The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 81-06B; POINSETTIA VILLAGE; ADDENDUM TO TRAFFIC STUDY; 1985-12-06elf/-21 SCHATZMANN, THOMPSON & ASSOC., INC. CT 1Le13 1010 Linda Vista Drive Suite 203 - San Marcos, CA 92069 (619)744-1371 SURVEYING, CIVIL & TRAFFIC ENGINEERING I RECEIVED December 6,1985 Holmes & Reynolds Development Co. 839 West Harbor Drive Suite 1 San Diego, Ca. 92101 Attn: Fred Delaney DEC 101985 CITY OF CARLSBAD DEVELOP. PROC. SERV. DIV. Re: Addendum #1 to Poinsettia Village Traffic Study - Intersection Capacity Analysis Dear Fred: Per the request of the City of Carlsbad Engineering Department, we have prepared calculations to show the Intersection capacities along Avenida Encirias adjacent to your project. Case 1 analysis assumes the three driveways as proposed on the site plan. This alternative proposes one signalized intersection at the center driveway and the other two driveways being controlled by stop signs. The Case 2 analysis assumes that there will only be two approaches to the project at the existing road openings hee two intersections would be controlio by signalWhd the main- driveway to the mobile name park would L c3to1ied by a :S.tOp sigr1. The Case 1 analysis also studied the effect of adding a right turn lane at the center driveway. This would be a turn lane and acceleration lane. The capacity analysis for both the signalized and unsignalized intersections were completed using a computer analysis prepared by the Institute of Transportation Studies, Version 2.01. The computer printouts for the various runs are included in the appendix. From this analysis all of the signalized Intersections would be operating below capacity. In the Case 1 analysis, Driveway #2 would be operating at the equivalent of Level of Service B or a volume/capaicty ratio of 0.69 By adding the right turn andr lane to this Intersection a Lev1 of Service oj B with a volume/6pac1t:y ratio of 0.66 was obt1ed From this analysis it would seem that the addition of the right turn facilities would have very little impact in Improving the operation of this intersection.The Level of Service would remain the same and be at an acceptable operating level. Driveway #1 and #3 would be controlled by stop signs. From the computer analysis it is shown that during the peak hour the left turn movements from these Intersections will operating below Level of Service D. As these volumes are quite low the impact to the general motoring public will be small. The motorists exiting the commercia.l center from these driveways will also be able to utilize the signalized intersection when delays become unacceptable. There is suuficlent excess capacity at Driveway #2 to handle the additional shift of traffic. In the Case 2 analysis, with just the two driveway approaches the signalized intersection are shown to be operating--below capacity. In this analysis Driveway #1 would be operating at a Level of Service C with a volume/capacity ratio of 0.78. Driveway #3 would be operating at a Level of Servlce..D with a volume/capacity ratio of 0.82. From this analysis It would seem that the addition of the third driveway approach would not impact the flow of traffic along Avenida Encinas, The addition of a right turn lane and acceleration lane at Driveway #2 does not seem to be warranted as the Level of Service would remain unchanged. The volumes used In this analysis were obtained from the Traffic Study Supplement for the atIquitos Lagoon Educational Project . and. adjusted to,,..-- -include- .. the.. vo1ume.s.. ------ from . .......t.he......................... Poinsettia Village Project. As discussed in our original report for this project the Case 1 sltutatiori would be a better design to facilitate the-flow-of traffic... .as there would be only one signal and the spacing of the signals would be better. ... If you have any questions or need additional Information on this item, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely. ' Len Schatzmann Professional Engineer .ft SAN 7IE1570 iJrc.cj1AC. -- I.7J7 ACA3 / ? T - a / / 4lOA' SURVIVING. CIVIL &TRAFFIC ENGINEERING £NCI?4A PROPOSED SITE PLAN EXHIBIT 1 stop 12 10: E +0% il L : lanes = 4 : 7 speed = 30 -\ / AVENIDA ENCINA v 6 pop. ( 250,000 N- -s 5 PHF = 0.90 / \ 4 50% of 3 Impeding ------------50% of 6 impeding +0% 49% of 2 on right MOVE. 2 48% of 5 on right 3 A 1 I r Traffic Unspecified. Composition Average values 8 stop used • +0% These Movements 8 -and 9 DRIVEWAY #1 share lanes: 10 and 11 Hit <F!> or <PrtSc> key for hard copy: Any other key to continue. move. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 vol. 120 799 22 6 810 38 10 3 6 10 3 150 evol. 147 888 24 7 900. 42 12 4 7 12 4 183 sight +0.00 * * +0.00 * - * +0.00 +0.00 +0.00 +0.00 +0.00 +0.00 cap. 359 * * 374 . * * 31 152 152 42 42 663 xcap. 212. * *. .367 * * 19 141 141 26 26 .. 479 LOS C *. * B *. * E D D E E A This Is a 4 - Way intersection 1) -Major street is: AVENIDA ENCINA2). Minor street is: DRIVEWAY #1 3) Volumes 4) sight adjustments 5) TraffIc Composition on major 6) Traffic, Composition on minor Unspecified 7) Speed = 30 8) Number of lanes = 4 50% of 3 Impeding 9) Population ( 250,000 10) Percentages of 50% of 6 impeding 11)Shared. lanes.: .8 .and9...................traffI.c..in..Lanes.:_.49%.oL.2.on..rJght 10 and 11 48%, of 5 on right Peak Hour Factor = 0.90 Corner A: Stop, no Accel. lane, normal radius -- --44)--Co-rner B: no right' turn- lane, normal turn S -- - - .15) Corner C: Stop, no Accel-. lane, normal radius Corner D: no right turn lane, normal turn Grades:e = +0, f = +0, g = +0 18) Exit to DOS Enter # to change, 0.to recalculate, 18 to quit: move. . 1 2- 3 4 5- 6 7 8- 9 to -11 12 vol. 120 799 2.2 . - 6 810 38 10 3 - 6 10 3 150 evol. 147 888 24 - 7 900 42 12 4 7 12 4 183 sight +0.00 - * - * +0.00 * * +000 +0.00 +0.00 +0.00+0.00 +0.00 cap. 359 * * 374 * * 31 152 152 42 42 663 xcap. 212 - - * * 367 * * 19 141 141 26 26 479 - 'LOS- - C * - * 'B * * E a ' - D - - E ' E - - A 3CHATZMANN. THOMPSON I ASSOCIA) S1JNV(YIN CIVIL £NONICING JI CASE 1 - DRIVEWAY #1 ... SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS --PLANNING METHOD (01-01-1980) SUMMARY OF INPUT DATA Street name (SE - NW): AVENIDA ENCINAS Street name (NE - SW): DRIVEWAY #2 (1) (2) (3) (4) Direction of travel: SE NE NW SW (1) Left-turnvolume (+PHF): 256 33 9 131 (2) Through volume (+PHF): 538 18595 18- (3) Right turn volume (+PHF): 21. 9 88 226 (4) Number of shared LT/TH/RT lanes: 0 0 .. 0 0 (5) Number of exclusive LT lanes: - 1 1 1 1 (6) Number of LT/TH or LT/RT lanes: 0 0 0 0 (7) % LT traffic In exclusive lane(s): IbO 100 100 100 (8) Number of exclusive TH lanes: 1 0 1 0 (9) Number of TH/RT lanes: 1 1 1 1 (10) Number of exclusive RT lanes: 0 0 0 0 (11) No. of exit lanes (reverse dir.): "2 1 2 1 (12) Peak-hour factor: 0.90 PRESS <SHIFT>PRTSC TO PRINT THIS INFORMATION. PRESS (ESC.> TO CONTINUE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION-LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS --PLANNING METHOD (01-01-1980) SUMMARY OF RESULTS Streét'name (SE - NW): AVENIDA ENCINAS Street name (NE - SW): DRIVEWAY #2 Directi-on- -o-f--travel": '--'-- SE --- -NE- - ---NW - -SW Critical LT lane volume: 284 37 10 146 Critical TM lane volume: 311 30 379 271 Volume opposing LT movement: 759 20 621 20 Conflicting TH + LT movements: 321 176 664 308 Critical movernent' volume: 664 308 --664 308 Sum of critical movements = 972 Relationship to capacity: BELOW CAPACITY PRESS <SI-IIFT>PRTSC TO PRINT THESE RESULTS. PRESS (ESC> TO CONTINUE $CNAYZMAN$. THO&WSO$ £ ASSOCI.'l - $4JVIYING. CIVIL £ YAFFtC £NGI$VCRING J CASE 1 - DRIVEWAY #2 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS --PLANNING METHOD (01-01-1980) SUMMARY OF INPUT DATA Street name (SE - NW): AVENIDA ENCINAS Street name (NE- SW): DRIVEWAY #2 (1) (2) (3) (4) Direction of travel: SE NE MW SW Left-turn volume (PHF): 256 33 9 131 Through volume (PHF): 538 18 595 18 Right turn volume (PHF): 21 9 88 226 Number of shared LT/TH/RT lanes: 0 0 0 0 Number of exclusive LT lanes: 1 1 1 1 Number of LT/TH or LT/RT lanes: 0 0 0 0 % LT traffic In exclusive lane(s): 100 100 100 100 Number of exclusive TM lanes: 1 0 2 0 Number of TH/RT lanes: . 1 1 0 1 Number of exclusive RT lanes: 0 0 1 0 No. of exit lanes (reverse dir.): 2 1 3 1 Peak-hour factor: 0.90 PRESS <SHIFT>PPTSC TO PRINT THIS INFORMATION. PRESS <ESC> TO. CONTINUE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS --PLANNING METHOD.(01-01-1980) SUMMARY OF RESULTS Street name (SE - NW): AVENIDA ENCINAS Street name (NE - SW): DRIVEWAY #2. Direction of travel: SE NE NW SW Critical LT lane volume: 284 37 10 146 Critical TM lane volume: 311 30 331 271 Volume opposing LT movement: 759 20 621 . 20 Conflicting TEl + LT movements: 321 176 615 308 Critical, movement volume: 615 .308 615. 308 Sum of critical movements = 923 Relationship to capacity:. BELOW CAPACITY PRESS <SHIFT>PRTSC TO PRINT THESE RESULTS. PRESS <ESO> TO CONTINUE SCHATZAN( THOUSO4 ASSOCIATES CASE 1 - DRIVEWAY #2 CIVIL ADDITIONAL RIGHT TURN LANE U S .. 1] S lanes =4 speed =30 \ AVENIDA ENCINAS pop. < 250,000 E- -w 5 PHF=0.90 / - _ 4 50% of 3 Impeding +0% 41% of 2 on right MOVE. 2 I r Traffic Unspecified. I Composition Average values I stop used 9 +0% These Movements No shared lanes DRIVEWAY #3 •,share lanes: Hit <Fl> or <PrtSc> key for hard copy: Any other key to continue. move. 2'3'' 4 5 '':7 .9' - - -. - vol. 562 103 130 596 70 10 evol. 624 114., 159 662.... 8.6 ..l59,......,....,._ ....................*+,Q,9+000 cap. * . * 462 * 66 770 xcap. * .* - 303 * -19 612 LOS B * F A This is a 3 — Way Intersection 1) Major street Is: AVENIDA ENCINA2) Minor street is: DRIVEWAY #3 3) Volumes 4) Sight adjustments 5) Traffic Composition on major 6) Traffic Composition on minor Unspecified 7) Speed = 30 8) Number of lanes = 4 50% of 3 Impeding 9) Population < 250,000 10) Percentages of Shared lanes: None traffic In lanes: . 41% of 2 on right. Peak Hour Factor = 0.90 Corner' A: Stop, no Accel. lane, normal radius . . Corner B: no right turn lane, normal turn Corner C: ' Corner D: Grades:e = +0, f = +0 Exit to DOS Enter # to change, 0 to recalculate, 18 to quit: move. 2 3 4 5 7 9 vol. 562 103 130 596 70 130 evol. '62'4 '114 .159 '662 '86 159 sight * * +0.00 * +0.00 +0.00 cap. * * 462 * 66 770 xcap. * * 303 * -19 612 LOS * * B * F A SCHATZMANK T140"PSON&ASSOCIATES ) . SUVYING.CIVILTA,CIC CNGiN(CIInJ CASE ]. - DRIVEWAY #3 .... ... S SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS --PLANNING METHOD (01-01-1980) SUMMARY OF INPUT DATA Street name ( S - N): AVENIDA ENCINAS Street name ( E - W): DRIVEWAY #1 (1) (2) (3) (4) Direction of travel: S E N W Left-turn volume (PHF): 295 10 6 91 Through volume (PHF): 626 3 648 20 Right turn volume (+PHF): 22 6 91 295 Number of shared LT/TH/RT lanes: 0 0 0 0 Number of exclusive LT lanes: 1 1 1 1 Number of LT/TH or LT/RT lanes: 0 0 0 0 % LT traffic In exclusive lane(s): 100 100 100 100 Number of exclusive TM lanes: 1 0 1 .0 Number of TH/RT lanes: 1 1 1 1 Number of exclusive RT lanes: 0 0 0 0 No. of exit lanes (reverse dir.): •2 1 2 1 Peak-hour factor: 0.90 PRESS <SHIFT>PRTSC TO PRINT THIS INFORMATION. PRESS <ESC> TO CONTINUE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS --PLANNING METHOD (01-01-1980) SUMMARY OF RESULTS Street name ( S - N):AVENIDA ENCINAS Street name ( E - W): DRIVEWAY #1 Direction of travel: . S E N W Critical LT lane volume: 328 ii 7 101 Critical TM lane volume: 360 10 411 350 Volume opposing LT movement: .821 22 720 3 Conflicting TM + LTmovements: 367 lii 738 361 Critical movement volume: 738 361 738 361 Sum of critical movements = 1099 Relationship to-capacity: BELOW CAPACITY PRESS <SHIFT>PRTSC TO PRINT THESE RESULTS. PRESS <ESC> TO CONTINUE SCHATZUAH#4. TKOPSON & ASSOCIATES J j CASE 2 - DRIVEWAY # 1 S .. SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS --PLANNING METHOD (12-02-1985) SUMMARY OF INPUT DATA Street name ( W - E): AVENIDAENCINAS Street name ( S - N): DRIVEWAY #3 (1) (2) (3) Direction of traveli W S E Left-turti volume (--PHF): 0 148 222 Through volume (PHF): 516 0 517 Right turn volume (-PHF): 148 222 0 Number of shared LT/TH/RT lanes: 0 0 0 Number of exclusive LT lanes: 0 1 1 Number of LT/TH or LT/RT lanes: 0 0. 0 % LT traffic in. exclusive lane(s): 0 100 100 Number of exclusive TH lanes: 1 0 1 Number of TH/RT lanes: . 0 0 0 Number of exclusive RT lanes: 0 1 0 No. of exit lanes (reverse dir.):' 2 1 2 (.12) Peak-hour factor: 0.90 PRESS <SHIFT>PRTSC TO PRINT THIS INFORMATION. PRESS <ESC> TO CONTINUE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS --PLANNING METHOD (12-02-1985) SUMMARY OF RESULTS Street name ( W - E): AVENIDA ENCINAS Street name ( S -. N): DRIVEWAY #3 Direction of travel: U S E Critical LT lane volume: 0 164 247 Critical TH lane volume: 738 0 574 Volume opposing LT movement: 574 0 738 Conflicting TH + LT movements: -984 0 574 Critical movement volume: .984 164 984 Sum of critical movements = 1149 Relationship to capacity: BELOW -CAPACITY- PRESS <SHIFT>PRTSC TO PRINT THESE RESULTS. PRESS <ESC> TO CONTINUE SC*IATZMAt*I. THOWP5ON £ ASSOCIATES - $VYCYING. Civil. £ TAFçIC cP.GI..ccliii.GJ CASE 2 - DRIVEWAY #3