The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1986-02-04; City Council; 8505; APPEAL - REQUEST FOR A 36 LOT | 35 UNIT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT IN NEIGHBORHOOD SE-10 OF THE LA COSTA MASTER PLAN. CT 85-21 |LCDP 85-3 - PARK VIEW EASTrnv cd -rl 3z hcd u4J Oh u sw al wo 2; u3 03 I e I hl 2 9 6 = 0 z 3 0 0 a continued for 90 days or denied based on incremental traffic impacts. The applicant indicated that he preferred to have project voted on at that time. The Commission voted 6-1 to I the project permitting the applicant to appeal the project tc City Council. On January 13, 1986 the applicant filed an appeal of the Pla Commission's decision. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Planning Director has determined that this project will cause any significant environmental impacts and, therefore, issued a Negative Declaration, dated November 27, 1985. Bec approval of the Negative Declaration on January 8, 1986. the project was denied, the Planning Cornmission did not recoi t .P 1 e e .. c Page 2 of Agenda Bill No. 17505 FISCAL IMPACT The increased need for city capital facilities resulting fro development will be offset by the payment of the public faci fee. Any capital facilities related directly to this develo will be constructed and paid for by the developer. Increased operating expenses related to this development wil offset to some extent from increased tax or fee revenue gene by the development. No detailed economic impact analysis of development has been conducted at this time so predictions o portion of operating expenses covered by additional operatin revenue created as a result of this project cannot be made. EXHIBITS 1. Location Map 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2517 3. Staff Report dated December 11, 1985 w/attachments - .. SANTA FE KNOWLES 73 single family units - -. .. _- POLYGON 156 single family 1 A- 1 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1'7 l8 e 0 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2517 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A 36 LOT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND 35 UNIT LA COSTA DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF MISION ESTANCIA APPROXIMATELY 280 FEET SOUTH OF LA COSTA AVENUE. APPLICANT: PARK VIEW EAST CASE NO: CT 85-21/LCDP 85-3 WHEREAS, a verified application for certain proper wit: Parcel 4 of Parcel Map No. 13524, City of Carlsbad County of San Diego, State of California, has been filed with the City of Carlsbad, and referred to t Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a 1 as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; ant WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 11 th December, 1985, and on the 8th day of January, 1986, hold ( noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, to consider sc request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and I 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all pe. desiring to be heard, said Cornmissioi considered all facto relating to the Tentative Tract Map and Condominium Permit NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Plan Commission as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hea Commission hereby DENIES CT-85-21/LCDP 85-3, based on following findings: //// //// T .- c 1 c 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 e e Find ing s : 1 ) The proposed project will incrementally contribute to unresolved traffic problems in the La Costa area, particularly on La Costa.Avenue. The 24' wide private streets serving the project are tc 2) narrow to provide adequate parking and safe circulatioi PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, he the 8th day of January, 1986, by the following vote, to wit AYES: Chairman Schlehuber, Commissioners: McBa Marcus, Smith, Holmes and Hall. NOES : Commissioner McFadden . ABSENT : None . ABSTAIN : None. CLARENCE SCHLEHUBER, Chair CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSI ATTEST: MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER PLANNING DIRECTOR - PC RES0 NO. 2517 -2- I APPLICATa SUBMITTAL DATE: i e JULY 11, 1985 a e 7- c @ STAFF REPORT DATE : DECEMBER 11, 1985 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: CT 85-21/LCDP 85-3 - PARK VIEW EAST - Request for a 34 lot/35 unit Tentative Tract Map and La Costa Developmt Permit for Neighborhood SE-10 of the La Costa Master Plan, located along the west side of Mision Estancia approximately 280 feet south of La Costa Avenue. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission continue this item until an analysis of the problems and potential solutions to the circulation problems in the La Costa area have been completed. 11. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting approval of a 36 lot/35 unit Tentative Tract Map and La Costa Development Permit for Neighborhood SE-10 of the La Costa Master Plan, located as described above, The proposed project will be located on a 7. acre site and have a density of 4.4 du/ac. This is in conformance with the General Plan and La Costa Master Plan designation for this site of RM, Residential Medium which is n 4-8 du/ac. The projects density is also well below the maximu allowable density of 9 du/ac provided by the La Costa Master Plan. The proposed project will consist of single-family detached homes on 3,190-7,800 square foot lots. The average lot size i 4,780 square feet. The residential units will range in size f 950 square feet to 1,400 square feet. Each of the units will have a two-car garage. The subject property consists of very gently rolling terrain, with a small westerly trending drainage located near the centt of the property. The site is composed of disturbed grassland is bounded on the west by a narrow band of riparian woodland, characterized by relatively small black willows. A portion 0. the site is, however, disturbed as a consequence of stockpilii dirt on the property associated with the construction of Misic Estancia. L I) 0 c I I. * The property to the south and west of of the site is vacant an is part of Stage Coach Park. The property to the east is in t process of being developed with minimum 7,500 square foot sing family residential lots (Santa Fe Knolls, CT 85-5). The property to the north is in the process of being graded for condominiums as part of CT 84-7, La Costa Racquet Club. 111. ANALYSIS 1) Is the proposed project in conformance with the La Costa Master Plan? 2) Does the proposed project conform to the development standards of the Planned Development Ordinance? 3) Does the project conform to the design criteria of the Planned Development Ordinance? DISCUSSION The La Costa Master Plan designates the subject property as Neighborhood SE-10. Neighborhood SE-10 is identified in the Master Plan as being a part of the La Costa Community Core. Because the subject property is included as part of the Community Core, The Master Plan indicates that it should be processed under the La Costa Development Plan review process. This review process requires that a La Costa Development Plan processed similarly to a site development plan under the procedures set forth in Chapter 21.06 "Q" Qualified Developme Overlay Zone. The La Costa Development Permit also requires that all projects must conform to general and specific development standards and regulations set forth in the La Cos Master Plan. The proposed project conforms with all of the general and specific development standards of the La Costa Master Plan. 35 dwelling units proposed is well below the maximum density allowed by the Master Plan of 100 dwelling units. The individual neighborhood development regulations for SE-10 indicate that development should; (1) utilize multiple dwelli unit development in two clusters, (2) provide access to adjac Stage Coach Park and, (3) provide neighborhood entrance/exit from Mision Estancia. With regard to these development stand and criteria, the project has been designed as discussed belc dwelling unit development, but instead proposes sma: lot single family detached product types. It is staff's opinion that the intention of this developmt standard of utilizing multiple unit development in f clusters, was to ensure that the maximum number of while at the same time ensuring that the projects design was opened up and the onsite riparian corridc 1) The project as proposed does not include multiple dwelling units (100) could be accommodated on the s -2- I 1- J @ 0 - preserved. Staff feels that with the proposed small lot single family detached product design, the above mentioned goals have been achieved. In addition, sinc the number of actual dwelling units have been reduced from a maximum of 100 to 35, potential site design and traffic impacts have been reduced. The proposed sing1 family units will also be more compatible with the larger lot single family residences approved for the Santa Fe Knolls project to the east. 2) The proposed project has been designed to include a 27 foot wide park accessway between Lots 14 and 15 to Sta Coach Park. In addition, the applicant has agreed to incorprate a meandering, specially design-treated sidewalk along his property fronting on Mision Estancj thereby providing another identifiable access to Stage Coach Park. 3) The project has been designed to include its principal and only accessway along Mision Estancia. This accessway has been chosen so that it lines up with tht accessway to the already approved Santa Fe Knolls project located along the east side of Mision Estancia. The proposed project was also reviewed with regard to its conformance with the Planned Development Ordinance. with the La Costa Development Plan Review process in order to provide more specific (restrictive) standards regarding parkin setbacks and recreation requirements. As proposed, this proje meets or exceeds the development standards of the Planned Development Ordinance. All of the units will have a two-car garage with a minimum dimension of 400 square feet. This will provide the adequate space to fulfill the storage requirements as well as provide parking for two cars. Guest parking will 1= available in parking bays distributed throughout the project a will also be provided as driveway tandem parking, in that all garages will be setback 20 feet from the front property line. All of the dwelling units will front on minimum 24 foot wide private driveways and will be set back at least 20 feet from t sidewalks. All of the units will have a minimum rearyard dimension of 15 feet. In addition, a common recreation center located in the center of the project and other smaller passive recreation spaces will be located throughout the project. The conmon recreation center will include a pool, spa and sundeck. In this case, the Planned Development Ordinance is used in association -3- u 1 I e a - DESIGN CRITERIA AS proposed, this project conforms with the design criteria of the Planned Development Ordinance at the density proposed. TI project has been laid out to incorporate much of the existing topography. In particular, the existing 75 foot wide drainagc swail/riparian corridor located along the projects western boundary will be preserved. The overall design of the project will ensure that many of the units have views of Stage Coach Park. Enriched pavement with thematic landscaping have been provided to breakup the appearance of the project streetscape The main entrance will include heavy landscaping, enriched pavement, open spaces and a view of the common recreation are The other smaller passive green spaces will help to create visual breaks throughout the project. Landscaped slopes and decorative block wall will buffer units from traffic along Mision Estancia. For these reasons, staff feels that the project justifies the density proposed. TRAFFIC staff has identified an increasing number of traffic concerns within the City and particularly within the La Costa area. S is currently undertaking a study to more clearly identify and resolve them. The proposed project is not a major traffic contributor in itself but will incrementally contribute to th traffic problems in the area. In accordance, the proposed project will be responsible for contributing a proportionate share towards the solution of identified problems. The propc project does comply with all of the relevant City standards i policies, however until the aforementioned traffic study is completed and the details of the appropriate solutions are identified, staff is unwilling to recommend approval and is providing three alternatives for the Planning Commission to consider in dealing with the proposed project relative to tri issues. These include: 1. A continuance of the project until the traffic study ha: been completed by staff. 2. Approve the proposed project based upon the finding thai the project will contribute only incrementally to the existing traffic problems and have staff return with documents. 3. Approve the project, with the inclusion of a condition requiring that the final map not be approved until the traffic study has been completed for the La Costa area the applicant has agreed to perform or participate in a solution. (There are some concerns with this alternati in that it may be difficult to make a finding for adequ public facilities. -4- I I 4 e e . In conclusion, staff is recommending Alternative No. 1, continuance of the project until after the traffic study for th La Costa area has been completed. Staff's recommendation is th it would be more appropriate to delay a decision on this projec until the traffic study is completed, letting us know the exter of the existing problems and possible solutions. should be completed sometime in February. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Land Use Planning Manager has determined that this project will not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, has issued a Negative Declaration on November 27, 1985. ATTACHMENTS 1 . Location Map 2. Vicinity/Existing Land Use Map 3. General Plan/Zoning Map 4. Background Data Sheet 5. Disclosure Form 6. Environmental Document 7. Exhibits "A" - "G", dated December 6, 1985 8. Traffic Volumes CDD : ad 11/18/85 The study -5- H MULTIPLE FAMILY n COMMERCIAL a SINGLE FAMILY a OPEN SPACE 17 0 c1 a H PLANNED COMUNITY a RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM 4.1-9 BRESiDENTiAL MEDIUM Low 1, aREsiDENTiAL Low 0-1.5 HIGH SCHOOL El RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM HIGH 9.1-15 a COMMERCIAL s- B Ir I. a EACKGROUJ!lD DATA SHEET CASE NO: CT 85-21/LcDP 85-3 APPLICANT: Park View East REQUEST AND UXATIm: for a tentative tract map and La Costa Developent Pem dong the west side of Mision Estancia approx. 280' south of La Costa Ave. LBGAL DESCIZIKPION: Parcel 4 of Parcel Map No. 13524, City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California AE": 223-060-43 Acres 7.923 Proposed No. of Lotsflnits 36/35 GENERAL PIAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation RM (4-8 Density Allowed, (4-8 du/ac> Censity Proposed 4.4 du/ac Existing Zone PC Proposed Zone PC Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: Zoning Land Use Site PC Vacant North PC proposed condos(La Costa south PC Stage Coach Park East PC Proposed Single Family (Santa Fe Knolls) West PC Stage Coach Park Racquet Club ) PUBLIC FACILITIES San Dieguito School District Encinitas Water Olivenhain Sewer ljeucadia EDU'S 35 Public Facilities Fee Agrement, dated E"MENTAt IMPACT ASSESS= - X Negative Declaration, issued November 27, 1985 June 24, 1985 E.I.R. Certified, dated - Other , u ),cL"Fi --am---- --- ----- -- --, -- -- --------- *-e- : aftar tne ~AXOR~=L+O J, ,hat further infomatiom required, You will be so a APPLICANT: Dd CfiRQa RRrnOtd NE (individual, partnership, )Oink Venture, corprakion, syndi 7\50 RLIW~DA Gdp Nlt.5 I C-fteLS(3ftD I cfl SZOOB 6tci > 931 -(3-2cI Business -8SS 1 I Telephke Numbu AGENT : R'LL CChGNfAJ. Name ~5-d Business Address Telephone Numbar MEMBE3S: llama *tindividual, partner. jdnt. venture, coworation, syndication) Beme Eddress Business Address Telephone Nuzber Telephone Xmber -.- VaZe Eome =dress 3isiness MMress Tzie$hoxz+ Ncaber Telephone ?;umber (Attach more sheets if necessary) I/We dsclze undez senalty of perjury that the inforreation contained in thi closure is tso and correct and that it will remain true and correct and ma relied up03 as Sting true and correct until aaended. 'DAoN b2fk$%i?bd Applicant BY 0 m1Cp - Agent, O.m&. Parthpr -1 m @ 1200 ELM A' CARLSBAD, CA (619) 438- c DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES LAND USE PLANNING OFFICE Citp of &arI$bab NEEATIVE DE&ARi9TION PRCNECT ADDRESS/UCATION: of Mision Estancia approximately 280 feet south of La Costa Avenue. The project is located along the wst side PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 35 single family lots and one recreation lot Over 7.9 acres. project is defined as Neighborhood SE-10 of the La Costa Master Plan. 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. review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbd, CA. 92008. Carmnents frm the public are invited. Please suhnit camrents in writing to the Plannixj Wprtment within ten (10) days of date of issuance . This project, (3. 85-21/LCDP 85-3, will include This As a result of said subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the >E 7 A I1 LcCI:w .<ct\kc bbtt .. 9 MI=@@ DATED: November 27, 1985 'MICHAEL J. CASE NO: CT 85-21/LcDP 85-3 A3PLICANT: PARK VIEW ERST PUBLISH mE: November 27, 1985 Lmd Use Plzng Manager ND4 11/85 'I 0 TRAFMC VOLU~ e* 14204 eo0 31000 EXISTING TRAFFIC PARKVIEW PROJECTED TRAFFIC CT 85-21 0. OTHER PROJECTS TRAFFIC 36 UNITS 360 TRIPS ego EXISTING CAPASITY a 0 m’R1 Weak P&gb Qcwl AaaW 5 L. .( TRAFFIC a TRANSPORTATION E November 7, 1985 Mr. Bill Hofman DAON Corporation I 5150 Avenida Encinas Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Mr. Hofman: This letter sunarites our review of traffic factors related to the develop of the Park View East project 3n the City of Carlsbad. The study is based infomation provided by you, previous studies and information provided by 1 City. The site is located on the westerly side of Mision kancia southerly of Li Avenue in the City of Carlsbad. To the southwest of the site is the propo! Stagecoach Park development. The project contains 36 single family reside! units with a density of 4.54 dwelling units per acre. All vehicular acces! from a street extending southwesterly from the intersection of Mision Estai and Sitio Lanero. EX I STING C I RCULAT I ON CONDIT IONS Both Mision Estancia and La Costa Avenue are currently under construction 4 of Rancho Santa Fe Road. Rancho Santa Fe Road is currently a two lane fac‘ however, the section from La Costa Avenue to Olivenhain Road is scheduled F signalization of the Rancho Santa Fe Road/Mision Estancia intersection. PM peak hour traffic counts for existing conditions were available on Rancl Santa Fe Road at La Costa Avenue and on El Camino Real at Olivenhain Road La Costa Avenue. Intersection Capacity Uti1 ization (ICU) analyses were COI for these intersections in order to quantify existing conditions. (The IC1 methodology and relationship of ICU to Level of Service are contained in Ai A). Existing ICU analyses are contained in Appendix B and sumnarized in TI improvement to ultimate standards in the next year, This improvement will 2651 EAST CHAPMAN AVENUE 0 SUITE 110 0 FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA 92631 (714) l I a e -2- 4 Table 1 EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR ICU VALUES Park View East I cu (1) LOS (2) - INTERSECT ION - El Camino Real & La Costa Avenue 0.98 E El Camino Real & Olivenhain Road 0.61 B Rancho Santa Fe Road & La Costa Avenue 0.44 A (1) Intersection Capacity Utilization . (2) Level of Service '. .* 0 0 -3 ! Review of Table 1 indicates acceptable conditions at two intersections and existing capacity deficiency of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue. TRIP GENERATION In order to examine the traffic factors, it is necessary to estimate the nu of trips that would be generated. Trip generation rates for various land I, have been established in previous studies including the City's Traffic Mode The rates utilized in this study are listed in Table 2. Applying these ral to the proposed development provides an estimate of trip generation. Tablt sunmarires daily and PM peak hew trip generation estimates fer the prajed and other development in the area. As indicated in Table 3, the project ia estimated to generate 290 daily trip ends with 35 occurring during the PM peak hour. TRIP ASSIGNMENT Geographic trip distribution patterns for projects In this area have been established previously from examination of regional land use and circulatic data. The trip distribution for this project was based upon these studies is illustrated on figure 1. By applying these distribution percentages to estimated project trip generation, these trips were assigned to the road sq This assignment of daily trips is illustrated on Figure 1 and represents cc ditions upon project completion. PM peak hour trips were assigned to inter traffic movements in a similar manner and these assignments are contained 1 Appendix B. ANALYSIS Project traffic has been examined at two future conditions. Conditions upc completion of the project have been simulated by combining existing, approk project and project traffic volumes. Ultimate or buildout conditions have been examined through the City's Traffic Model projections. AS described previously, existing ICU values were calculated and sumarizec in Table 1, Project traffic and estimated traffic from approved, but not 9 0 e -4- t. Table 2 TRIP GENERATION RATES Park View East LAND USE DENSITY TRIP ENOS PER DWELLING U PM - (WAC) Daily PM In Low Medi urn Dens i ty Res 5 dent i a1 (RLM) 0-4 10 0.8 0.2 Medium Density Restdenttal (RM) 4-10 '8 0.8 0.2 Medium High Density Resfdential (RMH) 10-20 8 0.6 0.1 z 0 I- 3 - m - 0’ a 0 LL - -3- e 3 .. constructed, projects were added to existing traffic to simulate conditions upon completion of the project. The other projects are listed in Table 3 along with their estimated trip generation. ICU values were calculated for this condition with consideration for street improvements planned or reguirc as a part of the other projects development. These ICU analyses are conta! in Appendix B and summarized in Table 4. Review of Table 4 indicates that the El Camino Reallla Costa Avenue intersel would operate with an ICU value greater than 0.90 while the other two inter, sections would have ICU values of less than 0.90. While the ICU value at tl El Camino Real/La Costa Avenue intersection is above generally accepted lev the project does not change the ICU value. This is due to the minor volume traffic added to the intersection by this project. The calculations in App B indicate no impact or change in ICU value due to the project. for ultimate conditions, the City's Traffic Model was utilized. This model has estimates of daily and peak hour intersection volumes at buildout. For the RM Zoning of this property, the model assumed seven dwelling units per which is 1.5 times greater than the actual proposed density of 4.54 dwellin units per acre. This would also indicate that traffic volumes in the model attributable to this site would be 1.5 times greater than the proposed proj The Traffic Model projected daily volumes of 4500 on Mision Estancia; 44,ZO on Rancho Santa Fe Road; and 25,800 on La Costa Avenue. These volumes are within the daily capacities of these roads with consideration of the accura of the model. Intersection analyses are a better measure of the adequacy a the street system. Ultimate PM peak hour intersection volumes were obtaine from the City and utilized to determine ICU values. These analyses are cor in Appendix C and sumnarized in Table 5. Review of Table 5 indicates that three of the intersections will require designs that exceed the nom1 standards in order to provide for projected traffic demands. This condition has been identified in previous studies ar indicates the need for analysis of both the Traffic Model volumes and inter section geometrics. With the improvements utilized in this analysis, the 1 ' L’ e e -6- 5 Table 3 TRIP GENERATION Park View East DWELLING LAND GENERATED TRIPS PM In PM Out Daily 7 AREA - - Project SElO Approved Projects sw1 sw2 sw3 sw4 25 SW16 Subtotals 920 7,530 710 180 36 RM 290 30 5 85 RLM 850 70 15 345 RM 2,760 275 70 126 RMH 1,010 75 25 233 RM 1,860 185 45 - 1,050 105 - - 131 RM - t - 7- *. t a @ Table 4 ICU SUMMARY AT PROJECT COMPLETION(^) Park View East EXISTING PROJECT COMPL ICU(*) - Ld3) -JG - - INTERSECT ION - t I 0.44 A 0.54 t El Camino Real & La Costa Avenue 0.98 E 0.98 El Camino Real l4 Olivenhain Road 0.61 B 0.86 Rancho Santa Fe Road & La Costa Avenue (1) PM Peak hour (2) Intersection Capacity Utilization (3) Level of Service -8- b a @ Table 5 ICU SUMMARY AT BUILDOUT (1) Park View East MODEL W1 MODEL IMPRO V EMt 1a-Q - Icu(2) - LOS(~ - INTERSECT ION I 1 I El Camino Real & La Costa Avenue 1.50 F 1.01 El Camino Real & Olivenhain Road 1.92 F 1.07 Rancho Santa Fe Road & La Costa Avenue 1.26 F 0.85 Rancho Santa Fe Road & Mision Estancia - 0.73 C (1) PM Peak Hour (2) Intersection Capacity Uti1 ization (3) Level of Service @ @ -9- values have been signif icantly reduced. These improvements are generally additional left and right turn lanes and do not represent major improvements It is recomnended that the future intersection requirements be determined sr that adequate right-of-way can be reserved. As indicated previously, this project would generate less traffic than assui in the Traffic Model. Due to the small magnitude of the project, it would I affect the ICU values. This condition may occur in other existing or plannl development which could have a cumulative reduction in travel demands, SUMMARY This study has reviewed traffic factors related to the proposed Park v'ew Ea development in the City of Carlsbad. Existing conditions were quantified 1 provide a basis for the study. Estimates were made of trips to be generate by the project and the ability of the street system to accorrmodate these tr examined. Analyses were camp1 eted for conditions at project completion ani General Plan buildout. It was found that the project would have no fmpact at project completion. While the project would generate less traffic than indicated by the City's Traffic Model, some improvements will be required ' accomnodate ultimate traffic volumes. Principal findings of the study are the following. 1. The project would generate an estimated 290 daily trip ends with occurring during the PM peak hour. 2. While the project and other approved projects, traffic operations would be at acceptable levels or unchanged. 3. The p-roposed density is 1.5 times less than utilized in the Traff Model resulting in reduced traffic volumes. 4. At ultimate or buildout, principal intersections will require imp ments above the normal standards. * * * -101 t m .. 1. We trust that this study will be of assistance to you and the City of Carlst If you have any questions or require additional Infomation, please contact US . Respectfully submitted s ' WESTON PRINGLE & ASSOCIATES fl&& Weston S. Pringle, P.E. Registered Professional Engineer State of California Numbers C16828 & TR565 WSP :bas cc: Mr. Clyde Wickham Mr. Chris Decerbo Mr. Pat O'Day L. i. m .. I I 9 APPENDIX A . EXPLANATION OF INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION LEVEL OF SERVICE AND I I( a e .. L. APPENDIX A EXPLANATION OF INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION The capacity of a street is nearly always greater between intersections and 1 at intersections. The reason for this is that the traffic flows continuouslj between intersections and only part of the time at intersections. To study (ICU) has been developed. ICU analysis consists of (a) determinin the pro- portion of signal time needed to serve each conflicting movement; 9 b) sumin{ the times for the movements; and (c) comparing the total time required to thf time available. For example, if for north-south traffic the northbound trafl is 1,000 vehicles per hour, thesouthbound traffic is 800 vehicles per hour, I the capacity of either approach is 2,000 vehicles per hour of green, then the northbound traffic is critical and requires 1,000/2,0QO 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. Whi left-turn phases exist, they are incorporated into the analysis. As ICU's approach 100 percent, the quality of traffic service approaches Level of Ser' (10s) E, as defined in the Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 87, Highw, Research Board , 1965 . Level of Service is used to describe quality of traffic flow. Levels of Ser A to C operate quite well. Level of Service 0 is typically the Level of Ser for which an urban street is designed, Level of Service E is the maximum vo 1 facility can accommodate and will result in possible stoppages of momentar, duration. Level of Service F occurs when a facility is overloaded and 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 unsignalited inter section is not valid, the presumption is that a signal can be installed and calculation shows whether the geometrics are capable of accomnodating the ex pected volumes. It is possible to have an ICU well below 1.0, yet have seve 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 mves . Capacity is often defined in terms of roadway width. However, standard lane have approximately the same capacity whether they are 11 foot or 14 foot Ian Our data indicates a typical lane, whether a through lane or left-turn lane Highway Capacity Manual found capacity to be about 1500 vehicles per lane pe 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 be assumed for through traffic, and 1600 vehicles per lane for turning lanes. intersection capacity, a technique known as Intersection Capacity Uti1 izatior a-capacity of approximately 1600 vehicles per lane per hour of green time. f Level of B C D E F Nominal Of IC1 0.00 - Low volumes; high speeds; speed not restricted by other vehicles; all signal cycles clear with no vehicles waiting through more than one signal cycl e. 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 manewerabi 1 i ty cl asely 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; recomnended ideal design standard. 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. section can accomnodate; 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. 0.61 1 0.71 4 Tolerable operating speeds; 31 to 70 percent 0.81 * Capacity; the maximum traffic volumes an inter- 0.91 Not m @ @ I. L. i APPENDIX B ICU ANALYSES PROJECT COMPLETION I 0 tP n n U aa * -*u* * \u e %\ WD(36(3v)wWQb *mQb +cu-Qb * FlFIOHrcNNV) 0-9 (*)WOQIW ........ .... +p: 00000000 ddo 0000 ?% $" rDv) mw wao OOIao CVNanO) O*"*O, -rWO?k ?2 -" -N cu- w dd d& dd 000 dddd ww * * *I I * ** 00 WDV) c3W Woo umw "Wm WW +\ He". How* ym* 979 U*'4??k eo 00 00 a00 ooow ';? * * *I 2 L uz w w 00 00 00 000 -0'00 ue U s YC s!+ (Dub *Qom e('lmQD n Ee 22 %G *. cuu *. OM? 0. 4rn?O!W 2 L K> 0. r Ln In 3 s OA 8 Ea QO 0 -E 0 0 % c 0 2 BCn 5 E s I z 00 00 p: E Ov) 8s *to OIW we4 d E E SA 6wW*~o*aoo~o 4 e =w a i 00000000 000 5 .. p:u CDwIDIDwIPCDIO -IDID ;If Y o L 00 00 00 000 a- we- 2% Hc*, me r(HH dm a= 0 s yo Gv Q,tY c, z ;If2 0 u Z& -e u E ZrY d ). u U z # p. z wo mHWw6v)HHWF-mw n %> wu Hrt(*)**(*) cur( Y a m z 0 * I 3 & Zk-U t =IT c O(3W w p. OeL 00000000 000 00 rtC3HHOHHH r(Hd I8 w v) I 5 I w 0, + u9w :!E5 E = gfs f we 00 00 00 000 v)T w v) IDw WW CD*W Ew 2 54 39: 9- SA .o 5m u ftY E ZtG :: WU I a0 v)=- YI -o+ Q u =+w ow 0 ocnu. +V u- Y v) CLw new $5 I I\d# $I OW= !2E McuOH~oHm0~~- &t;;SZv, E5 &+ OLJ rzrv)mv)uww3L OL HwHdmHdHoHMH g5 eF= l-cn =dm - OUdUO zd* II~P 5 ZKwv-d wz d+wA+=A+=A = r5 + 0 a ** * OI NOIMIO cu MN~OO~~ ma0*0 p. +- NOdN ?: dddd 0 ddoo w ++ * ctmrnw 8888 WcuoQon 01 N b OU -he0 +\ Cumrtcu ObBb ws 0000 0 0000 * *+ *9IOabO M r(mmr( = Z" "ON rn 0 c3cwqwam a. c3 2 v) 4 +.n A E E: o'ddd 0 0000 4p w = YC 2 d 2+c t;w O 3=3 f . Qco Mu) 4 *Lu 0 O w3 s 0) 0 G% ue u m A s -cL s too It wa 'u 2: Y Pa I Gk g kz hbda SkY %W 4- *4 EE% Gw EFP =%I %U - a). GZ mmdo rc LE L 3 z w n 7: z 0 H wx Od 2 LL> = QO a -- "E G t; 3 E tg z c- ar Q) E', Ai 4 Q Oat w o z gg u # PC= v)O Qom H = = +I 0 U z -u W rcQD OWQOrl 0. WT, C*)dNO Y -0 w zw * v)II w v) Av) 0 E ZL ggsg 0 UD ZZi! 0000 w H c3U v)=- mol- LIDC 2 E W =)I u- Qc xu II Up. %U wu new a+- Gl-u ON 0v)U gw 0u-Juo =A~ a W"" kt& 5- 53 ONm~N0000rc00 x ftS 5 OWL ZAW n urn c-l-U Qcv)w=>* 2wu-d w aa+Qca CT-I w w r: > S!E,,,,WtW&S E . * P * u* h6J-b 1) \w x\ NUN 4- HHtDOd P OQ. +5 ww r dm ON HOHO? c*)rcomm am a Y) * 0 Q) ..-r 0 L * U * a ww -dm r-mDv)Qo L a) s 0 dddd +e dd 00 ddddo \ r(0 Ndd msclarnm Y ddd dddd * dc; us U 5 Q +, 0 al * * 3 z s E2 z 5: 0 5 QY cortu)* cs hHtD 2% - r( ~urco*au e\ E" a* e9 ddd0 n fp 00 000 YI c c u) * u L O S& a 0 VI a m a 4 X W w z * -I> OW v) v) L u *n a Sa -s = YC E ao 5 a u= mm w u) (0 . cry mu) u) 0 rl a X2 alr am GS U =; Y "p LL + 2 VI C z u s n a 0 a ah0 v) WOlh QI Sf cs OW Eg &os 0-H * 4 u v) -E * u U V t;;* e !% co a 2 wCL c, z 2s 2 G* 2 *e E C Y 'I: c c c r t; s x* w O* wc 00 00 00000 .. mm 00 00 00000 ww wwIP(PN a n z a 3 0 a f v) 3 a I EL 00 H 25: 3& 0 oc3w a xu g5U, dm = mg ; 3s ad f 34 -4 e=< - E n ww gg wdor(6JoHr(mHNo L: ne- ! ES % Pa st* 2 0V)U gkz 2 kt& ZE -Hoomo-odooo x.Snu OWL r-Jw : ES ZZ&V) II II a c o'-Juo szuu--J =a* 7 Y w &zmv)wwww3L u2 u s E OQ. t3 CLU L 4 3 * Y 2: zy ZZ -0 Cr-ctCrm e =e u v) a w v) 000 00 tD a* 00 a Y Y MI M3E: E k-2 to2 5 2 CI z+ WP, wo v)v) V)=w t: ZIQC c -0C Qcc a =l-u V)WI \3 t?l r Wv) w crACQc:-J+Qc:A Qc: !E 8 > t e e 1 APPENDIX C ICU ANALYSES BU I LDOUT . , @ 9 . INTERSECTION CAPAC ITY UTI L I UT ION ANALYSIS PARK VIEW EAST (PM Peak Hour) At General Plan Build-out INTERSECTION: EL CAMlNO REAL / LA COSTA AVE WOVEMENT GEN PLAN PROPOSED GEN PLAN PROPOSED 6P MODEL GP MODEL ( LANES LANES CAPAC ITY CAPAC I TY VOLUME v/c c NL 1 1 1600 1600 108 0.07 NT 3 3 4800 4800 2204 0.48 NR 0 1 1600 110 SL 1 2 1600 3200 564 0.35 * ST 3 3 4800 4800 1277 0.45 SR 0 FREE 870 EL 1 2 1600 3200 7 16 0.45 * ET 2 2 3200 3200 545 0.27 ER 0 FREE 331 WL 1 1 1600 1600 19 0.01 KT 2 2 3200 3200 309 0.17 * WR 0 1 1600 246 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAt SUMS = 0.83 €AST/WEST CRITXCAL SUMS = 0.62 CLEARANCE - 0.05 ICU = 1.50, 10s = F N=NORTHBOUND s S-SOUTHBOUND, E= EASTBOUND, W=WESBBOUND L=LEFI',T-THROUGH ,R=RIGHT * DENOTES CRITICAL HOVEMENTS IPVEUPl I. I m e 4 e INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS r PARK VIEW EAST (PM Peak Hour) At General Plan Build-out INTERSECTION: EL CAMINO REAL / OLIVENHAIM RD MOVEMENT GEN PLAN PROPOSED GEN PLAN PROPOSED GP MODEL GP MODEL 6 LANES LANES CAPACITY CAPACITY VOLUME V/C h NL 1 1 1600 1600 58 0.04 NT 3 3 4800 4800 1942 0.57 * NR 0 FREE 786 St 1 2 1600 3200 512 0,32 * ST 3 3 4800 4800 920 0.20 SR 0 0 60 EL 1 2 1600 3200 306 0.19 ET 2 3 3200 a00 , 802 6.26 * ER 0 0 20 WL 1 2.5 1600 4000 1154 0.72 * WT 3 2.5 4800 4000 631 0.17 )IR 0 1 1600 200 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMS = 0.89 EAST/WEST CRITICAL SUMS = 0.98 CLEARANCE - 0.05 ICU - 1*92 10s = F N=NORTHBOUND 9 St SOUTHBOUND ,E=EASTBOUND 9 W=WESTBOUND L=LEFT, T=THROUGH 9 R=R X 6HT * DENOTES CRITICAL MOVEMENTS IPVEUPLC ' ,%, a a 1 1. 'a .I .. INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTI LP ZATION ANALYSIS PARK VIEW EAST (PM Peak Hour) At General Plan Build-out INTERSECTION: RANCHO SANTA FE RD / MISION ESTANCIA MOVEMENT GEN PIAN GEN PLAN GP MODEL GP MODEL LANES CAPACITY VOLUME v/c NL 0 NT 3 4800 2488 0.55 * NR 0 174 SL 1 1600 0.00 * ST 3 4800 1667 0.35 SR 0 EL 0 ET 0 ER 0 WL 1 1600 205 0.13 *, KT 0 WR 1 1600 36 0.02 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMS = 0.55 EAST/WEST CRITICAL SUMS - 0.13 CLEARANCE = 0.05 ICU - 0.73 ' LOS - C NtNORTHBOUND , St SOUTHBOUND ,E=EASTBOUND , W= WESTBOUND L=LEFT,T=THROUGH,R=RIGHl * DENOTES CRITICAL MOVEMENTS IPVEUPQ 4 .r I,.* e 0 4 .> I NTERSECT I ON CAPAC ITY UTI L I ZATION ANALY S IS ,J PARK VIEW EAST (PM Peak Hour) At General Plan Build-out INTERSECTION: RANCHO SANTA FE RD / LA COSTA AVE HOVEMENT GEN PLAN PROPOSED GEN PLAN PROPOSED GP MODEL GP MODEL 6 LANES LANES CAPACITY CAPACITY VOLUME v/c h NL 1 1 1600 1600 369 0.23 NT 3 3 4800 4800 1826 0.45 * NR 0 1 1600 329 SL 1 2 1600 3200 331 0.21 * ST 3 3 4800 4800 1153 0.35 SR 0 FREE 515 2 1600 3200 342 0.21 * 2 3200 3200 469 0.21 EL 1 ET 2 ER 0 1 1600 211 WL 1 2 1600 3200 302 0.19 KT 2 2 3200 3200 670 0.34 * WR 0 FREE 406 NORTHISOUTH CRITICAL SUMS = 0.66 EAST/WEST CRITICAL SUMS - 0.55 CLEARANCE = 0.05 ICU = 1.26 LOS - F N=NORTHBOUND, S=SOUTHBOUND ,E=EASTBOUND , W=WESTBOUND L=LEFT ,T=THROUGH , R= RIGHT * DENOTES CRITICAL MOVEMENTS IPVEUPS