HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1995 0524 CC SPC ITEM 03Az MOORPARK
O
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, Calffomia 93021 (805) 529 -6864
4q
rE
MEMORANDUM
TO: Workshop Mailing List
t
FROM: Jaime Aguilera, Director of Community De opme:1
DATE: May 19, 1995
SUBJECT:
DRAFT TRAFFIC STUDY FOR HIDDEN CREEK RANCH SPECIFIC 111�
(SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 8) - DISTRIBUTED FOR DISCUSSION
PURPOSES FOR THE MAY 24, 1995, CITY COUNCIL /PLANNING
COMLKISSION WORKSHOP
As identified in our prior correspondence regarding the scheduled
May 24, 1995, City Council /Planning Commission Workshop, one
intended discussion item is an overview presentation by Richard
Pool, ATE, of the Draft Traffic Study prepared by ATE for the
Hidden Creek Ranch Specific Plan Project. Attached, for discussion
purposes, is information from the referenced draft Traffic Study.
The Hidden Creek Ranch Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact
Report has not yet been released for public review, and no comments
are being requested, at this time, on the attached draft report.
Please contact me if you have any questions regarding the scheduled
workshop.
Attachment: Excerpted Information from Hidden Creek Ranch
Specific Plan Draft. Traffic Study
JRA /DST
cc: The Honorable City Council.
Planning Commission
Steven Kueny, City Manager
Charles Abbott, City Engineer
John Whitman, City Traffic Engineer
AUL VV. LAVVHA.SUN ors. bhRNARDO M. PEREZ PATRICK HUNTER SCOTT MONTGOMERY JOHN E WOZNIAK
Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember
-t: J. ,1 1
�QY'T>S1 r DRAFT
HIDDEN CREEK RANCH
CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION EIR SECTION
ATE Project # 93099
April 17, 1995
Prepared for:
Michael.Brandman Associates
17310 Red Hill Avenue QRpEESS /0
Irvine, California 92714 -5642 �p !
D p
00
Prepared by:
°C 8,0 0
Richard L. Pool, P.E.
lF OF
ASSOCIATED TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS
100 N. Hope Avenue, Suite 4, Santa Barbara CA 93110 -1686 • (805) 6874418 - FAX (805) 682 -8509
TABLE OF CONTENTS
3.7 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.7.1 INTRODUCTION ...........
3.7.2 STUDY METHODOLOGY .... ..
3.7.2.1 Study Scenarios .. .
3.7.2.2 Traffic Volume Forecasts
3.7.2.3 Circulation System Development
3.7.2.4 Project Options/Impacts
DRAFT
. — 3.7 -1
3.7 -1
.................... 3.7 -2
3.7 -2
3.7 -3
3.7 -3
.......... 3.7-4
3.7.3 EXISTING CONDITIONS ..... .......... 3.7 -4
3.7.3.1 Street System .... .. . ......... 3.7-4
3.7.3.2 Traffic Volumes and Levels ol' Service ................. 3.7 -9
3.7.4 IMPACT CRITERIA ......... . ......... 3.7 -14
3.7.5 PROJECT- GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES ................... 3.7 -14
3.7.5.1 Trip Generation ... ......... ......... 3.7 -14
3.7.5.2 Trip Distribution & Assignment 3.7 -15
3.7.6 YEAR 2000 BASELINE ANALYSIS 3.7 -15
3.7.6.1 Land Use & Traffic Volumes 3.7 -16
3.7.6.2 Circulation System 3.7 -16
3.7.6.3 Levels of Service .. 3.7 -16
3.7.6.4 Required Improvements 3.7 -20
_ 3.7.7 YEAR 2000 + PROJECT ANALYSIS ... . I ...................
3.7 -22
3.7.7.1
Land Use & Traffic Volumes ... ...................
3.7 -22
3.7.7.2
Circulation System . ......... . ... . . . ...
3.7 -26
3.7.7.3
Levels of Service .. . .. . ...................
3.7 -26
3.7.7.4
Circulation Deficiencies .... ...................
3.7 -27
3.7.7.5
Project Circulation Options ..... .. .................
3.7 -28
3.7.8 YEAR 2010 BASELINE ANALYSIS ..... ...................
3.7 -32
3.7.8.1
Land Use & Traffic Volumes .. . .................
3.7 -32
3.7.8.2
Circulation System . . ............. . ....
3.7 -32
3.7.8.3
Levels of Service ..... ....... . .................
3.7 -38
3.7.8.4
Required Improvements (Without. Project) ..............
3.7 -39
r
DRAFT
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
3.7.9
YEAR 2010 + PROJECT ANALYSIS .... . ....................
3.7-40
3.7.9.1
Land Use & Traffic Volumes .................
3.7 -40
3.7.9.2
Circulation System .................
3.7 -44
3.7.9.3
Levels of Service .... .................
3.7 -44
3.7.9.4
Circulation Deficiencies .................
3.7-46
3.7.10
MITIGATION MEASURES ..... , .................
3.7 -46
3.7.10.1
Year 2000 Measures .................
3.7-46
3.7.10.2
Year 2010 Measures .................
3.7 -48
3.7.11
SYSTEM CIRCULATION ALTERNATIVES .................
3.7 -49
3.7.11.1
System Element Descriptions .................
3.7 -50
3.7.11.2
Project Element Descriptions ............. :...
3.7 -50
3.7.11.3
Circulation Element Alternative Comparison .............
3.7 -51
3.7.12
INTERNAL
CIRCULATION .......
3.7 -53 -
3.7.12.1
Roadways ......... .................
3.7 -53
3.7.12.2
Intersections ........ ..................
3.7 -53
3.7.12.3
Internal Circulation Alternative (Roundabouts) ...........
3.7 -54
3.7.13
REGIONAL
PROJECT IMPACTS .... . . . .. . . . ...
3.7 -54
3.7.13.1
Ventura County Congestion Management Program ........
3.7 -54
3.7.13.2
Ventura County General Plan Consistency ..............
3.7 -55
3.7.13.3
City of Simi Valley's Circulation Element ..............
3.7 -55
3.7.14 LEVEL OF SERVICE DISCUSSION .. ........ 3.7 -56
3.7.14.1 Intersection Analysis Methodology ............... 3.7 -56
3.7.15 MTAM CIRCULATION ALTERNATIVES .. 3.7 -57
3.7.15.1 Year 2000 MTAM Circulation Alternatives ............. 3.7 -57
3.7:15.2 Year 2010 MTAM Circulation Alternatives ............. 3.7 -57
REFERENCES AND PERSONS CONTACTED _ ................. 3.7 -58
APPENDIX 3.7 ...... ... . .......... ............... 3.7 -59
M
DRAFT
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit 3.7 -1
Existing Street System .. .................
--3.7-6
Exhibit 3.7 -2
Existing ADT Volumes ... ..................
3.7 -10
Exhibit 3.7 -3
Existing A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ..............
3.7 -11
Exhibit 3.7 -4
Existing P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ..............
3.7 -12
Exhibit 3.7 -5
Year 2000 Baseline ADT Volumes ...................
3.7 -17
Exhibit 3.7 -6
Year 2000 Baseline A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ......
3.7 -18
Exhibit 3.7 -7
Year 2000 Baseline P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ......
3.7 -19
Exhibit 3.7 -8
Year 2000 Minimum Circulation System ...............
3.7 -21
Exhibit 3.7 -9
Year 2000 + Project ADT Volumes .........
3.7-40
Exhibit 3.7 -10
Year 2000 + Project A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ....
3.7 -24
Exhibit 3.7 -11
Year 2000 + Project P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ......
3.7 -25
Exhibit 3.7 -12
Intersection Geometric Improvements .................
3.7 -29
Exhibit 3.7 -13
Roundabout Conceptual Design ......................
3.7 -31
Exhibit 3.7 -15
Year 2010 Baseline A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
3.7 -35
Exhibit 3.7 -16
.
Year 2010 Baseline P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ......
3.7 -36
Exhibit 3.7 -17
Los Angeles Avenue Intersection Improvements ..........
3.7 -37
Exhibit 3.7 -18
Year 2020.+ Project ADT Volumes ..................
3.7-41
Exhibit 3.7 -19
Year 2010 + Project A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes .....
3.7-42
Exhibit 3.7 -20
Year 2010 + Project P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ......
3.7 -43
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1
Existing Peak Hour Intersection Levels of" Service ................
3.7 -13
Table 2
Project Trip Generation Estimates . .. I . ..................
3.7 -15
Table 3
Year 2000 Peak Hour Levels of Service ........................
3.7 -20
Table 4
Year 2000 Peak Hour Levels of Service (with Minimum System
Requirements) ............ .. I ... .. I ..........
3.7 -22
Table 5
Year 2000 + Project Peak Hour Levels of Service ................
3.7 -27
Table 6
Year 2010 Peak Hour Levels of Service (Without Project) ..........
3.7 -39
Table 7
, Year 2010 Peak Hour Levels of Service (with Minimum System
Requirements) (Without Project) .. .......................
3.7-40
Table 8
Year 2010 + Project Peak Hour Levels of Service ................
3.7-45
Table 9
Year 2010 + Project Peak Hour Levels of Service (Collins Drive/Campus
Park Drive)
3.7-46
Table 10
Mitigated Year 2000 System + Project Peak Hour Levels of Service (A.M.
Peak Hour @ Collins Drive/Campus Park Drive) ................
3.7-47
Table 11
Year 2000 - Project Percent Contributions , .................
3.7-47
Table 12
Year 2010 - Project Percent Contributions . ..................
3.7-49
Table 13
Year 2010 - System Alternative Comparison ....................
3.7 -52
Table 14
Year 2010 plus Project - Comparison of ICU Methodology ........
3.7 -57
IN
um' ir-i AFT
3.7 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.7.1 INTRODUCTION
The Transportation and Circulation Section of the Hidden Creek Ranch Project Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) was prepared by Associated Transportation Engineers. This section
identifies and analyzes numerous circulation system element alternatives and illustrates the
"trade- offs" associated with each. This section also contains an analysis of traffic conditions
for two "horizon years "; Year 2000 and Year 2010 (General Plan buildout). The Year 2000
scenario is based on estimates of potential development projects (and related circulation
improvements) that would be constructed by the Year 2000. The Year 2010 scenario is based
upon the development of the remaining General Plan land uses and the circulation system
required to efficiently move people and goods.
Completion of all of the improvements contained in the City's adopted Circulation Element are
not likely to occur within the Year 2000 or Year 2010 time - frames, due to funding constraints.
Therefore, the initial phase of the traffic analysis was to determine what elements of the
adopted Circulation Element would be needed to accommodate the traffic forecasts and achieve
the City's General Plan performance objective of Level of Service C (LOS Q. This is called
the "minimum" circulation system in the rest of the document. The recommendations for the
circulation system alternatives are caveated in that there are choices to be made by the City
regarding which of the enumerated elements will accommodate the traffic demands forecasted
for the Year 2000 and Year 2010 scenarios and address other issues that are associated with
each. As noted, there are choices for the City to make and each choice has a related group of
improvements that will be required to attain the LOS C objective. Most of the circulation
system choices are related to the Year 2010 buildout scenario, and, while the project has an
affect on the system, it does not drive the selection of alternatives, except for two or three of
the alternatives. Because of the many combinations of elements for the final solution, this
section does not contain a recommended or a single enumerated list of improvement measures,
but a group of options and the related improvements
The consultant view of the traffic section is that it should provide data and information to be
used by the decision makers as they evaluate the proposed project. One issue that the City
must address is the possibility and/or probability that the subject elements can or will be
constructed. We have tried to join the most likely elements together, but there may be other
more practical combinations. The primary objective is to balance the choices of circulation
element components to provide the best attainable City-wide level of service for the lesser cost.
The study suggests one alternative system of "roundabout" intersections for the project area.
This type of system will be new and innovative for circulation systems in Ventura County, and
probably in California. There is also a section included in the study where modification to the
City's guidelines for traffic analysis is presented. Again, it is our intent to provide the City
with information on each of the choices so that the decisions related to the circulation system
in the Moorpark area are as informed as possible
3.7
lill
In order to develop the traffic section of the EIR, an assumption that the City would develop
and fund a Capital Improvement Program for the Circulation System was made. Thus, the
structure of the section is based upon a circulation system sufficient to accommodate the
projected being in place when it is required.
3.7.2 STUDY METHODOLOGY
3.7.2.1 Study Scenarios
The scenarios that were chosen by the City for this analysis were Year 2000 and Year 2010
(General Plan buildout). These scenarios require that a circulation system be in place to
accommodate the projected traffic volumes. Thus, part of this analysis was to determine what
portions of the Circulation Element (or modifications) need to be in place for each scenario.
The Spring Road Extension was included as part of the Circulation System even though it is
not shown on the City's Circulation Plan. Since "D" Street has been determined to not be
feasible, another street system was needed to provide access into this area. Therefore, Spring
Road is included as part of the base street system.
The study approach was to add to the existing street system the circulation element components
associated with the development that was projected for Year 2000. This land use and street
system was then analyzed for the No Project scenario. The improvements required to maintain
LOS C were defined for the Year 2000 scenario. The project Year 2000 land use and street
system was then added to the traffic model. Since one of the questions raised was the timing
for the construction of the Lagoon Interchange, the interchange was treated as an alternative
to be added if required to achieve the desired LOS. The Project scenario was analyzed to
determine what additional improvements were needed to maintain LOS C. For this scenario
there were several different improvements that would achieve the desired LOS. Theses are
listed and a determination by the City as to which one they prefer will have to be made during
the processing of the application.
For the Year 2010 (No Project) scenario, the added land use and circulation components were
added to the. Year 2000 (Improved) circulation system. This scenario was then analyzed and
the improvements were identified that would provide the desired LOS. Again, there are
different improvements that will attain the desired. LOS, thus, the City will have to chose the
preferred improvement.
For the Year 2010 (Project) scenario, the Year 2000 with project and improvements was used
as the base and the balance of the project was added. Again, since the timing for the Lagoon
Interchange is one of the questions to be addressed, the base analysis was made without the
interchange. The interchange was treated as an alternative to provide the City with data on the
effects of its construction. This scenario was then analyzed to determine if any additional
improvements were needed. There were several different improvements that would provide
the desired LOS. Each improvement was shown with the associated LOS. The City will have
to determine which of the options or improvements Is preferred.
'R FT
The underlying premise for this traffic section is that the City will develop a Capital
Improvement Program and related funding to accomplish the improvements as needed.
3.7.2.2 Traffic Volume Forecasts
Traffic volumes for the various land use and circulation system scenarios analyzed in this study
were forecast using the Moorpark Traffic Analysis Model (MTAM). A comprehensive traffic
model update and calibration was recently performed and is described in the MTAM
document.' The MTAM is a sub -area (sub - model) derivation of the Ventura Countywide
Traffic Model (VCTM) prepared and maintained by the Ventura County Transportation
Commission (VCTC). The MTAM is intended to be used as a forecasting tool for a variety
of traffic studies and to provide consistency with the forecasting requirements of the Ventura
County Congestion Management Program. It covers the City of Moorpark as well as adjacent
unincorporated portions in the County of Ventura.
3.7.2.3 Circulation System Development
The "minimum" circulation system that would meet the City's LOS C performance objective
for intersection operations was determined and utilized as a basis for the analysis. The -
determination of the minimum circulation system began by selecting the most likely elements
that would be constructed as a result of the development of the parcels within the City.
Logically, the next step was to add some of the Circulation Element components (with some
modification of size) that appeared to be reasonable with respect to location and cost. This
process lead to the development of the circulation systems required to accommodate the Year
2000 and Year 2010 traffic demands (without the project).
To define the minimum circulation systems, a series of iterative analyses were performed using
the traffic model. When the traffic model runs for the alternatives were completed, we began
_ the task of evaluating the results. In the course of the inspection and evaluation, it became
evident that New Los Angeles Avenue -Los Angeles Avenue is the critical or controlling
corridor in the Moorpark area and will require widening to three through lanes in each
direction (six- lanes). However, it was concluded that there was a limit to the number of
additional lanes that could be added to each approach due to right -of -way constraints. It was
determined that five was the maximum number of lanes for an approach. Once Los Angeles
Avenue reached capacity with this configuration it was clear that additional east -west capacity
would be required. Thus, we began by adding the portion of the State Route (SR) 118
extension from the SR 118 /SR 23 freeway connection to Gabbert Road. It was then
determined necessary to include the link between Gabbert Road and Los Angeles Avenue
(SR 118) to accommodate the Year 2010 traffic, demands on New Los Angeles Avenue -Los
Angeles Avenue within the City of Moorpark..
' Moorpark Traffic Analysis Model - Model Description and Validation. Austin -Foust
Associates, June 1994.
a
�✓ r � ` r`�°i3� d
The series of iterative traffic model runs performed for this circulation system development
analysis are presented in Section 3.7.15, MTAM Circulation Alternatives.
3.7.2.4 Project Options/Impacts
Traffic model runs for the various project circulation system alternatives were made in
increments so that the effects of each element could be evaluated. All of the intersections are
addressed 'in detail for the most likely circulation alternative, and in general for the remaining
alternatives. The evaluation of the various project circulation options and required
improvements are provided to attain the LOS C performance objective of the City of Moorpark
for both the Year 2000 and Year 2010 scenarios. The Hidden Creek Ranch Project percent
contribution to the improvements are shown for each location.
3.7.3 EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.7.3.1 Street System
The circulation system serving the project site is comprised of two State Highways, major
arterial and local collector streets. The primary components of the study street system are
discussed in the following text and illustrated on Exhibit 3.7 -1. The illustrations are schematic
in nature and are not intended to be exact alignments. This particularly applies to the Year
2000 and Year 2010 systems. The links are intended to illustrate a general route, and not
precise alignment.
State Route 118 (SR 118) is a State Highway that extends from the Santa Paula Freeway
(SR 126) in the eastern portion of the City of Ventura to the Foothill Freeway (Interstate 210)
near the City of San Fernando. The following text describes the various segments of SR 118
in the project study area.
North -East of the New Los Angeles Avenue Interchange SR 118 is a four -to -six lane
freeway, with interchanges provided at Los Angeles Avenue - Princeton Avenue and
Collins Drive.
Between the New Los Angeles Avenue Interchange and Spring Road SR 118
(concurrent with SR 23) continues on a westerly alignment along New Los Angeles
Avenue. New Los Angeles Avenue is a major east -west arterial within the City of
Moorpark. This arterial has four travel lanes with traffic signals at Science Drive and
Spring Road.
,J
Between Spring Road and Tierra Rejada Road SR. 118 continues along Los Angeles
Avenue. Los Angeles Avenue in this portion of the City of Moorpark varies in width
3.7_.:
r
DRAFT
from 102' at the fully improved sections to 32' (two -lane section) west of Grimes
Canyon Road. Los Angeles Avenue is signalized at Spring Road, Moorpark Avenue,
Park Lane, Liberty Bell Road and Tierra Rejada Road- Gabbert Road.
IT
d
10 U
M r
2 i
cc
BROADWAY
i
� 2
r
U
2y
v
,�o
G�'
Q�?
Q CAMPUS PARK
SR -118
2Jti SIMI VALLEY fW`
3Pv <os
ELE ,NGELES
05
v
POINDE HIGH
XTE�r 1 (7
W 1 ¢
m n `
� 1
C7 LAS ANGELES NEW LO
Y ANGELES \�
Ix X00
9
Q PEACH HILL
�A
J
J 9
i
U �
W
CL
REJADA
TIERRA A f
j f
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
exhibit 3.7 -1
Existing Street System
f ' f
an
1�� qK'
v � �''°'ii it
West of Tierra Rejada Road -Gabbert Road, SR 118 continues west along Los Angeles
Avenue as a four -lane arterial. West of Butter Creek Road, SR 118 narrows to a
two -lane arterial.
State Route 23 (SR 23) is a State Highway facility that extends north from U.S. Highway 101
(US 101) in Thousand Oaks to SR 118 at the New Los Angeles Avenue interchange. The
following text describes the various segments of SR 23 in the Moorpark area.
South of the New Los Angeles Avenue Interchange, SR 23 is a four -to -six lane
freeway. This segment of SR 23 provides a north -south freeway connection between
US 101 on the south and SR 118 on the north.
Between the New Los Angeles Avenue interchange and Spring Road SR 23
(concurrent with SR 118) continues on a westerly alignment along New Los Angeles
Avenue. New Los Angeles Avenue is a major east -west arterial with four travel lanes.
Between Spring Road and Moorpark Avenue, SR 23 (concurrent with SR 118)
continues westerly along Los Angeles Avenue. This segment of Los Angeles Avenue
has four travel lanes. At Moorpark Avenue, SR 23 continues on'a northerly alignment.
Between Los Angeles Avenue and High Street, SR 23 continues along Moorpark
Avenue, a major north -south arterial. Between Los Angeles Avenue and Second Street,
Moorpark Avenue has four travel lanes and a median left -turn lane. North of Second
Street, Moorpark Avenue transitions to two travel lanes. Moorpark Avenue is
signalized at Los Angeles Avenue, Poindexter Avenue -First Street and High Street.
Between High Street and Broadway, SR 23 continues on a northerly alignment along
Walnut Canyon Road. This section of SR 23 has two 1.3' travel lanes and serves as the
primary north -south route between the Cities of Moorpark and Fillmore.
Between Walnut Canyon Road and Grimes Canyon Road SR 23 continues on a
westerly 'alignment along Broadway. This section of SR 23 has two 13' travel lanes.
North of Broadway, SR 23 continues on a northerly alignment along Grimes Canyon
Road. This section of SR 23 has two 13' travel lanes
Campus Park Drive is an east -west major artenal extending from its current terminus near
Cambridge Street on the west to Campus Road on the east. Between Princeton Avenue and
Campus Road, Campus Park Drive has four travel lanes with a raised median. West of
Princeton Avenue, Campus Park Drive is striped for two travel lanes. This arterial is
signalized at Collins Drive and Delfen Street. There is a four -way stop at Marquette Street.
Collins Drive is a north -south major arterial extending from Campus Road north of the
Moorpark College to the SR l ] 8 interchange. This arterial has four travel lanes and primarily
3.?..
CR"�T
serves the Moorpark College and residential areas in the northeast portion of the City. This
arterial is signalized at Campus Park Drive and the SR 118 westbound on -off ramps.
Princeton Avenue is a north -south arterial extending from Campus Park Drive on the north
to the SR 118 interchange on the south. This arterial has four travel lanes with a raised median
and primarily provides access to the SR 118 Freeway for residences in the northeast portion
of the City. Princeton Avenue is stop -sign controlled at the intersection with Campus
Park Drive. South of the SR 118 interchange, this arterial continues on a southerly /easterly
alignment as Los Angeles Avenue.
Los Angeles Avenue east of the Collins Drive/SR 118 interchange is a two -lane arterial
extending east to Madera Road in the City of Simi Valley. Between the SR 118/Princeton
Avenue interchange and Spring Road (opposite High Street), Los Angeles Avenue is a two -four
lane arterial connecting the northeast portion of the City to the downtown area This segment
of Los Angeles Avenue is signalized at the SR 118 interchange, as well as at Condor Drive
and Spring Road.
Spring Road is a north -south major arterial extending from Tierra Rejada Road on the south
to its current terminus north of the High Street -Los Angles Avenue intersection. Between High
Street -Los Angles Avenue and Los Angeles Avenue -New Los Angeles Avenue, Spring Road
has four travel lanes and a median left -turn lane. South of Los Angeles Avenue -New Los
Angeles Avenue, Spring Road narrows to two travel lanes and continues to Tierra Rejada
Road. At the Peach Hill Road intersection right- and left -turn lanes are provided on both the
north and southbound approaches. Spring Road is signalized at High Street -Los Angeles
Avenue, Los Angeles Avenue -New Los Angeles Avenue, Peach Hill Road and Tierra Rejada
Road.
Moorpark Avenue is a north -south major arterial that serves as SR 23 north of Los Angeles
Avenue. Between Second Street and Los Angeles Avenue, Moorpark Avenue has four travel
lanes with a median left -turn lane. North of Second Street, Moorpark Avenue narrows to two
C <�/ travel lanes and continues on a northerly alignment as Walnut Canyon Road north of Casey
n1 j Road. At the Poindexter Avenue -First Street and High Street intersections additional turn lanes
#Lf are provided. Moorpark Avenue is signalized at Los Angeles Avenue, Poindexter Avenue -First
f' Street and .High Street.
(High Street between Moorpark Avenue and Spring Road (opposite Los Angeles Avenue) is
a two lane east -west collector street with on -street parking. Commercial vehicles over 3 tons
are prohibited on this local collector street. High Street is signalized at Moorpark Avenue and
Spring Road.
Tierra Rejada Road is a four -lane major arterial extending south from Los Angeles Avenue
; (opposite Gabbert Road) through the southern portion of Moorpark to the City of Simi Valley.
This arterial is signalized at Los Angeles Avenue, Mountain Trail Street, Mountain Meadow
Drive, Walnut Creek Road, Peach Hill Road, Spring Road and the SR 23 interchange. North
_. of Los'Angeles Avenue, Tierra Rejada Road continues north as Gabbert Road. Between Los
Angeles Avenue and Poindexter Avenue, Gabbert Road is a four -lane north -south arterial.
3.7 -8
3.7.3.2 Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service
Daily Traffic Volumes. Existing average daily traffic (ADT) volume data for the study -area
surface streets were collected by ATE during November/December 1993, and January 1994,
for this study. The existing ADT volumes on the SR 118 and SR 23 freeway segments were
obtained from the City's MTAM document. Illustrated on Exhibit 3.7 -2 are the Existing ADT
Volumes for the study street segments. Copies of the ADT counts are contained in
Appendix 3.7.
Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service. Because traffic flow on roadway
networks is most severely restricted at intersections, a detailed traffic flow analysis must
examine the operating conditions of critical intersections during peak periods. In analyzing the
existing and future operational characteristics of intersections, "Levels of Service" (LOS)
grades "A" through "F" are used, with LOS A indicating very good operations and LOS F
indicating poor operations (more complete definitions of the levels of service grades are
contained in Appendix 3.7). City of Moorpark General Plan Policies state that LOS C is the
system performance objective.
For this study, A.M. and P.M. (7:00 A.M. - 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M. - 6:00 P.M.) peak hour
intersection turning movement traffic counts were conducted during November/December 1993
at the 20 critical intersections selected for evaluation. Illustrated on Exhibits 3.7 -3 and 3.7-4
are the Existing A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes at 20 study intersections.
In order to estimate the existing operational efficiency of the signalized intersections, an
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis was performed, as described in the guidelines
published by the City of Moorpark. z The existing levels of service for the stop -sign controlled
Princeton Avenue /Campus Park Drive intersection were determined based on actual vehicle
delays measured during the peak hour periods. The existing levels of service for the Collins
Drive /SR 118 Eastbound ramps -Los Angeles Avenue intersection were calculated using the
theoretical capacity of a three way stop -sign controlled intersection outlined in the 1985
Highway Capacity Manual.' The vehicle delays at the Happy Camp Road - Walnut Canyon
Road - Broadway (SR 23) intersections (three separate intersections) were averaged to represent
the operations of a single intersection. Table 1 lists the type of traffic control and existing
A.M. and P.M. peak hour levels of service for the '20 study intersections evaluated in this
analysis.
2 Guidelines For Preparing Traffic and Circulation Studies City of Moorpark, April
11, 1994.
Hi hway Capacity Manual, Highway Research Board Special Report 209,
Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, 1985.
3.7 -t
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
ADT Volumes in 1,000s
i
exhibit 3.7 -2
Existing ADT Volumes
j
qg
O
A't✓ff' f SR -1
� y
/ a
�t
c
SRS i Ito
d�4 r
110 Z R g-
ISource: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
°88 i
tj 4 i 100
RFo L to io-�►
i•— 1a xo7. °OR
I► qtr (�to tih
t to —►
t00 R 9 ° �p5
20
\ HICII Y 4 r too
tom �f
POINDEXTER Jc t6 �
yo SR; SCII
a
ep
too - i tto
�-- s�o 1 r tw ��►
LOS ANGELES r 1 r Jo j0f
t ��A
tw-+ 1120 I�('
i"
to RRR 1707 :get
Y - 2,
� � to i
" i424, �
Rs Io1 �~ 20 PEACH HILL �� to
l Jot 1
IO
tt .pt4o Win \'• / �_ to ob'o
�
110 x
270y
IQ
do so
Z �1�
NCE
v ` 5
J 4 4- 0
1 50 Jo t =0
nos _51
740 y0 —"
6.0
s^ o
10 2
tt' 1
tto "Z �^
g
SIx1 vALEIY 1
SR -111
O
i 40 14
tl i r 320 04
R F0. 7{
'.LES j r 110
RY .i —o
ion 4t
t 40 S 8
Y
°
o00
io
.11.- tt
SIERRA REJADA
-�
10
� i 4
r 7"
R
,Jt
r tt
to20
to
)
10 f BROADWAY
z3°-r
;p0 i
) t r
RR
9
L
:x—L
RIR°
qg
O
A't✓ff' f SR -1
� y
/ a
�t
c
SRS i Ito
d�4 r
110 Z R g-
ISource: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
°88 i
tj 4 i 100
RFo L to io-�►
i•— 1a xo7. °OR
I► qtr (�to tih
t to —►
t00 R 9 ° �p5
20
\ HICII Y 4 r too
tom �f
POINDEXTER Jc t6 �
yo SR; SCII
a
ep
too - i tto
�-- s�o 1 r tw ��►
LOS ANGELES r 1 r Jo j0f
t ��A
tw-+ 1120 I�('
i"
to RRR 1707 :get
Y - 2,
� � to i
" i424, �
Rs Io1 �~ 20 PEACH HILL �� to
l Jot 1
IO
tt .pt4o Win \'• / �_ to ob'o
�
110 x
270y
IQ
do so
Z �1�
NCE
v ` 5
J 4 4- 0
1 50 Jo t =0
nos _51
740 y0 —"
6.0
s^ o
10 2
tt' 1
tto "Z �^
g
SIx1 vALEIY 1
SR -111
O
i 40 14
tl i r 320 04
R F0. 7{
'.LES j r 110
RY .i —o
ion 4t
t 40 S 8
exhibit 3.7 -3
Existing A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
R
Jto1 �
SIERRA REJADA
-�
,d'
.p
R
ttt0
700-1`
N
exhibit 3.7 -3
Existing A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
L
og R S S .L a
4— 330
�, ew :
„ °z RRs
i�
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
A „o
4-- to tosh ('
.— t ° to.
a
i3O y `g�
130 --;1, 8 ° s
�a
io
r
too
IRON
4, '0
i 2w
U
o o
-Rdi 10
J"p-
r 20
2.
d° , o
✓gt<��i�r ,w
0 -
3 2
sp
1 to OROAOWAY
120 —►
�t A
10 1 -► I 1
20 1 A
,� to --► 1 /
= ^ 8
teo —L age
w'Z
Il
300
t e
�
230 \°`
70 �
1i01w !—
Z yo
~ 1�
•
r°
°s � CAIIPl15 PARK
og R S S .L a
4— 330
�, ew :
„ °z RRs
i�
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
A „o
4-- to tosh ('
.— t ° to.
a
i3O y `g�
130 --;1, 8 ° s
�a
io
r
too
4 i 170 b '�--
�— 57
tb S
3to -► 60
YO
i to
too
: ,ES
R
,10 �b
alwl vA(Lry
\ SOT
4N
r4
T 260 —1 70 —►
"o--p.
TIERRA REJADA
R 2
l JL
310 ` • g 701
630 000- -►
.a,�► 200 —i N
exhibit 3.7 -4
Existing P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
IRON
4, '0
i 2w
>r
_J01
POIND[KTCR
210
Z
8 i $ SCIENCE
sp
= ^ 8
lbl
i
300
t e
230 \°`
70 �
1i01w !—
LOS
NR^CEL ES
r°
;-
00
s
;00 -
tiERtr 0
o
70o Z
R
Ito so
26A0
g
lR
Io
� 10
$R
o
80
r
°to b
290,
too
SOS
M
4 i 170 b '�--
�— 57
tb S
3to -► 60
YO
i to
too
: ,ES
R
,10 �b
alwl vA(Lry
\ SOT
4N
r4
T 260 —1 70 —►
"o--p.
TIERRA REJADA
R 2
l JL
310 ` • g 701
630 000- -►
.a,�► 200 —i N
exhibit 3.7 -4
Existing P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
A brief description of the LOS calculation procedures used in estimating intersection levels of
service (signalized and unsignalized) is contained in Appendix 3.7, along with copies of the
traffic count and vehicle delay data, and LOS calculation worksheets.
The data presented in Table 1 indicate that all of the study intersections currently operate at
acceptable levels of service. This conclusion is based on the City's system performance
objective of LOS C.
Field observations conducted by ATE personnel confirmed that the study intersections currently
operate at their respective levels of service. However, it was observed that northbound traffic
on Collins Drive would periodically back up from Campus Park Drive to the SR 118
interchange during the A.M. peak hour. These conditions were primarily related to the influx
of college traffic and were relatively short-term, lasting only for about 15 minutes.
Table 1
Existing Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service
Study Intersection
Control
Type
ICU Ratio - LOS
A.M. Peak
P.M. Peak
Delfen St / Campus Park Dr
Signal
0.33 - A
0.19 - A
Collins Dr / Campus Park Dr
Signal
0.56 - A
0.40 - A
Collins Dr / SR 118 WB Ramps
Signal
0.55 - A
028 - A
Collins Dr / SR 118 EB Ramps - Los Angeles Ave (a)
3 -Way Stop
0.46 - A
0.24 - A
Princeton Ave / Campus Park Dr (b)
l -Way Stop
N/A - A
N/A - A
Princeton Ave - Los Angeles Ave / SR 118 WB Ramps
Signal
0.45 - A
0.36 - A
Los Angeles Ave / SR 118 EB Ramps
Signal
0.36 - A
0.49 - A
Los Angeles Ave / Condor Dr
Signal
0.38 - A
0.44 - A
Spring Rd /High St -Los Angeles Ave
Signal
0.29 - A
0.39 - A
Happy Camp Rd / Walnut Cyn Rd / Broadway (c)
Multi -Way Stop
N/A - B
N/A - B
Moorpark Ave / High St
Signal
0.36 - A
0.50 - A
Moorpark Ave / Poindexter Ave - First St
Signal
0.52 - A
0.59 - A
New Los Angeles Ave / Science Dr
Signal
0.55 - A
0.64 - B
Los Angeles Ave / Spring Rd
Signal
0.63 - B
0.74 - C
Los Angeles Ave / Moorpark Ave
Signal
0.57 - A
0.60 - A
Los Angeles Ave / Tierra Rejada Rd
Signal
0.55 - A
0.66 - B
Tierra Rejada Rd / SR 23 NB Ramps
Signal
0.36 - A
0.59 - A
Tierra Rejada Rd / SR 23 SB Ramps
Signal
0.36 - A
0.61 - B
Tierra Rejada Rd / Moorpark Rd
Signal
0.71 - C
0.59 - A
Tierra Rejada Rd / Spring Rd
Signal
0.57 - A
0.49 - A
kn) 1.ua oaseu on capacity or a s -way stop -sign controlled intersection.
(b) LOS based on measured vehicle delays.
(c) Vehicle delays averaged to represent operations o, a single intersection.
3.7-1
3.7.4 IMPACT CRITERIA
In order to identify any significant impacts that would be attributable to the projeet, the
following significance criteria were used.
The City of Moorpark significance criteria (City of Moorpark, "Guidelines for Preparing
Traffic and Circulation Studies ") states if a level of service degradation of one level of service
or greater is attributable to a project it will be considered significant enough to require
mitigation measures. The City's criteria also states that a level of service degradation of less
than one level of service may also be considered significant, depending on circumstances. As
a design constraint, it is intended that a Level of Service of C or better be maintained. This
provides a broad range of measurement for project - specific impacts. In order to equate this
significance criteria to a more definitive unit of measurement, the following criteria was
developed by ATE to relate the change in ICU ratio to project - specific impacts. The following
criteria was utilized to identify project - specific impacts at the study intersections within the
City.
l) At an intersection that is operating in the LOS D range (with project traffic), a
significant impact will be attributable to the project if the project traffic results in
a ICU ratio change greater than or equal to 0.02
2) At an intersection that is operating in the LOS E or LOS F range (with project
traffic), a significant impact will be attributable to the project if the project traffic
results in a ICU ratio change of 0.01 or greater.
3.7.5 PROJECT - GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
3.7.5.1 Trip Generation
Table 2 summarizes the trip generation estimates for the Hidden Creek Ranch Project. These
estimates were calculated using the trip generation rates contained in the City's traffic model,
which werer compiled primarily from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip
Generation report.' As shown in Table 2, the project trip generation was estimated assuming
the amount of development expected within the project site by Year 2000, and full
development of the project site for Year 2010.
The data in Table 2 indicate that 20,515 daily, 1,194 A.M. and 1,716 P.M. peak hour driveway
trips would be generated by the development expected within the project site for the Year
2000. The data also indicate that 47,206 daily, 2,933 A.M. and 3,790 P.M peak hour driveway
trips would be generated by the Hidden Creek Ranch Project upon buildout (Year 2010).
' Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Fifth Edition, 1991.
3.7 -14
Table 2
Project Trip Generation Estimates
3.7.5.2 Trip Distribution & Assignment
The MTAM, which accounts for pass -by and diverted trips, was used to distribute and assigned
project - generated traffic to the Moorpark street system. Because of the size of the project, the
existing zonal structure within the traffic model was also modified to properly "load" the trips
onto the street system. It is noted that the project trip generation estimates shown in Table 2
are "driveway trips" and that interaction of trips within the project boundaries will occur. The
distribution and assignment of these project trips to the surrounding street system by the
MTAM accounts for this type of trip interaction. Trip generation associated with retail
commercial developments has a high percentage of pass -by trips. That is, traffic on the street
system for other purposes patronizes the retail businesses as part of another trip. The MTAM
accounts for these trip types when assigning traffic to the system.
3.7.6 YEAR 2000 BASELINE ANALYSIS
In order to plan for the appropriate transportation infrastructure improvements, project - related
traffic impacts were assessed using Year 2000 traffic conditions as a baseline. The Year 2000
baseline traffic scenario considers developments projected to occur and the related street and
intersection improvements that would be in place at that time. The following text outlines the
3.7- I i
Vehicle Trip Ends
A.M. <Peak Hour
P.M. Peak Hour
Study Scenario /Land Use
Daily
Total
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Year 2000 Proiect:
940 SFDU (Low Density)
8,977
714
188
526
855
555
300
138 SFDU (Medium Density)
1,105
9f
28
63
107
66
41
311 Apartments
2,012
174
59
115
193
112
81
311 Condominiums
1,822
131
25
112
149
96
53
100,000 SF Commercial
5,050
22
14
8
356
178
178
186 Acre Golf Course
1,549
5ti
45
11
56
11
45
Totals:
20,515
1,194
359
835
1,716
1,018
698
Year 2010 Proiect:
2,021 SFDU (Low Density)
19,300
1,536
404
1,132
1,839
1,193
646
243 SFDU (Medium Density)
1,946
160
49
111
189
116
73
478 Apartments
3,092
268
91
177
296
172
124
479 Condominiums
2,806
210
38
172
230
148
82
318,000 SF Commercial
16,059
70
45
25
1,132
566
566
2,250 Std. Elem. /Mid. School
2,454
633
384
249
48
24
24
186 Acre Golf Course
1,549
56
45
11
56
11
45
Totals:
47,206
2,933
1,056
1,877
3,790
2,230
1,560
3.7.5.2 Trip Distribution & Assignment
The MTAM, which accounts for pass -by and diverted trips, was used to distribute and assigned
project - generated traffic to the Moorpark street system. Because of the size of the project, the
existing zonal structure within the traffic model was also modified to properly "load" the trips
onto the street system. It is noted that the project trip generation estimates shown in Table 2
are "driveway trips" and that interaction of trips within the project boundaries will occur. The
distribution and assignment of these project trips to the surrounding street system by the
MTAM accounts for this type of trip interaction. Trip generation associated with retail
commercial developments has a high percentage of pass -by trips. That is, traffic on the street
system for other purposes patronizes the retail businesses as part of another trip. The MTAM
accounts for these trip types when assigning traffic to the system.
3.7.6 YEAR 2000 BASELINE ANALYSIS
In order to plan for the appropriate transportation infrastructure improvements, project - related
traffic impacts were assessed using Year 2000 traffic conditions as a baseline. The Year 2000
baseline traffic scenario considers developments projected to occur and the related street and
intersection improvements that would be in place at that time. The following text outlines the
3.7- I i
�D
methodologies used to forecast the Year 2000 baseline traffic conditions and develop the
appropriate circulation system.
3.7.6.1 Land Use & Traffic Volumes
The trip generation attributes for the Year 2000 scenario were developed based on land use
projections prepared by City staff. For the most part, the Year 2000 land use represents
approximately 38 percent of the development growth forecast between 1994 and 2010 (six out
of 16 years), with some adjustments for specifically known projects. The MTAM was then
used to distribute and assigned the Year 2000 traffic demands onto the Moorpark street system.
The Year 2000 Baseline ADT Volumes are illustrated on Exhibit 3.7 -5. The Year 2000
Baseline A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes are illustrated on Exhibits 3.7 -6 and 3.7 -7.
3.7.6.2 Circulation System
The Year 2000 circulation system used by the MTAM is essentially identical to'the existing
system (illustrated on Exhibit 3.7 -1) with minor modifications to provide access to the parcels
expected to be developed by the Year 2000. For example, the addition of the south leg of
Science Drive at New Los Angeles Avenue and the turning lanes on New Los Angeles Avenue
will be required at the New Los Angeles Avenue /Science Drive intersection to provide access
to the Carlsberg Specific Plan area.
3.7.6.3 Levels of Service
In order to determine what improvements to the existing circulation system would be required
to accommodate the Year 2000 traffic demands, the intersection levels of service were
calculated using the Year 2000 peak hour traffic volumes. The results of this analysis are
displayed in Table 3, with the level of service worksheets contained in Appendix 3.7. The
improvements required of the Carlsberg Specific Plan at the New Los Angeles Avenue /Science
Drive intersection were assumed to be in place.
The data presented in Table 3 indicate that 2 of tree 20 study intersections would exceed the
City's LOS C objective during the P.M. peak hour.
3 7 -16
f �
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
L
6.11, \ 1 i 0, �� v "'" 18
rt,�eo.
ADT Volumes in 1,000s
exhibit 3.7 -5
Year 2000 Baseline ADT Volumes
'x
AF 100 1 r do � + 4 r- io
to 21900 11 t0f BROADWAY 401
9 R 290 —i 0
300-74, '
I
� RRp
T o SR - It
�- 20
1 =0
8R_ 4-- 10 ion ��g�
r 10 M1y to -;6, °
ISO Roo
too
HIGH 4
\ jp1
POINDEXTER » 290 --w
` tto7 g4"
g
gds i too 8� i 230 =o'" t 110 o°'
1,r SO
590 LOS ANGELES t] r 110 i— ,AD
Ito __p 1�� SOJ { t201 • �5i0
�JO ► 10 —s I tJto —► 1 �d
Iso -i SAES $R$ \ 10—a RRS 150 451
0\ --�,
$RR C4
SD -S
50 (� 1 4
y / p/
041`11- 0 CAMPUS PARK
G
i
a SIMI YALLEY
SR -118
0
Go
RI 1R 1 � T tic
I ♦ ♦ r 500
/ pp 7d x
va . ANGELES - 3 S � � r e0p
Ra �4: 'so
RR 9601 �t
�4 50— Ro
,ISCiENCE
�o
ta—>r
.6 "ot
to 300 — I T t / 30 130
w � eo 7 33ig f I � i � r "o 'cb Iq, f Jo
PLACH HILL
�
\0 - - ) 30�
150Z'�SYi
I �
tN1H�laH
to--*.
MOUNTAIN
MEADOW 84001 tS0
020
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
.50
510-0- {I I1
exhibit 3.7 -6
Year 2000 Baseline A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
°g
too
4- 450
750
a—'
,1 ti
amz N
I
exhibit 3.7 -6
Year 2000 Baseline A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
0
f 20
r e0
ozli'
, c o
v-s 10 SR -II
�y
J e'
v
c J tR�OL'
r
R R
ItI 30 .� � 4 'r- p
to 1 BROADWAY 701 A
1�0 --► t0 --► I
270
any so°
i o1i"
' ul:
_o 10 10 (HIGH
0
\
ddb
10 1 f
POINDEXTER
1lOZ Rss
g
$IIR i R84 i �I0 aY i 210
I I .0— Sao
7� r y tir SM LOS ANGELES f l- r 20w ♦- I11
a 9 -,o
6f ; 0 ,
2902 its / 8?0 \ 70 "'L °88 200'"'y X28
o I
'0`
♦- to 1 t70 -y ITr / 1fp i 2o
w
120 8_oY t
; dl4 i °� �1 °7,76 .-
/ �� �� PEACH 1111_1 �� '` '.A
570 }r
lowi.
�^ ,g
Y
MOUND �,,N so
oo 0
s
I I i 140 2'b rA
MOUNTAIN ISO 1 '
MEADOW 470 --► 7o a
170
I Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
43 2
✓// r ,0
,eo
20 J
—;k, R8
,w
CAMPUS PARK
n SIN) VALLEY MT
SR -118 `
O
I i 170 f�fS
r )to R o
�
MI h
ANGELES 1f f2 x n r r o 0
130
�s •— ,0
350 —41
4 90 -!
710 1 A
00 7 IQ
220,
!!0 1
690- -*. 1
200 /c c _
r TIERRA RCJADA
'1— ,150 90
00 o$
.�4
�10 f 1
10 h (• 720 --►
A7oZ
exhibit 3.7 -7
Year 2000 Baseline P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Table 3
Year 2000 Peak Hour Levels of Service
-
(a) LOS based on capacity of a 3 -way stop -sign controlled intersection.
(b) LOS based on estimated vehicle delays_
(c) LOS based on estimated vehicle delays for a single intersection.
(d) LOS assumes improvements required of the Carlsberg Specific Plan.
3.7.6.4 Required Improvements
The following improvements would be required at the locations expected to exceed the LOS C
performance objective under the Year 2000 baseline traffic conditions. These improvements
would provide the minimum circulation system for the Year 2000 scenario, and are illustrated
on Exhibit 3.7 -8. Table 4 summarizes the levels of service associated with the following
required improvements.
3.7 -20
ICU Ratio - LOS
Study Intersection
A.M. Peak
P.M. Peak
Delfen St / Campus Park Dr
0.36 - A
0.19 - A
Collins Dr / Campus Park Dr
0.73 - C
0.49 - A
Collins Dr / SR 118 WB Ramps
0.67 - B
0.33 - A
Collins Dr / SR 118 EB Ramps - Los Angeles Ave (a)
0.60 - A
0.32 - A
Princeton Ave / Campus Park Dr (b)
N/A - A
N/A - A
Princeton Ave - Los Angeles Ave / SR 118 WB Ramps
0.58 - A
0.48 - A
Los Angeles Ave / SR 118 EB Ramps
0.43 - A
0.58 - A
Los Angeles Ave / Condor Dr
0.31 - A
0.38 - A
Spring Rd / High St - Los Angeles Ave
0.42 - A
0.49 - A
Happy Camp Rd / Walnut Cyn Rd / Broadway (c:)
N/A - B
N/A - C
Moorpark Ave / High St
0.44 - A
0.65 - B
Moorpark Ave / Poindexter Ave - First St
0.56 - A
0.68 - B•
New Los Angeles Ave / Science Dr (d)
0.74 - C
0.77 - C
Los Angeles Ave / Spring Rd
0.71 - C
0.86 - D
0.76 - C
Los Angeles Ave / Moorpark Ave
0.67 - B
Los Angeles Ave / Tierra Rejada Rd
0.66 - B
0.88 - D
Tierra Rejada Rd / SR 23 NB Ramps
0.41 - A
0.68 - B
Tierra Rejada Rd / SR 23 SB Ramps
0.40 - A
0.69 - B
Tierra Rejada Rd / Moorpark Rd
0.73 - C
0.67 - B
Tierra Rejada Rd / Spring Rd
0.66 - B
0.59 - B
(a) LOS based on capacity of a 3 -way stop -sign controlled intersection.
(b) LOS based on estimated vehicle delays_
(c) LOS based on estimated vehicle delays for a single intersection.
(d) LOS assumes improvements required of the Carlsberg Specific Plan.
3.7.6.4 Required Improvements
The following improvements would be required at the locations expected to exceed the LOS C
performance objective under the Year 2000 baseline traffic conditions. These improvements
would provide the minimum circulation system for the Year 2000 scenario, and are illustrated
on Exhibit 3.7 -8. Table 4 summarizes the levels of service associated with the following
required improvements.
3.7 -20
r
—p-
GABBERT RD. MOORPARK AVE. SPRING RD. SCIENCE DR.
L. A. AVE. r- .� �. �" NEW
__0 --' L. A. AVE.
1
TIERRA REJADA RD.
1
LEGEND
�-- EXISTING INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS
-- YEAR 2000 IMPROVED INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS
exhibit 3.7 -8
Year 2000 Required Intersection Geometric Improvements
DRAFT
Los Angeles Avenue / Spring Road. The northbound left -turns forecast during the P.M. peak
hour period will require the addition of a second northbound left -turn lane. With this
additional turn lane, the intersection's operation during the P.M peak hour would improve to
LOS C. This improvement could be implemented by converting (restriping) the number one
northbound through lane to a northbound left -turn lane; thus providing dual left -turn lanes, one
through lane and a right -turn lane on the northbound approach at this intersection.
Modifications to the north -south left -turn signal phasing may be required at this location to
avoid potential conflicts between these two movements.
Los Angeles Avenue / Tierra Rejada Road. The westbound left -turns forecast during the
P.M. peak hour period will require the addition of a second westbound left -turn lane. With this
additional turn lane the intersection's operation during the P.M. peak hour would improve to
LOS C. This improvement could be implemented by restriping the east and westbound
approaches at this location..
Table 4
Year 2000 Peak Hour Levels of Service
(with Minimum System Requirements)
Study Intersection
ICU Ratio - LOS
A.M. Peak
P.M. Peak
Los Angeles Ave / Spring Rd -
0.75 C
0.77 - C
Los Angeles Ave / Tierra Rejada Rd
0.65 B
0.73 - C
3.7.7 YEAR 2000 + PROJECT ANALYSIS
Potential impacts of the Hidden Creek Ranch Project on the Year 2000 minimum circulation
system were assessed assuming the additional traffic which would be generated by the amount
of development expected within the project site h, Year 2000. The following text presents the
results of this analysis..
3.7.7.1 Land Use & Traffic Volumes
The traffic volumes expected to be generated by the project for the Year 2000 scenario were
added to the Year 2000 baseline traffic volumes. As shown in Table 2; 20,515 daily, 1,194
A.M. and 1,716 P.M. peak hour- driveway trips would be generated by the development
expected within the project site for the Year 2000. . These volumes were distributed and
assigned to the Year 2000 minimum circulation system using the MTAM. As previously
noted, a certain amount of project'trips will interact within the project boundaries. The Year
2000 + Project ADT Volumes are illustrated on Exhibit 3.7 -9. The Year 2000 + Project A.M.
and P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes are illustrated on Exhibits 3.7 -10 and 3.7 -11.
3.7 -.._.
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
ADT Volumes in 1,000s
exhibit 3.7 -9
Year 2000 + Project ADT Volumes
L
N
W
=
R
�Ir 160
R R 9
4 y
�— 20 V
u
t 10
,� .✓
r /
w 100
j- 11a
,►b
•- 160
��4
r l,a
20 0
(�
10 —r BROADWAY
290 —0.
701 •
°
sS
RRS
230Z nSS
o
s
I u
ISO
4 .— ♦.0
-
770 --►aaa
000
II � i 70
g__W� Y�� r 1io ,0 , ��� by 10-7. °F?
xo
HIGH A
101
u POINDEXTER
n 120-7 aR
8
1
�R$ t Ila Ron L "^
x,0
t 630 i 110 ,
r sw ew
� �1r
SCIENCE
\`P °
SR 118
"� l_'
411 It
1
�Ir 160
LOS ANGELES
4 y
p
4' f 4t
4! h \
,� .✓
r /
60
770- -1
I
8R
200 1
11,0 —►
�I (�
1 1
1x0 1
1110—►
'I (�
1 f
iy
,e0 -i
$°
°
107.
RRS
eoZ9R
o
h PO
170 ,L
/440 R ro
I u
ISO
4 .— ♦.0
-
770 --►aaa
or_
10 _1.
li 4
r
io7
i
♦ j ,70
�� ��_��7° 20
(]�0
��
_YR_g
PLACH HILL
s10
i 1►V. 4\
`\
,c„I ERR
�
t1W� w,
lvpr1�
° i
23i0y
_
\\
TIERRA REIADA -
M�HT AIN
h PO
170 ,L
/440 R ro
I u
ISO
4 .— ♦.0
770 --►aaa
bi
20
�— Iw
40UN7AIN
130 1
MEADOW
880--p.
ISource: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
e° a
2
o
U
� � C
230-L °
a
d - 5141 Y4LLEy �
SR -116
Y I i so N�fle
j 410
'.LCS
� 1 R
1a 1
�r 0
00
V�_pl
exhibit 3.7 -10
Year 2000 + Project A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
P
430 1
540--s- ., 0
!1
�g
\\
TIERRA REIADA -
Ald
ISO
4 .— ♦.0
770 --►aaa
exhibit 3.7 -10
Year 2000 + Project A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
3 y
n8ig
t 220A
20
r 00
_
20
4 �- 300
e0
O�
2
Ja r►
p
0
10 1 BROADWAY
170 -►
t ♦ ,~ ` too
•
do -► I
Y 50-0
201
20 --►
no °y r 'w:'ti�V
yo
A—W
�Y X1210
°o
p04
CAMPUS PARK
\JES ''IIi t
\ ~
HICH `°l �>t0 oIIY R -7 _♦ r L► t
t �
► xt
20 0
to
1100 y w
ott A
1407, goo 200
POINDETER X
CDs
u 120
R Y$
�J a SCIENCE
711 c``f St StS �gl� i ow �? t
FR- 11e /f r+41,j -AS10 LOS ANGELES `{t t'200 +41,j-'AIeO • ��`
7w i I t 1 �\ 250 1 "'900 1 I I �o
1~ 2807 I�& 7Z,rRY
1
eh t 30 t2o
10 430
/ Yp120 T 1� __ ____ P_ y �? W g � w�l � \ m � + ► ab}� � ea/ So p ) r�t7t 120
'o 1,0
2�0
PEACH � w s o 40
CIO l// U N
GD M�HZ'tH ano • YR � �„� cif � i
�4tt�a
MOUNTAIN f 25"0 �j v 4-1020
MEADOW
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
SI' yl VA11rY
R 4 COs
A_ teo \ �i °f`t
280 A
:LES „ R
xx \ s fib: o o
.��fi'
'
a.w 1
�4 eD� Rx
22D 1
so-i R
exhibit 3.7 -11
Year 2000 + Project P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
i
t 220A
�
770
1�-
�570-0. I�
2eo
0
TIERRA REJADA 'Y
A—W
�Y X1210
710—►.207
�
exhibit 3.7 -11
Year 2000 + Project P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
i
3.7.7.2 Circulation System
The Year 2000 minimum circulation system (improved) was modified to provide access-to the
project site (Hidden Creek Ranch property). The MTAM model network was revised to
include the site circulation system for the Hidden Creek Ranch, the primary component being
the east -west arterial, Hidden Creek Drive. A two -lane section on this roadway will be
sufficient for the Year 2000 scenario. This arterial would connect to SR 23 (Walnut Canyon
Road) to the west via an extension of Broadway. The circulation system modification assumed
that the existing Happy Camp Road/Walnut Cyn Road/Broadway intersection would be
reconfigured to a conventional intersection. The Year 2000 + Project peak hour traffic
volumes at this location may warrant the installation of traffic signals, thus traffic signals were
assumed to be in place for analysis comparison purposes. Hidden Creek Drive serving the
project site would also connect at the east to Campus Park Drive via the extension of the
existing road to the east, which is discussed in more detail in Section 3.7.12, Internal
Circulation. All other elements of the Year 2000 minimum circulation system were left
unchanged.
Construction of the Lagoon/SR 118 interchange was not assumed for the Year 2000 scenario,
since the initial traffic model runs determined that the interchange would not be necessary to
accommodate Year 2000 + Project traffic volumes.
3.7.7.3 Levels of Service
The A.M. and P.M. peak hour intersection levels of service were calculated using the Year
2000 + Project traffic volumes. The results of this analysis are displayed in Table 5, along
with Year 2000 baseline levels of service for comparison. The level of service worksheets are
contained in Appendix 3.7.
).7 -26
Table 5
Year 2000 + Project: Peak Hour Levels of Service
(a) LOS based on capacity of a 3 -way stop -sign controlled intersection.
(b) LOS based on estimated vehicle delays.
(c) Year 2000 + Project LOS based on reconfigured intersectio r! and ignal control.
3.7.7.4 Circulation Deficiencies
As shown in Table 5, the majority of the study intersections would continue to operate at
acceptable levels of service under the Year 2000 + Project traffic conditions, except for the
Collins Drive /Campus Park Drive intersection which is projected to operate at LOS E during
the A.M. peak hour. The following section presents some project circulation options which
would improve operations at this intersection during the critical A.M.. peak hour.
In addition to the project circulation options discussed in the following section, there is another
approach that would also result in an acceptable level of service at this intersection during the
critical A.M. peak hour. This is to modify the intersection analysis method. This topic is
discussed in more detail in Section 3.7 -14.
3.7 - -<7
ICU Ratio - LOS
A.M. Peak
P.M: ;Peak
Year 2000
Year 2000
Study Intersection
Year 2000
+ Project
Year 2000
±:Project.
Delfen St / Campus Park Dr
0.36 - A
0.43 - A
0.19 - A
0.37 - A
Collins Dr / Campus Park Dr
0.73 - C
0.93 - E
0.49 - A
0.69 - B
Collins Dr / SR 118 WB Ramps
0.67 - B
0.69 - B
0.33 - A
0.44 - A
Collins Dr / SR 118 EB Ramps - Los Angeles Ave (a;)
0.60 - A
0.55 - A
0.32 - A
0.37 - A
Princeton Ave / Campus Park Dr (b)
N/A - A
N/A - A
N/A - A
N/A - A
Princeton Ave - Los Angeles Ave / SR 118 WB Ramps
0.58 - A
0.52 - A
0.48 - A
0.45 - A
Los Angeles Ave / SR 118 EB Ramps
0.43 - A
0.41 - A
0.58 - A
0.56 - A
Los Angeles Ave / Condor Dr
031 - A
0.31 - A
0.38 - A
0.36 - A
Spring Rd / High St - Los Angeles Ave
0.42 - A
0.40 - A
0.49 - A
0.47 - A
Happy Camp Rd / Walnut Cyn Rd / Broadway (c)
N/A - 13
0.41 - A
N/A - C
0.52 - A
Moorpark Ave / High St
0.44 - A
0.46 - A
0.65 - B
0.68 - B
Moorpark Ave / Poindexter Ave - First St
0.56 - A
0.57 - A
0.68 - B
0.72 - C
New Los Angeles Ave / Science Dr
0.74 - C
0.73 - C
0.77 - C
0.77 - C
Los Angeles Ave / Spring Rd
0.75 - C
0.75 - C
0.77 - C
0.76 - C
Los Angeles Ave /Moorpark Ave
0.67 - B
0.68 - B
0.76 - C
0.78 - C
Los Angeles Ave / Tierra Rejada Rd
0.65 - B
0.66 - B
0.73 - C
0.74 - C
Tierra Rejada Rd / SR 23 NB Ramps
0.41 - A
0.42 - A
0.68 - B
0.67 - B
Tierra Rejada Rd / SR 23 SB Ramps
0.40 - A
0.41 - A
0.69 - B
0.70 - B
Tierra Rejada Rd / Moorpark Rd
0 73 - C
0.75 - C
0.67 - B
0.68 - B
Tierra Rejada Rd / Spring Rd
0.66 - B
0.67 - B
0.59 - A
0.59 - A
(a) LOS based on capacity of a 3 -way stop -sign controlled intersection.
(b) LOS based on estimated vehicle delays.
(c) Year 2000 + Project LOS based on reconfigured intersectio r! and ignal control.
3.7.7.4 Circulation Deficiencies
As shown in Table 5, the majority of the study intersections would continue to operate at
acceptable levels of service under the Year 2000 + Project traffic conditions, except for the
Collins Drive /Campus Park Drive intersection which is projected to operate at LOS E during
the A.M. peak hour. The following section presents some project circulation options which
would improve operations at this intersection during the critical A.M.. peak hour.
In addition to the project circulation options discussed in the following section, there is another
approach that would also result in an acceptable level of service at this intersection during the
critical A.M. peak hour. This is to modify the intersection analysis method. This topic is
discussed in more detail in Section 3.7 -14.
3.7 - -<7
3.7.7.5 Project Circulation Options
A circulation deficiency was identified at the Collins Drive /Campus Park Drive intersection for
the Year 2000 + Project scenario. There are several circulation options that could be
constructed by the project to eliminate the identified deficiency and attain the City's desired
LOS C objective. The following text presents the project circulation options.
3.7.7.5.1 Option 1 - Signal Phasing Modification
This option would modify the existing signal phasing at the Collins Drive /Campus Park Drive
intersection to provide a left -turn phase on each approach and a northbound right -turn green
arrow overlap with the westbound left -turn signal phase. An evaluation of the intersection
operations during the critical A.M. peak hour indicated that the modified signal operation
would improve the ICU ratio to 0.82, but would not attain the LOS C objective.
3.7.7.5.2 Option 2 - Spring Road Extension
This option would construct a circulation route by the extension of Spring Road from its
present terminus through the adjacent specific plan area into the project site in the Year 2000
scenario in lieu of the Year 2010 scenario. (This does not have to be a direct link, but a
collector /minor arterial route that will conveniently allow for traffic flow). It is estimated that
this circulation link would divert approximately 20 percent of the project traffic from the
Campus Park Drive - Collins Drive corridor. This option provides a more direct route into the
downtown area. This option would lower the ICU ratio to 0.88, but would not achieve the
LOS C objective. However, this option combined with the signal phasing modification option
would lower the ICU ratio to 0.77 and achieve the I_ OS C objective during the critical A.M.
peak hour time period.
3.7.7.5.3 Option 3 - Intersection Geometric Improvements
This option consists of the standard intersection improvements (ie: roadway widening and lane
additions) at-the Collins Drive /Campus Park Drive intersection. In order to achieve LOS C
during the A.M. time period, the existing northbound right -turn lane would need to be
converted to a free - flowing right -turn lane, the optional northbound through -right lane would
need to be converted to a northbound through lane and a second westbound left -turn lane
would need to be constructed. The northbound lane conversion would require that the existing
south curb -line on Campus Park Drive, between Collins Drive and College View Avenue be
relocated to the south to provide an eastbound acceleration lane for the northbound right -turn
vehicles. A conceptual design of these Intersection Geometric Improvements is illustrated on
Exhibit 3.7 -12. This option combined with the signal phasing modification would lower the
ICU ratio to 0.69 and achieve LOS B during the critical A.M. peak hour period.
3.7-29
1
LEGEND
— — EXISTING CURB
PROPOSED CURB
EXISTING HOMES MOORPARK
I, COLLEGE
r I
CAMPUS / PARK DR.
Ile
CIO
Ov
V //
PAUL GRIFFIN / // / /
/ PARK
I o
50 100
I �
exhibit 3.7 -I2
Intersection Geometric Improvements
3.7.7.5.4 Option 4 - Campus Park Drive (West) Extension
This option would connect Campus Park Drive (west) to the project street system.- It. is
estimated that this circulation link would divert approximately 15 percent of the project traffic
from the Campus Park Drive - Collins Drive corridor to the Campus Park Drive (west)- Princeton
Avenue corridor. This option would lower the ICU ratio to 0.89, but would not achieve the
LOS C objective. However, this option combined with the signal phasing modification option
would lower the ICU ratio to 0.79 and achieve the LOS C objective during the critical A.M.
peak hour time period.
In addition to the improved intersection levels of service along the Campus Park Drive- Collins
Drive corridor, this option would result in a loop circulation system for this portion of the City,
thus providing good access for emergency vehicles, school bus routes, etc. The shorter travel
distances would reduce the auto emissions, thus reducing air quality impacts.
3.7.7.5.5 Option 5 - Campus Park Drive (West) and Spring Road Extensions
This option includes both Option 2 (Spring Road extension) and Option 4 (Campus Park Drive
extension). It is estimated that the addition of these two links would divert approximately 35
percent of the project traffic from the Campus Park Drive - Collins Drive corridor. This option
would lower the ICU ratio to 0.85, but would not achieve the LOS C objective. However, this
option combined with the signal phasing modification option would lower the ICU ratio to 0.74
and achieve the LOS C objective during the critical A.M. peak hour, and provide good
circulation for this area of the City.
3.7.7.5.6 Option 6 - Collins Drive / Campus Park Drive Roundabout
This option is the reconstruction of the Collins Drive /Campus Park Drive intersection to
provide a roundabout (an intersection control alternative). This option would be very
compatible with the existing neighborhood land uses and traffic patterns.
The Campus Park and Hidden Creek area is a defined sub -area within the City of Moorpark.
The traffic is generally related to the residential nature of the neighborhood except for the
traffic oriented to and from the Moorpark College. The college brings significant traffic into
the area on selected days and times, but for most of the remaining time, this area is a
residential neighborhood. In a residential area, the desire is to minimize traffic related noise,
maintain moderate speeds and keep air pollution to a minimum. The primary design principle
of a roundabout is to allow traffic to proceed at 20 to 25 miles per hour (mph) into an
intersection with the entering traffic yielding to the circulating traffic, thus minimizing average
vehicle delays.
3.7 -3
LEGEND
PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY
PROPOSED CURB
- - -- EXISTING CURB
EXISTING HOLES
CAMPUS PARK
exhibit 3.7 -13
Roundabout Conceptual Design
"RA
A, conceptual,! design for a= roundabout at. "Aie•t ollins Drive /Campus Park Drive - ,intersection is
shown on Exhibit 3.7=13: This conceptual design shows that there would be some
encroachment into Paul . Griffin Park and into the Moorpark College property. This -design
would easily accommodate the Year 2000 + Project peak hour traffic volumes, with average
vehicle delays well within the LOS 'A range during the critical A.M. peak hour time" period.
When this intersection control alternative (resultant LOS A) is compared to the conventional
method of intersection control (signalized) which is designed for LOS C with average,, vehicle
delays between 15 and 25 - seconds, one can see that the time;, and related air contamination
between the two control alternatives is quite significant.
The use of roundabouts as a system design circulation alternative is. discussed ` in more detail
in Section 3.7.12.
3.7.7.5.7 Option 7 - Lagoon / SR 118 Interchange
Though the Lagoon/SR 118 interchange is proposed as part of the project, • the level of
development proposed for the project site by the Year 2000 would not necessitate the
construction of this freeway interchange by the Year 2000.
3.7.8 YEAR 2010 BASELINE ANALYSIS
The Year 2010 baseline traffic scenario considers General Plan buildout without the Hidden
Creek Ranch Project. The Year 2010 minimum circulation system and related improvements
will be required to provide access and achieve the City's LOS C objective. This system was
developed for this baseline scenario through a series of iterations using the MTAM. The
following section outlines the methodologies used to forecast the Year 2010 baseline
traffic conditions.
3.7.8.1 Land Use & Traffic Volumes
The trip generation attributes associated with General Plan buildout conditions (Year 2010)
were developed using the rates contained in the MTAM document and then assigned to the
Moorpark street system. Exhibits 3.7 -14, 3.7 -15 and 3.7 -16 illustrate the Year 2010 Baseline
ADT, A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes.
3.7.8.2 Circulation System
A series of traffic model run iterations were completed to determine what portions of the City's
Circulation Element or alternative links suggested by the City Council would need to be added
to the Year 2000 circulation system to accommodate the Year 2010 traffic demands to maintain
the City's performance objective of LOS C. The Year 2000 circulation system, as described
in Sections 3.7.6.2 and 3.7.6.4, was utilized as the starting point for this analysis. Additional
circulation links including the extension of Spring Road from its present terminus, north into
specific plan area No. 2, C Street, the Casey Road extension and the completion of Science
3.7 -1)
I�
rT
Drive were added to the system; since they will be constructed as part of the specific plan
developments. While. "C"', Street is-included aspart of the circulation system, it is: not affected
by the project. The -land uses along "C" Street are low and the volume is less than 1,000, ADT.
The extension of "D" Street as shown in the Circulation Element was not considered, since it
has been determined by the City as not being feasible. The Spring Road Extension discussed
previously, is not included on the City's Circulation System. At the time of the preparation
of the Circulation, System it4as believed <that "D Street. could be used for access into SP No.
2, however, that was subsequently determined to be not feasible.
As was noted previously, the New Los Angeles Avenue -Los Angeles Avenue corridor is the
critical element in the City's circulation system and there is a limit on the number of lanes that
can be reasonably constructed at:several of the key intersections along this corridor. Therefore,
a configuration for the intersections along the New Los Angeles Avenue -Los Angeles Avenue
corridor was determined. Illustrated on Exhibi 3.7 -17 are the intersection improvements
required along this corridor.
The next task was to determine what portion of the remaining General Plan buildout could be
accommodated by the additional reserve capacity resulting from the improved intersection
geometrics along the New Los Angeles Avenue -Los Angeles Avenue corridor. A detailed level
of service analysis.: at, the key intersections along this corridor indicated that the additional
capacity would only accommodate approximately 20 percent of the remaining General Plan
buildout between the Year 2000 and 2010. This analysis clearly demonstrated that additional
east -west roadway capacity would be required prier to buildout of the City's General Plan, and
that this additional capacity would be needed approximately by the Year 2002.
.3.7 -3:
r4
♦- 70 v
v l
r so
l
hR
.�1(is r�
toJ �►
10 � 2
o R SCR
t to t 10
�► - tw .� 4 .- t°
r w
10J y BROADWAY
210 --*. 3 )0 -►
a 170 � 229
o C STREET
° to .Jle�
3pp i. �oJ 4
'lag i A4I i , �^�ol o �
° o Ji bt
17 \ X16 .711 3 1160
t 5 It 7
4 No
I i �► r e0 1
4- 10 %
r \ HIGH
10 °S POINDEXTER ` Y so -J► I
to d - 40-Z
P S
5� o
f o
SR -1 iB R3R t 1w $g^ i 1)0
\ r to LOS ANGELES Y r 6.7700 '30 •��
so • A t,
40-J►�11 'I��
to I �
,�\ R Q Y sG ,� 1
60j .- to l 170 } (• ! i i 10\
440: r ' °s �� �►y "° .-
Y Y f to ?0 PIACH H111 $� °�� r0'
-' -
o" ,
°�
=4 Tatll - w �\ d_ / z70J h
tto __*
2
000�►JN o Y 7467 �Pf s
�4 t 10 100 y1
MOUNTAIN 00 i
MEADOW '� J
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Jo °� r g o
Z o1r
SCIENCE
Try,
S ?St t
Ila
r 1!0
7o J R A c,
»70 -► / /
o Z 8 S
CAMPUS PARK
5147 PALL E'y
SR -I1R
I t) L to NCfXt
r iw R'
CLES 2 0 n n
leo it ll0
r 10
°n silo J so
�b
Ito J
180
• 77°
TIERRA REJADA
° :4
s r
i 1]0
w 1 t tw � A *- loo
17 o W' s- t h 1110-►
t IN
e.o' -i I
1110 "� .10 � o
exhibit 3.7 -15
Year 2010 Baseline A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
'lag i A4I i , �^�ol o �
° o Ji bt
17 \ X16 .711 3 1160
t 5 It 7
4 No
I i �► r e0 1
4- 10 %
r \ HIGH
10 °S POINDEXTER ` Y so -J► I
to d - 40-Z
P S
5� o
f o
SR -1 iB R3R t 1w $g^ i 1)0
\ r to LOS ANGELES Y r 6.7700 '30 •��
so • A t,
40-J►�11 'I��
to I �
,�\ R Q Y sG ,� 1
60j .- to l 170 } (• ! i i 10\
440: r ' °s �� �►y "° .-
Y Y f to ?0 PIACH H111 $� °�� r0'
-' -
o" ,
°�
=4 Tatll - w �\ d_ / z70J h
tto __*
2
000�►JN o Y 7467 �Pf s
�4 t 10 100 y1
MOUNTAIN 00 i
MEADOW '� J
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Jo °� r g o
Z o1r
SCIENCE
Try,
S ?St t
Ila
r 1!0
7o J R A c,
»70 -► / /
o Z 8 S
CAMPUS PARK
5147 PALL E'y
SR -I1R
I t) L to NCfXt
r iw R'
CLES 2 0 n n
leo it ll0
r 10
°n silo J so
�b
Ito J
180
• 77°
TIERRA REJADA
° :4
s r
i 1]0
w 1 t tw � A *- loo
17 o W' s- t h 1110-►
t IN
e.o' -i I
1110 "� .10 � o
exhibit 3.7 -15
Year 2010 Baseline A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Jo °� r g o
Z o1r
SCIENCE
Try,
S ?St t
Ila
r 1!0
7o J R A c,
»70 -► / /
o Z 8 S
CAMPUS PARK
5147 PALL E'y
SR -I1R
I t) L to NCfXt
r iw R'
CLES 2 0 n n
leo it ll0
r 10
°n silo J so
�b
Ito J
180
• 77°
TIERRA REJADA
° :4
s r
i 1]0
w 1 t tw � A *- loo
17 o W' s- t h 1110-►
t IN
e.o' -i I
1110 "� .10 � o
exhibit 3.7 -15
Year 2010 Baseline A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
exhibit 3.7 -15
Year 2010 Baseline A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
-4-- 20
r 10
101 �R
RRR i to
o i 20
� 270
to _-p
00 -+
"- R� --,
�— t0 U 5"E"T 4
r :o
to --w]
eoz E9 j ]° 7O � n °s% 2)0 -0 10 140
t 10
igo
o�tirr
1.0-7. S8°
to
050
100
7001b W_ 7010
✓ 4 ~
�e� 20
r
JoJI�to -►
Joo -7
Simi v'ttEY
30Z n�� `ks 770-J 1110 SR -11/
R ,70 gP' \ so i Sn _n° /o .PS. 00
40 120
4 r
\ "t� '�o R~
ANGELES I Y ° S f 17f
L 430
60 10 r 20
HIGH 510 10
'-t_ /o POINDEXTER Y IO —► + 4 $
I�4 0o a 707 1:.A$ SCIENCE 2501 r�
•• � 8 00 Z °
�o
C" Q .o
.0- loo g�f^ t 27o ^Yr' L 1t0
SR -1Id �:1 -440 LOS ANGELES fI Y 4'1250 1 1,r
SO J 1 I �\ Do J {. } 170 -0 I If ` °� J
�' 710 --► 1210 --*-1) 1100 -► 1r10�y '�0
Zy� 200 RS$ Yso 107 P.YSi 320-2 �$$ -
1• -' ✓fib
_
�; •°°► ,o k� tiro �� t7o too p? ago
/OO ► 1 ��� r w a 7 Ro>? /� �%4 �- 100 �`O''c'� �- i0 `N-' J 750-
001 PL.LN HILL r to
\_J �]00 -*. i ~\+1 ()• i Q
.0 /y i ^ �Ry,,1. w 20' 190 • Li
.o r;` poly 1^�t _� 40 -
v_ TIERRA REJADA
i
420 v�Nt►� /o e
cPf( d p'
if F
.p f/� r J S S 8 ✓r ��P 11-
5 !� >62 \ L 760
�Y �L --iiso
IJO
._. seo a � r o2 .0-loeo h ro -r
MOUNTAIN • M� 7.0� w' "oi N
10 J a ti 8° N
MEADOW 070 --f- 6 .70
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
exhibit 3.7 -16
Year 2010 Baseline P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
�R-
GABBERT RD.
L
L.A. AVE. { t.. f
_may
1
f TIERRA REJADA RD.
MOORPARK AVE.
SPRING RD.
SCIENCE DR.
LEGEN D
YEAR 2000 INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS
-- YEAR 2010 IMPROVED INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS
exhibit 3.7 -17
Los Angeles Avenue Intersection Improvements
f
NEW
'1-1 (' L.A. AVE.
J
_1� �
1 1 1 _ \♦ —�
I 1 1 }
LEGEN D
YEAR 2000 INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS
-- YEAR 2010 IMPROVED INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS
exhibit 3.7 -17
Los Angeles Avenue Intersection Improvements
A review of the City's Circulation Element indicated that the only additional east -west roadway
capacity available would be the extension of SR 118 west of the existing SR 118 /SR 23
freeway connection. The next step was to determine what segments of the SR 118 extension
would be required to accommodate the Year 2010 traffic demands and when these segments
would need to be constructed.
In summary, the following circulation system is required to accommodate the Year 2010 traffic
demands and achieve the City's performance objective of LOS C .
■ Year 2000 minimum circulation system with the improvements at Los Angeles
Avenue /Spring Road, Los Angeles Avenue/Tierra Rejada Road and one of the
options for the Collins Drive /Campus Park Drive intersections.
■ The Spring Road extension, C Street, the Casey Road extension and the completion
of Seience Drive.
■ Six -lane roadway section along New Los Angeles Avenue -Los Angeles Avenue with
intersection configurations as shown on Exhibit 3.7 -17.
■ Extension of SR 118 west from the SR 118 /SR 23 freeway connection to Los
Angeles Avenue (east -west traffic flow only) as a four lane expressway with "at
grade" intersections at Spring Road, Walnut Canyon Road, C Street and Gabbert
Road. (This roadway can be initially constructed as a two lane facility with the
additional lanes being added when needed). The Walnut Canyon Road connection
may have to be a grade separation due to the terrain.
■ Traffic signal installation at the SR 118 /Walnut Canyon Road (not needed if a grade
separation is necessary) and SR 118 /Spring Road intersections.
3.7.8.3 Levels of Service
The A.M. and P.M. peak hour levels of service were calculated using the Year 2010 baseline
(without project) traffic volumes, and the minimum Year 2010 circulation system. The levels
of service were also calculated for the SR 118/Walnut Canyon Road (may be a grade
separation due to terrain) and SR 118 /Spring Road intersections, which would be created by
the extension of SR 118. The intersection geometrics at these two future intersection locations
were determined based on a review of the Year 2010 peak traffic demands, and keeping in
mind the performance objective of LOS C. The results of the level of service analysis are
displayed in Table 6, with the level of service worksheets contained in Appendix 3.7.
3.7 -38
Table 6
Year 2010 Peak Hour Levels of Service
(Without Project)
Study Intersection
ICU Ratio - LOS
A.M. Peak
P.M. Peak
Delfen St / Campus Park Dr i
0.53 - A
0.24 - A
Collins Dr / Campus Park Dr
0.94 - E
0.68 - A
Collins Dr / SR 118 WB Ramps
0.81 - D
0.42 - A
Collins Dr / SR 118 EB Ramps - Los Angeles Ave (a)
0.76 - C
0.48 - A
Princeton Ave / Campus Park Dr (b)
N/A - A
N/A - A
Princeton Ave - Los Angeles Ave / SR. 118 WB Ramps
0.29 - A
0.33 - A
Los Angeles Ave / SR 118 EB Ramps
0.29 - A
0.42 - A
Los Angeles Ave / Condor Dr (c)
0.17 - A
0.20 - A
Spring Rd / High St - Los Angeles Ave
0.26 - A
0.54 - A
Happy Camp Rd / Walnut Cyn Rd / Broadway (d)
0.39 - A
0.63 - B
Moorpark Ave / High St
0.39 - A
0.62 - B'
Moorpark Ave / Poindexter Ave - First Si
0.51 - A
0.74 - C
New Los Angeles Ave / Science Dr
0.43 - A
0.76 - C
Los Angeles Ave / Spring Rd
0.61 - B
0.78 - C
Los Angeles Ave / Moorpark Ave
0.50 - A
0.71 - C
Los Angeles Ave / Tierra Rejada Rd
0.60 - A
0.69 - B
Tierra Rejada Rd / SR 23 NB Ramps
0.50 - A
0.70 - B
Tierra Rejada Rd / SR 23 SB Ramps
0.48 - A
0.68 - B
Tierra Rejada Rd / Moorpark Rd
0.78 -C
0.74 - C
Tierra Rejada Rd / Spring Rd
0.56 - A
0.50 - A
SR 118 Extension / Walnut Cyn Rd (e)
0.62 - B
0.69 - B
SR 118 Extension / Spring Rd (e)
0.56 - A
0.54 - B
(a) LUS based on capacity of a 3 -way stop -sign controlled intersection.
(b) LOS based on estimated vehicle delays.
(c) Should be studied, appears that traffic signal is no longer needed.
(d) LOS based on reconfigured intersection and signal control.
(e) New intersection created by SR 118 extension, assumed signalized.
The data presented in Table 6 indicate that the majority of the study intersections would
achieve the LOS C objective, with 2 of the study intersections projected to exceed the LOS C
objective during the A.M. peak hour time period
3.7.8.4 Required Improvements (Without Project)
The following intersection improvements would be required at the two locations to attain the
LOS C objective under the Year 2010 baseline (without project) traffic conditions. These
improvements, in addition to those described in Section 3.7.8.2, are considered as the minimum
circulation system for the Year 2010 + Project scenario. Table 7 summarizes the intersection
levels of service associated with the following required improvements.
.,.7 -39
If ,.
Collins Drive/Campus Park Drive. In �order';tO�Ac ieve -the City's performance objective of
LOS C,: the � signa3l .phasing at _ this intersection would' need to be modified as discussed in
Section 3:'.7:S:lw Thessial phsng "iidiiieationg would consist of providing anorth- south
and east -west left -turn phase, and a northbound right -turn green arrow that would operate in
conjunction with the westbound. left -turn signal phase.
Collins Drive /SR 118. WB Ramps. Improvements at this intersection that would be required
to achieve the City's objective„ of LQS C include the widening of the off -ramp to provide two
right -turn lanes. The westbound "approach- at this intersection- would be striped for" a left-turn
lane and two right -turn lanes. In order for the operations of this intersection to accommodate
the high westbound right -turn demand, the east curb -line on Collins Drive north of the
off -ramp would need to be relocated to the east to align with the northbound right -turn curb -
line at the Campus Park Drive intersection.
Table 7
Year 2010 Peak Hour Levels of Service
(with Minimum System Requirements)
(Without Project)
3.7.9 YEAR 2010 + PROJECT ANALYSIS
Potential impacts of the Hidden Creek Ranch Project on the Year 2010 minimum circulation
system were assessed assuming full buildout of the project site. The following text presents
the results of this analysis.
3.7.9.1 Land Use & Traffic Volumes
The traffic volumes expected to be generated by full buildout of the Hidden Creek Ranch
project were added to the Year 2010 baseline traffic volumes. As shown in Table 2; the
Year 2010 project (full project buildout) would generate 47,206 daily, 2,933 A.M. and 3,790
P.M peak hour trips. Again, it is noted that these estimates are "driveway trips" and that the
interaction of trips within the project boundaries will occur. (The traffic model takes into
account the trips that are internal to the project). The projected volumes were distributed 'and
assigned to the Year 2010 minimum circulation system using the MTAM. Illustrated on
Exhibits 3.7 -18, 3.7 -19 and 3.7 -20 are the Year 2010 + Project ADT, A.M. and P.M. Peak
Hour Traffic Volumes.
3.7 -40
UCI Ratio - LOS
Study Intersection
A.M. Peak
P.M. Peak
Collins Dr / Campus Park Dr
0.79 - C
0.68 - B
Collins Dr / SR 118 WB Ramps
0.69 - B
0.41 - A
3.7.9 YEAR 2010 + PROJECT ANALYSIS
Potential impacts of the Hidden Creek Ranch Project on the Year 2010 minimum circulation
system were assessed assuming full buildout of the project site. The following text presents
the results of this analysis.
3.7.9.1 Land Use & Traffic Volumes
The traffic volumes expected to be generated by full buildout of the Hidden Creek Ranch
project were added to the Year 2010 baseline traffic volumes. As shown in Table 2; the
Year 2010 project (full project buildout) would generate 47,206 daily, 2,933 A.M. and 3,790
P.M peak hour trips. Again, it is noted that these estimates are "driveway trips" and that the
interaction of trips within the project boundaries will occur. (The traffic model takes into
account the trips that are internal to the project). The projected volumes were distributed 'and
assigned to the Year 2010 minimum circulation system using the MTAM. Illustrated on
Exhibits 3.7 -18, 3.7 -19 and 3.7 -20 are the Year 2010 + Project ADT, A.M. and P.M. Peak
Hour Traffic Volumes.
3.7 -40
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. I ADT Volumes in 1,000s
exhibii 3.7 -I8
Year 2010 + Project ADT Volumes
-s;
r
v
�I
Z
-0- too
i - 70 i to II l f- ♦- 3
r 70 4 160 Y 1 i 70
1b i � e 10 J W BROADWAY 10
770 -+
7 J
RR Qg. i to g^ IW 7 goo
I �Y f r +— 10 10 C STREET ^ '
r
loci90 I _t
20 w ^Y.F
10 --► � (1 120 PLY r 1w
$$R to ;010
gg 1 A \ tih
1Q
y
°: i
Qy! � HICK 110
to
7R iO1NDC %TER
o
L w roR
^ t 700
4-- 300 t 130 pO °` Ji
-4,- 03 Y
SR-118 qtr w LOS ANGELES Y r �o i 1► �1r 7p
�1— It� p 1030
140 1t� 1�7C -1► It� ,)70 11
�a g� I�oZ °8 SR$ 1oZ RoR 711 a os� it
1 : Jo F�
It to 7� `_ to $w '—►
So so
`.. 470—r l w _RYQ � � r � If .�" j +b\�.6 b ~ 70
.�� i� (• w_r J PEACH HILL
to }
\10 lit
� /�JF } ui 110 '1 �
DID i
pr,NOO u
to
th b
�1 i to
MOUNTAIN go --.O,
MEADOW 7110 --► �--�-
ISource: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
'JO 1i~ eo
�0`k go i aoi) i
$ ?R,t 2
tl V 4 770
0 y
J VO
t
ao 7 Sv Y
SI1q VALEE7 ,y
SR -III
L 70
r 170
ANGELES
°R tii rf0
sx 1d4 w 200 to
tit
fy I- 1110 .--r
t 7 '00 g o
SCIENCE
0
Iw R
A.
>1
a�
o n
= \7w o —+ 7 °IR /
5z
/ TIERRA REJADA
P
.+o °F R
i 710
00_51\� L IJO � �1 �— 570
�— 'w ♦ f 710 A70 —i
too--f, h's "oz IN
e o� 11.0 •o l5 4 I
Q
exhibit 3.7-19
Year 2010 + Project A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
9
'Aw
_1
i S, kRSS ` $kR_ C�4e
u -° /
r io .�— 2e20° A 4'0 to d i 4 r 59300
t o 1- J 10 J W BROADWAY 40 y 11 A 4
100 -i i 7 /
° 8
2.99 to 1 „ 3 140--%, VAR ,�iy r J10 Z '2481
A4 i to csr Tl. ��1i
120:: o O o 20 1 I � C CAMPUS PARK
C z 170 70'Z g yQ( p �7
7 $ 4 r 2to +R "" 240 �eA4 t.. 320 Z
S
// 4-- 41010
A SEMI ,0i Ip 100 fWY io
�R ,J Ite .: 220 1 1/
so O
q 'jp INC \ eeo -. 1120b. °
4 r �40 50.' -z 3 70 � .. 4 \
R R L 40 t�hy 1 t u0 Q <<<c
I 4C_ 20 s0 JS w
ANGELES L' u°
, o d 4
$ 4 - to
°a3 :e
IIIGH i SIO
7m _s
30 �tr
:J i 100 POINDCXTCR 10 -► 4
14 r so eO "i ' F �{ SCIENCE 2e0 _f t A
PO I
8 ,o -' $
200 -° ° R
0� SR -11a 4 r 430 LOS ANGELES � 4 r13" r1430
1.
µ/ 301 ./—�. 210 -t Zoo J `O A %
r
130, I I t 1 f P `'�-y °$
210' gal Sgo \ 2 oZ R °,° II3of0oz
6101 9 to ( e o �(+`x /� // 1 ° loo 9� • 720
340 s i J j 4 - 30 r� \1.30 o R / J I ` 14 r 1 'lM_
/ -' .10� W % \. �../ 790-s �1}} PCACN {IRJ. i0�y r 10 \3102 {r
It 4?° 1"il. 20-7 dd 160
W41 \ -•
,i F -~
if p9,p ,1H�71 A3307•
/ • �--� = 1 TIERRA REJAOA
Z too
510 0 6 L i 7° A 4- 1200
�- e10 044 r- o-r
MOUNTAIN Q SO-� y�0y -�S 4 N
OW 140 -.1' E
M[AD 330 -► e0 470--v 140 'o
3W w
Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
exhibit 3.7 -20
Year 2010 + Project P.M. Peak Hour Traf'l`iG Volumes
i
7a•:. ,
3.7.9.2 Circulation System
The Year 2010 minimum: circulation system was modified to provide access to the project -site
(Hidden Creek Ranch property), as'Aiscussed in Section 3.7.7.2. The MTAM model network
was revised to include the project site circulation system for the Hidden Creek Ranch, with the
primary components being the cast-west arterial, Hidden Creek Drive and the Spring Road
connection. All other elements of the. Year 2010 minimum circulation system were left
unchanged; One of the, issues -to be. •addressed in the traffic analysis was the timing for the
installation of the Lagoon Interchange. To address this issue, the analysis was made without
the interchange. The interchange was introduced into the analysis as an option. The affects
of providing the Lagoon/SR 118 interchange under Year 2010 + Project scenario is presented
in the Project Circulation Options discussion, Section 3.7.9.5.
3.7.9.3 Levels of Service
The A.M. and P.M. peak hour intersection levels of service were calculated using the Year
20.10 + Project traffic volumes. These: LOS calculations,, were performed assuming the required
improvements, discussed in Section 3.7.8.4 are in place. The results of this analysis are
presented in Table 8, along with the Year 2010 baseline levels of service for comparison. In
order to assess the project impacts at the Collins Drive/Campus Park Drive intersection, the
levels of service were calculated assuming that some of the improvements listed in Project
Circulation Options 3, 5, 6, and/or 7 as presented in Section 3.7.7.5 would be selected and
installed. This :analysis is predicated, upon the assumption that the Year 2010 project would
not be developed without the completion of the Year 2000 project, thus requiring the
implementation of one or more of the project circulation options. The results of this analysis
are presented in Table 9, with the level of service worksheets contained in Appendix 3.7.
1.7-44
a
"A
Table 8
Year 2010 + Project Peak Hour Levels of Service --
ka) Lw Da5cu on capacity or a s -way stop -sign controlled intersection.
(b) LOS based on estimated vehicle delays.
(c) Should be studied, appears that traffic signal is no longer needed.
(d) Year 2010 + Project LOS based on reconfigured intersection and signal control.
(e) New intersection created by the SR 118 extension, assumed signalized.
(f) See Table 9 for the Year 2010 + Project LOS values
3.7-4`
ICU Ratio - LOS
A.M. Peak
P.M. Peak
Year 2010
Year 2010
Study Intersection
Year 2010
+Project
Year.2010
+ Project
Delfen St / Campus Park Dr
0.53 - A
0.55 - A
024 - A
0.42 - A
Collins Dr / Campus Park Dr (see Table 9)
0.79 - C
(f)
0.68 - B
(f)
Collins Dr / SR 118 WB Ramps
0.69 - B
0.68 - B
0.41 - A
0.52 - A
Collins Dr / SR 118 EB Ramps - Los Angeles Ave (a)
0.76 - C
0.77 - C
0.48 - A
0.59 - A
Princeton Ave / Campus Park Dr (b)
N/A - A.
N/A - A
N/A - A
N/A - A
Princeton Ave - Los Angeles Ave / SR 118 WB Ramps
0.29 - A.
0.31 - A
0.33 - A
0.33 - A
Los Angeles Ave / SR 1 18 EB Ramps
0.29 - A
0.30 - A
0.42 - A
0.43 - A
Los Angeles Ave / Condor Dr (c)
0.17 - A
0.18 - A
0.22 - A.
0.23 - A
Spring Rd / High St - Los Angeles Ave
0.26 - A
0.31 - A
0.54 - A
0.58 - A
Happy Camp Rd / Walnut Cyn Rd / Broadway (d)
0.39 - A
0.49 - A
0.63 - B
0.62 - B
Moorpark Ave /High St
0.39 - A
0.38 - A
0.62 - B
0.63 - B
Moorpark Ave / Poindexter Ave - First St
0.51 - A
0.52 - A
0.74 - C
0.75 - C
New Los Angeles Ave /Science Dr
0.43 - A
0.58 - A
0.76 - C
0.77 - C
Los Angeles Ave /Spring Rd
0.61 - B
0.65 - B
0.78 - C
0.80 - C
Los Angeles Ave / Moorpark Ave
0.50 - A
0.49 - A
0.71 - C
0.75 - C
Los Angeles Ave / Tierra Rejada Rd
0.60 - .A
0.60 - A
0.69 - B
0.70 - B
Tierra Rejada Rd / SR 23 NB Ramps
0.50 - A
0.51 - A
0.70 - B
0.70 - B
Tierra Rejada Rd / SR 23 SB Ramps
0.48 - )%
0.50 - A
0.68 - B
0.69 -B
Tierra Rejada Rd / Moorpark Rd
0.78 - C
0.79 -C
0.74 - C
0.75 -C
Tierra Rejada Rd / Spring Rd
0..56 - A
0.58 - A
0.50 - A
0.51 - A
SR 118 Extension / Walnut Cyn Rd (e)
0.62 - B
0.64 - B
0.69 - B
0.78 -C
SR 118 Extension / Spring Rd (e)
0.56 - A
0.65 - B
0.54 - A
0.74 - C
ka) Lw Da5cu on capacity or a s -way stop -sign controlled intersection.
(b) LOS based on estimated vehicle delays.
(c) Should be studied, appears that traffic signal is no longer needed.
(d) Year 2010 + Project LOS based on reconfigured intersection and signal control.
(e) New intersection created by the SR 118 extension, assumed signalized.
(f) See Table 9 for the Year 2010 + Project LOS values
3.7-4`
Table 9
Year 2010 + Project Peak Hour Levels of Service
(Collins Drive /Campus Park Drive)
Project Circulation Options
ICU Ratio - LOS
A.M. Peak
P.M. Peak
Option 3 - Intersection Improvements
0.78 - C
0.66 - B
Option 5 - Campus Park Dr. & Spring Rd. Ext.
1.00 - E
0.79 - C
Option 6 - Roundabout Construction (a)
NA - A
NA - A
Option 7 - Lagoon / SR 118 Interchange
0.68 - B
0.64 - B
(a) l his option would include the removal of the existing traffic signal.
3.7.9.4 Circulation Deficiencies
The data presented in Table 8 indicate that all of the study intersections would operate at
acceptable levels of service under the Year 2010 + Project traffic conditions. This conclusion
is based on the intersections operating within the City's performance objective of LOS C.
The data presented in Table 9 indicate that the Collins Drive /Campus Park Drive intersection
would operate at LOS E during the A.M. peak hour without any additional intersection
improvements, as indicated under Option 5. However, the implementation of either Option 3,
6 or 7 would result in improved intersection operations and achieve the City's performance
objective of LOS C.
3.7.10 MITIGATION MEASURES
The project impact analysis presented in Sections 3.7.7 (Year 2000 + Project) identified a
circulation deficiency at the Collins Drive /Campus Park Drive intersection. As discussed in
the "Project Circulation Options" Section (3.7.7.5), there are several circulation options which
are available to mitigate the project impacts at this intersection. The following text presents
the mitigation measures for the Year 2000 and Year 2010 study scenarios.
3.7.10.1 Year 2000 Measures
The project will have to participate in the funding of the Capital Improvement Program as
adopted by the City of Moorpark.
The Year 2000 + Project impact analysis has identified a project specific circulation deficiency
at the Collins Drive /Campus Park Drive intersection during the A.M. peak hour. Section
3.7.7.5 presents five project circulation options which would improve operations at this
Iodation. Table 10 presents the levels of service that would be associated with each of the
project circulation options. The City will have to select the preferred option as part of the
project approval process.
"3.7 -4r
S K:,
Table 10
Mitigated. Year 2000 System + Project Peak Hour Levels of Service.
(A.M.: Peak Hour @ Collins Drive/Campus, Park Drive)
Project, Circulation Options
ICU'Ratio - LOS ;
: Withqut
Signal lklod.
:.:With.*' `<
Signal.W
OPtigO ""', p
Option 2 SPrinB
NA '
0.82. - D
;. om6 P.
0.77 - C
Option 3 - Intersection Improvements
NA_,
669`►!!"..
Option 4 - Campus Park Drive Extension
0.89 - D
y 0.79`- C
Option 5 - Campus Park Dr & Spring Rd Ext.
0.85 - D
0.74 - C
Option 6 - Roundabout Construction (a) -
NA - A
NA - A
Option 7 - Lagoon / SR 118 Interchange
Not Needed
Not Needed
ka) i nis option would include the removal of the existing traffic signal.
The data presented in Table 10 indicate that Project Circulation Options 2 through 6 (with the
signal modifications) would improve the level of service at the Collins Drive/Campus Park
Drive intersection during the critical A.M. peak hour, and achieve the City's performance
objective of LOS C.
The basis of this report is that the City will implement a Capital Improvement Program (CAP)
with the related funding. If that is the case, the project will be, required to pay any required
fees. If the CAP is not implemented then in order to allocate to the Hidden Creek Ranch
Project a fair - share portion of the required improvements to the Year 2000 circulation system,
the project's percent contribution was calculated using the existing and Year 2000 + Project
A.M. and P.M. peak hour traffic volumes. These calculations were performed for the Los
Angeles Avenue /Spring Road and Los Angeles AvenuelTierra Rejada Road intersections, as
well as for, the Collins Drive /Campus Park Drive intersection, where a deficiency was
identified. Table 11 presents the project's percen'c contribution at these three intersections.
Table II
Year 2000 - Project Percent Contributions
Prolecf ,1?grcent
Study .Intersection Contnbution (• /.)•;:
Los Angeles Ave / Spring Rd (a)
Los Angeles Ave / Tierra Rejada Rd 9.5 %
Collins Dr / Campus Park Dr (b) 62.9 %
(a) Project traffic reduces total "Year 2000" demands.
(b) Percent contribution calculated using baseline system.
3.7 -4
f
*� �4,
The project shall, participate in the CAP. If there is no CAP then the project shall pay a
proportionate .share for the improvements at Los Angeles Avenue / Tierra Rejada Road (9.5 %)
and at Collins Dr vz.'J Campus Park Drive (62.9 %). It is 'to be noted I that the onlj other
significant project in •the Campus Park Drive area is the expansion of ` Morpark` College and
it may, not be possible to require the College to participate in the intersection improvements.
3.7.10.2 Year ,2010 Measures
The basis of this report is that the City will implement a Capital improvement Program (CAP)
with the related :funding. If that is the case, the project will be required to pay any required
fees. If the CAP is not. implemented, then in order to allocate to the Hidden Creek Ranch
Project, a fair -share portion of the required improvements to the Year 2010 circulation system,
the project's percent contribution of traffic will be needed. A proportionate share-was'
calculated using the Existing and Year 2010 + Project A.M. and P.M. peak hour traffic
volumes. These calculations were performed for the four key intersections along -the New Los
Angeles Avenue -Los Angeles Avenue corridor, the Collins Drive /Campus Park Drive and
Collins Drive /SR 118 Westbound Ramps intersections, and the various segments of SR 1'18 and
SR 23. Table 12 presents the project's percent contributions at these locations.
All street segments and all intersections except Collins Drive / Campus Park Drive and Collins
Drive / SR 118 Westbound Ramps are included in the Year 2010 No Project scenario. Thus,
the only project specific impacts are to these two intersections. The project does contribute
to the impact at the other locations and should participate in the program that constructs these
facilities.
The implementation of a Capital Improvement Program with the related funding program by
the City of Moorpark will assure the construction of the circulation system. The project shall
participate in the program by the payment of the appropriate fee.
The project shall pay its proportionate share of the cost of improvements for Collins Drive !
Campus Park Drive and Collins Drive / SR 118 Westbound Ramps intersections.
If the City does not implement a CAP, it may be very difficult to construct all of the necessary
circulation system. Many of these components are of regional significance and involve state
highways, thus the development standards and procedures are more complex than the
construction of local streets.
Alternative mitigation measures are for the City to adopt the VCTC method of calculating the
Level Of Service and/or change the City's Level of Service objective in the Circulation
Element to the Congestion Management Program designated level of LOS D.
3.7 -4K
Table 12
Year 2010 - Project Percent Contributions
Study Intersection
Project Percent
Contribution ( %)
New Los Angeles Ave / Science Dr
4.5 %
Los Angeles Ave / Spring Rd
14.1 %
Los Angeles Ave / Moorpark Ave
(c)
Los Angeles Ave / Tierra Rejada Rd
5.5 %
Collins Dr / Campus Park Dr (a)
37.0%
Collins Dr / SR 118 Westbound Ramps
34.1 %
SR 118, East of Collins Dr (b)
13.8 %
SR 118, Collins Dr to Princeton Ave (b)
9.9%
SR 118, Princeton Ave to New L.A. Ave Interchange (b)
2.2 %
SR 118, SR 118 -SR 23 to Spring Rd (b)
19.4%
SR 118, Spring Rd to Walnut Cyn Rd (b)
11.1 %
SR 118, West of Walnut Cyn Rd (b)
15.0 %
SR 118, East of Gabbert Rd (b)
15.8 %
SR 118, West of Gabbert Rd (b)
14.3 %
SR 118, North of Los Angeles Ave (b)
5.6
Los Angeles Ave (SR 118), West of New Connection (b)
6.9 %
SR 23, New L.A. Ave Interchange to Tierra Rejada Rd (b)
3.3 %
SR 23, South of Tierra Rejada Rd (b)
2.9 %
tai Percent contribution calculated using base Year 2010 system.
(b) Percent contribution based on ADT.
(c) Project traffic reduces total "Year 2011:+ demands
3.7.11 SYSTEM CIRCULATION ALTERNATIVES
A review of the City's adopted Circulation Element has indicated that a number of
improvements were included in conjunction with the General Plan buildout. However, as
previously discussed, the completion of all of the improvements are not likely to occur within
the Year 2000 or Year 2010 time - frame, due to funding constraints. Though the Year 2010
minimum circulation system would accommodate the General Plan buildout traffic demands,
this system does not provide much reserve capacity at several of the key intersections along
the New Los Angeles Avenue -Los Angeles Avenue corridor. Therefore, this analysis presents
an evaluation of the circulation element alternatives that are not included as part of the Year
2010 minimum circulation system, but may provide additional capacity at selected intersections
along the New Los Angeles Avenue -Los Angeles Avenue corridor.
;.7 -4
3.7.11.1 System Element Descriptions
The following text describes the "system circulation elements" contained in the-City's
Circulation Element that are not included in the Year 2010 minimum circulation system.
SR 23 Connection (Freeway Connection to SR 118): This circulation element alternative
would provide a connection from the existing SR 118 /SR 23 freeway connection to the SR 118
extension. This alternative would reduce traffic demands oriented to and from the north -south
that currently utilize SR 23 through the City. In addition, this alternative could become the
designated truck route for SR 23, thus reducing truck traffic on New Los Angeles Avenue, Los
Angeles Avenue and potentially eliminating the SR 23 truck traffic from Moorpark Avenue.
A review of the various traffic model runs performed with this segment of the SR 23 indicates
that the reductions in traffic demands on the City's street system would be substantial, and that
this alternative should be considered. Therefore, this system circulation element is included
in the alternative comparison analysis, and will be referred to as "Alternative 1" thrDughout the
remainder of the section.
SR 23 By -Pass (SR 118 to the Broadway Extension): A review of the various traffic model
runs performed with this segment of the SR 23 by -pass indicated that the reductions in traffic
demands on the City's street system would not be significant. The preliminary cost estimates
provided by City staff indicate that this segment of the SR 23 by -pass would cost
approximately $5,745,000; thus resulting in a very low benefit -to -cost ratio. Therefore, this
system element is not considered a viable alternative and is not included in the circulation
element alternative comparison analysis.
SR 118 Extension (Six -lane Section): This system element alternative would include the
construction of SR 118 as a six -lane arterial street and provide a bridge at Walnut Canyon
Road. A review of the various traffic model runs with the SR 118 extension indicated that the
six -lane section may only be required between the SR 118 /SR 23 freeway connection and
Spring Road. The construction of SR 118 from SR 118/23 freeway connection to Los Angeles
Avenue as a four -lane arterial is part of the Year 2010 minimum circulation system.
Construction of the additional two lanes for the six -lane section does not appear to be
warranted beyond Spring Road, as the four -lane section would be adequate. Therefore, this
system element is not included in the circulation element alternative comparison analysis.
3.7.11.2 Project Element Descriptions
The following text describes the "Project Circulation Options" as presented in Section 3.7.7.5.
Though these circulation options are not included in the Year 2010 minimum circulation
system, and could be constructed by the project, they may have some additional benefit to the
City circulation system.
3.7 -50
Campus Park Drive (West) Extension: This circulation option would include the connection
of Campus Park Drive (west) to the proJect street system,.; as,. de.wrib—cd in Section 3.7.7.5.2.
This option has been discussed at length as a potential mitigation measure =.for project specific
impacts. In addition' to the immediate effects at the Collins Drive/C m -, Park Drive„ the
review of the various traffic 'model runs performed with this, extension" i thafthe;
reductions in traffic demands on other City streets would be substantial,. and that this
alternative should be considered as a part of a viable circulation, system. Therefore, this project
circulation option is included in the alternative comparison an*.sis to demonstmfte its impact
on the City's circulation system, and will be referred to as "Alternative. 2" throughout the
remainder of the section.
Lagoon / SR 118 Interchange: This circulation option would include the- construction of the
Lagoon/SR 118 interchange as part of the project, as described in Section 3.7.7.5.7. A review
of the various traffic model runs performed with this interchange indicated that this interchange
would not reduce traffic demands along the New Los Angeles Avenue -Los Angeles Avenue
corridor. In addition, subsequent level of service calculations performed- at the key
intersections along this corridor indicated that this option would not improve any intersection
operations (LOS) or provide any additional reserve capacity. Based; on this finding, it is
• concluded that the only _benefit associated with the Lagoon/SR-118 interchange would be to
the project and the Campus Park Drive - Collins Drive corridor. Therefore, this project
circulation option is not considered a "system circulation alternative" element and is not
included in the alternative comparison analysis
Alamos Canyon Connection: This circulation system option would extend Hidden Creek
Drive from the project to Alamos Canyon Road in lieu of constructing the Lagoon Interchange.
Similar to the discussion for the Lagoon Interchange, this option does not improve the
operation of any of the intersections along New Los Angeles -Los Angeles Avenue and will
increase the traffic volumes at the Collins Drive /Campus Park Drive intersection.
3.7.11.3 Circulation Element Alternative Comparison
The following analysis presents a comparison of the circulation element alternatives discussed
in the two previous sections (3.7.11.1 and 3.7.11.2). Section 3.7.11.1 describes "Alternative 1
the SR 23 by -pass from the SR 118 /SR 23 freeway connection to the SR 118 extension.
In order to determine the amount of additional reserve capacity that would be associated with
the circulation element alternative, the levels of service were calculated at the three key
intersections along the New Los Angeles Avenue -Los Angeles Avenue corridor (Science Drive,
Spring Road and Moorpark Avenue). The Year 2010 + Project P.M. peak hour levels of
service included in this analysis were obtained from Table 8. The results of this analysis are
presented in Table 13.
3.7 -51
3.7.12 INTERNAL CIRCULATION
3.7.12.1 Roadways
The on -site circulation system for Hidden Creek Drive is to be a quasi- access controlled
roadway. That is, there will be no direct access from parcels onto Hidden Creek Drive. This
roadway will be designated as a through street with all side streets initially being stop -sign
controlled. At two way stop intersections one of the first indications of a need for change in
the traffic controls is when the side street delay becomes noticeable. At that time, a review
of warrants should be made to determine the appropriate traffic control method or device.
Right -of -way for a major arterial width shall be dedicated, including the right -of -way
requirements at intersections. The initial construction of Hidden Creek Drive is for two -lanes,
with shoulders. The ultimate section will be designed in accordance with City Standards or
as required by the choice of intersection control methods. The details of the internal circulation
network will need to be evaluated when more detailed project plans are available. These
decisions can be made when the project plans are processed.
3.7.12.2 Intersections
Intersections with Hidden Creek Drive will initially be controlled with stop signs. At two way
stop intersections one of the first indications of a need for change in the traffic controls is
when the side street delay becomes noticeable. At that time, a review of warrants should be
made to determine the appropriate traffic control method or device (ie: multi -way stop, traffic
signals, roundabouts, etc.).
As previously discussed in Section 3.7.7.2 (Year 2000 + Project Circulation System), Hidden
Creek Drive will connect to the existing Happy Camp Road/Walnut Canyon Road/Broadway
intersection on the west. For analysis purposes this intersection was assumed to be
reconfigured to provide a conventional intersection (4 -way) with traffic signal control. In a
similar manner, the future Campus Park Drive /Campus Road intersection, which will be the
project access intersection connection to the Campus Park area, was assumed to have adequate
capacity to accommodate traffic associated with both the Moorpark College and the project.
An initial review of the Year 2010 + Project traffic volumes at this location indicated that the
Hidden Creek Drive connection to the Campus Park Drive /Campus Road intersection should
be the minor leg of a "T" intersection, with Campus Park Drive - Campus Road being the major
through street. The design of these two project access intersections, and type of intersection
control (ie: traffic signals, roundabout, etc.) will need to be evaluated when the project plans
are processed.
i.7 -5
"t, �AXNf,
3.7.113 Internal Circulation Alternative (Roundabouts)
In Section 3:7.7.5,6 the concept of using, roundabouts for traffic control at,intersecti®ns was
discussed as. it applied to the. Collins, DrivelCampus Park' Drive, intersection:,. Walt reSgeet to
the system -wide use of this traffic control; measure, `'it was noted that the Campus Park' and
Hidden Creek area is a defined sub -area -within the City of Moorpa&k Tite traffic` is generally .
related, to the residential, nature of the neighborhood. except for the traffic oriented. °to.and'from"
the Moorpark College. The college brings ;significant traffic into the - area:on; selicted days and
times, but for the remaining time, this area is a, residenflit'neighborhood. ` Ina residential' area
the desire is to minimize traffic related noise, maintain moderate speeds and keep air pollution
to a.minimum.. The primarydesign principle of a roundabout is- to;allow traffic to- proceed at
20 to 25 miles per hour (mph) into an intersection with the entering traffic yielding to the
circulating traffic, thus minimizing average vehicle delays
The basic precept in the use of roundabouts is to minimize the street width and provide`- for
intersection capacity that will keep the traffic moving at 20 to 25 mph through the intersection.
The roundabout concept within the Hidden Creek area is pretty clear, but how it would be
applied in the Campus Park area is more challenging. The concept would be to review each
intersection along Campus Park Drive where full control is now exercised (traffic signals and
three or four -way stop signs). In addition to the Collins Drive /Campus. Park Drive intersection,
this would include the Princeton Avenue /Campus Park Drive, Marquette Street/Campus Park
Drive, Delfen Street/Campus Park Drive and Campus Road/Campus Park Drive intersections.
In this concept, the traffic calming effects of the roundabouts, the reduced auto emissions and
general tranquility in the entire area can be established and preserved. It would not be
necessary to change all of the traffic controls at once, the existing could remain in place until
the delays or LOS reached a point where some change is warranted. The roundabout could
be installed at that time.
One of the most common comments on roundabouts is that the local driver is not familiar with
roundabouts, thus cannot negotiate them very well. A response to this in this area is that the
system will be basically serving the residents and there will not be a significant number of
"new" drivers. Other comments relate to bicycle and pedestrian traffic, with the ability to
reduce the width of the streets, it will be possible to provide separate bikeways and pedestrian
walkways. The treatment at the intersections is to provide pedestrian crossing on the narrow
street, 20 or 30 feet from the roundabout entrance or exit with a protected island in the middle
of the street if needed (see Exhibit 17 -13).
3.7.13 REGIONAL PROJECT IMPACTS
3.7.13.1 Ventura County Congestion Management Program
In meeting the City of Moorpark's objective of maintaining LOS C at all intersections, the
Year 2000 and Year 2010 minimum circulation systems with the respective improvements for
the Project scenarios will comply with the Ventura, County Congestion Management Program.
3.7.13.2 Ventura County General Plan Consistency
Ventura County policies state that discretionary projects shall be analyzed to determine if at
least 10 percent of project daily traffic and one peak hour trip are generated onto any roads
listed in the County's memorandum concerning this policy (a copy of the memorandum is
contained in the Appendix). If so, additional analysis is required to confirm that widening of
the impacted road will either not be required to maintain an acceptable level of service or
appropriate traffic mitigation measures are funded or implemented. If widening is required and
not funded at impacted locations, the project is considered inconsistent with the County
General Plan. In December, 1994, Ventura County adopted a Traffic Fee Mitigation Ordinance
(Ordinance # 4071) which became effective on January 19, 1995. Subsequent to the adoption
of the ordinance, Ventura County amended the General Plan and Circulation Element to allow
for participation in the Traffic Fee Program as a way of complying with the General Plan
Policies. However, since the project site is now within the County and would have to be
annexed into the City, this issue will have to be resolved between these two public entities
prior to the annexation.
The only route where the project traffic exceeds the thresholds is on SR 118 east of Erringer
Road where the contribution is more than 10% and one peak hour trip. Thus, the project is
not consistent with the Ventura County General Plan unless there is an agreement between the
City of Moorpark and Ventura County related to traffic fees.
Funding for the statewide transportation improvement program (STIP) is generated by a
combination of state and federal fuel taxes, and motor vehicle fees. Project - generated users
of the system would pay their appropriate fuel taxes and motor vehicle fees as part of the
operation of their motor vehicles. Also, the project could contribute to the SR 118 extension,
which is an element of the regional circulation improvements required to facilitate general
county and regional traffic increases. Therefore, while this project is potentially inconsistent
with the County's General Plan, there is a mechanism which would enable this project to be
deemed consistent with the County's General Plan. The determination on the amount of the
traffic impact fee the project should pay must take into consideration the regionally significant
elements of the City's Circulation system in which the project is going to participate.
3.7.13.3 City of Simi Valley's Circulation Element
The City of Simi Valley uses a computer traffic model to forecast their General Plan buildout
traffic demands. During the development of the City of Moorpark's traffic model there was
coordination between these two agencies to ensure that the two traffic model forecasts were
consistent at the modeling boundary periphery. Therefore, the General Plan buildout in the
City of Moorpark has been considered as part of the City of Simi Valley's circulation system
development. Thus, development in the City of Moorpark and the City of Simi Valley can be
accommodated by each city's circulation systern
1.7 -5
3.7.14 LEVEL OF SERVICE DISCUSSION
3.7.14.1 Intersection Analysis Methodology
The ICU methodology utilized for the evaluation of project impacts was based on lane
capacities currently being used within the City of Moorpark. As indicated in the guidelines,
the lane capacities vary depending on the usage of a particular lane and an ICU value of 0.10
is assumed for yellow clearance. It is noted that since the original publication of these
guidelines, extensive work has been conducted by agencies within Ventura County to establish
a uniform method for calculating intersection levels of service for the Congestion Management
Program. The ICU method adopted for use by the Ventura County Transportation Commission
(VCTC) is presented in the technical documents summarizing this research data. The current
methodology uses 1,600 vehicles per hour per lane (vphpl) without any added yellow clearance
interval. The justification for this is based upon the data gathered at locations within the
County. In adjacent Simi Valley, lane capacities of 1,800 vphpl are used.
The City of Moorpark methodology uses the basic 1,600 vphpl for through lanes, with a
reduction to 1,500 vphpl for left -turn and right -turn lanes and 2,600 vphpl for dual turn-lanes, _
and then adds 0.10 for a yellow clearance interval. The net result of the City's methodology
is to have an ICU value approximately 0.15 higher than would be calculated using the VCTC
methodology. The 0.15 ICU value increase amounts to 1.5 letter grades in the LOS, that is a
0.70 -B would be a 0.85 -D. This methodology coupled with the City's LOS C performance
objective results in the need for larger intersection configuration. This translates into higher
costs to develop and maintain the City's circulation system. A comparison of the ICU -LOS
values at the four critical intersections within, the {.study area using the two ICU methodologies
is shown in Table 1.4
s Developing a Uniform Method for Calculating Intersection Level of Service for
Congestion Management Programs Technical Committee on Congestion
Management Programs, 1992.
3 7 -5f,
9
REFERENCES AND PERSONS CONTACTED
LIST OF REFERENCES:
Moorpark Traffic Analysis Model - Model Description and Validation. Austin -Foust
Associates, June 1994.
Guidelines For Preparing Traffic and Circulation Studies, City of Moorpark, April 11, 1994.
Highway Capacity Manual, Highway Research Board Special Report 209, Transportation
Research Board, National Research Council„ 1985.
Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Fifth Edition, January, 1991.
Developing A Uniform Method For Calculating Intersection Levels of Service For
Congestion Management Programs , ITE Southern California Section, Ventura -Santa Barbara
Section, Technical Committee on Congestion Management Programs, 1992.
Carlsberg Specific Plan - Traffic and Circulation EIR Section, Austin Foust Associates.
LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED:
Deborah S. Traffenstedt - Senior Transportation Planner, City of Moorpark
John Whitman, P.E. - City Traffic Engineer, City of Moorpark (Dwight French & Assoc.)
Dirk Lovett, P.E. - City Engineer, City of Moorpark (Charles Abbott & Associates)
W. Butch Britt, P.E. - Deputy Director of Public Works, Ventura County
Robert B. Brownie, P.E. - Principal Engineer (Transportation Department), Ventura County
Steve Manz, P.E. - County Traffic Engineer, Ventura County
Sameerah Mateen - Transportation Planner, Caltrans District 7
William G. Golubics, P.E. - Principal Engineer (Traffic), City of Simi Valley
Kendall Elmer, Austin -Foust Associates, Inc
3.7 -5 9
CITY OF MOORPARK
CITY COUNCIL /PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP
Circulation Planning for Moorpark Area of Interest
North of Los Angeles Avenue
May 24, 1995
7:00 p.m.
OUTLINE
I. INTRODUCTION (Jaime Aguilera, City)
A. Workshop Purpose
B. Summarize General Plan Update and Sphere of Influence
Study completed in 1992
II. CIRCULATION ELEMENT OVERVIEW (Austin -Foust Associates)
A. Approved Circulation Element Highway /Roadway network
B. Assumptions related to Routes 118 and 23 extensions
1. Need based on General Plan buildout
2. Interchanges planned. (Discuss Walnut Canyon
Road /Route 118)
3. Number of lanes required
4. Circulation /traffic impact with no Route 118 or
Route 23 Extensions 'Year 2010)
III. SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 8 TRAFFIC STUDY OVERVIEW (Richard Pool, ATE)
A. Development of Traffic Study
B. Year 2000 Analysis
C. Year 2010 Analysis
D. Mitigation Measures
E. Circulation Alternatives
IV. SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2 PRELIMINARY CIRCULATION SYSTEM
ALTERNATIVES (Ramseyer and Associates)
A. Routes 118 and 23 Extension Alignments
B. Collector Roadway Extensic::n options
V. FEASIBILITY OF LOCATING FUTURE ROUTE 118 FREEWAY NORTH OF THE
CITY TO CONNECT WITH (AND BE COINCIDENT WITH) FUTURE ROUTE 23
E %TENSION SOUTH OF BROADWAY (Jaime Aguilera)
A. Pros
1. Remove Route 118 freeway from residential areas in
City
2. Prevent division of present City by a future
freeway
3. Provide ability to plan future commercial/
industrial land uses adjacent to future freeway
4. P entially less growth- inducing impacts on prime
aicultural land
5. Improved access for mining operations
B. Cons
1. R/W already planned /dedicated
2. Area where a northerly Route 118 freeway could be
located is outside of the current City limits and
City doesn't control development
3. There is no investigation of feasibility for a
northerly alignment (topographic constraints, R/W
requirements, impacts); and a study would need to
be funded
4. Los Angeles Avenue, in the City, may carry more
traffic
5. Growth inducing impacts
6. City would assume maintenance and improvement
responsibility for Walnut Canyon Road /Moorpark
Avenue and Los Angeles Avenue /New Los Angeles
Avenue
VI. CITY COUNCIL /PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION
VII. PUBLIC COM4ENTS
VIII. FUTURE ACTIONS