3 60 3 0 8 0 0 86 12 25 5 1 203 Total 17 290 11 6 34 7 6 455 57 77 27 12 999 07:00 PM 0 49 1 0 6 2 0 83 14 20 6 2 183 07:15 PM 5 53 0 1 6 3 1 71 12 13 3 2 170 07:30 PM 4 44 0 0 4 0 0 71 6 12 3 1 145 07:45 PM 0 33 1 0 4 0 0 59 9 6 6 2 120 Total 9 179 2 1 20 5 1 284 41 51 18 7 618 Grand Total 65 1217 42 71 212 53 32 2091 316 384 159 70 4712 % 4.9 91.9 3.2 21.1 63.1 15.8 1.3 85.7 13 62.6 25.9 11.4 Total % 1.4 25.8 0.9 1.5 4.5 1.1 0.7 44.4 6.7 8.1 3.4 1.5 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : H11080151 Site Code : 00003873 Start Date : 8/25/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: PHOENIX CLUB E-W Direction: BALL ROAD Groups Printed- Turning Movements PHOENIX CLUB Southbound BALL ROAD Westbound PHOENIX CLUB Northbound BALL ROAD Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 4 0 3 1 343 8 15 0 46 26 270 7 723 04:15 PM 8 0 2 2 348 8 9 1 18 19 291 7 713 04:30 PM 5 0 1 3 348 3 7 0 35 22 276 2 702 04:45 PM 7 0 3 0 375 6 10 0 20 28 285 4 738 Total 24 0 9 6 1414 25 41 1 119 95 1122 20 2876 05:00 PM 5 0 1 2 406 7 14 0 45 17 207 6 710 05:15 PM 5 0 1 1 350 6 13 0 35 25 285 3 724 05:30 PM 3 0 1 2 306 7 8 0 22 14 250 7 620 05:45 PM 7 0 2 1 255 5 16 0 30 20 304 15 655 Total 20 0 5 6 1317 25 51 0 132 76 1046 31 2709 06:00 PM 6 0 2 1 241 5 12 1 60 20 237 3 588 06:15 PM 3 0 1 1 200 2 12 1 37 13 206 2 478 06:30 PM 8 0 2 2 191 3 5 0 16 15 194 2 438 06:45 PM 7 0 1 0 166 2 8 0 18 7 172 6 387 Total 24 0 6 4 798 12 37 2 131 55 809 13 1891 07:00 PM 4 0 1 1 174 6 4 0 11 16 148 5 370 07:15 PM 5 0 4 1 171 3 0 0 14 13 139 6 356 07:30 PM 1 1 0 2 156 2 4 0 17 17 112 5 317 07:45 PM 6 0 1 0 139 1 3 0 13 10 112 3 288 Total 16 1 6 4 640 12 11 0 55 56 511 19 1331 Grand Total 84 1 26 20 4169 74 140 3 [PHONE REDACTED] 83 8807 % 75.7 0.9 23.4 0.5 97.8 1.7 24.1 0.5 75.3 7.3 90.5 2.2 Total % 1 0 0.3 0.2 47.3 0.8 1.6 0 5 3.2 39.6 0.9 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : H1108003 Site Code : 00005694 Start Date : 8/25/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: SPORTSTOWN E-W Direction: KATELLA AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements SPORTSTOWN Southbound KATELLA AVENUE Westbound SPORTSTOWN Northbound KATELLA AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 12 0 23 17 295 13 11 3 1 10 206 16 607 04:15 PM 19 0 18 17 256 10 26 0 12 7 239 9 613 04:30 PM 8 0 24 12 292 8 23 1 13 15 183 10 589 04:45 PM 19 0 22 26 271 8 18 1 16 10 237 14 642 Total 58 0 87 72 1114 39 78 5 42 42 865 49 2451 05:00 PM 18 2 25 27 351 10 26 4 14 12 205 10 704 05:15 PM 13 2 10 16 169 2 7 0 6 7 257 3 492 05:30 PM 22 2 20 22 283 17 41 5 18 12 205 8 655 05:45 PM 14 1 18 18 270 5 9 2 6 9 262 14 628 Total 67 7 73 83 1073 34 83 11 44 40 929 35 2479 06:00 PM 16 0 16 21 271 6 15 3 5 7 173 12 545 06:15 PM 18 0 21 27 207 4 28 1 21 8 211 7 553 06:30 PM 24 0 20 18 203 4 45 2 23 9 135 8 491 06:45 PM 20 2 21 22 179 3 12 2 3 6 171 13 454 Total 78 2 78 88 860 17 100 8 52 30 690 40 2043 07:00 PM 19 1 21 14 182 2 8 1 6 8 190 8 460 07:15 PM 13 1 26 20 146 6 32 0 13 6 150 11 424 07:30 PM 13 1 16 10 134 2 4 0 7 9 129 7 332 07:45 PM 16 1 20 10 132 3 9 1 0 3 152 17 364 Total 61 4 83 54 594 13 53 2 26 26 621 43 1580 Grand Total 264 13 [PHONE REDACTED] 103 314 26 [PHONE REDACTED] 167 8553 % 44.1 2.2 53.7 7.3 90.1 2.5 62.3 5.2 32.5 4 91.1 4.9 Total % 3.1 0.2 3.8 3.5 42.6 1.2 3.7 0.3 1.9 1.6 36.3 2 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : H11080111 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/25/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: SR-57 NB RAMPS E-W Direction: BALL ROAD Groups Printed- Turning Movements SR-57 NB ON RAMP Southbound BALL ROAD Westbound SR-57 NB ON-OFF RAMP Northbound BALL ROAD Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 0 0 0 101 335 0 77 0 178 138 232 0 1061 04:15 PM 0 0 0 77 254 0 84 0 204 110 204 0 933 04:30 PM 0 0 0 131 316 0 82 0 207 110 257 0 1103 04:45 PM 0 0 0 96 246 0 58 0 148 99 244 0 891 Total 0 0 0 405 1151 0 301 0 737 457 937 0 3988 05:00 PM 0 0 0 149 270 0 52 0 142 140 255 0 1008 05:15 PM 0 0 0 156 277 0 38 0 119 116 276 0 982 05:30 PM 0 0 0 106 217 0 51 0 126 118 219 0 837 05:45 PM 0 0 0 89 215 0 58 0 135 105 227 0 829 Total 0 0 0 500 979 0 199 0 522 479 977 0 3656 06:00 PM 0 0 0 83 180 0 36 0 150 141 225 0 815 06:15 PM 0 0 0 65 232 0 60 0 152 105 205 0 819 06:30 PM 0 0 0 68 162 0 46 0 133 135 159 0 703 06:45 PM 0 0 0 50 130 0 41 0 111 113 135 0 580 Total 0 0 0 266 704 0 183 0 546 494 724 0 2917 07:00 PM 0 0 0 80 136 0 45 0 118 145 138 0 662 07:15 PM 0 0 0 63 99 0 35 0 83 143 108 0 531 07:30 PM 0 0 0 67 121 0 31 0 88 158 105 0 570 07:45 PM 0 0 0 58 105 0 18 0 84 108 109 0 482 Total 0 0 0 268 461 0 129 0 373 554 460 0 2245 Grand Total 0 0 0 1439 3295 0 812 0 2178 1984 3098 0 12806 % 0 0 0 30.4 69.6 0 27.2 0 72.8 39 61 0 Total % 0 0 0 11.2 25.7 0 6.3 0 17 15.5 24.2 0 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h11080051 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/25/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: SR-57 NB RAMPS E-W Direction: KATELLA AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements SR-57 NB ON RAMP Southbound KATELLA AVENUE Westbound SR-57 NB ON - OFF RAMPS Northbound KATELLA AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 0 0 0 79 297 0 70 0 53 91 182 0 772 04:15 PM 0 0 0 48 250 0 74 0 75 90 163 0 700 04:30 PM 0 0 0 41 335 0 104 0 112 101 206 0 899 04:45 PM 0 0 0 32 274 0 150 0 164 94 204 0 918 Total 0 0 0 200 1156 0 398 0 404 376 755 0 3289 05:00 PM 0 0 0 68 343 0 141 0 156 133 231 0 1072 05:15 PM 0 0 0 42 321 0 135 0 172 147 213 0 1030 05:30 PM 0 0 0 43 275 0 144 0 184 106 218 0 970 05:45 PM 0 0 0 30 231 0 132 0 151 88 184 0 816 Total 0 0 0 183 1170 0 552 0 663 474 846 0 3888 06:00 PM 0 0 0 38 220 0 101 0 144 100 174 0 777 06:15 PM 0 0 0 45 177 0 47 0 46 98 175 0 588 06:30 PM 0 0 0 46 175 0 41 0 48 95 164 0 569 06:45 PM 0 0 0 44 137 0 38 0 39 84 109 0 451 Total 0 0 0 173 709 0 227 0 277 377 622 0 2385 07:00 PM 0 0 0 50 159 0 32 0 39 107 125 0 512 07:15 PM 0 0 0 40 147 0 38 0 39 85 119 0 468 07:30 PM 0 0 0 55 129 0 43 0 30 93 98 0 448 07:45 PM 0 0 0 63 138 0 40 0 33 82 75 0 431 Total 0 0 0 208 573 0 153 0 141 367 417 0 1859 Grand Total 0 0 0 764 3608 0 1330 0 1485 1594 2640 0 11421 % 0 0 0 17.5 82.5 0 47.2 0 52.8 37.6 62.4 0 Total % 0 0 0 6.7 31.6 0 11.6 0 13 14 23.1 0 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h11080121 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/25/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: SR-57 SB RAMPS E-W Direction: BALL ROAD Groups Printed- Turning Movements SR-57 SB ON-OFF RAMPS Southbound BALL ROAD Westbound SR-57 SB ON RAMP Northbound BALL ROAD Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 170 0 72 128 379 0 0 0 0 112 295 0 1156 04:15 PM 142 0 66 103 361 0 0 0 0 86 251 0 1009 04:30 PM 150 0 63 121 396 0 0 0 0 141 301 0 1172 04:45 PM 185 0 74 75 317 0 0 0 0 77 269 0 997 Total 647 0 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 416 1116 0 4334 05:00 PM 203 0 82 89 325 0 0 0 0 103 313 0 1115 05:15 PM 190 0 72 70 317 0 0 0 0 98 316 0 1063 05:30 PM 188 0 60 69 283 0 0 0 0 72 280 0 952 05:45 PM 233 0 78 54 291 0 0 0 0 76 248 0 980 Total 814 0 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 349 1157 0 4110 06:00 PM 260 0 87 42 294 0 0 0 0 85 286 0 1054 06:15 PM 220 0 67 40 339 0 0 0 0 78 237 0 981 06:30 PM 197 0 66 45 241 0 0 0 0 99 222 0 870 06:45 PM 130 0 47 41 209 0 0 0 0 79 207 0 713 Total 807 0 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 341 952 0 3618 07:00 PM 140 0 60 36 213 0 0 0 0 72 218 0 739 07:15 PM 133 0 35 23 164 0 0 0 0 58 221 0 634 07:30 PM 119 0 38 22 183 0 0 0 0 60 216 0 638 07:45 PM 104 0 31 32 161 0 0 0 0 58 196 0 582 Total 496 0 164 113 721 0 0 0 0 248 851 0 2593 Grand Total 2764 0 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 1354 4076 0 14655 % 73.5 0 26.5 18.1 81.9 0 0 0 0 24.9 75.1 0 Total % 18.9 0 6.8 6.8 30.5 0 0 0 0 9.2 27.8 0 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h11080061 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/25/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: SR-57 SB RAMPS E-W Direction: KATELLA AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements SR-57 SB ON-OFF RAMPS Southbound KATELLA AVENUE Westbound SR-57 SB ON RAMP Northbound KATELLA AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 134 0 42 122 223 0 0 0 0 90 228 0 839 04:15 PM 112 0 45 121 208 0 0 0 0 66 211 0 763 04:30 PM 119 0 35 139 303 0 0 0 0 86 269 0 951 04:45 PM 122 0 36 121 312 0 0 0 0 83 256 0 930 Total 487 0 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 325 964 0 3483 05:00 PM 72 0 38 127 376 0 0 0 0 96 331 0 1040 05:15 PM 83 0 41 107 381 0 0 0 0 81 316 0 1009 05:30 PM 87 0 37 88 376 0 0 0 0 69 282 0 939 05:45 PM 75 0 36 61 320 0 0 0 0 70 233 0 795 Total 317 0 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 316 1162 0 3783 06:00 PM 130 0 37 71 293 0 0 0 0 60 240 0 831 06:15 PM 125 0 33 52 171 0 0 0 0 58 237 0 676 06:30 PM 100 0 33 55 163 0 0 0 0 87 221 0 659 06:45 PM 106 0 34 44 137 0 0 0 0 42 164 0 527 Total 461 0 137 222 764 0 0 0 0 247 862 0 2693 07:00 PM 87 0 31 59 138 0 0 0 0 50 197 0 562 07:15 PM 90 0 38 51 137 0 0 0 0 36 170 0 522 07:30 PM 79 0 21 41 114 0 0 0 0 39 170 0 464 07:45 PM 85 0 23 39 136 0 0 0 0 46 134 0 463 Total 341 0 113 190 525 0 0 0 0 171 671 0 2011 Grand Total 1606 0 560 1298 3788 0 0 0 0 1059 3659 0 11970 % 74.1 0 25.9 25.5 74.5 0 0 0 0 22.4 77.6 0 Total % 13.4 0 4.7 10.8 31.6 0 0 0 0 8.8 30.6 0 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h11080021 Site Code : 00005053 Start Date : 8/25/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD E-W Direction: KATELLA AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD Southbound KATELLA AVENUE Westbound STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD Northbound KATELLA AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left U-Turn Right Thru Left U-Turn Right Thru Left U-Turn Right Thru Left U-Turn Int. Total 04:00 PM 28 128 13 2 16 195 44 4 50 126 46 1 23 146 44 0 866 04:15 PM 28 115 23 1 12 244 50 20 39 148 28 0 26 146 44 5 929 04:30 PM 41 144 15 1 15 200 42 8 41 165 34 1 36 165 48 1 957 04:45 PM 20 74 25 0 16 274 52 14 48 167 31 2 24 184 54 1 986 Total 117 461 76 4 59 913 188 46 178 606 139 4 109 641 190 7 3738 05:00 PM 71 185 12 1 9 240 60 12 51 209 45 3 23 162 26 0 1109 05:15 PM 31 125 17 1 11 209 57 12 41 134 26 0 27 183 44 1 919 05:30 PM 38 147 12 0 14 181 44 15 46 102 47 1 25 180 31 2 885 05:45 PM 38 98 29 0 15 227 42 13 38 64 20 1 19 197 45 2 848 Total 178 555 70 2 49 857 203 52 176 509 138 5 94 722 146 5 3761 06:00 PM 32 92 10 2 12 156 38 11 29 141 38 1 30 165 32 3 792 06:15 PM 22 83 10 1 12 179 44 16 31 100 20 0 24 139 44 3 728 06:30 PM 23 86 12 0 11 136 45 9 34 88 28 0 22 121 23 0 638 06:45 PM 27 64 11 1 14 164 33 8 31 42 8 0 18 143 27 1 592 Total 104 325 43 4 49 635 160 44 125 371 94 1 94 568 126 7 2750 07:00 PM 14 60 18 0 9 114 26 11 34 59 33 1 12 117 26 0 534 07:15 PM 20 61 12 0 12 113 29 9 27 66 30 3 19 104 19 0 524 07:30 PM 17 43 14 1 13 116 27 7 28 56 20 0 14 101 13 2 472 07:45 PM 18 28 15 0 11 93 21 8 29 63 23 0 14 118 14 0 455 Total 69 192 59 1 45 436 103 35 118 244 106 4 59 440 72 2 1985 Grand Total 468 1533 248 11 202 2841 654 [PHONE REDACTED] 477 14 356 2371 534 21 12234 % 20.7 67.8 11 0.5 5.2 73.3 16.9 4.6 21.2 61.4 16.9 0.5 10.8 72.2 16.3 0.6 Total % 3.8 12.5 2 0.1 1.7 23.2 5.3 1.4 4.9 14.1 3.9 0.1 2.9 19.4 4.4 0.2 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h11080081 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/25/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: STRUCK AVENUE E-W Direction: KATELLA AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements STRUCK AVENUE Southbound KATELLA AVENUE Westbound STRUCK AVENUE Northbound KATELLA AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 233 2 3 0 62 49 220 0 569 04:15 PM 0 0 0 0 197 9 6 0 62 53 193 0 520 04:30 PM 0 0 0 0 224 1 5 0 76 50 226 0 582 04:45 PM 0 0 0 0 202 3 5 0 65 51 257 0 583 Total 0 0 0 0 856 15 19 0 265 203 896 0 2254 05:00 PM 0 0 0 0 218 3 5 0 102 63 309 0 700 05:15 PM 0 0 0 0 259 2 4 0 73 57 268 0 663 05:30 PM 0 0 0 0 206 3 5 0 54 41 275 0 584 05:45 PM 0 0 0 0 186 0 6 0 44 40 251 0 527 Total 0 0 0 0 869 8 20 0 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 2474 06:00 PM 0 0 0 0 169 1 1 0 34 35 213 0 453 06:15 PM 0 0 0 0 171 3 3 0 37 38 154 0 406 06:30 PM 0 0 0 0 145 0 2 0 44 36 164 0 391 06:45 PM 0 0 0 0 148 2 2 0 24 29 115 0 320 Total 0 0 0 0 633 6 8 0 139 138 646 0 1570 07:00 PM 0 0 0 0 151 2 1 0 25 25 125 0 329 07:15 PM 0 0 0 0 122 0 1 0 19 20 114 0 276 07:30 PM 0 0 0 0 126 0 2 0 23 21 106 0 278 07:45 PM 0 0 0 0 164 1 1 0 24 20 102 0 312 Total 0 0 0 0 563 3 5 0 91 86 447 0 1195 Grand Total 0 0 0 0 2921 32 52 0 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 7493 % 0 0 0 0 98.9 1.1 6.3 0 93.7 16.9 83.1 0 Total % 0 0 0 0 39 0.4 0.7 0 10.2 8.4 41.3 0 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h11080131 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/25/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: SUNKIST STREET E-W Direction: BALL ROAD Groups Printed- Turning Movements SUNKIST STREET Southbound BALL ROAD Westbound SUNKIST STREET Northbound BALL ROAD Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left U-Turn Right Thru Left Right Thru Left U-Turn Int. Total 04:00 PM 19 20 44 148 365 38 2 57 77 14 5 318 28 0 1135 04:15 PM 21 38 60 149 315 37 2 54 58 14 6 211 33 0 998 04:30 PM 23 36 50 145 336 45 5 65 95 14 11 317 45 2 1189 04:45 PM 29 41 62 122 302 62 4 52 143 22 7 239 51 0 1136 Total 92 135 [PHONE REDACTED] 182 13 228 373 64 29 1085 157 2 4458 05:00 PM 21 44 39 127 352 36 4 77 133 19 11 298 42 0 1203 05:15 PM 28 42 66 128 305 54 1 63 169 21 6 274 55 1 1213 05:30 PM 34 32 51 114 314 51 3 49 136 25 7 255 47 1 1119 05:45 PM 40 45 48 135 310 71 2 50 143 14 5 216 54 0 1133 Total 123 163 [PHONE REDACTED] 212 10 239 581 79 29 1043 198 2 4668 06:00 PM 21 29 53 132 373 48 3 50 96 12 9 259 35 3 1123 06:15 PM 29 32 53 130 349 57 3 57 56 12 5 195 37 0 1015 06:30 PM 23 18 65 83 325 30 3 47 33 8 7 202 27 0 871 06:45 PM 20 17 52 81 248 25 1 41 18 9 10 200 22 0 744 Total 93 96 [PHONE REDACTED] 160 10 195 203 41 31 856 121 3 3753 07:00 PM 16 14 46 89 223 27 3 30 29 8 5 216 18 0 724 07:15 PM 23 16 47 74 200 21 2 40 21 7 2 198 24 0 675 07:30 PM 15 12 41 82 186 36 1 27 17 5 0 207 18 0 647 07:45 PM 21 16 48 77 175 20 2 24 14 8 2 183 13 0 603 Total 75 58 182 322 784 104 8 121 81 28 9 804 73 0 2649 Grand Total 383 [PHONE REDACTED] 4678 658 41 783 1238 212 98 3788 549 7 15528 % 23.1 27.2 49.7 25.2 65 9.1 0.6 35.1 55.4 9.5 2.2 85.3 12.4 0.2 Total % 2.5 2.9 5.3 11.7 30.1 4.2 0.3 5 8 1.4 0.6 24.4 3.5 0 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : H11080141 Site Code : 00003873 Start Date : 8/25/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: SUNKIST STREET E-W Direction: CERRITOS AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements SUNKIST STREET Southbound CERRITOS AVENUE Westbound SUNKIST STREET Northbound CERRITOS AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 24 30 13 38 43 3 3 37 3 3 20 29 246 04:15 PM 19 21 10 45 44 0 1 31 6 5 18 29 229 04:30 PM 19 32 10 39 41 3 1 45 5 7 13 35 250 04:45 PM 33 28 13 77 35 2 3 77 4 4 17 35 328 Total 95 111 46 199 163 8 8 190 18 19 68 128 1053 05:00 PM 26 29 15 55 53 1 2 82 15 5 14 39 336 05:15 PM 25 31 10 84 45 2 1 99 1 5 16 45 364 05:30 PM 20 28 6 57 27 0 1 89 7 3 19 38 295 05:45 PM 23 33 17 54 26 0 1 88 3 2 14 44 305 Total 94 121 48 250 151 3 5 358 26 15 63 166 1300 06:00 PM 25 33 12 54 42 1 1 71 5 3 19 14 280 06:15 PM 23 21 5 24 24 2 3 40 3 2 14 35 196 06:30 PM 22 18 12 12 18 1 2 24 1 6 12 13 141 06:45 PM 13 14 8 12 18 0 1 11 3 5 11 22 118 Total 83 86 37 102 102 4 7 146 12 16 56 84 735 07:00 PM 6 7 5 11 9 2 0 13 1 6 13 27 100 07:15 PM 17 3 5 15 16 0 0 13 3 2 6 14 94 07:30 PM 11 4 4 10 4 0 0 6 2 3 4 19 67 07:45 PM 16 10 1 6 5 0 0 4 1 3 6 14 66 Total 50 24 15 42 34 2 0 36 7 14 29 74 327 Grand Total 322 342 146 593 450 17 20 730 63 64 [PHONE REDACTED] % 39.8 42.2 18 55.9 42.5 1.6 2.5 89.8 7.7 8.7 29.5 61.7 Total % 9.4 10 4.3 17.4 13.2 0.5 0.6 21.4 1.8 1.9 6.3 13.2 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report - Appendices EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR ANGEL STADIUM (ANGEL STADIUM BASEBALL GAME DAY) ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h1108007 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/24/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: DOUGLASS ROAD E-W Direction: KATELLA AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements DOUGLASS ROAD Southbound KATELLA AVENUE Westbound DOUGLASS ROAD Northbound KATELLA AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left U-Turn Right Thru Left Right Thru Left U-Turn Int. Total 04:00 PM 81 11 31 25 268 11 1 8 5 24 62 219 18 2 766 04:15 PM 34 4 29 21 254 18 2 2 0 22 66 218 18 4 692 04:30 PM 77 5 26 30 292 10 0 5 3 30 53 226 18 8 783 04:45 PM 49 6 26 23 291 19 3 7 3 9 49 233 19 3 740 Total 241 26 112 99 1105 58 6 22 11 85 230 896 73 17 2981 05:00 PM 110 2 35 40 351 5 2 4 1 14 52 216 17 3 852 05:15 PM 55 4 21 25 266 8 2 1 1 14 44 231 16 5 693 05:30 PM 53 4 21 26 237 13 2 1 3 18 56 218 35 5 692 05:45 PM 50 4 31 29 235 27 7 8 1 13 87 219 39 3 753 Total 268 14 [PHONE REDACTED] 53 13 14 6 59 239 884 107 16 2990 06:00 PM 63 8 22 31 256 44 3 6 1 14 99 201 32 6 786 06:15 PM 42 9 16 11 213 59 0 4 2 11 193 216 28 2 806 06:30 PM 39 19 20 17 226 90 3 7 4 5 229 158 15 6 838 06:45 PM 29 15 14 8 185 73 3 4 0 5 240 198 11 3 788 Total 173 51 72 67 880 266 9 21 7 35 761 773 86 17 3218 07:00 PM 31 12 19 13 209 64 4 4 0 9 163 151 12 5 696 07:15 PM 36 7 10 16 174 28 0 3 2 14 88 125 10 9 522 07:30 PM 38 3 9 5 151 13 0 1 5 15 56 110 2 4 412 07:45 PM 24 0 7 6 156 10 0 6 2 10 32 107 9 6 375 Total 129 22 45 40 690 115 4 14 9 48 339 493 33 24 2005 Grand Total 811 113 [PHONE REDACTED] 492 32 71 33 227 1569 3046 299 74 11194 % 64.3 9 26.7 7.1 81.6 10.7 0.7 21.5 10 68.6 31.5 61.1 6 1.5 Total % 7.2 1 3 2.9 33.6 4.4 0.3 0.6 0.3 2 14 27.2 2.7 0.7 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h1108004 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/24/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: HOWELL AVENUE E-W Direction: KATELLA AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements HOWELL AVENUE Southbound KATELL AVENUE Westbound HOWELL AVENUE Northbound KATELL AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left U-Turns Right Thru Left U-Turns Right Thru Left Right Thru Left U-Turns Int. Total 04:00 PM 28 2 18 0 40 317 7 2 43 8 17 13 259 15 5 774 04:15 PM 28 4 18 0 52 268 6 1 20 4 21 10 223 17 3 675 04:30 PM 32 5 22 0 74 318 23 1 39 5 21 9 261 6 3 819 04:45 PM 42 8 22 0 55 306 8 0 24 7 28 10 244 13 3 770 Total 130 19 80 0 221 1209 44 4 126 24 87 42 987 51 14 3038 05:00 PM 33 3 33 0 44 372 12 2 51 6 22 4 303 16 3 904 05:15 PM 25 7 25 0 52 363 16 2 25 5 18 9 245 13 5 810 05:30 PM 29 1 29 0 68 362 15 2 41 4 15 9 299 20 6 900 05:45 PM 16 5 16 1 44 315 9 2 29 4 19 8 290 16 9 783 Total 103 16 103 1 208 1412 52 8 146 19 74 30 1137 65 23 3397 06:00 PM 20 9 20 0 92 327 7 3 29 5 17 9 241 6 12 797 06:15 PM 16 7 16 0 39 242 13 7 20 6 17 9 257 7 9 665 06:30 PM 16 5 16 2 33 219 10 6 34 6 7 10 248 6 5 623 06:45 PM 8 7 8 1 39 198 6 8 16 1 14 9 244 10 7 576 Total 60 28 60 3 203 986 36 24 99 18 55 37 990 29 33 2661 07:00 PM 16 5 16 0 33 184 5 2 24 2 8 4 190 9 4 502 07:15 PM 10 2 10 0 32 191 6 4 21 1 9 7 221 9 1 524 07:30 PM 8 2 8 0 20 164 8 5 28 1 12 7 198 3 7 471 07:45 PM 9 4 9 0 22 188 12 1 24 1 10 3 210 14 4 511 Total 43 13 43 0 107 727 31 12 97 5 39 21 819 35 16 2008 Grand Total 336 76 286 4 739 4334 163 48 468 66 [PHONE REDACTED] 180 86 11104 % 47.9 10.8 40.7 0.6 14 82 3.1 0.9 59.3 8.4 32.3 3 90.9 4.2 2 Total % 3 0.7 2.6 0 6.7 39 1.5 0.4 4.2 0.6 2.3 1.2 35.4 1.6 0.8 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h1108009 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/24/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: MAIN STREET E-W Direction: KATELLA AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements MAIN STREET Southbound KATELLA AVENUE Westbound MAIN STREET Northbound KATELLA AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left U-Turn Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left U-Turn Int. Total 04:00 PM 22 39 15 0 29 168 34 76 80 27 13 168 18 3 692 04:15 PM 18 48 23 0 31 150 48 83 87 36 14 154 11 4 707 04:30 PM 30 77 19 1 30 187 46 74 102 31 16 147 17 3 780 04:45 PM 22 48 16 0 19 193 48 64 67 34 10 182 21 2 726 Total 92 212 73 1 109 698 176 297 336 128 53 651 67 12 2905 05:00 PM 33 73 34 0 19 202 42 90 92 42 7 192 17 3 846 05:15 PM 12 52 24 0 22 183 38 63 100 30 16 177 16 1 734 05:30 PM 18 50 13 3 26 177 28 65 95 30 7 166 13 9 700 05:45 PM 15 49 16 0 20 212 42 63 80 32 14 179 13 3 738 Total 78 224 87 3 87 774 150 281 367 134 44 714 59 16 3018 06:00 PM 18 39 15 0 33 225 38 75 66 34 12 150 15 4 724 06:15 PM 18 48 10 1 22 194 27 44 44 25 7 122 13 2 577 06:30 PM 16 37 13 0 19 169 35 39 49 22 11 136 11 2 559 06:45 PM 13 28 10 1 16 186 33 46 37 19 9 99 10 3 510 Total 65 152 48 2 90 774 133 204 196 100 39 507 49 11 2370 07:00 PM 20 21 11 0 15 170 45 52 33 23 10 93 13 3 509 07:15 PM 18 22 15 1 15 129 22 30 24 25 8 97 4 3 413 07:30 PM 11 24 13 1 24 108 33 28 35 15 12 81 9 2 396 07:45 PM 13 16 17 1 13 113 12 38 29 14 9 59 2 1 337 Total 62 83 56 3 67 520 112 148 121 77 39 330 28 9 1655 Grand Total 297 671 264 9 353 2766 [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] 203 48 9948 % 23.9 54.1 21.3 0.7 9.6 75 15.5 38.9 42.7 18.4 6.7 83.8 7.7 1.8 Total % 3 6.7 2.7 0.1 3.5 27.8 5.7 9.3 10.3 4.4 1.8 22.1 2 0.5 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h1108010 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/24/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: MAIN STREET E-W Direction: STRUCK AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements MAIN STREET Southbound STRUCK AVENUE Westbound MAIN STREET Northbound STRUCK AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 3 79 3 12 27 7 6 164 22 47 17 6 393 04:15 PM 11 97 7 12 22 6 1 166 27 44 20 66 479 04:30 PM 1 135 3 5 22 1 0 174 31 36 14 66 488 04:45 PM 7 93 2 8 19 5 4 169 37 37 18 6 405 Total 22 404 15 37 90 19 11 673 117 164 69 144 1765 05:00 PM 12 119 3 11 26 5 2 184 51 44 9 9 475 05:15 PM 5 83 3 7 14 4 2 162 31 26 10 6 353 05:30 PM 11 91 2 9 20 6 5 168 22 33 10 7 384 05:45 PM 5 99 2 7 8 1 0 154 25 33 10 2 346 Total 33 392 10 34 68 16 9 668 129 136 39 24 1558 06:00 PM 4 89 2 4 17 6 3 144 25 18 11 5 328 06:15 PM 7 78 3 2 6 2 4 121 20 22 10 2 277 06:30 PM 3 66 1 5 8 3 3 94 18 18 10 9 238 06:45 PM 6 58 5 6 10 1 6 84 16 26 10 0 228 Total 20 291 11 17 41 12 16 443 79 84 41 16 1071 07:00 PM 4 65 2 2 8 1 1 105 19 17 5 4 233 07:15 PM 3 59 1 3 7 4 1 59 8 33 3 6 187 07:30 PM 4 61 1 3 6 1 1 71 5 25 1 3 182 07:45 PM 1 37 0 1 14 3 3 62 7 18 7 2 155 Total 12 222 4 9 35 9 6 297 39 93 16 15 757 Grand Total 87 1309 40 97 234 56 42 2081 364 477 [PHONE REDACTED] % 6.1 91.2 2.8 25.1 60.5 14.5 1.7 83.7 14.6 56.7 19.6 23.7 Total % 1.7 25.4 0.8 1.9 4.5 1.1 0.8 40.4 7.1 9.3 3.2 3.9 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : H1108015 Site Code : 00003873 Start Date : 8/24/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: PHOENIX CLUB E-W Direction: BALL ROAD Groups Printed- Turning Movements PHOENIX CLUB Southbound BALL ROAD Westbound PHOENIX CLUB Northbound BALL ROAD Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 2 0 2 2 342 9 13 0 29 25 212 5 641 04:15 PM 4 0 1 3 350 10 13 0 24 28 223 7 663 04:30 PM 8 0 0 1 356 6 7 0 33 29 227 6 673 04:45 PM 7 0 1 1 288 9 14 0 31 25 232 5 613 Total 21 0 4 7 1336 34 47 0 117 107 894 23 2590 05:00 PM 3 0 2 2 310 9 16 0 38 20 225 4 629 05:15 PM 6 1 0 3 322 11 13 0 37 35 246 2 676 05:30 PM 5 0 1 1 273 7 10 0 43 25 217 5 587 05:45 PM 9 0 0 1 265 5 5 0 36 34 225 9 589 Total 23 1 3 7 1170 32 44 0 154 114 913 20 2481 06:00 PM 8 0 1 2 240 5 12 0 45 29 214 6 562 06:15 PM 7 0 2 4 237 6 15 0 51 25 217 10 574 06:30 PM 4 1 0 2 224 5 9 0 22 19 147 7 440 06:45 PM 8 1 0 1 140 5 7 1 27 23 145 0 358 Total 27 2 3 9 841 21 43 1 145 96 723 23 1934 07:00 PM 6 0 2 0 149 5 9 0 29 23 132 4 359 07:15 PM 5 0 0 1 147 8 2 0 23 27 143 4 360 07:30 PM 1 0 0 1 149 7 6 0 25 18 87 6 300 07:45 PM 7 0 0 0 126 1 5 0 26 14 99 10 288 Total 19 0 2 2 571 21 22 0 103 82 461 24 1307 Grand Total 90 3 12 25 3918 108 156 1 [PHONE REDACTED] 90 8312 % 85.7 2.9 11.4 0.6 96.7 2.7 23.1 0.1 76.8 11.5 85.9 2.6 Total % 1.1 0 0.1 0.3 47.1 1.3 1.9 0 6.2 4.8 36 1.1 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : H11080031 Site Code : 00005694 Start Date : 8/24/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: SPORTSTOWN E-W Direction: KATELLA AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements SPORTSTOWN Southbound KATELLA AVENUE Westbound SPORTSTOWN Northbound KATELLA AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 19 3 16 28 257 30 15 4 10 33 218 11 644 04:15 PM 16 5 22 26 334 25 24 3 16 39 240 12 762 04:30 PM 18 5 20 36 316 23 29 1 36 56 225 14 779 04:45 PM 23 3 19 32 347 24 17 2 18 29 253 16 783 Total 76 16 77 122 1254 102 85 10 80 157 936 53 2968 05:00 PM 26 3 32 39 319 12 16 4 17 28 208 24 728 05:15 PM 26 3 22 39 396 20 36 3 42 38 237 22 884 05:30 PM 29 3 24 32 347 16 35 3 36 19 245 26 815 05:45 PM 32 1 22 48 305 17 20 1 25 28 269 16 784 Total 113 10 [PHONE REDACTED] 65 107 11 120 113 959 88 3211 06:00 PM 16 2 25 56 258 28 22 2 36 26 206 37 714 06:15 PM 19 5 22 44 334 19 24 2 22 30 275 29 825 06:30 PM 19 3 13 45 220 27 62 15 46 32 186 25 693 06:45 PM 21 0 20 43 302 28 24 3 33 30 231 35 770 Total 75 10 80 188 1114 102 132 22 137 118 [PHONE REDACTED] 07:00 PM 27 0 29 38 226 16 20 2 21 30 213 17 639 07:15 PM 20 0 25 25 187 19 47 2 31 17 181 17 571 07:30 PM 11 6 23 28 156 8 17 4 15 16 151 19 454 07:45 PM 19 0 18 11 154 15 18 3 15 10 138 8 409 Total 77 6 95 102 723 58 102 11 82 73 683 61 2073 Grand Total 341 42 [PHONE REDACTED] 327 426 54 [PHONE REDACTED] 328 11254 % 46.4 5.7 47.9 10.6 83.2 6.1 47.4 6 46.6 10.8 81.5 7.7 Total % 3 0.4 3.1 5.1 39.6 2.9 3.8 0.5 3.7 4.1 30.9 2.9 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : H1108011 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/24/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: SR-57 NB RAMPS E-W Direction: BALL ROAD Groups Printed- Turning Movements SR-57 NB ON RAMP Southbound BALL ROAD Westbound SR-57 NB ON-OFF RAMP Northbound BALL ROAD Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 0 0 0 101 369 0 14 0 103 121 248 0 956 04:15 PM 0 0 0 77 229 0 49 0 83 153 186 0 777 04:30 PM 0 0 0 68 331 0 33 0 109 142 222 0 905 04:45 PM 0 0 0 75 239 0 54 0 118 147 209 0 842 Total 0 0 0 321 1168 0 150 0 413 563 865 0 3480 05:00 PM 0 0 0 100 298 0 53 0 126 183 244 0 1004 05:15 PM 0 0 0 87 242 0 43 0 116 155 191 0 834 05:30 PM 0 0 0 123 203 0 43 0 125 159 228 0 881 05:45 PM 0 0 0 101 195 0 50 0 122 130 179 0 777 Total 0 0 0 411 938 0 189 0 489 627 842 0 3496 06:00 PM 0 0 0 93 192 0 38 0 126 131 204 0 784 06:15 PM 0 0 0 80 173 0 37 0 125 148 155 0 718 06:30 PM 0 0 0 92 161 0 35 0 110 147 160 0 705 06:45 PM 0 0 0 84 142 0 42 0 95 124 155 0 642 Total 0 0 0 349 668 0 152 0 456 550 674 0 2849 07:00 PM 0 0 0 84 107 0 37 0 105 138 132 0 603 07:15 PM 0 0 0 47 108 0 31 0 114 141 115 0 556 07:30 PM 0 0 0 80 93 0 33 0 79 139 78 0 502 07:45 PM 0 0 0 60 99 0 20 0 71 137 96 0 483 Total 0 0 0 271 407 0 121 0 369 555 421 0 2144 Grand Total 0 0 0 1352 3181 0 612 0 1727 2295 2802 0 11969 % 0 0 0 29.8 70.2 0 26.2 0 73.8 45 55 0 Total % 0 0 0 11.3 26.6 0 5.1 0 14.4 19.2 23.4 0 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : H1108005 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/24/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: SR-57 NB RAMPS E-W Direction: KATELLA AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements SR-57 NB ON RAMP Southbound KATELLA AVENUE Westbound SR-57 NB ON - OFF RAMPS Northbound KATELLA AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 0 0 0 84 292 0 125 0 53 129 187 0 870 04:15 PM 0 0 0 60 254 0 134 0 35 83 189 0 755 04:30 PM 0 0 0 73 322 0 131 0 57 102 187 0 872 04:45 PM 0 0 0 51 297 0 143 0 44 114 165 0 814 Total 0 0 0 268 1165 0 533 0 189 428 728 0 3311 05:00 PM 0 0 0 95 378 0 69 0 56 153 213 0 964 05:15 PM 0 0 0 53 278 0 64 0 59 109 215 0 778 05:30 PM 0 0 0 60 252 0 74 0 69 126 224 0 805 05:45 PM 0 0 0 48 249 0 81 0 73 111 251 0 813 Total 0 0 0 256 1157 0 288 0 257 499 903 0 3360 06:00 PM 0 0 0 64 269 0 93 0 81 119 261 0 887 06:15 PM 0 0 0 59 206 0 99 0 63 103 328 0 858 06:30 PM 0 0 0 48 218 0 110 0 90 108 291 0 865 06:45 PM 0 0 0 47 176 0 115 0 88 97 297 0 820 Total 0 0 0 218 869 0 417 0 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 3430 07:00 PM 0 0 0 55 189 0 87 0 49 84 214 0 678 07:15 PM 0 0 0 50 178 0 61 0 51 104 161 0 605 07:30 PM 0 0 0 57 147 0 42 0 47 107 134 0 534 07:45 PM 0 0 0 39 151 0 37 0 40 109 116 0 492 Total 0 0 0 201 665 0 227 0 187 404 625 0 2309 Grand Total 0 0 0 943 3856 0 1465 0 955 1758 3433 0 12410 % 0 0 0 19.6 80.4 0 60.5 0 39.5 33.9 66.1 0 Total % 0 0 0 7.6 31.1 0 11.8 0 7.7 14.2 27.7 0 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h1108012 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/24/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: SR-57 SB RAMPS E-W Direction: BALL ROAD Groups Printed- Turning Movements SR-57 SB ON-OFF RAMPS Southbound BALL ROAD Westbound SR-57 SB ON RAMP Northbound BALL ROAD Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 178 0 65 119 343 0 0 0 0 124 297 0 1126 04:15 PM 187 0 78 91 231 0 0 0 0 88 268 0 943 04:30 PM 163 0 62 117 314 0 0 0 0 105 296 0 1057 04:45 PM 174 0 66 82 268 0 0 0 0 82 284 0 956 Total 702 0 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 399 1145 0 4082 05:00 PM 183 0 65 110 322 0 0 0 0 117 367 0 1164 05:15 PM 193 0 64 59 296 0 0 0 0 110 277 0 999 05:30 PM 172 0 69 49 282 0 0 0 0 108 327 0 1007 05:45 PM 211 0 63 46 269 0 0 0 0 81 248 0 918 Total 759 0 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 416 1219 0 4088 06:00 PM 211 0 59 57 263 0 0 0 0 80 277 0 947 06:15 PM 215 0 60 44 252 0 0 0 0 88 243 0 902 06:30 PM 177 0 51 48 222 0 0 0 0 102 250 0 850 06:45 PM 178 0 54 43 195 0 0 0 0 76 230 0 776 Total 781 0 224 192 932 0 0 0 0 346 1000 0 3475 07:00 PM 175 0 40 30 179 0 0 0 0 66 226 0 716 07:15 PM 122 0 35 32 193 0 0 0 0 77 225 0 684 07:30 PM 118 0 33 23 147 0 0 0 0 75 182 0 578 07:45 PM 98 0 30 31 141 0 0 0 0 67 205 0 572 Total 513 0 138 116 660 0 0 0 0 285 838 0 2550 Grand Total 2755 0 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 1446 4202 0 14195 % 75.5 0 24.5 20 80 0 0 0 0 25.6 74.4 0 Total % 19.4 0 6.3 6.9 27.6 0 0 0 0 10.2 29.6 0 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h1108006 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/24/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: SR-57 SB RAMPS E-W Direction: KATELLA AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements SR-57 SB ON-OFF RAMPS Southbound KATELLA AVENUE Westbound SR-57 SB ON RAMP Northbound KATELLA AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 150 0 69 109 233 0 0 0 0 88 244 0 893 04:15 PM 115 0 78 86 206 0 0 0 0 68 198 0 751 04:30 PM 156 0 68 149 228 0 0 0 0 95 218 0 914 04:45 PM 147 0 60 116 224 0 0 0 0 63 213 0 823 Total 568 0 275 460 891 0 0 0 0 314 873 0 3381 05:00 PM 160 0 65 141 294 0 0 0 0 105 286 0 1051 05:15 PM 160 0 79 84 248 0 0 0 0 78 245 0 894 05:30 PM 145 0 83 98 228 0 0 0 0 89 268 0 911 05:45 PM 172 0 98 63 257 0 0 0 0 79 288 0 957 Total 637 0 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 351 1087 0 3813 06:00 PM 165 0 121 72 280 0 0 0 0 64 262 0 964 06:15 PM 160 0 166 56 210 0 0 0 0 74 262 0 928 06:30 PM 180 0 150 57 250 0 0 0 0 74 247 0 958 06:45 PM 179 0 165 54 211 0 0 0 0 61 231 0 901 Total 684 0 602 239 951 0 0 0 0 273 1002 0 3751 07:00 PM 117 0 106 57 179 0 0 0 0 63 189 0 711 07:15 PM 65 0 66 51 179 0 0 0 0 58 202 0 621 07:30 PM 61 0 41 41 149 0 0 0 0 62 196 0 550 07:45 PM 69 0 44 51 145 0 0 0 0 44 185 0 538 Total 312 0 257 200 652 0 0 0 0 227 772 0 2420 Grand Total 2201 0 1459 1285 3521 0 0 0 0 1165 3734 0 13365 % 60.1 0 39.9 26.7 73.3 0 0 0 0 23.8 76.2 0 Total % 16.5 0 10.9 9.6 26.3 0 0 0 0 8.7 27.9 0 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h1108002 Site Code : 00005053 Start Date : 8/24/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD E-W Direction: KATELLA AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD Southbound KATELLA AVENUE Westbound STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD Northbound KATELLA AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left U-Turn Right Thru Left U-Turn Right Thru Left U-Turn Right Thru Left U-Turn Int. Total 04:00 PM 50 86 38 1 54 268 53 9 59 184 38 3 26 170 42 1 1082 04:15 PM 37 133 28 3 61 248 65 6 50 141 30 1 21 199 42 7 1072 04:30 PM 44 138 28 2 37 242 69 7 77 201 36 5 31 206 44 2 1169 04:45 PM 51 175 34 0 32 247 78 10 52 161 30 0 42 204 48 5 1169 Total 182 532 128 6 184 1005 265 32 238 687 134 9 120 779 176 15 4492 05:00 PM 50 176 25 2 15 322 99 17 55 205 49 3 62 201 37 3 1321 05:15 PM 42 168 24 0 28 280 90 14 64 235 54 2 59 160 49 3 1272 05:30 PM 47 163 28 2 20 248 107 16 50 163 52 6 51 234 33 0 1220 05:45 PM 38 146 28 0 11 232 95 10 52 194 41 7 56 214 41 5 1170 Total 177 653 105 4 74 1082 391 57 221 797 196 18 228 809 160 11 4983 06:00 PM 42 173 32 1 22 206 114 16 47 138 41 5 84 230 54 6 1211 06:15 PM 25 164 38 3 11 183 116 11 48 136 26 2 88 204 50 3 1108 06:30 PM 32 146 30 5 18 194 138 10 63 111 29 3 101 173 33 5 1091 06:45 PM 23 149 41 1 12 184 125 13 47 95 29 5 97 163 31 3 1018 Total 122 632 141 10 63 767 493 50 205 480 125 15 370 770 168 17 4428 07:00 PM 19 92 24 2 12 169 76 9 35 80 27 6 73 166 31 2 823 07:15 PM 29 92 20 0 9 125 69 13 26 69 24 5 34 136 24 3 678 07:30 PM 16 70 19 1 4 128 47 11 34 91 24 2 33 111 21 2 614 07:45 PM 18 78 15 0 7 180 39 13 33 57 20 3 24 113 21 1 622 Total 82 332 78 3 32 602 231 46 128 297 95 16 164 526 97 8 2737 Grand Total 563 2149 452 23 353 3456 1380 [PHONE REDACTED] 550 58 882 2884 601 51 16640 % 17.7 67.4 14.2 0.7 6.6 64.3 25.7 3.4 21.6 61.8 15 1.6 20 65.3 13.6 1.2 Total % 3.4 12.9 2.7 0.1 2.1 20.8 8.3 1.1 4.8 13.6 3.3 0.3 5.3 17.3 3.6 0.3 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h1108008 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/24/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: STRUCK AVENUE E-W Direction: KATELLA AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements STRUCK AVENUE Southbound KATELLA AVENUE Westbound STRUCK AVENUE Northbound KATELLA AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 212 2 6 0 74 65 180 0 539 04:15 PM 0 0 0 0 195 2 5 0 55 52 197 0 506 04:30 PM 0 0 0 0 244 1 4 0 65 45 209 0 568 04:45 PM 0 0 0 0 225 1 7 0 68 57 213 0 571 Total 0 0 0 0 876 6 22 0 262 219 799 0 2184 05:00 PM 0 0 0 0 265 2 3 0 118 40 201 0 629 05:15 PM 0 0 0 0 229 1 5 0 64 39 223 0 561 05:30 PM 0 0 0 0 228 3 6 0 58 42 198 0 535 05:45 PM 0 0 0 0 248 4 6 0 49 48 228 0 583 Total 0 0 0 0 970 10 20 0 289 169 850 0 2308 06:00 PM 0 0 0 0 240 2 1 0 47 34 180 0 504 06:15 PM 0 0 0 0 258 2 2 0 34 30 175 0 501 06:30 PM 0 0 0 0 251 2 7 0 41 29 132 0 462 06:45 PM 0 0 0 0 223 5 3 0 26 33 148 0 438 Total 0 0 0 0 972 11 13 0 148 126 635 0 1905 07:00 PM 0 0 0 0 212 0 2 0 41 31 143 0 429 07:15 PM 0 0 0 0 186 1 3 0 23 38 100 0 351 07:30 PM 0 0 0 0 130 1 2 0 16 26 94 0 269 07:45 PM 0 0 0 0 143 0 0 0 30 29 78 0 280 Total 0 0 0 0 671 2 7 0 110 124 415 0 1329 Grand Total 0 0 0 0 3489 29 62 0 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 7726 % 0 0 0 0 99.2 0.8 7.1 0 92.9 19.1 80.9 0 Total % 0 0 0 0 45.2 0.4 0.8 0 10.5 8.3 34.9 0 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : h1108013 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 8/24/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: SUNKIST STREET E-W Direction: BALL ROAD Groups Printed- Turning Movements SUNKIST STREET Southbound BALL ROAD Westbound SUNKIST STREET Northbound BALL ROAD Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left U-Turn Right Thru Left Right Thru Left U-Turn Int. Total 04:00 PM 34 27 54 116 366 41 3 65 68 21 10 309 29 0 1143 04:15 PM 20 32 46 88 272 51 2 50 45 9 7 256 35 1 914 04:30 PM 24 32 40 104 337 32 1 63 59 12 8 301 44 1 1058 04:45 PM 25 39 53 84 292 45 2 55 43 14 4 252 43 1 952 Total 103 130 [PHONE REDACTED] 169 8 233 215 56 29 1118 151 3 4067 05:00 PM 19 38 40 111 356 32 3 90 80 18 10 350 48 0 1195 05:15 PM 33 38 62 118 295 57 1 58 70 8 8 266 44 0 1058 05:30 PM 26 27 59 91 326 47 5 58 56 18 5 317 45 0 1080 05:45 PM 32 45 50 99 314 53 3 36 53 8 4 238 33 0 968 Total 110 148 [PHONE REDACTED] 189 12 242 259 52 27 1171 170 0 4301 06:00 PM 25 33 41 94 355 44 3 49 48 12 8 267 29 1 1009 06:15 PM 15 34 53 78 301 66 9 55 43 6 8 227 22 0 917 06:30 PM 22 43 59 82 270 42 5 42 36 11 7 242 21 0 882 06:45 PM 20 25 41 74 244 53 2 36 20 5 11 236 30 0 797 Total 82 135 [PHONE REDACTED] 205 19 182 147 34 34 972 102 1 3605 07:00 PM 18 19 43 80 244 34 0 38 19 10 3 212 21 2 743 07:15 PM 20 22 57 71 212 25 2 43 30 6 3 204 13 0 708 07:30 PM 18 6 43 70 162 23 5 26 9 10 3 195 13 0 583 07:45 PM 10 12 41 46 177 20 0 23 14 4 2 189 13 0 551 Total 66 59 184 267 795 102 7 130 72 30 11 800 60 2 2585 Grand Total 361 [PHONE REDACTED] 4523 665 46 787 693 [PHONE REDACTED] 483 6 14558 % 22.4 29.2 48.4 21.2 68.1 10 0.7 47.6 41.9 10.4 2.2 87.3 10.4 0.1 Total % 2.5 3.2 5.4 9.7 31.1 4.6 0.3 5.4 4.8 1.2 0.7 27.9 3.3 0 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- File Name : H1108014 Site Code : 00003873 Start Date : 8/24/2011 Page No : 1 City: ANAHEIM N-S Direction: SUNKIST STREET E-W Direction: CERRITOS AVENUE Groups Printed- Turning Movements SUNKIST STREET Southbound CERRITOS AVENUE Westbound SUNKIST STREET Northbound CERRITOS AVENUE Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Int. Total 04:00 PM 17 22 16 37 51 1 1 40 8 8 17 29 247 04:15 PM 18 23 9 16 35 0 7 22 6 7 22 27 192 04:30 PM 37 21 12 32 37 0 2 29 9 2 13 32 226 04:45 PM 19 20 12 27 44 1 2 22 6 7 25 33 218 Total 91 86 49 112 167 2 12 113 29 24 77 121 883 05:00 PM 17 19 10 37 52 4 3 40 12 8 16 40 258 05:15 PM 32 35 10 34 30 2 1 42 8 7 15 34 250 05:30 PM 24 26 13 24 34 3 2 40 3 4 8 38 219 05:45 PM 23 28 16 24 31 1 0 30 4 3 23 26 209 Total 96 108 49 119 147 10 6 152 27 22 62 138 936 06:00 PM 22 27 11 21 28 0 0 32 4 4 16 22 187 06:15 PM 18 21 12 17 20 0 3 12 6 3 18 35 165 06:30 PM 15 36 19 13 13 3 0 25 2 2 13 16 157 06:45 PM 11 16 22 7 11 0 0 8 1 1 12 14 103 Total 66 100 64 58 72 3 3 77 13 10 59 87 612 07:00 PM 16 20 14 14 17 0 2 12 2 4 13 22 136 07:15 PM 10 13 8 12 5 0 1 19 0 3 8 31 110 07:30 PM 9 7 1 15 5 0 0 2 2 2 10 15 68 07:45 PM 8 6 3 8 8 0 0 2 4 5 7 12 63 Total 43 46 26 49 35 0 3 35 8 14 38 80 377 Grand Total 296 340 188 338 421 15 24 377 77 70 [PHONE REDACTED] % 35.9 41.3 22.8 43.7 54.4 1.9 5 78.9 16.1 9.6 32.2 58.2 Total % 10.5 12.1 6.7 12 15 0.5 0.9 13.4 2.7 2.5 8.4 15.2 Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Suite H Tustin, CA. 92780 ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report - Appendices EXISTING DAILY ARTERIAL SEGMENT TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR ANGEL STADIUM (NO EVENTS DAY & ANGEL STADIUM BASEBALL GAME DAY) ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : BALL ROAD Location Date: : SR-57 NB RAMPS TO PHOENIX CLUB Segment 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 57 294 1,084 66 205 269 1,068 262 2,152 14 563 80 12:15 232 35 270 10 502 45 12:30 286 54 272 21 558 75 12:45 272 50 257 12 529 62 01:00 25 266 990 45 109 258 1,075 134 2,065 4 524 49 01:15 234 24 260 5 494 29 01:30 236 28 314 8 550 36 01:45 254 12 243 8 497 20 02:00 25 250 1,019 26 85 282 1,246 110 2,265 4 532 30 02:15 258 19 296 6 554 25 02:30 238 20 402 8 640 28 02:45 273 20 266 7 539 27 03:00 18 258 1,074 20 70 336 1,549 88 2,623 5 594 25 03:15 278 16 308 5 586 21 03:30 248 18 497 2 745 20 03:45 290 16 408 6 698 22 04:00 60 285 1,030 22 173 406 1,422 233 2,452 8 691 30 04:15 250 48 300 18 550 66 04:30 245 51 398 15 643 66 04:45 250 52 318 19 568 71 05:00 119 291 1,025 76 375 405 1,301 494 2,326 22 696 98 05:15 246 84 324 26 570 110 05:30 236 105 310 34 546 139 05:45 252 110 262 37 514 147 06:00 212 228 826 128 606 272 938 818 1,764 28 500 156 06:15 202 132 254 38 456 170 06:30 190 164 224 62 414 226 06:45 206 182 188 84 394 266 07:00 735 160 527 187 865 182 660 1,600 1,187 98 342 285 07:15 150 206 162 142 312 348 07:30 119 240 164 182 283 422 07:45 98 232 152 313 250 545 08:00 1,148 90 308 220 795 159 553 1,943 861 274 249 494 08:15 91 206 128 304 219 510 08:30 68 178 120 264 188 442 08:45 59 191 146 306 205 497 09:00 1,001 42 155 222 828 142 509 1,829 664 236 184 458 09:15 38 188 113 238 151 426 09:30 36 223 138 253 174 476 09:45 39 195 116 274 155 469 10:00 1,016 54 119 190 892 124 384 1,908 503 234 178 424 10:15 24 230 96 260 120 490 10:30 25 224 86 260 111 484 10:45 16 248 78 262 94 510 11:00 1,060 14 76 251 1,008 68 222 2,068 298 268 82 519 11:15 28 236 44 258 72 494 11:30 22 256 65 256 87 512 11:45 12 265 45 278 57 543 Totals 5,476 8,233 6,011 10,927 11,487 19,160 Split% 43.0 52.3 57.0 47.7 Day Totals 16,938 30,647 13,709 Day Splits 44.7 55.3 Peak Hour 07:45 03:15 11:00 03:15 11:00 03:15 Volume 1,155 1,101 1,008 1,619 2,068 2,720 Factor 0.92 0.95 0.95 0.81 0.95 0.91 Data File : D1108025 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : BALL ROAD Location Date: : SR-57 NB RAMPS TO PHOENIX CLUB Segment 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 36 276 1,096 40 129 247 1,021 165 2,117 7 523 47 12:15 276 20 262 14 538 34 12:30 256 28 252 9 508 37 12:45 288 41 260 6 548 47 01:00 20 260 1,015 38 95 267 1,056 115 2,071 6 527 44 01:15 236 14 266 5 502 19 01:30 241 21 272 4 513 25 01:45 278 22 251 5 529 27 02:00 18 251 1,074 8 58 256 1,186 76 2,260 6 507 14 02:15 290 16 282 4 572 20 02:30 267 18 350 4 617 22 02:45 266 16 298 4 564 20 03:00 19 248 1,068 32 73 300 1,407 92 2,475 2 548 34 03:15 278 10 304 8 582 18 03:30 260 16 455 2 715 18 03:45 282 15 348 7 630 22 04:00 60 284 1,158 23 149 432 1,531 209 2,689 8 716 31 04:15 254 29 334 7 588 36 04:30 308 54 419 16 727 70 04:45 312 43 346 29 658 72 05:00 156 272 1,122 69 339 388 1,369 495 2,491 32 660 101 05:15 302 80 391 26 693 106 05:30 273 82 318 32 591 114 05:45 275 108 272 66 547 174 06:00 272 238 859 148 640 262 914 912 1,773 50 500 198 06:15 234 155 250 58 484 213 06:30 202 160 214 68 416 228 06:45 185 177 188 96 373 273 07:00 742 182 590 174 816 203 715 1,558 1,305 116 385 290 07:15 140 208 164 143 304 351 07:30 126 226 188 196 314 422 07:45 142 208 160 287 302 495 08:00 1,085 90 309 226 865 148 513 1,950 822 260 238 486 08:15 90 209 140 286 230 495 08:30 62 224 117 252 179 476 08:45 67 206 108 287 175 493 09:00 1,110 61 193 194 793 122 458 1,903 651 334 183 528 09:15 48 204 114 242 162 446 09:30 38 202 122 268 160 470 09:45 46 193 100 266 146 459 10:00 1,007 28 94 211 887 124 333 1,894 427 273 152 484 10:15 20 241 88 228 108 469 10:30 22 222 58 252 80 474 10:45 24 213 63 254 87 467 11:00 1,066 18 56 214 940 71 202 2,006 258 264 89 478 11:15 14 226 40 266 54 492 11:30 12 250 59 274 71 524 11:45 12 250 32 262 44 512 Totals 5,591 8,634 5,784 10,705 11,375 19,339 Split% 44.6 50.8 55.4 49.2 Day Totals 16,489 30,714 14,225 Day Splits 46.3 53.7 Peak Hour 08:15 04:30 11:00 03:30 11:00 04:30 Volume 1,159 1,194 940 1,569 2,006 2,738 Factor 0.87 0.96 0.94 0.86 0.96 0.94 Data File : D1108025 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : BALL ROAD Location Date: : SUNKIST TO SR-57 SB RAMPS Segment 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 546 344 1,331 50 191 350 1,471 737 2,802 164 694 214 12:15 316 58 387 141 703 199 12:30 339 41 382 132 721 173 12:45 332 42 352 109 684 151 01:00 186 324 1,344 48 181 388 1,494 367 2,838 57 712 105 01:15 356 44 378 39 734 83 01:30 350 50 360 48 710 98 01:45 314 39 368 42 682 81 02:00 133 418 1,626 42 154 376 1,526 287 3,152 46 794 88 02:15 386 26 376 32 762 58 02:30 448 38 388 23 836 61 02:45 374 48 386 32 760 80 03:00 179 366 1,532 34 212 390 1,776 391 3,308 39 756 73 03:15 330 34 434 52 764 86 03:30 455 68 449 44 904 112 03:45 381 76 503 44 884 120 04:00 298 400 1,536 64 350 462 1,776 648 3,312 48 862 112 04:15 345 78 441 54 786 132 04:30 411 96 433 102 844 198 04:45 380 112 440 94 820 206 05:00 723 458 1,615 123 732 478 1,816 1,455 3,431 113 936 236 05:15 406 146 475 162 881 308 05:30 424 205 422 222 846 427 05:45 327 258 441 226 768 484 06:00 1,203 344 1,347 252 1,107 454 1,652 2,310 2,999 228 798 480 06:15 371 231 458 242 829 473 06:30 320 282 388 339 708 621 06:45 312 342 352 394 664 736 07:00 1,530 297 1,134 338 1,504 376 1,187 3,034 2,321 364 673 702 07:15 293 378 307 360 600 738 07:30 264 370 252 430 516 800 07:45 280 418 252 376 532 794 08:00 1,456 241 960 354 1,503 257 894 2,959 1,854 390 498 744 08:15 244 395 223 352 467 747 08:30 244 396 200 382 444 778 08:45 231 358 214 332 445 690 09:00 1,249 236 1,017 354 1,367 174 730 2,616 1,747 313 410 667 09:15 236 319 192 314 428 633 09:30 220 354 183 326 403 680 09:45 325 340 181 296 506 636 10:00 1,166 236 892 370 1,429 195 634 2,595 1,526 296 431 666 10:15 250 328 178 280 428 608 10:30 222 367 132 290 354 657 10:45 184 364 129 300 313 664 11:00 1,193 184 702 370 1,480 119 383 2,673 1,085 270 303 640 11:15 192 357 112 292 304 649 11:30 187 380 82 325 269 705 11:45 139 373 70 306 209 679 Totals 9,862 15,036 10,210 15,339 20,072 30,375 Split% 49.5 50.9 50.5 49.1 Day Totals 25,549 50,447 24,898 Day Splits 49.4 50.6 Peak Hour 07:15 04:45 07:45 03:30 07:30 04:45 Volume 1,556 1,668 1,563 1,855 3,085 3,483 Factor 0.90 0.91 0.93 0.92 0.96 0.93 Data File : D1108022 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : BALL ROAD Location Date: : SUNKIST TO SR-57 SB RAMPS Segment 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 458 404 1,477 47 189 360 1,433 647 2,910 102 764 149 12:15 358 48 372 134 730 182 12:30 389 44 343 124 732 168 12:45 326 50 358 98 684 148 01:00 268 370 1,492 47 176 396 1,478 444 2,970 84 766 131 01:15 396 45 372 52 768 97 01:30 388 40 354 48 742 88 01:45 338 44 356 84 694 128 02:00 152 412 1,607 30 136 352 1,533 288 3,140 44 764 74 02:15 362 34 381 38 743 72 02:30 467 36 390 30 857 66 02:45 366 36 410 40 776 76 03:00 153 398 1,553 38 203 434 1,834 356 3,387 39 832 77 03:15 362 28 428 36 790 64 03:30 440 61 456 34 896 95 03:45 353 76 516 44 869 120 04:00 305 400 1,562 59 372 478 1,910 677 3,472 67 878 126 04:15 366 84 502 60 868 144 04:30 426 112 490 98 916 210 04:45 370 117 440 80 810 197 05:00 741 449 1,525 120 759 456 1,836 1,500 3,361 122 905 242 05:15 396 164 456 165 852 329 05:30 368 206 432 230 800 436 05:45 312 269 492 224 804 493 06:00 1,231 346 1,280 236 1,140 502 1,771 2,371 3,051 209 848 445 06:15 313 252 492 289 805 541 06:30 338 298 446 367 784 665 06:45 283 354 331 366 614 720 07:00 1,550 281 1,097 344 1,410 336 1,217 2,960 2,314 362 617 706 07:15 300 317 301 398 601 715 07:30 258 358 304 432 562 790 07:45 258 391 276 358 534 749 08:00 1,479 226 852 404 1,720 226 861 3,199 1,713 393 452 797 08:15 212 452 250 340 462 792 08:30 206 430 209 386 415 816 08:45 208 434 176 360 384 794 09:00 1,219 209 819 428 1,648 194 763 2,867 1,582 320 403 748 09:15 204 406 200 304 404 710 09:30 182 426 186 311 368 737 09:45 224 388 183 284 407 672 10:00 1,311 214 801 418 1,509 194 618 2,820 1,419 303 408 721 10:15 178 388 160 333 338 721 10:30 206 366 124 359 330 725 10:45 203 337 140 316 343 653 11:00 1,354 169 679 360 1,459 122 404 2,813 1,083 333 291 693 11:15 198 373 104 346 302 719 11:30 168 364 94 345 262 709 11:45 144 362 84 330 228 692 Totals 10,221 14,744 10,721 15,658 20,942 30,402 Split% 48.5 51.2 51.5 48.8 Day Totals 26,379 51,344 24,965 Day Splits 48.6 51.4 Peak Hour 07:15 04:30 08:15 03:45 08:00 03:45 Volume 1,581 1,641 1,744 1,986 3,199 3,531 Factor 0.91 0.91 0.96 0.96 0.98 0.96 Data File : D1108022 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : CERRITOS AVENUE Location Date: : E/O SUNKIST STREET Segment 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 9 40 160 9 20 40 152 29 312 1 80 10 12:15 38 4 32 5 70 9 12:30 42 6 48 1 90 7 12:45 40 1 32 2 72 3 01:00 1 43 131 1 8 34 151 9 282 1 77 2 01:15 32 2 46 0 78 2 01:30 33 4 37 0 70 4 01:45 23 1 34 0 57 1 02:00 4 44 152 1 3 38 162 7 314 1 82 2 02:15 42 0 34 0 76 0 02:30 34 1 46 2 80 3 02:45 32 1 44 1 76 2 03:00 3 22 114 2 7 50 285 10 399 2 72 4 03:15 28 3 71 0 99 3 03:30 30 1 93 1 123 2 03:45 34 1 71 0 105 1 04:00 18 39 137 6 11 95 293 29 430 3 134 9 04:15 26 0 56 4 82 4 04:30 26 1 82 2 108 3 04:45 46 4 60 9 106 13 05:00 76 30 118 2 23 102 271 99 389 6 132 8 05:15 21 3 58 16 79 19 05:30 23 5 68 16 91 21 05:45 44 13 43 38 87 51 06:00 148 29 141 9 45 59 149 193 290 24 88 33 06:15 41 8 34 34 75 42 06:30 33 10 34 39 67 49 06:45 38 18 22 51 60 69 07:00 308 15 51 16 95 24 79 403 130 60 39 76 07:15 18 19 23 96 41 115 07:30 8 24 14 72 22 96 07:45 10 36 18 80 28 116 08:00 208 7 23 30 114 20 55 322 78 46 27 76 08:15 5 26 12 56 17 82 08:30 5 20 12 56 17 76 08:45 6 38 11 50 17 88 09:00 124 3 23 30 98 17 90 222 113 42 20 72 09:15 10 20 17 39 27 59 09:30 3 28 24 25 27 53 09:45 7 20 32 18 39 38 10:00 92 5 11 26 103 20 58 195 69 22 25 48 10:15 4 22 17 22 21 44 10:30 1 29 10 22 11 51 10:45 1 26 11 26 12 52 11:00 135 0 6 24 124 8 22 259 28 28 8 52 11:15 4 30 5 26 9 56 11:30 1 36 3 43 4 79 11:45 1 34 6 38 7 72 Totals 1,126 1,067 651 1,767 1,777 2,834 Split% 37.6 36.6 62.4 63.4 Day Totals 2,418 4,611 2,193 Day Splits 47.6 52.4 Peak Hour 07:00 12:15 11:00 03:15 07:00 03:15 Volume 308 163 124 330 403 461 Factor 0.80 0.95 0.86 0.87 0.87 0.86 Data File : D1108024 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : CERRITOS AVENUE Location Date: : E/O SUNKIST STREET Segment 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 7 38 177 5 14 49 183 21 360 2 87 7 12:15 40 5 46 2 86 7 12:30 51 3 50 2 101 5 12:45 48 1 38 1 86 2 01:00 1 30 118 3 10 24 139 11 257 0 54 3 01:15 26 1 39 0 65 1 01:30 43 3 34 0 77 3 01:45 19 3 42 1 61 4 02:00 1 35 127 0 3 34 157 4 284 1 69 1 02:15 26 1 40 0 66 1 02:30 28 1 36 0 64 1 02:45 38 1 47 0 85 1 03:00 3 20 103 2 9 64 275 12 378 0 84 2 03:15 28 1 63 1 91 2 03:30 23 4 88 0 111 4 03:45 32 2 60 2 92 4 04:00 20 31 116 5 12 92 375 32 491 1 123 6 04:15 24 1 86 2 110 3 04:30 31 0 85 7 116 7 04:45 30 6 112 10 142 16 05:00 72 35 125 2 31 118 412 103 537 8 153 10 05:15 26 6 114 12 140 18 05:30 38 4 98 26 136 30 05:45 26 19 82 26 108 45 06:00 147 29 97 6 49 92 183 196 280 25 121 31 06:15 21 7 35 28 56 35 06:30 23 16 31 40 54 56 06:45 24 20 25 54 49 74 07:00 310 11 41 23 102 26 68 412 109 67 37 90 07:15 12 21 14 94 26 115 07:30 8 24 12 72 20 96 07:45 10 34 16 77 26 111 08:00 242 10 32 32 134 10 45 376 77 64 20 96 08:15 11 30 11 52 22 82 08:30 6 32 13 66 19 98 08:45 5 40 11 60 16 100 09:00 127 6 18 24 101 24 79 228 97 42 30 66 09:15 7 34 26 36 33 70 09:30 2 21 14 25 16 46 09:45 3 22 15 24 18 46 10:00 118 10 19 31 99 8 24 217 43 26 18 57 10:15 3 25 7 32 10 57 10:30 2 20 6 28 8 48 10:45 4 23 3 32 7 55 11:00 149 3 8 58 170 13 37 319 45 30 16 88 11:15 4 38 10 26 14 64 11:30 1 36 7 42 8 78 11:45 0 38 7 51 7 89 Totals 1,197 981 734 1,977 1,931 2,958 Split% 33.2 38.0 66.8 62.0 Day Totals 2,711 4,889 2,178 Day Splits 44.5 55.5 Peak Hour 07:00 12:00 11:00 04:45 07:15 04:45 Volume 310 177 170 442 418 571 Factor 0.82 0.87 0.73 0.94 0.91 0.93 Data File : D1108024 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : DOUGLASS ROAD Location Date: : N/O KATELLA AVENUE Segment 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: NB SB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 16 68 352 4 20 92 277 36 629 5 160 9 12:15 108 4 66 6 174 10 12:30 94 9 67 1 161 10 12:45 82 3 52 4 134 7 01:00 6 72 264 3 4 60 218 10 482 2 132 5 01:15 64 1 58 1 122 2 01:30 68 0 46 3 114 3 01:45 60 0 54 0 114 0 02:00 5 51 194 0 5 86 325 10 519 1 137 1 02:15 46 2 70 1 116 3 02:30 49 2 87 2 136 4 02:45 48 1 82 1 130 2 03:00 10 43 246 0 5 72 375 15 621 3 115 3 03:15 68 3 74 2 142 5 03:30 76 0 114 2 190 2 03:45 59 2 115 3 174 5 04:00 38 43 182 1 9 130 378 47 560 6 173 7 04:15 44 2 68 4 112 6 04:30 52 2 102 10 154 12 04:45 43 4 78 18 121 22 05:00 126 54 230 3 32 143 387 158 617 10 197 13 05:15 52 6 77 16 129 22 05:30 56 11 76 31 132 42 05:45 68 12 91 69 159 81 06:00 231 61 146 8 54 92 289 285 435 32 153 40 06:15 34 9 76 41 110 50 06:30 31 11 65 58 96 69 06:45 20 26 56 100 76 126 07:00 500 25 76 22 139 63 192 639 268 107 88 129 07:15 21 49 48 152 69 201 07:30 16 33 47 132 63 165 07:45 14 35 34 109 48 144 08:00 460 15 50 34 142 30 110 602 160 138 45 172 08:15 12 36 21 114 33 150 08:30 13 40 26 104 39 144 08:45 10 32 33 104 43 136 09:00 245 11 82 35 119 48 151 364 233 76 59 111 09:15 18 34 34 68 52 102 09:30 21 26 45 54 66 80 09:45 32 24 24 47 56 71 10:00 155 14 52 36 128 22 56 283 108 37 36 73 10:15 16 36 22 40 38 76 10:30 13 26 6 38 19 64 10:45 9 30 6 40 15 70 11:00 220 5 15 64 300 5 15 520 30 44 10 108 11:15 4 88 5 46 9 134 11:30 5 87 5 64 10 151 11:45 1 61 0 66 1 127 Totals 2,012 1,889 957 2,773 2,969 4,662 Split% 40.5 32.2 59.5 67.8 Day Totals 3,730 7,631 3,901 Day Splits 51.1 48.9 Peak Hour 07:15 12:15 11:00 03:15 07:15 03:15 Volume 531 356 300 433 682 679 Factor 0.87 0.82 0.85 0.83 0.85 0.89 Data File : D1108020 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : DOUGLASS ROAD Location Date: : N/O KATELLA AVENUE Segment 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: NB SB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 8 66 271 5 10 96 301 18 572 1 162 6 12:15 58 0 84 5 142 5 12:30 75 5 66 1 141 6 12:45 72 0 55 1 127 1 01:00 10 60 270 2 7 52 224 17 494 4 112 6 01:15 74 1 50 2 124 3 01:30 68 1 61 2 129 3 01:45 68 3 61 2 129 5 02:00 5 56 223 0 1 72 286 6 509 0 128 0 02:15 56 1 54 2 110 3 02:30 56 0 78 0 134 0 02:45 55 0 82 3 137 3 03:00 7 69 236 0 1 58 337 8 573 0 127 0 03:15 56 1 62 2 118 3 03:30 61 0 147 1 208 1 03:45 50 0 70 4 120 4 04:00 39 46 259 2 10 105 317 49 576 7 151 9 04:15 56 3 54 8 110 11 04:30 65 1 98 11 163 12 04:45 92 4 60 13 152 17 05:00 140 98 417 1 32 140 374 172 791 13 238 14 05:15 100 3 86 21 186 24 05:30 104 18 80 28 184 46 05:45 115 10 68 78 183 88 06:00 241 87 193 6 40 82 212 281 405 33 169 39 06:15 49 12 46 40 95 52 06:30 32 7 51 58 83 65 06:45 25 15 33 110 58 125 07:00 550 29 69 44 154 47 146 704 215 112 76 156 07:15 16 41 31 158 47 199 07:30 11 31 40 154 51 185 07:45 13 38 28 126 41 164 08:00 413 11 45 28 124 52 192 537 237 114 63 142 08:15 12 27 38 110 50 137 08:30 11 36 68 100 79 136 08:45 11 33 34 89 45 122 09:00 285 12 63 46 143 64 181 428 244 91 76 137 09:15 14 37 42 88 56 125 09:30 23 33 47 62 70 95 09:45 14 27 28 44 42 71 10:00 167 8 19 30 130 25 63 297 82 44 33 74 10:15 4 36 16 32 20 68 10:30 5 26 10 45 15 71 10:45 2 38 12 46 14 84 11:00 252 4 13 108 331 1 11 583 24 44 5 152 11:15 2 66 5 62 7 128 11:30 4 74 5 61 9 135 11:45 3 83 0 85 3 168 Totals 2,117 2,078 983 2,644 3,100 4,722 Split% 44.0 31.7 56.0 68.3 Day Totals 3,627 7,822 4,195 Day Splits 53.6 46.4 Peak Hour 07:15 05:00 11:00 03:15 07:00 05:00 Volume 552 417 331 384 704 791 Factor 0.87 0.91 0.77 0.65 0.88 0.83 Data File : D1108020 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location Date: : HOWELL TO SR-57 SB RAMPS Segment 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 387 279 1,183 36 116 330 1,258 503 2,441 98 609 134 12:15 324 34 302 109 626 143 12:30 288 24 328 94 616 118 12:45 292 22 298 86 590 108 01:00 216 265 1,176 28 74 342 1,367 290 2,543 70 607 98 01:15 272 24 369 48 641 72 01:30 342 14 322 60 664 74 01:45 297 8 334 38 631 46 02:00 136 297 1,225 12 47 300 1,188 183 2,413 50 597 62 02:15 318 17 285 33 603 50 02:30 286 14 300 27 586 41 02:45 324 4 303 26 627 30 03:00 77 300 1,294 10 43 298 1,477 120 2,771 15 598 25 03:15 320 14 352 14 672 28 03:30 332 13 476 26 808 39 03:45 342 6 351 22 693 28 04:00 130 350 1,332 17 205 376 1,440 335 2,772 30 726 47 04:15 334 34 330 19 664 53 04:30 336 38 360 36 696 74 04:45 312 116 374 45 686 161 05:00 311 406 1,492 144 704 418 1,540 1,015 3,032 52 824 196 05:15 339 163 370 84 709 247 05:30 376 206 354 80 730 286 05:45 371 191 398 95 769 286 06:00 590 326 1,261 188 938 422 1,598 1,528 2,859 112 748 300 06:15 327 257 405 122 732 379 06:30 314 213 394 164 708 377 06:45 294 280 377 192 671 472 07:00 962 244 994 238 1,184 310 1,024 2,146 2,018 178 554 416 07:15 294 308 266 229 560 537 07:30 236 314 220 256 456 570 07:45 220 324 228 299 448 623 08:00 999 208 855 358 1,409 173 657 2,408 1,512 260 381 618 08:15 226 376 170 260 396 636 08:30 208 340 174 231 382 571 08:45 213 335 140 248 353 583 09:00 830 230 1,472 304 1,258 158 690 2,088 2,162 222 388 526 09:15 338 320 177 198 515 518 09:30 418 300 198 212 616 512 09:45 486 334 157 198 643 532 10:00 843 437 1,260 284 1,250 146 484 2,093 1,744 192 583 476 10:15 338 312 140 211 478 523 10:30 233 336 104 219 337 555 10:45 252 318 94 221 346 539 11:00 1,032 227 712 296 1,225 76 298 2,257 1,010 223 303 519 11:15 176 315 68 278 244 593 11:30 152 306 88 258 240 564 11:45 157 308 66 273 223 581 Totals 6,513 14,256 8,453 13,021 14,966 27,277 Split% 52.3 56.5 47.7 43.5 Day Totals 21,474 42,243 20,769 Day Splits 49.2 50.8 Peak Hour 07:30 09:15 08:00 05:45 07:45 05:00 Volume 1,075 1,679 1,409 1,619 2,448 3,032 Factor 0.90 0.86 0.94 0.96 0.96 0.92 Data File : D1108015 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location Date: : HOWELL TO SR-57 SB RAMPS Segment 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 425 288 1,151 54 141 270 1,118 566 2,269 147 558 201 12:15 268 33 301 98 569 131 12:30 281 32 278 82 559 114 12:45 314 22 269 98 583 120 01:00 198 304 1,179 26 74 297 1,105 272 2,284 64 601 90 01:15 272 19 232 51 504 70 01:30 339 11 266 47 605 58 01:45 264 18 310 36 574 54 02:00 137 294 1,240 20 76 260 1,110 213 2,350 61 554 81 02:15 330 16 273 26 603 42 02:30 320 24 293 30 613 54 02:45 296 16 284 20 580 36 03:00 79 292 1,178 23 125 296 1,290 204 2,468 27 588 50 03:15 266 36 306 10 572 46 03:30 292 32 392 20 684 52 03:45 328 34 296 22 624 56 04:00 122 300 1,233 29 281 282 1,254 403 2,487 14 582 43 04:15 301 54 316 17 617 71 04:30 304 88 330 36 634 124 04:45 328 110 326 55 654 165 05:00 322 400 1,456 113 676 414 1,572 998 3,028 46 814 159 05:15 406 142 416 73 822 215 05:30 348 216 358 91 706 307 05:45 302 205 384 112 686 317 06:00 572 296 1,089 203 927 254 994 1,499 2,083 118 550 321 06:15 285 216 268 118 553 334 06:30 302 249 240 146 542 395 06:45 206 259 232 190 438 449 07:00 1,019 231 831 250 1,085 220 838 2,104 1,669 212 451 462 07:15 214 268 200 240 414 508 07:30 186 267 204 287 390 554 07:45 200 300 214 280 414 580 08:00 965 190 786 288 1,368 184 612 2,333 1,398 265 374 553 08:15 162 381 148 247 310 628 08:30 210 335 144 216 354 551 08:45 224 364 136 237 360 601 09:00 859 205 791 297 1,181 152 507 2,040 1,298 200 357 497 09:15 228 290 148 222 376 512 09:30 174 282 117 224 291 506 09:45 184 312 90 213 274 525 10:00 923 155 716 270 1,153 113 406 2,076 1,122 209 268 479 10:15 183 287 101 240 284 527 10:30 164 306 96 224 260 530 10:45 214 290 96 250 310 540 11:00 1,040 208 688 328 1,236 68 214 2,276 902 222 276 550 11:15 160 306 49 264 209 570 11:30 166 302 51 258 217 560 11:45 154 300 46 296 200 596 Totals 6,661 12,338 8,323 11,020 14,984 23,358 Split% 52.8 55.5 47.2 44.5 Day Totals 19,343 38,342 18,999 Day Splits 49.6 50.4 Peak Hour 07:30 04:45 08:15 05:00 08:00 05:00 Volume 1,079 1,482 1,377 1,572 2,333 3,028 Factor 0.94 0.91 0.90 0.94 0.93 0.92 Data File : D1108015 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : SR-57 NB RAMP TO SR-57 SB RAMP Segment: 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 373 278 1,239 43 129 329 1,253 502 2,492 112 607 155 12:15 314 32 298 92 612 124 12:30 334 30 312 94 646 124 12:45 313 24 314 75 627 99 01:00 194 305 1,278 27 80 326 1,330 274 2,608 62 631 89 01:15 326 14 312 51 638 65 01:30 341 26 352 49 693 75 01:45 306 13 340 32 646 45 02:00 138 312 1,233 18 52 307 1,183 190 2,416 60 619 78 02:15 298 9 286 26 584 35 02:30 305 16 322 27 627 43 02:45 318 9 268 25 586 34 03:00 83 306 1,288 15 62 276 1,370 145 2,658 16 582 31 03:15 314 19 288 16 602 35 03:30 324 15 446 29 770 44 03:45 344 13 360 22 704 35 04:00 139 330 1,298 26 128 324 1,295 267 2,593 25 654 51 04:15 340 28 282 18 622 46 04:30 307 30 371 30 678 60 04:45 321 44 318 66 639 110 05:00 453 376 1,450 32 276 410 1,346 729 2,796 79 786 111 05:15 322 50 314 94 636 144 05:30 365 102 306 114 671 216 05:45 387 92 316 166 703 258 06:00 728 362 1,568 111 546 318 1,116 1,274 2,684 142 680 253 06:15 428 131 278 154 706 285 06:30 384 148 276 188 660 336 06:45 394 156 244 244 638 400 07:00 972 294 1,078 206 944 239 895 1,916 1,973 200 533 406 07:15 308 246 248 222 556 468 07:30 236 237 182 282 418 519 07:45 240 255 226 268 466 523 08:00 976 197 808 280 1,029 159 640 2,005 1,448 286 356 566 08:15 202 254 162 230 364 484 08:30 212 255 160 232 372 487 08:45 197 240 159 228 356 468 09:00 834 223 1,269 247 949 170 978 1,783 2,247 216 393 463 09:15 296 225 232 213 528 438 09:30 340 232 273 214 613 446 09:45 410 245 303 191 713 436 10:00 900 350 1,006 232 992 195 547 1,892 1,553 232 545 464 10:15 250 242 153 210 403 452 10:30 226 253 100 228 326 481 10:45 180 265 99 230 279 495 11:00 1,066 196 677 274 1,132 62 210 2,198 887 256 258 530 11:15 156 288 42 248 198 536 11:30 183 272 64 292 247 564 11:45 142 298 42 270 184 568 Totals 6,856 14,192 6,319 12,163 13,175 26,355 Split% 53.8 48.0 46.2 52.0 Day Totals 18,482 39,530 21,048 Day Splits 53.2 46.8 Peak Hour 07:30 06:00 11:00 03:15 11:00 05:00 Volume 1,066 1,568 1,132 1,418 2,198 2,796 Factor 0.93 0.92 0.95 0.79 0.97 0.89 Data File : D1108014 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : SR-57 NB RAMP TO SR-57 SB RAMP Segment: 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 420 316 1,236 42 116 316 1,176 536 2,412 139 632 181 12:15 297 26 292 98 589 124 12:30 306 26 292 90 598 116 12:45 317 22 276 93 593 115 01:00 199 320 1,227 28 78 312 1,222 277 2,449 68 632 96 01:15 279 22 294 50 573 72 01:30 336 10 300 42 636 52 01:45 292 18 316 39 608 57 02:00 123 302 1,210 14 54 334 1,145 177 2,355 54 636 68 02:15 292 12 282 22 574 34 02:30 344 10 278 28 622 38 02:45 272 18 251 19 523 37 03:00 68 284 1,096 13 59 304 1,345 127 2,441 14 588 27 03:15 240 15 318 11 558 26 03:30 268 13 421 20 689 33 03:45 304 18 302 23 606 41 04:00 165 246 1,052 16 118 340 1,437 283 2,489 19 586 35 04:15 244 28 289 26 533 54 04:30 274 28 422 50 696 78 04:45 288 46 386 70 674 116 05:00 468 316 1,215 52 314 506 1,791 782 3,006 72 822 124 05:15 336 59 461 97 797 156 05:30 291 92 442 133 733 225 05:45 272 111 382 166 654 277 06:00 724 256 950 102 576 338 952 1,300 1,902 146 594 248 06:15 255 130 220 172 475 302 06:30 236 156 214 176 450 332 06:45 203 188 180 230 383 418 07:00 1,043 211 763 206 992 192 708 2,035 1,471 230 403 436 07:15 207 238 174 227 381 465 07:30 188 240 160 306 348 546 07:45 157 308 182 280 339 588 08:00 956 168 702 266 1,176 181 671 2,132 1,373 252 349 518 08:15 164 302 158 252 322 554 08:30 172 314 185 228 357 542 08:45 198 294 147 224 345 518 09:00 995 209 730 266 949 159 533 1,944 1,263 267 368 533 09:15 176 228 150 242 326 470 09:30 166 232 122 271 288 503 09:45 179 223 102 215 281 438 10:00 1,026 138 673 234 964 108 350 1,990 1,023 259 246 493 10:15 172 238 98 227 270 465 10:30 167 244 84 262 251 506 10:45 196 248 60 278 256 526 11:00 1,171 209 698 296 1,182 82 227 2,353 925 260 291 556 11:15 176 278 45 285 221 563 11:30 162 292 58 318 220 610 11:45 151 316 42 308 193 624 Totals 7,358 11,552 6,578 11,557 13,936 23,109 Split% 50.0 47.2 50.0 52.8 Day Totals 18,135 37,045 18,910 Day Splits 51.0 49.0 Peak Hour 11:00 12:45 07:45 04:45 11:00 04:45 Volume 1,171 1,252 1,190 1,795 2,353 3,026 Factor 0.92 0.93 0.95 0.89 0.94 0.92 Data File : D1108014 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location Date: : SR-57 NB RAMPS TO DOUGLASS RD Segment 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 326 308 1,216 30 99 278 1,083 425 2,299 86 586 116 12:15 334 16 272 92 606 108 12:30 286 35 252 80 538 115 12:45 288 18 281 68 569 86 01:00 178 263 1,078 20 53 310 1,188 231 2,266 67 573 87 01:15 270 19 276 42 546 61 01:30 286 8 313 42 599 50 01:45 259 6 289 27 548 33 02:00 79 236 1,032 16 42 280 1,064 121 2,096 44 516 60 02:15 268 7 276 15 544 22 02:30 258 10 270 10 528 20 02:45 270 9 238 10 508 19 03:00 35 260 1,265 10 40 284 1,195 75 2,460 7 544 17 03:15 287 18 276 8 563 26 03:30 398 4 333 7 731 11 03:45 320 8 302 13 622 21 04:00 162 295 1,173 23 89 352 1,272 251 2,445 13 647 36 04:15 275 14 276 18 551 32 04:30 301 24 378 47 679 71 04:45 302 28 266 84 568 112 05:00 519 277 1,140 46 236 394 1,242 755 2,382 83 671 129 05:15 246 46 322 100 568 146 05:30 278 74 296 132 574 206 05:45 339 70 230 204 569 274 06:00 853 327 1,520 97 483 283 995 1,336 2,515 155 610 252 06:15 394 116 256 188 650 304 06:30 397 142 232 194 629 336 06:45 402 128 224 316 626 444 07:00 1,287 314 869 142 707 254 765 1,994 1,634 271 568 413 07:15 239 167 176 282 415 449 07:30 176 210 153 344 329 554 07:45 140 188 182 390 322 578 08:00 1,399 134 497 228 845 240 773 2,244 1,270 448 374 676 08:15 122 205 144 332 266 537 08:30 126 212 202 319 328 531 08:45 115 200 187 300 302 500 09:00 1,005 98 457 192 796 266 1,534 1,801 1,991 276 364 468 09:15 116 196 598 244 714 440 09:30 125 192 414 253 539 445 09:45 118 216 256 232 374 448 10:00 962 115 340 187 833 184 496 1,795 836 236 299 423 10:15 93 206 152 238 245 444 10:30 70 220 94 238 164 458 10:45 62 220 66 250 128 470 11:00 1,114 46 214 208 992 89 262 2,106 476 266 135 474 11:15 57 248 72 260 129 508 11:30 54 270 59 274 113 544 11:45 57 266 42 314 99 580 Totals 7,919 10,801 5,215 11,869 13,134 22,670 Split% 47.6 39.7 52.4 60.3 Day Totals 17,084 35,804 18,720 Day Splits 52.3 47.7 Peak Hour 07:30 06:00 11:00 09:00 07:30 03:15 Volume 1,514 1,520 992 1,534 2,345 2,563 Factor 0.84 0.95 0.92 0.64 0.87 0.88 Data File : D1108013 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location Date: : SR-57 NB RAMPS TO DOUGLASS RD Segment 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 114 283 1,123 52 154 299 1,174 268 2,297 48 582 100 12:15 284 36 288 26 572 62 12:30 258 38 285 24 543 62 12:45 298 28 302 16 600 44 01:00 72 284 1,070 17 65 300 1,200 137 2,270 24 584 41 01:15 258 17 269 20 527 37 01:30 262 17 341 10 603 27 01:45 266 14 290 18 556 32 02:00 52 213 936 8 43 314 1,152 95 2,088 18 527 26 02:15 248 16 258 8 506 24 02:30 246 7 322 12 568 19 02:45 229 12 258 14 487 26 03:00 45 263 1,055 16 54 302 1,219 99 2,274 5 565 21 03:15 281 14 274 4 555 18 03:30 273 6 360 14 633 20 03:45 238 18 283 22 521 40 04:00 185 256 1,166 14 89 370 1,284 274 2,450 18 626 32 04:15 247 22 303 26 550 48 04:30 294 22 355 37 649 59 04:45 369 31 256 104 625 135 05:00 529 390 1,515 40 213 411 1,159 742 2,674 80 801 120 05:15 391 45 264 97 655 142 05:30 382 60 264 128 646 188 05:45 352 68 220 224 572 292 06:00 831 312 866 108 491 260 899 1,322 1,765 158 572 266 06:15 200 141 243 174 443 315 06:30 204 126 200 209 404 335 06:45 150 116 196 290 346 406 07:00 1,259 142 559 169 747 210 762 2,006 1,321 268 352 437 07:15 156 174 178 290 334 464 07:30 139 222 202 344 341 566 07:45 122 182 172 357 294 539 08:00 1,479 131 454 209 809 192 690 2,288 1,144 410 323 619 08:15 95 204 178 349 273 553 08:30 112 209 150 358 262 567 08:45 116 187 170 362 286 549 09:00 1,073 100 393 208 768 139 560 1,841 953 286 239 494 09:15 115 172 161 270 276 442 09:30 94 208 136 260 230 468 09:45 84 180 124 257 208 437 10:00 1,022 57 245 188 776 104 327 1,798 572 271 161 459 10:15 78 182 85 248 163 430 10:30 48 212 74 229 122 441 10:45 62 194 64 274 126 468 11:00 1,079 65 249 284 1,078 56 201 2,157 450 232 121 516 11:15 70 254 52 255 122 509 11:30 50 276 40 296 90 572 11:45 64 264 53 296 117 560 Totals 7,740 9,631 5,287 10,627 13,027 20,258 Split% 47.5 40.6 52.5 59.4 Day Totals 15,914 33,285 17,371 Day Splits 52.2 47.8 Peak Hour 08:00 04:45 11:00 04:15 08:00 04:30 Volume 1,479 1,532 1,078 1,325 2,288 2,730 Factor 0.90 0.98 0.95 0.81 0.92 0.85 Data File : D1108013 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : STATE COLLEGE TO HOWELL Segment: 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 360 234 1,000 29 129 296 1,050 489 2,050 91 530 120 12:15 272 38 224 102 496 140 12:30 236 36 282 88 518 124 12:45 258 26 248 79 506 105 01:00 200 214 972 26 74 288 1,124 274 2,096 65 502 91 01:15 259 23 282 48 541 71 01:30 269 18 282 52 551 70 01:45 230 7 272 35 502 42 02:00 120 246 989 10 44 280 1,060 164 2,049 45 526 55 02:15 240 10 246 28 486 38 02:30 262 17 275 22 537 39 02:45 241 7 259 25 500 32 03:00 68 288 1,107 10 44 278 1,308 112 2,415 13 566 23 03:15 248 14 300 14 548 28 03:30 294 12 382 22 676 34 03:45 277 8 348 19 625 27 04:00 114 276 1,056 8 107 312 1,309 221 2,365 24 588 32 04:15 256 24 319 14 575 38 04:30 270 22 322 34 592 56 04:45 254 53 356 42 610 95 05:00 295 336 1,268 108 517 396 1,479 812 2,747 41 732 149 05:15 251 102 372 78 623 180 05:30 359 144 354 80 713 224 05:45 322 163 357 96 679 259 06:00 577 279 1,124 136 687 369 1,371 1,264 2,495 113 648 249 06:15 290 185 338 128 628 313 06:30 306 170 354 149 660 319 06:45 249 196 310 187 559 383 07:00 920 222 890 184 816 310 960 1,736 1,850 180 532 364 07:15 256 184 236 208 492 392 07:30 204 216 208 247 412 463 07:45 208 232 206 285 414 517 08:00 924 188 783 220 965 176 636 1,889 1,419 270 364 490 08:15 217 264 173 231 390 495 08:30 192 249 147 223 339 472 08:45 186 232 140 200 326 432 09:00 709 203 1,247 243 945 152 687 1,654 1,934 202 355 445 09:15 312 246 182 160 494 406 09:30 356 226 168 187 524 413 09:45 376 230 185 160 561 390 10:00 721 338 1,024 243 977 172 516 1,698 1,540 167 510 410 10:15 275 235 136 170 411 405 10:30 205 250 100 222 305 472 10:45 206 249 108 162 314 411 11:00 840 194 632 240 999 86 296 1,839 928 194 280 434 11:15 156 273 74 214 230 487 11:30 146 252 66 224 212 476 11:45 136 234 70 208 206 442 Totals 5,848 12,092 6,304 11,796 12,152 23,888 Split% 50.6 51.9 49.4 48.1 Day Totals 18,100 36,040 17,940 Day Splits 49.8 50.2 Peak Hour 07:30 09:15 10:45 05:00 07:45 05:00 Volume 1,033 1,382 1,014 1,479 1,974 2,747 Factor 0.91 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.94 Data File : D1108016 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : STATE COLLEGE TO HOWELL Segment: 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 388 244 977 59 156 264 1,036 544 2,013 127 508 186 12:15 230 38 270 93 500 131 12:30 236 33 250 84 486 117 12:45 267 26 252 84 519 110 01:00 185 260 971 28 75 267 1,021 260 1,992 64 527 92 01:15 216 18 252 46 468 64 01:30 271 18 262 46 533 64 01:45 224 11 240 29 464 40 02:00 117 238 1,016 17 65 302 1,110 182 2,126 51 540 68 02:15 266 18 245 25 511 43 02:30 278 16 278 26 556 42 02:45 234 14 285 15 519 29 03:00 58 234 954 11 79 251 1,216 137 2,170 19 485 30 03:15 214 27 303 7 517 34 03:30 240 26 334 14 574 40 03:45 266 15 328 18 594 33 04:00 102 266 991 26 189 320 1,309 291 2,300 13 586 39 04:15 230 24 324 15 554 39 04:30 250 69 303 28 553 97 04:45 245 70 362 46 607 116 05:00 297 314 1,208 85 511 366 1,541 808 2,749 38 680 123 05:15 335 118 417 70 752 188 05:30 324 142 396 88 720 230 05:45 235 166 362 101 597 267 06:00 583 260 939 151 695 367 1,080 1,278 2,019 115 627 266 06:15 227 184 248 117 475 301 06:30 280 166 260 134 540 300 06:45 172 194 205 217 377 411 07:00 940 203 771 182 828 218 773 1,768 1,544 178 421 360 07:15 202 208 196 230 398 438 07:30 182 184 172 265 354 449 07:45 184 254 187 267 371 521 08:00 909 164 716 232 1,019 194 616 1,928 1,332 239 358 471 08:15 165 276 148 256 313 532 08:30 177 247 154 198 331 445 08:45 210 264 120 216 330 480 09:00 756 205 697 243 963 140 530 1,719 1,227 204 345 447 09:15 190 248 147 188 337 436 09:30 154 240 138 202 292 442 09:45 148 232 105 162 253 394 10:00 786 156 643 230 928 118 441 1,714 1,084 196 274 426 10:15 162 218 122 186 284 404 10:30 156 248 105 214 261 462 10:45 169 232 96 190 265 422 11:00 871 174 594 280 1,066 86 237 1,937 831 205 260 485 11:15 149 283 63 202 212 485 11:30 139 236 48 226 187 462 11:45 132 267 40 238 172 505 Totals 5,992 10,477 6,574 10,910 12,566 21,387 Split% 49.0 52.3 51.0 47.7 Day Totals 17,484 33,953 16,469 Day Splits 48.5 51.5 Peak Hour 07:30 04:45 11:00 05:15 07:30 04:45 Volume 1,027 1,218 1,066 1,542 1,973 2,759 Factor 0.96 0.91 0.94 0.92 0.93 0.92 Data File : D1108016 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location Date: : E/O DOUGLASS ROAD Segment 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 196 255 1,009 52 144 241 965 340 1,974 46 496 98 12:15 270 38 220 58 490 96 12:30 256 26 246 48 502 74 12:45 228 28 258 44 486 72 01:00 100 220 918 40 91 292 1,177 191 2,095 45 512 85 01:15 245 30 262 24 507 54 01:30 248 13 328 21 576 34 01:45 205 8 295 10 500 18 02:00 55 219 902 24 72 243 1,035 127 1,937 20 462 44 02:15 228 20 256 14 484 34 02:30 220 14 286 8 506 22 02:45 235 14 250 13 485 27 03:00 30 202 962 13 56 258 1,074 86 2,036 7 460 20 03:15 220 17 236 7 456 24 03:30 288 16 310 2 598 18 03:45 252 10 270 14 522 24 04:00 131 247 977 20 102 290 1,192 233 2,169 10 537 30 04:15 242 22 282 16 524 38 04:30 240 25 316 39 556 64 04:45 248 35 304 66 552 101 05:00 411 220 928 33 230 374 1,193 641 2,121 65 594 98 05:15 226 37 282 84 508 121 05:30 232 86 263 104 495 190 05:45 250 74 274 158 524 232 06:00 591 198 742 82 469 298 1,118 1,060 1,860 111 496 193 06:15 186 138 288 148 474 286 06:30 187 108 290 118 477 226 06:45 171 141 242 214 413 355 07:00 794 156 508 162 748 256 807 1,542 1,315 155 412 317 07:15 138 182 226 186 364 368 07:30 110 204 151 214 261 418 07:45 104 200 174 239 278 439 08:00 975 107 420 190 829 162 562 1,804 982 299 269 489 08:15 108 242 152 228 260 470 08:30 106 194 129 234 235 428 08:45 99 203 119 214 218 417 09:00 771 91 627 186 733 124 484 1,504 1,111 208 215 394 09:15 144 189 114 180 258 369 09:30 171 178 126 198 297 376 09:45 221 180 120 185 341 365 10:00 870 134 338 192 792 125 344 1,662 682 214 259 406 10:15 96 192 89 226 185 418 10:30 64 198 55 216 119 414 10:45 44 210 75 214 119 424 11:00 997 49 200 222 856 55 191 1,853 391 245 104 467 11:15 52 222 42 240 94 462 11:30 50 216 62 252 112 468 11:45 49 196 32 260 81 456 Totals 5,921 8,531 5,122 10,142 11,043 18,673 Split% 45.7 46.4 54.3 53.6 Day Totals 15,264 29,716 14,452 Day Splits 48.6 51.4 Peak Hour 07:45 03:30 10:45 04:15 11:00 04:15 Volume 1,000 1,029 870 1,276 1,853 2,226 Factor 0.84 0.89 0.98 0.85 0.99 0.94 Data File : D1108012 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location Date: : E/O DOUGLASS ROAD Segment 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 95 269 1,068 41 105 248 1,023 200 2,091 42 517 83 12:15 262 22 253 18 515 40 12:30 277 23 254 22 531 45 12:45 260 19 268 13 528 32 01:00 56 258 936 24 73 299 1,167 129 2,103 18 557 42 01:15 217 26 304 16 521 42 01:30 236 12 278 8 514 20 01:45 225 11 286 14 511 25 02:00 46 190 908 10 36 284 1,018 82 1,926 18 474 28 02:15 230 10 228 6 458 16 02:30 258 6 260 10 518 16 02:45 230 10 246 12 476 22 03:00 38 224 933 15 45 260 1,071 83 2,004 4 484 19 03:15 227 8 248 4 475 12 03:30 262 9 304 12 566 21 03:45 220 13 259 18 479 31 04:00 141 256 1,052 12 75 299 1,169 216 2,221 14 555 26 04:15 238 16 268 16 506 32 04:30 266 25 312 30 578 55 04:45 292 22 290 81 582 103 05:00 391 324 1,183 40 251 328 1,145 642 2,328 65 652 105 05:15 300 48 300 78 600 126 05:30 295 72 279 107 574 179 05:45 264 91 238 141 502 232 06:00 582 230 725 90 512 199 769 1,094 1,494 112 429 202 06:15 172 116 207 119 379 235 06:30 192 128 192 150 384 278 06:45 131 178 171 201 302 379 07:00 833 142 500 142 734 184 674 1,567 1,174 192 326 334 07:15 126 178 152 183 278 361 07:30 128 186 152 204 280 390 07:45 104 228 186 254 290 482 08:00 1,011 112 398 165 794 151 559 1,805 957 271 263 436 08:15 80 198 147 235 227 433 08:30 108 242 125 249 233 491 08:45 98 189 136 256 234 445 09:00 822 100 351 206 786 108 448 1,608 799 208 208 414 09:15 94 196 132 198 226 394 09:30 84 186 116 208 200 394 09:45 73 198 92 208 165 406 10:00 884 56 206 184 810 114 330 1,694 536 228 170 412 10:15 58 210 90 220 148 430 10:30 39 204 71 207 110 411 10:45 53 212 55 229 108 441 11:00 976 49 209 206 877 72 227 1,853 436 210 121 416 11:15 64 216 53 236 117 452 11:30 42 225 55 270 97 495 11:45 54 230 47 260 101 490 Totals 5,875 8,469 5,098 9,600 10,973 18,069 Split% 46.9 46.5 53.1 53.5 Day Totals 14,698 29,042 14,344 Day Splits 49.4 50.6 Peak Hour 08:00 04:45 11:00 04:30 11:00 04:30 Volume 1,011 1,211 877 1,230 1,853 2,412 Factor 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.92 Data File : D1108012 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : E/O MAIN STREET Segment: 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 146 256 955 18 61 237 980 207 1,935 24 493 42 12:15 239 12 235 47 474 59 12:30 230 13 252 35 482 48 12:45 230 18 256 40 486 58 01:00 82 252 894 20 51 276 1,046 133 1,940 38 528 58 01:15 222 16 248 15 470 31 01:30 230 11 252 19 482 30 01:45 190 4 270 10 460 14 02:00 46 172 802 14 45 216 840 91 1,642 22 388 36 02:15 232 12 224 7 456 19 02:30 189 12 204 5 393 17 02:45 209 7 196 12 405 19 03:00 31 232 905 14 45 204 892 76 1,797 6 436 20 03:15 196 11 200 8 396 19 03:30 257 11 256 1 513 12 03:45 220 9 232 16 452 25 04:00 104 246 1,024 18 109 232 976 213 2,000 12 478 30 04:15 261 16 211 14 472 30 04:30 258 32 275 30 533 62 04:45 259 43 258 48 517 91 05:00 235 298 1,001 39 210 256 989 445 1,990 35 554 74 05:15 244 44 242 45 486 89 05:30 222 65 233 60 455 125 05:45 237 62 258 95 495 157 06:00 356 223 735 89 490 284 1,016 846 1,751 66 507 155 06:15 184 141 259 84 443 225 06:30 182 114 265 86 447 200 06:45 146 146 208 120 354 266 07:00 528 150 510 186 876 224 685 1,404 1,195 114 374 300 07:15 136 210 166 118 302 328 07:30 120 238 160 130 280 368 07:45 104 242 135 166 239 408 08:00 702 113 409 246 877 118 415 1,579 824 224 231 470 08:15 106 232 90 158 196 390 08:30 90 185 111 167 201 352 08:45 100 214 96 153 196 367 09:00 599 101 585 175 688 74 264 1,287 849 146 175 321 09:15 128 174 66 142 194 316 09:30 151 162 72 150 223 312 09:45 205 177 52 161 257 338 10:00 711 136 334 167 744 50 176 1,455 510 167 186 334 10:15 91 182 48 176 139 358 10:30 52 210 38 184 90 394 10:45 55 185 40 184 95 369 11:00 850 38 165 166 764 38 115 1,614 280 192 76 358 11:15 45 208 28 220 73 428 11:30 48 190 28 207 76 397 11:45 34 200 21 231 55 431 Totals 4,390 8,319 4,960 8,394 9,350 16,713 Split% 49.8 53.0 50.2 47.0 Day Totals 13,354 26,063 12,709 Day Splits 48.8 51.2 Peak Hour 11:00 04:15 07:30 05:45 07:30 04:30 Volume 850 1,076 958 1,066 1,636 2,090 Factor 0.92 0.90 0.97 0.94 0.87 0.94 Data File : D1108010 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location: Date: : E/O MAIN STREET Segment: 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 92 258 932 20 52 229 923 144 1,855 36 487 56 12:15 214 6 222 25 436 31 12:30 230 14 232 16 462 30 12:45 230 12 240 15 470 27 01:00 56 232 901 14 30 208 899 86 1,800 20 440 34 01:15 218 7 250 18 468 25 01:30 218 6 239 7 457 13 01:45 233 3 202 11 435 14 02:00 51 200 838 8 29 240 900 80 1,738 18 440 26 02:15 215 8 242 11 457 19 02:30 212 8 213 9 425 17 02:45 211 5 205 13 416 18 03:00 29 210 936 10 36 218 878 65 1,814 6 428 16 03:15 244 6 186 3 430 9 03:30 266 11 272 8 538 19 03:45 216 9 202 12 418 21 04:00 87 261 1,071 18 93 242 950 180 2,021 11 503 29 04:15 252 18 240 10 492 28 04:30 268 31 238 24 506 55 04:45 290 26 230 42 520 68 05:00 210 316 1,197 45 238 284 942 448 2,139 32 600 77 05:15 303 44 244 41 547 85 05:30 288 59 228 60 516 119 05:45 290 90 186 77 476 167 06:00 414 254 786 101 527 198 761 941 1,547 74 452 175 06:15 194 132 214 84 408 216 06:30 212 138 185 104 397 242 06:45 126 156 164 152 290 308 07:00 583 150 513 176 898 186 636 1,481 1,149 134 336 310 07:15 105 212 152 127 257 339 07:30 148 224 134 142 282 366 07:45 110 286 164 180 274 466 08:00 773 97 408 246 973 128 463 1,746 871 184 225 430 08:15 102 248 108 189 210 437 08:30 115 254 103 174 218 428 08:45 94 225 124 226 218 451 09:00 692 88 351 220 782 80 291 1,474 642 194 168 414 09:15 98 172 94 162 192 334 09:30 85 184 62 147 147 331 09:45 80 206 55 189 135 395 10:00 776 71 227 198 777 60 203 1,553 430 194 131 392 10:15 56 186 59 196 115 382 10:30 58 195 48 192 106 387 10:45 42 198 36 194 78 392 11:00 820 56 206 195 858 37 129 1,678 335 205 93 400 11:15 62 224 28 196 90 420 11:30 44 230 34 202 78 432 11:45 44 209 30 217 74 426 Totals 4,583 8,366 5,293 7,975 9,876 16,341 Split% 51.2 53.6 48.8 46.4 Day Totals 13,268 26,217 12,949 Day Splits 49.4 50.6 Peak Hour 11:00 04:45 07:45 04:30 07:45 04:45 Volume 820 1,197 1,034 996 1,761 2,183 Factor 0.94 0.95 0.90 0.88 0.94 0.91 Data File : D1108010 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location Date: : E/O STRUCK AVENUE Segment 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 191 229 807 36 104 202 816 295 1,623 41 431 77 12:15 208 28 178 50 386 78 12:30 200 20 224 54 424 74 12:45 170 20 212 46 382 66 01:00 94 200 743 34 75 248 1,015 169 1,758 28 448 62 01:15 165 23 247 30 412 53 01:30 206 10 260 24 466 34 01:45 172 8 260 12 432 20 02:00 44 154 674 18 63 185 800 107 1,474 17 339 35 02:15 168 18 214 14 382 32 02:30 170 14 211 5 381 19 02:45 182 13 190 8 372 21 03:00 20 164 789 10 48 214 857 68 1,646 7 378 17 03:15 188 17 188 3 376 20 03:30 221 14 238 2 459 16 03:45 216 7 217 8 433 15 04:00 76 178 797 16 86 212 876 162 1,673 8 390 24 04:15 182 20 200 6 382 26 04:30 229 22 242 20 471 42 04:45 208 28 222 42 430 70 05:00 223 211 838 24 172 240 881 395 1,719 38 451 62 05:15 212 26 212 53 424 79 05:30 196 66 201 50 397 116 05:45 219 56 228 82 447 138 06:00 382 198 670 64 394 243 955 776 1,625 69 441 133 06:15 162 117 250 108 412 225 06:30 158 92 244 83 402 175 06:45 152 121 218 122 370 243 07:00 503 136 429 126 648 218 678 1,151 1,107 119 354 245 07:15 125 158 194 114 319 272 07:30 102 176 134 100 236 276 07:45 66 188 132 170 198 358 08:00 708 108 360 175 723 146 486 1,431 846 223 254 398 08:15 80 210 138 182 218 392 08:30 90 164 102 153 192 317 08:45 82 174 100 150 182 324 09:00 566 88 529 164 630 108 411 1,196 940 151 196 315 09:15 120 160 100 125 220 285 09:30 140 142 113 144 253 286 09:45 181 164 90 146 271 310 10:00 631 141 343 152 657 92 275 1,288 618 144 233 296 10:15 92 163 68 158 160 321 10:30 58 164 48 154 106 318 10:45 52 178 67 175 119 353 11:00 796 33 153 166 652 42 154 1,448 307 166 75 332 11:15 42 177 36 207 78 384 11:30 39 161 51 205 90 366 11:45 39 148 25 218 64 366 Totals 4,234 7,132 4,252 8,204 8,486 15,336 Split% 46.5 50.1 53.5 49.9 Day Totals 12,456 23,822 11,366 Day Splits 47.7 52.3 Peak Hour 11:00 04:30 07:30 01:00 07:45 04:30 Volume 796 860 749 1,015 1,465 1,776 Factor 0.91 0.94 0.89 0.98 0.92 0.94 Data File : D1108011 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location Date: : E/O STRUCK AVENUE Segment 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 84 242 870 33 79 192 846 163 1,716 32 434 65 12:15 201 17 207 23 408 40 12:30 203 16 205 16 408 32 12:45 224 13 242 13 466 26 01:00 50 188 709 15 47 276 1,000 97 1,709 15 464 30 01:15 180 14 264 18 444 32 01:30 169 11 246 10 415 21 01:45 172 7 214 7 386 14 02:00 44 154 690 8 29 234 811 73 1,501 18 388 26 02:15 186 10 194 11 380 21 02:30 176 5 180 9 356 14 02:45 174 6 203 6 377 12 03:00 34 183 773 10 42 200 824 76 1,597 8 383 18 03:15 182 8 186 3 368 11 03:30 198 10 238 10 436 20 03:45 210 14 200 13 410 27 04:00 78 192 868 11 64 218 874 142 1,742 8 410 19 04:15 204 13 216 8 420 21 04:30 204 22 222 18 426 40 04:45 268 18 218 44 486 62 05:00 222 270 1,066 33 189 209 850 411 1,916 47 479 80 05:15 280 30 220 44 500 74 05:30 277 54 230 46 507 100 05:45 239 72 191 85 430 157 06:00 372 240 700 76 441 169 635 813 1,335 68 409 144 06:15 180 100 164 80 344 180 06:30 169 109 154 106 323 215 06:45 111 156 148 118 259 274 07:00 528 121 454 114 640 157 573 1,168 1,027 132 278 246 07:15 118 154 130 121 248 275 07:30 111 166 120 113 231 279 07:45 104 206 166 162 270 368 08:00 791 94 348 156 709 127 489 1,500 837 193 221 349 08:15 78 174 135 184 213 358 08:30 96 211 108 194 204 405 08:45 80 168 119 220 199 388 09:00 614 82 296 188 667 87 376 1,281 672 168 169 356 09:15 90 153 116 140 206 293 09:30 68 152 94 144 162 296 09:45 56 174 79 162 135 336 10:00 654 62 192 152 660 90 265 1,314 457 156 152 308 10:15 58 180 72 176 130 356 10:30 32 163 60 164 92 327 10:45 40 165 43 158 83 323 11:00 790 52 173 174 694 68 195 1,484 368 174 120 348 11:15 44 174 44 180 88 354 11:30 39 164 45 212 84 376 11:45 38 182 38 224 76 406 Totals 4,261 7,139 4,261 7,738 8,522 14,877 Split% 48.0 50.0 52.0 50.0 Day Totals 11,999 23,399 11,400 Day Splits 48.7 51.3 Peak Hour 08:00 04:45 07:45 12:45 08:15 04:45 Volume 791 1,095 747 1,028 1,507 1,972 Factor 0.90 0.98 0.89 0.93 0.93 0.97 Data File : D1108011 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location Date: : W/O STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD Segment 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 359 210 847 47 158 251 889 517 1,736 121 461 168 12:15 219 49 196 64 415 113 12:30 196 32 236 100 432 132 12:45 222 30 206 74 428 104 01:00 184 215 883 21 76 262 1,004 260 1,887 64 477 85 01:15 234 24 250 41 484 65 01:30 220 20 265 42 485 62 01:45 214 11 227 37 441 48 02:00 116 229 958 12 56 238 957 172 1,915 39 467 51 02:15 257 21 216 28 473 49 02:30 216 13 266 25 482 38 02:45 256 10 237 24 493 34 03:00 51 259 1,060 13 60 248 1,172 111 2,232 6 507 19 03:15 262 16 264 13 526 29 03:30 283 17 338 16 621 33 03:45 256 14 322 16 578 30 04:00 117 240 1,042 19 139 285 1,226 256 2,268 15 525 34 04:15 266 24 297 20 563 44 04:30 272 34 316 42 588 76 04:45 264 62 328 40 592 102 05:00 390 290 1,210 80 428 385 1,345 818 2,555 67 675 147 05:15 284 101 362 71 646 172 05:30 324 115 306 118 630 233 05:45 312 132 292 134 604 266 06:00 668 296 1,201 112 490 283 1,038 1,158 2,239 132 579 244 06:15 327 126 260 141 587 267 06:30 310 126 243 169 553 295 06:45 268 126 252 226 520 352 07:00 993 264 833 162 707 206 796 1,700 1,629 203 470 365 07:15 203 160 216 224 419 384 07:30 189 193 204 272 393 465 07:45 177 192 170 294 347 486 08:00 925 182 586 173 802 164 618 1,727 1,204 274 346 447 08:15 150 190 180 234 330 424 08:30 122 230 142 202 264 432 08:45 132 209 132 215 264 424 09:00 722 148 634 234 882 174 900 1,604 1,534 188 322 422 09:15 144 233 210 180 354 413 09:30 158 207 246 176 404 383 09:45 184 208 270 178 454 386 10:00 680 205 732 218 875 264 758 1,555 1,490 142 469 360 10:15 187 215 208 186 395 401 10:30 167 228 152 164 319 392 10:45 173 214 134 188 307 402 11:00 718 166 562 222 878 104 323 1,596 885 152 270 374 11:15 135 238 84 190 219 428 11:30 133 236 81 190 214 426 11:45 128 182 54 186 182 368 Totals 5,923 10,548 5,551 11,026 11,474 21,574 Split% 48.9 48.4 51.1 51.6 Day Totals 16,577 33,048 16,471 Day Splits 49.8 50.2 Peak Hour 07:30 05:30 10:45 04:30 07:30 05:00 Volume 1,074 1,259 910 1,391 1,822 2,555 Factor 0.91 0.96 0.96 0.90 0.94 0.95 Data File : D1108017 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : KATELLA AVENUE Location Date: : W/O STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD Segment 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: EB WB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 387 230 888 58 147 210 878 534 1,766 116 440 174 12:15 206 38 249 88 455 126 12:30 214 24 198 87 412 111 12:45 238 27 221 96 459 123 01:00 201 202 856 32 80 216 949 281 1,805 57 418 89 01:15 226 15 250 52 476 67 01:30 220 18 235 48 455 66 01:45 208 15 248 44 456 59 02:00 112 231 886 20 84 238 1,032 196 1,918 46 469 66 02:15 180 24 250 24 430 48 02:30 259 18 248 26 507 44 02:45 216 22 296 16 512 38 03:00 57 220 866 13 81 247 1,131 138 1,997 16 467 29 03:15 190 20 282 9 472 29 03:30 224 29 314 16 538 45 03:45 232 19 288 16 520 35 04:00 130 228 959 24 169 331 1,300 299 2,259 24 559 48 04:15 224 28 334 18 558 46 04:30 245 65 314 46 559 111 04:45 262 52 321 42 583 94 05:00 390 282 1,120 87 444 396 1,440 834 2,560 48 678 135 05:15 310 106 396 75 706 181 05:30 274 128 328 129 602 257 05:45 254 123 320 138 574 261 06:00 641 262 819 114 557 280 961 1,198 1,780 124 542 238 06:15 203 146 256 150 459 296 06:30 204 144 220 172 424 316 06:45 150 153 205 195 355 348 07:00 995 178 677 166 693 204 792 1,688 1,469 210 382 376 07:15 168 156 228 231 396 387 07:30 175 168 180 274 355 442 07:45 156 203 180 280 336 483 08:00 932 160 628 203 892 204 662 1,824 1,290 268 364 471 08:15 150 235 138 229 288 464 08:30 156 234 178 226 334 460 08:45 162 220 142 209 304 429 09:00 693 150 573 206 847 159 592 1,540 1,165 184 309 390 09:15 152 230 171 163 323 393 09:30 122 190 146 188 268 378 09:45 149 221 116 158 265 379 10:00 739 164 690 219 877 122 457 1,616 1,147 158 286 377 10:15 152 230 120 172 272 402 10:30 182 211 133 207 315 418 10:45 192 217 82 202 274 419 11:00 792 160 603 220 911 84 278 1,703 881 190 244 410 11:15 148 243 76 189 224 432 11:30 164 207 62 190 226 397 11:45 131 241 56 223 187 464 Totals 6,069 9,565 5,782 10,472 11,851 20,037 Split% 47.7 48.8 52.3 51.2 Day Totals 16,254 31,888 15,634 Day Splits 49.0 51.0 Peak Hour 07:15 04:45 11:00 04:45 07:45 04:45 Volume 1,053 1,128 911 1,441 1,878 2,569 Factor 0.94 0.91 0.94 0.91 0.97 0.91 Data File : D1108017 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : MAIN STREET Location Date: : S/O KATELLA AVENUE Segment 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: NB SB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 72 154 597 15 40 122 471 112 1,068 22 276 37 12:15 144 8 94 13 238 21 12:30 151 8 118 19 269 27 12:45 148 9 137 18 285 27 01:00 35 154 508 8 20 141 539 55 1,047 16 295 24 01:15 117 6 142 6 259 12 01:30 122 2 130 5 252 7 01:45 115 4 126 8 241 12 02:00 40 130 546 2 10 100 426 50 972 16 230 18 02:15 154 3 106 3 260 6 02:30 138 1 118 13 256 14 02:45 124 4 102 8 226 12 03:00 29 154 618 2 24 98 428 53 1,046 8 252 10 03:15 146 4 105 4 251 8 03:30 172 4 123 9 295 13 03:45 146 14 102 8 248 22 04:00 64 194 781 7 81 94 474 145 1,255 12 288 19 04:15 204 8 118 12 322 20 04:30 192 24 136 24 328 48 04:45 191 42 126 16 317 58 05:00 123 212 757 27 140 124 416 263 1,173 18 336 45 05:15 179 26 102 28 281 54 05:30 192 36 92 29 284 65 05:45 174 51 98 48 272 99 06:00 183 147 489 46 285 99 335 468 824 40 246 86 06:15 130 60 96 42 226 102 06:30 108 76 62 48 170 124 06:45 104 103 78 53 182 156 07:00 329 106 319 116 634 74 249 963 568 57 180 173 07:15 69 162 66 76 135 238 07:30 74 154 70 110 144 264 07:45 70 202 39 86 109 288 08:00 371 58 218 168 587 44 171 958 389 96 102 264 08:15 56 154 50 88 106 242 08:30 60 150 38 96 98 246 08:45 44 115 39 91 83 206 09:00 371 54 216 89 368 30 147 739 363 94 84 183 09:15 44 112 35 84 79 196 09:30 56 90 36 92 92 182 09:45 62 77 46 101 108 178 10:00 424 54 130 90 400 33 93 824 223 92 87 182 10:15 32 89 33 102 65 191 10:30 28 123 13 114 41 237 10:45 16 98 14 116 30 214 11:00 543 11 63 84 389 19 90 932 153 135 30 219 11:15 10 94 15 110 25 204 11:30 24 103 24 147 48 250 11:45 18 108 32 151 50 259 Totals 2,584 5,242 2,978 3,839 5,562 9,081 Split% 57.7 53.5 42.3 46.5 Day Totals 6,817 14,643 7,826 Day Splits 53.4 46.6 Peak Hour 11:00 04:15 07:15 12:45 07:30 04:15 Volume 543 799 686 550 1,058 1,303 Factor 0.90 0.94 0.85 0.97 0.92 0.97 Data File : D1108021 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : MAIN STREET Location Date: : S/O KATELLA AVENUE Segment 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: NB SB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 35 162 602 14 37 156 608 72 1,210 16 318 30 12:15 134 8 154 9 288 17 12:30 144 9 145 5 289 14 12:45 162 6 153 5 315 11 01:00 19 128 549 4 19 130 548 38 1,097 11 258 15 01:15 122 9 141 2 263 11 01:30 156 3 133 2 289 5 01:45 143 3 144 4 287 7 02:00 22 152 603 3 11 100 432 33 1,035 6 252 9 02:15 151 2 116 1 267 3 02:30 168 2 112 5 280 7 02:45 132 4 104 10 236 14 03:00 23 158 622 4 20 106 461 43 1,083 4 264 8 03:15 128 2 108 8 236 10 03:30 184 2 132 7 316 9 03:45 152 12 115 4 267 16 04:00 43 216 777 8 71 106 494 114 1,271 6 322 14 04:15 174 7 122 10 296 17 04:30 224 22 138 15 362 37 04:45 163 34 128 12 291 46 05:00 106 214 761 20 164 110 430 270 1,191 14 324 34 05:15 199 34 123 18 322 52 05:30 184 50 83 29 267 79 05:45 164 60 114 45 278 105 06:00 205 164 510 39 297 87 373 502 883 30 251 69 06:15 136 68 108 36 244 104 06:30 104 79 98 59 202 138 06:45 106 111 80 80 186 191 07:00 345 102 323 121 759 72 230 1,104 553 76 174 197 07:15 77 150 62 84 139 234 07:30 84 230 46 92 130 322 07:45 60 258 50 93 110 351 08:00 405 60 241 222 878 44 168 1,283 409 104 104 326 08:15 76 254 36 100 112 354 08:30 68 204 56 91 124 295 08:45 37 198 32 110 69 308 09:00 373 42 151 166 562 38 137 935 288 89 80 255 09:15 38 170 37 84 75 254 09:30 38 118 27 102 65 220 09:45 33 108 35 98 68 206 10:00 435 46 144 116 435 36 115 870 259 109 82 225 10:15 28 115 33 114 61 229 10:30 40 100 26 104 66 204 10:45 30 104 20 108 50 212 11:00 571 15 72 166 584 18 79 1,155 151 143 33 309 11:15 23 136 18 129 41 265 11:30 20 142 26 154 46 296 11:45 14 140 17 145 31 285 Totals 2,582 5,355 3,837 4,075 6,419 9,430 Split% 56.8 59.8 43.2 40.2 Day Totals 7,912 15,849 7,937 Day Splits 50.1 49.9 Peak Hour 11:00 04:30 07:30 12:00 07:30 04:30 Volume 571 800 964 608 1,353 1,299 Factor 0.93 0.89 0.93 0.97 0.96 0.90 Data File : D1108021 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : PHOENIX CLUB DRIVE Location: Date: : S/O BALL ROAD Segment: 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: SB NB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 4 44 183 0 5 66 214 9 397 0 110 0 12:15 46 0 48 0 94 0 12:30 51 2 50 2 101 4 12:45 42 3 50 2 92 5 01:00 3 44 142 3 3 42 172 6 314 0 86 3 01:15 27 0 44 0 71 0 01:30 27 0 38 2 65 2 01:45 44 0 48 1 92 1 02:00 2 34 145 1 3 41 191 5 336 0 75 1 02:15 38 0 47 0 85 0 02:30 30 0 60 0 90 0 02:45 43 2 43 2 86 4 03:00 3 14 107 0 4 59 205 7 312 1 73 1 03:15 28 3 58 1 86 4 03:30 29 1 40 1 69 2 03:45 36 0 48 0 84 0 04:00 0 31 126 0 0 54 174 0 300 0 85 0 04:15 26 0 43 0 69 0 04:30 33 0 33 0 66 0 04:45 36 0 44 0 80 0 05:00 11 44 169 0 2 36 144 13 313 0 80 0 05:15 39 0 40 0 79 0 05:30 38 0 34 4 72 4 05:45 48 2 34 7 82 9 06:00 25 34 160 2 7 38 144 32 304 1 72 3 06:15 38 0 38 0 76 0 06:30 48 2 40 10 88 12 06:45 40 3 28 14 68 17 07:00 119 27 87 4 26 36 122 145 209 22 63 26 07:15 24 6 36 25 60 31 07:30 23 8 26 28 49 36 07:45 13 8 24 44 37 52 08:00 151 8 16 18 56 28 136 207 152 39 36 57 08:15 8 10 36 28 44 38 08:30 0 16 36 40 36 56 08:45 0 12 36 44 36 56 09:00 163 0 10 15 65 58 141 228 151 38 58 53 09:15 2 14 26 36 28 50 09:30 4 18 32 41 36 59 09:45 4 18 25 48 29 66 10:00 211 2 4 26 118 25 87 329 91 50 27 76 10:15 0 30 15 42 15 72 10:30 2 28 23 54 25 82 10:45 0 34 24 65 24 99 11:00 218 0 11 32 127 17 37 345 48 57 17 89 11:15 7 32 9 62 16 94 11:30 0 38 5 50 5 88 11:45 4 25 6 49 10 74 Totals 910 1,160 416 1,767 1,326 2,927 Split% 39.6 31.4 60.4 68.6 Day Totals 2,183 4,253 2,070 Day Splits 48.7 51.3 Peak Hour 10:30 12:00 10:45 02:30 10:45 12:00 Volume 238 183 136 220 370 397 Factor 0.92 0.90 0.89 0.92 0.93 0.90 Data File : D1108026 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : PHOENIX CLUB DRIVE Location: Date: : S/O BALL ROAD Segment: 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: SB NB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 2 46 189 1 5 37 191 7 380 0 83 1 12:15 63 0 52 1 115 1 12:30 33 4 54 1 87 5 12:45 47 0 48 0 95 0 01:00 1 53 167 1 5 55 205 6 372 0 108 1 01:15 36 2 61 1 97 3 01:30 45 1 48 0 93 1 01:45 33 1 41 0 74 1 02:00 1 29 87 0 2 40 228 3 315 0 69 0 02:15 26 2 54 1 80 3 02:30 14 0 68 0 82 0 02:45 18 0 66 0 84 0 03:00 0 10 107 0 0 72 204 0 311 0 82 0 03:15 30 0 44 0 74 0 03:30 30 0 46 0 76 0 03:45 37 0 42 0 79 0 04:00 1 35 130 0 0 52 202 1 332 0 87 0 04:15 36 0 47 0 83 0 04:30 38 0 54 0 92 0 04:45 21 0 49 1 70 1 05:00 6 23 94 0 4 58 203 10 297 0 81 0 05:15 28 0 49 3 77 3 05:30 18 3 50 2 68 5 05:45 25 1 46 1 71 2 06:00 26 26 114 0 4 42 144 30 258 4 68 4 06:15 26 0 30 4 56 4 06:30 35 0 44 9 79 9 06:45 27 4 28 9 55 13 07:00 116 38 91 4 24 32 104 140 195 20 70 24 07:15 22 6 22 22 44 28 07:30 14 6 26 31 40 37 07:45 17 8 24 43 41 51 08:00 182 8 27 24 80 26 80 262 107 42 34 66 08:15 11 20 20 48 31 68 08:30 4 22 19 40 23 62 08:45 4 14 15 52 19 66 09:00 174 9 19 17 73 25 95 247 114 57 34 74 09:15 4 20 18 38 22 58 09:30 2 14 33 40 35 54 09:45 4 22 19 39 23 61 10:00 192 3 8 25 122 17 59 314 67 42 20 67 10:15 0 32 20 56 20 88 10:30 3 33 9 48 12 81 10:45 2 32 13 46 15 78 11:00 194 2 8 40 145 9 19 339 27 60 11 100 11:15 1 36 3 49 4 85 11:30 4 38 2 48 6 86 11:45 1 31 5 37 6 68 Totals 895 1,041 464 1,734 1,359 2,775 Split% 37.5 34.1 62.5 65.9 Day Totals 2,198 4,134 1,936 Day Splits 46.8 53.2 Peak Hour 10:15 12:15 10:45 02:15 10:45 12:15 Volume 210 196 146 260 349 405 Factor 0.88 0.78 0.91 0.90 0.87 0.88 Data File : D1108026 ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD Location: Date: : N/O KATELLA AVENUE Segment: 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: NB SB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 125 197 766 45 94 200 706 219 1,472 38 397 83 12:15 190 19 180 28 370 47 12:30 187 18 154 37 341 55 12:45 192 12 172 22 364 34 01:00 83 223 823 9 35 187 712 118 1,535 28 410 37 01:15 216 10 185 20 401 30 01:30 178 11 198 24 376 35 01:45 206 5 142 11 348 16 02:00 117 169 812 8 33 154 654 150 1,466 30 323 38 02:15 222 10 156 37 378 47 02:30 218 5 178 28 396 33 02:45 203 10 166 22 369 32 03:00 62 208 962 12 47 160 711 109 1,673 16 368 28 03:15 226 12 159 13 385 25 03:30 274 11 187 11 461 22 03:45 254 12 205 22 459 34 04:00 96 270 1,105 13 74 222 860 170 1,965 15 492 28 04:15 257 18 188 20 445 38 04:30 314 22 228 31 542 53 04:45 264 21 222 30 486 51 05:00 172 323 1,152 26 152 314 1,072 324 2,224 29 637 55 05:15 278 26 278 26 556 52 05:30 243 40 260 51 503 91 05:45 308 60 220 66 528 126 06:00 330 233 818 48 335 242 869 665 1,687 60 475 108 06:15 208 60 210 64 418 124 06:30 203 91 227 86 430 177 06:45 174 136 190 120 364 256 07:00 709 124 492 136 791 171 529 1,500 1,021 158 295 294 07:15 116 175 148 154 264 329 07:30 138 240 112 159 250 399 07:45 114 240 98 238 212 478 08:00 733 118 433 194 754 98 324 1,487 757 196 216 390 08:15 114 204 84 200 198 404 08:30 86 174 78 170 164 344 08:45 115 182 64 167 179 349 09:00 699 112 655 150 506 67 293 1,205 948 187 179 337 09:15 177 144 76 165 253 309 09:30 140 130 55 182 195 312 09:45 226 82 95 165 321 247 10:00 508 160 479 160 592 62 218 1,100 697 124 222 284 10:15 136 124 61 127 197 251 10:30 89 153 50 126 139 279 10:45 94 155 45 131 139 286 11:00 591 52 170 152 612 32 113 1,203 283 134 84 286 11:15 38 132 34 156 72 288 11:30 51 174 28 144 79 318 11:45 29 154 19 157 48 311 Totals 4,225 8,667 4,025 7,061 8,250 15,728 Split% 55.1 48.8 44.9 51.2 Day Totals 11,086 23,978 12,892 Day Splits 53.8 46.2 Peak Hour 07:45 04:30 07:30 04:45 07:30 05:00 Volume 804 1,179 878 1,074 1,671 2,224 Factor 0.84 0.91 0.91 0.86 0.87 0.87 Data File : D1108018 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD Location: Date: : N/O KATELLA AVENUE Segment: 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: NB SB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 92 208 933 28 73 168 710 165 1,643 21 376 49 12:15 250 22 184 29 434 51 12:30 224 9 180 20 404 29 12:45 251 14 178 22 429 36 01:00 82 234 831 13 40 153 683 122 1,514 22 387 35 01:15 213 7 184 27 397 34 01:30 205 9 179 19 384 28 01:45 179 11 167 14 346 25 02:00 76 206 858 12 34 159 675 110 1,533 30 365 42 02:15 214 6 156 16 370 22 02:30 238 7 194 16 432 23 02:45 200 9 166 14 366 23 03:00 63 223 904 3 46 196 726 109 1,630 19 419 22 03:15 196 12 166 14 362 26 03:30 271 16 190 14 461 30 03:45 214 15 174 16 388 31 04:00 96 238 1,044 6 71 222 867 167 1,911 28 460 34 04:15 248 14 186 14 434 28 04:30 246 29 242 24 488 53 04:45 312 22 217 30 529 52 05:00 203 320 1,229 26 167 252 910 370 2,139 35 572 61 05:15 361 31 224 30 585 61 05:30 302 62 256 60 558 122 05:45 246 48 178 78 424 126 06:00 400 272 774 56 341 212 641 741 1,415 80 484 136 06:15 200 66 188 67 388 133 06:30 182 82 116 107 298 189 06:45 120 137 125 146 245 283 07:00 729 120 506 158 905 118 402 1,634 908 134 238 292 07:15 144 198 114 159 258 357 07:30 128 273 84 190 212 463 07:45 114 276 86 246 200 522 08:00 888 92 412 220 880 79 308 1,768 720 223 171 443 08:15 104 209 87 231 191 440 08:30 108 225 74 214 182 439 08:45 108 226 68 220 176 446 09:00 657 94 353 178 642 54 240 1,299 593 167 148 345 09:15 102 152 62 150 164 302 09:30 75 162 64 168 139 330 09:45 82 150 60 172 142 322 10:00 610 84 290 138 553 53 187 1,163 477 152 137 290 10:15 71 135 55 171 126 306 10:30 80 134 42 127 122 261 10:45 55 146 37 160 92 306 11:00 706 65 168 166 640 23 139 1,346 307 158 88 324 11:15 29 160 44 160 73 320 11:30 38 152 40 184 78 336 11:45 36 162 32 204 68 366 Totals 4,602 8,302 4,392 6,488 8,994 14,790 Split% 56.1 48.8 43.9 51.2 Day Totals 10,880 23,784 12,904 Day Splits 54.3 45.7 Peak Hour 07:45 04:45 07:30 04:45 07:30 04:45 Volume 914 1,295 978 949 1,868 2,244 Factor 0.93 0.90 0.89 0.93 0.89 0.96 Data File : D1108018 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD Location: Date: : S/O KATELLA AVENUE Segment: 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: NB SB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 160 221 841 30 97 179 805 257 1,646 40 400 70 12:15 220 18 212 60 432 78 12:30 198 25 180 32 378 57 12:45 202 24 234 28 436 52 01:00 94 198 746 13 55 216 791 149 1,537 24 414 37 01:15 211 18 199 27 410 45 01:30 168 11 192 32 360 43 01:45 169 13 184 11 353 24 02:00 75 188 745 12 48 186 731 123 1,476 26 374 38 02:15 191 12 176 17 367 29 02:30 180 10 192 23 372 33 02:45 186 14 177 9 363 23 03:00 48 244 944 15 61 178 753 109 1,697 14 422 29 03:15 204 14 160 3 364 17 03:30 250 16 207 16 457 32 03:45 246 16 208 15 454 31 04:00 79 300 1,140 17 87 216 930 166 2,070 16 516 33 04:15 291 18 228 11 519 29 04:30 266 23 228 24 494 47 04:45 283 29 258 28 541 57 05:00 133 352 1,241 32 182 314 1,252 315 2,493 18 666 50 05:15 306 36 326 28 632 64 05:30 308 44 316 34 624 78 05:45 275 70 296 53 571 123 06:00 284 268 886 76 525 334 1,460 809 2,346 45 602 121 06:15 217 112 348 60 565 172 06:30 214 139 404 80 618 219 06:45 187 198 374 99 561 297 07:00 569 165 634 174 937 308 909 1,506 1,543 119 473 293 07:15 190 199 272 138 462 337 07:30 132 276 175 128 307 404 07:45 147 288 154 184 301 472 08:00 630 134 503 239 897 120 389 1,527 892 170 254 409 08:15 124 246 98 172 222 418 08:30 128 211 102 157 230 368 08:45 117 201 69 131 186 332 09:00 595 143 944 152 598 94 342 1,193 1,286 160 237 312 09:15 238 172 80 148 318 320 09:30 232 136 88 142 320 278 09:45 331 138 80 145 411 283 10:00 591 228 588 142 590 77 259 1,181 847 146 305 288 10:15 201 134 68 165 269 299 10:30 92 156 62 145 154 301 10:45 67 158 52 135 119 293 11:00 674 39 151 155 639 48 169 1,313 320 136 87 291 11:15 36 140 36 172 72 312 11:30 46 162 50 166 96 328 11:45 30 182 35 200 65 382 Totals 3,932 9,363 4,716 8,790 8,648 18,153 Split% 51.6 54.5 48.4 45.5 Day Totals 13,506 26,801 13,295 Day Splits 49.6 50.4 Peak Hour 07:45 04:45 07:30 06:00 07:30 05:00 Volume 683 1,249 1,049 1,460 1,703 2,493 Factor 0.93 0.89 0.91 0.90 0.90 0.94 Data File : D1108019 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD Location: Date: : S/O KATELLA AVENUE Segment: 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client: Interval Combined Day: NB SB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 90 230 845 40 118 211 833 208 1,678 29 441 69 12:15 225 28 224 24 449 52 12:30 178 30 186 21 364 51 12:45 212 20 212 16 424 36 01:00 79 202 722 23 81 198 752 160 1,474 31 400 54 01:15 177 20 198 18 375 38 01:30 180 22 178 16 358 38 01:45 163 16 178 14 341 30 02:00 53 164 757 11 31 166 700 84 1,457 17 330 28 02:15 196 5 156 8 352 13 02:30 200 8 174 14 374 22 02:45 197 7 204 14 401 21 03:00 39 206 870 6 45 192 732 84 1,602 9 398 15 03:15 198 18 174 11 372 29 03:30 248 11 193 6 441 17 03:45 218 10 173 13 391 23 04:00 84 268 1,070 7 76 222 856 160 1,926 16 490 23 04:15 264 14 194 22 458 36 04:30 250 24 242 20 492 44 04:45 288 31 198 26 486 57 05:00 144 314 1,206 38 195 268 966 339 2,172 23 582 61 05:15 326 32 226 29 552 61 05:30 328 57 272 34 600 91 05:45 238 68 200 58 438 126 06:00 317 282 836 69 471 240 712 788 1,548 52 522 121 06:15 220 126 202 66 422 192 06:30 189 102 130 79 319 181 06:45 145 174 140 120 285 294 07:00 593 167 551 190 1,048 124 432 1,641 983 118 291 308 07:15 142 234 120 136 262 370 07:30 140 296 78 171 218 467 07:45 102 328 110 168 212 496 08:00 648 108 397 264 959 104 379 1,607 776 188 212 452 08:15 87 254 98 170 185 424 08:30 108 229 95 156 203 385 08:45 94 212 82 134 176 346 09:00 599 100 392 185 681 84 327 1,280 719 163 184 348 09:15 108 162 74 150 182 312 09:30 88 164 89 142 177 306 09:45 96 170 80 144 176 314 10:00 581 96 283 118 575 88 275 1,156 558 143 184 261 10:15 63 142 60 170 123 312 10:30 80 152 56 133 136 285 10:45 44 163 71 135 115 298 11:00 676 55 199 158 664 68 229 1,340 428 132 123 290 11:15 47 171 67 172 114 343 11:30 43 173 56 169 99 342 11:45 54 162 38 203 92 365 Totals 3,903 8,128 4,944 7,193 8,847 15,321 Split% 53.1 55.9 46.9 44.1 Day Totals 12,137 24,168 12,031 Day Splits 49.8 50.2 Peak Hour 07:30 04:45 07:30 05:00 07:30 04:45 Volume 697 1,256 1,142 966 1,839 2,220 Factor 0.93 0.96 0.87 0.89 0.93 0.93 Data File : D1108019 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : SUNKIST STREET Location Date: : N/O CERRITOS AVENUE Segment 08/24/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: NB SB Wednesday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 19 56 221 3 14 38 218 33 439 5 94 8 12:15 72 6 57 5 129 11 12:30 54 1 55 7 109 8 12:45 39 4 68 2 107 6 01:00 20 35 201 4 11 70 204 31 405 4 105 8 01:15 52 1 46 3 98 4 01:30 52 2 52 9 104 11 01:45 62 4 36 4 98 8 02:00 6 66 247 1 12 52 191 18 438 2 118 3 02:15 46 1 50 0 96 1 02:30 76 6 52 2 128 8 02:45 59 4 37 2 96 6 03:00 6 74 403 4 15 51 230 21 633 2 125 6 03:15 76 2 53 3 129 5 03:30 149 3 60 1 209 4 03:45 104 6 66 0 170 6 04:00 25 109 371 9 52 60 233 77 604 5 169 14 04:15 78 6 64 2 142 8 04:30 100 12 51 12 151 24 04:45 84 25 58 6 142 31 05:00 56 147 416 14 116 66 259 172 675 17 213 31 05:15 98 22 64 13 162 35 05:30 98 24 60 8 158 32 05:45 73 56 69 18 142 74 06:00 83 86 226 50 248 56 251 331 477 24 142 74 06:15 52 47 72 18 124 65 06:30 52 66 62 14 114 80 06:45 36 85 61 27 97 112 07:00 145 48 161 93 485 38 104 630 265 26 86 119 07:15 56 122 32 37 88 159 07:30 26 132 13 32 39 164 07:45 31 138 21 50 52 188 08:00 150 35 103 98 344 16 50 494 153 50 51 148 08:15 30 90 16 36 46 126 08:30 20 102 5 32 25 134 08:45 18 54 13 32 31 86 09:00 121 29 165 64 230 10 36 351 201 30 39 94 09:15 29 48 10 26 39 74 09:30 36 62 10 31 46 93 09:45 71 56 6 34 77 90 10:00 143 41 107 46 174 6 26 317 133 38 47 84 10:15 38 39 8 34 46 73 10:30 15 47 7 33 22 80 10:45 13 42 5 38 18 80 11:00 142 19 52 45 185 5 16 327 68 37 24 82 11:15 16 40 4 39 20 79 11:30 8 54 2 36 10 90 11:45 9 46 5 30 14 76 Totals 916 2,673 1,886 1,818 2,802 4,491 Split% 59.5 67.3 40.5 32.7 Day Totals 3,704 7,293 3,589 Day Splits 49.2 50.8 Peak Hour 07:15 03:30 07:15 05:00 07:15 03:30 Volume 169 440 490 259 659 690 Factor 0.85 0.74 0.89 0.94 0.88 0.83 Data File : D1108023 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Studies, Inc. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste H Tustin, CA. 92780 ANAHEIM Site: : SUNKIST STREET Location Date: : N/O CERRITOS AVENUE Segment 08/25/11 : CITY OF ANAHEIM Client Interval Combined Day: NB SB Thursday Begin PM AM PM AM PM AM 12:00 24 70 244 3 7 48 229 31 473 9 118 12 12:15 58 0 60 9 118 9 12:30 58 0 55 4 113 4 12:45 58 4 66 2 124 6 01:00 14 49 222 3 10 60 192 24 414 5 109 8 01:15 52 2 48 2 100 4 01:30 52 1 56 7 108 8 01:45 69 4 28 0 97 4 02:00 14 54 254 3 9 56 205 23 459 5 110 8 02:15 63 3 48 3 111 6 02:30 70 1 43 2 113 3 02:45 67 2 58 4 125 6 03:00 6 89 424 2 12 44 217 18 641 4 133 6 03:15 106 2 51 0 157 2 03:30 133 2 54 0 187 2 03:45 96 6 68 2 164 8 04:00 27 113 541 2 54 64 257 81 798 6 177 8 04:15 108 5 53 5 161 10 04:30 140 16 66 7 206 23 04:45 180 31 74 9 254 40 05:00 51 196 762 16 122 70 265 173 1,027 7 266 23 05:15 202 26 63 10 265 36 05:30 204 26 60 8 264 34 05:45 160 54 72 26 232 80 06:00 71 122 293 36 220 65 195 291 488 12 187 48 06:15 78 47 52 14 130 61 06:30 46 58 48 25 94 83 06:45 47 79 30 20 77 99 07:00 119 48 153 121 546 18 91 665 244 23 66 144 07:15 39 137 27 32 66 169 07:30 37 144 16 30 53 174 07:45 29 144 30 34 59 178 08:00 200 32 97 138 461 23 63 661 160 54 55 192 08:15 20 125 21 48 41 173 08:30 22 98 9 56 31 154 08:45 23 100 10 42 33 142 09:00 129 24 99 68 262 14 48 391 147 34 38 102 09:15 36 71 12 33 48 104 09:30 20 63 11 32 31 95 09:45 19 60 11 30 30 90 10:00 145 16 62 58 228 8 31 373 93 28 24 86 10:15 23 60 7 37 30 97 10:30 13 62 3 44 16 106 10:45 10 48 13 36 23 84 11:00 168 13 57 36 159 4 16 327 73 50 17 86 11:15 20 32 2 38 22 70 11:30 13 41 0 42 13 83 11:45 11 50 10 38 21 88 Totals 968 3,208 2,090 1,809 3,058 5,017 Split% 63.9 68.3 36.1 31.7 Day Totals 3,899 8,075 4,176 Day Splits 51.7 48.3 Peak Hour 08:00 04:45 07:15 04:30 07:30 04:45 Volume 200 782 563 273 717 1,049 Factor 0.89 0.96 0.98 0.92 0.93 0.99 Data File : D1108023 * ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX C: EXISTING PEAK HOUR VOLUME AND SPEED ON STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM ---PAGE BREAK--- NHL peak hour event trips (14,021 attendance) 2,306 Counted Event Attendance Avg Seating Capacity Growth Factor Max Seating Capacity Growth Factor MLB peak hour event trips (25,462 attendance) 4,973 DUCKS 14,021 11,264 0.80 18,900 1.35 MLB 25,462 29,402 1.15 Summary of Year 2011 Freeway Ramp Volumes P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour 1 I-5 SB on-ramp at Lincoln 1% 23 0% 0 19 27 0 2 I-5 SB off-ramp to Machester/Disneyland Dr. 0% 0 0% 0 0 0 0 3 I-5 SB on-ramp from Machester/Disneyland Dr. 0% 0 2% 99 0 0 134 4 I-5 SB off-ramp to Harbor 1% 23 0% 0 19 27 0 5 I-5 SB off-ramp to Katella/Orangewood 2% 46 3% 149 37 53 201 6 I-5 NB off-ramp to Katella NA pending NA pending 7 SR-57 NB on-ramp from I-5 5% 115 0% 0 93 133 0 8 SR-57 NB on-ramp from chapman WB 5% 115 0% 0 93 133 0 9 SR-57 NB off-ramp to orange 1% 23 0% 0 19 27 0 10 SR-57 NB on-ramp from orangewood WB 2% 46 0% 0 37 53 0 11 SR-57 NB off-ramp to Katella NA 675 NA 235 542 779 317 12 SR-57 NB on-ramp from Katella NA 0 NA 95 0 0 128 13 SR-57 NB off-ramp to Ball NA 148 NA -121 119 171 -163 14 SR-57 SB on-ramp from SR-91 WB 2% 46 5% 249 37 53 335 15 SR-57 SB off-ramp to Lincoln 0% 0 0% 0 0 0 0 16 SR-57 SB on-ramp from Lincoln 0 0 0 17 SR-57 SB off-ramp to Ball NA 513 NA -69 412 593 -93 18 SR-57 SB on-ramp from Ball NA 43 NA 29 35 50 39 19 SR-57 SB off-ramp to katella NA 353 NA 688 283 407 927 P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour ( 6-7 PM) P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour 3 I-5 SB on-ramp from Machester/Disneyland Dr. 900 660 660 790 660 790 4 I-5 SB off-ramp to Harbor 640 470 490 490 500 500 5 I-5 SB off-ramp to Katella 200 150 190 390 200 400 6 I-5 NB off-ramp to Katella 1,120 960 960 960 960 960 8 SR-57 NB on-ramp from chapman WB 330 270 360 360 400 400 9 SR-57 NB off-ramp to orangewood 280 225 240 240 250 250 10 SR-57 NB on-ramp from orangewood WB 280 230 270 270 280 280 11 SR-57 NB off-ramp to Katella NA 460 1,000 1,320 1,240 1,560 12 SR-57 NB on-ramp from Katella WB NA 200 200 330 200 330 13 SR-57 NB off-ramp to Ball NA 560 680 680 730 730 14 SR-57 SB on-ramp from SR-91 WB 1,530 924 960 1,300 980 1,320 15 SR-57 SB off-ramp to Lincoln 1,030 750 750 750 750 750 17 SR-57 SB off-ramp to Ball NA 690 1,100 1,100 1,280 1,280 18 SR-57 SB on-ramp from Ball EB NA 340 370 410 390 430 19 SR-57 SB off-ramp to katella NA 580 860 1,790 990 1,920 XX Calculated from ramp termini intersection volumes Ramp volume includes the off-ramp volumes to Manchester/Orangewood NB turning movement multiplied by the split from the model. Existing + Max HC Existing + Max HC + Avg MLB Calculated Event Trips Honda Center Event (Average Attendance) MLB Event(Average Attendance) New Honda Center (Maximum Attendance) EVENT TRIPS Computed NHL Event Trips (14,021 attendance) HC TD % based on Select Link Angel Stadium TD % based on Select Link Ramp Segment ID Computed MLB Event Trips (25,462 attendance) Ramp Segment Existing 2011 No Event Existing + Avg HC Existing 2008 (PTMLUP) Existing + Avg HC + Avg MLB ---PAGE BREAK--- Counted Event Attendance Avg Seating Capacity Growth Factor Max Seating Capacity Growth Factor NHL peak hour event trips (14,021 attendance) 2306 14,021 11,264 0.80 18,900 1.35 MLB peak hour event trips (25,462 attendance) 4973 25,462 29,402 1.15 Summary of Year 2011 Freeway Mainline Volumes and Speeds P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour 1 I-5 SB b/w Lincoln & Machester/disneyland dr. 3% 69 3% 149 56 80 201 2 I-5 SB b/w Disneyland Dr. & Harbor 3% 69 5% 249 56 80 335 3 I-5 SB b/w Harbor & Disney way 3% 69 5% 249 56 80 335 4 I-5 SB b/w Disney Way & Katella 2% 46 3% 149 37 53 201 5 I-5 NB b/w Katella & Gene Autry Way 0% 0 0% 0 0 0 0 6 SR-57 NB before connector from I-5 6% 138 0% 0 111 160 0 7 SR-57 NB b/w I-5 and Chapman loop on-ramp 11% 254 0% 0 204 293 0 8 SR-57 NB b/w Chapman & Orangewood 18% 415 0% 0 333 479 0 9 SR-57 NB b/w Orangewood & Katella 20% 461 0% 0 371 533 0 10 SR-57 NB b/w Katella & Ball 1% 23 0% 0 19 27 0 11 SR-57 SB b/w SR-91 & Lincoln 9% 208 7% 348 167 240 469 12 SR-57 SB b/w Lincoln & Ball 9% 208 10% 497 167 240 670 13 SR-57 SB b/w Ball & katella 1% 23 9% 448 19 27 603 P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour 7PM) P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour 1 I-5 SB b/w Lincoln & Machester/disneyland dr. 5,960 6,020 6,220 6,040 6,240 68 2 I-5 SB b/w Disneyland Dr. & Harbor 7,880 6,480 6,540 6,880 6,560 6,900 73 3 I-5 SB b/w Harbor & Disney way 6,310 6,370 6,710 6,390 6,730 69 8 SR-57 NB b/w Chapman & Orangewood 8,770 7,010 7,340 7,340 7,490 7,490 69 9 SR-57 NB b/w Orangewood & Katella 7,790 6,230 6,600 6,600 6,760 6,760 70 10 SR-57 NB b/w Katella & Ball 7,950 6,420 6,440 6,440 6,450 6,450 64 11 SR-57 SB b/w SR-91 & Lincoln 7,390 5,700 5,870 6,340 5,940 6,410 65 12 SR-57 SB b/w Lincoln & Ball 7,370 6,540 6,710 7,380 6,780 7,450 69 13 SR-57 SB b/w Ball & katella 7,380 5,360 5,380 5,980 5,390 5,990 65 Source: xx Freeway No Event Volumes calculated based on adjacent segment growth rate Freeway No Event Volumes obtained from PeMs data April 7th 2011 (6-7 PM) Existing Speed Honda Center Event (Average Attendance) New Honda Center (Maximum Attendance) MLB Event(Average Attendance) Calculated Event Trips Existing + Max HC EVENT TRIPS ID Mainline Volumes Existing No Event 2011 Existing + Max HC + Avg MLB HC TD % based on Select Link Computed NHL Event Trips (14,021 attendance) Angel Stadium TD % based on Select Link Computed MLB Event Trips (25,462 attendance) Mainline Volumes ID Existing 2008 (PTMLUP) Existing + Avg HC Existing + Avg HC + Avg MLB ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX D: HONDA CENTER EVENT TRIPS ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices (PROJECT TRIPS) (AVERAGE ATTENDANCE HONDA CENTER EVENT TRIPS) ---PAGE BREAK--- Average Attendance Honda Center Event Peak Hour Trips L T R L T R L T R L T R 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 79 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 105 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 14 13 27 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 30 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 26 105 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim 52 52 132 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim 238 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 27 14 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 14 45 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 26 238 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 32 12 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 13 27 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 15 54 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 15 74 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 83 141 34 13 6 16 264 4 2 14 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 141 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 110 32 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 63 31 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 63 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 63 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 47 16 16 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 3 41 1 8 381 10 15 31 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 5 16 30 43 5 54 28 174 126 26 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 11 33 182 33 89 9 28 2 12 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 2 22 21 15 408 28 76 43 97 26 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Anaheim 328 186 9 24 113 19 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim 240 112 498 22 111 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps* Anaheim 41 107 370 3 106 19 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim 55 619 724 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 35 36 10 14 4 814 370 109 46 193 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 9 2 6 2 10 10 24 411 78 106 4 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue Orange 29 5 27 43 490 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 10 59 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 58 65 16 30 54 1 14 7 22 334 5 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Orange 90 130 2 2 15 36 3 3 9 1 27 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 10 49 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Orange 223 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Orange 25 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 223 40 Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Orange 167 41 Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Orange 167 42 Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Orange 83 84 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Orange 84 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Orange 84 Eastbound Westbound ID Intersection Jurisdiction Northbound Southbound ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report - Appendices (PROJECT TRIPS) ---PAGE BREAK--- Peak Hour Project Trips L T R L T R L T R L T R 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 133 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 177 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 23 22 45 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 50 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 44 177 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim 89 88 222 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim 399 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 45 23 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 25 75 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 44 399 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 52 12 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 23 45 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 25 91 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 25 125 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 139 236 57 22 9 27 443 7 3 23 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 236 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 184 52 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 105 52 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 105 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 105 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 78 26 26 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 5 69 1 13 639 16 26 51 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 8 27 50 73 8 90 47 293 212 43 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 19 55 306 55 150 15 47 4 20 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 3 38 35 26 685 47 128 71 163 26 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Anaheim 0 550 311 15 40 190 32 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim 403 189 836 36 186 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps* Anaheim 69 0 179 621 5 178 32 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim 93 1,039 1,215 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 58 61 16 24 7 1,366 620 183 77 324 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 15 3 9 4 18 16 40 690 131 178 7 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue Orange 49 8 44 71 822 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 16 98 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 97 109 27 50 90 1 24 12 36 561 8 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Orange 151 218 4 3 26 61 5 5 15 1 46 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 16 82 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Orange 374 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Orange 40 42 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 374 40 Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Orange 281 41 Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Orange 281 42 Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Orange 140 141 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Orange 141 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Orange 141 Eastbound Westbound ID Intersection Jurisdiction Northbound Southbound ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX E: ANGEL STADIUM EVENT TRIPS (AVERAGE ATTENDANCE ANGEL STADIUM EVENT TRIPS) ---PAGE BREAK--- Average Attendance Angel Stadium Event Peak Hour Trips L T R L T R L T R L T R 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 85 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 127 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 42 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 42 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 212 6 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim 85 212 212 7 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim 509 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 42 42 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 42 509 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 100 12 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 93 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 187 93 93 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 468 42 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 36 126 92 113 355 21 48 233 319 385 152 16 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim 92 59 1,000 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 92 852 1,000 100 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 796 149 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 447 348 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 447 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 348 99 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim 98 16 37 2 9 99 240 102 98 293 115 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 45 134 3 52 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 1 31 16 3 3 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 15 6 39 24 126 26 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Anaheim 55 6 28 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim 537 258 162 30 216 20 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps* Anaheim 65 96 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim 52 219 641 58 185 52 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 2 14 8 52 25 66 849 290 202 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 16 7 2 3 12 47 10 50 6 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue Orange 10 6 6 391 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 1 17 10 262 17 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Orange 25 18 1 3 5 16 8 6 8 13 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Orange 262 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Orange 66 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange 66 164 40 Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Orange 164 41 Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Orange 164 42 Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Orange 33 33 98 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Orange 98 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Orange 98 Eastbound Westbound ID Intersection Jurisdiction Northbound Southbound ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Final Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX F: INTERSECTION LANE CONFIGURATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- L T R L T R L T R L T R Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 Without Project 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2 4 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2 4 0 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 0 2 3 1 2030 Without Project 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 0 2 4 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 0 2 4 0 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 2 1 2 3 1 1 3 0 1 3 1 2030 Without Project 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 3 1 1 3 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 2030 Without Project 2 3 1 2 3 0 1 1 0 2 0.5 1.5 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 0 1 1 0 2 0.5 1.5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2 3 1 2030 Without Project 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2 4 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2 4 1 Manchester Avenue (I-5 SB Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1.5 0 1.5 2 2 1 0 3 1 2 3 0 2030 Without Project 1.5 0 1.5 2 2 1 0 4 2 2 4 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 1.5 0 1.5 2 2 1 0 4 2 2 4 0 Anaheim Way (I-5 NB Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1.5 3 0.5 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 3.5 1.5 2030 Without Project 1.5 3 0.5 0 0 0 2 4 0 0 4.5 1.5 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 3 1 0 0 0 2 4 0 0 4.5 1.5 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 2 3 0 2030 Without Project 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 2 3 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 3 1 2 3 0 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2030 Without Project 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Without Project 2 2 1 2 1.5 1.5 2 4 0 2 5 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 2 1 2 1.5 1.5 2 5 0 2 5 0 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Existing Conditions 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 2030 Without Project 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 2.5 0.5 1 2.5 0.5 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 2.5 0.5 1 2.5 0.5 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 3 0 0 3 0 2030 Without Project 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 3 0 0 3 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 3 0 0 3 0 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 3 1 2 3 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Without Project 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 0 2 3 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 0 2 3 0 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2030 Without Project 2 3 0 2 3 0 2 2 1 2 2 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 3 0 2 3 0 2 2 1 2 2 0 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 2.5 1.5 2 3 1 2030 Without Project 2 3 1 2 2 2 3 3 1 2 4 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 2 2 4 1 2 4 1 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Anaheim Existing Conditions 0 3 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2030 Without Project 1 3 1 2 3 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 1 3 1 2 3 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 3 0 2 3 0 1.5 1.5 0 1 1 1 2030 Without Project 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 1.5 1.5 2 3 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 1.5 1.5 2 3 0 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim / Existing Conditions Orange 2 4 0 2 4 0 2 3 0 2 3 0 2030 Without Project 2 4 1 2 4 0 2 3 0 2 4 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 5 0 2 4 0 2 3 0 2 4 1 State College Boulevard / I-5 NB Ramps Orange Existing Conditions 2 4 F 1 4 1 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 2 2030 Without Project 2 4 F 1 4 1 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 2 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 4 F 1 4 1 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 2 State College Boulevard / I-5 SB Ramps Orange Existing Conditions 0 5 0 0 4 F 1.5 0.5 2 0 0 0 2030 Without Project 0 5 0 0 4 F 1.5 0.5 2 0 0 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 0 5 0 0 4 F 1.5 0.5 2 0 0 0 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 2 3 2 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 Without Project 2 3 2 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 2.5 1.5 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 3 2 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 2.5 1.5 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 1 2030 Without Project 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 2 0 1 2 0 2 3 0 2 2 1 2030 Without Project 1 2 1 2 2 0 2 3 0 2 3 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 1 3 1 2 2 0 2 4 0 2 3 1 17 23 22 18 19 20 21 12 13 14 15 16 8 9 10 11 6 7 Eastbound Westbound 3 4 5 1 2 ID Intersection Jurisdiction Northbound Southbound V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\TrafficAnalysis\ICU\HondaCenter-IsecLaneConfigs-010312.xlsx 1/4/2012 ---PAGE BREAK--- L T R L T R L T R L T R Eastbound Westbound ID Intersection Jurisdiction Northbound Southbound Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 2 0 0 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2030 Without Project 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 1 1 2 0.5 0.5 2 3 0 2 3 0 2030 Without Project 1 1 1 2 0.5 1.5 2 3 0 2 3 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 1 1 1 2 0.5 1.5 2 4 1 2 3 1 Ball Road / SR-57 SB Ramps Anaheim Existing Conditions 0 0 0 0.5 0 1.5 0 3 F 0 3 F 2030 Without Project 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 F 0 3 F 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 3 F 0 4 F SR-57 SB Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 0 3 F 0 3 F 2030 Without Project 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 F 0 3 F 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 4 F 0 4 F Ball Road / SR-57 NB Ramps Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 F 0 3 F 2030 Without Project 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 3 F 0 3 F 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 F 0 4 F SR-57 NB Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 3 F 0 3 1 2030 Without Project 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 3 F 0 3 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 1.5 0 2.5 0 0 0 0 3 F 0 4 1 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 1 0 1 0.5 1.5 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 Without Project 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 4 1 2 4 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 3 4 2 2 4 1 3 4 1 2 5 2 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 1.33 0.34 0.33 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 0 2030 Without Project 1.33 0.34 0.33 1 0 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 1.33 0.34 0.33 1 0 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 1.5 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 3 0 2030 Without Project 1.5 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 3 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 1.5 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 4 0 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 1.5 0.5 1 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2030 Without Project 2.5 0.5 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2.5 0.5 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 3 0 2030 Without Project 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 2 1 1 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 Main Street / Struck Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2030 Without Project 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 2030 Without Project 2 2 0 1 2 0 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 2 0 1 2 0 2 3 1 2 3 1 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Without Project 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 2030 Without Project 1 3 1 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 3 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 1 3 1 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 3 1 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 3 0 2 3 0 2030 Without Project 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 0.33 0.34 0.33 0.33 0.34 0.33 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Without Project 0.33 0.34 0.33 0.33 0.34 0.33 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 0.33 0.34 0.33 0.33 0.34 0.33 1 3 0 1 3 0 Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Without Project 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 2 3 1 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 Without Project 2 3 1 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 3 1 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 2.5 1.5 1 3 0 2030 Without Project 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 2.5 1.5 1 3 0 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 3 2 2 3 0 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 F 0 3 F 2030 Without Project 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 F 0 3 F 2030 With Project With Recommended Mitigation 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 F 0 3 F Source: City of Anaheim F - Free right-turn lane 44 38 40 41 42 43 36 37 39 33 34 35 31 30 32 28 26 29 27 24 25 V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\TrafficAnalysis\ICU\HondaCenter-IsecLaneConfigs-010312.xlsx 1/4/2012 ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX G-1: ICU WORKSHEETS UNDER 2011 BASELINE CONDITIONS SCENARIO 1: NO EVENTS SCENARIO 2: WITH AAHC EVENT SCENARIO 3: WITH AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT SCENARIO 4: WITH PROJECT SCENARIO 5: WITH PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 236 0.07 * 3400 236 0.07 * NBL 2 3400 236 0.07 * 3400 236 0.07 * NBT 3 5100 786 0.15 5100 786 0.15 NBT 3 5100 786 0.15 5100 786 0.15 NBR 1 1700 368 0.22 1700 368 0.22 NBR 1 1700 368 0.22 1700 368 0.22 SBL 2 3400 98 0.03 3400 98 0.03 SBL 2 3400 98 0.03 3400 98 0.03 SBT 3 5100 873 0.17 * 5100 873 0.17 * SBT 3 5100 873 0.17 * 5100 873 0.17 * SBR 1 1700 227 0.13 1700 227 0.13 SBR 1 1700 227 0.13 1700 227 0.13 EBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 230 0.07 EBL 2 3400 230 0.07 3400 230 0.07 EBT 3 5100 770 0.15 5100 903 0.18 * EBT 3 5100 849 0.17 * 5100 903 0.18 * EBR 1 1700 256 0.15 1700 256 0.15 EBR 1 1700 256 0.15 1700 256 0.15 WBL 2 3400 469 0.14 3400 469 0.14 * WBL 2 3400 469 0.14 * 3400 469 0.14 * WBT 3 5100 1,200 0.24 * 5100 1,200 0.24 WBT 3 5100 1,200 0.24 5100 1,200 0.24 WBR 1 1700 134 0.08 1700 134 0.08 WBR 1 1700 134 0.08 1700 134 0.08 N/S Movements 0.24 0.24 N/S Movements 0.24 0.24 E/W Movements 0.30 0.31 E/W Movements 0.30 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.59 0.61 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.61 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 236 0.07 * 3400 236 0.07 * NBT 3 5100 786 0.15 5100 786 0.15 NBR 1 1700 368 0.22 1700 368 0.22 SBL 2 3400 98 0.03 3400 98 0.03 SBT 3 5100 873 0.17 * 5100 873 0.17 * SBR 1 1700 227 0.13 1700 227 0.13 EBL 2 3400 230 0.07 3400 230 0.07 EBT 3 5100 934 0.18 * 5100 988 0.19 * EBR 1 1700 256 0.15 1700 256 0.15 WBL 2 3400 469 0.14 * 3400 469 0.14 * WBT 3 5100 1,200 0.24 5100 1,200 0.24 WBR 1 1700 134 0.08 1700 134 0.08 N/S Movements 0.24 0.24 E/W Movements 0.32 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.61 0.62 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 89 0.05 1700 89 0.05 NBL 1 1700 89 0.05 1700 89 0.05 NBT 1 1700 132 0.08 * 1700 132 0.08 * NBT 1 1700 132 0.08 * 1700 132 0.08 * NBR 1 1700 186 0.11 * 1700 186 0.11 * NBR 1 1700 186 0.11 * 1700 186 0.11 * SBL 1 1700 36 0.02 * 1700 36 0.02 * SBL 1 1700 36 0.02 * 1700 36 0.02 * SBT 1 1700 72 0.04 1700 72 0.04 SBT 1 1700 72 0.04 1700 72 0.04 SBR 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 150 0.09 * SBR 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 150 0.09 * EBL 2 3400 82 0.02 * 3400 82 0.02 * EBL 2 3400 82 0.02 * 3400 82 0.02 * EBT 3 5100 1,079 0.22 5100 1,256 0.26 EBT 3 5100 1,184 0.24 5100 1,256 0.26 EBR 0 52 52 EBR 0 52 52 WBL 2 3400 36 0.01 3400 36 0.01 WBL 2 3400 36 0.01 3400 36 0.01 WBT 3 5100 1,623 0.32 * 5100 1,623 0.32 * WBT 3 5100 1,623 0.32 * 5100 1,623 0.32 * WBR 1 1700 86 0.05 1700 86 0.05 WBR 1 1700 86 0.05 1700 86 0.05 N/S Movements 0.10 0.10 N/S Movements 0.10 0.10 E/W Movements 0.34 0.34 E/W Movements 0.34 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.04 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.04 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.53 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.53 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 89 0.05 1700 89 0.05 NBT 1 1700 132 0.08 * 1700 132 0.08 * NBR 1 1700 186 0.11 * 1700 186 0.11 * SBL 1 1700 36 0.02 * 1700 36 0.02 * SBT 1 1700 72 0.04 1700 72 0.04 SBR 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 150 0.09 * EBL 2 3400 82 0.02 * 3400 82 0.02 * EBT 3 5100 1,311 0.27 5100 1,383 0.28 EBR 0 52 52 WBL 2 3400 36 0.01 3400 36 0.01 WBT 3 5100 1,623 0.32 * 5100 1,623 0.32 * WBR 1 1700 86 0.05 1700 86 0.05 N/S Movements 0.10 0.10 E/W Movements 0.34 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.04 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.53 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 213 0.06 3400 213 0.06 NBL 2 3400 213 0.06 3400 213 0.06 NBT 2 3400 776 0.23 * 3400 776 0.23 * NBT 2 3400 776 0.23 * 3400 776 0.23 * NBR 1 1700 123 0.07 1700 123 0.07 NBR 1 1700 123 0.07 1700 123 0.07 SBL 2 3400 66 0.02 * 3400 89 0.03 * SBL 2 3400 80 0.02 * 3400 89 0.03 * SBT 3 5100 526 0.10 5100 548 0.11 SBT 3 5100 539 0.11 5100 548 0.11 SBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 SBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 EBL 1 1700 104 0.06 1700 104 0.06 EBL 1 1700 104 0.06 1700 104 0.06 EBT 3 5100 697 0.16 * 5100 742 0.17 * EBT 3 5100 724 0.17 * 5100 742 0.17 * EBR 0 132 132 EBR 0 132 132 WBL 1 1700 147 0.09 * 1700 147 0.09 * WBL 1 1700 147 0.09 * 1700 147 0.09 * WBT 3 5100 822 0.16 5100 822 0.16 WBT 3 5100 822 0.16 5100 822 0.16 WBR 1 1700 106 0.06 1700 106 0.06 WBR 1 1700 106 0.06 1700 106 0.06 N/S Movements 0.25 0.25 N/S Movements 0.25 0.25 E/W Movements 0.25 0.26 E/W Movements 0.25 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.56 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.56 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 213 0.06 3400 213 0.06 NBT 2 3400 776 0.23 * 3400 776 0.23 * NBR 1 1700 123 0.07 1700 123 0.07 SBL 2 3400 80 0.02 * 3400 89 0.03 * SBT 3 5100 581 0.11 5100 590 0.12 SBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 EBL 1 1700 104 0.06 1700 104 0.06 EBT 3 5100 724 0.17 * 5100 742 0.17 * EBR 0 132 132 WBL 1 1700 147 0.09 * 1700 147 0.09 * WBT 3 5100 822 0.16 5100 822 0.16 WBR 1 1700 106 0.06 1700 106 0.06 N/S Movements 0.25 0.25 E/W Movements 0.25 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.56 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: Honda Center Traffic Study ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: Year 2011 Conditions INTERSECTION: 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue INTERSECTION 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 16 0.01 1700 16 0.01 NBL 1 1700 16 0.01 1700 16 0.01 NBT 3 5100 842 0.17 * 5100 842 0.17 * NBT 3 5100 842 0.17 * 5100 842 0.17 * NBR 1 1700 233 0.14 1700 233 0.14 NBR 1 1700 233 0.14 1700 233 0.14 SBL 1 1700 81 0.05 * 1700 131 0.08 * SBL 1 1700 111 0.07 * 1700 131 0.08 * SBT 3 5100 674 0.14 5100 674 0.14 SBT 3 5100 674 0.14 5100 674 0.14 SBR 0 15 15 SBR 0 15 15 EBL 1 1700 16 0.01 1700 16 0.01 EBL 1 1700 16 0.01 1700 16 0.01 EBT 1 1700 11 0.02 * 1700 11 0.02 * EBT 1 1700 11 0.02 * 1700 11 0.02 * EBR 0 23 23 EBR 0 23 23 WBL 1 1700 430 0.25 * 1700 430 0.25 * WBL 1 1700 430 0.25 * 1700 430 0.25 * WBT 1 1700 11 0.01 1700 11 0.01 WBT 1 1700 11 0.01 1700 11 0.01 WBR 1 1700 97 0.06 * 1700 97 0.06 WBR 1 1700 97 0.06 1700 97 0.06 N/S Movements 0.21 0.24 N/S Movements 0.23 0.24 E/W Movements 0.27 0.27 E/W Movements 0.27 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.57 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.57 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 16 0.01 1700 16 0.01 NBT 3 5100 842 0.17 * 5100 842 0.17 * NBR 1 1700 233 0.14 1700 233 0.14 SBL 1 1700 111 0.07 * 1700 131 0.08 * SBT 3 5100 716 0.14 5100 716 0.14 SBR 0 15 15 EBL 1 1700 16 0.01 1700 16 0.01 EBT 1 1700 11 0.02 * 1700 11 0.02 * EBR 0 23 23 WBL 1 1700 430 0.25 * 1700 430 0.25 * WBT 1 1700 11 0.01 1700 11 0.01 WBR 1 1700 97 0.06 1700 97 0.06 N/S Movements 0.23 0.24 E/W Movements 0.27 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.57 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 112 0.03 3400 112 0.03 NBL 2 3400 112 0.03 3400 112 0.03 NBT 3 5100 563 0.11 * 5100 563 0.11 * NBT 3 5100 563 0.11 * 5100 563 0.11 * NBR 1 1700 98 0.06 1700 142 0.08 NBR 1 1700 124 0.07 1700 142 0.08 SBL 2 3400 64 0.02 * 3400 64 0.02 * SBL 2 3400 64 0.02 * 3400 64 0.02 * SBT 3 5100 422 0.08 5100 422 0.08 SBT 3 5100 422 0.08 5100 422 0.08 SBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 160 0.09 SBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 160 0.09 EBL 2 3400 102 0.03 * 3400 102 0.03 * EBL 2 3400 102 0.03 * 3400 102 0.03 * EBT 4 6800 1,105 0.18 6800 1,282 0.21 EBT 4 6800 1,210 0.19 6800 1,282 0.21 EBR 0 113 113 EBR 0 113 113 WBL 2 3400 112 0.03 3400 112 0.03 WBL 2 3400 112 0.03 3400 112 0.03 WBT 3 5100 1,482 0.29 * 5100 1,482 0.29 * WBT 3 5100 1,482 0.29 * 5100 1,482 0.29 * WBR 1 1700 42 0.02 1700 42 0.02 WBR 1 1700 42 0.02 1700 42 0.02 N/S Movements 0.13 0.13 N/S Movements 0.13 0.13 E/W Movements 0.32 0.32 E/W Movements 0.32 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.50 0.50 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.50 0.50 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 112 0.03 3400 112 0.03 NBT 3 5100 563 0.11 * 5100 563 0.11 * NBR 1 1700 124 0.07 1700 142 0.08 SBL 2 3400 64 0.02 * 3400 64 0.02 * SBT 3 5100 422 0.08 5100 422 0.08 SBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 160 0.09 EBL 2 3400 102 0.03 * 3400 102 0.03 * EBT 4 6800 1,422 0.23 6800 1,494 0.24 EBR 0 113 113 WBL 2 3400 112 0.03 3400 112 0.03 WBT 3 5100 1,482 0.29 * 5100 1,482 0.29 * WBR 1 1700 42 0.02 1700 42 0.02 N/S Movements 0.13 0.13 E/W Movements 0.32 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.50 0.50 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 6 Manchester Avenue / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 6 Manchester Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 58 0.03 * 1700 58 0.03 * NBL 1.5 1700 58 0.03 * 1700 58 0.03 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3400 166 0.05 3400 255 0.08 * NBR 1.5 3400 218 0.06 3400 255 0.08 * SBL 2 3400 22 0.01 3400 110 0.03 SBL 2 3400 74 0.02 3400 110 0.03 SBT 2 3400 42 0.01 * 3400 42 0.01 * SBT 2 3400 42 0.01 * 3400 42 0.01 * SBR 1 1700 7 0.00 1700 7 0.00 SBR 1 1700 7 0.00 1700 7 0.00 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3 5100 674 0.13 5100 896 0.18 EBT 3 5100 806 0.16 5100 896 0.18 EBR 1 1700 484 0.28 * 1700 484 0.28 * EBR 1 1700 484 0.28 * 1700 484 0.28 * WBL 2 3400 228 0.07 3400 228 0.07 WBL 2 3400 228 0.07 3400 228 0.07 WBT 3 5100 1,565 0.31 * 5100 1,565 0.31 * WBT 3 5100 1,565 0.31 * 5100 1,565 0.31 * WBR 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.05 0.05 N/S Movements 0.05 0.05 E/W Movements 0.31 0.31 E/W Movements 0.31 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.12 0.12 Rt. Turn Component 0.09 0.12 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.52 0.52 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.50 0.52 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 6 Manchester Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 58 0.03 1700 58 0.03 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * NBR 1.5 3400 303 0.09 * 3400 340 0.10 * SBL 2 3400 286 0.08 * 3400 322 0.09 * SBT 2 3400 42 0.01 3400 42 0.01 SBR 1 1700 7 0.00 1700 7 0.00 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,018 0.20 5100 1,108 0.22 EBR 1 1700 484 0.28 * 1700 484 0.28 * WBL 2 3400 228 0.07 3400 228 0.07 WBT 3 5100 1,565 0.31 * 5100 1,565 0.31 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.08 0.09 E/W Movements 0.31 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.12 0.12 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.57 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 7 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 7 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3400 672 0.20 * 3400 672 0.20 * NBL 1.5 3400 672 0.20 * 3400 672 0.20 * NBT 3 4520 817 0.18 4520 817 0.18 NBT 3 4520 817 0.18 4520 817 0.18 NBR 0.5 580 109 0.19 * 580 109 0.19 * NBR 0.5 580 109 0.19 * 580 109 0.19 * SBL 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 43 0.01 * 3400 43 0.01 EBL 2 3400 43 0.01 3400 43 0.01 EBT 3 5100 837 0.16 5100 1,236 0.24 * EBT 3 5100 1,075 0.21 * 5100 1,236 0.24 * EBR 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3.5 6800 1,228 0.18 * 6800 1,228 0.18 WBT 3.5 6800 1,228 0.18 6800 1,228 0.18 WBR 1.5 1700 86 0.05 1700 86 0.05 WBR 1.5 1700 86 0.05 1700 86 0.05 N/S Movements 0.20 0.20 N/S Movements 0.20 0.20 E/W Movements 0.19 0.24 E/W Movements 0.21 0.24 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.49 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.46 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 7 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3400 672 0.20 * 3400 672 0.20 * NBT 3 4520 817 0.18 4520 817 0.18 NBR 0.5 580 109 0.19 * 580 109 0.19 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 43 0.01 3400 43 0.01 EBT 3 5100 1,584 0.31 * 5100 1,745 0.34 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3.5 6800 1,228 0.18 6800 1,228 0.18 WBR 1.5 1700 86 0.05 1700 86 0.05 N/S Movements 0.20 0.20 E/W Movements 0.31 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.59 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 42 0.02 * 1700 42 0.02 * NBL 1 1700 42 0.02 * 1700 42 0.02 * NBT 2 3400 10 0.04 3400 10 0.04 NBT 2 3400 10 0.04 3400 10 0.04 NBR 0 133 133 NBR 0 133 133 SBL 1 1700 55 0.03 1700 55 0.03 SBL 1 1700 55 0.03 1700 55 0.03 SBT 1 1700 43 0.06 * 1700 43 0.06 * SBT 1 1700 43 0.06 * 1700 43 0.06 * SBR 0 54 54 SBR 0 54 54 EBL 1 1700 34 0.02 * 1700 34 0.02 EBL 1 1700 34 0.02 1700 34 0.02 EBT 3 5100 844 0.17 5100 889 0.18 * EBT 3 5100 871 0.18 * 5100 889 0.18 * EBR 0 25 48 EBR 0 39 48 WBL 2 3400 72 0.02 3400 72 0.02 * WBL 2 3400 72 0.02 * 3400 72 0.02 * WBT 3 5100 877 0.18 * 5100 877 0.18 WBT 3 5100 877 0.18 5100 877 0.18 WBR 0 28 28 WBR 0 28 28 N/S Movements 0.08 0.08 N/S Movements 0.08 0.08 E/W Movements 0.20 0.21 E/W Movements 0.20 0.21 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.33 0.34 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.33 0.34 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 42 0.02 * 1700 42 0.02 * NBT 2 3400 10 0.04 3400 10 0.04 NBR 0 133 133 SBL 1 1700 55 0.03 1700 55 0.03 SBT 1 1700 43 0.06 * 1700 43 0.06 * SBR 0 54 54 EBL 1 1700 34 0.02 1700 34 0.02 EBT 3 5100 871 0.18 * 5100 889 0.18 * EBR 0 39 48 WBL 2 3400 72 0.02 * 3400 72 0.02 * WBT 3 5100 877 0.18 5100 877 0.18 WBR 0 28 28 N/S Movements 0.08 0.08 E/W Movements 0.20 0.21 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.33 0.34 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue INTERSECTION 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 18 0.01 * 1700 18 0.01 * NBL 1 1700 18 0.01 * 1700 18 0.01 * NBT 2 3400 80 0.02 3400 80 0.02 NBT 2 3400 80 0.02 3400 80 0.02 NBR 1 1700 79 0.05 * 1700 79 0.05 * NBR 1 1700 79 0.05 * 1700 79 0.05 * SBL 1 1700 11 0.01 1700 36 0.02 SBL 1 1700 25 0.01 1700 36 0.02 SBT 2 3400 106 0.05 * 3400 106 0.05 * SBT 2 3400 106 0.05 * 3400 106 0.05 * SBR 0 49 49 SBR 0 49 49 EBL 1 1700 47 0.03 * 1700 47 0.03 * EBL 1 1700 47 0.03 * 1700 47 0.03 * EBT 2 3400 214 0.07 3400 289 0.09 EBT 2 3400 259 0.08 3400 289 0.09 EBR 0 20 20 EBR 0 20 20 WBL 1 1700 28 0.02 1700 28 0.02 WBL 1 1700 28 0.02 1700 28 0.02 WBT 2 3400 289 0.09 * 3400 289 0.09 * WBT 2 3400 289 0.09 * 3400 289 0.09 * WBR 0 6 6 WBR 0 6 6 N/S Movements 0.06 0.06 N/S Movements 0.06 0.06 E/W Movements 0.11 0.11 E/W Movements 0.11 0.11 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.23 0.23 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.23 0.23 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 18 0.01 * 1700 18 0.01 * NBT 2 3400 80 0.02 3400 80 0.02 NBR 1 1700 79 0.05 * 1700 79 0.05 * SBL 1 1700 25 0.01 1700 36 0.02 SBT 2 3400 106 0.05 * 3400 106 0.05 * SBR 0 49 49 EBL 1 1700 47 0.03 1700 47 0.03 EBT 2 3400 301 0.11 * 3400 331 0.12 * EBR 0 62 62 WBL 1 1700 28 0.02 * 1700 28 0.02 * WBT 2 3400 289 0.09 3400 289 0.09 WBR 0 6 6 N/S Movements 0.06 0.06 E/W Movements 0.12 0.13 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.24 0.24 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 17 0.01 1700 17 0.01 NBL 1 1700 17 0.01 1700 17 0.01 NBT 1 1700 61 0.05 * 1700 61 0.08 * NBT 1 1700 61 0.07 * 1700 61 0.08 * NBR 0 24 68 NBR 0 50 68 SBL 1 1700 25 0.01 * 1700 25 0.01 * SBL 1 1700 25 0.01 * 1700 25 0.01 * SBT 1 1700 4 0.00 1700 4 0.00 SBT 1 1700 4 0.00 1700 4 0.00 SBR 1 1700 169 0.10 * 1700 169 0.10 * SBR 1 1700 169 0.10 * 1700 169 0.10 * EBL 1 1700 108 0.06 * 1700 108 0.06 * EBL 1 1700 108 0.06 * 1700 108 0.06 * EBT 3 5100 750 0.15 5100 1,149 0.23 EBT 3 5100 988 0.20 5100 1,149 0.23 EBR 0 8 8 EBR 0 8 8 WBL 1 1700 16 0.01 1700 16 0.01 WBL 1 1700 16 0.01 1700 16 0.01 WBT 3 5100 1,154 0.23 * 5100 1,154 0.23 * WBT 3 5100 1,154 0.23 * 5100 1,154 0.23 * WBR 0 30 30 WBR 0 30 30 N/S Movements 0.06 0.09 N/S Movements 0.08 0.09 E/W Movements 0.30 0.30 E/W Movements 0.30 0.30 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.02 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.43 0.46 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.45 0.46 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 17 0.01 1700 17 0.01 NBT 1 1700 61 0.07 * 1700 61 0.08 * NBR 0 50 68 SBL 1 1700 67 0.04 * 1700 67 0.04 * SBT 1 1700 4 0.00 1700 4 0.00 SBR 1 1700 169 0.10 * 1700 169 0.10 * EBL 1 1700 108 0.06 1700 108 0.06 EBT 3 5100 1,497 0.30 * 5100 1,658 0.33 * EBR 0 8 8 WBL 1 1700 16 0.01 * 1700 16 0.01 * WBT 3 5100 1,154 0.23 5100 1,154 0.23 WBR 0 30 30 N/S Movements 0.10 0.12 E/W Movements 0.30 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.46 0.50 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way INTERSECTION 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 2 3400 29 0.01 * 3400 29 0.01 * NBR 2 3400 29 0.01 * 3400 29 0.01 * SBL 2 3400 19 0.01 * 3400 71 0.02 * SBL 2 3400 51 0.02 * 3400 71 0.02 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 1700 9 0.01 * 1700 9 0.01 * WBL 1.5 1700 9 0.01 * 1700 9 0.01 * WBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 WBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 WBR 1.5 3400 23 0.01 * 3400 23 0.01 WBR 1.5 3400 23 0.01 3400 23 0.01 N/S Movements 0.01 0.02 N/S Movements 0.02 0.02 E/W Movements 0.01 0.01 E/W Movements 0.01 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.07 0.08 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.07 0.08 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 2 3400 29 0.01 * 3400 29 0.01 * SBL 2 3400 151 0.04 * 3400 171 0.05 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 1700 9 0.01 * 1700 9 0.01 * WBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 WBR 1.5 3400 23 0.01 3400 23 0.01 N/S Movements 0.04 0.05 E/W Movements 0.01 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.10 0.11 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 12 East Street / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 12 East Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 131 0.04 * 3400 154 0.05 * SBL 2 3400 144 0.04 * 3400 154 0.05 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 156 0.09 1700 156 0.09 SBR 1 1700 156 0.09 1700 156 0.09 EBL 1 1700 208 0.12 * 1700 208 0.12 * EBL 1 1700 208 0.12 * 1700 208 0.12 * EBT 3 5100 863 0.17 5100 908 0.18 EBT 3 5100 890 0.17 5100 908 0.18 EBR 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 816 0.19 * 5100 816 0.19 * WBT 3 5100 816 0.19 * 5100 816 0.19 * WBR 0 176 176 WBR 0 176 176 N/S Movements 0.04 0.05 N/S Movements 0.04 0.05 E/W Movements 0.32 0.32 E/W Movements 0.32 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.41 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.41 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 12 East Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 93 93 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 144 0.04 * 3400 154 0.05 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 156 0.09 1700 156 0.09 EBL 1 1700 208 0.12 * 1700 208 0.12 * EBT 3 5100 890 0.17 5100 908 0.18 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 816 0.19 * 5100 816 0.19 * WBR 0 176 176 N/S Movements 0.04 0.05 E/W Movements 0.32 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.41 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 123 0.04 3400 123 0.04 NBL 2 3400 123 0.04 3400 123 0.04 NBT 3 5100 530 0.10 * 5100 530 0.10 * NBT 3 5100 530 0.10 * 5100 530 0.10 * NBR 1 1700 127 0.07 1700 127 0.07 NBR 1 1700 127 0.07 1700 127 0.07 SBL 2 3400 207 0.06 * 3400 207 0.06 * SBL 2 3400 207 0.06 * 3400 207 0.06 * SBT 3 5100 329 0.09 5100 354 0.10 SBT 3 5100 344 0.09 5100 354 0.10 SBR 0 132 132 SBR 0 132 132 EBL 1 1700 159 0.09 * 1700 159 0.09 * EBL 1 1700 159 0.09 * 1700 159 0.09 * EBT 3 5100 814 0.18 5100 905 0.19 EBT 3 5100 868 0.19 5100 905 0.19 EBR 0 88 88 EBR 0 88 88 WBL 1 1700 114 0.07 1700 114 0.07 WBL 1 1700 114 0.07 1700 114 0.07 WBT 3 5100 718 0.18 * 5100 718 0.18 * WBT 3 5100 718 0.18 * 5100 718 0.18 * WBR 0 208 208 WBR 0 208 208 N/S Movements 0.16 0.16 N/S Movements 0.16 0.16 E/W Movements 0.28 0.28 E/W Movements 0.28 0.28 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.49 0.49 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.49 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 123 0.04 * 3400 123 0.04 * NBT 3 5100 530 0.10 5100 530 0.10 NBR 1 1700 127 0.07 1700 127 0.07 SBL 2 3400 207 0.06 3400 207 0.06 SBT 3 5100 531 0.13 * 5100 541 0.13 * SBR 0 132 132 EBL 1 1700 159 0.09 1700 159 0.09 EBT 3 5100 961 0.21 * 5100 998 0.21 * EBR 0 88 88 WBL 1 1700 207 0.12 * 1700 207 0.12 * WBT 3 5100 718 0.18 5100 718 0.18 WBR 0 208 208 N/S Movements 0.17 0.17 E/W Movements 0.33 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.55 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue INTERSECTION 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 72 0.04 * 1700 72 0.04 NBL 1 1700 72 0.04 * 1700 72 0.04 NBT 3 5100 598 0.12 5100 598 0.12 * NBT 3 5100 598 0.12 5100 598 0.12 * NBR 0 15 15 NBR 0 15 15 SBL 1 1700 11 0.01 1700 36 0.02 * SBL 1 1700 26 0.02 1700 36 0.02 * SBT 3 5100 425 0.09 * 5100 425 0.09 SBT 3 5100 425 0.09 * 5100 425 0.09 SBR 0 58 58 SBR 0 58 58 EBL 1 1700 58 0.03 * 1700 58 0.03 EBL 1 1700 58 0.03 1700 58 0.03 EBT 2 3400 113 0.06 3400 238 0.09 * EBT 2 3400 187 0.08 * 3400 238 0.09 * EBR 0 80 80 EBR 0 80 80 WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 * WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 20 0.01 * WBT 2 3400 122 0.04 * 3400 122 0.04 WBT 2 3400 122 0.04 3400 122 0.04 WBR 0 27 27 WBR 0 27 27 N/S Movements 0.14 0.14 N/S Movements 0.14 0.14 E/W Movements 0.08 0.11 E/W Movements 0.09 0.11 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.27 0.30 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.28 0.30 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 72 0.04 1700 72 0.04 NBT 3 5100 1,066 0.21 * 5100 1,066 0.21 * NBR 0 15 15 SBL 1 1700 26 0.02 * 1700 36 0.02 * SBT 3 5100 425 0.09 5100 425 0.09 SBR 0 58 58 EBL 1 1700 58 0.03 1700 58 0.03 EBT 2 3400 187 0.09 * 3400 238 0.11 * EBR 0 122 122 WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 20 0.01 * WBT 2 3400 122 0.04 3400 122 0.04 WBR 0 27 27 N/S Movements 0.23 0.23 E/W Movements 0.10 0.12 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.38 0.40 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3,400 110 0.03 3,400 110 0.03 NBL 2 3,400 110 0.03 3,400 110 0.03 NBT 3 5,100 467 0.11 * 5,100 606 0.19 * NBT 3 5,100 550 0.16 * 5,100 606 0.19 * NBR 0 119 355 NBR 0 260 355 SBL 2 3,400 71 0.02 * 3,400 128 0.04 * SBL 2 3,400 105 0.03 * 3,400 128 0.04 * SBT 3 5,100 375 0.07 5,100 397 0.08 SBT 3 5,100 388 0.08 5,100 397 0.08 SBR 1 1,700 99 0.06 1,700 108 0.06 SBR 1 1,700 105 0.06 1,700 108 0.06 EBL 2 3,400 124 0.04 3,400 151 0.04 EBL 2 3,400 140 0.04 3,400 151 0.04 EBT 2.5 5,100 664 0.13 * 5,100 1,107 0.22 * EBT 2.5 5,100 928 0.18 * 5,100 1,107 0.22 * EBR 1.5 1,700 88 0.05 1,700 88 0.05 EBR 1.5 1,700 88 0.05 1,700 88 0.05 WBL 2 3,400 211 0.06 * 3,400 218 0.06 * WBL 2 3,400 215 0.06 * 3,400 218 0.06 * WBT 3 5,100 772 0.15 5,100 775 0.15 WBT 3 5,100 774 0.15 5,100 775 0.15 WBR 1 1,700 60 0.04 1,700 83 0.05 WBR 1 1,700 74 0.04 1,700 83 0.05 N/S Movements 0.14 0.23 N/S Movements 0.19 0.23 E/W Movements 0.19 0.28 E/W Movements 0.25 0.28 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.38 0.56 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.48 0.56 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3,400 146 0.04 3,400 146 0.04 NBT 3 5,100 676 0.20 * 5,100 732 0.23 * NBR 0 352 447 SBL 2 3,400 218 0.06 * 3,400 241 0.07 * SBT 3 5,100 742 0.15 5,100 751 0.15 SBR 1 1,700 125 0.07 1,700 129 0.08 EBL 2 3,400 189 0.06 3,400 199 0.06 EBT 2.5 5,037 1,162 0.23 * 5,100 1,341 0.26 * EBR 1.5 1,763 407 0.23 1,700 407 0.24 WBL 2 3,400 600 0.18 * 3,400 602 0.18 * WBT 3 5,100 926 0.18 5,100 927 0.18 WBR 1 1,700 90 0.05 1,700 99 0.06 N/S Movements 0.27 0.30 E/W Movements 0.41 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.72 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Impact PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive INTERSECTION: 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 3 5100 813 0.16 * 5100 1,049 0.21 * NBT 3 5100 954 0.19 * 5100 1,049 0.21 * NBR 0 12 12 NBR 0 12 12 SBL 2 3400 7 0.00 * 3400 7 0.00 * SBL 2 3400 7 0.00 * 3400 7 0.00 * SBT 3 5100 623 0.12 5100 623 0.12 SBT 3 5100 623 0.12 5100 623 0.12 SBR 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1 1700 24 0.01 * 1700 24 0.01 * WBL 1 1700 24 0.01 * 1700 24 0.01 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1 1700 43 0.03 * 1700 43 0.03 * WBR 1 1700 43 0.03 * 1700 43 0.03 * N/S Movements 0.16 0.21 N/S Movements 0.19 0.21 E/W Movements 0.01 0.01 E/W Movements 0.01 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.02 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.25 0.30 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.28 0.30 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 * NBT 3 5100 1,046 0.21 5100 1,141 0.23 NBR 0 12 12 SBL 2 3400 66 0.02 3400 66 0.02 SBT 3 5100 1,623 0.32 * 5100 1,623 0.32 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1 1700 24 0.01 * 1700 24 0.01 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1 1700 43 0.03 * 1700 43 0.03 * N/S Movements 0.32 0.32 E/W Movements 0.01 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.39 0.39 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way INTERSECTION: 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 8 0.00 3400 8 0.00 NBL 2 3400 8 0.00 3400 8 0.00 NBT 3 5100 776 0.15 * 5100 960 0.19 * NBT 3 5100 886 0.17 * 5100 960 0.19 * NBR 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 1 0.00 * 3400 1 0.00 * SBL 2 3400 1 0.00 * 3400 1 0.00 * SBT 3 5100 623 0.13 5100 623 0.13 SBT 3 5100 623 0.13 5100 623 0.13 SBR 0 24 24 SBR 0 24 24 EBL 1.5 3,400 45 0.01 3,400 97 0.03 * EBL 1.5 3,400 77 0.02 * 3,400 97 0.03 * EBT 1.5 1,700 0 0.02 * 1,700 0 0.02 EBT 1.5 1,700 0 0.02 1,700 0 0.02 EBR 0 34 34 EBR 0 34 34 WBL 1 1700 4 0.00 * 1700 4 0.00 WBL 1 1700 4 0.00 1700 4 0.00 WBT 1 1700 2 0.00 1700 2 0.00 * WBT 1 1700 2 0.00 * 1700 2 0.00 * WBR 1 1700 4 0.00 * 1700 4 0.00 * WBR 1 1700 4 0.00 * 1700 4 0.00 * N/S Movements 0.15 0.19 N/S Movements 0.17 0.19 E/W Movements 0.02 0.03 E/W Movements 0.03 0.03 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.23 0.27 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.25 0.27 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 8 0.00 3400 8 0.00 NBT 3 5100 978 0.36 * 5100 1,052 0.37 * NBR 0 852 852 SBL 2 3400 1,001 0.29 * 3400 1,001 0.29 * SBT 3 5100 623 0.13 5100 623 0.13 SBR 0 24 24 EBL 1.5 2,219 77 0.03 2,511 97 0.04 EBT 1.5 2,881 100 0.05 * 2,589 100 0.05 * EBR 0 34 34 WBL 1 1700 4 0.00 * 1700 4 0.00 * WBT 1 1700 2 0.00 1700 2 0.00 WBR 1 1700 4 0.00 1700 4 0.00 N/S Movements 0.65 0.67 E/W Movements 0.05 0.05 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.75 0.77 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue INTERSECTION: 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 50 0.01 3400 50 0.01 NBL 2 3400 50 0.01 3400 50 0.01 NBT 4 6800 597 0.10 * 6800 702 0.11 * NBT 4 6800 660 0.11 * 6800 702 0.11 * NBR 0 60 60 NBR 0 60 60 SBL 2 3400 68 0.02 * 3400 68 0.02 * SBL 2 3400 68 0.02 * 3400 68 0.02 * SBT 4 6800 487 0.09 6800 487 0.09 SBT 4 6800 487 0.09 6800 487 0.09 SBR 0 137 137 SBR 0 137 137 EBL 2 3400 140 0.04 * 3400 192 0.06 * EBL 2 3400 171 0.05 * 3400 192 0.06 * EBT 3 5100 375 0.08 5100 375 0.08 EBT 3 5100 375 0.08 5100 375 0.08 EBR 0 45 45 EBR 0 45 45 WBL 2 3400 96 0.03 3400 96 0.03 WBL 2 3400 96 0.03 3400 96 0.03 WBT 3 5100 529 0.12 * 5100 529 0.12 * WBT 3 5100 529 0.12 * 5100 529 0.12 * WBR 0 64 64 WBR 0 64 64 N/S Movements 0.12 0.13 N/S Movements 0.13 0.13 E/W Movements 0.16 0.17 E/W Movements 0.17 0.17 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.32 0.35 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.34 0.35 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 50 0.01 3400 50 0.01 NBT 4 6800 1,456 0.22 * 6800 1,498 0.23 * NBR 0 60 60 SBL 2 3400 68 0.02 * 3400 68 0.02 * SBT 4 6800 487 0.09 6800 487 0.09 SBR 0 137 137 EBL 2 3400 320 0.09 * 3400 341 0.10 * EBT 3 5100 375 0.08 5100 375 0.08 EBR 0 45 45 WBL 2 3400 96 0.03 3400 96 0.03 WBT 3 5100 529 0.12 * 5100 529 0.12 * WBR 0 64 64 N/S Movements 0.24 0.25 E/W Movements 0.21 0.22 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.50 0.52 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps INTERSECTION: 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 39 0.01 3400 39 0.01 NBL 2 3400 39 0.01 3400 39 0.01 NBT 4 6800 631 0.09 * 6800 736 0.11 * NBT 4 6800 694 0.10 * 6800 736 0.11 * NBR (free) 50 85,000 304 0.00 85,000 304 0.00 NBR (free) 50 85,000 304 0.00 85,000 304 0.00 SBL 1 1700 32 0.02 * 1700 32 0.02 * SBL 1 1700 32 0.02 * 1700 32 0.02 * SBT 4 6800 670 0.10 6800 670 0.10 SBT 4 6800 670 0.10 6800 670 0.10 SBR 1 1700 16 0.01 1700 16 0.01 SBR 1 1700 16 0.01 1700 16 0.01 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 1700 81 0.05 1700 81 0.05 WBL 1.5 1700 81 0.05 1700 81 0.05 WBT 1.5 3400 343 0.10 * 3400 343 0.10 * WBT 1.5 3400 343 0.10 * 3400 343 0.10 * WBR 2 3400 206 0.06 3400 206 0.06 WBR 2 3400 206 0.06 3400 206 0.06 N/S Movements 0.11 0.13 N/S Movements 0.12 0.13 E/W Movements 0.10 0.10 E/W Movements 0.10 0.10 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.26 0.28 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.27 0.28 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 39 0.01 3400 39 0.01 NBT 4 6800 1,141 0.17 * 6800 1,183 0.17 * NBR (free) 50 85,000 304 0.00 85,000 304 0.00 SBL 1 1700 32 0.02 * 1700 32 0.02 * SBT 4 6800 670 0.10 6800 670 0.10 SBR 1 1700 16 0.01 1700 16 0.01 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 1700 81 0.05 1700 81 0.05 WBT 1.5 3400 343 0.10 * 3400 343 0.10 * WBR 2 3400 554 0.16 * 3400 554 0.16 * N/S Movements 0.19 0.19 E/W Movements 0.10 0.10 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.04 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.38 0.39 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps INTERSECTION: 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 5 8500 918 0.11 * 8500 1,023 0.12 * NBT 5 8500 981 0.12 * 8500 1,023 0.12 * NBR 0 14 14 NBR 0 14 14 SBL 0 0 * 0 * SBL 0 0 * 0 * SBT 4 6800 582 0.09 6800 582 0.09 SBT 4 6800 582 0.09 6800 582 0.09 SBR (free) 50 85000 168 0.00 85,000 168 0.00 SBR (free) 50 85000 168 0.00 85,000 168 0.00 EBL 1.5 1700 56 0.03 1700 56 0.03 EBL 1.5 1700 56 0.03 1700 56 0.03 EBT 0.5 1700 136 0.08 * 1700 136 0.08 * EBT 0.5 1700 136 0.08 * 1700 136 0.08 * EBR 2 3400 329 0.10 * 3400 329 0.10 * EBR 2 3400 329 0.10 * 3400 329 0.10 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.11 0.12 N/S Movements 0.12 0.12 E/W Movements 0.08 0.08 E/W Movements 0.08 0.08 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.02 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.26 0.27 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.26 0.27 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 5 8500 1,428 0.17 * 8500 1,470 0.17 * NBR 0 14 14 SBL 0 0 * 0 * SBT 4 6800 582 0.09 6800 582 0.09 SBR (free) 50 85000 168 0.00 85,000 168 0.00 EBL 1.5 1700 56 0.03 1700 56 0.03 EBT 0.5 1700 136 0.08 * 1700 136 0.08 * EBR 2 3400 329 0.10 * 3400 329 0.10 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.17 0.17 E/W Movements 0.08 0.08 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.32 0.32 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue INTERSECTION 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 230 0.07 3400 230 0.07 NBL 2 3400 230 0.07 3400 230 0.07 NBT 3 5100 862 0.17 * 5100 940 0.18 * NBT 3 5100 909 0.18 * 5100 940 0.18 * NBR 2 3400 89 0.03 3400 89 0.03 NBR 2 3400 89 0.03 3400 89 0.03 SBL 2 3400 295 0.09 * 3400 295 0.09 * SBL 2 3400 295 0.09 * 3400 295 0.09 * SBT 3 5100 897 0.18 5100 897 0.18 SBT 3 5100 897 0.18 5100 897 0.18 SBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 SBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 EBL 2 3400 122 0.04 * 3400 148 0.04 * EBL 2 3400 138 0.04 * 3400 148 0.04 * EBT 3 5100 469 0.09 5100 495 0.10 EBT 3 5100 485 0.10 5100 495 0.10 EBR 1 1700 282 0.17 * 1700 282 0.17 * EBR 1 1700 282 0.17 * 1700 282 0.17 * WBL 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 130 0.04 WBL 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 130 0.04 WBT 3 5100 618 0.12 * 5100 618 0.12 * WBT 3 5100 618 0.12 * 5100 618 0.12 * WBR 1 1700 366 0.22 * 1700 366 0.22 * WBR 1 1700 366 0.22 * 1700 366 0.22 * N/S Movements 0.26 0.27 N/S Movements 0.27 0.27 E/W Movements 0.16 0.16 E/W Movements 0.16 0.16 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.48 0.49 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.49 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 230 0.07 3400 230 0.07 NBT 3 5100 1,257 0.25 * 5100 1,288 0.25 * NBR 2 3400 89 0.03 3400 89 0.03 SBL 2 3400 295 0.09 * 3400 295 0.09 * SBT 3 5100 897 0.18 5100 897 0.18 SBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 EBL 2 3400 237 0.07 * 3400 247 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 485 0.10 5100 495 0.10 EBR 1 1700 282 0.17 * 1700 282 0.17 * WBL 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 130 0.04 WBT 3 5100 618 0.12 * 5100 618 0.12 * WBR 1 1700 366 0.22 * 1700 366 0.22 * N/S Movements 0.33 0.34 E/W Movements 0.19 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.58 0.59 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 40 0.02 1,700 45 0.03 NBL 1 1,700 43 0.03 1,700 45 0.03 NBT 0.5 109 3 0.03 * 109 3 0.03 * NBT 0.5 109 3 0.03 * 109 3 0.03 * NBR 1.5 3,291 91 0.03 3,291 91 0.03 NBR 1.5 3,291 91 0.03 3,291 91 0.03 SBL 1 1,700 93 0.05 * 1,700 162 0.10 * SBL 1 1,700 134 0.08 * 1,700 162 0.10 * SBT 1 1,700 3 0.00 1,700 4 0.00 SBT 1 1,700 4 0.00 1,700 4 0.00 SBR 1 1,700 80 0.05 * 1,700 93 0.05 * SBR 1 1,700 88 0.05 * 1,700 93 0.05 * EBL 1 1,700 52 0.03 * 1,700 52 0.03 EBL 1 1,700 52 0.03 1,700 52 0.03 EBT 3 5,100 777 0.16 5,100 1,416 0.29 * EBT 3 5,100 1,158 0.24 * 5,100 1,416 0.29 * EBR 0 32 48 EBR 0 42 48 WBL 1 1,700 18 0.01 1,700 44 0.03 * WBL 1 1,700 33 0.02 * 1,700 44 0.03 * WBT 3 5,100 867 0.17 * 5,100 918 0.18 WBT 3 5,100 898 0.18 5,100 918 0.18 WBR 1 1,700 100 0.06 1,700 100 0.06 WBR 1 1,700 100 0.06 1,700 100 0.06 N/S Movements 0.08 0.12 N/S Movements 0.11 0.12 E/W Movements 0.20 0.31 E/W Movements 0.25 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.33 0.49 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 141 0.08 1,700 144 0.08 NBT 0.5 443 19 0.04 * 443 19 0.04 * NBR 1.5 2,957 128 0.04 2,957 128 0.04 SBL 1 1,700 136 0.08 * 1,700 164 0.10 * SBT 1 1,700 13 0.01 1,700 14 0.01 SBR 1 1,700 88 0.05 1,700 93 0.05 EBL 1 1,700 151 0.09 1,700 151 0.09 EBT 3 5,100 1,398 0.30 * 5,100 1,656 0.35 * EBR 0 143 150 WBL 1 1,700 131 0.08 * 1,700 142 0.08 * WBT 3 5,100 1,191 0.23 5,100 1,212 0.24 WBR 1 1,700 215 0.13 1,700 215 0.13 N/S Movements 0.12 0.14 E/W Movements 0.38 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.63 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 25 0.01 1,700 33 0.02 NBL 1 1,700 30 0.02 1,700 33 0.02 NBT 2 3,400 120 0.08 * 3,400 147 0.11 * NBT 2 3,400 136 0.10 * 3,400 147 0.11 * NBR 0 165 215 NBR 0 195 215 SBL 1 1,700 222 0.13 * 1,700 222 0.13 * SBL 1 1,700 222 0.13 * 1,700 222 0.13 * SBT 2 3,400 85 0.05 3,400 158 0.07 SBT 2 3,400 128 0.06 3,400 158 0.07 SBR 0 77 85 SBR 0 82 85 EBL 2 3,400 103 0.03 * 3,400 103 0.03 * EBL 2 3,400 103 0.03 * 3,400 103 0.03 * EBT 3 5,100 1,005 0.20 5,100 1,095 0.23 EBT 3 5,100 1,059 0.22 5,100 1,095 0.23 EBR 0 21 68 EBR 0 49 68 WBL 2 3,400 148 0.04 3,400 441 0.13 WBL 2 3,400 322 0.09 3,400 441 0.13 WBT 2 3,400 903 0.27 * 3,400 1,115 0.33 * WBT 2 3,400 1,029 0.30 * 3,400 1,115 0.33 * WBR 1 1,700 333 0.20 1,700 376 0.22 WBR 1 1,700 359 0.21 1,700 376 0.22 N/S Movements 0.21 0.24 N/S Movements 0.23 0.24 E/W Movements 0.30 0.36 E/W Movements 0.33 0.36 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.65 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.61 0.65 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 33 0.02 NBT 2 3400 136 0.10 * 3400 147 0.11 * NBR 0 0 195 0 215 SBL 1 1700 222 0.13 * 1700 222 0.13 * SBT 2 3400 173 0.08 3400 203 0.08 SBR 0 0 82 0 85 EBL 2 3400 103 0.03 3400 103 0.03 EBT 3 5100 1,193 0.24 * 5100 1,229 0.26 * EBR 0 53 72 WBL 2 3400 374 0.11 * 3400 492 0.14 * WBT 2 3400 1,029 0.30 3400 1,115 0.33 WBR 1 1,700 359 0.21 1700 376 0.22 N/S Movements 0.23 0.24 E/W Movements 0.35 0.40 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.63 0.69 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue INTERSECTION: 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 13 0.01 * 1,700 13 0.01 * NBL 1 1,700 13 0.01 * 1,700 13 0.01 * NBT 2 3,400 67 0.02 3,400 86 0.04 NBT 2 3,400 78 0.03 3,400 86 0.04 NBR 0 1 56 NBR 0 34 56 SBL 0 31 337 SBL 0 213 337 SBT 2 3,400 52 0.04 * 3,400 107 0.15 * SBT 2 3,400 85 0.11 * 3,400 107 0.15 * SBR 0 65 65 SBR 0 65 65 EBL 1 1,700 99 0.06 * 1,700 99 0.06 * EBL 1 1,700 99 0.06 * 1,700 99 0.06 * EBT 2 3,400 57 0.02 3,400 207 0.07 EBT 2 3,400 146 0.05 3,400 207 0.07 EBR 0 16 31 EBR 0 25 31 WBL 1 1,700 1 0.00 1,700 48 0.03 WBL 1 1,700 29 0.02 1,700 48 0.03 WBT 2 3,400 83 0.04 * 3,400 87 0.04 * WBT 2 3,400 85 0.04 * 3,400 87 0.04 * WBR 0 45 65 WBR 0 57 65 N/S Movements 0.05 0.16 N/S Movements 0.11 0.16 E/W Movements 0.10 0.10 E/W Movements 0.10 0.10 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.20 0.31 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.26 0.31 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 14 0.01 * 1,700 14 0.01 * NBT 2 3,400 78 0.03 3,400 86 0.04 NBR 0 34 56 SBL 0 245 368 SBT 2 3,400 101 0.12 * 3,400 123 0.16 * SBR 0 65 65 EBL 1 1,700 102 0.06 * 1,700 102 0.06 * EBT 2 3,400 150 0.05 3,400 210 0.07 EBR 0 25 31 WBL 1 1,700 29 0.02 1,700 48 0.03 WBT 2 3,400 85 0.04 * 3,400 87 0.04 * WBR 0 57 65 N/S Movements 0.13 0.17 E/W Movements 0.10 0.11 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.28 0.33 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 38 0.02 * 1,700 38 0.02 NBL 1 1,700 38 0.02 1,700 38 0.02 NBT 1 1,700 9 0.01 1,700 12 0.01 * NBT 1 1,700 11 0.01 * 1,700 12 0.01 * NBR 1 1,700 76 0.04 * 1,700 114 0.07 * NBR 1 1,700 98 0.06 * 1,700 114 0.07 * SBL 2 3,400 159 0.05 3,400 194 0.06 * SBL 2 3,400 180 0.05 * 3,400 194 0.06 * SBT 0.5 388 13 0.03 * 388 13 0.03 SBT 0.5 388 13 0.03 388 13 0.03 SBR 0.5 1,312 44 0.03 1,312 44 0.03 SBR 0.5 1,312 44 0.03 1,312 44 0.03 EBL 2 3,400 73 0.02 * 3,400 99 0.03 EBL 2 3,400 88 0.03 3,400 99 0.03 EBT 3 5,100 850 0.17 5,100 1,535 0.32 * EBT 3 5,100 1,258 0.26 * 5,100 1,535 0.32 * EBR 0 30 77 EBR 0 58 77 WBL 2 3,400 51 0.02 3,400 179 0.05 * WBL 2 3,400 127 0.04 * 3,400 179 0.05 * WBT 3 5,100 912 0.20 * 5,100 983 0.25 WBT 3 5,100 955 0.23 5,100 983 0.25 WBR 0 132 295 WBR 0 229 295 Split phase N/S Movements 0.07 0.08 Split phase N/S Movements 0.08 0.08 E/W Movements 0.23 0.37 E/W Movements 0.30 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.35 0.50 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.42 0.50 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 53 0.03 * 1,700 53 0.03 * NBT 1 1,700 16 0.01 1,700 17 0.01 NBR 1 1,700 138 0.08 * 1,700 153 0.09 * SBL 2 3,400 180 0.05 3,400 194 0.06 SBT 0.5 779 37 0.05 * 779 37 0.05 * SBR 0.5 921 44 0.05 921 44 0.05 EBL 2 3,400 88 0.03 3,400 99 0.03 EBT 3 5,100 1,384 0.28 * 5,100 1,661 0.34 * EBR 0 58 77 WBL 2 3,400 127 0.04 * 3,400 179 0.05 * WBT 3 5,100 955 0.23 5,100 983 0.25 WBR 0 229 295 Split phase N/S Movements 0.08 0.09 E/W Movements 0.32 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.47 0.54 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 26 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps INTERSECTION: 26 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0.5 893 182 0.20 * 1601 732 0.46 * SBL 0.5 1437 510 0.35 * 1601 732 0.46 * SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 2507 511 0.20 * 4035 822 0.20 * SBR 1.5 1963 697 0.35 * 1799 822 0.46 * EBL 0 0 0 * EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,054 0.21 * 5100 1,069 0.21 EBT 3 5100 1,063 0.21 * 5100 1,069 0.21 EBR (free) 50 85000 342 0.00 85000 382 0.00 EBR (free) 50 85000 366 0.00 85000 382 0.00 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 912 0.18 5100 1,102 0.22 * WBT 3 5100 1,025 0.20 5100 1,102 0.22 * WBR (free) 50 85000 177 0.00 85000 209 0.00 WBR (free) 50 85000 196 0.00 85000 209 0.00 N/S Movements 0.20 0.46 N/S Movements 0.35 0.46 E/W Movements 0.21 0.22 E/W Movements 0.21 0.22 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.46 0.72 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.61 0.72 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 26 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0.5 1437 510 0.35 * 2063 732 0.35 * SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 1963 697 0.35 * 1799 822 0.46 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 1,118 0.22 * 5100 1,124 0.22 * EBR (free) 50 85000 372 0.00 85000 388 0.00 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 1,025 0.20 5100 1,102 0.22 WBR (free) 50 85000 224 0.00 85000 237 0.00 N/S Movements 0.35 0.35 E/W Movements 0.22 0.22 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.10 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.62 0.73 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Impact Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 2550 172 0.07 * 2550 575 0.23 * SBL 1.5 2550 412 0.16 * 2550 575 0.23 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 2550 408 0.16 * 2550 597 0.23 * SBR 1.5 2550 520 0.20 * 2550 597 0.23 * EBL 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 811 0.16 * 5100 1,647 0.32 * EBT 3 5100 1,309 0.26 * 5100 1,647 0.32 * EBR (free) 50 85000 250 0.00 85000 286 0.00 EBR (free) 50 85000 272 0.00 85000 286 0.00 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 677 0.13 5100 863 0.17 WBT 3 5100 788 0.15 5100 863 0.17 WBR (free) 50 85000 256 0.00 85000 256 0.00 WBR (free) 50 85000 256 0.00 85000 256 0.00 N/S Movements 0.07 0.23 N/S Movements 0.16 0.23 E/W Movements 0.16 0.32 E/W Movements 0.26 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.09 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.37 0.61 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.51 0.61 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 2550 949 0.37 * 2550 1,112 0.44 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 2550 778 0.31 * 2550 854 0.33 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 1,471 0.29 * 5100 1,808 0.35 * EBR (free) 50 85000 302 0.00 85000 316 0.00 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 1,004 0.20 5100 1,079 0.21 WBR (free) 50 85000 276 0.00 85000 276 0.00 N/S Movements 0.37 0.44 E/W Movements 0.29 0.35 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.71 0.84 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Impact Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps INTERSECTION: 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 429 0.25 * 1700 498 0.29 * NBL 1 1700 470 0.28 * 1700 498 0.29 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 135 0.08 * 1700 314 0.18 * NBR 1 1700 242 0.14 * 1700 314 0.18 * SBL 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 631 0.12 5100 1,252 0.25 * EBT 3 5100 1,001 0.20 * 5100 1,252 0.25 * EBR (free) 50 85000 579 0.01 85000 584 0.01 EBR (free) 50 85000 582 0.01 85000 584 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 649 0.13 * 5100 827 0.16 WBT 3 5100 755 0.15 5100 827 0.16 WBR (free) 50 85000 269 0.00 85000 301 0.00 WBR (free) 50 85000 288 0.00 85000 301 0.00 N/S Movements 0.25 0.29 N/S Movements 0.28 0.29 E/W Movements 0.13 0.25 E/W Movements 0.20 0.25 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.43 0.59 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.52 0.59 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 470 0.28 * 1700 498 0.29 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 242 0.14 * 1700 314 0.18 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 1,001 0.20 * 5100 1,252 0.25 * EBR (free) 50 85000 647 0.01 85000 649 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 755 0.15 5100 827 0.16 WBR (free) 50 85000 384 0.00 85000 397 0.00 N/S Movements 0.28 0.29 E/W Movements 0.20 0.25 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.52 0.59 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2517 227 0.09 * 1700 320 0.19 * NBL 1.5 1700 282 0.17 * 1700 320 0.19 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 2583 233 0.09 * 3400 1,272 0.37 * NBR 1.5 3400 852 0.25 * 3400 1,272 0.37 * SBL 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 5 8500 605 0.07 8500 1,820 0.21 * EBT 5 8500 1,329 0.16 * 8500 1,820 0.21 * EBR (free) 50 85000 414 0.00 85000 414 0.00 EBR (free) 50 85000 414 0.00 85000 414 0.00 WBL 0 0 0 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 715 0.14 * 5100 715 0.14 WBT 3 5100 715 0.14 5100 715 0.14 WBR 1 1700 197 0.12 1700 197 0.12 WBR 1 1700 197 0.12 1700 197 0.12 N/S Movements 0.09 0.19 N/S Movements 0.17 0.19 E/W Movements 0.14 0.21 E/W Movements 0.16 0.21 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.08 0.19 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.28 0.64 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.46 0.64 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 334 0.20 * 1700 372 0.22 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3400 1,072 0.32 * 3400 1,492 0.44 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 5 8500 1,970 0.23 * 8500 2,460 0.29 * EBR (free) 50 85000 472 0.01 85000 472 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 900 0.18 5100 900 0.18 WBR 1 1700 249 0.15 1700 249 0.15 N/S Movements 0.20 0.22 E/W Movements 0.23 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.12 0.22 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.78 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Impact Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 98 0.06 * NBL 1 1700 75 0.04 * 1700 98 0.06 * NBT 1 1700 4 0.01 1700 65 0.05 NBT 1 1700 40 0.04 1700 65 0.05 NBR 0 0 11 0 27 NBR 0 0 21 0 27 SBL 1 1,700 44 0.03 1,700 68 0.04 SBL 1 1,700 58 0.03 1,700 68 0.04 SBT 0.5 23 1 0.04 * 171 8 0.05 * SBT 0.5 113 5 0.04 * 171 8 0.05 * SBR 1.5 3,377 146 0.04 3,229 146 0.05 SBR 1.5 3,287 146 0.04 3,229 146 0.05 EBL 2 3400 64 0.02 * 3400 1,430 0.42 * EBL 2 3400 878 0.26 * 3400 1,430 0.42 * EBT 3 5100 749 0.15 5100 1,369 0.27 EBT 3 5100 1,119 0.22 5100 1,369 0.27 EBR 1 1700 22 0.01 1700 205 0.12 EBR 1 1700 131 0.08 1700 205 0.12 WBL 2 3400 9 0.00 3400 86 0.03 WBL 2 3400 55 0.02 3400 86 0.03 WBT 3 5100 691 0.14 * 5100 691 0.14 * WBT 3 5100 691 0.14 * 5100 691 0.14 * WBR 1 1700 58 0.03 1700 382 0.22 * WBR 1 1700 251 0.15 1700 382 0.22 * N/S Movements 0.07 0.10 N/S Movements 0.09 0.10 E/W Movements 0.15 0.56 E/W Movements 0.39 0.56 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.05 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.27 0.76 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.76 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 75 0.04 * 1700 98 0.06 * NBT 1 1700 42 0.05 1700 67 0.06 NBR 0 0 34 0 41 SBL 1 1,700 67 0.04 1,700 76 0.04 SBT 0.5 848 57 0.07 * 878 60 0.07 * SBR 1.5 2,552 171 0.07 2,522 171 0.07 EBL 2 3400 878 0.26 * 3400 1,430 0.42 * EBT 3 5100 1,184 0.23 5100 1,435 0.28 EBR 1 1700 980 0.58 * 1700 1,054 0.62 * WBL 2 3400 345 0.10 3400 376 0.11 WBT 3 5100 893 0.18 * 5100 893 0.18 * WBR 1 1700 251 0.15 1700 382 0.22 * N/S Movements 0.11 0.13 E/W Movements 0.43 0.60 Rt. Turn Component 0.30 0.29 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.89 1.06 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D F Impact Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1 1,700 98 0.06 NBL 1 1700 75 0.04 1 1700 98 0.06 NBT 1 1700 4 0.01 * 1 1,700 65 0.05 * NBT 1 1700 40 0.04 * 1 1700 65 0.05 * NBR 0 0 11 0 27 NBR 0 0 21 0 0 27 SBL 1 1700 44 0.03 * 1 1,700 68 0.04 * SBL 1 1700 58 0.03 * 1 1700 68 0.04 * SBT 0.5 850 1 0.00 0.5 850 8 0.01 SBT 0.5 850 5 0.01 0.5 850 8 0.01 SBR 1.5 2550 146 0.06 * 1.5 2,550 146 0.06 SBR 1.5 2550 146 0.06 1.5 2550 146 0.06 EBL 2 3400 64 0.02 * 2 3,400 1,430 0.42 * EBL 2 3400 878 0.26 * 2 3400 1,430 0.42 * EBT 3 5100 749 0.15 3 5,100 1,369 0.27 EBT 3 5100 1,119 0.22 3 5100 1,369 0.27 EBR 1 1700 22 0.01 1 1,700 205 0.12 EBR 1 1700 131 0.08 1 1700 205 0.12 WBL 2 3400 9 0.00 2 3,400 86 0.03 WBL 2 3400 55 0.02 2 3400 86 0.03 WBT 3 5100 691 0.14 * 3 5,100 691 0.14 * WBT 3 5100 691 0.14 * 3 5100 691 0.14 * WBR 1 1700 58 0.03 1 1,700 382 0.22 * WBR 1 1700 251 0.15 1 1700 382 0.22 * N/S Movements 0.03 0.09 N/S Movements 0.07 0.09 E/W Movements 0.15 0.56 E/W Movements 0.39 0.56 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.05 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.25 0.75 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.51 0.75 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 75 0.04 * 1 1700 98 0.06 * NBT 1 1700 42 0.05 1 1700 67 0.06 NBR 0 0 34 0 0 41 SBL 1 1700 67 0.04 1 1700 76 0.04 SBT 0.5 850 57 0.07 * 0.5 850 60 0.07 * SBR 1.5 2550 171 0.07 1.5 2550 171 0.07 EBL 2 3400 878 0.26 * 2 3400 1,430 0.42 * EBT 3 5100 1,184 0.23 3 5100 1,435 0.28 EBR 1 1700 980 0.58 * 2 3400 1,054 0.31 WBL 2 3400 345 0.10 2 3400 376 0.11 WBT 3 5100 893 0.18 * 3 5100 893 0.18 * WBR 1 1700 251 0.15 1 1700 382 0.22 * N/S Movements 0.11 0.13 E/W Movements 0.43 0.60 Rt. Turn Component 0.30 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.89 0.78 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D C Add EBR Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.33 2,675 107 0.04 * 2,585 122 0.05 * NBL 1.33 2,618 116 0.04 * 2,585 122 0.05 * NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.33 725 29 0.04 * 815 38 0.05 NBR 0.33 782 35 0.05 815 38 0.05 SBL 1 1,700 3 0.00 1,700 7 0.00 SBL 1 1,700 5 0.00 1,700 7 0.00 SBT 1 1,700 1 0.01 * 1,700 1 0.02 * SBT 1 1,700 1 0.01 * 1,700 1 0.02 * SBR 0 13 31 SBR 0 23 31 EBL 1 1,700 11 0.01 * 1,700 27 0.02 * EBL 1 1,700 21 0.01 * 1,700 27 0.02 * EBT 2 3,400 690 0.20 3,400 730 0.21 EBT 2 3,400 714 0.21 3,400 730 0.21 EBR 1 1,700 94 0.06 1,700 784 0.46 * EBR 1 1,700 505 0.30 * 1,700 784 0.46 * WBL 1 1,700 20 0.01 1,700 151 0.09 WBL 1 1,700 98 0.06 1,700 151 0.09 WBT 2 3,400 798 0.24 * 3,400 976 0.29 * WBT 2 3,400 904 0.27 * 3,400 976 0.29 * WBR 0 2 9 WBR 0 6 9 N/S Movements 0.05 0.07 N/S Movements 0.06 0.07 E/W Movements 0.24 0.31 E/W Movements 0.28 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.20 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.20 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.34 0.62 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.43 0.62 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.33 2,586 132 0.05 * 2,559 138 0.05 * NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.33 814 42 0.05 841 45 0.05 SBL 1 1,700 5 0.00 1,700 7 0.00 SBT 1 1,700 3 0.02 * 1,700 3 0.02 * SBR 0 27 34 EBL 1 1,700 32 0.02 * 1,700 39 0.02 * EBT 2 3,400 714 0.21 3,400 730 0.21 EBR 1 1,700 553 0.33 * 1,700 832 0.49 * WBL 1 1,700 108 0.06 1,700 161 0.09 WBT 2 3,400 954 0.28 * 3,400 1,026 0.31 * WBR 0 12 15 N/S Movements 0.07 0.08 E/W Movements 0.30 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.06 0.22 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.49 0.67 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue INTERSECTION: 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3,150 151 0.05 * 3,089 200 0.06 * NBL 1.5 3,109 180 0.06 * 3,089 200 0.06 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.5 250 12 0.05 * 311 20 0.06 * NBR 0.5 291 17 0.06 * 311 20 0.06 * SBL 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3 5,100 684 0.13 * 5,100 684 0.13 EBT 3 5,100 684 0.13 5,100 684 0.13 EBR 1 1,700 134 0.08 1,700 178 0.10 EBR 1 1,700 161 0.09 1,700 178 0.10 WBL 1 1,700 12 0.01 * 1,700 83 0.05 WBL 1 1,700 55 0.03 1,700 83 0.05 WBT 3 5,100 590 0.12 5,100 1,412 0.28 * WBT 3 5,100 1,080 0.21 * 5,100 1,412 0.28 * WBR 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.05 0.06 N/S Movements 0.06 0.06 E/W Movements 0.14 0.28 E/W Movements 0.21 0.28 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.24 0.39 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.32 0.39 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3,039 190 0.06 * 3,027 210 0.07 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.5 361 23 0.06 * 373 26 0.07 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3 5,100 684 0.13 5,100 684 0.13 EBR 1 1,700 161 0.09 1,700 178 0.10 WBL 1 1,700 60 0.04 1,700 89 0.05 WBT 3 5,100 1,472 0.29 * 5,100 1,804 0.35 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.06 0.07 E/W Movements 0.29 0.35 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.40 0.47 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue INTERSECTION 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3299 260 0.08 * 3304 276 0.08 * NBL 1.5 3302 270 0.08 * 3304 276 0.08 * NBT 0.5 101 8 0.08 96 8 0.08 NBT 0.5 98 8 0.08 96 8 0.08 NBR 1 1700 126 0.07 1700 126 0.07 NBR 1 1700 126 0.07 1700 126 0.07 SBL 1 1700 1 0.00 1700 1 0.00 SBL 1 1700 1 0.00 1700 1 0.00 SBT 1 1700 8 0.04 * 1700 8 0.04 * SBT 1 1700 8 0.04 * 1700 8 0.04 * SBR 0 54 54 SBR 0 54 54 EBL 1 1700 27 0.02 1700 27 0.02 EBL 1 1700 27 0.02 1700 27 0.02 EBT 2 3400 605 0.20 * 3400 605 0.20 * EBT 2 3400 605 0.20 * 3400 605 0.20 * EBR 0 91 91 EBR 0 91 91 WBL 1 1700 89 0.05 * 1700 89 0.05 * WBL 1 1700 89 0.05 * 1700 89 0.05 * WBT 2 3400 538 0.16 3400 636 0.19 WBT 2 3400 597 0.18 3400 636 0.19 WBR 0 1 1 WBR 0 1 1 N/S Movements 0.12 0.12 N/S Movements 0.12 0.12 E/W Movements 0.26 0.26 E/W Movements 0.26 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.42 0.43 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.43 0.43 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3425 270 0.08 * 3304 276 0.08 * NBT 0.5 101 8 0.08 96 8 0.08 NBR 1 1700 126 0.07 1700 126 0.07 SBL 1 1700 1 0.00 1700 1 0.00 SBT 1 1700 8 0.04 * 1700 8 0.04 * SBR 0 54 54 EBL 1 1700 27 0.02 1700 27 0.02 EBT 2 3400 605 0.20 * 3400 605 0.20 * EBR 0 91 91 WBL 1 1700 89 0.05 * 1700 89 0.05 * WBT 2 3400 597 0.18 3400 636 0.19 WBR 0 1 1 N/S Movements 0.12 0.12 E/W Movements 0.26 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.42 0.43 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3,400 114 0.03 3,400 211 0.06 NBL 2 3,400 172 0.05 3,400 211 0.06 NBT 2 3,400 195 0.06 * 3,400 304 0.09 * NBT 2 3,400 260 0.08 * 3,400 304 0.09 * NBR 1 1,700 172 0.10 1,700 199 0.12 NBR 1 1,700 188 0.11 1,700 199 0.12 SBL 1 1,700 80 0.05 * 1,700 80 0.05 * SBL 1 1,700 80 0.05 * 1,700 80 0.05 * SBT 2 3,400 126 0.04 3,400 176 0.05 SBT 2 3,400 156 0.05 3,400 176 0.05 SBR 1 1,700 69 0.04 1,700 159 0.09 * SBR 1 1,700 123 0.07 1,700 159 0.09 * EBL 1 1,700 63 0.04 * 1,700 64 0.04 * EBL 1 1,700 64 0.04 * 1,700 64 0.04 * EBT 3 5,100 422 0.08 5,100 446 0.09 EBT 3 5,100 436 0.09 5,100 446 0.09 EBR 1 1,700 32 0.02 1,700 44 0.03 EBR 1 1,700 39 0.02 1,700 44 0.03 WBL 1 1,700 130 0.08 1,700 166 0.10 WBL 1 1,700 152 0.09 1,700 166 0.10 WBT 3 5,100 560 0.13 * 5,100 1,121 0.24 * WBT 3 5,100 894 0.19 * 5,100 1,121 0.24 * WBR 0 81 89 WBR 0 86 89 N/S Movements 0.10 0.14 N/S Movements 0.12 0.14 E/W Movements 0.16 0.28 E/W Movements 0.23 0.28 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.32 0.46 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.40 0.46 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 172 0.05 3,400 211 0.06 NBT 2 3400 260 0.08 * 3,400 304 0.09 * NBR 1 1700 189 0.11 1,700 200 0.12 SBL 1 1700 80 0.05 * 1,700 80 0.05 * SBT 2 3400 156 0.05 3,400 176 0.05 SBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1,700 177 0.10 * EBL 1 1700 64 0.04 * 1,700 64 0.04 * EBT 3 5100 447 0.09 5,100 457 0.09 EBR 1 1700 39 0.02 1,700 44 0.03 WBL 1 1700 152 0.09 1,700 166 0.10 WBT 3 5100 1,156 0.25 * 5,100 1,383 0.29 * WBR 0 103 106 N/S Movements 0.12 0.14 E/W Movements 0.28 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.46 0.52 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue INTERSECTION: 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 70 0.04 1,700 221 0.13 * NBL 1 1,700 160 0.09 * 1,700 221 0.13 * NBT 2 3,400 444 0.13 * 3,400 662 0.20 NBT 2 3,400 574 0.17 3,400 662 0.20 NBR 0 3 7 NBR 0 5 7 SBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 * 1,700 13 0.01 SBL 1 1,700 12 0.01 1,700 13 0.01 SBT 2 3,400 268 0.08 3,400 294 0.11 * SBT 2 3,400 283 0.10 * 3,400 294 0.11 * SBR 0 19 80 SBR 0 55 80 EBL 1 1,700 17 0.01 1,700 22 0.01 EBL 1 1,700 20 0.01 1,700 22 0.01 EBT 1 1,700 40 0.07 * 1,700 45 0.09 * EBT 1 1,700 43 0.08 * 1,700 45 0.09 * EBR 0 85 100 EBR 0 94 100 WBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 * 1,700 11 0.01 * WBL 1 1,700 11 0.01 * 1,700 11 0.01 * WBT 1 1,700 28 0.03 1,700 74 0.05 WBT 1 1,700 55 0.04 1,700 74 0.05 WBR 0 18 18 WBR 0 18 18 N/S Movements 0.14 0.24 N/S Movements 0.19 0.24 E/W Movements 0.08 0.09 E/W Movements 0.09 0.09 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.27 0.38 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.33 0.38 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 185 0.11 * 1,700 246 0.14 * NBT 2 3,400 574 0.18 3,400 662 0.20 NBR 0 24 26 SBL 1 1,700 12 0.01 1,700 13 0.01 SBT 2 3,400 284 0.10 * 3,400 295 0.11 * SBR 0 59 83 EBL 1 1,700 25 0.01 1,700 27 0.02 EBT 1 1,700 59 0.09 * 1,700 62 0.10 * EBR 0 102 108 WBL 1 1,700 17 0.01 * 1,700 17 0.01 * WBT 1 1,700 63 0.06 1,700 82 0.07 WBR 0 31 31 N/S Movements 0.21 0.26 E/W Movements 0.10 0.11 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.36 0.42 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue INTERSECTION: 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 100 0.06 * 1700 100 0.06 * NBL 1 1700 100 0.06 * 1700 100 0.06 * NBT 2 3400 137 0.05 3400 137 0.05 NBT 2 3400 137 0.05 3400 137 0.05 NBR 0 35 35 NBR 0 35 35 SBL 1 1700 17 0.01 1700 17 0.01 SBL 1 1700 17 0.01 1700 17 0.01 SBT 2 3400 125 0.08 * 3400 125 0.08 * SBT 2 3400 125 0.08 * 3400 125 0.08 * SBR 0 130 146 SBR 0 140 146 EBL 1 1700 138 0.08 * 1700 138 0.08 * EBL 1 1700 138 0.08 * 1700 138 0.08 * EBT 2 3400 549 0.16 3400 549 0.16 EBT 2 3400 549 0.16 3400 549 0.16 EBR 1 1700 101 0.06 1700 101 0.06 EBR 1 1700 101 0.06 1700 101 0.06 WBL 1 1700 46 0.03 1700 46 0.03 WBL 1 1700 46 0.03 1700 46 0.03 WBT 2 3400 427 0.13 * 3400 509 0.15 * WBT 2 3400 476 0.14 * 3400 509 0.15 * WBR 1 1700 15 0.01 1700 15 0.01 WBR 1 1700 15 0.01 1700 15 0.01 N/S Movements 0.13 0.14 N/S Movements 0.14 0.14 E/W Movements 0.21 0.23 E/W Movements 0.22 0.23 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.39 0.42 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.42 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 100 0.06 * 1700 100 0.06 * NBT 2 3400 137 0.05 3400 137 0.05 NBR 0 35 35 SBL 1 1700 17 0.01 1700 17 0.01 SBT 2 3400 125 0.08 * 3400 125 0.08 * SBR 0 140 146 EBL 1 1700 138 0.08 * 1700 138 0.08 * EBT 2 3400 549 0.16 3400 549 0.16 EBR 1 1700 101 0.06 1700 101 0.06 WBL 1 1700 46 0.03 1700 46 0.03 WBT 2 3400 476 0.14 * 3400 509 0.15 * WBR 1 1700 15 0.01 1700 15 0.01 N/S Movements 0.14 0.14 E/W Movements 0.22 0.23 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.42 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 38 0.02 1700 38 0.02 NBL 1 1700 38 0.02 1700 38 0.02 NBT 2 3400 169 0.05 * 3400 169 0.05 * NBT 2 3400 169 0.05 * 3400 169 0.05 * NBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 SBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBT 2 3400 114 0.03 3400 114 0.03 SBT 2 3400 114 0.03 3400 114 0.03 SBR 1 1700 71 0.04 1700 71 0.04 SBR 1 1700 71 0.04 1700 71 0.04 EBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 70 0.04 * EBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 70 0.04 * EBT 3 5100 647 0.13 5100 647 0.13 EBT 3 5100 647 0.13 5100 647 0.13 EBR 0 22 22 EBR 0 22 22 WBL 1 1700 78 0.05 1700 78 0.05 WBL 1 1700 78 0.05 1700 78 0.05 WBT 3 5100 554 0.14 * 5100 928 0.22 * WBT 3 5100 777 0.19 * 5100 928 0.22 * WBR 0 170 170 WBR 0 170 170 N/S Movements 0.11 0.11 N/S Movements 0.11 0.11 E/W Movements 0.18 0.26 E/W Movements 0.23 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.35 0.42 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.39 0.42 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 38 0.02 1700 38 0.02 NBT 2 3400 169 0.05 * 3400 169 0.05 * NBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 SBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBT 2 3400 114 0.03 3400 114 0.03 SBR 1 1700 71 0.04 1700 71 0.04 EBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 70 0.04 * EBT 3 5100 647 0.13 5100 647 0.13 EBR 0 22 22 WBL 1 1700 78 0.05 1700 78 0.05 WBT 3 5100 1,039 0.24 * 5100 1,190 0.27 * WBR 0 170 170 N/S Movements 0.11 0.11 E/W Movements 0.28 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.47 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue INTERSECTION: 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 74 0.04 1700 74 0.04 NBL 1 1700 74 0.04 1700 74 0.04 NBT 3 5100 561 0.13 * 5100 561 0.13 * NBT 3 5100 561 0.13 * 5100 561 0.13 * NBR 0 105 105 NBR 0 105 105 SBL 1 1700 63 0.04 * 1700 103 0.06 * SBL 1 1700 87 0.05 * 1700 103 0.06 * SBT 3 5100 414 0.11 5100 414 0.11 SBT 3 5100 414 0.11 5100 414 0.11 SBR 0 131 131 SBR 0 131 131 EBL 1 1700 173 0.10 * 1700 173 0.10 * EBL 1 1700 173 0.10 * 1700 173 0.10 * EBT 2 3400 369 0.11 3400 369 0.11 EBT 2 3400 369 0.11 3400 369 0.11 EBR 1 1700 65 0.04 1700 65 0.04 EBR 1 1700 65 0.04 1700 65 0.04 WBL 1 1700 47 0.03 1700 47 0.03 WBL 1 1700 47 0.03 1700 47 0.03 WBT 2 3400 231 0.07 * 3400 273 0.08 * WBT 2 3400 256 0.08 * 3400 273 0.08 * WBR 1 1700 65 0.04 1700 65 0.04 WBR 1 1700 65 0.04 1700 65 0.04 N/S Movements 0.17 0.19 N/S Movements 0.18 0.19 E/W Movements 0.17 0.18 E/W Movements 0.18 0.18 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.39 0.42 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.42 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 74 0.04 1700 74 0.04 NBT 3 5100 561 0.13 * 5100 561 0.13 * NBR 0 105 105 SBL 1 1700 87 0.05 * 1700 103 0.06 * SBT 3 5100 480 0.12 5100 480 0.12 SBR 0 131 131 EBL 1 1700 173 0.10 * 1700 173 0.10 * EBT 2 3400 369 0.11 3400 369 0.11 EBR 1 1700 65 0.04 1700 65 0.04 WBL 1 1700 47 0.03 1700 47 0.03 WBT 2 3400 256 0.08 * 3400 273 0.08 * WBR 1 1700 65 0.04 1700 65 0.04 N/S Movements 0.18 0.19 E/W Movements 0.18 0.18 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.42 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 118 0.07 1700 118 0.07 NBL 1 1700 118 0.07 1700 118 0.07 NBT 2 3400 366 0.11 * 3400 366 0.11 * NBT 2 3400 366 0.11 * 3400 366 0.11 * NBR 1 1700 121 0.07 1700 121 0.07 NBR 1 1700 121 0.07 1700 121 0.07 SBL 1 1700 125 0.07 * 1700 125 0.07 * SBL 1 1700 125 0.07 * 1700 125 0.07 * SBT 2 3400 333 0.10 3400 333 0.10 SBT 2 3400 333 0.10 3400 333 0.10 SBR 1 1700 118 0.07 1700 118 0.07 SBR 1 1700 118 0.07 1700 118 0.07 EBL 2 3400 206 0.06 * 3400 206 0.06 * EBL 2 3400 206 0.06 * 3400 206 0.06 * EBT 3 5100 699 0.15 5100 699 0.15 EBT 3 5100 699 0.15 5100 699 0.15 EBR 0 82 82 EBR 0 82 82 WBL 2 3400 146 0.04 3400 146 0.04 WBL 2 3400 146 0.04 3400 146 0.04 WBT 3 5100 659 0.15 * 5100 1,033 0.23 * WBT 3 5100 882 0.20 * 5100 1,033 0.23 * WBR 0 126 126 WBR 0 126 126 N/S Movements 0.18 0.18 N/S Movements 0.18 0.18 E/W Movements 0.21 0.29 E/W Movements 0.26 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.45 0.52 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.49 0.52 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 118 0.07 1700 118 0.07 NBT 2 3400 366 0.11 * 3400 366 0.11 * NBR 1 1700 121 0.07 1700 121 0.07 SBL 1 1700 125 0.07 * 1700 125 0.07 * SBT 2 3400 333 0.10 3400 333 0.10 SBR 1 1700 184 0.11 1700 184 0.11 EBL 2 3400 206 0.06 * 3400 206 0.06 * EBT 3 5100 699 0.15 5100 699 0.15 EBR 0 82 82 WBL 2 3400 146 0.04 3400 146 0.04 WBT 3 5100 1,046 0.23 * 5100 1,197 0.26 * WBR 0 126 126 N/S Movements 0.18 0.18 E/W Movements 0.29 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.52 0.55 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 40 N Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 40 N Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0.33 635 59 0.09 635 59 0.09 NBL 0.33 635 59 0.09 635 59 0.09 NBT 0.34 258 24 0.09 258 24 0.09 NBT 0.34 258 24 0.09 258 24 0.09 NBR 0.33 807 75 0.09 807 75 0.09 NBR 0.33 807 75 0.09 807 75 0.09 SBL 0.33 436 10 0.02 436 10 0.02 SBL 0.33 436 10 0.02 436 10 0.02 SBT 0.34 654 15 0.02 654 15 0.02 SBT 0.34 654 15 0.02 654 15 0.02 SBR 0.33 610 14 0.02 610 14 0.02 SBR 0.33 610 14 0.02 610 14 0.02 EBL 1 1700 13 0.01 1700 13 0.01 * EBL 1 1700 13 0.01 1700 13 0.01 * EBT 3 5100 935 0.19 * 5100 935 0.19 EBT 3 5100 935 0.19 * 5100 935 0.19 EBR 0 34 34 EBR 0 34 34 WBL 1 1700 38 0.02 * 1700 38 0.02 WBL 1 1700 38 0.02 * 1700 38 0.02 WBT 3 5100 763 0.15 5100 1,044 0.21 * WBT 3 5100 930 0.19 5100 1,044 0.21 * WBR 0 19 19 WBR 0 19 19 N/S Movements 0.12 0.12 N/S Movements 0.12 0.12 E/W Movements 0.21 0.22 E/W Movements 0.21 0.22 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.38 0.38 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.38 0.38 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 40 N Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0.33 635 59 0.09 635 59 0.09 NBT 0.34 258 24 0.09 258 24 0.09 NBR 0.33 807 75 0.09 807 75 0.09 SBL 0.33 436 10 0.02 436 10 0.02 SBT 0.34 654 15 0.02 654 15 0.02 SBR 0.33 610 14 0.02 610 14 0.02 EBL 1 1700 13 0.01 * 1700 13 0.01 * EBT 3 5100 935 0.19 5100 935 0.19 EBR 0 34 34 WBL 1 1700 38 0.02 1700 38 0.02 WBT 3 5100 1,094 0.22 * 5100 1,208 0.24 * WBR 0 19 19 N/S Movements 0.12 0.12 E/W Movements 0.23 0.25 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.39 0.41 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 41 N Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 41 N Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 48 0.03 1700 48 0.03 NBL 1 1700 48 0.03 1700 48 0.03 NBT 1 1700 138 0.08 * 1700 138 0.08 * NBT 1 1700 138 0.08 * 1700 138 0.08 * NBR 1 1700 74 0.04 1700 74 0.04 NBR 1 1700 74 0.04 1700 74 0.04 SBL 1 1700 100 0.06 * 1700 100 0.06 * SBL 1 1700 100 0.06 * 1700 100 0.06 * SBT 1 1700 171 0.10 1700 171 0.10 SBT 1 1700 171 0.10 1700 171 0.10 SBR 1 1700 44 0.03 1700 44 0.03 SBR 1 1700 44 0.03 1700 44 0.03 EBL 1 1700 51 0.03 1700 51 0.03 * EBL 1 1700 51 0.03 * 1700 51 0.03 * EBT 3 5100 898 0.19 * 5100 898 0.19 EBT 3 5100 898 0.19 5100 898 0.19 EBR 0 48 48 EBR 0 48 48 WBL 1 1700 82 0.05 * 1700 82 0.05 WBL 1 1700 82 0.05 1700 82 0.05 WBT 3 5100 745 0.19 5100 1,026 0.24 * WBT 3 5100 912 0.22 * 5100 1,026 0.24 * WBR 0 211 211 WBR 0 211 211 N/S Movements 0.14 0.14 N/S Movements 0.14 0.14 E/W Movements 0.23 0.27 E/W Movements 0.25 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.42 0.46 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.46 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 41 N Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 48 0.03 1700 48 0.03 NBT 1 1700 138 0.08 * 1700 138 0.08 * NBR 1 1700 74 0.04 1700 74 0.04 SBL 1 1700 100 0.06 * 1700 100 0.06 * SBT 1 1700 171 0.10 1700 171 0.10 SBR 1 1700 44 0.03 1700 44 0.03 EBL 1 1700 51 0.03 * 1700 51 0.03 * EBT 3 5100 898 0.19 5100 898 0.19 EBR 0 48 48 WBL 1 1700 82 0.05 1700 82 0.05 WBT 3 5100 1,076 0.25 * 5100 1,190 0.27 * WBR 0 211 211 N/S Movements 0.14 0.14 E/W Movements 0.28 0.30 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.47 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 42 N Tustin Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 42 N Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 219 0.0644 3400 359 0.1056 NBL 2 3400 302 0.09 3400 359 0.11 NBT 3 5100 749 0.1469 * 5100 749 0.1469 * NBT 3 5100 749 0.15 * 5100 749 0.15 * NBR 1 1700 380 0.2235 1700 380 0.2235 NBR 1 1700 380 0.22 1700 380 0.22 SBL 2 3400 449 0.1321 * 3400 449 0.1321 * SBL 2 3400 449 0.13 * 3400 449 0.13 * SBT 3 5100 621 0.1488 5100 621 0.1488 SBT 3 5100 621 0.15 5100 621 0.15 SBR 0 138 138 SBR 0 138 138 EBL 2 3400 229 0.0674 3400 229 0.0674 EBL 2 3400 229 0.07 3400 229 0.07 EBT 3 5100 902 0.1769 * 5100 902 0.1769 * EBT 3 5100 902 0.18 * 5100 902 0.18 * EBR 1 1700 127 0.0747 1700 127 0.0747 EBR 1 1700 127 0.07 1700 127 0.07 WBL 2 3400 384 0.1129 * 3400 384 0.1129 * WBL 2 3400 384 0.11 * 3400 384 0.11 * WBT 3 5100 785 0.1539 5100 926 0.1816 WBT 3 5100 869 0.17 5100 926 0.18 WBR 1 1700 591 0.3476 * 1700 591 0.3476 * WBR 1 1700 591 0.35 * 1700 591 0.35 * N/S Movements 0.28 0.28 N/S Movements 0.28 0.28 E/W Movements 0.29 0.29 E/W Movements 0.29 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.03 Rt. Turn Component 0..00 0.03 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.62 0.65 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.62 0.65 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 42 N Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 335 0.10 3400 392 0.12 NBT 3 5100 749 0.15 * 5100 749 0.15 * NBR 1 1700 380 0.22 1700 380 0.22 SBL 2 3400 449 0.13 * 3400 449 0.13 * SBT 3 5100 621 0.16 5100 621 0.16 SBR 0 171 171 EBL 2 3400 229 0.07 3400 229 0.07 EBT 3 5100 902 0.18 * 5100 902 0.18 * EBR 1 1700 127 0.07 1700 127 0.07 WBL 2 3400 384 0.11 * 3400 384 0.11 * WBT 3 5100 967 0.19 5100 1,024 0.20 WBR 1 1700 591 0.35 * 1700 591 0.35 * N/S Movements 0.28 0.28 E/W Movements 0.29 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.03 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.64 0.63 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 314 0.09 * 3400 314 0.09 * SBL 2 3400 314 0.09 * 3400 314 0.09 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 356 0.21 * 1700 356 0.21 * SBR 1 1700 356 0.21 * 1700 356 0.21 * EBL 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 2.5 3,610 937 0.26 * 3,610 937 0.26 * EBT 2.5 3,610 937 0.26 * 3,610 937 0.26 * EBR 1.5 3,190 828 0.26 3,190 828 0.26 EBR 1.5 3,190 828 0.26 3,190 828 0.26 WBL 1 1700 484 0.28 * 1700 484 0.28 * WBL 1 1700 484 0.28 * 1700 484 0.28 * WBT 3 5100 1,485 0.29 5100 1,626 0.32 WBT 3 5100 1,569 0.31 5100 1,626 0.32 WBR 50 85000 0 0.00 85000 0 0.00 WBR 50 85000 0 0.00 85000 0 0.00 N/S Movements 0.09 0.09 N/S Movements 0.09 0.09 E/W Movements 0.54 0.54 E/W Movements 0.54 0.54 Rt. Turn Component 0.12 0.12 Rt. Turn Component 0.12 0.12 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.80 0.80 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.80 0.80 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 314 0.09 * 3400 314 0.09 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 356 0.21 * 1700 356 0.21 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 2.5 3,610 937 0.26 * 3,610 937 0.26 * EBR 1.5 3,190 828 0.26 3,190 828 0.26 WBL 1 1700 484 0.28 * 1700 484 0.28 * WBT 3 5100 1,667 0.33 5100 1,724 0.34 WBR 50 85000 0 0.00 85000 0 0.00 N/S Movements 0.09 0.09 E/W Movements 0.54 0.54 Rt. Turn Component 0.12 0.12 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.80 0.80 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 998 0.29 * 3400 998 0.29 * NBL 2 3400 998 0.29 * 3400 998 0.29 * NBT 0 5 0.00 5 0.00 NBT 0 5 0.00 5 0.00 NBR 1 1700 774 0.46 * 1700 774 0.46 * NBR 1 1700 774 0.46 * 1700 774 0.46 * SBL 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 1 1700 26 0.02 * 1700 26 0.02 * SBR 1 1700 26 0.02 * 1700 26 0.02 * EBL 0 0 0 * EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 2 3400 844 0.25 * 3400 844 0.25 EBT 2 3400 844 0.25 3400 844 0.25 EBR (free) 50 85000 415 0.00 85000 415 0.00 EBR (free) 50 85000 415 0.00 85000 415 0.00 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 1,218 0.24 5100 1,359 0.27 * WBT 3 5100 1,302 0.26 * 5100 1,359 0.27 * WBR (free) 50 85000 268 0.00 85000 268 0.00 WBR (free) 50 85000 268 0.00 85000 268 0.00 N/S Movements 0.29 0.29 N/S Movements 0.29 0.29 E/W Movements 0.25 0.27 E/W Movements 0.26 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.18 0.18 Rt. Turn Component 0.18 0.18 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.77 0.79 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.78 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 998 0.29 * 3400 998 0.29 * NBT 0 5 0.00 5 0.00 NBR 1 1700 774 0.46 * 1700 774 0.46 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 1 1700 26 0.02 * 1700 26 0.02 * EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 2 3400 844 0.25 3400 844 0.25 EBR (free) 50 85000 415 0.00 85000 415 0.00 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 1,400 0.27 * 5100 1,457 0.29 * WBR (free) 50 85000 268 0.00 85000 268 0.00 N/S Movements 0.29 0.29 E/W Movements 0.27 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.18 0.18 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.80 0.81 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2011 Conditions Year 2011 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX G-2: ICU WORKSHEETS UNDER 2013 OPENING YEAR CONDITIONS SCENARIO 1: NO EVENTS SCENARIO 2: WITH AAHC EVENT SCENARIO 3: WITH AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT SCENARIO 4: WITH PROJECT SCENARIO 5: WITH PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 260 0.08 * 3400 260 0.08 * NBL 2 3400 260 0.08 * 3400 260 0.08 * NBT 3 5100 860 0.17 5100 860 0.17 NBT 3 5100 860 0.17 5100 860 0.17 NBR 1 1700 400 0.24 1700 400 0.24 NBR 1 1700 400 0.24 1700 400 0.24 SBL 2 3400 110 0.03 3400 110 0.03 SBL 2 3400 110 0.03 3400 110 0.03 SBT 3 5100 960 0.19 * 5100 960 0.19 * SBT 3 5100 960 0.19 * 5100 960 0.19 * SBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 250 0.15 SBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 250 0.15 EBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 3400 250 0.07 EBL 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 250 0.07 EBT 3 5100 850 0.17 5100 980 0.19 * EBT 3 5100 930 0.18 * 5100 980 0.19 * EBR 1 1700 280 0.16 1700 280 0.16 EBR 1 1700 280 0.16 1700 280 0.16 WBL 2 3400 520 0.15 3400 520 0.15 * WBL 2 3400 520 0.15 * 3400 520 0.15 * WBT 3 5100 1,320 0.26 * 5100 1,320 0.26 WBT 3 5100 1,320 0.26 5100 1,320 0.26 WBR 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 150 0.09 WBR 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 150 0.09 N/S Movements 0.26 0.26 N/S Movements 0.26 0.26 E/W Movements 0.33 0.35 E/W Movements 0.34 0.35 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.65 0.66 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.65 0.66 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 260 0.08 * 3400 260 0.08 * NBT 3 5100 860 0.17 5100 860 0.17 NBR 1 1700 400 0.24 1700 400 0.24 SBL 2 3400 110 0.03 3400 110 0.03 SBT 3 5100 960 0.19 * 5100 960 0.19 * SBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 250 0.15 EBL 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 250 0.07 EBT 3 5100 1,020 0.20 * 5100 1,070 0.21 * EBR 1 1700 280 0.16 1700 280 0.16 WBL 2 3400 520 0.15 * 3400 520 0.15 * WBT 3 5100 1,320 0.26 5100 1,320 0.26 WBR 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 150 0.09 N/S Movements 0.26 0.26 E/W Movements 0.35 0.36 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.67 0.68 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 100 0.06 NBL 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 100 0.06 NBT 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 150 0.09 * NBT 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 150 0.09 * NBR 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 200 0.12 * NBR 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 200 0.12 * SBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 40 0.02 * SBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 40 0.02 * SBT 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 SBT 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 SBR 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 170 0.10 * SBR 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 170 0.10 * EBL 2 3400 90 0.03 * 3400 90 0.03 * EBL 2 3400 90 0.03 * 3400 90 0.03 * EBT 3 5100 1,190 0.25 5100 1,370 0.28 EBT 3 5100 1,300 0.27 5100 1,370 0.28 EBR 0 60 60 EBR 0 60 60 WBL 2 3400 40 0.01 3400 40 0.01 WBL 2 3400 40 0.01 3400 40 0.01 WBT 3 5100 1,790 0.35 * 5100 1,790 0.35 * WBT 3 5100 1,790 0.35 * 5100 1,790 0.35 * WBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 WBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 N/S Movements 0.11 0.11 N/S Movements 0.11 0.11 E/W Movements 0.38 0.38 E/W Movements 0.38 0.38 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.04 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.04 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.58 0.58 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.58 0.58 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 100 0.06 NBT 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 150 0.09 * NBR 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 200 0.12 * SBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 40 0.02 * SBT 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 SBR 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 170 0.10 * EBL 2 3400 90 0.03 * 3400 90 0.03 * EBT 3 5100 1,430 0.29 5100 1,500 0.31 EBR 0 60 60 WBL 2 3400 40 0.01 3400 40 0.01 WBT 3 5100 1,790 0.35 * 5100 1,790 0.35 * WBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 N/S Movements 0.11 0.11 E/W Movements 0.38 0.38 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.04 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.58 0.58 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 230 0.07 3400 230 0.07 NBL 2 3400 230 0.07 3400 230 0.07 NBT 2 3400 850 0.25 * 3400 850 0.25 * NBT 2 3400 850 0.25 * 3400 850 0.25 * NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBL 2 3400 70 0.02 * 3400 90 0.03 * SBL 2 3400 80 0.02 * 3400 90 0.03 * SBT 3 5100 580 0.11 5100 600 0.12 SBT 3 5100 590 0.12 5100 600 0.12 SBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 120 0.07 SBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 120 0.07 EBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 EBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 EBT 3 5100 770 0.18 * 5100 820 0.19 * EBT 3 5100 800 0.19 * 5100 820 0.19 * EBR 0 150 150 EBR 0 150 150 WBL 1 1700 160 0.09 * 1700 160 0.09 * WBL 1 1700 160 0.09 * 1700 160 0.09 * WBT 3 5100 900 0.18 5100 900 0.18 WBT 3 5100 900 0.18 5100 900 0.18 WBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 120 0.07 WBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 120 0.07 N/S Movements 0.27 0.28 N/S Movements 0.27 0.28 E/W Movements 0.27 0.28 E/W Movements 0.28 0.28 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.61 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.61 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 230 0.07 3400 230 0.07 NBT 2 3400 850 0.25 * 3400 850 0.25 * NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBL 2 3400 80 0.02 * 3400 90 0.03 * SBT 3 5100 630 0.12 5100 640 0.13 SBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 120 0.07 EBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 EBT 3 5100 800 0.19 * 5100 820 0.19 * EBR 0 150 150 WBL 1 1700 160 0.09 * 1700 160 0.09 * WBT 3 5100 900 0.18 5100 900 0.18 WBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 120 0.07 N/S Movements 0.27 0.28 E/W Movements 0.28 0.28 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.61 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: Honda Center Traffic Study ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: Year 2013 Conditions INTERSECTION: 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue INTERSECTION 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 NBT 3 5100 930 0.18 * 5100 930 0.18 * NBT 3 5100 930 0.18 * 5100 930 0.18 * NBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 260 0.15 NBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 260 0.15 SBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 140 0.08 * SBL 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 140 0.08 * SBT 3 5100 740 0.15 5100 740 0.15 SBT 3 5100 740 0.15 5100 740 0.15 SBR 0 20 20 SBR 0 20 20 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 EBT 1 1700 10 0.02 * 1700 10 0.02 * EBT 1 1700 10 0.02 * 1700 10 0.02 * EBR 0 30 30 EBR 0 30 30 WBL 1 1700 470 0.28 * 1700 470 0.28 * WBL 1 1700 470 0.28 * 1700 470 0.28 * WBT 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 WBT 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 WBR 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 110 0.06 WBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 N/S Movements 0.24 0.26 N/S Movements 0.25 0.26 E/W Movements 0.30 0.30 E/W Movements 0.30 0.30 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.59 0.61 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.61 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 NBT 3 5100 930 0.18 * 5100 930 0.18 * NBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 260 0.15 SBL 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 140 0.08 * SBT 3 5100 780 0.16 5100 780 0.16 SBR 0 20 20 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 EBT 1 1700 10 0.02 * 1700 10 0.02 * EBR 0 30 30 WBL 1 1700 470 0.28 * 1700 470 0.28 * WBT 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 WBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 N/S Movements 0.25 0.26 E/W Movements 0.30 0.30 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.61 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 120 0.04 3400 120 0.04 NBL 2 3400 120 0.04 3400 120 0.04 NBT 3 5100 620 0.12 * 5100 620 0.12 * NBT 3 5100 620 0.12 * 5100 620 0.12 * NBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 150 0.09 NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 150 0.09 SBL 2 3400 70 0.02 * 3400 70 0.02 * SBL 2 3400 70 0.02 * 3400 70 0.02 * SBT 3 5100 460 0.09 5100 460 0.09 SBT 3 5100 460 0.09 5100 460 0.09 SBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 180 0.11 SBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 180 0.11 EBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 110 0.03 * EBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 110 0.03 * EBT 4 6800 1,220 0.20 6800 1,400 0.22 EBT 4 6800 1,330 0.21 6800 1,400 0.22 EBR 0 120 120 EBR 0 120 120 WBL 2 3400 120 0.04 3400 120 0.04 WBL 2 3400 120 0.04 3400 120 0.04 WBT 3 5100 1,630 0.32 * 5100 1,630 0.32 * WBT 3 5100 1,630 0.32 * 5100 1,630 0.32 * WBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 WBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 N/S Movements 0.14 0.14 N/S Movements 0.14 0.14 E/W Movements 0.35 0.35 E/W Movements 0.35 0.35 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.54 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.54 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 120 0.04 3400 120 0.04 NBT 3 5100 620 0.12 * 5100 620 0.12 * NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 150 0.09 SBL 2 3400 70 0.02 * 3400 70 0.02 * SBT 3 5100 460 0.09 5100 460 0.09 SBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 180 0.11 EBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 110 0.03 * EBT 4 6800 1,540 0.24 6800 1,610 0.25 EBR 0 120 120 WBL 2 3400 120 0.04 3400 120 0.04 WBT 3 5100 1,630 0.32 * 5100 1,630 0.32 * WBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 N/S Movements 0.14 0.14 E/W Movements 0.35 0.35 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.54 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 6 Manchester Avenue / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 6 Manchester Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 60 0.04 * NBL 1.5 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 60 0.04 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3400 180 0.05 3400 270 0.08 * NBR 1.5 3400 230 0.07 3400 270 0.08 * SBL 2 3400 20 0.01 3400 110 0.03 SBL 2 3400 70 0.02 3400 110 0.03 SBT 2 3400 50 0.01 * 3400 50 0.01 * SBT 2 3400 50 0.01 * 3400 50 0.01 * SBR 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 SBR 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3 5100 740 0.15 5100 960 0.19 EBT 3 5100 870 0.17 5100 960 0.19 EBR 1 1700 530 0.31 * 1700 530 0.31 * EBR 1 1700 530 0.31 * 1700 530 0.31 * WBL 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 250 0.07 WBL 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 250 0.07 WBT 3 5100 1,720 0.34 * 5100 1,720 0.34 * WBT 3 5100 1,720 0.34 * 5100 1,720 0.34 * WBR 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.05 0.05 N/S Movements 0.05 0.05 E/W Movements 0.34 0.34 E/W Movements 0.34 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.13 0.13 Rt. Turn Component 0.11 0.13 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.57 0.57 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.57 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 6 Manchester Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 60 0.04 1700 60 0.04 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * NBR 1.5 3400 320 0.09 * 3400 360 0.11 * SBL 2 3400 280 0.08 * 3400 320 0.09 * SBT 2 3400 50 0.01 3400 50 0.01 SBR 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,080 0.21 5100 1,170 0.23 EBR 1 1700 530 0.31 * 1700 530 0.31 * WBL 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 250 0.07 WBT 3 5100 1,720 0.34 * 5100 1,720 0.34 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.08 0.09 E/W Movements 0.34 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.13 0.13 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.61 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 7 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 7 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3400 740 0.22 * 3400 740 0.22 * NBL 1.5 3400 740 0.22 * 3400 740 0.22 * NBT 3 4520 900 0.20 4520 900 0.20 NBT 3 4520 900 0.20 4520 900 0.20 NBR 0.5 580 120 0.21 * 580 120 0.21 * NBR 0.5 580 120 0.21 * 580 120 0.21 * SBL 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 50 0.01 * 3400 50 0.01 EBL 2 3400 50 0.01 3400 50 0.01 EBT 3 5100 920 0.18 5100 1,320 0.26 * EBT 3 5100 1,160 0.23 * 5100 1,320 0.26 * EBR 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3.5 6800 1,350 0.20 * 6800 1,350 0.20 WBT 3.5 6800 1,350 0.20 6800 1,350 0.20 WBR 1.5 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 WBR 1.5 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 N/S Movements 0.22 0.22 N/S Movements 0.22 0.22 E/W Movements 0.21 0.26 E/W Movements 0.23 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.48 0.53 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.50 0.53 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 7 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3400 740 0.22 * 3400 740 0.22 * NBT 3 4520 900 0.20 4520 900 0.20 NBR 0.5 580 120 0.21 * 580 120 0.21 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 50 0.01 3400 50 0.01 EBT 3 5100 1,670 0.33 * 5100 1,830 0.36 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3.5 6800 1,350 0.20 6800 1,350 0.20 WBR 1.5 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 N/S Movements 0.22 0.22 E/W Movements 0.33 0.36 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.63 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 * NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 * NBT 2 3400 10 0.05 3400 10 0.05 NBT 2 3400 10 0.05 3400 10 0.05 NBR 0 150 150 NBR 0 150 150 SBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 60 0.04 SBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 60 0.04 SBT 1 1700 50 0.06 * 1700 50 0.06 * SBT 1 1700 50 0.06 * 1700 50 0.06 * SBR 0 60 60 SBR 0 60 60 EBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 40 0.02 EBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 40 0.02 EBT 3 5100 930 0.19 5100 980 0.20 * EBT 3 5100 960 0.20 * 5100 980 0.20 * EBR 0 30 50 EBR 0 40 50 WBL 2 3400 80 0.02 3400 80 0.02 * WBL 2 3400 80 0.02 * 3400 80 0.02 * WBT 3 5100 960 0.19 * 5100 960 0.19 WBT 3 5100 960 0.19 5100 960 0.19 WBR 0 30 30 WBR 0 30 30 N/S Movements 0.09 0.09 N/S Movements 0.09 0.09 E/W Movements 0.22 0.23 E/W Movements 0.22 0.23 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.36 0.37 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.36 0.37 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 * NBT 2 3400 10 0.05 3400 10 0.05 NBR 0 150 150 SBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 60 0.04 SBT 1 1700 50 0.06 * 1700 50 0.06 * SBR 0 60 60 EBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 40 0.02 EBT 3 5100 960 0.20 * 5100 980 0.20 * EBR 0 40 50 WBL 2 3400 80 0.02 * 3400 80 0.02 * WBT 3 5100 960 0.19 5100 960 0.19 WBR 0 30 30 N/S Movements 0.09 0.09 E/W Movements 0.22 0.23 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.36 0.37 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue INTERSECTION 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 20 0.01 * NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 20 0.01 * NBT 2 3400 90 0.03 3400 90 0.03 NBT 2 3400 90 0.03 3400 90 0.03 NBR 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 90 0.05 * NBR 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 90 0.05 * SBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 40 0.02 SBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 40 0.02 SBT 2 3400 120 0.05 * 3400 120 0.05 * SBT 2 3400 120 0.05 * 3400 120 0.05 * SBR 0 50 50 SBR 0 50 50 EBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 * EBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 * EBT 2 3400 240 0.08 3400 320 0.10 EBT 2 3400 290 0.09 3400 320 0.10 EBR 0 20 20 EBR 0 20 20 WBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 30 0.02 WBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 30 0.02 WBT 2 3400 320 0.10 * 3400 320 0.10 * WBT 2 3400 320 0.10 * 3400 320 0.10 * WBR 0 10 10 WBR 0 10 10 N/S Movements 0.06 0.06 N/S Movements 0.06 0.06 E/W Movements 0.13 0.13 E/W Movements 0.13 0.13 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.25 0.25 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.25 0.25 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 20 0.01 * NBT 2 3400 90 0.03 3400 90 0.03 NBR 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 90 0.05 * SBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 40 0.02 SBT 2 3400 120 0.05 * 3400 120 0.05 * SBR 0 50 50 EBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 EBT 2 3400 330 0.11 * 3400 360 0.12 * EBR 0 60 60 WBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 30 0.02 * WBT 2 3400 320 0.10 3400 320 0.10 WBR 0 10 10 N/S Movements 0.06 0.06 E/W Movements 0.13 0.14 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.25 0.26 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 NBT 1 1700 70 0.06 * 1700 70 0.08 * NBT 1 1700 70 0.08 * 1700 70 0.08 * NBR 0 30 70 NBR 0 60 70 SBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 30 0.02 * SBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 30 0.02 * SBT 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 SBT 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 190 0.11 * SBR 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 190 0.11 * EBL 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 120 0.07 * EBL 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 120 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 830 0.16 5100 1,230 0.24 EBT 3 5100 1,070 0.21 5100 1,230 0.24 EBR 0 10 10 EBR 0 10 10 WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 WBT 3 5100 1,270 0.25 * 5100 1,270 0.25 * WBT 3 5100 1,270 0.25 * 5100 1,270 0.25 * WBR 0 30 30 WBR 0 30 30 N/S Movements 0.08 0.10 N/S Movements 0.09 0.10 E/W Movements 0.33 0.33 E/W Movements 0.33 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.02 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.48 0.50 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.49 0.50 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 NBT 1 1700 70 0.08 * 1700 70 0.08 * NBR 0 60 70 SBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 70 0.04 * SBT 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 190 0.11 * EBL 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 120 0.07 EBT 3 5100 1,580 0.31 5100 1,740 0.34 * EBR 0 10 10 WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 * WBT 3 5100 1,270 0.25 * 5100 1,270 0.25 WBR 0 30 30 N/S Movements 0.12 0.12 E/W Movements 0.33 0.35 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.49 0.53 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way INTERSECTION: 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 2 3400 30 0.01 * 3400 30 0.01 * NBR 2 3400 30 0.01 * 3400 30 0.01 * SBL 2 3400 20 0.01 * 3400 70 0.02 * SBL 2 3400 50 0.01 * 3400 70 0.02 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 10 0.01 * WBL 1.5 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 10 0.01 * WBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 WBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 WBR 1.5 3400 30 0.01 * 3400 30 0.01 WBR 1.5 3400 30 0.01 3400 30 0.01 N/S Movements 0.01 0.02 N/S Movements 0.01 0.02 E/W Movements 0.01 0.01 E/W Movements 0.01 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.07 0.08 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.07 0.08 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 2 3400 30 0.01 * 3400 30 0.01 * SBL 2 3400 150 0.04 * 3400 170 0.05 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 10 0.01 * WBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 WBR 1.5 3400 30 0.01 3400 30 0.01 N/S Movements 0.04 0.05 E/W Movements 0.01 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.10 0.11 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 12 East Street / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 12 East Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 140 0.04 * 3400 160 0.05 * SBL 2 3400 150 0.04 * 3400 160 0.05 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 170 0.10 SBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 170 0.10 EBL 1 1700 230 0.14 * 1700 230 0.14 * EBL 1 1700 230 0.14 * 1700 230 0.14 * EBT 3 5100 950 0.19 5100 1,000 0.20 EBT 3 5100 980 0.19 5100 1,000 0.20 EBR 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 900 0.21 * 5100 900 0.21 * WBT 3 5100 900 0.21 * 5100 900 0.21 * WBR 0 190 190 WBR 0 190 190 N/S Movements 0.04 0.05 N/S Movements 0.04 0.05 E/W Movements 0.35 0.35 E/W Movements 0.35 0.35 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.45 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.45 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 12 East Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 90 90 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 150 0.04 * 3400 160 0.05 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 170 0.10 EBL 1 1700 230 0.14 * 1700 230 0.14 * EBT 3 5100 980 0.19 5100 1,000 0.20 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 900 0.21 * 5100 900 0.21 * WBR 0 190 190 N/S Movements 0.04 0.05 E/W Movements 0.35 0.35 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.45 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 140 0.04 3400 140 0.04 NBL 2 3400 140 0.04 3400 140 0.04 NBT 3 5100 580 0.11 * 5100 580 0.11 * NBT 3 5100 580 0.11 * 5100 580 0.11 * NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 230 0.07 * SBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 230 0.07 * SBT 3 5100 360 0.10 5100 390 0.11 SBT 3 5100 380 0.10 5100 390 0.11 SBR 0 150 150 SBR 0 150 150 EBL 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 170 0.10 * EBL 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 170 0.10 * EBT 3 5100 900 0.20 5100 990 0.21 EBT 3 5100 950 0.21 5100 990 0.21 EBR 0 100 100 EBR 0 100 100 WBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 130 0.08 WBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 130 0.08 WBT 3 5100 790 0.20 * 5100 790 0.20 * WBT 3 5100 790 0.20 * 5100 790 0.20 * WBR 0 230 230 WBR 0 230 230 N/S Movements 0.18 0.18 N/S Movements 0.18 0.18 E/W Movements 0.30 0.30 E/W Movements 0.30 0.30 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.53 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.53 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 140 0.04 * 3400 140 0.04 * NBT 3 5100 580 0.11 5100 580 0.11 NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBL 2 3400 230 0.07 3400 230 0.07 SBT 3 5100 570 0.14 * 5100 580 0.14 * SBR 0 150 150 EBL 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 170 0.10 EBT 3 5100 1,040 0.22 * 5100 1,080 0.23 * EBR 0 100 100 WBL 1 1700 220 0.13 * 1700 220 0.13 * WBT 3 5100 790 0.20 5100 790 0.20 WBR 0 230 230 N/S Movements 0.18 0.18 E/W Movements 0.35 0.36 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.59 0.60 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue INTERSECTION 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 80 0.05 * 1700 80 0.05 NBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 NBT 3 5100 660 0.13 5100 660 0.13 * NBT 3 5100 660 0.13 5100 660 0.13 * NBR 0 20 20 NBR 0 20 20 SBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 40 0.02 * SBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 40 0.02 * SBT 3 5100 470 0.10 * 5100 470 0.10 SBT 3 5100 470 0.10 5100 470 0.10 SBR 0 60 60 SBR 0 60 60 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 60 0.04 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 60 0.04 EBT 2 3400 120 0.06 3400 250 0.10 * EBT 2 3400 190 0.08 * 3400 250 0.10 * EBR 0 90 90 EBR 0 90 90 WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 * WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 20 0.01 * WBT 2 3400 130 0.05 * 3400 130 0.05 WBT 2 3400 130 0.05 3400 130 0.05 WBR 0 30 30 WBR 0 30 30 N/S Movements 0.15 0.16 N/S Movements 0.15 0.16 E/W Movements 0.08 0.11 E/W Movements 0.09 0.11 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.28 0.32 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.30 0.32 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 NBT 3 5100 1,130 0.23 * 5100 1,130 0.23 * NBR 0 20 20 SBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 40 0.02 * SBT 3 5100 470 0.10 5100 470 0.10 SBR 0 60 60 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 60 0.04 EBT 2 3400 190 0.09 * 3400 250 0.11 * EBR 0 130 130 WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 20 0.01 * WBT 2 3400 130 0.05 3400 130 0.05 WBR 0 30 30 N/S Movements 0.24 0.25 E/W Movements 0.11 0.12 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.40 0.42 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3,400 120 0.04 3,400 120 0.04 NBL 2 3,400 120 0.04 3,400 120 0.04 NBT 3 5,100 510 0.13 * 5,100 650 0.20 * NBT 3 5,100 590 0.17 * 5,100 650 0.20 * NBR 0 130 370 NBR 0 270 370 SBL 2 3,400 80 0.02 * 3,400 140 0.04 * SBL 2 3,400 110 0.03 * 3,400 140 0.04 * SBT 3 5,100 410 0.08 5,100 430 0.08 SBT 3 5,100 420 0.08 5,100 430 0.08 SBR 1 1,700 110 0.06 1,700 120 0.07 SBR 1 1,700 120 0.07 1,700 120 0.07 EBL 2 3,400 140 0.04 3,400 170 0.05 EBL 2 3,400 160 0.05 3,400 170 0.05 EBT 2.5 5,100 730 0.14 * 5,100 1,170 0.23 * EBT 2.5 5,100 990 0.19 * 5,100 1,170 0.23 * EBR 1.5 1,700 100 0.06 1,700 100 0.06 EBR 1.5 1,700 100 0.06 1,700 100 0.06 WBL 2 3,400 230 0.07 * 3,400 240 0.07 * WBL 2 3,400 230 0.07 * 3,400 240 0.07 * WBT 3 5,100 850 0.17 5,100 850 0.17 WBT 3 5,100 850 0.17 5,100 850 0.17 WBR 1 1,700 70 0.04 1,700 90 0.05 WBR 1 1,700 80 0.05 1,700 90 0.05 N/S Movements 0.15 0.24 N/S Movements 0.20 0.24 E/W Movements 0.21 0.30 E/W Movements 0.26 0.30 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.59 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.51 0.59 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3,400 160 0.05 3,400 160 0.05 NBT 3 5,100 720 0.21 * 5,100 780 0.24 * NBR 0 360 460 SBL 2 3,400 220 0.06 * 3,400 250 0.07 * SBT 3 5,100 770 0.15 5,100 780 0.15 SBR 1 1,700 140 0.08 1,700 140 0.08 EBL 2 3,400 210 0.06 3,400 220 0.06 EBT 2.5 5,059 1,220 0.24 * 5,100 1,400 0.27 * EBR 1.5 1,741 420 0.24 1,700 420 0.25 WBL 2 3,400 610 0.18 * 3,400 620 0.18 * WBT 3 5,100 1,000 0.20 5,100 1,000 0.20 WBR 1 1,700 100 0.06 1,700 110 0.06 N/S Movements 0.28 0.32 E/W Movements 0.42 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.75 0.82 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Impact PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive INTERSECTION: 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 3 5100 890 0.18 * 5100 1,130 0.22 * NBT 3 5100 1,030 0.20 * 5100 1,130 0.22 * NBR 0 10 10 NBR 0 10 10 SBL 2 3400 10 0.00 * 3400 10 0.00 * SBL 2 3400 10 0.00 * 3400 10 0.00 * SBT 3 5100 690 0.14 5100 690 0.14 SBT 3 5100 690 0.14 5100 690 0.14 SBR 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 30 0.02 * WBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 30 0.02 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 * WBR 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 * N/S Movements 0.18 0.23 N/S Movements 0.21 0.23 E/W Movements 0.02 0.02 E/W Movements 0.02 0.02 Rt. Turn Component 0.03 0.03 Rt. Turn Component 0.03 0.03 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.27 0.32 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.30 0.32 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 * NBT 3 5100 1,120 0.22 5100 1,220 0.24 NBR 0 10 10 SBL 2 3400 70 0.02 3400 70 0.02 SBT 3 5100 1,690 0.33 * 5100 1,690 0.33 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 30 0.02 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 * N/S Movements 0.33 0.33 E/W Movements 0.02 0.02 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.41 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way INTERSECTION: 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 10 0.00 3400 10 0.00 NBL 2 3400 10 0.00 3400 10 0.00 NBT 3 5100 850 0.17 * 5100 1,030 0.20 * NBT 3 5100 960 0.19 * 5100 1,030 0.20 * NBR 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 0 0.00 * 3400 0 0.00 * SBL 2 3400 0 0.00 * 3400 0 0.00 * SBT 3 5100 690 0.14 5100 690 0.14 SBT 3 5100 690 0.14 5100 690 0.14 SBR 0 30 30 SBR 0 30 30 EBL 1.5 3,400 50 0.01 3,400 100 0.03 * EBL 1.5 3,400 80 0.02 3,400 100 0.03 * EBT 1.5 1,700 0 0.02 * 1,700 0 0.02 EBT 1.5 1,700 0 0.02 1,700 0 0.02 EBR 0 40 40 EBR 0 40 40 WBL 1 1700 0 0.00 * 1700 0 0.00 WBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 WBT 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 * WBT 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 * WBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 WBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 N/S Movements 0.17 0.20 N/S Movements 0.19 0.20 E/W Movements 0.02 0.03 E/W Movements 0.02 0.03 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.24 0.28 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.26 0.28 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 10 0.00 3400 10 0.00 NBT 3 5100 1,050 0.37 * 5100 1,120 0.39 * NBR 0 850 850 SBL 2 3400 1,000 0.29 * 3400 1,000 0.29 * SBT 3 5100 690 0.14 5100 690 0.14 SBR 0 30 30 EBL 1.5 2,267 80 0.04 2,550 100 0.04 EBT 1.5 2,833 100 0.05 * 2,550 100 0.05 * EBR 0 40 40 WBL 1 1700 0 0.00 * 1700 0 0.00 * WBT 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 WBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 N/S Movements 0.67 0.68 E/W Movements 0.05 0.05 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.77 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue INTERSECTION: 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 60 0.02 3400 60 0.02 NBL 2 3400 60 0.02 3400 60 0.02 NBT 4 6800 660 0.11 * 6800 770 0.12 * NBT 4 6800 720 0.12 * 6800 770 0.12 * NBR 0 70 70 NBR 0 70 70 SBL 2 3400 70 0.02 * 3400 70 0.02 * SBL 2 3400 70 0.02 * 3400 70 0.02 * SBT 4 6800 540 0.10 6800 540 0.10 SBT 4 6800 540 0.10 6800 540 0.10 SBR 0 150 150 SBR 0 150 150 EBL 2 3400 150 0.04 * 3400 200 0.06 * EBL 2 3400 180 0.05 * 3400 200 0.06 * EBT 3 5100 410 0.09 5100 410 0.09 EBT 3 5100 410 0.09 5100 410 0.09 EBR 0 50 50 EBR 0 50 50 WBL 2 3400 110 0.03 3400 110 0.03 WBL 2 3400 110 0.03 3400 110 0.03 WBT 3 5100 580 0.13 * 5100 580 0.13 * WBT 3 5100 580 0.13 * 5100 580 0.13 * WBR 0 70 70 WBR 0 70 70 N/S Movements 0.13 0.14 N/S Movements 0.14 0.14 E/W Movements 0.17 0.19 E/W Movements 0.18 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.35 0.38 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.37 0.38 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 60 0.02 3400 60 0.02 NBT 4 6800 1,520 0.23 * 6800 1,570 0.24 * NBR 0 70 70 SBL 2 3400 70 0.02 * 3400 70 0.02 * SBT 4 6800 540 0.10 6800 540 0.10 SBR 0 150 150 EBL 2 3400 330 0.10 * 3400 350 0.10 * EBT 3 5100 410 0.09 5100 410 0.09 EBR 0 50 50 WBL 2 3400 110 0.03 3400 110 0.03 WBT 3 5100 580 0.13 * 5100 580 0.13 * WBR 0 70 70 N/S Movements 0.25 0.26 E/W Movements 0.22 0.23 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.54 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps INTERSECTION: 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 40 0.01 3400 40 0.01 NBL 2 3400 40 0.01 3400 40 0.01 NBT 4 6800 690 0.10 * 6800 800 0.12 * NBT 4 6800 750 0.11 * 6800 800 0.12 * NBR (free) 50 85,000 330 0.00 85,000 330 0.00 NBR (free) 50 85,000 330 0.00 85,000 330 0.00 SBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 40 0.02 * SBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 40 0.02 * SBT 4 6800 740 0.11 6800 740 0.11 SBT 4 6800 740 0.11 6800 740 0.11 SBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 SBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 WBL 1.5 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 WBT 1.5 3400 380 0.11 * 3400 380 0.11 * WBT 1.5 3400 380 0.11 * 3400 380 0.11 * WBR 2 3400 230 0.07 3400 230 0.07 WBR 2 3400 230 0.07 3400 230 0.07 N/S Movements 0.13 0.14 N/S Movements 0.13 0.14 E/W Movements 0.11 0.11 E/W Movements 0.11 0.11 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.29 0.30 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.30 0.30 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 40 0.01 3400 40 0.01 NBT 4 6800 1,200 0.18 * 6800 1,250 0.18 * NBR (free) 50 85,000 330 0.00 85,000 330 0.00 SBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 40 0.02 * SBT 4 6800 740 0.11 6800 740 0.11 SBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 WBT 1.5 3400 380 0.11 * 3400 380 0.11 * WBR 2 3400 580 0.17 * 3400 580 0.17 * N/S Movements 0.20 0.21 E/W Movements 0.11 0.11 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.04 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.40 0.40 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps INTERSECTION: 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 5 8500 1,010 0.12 * 8500 1,120 0.13 * NBT 5 8500 1,070 0.13 * 8500 1,120 0.13 * NBR 0 20 20 NBR 0 20 20 SBL 0 0 * 0 * SBL 0 0 * 0 * SBT 4 6800 640 0.09 6800 640 0.09 SBT 4 6800 640 0.09 6800 640 0.09 SBR (free) 50 85000 180 0.00 85,000 180 0.00 SBR (free) 50 85000 180 0.00 85,000 180 0.00 EBL 1.5 1700 60 0.04 1700 60 0.04 EBL 1.5 1700 60 0.04 1700 60 0.04 EBT 0.5 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 150 0.09 * EBT 0.5 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 150 0.09 * EBR 2 3400 360 0.11 * 3400 360 0.11 * EBR 2 3400 360 0.11 * 3400 360 0.11 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.12 0.13 N/S Movements 0.13 0.13 E/W Movements 0.09 0.09 E/W Movements 0.09 0.09 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.02 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.28 0.29 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.28 0.29 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 5 8500 1,520 0.18 * 8500 1,570 0.19 * NBR 0 20 20 SBL 0 0 * 0 * SBT 4 6800 640 0.09 6800 640 0.09 SBR (free) 50 85000 180 0.00 85,000 180 0.00 EBL 1.5 1700 60 0.04 1700 60 0.04 EBT 0.5 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 150 0.09 * EBR 2 3400 360 0.11 * 3400 360 0.11 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.18 0.19 E/W Movements 0.09 0.09 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.34 0.34 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue INTERSECTION 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 250 0.07 NBL 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 250 0.07 NBT 3 5100 950 0.19 * 5100 1,030 0.20 * NBT 3 5100 1,000 0.20 * 5100 1,030 0.20 * NBR 2 3400 100 0.03 3400 100 0.03 NBR 2 3400 100 0.03 3400 100 0.03 SBL 2 3400 320 0.09 * 3400 320 0.09 * SBL 2 3400 320 0.09 * 3400 320 0.09 * SBT 3 5100 990 0.19 5100 990 0.19 SBT 3 5100 990 0.19 5100 990 0.19 SBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 SBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 EBL 2 3400 130 0.04 * 3400 160 0.05 * EBL 2 3400 150 0.04 * 3400 160 0.05 * EBT 3 5100 520 0.10 5100 550 0.11 EBT 3 5100 540 0.11 5100 550 0.11 EBR 1 1700 310 0.18 * 1700 310 0.18 * EBR 1 1700 310 0.18 * 1700 310 0.18 * WBL 2 3400 140 0.04 3400 140 0.04 WBL 2 3400 140 0.04 3400 140 0.04 WBT 3 5100 680 0.13 * 5100 680 0.13 * WBT 3 5100 680 0.13 * 5100 680 0.13 * WBR 1 1700 400 0.24 * 1700 400 0.24 * WBR 1 1700 400 0.24 * 1700 400 0.24 * N/S Movements 0.28 0.30 N/S Movements 0.29 0.30 E/W Movements 0.17 0.18 E/W Movements 0.18 0.18 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.52 0.54 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.54 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 250 0.07 NBT 3 5100 1,350 0.26 * 5100 1,380 0.27 * NBR 2 3400 100 0.03 3400 100 0.03 SBL 2 3400 320 0.09 * 3400 320 0.09 * SBT 3 5100 990 0.19 5100 990 0.19 SBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 EBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 3400 260 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 540 0.11 5100 550 0.11 EBR 1 1700 310 0.18 * 1700 310 0.18 * WBL 2 3400 140 0.04 3400 140 0.04 WBT 3 5100 680 0.13 * 5100 680 0.13 * WBR 1 1700 400 0.24 * 1700 400 0.24 * N/S Movements 0.36 0.36 E/W Movements 0.21 0.21 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.63 0.63 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 40 0.02 1,700 50 0.03 NBL 1 1,700 40 0.02 1,700 50 0.03 NBT 0.5 109 3 0.03 * 109 3 0.03 * NBT 0.5 109 3 0.03 * 109 3 0.03 * NBR 1.5 3,291 100 0.03 3,291 100 0.03 NBR 1.5 3,291 100 0.03 3,291 100 0.03 SBL 1 1,700 100 0.06 * 1,700 170 0.10 * SBL 1 1,700 140 0.08 * 1,700 170 0.10 * SBT 1 1,700 0 0.00 1,700 0 0.00 SBT 1 1,700 0 0.00 1,700 0 0.00 SBR 1 1,700 90 0.05 * 1,700 100 0.06 * SBR 1 1,700 100 0.06 * 1,700 100 0.06 * EBL 1 1,700 60 0.04 * 1,700 60 0.04 EBL 1 1,700 60 0.04 1,700 60 0.04 EBT 3 5,100 850 0.17 5,100 1,490 0.30 * EBT 3 5,100 1,230 0.25 * 5,100 1,490 0.30 * EBR 0 40 60 EBR 0 50 60 WBL 1 1,700 20 0.01 1,700 50 0.03 * WBL 1 1,700 40 0.02 * 1,700 50 0.03 * WBT 3 5,100 950 0.19 * 5,100 1,000 0.20 WBT 3 5,100 980 0.19 5,100 1,000 0.20 WBR 1 1,700 110 0.06 1,700 110 0.06 WBR 1 1,700 110 0.06 1,700 110 0.06 N/S Movements 0.09 0.13 N/S Movements 0.11 0.13 E/W Movements 0.22 0.33 E/W Movements 0.27 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.36 0.51 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.51 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 140 0.08 1,700 150 0.09 NBT 0.5 425 20 0.05 * 425 20 0.05 * NBR 1.5 2,975 140 0.05 2,975 140 0.05 SBL 1 1,700 140 0.08 * 1,700 170 0.10 * SBT 1 1,700 10 0.01 1,700 10 0.01 SBR 1 1,700 100 0.06 1,700 100 0.06 EBL 1 1,700 160 0.09 1,700 160 0.09 EBT 3 5,100 1,470 0.32 * 5,100 1,730 0.37 * EBR 0 150 160 WBL 1 1,700 140 0.08 * 1,700 150 0.09 * WBT 3 5,100 1,270 0.25 5,100 1,290 0.25 WBR 1 1,700 230 0.14 1,700 230 0.14 N/S Movements 0.13 0.15 E/W Movements 0.40 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.58 0.66 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 30 0.02 1,700 40 0.02 NBL 1 1,700 30 0.02 1,700 40 0.02 NBT 2 3,400 130 0.09 * 3,400 160 0.11 * NBT 2 3,400 150 0.11 * 3,400 160 0.11 * NBR 0 180 230 NBR 0 210 230 SBL 1 1,700 240 0.14 * 1,700 240 0.14 * SBL 1 1,700 240 0.14 * 1,700 240 0.14 * SBT 2 3,400 90 0.05 3,400 160 0.07 SBT 2 3,400 130 0.06 3,400 160 0.07 SBR 0 80 90 SBR 0 80 90 EBL 2 3,400 110 0.03 * 3,400 110 0.03 * EBL 2 3,400 110 0.03 * 3,400 110 0.03 * EBT 3 5,100 1,110 0.22 5,100 1,200 0.25 EBT 3 5,100 1,160 0.24 5,100 1,200 0.25 EBR 0 20 70 EBR 0 50 70 WBL 2 3,400 160 0.05 3,400 450 0.13 WBL 2 3,400 330 0.10 3,400 450 0.13 WBT 2 3,400 990 0.29 * 3,400 1,200 0.35 * WBT 2 3,400 1,120 0.33 * 3,400 1,200 0.35 * WBR 1 1,700 370 0.22 1,700 410 0.24 WBR 1 1,700 400 0.24 1,700 410 0.24 N/S Movements 0.23 0.26 N/S Movements 0.25 0.26 E/W Movements 0.32 0.39 E/W Movements 0.36 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.61 0.69 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.69 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 40 0.02 NBT 2 3400 150 0.11 * 3400 160 0.11 * NBR 0 0 210 0 230 SBL 1 1700 240 0.14 * 1700 240 0.14 * SBT 2 3400 180 0.08 3400 210 0.09 SBR 0 0 80 0 90 EBL 2 3400 110 0.03 3400 110 0.03 EBT 3 5100 1,290 0.26 * 5100 1,330 0.27 * EBR 0 50 70 WBL 2 3400 380 0.11 * 3400 500 0.15 * WBT 2 3400 1,120 0.33 3400 1,200 0.35 WBR 1 1,700 400 0.24 1700 410 0.24 N/S Movements 0.25 0.26 E/W Movements 0.37 0.42 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.67 0.73 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Impact Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue INTERSECTION: 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 * 1,700 10 0.01 * NBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 * 1,700 10 0.01 * NBT 2 3,400 70 0.02 3,400 90 0.04 NBT 2 3,400 80 0.03 3,400 90 0.04 NBR 0 0 60 NBR 0 30 60 SBL 0 30 340 SBL 0 210 340 SBT 2 3,400 60 0.05 * 3,400 120 0.16 * SBT 2 3,400 90 0.11 * 3,400 120 0.16 * SBR 0 70 70 SBR 0 70 70 EBL 1 1,700 110 0.06 * 1,700 110 0.06 * EBL 1 1,700 110 0.06 * 1,700 110 0.06 * EBT 2 3,400 60 0.02 3,400 210 0.07 EBT 2 3,400 150 0.05 3,400 210 0.07 EBR 0 20 30 EBR 0 30 30 WBL 1 1,700 0 0.00 1,700 50 0.03 WBL 1 1,700 30 0.02 1,700 50 0.03 WBT 2 3,400 90 0.04 * 3,400 90 0.05 * WBT 2 3,400 90 0.04 * 3,400 90 0.05 * WBR 0 50 70 WBR 0 60 70 N/S Movements 0.05 0.16 N/S Movements 0.11 0.16 E/W Movements 0.11 0.11 E/W Movements 0.11 0.11 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.21 0.32 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.27 0.32 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 * 1,700 10 0.01 * NBT 2 3,400 80 0.03 3,400 90 0.04 NBR 0 30 60 SBL 0 240 370 SBT 2 3,400 110 0.12 * 3,400 140 0.17 * SBR 0 70 70 EBL 1 1,700 110 0.06 * 1,700 110 0.06 * EBT 2 3,400 150 0.05 3,400 210 0.07 EBR 0 30 30 WBL 1 1,700 30 0.02 1,700 50 0.03 WBT 2 3,400 90 0.04 * 3,400 90 0.05 * WBR 0 60 70 N/S Movements 0.13 0.18 E/W Movements 0.11 0.11 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.29 0.34 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 40 0.02 * 1,700 40 0.02 NBL 1 1,700 40 0.02 1,700 40 0.02 NBT 1 1,700 10 0.01 1,700 10 0.01 * NBT 1 1,700 10 0.01 * 1,700 10 0.01 * NBR 1 1,700 80 0.05 * 1,700 120 0.07 * NBR 1 1,700 100 0.06 * 1,700 120 0.07 * SBL 2 3,400 170 0.05 3,400 210 0.06 * SBL 2 3,400 190 0.06 * 3,400 210 0.06 * SBT 0.5 283 10 0.04 * 283 10 0.04 SBT 0.5 283 10 0.04 283 10 0.04 SBR 0.5 1,417 50 0.04 1,417 50 0.04 SBR 0.5 1,417 50 0.04 1,417 50 0.04 EBL 2 3,400 80 0.02 * 3,400 110 0.03 EBL 2 3,400 100 0.03 3,400 110 0.03 EBT 3 5,100 940 0.19 5,100 1,620 0.33 * EBT 3 5,100 1,350 0.28 * 5,100 1,620 0.33 * EBR 0 30 80 EBR 0 60 80 WBL 2 3,400 60 0.02 3,400 190 0.06 * WBL 2 3,400 140 0.04 * 3,400 190 0.06 * WBT 3 5,100 1,000 0.23 * 5,100 1,070 0.27 WBT 3 5,100 1,040 0.25 5,100 1,070 0.27 WBR 0 150 310 WBR 0 250 310 Split phase N/S Movements 0.07 0.09 Split phase N/S Movements 0.08 0.09 E/W Movements 0.25 0.39 E/W Movements 0.32 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.38 0.52 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.45 0.52 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 60 0.04 * 1,700 60 0.04 * NBT 1 1,700 20 0.01 1,700 20 0.01 NBR 1 1,700 140 0.08 * 1,700 160 0.09 * SBL 2 3,400 190 0.06 3,400 210 0.06 SBT 0.5 638 30 0.05 * 638 30 0.05 * SBR 0.5 1,063 50 0.05 1,063 50 0.05 EBL 2 3,400 100 0.03 3,400 110 0.03 EBT 3 5,100 1,480 0.30 * 5,100 1,750 0.36 * EBR 0 60 80 WBL 2 3,400 140 0.04 * 3,400 190 0.06 * WBT 3 5,100 1,040 0.25 5,100 1,070 0.27 WBR 0 250 310 Split phase N/S Movements 0.09 0.10 E/W Movements 0.34 0.41 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.49 0.56 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 26 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps INTERSECTION: 26 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0.5 895 200 0.22 * 1574 750 0.48 * SBL 0.5 1408 530 0.38 * 1574 750 0.48 * SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 2505 560 0.22 * 3892 870 0.22 * SBR 1.5 1992 750 0.38 * 1826 870 0.48 * EBL 0 0 0 * EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,160 0.23 * 5100 1,170 0.23 EBT 3 5100 1,170 0.23 * 5100 1,170 0.23 EBR (free) 50 85000 380 0.00 85000 420 0.00 EBR (free) 50 85000 400 0.00 85000 420 0.00 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 1,000 0.20 5100 1,190 0.23 * WBT 3 5100 1,110 0.22 5100 1,190 0.23 * WBR (free) 50 85000 190 0.00 85000 220 0.00 WBR (free) 50 85000 210 0.00 85000 220 0.00 N/S Movements 0.22 0.48 N/S Movements 0.38 0.48 E/W Movements 0.23 0.23 E/W Movements 0.23 0.23 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.50 0.76 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.76 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 26 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0.5 1408 530 0.38 * 1992 750 0.38 * SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 1992 750 0.38 * 1826 870 0.48 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 1,230 0.24 * 5100 1,230 0.24 * EBR (free) 50 85000 410 0.00 85000 430 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 1,110 0.22 5100 1,190 0.23 WBR (free) 50 85000 240 0.00 85000 250 0.00 N/S Movements 0.38 0.38 E/W Movements 0.24 0.24 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.10 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.67 0.77 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Impact Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 2550 190 0.07 * 2550 590 0.23 * SBL 1.5 2550 430 0.17 * 2550 590 0.23 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 2550 450 0.18 * 2550 640 0.25 * SBR 1.5 2550 560 0.22 * 2550 640 0.25 * EBL 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 890 0.17 * 5100 1,730 0.34 * EBT 3 5100 1,390 0.27 * 5100 1,730 0.34 * EBR (free) 50 85000 280 0.00 85000 320 0.00 EBR (free) 50 85000 300 0.00 85000 320 0.00 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 740 0.15 5100 930 0.18 WBT 3 5100 850 0.17 5100 930 0.18 WBR (free) 50 85000 280 0.00 85000 280 0.00 WBR (free) 50 85000 280 0.00 85000 280 0.00 N/S Movements 0.07 0.23 N/S Movements 0.17 0.23 E/W Movements 0.17 0.34 E/W Movements 0.27 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.10 0.02 Rt. Turn Component 0.05 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.40 0.64 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.64 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 2550 970 0.38 * 2550 1,130 0.44 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 2550 820 0.32 * 2550 900 0.35 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 1,550 0.30 * 5100 1,890 0.37 * EBR (free) 50 85000 330 0.00 85000 350 0.00 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 1,070 0.21 5100 1,150 0.23 WBR (free) 50 85000 300 0.00 85000 300 0.00 N/S Movements 0.38 0.44 E/W Movements 0.30 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.73 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Impact Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps INTERSECTION: 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 470 0.28 * 1700 540 0.32 * NBL 1 1700 510 0.30 * 1700 540 0.32 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 330 0.19 * NBR 1 1700 260 0.15 * 1700 330 0.19 * SBL 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 690 0.14 5100 1,310 0.26 * EBT 3 5100 1,060 0.21 * 5100 1,310 0.26 * EBR (free) 50 85000 640 0.01 85000 650 0.01 EBR (free) 50 85000 640 0.01 85000 650 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 710 0.14 * 5100 890 0.17 WBT 3 5100 820 0.16 5100 890 0.17 WBR (free) 50 85000 300 0.00 85000 330 0.00 WBR (free) 50 85000 320 0.00 85000 330 0.00 N/S Movements 0.28 0.32 N/S Movements 0.30 0.32 E/W Movements 0.14 0.26 E/W Movements 0.21 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.47 0.62 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.62 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 510 0.30 * 1700 540 0.32 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 260 0.15 * 1700 330 0.19 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 1,060 0.21 * 5100 1,310 0.26 * EBR (free) 50 85000 700 0.01 85000 710 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 820 0.16 5100 890 0.17 WBR (free) 50 85000 420 0.00 85000 430 0.01 N/S Movements 0.30 0.32 E/W Movements 0.21 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.62 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2500 250 0.10 * 1700 340 0.20 * NBL 1.5 1700 310 0.18 * 1700 340 0.20 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 2600 260 0.10 * 3400 1,300 0.38 * NBR 1.5 3400 880 0.26 * 3400 1,300 0.38 * SBL 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 5 8500 670 0.08 8500 1,880 0.22 * EBT 5 8500 1,390 0.16 * 8500 1,880 0.22 * EBR (free) 50 85000 460 0.01 85000 460 0.01 EBR (free) 50 85000 460 0.01 85000 460 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 790 0.15 * 5100 790 0.15 WBT 3 5100 790 0.15 5100 790 0.15 WBR 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 220 0.13 WBR 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 220 0.13 N/S Movements 0.10 0.20 N/S Movements 0.18 0.20 E/W Movements 0.15 0.22 E/W Movements 0.16 0.22 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.18 Rt. Turn Component 0.08 0.18 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.30 0.65 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.47 0.65 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 360 0.21 * 1700 390 0.23 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3400 1,100 0.32 * 3400 1,520 0.45 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 5 8500 2,030 0.24 * 8500 2,520 0.30 * EBR (free) 50 85000 520 0.01 85000 520 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 970 0.19 5100 970 0.19 WBR 1 1700 270 0.16 1700 270 0.16 N/S Movements 0.21 0.23 E/W Movements 0.24 0.30 Rt. Turn Component 0.11 0.22 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.61 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Impact Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 100 0.06 * NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 100 0.06 * NBT 1 1700 4 0.01 1700 70 0.06 NBT 1 1700 40 0.04 1700 70 0.06 NBR 0 0 10 0 30 NBR 0 0 20 0 30 SBL 1 1,700 50 0.03 1,700 70 0.04 SBL 1 1,700 60 0.04 1,700 70 0.04 SBT 0.5 23 1 0.05 * 200 10 0.05 * SBT 0.5 200 10 0.05 * 200 10 0.05 * SBR 1.5 3,377 160 0.05 3,200 160 0.05 SBR 1.5 3,200 160 0.05 3,200 160 0.05 EBL 2 3400 70 0.02 * 3400 1,440 0.42 * EBL 2 3400 880 0.26 * 3400 1,440 0.42 * EBT 3 5100 820 0.16 5100 1,440 0.28 EBT 3 5100 1,190 0.23 5100 1,440 0.28 EBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 200 0.12 EBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 200 0.12 WBL 2 3400 10 0.00 3400 90 0.03 WBL 2 3400 60 0.02 3400 90 0.03 WBT 3 5100 760 0.15 * 5100 760 0.15 * WBT 3 5100 760 0.15 * 5100 760 0.15 * WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 380 0.22 * WBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 380 0.22 * N/S Movements 0.07 0.11 N/S Movements 0.09 0.11 E/W Movements 0.17 0.57 E/W Movements 0.41 0.57 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.03 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.03 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.29 0.76 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.76 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 100 0.06 * NBT 1 1700 40 0.04 1700 70 0.06 NBR 0 0 30 0 40 SBL 1 1,700 70 0.04 1,700 80 0.05 SBT 0.5 816 60 0.07 * 816 60 0.07 * SBR 1.5 2,584 190 0.07 2,584 190 0.07 EBL 2 3400 880 0.26 * 3400 1,440 0.42 * EBT 3 5100 1,260 0.25 5100 1,510 0.30 EBR 1 1700 980 0.58 * 1700 1,050 0.62 * WBL 2 3400 350 0.10 3400 380 0.11 WBT 3 5100 960 0.19 * 5100 960 0.19 * WBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 380 0.22 N/S Movements 0.11 0.13 E/W Movements 0.45 0.61 Rt. Turn Component 0.29 0.26 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 1.06 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D F Impact Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1 1,700 100 0.06 NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1 1700 100 0.06 NBT 1 1700 4 0.01 * 1 1,700 70 0.06 * NBT 1 1700 40 0.04 * 1 1700 70 0.06 * NBR 0 0 10 0 30 NBR 0 0 20 0 0 30 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1 1,700 70 0.04 * SBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1 1700 70 0.04 * SBT 0.5 850 1 0.00 0.5 850 10 0.01 SBT 0.5 850 10 0.01 0.5 850 10 0.01 SBR 1.5 2550 160 0.06 * 1.5 2,550 160 0.06 SBR 1.5 2550 160 0.06 1.5 2550 160 0.06 EBL 2 3400 70 0.02 * 2 3,400 1,440 0.42 * EBL 2 3400 880 0.26 * 2 3400 1,440 0.42 * EBT 3 5100 820 0.16 3 5,100 1,440 0.28 EBT 3 5100 1,190 0.23 3 5100 1,440 0.28 EBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1 1,700 200 0.12 EBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1 1700 200 0.12 WBL 2 3400 10 0.00 2 3,400 90 0.03 WBL 2 3400 60 0.02 2 3400 90 0.03 WBT 3 5100 760 0.15 * 3 5,100 760 0.15 * WBT 3 5100 760 0.15 * 3 5100 760 0.15 * WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1 1,700 380 0.22 * WBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1 1700 380 0.22 * N/S Movements 0.04 0.10 N/S Movements 0.07 0.10 E/W Movements 0.17 0.57 E/W Movements 0.41 0.57 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.03 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.03 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.27 0.76 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.76 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1 1700 100 0.06 * NBT 1 1700 40 0.04 1 1700 70 0.06 NBR 0 0 30 0 0 40 SBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1 1700 80 0.05 SBT 0.5 850 60 0.07 * 0.5 850 60 0.07 * SBR 1.5 2550 190 0.07 1.5 2550 190 0.07 EBL 2 3400 880 0.26 * 2 3400 1,440 0.42 * EBT 3 5100 1,260 0.25 3 5100 1,510 0.30 EBR 1 1700 980 0.58 * 2 3400 1,050 0.31 WBL 2 3400 350 0.10 2 3400 380 0.11 WBT 3 5100 960 0.19 * 3 5100 960 0.19 * WBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1 1700 380 0.22 N/S Movements 0.11 0.13 E/W Movements 0.45 0.61 Rt. Turn Component 0.29 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D C Add EBR Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.33 2,720 120 0.04 * 2,600 130 0.05 * NBL 1.33 2,600 130 0.05 * 2,600 130 0.05 * NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.33 680 30 0.04 * 800 40 0.05 NBR 0.33 800 40 0.06 800 40 0.05 SBL 1 1,700 0 0.00 1,700 0 0.00 SBL 1 1,700 0 0.00 1,700 0 0.00 SBT 1 1,700 0 0.01 * 1,700 0 0.02 * SBT 1 1,700 0 0.01 * 1,700 0 0.02 * SBR 0 10 30 SBR 0 20 30 EBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 * 1,700 30 0.02 * EBL 1 1,700 20 0.01 * 1,700 30 0.02 * EBT 2 3,400 760 0.22 3,400 800 0.24 EBT 2 3,400 780 0.23 3,400 800 0.24 EBR 1 1,700 100 0.06 1,700 790 0.46 * EBR 1 1,700 510 0.30 * 1,700 790 0.46 * WBL 1 1,700 20 0.01 1,700 150 0.09 WBL 1 1,700 100 0.06 1,700 150 0.09 WBT 2 3,400 880 0.26 * 3,400 1,060 0.31 * WBT 2 3,400 990 0.29 * 3,400 1,060 0.31 * WBR 0 0 10 WBR 0 0 10 N/S Movements 0.05 0.07 N/S Movements 0.06 0.07 E/W Movements 0.26 0.33 E/W Movements 0.30 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.18 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.18 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.36 0.63 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.63 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.33 2,550 150 0.06 * 2,550 150 0.06 * NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.33 850 50 0.06 850 50 0.06 SBL 1 1,700 0 0.00 1,700 0 0.00 SBT 1 1,700 0 0.01 * 1,700 0 0.02 * SBR 0 20 30 EBL 1 1,700 30 0.02 * 1,700 40 0.02 * EBT 2 3,400 780 0.23 3,400 800 0.24 EBR 1 1,700 560 0.33 * 1,700 840 0.49 * WBL 1 1,700 110 0.06 1,700 160 0.09 WBT 2 3,400 1,040 0.31 * 3,400 1,110 0.33 * WBR 0 10 20 N/S Movements 0.07 0.08 E/W Movements 0.33 0.36 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.20 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.49 0.68 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue INTERSECTION: 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3,211 170 0.05 * 3,117 220 0.07 * NBL 1.5 3,238 200 0.06 * 3,117 220 0.07 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.5 189 10 0.05 * 283 20 0.07 * NBR 0.5 162 10 0.06 * 283 20 0.07 * SBL 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3 5,100 750 0.15 * 5,100 750 0.15 EBT 3 5,100 750 0.15 5,100 750 0.15 EBR 1 1,700 150 0.09 1,700 190 0.11 EBR 1 1,700 180 0.11 1,700 190 0.11 WBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 * 1,700 80 0.05 WBL 1 1,700 50 0.03 1,700 80 0.05 WBT 3 5,100 650 0.13 5,100 1,470 0.29 * WBT 3 5,100 1,140 0.22 * 5,100 1,470 0.29 * WBR 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.05 0.07 N/S Movements 0.06 0.07 E/W Movements 0.15 0.29 E/W Movements 0.22 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.26 0.41 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.34 0.41 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3,104 210 0.07 * 3,008 230 0.08 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.5 296 20 0.07 * 392 30 0.08 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3 5,100 750 0.15 5,100 750 0.15 EBR 1 1,700 180 0.11 1,700 190 0.11 WBL 1 1,700 60 0.04 1,700 90 0.05 WBT 3 5,100 1,530 0.30 * 5,100 1,860 0.36 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.07 0.08 E/W Movements 0.30 0.36 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.42 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue INTERSECTION: 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3287 290 0.09 * 3294 310 0.09 * NBL 1.5 3290 300 0.09 * 3294 310 0.09 * NBT 0.5 113 10 0.09 106 10 0.09 NBT 0.5 110 10 0.09 106 10 0.09 NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 SBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 SBT 1 1700 10 0.04 * 1700 10 0.04 * SBT 1 1700 10 0.04 * 1700 10 0.04 * SBR 0 60 60 SBR 0 60 60 EBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 30 0.02 EBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 30 0.02 EBT 2 3400 670 0.23 * 3400 670 0.23 * EBT 2 3400 670 0.23 * 3400 670 0.23 * EBR 0 100 100 EBR 0 100 100 WBL 1 1700 100 0.06 * 1700 100 0.06 * WBL 1 1700 100 0.06 * 1700 100 0.06 * WBT 2 3400 590 0.17 3400 690 0.20 WBT 2 3400 650 0.19 3400 690 0.20 WBR 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.13 0.14 N/S Movements 0.13 0.14 E/W Movements 0.29 0.29 E/W Movements 0.29 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.46 0.47 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.47 0.47 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3400 300 0.09 * 3294 310 0.09 * NBT 0.5 113 10 0.09 106 10 0.09 NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 SBT 1 1700 10 0.04 * 1700 10 0.04 * SBR 0 60 60 EBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 30 0.02 EBT 2 3400 670 0.23 * 3400 670 0.23 * EBR 0 100 100 WBL 1 1700 100 0.06 * 1700 100 0.06 * WBT 2 3400 650 0.19 3400 690 0.20 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.13 0.14 E/W Movements 0.29 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.46 0.47 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3,400 130 0.04 3,400 230 0.07 NBL 2 3,400 190 0.06 3,400 230 0.07 NBT 2 3,400 210 0.06 * 3,400 320 0.09 * NBT 2 3,400 280 0.08 * 3,400 320 0.09 * NBR 1 1,700 190 0.11 1,700 220 0.13 NBR 1 1,700 210 0.12 1,700 220 0.13 SBL 1 1,700 90 0.05 * 1,700 90 0.05 * SBL 1 1,700 90 0.05 * 1,700 90 0.05 * SBT 2 3,400 140 0.04 3,400 190 0.06 SBT 2 3,400 170 0.05 3,400 190 0.06 SBR 1 1,700 80 0.05 1,700 170 0.10 * SBR 1 1,700 130 0.08 1,700 170 0.10 * EBL 1 1,700 70 0.04 * 1,700 70 0.04 * EBL 1 1,700 70 0.04 * 1,700 70 0.04 * EBT 3 5,100 460 0.09 5,100 480 0.09 EBT 3 5,100 470 0.09 5,100 480 0.09 EBR 1 1,700 40 0.02 1,700 50 0.03 EBR 1 1,700 50 0.03 1,700 50 0.03 WBL 1 1,700 140 0.08 1,700 180 0.11 WBL 1 1,700 160 0.09 1,700 180 0.11 WBT 3 5,100 620 0.14 * 5,100 1,180 0.25 * WBT 3 5,100 950 0.20 * 5,100 1,180 0.25 * WBR 0 90 100 WBR 0 90 100 N/S Movements 0.11 0.15 N/S Movements 0.14 0.15 E/W Movements 0.18 0.29 E/W Movements 0.25 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.35 0.49 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.43 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 190 0.06 3,400 230 0.07 NBT 2 3400 280 0.08 * 3,400 320 0.09 * NBR 1 1700 210 0.12 1,700 220 0.13 SBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1,700 90 0.05 * SBT 2 3400 170 0.05 3,400 190 0.06 SBR 1 1700 150 0.09 1,700 190 0.11 * EBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1,700 70 0.04 * EBT 3 5100 480 0.09 5,100 490 0.10 EBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1,700 50 0.03 WBL 1 1700 160 0.09 1,700 180 0.11 WBT 3 5100 1,210 0.26 * 5,100 1,440 0.31 * WBR 0 110 120 N/S Movements 0.14 0.15 E/W Movements 0.30 0.35 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.49 0.54 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue INTERSECTION: 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 80 0.05 1,700 230 0.14 * NBL 1 1,700 170 0.10 * 1,700 230 0.14 * NBT 2 3,400 490 0.14 * 3,400 710 0.21 NBT 2 3,400 620 0.18 3,400 710 0.21 NBR 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 * 1,700 10 0.01 SBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 1,700 10 0.01 SBT 2 3,400 290 0.09 3,400 320 0.12 * SBT 2 3,400 310 0.11 * 3,400 320 0.12 * SBR 0 20 80 SBR 0 60 80 EBL 1 1,700 20 0.01 1,700 30 0.02 EBL 1 1,700 20 0.01 1,700 30 0.02 EBT 1 1,700 40 0.08 * 1,700 50 0.09 * EBT 1 1,700 40 0.08 * 1,700 50 0.09 * EBR 0 90 100 EBR 0 100 100 WBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 * 1,700 10 0.01 * WBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 * 1,700 10 0.01 * WBT 1 1,700 30 0.03 1,700 80 0.06 WBT 1 1,700 60 0.05 1,700 80 0.06 WBR 0 20 20 WBR 0 20 20 N/S Movements 0.15 0.25 N/S Movements 0.21 0.25 E/W Movements 0.08 0.09 E/W Movements 0.09 0.09 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.28 0.40 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.35 0.40 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 200 0.12 * 1,700 260 0.15 * NBT 2 3,400 620 0.19 3,400 710 0.21 NBR 0 20 20 SBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 1,700 10 0.01 SBT 2 3,400 310 0.11 * 3,400 320 0.12 * SBR 0 60 80 EBL 1 1,700 20 0.01 1,700 30 0.02 EBT 1 1,700 60 0.10 * 1,700 70 0.11 * EBR 0 110 110 WBL 1 1,700 20 0.01 * 1,700 20 0.01 * WBT 1 1,700 70 0.06 1,700 90 0.07 WBR 0 30 30 N/S Movements 0.23 0.27 E/W Movements 0.11 0.12 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.39 0.44 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue INTERSECTION: 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 110 0.06 * NBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 110 0.06 * NBT 2 3400 150 0.06 3400 150 0.06 NBT 2 3400 150 0.06 3400 150 0.06 NBR 0 40 40 NBR 0 40 40 SBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 SBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 SBT 2 3400 140 0.08 * 3400 140 0.09 * SBT 2 3400 140 0.09 * 3400 140 0.09 * SBR 0 140 160 SBR 0 150 160 EBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 150 0.09 * EBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 150 0.09 * EBT 2 3400 600 0.18 3400 600 0.18 EBT 2 3400 600 0.18 3400 600 0.18 EBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 EBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 WBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 WBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 WBT 2 3400 470 0.14 * 3400 550 0.16 * WBT 2 3400 520 0.15 * 3400 550 0.16 * WBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 WBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 N/S Movements 0.15 0.15 N/S Movements 0.15 0.15 E/W Movements 0.23 0.25 E/W Movements 0.24 0.25 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.42 0.45 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.45 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 110 0.06 * NBT 2 3400 150 0.06 3400 150 0.06 NBR 0 40 40 SBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 SBT 2 3400 140 0.09 * 3400 140 0.09 * SBR 0 150 160 EBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 150 0.09 * EBT 2 3400 600 0.18 3400 600 0.18 EBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 WBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 WBT 2 3400 520 0.15 * 3400 550 0.16 * WBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 N/S Movements 0.15 0.15 E/W Movements 0.24 0.25 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.45 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 40 0.02 NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 40 0.02 NBT 2 3400 190 0.06 * 3400 190 0.06 * NBT 2 3400 190 0.06 * 3400 190 0.06 * NBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 SBL 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 120 0.07 * SBL 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 120 0.07 * SBT 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 130 0.04 SBT 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 130 0.04 SBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 SBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 EBL 1 1700 80 0.05 * 1700 80 0.05 * EBL 1 1700 80 0.05 * 1700 80 0.05 * EBT 3 5100 710 0.14 5100 710 0.14 EBT 3 5100 710 0.14 5100 710 0.14 EBR 0 20 20 EBR 0 20 20 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 WBT 3 5100 610 0.16 * 5100 980 0.23 * WBT 3 5100 830 0.20 * 5100 980 0.23 * WBR 0 190 190 WBR 0 190 190 N/S Movements 0.13 0.13 N/S Movements 0.13 0.13 E/W Movements 0.20 0.28 E/W Movements 0.25 0.28 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.38 0.45 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.42 0.45 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 40 0.02 NBT 2 3400 190 0.06 * 3400 190 0.06 * NBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 SBL 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 120 0.07 * SBT 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 130 0.04 SBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 EBL 1 1700 80 0.05 * 1700 80 0.05 * EBT 3 5100 710 0.14 5100 710 0.14 EBR 0 20 20 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 WBT 3 5100 1,090 0.25 * 5100 1,240 0.28 * WBR 0 190 190 N/S Movements 0.13 0.13 E/W Movements 0.30 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.47 0.50 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue INTERSECTION: 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 NBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 NBT 3 5100 620 0.15 * 5100 620 0.15 * NBT 3 5100 620 0.15 * 5100 620 0.15 * NBR 0 120 120 NBR 0 120 120 SBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBT 3 5100 460 0.12 5100 460 0.12 SBT 3 5100 460 0.12 5100 460 0.12 SBR 0 140 140 SBR 0 140 140 EBL 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 190 0.11 * EBL 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 190 0.11 * EBT 2 3400 410 0.12 3400 410 0.12 EBT 2 3400 410 0.12 3400 410 0.12 EBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 EBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 WBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 WBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 WBT 2 3400 250 0.07 * 3400 290 0.09 * WBT 2 3400 280 0.08 * 3400 290 0.09 * WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 N/S Movements 0.19 0.21 N/S Movements 0.20 0.21 E/W Movements 0.19 0.20 E/W Movements 0.19 0.20 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.42 0.46 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.46 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 NBT 3 5100 620 0.15 * 5100 620 0.15 * NBR 0 120 120 SBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBT 3 5100 530 0.13 5100 530 0.13 SBR 0 140 140 EBL 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 190 0.11 * EBT 2 3400 410 0.12 3400 410 0.12 EBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 WBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 WBT 2 3400 280 0.08 * 3400 290 0.09 * WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 N/S Movements 0.20 0.21 E/W Movements 0.19 0.20 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.46 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 130 0.08 NBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 130 0.08 NBT 2 3400 400 0.12 * 3400 400 0.12 * NBT 2 3400 400 0.12 * 3400 400 0.12 * NBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 130 0.08 NBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 130 0.08 SBL 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 140 0.08 * SBL 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 140 0.08 * SBT 2 3400 370 0.11 3400 370 0.11 SBT 2 3400 370 0.11 3400 370 0.11 SBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 130 0.08 SBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 130 0.08 EBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 230 0.07 * EBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 230 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 770 0.17 5100 770 0.17 EBT 3 5100 770 0.17 5100 770 0.17 EBR 0 90 90 EBR 0 90 90 WBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 160 0.05 WBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 160 0.05 WBT 3 5100 720 0.17 * 5100 1,090 0.24 * WBT 3 5100 940 0.21 * 5100 1,090 0.24 * WBR 0 140 140 WBR 0 140 140 N/S Movements 0.20 0.20 N/S Movements 0.20 0.20 E/W Movements 0.24 0.31 E/W Movements 0.28 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.49 0.56 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.56 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 130 0.08 NBT 2 3400 400 0.12 * 3400 400 0.12 * NBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 130 0.08 SBL 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 140 0.08 * SBT 2 3400 370 0.11 3400 370 0.11 SBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 200 0.12 EBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 230 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 770 0.17 5100 770 0.17 EBR 0 90 90 WBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 160 0.05 WBT 3 5100 1,100 0.24 * 5100 1,250 0.27 * WBR 0 140 140 N/S Movements 0.20 0.20 E/W Movements 0.31 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.59 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 40 N Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 40 N Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0.33 600 60 0.10 600 60 0.10 NBL 0.33 600 60 0.10 600 60 0.10 NBT 0.34 300 30 0.10 300 30 0.10 NBT 0.34 300 30 0.10 300 30 0.10 NBR 0.33 800 80 0.10 800 80 0.10 NBR 0.33 800 80 0.10 800 80 0.10 SBL 0.33 340 10 0.03 340 10 0.03 SBL 0.33 340 10 0.03 340 10 0.03 SBT 0.34 680 20 0.03 680 20 0.03 SBT 0.34 680 20 0.03 680 20 0.03 SBR 0.33 680 20 0.03 680 20 0.03 SBR 0.33 680 20 0.03 680 20 0.03 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 EBT 3 5100 1,030 0.21 * 5100 1,030 0.21 * EBT 3 5100 1,030 0.21 * 5100 1,030 0.21 * EBR 0 40 40 EBR 0 40 40 WBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 40 0.02 * WBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 40 0.02 * WBT 3 5100 840 0.17 5100 1,120 0.22 WBT 3 5100 1,010 0.20 5100 1,120 0.22 WBR 0 20 20 WBR 0 20 20 N/S Movements 0.13 0.13 N/S Movements 0.13 0.13 E/W Movements 0.23 0.23 E/W Movements 0.23 0.23 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.41 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.41 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 40 N Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0.33 600 60 0.10 600 60 0.10 NBT 0.34 300 30 0.10 300 30 0.10 NBR 0.33 800 80 0.10 800 80 0.10 SBL 0.33 340 10 0.03 340 10 0.03 SBT 0.34 680 20 0.03 680 20 0.03 SBR 0.33 680 20 0.03 680 20 0.03 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 10 0.01 * EBT 3 5100 1,030 0.21 5100 1,030 0.21 EBR 0 40 40 WBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 40 0.02 WBT 3 5100 1,170 0.23 * 5100 1,280 0.25 * WBR 0 20 20 N/S Movements 0.13 0.13 E/W Movements 0.24 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.42 0.44 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 41 N Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 41 N Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 NBT 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 150 0.09 * NBT 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 150 0.09 * NBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 NBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 SBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBT 1 1700 190 0.11 1700 190 0.11 SBT 1 1700 190 0.11 1700 190 0.11 SBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 SBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 60 0.04 * EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 60 0.04 * EBT 3 5100 990 0.20 * 5100 990 0.20 EBT 3 5100 990 0.20 5100 990 0.20 EBR 0 50 50 EBR 0 50 50 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 90 0.05 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 WBT 3 5100 820 0.21 5100 1,100 0.26 * WBT 3 5100 990 0.24 * 5100 1,100 0.26 * WBR 0 230 230 WBR 0 230 230 N/S Movements 0.15 0.15 N/S Movements 0.15 0.15 E/W Movements 0.26 0.30 E/W Movements 0.27 0.30 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.46 0.50 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.48 0.50 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 41 N Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 NBT 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 150 0.09 * NBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 SBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBT 1 1700 190 0.11 1700 190 0.11 SBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 60 0.04 * EBT 3 5100 990 0.20 5100 990 0.20 EBR 0 50 50 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 WBT 3 5100 1,150 0.27 * 5100 1,260 0.29 * WBR 0 230 230 N/S Movements 0.15 0.15 E/W Movements 0.31 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.51 0.53 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 42 N Tustin Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 42 N Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 240 0.0706 3400 360 0.1059 NBL 2 3400 320 0.09 3400 380 0.11 NBT 3 5100 820 0.1608 * 5100 1,370 0.2686 * NBT 3 5100 820 0.16 * 5100 820 0.16 * NBR 1 1700 420 0.2471 1700 530 0.3118 NBR 1 1700 420 0.25 1700 420 0.25 SBL 2 3400 490 0.1441 * 3400 840 0.2471 * SBL 2 3400 490 0.14 * 3400 490 0.14 * SBT 3 5100 680 0.1627 5100 1,260 0.2902 SBT 3 5100 680 0.16 5100 680 0.16 SBR 0 150 220 SBR 0 150 150 EBL 2 3400 250 0.0735 3400 270 0.0794 EBL 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 250 0.07 EBT 3 5100 990 0.1941 * 5100 1,540 0.3020 * EBT 3 5100 990 0.19 * 5100 990 0.19 * EBR 1 1700 140 0.0824 1700 320 0.1882 EBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 WBL 2 3400 420 0.1235 * 3400 460 0.1353 * WBL 2 3400 420 0.12 * 3400 420 0.12 * WBT 3 5100 860 0.1686 5100 1,190 0.2333 WBT 3 5100 940 0.18 5100 1,000 0.20 WBR 1 1700 650 0.3824 * 1700 780 0.4588 WBR 1 1700 650 0.38 * 1700 650 0.38 * N/S Movements 0.30 0.52 N/S Movements 0.30 0.30 E/W Movements 0.32 0.44 E/W Movements 0.32 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0..00 0.04 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.67 1.00 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.67 0.71 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 42 N Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 350 0.10 3400 410 0.12 NBT 3 5100 820 0.16 * 5100 820 0.16 * NBR 1 1700 420 0.25 1700 420 0.25 SBL 2 3400 490 0.14 * 3400 490 0.14 * SBT 3 5100 680 0.17 5100 680 0.17 SBR 0 180 180 EBL 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 250 0.07 EBT 3 5100 990 0.19 * 5100 990 0.19 * EBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 WBL 2 3400 420 0.12 * 3400 420 0.12 * WBT 3 5100 1,040 0.20 5100 1,100 0.22 WBR 1 1700 650 0.38 * 1700 650 0.38 * N/S Movements 0.30 0.30 E/W Movements 0.32 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.03 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.71 0.70 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C B Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 350 0.10 * 3400 350 0.10 * SBL 2 3400 350 0.10 * 3400 350 0.10 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 390 0.23 * 1700 390 0.23 * SBR 1 1700 390 0.23 * 1700 390 0.23 * EBL 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 2.5 3,610 1,030 0.29 * 3,610 1,030 0.29 * EBT 2.5 3,610 1,030 0.29 * 3,610 1,030 0.29 * EBR 1.5 3,190 910 0.29 3,190 910 0.29 EBR 1.5 3,190 910 0.29 3,190 910 0.29 WBL 1 1700 530 0.31 * 1700 530 0.31 * WBL 1 1700 530 0.31 * 1700 530 0.31 * WBT 3 5100 1,630 0.32 5100 1,770 0.35 WBT 3 5100 1,710 0.34 5100 1,770 0.35 WBR 50 85000 0 0.00 85000 0 0.00 WBR 50 85000 0 0.00 85000 0 0.00 N/S Movements 0.10 0.10 N/S Movements 0.10 0.10 E/W Movements 0.60 0.60 E/W Movements 0.60 0.60 Rt. Turn Component 0.13 0.13 Rt. Turn Component 0.13 0.13 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.88 0.88 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.88 0.88 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 350 0.10 * 3400 350 0.10 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 390 0.23 * 1700 390 0.23 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 2.5 3,610 1,030 0.29 * 3,610 1,030 0.29 * EBR 1.5 3,190 910 0.29 3,190 910 0.29 WBL 1 1700 530 0.31 * 1700 530 0.31 * WBT 3 5100 1,810 0.35 5100 1,870 0.37 WBR 50 85000 0 0.00 85000 0 0.00 N/S Movements 0.10 0.10 E/W Movements 0.60 0.60 Rt. Turn Component 0.13 0.13 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.88 0.88 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 1,100 0.32 * 3400 1,100 0.32 * NBL 2 3400 1,100 0.32 * 3400 1,100 0.32 * NBT 0 10 0.00 10 0.00 NBT 0 10 0.00 10 0.00 NBR 1 1700 850 0.50 * 1700 850 0.50 * NBR 1 1700 850 0.50 * 1700 850 0.50 * SBL 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 30 0.02 * SBR 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 30 0.02 * EBL 0 0 0 * EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 2 3400 930 0.27 * 3400 930 0.27 EBT 2 3400 930 0.27 3400 930 0.27 EBR (free) 50 85000 460 0.01 85000 460 0.01 EBR (free) 50 85000 460 0.01 85000 460 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 1,340 0.26 5100 1,480 0.29 * WBT 3 5100 1,420 0.28 * 5100 1,480 0.29 * WBR (free) 50 85000 290 0.00 85000 290 0.00 WBR (free) 50 85000 290 0.00 85000 290 0.00 N/S Movements 0.32 0.32 N/S Movements 0.32 0.32 E/W Movements 0.27 0.29 E/W Movements 0.28 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.19 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.19 0.19 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.84 0.86 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 1,100 0.32 * 3400 1,100 0.32 * NBT 0 10 0.00 10 0.00 NBR 1 1700 850 0.50 * 1700 850 0.50 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 30 0.02 * EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 2 3400 930 0.27 3400 930 0.27 EBR (free) 50 85000 460 0.01 85000 460 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 1,520 0.30 * 5100 1,580 0.31 * WBR (free) 50 85000 290 0.00 85000 290 0.00 N/S Movements 0.32 0.32 E/W Movements 0.30 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.19 0.19 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.87 0.88 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX G-3: ICU WORKSHEETS UNDER 2030 FUTURE YEAR CONDITIONS SCENARIO 1: NO EVENTS SCENARIO 2: WITH AAHC EVENT SCENARIO 3: WITH AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT SCENARIO 4: WITH PROJECT SCENARIO 5: WITH PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 1 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 630 0.19 * 3400 630 0.19 * NBL 2 3400 630 0.19 * 3400 630 0.19 * NBT 3 5100 1,090 0.21 5100 1,090 0.21 NBT 3 5100 1,090 0.21 5100 1,090 0.21 NBR 1 1700 230 0.14 1700 230 0.14 NBR 1 1700 230 0.14 1700 230 0.14 SBL 2 3400 200 0.06 3400 200 0.06 SBL 2 3400 200 0.06 3400 200 0.06 SBT 3 5100 730 0.14 * 5100 730 0.14 * SBT 3 5100 730 0.14 * 5100 730 0.14 * SBR 1 1700 580 0.34 * 1700 580 0.34 * SBR 1 1700 580 0.34 * 1700 580 0.34 * EBL 2 3400 510 0.15 * 3400 510 0.15 * EBL 2 3400 510 0.15 * 3400 510 0.15 * EBT 4 6800 1,730 0.28 6800 1,860 0.30 EBT 4 6800 1,810 0.29 6800 1,860 0.30 EBR 0 170 170 EBR 0 170 170 WBL 2 3400 420 0.12 3400 420 0.12 WBL 2 3400 420 0.12 3400 420 0.12 WBT 4 6800 2,350 0.37 * 6800 2,350 0.37 * WBT 4 6800 2,350 0.37 * 6800 2,350 0.37 * WBR 0 170 170 WBR 0 170 170 N/S Movements 0.33 0.33 N/S Movements 0.33 0.33 E/W Movements 0.52 0.52 E/W Movements 0.52 0.52 Rt. Turn Component 0.05 0.05 Rt. Turn Component 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.95 0.95 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.95 0.95 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 1 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 630 0.19 * 3400 630 0.19 * NBT 3 5100 1,090 0.21 5100 1,090 0.21 NBR 1 1700 230 0.14 1700 230 0.14 SBL 2 3400 200 0.06 3400 200 0.06 SBT 3 5100 730 0.14 * 5100 730 0.14 * SBR 1 1700 580 0.34 * 1700 580 0.34 * EBL 2 3400 510 0.15 * 3400 510 0.15 * EBT 4 6800 1,900 0.30 6800 1,950 0.31 EBR 0 170 170 WBL 2 3400 420 0.12 3400 420 0.12 WBT 4 6800 2,350 0.37 * 6800 2,350 0.37 * WBR 0 170 170 N/S Movements 0.33 0.33 E/W Movements 0.52 0.52 Rt. Turn Component 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.95 0.95 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E CMP Intersection, LOS E is acceptable Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 2 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 120 0.07 NBL 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 120 0.07 NBT 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 120 0.07 * NBT 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 120 0.07 * NBR 1 1700 430 0.25 * 1700 430 0.25 * NBR 1 1700 430 0.25 * 1700 430 0.25 * SBL 1 1700 300 0.18 * 1700 300 0.18 * SBL 1 1700 300 0.18 * 1700 300 0.18 * SBT 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBT 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 SBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 EBL 2 3400 90 0.03 * 3400 90 0.03 * EBL 2 3400 90 0.03 * 3400 90 0.03 * EBT 4 6800 1,950 0.30 6800 2,130 0.32 EBT 4 6800 2,060 0.31 6800 2,130 0.32 EBR 0 70 70 EBR 0 70 70 WBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 160 0.05 WBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 160 0.05 WBT 4 6800 2,930 0.44 * 6800 2,930 0.44 * WBT 4 6800 2,930 0.44 * 6800 2,930 0.44 * WBR 0 80 80 WBR 0 80 80 N/S Movements 0.25 0.25 N/S Movements 0.25 0.25 E/W Movements 0.47 0.47 E/W Movements 0.47 0.47 Rt. Turn Component 0.14 0.14 Rt. Turn Component 0.14 0.14 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.90 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 2 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 120 0.07 NBT 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 120 0.07 * NBR 1 1700 430 0.25 * 1700 430 0.25 * SBL 1 1700 300 0.18 * 1700 300 0.18 * SBT 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 EBL 2 3400 90 0.03 * 3400 90 0.03 * EBT 4 6800 2,190 0.33 6800 2,260 0.34 EBR 0 70 70 WBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 160 0.05 WBT 4 6800 2,930 0.44 * 6800 2,930 0.44 * WBR 0 80 80 N/S Movements 0.25 0.25 E/W Movements 0.47 0.47 Rt. Turn Component 0.14 0.14 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D CMP Intersection, LOS E is acceptable Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 300 0.09 3400 300 0.09 NBL 2 3400 300 0.09 3400 300 0.09 NBT 3 5100 1,800 0.35 * 5100 1,800 0.35 * NBT 3 5100 1,800 0.35 * 5100 1,800 0.35 * NBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 160 0.09 NBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 160 0.09 SBL 2 3400 460 0.14 * 3400 480 0.14 * SBL 2 3400 470 0.14 * 3400 480 0.14 * SBT 3 5100 880 0.17 5100 900 0.18 SBT 3 5100 890 0.17 5100 900 0.18 SBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 EBL 2 3400 240 0.07 * 3400 240 0.07 * EBL 2 3400 240 0.07 * 3400 240 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,000 0.20 5100 1,050 0.21 EBT 3 5100 1,030 0.20 5100 1,050 0.21 EBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1700 300 0.18 EBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1700 300 0.18 WBL 2 3400 170 0.05 3400 170 0.05 WBL 2 3400 170 0.05 3400 170 0.05 WBT 3 5100 1,640 0.32 * 5100 1,640 0.32 * WBT 3 5100 1,640 0.32 * 5100 1,640 0.32 * WBR 1 1700 540 0.32 1700 540 0.32 WBR 1 1700 540 0.32 1700 540 0.32 N/S Movements 0.49 0.49 N/S Movements 0.49 0.49 E/W Movements 0.39 0.39 E/W Movements 0.39 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.93 0.94 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.93 0.94 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 3 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 300 0.09 3400 300 0.09 NBT 3 5100 1,800 0.35 * 5100 1,800 0.35 * NBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 160 0.09 SBL 2 3400 470 0.14 * 3400 480 0.14 * SBT 3 5100 930 0.18 5100 940 0.18 SBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 EBL 2 3400 240 0.07 * 3400 240 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,030 0.20 5100 1,050 0.21 EBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1700 300 0.18 WBL 2 3400 170 0.05 3400 170 0.05 WBT 3 5100 1,640 0.32 * 5100 1,640 0.32 * WBR 1 1700 540 0.32 1700 540 0.32 N/S Movements 0.49 0.49 E/W Movements 0.39 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.93 0.94 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E CMP Intersection, LOS E is acceptable Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: Honda Center Traffic Study ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: Year 2030 Conditions INTERSECTION: 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue INTERSECTION 4 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 130 0.04 NBL 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 130 0.04 NBT 3 5100 1,880 0.37 * 5100 1,880 0.37 * NBT 3 5100 1,880 0.37 * 5100 1,880 0.37 * NBR 1 1700 510 0.30 1700 510 0.30 NBR 1 1700 510 0.30 1700 510 0.30 SBL 2 3400 330 0.10 * 3400 380 0.11 * SBL 2 3400 360 0.11 * 3400 380 0.11 * SBT 3 5100 1,280 0.26 5100 1,280 0.26 SBT 3 5100 1,280 0.26 5100 1,280 0.26 SBR 0 70 70 SBR 0 70 70 EBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 EBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 EBT 1 1700 70 0.14 * 1700 70 0.14 * EBT 1 1700 70 0.14 * 1700 70 0.14 * EBR 0 170 170 EBR 0 170 170 WBL 2 3400 690 0.20 * 3400 690 0.20 * WBL 2 3400 690 0.20 * 3400 690 0.20 * WBT 0.5 540 100 0.19 540 100 0.19 WBT 0.5 540 100 0.19 540 100 0.19 WBR 1.5 2860 530 0.19 2860 530 0.19 WBR 1.5 2860 530 0.19 2860 530 0.19 N/S Movements 0.47 0.48 N/S Movements 0.47 0.48 E/W Movements 0.34 0.34 E/W Movements 0.34 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.86 0.87 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.87 0.87 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 4 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 130 0.04 NBT 3 5100 1,880 0.37 * 5100 1,880 0.37 * NBR 1 1700 510 0.30 1700 510 0.30 SBL 2 3400 360 0.11 * 3400 380 0.11 * SBT 3 5100 1,320 0.27 5100 1,320 0.27 SBR 0 70 70 EBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 EBT 1 1700 70 0.14 * 1700 70 0.14 * EBR 0 170 170 WBL 2 3400 690 0.20 * 3400 690 0.20 * WBT 0.5 540 100 0.19 540 100 0.19 WBR 1.5 2860 530 0.19 2860 530 0.19 N/S Movements 0.47 0.48 E/W Movements 0.34 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.87 0.87 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D CMP Intersection, LOS E is acceptable PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 340 0.10 3400 340 0.10 NBL 2 3400 340 0.10 3400 340 0.10 NBT 3 5100 1,160 0.23 * 5100 1,160 0.23 * NBT 3 5100 1,160 0.23 * 5100 1,160 0.23 * NBR 1 1700 370 0.22 1700 410 0.24 NBR 1 1700 400 0.24 1700 410 0.24 SBL 2 3400 430 0.13 * 3400 430 0.13 * SBL 2 3400 430 0.13 * 3400 430 0.13 * SBT 3 5100 540 0.11 5100 540 0.11 SBT 3 5100 540 0.11 5100 540 0.11 SBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1700 300 0.18 SBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1700 300 0.18 EBL 2 3400 490 0.14 * 3400 490 0.14 EBL 2 3400 490 0.14 3400 490 0.14 EBT 4 6800 2,050 0.32 6800 2,230 0.35 * EBT 4 6800 2,160 0.34 * 6800 2,230 0.35 * EBR 0 150 150 EBR 0 150 150 WBL 2 3400 590 0.17 3400 590 0.17 * WBL 2 3400 590 0.17 * 3400 590 0.17 * WBT 4 6800 2,410 0.35 * 6800 2,410 0.35 WBT 4 6800 2,410 0.35 6800 2,410 0.35 WBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 120 0.07 WBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 120 0.07 N/S Movements 0.35 0.35 N/S Movements 0.35 0.35 E/W Movements 0.50 0.52 E/W Movements 0.51 0.52 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.93 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.92 0.93 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 340 0.10 3400 340 0.10 NBT 3 5100 1,160 0.23 * 5100 1,160 0.23 * NBR 1 1700 400 0.24 1700 410 0.24 SBL 2 3400 430 0.13 * 3400 430 0.13 * SBT 3 5100 540 0.11 5100 540 0.11 SBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1700 300 0.18 EBL 2 3400 490 0.14 3400 490 0.14 EBT 4 6800 2,370 0.37 * 6800 2,440 0.38 * EBR 0 150 150 WBL 2 3400 590 0.17 * 3400 590 0.17 * WBT 4 6800 2,410 0.35 6800 2,410 0.35 WBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 120 0.07 N/S Movements 0.35 0.35 E/W Movements 0.54 0.55 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.95 0.96 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Impact PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 6 Manchester Avenue / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 6 Manchester Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2488 200 0.08 2040 200 0.10 NBL 1.5 2217 200 0.09 2040 200 0.10 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * NBR 1.5 2612 210 0.08 3060 300 0.10 NBR 1.5 2883 260 0.09 3060 300 0.10 SBL 2 3400 520 0.15 * 3400 610 0.18 * SBL 2 3400 570 0.17 * 3400 610 0.18 * SBT 2 3400 150 0.04 3400 150 0.04 SBT 2 3400 150 0.04 3400 150 0.04 SBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 EBL 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 4 6800 1,930 0.28 * 6800 2,150 0.32 * EBT 4 6800 2,060 0.30 * 6800 2,150 0.32 * EBR 2 3400 1,110 0.33 3400 1,110 0.33 EBR 2 3400 1,110 0.33 3400 1,110 0.33 WBL 2 3400 770 0.23 * 3400 770 0.23 * WBL 2 3400 770 0.23 * 3400 770 0.23 * WBT 4 6800 2,480 0.36 6800 2,480 0.36 WBT 4 6800 2,480 0.36 6800 2,480 0.36 WBR 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.15 0.18 N/S Movements 0.17 0.18 E/W Movements 0.51 0.54 E/W Movements 0.53 0.54 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.71 0.77 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.75 0.77 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 6 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1855 200 0.11 1729 200 0.12 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * NBR 1.5 3245 350 0.11 3371 390 0.12 SBL 2 3400 780 0.23 * 3400 820 0.24 * SBT 2 3400 150 0.04 3400 150 0.04 SBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 4 6800 2,270 0.33 * 6800 2,360 0.35 * EBR 2 3400 1,110 0.33 3400 1,110 0.33 WBL 2 3400 770 0.23 * 3400 770 0.23 * WBT 4 6800 2,480 0.36 6800 2,480 0.36 WBR 0 0 0 Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT N/S Movements 0.23 0.24 E/W Movements 0.56 0.57 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.84 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D CMP Intersection, LOS E is acceptable ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 7 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 7 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2521 860 0.34 2521 860 0.34 NBL 1.5 2521 860 0.34 2521 860 0.34 NBT 3 4924 1,680 0.34 4924 1,680 0.34 NBT 3 4924 1,680 0.34 4924 1,680 0.34 NBR 0.5 1055 360 0.34 1055 360 0.34 NBR 0.5 1055 360 0.34 1055 360 0.34 SBL 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 50 0.01 * 3400 50 0.01 EBL 2 3400 50 0.01 3400 50 0.01 EBT 4 6800 2,600 0.38 6800 3,000 0.44 * EBT 4 6800 2,840 0.42 * 6800 3,000 0.44 * EBR 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 4.5 7663 2,870 0.37 * 7663 2,870 0.37 WBT 4.5 7663 2,870 0.37 7663 2,870 0.37 WBR 1.5 2537 950 0.37 2537 950 0.37 WBR 1.5 2537 950 0.37 2537 950 0.37 N/S Movements 0.34 0.34 N/S Movements 0.34 0.34 E/W Movements 0.39 0.44 E/W Movements 0.42 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.78 0.83 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.81 0.83 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 7 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2521 860 0.34 2521 860 0.34 NBT 3 4924 1,680 0.34 4924 1,680 0.34 NBR 0.5 1055 360 0.34 1055 360 0.34 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 50 0.01 3400 50 0.01 EBT 4 6800 3,350 0.49 * 6800 3,510 0.52 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 4.5 7663 2,870 0.37 7663 2,870 0.37 WBR 1.5 2537 950 0.37 2537 950 0.37 Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT N/S Movements 0.34 0.34 E/W Movements 0.49 0.52 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.88 0.91 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E CMP Intersection, LOS E is acceptable ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 380 0.22 1700 380 0.22 NBL 1 1700 380 0.22 1700 380 0.22 NBT 2 3400 10 0.31 * 3400 10 0.31 * NBT 2 3400 10 0.31 * 3400 10 0.31 * NBR 0 1,040 1,040 NBR 0 1,040 1,040 SBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 70 0.04 * SBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 70 0.04 * SBT 1 1700 110 0.12 1700 110 0.12 SBT 1 1700 110 0.12 1700 110 0.12 SBR 0 90 90 SBR 0 90 90 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 EBT 3 5100 1,410 0.35 * 5100 1,460 0.36 * EBT 3 5100 1,440 0.35 * 5100 1,460 0.36 * EBR 0 360 380 EBR 0 370 380 WBL 2 3400 510 0.15 * 3400 510 0.15 * WBL 2 3400 510 0.15 * 3400 510 0.15 * WBT 3 5100 1,760 0.35 5100 1,760 0.35 WBT 3 5100 1,760 0.35 5100 1,760 0.35 WBR 0 10 10 WBR 0 10 10 N/S Movements 0.35 0.35 N/S Movements 0.35 0.35 E/W Movements 0.50 0.51 E/W Movements 0.50 0.51 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.91 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.91 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 380 0.22 1700 380 0.22 NBT 2 3400 10 0.31 * 3400 10 0.31 * NBR 0 1,040 1,040 SBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 70 0.04 * SBT 1 1700 110 0.12 1700 110 0.12 SBR 0 90 90 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 EBT 3 5100 1,440 0.35 * 5100 1,460 0.36 * EBR 0 370 380 WBL 2 3400 510 0.15 * 3400 510 0.15 * WBT 3 5100 1,760 0.35 5100 1,760 0.35 WBR 0 10 10 N/S Movements 0.35 0.35 E/W Movements 0.50 0.51 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.91 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Impact Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue INTERSECTION 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 NBT 2 3400 1,030 0.30 * 3400 1,030 0.30 * NBT 2 3400 1,030 0.30 * 3400 1,030 0.30 * NBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1700 300 0.18 NBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1700 300 0.18 SBL 1 1700 130 0.08 * 1700 160 0.09 * SBL 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 160 0.09 * SBT 2 3400 710 0.28 3400 710 0.28 SBT 2 3400 710 0.28 3400 710 0.28 SBR 0 230 230 SBR 0 230 230 EBL 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 190 0.11 EBL 1 1700 190 0.11 1700 190 0.11 EBT 2 3400 840 0.32 3400 920 0.35 * EBT 2 3400 890 0.34 * 3400 920 0.35 * EBR 0 260 260 EBR 0 260 260 WBL 1 1700 240 0.14 1700 240 0.14 * WBL 1 1700 240 0.14 * 1700 240 0.14 * WBT 2 3400 1,240 0.36 * 3400 1,240 0.36 WBT 2 3400 1,240 0.36 3400 1,240 0.36 WBR 1 1700 210 0.12 1700 210 0.12 WBR 1 1700 210 0.12 1700 210 0.12 N/S Movements 0.38 0.40 N/S Movements 0.39 0.40 E/W Movements 0.48 0.49 E/W Movements 0.48 0.49 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.91 0.94 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.91 0.94 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 NBT 2 3400 1,030 0.30 * 3400 1,030 0.30 * NBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1700 300 0.18 SBL 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 160 0.09 * SBT 2 3400 710 0.28 3400 710 0.28 SBR 0 230 230 EBL 1 1700 190 0.11 1700 190 0.11 EBT 2 3400 930 0.36 * 3400 960 0.37 * EBR 0 300 300 WBL 1 1700 240 0.14 * 1700 240 0.14 * WBT 2 3400 1,240 0.36 3400 1,240 0.36 WBR 1 1700 210 0.12 1700 210 0.12 N/S Movements 0.39 0.40 E/W Movements 0.50 0.51 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.94 0.96 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Impact Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 3400 250 0.07 * NBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 3400 250 0.07 * NBT 2 3400 670 0.20 3400 670 0.20 NBT 2 3400 670 0.20 3400 670 0.20 NBR 1 1700 530 0.31 1700 570 0.34 NBR 1 1700 560 0.33 1700 570 0.34 SBL 2 3400 380 0.11 3400 380 0.11 SBL 2 3400 380 0.11 3400 380 0.11 SBT 1.5 1907 460 0.24 * 1907 460 0.24 * SBT 1.5 1907 460 0.24 * 1907 460 0.24 * SBR 1.5 3193 770 0.24 3193 770 0.24 SBR 1.5 3193 770 0.24 3193 770 0.24 EBL 2 3400 420 0.12 3400 420 0.12 EBL 2 3400 420 0.12 3400 420 0.12 EBT 4 6800 2,120 0.33 * 6800 2,520 0.39 * EBT 4 6800 2,360 0.36 * 6800 2,520 0.39 * EBR 0 110 110 EBR 0 110 110 WBL 2 3400 490 0.14 * 3400 490 0.14 * WBL 2 3400 490 0.14 * 3400 490 0.14 * WBT 5 8500 2,740 0.34 8500 2,740 0.34 WBT 5 8500 2,740 0.34 8500 2,740 0.34 WBR 0 190 190 WBR 0 190 190 N/S Movements 0.31 0.31 N/S Movements 0.31 0.31 E/W Movements 0.47 0.53 E/W Movements 0.51 0.53 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.84 0.90 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.87 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 250 0.07 NBT 2 3400 670 0.20 * 3400 670 0.20 * NBR 1 1700 560 0.33 1700 570 0.34 SBL 2 3400 420 0.12 * 3400 420 0.12 * SBT 1.5 1907 460 0.24 1907 460 0.24 SBR 1.5 3193 770 0.24 3193 770 0.24 EBL 2 3400 420 0.12 3400 420 0.12 EBT 4 6800 2,870 0.44 * 6800 3,030 0.46 * EBR 0 110 110 WBL 2 3400 490 0.14 * 3400 490 0.14 * WBT 5 8500 2,740 0.34 8500 2,740 0.34 WBR 0 190 190 N/S Movements 0.32 0.32 E/W Movements 0.58 0.61 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.95 0.98 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Impact Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way INTERSECTION 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 2 3400 110 0.03 3400 110 0.03 NBR 2 3400 110 0.03 3400 110 0.03 SBL 2 3400 400 0.12 * 3400 450 0.13 * SBL 2 3400 430 0.13 * 3400 450 0.13 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 SBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 EBL 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 200 0.12 * EBL 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 200 0.12 * EBT 2.5 4054 620 0.15 4054 620 0.15 EBT 2.5 4054 620 0.15 4054 620 0.15 EBR 0.5 1046 160 0.15 1046 160 0.15 EBR 0.5 1046 160 0.15 1046 160 0.15 WBL 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 170 0.10 WBL 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 170 0.10 WBT 2.5 3555 1,680 0.47 * 3555 1,680 0.47 * WBT 2.5 3555 1,680 0.47 * 3555 1,680 0.47 * WBR 0.5 1545 730 0.47 1545 730 0.47 WBR 0.5 1545 730 0.47 1545 730 0.47 N/S Movements 0.12 0.13 N/S Movements 0.13 0.13 E/W Movements 0.59 0.59 E/W Movements 0.59 0.59 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.76 0.77 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.77 0.77 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 11 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 2 3400 110 0.03 3400 110 0.03 SBL 2 3400 530 0.16 * 3400 550 0.16 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 EBL 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 200 0.12 * EBT 2.5 4054 620 0.15 4054 620 0.15 EBR 0.5 1046 160 0.15 1046 160 0.15 WBL 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 170 0.10 WBT 2.5 3555 1,680 0.47 * 3555 1,680 0.47 * WBR 0.5 1545 730 0.47 1545 730 0.47 N/S Movements 0.16 0.16 E/W Movements 0.59 0.59 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.80 0.80 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 12 East Street / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 12 East Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 270 0.08 * 3400 290 0.09 * SBL 2 3400 280 0.08 * 3400 290 0.09 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 390 0.23 1700 390 0.23 SBR 1 1700 390 0.23 1700 390 0.23 EBL 2 3400 870 0.26 * 3400 870 0.26 * EBL 2 3400 870 0.26 * 3400 870 0.26 * EBT 3 5100 1,680 0.33 5100 1,730 0.34 EBT 3 5100 1,710 0.34 5100 1,730 0.34 EBR 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 1,900 0.47 * 5100 1,900 0.47 * WBT 3 5100 1,900 0.47 * 5100 1,900 0.47 * WBR 0 480 480 WBR 0 480 480 N/S Movements 0.08 0.09 N/S Movements 0.08 0.09 E/W Movements 0.72 0.72 E/W Movements 0.72 0.72 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.86 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 12 East Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 90 90 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 280 0.08 * 3400 290 0.09 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 390 0.23 1700 390 0.23 EBL 2 3400 870 0.26 * 3400 870 0.26 * EBT 3 5100 1,710 0.34 5100 1,730 0.34 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 1,900 0.47 * 5100 1,900 0.47 * WBR 0 480 480 N/S Movements 0.08 0.09 E/W Movements 0.72 0.72 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 220 0.06 3400 220 0.06 NBL 2 3400 220 0.06 3400 220 0.06 NBT 3 5100 1,570 0.31 * 5100 1,570 0.31 * NBT 3 5100 1,570 0.31 * 5100 1,570 0.31 * NBR 1 1700 190 0.11 1700 190 0.11 NBR 1 1700 190 0.11 1700 190 0.11 SBL 2 3400 280 0.08 * 3400 280 0.08 * SBL 2 3400 280 0.08 * 3400 280 0.08 * SBT 3 5100 610 0.12 5100 640 0.13 SBT 3 5100 630 0.12 5100 640 0.13 SBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 170 0.10 SBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 170 0.10 EBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 3400 250 0.07 * EBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 3400 250 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,490 0.33 5100 1,580 0.35 EBT 3 5100 1,540 0.34 5100 1,580 0.35 EBR 0 180 180 EBR 0 180 180 WBL 2 3400 170 0.05 3400 170 0.05 WBL 2 3400 170 0.05 3400 170 0.05 WBT 3 5100 1,920 0.43 * 5100 1,920 0.43 * WBT 3 5100 1,920 0.43 * 5100 1,920 0.43 * WBR 0 270 270 WBR 0 270 270 N/S Movements 0.39 0.39 N/S Movements 0.39 0.39 E/W Movements 0.50 0.50 E/W Movements 0.50 0.50 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.94 0.94 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.94 0.94 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 13 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 220 0.06 3400 220 0.06 NBT 3 5100 1,570 0.31 * 5100 1,570 0.31 * NBR 1 1700 190 0.11 1700 190 0.11 SBL 2 3400 280 0.08 * 3400 280 0.08 * SBT 3 5100 820 0.16 5100 830 0.16 SBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 170 0.10 EBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 3400 250 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,630 0.35 5100 1,670 0.36 EBR 0 180 180 WBL 2 3400 260 0.08 3400 260 0.08 WBT 3 5100 1,920 0.43 * 5100 1,920 0.43 * WBR 0 270 270 N/S Movements 0.39 0.39 E/W Movements 0.50 0.50 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.94 0.94 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue INTERSECTION 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 340 0.10 3400 340 0.10 NBL 2 3400 340 0.10 3400 340 0.10 NBT 3 5100 1,520 0.31 * 5100 1,520 0.31 * NBT 3 5100 1,520 0.31 * 5100 1,520 0.31 * NBR 0 70 70 NBR 0 70 70 SBL 2 3400 20 0.01 * 3400 50 0.01 * SBL 2 3400 40 0.01 * 3400 50 0.01 * SBT 3 5100 720 0.17 5100 720 0.17 SBT 3 5100 720 0.17 5100 720 0.17 SBR 0 160 160 SBR 0 160 160 EBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 3400 250 0.07 * EBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 3400 250 0.07 * EBT 2 3400 730 0.21 3400 860 0.25 EBT 2 3400 800 0.24 3400 860 0.25 EBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 200 0.12 EBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 200 0.12 WBL 2 3400 60 0.02 3400 60 0.02 WBL 2 3400 60 0.02 3400 60 0.02 WBT 2 3400 970 0.31 * 3400 970 0.31 * WBT 2 3400 970 0.31 * 3400 970 0.31 * WBR 0 90 90 WBR 0 90 90 N/S Movements 0.32 0.33 N/S Movements 0.32 0.33 E/W Movements 0.39 0.39 E/W Movements 0.39 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.75 0.76 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.76 0.76 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 14 State College Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 340 0.10 3400 340 0.10 NBT 3 5100 1,990 0.40 * 5100 1,990 0.40 * NBR 0 70 70 SBL 2 3400 40 0.01 * 3400 50 0.01 * SBT 3 5100 720 0.17 5100 720 0.17 SBR 0 160 160 EBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 3400 250 0.07 * EBT 2 3400 800 0.24 3400 860 0.25 EBR 1 1700 240 0.14 1700 240 0.14 WBL 2 3400 60 0.02 3400 60 0.02 WBT 2 3400 970 0.31 * 3400 970 0.31 * WBR 0 90 90 N/S Movements 0.42 0.42 E/W Movements 0.39 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.85 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3,400 530 0.16 * 3,400 530 0.16 * NBL 2 3,400 530 0.16 * 3,400 530 0.16 * NBT 3 5,100 830 0.16 5,100 970 0.19 NBT 3 5,100 910 0.18 5,100 970 0.19 NBR 1 1,700 250 0.15 1,700 490 0.29 NBR 1 1,700 390 0.23 1,700 490 0.29 SBL 2 3,400 320 0.09 3,400 380 0.11 SBL 2 3,400 350 0.10 3,400 380 0.11 SBT 2 3,400 680 0.20 * 3,400 700 0.21 * SBT 2 3,400 690 0.20 * 3,400 700 0.21 * SBR 2 3,400 820 0.24 3,400 830 0.24 SBR 2 3,400 830 0.24 3,400 830 0.24 EBL 3 5,100 900 0.18 5,100 930 0.18 EBL 3 5,100 920 0.18 5,100 930 0.18 EBT 3 5,100 1,240 0.24 * 5,100 1,680 0.33 * EBT 3 5,100 1,500 0.29 * 5,100 1,680 0.33 * EBR 1 1,700 420 0.25 1,700 420 0.25 EBR 1 1,700 420 0.25 1,700 420 0.25 WBL 2 3,400 690 0.20 * 3,400 700 0.21 * WBL 2 3,400 690 0.20 * 3,400 700 0.21 * WBT 4 6,800 1,670 0.25 6,800 1,670 0.25 WBT 4 6,800 1,670 0.25 6,800 1,670 0.25 WBR 1 1,700 350 0.21 1,700 370 0.22 WBR 1 1,700 360 0.21 1,700 370 0.22 N/S Movements 0.36 0.36 N/S Movements 0.36 0.36 E/W Movements 0.45 0.54 E/W Movements 0.50 0.54 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.95 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.91 0.95 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3,400 570 0.17 * 3,400 570 0.17 * NBT 3 5,100 1,040 0.20 5,100 1,100 0.22 NBR 1 1,700 480 0.28 1,700 580 0.34 SBL 2 3,400 460 0.14 3,400 490 0.14 SBT 2 3,400 1,040 0.31 * 3,400 1,050 0.31 * SBR 2 3,400 850 0.25 3,400 850 0.25 EBL 3 5,100 970 0.19 5,100 980 0.19 EBT 3 5,100 1,730 0.34 * 5,100 1,910 0.37 * EBR 1 1,700 740 0.44 1,700 740 0.44 WBL 2 3,400 1,070 0.31 * 3,400 1,080 0.32 * WBT 4 6,800 1,820 0.27 6,800 1,820 0.27 WBR 1 1,700 380 0.22 1,700 390 0.23 N/S Movements 0.47 0.48 E/W Movements 0.65 0.69 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.18 1.22 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Impact PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive INTERSECTION: 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 NBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 NBT 3 5100 1,000 0.20 * 5100 1,240 0.24 * NBT 3 5100 1,140 0.22 * 5100 1,240 0.24 * NBR 1 1700 510 0.30 1700 510 0.30 NBR 1 1700 510 0.30 1700 510 0.30 SBL 2 3400 400 0.12 * 3400 400 0.12 * SBL 2 3400 400 0.12 * 3400 400 0.12 * SBT 3 5100 1,030 0.23 5100 1,030 0.23 SBT 3 5100 1,030 0.23 5100 1,030 0.23 SBR 0 140 140 SBR 0 140 140 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 60 0.04 * EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 60 0.04 * EBT 1 1700 30 0.05 1700 30 0.05 EBT 1 1700 30 0.05 1700 30 0.05 EBR 0 50 50 EBR 0 50 50 WBL 2 3400 1,160 0.34 3400 1,160 0.34 WBL 2 3400 1,160 0.34 3400 1,160 0.34 WBT 1 1700 60 0.36 * 1700 60 0.36 * WBT 1 1700 60 0.36 * 1700 60 0.36 * WBR 0 560 560 WBR 0 560 560 N/S Movements 0.31 0.36 N/S Movements 0.34 0.36 E/W Movements 0.41 0.41 E/W Movements 0.41 0.41 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.78 0.82 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.80 0.82 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 16 State College Boulevard / Gateway Center Drive Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 80 0.05 * 1700 80 0.05 * NBT 3 5100 1,230 0.24 5100 1,330 0.26 NBR 1 1700 510 0.30 1700 510 0.30 SBL 2 3400 460 0.14 3400 460 0.14 SBT 3 5100 2,030 0.43 * 5100 2,030 0.43 * SBR 0 140 140 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 60 0.04 * EBT 1 1700 30 0.05 1700 30 0.05 EBR 0 50 50 WBL 2 3400 1,160 0.34 3400 1,160 0.34 WBT 1 1700 60 0.36 * 1700 60 0.36 * WBR 0 560 560 N/S Movements 0.47 0.47 E/W Movements 0.41 0.41 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.93 0.93 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way INTERSECTION: 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 470 0.14 * 3400 470 0.14 * NBL 2 3400 470 0.14 * 3400 470 0.14 * NBT 3 5100 1,390 0.27 5100 1,570 0.31 NBT 3 5100 1,500 0.29 5100 1,570 0.31 NBR 1 1700 420 0.25 1700 420 0.25 NBR 1 1700 420 0.25 1700 420 0.25 SBL 2 3400 0 0.00 3400 0 0.00 SBL 2 3400 0 0.00 3400 0 0.00 SBT 3 5100 1,380 0.27 * 5100 1,380 0.27 * SBT 3 5100 1,380 0.27 * 5100 1,380 0.27 * SBR 1 1700 560 0.33 1700 560 0.33 SBR 1 1700 560 0.33 1700 560 0.33 EBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 280 0.08 * EBL 2 3400 260 0.08 * 3400 280 0.08 * EBT 1.5 1700 210 0.12 1700 210 0.12 EBT 1.5 1700 210 0.12 1700 210 0.12 EBR 1.5 3400 710 0.21 3400 710 0.21 EBR 1.5 3400 710 0.21 3400 710 0.21 WBL 2 3400 20 0.01 3400 20 0.01 WBL 2 3400 20 0.01 3400 20 0.01 WBT 3 5100 700 0.15 * 5100 700 0.15 * WBT 3 5100 700 0.15 * 5100 700 0.15 * WBR 0 40 40 WBR 0 40 40 N/S Movements 0.41 0.41 N/S Movements 0.41 0.41 E/W Movements 0.27 0.27 E/W Movements 0.27 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.73 0.73 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.73 0.73 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 17 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 470 0.14 3400 470 0.14 NBT 3 5100 1,590 0.31 * 5100 1,660 0.33 * NBR 1 1700 1,270 0.75 * 1700 1,270 0.75 * SBL 2 3400 1,000 0.29 * 3400 1,000 0.29 * SBT 3 5100 1,380 0.27 5100 1,380 0.27 SBR 1 1700 560 0.33 1700 560 0.33 EBL 2 3400 260 0.08 * 3400 280 0.08 * EBT 1.5 1700 310 0.18 1700 310 0.18 EBR 1.5 3400 710 0.21 3400 710 0.21 WBL 2 3400 20 0.01 3400 20 0.01 WBT 3 5100 700 0.15 * 5100 700 0.15 * WBR 0 40 40 N/S Movements 0.61 0.62 E/W Movements 0.33 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.43 0.42 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.41 1.41 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue INTERSECTION: 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 100 0.03 3400 100 0.03 NBL 2 3400 100 0.03 3400 100 0.03 NBT 4 6800 1,960 0.29 * 6800 2,070 0.30 * NBT 4 6800 2,020 0.30 * 6800 2,070 0.30 * NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBL 2 3400 670 0.20 * 3400 670 0.20 * SBL 2 3400 670 0.20 * 3400 670 0.20 * SBT 4 6800 1,400 0.28 6800 1,400 0.28 SBT 4 6800 1,400 0.28 6800 1,400 0.28 SBR 0 520 520 SBR 0 520 520 EBL 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 300 0.09 EBL 2 3400 280 0.08 3400 300 0.09 EBT 3 5100 870 0.18 * 5100 870 0.18 * EBT 3 5100 870 0.18 * 5100 870 0.18 * EBR 0 50 50 EBR 0 50 50 WBL 2 3400 630 0.19 * 3400 630 0.19 * WBL 2 3400 630 0.19 * 3400 630 0.19 * WBT 4 6800 1,750 0.26 6800 1,750 0.26 WBT 4 6800 1,750 0.26 6800 1,750 0.26 WBR 1 1700 390 0.23 1700 390 0.23 WBR 1 1700 390 0.23 1700 390 0.23 N/S Movements 0.49 0.50 N/S Movements 0.49 0.50 E/W Movements 0.37 0.37 E/W Movements 0.37 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.92 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.91 0.92 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 100 0.03 3400 100 0.03 NBT 4 6800 2,820 0.41 * 6800 2,870 0.42 * NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBL 2 3400 670 0.20 * 3400 670 0.20 * SBT 4 6800 1,400 0.28 6800 1,400 0.28 SBR 0 520 520 EBL 2 3400 430 0.13 * 3400 450 0.13 * EBT 3 5100 870 0.18 5100 870 0.18 EBR 0 50 50 WBL 2 3400 630 0.19 3400 630 0.19 WBT 4 6800 1,750 0.26 * 6800 1,750 0.26 * WBR 1 1700 390 0.23 1700 390 0.23 N/S Movements 0.61 0.62 E/W Movements 0.38 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.05 1.06 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Impact Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps INTERSECTION: 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 930 0.27 * 3400 930 0.27 * NBL 2 3400 930 0.27 * 3400 930 0.27 * NBT 4 6800 1,670 0.25 6800 1,780 0.26 NBT 4 6800 1,730 0.25 6800 1,780 0.26 NBR (free) 50 85,000 390 0.00 85,000 390 0.00 NBR (free) 50 85,000 390 0.00 85,000 390 0.00 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 SBT 4 6800 1,870 0.28 * 6800 1,870 0.28 * SBT 4 6800 1,870 0.28 * 6800 1,870 0.28 * SBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 180 0.11 SBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 180 0.11 EBL 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 2720 160 0.06 2720 160 0.06 WBL 1.5 2720 160 0.06 2720 160 0.06 WBT 1.5 2380 140 0.06 2380 140 0.06 WBT 1.5 2380 140 0.06 2380 140 0.06 WBR 2 3400 590 0.17 * 3400 590 0.17 * WBR 2 3400 590 0.17 * 3400 590 0.17 * N/S Movements 0.55 0.55 N/S Movements 0.55 0.55 E/W Movements 0.06 0.06 E/W Movements 0.06 0.06 Rt. Turn Component 0.09 0.09 Rt. Turn Component 0.09 0.09 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.74 0.74 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.74 0.74 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 19 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 930 0.27 * 3400 930 0.27 * NBT 4 6800 2,180 0.32 6800 2,230 0.33 NBR (free) 50 85,000 390 0.00 85,000 390 0.00 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 50 0.03 SBT 4 6800 1,870 0.28 * 6800 1,870 0.28 * SBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 180 0.11 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 2720 160 0.06 2720 160 0.06 WBT 1.5 2380 140 0.06 2380 140 0.06 WBR 2 3400 940 0.28 * 3400 940 0.28 * N/S Movements 0.55 0.55 E/W Movements 0.06 0.06 Rt. Turn Component 0.19 0.19 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.85 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps INTERSECTION: 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 5 8500 2,680 0.32 * 8500 2,790 0.34 * NBT 5 8500 2,740 0.33 * 8500 2,790 0.34 * NBR 0 80 80 NBR 0 80 80 SBL 0 0 * 0 * SBL 0 0 * 0 * SBT 4 6800 1,720 0.25 6800 1,720 0.25 SBT 4 6800 1,720 0.25 6800 1,720 0.25 SBR (free) 50 85000 320 0.00 85,000 320 0.00 SBR (free) 50 85000 320 0.00 85,000 320 0.00 EBL 1.5 1700 150 0.09 1700 150 0.09 EBL 1.5 1700 150 0.09 1700 150 0.09 EBT 0.5 1700 720 0.42 * 1700 720 0.42 * EBT 0.5 1700 720 0.42 * 1700 720 0.42 * EBR 2 3400 340 0.10 3400 340 0.10 EBR 2 3400 340 0.10 3400 340 0.10 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.32 0.34 N/S Movements 0.33 0.34 E/W Movements 0.42 0.42 E/W Movements 0.42 0.42 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.80 0.81 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.81 0.81 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 20 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 5 8500 3,190 0.38 * 8500 3,240 0.39 * NBR 0 80 80 SBL 0 0 * 0 * SBT 4 6800 1,720 0.25 6800 1,720 0.25 SBR (free) 50 85000 320 0.00 85,000 320 0.00 EBL 1.5 1700 150 0.09 1700 150 0.09 EBT 0.5 1700 720 0.42 * 1700 720 0.42 * EBR 2 3400 340 0.10 3400 340 0.10 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.38 0.39 E/W Movements 0.42 0.42 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.86 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue INTERSECTION 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 210 0.06 3400 210 0.06 NBL 2 3400 210 0.06 3400 210 0.06 NBT 3 5100 1,490 0.29 * 5100 1,570 0.31 * NBT 3 5100 1,540 0.30 * 5100 1,570 0.31 * NBR 2 3400 780 0.23 3400 780 0.23 NBR 2 3400 780 0.23 3400 780 0.23 SBL 2 3400 160 0.05 * 3400 160 0.05 * SBL 2 3400 160 0.05 * 3400 160 0.05 * SBT 4 6800 1,520 0.22 6800 1,520 0.22 SBT 4 6800 1,520 0.22 6800 1,520 0.22 SBR 1 1700 230 0.14 1700 230 0.14 SBR 1 1700 230 0.14 1700 230 0.14 EBL 2 3400 390 0.11 3400 420 0.12 EBL 2 3400 410 0.12 3400 420 0.12 EBT 3 5100 1,350 0.26 * 5100 1,380 0.27 * EBT 3 5100 1,370 0.27 * 5100 1,380 0.27 * EBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 EBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 WBL 2 3400 510 0.15 * 3400 510 0.15 * WBL 2 3400 510 0.15 * 3400 510 0.15 * WBT 2.5 4206 1,200 0.29 4206 1,200 0.29 WBT 2.5 4206 1,200 0.29 4206 1,200 0.29 WBR 1.5 2594 740 0.29 2594 740 0.29 WBR 1.5 2594 740 0.29 2594 740 0.29 N/S Movements 0.34 0.35 N/S Movements 0.35 0.35 E/W Movements 0.41 0.42 E/W Movements 0.42 0.42 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.80 0.83 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.82 0.83 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 210 0.06 3400 210 0.06 NBT 3 5100 1,890 0.37 * 5100 1,920 0.38 * NBR 2 3400 780 0.23 3400 780 0.23 SBL 2 3400 160 0.05 * 3400 160 0.05 * SBT 4 6800 1,520 0.22 6800 1,520 0.22 SBR 1 1700 230 0.14 1700 230 0.14 EBL 2 3400 510 0.15 * 3400 520 0.15 * EBT 3 5100 1,370 0.27 5100 1,380 0.27 EBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 WBL 2 3400 510 0.15 3400 510 0.15 WBT 2.5 4206 1,200 0.29 * 4206 1,200 0.29 * WBR 1.5 2594 740 0.29 2594 740 0.29 N/S Movements 0.42 0.42 E/W Movements 0.44 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.91 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Impact Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3,400 620 0.18 * 3,400 630 0.19 * NBL 2 3,400 620 0.18 * 3,400 630 0.19 * NBT 1 1,700 20 0.01 1,700 20 0.01 NBT 1 1,700 20 0.01 1,700 20 0.01 NBR 2 3,400 1,170 0.34 * 3,400 1,170 0.34 * NBR 2 3,400 1,170 0.34 * 3,400 1,170 0.34 * SBL 1 1,700 150 0.09 1,700 220 0.13 SBL 1 1,700 190 0.11 1,700 220 0.13 SBT 1 1,700 20 0.01 * 1,700 20 0.01 * SBT 1 1,700 20 0.01 * 1,700 20 0.01 * SBR 1 1,700 120 0.07 * 1,700 130 0.08 * SBR 1 1,700 130 0.08 * 1,700 130 0.08 * EBL 2 3,400 130 0.04 3,400 130 0.04 EBL 2 3,400 130 0.04 3,400 130 0.04 EBT 3 5,100 1,220 0.24 * 5,100 1,860 0.36 * EBT 3 5,100 1,600 0.31 * 5,100 1,860 0.36 * EBR 1 1,700 480 0.28 1,700 500 0.29 EBR 1 1,700 490 0.29 1,700 500 0.29 WBL 2 3,400 890 0.26 * 3,400 920 0.27 * WBL 2 3,400 910 0.27 * 3,400 920 0.27 * WBT 3 5,100 1,730 0.34 5,100 1,780 0.35 WBT 3 5,100 1,760 0.35 5,100 1,780 0.35 WBR 1 1,700 140 0.08 1,700 140 0.08 WBR 1 1,700 140 0.08 1,700 140 0.08 N/S Movements 0.19 0.20 N/S Movements 0.19 0.20 E/W Movements 0.50 0.64 E/W Movements 0.58 0.64 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.75 0.88 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.83 0.88 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3,400 720 0.21 * 3,400 730 0.21 * NBT 1 1,700 40 0.02 1,700 40 0.02 NBR 2 3,400 1,210 0.36 * 3,400 1,210 0.36 * SBL 1 1,700 190 0.11 1,700 220 0.13 SBT 1 1,700 30 0.02 * 1,700 30 0.02 * SBR 1 1,700 130 0.08 1,700 130 0.08 EBL 2 3,400 230 0.07 3,400 230 0.07 EBT 3 5,100 1,840 0.36 * 5,100 2,100 0.41 * EBR 1 1,700 590 0.35 1,700 600 0.35 WBL 2 3,400 1,010 0.30 * 3,400 1,020 0.30 * WBT 3 5,100 2,050 0.40 5,100 2,070 0.41 WBR 1 1,700 260 0.15 1,700 260 0.15 N/S Movements 0.23 0.23 E/W Movements 0.66 0.71 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.94 0.99 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Impact PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 90 0.05 1,700 100 0.06 NBL 1 1,700 90 0.05 1,700 100 0.06 NBT 2 3,400 990 0.29 * 3,400 1,020 0.30 * NBT 2 3,400 1,010 0.30 * 3,400 1,020 0.30 * NBR 1 1,700 600 0.35 1,700 650 0.38 NBR 1 1,700 630 0.37 1,700 650 0.38 SBL 2 3,400 360 0.11 * 3,400 360 0.11 * SBL 2 3,400 360 0.11 * 3,400 360 0.11 * SBT 2 3,400 360 0.15 3,400 430 0.17 SBT 2 3,400 400 0.16 3,400 430 0.17 SBR 0 140 150 SBR 0 140 150 EBL 2 3,400 230 0.07 3,400 230 0.07 EBL 2 3,400 230 0.07 3,400 230 0.07 EBT 3 5,100 1,740 0.35 * 5,100 1,830 0.37 * EBT 3 5,100 1,790 0.36 * 5,100 1,830 0.37 * EBR 0 20 70 EBR 0 50 70 WBL 2 3,400 600 0.18 * 3,400 890 0.26 * WBL 2 3,400 770 0.23 * 3,400 890 0.26 * WBT 3 5,100 1,960 0.38 5,100 2,170 0.43 WBT 3 5,100 2,090 0.41 5,100 2,170 0.43 WBR 1 1,700 810 0.48 1,700 850 0.50 WBR 1 1,700 840 0.49 1,700 850 0.50 N/S Movements 0.40 0.41 N/S Movements 0.40 0.41 E/W Movements 0.52 0.63 E/W Movements 0.59 0.63 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.97 1.09 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.04 1.09 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E F LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 100 0.06 NBT 2 3400 1,010 0.30 * 3400 1,020 0.30 * NBR 1 1700 630 0.37 1700 650 0.38 SBL 2 3400 360 0.11 * 3400 360 0.11 * SBT 2 3400 450 0.17 3400 480 0.19 SBR 0 0 140 0 150 EBL 2 3400 230 0.07 3400 230 0.07 EBT 3 5100 1,920 0.39 * 5100 1,960 0.40 * EBR 0 50 70 WBL 2 3400 820 0.24 * 3400 940 0.28 * WBT 3 5100 2,090 0.41 5100 2,170 0.43 WBR 1 1,700 840 0.49 1700 850 0.50 N/S Movements 0.40 0.41 E/W Movements 0.63 0.67 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.08 1.13 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Impact Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue INTERSECTION: 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 30 0.02 1,700 30 0.02 NBL 1 1,700 30 0.02 1,700 30 0.02 NBT 2 3,400 580 0.23 * 3,400 600 0.25 * NBT 2 3,400 590 0.24 * 3,400 600 0.25 * NBR 0 200 260 NBR 0 230 260 SBL 1 1,700 150 0.09 * 1,700 460 0.27 * SBL 1 1,700 330 0.19 * 1,700 460 0.27 * SBT 2 3,400 320 0.14 3,400 380 0.16 SBT 2 3,400 350 0.15 3,400 380 0.16 SBR 0 160 160 SBR 0 160 160 EBL 1 1,700 170 0.10 * 1,700 170 0.10 * EBL 1 1,700 170 0.10 * 1,700 170 0.10 * EBT 2 3,400 260 0.08 3,400 410 0.13 EBT 2 3,400 350 0.11 3,400 410 0.13 EBR 0 20 30 EBR 0 30 30 WBL 1 1,700 230 0.14 1,700 280 0.16 WBL 1 1,700 260 0.15 1,700 280 0.16 WBT 2 3,400 720 0.34 * 3,400 720 0.34 * WBT 2 3,400 720 0.34 * 3,400 720 0.34 * WBR 0 430 450 WBR 0 440 450 N/S Movements 0.32 0.52 N/S Movements 0.44 0.52 E/W Movements 0.44 0.44 E/W Movements 0.44 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.81 1.02 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.93 1.02 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D F LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E F Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 30 0.02 1,700 30 0.02 NBT 2 3,400 590 0.24 * 3,400 600 0.25 * NBR 0 230 260 SBL 1 1,700 360 0.21 * 1,700 490 0.29 * SBT 2 3,400 370 0.16 3,400 400 0.16 SBR 0 160 160 EBL 1 1,700 170 0.10 * 1,700 170 0.10 * EBT 2 3,400 350 0.11 3,400 410 0.13 EBR 0 30 30 WBL 1 1,700 260 0.15 1,700 280 0.16 WBT 2 3,400 720 0.34 * 3,400 720 0.34 * WBR 0 440 450 N/S Movements 0.45 0.54 E/W Movements 0.44 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.94 1.04 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E F Impact Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 130 0.08 1,700 130 0.08 NBL 1 1,700 130 0.08 1,700 130 0.08 NBT 1 1,700 90 0.05 * 1,700 90 0.05 * NBT 1 1,700 90 0.05 * 1,700 90 0.05 * NBR 1 1,700 210 0.12 * 1,700 250 0.15 * NBR 1 1,700 230 0.14 * 1,700 250 0.15 * SBL 2 3,400 500 0.15 * 3,400 540 0.16 * SBL 2 3,400 520 0.15 * 3,400 540 0.16 * SBT 0.5 756 20 0.03 756 20 0.03 SBT 0.5 756 20 0.03 756 20 0.03 SBR 1.5 2,644 70 0.03 2,644 70 0.03 SBR 1.5 2,644 70 0.03 2,644 70 0.03 EBL 2 3,400 190 0.06 * 3,400 220 0.06 EBL 2 3,400 210 0.06 * 3,400 220 0.06 EBT 3 5,100 2,070 0.42 5,100 2,750 0.56 * EBT 3 5,100 2,480 0.51 5,100 2,750 0.56 * EBR 0 70 120 EBR 0 100 120 WBL 2 3,400 90 0.03 3,400 220 0.06 * WBL 2 3,400 170 0.05 3,400 220 0.06 * WBT 3 5,100 2,580 0.51 * 5,100 2,650 0.52 WBT 3 5,100 2,620 0.51 * 5,100 2,650 0.52 WBR 1 1,700 530 0.31 1,700 690 0.41 WBR 1 1,700 630 0.37 1,700 690 0.41 Split phase N/S Movements 0.22 0.24 Split phase N/S Movements 0.23 0.24 E/W Movements 0.56 0.63 E/W Movements 0.58 0.63 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.86 0.92 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.86 0.92 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 150 0.09 1,700 150 0.09 NBT 1 1,700 100 0.06 * 1,700 100 0.06 * NBR 1 1,700 270 0.16 * 1,700 290 0.17 * SBL 2 3,400 520 0.15 * 3,400 540 0.16 * SBT 0.5 1,236 40 0.03 1,236 40 0.03 SBR 1.5 2,164 70 0.03 2,164 70 0.03 EBL 2 3,400 210 0.06 3,400 220 0.06 EBT 3 5,100 2,610 0.53 * 5,100 2,880 0.59 * EBR 0 100 120 WBL 2 3,400 170 0.05 * 3,400 220 0.06 * WBT 3 5,100 2,620 0.51 5,100 2,650 0.52 WBR 1 1,700 630 0.37 1,700 690 0.41 Split phase N/S Movements 0.24 0.25 E/W Movements 0.58 0.65 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.89 0.97 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Impact PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 26 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps INTERSECTION: 26 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 640 0.38 * 1700 1,190 0.70 * SBL 1 1700 970 0.57 * 1700 1,190 0.70 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 2 3400 650 0.19 * 3400 960 0.28 * SBR 2 3400 840 0.25 * 3400 960 0.28 * EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,120 0.42 5100 2,130 0.42 EBT 3 5100 2,130 0.42 5100 2,130 0.42 EBR (free) 50 85000 580 0.01 85000 620 0.01 EBR (free) 50 85000 600 0.01 85000 620 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 2,940 0.58 * 5100 3,130 0.61 * WBT 3 5100 3,050 0.60 * 5100 3,130 0.61 * WBR (free) 50 85000 620 0.01 85000 650 0.01 WBR (free) 50 85000 640 0.01 85000 650 0.01 N/S Movements 0.38 0.70 N/S Movements 0.57 0.70 E/W Movements 0.58 0.61 E/W Movements 0.60 0.61 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.00 1.36 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.22 1.36 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E F LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 26 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 970 0.57 * 1700 1,190 0.70 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 2 3400 840 0.25 * 3400 960 0.28 * EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,190 0.43 5100 2,190 0.43 EBR (free) 50 85000 610 0.01 85000 630 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 3,050 0.60 * 5100 3,130 0.61 * WBR (free) 50 85000 670 0.01 85000 680 0.01 N/S Movements 0.57 0.70 E/W Movements 0.60 0.61 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.22 1.36 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Impact Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 240 0.14 * 1700 640 0.38 * SBL 1 1700 480 0.28 * 1700 640 0.38 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 2 3400 570 0.17 * 3400 760 0.22 * SBR 2 3400 680 0.20 * 3400 760 0.22 * EBL 0 0 * 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 2,200 0.43 5100 3,040 0.60 * EBT 3 5100 2,700 0.53 * 5100 3,040 0.60 * EBR (free) 50 85000 510 0.01 85000 550 0.01 EBR (free) 50 85000 530 0.01 85000 550 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 2,430 0.48 * 5100 2,620 0.51 WBT 3 5100 2,540 0.50 5100 2,620 0.51 WBR (free) 50 85000 510 0.01 85000 510 0.01 WBR (free) 50 85000 510 0.01 85000 510 0.01 N/S Movements 0.14 0.38 N/S Movements 0.28 0.38 E/W Movements 0.48 0.60 E/W Movements 0.53 0.60 Rt. Turn Component 0.03 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.69 1.02 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.86 1.02 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B F LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D F Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 1,020 0.60 * 1700 1,180 0.69 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 2 3400 940 0.28 * 3400 1,020 0.30 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 2,860 0.56 * 5100 3,200 0.63 * EBR (free) 50 85000 560 0.01 85000 580 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 2,760 0.54 5100 2,840 0.56 WBR (free) 50 85000 530 0.01 85000 530 0.01 N/S Movements 0.60 0.69 E/W Movements 0.56 0.63 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.21 1.37 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Impact Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps INTERSECTION: 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2663 590 0.22 * 2439 660 0.27 * NBL 1.5 2510 630 0.25 * 2439 660 0.27 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 2437 540 0.22 * 2661 720 0.27 * NBR 1.5 2590 650 0.25 * 2661 720 0.27 * SBL 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,240 0.44 5100 2,860 0.56 EBT 3 5100 2,610 0.51 5100 2,860 0.56 EBR (free) 50 85000 650 0.01 85000 660 0.01 EBR (free) 50 85000 650 0.01 85000 660 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 2,960 0.58 * 5100 3,140 0.62 * WBT 3 5100 3,070 0.60 * 5100 3,140 0.62 * WBR (free) 50 85000 1,060 0.01 85000 1,090 0.01 WBR (free) 50 85000 1,080 0.01 85000 1,090 0.01 N/S Movements 0.22 0.27 N/S Movements 0.25 0.27 E/W Movements 0.58 0.62 E/W Movements 0.60 0.62 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.94 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.94 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2510 630 0.25 * 2439 660 0.27 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 2590 650 0.25 * 2661 720 0.27 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,610 0.51 5100 2,860 0.56 EBR (free) 50 85000 710 0.01 85000 720 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 3,070 0.60 * 5100 3,140 0.62 * WBR (free) 50 85000 1,180 0.01 85000 1,190 0.01 N/S Movements 0.25 0.27 E/W Movements 0.60 0.62 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.94 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Impact Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1962 300 0.15 * 1700 390 0.23 * NBL 1.5 1700 360 0.21 * 1700 390 0.23 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3138 480 0.15 * 3400 1,520 0.45 * NBR 1.5 3400 1,100 0.32 * 3400 1,520 0.45 * SBL 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 5 8500 1,850 0.22 8500 3,060 0.36 EBT 5 8500 2,570 0.30 8500 3,060 0.36 EBR (free) 50 85000 500 0.01 85000 500 0.01 EBR (free) 50 85000 500 0.01 85000 500 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 2,970 0.58 * 5100 2,970 0.58 * WBT 3 5100 2,970 0.58 * 5100 2,970 0.58 * WBR 1 1700 530 0.31 1700 530 0.31 WBR 1 1700 530 0.31 1700 530 0.31 N/S Movements 0.15 0.23 N/S Movements 0.21 0.23 E/W Movements 0.58 0.58 E/W Movements 0.58 0.58 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.22 Rt. Turn Component 0.11 0.22 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.79 1.08 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.96 1.08 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C F LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E F Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 410 0.24 * 1700 440 0.26 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3400 1,320 0.39 * 3400 1,740 0.51 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 5 8500 3,210 0.38 8500 3,700 0.44 EBR (free) 50 85000 560 0.01 85000 560 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 3,150 0.62 * 5100 3,150 0.62 * WBR 1 1700 580 0.34 1700 580 0.34 N/S Movements 0.24 0.26 E/W Movements 0.62 0.62 Rt. Turn Component 0.15 0.25 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.06 1.18 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Impact Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 1,060 0.31 * 3400 1,120 0.33 * NBL 2 3400 1,090 0.32 * 3400 1,120 0.33 * NBT 2 3400 580 0.17 3400 640 0.19 NBT 2 3400 620 0.18 3400 640 0.19 NBR 1 1700 640 0.38 * 1700 660 0.39 * NBR 1 1700 650 0.38 * 1700 660 0.39 * SBL 2 3400 530 0.16 3400 550 0.16 SBL 2 3400 540 0.16 3400 550 0.16 SBT 2 3400 320 0.09 * 3400 330 0.10 * SBT 2 3400 320 0.09 * 3400 330 0.10 * SBR 1 1700 390 0.23 * 1700 390 0.23 SBR 1 1700 390 0.23 1700 390 0.23 EBL 2 3400 260 0.08 * 3400 1,630 0.48 * EBL 2 3400 1,070 0.31 * 3400 1,630 0.48 * EBT 4 6800 1,500 0.22 6800 2,120 0.31 EBT 4 6800 1,870 0.28 6800 2,120 0.31 EBR 1 1700 500 0.29 1700 680 0.40 EBR 1 1700 610 0.36 1700 680 0.40 WBL 2 3400 570 0.17 3400 650 0.19 WBL 2 3400 620 0.18 3400 650 0.19 WBT 4 6800 2,220 0.33 * 6800 2,220 0.33 * WBT 4 6800 2,220 0.33 * 6800 2,220 0.33 * WBR 1 1700 850 0.50 * 1700 1,170 0.69 * WBR 1 1700 1,040 0.61 * 1700 1,170 0.69 * N/S Movements 0.41 0.43 N/S Movements 0.41 0.43 E/W Movements 0.40 0.81 E/W Movements 0.64 0.81 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.20 Rt. Turn Component 0.13 0.20 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.88 1.48 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.23 1.48 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D F LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 1,090 0.32 * 3400 1,120 0.33 * NBT 2 3400 620 0.18 3400 640 0.19 NBR 1 1700 660 0.39 1700 670 0.39 SBL 2 3400 550 0.16 3400 560 0.16 SBT 2 3400 370 0.11 * 3400 380 0.11 * SBR 1 1700 420 0.25 1700 420 0.25 EBL 2 3400 1,070 0.31 * 3400 1,630 0.48 * EBT 4 6800 1,940 0.29 6800 2,190 0.32 EBR 1 1700 1,460 0.86 * 1700 1,530 0.90 * WBL 2 3400 910 0.27 3400 940 0.28 WBT 4 6800 2,420 0.36 * 6800 2,420 0.36 * WBR 1 1700 1,040 0.61 * 1700 1,170 0.69 * N/S Movements 0.43 0.44 E/W Movements 0.67 0.84 Rt. Turn Component 0.35 0.42 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.50 1.74 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Impact Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.33 1,882 980 0.52 * 1,880 990 0.53 * NBL 1.33 1,880 990 0.53 * 1,880 990 0.53 * NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.33 1,518 790 0.52 * 1,520 800 0.53 * NBR 0.33 1,520 800 0.53 * 1,520 800 0.53 * SBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 1,700 10 0.01 SBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 1,700 10 0.01 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 1 1,700 10 0.01 1,700 30 0.02 SBR 1 1,700 20 0.01 1,700 30 0.02 EBL 1 1,700 30 0.02 1,700 50 0.03 EBL 1 1,700 40 0.02 1,700 50 0.03 EBT 3 5,100 1,820 0.54 * 5,100 1,860 0.68 * EBT 3 5,100 1,840 0.62 * 5,100 1,860 0.68 * EBR 0 920 1,610 EBR 0 1,330 1,610 WBL 1 1,700 600 0.35 * 1,700 730 0.43 * WBL 1 1,700 680 0.40 * 1,700 730 0.43 * WBT 3 5,100 3,150 0.62 5,100 3,330 0.66 WBT 3 5,100 3,260 0.65 5,100 3,330 0.66 WBR 0 30 40 WBR 0 30 40 N/S Movements 0.52 0.53 N/S Movements 0.53 0.53 E/W Movements 0.89 1.11 E/W Movements 1.02 1.11 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.46 1.69 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.60 1.69 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.33 1,887 1,010 0.54 * 1,887 1,010 0.54 * NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.33 1,513 810 0.54 * 1,513 810 0.54 * SBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 1,700 10 0.01 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 1 1,700 20 0.01 1,700 30 0.02 EBL 1 1,700 50 0.03 1,700 60 0.04 EBT 3 5,100 1,840 0.63 * 5,100 1,860 0.69 * EBR 0 1,380 1,660 WBL 1 1,700 690 0.41 * 1,700 740 0.44 * WBT 3 5,100 3,310 0.66 5,100 3,380 0.67 WBR 0 40 50 N/S Movements 0.54 0.54 E/W Movements 1.04 1.13 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.62 1.71 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Impact Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue INTERSECTION: 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3,287 580 0.18 * 3,245 630 0.19 * NBL 1.5 3,292 610 0.19 * 3,245 630 0.19 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.5 113 20 0.18 * 155 30 0.19 * NBR 0.5 108 20 0.19 * 155 30 0.19 * SBL 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3 5,100 2,670 0.52 5,100 2,670 0.52 EBT 3 5,100 2,670 0.52 5,100 2,670 0.52 EBR 1 1,700 350 0.21 1,700 390 0.23 EBR 1 1,700 380 0.22 1,700 390 0.23 WBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 1,700 80 0.05 WBL 1 1,700 50 0.03 1,700 80 0.05 WBT 3 5,100 3,000 0.59 * 5,100 3,820 0.75 * WBT 3 5,100 3,490 0.68 * 5,100 3,820 0.75 * WBR 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.18 0.19 N/S Movements 0.19 0.19 E/W Movements 0.59 0.75 E/W Movements 0.68 0.75 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.81 0.99 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.92 0.99 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3,243 620 0.19 * 3,200 640 0.20 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.5 157 30 0.19 * 200 40 0.20 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3 5,100 2,670 0.52 5,100 2,670 0.52 EBR 1 1,700 380 0.22 1,700 390 0.23 WBL 1 1,700 60 0.04 1,700 90 0.05 WBT 3 5,100 3,880 0.76 * 5,100 4,210 0.83 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.19 0.20 E/W Movements 0.76 0.83 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.00 1.08 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E F Impact PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue INTERSECTION 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2.5 4792 1,400 0.29 * 4796 1,420 0.30 * NBL 2.5 4794 1,410 0.29 * 4796 1,420 0.30 * NBT 0.5 308 90 0.29 304 90 0.30 NBT 0.5 306 90 0.29 304 90 0.30 NBR 1 1700 500 0.29 1700 500 0.29 NBR 1 1700 500 0.29 1700 500 0.29 SBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 SBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 SBT 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 * SBT 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 * SBR 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 200 0.12 * SBR 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 200 0.12 * EBL 2 3400 70 0.02 3400 70 0.02 EBL 2 3400 70 0.02 3400 70 0.02 EBT 3 5100 2,010 0.39 * 5100 2,010 0.39 * EBT 3 5100 2,010 0.39 * 5100 2,010 0.39 * EBR 1 1700 590 0.35 1700 590 0.35 EBR 1 1700 590 0.35 1700 590 0.35 WBL 2 3400 470 0.14 * 3400 470 0.14 * WBL 2 3400 470 0.14 * 3400 470 0.14 * WBT 3 5100 2,240 0.44 5100 2,340 0.46 WBT 3 5100 2,300 0.45 5100 2,340 0.46 WBR 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 WBR 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 N/S Movements 0.32 0.33 N/S Movements 0.32 0.33 E/W Movements 0.53 0.53 E/W Movements 0.53 0.53 Rt. Turn Component 0.07 0.07 Rt. Turn Component 0.07 0.07 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.97 0.98 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.97 0.98 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 33 Main Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2.5 4826 1,410 0.29 * 4796 1,420 0.30 * NBT 0.5 308 90 0.29 304 90 0.30 NBR 1 1700 500 0.29 1700 500 0.29 SBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 SBT 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 * SBR 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 200 0.12 * EBL 2 3400 70 0.02 3400 70 0.02 EBT 3 5100 2,010 0.39 * 5100 2,010 0.39 * EBR 1 1700 590 0.35 1700 590 0.35 WBL 2 3400 470 0.14 * 3400 470 0.14 * WBT 3 5100 2,300 0.45 5100 2,340 0.46 WBR 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 N/S Movements 0.32 0.33 E/W Movements 0.53 0.53 Rt. Turn Component 0.07 0.07 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.97 0.98 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3,400 200 0.06 * 3,400 300 0.09 * NBL 2 3,400 260 0.08 * 3,400 300 0.09 * NBT 2 3,400 870 0.26 3,400 980 0.29 NBT 2 3,400 940 0.28 3,400 980 0.29 NBR 1 1,700 500 0.29 1,700 530 0.31 NBR 1 1,700 520 0.31 1,700 530 0.31 SBL 1 1,700 130 0.08 1,700 130 0.08 SBL 1 1,700 130 0.08 1,700 130 0.08 SBT 2 3,400 1,010 0.30 * 3,400 1,060 0.31 * SBT 2 3,400 1,040 0.31 * 3,400 1,060 0.31 * SBR 1 1,700 530 0.31 1,700 620 0.36 SBR 1 1,700 580 0.34 1,700 620 0.36 EBL 2 3,400 320 0.09 3,400 320 0.09 * EBL 2 3,400 320 0.09 * 3,400 320 0.09 * EBT 3 5,100 1,920 0.38 * 5,100 1,940 0.38 EBT 3 5,100 1,930 0.38 5,100 1,940 0.38 EBR 1 1,700 160 0.09 1,700 170 0.10 EBR 1 1,700 170 0.10 1,700 170 0.10 WBL 2 3,400 230 0.07 * 3,400 270 0.08 WBL 2 3,400 250 0.07 3,400 270 0.08 WBT 3 5,100 1,610 0.32 5,100 2,170 0.43 * WBT 3 5,100 1,940 0.38 * 5,100 2,170 0.43 * WBR 1 1,700 220 0.13 1,700 230 0.14 WBR 1 1,700 220 0.13 1,700 230 0.14 N/S Movements 0.36 0.40 N/S Movements 0.38 0.40 E/W Movements 0.44 0.52 E/W Movements 0.47 0.52 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.97 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.91 0.97 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 260 0.08 * 3,400 300 0.09 * NBT 2 3400 940 0.28 3,400 980 0.29 NBR 1 1700 520 0.31 1,700 530 0.31 SBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1,700 130 0.08 SBT 2 3400 1,040 0.31 * 3,400 1,060 0.31 * SBR 1 1700 600 0.35 1,700 640 0.38 EBL 2 3400 320 0.09 * 3,400 320 0.09 * EBT 3 5100 1,940 0.38 5,100 1,950 0.38 EBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1,700 170 0.10 WBL 2 3400 250 0.07 3,400 270 0.08 WBT 3 5100 2,200 0.43 * 5,100 2,430 0.48 * WBR 1 1700 240 0.14 1,700 250 0.15 N/S Movements 0.38 0.40 E/W Movements 0.53 0.57 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.96 1.02 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E F Impact Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue INTERSECTION: 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 320 0.19 * 1,700 470 0.28 * NBL 1 1,700 410 0.24 * 1,700 470 0.28 * NBT 2 3,400 1,210 0.39 3,400 1,430 0.46 NBT 2 3,400 1,340 0.43 3,400 1,430 0.46 NBR 0 130 130 NBR 0 130 130 SBL 1 1,700 120 0.07 1,700 120 0.07 SBL 1 1,700 120 0.07 1,700 120 0.07 SBT 2 3,400 1,020 0.31 * 3,400 1,050 0.34 * SBT 2 3,400 1,040 0.33 * 3,400 1,050 0.34 * SBR 0 30 90 SBR 0 70 90 EBL 1 1,700 50 0.03 1,700 60 0.04 EBL 1 1,700 50 0.03 1,700 60 0.04 EBT 2 3,400 170 0.10 * 3,400 180 0.11 * EBT 2 3,400 170 0.10 * 3,400 180 0.11 * EBR 0 170 180 EBR 0 180 180 WBL 1 1,700 100 0.06 * 1,700 100 0.06 * WBL 1 1,700 100 0.06 * 1,700 100 0.06 * WBT 2 3,400 140 0.08 3,400 190 0.09 WBT 2 3,400 170 0.09 3,400 190 0.09 WBR 0 120 120 WBR 0 120 120 N/S Movements 0.50 0.61 N/S Movements 0.57 0.61 E/W Movements 0.16 0.16 E/W Movements 0.16 0.16 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.71 0.83 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.78 0.83 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 35 Main Street / Struck Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 440 0.26 * 1,700 500 0.29 * NBT 2 3,400 1,340 0.44 3,400 1,430 0.46 NBR 0 150 150 SBL 1 1,700 120 0.07 1,700 120 0.07 SBT 2 3,400 1,040 0.33 * 3,400 1,050 0.34 * SBR 0 70 90 EBL 1 1,700 50 0.03 1,700 60 0.04 EBT 2 3,400 190 0.11 * 3,400 200 0.11 * EBR 0 190 190 WBL 1 1,700 110 0.06 * 1,700 110 0.06 * WBT 2 3,400 180 0.09 3,400 200 0.10 WBR 0 130 130 N/S Movements 0.59 0.63 E/W Movements 0.18 0.18 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.81 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue INTERSECTION: 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 280 0.08 3400 280 0.08 NBL 2 3400 280 0.08 3400 280 0.08 NBT 2 3400 890 0.38 * 3400 890 0.38 * NBT 2 3400 890 0.38 * 3400 890 0.38 * NBR 0 390 390 NBR 0 390 390 SBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 90 0.05 * SBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 90 0.05 * SBT 2 3400 550 0.29 3400 550 0.30 SBT 2 3400 550 0.29 3400 550 0.30 SBR 0 440 460 SBR 0 450 460 EBL 2 3400 360 0.11 3400 360 0.11 EBL 2 3400 360 0.11 3400 360 0.11 EBT 3 5100 1,680 0.33 * 5100 1,680 0.33 * EBT 3 5100 1,680 0.33 * 5100 1,680 0.33 * EBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 260 0.15 EBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 260 0.15 WBL 2 3400 340 0.10 * 3400 340 0.10 * WBL 2 3400 340 0.10 * 3400 340 0.10 * WBT 3 5100 1,410 0.28 5100 1,490 0.29 WBT 3 5100 1,460 0.29 5100 1,490 0.29 WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 N/S Movements 0.43 0.43 N/S Movements 0.43 0.43 E/W Movements 0.43 0.43 E/W Movements 0.43 0.43 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.91 0.91 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.91 0.91 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 36 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 280 0.08 3400 280 0.08 NBT 2 3400 890 0.38 * 3400 890 0.38 * NBR 0 390 390 SBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 90 0.05 * SBT 2 3400 550 0.29 3400 550 0.30 SBR 0 450 460 EBL 2 3400 360 0.11 3400 360 0.11 EBT 3 5100 1,680 0.33 * 5100 1,680 0.33 * EBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 260 0.15 WBL 2 3400 340 0.10 * 3400 340 0.10 * WBT 3 5100 1,460 0.29 5100 1,490 0.29 WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 N/S Movements 0.43 0.43 E/W Movements 0.43 0.43 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.91 0.91 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 330 0.19 * 1700 330 0.19 * NBL 1 1700 330 0.19 * 1700 330 0.19 * NBT 2 3400 580 0.17 3400 580 0.17 NBT 2 3400 580 0.17 3400 580 0.17 NBR 1 1700 340 0.20 1700 340 0.20 NBR 1 1700 340 0.20 1700 340 0.20 SBL 1 1700 310 0.18 1700 310 0.18 SBL 1 1700 310 0.18 1700 310 0.18 SBT 2 3400 690 0.20 * 3400 690 0.20 * SBT 2 3400 690 0.20 * 3400 690 0.20 * SBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 EBL 2 3400 420 0.12 3400 420 0.12 * EBL 2 3400 420 0.12 3400 420 0.12 * EBT 3 5100 1,370 0.27 * 5100 1,370 0.27 EBT 3 5100 1,370 0.27 * 5100 1,370 0.27 EBR 1 1700 190 0.11 1700 190 0.11 EBR 1 1700 190 0.11 1700 190 0.11 WBL 2 3400 210 0.06 * 3400 210 0.06 WBL 2 3400 210 0.06 * 3400 210 0.06 WBT 3 5100 820 0.16 5100 1,190 0.23 * WBT 3 5100 1,040 0.20 5100 1,190 0.23 * WBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 WBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 N/S Movements 0.40 0.40 N/S Movements 0.40 0.40 E/W Movements 0.33 0.36 E/W Movements 0.33 0.36 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.78 0.80 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.78 0.80 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 37 Batavia Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 330 0.19 * 1700 330 0.19 * NBT 2 3400 580 0.17 3400 580 0.17 NBR 1 1700 340 0.20 1700 340 0.20 SBL 1 1700 310 0.18 1700 310 0.18 SBT 2 3400 690 0.20 * 3400 690 0.20 * SBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 EBL 2 3400 420 0.12 * 3400 420 0.12 * EBT 3 5100 1,370 0.27 5100 1,370 0.27 EBR 1 1700 190 0.11 1700 190 0.11 WBL 2 3400 210 0.06 3400 210 0.06 WBT 3 5100 1,300 0.25 * 5100 1,450 0.28 * WBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 N/S Movements 0.40 0.40 E/W Movements 0.38 0.41 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.83 0.85 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue INTERSECTION: 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 NBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 NBT 3 5100 1,100 0.22 * 5100 1,100 0.22 * NBT 3 5100 1,100 0.22 * 5100 1,100 0.22 * NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBT 3 5100 820 0.16 5100 820 0.16 SBT 3 5100 820 0.16 5100 820 0.16 SBR 1 1700 380 0.22 1700 380 0.22 SBR 1 1700 380 0.22 1700 380 0.22 EBL 2 3400 550 0.16 3400 550 0.16 EBL 2 3400 550 0.16 3400 550 0.16 EBT 3 5100 1,630 0.32 * 5100 1,630 0.32 * EBT 3 5100 1,630 0.32 * 5100 1,630 0.32 * EBR 1 1700 410 0.24 1700 410 0.24 EBR 1 1700 410 0.24 1700 410 0.24 WBL 1 1700 80 0.05 * 1700 80 0.05 * WBL 1 1700 80 0.05 * 1700 80 0.05 * WBT 3 5100 460 0.09 5100 500 0.10 WBT 3 5100 490 0.10 5100 500 0.10 WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 N/S Movements 0.26 0.28 N/S Movements 0.27 0.28 E/W Movements 0.37 0.37 E/W Movements 0.37 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.67 0.70 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.69 0.70 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 38 Glassell Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C PM PK. HR. WITH HC+MLB EVENT NBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 NBT 3 5100 1,100 0.22 * 5100 1,100 0.22 * NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBT 3 5100 890 0.17 5100 890 0.17 SBR 1 1700 380 0.22 1700 380 0.22 EBL 2 3400 550 0.16 3400 550 0.16 EBT 3 5100 1,630 0.32 * 5100 1,630 0.32 * EBR 1 1700 410 0.24 1700 410 0.24 WBL 1 1700 80 0.05 * 1700 80 0.05 * WBT 3 5100 490 0.10 5100 500 0.10 WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 N/S Movements 0.27 0.28 E/W Movements 0.37 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.69 0.70 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK.HR. WITH NEW HC+MLB EVENT Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 300 0.09 * 3400 300 0.09 * NBL 2 3400 300 0.09 * 3400 300 0.09 * NBT 2 3400 1,140 0.34 3400 1,140 0.34 NBT 2 3400 1,140 0.34 3400 1,140 0.34 NBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 160 0.09 NBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 160 0.09 SBL 2 3400 200 0.06 3400 200 0.06 SBL 2 3400 200 0.06 3400 200 0.06 SBT 2 3400 1,140 0.34 * 3400 1,140 0.34 * SBT 2 3400 1,140 0.34 * 3400 1,140 0.34 * SBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 260 0.15 SBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 260 0.15 EBL 2 3400 480 0.14 3400 480 0.14 EBL 2 3400 480 0.14 3400 480 0.14 EBT 3 5100 1,980 0.39 * 5100 1,980 0.39 * EBT 3 5100 1,980 0.39 * 5100 1,980 0.39 * EBR 1 1700 450 0.26 1700 450 0.26 EBR 1 1700 450 0.26 1700 450 0.26 WBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 230 0.07 * WBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 230 0.07 * WBT 3 5100 820 0.16 5100 1,190 0.23 WBT 3 5100 1,040 0.20 5100 1,190 0.23 WBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 100 0.06 WBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 100 0.06 N/S Movements 0.42 0.42 N/S Movements 0.42 0.42 E/W Movements 0.46 0.46 E/W Movements 0.46 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.93 0.93 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.93 0.93 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 39 Glassell Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C PM PK. HR. WITH HC+MLB EVENT NBL 2 3400 300 0.09 * 3400 300 0.09 * NBT 2 3400 1,140 0.34 3400 1,140 0.34 NBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 160 0.09 SBL 2 3400 200 0.06 3400 200 0.06 SBT 2 3400 1,140 0.34 * 3400 1,140 0.34 * SBR 1 1700 330 0.19 1700 330 0.19 EBL 2 3400 480 0.14 3400 480 0.14 EBT 3 5100 1,980 0.39 * 5100 1,980 0.39 * EBR 1 1700 450 0.26 1700 450 0.26 WBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 230 0.07 * WBT 3 5100 1,200 0.24 5100 1,350 0.26 WBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 100 0.06 N/S Movements 0.42 0.42 E/W Movements 0.46 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.93 0.93 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Honda Center Traffic Study PM PK.HR. WITH NEW HC+MLB EVENT Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 40 N Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 40 N Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0.33 397 70 0.18 397 70 0.18 NBL 0.33 397 70 0.18 397 70 0.18 NBT 0.34 850 150 0.18 850 150 0.18 NBT 0.34 850 150 0.18 850 150 0.18 NBR 0.33 453 80 0.18 453 80 0.18 NBR 0.33 453 80 0.18 453 80 0.18 SBL 0.33 425 10 0.02 425 10 0.02 SBL 0.33 425 10 0.02 425 10 0.02 SBT 0.34 850 20 0.02 850 20 0.02 SBT 0.34 850 20 0.02 850 20 0.02 SBR 0.33 425 10 0.02 425 10 0.02 SBR 0.33 425 10 0.02 425 10 0.02 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 EBT 3 5100 2,010 0.40 * 5100 2,010 0.40 * EBT 3 5100 2,010 0.40 * 5100 2,010 0.40 * EBR 0 40 40 EBR 0 40 40 WBL 1 1700 310 0.18 * 1700 310 0.18 * WBL 1 1700 310 0.18 * 1700 310 0.18 * WBT 3 5100 1,090 0.22 5100 1,370 0.27 WBT 3 5100 1,260 0.25 5100 1,370 0.27 WBR 0 20 20 WBR 0 20 20 N/S Movements 0.20 0.20 N/S Movements 0.20 0.20 E/W Movements 0.58 0.58 E/W Movements 0.58 0.58 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.83 0.83 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.83 0.83 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 40 N Schaffer Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0.33 397 70 0.18 397 70 0.18 NBT 0.34 850 150 0.18 850 150 0.18 NBR 0.33 453 80 0.18 453 80 0.18 SBL 0.33 425 10 0.02 425 10 0.02 SBT 0.34 850 20 0.02 850 20 0.02 SBR 0.33 425 10 0.02 425 10 0.02 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 EBT 3 5100 2,010 0.40 * 5100 2,010 0.40 * EBR 0 40 40 WBL 1 1700 310 0.18 * 1700 310 0.18 * WBT 3 5100 1,420 0.28 5100 1,530 0.30 WBR 0 20 20 N/S Movements 0.20 0.20 E/W Movements 0.58 0.58 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.83 0.83 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 41 N Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 41 N Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 NBT 2 3400 320 0.09 * 3400 320 0.09 * NBT 2 3400 320 0.09 * 3400 320 0.09 * NBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 NBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 SBL 1 1700 270 0.16 * 1700 270 0.16 * SBL 1 1700 270 0.16 * 1700 270 0.16 * SBT 2 3400 460 0.14 3400 460 0.14 SBT 2 3400 460 0.14 3400 460 0.14 SBR 1 1700 420 0.25 1700 420 0.25 SBR 1 1700 420 0.25 1700 420 0.25 EBL 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 260 0.15 * EBL 1 1700 260 0.15 * 1700 260 0.15 * EBT 3 5100 1,650 0.35 * 5100 1,650 0.35 EBT 3 5100 1,650 0.35 5100 1,650 0.35 EBR 0 140 140 EBR 0 140 140 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 90 0.05 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 WBT 3 5100 910 0.25 5100 1,190 0.30 * WBT 3 5100 1,080 0.28 * 5100 1,190 0.30 * WBR 0 360 360 WBR 0 360 360 N/S Movements 0.25 0.25 N/S Movements 0.25 0.25 E/W Movements 0.40 0.46 E/W Movements 0.44 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.71 0.76 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.74 0.76 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 41 N Cambridge Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 70 0.04 NBT 2 3400 320 0.09 * 3400 320 0.09 * NBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 SBL 1 1700 270 0.16 * 1700 270 0.16 * SBT 2 3400 460 0.14 3400 460 0.14 SBR 1 1700 420 0.25 1700 420 0.25 EBL 1 1700 260 0.15 * 1700 260 0.15 * EBT 3 5100 1,650 0.35 5100 1,650 0.35 EBR 0 140 140 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 WBT 3 5100 1,240 0.31 * 5100 1,350 0.34 * WBR 0 360 360 N/S Movements 0.25 0.25 E/W Movements 0.47 0.49 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.77 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 42 N Tustin Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 42 N Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 220 0.0647 3400 360 0.1059 NBL 2 3400 300 0.09 3400 360 0.11 NBT 3 5100 1,370 0.2686 * 5100 1,370 0.2686 * NBT 3 5100 1,370 0.27 * 5100 1,370 0.27 * NBR 1 1700 530 0.3118 1700 530 0.3118 NBR 1 1700 530 0.31 1700 530 0.31 SBL 2 3400 840 0.2471 * 3400 840 0.2471 * SBL 2 3400 840 0.25 * 3400 840 0.25 * SBT 3 5100 1,260 0.2902 5100 1,260 0.2902 SBT 3 5100 1,260 0.29 5100 1,260 0.29 SBR 0 220 220 SBR 0 220 220 EBL 2 3400 270 0.0794 3400 270 0.0794 EBL 2 3400 270 0.08 3400 270 0.08 EBT 3 5100 1,540 0.3020 * 5100 1,540 0.3020 * EBT 3 5100 1,540 0.30 * 5100 1,540 0.30 * EBR 1 1700 320 0.1882 1700 320 0.1882 EBR 1 1700 320 0.19 1700 320 0.19 WBL 2 3400 460 0.1353 * 3400 460 0.1353 * WBL 2 3400 460 0.14 * 3400 460 0.14 * WBT 3 5100 1,050 0.2059 5100 1,190 0.2333 WBT 3 5100 1,130 0.22 5100 1,190 0.23 WBR 1 1700 780 0.4588 * 1700 780 0.4588 WBR 1 1700 780 0.46 1700 780 0.46 N/S Movements 0.52 0.52 N/S Movements 0.52 0.52 E/W Movements 0.44 0.44 E/W Movements 0.44 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0..00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.00 1.00 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.00 1.00 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 42 N Tustin Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 330 0.10 3400 390 0.11 NBT 3 5100 1,370 0.27 * 5100 1,370 0.27 * NBR 1 1700 530 0.31 1700 530 0.31 SBL 2 3400 840 0.25 * 3400 840 0.25 * SBT 3 5100 1,260 0.30 5100 1,260 0.30 SBR 0 250 250 EBL 2 3400 270 0.08 3400 270 0.08 EBT 3 5100 1,540 0.30 * 5100 1,540 0.30 * EBR 1 1700 320 0.19 1700 320 0.19 WBL 2 3400 460 0.14 * 3400 460 0.14 * WBT 3 5100 1,230 0.24 5100 1,290 0.25 WBR 1 1700 780 0.46 1700 780 0.46 N/S Movements 0.52 0.52 E/W Movements 0.44 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.00 1.00 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 400 0.12 * 3400 400 0.12 * SBL 2 3400 400 0.12 * 3400 400 0.12 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 410 0.24 * 1700 410 0.24 * SBR 1 1700 410 0.24 * 1700 410 0.24 * EBL 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 2.5 4,026 1,930 0.48 * 4,026 1,930 0.48 * EBT 2.5 4,026 1,930 0.48 * 4,026 1,930 0.48 * EBR 1.5 2,774 1,330 0.48 2,774 1,330 0.48 EBR 1.5 2,774 1,330 0.48 2,774 1,330 0.48 WBL 1 1700 520 0.31 * 1700 520 0.31 * WBL 1 1700 520 0.31 * 1700 520 0.31 * WBT 3 5100 1,850 0.36 5100 1,990 0.39 WBT 3 5100 1,930 0.38 5100 1,990 0.39 WBR 50 85000 0 0.00 85000 0 0.00 WBR 50 85000 0 0.00 85000 0 0.00 N/S Movements 0.12 0.12 N/S Movements 0.12 0.12 E/W Movements 0.79 0.79 E/W Movements 0.79 0.79 Rt. Turn Component 0.12 0.12 Rt. Turn Component 0.12 0.12 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.08 1.08 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.08 1.08 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 43 SR-55 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 400 0.12 * 3400 400 0.12 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 410 0.24 * 1700 410 0.24 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 2.5 4,026 1,930 0.48 * 4,026 1,930 0.48 * EBR 1.5 2,774 1,330 0.48 2,774 1,330 0.48 WBL 1 1700 520 0.31 * 1700 520 0.31 * WBT 3 5100 2,030 0.40 5100 2,090 0.41 WBR 50 85000 0 0.00 85000 0 0.00 N/S Movements 0.12 0.12 E/W Movements 0.79 0.79 Rt. Turn Component 0.12 0.12 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.08 1.08 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 1,070 0.31 * 3400 1,070 0.31 * NBL 2 3400 1,070 0.31 * 3400 1,070 0.31 * NBT 0 30 0.00 30 0.00 NBT 0 30 0.00 30 0.00 NBR 1 1700 830 0.49 * 1700 830 0.49 * NBR 1 1700 830 0.49 * 1700 830 0.49 * SBL 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 30 0.02 * SBR 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 30 0.02 * EBL 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 2 3400 1,550 0.46 * 3400 1,550 0.46 * EBT 2 3400 1,550 0.46 * 3400 1,550 0.46 * EBR (free) 50 85000 450 0.01 85000 450 0.01 EBR (free) 50 85000 450 0.01 85000 450 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 1,320 0.26 5100 1,460 0.29 WBT 3 5100 1,400 0.27 5100 1,460 0.29 WBR (free) 50 85000 290 0.00 85000 290 0.00 WBR (free) 50 85000 290 0.00 85000 290 0.00 N/S Movements 0.31 0.31 N/S Movements 0.31 0.31 E/W Movements 0.46 0.46 E/W Movements 0.46 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.19 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.19 0.19 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.01 1.01 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.01 1.01 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 44 SR-55 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 1,070 0.31 * 3400 1,070 0.31 * NBT 0 30 0.00 30 0.00 NBR 1 1700 830 0.49 * 1700 830 0.49 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 30 0.02 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 2 3400 1,550 0.46 * 3400 1,550 0.46 * EBR (free) 50 85000 450 0.01 85000 450 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 1,500 0.29 5100 1,560 0.31 WBR (free) 50 85000 290 0.00 85000 290 0.00 N/S Movements 0.31 0.31 E/W Movements 0.46 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.19 0.19 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.01 1.01 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX G-4: ICU WORKSHEETS UNDER 2011 BASELINE CONDITIONS (MITIGATED) (COMPARSION 3 – PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT) COMPARISON 3 - AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1 1,700 100 0.06 NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1 1700 100 0.06 NBT 1 1700 4 0.01 * 1 1,700 70 0.06 * NBT 1 1700 40 0.04 * 1 1700 70 0.06 * NBR 0 0 10 0 30 NBR 0 0 20 0 0 30 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1 1,700 70 0.04 * SBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1 1700 70 0.04 * SBT 0.5 850 1 0.00 0.5 850 10 0.01 SBT 0.5 850 10 0.01 0.5 850 10 0.01 SBR 1.5 2550 160 0.06 * 1.5 2,550 160 0.06 SBR 1.5 2550 160 0.06 1.5 2550 160 0.06 EBL 2 3400 70 0.02 * 2 3,400 1,440 0.42 * EBL 2 3400 880 0.26 * 2 3400 1,440 0.42 * EBT 3 5100 820 0.16 3 5,100 1,440 0.28 EBT 3 5100 1,190 0.23 3 5100 1,440 0.28 EBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1 1,700 200 0.12 EBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1 1700 200 0.12 WBL 2 3400 10 0.00 2 3,400 90 0.03 WBL 2 3400 60 0.02 2 3400 90 0.03 WBT 3 5100 760 0.15 * 3 5,100 760 0.15 * WBT 3 5100 760 0.15 * 3 5100 760 0.15 * WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1 1,700 380 0.22 * WBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1 1700 380 0.22 * N/S Movements 0.04 0.10 N/S Movements 0.07 0.10 E/W Movements 0.17 0.57 E/W Movements 0.41 0.57 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.03 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.03 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.27 0.76 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.76 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1 1700 100 0.06 * NBT 1 1700 40 0.04 1 1700 70 0.06 NBR 0 0 30 0 0 40 SBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1 1700 80 0.05 SBT 0.5 850 60 0.07 * 0.5 850 60 0.07 * SBR 1.5 2550 190 0.07 1.5 2550 190 0.07 EBL 2 3400 880 0.26 * 2 3400 1,440 0.42 * EBT 3 5100 1,260 0.25 3 5100 1,510 0.30 EBR 1 1700 980 0.58 * 2 3400 1,050 0.31 WBL 2 3400 350 0.10 2 3400 380 0.11 WBT 3 5100 960 0.19 * 3 5100 960 0.19 * WBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1 1700 380 0.22 N/S Movements 0.11 0.13 E/W Movements 0.45 0.61 Rt. Turn Component 0.29 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D C Add EBR Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX G-5: ICU WORKSHEETS UNDER 2013 OPENING YEAR CONDITIONS (MITIGATED) (COMPARSION 3 – PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT) COMPARISON 3 - AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1 1,700 100 0.06 NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1 1700 100 0.06 NBT 1 1700 4 0.01 * 1 1,700 70 0.06 * NBT 1 1700 40 0.04 * 1 1700 70 0.06 * NBR 0 0 10 0 30 NBR 0 0 20 0 0 30 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1 1,700 70 0.04 * SBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1 1700 70 0.04 * SBT 0.5 850 1 0.00 0.5 850 10 0.01 SBT 0.5 850 10 0.01 0.5 850 10 0.01 SBR 1.5 2550 160 0.06 * 1.5 2,550 160 0.06 SBR 1.5 2550 160 0.06 1.5 2550 160 0.06 EBL 2 3400 70 0.02 * 2 3,400 1,440 0.42 * EBL 2 3400 880 0.26 * 2 3400 1,440 0.42 * EBT 3 5100 820 0.16 3 5,100 1,440 0.28 EBT 3 5100 1,190 0.23 3 5100 1,440 0.28 EBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1 1,700 200 0.12 EBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1 1700 200 0.12 WBL 2 3400 10 0.00 2 3,400 90 0.03 WBL 2 3400 60 0.02 2 3400 90 0.03 WBT 3 5100 760 0.15 * 3 5,100 760 0.15 * WBT 3 5100 760 0.15 * 3 5100 760 0.15 * WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1 1,700 380 0.22 * WBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1 1700 380 0.22 * N/S Movements 0.04 0.10 N/S Movements 0.07 0.10 E/W Movements 0.17 0.57 E/W Movements 0.41 0.57 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.03 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.03 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.27 0.76 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.76 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1 1700 100 0.06 * NBT 1 1700 40 0.04 1 1700 70 0.06 NBR 0 0 30 0 0 40 SBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1 1700 80 0.05 SBT 0.5 850 60 0.07 * 0.5 850 60 0.07 * SBR 1.5 2550 190 0.07 1.5 2550 190 0.07 EBL 2 3400 880 0.26 * 2 3400 1,440 0.42 * EBT 3 5100 1,260 0.25 3 5100 1,510 0.30 EBR 1 1700 980 0.58 * 2 3400 1,050 0.31 WBL 2 3400 350 0.10 2 3400 380 0.11 WBT 3 5100 960 0.19 * 3 5100 960 0.19 * WBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1 1700 380 0.22 N/S Movements 0.11 0.13 E/W Movements 0.45 0.61 Rt. Turn Component 0.29 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D C Add EBR Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2013 Conditions Year 2013 Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX G-6: ICU WORKSHEETS UNDER 2030 FUTURE YEAR CONDITIONS (MITIGATED) COMPARISON 1: NO EVENTS VS. PROJECT COMPARISON 2: AAHC EVENT VS. PROJECT COMPARISON 3: AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 300 0.09 2 3,400 300 0.09 NBL 2 3400 300 0.09 2 3,400 300 0.09 NBT 3 5100 1,800 0.35 * 3 5,100 1,800 0.35 * NBT 3 5100 1,800 0.35 * 3 5,100 1,800 0.35 * NBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1 1,700 160 0.09 NBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1 1,700 160 0.09 SBL 2 3400 460 0.14 * 2 3,400 480 0.14 * SBL 2 3400 470 0.14 * 2 3,400 480 0.14 * SBT 3 5100 880 0.17 3 5,100 900 0.18 SBT 3 5100 890 0.17 3 5,100 900 0.18 SBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1 1,700 140 0.08 SBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1 1,700 140 0.08 EBL 2 3400 240 0.07 * 2 3,400 240 0.07 * EBL 2 3400 240 0.07 * 2 3,400 240 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,000 0.20 3 5,100 1,050 0.21 EBT 3 5100 1,030 0.20 3 5,100 1,050 0.21 EBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1 1,700 300 0.18 EBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1 1,700 300 0.18 WBL 2 3400 170 0.05 2 3,400 170 0.05 WBL 2 3400 170 0.05 2 3,400 170 0.05 WBT 3 5100 1,640 0.32 * 4 6,800 1,640 0.24 * WBT 3 5100 1,640 0.32 * 4 6,800 1,640 0.24 * WBR 1 1700 540 0.32 1 1,700 540 0.32 WBR 1 1700 540 0.32 1 1,700 540 0.32 N/S Movements 0.49 0.49 N/S Movements 0.49 0.49 E/W Movements 0.39 0.31 E/W Movements 0.39 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.93 0.86 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.93 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D Add one WBT Add one WBT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 3 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h NBL 2 3400 300 0.09 2 3400 300 0.09 NBT 3 5100 1,800 0.35 * 3 5100 1,800 0.35 * NBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1 1700 160 0.09 SBL 2 3400 470 0.14 * 2 3400 480 0.14 * SBT 3 5100 930 0.18 3 5100 940 0.18 SBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1 1700 140 0.08 EBL 2 3400 240 0.07 * 2 3400 240 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,030 0.20 3 5100 1,050 0.21 EBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1 1700 300 0.18 WBL 2 3400 170 0.05 2 3400 170 0.05 WBT 3 5100 1,640 0.32 * 4 6800 1,640 0.24 * WBR 1 1700 540 0.32 1 1700 540 0.32 N/S Movements 0.49 0.49 E/W Movements 0.39 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.93 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D Add one WBT Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 340 0.10 2 3,400 340 0.10 NBL 2 3400 340 0.10 2 3400 340 0.10 NBT 3 5100 1,160 0.23 * 4 6,800 1,160 0.17 * NBT 3 5100 1,160 0.23 * 4 6800 1,160 0.17 * NBR 1 1700 370 0.22 1 1,700 410 0.24 NBR 1 1700 400 0.24 1 1700 410 0.24 SBL 2 3400 430 0.13 * 2 3,400 430 0.13 * SBL 2 3400 430 0.13 * 2 3400 430 0.13 * SBT 3 5100 540 0.11 3 5,100 540 0.11 SBT 3 5100 540 0.11 3 5100 540 0.11 SBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1 1,700 300 0.18 SBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1 1700 300 0.18 EBL 2 3400 490 0.14 * 2 3,400 490 0.14 EBL 2 3400 490 0.14 2 3400 490 0.14 EBT 4 6800 2,050 0.32 4 6,800 2,230 0.35 * EBT 4 6800 2,160 0.34 * 4 6800 2,230 0.35 * EBR 0 150 0 150 EBR 0 150 0 150 WBL 2 3400 590 0.17 2 3,400 590 0.17 * WBL 2 3400 590 0.17 * 2 3400 590 0.17 * WBT 4 6800 2,410 0.35 * 4 6,800 2,410 0.35 WBT 4 6800 2,410 0.35 4 6800 2,410 0.35 WBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1 1,700 120 0.07 WBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1 1700 120 0.07 N/S Movements 0.35 0.30 N/S Movements 0.35 0.30 E/W Movements 0.50 0.52 E/W Movements 0.51 0.52 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.87 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.92 0.87 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D Add one NBT Add one NBT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 5 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 340 0.10 2 3400 340 0.10 NBT 3 5100 1,160 0.23 * 4 6800 1,160 0.17 * NBR 1 1700 400 0.24 1 1700 410 0.24 SBL 2 3400 430 0.13 * 2 3400 430 0.13 * SBT 3 5100 540 0.11 3 5100 540 0.11 SBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1 1700 300 0.18 EBL 2 3400 490 0.14 2 3400 490 0.14 EBT 4 6800 2,370 0.37 * 4 6800 2,440 0.36 * EBR 0 150 1 1700 150 0.09 WBL 2 3400 590 0.17 * 2 3400 590 0.17 * WBT 4 6800 2,410 0.35 4 6800 2,410 0.35 WBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1 1700 120 0.07 N/S Movements 0.35 0.30 E/W Movements 0.54 0.53 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.95 0.88 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D Add one NBT Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 380 0.22 1 1,700 380 0.22 NBL 1 1700 380 0.22 1 1700 380 0.22 NBT 2 3400 10 0.31 * 2 3,400 10 0.31 * NBT 2 3400 10 0.31 * 2 3400 10 0.31 * NBR 0 1,040 0 1,040 NBR 0 1,040 0 1,040 SBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1 1,700 70 0.04 * SBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1 1700 70 0.04 * SBT 1 1700 110 0.12 1 1,700 110 0.12 SBT 1 1700 110 0.12 1 1700 110 0.12 SBR 0 90 0 90 SBR 0 90 0 90 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1 1,700 10 0.01 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1 1700 10 0.01 EBT 3 5100 1,410 0.35 * 3 5,100 1,440 0.28 * EBT 3 5100 1,410 0.35 * 3 5100 1,460 0.29 * EBR 0 360 1 1,700 370 0.22 EBR 0 360 1 1700 380 0.22 WBL 2 3400 510 0.15 * 2 3,400 510 0.15 * WBL 2 3400 510 0.15 * 2 3400 510 0.15 * WBT 3 5100 1,760 0.35 3 5,100 1,760 0.35 WBT 3 5100 1,760 0.35 3 5100 1,760 0.35 WBR 0 10 0 10 WBR 0 10 0 10 N/S Movements 0.35 0.35 N/S Movements 0.35 0.35 E/W Movements 0.50 0.43 E/W Movements 0.50 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.83 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.84 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Add one EBR Add one EBR INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 8 Lewis Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 380 0.22 1 1700 380 0.22 NBT 2 3400 10 0.31 * 2 3400 10 0.31 * NBR 0 1,040 0 1,040 SBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1 1700 70 0.04 * SBT 1 1700 110 0.12 1 1700 110 0.12 SBR 0 90 0 90 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1 1700 10 0.01 EBT 3 5100 1,440 0.35 * 3 5100 1,460 0.29 * EBR 0 370 1 1700 380 0.22 WBL 2 3400 510 0.15 * 2 3400 510 0.15 * WBT 3 5100 1,760 0.35 3 5100 1,760 0.35 WBR 0 10 0 10 N/S Movements 0.35 0.35 E/W Movements 0.50 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.84 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Add one EBR Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue INTERSECTION 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1 1,700 50 0.03 NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1 1700 50 0.03 NBT 2 3400 1,030 0.30 * 2 3,400 1,030 0.30 * NBT 2 3400 1,030 0.30 * 2 3400 1,030 0.30 * NBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1 1,700 300 0.18 NBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1 1700 300 0.18 SBL 1 1700 130 0.08 * 1 1,700 160 0.09 * SBL 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1 1700 160 0.09 * SBT 2 3400 710 0.28 2 3,400 710 0.28 SBT 2 3400 710 0.28 2 3400 710 0.28 SBR 0 230 0 230 SBR 0 230 0 230 EBL 1 1700 190 0.11 * 2 3,400 190 0.06 * EBL 1 1700 190 0.11 1 1700 190 0.11 * EBT 2 3400 840 0.32 2 3,400 920 0.27 EBT 2 3400 890 0.34 * 2 3400 920 0.27 EBR 0 260 1 1,700 260 0.15 EBR 0 260 1 1700 260 0.15 WBL 1 1700 240 0.14 1 1,700 240 0.14 WBL 1 1700 240 0.14 * 1 1700 240 0.14 WBT 2 3400 1,240 0.36 * 2 3,400 1,240 0.36 * WBT 2 3400 1,240 0.36 2 3400 1,240 0.36 * WBR 1 1700 210 0.12 1 1,700 210 0.12 WBR 1 1700 210 0.12 1 1700 210 0.12 N/S Movements 0.38 0.40 N/S Movements 0.39 0.40 E/W Movements 0.48 0.42 E/W Movements 0.48 0.48 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.91 0.87 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.91 0.92 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Add EBR, EBL Add EBR INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 9 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1 1700 50 0.03 NBT 2 3400 1,030 0.30 * 2 3400 1,030 0.30 * NBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1 1700 300 0.18 SBL 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1 1700 160 0.09 * SBT 2 3400 710 0.28 2 3400 710 0.28 SBR 0 230 0 230 EBL 1 1700 190 0.11 1 1700 190 0.11 * EBT 2 3400 930 0.36 * 2 3400 960 0.28 EBR 0 300 1 1700 300 0.18 WBL 1 1700 240 0.14 * 1 1700 240 0.14 WBT 2 3400 1,240 0.36 2 3400 1,240 0.36 * WBR 1 1700 210 0.12 1 1700 210 0.12 N/S Movements 0.39 0.40 E/W Movements 0.50 0.48 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.94 0.92 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Add EBR Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 2 3,400 250 0.07 NBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 2 3400 250 0.07 * NBT 2 3400 670 0.20 2 3,400 670 0.20 * NBT 2 3400 670 0.20 2 3400 670 0.20 NBR 1 1700 530 0.31 1 1,700 570 0.34 NBR 1 1700 560 0.33 1 1700 570 0.34 SBL 2 3400 380 0.11 2 3,400 380 0.11 * SBL 2 3400 380 0.11 2 3400 380 0.11 SBT 1.5 1907 460 0.24 * 1.5 2,550 460 0.18 SBT 1.5 1907 460 0.24 * 1.5 1907 460 0.24 * SBR 1.5 3193 770 0.24 1.5 2,550 770 0.30 SBR 1.5 3193 770 0.24 1.5 3193 770 0.24 EBL 2 3400 420 0.12 2 3,400 420 0.12 EBL 2 3400 420 0.12 2 3400 420 0.12 EBT 4 6800 2,120 0.33 * 4 6,800 2,520 0.39 * EBL 4 6800 2,360 0.36 * 4 6800 2,520 0.39 * EBR 0 110 0 110 EBL 0 110 0 110 WBL 2 3400 490 0.14 * 2 3,400 490 0.14 * WBL 2 3400 490 0.14 * 2 3400 490 0.14 * WBT 5 8500 2,740 0.34 5 8,500 2,740 0.34 WBT 5 8500 2,740 0.34 5 8500 2,740 0.34 WBR 0 190 0 190 WBR 0 190 0 190 N/S Movements 0.31 0.31 N/S Movements 0.31 0.31 E/W Movements 0.47 0.53 E/W Movements 0.51 0.53 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.84 0.89 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.87 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Impact Impact INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 10 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 250 0.07 2 3400 250 0.07 NBT 2 3400 670 0.20 * 2 3400 670 0.20 * NBR 1 1700 560 0.33 1 1700 570 0.34 SBL 2 3400 420 0.12 * 2 3400 420 0.12 * SBT 1.5 1907 460 0.24 1.5 1907 460 0.24 SBR 1.5 3193 770 0.24 1.5 3193 770 0.24 EBL 2 3400 420 0.12 2 3400 420 0.12 EBT 4 6800 2,870 0.44 * 5 8500 3,030 0.37 * EBR 0 110 0 110 WBL 2 3400 490 0.14 * 2 3400 490 0.14 * WBT 5 8500 2,740 0.34 5 8500 2,740 0.34 WBR 0 190 0 190 N/S Movements 0.32 0.32 E/W Movements 0.58 0.51 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.95 0.88 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D Add one EBT Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3,400 530 0.16 * 2 3,400 530 0.16 NBL 2 3,400 530 0.16 * 2 3,400 530 0.16 NBT 3 5,100 830 0.16 3 5,100 970 0.19 * NBT 3 5,100 910 0.18 3 5,100 970 0.19 * NBR 1 1,700 250 0.15 1 1,700 490 0.29 NBR 1 1,700 390 0.23 1 1,700 490 0.29 SBL 2 3,400 320 0.09 2 3,400 380 0.11 * SBL 2 3,400 350 0.10 2 3,400 380 0.11 * SBT 2 3,400 680 0.20 * 3 5,100 700 0.14 SBT 2 3,400 690 0.20 * 3 5,100 700 0.14 SBR 2 3,400 820 0.24 2 3,400 830 0.24 SBR 2 3,400 830 0.24 2 3,400 830 0.24 EBL 3 5,100 900 0.18 2 3,400 930 0.27 * EBL 3 5,100 920 0.18 3 5,100 930 0.18 EBT 3 5,100 1,240 0.24 * 4 6,800 1,680 0.25 EBT 3 5,100 1,500 0.29 * 3 5,100 1,680 0.33 * EBR 1 1,700 420 0.25 1 1,700 420 0.25 EBR 1 1,700 420 0.25 1 1,700 420 0.25 WBL 2 3,400 690 0.20 * 2 3,400 700 0.21 WBL 2 3,400 690 0.20 * 2 3,400 700 0.21 * WBT 4 6,800 1,670 0.25 4 6,800 1,670 0.25 * WBT 4 6,800 1,670 0.25 4 6,800 1,670 0.25 WBR 1 1,700 350 0.21 1 1,700 370 0.22 WBR 1 1,700 360 0.21 1 1,700 370 0.22 N/S Movements 0.36 0.30 N/S Movements 0.36 0.30 E/W Movements 0.45 0.52 E/W Movements 0.50 0.54 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.87 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.91 0.89 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D Add one SBT Add one SBT Restripe EBL to EBT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 15 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h NBL 2 3,400 570 0.17 * 2 3,400 570 0.17 * NBT 3 5,100 1,040 0.20 3 5,100 1,100 0.22 NBR 1 1,700 480 0.28 1 1,700 580 0.34 SBL 2 3,400 460 0.14 2 3,400 490 0.14 SBT 2 3,400 1,040 0.31 * 3 5,100 1,050 0.21 * SBR 2 3,400 850 0.25 2 3,400 850 0.25 EBL 3 5,100 970 0.19 3 5,100 980 0.19 EBT 3 5,100 1,730 0.34 * 3 5,100 1,910 0.37 * EBR 1 1,700 740 0.44 1 1,700 740 0.44 WBL 2 3,400 1,070 0.31 * 2 3,400 1,080 0.32 * WBT 4 6,800 1,820 0.27 4 6,800 1,820 0.27 WBR 1 1,700 380 0.22 1 1,700 390 0.23 N/S Movements 0.47 0.37 E/W Movements 0.65 0.69 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.18 1.12 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Add one SBT Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue INTERSECTION: 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 100 0.03 2 3,400 100 0.03 NBL 2 3400 100 0.03 2 3400 100 0.03 NBT 4 6800 1,960 0.29 * 5 8,500 2,070 0.26 * NBT 4 6800 2,020 0.30 * 5 8500 2,070 0.26 * NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 0 140 NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 0 140 SBL 2 3400 670 0.20 * 2 3,400 670 0.20 * SBL 2 3400 670 0.20 * 2 3400 670 0.20 * SBT 4 6800 1,400 0.28 4 6,800 1,400 0.28 SBT 4 6800 1,400 0.28 4 6800 1,400 0.28 SBR 0 520 0 520 SBR 0 520 0 520 EBL 2 3400 250 0.07 2 3,400 300 0.09 EBL 2 3400 280 0.08 2 3400 300 0.09 EBT 3 5100 870 0.18 * 3 5,100 870 0.18 * EBT 3 5100 870 0.18 * 3 5100 870 0.18 * EBR 0 50 0 50 EBR 0 50 0 50 WBL 2 3400 630 0.19 * 2 3,400 630 0.19 * WBL 2 3400 630 0.19 * 2 3400 630 0.19 * WBT 4 6800 1,750 0.26 4 6,800 1,750 0.26 WBT 4 6800 1,750 0.26 4 6800 1,750 0.26 WBR 1 1700 390 0.23 1 1,700 390 0.23 WBR 1 1700 390 0.23 1 1700 390 0.23 N/S Movements 0.49 0.46 N/S Movements 0.49 0.46 E/W Movements 0.37 0.37 E/W Movements 0.37 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.87 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.91 0.87 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D Restripe NBR to NBT Restripe NBR to NBT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 18 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 100 0.03 2 3400 100 0.03 NBT 4 6800 2,820 0.41 * 5 8500 2,870 0.35 * NBR 1 1700 140 0.08 0 140 SBL 2 3400 670 0.20 * 2 3400 670 0.20 * SBT 4 6800 1,400 0.28 4 6800 1,400 0.28 SBR 0 520 0 520 EBL 2 3400 430 0.13 * 2 3400 450 0.13 * EBT 3 5100 870 0.18 3 5100 870 0.18 EBR 0 50 0 50 WBL 2 3400 630 0.19 2 3400 630 0.19 WBT 4 6800 1,750 0.26 * 4 6800 1,750 0.26 * WBR 1 1700 390 0.23 1 1700 390 0.23 N/S Movements 0.61 0.55 E/W Movements 0.38 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.05 0.99 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F E Restripe NBR to NBT Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue INTERSECTION 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 210 0.06 2 3,400 210 0.06 NBL 2 3400 210 0.06 2 3400 210 0.06 NBT 3 5100 1,490 0.29 * 3 5,100 1,570 0.31 * NBT 3 5100 1,540 0.30 * 3 5100 1,570 0.31 * NBR 2 3400 780 0.23 2 3,400 780 0.23 NBR 2 3400 780 0.23 2 3400 780 0.23 SBL 2 3400 160 0.05 * 2 3,400 160 0.05 * SBL 2 3400 160 0.05 * 2 3400 160 0.05 * SBT 4 6800 1,520 0.22 4 6,800 1,520 0.22 SBT 4 6800 1,520 0.22 4 6800 1,520 0.22 SBR 1 1700 230 0.14 1 1,700 230 0.14 SBR 1 1700 230 0.14 1 1700 230 0.14 EBL 2 3400 390 0.11 2 3,400 420 0.12 EBL 2 3400 410 0.12 2 3400 420 0.12 EBT 3 5100 1,350 0.26 * 3 5,100 1,380 0.27 * EBT 3 5100 1,370 0.27 * 3 5100 1,380 0.27 * EBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1 1,700 140 0.08 EBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1 1700 140 0.08 WBL 2 3400 510 0.15 * 2 3,400 510 0.15 * WBL 2 3400 510 0.15 * 2 3400 510 0.15 * WBT 2.5 4206 1,200 0.29 2.5 4,250 1,200 0.28 WBT 2.5 4206 1,200 0.29 2.5 4206 1,200 0.29 WBR 1.5 2594 740 0.29 1.5 2,550 740 0.29 WBR 1.5 2594 740 0.29 1.5 2594 740 0.29 N/S Movements 0.34 0.35 N/S Movements 0.35 0.35 E/W Movements 0.41 0.42 E/W Movements 0.42 0.42 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.80 0.83 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.82 0.83 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 21 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 210 0.06 2 3400 210 0.06 NBT 3 5100 1,890 0.37 * 4 6800 1,920 0.28 * NBR 2 3400 780 0.23 1 1700 780 0.46 * SBL 2 3400 160 0.05 * 2 3400 160 0.05 * SBT 4 6800 1,520 0.22 4 6800 1,520 0.22 SBR 1 1700 230 0.14 1 1700 230 0.14 EBL 2 3400 510 0.15 * 2 3400 520 0.15 * EBT 3 5100 1,370 0.27 3 5100 1,380 0.27 EBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1 1700 140 0.08 WBL 2 3400 510 0.15 2 3400 510 0.15 WBT 2.5 4206 1,200 0.29 * 2.5 4206 1,200 0.29 * WBR 1.5 2594 740 0.29 1.5 2594 740 0.29 N/S Movements 0.42 0.33 E/W Movements 0.44 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.03 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.84 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Restripe 1 NBR to NBT Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions Year 2030 Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3,400 620 0.18 * 2 3,400 630 0.19 * NBL 2 3,400 620 0.18 * 2 3,400 630 0.19 * NBT 1 1,700 20 0.01 1 1,700 20 0.01 NBT 1 1,700 20 0.01 1 1,700 20 0.01 NBR 2 3,400 1,170 0.34 * 2 3,400 1,170 0.34 * NBR 2 3,400 1,170 0.34 * 2 3,400 1,170 0.34 * SBL 1 1,700 150 0.09 1 1,700 220 0.13 SBL 1 1,700 190 0.11 1 1,700 220 0.13 SBT 1 1,700 20 0.01 * 1 1,700 20 0.01 * SBT 1 1,700 20 0.01 * 1 1,700 20 0.01 * SBR 1 1,700 120 0.07 * 1 1,700 130 0.08 * SBR 1 1,700 130 0.08 * 1 1,700 130 0.08 * EBL 2 3,400 130 0.04 2 3,400 130 0.04 EBL 2 3,400 130 0.04 2 3,400 130 0.04 EBT 3 5,100 1,220 0.24 * 4 6,800 1,860 0.27 * EBT 3 5,100 1,600 0.31 * 4 6,800 1,860 0.27 * EBR 1 1,700 480 0.28 1 1,700 500 0.29 EBR 1 1,700 490 0.29 1 1,700 500 0.29 WBL 2 3,400 890 0.26 * 2 3,400 920 0.27 * WBL 2 3,400 910 0.27 * 2 3,400 920 0.27 * WBT 3 5,100 1,730 0.34 3 5,100 1,780 0.35 WBT 3 5,100 1,760 0.35 3 5,100 1,780 0.35 WBR 1 1,700 140 0.08 1 1,700 140 0.08 WBR 1 1,700 140 0.08 1 1,700 140 0.08 N/S Movements 0.19 0.20 N/S Movements 0.19 0.20 E/W Movements 0.50 0.54 E/W Movements 0.58 0.54 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.75 0.79 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.83 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D C Add EBT Add EBT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 22 Sportstown / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h NBL 2 3,400 720 0.21 * 2 3,400 730 0.21 * NBT 1 1,700 40 0.02 1 1,700 40 0.02 NBR 2 3,400 1,210 0.36 * 2 3,400 1,210 0.36 * SBL 1 1,700 190 0.11 1 1,700 220 0.13 SBT 1 1,700 30 0.02 * 1 1,700 30 0.02 * SBR 1 1,700 130 0.08 1 1,700 130 0.08 EBL 2 3,400 230 0.07 2 3,400 230 0.07 EBT 3 5,100 1,840 0.36 * 4 6,800 2,100 0.31 * EBR 1 1,700 590 0.35 1 1,700 600 0.35 WBL 2 3,400 1,010 0.30 * 2 3,400 1,020 0.30 * WBT 3 5,100 2,050 0.40 3 5,100 2,070 0.41 WBR 1 1,700 260 0.15 1 1,700 260 0.15 N/S Movements 0.23 0.23 E/W Movements 0.66 0.61 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.94 0.89 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D Add EBT Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Honda Center Traffic Study ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 90 0.05 1 1,700 100 0.06 NBL 1 1,700 90 0.05 1 1,700 100 0.06 NBT 2 3,400 990 0.29 * 3 5,100 1,020 0.20 * NBT 2 3,400 1,010 0.30 * 2 3,400 1,020 0.30 * NBR 1 1,700 600 0.35 1 1,700 650 0.38 NBR 1 1,700 630 0.37 1 1,700 650 0.38 SBL 2 3,400 360 0.11 * 2 3,400 360 0.11 * SBL 2 3,400 360 0.11 * 2 3,400 360 0.11 * SBT 2 3,400 360 0.15 2 3,400 430 0.17 SBT 2 3,400 400 0.16 2 3,400 430 0.17 SBR 0 140 0 150 SBR 0 140 0 150 EBL 2 3,400 230 0.07 2 3,400 230 0.07 EBL 2 3,400 230 0.07 2 3,400 230 0.07 EBT 3 5,100 1,740 0.35 * 4 6,800 1,830 0.28 * EBT 3 5,100 1,790 0.36 * 4 6,800 1,830 0.28 * EBR 0 20 0 70 EBR 0 50 0 70 WBL 2 3,400 600 0.18 * 2 3,400 890 0.26 * WBL 2 3,400 770 0.23 * 2 3,400 890 0.26 * WBT 3 5,100 1,960 0.38 3 5,100 2,170 0.43 WBT 3 5,100 2,090 0.41 3 5,100 2,170 0.43 WBR 1 1,700 810 0.48 1 1,700 850 0.50 WBR 1 1,700 840 0.49 1 1,700 850 0.50 N/S Movements 0.40 0.31 N/S Movements 0.40 0.41 E/W Movements 0.52 0.54 E/W Movements 0.59 0.54 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.97 0.90 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.04 1.00 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F E Add 1 EBT Add 1 EBT Add 1 NBT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 23 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h NBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1 1700 100 0.06 NBT 2 3400 1,010 0.30 * 2 3400 1,020 0.30 * NBR 1 1700 630 0.37 1 1700 650 0.38 SBL 2 3400 360 0.11 * 2 3400 360 0.11 * SBT 2 3400 450 0.17 2 3400 480 0.19 SBR 0 0 140 0 0 150 EBL 2 3400 230 0.07 2 3400 230 0.07 EBT 3 5100 1,920 0.39 * 4 6800 1,960 0.30 * EBR 0 50 0 70 WBL 2 3400 820 0.24 * 2 3400 940 0.28 * WBT 3 5100 2,090 0.41 3 5100 2,170 0.43 WBR 1 1,700 840 0.49 1 1,700 850 0.50 N/S Movements 0.40 0.41 E/W Movements 0.63 0.58 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.08 1.03 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Add 1 EBT Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue INTERSECTION: 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 30 0.02 1 1,700 30 0.02 NBL 1 1,700 30 0.02 1 1,700 30 0.02 NBT 2 3,400 580 0.23 * 2 3,400 600 0.18 * NBT 2 3,400 590 0.24 * 2 3,400 600 0.25 * NBR 0 200 1 1,700 260 0.15 NBR 0 230 0 260 SBL 1 1,700 150 0.09 * 1 1,700 460 0.27 * SBL 1 1,700 330 0.19 * 1 1,700 460 0.27 * SBT 2 3,400 320 0.14 2 3,400 380 0.16 SBT 2 3,400 350 0.15 2 3,400 380 0.16 SBR 0 160 0 160 SBR 0 160 0 160 EBL 1 1,700 170 0.10 * 1 1,700 170 0.10 * EBL 1 1,700 170 0.10 * 1 1,700 170 0.10 * EBT 2 3,400 260 0.08 2 3,400 410 0.13 EBT 2 3,400 350 0.11 2 3,400 410 0.13 EBR 0 20 0 30 EBR 0 30 0 30 WBL 1 1,700 230 0.14 1 1,700 280 0.16 WBL 1 1,700 260 0.15 1 1,700 280 0.16 WBT 2 3,400 720 0.34 * 2 3,400 720 0.21 * WBT 2 3,400 720 0.34 * 2 3,400 720 0.21 * WBR 0 430 1 1,700 450 0.26 WBR 0 440 1 1,700 450 0.26 N/S Movements 0.32 0.45 N/S Movements 0.44 0.52 E/W Movements 0.44 0.31 E/W Movements 0.44 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.81 0.81 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.93 0.89 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D Add NBR, WBR Add WBR INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 24 Sunkist Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h NBL 1 1,700 30 0.02 1 1,700 30 0.02 NBT 2 3,400 590 0.24 * 2 3,400 600 0.25 * NBR 0 230 0 260 SBL 1 1,700 360 0.21 * 1 1,700 490 0.29 * SBT 2 3,400 370 0.16 2 3,400 400 0.16 SBR 0 160 0 160 EBL 1 1,700 170 0.10 * 1 1,700 170 0.10 * EBT 2 3,400 350 0.11 2 3,400 410 0.13 EBR 0 30 0 30 WBL 1 1,700 260 0.15 1 1,700 280 0.16 WBT 2 3,400 720 0.34 * 2 3,400 720 0.21 * WBR 0 440 1 1,700 450 0.26 N/S Movements 0.45 0.54 E/W Movements 0.44 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.94 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D Add WBR Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1,700 130 0.08 1 1,700 130 0.08 NBL 1 1,700 130 0.08 1 1,700 130 0.08 NBT 1 1,700 90 0.05 * 1 1,700 90 0.05 * NBT 1 1,700 90 0.05 * 1 1,700 90 0.05 * NBR 1 1,700 210 0.12 * 1 1,700 250 0.15 * NBR 1 1,700 230 0.14 * 1 1,700 250 0.15 * SBL 2 3,400 500 0.15 * 2 3,400 540 0.16 * SBL 2 3,400 520 0.15 * 2 3,400 540 0.16 * SBT 0.5 756 20 0.03 0.5 756 20 0.03 SBT 0.5 756 20 0.03 0.5 756 20 0.03 SBR 1.5 2,644 70 0.03 1.5 2,644 70 0.03 SBR 1.5 2,644 70 0.03 1.5 2,644 70 0.03 EBL 2 3,400 190 0.06 * 2 3,400 220 0.06 * EBL 2 3,400 210 0.06 * 2 3,400 220 0.06 * EBT 3 5,100 2,070 0.42 4 6,800 2,750 0.42 EBT 3 5,100 2,480 0.51 4 6,800 2,750 0.42 EBR 0 70 0 120 EBR 0 100 0 120 WBL 2 3,400 90 0.03 2 3,400 220 0.06 WBL 2 3,400 170 0.05 2 3,400 220 0.06 WBT 3 5,100 2,580 0.51 * 3 5,100 2,650 0.52 * WBT 3 5,100 2,620 0.51 * 3 5,100 2,650 0.52 * WBR 1 1,700 530 0.31 1 1,700 690 0.41 WBR 1 1,700 630 0.37 1 1,700 690 0.41 Split phase N/S Movements 0.22 0.24 Split phase N/S Movements 0.23 0.24 E/W Movements 0.56 0.58 E/W Movements 0.58 0.58 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.86 0.88 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.86 0.88 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Add one EBT Add one EBT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 25 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h NBL 1 1,700 150 0.09 1 1,700 150 0.09 NBT 1 1,700 100 0.06 * 1 1,700 100 0.06 * NBR 1 1,700 270 0.16 * 1 1,700 290 0.17 * SBL 2 3,400 520 0.15 * 2 3,400 540 0.16 * SBT 0.5 1,236 40 0.03 0.5 1,236 40 0.03 SBR 1.5 2,164 70 0.03 1.5 2,164 70 0.03 EBL 2 3,400 210 0.06 2 3,400 220 0.06 * EBT 3 5,100 2,610 0.53 * 4 6,800 2,880 0.44 EBR 0 100 0 120 WBL 2 3,400 170 0.05 * 2 3,400 220 0.06 WBT 3 5,100 2,620 0.51 3 5,100 2,650 0.52 * WBR 1 1,700 630 0.37 1 1,700 690 0.41 Split phase N/S Movements 0.24 0.25 E/W Movements 0.58 0.58 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.89 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Add one EBT Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Honda Center Traffic Study ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 26 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps INTERSECTION: 26 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 640 0.38 * 2 3,400 1,190 0.35 * SBL 1 1700 970 0.57 * 2 3400 1,190 0.35 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 2 3400 650 0.19 * 2 3,400 960 0.28 * SBR 2 3400 840 0.25 * 2 3400 960 0.28 * EBL 0 0 * 0 0 * EBL 0 0 * 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,120 0.42 3 5,100 2,130 0.42 EBT 3 5100 2,130 0.42 3 5100 2,130 0.42 EBR (free) 50 85000 580 0.01 50 85,000 620 0.01 EBR (free) 50 85000 600 0.01 50 85000 620 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 2,940 0.58 * 4 6,800 3,130 0.46 * WBT 3 5100 3,050 0.60 * 3 5100 3,130 0.61 * WBR (free) 50 85000 620 0.01 50 85,000 650 0.01 WBR (free) 50 85000 640 0.01 50 85000 650 0.01 N/S Movements 0.38 0.35 N/S Movements 0.57 0.35 E/W Movements 0.58 0.46 E/W Movements 0.60 0.61 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.00 0.86 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.22 1.01 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Add SBL, WBT Add SBL INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 26 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 970 0.57 * 2 3400 1,190 0.35 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 2 3400 840 0.25 * 2 3400 960 0.28 * EBL 0 0 * 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,190 0.43 3 5100 2,190 0.43 EBR (free) 50 85000 610 0.01 50 85000 630 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 3,050 0.60 * 3 5100 3,130 0.61 * WBR (free) 50 85000 670 0.01 50 85000 680 0.01 N/S Movements 0.57 0.35 E/W Movements 0.60 0.61 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.22 1.01 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Add SBL Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 240 0.14 * 2 3,400 640 0.19 * SBL 1 1700 480 0.28 * 2 3400 640 0.19 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 2 3400 570 0.17 * 2 3,400 760 0.22 * SBR 2 3400 680 0.20 * 2 3400 760 0.22 * EBL 0 0 * 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 2,200 0.43 4 6,800 3,040 0.45 * EBT 3 5100 2,700 0.53 * 3 5100 3,040 0.60 * EBR (free) 50 85000 510 0.01 50 85,000 550 0.01 EBR (free) 50 85000 530 0.01 50 85000 550 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 0 * WBL 0 0 * 0 0 * WBT 3 5100 2,430 0.48 * 4 6,800 2,620 0.39 WBT 3 5100 2,540 0.50 3 5100 2,620 0.51 WBR (free) 50 85000 510 0.01 50 85,000 510 0.01 WBR (free) 50 85000 510 0.01 50 85000 510 0.01 N/S Movements 0.14 0.19 N/S Movements 0.28 0.19 E/W Movements 0.48 0.45 E/W Movements 0.53 0.60 Rt. Turn Component 0.03 0.04 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.04 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.69 0.72 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.86 0.87 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Add 1 SBL, 1 EBT and 1 WBT Add SBL INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 27 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 1,020 0.60 * 2 3400 1,180 0.35 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 2 3400 940 0.28 * 2 3400 1,020 0.30 * EBL 0 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 2,860 0.56 * 3 5100 3,200 0.63 * EBR (free) 50 85000 560 0.01 50 85000 580 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 0 * WBT 3 5100 2,760 0.54 3 5100 2,840 0.56 WBR (free) 50 85000 530 0.01 50 85000 530 0.01 N/S Movements 0.60 0.35 E/W Movements 0.56 0.63 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.21 1.02 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Add SBL Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps INTERSECTION: 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2663 590 0.22 * 2 3,400 660 0.19 * NBL 1.5 2510 630 0.25 * 2 3,400 660 0.19 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 2437 540 0.22 * 2 3,400 720 0.21 * NBR 1.5 2590 650 0.25 * 2 3,400 720 0.21 * SBL 0 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,240 0.44 3 5,100 2,860 0.56 * EBT 3 5100 2,610 0.51 3 5100 2,860 0.56 EBR (free) 50 85000 650 0.01 50 85,000 660 0.01 EBR (free) 50 85000 650 0.01 50 85000 660 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 0 * WBL 0 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 2,960 0.58 * 4 6,800 3,140 0.46 WBT 3 5100 3,070 0.60 * 3 5100 3,140 0.62 * WBR (free) 50 85000 1,060 0.01 50 85,000 1,090 0.01 WBR (free) 50 85000 1,080 0.01 50 85000 1,090 0.01 N/S Movements 0.22 0.19 N/S Movements 0.25 0.19 E/W Movements 0.58 0.56 E/W Movements 0.60 0.62 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.02 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.82 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.88 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Restripe NBLR to NBR, Add NBL, WBT Restripe NBLR to NBR, Add NBL INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 28 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2510 630 0.25 * 2 3,400 660 0.19 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 2590 650 0.25 * 2 3,400 720 0.21 * SBL 0 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,610 0.51 3 5100 2,860 0.56 EBR (free) 50 85000 710 0.01 50 85000 720 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 3,070 0.60 * 3 5100 3,140 0.62 * WBR (free) 50 85000 1,180 0.01 50 85000 1,190 0.01 N/S Movements 0.25 0.19 E/W Movements 0.60 0.62 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.88 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Restripe NBLR to NBR, Add NBL Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1962 300 0.15 * 1.5 1700 390 0.23 * NBL 1.5 1700 360 0.21 * 1.5 1041 390 0.37 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3138 480 0.15 * 2.5 5100 1,520 0.30 * NBR 1.5 3400 1,100 0.32 * 1.5 4059 1,520 0.37 * SBL 0 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 0 * EBL 0 0 * 0 0 * EBT 5 8500 1,850 0.22 5 8,500 3,060 0.36 EBT 5 8500 2,570 0.30 5 8500 3,060 0.36 EBR (free) 50 85000 500 0.01 50 85,000 500 0.01 EBR (free) 50 85000 500 0.01 50 85000 500 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 2,970 0.58 * 4 6,800 2,970 0.44 * WBT 3 5100 2,970 0.58 * 4 6800 2,970 0.44 * WBR 1 1700 530 0.31 1 1,700 530 0.31 WBR 1 1700 530 0.31 1 1700 530 0.31 N/S Movements 0.15 0.23 N/S Movements 0.21 0.37 E/W Movements 0.58 0.44 E/W Movements 0.58 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.07 Rt. Turn Component 0.11 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.79 0.78 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.96 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D Add WBT, NBR Add WBT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 29 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 410 0.24 * 1.5 1029 440 0.43 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3400 1,320 0.39 * 1.5 4071 1,740 0.43 * SBL 0 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 0 * EBT 5 8500 3,210 0.38 5 8500 3,700 0.44 EBR (free) 50 85000 560 0.01 50 85000 560 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 3,150 0.62 * 4 6800 3,150 0.46 * WBR 1 1700 580 0.34 1 1700 580 0.34 N/S Movements 0.24 0.43 E/W Movements 0.62 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.15 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.06 0.94 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F E Add WBT Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 1,060 0.31 * 3 5,100 1,120 0.22 * NBL 2 3400 1,090 0.32 * 2 3400 1,120 0.33 * NBT 2 3400 580 0.17 4 6,800 640 0.09 NBT 2 3400 620 0.18 2 3400 640 0.19 NBR 1 1700 640 0.38 * 2 3,400 660 0.19 NBR 1 1700 650 0.38 * 1 1700 660 0.39 * SBL 2 3400 530 0.16 2 3,400 550 0.16 SBL 2 3400 540 0.16 2 3400 550 0.16 SBT 2 3400 320 0.09 * 4 6,800 330 0.05 * SBT 2 3400 320 0.09 * 2 3400 330 0.10 * SBR 1 1700 390 0.23 * 1 1,700 390 0.23 SBR 1 1700 390 0.23 1 1700 390 0.23 EBL 2 3400 260 0.08 * 3 5,100 1,630 0.32 * EBL 2 3400 1,070 0.31 * 3 5100 1,630 0.32 * EBT 4 6800 1,500 0.22 4 6,800 2,120 0.31 EBT 4 6800 1,870 0.28 4 6800 2,120 0.31 EBR 1 1700 500 0.29 1 1,700 680 0.40 EBR 1 1700 610 0.36 1 1700 680 0.40 WBL 2 3400 570 0.17 2 3,400 650 0.19 WBL 2 3400 620 0.18 2 3400 650 0.19 WBT 4 6800 2,220 0.33 * 5 8,500 2,220 0.26 * WBT 4 6800 2,220 0.33 * 4 6800 2,220 0.33 * WBR 1 1700 850 0.50 * 2 3,400 1,170 0.34 WBR 1 1700 1,040 0.61 * 2 3400 1,170 0.34 N/S Movements 0.41 0.27 N/S Movements 0.41 0.43 E/W Movements 0.40 0.58 E/W Movements 0.64 0.65 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.13 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.88 0.90 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.23 1.12 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Add 1 NBL, 2 NBT, 1NBR, 2 SBT, 1 EBL, 1 WBT, 1WBR Add EBL, WBR INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h NBL 2 3400 1,090 0.32 * 2 3400 1,120 0.33 * NBT 2 3400 620 0.18 2 3400 640 0.19 NBR 1 1700 660 0.39 1 1700 670 0.39 SBL 2 3400 550 0.16 2 3400 560 0.16 SBT 2 3400 370 0.11 * 2 3400 380 0.11 * SBR 1 1700 420 0.25 1 1700 420 0.25 EBL 2 3400 1,070 0.31 * 3 5100 1,630 0.32 * EBT 4 6800 1,940 0.29 4 6800 2,190 0.32 EBR 1 1700 1,460 0.86 * 1 1700 1,530 0.90 * WBL 2 3400 910 0.27 2 3400 940 0.28 WBT 4 6800 2,420 0.36 * 4 6800 2,420 0.36 * WBR 1 1700 1,040 0.61 * 2 3400 1,170 0.34 N/S Movements 0.43 0.44 E/W Movements 0.67 0.68 Rt. Turn Component 0.35 0.25 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.50 1.42 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Add EBL, WBR Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road INTERSECTION: 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.33 1,882 980 0.52 * 1.33 1,880 990 0.53 * NBL 1.33 1,880 990 0.53 * 1.33 1,880 990 0.53 * NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 0.34 0 0 0.00 NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 0.34 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.33 1,518 790 0.52 * 0.33 1,520 800 0.53 * NBR 0.33 1,520 800 0.53 * 0.33 1,520 800 0.53 * SBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 1 1,700 10 0.01 SBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 1 1,700 10 0.01 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * SBR 1 1,700 10 0.01 1 1,700 30 0.02 SBR 1 1,700 20 0.01 1 1,700 30 0.02 EBL 1 1,700 30 0.02 1 1,700 50 0.03 EBL 1 1,700 40 0.02 1 1,700 50 0.03 EBT 3 5,100 1,820 0.54 * 3 5,100 1,860 0.36 * EBT 3 5,100 1,840 0.62 * 3 5,100 1,860 0.36 * EBR 0 920 1 1,700 1,610 0.95 * EBR 0 1,330 1 1,700 1,610 0.95 * WBL 1 1,700 600 0.35 * 1 1,700 730 0.43 * WBL 1 1,700 680 0.40 * 1 1,700 730 0.43 * WBT 3 5,100 3,150 0.62 3 5,100 3,330 0.66 WBT 3 5,100 3,260 0.65 3 5,100 3,330 0.66 WBR 0 30 0 40 WBR 0 30 0 40 N/S Movements 0.52 0.53 N/S Movements 0.53 0.53 E/W Movements 0.89 0.79 E/W Movements 1.02 0.79 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.06 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.06 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.46 1.43 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.60 1.43 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Add EBR Add EBR INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 31 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h NBL 1.33 1,887 1,010 0.54 * 1.33 1,887 1,010 0.54 * NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 0.34 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.33 1,513 810 0.54 * 0.33 1,513 810 0.54 * SBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 1 1,700 10 0.01 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * SBR 1 1,700 20 0.01 1 1,700 30 0.02 EBL 1 1,700 50 0.03 1 1,700 60 0.04 * EBT 3 5,100 1,840 0.63 * 3 5,100 1,860 0.36 EBR 0 1,380 1 1,700 1,660 0.98 * WBL 1 1,700 690 0.41 * 2 3,400 740 0.22 WBT 3 5,100 3,310 0.66 3 5,100 3,380 0.67 * WBR 0 40 0 50 N/S Movements 0.54 0.54 E/W Movements 1.04 0.71 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.08 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.62 1.37 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Add EBR Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue INTERSECTION: 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3,287 580 0.18 * 1.5 3,245 630 0.19 * NBL 1.5 3,292 610 0.19 * 1.5 3,245 630 0.19 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.5 113 20 0.18 * 0.5 155 30 0.19 * NBR 0.5 108 20 0.19 * 0.5 155 30 0.19 * SBL 0 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 0 EBT 3 5,100 2,670 0.52 3 5,100 2,670 0.52 * EBT 3 5,100 2,670 0.52 3 5,100 2,670 0.52 * EBR 1 1,700 350 0.21 1 1,700 390 0.23 EBR 1 1,700 380 0.22 1 1,700 390 0.23 WBL 1 1,700 10 0.01 1 1,700 80 0.05 * WBL 1 1,700 50 0.03 1 1,700 80 0.05 * WBT 3 5,100 3,000 0.59 * 4 6,800 3,820 0.56 WBT 3 5,100 3,490 0.68 * 4 6,800 3,820 0.56 WBR 0 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.18 0.19 N/S Movements 0.19 0.19 E/W Movements 0.59 0.57 E/W Movements 0.68 0.57 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.81 0.81 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.92 0.81 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D Add one WBT Add one WBT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 32 Katella Avenue / Struck Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h NBL 1.5 3,243 620 0.19 * 1.5 3,200 640 0.20 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.5 157 30 0.19 * 0.5 200 40 0.20 * SBL 0 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 * 0 0 * EBT 3 5,100 2,670 0.52 3 5,100 2,670 0.52 EBR 1 1,700 380 0.22 1 1,700 390 0.23 WBL 1 1,700 60 0.04 1 1,700 90 0.05 WBT 3 5,100 3,880 0.76 * 4 6,800 4,210 0.62 * WBR 0 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.19 0.20 E/W Movements 0.76 0.62 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.00 0.87 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D Add one WBT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 1 Comparison 2 PROJECT: PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue INTERSECTION: 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITHOUT EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3,400 200 0.06 * 2 3,400 300 0.09 NBL 2 3,400 260 0.08 * 2 3,400 300 0.09 * NBT 2 3,400 870 0.26 2 3,400 980 0.29 * NBT 2 3,400 940 0.28 2 3,400 980 0.29 NBR 1 1,700 500 0.29 1 1,700 530 0.31 NBR 1 1,700 520 0.31 1 1,700 530 0.31 SBL 1 1,700 130 0.08 1 1,700 130 0.08 * SBL 1 1,700 130 0.08 1 1,700 130 0.08 SBT 2 3,400 1,010 0.30 * 3 5,100 1,060 0.21 SBT 2 3,400 1,040 0.31 * 2 3,400 1,060 0.31 * SBR 1 1,700 530 0.31 1 1,700 620 0.36 * SBR 1 1,700 580 0.34 1 1,700 620 0.36 EBL 2 3,400 320 0.09 2 3,400 320 0.09 EBL 2 3,400 320 0.09 * 2 3,400 320 0.09 EBT 3 5,100 1,920 0.38 * 3 5,100 1,940 0.38 * EBT 3 5,100 1,930 0.38 3 5,100 1,940 0.38 * EBR 1 1,700 160 0.09 1 1,700 170 0.10 EBR 1 1,700 170 0.10 1 1,700 170 0.10 WBL 2 3,400 230 0.07 * 2 3,400 270 0.08 * WBL 2 3,400 250 0.07 2 3,400 270 0.08 * WBT 3 5,100 1,610 0.32 4 6,800 2,170 0.35 WBT 3 5,100 1,940 0.38 * 4 6,800 2,170 0.35 WBR 1 1,700 220 0.13 0 230 WBR 1 1,700 220 0.13 0 230 N/S Movements 0.36 0.36 N/S Movements 0.38 0.40 E/W Movements 0.44 0.46 E/W Movements 0.47 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.87 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.91 0.91 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Restripe WBR to WBT Restripe WBR to WBT Add SBT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Comparison 3 PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 34 Main Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/16/2011 PM PK. HR. WITH EVENT+AS MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/h NBL 2 3400 260 0.08 * 2 3400 300 0.09 * NBT 2 3400 940 0.28 2 3400 980 0.29 NBR 1 1700 520 0.31 1 1700 530 0.31 SBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1 1700 130 0.08 SBT 2 3400 1,040 0.31 * 2 3400 1,060 0.31 * SBR 1 1700 600 0.35 1 1700 640 0.38 EBL 2 3400 320 0.09 * 2 3400 320 0.09 * EBT 3 5100 1,940 0.38 3 5100 1,950 0.38 EBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1 1700 170 0.10 WBL 2 3400 250 0.07 2 3400 270 0.08 WBT 3 5100 2,200 0.43 * 4 6800 2,430 0.39 * WBR 1 1700 240 0.14 0 250 N/S Movements 0.38 0.40 E/W Movements 0.53 0.49 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.96 0.94 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Restripe WBR to WBT Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) PM PK.HR. WITH PROJECT+AS Honda Center Traffic Study Honda Center Traffic Study Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) Year 2030 Conditions (Mitigation) ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX H-1: CALTRANS RAMP TERMINI WORKSHEETS UNDER 2011 BASELINE CONDITIONS SCENARIO 1: NO EVENTS SCENARIO 2: WITH AAHC EVENT SCENARIO 3: WITH AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT SCENARIO 4: WITH PROJECT SCENARIO 5: WITH PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 6: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue 2011 Baseline No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 674 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 58 0 166 22 42 7 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1399 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1400 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.84 0.84 0.84 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 702 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 78 0 224 26 50 8 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 263 0 0 0 0 84 102 0 0 7 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 702 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 70 32 14 26 50 1 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 43.0 43.0 13.0 60.2 9.0 19.9 10.9 4.1 6.0 6.0 Effective Green, g 43.0 43.0 13.0 60.2 9.0 19.9 10.9 4.1 6.0 6.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.14 0.67 0.10 0.22 0.12 0.05 0.07 0.07 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2338 [PHONE REDACTED] 162 309 175 150 227 102 v/s Ratio Prot 0.14 0.07 c0.33 c0.04 0.01 0.01 c0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.16 0.01 0.01 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.30 0.33 0.50 0.50 0.43 0.10 0.08 0.17 0.22 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 14.3 14.6 35.5 7.4 38.1 27.9 35.1 41.3 39.8 39.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.88 1.49 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.0 Delay 14.7 15.8 31.5 11.5 38.8 28.0 35.2 41.9 40.3 39.2 Level of Service B B C B D C D D D D Approach Delay 15.1 14.1 33.2 40.7 Approach LOS B B C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 16.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.47 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 14.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2011 Baseline No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 43 837 0 0 1228 86 672 817 109 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.91 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 45 881 0 0 1279 90 738 898 120 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 55 0 15 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 45 881 0 0 1287 26 369 1372 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 Actuated Green, G 3.2 36.0 29.1 29.1 42.0 42.0 Effective Green, g 3.2 36.0 29.1 29.1 42.0 42.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.40 0.32 0.32 0.47 0.47 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 117 1957 1876 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.18 c0.22 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.27 0.24 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.45 0.69 0.07 0.57 0.52 Uniform Delay, d1 42.4 19.8 26.5 21.1 17.5 16.9 Progression Factor 1.15 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.7 2.1 0.3 3.7 0.7 Delay 49.4 17.6 28.5 21.4 21.2 17.6 Level of Service D B C C C B Approach Delay 19.2 28.1 18.4 0.0 Approach LOS B C B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 11: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps 2011 Baseline No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 9 23 0 29 19 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.0 6.0 4.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.97 Frt 0.91 0.85 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 3299 1470 2842 3502 Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 3299 1470 2842 3502 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.72 0.72 1.00 0.64 0.79 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 12 32 0 45 24 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 15 15 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 13 1 0 45 24 0 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Perm Free custom Protected Phases 3 Permitted Phases 3 Free 6 Actuated Green, G 3.2 3.2 34.4 20.2 Effective Green, g 3.2 3.2 34.4 20.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.09 1.00 0.59 Clearance Time 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 2056 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 c0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 14.2 14.2 0.0 3.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay 14.3 14.2 0.0 3.0 Level of Service B B A A Approach Delay 14.3 0.0 3.0 Approach LOS B A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 6.2 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.02 Actuated Cycle Length 34.4 Sum of lost time 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 19: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard 2011 Baseline No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 81 343 206 39 631 0 32 670 16 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 87 369 222 41 657 0 34 705 17 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 182 0 0 0 0 0 7 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 78 378 40 41 657 0 34 705 10 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 19.7 19.7 19.7 6.3 66.2 5.4 65.5 65.5 Effective Green, g 19.7 19.7 19.7 6.3 66.2 5.4 65.5 65.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.06 0.60 0.05 0.60 0.60 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 278 583 [PHONE REDACTED] 84 3672 907 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.11 c0.02 c0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.12 0.01 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.65 0.08 0.22 0.18 0.40 0.19 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 39.0 41.9 37.6 49.5 9.8 50.7 10.2 9.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.81 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 2.5 0.1 0.6 0.1 3.2 0.1 0.0 Delay 39.6 44.4 37.7 46.3 8.0 53.9 10.3 9.1 Level of Service D D D D A D B A Approach Delay 0.0 41.7 10.3 12.2 Approach LOS A D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 20.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.30 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 18.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 20: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard 2011 Baseline No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 56 136 329 0 0 0 0 918 14 0 582 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1715 2682 7244 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1715 2682 7244 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.95 0.90 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 62 143 366 0 0 0 0 956 15 0 600 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 267 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 56 149 99 0 0 0 0 970 0 0 600 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 5% 6% 5% 5% 5% 6% 6% 5% 5% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 15.3 15.3 15.3 78.7 78.7 Effective Green, g 15.3 15.3 15.3 78.7 78.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.72 0.72 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 2.5 2.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 225 [PHONE REDACTED] 4411 v/s Ratio Prot c0.13 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.09 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.25 0.62 0.27 0.19 0.14 Uniform Delay, d1 42.2 44.6 42.3 5.1 4.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.54 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 4.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 Delay 42.6 49.0 42.6 5.2 2.8 Level of Service D D D A A Approach Delay 44.3 0.0 5.2 2.8 Approach LOS D A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 14.9 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.26 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2011 Baseline No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1054 912 0 182 511 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1620 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1620 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1133 1025 0 204 574 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 30 30 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1133 1025 0 369 349 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 53.7 53.7 26.7 26.7 Effective Green, g 53.7 53.7 26.7 26.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.30 0.30 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2919 2919 481 429 v/s Ratio Prot c0.23 0.21 0.23 v/s Ratio Perm c0.24 v/c Ratio 0.39 0.35 0.77 0.81 Uniform Delay, d1 9.5 9.3 28.8 29.4 Progression Factor 1.00 0.70 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.3 6.5 10.7 Delay 9.9 6.8 35.4 40.1 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 9.9 6.8 37.7 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 16.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.53 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 27: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps 2011 Baseline No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 811 677 0 172 408 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3123 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3123 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.87 0.87 0.89 0.89 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 845 778 0 193 458 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 97 97 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 845 778 0 325 132 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 7 Permitted Phases 7 Actuated Green, G 66.2 66.2 13.8 13.8 Effective Green, g 66.2 66.2 13.8 13.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.74 0.74 0.15 0.15 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.2 1.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3599 3599 479 213 v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 0.16 c0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.23 0.22 0.68 0.62 Uniform Delay, d1 3.8 3.7 36.0 35.7 Progression Factor 1.00 0.84 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.1 3.0 4.0 Delay 4.0 3.3 39.0 39.7 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 4.0 3.3 39.3 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 13.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.31 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2011 Baseline No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 631 0 0 649 429 135 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.70 0.70 0.83 0.83 Adj. Flow (vph) 651 0 0 927 517 163 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 50 Lane Group Flow (vph) 651 0 0 927 517 113 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 46.0 46.0 34.4 34.4 Effective Green, g 46.0 46.0 34.4 34.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.51 0.51 0.38 0.38 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2501 2501 651 583 v/s Ratio Prot 0.13 c0.19 c0.30 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.37 0.79 0.19 Uniform Delay, d1 12.4 13.3 24.7 18.5 Progression Factor 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.4 6.2 0.1 Delay 12.5 13.7 30.9 18.6 Level of Service B B C B Approach Delay 12.5 13.7 27.9 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2011 Baseline No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 605 0 0 912 227 233 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3216 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3216 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.84 0.84 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 624 0 0 1086 247 253 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 63 136 Lane Group Flow (vph) 624 0 0 1086 280 21 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 68.2 68.2 11.8 11.8 Effective Green, g 68.2 68.2 11.8 11.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.76 0.76 0.13 0.13 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 5501 4672 422 182 v/s Ratio Prot 0.09 c0.18 c0.09 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.11 0.23 0.66 0.11 Uniform Delay, d1 2.9 3.2 37.2 34.5 Progression Factor 0.82 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.1 3.0 0.1 Delay 2.4 3.3 40.3 34.6 Level of Service A A D C Approach Delay 2.4 3.3 38.5 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 11.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.30 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 30.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2011 Baseline No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 937 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 314 0 356 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 986 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 349 0 396 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 80 296 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1342 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 349 0 363 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 1 Actuated Green, G 32.0 32.0 29.0 66.0 24.0 24.0 Effective Green, g 32.0 32.0 29.0 66.0 24.0 24.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.32 0.32 0.29 0.66 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1412 [PHONE REDACTED] 793 366 v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 0.11 c0.30 0.32 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.24 v/c Ratio 0.95 0.33 1.04 0.49 0.44 0.99 Uniform Delay, d1 33.2 25.9 35.5 8.5 32.3 37.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.92 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 13.9 0.5 49.7 0.1 0.4 44.4 Delay 47.1 26.3 81.6 7.9 32.7 82.3 Level of Service D C F A C F Approach Delay 42.3 26.1 0.0 59.0 Approach LOS D C A E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 37.7 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.99 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 44: Katella Ave & 2011 Baseline No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 844 0 0 1486 0 998 5 774 0 0 26 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 1633 1638 1538 1565 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 1633 1638 1538 1565 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 938 0 0 1615 0 1018 5 790 0 0 27 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 938 0 0 1615 0 509 514 777 0 0 26 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Turn Type Perm Perm custom Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G 35.0 35.0 55.0 55.0 55.0 55.0 Effective Green, g 35.0 35.0 55.0 55.0 55.0 55.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.35 0.35 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1192 1713 898 901 846 861 v/s Ratio Prot 0.28 c0.33 v/s Ratio Perm 0.31 0.31 c0.51 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.79 0.94 0.57 0.57 0.92 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 29.2 31.5 14.7 14.8 20.5 10.3 Progression Factor 0.34 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.2 11.0 2.6 2.6 16.5 0.0 Delay 12.1 42.5 17.3 17.4 37.0 10.3 Level of Service B D B B D B Approach Delay 12.1 42.5 25.9 10.3 Approach LOS B D C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 28.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.93 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 6: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue 2011 Baseline with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 806 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 58 0 218 74 42 7 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1396 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1399 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.84 0.84 0.84 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 840 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 78 0 295 88 50 8 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 272 0 0 0 0 114 136 0 0 7 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 840 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 70 39 14 88 50 1 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 41.5 41.5 13.0 58.7 10.5 19.0 8.5 8.0 6.0 6.0 Effective Green, g 41.5 41.5 13.0 58.7 10.5 19.0 8.5 8.0 6.0 6.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.46 0.46 0.14 0.65 0.12 0.21 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.07 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2256 [PHONE REDACTED] 189 295 137 294 227 102 v/s Ratio Prot 0.17 0.07 c0.33 c0.04 0.02 0.03 c0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.15 0.01 0.01 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.33 0.50 0.51 0.37 0.13 0.10 0.30 0.22 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 15.8 15.4 35.5 8.2 36.7 28.8 37.3 38.4 39.8 39.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 1.3 0.3 0.6 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.0 Delay 16.2 16.7 35.8 8.7 37.1 28.9 37.4 39.0 40.3 39.2 Level of Service B B D A D C D D D D Approach Delay 16.4 12.2 33.8 39.4 Approach LOS B B C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 16.9 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.44 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2011 Baseline with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 43 1075 0 0 1228 86 672 817 109 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.91 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 45 1132 0 0 1279 90 738 898 120 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 55 0 12 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 45 1132 0 0 1287 26 369 1375 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 Actuated Green, G 3.2 36.0 29.1 29.1 42.0 42.0 Effective Green, g 3.2 36.0 29.1 29.1 42.0 42.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.40 0.32 0.32 0.47 0.47 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 117 1957 1876 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.23 c0.22 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.27 0.24 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.58 0.69 0.07 0.57 0.52 Uniform Delay, d1 42.4 21.1 26.5 21.1 17.5 16.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 1.3 2.1 0.3 3.7 0.7 Delay 43.2 22.3 28.5 21.4 21.2 17.6 Level of Service D C C C C B Approach Delay 23.1 28.1 18.4 0.0 Approach LOS C C B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 22.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 11: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps 2011 Baseline with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 9 23 0 29 51 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.0 6.0 4.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.97 Frt 0.91 0.85 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 3299 1470 2842 3502 Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 3299 1470 2842 3502 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.72 0.72 1.00 0.64 0.79 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 12 32 0 45 65 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 15 15 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 13 1 0 45 65 0 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Perm Free custom Protected Phases 3 Permitted Phases 3 Free 6 Actuated Green, G 3.2 3.2 34.6 20.4 Effective Green, g 3.2 3.2 34.6 20.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.09 1.00 0.59 Clearance Time 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 2065 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 c0.02 c0.02 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 14.3 14.3 0.0 3.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay 14.4 14.3 0.0 3.0 Level of Service B B A A Approach Delay 14.4 0.0 3.0 Approach LOS B A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 5.4 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.03 Actuated Cycle Length 34.6 Sum of lost time 5.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 19: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard 2011 Baseline with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 81 343 206 39 694 0 32 670 16 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 87 369 222 41 723 0 34 705 17 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 182 0 0 0 0 0 7 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 78 378 40 41 723 0 34 705 10 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 19.7 19.7 19.7 6.3 66.2 5.4 65.5 65.5 Effective Green, g 19.7 19.7 19.7 6.3 66.2 5.4 65.5 65.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.06 0.60 0.05 0.60 0.60 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 278 583 [PHONE REDACTED] 84 3672 907 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.12 c0.02 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.12 0.01 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.65 0.08 0.22 0.19 0.40 0.19 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 39.0 41.9 37.6 49.5 9.9 50.7 10.2 9.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 2.5 0.1 0.6 0.1 3.2 0.1 0.0 Delay 39.6 44.4 37.7 50.1 10.0 53.9 10.3 9.1 Level of Service D D D D A D B A Approach Delay 0.0 41.7 12.1 12.2 Approach LOS A D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.31 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 18.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 20: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard 2011 Baseline with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 56 136 329 0 0 0 0 981 14 0 582 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1715 2682 7245 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1715 2682 7245 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.95 0.90 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 62 143 366 0 0 0 0 1022 15 0 600 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 267 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 56 149 99 0 0 0 0 1036 0 0 600 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 5% 6% 5% 5% 5% 6% 6% 5% 5% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 15.3 15.3 15.3 78.7 78.7 Effective Green, g 15.3 15.3 15.3 78.7 78.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.72 0.72 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 2.5 2.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 225 [PHONE REDACTED] 4411 v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.09 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.25 0.62 0.27 0.20 0.14 Uniform Delay, d1 42.2 44.6 42.3 5.2 4.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 4.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 Delay 42.6 49.0 42.6 5.3 5.0 Level of Service D D D A A Approach Delay 44.3 0.0 5.3 5.0 Approach LOS D A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.27 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2011 Baseline with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1063 1025 0 510 697 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1674 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1674 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1143 1152 0 573 783 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 10 15 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1143 1152 0 696 635 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 39.3 39.3 41.1 41.1 Effective Green, g 39.3 39.3 41.1 41.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.44 0.46 0.46 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2137 2137 764 661 v/s Ratio Prot 0.23 c0.24 0.42 v/s Ratio Perm c0.44 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.54 0.91 0.96 Uniform Delay, d1 18.6 18.7 22.8 23.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 1.0 14.8 25.5 Delay 19.6 19.7 37.5 49.1 Level of Service B B D D Approach Delay 19.6 19.7 43.1 Approach LOS B B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 28.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.76 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 27: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps 2011 Baseline with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1309 788 0 412 520 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3191 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3191 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.87 0.87 0.89 0.89 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1364 906 0 463 584 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 57 57 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1364 906 0 657 276 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 7 Permitted Phases 7 Actuated Green, G 56.3 56.3 23.7 23.7 Effective Green, g 56.3 56.3 23.7 23.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.63 0.63 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.2 1.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3061 3061 840 365 v/s Ratio Prot c0.28 0.19 c0.21 v/s Ratio Perm 0.20 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.30 0.78 0.76 Uniform Delay, d1 8.7 7.7 30.8 30.5 Progression Factor 1.00 0.79 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.2 4.4 7.7 Delay 9.2 6.4 35.2 38.2 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 9.2 6.4 36.2 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 16.9 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2011 Baseline with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1001 0 0 755 470 242 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.70 0.70 0.83 0.83 Adj. Flow (vph) 1032 0 0 1079 566 292 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 9 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1032 0 0 1079 566 283 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 43.2 43.2 37.2 37.2 Effective Green, g 43.2 43.2 37.2 37.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.41 0.41 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2349 2349 704 630 v/s Ratio Prot 0.21 c0.22 c0.33 v/s Ratio Perm 0.19 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.46 0.80 0.45 Uniform Delay, d1 15.4 15.6 23.2 19.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.6 6.3 0.2 Delay 16.0 16.3 29.5 19.2 Level of Service B B C B Approach Delay 16.0 16.3 26.0 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2011 Baseline with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1329 0 0 912 282 852 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3102 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3102 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.84 0.84 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 1370 0 0 1086 307 926 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 25 25 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1370 0 0 1086 745 438 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 50.2 50.2 29.8 29.8 Effective Green, g 50.2 50.2 29.8 29.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.56 0.56 0.33 0.33 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 4049 3439 1027 459 v/s Ratio Prot c0.19 0.18 0.24 v/s Ratio Perm c0.32 v/c Ratio 0.34 0.32 0.87dr 0.95 Uniform Delay, d1 10.8 10.7 26.5 29.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.2 2.2 30.3 Delay 11.1 10.9 28.7 59.7 Level of Service B B C E Approach Delay 11.1 10.9 40.3 Approach LOS B B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 20.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2011 Baseline with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 937 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 314 0 356 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 986 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 349 0 396 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 79 301 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1343 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 349 0 371 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 1 Actuated Green, G 31.0 31.0 29.0 65.0 25.0 25.0 Effective Green, g 31.0 31.0 29.0 65.0 25.0 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.31 0.29 0.65 0.25 0.25 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1368 [PHONE REDACTED] 826 381 v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 0.10 c0.30 0.34 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.24 v/c Ratio 0.98 0.33 1.04 0.52 0.42 0.97 Uniform Delay, d1 34.2 26.5 35.5 9.3 31.4 37.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.89 0.88 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 19.9 0.5 49.3 0.1 0.4 38.6 Delay 54.1 27.0 80.9 8.3 31.8 75.8 Level of Service D C F A C E Approach Delay 47.8 25.4 0.0 55.2 Approach LOS D C A E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 38.7 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.00 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 44: Katella Ave & 2011 Baseline with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 844 0 0 1570 0 998 5 774 0 0 26 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 1633 1638 1538 1565 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 1633 1638 1538 1565 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 938 0 0 1707 0 1018 5 790 0 0 27 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 938 0 0 1707 0 509 514 775 0 0 27 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Turn Type Perm Perm custom Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G 36.0 36.0 54.0 54.0 54.0 54.0 Effective Green, g 36.0 36.0 54.0 54.0 54.0 54.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.36 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1226 1761 882 885 831 845 v/s Ratio Prot 0.28 c0.35 v/s Ratio Perm 0.31 0.31 c0.50 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.77 0.97 0.58 0.58 0.93 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 28.3 31.5 15.4 15.4 21.3 10.8 Progression Factor 0.32 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 14.7 2.7 2.8 18.6 0.0 Delay 10.7 46.1 18.1 18.2 40.0 10.8 Level of Service B D B B D B Approach Delay 10.7 46.1 27.7 10.8 Approach LOS B D C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 31.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.95 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 6: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue 2011 Baseline AAHC Event & Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1018 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 58 0 303 286 42 7 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1393 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1396 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.84 0.84 0.84 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1060 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 78 0 409 340 50 8 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 318 0 0 0 0 146 188 0 0 7 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1060 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 70 62 21 340 50 1 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 33.2 33.2 12.9 50.3 15.8 24.3 8.5 16.4 9.1 9.1 Effective Green, g 33.2 33.2 12.9 50.3 15.8 24.3 8.5 16.4 9.1 9.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.37 0.37 0.14 0.56 0.18 0.27 0.09 0.18 0.10 0.10 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1805 [PHONE REDACTED] 284 376 137 602 344 154 v/s Ratio Prot 0.22 0.07 c0.33 0.04 0.03 c0.10 0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.12 c0.02 0.01 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.59 0.33 0.50 0.60 0.25 0.16 0.15 0.56 0.15 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 22.9 20.4 35.6 13.1 32.0 25.1 37.4 33.5 36.9 36.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.4 1.6 0.3 1.0 0.2 0.1 0.2 1.2 0.2 0.0 Delay 24.3 22.0 35.9 14.1 32.1 25.2 37.6 34.8 37.1 36.4 Level of Service C C D B C C D C D D Approach Delay 23.5 16.9 31.5 35.1 Approach LOS C B C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 22.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2011 Baseline AAHC Event & Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 43 1584 0 0 1228 86 672 817 109 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.91 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 45 1667 0 0 1279 90 738 898 120 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 55 0 2 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 45 1667 0 0 1287 26 369 1385 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 Actuated Green, G 3.2 36.0 29.1 29.1 42.0 42.0 Effective Green, g 3.2 36.0 29.1 29.1 42.0 42.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.40 0.32 0.32 0.47 0.47 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 117 1957 1876 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.34 0.22 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.27 0.24 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.85 0.69 0.07 0.57 0.52 Uniform Delay, d1 42.4 24.6 26.5 21.1 17.5 17.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 4.9 2.1 0.3 3.7 0.8 Delay 43.2 29.5 28.5 21.4 21.2 17.7 Level of Service D C C C C B Approach Delay 29.9 28.1 18.4 0.0 Approach LOS C C B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 25.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.70 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 11: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps 2011 Baseline AAHC Event & Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 9 23 0 29 151 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.0 6.0 4.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.97 Frt 0.91 0.85 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 3299 1470 2842 3502 Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 3299 1470 2842 3502 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.72 0.72 1.00 0.64 0.79 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 12 32 0 45 191 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 15 15 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 13 1 0 45 191 0 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Perm Free custom Protected Phases 3 Permitted Phases 3 Free 6 Actuated Green, G 3.2 3.2 35.3 21.1 Effective Green, g 3.2 3.2 35.3 21.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.09 1.00 0.60 Clearance Time 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 2093 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 c0.02 c0.05 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 14.7 14.6 0.0 3.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay 14.7 14.7 0.0 3.0 Level of Service B B A A Approach Delay 14.7 0.0 3.0 Approach LOS B A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 4.4 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.07 Actuated Cycle Length 35.3 Sum of lost time 5.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 21.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 19: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard 2011 Baseline AAHC Event & Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 81 343 554 39 1141 0 32 670 16 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 87 369 596 41 1189 0 34 705 17 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 345 0 0 0 0 0 7 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 78 378 251 41 1189 0 34 705 10 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 22.4 22.4 22.4 6.3 63.5 5.4 62.8 62.8 Effective Green, g 22.4 22.4 22.4 6.3 63.5 5.4 62.8 62.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.06 0.58 0.05 0.57 0.57 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 316 663 [PHONE REDACTED] 84 3520 870 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.19 c0.02 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.12 0.09 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.25 0.57 0.46 0.22 0.33 0.40 0.20 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 36.7 39.5 38.5 49.5 12.2 50.7 11.4 10.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 1.2 0.6 0.6 0.3 3.2 0.1 0.0 Delay 37.1 40.7 39.1 50.1 12.4 53.9 11.6 10.2 Level of Service D D D D B D B B Approach Delay 0.0 39.5 13.7 13.4 Approach LOS A D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 22.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.40 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 18.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 20: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard 2011 Baseline AAHC Event & Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 56 136 329 0 0 0 0 1428 14 0 582 168 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1715 2682 7249 5959 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1715 2682 7249 5959 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.95 0.90 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 62 143 366 0 0 0 0 1488 15 0 600 173 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 334 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 40 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 56 149 32 0 0 0 0 1502 0 0 733 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 5% 6% 5% 5% 5% 6% 6% 5% 5% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 9.5 9.5 9.5 84.5 84.5 Effective Green, g 9.5 9.5 9.5 84.5 84.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.77 0.77 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 2.5 2.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 140 [PHONE REDACTED] 4578 v/s Ratio Prot c0.21 0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.09 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.40 1.01 0.14 0.27 0.16 Uniform Delay, d1 47.6 50.2 46.5 3.7 3.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.4 75.8 0.2 0.1 0.1 Delay 48.9 126.0 46.7 3.8 3.4 Level of Service D F D A A Approach Delay 67.6 0.0 3.8 3.4 Approach LOS E A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 16.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.34 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2011 Baseline AAHC Event & Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1118 1025 0 510 697 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1674 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1674 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1202 1152 0 573 783 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 2 2 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1202 1152 0 704 648 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 36.3 36.3 54.1 54.1 Effective Green, g 36.3 36.3 54.1 54.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.36 0.54 0.54 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1776 1776 906 783 v/s Ratio Prot c0.25 0.24 0.42 v/s Ratio Perm c0.45 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.65 0.78 0.83 Uniform Delay, d1 26.9 26.5 18.2 19.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.1 1.8 3.9 6.9 Delay 29.0 28.4 22.0 25.9 Level of Service C C C C Approach Delay 29.0 28.4 23.9 Approach LOS C C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.77 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 27: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps 2011 Baseline AAHC Event & Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1471 1004 0 949 778 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3244 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3244 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.87 0.87 0.89 0.89 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1532 1154 0 1066 874 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 23 23 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1532 1154 0 1305 589 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 7 Permitted Phases 7 Actuated Green, G 42.0 42.0 38.0 38.0 Effective Green, g 42.0 42.0 38.0 38.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.47 0.47 0.42 0.42 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.2 1.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2283 2283 1370 585 v/s Ratio Prot c0.31 0.24 0.40 v/s Ratio Perm c0.43 v/c Ratio 0.67 0.51 0.95 1.01 Uniform Delay, d1 18.6 16.8 25.1 26.0 Progression Factor 1.00 0.76 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.6 0.8 14.4 39.1 Delay 20.2 13.5 39.5 65.1 Level of Service C B D E Approach Delay 20.2 13.5 47.6 Approach LOS C B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 30.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 100.9% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2011 Baseline AAHC Event & Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1001 0 0 755 470 242 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.70 0.70 0.83 0.83 Adj. Flow (vph) 1032 0 0 1079 566 292 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 15 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1032 0 0 1079 566 277 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 50.1 50.1 40.3 40.3 Effective Green, g 50.1 50.1 40.3 40.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.50 0.50 0.40 0.40 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2451 2451 686 614 v/s Ratio Prot 0.21 c0.22 c0.33 v/s Ratio Perm 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.44 0.83 0.45 Uniform Delay, d1 15.8 16.0 26.7 21.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.6 7.6 0.2 Delay 16.3 16.5 34.3 22.0 Level of Service B B C C Approach Delay 16.3 16.5 30.1 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 20.4 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2011 Baseline AAHC Event & Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1970 0 0 1149 334 1072 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3096 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3096 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.84 0.84 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 2031 0 0 1368 363 1165 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 4 4 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2031 0 0 1368 942 578 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 49.0 49.0 31.0 31.0 Effective Green, g 49.0 49.0 31.0 31.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.34 0.34 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3952 3357 1066 477 v/s Ratio Prot c0.28 0.22 0.30 v/s Ratio Perm c0.42 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.41 1.10dr 1.21 Uniform Delay, d1 13.0 12.0 27.8 29.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.4 8.6 113.5 Delay 13.4 12.4 36.4 143.0 Level of Service B B D F Approach Delay 13.4 12.4 77.0 Approach LOS B B E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 32.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.4% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2011 Baseline AAHC Event & Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 937 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 314 0 356 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 986 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 349 0 396 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 80 305 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1342 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 349 0 376 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 1 Actuated Green, G 30.0 30.0 30.0 65.0 25.0 25.0 Effective Green, g 30.0 30.0 30.0 65.0 25.0 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.65 0.25 0.25 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1324 [PHONE REDACTED] 826 381 v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 0.10 c0.30 0.36 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.25 v/c Ratio 1.01 0.33 1.01 0.56 0.42 0.99 Uniform Delay, d1 35.0 27.2 35.0 9.6 31.4 37.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.88 0.85 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 28.2 0.5 38.7 0.2 0.4 42.1 Delay 63.2 27.7 69.7 8.4 31.8 79.4 Level of Service E C E A C E Approach Delay 54.9 22.2 0.0 57.1 Approach LOS D C A E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 39.9 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.00 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 44: Katella Ave & 2011 Baseline AAHC Event & Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 844 0 0 1668 0 998 5 774 0 0 26 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 1633 1638 1538 1565 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 1633 1638 1538 1565 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 938 0 0 1813 0 1018 5 790 0 0 27 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 938 0 0 1813 0 509 514 771 0 0 27 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Turn Type Perm Perm custom Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G 38.0 38.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 Effective Green, g 38.0 38.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1294 1859 849 852 800 814 v/s Ratio Prot 0.28 c0.37 v/s Ratio Perm 0.31 0.31 c0.50 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.72 0.98 0.60 0.60 0.96 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 26.5 30.5 16.7 16.8 23.1 11.7 Progression Factor 0.30 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 15.3 3.1 3.2 24.2 0.0 Delay 9.0 45.8 19.9 19.9 47.3 11.7 Level of Service A D B B D B Approach Delay 9.0 45.8 31.8 11.7 Approach LOS A D C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 32.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.97 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 6: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue 2011 Baseline with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 896 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 58 0 255 110 42 7 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1394 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1398 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.84 0.84 0.84 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 933 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 78 0 345 131 50 8 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 287 0 0 0 0 132 159 0 0 7 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 933 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 70 45 17 131 50 1 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 38.7 38.7 13.0 55.9 11.0 19.5 8.5 10.8 8.3 8.3 Effective Green, g 38.7 38.7 13.0 55.9 11.0 19.5 8.5 10.8 8.3 8.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.43 0.43 0.14 0.62 0.12 0.22 0.09 0.12 0.09 0.09 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2104 [PHONE REDACTED] 198 302 137 396 314 141 v/s Ratio Prot 0.19 0.07 c0.33 c0.04 0.02 0.04 c0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.14 0.01 0.01 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.33 0.50 0.54 0.35 0.15 0.12 0.33 0.16 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 18.1 17.0 35.5 9.7 36.2 28.5 37.3 36.3 37.6 37.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 1.4 0.3 0.7 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.0 Delay 18.7 18.4 35.8 10.4 36.6 28.6 37.5 36.8 37.9 37.1 Level of Service B B D B D C D D D D Approach Delay 18.6 13.6 33.6 37.1 Approach LOS B B C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.7 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.47 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 14.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2011 Baseline with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 43 1236 0 0 1228 86 672 817 109 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.91 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 45 1301 0 0 1279 90 738 898 120 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 55 0 7 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 45 1301 0 0 1287 26 369 1380 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 Actuated Green, G 3.2 36.0 29.1 29.1 42.0 42.0 Effective Green, g 3.2 36.0 29.1 29.1 42.0 42.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.40 0.32 0.32 0.47 0.47 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 117 1957 1876 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.27 0.22 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.27 0.24 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.66 0.69 0.07 0.57 0.52 Uniform Delay, d1 42.4 22.1 26.5 21.1 17.5 16.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 1.8 2.1 0.3 3.7 0.7 Delay 43.2 23.9 28.5 21.4 21.2 17.7 Level of Service D C C C C B Approach Delay 24.5 28.1 18.4 0.0 Approach LOS C C B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 23.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 11: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps 2011 Baseline with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 9 23 0 29 71 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.0 6.0 4.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.97 Frt 0.91 0.85 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 3299 1470 2842 3502 Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 3299 1470 2842 3502 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.72 0.72 1.00 0.64 0.79 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 12 32 0 45 90 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 15 15 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 13 1 0 45 90 0 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Perm Free custom Protected Phases 3 Permitted Phases 3 Free 6 Actuated Green, G 3.2 3.2 34.7 20.5 Effective Green, g 3.2 3.2 34.7 20.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.09 1.00 0.59 Clearance Time 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 2069 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 c0.02 c0.03 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 14.4 14.3 0.0 3.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay 14.4 14.4 0.0 3.0 Level of Service B B A A Approach Delay 14.4 0.0 3.0 Approach LOS B A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 5.0 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.03 Actuated Cycle Length 34.7 Sum of lost time 5.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 19: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard 2011 Baseline with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 81 343 206 39 736 0 32 670 16 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 87 369 222 41 767 0 34 705 17 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 182 0 0 0 0 0 8 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 78 378 40 41 767 0 34 705 9 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 19.7 19.7 19.7 11.1 66.2 5.4 60.7 60.7 Effective Green, g 19.7 19.7 19.7 11.1 66.2 5.4 60.7 60.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.10 0.60 0.05 0.55 0.55 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 278 583 [PHONE REDACTED] 84 3403 841 v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 c0.12 c0.02 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.12 0.01 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.65 0.08 0.12 0.21 0.40 0.21 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 39.0 41.9 37.6 45.0 10.0 50.7 12.5 11.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 2.5 0.1 0.2 0.1 3.2 0.1 0.0 Delay 39.6 44.4 37.7 45.2 10.1 53.9 12.6 11.1 Level of Service D D D D B D B B Approach Delay 0.0 41.7 11.9 14.4 Approach LOS A D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.34 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 24.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 20: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard 2011 Baseline with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 56 136 329 0 0 0 0 1023 14 0 582 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1715 2682 7245 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1715 2682 7245 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.95 0.90 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 62 143 366 0 0 0 0 1066 15 0 600 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 213 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 56 149 153 0 0 0 0 1080 0 0 600 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 5% 6% 5% 5% 5% 6% 6% 5% 5% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 15.4 15.4 15.4 78.6 78.6 Effective Green, g 15.4 15.4 15.4 78.6 78.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.71 0.71 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 2.5 2.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 227 [PHONE REDACTED] 4406 v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.09 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.25 0.62 0.41 0.21 0.14 Uniform Delay, d1 42.1 44.6 43.1 5.3 5.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 4.3 0.5 0.1 0.1 Delay 42.5 48.8 43.7 5.4 5.0 Level of Service D D D A A Approach Delay 44.9 0.0 5.4 5.0 Approach LOS D A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.28 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2011 Baseline with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1069 1102 0 732 822 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1689 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1689 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1149 1238 0 822 924 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1149 1238 0 913 831 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 30.0 30.0 60.4 60.4 Effective Green, g 30.0 30.0 60.4 60.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.30 0.30 0.60 0.60 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1468 1468 1020 874 v/s Ratio Prot 0.23 c0.25 0.54 v/s Ratio Perm c0.57 v/c Ratio 0.78 0.84 0.89 0.95 Uniform Delay, d1 32.0 32.8 17.1 18.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.2 6.1 10.0 19.3 Delay 36.3 38.9 27.0 37.7 Level of Service D D C D Approach Delay 36.3 38.9 32.1 Approach LOS D D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 35.3 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.92 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.6% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 27: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps 2011 Baseline with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1647 863 0 575 597 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3214 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3214 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.87 0.87 0.89 0.89 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1716 992 0 646 671 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 39 39 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1716 992 0 862 377 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 7 Permitted Phases 7 Actuated Green, G 50.1 50.1 29.9 29.9 Effective Green, g 50.1 50.1 29.9 29.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.56 0.56 0.33 0.33 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.2 1.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2724 2724 1068 460 v/s Ratio Prot c0.35 0.20 0.27 v/s Ratio Perm c0.27 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.36 0.81 0.82 Uniform Delay, d1 13.6 11.1 27.4 27.6 Progression Factor 1.00 0.78 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 0.4 4.3 10.3 Delay 14.7 9.0 31.7 37.9 Level of Service B A C D Approach Delay 14.7 9.0 33.7 Approach LOS B A C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.70 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 90.5% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2011 Baseline with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1252 0 0 827 498 314 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.70 0.70 0.83 0.83 Adj. Flow (vph) 1291 0 0 1181 600 378 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 5 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1291 0 0 1181 600 373 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 48.1 48.1 42.3 42.3 Effective Green, g 48.1 48.1 42.3 42.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.42 0.42 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2354 2354 720 645 v/s Ratio Prot c0.26 0.24 c0.35 v/s Ratio Perm 0.24 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.50 0.83 0.58 Uniform Delay, d1 18.3 17.8 25.7 22.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 0.8 7.9 0.8 Delay 19.2 18.5 33.6 22.8 Level of Service B B C C Approach Delay 19.2 18.5 29.4 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.68 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2011 Baseline with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1820 0 0 [PHONE REDACTED] Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3079 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3079 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.84 0.84 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 1876 0 0 1086 348 1383 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 7 7 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1876 0 0 1086 1033 684 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 49.0 49.0 31.0 31.0 Effective Green, g 49.0 49.0 31.0 31.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.34 0.34 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3952 3357 1061 477 v/s Ratio Prot c0.26 0.18 0.34 v/s Ratio Perm c0.49 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.32 1.30dr 1.43 Uniform Delay, d1 12.6 11.3 29.1 29.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.3 21.3 207.4 Delay 13.0 11.6 50.4 236.9 Level of Service B B D F Approach Delay 13.0 11.6 124.9 Approach LOS B B F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 53.9 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.85 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2011 Baseline with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 937 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 314 0 356 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 986 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 349 0 396 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 80 305 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1342 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 349 0 374 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 1 Actuated Green, G 30.0 30.0 30.0 65.0 25.0 25.0 Effective Green, g 30.0 30.0 30.0 65.0 25.0 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.65 0.25 0.25 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1324 [PHONE REDACTED] 826 381 v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 0.10 c0.30 0.35 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.25 v/c Ratio 1.01 0.33 1.01 0.54 0.42 0.98 Uniform Delay, d1 35.0 27.2 35.0 9.5 31.4 37.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.88 0.86 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 28.2 0.5 38.9 0.2 0.4 40.7 Delay 63.2 27.7 69.8 8.4 31.8 78.0 Level of Service E C E A C E Approach Delay 54.9 22.5 0.0 56.3 Approach LOS D C A E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 40.1 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.00 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 44: Katella Ave & 2011 Baseline with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 844 0 0 1627 0 998 5 774 0 0 26 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 1633 1638 1538 1565 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 1633 1638 1538 1565 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 938 0 0 1768 0 1018 5 790 0 0 27 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 938 0 0 1768 0 509 514 773 0 0 27 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Turn Type Perm Perm custom Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G 37.0 37.0 53.0 53.0 53.0 53.0 Effective Green, g 37.0 37.0 53.0 53.0 53.0 53.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.37 0.37 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1260 1810 865 868 815 829 v/s Ratio Prot 0.28 c0.36 v/s Ratio Perm 0.31 0.31 c0.50 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.74 0.98 0.59 0.59 0.95 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 27.4 31.1 16.1 16.1 22.2 11.2 Progression Factor 0.31 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.4 15.8 2.9 3.0 21.2 0.0 Delay 9.7 46.9 19.0 19.1 43.5 11.3 Level of Service A D B B D B Approach Delay 9.7 46.9 29.7 11.3 Approach LOS A D C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 32.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.96 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 6: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue 2011 Baseline with Project & AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1108 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 58 0 340 322 42 7 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1392 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1395 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.84 0.84 0.84 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1154 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 78 0 459 383 50 8 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 323 0 0 0 0 162 171 0 0 7 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1154 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 70 71 63 383 50 1 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 32.3 32.3 12.6 49.1 16.8 25.3 8.5 17.6 9.3 9.3 Effective Green, g 32.3 32.3 12.6 49.1 16.8 25.3 8.5 17.6 9.3 9.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.36 0.14 0.55 0.19 0.28 0.09 0.20 0.10 0.10 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1756 [PHONE REDACTED] 302 392 137 646 352 157 v/s Ratio Prot 0.24 0.07 c0.33 0.04 0.03 c0.12 0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.12 0.02 c0.04 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.33 0.52 0.61 0.23 0.18 0.46 0.59 0.14 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 24.2 21.0 35.9 13.9 31.1 24.5 38.6 32.9 36.7 36.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 1.6 0.4 1.1 0.1 0.1 0.9 1.5 0.2 0.0 Delay 26.1 22.6 36.3 15.0 31.3 24.6 39.5 34.4 36.9 36.2 Level of Service C C D B C C D C D D Approach Delay 25.1 17.7 31.9 34.7 Approach LOS C B C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 23.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2011 Baseline with Project & AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 43 1745 0 0 1228 86 672 817 109 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.91 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 45 1837 0 0 1279 90 738 898 120 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 55 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 45 1837 0 0 1287 26 369 1386 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 Actuated Green, G 3.2 36.0 29.1 29.1 42.0 42.0 Effective Green, g 3.2 36.0 29.1 29.1 42.0 42.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.40 0.32 0.32 0.47 0.47 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 117 1957 1876 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.38 0.22 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.27 0.24 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.94 0.69 0.07 0.57 0.52 Uniform Delay, d1 42.4 25.9 26.5 21.1 17.5 17.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 10.3 2.1 0.3 3.7 0.8 Delay 43.2 36.2 28.5 21.4 21.2 17.7 Level of Service D D C C C B Approach Delay 36.4 28.1 18.4 0.0 Approach LOS D C B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.74 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 11: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps 2011 Baseline with Project & AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 9 23 0 29 171 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.0 6.0 4.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.97 Frt 0.91 0.85 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 3299 1470 2842 3502 Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 3299 1470 2842 3502 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.72 0.72 1.00 0.64 0.79 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 12 32 0 45 216 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 15 15 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 13 1 0 45 216 0 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Perm Free custom Protected Phases 3 Permitted Phases 3 Free 6 Actuated Green, G 3.2 3.2 35.4 21.2 Effective Green, g 3.2 3.2 35.4 21.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.09 1.00 0.60 Clearance Time 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 2097 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 c0.02 c0.06 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.01 0.02 0.10 Uniform Delay, d1 14.7 14.7 0.0 3.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay 14.8 14.7 0.0 3.1 Level of Service B B A A Approach Delay 14.8 0.0 3.1 Approach LOS B A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 4.3 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.08 Actuated Cycle Length 35.4 Sum of lost time 5.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 21.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 19: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard 2011 Baseline with Project & AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 81 343 554 39 1183 0 32 670 16 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 87 369 596 41 1232 0 34 705 17 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 365 0 0 0 0 0 8 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 78 378 231 41 1232 0 34 705 9 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 22.4 22.4 22.4 9.3 63.5 5.4 59.8 59.8 Effective Green, g 22.4 22.4 22.4 9.3 63.5 5.4 59.8 59.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.08 0.58 0.05 0.54 0.54 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 316 663 [PHONE REDACTED] 84 3352 829 v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 c0.20 c0.02 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.12 0.09 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.25 0.57 0.42 0.15 0.35 0.40 0.21 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 36.7 39.5 38.2 46.7 12.3 50.7 12.9 11.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 1.2 0.5 0.2 0.3 3.2 0.1 0.0 Delay 37.1 40.7 38.7 46.9 12.6 53.9 13.1 11.5 Level of Service D D D D B D B B Approach Delay 0.0 39.3 13.7 14.9 Approach LOS A D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 22.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 24.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 20: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard 2011 Baseline with Project & AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 56 136 329 0 0 0 0 1470 14 0 582 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1715 2682 7250 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1715 2682 7250 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.95 0.90 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 62 143 366 0 0 0 0 1531 15 0 600 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 334 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 56 149 32 0 0 0 0 1545 0 0 600 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 5% 6% 5% 5% 5% 6% 6% 5% 5% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 9.5 9.5 9.5 84.5 84.5 Effective Green, g 9.5 9.5 9.5 84.5 84.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.77 0.77 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 2.5 2.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 140 [PHONE REDACTED] 4737 v/s Ratio Prot c0.21 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.09 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.40 1.01 0.14 0.28 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 47.6 50.2 46.5 3.8 3.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.4 75.8 0.2 0.1 0.1 Delay 48.9 126.0 46.7 3.9 3.3 Level of Service D F D A A Approach Delay 67.6 0.0 3.9 3.3 Approach LOS E A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.1 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.35 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2011 Baseline with Project & AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1124 1102 0 732 822 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1689 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1689 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1209 1238 0 822 924 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1209 1238 0 913 831 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 30.0 30.0 60.4 60.4 Effective Green, g 30.0 30.0 60.4 60.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.30 0.30 0.60 0.60 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1468 1468 1020 874 v/s Ratio Prot 0.25 c0.25 0.54 v/s Ratio Perm c0.57 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.84 0.89 0.95 Uniform Delay, d1 32.5 32.8 17.1 18.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 5.4 6.1 10.0 19.3 Delay 37.9 38.9 27.0 37.7 Level of Service D D C D Approach Delay 37.9 38.9 32.1 Approach LOS D D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 35.8 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.92 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.0% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 27: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps 2011 Baseline with Project & AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1808 1079 0 1112 854 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3251 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3251 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.87 0.87 0.89 0.89 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1883 1240 0 1249 960 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 15 15 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1883 1240 0 1503 676 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 7 Permitted Phases 7 Actuated Green, G 41.0 41.0 39.0 39.0 Effective Green, g 41.0 41.0 39.0 39.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.46 0.46 0.43 0.43 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.2 1.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2229 2229 1409 601 v/s Ratio Prot c0.38 0.25 0.46 v/s Ratio Perm c0.49 v/c Ratio 0.84 0.56 1.07 1.12 Uniform Delay, d1 21.7 17.9 25.5 25.5 Progression Factor 1.00 0.76 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.1 1.0 43.9 75.9 Delay 25.8 14.5 69.4 101.4 Level of Service C B E F Approach Delay 25.8 14.5 79.4 Approach LOS C B E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 45.4 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.98 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 114.3% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2011 Baseline with Project & AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1252 0 0 827 498 314 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.70 0.70 0.83 0.83 Adj. Flow (vph) 1291 0 0 1181 600 378 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 5 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1291 0 0 1181 600 373 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 48.1 48.1 42.3 42.3 Effective Green, g 48.1 48.1 42.3 42.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.42 0.42 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2354 2354 720 645 v/s Ratio Prot c0.26 0.24 c0.35 v/s Ratio Perm 0.24 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.50 0.83 0.58 Uniform Delay, d1 18.3 17.8 25.7 22.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 0.8 7.9 0.8 Delay 19.2 18.5 33.6 22.8 Level of Service B B C C Approach Delay 19.2 18.5 29.4 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.68 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2011 Baseline with Project & AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2460 0 0 1149 372 1492 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3078 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3078 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.84 0.84 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 2536 0 0 1368 404 1622 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2536 0 0 1368 1214 810 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 49.0 49.0 31.0 31.0 Effective Green, g 49.0 49.0 31.0 31.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.34 0.34 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3952 3357 1060 477 v/s Ratio Prot c0.35 0.22 0.39 v/s Ratio Perm c0.58 v/c Ratio 0.64 0.41 1.54dr 1.70 Uniform Delay, d1 14.4 12.0 29.5 29.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.4 76.7 322.8 Delay 15.2 12.4 106.2 352.3 Level of Service B B F F Approach Delay 15.2 12.4 204.7 Approach LOS B B F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 79.3 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.05 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 98.4% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2011 Baseline with Project & AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 937 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 314 0 356 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.25 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 986 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 349 0 396 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 80 310 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1342 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 349 0 378 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 1 Actuated Green, G 29.0 29.0 31.0 65.0 25.0 25.0 Effective Green, g 29.0 29.0 31.0 65.0 25.0 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.29 0.29 0.31 0.65 0.25 0.25 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1279 [PHONE REDACTED] 826 381 v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 0.10 c0.30 0.37 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.25 v/c Ratio 1.05 0.33 0.98 0.58 0.42 0.99 Uniform Delay, d1 35.5 27.9 34.1 9.8 31.4 37.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.88 0.84 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 39.3 0.5 29.5 0.2 0.4 43.8 Delay 74.8 28.4 59.6 8.4 31.8 81.2 Level of Service E C E A C F Approach Delay 63.9 19.6 0.0 58.1 Approach LOS E B A E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 42.0 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.01 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 44: Katella Ave & 2011 Baseline with Project & AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 844 0 0 1725 0 998 5 774 0 0 26 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 1633 1638 1538 1565 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 1633 1638 1538 1565 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 938 0 0 1875 0 1018 5 790 0 0 27 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 938 0 0 1875 0 509 514 769 0 0 27 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Turn Type Perm Perm custom Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G 39.0 39.0 51.0 51.0 51.0 51.0 Effective Green, g 39.0 39.0 51.0 51.0 51.0 51.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.39 0.39 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1328 1908 833 835 784 798 v/s Ratio Prot 0.28 c0.38 v/s Ratio Perm 0.31 0.31 c0.50 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.98 0.61 0.62 0.98 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 25.7 30.2 17.4 17.5 24.0 12.2 Progression Factor 0.29 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 16.6 3.3 3.4 27.8 0.0 Delay 8.3 46.7 20.8 20.9 51.8 12.2 Level of Service A D C C D B Approach Delay 8.3 46.7 34.3 12.2 Approach LOS A D C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 34.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.98 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX H-2: CALTRANS RAMP TERMINI WORKSHEETS UNDER 2013 OPENING YEAR CONDITIONS SCENARIO 1: NO EVENTS SCENARIO 2: WITH AAHC EVENT SCENARIO 3: WITH AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT SCENARIO 4: WITH PROJECT SCENARIO 5: WITH PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 6: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue 2013 Opening Year No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 740 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 60 0 180 20 50 10 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1397 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.87 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1222 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 779 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 63 0 189 21 53 11 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 238 0 0 0 0 82 85 0 0 10 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 779 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 57 17 11 21 53 1 Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 51.6 51.6 6.0 61.8 4.4 10.7 10.7 2.7 9.0 9.0 Effective Green, g 51.6 51.6 6.0 61.8 4.4 10.7 10.7 2.7 9.0 9.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.57 0.57 0.07 0.69 0.05 0.12 0.12 0.03 0.10 0.10 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2805 [PHONE REDACTED] 79 154 172 99 341 152 v/s Ratio Prot 0.16 c0.08 c0.37 c0.04 0.01 0.01 c0.02 v/s Ratio Perm 0.21 0.01 0.01 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.37 1.20 0.54 0.72 0.11 0.07 0.21 0.16 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 9.7 10.4 42.0 7.0 42.2 35.4 35.2 42.6 37.0 36.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.83 0.78 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 1.2 121.1 0.6 23.8 0.1 0.1 1.1 0.2 0.0 Delay 10.0 11.6 156.1 6.0 66.0 35.5 35.3 43.7 37.2 36.5 Level of Service A B F A E D D D D D Approach Delay 10.6 25.1 42.3 38.7 Approach LOS B C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.4 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.58 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 19.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2013 Opening Year No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 920 0 0 1350 90 740 900 120 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 53 968 0 0 1421 95 779 947 126 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 56 0 16 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 53 968 0 0 1430 29 389 1447 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 Actuated Green, G 3.2 38.0 31.1 31.1 40.0 40.0 Effective Green, g 3.2 38.0 31.1 31.1 40.0 40.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.42 0.35 0.35 0.44 0.44 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 117 2066 2005 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.20 c0.25 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.28 0.26 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.47 0.71 0.07 0.63 0.58 Uniform Delay, d1 42.5 18.7 25.6 19.7 19.3 18.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 0.8 2.2 0.3 5.0 1.0 Delay 43.6 19.5 27.8 20.1 24.3 19.6 Level of Service D B C C C B Approach Delay 20.7 27.3 20.6 0.0 Approach LOS C C C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 23.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.63 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 11.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 11: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps 2013 Opening Year No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 30 0 30 20 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.97 Frt 0.91 0.85 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 3291 1470 2842 3502 Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 3291 1470 2842 3502 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 32 0 32 21 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 15 15 0 29 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 12 1 0 3 21 0 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Perm custom custom Protected Phases 3 Permitted Phases 3 2 2 Actuated Green, G 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 Effective Green, g 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 Clearance Time 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 293 131 253 312 v/s Ratio Prot c0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.00 c0.01 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.07 Uniform Delay, d1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Delay 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.2 Level of Service A A A A Approach Delay 6.1 6.1 6.2 Approach LOS A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 6.1 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.05 Actuated Cycle Length 14.6 Sum of lost time 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 19: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard 2013 Opening Year No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 90 380 230 40 690 0 40 740 20 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 95 400 242 42 726 0 42 779 21 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 196 0 0 0 0 0 9 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 85 410 46 42 726 0 42 779 12 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 21.1 21.1 21.1 5.7 64.5 5.7 64.7 64.7 Effective Green, g 21.1 21.1 21.1 5.7 64.5 5.7 64.7 64.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.59 0.05 0.59 0.59 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 297 625 [PHONE REDACTED] 88 3627 896 v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 0.12 c0.02 c0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.13 0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.29 0.66 0.09 0.25 0.20 0.48 0.21 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 38.0 41.1 36.6 50.1 10.7 50.7 10.7 9.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 2.5 0.1 0.8 0.1 4.0 0.1 0.0 Delay 38.5 43.6 36.6 50.8 10.8 54.7 10.8 9.4 Level of Service D D D D B D B A Approach Delay 0.0 40.7 13.0 13.0 Approach LOS A D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.32 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 17.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 20: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard 2013 Opening Year No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 60 150 360 0 0 0 0 1010 20 0 640 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1700 2682 7238 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1700 2682 7238 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 63 158 379 0 0 0 0 1063 21 0 674 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 218 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 57 164 161 0 0 0 0 1083 0 0 674 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 16.7 16.7 16.7 77.3 77.3 Effective Green, g 16.7 16.7 16.7 77.3 77.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.70 0.70 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 2.5 2.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 246 [PHONE REDACTED] 4333 v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.10 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.23 0.64 0.40 0.21 0.16 Uniform Delay, d1 41.0 43.8 42.1 5.7 5.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 4.4 0.5 0.1 0.1 Delay 41.4 48.2 42.6 5.8 5.5 Level of Service D D D A A Approach Delay 44.0 0.0 5.8 5.5 Approach LOS D A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.29 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2013 Opening Year No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1160 1000 190 200 560 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 0.93 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4776 1620 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4776 1620 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1221 1053 200 211 589 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 23 0 29 29 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1221 1230 0 382 360 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 53.1 53.1 27.3 27.3 Effective Green, g 53.1 53.1 27.3 27.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.59 0.59 0.30 0.30 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2887 2818 491 439 v/s Ratio Prot 0.25 c0.26 0.24 v/s Ratio Perm c0.25 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.44 0.78 0.82 Uniform Delay, d1 10.1 10.2 28.6 29.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.5 7.0 11.2 Delay 10.5 10.7 35.6 40.3 Level of Service B B D D Approach Delay 10.5 10.7 37.9 Approach LOS B B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 27: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps 2013 Opening Year No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 890 740 0 190 450 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3123 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3123 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 937 779 0 200 474 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 96 96 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 937 779 0 341 141 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 7 Permitted Phases 7 Actuated Green, G 65.7 65.7 14.3 14.3 Effective Green, g 65.7 65.7 14.3 14.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.73 0.73 0.16 0.16 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.2 1.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3572 3572 496 220 v/s Ratio Prot c0.19 0.16 c0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.22 0.69 0.64 Uniform Delay, d1 4.1 3.9 35.7 35.4 Progression Factor 1.00 0.80 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.1 3.2 4.7 Delay 4.2 3.3 38.9 40.2 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 4.2 3.3 39.3 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 13.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.34 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2013 Opening Year No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 690 0 0 710 470 150 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 726 0 0 747 495 158 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 30 Lane Group Flow (vph) 726 0 0 747 495 128 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 46.9 46.9 33.5 33.5 Effective Green, g 46.9 46.9 33.5 33.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.52 0.37 0.37 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2550 2550 634 567 v/s Ratio Prot 0.15 c0.15 c0.29 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.29 0.78 0.23 Uniform Delay, d1 12.1 12.2 25.0 19.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.3 5.7 0.1 Delay 12.4 12.5 30.7 19.4 Level of Service B B C B Approach Delay 12.4 12.5 28.0 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.50 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2013 Opening Year No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 670 0 0 1010 250 260 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3214 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3214 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 705 0 0 1063 263 274 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 71 142 Lane Group Flow (vph) 705 0 0 1063 296 28 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 67.7 67.7 12.3 12.3 Effective Green, g 67.7 67.7 12.3 12.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.75 0.75 0.14 0.14 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 5460 4638 439 189 v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.17 c0.09 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.13 0.23 0.67 0.15 Uniform Delay, d1 3.1 3.3 36.9 34.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.1 3.2 0.1 Delay 3.1 3.5 40.2 34.4 Level of Service A A D C Approach Delay 3.1 3.5 38.3 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 11.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.30 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 32.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2013 Opening Year No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1030 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 350 0 390 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1084 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 368 0 411 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 66 315 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1497 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 368 0 380 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 1 Actuated Green, G 41.0 41.0 38.0 84.0 26.0 26.0 Effective Green, g 41.0 41.0 38.0 84.0 26.0 26.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.34 0.34 0.32 0.70 0.22 0.22 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1507 [PHONE REDACTED] 716 330 v/s Ratio Prot c0.34 0.12 c0.33 0.35 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.25 v/c Ratio 0.99 0.37 1.04 0.50 0.51 1.15 Uniform Delay, d1 39.4 29.7 41.0 8.3 41.4 47.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.88 0.86 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 21.4 0.5 45.4 0.1 0.6 96.9 Delay 60.8 30.2 81.5 7.2 42.1 143.9 Level of Service E C F A D F Approach Delay 53.6 25.4 0.0 95.8 Approach LOS D C A F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 47.5 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.05 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 44: Katella Ave & 2013 Opening Year No Events - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 930 0 0 1630 0 1100 10 850 0 0 30 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3438 4940 1633 1639 1538 1565 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3438 4940 1633 1639 1538 1565 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 979 0 0 1716 0 1158 11 895 0 0 32 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 979 0 0 1716 0 579 590 886 0 0 32 Heavy Vehicles 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Turn Type Perm Perm custom Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G 41.0 41.0 69.0 69.0 69.0 69.0 Effective Green, g 41.0 41.0 69.0 69.0 69.0 69.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.34 0.34 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1175 1688 939 942 884 900 v/s Ratio Prot 0.28 c0.35 v/s Ratio Perm 0.35 0.36 c0.58 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.83 1.02 0.62 0.63 1.00 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 36.4 39.5 16.8 16.9 25.5 11.1 Progression Factor 0.31 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.5 26.1 3.0 3.1 30.7 0.0 Delay 13.9 65.6 19.8 20.1 56.2 11.1 Level of Service B E B C E B Approach Delay 13.9 65.6 35.7 11.1 Approach LOS B E D B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 41.8 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.01 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 6: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue 2013 Opening Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 870 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 60 0 230 70 50 10 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1395 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1396 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 916 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 63 0 242 74 53 11 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 234 0 0 0 0 110 114 0 0 10 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 916 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 57 15 9 74 53 1 Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 52.2 52.2 6.0 62.4 4.4 6.5 6.5 6.3 8.4 8.4 Effective Green, g 52.2 52.2 6.0 62.4 4.4 6.5 6.5 6.3 8.4 8.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.58 0.58 0.07 0.69 0.05 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.09 0.09 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2838 [PHONE REDACTED] 79 101 105 231 318 142 v/s Ratio Prot 0.19 c0.08 c0.37 c0.04 0.01 c0.02 0.02 v/s Ratio Perm 0.21 0.00 0.01 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.32 0.37 1.20 0.53 0.72 0.14 0.08 0.32 0.17 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 9.8 10.1 42.0 6.7 42.2 39.1 39.0 39.8 37.6 37.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.83 0.78 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.2 121.1 0.6 23.8 0.2 0.1 0.8 0.2 0.0 Delay 10.1 11.2 156.0 5.8 66.0 39.4 39.1 40.6 37.8 37.0 Level of Service B B F A E D D D D D Approach Delay 10.5 24.9 44.2 39.3 Approach LOS B C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.5 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 19.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2013 Opening Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 1160 0 0 1350 90 740 900 120 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 53 1221 0 0 1421 95 779 947 126 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 56 0 12 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 53 1221 0 0 1430 29 389 1451 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 Actuated Green, G 3.2 38.0 31.1 31.1 40.0 40.0 Effective Green, g 3.2 38.0 31.1 31.1 40.0 40.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.42 0.35 0.35 0.44 0.44 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 117 2066 2005 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.25 c0.25 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.28 0.26 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.59 0.71 0.07 0.63 0.58 Uniform Delay, d1 42.5 20.0 25.6 19.7 19.3 18.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 1.3 2.2 0.3 5.0 1.0 Delay 43.6 21.3 27.8 20.1 24.3 19.7 Level of Service D C C C C B Approach Delay 22.2 27.3 20.6 0.0 Approach LOS C C C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 23.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 11.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 11: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps 2013 Opening Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 30 0 30 50 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.97 Frt 0.91 0.85 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 3291 1470 2842 3502 Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 3291 1470 2842 3502 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 32 0 32 53 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 15 15 0 26 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 12 1 0 6 53 0 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Perm custom custom Protected Phases 3 Permitted Phases 3 2 2 Actuated Green, G 1.4 1.4 3.2 3.2 Effective Green, g 1.4 1.4 3.2 3.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.08 0.19 0.19 Clearance Time 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 278 124 548 675 v/s Ratio Prot c0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.00 c0.02 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 7.0 7.0 5.4 5.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Delay 7.1 7.0 5.4 5.6 Level of Service A A A A Approach Delay 7.1 5.4 5.6 Approach LOS A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 6.0 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.07 Actuated Cycle Length 16.6 Sum of lost time 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 19: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard 2013 Opening Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 90 380 230 40 750 0 40 740 20 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 95 400 242 42 789 0 42 779 21 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 196 0 0 0 0 0 9 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 85 410 46 42 789 0 42 779 12 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 21.1 21.1 21.1 8.1 64.5 5.7 62.3 62.3 Effective Green, g 21.1 21.1 21.1 8.1 64.5 5.7 62.3 62.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.07 0.59 0.05 0.57 0.57 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 297 625 [PHONE REDACTED] 88 3492 863 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.13 c0.02 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.13 0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.29 0.66 0.09 0.17 0.22 0.48 0.22 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 38.0 41.1 36.6 47.8 10.8 50.7 11.8 10.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 2.5 0.1 0.3 0.1 4.0 0.1 0.0 Delay 38.5 43.6 36.6 48.1 10.9 54.7 12.0 10.5 Level of Service D D D D B D B B Approach Delay 0.0 40.7 12.8 14.1 Approach LOS A D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.34 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 18.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 20: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard 2013 Opening Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 60 150 360 0 0 0 0 1070 20 0 640 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1700 2682 7239 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1700 2682 7239 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 63 158 379 0 0 0 0 1126 21 0 674 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 170 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 57 164 209 0 0 0 0 1146 0 0 674 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 16.8 16.8 16.8 77.2 77.2 Effective Green, g 16.8 16.8 16.8 77.2 77.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.70 0.70 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 2.5 2.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 247 [PHONE REDACTED] 4327 v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.10 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.23 0.63 0.51 0.23 0.16 Uniform Delay, d1 40.9 43.7 42.8 5.8 5.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 4.3 0.7 0.1 0.1 Delay 41.3 48.0 43.5 5.9 5.6 Level of Service D D D A A Approach Delay 44.5 0.0 5.9 5.6 Approach LOS D A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.30 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2013 Opening Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1170 1110 0 530 750 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1670 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1670 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1232 1168 0 558 789 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 11 15 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1232 1168 0 697 624 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 40.2 40.2 40.2 40.2 Effective Green, g 40.2 40.2 40.2 40.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2186 2186 746 646 v/s Ratio Prot c0.25 0.24 0.42 v/s Ratio Perm c0.43 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.53 0.93 0.97 Uniform Delay, d1 18.4 18.1 23.6 24.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 0.9 18.5 26.6 Delay 19.5 19.0 42.1 50.8 Level of Service B B D D Approach Delay 19.5 19.0 46.2 Approach LOS B B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 29.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.76 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 27: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps 2013 Opening Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1390 850 0 430 560 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3186 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3186 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1463 895 0 453 589 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 59 59 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1463 895 0 653 271 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 7 Permitted Phases 7 Actuated Green, G 56.5 56.5 23.5 23.5 Effective Green, g 56.5 56.5 23.5 23.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.63 0.63 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.2 1.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3072 3072 832 362 v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 0.18 c0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.20 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.29 0.78 0.75 Uniform Delay, d1 8.9 7.6 30.9 30.5 Progression Factor 1.00 0.72 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.2 4.5 7.2 Delay 9.4 5.7 35.4 37.8 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 9.4 5.7 36.2 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 16.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2013 Opening Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1060 0 0 710 510 260 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1116 0 0 747 537 274 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 5 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1116 0 0 747 537 269 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 44.4 44.4 36.0 36.0 Effective Green, g 44.4 44.4 36.0 36.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.40 0.40 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2414 2414 681 610 v/s Ratio Prot c0.23 0.15 c0.32 v/s Ratio Perm 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.31 0.79 0.44 Uniform Delay, d1 15.0 13.6 23.7 19.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.3 5.6 0.2 Delay 15.6 14.0 29.3 19.9 Level of Service B B C B Approach Delay 15.6 14.0 26.1 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2013 Opening Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1390 0 0 1010 310 880 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3107 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3107 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1463 0 0 1063 326 926 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 12 12 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1463 0 0 1063 777 451 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 47.8 47.8 32.2 32.2 Effective Green, g 47.8 47.8 32.2 32.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.53 0.53 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3855 3275 1112 496 v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 0.17 0.25 v/s Ratio Perm c0.33 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.32 0.70 0.91 Uniform Delay, d1 12.4 12.0 24.8 27.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.3 1.6 20.5 Delay 12.7 12.2 26.3 48.0 Level of Service B B C D Approach Delay 12.7 12.2 34.3 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.7 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2013 Opening Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1030 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 350 0 390 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1084 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 368 0 411 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 67 319 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1496 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 368 0 386 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 1 Actuated Green, G 40.0 40.0 38.0 83.0 27.0 27.0 Effective Green, g 40.0 40.0 38.0 83.0 27.0 27.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.69 0.22 0.22 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1471 [PHONE REDACTED] 743 343 v/s Ratio Prot c0.34 0.12 c0.33 0.37 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.25 v/c Ratio 1.02 0.37 1.04 0.53 0.50 1.13 Uniform Delay, d1 40.0 30.4 41.0 9.0 40.6 46.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.88 0.83 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 27.9 0.5 45.0 0.1 0.5 87.2 Delay 67.9 30.9 80.9 7.6 41.1 133.7 Level of Service E C F A D F Approach Delay 59.2 24.9 0.0 89.9 Approach LOS E C A F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 48.2 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.05 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 44: Katella Ave & 2013 Opening Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 930 0 0 1710 0 1100 10 850 0 0 30 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3438 4940 1633 1639 1538 1565 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3438 4940 1633 1639 1538 1565 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 979 0 0 1800 0 1158 11 895 0 0 32 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 979 0 0 1800 0 579 590 885 0 0 32 Heavy Vehicles 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Turn Type Perm Perm custom Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G 42.0 42.0 68.0 68.0 68.0 68.0 Effective Green, g 42.0 42.0 68.0 68.0 68.0 68.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.35 0.35 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1203 1729 925 929 872 887 v/s Ratio Prot 0.28 c0.36 v/s Ratio Perm 0.35 0.36 c0.58 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.81 1.04 0.63 0.64 1.01 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 35.4 39.0 17.5 17.6 26.0 11.5 Progression Factor 0.29 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.0 33.2 3.2 3.3 34.1 0.0 Delay 12.3 72.2 20.7 20.9 60.1 11.5 Level of Service B E C C E B Approach Delay 12.3 72.2 37.8 11.5 Approach LOS B E D B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 45.2 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.02 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 6: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue 2013 Opening Year AAHC Event&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1080 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 60 0 320 280 50 10 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1393 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1375 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1137 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 63 0 337 295 53 11 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 284 0 0 0 0 153 160 0 0 9 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1137 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 57 18 12 295 53 2 Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 44.2 44.2 6.0 54.4 4.4 6.5 6.5 14.3 16.4 16.4 Effective Green, g 44.2 44.2 6.0 54.4 4.4 6.5 6.5 14.3 16.4 16.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.07 0.60 0.05 0.07 0.07 0.16 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2403 [PHONE REDACTED] 79 100 105 525 621 278 v/s Ratio Prot 0.23 c0.08 c0.37 c0.04 0.01 c0.09 0.02 v/s Ratio Perm 0.18 0.00 0.01 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.37 1.20 0.61 0.72 0.18 0.12 0.56 0.09 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 15.2 14.2 42.0 11.2 42.2 39.2 39.1 35.0 30.6 30.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.83 0.79 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 1.4 121.1 0.9 23.8 0.3 0.2 1.4 0.1 0.0 Delay 15.9 15.6 156.0 9.7 66.0 39.6 39.3 36.3 30.6 30.1 Level of Service B B F A E D D D C C Approach Delay 15.8 28.2 43.2 35.3 Approach LOS B C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 25.5 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 19.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2013 Opening Year AAHC Event&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 1670 0 0 1350 90 740 900 120 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 53 1758 0 0 1421 95 779 947 126 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 56 0 2 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 53 1758 0 0 1430 29 389 1461 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 Actuated Green, G 3.2 38.0 31.1 31.1 40.0 40.0 Effective Green, g 3.2 38.0 31.1 31.1 40.0 40.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.42 0.35 0.35 0.44 0.44 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 117 2066 2005 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.36 0.25 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.28 0.26 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.85 0.71 0.07 0.63 0.58 Uniform Delay, d1 42.5 23.4 25.6 19.7 19.3 18.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 4.7 2.2 0.3 5.0 1.0 Delay 43.6 28.1 27.8 20.1 24.3 19.7 Level of Service D C C C C B Approach Delay 28.5 27.3 20.7 0.0 Approach LOS C C C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 25.4 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.74 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 11: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps 2013 Opening Year AAHC Event&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 30 0 150 50 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.97 Frt 0.91 0.85 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 3291 1470 2842 3502 Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 3291 1470 2842 3502 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 32 0 158 53 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 15 15 0 126 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 12 1 0 32 53 0 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Perm custom custom Protected Phases 3 Permitted Phases 3 2 2 Actuated Green, G 1.2 1.2 3.4 3.4 Effective Green, g 1.2 1.2 3.4 3.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.07 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 238 106 582 717 v/s Ratio Prot c0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.01 c0.02 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.01 0.06 0.07 Uniform Delay, d1 7.2 7.1 5.3 5.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Delay 7.3 7.2 5.4 5.4 Level of Service A A A A Approach Delay 7.3 5.4 5.4 Approach LOS A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 5.7 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.07 Actuated Cycle Length 16.6 Sum of lost time 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 19: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard2013 Opening Year AAHC Event&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 90 380 230 40 1200 0 40 740 20 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 95 400 242 42 1263 0 42 779 21 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 202 0 0 0 0 0 10 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 85 410 40 42 1263 0 42 779 11 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.3 67.5 5.7 55.1 55.1 Effective Green, g 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.3 67.5 5.7 55.1 55.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.61 0.05 0.50 0.50 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 255 536 [PHONE REDACTED] 88 3089 763 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.20 c0.02 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.13 0.01 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.33 0.76 0.09 0.08 0.33 0.48 0.25 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 40.6 43.9 39.0 38.7 10.3 50.7 15.7 13.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 6.4 0.1 0.1 0.2 4.0 0.2 0.0 Delay 41.4 50.3 39.1 38.8 10.6 54.7 15.9 13.8 Level of Service D D D D B D B B Approach Delay 0.0 45.6 11.5 17.8 Approach LOS A D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 22.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 18.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 20: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard2013 Opening Year AAHC Event&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 60 150 360 0 0 0 0 1520 20 0 640 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1700 2682 7245 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1700 2682 7245 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 63 158 379 0 0 0 0 1600 21 0 674 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 57 164 375 0 0 0 0 1620 0 0 674 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 22.5 22.5 22.5 71.5 71.5 Effective Green, g 22.5 22.5 22.5 71.5 71.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.65 0.65 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 2.5 2.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 331 [PHONE REDACTED] 4008 v/s Ratio Prot c0.22 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.10 c0.14 v/c Ratio 0.17 0.47 0.68 0.34 0.17 Uniform Delay, d1 36.1 38.5 40.5 8.7 7.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.7 3.2 0.2 0.1 Delay 36.3 39.2 43.7 8.9 7.7 Level of Service D D D A A Approach Delay 41.8 0.0 8.9 7.7 Approach LOS D A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2013 Opening Year AAHC Event&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1230 1110 0 530 750 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1670 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1670 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1295 1168 0 558 789 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 11 15 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1295 1168 0 697 624 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 40.2 40.2 40.2 40.2 Effective Green, g 40.2 40.2 40.2 40.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2186 2186 746 646 v/s Ratio Prot c0.26 0.24 0.42 v/s Ratio Perm c0.43 v/c Ratio 0.59 0.53 0.93 0.97 Uniform Delay, d1 18.7 18.1 23.6 24.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.2 0.9 18.5 26.6 Delay 19.9 19.0 42.1 50.8 Level of Service B B D D Approach Delay 19.9 19.0 46.2 Approach LOS B B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 29.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.4% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 27: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps 2013 Opening Year AAHC Event&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1550 1070 0 970 820 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3239 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3239 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1632 1126 0 1021 863 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 23 23 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1632 1126 0 1274 564 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 7 Permitted Phases 7 Actuated Green, G 42.1 42.1 37.9 37.9 Effective Green, g 42.1 42.1 37.9 37.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.47 0.47 0.42 0.42 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.2 1.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2289 2289 1364 584 v/s Ratio Prot c0.33 0.23 0.39 v/s Ratio Perm c0.41 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.49 0.93 0.97 Uniform Delay, d1 19.1 16.6 24.9 25.4 Progression Factor 1.00 0.71 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 0.7 11.7 28.5 Delay 21.0 12.4 36.6 54.0 Level of Service C B D D Approach Delay 21.0 12.4 42.0 Approach LOS C B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.5 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 105.2% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2013 Opening Year AAHC Event&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1060 0 0 820 510 260 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1116 0 0 863 537 274 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 5 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1116 0 0 863 537 269 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 44.4 44.4 36.0 36.0 Effective Green, g 44.4 44.4 36.0 36.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.40 0.40 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2414 2414 681 610 v/s Ratio Prot c0.23 0.18 c0.32 v/s Ratio Perm 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.36 0.79 0.44 Uniform Delay, d1 15.0 14.0 23.7 19.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.4 5.6 0.2 Delay 15.6 14.4 29.3 19.9 Level of Service B B C B Approach Delay 15.6 14.4 26.1 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2013 Opening Year AAHC Event&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2030 0 0 1240 360 1100 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3101 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3101 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 2137 0 0 1305 379 1158 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 3 3 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2137 0 0 1305 955 576 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 47.0 47.0 33.0 33.0 Effective Green, g 47.0 47.0 33.0 33.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.52 0.37 0.37 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3791 3220 1137 508 v/s Ratio Prot c0.29 0.21 0.31 v/s Ratio Perm c0.42 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.41 1.03dr 1.13 Uniform Delay, d1 14.6 13.0 26.1 28.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.4 5.5 82.6 Delay 15.2 13.4 31.6 111.1 Level of Service B B C F Approach Delay 15.2 13.4 61.5 Approach LOS B B E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 29.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.80 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2013 Opening Year AAHC Event&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1030 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 350 0 390 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1084 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 368 0 411 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 65 324 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1498 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 368 0 305 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 1 Actuated Green, G 38.9 38.9 40.0 83.9 26.1 26.1 Effective Green, g 38.9 38.9 40.0 83.9 26.1 26.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.32 0.32 0.33 0.70 0.22 0.22 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1430 [PHONE REDACTED] 718 331 v/s Ratio Prot c0.34 0.12 c0.33 0.22 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.20 v/c Ratio 1.05 0.37 0.98 0.32 0.51 0.92 Uniform Delay, d1 40.5 31.1 39.7 7.0 41.3 46.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.80 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 37.3 0.5 21.5 0.0 0.6 30.2 Delay 77.9 31.6 53.4 5.6 42.0 76.2 Level of Service E C D A D E Approach Delay 67.0 21.8 0.0 60.0 Approach LOS E C A E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 49.2 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.99 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 44: Katella Ave & 2013 Opening Year AAHC Event&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 930 0 0 1810 0 1100 10 850 0 0 30 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3438 4940 1633 1639 1538 1565 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3438 4940 1633 1639 1538 1565 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 979 0 0 1905 0 1158 11 895 0 0 32 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 979 0 0 1905 0 579 590 882 0 0 32 Heavy Vehicles 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Turn Type Perm Perm custom Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G 44.0 44.0 66.0 66.0 66.0 66.0 Effective Green, g 44.0 44.0 66.0 66.0 66.0 66.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.37 0.37 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1261 1811 898 901 846 861 v/s Ratio Prot 0.28 c0.39 v/s Ratio Perm 0.35 0.36 c0.57 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.78 1.05 0.64 0.65 1.04 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 33.6 38.0 18.8 19.0 27.0 12.4 Progression Factor 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 36.3 3.6 3.7 42.6 0.0 Delay 9.6 74.3 22.4 22.7 69.6 12.4 Level of Service A E C C E B Approach Delay 9.6 74.3 42.9 12.4 Approach LOS A E D B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 48.2 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.05 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 6: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue 2013 Opening Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 960 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 60 0 270 110 50 10 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1394 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1385 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1011 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 63 0 284 116 53 11 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 241 0 0 0 0 129 135 0 0 10 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1011 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 57 16 10 116 53 1 Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 51.2 51.2 6.0 61.4 4.4 6.5 6.5 7.3 9.4 9.4 Effective Green, g 51.2 51.2 6.0 61.4 4.4 6.5 6.5 7.3 9.4 9.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.57 0.57 0.07 0.68 0.05 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.10 0.10 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2784 [PHONE REDACTED] 79 100 105 268 356 159 v/s Ratio Prot 0.21 c0.08 c0.37 c0.04 0.01 c0.04 0.02 v/s Ratio Perm 0.21 0.00 0.01 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.37 1.20 0.54 0.72 0.16 0.10 0.43 0.15 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 10.5 10.6 42.0 7.2 42.2 39.2 39.0 39.4 36.7 36.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.83 0.79 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 1.2 121.1 0.6 23.8 0.3 0.2 1.1 0.2 0.0 Delay 10.9 11.8 156.0 6.2 66.0 39.5 39.2 40.5 36.9 36.1 Level of Service B B F A E D D D D D Approach Delay 11.2 25.2 43.7 39.2 Approach LOS B C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 22.1 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 19.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2013 Opening Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 1320 0 0 1350 90 740 900 120 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 53 1389 0 0 1421 95 779 947 126 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 56 0 7 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 53 1389 0 0 1430 29 389 1456 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 Actuated Green, G 3.2 38.0 31.1 31.1 40.0 40.0 Effective Green, g 3.2 38.0 31.1 31.1 40.0 40.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.42 0.35 0.35 0.44 0.44 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 117 2066 2005 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.28 0.25 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.28 0.26 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.67 0.71 0.07 0.63 0.58 Uniform Delay, d1 42.5 21.0 25.6 19.7 19.3 18.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 1.8 2.2 0.3 5.0 1.0 Delay 43.6 22.7 27.8 20.1 24.3 19.7 Level of Service D C C C C B Approach Delay 23.5 27.3 20.7 0.0 Approach LOS C C C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 23.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 11: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps 2013 Opening Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 30 0 30 70 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.97 Frt 0.91 0.85 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 3291 1470 2842 3502 Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 3291 1470 2842 3502 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 32 0 32 74 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 15 15 0 26 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 12 1 0 6 74 0 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Perm custom custom Protected Phases 3 Permitted Phases 3 2 2 Actuated Green, G 1.4 1.4 3.3 3.3 Effective Green, g 1.4 1.4 3.3 3.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.08 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 276 123 562 692 v/s Ratio Prot c0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.00 c0.02 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.11 Uniform Delay, d1 7.0 7.0 5.4 5.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Delay 7.1 7.1 5.4 5.6 Level of Service A A A A Approach Delay 7.1 5.4 5.6 Approach LOS A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 6.0 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.09 Actuated Cycle Length 16.7 Sum of lost time 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 19: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard 2013 Opening Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 90 380 230 40 800 0 40 740 20 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 95 400 242 42 842 0 42 779 21 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 196 0 0 0 0 0 9 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 85 410 46 42 842 0 42 779 12 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 20.9 20.9 20.9 9.9 64.7 5.7 60.7 60.7 Effective Green, g 20.9 20.9 20.9 9.9 64.7 5.7 60.7 60.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.09 0.59 0.05 0.55 0.55 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 295 619 [PHONE REDACTED] 88 3403 841 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.14 c0.02 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.13 0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.29 0.66 0.09 0.14 0.23 0.48 0.23 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 38.2 41.3 36.7 46.1 10.8 50.7 12.6 11.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 2.7 0.1 0.2 0.1 4.0 0.2 0.0 Delay 38.7 43.9 36.8 46.4 11.0 54.7 12.8 11.2 Level of Service D D D D B D B B Approach Delay 0.0 41.0 12.6 14.9 Approach LOS A D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.35 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 18.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 20: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard 2013 Opening Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 60 150 360 0 0 0 0 1120 20 0 640 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1700 2682 7240 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1700 2682 7240 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 63 158 379 0 0 0 0 1179 21 0 674 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 143 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 57 164 236 0 0 0 0 1199 0 0 674 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 16.9 16.9 16.9 77.1 77.1 Effective Green, g 16.9 16.9 16.9 77.1 77.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.70 0.70 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 2.5 2.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 249 [PHONE REDACTED] 4322 v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.10 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.23 0.63 0.57 0.24 0.16 Uniform Delay, d1 40.8 43.6 43.2 5.9 5.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 4.1 1.6 0.1 0.1 Delay 41.2 47.7 44.8 6.0 5.6 Level of Service D D D A A Approach Delay 45.2 0.0 6.0 5.6 Approach LOS D A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.31 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2013 Opening Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1170 1170 0 750 870 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1686 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1686 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1232 1232 0 789 916 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1232 1232 0 898 805 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 27.3 27.3 53.1 53.1 Effective Green, g 27.3 27.3 53.1 53.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.30 0.30 0.59 0.59 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1484 1484 995 854 v/s Ratio Prot c0.25 0.25 0.53 v/s Ratio Perm c0.56 v/c Ratio 0.83 0.83 0.90 0.94 Uniform Delay, d1 29.2 29.2 16.2 17.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 5.5 5.5 11.0 18.1 Delay 34.7 34.7 27.1 35.1 Level of Service C C C D Approach Delay 34.7 34.7 30.9 Approach LOS C C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 33.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.90 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.9% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 27: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps 2013 Opening Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1730 930 0 590 640 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3209 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3209 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1821 979 0 621 674 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 42 42 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1821 979 0 842 369 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 7 Permitted Phases 7 Actuated Green, G 50.6 50.6 29.4 29.4 Effective Green, g 50.6 50.6 29.4 29.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.56 0.56 0.33 0.33 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.2 1.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2751 2751 1048 453 v/s Ratio Prot c0.37 0.20 0.26 v/s Ratio Perm c0.27 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.36 0.80 0.82 Uniform Delay, d1 13.7 10.8 27.7 27.8 Progression Factor 1.00 0.71 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 0.4 4.3 10.3 Delay 15.0 8.0 32.0 38.1 Level of Service B A C D Approach Delay 15.0 8.0 33.9 Approach LOS B A C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.72 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.7% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2013 Opening Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1130 0 0 890 540 330 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1189 0 0 937 568 347 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 8 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1189 0 0 937 568 339 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 44.0 44.0 36.4 36.4 Effective Green, g 44.0 44.0 36.4 36.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.40 0.40 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2392 2392 689 616 v/s Ratio Prot c0.24 0.19 c0.33 v/s Ratio Perm 0.22 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.39 0.82 0.55 Uniform Delay, d1 15.5 14.5 23.9 20.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.5 7.6 0.6 Delay 16.3 15.0 31.5 21.1 Level of Service B B C C Approach Delay 16.3 15.0 27.6 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2013 Opening Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1880 0 0 1010 340 1300 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3082 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3082 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1979 0 0 1063 358 1368 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 2 2 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1979 0 0 1063 1040 682 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 44.0 44.0 36.0 36.0 Effective Green, g 44.0 44.0 36.0 36.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.40 0.40 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3549 3014 1233 554 v/s Ratio Prot c0.27 0.17 0.34 v/s Ratio Perm c0.49 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.35 1.12dr 1.23 Uniform Delay, d1 16.2 14.2 24.4 27.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.3 5.2 118.8 Delay 16.8 14.5 29.6 145.8 Level of Service B B C F Approach Delay 16.8 14.5 75.7 Approach LOS B B E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 37.6 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.8% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2013 Opening Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1030 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 350 0 390 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1084 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 368 0 411 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 66 327 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1497 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 368 0 391 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 1 Actuated Green, G 38.0 38.0 38.0 81.0 29.0 29.0 Effective Green, g 38.0 38.0 38.0 81.0 29.0 29.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.68 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1397 [PHONE REDACTED] 798 368 v/s Ratio Prot c0.34 0.12 c0.33 0.38 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.26 v/c Ratio 1.07 0.37 1.04 0.56 0.46 1.06 Uniform Delay, d1 41.0 31.7 41.0 10.2 38.8 45.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.87 0.80 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 45.7 0.5 44.7 0.2 0.4 64.7 Delay 86.7 32.2 80.5 8.3 39.3 110.2 Level of Service F C F A D F Approach Delay 73.9 25.0 0.0 76.7 Approach LOS E C A E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 51.7 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.06 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 44: Katella Ave & 2013 Opening Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 930 0 0 1770 0 1100 10 850 0 0 30 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3438 4940 1633 1639 1538 1565 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3438 4940 1633 1639 1538 1565 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 979 0 0 1863 0 1158 11 895 0 0 32 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 979 0 0 1863 0 579 590 883 0 0 32 Heavy Vehicles 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Turn Type Perm Perm custom Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G 43.0 43.0 67.0 67.0 67.0 67.0 Effective Green, g 43.0 43.0 67.0 67.0 67.0 67.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.36 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1232 1770 912 915 859 874 v/s Ratio Prot 0.28 c0.38 v/s Ratio Perm 0.35 0.36 c0.57 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.79 1.05 0.63 0.64 1.03 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 34.5 38.5 18.1 18.3 26.5 11.9 Progression Factor 0.26 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.5 36.8 3.4 3.5 38.1 0.0 Delay 10.5 75.3 21.5 21.8 64.6 12.0 Level of Service B E C C E B Approach Delay 10.5 75.3 40.3 12.0 Approach LOS B E D B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 47.4 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.04 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 6: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue 2013 Opening Year with Project&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1170 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 60 0 360 320 50 10 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1392 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1369 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1232 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 63 0 379 337 53 11 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 291 0 0 0 0 173 179 0 0 9 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1232 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 57 19 14 337 53 2 Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 43.1 43.1 6.0 53.3 4.4 6.5 6.5 15.4 17.5 17.5 Effective Green, g 43.1 43.1 6.0 53.3 4.4 6.5 6.5 15.4 17.5 17.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.07 0.59 0.05 0.07 0.07 0.17 0.19 0.19 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2343 [PHONE REDACTED] 79 100 105 565 662 296 v/s Ratio Prot 0.25 c0.08 c0.37 c0.04 0.01 c0.10 0.02 v/s Ratio Perm 0.18 0.00 0.01 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.37 1.20 0.62 0.72 0.19 0.13 0.60 0.08 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 16.3 14.8 42.0 11.9 42.2 39.3 39.1 34.4 29.7 29.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.83 0.79 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 1.4 121.1 0.9 23.8 0.3 0.2 1.7 0.1 0.0 Delay 17.2 16.2 156.0 10.3 66.0 39.6 39.3 36.1 29.7 29.3 Level of Service B B F B E D D D C C Approach Delay 16.9 28.8 42.9 35.1 Approach LOS B C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.1 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.68 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 19.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2013 Opening Year with Project&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 1830 0 0 1350 90 740 900 120 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5657 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 53 1926 0 0 1421 95 779 947 126 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 56 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 53 1926 0 0 1430 29 389 1462 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 Actuated Green, G 3.2 38.0 31.1 31.1 40.0 40.0 Effective Green, g 3.2 38.0 31.1 31.1 40.0 40.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.42 0.35 0.35 0.44 0.44 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 117 2066 2005 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.39 0.25 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.28 0.26 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.93 0.71 0.07 0.63 0.58 Uniform Delay, d1 42.5 24.8 25.6 19.7 19.3 18.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 9.2 2.2 0.3 5.0 1.0 Delay 43.6 34.0 27.8 20.1 24.3 19.7 Level of Service D C C C C B Approach Delay 34.2 27.3 20.7 0.0 Approach LOS C C C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 11: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps 2013 Opening Year with Project&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 30 0 30 170 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.97 Frt 0.91 0.85 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 3291 1470 2842 3502 Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 3291 1470 2842 3502 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 32 0 32 179 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 15 15 0 25 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 12 1 0 7 179 0 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Perm custom custom Protected Phases 3 Permitted Phases 3 2 2 Actuated Green, G 1.2 1.2 3.4 3.4 Effective Green, g 1.2 1.2 3.4 3.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.07 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 238 106 582 717 v/s Ratio Prot c0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.00 c0.05 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.25 Uniform Delay, d1 7.2 7.1 5.3 5.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.3 Delay 7.3 7.2 5.3 5.8 Level of Service A A A A Approach Delay 7.3 5.3 5.8 Approach LOS A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 6.0 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.20 Actuated Cycle Length 16.6 Sum of lost time 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 21.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 19: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard 2013 Opening Year with Project&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 90 380 580 40 1250 0 40 740 20 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3258 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 95 400 611 42 1316 0 42 779 21 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 434 0 0 0 0 0 9 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 85 410 177 42 1316 0 42 779 12 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 24.6 24.6 24.6 5.7 61.0 5.7 61.2 61.2 Effective Green, g 24.6 24.6 24.6 5.7 61.0 5.7 61.2 61.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.05 0.55 0.05 0.56 0.56 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 347 729 [PHONE REDACTED] 88 3431 848 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.21 c0.02 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.13 0.07 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.24 0.56 0.30 0.25 0.38 0.48 0.23 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 35.1 37.9 35.5 50.1 13.9 50.7 12.4 10.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 1.0 0.3 0.8 0.3 4.0 0.2 0.0 Delay 35.4 38.9 35.8 50.8 14.2 54.7 12.5 10.9 Level of Service D D D D B D B B Approach Delay 0.0 36.9 15.3 14.6 Approach LOS A D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 22.4 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.44 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 18.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 20: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard 2013 Opening Year with Project&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 60 150 360 0 0 0 0 1570 20 0 640 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1700 2682 7246 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1700 2682 7246 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 63 158 379 0 0 0 0 1653 21 0 674 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 57 164 376 0 0 0 0 1673 0 0 674 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 22.6 22.6 22.6 71.4 71.4 Effective Green, g 22.6 22.6 22.6 71.4 71.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.65 0.65 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 2.5 2.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 332 [PHONE REDACTED] 4002 v/s Ratio Prot c0.23 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.10 c0.14 v/c Ratio 0.17 0.47 0.68 0.36 0.17 Uniform Delay, d1 36.0 38.4 40.4 8.8 7.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.7 3.2 0.2 0.1 Delay 36.2 39.2 43.6 9.0 7.7 Level of Service D D D A A Approach Delay 41.7 0.0 9.0 7.7 Approach LOS D A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2013 Opening Year with Project&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1170 1190 0 750 870 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1686 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1686 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1232 1253 0 789 916 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1232 1253 0 898 805 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 27.3 27.3 53.1 53.1 Effective Green, g 27.3 27.3 53.1 53.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.30 0.30 0.59 0.59 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1484 1484 995 854 v/s Ratio Prot 0.25 c0.26 0.53 v/s Ratio Perm c0.56 v/c Ratio 0.83 0.84 0.90 0.94 Uniform Delay, d1 29.2 29.4 16.2 17.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 5.5 6.1 11.0 18.1 Delay 34.7 35.4 27.1 35.1 Level of Service C D C D Approach Delay 34.7 35.4 30.9 Approach LOS C D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 33.4 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.91 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 90.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 27: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps 2013 Opening Year with Project&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1890 1150 0 1130 900 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3248 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3248 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1989 1211 0 1189 947 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 17 17 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1989 1211 0 1447 655 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 7 Permitted Phases 7 Actuated Green, G 41.0 41.0 39.0 39.0 Effective Green, g 41.0 41.0 39.0 39.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.46 0.46 0.43 0.43 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.2 1.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2229 2229 1407 601 v/s Ratio Prot c0.41 0.25 0.45 v/s Ratio Perm c0.47 v/c Ratio 0.89 0.54 1.03 1.09 Uniform Delay, d1 22.5 17.7 25.5 25.5 Progression Factor 1.00 0.72 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 6.0 0.9 31.6 63.5 Delay 28.4 13.7 57.1 89.0 Level of Service C B E F Approach Delay 28.4 13.7 67.1 Approach LOS C B E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 40.6 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.99 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 118.8% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2013 Opening Year with Project&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1130 0 0 890 540 330 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1189 0 0 937 568 347 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 8 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1189 0 0 937 568 339 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 44.0 44.0 36.4 36.4 Effective Green, g 44.0 44.0 36.4 36.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.40 0.40 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2392 2392 689 616 v/s Ratio Prot c0.24 0.19 c0.33 v/s Ratio Perm 0.22 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.39 0.82 0.55 Uniform Delay, d1 15.5 14.5 23.9 20.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.5 7.6 0.6 Delay 16.3 15.0 31.5 21.1 Level of Service B B C C Approach Delay 16.3 15.0 27.6 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2013 Opening Year with Project&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1390 0 0 1240 390 1520 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3116 2621 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3116 2621 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1463 0 0 1305 411 1600 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 11 19 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1463 0 0 1305 928 1053 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 44.0 44.0 36.0 36.0 Effective Green, g 44.0 44.0 36.0 36.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.40 0.40 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3549 3014 1246 1048 v/s Ratio Prot 0.20 c0.21 0.30 v/s Ratio Perm c0.40 v/c Ratio 0.41 0.43 0.85dr 1.00 Uniform Delay, d1 14.7 14.9 23.1 27.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.5 2.2 28.9 Delay 15.1 15.4 25.2 55.9 Level of Service B B C E Approach Delay 15.1 15.4 41.6 Approach LOS B B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.69 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2013 Opening Year with Project&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1030 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 350 0 390 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4412 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1084 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 368 0 411 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 66 331 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1497 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 368 0 396 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 1 Actuated Green, G 37.0 37.0 38.0 80.0 30.0 30.0 Effective Green, g 37.0 37.0 38.0 80.0 30.0 30.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.31 0.32 0.67 0.25 0.25 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1360 [PHONE REDACTED] 826 381 v/s Ratio Prot c0.34 0.11 c0.33 0.40 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.26 v/c Ratio 1.10 0.37 1.04 0.60 0.45 1.04 Uniform Delay, d1 41.5 32.4 41.0 11.2 38.0 45.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.86 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 56.7 0.6 45.8 0.3 0.4 56.7 Delay 98.2 32.9 83.5 9.9 38.4 101.7 Level of Service F C F A D F Approach Delay 82.9 26.2 0.0 71.8 Approach LOS F C A E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 54.5 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.06 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 44: Katella Ave & 2013 Opening Year with Project&Concurrent AS Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 930 0 0 1580 290 1100 10 850 0 0 30 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3438 4825 1633 1639 1538 1565 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3438 4825 1633 1639 1538 1565 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 979 0 0 1663 305 1158 11 895 0 0 32 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 15 0 0 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 979 0 0 1946 0 579 590 880 0 0 31 Heavy Vehicles 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Turn Type Perm Perm custom Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G 45.0 45.0 65.0 65.0 65.0 65.0 Effective Green, g 45.0 45.0 65.0 65.0 65.0 65.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1289 1809 885 888 833 848 v/s Ratio Prot 0.28 c0.40 v/s Ratio Perm 0.35 0.36 c0.57 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.76 1.08 0.65 0.66 1.06 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 32.8 37.5 19.5 19.7 27.5 12.9 Progression Factor 0.24 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 44.9 3.8 3.9 47.3 0.0 Delay 8.9 82.4 23.3 23.6 74.8 12.9 Level of Service A F C C E B Approach Delay 8.9 82.4 45.7 12.9 Approach LOS A F D B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 52.6 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.06 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX H-3: CALTRANS RAMP TERMINI WORKSHEETS UNDER 2030 FUTURE YEAR CONDITIONS SCENARIO 1: NO EVENTS SCENARIO 2: WITH AAHC EVENT SCENARIO 3: WITH AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT SCENARIO 4: WITH PROJECT SCENARIO 5: WITH PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 6: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue 2030 Future Year No Events- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1930 1110 770 2480 0 200 0 210 520 150 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.88 0.97 0.86 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 6166 2682 3303 6166 1618 1459 1447 3303 3406 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 6166 2682 3303 6166 1618 0 1447 3303 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2032 1168 811 2611 0 211 0 221 547 158 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 464 0 0 0 0 37 118 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2032 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 150 108 19 547 158 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 37.7 37.7 26.8 68.7 25.6 25.6 16.5 20.0 10.9 Effective Green, g 37.7 37.7 26.8 68.7 25.6 25.6 16.5 20.0 10.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.31 0.22 0.57 0.21 0.21 0.14 0.17 0.09 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1937 [PHONE REDACTED] 345 311 199 551 309 v/s Ratio Prot c0.33 c0.25 0.42 c0.09 0.07 c0.17 0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.26 0.01 v/c Ratio 1.05 0.83 1.10 0.74 0.43 0.35 0.09 0.99 0.51 Uniform Delay, d1 41.1 38.3 46.6 19.0 40.9 40.1 45.2 49.9 52.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.71 0.55 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 34.7 9.6 51.0 0.4 0.9 0.7 0.2 36.3 1.4 Delay 75.9 47.8 84.1 10.8 41.8 40.8 45.4 86.2 53.4 Level of Service E D F B D D D F D Approach Delay 65.6 28.1 42.6 78.9 Approach LOS E C D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 49.0 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.92 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2030 Future Year No Events- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 2600 0 0 2870 [PHONE REDACTED] 360 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.76 0.76 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.85 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 6166 6689 1158 1379 5638 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 6166 6689 1158 1379 5638 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 53 2737 0 0 3021 1000 905 1768 379 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 11 11 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 53 2737 0 0 3420 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 4.2 63.0 55.1 55.1 47.0 47.0 Effective Green, g 4.2 63.0 55.1 55.1 47.0 47.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.52 0.46 0.46 0.39 0.39 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 116 3237 3071 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.44 c0.51 c0.44 0.43 v/s Ratio Perm 0.50 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.85 1.11 1.09 1.12 1.11 Uniform Delay, d1 56.8 24.3 32.5 32.5 36.5 36.5 Progression Factor 0.59 0.31 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.9 56.4 65.3 76.9 55.7 Delay 34.4 8.4 88.8 97.7 113.4 92.2 Level of Service C A F F F F Approach Delay 8.9 90.1 96.4 0.0 Approach LOS A F F A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 69.1 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.07 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.2% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 11: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps 2030 Future Year No Events- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 200 620 [PHONE REDACTED] 730 50 0 110 400 0 50 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 5028 1805 4951 1805 2842 3502 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 5028 1805 4951 1805 2842 3502 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 211 653 [PHONE REDACTED] 768 53 0 116 421 0 53 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 48 0 0 87 0 0 0 98 0 0 46 Lane Group Flow (vph) 211 773 0 179 2449 0 53 0 18 421 0 7 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Over Prot Over Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 1 7 5 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 12.6 47.0 13.6 49.0 13.5 13.6 12.0 12.6 Effective Green, g 12.6 47.0 13.6 49.0 13.5 13.6 12.0 12.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.52 0.15 0.55 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.14 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 254 2637 274 2708 272 431 469 227 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.15 0.10 c0.49 0.03 0.01 c0.12 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.83 0.29 0.65 0.90 0.19 0.04 0.90 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 37.5 12.0 35.8 18.2 33.3 32.4 38.2 33.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 20.0 0.1 5.5 4.8 0.4 0.0 19.5 0.1 Delay 57.5 12.0 41.3 23.0 33.6 32.5 57.7 33.3 Level of Service E B D C C C E C Approach Delay 21.3 24.2 32.8 55.0 Approach LOS C C C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length 89.6 Sum of lost time 11.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.6% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 19: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard 2030 Future Year No Events- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 160 140 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 50 1870 180 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3212 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3212 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 168 147 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 53 1968 189 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 241 0 0 0 0 0 67 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 102 213 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 53 1968 122 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 15.5 15.5 15.5 34.9 68.9 6.9 41.1 41.1 Effective Green, g 15.5 15.5 15.5 34.9 68.9 6.9 41.1 41.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.32 0.63 0.06 0.37 0.37 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 218 [PHONE REDACTED] 3862 107 2304 569 v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 0.29 0.03 c0.32 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.07 c0.14 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.47 1.00 0.93 0.46 0.50 0.85 0.21 Uniform Delay, d1 43.5 43.5 47.2 36.4 10.7 49.9 31.7 23.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.6 0.8 47.3 14.5 0.4 3.6 4.3 0.9 Delay 45.0 44.2 94.6 51.0 11.1 53.4 36.0 24.3 Level of Service D D F D B D D C Approach Delay 0.0 77.7 25.4 35.4 Approach LOS A E C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 37.5 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.91 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 20: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard 2030 Future Year No Events- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 150 720 340 0 0 0 0 2680 80 0 1720 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1701 2682 7228 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1701 2682 7228 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 158 758 358 0 0 0 0 2821 84 0 1811 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 142 774 356 0 0 0 0 2901 0 0 1811 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 48.5 48.5 48.5 45.5 45.5 Effective Green, g 48.5 48.5 48.5 45.5 45.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.41 0.41 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 2990 2550 v/s Ratio Prot c0.40 0.29 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 0.46 0.13 v/c Ratio 0.20 1.03 0.30 0.97 0.71 Uniform Delay, d1 18.8 30.8 19.8 31.6 26.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 41.4 0.1 10.8 1.7 Delay 19.0 72.1 20.0 42.4 28.5 Level of Service B E B D C Approach Delay 51.5 0.0 42.4 28.5 Approach LOS D A D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 40.1 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.00 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 96.8% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2030 Future Year No Events- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2120 2940 0 640 650 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2232 3095 0 674 684 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2232 3095 0 674 683 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 72.0 72.0 39.0 39.0 Effective Green, g 72.0 72.0 39.0 39.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.32 0.32 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2936 2936 553 872 v/s Ratio Prot 0.46 c0.63 c0.40 v/s Ratio Perm 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.76 1.05 1.22 0.78 Uniform Delay, d1 17.7 24.0 40.5 36.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 33.1 114.1 4.7 Delay 19.6 57.1 154.6 41.3 Level of Service B E F D Approach Delay 19.6 57.1 97.6 Approach LOS B E F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 52.8 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.11 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.8% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 27: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps 2030 Future Year No Events- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2200 2430 0 240 570 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2316 2558 0 253 600 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 7 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2316 2558 0 253 593 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 60.0 60.0 21.0 21.0 Effective Green, g 60.0 60.0 21.0 21.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.67 0.67 0.23 0.23 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3262 3262 397 626 v/s Ratio Prot 0.47 c0.52 0.15 v/s Ratio Perm c0.22 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.78 0.64 0.95 Uniform Delay, d1 9.5 10.5 31.1 34.0 Progression Factor 1.00 0.54 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 0.9 3.3 23.5 Delay 10.8 6.6 34.4 57.5 Level of Service B A C E Approach Delay 10.8 6.6 50.6 Approach LOS B A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 14.9 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.4% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2030 Future Year No Events- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2240 0 0 2960 590 540 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3230 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3230 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 2358 0 0 3116 621 568 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 5 5 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2358 0 0 3116 809 370 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 77.2 77.2 33.2 33.2 Effective Green, g 77.2 77.2 33.2 33.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.64 0.64 0.28 0.28 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3148 3148 894 383 v/s Ratio Prot 0.48 c0.64 0.25 v/s Ratio Perm c0.27 v/c Ratio 0.75 0.99 0.90 0.97 Uniform Delay, d1 14.7 21.0 41.9 42.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 13.8 12.5 36.7 Delay 16.4 34.8 54.3 79.6 Level of Service B C D E Approach Delay 16.4 34.8 62.3 Approach LOS B C E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 33.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.98 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2030 Future Year No Events- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1850 0 0 3500 300 480 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3162 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3162 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1947 0 0 3684 316 505 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 16 16 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1947 0 0 3684 542 247 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 61.2 61.2 18.8 18.8 Effective Green, g 61.2 61.2 18.8 18.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.68 0.68 0.21 0.21 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 4936 4193 661 290 v/s Ratio Prot 0.27 c0.60 0.17 v/s Ratio Perm c0.18 v/c Ratio 0.39 0.88 0.82 0.85 Uniform Delay, d1 6.3 11.4 34.0 34.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 2.9 8.0 20.7 Delay 6.5 14.4 42.0 55.0 Level of Service A B D E Approach Delay 6.5 14.4 46.2 Approach LOS A B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 16.1 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.87 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2030 Future Year No Events- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1930 1330 520 1850 0 0 0 0 400 0 410 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.97 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4463 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4463 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2032 1400 547 1947 0 0 0 0 421 0 432 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2648 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 421 0 405 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 65.0 65.0 20.0 90.0 20.0 20.0 Effective Green, g 65.0 65.0 20.0 90.0 20.0 20.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.17 0.75 0.17 0.17 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2417 [PHONE REDACTED] 551 254 v/s Ratio Prot 0.59 c0.60 c0.32 0.40 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm c0.27 v/c Ratio 1.10 1.10 1.93 0.53 0.76 1.59 Uniform Delay, d1 27.5 27.5 50.0 6.2 47.7 50.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 50.3 66.0 428.3 0.1 6.2 284.5 Delay 77.8 93.5 473.3 5.7 54.0 334.5 Level of Service E F F A D F Approach Delay 81.4 108.3 0.0 196.0 Approach LOS F F A F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 105.7 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.35 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 44: Katella Ave & 2030 Future Year No Events- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1550 0 0 1610 0 1070 30 830 0 0 30 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4940 4940 1633 1641 1538 1565 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4940 4940 1633 1641 1538 1565 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1632 0 0 1695 0 1126 32 874 0 0 32 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1632 0 0 1695 0 574 584 873 0 0 32 Turn Type Perm Perm custom Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G 42.0 42.0 68.0 68.0 68.0 68.0 Effective Green, g 42.0 42.0 68.0 68.0 68.0 68.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.35 0.35 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1729 1729 925 930 872 887 v/s Ratio Prot 0.33 c0.34 v/s Ratio Perm 0.35 0.36 c0.57 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.94 0.98 0.62 0.63 1.00 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 37.9 38.6 17.4 17.5 26.0 11.5 Progression Factor 0.58 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.4 17.1 3.1 3.2 30.8 0.1 Delay 23.3 55.7 20.5 20.7 56.8 11.6 Level of Service C E C C E B Approach Delay 23.3 55.7 36.2 11.6 Approach LOS C E D B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 38.3 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.99 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 6: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue 2030 Future Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2060 1110 770 2480 0 200 0 260 570 150 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.88 0.97 0.86 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.89 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 6166 2682 3303 6166 1618 1432 1447 3303 3406 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 6166 2682 3303 6166 1618 0 1447 3303 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2168 1168 811 2611 0 211 0 274 600 158 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 529 0 0 0 0 77 145 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2168 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 169 83 11 600 158 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 45.4 45.4 20.8 70.4 23.9 23.9 8.5 26.3 10.9 Effective Green, g 45.4 45.4 20.8 70.4 23.9 23.9 8.5 26.3 10.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.17 0.59 0.20 0.20 0.07 0.22 0.09 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2333 1015 573 3617 322 285 102 724 309 v/s Ratio Prot c0.35 c0.25 0.42 c0.10 0.06 c0.18 0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.24 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.93 0.63 1.42 0.72 0.52 0.29 0.11 0.83 0.51 Uniform Delay, d1 35.8 30.4 49.6 17.8 43.0 40.9 52.2 44.7 52.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.70 0.47 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 8.1 3.0 189.8 0.4 1.5 0.6 0.5 7.8 1.4 Delay 43.8 33.4 224.6 8.7 44.5 41.4 52.7 52.5 53.4 Level of Service D C F A D D D D D Approach Delay 40.2 59.9 46.1 52.7 Approach LOS D E D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 50.2 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.94 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 92.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2030 Future Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 2840 0 0 2870 [PHONE REDACTED] 360 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.76 0.76 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.85 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 6166 6689 1158 1379 5638 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 6166 6689 1158 1379 5638 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 53 2989 0 0 3021 1000 905 1768 379 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 53 2989 0 0 3420 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 4.2 63.0 55.1 55.1 47.0 47.0 Effective Green, g 4.2 63.0 55.1 55.1 47.0 47.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.52 0.46 0.46 0.39 0.39 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 116 3237 3071 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.48 c0.51 c0.44 0.43 v/s Ratio Perm 0.50 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.92 1.11 1.09 1.12 1.11 Uniform Delay, d1 56.8 26.3 32.5 32.5 36.5 36.5 Progression Factor 0.68 0.48 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.8 3.8 56.4 65.3 76.9 55.8 Delay 40.3 16.4 88.8 97.7 113.4 92.3 Level of Service D B F F F F Approach Delay 16.8 90.1 96.5 0.0 Approach LOS B F F A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 70.0 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.07 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.2% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 11: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps 2030 Future Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 200 620 [PHONE REDACTED] 730 50 0 110 430 0 50 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 5028 1805 4951 1805 2842 3502 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 5028 1805 4951 1805 2842 3502 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 211 653 [PHONE REDACTED] 768 53 0 116 453 0 53 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 48 0 0 87 0 0 0 98 0 0 46 Lane Group Flow (vph) 211 773 0 179 2449 0 53 0 18 453 0 7 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Over Prot Over Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 1 7 5 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 12.6 47.0 13.6 49.0 13.5 13.6 12.0 12.6 Effective Green, g 12.6 47.0 13.6 49.0 13.5 13.6 12.0 12.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.52 0.15 0.55 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.14 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 254 2637 274 2708 272 431 469 227 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.15 0.10 c0.49 0.03 0.01 c0.13 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.83 0.29 0.65 0.90 0.19 0.04 0.97 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 37.5 12.0 35.8 18.2 33.3 32.4 38.6 33.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 20.0 0.1 5.5 4.8 0.4 0.0 32.6 0.1 Delay 57.5 12.0 41.3 23.0 33.6 32.5 71.2 33.3 Level of Service E B D C C C E C Approach Delay 21.3 24.2 32.8 67.2 Approach LOS C C C E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 28.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84 Actuated Cycle Length 89.6 Sum of lost time 11.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.5% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 19: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard 2030 Future Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 160 140 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 50 1870 180 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3212 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3212 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 168 147 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 53 1968 189 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 237 0 0 0 0 0 67 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 102 213 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 53 1968 122 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 15.5 15.5 15.5 34.9 68.9 6.9 41.1 41.1 Effective Green, g 15.5 15.5 15.5 34.9 68.9 6.9 41.1 41.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.32 0.63 0.06 0.37 0.37 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 218 [PHONE REDACTED] 3862 107 2304 569 v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 0.30 0.03 c0.32 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.07 c0.14 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.47 1.02 0.93 0.47 0.50 0.85 0.21 Uniform Delay, d1 43.5 43.5 47.2 36.4 10.9 49.9 31.7 23.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.6 0.8 50.3 14.5 0.4 3.6 4.3 0.9 Delay 45.0 44.2 97.5 51.0 11.3 53.4 36.0 24.3 Level of Service D D F D B D D C Approach Delay 0.0 79.7 25.2 35.4 Approach LOS A E C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 37.6 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.91 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 20: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard 2030 Future Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 150 720 340 0 0 0 0 2740 80 0 1720 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1701 2682 7229 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1701 2682 7229 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 158 758 358 0 0 0 0 2884 84 0 1811 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 142 774 356 0 0 0 0 2964 0 0 1811 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 48.5 48.5 48.5 45.5 45.5 Effective Green, g 48.5 48.5 48.5 45.5 45.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.41 0.41 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 2990 2550 v/s Ratio Prot c0.41 0.29 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 0.46 0.13 v/c Ratio 0.20 1.03 0.30 0.99 0.71 Uniform Delay, d1 18.8 30.8 19.8 32.1 26.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 41.4 0.1 14.5 1.7 Delay 19.0 72.1 20.0 46.6 28.5 Level of Service B E B D C Approach Delay 51.5 0.0 46.6 28.5 Approach LOS D A D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 42.2 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.01 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 97.5% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2030 Future Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2120 3050 0 970 840 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2232 3211 0 1021 884 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2232 3211 0 1021 883 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 72.0 72.0 39.0 39.0 Effective Green, g 72.0 72.0 39.0 39.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.32 0.32 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2936 2936 553 872 v/s Ratio Prot 0.46 c0.66 c0.60 v/s Ratio Perm 0.33 v/c Ratio 0.76 1.09 1.85 1.01 Uniform Delay, d1 17.7 24.0 40.5 40.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 48.4 387.8 33.7 Delay 19.6 72.4 428.3 74.2 Level of Service B E F E Approach Delay 19.6 72.4 264.0 Approach LOS B E F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 106.0 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.36 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 120.2% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 27: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps 2030 Future Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2700 2540 0 480 680 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2842 2674 0 505 716 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 3 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2842 2674 0 505 713 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 73.7 73.7 37.3 37.3 Effective Green, g 73.7 73.7 37.3 37.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.61 0.61 0.31 0.31 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3005 3005 529 834 v/s Ratio Prot c0.58 0.55 c0.30 v/s Ratio Perm 0.27 v/c Ratio 0.95 0.89 0.95 0.86 Uniform Delay, d1 21.3 19.7 40.5 38.8 Progression Factor 1.00 0.65 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 7.9 0.4 27.9 8.6 Delay 29.2 13.3 68.4 47.4 Level of Service C B E D Approach Delay 29.2 13.3 56.1 Approach LOS C B E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.95 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2030 Future Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2610 0 0 3070 630 650 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3215 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3215 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 2747 0 0 3232 663 684 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 2 2 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2747 0 0 3232 921 422 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 77.0 77.0 33.4 33.4 Effective Green, g 77.0 77.0 33.4 33.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.64 0.64 0.28 0.28 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3140 3140 895 386 v/s Ratio Prot 0.56 c0.66 0.29 v/s Ratio Perm c0.30 v/c Ratio 0.87 1.03 1.03 1.09 Uniform Delay, d1 17.6 21.5 43.3 43.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.8 24.2 37.7 73.1 Delay 21.3 45.7 81.0 116.4 Level of Service C D F F Approach Delay 21.3 45.7 92.1 Approach LOS C D F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 45.1 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.05 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 92.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2030 Future Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2570 0 0 3500 360 1100 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3101 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3101 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 2705 0 0 3684 379 1158 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2705 0 0 3684 957 578 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 67.0 67.0 43.0 43.0 Effective Green, g 67.0 67.0 43.0 43.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.56 0.56 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 4053 3443 1111 497 v/s Ratio Prot 0.37 c0.60 0.31 v/s Ratio Perm c0.42 v/c Ratio 0.67 1.07 1.06dr 1.16 Uniform Delay, d1 18.7 26.5 35.7 38.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 38.1 7.0 93.9 Delay 19.5 64.6 42.8 132.4 Level of Service B E D F Approach Delay 19.5 64.6 76.5 Approach LOS B E E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 51.5 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.11 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.5% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2030 Future Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1930 1330 520 1930 0 0 0 0 400 0 410 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.97 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4463 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4463 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2032 1400 547 2032 0 0 0 0 421 0 432 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2648 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 421 0 412 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 63.0 63.0 20.0 88.0 22.0 22.0 Effective Green, g 63.0 63.0 20.0 88.0 22.0 22.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.52 0.17 0.73 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2343 [PHONE REDACTED] 606 279 v/s Ratio Prot 0.59 c0.60 c0.32 0.42 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm c0.27 v/c Ratio 1.13 1.14 1.93 0.57 0.69 1.48 Uniform Delay, d1 28.5 28.5 50.0 7.3 45.9 49.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.89 0.86 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 64.6 79.6 428.1 0.2 3.5 232.3 Delay 93.1 108.1 472.3 6.4 49.3 281.3 Level of Service F F F A D F Approach Delay 96.6 105.3 0.0 166.8 Approach LOS F F A F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 108.6 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.36 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 44: Katella Ave & 2030 Future Year with AAHC Event - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1550 0 0 1690 0 1070 30 830 0 0 30 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4940 4940 1633 1641 1538 1565 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4940 4940 1633 1641 1538 1565 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1632 0 0 1779 0 1126 32 874 0 0 32 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1632 0 0 1779 0 574 584 873 0 0 32 Turn Type Perm Perm custom Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G 42.0 42.0 68.0 68.0 68.0 68.0 Effective Green, g 42.0 42.0 68.0 68.0 68.0 68.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.35 0.35 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1729 1729 925 930 872 887 v/s Ratio Prot 0.33 c0.36 v/s Ratio Perm 0.35 0.36 c0.57 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.94 1.03 0.62 0.63 1.00 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 37.9 39.0 17.4 17.5 26.0 11.5 Progression Factor 0.58 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.4 29.4 3.1 3.2 30.8 0.1 Delay 23.2 68.4 20.5 20.7 56.8 11.6 Level of Service C E C C E B Approach Delay 23.2 68.4 36.2 11.6 Approach LOS C E D B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 42.6 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.01 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 6: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue 2030 Future Year with AAHC&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2270 1110 770 2480 0 200 0 350 780 150 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.88 0.97 0.86 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.87 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 6166 2682 3303 6166 1618 1405 1447 3303 3406 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 6166 2682 3303 6166 1618 1413 1447 3303 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2389 1168 811 2611 0 211 0 368 821 158 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 509 0 0 0 0 117 180 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2389 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 190 77 15 821 158 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 39.7 39.7 20.8 64.7 29.6 38.7 9.1 31.4 10.9 Effective Green, g 39.7 39.7 20.8 64.7 29.6 38.7 9.1 31.4 10.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.17 0.54 0.25 0.32 0.08 0.26 0.09 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2040 [PHONE REDACTED] 399 454 110 864 309 v/s Ratio Prot c0.39 c0.25 0.42 0.12 0.04 c0.25 c0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.25 0.01 0.01 v/c Ratio 1.17 0.74 1.42 0.79 0.48 0.17 0.13 0.95 0.51 Uniform Delay, d1 40.1 35.6 49.6 22.1 38.6 29.1 51.8 43.5 52.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.74 0.57 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 82.6 5.6 189.8 0.5 0.9 0.2 0.6 19.5 1.4 Delay 122.8 41.2 226.5 13.1 39.5 29.3 52.3 63.1 53.4 Level of Service F D F B D C D E D Approach Delay 96.0 63.6 40.4 61.5 Approach LOS F E D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 75.3 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.06 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 102.1% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2030 Future Year with AAHC&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 3350 0 0 2870 [PHONE REDACTED] 360 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.76 0.76 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.85 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 6166 6689 1158 1379 5638 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 6166 6689 1158 1379 5638 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 53 3526 0 0 3021 1000 905 1768 379 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 53 3526 0 0 3420 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 4.2 63.0 55.1 55.1 47.0 47.0 Effective Green, g 4.2 63.0 55.1 55.1 47.0 47.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.52 0.46 0.46 0.39 0.39 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 116 3237 3071 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.57 0.51 c0.44 0.43 v/s Ratio Perm 0.50 v/c Ratio 0.46 1.09 1.11 1.09 1.12 1.11 Uniform Delay, d1 56.8 28.5 32.5 32.5 36.5 36.5 Progression Factor 0.65 0.37 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.6 43.7 56.4 65.3 76.9 55.8 Delay 38.7 54.1 88.8 97.7 113.4 92.3 Level of Service D D F F F F Approach Delay 53.9 90.1 96.5 0.0 Approach LOS D F F A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 79.8 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.10 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 93.3% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 11: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps 2030 Future Year with AAHC&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 200 620 [PHONE REDACTED] 730 50 0 110 530 0 50 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 5028 1805 4951 1805 2842 3502 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 5028 1805 4951 1805 2842 3502 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 211 653 [PHONE REDACTED] 768 53 0 116 558 0 53 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 48 0 0 87 0 0 0 98 0 0 47 Lane Group Flow (vph) 211 773 0 179 2449 0 53 0 18 558 0 6 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Over Prot Over Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 1 7 5 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 11.0 44.4 13.6 48.0 16.5 13.6 15.0 11.0 Effective Green, g 11.0 44.4 13.6 48.0 16.5 13.6 15.0 11.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.49 0.15 0.53 0.18 0.15 0.17 0.12 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 221 2480 273 2641 331 429 584 197 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.15 0.10 c0.49 0.03 0.01 c0.16 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.95 0.31 0.66 0.93 0.16 0.04 0.96 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 39.3 13.7 36.0 19.4 30.9 32.6 37.2 34.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 47.5 0.1 5.6 6.4 0.2 0.0 26.3 0.1 Delay 86.7 13.7 41.6 25.7 31.1 32.7 63.5 34.9 Level of Service F B D C C C E C Approach Delay 28.6 26.8 32.2 61.0 Approach LOS C C C E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 32.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.94 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 19: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard 2030 Future Year with AAHC&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 160 140 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 50 1870 180 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3212 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3212 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 168 147 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 53 1968 189 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 248 0 0 0 0 0 90 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 102 213 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 53 1968 99 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 30.5 30.5 30.5 34.5 63.2 7.6 36.5 36.5 Effective Green, g 30.5 30.5 30.5 34.5 63.2 7.6 36.5 36.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.29 0.53 0.06 0.30 0.30 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 394 816 [PHONE REDACTED] 108 1875 464 v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 0.30 0.03 c0.32 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.07 c0.28 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.26 1.09 1.03 0.56 0.49 1.05 0.21 Uniform Delay, d1 35.7 35.7 44.8 42.8 19.1 54.3 41.8 31.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.2 60.1 37.3 0.7 3.5 35.2 1.0 Delay 36.1 35.9 104.9 80.0 19.8 57.8 77.0 32.1 Level of Service D D F F B E E C Approach Delay 0.0 88.2 40.9 72.7 Approach LOS A F D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 61.8 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.05 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 20: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard 2030 Future Year with AAHC&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 150 720 340 0 0 0 0 3190 80 0 1720 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1701 2682 7233 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1701 2682 7233 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 158 758 358 0 0 0 0 3358 84 0 1811 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 142 774 352 0 0 0 0 3439 0 0 1811 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 46.5 46.5 46.5 57.5 57.5 Effective Green, g 46.5 46.5 46.5 57.5 57.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.48 0.48 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 3466 2955 v/s Ratio Prot c0.48 0.29 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 0.46 0.13 v/c Ratio 0.23 1.17 0.34 0.99 0.61 Uniform Delay, d1 24.7 36.8 25.9 31.0 23.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 93.9 0.2 13.6 1.0 Delay 24.9 130.7 26.1 44.6 24.0 Level of Service C F C D C Approach Delay 89.5 0.0 44.6 24.0 Approach LOS F A D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 47.6 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.07 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 102.7% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2030 Future Year with AAHC&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2120 3050 0 970 840 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2232 3211 0 1021 884 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2232 3211 0 1021 884 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 59.0 59.0 52.0 52.0 Effective Green, g 59.0 59.0 52.0 52.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.43 0.43 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2406 2406 738 1162 v/s Ratio Prot 0.46 c0.66 c0.60 v/s Ratio Perm 0.33 v/c Ratio 0.93 1.33 1.38 0.76 Uniform Delay, d1 28.5 30.5 34.0 28.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 7.8 153.5 181.0 3.0 Delay 36.3 184.0 215.0 31.7 Level of Service D F F C Approach Delay 36.3 184.0 129.9 Approach LOS D F F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 125.1 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.36 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 120.2% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 27: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps 2030 Future Year with AAHC&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2700 2760 0 1020 940 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2842 2905 0 1074 989 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2842 2905 0 1074 988 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 68.0 68.0 43.0 43.0 Effective Green, g 68.0 68.0 43.0 43.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.57 0.57 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2773 2773 610 961 v/s Ratio Prot 0.58 c0.59 c0.63 v/s Ratio Perm 0.37 v/c Ratio 1.02 1.05 1.76 1.03 Uniform Delay, d1 26.0 26.0 38.5 38.5 Progression Factor 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 23.8 24.6 349.0 36.5 Delay 49.8 37.5 387.5 75.0 Level of Service D D F E Approach Delay 49.8 37.5 237.7 Approach LOS D D F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 94.9 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.32 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 184.7% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2030 Future Year with AAHC&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2610 0 0 3070 630 650 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3215 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3215 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 2747 0 0 3232 663 684 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 2 2 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2747 0 0 3232 921 422 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 76.0 76.0 34.4 34.4 Effective Green, g 76.0 76.0 34.4 34.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.63 0.63 0.29 0.29 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3099 3099 922 397 v/s Ratio Prot 0.56 c0.66 0.29 v/s Ratio Perm c0.30 v/c Ratio 0.89 1.04 1.00 1.06 Uniform Delay, d1 18.4 22.0 42.8 42.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.2 28.8 29.1 62.7 Delay 22.6 50.8 71.9 105.5 Level of Service C D E F Approach Delay 22.6 50.8 82.5 Approach LOS C D F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 46.0 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.05 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 92.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2030 Future Year with AAHC&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 3210 0 0 3730 410 1320 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3096 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3096 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 3379 0 0 3926 432 1389 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 3379 0 0 3926 1126 693 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 77.0 77.0 33.0 33.0 Effective Green, g 77.0 77.0 33.0 33.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.64 0.64 0.28 0.28 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 4658 3957 851 381 v/s Ratio Prot 0.47 c0.64 0.36 v/s Ratio Perm c0.50 v/c Ratio 0.73 0.99 1.65dr 1.82 Uniform Delay, d1 14.4 21.2 43.5 43.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 12.6 153.8 379.0 Delay 15.4 33.8 197.3 422.5 Level of Service B C F F Approach Delay 15.4 33.8 283.1 Approach LOS B C F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 76.7 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.24 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 100.0% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2030 Future Year with AAHC&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1930 1330 520 2030 0 0 0 0 400 0 410 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.97 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4463 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4463 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2032 1400 547 2137 0 0 0 0 421 0 432 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2648 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 421 0 417 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 60.0 60.0 21.0 86.0 24.0 24.0 Effective Green, g 60.0 60.0 21.0 86.0 24.0 24.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.50 0.50 0.18 0.72 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2232 [PHONE REDACTED] 661 305 v/s Ratio Prot 0.59 c0.60 c0.32 0.44 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm c0.27 v/c Ratio 1.19 1.20 1.84 0.61 0.64 1.37 Uniform Delay, d1 30.0 30.0 49.5 8.6 44.0 48.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.88 0.82 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 88.7 103.0 387.2 0.3 2.0 184.6 Delay 118.7 133.0 430.8 7.3 46.0 232.6 Level of Service F F F A D F Approach Delay 122.0 93.6 0.0 140.5 Approach LOS F F A F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 113.3 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.36 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 44: Katella Ave & 2030 Future Year with AAHC&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1550 0 0 1790 0 1070 30 830 0 0 30 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4940 4940 1633 1641 1538 1565 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4940 4940 1633 1641 1538 1565 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1632 0 0 1884 0 1126 32 874 0 0 32 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1632 0 0 1884 0 574 584 873 0 0 32 Turn Type Perm Perm custom Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G 44.0 44.0 66.0 66.0 66.0 66.0 Effective Green, g 44.0 44.0 66.0 66.0 66.0 66.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.37 0.37 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1811 1811 898 903 846 861 v/s Ratio Prot 0.33 c0.38 v/s Ratio Perm 0.35 0.36 c0.57 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.90 1.04 0.64 0.65 1.03 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 35.9 38.0 18.7 18.9 27.0 12.4 Progression Factor 0.53 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 32.5 3.5 3.6 39.5 0.1 Delay 19.6 70.5 22.2 22.4 66.5 12.5 Level of Service B E C C E B Approach Delay 19.6 70.5 41.3 12.5 Approach LOS B E D B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 44.6 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.04 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 6: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue 2030 Future Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2150 1110 770 2480 0 200 0 300 570 150 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.88 0.97 0.86 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.87 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 6166 2682 3303 6166 1618 1414 1447 3303 3406 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 6166 2682 3303 6166 1618 0 1447 3303 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2263 1168 811 2611 0 211 0 316 600 158 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 508 0 0 0 0 116 158 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2263 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 184 56 13 600 158 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 46.0 46.0 19.8 70.0 24.3 24.3 8.9 26.3 10.9 Effective Green, g 46.0 46.0 19.8 70.0 24.3 24.3 8.9 26.3 10.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.17 0.58 0.20 0.20 0.07 0.22 0.09 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2364 1028 545 3597 328 286 107 724 309 v/s Ratio Prot c0.37 c0.25 0.42 c0.11 0.04 c0.18 0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.25 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.96 0.64 1.49 0.73 0.56 0.20 0.12 0.83 0.51 Uniform Delay, d1 36.0 30.3 50.1 18.1 43.1 39.7 51.9 44.7 52.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.72 0.53 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 10.9 3.1 222.4 0.4 2.2 0.3 0.5 7.8 1.4 Delay 46.9 33.3 258.6 9.9 45.2 40.1 52.4 52.5 53.4 Level of Service D C F A D D D D D Approach Delay 42.3 68.8 45.9 52.7 Approach LOS D E D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 54.7 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.96 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 93.8% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2030 Future Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 3000 0 0 2870 [PHONE REDACTED] 360 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.76 0.76 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.85 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 6166 6689 1158 1379 5638 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 6166 6689 1158 1379 5638 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 53 3158 0 0 3021 1000 905 1768 379 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 53 3158 0 0 3420 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 4.2 63.0 55.1 55.1 47.0 47.0 Effective Green, g 4.2 63.0 55.1 55.1 47.0 47.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.52 0.46 0.46 0.39 0.39 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 116 3237 3071 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.51 c0.51 c0.44 0.43 v/s Ratio Perm 0.50 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.98 1.11 1.09 1.12 1.11 Uniform Delay, d1 56.8 27.8 32.5 32.5 36.5 36.5 Progression Factor 0.69 0.48 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 8.3 56.4 65.3 76.9 55.8 Delay 40.9 21.6 88.8 97.7 113.4 92.3 Level of Service D C F F F F Approach Delay 21.9 90.1 96.5 0.0 Approach LOS C F F A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 70.7 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.08 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.2% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 11: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 200 620 [PHONE REDACTED] 730 50 0 110 450 0 50 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 5028 1805 4951 1805 2842 3502 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 5028 1805 4951 1805 2842 3502 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 211 653 [PHONE REDACTED] 768 53 0 116 474 0 53 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 48 0 0 87 0 0 0 98 0 0 46 Lane Group Flow (vph) 211 773 0 179 2449 0 53 0 18 474 0 7 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Over Prot Over Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 1 7 5 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 12.0 46.4 13.6 49.0 14.5 13.6 13.0 12.0 Effective Green, g 12.0 46.4 13.6 49.0 14.5 13.6 13.0 12.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.52 0.15 0.54 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 241 2592 273 2696 291 429 506 215 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.15 0.10 c0.49 0.03 0.01 c0.14 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.88 0.30 0.66 0.91 0.18 0.04 0.94 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 38.3 12.5 36.0 18.5 32.6 32.6 38.1 33.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 27.8 0.1 5.6 5.0 0.3 0.0 24.9 0.1 Delay 66.1 12.5 41.6 23.4 32.9 32.7 63.0 34.0 Level of Service E B D C C C E C Approach Delay 23.5 24.6 32.7 60.1 Approach LOS C C C E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 28.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.91 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.0% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 19: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard 2030 Future Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 160 140 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 50 1870 180 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3212 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3212 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 168 147 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 53 1968 189 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 235 0 0 0 0 0 64 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 102 213 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 53 1968 125 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 15.2 15.2 15.2 34.9 69.2 6.9 41.4 41.4 Effective Green, g 15.2 15.2 15.2 34.9 69.2 6.9 41.4 41.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.32 0.63 0.06 0.38 0.38 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 214 [PHONE REDACTED] 3879 107 2321 574 v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 0.30 0.03 c0.32 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.07 c0.14 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.48 1.04 0.93 0.48 0.50 0.85 0.22 Uniform Delay, d1 43.7 43.8 47.4 36.4 10.9 49.9 31.4 23.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 0.8 57.4 14.5 0.4 3.6 4.1 0.9 Delay 45.4 44.6 104.8 51.0 11.3 53.4 35.5 24.2 Level of Service D D F D B D D C Approach Delay 0.0 84.6 24.9 35.0 Approach LOS A F C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 37.9 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.91 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 20: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard 2030 Future Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 150 720 340 0 0 0 0 2790 80 0 1720 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1701 2682 7229 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1701 2682 7229 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 158 758 358 0 0 0 0 2937 84 0 1811 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 142 774 356 0 0 0 0 3017 0 0 1811 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 48.5 48.5 48.5 45.5 45.5 Effective Green, g 48.5 48.5 48.5 45.5 45.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.41 0.41 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 2990 2550 v/s Ratio Prot c0.42 0.29 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 0.46 0.13 v/c Ratio 0.20 1.03 0.30 1.01 0.71 Uniform Delay, d1 18.8 30.8 19.8 32.2 26.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 41.4 0.1 18.7 1.7 Delay 19.0 72.1 20.0 50.9 28.5 Level of Service B E B D C Approach Delay 51.5 0.0 50.9 28.5 Approach LOS D A D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 44.4 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.02 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 98.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2120 3130 0 1190 960 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2232 3295 0 1253 1011 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2232 3295 0 1253 1011 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 67.0 67.0 44.0 44.0 Effective Green, g 67.0 67.0 44.0 44.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.56 0.56 0.37 0.37 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2732 2732 624 983 v/s Ratio Prot 0.46 c0.67 c0.74 v/s Ratio Perm 0.38 v/c Ratio 0.82 1.21 2.01 1.03 Uniform Delay, d1 21.5 26.5 38.0 38.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.8 96.4 459.3 36.2 Delay 24.4 122.9 497.3 74.2 Level of Service C F F E Approach Delay 24.4 122.9 308.4 Approach LOS C F F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 148.6 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.52 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 191.1% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 27: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 3040 2620 0 640 760 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 3200 2758 0 674 800 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 2 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 3200 2758 0 674 798 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 73.0 73.0 38.0 38.0 Effective Green, g 73.0 73.0 38.0 38.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.61 0.61 0.32 0.32 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2977 2977 539 849 v/s Ratio Prot c0.65 0.56 c0.40 v/s Ratio Perm 0.30 v/c Ratio 1.07 0.93 1.25 0.94 Uniform Delay, d1 23.5 21.1 41.0 39.9 Progression Factor 1.00 0.26 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 40.9 0.7 127.5 17.8 Delay 64.4 6.1 168.5 57.7 Level of Service E A F E Approach Delay 64.4 6.1 108.3 Approach LOS E A F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 51.5 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.13 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 167.0% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2860 0 0 3140 660 720 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3209 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3209 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 3011 0 0 3305 695 758 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 3011 0 0 3305 990 461 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 79.0 79.0 31.4 31.4 Effective Green, g 79.0 79.0 31.4 31.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.66 0.66 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3221 3221 840 363 v/s Ratio Prot 0.62 c0.68 0.31 v/s Ratio Perm c0.33 v/c Ratio 0.93 1.03 1.18 1.27 Uniform Delay, d1 18.2 20.5 44.3 44.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 6.6 23.0 92.4 141.0 Delay 24.8 43.5 136.7 185.3 Level of Service C D F F Approach Delay 24.8 43.5 152.1 Approach LOS C D F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 56.5 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.10 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.0% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 3060 0 0 3500 390 1520 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3081 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3081 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 3221 0 0 3684 411 1600 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 3221 0 0 3684 1211 800 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 67.0 67.0 43.0 43.0 Effective Green, g 67.0 67.0 43.0 43.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.56 0.56 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 4053 3443 1104 497 v/s Ratio Prot 0.44 c0.60 0.39 v/s Ratio Perm c0.58 v/c Ratio 0.79 1.07 1.47dr 1.61 Uniform Delay, d1 21.0 26.5 38.5 38.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 38.1 57.6 283.6 Delay 22.7 64.6 96.1 322.1 Level of Service C E F F Approach Delay 22.7 64.6 186.0 Approach LOS C E F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 76.9 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.28 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 106.6% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2030 Future Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1930 1330 520 1990 0 0 0 0 400 0 410 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.97 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4463 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4463 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2032 1400 547 2095 0 0 0 0 421 0 432 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2648 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 421 0 415 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 62.0 62.0 20.0 87.0 23.0 23.0 Effective Green, g 62.0 62.0 20.0 87.0 23.0 23.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.52 0.17 0.72 0.19 0.19 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2306 [PHONE REDACTED] 633 292 v/s Ratio Prot 0.59 c0.60 c0.32 0.43 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm c0.27 v/c Ratio 1.15 1.16 1.93 0.59 0.67 1.42 Uniform Delay, d1 29.0 29.0 50.0 7.9 44.9 48.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.87 0.83 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 72.3 87.0 427.8 0.2 2.6 208.5 Delay 101.3 116.0 471.2 6.8 47.6 257.0 Level of Service F F F A D F Approach Delay 104.7 102.9 0.0 153.6 Approach LOS F F A F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 110.0 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.36 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 44: Katella Ave & 2030 Future Year with Project - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1550 0 0 1750 0 1070 30 830 0 0 30 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4940 4940 1633 1641 1538 1565 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4940 4940 1633 1641 1538 1565 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1632 0 0 1842 0 1126 32 874 0 0 32 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1632 0 0 1842 0 574 584 874 0 0 32 Turn Type Perm Perm custom Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G 41.0 41.0 69.0 69.0 69.0 69.0 Effective Green, g 41.0 41.0 69.0 69.0 69.0 69.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.34 0.34 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1688 1688 939 944 884 900 v/s Ratio Prot 0.33 c0.37 v/s Ratio Perm 0.35 0.36 c0.57 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.97 1.09 0.61 0.62 0.99 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 38.8 39.5 16.7 16.8 25.1 11.1 Progression Factor 0.58 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.3 51.3 3.0 3.0 27.6 0.1 Delay 24.9 90.8 19.7 19.9 52.7 11.1 Level of Service C F B B D B Approach Delay 24.9 90.8 33.9 11.1 Approach LOS C F C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 50.0 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.03 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 6: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2360 1110 770 2480 0 200 0 390 820 150 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.88 0.97 0.86 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 6166 2682 3303 6166 1618 1403 1447 3303 3406 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 6166 2682 3303 6166 1618 1410 1447 3303 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2484 1168 811 2611 0 211 0 411 863 158 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 524 0 0 0 0 122 193 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2484 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 190 96 21 863 158 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 37.3 37.3 18.8 60.3 34.0 45.5 11.5 33.4 10.9 Effective Green, g 37.3 37.3 18.8 60.3 34.0 45.5 11.5 33.4 10.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.31 0.16 0.50 0.28 0.38 0.10 0.28 0.09 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1917 [PHONE REDACTED] 458 533 139 919 309 v/s Ratio Prot c0.40 c0.25 0.42 0.12 0.05 c0.26 c0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.24 0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 1.30 0.77 1.57 0.84 0.41 0.18 0.15 0.94 0.51 Uniform Delay, d1 41.4 37.5 50.6 25.8 34.9 24.8 49.8 42.3 52.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.81 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 137.1 6.9 258.7 0.9 0.6 0.2 0.5 16.7 1.4 Delay 178.4 44.4 302.3 21.7 35.5 25.0 50.2 59.0 53.4 Level of Service F D F C D C D E D Approach Delay 135.6 88.2 36.9 58.1 Approach LOS F F D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 100.9 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.14 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 19.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 104.9% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 3510 0 0 2870 [PHONE REDACTED] 360 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.76 0.76 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.85 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 6166 6689 1158 1379 5638 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 6166 6689 1158 1379 5638 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 53 3695 0 0 3021 1000 905 1768 379 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 53 3695 0 0 3420 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 4.2 64.0 56.1 56.1 46.0 46.0 Effective Green, g 4.2 64.0 56.1 56.1 46.0 46.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.53 0.47 0.47 0.38 0.38 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 116 3289 3127 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.60 0.51 c0.44 0.43 v/s Ratio Perm 0.50 v/c Ratio 0.46 1.12 1.09 1.07 1.15 1.13 Uniform Delay, d1 56.8 28.0 31.9 31.9 37.0 37.0 Progression Factor 0.72 0.43 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.5 58.1 48.1 59.1 85.9 65.8 Delay 42.3 70.2 80.1 91.0 122.9 102.8 Level of Service D E F F F F Approach Delay 69.8 81.7 106.8 0.0 Approach LOS E F F A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 84.6 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.13 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.6% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 11: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 200 620 [PHONE REDACTED] 730 50 0 110 550 0 50 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 5028 1805 4951 1805 2842 3502 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 5028 1805 4951 1805 2842 3502 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 211 653 [PHONE REDACTED] 768 53 0 116 579 0 53 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 48 0 0 87 0 0 0 98 0 0 47 Lane Group Flow (vph) 211 773 0 179 2449 0 53 0 18 579 0 6 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Over Prot Over Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 1 7 5 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 11.0 43.4 13.6 47.0 17.5 13.6 16.0 11.0 Effective Green, g 11.0 43.4 13.6 47.0 17.5 13.6 16.0 11.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.48 0.15 0.52 0.19 0.15 0.18 0.12 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 221 2425 273 2586 351 429 623 197 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.15 0.10 c0.49 0.03 0.01 c0.17 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.95 0.32 0.66 0.95 0.15 0.04 0.93 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 39.3 14.3 36.0 20.3 30.1 32.6 36.4 34.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 47.5 0.1 5.6 8.3 0.2 0.0 20.3 0.1 Delay 86.7 14.3 41.6 28.7 30.3 32.7 56.7 34.9 Level of Service F B D C C C E C Approach Delay 29.1 29.5 31.9 54.9 Approach LOS C C C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 33.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.94 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.9% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 19: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 160 140 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 50 1870 180 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3212 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3212 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 168 147 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 53 1968 189 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 212 0 0 0 0 0 90 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 102 213 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 53 1968 99 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 28.8 28.8 28.8 35.3 65.3 7.2 37.4 37.4 Effective Green, g 28.8 28.8 28.8 35.3 65.3 7.2 37.4 37.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.29 0.54 0.06 0.31 0.31 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 372 771 [PHONE REDACTED] 102 1922 475 v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 0.38 0.03 c0.32 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.07 c0.29 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.27 0.28 1.21 1.01 0.70 0.52 1.02 0.21 Uniform Delay, d1 37.1 37.1 45.6 42.4 20.1 54.7 41.3 30.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.2 107.1 30.6 1.2 4.4 26.8 1.0 Delay 37.5 37.3 152.7 73.0 21.4 59.1 68.1 31.4 Level of Service D D F E C E E C Approach Delay 0.0 124.8 36.6 64.8 Approach LOS A F D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 62.5 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.07 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.4% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 20: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 150 720 340 0 0 0 0 3240 80 0 1720 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1701 2682 7233 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1701 2682 7233 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 158 758 358 0 0 0 0 3411 84 0 1811 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 142 774 351 0 0 0 0 3492 0 0 1811 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 45.5 45.5 45.5 58.5 58.5 Effective Green, g 45.5 45.5 45.5 58.5 58.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.49 0.49 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 3526 3006 v/s Ratio Prot c0.48 0.29 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 0.46 0.13 v/c Ratio 0.23 1.20 0.35 0.99 0.60 Uniform Delay, d1 25.4 37.2 26.6 30.5 22.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 104.4 0.2 13.1 0.9 Delay 25.5 141.7 26.8 43.5 23.2 Level of Service C F C D C Approach Delay 96.5 0.0 43.5 23.2 Approach LOS F A D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 48.2 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.08 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 103.3% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2120 3130 0 1190 960 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2232 3295 0 1253 1011 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2232 3295 0 1253 1011 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 68.0 68.0 43.0 43.0 Effective Green, g 68.0 68.0 43.0 43.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.57 0.57 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2773 2773 610 961 v/s Ratio Prot 0.46 c0.67 c0.74 v/s Ratio Perm 0.38 v/c Ratio 0.80 1.19 2.05 1.05 Uniform Delay, d1 20.7 26.0 38.5 38.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.6 88.6 480.0 43.7 Delay 23.3 114.6 518.5 82.2 Level of Service C F F F Approach Delay 23.3 114.6 323.7 Approach LOS C F F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 149.2 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.52 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 193.4% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 27: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 3200 2840 0 1180 1020 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 3368 2989 0 1242 1074 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 3368 2989 0 1242 1073 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 72.0 72.0 39.0 39.0 Effective Green, g 72.0 72.0 39.0 39.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.32 0.32 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2936 2936 553 872 v/s Ratio Prot c0.69 0.61 c0.73 v/s Ratio Perm 0.40 v/c Ratio 1.15 1.02 2.25 1.23 Uniform Delay, d1 24.0 24.0 40.5 40.5 Progression Factor 1.00 0.49 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 70.7 10.5 566.5 113.6 Delay 94.7 22.3 607.0 154.1 Level of Service F C F F Approach Delay 94.7 22.3 397.0 Approach LOS F C F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 150.5 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.53 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 204.7% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2860 0 0 3140 660 720 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3209 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3209 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 3011 0 0 3305 695 758 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 3011 0 0 3305 990 461 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 77.0 77.0 33.4 33.4 Effective Green, g 77.0 77.0 33.4 33.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.64 0.64 0.28 0.28 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3140 3140 893 386 v/s Ratio Prot 0.62 c0.68 0.31 v/s Ratio Perm c0.33 v/c Ratio 0.96 1.05 1.11 1.20 Uniform Delay, d1 20.0 21.5 43.3 43.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9.0 32.1 64.6 110.5 Delay 29.0 53.6 107.9 153.8 Level of Service C D F F Approach Delay 29.0 53.6 122.5 Approach LOS C D F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 57.0 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.10 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.0% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 3700 0 0 3730 440 1740 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3079 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3079 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 3895 0 0 3926 463 1832 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 3895 0 0 3926 1379 916 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 66.0 66.0 44.0 44.0 Effective Green, g 66.0 66.0 44.0 44.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.55 0.55 0.37 0.37 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3992 3391 1129 508 v/s Ratio Prot 0.54 c0.64 0.45 v/s Ratio Perm c0.66 v/c Ratio 0.98 1.16 1.64dr 1.80 Uniform Delay, d1 26.2 27.0 38.0 38.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9.6 74.7 107.8 369.2 Delay 35.8 101.7 145.8 407.2 Level of Service D F F F Approach Delay 35.8 101.7 250.1 Approach LOS D F F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 110.0 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.42 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 123.1% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1930 1330 520 2090 0 0 0 0 400 0 410 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.97 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4463 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4463 1310 1703 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2032 1400 547 2200 0 0 0 0 421 0 432 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2648 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 421 0 415 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 58.0 58.0 27.0 90.0 20.0 20.0 Effective Green, g 58.0 58.0 27.0 90.0 20.0 20.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.22 0.75 0.17 0.17 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2157 [PHONE REDACTED] 551 254 v/s Ratio Prot 0.59 c0.60 c0.32 0.45 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm c0.27 v/c Ratio 1.23 1.24 1.43 0.60 0.76 1.64 Uniform Delay, d1 31.0 31.0 46.5 6.8 47.7 50.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.81 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 106.8 120.5 205.1 0.2 6.2 303.0 Delay 137.8 151.5 244.9 5.7 54.0 353.0 Level of Service F F F A D F Approach Delay 140.9 53.4 0.0 205.4 Approach LOS F D A F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 114.5 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.36 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 44: Katella Ave & 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1550 0 0 1850 0 1070 30 830 0 0 30 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4940 4940 1633 1641 1538 1565 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4940 4940 1633 1641 1538 1565 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1632 0 0 1947 0 1126 32 874 0 0 32 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1632 0 0 1947 0 574 584 873 0 0 32 Turn Type Perm Perm custom Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G 43.0 43.0 67.0 67.0 67.0 67.0 Effective Green, g 43.0 43.0 67.0 67.0 67.0 67.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.36 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1770 1770 912 916 859 874 v/s Ratio Prot 0.33 c0.39 v/s Ratio Perm 0.35 0.36 c0.57 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.92 1.10 0.63 0.64 1.02 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 36.9 38.5 18.0 18.2 26.5 11.9 Progression Factor 0.38 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 54.3 3.3 3.4 34.9 0.1 Delay 14.9 92.8 21.3 21.6 61.4 12.0 Level of Service B F C C E B Approach Delay 14.9 92.8 38.6 12.0 Approach LOS B F D B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 50.3 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.05 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX H-4: CALTRANS RAMP TERMINI WORKSHEETS UNDER 2011 BASELINE CONDITIONS (MITIGATED) (COMPARSION 3 – PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT) COMPARISON 3 - AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2011 Baseline with Project & AS Event (Mitigation) - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2460 0 0 1149 372 1492 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3113 2621 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3113 2621 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.84 0.84 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 2536 0 0 1368 404 1622 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 2 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2536 0 0 1368 938 1085 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 49.0 49.0 31.0 31.0 Effective Green, g 49.0 49.0 31.0 31.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.34 0.34 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3952 3357 1072 903 v/s Ratio Prot c0.35 0.22 0.30 v/s Ratio Perm c0.41 v/c Ratio 0.64 0.41 1.02dr 1.20 Uniform Delay, d1 14.4 12.0 27.7 29.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.4 7.9 101.3 Delay 15.2 12.4 35.6 130.8 Level of Service B B D F Approach Delay 15.2 12.4 86.7 Approach LOS B B F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 39.0 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX H-5: CALTRANS RAMP TERMINI WORKSHEETS UNDER 2013 OPENING YEAR CONDITIONS (MITIGATED) (COMPARSION 3 – PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT) (COMPARISON 3 - PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT) COMPARISON 3 - AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Ave & SR-57 NB Ramps 2013 Opening Year Project&Concurrent AS Event (Mitigation)- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1390 0 0 1240 390 1520 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3116 2621 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3116 2621 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1463 0 0 1305 411 1600 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 11 19 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1463 0 0 1305 928 1053 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 44.0 44.0 36.0 36.0 Effective Green, g 44.0 44.0 36.0 36.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.40 0.40 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3549 3014 1246 1048 v/s Ratio Prot 0.20 c0.21 0.30 v/s Ratio Perm c0.40 v/c Ratio 0.41 0.43 0.85dr 1.00 Uniform Delay, d1 14.7 14.9 23.1 27.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.5 2.2 28.9 Delay 15.1 15.4 25.2 55.9 Level of Service B B C E Approach Delay 15.1 15.4 41.6 Approach LOS B B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.69 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX H-6: CALTRANS RAMP TERMINI WORKSHEETS UNDER 2030 FUTURE YEAR CONDITIONS (MITIGATED) COMPARISON 1: NO EVENTS VS. PROJECT COMPARISON 2: AAHC EVENT VS. PROJECT COMPARISON 3: AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices (COMPARISON 1 – PROJECT VS. NO EVENTS) COMPARISON 1 - NO EVENTS VS. PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2030 Future Year with Project (Mitigation)- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 3000 0 0 2870 [PHONE REDACTED] 360 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.76 0.76 0.97 0.91 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 6166 6689 1158 3303 4893 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 6166 6689 1158 3303 4893 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 53 3158 0 0 3021 1000 905 1768 379 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 53 3158 0 0 3420 [PHONE REDACTED] 379 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 Actuated Green, G 4.2 67.0 59.1 59.1 43.0 41.0 41.0 Effective Green, g 4.2 67.0 59.1 59.1 43.0 41.0 41.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.56 0.49 0.49 0.36 0.34 0.34 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 116 3443 3294 570 1184 1672 521 v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.51 c0.51 0.27 c0.36 v/s Ratio Perm 0.50 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.92 1.04 1.02 0.76 1.06 0.73 Uniform Delay, d1 56.8 24.0 30.4 30.4 34.0 39.5 34.6 Progression Factor 0.64 0.44 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 3.5 26.8 41.9 3.0 39.0 8.6 Delay 38.3 14.0 57.2 72.3 37.0 78.5 43.2 Level of Service D B E E D E D Approach Delay 14.4 59.5 61.8 0.0 Approach LOS B E E A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 46.1 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.01 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 11.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.9% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project (Mitigation)- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2120 3130 0 1190 960 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.86 0.97 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 6166 3303 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 6166 3303 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2232 3295 0 1253 1011 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2232 3295 0 1253 1011 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 67.0 67.0 44.0 44.0 Effective Green, g 67.0 67.0 44.0 44.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.56 0.56 0.37 0.37 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2732 3443 1211 983 v/s Ratio Prot 0.46 c0.53 c0.38 v/s Ratio Perm 0.38 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.96 1.03 1.03 Uniform Delay, d1 21.5 25.1 38.0 38.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.8 8.2 35.2 36.2 Delay 24.4 33.3 73.2 74.2 Level of Service C C E E Approach Delay 24.4 33.3 73.7 Approach LOS C C E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 42.5 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.99 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 140.8% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project (Mitigation)- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2860 0 0 3140 660 720 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.86 0.97 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 6166 3303 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 6166 3303 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 3011 0 0 3305 695 758 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 2 Lane Group Flow (vph) 3011 0 0 3305 695 756 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 79.0 79.0 31.4 31.4 Effective Green, g 79.0 79.0 31.4 31.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.66 0.66 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3221 4059 864 702 v/s Ratio Prot c0.62 0.54 0.21 v/s Ratio Perm c0.28 v/c Ratio 0.93 0.81 0.80 1.08 Uniform Delay, d1 18.2 15.1 41.4 44.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 6.6 1.9 5.5 56.5 Delay 24.8 17.0 46.9 100.8 Level of Service C B D F Approach Delay 24.8 17.0 75.0 Approach LOS C B E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 30.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.98 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project (Mitigation)- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 3060 0 0 3500 390 1520 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.81 0.97 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 7259 3116 2621 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 7259 3116 2621 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 3221 0 0 3684 411 1600 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 3221 0 0 3684 939 1072 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 67.0 67.0 43.0 43.0 Effective Green, g 67.0 67.0 43.0 43.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.56 0.56 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 4053 4053 1117 939 v/s Ratio Prot 0.44 c0.51 0.30 v/s Ratio Perm c0.41 v/c Ratio 0.79 0.91 0.97dr 1.14 Uniform Delay, d1 21.0 23.8 35.4 38.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 4.0 5.8 76.6 Delay 22.7 27.8 41.2 115.1 Level of Service C C D F Approach Delay 22.7 27.8 80.6 Approach LOS C C F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 37.9 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.00 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2030 Future Year with Project (Mitigation)- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1930 1330 520 1990 0 0 0 0 400 0 410 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 2682 3303 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 2682 3303 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2032 1400 547 2095 0 0 0 0 421 0 432 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2032 1400 547 2095 0 0 0 0 421 0 420 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 57.0 57.0 19.0 81.0 29.0 29.0 Effective Green, g 57.0 57.0 19.0 81.0 29.0 29.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.16 0.68 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2324 1274 523 3303 798 368 v/s Ratio Prot 0.42 c0.52 c0.17 0.43 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm c0.28 v/c Ratio 0.87 1.10 1.05 0.63 0.53 1.14 Uniform Delay, d1 28.3 31.5 50.5 11.1 39.5 45.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.87 0.80 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.0 56.8 49.1 0.3 0.6 91.0 Delay 32.3 88.3 92.9 9.2 40.2 136.5 Level of Service C F F A D F Approach Delay 55.1 26.5 0.0 89.0 Approach LOS E C A F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 48.4 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.10 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices (COMPARISON 2 – PROJECT VS. AAHC EVENT) COMPARISON 2 - AAHC EVENT VS. PROJECT ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2030 Future Year with Project (Mitigation) - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 3000 0 0 2870 [PHONE REDACTED] 360 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.76 0.76 0.97 0.91 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 6166 6689 1158 3303 4893 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 6166 6689 1158 3303 4893 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 53 3158 0 0 3021 1000 905 1768 379 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 53 3158 0 0 3420 [PHONE REDACTED] 379 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 Actuated Green, G 4.2 67.0 59.1 59.1 43.0 41.0 41.0 Effective Green, g 4.2 67.0 59.1 59.1 43.0 41.0 41.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.56 0.49 0.49 0.36 0.34 0.34 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 116 3443 3294 570 1184 1672 521 v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.51 c0.51 0.27 c0.36 v/s Ratio Perm 0.50 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.92 1.04 1.02 0.76 1.06 0.73 Uniform Delay, d1 56.8 24.0 30.4 30.4 34.0 39.5 34.6 Progression Factor 0.64 0.44 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 3.5 26.8 41.9 3.0 39.0 8.6 Delay 38.3 14.0 57.2 72.3 37.0 78.5 43.2 Level of Service D B E E D E D Approach Delay 14.4 59.5 61.8 0.0 Approach LOS B E E A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 46.1 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.01 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 11.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.9% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project (Mitigation) - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2120 3130 0 1190 960 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3303 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3303 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2232 3295 0 1253 1011 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2232 3295 0 1253 1010 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 71.0 71.0 40.0 40.0 Effective Green, g 71.0 71.0 40.0 40.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.59 0.59 0.33 0.33 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2895 2895 1101 894 v/s Ratio Prot 0.46 c0.67 c0.38 v/s Ratio Perm 0.38 v/c Ratio 0.77 1.14 1.14 1.13 Uniform Delay, d1 18.4 24.5 40.0 40.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.1 66.9 73.5 72.7 Delay 20.4 91.4 113.5 112.7 Level of Service C F F F Approach Delay 20.4 91.4 113.1 Approach LOS C F F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 77.4 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.14 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 140.8% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project (Mitigation) - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2860 0 0 3140 660 720 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3303 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3303 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 3011 0 0 3305 695 758 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 2 Lane Group Flow (vph) 3011 0 0 3305 695 756 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 79.0 79.0 31.4 31.4 Effective Green, g 79.0 79.0 31.4 31.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.66 0.66 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3221 3221 864 702 v/s Ratio Prot 0.62 c0.68 0.21 v/s Ratio Perm c0.28 v/c Ratio 0.93 1.03 0.80 1.08 Uniform Delay, d1 18.2 20.5 41.4 44.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 6.6 23.0 5.5 56.5 Delay 24.8 43.5 46.9 100.8 Level of Service C D D F Approach Delay 24.8 43.5 75.0 Approach LOS C D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 42.1 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.04 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project (Mitigation) - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 3060 0 0 3500 390 1520 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.81 0.97 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 7259 3116 2621 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 7259 3116 2621 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 3221 0 0 3684 411 1600 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 3221 0 0 3684 939 1072 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 64.0 64.0 46.0 46.0 Effective Green, g 64.0 64.0 46.0 46.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.53 0.53 0.38 0.38 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3871 3871 1194 1005 v/s Ratio Prot 0.44 c0.51 0.30 v/s Ratio Perm c0.41 v/c Ratio 0.83 0.95 0.90dr 1.07 Uniform Delay, d1 23.5 26.5 32.7 37.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.2 6.9 3.5 47.9 Delay 25.7 33.5 36.2 84.9 Level of Service C C D F Approach Delay 25.7 33.5 62.2 Approach LOS C C E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 37.1 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.00 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2030 Future Year with Project (Mitigation) - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1930 1330 520 1990 0 0 0 0 400 0 410 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 2682 3303 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 2682 3303 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2032 1400 547 2095 0 0 0 0 421 0 432 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2032 1400 547 2095 0 0 0 0 421 0 420 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 57.0 57.0 19.0 81.0 29.0 29.0 Effective Green, g 57.0 57.0 19.0 81.0 29.0 29.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.16 0.68 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2324 1274 523 3303 798 368 v/s Ratio Prot 0.42 c0.52 c0.17 0.43 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm c0.28 v/c Ratio 0.87 1.10 1.05 0.63 0.53 1.14 Uniform Delay, d1 28.3 31.5 50.5 11.1 39.5 45.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.87 0.80 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.0 56.8 49.1 0.3 0.6 91.0 Delay 32.3 88.3 92.9 9.2 40.2 136.5 Level of Service C F F A D F Approach Delay 55.1 26.5 0.0 89.0 Approach LOS E C A F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 48.4 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.10 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices (COMPARSION 3 – PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT) COMPARISON 3 - PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT COMPARISON 3 - AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 6: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event (Mitigation)- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2360 1110 770 2480 0 200 0 390 820 150 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.88 0.97 0.86 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 2682 3303 6166 1618 1403 1447 3303 3406 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 2682 3303 6166 1618 1410 1447 3303 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2484 1168 811 2611 0 211 0 411 863 158 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 591 0 0 0 0 126 196 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2484 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 190 92 18 863 158 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 37.3 37.3 19.8 61.3 33.0 43.3 10.3 33.6 10.9 Effective Green, g 37.3 37.3 19.8 61.3 33.0 43.3 10.3 33.6 10.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.31 0.17 0.51 0.28 0.36 0.09 0.28 0.09 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2256 [PHONE REDACTED] 445 507 124 925 309 v/s Ratio Prot c0.34 c0.25 0.42 0.12 0.05 c0.26 c0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.22 0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 1.10 0.69 1.49 0.83 0.43 0.18 0.15 0.93 0.51 Uniform Delay, d1 41.4 36.3 50.1 24.9 35.7 26.2 50.8 42.1 52.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.88 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 52.9 4.7 224.6 1.4 0.7 0.2 0.6 15.8 1.4 Delay 94.3 41.0 269.7 23.3 36.4 26.4 51.3 57.9 53.4 Level of Service F D F C D C D E D Approach Delay 77.3 81.7 38.0 57.2 Approach LOS E F D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 73.8 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.02 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 98.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 7: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event (Mitigation)- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 3510 0 0 2870 [PHONE REDACTED] 360 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.76 0.76 0.97 0.91 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 6166 6689 1158 3303 4893 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 6166 6689 1158 3303 4893 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 53 3695 0 0 3021 1000 905 1768 379 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 53 3695 0 0 3421 [PHONE REDACTED] 379 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 Actuated Green, G 4.2 68.0 60.1 60.1 42.0 40.0 40.0 Effective Green, g 4.2 68.0 60.1 60.1 42.0 40.0 40.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.57 0.50 0.50 0.35 0.33 0.33 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 116 3494 3350 580 1156 1631 508 v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.60 0.51 0.27 c0.36 v/s Ratio Perm 0.50 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.46 1.06 1.02 1.00 0.78 1.08 0.75 Uniform Delay, d1 56.8 26.0 29.9 29.9 34.9 40.0 35.5 Progression Factor 0.78 0.52 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 31.2 21.1 37.2 3.5 48.8 9.6 Delay 46.0 44.6 51.1 67.1 38.5 88.8 45.1 Level of Service D D D E D F D Approach Delay 44.6 53.4 68.5 0.0 Approach LOS D D E A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 54.6 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.07 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 93.3% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 19: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event (Mitigation)- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 160 140 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 50 1870 180 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.90 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 2609 2621 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 2609 2621 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 168 147 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 53 1968 189 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 119 205 0 0 0 0 0 91 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 151 371 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 53 1968 98 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 20.5 20.5 20.5 38.6 73.6 7.2 42.4 42.4 Effective Green, g 20.5 20.5 20.5 38.6 73.6 7.2 42.4 42.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.32 0.61 0.06 0.35 0.35 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 265 [PHONE REDACTED] 3782 102 2179 538 v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 0.38 0.03 c0.32 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.14 c0.17 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.57 0.95dr 1.02 0.92 0.62 0.52 0.90 0.18 Uniform Delay, d1 45.7 48.1 49.8 39.2 14.5 54.7 36.9 26.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.8 12.5 48.4 12.8 0.8 4.4 6.7 0.7 Delay 48.5 60.6 98.2 52.0 15.3 59.1 43.5 27.6 Level of Service D E F D B E D C Approach Delay 0.0 78.3 26.1 42.5 Approach LOS A E C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 41.4 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.93 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 26: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event (Mitigation)- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2120 3130 0 1190 960 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3303 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3303 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2232 3295 0 1253 1011 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2232 3295 0 1253 1011 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 68.0 68.0 43.0 43.0 Effective Green, g 68.0 68.0 43.0 43.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.57 0.57 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2773 2773 1184 961 v/s Ratio Prot 0.46 c0.67 c0.38 v/s Ratio Perm 0.38 v/c Ratio 0.80 1.19 1.06 1.05 Uniform Delay, d1 20.7 26.0 38.5 38.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.6 88.6 43.0 43.7 Delay 23.3 114.6 81.5 82.2 Level of Service C F F F Approach Delay 23.3 114.6 81.8 Approach LOS C F F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 78.9 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.14 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 161.4% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 27: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event (Mitigation)- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 3200 2840 0 1180 1020 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3303 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3303 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 3368 2989 0 1242 1074 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 3368 2989 0 1242 1073 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 71.0 71.0 40.0 40.0 Effective Green, g 71.0 71.0 40.0 40.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.59 0.59 0.33 0.33 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2895 2895 1101 894 v/s Ratio Prot c0.69 0.61 0.38 v/s Ratio Perm c0.40 v/c Ratio 1.16 1.03 1.13 1.20 Uniform Delay, d1 24.5 24.5 40.0 40.0 Progression Factor 1.00 0.53 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 77.7 20.4 69.6 101.0 Delay 102.2 33.3 109.6 141.0 Level of Service F C F F Approach Delay 102.2 33.3 124.2 Approach LOS F C F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 84.3 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.18 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 175.0% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 28: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event (Mitigation)- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2860 0 0 3140 660 720 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3303 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3303 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 3011 0 0 3305 695 758 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 2 Lane Group Flow (vph) 3011 0 0 3305 695 756 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 77.0 77.0 33.4 33.4 Effective Green, g 77.0 77.0 33.4 33.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.64 0.64 0.28 0.28 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3140 3140 919 746 v/s Ratio Prot 0.62 c0.68 0.21 v/s Ratio Perm c0.28 v/c Ratio 0.96 1.05 0.76 1.01 Uniform Delay, d1 20.0 21.5 39.6 43.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9.0 32.1 3.6 36.3 Delay 29.0 53.6 43.2 79.6 Level of Service C D D E Approach Delay 29.0 53.6 62.2 Approach LOS C D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 45.7 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.04 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 29: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event (Mitigation)- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 3700 0 0 3730 440 1740 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.81 0.97 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 7259 3114 2621 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 7259 3114 2621 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 3895 0 0 3926 463 1832 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 3895 0 0 3926 1068 1227 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 67.0 67.0 43.0 43.0 Effective Green, g 67.0 67.0 43.0 43.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.56 0.56 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 4053 4053 1116 939 v/s Ratio Prot 0.54 c0.54 0.34 v/s Ratio Perm c0.47 v/c Ratio 0.96 0.97 1.11dr 1.31 Uniform Delay, d1 25.3 25.5 37.6 38.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 7.6 8.5 17.4 145.8 Delay 32.9 34.0 55.0 184.3 Level of Service C C D F Approach Delay 32.9 34.0 124.1 Approach LOS C C F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 54.0 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.10 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.9% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Traffic Study 43: Katella Ave & SR-55 SB Off-Ramp 2030 Future Year with Project&AS Event (Mitigation)- PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1930 1330 520 2090 0 0 0 0 400 0 410 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.91 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 2682 3303 4893 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 2682 3303 4893 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2032 1400 547 2200 0 0 0 0 421 0 432 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2032 1400 547 2200 0 0 0 0 421 0 416 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot custom Protected Phases 4 4 3 8 1 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 58.0 58.0 24.1 87.1 22.9 22.9 Effective Green, g 58.0 58.0 24.1 87.1 22.9 22.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.20 0.73 0.19 0.19 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2365 1296 663 3552 630 291 v/s Ratio Prot 0.42 c0.52 c0.17 0.45 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm c0.27 v/c Ratio 0.86 1.08 0.83 0.62 0.67 1.43 Uniform Delay, d1 27.4 31.0 45.9 8.2 45.0 48.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.84 0.81 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.4 49.7 7.0 0.3 2.7 211.8 Delay 30.7 80.7 45.5 6.9 47.7 260.3 Level of Service C F D A D F Approach Delay 51.1 14.6 0.0 155.4 Approach LOS D B A F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 49.5 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.10 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX I-1: FREEWAY MAINLINE ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS UNDER 2011 BASELINE CONDITIONS SCENARIO 1: NO EVENTS SCENARIO 2: WITH AAHC EVENT SCENARIO 3: WITH AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT SCENARIO 4: WITH PROJECT SCENARIO 5: WITH PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 1- Lincoln Avenue to Disneyland Drive ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing 5,960 6,020 6,220 5 5 5 0.90 0.9 0.9 9 9 9 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 1.00 Level Level Level 1,384 1,398 1,444 68 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 68 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 68 20.3 20.5 21.2 C C C ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 2 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing 6,310 6,370 6,710 5 5 5 0.90 0.9 0.9 9 9 9 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 1.00 Level Level Level 1,465 1,479 1,558 69 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 69 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 69 21.4 21.6 22.7 C C C ROUTE: SR-57 Southbound SEGMENT: 3- Lincoln Avenue to Ball Road ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing Volume, V (veh/hr) 6,540 6,710 7,380 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 % Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % RVs 0 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level Level 1,549 1,589 1,747 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 69 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 69 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 69 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 22.5 23.1 25.4 Level of Service C C C Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV EXISTING WITH AA HC EVENTS + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV EXISTING WITH AA HC EVENTS + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV EXISTING WITH AA HC EVENTS + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) EXISTING WITH AA HC EVENT EXISTING WITH AA HC EVENT EXISTING WITH AA HC EVENT Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Number of mainline lanes, N Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) EXISTING NO EVENT Level of Service Level of Service Level of Service Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Terrain type PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D (pc/mi/ln) HONDA CENTER ENHANCED PROJECT EIR TRAFFIC STUDY REPORT PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service EXISTING NO EVENT EXISTING NO EVENT Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\TrafficAnalysis\Freeway\Mainline\Y11\HC-Existing-Fwy-LOS-102811.xlsx 12/19/2011 HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 1- Lincoln Avenue to Disneyland Drive ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing 6,040 6,240 5 5 0.9 0.9 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,403 1,449 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 68 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 68 20.6 21.2 C C ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 2 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing 6,390 6,730 5 5 0.9 0.9 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,484 1,563 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 69 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 69 21.6 22.8 C C ROUTE: SR-57 Southbound SEGMENT: 3- Lincoln Avenue to Ball Road ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing 6,780 7,450 5 5 0.87 0.87 6 6 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.971 0.971 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,605 1,764 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 69 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 69 23.3 25.6 C C HONDA CENTER ENHANCED PROJECT EIR TRAFFIC STUDY REPORT Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV EXISTING WITH PROJECT + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV EXISTING WITH PROJECT + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV EXISTING WITH PROJECT + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV EXISTING WITH PROJECT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV EXISTING WITH PROJECT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV EXISTING WITH PROJECT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\TrafficAnalysis\Freeway\Mainline\Y11\HC-Existing-Fwy-LOS-102811.xlsx 12/19/2011 HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX I-2: FREEWAY MAINLINE ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS UNDER 2013 OPENING YEAR CONDITIONS SCENARIO 1: NO EVENTS SCENARIO 2: WITH AAHC EVENT SCENARIO 3: WITH AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT SCENARIO 4: WITH PROJECT SCENARIO 5: WITH PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 1- Lincoln Avenue to Disneyland Drive ANALYSIS YEAR: 2013 Opening Year 6,560 6,620 6,820 5 5 5 0.95 0.95 0.95 9 9 9 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 1.00 Level Level Level 1,443 1,456 1,500 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 22.2 22.4 23.1 C C C ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 2 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2013 Opening Year 6,940 7,000 7,340 5 5 5 0.95 0.95 0.95 9 9 9 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 1.00 Level Level Level 1,527 1,540 1,615 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 23.5 23.7 24.8 C C C ROUTE: SR-57 Southbound SEGMENT: 3- Lincoln Avenue to Ball Road ANALYSIS YEAR: 2013 Opening Year Volume, V (veh/hr) 7,190 7,360 8,030 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % RVs 0 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level Level 1,559 1,596 1,741 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 24.0 24.6 26.8 Level of Service C C D Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2013 WITH AA HC EVENTS + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2013 WITH AA HC EVENTS + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2013 WITH AA HC EVENTS + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 2013 WITH AA HC EVENT 2013 WITH AA HC EVENT 2013 WITH AA HC EVENT Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Number of mainline lanes, N Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 2013 NO EVENT Level of Service Level of Service Level of Service Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Terrain type PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service 2013 NO EVENT 2013 NO EVENT Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp HONDA CENTER ENHANCED PROJECT EIR TRAFFIC STUDY REPORT PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\TrafficAnalysis\Freeway\Mainline\Y13\HC-Y13-Fwy-LOS-102811.xlsx 12/19/2011 HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 1- Lincoln Avenue to Disneyland Drive ANALYSIS YEAR: 2013 Opening Year 6,640 6,840 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,461 1,505 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 22.5 23.2 C C ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 2 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2013 Opening Year 7,020 7,360 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,544 1,619 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 23.8 24.9 C C ROUTE: SR-57 Southbound SEGMENT: 3- Lincoln Avenue to Ball Road ANALYSIS YEAR: 2013 Opening Year 7,430 8,100 5 5 0.95 0.95 6 6 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.971 0.971 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,611 1,756 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 24.8 27.0 C D Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2013 WITH PROJECT + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2013 WITH PROJECT + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2013 WITH PROJECT + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2013 WITH PROJECT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2013 WITH PROJECT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2013 WITH PROJECT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF HONDA CENTER ENHANCED PROJECT EIR TRAFFIC STUDY REPORT V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\TrafficAnalysis\Freeway\Mainline\Y13\HC-Y13-Fwy-LOS-102811.xlsx 12/19/2011 HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX I-3: FREEWAY MAINLINE ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS UNDER 2030 FUTURE YEAR CONDITIONS SCENARIO 1: NO EVENTS SCENARIO 2: WITH AAHC EVENT SCENARIO 3: WITH AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT SCENARIO 4: WITH PROJECT SCENARIO 5: WITH PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 1- Lincoln Avenue to Disneyland Drive ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 Future Year 8,700 8,760 8,960 5 5 5 0.95 0.95 0.95 9 9 9 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 1.00 Level Level Level 1,914 1,927 1,971 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 29.4 29.6 30.3 D D D ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 2 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 Future Year 9,150 9,210 9,550 5 5 5 0.95 0.95 0.95 9 9 9 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 1.00 Level Level Level 2,013 2,026 2,101 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 31.0 31.2 32.3 D D D ROUTE: SR-57 Southbound SEGMENT: 3- Lincoln Avenue to Ball Road ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 Future Year Volume, V (veh/hr) 8,340 8,510 9,180 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % RVs 0 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level Level 1,808 1,845 1,991 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 27.8 28.4 30.6 Level of Service D D D Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2030 WITH AA HC EVENTS + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2030 WITH AA HC EVENTS + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2030 WITH AA HC EVENTS + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 2030 WITH AA HC EVENT 2030 WITH AA HC EVENT 2030 WITH AA HC EVENT Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Number of mainline lanes, N Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 2030 NO EVENTS Level of Service Level of Service Level of Service Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Terrain type PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D (pc/mi/ln) HONDA CENTER ENHANCED PROJECT EIR TRAFFIC STUDY REPORT PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service 2030 NO EVENTS 2030 NO EVENTS Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\TrafficAnalysis\Freeway\Mainline\Y30\HC-Y30-Fwy-LOS-102811.xlsx 12/19/2011 HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 1- Lincoln Avenue to Disneyland Drive ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 Future Year 8,780 8,980 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,932 1,976 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 29.7 30.4 D D ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 2 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 Future Year 9,230 9,570 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 2,031 2,105 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 31.2 32.4 D D ROUTE: SR-57 Southbound SEGMENT: 3- Lincoln Avenue to Ball Road ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 Future Year 8,580 9,250 5 5 0.95 0.95 6 6 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.971 0.971 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,861 2,006 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 28.6 30.9 D D HONDA CENTER ENHANCED PROJECT EIR TRAFFIC STUDY REPORT Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2030 WITH PROJECT + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2030 WITH PROJECT + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2030 WITH PROJECT + CONCURRENT AS EVENT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2030 WITH PROJECT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2030 WITH PROJECT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 2030 WITH PROJECT PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\174653A-OCRoyals-HondaCenter\TrafficAnalysis\Freeway\Mainline\Y30\HC-Y30-Fwy-LOS-102811.xlsx 12/19/2011 HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX J-1: HCS FREEWAY WEAVING ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS UNDER 2011 BASELINE CONDITIONS SCENARIO 1: NO EVENTS SCENARIO 2: WITH AAHC EVENT SCENARIO 3: WITH AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT SCENARIO 4: WITH PROJECT SCENARIO 5: WITH PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- 2011 Baseline No Events ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 68 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.18 Weaving ratio, R 0.41 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4860 30 630 440 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1350 8 175 122 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5643 34 721 503 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.68 0.33 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.53 58.49 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.39 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 56.67 mph Weaving segment density, D 24.35 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10786 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10322 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9290 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1224 2800 a Average flow rate 1380 2380 b Volume ratio, VR 0.18 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.41 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Chapman On to Orangewood Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1230 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.08 Weaving ratio, R 0.45 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5355 10 260 215 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1539 3 75 62 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6339 11 307 254 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.43 0.13 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 53.52 63.85 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.74 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 62.87 mph Weaving segment density, D 21.99 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9925 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 561 4000 a Average flow rate 1382 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.08 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.45 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1230 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Orangewood On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 70 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1360 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.11 Weaving ratio, R 0.33 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5550 10 450 220 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1595 3 129 63 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6570 11 532 260 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.45 0.15 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 56.42 67.29 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.69 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 65.92 mph Weaving segment density, D 22.37 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11863 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11517 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10020 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 792 4000 a Average flow rate 1474 2400 b Volume ratio, VR 0.11 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.33 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1360 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Katella On to Ball Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2130 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.12 Weaving ratio, R 0.26 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5670 10 550 190 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1629 3 158 55 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6712 11 651 224 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.43 0.16 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 53.34 62.48 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.45 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.27 mph Weaving segment density, D 31.00 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9400 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9126 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7940 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 875 4000 a Average flow rate 1899 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.12 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.26 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2130 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: Ball On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2490 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.16 Weaving ratio, R 0.36 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4460 20 560 320 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1282 6 161 92 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5280 23 662 378 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.39 0.16 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 54.59 62.49 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.61 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.04 mph Weaving segment density, D 25.98 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9400 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9126 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7940 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1040 4000 a Average flow rate 1585 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.16 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.36 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2490 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: SR-91 to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1620 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.33 Weaving ratio, R 0.44 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3126 50 874 700 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 898 14 251 201 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3700 59 1034 828 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.62 0.23 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 36.00 59.81 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.05 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 49.06 mph Weaving segment density, D 22.91 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 10426 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10122 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8806 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1862 2800 a Average flow rate 1124 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.33 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.44 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1620 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 68 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.16 Weaving ratio, R 0.42 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5420 30 630 460 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1506 8 175 128 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6293 34 721 526 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.73 0.36 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 48.60 57.63 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.34 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 55.92 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.09 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10877 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10409 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9368 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1247 2800 a Average flow rate 1514 2380 b Volume ratio, VR 0.16 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.42 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Chapman On to Orangewood Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1230 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.09 Weaving ratio, R 0.39 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5450 20 340 220 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1566 6 98 63 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6452 23 402 260 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.45 0.14 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.99 63.30 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.78 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 62.18 mph Weaving segment density, D 22.96 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9925 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 662 4000 a Average flow rate 1427 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.09 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.39 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1230 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Orangewood On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 70 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1360 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.19 Weaving ratio, R 0.21 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5340 10 990 260 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1534 3 284 75 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6322 11 1172 307 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.55 0.24 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 53.80 63.39 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.09 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.32 mph Weaving segment density, D 25.48 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11732 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11390 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9909 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1479 4000 a Average flow rate 1562 2400 b Volume ratio, VR 0.19 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.21 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1360 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Katella On to Ball Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2130 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.13 Weaving ratio, R 0.22 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5570 10 670 190 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1601 3 193 55 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6594 11 793 224 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.45 0.18 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.89 61.81 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.51 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 60.45 mph Weaving segment density, D 31.52 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9400 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9126 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7940 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1017 4000 a Average flow rate 1905 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.13 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.22 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2130 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: Ball On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2490 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.22 Weaving ratio, R 0.29 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4170 20 840 350 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1198 6 241 101 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4936 23 994 414 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.43 0.21 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 53.36 60.40 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.83 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 58.69 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.12 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9300 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9029 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7855 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1408 4000 a Average flow rate 1591 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.22 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.29 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2490 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: SR-91 to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1620 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.33 Weaving ratio, R 0.43 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3230 50 910 700 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 928 14 261 201 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3824 59 1077 828 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.66 0.23 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 35.68 59.54 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.05 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 48.80 mph Weaving segment density, D 23.72 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 10426 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10122 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8806 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1905 2800 a Average flow rate 1157 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.33 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.43 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1620 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 68 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.17 Weaving ratio, R 0.38 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5640 40 750 450 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1567 11 208 125 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6548 46 858 515 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.77 0.40 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 47.69 56.57 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.39 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 54.81 mph Weaving segment density, D 29.07 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10822 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10356 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9320 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1373 2800 a Average flow rate 1593 2380 b Volume ratio, VR 0.17 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.38 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Chapman On to Orangewood Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1230 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.09 Weaving ratio, R 0.39 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5450 20 340 220 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1566 6 98 63 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6452 23 402 260 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.45 0.14 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.99 63.30 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.78 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 62.18 mph Weaving segment density, D 22.96 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9925 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 662 4000 a Average flow rate 1427 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.09 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.39 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1230 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Orangewood On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 70 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1360 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.24 Weaving ratio, R 0.17 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5020 10 1310 260 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1443 3 376 75 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5943 11 1550 307 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.60 0.30 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.58 60.99 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.37 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 58.76 mph Weaving segment density, D 26.59 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11580 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11243 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9781 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1857 4000 a Average flow rate 1562 2400 b Volume ratio, VR 0.24 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.17 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1360 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Katella On to Ball Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2130 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.15 Weaving ratio, R 0.32 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5450 20 660 310 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1566 6 190 89 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6452 23 781 367 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.47 0.19 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.50 61.16 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.58 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 59.67 mph Weaving segment density, D 31.94 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9400 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9126 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7940 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1148 4000 a Average flow rate 1905 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.15 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.32 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2130 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: Ball On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2490 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.36 Weaving ratio, R 0.18 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3800 20 1770 390 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1092 6 509 112 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4498 23 2095 461 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.59 0.45 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.53 52.90 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.49 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 51.63 mph Weaving segment density, D 34.27 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 8541 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 8292 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7214 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2556 4000 a Average flow rate 1769 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.36 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.18 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2490 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: SR-91 to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1620 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.36 Weaving ratio, R 0.36 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3300 70 1230 680 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 948 20 353 195 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3906 82 1456 805 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.89 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 34.06 57.77 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.19 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 46.15 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.08 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10426 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10122 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8806 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2261 2800 a Average flow rate 1249 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.36 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.36 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1620 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2011 Baseline with Project ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 68 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.17 Weaving ratio, R 0.43 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5430 30 630 470 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1508 8 175 131 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6304 34 721 537 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.73 0.36 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 48.53 57.55 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.34 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 55.83 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.21 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10870 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10402 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9362 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1258 2800 a Average flow rate 1519 2380 b Volume ratio, VR 0.17 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.43 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Chapman On to Orangewood Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1230 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.10 Weaving ratio, R 0.38 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5610 20 380 230 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1612 6 109 66 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6641 23 449 272 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.46 0.15 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.59 62.94 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.79 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.75 mph Weaving segment density, D 23.92 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9925 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 721 4000 a Average flow rate 1477 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.10 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.38 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1230 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Orangewood On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 70 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1360 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.22 Weaving ratio, R 0.18 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5250 10 1230 270 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1509 3 353 78 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6215 11 1456 319 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.59 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.74 61.56 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.27 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 59.36 mph Weaving segment density, D 26.96 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11637 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11298 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9829 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1775 4000 a Average flow rate 1600 2400 b Volume ratio, VR 0.22 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.18 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1360 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Katella On to Ball Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2130 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.14 Weaving ratio, R 0.21 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5530 10 720 190 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1589 3 207 55 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6547 11 852 224 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.46 0.18 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.71 61.51 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.54 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 60.10 mph Weaving segment density, D 31.76 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9400 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9126 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7940 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1076 4000 a Average flow rate 1908 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.14 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.21 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2130 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: Ball On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2490 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.25 Weaving ratio, R 0.28 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4030 20 970 370 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1158 6 279 106 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4771 23 1148 438 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.46 0.24 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.77 59.28 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.95 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 57.51 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.73 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9170 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 8903 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7746 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1586 4000 a Average flow rate 1595 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.25 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.28 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2490 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: SR-91 to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1620 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.33 Weaving ratio, R 0.43 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3270 50 930 700 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 940 14 267 201 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3871 59 1101 828 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.68 0.24 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 35.53 59.40 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.05 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 48.64 mph Weaving segment density, D 24.09 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10426 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10122 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8806 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1929 2800 a Average flow rate 1171 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.33 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.43 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1620 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2011 Baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 68 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.17 Weaving ratio, R 0.38 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5650 40 750 460 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1569 11 208 128 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6560 46 858 526 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.78 0.40 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 47.63 56.49 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.39 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 54.73 mph Weaving segment density, D 29.20 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10816 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10350 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9315 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1384 2800 a Average flow rate 1598 2380 b Volume ratio, VR 0.17 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.38 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Chapman On to Orangewood Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1230 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.10 Weaving ratio, R 0.38 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5610 20 380 230 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1612 6 109 66 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6641 23 449 272 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.46 0.15 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.59 62.94 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.79 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.75 mph Weaving segment density, D 23.92 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9925 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 721 4000 a Average flow rate 1477 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.10 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.38 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1230 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Orangewood On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 70 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1360 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.27 Weaving ratio, R 0.15 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4930 10 1550 270 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1417 3 445 78 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5836 11 1835 319 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.64 0.36 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 51.56 59.03 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.56 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 56.81 mph Weaving segment density, D 28.17 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11468 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11134 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9687 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2154 4000 a Average flow rate 1600 2400 b Volume ratio, VR 0.27 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.15 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1360 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Katella On to Ball Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2130 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.16 Weaving ratio, R 0.30 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5410 20 710 310 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1555 6 204 89 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6404 23 840 367 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.47 0.20 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.32 60.85 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.61 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 59.32 mph Weaving segment density, D 32.17 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 9400 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9126 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7940 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1207 4000 a Average flow rate 1908 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.16 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.30 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2130 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: Ball On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2490 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.39 Weaving ratio, R 0.18 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3660 20 1900 410 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1052 6 546 118 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4333 23 2249 485 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.62 0.50 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.00 51.60 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.61 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 50.57 mph Weaving segment density, D 35.05 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 8386 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 8142 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7084 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2734 4000 a Average flow rate 1772 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.39 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.18 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2490 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: SR-91 to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1620 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.36 Weaving ratio, R 0.35 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3340 70 1250 680 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 960 20 359 195 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3954 82 1479 805 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.91 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 33.93 57.64 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.20 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 46.02 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.47 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10426 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10122 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8806 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2284 2800 a Average flow rate 1264 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.36 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.35 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1620 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX J-2: HCS FREEWAY WEAVING ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS UNDER 2013 OPENING YEAR CONDITIONS SCENARIO 1: NO EVENTS SCENARIO 2: WITH AAHC EVENT SCENARIO 3: WITH AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT SCENARIO 4: WITH PROJECT SCENARIO 5: WITH PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- 2013 Opening Year No Events ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.18 Weaving ratio, R 0.41 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5350 40 690 480 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1408 11 182 126 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5885 44 748 520 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.65 0.20 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 35.77 60.81 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.41 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 54.13 mph Weaving segment density, D 26.59 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10509 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10056 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9553 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1268 2800 a Average flow rate 1439 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.18 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.41 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Chapman On to Orangewood Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1230 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.08 Weaving ratio, R 0.45 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5900 20 280 230 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1553 5 74 61 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6396 21 303 249 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.43 0.13 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 53.50 63.86 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.73 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 62.90 mph Weaving segment density, D 22.16 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10838 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 552 4000 a Average flow rate 1393 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.08 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.45 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1230 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Orangewood On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1360 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.11 Weaving ratio, R 0.32 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6100 10 500 240 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1605 3 132 63 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6613 10 542 260 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.45 0.15 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.90 62.87 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.77 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.61 mph Weaving segment density, D 24.10 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11724 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11383 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10814 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 802 4000 a Average flow rate 1485 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.11 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.32 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1360 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Katella On to Ball Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2130 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.12 Weaving ratio, R 0.26 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6230 10 610 210 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1639 3 161 55 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6754 10 661 227 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.37 0.13 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 55.02 63.75 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.60 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 62.60 mph Weaving segment density, D 24.45 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10838 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 888 4000 a Average flow rate 1530 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.12 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.26 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2130 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: Ball On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2490 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.16 Weaving ratio, R 0.36 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4910 20 620 350 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1292 5 163 92 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5323 21 672 379 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.39 0.16 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 54.52 62.43 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.61 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 60.97 mph Weaving segment density, D 26.22 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9400 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9126 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8670 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1051 4000 a Average flow rate 1598 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.16 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.36 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2490 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: SR-91 to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1620 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.33 Weaving ratio, R 0.45 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3430 50 970 780 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 903 13 255 205 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3718 54 1051 845 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.64 0.23 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 35.83 59.63 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.06 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 48.79 mph Weaving segment density, D 23.23 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 10426 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10122 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9616 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1896 2800 a Average flow rate 1133 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.33 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.45 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1620 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.16 Weaving ratio, R 0.42 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5960 40 690 500 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1568 11 182 132 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6556 44 748 542 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.75 0.38 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 46.35 54.89 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.36 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 53.29 mph Weaving segment density, D 29.61 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10601 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10144 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9637 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1290 2800 a Average flow rate 1578 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.16 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.42 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Chapman On to Orangewood Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1230 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.09 Weaving ratio, R 0.40 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6060 20 370 250 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1595 5 97 66 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6570 21 401 271 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.45 0.14 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.85 63.21 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.77 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 62.08 mph Weaving segment density, D 23.40 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10838 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 672 4000 a Average flow rate 1452 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.09 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.40 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1230 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Orangewood On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1360 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.18 Weaving ratio, R 0.21 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5890 10 1040 280 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1550 3 274 74 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6386 10 1127 303 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.54 0.23 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 50.70 59.63 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.13 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 57.77 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.09 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11485 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11150 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10592 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1430 4000 a Average flow rate 1565 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.18 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.21 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1360 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Katella On to Ball Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2130 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.13 Weaving ratio, R 0.22 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6130 10 730 210 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1613 3 192 55 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6646 10 791 227 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.39 0.14 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 54.64 63.23 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.67 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.94 mph Weaving segment density, D 24.78 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10838 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1018 4000 a Average flow rate 1534 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.13 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.22 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2130 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: Ball On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2490 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.22 Weaving ratio, R 0.30 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4620 20 900 380 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1216 5 237 100 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5009 21 975 412 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.43 0.21 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 53.40 60.53 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.81 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 58.83 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.27 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9324 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9052 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8599 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1387 4000 a Average flow rate 1604 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.22 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.30 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2490 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: SR-91 to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1620 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.33 Weaving ratio, R 0.44 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3530 50 1010 780 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 929 13 266 205 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3827 54 1095 845 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.68 0.24 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 35.52 59.37 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.06 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 48.52 mph Weaving segment density, D 24.00- pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 10426 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10122 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9616 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1940 2800 a Average flow rate 1164 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.33 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.44 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1620 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.17 Weaving ratio, R 0.38 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6170 40 820 500 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1624 11 216 132 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6787 44 889 542 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.87 0.24 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 34.14 59.44 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.42 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 52.68 mph Weaving segment density, D 31.37 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10531 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10078 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9574 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1431 2800 a Average flow rate 1652 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.17 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.38 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Chapman On to Orangewood Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1230 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.09 Weaving ratio, R 0.40 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6060 20 370 250 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1595 5 97 66 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6570 21 401 271 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.45 0.14 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.85 63.21 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.77 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 62.08 mph Weaving segment density, D 23.40 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10838 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 672 4000 a Average flow rate 1452 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.09 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.40 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1230 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Orangewood On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1360 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.23 Weaving ratio, R 0.17 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5570 10 1360 280 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1466 3 358 74 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6039 10 1474 303 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.59 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.67 57.64 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.37 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 55.62 mph Weaving segment density, D 28.14 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11368 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11037 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10485 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1777 4000 a Average flow rate 1565 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.23 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.17 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1360 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Katella On to Ball Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2130 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.15 Weaving ratio, R 0.31 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6010 20 720 330 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1582 5 189 87 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6516 21 780 357 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.40 0.15 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 54.31 62.73 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.74 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.32 mph Weaving segment density, D 25.03 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10838 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1137 4000 a Average flow rate 1534 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.15 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.31 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2130 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: Ball On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2490 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.35 Weaving ratio, R 0.19 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4250 20 1830 420 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1118 5 482 111 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4607 21 1984 455 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.58 0.42 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.87 53.75 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.41 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 52.34 mph Weaving segment density, D 33.75 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 8642 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 8390 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7970 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2439 4000 a Average flow rate 1766 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.35 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.19 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2490 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: SR-91 to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1620 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.36 Weaving ratio, R 0.36 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3600 70 1330 760 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 947 18 350 200 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3903 75 1442 824 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.89 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 34.05 57.75 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.20 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 46.10 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.09 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10426 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10122 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9616 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2266 2800 a Average flow rate 1248 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.36 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.36 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1620 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2013 Opening Year with Project ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.16 Weaving ratio, R 0.42 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5970 40 690 510 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1571 11 182 134 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6567 44 748 552 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.76 0.38 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 46.30 54.82 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.37 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 53.21 mph Weaving segment density, D 29.73 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10595 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10139 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9632 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1300 2800 a Average flow rate 1582 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.16 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.42 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Chapman On to Orangewood Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study Max Honda Center Attendance Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1230 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.10 Weaving ratio, R 0.39 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6140 20 410 260 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1616 5 108 68 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6657 21 444 281 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.46 0.15 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.56 62.91 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.79 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.72 mph Weaving segment density, D 23.99 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10838 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 725 4000 a Average flow rate 1480 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.10 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.39 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1230 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Orangewood On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1360 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.21 Weaving ratio, R 0.18 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5810 20 1270 280 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1529 5 334 74 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6299 21 1376 303 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.58 0.27 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.88 58.23 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.27 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 56.25 mph Weaving segment density, D 28.44 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11407 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11075 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10521 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1679 4000 a Average flow rate 1599 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.21 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.18 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1360 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Katella On to Ball Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2130 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.14 Weaving ratio, R 0.21 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6090 10 780 210 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1603 3 205 55 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6602 10 845 227 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.39 0.15 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 54.49 63.00 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.70 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.66 mph Weaving segment density, D 24.93 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10838 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1072 4000 a Average flow rate 1536 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.14 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.21 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2130 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: Ball On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2490 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.24 Weaving ratio, R 0.28 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4480 20 1030 400 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1179 5 271 105 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4857 21 1116 433 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.45 0.24 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.87 59.53 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.92 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 57.77 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.81 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9206 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 8938 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8491 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1549 4000 a Average flow rate 1606 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.24 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.28 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2490 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: SR-91 to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1620 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.33 Weaving ratio, R 0.43 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3580 50 1020 780 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 942 13 268 205 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3881 54 1105 845 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.69 0.24 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 35.43 59.30 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.06 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 48.47 mph Weaving segment density, D 24.28 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10426 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10122 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9616 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1950 2800 a Average flow rate 1177 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.33 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.43 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1620 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2013 Opening Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.17 Weaving ratio, R 0.38 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6180 40 820 510 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1626 11 216 134 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6798 44 889 552 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.88 0.24 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 34.09 59.39 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.42 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 52.60 mph Weaving segment density, D 31.49 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10525 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10072 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9568 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1441 2800 a Average flow rate 1656 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.17 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.38 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Chapman On to Orangewood Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1230 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.10 Weaving ratio, R 0.39 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6140 20 410 260 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1616 5 108 68 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6657 21 444 281 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.46 0.15 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.56 62.91 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.79 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.72 mph Weaving segment density, D 23.99 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10838 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 725 4000 a Average flow rate 1480 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.10 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.39 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1230 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Orangewood On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1360 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.25 Weaving ratio, R 0.15 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5490 20 1590 280 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1445 5 418 74 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5952 21 1723 303 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.62 0.34 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 48.88 56.16 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.52 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 54.12 mph Weaving segment density, D 29.56 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11308 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10979 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10430 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2026 4000 a Average flow rate 1599 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.25 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.15 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1360 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Katella On to Ball Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2130 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.15 Weaving ratio, R 0.30 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5970 20 770 330 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1571 5 203 87 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6472 21 834 357 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.40 0.16 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 54.15 62.49 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.77 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.03 mph Weaving segment density, D 25.18 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10838 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1191 4000 a Average flow rate 1536 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.15 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.30 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2130 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: Ball On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2490 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.37 Weaving ratio, R 0.18 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4110 20 1960 440 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1082 5 516 116 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4456 21 2125 477 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.60 0.46 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.39 52.57 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.52 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 51.35 mph Weaving segment density, D 34.46 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 8500 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 8252 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7839 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2602 4000 a Average flow rate 1769 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.37 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.18 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2490 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: SR-91 to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1620 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.36 Weaving ratio, R 0.36 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3650 70 1340 760 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 961 18 353 200 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3957 75 1452 824 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.90 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 33.97 57.68 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.19 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 46.08 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.38 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10426 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10122 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9616 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2276 2800 a Average flow rate 1261 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.36 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.36 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1620 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX J-3: HCS FREEWAY WEAVING ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS UNDER 2030 FUTURE YEAR CONDITIONS SCENARIO 1: NO EVENTS SCENARIO 2: WITH AAHC EVENT SCENARIO 3: WITH AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT SCENARIO 4: WITH PROJECT SCENARIO 5: WITH PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- 2030 Future Year No Events ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.18 Weaving ratio, R 0.40 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 7150 50 980 650 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1882 13 258 171 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7865 55 1062 704 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 2.22 0.30 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 32.06 57.27 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.49 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 50.09 mph Weaving segment density, D 38.68 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS E Capacity of base condition, cb 10465 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10014 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9513 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1766 2800 a Average flow rate 1937 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.18 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.40 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Chapman On to Orangewood Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1230 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.08 Weaving ratio, R 0.42 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 7850 20 420 300 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2066 5 111 79 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 8511 21 455 325 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.53 0.17 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 50.95 61.92 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.69 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 60.83 mph Weaving segment density, D 30.62 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10838 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 780 4000 a Average flow rate 1862 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.08 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.42 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1230 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Orangewood On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1360 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.15 Weaving ratio, R 0.47 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 7840 30 750 660 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2063 8 197 174 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 8500 32 813 715 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.61 0.25 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.20 58.83 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.96 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 57.13 mph Weaving segment density, D 35.22 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 11584 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11247 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10685 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1528 4000 a Average flow rate 2012 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.15 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.47 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1360 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Katella On to Ball Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2130 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.13 Weaving ratio, R 0.31 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 10600 30 1100 500 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2789 8 289 132 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 11492 32 1192 542 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.57 0.24 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 50.12 59.35 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.61 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 57.95 mph Weaving segment density, D 45.76 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10838 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1734 4000 a Average flow rate 2651 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.13 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.31 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2130 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: Ball On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2490 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.13 Weaving ratio, R 0.41 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 8930 30 780 550 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2350 8 205 145 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 9682 32 845 596 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.54 0.23 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 50.70 59.65 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.44 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 58.32 mph Weaving segment density, D 47.82 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 9400 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9126 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8670 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1441 4000 a Average flow rate 2788 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.13 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.41 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2490 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: SR-91 to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1620 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.36 Weaving ratio, R 0.37 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4620 90 1640 980 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1216 24 432 258 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5009 97 1778 1062 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 2.36 0.39 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 31.35 54.69 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.25 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 43.20 mph Weaving segment density, D 36.79 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS E Capacity of base condition, cb 10426 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10122 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9616 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2840 2800 a Average flow rate 1589 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.36 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.37 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1620 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 68 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.16 Weaving ratio, R 0.42 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5420 30 630 460 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1506 8 175 128 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6293 34 721 526 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.73 0.36 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 48.60 57.63 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.34 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 55.92 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.09 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10877 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10409 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9368 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1247 2800 a Average flow rate 1514 2380 b Volume ratio, VR 0.16 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.42 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Chapman On to Orangewood Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1230 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.09 Weaving ratio, R 0.39 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5450 20 340 220 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1566 6 98 63 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6452 23 402 260 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.45 0.14 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.99 63.30 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.78 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 62.18 mph Weaving segment density, D 22.96 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9925 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 662 4000 a Average flow rate 1427 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.09 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.39 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1230 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Orangewood On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 70 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1360 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.19 Weaving ratio, R 0.21 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5340 10 990 260 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1534 3 284 75 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6322 11 1172 307 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.55 0.24 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 53.80 63.39 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.09 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.32 mph Weaving segment density, D 25.48 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11732 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11390 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9909 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1479 4000 a Average flow rate 1562 2400 b Volume ratio, VR 0.19 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.21 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1360 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Katella On to Ball Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2130 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.13 Weaving ratio, R 0.22 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5570 10 670 190 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1601 3 193 55 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6594 11 793 224 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.45 0.18 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.89 61.81 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.51 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 60.45 mph Weaving segment density, D 31.52 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9400 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9126 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7940 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1017 4000 a Average flow rate 1905 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.13 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.22 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2130 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: Ball On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2490 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.22 Weaving ratio, R 0.29 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4170 20 840 350 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1198 6 241 101 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4936 23 994 414 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.43 0.21 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 53.36 60.40 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.83 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 58.69 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.12 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9300 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9029 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7855 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1408 4000 a Average flow rate 1591 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.22 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.29 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2490 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: SR-91 to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1620 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.33 Weaving ratio, R 0.43 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3230 50 910 700 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 928 14 261 201 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3824 59 1077 828 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.66 0.23 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 35.68 59.54 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.05 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 48.80 mph Weaving segment density, D 23.72 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 10426 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10122 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8806 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1905 2800 a Average flow rate 1157 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.33 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.43 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1620 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 68 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.17 Weaving ratio, R 0.38 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5640 40 750 450 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1567 11 208 125 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6548 46 858 515 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.77 0.40 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 47.69 56.57 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.39 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 54.81 mph Weaving segment density, D 29.07 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10822 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10356 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9320 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1373 2800 a Average flow rate 1593 2380 b Volume ratio, VR 0.17 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.38 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Chapman On to Orangewood Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1230 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.09 Weaving ratio, R 0.39 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5450 20 340 220 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1566 6 98 63 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6452 23 402 260 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.45 0.14 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.99 63.30 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.78 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 62.18 mph Weaving segment density, D 22.96 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9925 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 662 4000 a Average flow rate 1427 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.09 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.39 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1230 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Orangewood On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 70 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1360 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.24 Weaving ratio, R 0.17 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5020 10 1310 260 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1443 3 376 75 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5943 11 1550 307 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.60 0.30 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.58 60.99 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.37 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 58.76 mph Weaving segment density, D 26.59 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11580 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11243 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9781 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1857 4000 a Average flow rate 1562 2400 b Volume ratio, VR 0.24 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.17 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1360 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Katella On to Ball Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2130 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.15 Weaving ratio, R 0.32 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5450 20 660 310 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1566 6 190 89 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6452 23 781 367 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.47 0.19 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.50 61.16 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.58 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 59.67 mph Weaving segment density, D 31.94 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9400 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9126 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7940 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1148 4000 a Average flow rate 1905 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.15 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.32 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2130 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: Ball On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2490 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.36 Weaving ratio, R 0.18 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3800 20 1770 390 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1092 6 509 112 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4498 23 2095 461 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.59 0.45 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.53 52.90 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.49 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 51.63 mph Weaving segment density, D 34.27 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 8541 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 8292 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7214 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2556 4000 a Average flow rate 1769 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.36 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.18 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2490 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: SR-91 to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1620 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.36 Weaving ratio, R 0.36 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3300 70 1230 680 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 948 20 353 195 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3906 82 1456 805 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.89 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 34.06 57.77 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.19 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 46.15 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.08 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10426 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10122 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8806 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2261 2800 a Average flow rate 1249 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.36 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.36 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1620 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2030 Future Year with Project ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 68 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.17 Weaving ratio, R 0.43 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5430 30 630 470 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1508 8 175 131 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6304 34 721 537 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.73 0.36 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 48.53 57.55 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.34 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 55.83 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.21 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10870 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10402 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9362 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1258 2800 a Average flow rate 1519 2380 b Volume ratio, VR 0.17 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.43 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Chapman On to Orangewood Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1230 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.10 Weaving ratio, R 0.38 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5610 20 380 230 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1612 6 109 66 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6641 23 449 272 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.46 0.15 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.59 62.94 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.79 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.75 mph Weaving segment density, D 23.92 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9925 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 721 4000 a Average flow rate 1477 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.10 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.38 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1230 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Orangewood On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 70 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1360 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.22 Weaving ratio, R 0.18 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5250 10 1230 270 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1509 3 353 78 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6215 11 1456 319 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.59 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.74 61.56 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.27 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 59.36 mph Weaving segment density, D 26.96 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11637 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11298 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9829 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1775 4000 a Average flow rate 1600 2400 b Volume ratio, VR 0.22 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.18 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1360 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Katella On to Ball Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2130 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.14 Weaving ratio, R 0.21 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5530 10 720 190 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1589 3 207 55 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6547 11 852 224 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.46 0.18 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.71 61.51 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.54 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 60.10 mph Weaving segment density, D 31.76 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9400 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9126 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7940 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1076 4000 a Average flow rate 1908 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.14 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.21 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2130 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: Ball On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2490 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.25 Weaving ratio, R 0.28 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4030 20 970 370 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1158 6 279 106 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4771 23 1148 438 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.46 0.24 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.77 59.28 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.95 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 57.51 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.73 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9170 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 8903 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7746 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1586 4000 a Average flow rate 1595 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.25 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.28 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2490 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: SR-91 to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1620 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.33 Weaving ratio, R 0.43 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3270 50 930 700 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 940 14 267 201 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3871 59 1101 828 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.68 0.24 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 35.53 59.40 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.05 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 48.64 mph Weaving segment density, D 24.09 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10426 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10122 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8806 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1929 2800 a Average flow rate 1171 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.33 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.43 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1620 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 68 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.17 Weaving ratio, R 0.38 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5650 40 750 460 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1569 11 208 128 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6560 46 858 526 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.78 0.40 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 47.63 56.49 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.39 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 54.73 mph Weaving segment density, D 29.20 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10816 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10350 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9315 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1384 2800 a Average flow rate 1598 2380 b Volume ratio, VR 0.17 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.38 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Chapman On to Orangewood Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1230 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.10 Weaving ratio, R 0.38 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5610 20 380 230 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1612 6 109 66 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6641 23 449 272 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.46 0.15 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.59 62.94 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.79 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.75 mph Weaving segment density, D 23.92 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11408 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9925 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 721 4000 a Average flow rate 1477 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.10 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.38 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1230 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Orangewood On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 70 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1360 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.27 Weaving ratio, R 0.15 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4930 10 1550 270 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1417 3 445 78 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5836 11 1835 319 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.64 0.36 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 51.56 59.03 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.56 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 56.81 mph Weaving segment density, D 28.17 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11468 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11134 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9687 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2154 4000 a Average flow rate 1600 2400 b Volume ratio, VR 0.27 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.15 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1360 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Katella On to Ball Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2130 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.16 Weaving ratio, R 0.30 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5410 20 710 310 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1555 6 204 89 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6404 23 840 367 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.47 0.20 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.32 60.85 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.61 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 59.32 mph Weaving segment density, D 32.17 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 9400 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9126 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7940 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1207 4000 a Average flow rate 1908 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.16 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.30 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2130 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: Ball On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 4 Weaving segment length, L 2490 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.39 Weaving ratio, R 0.18 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3660 20 1900 410 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1052 6 546 118 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4333 23 2249 485 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.62 0.50 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.00 51.60 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.61 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 50.57 mph Weaving segment density, D 35.05 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 8386 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 8142 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7084 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2734 4000 a Average flow rate 1772 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.39 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.18 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2490 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: SR-91 to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project and Concurrent AS Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1620 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.36 Weaving ratio, R 0.35 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3340 70 1250 680 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 960 20 359 195 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3954 82 1479 805 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.91 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 33.93 57.64 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.20 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 46.02 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.47 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10426 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10122 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8806 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2284 2800 a Average flow rate 1264 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.36 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.35 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1620 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX J-4: HCS FREEWAY WEAVING ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS UNDER 2030 FUTURE YEAR CONDITIONS (MITIGATED) COMPARISON 1: NO EVENTS VS. PROJECT COMPARISON 2: AAHC EVENT VS. PROJECT COMPARISON 3: AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- Comparison 1&2: 2030 Future Year No Events vs. With Project - Mitigated ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10590 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1740 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 570 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10590 1740 570 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2787 458 150 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11649 1887 618 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3820 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 9320 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 7433 9600 No FO F R v 1887 3800 No R v v 2750 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3920 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3920 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 24.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.598 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9810 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1570 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 360 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9810 1570 360 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2582 413 95 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10636 1702 390 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4670 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8509 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6807 9600 No FO F R v 1702 2000 No R v v 1919 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4670 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4670 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 39.9 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence E Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.581 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10220 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1450 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 650 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10220 1450 650 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2689 382 171 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11081 1572 705 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4752 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8865 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 7293 9600 No FO F R v 1572 2000 No R v v 2056 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4752 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4752 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 40.6 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence E Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.569 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Mitigation Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8580 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1960 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 620 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8580 1960 620 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2258 516 163 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9303 2125 672 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3508 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7443 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5318 9600 No FO F R v 2125 3800 No R v v 1967 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3508 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3508 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 20.9 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.619 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Comparison 3: 2030 Future Year AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event vs. With Project and Concurrent AS Event – Mitigated ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.23 Weaving ratio, R 0.38 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5880 60 1100 670 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1547 16 289 176 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6468 66 1192 726 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 2.11 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 32.66 57.55 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.68 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 49.06 mph Weaving segment density, D 34.45 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 10338 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9893 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9398 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1918 2800 a Average flow rate 1690 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.23 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.38 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Orangewood On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1360 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.31 Weaving ratio, R 0.27 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5590 40 1850 700 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1471 11 487 184 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6060 43 2005 758 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.74 0.49 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 46.60 51.92 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.90 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 50.14 mph Weaving segment density, D 35.37 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 11022 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10701 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10166 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2763 4000 a Average flow rate 1773 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.31 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.27 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1360 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Weaving Location: Katella On to Ball Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2130 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.20 Weaving ratio, R 0.31 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 8140 30 1420 630 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2142 8 374 166 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 8825 32 1539 683 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.57 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 50.05 57.72 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.99 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 56.00 mph Weaving segment density, D 39.57 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS E Capacity of base condition, cb 11746 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11404 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10834 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2222 4000 a Average flow rate 2215 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.20 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.31 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2130 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: Ball On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2490 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.25 Weaving ratio, R 0.23 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 8120 30 2130 640 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2137 8 561 168 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 8803 32 2309 693 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.61 0.37 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.23 55.20 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.25 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 53.55 mph Weaving segment density, D 44.21 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 11436 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11103 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10548 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 3002 4000 a Average flow rate 2367 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.25 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.23 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2490 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 11/02/11 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Weaving Location: SR-91 to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1620 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.44 Weaving ratio, R 0.32 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3710 110 2010 960 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 976 29 529 253 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4022 119 2179 1040 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 2.49 0.44 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 30.77 53.22 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.54 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 40.34 mph Weaving segment density, D 36.49 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS E Capacity of base condition, cb 10426 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10122 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9616 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 3219 2800 a Average flow rate 1472 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.44 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.32 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1620 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX K-1: HCS FREEWAY RAMP ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS UNDER 2011 BASELINE CONDITIONS SCENARIO 1: NO EVENTS SCENARIO 2: WITH AAHC EVENT SCENARIO 3: WITH AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT SCENARIO 4: WITH PROJECT SCENARIO 5: WITH PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- 2011 Baseline No Events ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2011 Baseline No Events ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 6,600 7,663 0.9 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 26.9 0.957 Level of service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,663 User Input Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2011 Baseline No Events ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 6,820 7,919 0.9 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 27.8 0.957 Level of service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,919 User Input Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6230 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 460 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 410 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6230 460 410 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1790 132 118 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7376 545 485 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2880 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5901 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5356 9600 No FO F R v 545 2000 No R v v 1510 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2880 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2880 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 24.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.477 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6420 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 560 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 580 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6420 560 580 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1845 161 167 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7601 663 687 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3688 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7601 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6938 9600 No FO F R v 663 2000 No R v v 1956 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3688 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3688 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 31.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.488 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6540 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 690 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 180 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6540 690 180 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1879 198 52 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7743 817 213 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3162 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6195 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5378 9600 No FO F R v 817 2000 No R v v 1516 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3162 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3162 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 26.9 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.502 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5360 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 580 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 260 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5360 580 260 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1540 167 75 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6346 687 308 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3154 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6346 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5659 9600 No FO F R v 687 2000 No R v v 1596 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3154 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3154 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 26.9 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.490 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2011 Baseline with AA HC Event ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 6,600 7,663 0.9 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 26.9 0.957 Level of service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,663 User Input Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2011 Baseline with AA HC Event ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 6,850 7,954 0.9 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 28.0 0.957 Level of service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,954 User Input Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6600 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1000 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 410 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6600 1000 410 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1897 287 118 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7814 1184 485 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3394 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6252 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5068 9600 No FO F R v 1184 2000 No R v v 1429 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3394 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3394 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 28.9 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.535 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6440 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 680 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 580 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6440 680 580 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1851 195 167 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7624 805 687 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3778 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7624 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6819 9600 No FO F R v 805 2000 No R v v 1923 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3778 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3778 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 32.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.500 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6710 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1100 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 180 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6710 1100 180 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1928 316 52 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7944 1302 213 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3506 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6356 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5054 9600 No FO F R v 1302 2000 No R v v 1425 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3506 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3506 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 29.9 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.545 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5380 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 860 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 260 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5380 860 260 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1546 247 75 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6369 1018 308 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3351 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6369 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5351 9600 No FO F R v 1018 2000 No R v v 1509 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3351 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3351 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 28.6 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.520 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2011 Baseline AA HC Event and AS Event ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 6,600 7,663 0.9 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 26.9 0.957 Level of service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,663 User Input Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2011 Baseline AA HC Event and AS Event ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,060 8,197 0.9 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 28.8 0.957 Level of service, LOS D 1.00 Level 8,197 User Input Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6600 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1320 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 410 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6600 1320 410 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1897 379 118 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7814 1563 485 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3607 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6252 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4689 9600 No FO F R v 1563 2000 No R v v 1322 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3607 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3607 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 30.8 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.569 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6440 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 680 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 580 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6440 680 580 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1851 195 167 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7624 805 687 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3778 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7624 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6819 9600 No FO F R v 805 2000 No R v v 1923 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3778 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3778 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 32.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.500 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7380 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1100 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 180 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7380 1100 180 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2121 316 52 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8737 1302 213 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3782 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6990 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5688 9600 No FO F R v 1302 2000 No R v v 1604 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3782 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3782 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 32.3 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.545 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5980 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1790 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 260 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5980 1790 260 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1718 514 75 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7080 2119 308 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4282 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7080 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4961 9600 No FO F R v 2119 2000 Yes R v v 1399 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4282 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4282 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 36.6 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.619 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- 2011 Baseline with Project ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2011 Baseline With Project ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 6,600 7,663 0.9 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 26.9 0.957 Level of service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,663 User Input Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2011 Baseline With Project ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 6,870 7,977 0.9 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 28.0 0.957 Level of service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,977 User Input Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6760 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1240 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 410 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6760 1240 410 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1943 356 118 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8003 1468 485 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3620 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6403 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4935 9600 No FO F R v 1468 2000 No R v v 1391 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3620 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3620 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 30.9 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.560 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6450 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 730 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 580 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6450 730 580 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1853 210 167 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7636 864 687 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3817 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7636 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6772 9600 No FO F R v 864 2000 No R v v 1909 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3817 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3817 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 32.6 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.506 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6780 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1280 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 180 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6780 1280 180 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1948 368 52 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8027 1515 213 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3654 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6422 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4907 9600 No FO F R v 1515 2000 No R v v 1384 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3654 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3654 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 31.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.564 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5390 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 990 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 260 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5390 990 260 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1549 284 75 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6381 1172 308 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3443 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6381 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5209 9600 No FO F R v 1172 2000 No R v v 1469 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3443 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3443 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 29.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.533 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- 2011 Baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2011 Baseline With Project and Concurrent AS Event ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 6,600 7,663 0.9 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 26.9 0.957 Level of service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,663 User Input Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2011 Baseline With Project and Concurrent AS Event ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,070 8,209 0.9 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 28.9 0.957 Level of service, LOS D 1.00 Level 8,209 User Input Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6760 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1560 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 410 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6760 1560 410 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1943 448 118 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8003 1847 485 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3833 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6403 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4556 9600 No FO F R v 1847 2000 No R v v 1285 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3833 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3833 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 32.7 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.594 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6450 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 730 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 580 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6450 730 580 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1853 210 167 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7636 864 687 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3817 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7636 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6772 9600 No FO F R v 864 2000 No R v v 1909 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3817 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3817 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 32.6 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.506 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7450 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1280 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 180 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7450 1280 180 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2141 368 52 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8820 1515 213 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3931 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7056 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5541 9600 No FO F R v 1515 2000 No R v v 1562 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3931 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3931 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 33.6 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.564 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - With Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5990 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1920 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 260 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5990 1920 260 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1721 552 75 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7092 2273 308 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4374 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7092 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4819 9600 No FO F R v 2273 2000 Yes R v v 1359 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4374 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4374 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 37.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.633 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX K-2: HCS FREEWAY RAMP ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS UNDER 2013 OPENING YEAR CONDITIONS SCENARIO 1: NO EVENTS SCENARIO 2: WITH AAHC EVENT SCENARIO 3: WITH AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT SCENARIO 4: WITH PROJECT SCENARIO 5: WITH PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- 2013 Opening Year No Events ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2013 Opening Year Without Events ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,260 7,986 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 28.1 0.957 Level of service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,986 User Input Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2013 Opening Year Without Events ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,500 8,250 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 29.0 0.957 Level of service, LOS D 1.00 Level 8,250 User Input Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6850 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 510 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 450 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6850 510 450 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1803 134 118 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7427 553 488 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2903 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5942 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5389 9600 No FO F R v 553 2000 No R v v 1519 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2903 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2903 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 24.7 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.478 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7060 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 620 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 640 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7060 620 640 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1858 163 168 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7655 672 694 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3717 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7655 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6983 9600 No FO F R v 672 2000 No R v v 1969 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3717 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3717 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 31.7 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.488 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7190 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 760 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 200 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7190 760 200 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1892 200 53 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7795 824 217 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3184 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6236 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5412 9600 No FO F R v 824 2000 No R v v 1526 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3184 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3184 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 27.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.502 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5900 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 640 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 290 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5900 640 290 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1553 168 76 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6397 694 314 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3181 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6397 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5703 9600 No FO F R v 694 2000 No R v v 1608 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3181 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3181 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 27.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.490 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2013 Opening Year AA HC Event ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,260 7,986 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 28.1 0.957 Level of service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,986 User Input Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2013 Opening Year AA HC Event ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,540 8,294 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 29.2 0.957 Level of service, LOS D 1.00 Level 8,294 User Input Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study Average Honda Center Attendancet Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7220 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1050 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 450 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7220 1050 450 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1900 276 118 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7828 1138 488 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3372 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6263 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5125 9600 No FO F R v 1138 2000 No R v v 1445 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3372 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3372 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 28.8 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.530 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7080 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 740 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 640 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7080 740 640 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1863 195 168 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7676 802 694 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3799 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7676 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6874 9600 No FO F R v 802 2000 No R v v 1938 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3799 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3799 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 32.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.500 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7360 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1170 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 200 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7360 1170 200 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1937 308 53 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7980 1269 217 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3499 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6384 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5115 9600 No FO F R v 1269 2000 No R v v 1442 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3499 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3499 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 29.8 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.542 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - Average Attendance Honda Center Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5920 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 920 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 290 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5920 920 290 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1558 242 76 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6419 997 314 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3361 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6419 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5422 9600 No FO F R v 997 2000 No R v v 1529 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3361 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3361 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 28.7 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.518 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- 2013 Opening Year Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2013 Opening Year AA HC Event and Concurrent AS Event ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,260 7,986 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 28.1 0.957 Level of service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,986 User Input Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2013 Opening Year AA HC Event and Concurrent AS Event ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,740 8,514 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 29.9 0.957 Level of service, LOS D 1.00 Level 8,514 User Input Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7220 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1370 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 450 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7220 1370 450 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1900 361 118 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7828 1485 488 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3568 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6263 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4778 9600 No FO F R v 1485 2000 No R v v 1347 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3568 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3568 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 30.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.562 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7080 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 740 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 640 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7080 740 640 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1863 195 168 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7676 802 694 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3799 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7676 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6874 9600 No FO F R v 802 2000 No R v v 1938 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3799 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3799 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 32.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.500 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8030 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1170 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 200 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8030 1170 200 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2113 308 53 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8706 1269 217 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3752 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6965 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5696 9600 No FO F R v 1269 2000 No R v v 1606 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3752 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3752 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 32.0 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.542 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study - AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6520 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1850 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 290 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6520 1850 290 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1716 487 76 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7069 2006 314 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4213 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7069 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5063 9600 No FO F R v 2006 2000 Yes R v v 1428 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4213 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4213 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 36.0 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.609 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- 2013 Opening Year with Project ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2013 Opening Year With Project ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,260 7,986 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 28.1 0.957 Level of service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,986 User Input Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2013 Opening Year With Project ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,550 8,305 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 29.2 0.957 Level of service, LOS D 1.00 Level 8,305 User Input Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7380 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1290 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 450 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7380 1290 450 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1942 339 118 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8001 1399 488 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3580 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6401 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5002 9600 No FO F R v 1399 2000 No R v v 1410 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3580 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3580 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 30.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.554 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7090 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 790 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 640 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7090 790 640 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1866 208 168 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7687 857 694 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3835 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7687 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6830 9600 No FO F R v 857 2000 No R v v 1926 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3835 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3835 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 32.7 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.505 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6780 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1280 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 180 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6780 1280 180 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1948 368 52 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8027 1515 213 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3654 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6422 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4907 9600 No FO F R v 1515 2000 No R v v 1384 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3654 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3654 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 31.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.564 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5930 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1050 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 290 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5930 1050 290 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1561 276 76 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6429 1138 314 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3445 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6429 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5291 9600 No FO F R v 1138 2000 No R v v 1492 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3445 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3445 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 29.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.530 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.9 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- 2013 Opening Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2013 Opening Year With Project and Concurrent AS Event ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,260 7,986 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 28.1 0.957 Level of service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,986 User Input Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2013 Opening Year With Project and Concurrent AS Event ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,750 8,525 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 30.0 0.957 Level of service, LOS D 1.00 Level 8,525 User Input Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7380 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1610 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 450 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7380 1610 450 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1942 424 118 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8001 1746 488 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3776 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6401 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4655 9600 No FO F R v 1746 2000 No R v v 1312 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3776 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3776 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 32.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.585 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7090 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 790 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 640 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7090 790 640 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1866 208 168 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7687 857 694 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3835 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7687 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6830 9600 No FO F R v 857 2000 No R v v 1926 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3835 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3835 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 32.7 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.505 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8100 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1350 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 200 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8100 1350 200 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2132 355 53 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8782 1464 217 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3889 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7026 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5562 9600 No FO F R v 1464 2000 No R v v 1568 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3889 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3889 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 33.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.560 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6530 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1980 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 290 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6530 1980 290 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1718 521 76 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7080 2147 314 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4298 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7080 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4933 9600 No FO F R v 2147 2000 Yes R v v 1391 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4298 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4298 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 36.7 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.621 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX K-3: HCS FREEWAY RAMP ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS UNDER 2030 FUTURE YEAR CONDITIONS SCENARIO 1: NO EVENTS SCENARIO 2: WITH AAHC EVENT SCENARIO 3: WITH AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT SCENARIO 4: WITH PROJECT SCENARIO 5: WITH PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- 2030 Future Year No Events ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 12710 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1740 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 570 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 12710 1740 570 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3345 458 150 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 13981 1887 618 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4304 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 11185 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9298 9600 No FO F R v 1887 3800 No R v v 3440 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5785 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5785 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 40.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.598 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 Future Year Without Events ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,770 8,547 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 30.1 0.957 Level of service, LOS D 1.00 Level 8,547 User Input Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9280 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 790 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 360 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9280 790 360 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2442 208 95 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10061 857 390 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3993 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8049 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 7192 9600 No FO F R v 857 2000 No R v v 2028 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3993 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3993 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 34.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.505 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 12230 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1280 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 650 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 12230 1280 650 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3218 337 171 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 13260 1388 705 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 5408 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 10608 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9220 9600 No FO F R v 1388 2000 No R v v 2600 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5408 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5408 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 46.3 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.553 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8340 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1370 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 620 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8340 1370 620 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2195 361 163 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9042 1485 672 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3992 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7234 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5749 9600 No FO F R v 1485 2000 No R v v 1621 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3992 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3992 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 34.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.562 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study No Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10290 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 820 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 510 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10290 820 510 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2708 216 134 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11157 889 553 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 5366 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 11157 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 10268 9600 Yes FO F R v 889 2000 No R v v 2895 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5757 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5757 4400 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 49.3 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.508 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study- Average Attendance Honda Center Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 12710 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1740 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 570 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 12710 1740 570 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3345 458 150 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 13981 1887 618 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4304 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 11185 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9298 9600 No FO F R v 1887 3800 No R v v 3440 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5785 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5785 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 40.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.598 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 Future Year AA HC Event ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,810 8,591 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 30.2 0.957 Level of service, LOS D 1.00 Level 8,591 User Input Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study- Average Attendance Honda Center Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9650 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1330 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 360 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9650 1330 360 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2539 350 95 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10463 1442 390 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4463 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8371 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6929 9600 No FO F R v 1442 2000 No R v v 1954 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4463 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4463 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 38.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence E Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.558 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study- Average Attendance Honda Center Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 12250 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1400 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 650 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 12250 1400 650 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3224 368 171 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 13282 1518 705 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 5489 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 10626 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9108 9600 No FO F R v 1518 2000 No R v v 2568 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5489 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5489 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 47.0 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.565 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study- Average Attendance Honda Center Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8510 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1780 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 620 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8510 1780 620 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2239 468 163 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9227 1930 672 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4307 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7382 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5452 9600 No FO F R v 1930 2000 No R v v 1537 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4307 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4307 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 36.8 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence E Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.602 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study- Average Attendance Honda Center Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10310 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1100 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 510 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10310 1100 510 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2713 289 134 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11178 1193 553 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 5546 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 11178 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9985 9600 Yes FO F R v 1193 2000 No R v v 2816 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5778 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5778 4400 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 49.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.535 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 12710 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1740 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 570 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 12710 1740 570 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3345 458 150 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 13981 1887 618 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4304 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 11185 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9298 9600 No FO F R v 1887 3800 No R v v 3440 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5785 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5785 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 40.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.598 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 Future Year AA HC Event and Concurrent AS Event ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 8,010 8,811 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 31.0 0.957 Level of service, LOS D 1.00 Level 8,811 User Input Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9650 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1650 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 360 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9650 1650 360 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2539 434 95 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10463 1789 390 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4659 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8371 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6582 9600 No FO F R v 1789 2000 No R v v 1856 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4659 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4659 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 39.8 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence E Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.589 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 12250 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1400 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 650 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 12250 1400 650 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3224 368 171 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 13282 1518 705 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 5489 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 10626 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9108 9600 No FO F R v 1518 2000 No R v v 2568 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5489 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5489 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 47.0 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.565 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9180 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1780 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 620 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9180 1780 620 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2416 468 163 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9953 1930 672 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4560 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7963 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6033 9600 No FO F R v 1930 2000 No R v v 1701 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4560 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4560 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 39.0 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence E Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.602 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10910 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 2030 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 510 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10910 2030 510 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2871 534 134 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11829 2201 553 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 6399 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 11829 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9628 9600 Yes FO F R v 2201 2000 Yes R v v 2715 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 6429 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 6429 4400 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 55.0 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.626 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- 2030 Future Year with Project ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 12710 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1740 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 570 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 12710 1740 570 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3345 458 150 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 13981 1887 618 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4304 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 11185 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9298 9600 No FO F R v 1887 3800 No R v v 3440 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5785 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5785 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 40.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.598 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 Future Year With Project ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,820 8,602 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 30.2 0.957 Level of service, LOS D 1.00 Level 8,602 User Input Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 12260 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1450 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 650 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 12260 1450 650 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3226 382 171 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 13292 1572 705 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 5523 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 10634 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9062 9600 No FO F R v 1572 2000 No R v v 2555 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5523 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5523 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 47.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.569 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study Max Honda Center Attendance Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8580 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1960 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 620 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8580 1960 620 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2258 516 163 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9303 2125 672 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4444 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7443 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5318 9600 No FO F R v 2125 2000 Yes R v v 1499 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4444 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4444 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 38.0 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.619 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10320 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1230 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 510 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10320 1230 510 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2716 324 134 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11189 1334 553 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 5631 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 11189 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9855 9600 Yes FO F R v 1334 2000 No R v v 2779 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5789 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5789 4400 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 49.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.548 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 12710 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1740 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 570 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 12710 1740 570 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3345 458 150 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 13981 1887 618 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4304 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 11185 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9298 9600 No FO F R v 1887 3800 No R v v 3440 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5785 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5785 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 40.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.598 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 Future Year With Project and Concurrent AS Event ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 8,020 8,822 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 31.0 0.957 Level of service, LOS D 1.00 Level 8,822 User Input Flow rate, VF % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver population factor, fp Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Terrain type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8020 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 660 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 700 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 700 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 820 vph Position of adjacent ramp Upstream Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8020 660 820 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2111 174 216 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8822 716 889 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2365 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7058 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6342 9600 No FO F R v 716 3800 No R v v 2346 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2823 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2823 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 9.6 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.492 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9810 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1890 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 360 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9810 1890 360 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2582 497 95 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10636 2049 390 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4866 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8509 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6460 9600 No FO F R v 2049 2000 Yes R v v 1821 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4866 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4866 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 41.6 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.612 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 12260 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1450 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 650 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 12260 1450 650 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3226 382 171 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 13292 1572 705 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 5523 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 10634 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9062 9600 No FO F R v 1572 2000 No R v v 2555 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5523 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5523 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 47.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.569 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9250 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1960 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 620 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9250 1960 620 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2434 516 163 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10029 2125 672 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4697 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8024 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5899 9600 No FO F R v 2125 2000 Yes R v v 1663 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4697 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4697 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 40.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.619 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – with Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10920 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 2160 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 510 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10920 2160 510 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2874 568 134 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11840 2342 553 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 6483 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 11840 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9498 9600 No FO F R v 2342 2000 Yes R v v 2678 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 6483 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 6483 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 55.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.639 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX K-4: HCS FREEWAY RAMP ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS UNDER 2011 BASELINE CONDITIONS (MITIGATED) (COMPARSION 3 – PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT) ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2011 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5990 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1920 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 260 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5990 1920 260 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1721 552 75 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7092 2273 308 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3526 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7092 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4819 9600 No FO F R v 2273 3800 No R v v 1783 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3526 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3526 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 21.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.633 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX K-5: HCS FREEWAY RAMP ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS UNDER 2013 OPENING YEAR CONDITIONS (MITIGATED) (COMPARSION 3 – PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT) ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/30/2011 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2013 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6530 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1980 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 290 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6530 1980 290 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1718 521 76 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7080 2147 314 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3430 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7080 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4933 9600 No FO F R v 2147 3800 No R v v 1825 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3430 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3430 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 20.3 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.621 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Honda Center Enhancement Project EIR Draft Traffic Study Report - Appendices APPENDIX K-6: HCS FREEWAY RAMP ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS UNDER 2030 FUTURE YEAR CONDITIONS (MITIGATED) COMPARISON 1: NO EVENTS VS. PROJECT COMPARISON 2: AAHC EVENT VS. PROJECT COMPARISON 3: AAHC EVENT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT VS. PROJECT AND CONCURRENT AS EVENT ---PAGE BREAK--- Comparison 1&2: 2030 Future Year No Events vs. With Project - Mitigated ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 Future Year With Project Mitigated ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 10,590 11,649 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 41.0 0.957 Level of service, LOS E 1.00 Level 11,649 User Input Flow rate, VF Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Density, D Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Terrain type HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9810 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1570 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 360 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9810 1570 360 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2582 413 95 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10636 1702 390 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4670 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8509 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6807 9600 No FO F R v 1702 2000 No R v v 1919 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4670 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4670 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 39.9 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence E Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.581 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10220 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1450 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 650 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10220 1450 650 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2689 382 171 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11081 1572 705 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4752 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8865 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 7293 9600 No FO F R v 1572 2000 No R v v 2056 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4752 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4752 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 40.6 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence E Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.569 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Mitigation Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8580 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1960 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 620 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8580 1960 620 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2258 516 163 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9303 2125 672 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3508 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7443 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5318 9600 No FO F R v 2125 3800 No R v v 1967 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3508 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3508 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 20.9 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.619 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Comparison 3: 2030 Future Year AAHC Event and Concurrent AS Event vs. With Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event - Mitigated ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 Future Year With Project and Concurrent AS Event - Mitigated ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 10,590 11,649 0.95 Max Upstream Fwy Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v>Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of lanes, N 5 1.2 41.0 0.957 Level of service, LOS E 1.00 Level 11,649 User Input Flow rate, VF Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Density, D Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Terrain type HONDA CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE WORKSHEET Volume, V Flow rate, VF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9810 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1890 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 360 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1950 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9810 1890 360 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2582 497 95 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10636 2049 390 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3729 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8509 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6460 9600 No FO F R v 2049 3800 No R v v 2390 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3729 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3729 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 22.8 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.612 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 71.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10220 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1450 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 650 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1500 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10220 1450 650 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2689 382 171 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11081 1572 705 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4752 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8865 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 7293 9600 No FO F R v 1572 2000 No R v v 2056 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4752 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4752 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 40.6 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence E Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.569 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Ball Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9250 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1960 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 620 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1180 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9250 1960 620 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2434 516 163 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10029 2125 672 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3659 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8024 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5899 9600 No FO F R v 2125 3800 No R v v 2182 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3659 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3659 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 22.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.619 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 11/02/11 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: SR-57 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: Honda Center Traffic Study – With Project and Concurrent AS Event Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10920 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 2160 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 510 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1120 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10920 2160 510 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2874 568 134 v Trucks and buses 6 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.971 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11840 2342 553 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4196 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 9472 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 7130 9600 No FO F R v 2342 3800 No R v v 2638 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4196 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4196 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 26.8 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.639 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.9 mph