the neighborhoods of tustin town center: a new ... - City of Tustin

LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION
The land uses and trip generation for each neighborhood area and alternatives illustrated in
Figures 4 through 9 are summarized in Tables 2 through 4. The highest Alternative A increase
over existing, by approximately 35%, occurs in Center City whereas Southern Gateway and
West Village proposed land use changes increase around 20% and 5%, respectively. The trips
generated by the land uses assumed in Alternative A for any neighborhood area indicate that
it is less intense than Alternative B by as much as 15% on a daily basis as in the case in Center
City. Alternative B can be intense by as much as 51% compared to existing and 29% and 15% in
Southern Gateway and West Village, respectively. There are three neighborhood areas (Center
City, Southern Gateway, and West Village) each with two circulation plans that are referred to in this
report as Neighborhood Plans (Alternatives A and B) and two land use alternatives (Alternatives
A and B). The traffic evaluation carried out here for worse-case evaluation purposes uses the land
use alternative with the highest trip generation (Alternative B) for each Neighborhood Plan under
existing conditions in each of the Neighborhood Areas. However, it is likely the final development
plan for Tustin Town Center will be a combination of circulation (such as Neighborhood Plan) and
land use alternatives for each Neighborhood Area presented in Figures 4 through 9 and Tables
2 through 4.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Figure 10 presents the circulation system within the study area. The existing ADT volumes
are illustrated in Figure 11 and the select key intersections evaluated are shown in Figure 12.
Drivers are more likely to perceive traffic problem at intersections rather than roadway segments,
therefore the performance of intersections using peak hour data is the main emphasis of the
evaluation given here. The ICU values for these intersections are summarized in Table 5. As can
be seen here, all intersections are operating better than the acceptable level of service “D” (ICU
= .90) with LOS “C” or better (ICU = .80 or below). The worst performing intersection with a PM
peak hour ICU of .71 under existing conditions is Pasadena Avenue at McFadden Avenue.
Future conditions that are not analyzed here but could affect travel patterns include the extension
of Newport Avenue from just south of Sycamore Avenue to Edinger Avenue which will particularly
affect traffic on Newport Avenue in the Southern Gateway. To what extent will be the subject of
further study at a later date.
A-10 THE NEIGHBORHOODS OF TUSTIN TOWN CENTER
MARKET ANALYSIS AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONCEPT PLANS
STRATEGIC GUIDE 09.21.2010