Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
CUP 2024-0008; PICKLEBALL CUP; LMA - LOCAL MOBILITY ANALYSIS; 2025-02-27
COLLECTIVE Mobility & Technology In Transportation C2 CONSUL TING COLLECTIVE Hisroric Santa Fe Depot 1050 Kettner Blvd, Suite D-551 San Diego, CA 92101 info@c2-mobility.com 858.270.4444 Planning. Design.Tech no logy 14 'I lf&iiiili+i::9 Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) Rally House Pickleball City of Carlsbad, California February 27, 2025 C2 Reference: 23.069 A WENN4650 Company COLLECTIVE MobFlity & Technologv In Transpc,rtation TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................................... 1 LIST OF APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................................... 2 LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................................. 2 LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................... 2 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK ..................................................................................................................... 4 1.3 REPORT SCOPE & ORGANIZATION ..................................................................................................... 4 2. ANALYSIS APPROACH & METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................... 8 2.1 LMAANALYSIS .................................................................................................................................... 8 2.1.1 Multimodal Level-of-Service (MM LOS) ........................................................................................... 8 2.1.2 LMA Study Area ............................................................................................................................... 9 2.1.3 LMA Analysis Methodology ........................................................................................................... 10 2.1.4 Improvement Determination ........................................................................................................ 11 3. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS ....................................................................................... 15 3.1 Existing Roadway & Intersection Configurations ............................................................................. 15 3.2 Existing Pedestrian Facilities ............................................................................................................ 15 3.3 Existing Bicycle Facilities .................................................................................................................. 16 3.4 Existing Local & Regional Transit Service ......................................................................................... 16 4. PROPOSED PROJECT .......................................................................................................................... 17 4.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................................... 17 4.2 TRIP GENERATION ............................................................................................................................ 17 4.3 TRIP DISTRIBUTION & ASSIGNMENT ................................................................................................ 18 5. MM LOS ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................. 20 5.1 PEDESTRIAN MMLOS ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................... 20 5.2 BICYCLE MM LOS ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................... 21 6. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................... 22 Rally House Pickleball -Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) C2 Reference: 24.177 i°IW%MM:IH1F Page 11 COLLECTIVE MobFlitv & Technologv In Transportation LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Project Scoping Agreement Street Typology Descriptions and Preferred Attributes MM LOS Worksheets LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1 Mobility Element Street Typologies ................................................................................................. 8 Table 2-2 MM LOS Point System & LOS Rating ................................................................................................. 9 Table 2-3 GMP Study Area Limits ..................................................................................................................... 9 Table 4-1 Trip Generation .............................................................................................................................. 17 Table 5-1 Pedestrian MM LOS Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 20 Table 5-2 Bicycle MM LOS Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 21 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1 Local Area Map ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Figure 1-2 Site Plan ....................................................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 1-3 Interior Layout ........................................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 2-1 Roadway Segment Typologies and Exempt Segments ................................................................. 13 Figure 2-2 Study Area ..................................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 4-1 Trip Distribution & Assignment ..................................................................................................... 19 C2 Reference: 24.177 c2 rally house pickleball Ima 2.27.2025 Rally House Pickleball -Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) C1 Reference: 24.177 F·:d&%%1::F Page I 2 COLLECTIVE MobFlitv & Teehnotogv 11'11 Tr~nSl)ort~Cion 1. INTRODUCTION Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) Rally House Pickleball City of Ca rlsbad, California February 27, 2025 C2 Reference: 24.177 The Consulting Collective (C2) prepared the following Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) for the Rally House Pickleball project in the City of Carlsbad. The LMA was prepared in compliance with the City's General Plan Mobility Element, City guidelines, and under the direction of City staff direction. The LMA forecasts, describes, and analyzes the potential effect a development may have on the existing and future circulation infrastructure for all transportation modes. The purpose of the LMA is to assist engineers and planners in both the development community and public agencies when making land use and other development decisions. A LMA quantifies the changes in traffic levels, among other metrics, and translates these changes into transportation system impacts in the vicinity of a project. These findings can then be used to determine project specific improvements to offset the project's effect on the transportation system, if any. 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project is located at 6131 Innovation Wy in the City of Carlsbad. The project is proposing eleven (11) indoor pickleball courts within an existing 32,441 square foot warehouse space. The pickleball courts will be open to the general public, but membership options will be available. All players will pay to use the courts. The hours of operation are anticipated to be between 6AM and 10PM, Monday through Sunday. The ground floor would be utilized as the entry lobby, restrooms, and 2,690 square feet of supporting single tenant office space. The lobby area will have a small snack bar for pickleball players to purchase a limited selection of dry snacks and beverages such as protein bars, chips, sports drinks and water. The lobby area will also have a sma ll retail 'pro shop' which will sell a limited selection of paddles, balls, and activewear. The 'pro shop' is not intended for general public retail. The mezzanine/lounge area will have addit ional seating for spectators and players to utilize pre or post play. The project is designed to be predominantly self-serving and functioning. Therefore, a low employee requirement is anticipated and not expected to exceed three (3) employees at any time during operating hours. This includes one employee at the front desk check-in/reception area, one employee at the patron snack bar/retail shop, and one employee in the administrative office space. Project access will be provided via an existing full-movements driveway on Innovation Wy. No changes to the project driveway are proposed. The site is located within Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 213-261-16 and Local Facilities Management Zones (LFMZ) number 17. The site is subject to the Pl (Planned Industrial) Designation, Zoned P-C (Planned Community), and within the Bressi Ranch Master Planning Zone PA-3 designated as an Industrial land use. The project would be consistent with the General Plan, zoning ordinance, and Bressi Ranch Master Plan. Rally House Pickleball -Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) c' Reference: 24.177 Ell :IIWNHHl::E Page I 3 COLLECTIVE Mcibllity & Technology In Tnnsi,ortat,on Figure 1-1 shows the local project area map. The project site plan is illustrated in Figure 1-2. Figure 1-3 provides details of the interior layout. 1.2 ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK The LMA analysis is based on the City's Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (2018). The City's General Plan indicates that Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS) thresholds must only be met for specific modes based on facility typology. The MM LOS analysis, specific to this project, includes pedestrian facilities, and bike facilities. The analysis methodologies are detailed in Section 2 of this report. 1.3 REPORT SCOPE & ORGANIZATION The project study area was developed through t he scoping process with City staff. The project's approved Scoping Agreement is provided in Appendix A. This report is structured to provide a comprehensive transportation review, consistent with City guidelines and industry best practices. The organization of the report is as follows: 1. Introduction 2. Analysis Approach & Methodology 3. Existing Transportation Conditions 4. Proposed Project 5. MM LOS Analysis 6. Conclusions Each section is designed to build on the previous one, providing a logical flow from the report introduction to the detailed analysis and finally to the conclusions and recommendations. Relevant figures can be found at the end of each report section. Rally House Pickleball -Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) C' Reference: 24.177 51: iliWM:Hi::F Page I 4 COLLECTIVE Mobility & Technology In Transportation FIGURE 1-1 Local Area Map RB ii&WHl::8 Project area denoted in gray COLLECTIVE t-tobility& Technology In TnnspQrtation >-< -I 3: z 0 i== <( > 0 z ~ FIGURE 1-2 Site Plan l'l 11 1@%\Hbl FJ----i:::r---q:===s, PATRON LOUNGE OFFICE sf 2,690 MEZZ sf 1,680 ] ~ ~[CUJPANCY sf 4 370 l ;J --------1 u -__, ~, i ! ! r~-r--u r-• @ © ~ L____________ T ________ J (j) ! @ ~ ~fr-! o,,.,=~-1 COLLECTIVE Mobility-& Technology In Transportation ! i------r-------1,---------;----r------r---7 : ~:,-irf J-0 ! .1 1~:auJ~! 1 ! ---j;_ ,:,r., 1~[ .. ---i l '----.__......__ I ·J l ~------------------~----------r----\ ~----------------------------: '1 l PICKLE BALL COURTS t i '\,,. I I I n I ~-r=, ~=-T"'~ ',,_.=--,---, I I ® ® l I I I =@:---r----, I ~_;;_ __ .._ ___ I l It--,--, == ;--I® ---,-I --,I j ,\_r I I I® I I ·- t \. ___ r--------------------•-----------~-------------J J \ ~ t ---~ -=======,------,, / -• ~ -·· • WAREHOUSE sf 25.800 T__i COURT sf 880 x 13 + 11.440 / '-v , 14,360 FIGURE 1-3 Interior Layout 11· I lidHFl::F COLLECTIVE Mobility & Technology In Transportation 2. ANALYSIS APPROACH & METHODOLOGY 2.1 LMA ANALYSIS The LMA analysis is based on the City's Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (2018). The City's Mobility Element was adopted with the City's General Plan Update in 2015. Traditionally, transportation systems were designed to accommodate the automobile. Through state legislation and the City's Livable Streets vision, the City has transitioned to designing streets to accommodate all users. As a resu lt, the City requires that a multimodal level of service (MMLOS) analysis be conducted as part of the overall analysis of the City's transportation system. The elements of the LMA are based on a level of the LMA. The City's guidelines provide guidance on LMA Levels I through VIII. The level of study was based on the project's net new trip generation that accounts for the existing land use. In coordination with City staff, the type of LMA for this project has been identified as: • Level I LMA 2.1.1 Multimodal Level-of-Service (MMLOS) The City of Carlsbad requires multimodal level of service (MM LOS) evaluation for auto, pedestrian, bicycle and transit/rideshare users of the public roadway system. The City organizes the street network by a system of "typologies", as defined by the City of Carlsbad Mobility Element. Depending on t he typology, different streets may require different MMLOS evaluations. For each roadway user set (auto, pedestrian, bicycle, transit), general criteria groups have been identified. Figure 2-1 shows the Citywide roadway segment typologies. The MM LOS analysis evaluates each of the sub-criteria, totals the points for the subject street typology, and compares the points to the City's MMLOS Point System and LOS Rating, shown in Table 2-1. This table assigns a qualitative LOS to several ranges of points. Street typology descriptions and preferred attributes are provided in Appendix B. The MMLOS analysis applies to public roadways; private roadways are not subject to MM LOS. TABLE 2-1 MOBILITY ELEMENT STREET TYPOLOGIES Street Typology Freeways Arterial Streets Identity Streets Village Streets Arterial Connector Streets Neighborhood Connector Streets Employment/Transit Connector Streets Coastal Streets School Streets Industrial Streets Local/Neighborhood Streets Rally House Pickleball -Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) C' Reference: 24.177 I:: 1, HMMi\NH:i Subjectto MMLOSStandard Auto Transit Pedestrian • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Bicycle • • • • • • • • Page I 8 COLLECTIVE Mobflitv & Technology In Transportation Pedestrian/Bicycle Pathway Streets with ½ Mile of Transit Center • • • • • Source: City of Carlsbad General Plan Mobility Element (2015) and Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (2018) TABLE 2-2 MMLOS POINT SYSTEM & LOS RATING (AUTO, Transit, Pedestrian, Bicycle Modes) Point Score LOS 90-100 A Acceptable 80-90 B 70-80 C 60-70 D 50-60 E Deficient 0-50 F Source: City of Carlsbad Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (2018) 2.1.2 LMA Study Area The City of Carlsba d TIA Guidelines as tabulated in Table 2-3, provide guidance on the MMLOS study area. Figure 2-2 illustrates the LMA MM LOS study area and project vicinity street typologies/exempt roadways. The following roadway segment(s) was evaluated in this report. The associated street typology and MM LOS standard is also noted. • Innovation Wy between Palomar Airport Rd and Gateway Rd [Local/Neighborhood Street -Pedestrian and Bicycle MM LOS] TABLE 2-3 LMA STUDY AREA LIMITS General Roadway Segments fronting the project and connecting the project to the Citywide transportation system. The City has the discretion to adjust the study limits, as required. Auto Intersections All signalized intersections within ½ miles (2,640 feet) of a project access point serving vehicles. Additional intersections within ¼ to½ miles (1,320 to 2,640 feet) from the project access points may also be added to the study area the discretion of the City Engineer/ City Traffic Engineer. Roadway Segments Roadway segments that are subject to Auto LOS Criteria and expected to experience an increase in project traffic equal to 50 or more peak hour trips in either direction of travel. Freeway Mainline Freeway mainline segments where the project adds 50 or more peak hour trips in either direction of Segments travel. Freeway Ramps Freeway entrance and exit ramps where the proposed project will add 20 or more peak-hour trips and/or cause any traffic queues to exceed ramp storage capacities. Transit MMLOS Roadway Transit lines and stops located within a ½ mile (2,640 feet) walking distance of the project site will be Segments analyzed according to the Transit MM LOS. Rally House Pickleball -Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) C2 Reference: 24.177 Page I 9 111ilifWH:#i::I CO LLECTIVE Mobility & Technology ln Transport.ition Adjacent Facilities Pedestrian MMLOS Roadway Segments Adjacent Facilities Bicycle MMLOS Roadway Segments Adjacent Facilities If no transit lines are provided, but the roadways within the study area are identified as subject to transit MMLOS, the project shall complete the MM LOS worksheet for "No Transit Located within ½ Mile Walk from Subject Site or Roadway Segment". Transit lines and stops located within a½ mile (2,640 feet) walking distance of the project site. Pedestrian rout es linking the project site to a transit line within the¼ mile walking distance boundary. Roadway segments included in the study area that are subject to the Pedestrian MM LOS standards. Pedestrian facilities that are directly connected to project access points or adjacent to the project development will be included in the study area. The analysis of each pedestrian facility will extend in each direction to the nearest intersection or connection point to a multi use trail or path. The study area will extend from the project site (northbound and southbound OR eastbound and westbound) until a Mobility Element Road or Class I trail is reached in each direction. Pedestrian analysis need only be conducted for the side of the street where the project is located unless the project is located on both sides of the street, in which case both sides of the street should be studied. Roadway segments subject the Bicycle MMLOS standards. Bicycle analysis shall be conducted for both directions of travel (e.g., both sides of t he street) of each facility included in the study area. All facilities that bicyclists can legally use within the study area from each project access point extending in each direction of travel to the nearest intersection, dedicated bicycle facility, or connection point to a multiuse trail or path. Bicycle analysis shall be conducted for both directions of travel (e.g., both sides of the street) of each facility included in the study area. 2.1.3 LMA Analysis Methodology Consistent wit h the MMLOS study area and project vicinity street typologies, the following analysis methodologies were utilized. Pedestrian MMLOS The pedestrian MM LOS criteria evaluates the quality of the pedestrian system (e.g. number of vehicle lanes that need to be crossed and the speed of adjacent traffic) and the friendliness of the infrast ructure at intersections (e.g. pedestrian countdown heads, dedicated pedestrian phases (e.g. a scramble phase), curb extensions, refuge median). In addition, the connectivity and contiguity of the pedestrian system along street sections (particularly ADA-compliant connectivity/contiguity) is a critical component of pedestrian priority streets. Daily traffic volumes utilized for the MM LOS analysis will be based on collected traffic count data, if required for the Auto LOS analysis. In cases where traffic count data is not required, daily traffic volumes will be estimated based on "anticipated ADT ranges" from the City of Carlsbad's Street Design Criteria (Engineering Standards) and associated street classification. Rally House Pickleball -Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) C2 Reference: 24.177 i:d&%N%1F Page I 10 COLLECTIVE MCJbilitv & Ttchno!ogy In Tran5porh1tion Bicycle MMLOS The bicylcle MM LOS criteria evaluates the quality of the bicycle system (e.g. bicycle route, bicycle lanes, or bicycle pathway; presence of bicycle buffers from the vehicle travel way), the amenities of the system (e.g. presence of bicycle parking), and the friendliness of the infrastructure (e.g. bicycle detection at intersections, pavement conditions, presence of vehicle parking). In addition, the connectivity and contiguity of the bicycle system along street sections is a critical component of pedestrian priority streets. Daily traffic volumes utilized for the MMLOS analysis are based on collected traffic count data, if required for the Auto LOS analysis. In cases where traffic count data is not required, daily traffic volumes was estimated based on "anticipated ADT ranges" from the City of Carlsbad's Street Design Criteria (Engineering Standards) and associated street classification. 2.1.4 Improvement Determination Performance Standard The City's Mobility Element calls for each street typology to achieve LOS D or better operations for each general criteria group. It should be noted that scores in excess of 100 points can be achieved. The GM P Performance Standard, as described in the Local Facilities Management Plan (Amended August 2017) states that: "Implement a comprehensive livable streets network that serves all users of the system -vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles and public transit. Maintain LOS D or better for all modes that are subject to this multimodal level of service (MMLOS) standard, as identified in Table 3-1 of the General Plan Mobility Element, excluding LOS exempt intersections and streets approved by the City Council." Based on these criteria, a GMP trigger is identified if a roadway segment, pedestrian facility, bicycle facility or transit facility operates at LOS E or F. Improvement measures to return any of these facilities to LOS D or better are required to meet the GMP standard. In addition, the analysis must address any intersection operational performance standards that are identified, consistent with the signalized/unsignalized methodologies previously discussed in this report section (i.e. left/right-turn pockets, and warrants). Exempt Roadways The City recognizes that maintaining LOSE or F conditions along arterial, auto-oriented roadways during the peak hours may not be feasible without widening the roadways beyond the General Plan designation. As a result, the City has identified exempt corridors that are forecast to exceed the LOS D threshold in the General Plan. These segments exceed the peak hour performance threshold and are exempt from vehicle LOS standards. All other MM LOS standards still apply. The General Plan Mobility Element policy 3-P.11 applies to exempt roadways where the project adds 110 ADT or 11 peak hour trips. Projects that exceed the traffic threshold are required to implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) and Transportation System Management (TSM) measures. Project-generated trips were distributed onto the study area roadway network and any Exempt Roadways within the project vicinity (including those outside the study area) to assess whether Rally House Pickleball - Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) C2 Reference: 24.177 El%F%:fo11F Page I 11 COLLECTIVE Mobility & Teehnologv In Traflsportatfon traffic thresholds were exceeded. The following Exempt Roadway within the project vicinity was reviewed: • Palomar Airport Roadway between El Camino Real and El Fuerte St Rally House Pickleball -Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) C2 Reference: 24.177 Efr :ii&%:Fl11F Page J 12 LEGEND • D D N A Freeway Arterial Streets Identity Streets Village St1eets Arler~1 Co.nnecto, Streets NelgM>0fhOOd Connect°' StfHtS Coastal Streets School Stteots Empl~rnenVlrinSit Cooec:tor Streets Industrial Streets Local/Neighbo<hOOd Streets Pklrtned Art8ri&1 Street< PbMed Arterial Coflnector St,eets Pt~Mltdlocol/ Neighborhood Str&ets Highwa'(S Reilroad lransit Centers H31f Mile Radius Qty limits Exempt Roadways COLLECTIVE Mobility & Technology In Transportation -' ! ,. 'A ,. -~ ,.-I .~ . . \ p1U It FIGURE 2-1 Roadway Segment Typologies and Exempt Segments Elli&NMH::F COLLECTIVE Mobility & Technology In Transportation FIGURE 2-2 Study Area SVH&ffinihbi COLLECTIVE Mobility & Technologv In Trat'lsportation 3. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS Existing transportation conditions within the study area were reviewed for modes of travel consistent with the street typologies within the study area. The following roadway segment(s) was evaluated in this report. The associated street typology and MM LOS standard is also noted. ■ Innovation Wy between Palomar Airport Rd and Gateway Rd [Local/Neighborhood Street-Pedestrian and Bicycle MM LOS] 3.1 Existing Roadway & Intersection Configurations Innovation Wy is classified as a Local/Neighborhood Street and constructed as a two-lane undivided roadway with a center left-turn lane. Innovation Wy provides primary access to the project site. Curbside parking is not permitted. This facility is subject to Pedestrian and Bicycle MMLOS. Figure 3-1 illustrates existing conditions in the study area. FIGURE 3-1 INNOVATION WY (LOOKING NORTH) 3.2 Existing Pedestrian Facilities Innovation Wy provides contiguous sidewalks within the study area. The intersections on this roadway are both signalized and unsignalized with marked crosswalks. This facility is subject to Pedestrian and Bicycle MMLOS. Rally House Pickleball -Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) C' Reference: 24.177 Eli I HD%&+i::F Page I 15 COLLECTIVE Mobility & Technology tn Tran1p,ort:;,tion 3.3 Existing Bicycle Facilities Innovation Wy generally provides Class II bicycle lanes in both directions within the study area. A segment of the northbound bike lane terminates as it approaches Palomar Airport Road, to accommodate the dedicated right turn lane. This facility is subject to Pedestrian and Bicycle MM LOS. Palomar Airport Rd is proposed as buffered bike lanes in the City's Sustainable Mobility Plan, and currently provides Class II bicycle lanes. 3.4 Existing Local & Regional Transit Service Innovation Wy does not provide any transit st ops in either direction within the study area. Rally House Pickleball -Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) C2 Reference: 24.177 8\i ili&%N+l11h Page I 16 COLLECTIVE Mobility & Teehnotogv In Tra,upcutati(ln . PROPOSED PROJECT This section describes the Project, estimated trip generation, trip distribution, and assignment of trips to the adjacent roadway network. 4.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project is proposing eleven (11) indoor pickleball courts within an existing 32,441 square foot warehouse space. The pickleball courts will be open to the general public, but membership options will be available. All players will pay to use the courts. The hours of operation are anticipated to be between 6AM and 10PM, Monday through Sunday. The ground floor would be utilized as the entry lobby, restrooms, and 2,690 square feet of supporting single tenant office space. The lobby area will have a small snack bar for pickleball players to purchase a limited selection of dry snacks and beverages such as protein bars, chips, sports drinks and water. The lobby area will also have a small retail 'pro shop' which will sell a limited selection of paddles, balls, and activewear. The 'pro shop' is not intended for general public retail. The mezzanine/lounge area will have additional seating for spectators and players to utilize pre or post play. The project is designed to be predominantly self-serving and functioning. Therefore, a low employee requirement is anticipated and not expected to exceed three (3) employees at any time during operating hours. This includes one employee at the front desk check-in/reception area, one employee at the patron snack bar/retail shop, and one employee in the administrat ive office space. Project access will be provided via an existing full-movements driveway on Innovation Wy. No changes to the project driveway are proposed. 4.2 TRIP GENERATION The project's trip generation was developed for the traffic impact analysis. Table 4-1 presents the trip generation rates used for the Project and summarizes t he forecast trips generated by the Project. As shown on Table 4-3, the Project is forecast to generate 206 trips per day, which includes 2 AM peak hour trips and 18 PM peak hour trips. TABLE 4-1 TRIP GENERATION AM Peak Hourd % PM Peak Hour %of of l and Use Size Trip Rateb ADT' In I Out I Total ADT ln:Out ln:Out I In Out Total Split ADT Split Proposed Pickleball Courts• 11 courts 30/court 330 5% 60:40 1i I 7 I 17 11% 50:50 I 18 Single Tenant Office 2,690 SF 14/KSF 38 15% 90:10 1 6 15% 10:90 1 Existing Warehousing1 32,441 SF 5/KSF 162 13% 70:30 15 I 6 I 21 15% 40:60 I 10 TOTAL Net New Trips 206 o I 2 I 2 l 9 Notes: a. nRecreation -Tennis Courts" land use was assumed as a suitable proxy for pickleball courts. b. Trip rate based on SANDA G's (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generotion Rotes for the Son Diego Region, April 2002 c. Average Oaily Traffic (ADT) d. AM and PM peak hours are between 6-9am and 4-6pm, respectively. Rally House Pickleball - Local Mobility Analysis (LMA] C' Reference: 24.177 EH IM&1tfri::F 18 36 5 6 14 24 9 18 Page I 17 COLLECTIVE Mobility & T•eMology In Transp'Jrhtion 4.3 TRIP DISTRIBUTION & ASSIGNMENT The Project's distribution was based developed for the project. The trip distribution was developed based on existing travel patterns, access to major road networks in the study area, understanding of surrounding land uses, and the proj ect access scheme. Figure 4-1 illustrates the general trip distribution within the study area. Based on the trip distribution Project trips were assigned to the study area roadway network. Figure 4-1 illustrates the proposed trip assignment AM and PM peak hour and daily traffic volumes associated with the proposed Project. As shown in Figure 4-1, the Project will not add traffic in excess of 11 peak hour trips/110 ADT to Palomar Airport Road between El Camino Real and El Fuerte which exempt from vehicular LOS standards. Per Mobility Element Policy 3-P.ll, the Project will not be required to implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) and Transportation Systems Management (TSM) measures. Rally House Pickleball -Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) c' Reference: 24.177 i I I ii@NMH11F Page I 18 COLLECTIVE Mobilitv & Technology In Transs:iortation FIGURE 4-1 Trip Distribution & Assignment 5:PMHN+lai COLLECTIVE Mobility&, Technology In Tran$porh,tion 5. MMLOS ANALYSIS The Multi-Modal Level of Service (MM LOS) analysis was conducted for each mode of transportation require for each study area street typology (i.e. transit, pedestrian, and bicycle). 5.1 PEDESTRIAN MM LOS ANALYSIS Table 5-1 summarizes the results of the pedestrian MMLOS analysis. Appendix C contains the MMLOS worksheets. Roadway Segments Innovation Wy from Palomar Airport Rd to Gateway Rd meets the LOS D operational standards in the eastbound direction. Therefore, no pedestrian improvements are recommended. Intersections In addition to the MMLOS analysis, existing intersection/roadway segment configurations and the City's Pedestrian Master Plan and Sustainable Mobility Plan were reviewed. In general, the pedestrian network is built out within the study area. Therefore, no substantial pedestrian network deficiencies were identified. Project Driveway(s) In addition to the MM LOS analysis, existing project driveway(s) configurations were reviewed with respect to pedestrian accessibility. The following key observations were made: ■ ■ The project site provides direct pedestrian access from the local street via a dedicated pathway located at the southeast corner of the property. At the project driveway no dedicated pedestrian access is provided. However, advisory signage is provided "Caution SMPH Possible Pedestrian Traffic". The driveway configuration with respect to width (approximately 30') and design (curb returns) are less typical for private driveways. The selected design was likely dictated by the requirements of large vehicles that ingress/egress the project site for industrial use. While this may not be ideal for pedestrian exposure for pedestrians on sidewalk crossing the driveway, the design does not appear to be substandard. Table 5-1 Pedestrian MMLOS Analysis Pedestrian Roadway Segment Direction MMLOS Deficient Score I LOS Innovation Wy NB• '1/a I n/ .. n l·· Palomar Airport Rd to Gateway Rd '. SB 90 I A No Notes: o. Per City guidelines, pedestrian facilities that are directly connected to project access points or adjacent to the project development are subject to MMLOS. Rally House Pickleball -Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) C' Reference: 24.177 Page I 20 Efll:ifMffiM+I::& COLLECTIVE MoblMV & Technology In Transpc;u\..ation 5.2 BICYCLE MM LOS ANALYSIS Table 5-2 summarizes the results of the bicycle MMLOS analysis. Appendix C contains the MMLOS worksheets. Roadway Segments Innovation Wy from Palomar Airport Rd to Gateway Rd meets the LOS D operational standards in the eastbound direction. Therefore, no bicycle improvements are recommended. Intersections In addition to the MMLOS analysis, existing intersection/roadway segment configurations and the City's Bicycle Master Plan and Sustainable Mobility Plan were reviewed. In general, the bicycle network is built out within the study area. Therefore, no substantial bicycle network deficiencies were identified. Table 5-2 Bicycle MM LOS Analysis Roadway Segment Innovation Wy Palomar Airport Rd to Gateway Rd Rally House Pickleball -Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) C' Reference: 24.177 1,1 M&&ii:Fl::8 Direction NB SB Bicycle MMLOS Score I LOS 100 I A 100 I A Deficient No No Page I 21 COLLECTIVE MoblM y & Tl!chno!ogv In T1•,u;portatlon 6. CONCLUSION The Consulting Collective (C2) prepared the following Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) for the Sunny Creek project in the City of Carlsbad. The LMA was prepared in compliance with the City's General Plan Mobility Element, City guidelines, and under the direction of City staff direction. The project is located at 6131 Innovation Wy in the City of Carlsbad. The project is proposing eleven (11) indoor pickleball courts within an existing 32,441 square foot warehouse space. The pickleball courts will be open to the general public, but membership options will be available. All players will pay to use the courts. The hours of operation are anticipated to be between 6AM and 10PM, Monday through Sunday. The ground floor would be utilized as the entry lobby, restrooms, and 2,690 square feet of supporting single tenant office space. The lobby area will have a small snack bar for pickleball players to purchase a limited selection of dry snacks and beverages such as protein bars, chips, sports drinks and water. The lobby area will also have a small retail 'pro shop' which will sell a limited selection of paddles, balls, and activewear. The 'pro shop' is not intended for general public retail. The mezzanine/lounge area will have additional seating for spectators and players to utilize pre or post play. Project access will be provided via an existing full-movements driveway on Innovation Wy. No changes to the project driveway are proposed. The Project is forecast to generate 206 trips per day, which includes 2 AM peak hour trips and 18 PM peak hour trips. The LMA analysis is based on the City's Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (2018) and the City's General Plan Mobility Element (adopted in 2015). The following project requirements, for each transportation element, were identified. Project Pedestrian Requirements The project meets the LOS D operational standards per the MMLOS analysis. Therefore, no pedestrian improvements are required. Project Bicycle Requirements The project meets the LOS D operational standards per the MMLOS analysis. Therefore, no bicycle improvements are required. Project TOM Requirements The Project will not add traffic in excess of 11 peak hour trips/110 ADT to an exempt roadway. Therefore, from vehicular LOS standards. Per Mobility Element Policy 3-P.11, the Project will not be required to implement TDM measures. Project TSM Requirements The Project will not add traffic in excess of 11 peak hour trips/110 ADT to an exempt roadway. Therefore, from vehicular LOS standards. Per Mobility Element Policy 3-P.11, the Project will not be required to implement TSM measures. Rally House Pickleball -Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) C' Reference: 24.177 5811&%&+1::F End of Report Page I 22 COLLECTIVE Mobility & Technology In Transportation TECHNICAL APPENDICES TRANSPORTATION LOCAL MOBILITY ANALYSIS (LMA) Rally House Pickleball City of Carlsbad, CA APPENDIX SUMMARY Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Project Scoping Agreement Street Typology Descriptions and Preferred Attributes MMLOS Worksheets Rally House Pickleball -Technical Appendices C' Reference: 24.177 E1€f#M%1%11h COLLECTIVE Mobility & Technology In Transportation APPENDIX A Project Scoping Agreement Rally House Pickleball -Technical Appendices C' Reference: 24.177 E:liiiW%:Hl::F (City of __ T_RA_N_S_P_O_R_TA_T_IO_N_IM_P_A_C_T_A_N_A_LY_S_IS_G_U_ID_E_L_IN_E_S ______________ Carlsbad April 2018 . , c2 Ref: 24.177 ATTACHMENT A SCOPING AGREEMENT FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY This letter acknowledges the City of Carlsbad Traffic Engineering Division requirements for the transportation impact analysis of the followinR project. The analysis must follow the latest City of Carlsbad Transportalon Impact Study Guidelines dated April 2018. Case No. CUP 2024-0008 Project Name: Rally House Pickleball Project Location: 6131 Innovation Way, Suite 100 Project Description: 11 indoor Pickleball Courts with supporting Office Space Related Cases - SP No. EIR No. -------------------------------- GP A No. -------------------------------- Q No. Consultant Developer Name: C2 Consulting Collective Rally House Pickleball, LLC Address: 1050 Kettner Blvd, Suite 0-551 6131 Innovation Way, Suite 100 Carlsbad, CA 92009 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: 858.270.4444 A. Trip Generation source: SANDAG note: trip generation calculations are attached ----------~~-------------- Extended Land use Industrial -Warehouse Extended zoning P-C (Planned Com.) Total Daily Trips Proposed Land Use Recreation & Office Proposed Zoning P-C (Planned Com.) Forcast Daily Trips 206 ADT ------------ (Attach a trip generation table. Describe Trip Reduction Factors proposed and Included in the trip generation table.) B. Trip Distribution: D Select Zone (Model Series_) n/a (Provide exhibit for detailed trip distribution and assignment.) C. Background Traffic Phased Project 0 No 0 Yes Phases: n/a ----------------- Please contact the Engineering Devision or use the most recently provided data Model/Forcast Methodology: n/a -------------------------- www.c2-mobi1ity.com 35 I Page (City of ----=T---=RA---=N---=s:....:P---=O---=R---=T A---=T:....:10-=-N~1 M---=P---=A---=c:....:T---=A:....:N---=A-=-L v---=s---=1s_G:....:u:....:10-=-E=--=L:....:1N---=E:..::_s ______________ Carlsbad C alifo t nla April 2018 D. Study Intersections: (NOTE: Subject to revision after other projects, trip generation and distribution are determined, or comments) 1. n/a 2. 3. 4. ---------------- s. ________________ _ 6. ________________ _ 7. ----------------- 8. ________________ _ E. Study Roadway Segments: (NOTE: Subject to revision after other projects, trip generation and distribution are determined, or comments) 1. Innovation Wy (PAR and Gateway Rd) s. -----------------2. Pedestrian/81cycle MMLOS (west side only for Pedestrian) 6. ________________ _ 3. ----------------7. ________________ _ 4. ----------------8. ________________ _ F. Other Jurisdictional Impacts Is this project within any other Agency's Sphere of Influence or one-mile radius of boundaries? □Yes IZI No If so, name of Jurisdiction: n/a ----------------------------- G. Site Plan (Attach a legible 11'X17' copy) H. Specific issues to be adressed in the Study (in addition to the standard analysis described in the Guidelines) (To be filled out by Engineering Devision) Level I LMA Recommended by: Walter B. Musial, PE RSP Consultant's Representative Scoping Agreement Submitted on Scoping Agreement Resubmitted on Approved Scoping Agreement: ~~ City of Carlsbad Traffic Engineering Division 01 /21/2025 Date 01/21/2025 Date 01/24/2025 Date 01/26/25 Date www.c2-mobility.com 36 I Page COLLECTIVE Mobfllty & Tschnology ln Tr,1n:1portoti0n Land Use Proposed Pickleball Courtsa Single Tenant Office Existing Warehousing • Footnotes: Size 11 courts 2,690 SF 32,441 SF ATTACHMENT A Rally House Pickleball Trip Generation Average Dally Trips (ADTs) AM Peak Hour Rateb %of ln:Out Split Volume ADT Out ADT In 30 /court 330 5% 60% 40% 10 7 14 /KSF 38 15% 90% 10% s 1 S /KSF 162 13% 70% 30% 15 6 ,. I b. Trip Generation r~tes are belied 5.ANDAG's (Not 5':i) !f,~f Gu~ of Vehlctttaf 7toffic Glnerorion l!otesf o, the Scm 0""1Q R-egior,, Apr\l :lOOl. I I I ii?Mi+l::F %of Total AOT 17 11% 6 15% 21 15% C2 CONSULTING COLLECTIVE Historic Santa Fe Depot 1050 Kettner Blvd, SUlle 0-551 San Diego, CA 92101 lnfo@c2-mobil1ty.com 8S8.270.4444 Planning.Design.Technology PM Peak Hour ln:Out Spilt Volume In Out Total 50% 50% 18 18 36 10% 90% 1 s 6 40% 60% 10 14 24 : LEGEND • D D N A Freeway Arterial Streets Identity Streets Village Stre-et.s Arterial Connector Streets Nelghl>OfhOOd Connector SlrNls Coastal Streets Schoof Streets Employment/Tra.nsil Cone,cto, Streets Industrial Straets LoeaVNelghbo.-hood Streets Planned Arterial Streets Ptanned Arterial Connector StruU P1anned LocaV Neighborhood Streets Highw•ys Ra,,oad Tl"8f\'Slt CentefS Half Mile Radius City Limits COLLECTIVE Mobilit'/ & Technology In Transportation /I I I i I .. r , \-. ?' ::'1,LI' E.,;.r '• ·-9· FIGURE A Roadway Segment Typologies and Exempt Segments .. Access Point COLLECTIVE Mobillty & Technology In Transportation FIGURE B ½ Mile Distance from Access Point Ii: I ii&MMEl::E ~~~~~-~-fl T -'I I =i=I Project area denoted in gray COLLECTIVE Mobility & Technology In Tr.ansportation nn :11 >--< 3: z 0 i'= < > 0 L. z FIGURE C Site Plan I ti\ HNMMH:F -t r --- OFFICE st 2,6~ 7 MEZZ st 1.68 . B OCCUPANCY sf 4,370 ---rF•IG·URE D Interior Layout a;m+1::e SIIIOT COLLECTIVE Mobility & TecMoto9y In Transportaticn ADT AM Peak IN OUT PM Peak IN OUT Fi: I li@§iiihi ATTACHMENT B Trip Distribution Exempt Roadway (Palomar Airport Rd) Review Trip Generation Trip Distribution (highest) 206 40% 0 40% 40% 9 40% 9 40% Trip Ass gnment (highest) 82 <110 0 <11 <11 <11 <11 C2 CONSUL TING COLLECTIVE Histor,c Sama Fe Depot 1050 Kettner Blvd, Suite 0-551 San Diego, CA 92101 1nfo@c2-mobH1ty.com 858.270.4444 Planning.Design.Technology COLLECTIVE Mobility & Technology In Traniportation APPENDIX B Street Typology Descriptions and Preferred Attributes Rally House Pickleball -Technical Appendices c' Reference: 24.177 www.c2•mob1l1ty.com (C i t y of __ T_RA_N_S_P_O_R_TA_T_IO_ N_ I M_P_A_C T _ A_N_A_LY _S_IS _G_U_ID_E_L _ IN _E _ S __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ Ca r l s b a d -- - - - - - - - ··. ~ , :: . - i Fi g u r e 1: MM LO S Re q u i r e d A n a l y s i s by Mo b ili t y Elem e n t Ro a d w a y Ap r i l 20 1 8 . " i . ' ~ - i ~ 'l. l ' ' l < l l ' l " ' ! ' • ~ . }i t ~ • . . : ' • Ca l i f o r n i a 11 I Pa g e (City of __ T_R_AN_S_P_O_R_TA_T_IO_N_IM_P_A_CT_A_N_A_LY_S_IS_G_U_I_DE_L_IN_E_S ______________ Carlsbad C,1lifornia STREET TYPOLOGY AND ACCOMMODATED MODES ACCOMMODATED SUBJECT STREET TYPOLOGY DESCRIPTION AND PREFERRED ATTRIBUTES MODES TOMMLOS STANDARD (Y/N) Freeways -y • High-speed facilities designed to accommodate vehicles and buses moving through the city and region -. ~ y • Bicycles and pedestrians are prohibited Arterial Streets -y • Tllese are the primary vehicle routes through the city for both local and regional vehicle trips. • Designed to safely move all modes of travel while efficiently moving vehicles and buses throughout the city. ---- ij N • Traffic signals shall be coordinated to optimize vehicle movements • Bicycle lanes shall be provided and can be further enhanced or complemented by other facilities or off-street pathways • Pedestrian facllltles to be provided consistent with ADA requirements -~ N • Mid-blCKk crossings should not be provided • On-street parking should be prohibited along the$e corridors • Vertie.al traffic calming techniques ($uch as speed tables, humps, etx:.) should not be considered ;_._ V • Special c:onsiderations can be considered on arterials within proximity to schools to enhance Safe Routes to Schools for pedestrians and blcycllsts. Identity Streets -N • These streets provide the primary aa:ess to and from the heart of the city• the VIiiage • Designed t:o 5afely move all modes of travel while enhancing mobility for pedestrians and bicyclists • Vehicle speeds should be managed to promote safe pedestrian and bicycle movement . No pedestrian shall crOS5 more than five vehia1lar travel and/or turn lanes • In addition to ADA compliant ramps and sid-alks, sidewalks should support the adja- cent land uses ■s follows: ~ V -Adjacent t:o retail uses, modified/new sidewalks should generally be a minimum of 10 feet (12 feet preferred) in width where feasible and taking into consideration the traffic volumes of the adjacent roadway, and allow for the land use to utilize the sidewalk with outdoor seating and ottier activities -Adjacent to residential uses, modified/new sidewalks should be a minimum of si11 feet in width Elsewnere, modified/new sldewalks should be a minimum of eight feet In width A y • Where feasible, bicycle lanes should be provided • Vehicle speed5 should complement the adjacent land uses • Bicycle parking should be provided in retail areas • Bike rec.ks should be readily provided within the public right-of-way and encouraged on private property • Traffic calming devices, such ■s curt> extensions (bulbouts) or enhanced pedestrian crossings should be considered and evaluated for implementation ~ N • Street furniture shall be oriented toward the businesses . Mid-block pedestrian Cro5$lngs could be provided at appropriate locirtions (e.g. where sight distance is adequ.te and speeds are 11ppropri11te) • On-street vehide parking should be provided. In areas with high parking demand, in- novative parking management techniques should be implemented/ considered • Pedestrians should typically be •buttered• from vehicle traffic using landscaping or parked vehicles April 2018 25 I Page TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS GUIDELINES STREET TYPOLOGY AND ACCOMMODATED MODES ACCOMMODATED SUBJECT i STREET TYPOLOGY DESCRIPTION AND PREFERRED ATTRIBUTES MODES TO MMLOS STANDARD (YIN} VIiiage Streets N y • Primary purpose is to move people throughout the Village; providing access to busi- nesses, residences, transit and recreation within the Village area. • Designed to Mfely move all modes of travel while enhanting mobility for pedestrians and blcycllsu. • Vehicle speeds should be managed to promote safe pedestrian and bicycle movement 1 • Promote pedestricln and bicyc.le connectivity through short block lengths --------+------~· • Bicycle lanes should be provided A y • Bicycle boulevards can be considered N Arterial Connector Streets y y y ;;;,....;., N Neighborhood Connedor Street N ~ y ,,_ I y ..__. N April 2018 • Pedestrians should be accommodated on sidewalks adjacent to the travel way (mini- mum 5' wide sidewalk) • Mid-block pedestrian crossings and traffic calming devices should be considered, but only at loaitions with high pedestrian activity levels or major destinations/attractions • On-street parklng may be provided • Primary purpose is to connect people to diffenmt areas and land uses of the city by con- necting to/from anerial streets • D11$igned to Mfely move all modes of travel whihl enhaming mobility for pedestri111'15 and bicyclists and efficiently moving vehicles between arterial streets. • Bicycle lanes should be provided • Pedestrians should be accommodated on sidewalks adjacent to the travel way (mini- mum s• wide sidewalk) • Mid-block pedestrian crossings and traffic calming devices should be oonsidered, but only at locations with high pedestrian activity levels or major destinations/attractions • On-street parking may be provided . • Primary purpose is to oonnect people to different neighborhoods and land uses of the I city I • Designed to safely move all modes of travel while enhancing mobility for pedestrians and bicyclists. I • Vehicle speeds should be managed to promote safe pedestrian and bicycle movement ~ • Bicycle lanes should be provided I • Bicycle lxlulevaros can be considered • Pedestrians should be accommodated on sidewalk$ adjacent to the travel way (mini- mum 5' wide sidewalk) • Mid-block pedestrian crossings and traffic calming devices should be considered, but only at IOOltions with high pedestrian activity levels or major destinations/attractions • On-street parking may be provided 26 I Page (City of _....:T....:R....:A....:NS::_P....:O....:R....:TA---'T---'10~N---'1 M.:..;,,:__:_PA....:C....:T....:A....:N....:A:..::.L v....:s....:1s'---G::...:u::_1=-D=--=EL::..:..c1 N...:..::E:..::.s ______________ Carlsbad California STREET TYPOLOGY AND ACCOMMODATED MODES ACCOMMODATED MODES SUBJECT STREET TYPOLOGY DESCRIPTION AND PREFERRED ATTRIBUTES TOMMLOS STANDARD (YIN) Employment/Transit Conne<tor Streets --N • Primary purpose Is to connect people to and from the employment areas of the city, as y y well as important destinations and major transit facilities. • Designed to safely move all modes of travel while enhancing moblltty for pedestrians and bicyclists and efficiently moving buses to employment. transit stations and major destinations. • Vehicle speeds should be managed to promote safe pedestrian and blcycle movement • Direct connections to bus stops should be provided • Enhanced bus stops should be considered that include shelters, benches, and lighting 1-------------------.j • Bicy(le lanes end sidewelks should be provided y Coastal Streets N ij y y • Pedestrian crossing distances should be minimized • On-street p11rti:ing may be provided • Primary purpose is to move people along the city's ocean waterfront and connect people to the beach, recreation, businesses and residences in close proximity to the waterfront. The street serves as a destination for people who seek to drive, walk and bicycle along the ocean waterfront. • Designed to safely move all modes of travel whlle enhancing mobility for pedestrians and bicyclisu. • Ve hide speeds shall be managed to support uses along the coast • Enhanced bicycle 1md pedestrian crossings should be provided, including: -High visibility cro53walks -Enhanced pedestrian notific11tlons (e.g. reiponsive push-button devices) -Enhanced bicycle detection -Bicycle lanes shall be provided and an be further enhanced or complemented by other facilities (such as bicyde h,ne butte~ or off-street pathweys) • Pedestrian facllltles should be a minimum of five feet and shall strive for six to eight feet In width and shall conform to ADA requirements 1---~------+----N------, • Pedestrian crossing distances should be minimized • Trail facilities should be encouraged • Opponunities for mid-block pedestrian cronings should be investigated • On-street parking should be provided • Transit facility and operation Improvements should be encouraged -----__J Apri/2018 27 I Page (City of __ T_RA_N_S_P_O_R_TA_T_IO_N_IM_P_A_CT_A_N_A_LY_S_IS_G_U_I_DE_L_IN_E_S ______________ Carlsbad C"l lrorni a STREET TYPOLOGY AND ACCOMMODATED MODES ACCOMMODATED SUBJECT STREET TYPOLOGY DESCRIPTION AND PREFERRED ATTRIBlrrES MODES lOMMLOS STANDARD (YIN) Sd'lool Streett N . Primary purpose is to connect people to Khools from nearby residential neighbor- hoods. . Designed to safely move all modes of travel with an emphasis on providing safe pedes- trian and bicycle acCMS for students traveling to and from nearby schools. y • Vehicle speeds shall ba managed to support school uses (typically 25 MPH) . Enhanced bkycle and pedestrian crossings should be provided, including; -High visibility crouwalks -Enhanced pedestrian notifications {e.g. responsive push-button devices) y -Enhanced bicycle detection -Bicycle lanes shall be provided and can be further enhanced or complemented by other facilities or off-street pathways • Pedestrian facilities should be a minimum of six feet and shall strive for eight feet ln N width and shall conform to ADA requirements . Pedestrian croning distances should be minimized • Opportunities for mid-block pedestrian aosslngsshould be investigated • Traffic calming d.vices that improw service lewis and safety for pedestrians and blcy- clists should be considered -------------· --· ------- lndu.strial Streets -· ---y • Primary purpose is to connect people to businesses within the city's industrial parks. • Designed to safely move all modes of travel while efficiently moving vehldes and buses ~ N from arrerial streets and employment/transit connector streets to businesses. • Traffic calming devicas are generally discouraged given the propensity for larger trucks and heavy vehicles in this area ~ N • On-street parking may be provided as long 11s it does not interfere with the turning n,dii of heavy vehicles. :;a y Local/Neighborhood Street ... N . Primary purpose is to connect people to and through residential neighborhoods and loc,1 •reas of the city. . Designed to safely move all modes of travel while enhancing mobility for pedestrians ---~ and bicyclists. ij y • Vehicle 5J>eeds should be managad to promote safe pedestrian and bityele movement • Peclestrlans should be accommodated on a sidewalk or soft surface trall (such as de- composed granite) unless those facilities are inconsistent with the existing desirable -.,,. y neighborhood character . Bicycles can be 11ccommodated with a bicycle lane or route if vehicle volumes and/or speeds necessitate; otherwise bityCles can share the street • Bicycle boulevards can be considered ~ N • Traffic calming measures should ba considered when suppomd by the neighborhood or when warranted for safety reasons • On-street parking should be considered April 2018 28 I Page COLLECTIVE Mobihty & Technology In Trainsportation APPENDIX C MM LOS Worksheets Rally House Pickleball -Technical Appendices C' Reference: 24.177 Fili:iiM+Nh1h ROADWAY INFO PEDESTRIAN * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD? * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'): * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)? * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA t ? Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes In count) Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way: Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way? Any apparent sight distance Issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings? Are there any permanent speed control devices installed? Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)? o c s al sap ea t be hi h • ibilit ? Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings? t r es ri cale Ii t· ? Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line? Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions? Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length? lnnovatio W y Palom r Airp rt R Gate av Rd L ca /Ne· hborhoo 2,000 NB SCORE I LOS SB SCORE I LOS 90 I A No No No No N No Yes 0 No No Project: Rally House Pickleball Segment: Innovation Way From Palomar Airport Rd To Gateway Rd Scenario: _E_x_is_ti_n.;:g ____________________________________________ _ By: C2 Consulting Collective Accessibility and functionality Street characteristics meets ADA unobstructed width requirements • Essential Features (Criteria must be met): Sidewalk width meets minimum width for typology according to the Mobility Element (or 5' if unspecified) Sidewalk width exceeds minimum width for typology according to the Mobility Element (or 6' if unspecified) • Essential Features (Criteria must be met): Ramps and land in s within se ment meet ADA re uirements segments meet ADA requirements (cross-slope and trip Sidewalk width meets recommended width for typology according to the Mobility Element (or 8' if unspecified) 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge On-street parking or bike lane provides 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way Landscaping 2' to 5' wide provides 'buffer' between pedestrians and vehicle travel way Landscaping greater than 5' wide provides 'buffer' between pedestrians and vehicle travel way Less than 3,000 vehicles per lane per day Speed limit 30 mph or less No apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings Permanent speed control devices installed on segments posted as approved by the City Traffic Engineer • Essential Features (Criteria must be met): Crosswalks are marked according to CA MUTCD guidelines Crosswalk is high visibility (i.e., continental markings per the CAMUTCD) Traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width Crossing characteristics (pedestrian refuge, bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island) Other Elements Presence of intersection enhancements for pedestrians (pedestrian-friendly signal phasing, pedestrian countdown heads, signage, etc.) RRFBs at uncontrolled crossings if warranted • Essential Features (Criteria must be met\: Street light locations appear adequate Active building frontages on 80% of street curbline (pedestrian attracting frontages such as active storefronts and recreationa spaces) Street trees provide shade over more than 50% of sidewalk length Street furniture oriented toward businesses or attractions 15 10 5 10 10 10 10 5 s 10 s 5 5 s 10 5 10 10 5 10 5 5 5 5 ,_ ________ ..,.Pedestrian scale lighting ,. -" , .. , ' , !~ . ., , . -. , ,.... r =~ " ~ ~,.. .,, , ""' , . . ~· -t ' ~ " ' ' ' " ~ > .... :, • .... , <, ~-:~~;¢i&i..::~~~..ii<~ ~~,,-~~,~✓ ~-~ .. ---~-~, •• 'i~~-• , , ~~ "~{ 15 10 0 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 5 s 5 0 10 0 0 0 5 10 0 5 0 0 90 A Yes * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)? * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines? Is on-street parki Speed limit (miles Does the bikeway on the study segment and side IXf1 streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan~ Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection INFO I no ation ay P lomar i port Rd Gate a Local/Neighborhoo 2,000 NB SCORE I LOS 100 I A Yes Yes Yes No 30 mph Study Segment Only No No SB SCORE I LOS 100 I A Yes Yes Yes No 30 mph Study Segment Only No 0 Project: Rally House Pickleball Segment: Innovation Way From Palomar Airport Rd To Gateway Rd Scenario: _E_x_is_ti_ng"------------------------------------------- Speed limit is~ 25 mph 25 0 0 Speed limit is 30 mph 15 15 15 Street Characteristics ~S.:...p_ee_d_lim_it_is_.;.35'-m..:.p_h ______________ -+_....::1.:.0_--+-----'0----+---- 1 o 5 ____ -I Street with ADT < 3,000 15 15 Street with ADT between 3,000 and 6,000 10 0 0 Facility Bikeway Design Class I facility (off-street path), Class IV (cycle track), or multiuse path Class II facility that meets minimum width of 5' (on-street bicycle lanes) Bike lane buffer (2' min) is provided Class Ill facility (bike route designated by signage or paint only} Additional traffic calming/speed management features have been applied to Class Ill facility (i.e. a bike boulevard) Bikeway meets or exceeds the Bicycle Master Plan Bike lane (including buffer) is at least 8' wide from face of curb Bicycle facilities with signing and striping meet design guidelines D Good pavement condition for bikeway (no visible potholes) Free of infrastructure that obstructs bike facility (e.g. grates) Bikeways on side streets are consistent with Bicycle Master Plan along segment Connectivity/ Contiguity Bike lanes are striped continuously on all approaches to and Adjacent Vehicle Parking Other Elements departures from intersections, without dropping at turn lanes or driveways No on-street parking and speed limit is 25 or 30 mph Back-in angled parking Parallel parking with door-side buffered bike lane Enhanced bicycle detection or video detection is provided at intersections 25 0 0 15 15 15 5 0 0 5 0 0 10 0 0 25 25 25 10 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 5 5 5 5 0 0 5 0 5 5 5 5 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 100 100 A A COLLECTIVE Mob1hty & T•chno4ogy In Transportation Rally House Pickleball -Technical Appendices C1 Reference: 24.177 I ,,fi§f ::F::F End of Appendices October 28, 2024 tML HOWES I WEILER I LANDY PLANNING & ENGINEERING Subject: Noise Study for Pickleball Courts, 6131 Innovation Way Executive Summary The Pickle ball Courts site is located at 6131 Innovation Way Ste. 100 in the City of Carlsbad, California. The project site is the current location of a light industrial building. The project is proposing a conditional use permit, to modify the use from office, industrial, warehouse to indoor pickleball courts. Pickleball has a reputation for noise associated with the game, primarily based on the sound the ball makes off the paddle as well as the celebrations of the players. This is a genuine concern in every municipality especially when close to residential areas. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) states that when an individuals is exposed to 90 decibels (dBa) or greater for eight hours of more, that noise exposure becomes dangerous. Information provided by on line articles written by the Racket Sprots World and Bob Unetich of Pickleball Sound Mitigation, surrounding the noise of pickleball, has shared results of studies done to measure sounds levels. These studies have found that the average sound associated with pickleball comes around 70 dBa from about 100 feet away from the strike of the ball with no sound reduction efforts. Two other acoustical studies of pickleball courts to provide information. These studies include a 2019 study for the City of Pacific Grove (https://sagaponackvillage.org/wp- content/uploads/2022/04/Extant-Pickleball-Noise-Study.pdf), a 2012 study prepared for Sun City, Arizona (https://scwpickleballclub.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/scg-sound- study.pdf) and a 2022 study prepared for an HOA in Bend, Oregon (https://www.rivercanyonestates.com/file/document/18291 29837 /Lgi C FPc9U DWh702B. p df). While these studies contain some findings not relevant to Carlsbad they confirm the general consensus that the noise generated by pickleball is between 60-70 dBa, without any sound attenuation measures. NOV 1 8 2024 Below is a list of sound sources taken from Decibal Meter Pro, copyright 2022, that are 70 dBa-equivalent (on average) or above: Activity Decibel Normal Conversation 60-70 Open Office Noise 65-70 Vacuum Cleaner 60-80 Alarm Clock 70-80 Dishwasher/ Washing Machine 70 Restaurant 70-80 Playground noise 80 Traffic (inside the car) 80-85 Lawnmower 80-90 With the understanding that all park activities produce certain levels of sound or noise associated with it, the following are options to assist in the reduction of noise, specifically to address sound coming from additional pickleball courts. Placement of Courts Most residential neighborhoods within Carlsbad typically have ambient noise levels of between 45-55 dBa. Homes that are 200 feet or more from outdoor pickleball courts should expect the decibel levels to lessen from the average of 70 dBa to about 64 dBa, and homes that are 400 feet away would lessen to about 58 dBa. The proposed location of the courts would all be inside an existing light-industrial building, and the closest pickleball court being approximately 460 feet away from the closet residence off Discovery Road - a residential neighborhood of Bressi Ranch. In addition, these properties abut against Gateway Road, which has a traffic noise level of 80 dBa which separates the residences from the project location. Meaning the traffic noise produced by Gateway Road is higher than the proposed project. There aerial photo below shows the project location and the proximity of the nearest residences. Consistency with the General Plan Noise Element The General Plan Noise Element Table 5.1 and 5.2 establishes standards for noise within the City. The guidelines do not contain any specific standards, such as maximum decibel limits. Rather, it takes a broader look at preventing unusual or unnecessary noise by looking at factors such as volume, proximity to residence, the nature of the area where the noise is being generated, time of day, etc. According to the Noise Element Policy states: 5-P.3 Noise-Attenuation. For all projects that require discretionary review and have noise exposure levels that exceed the standards in Table 5-1, require site planning and architecture to incorporate noiseattenuating features. With mitigation, development should meet the allowable outdoor and indoor noise exposure standards in Table 5-2. When a building's openings to the exterior are required to be closed to meet the interior noise standard, then mechanical ventilation shall be provided. The project is consistent with this policy by having the pickle ball courts within an existing building that naturally provides a sound barrier, additionally separated by Gateway Road which traffic noise is nearly 80 dBa. The proposed project noise level to the nearest residence will not be heard due to other noise generating factors (Gateway Road) and the noise barrier of having the operation within an existing building. Simply, the pickle ball courts will not be heard from any residential properties. Therefore, is consistent with the City's Noise Guidelines. CO LLECT IVE Mob1hty & Teehnologv In Transportation TECHNICAL APPENDICES TRANSPORTATION LOCAL MOBILITY ANALYSIS (LMA) Rally House Pickleball City of Carlsbad, CA APPENDIX SUMMARY Appendix A Appendix 8 Appendix C Project Scoping Agreement Street Typology Descriptions and Preferred Attributes MMLOS Worksheets Rally House Pickleball -Technical Appendices C' Reference: 24.177 I I I if@Jie+l::i JA~ 3 0 2025 COLLECTIVE Mobility & Tec:hoology In Transpoftat10n APPENDIX A Project Scoping Agreement Rally House Pickleball -Technical Appendices C' Reference: 24.177 I I I if&NHl+i::i (city of __ T_RA_N_S_P_O_R_TA_T_IO_N_IM_P_A_C_T_A_N_A_l Y_S_IS_G_U_I_DE_L_IN_E_S ______________ Carlsbad April 2018 c2 Ref: 24.177 ATTACHMENT A SCOPING AGREEMENT FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY This letter acknowledges the City of Carlsbad Traffic Engineering Division requirements for the transportation impact analysis of the following project. The analysis must follow the latest City of Carlsbad Transportaion Impact Study Guidelines dated April 2018. Case No. CUP 2024-0008 Project Name: Rally House Pickleball Project Location: 6131 Innovation Way, Suite 100 Project Description: 11 indoor Pickleball Courts with supporting Office Space Related Cases • SP No. EIR No. GPA No. ------------------------------- CTN o. Consultant Name: C2 Consulting Collective Address: 1050 Kettner Blvd, Suite 0-551 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: 858.270.4444 Developer Rally House Pickleball, LLC 6131 Innovation Way, Suite 100 Carlsbad, CA 92009 A. Trip Generation Source: SANDAG note: trip generation calculations are attached ----------.:.....:=---------------- C x tended Land use Industrial -Warehouse Extended Zonmc P-C (Planned Com.) Total Daily Trips Proposed Land Use Recreation & Office Proposed Zoning P-C (Planned Com.) Forcast Daily Trips 206 ADT ------------ (Attach a trip generation table. Describe Trip Reduction Factors proposed and Included in the trip generation table.) B. Trip Distribution: 0 Select Zone (Model Ser es __ ) n/a (Provide exhibit for detailed trip distribution and assignment ) C. Background Traffic Phased Project 0 No 0 Yes Phases: n/a ----------------- Please contact ~e Engineering Devision or use the mast recently provided data Model/Forcast Methodology: n/a -------------------------- www.c2-mobility.com 35 I Page (City of _ _..:_T_..:_RA...:..N...:..S:..:.P--=O...:..R...:..TA...:..T...:..10-=--N~I M...:..P:....:.A_..:_CT:...;_;__A:..:.N...:..Ac.::_LY--=S..:..;:IS'---G"-U:..:.1-=--DE=-=L:.:..:.IN_..:_E:..:_S ______________ Carlsbad ( a f O I f"l I ~ April 2018 D. Study Intersections: (NOTE: Subject to revision after other projects, trip generation and distribution are determined, or comments) 1. n/a 2. 3. ---------------- 4. ---------------- s. ________________ _ 6. ----------------- 7. ----------------- 8. _______________ _ E. Study Roadway Segments: (NOTE: Subject to revision after other projects, trip generation and distribution are determined, or comments) 1. Innovation Wy (PAR and Gateway Rd) 2. Pedestrian/Bicycle MM LOS (west side only for Pedestrian) 3. 4. F. Other Jurisdictional Impacts s. _______________ _ 6. _______________ _ 7. ----------------- 8. _______________ _ Is this project within any other Agency's Sphere of Influence or one-mile radius of boundaries? □Yes [2] No If so, name of Jurisdiction: n/a ----------------------------- G. Site Plan (Attach a legible 11'X17' copy) H. Specific issues to be adressed in the Study (in addition to the standard analysis described in the Guidelines) (To be filled out by Engineering Devision) Level I LMA Recommended by: Walter 8. Musial, PE RSP 01/21/2025 Consultant's Representative Date Scoping Agreement Submitted on 01/21/2025 Date Scoping Agreement Resubmitted on 01/24/2025 Date Approved Scoping Agreement: City of Carlsbad Date Traffic Engineering Division www.c2-mobility.com 36 I Page COLLECTIVE Mobility & Technology In Tr•nsportation Land Use Proposed Pickleball Courtsa Smgle Tenant Office Existing Warehousing • Footnotes: I I I iiWMH::5 Size 11 courts 2,690 SF 32,441 SF ATTACHMENT A Rally House Pickleball Trip Generation Average Daily Trips (ADTs) AM Peak Hour Rate" ADT %of ln:Oul Split Volume AOT In Out 30 /court 330 5% 60% 40% 10 7 14 /KSF 38 15% 90% 10% 5 I 5 /KSF 162 13% 70% 30% 15 6 ,. ' %of Total AOT 17 11% 6 15% 21 15% I C2 CONSULTING COLLECTIVE Historic Santa Fe Depot 1050 Kettner Blvd, Suite 0-551 San Diego, CA 92101 info@c2•mobility.com 858.270.4444 Planning.Design.Technology PM Peak Hour ln:Out Split Volume In Out Total SO% SO% 18 18 36 10% 90% 1 s 6 40% 60% 10 14 24 : LEGEND • D D ,. --., N rrttN '( Arte·1a St•tfittS A-te,~1a C,JmKt:>• Street~ Ne1gtib0rh00d Conroec.to, 5\•~t!. Cna<.t.l' Str~te"o School St•elll'lS Erip,o,, n"Mtnt'Trd"'lS1t Conector s1,eeit\ lt"tdunr,a1 st~eeh Loca\/Ne.g~t>ornood St•H,t! Plan.,•1 Arter,a' Str••U- PIJll ,~J Art~ru Connector Street!I PlannPd LocaV Ne,ghbOrhOOd Stteels H,gtiw,1ys Ra Ir >ad lrans t Centers Hall M e Rctdtus Cly l m,ts Exempt Rt>adways COLLECTIVE Mob1hty & Technology In Transportation .... 1_. J ,•-'. 1' ... i\ ~i t--i ···-, i i <;._ i \ I FIGURE A Roadway Segment Typologies and Exempt Segments I 11 ifd%\Ulal .. Access Point COLLECTIVE Mob1hty &: Technology In Transportation FIGURE B ½ Mile Distance from Access Point I I I ·M&iiihi::i I I I I Project area denoted in gray COLLECTIVE Mobility & hchnology In Transportation 1, .. --v- -◊ FIGURE C Site Plan 1\1 I IFN11Fi::F CD COLLECTIVE Mobility & Technology In Transportalron j ~ -~ c::::::J til_} . la.::. j-~ - f ~ - PATRON LOUNGE l 1! . OFFICE sf 2,690 MEZZ sf 1,680 B OCCUPANCY sf 4.370 -0 LI ciJ ~ rt (j) © ---7-__ ), __ : __ .1~----)~ l rJJ 1~ e l :.. 1! I I I ' -I I : --+--I i.---1----1 l---+---1 : GI Ii.. al : OFFICE I I _ (!"' .-I : : -L ,· I : .! 1 ! _,9Jii; • .ii,,-, -~ ! ~~--• t "t!ll ., -mv I I -, I l l I : ._._.. _ _, .__,.j_..,..dl ....___._ _ _, l --• .._ I I ~ ---1 I t I ~-----------------------------~-----------------•---------r----' "-PICKLE BALL COURTS t ' ®I ® El ' ~ t ' ' ' ' ' ' I ' \ !,,____,---® 1=1 ~1® ~1 I l -~ \ I \ I ~~Tt --------------------•------~ ---. _______ J WAREHOUSE sf 25.800 COURT sf 880 x 13 • 11,440 14.360 "- FI GURED Interior Layout I 11 ·MMH11F COLLECTIVE Mobility & Technologv In Transportation ADT AM Peak IN OUT PM Peak IN OUT e , 1 H@Mm1::e ATTACHMENT 8 Trip Distribution Exempt Roadway (Palomar Airport Rd} Review Trip Generation 206 Trip Distnbuhon (highest) 40% 40% 40% 40% 40% Trip Assignment (htghest} 82 <110 <11 <11 <11 <11 C2 CONSUL TING COLLECTIVE H1storlC Santa ~e De.pot 1050 Kettner Blvd, Suite 0-551 San Diego, CA 92101 1nfo@c2-mobility.com 858 270.4444 Plann1 ng. Design.Technology COLLECTIVE Mobility g. Technologv In Transportation APPENDIX B Street Typology Descriptions and Preferred Attributes Rally House Pickleball -Technical Appendices C2 Reference: 24.177 I I I ifWNHl+l::F (C i t y of __ T_RA_N_S'- - - - P _ O _R_TA_T_ I O - ' - - N _ I M _P_A_CT _ A _ N _A_L Y_S_IS _ G _U_I_DE_l_lN _E_S __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Ca r l s b a d Fi g u r e 1: MM LO S Re q u ire d An a l y s i s by Mo b i l i t y El e m e n t Ro a d w a y Ap r , / 2 0 1 8 11 I Pa g e ( City of _ _:_T___:_RA-----'-N_S:..._P_O_;_R_;_TA----'-T----'-IO-'----N-1M_P_A_;,,;C:...:_T_A_N_A_LY_S_IS_G_U:..._I_D_EL_IN_E_S ______________ Carlsbad ( d I f Cl r· d STREET TYPOLOGY AND ACCOMMODATED MODES ACCOMMODATED SUBJECl I STREET TYPOLOGY DESCRIPTION AND PREFERRED ATTRIBUTES MODES TO M MlDS STANDARD (YIN) I Freeways ......, Artarlal Stl"fftl Identity Streets - ......, April 2018 I .j. I I y y • High4peed facilities designed to aca,mrnod1te vehldes and bUHs moving through tha city and region • Bl()'CkK and pedmrlans 1ra prohibited Y • Thesa ara tha primary vahlda routes throu~ tha dty for both local and ragiom1I vehida N trips. • o.slgned tx> 11,1faly mow 111 modn of traval whlla affldently moving Vfllklff and busas throughout tha dty. • Traffk signals shall be coordiNted to optimize vehide movements • Blcyde lanes shall be provided and can be further enhanced or complemented by other facilities ~ off-street pathways • Pedestrian fadliti11 to be provided conslnent with ADA raquirements N • Mid-block crossings should not ba providad y N y • On-street parking should be l)f"Ohlbited along these corridors • Vartlcal traffic calming techniques (such as speed tables, humps. ett.) should not be considered • Sped1I considerations can be conslderad on arterials within Pf"OXlmlty to schools to enhance Safe Routes to Schools for pedestrians and blcydlm.. • TMH streets provide th■ primary aa:as to and from th• h■-t of th• d ty • the Village • Designed to safely move all modes of travel whlle enhancing mobility~ pedestrians and blcycllsts • Vehicle speeds should be managed to l)f"Offlote safe pedestr1an and bicycle movement • No pedastrl1n 5h1II crou mora than flva vehicular travel and/or turn lanes • In lldd'rtion to ADA compliant rtml)I and sld-1lk5, sld-alks should support the adja• ant land uMS 1s follows: -Adjacent to ret,11 uses, modified/new sidewalks should generally be a minimum of 10 feet {12 feet preferred) in width where feasible and taking into consideretion the traffic volumn of the adjacent roadway, ,nd allow for the land use to utllin the sidewalk with outdoor 1Ntlng 1nd other activities -Adjacent to residential uses, modified/new slclewalks should be• minimum of six feat in width Elsewhere, modified/new sidewalks 5hould be• minimum of eight ~et In width y • Where feasible, bicycle lanes should be provided N • Vahlda $pffds should comp lament th• adjacent land usn • Bicyde parking should be provided in retail areas • Bike racks should be readily provided within the public right-of-way and encouraged on private property • Traffic calming devices. such as airb extensions (bulbouts) or enhanced pedestrian crossings should be considered and evaluated for implementation • StrHt furniture shall be orlenwd toward the busl116MS • Mid-block pedestrian cl'05Sings could be provided ,t appropriate loclltlorn {e.g. where sight distance is ,dequata and spffds ara appropriaw) • On-street vehicle parking should t,e provided. In areas with high p.11rklng demand, ln- nOYlltlve parking m,r,agement techniques should be Implemented/ considered • Pedestrians should typically be "buffered• from vehlcle traffic using landscaping or p11rlced vehides 25 I Page (c ity of __ T_RA_N_S_P_O_R_TA_T_IO_N_IM_P_A_C_T_A_N_A_LY_S_IS_G_U_I_D_EL_IN_E_S ______________ CarJsbad STREET TYPOLOGY AND ACCOMMODAT[D MODES ACCOMMODATED SUBJECT STllEET TYPOLOGY DESCRIPTION AND PREFERRED ATTRIBUTES MODES TO MMLOS STANDARD (YIN) VIiiage Streets --N ij y y N Arwtal Connector Struts y y y N Neighborhood Connector Street ij y y N April 2018 • Primary pufPON rs to move people throughout the Vlllag•; providing accns to busl- nuses, mdenats, trantlt and recRatlon within the VIiiage area. • Dfllgned to Mf•ly mow all modes of trawl while Mlhlndng mobility for pedmrlans and bicydlsu. • V.tllde spff<h should be manaii-d to promote wif1 pedfltrian and blcyd• mCM1ment • Promote pedestrian and bicycle connectivity through short block lengths • Bk:yde lanes should be provided • Blcyde boulft'llrds c:an be consldar.cf • Pedestrians should be 11C00mmodated on sldewalltJ adjaoent to the tr1111er way (mini- mum 5' wide sidewalk) • Mid-block pedestrian aosslngs and traffic calming devices should be considered, but only at loatlons with high pedestrlln activity levels or major destlnatlons/attractlons • Dn-itreet parking may be provided • Primary purpose is to connect people to dltt.r.nt ll'HI and land uHs of the city by wn- necting tclfrom arterial strNtJ • Dfllgned to Mf•ly move 111 modia of t,-,,.1 while Mlhlndng mobility for pedmrlans and blcydlsts and .tfidently moving vehldes ~n art.rial strffts. • Bicycle lanes should be provided • Pedestrians should be accommodated on 11d-alks adjacent to the tr11111I Wll'J (mini- mum s• wide sidewalk) • Mid-blodc pedastri&n aosslngs and traffic c.alming d.vices should be <X>Nidered. but only at loc.atloos with high pedestrian actlvlty levels or major dutlnations/attractlons • On-strnt parking may be prOYiCMd • Primary purpose is to connect people to different neighborhoods and land UAS of the dty • Designed to safely m011e all modes of travel while enhenclng moblllty for pedestrians and bicydbts. • Vehicle speeds should be managed to promote safe pedestrian and bicycle movement • Blcyd• lanes should be provided • Blcyde boulevards can be considered • Pedntnans should be accommodated on sidewalks adjaoent to the travel way (mini- mum 5' wide 5idewalk) • Mid-block pedestrian aosslngs and traffic calming devices should be considered. but only at locations with high pedemlan activity levels or major destlnatlons/attractlons • On-street parking may be provided 26 I Page (_ City of __ T_RA_N_S_P_O_R_TA_T_IO_N_IM_P_A_CT_A_N_A_LY_S_IS_G_U_ID_E_L_IN_E_S ______________ Carlsbad STREET TYPOLOGY AND ACCOMMODATED MODES ACCOMMODATED SUBJECT STREET TYPOLOGY DESCRIPTION AND PREFERRED ATTRIBUTES MODES TO MMLOS Sf D'-.11~ (Y/ Employment/Transit Connector Str'Nb Coastal Streets __, April 2018 N • Primary purpo141 is to connect peopl1 to and from tile 1mploym1nt 1rus of the dty, • -11 as Import.ant datJnatJons and major transit t.dlltJes. • ~ned to safely 1T1CM1111 modes of travel while enhandng mobility for pedestrians y and bkydlsu and efficiently moving buses to employment, 1nlnstt statlons and major destinations. • V1hid1 Jl)ffds should bl manag4td to promot1 sat, pedestrian and blcyd• movement y • Direct connections to bus rtops should be provided • Enhanc»d bus stops should b1 considared that include lhlttlln. benches, and llghtlng y • Blcycle lanes and sidewalks should be provided • Pedestrian croulng distances should be minimized • On-nreet partclng may be provided N • Primary purpose II to mov1 people along the city's OCHn waterfront and connect y y N people to the belch, recr11tlon, bu sin-and reddenon In d011 proximity to the waterfront. Thi stnt1t MfWI as I destination for people who Melt to drlw, wale and bicycle along the OCNn waterfront. • ~ned to safely mcwe ell modes of travel whlle enh1ndng mobility for pedestrians and bicycllsu. • Vehicle speeds shall be tNnaged to support uses along the coart • Enhanced bicycle and pedestrian crosslngs should be provided, including: -High visibility crouwalks -Enhanced pedettrlan notlflcatlons (e.g. raponslve pum-button devkes) -Enhanced blcyde detection -Bicyde li nes shall b1 provided and can be furthet" enh.nced or complemented by other fadlitifl {5uch as bkyde lan1 buffers or off-rtrfft pathwl9Y$) • Pedestrian fldlltles should be a minimum of five feet ind shall strive for six to eight feet In width and shall conform to ADA requirements • Pedertri1n aosslng distances should be mlnlmi.zed • Trail facilities should be encouraged • Oppommltl1sfor mid-block pedutrlln aonlngs should be Investigated • On-street parttlng should be provided • Transit facility and optrltion lmprawments should be 1ncouraged 27 I Page ( City of __ T_R:__AN_S_P_O_R_TA_T_IO-=-N_IM_P_A_C_T:__A:__N_A_LY_:S_:IS_G=--U:..:.1-=-D-=-EL::..:..:I N_:E:..::.S ______________ Carlsbad (. t I { STREET TYPOLOGY AND ACCOMMODATED MODES ACCOMMODATED MODE.S School Streets Industrial Streets ....... i SUBJECT TOMMLOS STANDARD (YIN) I STREET TYPOLOGY DESCRIPTION AND PREFERRED ATTRIBlJTES N • Primary purpose ls to connect peopl1 to Khooh from n..t,y rtsldlntlal neighbor- .. + +- hoods. • Designed to safely move all modes of travel with an emphasis on providing safe pedes- trian and bicycle acceu for students traveling to and from nearby schools. y • Vlhlde speeds shall be ~ged to support Khool uses (typkally ZS MPH) y N y N N y Enhanced blc,cle and pedestrian crossings should be provided, lncludlng: -Hlgh villbility crosswalks -EnhanCl!d pedestrian notif1G11tlons (e.g. responsive push-button devices) -Enhanatd blcyd■ detection -Bicycle lanes shall be provided and can be further enh■ncied or complem~ted by other facllltles or off-street pathways • Pedestrian fadlltles should be a minimum of six feet and shall strive for eight feet in width and shall oonform to ADA requirements • Pedestrian crossing distances should be minimized • Opportunities for mid-block pedestrian aosslngs should be Investigated • Traffic calming dftlcn that improw service lewis and safety for p■d■strltm and blcy• cli1ts lhould be considered • Primary purpose ls to connect people to businesses within the city's industrial parks. • Designed to safely move all modes of tr1vel whlle efficlently moving vehicles and buses from arterial streets end employment/t~it connector 1treets to buslnesse1. • Traffic calming devices ere generally disoouraged given the propensity for larger trucks and hHV)' vehicles ln this area • On-street parking may be provided as long 11 it doe$ not interfere with the turning radii of hNYY vehldes. Local/Nelilhborhood Stl9et April 2018 N • Primary purpow i5 to connect people to end through re1ldentitl neighborhoods end y y N IOCIII •en of the dty. • Designed to safely moYe all modes of travel while enhandng mobility for pedestrians and blcydlsts. • Vehid• speeds should be man11ged to promote safe pedestrian end b!cyd1 movement • Pedestrians should be a«ommodeted on a sidewalk or soft surface trall {such as de- composed granite) unless thosa fadlltles are Inconsistent with the existing desirable neighborhood character • Bicycles can be accommodatad with a blcyd■ lane or rout. if vehid• volumes and/or speeds necesslt■t1; otherwise bi~ia can sher• th■ str1et • Bkyde boul■vards can be considered • Traffic calming me&sur■s should b■ consid■r■d wh1n supportld by the n1lghborhood or when warrentad for safety re&sons • On-street parking should be considered 28 I Page COLLECTIVE Mob1hty & T•chnology In Tran5port1tlon APPENDIX C MM LOS Worksheets Rally House P,ckleb~II -Technical Appendices C' Reference: 24.177 I It H#MMHl::F * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)? * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines? Is on-street parking provided? Speed limit (miles per hour -mph): Does the bikeway on the study segment and side IX1, streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?COJ Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections? Any bicycle racks are provided along segment? Palomar Airport Rd Gateway Rd Local/Neighborhood 2,000 NB SCORE I LOS 100 I A Yes Yes Yes No 25 mph or lower Both No No SB SCORE I A Yes Yes Yes No 25 mph or lower Both No No {_ City of Carlsbad ROADWAY INFO PEDESTRIAN May require improvements and upgrades to fully support CAP goals! • Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD? • Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in FHt (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'): • Do sidewalks appear to mHt ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)? ---• Do ramps and landings appear to mHt ADA requirements? ---• Do th• strHt light locations appear adequate? SpHd limit (miles per hour· mph): Number of Throu1h Lanu: Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count) Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way: Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 61 or more buffer betwHn pedestrians and vehicle travel way? Any apparent si1ht distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings? ·-==~ Ar■ there any permanent speed control devices Installed? Are there traffic calmlnc measures that reduce crosslnc width (e.,., bulbouts, chokers, rieht·tum median Do crosswalks appear to be hl&h visibility? Are th•r• intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? Are there Rectancular Rapid Flashinc Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings? ....;~.....:=---- 1 s there pedestrian seal■ lighting? Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of strHt curb line? Does th■ strHt furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions? Do th• street trees appear to provide shade over more than SO% of the sidewalk leneth_? ___ _ NB SCORE I LOS 0 I F 25 mph or lower SB SCORE I LOS 90 I A Yes Indicates an essential feature that strollg/y supports and promotes the goals /dent/fed In tM a/mate Action Pion (CAP}. -----' COLLECTIVE Mob1l1t'( & lechn0I0QV In l11r11,port•t1on Rally House P,ckleball -Technical Append,cei. C' Reference: 24 177 I I I l!Mi11H:F End of Appendices