The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCUP 04-08; Alga Norte Community Park; Conditional Use Permit (CUP) (3)' I . 660 Ash Street, San Diego, CA 9210 I Phone 619-890-1253, Fax 619-374-7247 July 23, 2004 Ms. Stephanie Hatton Wimmer Yamada and Caughey 3067 Fifth Avenue San Diego, CA 92103 RECEIVED JUL 2 7 2004 CITY OF CARLSBAD PlANNING DEPT. SUBJECT: City of Carlsbad Alga Norte Community Park Traffic Letter Report Dear Ms. Hatton: The following traffic letter report has been prepared for the proposed City of Carlsbad Alga Norte Community Park to: I) Calculate the weekday trip generation, 2) Compare the park's trip generation to !he trip generation documented in the Villages of La Costa EIR for the same project location, 3) Calculate the weekday parking demands, 4) Calculate if sufficient intersection capacity exists (under year 2020 conditions) to accommodate the proposed Park at eight (8) intersections in the immediate area around the project, and 5) Calculate if traffic signals are warranted at the park driveways. This letter report is structured with the figures and attachments located after the text. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed Alga Norte Community Park of 32.9 acres is to be located on !he future northwest comer of Poinsettia Lane and Alicante Road wilhin The Villages of La Costa development identified as La Costa Greens. Upon completion, the Alga Norte Community Park would contain a 5 acre aquatics complex, a skate-park, three baseball fields, lhree rot lots, a dog park, picnic areas, and three basketball half-courts. A conceptual site plan is shown in Figure 1. ALGA NORTE COMMUNITY PARK WEEKDAY TRIP GENERATION Because of the uniqueness of the proposed project, a standard trip generation rate was not available to match the project's description. Rather a combination of published and field collected rates were used to determine !he trip generation for the Alga Norte Community Park. The project was divided into two parts: I) a mixed-use park wilhout the aquatics complex, and 2) an aquatics complex. -------------------------------- IDIE.tllk.,_lllt:. Tr611/ciiiii,...,IIIIM6 Alga Norte Community Park Traffic Letter Report Ms. Stephanie Hatton-July 23, 2004 Published trip rates were reviewed for applicability to the aquatics complex, which included the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) t• Edition Trip Generation Rates 2003 and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) April 2002 Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region. Both sources of published trip rates did not have an exact land use match for an aquatics complex; therefore, a similar land use with an independent variable that best fit the aquatics complex was used. The number of employees was the chosen independent variable, because an aquatics complex is difficult to quantify in size due to the mix of outdoor pools and building facilities. The ITE Recreation Community Center category was chosen. Field collected rates were used for the mixed-use park and were obtained from data collected at the City of Carlsbad Poinsettia Community Park and the City of Carlsbad Calavera Hills Park. These two parks were chosen because they had similar park features to the proposed park and their locations were not affected by overflow traffic from adjacent schools or other land uses. Copies of the collected field data sheets are included in Attachment A. Field data were collected from Thursday April 15, 2004 through Sunday April 18, 2004. Thursday (4/15/04) had normal weather with a typical use of park facilities including softball leagues using the ball fields. Friday (4/16/04) had normal weather with a typical use of park facilities, but no softball leagues. Saturday (4/17/04) had unscheduled rain and Sunday (4/18/04) had normal weather. The weekday trip generation rate for Thursday was used because it represented a typical use of the parks with softball leagues using the ball fields. The calculation sheets are included in Attachment B. The published and field collected trip generation rates are summarized below in Table 1. Table 1: Summary of Weekday Park Trip Generation Rates Land Use Category ADT ITE Recreation Community Center FIELD DATA Calavera Hills Park (developed with meeting rooms and sports facilities) Rate 27/Emp 70/AC FIELD DATA Poinsettia Park (developed with 75/ AC sports facilities) AM PeakHonr %of IN OUT ADT SPLIT 9.8% 72 28 3% 79 21 2% 57 43 PMPeakHonr %of IN OUT ADT SPLIT 8.9% 27 73 12% 61 39 16% 56 44 Notes: ADT: Average Daily Traffic Volume. Emp: employee. The AM peak hour is the highest hour of traffic between 6 and 9 AM. PM peak hour is tht highest hour of traffic between 4 and 6 PM. IN:OUT designation defines the split of inbound and outbound traffic (40:60 means 40% in and 60% out). The Alga Norte Community Park trip generation was calculated by using the most conservative field data rate for the mixed-use park combined with the ITE Recreation Community Center rate for the aquatics complex identified in Table I. The Alga Norte Community Park is calculated to generate 3,150 ADT with 146 AM peak hour trips (99 inbound and 47 outbound) and 429 PM peak hour trips (213 inbound and 216 outbound) as shown in Table 2. 2 lllliii/6--IIIC. Tr611/t: 61111,..,. .. Alga Norte Community Park Traffic Letter Report Ms. Stephanie Hatton-July 23, 2004 Table 2: Alga Norte Community Park Trip Generation Land Use Category ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour IN OUT IN OUT Alga Norte Community Park less Aquatics Complex (27.9 acres) at 75 ADT/Acre 2,090 24 18 187 147 Aquatic Complex at Alga Norte Park (5 Acres with 39 Emp) at 27 ADT!Emp (Attachment C) 1,060 75 29 26 69 Proposed Alga Norte Community Park (27.9 AC Park+ 5 AC Aquatic Complex) 3,150 99 47 213 216 Notes: ADT: Average Daily Traffic Volume. Emp: employee. ADT rounded to nearest 10. The AM peak hour is the highest hour of traffic between 6 and 9 AM. PM peak hour is the highest hour of traffic between 4 and 6 PM. VILLAGES OF LA COSTA EIR TRIP GENERATION The Alga Norte Community Park is proposed to occupy the Villages of La Costa Neighborhoods 1.4 and 1.5, which were identified in the EIR (SCH No. 1999011023) as an elementary school and public community park as shown in Figure 2. The EIR documented the Year 2020 trip generation for Neighborhoods 1.4 and 1.5 at 1,790 ADT, 170 AM peak hour trips (95 inbound and 75 outbound), and 80 PM peak hour trips (35 inbound and 45 outbound), which are summarized in Table 3 and included in Attachment D. Table 3: Year 2020 Trip Generation from the Villages of La Costa EIR Land Use Category ADT ---'AM~~P=eak=H~o:CuO::r:--..:P..:.M~P,.=ea=k..:Hc::o::,;uo-;r:;- IN OUT IN OUT Elementary School-Neighborhood 1.4 on 7.2 Acres 430 70 50 Public Community Park-Neighborhood 1.5 on 27.2 Acres I ,360 25 25 Sit~ Trip Generation from Villages of La Costa EIR 1,790 95 75 Source: Villages of La Costa Traffic Impact Analysis Table 4, LLG Engineers July 19, 2001. 10 25 35 ALGA NORTE PARK TRIP GENERATION VERSUS VILLAGES OF LA COSTA EIR 20 25 45 The proposed Alga Norte Community Park is calculated to generate I ,360 more ADT, 24 less AM peak hour traffic (4 new inbound and 28 less outbound), and 349 more PM peak hour traffic (178 new inbound and 171 new outbound) than identified in the Villages of La Costa EIR for the project site as shown in Table 4. Table 4: Net Change in Trip Generation between Proposed Project and EIR Land Use Category ADT -'AM=:'~P.::;ea=k=H;::oc;:u;::r:--=P..:.M"=P:-=ea=k..:H:.::o:::ur==:::,_ IN OUT IN OUT Proposed Alga Norte Park Site Trip Generation from Villages of La Costa EIR Net Change in Trip Generation 3 3,150 -1,790 1,360 99 -95 4 47 -75 -28 213 -35 178 216 -45 171 liS 1111/11_,.1111:. Trllll/c alldlr6IIIJIIIDIIII Alga Norte Community Park Traffic Letter Report Ms. Stephanie Hatton-July 23, 2004 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL RELOCATION Relocation of the elementary school from La Costa Greens' Neighborhood 1.4 to another neighborhood will require a separate traffic analysis to determine the net increase or decrease in traffic for the overall La Costa Greens as the final location of the school will determine what traffic generation credit may be applied. PARKING The parking proforma, prepared by Winuner Yamada and Caughey for the proposed Alga Norte Community Park, recommends a parking supply of 546 spaces as shown in Table 5. TABLE 5: Alga Norte Community Park-Parking Proforma Program Element Aquatlu Com plax Stiffing River Pool Slides South Slides Aqua Play Feature Tot Pool Competition Pool Instructional Pool Therapy Pool South Building North Building Total Staffing llla11hnum Aquatlea Com plea: u .. ra Recreation Componenls Com petilive Pool Instructional Pool Therapy Pool Total User Maximum Total Aquatln Canter Skatapark 300' a .. aball Flald 275' a .. aball Field 275' Bauball Field Malntenam;:e Building Tot-Lot Number One Tot-Lot Number Two Tot-Lot Number Three Dog Park Picnic Areas Basketball H atl-court 11 Basketball H atf-court 12 Basketball H slf-court 13 Total Required for Daily Use Excess Parking Provided Total Parklna Provided Unit QuantttyiStandard Applied ADG!Haralson Standard of 3.5-4 ppv ADG/Haralson Standard of 3.5-4 ppv ADG/Haralson Standard of 3.5-4 ppv ADG/Haralson Standard of 3.5-4 ppv ADG/Harelson Standard of 3.5-4 ppv ADG/Haralson Standard of 3.5-4 ppv ADG/Haralson Standard of 3.5-4 ppv ADG/Haralson Standard of 3.54 ppv ADG/Haralson Standard of3.54 ppv ADG/Haralson Standard of 3.54 ppv ADG/Haralson Standard of 3.54 ppv ADG/Haralson Standard of 3.5-4 ppv ADG/Haralson Standard of 3.5-4 ppv ADG/Haralson Standard of 3.5-4 ppv ADG/Haralson Standard of 3.5-4 ppv ADG/Haralson Standard of 3.5-4 ppv ADG/Haralson Standard of3.5-4 ppv ADG/Haralson Standard of 3.5-4 ppv ADG/H~ralson Stand~rd ol3.5-4 ppv CSPISDG Standard Per City Standards Provkled Per City Standards Provided Per City Standards Provided Staff personnel parking 8.5 people per 3000 &.f. 8.5 people per 3000 s.f. 8.5 people per 3000 s.f. No Known Standard-Allowance Provided Per City Standards Provided Per City Standards Provided Per City Standards Provided Per City Standards Provided Number of Spatial Size/Notes Number of Users Parking Stalls Used 3.5 ppv 5x21 lanes dependant Used 3.5 ppv 14,000 s.f. 2661 6500 5260 39665 3 per ppv 1 stall per 3 users 1 stall per 3 users 1 staH per 3 users 2 4 9 39 988 105 80 10 1183 1222 70 0.69 2.17 1.75 105 10 10 10 2.29 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.00 1.14 2.57 1.43 1.43 11.14 282.29 30.00 22.86 2.86 338.00 349.14 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 2.00 7.60 18.42 14.90 15.00 35.00 3.33 3.33 3.33 532.06 13.94 546.00 Source: Wimmer Yamada and Caughey 3/31/04; •Accessible Stalls -2% of Total (10.92 Req, 11 Provided); •No Compact Reduction Taken 4 161 EDJIIIIN-//It:. Tl'tllllt: ..,,. ... ,... Alga Norte Community Park Traffic Letter Report Ms. Stephanie Hatton-July 23, 2004 The aquatics complex proposed parking of 349 spaces equals a rate of 8.9 spaces per employee with 39 employees. The ITE 2"d Edition Parking Generation 1987 has a published parking rate of 6.1 spaces per employee for a Swimming Club land use as shown in Attachment E. Using the ITERate, the aquatics complex would require 238 parking spaces. The proposed parking supply for the aquatics complex exceeds the ITE published rate by Ill spaces. When compared to the parking requirements outlined in the Poinsettia Park -Preliminary Park Program report dated March 24, 1992, the proposed Alga Norte parking supply is about 16 spaces under the recommended parking supply for the mixed-uses of baseball fields, tot-lots, picnic areas and basketball courts. Published rate were not found for the skatepark or dog park. The parking proforma recommended 20 spaces for the skatepark and 15 spaces for the dog park. The Alga Norte parking supply was also compared by space per acre to Calavera Hills and Poinsettia Parks. As shown in Table 6, the proposed Alga Norte Community Park without the aquatics complex is below the Calavera Hills and Poinsettia parking rates and above the rate when the parking supply and building area for the aquatics complex in brought into the equation. Table 6: Mixed-Use Parking Rate Comparison Per Acre Park Parking Spaces Acres Rate Calavera Hills 165 16 10 spaces/acre Poinsettia (as built) 263 33 8 spaces/acre Poinsettia (at buildout) 412 42 I 0 spaces/acre Proposed Alga Norte (without aquatics complex) 197 27.9 7 spaces/acre Proposed Alga Norte (with aquatics complex) 546 32.9 17 spaces/acre Acres and parking spaces from Exbibit D of the Northwest Quadrant Community Park Revised Neighboring Facility and Community Park Parking Analysis, July 2002. For the overall Alga Norte Community Park, the aquatics complex exceeds the ITE parking rate by Ill spaces while the mixed-use portion of the park will be short by 16 spaces per the Poinsettia Park -Preliminary Park Program. With a combined parking supply, there should be about 95 additional spaces when calculated using published rates. The total proposed parking supply of 546 spaces include a net excess of 14 spaces per the parking proforma. There is a phenomenon of shared parking when multiple land uses share a common parking area. Shared parking allows for a reduction in reqnired parking when properly documented. Because published shared parking data were not found for the mix of park uses, a shared parking reduction was not applied. Staff from the Calavera Hills Park was asked if the existing parking supply has ever been exceeded. Staff indicated that parking demand has exceeded supply on occasion at Calavera Hills, but no more than 15-20 days out of the year. Staff also indicated that proper event scheduling of the community center could help eliminate parking shortages. 5 Alga Norte Community Park Traffic Letter Report Ms. Stephanie Hatton-July 23, 2004 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS Eight surrounding intersections were analyzed under year 2020 conditions to determine if sufficient capacity exists to accommodate traffic from the proposed Alga Norte Community Park. The eight intersections were chosen based on their proximity to the proposed park. The year 2020 intersection volumes and geometries were obtained from the Villages of La Costa traffic study to the EIR (Attachment F). The intersection locations and proposed year 2020 geometries are shown in Figure 3. The intersections were analyzed by: I) Determining a distribution pattern of park patrons as shown in Figure 4. The distribution of park patrons was based on the location of nearby existing and proposed residential areas. Travel patterns from distance residential neighborhoods were also included. 2) Obtaining year 2020 traffic volumes from the Villages of La Costa EIR as shown in Figure 5. 3) Assigning the net increase of the proposed park traffic (Table 4) to the eight intersections as shown in Figure 6. 4) Adding the net increase of traffic to the year 2020 traffic volumes as shown in Figure 7, and 5) Determining if a significance impact exists with the addition of the net increase of park traffic based on the City of Carlsbad Growth Management Plan criteria, which states that if the addition of project traffic causes the intersection LOS to decrease to worse than LOS D during the peak hour, then the project is considered to have a significant impact. For intersections which are currently operating worse than LOS D, a project impact will be considered significant if the project causes the ICU value at an intersection to increase by greater than 0.02. As shown below in Table 7, no significant impacts were calculated with the net addition of project traffic (calculations are included in Attachment G). Table 7: Year 2020 Intersection Operations Intersection and Movement Peak 2020 +Pro ct Control2 Hour Dela LOS o.oa %Increase lm act 1) Palomar Airport Rd All AM 28.0 c 0.0 0.0% No at Alicante Rd (S) All PM 18.5 B 0.7 3.8% No 2) Poinsettia lane/1st NB l AM 31.6 0 32.2 0 0.6 1.9% No Entrace e/o ECR (U) NB L PM 30.9 0 31.1 0 0.2 0.6% No 3) El Camino Real at All AM 35.1 0 35.2 0 0.1 0.3% No Poinsettia Ln (S) All PM 36.1 0 36.6 0 0.7 1.9% No 4) Alga Road at All AM 37.1 0 37.2 0 0.1 0.3% No Alicante Road (S) All PM 25.2 c 26.6 c 1.4 5.6% No 5) Poinsettia Lane/2nd SB L AM 15.9 c 16.0 c 0.1 0.6% No Entrance e/o Alicante (U) SB L PM 18.2 c 18.3 c 0.1 0.5% No 6) Poinsettia ln at El All AM 27.9 c 28.3 c 0.4 1.4% No Fuerte Road {S) Ali PM 31.9 c 34.1 c 2.2 6.9% No 7) Poinsettia ln/1 st SBL AM 10.2 B 10.3 B 0.1 1.0% No Entrance elo Alicante (U) SB L AM 12.1 B 12.7 B 0.6 5.0% No B) Poinsettia Ln at Ali AM 36.2 0 36.7 D 0.5 1.4% No Allcante Rd (S) All PM 32.7 c 37.5 c 4.8 14.7% No Notes: 1) 2020 Analysis taken from Viltages of La Costa Traffic Impact Analysis Tables 10 & 12, LLG Engineerings July 19, 2001. Movement- SB L-Southbound left tum lane. 2) Intersection Control-S: Signalized: U: Unsignalized. 3) Delay is HCM delay measured in seconds. 4) LOS: Level of Service. 5) Delta is the increase in delay from project. 6) Percent increase in delay. 7) Impact due to project {yes or no). 6 Alga Norte Community Park Traffic Letter Report Ms. Stephanie Hatton-July 23, 2004 DRIVEWAY SIGNAL WARRANTS AND ANALYSIS The justification for a traffic signal at an intersection is based on warrants listed in Cal trans' Traffic Manual, which is based on the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The Caltrans' Traffic Manual states that Table 4C-IOI should be used for new intersections where it is not reasonable to count actual traffic volumes. Table 4C-l 0 I uses estimated ADT volumes. The estimated ADT volumes for the two park driveways were calculated based on where the majority of the parking is located. Approximately 70 percent of the parking supply is grouped around the north driveway; therefore, 70 percent of the traffic is assumed to use the north driveway and 30 percent the south driveway. The north driveway is calculated to have 2,205 ADT (Table 2 ADT of 3,150 x 70%) and the south driveway is calculated to have 945 ADT (Table 2 ADT of3,!50 x 30"/o). The estimated ADT volume for Alicante along the park frontage of 9,000 ADT was obtained from SANDAG, as documented in Attachment H. Calculations show that traffic signals are not warranted on the Park's north or south driveways at Alicante Road based on the estimated ADT volumes as shown in Table 4C-l 0 I (Attachment 1). An un-signalized Year 2020 Level of Service analysis was also performed for both driveways to determine the anticipated intersection operations with only stop control on the egress movements. The AM and PM peak hour volumes based on the assignment of 70 percent to the north driveway and 30 percent to the south driveway and lane geometry are shown in Figure 8. As shown in Table 8, both driveways are calculated to have acceptable LOS without a traffic signal (LOS calculations are included in Attachment J). Table 8: Year 2020 Driveway Operations Intersection and Movement Peak 2020 + Project Control1 Hour Dela\? 9) Project North Driveway EBLR AM 12.3 at Alicante Rd (U) EBLR PM 17.3 1 0) Project South Driveway EBLR AM 11.7 at Alicante Rd (U) EBLR PM 15.7 Notes: 1) Intersection Control -S: Signalized; U: Unsignallzed. 2) Delay is HCM delay measured in seconds. 3) LOS: Level of Service. Movement EB LR-Combination eastbound left-right lane. CONCLUSIONS LOS' B c B c The proposed Alga Norte Community Park of 32.9 acres is planned on the northwest comer of the future intersection of Alicante Road and Poinsettia Lane. This letter report documents the anticipated trip generation and parking demands based on published and field collected data. The analysis accounted for a typical weekday with normal use of park facilities including softball league activities, but not a weekend day or softball tournament conditions. Eight (8) intersections were analyzed under 2020 conditions to determine if sufficient capacity exists to accommodate the proposed park traffic, 7 ' Alga Norte Community Park Traffic Letter Report Ms. Stephanie Hatton-July 23, 2004 and signal warrants were reviewed for the two proposed driveways to determine if signals are warranted. In summary, the proposed Alga Norte Community Park is: I) Calculated to generate a weekday 3,150 ADT with 146 AM peak hour trips (99 inbound and 47 outbound) and 429 PM peak hour trips (213 inbound and 216 outbound), 2) Calculated to have a weekday net change over the Villages of La Costa EIR of 1,360 additional ADT, 24 less AM peak hour traffic (4 new inbound and 28less outbound), and 349 additional PM peak hour traffic (178 new inbound and 171 new outbound), 3) Calculated to require 4 3 7 weekday parking spaces, with 546 proposed, 4) Calculated to have no significant intersection impacts under year 2020 conditions at eight (8) surrounding intersections, and 5) Calculated to not meet signal warrants at both driveways to Alicante Road and have acceptable un-signalized LOS operations. Please call me at (619) 890-1253 if you have any questions. Sincerely, LOS Engineering, Inc. 'tAdt.:.-~A<l ustin Rasas, P.E., P.T.O.E. Principal and Officer of LOS Engineering, Inc. Attachments. 8 liS Eng/nlllldn/1, Inc. Tra/1/c and Transnonauon Alga Norte Community Park Traffic Letter Report Ms. Stephanie Hatton-July 23, 2004 Figures and Attachments Figure 1: Proposed Alga Norte Community Park Site Plan THEVILJJ\GES OF LA COSTA 1.2 -- wn,. B011ndlry ~:~~Aifl c=J SFLOII • 11,/lfO -.1. c:J SF 1.011 • t,IOO s.J. r:=J SF Lots· 7.SDO s./. c:J SHIJO· 1,0001.1. c::J $1 LtJO. 6.1100 -.1. c=:J $1 Ulr. 4,$/lf s.L s-n l'lw li/hlp> of Lll c.,,., Mww l'lu~ 0.....,..., JIKJO I Rtf« 10 TUI< l l f,~ o d,ffrm.u•um bn"'-...oiiCI'()p,;n Spo« -s ·.,..ucr Op.n ~'>'• ~ .. Em irollnr~mallmpac.t R'fJIIrt ( CH Va /9990/10~31 PROJECT DESCRIPTION • ' Figure 3-:l LA COSTA G REENS DEVELOPMENT PLAN Figure 2: Villages of La Costa proposed use for Project Site signal 'It .................................................... ""' .,. '~ \\. "'\ '·"" \\ ''\,~\--, " Poinsettia Ln / /; g I I E" I ' "'Q) / 0 0::: I I w I / / / / I ,.. ............................. -... ·-· ...... / J, .. I .,f,t. G) Signal LEGEND Stop Sign Through lane Left Tum lane Right Tum lane Combination Right-Through lane \ Intersection Reference Number to LOS Tables Source: Villages of La Costa Traffic Impact Analysis, LLG Engineers July 19, 2001 I .............. -.... -............ _ .... ,_ .... _ ................................. -..... -......... .J ................................................................. -... J ~t. __ff. ® "'-___,. ,._ '"'V Signal ..V '11> No Scale Figure 3: Year 2020 Intersection Geometries from Villages of La Costa EIR 1% 0 2% ...!J'~ 0 ~~ ~ ~ 30% ~ +-30% 10%....., (i-F 5% ~ 10% 5% 5% I! ...!J'~ "' ~~ ® 5% 0 25%-) +--25% 10% ~ +-10% ~~ ~ 1% 15% -w t (i-F (i ~ 1% 15% Poinsettia Ln 3% 1% ...!J'~ "' ~ ....... ~ 0 3% 0 ~ 17% """* ~ 17% 32% ~ +-31% ~~ fi"' 5% t 5% 5% 5% 10% 26% 25% 32% ...!J'~ "' ~ ....... ...!J'~ "' ~~ 5% 0 10% 26% 32% ~ ~ -4 0 ~ ~~ t (i-F --w~ t (;"" 5% 25% LEGEND ... Regional distribution ~ -Local distribution absorption G) Intersection Reference Number to LOS Tables No Scale Figure 4: Project Distribution ................. ! 1920 (1980) -7 0 ~ 2310 (2135)1 256 (30) ...,.. ~ 0 (10) 14~ ~6o \\ L. .. ... . ..1.~1) . . ... l~!-~1 .................................. ,, 1 ............. .1 ~~·~ ...................... ~ .............. nr t II r .... IJ if if i! 1.' f! u !i (2) 2 (15) ...:7' (/ 948 (546) -7 225 695 120 !i ---+-'P_,a,lo"-m,_.ar Mport Rd I Poinsettia Ln /,i ;/ ///:/' ·! ~ ,/ / 0 0:::: /1/ . ........................... .. ......... .// !~ .................................................. .. 15 770 35 (17~ (1775) (105) (20) ...:7' .j, ~ ..._ j II if 300 320 80 (275)-7 0 ~ (55) ...,.. ~ t ~ ~ 280 180 370 (50) (195) (805) if II // 254 330 61 35 1825 685 ................. !~~) _j62~)_ .!~~9L. ................ ~62"" 11 """"17 (36) (150) (12) (78) 4' (/ .j, ~ ..._ 9 (546) -7 0 ~ 440 (458) ~--~ 5 ~L t ... ~ 42~ 99 I' 5 1 1/ ..;;; 'i j I / (16) ; (686) i (8) . .... J1.1.9J J1~L .... m .......................... . LEGEND XX AM peak hour volumes at intersections (YY) PM peak hour volumes at intersections G) Intersection Reference Number to LOS Tables Source: Villages of La Costa Traffic Impact Analysis, LLG Engineers July 19, 2001 950 (561) -7 Figure 5: Year 2020 Volumes from the Villages of La Costa EIR ................. 15"'"" .............................. ""! (1) I ~~ 2 (15): 0 ~ 508 (965) : ! i .. .......... , 55 (35) ' 295 (700}! 10 (115) i 5 518 ! '"""'"""'! (25) i (942) i ""'""""""''''1 (25) (930) (80) ! No Scale [ 0 ~ (18),. 0~ ............... l!!.l +--~ -F 0 0 (9) \ .. .J~l .......................................... \\ .............................................................. ·; \\ (43) (2) \\ ~ " \ ···············································a 0 0 (2) (3) J'o ~ (52)~ l----!/" !I !i II II i! !! !i !/ L. 0 0 0 .................................................................. ! ® 2 .............................. ! .v ® (18) t .................................. J ---i-P'-'a,lo,m-"'ar A,lfport Rd ff Poinsettia Ln // /I 'I /I ;"I / / I ! ~~ I / ' I' .' / I ..................................................• // /~ .. 1~, ···_, .. -·1 II ~ .v ~ II (30) ~ 0) ~ ~ ~~~' II ,.~ t ~-F 0 (9) II ........................................................................ [~) ....................................... !II ··························-.. ··· o ........ "r ............... o ........................................ VI (9) (9) (17) 0 ~~ .V L (9) ~--~ ~ 0 +--... ~ b ~-¥' ....... ----... J~l- LEGEND (18) XX (YY) AM peak hour volumes at intersections PM peak hour volumes at intersections I CD Intersection Reference Number to LOS Tables Figure 6: Project Assignment ~\ \\ 0 0 (2) ~ (55) -7 0 2 (56) i; ' \_~_-_.,,! __ _ ' h •••.••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• .J \\ ............................................... () .. ··············ir·-·-···· · o ........................ ~ \ (45\ (44) (55) ~~ .V L (46) ~--~ 2 ~ 0 ~ ... ~ ~ ~..p- (58) ----j~~) No Scale -, ' 1920 256 (1980) ~ G) -E--2310 (48) ~ -F 0 (2135)j (19) i \ 14~ ~60 ' ) ...... ······-······ -~\, ······-···-···-··--J~.!~! --··--···'"'"'~-----" \\ ....................... !~ (1085)! (22) i I ............ ..!. _, \\ \\ \\ \ ................................. n> ................................ ls· ......................................... ! (4) (1) 1 2 (18) ~ ~ ~ t_ 2 (15) ! 948 (598) ~ 0 -E--510 (1019)! ht .... /("" II !! i! 225 695 120 II i! If ii I ............... J .............................. , I 55 (35) ! 296 (718) i 10 (115)] __ ____,_,P_,a,_.,lo,_,me:ar A/fport Rd if Poinsettia Ln I ;I // ' I /! / / 0 <= ·E ro " "' u"' ' I ii5 -o "' -@ B < "~:::... t:::.," ·· ....... ~ ..... \ ...... ......._ ~ -\ ·,,>~ .......... w \ '-~~"' iii \ ....... ~"' ..... , ----------------J_____---%'' ~ "'-,_ Alga Rd ' '· \\ ......•...•.. -············· ······-··---~"-''---, _____ _ /I __ //I 300 321 80 (1',"~ (17:~5) ;;~) 1 (20) ~ "' ~ "--. 280 (55) ,_. ;! r:;-.. I! (305) ~ 0 ~ 180 (224) i . !,!·! (55) --.,.. ~ t ~ -F 370 (814)! /I 35 1825 685 ! / . . _ <65) .... <?.2.5) __ (41!1!) .. .... . J 11 254 330 61 · ·· ·· ...... s2 .. · ........ rr ........... :rt ......................................... V! (87) _;~ (:t9) ~2: ( ('";\ 10 (34) ' (546) --? IV -E--44o <686> , (458) --.,.. ~ t ~ -F 5 (8) . 428 99 5 _ ......................... J1_1_9) _(28) _______ EL..... ......... _ _, LEGEND )()( (YY) CD AM peak hour volumes at intersections PM peak hour volumes at intersections Intersection Reference Number to LOS Tables Figure 7: Year 2020 +Project Traffic \ f"" 1~ ................................................ ! \\ \\ 950 ~--- ) 516 555 20 ~ (616) ~ 0 . "'"'f30" '"'""20 """"""9'5"' (190) (259) (90) ~~ "' ~~ (316) ~--- (495) --? ® -E---- (30) ---~ ~~ t ~~ 70 116 305 - ---···-··-···-··-···-····J!?J. .• J~Ql ...... J?QL. 5 520 22 630 10 (25) ; (998)! ................. ..J ...................... 1 (83) : (930)' (80) l .. ..J No Scale ,-----------------------~ LEGEND XX (YY) z.zzz C0 AM peak hour volumes at intersections PM peak hour volumes at intersections ADT volumes shown along segments Intersection Reference Number lo LOS Tables Volumes ........... 5"''''''''272''') (11 ) (520) l ~ ~ ~ (11)....:1' ®l 10 i 12 (54) ,.. () t I 25 707 i : ........ , .................. l~.~l .... .J~.~L Figure 8: Project Driveway Assignment and Lane Geometry Lane Geometry ....................................... . . . . . . . . i 1 :t I i ................................ J ..................................... . . . . : : ~-~-~: I No Scale ATTACHMENT A AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT) DATA COLLECTED AT POINSETTIA PARK AND CALAVERA HILLS PARK Source: Traffic Data Service Southwest-Martin Parish (619) 390-8495 POINSETTIA PARK Westbound (IN) Report ld: WeeklyEvent-1594 Site ID: 13501.0W Location: Hidden Valley Rd at Main Entrance to Poinsettia Park Filter time: 11:00 Wed 14 Apr 2004 to 15:00 Mon 19 Apr 2004 Method: Count axles divided by two. -TOE WED THU FRI SAT SUN AVERAGES Date 12 Apr 04 13 Apr 14 Apr 15 Apr 16 Apr 17 Apr 18 Apr 5-0AY 7-DAY Hour period 0000-0100 • 1 0 1 0 0.5 0.5 0100-0200 • • • 0 0 0 1 0.0 0.3 0200-0300 • • 0 1 0 1 0.5 0.5 0300-0400 • • 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0400-0500 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0500-0600 • • • 9 4 3 1 6.5 4.3 0600-0700 3 1 12 2 2.0 4.5 0700-0800 • • • 16 15 66 42 15.5 34.8 0800-0900 • 26 21 77 58 23.5 45.5 0900-1000 36< 15 64 56 25.5 42.8 1000-1100 21 39 89 74 30.0 55.8 1100-1200 • 49 29 53< 94< 82<1 43.7< 61.4< 1200-1300 • 54 60 59 17 105 I 57.7 59.0 1300-1400 27 38 32 B 55 I 32.3 32.0 1400-1500 • 32 33 44 15 81 I 36.3 41.0 1500-1600 • 63 163 69 14 BB I 98.3 79.4 1600-1700 • 103 120 62 18 91 I 95.0 78.8 1700-1800 157< 216< 84 18< 98<1 152.3< 114.6< 1800-1900 • 123 138 104< 17 42 I 121.7 84.8 1900-2000 127 127 42 12 10 I 98.7 63. 6 2000-2100 • 78 68 19 3 9 I 55.0 35.4 2100-2200 • 7 12 14 9 3 I 11.0 9.0 2200-2300 • 4 0 0 2 1 I 1.3 1.4 2300-2400 0 3 3 1 0 I 2.0 1.4 I TOTALS I I 12Hr 7-19 • 896 597 497 872 I 746.5 715.5 16Hr 6-22 • • 1106 67 3 533 896 I 889.5 802.0 18Hr 6-24 1109 676 536 897 I 892.5 804.5 24Hr 0-24 • 1119 681 540 900 I 900.0 810.0 I AM HR • 0900 1100 1100 1100 I PEAK • 36 53 94 82 I I PM HR 1700 1700 1800 1700 1700 I PEAK • • 157 216 104 18 98 I * -No data. POINSETTIA PARK Eastbound (OUT) Report ld: WeeklyEvent-1594 SiteiD: 13501.0W Location: Hidden Valley Rd At Main Entrance to Poinsettia Park Filter time: 11:00 Wed 14 Apr 2004 to 15:00 Mon 19 Apr 2004 Method: Count axles divided by two. MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT SUN AVERAGES Date 12 Apr 04 13 Apr 14 Apr 15 Apr 16 Apr 17 APr 18 Apr 5-DAY 7-DAY Hour period I 0000-0100 • • • 0 0 3 0 I 0.0 0.8 0100-0200 1 0 2 2 I 0.5 1.3 0200-0300 0 1 0 2 I 0.5 0.8 0300-0400 • • 0 0 0 0 I 0.0 0.0 0400-0500 • • 0 0 0 0 I 0.0 0.0 0500-0600 • • 2 0 1 0 I 1.0 0.8 0600-0700 • • 5 2 3 2 I 3.5 3.0 0700-0800 • • • 5 5 29 6 I 5.0 11.3 0800-0900 • • 20 6 41 21 I 13.0 22.0 0900-1000 47< 21 35 28 I 34.0 32.8 1000-1100 18 44 116 85 I 31.0 65.8 1100-1200 50 45 48< 172< 88<1 47.7< 80.6< 1200-1300 • 57 51 41 91 117 I 49.7 71.4 1300-1400 63 61 83 9 64 I 69.0 56.0 1400-1500 • 59 51 34 19 126 I 48.0 57.8 1500-1600 39 61 45 6 92 I 48.3 48.6 1600-1700 • 75 131 39 12 124 I 81.7 76.2 1700-1800 • 81 170 67 23< 93 I 106.0 86.8 1800-1900 80 117 84 19 132<1 93.7 86.4 1900-2000 • • 194< 207< 118< 21 36 I 173.0< 115.2< 2000-2100 • • 153 152 37 9 43 I 114.0 78.8 2100-2200 75 110 97 6 24 I 94.0 62.4 2200-2300 • • 133 95 9 3 5 I 79.0 49.0 2300-2400 0 5 0 1 0 I 1.7 1.2 I TOTALS I I 12Hr 7-19 • 777 517 572 976 I 647.0 710.5 16Hr 6-22 • • 1251 771 611 1081 I 1011.0 928.5 18Hr 6-24 1351 780 615 1086 I 10 65. 5 958.0 24Hr 0-24 • 1354 781 621 1090 I 1067.5 961.5 I AM HR • 0900 1100 1100 1100 I PEAK • • 47 48 172 88 I I PM HR 1900 1900 1900 1700 1800 I PEAK • 194 207 118 23 132 I . -No datil .. CALAVERA HILLS PARK Westbound (IN) Report ld: WeeklyVehicle-160 1 Site ID: 13503.0EW Location: !Calaveras Park @ Driveways Filter time: 17:00 Wed 14 Apr 2004 to 19:00 Tue 20 Apr 2004 Scheme: Scheme F99 Filter: CL(1 2 3 4 56 7 8 9 10 11 12 13) DR(W) SP(O, 100) HW(all) I«)N TUE WED THU FRI SAT SUN AVERAGES Date 12 Apr 04 13 Apr 14 Apr 15 Apr 16 Apr 17 Apr 18 Apr 5-DAY 7-DAY Hour period 0000-0100 1 3 1 4 2.0 2.3 0100-0200 • 0 0 1 0 0.0 0.3 0200-0300 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0300-0400 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0400-0500 • • 1 1 1 1 1.0 1.0 0500-0600 3 1 1 1 2.0 1.5 0600-0700 • 9 8 4 1 8.5 5.5 0700-0800 • 11 12 39 3 11.5 16.3 0800-0900 • 31 23 135 8 27.0 49.3 0900-1000 52< 25 108 6 38.5< 47.8 1000-1100 • 27 31< 155< 21 29.0 58.5< 1100-1200 32 20 130 45<1 26.0 56.8 1200-1300 • • 21 17 59< 57 I 19.0 38.5 1300-1400 • • 27 17 14 57<1 22.0 28.8 1400-1500 15 18 28 44 I 16.5 26.3 1500-1600 42 28 11 53 I 35.0 33.5 1600-1700 55 39 17 34 I 47.0 36.3 1700-1800 • • 65 80< 76< 22 17 I 73.7< 52.0< 1800-1900 64 68 43 15 5 I 58.3 39.0 1900-2000 • 56 54 37 19 4 I 49.0 34.0 2000-2100 31 34 26 1 6 I 30.3 19.6 2100-2200 • • 5 2 9 6 3 5.3 5.0 2200-2300 2 2 6 3 4 3.3 3.4 2300-2400 • • 1 0 1 2 0 0.7 0.8 TOTALS 12Hr 7-19 461 349 733 350 405.0 473.3 16Hr 6-22 560 429 763 364 494.5 529.0 18Hr 6-24 • 562 436 768 368 4 99.0 533.5 24Hr 0-24 567 441 772 374 504.0 538.5 AM HR 0900 1000 1000 1100 PEAK 52 31 155 45 PM HR • 1700 1700 1200 1300 PEAK • 80 76 59 57 0 -No data. CALAVERA HILLS PARK Eastbound {OUT) Report ld: WeeklyVehicle-1601 Site ID: 13503.0EW Location: !Calaveras Park@ Driveways Filter time: 17:00 Wed 14 Apr 2004 to 19:00 Tue 20 Apr 2004 Scheme: Scheme F99 Filter: CL(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 11 12 13 ) DR(E) SP(0,1 00) HW(all) liON TUE NED THU FRI SAT SUN AVERAGES Date 12 Apr 04 13 Apr 14 Apr 15 Apr 16 Apr 17 Apr 18 Apr 5-DAY 7-0AY Hour period I 0000-0100 • • 0 1 1 3 I 0.5 1.3 0100-0200 • 1 2 a 1 I 1.5 1.0 0200-0300 • 0 0 1 0 I 0.0 0.3 0300-0400 • 0 0 0 0 I 0.0 0.0 0400-0500 • • 0 0 0 0 I 0.0 0.0 0500-0600 • 1 0 0 0 I 0.5 0.3 0600-0700 • 6 4 1 2 I 5.0 3.3 0700-0800 1 10 15 2 I 5.5 7.0 0800-0900 • 8 ]] 19 5 I 9.5 10.8 0900-1000 • • • 17 12 104 8 I 14.5 35.3 1000-1100 • 18 21 149 ]] I 19.5 49.8 1100-1200 • • • 74< 34< 187< 24<1 54.0< 79.8< 1200-1300 • • 41 30 118< 34 I 35.5 55.8< 1300-1400 • 27 14 18 46 I 20.5 26.3 1400-1500 • 18 21 11 65<1 19.5 43.8 1500-1600 • • 33 17 13 63 I 25.0 31.5 1600-1700 38 34 18 41 I 36.0 32.8 1700-1800 29 52 46 ]] 39 I 42.3 35.4 1800-1900 53 46 43 6 12 47.3 32.0 1900-2000 • 49 84< 40 20 2 57.7 39.0 2000-2100 • 74 49 54< 29 1 59.0< 41.4 2100-2200 • 46 39 31 4 ]] 38.7 26.2 2200-2300 • 2 16 9 6 5 9.0 7.6 2300-2400 • 3 1 3 1 1 2.3 1.8 TOTALS 12Hr 7-19 • • 373 293 729 350 333.0 436.3 16Hr 6-22 • 551 422 783 366 486.5 530.5 18Hr 6-24 • 568 434 790 372 501.0 541.0 24Hr 0-24 • 570 437 792 376 ~03.5 543.8 AM HR • • 1100 1100 1100 1100 PEAK • • 74 34 187 24 PM HR • • • 1900 2000 1200 1400 PEAK 84 54 Jl8 65 * -No data. ATTACHMENT 8 WEEKDAY TRIP GENERATION CALCULATIONS (Based on Thursday 4-15-04 Data) Poinsettia Park (33 acres as built-buildout is 42 acres) ADT Acres ADT/Acre AM In AM Out AM Total PM In PM Out 2,473 33 75 26 20 46 216 170 In Split Out Split o/oofADT In Split Out Split 0.57 0.43 2% 0.56 0.44 Calavera Hills Park (16.2 acres) ADT Acres ADT/Acre AM In AM Out AM Total PM In PM Out 1,137 16 70 31 8 39 80 52 In Split Out Split % ofADT In Split Out Split 0.79 0.21 3% 0.61 0.39 PM Total 386 o/oofADT 16% PM Total 132 % ofADT 12% ATTACHMENTC ITE 71h Edition Trip Generation Calculations Summary of Trip Generation Calculation For 39 Employees of Recreation Community Center Average Standard Adjustment Driveway Rate Deviation Factor Volume Avg. Weekday 2-Way Volume 27.25 0.00 1.00 1063 7-9 AM Peak Hour Enter 1.92 0.00 1.00 75 7-9 AM Peak Hour Exit 0.74 0.00 1.00 29 7-9 AM Peak Hour Total 2.66 0.00 1.00 104 4-6 PM Peak Hour Enter 0.66 0.00 1.00 26 4-6 PM Peak Hour Exit 1.78 0.00 1.00 69 4-6 PM Peak Hour Total 2.44 0.00 1.00 95 Saturday 2-Way Volume 18.34 0.00 1.00 715 Saturday Peak Hour Enter 1.37 0.00 Saturday Peak Hour Exit 1.22 0.00 Saturday Peak Hour Total 2.59 0.00 Note: A zero indicates no data available. Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 7th Edition, 2003. 1.00 53 1.00 48 1.00 101 TRIP GENERATION BY MICRO TRANS TA8LE4 VILLIIIIES OF LA COSTA PROoiECT TliAFfiC QENERAnON YEAR 21120 LA COSTA PIIOJECT 8/DU lndul1rial !n'AC . 10 Elom-.y School WAC 50 Community Pall< 50/AC 25 Day Core W1,000SF 150 Comm1011ty F-1,200/AC 1lil! SUBTOTAL 990 La COlla Ridge 11 Slnglo Family Rostdonllal 262DU 10/DU 2,820 8% 3:7 135 320 10% 7:3 400 Mufti.Famll)' Reo-58DU 8/DU ~ 8% 2:8 § ® 10% 7:3 311 SUBTOTAL 3,080 140 350 430 La COlla Ooka 11 Slnglo Family Reoldontlal 881 DU 10/DU 8,610 8% 3:7 110 260 10% 7:3 Mulii-Fomlly 171 DU 8/Du--1,370 8% 2:8 20 90 10% 7:3 Com-yF-&.SAC 300/AC J.Jilll! 14% 9:1 2li!l ® 13'lfo 2:8 SUBTOTAL 11,1160 380 380 2. Is a~ end per-~ unll (DU) and ocraa. 3. ADra arw rounded to th1 nearnt 10 and pelk houri to the rwantst !5. 4. Trip erds are one-way tralflc ,.,.,._, onlarfng 0< leaving. Average Rate 6.10 ATTACHMENT E ITE 2"d Edition Parking Generation SWIMMING CLUB (497) Peak Parking Spaces Occupied vs: EMPLOYEES On a: WEEKDAY PARKING GENERATION RATES Range of Rates Standard Deviation Number of Studies Average Number of Employees 10 CAunON-USE CAREFULLY-SMALL SAMPLE SIZE. NO PLOT OR EQUATION AVAILABLE-INSUFFICIENT DATA• Parking Geru,n~tion, August 1987flnstitute of Transportation Engi11eers .. -------- ATTACHMENTF Year 2020 Intersection Lane Geometry and Volumes from Villages of La Costa Traffic Impact Analysis, LLG Engineers July 19, 2001 •• I] '-- 11\.'(\ill I ·\\ \ ,\, ( .l·~f L '\'11'\'\ ENGINEERS TABLE10 • 2020 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS I I 1) PM 2) El Camino ReaVCollege Boulevard AM I PM 3) El Camino ReaVFaraday Avenue AM II PM 4) El Camino ReaVPalomar Airport Road AM • PM • 5) El Camino ReaVBressi Access West AM PM 6) El Camino ReaVCamlno Vida Roble AM PM T) El Camino ReaVPoinsettia Lane AM PM • 8) El Camino ReaVAiga Road/Avtara Parkway AM PM 9) El Camino ReaVLa Costa Avenue2•4 AM PM 1 0) El Camino ReaVCalle Barcelona AM PM 11) El Camino ReaVLeucadia Boulevard/OIIvenhaln Road 1 AM PM 12) El Camino ReaVEncinitas Boulevard 1 AM PM 13) Melrose Drive/Sycamore Avenue 1 AM • • • ' • With proJect mi11gallon . 3 • TIF/other mlllgatlon Is defined a improvements ldenlltled in the carlsbad TraffiC Impact Fee Study or n the ,.ponolbillly 01 other projec1S With lignificant tralfic (>20%). • • Project mitigation: Due to project only tnlfllc. OSA • 0\ltlide Study Area. leA then !50 peek hOur project trips reach this intersection. ONE • 0-Not Eldst RIRO • Right·IUm ir\lright·tum OUI from minor leg. Bold • 1999 Growlh Management lnt~ • ' Tab10.723 08/21100 ·49· 38.3 D 37.0 D 40.7 0 50.9 0 43.3 03 60.6 E 50.9 o:J 67.5 E 46.7 o:J 43.1 0 40.2 o:J 31.2 c 35.9 0 26.3 c 24.1 c 30.7 c 30.6 c 39.6 0 34.0 c• 69.7 E 42.4 o• 45.6 0 32.8 c 23.0 c 18.7 B 33.8 c 48.0 0 37.3 0 37.8 0 42.2 0 A B 10.1 c 20.1 0 35.1 e 55.1 F 0 38.3 0 37.4 0 48.2 0 53.0 0 44.2 03 63.4 E 54.4 03 72.5 E 48.3 03 44.9 0 42.0 03 31.7 c 37.6 0 41.2 0 33.1 c 35.1 0 36.1 0 41.3 0 35.3 o• 71.8 E 43.5 o• 47.4 0 34.8 c 23.4 c 18.9 B 34.4 c 49.5 0 37.5 0 38.8 0 44.2 0 (SEC) ~ 10.0 to 20.0 to 35.0 to 55.0 to 80.0 > ao.o Ill '---• • • • II Ill • II II • '-II II 11'>1 r l I I I \\\ :, I , I; I I ~'',I' \ "-i ENGINEERS TABLE10 2020 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS (continued) INTERSECTION 30) Palomar Airport Road/Alicante Road 31) Palomar Airport RoadiE! Fuerte Street 32) Palomar Airport Road/Business Park Drive 33) W. San Marcos Boulevard/Discovery Street 1 34) W. San Marcos BoulevardNia Vera Cruz 1 35) Poinsettia Lane/I-S 58 Ramps 36) Poinsettia Lane/1-5 NB Ramps 37) Poinsettia Lane/Paseo Del Norte 38) Poinsettia Lane/Aviara Parkway 39) Poinsettia Lane/Aiicante Road 40) Poinsettia Lane/EI Fuerte Street 41) Alga Road/Aiicante Road 42) Alga RoadiE! Fuerte Street 43) La Costa Avenue/I-S SB Ramps 44) La Costa Avenue/1·5 NB Ramps 45) Leucadia Boulevard/Quail Garden Drive' 46) Questhaven Road/Street "A" ' 47) Questhaven Road/EHin Forest Road ' Tab10.723 08/21100 PEAK HOUR AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM -51- YEAR 2020 WITHOUT PROJECT DELAY LOS 24.9 c t7.3 B 38.2 D 41.2 0 27.5 c 23.3 c 28.9 c 34.0 c 42.8 D 45.8 D t8.3 B 25.t c 26.2 c 25.7 c 21.3 c 26.8 c 34.9 c 37.4 0 32.1 c 28.9 c 27.4 c 3t.5 c 35.8 D 21.1 c 2t.7 c 34.6 c 21.6 c 25.7 c t5.6 B 23.t c 25.4 c 26.4 c 7.8 A 23.3 c 35.8 0 43.0 0 YEAR 2020 WITH PROJECT DELAY LOS 28.0 c 18.5 B 38.5 0 41.8 D 27.6 c 23.6 c 29.5 c 36.0 0 42.8 D 46.7 D 18.4 B 25.6 c 26.3 c 25.8 c 21.3 c 27.9 c 34.6 c . 37.6 0 36.2 D 32.7 c 27.9 c 31.9 c 37.1 0 25.2 c 25.1 c 35.7 D 22.t c 26.6 c 15.4 B 24.1 c 25.3 c 26.7 c 7.9 A 23.4 c 36.1 0 46.6 0 • TAaLE12 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LOS ANALYSIS INTERSECTION PEAK YEAR2005 YEAR 2010 HOUR ALTERNATIVE 1 WITHOUT WITH WITHOUT WITH PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT DELAY LOS DELAY LOS DELAY 51) Alga Road/Ridge N. Enlrance AM ONE ONE 11.2 a ONE PM ONE ONE 10.1 a ONE 52) Alga Road/1• Entrance AM 13.2 B 15.4 c 10.9 elo El Camino Real PM 22.8 c 30.3 0 22.4 53) Poinsel1ia Lane/1• Enllance AM ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE alo B camino Real PM ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE 54) Poinsettia lane/1" Entrance AM ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE elo Alicanle Road PM ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE 55) Poinseula Lane/2"" Entrance AM ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE elo Alicante Road PM ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE OELA Y Is measured In seconds as 1he average delay, per lhe 1997 Highway Capacity Manual. LOS •level o1 SeMce NB•Ho~ele. R • RighHurn. etc. ONE • Does Hoi Exist elo • easlol 'Wilh Miligalion <1 reslricling NB and SB left·lurn and 1h<u movern8f11S. Tab12.723 08121/00 LOS DELAY LOS ONE 10.5 B ONE 10.3 B B 12.8 B 11.4' B' c 37.4 E 12.8' B' ONE 28.1 0 ONE 29.5 0 ONE 9.7 A ONE 16.9 c ONE 12.0 B ONE 14.5 B QWY 0.0 :: 10.0 10.1 1o 15.0 15. I 1o 25.0 25.1 1o 35.0 35.1 10 50.0 > 50.0 -· •• , 9 •. , YEAR2010 ALTERNATIVE 2 WITHOUT WITH PROJECT PROJECT DELAY ONE ONE 10.9 22.4 ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE illli A B c 0 E F LOS ONE ONE B c ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE DELAY LOS 10.5 B 10.3 B 12.8 B 11.4' B' 37.4 E 12.8' B' 28.1 0 29.5 0 9.7 A 16.9 c 12.0 B 14.5 B YEAR 2020 WITHOUT WITH PROJECT PROJECT DELAY LOS OELAV LOS ONE ONE 12.4 B ONE ONE 11.0 B 17.9 c 24.4 c 12.2' a· 12.7' B' 38.2 E 78.1 F 14.2' B' 1<t.2" B' ONE ONE 31.6 0 ONE ONE 30.9 0 ONE ONE 10.2 B ONE ONE 12.1 B ONE ONE 15.9 c ONE ONE 18.2 c ~CAMINO R~ NON ROAD !U }~! .. -\.. 17J/18G .Jj\.. -811/385 ·~/84 =::!. "'ff' .eo/•23-. !U CD ..... s-~ !!- E1. ~INO R~RESSI NX WEST ~1!12 __ , fs~~ '-3DD/ZSD , __ .JI\.. -2S/110 , 148/280 1101200 .-~ ""t r so/ so-40/150-, 3!§ ® ~ ...... , ~i~ El. CAMINO ~ LA iWA AVEN ..... , ...... ..,.,_ r::;. "'-371/128 --317/:IOe ..; I\.. r 1011 a. 111/870 _..1 122/334-"''fr 130/218-, ~~~-s; ~!-- ® :::,.;;;.-... -No ~~- ~D'* II UE II:!~ ~i'i '--342/8110 ---.lS/1152 ..1 + 1, , 913/174 27/19 _..1 "'ll"' 44/50-47m-. -.... ,..~t:: @ ;:,..:::.. ...... ·iS IIELROSE DRIVE/ ALGA ROAD ....... ... _ ... ,_ ~s-~ .... '-.22/5 • ..II\.. -••ts r zo11• .sa; ez _..~ ""I r 1/17-au;w-, §s~ @ i~~ REV. 02/17/01 I.1.G723.(owi; l I'\~( () l I [ ,\\\ .\. < .rn r "-"1',\N ~~~ARD El. CAMINO~ ~~~~ROAD F~~AVENU S!;::S! 2~~ ~~~ ~, ..... -... ~~ ....... ~~ '-24/ 2S -~ii '-3155/753 :o:ii \..170/915 .J+I, ?~~ ---532/175 .Jl\.. -r=~ .Jl\.. , 118/312 21~_..1 "''tr Sl/158 _..1 "'ll"' 711$/325 _..~ "'' I r -taoz-U/:sat-810/910- 17ll/173-, -.. -38D/SU-; i"-110/ISS-, iii! '":;:1 .... "" ® ...... , ...... @ ~S.i 0 i~8 ~.,~ -: =! N:!" El CAMINO~ E1. CAMINO~ b~l~PKW1 CAMINO VIDA POINSE111A LAN ~~~ ~~! I" i!; -~ ~~it }il; '-.2~3D '--280/ so !" '--119/ S4 -110/105 .JI\.. _,/I .JI\.. , 370/105 .J + 1, -211/330 r 10123 r 11011/448 137/173 _..1 "''lr 3DO/Jg::!. "'I r 153/ au "''ll"' o; a-~~55-; ~~~ Z00/470- 154/471-, ;a!:! 374/534-, i~ii! ® ~ ............ 0 il'ia ® ._!::_ ~~~R ~=~;:: "':!!"' El. CAM~ flu~~~ARD/ El. CAMINO R~ ENCINITAS BOU MD CAUf~-~trRCW> i!~ ;-~!' . .. ~i~ ,.:;., ~ u '--1107/!180 • '-. U/ 25 ... . '--438/121 .Jj\.. -211/ 71 N -.J 1'---431/2"" .Jjl.. -114/1151 , 353/141 f"" 1011/SSO r 38/19 ~~::!. "''lr 81/ .... _..~ ""t r 329/~ _..1 "'fr 271/1124- 18/282-. !'!a~ ... ,~·---110/205-, ~t= Cl-~' ,. 371-, ~~~ ' " @ @ ~~~ @ ~~ .. -: ..... -_ .. ., ~~.fA~ ~=~ROAD MELROSE DPM{_ POINSE111A LAN ~~-!~· !;2 ':;-~~ }"'" 'ji3-Sli!~ '-. 48/3DO !:!~ '--335/ .,. ~ -'-10/ 5 ,.._ -300/t14 ..1 I'· -1110/1375 .J + 1.. -30/15 .J+'--('"111/342 , 50/700 r •s;•o SOS/787 _..1 "''lr 710/?N.-1 "'ll"' 740/Zao .-~ "''I r 39J/1e4-1200/1200-10/35-421/383-, ..... -I!J/ 375-, !!~i 20/ I'-, Iiiii!:! ·---·-'-'~~ -, .............. ()}) l~§ @ ~~~ @ i~- MELROSE DR!Y_E/. RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD a~~ LEGEND ..... s,~ '-. NA/f'IA ~:e:; '--227/188 ®-Traffic Signal -NA/J'IA r NA/f'IA ..Ill.. -521/5'75 r eo;•SJ NOTE: (N)-Narth E-W SlliEET ~ ezo13,. .-~ '"II r 208/520-(S)-South 111/075-, ~~ .. (E)-East .. ? .......... :l: @ !§"' (W)-West NO SCIIIE Figure 52 2020 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR VOLUMES AM/PM PEAK HOURS -14 t- • • • • • • It • .. • • • • • • • RANCHO SANTA FE GRAND AVENUE liS s-~s N;o ...._ 12S/33s --472/4.38 .J p,. ,r I I 7S/S7S 104/141 ..J "'11 (" :!t0/2!16- ll/ ..o-... S!!::! NNN t:;;\ :;. s. ;:;-® :!:X~ ~~~ .... ......... ~~~~~ '-210/ 155 1 I, -1870/1535 .. t ... ,r 5J0/ 400 455/ 215_..1 1801/1720- 100/ 410 ..... P1 CN5NSSB~'~E/ -,_ps ~§ i~ J' -849/101 ...... ,r5J0/454 113/967- 143/182 ..... REV. 08/17/00 U.0723.\.DWG I IN<.,( ()I I L•\\\ ,\ Llill i\.<.,J'AN ENCIN!ERS 716/ 247 ..J 1102/11S4- '-1258/ 425 -1752/1432 POINSETTIA LANE/ 1-5 NB RAMPS .... l8l/ 183 -1178/1158 '-57/15 tr ..... F !!! ~~~s:rrft ROAD/ ~~~ o(.tAFEoc~ ,s....... ,_. !;;:: '-.Ill/ 78 !~ '-. 100/ 2l .Jil,. (=I ~w,~ il,. ,r 141/t18 -1381/1838 ,r <"S/ 2N 1507/1371-"''(" 712/ en '""\ t~ @ ~~ LEGEND @ -Traffic Signal NOTE: (N)-North (S)-South (E)-East (W)-West tr ~ ~ ; 'j '-0/ 10 .... -2310/21JS 1820/.1110-(" 251/ JO..... ., ;; i i;::l .... ~!i- ··-'-.315/ 401 ,j, .. -aao/1004 ....... ,147/214 'I' z NO SCALE Figure 52 2020 WfTH PROJECT PEAK HOUR VOLUMES -142-AM/PM PEAK HOURS VIII A~C: nc:-I A r-n=A .. • .. • .. • .. ... • ... ' ' • -II • • • • .. POJN~ETTIA LAN~ PASE DEL NO ~:II~ ............... ~~ .. ..._ 14D/172 N -912/0715 .) jl .. , 75/ 72 21/ 588..) '"\If' 1188/1273- 49/ 178""' &U~!e ............... ® ~~~ ALGA ROADm:; AUCANTE OAO II($~ ...... , ........ ..._ 0/ 16 N-,.._ ., __ -440/581 .)~I,. r 5/ 8 154/ 71..) '"llr 3,30/548- 51/45S""' '"""' @ ~~~ .. !fLUCAOIA' BOULEVARD/.: : UAIL. GARDEN: ORNE · . -::li! :::-~~ ..._ 17/113 .)~I,. -834/873 r 3Se/334 1/ 7..) '"llr s.t!S/904-.. ; 43""' :8~!2 ~~s @ .., .., .., RANCH~ FE R~~ OAKS SOUTH 0 QUEST~\'® ROAD ::ri::. ..... 30/ 110 --10/20 .) ~I,. , 20/110 10/5..) '"llr 2/1- 10/5""' o-., -f;t- @ ~.:;:,~ 6 "' POI~FlRST EN!RAN&: EAST F CAMINO R -800/1042 r s; 20 1022/815-'"\(' 10/ 40""' 0"' @ ~2' REV. 08/17/00 LLG723A.DWG liN<.,( Oil LA\\',\ < .Ia I N<.,I'AN ENCliNE!RS POINSETilA LAN~ AVIAAA PARIC'NAY POINSETilA LANE/ AUCANTE ROAD POINSETTIA ~ a FUERTE n~ ~~~ ~ci _,.. ~~~ g~w ....... ..... 1<5/ 58 ..... 2Jl/ 25 1... "I lll -488/508 -130/130 -2"/700 .)~\,.. , 20/ 50 .)~\,.. , 10/ 110 .)~\,.. , 10/115 271/ 110..) '"llr 515/270..) '"llr 22.5/115 ...J '"' 1,. 11115/5H-5"/4115-11115/300- 97/332""' 2~s:t 20/ 30""' ~~2 110/1t5""' ~~!!. "' ~~' ....... :.:-....... ....::~ 0§8 ® ~~!: @ @ ;; - ALGA ROAD/ a FUERTE STREET LA COSTA AVENUE/ 1-5 sa RAMPS LA COfA AVENUE/ 1-5 N RAMPS ill::!:: ..,0 ... ~ill ~~~ ...__/ 84 ";:;-> 2::: -211/1033 --; ... ..... 384/288 .)~\,.. , 12/ 233 .)I,. , 501/313 -137/97 71/ 18..) '"llr -,0571-1"/147..) '"\(' •11/331-12 ,1141 ""' 440/820-l!J! 3/ 15""' .... ~ _ .. ';r;::,-",;t ~g @ _.,_ @ @ N _,_ . ~~-ROAD/ ~';fit;,-R~" L~~~~ m:A 0 .. . $8 ....... E ,.....,_ il"~ '.t:. "" ...... :::. "'!!! !·~ ..._ 81/436 :t .)I,. ..._ 1!88/1.31 .)~\,.. -501/818 .)~ -1108/IH , 8/ 45 Vi/ 135..) 145/754..) '"Iff' 110/30..) '"II 14SII/1SJ2-981/174-50/30""' 457/548 ""' ~~:: ~:l ... ..... ... @ @ ~~~ @ ~ ill! ... ;; ELFU~~ ALGA ROAD~ ~ R<W>fiFlRST ENTR~r . RIDGE W E RIDGE NO ENTRANCE OF L CAMINO "~t .. ~#,' ~~ .. .,ON f.f';$.~~0 ~.,£. -'4.!\. • .,._ ..... 30/1 g~:.-..... 2/ ~;~: ; .)~\,.. -10/2 -H<J/54 o.okl.-· , 1/1 -SU/1288 .)~\,.. , 21 1' · .. ~ . 877/731-,. -+ 48/30..) '"llr v, 30..) '"llr 2/10-5/ 20""' ., 110 /1281-''{ 25/35""' ~~-~ 5/ 15""' ~~~ ..... ..,., ..... "' -~-~ @ !!2-@) @ ,. ·._. . mr~ ~-~E ~ N-1...""/PW ~2--AlA/PtA ..... 5/ 25 ..._ 2/ 15 , ... ;w. .) -511/941 .)I,. -508/915 E-W STREET t; 950/5•1-2/ 15..) ~ 948/54&- "' ? I e @ z NO 5CAI.E Figure 52 2020 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR VOLUMES -143-AM/PM PEAK HOURS VJUAGES OF LA COSTA I' -.,. '·--.. II .. II .. .. ._ ' • • • • • I I I DOES NOT EXIST 41 ~!:-.~SPUr _.,.,~ tr II'IJT=t "'\ • @ liF /OlHER liTIGATION ~~~~ Ill'-.!:..> ~ ttl"' 011F /OTI£R wmMnON 4U~<;:SPUT j\~ SPUT-+ "'\"'\ttl"' • @nf'/OlHER ~CAMINO R~ OINSETTIA LAN ~ -4111..~!:-. ~ s j r'"''"' ttl"' I"' ~I ~ 011F /ontER IIIIIGATION 4U~s_~SPUT 4W~:-,-;: SI'\Jf _...,~ _.,.,~ SPUT-+ "'\"'\ttl"' s•ur-f "'\"'\ tfl"' • • ® ® ~CAMINO~ INSEITIA LAN ~=~~ ~ ~ --4111.. '-; !:-. ~ 4111.. '-; !:-. ~ ,,~ ,,~ i "'\"'\ ttl"'r i "'\"'ftl"'t" -~ -~ g .. .. "' 0 0 nF /OTHER MITIGA110N IS DEFlNED IS IAAPROVEIIEHTS 10EHT1F1ED IN lHE CAR~ TIWFIC IMPACT FEE STVDY OR ARE lHE RESPONSISIIJIY OF OlHER PROJECTS Willi SIGNIFICANT 'I1WflC (>20X) • OTHER MmG4nON IS DEl"lNED IS IAAPRO\IEMEHTS IDENTIFlED OI.ITSIDE lHE CITY OF CARLSIIAO. PRO.JECT MmG4nON IS DEFINED IS IMPACTS CAUSED SOLELY BY PRO.JECT 'IIWFIC (>20X). L£GENO ® -Traffic Signal Fl" -Free Flow @ -Unsignolized RTOL-Right-tum Over1ap NOTE: (N)-North (5)-South (E)-East (W)-Wsst 411\, !:-,-;: SPUT _.,.,~ SPUT -f "'\ "'\ ttl"' • ® ~~~~ ~ -4111..1.;~~ ,,~ i "'\"'\ltl"'t" -~ .. "' 0 E-W STREET ! R£\1. 02/17/01 LJ.G723T.DWG 11"-J'->( Oil I,\\\ ,\ "OSA" • Outside Study Area, lea than !10 peak hour ~ect traffic volumes F·1 g u re 53 in either dl ·on added to lnte,.eetlon. CRll N'-,I'AN . Uitlgatlon is shown bold. Existing geometly is shown shaded. LANE GEOMETRY CONOmONS ENGINEERS VIUAGES OF' LA COSTA '' -• Ill -.. .. q II II '- .. II • • • • • EXIsnNG + YEAR 2005 YEAR 2010 YEAR 2010 ,.. • ., 2020 YEAR 2005 PROJECT AlTERNA1lVE 1 AlTERNA1lVE 2 '"""' pN,DWNI AIRPORT ROMJ/ PAI.OIIAR AIRPORT RONJ/ PAI.OIIAR AIRPORT ROMJ/ PAI.OIIAR AIRPORT f!OMJ/ PAI.OIIAR AIRPORT ROMJ/ ALICANTE ROAD AUCANTE ROAD ALICANTE ROAD ALICANTE ROAD ALICANTE ROAD ---::: ---DOES NOT ---~ ~ ~ r EXIST ~ ~ Iii'" @ @11F/Oli£R lolmGATION @ @ @ PAI.OIIAR AIRPORT f!OMJ/ PAI.OIIAR AIRPORT PJJN)j PAI.OIIAR AIRPORT ROMJ/ PAI.OIIAR AIRPORT PJJN)j PALOMAR AllPORT PJJN)j EL FUERTE STREET EL FUERTE STREET a FUERTE STREET a FUERTE STREET a FUERTE STREET. sPLIT I ~ ...{1...1.. ::: --\SI-r __ ~ 1' -; SPLIT ---4!1...1... ~ --:-<'S'r---- j " "'; "\ I !' ---.. ~~= ~~:&~~ ~~=t ~=&~~ ~~= ::: I ~~ ~t_::__ 1:: J \' ·-.; ... " ~::: -./.-{'-~ -:_) ---- W. SAN MARCOS BLVD/ W. SAN MARCOS ll.W/ W. SAN MARCOS ll.W/ DISCOVERY STREET · DISCOIIERY STREET DISCOIIERY STREET OSA == llf /OTHER llrnGAllON IS O£FINED ~ IIIPR<MlotENTS IOENllFlED IN TH£ CARLS8AD 11W'I'1C IMPACT FEE SlUDY OR ARE '!liE RESPONSIBILflY Of OTHER PRO.IECTS WITH SIGNIFICANT TRAFFIC (>20X) • OlliER llmGA.TION IS DEFlNED ~ IMPRO\IEMENTS IDENllflED OUTSIDE TH£ CITY Of CARLSBAD. PROJECT MmGA.nON IS DEFINED ~ IMPACTS CAUSED SOLELY BY PRO.IECT TRAFF1C (>20X) • LEGEND @ -Traffic Signal F'F' -F'r•e Row @ -Unsignolized Fn'OL-Right-tum Overlap NOTE: {N)-North (5)-South (E)-East {W)-West - REV. 10/06/00 LLG723T.DWG liN<.,< <>I I [;\\\' s "OSA • • Outside Study Area. leas than 50 peak hour project traffic volumes F .I g u re 5 3 in either direction added to intef"11ection. ( ,JULN<.,f'AN Mitigation is shown bold. Existing geometry is shown shaded. -151- LANE GEOMETRY CONDmONS ENCINEERS VILlAGES OF LA COSTA • • • • • "---' • • .. EXISTING + YEAR 20011 YEAR 2010 YEAR 2010 YEAR 2020 ~ 200S PROJECT ALTERNATIVE I ALTERNATIVE 2 ~~if POINSETTlA .LANE/ AVIAAA PARtrNAY POINSETTlA ~¥ AVIAAA PAR!rNA POINSETTlA LAN~ AVIARA PARtrNAY POINSETTlA LANE/ AVIARA P/loRY:HAY -41 I,. ~ ..\... -41 I,. ~ -41 I,.~ 7 OSA OSA s"' '"~ s"' :::'' c:' ... ,, tl' j 'I'. tl' j "~''ii t I' --- @ @ @ ~ ~ @ @ ~ POINSETTIA LANE/ AUCANTE ROAD POINSETTlA LANE/ AUCANTE ROAD POINSETTlA LANE/ AUCANTE ROAD ~~ PO~ LANE/ AU ROAD 4~ ~ ..{I,. ±:: ..{I,. ±:: ..\... J-..{I,. -..{\,.~-;:; .-.::-.r ~· ::-,r r;~· s s ..)\,~ ..) ,s_, ..)\,~ ~"\r -!.".....,!' -'il' -'il' -'il' "T ' ' ' ' @ 11F'/Oli£R IIIIGATlOH @ @ @ @ POl~ LAN~ a FU STR POINS~ LAN~ a FU STR ~~~~~~ ~~~~~ ·~~~~~ ~ • J-J- DOES NOT 41'-r.::-.• 41'(; ? 41 I,. -41\::-,r EXIST s s s"' s -!. ;:.-"''tr -!." ;Y'i t I' -!." ;Y'i f }"' -!." ;:-'"\ t I' "T ' ' ' @ @ Tlf' /OlHER IIIIIGATlOH @ @ @ ALGA ROADio AUCANTE OAO ~~~ ~~ ALGA ROAD~ AUCANTE ALGA ROAO/o ALJCANTE OAO -4~ !:: J-J-..{I,. ±:: -41,. -..{1,.~7 r "'' ~· s'' :fj'ir ..) ,s_, ..)\,~ ..) \,~ -!."'\y -.....,,... -"'\I' -"'\I' ' ' ' ' @ @11F/011£R @ @ @ ~OTHER MIIIGAliON IS DEfiNED I>S IMPROI/EioiENTS IDENTIFlED IN 1liE CARI.SBAO TRN"F1C I w::T ftt S1'IJOY OR W. THE RESP0NS1!11U1Y OF OTHER PROJECTS WITH SIGNiflCN(l' TRAFFIC (>201) . OTHER MIIIGAllON IS DEFlNED I>S IMPROVEMENTS IDENTIFIED OUTSIDE THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. PROJECT MIIIGAllON IS DEfiNED 1>S IMPACTS CAUSED SOLElY BY PROJECT TRAFFIC (>201). E-W STREEt' i LEGEND NOTE: (N}-North ® -Traffic Signol F1 -Free F'Jow (S)-South .. ~ @ -Unsionalized (E)-Eost I lmll-Right-turn Overlop z (W}-West (W)-West NO SCALE REV. 10/lle/00 LLG723T.DWG I IN'>( ( l I I I \\\ ,\ "OSA" • Outside Study /veo, less than SO peak hour Qect traffic volumes F ·1 g u re 53 in either di ·an added to intersection • < .1~11 ~'>1',\N Mitigation is shown bold. Exieting geomeby is shown shaded. -l53- LANE GEOMETRY CONDmONS ENCiiN!!RS VILLAGES OF LA COSTA ,. " ' -• 1(1 ' • ' EXISTING + YCAA 2005 PROJECT YeAR 2005 * 4 1-y I YeAR 2010 ALTERNATIVE 1 YEAR 2010 ALTERNATIVE 2 @ PRO.JECT WITIGATlON @ @ @ @ lr= ~ @ PRO.JECT lllllG4nON @P DOES NOT -x,s-c. , I DOES NOT EXIST ~cw.= I TIF' /O'IMER MITlGATION IS DEFlNED ~ IMPRO\IENEN!S IOENTII'IED IN THE CARI.S8AO 'IRAf'FlC IMPACT F'EE ST\JDY OR AAE 'THE RESPONSIBIUlY OF' O'IMER PROJECTS WITH SlGNIFlCANT 'IRAf'FlC (>2"") • O'IMER MmGI<TION IS DEFINED ~ IMPRO\IENEN!S IDENTIFlED OUTSIDE 'THE C11Y OF' CARI.S8AO. PROJECT MmGI<TlON IS DEFINED ~ IMPH:'IS CAUSED SOI.n.Y BY PROJECf llWflC {>20X). LEGEND ® -Traffic Signal @ -Unsi9nolized FF' -free Flow OIOL -Right-turn Overlap YEAR 2020 • REV. D1/1!5/D1 NOTE: (N)-North (S)-South (E)-East (W)-West "OSA • • Outsidl! Study Arl!a, less than 50 peak hour project traffic volumes .'-U.G723T.OWG • I IN'.( < >I I I!\\\ 0.. C.I~U N<,I';\N .. ENCINEERS in either direction odded to intersection. Figure 53 Mitigation is shown bold. · Existing geometry is shown shaded. LANE GEOMETRY CONDmONS -156-,,.,, __ ,..._ --.. ---- II ··-• ~ • • • • • • • .,__, • • -. EXIST1NG + YtAR 2005 YEAR 2010 YEAR 2010 YEAR 2020 YEAR 2005 PROJECT ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 POHiEJl1oVF1RST EHI'RN«:£ POINSEI1I.4/FRS EHIRANCE I'OINSEmt./fliS ENllWICE POMiEI1lA/FIIST EHIRANCE ~EHIRANCE tAST OF ALJCAHlE ROAD tAST OF AUCANTE RON> fAST OF AI.JCAHlE RON> fAST OF AI.JCAHl£ RON> fAST OF ALJCANTE RON> DOES NOT DOES NOT ~ ~ I --:=@~ EXIST EXIST .=.__ ------- e @ @ 8 @ ~~ ~ENliW«:E fAST OF AUCAHIE ROAO ~ EIIIIW«:E fAST OF AlJCANI'E RON> ~EHIIW([ fAST OF AI.JCAHl£ ROAD ~ENliW«:E fAST OF AI.JCAHlE RON> DOES NOT DOES NOT ~ ~ ~ EXIST EXIST --.) .) __,. ------@ .@ @ @ @ T1%0THER lotfTIGATlON IS DEFINED AS llotPROIIEWENTS IDENTIFIED IN THE CMLS8AD TRAFFIC llot ACT FEE STUOY OR ARE THE RESPONSIBIU!Y Of' OTHER PROJECTS WITH SIGNIFICANT TRAFFIC (>201) • OTHER lotmGATION IS DEFINED AS lloiPROIIEWENTS IDENTIAED OUTSIDE THE CITY OF CARlSBAD. PROJECT lotmGATlON IS DEFINED AS lloiPACTS ~USED SOLELY 81 PROJECT TRAfFIC (>201). E-W STREET ~ LEGEND NOTE: (N~-North ® -Traffic Signal FF -F'ree Flow (S -South .. ? (E)-Eoot I (Q) -Unsignolized RTOC-Right-turn Overtop z (W)-West NO SCAI.! REV. 10/10/00 LLG723T.DWG liN\( Oil I,\\\ ,\ "OSA" • Outside Study Area, len than 50 peak hour project traffic: volumes F ·1 g u re 5 3 in either direction added to Intersection. CRII r--:'ot'J\:'·-; Mitigation is shown bold. Existing geometry is shown shaded. -157- LANE GEOMETRY CONDmONS ENCIN!ERS VILLAGES OF LA COSTA ATTACHMENT G Year 2020 Intersection LOS Calculations With Project Traffic 2020 + Project AM 1: Palomar Airport Rd & Alicante Rd -+ " +-~ /"' Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBR f1J3 Lane Configurations ttt ., ttt 'i ., Volume (vph) 1920 256 2310 141 60 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 3 Permitted Phases 4 2 Detector Phases 4 4 8 2 2 Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 Total Split (s) 52.0 52.0 67.0 53.0 53.0 15.0 Total Split(%) 43.3% 43.3% 55.8% 44.2% 44.2% 13% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None Max Max None Act Effct Green (s) 62.8 62.8 62.8 49.0 49.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.41 0.41 v/c Ratio 0.75 0.30 0.93 0.21 0.09 Control Delay 24.6 5.1 34.2 23.9 5.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 24.6 5.1 34.2 23.9 5.6 LOS c A c c A Approach Delay 22.2 34.2 18.4 Approach LOS c c B Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 11 9.8 Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.93 Intersection Signal Delay: 28.0 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1: Palomar Airport Rd & Alicante Rd I 02 ~: ,_... 04 LOS Engineering Synchro 6 Report Timings 2020 + Project PM 1: Palomar Airport Rd & Alicante Rd --+ .. • +-~ ~ Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations ttt ., "' ttt "' ., Volume (vph) 1980 48 19 2135 278 224 Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 3 8 2 Permitted Phases 4 2 Detector Phases 4 4 3 8 2 2 Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 52.0 52.0 30.0 82.0 38.0 38.0 Total Split(%) 43.3% 43.3% 25.0% 68.3% 31.7% 31 .7% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time ( s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None Max Max Act Effct Green (s) 53.6 53.6 6.7 58.0 34.3 34.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.53 0.53 0.06 0.58 0.34 0.34 v/c Ratio 0.76 0.06 0.18 0.78 0.49 0.34 Control Delay 21 .1 6.0 49.3 17.3 31.7 5.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 21 .1 6.0 49.3 17.3 31 .7 5.3 LOS c A D B c A Approach Delay 20.8 17.6 19.9 Approach LOS c B B Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 1 00.4 Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0. 78 Intersection Signal Delay: 19.2 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases· 1: Palomar Airport Rd & Alicante Rd LOS Engineering Synchro 6 Report Timings 2020 + Project AM Synchro 6 Report 2: Poinsettia Ln & 1st Entance e/o ECR HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --+ "'). • ~ ~ ~ Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations tf+ " +t " 7' Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 1023 10 5 800 25 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1077 11 5 842 26 21 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 501 pX, platoon unblocked 0.92 0.92 0.92 vC, conflicting volume 1087 1514 544 vC1 , stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1005 1470 413 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 pO queue free % 99 76 96 eM capacity (veh/h) 634 108 542 Direction, Lane# EB 1 EB2 WB 1 WB2 WB3 NB 1 NB2 Volume Total 718 369 5 421 421 26 21 Volume Left 0 0 5 0 0 26 0 Volume Right 0 11 0 0 0 0 21 cSH 1700 1700 634 1700 1700 108 542 Volume to Capacity 0.42 0.22 0.01 0.25 0.25 0.24 0.04 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 1 0 0 22 3 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 10.7 0.0 0.0 48.5 11 .9 Lane LOS B E B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.1 32.2 Approach LOS D Intersection Summa!1 Average Delay 0.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 LOS Engineering 2020 + Project PM Synchro 6 Report 2: Poinsettia Ln & 1st Entance e/o ECR HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis __. .,. ~ ,.__ ~ I" Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations tt. 'I tt 'I ., Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 859 40 22 1085 10 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 904 42 23 1142 11 7 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft} Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh} Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 501 pX, platoon unblocked 0.92 0.92 0.92 vC, conflicting volume 946 1543 473 vC1 , stage 1 conf val vC2, stage 2 conf val vCu, unblocked vol 859 1505 347 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 pO queue free % 97 89 99 eM capacity (veh/h) 718 100 599 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB2 WB 1 WB2 WB3 NB 1 NB2 Volume Total 603 344 23 571 571 11 7 Volume Left 0 0 23 0 0 11 0 Volume Right 0 42 0 0 0 0 7 cSH 1700 1700 718 1700 1700 100 599 Volume to Capacity 0.35 0.20 0.03 0.34 0.34 0.11 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft} 0 0 2 0 0 9 1 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 10.2 0.0 0.0 45.2 11 .1 Lane LOS B E B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.2 31 .1 Approach LOS D Intersection Summa!1 Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 LOS Engineering 2020 + Project AM Synchro 6 Report 3: Poinsettia Ln & El Camino Real Timings ~ _. ~ • +-~ t I" '. + lane Grou~ EBl EBT EBR WBl WBT NBl NBT NBR SBl SBT l ane Configurations "" ++ 7' "" tt. "" ttt. 7' "" ttt. Volume (vph) 300 321 80 370 180 35 1825 685 35 770 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Prot pm+ov Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 3 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 2 Detector Phases 7 4 4 3 8 5 2 3 1 6 Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 22.0 20.0 20.0 19.0 17.0 8.0 44.0 19.0 37.0 73.0 Total Split(%) 18.3% 16.7% 16.7% 15.8% 14.2% 6.7% 36.7% 15.8% 30.8% 60.8% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None Max None None Max Act Effct Green (s) 17.8 14.8 14.8 15.0 12.0 4.0 52.4 69.1 22.1 69.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.03 0.45 0.60 0.18 0.60 v/c Ratio 0.62 0.77 0.31 0.90 0.88 0.33 0.91 0.71 0.06 0.28 Control Delay 52.0 58.3 12.6 74.5 38.4 64.4 40.4 7.9 34.5 12.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 52.0 58.3 12.6 74.5 38.4 64.4 40.4 7.9 34.5 12.0 LOS D E B E D E D A c B Approach Delay 50.4 54.5 32.0 12.9 Approach LOS D D c B Intersection Summa!1 Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 115.6 Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.91 Intersection Signal Delay: 35.2 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.9% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: Poinsettia Ln & El Camino Real ,_. ~4 u. ........ ~'·'.-~, ..... ~· ~s • • • • 1~ ~7 LOS Engineering 2020 + Project PM Synchro 6 Report 3: Poinsettia Ln & El Camino Real Timings ~ --+ .. .. ,.__ "\ t I" '. ~ Lane Grou~ EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations 'i'i tt , 'i'i tt. 'i'i ttt. , 'i'i ttt. Volume (vph) 20 305 55 814 224 65 625 489 110 1775 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Prot pm+ov Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 3 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 2 Detector Phases 7 4 4 3 8 5 2 3 1 6 Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 11.0 17.0 17.0 35.0 41 .0 8.0 44.0 35.0 14.0 50.0 Total Split(%) 10.0% 15.5% 15.5% 31 .8% 37.3% 7.3% 40.0% 31 .8% 12.7% 45.5% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None Max None None Max Act Effct Green (s) 15.7 12.5 12.5 29.9 33.1 4.0 40.1 69.9 9.2 47.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.28 0.31 0.04 0.37 0.65 0.09 0.44 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.78 0.25 0.90 0.27 0.54 0.44 0.43 0.39 0.93 Control Delay 36.0 58.8 14.4 49.0 30.7 68.1 25.6 4.7 50.5 38.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 36.0 58.8 14.4 49.0 30.7 68.1 25.6 4.7 50.5 38.5 LOS D E 8 D c E c A D D Approach Delay 51 .2 44.3 21 .2 39.2 Approach LOS D D c D Intersection Summa~ Cycle Length: 110 Actuated Cycle Length: 107.7 Natural Cycle: 100 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.93 Intersection Signal Delay: 36.8 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.5% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 and Phases: m6 • • •• LOS Engineering 2020 + Project AM Synchro 6 Report 4: Al~a Rd & Alicante Rd Timings ~ __., .. +-~ t '. ~ LaneGroue EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations 'I tft 'I tft 'I ft 'I ft Volume (vph) 254 330 5 440 428 99 17 11 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Detector Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 27.0 31 .0 18.0 22.0 29.0 30.0 11 .0 12.0 Total Split(%) 30.0% 34.4% 20.0% 24.4% 32.2% 33.3% 12.2% 13.3% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time ( s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Max None Max Act Effct Green (s) 17.1 34.7 5.9 15.5 23.6 39.8 6.3 16.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.39 0.06 0.17 0.27 0.45 0.07 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.78 0.30 0.05 0.76 0.95 0.13 0.15 0.22 Control Delay 41.0 18.5 45.0 40.5 56.8 18.3 45.4 13.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 41 .0 18.5 45.0 40.5 56.8 18.3 45.4 13.8 LOS D B D D E B D B Approach Delay 27.4 40.6 49.3 19.8 Approach LOS c D D B Intersection Summa~ Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 88.6 Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.95 Intersection Signal Delay: 37.2 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.9% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 - - - - LOS Engineering 2020 + Project PM Synchro 6 Report 4: Al~a Rd & Alicante Rd Timings ,I---+ # +-~ t \. + Lane Grou~ EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations 'i +t. 'i +t. 'i t. 'i t. Volume (vph) 87 546 8 686 119 28 29 159 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Detector Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 23.0 31.0 14.0 22.0 29.0 34.0 11.0 16.0 Total Split(%) 25.6% 34.4% 15.6% 24.4% 32.2% 37.8% 12.2% 17.8% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Max None Max Act Effct Green (s) 9.1 27.7 6.0 18.8 10.3 30.7 6.4 22.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.38 0.08 0.26 0.14 0.43 0.08 0.31 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.74 0.06 0.82 0.50 0.05 0.21 0.37 Control Delay 33.0 19.1 38.2 36.0 31 .8 14.5 39.0 24.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 33.0 19.1 38.2 36.0 31.8 14.5 39.0 24.5 LOS c B D D c B D c Approach Delay 20.2 36.0 27.9 26.3 Approach LOS c D c c Intersection Summa!1 Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 72.2 Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.82 Intersection Signal Delay: 26.6 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Rd & Alicante Rd - - - - LOS Engineering 2020 + Project AM Synchro 6 Report 5: Poinsettia Ln & 2nd Entrance e/o Alicante HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ,J-~ ~ ' '-. ~ Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 'i tt tt. 'i 7' Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 2 948 510 2 15 15 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 1009 543 2 16 16 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 751 pX, platoon unblocked 0.94 vC, conflicting volume 545 1052 272 vC1, stage 1 conf val vC2, stage 2 conf val vCu, unblocked val 545 995 272 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 pO queue free % 100 93 98 eM capacity (veh/h) 1020 227 725 Direction, Lane# EB 1 EB2 EB3 WB1 WB2 SB 1 SB2 Volume Total 2 504 504 362 183 16 16 Volume Left 2 0 0 0 0 16 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 2 0 16 cSH 1020 1700 1700 1700 1700 227 725 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.30 0.30 0.21 0.11 0.07 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 Control Delay (s) 8.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.0 10.1 Lane LOS A c B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 16.0 Approach LOS c Intersection Summa!1 Average Delay 0.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 LOS Engineering 2020 + Project PM Synchro 6 Report 5: Poinsettia Ln & 2nd Entrance e/o Alicante HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ~ -+ +--~ '. ~ Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 'i tt tit 'i 7' Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume {veh/h} 18 598 1019 15 1 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly flow rate (vph} 20 664 1132 17 1 4 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh} Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 751 pX, platoon unblocked 0.95 vC, conflicting volume 1149 1513 574 vC 1 , stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1149 1486 574 tC, single (s) 4.2 6.9 7.0 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 pO queue free % 97 99 99 eM capacity (veh/h) 598 105 459 Direction, Lane# EB 1 EB2 EB3 WB 1 WB2 SB 1 SB2 Volume Total 20 332 332 755 394 1 4 Volume Left 20 0 0 0 0 1 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 17 0 4 cSH 598 1700 1700 1700 1700 105 459 Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.20 0.20 0.44 0.23 0.01 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 Control Delay (s) 11.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 39.8 12.9 Lane LOS B E B Approach Delay (s) 0.3 0.0 18.3 Approach LOS c Intersection Summa~ Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period {min) 15 LOS Engineering 2020 + Project AM Synchro 6 Report 6: Poinsettia Ln & Fuerte St Timings ..J-~ • +-~ t \. ~ Lane Grou~ EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations 'i tt. 'i tt. 'i tt. 'i tt. Volume (vph) 225 695 10 296 211 605 30 120 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Detector Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 11.0 25.0 9.0 23.0 17.0 47.0 9.0 39.0 Total Split(%) 12.2% 27.8% 10.0% 25.6% 18.9% 52.2% 10.0% 43.3% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Min None Min Act Effct Green (s) 7.2 22.3 5.1 12.4 12.3 23.3 5.0 10.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.38 0.08 0.21 0.21 0.40 0.08 0.17 v/c Ratio 1.12 0.66 0.08 0.51 0.62 0.55 0.24 0.43 Control Delay 130.1 20.2 32.9 21 .0 30.8 14.9 34.3 10.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 130.1 20.2 32.9 21 .0 30.8 14.9 34.3 10.2 LOS F c c c c B c B Approach Delay 44.0 21.3 18.6 12.6 Approach LOS D c B B Intersection Summa!1 Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 58.3 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.12 Intersection Signal Delay: 28.3 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 6: Poinsettia Ln & Fuerte St j ...... 08 !~04 II ~05 t 06 - - - - LOS Engineering 2020 + Project PM Synchro 6 Report 6: Poinsettia Ln & Fuerte St Timings ~ --+ • ~ ~ t \. ~ Lane Grou~ EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations " tt. " tt. " tt. " tt. Volume (vph) 174 317 115 718 117 75 80 590 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Detector Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 17.0 26.0 15.0 24.0 13.0 35.0 14.0 36.0 Total Split(%) 18.9% 28.9% 16.7% 26.7% 14.4% 38.9% 15.6% 40.0% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time ( s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Min None Min Act Effct Green (s) 11.7 25.9 9.5 20.8 8.4 24.9 8.5 25.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.32 0.12 0.26 0.10 0.31 0.10 0.31 v/c Ratio 0.73 0.47 0.61 0.89 0.70 0.10 0.47 0.82 Control Delay 47.2 21 .5 45.0 45.0 54.9 16.8 42.9 26.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 47.2 21 .5 45.0 45.0 54.9 16.8 42.9 26.2 LOS D c D D D B D c Approach Delay 28.0 45.0 37.7 27.6 Approach LOS c D D c Intersection Summa~ Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 79.7 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.89 Intersection Signal Delay: 34.1 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.8% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 6: Poinsettia Ln & Fuerte St 1.\..el ~·' fileiil2 ---~~-·-~~~3-=·'--+·e·4 --~j ~ e5 I ~ e6 ~ e7 I~ e8 - - - - LOS Engineering 2020 + Project AM Synchro 6 Report 7: Poinsettia Ln & 1st Entrance e/o Alicante HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ~ ~ .,__ '-'-. .., Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations ++ ttt r' Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 950 520 5 0 35 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 1033 565 5 0 38 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 351 pX, platoon unblocked 0.91 vC, conflicting volume 571 1084 285 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 571 998 285 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 pO queue free % 100 100 95 eM capacity (veh/h) 998 220 711 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB2 WB 1 WB2 SB 1 Volume Total 516 516 377 194 38 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 5 38 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 711 Volume to Capacity 0.30 0.30 0.22 0.11 0.05 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 4 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.3 Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 10.3 Approach LOS B Intersection Summa!:X Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 29.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 LOS Engineering 2020 + Project PM Synchro 6 Report 7: Poinsettia Ln & 1st Entrance e/o Alicante HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis .,. --+ +--~ '. ~ Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt tt. 7' Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h} 0 616 998 25 0 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph} 0 670 1085 27 0 8 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft} Walking Speed (ft/s} Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh} Median type None Median storage veh} Upstream signal (ft) 351 pX, platoon unblocked 0.91 vC, conflicting volume 1112 1433 556 vC1, stage 1 conf val vC2, stage 2 conf val vCu, unblocked val 1112 1377 556 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s} tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 pO queue free % 100 100 98 eM capacity (veh/h} 624 124 475 Direction, Lane# EB 1 EB2 WB1 WB2 SB 1 Volume Total 335 335 723 389 8 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 27 8 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 475 Volume to Capacity 0.20 0.20 0.43 0.23 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 1 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.7 Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 12.7 Approach LOS B Intersection Summa~ Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min} 15 LOS Engineering 2020 + Project AM Synchro 6 Report 8: Poinsettia Ln & Alicante Rd Timings ~ --+ • +-~ t '. ~ Lane Groul! EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations 1lj tft 1lj tft 1lj ft 1lj ft Volume (vph) 516 555 10 630 70 116 95 20 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Detector Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 36.0 52.0 8.0 24.0 9.0 28.0 12.0 31.0 Total Split(%) 36.0% 52.0% 8.0% 24.0% 9.0% 28.0% 12.0% 31 .0% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Min None Min Act Effct Green (s) 29.5 51 .5 4 .2 19.2 19.1 21 .1 7.6 9.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.32 0.56 0.04 0.21 0.21 0.23 0.08 0.11 v/c Ratio 0.93 0.30 0.14 0.90 0.20 0.91 0.68 0.53 Control Delay 47.6 12.4 52.6 48.7 32.8 40.5 64.0 12.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 47.6 12.4 52.6 48.7 32.8 40.5 64.0 12.7 LOS D B D D c D E B Approach Delay 29.1 48.8 39.4 32.6 Approach LOS c D D c Intersection Summa!1 Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 91.3 Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.93 Intersection Signal Delay: 36.7 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 90.2% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 ls.:ifi:is:lndiPihlalselsi:II8[:P=oij"l~.etti:IL[nj&l·~~~i[c:::1riRI~diiZii41111 .... 111111111111111[=l • .. 1~ 1!15 ....... 1!18 1~ 1!17 . -. . LOS Engineering 2020 + Project PM Synchro 6 Report 8: Poinsettia Ln & Alicante Rd Timings ~ --+ • +-~ t '. ~ Lane GrouE! EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations "' tt. "' tt. "' t. "' t. Volume (vph) 316 495 80 930 15 80 90 259 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Detector Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 19.0 33.0 18.0 32.0 10.0 24.0 15.0 29.0 Total Split(%) 21 .1% 36.7% 20.0% 35.6% 11 .1% 26.7% 16.7% 32.2% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Min None Min Act Effct Green (s) 15.1 35.5 9.1 27.1 5.8 11 .9 11 .5 23.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.1 9 0.45 0.11 0.34 0.07 0.15 0.14 0.29 v/c Ratio 0.98 0.35 0.42 0.88 0.13 0.37 0.38 0.87 Control Delay 79.9 17.6 36.6 33.8 42.3 31.4 35.1 38.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 Total Delay 79.9 17.6 36.6 33.8 42.3 31.4 35.1 40.8 LOS E B D c D c D D Approach Delay 41.0 34.0 32.8 39.8 Approach LOS D c c D Intersection Summa~ Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 79.4 Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.98 Intersection Signal Delay: 37.5 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 81 .1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 8: Poinsettia Ln & Alicante Rd LOS Engineering ATTACHMENT H Year 2020 ADT Volumes for Alicante from SANDAG ... 9f3 IJ 'V 3.1 ... <:/ ... 991 Q.e ; 9112 1028 "" •y .3. . . "' . 1036 • ATTACHMENT I Traffic Signal Warrants for Project Driveways • MUTCD 2003 California Supplement Table 4C-101. Trllffic Signal Wa"ants Worksheet (Average Traffic Estimate Form) Noen-1 lX21.,;t ulrf (Based on Estimated Average Dally Traffic -See Note) URBAN .......... X ........... RURAL .................... ....... Minmlm ~~- 1A -t.lnlmum Yehtcul• TlllffJc )( vehicles ~' Day VOilictnPorOoy Satisfted Not Satisfied on Highor·VOiume on~Sireet Minor Slreel ApJl!08CI1 (Total of Approaches) (One Olrectici1 Only) Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach w:::t~~.l) .. ~ ~street 2 Jo~.¥ Urban RlJral Urban Rlnl c:m>~s 5,600 ~tJo 1,680 l .. ::.·.···::: ··:: .·.:::::· .•. : 6,720 1.680 2 01 More ........................ 2 or More ........................ 9.600 6,720 3.200 2.240 L ....... ..................... 2 or More. . ..................... 8.000 5,600 3.2009:z·l. 2.240 18 ·ln-..ption of Continuos Traffic V-PerOoy Yehideo Per Day on Higher-VOlume Satisfied Not Satisfied X on Major Slreet Minor Slreel Approach (Total of Both Approaches) (One Direction Only) Number of lanes for moving tra1fic on each approach ~:"'::' ~~ot( ~ 4!"~tr~~~~? +>r Urtlan Rural q;re.s Rural mf'/0 8.400 850 . 10.080 850 2 or More .......... 2 or More. ................ 14,400 10.080 1.800 1.120 1 .................. ................ 2 or More ............... -12,00075./-400 1,600 1,120 1A&B • Combinations Satisfied Not Satisfied >< 2 Warrants 2 Wtlrrants No ii'J wnt satisfied, but fol~ng warra'f;} fUM ormore........... y$ 0 1 2 Note: To bs used only for NI!W INTI!RSI!CnONS or -tocatlons where K Is not reasonobleto count actual traffic volumes. Page 4C-8 May20,2004 • MUTCD 2003 California Supplement Table 4C-101. Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheet (Average Traffic Estimate Form) '5ov!H li2tvEtvr1! (Based on Estimated Average Dally Traffic • See Note) URBAN .......... X ........... RURAL ... ................... ··•· Wlnimum e'k"'lt'emonts 1A-Minimum Vehlcutar Tralllc X Vehicleo Per Day VehiCles Per Day g,ttsfied Not Sati$11ed 00~·-on=\IOiume Mino AI>Jl!08Ch !Total of Bo Approaches) (~ Olrection Only) Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach <r:"'M:;:'~~:~~ cpnorStreet 'N~ Avr I.Jrban R""" Urban Rural ~YiS5,600 (-:mJo/0 1.680 ~ ..... ~ ~:::: .' _·_·_: ·_ :: :: .... _._._._::: :_-_ ...... ~:: : . 6.720 1,880 2 or More ....................... 2 "'MOre ......... .............. 9.600 6,720 3.200 2.240 t... ..... ....... ... .... 2 or More .... . .............. 8,000 5,600 3.200 '3'f/ 2.240 111-lntotruptlon of Continuos Trame VehiCles Per Day Vehicles Per Day on ~r-VOiume on~<Street S;otisfied Not SiOtiSfied ~ (Total of Approaches) Minor StreetAp)liQIIch (One Direction Only) Number of lanes for moving traffiC on each approach ~.;or Street 'ij ltbf /tJinorstreet '/Xf ~).[.. Urban Rural Urban Rural ............ ~ ... ~"'· 8.400 ~ llo 850 2 or More. ......... L. ...... ..................... . 10,080 850 2 or More ......... 2 or More ... 14,400 10.080 1,600 1.120 L. .... ...................... 2orMore ····················· 12,00'j~, 8.400 1,600 1,120 I. 1A&B • Combinations ~tisfled Not SiOtisfted X 2 Warrants 2Wommts ~~~~ ... but tot¥ng warra~ 0 Note: To H used only for NEW INTERSECTIONS or other locations where It Is not rea&Onable to count actual trafftc volumes. Page 4C-8 May 20.2004 • ATTACHMENT J Year 2020 Project Driveway LOS Calculations ., 2020 + Project AM Synchro 6 Report 9: Project North Drivewa~ & Alicante Rd HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ~ .,. ~ t ~ ~ Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations v "' t t. Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 6 27 57 652 250 12 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 7 29 62 709 272 13 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 768 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1111 278 285 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2. stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1111 278 285 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 pO queue free % 97 96 95 eM capacity (veh/h) 220 761 1277 Direction, Lane# EB 1 NB 1 NB2 Volume Total 36 62 709 285 Volume Left 7 62 0 0 Volume Right 29 0 0 13 cSH 526 1277 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.05 0.42 0.17 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 4 0 0 Control Delay (s) 12.3 8.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay ( s) 12.3 0.6 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summa!1 Average Delay 0.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 LOS Engineering .. 2020 + Project PM Synchro 6 Report 9: Project North Drivewa~ & Alicante Rd HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ..J' ~ ~ t ~ .t/ Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations v " + t. Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 26 125 124 341 406 26 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 28 136 135 371 441 28 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 768 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1096 455 470 vC 1 , stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1096 455 470 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 pO queue free % 86 78 88 eM capacity (veh/h) 207 605 1092 Direction, Lane# EB 1 NB 1 NB2 SB 1 Volume Total 164 135 371 470 Volume Left 28 135 0 0 Volume Right 136 0 0 28 cSH 455 1092 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.36 0.12 0.22 0.28 Queue Length 95th {ft) 41 11 0 0 Control Delay (s) 17.3 8.8 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS c A Approach Delay (s) 17.3 2.3 0.0 Approach LOS c Intersection Summa!l: Average Delay 3.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 LOS Engineering ., 2020 + Project AM Synchro 6 Report 10: Project South Drivewa;l & Alicante Rd HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis _,}-" ~ t ~ -.1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations v 'i t f. Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 2 12 25 707 272 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 13 27 768 296 5 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 368 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1121 298 301 vC 1 , stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1121 298 301 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 pO queue free % 99 98 98 eM capacity (veh/h) 223 741 1260 Direction, Lane# EB 1 NB 1 NB2 SB 1 Volume Total 15 27 768 301 Volume Left 2 27 0 0 Volume Right 13 0 0 5 cSH 557 1260 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.02 0.45 0.18 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 2 0 0 Control Delay (s) 11.7 7.9 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay ( s) 11.7 0.3 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summa~ Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 LOS Engineering • 2020 + Project PM Synchro 6 Report 10: Project South Drivewa;t & Alicante Rd HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ,;. "'\-~ t ~ ~ Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations v " + f. Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 11 54 53 454 520 11 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 12 59 58 493 565 12 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 368 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1180 571 577 vC1, stage 1 conf val vC2, stage 2 conf val vCu, unblocked val 1180 57 1 577 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 pO queue free % 94 89 94 eM capacity (veh/h) 198 520 996 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 NB2 SB 1 Volume Total 71 58 493 577 Volume Left 12 58 0 0 Volume Right 59 0 0 12 cSH 408 996 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.17 0.06 0.29 0.34 Queue Length 95th (ft) 15 5 0 0 Control Delay (s) 15.7 8.8 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS c A Approach Delay ( s) 15.7 0.9 0.0 Approach LOS c Intersection Summa~ Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 LOS Engineering