The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About3813; TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES; SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS; 2009-03-05b CONSULTING March 5, 2009 Mr. Marshall Plantz, P.E. City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: Supplemental Carlsbad TIF 'Program Traffic Analysis Dear Mr. Plantz: JN 55-100583.001 RBF Consulting has been retained by the City of Carlsbad to prepare a traffic assessment of several improvement projects included in the current 2008 Traffic Impact Fee Update - Project List. Specifically, this evaluation will address the following TIF segment and intersection projects: Segments: S-2 Carlsbad Boulevard 600 feet north of Cannon Road to Manzano Drive S-4 Carlsbad Village Drive from Pontiac Drive to Victoria Avenue S76 Cannon Road Reach 4 S-7 Carlsbad Boulevard from Carlsbad-Oceanside City Boundary to State Street * S-9 Poinsettia Lane from Paseo Del Norte to Batiquitos Lane Intersections: 1-8 El Camino Real / Carlsbad Village Drive 1-9 El Camino Real/Cannon Road I-Il El Camino Real / Tamarack Avenue The evaluation and findings of the identified TIF program segments and intersections are discussed in the following sections. Assessment of Impacts Related to the Removal of Cannon Road Reach 4 Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants submitted a letter dated September11, 2008 that included a brief evaluation of the need for the Cannon Road extension (Reach 4). The analysis was based on a review of the year 2030 daily traffic forecast reported in a preliminary version of SANDAG's Combined North County Series 11 Model. The Series 11 traffic forecast model was in the development stages and had not yet been approved by all jurisdictions in North County for use in traffic analyses. Fehr & Peers' assessment concluded that if Cannon Road Reach 4 is not constructed then TIF program intersection improvements along El Camino Real at Carlsbad Village Drive, Cannon Road, and Tamarack Avenue (1-8,1-9, and I-il) may not be needed. PLANNING M DESIGN • CONSTRUCTION 5050 Avenida Encinas, Suite 260, Carlsbad, California 92008 • 760.476.9193 • FAX 760.476.9198 Offices located throughout California, Arizona & Nevada 0 waw.RBF.coni Marshall Plantz JN: 55-100583.001 March 5, 2009 Page 2 RBF reviewed the Cannon Reach 4 Traffic Impact Analysis prepred by RBF for the City in 2006 and researched the impacts associated with the "No Build" scenario. Mitigation needs associated with the No Build scenario were compared to 'With Project" 2-lane and 4-lane alternatives and a matrix was created that illustrates the principle • differences, between the alternatives. The findings of this comparison are presented in Table 1. The matrix shows the intersections that would have mitigation needs without Cannon Road Reach 4 and also with Cannon Road Reach 4 as a 4-lane segment. The intersection impacts for the 2-lane Cannon Road Reach 4 scenario is basically the same as for the 4-lane scenario and therefore is not included. It is important to note that the 2006 Cannon Road Reach 4 Traffic Impact Analysis used the SANDAG Series 10 Combined North County Model as the source for 2030 traffic forecast data. A comparison of the Series 10 and Series 11 forecast data for 2030 shows that the Series 10 traffic forecast data is generally higher than the current version of Series 11 for streets within the study area. Table I Horizon Year 2030 Deficient Intersection Operations Without vs. With Cannon Reach 4 Extnsinn Study Intersection Jurisdiction Horizon Year 2030 HCM Deficient Intersections Without 'Cannon Reach 4 With Cannon Reach 4 (4 lane) A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 1 Plaza Dr.! SR-78 EB Ramps Oceanside X 2 College Blvd. ! Plaza Dr; Oceanside X X 3 College Blvd. /Lake Dr. Oceanside X 4 Cannon Rd. I Paseo Del Norte Carlsbad ' X X 5 El Camino Real I Tamarack Ave. Carlsbad X X 6 El Camino Real I College Blvd. Carlsbad X 7 Palomar Airport Rd. I 'College Blvd. 'Carlsbad X X 8 Palomar Airport Rd. / El Camino Real Carlsbad X X 9 Lake Blvd. / Sky Haven Ln.* Oceanside X 10 Lake Blvd. / Emerald Dr. * ' Oceanside X X 11 Cannon Rd. I Shadowridge Dr. * Oceanside X X 12 Melrose Dr. I Buena Vista Dr. Vista X X 13 Melrose Dr. I Longhorn Dr. Vista X X 14 Melrose Dr. I Palomar Airport Rd. Carlsbad X X 15 Palomar Airport Rd. / Business Park Dr. Vista X X 16 Sycamore Ave. I SR-78 EB Ramps Vista X X (X) Peak hour is forecast to operate at deficient level of service. * Unsignalized intersection. Installation of a traffic signal at these intersections would mitigate the identified deficient operating conditions. Marshall Plantz JN: 55-100583.001 March 5,2009 Page 3 As shown in Table 1, the analysis results indicate that the "without Cannon Reach 4 extension" scenario results in 14 intersections becoming Level of Service deficient and would therefore require some form of improvement as mitigation. In comparison, the "with Cannon Reach 4 scenario" resulted in 12 intersections becoming Level of Service (LOS) deficient. Ten of the impacted intersections are common to both scenarios and nine of the intersections require identical mitigation. The mitigation needed at the intersection of Palomar Airport Road/El Camino Real is the same for both scenarios with the exception of an additional "right turn overlap" signal modification that is needed in the- westbound direction for the "with Cannon Reach 4" scenario. In all cases the identified mitigation measures improve the peak hour levels of service to Level of Service D or better. In addition to these ten impacted intersections that are common to both scenarios, the "without Cannon Reach 4 extension" scenario results in four additional LOS deficient intersections. Three of these intersections are in Oceanside and one is in Carlsbad (Melrose Drive/Palomar Airport Road). In comparison, the "with Cannon Reach 4 scenario" results in only two additional LOS deficient intersections that are located 'either on Cannon Road (at Shadówridge Drive) or nearby at an intersection that would serve as access to Cannon Road (El Camino Real/College Boulevard). The Cannon Road Reach 4 analysis concluded that the extension of Cannon Road would serve both local and regional travel needs. Without Cannon Road Reach 4, the un-served travel demand is re- routed to other available east-west travel corridors such as: SR 78 between 1-5 and Melrose Drive (4,000 to 6,000 ADT added); College Boulevard between Cannon Road and SR 78 (approx. 5,500 ADT added); Lake Boulevard between College Boulevard and Cannon Road (approx. 2,800 ADT added); Faraday Avenue between El Camino Real and Melrose Drive (4,000 to 5,000 ADT.added); Palomar Airport Road between College Boulevard and Melrose Drive (approx. 2,600 ADT added) Poinsettia Lane between El Camino Real and Melrose Drive (approx. 2,100 ADT added); and , Melrose Drive between Cannon Road and Palomar Airport Road (4,000 to 8,000 ADT). It is important to note that the Cannon Road Reach 4 traffic impact analysis did not find substantial differences in the peak period traffic forecasts at the two intersections along El Camino Real at Carlsbad Village Drive, and Tamarack Avenue (1-8 and I-Il). The calculated Level of Service was the same at both intersections whether or not Cannon Road was extended. As a result, we conclude that the elimination of the Cannon Reach 4 extension would not result in a change in TIF projects 1-8 and I-li. For obvious reasons, traffic volume projections for the intersection of El Camino Real and Cannon Road were higher with the Cannon Road extension and the Level of Service was slightly worse (Level of Service 0 instead of Level of Service C) with the extension of Cannon Road. Therefore the removal of the Cannon Reach 4 extension could result in a slight change in the definition of TIE improvement 1-9. Marshall Plantz JN: 55-100583.001 March 5, 2009 Page 4 Evaluation of Lane Requirements for Carlsbad Village Drive TIF Segment (S-4) The Fehr & Peers analysis documented in the September 11, 2008 letter questioned the need for widening Carlsbad Village Drive between. Pontiac Drive and Chatham Road as planned in the 2008 Traffic Impact Fee Update - Project List (identified as project S-4). The analysis was based on a review of the year 2030 daily traffic forecast reported in a preliminary version of SANDAG's Combined North County Series 11 Model. RBF has investigated the current conditions on this segment of Carlsbad Village Drive including the physical geometry of the existing roadway and historic traffic counts. Exhibit la and lb shows the general configuration of Carlsbad Village Drive from Pontiac Drive to Chatham Road. As shown, the 4-lane section at Pontiac tapers to a 2-lane section with a varied width. The initial taper reduces the road with to approximately 31 feet and then reduces again to approximately 27 feet northwest of Victoria Avenue. As the roadway approaches Victoria Avenue, it begins to widen to allow space for a westbound left turn lane into Victoria Avenue. The roadway tapers out again to a 4-lane cross- section east of Chatham Road. This segment of Carlsbad Village Drive traverses a hillside with residential development located on the high side (southwest of the road) and open space on the low side (northeast of the road). There is no direct property access along Carlsbad Village Drive from Pontiac Drive to Chatham Road and the posted regulatory speed limit is 40 mph (35 mph warning signs are posted on the curves near Pontiac Drive and Victoria Avenue). According to information provided by the City, the undeveloped property on the northeast side of Carlsbad Village Drive is expected to remain as open space in the future and therefore no new access will likely be needed along this segment. The configuration of the existing intersections on Carlsbad. Village Drive at Pontiac Drive, Victoria Avenue, and Chatham Road is depicted in Exhibits 2, 3, and 4 respectively. As can be seen, all of the intersections provide a separate left turn lane for traffic on Carlsbad Village Drive. Historic traffic count data dating back to 1997 indicates that traffic volumes on Carlsbad village Drive' between Pontiac Drive and Victoria Avenue increased from 5,300 vpd to a high of 8,400 vpd in 2004 and have since reduced to 5,600 vpd in 2008. Peak hour directional traffic volumes peak at 231 vehicles per hour (vph) in the westbound direction' and 314 vph in the eastbound direction. This is well within the standard capacity of a typical 2-lane roadway with no fronting property. The typical daily capacity for this type of two-lane roadway is 7,500 vpd for Level of Service (LOS) C and 9,000 vpd for LOS D. . Both the SANDAG Series 10 and Series 11 2030 traffic forecast shows traffic volumes on this segment of Carlsbad Village Drive that are lower than the existing volume. The Series 10 model shows 4,600 vpd and Series 11 shows 3,300 vpd. Based on our experience using the SANDAG model, if the 2030 forecast produces traffic volumes that are the same or less than existing traffic volumes, we typically apply a nominal 10 percent growth assumption. This equates to little less than one half of one percent growth in traffic per year to the year 2030. This is also the approximate Marshall Plantz JN: 55-100583.001 March 5, 2009 Page 5 growth that has occurred on this segment of Carlsbad Village Drive since 1997. At this growth rate the 2030 traffic projection is approximately 6,200 vpd. The estimated highest peak hour volume in one direction is 350 vph. Based on this adjusted traffic forecast, a 2-lane roadway with no direct property access would have sufficient capacity to continue to operate at Level of Service C or better. The Fehr & Peers assessment suggested that this segment of Carlsbad Village Drive could remain as 2-lane even if Man-on Road is not extended between El Camino Real and College Boulevard. A review of the Series 10 year 2030-traffic forecast indicate that Man-on Road would serve between 12,700 and 16,900 daily vehicle trips. The current Series 11 model shows Man-on Road serving between 10,800 and 15,100 daily vehicle trips. Based on the forecast daily traffic generated by the existing and future land uses along Man-on Road and the daily traffic volume on Rancho Del Oro Drive (including the planned interchange) north of Man-on Road, it was estimated from the Series 10 model that through traffic remaining on Man-on Road between El Camino Real and College Boulevard is approximately 4,700 vpd. A significant amount of the forecast traffic on Man-on Road is due to the extension of Rancho Del Oro Drive south to Man-on Road, which would re-route to either El Camino Real or College Boulevard if the Man-on Road extension is not constructed. If Man-on Road is not extended between El Camino Real and College Boulevard, then the through traffic that used Man-on Road (4,700 vpd) would re-route to other parallel east-west roadways including Vista Way, SR-78, and Carlsbad Village Drive. Due to the close proximity of the Man-on Road extension to SR-78, it is reasonable to expect that the majority of traffic would re-route to SR- 78 between El Camino Real and College Boulevard. Since Vista Way closely parallels SR-78 and provides a shorter, higher-speed alternate route than Carlsbad Village Drive, it is also expected that a substantially higher percentage of the remaining traffic would re-route to Vista Way rather than Carlsbad Village Drive. It is highly probable that if the Man-on Road extension is not constructed between El Camino Real and College Boulevard, forecast 2030 daily traffic on Carlsbad Village Drive would not increase by more than 1,000 vpd. Based on the most conservative estimate of 2030 forecast daily traffic on this segment of Carlsbad Village (6,200 vpd) with the Man-on Road extension, an increase of 1,000 vpd without the Man-on Road extension would still leave sufficient capacity for this segment of Carlsbad Village Drive to continue operating at LOS D or better (9,000 vpd LOS D capacity for a two-lane Collector). As an alternative to widening to 4-lane Major Arterial standards, TIF project S-4 could be redefined to improve the segment of Carlsbad Village Drive from Pontiac Drive to Chatham Road while maintaining the necessary capacity. Alternative improvements could include widening the segment to provide two 12-foot travel lanes, two 5-foot bike lanes, and a 6-foot median to provide a safer separation of the opposing travel lanes. This would provide a roadway width of 40 feet, which is more consistent with City Circulation Element standard for a two-lane Collector street. Marshall Plàntz JN: 55-100583.001 March 5, 2009 Page 6 Evaluation of Lane Requirements for Carlsbad Boulevard TIF Segments (S-2 and S-7) RBF has reviewed the widening needs for Carlsbad Boulevard from the Carlsbad-Oceanside City Boundary to State Street (project S-2).and Carlsbad Boulevard from approximately 600 feet north of Cannon Road to Manzano Drive (project S-7) as planned in the City of Carlsbad 2008 TIE Update - Project List. Future improvement needs have been evaluated by reviewing and comparing the 2030 traffic forecast data for Carlsbad Boulevard TIE segments S-2 and S-7 based on the previous (Series 10) and current (Series 11) SANDAG Combined North County Subarea Model. TIF Segment S-2 (Catisbad Boulevard from Catisbad-Oceanside Boundary to State Street) Carlsbad Boulevard from the Carlsbad-Oceanside City Boundary to State Street is currently built with two northbound lanes and one southbound lane, with bike lanes provided in each direction of travel. Currently no curbs or sidewalks are constructed along this segment. Carlsbad Boulevard from the Carlsbad-Oceanside City Boundary to State Street has a paved cross-section ranging from approximately 45 feet at the Buena Vista Lagoon bridge crossing near the Carlsbad-Oceanside boundary to approximately 54 feet just north of State Street. The City of Carlsbad General Plan Circulation Element classifies this segment of Carlsbad Boulevard as a four-lane Major Arterial, but its current three-lane cross-section, which is more similar to a Secondary Arterial, is not built as a typical Circulation Element roadway. Most of this segment traverses the Buena Vista Lagoon and no driveway or street access points are provided; therefore, its primary function is to carry traffic across the Buena Vista Lagoon between the cities of Oceanside and Carlsbad. The junction of Carlsbad Boulevard and State Street is a non- controlled intersection with a left-turn lane provided for southbound traffic on Carlsbad Boulevard to access State Street. South of State Street, Carlsbad Boulevard is built with one through lane in each direction of travel. Northbound Carlsbad Boulevard and State Street, which are both built with a single northbound through lane south of the junction, merge to a single roadway with two through lanes provided north of State Street, allowing northbound traffic on both roadways to merge into this segment without yielding. North of the Carlsbad-Oceanside boundary, Carlsbad Boulevard transitions to South Coast Highway 101 and maintains the three-lane configuration (two NB and one SB lane) to just south of Vista Way, where the roadway tapers out to a four-lane cross-section. Historic traffic count data dating back to 1997 indicates that traffic volumes on Carlsbad Boulevard from the Carlsbad-Oceanside City Boundary to State Street increased from 20,483 vehicles per day (vpd) to a high of 22,389 vpd in 2000, and since reduced to 18,281 vpd in 2007. Virtually all of the historical count data were collected during the peak summer months. Marshall Plantz JN: 55-100583.001 March 5, 2009 Page 7 Based on the SANTEC/ITE Traffic Impact Study Guidelines, four-lane Secondary Arterials can carry a maximum of 25,000 vehicles per day to maintain Level of Service D or better. A three-lane Secondary Arterial (not a Circulation Element roadway) is estimated to carry a maximum of 18,750 vpd at LOS D, based on a daily LOS D capacity of 6,250 vpd per lane. Because of the imbalance in the segment lane configuration, the northbound direction has a higher capacity than the southbound direction. The two northbound lanes have a combined daily LOS D capacity of 12,500 vpd, while the single southbound lane has a daily LOS D capacity of 6,250 vpd. The most recent traffic count data collected for this segment (2007) shows 8,902 vpd for the northbound traffic, and 9,379 vpd for southbound traffic. Evaluation of this segment based on direction of travel shows there is reserve capacity for the northbound direction since the existing daily northbound traffic is below the LOS D capacity threshold, but the existing daily traffic in the southbound direction exceeds the maximum roadway capacity to maintain LOS D orbetter. The most recent traffic count data collected during the peak hours for the intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard / State Street shows that during the morning peak hour, 381 vehicles were counted traveling northbound and, 925 southbound vehicles were counted on the segment of Carlsbad Boulevard north of State Street. During the evening peak hour, 1,204 northbound vehicles were counted, and 826 vehicles were counted traveling southbound. Exhibit 10-7 in Chapter 10 (Urban Street Concepts) of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 provides roadway segment LOS thresholds during the peak hours based on street classifications ranging from Classes I to IV. Carlsbad Boulevard from the Carlsbad-Oceanside City Boundary to State Street can be classified as either a Class II or Class Ill roadway. The peak hour LOS E capacity for a Class II roadway is 890 vehicles per hour per lane (vphpl), and a Class Ill roadway has a peak hour LOS E capacity of 850 vphpl. Based on the HCM 2000 peak hour segment LOS thresholds for both Class II and Class Ill roadways, the single southbound lane of this segment currently operates at LOS F during the a.m. peak hour. During the p.m. peak hour, the southbound lane operates at LOS D as a Class II roadway, and at LOS E as a Class Ill roadway; The two northbound lanes currently operate at LOS D or better during both the morning and evening peak hours. -, The SANDAG Series 10 2030 traffic forecast shows that Carlsbad Boulevard from the Carlsbad- Oceanside City Boundary to State Street would carry 23,900 vpd. The new SANDAG Series 11 2030 traffic forecast is substantially lower at 17,600 vpd, which is lower than the existing (2007) daily traffic volume on this segment. As discussed earlier in this memo, if the 2030 SANDAG model forecast produces traffic volumes that are the same or less than existing traffic volumes, we typically apply a nominal 10 percent growth assumption. This equatOs to a little less than one half of one percent growth in traffic per year to the year 2030. At this growth rate the adjusted Series 11 2030 traffic projection is approximately 20,100 .vpd. Using either Series 10 or Series 1.1 2030 traffic forecast, the daily traffic volumes on Carlsbad Boulevard from the Carlsbad-Oceanside City Boundary to State Street exceed the maximum daily capacity (18,750 vpd) of the existing roadway to maintain LOS D or better. Marshall Plantz JN: 55-100583.001 March 5, 2009 Page 8 Since either 2030 daily traffic projection for this segment is below the maximum daily capacity at LOS D for a four-lane Secondary Arterial (25,000 vpd), RBF suggests that Carlsbad Boulevard from the Carlsbad-Oceanside City Boundary to State Street could be improved as a four-lane Secondary Arterial. The curb-to-curb cross-section for.a Secondary Arterial is 64 feet, which typically includes a painted center median. Due to the absence of driveways and side streets along this segment, a center median would not be needed. Baed on our evaluation, Carlsbad Boulevard from the Carlsbad-Oceanside City Boundary to State Street should be constructed with four 12-foot travel lanes, two 5-foot bike lanes, and a 6-foot raised median. This suggested cross-section would require a width of 64 feet, which is substantially less than the typical curb-to-curb cross-section required for a four-lane Major Arterial (82 feet). Two northbound lanes would be maintained with this improvement, and a second southbound lane would be provided. TIF Segment S-7 (Carlsbad Boulevard from 600 feet north of Cannon Road to Manzano Drive) Carlsbad Boulevard from 600 feet north of Cannon Road to Manzano Drive is currently built with one through lane and a bike lane in each direction of travel, with left-turn lanes provided for all side street access. A painted continuous two-way left-turn lane (1WLTL) is provided between Cannon Road and Cerezo Drive. Between Cerezo Drive and Manzano Drive no left-turn refuge is provided. Currently no curbs or sidewalks are constructed along most of this segment. Carlsbad Boulevard from 600 feet north of Cannon Road to Cannon Road has a paved cross-section ranging from approximately 65 feet at the north end to approximately 51 feet just north of Cannon Road. Between Cannon Road and Manzano Drive, Carlsbad Boulevard has a paved street width ranging from 47 feet to 50 feet. On-street parallel parking is provided along much of the southbound shoulder of this road segment South of Cerezo Drive, vehicles park off the paved street on a dirt shoulder. The on- street parking south of Cerezo Drive is heavily utilized by beachgoers and surfers, particularly during the summer months. The City of Carlsbad General Plan Circulation Element classifies this segment of Carlsbad Boulevard as a four-lane Major Arterial, but it is currently built as a two-lane Collector. Two signalized intersections are located along this segment of Carlsbad Boulevard, at Cannon Road and at Cerezo Drive. Approximately 600 feet north of Cannon Road, Carlsbad Boulevard tapers out to a four-lane Major Arterial cross-section. South of Manzano Drive, Carlsbad Boulevard becomes integrated with Palomar Airport Road as a grade-separated interchange, and south of Palomar Airport Road, Carlsbad Boulevard is built as a four-lane Major Arterial with a variable median width. The most recent traffic count data on Carlsbad Boulevard just north of Cannon Road were collected in July 2006, which shows a peak weekday count of 24,765 vpd. Historic traffic count data dating back to 1997 indicates that traffic volumes on Carlsbad Boulevard from Cannon Road to Manzano Drive increased from 14,608 vpd to a high of 21,829 in 2005, and has since reduced to 15,595 in 2008. Virtually all of the historical count data were collected during the peak summer months. A newer count on this segment was collected in October 2008, which showed 15,485 vpd, indicating that a significant summer traffic peak did not seem to occur in 2008. Marshall Plantz JN: 55-100583.001 March 5, 2009 Page Based on the SANTEC/ITE Traffic Impact Study Guidelines, a two-lane Collector (with TWLTL) can carry a maximum of 13,000 vehicles per day to maintain Level of Service D or better; therefore, the current daily traffic volumes on the segments of Carlsbad Boulevard from 600 feet north of Cannon Road to Manzano Drive exceed the typical daily LOS D capacity threshold for a two-lane Collector. The SANDAG Series 10 2030 traffic forecast shows that Carlsbad Boulevard north of Cannon Road is projected to carry 34,600 vpd. The new SANDAG Series 11 2030 traffic forecast is substantially lower, with 19,200 vpd projected on Carlsbad Boulevard north of Cannon Road. The Series 112030 traffic forecast for Carlsbad Boulevard north of Cannon Road is lower than the historical count data collected in 2006. Applying a nominal 10 percent growth assumption, that equates to a little less than one half of one percent growth in traffic per year between 2006 and 2030. The adjusted Series 11 2030 traffic projection is approximately 27,200 vpd. Using either Series 10 or Series 11 2030 traffic forecast, the daily traffic volumes on Carlsbad Boulevard just north of Cannon Road exceed the maximum daily capacity to maintain LOS D or better based on the existing segment cross-section. Between Cannon Road and Manzano Drive, Carlsbad Boulevard is projected to carry 26,200 vpd based on the SANDAG Series 10 traffic forecast. The new SANDAG Series 11 2030 traffic forecast is substantially lower, with 19,800 vpd projected on Carlsbad Boulevard from Cannon Road to Manzano Drive. Using either Series 10 or Series 112030 traffic forecast, the daily traffic volumes on Carlsbad Boulevard from Cannon Road to Manzano Drive exceed the maximum daily capacity to maintain LOS D or better based on the existing segment cross-section. Based on both the existing and 2030 forecast daily traffic volumes for this segment, RBF suggests that Carlsbad Boulevard north of Cannon Road be improved to a four-lane Major Arterial cross- section to match the existing cross-section located to the north of this segment. Between Cannon Road and Cerezo Drive, single-family homes abut both sides of Carlsbad Boulevard, with most of these properties taking direct driveway access from Carlsbad Boulevard. Widening this segment of Carlsbad Boulevard would require eliminating the existing on-street parking along the southbound side, and acquiring additional right-of-way from each residential property along the northbound side of the street segment. Although the Series 10 2030 daily traffic forecast for Carlsbad Boulevard from Cannon Road to Manzano Drive exceeds the maximum daily capacity at LOS D for a four-lane Secondary Arterial (25,000 vpd), RBF suggests that Carlsbad Boulevard from Cannon Road to Manzano Drive be constructed as a Modified Major Arterial with a reduced median width. It is our professional judgment that the Series 10 traffic forecast may have overstated the improvement needs for Carlsbad Boulevard, while the new Series 11 forecast appears to be underestimating the 2030 daily traffic volumes on Carlsbad Boulevard. Marshall Plantz JN: 55-100583.001 March 5, 2009 Page 10 Due to the extensive right-of-way impacts that would likely occur by improving this segment of Carlsbad Boulevard, constructing it as a Modified Major Arterial with a reduced median width would require less right-of-way to be taken from the residential properties to provide four travel lanes with the needed additional traffic capacity. A Major Arterial typically has an 82-foot cross-section, which provides four 12-foot travel lanes, two 8-foot bike lanes, and one 18-foot raised median. The modified cross section would reduce the median width to a maximum of 12 feet which would result in a maximum curb to curb width of 76 feet. From Cerezo Drive to Manzano Drive, the current paved width of Carlsbad Boulevard is approximately 48 to 50 feet, with single-family homes taking driveway access from the northbound side of Carlsbad Boulevard. The southbound side of this segment is fronted by open space, and on- street parking is provided on a dirt shoulder. Since there are no developed properties along the southbound side of this segment of Carlsbad Boulevard, widening can be limited to the southbound direction to avoid right-of-way acquisition from the residential properties located along northbound Carlsbad Boulevard. On-street parking could be provided along the southbound side of this segment. Evaluation of Lane Requirements for Poinsettia Lane TIF Segment (S-9) RBF has reviewed the existing and future capacity needs along Poinsettia Lane between Paseo Del Norte and Batiquitos Drive. The analysis also included an evaluation of existing and future traffic operations at the heavily utilized Poinsettia Lane intersections at the 1-5 Interchange Ramps and at Paseo Del Norte. It is these three intersections that effectively define the number of travel lanes that are needed on Poinsettia Lane. The existing traffic volume on Poinsettia Lane between Paseo Del Norte and Batiquitos Drive is 24,560 vpd. The peak hour directional traffic flows reach almost 1,100 vph in the westbound direction and 1,200 vph in the eastbound direction. The SANDAG Series 10 Year 2030 traffic forecast shows 35,800 vpd and the current Series 11 forecast shows a slightly higher volume of 37,000 vpd. Poinsettia Lane currently has four through lanes on the I-S over crossing and five through lanes (3 westbound and 2 eastbound) between the 1-5 NB Ramps and Paseo Del Norte. One of the three westbound lanes becomes a left turn lane on the bridge as it approaches the southbound 1-5 Ramps. The cross-section reduces to four through lanes between Paseo Del Norte and Batiquitos Drive. Afield review of morning and evening peak hour operating conditions along Poinsettia Lane revealed some congestion in the westbound direction during the evening peak hour between Paseo Del Norte and the 1-5 NB Ramps. Since one of the two westbound through lanes on Poinsettia Lane becomes a mandatory left turn lane (e.g. drop lane) at the I-S SB Ramps, motorists who want to continue west on Poinsettia Lane begin to merge right immediately after the Paseo Del Norte intersection. Those Marshall Plantz JN: 55-100583.001 March 5, 2009 Page 11 westbound motorists who want to access northbound 1-5 must change lanes twice to get into the right turn bay that serves the northbound 1-5 On-ramp. This movement often conflicts with the southbound right turn movement from Paseo. Del Norte since the southbound motorists who are turning right consider the added westbound lane as a free lane to turn into and do so with little regard to westbound through traffic. The combination of lane change movements over a relatively short distance causes motorists to slow abruptly and this in turn results in congestion. Field observations noted several 'close calls" at the Pase Del Norte intersection as westbound motorists changed lanes through the intersection and encountered southbound vehicles turning right onto Poinsettia Lane. The recommended solution to this problem is to realign the Poinsettia Lane through lanes at the westbound approach so that they align with the number 2 and number 3 lanes between Paseo Del Norte and the I-S NB Ramps. RBF prepared several alternative conceptual designs that would accomplish the lane realignment and reviewed them with City staff before deciding on the preferred design alternative that is depicted in Exhibit 5a. Based on either the SANDAG Series 10 or Series 11 2030 traffic forecasts, daily traffic volumes on Poinsettia Lane between Paseo Del Norte and Batiquitos Drive exceed the typical maximum daily capacity of 35,000 vpd to maintain LOS D or better based on the existing four-lane Major Arterial cross-section. It is our suggestion that as an alternative to widening this segment of Poinsettia Lane to six lanes, eastbound and westbound right-turn lanes as shown in Exhibit 5b could be provided at the intersection with Batiquitos Drive to increase the capacity of the two through lanes on Poinsettia Lane. These improvements would supplement the recommended realignment of the westbound travel lanes on Poinsettia Lane at Paseo Del Norte to provide for the long-range travel needs on this segment. Existing and Year 2030 p.m. peak hour intersection operations were analyzed for the two Poinsettia Lane I 1-5 ramp intersections and Poinsettia Lane / Paseo Del Norte, using the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) operation -methodology for signalized intersections to determine the operating Levels of Service (LOS) of the study intersections. The SYNCHRO software package was used to evaluate the intersections using the HCM methodology. The Year 2030 peak hour intersection turning movement volumes were post-processed using the daily traffic volumes from the most recent SANDAG Series 11 Combined North County Subarea model. The evaluation of the Year 2030 peak hour operations includes the recommended realignment of the two westbound lanes on Poinsettia Lane east of Paseo Del Norte. The level of service analysis results are presented in Table 2. Detailed HCM calculation sheets are contained in the technical appendices following this report. • Marshall Plantz JN: 55-100583.001 March 5, 2009 Page 12 Table 2 Poinsettia Lane Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Existing and Year 2030 Conditions Intersection Existing P.M. Peak Hour Conditions Year 2030 P.M. Peak Hour Conditions' Delay (1) LOS Delay LOS Poinsettia Lane! Paseo Del Norte 17.7 B 33.8 , C Poinsettia Lane /I-S NB Ramps 24.0 C 24.5 ' C Poinsettia Lane! I-S SB Ramps , 27.6 C 27.3 C Note.'' Seconds or delay per Vehicle. As shown in Table 2, the three intersections along Poinsettia Lane that were evaluated are currently operating at LOS C or better, and by 2030 would continue to operate at LOS C or better. Existing signal timing sheets show that the three intersections are currently uncoordinated. By 2030, it is assumed that the three intersections would be coordinated with an optimized cycle length. As a result of the cycle length optimization, the average p.m. peak hour delay at Poinsettia Lane / 1-5 Southbound Ramps actually decreases from existing conditions to Year 2030 even though the forecast traffic volumes would have increased. Since the recommended realignment does not affect the number of approach lanes at the intersection the HCM-based level of service analysis results do not change. As an alternative means of evaluating the improvement to traffic flow offered by the realignment of the westbound through lanes, the Poinsettia Lane segment from Paseo Del Norte to the 1-5 Southbound Ramps was also evaluated under Year 2030 conditions through observations of simulated traffic operations conducted using the SimTraffic application included in the SYNCHRO software package. The Synchro-based SimTraffic application allows the user to observe the manner in which traffic flows between consecutive intersections. These observations revealed that the realignment of the westbound lanes approaching Paseo Del Norte eliminates the weaving and abrupt lane changes with westbound traffic on Poinsettia Lane between Paseo Del Norte and the 1-5 Northbound Ramps, thus improving the westbound traffic flow through the intersections. Observations of simulated traffic operations without the recommended realignment dearly show that the existing lane configuration on westbound Poinsettia Lane results in excessive lane changes in the westbound lanes between Paseo Del Norte and the 1-5 ramp intersections. We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this important project. If you have any questions pertaining to the analysis results summarized in this letter, please call me at (760) 476-9193.' Sincerely, a4i 0 J64W Robert Davis Senior Associate Transportation Services SECTION A-A LOCATION, MAP CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR EXISTING GEOMETRY PF- - PLANNINO • OtSIUN • CDNtrRUCTION EXHIBIT la CONSULTING 7Q83 F '' •'• "/! _______ I CARLSB -AG I I•_ _ N _ 4Yp41 r , a •_ii* I 1 SECTION B-B EXHIBIT lb • LOCATION MAP CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR EXISTING GEOMETRY PLANNINC • -810H U CONUTRUCTIDN F U. CONSULTING 7OA783 • FAA iae,a • mIn I CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR. / PUNTIAC DR, I EXISTING GEOMETRY PF I - pLANNINa • DES,... • CONSTRUCTION 5O A'.CA eicwa aflE 280 cM80AA C EXHIBIT 2 CONSULTING 7847&A3 • FAX 780B98 • VICTORIA AVE. CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR / VICTORIA AVE EXISTING GEOMETRY EXHIBIT 3 PF '—""' U OUSION • CONSlaUCYtON . == CONSULTING 78CA783 . FAX 76OVC.8 - -H -I 70 xl H:\POATA\55100583\CADD\CARLSBADVILLAGEDWC NMINILU 3/2/09 4.34 pm ow~l 1w 14 W 0 • 1V BATIQUITOS DR. OD -- ____ __ •1 ___ I p I POINSETTIA LANE / BATIOUITOS DR. INTERSECTION RECOMMENDED LANE GEOMETRY EXHIBIT 5b TECHNICAL APPENDIX SYNCHRO HCM Analysis Worksheets - Poinsettia Lane Intersections Existing Conditions Supplemental TlF Analysis Existing PM Peak Hour Conditions 1: Poinsettia Lane & Paseo Del Norte 2/3/2009 Iaeaihow(vpnpl) . iUU 10U 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 19001900 1900 1900 LaneWidth 12 12 12 10 12 16 12 14 14 12 16 16 Total Lost time (s) 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 Lane UhI Factor 0 97 0 95 1 00 1 00 0 95 1 00 1 00 1 00 A.; 00 Fit 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.86 Fitrolected 0 95 1 00 1 00 0 95 1 00 0 95 1 00 0 P 95 1 00 Said. Flow(prot) 34333539 1583 1652 3502 1770 1813 1770 1816 Fit Permitted 095in1 00 1 00 095 1 00 036 1 00 0 74 77 1813 100 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3539 1583 1652 3502 6 1381 1816 Peak hour factor PHF 0 92 092 092 092 0 92 092 092 092 092 0 92 0 92 0 92 Adj. Flow (vph) 410 1225 50 10 1177 88 34 10 14 117 21 287 RlORReduchon (vph) 0 0 15 0 5 0 0 12 0 0 248 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 410 11.225 35 10 1260 0 34 12 0 117 60 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 5t=2 1 6 8 ... Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, C(s) 13.1 54.4 . .. 544 .9 44.2 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 EffecUy Greer, g cs) 13 1 544 544 11 0 I 0 'ii 0 11 0 Actuated gfC Ratio ..0,16 0.67 0.67 0.04 0.54 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 C1earanceTimes 42 46 46 42 46 46 46 46 46 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 LaneGpCap(vpl) 550 2356 1054 59 1895 91 244 186 245 V/S Ratio Prot c0.112 0.35 0.01 01 0.03 v!s Ratio Perm 002 005 cO 08 v/c Ratio 0.75 0.52 0.03 07 067 0.37 0.05 0.63 0.24 Uniform Delay dl 32 7 70 47 2 1 32 2 30 8 334 31 6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 48 08 0 1 5 3 09 00 4 0 2 Delay (s) 37.5 7.8 4.7 38.715.3 33.2 30.8 38.1 31.8 Leveo1Service 0 A A D B C C C Approach Delay (s). 149 1.5 32.2 33.6 HCM Volume to Capacity raUo 0.67 Actuat cyte-Lngtt.(s -' &t7 -$urmQtlosthme s) ' ,1a4 Intersection Capad U.Wization 79.8%IOU Level of Service .0 AnaIyis P&iod (nin 1.5 c Critical Lane Group POINSETTIA LANE ANALYSIS 1/12/2009 EXISTING CONDITIONS Synchro 7- Report %user_name% Page 1 Supplemental hF Analysis Existing PM Peak Hour Conditions 2: Poinsettia Lane & Northbound Ramps 2/3/2009 -. 4- 4\ f • 4' Ideal FlowvphpI) 190.1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost bme çs) 4 2 46 46 4 6 4 6 46 Lane Uffi. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.88 Frt 100 1 00 1 00 0 85 1 00 085 Fit Protected 0.95 1..00 1.00 1.00 0•95 • 1.00 Satd Flow (pcot) 1770 3539 5085 1583 1770 2787 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Sàtd.:Flôw .::i.77.o :•3539 ..:::.:... ......•.:. :5085.. .l:583. :.: .:r 1770.:: .2781 •. : :. :. :. Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj Flow (vph) 225 985 0 0 1176 322 235 0 700 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 180 0 0 238 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Perm Perm 5 . Permitted Phases 6 8 . 8 ActiatedGreen(s 1208: 655 -0'5 405 1211?2 ... = Effective Green, g (s) 20.8 65.5 40.5 40.5 17.2 17.2 Act6jtiIç. aiio o .4- Q44: 0 0 Clearance Time (s) •4.2 4.6 4.6 4,6 4.6 4.6 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 401 2522 241 698 331 522 v/s Ratio Prot cC) 13 0 28 cC) 23 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 0.13 c0.17 v/c Ratio 056 039 052 020 0 71 088 Uniform Delay, dl 31.5 5.3 18.7 15.8 35.0 36.4 Progression Factor 1 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 100 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 5 ..0.9 - 07• 5.6 15.9 Delay(s) 2 57 196 164 406 523 Level of Service C A B B D D Approach Delay(s) 107 18 9 493 0 0 Approach LOS B B D A 11CM Average c9P Y........ of Service p... ................... .....................24....cMJLevol,. HctaIurto Capa&ty rab - osi ..... - - - - Actuated Cycle L (s)..1.......91 . Sum of lost time (s.L - ........................13.4 .. lnrs ion. Cipact9Ubui2athn - 58 9°J - lC1tteveI f$ennce Analysis Period (mm) 15 n.- POINSETTIA LANE ANALYSIS 1/1212009 EXISTING CONDITIONS . - . Synchro 7- Report %user..name% . . Page 2 Supplemental TIF Analysis Existing PM Peak Hour Conditions 3: Poinsettia Lane & Southbound Ramps 2/3/2009 tt Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 TotaILosttims) 46 42 46 - - 46 -46 46 Lane UI. Factor . 0•95 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 Fr,t 100 08S ioo too - - 'I-00 tOO 085 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 100 095 0.95 100 SatdFIqw(prot - -353 -1583. 3433 539 - . 1681 1686 -, At Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 • 0.950.95 .1.00 -1681- 168& 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0,92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 MM"M 416 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 68 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 160 Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm Permitted Phases 2 4 4 AcuatedGeii()z- . 5 --24a -5.9 f59-159 Effective Green g (s) 52.0 520 24.3 80.5 159 15 9 15.9 Actuatedg!GRâti -............... : T,.Q19 - 015 Clearance Time (s) 46 46 42 46 46 46 46 - -- - - PPP .............................174378.790 2698 253 254 238 v/s Ratio Perm .' . 0.05 , , . 120.02 -01' 111'028 '0't2 Uniform Delay, dl 175 144 38.5 38 4-3.5 435 38.8 Incremental Delay, d2 09 03 6 1 03 18 1 185 0.1 Level of Service' B B D A E AprachIa) - "-178,. - "' - - 2- - -b; Approach LOS B C . A .................................................... MIN HCMAverageControl Delay 27.6 HCM Level of Service . C Actuated Cycle Length (s) 1056 Sum of lost time (s) 134 Period (nun) . 15 POINSETTIA LANE ANALYSIS 1/1212009 EXISTING CONDITIONS . Synchro 7- Report %user_name% . . Page 3 SYNCHRO HCM Analysis Worksheets Poinsettia Lane Intersections Year 2030 Conditions HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Year 2030 PM Peak Hour LOS 1: Poinsettia Lane & Paseo Del Norte . . 3/5/2009 t ili-IOW(VPhPi) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Vidth 12 12 12 10 12 16 12 14 14 12 16 16 Iota! Lost time (s) 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 Lane Uti! Factor 097 095 1 00 100 095 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.86 Fit Protected upi-0 95 1 00 '100 0 95 1 00 095 1 00. 095 1 00 Satd..Flow(prot) 3433 3539 1583 1652 3502 1770. 1818 1770 1820 •• Fit Permitted 095 1 00 1 00 0 95 '100 014 1 00 072 1 00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3539 1583 1652 3502 266 1818 1346 1820 Peak hourfactor PHF 092 092 092 092 092 092 092 092 092 092 092 092 Flow (vph) 520 1553 74 23 1439 108 65 23 30 164 35 401 RTOR Reduclion (vph) 0 0 25 0 5 0 0 22 0 0 240 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 520 1553 49 23 1542 0 65 31 () 14 1R fl Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 .. Actuated Green, f .50.6 ..................6652.1 :28.028.0 §0 0 .. Effhnsl 665 - .66 57j 506 0 'i-.. - 280 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.60 ' 0.60 0.02 0.46 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 creaiac) 4 6:42i -46: - -. Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 vls Ratio Prot c0.15 0.44 . 0.01 cO.44 0.02 - .. Y03 i- ; v/c Ratio 0.93 0.73 0.05 0.72 0.96 0.96 0.07 0.48 0.42 e1i=- t --28T- 4-3t1 48 $41- Prog ression Factor 1.08 0.56 0.391.00 1.00 1.00 toO too oo . Delay(s) 65,5 10.1 3.5 101.6 43.0 132.7 31.1 35.2 34.5 eS -- B: " -A-F'- -F -- :. C Or PPPP!!aY_( 23.3 .439 87.1 34.7 HçM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.95 1100 lntersecon Capacity Utilization 97.0% ICU Level of Service F MalysiPerrd (mTn - - -kS r - - - -. . c Critical Lane Group . . 1: Poinsettia Lane & Paseo Del Norte Synchro 7- Report POINSEfrIA LANE ANALYSIS . . Page 1 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Year 2030 PM Peak Hour LOS 2: Poinsettia Lane & 1-5 Northbound Ramps . 3/5/2009 !ealI9WP.flPl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 otal Lost lime (s 42 46 4 6 46 46 46 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.88 it 1 00 1 00 1 00 085 1 00 085 Fit Protected ...0 ..190 1.00 1.90 095 .1:90 Satd Ffow (prot) 1770 3539 85 1583 1770 2787 Fit Permitted . 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd Flow (perm) 1770 3539 0. 85 1583 1770 2787 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 092 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 AdjFrow(vph) 335 1205 0 0 149t 478 290 0 866 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 190 0 0 100 0 0 0 Turn Type . ,....., Prot Perm Perm Perm ., F ff. . . . :a -.-- it .-: Permitted Phases 6 8 8 WAJ Ad 318- Effective Green, g() 23.5........69.0 .....41.3 31.8 31.8 uatgJRaIw : 063 T38 038 . 02.9 O29 ... - Clearance Time (s) 4.2 4.6 . 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 378 2220 1909 594 512 806 v/s Rabo Prof cO 19 034 cO 29 v/s Ratio Perm 0.18 0.16 cO.28 vlcRaho 089 054 07 049 057 095 Uniform Delay, dl...42.0 11.6 .. 30.4 2 33.2 38.3 Progression Factor 087 0 64 0 0 17 1 00 100 Incremental Delay, d2 14.9 0.6 1,6 1.4 0.9 20.5 Delay (s) 51 3 8 0 1' 5 9 1. 1 34 588 Level of Service D A B A C E Approach Delay (s) 174 136T1. 526 0 0 Approach LOS B B D . A HCM Average Control Delay 24.5 11CM Level of Service . C HCM Vo'ume to Capacity ratio 0 86 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 110.0 Sum of lost time (s) 13.4 Intersection capacity Uhhzation 74 5% CU Level of Service D Analysis Period (mm) 15 -, 2: Poinsettia Lane & 1-5 Northbound Ramps POINSETTIA LANE ANALYSIS Synchro7- Report Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Year 2O3OPM Peak Hour LOS 3: Poinsettia Lane & 1-5 Southbound Ramps 3/5/2009 Idea! (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 'T. 46 46 42 46 46 46 46 Lane WI. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 Frt 100 85 1 00 00 1 00 100 085 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Said Flow(prot) 3539 83 34.33 39 1q81 1686 1583 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Satd Flow (penn) - 3539 83 3433 3539 1681 1686MRO Peak-hour Factor, P1-IF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj Flow (vph) 0 1037 8.....853 939 0 0 0 567 3 257 RlORReducbon(vph)0 .1150 ...0 00 0149 LaneGroupFtow(vph) 0 1037 183 853 939 0 0 0 283 287 108 Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 ...... 4 Actuated Green G (s) 449 44 30 79 5 21 3 21 21 3 Effective Green, g (s) 44.9 44.9 79.5 21.3 21.3 . .30A 21.3 Actuatedç Ratio 041 041 0 072 019 01 019 Clearance Time (s) 4.6 4.6 424.6 ........................ 4.6 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Ex nsiori (s) 1 0 1 0 2 0 5 0 1 0 1 0 X.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) . 1445 646 949 2558 326 326 307 v/s Ratio Perm - ...... ........ 0.07 . vlcRatio 072 028 090 037 087 0 035 Uniform Delay, di 27.2 21.8 38.35.8 43.0 43.1 ...4 Progression Factor - MID 1 0 0 12 1 00 1 C 1 00 d2 3.1 1.1 7. 0.3 .20.3 22.5 0.3 -. elay 30 z 25 09 633 656 386 Level of Service C C C A E E D - ppraach Delay (s) 287 128 . 00 564 Approach LOS C B A E 11CM Average Control Delay 7.3 Level of Service .HCM 11CM Volume to Capacity ratio 081 Q. Actuated Cycle Length (s) 110.0 Sum of lost lime (s)13.4 . intersection capacity UbhzaUon 74 5% CU Level of Service D Ana!ysis Period (mm) 15 . c Cnticai Lane Group 3: Poinsettia Lane & 1-5 Southbound Ramps . . SynchrO 7 - Report POINSETTIA LANE ANALYSIS . . Page 3