Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLFMP 87-12; Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 12; Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP)LFMP 87-12 ZONE 12 Description: E/ECR, N/OLIVENHAIN, W/RSF, S/LEVANTE APNNo.: NONE Status: Approved Application date: June 30,1987 HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES Planning • Project Management • Environmental August 30, 1988 Mr. Phil Carter Growth Management Manager City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Submittal of $10,000 Processing Fee For Zone 12 - LFMP Based on the Southwest Master Plan. Dear Phil: As the authorized agent for La Costa Ranch Company, herewith is a $10,000 deposit for processing of the amended Zone 12 - Local Facilities Management Plan. The amendment to the Local Facilities Management Plan is based on the concurrent processing of the Master Plan for the Southwest. Sincerely, Bill Hofman Attachment 6994 El Camino Real, Suite 208 • Carlsbad • CA 92009 • [619] 438-1465 12MELMAV6NUE ZONE 12 LFMP AMENDMENT ADDED CIRCULATION CONDITION PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FIRST FINAL MAP, ISSUANCE OF A GRADING PERMIT OR BUILDING PERMIT, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST WITHIN ZONE 12, A FINANCING MECHANISM SHALL BE APPROVED GUARANTEEING CONSTRUCTION OF A PROPORTIONAL SHARE OF THE FOLLOWING CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS: 1. IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED PRIOR TO 1998 Rancho Santa Fe Road from Olivenhain Road to the southern Carlsbad City boundary shall be constructed to include the following: a. Complete grading to ultimate right-of-way width to major arterial standards; b. Construction of four through travel lanes, two ~* in each direction, to include intersection improvements including a fully landscaped median. ZONE 12 LFMP AMENDMENT ADDED FINANCING CONDITION PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FIRST FINAL MAP, ISSUANCE OF A GRADING PERMIT OR BUILDING PERMIT, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST WITHIN ZONE 12, THE ZONE IS REQUIRED TO PARTICIPATE IN ANY CURRENT CITY-WIDE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT OR PROVIDE AN ALTERNATE FINANCIAL GUARANTEE TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE FINANCE DIRECTOR FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE CITY-WIDE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 438-1161 Citp of Carlfibab NOTICE OF DETERMINATION County Clerk County of San Diego Attn: Mail Drop c-ll 220 West Broadway San Diego, CA 92101 February 25, 1988 This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad on February 23, 1988, approved the following project: Project Title: Zone 12 Local Facilities Management Plan Project Address/Location: The largely undeveloped southerly portion of the La Costa Master Plan, generally described as between El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe Road north of Olivenhain Road and south of the developed area around Levante Street. Project Description: Based on the City of Carlsbad's General Plan, the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12 provides a plan for the provision of public facilities to meet adopted performance standards. This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad has approved the above described project and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: 1. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment . 2.-r, -ATiNegative Declaration was prepared for this project tp the '..provisions t>f CEQA.' " ' '1 M " *• -- ''si&ffi• '-.-','" .-'.'.:- , £-•-•.-. negative Declaration^ arid-record of project approval may at: CITY LBSidm PLANNING DEPARTMENT CnYOF CARLSBAD MICHAEL J. HOLZ! Planning Director '6 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, May 16, 1990, to consider approval of a Local Facilities Management Plan on property generally located south of Levante Street, east of El Camino Real, north of the City of Encinitas, and west of Rancho Santa Fe Road. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. If you have any questions, please call the Planning Department at 438-1161. If you challenge the Local Facilities Management Plan in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: LFMP Zone 12 APPLICANT: Hofman Planning Associates PUBLISH DATE FOR CARLSBAD JOURNAL: MAY 3, 1990 PUBLISH DATE FOR BLADE CITIZEN - LA COSTA EDITION:MAY 4, 1990 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION Zone 12 City if CtrlsM Local Facilities Management Boundaries City of Carlsbad PUBLIC NOTICE OF PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE Please Take Notice: The Planning Department has determined that the environmental effects of the project described below have already been considered in conjunction with previously certified environmental documents and, therefore, no additional environmental review will be required and a notice of determination will be filed. Project Title: Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 12 Project Location: West of rancho Santa Fe Road, East of El Camino Real, North of Olivenhain Road, South of Levante Street. Project Description: Justification for this determination is on file in the Planning Department, Community Development, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within ten (10) days of date of publication. Dated: March 29, 1990 Case No.: LFMP-12 Applicant: Hofman Planning Associates Publish Date: March 29, 1990 MICHAEL J. HQLZMfflLER Planning Director BH:kd 2O75 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad, California 92OO9-4859 - (619) 438-1161 STAFF REPORT DATE: JUNE 6, 1990 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUJ3JECT,: LFMP 12-LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR ZONE 12 I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 3040 recommending APPROVAL of Local Facilities Management Plan 12 as amended. II.BACKGROUND This application was originally scheduled to be heard on May 16, 1990, however, was continued due to the lateness of the hour. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Repdrt dated May 16, 1990, with attachments, BPt:rvd May 30, 1990 LFMP 12 - HOFMAN PLANING MAY 16, 1990 Page 2 3. How does this amendment differ from the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12 adopted in 1988? DISCUSSION The Growth Management Program requires that a Local Facilities Management Plan be prepared for each Management Zone in order to show how compliance will be maintained with the City's adopted public facility performance standards as development occurs. The first step in this process requires determining the buildout development potential in the zone. The buildout projection for this zone is consistent with the methodology contained in the 1986 Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan and the provisions of Proposition E which was approved by the citizens of Carlsbad on November 4, 1986. The plan phases the buildout development of the zone based on estimates of yearly development activity. The phasing estimate is consistent with generalized phasing assumptions used in the 1986 Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan. From these buildout and phased development projections, yearly phased demands for public facilities may be projected and buildout demands identified. The plan analyzes eleven (11) public facilities. This analysis compares the projected public facility demands with the available and planned supply of public facilities to ensure compliance with the adopted performance standards. Where demands for facilities exceed supply, the plan proposes the necessary mitigation to maintain conformance with the standard. This analysis is consistent with both the 1986 Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan and the Growth Management Program. The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12 that was adopted in 1988 showed the following net developable acreage by residential general plan land use: RLM = 366.2, RM = 101.3, RMH = 25.0. There were 30 acres of future school dedication shown and 73.9 unconstrained acres of open space. The proposed amendment to the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12 reflects the following proposed net developable acreage by residential general plan land use: RLM = 366.75, RM = 123.68. The refinement of requested development entitlements and additional environmental data modifies the school acreage to 40.7 acres while the unconstarined open space is now 61.9 acres. As the Growth Managment Program bases its analysis on the General Plan, the net developable acreage, and the Growth Management Control Points, other discretionary actions (ZC, CT, PUD, HDP, SDP, SUP, and ROI) are not pertinent to this discussion. The proposed amendment would result in a reduction of the potential buildout dwelling unit total to 1,734 units after the transfer of 179 dwelling units into Zone 11. The amended zone plan has been brought up to date with current information, phasing, and conditions. The condition changes are more temporal than substantive and reflect an increased sophistication of the process rather than a recognition of a previously unheralded impact. The following chart provides a brief summary of the eleven public facilities analyzed in the plan. LFMP 12 - HOFMAN PLANING MAY 16, 1990 Page 4 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Planning Director has determined that the environmental effects of the project have already been considered in conjunction with previously certified environmental documents and, therefore, no additional environmental review will be required and a Notice of Determination will be filed. ATTACHMENTS 1. Planning Commission Resolutions No. 3040 2. Exhibits - "A" - Citywide Map of Local Facility Management Zones "B" - Local Faculties Management Plan - 12 General Plan Land Use Map "C" - Local Facilities Management Plan - 12 Zoning Map BH:kd 4/26/90 Exhibit A ZONE 12 City of Carlsbad Local Facilities Management Plan te >^=« *"** *W»*"M^« «*•! *p.// ~'l p-C La Costa Master Plan MP 149 (G) ZONE 11 LEGEND: P—C Planned Community La Costa Master Plan MP 149(G) OTY OF ENCNTAS GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ZONE 12 LAND-USE ZONING Exhibit C APPLICATION SUBMITTAL DATE DECEi. .fiR 12. 1989 STAFF REPORT DATE: MAY 16, 1990 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION SUBJECT: LFMP 12-LOCAL FAdLrnES MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR ZONE 12 I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 3040 recommending APPROVAL of Local Facilities Management Plan 12 as amended. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND Zone 12 is located in the southeastern quadrant of the City adjacent to the northern edge of the City of Encinitas. (See Exhibit "A") The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12 was originally adopted by the City Council on February 23,1988. That plan showed 556 acres of residential land with density ranges from low- medium (0-4 du/ac) to medium-high (8-15 du/ac) and 92 acres of open space. The base residential buildout for Zone 12 was projected at 2,067 dwelling units. The City Council approved a dwelling unit transfer to Zone 11 of 179 dwelling units which lowered the projected buildout total in Zone 12 to 1,888 units. The amendment to Zone 12 changes the land uses as identified previously. As shown on Exhibit "B" Zone 12 the proposed land uses are primarily residential. Of the Amended Plan's 669 total acres 512 are proposed for residential. Based on the proposed General Plan amendment accompanying this action, residential densities would range from low-medium (0-4 du/ac) to medium (4-8 du/ac). Nonresidential General Plan land uses would include 96 acres of Open Space, 2 acres of travel service/commercial, 3 acres of public utilities, 41 acres of public schools and 15 acres of roads. III. ANALYSIS 1. Does the proposed Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment for Zone 12 fulfill the purpose, intent, and specific requirements of Section 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (Growth Management Program)? 2. Is the Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment for Zone 12 consistent with and does it implement the 1986 Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan? LEGEND: LAND-USE RESIDENTIAL ZONE 6 RLM Low-Medium Density(4-8 DU/Ac.) RM Medium Denalty(4-8 DU/Ac.) RLM-5J \ /••*.-.-•——^. ^RM-4 \ / VJ. . RLU-4 OS-8 TS—-» ' PRIME ARTERIAL crrv OF ENC:NITAS U Public Utilities OS Open Space J Junior High School Elementary School TS Travel Service GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ZONE 12 LAND USE ZONING Exhibit B LFMP 12 - HOFMAN PLAN»»NG MAY 16, 1990 Page 3 ZONE 12 BmLDOUT PUBLIC FACILITIES SUMMARY SHEET LFMP 12 FACILITY CONFORMANCE WITH ADOPTED PERFORMANCE STANDARD City Administrative Existing and planned facilities will meet the adopted Facilities performance standard through buildout. Library Wastewater Treatment Parks Drainage Circulation Fire Open Space Schools Sewer Collection Water Distribution Existing and planned facilities will meet the adopted performance standard through buildout. Existing and planned facilities meet the adopted performance standard through the year 2000. Park District 4 (southeast quadrant) meets the adopted performance standard through build out with the proposed mitigation. Drainage faculties will meet the adopted performance standard with the proposed mitigation through build out. Circulation facilities will meet the adopted performance standard with the proposed mitigation through build out. Existing and planned facilities meet the adopted performance standard through build out. Existing open space meets the adopted performance standard for existing and approved projects. An ongoing work program will assure the open space performance standard through build out. Existing and planned facilities meet the adopted performance standard with the proposed mitigation through build out. Sewer facilities meet the adopted performance standard with the proposed mitigation through build out of the zone. Water facilities meet the adopted performance standard with the proposed mitigation through build out of the zone. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, May 16, 1990, to consider approval of a Local Facilities Management Plan on property generally located south of Levante Street, east of El Camino Real, north of the City of Encinitas, and west of Rancho Santa Fe Road. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. If you have any questions, please call the Planning Department at 438-1161. If you challenge the Local Facilities Management Plan in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: LFMP Zone 12 APPLICANT: Hofman Planning Associates PUBLISH DATE FOR CARLSBAD JOURNAL: MAY 3, 1990 PUBLISH DATE FOR BLADE CITIZEN - LA COSTA EDITION:MAY 4, 1990 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION Zone 12 A City of Carlsbad Local Facilities Management Boundaries DATE: August 14,1991 PROJECT NAME: Arroyo La Costa PROJECT NO: CT88-03 SUBJECT: CITY COORDINATION, FIRST PLAN CHECK MEETING AGENDA • OVERVIEW: UNIT 1, VILLAGE "I" Sewer - L.C.W.D. Water - O.M.W.D. El Camino Real Const. - Olivenhain To Levante % width and full median Olivenhain Road - 4 lane interimNr 6 Lane ultimate • GROWTH MANAGEMENT ISSUES Finance Plan LANDSCAPE No plans to date U & M Signals at Olivenhain Road & El Camino Real Levante and El Camino Real Calle Barcelona and El Camino Real PLANNING Affordable housing ENGINEERING Encinitas Creek Study Hydrology & Hydraulics Olivenhain Road? •4*J l^AMfa*£~ ±L_Rk '••••••••^•••^•••••••••••^"^•^•^••••••••••••^^••••••••••••'•'^^^^ a • f /^^Ja^^ jR i<£-4~ €>^M^^-rOnv ^«^ _^Zi __>__S-pJcw__j^^ZJL JSO^£^JJ^!jLL &teijg-^2£3L. ^ ^^ jf f / Carlsbad Journal Decreed A Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San Diego County Mail all correspondence regarding public notice advertising to North Coast Publishers, Inc. corporate offices: P.O. Box 878, Encinitas, CA 92024 (619)753-6543 A 4§. ' _ , , _ . .. . ,,..,{££1987Proof of Publication liw9 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am principal clerk of the printer of the Carlsbad Journal a newspaper of general circulation, published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, and which newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general character, and which newspaper at a times herein mentioned hadandsti hasabonafide subscription list of paying subscribers, and which newspaper has been established, printed and published at regular intervals in the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding one year next NEGATIVE preceding the date of publication of the notice DECLARATION hereinafter referred to; and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of saidPROJECT ADDRESS/LOCA- TION: The largely undeveloped #202-2M-7 86 southerly portion of the La Costa Master Plan, generally described as between El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe Road north of Olivenhain Road and south of the developed area around LevanteStreet. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Basedon the City of Carlsbad's General ; Plan, the Local Facilities Manage- ment Plan for Zone 12 provides a plan for the provision of public fa- cilities to meet adopted perfor- mance standards. The City of Carlsbad has con- ducted an environmental review of the above described project pur- suant to the Guidelines for Imple- mentation of the California Envi- ronmental Quality Act and the En- vironmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declara- tion (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Jus- tification for this action is on file inthe Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declara- tion with supportive documents ison file in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please sub- mit comments in writing to the Planning Department within ten(10) days of date of issuance. Dated: December 11,1987 Case No: LFMP 87-12 Applicant: THE BILL HOFMAN COMPANY MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director CJ 4960: December 11, 1987 newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: December 11 19 87 19. 19 I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California on _ ™e I"*1 day of December, 1987 Clerk of the Printer Hofman Planning Associates May 28, 1991 v . Don Rideout City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Zone 12 LFMP Amendment - Clerical Revisions to Circulation Chapter per Conditions of Approval. Dear Don: Per your request, enclosed please find clerical revisions to the Zone 12 Amendment Circulation Chapter, including analysis of Rancho Santa Fe Road south of Olivenhain Road. As you know, prior to City Council approval, an analysis of this road segment was carried out by Weston Pringle and Associates which included recommended improvements to the road segment in 1998 (See Addendum #5, Attached). While the conditions of approval reflect the recommended improvements, the technical analysis is not at this time included in the Zone 12 Amendment text. At your request, we have incorporated this information and submit the required clerical changes for your review. I have also included a copy of the text on computer disk to update your files. If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to give me a call. Sincerely, Lisa King cc: Ruth Besecker enclosures August 7, 1990 THE VllLAGESOFLA COSTA Mr. Ray Patchett City Manager 1241 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 RE: August 7, 1990, City Council Meeting - Request to continue Agenda item 18 / Amendment to Public Facilities Plan Zone 12. Dear Mr. Patchett: Please accept this letter as our request to continue the above mentioned matter. At our July 31, 1990, public hearing on related matters, a new condition was offered by the City Council which would affect Zone 12. We would like a little additional time to work through this condition with your staff, and our lender. If possible, we would ask that the matter be continued to the next available City Council date. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, DMA/lh c.c. M. Orenyak (/DOUG AVIS P.O. Box 9000-266 • Carlsbad, California 92009 • (619) 931-8747 • FAX (619) 931-1946 A Community Bv The Fieldstone Companv July 26, 1990 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: Community Development Director STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR GUARANTEED FINANCING OF RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS As you are aware, presentation of the Arroyo La Costa Master Plan will be the first discretionary determination made by the City Council in that section of the southeast quadrant since passage of Proposition E. Council is scheduled to review the Arroyo La Costa Master Plan and Tentative Map, and the Zone 12 Local Facilities Management Plan on July 31, 1990. On July 10, 1990, at the public hearing for approval of the Resolution of Intention for formation of a Community Facilities District (CFD), several concerns were raised. It was brought to the Council's attention, that numerous small developers who currently have approved projects (see attached list), are prevented from progressing in the development process until a funding mechanism for the Rancho Santa Fe Road improvements is in place. Establishment of guaranteed financing for improvements to Rancho Santa Fe Road is a Local Facilities Management Plan condition which has been placed on new development in zones 11 and 12, and was added as a condition to specific projects in zone 6. The Arroyo La Costa Master Plan and the Zone 12 Local Facilities Management Plan both include the following condition: Prior to recordation of the first final map, issuance of grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, within Zone 12, a comprehensive financing program guaranteeing construction of: Rancho Santa Fe Road, from Met rose Avenue North to La Costa Avenue; and Olivenhain Road, between El Cam/no Real and Rancho Santa Fe Road, shall be approved. Arroyo La Costa's proposed 1076 dwelling units would, based on their current condition, be allowed to begin construction once the conditions of the Zone 12 Plan have been satisfied and a financial guarantee for road construction is in place. This condition is not adequate in guaranteeing completion of the road improvements prior to or concurrent with the need. Approval of the Arroyo La Costa Master Plan, Tentative Map and the Zone 12 Local Facilities Master Plan in their existing form would, in effect, raise developer expectations, making a potentially bad situation, worse. The Fieldstone Company, developer of Arroyo La Costa, is the single largest landowner in the affected zones, and therefore has the largest monetary obligation and hence "vote" in deciding when and how financing for road construction will be provided. Fieldstone is currently working with City staff on use of an assessment district as the financing guarantee for the road, a process which is always lengthy. Theoretically, recordation and issuance of permits could occur shortly before actual construction of their project (projected to begin construction in 1992). This situation places smaller developers with previously approved projects in Zone 6 and 11 in a inequitable position. These small developers are prohibited from moving forward in the development process until the required guarantee has been established and accepted by the City Council. Due to the of the complexity of Arroyo La Costa and pending design and environmental issues for both Rancho Santa Fe Road and their subdivision, staff is concerned that Rancho Santa Fe Road financing may be given a lower priority. While Fieldstone is moving forward with both the environmental and alignment studies for Rancho Santa Fe Road, other affected developers have indicated their belief that adequate progress is not being made by Fieldstone, toward resolving the financing issue. In effect developers in zones 6 and 11 feel they are being unduly delayed, while Fieldstone is concentrating on other issues. Staff had anticipated approval of the Resolution of Intention for formation of the CFD. A concern now exists, that landowners, specifically those in Zones 6,11 and 12 may not wish to participate in the City-wide CFD, until they are certain a financial guarantee for Rancho Santa Fe Road is in place, allowing them to proceed with their development. In order to alleviate the possibility of developers negotiating their participation in the CFD, the following condition is recommended as a standard condition of approval on any new or revised Zone Plans: Zone is required to participate in any current City-Wide Community Facilities District or provide an alternate financial guarantee for construction of the improvements included in the City-Wide Community Facilities District Staff believes the timely completion of Rancho Santa Fe Road is required for this project and is in the best interest of Carlsbad. Staff supports the following two conditions, and recognizes Council may wish make modifications to them. 1. Adopt the ordinances approving the zone changes and the Arroyo La Costa Master Plan, with the provision that they are not effective until an agreement acceptable to the City Council is approved and provides for the formation of an assessment district to finance the Rancho Santa Fe Road improve- ments. Condition the Tentative Map so it's effective date will coincide with, and be contingent upon, the effective date for the Arroyo La Costa Master Plan. 2. Condition the Tentative Map approval to provide that within 180 days from the date of the Arroyo La Costa Tentative Map approval, a financial guarantee acceptable to the City Council for construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road improvements, and a financing plan for Zones 11 and 12 will be presented to the City Council. Unless the guarantee and both plans are approved by the City Council within the 180 day period, all processing on the Arroyo La Costa Final Map will cease until such time as they are approved. The time limit may be extended at the discretion of the City Council. In addition to these conditions, staff is recommending that previously approved projects in Zone 11 and specific projects condition in Zone 6, should be revised to require participation in the assessment district for Rancho Santa Fe Road improvements. Their financial obligation should reflect their estimated proportionate share of the improve- ments. Any number of financing mechanisms are available to Fieldstone and the other developers in zones 11 and 6 to guarantee construction of the road. These could be initiated immediately and include: 1. A letter of credit in a sum equal to 150% of the estimated construction costs for Rancho Santa Fe Road. 2. Deposit cash with the City in a sum equal to 150% of the estimated construction costs for Rancho Santa Fe Road. 3. Begin formation of a CFD Overlay to include only Rancho Santa Fe Improvements. 4. Provide a performance bond and agreement, similar to that used by Zone 5 property owners, in guaranteeing construction of Palomar Airport Road (east). 5. Begin formation of a 1915 Act Assessment District. 6. Secure the road construction with a trust deed on the property. Since Fieldstone expects both the Zone 12 LFMP and the Tentative Map and Master Plan for Arroyo La Costa to be presented to Council for adoption on July 31, 1990, time is of the essence in notifying them of any new conditions which will be placed on their Zone Plan, Master Plan and Tentative Map. Staff will provide any necessary assistance to Fieldstone and the affected landowners in developing and initiating a more timely financing mechanism. Marty Orenyak MO:CH Attachment c. City Manager City Attorney Attachment PROJECTS CONDITIONED TO CONTRIBUTE TO RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD Zone Proj. No. Proj. Name Units Sq. Ft. 6 SDP84-8A Brehm Apartments 100 6 CT85-19 The Meadow Lands 112 11 CT85-9 Vista Santa Fe Area B 102 11 CT 85-10 Rice Property 139 11 CT 85-11 Vista Santa Fe Area C 154 11 CT85-15 Park View West 131 11 CT 85-21 Park View East 35 11 SDP86-3 Rancho La Costa Plaza 46,885 TOTALS 773 City of Carlsbad Engineering Department April 2, 1990 Joan R. Geiselhart Leucadia County Water District P.O. Box 2397 Leucadia, CA 92024 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 12A As you are aware, the Arroyo La Costa Master Plan is currently being amended. In conjunction with the master plan amendment, the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12 is also being revised. Attached is a copy of the sewer collection and wastewater section pertaining to future development in LFMP Zone 12. Please review the contents, technical assumptions and proposed mitigation with regards to the services provided by the district. The LFMP for Zone 12 and the Arroyo La Costa Master Plan is scheduled for the Carlsbad Planning Commission on May 16, 1990. Could you please provide me your comments prior to April 17, 1990 so that your input can be incorporated in the final document for the public hearing. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 438-1161. STEVEN C. JANTZ Associate Civil Engineer c: Dee Landers Bob Wojcik 2O75 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92OO9-4859 (619) 438-1161 City of Carlsbad Engineering Department April 2, 1990 F.D. Fontanesi Olivenhain Muncipal Waster District 1966 Olivenhain Road Encinitas, CA 92024 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 12A As you are aware, the Arroyo La Costa Master Plan is currently being amended. In conjunction with the master plan amendment, the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12 is also being revised. Attached is a copy of the water distribution system pertaining to future development in LFMP Zone 12. Please review the contents, technical assumptions and proposed mitigation with regards to the services provided by the district. The LFMP for Zone 12 and the Arroyo La Costa Master Plan is scheduled for the Carlsbad Planning Commission on May 16, 1990. Could you please provide me your comments prior to April 17, 1990 so that your input can be incorporated in the final document for the public hearing. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 438-1161. STEVEN C. JANTZ Associate Civil Engineer c: Dee Landers Bob Wojcik 2O75 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92OO9-4859 (619) 438-1161 APRIL 12, 1990 TO: CITY MANAGER CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR CITY ENGINEER ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER PLANNING DIRECTOR ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR PARKS & RECREATION DIRECTOR FROM: Growth Management Division RE: ZONE 12 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW The Zone 12 Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment Department Head Review has been scheduled for April 24, 1990 at 2:00 pm. If you are unable to attend and desire input into this process please forward your written comments to us prior to this date. BH:kd March 15,1990 Lisa King Hofman Planning Associates 2386 Faraday Avenue, Suite 120 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Ms. King: The following comments reflect our meeting of March 15, 1990 and should allow you to prepare a Local Facility Management Plan for Zone 12 that is adequate for department head review: 1. When the Planning Commission date on the title page. 2. Please correct consultant's name (Thomas?) and add Mr. names. 3. Please provide joint use agreements (current) between and city and park agreement with BCED and successors in 4. Packs special condition should summarize BCED agreement 5. Page 25 - Replace "Zone 11" with "Rancho Santa Fe Road" and add "...and all finds required by Proposition E can be made." to last complete sentence. 6. Exhibit 7 - 7. Exhibit 9 - 8. Exhibit 10 9. Exhibit 13 Proposition flexibility. Proposition needs to be 10. Parks, page = 66.35 acres. 11. Exhibit 32; clean up. 12. Parks, page 85 - Appendix A-3 is wastewater. 13. Parks, page 87 - Adequacy findings should discuss no further dwelling units after 1/93 if Alga Norte Park not constructed. Special Condition should then summarize parks agreement. is established, it will be incorporated Orenyak to City school districts parks appendix. clean up. provide key/legend. - RLM net = 366.75 - Contiguous similar land uses may be lump summed. However, E does not allow non-contiguous similar land uses the same Therefore, RLM and RM both are 1 dwelling unit in excess of E limits. Specifically, RM-7 and RLM-4,5,6. This correction reflected throughout text. 80 - Park District 4 Existing Performance Standard Park Demand 2O75 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad, California 92OO9-4859 • (619) 438-1161 Lisa King March 15, 1990 Page Two 14. Staff will forward the waste water, sewer and water sections to the appropriate districts. 15. Circulation comments will follow after review of E.I.R. traffic analysis. 16. Add discussion regarding future hydrology studies. Sincerely, BRIAN HUNTER Senior Planner BH:am HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES Ranning • Project Management • Fiscal Analysis February 7, 1990 Brian Hunter City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Zone 12 LFMP Amendment - Resubmittal. Dear Brian: Enclosed please find three (3) copies of the revised Zone 12 Plan. This draft responds to your letter of January 30, 1990 as follows: 1. Mr. Carter has been deleted from the persons responsible for the preparation of the plan. 2. All graphics have been reviewed for neatness. The 41-43, 58, 60, 62 and 65 have been completely redrafted as requested. We are in the process of revising the lettering on Exhibits 1, 25, 28, 33, 50, 56, and 62 to be consistent. Please note that Elm Ave. has been changed in all cases to Carlsbad Village Drive. 3. All references to a potential General Plan Amendment on the TS property have been deleted. 4. Circulation - This section will be updated as information is available from City Staff. 5. The Sewer, Water, and Wastewater sections will be revised upon receipt of the districts' comments. 6. The requested language has been added to the Open Space section and the table has been revised to match the build out section. 7. Per a phone conversation on Monday, February 5, 1990 with Don Rideout, the City requested that the draft which was otherwise ready for submittal, not be submitted until updated to 1/1/90. The revised draft includes the updated Citywide phasing as of 1/1/90. 2386 Faraday, Suite 120 • Carlsbad • CA 92008 • [619)438-1465 If you have any questions or comments, please give me a call Thank You. Sincerely, Lisa Thomas cc: Dee Landers Don Rideout Steve Jantz Ruth Besecker City of Carlsbad Planning Department January 30, 1990 Lisa Thomas Hofman Planning Associates 2386 Faraday, Suite 120 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Ms. Thomas: The following comments reflect our meeting of January 12, 1990 and January 29, 1990 and should be incorporated into the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12: 1. Delete Mr. Carter from individuals responsible for the preparation of this plan. 2. All graphics need to be reviewed prior to final printing as they are generally not of the quality expected from your firm. Please change Elm Avenue to Carlsbad Village Drive. 3. As no General Plan Amendment from nonresidential to residential is possible at this time due to the requirements of Proposition E, Northwestern Pacific Railroad Company parcel needs to be reviewed per the existing General Plan. 4. Circulation - text fine. Final review of all numbers for consistency occurring at this time. 5. The Wastewater, Sewer, and Water Section revisions were received from your firm on January 12, 1990 and forwarded to the appropriate districts for review. 6. The Open Space Section needs to numerically match the buildout section regarding net developable, etc. Please delineate on map between existing and future performance standard open space. Under "Adequacy Findings" add..."On January 2, 1990 the City Council adopted the work plan for 2O75 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad, California 92OO9-4859 • (619) 438-1161 Lisa Thomas January 30, 1990 Page Two considering the recommendations of the report from the Citizens Committee to Study Open Space. The work plan includes consideration of modifications to the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan regarding types of open space which qualify toward meeting the performance standard. Development projects will be reviewed per the existing policies at the time of discretionary action." 7. Citywide phasing is attached effective January 1, 1990. If you have any questions regarding our comments, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, BRIAN HUNTER Senior Planner BH:af c: Dee Landers, Senior Planner Don Rideout - Senior Management Analyst Steve Jantz - Associate Civil Engineer CITYW1DE RESIDENTIAL PHASING PROJECTIONS PER ADOPTED ZONE PLANS YEAR AS OF 1/1 1990 (EXISTING) 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONES 1 10,012 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 BLDOUT TOTAL 12,220 23 4 2,486 234 3,065 30 8 BLD 36 3 OUT 21 2 5 2 BLD 2 OUT 1 BLD OUT 2.578 252 3.065 56789 0 7,406 1.101 1 459 312 0 00 300 291 386 286 150 221 325 165 113 130 238 BLD 111 150 250 OUT 81 150 25 50 150 BLD 50 140 OUT 50 BLD 50 OUT 50 50 50 50 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 25 20 20 BLDOUT 0 9.218 2,333 1,225 910 10 11 12 0 954 589 0 0 117 436 432 382 510 296 375 185 275 BLD 240 OUT 240 207 164 81 BLD OUT 0 3,595 1,888 AS Of LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONES 13 14* 0 2 0 99 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 101 BLD OUT 0 1,122 15* 16 520 0 0 260 368 368 400 400 389 303 BLD OUT 3,008 0 17 18 19 0 1 2 139 251 454 426 425 410 332 351 256 226 BLD OUT 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 0 268 0 115 1 000 119 182 125 110 190 125 110 161 77 110 65 BLD 106 BLD OUT 106 OUT 106 106 106 106 106 106 106 106 106 106 106 106 106 106 106 106 106 BLDOUT 0 1 3,272 2,491 0 866 0 442 1 TOTAL ADOPTED PHASED DU'S 27,244 581 2,983 3.152 2,643 2,280 1.655 1.474 1,397 826 753 430 248 248 248 238 238 238 238 238 238 238 223 218 218 0 48.487 31-Jan-90 TOTAL CITYWIDE D.U.'S AS OF 1/1 27,244 27,244 27,825 30,808 33.960 36.603 38,883 40,538 42,012 43.409 44,235 44,988 45,418 45.666 45,914 46,162 46,400 46.638 46.876 47,114 47,352 47,590 47,828 48.051 48,269 48,487 48,487 TOTAL CITYWIDE POPULATION AS OF 1/1 67.320 67.320 68,75r 76. 12> 83.915 90,446 96.080 100,169 103,812 107.264 109,305 111.165 112.228 112,841 113.453 114,066 114,654 115.242 115,831 116.41f 117.007 117,595 118.183 118.734 119.273 119,811 119.811 * Zone Plan not yet adopted. Phasing is taken from draft Zone Plan. NOTE: The above phasing is based on property owners'/developers' projections. Actual development is contingent upon adequacy of public facilities. CITYWIDE NON-RESIDENTIAL PHASING PROJECTIONS FOR ADOPTED ZONE PLANS YEAR AS OF 1/1 1990 (EXISTING) 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 PAGE 1 OF 2 As of 31-Jan-90 LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONES 1 2,734,987 45,000 44.500 55,400 28,000 67,500 62,000 65,000 95,000 77.000 62.000 88,560 65,500 38.000 28,000 75.000 87.550 75,000 75,000 82,550 94,050 96,800 192.700 186,799 57,084 BID OUT TOTAL 4.578.980 2 34 266,499 1.868,591 0 40,249 44,700 0 116,566 37,897 89,211 BID OUT 30,056 BID OUT 44,431 13,068 86.707 99,317 BID OUT 423,314 2,224.767 89.211 5 6,670,478 954,530 954,530 954,530 954,530 954,530 954,530 954,530 943,503 493,788 493.788 493.788 493,788 493,786 493,788 493.788 493,788 493,768 493.788 493,788 493,788 493,788 493,788 493,788 493,788 BLDOUT 22,196,299 6 7 892,804 1,600 83,505 0 34,875 39.204 34,875 39,204 34,875 39,204 34,875 BLDOUT 34,675 34,875 34,875 34.875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34.875 34.875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 BLDOUT 1,778,434 119.212 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 98,385 00 0 00 00 0 280.099 46,885 60.984 79.715 460,000 285,789 BLDOUT 0 468,552 285,789 0 BLDOUT 285,789 0 BLDOUT 0 0 0 0 0 0 131,900 0 0 19,000 0 109,400 49,975 4.725 4,725 BLDOUT 399,440 1,307,036 904,252 60.984 0 CITYWIDE NON-RESIDENTIAL PHASING PROJECTIONS FOR ADOPTED ZONE PLANS YEAR AS OF 1/1 1990 (EXISTING) 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 TOTAL 15' 0 0 137.500 77.500 68,000 55,500 45.000 145.478 135,663 106.237 64,551 BID OUT 835.429 PAGE 2 OF 2 As of 31 -Jan-90 LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONES 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 0 248,461 10.454 0 325,829 372,940 BID OUT 306,132 73,180 73,180 101,930 259,212 BLOOUT TOTAL ADOPTED NON-RES. SQ.FT. 12.783,795 1,180,428 2,543,011 2.325,193 1.998,554 1,486.436 1,287,037 1,560,408 1,211,038 713.898 657.213 619.223 596.164 700,565 558,666 605,667 637,218 605.669 715.070 663,196 629,447 632,198 723.374 717.474 587.760 0 336,283 1,435.035 36.738,702 TOTAL CITYWIDE SQ.FT. AS OF 1/1 12,781,805 12,781,805 13.962,233 16,505.244 18,830,437 20.828,991 22,315.427 23.602,464 25,162.872 26,373,910 27,087,808 27,745,021 28,364,244 28,960.408 29,660,973 30,219,639 30.825,306 31.462,524 32,068.193 32,783.263 33,446.459 34,075,906 34,706,104 35,431.478 36,148,952 36.736,712 36,688,676 Zone Plan not yet adopted. Phasing Is taken from draft Zone Plan. HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES Planning • Project Management • Fiscal Analysis November 30, 1989 Don Rideout City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Zone 12 LFMP Amendment - Resubmittal. Dear Don: Enclosed please find three (3) copies of the revised Zone 12 Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment. Per the Zone 12 traffic meeting held on October 27, with Dee Landers, Steve Jantz, Marty Bowman and the Fieldstone team, the attached Zone 12 Traffic Report has been revised to include new counts on Olivenhain Road and to include the I-5/La Costa Avenue Southbound ramps. In addition, an addendum to this study will be complete within a few days which shows the possible scenario with no Leucadia Boulevard connection to 1-5. Steve Jantz has agreed to accept the plan for review without this study, however, final comments from the City will not be returned until Steve has reviewed the addendum. In addition, the following revisions have been made per your October 3, 1989 letter: 1. Executive Summary The first sentence has been revised to indicate Zone 12 total acreage and master plan acreage. Zone 6 Circulation discussion has been deleted. Exhibits 2 and 3 are reformatted to Zone 7 format. Per our subsequent discussion on November 17, no parks condition will be required. There is no special condition for Fire. Station No. 6 has is shown as operational. 2386 Faraday, Suite 120 • Carlsbad • CA 92008 • (619)438-1465 2. Introduction A discussion has been added regarding transfer of any excess units. The acreages on Exhibit 6 have been corrected. 3. Buildout Exhibit 9 - Summary Table has been deleted. Exhibits 10 and 12 - acreages shown on Exhibit 10 are correct and Exhibit 12 has been revised to be consistent. 4. City Administration Exhibit 22 - Water District office location has been added. Exhibit 24 - Las Palmas Debt Service is shown as requested. 5. Library New 6,060 square foot leased space has replaced previously leased space. 6. Wastewater We have not received comments from the water district at this time. The changes indicated in red-lined text from the City have been made. Amounts shown for Leucadia's share of Encina projects are from Joan Geiselhart. Exhibit 30 has been reprinted to show all columns. We understand that the demand figures will be updated prior to Planning Commission approval. 7. Parks Correct Parks inventory adoption date is shown. Exhibit 34 - Zone ll's phasing has been corrected and reference to Carrillo has been deleted. Exhibit 35 - CIP budget for Carrillo is shown. 8. Drainage Exhibit 36 has been deleted. Exhibit 37 (new 36) - Corrections as requested. The Rick Engineering study, reviewed by the City, has been used to determine mitigation for the purposed of the zone plan at this time. Per our previous discussions, the revised section addresses improvements at the Olivenhain Road and La Costa Avenue crossings of Encinitas Creek. Discussion of potential future studies and revisions to the findings of the Rick report are included in the text and special conditions. Other revisions have been made as indicated. 9. Open Space Exhibit 51 (new 49) - This exhibit has been revised to indicate CT 85-6(A) demand. As indicated, this map is being revised and therefore the demand will most likely change. Exhibit 50 (new 48) - Exhibit has been revised so that no 25 - 40% slopes are counted as existing performance standard open space. Due to the small scale of the map, what appears to be right-of-way counted along Calle Barcelona is a proposed bike/pedestrian trail system which runs throughout the proposed Arroyo La Costa project. The portion of this trail being counted for open space is completely outside the right-of-way. 10. Schools To date, we have not received formal comment from the school district. 11. Sewer Exhibit 61 (new 58) has been redrawn to be more clear and consistent with other graphics. Proposed Build Out Facilities have been moved as indicated. Reclaimed water discussion has been deleted from this section. Standard wording has been added to special conditions. Changes have been made as noted. 12. Water Exhibit 66 (new 63) has been revised as noted. I will contact Steve as soon as the addendum is available. Please give me a call if you have any questions or need additional information. Thank you for your continued cooperation in the processing of this amendment. Sincerely, Lisa Thomas cc: Brian Hunter Steve Jantz John Barone Doug Avis Bill Hofman Dave Davis HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES Planning • Project Management • Fiscal Analysis November 9, 1989 Don Rideout City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Request for Withdrawal of the Zone 12 Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment. Dear Don: As per the request in your letter dated November 6, 1989, on behalf of the property owner in Zone 12, we are respectfully requesting a withdrawal of the Zone 12 Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment. Although we are withdrawing the Zone 12 LFMP at this time, it is our understanding that with resubmittal of the next draft of the plan, no processing time will be lost. Sincerely, Lisa Thomas cc: Phil Carter Brian Hunter Steve Jantz Ruth Besecker, The Villages of La Costa John Barone, The Fieldstone Company 2386 Faraday, Suite 120 • Carlsbad • CA 92008 • [619] 438-1465 City of Carlsbad Community Development November 7, 1989 Lisa Thomas Hofman Planning Associates 2386 Faraday Avenue, Suite 120 Carlsbad, CA 92008 AMENDMENT TO THE ZONE 12 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN Dear Lisa: The State mandated time limit for processing the amendment to the Zone 12 Local Facilities Management Plan is November 28, 1989. Since it is not possible for the amendment to be approved by that time, it is recommended that the plan be withdrawn at this time. The plan may be resubmitted as soon as you wish. Your letter of withdrawal must be received by November 14, 1989 or staff will have no choice but to schedule the amendment for denial. Your prompt reply will be appreciated. Sincerely, DON RIDEOUT Senior Management Analyst DR:bjn c: Assistant to the City Manager Planning Director Senior Planner Associate Civil Engineer 2O75 Las Palmas Drive •Carlsbad, California 92OO9-4859»(619) 438-1161 City of Carlsbad Community Development October 2, 1989 Lisa Thomas Hofman Planning Associates 2386 Faraday Avenue, Suite 120 Carlsbad, CA 92008 CORRECTIONS AND CHANGES TO LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR ZONE 12 Dear Lisa: In follow-up to our meeting yesterday, the following corrections and changes need to be made to the draft Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12: 1. Executive Summary » Pg. 1 - Indicate total acreage of zone as well as acreage within master plan area. • Pg. 2 - Delete discussion of Zone 6 Circulation Exhibits 2 and 3. Use format as shown in latest version of Zone 7. ^*» Pg. 15 - Parks Special Condition should state that no residential development will be allowed after 1995 unless actions have been taken to guarantee additional park acreage within the Southeast Quadrant. * Pg. 17 - No Special Conditions for Fire. Assume Station No. 6 will be operational. 2. Introduction 3. Buildout Pg. 21 - As part of the discussion of the revised master plan, include a discussion of the reduction of units and indicate that the lost units will only be available subject to City Council Policy on allocation of excess units. Exhibit 6 - Clarify acreage figures. Exhibit 9 - Delete summary table. Exhibit 10 - Show correct acreage figures. Exhibit 12 - Show correct acreage figures. 2O75 Las Palmas Drive-Carlsbad, California 92OO9-4859«(619) 438-1161 Lisa Thomas October 2, 1989 Page Two 4. City Administration » Exhibit 22 - Indicate location of Carlsbad Municipal Water District offices. * Exhibit 24 - Indicate Las Palmas Debt Service 1989-99 5. Library 4 Pg. 60 and 62 - Add square footage for new warehouse lease. 6. Wastewater « This section will be reviewed by Leucadia County Water District, and additional comments or corrections may be forthcoming. • Exhibit 30 - The right-hand column (Adequacy/Inadequacy) did not print completely. • Pg. 72 - Demand figures will need to be updated at a future time. * Exhibit 31 - Show only Leucadia County Water District share of these facilities. 7. Parks 8. Drainage Pg. 79 - Show correct date for adoption of new Parks Inventory. Exhibit 34 - Show corrected phasing of Zone 11. In footnote no. 1, delete reference to Carrillo Park. Exhibit 35 - In footnotes, show CIP Budget for Carrillo Park. • Delete Exhibit 36. • Exhibit 37 - Show internal street system. Provide description of natural drainage course between B and C. • Indicate proposed detention basin. • Pg. 91 - Discuss intersection of El Camino Real and Olivenhain in more detail. Drainage mitigation must address this location. • Exhibit 38 - Make corrections as noted. 9. Open Space • Pg. 106 and Exhibit 51 - Must address CT 85-6(A) open space demands. • Slopes 25% - 40% can only be counted toward open space requirement if improved. • Do not count any right-of-way areas as open space. 10. Schools » This section has been sent to the appropriate school districts for comment. Lisa Thomas October 2, 1989 Page Three 11. Sewer 12. Water Sincerely, Exhibit 61 - Should be re-done to be consistent with other graphics. Pg. 137 - Proposed buildout facilities discussion should be moved up to immediately follow existing facilities discussion. Pg. 138 - Delete discussion of reclaimed water. Pg. 141 - Provide standard wording for Special Conditions. Make other changes as noted. Exhibit 66 - Make corrections as noted. DON RIDEOUT Senior Management Analyst bjn c: Assistant to the City Manager HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES Planning • Project Management • Fiscal Analysis August 28, 1989 Brian Hunter City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Zone 12 LFMP Amendment - Resubmittal. Dear Brian: Attached for your review, please find four draft copies of the Zone 12 Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment. This plan has been revised to address comments from the City's April 12, 1989 letter as well as comments received during our subsequent meeting. For your convenience, listed below are the items which require some explanation: Item 1: Text on page 1 of Executive Summary has been modified to include explanation that this plan is an amendment. Item 5: Most of the differences between the Parks section in the original plan and that in the amendment are attributable to the 1988 parks agreement between BCE Development and the City of Carlsbad. This agreement was made to provide for the mitigation outlined in the original Zone 12 plan. The agreement is discussed in the revised Parks chapter and will be included in the appendix of the final draft. Other differences in the analysis are generally in the area of existing and approved dwelling unit counts. Additional dwelling units have been built in Zones 6 and 11 since approval of the Zone 12 plan in 1987. The new figures for existing and approved units are shown in the revised amendment draft. In addition, the acreage, timing, and funds for various park facilities have been updated to reflect the 1989 parks inventory and 1989-90 to Build Out CIP. 2386 Faraday, Suite 120 • Carlsbad • CA 98008 • [619)438-1465 Item 6: The Drainage Facilities section of the plan has been revised to incorporate the findings of three HEC studies prepared by Rick Engineering and Hunsaker and Associates. These documents have been reviewed by Fraser Engineering for the City of Carlsbad. Item 7: A revised traffic report is forthcoming from Weston Pringle and Associates. The final report is projected to be complete within one week. We are requesting that you review the remainder of the plan in the interim. Item 9: No major revisions were requested by the School Distict during the meeting on April 14, 1989. We are in continuing contact with both districts during the review of the La Costa Southwest Tentative Maps and will incorporate their requests into the plan where applicable. Item 10: These sections have been updated to include findings from the most recent studies. A few items should be noted in addition to the above explanations. The Quadrant Cap has been removed from Exhibit 17 pending completion of the Southeast Quadrant analysis in terms of Prop E. As a result, the quadrant population and build out demand have not been revised. The remainder of the Parks chapter has been updated. The Wastewater section of the plan has been updated to reflect most recent analysis for Encina. The Leucadia County Water District projections have been updated per conversations with district staff, however the district supervisor was not available during final revisions, therefore, the district will need to review the updated analysis. If you have any questions or need additional information, please give me a call. Thank you for your continued cooperation in expediting the approval of this plan. Sincerely, Lisa Thomas cc: Phil Carter Don Rideout Steve Jantz The Fieldstone Company HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES Planning • Project Management « Rscal Analysis August 25, 1989 Don Rideout City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Zone 12 LFMP Amendment - Request for Extension of Time Limit. Dear Don: In response to your letter of August 18, 1989, we are respectfully requesting a 90-day extension of processing time limits for the Zone 12 Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment. This request is made on behalf of the Zone 12 property owners. We anticipate submitting the revised draft plan on Monday, August 28, 1989 under a separate cover. If you have any questions or need additional information, please give me a call. Sincerely, Lisa Thomas cc: Brian Hunter Steve Jantz John Barone, The Fieldstone Company Ruth Besecker, The Villages of La Costa 2386 Faraday, Suite 1 SO • Carlsbad • CA 92008 • [619] 438-1465 City of Carlsbad Community Development August 18, 1989 Lisa Thomas Hofman Planning Associates 2386 Faraday Avenue, Suite 120 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Lisa: The State-mandated deadline for processing the Zone 12 Amendment is rapidly approaching. The Amendment was submitted on August 30, 1988. This makes the deadline August 30, 1989. Since we have never seen the revised draft, it is not possible for the Plan to be reviewed, finalized and brought to a public hearing even with a 90 day extension. Therefore, it is suggested that you consider withdrawing the Plan at this time and resubmitting when the revised draft is ready for City review. Due to the impending deadline, your response must be received by Friday, August 25, 1989. Sincerely, DON RIDEOUT Senior Management Analyst bjn 2075 Las Palmas Drive •Carlsbad, California 92OO9-4859»(619) 438-1161 City of Carlsbad Planning Department June 21, 1989 Bill Hofman Hofman Planning Associates 2386 Faraday Avenue, Suite 120 Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: Zone 12 LFMP Amendment - Traffic Report Per our recent conversation, this letter is written to summarize the requirements for the traffic analysis for the Zone 12 Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment. The traffic study included in the adopted Zone 11 and 12 Plans must be updated in order to provide an adequate analysis for the impacts of future development by Zone 12. The revised traffic study should be based on the following assumptions: 1. Use the latest traffic counts on the circulation facilities impacted by Zone 12 traffic. The latest counts can be provided by City staff upon request of your consultant. 2. Assume background traffic increases of 3% per year. 3. Revise the phasing of future development in Zone 11 and 12 to conform with the proposed phasing in the amended Zone 12 Plan. 4. Include traffic generated from any new development in the City of Encinitas which directly impacts circulation facilities adjacent to Zone 12. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at 438-1161. Associate Civil Engineer SCJ:af c: Ruth Besecker Phil Carter Brian Hunter Don Rideout Bob Wojcik 2O75 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad, California 92OO9-4859 • (619) 438-1161 ENCINITAS UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT HPR1S BOARD OF TRUSTEES Anthony]. Brandenburg William Carli Mary Jo Nortman VanRlley Sandra Schultz SUPERINTENDENT Donald E. Lhubtrom. Ed.D DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT David Philips ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT/ PERSONNEL Mary Lee Howe. Ed.D. GiTY OF CARLSBAD D DISTRICT OFFICE 189 Union Street Endnitas, CA 92024 (619) 944-4300 FAX (619) 942-7094 O CAPRI 941 Capri Road Endnitas, CA 92024 944-4360 Nancy Austin Principal O FLORA VISTA 1690 Wandering Road Endnitas. CA 92024 944-4329 Nancy Cunningham. Ed.D. Principal D LA COSTA HEIGHTS 3035 Levante Street Carlsbad 92009 944-4375 Kay North Principal D MISSION ESTANCIA 3330 Calk Barcelona Carlsbad 92009 944-4300 Greg Ryan Principal D OCEAN KNOLL 910MelbaRoad Endnitas 92024 944-4351 Raymond O'Toole. Ph.D. Principal D PACIFIC VIEW 608 Third Street Endnitas 92024 944-4339 Lorraine Boyle Principal O PARK DALE LANE 2050 Park Dale Lane Endnitas 92024 944-4344 Bruce DeMltchell Principal D PAUL ECKE CENTRAL 185 Union Street Endnitas 92024 944-4323 Jere Mclnemey. Ph.D. Principal April 20, 1989 Mr. Brian Hunter City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 Dear Mr. Hunter, I have reviewed the information regarding Zone 12. The assumptions as presented appear to be within the school district's master plan for providing facilities for students. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review the information. Donald E. Lindstror Superintendent via City of Carlsbad Planning Department April 14, 1989 Mr. Eric Hall San Dieguito Union High School District 625 N. Vulcan Avenue Leucadia, CA 92024 RE: ZONE 12 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN Dear Mr. Hall: The City of Carlsbad is currently undertaking the second phase of its Growth Management Program. This phase includes the preparation and review of Local Facilities Management Plans for each of the 25 Local Facilities Management Zones within the City. As part of the formal preparation and review process, your district is being asked to review the buildout and phasing assumptions of the plans to determine whether the information is consistent with your district's planning and programming of school facilities. Specifically, the City's Growth Management Program requires the adopted performance standard for school facilities be continually met as growth occurs in Carlsbad. Attached, you will find your review: 1. The adopted performance standard for school facilities 2. Draft buildout assumptions for Zone 12 3. Draft phasing assumptions for Zone 12 Could you please review this information to determine three things. First, is the information correct? Second, can your district provide school facilities according to the phasing assumptions presented in the plan and consistent with Carlsbad's adopted performance standard? And third, what means of monitoring demand for and supply of school facilities would be appropriate to establish between your district and the City of Carlsbad? We would appreciate a letter indicating your findings and any comments regarding the processing of Local Facilities Management Plans. If you need further information or assistance, please call me at 438-1161. Thank you very much for your assistance. Sincerely, BRIAN HUNTER Senior Planner Enclosure c: Phil Carter, Assistant to the City Manager Don Rideout, Senior Management Analyst 2O75 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad, California 92OO9-4859 • (619) 438-1161 City of Carlsbad** •^^^•^•••^^^•^••'•^^•••^••••^•^^•^^••^iPlanninci Department April 14, 1989 Mr. Donald Lindstrom Encinitas Union School District 189 Union Street Encinitas, CA 92024 RE: ZONE 12 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN Dear Mr. Lindstrom The City of Carlsbad is currently undertaking the second phase of its Growth Management Program. This phase includes the preparation and review of Local Facilities Management Plans for each of the 25 Local Facilities Management Zones within the City. As part of the formal preparation and review process, your district is being asked to review the buildout and phasing assumptions of the plans to determine whether the information is consistent with your district's planning and programming of school facilities. Specifically, the City's Growth Management Program requires the adopted performance standard for school facilities be continually met as growth occurs in Carlsbad. Attached, you will find your review: 1. The adopted performance standard for school facilities 2. Draft buildout assumptions for Zone 12 3. Draft phasing assumptions for Zone 12 Could you please review this information to determine three things. First, is the information correct? Second, can your district provide school facilities according to the phasing assumptions presented in the plan and consistent with Carlsbad's adopted performance standard? And third, what means of monitoring demand for and supply of school facilities would be appropriate to establish between your district and the City of Carlsbad? We would appreciate a letter indicating your findings and any comments regarding the processing of Local Facilities Management Plans. If you need further information or assistance, please call me at 438-1161. Thank you very much for your assistance. Sincerely, BRIAN HUNTER Senior Planner Enclosure c: Phil Carter, Assistant to the City Manager Don Rideout, Senior Management Analyst 2O75 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad, California 92OO9-4859 • (619) 438-1161 HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES Planning • Project Management • Rscal Analysis March 13, 1989 Phil Carter City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Transmittal of Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment for Management Zone 12. Dear Phil: Attached please find 6 copies of the Zone 12 Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment. We are pleased to present this LFMP as the official submittal. As per our discussions with the growth management team, the approved Zone 12 circulation chapter and appendices are included. It is anticipated that these will be revised upon finalization of the La Costa Master Plan EIR. Please let me know if there is anything I can do for you or provide to you to facilitate your review. Sincerely, Lisa Thomas cc: Mike Holzmiller Ray Patchett Don Rideout Brian Hunter Steve Jantz Doug Avis Brian Milich 2386 Faraday, Suite 120 • Carlsbad • CA 92008 • [619] 438-1465 Lance B. Schulte City of Carlsbad Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: RECEIPT OF FINAL DRAFT LFMP FOR ZONE 12 The San Dieguito Union High School District has received a copy of the School section of the final draft Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12. The section is consistent with the San Dieguito Union High School District comments as stated in our letter(s) of [Name of Contact] [Date] y//y 7? [Agency] Citv of CarlsbadM*P*i^«Engineering August 29, 1991 Mr.Mark Campbell Project Design Consultants Imperial Bank Building 701 "B" Street San Diego, Ca 92101 RE: CONDITION OF APPROVAL ARROYO LA COSTA, CT88-03-1 As the first plan check is being returned to you, we would like to emphasize that there are a number of items listed in the Conditions of Approval that need to be satisfied in addition to the construction drawings and record map. Paramount among the conditions are the ones relating to the following: • Cond. 2, Reso. 3029 (as modified by City Council Reso. 90-264) Prior to the first final' map. Requires a financing of a proportional guaranteeing construction of a proportional share of Rancho Santa Fe Road from Olivenhain Road southerly to the City boundary. • Cond. 2, Reso. 3032: Parks Agreement Approval of CT88-03 is contingent upon approval of a Supplement to the 1988 Parks Agreement. (This supplement has not been completed to date. The approval of CT88-03 is contingent upon this agreement, therefore the lack of the supplement is a critical short fall). • Cond. 14, Reso. 3032: Prior to any final map. Requires a comprehensive financing plan for all improvements required by the LFMP for Zone 12 to be approved by the City Council. • Cond. 44 Reso. 3032: Prior to the first final map. Requires an agreement with the City to provide this project's proportional share of the City's total obligation for low and moderate income housing units. Please note that the items listed are not the only ones needing attention. The responsibility of meeting the conditions of approval and the plancheck comments are entirely with the Developer and the Engineer-of-Work, After you have had a chance to review the plan check comments, we recommend you call to set- up a meeting to review the plan check and resolve any questions that you may have. . Helming Planchecker Doug Con DLH:pd tr 2O75 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad, California 92OO9-1519 • (619)438-1161 Lance B. Schulte MAR 1988 City of Carlsbad PWNMKPp;, Planning Department CARLSBAD 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: RECEIPT OF FINAL DRAFT LFMP FOR ZONE 12 The Olivenhain Municipal Water District has received a copy of the Water section of the final draft Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12. The section is consistent with the Olivenhain Municipal Water District comments as stated in our letter(s) of r . t - [Name of Contact^[Date]General Services Subdivision Rep OLIVENHAIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT [Agency] City of Carlsbad Planning Department PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF DECISION July 8, 1990 HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES 2836 Faraday, Suite 120 Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: LFMP 12 At the Planning Commission meeting of June 20, 1990, your application was considered. The Commission voted 6-0 to APPROVE your request. Some decisions are final at Planning Commission, and others automatically go forward to City Council. If you have any questions regarding the final dispositions of your application, please call the Planning Department at 438-1161. MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director OL/I? MJH:kd 2O75 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92OO9-4859 • (619)438-1161 City of Carlsbad Community Development January 18, 1989 Mr. William Hofman Hofman Planning Associates 2386 Faraday, Suite 120 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Bill: It was a pleasure meeting with you today regarding Zone 12. This letter is to confirm our discussion. Because an EIR is being prepared in conjunction with the Zone Plan revision, General Plan Amendment, and Master Plan, the State mandated time limit for processing these items is one year from the date of acceptance by the City. Since the Zone Plan revision was accepted on August 30, 1988 with the deposit of the processing fee, the deadline is August 30, 1989. Another issue discussed today was circulation, specifically the alignment of Olivenhain Road at its intersection with El Camino Real. It was agreed that you will prepare several alternative alignments and a detailed initial study of these alternatives for review by the City of Carlsbad and later discussion with the City of Encinitas. Carlsbad staff's initial perception is that a mitigated Negative Declaration may be sufficient, but it is also possible that a higher level of environmental review could prove to be necessary. Finally, it was indicated that additional authorization is needed for preparation of the revised Zone Plan because of the property owned by the Northern Pacific Railroad Co. If the Railroad is not agreeable to authorizing the revision, the matter can be scheduled for City Council authorization at the appropriate time. Staff will continue to coordinate with you on these issues and others that may arise so that the revised Zone 12 Plan and related actions can be accomplished concurrently. Sincerely, DON RIDEOUT Senior Management Analyst bjn 2O75 Las Palmas Drive •Carlsbad, California 92OO9-4859«(619) 438-1161 HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES Planning " Project Management " Fiscal Analysis December 12, 1988 Phil Carter City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Number of Existing Dwelling Units in Local / Facilities Management Zones 6, 11, and 12. i Dear Phil: Enclosed for your review, please find an updated list of dwelling units built in Zones 6, 11, and 12 from January 1, 1987 to November 30, 1988. This list was derived from review of City monthly building reports (permits issued) . With your concurrence, we will be adding the attached totals to those shown as existing in the previously adopted Zone 12 plan. This new total will be used in the Zone 12- Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment. If you have any questions or do not concur with the above understanding, please give me a call. Sincerely, Lisa Thomas attachments c: Doug Avis 2386 Faraday, Suite 120 • Carlsbad • CA 92008 • (619)438-1465 EXISTING DWELLING UNIT SUMMARY DATE ADDRESS DU's LFM ZONE |JAN '87 1 1 1 |FEB '87 1 1 (MARCH '87 APRIL '87 |MAY '87 IJUNE '87 11111 |AUG '87 il i1 (SEPT '87 |OCT '87 i1 |NOV '87 111 (DEC '87 1 1 6700/6800 Xana Way (CT 84-23) 2607 Levante 2904 Managua 7000's Alicante 2848 Esturion 2105 Alga 2912 Managua 2801 Esturion 7336 El Fuerte 2720 Llama <^f316 Cadencia^"^ 2610 Acuna Ct. 7058 El Fuerte 7125 Argonauta 7326 Cadencia none 7233 Babi Ionia St. 2833 Esturion CT7610 Primavera} (~$Wi Venad^) 2712 Cazadero 2656 Obeli sco £3015 La Costa AveT} C546T7a~l:osta AveT") 2809 Eoturion -7041 Cl Fuerie 7999 El l-U&rte /2"A20 La Costa Avej? £"7000 Caminito Monarca (CT 83-1) ~rr\f 1 A i »A+n./] j-BUi Mcunu <^336 Venado__^ x^7S28Nueva Castilla Way,), <C23TT F_osc£> none SUBTOTAL '87 54 1 1 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . fv" » 91i 1 o ** 1 & 1 1 S)1 <&s> 220 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 A 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 I Note: ** = duplex units *** 12-unit condos. EXISTING DUELLING UNIT SUMMARY (con't) I JAN '88 |FEB '88 |MAR '88 [APRIL '88 rj3Q6-jl4Atta Vista (CT 72jjO) |HAY '88 /7704 RocTs AUG '88 ^jCTTPiragua ^> 2910 Mmiiajua (CT 84-10) •ZOOO'H-i o idUUU's AllCante- 7000'!, AUivu gi^g Unieuiiiiu i' (SEPT '88 |OCT '88 NOV '88 T7nr Hanipiin •7340 El Tuerte HOB Dolora (3T07 La Costa 7030 Cl Tuorte SUBTOTAL '88 ZONE 6 TOTAL (APRIL '87 3514 Sitio Baya |OCT '87 3467-72 Sitio Baya (CT 75-9B) I I ZONE 11 TOTAL Note: ** = duplex units **** - 4-piex units HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES Planning • Project Management • Rscal Analysis November 21, 1988 Phil Carter City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Submittal of Zone 12 - LFMP Amendment. Dear Phil: During our phone conversation on November 14, 1988, we discussed the processing of the Zone 12 - Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment which is being prepared concurrently with the Arroyo La Costa Master Plan. At the City's request, a ten thousand dollar processing fee for the amendment was submitted on August 24, 1988. This was requested in conjunction with the Arroyo La Costa preliminary tentative map review. Since at that time preparation of an amendment to Zone 12 would have been premature, no draft copy of the amendment was submitted with the processing fee. Since that time, preparation of the Zone 12 - LFMP Amendment has begun and the plan is projected to be complete within approximately three weeks. The amendment will be a fully updated, complete zone plan. A complete summary of the mitigation measures is not available as yet, however, analysis to date shows no major revisions to the previously approved mitigation. We would like to take this opportunity to affirm our desire to process the plan within the given time constraint and willingness to facilitate its review. If you have any questions or need additional information, please give me a call. Sincerely, Lisa Thomas cc: Doug Avis Bill Hofman Cheryl Cunningham 2386 Faraday, Suite 120 • Carlsbad • CA 92008 • [619)438-1465 PLANNING DEPARTMENT ' 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 (619) 438-1161 €itp of Cartefrab February 26, 1988 Ross MacDonald Managing Director La Costa Ranch Company 6670 El Camino Real P.O Box 9000-266 Carlsbad, California 92009 Dear Ross: The purpose of this letter is summarize the Council's action taken regarding Local Facilities Management Plans for Zones 11 and 12. As you are well aware the City Council approved both the Local Facilities Management Plans for Zones 11 and 12 on February 23, 1988. A point that needs to be clarified is that dealing with the dwelling unit transfer. As proposed the 179 dwelling units to be transferred from Local Facilities Management Zone 12 to Local Facilities Management Zone 11 was approved by the City Council with their action. The proposal to transfer 206 dwelling units from Local Facilities Management 10 to Local Facilities Management Zone 11 was conditionally approved based upon the Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council. In essence this means, 206 units cannot be transferred from Management Zone 10 until the Local Facilities Management Plan has been prepared for that zone. As referenced in your letter of December 9, 1987, the maximum number of dwelling units to be built in Zone 10 will be 633 provided the 206 units are transferred to Zone 11 once the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 10 has been prepared and approved. It is correct to assume that in the event other unit reductions are achieved elsewhere within the southwest quadrant that any unit savings would be considered for the La Costa Ranch Company Land as allowed under Section 21.90 of the City's Growth Management Ordinance. Allowing for an excess of 633 could be achieved where appropriate provided that is both consistent with the Growth Management Program and the provisions of Proposition E which set the ultimate dwelling unit cap for the southeast Ross MacDonald February 26, 1988 Page 2 quadrant of 17,328 units. The La Costa Ranch Company would have the same ability to request additional units as any other land holder within the southeast quadrant. It is important to emphasize that the exact method or priority order in which staff would recommend additional dwelling units being added to La Costa Ranch property or other property in the southeast quadrant has not been specifically determined at this time. It is also important to understand that a dwelling unit transfer or an increase in density, should units become available, cannot be made until after all the zone plans have been prepared and approved within the quadrant. Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the preparation of both the Local Facilities Management Plans for Zones 11 and 12. It took an extreme amount of hard work and effort on your part and I appreciate your assistance. Sincerely, CITY OF CARLSBAD PHILIP O. CARTER Growth Management Manager arb cc:Marty Orenyak Michael Holzmiller Zone 11 & 12 Files THE WILLIAM N. HOFMAN COMPANY Planning Project Management Environmental October 13, 1987 Philip Carter City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Residential Dwelling Unit Balance in the Southeast Quadrant. Dear Phil: The purpose of this letter is to discuss the dwelling unit balance in the southeast quadrant. You have recently indicated to me that the total number of residential units in individual zones may be in excess of the quadrant limits established as part of Proposition E. If this is the case, I believe it is in the best interests of both the city and the major property owners to discuss methods to resolve this issue. The La Costa Ranch Company, being the major land owner in this quadrant, has asked me to suggest ways of resolving this issue in a fair and equitable manner to all the property owners within the quadrant. This issue also relates to the La Costa Ranch Company's request for a unit transfer from Zone 10 to Zone 11. Methods by which I see resolution to this issue are the following listed in order of preference by the La Costa Ranch Company: 1. La Costa Master Plan Amendment - As you know, the La Costa Master Plan is being amended by the City. The La Costa Ranch Company has requested a change of land use in Zone 10, north of Carrillo Way, from residential to a mixed land use concept. Such a change would lower the overall number of residential units in Zone 10. The number of units may be reduced to a point where the overall quadrant count may fall below the Proposition E limitation. The La Costa Ranch Company would expect to achieve a viable mixed use concept through the master planning process north of Carrillo Way. Also, the request for a unit transfer of the remaining residential units would still be in effect. 6994 El Camino Real • Suite 208-G • Carlsbad • CA 92009 • (619) 438-1465 2. Compile Excess Units from Other Zones - If the reduction of residential units from Zone 10 is not sufficient to reduce the quadrant unit count below the Proposition E limit, then surplus units may be available from other zones within the quadrant. Our review of zone 6 build out projections indicates that more potential future units are projected for this zone than can be physically built, assuming control point densities. Also, Scripps Hospital in Zone 18 will replace existing residential land use classifications and be a source of more residential units. At a minimum, a thorough analysis should be undertaken of each zone within the quadrant to determine the precise number of excess units from these zones. 3. Refine Density Control Numbers - In the event that no excess units can be found, the last suggestion is to lower the density control point on a quadrant level. This would assure equity among all the land owners within the quadrant if a unit reduction is necessary. These are only three alternatives and there may be others. In any event, I believe it is necessary to develop a quadrant solution as opposed to an individual zone solution to a quadrant problem. I suggest that a meeting be held with the Planning Department and the La Costa Ranch Company to discuss the overall quadrant build out numbers and the unit transfer. Each zone is dependent on knowing the exact number of available units for that zone in order to determine public facility adequacy and future demand. Please call me if you have any questions. At your suggestion, I will call Mike Howes to set up a meeting with Mike, Michael Holzmiller and you for Friday afternoon to discuss this issue. Sincerely, Bill Hofman cc: Michael Holzmiller Mike Howes Lance Schulte Ross McDonald THE WILLIAM N. HOFMAN COMPANY Planning Project Management Environmental October 8, 1987 Lance Schulte City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Build Out Projections for the Local Facilities Management Plan - Zone 12. Dear Lance: This letter is written to discuss the methodology used to determine the build out projections and potential future units for Zone 12 pursuant to the City's Growth Management Plan. In your letter of September 18, 1987, it is indicated that the potential remaining units in our Zone 12 - LFMP were incorrect and should be reduced by 298 from 689 to 391, a 43 percent reduction. We believe this is a misunderstanding and that the original number is correct. This letter will attempt to demonstrate the reason. First, I would like to briefly describe the methodology used in the zone 12 plan in determining the build out numbers. METHODOLOGY The methodology used to calculate our build out projections was discussed with and agreed to by the City staff and the City's consultants (ie. Fay Round and Paul Zucker) after several meetings were held to discuss this issue. The methodology takes into account the existing units within Zone 12 that were built above the density control point of the Growth Management Plan. The methodology used is as follows: 1. Calculation of Gross Residential Acres - The gross acreage for each residential land use category was calculated by Rick Engineering based on the City's existing General Plan. The method of calculation 6994 El Camino Real • Suite 208-G • Carlsbad • CA 92009 • (619) 438-1465 was a planimeter on the city's 1000* scale map. The gross acreage for the entire zone was determined which included existing projects and approved projects. The total land was categorized by General Plan land use designations. 2. Determination of Environmental Constraints - All environmental constraints were determined by Rick Engineering using a 200* scale aerial topographic map and biological field surveys. In your September 18th letter mentioned above, it is indicated that the constraints map appears to be accurate. 3. Calculation of Net Residential Acres - Net residential acres were determined by subtracting the environmentally constrained lands from the remaining gross acreage and the vacant gross acreage with approved developments. Environmental constraints were not subtracted from existing developments since these properties were built prior to the Growth Management Ordinance and the General Plan Amendment relating to density calculation. Again, this procedure was previously agreed to by the City at an early meeting regarding the preparation of the zone plans. 4. Total Zone 12 Unit Calculation - The potential total units for Zone 12 were determined by multiplying the net residential acres by the established density control points. This number represents the maximum number of units that can be built in Zone 12. 5. Potential Future Units - The potential future units were determined by subtracting the existing and the approved units from the total units derived in 4 above. This calculation ensures that the zone will not receive a higher number of units due to approved and existing projects that have densities above the density control point. Applying this methodology, the potential future units for the zone is 689. As I have mentioned, this methodology was based on direction from the city at several meetings at the outset of the Growth Management Program. Shortly, I will provide you with documentation that outlines the meetings and the specific direction received from the city regarding build out projections during the last year. PROBLEM AND RESOLUTION In an attachment to your letter of September 18, 1987, it is stated that the existing and approved projects within the zone (Ponderosa, Santa Fe Ridge and SW Phase I) exceed the density control point by 298 units. The letter indicates, therefore, that the 689 potential future units must be reduced by this amount. What may not have been recognized by this evaluation is that the excess units in the approved and existing projects were already subtracted per step 5 as described above. In effect, these excess units may have been double counted. The primary point to be made is that although the area of zone 12 that includes existing and approved projects (i.e. Ponderosa, Santa Fe Ridge and SW Phase I) exceeds the density control point by 298 units, the overall zone at build out will not exceed this control point. This is because the potential future units calculated for the zone are below the density control point, thus, averaging the units within the entire zone to density control point conformity. Please review this letter and call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Bill Hofman cc: Michael Holzmiller Phil Carter Mike Howes Ross McDonald REC'D FROM H CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 438-5621 ( LA COSTA RANCH CO i. Lid. 45-0616006 NO. 100090 PLEASE DETACH HERE BEFORE DEPOSITING CHECK CARLSBAD, CALIFOftNIA 92008^ REC'D FROM Oo- ACCOUNT NO.DESCRIPTION AMOUNT • ffa./jLi.v"-. - H»tyrf$,i* 07/2i 0,Ol OSMisc. . i , TOTAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 (619) 438-1161 City of Cartebab NEGATIVE DECLARATION M u PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: The largely undeveloped southerly portion of the La Costa Master Plan, generally described as between El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe Road north of Olivenhain Road and south of the developed area around Levante Street. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Based on the City of Carlsbad's General Plan, the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12 provides a plan for the provision of public facilities to meet adopted performance standards. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within ten (10) days of date of issuance. DATED: December 11, 1987 CASE NO: LFMP 87-12 MICHAEL J. HO" Planning Director MILLER « t '"*; T1%rrTHE;. I&LL HOFJMAlf COMPANY - l/%*1-*''^' --'^O^Kf §L"r<^ ~iPUBLISH pATf*1 December il, i»B> C:? ^? .'' STAFF REPORT DATE: JUNE 20, 1990 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: LFMP 12-LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR ZONE 12 I.RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 3040 recommending APPROVAL of Local Facilities Management Plan 12 as amended. II.BACKGROUND This application was originally scheduled to be heard on May 16, 1990, and June 6, 1990, however, was continued to June 20, 1990, due to the lateness of the hour. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Report dated May 16, 1990, with attachments. BH:rvo May 30, 1990 APPLICATT*"^ SUBMITTAL DATE JULY 23. -^87 STAFF REPORT DATE: JANUARY 20, 1988 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: LFMP 87-11 - LOCAL FArTT-TTIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR ZONE 11 AND LFMP 87-12 - LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR ZONE 12. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission APPROVE the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and ADOPT Resolution No. 2710 recommending APPROVAL of LFMP 87-11 and Resolution No. 2711 recommending APPROVAL of LFMP 87-12. The Local Facilities Management Plans for Zones 11 and 12 are being brought together before the Planning Commission due to the Zones 1) locational proximity, 2) interrelated public facilities impact, and 3) unified public facilities financing program. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND As shown on Exhibit A Zones 11 and 12 are located in the southeastern corner of the City adjacent to Local Facilities Management Zone 6. As shown on Exhibit B Zone 11 is primarily residential. Of the Zone's 2,117 total acres 1,619 are residential. General Plan residential densities range from low (0-1.5 du/ac) to medium-high (8-15 du/ac). Non-residential General Plan land uses include 48 acres of Community Commercial, 11 acres of Office, and 4 acres of Government/Office. Most of Zone 11 is governed by the La Costa Master Plan (MP-149G) as shown on Exhibit C. Zone 12 is also primarily residential. Of the Zone's 669 acres, 555 are residential. Exhibit D shows the Zone's General Plan land use designations. Exhibit E shows the Land Use Zoning in Zone 12. All of Zone 12 is within the La Costa Master Plan (MP-149G). STAFF REPORT LFMP 87-11/87-12 Page 2 III. ANALYSIS 1. Do the proposed Local Facilities Management Plans for Zone 11 and 12 fulfill the purpose, intent, and specific requirements of the Section 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (Growth Management Program)? 2. Are the Local Facilities Management Plans for Zone 11 and 12 consistent with and implement the 1986 Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (1986 CFIP)? DISCUSSION The Growth Management Program requires that a Local Facilities Management Plan be prepared for each Management Zone in order to show how compliance will be maintained with the City's adopted public facility performance standards as growth occurs. The first step in this process requires determining the buildout development potential in the zone. The buildout projections for both these zones are consistent with the methodology contained in the 1986 Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan and the provisions of Proposition E which was approved by the Carlsbad citizens on November 4, 1986. Both plans are proposing to modify the original buildout projections by transferring residential dwelling units out of Management Zones 10 (206 units) and 12 (179) into Management Zone 11. All dwelling unit transfers are proposed on La Costa Ranch Company property. The Carlsbad General Plan allows "density transfer" incentives to encourage the dedication of significant areas of open space. This open space would be determined as the La Costa Master Plan revisions are made and would be located in Management Zone 10. The Growth Management Program anticipated dwelling unit transfers and these may be allowed within a quadrant so long as the transfer does not violate the provisions of Proposition E which established dwelling units caps in each of the four quadrants of the City. Buildout numbers have been confirmed for Management Zones 10, 11, 12, and these are consistent with Proposition E. The transfer of these dwelling units was proposed by the La Costa Ranch Company to assist in the financing of public facility improvements in Zone 11. With this transfer and confirmation of buildout projections in Management Zones 10, 11, and 12, the City can be assured that compliance with the STAFF REPORT LFMP 87-11/87-12 Page 3 provisions of Proposition E will southeast quadrant of the City. be maintained in the Second, the Plans phase the buildout development of each zone based on estimates of yearly development activity. The phasing estimates are consistent with generalized phasing assumptions used in the 1986 CFIP. From these buildout and phased development projections, yearly phased demands for public facilities may be projected and buildout demands identified. Both plans analyze each of the 11 public facilities. This analysis compares the projected public facility demands with the available and planned supply of public facilities to ensure compliance with the adopted performance standards. Where demands for facilities exceed supply, the plans propose the necessary mitigation to maintain conformance with the standard. This analysis is consistent with both the 1986 CFIP and the Growth Management Program. Both Local Facilities Management Plans identify three facilities which currently do not conform with the adopted performance standards. 1. Circulation - 2.Parks - 3. Fire Station No. 6 - 1-5 at La Costa Avenue A shortfall of 28.18 acres in Park District 4 Is needed now. These three facility shortfalls were also identified during the preparation of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6. As part of this Local Facilities Management Plan, an attempt has been made to bring these facilities into conformance with the adopted performance standards. Of these three facility shortfalls, the developers in Zones 11 and 12 are proposing to provide mitigation to bring Parks and Fire into conformance with the adopted performance standards. These plans do not provide an immediate solution for the interchange of 1-5 and La Costa Avenue. The developers of these plans will be proposing a Mello-Roos district to provide for the upfront funding of the interchange improvements. The following two charts provide a brief summary of the 11 public facilities analyzed in both plans. STAFF REPORT LFMP 87-11/87-1* Page 4 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 11 PUBLIC FACILITIES SUMMARY As of 1 1. City Administrative Facilities 2. Library 3. Waste-water Treatment Capacity Parks As of 1/1/87, existing facilities meet the adopted performance standard. Existing and planned facilities are projected to meet the adopted performance standard until 2005. With the construction of the South Carlsbad Library in 1992, library facilities meet the adopted performance standard, and are projected to meet the adopted performance standard until 2002. Existing facilities meet the adopted performance standard. Facilities in Park District 4 presently do not meet the adopted performance standard. As of 1/1/87 there was an inadequacy of 3.28 acres of park land in Park District 4. Additional Park demand created by development between 1/1/87 and 10/31/87 increased park demand to 10.55 acres. Approved but unbuilt developments in Park District 4 increased this inadequacy to 28.18 acres. As a consequence, the plan proposes mitigation that will include revising the existing parks agreement with the la Costa Ranch Company and City 1Adoption date to be added. STAFF REPORT LFMP 87-11/87-12 Page 5 5. Drainage 6. Circulation to do the following: 1) dedicate 32.3 acres of park land and 2) guarantee construction and operation of 28.18 acres of park land. Once this new agreement is executed the Parks standard will be met. Drainage facilities will meet the adopted performance standard with the proposed mitigation measures. Existing conditions require that prior to the issuance of any development permit within Zone 11, a financing program guaranteeing construction of the I-5/Ia Costa Interchange must be approved. As this zone develops, the following road segments will require upgrading: a) Rancho Santa Fe Road b) Olivenhain Road c) La Costa Avenue d) El Camino Real e) Melrose Avenue The mitigation section within the circulation analysis of this zone plan indicates the time frame when these improvements will be required. Also, a financing program guaranteeing the compeltion of the necessary improvements prior to granting occupancy of units within Zone 11 must be approved. This mitigation plan will ensure conformance with the adopted standard through buildout of the Zone. STAFF REPORT LFMP 87-11/87-12 Page 6 7. Fire 8. Open Space 9. Schools Fire facilities serving Zone 11 presently do not meet the adopted performance standard. The proposed mitigation measures will accelerate the construction and operation of Fire Station No. 6. The La Costa Ranch Company will be providing the up front financing necessary to construct and operate this station ahead of the City's proposed C.I.P. Once the performance standard is met, residential development can resume in the zone. Existing permanent open space meets the adopted performance standard. An ongoing work program will ensure that the open space performance standard will be maintained through buildout. For areas of Zone 11 within Encinitas Union Elementary School District and San Dieguito High School District, the adopted performance standard is presently being met. School facilities are projected to continue to meet the performance standard to buildout if proposed school facilities are constructed. The area of Zone 11 within the San Marcos Unified School District does not presently meet the adopted performance standard. Proposed mitigation once implemented will provide school facilities that are projected to meet the performance standard for the portion of STAFF REPORT LFMP 87-11/87-12 Page 7 10. Sewer Collection System Zone 11 served by the San Marcos Unified School District to buildout. Existing Sewer facilities in Zone 11 meet the adopted performance standard. For the area of Zone 11 served by the San Marcos County Water District existing sewer facilities meet the adopted performance standard to buildout. The remaining area of Zone 11 which is served by the Leucadia County Water District will require additional facilities to meet the adopted performance standard through buildout. These additional facilities are included in the proposed mitigation. When implemented, the mitigation is phased to assure conformance to the adopted performance standard through buildout. 11. Water Distribution System Water facilities serving Zone 11 meet the adopted performance standard. The proposed mitigation once implemented will assure maintenance of the adopted performance standard through to buildout of the zone. For Zone 12 the analysis summary of the 11 public facilities is as follows: STAFF REPORT LFMP 87-11/87-12 Page 8 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 12 PUBLIC FACILITIES SUMMARY AS Of 2 1. City Administrative Facilities 2. T library 3. Wastewater Treatment Center 4. Parks As of 1/1/87, existing facilities meet the adopted performance standard. Existing and programmed facilities are projected to meet the adopted performance standard until 2005. With the construction of the South Carlsbad Library in 1992, library facilities meet the adopted performance standard, and are projected to meet the adopted performance standard until 2002. Existing facilities meet the adopted performance standard. Facilities in Park District 4 presently do not meet the adopted performance standard. As of 1/1/87 there was an inadequacy of 3.28 acres of park land in Park District 4. Additional Park demand created by development between 1/1/87 and 10/31/87 increased park demand to 10.55 acres. Approved but unbuilt developments in Park District 4 increased this inadequacy to 28.18 acres. As a consequence, the plan proposes mitigation that will include revising the existing 2Adoption date to be added STAFF REPORT LFMP 87-11/87-12 Page 9 5. Drainage 6. Circulation parks agreement with the La Costa Ranch Company and City to do the following: 1) dedicate 32.3 acres of park land and 2) guarantee construction and operation of 28.18 acres of park land. Existing drainage facilities will meet the adopted performance standard. The proposed mitigation measures when implemented will assure compliance with the performance standard through buildout. Existing conditions require that prior to the issuance of any development permit within Zone 12, a financing program guaranteeing construction of the I-5/La Costa Interchange must be approved. As this zone develops, the following road segments will require upgrading: a) Rancho Santa Fe Road b) Olivenhain Road c) La Costa Avenue d) El Camino Real e) Melrose Avenue The mitigation section within the circulation analysis of this zone plan indicates the time frame when these improvements will be required. Also, a financing program guaranteeing the compeltion of the necessary improvements prior to granting occupancy of units within Zone 12 must be approved. This mitigation plan will ensure conformance with the adopted standard through buildout of the Zone. STAFF REPORT LFMP 87-11/87-12 Page 10 7. Fire 8. Open Space 9. Schools 10. Sewer Collection System Fire facilities serving Zone 12 presently do not meet the adopted performance standard. The proposed mitigation measures will accelerate the construction and operation of Fire Station No. 6. The La Costa Ranch Company will be providing the up front financing necessary to construct and operate this station ahead of the City's C.I.P. Once the performance standard is met, residential development can resume in the zone. Existing permanent open space meets the adopted performance standard. An ongoing work program will ensure that the open space performance standard will be maintained through buildout. Zone 12 is within Encinitas Union Elementary School District and San Dieguito High School District. These school districts have indicated the adopted performance standard is presently being met. The school districts have indicated the ability to meet the adopted performance standard through buildout if proposed school facilities are constructed. Existing Sewer facilities in Zone 12 meet the adopted performance standard. Additional sewer facilities will be required to meet the adopted performance standard through buildout. These additional facilities are STAFF REPORT LFMP 87-11/87-12 Page 11 11. Water Distribution System included in the proposed mitigation. When implemented, the mitigation is phased to assure conf ormance to the adopted performance standard through buildcut. Existing water facilities serving Zone 12 meet the adopted performance standard. The proposed mitigation once implemented will assure maintenance of the adopted performance standard through buildout. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Local Facilities Management Plans for Zones 11 and 12 are public facilities planning documents. The plans establish parameters that ensure Carlsbad's Public Facilities Performance Standards are met and public facilities inadequacies mitigated to accomplish this goal. The plans for informational purposes occasionally estimate locations and costs of public facility improvements. The plans fully recognize that complete environmental review will be necessary once specific public facility improvements are established. Therefore, the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zones 11 and 12 will not cause any significant environmental impacts and Negative Declarations for both plans have been issued by the Planning Director on December 11, 1987. ATTACHMENTS 1. Planning Commission Resolutions No. 2710 and 2711 2. Exhibits - "A" - Citywide Map of Local Facility Management Zones "B" - LFMP-11 General Plan Land Use Map "C" - LFMP-11 Land Use Zoning Map "D" - LFMP-12 General Plan Land Use Map "E" - LFMP-12 Land Use Zoning Map. 3. LFMP-11 Dated / / 4. LFMP-12 Dated / / 5. Environmental Documents LBS/PC:af Exhibit A LFMP 87-11 LFMP 87-12 LFMP 87-12 LFMP 87-1 1 Clly ol Carlsbad Growth Minagemtnt Program JANUARY 198 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLANS / "i RESIDENTIAL RL Low density (0-1.5 DU/Ac.) RLM Low-Medium Density (0-4 DU/Ac.) RM Medium density (4-8 DU/Ac.) RMH Medium High Density (8-15 DU/Ac.) NON-RESIDENTIAL CIRCULAUON Existing ••••••• Prime arterial 'iiiuii Major arterial Secondary arterial •••••• Proposed 0 300 600 1200 C Community Commercial O Professional & Related G/O Governmental Offices. E Elementary School H High School U Public Utility OS Open Space NOTE: The new conceptual alignment of Rancho Santa FejRd. was approved by the City Council on • October 20, 1987. GROWTH «*Generai nan uesignacionsPROGRAMZone 11 Exhibit B P-C La Costa Master Plan - MP 149 (G) -iTY OF £NCINITAS R-1 One Family Residential -10: 10,000 s.f. lots -25: 25,000 s.f. lots -40: 40,000 s.f. tots P-C Planned Community /La CostaMaster Plan - MP 149CG) RD-M Residential Density-Multiple -Q: qualifying overlay U Public Utility OS Open Space 0 300 600 |JOO " OF =NC;NITAS •p ir is GROWTH o tana use zoning "yjr'li'ltfiyj/j Exhibit C ZONE 6 LEGEND: LAND-USE RESIDENTIAL RLM Low-Medium Densrty(0-4 DU/Ac.) RM Medium Density (4-8 DU/Ac.) RMH Medium-High Density (8-15 DU/Ac.) ) ZONE •& ZONE!1 NON-RESIDENTIAL In costn RflncH CD. — •••i^,. •-PRIME ARTERIAL C;TV CF ENCINITAS TS Travel Services Commercial U Public Utilities OS Open Space J Junior High School E Elementary School ~..JWTH MANAGEMENT _ PROGRAM GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS Zone. 12 26 Exhibit D ZONE 6 ZONE 6 ZONE 23 I '"• 1' In cnstn RRHCH co. P-C La Costa Master Plan MP 149 (G) •f ZONE 11 LEGEND: P~C Planned CommunityLa Costa Master Plan MP 149(G) R~ 1 One Family Residential Zone planning GROWTH ^MANAGEMENT. PROGRAM • LAND-USE ZONING Zone 12 Exhibit E NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINi NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, January 20, 1987, to consider approval of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12 on property generally located at the largely undeveloped southerly portion of the La Costa Master Plan and more particularly described as: Between El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe Road, north of Olivenhain Road and south of the developed area around Levante Street. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. If you have any questions, please call the Planning Department at 438-1161. If you challenge the Local Facilities Management Plan in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: APPLICANT: PUBLISH: LFMP 87-12 THE BILL HOFMAN COMPANY JANUARY 8, 1988 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION \:^J7 i y^v"~ s £=f ,^3 Carlsbad Journal Decreed A Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San Diego County Mail all correspondence regarding public notice advertising to North Coast Publishers, Inc. corporate offices: P O. Box 878, Encinitas, CA 92024 (619) 753-6543 Proof of Publication STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am principa clerk of the printer of the Carlsbad Journal a newspaper of general circulation, published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, and which newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a genera character, and which newspaper ata times here in mentioned had and still hasabonafide subscription list of paying subscribers, and which newspaper has been established, printed and published at regular intervals in the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, fora period exceeding one year next ~-~^~^i;.-,^i +u^ ^,-,+0 ^-f ,-,, ikl i^ntinn nf the notice NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING e notice of •• • * I NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public -c, ,p nf^hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday t u r January 20, 1988, to consider approval of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12 on property TTnereoton generally located at the largely undeveloped southerly portion of the La Costa Master Plan and moreparticularly aescribed as: Between El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe Road, north of Olivenhain Road andsouth of the developed area around Levante Street. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing If you have any questions, please call the Planning Department at 438-1161. If you challenge the Local Facilities Management Plan in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the C^^lferlsbad at or prior to the public hearing. Case File: LFMP 87-12 ! -'^ ; j^ Applicant: The Bill Hoftnan C|sipaig^**"* 'I&RLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 1988. 19. 19. . 19. . ing is true and liego, State of of the Printer CJ 4972: January 8, 1988 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION AI! 1988 County of San Diego ) ) ss. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) Susan Loy being duly sworn, says she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the Citizen & La Costan, semi-weekly newspapers of general circulation, printed in the City of Oceanside, published in the City of' Solana Beach and Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California^ and that the notice, of which the annexed is a true copy, was published one times in said newspapers, commencing on the 8th day of January A. p. t 19 88 .namely on the following dates: January 8, 1988 Proof of Publication of: Pub. Hearing border ad I declare under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct. day of "in the County of San Diego, State^xf California. Executed this 8 Jan. , 19 88 Legal Advertising Representative NOTICE OF PUB NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commissio at the Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, Cc 1988, to consider approval of the Local Facilities Manai located at the largely undeveloped southerly portion of t described as: Between El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe Re the developed area around Levante Street. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are coi have any questions, please call the Planning Department If you challenge the Local Facilities Management Plan ir issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing de delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public t CASE FILE: LFMP 87-12 APPLICANT: THE BILL HOFMAN COMPANY LEGAL 2088, JAN. 8, 1988 CITY OF CA AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION County of San Diego ) )ss. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) Susan Loy being duly sworn, says she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the ' Blade-Citizen, a semi-weekly newspaper of general circulation, printed in the City of Oceanside, published in the Ci1 and Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State O; the notice, of which the annexed is a true 1 times in said newspaper comme 4th day of May A.D., 19 90 namely dates: May 4, 1990 Proof of Publication of: Public Hearing I declare under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 4th May 19 yu day of "in the County of San Diego, State of California. rru-TTT^ f*^ jf- T _~ -- - _ ^_<T*7_TUI .-_-_.-!_ Jr"** — L- /*^Legal Advertising Representative NOTICE IS a public hearing at the Carlsbad, California, at Local Facilides ofElCaminoReal, '"'•^'^4 Those persons wishing to sjpeak on 438-1161. If you challenge the Local Facilities j ment Plan in court, you may beliifiiia to raising only those issues you or someone* raised at the public hearing described in tl notice or in written correspondence deli v| to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to.ihe p hearing.. -. ' ' > \ ,- CASE FILE: LFMP Zone 12 APPLICANT: BofinanJcrrroFCARSjSBADPUbwat®' *%!l COMMISSION Legal 3030 May 4,1990 Carlsbad Journal Decreed A Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San Diego County Mail all correspondence regarding public notice advertising to North Coast Publishers, Inc. corporate offices: P.O. Box 878, Encinitas, CA 92024 (619) 753-6543 Proof of Publication STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am principa clerk of the printer of the Carlsbad Journal a newspaper of general circulation, published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, and which newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general character, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still hasa bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, and which newspaper has been established, printed and published at regular intervals in the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of Ca ifornia, for a period exceeding one year next preceding the date of publication of the notice hereinafter referred to; and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: CE OF PUBLIC HEARING I that the Planning Commission of the City o-f Carlsbad will hold jncll Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 16,1990, to consider approval of a Local Facilities Management located south of Levante Street, east of El Camlno Real, north of vest of Rancho Santa Fe Road. speak on this pro- attend the public juestions, please >nt at 438-1161. :acillties Manage- nay be limited to you or someone aring described in rrespondence de- ad at or prior to the Associates >F CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 3 19 90 19. 19 19. 19. I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California on THEJTHIRD day of ,.-.-- MAY, 1990 Clerk of the Printer Carlsbad Journal Decreed A Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San Diego County Mail all correspondence regarding public notice advertising to North Coast Publishers, Inc. corporate offices: P.O. Box 878, Encinitas, CA 92024 (619) 753-6543 Proof of Publication STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am principal clerk of the printer of the Carlsbad Journal a newspaper of general circulation, published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, and which newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general character, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and sti has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, and which newspaper has been established, printed and published at regular intervals in the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding one year next preceding the date of publication of the notice hereinafter referred to,- and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been PUBLIC NOTICE OF published in each regular and entire issue of said PRIOR newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:The Planning Department has de-termined that the environmentaleffects of the project described be-low have already been consideredin conjunction with previouslycertified environmental docu-ments and, therefore, no additional environmental review will be re- quired and a notice of determina- tion will be filed.Project Title: Local FacilitiesManagement Plan Zone 12. Project Location: West of Rancho Santa Fe Road, East of El Camino Real, North of Olivenhain Road, South of Levante Street. Project Description: Justification for this determina- tion is on file in the Planning De- partment, Community Develop- ment, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carls- bad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to thePlanning Department within ten(10) days of date of publication. Dated: March 29,1990 Case No: LFMP-12 Applicant: Hofman Planning Associates MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning DirectorCJ 5031: March 29, 1990 March 29 19 90 19. . . 19. . 19 19 I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California on the 29th day of March, Clerk of the Printer #202-2M-12/87 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 PLANNING DEPARTMENT W*k$Lym (619)438-1161 City of Cartefcab NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: The largely undeveloped southerly portion of the La Costa Master Plan, generally described as between El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe Road north of Olivenhain Road and south of the developed area around Levante Street. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Based on the City of Carlsbad's General Plan, the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12 provides a plan for the provision of public facilities to meet adopted performance standards. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within ten (10) days of date of issuance. DATED: December 11, 1987 MICHAEL J. CASE NO: LFMP 87-12 Planning Director APPLICANT: THE BILL HOFMAN COMPANY PUBLISH DATE: December 11, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II (To Be Completed by the Planning Department) CASE NO. LFMP 87-12 DATE: 12/03/87 I. BACKGROUND 1. APPLICANT; THE WILLIAM HOFMAN COMPANY 2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 6999 El Camino Real SUITE 208 G CARLSBAD, CA 92009 3. DATE CHECK LIST SUBMITTED: II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations ofall Affirmative Answers are to be Written Under Section III - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation) YES MAYBE NO 1 . Earth - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, com- paction or overcovering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel or a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? YES MAYBE NO 2. Air - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3. Water - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? h. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? -2- YES MAYBE NO *• Plant Life - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. Animal Life - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. Noise - Will the proposal significantly increase existing noise levels? 7. Light and Glare - Will the proposal sig- nificantly produce new light or glare? 8. Land Use - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? -3- YES MAYBE NO 9. Natural Resources - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset - Does the proposal involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 11. Population - Will the proposal signif- icantly alter the location, distribu- tion, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing - Will the proposal signif- icantly affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportation/Circulation - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Generation of additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilit- ies, or demand for new parking? c. Impact upon existing transporation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? YES MAYBE NO Public Services - Will the proposal have a significant effect upon, or have signif- icant results in the need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? 15. Energy - Will the proposal have signif- icant results in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 16. Utilities - Will the proposal have significant results in the need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? 17. Human Health - Will the proposal have significant results in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? -5- YES MAYBE NO 18. Aesthetics - Will the proposal have significant results in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in creation of an aesthetically offensive public view? 19. Recreation - Will the proposal have significant results in the impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. Archeological/Historical - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? 21. Analyze viable alternatives to the proposed project such as: a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site designs, c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the site, e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alternate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative. A) Phased planning for public facilities will not efficiently address public facility adequately B) The project is a public facility information and planning study. C) The project is a public facility information and planning study. D) Uses for the area covered by the plan are based on the General Plan. E) The plan considers phased development. F) The project is a public facility information and planning study. G) Would not assure adequate public facilities to meet demand. -6- YES MAYBE NO 22. Mandatory Findings of Significance - a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, or curtail the diversity in the environment? X b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12 is a facilities planning document. The intent of the plan is to establish parameters that assure adequate and acceptable public facilities are available when needed. To accomplish this occasionally locations and costs of public facility improvements are estimated for informational purposes. It is recognized that CEQA Review for these public facilities estimates is general, and does not satisfy CEQA requirements for the project's themselves. The Zone 12 Local Facilities Management Plan requires complete CEQA review prior to initialization of any public or private project discussed in the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12. -7 - IV. DETERMINATION (To Be Completed by the Planning Department) On the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative Declaration will be proposed. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I2L-S-S7 Date L/J Signature V. MITIGATING MEASURES (If Applicable) -8- MITIGATING MEASURES (Continued) VI. APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PR03ECT. Date Signature -9- 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 PLANNING DEPARTMENT WNi/JW (619)438-1161 Cttp of Cartebab April 5, 1988 Mr. Bill Hofman Hofman Planning Associates 6994 El Camino Real, Suite 208 Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: ZONE 12 - MASTER PLAN Dear Bill: Thanks for the productive meeting of April 1, 1988. We look forward to receiving, at 8:00 a.m. April 11, 1988, your submittals that will address and resolve issues raised in our letters of March 31, 1988 and March 14, 1988. Staff will again review the submittal for acceptability as expeditiously as possible and if acceptable, begin the EIR process. As we discussed, the quality and timeliness of your submittal is critical in establishing an acceptable project and beginning the EIR process. In closing, we have made significant progress on the Master Plan project in a very short time. We look forward to carrying this productive working relationship through the Master Plan revision process. Sincerel \ LANCE B. SCHULTE Associate Planner LBS:af Doug Avis Ruth Besecker MP-149(0) Marty Orenyak Michael J. Holzmiller Mike Howes MARCH 21, 1988 TO: RON R. BALL FROM: LANCE RECORDATION OF POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT RIGHT BETWEEN ZONE 10, 11 AND 12 Thanks for your memo of March 2, 1988. Enclosed, Exhibit A is an example of what I believed the Planning Commission and City Council wished to have recorded concerning the dwelling unit transfer. This has been reviewed and ok'd by Michael Holzmiller and Phil Carter on 3/21/88. I hope this is helpful in drafting the City Council Resolution and recording the notice. LBS:af LFMP 10, 87-11, 87-12 Michael J. Holzmiller Philip 0. Carter Lance B. Schulte To be recorded with the office of the County Recorder on all La Costa Ranch Company Lands in Local Facility Management Zones 10, 11, and 12 prior to within Local Facility Management Zones 10, 11 and 12. "By City of Carlsbad City Council Resolutions #88-46 and 88-47 on 2/23/88 the La Costa Ranch Company holder of title requested and received approval of a transfer of potential residential development from La Costa Ranch Company Lands in Local Facility Management Zone 10 described as and La Costa Ranch Company Lands in Local Facility Management Zone 12 described as , to La Costa Ranch Company Lands in Local Facility Management Zone 11 described as . The request and approval both 1) Confirmed the maximum potential residential land use allowed within Local Facilities Management Plans for Zones 10, 11 and 12 according to Carlsbad's General Plan, Growth Management Program and City Ordinances. The maximum potential dwelling units in Zone 10 is 633; in Zone 11 is 3,595; and in Zone 12 is 1.888; and 2) Required' the La Costa Ranch Company to provide within Local Facility Management Zone 10 from 30 to 70 acres of additional unconstrained performance standard open space as defined by Carlsbad's Growth Management Program. These 30 to 70 additional acres must be above and beyond the unconstrained performance standard open space required in the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 10, according to Carlsbad's Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan as adopted by City Council Resolution #8797 and by the City of Carlsbad's General Plan. The exact amount and location of the additional 30 to 70 acres of unconstrained performance standard open space is to be established and confirmed with the preparation and adoption of the Local Facilities Management Plan and Master Plan for Zone 10. The exact acreage requirement will be based upon what residential land use the 206 dwelling units are transferred from Local Facilities Management Zone 10 to Local Facilities Management Zone 11. Until the Local Facilities Management Plan and Mater Plan for Zone 10 are adopted by the City Council with the aforementioned provision of open space and ultimate residential land use intensity no application which incorporates the potential transfer of 206 dwelling units from Zone 10 to 11 can be considered." LBSraf EXHIBIT A 2 of 2 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 (619)438-1161 City of Cartebab March 14, 1988 Mr. Bill Hofman Hofman Planning Associates 6994 El Camino Real, Suite 208 Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: ZONE 12 - CONCEPT MASTER PLAN COMMENTS Dear Mr. Hofman: Thanks for the initial presentation of a Master Plan concept to ourselves and our EIR consultants on March 8, 1988. A lot was accomplished. As we discussed then the following comments can be either incorporated in a revised concept Master Plan or can be looked at as an alternative or series of alternatives. Staff believes it is best to revise the concept plan to provide the best, most thought-out project for analysis and comparison with alternatives by the EIR. Please let me know as soon as possible which way you wish to go. Staff's comments are divided in two sections. Items 1-8 need closure prior to the EIR starting. Items 9-11 can be resolved during the EIR process. 1. As we discussed 3/8/88, the concept plan and all alternatives must provide an itemization of land use intensity for comparison with buildout projections in the adopted Local Facilities Management Plan 87-12. The itemization must include the figures for the entire Zone 12. 2. Our 3/9/88 meeting with SDUHSD raised issues about the appropriate location and situation for school sites. The following factors should be incorporated into the project: 1) The "design criteria" of SDUHSD, 2) The SDUHSD1 s desire for a 5 acre bus storage location, 3) Land use compatibility concerns of SDUHSD (noise), 4) The State of California's "requirements" about locating schools at least (100'-400') away from powerline (and potentially high pressure gas pipeline) easements, and 5) A detailed constraints analysis for each proposed school site. Mr. Bill Hofman March 14, 1988 Page 2 3. The size and exact land use of area M needs full disclosure and itemization. Staff assumes this "village" will only serve the Zone 12 area (predominately by pedestrian and bike travel) and not be a stop-n-go commercial entity that utilizes traffic volumes along Calle Barcelona for viability. Preferred alternative locations for the "Village" would be in Areas A or M. 4. Residential planning areas should include minimum lot size, and maximum building intensity (both square feet and massing) for proper EIR analysis. 5. As discussed at our 3/8/88 meeting the change in land use and resubdivision of Phase II of CT 85-6 needs to be added to the proposed project. Please see our 3/10/88 letter to Dave Davis. Also the entire Zone 12 should be looked at in the project since the Master Plan covers Zone 12. All existing roadway access points should be shown on the map. 6. The open space corridors along El Camino Real, between Areas F, M, and N, and through the central riparian drainage area on the whole seem well thought out and environmentally sensitive. There are some adjustments and detailing that needs to be done in Area E. This open space core also appears to serve as a positive delineator of neighborhoods within the project. Staff would like to see typicals of these open space edges along roadways and between areas and how these open space edges relate to the proposed core open space network in the proposed concept Master Plan. Road noise mitigation along these open space edges should also be typicaled for EIR analysis. 7. As discussed at our 3/8/88 meeting our EIR consultants have stated 1) a limit of grading map, 2) land use intensity (lot size/building volume) area summary, 3) Local Facilities Management Plan 87-12 buildout projection comparison analysis, 4) land use design typicals are needed for the project, 5) a project description and 6) the proposed tentative map for the project as the minimal amount of information to begin the EIR process. 8. RV storage facilities must be itemized and shown on the concept plan. 9. The idea of a village center with a church/ community/commercial/educational focus is a good concept. Staff would like to see details as to how this focus will function, and serve the Zone 12 area. Mr. Bill Hofman March 14, 1988 Page 3 The proposed pedestrian network that focuses on this center along with an indication of the centers building massing and neighborhood orientation should be detailed. 10. Staff is concerned about proposed residential land use in Area F that is along Calle Barcelona and below the bluff. Staff had envisioned a nonresidential land use such as a park-n-ride facility for this area. 11. The idea of a "landmark" in area N is a positive step forward in creating a community and community focus. Staff would appreciate details concerning the design and functioning of this area. This landmark should be established and "in place" with the first phase of development in Zone 12. The proposed location for this focus would be in Area H. Hopefully soon we can establish the project and alternatives and prepare the requisite detail to give our EIR consultants for analysis. Also, you've expressed the desire to process a tentative map for areas A - O along with the resubdivision of Phase II of CT 85-6 concurrent with the Master Plan and EIR. Significantly more detail is needed to do this. Once an agreeable proposed project is established, staff can begin analyzing a potential tentative map that implements the project. Once a tentative map is agreed upon this also can be submitted to our EIR consultants for analysis. Due to the need for the efficient coordination of actions in the Zone 12 area, staff would greatly appreciate all your communication to come through one spokesperson. Consequently, all staff's communication will be coordinated and come from myself. Establishing and sticking to these two points of communication will assure accuracy of information and greatly expedite work on the Master Plan, EIR, and related Zone 12 projects. This summarizes staff's major comments on the 3/8/88 presentation of the conceptual Master Plan. The concept plan you submitted is a positive first step in the Master Plan process. Staff appreciates the care and concern you've taken so far. Sincerely, B. SCHULTE Associate Planner cc: Mike Howes MP-149(O) Fred Talarico MEMORANDUM JANUARY 25, 1988 TO: FROM: LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FILES FOR ZONES 10, 11, AND 12 PHILIP O. CARTE SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST SUBJECT: OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT AS A RESULT OF DWELLING UNIT TRANSFERS During the preparation of the Local Facilities Management Plans for Zones 11 and 12, dwelling units were transferred from Zones 10 and 12 into Zone 11 Transfer Summary 206 Units from Zone 10 into Zone 11 179 Units from Zone 12 into Zone 11 Consistent with City policies, the transfer of these units will require that a corresponding amount of permanent open space be established in Zone 10. The exact amount and location of this open space will be made during the revisions of the La Costa Master Plan. The acreage of open space required will be determined by computing the net acreage which would have supported 206 dwelling units transferred out of Zone 10. Example #1; 1. 206 RLM Dwelling units on RLM designated land 2. 206 Dwelling units divided by 3.2 dwelling units per acre equals = 64.375 net acres Example #2: 1. 206 RM Dwelling units on RM designated land 2. 206 Dwelling units divided by 6 dwelling units per acre equals = 34.333 net acres PC:af in costR January 19, 1988 JAN 1988 PUNNING DEPARTMENT ccj 12 CITY OF NM ,<~i CARLSBAD >;/ Mr. Michael Holzmiller <l- Planning Director City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Carlsbad, California 92009 Re: Future Open Space Agreement for Local Facilities Management Plans Zones 11 and 12 Dear Mr. Holzmiller: The La Costa Ranch Company is committed to providing future open space in conformance with the adopted performance standards as contained in Local Facilities Management Plans for Zones 11 and 12. It is our understanding that the location of this space is subject to any changes that may occur within the city-initiated revision of the La Costa Master Plan. Yours truly, ROSS MCDONALD Managing Director RM: jb cc: Phil Carter 6670 El Camino Real, P.O. Box 9000-266 • Carlsbad • California 92009 • (619)931-8747: fjfl Y ROUND/C 263° Cazadero Dr've ASSOCIATES January 15, 1988 Mr. Phil Carter Community Development Department City of Carlsbad 2075 La Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 Subject: La Costa Environmental Documentation Dear Mr. Carter: Enclosed are four volumes of environmental documentation and related material for the La Costa area. The first volume addresses the overall La Costa Master Plan area, and the remaining three cover Local Facilities Management Plan Zones 6, 10, 11 and 12. I have also included a copy of the 1980 La Costa Master Plan for inclusion in the City's library of documentation. Dating from 1975, this material represents, to the best of my knowledge, all of the relevant environmental documents that have been produced for this area. I am aware of other reports or analyses that have been prepared, but they involved projects which were withdrawn before being submitted to the City. Some of this material may be of only marginal value, given their age and the fact that many of the areas addressed have already been built out. Nevertheless, they have been included to insure that the City has as complete a library of documents for the La Costa area as possible. Please let me know if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Fay 0. Round President cc: Mr. William Hofman Mr. Ross McDonald PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 (619)438-1161 dtp of Cartebab January 7, 1988 Mr. Craig Jones City of Encinitas Community Development Department 527 Encinitas Blvd., #100 Encinitas, CA 92024 Dear Mr. Jones: Enclosed for your information is a copy of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zones 11 and 12. The Plan is scheduled to go before the Planning Commission January 20, 1988 and to the City Council for adoption approximately a month later. The City of Carlsbad hopes you will use the Local Facilities Management Plan when discussing public facilities planning and adequacy with the City of Carlsbad. The Plan when adopted will be Carlsbad's "Guidebook" for projection of public facilities in the zone. The Plan will be monitored, reviewed and revised annually by the City of Carlsbad as a part of the City's overall Growth Management Program. A key component of the Management Program is information your agency can provide concerning public facility demands which are generated in Encinitas and impact the City of Carlsbad. Please review the Plan. Let us know how it can be improved and updated by information you may have. Thank you. Sincerely, LANCE B. SCHULTE Associate Planner LBS:af cc: Michael J. Holzmiller LFMP - 87-11 and 12 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 PLANNING DEPARTMENT WNvJW (619)438-1161 ^^£^r Citp of Cartefrab January 7, 1988 Ms. Joan R. Geiselhart Leucadia County Water District P. O. Box 2397 Leucadia, CA 92024 Dear Ms. Geiselhart: Thank you for your cooperation in the preparation of this Draft Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12. Enclosed for your information is a copy of the Wastewater Treatment section of the Draft Plan. The Draft Plan is scheduled to go before the Planning Commission January 20, 1987 and to the City Council for adoption approximately a month later. Enclosed is a letter of receipt of the Wastewater Treatment section for you to fill out and return to us. A pre-addressed stamped envelope is included for your convenience. The City of Carlsbad hopes you will use the Local Facilities Management Plan as the medium of communication to address Wastewater facilities which your district provides to Zone 12. Consequently, after approval, the Plan will be monitored, reviewed and revised annually by the City of Carlsbad as a part of the City's overall Growth Management Program. A key component of the Management Program is the analysis and information your agency can provide in the annual review and update. Please review the Draft Plan. Let us know how it can be improved and updated in the annual review. Staff will begin the formal review and update of the Plan sometime in 1988. We will contact you again at that time. Again, thank you for your input into this plan. Sincerely, LANCE B. SCHULTE Associate Planner LBSraf cc: Michael J. Holzmiller Philip O. Carter LFMP 87-12 Encl. Lance B. Schulte City of Carlsbad Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: RECEIPT OF FINAL DRAFT LFMP FOR ZONE 12 The Leucadia County Water District has received a copy of the Wastewater Treatment section of the final draft Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12. The section is consistent with the Leucadia County Water District comments as stated in our letter(s) of [Name of Contact] [Date] [Agency] PLANNING DEPARTMENT January 7, 1988 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 (619)438-1161 Cttp of Cartebab Mr. Donald E. Lindstrom, Superintendent Encinitas Union Elementary School District 189 Union Street Encinitas, CA 92029 Dear Mr. Lindstrom: Thank you for your cooperation in the preparation of this Draft Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12. Enclosed for your information is a copy of the Schools section of the Draft Plan. The Draft Plan is scheduled to go before the Planning Commission January 20, 1987 and to the City Council for adoption approximately a month later. Enclosed is a letter of receipt of the Schools section for you to fill out and return to us. A pre- addressed stamped envelope is included for your convenience. The City of Carlsbad hopes you will use the Local Facilities Management Plan as the medium of communication to address School facilities which your district provides to Zone 12. Consequently, after approval, the Plan will be monitored, reviewed and revised annually by the City of Carlsbad as a part of the City^s overall Growth Management Program. A key component of the Management Program is the analysis and information your agency can provide in the annual review and update. Please review the Draft Plan. Let us know how it can be improved and updated in the annual review. Staff will begin the formal review and update of the Plan sometime in 1988. We will contact you again at that time. Again, thank you for your input into this plan. Sincerely, /(^/UM^ LANCE B. SCHULTE Associate Planner LBS:af cc: Michael J. Holzmiller Philip O. Carter LFMP 87-12 Encl. Lance B. Schulte City of Carlsbad Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: RECEIPT OF FINAL DRAFT LFMP FOR ZONE 12 The Encinitas Union Elementary School District has received a copy of the School section of the final draft Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12. The section is consistent with the Encinitas Union Elementary School District comments as stated in our letter(s) of [Name of Contact] [Date] [Agency] 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 PLANNING DEPARTMENT W^ijfM (619)438-1161 ^$p7 Citp of Cartebab January 7, 1988 William A. Berrier Superintendent San Dieguito Union High School District 675 North Vulcan Avenue Leucadia, CA 92024 Dear Mr. Berrier: Thank you for your cooperation in the preparation of this Draft Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12. Enclosed for your information is a copy of the Schools section of the Draft Plan. The Draft Plan is scheduled to go before the Planning Commission January 20, 1987 and to the City Council for adoption approximately a month later. Enclosed is a letter of receipt of the Schools section for you to fill out and return to us. A pre- addressed stamped envelope is included for your convenience. The City of Carlsbad hopes you will use the Local Facilities Management Plan as the medium of communication to address School facilities which your district provides to Zone 12. Consequently, after approval, the Plan will be monitored, reviewed and revised annually by the City of Carlsbad as a part of the City's overall Growth Management Program. A key component of the Management Program is the analysis and information your agency can provide in the annual review and update. Please review the Draft Plan. Let us know how it can be improved and updated in the annual review. Staff will begin the formal review and update of the Plan sometime in 1988. We will contact you again at that time. Again, thank you for your input into this plan. LANCE B. SCHULTE Associate Planner LBS:af cc: Michael J. Holzmiller Phil Carter LFMP 87-12 Encl. Lance B. Schulte City of Carlsbad Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: RECEIPT OF FINAL DRAFT LFKP FOR ZONE 12 The San Dieguito Union High School District has received a copy of the School section of the final draft Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12. The section is consistent with the San Dieguito Union High School District comments as stated in our letter(s) of [Name of Contact] [Date] [Agency] 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 PLANNING DEPARTMENT WHL^M (619)438-1161^y^ City of Cartefeafc January 7, 1988 Mr. F. D. Fontanesi Olivenhain Municipal Water District 1966 Olivenhain Road Encinitas, CA 92024 Dear Mr. Fontanesi: Thank you for your cooperation in the preparation of this Draft Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12. Enclosed for your information is a copy of the Water section of the Draft Plan. The Draft Plan is scheduled to go before the Planning Commission January 20, 1987 and to the City Council for adoption approximately a month later. Enclosed is a letter of receipt of the Water section for you to fill out and return to us. A pre- addressed stamped envelope is included for your convenience. The City of Carlsbad hopes you will use the Local Facilities Management Plan as the medium of communication to address Water facilities which your district provides to Zone 12. Consequently, after approval, the Plan will be monitored, reviewed and revised annually by the City of Carlsbad as a part of the City's overall Growth Management Program. A key component of the Management Program is the analysis and information your agency can provide in the annual review and update. Please review the Draft Plan. Let us know how it can be improved and updated in the annual review. Staff will begin the formal review and update of the Plan sometime in 1988. We will contact you again at that time. Again, thank you for your input into this plan. Sincerely, LANCE B. SCHULTE Associate Planner LBS:af cc: Michael J. Holzmiller Philip O. Carter LFMP 87-12 Encl. Lance B. Schulte City of Carlsbad Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: RECEIPT OF FINAL DRAFT LFMP FOR ZONE 12 The Olivenhain Municipal Water District has received a copy of the Water section of the final draft Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12. The section is consistent with the Olivenhain Municipal Water District comments as stated in our letter(s) of [Name of Contact] [Date] I Agency] December 16, 1987 TO: Dave Bradstreet FROM: Phil Carter LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR ZONES 11 AND 12 Attached are copies of the Parks Section for both local plans for Zones 11 and 12 for your review. Please review these sections and let me know if you have any questions or comments. I need your input back no later than the December 22. If you do have any questions, please call me. c: Lance Schulte Steve Jantz December 16, 1987 TO: Ray Patchett Marty Orenyak Frank Mannen Michael Holzmiller Lloyd Hubbs Jim Elliott Vince Biondo FROM: Phil Carter LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR ZONES 11 AND 12 Attached are copies of both plans for Zones 11 and 12 for your review. A complete Financing Section which summarizes the issues and requirements for these zones is being prepared and is not included at this time. However, each facility section does contain a discussion on financing. Also, the Circulation Section has not been completed and will be added to the plans next week. We will be meeting at 1:00 p.m. on the 23rd in Marty Orenyak's Office to discuss both of these plans. If you have any questions in the meantime, please call me. c: Lance Schulte Steve Jantz 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE M^Krm TELEPHONE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 USf^M (619) 438-1161 Office of the City Engineer (£itu of (Earlabad December 2, 1987 Mr. Bill Hofman The William N. Hofman Company 6994 El Camino Real Suite 208-G Carlsbad, CA 92009 ZONE 12 CIRCULATION Dear Bill This letter is in regards to the circulation section of LFMP Zone 12 and the Traffic Analysis prepared by Weston Pringle and Associates. Staff has reviewed the above mentioned documents and the following are comments which need to be addressed. After reviewing the traffic analysis prepared for LFMP Zone 12, Staff does not fully agree with the findings as presented in the analysis. The initial assumption of a three percent growth rate for this portion of Carlsbad should be adjusted to reflect growth potential in Zone 11. This initial assumption would have an affect on the analysis as presented. Also, the analysis of La Costa Avenue and the La Costa/I-5 intersection does not coincide with the study prepared by Barton-Aschman and Associates. Staff believes that the La Costa Avenue link does not fail at this time but the 1-5 interchange does. A quick analysis done at the interchange to include a 3 phase signal does not provide adequate mitigation so that this intersection conforms with the adopted performance standard. Also, I would like to emphasize the need to review the circulation analysis for Zone 11 as soon as possible. Staff believes the impacts and analysis of Zone 11 will arrive with the same conclusions. The following is a list of requirements needing to be addressed within the text of the Zone 12 circulation section: 1. Detailed intersection design including: A. Lane Configurations B. Existing and Proposed Improvements C. Existing and Proposed Right-of-Way December 2, 1987 Zone 12 Circulation Page: 2 2. Cost Estimates including: A. Right-of-way Acquisition B. Utility Relocation 3. Analysis indicates a portion of El Camino Real required 4 lanes indicate: A. Location and limits of the 4 lane section B. Proposed Transitions C. Right-of-way necessary to accommodate additional lanes If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call this office. STEVEN C. JANTZ Associate Civil Engineer SCJ:rp MITIGATION Due to the time frame needed to complete the processing of LFMP Zone 12, the following conditions are being proposed: 1. Prior to the recordation of the first final map within LFMP Zone 12, a financing program shall be approved to mitigate the traffic impacts of the La Costa Avenue/I-5 interchange. 2. Prior to the recordation of the first final map within LFMP Zone 12 boundaries, a financing program shall be approved for the following road segments which guarantees construction by 1990: A. Olivenhain Road from El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe Road. 6. Rancho Santa Fe Road from La Costa Avenue at Mel rose. The above intersection and road segments will be impacted by the first development within Zone 12 therefore a mitigation program shall be adopted prior to development. 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 PLANNING DEPARTMENT W^H Sfm (619)438-1161 Citp of Cartebab November 25, 1987 The William N. Hofman Company 6994 El Camino Real, Suite 208 "G" Carlsbad, California 92008 RE: CIRCULATION SECTIONS FOR ZONES 11 AND 12 Dear Mr. Hofman: As you are aware, staff has not received the circulation section for the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 11. Last week, we did receive a partial circulation section for the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12. Staff has been working with you and Wes Pringle for some time to prepare an acceptable circulation section for these plans. It is extremely important that the complete sections for both plans be provided to staff early next week. Staff will be preparing a complete list of those items which were missing or need to be revised in the Circulation section of the Zone 12 plan and will provide it to you Monday, November 30th. If you need any assistance with this request or unable to provide both circulation sections early this week, please call me. Sincerely, PHILIP O. CARTER Senior Management Analyst POC : dm cc: Lance Schulte Steve Jantz Michael Holzmiller Ross McDonald L-El LJ C: f=1 D I F1 SEILJEF3 D I J-7959 Project/Letter # UH ENCINITAS LEASE Polygon B (#1) Al icante Hills (#2) La Costa Greens (#3) Al icante Crossroads < #4 ) SUBTOTAL-ENC I N I TAS VISTA LEASE SoCal <#17, 21 , & 31 ) Mision Estanc i a ( # i 8 &• 27) Staqecoach Park (#19) Christopher(#2O,26,S. 28) Alga Hills (#22) SU Phase I (#23) Polygon C-CT 85-9 (#24) CT 85-1 1 (#25 & 3O) M.A.G. (#29) SUBTOTAL- VISTA 8UENA LEASE Alicante View < *5 , 8 , & 13) L.I- ' 249 (#6) A\ .:ante Hills (#7) Un i on 'O i 1 ( #9 > Alicante Cros*ro«d» <#1O> A lg» Hill* <*1 1 .£• 15) Santa Fe R i dga (#12 £. 14) SoCal ':#16) # 1 1 -Serve A 563 .38 28 1 630 469 1 1 1 132 "299 SOS 1O1 360 1 2179 218 6O 2 1 472 3O2 170 350 o-P Units pproved E: —38 28 O 66 35 - - 131 299 789 154 156 1 1565 7O 60 38 1 O 299 —~* Ad •< i *t i ng t 260 —-O 26O 496 1 — — —- — — 497 _ _ — —O —170 496 1 j ustment o Lease -3O3 0 " O •"• 1 -3O4 O 24 0 . -1 O -16 53 -204 O -613 -148 O -2 O -472 -3O2 O 145 Rev i sed Units 260 38 28 0 326 O 35 1 131 299 739 154 156 1 1566 70 60 0 1 O • 0 170 496- SUBTOTAL-BUENA 1575 468 666 -778 797 THE WILLIAM N. HOFMAN COMPANY Planning Project Management Environmental November 24, 1987 Lance Schulte City Planning Dept. 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: Revisions to the Zone 11 - Local Facility Management Plan. Dear Lance: Attached please find the revisions of the Wastewater Section of the Zone 11 - Local Facilities Management Plan as follows: New Old Section Page No. Replaces Page No. Wastewater 39 - 47 40 - 45 The revisions to the wastewater section are based on the November 23, 1987 meeting with Phil Carter and Steve Jantz. At that meeting, Steve Jantz requested that a letter from the Leucadia County Water District be provided to verify flow rate currently being used by the district. Cheryl Cunningham of Rick Engineering has contacted the district to request this letter be provided to you by Tuesday, December 1, 1987. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, /c Bill Hofman cc: Phil Carter Steve Jantz 6994 El Camino Real • Suite 208-G • Carlsbad • CA 92009 • (619) 438-1465 THE WILLIAM N. HOFMAN COMPANY Planning Project Management Environmental November 24, 1987 TO: Phil Carter FROM: Bill Hofman SUBJECT: Mitigation Condition for Drainage section of Zone 11. The following is a suggested mitigation condition for drainage impacts in Zone 11: "Prior to the recordation of a final map in Phases B, C, D and E of Zone 11, a comprehensive hydraulic study shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, This study shall include an analysis of the Encinitas Creek drainage basin within Zone 11 up to and including the bridge at El Camino Real." Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely , Bill Hofman cc: Zone 11 Property Owners Rick Engineering 6994 El Camino Real • Suite 208-6 • Carlsbad • CA 92009 • (619) 438-1465 w A PtwgEe and TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING November 18, 1987 Mr. Lance B. Schulte, Associate Planner City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Pal mas Drive * Carlsbad, CA 92009 Dear Mr. Schulte: Enclosed please find a draft copy of the completed circulation section of the Local Facility Management Plan for Zone 12. This completed draft copy does not contain any of the figures for inventory analysis requirements, these will be forthcoming. We trust that this draft report will be of assistance to you. If you have any questions or comments please contact us. Respecfullly submitted, WESTON PRIN6LE AND ASSOCIATES Weston S. Prffigle, P.E. Registered professional Engineer State of California: Numbers C16828 & TR565 WSP/pjm cc: Steve Jantz Phil Carter Lloyd Hubbs 2651 EAST CHAPMAN AVENUE • SUITE 110 • FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA 92631 • (714)871-2931 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 PLANNING DEPARTMENT W^I^M (619)438-1161WaW"*°?r..0.''*'to^g^y ^g^ €itp of Cartebab November 16, 1987 Mr. Bill Hofman The William N. Hofman Company 6994 El Camino Real, Suite 208-G Carlsbad, CA 92009 Dear Mr. Hofman: In reference to your November 13, 1987 letter, I would like to emphasize that we believe Zones 11 and 12 will be prepared in such a way as to benefit from all of the information learned by preparing previous plans. In this regard, both format, accuracy, and the ability to clearly track the data contained in these plans is essential. Staff will be working closely with you to see that this is accomplished. The second point in your letter concerns addressing the major issues to be resolved in these zone plans. As we discussed previously, staff will meet individual to address each of these issue items. To summarize these issues: 1. Parks - The revised park section is under review by staff. We will set up a meeting early next week to discuss the section. 2. Circulation - We are still waiting for these revisions. 3. Fire - We met Friday, November 13, 1987 to discuss this issue. Staff identified several key areas which you are now exploring. These items are due back in two weeks. 4. Schools - San Marcos and Encinitas are still outstanding. As you can see three of these items are now being worked on by you. We will review them when they are complete. Mr. Bill Hofman November 16, 1987 Page 2 We are still waiting for a buildout confirmation and dwelling unit transfer letter and need this as soon as possible. Please let me know when this will be completed. Let me close this letter by saying that we fully understand the need you have to complete these plans as quickly as we can. In that regard, I believe it would be a much better use of our time if we reduce the number of letters we sent back and forth. In the future, please call me if you think we need to discuss or resolve anything. I will call you later this week to set up a meeting to verify and confirm a how Zones 11 and 12 will be processed. Sincerely, CITY OF CARLSBAD PHILIP O. CARTER Sr. Management Analyst arb cc:Michael Holzmiller Lance Schulte Mike Howes THE WILLIAM N. HOFMAN COMPANY Planning Project Management Environmental November 13, 1987 Lance Schulte City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Processing of the Zone 11 and 12 Local Facility Management Plans. Dear Lance: This letter is written to clarify our understanding of the processing of the Local Facilities Management Plans for Zones 11 and 12. To date, we have received excellent input from you and Mike Howes regarding the plans. To this point, most of the items discussed have related to format changes and confirmation of the accuracy of the data. I believe we are well on the way to developing a consistent format with adequate levels of information to use as the guide for all future Local Facility Management Plans. Without this type of review, it would be difficult to complete the review of the more substantial issues of these zones. Since we have made such a good start, I thought it would be beneficial to begin laying the ground work for the upcoming review of the major issues. The major issues as we see it with both zones are the following: 1. Mitigation of Park Facility Deficiencies; 2. Mitigation of Major Circulation Deficiencies; 3. Location of a New Fire Station Site; 4. Mitigation of School Impacts in the San Marcos School District. There may be more and your input will be necessary to identify the remaining issues. I would suggest that we begin a dual process of review: 1) continue with the more detailed review of format, verification and accuracy of data, and 2) address the major issues so that we can begin developing solutions. My fear is that the major issues 6994 El Camino Real • Suite 208-G • Carlsbad • CA 92009 • (619) 438-1465 will take time to adequately resolve which could delay the process. The following is a brief summary of the issues and the actions on them that we have taken to date: 1. Parks - The latest parks section submitted to you yesterday contains a proposed mitigation method which we believe is workable. Please review and comment on its practicality. 2. Circulation - Pringle and Associates is close to completion of the circulation plan for Zone 12. You will have a report in your hands on Monday, November 16, 1987. His preliminary comments to me indicate that the circulation deficiencies are not as great as we once had thought. This is due to the more practical methodology worked out with the Engineering Department. 3. Fire Station Site - We are meeting today with you and the Fire Department staff to discuss a new location for Station No. 6. We believe this issue can be resolved in a short period of time. The latest Fire section submitted to you yesterday also contains the mitigation necessary for the zone once the station site is determined. 4. San Marcos School District - We have met with Jeff Okun of the San Marcos School District and have given him new dwelling unit counts for Zone 11. He will review these numbers and indicate to us the district's requirements for Zone 11. He said that he may get back to us today, but I have not received word at this writing. Hopefully, this letter will serve as a basis for further discussion. I would appreciate your feedback. Sincerely, Bill Hofman cc: Phil Carter Mike Howes Ross McDonald THE WILLIAM N. HOFMAN COMPANY Planning Project Management Environmental November 12, 1987 Lance Schulte City Planning Dept. 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: Revisions to the Zone 11 - Local Facility Management Plan. Dear Lance: Attached please find todays's (November 12, 1987) revisions of the Zone 11 - Local Facilities Management Plan as follows: New Old Section Page No. Replaces Page No. Wastewater 40 - 45 160- 16R Park 46 - 58 35 - 45 Fire 93 - 98 60 - 65 Open Space 99 - 103 68 - 72 These sections are complete except for the open space exhibit which will be provided as soon as possible. 6994 El Camino Real • Suite 208-G • Carlsbad • CA 92009 • (619) 438-1465 J In addition to the above sections, the following revised tables and exhibits to the November 6, 1987 submittal are as follows: Table 6 - Phasing of City Administrative Facilities (p. 29) Table 7 - Phasing of Library Facilities (p. 36) Exhibit 7 - Graph of City Administrative Facilities (p. 30) Exhibit 10 - Graph of Library Facilities (p. 37) Exhibit 9 - Location of Library Facilities (p. 32) Sincerely , Bill Hofman cc: Phil Carter Mike Howes 625 North Vulcan AVMIIM Leucadla, California 92024 619/753-6491 ,, , , ,_ , ,_Union High School District November 12, 1987 City of Carlsbad Planning Department Lance B. Schulte 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad CA 92009-4859 SUBJECT: Response to Zone 11 and Zone 12 Local Facilities Management Plan Dear Mr. Schulte: I. Zone 11 Plan, Your letter of 9/24/87. Page 81 "Conclusions: the mechanisms for obtaining funding for the construction of the new high school are in place" Suggested change: "Conclusions: Developer fees and other sources of local funding will provide approximately half the cost of the proposed senior high school. State funds and/or other financing alternatives will be required to complete the facility. Page 80, top of page "... Mr. William Berrier, that this school will not be needed in the near future, and perhaps not for 10 years." Suggested change: "— Mr. William Berrier, that this school will not be needed in the immediate future." II. Zone 12 Plan, Your letter of 9/24/87. Page 67 "Conclusion: the mechanisms for obtaining funding for the construction of the new high school are in place." Suggested change: "Conclusions: Developer fees and other sources of funding will provide for approximately half the cost of the proposed senior high school and approximately 10% of the proposed junior high school. State funds and/or other financing mechanisms will be required to complete the needed facilities. Mr. Lance B. Schulte Page 2 November 12, 1987 Page 62c, top of page "... Mr. William Berrier, that this school will not be needed in the near future, and perhaps not for 10 years." Suggested change: " ... Mr. William Berrier, that this school will not be needed in the immediate future." III. General Comment: The information presented is accurate with the above changes included. The district ability to provide school facilities concurrent with need depends upon available local and state funding. District policy is to explore every available source of funding and to make application for construction funds as necessary. At present we monitor construction through the building permit process. It would be helpful if the City of Carlsbad were to make forward predictions on single family and multiple family residential construction. With forward predictions we can better anticipate when specific facilities will be needed. IV. Summary: Your management plans will be of considerable assistance to the district in their future planning. You are to be congratulated for the thoroughness and detail of the zone plans. Sincerely, J William A. Berrier Superintendent WAB/jms cc: Mr. Eric Hall Mr. Rodney E. Phillips TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE 12 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The City of Carlsbad has enacted Ordinances and Policies that require growth management plans which include consideration of traffic and circulation. In response to that requirement, analyses have been completed for Zone 12 and these are summarized in this report. This study has followed the Guidelines for Preparation of Local Facility Management Plans and the results of discussions and clarifications by City Staff. STUDY AREA The study area, for traffic analysis purposes, is defined as those streets and intersections which would be utilized by 20 percent or more of project generated traffic external to the Zone. Figure 1 illustrates the trip distribution assumptions for the existing arterial system for Zone 12 which are based upon previous traffic studies in this area. These distribution percentages illustrated in Figure 1, along with future changes to distribution percentages due to future arterial system changes, were utilized to define the road segments and intersections that are included in this study. METHODOLOGY This report contains an analysis of existing, the year 1990, 1995, 2000 and City Buildout (year 2010) conditions. Existing conditions were determined through the use of manual and machine counts conducted by Barton-Aschman Associates Inc., the City's traffic count program, and Weston Pringle and Associates. Conditions for the years 1990, 1995 and 2000 were calculated using a compounded three percent growth rate of existing volumes. Adjustments were made for future additional arterial segments that do not presently exist. The City Buildout (year 2010) traffic volumes at intersections and segments were obtained from the SANDAG Series 6 Constrained General Plan Model run, completed in 1986. Adjustment were made to the SANDAG model volumes for differences in proposed and modeled land uses for Zone 12. EXISTING CONDITIONS The existing arterial system and general boundaries of Zone 12 are illustrated on Figure 1. Classifications of the various existing arterials in the environs Olivenhain Municipal Water District BOARD OF DIRECTORS ' GENERAL COUNSEL Ann L. Peay, President 1966 OLIVENHAIN ROAD Smirh and Pei'zfr Howard G. Golem, Vice President ENCINITAS. CALIFORNIA 92024-9761 ENGINEER Harley L. Denk, Secretary PHONE to!9) 753-64f* «o<Je f.-^meer.r-^ Curo Harold L. Gano, Treasurer MANAGER r^'ma M. Miller, Director November 9, 1987 IVfcnH.Ho/.W^or:', City of Carlsbad Planning Department ATTN: Mr. Lance Schulte 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 CITYOF CARLSBAD SUBJECT: Zone 11/12 Local Facilities Management Plan District Review of Submittal Dear Mr. Schulte: The Facilities Management Plans for the subject zones as submitted to this District have been reviewed by District's staff with respect to the capability of this District to provide water service to these two zones. This review finds first that the information is essentially correct and has been correctly extracted from the District's master plan with respect to the development in the La Costa area. Secondly, it is the staff's judgement that the District can provide the water service to these areas according to the phasing assumptions presented in the plan and as determined the City's planning staff. The only comment that requires some degree of review is in the Zone 12 facilities document on page 76 and 76-A which speak to the installation of the water distribution line in Calle Barcelona vis-a-vis the phasing of the La Costa South area. The La Costa South area as defined for this purpose is the area contiguous to Pancho Ponderosa and Mission Ridge subdivisions. The Phase I requirement for the water line in Calle Barcelona has been stipulated to the proponents' engineer of record. The District's stipulation may not be in accordance with your (the City's) Phase I densities noted on page 76 and 76-A. However, since the engineer of record knows what portion of Calle Barcelona water line needs to be installed with the initial development and what development triggers the remainder to El Camino Real, the difference in definitions should not cause a problem. The above comments pertain to the questions contained in your cover letter. The first two are answered in the opening paragraph. Your third question relating to what means of monitoring construction of facilities is necessary to ensure that both the District's and the City's requirements and obligations are met requires some lengthy discussion. The current District procedures have been historically geared to the procedures used by the County of San Diego. These procedures are not necessarily consistent with the City's procedures. A Public Agency incoroorateo on Marcf- 24 '95"). tormec under lie Monacal '/<••-:• )istrct LJA ol '9n Section 71000 el. seq. of the Slate ot California Water Cor- Mr. Lance Schulte November 9, 1987 Page Two With minor modifications, we can adjust to suit our mutual purposes. The District currently requires that a new project be submitted, along with a letter from the serving fire department stipulating the fire flow, and given to the District's consulting engineer, Boyle Engineering Corp., for a hydraulic analysis to determine whether or not the District can supply the water supply and what facilities are required to be constructed by the developer to provide this service. Following the study by the District's consulting engineer and approval by the Board of Directors, the developer then has the basic criteria with which to proceed with the improvement plans and design of the water system. At this point, the District has a procedure for the incremental collection of capacity fees which is the source of the District's funding for capital improvements such as storage and transmission facilities. If the City would require a water availability letter or some formal correspondence at this point in the processing of subdivision maps, the developer would be required to pay five percent (5%) of the capacity fees. Following the approval of the tentative map and approval of the improvement plans during this period of processing, ten percent (10%) of the capacity fees are required, and following the recordation of the final map, thirty-five percent (35%) of the capacity fees are required. At this point, the developer will have paid fifty percent (50%) of the capacity fees as a function of the current schedule. If we can establish a set of procedures similar to these, the District is in a position to ensure that facilities as approved by the City will in fact have water available to them at time of construction and occupancy. Without sane reasonable set of procedures such as these, a project may be approved through city stages without having an adequate study made for water facilities and could conceivably result in having a project approved for which no water is available. This extreme result has not heretofore happened, but it is a conceivable result. Moreover, what has been the District's experience is that maps processed through the City have reached a processing point whereby fees have not been paid and approvals have been given by the City without a study having been made by the District's consulting engineer and fees have had to be collected in lump sums. I am enclosing with this letter a copy of the District's Ordinance No. 119 which stipulates the various steps requiring payments along with a copy of the District's instructions that are given to proponents with the agreement which must be executed before construction can begin. I am not clear as to whether or not these documents and these procedures are more appropriately the province of the planning department or of the engineering department, but in either case, some mutual understanding should be arrived at between our two entities to ensure that all projects submitted are reviewed and that the proponents are given clear guidance as to the requirements to provide the various services involved. Mr. Lance Schulte November 9, 1987 Page Three In the event that any further cxordination and meetings are required, I or the District's Manager or Assistant Manager are always available to meet with City authorities to discuss the matter in detail. If there are any questions, the undersigned should be contacted. MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT F.D. Fontanesi General Services Director Enclosures ORDINANCE NO. 119 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OLIVENHAIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT FIXING THE TIME OF PAYMENT OF CONNECTION FEES AND RESCIND- ING ORDINANCE NO. 82 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OLIVENHAIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1; Applicants who desire to connect to the District facilities and obtain water service shall pay a connection fee in the following manner: Section 1.1: At the time the applicant requests the District to represent that facilities and water services are available fcr subdivisions as defined in the State Subdivision Act, the applicant shall pay an installment equal to five percent (5%) of the connection fee based upon the rate which is in effect at that time. Upon payment thereof, District shall represent that facilities and water service are available for the applicant's project for a period of two (2) years. Section 1.2: Within thirty (30) days of the date of approval of applicant's tentative subdivision map by the city or county having jurisdiction there- over, applicant shall pay an additional installment equal to ten percent (10%) of the connection fee based upon the rate in effect at that time. Upon payment thereof, the District shall represent that said facilities and water services are available for the period concurrent with the term of val- idity of the tentative subdivision map applicable under the provisions of the ordinances of the city or county having jurisdiction thereover. Section 1.3: Within thirty (30)days of the date of applicant's recordation of the final map, applicant shall pay an additional installment equal to thirty-five percent (35%) of the connection fee based upon the rate in effect at that time. Upon payment thereof, the District shall represent that said facilities and water service are available for a period concurrent with the term of validity of the final map applicable under the provisions of the city or county having jurisdiction thereover. Provided, however, applicant shall be requested to pay the fee required in Section 1.5 hereof within five (5) years of recordation of the final map or at such time as the applicant files an application for the installation of a water meter, whichever shall first occur. Section 1.4: The payment schedule (Sections 1.1 through 1.3) above requires that payments for each increment are current as computed on the latest approved connection fee. In the event an increase has occurred since the previous installment payment, all prior increments must be recomputed and paid on the basis of the latest connection fee. Section 1.5: Upon filing the application for the installation of the water meter, the applicant shall pay 100% of the connection fee based upon the rate in effect at that time, less total amount paid as installments under Sections 1.1 through 1.4, and District shall install said meter and provide water service. SECTION 2: Upon receipt of the installment payments of the connection fee as specified in Sections 1.1 through 1.5 above, the District shall make every rea- sonable effort to provide the capacity and facilities represented to be available by the District as a result of the applicant's request and the payment of the fee thereof. SECTION 3: Notwithstanding the foregoing Sections, upon written request by the applicant, but in no case more than sixty (60) calendar days after the expira- tion of the term of the validity of a map or expiration of the original water availability letter, District may, in its sole discretion, grant an extension or waiver of any of the time limits set forth herein. SECTION 4: In the event the applicant fails to comply with the provisions of Sections 1 through 3 hereof, the installment fees paid shall not be refunded nor 70 _ ^ ORDINANCE NO. 119 :inued credited against the payment of future connection fees to the District and the representation of the District to make every reasonable effort to provide capacity, and facilities shall be null and void. If such an event should occur, the appli- cant shall be required to initiate a new request for facilities and water service pursuant to the rules and regulations of the District in effect at that time. SECTION 5: In lieu of the foregoing Sections, the District, In its dis- cretion, may enter into agreements with applicant regarding the availability of District's facilities, water service and the payment of connection fees upon terms and conditions satisfactory to the District. SECTION 6: The provisions hereof shall not apply to final subdivision maps filed and recorded. SECTION 7: Except as provided for in Section 6 hereof, all existing pending applications for facilities and water service shall comply with the provisions of this Ordinance on or before February 19, 1981, and failure to do so shall render the representations of the District regarding the availability of facilities and water service null and void. SECTION 8: Ordinance Number 82 is hereby rescinded. SECTION 9: All monies collected under provisions in Ordinance No.'s 75 and 82 shall be retained by the District and applied to the respective properties according to the term of validity of the subdivision and/or parcel map under which the fees were collected. SECTION 10: All projects not classified as subdivisions shall pay connection fees at the time of purchase of the meter. SECTION 11; The Secretary of the Board of Directors is hereby ordered and directed to cause notice of this Ordinance to be given by publication in a newspaper of general circulation published and/or circulated in the Olivenhain Municipal Water District. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Olivenhain Municipal Water District held this 19th day 6f February, 1981, by the following Roll Call Vote: AYES: Directors: Miller, Golem, Denk, Peay, Stueven NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None Thelma M. Miller, President Board of Directors Olivenhain Municipal Water District ATTEST: Harold Stueven, Secretary Board of Directors Olivenhain Municipal Water District ""^ INSTRUCTION TO DEVELOPER FOR ON-oITE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WATER SYSTEh FOR DEVELOPER SHALL: 1. Execute and deliver to District the "Agreement - Construction of Pipeline Project", together with required deposits and supporting documents ensuring that: 1.1 The Agreement is properly executed and notarized. Note; All signatures must be notarized with notary seal and appropriate certifi- cate of acknowledgement. Corporations use Corporation Acknowledgement with two officials signing or one official with authorization documenta- tion and corporate seal. Partnerships use Partnership Acknowledgement wil.ii appropriate signatures for specific legal form of Partnership. Attorney-in-Fact use appropriate Acknowledgement. Note; Jurats are not sufficient. 1.2 Either a cash deposit, letter of credit, or performance bond is provided for both performance and payment bonds. One hundred per- cent (lilO".) i.s required for the performance bond and fifty percent (50%) i.:-, required for the payment bond based on the total estimated project co.,t. which is 1.2.1 Upon completion of the project, a Performance Bond in the amount of ten percent (10%) of original Bond value shall be filed in favor of the District for a period of one (1) year from the date of ciccoi tance of the project. This Bond shall be non-cancellable during that period. 1.3 The agent authority on any of the non-cash instruments must be pruporly notarised,as stated in paragraph 1.1. J . 4 Any .bond must be noncancellable without thirty (30) days v:j i tte i notice to the District; and letter of credit must be non- carci•! lab.lo prior to completion and acceptance of the project by the 1.5 Provide Insurance Certificate as follows; 1.5.1 Certificate of Worker's Compensation Insurance. 1.'•>.:> I.j ability Insurance in the amount specified. 1.5.3 All insurance must be properly notarized or otherwise certified a:; to the rv.jcnt's authority to bind the insurance company. 1.5. ! Insui -mce certificates must be noncancellable without thirty (30) days prior notice to the District. The following paragraph must -1- be incorporated in the Insurance Certificate: THE COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE SHALL INCLUDE AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS; THE DISTRICT, THE DISTRICT'S REPRESENTATIVES, THE DISTRICT'S ENGINEER, AND THEIR CONSULTANTS AND EACH OF THE DISTRICT'S OFFICERS, AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES AND CONSULTANTS. 1.5.5 The Certificate of Insurance must show the insurance policy has been issued in the amount of $3,000,000. The single limit may be divided into primary, excess and umbrella proportions, but must be a total of not less then $3,000,000. 1.5.6 If applicable, a copy of the trenching permit issued by the California Division of Industrial Safety for all trench work. Note: For excavations five feet or more in depth, the Contractor shall sub- rait to the District for acceptance, in advance of excavation, a detailed plan allowing the design of shoring, bracing, sloping, or other provisions to l)o made for worker protection from the hazard of caving ground during excavation. The plan shall be prepared by a registered civil or structural engineer. 2. Concur rout ly with the action required pursuant to Paragraph 1 above, file witli the District Manager the following: 2.1 All environmental impact data required by District/District Engineer and other govermental agencies needed to 'make the required assessment of the environmental impact resulting from the proposed construction. 2.2 The permit issued pursuant to the California Coastal Zone (' .nservation Act permitting the proposed construction within the coastal zone and any implementing regulations as applicable to the project. 2.3.1 The easement data (legal description and plat) for the right- of-way of tho pipeline. 2.4 The plans and specifications for the construction of the pipe- lino including: Three (3) sets of Improvements Plans; Two (2) sets of Grading Plans,• and Two (2) seto of Final Map as recorded or to be recorded. 2.5 Two (2) copies of a preliminary title report covering the proposed easement data (to be ordered by the District). 3. Execute the easement documents as prepared by the District Manager/ District Engineer, obtain all required signatures or subordination agreements, present these documents to the District Manager for examination and approval. Title Policy is a condition of acceptance of the project. -2- 4. Undertake no construction until written authorization to proceed with the construction has been received from the District Manager. 5. Commence and complete construction subject to inspection by the District Representative. 6. Upon completion of construction and prior to acceptance by the District's Board of Directors, the following documents will be pro- vided: n. Payment of the balance due to the District for District expenses in excess of original estimates; b. Three (3) sets of "As-Built" drawings; c. Certification that any and all claims for labor, materials or any other construction costs have been cleared, that there are no encumbrances. d. Payment Bond as noted in paragraph 1.2.1. c. (1) Copy of Final Recorded Tract Map document -3- PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 (619)438-1161 City of Cartelmb October 23, 1987 Bill Hofman William N. Hofman Company 6994 El Camino Real #208-G Carlsbad, California 92009 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONES 11 AND 12 REVISION AND ANALYSIS Dear Bill: Pursuant to our phone conversation, this letter is a written reminder of our schedule for the processing of the Local Facilities Management Plans for Zones 11 and 12. Staff has provided you an analysis and review of these plans and has requested changes or further information to the plans to comply with the City's Growth Management Program. Some of those changes were requested weeks ago, others more recently. In any event, to adhere to the September 21, 1987 processing schedule, those changes and further information will need to be complete and in our office for review by October 26, 1987. The following outlines our October 26, 1987, needs: A. Item numbers 4, 6, 7, 12, 14, and 15 of our February 20, 1987 letter to you. B. Item number 6 of our June 4, 1987 letter to you. C. Item numbers 3 and 5 of our July 23, 1987 letter to you. D. Item numbers 3, 4, 5, and 6 of our September 18, 1987 letter to you. E. Corrections and Additions: 1.From the beginning of the report through to "Park Facilities". 2.To Fire, Open Space, sections. and School Facilities Page 2 F. Corrections and additions to the Drainage section, as identified by staff. Staff will review and comment on Water, Sewer, and Wastewater sections by October 28, 1987. These comments will be made available to you as soon as possible. Also, as a final note, due to the delays in the preparation of an adequate Traffic Analysis for the Circulation Facilities section, please advise me as to modifications to the processing schedule that may be necessary. LANCE B. SCHULTE Associate Planner LBS:dm cc: Mike Howes Philip Carter Dan Clark PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 (619) 438-1161 Citp of Cartefcab October 22, 1987 Mr. Bill Hofman William N. Hofman Co. 6994 El Camino Real, #208G Carlsbad, CA 92009 Dear Bill: Staff has met concerning several items dealing with the processing of the Local Facilities Management Plans for Zones 11 and 12. These items specifically deal with buildout numbers in Zone 12 and the proposed unit transfer from Zone 10 to Zone 11 totalling 385 units out of Zones 10 and 12. Because both of these items, as well as the ultimate buildout numbers for Zone 10 are all inter-related, staff believes that a comprehensive solution needs to be arrived at and agreed to before further processing takes place with these plans. The solution would include establishing the buildout numbers for Zones 10, 11, and 12 and, defining the parameters in which a unit transfer from Zones 10 and 12 into Zone 11 would be allowed. First of all, staff has reviewed your buildout information for Zone 12 and as we discussed an initial error was made concerning the actual boundary of the Zone. It appears this boundary error created most of our discrepancies, however, the original analysis of this area by the City may have subtracted environmental constraints over that area which was previously developed (Ponderosa). This added to the original boundary error accounts for the majority difference between your buildout numbers and the City's. In regard to transferring 385 units into Zone 11, I believe that this can be done in such a way as not to violate the provisions and intent of the Growth Management Ordinance. The transfer could be made so long as the amount of net developable acreage which would have supported these units is set aside as Open Space within the Zone the units are transferred out of. However, Michael Holzmiller and Marty Orenyak are currently reviewing my solution to see if it is workable under the provisions of the Growth Management Program. October 22, 1987 Mr. Bill Hofman Page Two If this solution is workable and the unit transfer is to be made from Zone 12, as well as Zone 10, this should be done at this time. In Ross McDonald's letter to Michael Holzmiller dated September 29, he detailed how this transfer would take place and that 179 units would come from Zone 12. Therefore, 206 units would need to be transferred from Zone 10. This would require 64.375 acres within Zone 10 to be left as Open Space if the proposed units are transferred from areas designated as RLM on the General Plan. Based upon the City's buildout calculations this would leave 950 total dwelling units in Zone 10 at buildout. This would create a total buildout number of 3,595 in Zone 11 and a total buildout in Zone 12 of 1,888 (Existing - 589, Approved - 789 less 179 transferred to Zone 11, Future- 689) . The City is ready to agree to these buildout numbers and to recommend the appropriate unit transfers into Zone 11, provided: 1. The transfer is clearly shown and is acceptable in terms of planning for the effected ot impacted zones. 2. Units that are transferred must be in the same ownership. 3. The net acreage which would have supported units transferred out of a zone will be set aside as Open Space. 4. The unit transfer will not necessitate a General Plan Amendment. As always, there is no guarantee that the buildout unit confirmation numbers used to plan for public facilities will ultimately be built within the Zone. The ultimate building that will take place will be subject to all the requirements imposed through the City's formal review process. PHILIP O. CARTER Senior Management Analyst POC:bjn c: Ross McDonald, La Costa Ranch Company LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 2397 • LEUCADIA. CALIFORNIA 92O24-O954 • (6191 753-OI55 October 15, 1987 I : OGT City of Carlsbad PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 Attn: Lance Schulte Re: LFMP Zones 6-11-12 Gentlemen: The following comments are in response to the drafts received for the referenced zones. Your data indicates the District's historical use of 238 gpd/EDU. Records over the past four years reveal a more accurate figure would be 210. We are hoping to complete an I~& I Study this year to confirm our statistical data. ZONE 6 The boundaries of LFMP Zone 6 effect most of LCWD Zones 10 and 11 and a small portion of LCWD Zones 8 and 9. We performed a detailed comparison of the land uses for LFMP Zone 6 as shown on the attached "Exhibit 77a" to the land uses in the 1985 Planning Study. The land uses were very similar with the following exceptions: LCWD ZONE 10 - A 7-acre site (area #12) was zoned "C-2" for the Planning Study and is now shown as "RMH"; site is presently vacant. A 9-acre site (area #16) was zoned "School" for the Planning study and is now shown as "OS"; site presently has two ball fields and a recreation center. LCWD ZONE Jl - A 4-acre site (area #3) located at the NE corner of Alga and ECR was zoned "C-l-Q" for the Planning Study and is now shown as "RMH"; site is now presently 100% occupied commercial-retail. LCWD ZONE 9^ - A 12-acre site (area #40) was zoned "C" for the Planning Study and is now shown as "RMH"; site is presently undeveloped. DISTRICT OFFICE. I960 LA COSTA AVENUE • CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA City of Carlsbad PLANNING DEPARTMENT October 16, 1987 Page two The areas with zoning conflicts total 32 acres and represent approxima- tely 1.4% of the 2,300 acres involved. Differences between the commercial and RMH zoning would be small because wastewater generation rates per acre are similar. Some of the conflicting areas, especially the existing commercial development at the NE corner of Alga and El Camino Real may be zoned incorrectly on the LFMP zone 6 exhibit. Regarding the LFMP "Zone 6 Build Out Projections" summary, you show 7,434 ultimate dwelling units. We calculated slightly more, 7,519, according to the Planning Study. We calculated approximately 84 acres commercial compared to your total of 219 acres. We would need a more detailed summary from the City to be able to determine where the difference lies. In any event, the numbers are close. In regards to the letter dated July 17, 1987 from Carlsbad City Engineer, Lloyd Hubbs, we have reviewed his assumption of 100,000 gpd annual increase for the LCWD portion of LFMP zone 6. Based on the flow projections of the 1985 Planning Study, the annual increase is approximately 112,000 gpd from 1985 to 1990 but drops dramatically to about 17,000 gpd annual increase from 1990 to 2005 (see attached table). The assumption of 100,000 gpd seems reasonable, however, please inform us how long you plan to continue using that assumption. LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN - ZONE 11 In order to review the Zone 11 ultimate flow projections shown on page 89, we would need a map showing the Zone 11 boundary in detail and a map showing all of the land uses. After a quick review, it appears the ultimate flow for Zone 11 is less than that of the Planning Study. It's stated on page 90 that the "Planning study does not recommend any other major sewer trunk lines" in the area, however, the Planning Study recom- mends paralleling the existing trunk sewer in Rancho Santa Fe with 1,526 feet of 8" and 10" sewer. Table 13 on page 92-B shows sewer impacts on a small section of the trunk line serving the LFMP Zone 11. Why are you showing this table? Our Planning Study shows that the trunk line upstream is more critical than this section. Also, the build out dwelling unit total of 2,765 shown on this table does not total correctly. You also used a constant peak factor of 2.8, the peak factor would change relative to the population. City of Carlsbad PLANNING DEPARTMENT October 16, 1987 Page three If the SE corner of Zone 11 is to be served by LCWD, a pump station will be required. The area is shown on the LAFCO sphere of influence map. In addition, page 16-T of your October 6 letter contains incorrect data in Table I-H. The District's capacity at Encina in 1991 (Phase Phase IV) will be 8.45 mgd. Regarding your letter re Zone 12 dated September 29, 1987, LCWD was requested to determine three things. First, if the information was correct; second, if LCWD could provide facilities to meet the phasing assumptions used; and last, what means of monitoring whether facilities are adequate can be deve- loped. In response to these items, more detailed information is required to check the flow data presented (land use maps and Zone 11 boundary map); second, it appears the district can provide facilities (if the data is correct); last, the sewer facilities are on a computer model and the model can be updated periodically with proposed changes in land use. Yours very truly, LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT Joan R. Geiselhart Secretary-Manager JRG/bls GENERAL PLAN- Sub Areas .. EXHIBIT 77 a \ ^o*, •^)Zfx> O -if-/ i a: \ J* * + •*% 1 ZONt 12 1 i, ^rAt^--—-*--!^^;^^gr=*j\T^ t^Jf^* RMH-6 ^ RLM- 1 ^*•••• | •'"--i! 03 o (D Ol o NE 6 AL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN JANUARY 1987 SD010.04 LCWD1.WK1 LEUCflDIfl COUNTY WflTER FOR PORTION DISTRICT FLOWS OF LOCflL FflCILITIES MflNflGEMENT PLflN - ZONE 6 LCWD ZONE 8 9 10 11 1985 1990 EXIST. FLOW FLOW (5 YEflR) ( (gpd) (gpd) £3, 000 £3, 000 106,000 137,000 537, 000 883, 000 532,000 714,000 1,198,000 1,757,000 1 1995 £000 FLOW FLOW 10 YEflR) (15 YEflR) (gpd) (gpd) £3, 000 £3, 000 138,000 139,000 913,000 949,000 7&5,000 817,000 ,839,000 1,928,000 £005 ULT. FLOW (£0 YEflR) (gpd) £3, 000 141,000 981,000 871,000 2,016,000 YEflRS flNNUflL INCREftSE (gpd) 1985 - 1930 1990 - 1995 1995 - £000 £000 - £005 111. 800 16,400 17, eoo 17,600 NOTE: Flow data extracted from 1985 LCWD Planning Study. Study area i< the portion of the Local Facilities Management Plan. Zone &, within the Leucadia County Water District. 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 PLANNING DEPARTMENT W&JM (619)438-1161 Citp of Cartefrab October 14, 1987 Mr. Bill Hofman 6994 El Camino Real Suite 208-G Carlsbad, CA 92009 Dear Bill: After reading your letter regarding a potential dwelling units problem in the southeast quadrant of the City, I wanted to re-state a couple points. The City does not believe there is an overall dwelling unit problem in this quadrant. We do believe that based upon the buildout projection submitted for zones within this quadrant that we would have a dwelling unit problem. However, the City is not in total agreement with these numbers. Specifically regarding Zone 12 buildout projections, we do have a disagreement as to what the final dwelling unit numbers should be. Staff is currently reviewing your previous correspondence which detailed how you arrived at your buildout projections. As soon as we have completed this review, we will set up a meeting to close on the buildout numbers for Zone 12. Sincerely, Philip 0. Carter Senior Management Analyst POC : rp PLANNING DEPARTMENT <^U^e ^075^LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 (619)438-1161 Cttp of Cartebab September 30, 1987 Mr. Ross McDonald La Costa Ranch Company 6670 El Camino Real P.O. Box 9000-266 Carlsbad, California 92009 Dear Ross: The purpose of this letter is to respond to your letter of September 21, 1987 regarding yearly phasing schedules. Let me start by saying in the future all questions regarding zones 11 and 12 should be handled through Bill Hofman and Lance Schulte. It is extremely important to maintain a consistent flow of communication regarding these zone plans. Your cooperation is appreciated. The 1250 units per unit used in the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan as well as the Local Facilities Management Plans is for the purpose of projecting future facility demands. This is not a limitation on the number of units which can be built per -year. The yearly phasing schedules required in zones 11 and 12 are essential to ensuring that all of the needed public facilities can be provided in compliance with the adopted performance standards. Again, these schedules are for planning purposes only. It should also be clarified that staff has used 1250 dwelling units per year as a basis for projecting the City's future public facility needs. As staff reviews the various zone plans which are being prepared, the projected facility demands will be modified to reflex the phasing schedules presented in these specific zone plans. The actual demand for facilities will either increase or decrease depending on the phasing projections. Mr. Ross McDonald September 30, 1987 Page 2 If you have any questions regarding this letter or other items regarding zones 11 and 12, please direct your questions through Bill Hofman to Lance Schulte who is coordinating the processing of these plans. Sincerely, CITY OF CARLSBAD MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director arb cc: Mike Howes Lance Schulte Phil Carter PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 (619)438-1161 €itp of Cartefcab September 29, 1987 Leucadia County Water District P.O. BOX 2397 Leucadia, California 92024 Attn: Joan Geiselhart General Manager RE: ZONE 12 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN Dear Ms. Geiselhart: The City of Carlsbad is currently undertaking the second phase of its Growth Management Program. This phase includes the preparation and review of Local Facilities Management Plans for each of the 25 Local Facilities Management Zones within the City. As part of the formal preparation and review process, your district is being asked to review the buildout and phasing assumptions of the plans to determine whether the information is consistent with your district's planning and programming of sewer facilities. Specifically, the City's Growth Management Program requires the adopted performance standard for sewer facilities be continually met as growth occurs in Carlsbad. Attached, you will find for your review: 1. The adopted performance standard and adequacy analysis for sewer facilities 2. Draft buildout assumptions for Zone 12 3. Draft phasing assumptions for Zone 12 Could you please review this information to determine three things. First, is the information correct? Second, can your district provide sewer facilities according to the phasing assumptions presented in the plan and consistent with Carlsbad's adopted performance standard? And third, what Page 2 means of monitoring demand for and supply of sewer facilities would be appropriate to establish between you district and the City of Carlsbad? We would appreciate a letter indicating your findings and any comments regarding the processing of Local Facilities Management Plans. Your review and comments are part of an overall plan preparation which needs to be completed by October 15, 1987. If you need further information or assistance, please call me at 438-1161. Page 70 of the report mentions an undersized 15 inch line in El Camino Real. If this is acceptable, please jusitfy. Thank you very much for your assistance. Sincere] LANCE B. SCHULTE Associate Planner LBS:dm cc: Michael Holzmiller Mike Howes Lloyd Hubbs Dan Clark In costn RHHCH CD. September 29, 1987 Mr. Michael Holzmiller City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 SUBJECT: Density Transfer of Units in the Southeast Quadrant Dear Michael: This letter is written to clearly define our proposal of density transfer among Zones 10, 11 and 12 in the southeast quadrant. Also, this letter gives the major reasons why this transfer is critical to the overall development program being proposed by the La Costa Ranch Company. To begin, I would like to summarize earlier conversations with the City staff regarding this issue which laid the groundwork for all of our decisions on density transfer. Background A meeting was held with Phil Carter and Bill Hofman over a year ago to discuss several questions that arose from the newly adopted Growth Management Ordinance. Among these was the question of unit transfer between zones. At this meeting, Phil indicated that the Growth Management Ordinance did not preclude unit transfer, how- ever, that the staff was going to review unit transfers very care- fully looking at the following criteria: 1. For any unit transfer that is proposed, it must be clearly shown where the units are coming from and where they are going. No new units can be created. 2. The units that are transferred must be from the same ownership. 3. A transfer of units into any zone must not exceed the limits of the General Plan designation. In other words, any unit transfer cannot necessitate a General Plan amendment. 6670 El Camino Real, P.O. Box 9000-266 • Carlsbad • California 92009 • (619)931-8747: Mr. Michael Holzmilier September 29, 1987 Page Two With the following criteria being met, the staff could allow a unit transfer between zones. It is also important to point out that we are not trying to set policy precedent. We are the only landowners who own the overwhelming majority of three entire zones. Hence, this is a unique situation and not one that has to be handled in all 25 zones. A. SPECIFIC PROPOSAL 1. We are proposing that 385 units be transferred from Zones 10 and 12 into Zone 11. At the present time, we are proposing that all the units come from Zone 10, how- ever, as you are aware, we will be reducing the overall units in our Southwest Phase I tentative map. The sur- plus units we receive from these maps would be trans- ferred into Zone 11. We anticipate that 179 units will be lost from the SW I portion of Zone 12 which would go into Zone 11. The remainder would be taken from Zone 10. We have not indicated any transfer from the Zone 12 plan at this time since the amendment to the SW I tentative map has yet not been approved. 2. The overall density of our property will remain low because of the difficult topography. B. REASONS FOR UNIT TRANSFER 1. The primary reason is providing a sufficient unit count in Zone 11 to secure the financing of the major infra- structure this zone requires. Of most importance is the financing of Rancho Santa Fe Road. Without the unit transfer, the financing mechanisms introduced to the City are based on invalid information and may not work. 2. The transfer of units from Zones 10 and 12 will reduce the overall density of these zones allowing for any upper end, low density development in these zones. Our marketing studies indicate that a high end residential project south of Carrillo way in combination with a mixed use concept north of Carrillo Way would be suc- cessful. We believe that this is the type of develop- ment that the City would find desirable also. Mr. Michael Holzmiller September 29, 1987 Page Three 3. The overall density of our property will remain low because of the difficult topography. At a meeting with Mike Howes and Lance Shulte held yesterday, it was indicated that the staff felt the unit transfer was premature at this time. We disagree since the entire zone plan for Zone 11 is based on the unit transfer. We believe that the issue needs to be resolved immediately. I hope this letter provides you with the information you need to feel comfortable with the unit transfer. Again, we are not creat- ing any new units in the southeast quadrant. We understand that any units transferred in to Zone 11 will be lost from Zone 10 regardless of the final build out numbers determined by the City for Zone 10. With this understanding, we request that the pro- cessing for Zones 11 and 12 be continued with the requested unit transfer. I will call you to discuss this letter and provide any additional information. Sincerely, Ross McDonald cc: Mike Howes Lance Shulte PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 (619)438-1161 Citp of Carte&ab September 29, 1987 Olivenhain Municipal Water District 1966 Olivenhain Road Encinitas, California 92024 Attn: Bill Hollingsworth General Manager RE: ZONE 12 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN Dear Mr. Hollingsworth: The City of Carlsbad is currently undertaking the second phase of its Growth Management Program. This phase includes the preparation and review of Local Facilities Management Plans for each of the 25 Local Facilities Management Zones within the City. f As part of the formal preparation and review process, your district is being asked to review the buildout and phasing assumptions of the plans to determine whether the information is consistent with your district's planning and programming of water facilities. Specifically, the City's Growth Management Program requires the adopted performance standard for water facilities be continually met as growth occurs in Carlsbad. Attached, you will find for your review: 1. The adopted performance standard and adequacy analysis for water facilities 2. Draft buildout assumptions for Zone 12 3. Draft phasing assumptions for Zone 12 Could you please review this information to determine three things. First, is the information correct? Second, can your district provide water facilities according to the phasing assumptions presented in the plan and consistent with Carlsbad's adopted performance standard? And third, what Page 2 means of monitoring demand for and supply of water facilities would be appropriate to establish between you district and the City of Carlsbad? We would appreciate a letter indicating your findings and any comments regarding the processing of Local Facilities Management Plans. Your review and comments are part of an overall plan preparation which needs to be completed by October 15, 1987. If you need further information or assistance, please call me at 438-1161. Thank you very much for your assistance. / Sine LANCE B. SCHULTE Associate Planner LBS:dm cc: Michael Holzmiller Mike Howes Lloyd Hubbs Dan Clark PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 (619)438-1161 Citp of Cartebab September 24, 1987 Rodney E. Phillips, Ed.D Coordinator of Special Projects San Dieguito Union High School District 625 North Vulcan Avenue Leucadia, California 92024 RE: ZONE 12 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN Dear Rodney E. Phillips, Ed.D.: The City of Carlsbad is currently undertaking the second phase of its Growth Management Program. This phase includes the preparation and review of Local Facilities Management Plans for each of the 25 Local Facilities Management Zones within the City. As part of the formal preparation and review process, your district is being asked to review the buildout and phasing assumptions of the plans to determine whether the information is consistent with your district's planning and programming of school facilities. Specifically, the City's Growth Management Program requires the adopted performance standard for school facilities be continually met as growth occurs in Carlsbad. Attached, you will find for your review: 1. The adopted performance standard for school facilities 2. Draft buildout assumptions for Zone 12 3. Draft phasing assumptions for Zone 12 Could you please review this information to determine three things. First, is the information correct? Second, can your district provide school facilities according to the phasing assumptions presented in the plan and consistent with Carlsbad's adopted performance standard? And third, what means of monitoring demand for and supply of school Page 2 facilities would be appropriate to establish between you district and the City of Carlsbad? We would appreciate a letter indicating your findings and any comments regarding the processing of Local Facilities Management Plans. Your review and comments are part of an overall plan preparation which needs to be completed by October 15, 1987. If you need further information or assistance, please call me at 438-1161. Thank you very much for your assistance LANCE B. SCHULTE Associate Planner LBS:dm cc: Michael Holzmiller Mike Howes Lloyd Hubbs Dan Clark PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 (619)438-1161 Citp of Cartebab September 24, 1987 Dr. Donald Linstrom, Superintendent Encinitas School District 189 Union Street Encinitas, California 92024 RE: ZONE 12 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN Dear Dr. Linstrom: The City of Carlsbad is currently undertaking the second phase of its Growth Management Program. This phase includes the preparation and review of Local Facilities Management Plans for each of the 25 Local Facilities Management Zones within the City. As part of the formal preparation and review process, your district is being asked to review the buildout and phasing assumptions of the plans to determine whether the information is consistent with your district's planning and programming of school facilities. Specifically, the City's Growth Management Program requires the adopted performance standard for school facilities be continually met as growth occurs in Carlsbad. Attached, you will find for your review: 1. The adopted performance standard for school facilities 2. Draft buildout assumptions for Zone 12 3. Draft phasing assumptions for Zone 12 Could you please review this information to determine three things. First, is the information correct? Second, can your district provide school facilities according to the phasing assumptions presented in the plan and consistent with Carlsbad's adopted performance standard? And third, what means of monitoring demand for and supply of school facilities would be appropriate to establish between you Page 2 , district and the City of Carlsbad? We would appreciate a letter indicating your findings and any comments regarding the processing of Local Facilities Management Plans. Your review and comments are part of an overall plan preparation which needs to be completed by October 15, 1987. If you need further information or assistance, please call me at 438-1161. iuch for your assistance. LANCE B. SCHtJIjTE Associate Planner LBS:dm cc: Michael Holzmiller Mike Howes Lloyd Hubbs Dan Clark CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD 1,500 square feet per 1,000 population must be scheduled for construction within a five year period. II. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS A. INVENTORY 1. Build Out Assumptions: Required Population Square Footage Existing (citywide/zone) 57,693/1,455 86,539/2,182 Build Out (citywide/zone) 134,914/5,107 202,371/7,660 2. Existing Facilities; Square Footage Permanent Temporary Leased Space Space Space City Hall Facilities: City Hall 12,899 Finance Modular 2,700 Purchasing/Personnel Modular 1,800 Redevelopment 2,000 Community Development Las Palmas Facility 22,627 Public Safety and Service Center: Phase I Police and Fire 53,700 Vehicle Maintenance 10,358 Totals 99,584 4,500 2,000 TOTAL EXISTING FACILTIES 106,084 12E Conclusion: Existing city administrative facilities exceed the performance standard set forth by the city of Carlsbad. However, 1.9 percent of the total square footage is leased and 4.2 percent are in temporary modular units. If the leases are terminated, thereby reducting the existing city administration facilities, this LFMP and the "Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan" will have to be amended. 3. Facilities in City's Five Year Capital Improvements Program; Square Facility Feet Year Cost Source Public Safety Center Phase II* Design 86-87 $ 255,000 PFF** Construction 62,000 89-90 $3,455,000 PFF/S/W** TOTAL 62,000 * Yard offices, maintenance shops and purchasing warehouse for the use of utility maintenance, parks and recreation maintenance, street maintenance and purchasing. Approximate purchasing warehouse with 6,400 square feet mezzanine. ** Public Facilities Fee Sewer/Water Enterprise III. PHASING The existing city administrative facilities and projected 5- year C.I.P. are as follows: Existing Facilities 106,084 square feet Five Year C.I.P. 62,000 square feet TOTAL 168,084 square feet To assess the need for future facilities, a citywide population projection is provided on Table 1-A in the phasing section. Table 1-A provides population projections for the city of Carlsbad on a yearly basis from 1987 -2012. These projections were taken from the "Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan", adopted September 16, 1987 which assumes a build out rate of 1250 units per year and 2.471 persons per dwelling unit.p 2 3 mi 12F Based on these population projections, Table 1-C shows the adequacy of city administrative facilites on a city wide basis by comparing the projected population to the facilities required by the performance standard. Analysis of this table shows that city administrative facilities currently meet the performance standard. In addition, the facilities will conform to the performance standard until the year 2005. In addition to the citywide analysis, Table 1-D shows the demand for city administrative facilities based on the yearly phasing schedule proposed for zone 12 found in Table 1-A. Based on the zone 12 phasing schedule, the additional demand created by zone 12 is added to the citywide phasing schedule. A comparison of Table 1-C and 1-D, shows a higher citywide demand for administrative facilities starting in 1989. However, this additional demand created by zone 12 has little impact on the non-conformance of administrative facilites. The year administrative facilities become deficient remains 2005 as projected by the citywide plan. IV. MITIGATION Analysis of zone 12 impact on the city administative facilities shows that no mitigation is needed at this time. The performance standard is currently being conformed to and will continue to conform until the year 2005. IV. FINANCING The city currently collects a public facility fee (PFF) which is set at 2.5% of permit valuation. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. In calculating the PFF the following expenditures were projected for City Administrative Facilities: Public Safety Center Phas II $3,400,000 City Hall - Future $4,000,000 TOTAL $7,400,000 In addition to the PFF funds, the city's five year CIP indicates the use of sewer funds and water enterprise funds for part of the public safety center Phase II. It is assumed that PFF will continue to be paid by residential development in the zone. Thus, no other financing mechanism is required as a condition of development within Management Zone 12. 2 31987. 12G LIBRARY FACILITIES I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD 800 square feet per 1,000 population of library must be scheduled for construction within a five year period. II. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS A. INVENTORY 1. Build Out Assumptions; Required Population Square Footage Existing (citywide/zone) 57,693/1,455 46,154/1,164 Build Out (citywide/zone) 134,914/5,107 107,931/4,085 2, Existing Facilities; Owned Leased* Facility Square Feet Square Feet Civic Center Library 24,600 Adult Learning Center 400 La Costa Area Library** 4,500 Warehouse 2,000 TOTAL 24,600 6,900 = 31,500 *It should be noted that the "Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan" uses leased library space in assessing compliance with the adopted performance standard. This space should be considered temporary and may not always be available for use by the library. **The La Costa Area Library lease will end when the new South Carlsbad Library is constructed. 3. Facilities in the 1986-9991 C.I.P.; The adopted five year C.I.P. includes $650,000 for the design of a main library in the southern area of the city. 4. Facilities in the 1987-1991 C.I. P.; On July 7, 1987, the city of Carlsbad recommended funding for a new library in South Carlsbad to include the following projected costs: 12L Land Acquisition 1988-89 Grading 1988-89 Design 1988-89 construction 1989-91 TOTAL $1.1 million 0.9 million 0.6 million 8.4 million $11.0 million The South Carlsbad Library will be a 58,000 square foot facility with 48,000 square feet to be occupied in 1992. The additional 10,000 square feet will be leased out by the City until it is needed (circa 1998). III. PHASING Listed on Table 1-E is the demand for library facilities based on the population projections. Population projections for the entire city were prepared on a yearly basis and are shown on Table 1-A. With the addition of the new 58,000 square foot library in 1992, the performance standard is conformed to until the year 2002. In addition to the city wide projections, Table 1-F shows the impact of zone 12 phasing schedule on the city's projected phasing schedule. This table indicates the actual impact from zone 12 based on a four year phasing schedule and can be used by the city for a more accurate city wide phasing schedule. The zone 12 phasing schedule shows the performance standard is conformed to until the year 2002. IV. MITIGATION As the construction of the South Carlsbad library is scheduled for 1991, library facilities conform to the adopted performance standard. Therefore, no mitigation is currently needed for library facilities that would preclude development in zone 12 until the year 2002. V. FINANCING On July 7, 1987, the City Council appropriated sufficient funds for the acquisition and construction of the 58,000 square foot South Carlsbad Library. Although the City Council has guaranteed the needed funds, the long term financing method has not been determined. The City of Carlsbad currently collects a Public Facility Fee (3.5% of permit valuation) which is applied at the time the building permit is issued. SEP 2 3 1987 12M CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD 1,500 square feet per 1,000 population must be scheduled for construction within a five year period. II. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS A. INVENTORY 1. Build Out Assumptions: Required Population Square Footage Existing (citywide/zone) 57,693/1433 86,539/2,149 Build Out (citywide/zone) 134,914/8,883 202,371/13,324 2. Existing Facilities; Square Footage Permanent Temporary Leased Space Space Space City Hall Facilities: City Hall 12,899 Finance Modular 2,700 Purchasing/Personnel Modular 1,800 Redevelopment 2,000 Community Development Las Palmas Facility 22,627 Public Safety and Service Center: Phase I Police and Fire 53,700 Vehicle Maintenance 10,358 Totals 99,584 4,500 2,000 TOTAL EXISTING FACILTIES 106,084 16F Conclusion: Existing city administrative facilities exceed the performance standard set forth by the city of Carlsbad. However, 1.9 percent of the total square footage is leased and 4.2 percent are in temporary modular units. If the leases are terminated, thereby reducting the existing city administration facilities, this LFMP and the "Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan" will have to be amended. 3. Facilities in City's Five Year Capital Improvements Program; Square Facility Feet Year Cost Source Public Safety Center Phase II* Design 86-87 $ 255,000 PFF** Construction 62,000 89-90 $3,455,000 PFF/S/W** TOTAL 62,000 * Yard offices, maintenance shops and purchasing warehouse for the use of utility maintenance, parks and recreation maintenance, street maintenance and purchasing. Approximate purchasing warehouse with 6,400 square feet mezzanine. ** Public Facilities Fee Sewer/Water Enterprise III. PHASING The existing city administrative facilities and projected 5- year C.I.P. are as follows: Existing Facilities 106,084 square feet Five Year C.I.P. 62,000 square feet TOTAL 168,084 square feet To assess the need for future facilities, a citywide population projection is provided on Table 1-A in the phasing section. Table 1-A provides population projections for the city of Carlsbad on a yearly basis from 1987 -2013. These projections were taken from the "Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan", adopted September 16, 1987 which assumes a build out rate of 1250 units per year and 2.471 persons per dwelling unit. SEP 2 3 1987 16G Based on these population projections, Table 1-C shows the adequacy of city administrative facilites on a city wide basis by comparing the projected population to the facilities required by the performance standard. Analysis of this table shows that city administrative facilities currently meet the performance standard. In addition, the facilities will conform to the performance standard until the year 2005. In addition to the citywide analysis, Table 1-D shows the demand for city administrative facilities based on the yearly phasing schedule proposed for zone 11 found in Table 1-B. Based on the zone 11 phasing schedule, the additional demand created by zone 11 is added to the citywide phasing schedule. A comparison of Table 1-C and 1-D, shows a higher citywide demand for administrative facilities starting in 1988. However, this additional demand created by zone 11 has little impact on the non-conformance of administrative facilites. The year administrative facilities become deficient has moved up one year to 2004 instead of 2005 as projected by the citywide plan. IV. MITIGATION Analysis of zone 11 impact on the city administative facilities shows that no mitigation is needed at this time. The performance standard is currently being conformed to and will continue to conform until the year 2004. V. FINANCING The city currently collects a public facility fee (PFF) which is set at 2.5% of permit valuation. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. In calculating the PFF the following expenditures were projected for City Administrative Facilities:^ Public Safety Center Phas II $3,400,000 City Hall - Future $4,000,000 TOTAL $7,400,000 In addition to the PFF funds, the city's five year CIP indicates the use of sewer funds and water enterprise funds for part of the public safety center Phase II. It is assumed that PFF will continue to be paid by residential development in the zone. Thus, no other financing mechanism is required as a condition of development within Management Zone 11. SEP 231987 16H LIBRARY FACILITIES I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD 800 square feet per 1,000 population of library must be scheduled for construction within a five year period. II. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS A. INVENTORY 1. Build Out Assumptions; Required Population Square Footage Existing (citywide/zone) 57,693\1433 46,154\1146 Build Out (citywide/zone) 134,914\8883 107,931\7106 2. Existing Facilities; Owned Leased* Facility Square Feet Square Feet Civic Center Library 24,600 Adult Learning Center 400 La Costa Area Library** 4,500 Warehouse 2,000 TOTAL 24,600 6,900 - 31,500 *It should be noted that the "Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan" uses leased library space in assessing compliance with the adopted performance standard. This space should be considered temporary and may not always be available for use by the library. **The La Costa Area Library lease will end when the new South Carlsbad Library is constructed. 3. Facilities in the 1986-9991 C.I.P.; The adopted five year C.I.P. includes $650,000 for the design of a main library in the southern area of the city. 4. Facilities in the 1987-1991 C.I.P.; On July 7, 1987, the city of Carlsbad recommended funding for a new library in South Carlsbad to include the following projected costs: SEP 23 1987 16K Land Acquisition 1988-89 Grading 1988-89 Design 1988-89 construction 1989-91 TOTAL $1.1 million 0.9 million 0.6 million 8.4 million $11.0 million The South Carlsbad Library will be a 58,000 square foot facility with 48,000 square feet to be occupied in 1992. The additional 10,000 square feet will be leased out by the City until it is needed (circa 1998). III. PHASING Listed on Table 1-E is the demand for library facilities based on the population projections. Population projections for the entire city were prepared on a yearly basis and are shown on Table 1-A. With the addition of the new 58,000 square foot library in 1992, the performance standard is conformed until the year 2002. In addition to the city wide projections, Table 1-F shows the impact of zone 11 phasing schedule on the city's projected phasing schedule. This table indicates the actual impact from zone 11 based on a ten year phasing schedule and can be used by the city for a more accurate city wide phasing schedule. The zone 11 phasing schedule shows the performance standard is conformed to until the year 2001. IV. MITIGATION As the construction of the South Carlsbad library is scheduled for 1991, library facilities conform to the adopted performance standard. Therefore, no mitigation is currently needed for library facilities that would preclude development in zone 11 until the year 2001. IV. FINANCING On July 7, 1987, the City Council appropriated sufficient funds for the acquisition and construction of the 58,000 square foot South Carlsbad Library. Although the City Council has guaranteed the needed funds, the long term financing method has not been determined. The City of Carlsbad currently collects a Public Facility Fee (3.5% of permit valuation) which is applied at the time the building permit is issued. SEP ^3 1987 16L TABLE 1-F CITY LIBRARY FACILITIES (800 SQUARE FEET PER 1,000 POPULATION) ZONE 11 YEAR POPULATION ZONE 11 CITYWIDE EXISTING CONFORMING/ DEMAND POPULATION DEMAND FACILITIES (NONCONFORMING) 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 1433 1433 2669 3736 4996 5923 6602 7195 7788 8300 8705 8883 1146 1146 2135 2989 3997 4738 5282 5756 6231 6640 6964 7106 57,693 60,484 64,510 68,368 72,419 76,137 79,607 82,991 86,374 89,677 92,873 95,841 98,632 101,423 104,214 107,004 109,795 112,586 115,377 118,167 120,958 123,749 126,540 129,330 132,121 134,912 134,914 46,154 48,387 51,608 54,695 57,935 60,909 63,685 66,392 69,100 71,741 74,298 76,673 78,906 81,138 83,371 85,603 87,836 90,069 92,301 94,534 96,766 98,999 101,232 103,464 105,697 107,929 107,931 31,500 31,500 31,500 31,500 31,500 72,600 * 72,600 72,600 72,600 72,600 72,600 82,600 ** 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 (14,654) (16,887) (20,108) (23,195) (26,435) 11,691 8,915 6,208 3,500 859 (1,698) 5,927 3,694 1,462 (771) (3,003) (5,236) (7,469) (9,701) (11,934) (14,166) (16,399) (18,632) (20,864) (23,097) (25,329) (25,331) NOTES: * City Council action on 7/7/87 to add southern library to 5 year Capital Improvement Program, Leased space (6900 ft.) deleted. ** Phase II of south Carlsbad library. (REVISED 9/18/87 - REPLACES P. 12-0 TABLE 1-E CITY LIBRARY FACILITIES (800 SQUARE FEET PER 1,000 POPULATION) CITYWIDE EXISTING YEAR POPULATION DEMAND FACILITIES CONFORMING/ (NONCONFORMING) 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 57,693 60,782 63,871 66,959 70,048 73,137 76,226 79,314 82,403 85,492 88,581 91,669 94,758 97,847 100,936 104,024 107,113 110,202 113,291 116,379 119,468 122,557 125,646 128,734 131,823 134,912 134,914 46,154 48,625 51,096 53,567 56,038 58,509 60,980 63,451 65,922 68,393 70,864 73,335 75,806 78,277 80,748 83,219 85,690 88,161 90,632 93,103 95,574 98,045 100,516 102,987 105,458 107,929 107,931 31,500 31,500 31,500 31,500 31,500 72,600 * 72,600 72,600 72,600 72,600 72,600 82,600 ** 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 (14,654) (17,125) (19,596) (22,067) (24,538) 14,091 11,620 9,149 6,678 4,207 1,736 9,265 6,794 4,323 1,852 (619) (3,090) (5,561) (8,032) (10,503) (12,974) (15,445) (17,916) (20,387) (22,858) (25,329) (25,331) NOTES: * City Council action on 7/7/87 to add southern librar to 5 year Capital Improvement Program. Leased space (6900 ft.) deleted. ** Phase II of south Carlsbad library. (REVISED 9/18/87 - REPLACES P. 16-N) TABLE 1-C CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES (1,500 SQUARE FEET PER 1,000 POPULATION) CITYWIDE EXISTING CONFORMING/ YEAR POPULATION DEMAND FACILITIES (NONCONFORMING) 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 57,693 60,782 63,871 66,959 70,048 73,137 76,226 79,314 82,403 85,492 88,581 91,669 94,758 97,847 100,936 104,024 107,113 110,202 113,291 116,379 119,468 122,557 125,646 128,734 131,823 134,912 134,914 86,540 91,173 95,806 100,439 105,072 109,705 114,338 118,971 123,605 128,238 132,871 137,504 142,137 146,770 151,403 156,036 160,670 165,303 169,936 174,569 179,202 183,835 188,468 193,101 197,735 202,368 202,371 106,084 106,084 106,084 106,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 19,545 14,911 10,278 5,645 63,012 58,379 53,746 49,113 44,480 39,846 35,213 30,580 25,947 21,314 16,681 12,048 7,415 2,781 (1,852) (6,485) (11,118) (15,751) (20,384) (25,017) (29,651) (34,284) (34,287) (REVISED 9/18/87 - REPLACES P. 16-1) TABLE 1-D ZONE 11 - CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES (1,500 SQUARE FEET PER 1,000 POPULATION) ZONE 11 BEGIN YR YEAR POPULATION 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 1433 1433 2669 3736 4996 5923 6602 7195 7788 8300 8705 8883 8883 8883 8883 8883 8883 8883 8883 8883 8883 8883 8883 8883 8883 8883 8883 ZONE 11 BEGIN YR DEMAND 2,150 2,150 4,003 5,604 7,494 8,884 9,903 10,793 11,683 12,450 13,058 13,325 13,325 13,325 13,325 13,325 13,325 13,325 13,325 13,325 13,325 13,325 13,325 13,325 13,325 13,325 13,325 CITYWIDE POPU- LATION 57,693 60,484 64,510 68,368 72,419 76,137 79,607 82,991 86,374 89,677 92,873 95,841 98,632 101,423 104,214 107,004 109,795 112,586 115,377 118,167 120,958 123,749 126,540 129,330 132,121 134,912 134,914 CITYWIDE EXISTING CONFORMING/ DEMAND FACILITIES (NONCONFORMING) 86,540 90,726 96,765 102,552 108,629 114,205 119,410 124,486 129,562 134,515 139,309 143,762 147,948 152,134 156,320 160,506 164,693 168,879 173,065 177,251 181,437 185,623 189,809 193,995 198,182 202,368 202,371 106,084 106,084 106,084 106,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 168,084 19,545 15,358 9,319 3,532 59,455 53,879 48,674 43,598 38,522 33,569 28,775 24,322 20,136 15,950 11,764 7,578 3,391 (795) (4,981) (9,167) (13,353) (17,539) (21,725) (25,911) (30,098) (34,284) (34,287) (REVISED 9/18/87 - REPLACES P. 16-J) THE WILLIAM N. HOFMAN COMPANY Planning Project Management Environmental September 23, 1987 Mike Howes Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Revised Zones 11 and 12 LFMP - City Administrative and Library Facilities. Dear Mike: Enclosed please find the revised sections for City Administrative and Library Facilities for the Zones 11 and 12 - LFMP. The revised text will replace the text as follows: Zone 11 - LFMP (Library Facilities) 1. P. 16-K replaces old 16-K. 2. P. 16-L replaces old 16-L. 3. Omit P. 16-M. Zone 11 - LFMP (City Administrative Facilities) 1. P. 16-F replaces old 16-F. 2. P. 16-G replaces old 16-G. 3. P. 16-H replaces old 16-H. Zone 12 - LFMP (Library Facilities) 1. P. 12-L replaces old 12-L. 2. P. 12-M replaces old 12-M. 3. Omit P. old 12-N. Zone 12 - LFMP (City Administrative Facilities) 1. P. 12-E replaces old 12-E. 2. P. 12-F replaces old 12-F. 3. P. 12-G replaces old 12-G. 6994 El Camino Real • Suite 208-G • Carlsbad • CA 92009 • (619) 438-1465 In addition the above revisions, Bill delivered the revised spread sheets for the above facilities to you on September 22, 1987. The spread sheets are inserted as follows: Zone 11 - LFMP (Library Facilities) 1. P. 16-N replaces old 16-N. 2. P. 16-0 replaces old 16-0. Zone 11 - LFMP (Library Facilities) 1. P. 16-1 replaces old 16-1. 2. P. 16-J replaces old 16-J. Zone 12 - LFMP (Library Facilities) 1. P. 12-P replaces old 12-P. 2. Please insert Citywide Library Facilities Spread Sheet in front of 12-P. Zone 12 - LFMP (City Administrative Facilities) 1. P. 12-1 replaces old 12-1. 2. P. 12-J replaces old 12-J. With these revisions, City Administrative Facilities and Library Facilities are complete. Based on the new parks inventory and comments previously received from Lance Schulte, we will submit a revised Parks and Open Space Facilities within the next few days. If you have any questions or comments, please give me a call. Sincerely, Sheila Donovan Attachments 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 •PLANNING DEPARTMENT WHIJrm (619)438-1161 Cttp of Cartefcab September 18, 1987 Bill Hofman 6994 El Camino Real #208-G Carlsbad, California 92009 Dear Bill: Pursuant to the Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.90.125(a)(1), the City is required to provide a schedule for a Local Facilities Management Plan for public hearing (Planning Commission) within 60 days of receipt of a complete application. In accordance with this requirement, please find enclosed the proposed processing schedule which will bring Zone 12 to public hearing on February 23, 1988. This schedule incorporates the following key assumptions: 1. The confirmed buildout figures are correct and accepted. 2. An adequate EIA Part I for the zone plan will be provided by you in our office by October 1, 1987. 3. The corrections and issues we have indicated to you in our February 20, 1987, June 4, 1987, and July 23, 1987 letters will be resolved or addressed by you and in our office by October 1, 1987. 4. The revised traffic study and program you have indicated to staff is being prepared and needs to be in our office for review by October 1, 1987. 5. A copy of both the word processing and spreadsheet disks for the updated draft plan needs to be in our offices by October 1, 1987. The disks need to have an index by chapters. 6. Adequate summaries of the financing and corresponding financing alternatives proposed in the plan need to be in our office by October 1, 1987. 7. The enclosed schedule relies on a fairly rigid allocation of staff time. We have reserved Thursday Page 2 Lance to dedicate to Zone 12 processing. If this time allocation shifts, the zone processing schedule will be affected. Further, this allocation of staff time assumes an adequate and timely flow of corrections from you on Thursdays. Please let me know if you have any difficulties with this proposed schedule. Yours Truly, MIKE HOWES Senior Planner MH:dm cc: Zone 12 Lance Schulte Philip Carter Michael Holzmiller LFMP ZONES 11 AND 12 BUILDOUT ASSUMPTIONS Staff has completed its review of the buildout projections for Zones 11 and 12. The constraints maps were analyzed and appear to be accurate. A review was also made of all units in Zones 11 and 12 which currently exist or are in the approval process to determine whether they were built in conformance with the Growth Control Points for each land use designation. In Zone 11, the existing and approved units were built in conformance with the Growth Control Points. However, in Zone 12, the existing and approved units exceed the Growth Control Points by 298 units. Therefore, no adjustments are necessary for Zone 11, but in Zone 12, 298 must be reduced from future residential units. The following is a breakdown of your confirmed buildout numbers: Existing Approved Future Zone 11 580 1,000 1,630 Zone 12 589 789 391 Schedule Hm: LFIfPs Zone i: - Process™ Schedule Project lunger: Lanct Schulu As of Oite: 21-Seo-S? 10:13n Schedule File: fi:\LFHP12A Jul Auq Sep Mho Status 27 3 " 10 17 24 31 7 H ftppl. Accepted IBS F'C1" D H P.M. Scntdule LB: PDr E.I. ft Part 11 BH il City Adi IBS PCC P i2 Library L8C, PGC P 16 Tire US, Fire ft »8 Schools LE- KB f Pln.ftssMbles IBS, POC C H /C fi /ftevitK PF VB C Reviw Htg LB5,PC:.H* C FUn Hodilied PLK.. En--. C PC Public Noticing IBS P0r CC Public Noticing CC Public Hearing C D Done === last - Slack tue (== — ), or C Critical +*« Started t«sfe Resource delay (— ") fi Resource conflict ?• Milestone > Conflict p Partial dependency Scale: Each character eguaU 1 cay Oct Hov Dec Jan Feb Har Aor 1 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 26 4 11 18 25 1 6 14 22 29 7 14 21 23 4 11 18 25 _ . fl TIKE LINE G»ntt Chart Recort Strip 1 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 (619) 438-1161 Citp of Cartebab September 2, 1987 Bill Hofman WILLIAM N. HOFMAN CO. 6994 El Camino Real, Suite 208"G" Carlsbad, CA 92009 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN - ZONE 12 Dear Mr. Hofman: Although the guidelines for the preparation of a Local Facilities Management Plan did not specifically require the submittal of an Environmental Impact Assessment Form - Part I, the City Attorney has determined these plans to be projects under CEQA and, therefore, are subject to all CEQA requirements . As a result, you will be required to provide this information to the City for Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 12 as soon as possible. All CEQA guidelines are a part of the application processing requirements. If you have any questions please contact the Planner coordinating the Zone Plan review. Sincerely, PHILIP O: CARTER Senior Management Analyst POCtbjn c: Michael J. Holzmiller Charlie Grimm Mike Howes Gary Wayne Lance Schulte IR CDStn RnrcH CD. July 27, 1987 Ray Patchett Acting City Manager City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Ray: We want to thank you for your hard work in processing the Zone 11 and Zone 12 Growth Management Plans. We have made every effort to do the best possible work we could on the plans as we know you have. We believe this cooperative effort has produced a product with a high standard of ex- cellence that we can both be confident and proud of. Though at times we have felt frustrated by the trials and errors it has taken to get to this point, we have always realized the enormity of your tasks in administering the entire city in difficult times with limited resources. In this regard we admire your integrity in not substituting expediency for quality despite all the new pressures of the Growth Management Program. We are trying to follow the same course and believe the zone plans reflect that commitment to the Growth Management Plans on both our parts. Now that Zone 11 & 12 have been accepted for formal pro- cessing, we would like to offer any help we can in regards to zone plans and the Growth Management Program whether directly related to our project or not. Regards, Ross McDonald Bill Hofman Doug Avis RM/sb cc: Marty Orenyak Mayor Lewis Phil Carter Michael Holzmiller Mike Howes Lance Schultevx 6670 El Camino Real, P.O. Box 9000-266 • Carlsbad • California 92009 • (619)931-8747: 1200 ELM AVENUE - »*O/ cJM TELEPHONE CARLSBAD, CA 92008-1989 WfeS^!^ (619) 438-5525\fy*r£r of Cartebab DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING SERVICES DIVISIONOuly 23, 1987 Bill Hofman The William N. Hofman Company 6994 El Camino Real, #208-G Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUB3ECT: 6-30-87 SUBMITTAL OF LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR ZONE 12 Dear Bill: It was a pleasure to receive revisions to the Zone 12 Plan on 6- 30-87. This revision was to address issues brought to your attention in our Dune 4, 1987 letter. Staff has conducted a preliminary review of the resubmitted Zone Plan. The review concluded that the Plan basically has all the necessary parts to be considered complete and acceptable for processing. However in this preliminary review, several major technical issues have been identified. These issues will need correction or clarification at the earliest possible date for the Plan to move forward in processing. These issues are: 1. The dwelling units/population/land use intensity within various phasing tables are inconsistent. Further, the inconsistencies violate the provisions of Proposition E. 2. The buildout assumptions will need full technical review by staff. Staff will initiate this as soon as possible. 3. The plan is heavily dependent on proposed financing programs. A separate "financing" section should be prepared for the plan and submitted to staff for detailed technical review. The financing section should itemize financing for all public facilities addressed in the plan. 3uly 23, 1987 Page 2 4-. Environmental information documentation concerning the proposed alignment of Calle Barcelona needs to be provided. This will allow proper and efficient CEQA review. 5. Lastly, as stated in our dune A-, 1987 letter to you, several technical issues were identified and should have been addressed in your 6-30-87 submittal. These issues are still valid; as are issues identified in our 2-20-87 letter to you. Please address these issues as soon as possible. With respect to a processing schedule for the Zone 12 Plan, please refer to our Duly 16, 1987 letter to Ross McDonald. However, Staff will provide you with a processing schedule within 60 days of acceptance of your processing fee. Again, thank you for the receipt of the Zone 12 Plan. We look forward to working with you on the Plan. Sincerely yours, LANCE B. SCHULTE Associate Planner LSBtaf cc: Mike Howes Michael Holzmiller Charlie Grimm Phil Carter Zone 12 File 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 PLANNING DEPARTMENT IRHL/Ji (619)438-1161 ^gj^jjiL^dhfly Citp of Cartebab Duly 16, 1987 Ross McDonald La Costa Ranch Company P.O. Box 9000-266 Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: 3ULY 2, 1987 LETTER DATED OUNE 11, 1987 CONCERNING 6-30-87 SUBMITTAL OF LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR ZONES 11 and 12 Dear Ross: It was a pleasure to receive revisions to the Zones 11 and 12 Plans on 6-30-87. Staff will be writing you near the end of this month as to the plan(s) official acceptance as complete or incomplete. With respect to potential processing schedules for the Zone 11 and 12 Plans, please be advised that the plan for Zone 6 has staff's priority. The Zone 6 Plan is expected to be completed soon and should impart no delay on the review and analysis of the Zone 11 and 12 Plans. Your suggestion to concurrently process the Zone 11 and Zone 12 Plans is unique, and will require a bit more management analysis to see if it is practical. Additionally, as we have discussed verbally with your consultants, concurrent processing would require a longer period of review before going before the Planning Commission. Again, thank you for the receipt of the Zone 11 and 12 Plan revisions. We^look forward to working with you on these plans. Sincerely your*, IL—r+c-it _ LANCE B. SCHULTE Associate Planner LBS:af cc: Mike Howes Michael Holzmiller Charlie Grimm Phil Carter Zone 11 and 12 Property Owners Zone 11 & 12 Files 4. Per my conversations with you and Phil Carter and a meeting between Phil and Cheryl Cunningham, the Chapters on fire and drainage do not contain a year to year demand schedule. A year to year demand schedule is not applicable to these particular facilities for the following reasons: a. Fire - A fire station is needed up front for both Zones 11 and 12. The year it is scheduled is provided in the plan. Once completed, no units in either zone will be outside a five minute response time. Since the station will be provided up front, phasing is not applicable. b. Drainage - Using the same reasoning and methodology of the city contained in the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 5, the timing of these facilities are more related to adjacent development. Estimated dates of completion of the major facilities are provided and these dates can be used for planning projection purposes for analyzing the entire region. Yearly demand would not be meaningful for this facility. The staff has agreed to this approach for these facilities. Since there were only two items necessary for the completion of this application and since the staff has already taken 30 days to review the report we would expect official acceptance within one week. Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Bill Hofman cc: Ray Patchet Marty Orenyak Michael Holzmiller Charlie Grimm Phil Carter Mike Howes Ross McDonald Rick Engineering THE WILLIAM N. HOFMAN COMPANY Planning Project Management Environmental June 30, 1987 Lance Schulte 2075 Las Palmas Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Official Submittal of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zones 11 and 12. Dear Lance: Attached hereto are the remaining items necessary for the official acceptance of our application for the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zones 11 and 12. Per my previous conversations with you and Phil Carter, the necessary items needed for the City to deem this application complete are items 1 and 2 contained in your letter of June 4, 1987. Zone 11 has the same submittal requirements as Zone 12 according to your letter of June 18, 1987. The following is a summary of the items contained in this submittal package: 1. A new chapter outlining an overall, year to year phasing program for each zone including both residential and non-residential phasing sequences. 2. New chapters discussing Citywide facilities including City Administrative, Library and Waste Water facilities. For each facility, we have provided a year to year demand schedule, comparison of demand and supply and identification of conformance and nonconformance with the performance standards. Also included is a comparison of the Zone 11 and 12 demand on these facilities with the projected Citywide projected demand. 3. Each facility chapter contains a yearly demand schedule, comparison of demand and supply and identification of conformance or non-conf ormance. Also, where applicable, mitigation measures are proposed. 6994 El Camino Real • Suite 208-G • Carlsbad • CA 92009 • (619) 438-1465 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 PLANNING DEPARTMENT ^K^L^jf (619)438-1161 ^5Jg^ Citp of Cartebab 3une 29, 1987 Cheryl Cunningham Rick Engineering Company 365 South Rancho Santa Fe Road San Marcos, CA 92069 Dear Cheryl: We have reviewed your request to modify the Growth Management Program requirement to submit a property owners' list and addressed, stamped envelopes for the formal submittal of the Local Facilities Management Plans for Zones 10, 11, 12, 18, and 22. We are willing to accept an individual request on a zone by zone basis to modify the Local Facilities Management Plan noticing requirement in lieu of receiving individual stamped envelopes at the time the plan is officially submitted. Each of your specific zone requests have been given to the project planner working on that specific zone. We believe in some cases your request may be acceptable, however, for other zones it would not. If you have any questions, please call me, PHILIP 0. CARTER Senior Management Analyst POCtbjn PUNNING CONSULTANTSAND CIVIL ENGINEERSRICK ENGINEERING COMPANY 365 SO. RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD • SUITE 100 SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA 92069 • 619/744-4800 June 19, 1987 Mr. Michael Holzmiller CITY OF CARLSBAD 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009 RE: SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LFMP ZONE 12 (JOB NUMBER 7951-B) Dear Michael: We would like to request a modification of the requirement to submit a property owners' list and addressed stamped envelopes for the formal submittal of the Local Facility Management Plan (LFMP) for Management Zone 12. The purpose of the original requirement was to notify all property owners' within a given zone and within a 600-foot radius of that zone, of any public hearings regarding the LFMP. The City of Carlsbad, in preparing the LFMP's for Zones 2 through 5, set a precedence by notifying the property owners' of the public hearings with a notice in the local newspaper. We propose that a notice of public hearing regarding the LFMP for Zone 12 be published in the local newspaper in lieu of mailing individual notices. Please let us know your response at your earliest convenience. Sine CC:cea/001 In CQStB BflrCH CD. June 11, 1987 Michael J. Holzmiller City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Carlsbad, CA 92009 Subject: Local Facility Management Plan 12-Official Submittal. Dear Michael: Zones 11 and Attached are further amendments to the Management Plans for Zones 11 and 12 that have been required by the Planning Depart- ment prior to official acceptance of our applications. We are disappointed that our first official submittal was rejected by the city. Your staff believed our phasing program was insuf- ficient and a discussion of City wide facilities was not in- cluded. Regarding phasing, our plans did include a phasing program based on threshold levels of facilities and we are now adding a yearly estimated phasing projection for each facility. With regards to City wide facilities, we did not include a dis- cussion because at the time it was not required because our plans acknowledged we concurred with the findings of the City wide Facilities Plan. Staff has indicated that the inclusion of these discussions on city wide facilities is a new requirement which we are now subject. To meet these requirements, we have amended the Zone 11 and 12 plans to include both a more detailed phasing program that meets the city guidelines and a discussion of Zone 11 and 12 impacts on the City wide public facilities. Our management plans recognize the need for construction of major improvements in south Carlsbad and La Costa in particular. Our phasing approach is interwoven with our public financing concept for these regional improvements. The proposed yearly unit totals correspond with the amount of public financing that is needed to construct these improvements in an economically viable manner. It is our understanding that the City would like to implement the Growth Management Plan in a timely manner to benefit current residents by taking care of existing public deficiencies. We believe that in cooperation with City officials we can be a 6670 El Camino Real, P.O. Box 9000-266 • Carlsbad • California 92009 • (619)931-8747: Michael J. Holzmiller Page 2 • June 11, 1987 major contributor to the successful implementation. For this program to be successful it is imperative that our plans be processed as soon as-- possible. The first step is official acceptance of our applications by the city and sub- mittal of our processing fees. Since our applications have already been thoroughly reviewed by the planning staff and the incomplete items are now included in this amendment, we are requesting a one week period to insure completeness and to accept our application as complete. We believe it is in the City's and La Costa Ranch Company's best interests to process Zones 11 and 12 concurrently and in a timely manner. As you know, these zones are closely related and share responsibility for the major infrastructure in La Costa. Of greatest benefit would be the concurrent pro- cessing of Zones 6, 11 and 12 and we would make this suggestion to you. Alternately, Zones 11 and 12 hold the solutions to anticipated problems in Zone 6 and can be processed ahead of 6. Whatever the exact methodology you choose, we feel that the following schedule of processing is critical to successful implementation: Action Official Acceptance of Zone 11 & 12 plans Planning Commission approval of Zones 6, 11 and 12 City Council approval Yours truly, Date June 30, 1987 July 29, 1987 September 8, 1987 Ross McDonald Managing Director RM/sb cc Ray Patchett Marty Orenyak Charlie Grimm Lance Schulte Phil Carter Mike Howes 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 PLANNING DEPARTMENT »O/ ffM (619)438-1161 Citp of Cartebab Dune A, 1987 William N. Hofman Company 6994 El Camino Real, //208-G Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Bill, Enclosed are Staff's comments concerning the May 5, 1987 resubmittal of the Local Facility Management Plan for Zone 12. This re-submittal was later clarified in your May 27, 1987 letter. Your plan is being rejected because it failed to properly address facility phasing as indicated in our 2/20/87 letter. A detailed discussion of how phasing should be addressed is listed below as item 1. There are also several other items brought to your attention in our 2/20/87 letter reviewing the first preliminary draft submittal were not addressed. These items are explained following item 1 and should be incorporated when this plan is resubmitted. 1) Phasing - Provide a clear identification of each of the phased public facility improvements to concurrently meet the specific public facility demand being created by development in Zone 12. See Item #7 in 2/20/87 letter. A unified phasing schedule must be provided for the Zone 12 plan. A fragmented and loosely linked phasing schedule defeats the goal of the Growth Management Program which is to provide all Public Facilities concurrent or in advance of need. Further fragmented phasing schedule will also add unnecessary complexity, time and expense to the development review process. Consequently, each public facility section must be able to stand alone yet be linked to a unified phasing schedule. This means a complete yearly demand schedule, a yearly comparison of demand and supply, and identification of conformance or non- conformance with the adopted standard. Mitigation measures should be proposed if non-conformance is determined. And, the complete financing alternatives must be given if mitigation is required. To help clarify this issue the following excerpt from Pages 65 and 66 of the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan is provided for your benefit (emphasis added). 3une 4, 1987 Page 2 III. Phasing A phasing schedule establishing the timing for installation of the facilities or improvements in relationship to the amount of development activity (e.g. number of dwelling units, number of square feet of commercial space, etc.) shall be submitted for the facility management zone. The phasing schedule shall ensure that development of one area of the zone will not utilize more than the area's pro rata share of facility or improvment capacity within that zone unless sufficient capacity is ensured for other areas of the zone at the time of the first development. Periods where facilities and improvements may not meet the City standard shall be indicated, and the plan shall either: i. Provide a means for meeting the standard, or ii. Suspend development in the zone for a period of time until the standard is met. The primary goal of the zone plan is to provide more up front, longer term planing for public facilities. The phasing analysis and schedules are primarily for planning and "early alert" purposes. It is recognized that when development will actually take place related to many variables that change over time. Nevertheless, it is necessary to prepare phasing assumptions in order to analyze facility phasing, construction and financing plans. The decision as to whether a specific project may proceed will be made in relation to both the zone plan and the actual project approval. In both cases analysis will relate directly to assurances that the Performance Standards can be met. Both dwelling unit and non-residential land usage should be projected on a year-by-year basis over a twenty year time line similar to the analysis that was done in the Citywide Facilities and improvements Plan. Development projected beyond the 20 year period should be shown in one remainder number. A table for the specific zone should be included as part of the plan. City staff will verify the "reasonableness" of these projections based upon regional growth predictions prepared by SANDAG, June 4, 1987 Page 3 projections made by the City in conjunciton with the Capital Improvements Program and actual historical trends. Specific facility phasing for each of the eleven facilities should relate directly to these projections. When considered helpful, alternative phasing schedules may be submitted. For example, such schedules might document that facilities will be adequate for variable rates of development within the specific zone. 2) Citywide Facilities - There is no discussion of Zone 12's impact on Citywide facilities (i.e., City Administration Facilities, Library Facilities, & Wastewater Treatment Facilities). The Zone Plan must address this impact and clearly show that the year by year demand from Zone 12 on each of thse facilities is consistent with the Citywide Plan. See Item #3 in 2/20/87 letter. The Citywide plan makes certain assumptions concerning the phasing of demand and supply of Citywide facilities. Acceptance of those Citywide plan assumptions must be clearly shown in the local plan for that local plan to claim consistancy and acceptance of the planning of Citywide facilities. If this cannot be done the local plan can propose an alternative to the Citywide plans programming of a Citywide facility. However, the alternative must clearly indicate how the adopted performance standard is maintained. The guidelines are being changed to require this analysis in all local plans. 3) Parks - A thorough documentation of the Joint use Agreement (OUA) between the school districts and the City for Park use of school sites is necessary. See item #9 in 2/20/87 letter. Of particular concern is the applicability of those DUAs for future school facilities and the source and committment for their financing. 4) Open Space - Define usability and constraints of open space identified. See item #12 in 2/20/87 letter. Much of this "open space" identified appears to be manufactured slopes greater than 4-0% in grade. Most of those slopes appear along roadway corridors. These slopes are a by-product of grading to create large building pads. The useability of these slopes as open space consistent with the adopted Performance Standard must clearly be clearly shown; as must the usability of all acreage inventoried as open space in Zone 12. Dune 4, 1987 Page > 5) Circulation - Existing Facilities The inventory for existing facilities is incomplete. Exhibits should be prepared showing the existing facilities including number of lanes, lane widths and existing right- of-ways. The traffic studies should use the Barton-Aschman Report for design guidelines. 1,600 vehicles per lane has been assumed as the capacity in this report, whereas, Barton-Aschman uses 1,500 vehicles per lane. The ICU analysis varies substantially from the Barton-Aschman study. Variances should be explained and substantiated with further studies. An analysis of existing committed and buildout traffic ICU should be provided for existing facilities without improvements. Committed Projects The committed projects listed in Table 3 on page 5 are unidentifiable. Please provide planning project numbers or appropriate CT numbers. Provide a map of the projects. Show all projects within the area including County projects. For instance, the project on the south side of Olivenhain Road, east of El Camino Real is anticipated to have major traffic impacts on this area. Buildout conditions These comments are addressed to the Wes Pringle report. Provide a basis for traffic splits as shown on the first page. The report does not have index or page numbers. It is very hard to follow. Provide a copy of the SANDAG model and show how adjustments were made considering SANDAG projections. The traffic generation value for high density residential is incorrect and should be eight trips per day for eight to fifteen units per acre. ICU values should be re-evaluated in light of the Barton-Aschman study, diagrams should be given for all intersection improvement proposals. The diagrams should show the existing street improvements and right-of-way as well as the proposed improvements and right-of-way. Phasing has not mitigated the failed intersections. Intersections which fail with Phase 1 must be built with Phase 1. Appendix A cites vehicle capacity of 1,600 vehicles per lane. Use 1,500 vehicles per lane. See the Barton-Aschman study, page 22. the proposed plan and profile for Calle Barcelona does not conform to engineering standards. Maximum grades at intersections shall be 6%. dune 4, 1987 Page 5 6) Drainage - Address the inadequacy of facilities when consideration is given to the new IDF curves. The existing master plan is inadequate in that it is based upon the old IDF curves. Address facility adequacy within Zone 6 from the area along the north that drains into that zone. 7) Sewer - Provide study basin and calculations for the 15% sewer line in El Camino Real road. Present projections for ultimate peak flow are 0.3 MGD over existing capacity. Provide a letter from the Leucadia County Water District addressing the adequacy of the Zone plan. 8) Water - Provide letter from Olivenhain Municipal Water District addressing the adequacy of the Zone plan. Provide copies of references cited: (1) the water system analysis for the planned development of La Costa within the Olivenhain Municipal Water District; and (2) planning study fo Leucadia County Water District. These and the 2/20/87 comments are intended to help you prepare a Local Facilities Management Plan acceptable for processing. That is a plan that (1) has all the components that fulfill the "guidelines" as outlined in the adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan as amended, and (2) complies with the goal of the Growth Management Program; that is to provide public facilities meeting the adopted Performance Standards concurrent or in advance of need. Only after item 1 and 2 has been fully addressed as outlined, can the plan be accepted for the detailed process of verifying the plan's specific figures and assumptions and analyzing the plan's conclusions. Of course, all of the other comments should be incorporated in the plan when it is re-submitted. 3une 4, 1987 Page 6 When these items have been fully addressed in your plan, please call. At that time we can schedule a meeting to discuss the amendments and receive your formal submittal. If you have any questions, or need more clarification, please call me. ely./?// LANCE B. SCHULTE Associate Planner LBS:af Holzmiller O'Mike Howes \Phil Carter Ross McDonald >Rick Engineering Pringle & Associates THE WILLIAM N. HOFMAN COMPANY Planning Project Management Environmental May 27, 1987 Lance Schulte City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Dear Lance: Local Facility Management Plan - Zone 12; Clarification of the Status of the Management Plan. Pursuant to our discussion today, this letter clarifies the status of the Local Facility Management Plan for Zone 12. The second submittal dated May 5, 1987 constitutes the official submittal of the La Costa Ranch Company. We believe our application is complete and meets all the guidelines of the Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plans. The fact that this is our official submittal was not made clear in our cover letter submitted with the plan and I apologize for not being more clear. Please let me know if you need any additional information. Sincerely , Bill Hofman 6994 El Camino Real • Suite 208-G • Carlsbad • CA 92009 • (619) 438-1465 THE WILLIAM N. HOFMAN COMPANY Planning Project Management Environmental May 5, 1987 Mr. Lance B. Schulte, Associate Planner City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 Dear Lance: Attached please find the revised Zone 12 Local Facility Management Plan. This plan addresses all the comments made in your letter of February 20, 1987. Also, substantial revisions to the text have been made which include the elimination of our proposal to transfer units into this zone from other southeast quadrant zones. All impacts on public facilities reflect the existing General Plan land uses and its corresponding constraints. A new traffic report is included using these new numbers. Listed below is a summary of the changes made in response to your letter of February 20th. For each item, the change is noted with reference to the corresponding page in the text when appropriate. 1. The text was reviewed and rewritten to conform to the formatting suggestions made in item number 1 (i.e. definition of technical terms, paging exhibits and citing data sources) . 2. The LFMP is based solely on the existing general plan. The text has been revised to clarify this point. Specifically, p. 7 of the Build Out section clarifies this point. 3. The property owners have accepted the findings made by the city with regard to the citywide facilities. This statement is made on page 1 of the Introduction and complies with guidelines for the preparation of Local Facilities Management Plans contained in the "Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan." 6994 El Camino Real • Suite 208-G • Carlsbad • CA 92009 • (619) 438-1465 4. The unit transfer into Management Zone 12 from other management zones has not been included in this LFMP. See Table 1 (p. 8) for the updated build out of Management Zone 12. 5. Non-residential build out assumptions have been added to the text (p. 12). The comments regarding corrections to Table 1 have been addressed. 6. The remaining undeveloped land of Management Zone 12 is entirely owned by the La Costa Ranch Company. The remainder of the zone is owned by individual single family homeowners. The list of these single family owners is not included per direction from Michael Holzmiller and Phil Carter at the initial meeting regarding Zone 12. 7. The phasing sequence to Management Zone 12 is tied to the improvements of the circulation elements. The circulation section describes in detail the phasing sequence for the zone. When appropriate, other public facility improvements are tied to the phasing sequence described in circulation. In most cases, such as fire, the major facilities must be provided up front and a phasing sequence is not applicable. When this is the case, it has been noted in the text. 8. Phasing and financing of circulation are complete and have been included. Changes have been made to the exhibits as recommended. 9. Copies of the joint use agreements between the city of Carlsbad and surrounding communities can be found in Appendix 2. Revisions to the text regarding the joint use agreements can be found on p. 13. 10. The existing facilities were designed and constructed to city standards (see p. 44), thus, adequately serving the zone. Minor modifications to drainage are consistent with the intent of the Master Plan. Per discussion with the Engineering Department, improvement plan numbers are not required for the LFMP. Therefore, flows and capacities are assumed to be as found in the drainage master plan. 11. At a meeting with Fire Chief Thompson, he indicated that mutual support agreements need not be incorporated into the fire section as these agreements can not be applied towards the performance standard. Please see text on p. 48 for further details. 12. Text and exhibits have been updated to conform with open space comments found in item number 12. See page 54 and 56 and the open space exhibit on p. 55. 13. School Exhibit (#8) on page 59 has been changed to show locations of schools serving Management Zone 12. 14. See p. 72 for a discussion of reclaimed water. Phasing and financing (p. 72) have been revised to correspond with the phasing schedule discussed in the circulation section. Improvement plan numbers are not needed as the minor modifications are consistent with the master plan. 15. Discussion and location of storage capacity can be found on Exhibit 21 (p. 74) and p. 76. The capacity (demand) can be found on p. 76. As the water facilities described in this LFMP are consistent with the master water plan, no improvement plans are necessary. The phasing and financing sections have been revised to be consistent with the circulation phasing schedule. 16. Substantial revisions to the traffic report have been made by Wes Pringle and Associates including comments made in item number 16. 17. See Appendix 4. Please call if you have any questions regarding this letter. Sincerely , C>'C2-Bill Hofman cc: Mike Holzmiller Charlie Grimm Mike Howes Ray Patchett Phil Carter Jim Elliot Lloyd Hubbs PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 (619)438-1161 City of Cartebab February 20, 1987 William N. Hofman Co. 6994 El Camino Real, #208-G Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Mr. Hofman: Enclosed are staff's comments concerning your preliminary first draft of the Local Facility Management Plan for Zone 12 submitted January 21, 1987. It is important to understand that these are initial comments and are not*intended to be a complete critical review of the draft Plan. This is a good preliminary first draft, however, the following comments will be useful preparing an acceptable plan for the City to review, attention should be paid to items Numbers 2, 3, 4, 7, 16. in Special 8, 11 and 1 . Data and information used in several sections should clearly reference back to the original citation. The exhibits should explain accurately the bulk of the information in the report and be consistent with the text. Source of data should be included to allow a verification of methods and sources. Also provide an explanation of any "technical" terms. Provide page numbers in the list of exhibits and within the text. In the report clearly and consistently use and define all terms used. Index all appendices. 2. Concurrent processing - The Plan improperly proposes concurrent processing of the Local Facility Management Plan (LFMP) and the staff review of the City Council initiated La Costa Master Plan Amendment. The LFMP must be based on the existing General Plan and La Costa Master Plan. The plan may include an alternative to the existing General Plan land uses. However, the alternative must be fully analyzed in the report to the same level of detail as the existing General Plan. . Further, land use assumptions used in the report and traffic study must be consistent. 3. Citywide Facilities - There is no discussion of Zone 12's impact on Citywide facilities (ie, City Administration Facilities, Library Facilities, & Waste Water Treatment Facilities). The Zone Plan must address this Impact and clearly show the year by year demand from Zone 12 on each of these facilities. February 20, 1987 Page Two 4. Proposed dwelling unit transfer between Local Facility Management Zones - The proposed dwelling unit transfer between Zones 10, 11 and 12 cannot be considered at this time. 5. Buildout Assumptions - No buildout assumptions or phasing for non-residential land use was provided. Provide a complete legend for Exhibits 5 and 6. On Table 1, provide a complete copy of the spread sheet. Label columns with terms that are clearly understandable (Ex. "Gross" and "Units"). 6. Ownership - A map and table of ownership and acreage needs to be submitted. 7. Phasing - Provide a clear identification of the phased public facility improvement to meet the specific public facility demand being created by development in Zone 12. Link all phased improvements with a firm point (eg at issuance of final map/building permits, etc.). 8. Circulation - As mentioned in your January 21, 1987 letter, the circulation section is missing the phasing and financing portions. A detailed City boundary map showing the existing and ultimate right-of-way of Olivenhain Road is needed. The line and grade for Calle Barcelona is not consistent with the constraints map. Show circulation roads as per Circulation Element. 9. Parks - A thorough documentation of the Hoint Use Agreement between the school districts and the City for park use of school sites is necessary. 10. Drainage - Describe how conclusions as to the adequacy of these facilities was reached. Completely describe the inter-zone impacts of the plan's proposed master drainage plan amendment. Provide improvement plan numbers for existing facilities inventory on Pg. 20 and Exhibit 9. Provide expected flows and capacities. 11. Fire - Provide location and qualitative information on mutual support stations and agreements. Define in' detail alternative phasing and financing. 12. Open Space - Define ownership of open space identified. Define usability and constraints of open space identified. Provide an understandable linkage between open space listed in the inventory table and shown on Exhibit 12. February 20, 1987 Page Three 13. School Facilities - identify the locations of all the schools presently serving Zone 12. 14. Sewer - Discuss the reclamation of waste water in Zone 12. Provide improvement plan numbers for Exhibit 15. Exhibit 14 on Page 42 should be titled Exhibit 15. Phasing and financing of facilities needs to be accurately defined and identified. 15. Water Facilities - Discuss and exhibit the location of storage capacity used by Zone 12. Identify the amount of storage capacity used by Zone 12 and all other users of the identified capacity. Provide improvement plan numbers on Exhibit 16 and on Page 44. Provide an accurate and definitive discussion and table on phasing and financing of water facilities. Address additional Local Facility Management Zone's demand for storage tank capacity. 16. Traffic Study - Do not use a boilerplate report; "Project" is not the word to describe what we assume you mean as Zone 12 buildout. Provide an index. Provide the traffic engineer's seal and signature. Provide full documentation of data used in the report. Provide a page number reference for all exhibits cited in the report. Discuss traffic generated by Encinitas and San Marcos. Provide all analysis and exhibits based on the City's General Plan. Existing daily vehicle trips on La Costa Avenue: 1-5 to El Camino Real is 22,000 as per SANDAG. Provide a map of projects on Table 3. Table 6 was not provided. Provide an explanation of "units" on Table 8. Define exactly what is meant by the second to last sentence on Page 14 of the Traffic Study. Substantiate the eventual full extension and improvement of Leucadia Boulevard between El Camino Real and Interstate 5 or provide an alternative. Delete the truck bypass link. Buildout conditions described on Page 18 are very difficult to follow, consolidate the data and provide a clear explanation. 17. Show Zone 12 boundary on Page 4 of Carlsbad Master Drainage Plan within the appendix. Again, these comments are intended to help you to prepare an acceptable Local Facility Management Plan. That means, acceptable in terms of having all of the appropriate pieces of the plan. After these are assembled we will begin the detailed process of verifying the plan's specific figures and assumptions and analyzing the plan's conclusions. February 20, 1987 Page Four When all these Items have been addressed in your second draft plan, please call. At that time we can schedule a meeting to discuss the changes and receive your second draft. If you have any questions, or need more clarification, please call me. Sincer 1ANCE B. 'SCHULTE Associate Planner LBS:bn c: Michael Holzmiller Mike Howes Phil Carter Ross Me Donald Rick Engineering Weston Pringle & Associates FEBRUARY 10, 1987 TO: MICHAEL HOLZMILLER BOBBIE HODER JV1IKE HQWES__^ LANCE SCHULTE PHIL DAN CLARK PAUL ZUCKER RE: CLOSE OF PRELIMINARY COMMENTS OF ZONE 12 SUBMITTAL A meeting has been scheduled in regards to the above on Thursday, February 19, 1987 at 3:30 P.M. in the Planning Department Conference Room. Please mark your calendars and plan on attending. THANK YOU. Anita tf»rJITE IT-DON'T Date January 28,1987 To Michael Holzmiller, Mike Howes,\j_ance SchuH Phil Carter, Clyde Wickham & From Anita Ramos-Bonas D Reply Wanted DNo Reply Necessary A meeting has been scheduled for Thursday, February 5, 1987 at 3:30 in the Planning Department conference room in regards to: 1) Preliminary review of local facility management plan for Zone 12; 2) Establish format and extent of comments on the completness and adequacy of this plan; v 3) Set a meeting time for final review and comments on the plan between February 15, 1987 & February 19, 1987. Please mark your calendars and plan on attending. Thank you very much. AIGNER FORM NO. 55-032 PRINTED IN USA THE WILLIAM N. HOFMAN COMPANY Planning Project Management Environmental January 21, 1987 Phillip Carter, Senior Management Analyst City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Transmittal of Local Facilities Management Plan for Management Zone 12. Dear Phil: Attached are 10 copies of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12 located in southwest La Costa. Per our discussion last week, the phasing and financing plan of the circulation section is not included. The improvements and phasing of circulation in La Costa is complicated and relates to all the zones within the southeast quadrant. We are looking at several methods of financing the improvements and this section will be submitted in the near future. The plan is complete in all other areas. You indicated that the staff would st-ill review the plan within the next 30 days which would satisfy the initial 30 day preliminary review procedure. We are looking forward to working with you on this plan. Please call me if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, Bill Hofman cc: ROS.S McDonald, La Costa Ranch Company Rick Engineering Weston Pringle & Associates 6994 El Camino Real • Suite 208-G • Carlsbad • CA 92008 • (619) 438-1465 A = ACCEPTABLE N/A = NOT ADDRESSED U = UNACCEPTABLE WATER DISTRIBUTION ZONE ///A/0 REVIEWER ACE #1_I 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. toDate 1. Water Map - F\iture Facilities - District Boundaries Summary Inventory - Facility Description <?g>fJ£S . ~ Service Demands ^Water Reclamation Adeo^acy Discussion / Mitigation - Mitigation Description - Special Conditions - Financing 1st U 0 Uuu U , u^» V ^ u zr U \) vj 2nd 3rd A = ACCEPTABLE N/A = NOT ADDRESSED U = UNACCEPTABLE WASTEWATER TREATMENT ZONEZMLJ/REVIEWER ACE #1_ 1. Map of District if Applicable 2. Summary Sheet PRJbVI&& 3. Inventory - Existing Facilities \^LUVE_ SATELLITE 4. Phasing /A/^HJOi - Service Demand - Demand Chart 5. Adequacy Discussion 6. Mitigation f>t>SNlO£ - Mitigation Description " * - Special Conditions - Financing 1st U •KiM A a uu * u u u u Ll *J 2nd 3rd is EXHIBIT 25 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN-Zone 6 WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPACITY Leucadia County Water District SUMMARY SHEET BUILDOUT PROJECTION EXISTING MGD APPROVED MGD FUTURE MGD DEMAND a CD Z CO X 0. a a SUPPLY 6.22c,d 6.37b,d 8.25d ADEQUACY w/8t«ndwd) NO YES YES MITIGATION SEE PAGE 77 N/A •, N/A FUNDING SEE PAGE 78 N/A N/A a. Demand analysis assumptions are for the entire sewer district's service area which includes a portion of Zone 6. Each individual development within Zone 6 shall provide a letter of availability from LCWD addressing the adequacy of sewer treatment capacity. b. Assumes Phase IV expansion of Encina. c. Includes leased capacity from the following agencies: Vista to LCWD 1.20 MGD Buena to LCWD 0.375 MGD Encinitas to LCWD 0.150 MGD (these leases expire in 1992) d. Includes 0.75 MGD capacity at the Gafner WRP. 69 A - ACCEPTABLE N/A = NOT ADDRESSED U = UNACCEPTABLE SEWER COLLECTION ILl/Z.ZCKE // 7 / L^ REVIEWER X0fl/ ACE #1 N 1. Setter Maps - Existing Facilities - Major Basins IxXTSM - Sewer Districts - Future Facilities 2. Summary Sheet — 3. Inventory - Facility Descriptions - Service Demands - Facility Analysis - Demand/Capacity Charts - Consistency with Sewer Master Plan 4. Adequacy Analysis 5. Mitigation - Mitigation Description - Cost Estimates </ - Financing /A//? L fa/^ - Special Conditions (TMMENTS/PRDBLEMS_ ^1 *7 1st fi-ll U LIa V/A U A A U U U U U U U U ' — 2nd 3rd \A//Ttf AtbbVP AND /}<> /A/ EXHIBIT 64 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN-Zone 6 SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM BUILDOUT PROJECTION EXISTING MGD APPROVED MGD FUTURE MGD DEMAND ## oz CO< Xa. •** — , ** . SUPPLY ** ** -. ** ADEQUACY YES YES YES MITIGATION N/A * SEE PAGE 162 s SEE PAGE 162 FUNDING N/A SEE PAGE 163 SEE PAGE 163 * Demand analysis for all three independent sewer districts is shown on Exhibit 66, "Zone 6: Buildout Projections", on Page 16' ** Interceptors are not monitored for existing capacity. The determination of adequacy of trunk line capacity will be the sole responsibility o'f each sewer district. 156 L£GEKD LEGEND 15% = Percent of Project Traffic on Road Segment Prime Arterial - eiUtlnp W*>or Artvrltt - Secondary Arlerl«I — existing Collector - existing Prime Arlerlfil - proposed Arterisl — proposed Srcondsry Arterial - proposed Collector — proposed tn.pzcled hlemection knpsctfrd c-ftdwRy f J City ct Enc'nhat Leuctdit £>lvd. MAN'AGEt/ENT STUDY AREA FIGURE 1 of~ Zone 12 are also indicated. Existing daily traffic volumes, daily volume/capacity ratios and Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) values for the existing circulation system, based upon the existing intersection geometries contained in Table 1, are illustrated on Figure 2. The ICU methodology and relationship of ICU to Level of Service are described in Appendix A. ICU calculation sheets are contained in Appendix B. ICU values are provided for the AM and PM peak hour conditions. Table 1 summarizes existing road segment volumes, capacities and volume/capacity ratios and Table 2 summarizes existing intersection ICU values. These data were obtained from the report prepared by Barton-Aschman Associates Inc. entitled "Carlsbad Traffic Impact Fee Study". Review of the data on Figure 2 as contained in Tables 2 and 3 indicates that the segment of La Costa Avenue from 1-5 to El Camino Real is currently operating at unacceptable conditions. ZONE 12 TRAFFIC CONDITIONS In order to quantify traffic conditions with the development of Zone 12 added to existing and future conditions, it was necessary to define land use plans and estimate trip generation. Since the SANDAG Traffic Model is a basis for analyses of City Buildout conditions, it was also necessary to compare proposed uses to those in the model and adjust as necessary. Table 4 lists the land uses proposed by the developer. Estimates were made of trips to be generated by both the SANDAG and developer land use proposals. These estimates were based upon SANDAG trip generation rates which are summarized in Table 5. Estimated daily, AM peak hour and PM peak hour trip generation for the SANDAG Model and proposed project land uses are summarized in Table 6. As indicated in Table 6, the proposed development of Zone 12 would result in an addition of 2,865 daily, 265 AM peak hour and 255 PM peak hour trip ends from those contained in the SANDAG Model. These data were utilized to adjust SANDAG traffic volumes at City Buildout. Table 6 contains the proposed yearly development of Zone 12 along with the volume of trips generated per year. Review of Table 7 indicates that the development of Zone 12 is proposed to be completed by the year 1993. Estimated project traffic from Table 6 for the years 1990, 1995 and 2000 was assigned to the roads and intersections in conformance with the trip TABLE 1 EXISTING - INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS ZONE 12 INTERSECTION NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR La Costa Ave. ?-: 1—5 Southbound Ramps IMPROVEMENTS La Costa Ave. & 1—5 Northbound Ramps IMPROVEMENTS La Costa Ave. ?•< El Camino Real IMPROVEMENTS El Camino Real S< Levante IMPROVEMENTS El Camino Real & Olivenhain IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe S-. Olivenhain IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe & Calle Barcelona IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe 8< La Costa IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe ?< Mel rose 0 — 1 — 2 — 0 — 0 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 o — 0 — 3 — 2 — 2 — 2 — 3 — 2 — 1 0 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — o — 0 — 0 — o 1 — 0 — 2 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 0 0 — o — 3 — 2 — 2 — 2 — 3 — 1 — 1 FREE — 0 — 1 — 0 — 0 — 1 — 0 — 1 — FREE 0 — 0 — 2 — O — 0 — 0 — o — 1 — 1 1 — 1 — 2 — O — 0 — 1 — o — 2 — 0 0 — o — 1 — o — 0 — 1 — 0 — o — 1 o — 0 — 1 — 1.5 — 0 — 0 — 1 — 1 — o 1 0 — — 1 0 — 1 1 — — 0 1.5 — — 1 0 — — 1 1 — — O 1 — — 2 o — — 0 0 IMPROVEMENTS LEGEND \C>J VALUED- /I'M fifik / f-tf. frXiLT/flJCr >« , /y /Vex "f-f, f City of San MarcosPrime Arterial - existing Mt}or Arterial - existing Secondary Arterial - existing Collector - existing Prime Arterial - proposed Major Arterial - proposed Secondary Arterial - proposed Collector - proposed Impacted kitersection CirculaUoi Zorte12WANAfiEWENJ Table 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS - ROAD SEGMENTS NO IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 -4- LOCATION EXISTING DAILY VOLUME EXISTING^ EXISTING DAILY VOLUME/ CAPACITY CAPACITY RATIO LEVEL OF SERVICE La Costa Avenue: 1-5 to El Camino 21,000 22,230 0.94 El Camino Real: Olivenhain to La Costa Olivenhain East of El Camino: Rancho Santa Fe Road: Olivenhain to La Costa La Costa - Mel rose 22,800 11,200 12,700 14,400 44,450 16,670 66,670 22,230 0.57 0.67 0.19 0.65 A B A B (1) Based upon LOS F -5- Table 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS - INTERSECTIONS NO IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 INTERSECTION La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Southbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Northbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & El Camino Real El Camino & Levante El Camino & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Calle Barcelona Rancho Santa Fe & La Costa Rancho Santa Fe & Mel rose ICU/LOS(1) AM Peak 0.76/C 0.76/C 0.64/B 0.38/A 0.64/B 0.38/A 0.22/A 0.53/A 0.63/B PM Peak 0.63/B 0.66/B 0.73/C 0.40/A 0.74/C 0.40/A 0.24/A 0.51/A 0.60/A (1) ICU = Intersection Utilization LOS = Level of Service Table 4 LAND USE SUMMARY Zone 12 -6- LAND USE Low Medium Density Residential (RLM) Medium Density Residential (RM) High Density Residential (RMH) Elementary School Jr. High School Travel Service DESCRIPTOR Dwelling Unit Dwelling Unit Dwelling Unit Acre Acre Acre UNITS SANDAG 871 693 300 10 19 3.0 PROJECT 1888 0 0 10 20 3.5 Table 5 TRIP GENERATION RATES Zone 12 LAND USE Low Medium Density Residential (RLM) Medium Density Residential (RM) High Density Residential (RMH) Elementary School Jr. High School DESCRIPTOR Dwelling Unit Dwelling Unit Dwelling Unit Acre Acre TRIP ENDS PER DESCRIPTOR Daily 10.0 8.0 6.0 60 40 AM In 0.2 0.1 0.1 9.4 6.3 AM Out 0.6 0.5 0.4 6.2 2.7 PM In 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.9 0.8 PM Out 0.3 0.2 0.2 2.1 1.9 -7- Table 6 TRIP GENERATION Zone 12 LAND USE SANDAG MODEL Low Medium Density Residential (RLM) Medium Density Residential (RM) High Density (RMH) Elementary School Jr. High School Totals Zone 12 Low Medium Density Residential (RLM) Elementary School Jr. High School Totals QUANTITY TRIP ENDS 871 Units 693 Units 300 Units 10 Acres 19 Acres 1,888 Units 10 Acres 20 Acres Daily 8710 5545 1800 600 760 17,415 18880 600 800 AM In 175 70 30 95 120 490 380 95 125 AM Out 520 345 120 60 50 1,095 1135 60 55 PM In 610 415 150 10 15 1,200 1320 10 15 PM Out 260 140 60 20 35 515 565 20 40 20,280 600 1250 1345 625 ZONE 12 DIFFERENCE +2865 +110 +155 +145 +110 -8- Jable 7 TRIP GENERATION BY YEAR Zone 12 LAND USE 1989 Low Medium Residential (RLM) QUANTITY TRIP ENDS 1990 Low Medium Residential (RLM) 436 Units TOTAL 382 Units SUB-TOTAL TOTAL (1989+1991) 1991 Low Medium Residential (RLM) 296 Units SUB-TOTAL TOTAL (1989-1991) 1992 Low Medium Residential (RLM) 185 Units Elementary School 10 Acres Jr. High School 20 Acres SUB-TOTAL Daily 4360 4360 3820 3820 8180 2960 2960 11140 1850 600 800 3250 AM In 85 85 75 75 160 60 60 220 35 95 125 255 AM Out 260 260 230 230 490 175 175 665 110 60 55 225 PM In 305 305 265 265 570 205 205 775 130 10 15 155 PM Out _13p 130 115 115 245 90 90 335 55 20 40 115 TOTAL (1989-1992)14390 475 890 930 450 -9- distributions contained on Figures 3, 5 and 7 respectfully. These Zone 12 volumes were combined with the projected future volumes to simulate conditions in the years 1990, 1995 and 2000 respectively. Figures 4, 6 and 8 illustrate these simulated traffic conditions and are summarized in Tables 8 and 9, 10 and 11, and, 12 and 13 respectively, for road segments and intersections with no circulation improvements. Review of Tables 8 and 9 for the year 1990 indicates road segment deficiencies on La Costa Avenue with all intersections operating at acceptable conditions. Review of Tables 10 and 11 for the year 1995 indicates road segment deficiences on La Costa Avenue, Olivenhain Road and portions of Rancho Santa Fe Road. Table 11 indicates unacceptable conditions at two intersections. Review of Tables 12 and 13 for the year 2000 indicates road segment deficiences on La Costa Avenue, Olivenhain Road and portions of Rancho Santa Fe Raod. Table 13 indicates unacceptable conditions at three intersections. CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT NEEDS Traffic conditions for existing, the year 1990 plus Zone 12, the year 1995 plus Zone 12, and the year 2000 plus Zone 12 have been analyzed. The circulation improvement needs for each of these conditions are identified. The mitigation measures represent the minimal improvements needed to provide acceptable conditions. The City Arterial Phasing Plan was referenced for those intersections and road segments that require improvements. Intersection and road segments that are not deficient do not show any improvements as a result of the City Arterial Phasing Plan. Exi si ti ng Improvements The segment of La Costa Avenue from 1-5 to El Camino Real will require two lanes in each direction plus left turn channelization to maintain an acceptable LOS. The intersections of La Costa Avenue and the 1-5 Northbound and Southbound ramps will require signalization to maintain an acceptable LOS. No other intersection improvements are required at this time. Table 14 summarizes the intersection and road segment improvment needs for existing conditions. The existing intersection geometries are contained in Table 15. Figure 9 illustrates these existing conditions with improvements, Tables 16 and 17 summarize the conditions illustrated in Figure 9. LEGEND City of San MarcosPrime Arterial - existing Me}or Arterial - existing Secondary Arterial - existing Collector - existing Prime Arterial - proposed Major Arterial - proposed •— ———• Secondary Arterial — proposed Collector - proposed Impacted kitersection .X~NImpacted Rpjidway /-•' I Sf! ) enhain Road MANAGEMENTQ tooo 2000 \C\) VALveg - AbPtAK / pV> LEGEND City of San l/.e-cosPrime Arterial - existing Mafoi Arterial - existing Secondary Arterial - existing Collector - existing Prime Arterial - proposed Major Arterial - proposed Secondary Arterial — proposed Collector - proposed Impacted fritersection trnpactee1 City of Encinitas MANAGEMEN -10- LOCATION Table 8 YEAR 1990 CONDITIONS - ROAD SEGMENTS NO IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 1990 DAILY VOLUME DAILY CAPACITY La Costa Avenue: 1-5 to El Camino El Camino Real: 25,900 22,230 1990 VOLUME/ CAPACITY RATIO 1.17 LEVEL OF SERVICE Olivenhain to La Costa Ollvenhaln East of El Camino: Rancho Santa Fe Road: Olivenhain to La Costa La Costa - Mel rose 28,000 13,400 17,600 19,600 44,450 16,670 66,670 22,230 0.63 0.80 0.26 0.88 B D A D (1) Based upon LOS F -11- Table 9 YEAR 1990 CONDITIONS - INTERSECTIONS NO IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 INTERSECTION La Costa Ave & 1-5 Southbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Northbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & El Camino Real El Camino & Levante El Camino & OHvenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Ollvenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Calle Barcelona Rancho Santa Fe & La Costa Rancho Santa Fe & Mel rose ICU/LOS (1) AM Peak 0.73/C 0.75/C 0.72/C 0.47/A 0.76/C N/A N/A 0.67/B 0.75/C PM Peak 0.59/A 0.64/B 0.75/C 0.48/A 0.90/D N/A N/A 0.72/C 0.73/C (1) ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization LOS = Level of Service LEGEND Cily of San Marcos Prime Arterial — existing Major Arterial - existing Secondary Arterial - existing Collector - existing . E£ Prime Arterial - proposed •BMCIKBB Major Arterial - proposed •—^ —— — Secondary Arterial - proposed _ Collector - proposed fj) Impacted Intersection • S~\Roadway s-' MANAGEMENT LEGEND Cil) of San Marcos Prime Arterial - existing Mtfor Arterial - existing Secondary Arterial - existing Collector - existing Prime Arterial - proposed Major Arterial - proposed Secondary Arterial - proposed Collector - proposed Impacted trier-section frnpacted Roadway f- Batiquitos Lagoon Fd*"^ ^ GROV/TH planning MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Circulatior Zorte 1 £ y/' -»f c\c a A/ £) j 7.7 ^ /; '^ - Table 10 YEAR 1995 CONDITIONS - ROAD SEGMENTS NO IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 -12- LOCATION 1995 DAILY VOLUMES 1995^ DAILY CAPACITY 1995 VOLUME/ CAPACITY RATIO LEVEL OF SERIVCE La Costa Avenue 1-5 to El Camino El Camino Real Ollvenhain East of El Camino Rancho Santa Fe Road: 30,900 Ollvenhain to La Costa 33,300 15,700 Olivenhain to La Costa 23,300 La Costa to Mel rose 24,100 22,230 44,450 16,670 1.39 0.75 0.94 66,670 0.35 A 22,230 1.08 F (1) Based upon LOS F Table 11 YEAR 1995 CONDITIONS - INTERSECTIONS NO IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 -13- INTERSECTION La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Southbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Northbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & El Camlno Real El Camlno & Levante El Camlno & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Calle Barcelona Rancho Santa Fe & La Costa Rancho Santa Fe & Mel rose ICU/LOS AM Peak 0.88/D 0.89/D 0.85/D 0.57 /A 0.90/D N/A N/A 0.83/D 0.92/E PM Peak 0.70/B 0.74/C 0.89/D 0.57/A 1.06/F N/A N/A 0.89/D 0.88/D (1) ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization LOS = Level of Service LEGEND City of San MarcosPrime Arterial - existing Major Arterial - existing Secondary Arterial - existing Collector - existing Prime Arterial - proposed Major Arterial - proposed Secondary Arterial - proposed Collector - proposed Impacted Intersection Impacted f 30*» iPCDBtRRBnCHCD. -0 I/~LS ^A/L/Aj 1 tjIfflftlHfi 0 1000 2000 1 GROWTH MANAOitMbNJ : PROGRAM \ Circulation. Zone 12. ±000 }CV VALUED- /?M f f AK / pr/, UEGEND City of San MarcosPrime Arterial - existing Ua}or Arterial - existing Becondery Arterial — existing Collector - existing Prime Arterial - proposed Major Arterial - proposed Secondary Arterial - proposed Collector - proposed Impacted frrtersecton •^~\ •--»knpacted Roadway /••"' '--^ _f*' \ BatiquitoE Lagoon City of Encinitas -^Olivenhain Road MANAGEMENT Circulation ft 3 i/'\f % ^ U !: :'-'. '• / '"' ^ Table 12 YEAR 2000 CONDITIONS - ROAD SEGMENTS NO IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 -14- LOCATION La Costa Avenue 1-5 to El Canrino El Camino Real Ollvenhain East of El Camino Rancho Santa Fe Road: 2000 DAILY VOLUME 33,400 Olivenhain to La Costa 38,100 20,200 Ollvenhain to La Costa 25,300 La Costa to Mel rose 27,200 2000^ DAILY CAPACITY 22,230 44,450 16,670 66,670 22,230 2000 VOLUME/ CAPACITY RATIO 1.50 0.86 1.21 0.38 1.22 LEVEL OF SERVICE A F (1) Based upon LOS F Table 13 YEAR 2000 CONDTIONS - INTERSECTIONS NO IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 -15- INTERSECTION La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Southbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Northbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & El Camino Real El Camino & Levante El Camino & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Calle Barcelona Rancho Santa Fe & La Costa Rancho Santa Fe & Mel rose ICU/LOS AM Peak 0.84/D 0.85/D 0.86/D 0.57 /A N/A N/A N/A 0.90/E 1.04/F PM Peak 0.64/B 0.71/C 0.92/E 0.58/A N/A N/A N/A 0.97/E 0.98/E (1) ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization LOS = Level of Service -16- Table 14 EXISTING - CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 ROAD SEGMENT/INTERSECTION La Costa Avenue - 1-5 to El Camino INTERSECTION La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Southbound ramp La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Northbound ramp IMPROVEMENTS Widen to provide two lanes in each direction plus left turn channel- ization Signalize intersection TABLE 15 EXISTING - INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS WITH IMPROVEMENTS ZONE 12 INTERSECTION La Costa Ave. fe 1-5 Southbound Ramps IMPROVEMENTS * La Costa Ave. ?< 1-5 Northbound Ramps IMPROVEMENTS * La Costa Ave. & El Camino Real IMPROVEMENTS El Camino Real & Levante IMPROVEMENTS El Camino Real & Olivenhain IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe & Olivenhain IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe ?< Calle Barcelona IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe & La Costa NL O — 1 — 2 — O — 0 — 1 — 1 — 1 NT 0 — O — 3 — 2 — 2 — 2 — 3 — 2 NR O_ 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — O — 0 — o SL 1 — 0 — 2 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 ST 0 — 0 — 3 — 2 — 2 — 2 — 3 — 1 SR FREE — O — 1 — 0 — 0 — 1 — o — 1 EL 0 — 0 — 2 — O — 0 — 0 — 0 — 1 ET 1 — 1 — 2 — 0 — 0 — 1 — 0 — 2 ER 0 — o — 1 — 0 — o — 1 — 0 — 0 WL 0 - 0 — 1 — 1.5 — o — 0 — 1 — 1 WT i - 1 — 1 — 0 — 1 — 1 — o - 2 WR 0 - c — 1 — 1.5 — 0 — 1 — 1 - o IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe & Mel rose IMPROVEMENTS 1 0 O 1 FREE 1 0 1 0 0 0 * Intersections to be signalized. \CV VALUED - At* h'AK / f-V- LEGEND f c../''City of San Marcos Prime Arterial - existing Me}or Arterial - existing Secondary Arterial - existing Collector - existing Prime Arterial - proposed Major Arterial - proposed Secondary Arterial - proposed Collector - proposed Impacted fritersection Impacted MANAGEMENT Table 16 EXISTING CONDITIONS - ROAD SEGMENTS WITH IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 -18- LOCATION La Costa Avenue 1-5 to El Camino El Camino Real 01iyenhain East of El Camino Rancho Santa Fe Road: DAILY VOLUMES 21,000 Olivenhain to La Costa 22,800 11,200 Olivenhain to La Costa 12,700 La Costa to Mel rose 14,400 DAILY VOLUME/ LEVEL CAPACITY CAPACITY OF RATIO SERVICE 44,450 44,450 16,670 66,670 22,230 0.47 0.51 0.67 0.19 0.65 A B -19- Table 17 EXISTING CONDITIONS - INTERSECTION WITH IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 INTERSECTION La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Southbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Northbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & El Camino Real El Camino & Levante El Camino & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Calle Barcelona Rancho Santa Fe & La Costa Rancho Santa Fe & Mel rose ICU/LQS (1) AM Peak 0.76/C 0.76/C 0.64/B 0.38/A 0.64/B 0.38/A 0.22/A 0.53/A 0.63/B PM Peak 0.63/B 0.66/B 0.73/C 0.40/A 0.74/C 0.40/A 0.24/A 0.51/A 0.60/A (1) ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization LOS = Level of Service -20- Year 1990 Improvements No road segments or intersections would require improvement by the year 1990 as a result of either, Zone 12 development or projected growth traffic volumes. However, one intersection will be constructed and three will undergo improvements. As a result of the development of Zone 12 the intersection of El Camino Real and Calle Barcelona will be constructed and the intersection of Rancho Santa Fe and Calle Barcelona will be improved. Discussions with Bill Hollingsworth of the Olivenhain Water District disclosed that the intersection of Rancho Santa Fe and Olivenhain is planned to be realigned prior to the year 1990. No specific plans were available at the time this report was written. The assumed geometries are contained in Table 19 (Rancho Santa Fe Raod represents the North-South arterial.) Discussions with the City Staff disclosed that the intersection of Rancho santa Fe Road and Mel rose Avenue is also planeed to be realigned and signalized prior to the year 1990. The interim and ultimate geometries were obtained (via City Staff) from a report prepared by Will dan Associates. The interim geometries are contained in Table 19. The ultimate geometries were used for City Buildout conditions. Table 18 summarizes the intersection and road segment improvement needs for the year 1990. The entire intersection geometries for each intersection with improvements are contained in Table 19. Tables 20 and 21 contain a breakdown of the road segment and intersection conditions that are illustrated in Figure 10. Year 1995 Improvements Two raod segments and one intersection will require improvements as a result of Zone 12 development and projected background traffic volumes by the year 1995. These improvements are in addition to those listed for the year 1990. The segment of Olivenhain Road east of El Camino Real will require two lanes in each direction plus left turn channelization in order to maintain an acceptable LOS. This segment will obtain an unacceptable LOS E in the year 1994. The City Arterial Phasing Plan schedules this segment to be improved to -21- Table 18 CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS - 1990 Zone 12 ROAD SEGMENT IMPROVEMENTS INTERSECTION NO IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED El Camlno & Calle Barcelona Rancho Santa Fe & Calle Barcelona Rancho Santa Fe & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Mel rose Add one south bound left turn lane. Add one westbound left and right turn lanes. Add one eastbound left, through and right turn lane. Add one westbound through lane. New alignment - see table for geometries. New alignment geometries. see table for TABLE 19 YEAR 1990 - INTERSECTION GEOMETRIES WITH IMPROVEMENTS ZONE 12 INTERSECTION NL NT MR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR La Costa Ave. ?< 1-5 Southbound Ramps IMPROVEMENTS La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Northbound Ramps IMPROVEMENTS La Costa Ave. & El Camino Real IMPROVEMENTS El Camino Real S< Les'ante IMPROVEMENTS El Camino Real & Calls Barcelona IMPROVEMENTS El Camino Real & Olivenhain IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe & Olivenhain IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe & Calle Barcelona IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe S< La Costa IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe & Mel rose IMPROVEMENTS 0 — 1 — 2 — 0 — 0 — o — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 0 — 0 — 3 — 2 — 2 — 2 — 2 — 3 — 2 — 1 — 0 — 1 — 1 — 1 — o — 1 — 0 — 0 — 0 — o — 1 — o — 2 — 1 — 1 1 1 — 0 — 1 — 1 — o — 0 FREE — — 0 O — — 3 1 — — 2 0 — — 2 0 — — 2 0 — — 2 1 — — 3 0 — — 1 1 — — 1 1 — — 0 — 0 — 2 — 0 — o — 0 — 2 — 1 1 1 — 2 — 1 — 1 — 2 — O — 0 — 0 — o — 1 1 2 — 1 — 0 — 0 — 1 — 0 ~ 0 — o — 1 — 1 1 0 — 1 — 0 — 0 — 1 — 1.5 — 1 1 0 — 0 — 1 — 1 — 0 — 1 — 1 — 1 — o — 0 — 1 — o — 1 1 2 — O — 0 — — 1 — 1.5 „ 1 1 0 — o — 0 — o — 0 — 1roroi \co LEGEND City of Sari MarcosPrime Arterial - existing Ma}or Arterial - existing Secondary Arterial - existing Collector - existing Prime Arterial - proposed Major Arterial - proposed Secondary Arterial — proposed Collector - proposed Impacted Intersection fcnpacted Rjtadway f Table 20 YEAR 1990 CONDITIONS - ROAD SEGMENTS WITH IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 -23- LOCATION 1990 DAILY VOLUMES 1990^ DAILY CAPACITY 1990 VOLUME/ CAPACITY RATIO LEVEL OF SERVICE La Costa Avenue 1-5 to El Camino El Camino Real Olivenhain East of El Camino Rancho Santa Fe Road: 25,900 Olivenhain to La Costa 28,000 13,400 Olivenhain to La Costa 17,600 La Costa to Mel rose 19,600 44,450 44,450 16,670 0.58 0.63 0.80 66,670 0.26 A 22,230 0.88 D (1) Based upon LOS F -24- Table 21 YEAR 1990 CONDITIONS - INTERSECTIONS WITH IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 INTERSECTION La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Southbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Northbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & El Camino Real El Camino & Levante El Camino & Calle Barcelona El Camino & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Calle Barcelona Rancho Santa Fe & La Costa Rancho Santa Fe & Mel rose ICU/LOS (1) AM Peak 0.73/C 0.75/C 0.72/C 0.47 /A 0.37 /A 0.76/C 0.34/A 0.40/A 0.67/B 0.69/B PM Peak 0.59/A 0.64/B 0.75/C 0.48/A 0.55/A 0.90/D 0.40/A 0.36/A 0.72/C 0.69/B (1) ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization LOS = Level of Service -25- .a four lane facility in the year 1990 and to an ultimate six lane facility in the year 1995. The intersection of El Camino Real and Olivenhain will require the addition of two westbound left turn lanes. The lane requirement on the east leg (Olivenhain Road) of the intersection is five lanes. This can be accommodated within the four lane facility (including a median) right-of-way scheduled for the year 1990 in the City Facility Phasing Plan. The segment of Rancho Santa Fe Raod from La Costa to Mel rose will require two lanes in each direction plus left turn channelization to operate at an accetpable LOS. This segment will obtain an unacceptable LOS E in the year 1991. The City Arterial Phasing Plan schedules this segment to be improved to a six lane facility in the year 1995. An interim four lane facility is needed by the year 1991 in order to maintain an acceptable LOS on this segment of Rancho Santa Fe Road. Table 22 summarizes these intersection and road segment improvement needs for the year 1995. The entire intersection geometries with improvements are contained in Table 23. Figure 11 illustrates this condition, Tables 24 and 25 summarize conditions on raod segments and at intersection. Year 2000 Improvements In order to maintain an acceptable LOS, four intersections will require improvements as a result of projected growth traffic volumes prior to the year 2000. All road segments will operate at acceptable LOS with no improvements. The improvements required at the four intersection are in addition to those listed for the years 1990 and 1995. Table 26 summarizes these intersections and road segments improvement needs for the year 2000. The entire intersection geometries with improvements are contained in Table 27. Figure 12 illustrates this condition, Tables 28 and 29 summarize conditions on road segments and at intersections. CITY BUILDOUT CONDITIONS (YEAR 2010) The SANDAG Series 6 Constrained General Plan Model run, completed in 1986, provides AM and PM peak hour and daily traffic volumes for conditions at -26- Table 22 CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS - YEAR 1995 Zone 12 ROAD SEGMENT/INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS Olivenhaln - East of El Camino Widen to provide two lanes in each direction plus left turn channel- Rancho Santa Fe - La Costa to Mel rose ization INTERSECTION El Camino & Olivenhain Add two westbound left turn lanes. TABLE 23 YEAR 1995 - INTERSECTION GEQMETRICS WITH IMPROVEMENTS ZONE 12 INTERSECTION La Cost La Cost La Cost El Cami El Cami El Cami Rancho Rancho Rancho Rancho a Ave. & 1-5 Southbound Ramps IMPROVEMENTS a Ave. & 1-5 Northbound Ramps IMPROVEMENTS a Ave. & El Camino Real IMPROVEMENTS no Real & Levant e IMPROVEMENTS no Real & Calls Barcelona IMPROVEMENTS no Real ?< Olivenhain IMPROVEMENTS Santa Fe 8< Olivenhain IMPROVEMENTS Santa Fe & Calle Barcelona IMPROVEMENTS Santa Fe & La Costa IMPROVEMENTS Santa Fe & Mel rose IMPROVEMENTS NL O — 1 — 2 — 0 — O — 0 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — NT O — O — 3 — 2 — 2 — 2 — 2 — 3 — 2 — 1 — NR 0_ 1 — 1 — 1 — 0 — 1 — 0 — 0 — 0 — 0 — SL 1 — o — 2 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 0 — 1 — 1 — 0 — ST 0 — - 0 — 3 — 2 — 2 — 2 — 2 — 3 — 1 — 1 — SR FREE — O — 1 — 0 — o — 0 — 1 — o — 1 — 1 — EL 0 — 0 — 2 — O — 0 — o — 2 — 1 — 1 — 2 — ET 1 — • 1 — 2 — O — O — o — o — 1 — 2 — 1 — ER O — 0 — 1 — 0 — 0 — 0 — 1 — 1 — 0 — 1 — WL WT WR 0 1 0 — — — 0 1 C ' — — — 1 1 1 — — — 1.5 0 1.5 — — — 1 O 1 — — — 2 1 0 2 O 0 0 — — 1 1 0 — - — — 1 2 0 — — — O 0 0 _ _» ~— ro i \CO fV/?K / P>V. LEGEND Prime Arterial - existing Major Arterial - existing Secondary Arterial - existing Collector - existing Prime Arterial - proposed Major Arterial - proposed Secondary Arterial - proposed Collector — proposed Impacted krtersection knpacted Rpadway f' . ^"\. ^e"' V^__. * BaliquiioE Lagoon City o1 Encinitas Leucadia eivd MANAGEMENT Circulationpanning_ Q tooo PROGRAM Zorte 12 /. 7 7/7 Table 24 YEAR 1995 CONDITIONS - ROAD SEGMENTS WITH IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 -28- LOCATION 1995 DAILY VOLUMES DAILY CAPACITY 1995 VOLUME/ CAPACITY RATIO LEVEL OF SERVICE La Costa Avenue 1-5 to El Carolno Olivenhain East of El Camino Rancho Santa Fe Road: 30,900 El Camino Real Olivenhain to La Costa 33,300 15,700 Olivenhain to La Costa 23,300 La Costa to Mel rose 24,100 44,450 44,450 66,670 0.70 0.75 0.24 66,670 0.35 44,450 0.54 A A (1) Based upon LOS F -29- Table 25 YEAR 1995 CONDITIONS - INTERSECTIONS WITH IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 INTERSECTION La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Southbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Northbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & El Camino Real El Camino & Levante El Camino & Calle Barcelona El Camino & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Calle Barcelona Rancho Santa Fe $ La Costa Rancho Santa Fe & Mel rose ICU/LOS (1) AM Peak 0.88/D 0.89/D 0.85/D 0.57 /A 0.49/A 0.59/A 0.39/A 0.55/A 0.83/D 0.85/D PM Peak 0.70/B 0.74/C 0.89/D 0.57/A 0.69/B 0.79/C 0.45/A 0.49/A 0.89/D 0.83/D (1) ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization LOS = Level of Service -30- Table 26 CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS - YEAR 2000 Zone 12 ROAD SEGMENT IMPROVEMENTS NO IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED INTERSECTION La Costa & El Camino Real El Camino & OlivenhaiV1' Rancho Santa Fe & La Costa Add additional westbound through lane. Add one northbound left turn lane. Add an additional northbound through lane. Add an additional southbound through lane. Add one southbound right turn lane. Add one eastbound left turn, two eastbound through lanes. Add an additional westbound through and right turn lane. Remove one westbound left turn lane. Add an additional through lane. southbound (1) Represents four-way intersection with Olivenhain Road continuing into Leucadia Boulevard. TABLE 27 YEAR 2OOO - INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS WITH IMPROVEMENTS ZONE 12 INTERSECTION NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR La Costa Ave. & 1—5 Southbound Ramps IMPROVEMENTS La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Northbound Ramps IMPROVEMENTS La Costa Ave. & El Camino Real IMPROVEMENTS El Camino Real & Levante IMPROVEMENTS El Camino Real & Calle Barcelona IMPROVEMENTS El Camino Real ?-< Olivenhain IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe & Olivenhain IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe ?< Calle Barcelona IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe ?< La Costa IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe & Mel rose IMPROVEMENTS 0 — 1 — 2 — 0 — 0 — 1 1 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 0 — 0 — 3 — 2 — 2 — 3 1 2 — 3 — 2 — 2 1 0 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 0 — 1 — 0 — 0 — 0 — 0 — 1 — o — 2 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 0 — 1 — 1 — 0 — 0 — 0 — 3 — 2 — 2 — 3 1 2 — 3 — 2 1 2 1 FREE — 0 — 1 — 0 — o — 1 1 1 — 0 — 1 — 1 — 0 — 0 — 2 — o — 0 - 1 1 2 — 1 — 1 — 2 — 1 — 1 — 2 — 0 — O — 2 2 0 — 1 — 2 — 1 — O — 0 — 1 — o - o - 1 1 1 - 1 — o — 1 — o — o — 1 — 1.5 — 1 - 1 -i 0 — 1 — 1 — 0 — i o— — 1 <" — — 2 1 1 0 1.5 - - 0 1 - - 1 1 2 1 0 0_ _ 1 0 — — 2 0 — — 0 0 — — CO 1 "*i \CO VALUED- LEGEND City of San Marcos Prime Arterial - existing Major Arterial - existing Secondary Arterial - existing Collector - existing Prime Arterial - proposed Major Arterial - proposed Secondary Arterial - proposed Collector - proposed Impacted Intersection ..^~\ftaadwey f Batiquitos Lagoon .L I/(?.*/ IB CD5tP, R,1'ntK OJ. CirculationMANAGEMEtTTplanning" / ~ ' ^PROGRAM Zone 12 /f ; PCO C 0 fJ € V TS Table 28 YEAR 2000 CONDITIONS - ROAD SEGMENTS WITH IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 -32- LOCATION 2000 DAILY VOLUMES 2000^ DAILY CAPACITY 2000 VOLUME/ CAPACITY RATIO LEVEL OF SERVICE La Costa Avenue 1-5 to El Camino 33,400 44,450 0.75 El Camino Real Olivenhain to La Costa 38,100 44,450 0.85 Olivenhain East of El Camino 20,200 66,670 0.30 Rancho Santa Fe Road; Olivenhain to La Costa 25,300 La Costa to Mel rose 27,200 66,670 44,450 0.38 0.61 A B (1) Based upon LOS F -33- Table 29 YEAR 2000 CONDITIONS - INTERSECTIONS WITH IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 INTERSECTION La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Southbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Northbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & El Camino Real El Camino & Levante El Camino & Calle Barcelona El Camino & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Calle Barcelona Rancho Santa Fe & La Costa Rancho Santa Fe & Mel rose ICU/LOS(1) AM Peak 0.84/D 0.85/D 0.62/B 0.57/A 0.46/A 0.74/C 0.46/A 0.60/A 0.65/B 0.59/A PM Peak 0.64/B 0.71/C 0.81/D 0.58/A 0.64/B 0.86/D 0.56/A 0.59/A 0.68/B 0.56/A (1) ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization LOS = Level of Service -34- buildout of the City of Carlsbad. These City buildout (year 2010) traffic volumes, were adjusted for the differences between the modeled and proposed land uses for Zone 12 (as contained in Table 6) in conformance with the distribution illustrated in Figure 13. Appendix B contains ICU analyses for City buildout conditions. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 30 and Table 31 as illustrated in Figure 14. These analyses assume a completed circulation system and would require the intersection geometries listed in Table 32. SUMMARY This study has reviewed traffic factors related to Growth Management Zone 12. Existing conditions and have been quantified and projections made for conditions in the years 1990, 1995 and 2000 using a compounded three percent growth rate of the existing volumes. Estimated traffic from Zone 12 has been combined with existing, the year 1990, 1995 and 2000 traffic volumes to simulate conditions with the development of Zone 12. Improvement needs for each condition have been identifed. The improvement of La Costa Avenue is an existing improvement need, along with the signalization of La Costa Avenue and the Northbound and Southbound 1-5 ramps. No other inersections require improvement for existing conditions. In the year 1990, the intersections of El Camino Real and Calle Barcelona, Rancho Santa Fe Raod and Calle Barcelona, Rancho Santa Fe Road and Olivenhain Road, Rancho Santa Fe Road and Mel rose Avenue will require improvements. No road segments will require improvements at this time. In the year 1995 the intersection of El Camino Real arid Olivenhain Road, the segment of Olivenhain, east of El Camino Real, and the segment of Rancho Santa Fe Road, from La Costa to Mel rose, will require improvements. In the year 2000 the intersection of La Costa Avenue and El Camino Real, El Camino Real and Olivenhain Raod, and Rancho Santa Fe Road and La Costa Avenue will require improvement. No road segments will require improvements at this time. The SANDA6 Series 6 Constained General Plan Model run (1986) volumes for the AM and PM peak hour and daily conditions were adjusted for differences between the proposed land uses in Zone 12 and those assumed in the model. These volumes were used to identify improvement needs at buildout of the City of Carlsbad. LEGEND Arterial - existing Major Arterial - existing Secondary Arterial - existing Collector - existing Prime Arterial - proposed Major Arterial - proposed •"••—"——••» Secondary Arterial - proposed Collector - proposed Impacted fritersectior \CO VALUED - - CJTy LEGEND Cily of San UarcosPrime Arterial - existing Mtjor Arterial - existing Secondary Arterial - existing Collector - existing Prime Arterial - proposed Major Arterial - ppposed Secondary Arterial - proposed Collector - proposed Impacted kitersectkxi _ Impacted enhain Road -X"\ o.i? 0 1000 2000 GROWTH MANAGEMEN1PROGRAM CirculatiojL Zong_12. Table 30 CITY BUILDOUT CONDITION - ROAD SEGMENTS WITH IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 -35- LOCATION La Costa Avenue 1-5 to El Camino El Camino Real Olivenhain East of El Camino Rancho Santa Fe Road: 2010 DAILY VOLUMES 33,100 Olivenhain to La Costa 40,300 35,100 Olivenhain to La Costa 39,300 La Costa to Mel rose 55,400 DAILY CAPACITY 44,450 66,670 66,670 2010 VOLUME/ CAPACITY RATIO 0.74 0.60 0.53 LEVEL OF SERVICE 66,670 0.59 A 66,670 0.83 D (1) Based upon LOS F -36- Table 31 CITY BUILDOUT CONDITIONS - INTERSECTIONS WITH IMPROVEMENTS Zone 12 INTERSECTION La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Southbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Northbound Ramp La Costa Ave. & El Camino Real El Camino & Levante El Camino & Calle Barcelona El Camino & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Olivenhain Rancho Santa Fe & Calle Barcelona Rancho Santa Fe & La Costa Rancho Santa Fe & Mel rose ICU/LOS (1) AM Peak 0.79/C 0.69/B 0.86/D 0.86/D 0.67/B 0.82/D 0.78/C 0.60/A 0.80/C 0.86/D PM Peak 0.89/D 0.82/D 0.82/D 0.78/C 0.74/C 0.87/D 0.82/D 0.55/A 0.84/D 0.82/D (1) ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization LOS = Level of Service TABLE 32 CITY BUILDOUT (2010) - INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS WITH IMPROVEMENTS ZONE 12 INTERSECTION La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Southbound Ramps IMPROVEMENTS La Costa Ave. & 1-5 Northbound Ramps IMPROVEMENTS La Costa Ave. & El Camino Real IMPROVEMENTS El Camino Real & Levante * IMPROVEMENTS El Camino Real & Calle Barcelona IMPROVEMENTS El Camino Real ?/. Olivenhain IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe ?< Olivenhain ** IMPROVEMENTS A'ancho Santa Fe 2< Calle Barcelona IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe ?< La Costa IMPROVEMENTS Rancho Santa Fe 2< Mel rose IMPROVEMENTS , -* Addition of West leg o-f intersection. ** Includes 680 extension. NL O . — 1 — 2 — 2 2 O — 1 — 1 — 1 — 2 1 2 1 NT 0 — 0 — 4 1 4 2 3 1 3 — 3 1 3 — 3 1 3 1 NR O — 1 — 1 — 1 — 0 — 1 — 0 — o — 1 1 0 — SL 2 1 0 — 2 — 1 — 1 — 2 1 1 1 1 — 1 — 1 1 ST 0 — 0 — 4 1 4 2 3 1 3 — 3 1 3 — 3 1 3 1 SR FREE — 0 — 1 — 1 1 0 — 1 — FREE FREE 1 1 1 — FREE FREE EL 0 — 1 1 2 — 2 2 0 — 2 1 2 — 2 1 1 — 1.5 — ET 1 — 1 — 2 — 1 1 O — 3 1 2 2. 1 — 2 — 1.5 — ER 0 — 0 — 1 — 1 1 0 — 1 — 1 — 1 — o — FREE FREE WL 1 1 0 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 1 1 — 1 — 1 1 WT 1 — 1 — 2 — 2 2 0 — 3 2 2 2 1 — 2 — 1 1 WR 0 — FREE FREE 1 — 0 .— . 1 1 — 1 — 1 1 0 — o — 1 1 u> i APPENDIX A EXPLANATION OF INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION AND LEVEL OF SERVICE APPENDIX A EXPLANATION OF INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION The capacity of a street is nearly always greater between intersections and less at intersections. The reason for this is that the traffic flows continuously between intersections and only part of the time at intersections. To study intersection capacity, a technique known as Intersection Capacity Utilization (1CU) has been developed. ICU analysis consists of (a) determining the pro- portion of signal time needed to serve each conflicting movement; (b) summing the times for the movements; and (c) comparing the total time required to the time available. For example, if for north-south traffic the northbound traffic is 1,000 vehicles per hour, the southbound traffic is 800 vehicles per hour, and the capacity of either approach is 2,000 vehicles per hour of green, then the northbound traffic is critical and requires 1,000/2,000 or 50 percent of the signal time. If for the east-west traffic, 40 percent of the signal time is required, then it can be seen that the ICU is 50 plus 40, or 90 percent. When left-turn phases exist, they are incorporated into the analysis. As ICU's approach 100 percent, the quality of traffic service approaches Level of Service (LOS) E, as defined in the Highway Capacity Manual. Special Report 87, Highway Research Board, 1965. - - Level of Service is used to describe quality of traffic flow. Levels of Service A to C operate quite well. Level of Service D is typically the Level of Service for which an urban street is designed. Level of Service E is the maximum volume a facility can accommodate and will result in possible stoppages of momentary duration. Level of Service F occurs when a facility is overloaded arid is characterized by stop-and-go traffic with stoppages of long duration. A des- cription of the various levels of service appears on the following page. The ICU calculations assume that an intersection is signalized and that the signal is ideally timed. Although calculating ICU for an unsignalized inter- section is not valid, the presumption is that a signal can be installed and the calculation shows whether the geometries are capable of accommodating the ex- pected volumes. It is possible to have an ICU well below 1.0, yet have severe traffic congestion. This would occur because one or more movements is not getting enough time to satisfy its demand with excess time existing on other moves. Capacity is often defined in terms of roadway width. However, standard lanes have approximately the same capacity whether they are 11 foot or 14 foot lanes. Our data indicates a typical lane, whether a through lane or left-turn lane has a capacity of approximately 1600 vehicles per lane per hour of green time. The Highway Capacity Manual found capacity to be about 1500 vehicles per lane per hour of green for through lanes and 1200 vehicles per lane per hour of green for left-turn lanes. However, the capacity manual is based on pre-1965 data, and recent studies and observations show higher capacities in the southern California area. For this study a capacity of 1600 vehicles per lane has been assumed for through traffic, and 1600 vehicles per lane for turning lanes. APPENDIX A LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS Level of Service Nominal Range Of ICU (a) A Low volumes; high speeds; speed not restricted by other vehicles; all signal cycles clear with no vehicles waiting through more than one signal cycle. Operating speeds beginning to be affected by other traffic; between one and ten percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods. Operating speeds and maneuverability closely controlled by other traffic; between 11 and 30 percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods; recommended ideal design standard. Tolerable operating speeds; 31 to 70 percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods; often used as design standard in urban areas. Capacity; the maximum traffic volumes an inter- section can accommodate; restricted speeds; 71 to 100 percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods. Long queues of traffic; unstable flow; stop- pages of long duration; traffic volume and traffic speed can drop to zero; traffic volume will be less than the volume which occurs at Level of Service E. 0.00 - 0.60 0.61 - 0.70 0.71 - 0.80 0.81 - 0.90 0.91 - 1.00 Not meaningful (a) ICU (Intersection Capacity Utilization) at various Levels of Service versus Level of Service E for urban arterial streets. APPENDIX B ICU WORKSHEETS PROJECT: CARLSBAD LOCAL FACILITY MANASEMENT PLANZONE: 12 INTERVAL: AH PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION: U COSTA AVENUE t 1-5 SOUTHBOUND RAMPS OEHENT NL NT KR...SLST SR ELET ER ItLrr ! -Wt ICUI25BO N = HOST"E = EASTSL = LEFT,N.S. = NOLOS - LEV* DENOTES EXISTLANES 0 0 01 0 FREE 010 01 0 < PRE-1990LANES ====S 000I 0 FREE 01 0 010 3EOMET IM 1990LANES 0 0 01 0 FREE 0100j 0 jrrc — \ 'ROVEM 1995LANES===== 8 00 0 FREE 0 00 0 :*TS— 2000LANES 0 0 010 FREE 0 1 00J 0 — > 2010LAK'ES 0 002 0 FREE 0101i 0 EXISTVOL ;:==== 210 111 337 B2 752 170 <— 19YEAfi1990VOL 120 129 39095715195 -TRAFF?o — >ZONE12VOL == = = = 15 50 C VOL<--19YEAR 1995 VOL ===== 140 150 455no 630 230 !5— >ZONE12 VOL ==== = 35 85 <— 20YEAR2000VOL 75 175 525130905265 ;0— > ZONE 12 VOL 10 20 YEAR 2010 VOL 00C 599 0900393 IB 467 419 0 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMS =< ICU SPREADSHEET FILE NAME EAST/KEST CRITICAL SUMS = BOUND, S - SOUTHBOUND CLEARANCE =OUND, N = HESTBQUNDT -= THROUGH, R = RIGHT !CU VALUE *T SISNALIZEDEL OF SERVICE LOS =CRITICAL MOVEMENTS EXIST V/C 0.13 N.S. 0.26 o.se i i 0.13 C.5E 0.05 0.76 == <-EX!S EXIST 11990 K/IMP 16RDKTHv/c : v/c 0.13 N.S. 0.26 0.58 ; *io.08 ! N.S, 10.30 » 10.57 » * 0.13 10.06 0.50 10.5? 0.05 10.05 ====== ========0.76 10.70 C rIN6-- 1 B , < 1 1990+ ZONV/C ===== 0.06 N.S. 0.30 0.60 -V := * 0.08 0.60 0.05 0.73 C 5LUKE/CA 1990 + ZONE H/IHPV/C ======= 0.08 N.S. 0.30 0.60 t f 0.06 0.60 0.05 =======0.73 C ACITY R 1995SRSHTHV/C 0.09 N S 0.35 0.66 9 t 0.09 0.66 0.05 0.60 it 1995+ ZOKV/C SSSSS 0.11 N.S. 0.35 0.72 • i 0.11 0.72 0.05 0.68 D 1995 1+ ZONE;N/IMP 1V/C 1 0.11 N.S. 0.35 0.72 f . 0.11 1 0.72 i 0.05 1 0.86 1 Tl ' 2000SROi'THV/C 0.05 N.S. 0.41 0.73 t < 0.05 0.73 0.05 0.63 D 2000+ ZONEV/C 0.05 N.S. 0.41 0.74 t i 0.05 0.74 0.05 0,84 D 2000 1+ ZONE1H/IMF 1V/C 1 0.05 N.S. 0.41 0.74 t . 0.05 ! 0.74 1 0.05 1 0,84 1 B, ! 120102010 IBROHTl6ROiiTH IK/IMPV/C 1 V/C 0.37 N.S. 0.26 0.55 t »J0.19 1 ' N 10.26 10.29 *10,26 1 -> 1 := f f 0.37 10.19 0.55 10.55 0.05 10.05 0.97 10.79 E (EAR 1990 > < YEAR 1995 > < YEAR 2000 > <--YEf = : c -==5======1R 2010~> PROJECT: CARLSBAD LOCAL FACILITY MANABEHENT PLAN ZONE: 12 .. INTERVAL: PR PEAK HOURINTERSECTION: LA COSTA AVENUE t 1-5 SOUTHBOUND RAMPS MOVEMENT NT MRSLET SR- a ...ET ER *•- «R EXIST iANES 1 FREE 1 1 BEOMETI PRE-1990IANES 1 FREE 1 1990LANES 1 FREE 1 1 ucs- 'RQv'ES 1995 LANES 1 FREE 1 1 n j 3 2000LANES FREE 2010LANES 2 FREE 1 1 1 < TRAFF EXISTVDL ===== 234 218 42856427254 YEAR1990VDL ===== 115 255 495 65 370 295 ZONE12VOL ===== 55 25 'C VOH<--19YEAR1995VOL == === 130 295 575 75 430 340 JMES--15— >ZONE12 VOL 90 40 <--20YEAR2000VOL 95 340 665 85 415395 10 — > ZONE12VOL == = = = 25 10 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMICUI25BO <-— ICU SPREADSHEET FILE NftKE -EAST/KEST CRITICAL SUM N « K08THBGUND, S = SOUTHBOUND . CLEARANC- .E -. EASTBOUKD, K = BESTBOUND . . .L = LEFT. T = THROUGH, R = RI6HT ICU VALUN.S. = NOT SIGNALIZESLOS = LEVEL OF SERVICE LO » DENOTES CRITICAL MOVEMENTS YEAR2010VOL 000693062 0647 25 320 462 0 i = EXIST V/C 0.15 N.S. 0.30 0,43 I i 0.15 0.43 0.05 0.63 B <-EI S" EXIST K/IHP V/C 0.15 N.S. 0.30 0,43 4 t 1 0.15 0.43 0.05 0.63 D 1990 6ROKTHV/C ======= 0,07 N.S. 0.35 0.42 t C.07 0.42 0.05 0.54 A riN6~> < —- VOLUKE/CA 119901990 1+ ZONE + ZONE 1K/1MP V/C 1 V/C 0.11 N.S. 0,35 i j N.S. J0.35 •J0.43 t i 0.11 10.11 0.43 10.43 0.05 10.05 0.59 10.59 A 1 A 'ACITY Rf 1995 6RBKTH V/C 0.06 N.S. 0.41 0.48 t 0,06 0.48 0.05 0.61 B 1TIOS— 1995 + ZONE V/C ======= 0.14 N.S. 0.41 . 0.51 f 0.14 0.51 0.05 0.70 a 1995 + ZONE K/IMP V/C ======= 0.14 N.S. 0.41 0.51 » 0.14 0.5! 0.05 0.70 B 2000BSOiiTH V/C 0.06 N.S. 0.47 0.51 * f 0.06 0.51 0.05 0.62 B 12000 2000 1+ ZONE + ZONE WIMP V/C 1 V/C O.CB N.S. 0.47 0.51 *!0.06 1 N.S. 10.47 1 *io.5it i 4 0.06 10.08 0.51 10.51 0.05 10.05 0.64 10.64 B 1 £ 12010 2010 16ROSTHBRONTH IK/IMP V/C ! V/C ======= | ======= 0.43 N.S. 0.42 0.49 0.43 *J0.22 1 N. 10.42 10.20*10.29 ========10.22 0.49 10.62 0.05 10.05 0.97 10.89 E 1 D fEAR 1990 > < YEAR 1995 > < YEAR 2000 > (--YEAR 2010-- 4 = ^ = STON PRINBLE AND ASSOCIATES 10-Nov-87 PROJECT: CABL5BAD LOCAL FACILITY HANABEHENT PLAN INTERVAL: AH PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION: LA COSTA AVENUE t 1-5 NORTHBOUND RflHPS KOVEHENT NLNT NRSL ST SRELET - ER*LKT- *R ICUI24BO EXIST LANES 0 10c 0 01 0 0 0 < — N = NORTHBOUND, E = EASTBOilNB, HL = LEFT, T - ThN.S. =. NOT SI6NA LOS = LEVEL OF S « DENOTES CRITIC < — PRE-1990 LANEE 10 0C0C 00 « tunti— IH 199CLANES 1C10 00 01cc1 6 <ILS —'ROVES 1995LANES 10j .- 0C0c 1 0 0J 0 NTS-- 2000LANES 1oj 0c00 0o « ; 2010LANES 10 i 00011 0 01 FREE \ EXISTVDL 21 369 93 446 806 311 <-19 YEAR 1990VOL 25 365 HO395 775 205 )0— > ZONE 12VD. 15 15 5050 L VliL <--19 YEAR 1995VOL 3C 425 125455 500 235 ints— (5— > 20NE12VOL 35 35 65 65 <--20 YEAR 2000VOL 35 325 145 445 9E5 215 X> — > ZONE12VOL 10 10 2020 YEAR 2010VOL 5i012500031961 0 0830 449 NORTH/SOUTH- CRITICAL SUKS =ICU SPREADSHEET FILE HAKE EAST/HEST CRITICAL SUIta = S = SOUTHBOUND CLEARANCE = = KESTBOUNDRDUBH, S = RIBHT -- ICU VALUE = .I ZEDERVICE LOS - AL HOVEHENTS <, EXIST V/C 0.01 0.23 0.34 0.70 * 0.01 0.70 0.05 0.76 C EXIST 11990 J1990 K/IHP IBROKTH :+ ZONV/C ! V/C 1 V/C 0.01 0.23 0.34 0.70 ' 0.01 0.70 0,05 0.76 C « 10.02 j 0.23 ! !0.32 110.61 «!O.C2 10.24 1 ! |0.33 *!0.6E "V < i 10.02 10.02 10.61 10.68 10.05 10.05 ===============10.68 S0.75 I B 1 C jLimt/uirm.!!! n 1990 ! + ZONE 11995K/IHP IBROKTHV/C ! V/C 0.02 0.24 0.33 0.68 0.02 0.68 0.05 ===>= 0.75 C »IO,02 J0.27 1 10.36 tjo.71 ' . !0.02 !0.71 10.05 =========!0.78 ! C mu3 119951995 1+ ZONE+ ZONE IK/1HPV/C ! V/C O.C2 0.29 0.38 O.E2 *!0.02 i 10.29 ! 10.38 *!O.B2 i 1 0.02 10.02 0.82 10.62 0.05 10.05 =========== =0.89 10.89 D ! D 2000 BROkiTHV/C 0.02 0.20 0.37 0.75 » ft < 0.02 0.75 0.05 _== = === O.B2 D 2000+ ZONEV/C 0.02 0.21 0.38 0.78 i i f f 0.02 0.78 0.05 ,=======0.85 D 2000 i + ZONE! K/IHP ! V/C ! 0.02 0.21 0.38 0.78 * 0.02 ! 0.78 1 0.05 ! =======0.85 ! D : 120102010 iSROKTHBROfc'TH IH/IHP V/C ! V/C 0.04 0.08 0.62 0.92 «!0.04 t 1C. OS «! * *i0.02 10.40 *i ,' * «!0.52! N.S. 0.04 10.04 0.92 10.60 0.05 10.05 ===============1.01 10.69 F i B <--EnSTINS-> < YEAR 1990 > < YEAR 1995 > -< YEAR 2000 > <-YEAR 2010--> PROJECT: CARLSBAD LOCAL FACILITY HANABEHENT PLAN ZONE: 12INTERVAL: PK PEAK HOURIKTERSECTION: LA COSTA AVENiJE I 1-5 NORTHBOUND RAHPS (53VEHEKT ======== KLNT ....XRSL ST SR EL ET ER KL k'T .. HR jic'jt2«a N = N3RTH . £ ? EASTE L = LEFT. K.S. = NO LOS = LEV « DENOTES EXIST LANES ===== i __J 1 . .1 PRE- 1990 LANES =====1 jEOSET! 1990 LANEE=====i •i j i 'RuVEto 1995 LAKES =====j ..1. 1 .1 >'TS- 2000 LAKES ===== 1 2010 LANES 1 i J 1 1 FREE EXIST VOL 50 516 120 464 598 335 YEAR 1990VOL 60 44Q 140 380 570 265 -TRAFF ZDNE 12 VOL 55 55 25 25 C VOL <--19 YEfiR 1995VOL 65 510 160 440 660 305 >5— > ZONE 12 VGL 90 90 40 40 <-20 YEfiR 2000 V0_ 80 535 IBS 455 680 270 10— > ZONE 12 VOL 25 25 10 1C YEAR 2010 VCL 30 0 409 0 0 C 141 1199 C 0 752 625 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SIMS = <-— iCIJ SPREADSHEET FILE NAKE . EAST/KE5T CRITICAL BUH5 = BOOND, S = SCUTHBOUWi . CLEARANCE = OUNB, ii = KSTBOliND T = THROUGH, R = RIBHT ICU VALUE = T SIBNfiLlZEI) EL OF SERVICE LOS * CRITICAL KOVEKENTS . - EXIST V/C '0.03 0.32 0.37 0,58 t i 0.03 0.58 0,05 0.66 B EXIST ! H/IHP ! V/C ! C.03 0.32 0.37 0.56 a t 0.03 ! 0.58 ! 0.05 ! 0.66 ! 0 l 1990 BRQfcTH - V/C 0.04 0.28 0.33 0.52 f * 0.04 0.52 0.05 0.61 D 1990 + ZON V/C 0.04 0.31 0.36 0.55 11990 !* ION: IK/IHP ! V/C »!0.04 10.31 ! 10.34 1 tjo.55 ;A i . 0.04 10,04 0.55 :0.55 0.05 10.05 0.64 10.64 B i B 'AC1TV 1995 SROKTt V/C 0.04 0.32 0.38 0.60 R < 4 t 0.04 0.60 0.05 0.69 B CT1QS-- 1995 + ZONi V/C ===== 0.04 0.38 0.43 0.65 < i 0.04 0.65 0.05 0.74 C ... \ 1995 « ZON K/IHP V/C ==== = 0.04 0,38 0.43 0.65 := < i 0.04 0.65 0.05 0.74 r 2000 BROk'T V/C 0.05 0.33 0.4C 0.59 { t i 0,05 0.59 0.05 0.69 B 12000 ! 12010 2000 !+ ZONE 12010 IBRDiiTH + ZONE iH/IHP IBROKTK ifc/IHP V/C 1 V/C ! V/C ! V/C 0.05 0.35 0.42 0.61 *!0.05 10.35 i| 10.42 t •10.61 »!0.02 10,26 ti 10.84 Ji'o.Bi *!0,02 J0.26 «:'o,09 10.75 *!C,47 ! N.S. i I t 0.05 10.05 10.02 10.02 0.61 10.61 !O.B6 10.75 0.05 !0.05 !0,05 10.05 0.71 10.71 10.93 IO.B2 c : c : £ : D <-EJISTlllS-> • < YEAR 1990 ) < YEAR 1995 > < YEAR 2000 > <-YEAR 2010--> ESTON PRINBLE AND ASSOCIATES 13-Nov-87 PROJECT; CARLSBAD LOCAL FACILITYZONE: 12 INTERVAL: AH PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION: LA COSTA AVENUE t EL CA« HOVEKENT NLNT NR SL ST SR EL -ET ERVL KT . KR ICUI23BO N = NORTH E = EASTS L = LEFT. K.S. = N3 LOS = LEV t DENOTES EXIST LANES 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 1 1 PRE- 1990 LANES « 3 1 2 I2 2 j 1 EOHET 1990 LANES 2 3 2 3 1 2 2 11 1 1 'ROVE* 1995 LANES n J 2•j 1 1 2000 LANES 3 1 2 3 1 2 21 1 21 2010 LANES 24 1 2 4 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 HANA6EKENT PLAN ND REAL EXIST VOL 44? 292 199 85 372 509 235 363 39 49 479 126 <— 19 YEAR 1990 VOL ===== 52C 340 230 100 430 275 90 420 45 55 555 145 -TRAFF ?0 — > ZONE 12 VOL 75 50 10 15 10 25 25 25 C VOLl <--19 YEAR 1995 VOL 605 390 265 115 500 315 100 490 50 65 645 170 nc.3 5 — > ZONE 12 VOL 125 E5 20 35 20 55 40 40 <--20 YEAR 2000 VOL 500 455 310 130 580 365 120 565 60 75 745 195 >0— > ZONE 12 VOL 40 85 20 35 20 40 YEAR 2010 VOL === = = 375 1409 49 122 2762 613 217 246 641 161 607 303 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUNS = < ICl) SPREADSHEET FILE NAHE EAST/HEST CRITICAL SUHS - BOUND, S = SOUTHBOUND CLEARANCE = OUNe, t = KEST8QUND T = THROU6H, R = R1BHT ICU VALUE = T EI6NALIZED EL OF SERVICE LOS = CRITICAL nOVEIOTS 1 EX 1ST 1 V/C ;===== 10.14 10.06 10.12 10.03 10.06 10.32 10.07 10.11 10.02 10.03 10.30 10.06 10.22 10.37 IEXIST 1K/IKP 1 V/C H0.14 10.06 10.12 10.03no. os 10.32no.07 10.11 10.02 10.03no. 30 10.08 10.22 10.37 10.05 10.05 { ============ 10.64 10.64 11990 16RONT 1 V/C £={===== H0.16 10.07 10.14 10.03 H0.09 10.17no. 03 10.13 10.03 10.03no.35 10.09 10.25 10.38 11990 < 1+ ZON 1 V/C 110.19 10.08 10.14 10.03 110.09 10.17 HO.C3 10.13 10.04 10.03 H0.36 10.11 10.26 10.39 -VOLUKE/ 1199C 1+ ZON: in/in? 1 V/C 110.19 10.06 10.14 10.03no. 09 10.17no. 03 10.13 10.04 10.03 110.36 10,11 10.26 10.39 OPACITY : 11995 1BROKT 1 V/C H0.19 10.08 10.1710,04no.io 10.20 HC. 03 10.15 10.03 10.04 H0.4C iO.ll 10.29 10.43 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 .•==r.=========================ss: 10.66 10,72 10.72 10.77 1 B 1 B 1 B 1 C 1 C ===========.======== = ============ = === = <-EX!STINS-> < YEAR 1990 1 C ^___ 11995 1 1+ ZON 1 V/C H0.23 10.10 10.17 10,04no. 11 10.20no. 03 10.16 10.07 10.04 110.43 10.13 10.34 10.46 10.05 10.85 1 D 11995 !+ ZON : 1H/IHP 1 V/C ;={===== no. 2310.10 10.17 10.04no.n 10.20 H0.03 10.16 10.07 10.04 110.43 10.13 10.34 10.46 10,05 10.85 1 D 1 1 :! 12000 116ROKT 11 V/C :={===== H0.1610.09 10.19 10.04 HO.12 10.23 H0.04 10.16 10.04 10.05 110.47 10.12 110.28 110.51 110.05 110.84 11 D 12000 1 ! + ZON ! V/C 110.17 10.1110.19 10.05 110.13 10.23 110.04 10.18 10.05 10.05 HO.47 10.15 10.30 10.51 10.05 10.86 1 D 12000 1+ ZON: IK/IB? 1 V/C 110.17 10.11 10.19 10.05 io',23 H0.04 10.18 10.05 10.05 H0.23 10.15 10.30 10.27 10.05 10.62 1 B 11 12010:: 12010 IBROKTHHBROKTH 1N/IHP 11 V/C 1 V/C •10.12 10.29 10.03 10.04 110.56 10.38 »!0.07 10.08 10.4010.10 HO. 3610.19 110.70 110.451 i 110.05 111.20 1! F --YEAR 1995 > < YEAR 2000 > <-YEf H0.12 10.22 10.03 10.04 110.43 10.38 H0.07 10.08 10.40 10.10 110.19 10.19 10.55 10.26 10.05 10.66 t i t 1 D ========= R 2010-) PROJECT: CARLSBAD LOCAL FACILITY HANASEHENT PLAN ZONE: 12 INTERVAL: PK PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION: LA CGSTA AVENUE i EL CAKINO REAL fiOVENENT SLNT NR SL ST SR..aET ER KL KT US ICUI23BB N = NORTH E = EAETi L = LEFT. N.S. = NC LOS = LEV i DENOTES EXISTLANES 23 1 2 7 "l 2 ! 1 1 1 < PRE- 1990L.ANES ===== 23 j 2 3 1 _2 2 1 1 1 1 itUPit 1 — id 1990LANES n .1 1 2 21 1 1 ' 1 flub— ROVEH 1995LANES 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 :NTS~ 2000 LANES t)i•j i rt 3 2 i 2 1 > > 20!0LANES " 24 1 2 4 1 2 1 1 .-2 1 <. EXISTVOL "272"531 90 194 969 465 505 535 296 85 350 140 <-19 YEAS 1990VOL "3li"615 105 225 1145 290 270 620 345 100 405 160 -lK«!-r id — > ZONE 12VOL ===== 35 25 30 55 30 85 10 10 t VUL <-19 YEAR 1995VOL 3ii"715 120 260 1330 340 310 720 400 115 470 190 Jfitb — ?5— > ZONE VOL 65 40 45 90 45 135 20 20 <--20 YEAR 2000VOL ~25<T825 140 300 1540 390 360 835 350 130 545 220 id— > ZONE 12VOL "lo"40 45 90 45 20 YEAR 2C10VOL ~613~ 1778 165 342 1665 446 654 499 435 93 - 375 267 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMS = <— - ICU SPREADSHEET FILE SAKE , EAST/tiEST CRITICAL SUNS = BOUND, E = SOUTHBOUND . CLEARANCE = DL'KD. If = HE5TBDUND T = THROUEH. R = RIBHT !CU VALUE = T SIBWLIZED EL OF SERVICE LOS = CRITICAL NOVEBENTS IEXIST: v/c 10,0910,11 10.06 10.06 10.21 10.29 10.16 10.17 10.19 10.05 10.22 10,05 IEXIST U/IHP1 V/C H0.0510.11 10.06 10.06 H0.21 10.29 H0.16 10.1710.19 10.05 110.22 10.09 10.30 10.30 10.38 10.05 10.73 1 C :====== <~EX 10.38 10.05 ========= 10.73 i C 11990 1BROMT 1 V/C 110.10 10.13 10.07 10.07 H0.24 10.18 tlO.08 10.19 10.22 10.06 «10.25 10.10 11990 H 1+ ZON1 V/C tio.ll10.13 10.07 10.08 H0.25 10.18 110.08 10.20 10.27 10.06 H0.26 10.11 •VUU'Bt/ 11990 1+ ZON: :»/ihP1 V/C n'o.n10.13 10.0710. oe H0.25 10.16 H0.08 10.20 10.27 10.06 H0.2o 10.11 ,W»i. 1 H Kfl 1 i US 11 i 11995 .111995 11995 1+ ZONE::BROKTH 1+ ZONE IK/IMP11 V/C 1 V/C 1 V/C JlO.ll10.15 10.08 10.06 »!0.28 10.21 110.10 10.23 10.25 10.07 i!0.29 10.12 *1C.1310.16 10.08 10.10 H0.30 10.21 H0.10 10.24 10.33 10.07 H0.3S 10.13 110.13 10.16 10.08 10.10 •10.30 10.21 H0.10 10.24 10.33 10.07 H0.31 10.13 10.34 10.36 10.36 110.39 10.43 10.43 10.33 10.34 10.34 110.39 10.41 10.41 10.05 10.05 10.05==========£============: 10.72 10.75 10,75 110.05 10,05 10.05 110.83 10.89 10.69 1 C 1 C 1 C 1! D 1 D 1 D 12000 IBROliT1 V/C 110.0810.17 10.09 10.09 H0.32 10.24 H0.ll 10.26 10.22 10.08 H0.34 10.14 1 12000 12000 1+ ZONE 1 1* ZONE IK/IMP1 V/C 1 V/C H0.0810.16 10.09 10.11 •10.34 10.24 110.1! 10.26 10.25 10.08 •10.34 10.15 f!0. 0810.16 10.09 10.11 H0.34 10.24 H0.ll 10.2610.25 10.08 H0.17 10.15 10.40 10.42 10.42 10.45 10.45 10.34 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.90 10.92 10.81 1 D 1 E 1 D 12010 1BROMT 1 V/C= ! ===== H0.19 10.37 10.10 10.11 110.35 10.28 10.20 HC.1610.27«;o.06 10.23 10.16 12010 lEROit'TH•: IK/HIP 1 V/C i 10.19 i 10.28 10.10 10.11 H0.26 i 10.28 H0.2C » 10.1610.27 10.06 U0.12 i 10.18 10.54 10.45 10.43 10.32 10.05 10.05s==sr=s========= 11.02 10.82 1 F 1 D STIN6--> •< YEAR 1990 > < YEAR 1995 > < YEAR 2000 > <~YEAR 2010--) E5TON PRINSLE AND ASSOCIATES iO-Kov-87 PROJECT: CARLSBAD LOCAL FACILITY RANASENENT PLANZONE: 12INTERVAL: AH PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION: EL CAK1NO REAL I LEVANTE STREET HOVEKENT NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER ML ST KR ICUf26EQ N = NORTH E = EAETE . L = LEFT. N.E. = NO LOS = LEV t DENOTES EXIST LAKES 0 2 1 12 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 PRE- 1990 LANES 0 2 1 1 00 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 iEOKETF 1990 LANES 0 2 1 1 20 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 •ROVEft 1995 LANES 0 2 1 1n 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 2000 LANES 0 2 00 0 1.5 0S.5 2010 LANES 2 4 1 1 4 1 22 1 1 20 EXIST VOL 547 51 131 424 190 <--19 YEAR 1990 VOL 635 60 150 490 220 -TRftFF '0— > ZONE 12 VOL 125 40 C VOL <--19 YEAR 1995 VGL 735 70 175 570 255 75— > ZONE 12 VOL 210 90 <-20 YEAR 2000 VDL 735 BO 205 490 295 )0 — > ZONE 12 VOL 125 55 YEAR 2010 VOL 612 1264 51 6 2230669 495 61 455 216 236144 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMS = < ICU SPREADSHEET FILE NfWiE EAST/KEST CRITICAL SUHS = BOUND, S = SOLTHBOUND CLEARANCE = BUffi. X = KESTEOUNS T = THRMJBK, R = RIBKT ICU VALUE = T SI5NA.IZED EL Of SERVICE LOS = CRITICAL HOVEKENTS IEXIST: v/c J===== 10.17 10.03 10,06 10.13 j 0.08 io.oo lEXIET IK/IflP 1 V/C =S = £S;==S «!o.!7 10.03 110.08 10.13 i'lO.OB 10.00 !1990 lEROk'T 1 V/C £= | ===== tio.20 10.04 110.09 10,15 «10.09 10.00 11990 H !+ ZON 1 V/C iio.24 10.04 *10.09 10.17 i »!0.09 10.00 -VOLUHE/CAPACITY 11990 1 !+ ZONE 11995 I IK/IHP 16RONT 1 V/C ! V/C *!o.24 10.04 «i0.09 10.17 110.09 10.00 H0.23 10.04 HO.ll 10.18 110.11 10.00 RATIOS- 11995 •i 1+ ZON: v/c 110.30 10.04 UO.ll 10.21 1 110.11 io.oo 11995 !+ ZON I IN/IN? 1 V/CEE jsssss 110.30 10.04 UO.ll 10.21 i!0.1! 10.00 : ;2ooo 16R3KT 1 V/C 110.23 10.05 i!0.13 JC.15 110.12 10.00 12000 i 1+ ZON i V/C iiO.27 10.05 110.13 10.17 ii 110.12 10.00 12000i+ ZON:: IK/IHP ! V/C = S |=S= = = lio. 27 10.05 H0.13 10.17 1 H1 lio. 12I io.oo :2oio 16RDKT 1 V/C 110.59 10.03 110.00 10.97 «1i 1J0.09 10.06 12010 IBROsT H IK/IHP 1 V/C 110.19 10.20 10.03 10.00 H0.35 10.56 !0.15 H0.02 10.28»!0.14 10.12 > j == i < i i 10.25 10.25 10.29 10.33 10.33 10.34 iO.41 10.41 10.36 10.40 10.40 10.97 10.54 10.06 10.08 10.09 !0.09 10.09 10,11 10.11 10.11 S0.12 10.12 10.12 iO.09 10.27 10,05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 1C.3B 10.38 10,43 10.47 10.47 10.50 10.57 10.57 10.53 10.57 10.57 11.11 10.86 1 ft 1 A 1 A ! A <-EXISTISS--> < YEAR 1 1 A 1 A -=============== ,90 > < IA1A1A1AIA1F1D •-YEAR 1995 > < YEAR 2000 > <— YEAR 2010- == -> f c PROJECT: CARLSBAD LOCAL FACILITY HANASESENT PLAN ZONE: 12INTERVAL: PK PEAK HOURINTERSECTION: EL CfiHINQ REAL t LEVANTE STREET NDVEhENT ======== KLK1 NR SL ST SR ELET ER NL KT. KR ICUI26E3. N = NORTH E = EASTG L = LEFT. N.S. = NC LOE = LEV i DENOTES EXIST ^ANES 2 i 1 2 1.5 1.5 —— — ,.-.1 PRE- 1990 LAKES 2 i1 2 1.5 1.5 EOKETF— m 1990 LANES 2 .. 1 1 2 1.5 1.5 ROVEM '995 LANES 2 1 2 1.5 1 Ci i kf NTS— 2000 LANES j 2 1.5 !.5 > 2010 LANES 2 4 1 1 4 12 I 1 1 2 EXIST VOL === = = 769 173 116 393 107 114 <-19YEAR 1993 VOL ===== 890 200 135 455 125 130 -TRAFF ?0 — > ZONE 12 VOL 60 145 C V0H <--19 YEAR 1995 VOL 1035 230 160 530 145 155 ?5— > ZONE 12 VDL ====r 105 230 <-20 YEAR 2000 VOL 1025 270 165 495 165 1BO )0~- > ZONE 12 VOL 65 135 YEAR 2010 VOL "576* 1294 253 45 1483 668B74 208 75B 90 128 34 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMS = <-— ICU SPREADSHEET FILE (fftSE EAET/HEST CRITICAL SUKS = BOJXD, S = SOITTHBOUKD . CLEARANCE = GUNS. * = KSTBOIIND T = THRDUSH, R = RIBKT ICU VALUE = T SIGNftLIZED EL OF SERVICE LOS = CRITICAL MOVEMENTS 1 iEXIST 1 V/C 10.24 10.11 10.07 10.12 i 10.04 iO.05 SEXIST IN/IIP 1 V/C 1======== 110,24;o.iiH0.07 10.12 1 IJO. 04 10.05 10.31 10.31 10.04 10.04 10.05 j===== 10.40 10,05 10.40 1 A 1 A:szc==s=r= ======= / — CYICTIkiC— \ 11990 ISRCk'T: v/c i!0,2E 10,13 HO.OB 10.14 1J0.05 10.05 11990 i 1+ ZON i V/C 110.30 10.13iio.ce J0.19 1 1J0.05 10,05 -VOLUKE/i 11990 1+ ZD«: IK/IKP 1 V/C 110.30 10.13lio.oe 10.19 1 1 110.05 10.05 APACITY Hl995 11SROKT 11 V/C :r { rs=== 110.32 10,14 110.10 10.17 110.06 io.06 S1995 1 !* ZON 1 V/C := j===== 110.36 10.14 110.10 10.24 ilO.Oi io.06 11995 !+ ZONE: IK/DIP 1 V/C :={====== 110.36 10.14 i!C. 10 10.24 i'iO.06 10.06 10.36 10.3E I0.3E 110.42 10.46 10.46 10.05 10.05 10.05 110.06 10.06 10.06 10.05 10.05 10.05 110.05 10.05 10.05 10.46 10.48 10.48 110.53 10.5? 10.57 1 A======= / 1 A 1 A 11 A 1 A 1 A 12000 IEROKT i V/C=;===== lie. 32 1C. 17 H0.12 10.15 110.07 1C.OE 12000 < 1+ ZON; v/c := ;===:= 110. 34 10.171:0.12 10.20 IJO. 07 io.OE 12000 it ZONE: iti/i«p 1 V/C iio.34 10.17 110.12 10.20 ijO.07 10.06 i 12010 HBROfc'T !! V/C iio.58 10.16 H0.03 10.67 lio. 04 ic.oi 120101BROKT J !k'/I«P 1 V/C lie. IE10.20 10.16 10.03 H0.23 10.42 !0.27 10.47 110.06 10.05 1C. 44 10.46 10.46 110.67 10.41 10.07 10.07 10.07 110.04 10.32 10.05 10.05 10.05 110.05 10.05 -> 1 i i t i := 10.56 10.58 10.58 110.76 10.78 1 A 1 A 1 A 11 C 1 C — VFfiP lOOA \ / VCfiD JOO^ S / VC&D OfiftA N / — VCfiD OfllA- £= .', STSN PRJN3LE *KC ASSOCIATES 10-Nov-87 PROJECT! CARLSBAD LOCAL FACILITY NANAGEKEKT PLAN INTERVAL: AH PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION: EL CAR!NO REAL i CALLE BARCELONA r r HOVEHENT NT NRSLETSRELETERNLKTMR ICUI27BG N = NORTH E = EfiSTB L = LEFT, U.S. = NCLBS = LEV » DENOTES EXIST LANES 0 C 0 C 0 0 00 0000 PRE- 1990 LANES 00 0 0 00c o 0c0 EOKET 1990LASES 0 2 C 1 20 CC0101 ucs—'ROVEKE 1995LANES 0« 0 2C 0 0 0 1 2000 LfiNEE =====0 20 1 i. 0 00c1c1 2010 LANES 0 3 0 1 3 0 0 0 016i EXIST VOL 598 614 <— 19YEAR 1990 VOL 695 710 TRA'F ?0 — >ZONE 12 VOL 30 40 100 125 C VOL <— 1"?! YEAF, 1995 VOL 805 B25 !5 — >ZONE 12 VOL 7590 165 210 <-20YEAR 2000 VOL B15 7B5 30— > ZONE 12 VOL 75 55 165 125 YEAR 2010 VOL 0166123 15?22680 0 0 0 233 0 436 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SIMS =<-— ICU SPREADSHEET FILE NAHE EAET/KEET CRITICAL SlIKS - BOUND, £ = S5UTHBOUSD CLEARANCE = DUNS, * = KSTBOL'NI! T = THROUGH, R = RIBKT ICU VALUE = T SIGNALIZEDEL OF SERVICE LOS = CRITICAL K2VEHESTS = EXIST V/C • 0.00 0,00 0.05 =======0.05 A EXIST k/IHP V/C • 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 A 1990BROS* V/C \ t 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 A !990 + ZDN V/C -V t 1 0.00 0,00 0,05 0.05 A 3LUKE/199Ct ZON k/ISF V/C 0.23 0.030.22 0.06 O.OE ,A t t * 0.26 0.06 0.05 0.3? A :'ADITY R 1995 BRGHTH V/C t 2 i 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 A iTTnC - 1995 + ZONE V/C i i 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 A 1995+ ZONE N/IHPV/C 0.26 0.060.26 0.10 0.13 t 0.34 0.10 0.05 0.49 A 2000 BRDKTH V/C i 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 A 12000 2000 1+ ZONE + ZONE U/1HFV/C 1 V/C J0.2E 10.03*|0.25 10.10 10. OB t t » 0.00 10.31 0.00 10.10 0.05 ======0.05 10.05 10.46 A 1 A 2010 BROk'TV/C 120101 BROk'T 4 ' M / T MP 1 V/C t! 10.36 10.10J10.47 jl j 10.15 10.27 0.00 10.4? := i t t i 0.00 10.15 0,05 10.05 0.05 10.67 A 1 B /— cvicTiys— ••, / vest- toon s / vcao icc^, \ t VCSB ->'.^f.- —\ /— vcap 7ntfi--^ PR JECT: CARLSBAD LOCAL FACILITY HANABEKENT PLAN ZONE: 12 INT RVAL: PK PEAK HOUR INTERSE TIBS: EL CAKING REAL i CALLE BARCELONA HOVEHENT ======== J!Tm SL ET SR ELETER KLKT 1ICUI27BC N = NORTHE = EASTBL = LEFT.N.S. = NjLOS = LEV« DENOTES EXISTLANES = = = = = PRE- LAfiES 5EOKET 1990LANES 2 12 1 ' i <!CS-'RQVEfi 1995LANES 2 12 1 'NT5-- 2000LAKES i 2C10LANES 3 1 3 1 1 EXIST VOL 942 50C <— 19YEAF: 1990VDL 1090 ESO TRAFF?0 — > ZONE 12VOL 115 145 50 60 1C VOL <--19YEAR 1995 VOL = === = 1265 670 JHES-- ZONE 12VOL IBS 230 85 105 <-20 YEAR 2000 VOL 1295 665 jO— > ZONE 12VOL IBS 135 E5 65 YEAR 2010VOL 0147S 150 534 1984 0C00 390 206 NORTH7SOUTH CRITICAL SUHS = <— - ICU SPREADSHEET FILE NASE EAST/KEBT CRITICAL EUHS = BG'JKD, S = SBJTHEOUND . CLEARANCE = T ='THsOUSH. R = RiSKT ICU VALUE =T EIBSfiLIZESEL Of SERVICE LOS =CRITICAL HOVEKENTS EXIST V/C t 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 A /--cue EXIST K/DiPV/C i 0.00 0.00 0,05 0.05 A 1990 BRDKTV/C i = f 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 A 1990 + ZONV/C o.oc 0.00 0.05 =======0.05 A 1990 + IDSK/IHPV/C == = = = 0.38 0.090.18 0.03 0.04 == i i t t 0,47 0,03 0.05 0.55 A 1995 BROKThV/C 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 A riw:: — *> / vrto IOOA ', / = : S 1995* ZONV/C ===== II 995 U ZON : SN/1HPI V/C ;= [=r=== *; 10.45 10.14 10.05«! 10.07 t * i 0.00 10.59 0.00 10.05 0.05 0.05 10.05 10.69 A 1 B 2000 BROtiTHV/C i t i i 0.00 c.oo 0.05 0.05 A 12000 2000 !+ ZONE 1- ZCNE IK/IHPV/C S V/C 10,46 10.08 J10.21 10.05f ( i'0.04 f t t 0.00 10.54 0.00 10.05 0.05 10,05 ==============0.05 10,64 A 1 B 120102010 16RO*T BROiiTH IK/IKP V/C i V/C 10.34 10.33•10.41 t; 10.02 10.13 0.00 10.67 -•i ^ i := 0,00 10.02 0.05 10.05 0.05 10.74 A : c CAD (COS \ / VCfiP OAftfi N / — VCfiC 7ft1ft- := -V E3TOK PRINSLE AKD ASSOCIATES 13-Nov-B? PRDJ^I: CAELS6AD LOCAL FSCILiTY KAKSEEKEdT FLAK INTERVfi..: AH PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION: EL CAKIN3 REAL i &.WVSAIN R3A: MVEKEKT HI KR SL 57 SF; EL£T ER ML KT IC!it28BG N - NORTH £ = EAST5 L = LEFT. U.S. = NC LOS = LEV t DENOTES EXIET LAKES 0 2 11 20 C0 001 0 PRE- 1990 LANES 0 2 11 20 C0 001 0 3EOKETIK 1990 0 0 0 0 01 0 'ROv'EK 1995 LAKES 0 0 0 2 1(j :KTS- 2000 LAKES i 3 1 1 1 -2 1 1 LAKES 1 3 1 2 1 2 1 13 1 EXIST VOL 456 116 553 4BB 115 YEAR 1990 VOL 530 135 640 565 135 -TRAFFIC VOL ZONE 12 30 10 100 25 YEAR 1995 VOL 615 3S5 HO 745 656 155 IQKl 12 VOL 75 20 165 40 YEAR 2000 VOL 70 640 145 165 775 85 115 350 125 405 395 135 ZONE 12 VOL 35 35 35 85 85 YEAR 2010 VOL 29 1225 3SC251 2046 266 104 777 1192 199 1396 436 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUKS = <— - ICU SPREADSHEET FILE W.1E EAST/KEST CRITICAL SUM = BOUND, S = EOLTHBS'JS: CLEARANCE = 3UND, K = MESTBOJNE T = TKROU6H. R - RIGHT ICU VALUE =T SI6KALIZED EL CF SERVICE LOS = CRITICAL ."DVDIENTS JESIST 11990 EXIST Hi/I*? 1EROCTH V/C 1 V/C i V/C 0.14 C.16 0.0? 0.1? 0.3S H0.14 10.16 H0.07 10.17 110.3B 110.1? 10.21 *!O.OE J0.20 110.44 * * 0.21 10.21 10.25 0.3S 10.36 iO.44 0.05 10,05 0.64 SO. 64 10.05 ,'0.74 B 1 B 1 C <~EX1STIKB"> < 1990 + ZOK V/C 0.16 0.22 0.06 0.23 0.45 •VOLUflt/CA 11990 _ !* ZOKE . IN/lftr 1 V/C iSO.lfi 10.22 110.06 10.231 110.45 i i t 0.26 10.26 0,45 10.45 0.05 10.05 0.76 iO.76 C 1 C -YEAR 1990 > 3ACITY 1995 GROKT V/C 0.19 0.24 0.10 0.23 0.51 1 11995 1 ! 12000 1 12010 11995 1+ ZONE !2000 S2000 1+ ZONE 12010 I6K3HTH i 1+ ZONE ilf/IHP I6ROKTH 1+ ZONE Ui/IUP 16S3KTK 1K/IRP 1 V/C 1 V/C ! V/C 1 V/C 1 V/C 1 V/C 1 V/C 1:0.22 10.25 *10.10 J0.2B f' «J0.53 U0.22 10.25 H0.10 10. 2E i i! 10.221,'O.IC K0.22 10.09 H0.12 10.27 JO. 56 1 ioiii H0.12 10.30 11i 1J0.49 10.04 loin H0.12 10.18 10,05 110.07 10.12 10.06 10.31 HC.30 10.08 10.24 H0.16 10.72 11.27 H0.02 !0.26 10.24 10.08 110.43 10.17 H0.03 10.16 10.75 10.12 H0.29 10.27 i t 0.29 10.32 10.32 10.34 10.35 10.26 10.72 10.45 0.51 10.53 !0.22 10,56 10.69 10.43 11.27 10.32 0.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 0.85 SO.W !0.59 10.97 ,'1.09 .'0.74 12.04 IO.S2 DIDIAIEIFICIFID < YEAR 1995 > < YEAR 2000 > <— YEAR 2010--)" r r r PROJECT; CAR.3BAD LOCA. FACILITY HANAEESEKT PLAN ZONE: 12INTERVAL: ft. PEAK H3JR I«TESS£Cn3K: EL CAKIW SEAL i CLUttiHSIN R3AI KOVEKEST KLNT KF:SL SR ELETER KLKT KR ICUI2BB3 S = NORTHE = EASTSL - LEFT.U.S. = NOLOS = LEV i DENOTES EXIST LANES 2 11 2 1 c-pc- 1990 LANES ==== = i i •EIMET — -IH 199C LAKES 2 1 •RBVEK 1995LASES 2. 11 :STS-- 2000 LAKES i 2 1i 2010LAKES=====j 1 31 3 1 I EXIETVO- 602 5331 9 9737 36? 124 <--19YEAR1990VOL===== 930 620230per 450 145 '0— >IOKE12 VOL •1530 50 10 <-19YEAR1995 VOL IOBC715265990 525 165 ?5 — > ZOKE 12 VQj 165 45 65 20 <--20YEAR2000 VOL 11254753101035 U585 395 70 305 145 »0— >ZOKE12VOL 9090 40 90 40 40 YEAR 2010VOL "to"10675734011331 336 307 1152 46 371 1023333 NORTK/SOuTH CRITICAL SL'HS = <--- - ICO SPREADSHEET F^E KAte EAST/KEET CRITICAL SUBS = EDUNB, 5 = SD'JTHBCyNC • CLEARANCE =3UNI, * = KESTBOyeT = THRDUSH, F, ' RI6HT ICU VALUE = T SIBK^IZECEL Cr SERVICE LOS = CRITICAL HCVEKEKTS i 1EXIST ! V/C 10.25 10.33 10.1210.23 I 10.32 SEXIST SK/IHP1 V/C i!0. 2510.33H0.1210.23 tiO.32 • . 10.37 10.37 10.32 10.32 10.05 10.05 10.74 !0.74 1 C 1 C <-EXISTISS~> 1990BRO«T V/C 0 ''90^39 0.140.27 0.37 J i i 0.43 0.37 0.05 0.65 D / 1990+ ZQNV/C 0,330.410.140.2B C.38 -V i 0.47 0.38 0.05 0.90 1) JLUnE/1996t ZOKN/IHPV/C 0.33 0.41 0.140.2B 0.38 OPACITY E 11995ISROiiT1 V/C== js==== 1 110.3410.45 |o!31 * 10.43 R( i t 0.47 10.51 0.36 10.43 0.05 10.05 0.90 10.99 C ! E iTIOS- 1995+ 20NV/C 0.400.480.170.34 0.44 11995n ZON: IK/IK?I v/c i!o. 4010.48H0.1710.34 10.171,'C.IC * 0.57 10.57 0.44 10.17 0.05 10.05 1.06 10.79 := F 1 C 20006RO«TV/C 0.390.300.19 0.36 0.50 12000< !+ ZON1 V/C 110,42 10.35 110.1910.37 110.55 12000 it ZON: IK/IBP ! V/C i!o!2510.35H0.1910.2210.07 H0.05 10.1510.04 10.22 io!o9 : 12010SSRBUT1 V/C ISO. 35 10.36 H0.2510.52 il r jl.Oc 12010 ISROsT i IK/IK?1 V/C "ioIoTiSO.22 10.36 ic!2t10.21 io!24 10.03SO. 23 UC.21 10.21 \ t i i t 0.56 10.61 10.44 10.60 10.35 0.50 10.55 10.37 11.03 10.47 0.05 10.05 10.05 1.13 11.21 SO.Si 10.05 10.05 11.73 10.67 F ! F 1 D S F 1 D fEAR 1990 > < YEAR 1995 > < YEAR 2000 > <— YEAR 2010-~ ESTOK PRISBLE ^ND ASSOCIATES 13-dov-B7 KOVEKENT KLNT KRSL CT SR EL ET EF; HL KT ICUI29BD K = NDF;7* E = EftSTBL = LEFT. S.S. = Nt LOS = LEV * DENOTES rtuiJU,' iNKLaimu LULHL MH.1L1H INTERVAL Ah PEAK HOUR NTERSECTION RANCHO SANTA Ft ROAD I 0 EXIST LAKES 12 0 2 0 1 1 0 11 c PRE- LANEE 1 2 0 2 1 0 0 i EOHET —IK !99C LANES 1 0 0 2 1 2 0 1 0c 0 ucs-- 'ROVEK 1995 LANES I 0 0 21 2 0 1 C 0 :RTS— 2000 LAKES i2 002 2 0 0 0 0 2010 LANES 1 3 01 3 FREE 2 21 1 2 1 IVEKHAIN ROAD EXIST VOL 26 260 10 264 323 8 15 11 23 84 196 <-19 YEAR 1990 VOL 105 225 330 385 345 125 •TRAFF )0 — > ZONE 12 VCL 10 25 25 10 c von <--19 YEAR 1995\jr\, 120 265 3EO445 400 145 ?5 — > ZONE 12 VOL 20 40 40 20 <--20 YEAR 2000 VOL 140 305 440 515 465 170 50— > ZONE 12 VOL 20 40 165 75 YEAR 2C!0 VOL 197 56B 2035 1112 B87 470 751 156 22 732 11 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMS = < ICU SPREADSHEET FILE NAKE EAST/MEST CRITICAL SIMS = BOUND, S - SOUTHBOUND CLEARANCE = Q'JND, It = HESTB3UND T = TKSOUSK, R = RIGHT ICU WLUE = T SIBNftLIZEBEL OF SERVICE LQS = CRITICAL MVEHEKTS SEXIST ! V/C 10.02 !O.C9 10.18 10.10 10.0! 10.02 10.01 io.Oc 10.12 10.27 10.06 10.05 10.35 SEXIST i V/C 10.02 ic!ic 10.01 1C.02 10.0! •!0.04 10.12 10.27 !0.06 10.05 J0.3S 11990 11990 16RGKTH !+ ZON 1 V/C 1 V/C 10.07 H0.07 lio.oo10,10 10.24 ic.22 10.08 iio.00 10.00 10,17 10.22 10.05 10.44 HC.07 10.07 io.oo icl 26 •10.22 10.08 10.00 10. (Ki 10.16 10.22 -VCLUME/CftFACITY S1990 1 1+ ZONE 11995 : 1H/IM'1 1BROKT i V/C 1 V/C •10.07 !O.C7 io'.26 10.11 JO.OB 10.18 10.11 10,05 10.05 10.45 10,34 H0.06 |0.08 ic.oo io'.2B 10.25 1C. 09 •ic.oo SO. 00 10.20 ,'0.25 10.05 10.50 DtTTHC ! 11995 11995 1+ ZON i 1+ ZONE lli/III51 i V/C 1 V/C •10. OE 10.09 io.oo io!30 *'l0.26 10.09 io.oo 10.00 SO. 21 SO. 26 1C. 05 10.52 ilO. OB 10.09 •10.1310.30 10.13 !o.09 i) 10.21 it. 13 10.05 10.39 1A1A1A1A1A1A1A1A f— rjTCTTHC— N / VCfiP 1001 S t VCtC IOCS : 12000IBROKT 1 V/C lie. 09 10.30 io.oo • 10.14 10.32 10.29 10.11 ilC.OC 10.00 10.23 10.29 12000 i 1+ ZON 1 V/C == [;==== H0.09 !O.JO io.oo •10.15 10.43 •10.34 10.11H 10.00 10,00 10.24 10.34 10.05 10.05 S0.57 10.63 1 A / 1 E v_ „ ,, 12000 1+ ZON: SK/IHP 1 V/C:=;===== •10.09 10,10 •io.15 10.43 J0.17 io.ii 10.24 10.17 10.05 10.46 1 A ! . 12010 SBROfc'T 1 V/C := |====r •10.12 10. IS 10.02 H0.35 10.55 10.76 10,10 • 10 47 10.01 10.47 ;6.74 12010 1BROHH i JK/IhF1 V/C *io,12 i10.12 10.02 110.23 i 1 K.S, 10.15 • H0.23 10.10 io! 23 • 10.0! 10.35 10.38 10.05 10.05 ================= 11.28 10,78 1 F 1 C ii!t \ /..VT40 ?r:in— •, PROJECT CARLSBAD LOCAL FACILITY HANSSEREKT PLAN ZOKE 12IKTERVftL Pfi PEAK HGliF:INTERSECTION RSNCH2 SANTA FE RDAD t CLIVENKAHI ROA3 KOVEHENT KLNT KFc SLST SSaE: ER«L KTNR ;ICW29B: <-- EHLAN /____ Hi = N3STHBOi;KD. E - EA5TB3UC, k L = LEFT. T = TH N.E. = N.T SiBW LOS = LEVEL CF E < f'K- 1990 LAKES 1 2 1 * 1 1 5EOHET! — IH 1990 LANES i2 •> 2 "CS—JROVE« 1995 LAKES 1 2 21 1 XS-- 2000 LMES 2 t 2 1 > 2010 LANES =====13 1 3 FREE2 2j 1 j EXIST V3L *>'. 322 10 201 2B3 12 11 4 13 129 65 290 <-19 YEAR 1990 VOL 225 335 235 345 3S5 145 -TRAFF ?0— ) ZCtiE12 VGi 30 10 10 30 ,: vo^ <-19 YEM 29'5 VOL 240 390 270 400 450 S95 MS— •5— > 20KE 12 VOL 45 20 20 45 <-20 YEAR 2000 VQL 300 450 315 460 520 225 ^0 — > 2DKE12 VOL 45 20 65 165 > YEAR 2010VOL 166 911 20 14 825 804 E73 804 233 2£727 2B NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SMS = ICL! SPREASSHEET FILE NAKE EAST/liEST CRITICAL SU«S = S = SCUTKBOOKD CLEARANCE = = KEETBOUE RDL'SK. R = RISKT ICU W.l'E = .IIED ERVSCE LOS = AL HOVEKEKTS !< ! 1EXIST 1 1EXIET Will? 1: v/c ; v/c i 10.01 SO.iO ic.n 10.09 10.01 10.0110. o; 10. 12 10.18 10.01 410.10 *'l0.13 10.09 10.0! io.oi10.01 *,'0.12 10,16 i £ 10.23 1C, 23 1 iO.!2 10.12 1 10.05 10.05 10.40 ,'0.40 1 ; 1 A 1 A 1 VOLUME/CAPACITY ! 11990 1 1990 S199C 1* ZONE 11995 BROKTH 1+ ZONE IK/IK? 1BRO«T V/C 1 V/C ! V/C 1 V/C c'j* VI IV 0,0<: 0.07 0.22 0.24 0.10 0.00 0.00 • 1C. 14 1C. 11 io.oo •10. OB 10.22 *'l0.26 1C. 10<; !0,C3 10.00 •10.14 10.11 •1C. OB 10.22 10,13 10.10 } i •10.16 SO. 12 io.oo •10. OB 10.25t! 10. 2B 10.12 HO.OO 10.00 riH ! lUw 11995 i 1+ ZON 1 V/C iio.u1-0.14 io.oo *10.09 10.26 110.31 10.12 io.oo 10.00 Si 995 !+ ZON: IK/IHP 1 V/C »;o.i4 10.14 »1C.09 10.26 !0.15 10.12 f } : i2ooo IBF.QtiT: v/c «io.!9 10.14 io.oo *!0.10 10.29t; 10.33 10.14 *io.oo 10.00 '2000 1 I* ZON i V/C «io.!910.15 io.oo •;0,!0 10.34 *10.44 10.14«; 10.00 10. OC 12000 ! 1+ ZONE 12010: ;K/;»P iBROtm i V/C ! V/C «!0.1910.15 HO. 10 10.34 10.22 10.14tj 110.10 JO. 29 io.O! JlC.26 10.50 « i 11.05 10.15 »io.47 10.02 12010 IBRDk'T i !*/!HF 1 V/C •10.10 10.19 10.01 •10.17 1 N.S. 10.27 •10.25 10.15 •1C.02 10.23 10.02 0.21 10,22 10.22 10.24 10.25 10.25 10.29 10,29 10.29 10.36 10,27 » t « * ;= 0.24 1C.26 10.13 10.28 10.31 - 10.15 10.33 iC.44 10.22 M.05 ,'0.50 0.05 10.05 0.50 10.53 10.05 ===s=r= 10.40 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10,05 10.57 !0.6! 10.45 10.67 10. 7E 10.56 11.46 A 1 A 1 A ! A 1 B S A <— EXISTINB— > < YEAR 1990 > < YEAR 1995 ! E 1 C < YEAR 2 10.05 s======as 10.82 1 A 1 F 1 D )00 > <--YEAF, 2010- .= -> EST3N RINSLE ANE ASSOCIATES 13-Nov-67 PROJECT: CARLSBAD LOCAL FACILITY KANA6EKENT PLANZDNE: 12 INTERVAL: A«! PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION: RANCH3 SANTA FE ROAD t CALLE BARCELONA H3VEHENT NLNT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER til KT • KR ICUI30BD N = NORTH E = EASTS L = LEFT, K.S. = NO LOS = LEV * DENOTEt EXIST LAKESsrrss i3 01 30 0 0 01 01 <_ — FRE- 1990 LAKES 1 0 1 30 0 0 0i 01 itunt i IK 1990 LANES 3 0 1 c 1 C ,1LS— DROVES 19?5 LANES 1 0j ^0j ^ I 0 >TS- 200C LANES 3 0 3 0 1 J 1 1 0 } 2010 LANES 1 0 1 31 2 1 1 1 i C \ EXIST VOL 495 15 15 415 60 50 <--19 YEAR 1990 VOL 575 15 15 715 70 60 -INHrf >--> ZONE 12 VOL 15 70 220 50 I VUi. <--!<? YEAS 1995 V0u 465 20 20 B25 80 45 NORTH/ < ICL1 SPREADSHEET FILE KftKE EAST BOUND, S = SOUTHBOUND QUND, K = reSTBO'JKD T = THRDUSK, R = RI5HT ' SIGNALIZES EL Of SERVICECRITICAL KOVEKENTE jntb— '5— > ZONE 12 VOL ==== = 35 145 375 B5 <— 20YEAR 2000 VOL 770 25 25 960 95 6P iO — > ZONE 12 VOL 90 145 335 210 YEAR 20 iC VOL B3 10040 0 19463E2 281 C 134c 0 0 OUTK CRITICAL SUHS = KEST CRITICAL SMS = CLEARANCE = ICU VALUE = LOS = ^ i 1EXIST (EXIST IfcVIKP 1 V/C 1 V/C ;0.0010.11 io.o; 10.13 10.04 :o.03 110.00 10.11 10.01 *i0.13 1! lio.04 10.03 111990 i I6RMT 11 V/C 110.00 10.12 io.o;no. is »; »10.04 10.04 11990 < !+ m 1 V/C ilO.Ol10.12 10.01 110. 16 110.04 10.04 -vuLur.L/i 11990 !+ ZONE I IK/iKP 1 V/C nO.C!10.12 'lO.Ol 110.16 10.14 110,00 10.03H0.04 10.04 iO.13 10.13 110.15 10.17 10.17 10.04 !0.04 110.04 10.04 10, IB 10.05 10.05 110.05 10.22 10.22 110.24 1 A 1 A i; A <— EIISTIKB— > < 10.05 10.26 10.05 10,40 ! A 1 A firkin i!995 ISRGKT 1 V/C 110.00 10.14 10.01 110.17 li 10.05 io.04 KHI1U5- 11995 •i 1+ ISH 1 V/C 110.02 10.14 ic.oi 110.21 1! 1J0.05 10.04 11995 1* ZONE E MM? 1 V/C ==S=2===Z 110.02 10.14 10.01 i|0.21 :0.23 110.00 10,05 H0.05 10.04 10.17 10,23 10.23 10.05 10.05 10.27 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.27 10.33 10.55 ! ft 1 A 1 A 12000 ,'BROKT 1 V/C = j == = = = HO. 0010.17 10.02 110.20 »! 10.06 io.cs 1 12000 1 12010 12000 1+ ZONE 12C10 iBROKTK •i 1+ ZONE lUHKf ,'ERSKTH !*/!«? 1 V/C 1 V/C 1 WC 1 V/C HO.C6 10.17 10.C2 110.23 *; lie. 06 10.05 H0.06 10.17 io.02 110.23 10.21 HO.OO 10.13 HO.06 10.05 10.20 10.29 10.29 10.06 10,06 10.26 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.31 10.40 10.60 1 A 1 A 1 ft. H0.05 JO. 2! io.oo 110.49 io.oot| 10.00 H0.05 » 10.21 io.oo 110.41 i 10.24 •10.09 i 10.00 10. OS 10.00no.oo i 10.54 10.46 10.00 10.09 10.05 10.05 10.59 10.60 1 A -YEAR 1990 > < YEAR 1995 > < YEAR 2000 > <-Y£f 1 A R 2010-->' PROJECT: CARLSBAD LOCAL FACILITY KANJaEHENT PLAN ZOC: 12INTERVAL: PK PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION: RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD I CALLE BARCELONA KDVEIiENT KL NT KR SL3TCR EL ET ER KL «T «R \ EJIST LANES 1 3 1 3 1 1 btL'riL i n . ^s / < IKPSOVERENTS ) FRF- 1990 LANES , 3 1 3 1 1 m? LANES 1 3 1 3 X 1 1 11 1°95 >AKES i 3 4 3 1i i 1i "(W> LANESr 3 1 3 t1i 1 1 7010 LANES 1 3 1 31 2 1 iii EXIST VOL 612 60 60 4=6 20 50 ihHrr <--19D0 — ) YEAR 19YO VDL 710 70 70 575 25 60 ZONE 12 VOL 55 255 110 25 L ViiL <-!9YEAR IW, VOL 820eo 80 665 *^ 65 ritS" 5— > ZONE1? VOL 90 410 590 40 <-2000— >VE« 7000 VQ;. 955 95 95 775 30 BC ?ONE17 VOL ?!f| 365 170 !C5 , YFAR 2010 VOL BP 1774 0 0 S5F.3 234 34B 0 9R 0 0 0 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SL'M = EAST/h'EST CRITICAL SUKS = N = Nj^TKBOuN:, S = SCUTHSO'JNS • CLEARANCE - I - LEFT. T = Th'ROuSH, R * SISHT ICU VALUE = S.S. - KuT SIENA-!iED LDS = LEVEL OF SERVICE LOS = EXIST V/C O.M 0.14 0.04 0.1C 0.01 0.03 i » t f O.St 0.0! 0.05 0.24 A <-EX;S VuLUnt/LHf Hul II KH 1 iU3 / 1! i 11990 ,' 1 11995 ! 1 12000 1 !20JOEXIST 111990 11990 1* ZONE S1995 11995 1+ ZONE 12000 12000 !+ ZONE 12010 ISRMTH S/Iffp HBROkTH 1+ ZONE 1N/IHP 1BROKTH 1+ ZOKE IN/ifiP 1BROKTH 1+ ZONE !H/I!f? 16ROSTK IK/IK6 V/C 1! V/C 1 V/C i V/C 1 V/C ! V/C 1 V/C 1 V/C 1 V/C 1 V/C 1 V/C 1 V/C o.« 0.14 0,04 0.10 0,01 0.03 ,'0.00 H0.16 j H0.04 10.12{ I » ; 1 110.021 10.04 .'0.03 H0.16j H0.04 10,17| I <ii HO.C2| 10.04 HO. 03 10,16 j 10.04 HO.17j 10.07no.oo 10.02 H0.02;o,o41 i.'O.OO 10.19 10.05 H0.14jft 1 1 10,02 { I 10.04 io.06 !i;o.o6 ino.oo H0.19 j no, 05 10.22 j * ! 1 nc.02J 10.04 10.19J 10.05no. 22 10.12no.oo 1C. 03no. 02 10.04 10.221 10,06nc.16 t f > ! 1 10.02n 10.05 10.14no. 22I 110.06 10.241 j «ij no. 02 j 10.05 nc.14 10.221 10.06 HO. 24 J 10.11no.oo 10.07 110,02 10.05 I nc.06 10.37J 10,00 110.38; t; j 1 10,00f J 10.00 no.06 i 10.37J 10.00 110.33 i 10.15no. u i 10.00 10.06 IO.C'0no.oo i1 0.1B 110.20 10,20 10,20 10.24 10.28 10. 2E 10.26 10.3E 10.36 10.44 10.39 0.01 110.02 10.02 10,11 iC.02 10.02 10.16 10.02 1C.02 ,'0.16 10.00 10. 11 0.05 110.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10,05 10.05 10.05 10.05 0.24 110.27 10.27 10.36 10.31 10.35 10.49 10.35 10.45 10.59 10.49 10.55 A11A1A1A1A1A1A1A1A1A1A1A -YEAR 1?90 > < YEAR 1995 ) < --YEAR 2000 > <-YEAR 2010-) I JESTON PRIKSLE AND ASSOCIATES 12-Xov-87 PROJECT: CAR! SBfiD LOCAL FACILITY KANASEKENT PLANZONE: 12 INTERVAL: AN PEAK HOiiR INTERSECTION: RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD I LA COSIA AVEN'JE KOVEHENT KLNT NRSLSTSRELET ERKLST ICUI22BO N = NORTHE = EASTSL = LEFT,U.S. = NOLOS = LEVi nrtmTrc EXIST LANES 1 2 0 11112 0120 PRE-1990LAKES 1 01iii 0i2o iEOHET — IK 1990LANES 1 0 11 1 2 0i 20 >ROVEHt 1995LANES 1201 1 11201 20 NTS-- 2000LAKES 2 0 i2i 01 n 0 2010LANES 2 ii ii 2 0120 * EXISTVOL 62418 42t135276 140 <— 19YEAR 1990VOL 70485 495155320 140 -TRAFF!0 — > ZONE 12VOL 50170 15 C VOL <--19YEAR 1995VDL 85 560 575180370 190 ?5 — )ZONE 12VOL 85290 130 35 <~20YEAR 2000 VOL 95650 665210430 220 )0-->ZONE 12VOL 40290 130 20 YEAR 2010VOL 13ES34 225 47160C294374445304239262107 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUHS =<---- ICU SPREADSHEET FILE KARE EAST/KEST CRITICAL SUHS = BDUKD, S = SOUTHBOUND CLEARANCE =OL'Ki, K = KSTBDUNDT = THROUBH, R = RI6HT ICU VALUE =T S16NALIZEDEL OF SERVICE LOS -rctTirai unuciicuTt! = 111!1 1EXIST 11990 11990 1EXIST 1N/1HP 16ROKTH 1+ ZON i V7C ! V/C 1 V/C ! V/C !C,0410.13 ie.oo10.2710.08:o.i?10.04 io.oo10.00 io.31 H0.0410.13 io.oono. 2710. OBno.i710.04 io.oono.oo 10.31 10.17 10.17 10.05 10.05 \ ==============10.53 10.53 1 A 1 A no. 0410.15 io.oono. 31 10.10 •10.2010.05 io.oono.oo 10.35 110.0610.20 10.00•10.34 10.10110.2010.05 io.oono.oo -VOLUKE/11990!+ ZON: H/IHP; v/c no. oe10.20 io.oo110.34 10.10no.20 10.05 io.oono.oo OPACITY :iii995li6RO»T J! V/C n'o.os10.16 io.oo•10.36 10.11 •10.2310.06 io.oono.oo 11995 4 1+ ZON 1 V/C no. n 10,27 io.ooH0.44 10.11 H0.2310.07 io.oono.oo 119951+ ZONE E IK/IKP1 V/C lie. 1110.27 io.ooH0.44 10,11•10.2310.07 10.00 • 10,00 10.42 10.42 110.41 10.55 10.55 10.20 S0.20 10.20 110.23 10.23 10.23 10.05 10.05 ===============.10.40 10.67 10.05 110.05 10.05 10.05 !0.67 I10.69 10.83 10.83 lAlBlBUBlDID 1200016ROKT 1 V/C • io.0610.20 io.oo110.42 10.13no. 27 10.07 io.oo • 10.00 10.46 12000H 1+ ZON 1 V/C •10.0B10.29 io.oo•10.50 10,13•10.27 10.08 10.00no.oo ======== 10.58 120001+ ZONE: IK/IHP 1 V/C== {=====:no. OB10.29 10.00no. 25 10.13 110.2710.06 io.oono.oo 10.33 10.27 10.27 10.27 10.05 10,05 10.05 10. BO 10.90 1C. 65 1 C 1 C 1 B 12C10 1EROKT 1 V/C = }=====•10.0910.33 io.03ni.oo 10. IB•10.2310.23 10.15•10.12 1201016RQKT i 1K/IHP1 V/C==!===== 110.0410.1710.14 10.03 • 10.33 10.1810.23•10.23 • 10.1510.12 11.09 10.37 10.38 10.36 10.05 10.05 11.52 iO.80 < i 1 i i - 1 F 1 C <--EXISTIN6--> < YEAR 1990 > < YEAR 1995 > < YEAR 2000 > <--YEAR 2010-) PROJECT: CARLSBAD LOCAL FACILITY HANASEKENT PLAN ZONE: 12 INTERVAL: PK PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD I LA COSTA AVENUE KBVEKENT NLNT NRSLST SR ELET ER«LHTHR ICUS22BC EXISTLAKES 1 2 111 12 1 2 1 PRE-1990LANES 12 111 J 12 < CO SP EOKETF 1990LANES 1 1 11 2 1 2 iEABSH N = NORTHBOUND, E = SQUTHBOUE = EASTBOUNB, K = KESTBOUNDL = LEFT, T = THR3U6H, R = R N.s. = NOT EIBNSLIZEDLOS = LEVEL OF SERVICE i DENOTES CRITICAL KOVEHENTS ICS —ROVEH; 1995LANES 12 Ii 4 1 2 2000LfiNES *) 1 21 12 1 i }> 2010LANES 2 3 11 31 12 12 EXISTVOL 177 446 376 204175 95 <--19YEAR1990VOL 205 505 435 235 200 110 TRAFF,0— > ZONE12VOL =====•JCii_-B5 200 55 C VOLi <--195 YEAR1995 VOL = = ===240600 505275230 130 NORTH/:ET FILE KA«E -EAST W SHT ntS—5— > ZONE VOL 40145 320 9C <--20 YEAR2000VOL = = ===275695 585320270 150 )0— >ZONE12Vfli. =====20145 320 45 YEAR 2010VDL 359-12722976611454062E942B166 315 619 222 QiiTH CRITICAL SUNS = KEST CRITICAL SUHS = CLEARANCE = ICU VALUE = LOS = i EX 1STi V/C;===== 10.1110.14 10.0010.2410.13iO.ll10.03 ic.oo 10.00 1EXIST 11990 11990 Iti/lBF 1EROKTH 1+ ZON1 V/C 1 WC 1 V/C 110.1110.14 10.00H0.2410.13H0.ll10.03 io.oo110.00 1 10.35 10.35 10.11 10.11 10.05 10.05 io.si :c,5i ! A 1 A no. 1310.16 io.ot>no. 2710.15no.13 10.03 io.oo110.00 110,1410.16 io.ooH0.4010.15H0.13JO. 05 io.ooUO.OO i -VOLUME/CAPACITY11990 11 1+ ZONE 11995I H/IHP 11BROKT! V/C !! V/C H0.1410.18 io.ooU0.4010.15H0.1310.05 io.ooUO.OO 10.40 10.54 10.54 10,13 10.13 10.13 10.05 10.05 ===============,'0.58 10.72 10.05 !0,?2 1 A 1 C 1 C ======================== H0.1510,19 io.oo•10.3210.17H0.1410.04 io.oo110.00 11995 ^ 1+ ZONi V/C lic.ie 10.23 io.ooH0.52 10.17110.14 10.07 io.ooUO.OO 10,47 10.70 11995It ZONE: I«/I«P1 V/C iio.1810.23 io.ooHC.52 10.17 H0.1410.07 10.00ijO.OO =========10.70 10.14 10.14 10.14 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.44 10.89 10.89 IBID i D:======== 12000IBROk'T1 V/C = j=====H0.17 10.22 10.00H0.37 10.20 H0.1710.05 io.oo110.00 10.54 1200C < 1+ ZONJ_V/C iio.1810.24 io.ooH0.57 10.20H0.1710.06 io.oo•10.00 10.75 120001+ ZONE: IK/INP! V/C:= [====== H0.1810.24 io.oo.H0.26 10.20 H0.1710.06 io.ooilO.OO ========510.46 10.17 10.17 10.17 10.05 10.05 10.05 ;0.76 !0.97 !0.4B 1 C ======= 1 E 1 B 1201016ROBT1 V/C HC.2210.49 ic.04 HC.7210.25H0.1610.19 iO.20H0.26 12010IBROkiT•>. IfcVIHP1 V/C;r j ===== H0.il10.2710.1910.04HO.24 10.25 i!0.!B10.19 J0.20110.26 10.94 10.35 10.44 10.44 10.05 10.05 !!.43 10.84 1 F 1 D -> < i < t £= ("EXIETINS") < YEAR 1990 > < YEAR 1995 > < YEAR 2000 > <--YEAR 2010-) :ESTON PRINBLE AND ASSOCIATES PROJECT: CARLSBAD LOCAL FACILITY HANASEHENT PLftNZONE: 12INTERVAL: AK PEAK HOURINTERSECTION: RANCHO SANTA FE RQA5 t MELRDSE AVENUE SBVEKENT KLNT NR SLCT SR EL ET ER KL KT ICUI21BO N = KOSTH E = EASTS L = LEFT. N.S. = NC LOS = LEV » DENOTES EXIST LANES 11 0 01 FREE 1 0 1 0 0 0 PRE- 1995 LANES 1 0 01 1 2 1 0 0 0 EOKET 1990LANES 1ic C1 1 2 11 0 0 0 ••ROVEN 1995 LAKES 1 ! 0 011 11 00 0 2000 LAKES 4 2 0 0 2 1 2 1 4 0 01 2010 LANES 2 0 1 3 FREE 1,5 1.5 FREE 1 t EXIST VOL 58 653 701 101 165 102 YEAR 1990VOL 65 755 615 115 190 120 •TRAFFIC VOL ZONE 12 VOL 170 55 YEAR 1995 VOL 80 880 940 135 220 135 ZONE 12VOL 290 130 YEAR 2000VOL ===== 90 1015 1090155 255 160 ZONE 12VOL 40 250 HO 20 YEAR 2C10 VOL 1395 1192 C 0 1235 16 274 0 1226 0 0 0 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SMS = < ICO SPREADSHEET FILE NAKE EAST/KEST CRITICAL SUBS = SOUND, S = SOUTHBOUND CLEARANCE = 3UND, k' = KSTBDUKD T = THRQUBH, R = RIGHT ICU VALUE = T SIBNALIZEDEL OF SERVICE LOS = CRITICAL KOVEKEKTS EXIST V/C ===== 0.04 0.41 0.44 N.S. C.10 0.06 lEXIST WHIP1 V/C :======= H0.04 10.41 110,44 10.06 *!0.05 10.0010.06 » l l l 0.4B 10.46 0.10 10.05 0.05 10.05 0.63 10.58 E 1 A 1990 GROKT V/C 0.04 0.47 0.5! N.S. 0.12 0.08 11990 i 1+ ZON 1 V/C 110.04 10.56 110.54 1 N.S, 10.08 t! 11990 !+ ZON: IK/IMP 1 V/C 110,04 10.58 1 110.54 10.07 1,'O.Oi 10.00 10.08 ; :A := i 0.55 10.56 10.58 C.12 10.12 10.04 0.05 10.05 10.05 ====================== 0.72 10.75 10.49 C 1 C 1 E 'ACITY 1995BROKT V/C 0.05 0.55 0.59 N.S. 0.14 0.08 R < i i t 0.64 0.14 0.05 O.E3 D 1995 + ZON V/C 0.05 0.73 0.67 N.S. 0,14 0.08 11995 1+ ZON: IK/INF 1 V/C 10.05 H0.73 t'l 10.67 10.05 H0.07 10.00 10. OE 1 i 0.73 10.73 0.14 10.07 0.05 10.05 0.92 10.E5 E 1 D 2000 ESOfc'T V/C 0.06 0.63 0.6B N.S. 0.16 0.10 ^ i i i 0.74 0.16 0.05 0.95 E <-EnSTlNB-> < YEAR 1990 > < YEAR 1995 > <..\ 12000 12000 1+ ZONE: + ZONE ,'H/IHP i V/C 1 V/C 1 o.oe 0.79 0.75 N.S. 0.16 0.11 HO.OE 10. 40 11C.3E 10,10 HO.OB 10.00 10.11 io.oo i i 0.83 10.46 1 0.16 10.06 1 0.05 10.05 1 1.04 10.59 1 F 1 A 1 fEAR 2000 > 2010 BROk'TV/C O.B7 0,75 0.77 N.S. 0.17 0.77 12010 16RDH7Hi Ifc'/INP 1 V/C H0.44 10.25 10.00H0.26 1 N.S. ioioo 1 N.E. 10.00HO.OO 10.00 i i i 1.44 10.70 0.17 10.1! 0.05 10.05 1.84 10.66 F 1 D <~YEAR 2010-)" PROJECT: CARLSBSD LCCSL FACILITY KAN65EHENT PLAN ZONE: 12!NTERVAl: PH PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION: RANCKO SANTA FE ROAS t KELROSE AVENUE KOVEHENT NLk'Tm SL ST SS ELET ER KLKTm :CUt2iBO N = NSRTi-E = EfeETEL • LEFT, K.E. = NOLOS = LEV i DENOTES EXISTLANES 1 1 1FREE1 1 SEOHET PRE-1990LANES 1 1 17 1 1 1990 LANES 1 1 < 1 J •ICS--JSOVE« 1995.AHES 11 1 2I1 2000LAKES ^ 2| 2ii 20JOLAKES 23 1 ^FREE 1.51.5FREE1 11 < EXIST VOL 85 760 530 135 115 50 / 19 YEAR 1990 VOL 100 BBC 615 155 135 55 •TRAFF (0— > ZONE 12 VOL 85 200 C VOLl<--19! YEAR 1995VOL "ili" 1020 715180 155 65 KES—5— > ZONE 12 VOL 145 320 <--20 YEAR 2000VOL 135 11 80 S3C210 160 •7C )0— >ZONE12 VOL " 20125 275 45 > YEAF. 2010vc: 1453 1206' 0012801 1240153500 0 NORTK/SBLiTH CRITICA. SUBS =< ICU SPREADSHEET FILE NAHE EAST/NEST CRITICAL SO«S = BSL'ffi, S = SOJTHBDUNC CLEARANCE =aUND, H = HESTBOUNDT = THROUGH, R = RISHT ICU VALUE =T SIGNALIZEDEL OF SERVICE LOS = CRITICAL WJVEHENTS SEXIST1 V/C 10.C510. 4B 10.331 N.S.10.07 10.03 i i 10.48 10.07 10.05 \ =======10.60 1 A {-EIIS1 EXIST 11990 H/IHF IBRO'iiTKV/C 1 V/C 0.05 0.4B 0.33 0.08 0.04C.OO0.03 10.06110.55 10.38 1 N.S. 110.08 10.03 »! t 0.48 10.55 0.04 10. OE 0,05 10.05 0.57 10.66 A IN6-- 1 E VQLUHE/CA 119901990 1+ ZONE + ZONE !K/IHPV/C ! V/C 0.060.60 0.51 N.S. 0.08 C.03 10.06 H0.40 10.5110.10 •10.04 10.0010.03 ! < f 0.40 10.40 C.OB 10.04 0.05 10.05 0.73 10.49 C ! B 5ACITY RATIOS1 11995 1995 11995 1+ ZON SSOiiTH 1+ ZONE SK/1KFV/C 1 V/C 1 V/C 0,07 0.64 0.45U.S.0.10 0.04 10.07 H0.73 10.65 1 N.S. tlO.10 10.04 1 10.07 110.73 10.65 10.11 H0.05 10,001C. 04 1 1 i t 0.64 10,73 10.73 0.10 10.10 10.05 0.05 10.05 10.05 0.79 10. BE 1C.B3 c > < YEAR 1990 > < 1 E=====£=: -YEAR 1 i I! 2000 SROKTV/C C.OB 0.74 C.52N.S.0.11 0.05 12000 \ 1+ ZON1 V/C 10.10HO.B:i tj 10.69 1 N.S. 110. 11 JO.OE : 120001» ZON E 1H/IHP| V/C io.io H0.41 10.35 10.13 HO.Ofc10.0010.08 10.00 f ^ i 0.74 10.E2 10.45 0.11 10.11 10.06 0.05 10.05 10.05 0.90 10.98 10.56 C 1 E 1 A 2010SROKTV/C 0.91 0.75 O.BON.S. 0.02 0.96 12010IBRDiiTt IK/IN?1 V/C lie, 45 10.25 10.00H0.27 1 N.S. HO.C5 10.001 N.S.10.00 10.00 -> H i i i 1.71 10.72 o.oe 10.05 0.05 10.05 1.84 10.B2 F 1 D ?95 > < YEAR 2000 > <— VEAR 2010-) r r r TGK PRINBLE ftND ASSOCIATES ll-Kov-87 PRDJECT:CARLSBAD LOCAL FACILITY KANA6EKENT PLANZONE; 12 INTERVAL:flf, PEAK H0:js IKTERSEtTJDIl.-SAHCK SANTA FE BDfil t KELROSE AVENUE MOVEMENT S£S=£5iS NL NT KR SL ST SR EL El ER KL KT KR 0 N = KDBTH E = EAETBI -UFT. N.E. = N* IDS = LEV « DEMOTES 1990 LAKES 0 0)i 2 i 1 0 0 0 <_ — 1991 LANES I1 0 01 2 1 1 0 0 0 EDKETF — 1« 1992 LAKES 5 l0011 2 ! 1 0 0 0 ICS--savEiit 1993 LANES 11 0 0 J i 1j 0f, 0 K7S- 1954 LAKES 1 1 0 1 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 — >> 1995 LANES 1 1 0 011 2 1 1 0 0 0 < — <--19 VEAR 1991 VOL 70 760 835 1 ?^ 195 120 1 — ) ZONE 12 VOL 235 75 <--19 YEAR 1992 VOL 70 600 B60 125 205 125 TRA"F 2— > ZONE VOL 290 130 C VQL <-19 YEAR 1993 VOL 75 825 89C 130 210 130 JKES-- ?3— > ZONE 12 VOL 290 13C <-!9 YEAR 1994 VOL 75 850 915 130 2!5 135 '4 — > ZONE12 VOL 290 13C <-19 YEAR 1995 VOL 80 880 940 135 220 135 '5— > YEAS 2010 VOL 290 130 tiORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUKS = < 10! SPREADSHEET FILE SAKE EAST/BEST CRITICAL SDKS = BDara. S = SOUTH JBUM CLEARANCE = DUKI', H = KSTBOUKD T = TKROUSH. R = RISHT ICU VALUE = T SISNALSZED EL OF SERVICE LOS = CRITICAL MVEKECTS X 1 1 11991 1 ! 11991 H ISIS. !!992 11991 1+ ZONE IK/IMP iBSOSTH 1 V/C 1 V/C ! V/C 1 V/C JO, 04 10.49 1C. 52 J0.06 10.00 * ,'0,04 10.63 *;o.57 10.08 •10. Oc 10.0010.08 *! 10.56 ,'<U3 10.06 10.06 10.05 10.05 10.67 !0,74 ! B r====s : c !0.04 *!0.63 I0.57 10.08 •10.06 10.001C. OB t; ;o.o4 t!C. 50 tl 10.54 10.08 •10.06 10.00 10.06 <! i t i 10.43 10.56 10.06 10.06 10.05 10.05 =======i=====cs=r=: 10.74 10.69 1 C 1 B VOLUNE/CAPftCm 11992 ! 1992 !+ ZONE 11993 < ZONE IK/IMF SBROKTt V/C 1 V/C 1 V/C 0.04 0.6E 0.62 O.OS 0.06 0.00 O.OS 10.04 J1C.6S t; 10.62 10.06 •10.06 10,00jo.oe i 10.05 •10.52 < 1 10.56 10.08 •10.07 10.00 iO.OB 1 1 11993 1 1 11994 ! 1 • 11993 1+ ZONE ,'!994 11994 1+ ZONE !!995 11995 < 1+ ZONE IK/IBP I6ROKTH 1+ ZONE U/IKF ISROKTH 1+ ZON 1 V/C 1 V/C i V/C 1 V/C ! V/C 1 V/C 1 V/C H0.05 10.70 • 10.64 10.08 •10.07 10.00 10.08 : 10.05 *!0.?0 »; 10.64 10.08 •IC.07 10.00 10.0B 1 10.05 *!0.53 i! 10.5? 10.06 <!0.0? 10.00 IO.OB ! *!0,05 10.71 1 *!0.65 10.06 »10.0? 10.00 10. OS ! 10.05 «1C.7I 10.65 10.06 •10.0? 10.00 10.08 1 10.05 «10.55 f < 10.59 10.0S •10.0? 10.00 10.08 1 *10.05 10.73 •10.67 iO.OS •10.07 10.00 10. OB ! 11995H ZOS : ifc/IH? 1 V/C •10.05 10.73 »!0.67 10.05 «10.07 10. 0010. oe ! 0.68 1C. IB ,'0.61 (0.70 10.70 10.62 10.71 10.71 10.64 10.73 10.73 •> = t j « ") 0.06 10.06 10.07 10.07 10.07 10.07 10.07 10.0? 10.0? 10.07 10.07 0.05 ==- = =; 0.79 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.79 10.73 10.62 10.62 10.74 10. B3 !C.B3 10.76 10.85 10,85 C1C1C1D1D1C1D1D1C —vran tot!'. , , ^ /., , vri» inn? •, / vrsu io<n •> ( vrss 1001... •> / — - 1 D 1 D£===r==== j ======= -vrac- <&c* — — \ PROJECT;CARLSBAD LOCAL FACILITY HANA8EMEKT PLAN ZONE; 12 IKTERWLiPK PEAK HOUR INTERSECT ION: RANCH SASTft FE ROAD (. NELROSE AVENUE MCVEHENT NT NR SL STcc EL ET ER KLKT 12191-95; N = NOTr E * EASTB L= LEFT,M.S. = N:LOS = LEV * DENOTES 1996 LAKES 1 1 199! LANES i",i. 1 3EOMET 1992 LANES 1 j 2 11 'R3VER 1993 LANES 1 2 1 1 1994 LANES 1 1 1 1 1995 LANES 1 1 1 2 1 1 <-19 YEAR 1991 VOL 105905 635 140 14C 55 n— > ZONE 12 VOL 115 270 <--19 YEAR 1992 VOL 930 165 145 60 '2— > ZQNE 12 VOL 145 320 C VDL <--!9[ YEAR 1993 VOL 110960 675 170 150 60 jncs 3 — > ZONE 12 VDL 145 320 <— 19 YEAR 1994 VOL 110 990 695 175 155 65 '4 — > ZONE 12 VOL 145 32C <--19 YEAR 1995 VOL =_•£== 115 1020 715 180 155 65 !5— > YEAR 2010 VOL 145 32C NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMS = < ICO SPREADSHEET FILE HAS- EAET/KEST CRITICAL SUMS = BC'JKt, S - SCI'THBCJKB CLEARANCE = CiiS, li = XEETEOUNt; T = THROUBK, R = .RISHT . . . . ICU VALUE = T SIC-WLIZED EL OF SERVICE LOS = CRITICAL HuVEMENTS <99! V/C bToT 0.57 0.4C 0.04 C.OO 11991 1+ ZON 1 V/C ~!o7oT *10.6« it), 5? 10.10 •10.04 10,00 (0.03 tl 1199I i! 1 1+ ZONE 11992 11992 E 1K/IRP 116ROKTH 1+ ZON 1 V/C 11 V/C 1 V/C 10.07 •10.64 10.57 10.10 tlO.04 10.00 10.03 i 10.07 •10.58 •I 10.41 10.10 tlO.05 10.00:o,04 1 10.0? •10.6? t! 10.61 10.10 •10.05 10.00 JO. 04 1 -VOLUKE/CAFACITY 11992 ! 1+ ZONE 11993 I IK/IMF IBROtiT 1 V/C 1 V/C •10.07 J0.67 » 10.61 10.10 •10.05 10.00 10.04 i •10.0?10.60 •10.42 10.11 •10.05 10.00 J0.04 1 1 „ — __ _____ _ _— — _ V '• 11993 1 1 11994 1 ! ,'1995 11993 !+ ZONE 11994 11994 1+ ZONE 11995 11995 1-t ZOS i 1+ ZONE IH/IKP ISROKTH 1+ ZONE IK/IMP I6ROKTK 1+ ZONE ID/IMP i V/C 1 V/C 1 V/C 1 V/C i V/C 1 V/C 1 V/C 1 V/C 10.07 *!0,69 10.62 10.11 • 10.05 iC.OO 10.04 1 •10.07 10.69 •10.62 1C. 11 •10.05 10.00 J0.04 1 •10.07 10.62 tlO.4310.11 •10.05 10.00 10.04 I i 10.0? •10.711 10.43 10.11 •10.05 10.00 10.04 1 10.07 tl 10.63 !C.l! •10.05 10.00 10.04 1 10.0?•10.64 tl 10.45 10,11 •10.05 10.00 10.04 1 10.07 •10.73 tl 10.65 1C.11 tlO.05 IO.OC 10.04 • !0.010.73 •10.45 10.11 •10.05 10.00 10.04 •: 0.57 10.64 10.64 10. 56 10.68 10.68 10.60 10.69 10.69 1C. 62 10.71 10.71 10.64 10.73 10.73 ; i 0.04 10.04 10,04 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10,05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10,05 0.05 10.05 10.C5 10.05 10.05 10.05 .'0.05 10.05 10.65 ,'0.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 10.05 0.66 10.73 JO. 73 10.68 10.76 10.78 10.70 10.79 10.79 10.72 10.81 10.81 10.74 10.83 B i C 1 C / VCiD 1001 1 B ! C S / VC60 1 10.05 "o.B3 1 C 1 B 1 C ! C i C 1 D 1 D 1 C 1 B 1 D >tn \ / vcao 1001 \ i vcfiD 1001 '> t VCAD 100=: % k'ESTDS PR1NBLE.AKS fiSSOClATES 12-NQv-B? THE WILLIAM N. HOFMAN COMPANY Planning Project Management Environmental November 17, 1987 Lance Schulte City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Zone 11 and 12 - Sewer, Water and Drainage Exhibits and Tables. Dear Lance: Attached are additional Exhibits and Tables for the Zone 11 and 12 Local Facility Management Plans. The attached letter from Cheryl Cunningham indicates where these items should be placed in the text. Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely , Bill Hofman cc: Phil Carter Mike Howes Steve Jantz 6994 El Camino Real • Suite 208-G • Carlsbad • CA 92009 • (619) 438-1465 ZONE 6 \-.—O- ' 1 ;. x—N i jf PropoTed, 12)Db\. 5'x6' • /Detention,Basin ^^Box Culvert CX^j^'^ "•"«* 5*x8 jr^Box Culvert 2'x4' Box Culvert (6 36" RCP '" 30* bWl £30"'CMP Drainage Basin Boundary Exist. Subdivision Boundary — Exist. Pipe Natural Drainage Course \-/ Exist. Inlet D Exist. Outlet Proposed Pipe \./ Proposed Inlet [] Proposed Outlet GROWTH _ _ _ _ Exhibit 16 MANAGEMENT • EXISTING & PROPOSED.MAJQfl1 DjRAJNAGE FAClUTfcS^ PROGRAM Zone 12 • ^^-^^-^-v-efcp • 1 ::--r >^T " **J^ K J ^N3'"3'"" t >\ •.; c \aox Cuivert Z \ V~"' • .*•**»- I /^ I *- / I / ^ 1 / PHASE B Vx V% v r««««*W*«***»*«^*"""" I / j / '' ": -:•-''•;• | 1 (EXISTING) ® An" RH? „_..:::::.- :. N I / ? •</^ ; J") \ sJ^2" RCP\£/ •V3bi. 30" RCP v oonc. energy Oissipafor / .^LEGENDg^ ^ "' -gi^ /--^ ••»« Drainage Phasing Boundary ,jf ^>30'RCPi4^ Exist subdivision Boundary x J?^>^ -,-,-- /x~\ — v Jfso" RCP-K /\i ~. „• -, ~ , .'^N w'\ / 2x4 Sox Culvert : 8 ) — jr-36" RC? ^ ^/ © .- ,^X' ^^'^WMraFWfeSiy^ajft s *eao*C! ::~^:s 'viSi'.* "" * * -^* f^p ^f* 5/^^'rayp*" s a*" x-' bbt 24" RCP ,<r\ /^\ ^^ O;TY OF SNC^AS l£j ^ Z>//"JK XN GROWTH/\/C/A 200- 4W 1 MANAGEMENT • DRAINAGE ffWMa • PROGRAM Exist. Pipe Natural Drainage Course fcxist. Inlet Exist. Outlet Proposed Pipe Proposed inlet Proposed Outlet Exhibit 15 PHASING BOUNDARIES Zone 12 ZONE 6 ZONE 6 F. • I is" " **'" :" ""*""*"" ^ X \ / s \ iBCOStRRBflCrtEQ.NOTE: Zone 12 is located antirsly within the Olivsnhain Municipal Water San/ice District- \/ ¥ • -V LEGEND *** Existing Trunk Sewer Lines c o o o Proposed Trunk Sewer Lines (12"Diameter and larger) Drainage Basin Boundary Drainage Basin Designation per Leucadia County Water District Pfenning Study. Sept. 1985 Direction of Natural Drainage GROWTH MANAGEMENT W/tfg ^^PROGRAM Exhibit 20 ^ SEWER SERVICE FACILITIES WITHIN ZONE Zone 12 ENCINA WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY LEGEND •—• Existing Major Trunk Sewer Existing Force Main Existing Pump Station 4s%. V^f^n^-.V v., ^.a.— >,-;•-I, . .?• •• ., - -;{-v V,:' •' 'fgAKtajlAO- ''.'.-'l'.-yL; \ f/ J-— /- ~- ^i ' *\^C^<SZ<*~•— .A _ -v,;'^.'' i i£^^TfN^^'^-^v &LJ^TO<Pl^P^^g^^^_/STATIC^ ^k^Tfe^^^S yv .t*Mi53-A^>^ -! - ^: -"— : MJJ.'T; %'tj)^^ -j" v,;-""-^--^'^ S PUMPING STATION Qy- •-V&^ s^^1=^:^^uV'tf^r ^^fr L.-j~-M , W^^ ' %-^-J1 5 / - -- ^ ;W!5V \ ^^>^r|^j;;£<r--% I'' K / NO 5CAL= GROWTH EXHIBITMANAGEMENT • Major Sewer Fasilities Outside of Zone PROGRAM . Zone .12 • •••• Sewer Phasing Boundaries Trunk Sewer Lines Proposed Trunk Sewer Lines (12'Diarneter and larger) Drainage Sasin Boundary Direction of Natural Drainage MOTE: Zone 12 is located antiraly within the Otivenhatfi Municipal Watsr Sarvics District- GROWTH Exhibit 20 200- «xr MANAGEMENT SEWER PHASING BOUNDARIES PROGRAM Zons 12 ZONE 6 GATYf LEGEND Existing Transmission Mains Existing Reservoirs STORAGE FACILITIES Existing water transmission facilities Proposed water transmission facilities NOTE: Zone 12 is located entirely within the Ofivenhain Municipal Water Service District. iBCQStRRBflCHCQ. GROWTH Exhibit 21 MANAGEMENT PROGRAM WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM Zone 12 Existing watsr transmission facilities Proposed water 'rsrsmission rsciS Phasing Boundaries CSTY OF ENGNITA3 GROWTH Exhibit 21 aw «iff MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 'WATER PHASING BOUNDARIES ^ Zone 12 OMWD12 79S0A TABLE TONE 12 YEARLY BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS AND WATER DEMANDS OLIVENHAIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT 11-5-87 YEAR 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 BUILDOUT CUMULATIVE . CUMULATIVE CUMULATIVE YEARLY RESIDENT NON-RESID NON-RESID WATER DEMAND UNITS UNITS ACRES ACRES < MGD ) 589 0 436 382 296 364 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 589 589 1025 1407 1703 2067 2067 2067 2067 2067 2067 2067 2067 2067 2067 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 THE AVERAGE WATER DEMAND ASSUMES AN AVERAGE UNIT FLOW OF 555 MGD/DU FOR RESIDENTIAL AND 2500 MGD/ACRE FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL.'