Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPIP 05-03; PALOMAR FORUM LOT 6 & 7; TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS; 2001-03-07r TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS for PALO MAR FORUM Prepared for PROFESSOR'S CAPITAL Final Report March 7, 2001 (With March 13, 2001 and October 10, 2001 Revisions) © URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOCIATES, INC. TRAFFIC PLANNING & ENGINEERING, MARKETING & PROJECT SUPPORT CONSULTANTS TO INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT 4540 Kearny Villa Road, Suite 106 San Diego, California 92123-1573 (858) 560-4911 Palomar Forum Final Report Section TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 1.0 IN'TRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 2.0 METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................. 3-1 4.0 THE PROJECT TRIP GENERATION .................................... 4-1 5.0 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS ............................... 5-1 6.0 SHORT TERM FUTURE (PRIOR TO YEAR 2005) CONDITIONS ............ 6-1 7.0 SHORT TERM FUTURE (YEAR 2005) CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-1 8.0 YEAR2010 CONDITIONS ............................. • ............... 8-1 9.0 BUILDOUT (YEAR2020) CONDITIONS ...... • .......................... 9-1 10.0 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (CJvfP) ...................... 10-1 11.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOl\lTh.ffiNDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-1 12.0 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-1 13.0 URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOCIATES, INC. PREPARERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-1 APPENDICES A. Existing Conditions Worksheets B. Project Plus Existing Conditions Worksheets C. Project Plus Short Term Future (Prio~ to Year 2005) D. Project Plus Short-Term Future (Year 2005) Conditions Levels of Service Worksheets E. Year 2020 (Buildout) Conditions Intersection Levels of Service Worksheets 002198 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Fontm Final Report Number 1-1 Project Location Map ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 LIST OF FIGURES ♦ • t • ♦ • t • • t • • • • o Io o O ♦ 0 0 o o • 0 o o o • o • • o o ♦ 0 ♦ ♦ 0 • • 0 0 o o o o o 1-2 3-1 Existing Average Daily Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-2 3-2 Existing Street Classifications ........................ •. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-3 3-3 Existing Lane Configurations and Street Classifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-6 3-4 Intersection Number Key . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-7 3-5 Existing AM Peak Hour Volumes ......... • .............................. 3-10 3-6 Existing PM Peak Hour Volumes ....................................... 3-13 4-1 Project Site Plan ...................................................... 4-2 4-2 Project Only Directional Distribution Percentages ........................... 4-4 4-3 Project Only Distribution Average Daily Traffic Volumes ..................... 4-5 4-4 Project Only AM Peak Hour Volumes (20% of Project & CN.IP Intersections) 4-6 4-5 Project Only PM Peak Hour Volumes (20% of Project & CN.IP Intersections) 4-9 5-1 Project Only Directional Distribution Percentages on Year 1998 Street Network ... 5-2 5-2 Project Only Average Daily Traffic Volumes on Year 1998 Street Network ....... 5-3 5-3 Project Only AM Peak Hour Volumes on 1998 Street Network ................. 5-6 5-4 Project Only PM Peak Hour Volumes on 1998 Street Network ................. 5-9 6-1 Prior To Year 2005 Comparison of Average Daily Traffic Volumes 6-4 6-2 Prior To Year 2005 AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes No Melrose Dr./ No Faraday Ave. I No Poinsettia Lane ...................... 6-5 7-1 Year 2005 Average Daily Traffic Volumes ................................. 7-'2 7-2 Year 2005 Project Only Directional Distribution Percentages .................. 7-5 7-3 Year 2005 Project Only AM Peak Hour (20% of Project and CMP Intersections) ... 7-6 002198 ii 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Fon,m Final Report Number ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 LIST OF FIGURES (conq 7-4 Year 2005 Project Only PM Peak Hour (20% of Project and CMP Intersections) ... 7-9 7-5 7-6 Year 2005 AM Peak Hour Volumes Year 2005 PM Peak Hour Volumes 7-12 7-15 7-7 Year 2005 Intersection Lane Configurations .............................. 7-20 8-1 Year 2010 Average Daily Traffic Volumes ................................. 8-2 9-1 Buildout (Year 2020) Average Daily Traffic Volumes ........................ 9-2 9-2 Buildout (Year 2020) Plus Project AM Peak Hour Volumes ................... 9-4 9-3 Buildout (Year 2020) Plus Project PM Peak Hour Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-7 9-4 Year 2020 Intersection Lane Configurations with Mitigation as Needed ......... 9-12 002198 iii 2198-,pt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 1.0 INTRODUCTION U rban Systems Associates, Inc. was retained by Professor's Capital to evaluate possible traffic impacts from the development of Palomar Forum in the City of Carlsbad. Figure 1-1 shows the project location. The project consists of approximately 45 acres of planned industrial uses. In order to evaluate possible project traffic impacts Existing, Existing Plus Project, Short-Term Future prior to Year 2005, Year 2005, Year 2010, and Buildout (Year 2020) conditions with and without the pr~ject were evaluated. Year 2005, Year 2010, and Buildout traffic volumes were estimated using the San Diego Area of Governments (SANDAG) Cities/County Transportation Forecast, City of Carlsbad, assumed built-out in year 2020. For the purposes of evaluation, the report is divided into the following sections: 002198 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Methodology 3.0 Existing Conditions 4.0 The Project Trip Generation 5.0 Existing Plus Project Conditions 6.0 Short-Term Future (Prior to Year 2005) Conditions 7.0 Short-Term Future (Year 2005) Conditions 8.0 Year 2010 Conditions 9.0 Buildout (Year 2020) Conditions 10.0 Congestion Management Program 11.0 Conclusion and Recommendations 1-1 • 2!98-rpt-30701 Palomar Fon,m Final Report 2.0 lVIETHODOLOGY ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Described below are the various regional or local guidelines or basis for studies that were used in the preparation of this report. 2.1 CMP GUIDELINES / SANTEC GUIDELINES The Congestion Management Program (CJ\1P) guidelines were developed to provide a set of procedures for completing enhanced CEQA review for certain projects. The guidelines, prepared by the San Diego Association of Governments (SAND AG), stipulate that any development project generating 2,400 or more average daily trips, or 200 or more peak hour trips must be evaluated in accordance with requirements of the Regional CMP. This project would generate 5,226 average \ daily trips, 580 AM and 625 PM peak hour trips, so that a CMP analysis has been included. The CMP also requires that a traffic impact analysis address freeway links with one hundred fifty of more peak hour project trips (in either direction) or fifty or more peak hour trips (in either direction) on CMP or Regionally Significant Arterials (RSA) roadways. Segments ofI-5 north and s_outh of Cannon Road and SR-78 east and west of El Camino Real are expected to have less than 150 project peak hour trips, so are not required to be evaluated. The SANTEC Guidelines were used to determine which intersections and street segments should be included in the study area. Intersections at which the peak hour trips from one direction were 50 or more are included in the study area. 2.2 CITY OF CARLSBAD GROWTH .MA.l.··~AGElVIENT PLAN GUIDELINES The City of Carlsbad Growth Management Plan circulation standards allow level of service "D" for street segments and intersections during peak hours. This evaluation includes this standard of 002198 2-1 2 I 98-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 performance. If a project causes an intersection or street segment to degrade to level of service "E" or "F", then the project impact is considered to be significant. 2.3 COMPUTER TRAVEL FORECASTS Computer travel forecasts used for the analysis ofY ear 2005, Year 2010 and Year 2020 (buildout) conditions were prepared by the City of Carlsbad and SANDAG. The SANDAG Cities/County, Transportation Forecast City of Carlsbad Year 2020 Alternative 5, 2010 and 2005 were used for evaluation. 2.4 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE LOS PROCEDURES To determine intersection peak hour Levels of Service (LOS) and any needed mitigation measures, as required by the City of Carlsbad Growth Management Plan Guidelines, the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method was used. Also, for Congestion Management Program evaluation purposes, intersection levels of service were also calculated using the latest Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) computer software methodology (the 1997 update to the 1994 HCM). 002198 • 2-2 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 This section of the report evaluates existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes on study area street segments (between intersections) and at intersections during AM and PM peak hours. Traffic ·volumes are based on the City of Carlsbad 1999 Traffic Monitoring Program daily roadway traffic counts and peak period manual traffic counts at intersections. 3.1 STREET SEGMENTS Figure 3-1 shows existing average daily traffic volumes on street segments within the study area. These volumes were taken from recent traffic counts conducted for the City of Carlsbad 1999 Traffic Monitoring Program and recent traffic counts for project analysis. Figure 3-2 shows existing roadway classifications for street segments within and adjacent to the study _area. Tab le 3-1 includes existing street segment levels of service based on the highest peak hour flow per lane and a per lane capacity of 1800 VPHPL. As shown, all street segments currently operate acceptably. 002198 3-1 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Fornm Final Report ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 TABLE 3-1 Existing Street Segment Levels of Service Average Peak Daily Peak VHPL/ Location Classification Volume VPBPL CPL LOS* '..~]·'#•:,~-. •. •:•~:-:.::~.t'.i;':i"~ .. ~._;;P.;~•;,_!;.;:7;~~:-;,, • .1~~"'l~1£--:'.'i','.ii:'.~1;.":.1~&':'r.1}t'i~~'!'f.:..'11c\'::"tt'?-;lf:::1'M~':--'~'i~t~·i-:i.;:~-~t:.:~r1;~:{1-?-.:-l'{~'",:~i1:i .. ;.;:~~:.l.?~:i~-;l~~~.;!,~"i'~?::::::.i?•':i~,{ ::;/~-~~ll'~i!t&>itttb-.&f-YI~~~:r,g:,!~,\:',;,~t~.f1>{~~-:-,:::_:")~•J,i;;t;;;t,:~ ~At~~-:-;; Jf...fS:\:!,",~':,:;_ :..-... ~-)~1~•r:~.~•;~t1 :=,•.: El Camino Real College Blvd-Faraday Ave. 4PA 25,000 675 0.38 A Faraday Ave. -Palomar Airport Rd. 6PA 31,000 520 0.29 A Palomar Airport Rd. -Camino Vida Roble 6PA 25,000 450 0.25 A Camino Vida Roble -Poinsettia Ln. 4PA 29,000 945 0.53 A Poinsettia Ln. -Aviara Pkwy.I Alga Rd. 4PA 29,000 945 0.53 A Palomar Airport Rd. College Blvd. -Camino Vida Roble 6PA 36,000 630 0.35 A Camino Vida Roble -El Camino Real 6PA 25,000 445 0.25 A El Camino Real -El Fuerte St. SPA 47,000 1405 0.78 C El Fuerte St. -Melrose Dr. 4PA 46,000 1505 0.84 D Melrose Dr. -Business Park Dr. 4PA 46,000 1520 0.84 D Business Park Dr. -Rancho Santa Fe Rd. 4PA 31,000 920 0.51 A San Marcos Blvd. Rancho Santa Fe Rd. -Las Posas Rd. 4M 33,000 860 0.48 A Las Posas Rd. -Via Vera Cruz 4M 33,000 850 0.47 A Via Vera Cruz -S. Bent Ave. 4M 36,000 870 0.48 A S. Bent Ave. -Grand Ave. 4M 42,000 875 0.48 A Melrose Dr. Cannon Rd. -Shadowridge Dr. 6PA 20,000 400 0.22 A Shadowridge Dr. -Sycamore Ave. 6PA 16,000 320 0.18 A Sycamore Ave. -Palomar Airport Rd. 6PA 3,000 100 0.06 A Palomar airport Rd. -Poinsettia Ln. 6PA 3,000 200 0.11 A Poinsettia Ln. -Alga Rd. 6PA 3,000 200 0.11 A ;~,!\': ~-w .· . ,;:;~f-'',.A,.~. 't;.•r-..,'~!..."'-,.-~!-.:"!.:::',.~~;o/X.~.J•,........,.~~~'n:~.-1-:.•'1.';7:,{{-F.•itJJ:. -~:'l:tf:'¥';:-• ~-!-.~~-~~ ,_;_· i-.. -~--'Hc"';;'-..t•~::,_,,..9,t,*::;,:"":..~ <:i>f;;;> ••,,:;'b.:;-~:f.t'~ .. -~,U~~••~--.,,.1,!i'::;(-(!~\~~ :.__.t,?-"j'f-:J::.::,;_:ff#;,9a,;:::.r:,°'t;'3¼t7..f.."!~""!Jif..'!:':J~';.,.•-• .. ~~'i!-:"!~·..,.;-_1-;-Z'$.,,;_, -~ Legend 8FWY = 8-lane freeway 6FWY = 6-lane freeway 6P A = 6-lane primary arterial 4MA = 4-lane major arterial 4SA = 4-lane secondary arterial 4C = 4-lane collector 2C = 2-lane collector VPHPL = Vehicles per hour per lane CPL = Capacity per lane @ 1,800 VPH V/C = Volume to capacity ratio * Based on the peak hour volume in the direction of the highest volume 002198 3-4 2198-TABJ-IB. wpd/CD-K 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 3.2 INTERSECTIONS Figure 3-3 shows the key to study area intersections, by number. ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 200 I Figure 3-4 shows intersection lane configurations as they were recorded in 1999 and with recent (Year 2000 and 2001) improvements. Figures 3-5 and 3-6 show existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the study area intersections. Table 3-2 includes the results of the intersection level of service evaluation for existing conditions. The study area intersections are shown to be operating at acceptable levels of service ("D" or better LOS) for existing conditions. Outside the City of Carlsbad, the Melrose Drive/Sycamore A venue intersection operates at level of service "E" during the PM peak hour, but would operate at level of service "B" with restriping of the westbound approach to accommodate the heavy right turn volumes. The Melrose Drive/Rancho Santa Fe Road intersection is at "F" during the AM peak hour, but the City of San Marcos has prepared improvements plans and has arranged funding for the ultimate improvements at this location. Appendix A includes existing conditions traffic counts and levels of service worksheets. 002198 3-5 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report ® ..,; l"IJ • 4~! ~ _,. _.,. ~ ~ ..,._ ..,._ r Palomar .A:irporl Rd. + Palomar Airport Road at El Fuerte Street @) ~ ,i ~ "II ..,._ 4 \.\. ! F- Jr. San. Maroa• Bllld. J "\ tt f _.,. ~ Wast San Marcos Boulevard at Grand Avenue @ ,: q -e ti ~ = '-.. Free ~ Right :s ..,_ ~ ..,_ ~,\.\. r ,..Palomar .d.VJ!orl Rd. ~ "\Y __.. __.. __.. ~ Palomar Airport Road at Business Park Drive @ ,: q ~ ~ \_.. 4!'--J ~ Pomaettil& A-. ~ , ttr --+- ~ Business Park Drive at Poinsettia Avenue FIGURE3-4 ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Page 3 of 3 @ ~ "" A; -+- ~JJ\. i F- F. San. Jla:rt1aa Bt11d. ~j "\"\ tt ,:ree __..Q; __., Right ~ West San Marcos Boulevard at Rancho Santa Fe Road @ ~ ........_ s Q) c ......... ~~ ~= -+-Q ...,_ "'"" s. Q 1 • ~ i; r ... ~\.._...,__;,~ es '! =. "'2 Palomar .Ai,porl Rd. -~ .... ... :::i "\Y ~~ .. i Palomar Airport Road at Palomar Fonm South Accaa/Pueo Valndo Existing Intersection Lane Configurations .co-K 2198-FlgJ-+-JB.dwg 002198 3-9 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report @ ... 0 f"2 0 "<t .: 24~! ~ 350~ 1020:::: -,r 0 210 ~ -+-2670 -+-,s PaJanu.-..lirpart lid. a,to ..... Palomar Airport Road at El Fuerte Streat @ 400 ti ~1795 IO ;, 0 00 ~ N..... l ~ 4 "'"' l F,s5 Jr. San Ma:rtJDII B&ld. 15 _J "ttt -. 1075 -,r IOIOO N-LO 25 Source: TSI West San Marcos Boulevard at Grand Avenue SOURCE City ofCadabad 1999 T.raf6o Monitoring Pmpm(E:u:cpt uNotcd) ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Page 3 of 3 @ s.: @ 70 <::a .II ~1140 li a. 0 IOO "" -LO CO ..-I>; .. '-2so F-670 0 .. Ji1'--i Free "<l"IO ·j Right. IO IXl =:1sso --'ZI ~"' .... ro 1T. Sa.n Ma:raoa Btvd. Pa.lommr .A.v;parl Rd. 230~ 1 ~ttr~ 680~ ~ro II; 420 ..... 540=:: _. 0 ..-N 0 0 75" .-"<t t0 0~ Source: TSI Source: TSI Palomar Airport Road at West San Marcos Boulevard at Business Park Drive Rancho Santa Fe Road @ i: 105 @ "· ~ 0 ~ '-~t .,..,__ C'l ~ IO ii! ~ Q. : 3020 ..... ,.,., ?=g45 ~--: u, 4!"' j ~~ ~1; ,s • ~~!I .. .Poinaatffa. .Ave. • 11.f"l PrJ/Dm.a.r' .A.fr:pori Rd. 5 _, "ttr .J Q . a 5---.. 1275--.i "y 5" 0 IO IO __,..::.. IOIO -N ~i N- ION Business Park Drive at Palomar Airport Road at Poinsettia Avenue Palamar Forum South AccNeJPuao Valndo FIGURE3-5 Existing AM Peak Hour Volumes . Cl-K 2198-FlgJ-5-JC.dwg 002198 3-12 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Fontm Final Report TABLE3-2 ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. October 10, 2001 Existjng Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Intersection AM PM # ICU LOS ICU LOS ;~-~-·._'·.,·.~,,.:-:-,}:.•_. • • .• ·-·:.-,__._.._· .-·.,.,_ • .... -·· • .. ·~~"'".:'··. ·,_ • :_·_ .. :·2..?~·-~•-·r~ ~-_·...::-.. ,.~-~.-:~1i~-~-fsrt~~~~'-· -~~\--~·~-...f~~~-:; ~;:?----~1t.:.~~1;~.:....{f..;::~:.§«~4:.!~$~~}f):¥;:~?-f:~_t:~,iL~· ... -=·j\:~.;._,-.~:~.,3i:--:.w'·, .... -~~---- 1 El Camino Real / College Boulevard 0.51 A 0.61 B 2 El Camino Real/ Faraday Avenue 0.67 B 0.71 C 3 El Camino Real / Palomar Airport Road 0.62 B 0.78 C 4 El Camino Real / Bressi West Access Future 5 El Camino Real / Camino Vida Roble 0.50 A 0.58 A 6 El Camino Real / Poinsettia Lane Future 7 Melrose Drive / Cannon Road 0.56 A 0.47 A 8 Melrose Drive / Shadowridge Drive 0.55 A 0.54 A 9 Melrose Drive/ Sycamore Avenue Q) 0.50 A 0.69 B 10 Melrose Drive/ Faraday Avenue 0.26 A 0.26 A 11 Melrose Drive/ Poinsettia Avenue Future 12 Melrose Drive / Palomar Airport Rd. 0.83 D 0.64 B 13 Melrose Drive / Poinsettia Lane 0.28 A 0.20 A 14 Melrose Drive / Alga Road 0.43 A 0.45 A 15 Palomar Airport Rd. / Camino Vida Roble 0.55 A 0.64 B 16 Palomar Airport Rd. / Bressi North Access Future 17 Palomar Airport Rd. / El Fuerte Street 0.69 B 0.61 B 18 Palomar Airport Rd. / Business Park Drive 0.75 C 0.80 C 19 West San Marcos Blvd. / Rancho Santa Fe Rd. 0.84 D 0.87 D 20 West San Marcos Blvd./ Grand Ave. 0.62 B 0.77 C 21 Business Parle Dr./ Poinsettia Avenue 0.56 A 0.73 C 22 Palomar Airport Rd. / Palomar Forum South Access / 0.87 D 0.61 B Paseo V alindo '-;' "":"~ '': w:;'•=::,.-:i.;,.,::-:;.., -•. • ~•.: ••~ •• • ;..'. f-.:-',.: :0 -~··:t1,• •• :-•-,•) .• ,; .. ,_ • •. ~ ~ :-.~,_-. '!.;:);'\!Jf~,1::.:"-... ~·:.~\""~-.'~ • ... •~•;::r:-•:··~•{.--::..t.1':~:~~r;:;.~·~3.\ •• "";-;i.!'· .•• (-;.,' 1;,';:':°·· -,t_.:.._;__v;47!tf·v1>},t;.~' '-;j:/~.I _(,_.~£,;_ :,.,,:.,;r-··~;;:,.-';'lv!.o'.•':..,f,.'-:~ "••.::""-· ···.?:t•-5:.,f:· .• --.:Y • 2198-Tab3-2E.wpd/CD-L Q) = With restriping of westbound lanes for right tum only lanes plus through / right lane. ICU LOS 0.00-0.60 A 0.61-0.70 B 0.71-0.80 C 0.81 -0.90 D 0.91-1.00 E Over 1.00 F 002198 3-16 2198-rpt-J 0 I 001 Palomar Forom Final Report 4.0 THE PROJECT TRIP GENERATION .©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 The project will consist of approximately 45 acres of planned industrial uses. Figure 4-1 includes the project site plan as proposed. Table 4-1 includes the vehicle trip generation expected from the site. As shown, the project is expected to generate 5,226 average daily trips (ADT) with 580 trips occurring in the AM peak hour (split 520 inbound and 60 outbound) and 625 occurring in the PM peak hour (split 122 inbound and 503 outbound). Also, the total traffic model average daily traffic volume for the combined Carlsbad Raceway and the Palomar F~rum project is 15,547 ADT. The property owners have agreed to an allocation of this ADT volume of 5,668 ADT to Palomar Forum, and 9,879 ADT to Carlsbad Raceway. No change in project impacts or mitigation would result from this allocation. Figure 4-2 shows the project only directional distribution percentages at buildout. The directional distribution percentages are based on a select zone plot of the project using the SAND AG/Cities/County 2020 Transportation Forecast, City of Carlsbad traffic model. Figure 4-3 shows project only average daily traffic. Figures 4-4 and 4-5 show Al\1 and PM peak hour project only traffic volumes at intersections impacted by 20% or more of project traffic (for 9rowth Management Program evaluation), and at Congestion Management Program intersections (50 or more peak hour trips in one direction). The volumes shown in these figures will be used in the following sections of this report for the identification of possible project only traffic impacts. 002198 4-1 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report CD 0 N l CoU.g• Blvd. 'ii .. A:; 5 g ta ii:; t I") El Camino Real at College Boulevard 0 'ii ~ u, .; g t, OQ 0 0 'ii .. A:; 0 .s N ' 5 rs ta ii;j Fo:ra.d.ay .Ava. 10" ~ tt .... l"'l .... El Camino Real at Faraday Avenue 'ii .. A:; 0 ll') -!: l 5 ta ii;j ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Page 1 of 3 0 'ii '-.s . A:; ~ ~ .,._.3 ~l rs ii;j Pa.lDma:r .Airport Rd. 25---. t LC'l I") Palomar Airport Road at El Camino Real 0 'ii .. A:; 5 LC') ..... 2 i I: ~ .; l JJrnri AccH• IJ'e•t Ca,mno Vim Roble P<ri,u•tfiG Ln. t t 15---. t 0 LC'l l"'l 0 ti) N El Camino Real at El Camino Real at El Camino Real at Bressi Access West Camino Vida Roble Poinsettia Lane 0 0 LC') 0 l"'l I") l l Cannon Rd. S11.tsdaturi.tl• J>r. i: t i: t q ~ .. .. .. IO . ll') ~ _g ~ :;; Melrose Drive at Melrose Drive at Cannon Road Shadowrldge Drive FIGURE4-4 Year 2020 Project Only AM Peak Hour Volumes (20% of Project & CMP Intersections) .CD-I 2198-Flg4-4-1.dwg 002198 4-6 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 0 0 ...,. i ,: q • .. rs _g ~ Syoa:mara A11e. tr It) ..- Melrose Drive at Sycamore Avenue @ .,_zo rs 1'1slamm-.AwportRd.. 1so-. ,: q • I' .. _g 0 :; in Palomar Airport Road at Melrose Drive @ . :;; " II; i .5 § i:.:, 25__. ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Page 2 of 3 @ 0 in ...,. 1$ 0 l IX] • .,20 \__ 10 .. ~ _g :; ,a:ra.d.a.y A.118. Poinntff4 .A11e. 15 ~ "t I' ,: q . .. N t0 N _g ~ Melrose Drive at Melrose Drive at Faraday Avenue Poinsettia Avenue @ @ ,: ,: q NI"') q I') .. ..Ii .. i .. .. Q " .!: .!: ~ ~ Powetna. Ln. Alga Rd.. 1s..! t t 0 0 I"') I") Melrose Drive at Melrose Drive at Poinsettia Lane Alga Road @ .. .. "'I ..,_5 !. .It " ~ -+-10 F<&lomcr .Awport Rd. Pllloma.r Awport Rd.. 100--..: " a ... ,c .. 5 II; l e 121 Palomar Airport Road at Palomar Airport. Road at Loker Ave./ Breaal Ranch Acceaa Camino Vida Roble FIGURE4-4 Year 2020 Project Only AM Peak Hour Volumes (20% of Project & CMP Intersections) .co-K 2198-Flg4-4-2A.dwg 002198 4-7 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Fontm Final Report 0 It) l CaU.g• Bwd. ;j " ~ .. = e ii i:, iii t 1/) N El Camino Real at College Boulevard 0 ;; .. II; .. . s 0 § -.j' r.) iii 0 0 ;; " A: Ill .$ t ~ r2 i:, iii ,a:raday 411L 3'"" ' tr 0 ltl LO ..-t'j El Camino Real at Faraday Avenue ;j .. A: 0 sq-l ! i c;a iii ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Page 1 of 3 0 ;; \...40 .. ~ 0 ..-2 -+-35 ~l r4o iii PtZJ.ama:r .AiTpori Rd. 5_,. f 0 .... Palomar Airport Road at El Camino Real 0 ;j .. A: 0 0 -.;I' ~ E -+-15 ~ i Brem ..4.aa... 1"•.t Ca;mino V--.da. Rabi. J ii;; p,,.....t& Ln. t t 5_,. t I() IJ') IJ') El Camino Real at El Camino Real at El Camino Real at Bressi Acceaa West Camino Vida Roble Poinsettia Lana 0 0 0 0 .... .... i ! C-.on, Rd. SIMJdmuridg• Jh-. .: t .: t q q .. • .. IJ') .. 0 _g 1'11 _g sq- ~ ~ Melrose Drive at Melrose Drive at Camon Road Shadowridge Drive FIGURE4-5 Year 2020 Project Only PM Peak Hour Volumes (20% of Project & CMP Intersections) .CO-I 2198-Flg-4-5-1.dwg 002198 4-9 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 0 0 ..... i ,: <:\ • .. .. .!: ~ r1 Syaa:rnare A11-. tr LO LO -.:I" Melrose Drive at Sycamore Avenue @ ...... 1ss r4s Pa.lamar Avpari Rd. ,: r "' 40--+-.. 0 .. _g .... :; Palomar Airport Road at Melross Drive ® .! "' .. ~ .g s: Q -5 I ~ 5__.,. ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Page 2 of 3 @ 0 0 ..... ,s 0 ! N '-ss . ,s .. " _g ~ l'o:ra.dD.1/ .41/L p.,.,..•tffa. A11a. 5~ ~tr .s .. • LO O 0 _g .,... LON ~ Melrose Drive at Melrose Drive at Faraday Avenue Poinsettia Avenue @ @ LOO ,: s: 0 "' ...-1"') q I'll .. ,./ t • J .. • .. Q .!: .!: ~ ~ .Pm-....ttiu L,._ Algcs Rd.. s.J t t 0 0 ... - Melrose Drive at Melrose Drive at Poinsettia Lane Alga Road ® .. .. '""' ._.30 Ii Jt " ... ..-115 PalDmln-AiryortRd. p..zom.s,. .Avporl Rd. 35__..5 a Q '""' ~ I ~ ,: • iE Palomar Airport Road at Camino Vida Roble Palomar Airport Road at Loker Ave./ Breesi Ranch Access FIGURE4-5 Year 2020 Project Only PM Peak Hour Volumes (20% of Project & CMP Intersections) .co-K 2198-Flg-4--5-2A.dwg 002198 4-10 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report ® ... '-.1s fl) LO 't: ..,_115 ~! r1s .; P~ Avport Rd. 30-+-f It') Palomar Airport Road at El Fuerte Streat @) .. ~ 1 ,s ..,_5 Jr. Sa.n. Jla:rr:ot1 Blvd. 25-+- West San Marcos Boulevard at Grand Avenue @ .: q t a.. .. .. .. 1 11:1 ..,_30 Palomm-..t..,,arl Rd. 130--... Palomar Air~ort Road at Buaineaa Park Drive ® i: q 10 1 -ii. ~ = .. ..,_ 10 ·! iq P""'aina. A1Ja. 55.J 35--... Business Park Drive at Poinsettia Avenue FIGURE4-5 ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Page 3 of 3 @ 'ti 0 i,; -~ ) i ~20 fl) -,,._ Sa.n. Jlan:011 Blvd. 25..;I l " ~ so-..~ 10~ 10 . West San Marcos Boulevard at Rancho Santa Fe Road @ ~ 0 0 0 I") .:: '-.30 N -\Ji.5 ~ s g "'I ifr,5 Pa.lama:r A..,,ort Rd. 50..;I Palomar Airport Road at Palomar Forum South Acceae Year 2020 Project Only PM Peak Hour Volumes (20% of Project & CMP Intersections) .CO-K 2198-Flg+-5-JA.dwg 002198 4-11 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 5.0 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 This section of the report evaluates traffic conditions with project only AM/PM peak hour and average daily traffic added to existing conditions. The project directional distribution of trips was determined using the SANDAG/Cities/County 1998 Transportation Forecast City of Carlsbad calibration model on the existing street network with only the Palomar Forum project considered to be built out. 5.1 STREET SEGMENTS Figure 5-1 shows the project only trip directional distribution percentages derived from the rerun of the 1998 transportation forecast. Figure 5-2 shqws existing average daily traffic volumes with project only traffic added. Table 5-1 includes the street segment level of service tabulation, which shows that with project traffic added to existing daily traffic, all segments evaluated comply with the City's Growth Management Plan level of service criteria oflevel of service "D" or better in the .ANI and PM peak hours. Therefore, no direct significant project impacts to street segments are expected. This assumes project and City Capital Improvements Program widening of Palomar Airport Road along the project south frontage. 002198 5-1 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar F omm Final Report ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 TABLE5-1 Existing + Project Street Segment Levels of Service Average Peak Daily Peak VBPL/ Location Classification Volume VPHPL CPL LOS* ,: ,,:.,.,-:-. "•:: -i•...,~.--;-, .\. ""-'"';·:::.r..:.-'f~.:--·r.>-,..-._:<-1.f'::.t•ti.,.~.:.:::J./itf'Yf:;,,.. :-1l..,..._~~::-i¥°,.~ -l~ . .;'"'4.; !~-~~·r'<t~'-~•r ·•~1;\~(:' -;-... ,t1.:<i•,-...,..,__ ::~r;~ • .:,: ....... _~•~?-:i.:'\,~~:'°'1"Z: .. ,f'" ,,:t. .. _~,:.1s.Zii1F"_~❖.t"-":$;'.\!'~~~t,J.~t.r}'-'~*-':i~❖-•:~;-s:!i.::',rl:'J~4..',J,!i'~-.::r-.... ~.! .• ,:;-~::,;) .. ti); . .'· El Camino Real College Blvd-Faraday Ave. 6PA 25,420 980 0.54 A Faraday Ave. -Palomar Airport Rd. 6PA 31,630 540 0.30 A Palomar Airport Rd. -Camino Vida Roble 6PA 25,730 410 0.23 A Camino Vida Roble -Poinsettia Ln. 6PA 29,630 910 0.51 A Poinsettia Ln. -Aviara Pkwy.I Alga Rd. 6PA 29,630 910 0.51 A Palomar Airport Rd. College Blvd. -Camino Vida Roble 6PA 36,365 625 0.35 A Camino Vida Roble -El Camino Real 6PA 25,520 650 0.36 A El Camino Real -El Fuerte St. 6PA 48,880 1,330 0.74 C El Fuerte St. -Melrose Dr. 6PA 48,040 1,405 0.78 C Melrose Dr. -Business Park Dr. 6PA 48,875 1,725 0.96 E<D Business Park Dr. -Rancho Santa Fe Rd. 4PA 32,515 1,030 0.57 A San Marcos Blvd. Rancho Santa Fe Rd. -Las Posas Rd. 4M 33,520 885 0.49 A Las Posas Rd. -Via Vera Cruz 4M 33,410 870 0.48 A Via Vera Cruz -S. Bent Ave. 4M 36,300 895 0.50 A S. Bent Ave. -Grand Ave. 4M 42,260 880 0.49 A Melrose Dr. Cannon Rd. -Shadowridge Dr. 6PA 20,315 560 0.31 A Shadowridge Dr. -Sycamore Ave. 6PA 16,470 620 0.34 A Sycamore Ave. -.Palomar Airport Rd. 6PA 3,055 220 0.12 A Palomar airport Rd. -Poinsettia Ln. 6PA 3,315 165 0.09 A Poinsettia Ln. -Alga Rd. 6PA 3,210 135 0.08 A , ···:~ .. ·-.... ; •. :·, ':, - • •. : . .:.~. -'-~ ...... ~ ;:• ,,. • ..,:. ~:.:-.!'t.~t•,:-~--· .--lk :,~· ... 1'•:"·; ,.t• •. ?';•.; .•. :. :: ,., , , • ,I, -~-; , •• _..,. _ .. ?,, .. ; .. .:, • ~ ~•!: ··~f . ",;-: .. • •. , • . _ •••• • _, •-. ~-.-,·---.• , • • . 1:., -~ __ ·: • ..... -~-~~:-..t.:·.·:·:,·,·:sr:.:·l'~ .. rr::2: .. '.·-: :':!f'rT.,~:· --·:: 2198-TABS-JA. wpd/CD.J Legend 8FWY = 8-lane freeway 4C = 4-lane collector 6FWY = 6-lane freeway 2C = 2-lane collector 6P A= 6-lane primary arterial VPHPL = Vehicles per hour per lane 4MA = 4-lane major arterial CPL= Capacity per lane @ 1,800 VPH 4SA = 4-lane secondary arterial V/C = Volume to capacity ratio G) = With added westbound lane along project frontage LOS= (0.64) B. * Based on the peak hour volume in the direction of the highest volume 002198 5-4 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 5.2 INTERSECTIONS ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Figures 5-3 and 5-4 show project only AM and PM peak hour traffic at the study area intersections. These volumes were added to existing volumes. Table 5-2 shows existing plus project intersection peak hour levels of service. Compared to existing conditions direct project impacts to intersections are expected at the following intersections: Palomar Airport Road/Melrose Drive Palomar Airport Road/Palomar Forum Access/Paseo Valindo However, with mitigation and with project only traffic added, these locations are expected to meet the city's Growth Management Program Circulation Level of Service Standard of at least level of service "D" during peak hours. Mitigation includes the added third westbound through lane along the project frontage on Palomar Airport Road and the third westbound through lane at the Palomar Airport Road/Melrose Drive intersection. Appendix B includes peak hour level of service worksheets for existing plus project conditions. 002198 5-5 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 0 I{) '<I" i CoU.g• Bl'Ud.. ii . II.; ] g l;a i:j t LO E Camino Real at College Boulevard 0 is .. A; ~ i 0 .-e liq 0 © ii .. II.; 10 l -st i ff rs t., liq Fo:raday A11e. 15~ ~ tr .... I{) .... El Camino Real at Faraday Avenue ii • II; 0 " .... $ i i l;a ~ ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Page 1 of 3 0 -; '-.10 . II.; LO ~ tO .,_5 \..e r10 e i:j Pcslamca-Airparl Rd. so--.. t I{) r-,. Palomar Airport Road at El Camino Real 0 ii . II; 0 .s .... e ~ i .BNari Aooen ·ll"rrri Cmnino V-'Ldu Roble i i:j Pouuretti4 L11. t .t t I{) I{) r-,. Jl') r-... r-... El Camino Real at El Camino Real at El Camino Real at Bressi Access West Camino Vida Roble Poinsettia Lane 0 0 10 0 """ "'1 i l Cannan Rd. Sha.daurri.d.g■ Dr. ,: t ~ t ~ .. • .. LO .. I{) " 1 .!: :; ~ Melrose Drive at Melrose Drive at Cannon Road Shadowrldge Drive FIGURES-3 Project Only AM Peak Hour Volumes At CMP Study Area Intersections, 1998 Street Network ,CO-K 219B-Flg5-J-1A.dwg 002198 5-6 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Fontm Final Report 0 LO LO"<t" ,~ ,s \_5 " ] :; Syr:a:mare Ava. t ..- Melrose Drive at Sycamore Avenue @ -+--25 rs Pa.lDmlw ..ivport Ref. 205__. .Ji I' .. .. .!: 0 ~ r,t) Palomar Airport Road at Melrose Drive @ .!I ... " ~ " ~ .I @ @ ...-s ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Page 2 of 3 ® .: 1/'l Cl \,_ 1 ~ .. .. .!: ~ Poina•fflc& Ava. l'a:ra.d.a.y Av-. ,s .. .. ~ ~ (Fuf:u.Te) Melrose Drive at Melrose Drive at Faraday Avenue Poinsettia Avenue @ s: Ji LO "' N r,t) .. t .. ..I l .. • l _g :; ~ .Poina■tfi4 Ln. .Alge& Rel. t 10J t LO 0 r,t) N Melrose Drive at Melrose Drive at Poinsettia Lane Alga Road @ ti ~ Ii ... 0 "'I ..,_25 g i:.. P111omcw .d.i?Porl Ref. Ptdamm".d.vporlRcf. 60__. 190__.: " " ""I .,e i ~ l e ~ Palomar Airport Road at Palomar Airport Raad at Camino Vida Roble Loker Ave. I Bressi Ranch Access FIGURES-3 Project Only AM Peak Hour Volumes At CMP Study Area Intersections, 1998 Street Network .CO-K 2198-Ftg5-J-2A.dwg 002198 5-7 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 0 0 ..... ! Collage Bbld. -; .. o; " .$ ~ c., iq t 0 -q- El Camino Raal at College Boulevard 0 ;; .. A; I 0 ,.._ ,!I .:; 0 0 ;; .. A; 0 ~ ..... i e iS r1 c., .;; Fa:ra.rlD.y .4VL 5 '"-\ ~ tt 1/) 0 1() ..--q- El Camino Real at Faraday Avenue -; . o; 0 " ,.._ s i i c., iq ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Page 1 of 3 0 -; "-....so .. A; Ill ~ ..... -+-50 \...l ,r-10 iiq Pl'.I.Zomlu-Avporl Rd. 15~ I' 1/) .- Palomar Airport Raad at El Camino Real 0 ';j .. A; 0 1 ,.._ J ~ .:; i Bram Ace•-1'aat Cmnino V-'\dc& Robla Plrinnttit:& Ln. t t t in LO .-1() -.- El Camino Real at El Camino Real at El Camino Real at Bressi Acceae West Camino Vida Roble Poinsettia Lane 0 0 0 0 ..... ..... i i Ca:nnan Rd. SltadDvJridfl• Dr. s: t s: t q q • .. .. 10 ,. 0 l )'I) _g 111 :; ~ Melrose Drive at Melrose Drive at Cannon Road Shadowridge Drive FIGURES-4 Project Only PM Peak Hour Volumes At CMP Study Area Intersections, 1998 Street Network .CO-J 2198-Fig5-+-1A.dwg 002198 5-9 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 0 0 ..-..-' " ,: "' '-45 • • Cl .!: ~ Syc411'1M'a .A11a. t LO Malrose Drive at Sycamore Avenue @ .,_195 r3o Palomar ..Avpori Rd. 50 __,,.. ,: I' "' • .. _g LO :; Palomar Airport Road at Melrose Drive @ ,! .0 " II; " 'ti i:::: ~ 'i c:., 15--. ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Page 2 of 3 @ 0 ,: ..-"'I \_5 " .. • " .!: .Poina•tHa. .A11•. ~ Fa:ra.d.o:y A11L ~ • .. _g :; (Fut:ure) Melrose Drive at Melrose Drive at Faraday Avenue Poinsettia Avenue @ @ I.() ,: 0 0 ,: "I I") "'I ..-C'I • ' • ~ ' .. ] _g :; ~ Poinnffia. Ln. .Alga Rd. t 7.J t 0 ..,, .... Melrose Drive at Melrose Drive at Poinsettia Lane Alga Road @ oi .. ""I ,._55 I; .II Cl .. ...... 195 Ptslamar .Airport Rd. Polam4r .Airport Rd. so--.: " " ""I .,: ! Ill '; .. e Ill Palomar Airport Road at Palomar Ai-port Road at Camino Vida Roble Loker Ave./ Breaai Ranch Acceaa FIGURES-4 Project Only PM Peak Hour Volumes At CMP Study Area Intersections, 1998 Street Network . CO-J 2.198-Fig5-+-2A.dwg 002198 5-10 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 6.0 SHORT-TER.lVI FUTURE PRIOR TO YEAR 2005 ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 The possible traffic impacts from a combination of the Palomar Forum and the adjacent Carlsbad Racewayproj ects, being developed without the construction of missing segments of Melrose Drive and Faraday Avenue, have been evaluated using the results of the modified SANDAG/Carlsbad Year 2005 Regional Traffic Model. The SAND AG /Carlsbad Year 2005 Regional Traffic Model assumes the completion of Melrose Dr., Faraday Ave. between El Fuerte St. and Melrose Dr. and Poinsettia Lane between El Camino Real and Melrose Dr. Tbis traffic model also assumes development of not yet approved but pending projects having access to the~e roadways. The Year 2005 traffic model was modified to approximate a short-term future scenario by deleting segments of Faraday Ave., Melrose Dr., and Poinsettia Lane to reflect the existing network. The Year 2005 traffic model land use files were modified to delete or reduce land use assumptions in Facilities Management Zone 16 and 17. However, the land use assumptions for the surrounding Cities of Oceanside, Vista, San Marcos and within the remaining areas of Carlsbad were not modified in the Year 2005 traffic model. The resulting modified Year 2005 traffic model therefore should approximate a "project plus existing plus background traffic" scenario that could occur prior to Year 2005. 002198 6-1 2]98-rpt.:.30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 6.1 STREET SEGMENTS ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 No street segments are projected to fail to meet the City's Growth Management Program circulation performance standard. Table 6-1 shows street segment levels of service for segments of El Camino Real and Palomar airport Road that would be most affected by development of both the Palomar Forum and Carlsbad Raceway project. Figure 6-1 shows a comparison of average daily traffic volumes with the combined projects prior to Year 2005 with those expected in Year 2005. This assumes missing segments ofMelrose Dr., Faraday Ave., and Poinsettia Lane. As shown in this figure, the volumes prior to Year 2005 would be no less or only slightly over Year 2005 volume projections, except along Business Park Dr. and . Palomar Airport Road adjacent to the Palomar Forum project. However, these volumes would be expected to decrease once the Melrose Dr. connection into Vista is completed. 6.2 INTERSECTIONS Figure 6-2 shows intersection peak hour volumes at key locations that would be most affected by the combined projects development prior to Year 2005 with no roadway improvements assumed. 002198 6-2 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Table 6-2 includes intersection peak hour levels of service at key locations that would be most affected by the combined projects. All locations evaluated are expected to be at acceptable levels of service except at the Business Park Dr./ Poinsettia Ave. intersection which is expected to be at level of service "E" in the PM peak with feasible mitigation. However, this level of service would be short lived and would be mitigated by the eventual extension of Melrose Dr. across the Carlsbad/Vista City limits. Appendix C includes intersection level of service worksheets for this condition. 002198 6-6 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 7.0 SHORT-TERlVI FUTURE <YEAR 2005) CONDITIONS ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 This section of the report evaluates roadway and intersection conditions assuming at least five years growth in traffic volumes including project traffic. For this evaluation, the Year 2005 traffic volumes were derived from the SAND AG/Carlsbad Year 2005 Regional Traffic Model, refined to account for approved projects. 7.1 STREET SEGMENTS (lVIelrose Drive/Poinsettia Lane) Year 2005 includes the completion ofMelrose Drive between Faraday Avenue and Palomar Airport Road, Poinsettia Lane between Melrose Drive and El Camino Real, and Faraday A venue between Melrose Drive and El Fuerte Street. Figure 7-1 shows Year 2005 average daily traffic volumes with project traffic included. Table 7-1 shows street segment levels of service predicted for Year 2005. As shown, all segments evaluated comply with the Growth Management Program level of service standard of a least LOS "D" during peak hours, so no significant project traffic impacts to street segments are expected in the short-term future scenario. 002198 7-1 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. TABLE7-1 Year 2005 Street Segment Levels of Service With Project Average Daily Peak Location Classification Volume VPHPL March 7, 2001 Peak VHPL/ CPL LOS* .J.~_ ... ,...~1j,\'\'.!~1";f't.~~ .. :::~~;:-r1r\'ll•!?.:U#1;t.;~1:-:I:;:-&~:.4ft.!~~'"Jt¾~t.:-:l.ii>.~ns.~~:~:~*1:~f!.-:~fe~v,~,.~~;;:.:.,:::;,·.:.:iit~'::~:8~}:_i..~~~~;; .. c~:-t&:~-1*~➔''.!1~~~.1$=~~~~1.l_,~¥'J-t~;,r~..;~~?:a~•,?•,~§k;i~~~tra:'&'.r~~-';-}.;~"'1.~t*~,,-..~;.:\~;:r:-;:-w;~ El Camino Real College Blvd -Faraday Ave. 6PA 37,000 597 0.33 A Faraday Ave. -Palomar Airport Rd. 6PA 46,000 697 0.39 A Palomar Airport Rd. -Camino Vida Roble 6PA 36,000 691 0.38 A Camino Vida Roble -Poinsettia Ln. 6PA 35,000 917 0.51 A Poinsettia Ln. -Aviara Pkwy./Alga Rd. 6PA 41,000 1,023 0.57 A Palomar Airport Rd. College Blvd. -Camino Vida Roble 6PA 26,000 413 0.23 A Camino Vida Roble -El Camino Real 6PA 26,000 395 0.22 A El Camino Real -El Fuerte St. 6PA 60,000 832 0.46 A El Fuerte St. -Melrose Dr. 6PA 48,000 948 0.52 A Melrose Dr. -Business Park Dr. 6PA 33,000 610 0.34 A Business Park Dr. -Rancho Santa Fe Rd. 4PA 38,000 738 0.41 A San Marcos Blvd. Rancho Santa Fe Rd. -Las Posas Rd. 4M 43,000 1,060 0.59 A Las Posas Rd. -Via Vera Cruz 4M 27,000 1,060 0.59 A Via Vera Cruz-S. Bent Ave. 4M 32,000 1,060 0.59 A S. Bent Ave. -Grand Ave. 4M 30,000 1,060 0.59 A Melrose Dr. Cannon Rd. -Shadowridge Dr. 6PA 35,000 803 0.45 A Shadowridge Dr. -Sycamore Ave. 6PA 39,000 810 0.45 A Sycamore Ave. -Palomar Airport Rd. 6PA 54,000 980 0.54 A Palomar airport Rd. -Poinsettia Ln. 6PA 30,000 782 0.43 A Poinsettia Ln. -Alga Rd. 6PA 13,000 367 0.20 A ),·.,=.;•i\..-? •.· .. •;;_ .·< ,::!,.•,;-"'-''r __ :. ,' •.•.•. :-::''-!,,.r ... ~..sf':.-14}:~~::;f~;;Y.YL.-...),v>~-.. ~:::~ t°-'"~v,,:,:;: ., __ ··~· 1"i.~,.-. 1-) •• :_\</.~-~~,·~~:~.-':··~ _ ... ,. '\; --· .. ·: ..•.. ~ . ..:,·,·:: •• _.,,.;:::.-;· J'.-..,.:.:,.;t·-~~.f't-:...:.~iJ4-11:,,'~?Y.-..-,.~-·-~r.::-,,-:1:--sr:·: 'l1:;.\,.;~~iF'.:½-'~ ·~s~v: ....... ~-.:.~·-::-:i;.e Le:end 8FWY = 8-lane freeway 6FWY = 6-lane freeway 6P A = 6-lane primary arterial 4MA = 4-lane major arterial 4SA = 4-lane secondary arterial 4C = 4~Iane collector 2C = 2-lane collector VPHPL = Vehicles per hour per lane CPL = Capacity per lane @ 1,800 VPH V/C = Volume to capacity ratio * Based on the peak hour volume in the direction of the highest volume 002198 7-3 2198-TAB7-IA.wpd/CD.J 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 7.2 INTERSECTIONS (Melrose Drive/Poinsettia Lane) Figure 7-2 shows project only directional distribution percentages for Year 2005. The assumed street configuration includes the completion of Melrose Drive between Faraday Avenue and Palomar Airport Road, Poinsettia Lane between Melrose Drive and El Camino Real, and Faraday A venue between Melrose Drive and El Fuerte Street. Figures 7-3 and 7-4 show Year 2005 AM and PM peak hour project only traffic volumes at study area intersections impacted by twenty percent of project traffic, and at CMP study area intersections. Figures 7-5 and 7-6 show AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes with project traffic and Year 2005 background traffic as included in the traffic forecast. Table 7-2 shows intersection peak hour levels of service with and without project traffic. As shown, all intersections evaluated are expected to operate within the Growth Management Plan Criteria of LOS "D" during peak hours with project traffic added, and with expected improvements listed below at intersections so no significant unmitigated project traffic impacts are expected. LOCATION IMPROVEMENT RESPONSIBILITY #1 El Camino Real/College Boulevard Add Northbound RTO Lane Sunny Creek Add East Leg Sunny Creek #4 El Camino Real/Bressi West Access Add East Leg LFMP Zone 17 Add Northbound Through Lane LFMP Zone 17 Add Northbound RTO Lane LFMP Zone 17 #5 El Camino Real/Camino Vida Roble Add East Leg LFMP Zone 10 Add Northbound Through Lane LFMP Zone 10 Add Northbound RTO Lane LFMP Zone 10 Add Eastbound RTO Lane T.I.F. Project 002198 7-4 2]98-rpt-_30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 0 0 ""'" t ;; "I .. .. a rs .!: :; Syaazn.aN A.,._ tr IO - Melrose Drive at Sycamore Avenue @ ..,_zo rs Pa.I.ama.r ..it.port Rd. 150--. Ji r .. .. _g 0 :; LC'] Palomar Airport Road at Melrose Drive ® .! ... " ll'l ,3 it " .5 j 25 __,. ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Page 2 of 3 @ ® LO ""'" ;; 0 i c; IX) .. ,20 '--10 .. \... _g :; .l'a.TtMLa.y d.11L Poina•ttiG Au•. 15" "tr ;; "" .. .. N C0 N ! .. ~ Melrose Drive at Melrose Drive at Faraday Avenue Poinsettia Avenue ® @ ' .: "" Nl"'l "I "" . ,' i : l • a a .!: .b :; :ii PrrinnffiALn. Alga. Rd. 1sJ t t 0 0 I"') l"1 Melrose Drive at Melrose Drive at Poinsettia Lane Alga Road @ oi .. ... .,_5 I; ,If a "I ..-10 PIMOfflCD' A..-part Rd. PIMOfflCD' A..-part Rd. 100--.: " " ... ~ i ll'l ,: .. e IZI P,alomar Airport Road at Palomar Airport Road at • Camino Vida Roble Loker Ave./ Braasl Ranch Access FIGURE7-3 Year 2005 Project Only AM Peak Hour Volumes (20% of Project & CMP Intersections) • _CD-K 2198-Flg7-3-2A.dwg 002198 7-7 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 0 10 ! CaU.g• Bllld. ;; .. A; s g ... iiq t 10 "' El Camino Real at Collage Boulevard 0 ii .. A; j 0 sq- iiq ® 0 is .. A; " tO .$ ' ~ r2 u ii;j Fa:ra.d.a:y .Awe. 3"' " tr 0 LI') 10 ...... "' El Camino Real at Faraday Avenue is . A; 0 " "<I" = ! s d Gq ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Page 1 of 3 0 ;; \...40 .. A; ~ 2 ..._35 \.) r4o ~ Palamcor .Ai>J>arl Rd. 5--... I' 0 ...... Palomar Airport Raad at El Camino Real 0 ;; .. II; 0 s "<I" ..... ,s ! i ... liq J BrHai ..tooHs 1'Ht Ca:mmo Vida Bal,Z. Pcrinffttia Ln. t t s--... t tO LI') ll'l El Camino Real at El Camino Real at El Camino Real at Bressi Accesa West Camino Vida Roble PoinaetUa Lane 0 0 0 0 ..... ..... ! l CannanR<L Sha.d,aurri,lg• Dr. i: t i: t Cl Cl . • • ll'l .. 0 ~ l"'l Q .!: "'It" ~ .. :ii Melrose Drive at . Melrose Drive at Cannon Road Shadowridge Drive FIGURE7-4 Y ear 2005 Project Only PM Peak Hour Volumes (20% of Project & CMP Intersections) _CO-J 219!!-Flg7-+-1A.dwg 002198 7-9 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 0 0 ..... l i: q • • .. r1 .!: :; Syca.m.znw ..._.,._ tr ~ Ill Melrose Drive at Sycamore Avenue ® .,_155 r4s Plllomar .Avport Rd. -~ r 4-0--+ • 0 .. ! ..... :; Palomar Airport Road at Melrose Drive ® ,l! "" Q A; " i! 0 ,!: j 5--+ ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Page 2 of 3 @ 0 0 ..-,s 0 l ,s N '-.as .. • ~ .G :; l'a:ra.d.a:y .d,.,._ Paitwetffcl ""-"•· 5 ' ~tr ,!i . • 10 0 0 .h ..-LO N :; Melrose Drive at Melrose Drive at Faraday Avenue Poinsettia Avenue @) ® IOO i: 0 ,: q .,...I') q I') . ..I l .. l .. .. ,g Q .!: :; ~ ~ Ln. A.tga. Rd. sJ t t 0 0 -..... Melrose Drive at Melrose Drive at Poinsettia Lane Alga Road ® .. .. "" I; -+-30 ... 0 '4 -+-115 Allomm-Ai:7]Jort .R<i. Plllama.r.l.vportR<i. 35--+: 0 0 "" .,e 5 A; ,: .. e ~ Palomar Airport Fload at Palomar Airport Road at Camino Vida Roble Loker Ave./ Breaai Ranch Acceaa FIGURE7-4 Y ear 2005 Project Only PM Peak Hour Volumes (20% of Project & C:MP Intersections) .CO-K 2198-Fig7-4-2S.dwg 002198 7-10 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report @ OOIO ... .., Jit! ~ SOOJ ~ 1490~ _.,. 220~ '-40 ...,_ ..-1370 ...,_ ~330 -r PIJU1'IIIIO" .AU'J>Orl BtL ")~ tt I' 0 IO 0 NU) ""If" ttl c-1 N Palomar Airport Road at El Fuerte Street @ 150 ,i .A-680 0 ;, It) 0 '"I ~4<:\.. l ..,._ .,c:ss -r W. S«n Man,os Bltxl. 15.,._j ~ttr 1290::f-IO U'l lt'l co~-N N 265 West San Marcos Boulevard at Grand Avenue ® ~ I ll, " '-290 i ~o~ ...,_ I"") It) It) ! ::=:1455 .J l "-" r120 Plllomar .Awport BtL 95~ ~ r~ _.,. 1540--... ---.. IOIO 150~ r--.N Palomar Airport Road at Business Parle Drive ® ,!i f 150 oo .e '-N CO • 7130 ~~1~1 r21s Pvinsetffa ...,_,, .. 110.J ~ ttr 145----. It) Oo 100~ ,,, Ort) l""l N Business Parle Drive at Poinettla Avenue FIGURE 7-6 ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. October JO, 2001 Page 3 of 3 ® 135 ~1100 :g~o ~ Jfi\..i ~885 r fl) 1'". San JCa:roo, Bhld. J, l "\"\tt ~r~ 605~ f II; 700--.. 0 0 0 'l{J 340~ I""),,, ""If" .... r-,. ""If" West San Marcos Boulevard at Rancho Santa Fe Road @ le 270 '-0 ON ::::: 1445 Q -.-N '-Q :24\...ii ...,_ 145 r I"") A, fl) PCllommr .Avport Rd. 75..J ~ t,~ sa5=: i OIO ___,. iii,; N 105" Q • ie Palomar Airport Road at Palomar Forum South Access / P■aeo Vallndo Y ear 2005 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes CO-L 2198-Flg7-6-313.dwg 002198 7-17 2198-rpt-101001 Palomar Fonim Final Report ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. TABLE7-2 Year 2005 With Poinsettia Lane / Melrose Drive Intersection Peak Hour Levels of Service AMPeakHour March 7, 200 I PMPeakHour Intersection Without With Without With # ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ---··{:,: : •. ••'.":-~ '•. ·-;_,-•. =~:..::-•..:..:-·-:'";; :,_-,,;·, ·-_.:~; .. "'• • .. .,:.,.: .. :·•.<{.: .. •:;~, ,a :·. _.-:•.:--'-,'. -·:--·~·:.,.,.:..:.•,.-.. :·:-, ... .,, __ ;·.:-;:;.-,· ... :,.,~,:~---·,~-.\:-, .:~:,,,,'_.-- 1 El Camino Real / College Boulevard (a) 0.71 C 0.72 C 0.62 B 0.63 B 2 El Camino Real/ Faraday Avenue 0.77 C 0.77 C 0.58 A 0.59 A 3 El Camino Real / Palomar Airport Road 0.85 D 0.85 ·o 0.80 C 0.82 D 4 El Camino Real / Bressi West Access (b) 0.76 C 0.77 C 0.65 B 0.65 B 5 El Camino Real / Camino Vida Roble (c) 0.87 D 0.87 D 0.59 A 0.60 A 6 El Camino Real / Poinsettia Lane 0.65 B 0.65 B 0.69 B 0.70 B 7 Melrose Drive / Cannon Road 0.52 A 0.53 A 0.54 A 0.54 A 8 Melrose Drive / Shadowridge Drive 0.87 D 0.88 D 0.65 B 0.65 B 9 Melrose Drive/ Sycamore Avenue (d) 0.88 D 0.88 D 0.80 C 0.80 C 10 Melrose Drive / Faraday Avenue (e) 0.73 C 0.74 C 0.78 C 0.78 C 11 Melrose Drive / Poinsettia Avenue 0.62 B 0.66 B 0.61 B 0.61 B 12 Melrose Drive / Palomar Airport Rd. (f) 0.88 D 0.89 D 0.71 C 0.73 C 13 Melrose Drive / Poinsettia Lane 0.67 B 0.67 B 0.78 C 0.78 C 14 Melrose Drive / Alga Road 0.50 A 0.50 A 0.74 C 0.74 C 15 Palomar Airport Rd. I Camino Vida Roble 0.42 A 0.42 A 0.33 A 0.33 A 16 Palomar Airport Rd. / Bressi North Access NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Palomar Airport Rd. I El Fuerte Street (g) 0.86 D 0.86 D 0.77 C 0.78 C 18 Palomar Airport Rd. / Business Park Drive (h) 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.58 A 0.60 A 19 West San Marcos Blvd./ Rancho Santa Fe Rd. (i) 0.73 C 0.78 C 0.80 C 0.83 D 20 West San Marcos Blvd. / Grand Ave. 0.55 A 0.56 A 0.85 D 0.86 D 21 Business Park Dr. / Poinsettia Ave. 0.39 A 0.41 A 0.45 A 0.47 A 22 Palomar Airport Rd. I Palomar Forum S Access 0.54 A 0.66 B 0.46 A 0.60 A .. . .. . . --: ·:-·--·-.·-·. . -. . '.: ----= ._ . : .·.:• -· .,,_ --. . :;,; .... :_, ··-• .. ..~.· ··-~; ' .:.~.~. ·,-.• ".; . ~ 2198-TAB7-2A.wpd/CD-K Notes: (a) Add east leg by adjacent project. (b) Add third northbound lane by adjacent project. (c) Add east leg and third northbound lane by adjacent project. (d) Add northbound right tum only lane (City of Vista). (e) Add eastbound left tum lane, add westbound through/ right tum lane (City of Vista). (f) Add southbound and northbound right tum only lane, add north leg, add westbound right tum only lane. (g) Add southbound through ultimate lanes by adjacent project. (h) Add eastbound right tum only lane (City of San Marcos). (i) With mitigation as shown in San Elijo Traffic Study, July 14, 1999: Add westbound right tum only lane, add southbound right tum only lane. 002198 7-18 2]98-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report LOCATION #6 El Camino Real/Poinsettia Lane #9 Melrose Drive/Sycamore A venue #10 Melrose Drive/Faraday A venue #12 Palomar Airport Road/Melrose Drive #16 Palomar Airport Road/Bressi Ranch Access #17 Palomar Airport Road/El Fuerte Street #18 Palomar Airport Road/Business Park Drive #19 West San Marcos Boulevard/Rancho Santa Fe Road ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Th1PRO VEMENT RESPONSIBILITY Add New Intersection Bridge and Thoroughfare District, LF?vlP Zone 10 Add Northbound RTO Lane City of Vista Add Eastbound Left Turn Lane City of Vista Add Westbound Through/Right Lane City of Vista Add North Leg LF?vlP Zone 18 Add WestboundRTO Lane LFMP Zone 18 Add Eastbound Dual Left LFMP Zone 18 Add Northbound RTO Lane T.I.F. Project Add Eastbound RTO Lane LFMP Zone 17 Add Eastbound RTO Lane LFMP Zone 17 Add Southbound Through/RT Lane LFJ\ilP Zone 17 Add Westbound Dual Left Tum Lane LF?vlP Zone 17 Add South Leg LFMP Zone 17 Add Eastbound RTO Lane City of San Marcos Add Westbound RTO Lane City of San Marcos Add Southbound RTO Lane City of San Marcos Figure 7-7 shows intersection lane configuration assumptions for Year 2005 with mitigation as listed above. Project mitigation includes participation in the construction of Melrose Drive and Faraday Avenue, and project frontage improvements to Palomar Airport Road. Appendix D includes intersection peak hour LOS worksheets for Year 2005 conditions, and AM/PM peak hour volumes at intersections without project traffic. 002198 7-19 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forom Final Report 0 ti .. a: . !l Free~JJ~ 1; Right a ilq CaU..ge Bl11d. , ~1 Fi " ~tttr -3, ....... * *~ (E3) El Camino Real at College Boulevard 0 ii .. II; .,. '-* -!i ~ ..._* .J iii"--~ r* Bn.wri .Aaau• JP'eat \ I __, ~tttr ~ ** CD El Camino Real at Bressi Access West * Mitigation Responsibility A .. Adjacent Project B =-Bridge & Thorougb:mre District p. = Project Mitigation T =City-W':tde Tmffic ImpactFcc ® ti .. a: ~ ~Ul\\.. j .._ r J'a.Tad.a.y .Atl& -.J ~~tttr ~ Existing El Camino Real at Faraday Avenue ©CL) -; .. A; * Cl CD .5 ~41!" i ~* l:,,j iiii r* Ccan.ina Y-'lda. Robla , *½.J ' "ttt t *~ ** ~ CD El Camino Real at Camino Vida Roble 0 '-.._ .._ .Jffl~~ ~ Clltnn07\ Rd. ' ~~ "ttr . __.. .. "' _g ~ {.E:ritttin.g) Melrose Drive at Cannon Road FIGURE7-7 ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Page 1 of 3 0 ~ .; .. A; ..,._ 1 ..._ ..._ )!!!~~! F LPmimnor .Ai,-porl Rd. ,1;1 -.J ~~tttrr __.. __.. ~ Palomar Airport Road at El Camino Real 0 ;; .. Js.-* II; * * 0 s: ..._: 4!!" ] ,g F* iiii , Poinaettic& L7L. *-.J ~ttYr $~ * ** ~ El Camino Real at Poinsettia Lane 0 '-~~~ ..... r SAad.ourridg• Dr. ,J "'ttr ~~ .. ] :; (E:r:ist:i:n.g) Melrose Drive at Shadowridge Drive Year 2005 Intersection Lane Configurations (With Poinsettia Lane/Melrose Drive) With Mitigation As Needed .CD-J 2!98-Flg7-7-tB.dwg 002198 7-20 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report @ 0 ~ "2 * • 4i~~! ~ __.. __.. CD*Z '-..,._ ..,._ ..,._ ~ Plllomar .Airporl Rd. ~~tY **** 0 Palomar Ai'port Road at EJ Fuerte Street @ ,I ~ ;> '"I l ....- ~,~~! ~ to!'-San Jlaroo• Bwrt. / J ~ttr _,.. ~ (E:riaf:i:ng) West San Marco• Boulevard at Grand Avenue * Mitigation Responsibility A = Adjacent Project B = Bridge & Thoroughfare District P = Project Mitigation T =City-Wide Traffic Im.pact Fee V = City of Vista SM =City of San.Marcos ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. October 10, 2001 Page 3 of 3 ® ,s ® '-* ~ ® ~ '-,If := @ ** II; :r ~4i~i F-~ i \..\..! ..,_ ...-- ,r r.:i_ .,,_ San .iflll'CI.,. Blvd. Palomar .Airport Rd. I/ / ~i ~~tt~e ~ ' ~y II; --.. . Right --.. --.. --.. --... ~ ~ Palomar Airport Road at West San Marcoe Boulevard at Business Parle Drive Rancho Santa Fe Road ® ,: @0 I: '-0 <::i ! '-** ""! .-* : ~ ..,_* ~l ~l 4 ~Ii .-,r , Poin.NtffaA11-. , ,-_P""""-Airport Rd. w~ ttr 0*~1 :,, ~ ~r ----------+-II ~ ___,. :;;. 0 CD ~i Buslneaa Parle Drive at Palomar Airport Road at Palomar Forum South Access / Poinsettia Avenue Paseo VaJlndo FIGURE 7-7 Year 2005 Intersection Lane Configurations (With Poinsettia Lane/Melrose Drive) With Mitigation As Needed .CD-L 2198-Fi97-7-3C.dwg 002198 7-22 2198-rpt-J0J00J Palomar Forum Final Report 8.0 YEAR 2010 CONDITIONS ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Figure 8-1 shows Year 2010 average daily traffic volumes for Year 2010. Previously, the Palomar Forum, at Year 2005 was evaluated and assumed to be built out and background traffic from other projects and regional growth was shown to be accommodated on the mitigated street network assumed for Year 2005. Therefore,_ the project's participation in ultimate roadway improvements to accommodate Year 2020 traffic and payment of City-Wide Traffic Impact Fees for funding future transportation improvements should be considered as the project's fair share toward mitigating traffic impacts expected to occur between Year 2005 and 2020. The project only improvements include the participation in the construction ofMelrose Drive north of Palomar Airport Road along the project's westerly property line, and the construction of a third westbound lane with curb gutter and sidewalk along the project's south property line. 002198 8-1 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 9.0 BUILDOUT (YEAR 2020) CONDITIONS ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 200 I The SAL'IDAG/Cities/County 2020 Transportation Forecast City of Carlsbad, Alternative 5 (8-23- 99) was used to determine Year 2020 (build out assumed in the City of Carlsbad) traffic volumes. 9.1 STREET SEGMENTS Figure 9-1 shows.Year 2020 average daily traffic volumes for study area street segments. Table 9-1 shows street segment levels of service for Year 2020. As shown, all segments evaluated are expected to meet the Growth Management Plan criteria oflevel of service "D" or better during peak hours, so no significant unmitigated project traffic impacts are expected in Year 2020. 9.2 INTERSECTIONS Figures 9-2 and9-3 showtheAMandPMpeakhourvolumes, at study area intersections, expected in Year 2020 and at build out of the City of Carlsbad. Table 9-2 shows intersection levels of service. As shown all evaluated intersections within the City of Carlsbad are expected to operate at level of service "D" or better during peak hours as required by the City's Growth Management Plan, so that no significant unmitigated project traffic impacts are expected. 002198 9-1 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report TABLE9-1 ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Year 2020 (Alternative#5) Street Segment Levels of Service With Project Average Peak Daily Peak VBPL/ Location Classification Volume VPBPL CPL LOS* ~~f-:E.:.r:.~tt,'.;r~~r.::1tr::.<;:.t.f-~~~?-tP-1F:i:=~:i{?."'S':-K1i;l{lr,r.?Jlr:~~J:tg;;~;.~t::,;.~~r~u-e,:~~i~f1..~~~,r~;~1vJltt~~~~;bf1~it.\~;~3::-'.tts-2q1t'i'~~::f~--!:t\~~1:~1I$'~~1--~rt?.&;1A~#~m~::tJ«.~s;:r~~@'~gfr:~?.t~-:;.1~:.r;.:r':~ .. .;r-:::tit .. ~ ... ~z~~f~ El Camino Real College Blvd-Faraday Ave. 6PA 54,000 977 0.54 D Faraday Ave. -Palomar Airport Rd. 6PA 49,000 845 0.47 A Palomar Airport Rd. -Camino Vida Roble 6PA 43,000 795 0.44 A Camino Vida Roble -Poinsettia Ln. 6PA 50,000 903 0.50 C Poinsettia Ln. -Aviara Pkwy.I Alga Rd. 6PA 47,000 865 0.48 C Palomar Airport Rd. College Blvd. -Camino Vida Roble 6PA 33,000 513 0.29 A Camino Vida Roble -El Camino Real 6PA 29,000 528 0.29 A El Camino Real -El Fuerte St. 6PA 66,000 770 0.43 A El Fuerte St. -Melrose Dr. 6PA 61,000 932 0.52 A Melrose Dr. -Business Park Dr. 6PA 42,000 675 0.38 A Business Park Dr. -Rancho Santa Fe Rd. 4PA 47,000 875 0.73 C San Marcos Blvd. Rancho Santa Fe Rd. -Las Posas Rd. 4M 64,000 1,200 0.67 B Las Posas Rd. -Via Vera Cruz 4M 43,000 1,200 0.67 B Via Vera Cruz -S. Bent Ave. 4M 49,000 1,200 0.67 B S. Bent Ave. -Grand Ave. 4M 48,000 1,200 0.67 B Melrose Dr. Cannon Rd. -Shadowridge Dr. 6PA 45,000 893 0.50 A Shadowridge Dr. -Sycamore Ave. 6PA 39,000 1,022 0.57 A Sycamore Ave. -Palomar Airport Rd. 6PA 51,000 948 0.53 A Palomar airport Rd. -Poinsettia Ln. 6PA 27,000 838 0.47 A Poinsettia Ln. -Alga Rd. 6PA 17,000 615 0.34 A --\, ~?"-,,,,:-·.~·;:-:.•\;"•'!1-''i: .. ::!•:,-/,Y:, • .:-,:,.· ... ;.,,1 • ..... ·,t;~''!.·<-.?'-·•'-::.,, 1-.... ~-..;lt --~--:-:: .. !,, ...... •;.~ {°'..\,~-: .. ..,:--:.·· ,.{:r.~_:'."_-;.~.;.:,• .... -:'; ~ V.:r -,:-<':" ,-:~~;,..:::" ...;1•,:,~-·:·~:r.:t-•• i_--~~ ,f·h••l")-.,...?'·; .. :~~:----~-s.:, .... r:.:-~: ~--... •. '·::' ,:)},..:~-~v"::.;;-.. 'l" • ··•r,<.· ----~~ , •• _~::,\.; :,:~:.-1:. ... Legend 8FWY = 8-lane freeway 6FWY = 6-lane freeway 6P A = 6-lane primary arterial 4MA = 4-lane major arterial 4SA = 4-lane secondary arterial 4C = 4-lane collector 2C = 2-lane collector VPHPL = Vehicles per hour per lane CPL= Capacity per lane@ 1,800 VPH V/C = Volume to capacity ratio * = Based on the peak hour volume in the direction of the highest volume. 002198 9-3 2198-TAB9-JC. wpd/CD-K 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. October I 0, 200 I TABLE9-2 Year 2020 City Alternative 5 Forecast Intersection Peak Hour Levels of Service With/ Without Project (ICU Analysis) AMPeakHour PMPeakHour Intersection Without With Without With # ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU I LOS ICU LOS ~ . :...-:-_ .... ~--~-::-: -··. ' .. •• :.~~·:" : ',,"•. '•, "'~, -,' • '.: • i "•.i\~•. ::.\~:~•~•'-','" :'':'i•t:•T ~•-.·•--., '.·• ~\\;,$:' •. , '•/_(;.~;' .. {--;:: ~.:_p ~i• ..... :; -,-.;~:::•· -.. :~\~~{$j \-~~.::••• .. : .. ~~~-•~•.:-°½,Ji:.-~-:U,.J,~ ,,, £,'-~1:, ,'• .. :,' .:.t:¢:·,-.":i: ., ,., 1 El Camino Real / College Boulevard (a) 0.82 D 0.82 D 0.88 D 0.88 D 2 El Camino Real/ Faraday Avenue (b) 0.79 C 0.79 C 0.90 D 0.90 D 3 El Camino Real / Palomar Airport Road 0.82 D 0.83 D 0.83 D 0.85 D 4 El Camino Real / Bressi West Access 0.64 B 0.65 B 0.73 C 0.74 C 5 El Camino Real I Camino Vida Roble 0.86 D 0.86 D 0.84 D 0.84 D 6 El Camino Real / Poinsettia Lane 0.64 B 0.64 B 0.74 C 0.74 C 7 Melrose Drive/ Cannon Road 0.83 D 0.84 D 0.86 C 0.86 D 8 Melrose Drive / Shadowridge Drive 0.78 C 0.80 C 0.86 D 0.86 D 9 Melrose Drive/ Sycamore Avenue (c) 0.87 D 0.87 D 0.71 C 0.73 C 10 Melrose Drive/ Faraday Avenue (d) 0.83 D 0.83 D 0.87 D 0.87 D 11 Melrose Drive / Poinsettia Avenue 0.64 B 0.68 B 0.60 A 0.60 A 12 Melrose Drive/ Palomar Airport Rd. (e) 0.90 D 0.90 D 0.79 C 0.82 D 13 Melrose Drive / Poinsettia Lane 0.62 B 0.63 B 0.56 A 0.57 A 14 Melrose Drive / Alga Road 0.68 B 0.68 B 0.90 D 0.90 D 15 Palomar Airport Rd. / Camino Vida Roble 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.50 A 0.51 A 16 Palomar Airport Rd. / Bressi North Access NA NA NA NA NA. NA NA NA 17 Palomar Airport Rd. / El Fuerte Street 0.70 B 0.70 B 0.74 C 0.75 C 18 Palomar Airport Rd. / Business Park Drive (f) 0.71 C 0.73 C 0.63 B 0.64 B 19 West San Marcos Blvd. / Rancho Santa Fe Rd. (g) 0.85 D 0.87 D 0.90 D 0.91 E 20 West San Marcos Blvd. / Grand Ave. (h) 0.72 C 0.73 C 0.92 E 0.93 E 21 Business Park Dr. / Poinsettia Ave. 0.78 C 0.79 C 0.59 A 0.62 B 22 Palomar Airport Rd. / Palomar Forum S Access / 0.62 B 0.74 C 0.57 A 0.63 B Paseo Valindo ~·. .... 0Io ,.~ ... •·t•~•:·•.!-~ .. ·'••:•:h~:;.~•~,•A",••~ . ..:,••N•.'•' "h·~ ••• ._,,i .-t,':....,' •• ur• -:. ·, .i.'-:.~"-:'!;;:.,-•~._ •·f::t_,.'.:<..:· 1•1~ • ~ -:,.._.:.:. ·',-;':...'.5.':'",. ', :::,.:;-,' •t(.f' • ,,;, :;r.-,l .. !:'!~;:• •· :,1~ Notes: (a) Add third southbound through lane. (b) Add westbound right tum only lane. ( c) Add dual northbound right tum only lanes; add westbound and southbound dual left tum lanes. ( d) Add northbound, southbound, and eastbound right turn only lane; add westbound dual left tum lanes. (e) Add northbound right tum only lane. (f) Add westbound right tum only lane; Add westbound through lane (City of Vista). LOS A B C D E F 219B-Tab9-2C."'fpd/CD-L ICU -0.60 0.61 -0.70 0.71 -0.80 0.81 -0.90 0.91-1.00 Over 1.00 (g) With mitigation as shown in San Elijo Traffic Study, July 14, 1999: Add through lane all legs; add right tum only lane southbound, eastbound and westbound. (h) With mitigation shown in San Elijo Ranch Traffic Study, July 14, 1999: Add third through lane eastbound, westbound and southbound; Add eastbound dual left tum lanes. 002198 9-10 2198-rpt-l0I 001 Palomar Forum Final Report ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Shown in Figure 9-4 are ultimate lane configurations at intersections that would be expected at buildout with improvements in addition to Year_ 2005 improvements noted. These intersection improvements are assumed to be provided when needed by adjacent development as frontage improvements or by City-wide Bridge and Thoroughfare Fee projects, as indicated. The Palomar Forum project traffic, assumed to be built out in Year 2005, and background traffic from other projects and regional growth, was shown to be accommodated on the mitigated street network assumed for Year 2005. The Palomar Forum's contribution to the construction of nearby roadway and intersections to their ultimate configurations (i.e., Melrose Drive, Faraday Avenue, Palomar Airport Road) should be considered. the project's ~air share contribution to mitigating roadway improvements meant to accommodate Year 2020 City of Carlsbad and regional cumulative traffic impacts at these nearby intersections and roadways. , Appendix E includes intersection peak hour LOS worksheets for Year 2020 conditions and AWPM peak hour volumes at Year 2020 without project traffic. 002198 9-11 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report ® © k * ,$ 4ii"" 1 F'* S110-.oreA11e. J ~tttrr ~ ** © Melrose Drive at Sycamore Avenue @ '-....... ....... ....... )i!!"" F- Auport Bel. -3 ~ .I ~'\tttt I' ___... ___.. e ** ___.. j '""\ ~ Palomar Airport Road at Metro•• Drive * Mitigation Responsibilify A = Adjacent Project B = Bridge & Thoroughfare District p = Project lvfitigation T = City-Wide Traffic Impact Fee V = City of Vista @CD ~© * ~ .,_ ) iii"! ~* F<lrallav Ave. ~ ~tttr --+- 0*'""\ * CD Melrose Drive at Faraday Avenue @) .s '-)iii"! ~ r ~ Ln. ~ ~ttr _ ___.. '""\ Melro•• Drive at Poinsettia Lane @ .! ,a ~ ~ i ~ )!"i .,_ r " r--Palomm" Airport Rd. .I J ~~y ___.. ___.. ~ Palomar Airport Road at Camino Vida Roble FIGURE 9-4 ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. October JO, 2001 Page 2 of 3 ® ~ ..I iii" ,r PoulNttlA Ave. J ~tttr ~ ' • • ! :; Melroae Drive at Poinsettia Avenue @ ,$ 4!!~j ~ ,r Alga Rd. J '\ttr =:f Melrose Drive at Alga Road @ .. .. .... I: \... -It ~ ...... ) ....... ~ PalQmar Auport Rd. • • ___,.. :: t ___,.. 0 ___,.. .... 1 '""\ II; 1 t sq Palomar Arport Road at Loker Ave. / Bressi Ranch Access Y ear 2020 Intersection Lane Configurations With Mitigation As Needed CO-L 2198-F'ig9-+--2B.dw9 002198 9-13 2198-rpt-101001 Palomar Forum Final Report 10.0 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (CMP) ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 As required by State of California Law (Proposition 111, June 1990, Congestion Management Program), an analysis of the Regionally Significant Arterials (RSA) in the study area are required. Palomar Airport Road, El Camino Real, and Melrose Drive are listed as an RSA through the study are~, and have been evaluated in previous sections of this report. Both street segments and . intersections are expected to operate at least at LOS "D", and therefore comply with Cl\.1P regional guidelines for Year 2020. 10.1 FREEWAY SEGMENTS EVALUATION The project traffic contribution to Interstate 5 and State Route 78 main lanes is less than the 150 peak hour trips established in the Cl\.1P Guidelines, so that a freeway main lane analysis is not needed for this project. 10.2 INTERSECTIONS Study area intersections were evaluated using the 1997 update to the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual software. As shown in Table 10-1, all intersections comply with CMP requirements using this methodology. Appendix E includes these LOS worksheets. 002198 10-1 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Fontm Final Report ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 TABLE 10-1 Year 2020 City Alternative 5 Forecast Intersection Peak Hour Levels of Service (CMP Analysis) AM Peak.Hour PM Peak.Hour Intersection HCS HCS # Delay LOS Delay LOS -••:•-~:;-.;.-_•::,. ;,.., :•:: • -•:•\. ~-o;_" •,_ /J.,J'?/::~ .. ••.• •:~•~1~ . ._,_-••:.:.~:••.:-•·. • -~-;•,,.,,':.-,!F":~;~:~'t _•p::-~;•· 7.= :'"" -,;":,:,:!/ ••O"',~~~-~-,,,.-;:'~~._.:',,,_~~.;:'~:.,;.~.._~\,'½;;!~t'.-f:t!f._:•,~.i;',-,~-;-xi~\:.;.~•:,.:::~.:~~--,._),~:-<"f,~:/.,i--~F}~.i') ,,' •. ,r,:..,•,,· 1 El Camino Real / College Boulevard (a) 2 El Camino Real/ Faraday Avenue (b) 3 El Camino Real / Palomar Airport Road 4 El Camino Real / Bressi West Access 5 El Camino Real / Camino Vida Roble 6 El Camino Real / Poinsettia Lane 7 Melrose Drive / Cannon Road 8 Melrose Drive / Shadowridge Drive 9 Melrose Drive/ Sycamore Avenue (c) 10 Melrose Drive/ Faraday Avenue (d) 11 Melrose Drive / Poinsettia Avenue 12 Melrose Drive / Palomar Airport Rd. (e) 13 Melrose Drive / Poinsettia Lane 14 Melrose Drive / Alga Road 15 Palomar Airport Rd. / Camino Vida Roble 16 Palomar Airport Rd. / Bressi North Access 17 Palomar Airport Rd. / El Fuerte Street 18 Palomar Airport Rd. / Business Park Drive (f) 19 West San Marcos Blvd./ Rancho Santa Fe Rd. (g) 20 West San Marcos Blvd./ Grand Ave. (h) 21 Business Park Dr./ Poinsettia Ave. 22 Palomar Airport Rd./ Palomar Forum S Access/ Paseo Valindo ,', : •• ••,.• •• , ' .... •.!, :/'; • '7:••_,. ,-••: ,' ',,: ~:••,, ,' I ,,-.~.!'•" ,'.'--• • '<".:: •• "':, • ',4. i-_, •'.;::'!•}:;-•:•,-.,~. it;;'";'' .. ,.,!( ~1,.• • :~:.-•, Notes: (a) Add third southbound through lane. (b) Add westbound right tum only lane. (c) Add dual northbound right tum only lanes. 48.7 D 50.7 D 49.8 D 30.6 C 45.9 D 33.4 C 54.6 D 39.8 D 40.6 D 52.4 D 40.4 D 52.2 D 36.0 D 28.2 C 33.2 C NA NA 48.3 D 25.9 C 31.8 C 43.8 D 35.6 D 30.7 C ·' ••.• ' ,\~)~;; : . ''.!.. ~=•f•··. •, ( d) Add northbound and southbound right tum only lanes, add eastbound right tum only lane, add westbound dual left tum lanes. (e) Add northbound fourth through lane. (f) Add westbound right tum only lane (City of Vista). (g) With mitigation as shown in San Elijo Traffic Study, July 14, 1999: Add through lane all legs. 54.4 D 48.7 D 42.4 D 41.3 D 35.9 C 44.4 D 46.1 D 45.8 D 38.6 D 47.2 D 21.8 C 46.1 D 20.4 C 28.2 C 37.9 C NA NA 52.1 D 27.3 C 52.9 D 28.9 C 41.8 D 36.6 D ..'\:_:.;_-.,.;_.,,!.; .-· ,. ••• , : >"""!]:';-;, :~:.,-, ·/~:1.,/.. .... :':,.: 2198-Tab10-1A.wpd/CD-K Total Stopped LOS Delay (sec) A :S:10 B :S:20 C :S:35 D :S:55 E :S:80 (h) San Elijo Ranch Traffic Study, July 14, 1999: Add third through lane eastbound and westbound. 002198 10-2 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report 11.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 11.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 200 I Both street segments and intersections within the study area currently operate acceptably within the City of Carlsbad Growth Management Plan circulation performance standard oflevel of service "D" or better during peak hours. 11.2 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS With project traffic added to existing traffic, street segments and intersections both would continue to operate acceptably and within Growth Management Plan circulation performance standards with project mitigation of adding the third westbound through lane along the project's Palomar Airport Road frontage. 11.3 SHORT-TERM (PRIOR TO YEAR 2005) CONDITIONS An evaluation of short-term future conditions prior to Year 2005 was conducted assuming the combined projects of the Palomar Forum and Carlsbad Raceway projects and assuming no construction of missing segments ofMelrose Dr., Faraday Ave. or Poinsettia Lane. Projects not yet approved adjacent to these missing segments were also deleted or reduced for this evaluation. Based on this evaluation it can be concluded that traffic from the two combined projects and background growth can be expected to be accommodated on the existing roadway system with only project :frontage and intersection improvements prior to Year 2005. 002198 11-1 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Key intersections that would most be affected by this scenario are expected to operate acceptably at level of service ''D" or better, except at the Business Park Dr./ Poinsettia Ave. intersection that is projected to be at level of service "E" during the PM peak hour with feasible mitigation (such as north and southbound dual left turn lanes and a southbound right turn only lane). However, this would be a short lived condition since construction of Melrose Dr. would provide mitigation. 11.4 SHORT-TERM (YEAR2005) CONDITIONS An evaluation of short-term future (Year 2005) conditions indicates that study area street segments and intersections with improvements shown on Figure 7-9 would operate acceptably and within the Growth Management Plan circulation performance standards. Therefore, no project mitigation would be needed nor is recommended· for the short term future, beyond the planned p_articipation in construction of Melrose Drive from the City of Vista City limits south to Palomar Airport Road, and Faraday Avenue between Melrose Drive and El Fuerte Street. Mitigation measures at off-site intersections are to be provided as adjacent projects build out or by Traffic Impact Fee projects as also shown in Figure 7-9, Year 2005 Intersection Lane Configurations. Off-site locations in Vista and San Marcos that would need mitigation as a request of cumulative increases in regional and local traffic volumes have been identified in previous traffic studies in those jurisdictions so that feasible mitigation has been identified. 11.5 BUILDOUT (YEAR 2020) CONDITIONS As planned, study area intersections are expected to accommodate Year 2020 peak hour volumes at acceptable levels of service and within the Growth Management Plan circulation performance 002198 11-2 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 standards with mitigation consisting of ultimate planned lane configurations and normal intersection improvements such as added left or right turn only lanes. The City of Carlsbad General Plan Circulation Element roadways as planned, can accommodate the projected peak hour volumes by the planned cross-sections and intersection lane configurations. Figure 9-4, Year 2020 Intersection Lane Configurations show needed mitigation to be provided by adjacent projects or by Traffic Impact Fee projects as they are needed. Off-site locations in Vista and San Marcos that would need mitigation as a result of cumulative increases in regional and local traffic volumes have been identified in previous traffic studies prepared in those jurisdictions so that feasible mitigation has been identified or findings of over riding considerations have been made. The project's contribution to city-wide circulation improvements will be made through the City's Traffic Impact Fee and a separate funding district for the construction of Melrose Drive from Palomar Airport road north to the City ofVista boundary and Faraday Avenue from Melrose Drive to Orion Street. 11.6 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Interstate 5, SR-78, Palomar Airport Road, El Camino Real and Melrose Drive are portions of the Regionally Significant Arterial or Freeway Systems. A Congestion Management Program evaluation was conducted for the study area arterial street segments and intersections. Intersections and street segments in the study area expected to comply with Cl\1P level of service requirements. The project's addition of traffic to the :freeway systems is expected to be less than 150 peak hour trips so that a freeway main lane evaluation is not required, according to Regional CN.IP Guidelines. 002198 11-3 2]98-rpt-30701 Palomar Forom- Final Report ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 fu summary, the Palomar Forum project would generate 5,229 average daily vehicle trips. The effects of these project trips were evaluated and found to lead to significant commutative impacts on the surrounding street network at certain locations. However, with roadway improvements planned in the City of Carlsbad, Vista, and San Marcos, acceptable roadway and intersection traffic operations are expected. 002198 11-4 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forum Final Report ((')Urban Systems Associates, Inc. 12.0 REFERENCES San Diego Region Traffic Engineer's Cowicil (SANTEC) and Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), California Border Section, Guidelines for Congestion Management Program (CMP) Traffic Impact Report, San Diego, CA (1993) Transportation Research Board, 1994 Highway Capacity Manual Special Report, Washington, D.C. (1994 and 1997 update) • March 7, 2001 City of Carlsbad_Traffic Impact Fee Study (draft);prepared by O'Rourke Engineering, July 18, 2000. San Elijo Ranch Traffic Study, Transtech Engineers, Inc., July 14, 1999. 002198 12-1 2198-rpt-30701 Palomar Forom Final Report 13.0 URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOCIATES INC. PREPARERS Principal Planning Director Sandee Witcraft-Schlaefli; J.D. Juris Doctor, Graduate courses Urban Plapning, B.A. Political Science/Social Welfare Principal Engineer· ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. March 7, 2001 Andy P. Schlaefli/ M.S. Civil Engineering, B.S. Civil Engineering Registered Civil Engineer, Licensed Traffic Engineer Project Engineer Sam P. Kab, II; Licensed Traffic Engineer Senior Technical Support, Graphics and Illustrations Mark A. Schlaefli Word Processing, Report Production and Compilation Lyndi Williams This report is site and time specific and is intended for a one-ti~e use for this intended project under the conditions described as "Proposed Project". Any changes or delay in implementation may require re-analysis and re-consideration by the public agency granting approvals. California land development planning involves subjective political considerations as well as frequently re-interpreted principals of law as well as changes in regulations, policies, guidelines and procedures. Urban Systems and their professionals make no warrant, either express or implied, regarding our findings, recommendations, or professional advice as to the ability to successfully accomplish this land development project. Traffic is a· consequence of human behavior and as such is predictable only in a gross cumulativ~ methodology of user opportunities, using accepted standarcis and following patterns of past behavior and physical constraints attempting to project into a future window of circumstances. Any counts or existing conditions cited are only as reliable as to the time and conditions under which they were recorded. As such the preparer of this analysis is unable to warrant, either express or implied, that any forecasts are statements of actual true conditions which will in fact exist at any future date. Services performed by Urban System professionals resulting in this document are of a_ manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing in the same locality under similar conditions. No other representation expressed or implied and no warranty or guarantee is included or intended in this report, document opinion or otherwise. Any changes by others to this analysis or re-use of document at a later point in time or other location, without the express consent and concurrence of Urban Systems releases and relieves Urban Systems of any liability, responsibility or duty for subsequent questions, claims, or damages. 002198 13-1 2198-rpt-30701