HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-07-09; City Council; 11251; CIRCULATION IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM AND TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE STUDY-.
y( 1
Q 9 8 pe
4 k
2 0 E a i 0 f 3 0 0
w ur bnnLamnv - nurm DILL - 1
AB#- TITLE: CIRCULATION IMPLEMENTATION GOGRAM
MTG. 7-9-91
DEPT,
CITY i AND TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE STUDY
DEPT. ENG CITY 1
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt Resolution No. 9 I -d a&- accepting the Circulation Implementation P
and Traffic Impact Fee Study, directing staff to implement the study recommendatic
wide Traffic Impact Fees.
authorizing staff to schedule a public hearing to consider establishment of unifoi
ITEM EXPLANATION:
In early 1990, the City of Carlsbad contracted with the San Diego Associ:
Governments (SANDAG) to complete a comprehensive traffic modeling and I
alternatives study. This study was designed to develop updated traffic volume pro
to guide the overall development of the City’s Circulation Element of the Generc
The study involved a complete update of land use and circulation network assun
projections for 1995, 2000 and buildout and the evaluation of the impacts of
alternative networks. Land use and growth projections were evaluated for comi
with adopted Local Facilities Management Plans (LFMP’s) and alternatives were dr
to evaluate the potential impact of major missing circulation links such as:
0 Cannon Road
0 Poinsettia Lane
a Faraday Avenue
a Melrose Drive
a Carrillo Way
a College Boulevard
The purpose of the study included four key components:
Evaluate adequacy of circulation element.
Identify required circulation element deficiencies.
Update and consolidate existing Traffic Impact Fees.
Establish Preliminary Circulation Phasing Program to insure confo
with Growth Management Standards to buildout of the City.
0
a
0
a
The Circulation Implementation Program and Traffic Impact Fee Study docum6
findings of those studies and recommends adoption of a revised Traffic Imp
Program.
The report identifies nearly $40,000,000 of roadway segments and intersection I
for funding through the recommended revised Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) program.
projects and cost estimates are shown in the attached tables.
The City Council on April 22, 1986 established a TIF for the La Costa area b:
projects identified prior to the adoption of the Growth Management Program. Or
1986 an interim fee for the northern part of the City was established pendins
study. Existing fees and proposed revisions are shown in the Table below.
Existing City-Wide
La Costa Fee Proposed Fee
Residential $67/Trip Residential $7;
Other (including $27,Trip Industrial/CommerciaI $3' Commercial,
Industrial, Office)
t
Existing
North Carlsbad Interim Fee
Residential $60nrip
Industrial/Other $1 5Frip
Commercial/Off ice $1 Onrip
City-Wide
Proposed Fee
Residential $77
Industrial/Other $31
Commercial/Office $31
La Costa Avenue
Leucadia Boulevard
Olivenhain Rd/Rancho Santa Fe Rd
TOTAL
$6,00(
3,50f s,ooc
$1 5,50f
LAND USE
Residential
Commercial/lndustrial/Other
TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE PER TRIP
OUTSIDE CFD INSIDE CFC
$77 $41
$31 $1 6
0 rl,asl 9
PAGE THREE OF AB #
The enclosed study additionally establishes a proposed phasing for the widen
existing circulation roadways and the construction of critical unconstructed roi
segments required to complete the Circulation Element roadway system.
A major finding of the report relates to impacts on Carlsbad due to traffic congest
the freeway system and regional arterials bordering the City. It is apparent tt
proposed regional roadway system is not adequate to accommodate buildout
county in compliance with Growth Management Standards. As the regional hi
system begins to break down, these impacts will be felt on the local system.
problems will be most critical in and around freeway interchanges and along major
south arterials such as Carlsbad Boulevard and El Camino Real. Many of these in
are not mitigatable through conventional highway construction and will require
participation in regional transit and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strai
Staff recommends that Council accept the report and authorize staff to proceed
public hearing to consolidate and revise the City’s Traffic Impact Fee program.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Any fee program must be revised from time to time to ensure that the revenue re
through fees will be adequate to fund the projects that will serve those paying thc
The City’s Traffic Impact Fees are no exception. The proposed revision includes b
update of the estimated project costs and the fees necessary to support
Adjustments have been made for those projects which are funded by the Comi
Facilities District.
Without the proposed fee, the City would have insufficient revenue to suppc
construction of many significant traffic related projects needed to serve the new res
and businesses in Carlsbad. Council will continue to see fee revisions over the this and other construction program through buildout,
Although the report identifies $40 million in costs, the proposed fees will suppo
$36.4 million of projects. The additional $3.6 million will be funded by grants,
developer contributions or may remain unfunded.
The TIF program includes three projects that will eventually be funded through thc
Community facilities District (CFD). These projects are:
0 La Costa Avenue - 1-5 to El Camino Real
0 Leucadia Boulevard
0 Olivenhain/Rancho Santa Fe Road
The proposed action will set a traffic impact fee that includes the cost of funding
projects. However, property owners inside the boundaries of the CFD will receive a
against the TlF in an amount proportional to the cost of these projects to the toti
TIF projects. Property owners outside the CFD boundary will be subject to the full
shown in the report.
0 Jl,$s( m
PAGE FOUR OF AB #
EXHIBITS:
1. Table 1 - Traffic Impact Fee Projects/Cost Estimates - Intersections
2. Table 2 - Traffic Impact Fee Projects/Cost Estimates - Roadway Segments
3. Resolution No. 0) / - & 3- (f?
4. Circulation Implementation Program and Traffic Impact Fee Study is on file w
City Clerk.
Intersection Proiect Description
1. Cannon Rd. - Interstate 5 Road and Ramp Widening
Signal Installation at Ramp
termini
Add one thru lane in each
direction
Add dual left turn signal
modifications
Add southbound right turn lane
Left turn lanes
Dual left on El Camino Real
Dual left turn lanes on El
Camino - right turn lanes
eastbound, westbound and
southbound
8. El Camino Real - Palomar Airport Rd. Intersection reconstruction.
Add left turn, thru and right
turn lanes on all legs - phased
construction
Close free right turn lane signal
modification for dual lefts and
left turn phasing. (reimburse
Foote Development)
2. Cannon Rd - Paseo Del Norte
3. El Camino Real - Alga Road
4. El Camino Real - Cannon Road
5. El Camino Real - Camino Vida Roble
6.
7. El Camino Real - Faraday Ave.
El Camino Real - Carlsbad Village Dr.
9. El Camino Real - Tamarack Ave.
10. Faraday Ave. - Orion Street
11. Faraday Ave. - College Blvd.
Traffic Signal
Dual left turn northbound and
southbound
12. Melrose Dr. - Alga Rd. Dual left turn lanes northbound, southbound
eastbound and westbound
Dual left turn lane southbound
Dual left turns all legs
13. Palomar Airport Road - College Blvd.
14. Palomar Airport Road - Paseo Del Norte
TOTAL
Estimated - cost
$1,750,000
$435,000
$250,000
$130,000
$320,000
$320,000
$71 0,000
$1,750,000
$1 70,000
$1 00,000
-0-
Already
Constructe
$480,000
$1 60,000
$525,000
$7,1OO,OOC
ROADWAY SEGMENTS
Proiect Description
1. Alga Road Widen south side from
Mimosa Drive to El Camino Real
Palomar Airport Road
2. Avenida Encinas Widen south of
3. Carlsbad Boulevard Widen from Manzano Drive to
600 ft. north of Cannon Road
Widen from Pontiac Drive to 4. Carlsbad Village Drive Victoria Avenue
Widen east of El Camino Real 5. Carlsbad Village Drive*
6. El Camino Real Widen from Tamarack Avenue to
Chestnut Avenue
Arena1 Road
Widen from 1-5 to El Camino Real
7. El Camino Real Widen from La Costa Avenue to
8. La Costa Avenue
9. La Costa Avenue* Mitigation for widening
10. Leucadia Boulevard** Construct from existing terminus east
to El Camino Real
Widen from El Camino Real to Melrose Drive 17, Olivenhain Road & Rancho Santa Fe Rd. **
12. Poinsettia Lane Widen from 1-5 to Batiquitos Lane
TOTAL
- cost
$ 300,00(
525,00(
2,100,00l
1,360,001
450,001
1,760,001
450,00(
6,710,001
765,001
3,500,001
6,000,001
1,870,OO
$25,790,00
L
i
v i
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
I1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
RESOLUTION NO. 9 1 - 2 2 6
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING THE CIRCULATION
IMPROVEMENTS TO BE FUNDED BY TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES
WHEREAS, that report entitled "City of Carlsbad Circulation lmplei
Program and Traffic Impact Fee Study" was completed in April 1991, hereinafte
to as the 'Traffic Impact Fee Study"; and
WHEREAS, that study estimates the capital costs of constri
improvements to implement the City's Circulation Program; and
WHEREAS, fees to implement the construction of those improvemer
forth in the Traffic Impact Fee Study; and
WHEREAS, the fees so established do not exceed the reasonable
constructing these facilities and the fees are not levied for general revenue pui
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the April 1991 City of Carlsbad Circulation Implementation Pros
Traffic Impact Fee Study, which is incorporated herein by this reference, is accl
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
//I
Ill
Ill
Ill
-
1
\ 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e- e
3. That staff is directed to implement recommendations in the Traffic Imp
Study and schedule a public hearing to consider the establishment of uniform C
Traffic Impact Fees.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlst
Council held on the 9th day of July , 1991 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Larson, Nygaard,
St ant on
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
AlTEST:
-p-7$?-, ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
(SEAL)
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CIRCULATION IMPLEMENTATION
PROGRAM AND
TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE STUDY
Traffic Impact
Fees
Program
April 1991
Prepared by:
Engineering Department
I
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CIRCULATION IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM
AND
TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE STUDY
I
I
r
i
i
i
i
8
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. STUDY METHODOLOGY 2
III. CIRCULATION SYSTEM EVALUATION 3
• Roadway Segment Analysis 3
• Intersection Analysis . . . 7
• Sidewalk Program 11
• Transportation Management and Monitoring 13
IV. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE PROGRAM 14
V. ALTERNATIVE AND PHASING ANALYSIS 18
VI. ISSUES 24
Cannon Road 24
Melrose Drive Extension 27
Rancho Del Oro Interchange 27
Arenal Road Extension 28
Carlsbad Boulevard 29
Freeway Ramp Metering 29
Transportation Demand Management 31
VII.SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS - 33
Appendix
A.
B.
C.
D.
Capacity Analysis
Project Cost Estimates
Sidewalk Priority Listing
La Costa Area Traffic Impact Fee Agenda Bill
I
CITY OF
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
CIRCULATION IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM
AND
TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE STUDY
List of Tables
Page No.
Table 1 Level of Service Roadway Segments 5
Table 2 Traffic Impact Fee Projects and Cost Estimates Roadway Segments 5
Table 3 Level of Service Description Intersections 8
Table 4 Traffic Impact Fee Projects and Cost Estimates Intersections 9
Table 5 Special Intersection Design (Incomplete Intersections) 11
Table 6 City of Carlsbad Traffic Impact Fees 14
Table 7 SANDAG Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation
Rates for the San Diego Region 15-16
Table 8 Future Trip Summary 17
Table 9 Traffic Impact Fee Existing and Proposed Fee 17
Table 10 ' Critical Link Phasing 18
Table 11 Road Segment Widening Program 20
List of Figures
Figure 1 Buildout Traffic Projections 4
Figure 2 Critical Road Segment Improvements (Traffic Impact Fee Projects) 6
Figure 3 Intersection Improvements (Traffic Impact Fee Projects) 10
Figure 4 Special Intersection Designs (Unconstructed Intersections) 12
Figure 5 Missing and Critical Links 19
Figure 6 Roadway Improvements Required by 1995 22
Figure 7 Roadway Improvements Required by 2000 23
Figure 8 Impacts of College/Tamarack Connection 1995 25
Figure 9 Impacts of Cannon Road & Melrose Connection at Buildout 26
Figure 10 Future Hot Spots 30
I
I
f
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
[
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CIRCULATION IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM
AND
TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE STUDY
I. INTRODUCTION
In early 1990, the City of Carlsbad contracted with the San Diego Association of Governments
(SANDAG) to complete a comprehensive traffic modeling and phasing alternatives study. This
study was designed to develop updated traffic volume projections to guide the overall
development of the City's Circulation Element of the General Plan.
Elements of the study included a complete update of land use and circulation network
assumptions, projections for 1995, 2000 and buildout and the evaluation of the impacts of
various alternative networks. Land use and growth projections were evaluated for compatibility
with adopted Local Facilities Management Plans (LFMP's) and alternatives were designed to
evaluate the potential impact of such major missing circulation links as:
• Cannon Road
• Poinsettia Lane
• Faraday Avenue
• Melrose Drive
• Carrillo Way
• College Boulevard
The purpose of the study included four key components:
• Evaluate adequacy of circulation element.
• Identify required circulation element deficiencies.
• Consolidate existing Traffic Impact Fees.
• Establish Preliminary Circulation Phasing Program to insure conformance with Growth
Management Standards to buildout of the City.
This report documents the findings of those studies and recommends adoption of a revised
Traffic Impact Fee Program.
-1 -
I
i
i
I
i
i
t
i
i
i
II. STUDY METHODOLOGY
---••. - . . , . '•- -^~^~ -, .'
Since adoption of the Growth Management Program in 1986, the City has embarked on a major
planning effort to establish detailed development parameters within the 25 Local Facilities
Management Zones (LFMZ's). Compared to prior studies far more detailed land use, circulation
and phasing information has been developed. It was necessary to incorporate this new data into
existing computerized traffic models to evaluate the current adequacy of the planned circulation
system. Land use intensities were significantly reduced by the adoption of the Growth
Management Program. Improvement in the overall circulation system performance was to be
expected.
m The following steps outline the overall study process:
1 » Evaluate and confirm Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ's)
• Review and revise transportation network connections and link characteristics
(• Establish buildout land use and trip characteristics for TAZ's
• Project land use and trip characteristics for 1995 and 2000 based on LFMP data
4» Project Average Daily Trips and Peak Hour trips on alternative networks for 1995,
2000 and buildout.
I , • Evaluate roadway .segments^ and intersection capacities for conformance with the
§ Growth Management Standard for Circulation
• Identify potential Circulation Element failures
| • Develop mitigation measures to insure conformance with the Growth Management
Standard for Circulation
I • Prepare project cost estimates
• Evaluate and revise Traffic Impact Fee (TIF)
I • Review impact of missing roadway segments on overall system performance in 1995
and 2000
I • Establish network phasing thresholds and preliminary project schedules.
This report will provide an overall framework for development of the circulation system. Annual
traffic monitoring should continue to be evaluated against model assumptions to insure accuracy
and compatibility. As appropriate, project scheduling should be revised as a part of the Annual
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) process.
-2-
I
I
f
I
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
\
I
I
I
I
I
ill. CIRCULATION SYSTEM EVALUATION
The City of Carlsbad Growth Management Standard for circulation provides that:
"No road segment or intersection in the zone nor any road segment or intersection
out of the zone which is impacted by development in the zone shall be projected
to exceed a Service Level C during off-peak hours, nor Service Level D during
peak hours. Impacted means where twenty percent or more of the traffic
generated by the Local Facilities Management Zone will use the road segment or
intersection."
Evaluation of the adequacy of the Circulation Element involves comparisons of projected peak
hour traffic volumes against planned roadway capacity for circulation roadway segments and
intersections. Tables 1 and 3 provide general parameters for Level of Service (LOS) evaluation.
Figure 1 compares buildout traffic volume projections with 1990 traffic volumes.
Roadway Segment Analysis
Roadway segment adequacy was evaluated against the Circulation Element classification, as well
as existing conditions.
The study confirmed that when fully constructed, the Circulation Element roadway segments are
adequate to-accommodate buildout traffic. There are however, a number of segments that are
only partially constructed and do not front on developable properties. Supplemental funding will
be required in order for these facilities to be fully constructed to meet traffic demands generated
by citywide growth. These links are recommended for inclusion in the Traffic Impact Fee
program. Deficient links are described in Table 2 and shown on Figure 2. Detailed descriptions
and project estimates are shown in Appendix B.
-3-
\
I
I
TABLE 1
LEVEL OF SERVICE
ROADWAY SEGMENTS
Level of Service
A
B
C
D
E
F
Capacity Ratio
0.00-0.60
0.61 -0.70
0.71-0.80
0.81-0.90
0.91-1.00
1.00+
Arterial Capacity*
Collector
1080
1260
1440
1620
1800
1800+
Secondary
2160
2520
2880
3240
3600
3600+
Prime
3240
3780
4320
4860
5400
5400+
* Capacity is expressed in vehicles per hour for the peak hour direction assumed to be 1800
vehicles per hour per lane.
TABLE 2
TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE
PROJECTS AND COST ESTIMATES
ROADWAY SEGMENTS
Project
1 . Alga Road
2. Avenida Encinas
3. -Carlsbad Boulevard
4. Carlsbad Village Drive
5. Carlsbad Village Drive*
6."EI Cafhino.Real ~ ~ ~~
7. El Camino Real
8. La Costa Avenue
9. La Costa Avenue*
1 0. Leucadia Boulevard**
1 1 . Olivenhain Road &
Rancho Santa Fe Rd. **
12. Poinsettia Lane
Description
Widen south side from
Mimosa Drive to El Camino Real
Widen south of
Palomar Airport Road
Widen from Manzano Drive to
600 ft. north of Cannon Road
Widen from Pontiac Drive to
Victoria Avenue
Widen east of El Camino Real
Widen from Tamarack Avenue to
Chestnut Avenue
Widen from La Costa Avenue to
Arenal Road
Widen from I-5 to El Camino Real
Mitigation for widening
Construct from existing terminus
east to El Camino Real
Widen from El Camino Real to
Melrose Drive
Widen from I-5 to Batiquitos Lane
TOTAL
Cost
$ 300,000
525,000
2,1 00,000
1 ,360,000
450,000
1,760,000
450,000
6,710,000
765,000
3,500,000
6,000,000
1 ,870,000
$25,790,000
I
\
\
\
\
Construction completed
**City contribution only-not full project
-5-
I
I
f
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
i
i
i
t
i
i
Intersection Analysis
The SANDAG computer model generates morning (AM) and afternoon (PM) peak hour turning
movement volumes at all major circulation element intersections. This turning movement data
was utilized to calculate intersection Levels of Service in the AM and PM peak for more than 60
intersections in Carlsbad. Assuming General Plan roadway configurations, 20 intersections were
identified as not meeting Growth Management Standards. These intersection were then analyzed
assuming the addition of turn lanes to determine required mitigation measures to allow the
intersections to meet standards. Impacted intersections and mitigation measures are shown in
Tables 4 and 5 and on Figures 3 and 4. Detailed project descriptions and cost estimates are
contained in Appendix B.
It should be noted that even with the implementation of the improvements proposed in this report
there remains a number of intersections which are projected to fail the adopted Growth
Management performance standards at buildout of the City. These intersections are shown in
Figure 10, but generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along
Carlsbad Boulevard. A more detailed analysis reveals that in excess of 50% of the future
Carlsbad Boulevard traffic volumes are the result of the diversion of regional traffic from Interstate
5 due to projected traffic congestion on the freeway.
Structural mitigation for these projected intersection failures is not feasible from an economic or
traffic engineering standpoint. With the adoption of the Citywide Facilities and Improvements
Plan it was recognized that there may be certain intersections which fail to meet the adopted
performance standard, over which the City does not have jurisdictional control and therefore
could not halt development because of this condition.
The diversion of regional traffic from a failing Interstate or State Highway onto City streets would
qualify as not being within the jurisdictional control of the City.
The City may be able to fully or at least partially mitigate these failures by aggressive pursuit of
the implementation of an effective regional program of Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) and alternative mass transit services. These programs are discussed later in this report.
-7-
I
I
\
\
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
TABLE 3
LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTION
INTERSECTIONS
Level
of
Service
A
B
C
D
E
F
Traffic Quality
Low Volumes; high speeds; speed not restricted by other vehicles; all signal
cycles clear with no vehicles waiting through more than one signal cycle.
Operating speeds beginning to be affected by other traffic; between one and
ten percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through
more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods
Operating speeds and maneuverability closely controlled by other traffic;
between 1 1 and 30 percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles
which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods;
recommended ideal design standard.
Tolerable operating speeds; 31 to 70 percent of the signal cycles have one or
more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic
periods; often used as design standard in urban areas.
Capacity; the maximum traffic volumes an intersection can accommodate;
restricted speeds; 71 to 100 percent of the signal cycles have one or more
vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic
periods
Long queues of traffic; unstable flow; stoppages 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.
Nominal
Range of
ICU (a)
0.00 - 0.60
0.61-0.70
0.71-0.80
0.81-0.90
0.91 - 1.00
Not
Meaningful
.(a) ICU (Intersection Capacity Utilization) at various Level of Service versus Level of Service E for
urban arterial streets.
Source: Highway Capacity Manual. Highway Research Board Special Report 87, National Academy
of Science, Washington D.C, 1965, page 320.
I
I
I
I -8-
TABLE 4
TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE
PROJECTS AND COST ESTIMATES
INTERSECTIONS
Intersection
1 . Cannon Rd. - Interstate 5
2. Cannon Rd - Paseo Del Norte
3. El Camino Real - Alga Road
4. El Camino Real - Cannon Road
5. El Camino Real - Camino Vida Roble
6. El Camino Real - Carlsbad Village Dr.
7. El Camino Real - Faraday Ave.
8. El Camino Real - Palomar Airport Rd.
9. El Camino Real - Tamarack Ave.
1 0. Faraday Ave. - Orion Street
1 1 . Faraday Ave. - College Blvd.
12. Melrose Dr. - Alga Rd.
13. Palomar Airport Road - College Blvd.
14. Palomar Airport Road - Paseo Del Norte
Project Description
Road and Ramp Widening
Signal Installation at Ramp
termini
Add one thru lane in each
direction
Add dual left turn signal
modifications
Add southbound right turn lane
Left turn lanes
Dual left on El Camino Real
Dual left turn lanes on El
Camino - right turn lanes
eastbound, westbound and
southbound
Intersection reconstruction.
Add left turn, thru and right
turn lanes on all legs - phased
construction
Close free right turn lane signal
- modification for dual lefts and
left turn phasing, (reimburse
Foote Development)
Traffic Signal
Dual left turn northbound and
southbound
Dual left turn lanes
northbound, southbound
eastbound and westbound
Dual left turn lane southbound
Dual left turns all legs
TOTAL
Estimated
Cost
$1,750,000
$435,000
$250,000
$130,000
$320,000
$320,000
$710,000
$1,750,000
$170,000
$100,000
-0-
Already"
Constructed
$480,000
$160,000
$525,000
$7,100,000
I
I -9-
I
I
I
I
\
i
I
I
I
\
I
\
\
\
\
I
I
TABLE 5
*SPECIAL INTERSECTION DESIGN
(INCOMPLETE INTERSECTIONS)
1. Cannon Road and College Boulevard
2. Cannon Road and Hidden Valley Road
3. Carlsbad Village Drive and College Boulevard
4. El Camino Real and Cannon Road
5. El Camino Real and Poinsettia Lane
6. El Camino Real and Calle Barcelona
7. El Camino Real and Olivenhain Road
** 8. El Camino Real and Marron Road
9. Melrose Drive and Faraday Avenue
10. Melrose Drive and Carrillo Way
11. Melrose Drive and Alga Road
12. Melrose Drive and Rancho Santa Fe Road
13. Palomar Airport Road and Hidden Valley Road
14. Poinsettia Lane and Alga Road
15. Rancho Santa Fe Road and Questhaven Road
* Intersections identified above indicate the need for dual left or free right turn lanes that should
be incorporated into design at time of construction. Further detailed analysis should be
conducted at time of improvement design.
** This intersection should be reviewed in detail as a part of the Zone 25 LFMP.
Sidewalk Program
As a part of the City's Pedestrian Action Plan, a full inventory of sidewalk deficiencies has been
prepared and a priority program established. The total priority program is estimated to cost
nearly $10 million, excluding detailed right-of-way, utility and drainage consideration. As growth
occurs throughout the City, pedestrian activities will increase and provisions for full pedestrian
facilities will become vital.
It is recommended that $300,000 per year be provided over a 20 year period to fund priority
sidewalks. The $6 million is to be included in the Traffic Impact Fee Program. Remaining
funding should be generated from assessments on existing residents from Federal, State and
regional funding sources or from City General Capital Construction GCC funds.
Identified sidewalk projects and rankings are attached as Appendix C. Actual projects should
be established as a part of the annual Capital Improvements Program.
-11 -
I
t
I
I
I
I
\
\
I
I
I
I
\
i
i
\
i
Transportation Management and Monitoring
Analysis of the overall Circulation Element has indicated that there exist a number of critical
locations that will have difficulty in maintaining the levels of service stipulated in the Growth
Management Plan. To insure optimum system operation all efforts should be made to manage
and monitor the circulation system. Many of the projected City deficiencies are related to
inadequacies in the regional freeway networks. Efforts to expand these regional facilities are not
possible at the City level. Attaining the regional transportation and air quality goals will require
an aggressive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program.
Transportation Demand Management strategies target work and school trips in an attempt to
increase transit use, ridesharing and work hour flexibility. Such efforts are designed to shift and
reduce peak hour traffic demands. This program can be particularly effective in areas of high
employment intensity.
LFM Zones 5 and 16, combined with portions of the City of Vista, provide a unique opportunity
to improve traffic flow in the Palomar Airport Road corridor and such north-south corridors as El
Camino Real, Melrose Drive, Interstate 5 and Carlsbad Boulevard. As such, these zones should
be given specific attention to implement a strong TDM program.
SANDAG is currently working with local agencies and the Air Pollution Control District to develop
Transportation Demand Management strategies. To facilitate these long-term efforts and to
annually monitor impacts on the circulation element, $1,100,000 has been included in the Traffic
Impact Fee program to finance management and monitoring efforts over a 20 year period.
- 13-
IV. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE PROGRAM
I
I
I
J
I
I
\
I
\
I
I
This study has identified a number of circulation element needs related to traffic demand created
by the buildout of the City. These improvements are required to serve overall traffic increases
throughout the City and are not attributable to localized project impacts.
The most common method of funding these types of projects is a Traffic Impact Fee (TIP) on new
development. Based on a previous study conducted in Carlsbad by Barton-Aschman Associates,
the City Council on April 22,1986 established a TIP for the La Costa area located generally south
of Poinsettia Lane. Subsequent to that action, an interim fee was adopted on July 6, 1986 for
the northern part of the City pending further study. A summary of the existing fee programs is
shown in Table 6 below. The La Costa area TIP agenda bill is attached as Appendix D.
TABLE 6
CITY OF CARLSBAD.
TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES "
Land Use
Residential
Industrial/Other
Commercial/Office
North TIP
$60/Trip
" $15/trip
$1 0/Trip
La Costa TIP
$67/Trip
$27/Trip
$27/Trip
Trip generation rates for various land uses are based on the trip tables established by SANDAG
as indicated in Table 7.
Based on current analysis, the following program demands have been identified:
Roadway Segment Projects (Table 2)
Intersection Projects (Table 4)
Sidewalk Construction Program
Transportation Management and Monitoring
Total of Projects
Funds Previously Received
BALANCE (FUTURE FEES)
$ 25,790,000
7,100,000
6,000,000
S 1.100.000
39,900,000
-3.627.000
$ 36,363,000
\
i - 14 -
Table 7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
I
I
i
i
r
i
San Diego
ASSOCIATION OF
GO\rERNMEXTS
Suite 800. First Interstate Plaza
4Q1 B Street
San O'ego. California 92101
619.'236-5300 Fax 619/236-7222
NOTE: This list only represents a guide of average, or estimated, traffic generation rates for land uses (emphasis on acreage and building
square footage) in the San Diego region. These rates are subject to change as future documentation becomes available, or as local sources
are updated. For more specific information regarding traffic data and trip rates, please refer to the San Diego Traffic Generators manual.
Always check with local jurisdictions for their preferred or applicable rates.
BRIEF GUIDE OF VEHICULAR
TRAFFIC GENERATION RATES FOR THE SAN DIEGO REGION
JANUARY 1990
LAND USE
Agriculture (Open Space)
Airports
Commercial
General Aviation
Heliports
AutomobileCar Wash
GasolineSales (Dealer & Repair)
Auto Repair Center
BankingBank (Walk-in only)
Bank (w/Drtve-through)
Drive-through only
Savings & Loan
Drive-through only
Cemeteries
Church (or Synagogue)
Commercial/Retail Centers
Super Regional Shopping Center
(More than 60 acres, more than600,000 sq. ft, w/usually 3+
major stores)
Regional Shopping Center
(30-60 acres, 300,000-600,000
sq. ft, w/usually 2+ major stores)
Community Shopping Center
(10-30 acres, 100,000-300,000 sq. ft..
w/usually 1 major store and detached
restaurant)
Neighborhood Shopping Center
(Less than 10 acres, less than
100,000 sq. ft, w/usualty grocery
store & drug store)
Commercial Shops
(also strip commercial)
Grocery Store
Convenience Market
Discount
Furniture Store
Lumber Store
Hardware/Paint Store
Garden Nursery
Education
University (4 years)
Junior College (2 years)
High School
Middle/Junior High
Elementary
Day Care
Hospitals
General
Convalescent/Nursing
ESTIMATED WEEKDAY VEHICLE
TRIP GENERATION RATE
2/acre"
12/acre, 100/flight, 70/1000 sq. ft*
4/acre, 2 flight 6/based aircraft*
100/acre"
900/srte, 600/acre"
750/station, 130/pump"
40/1000 sq. ft, 300/acre. 60/service stall*
20/1000 sq. ft, 400/acre. 20/setvice stall*
150/1000 sq. ft, 1000/acre* ••
200/1000 sq. ft. 1500/acre*
300/(150one-way)/lane*
60/1000 sq. ft, 600/acre"
100 (50 one-way)/lane"
5/acre*
15/1000 sq. ft, 40/acre** (triple rates
for Sunday, or days of assembly)
40/1000 sq. ft, 400/acre*
50/1000 sq. ft,500/acre*
70/1000 sq. ft, 700/aere* "
120/1000 sq. ft. 1200/acre* •*
40/1000 sq. ft, 400/acre*
150/1000 sq. ft, 2000/acre • **
500/1000 sq.ft"
70/1000 sq. ft, 700/acre* »•
6/1000 sq.ft, 100/acre"
30/1000 sq.ft, 150/acre**
60/1000 sq. ft, 600/acre"
40/1000 sq. ft. 90/acre"
2.5/studerrt, 100 acre*
1.6/studem.BO/acre*
1.4/studerrt,50/acre*
1.0/studerrt, 40/acre"
1.4/studem,60/acre"
3/child. 70/1000sq.ft"
20/bed, 20/1000 sq. ft, 200/acre*
3/bed"
HIGHEST PEAK HOUR % (plus IN:OUT ratio)
Between 7-9 A.M. Between 4-6 P.M.
6% (6:4)
4% (5:5)
6% (5:5)
8% (6:4)
8% (7:3)
4% (7:3)
5% (6:4)
3% (5:5)
2%
4%
4% (8:2)
2% (7:3)
2% (7:3)
3% (6:4)
4% (6:4)
3% (6:4)
9%
5%
7% (5:5)
9% (5:5)
12% (5:5)
10% (4:6)
11%
8% (4:6)
10% (5:5)
13% (5:5)
9%
15%
8% (5:5)
9% (5:5)
9% (5:5)
10% (5:5)
11% (5:5)
9% (5:5)
11% (5:5)
8% (5:5)
10% (5:5)
9% (5:5)
9% (5:5)
9% (5:5)
10% (5:5)
9% (3:7)8% (3:7)
14% (3:7)
7% (3:7)
5% (3:7)
18% (5:5)
11% (3:7)
8%
MEMBER AGENCIES: Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista. Coronado. Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas. Escondido. Imperial Beach. La Mesa.
Lemon Grove. National City. Oceanside. Poway, San Diego. San Marcos, Santee. Solana Beach. Vista and County of San Diego
ADVISORY/LIAISON MEMBERS: California Department of Transportation. U.S. Department of Defense and Tijuana/Baia California None.
-15-
Table 7 (Continued)
Industrial
Industrial/Business Park
Industrial Park (no commercial)
Industrial Plant (multiple shifts)
Manufacturing/Assembly
Warehousing
Storage
Science Research & Development
Library
Lodging
Hotel (w/convention facilities/restaurant)
Motel
Resort Hotel
Military
Offices
Standard Commercial Office
(less than 100,000 sq.ft.)
Large (high-rise) Commercial Office
(more than 100,000 sq. ft)
Corporate Office (single user)
Government (Civic Center)
Post Office
Department of Motor Vehicles
Medical
Parks
City (developed)
Regional (undeveloped)
Neighborhood
Amusement (Theme)
San Diego Zoo
Sea World
Recreation
Beach, Ocean or Bay
Beach, Lake (fresh water)
Bowling Center
Campground
Golf CourseMarinas
Racquetball/Health Club
Tennis CourtsSports Facilities
Outdoor StadiumIndoor Arena
Racetrack
Theaters (multiplex)
Residential
Single Family Detached(average 4 DU/acre)
Condominium
(or any multi-family less than
20 DU/acre)
Apartments
(or any multi-family units morethan 20 DU/acre)
MobileHome
Family
Adults Only
Retirement Community
Rural Estate
Congregate Care Facility
Restaurants
Quality
Sit down, high turnover
Fast Food (w/drrve-through)
Transportation Facilities
Bus Depot
Truck Terminal
Waterport
Transit Station (Rail)
16/1000 sq.ft. 200/acre*
8/1000 sq. ft, 90/acre*
10/1000 sq.ft. 120/acre*
4/1000 sq. ft, 60/acre"
5/1000sq.ft., 60/acre"
2/1000 sq. ft, 0.2/vault 30/acre*
8/1000 sq.ft., 80/acre*
40/1000 sq. ft, 400/aere"
10/room, 300/acre"
9/room, 200/acre*
8/room, 100/acre*
2.5 military & civilian personnel*
20/1000 sq.ft., 300/acre'
17/1000 sq. ft., 600/acre*
10/1000 sq.ft., 140/acre»
30/1000 sq.ft."
150/1000 sq.ft.**
180/1000 sq. ft, 900/acre"
50/1000sq.ft., 500/acre*
50/acre*
5/acre*
5/acre*
80/acre, 130/acre (summer only)**
115/acre*
80/acre*
600/1000 ft shoreline, 60/acre*
50/1000 ft shoreline, 5/acre*
30/lane, 300/acre**
4/campsrte**8/acre, 600/course**4/berth, 20/acre* ••
40/1000 sq. ft, 300/acre. 40/court*3071000 sq. ft, 30/court**
50/acre, 0.2/seat*
30/acre, 0.1/seat*
40/acre, 0.6 seat*
80/1000 sq. ft, 1.8/seat*
10/dwelling unit*
8/dwelling unit*
6/dwelling unit*
5/dwelling unit 40/acre*
3/dwelling unit, 20/acre*
4/dwelllng unit**
12/dwelling unit**
2/dwelling unit**
100/1000 sq. ft., 500/acre* **
300/1000 sq. ft, 1200/acre* **
700/1000 sq. ft, 3000/acre* **
25/1000 sq.ft."
10/1000 sq.ft., 60/acre
170/berth, 12/acre**
300/acre**
(8:2)
(7:3)
6% (6:4)8% (4:6)
5% (6:4)
9% (9:1)
14% (9:1)
13% (9:1)
15% (9:1)
9% (9:li
7% (5:5)
6% (6:4)
6% (8:2)
4%
7% (7:3)
4%
6% (8:2)
3%
4% (6:4)
4%
0.3%
8% (2:8)
8% (2:8)
8% (2:8)
9%
9%
3% (6:4)
1% (6:4)8% (5:5)4% (6:4)
9% (4:6)
14% (7:3)
12% (2:81
12% (2;5
15% (3;-
20% (V.-
25% (4:6i
9% (5:5)14% (1:9)
10% (5:5)
8% (6:4)
9% (6:4)
7% (4:6)
10% (2:8)
13% (2:8)
14% (2:8)
15% (1:9)
12% (3:7)
8% (5:5)
11% (4:6)
10% (3:7)
8%
11% (4:6)
10% (4:6)
8%9% (3:7)9%
9%
(3:7)
(6:4)
11% (5:5)
8% (7:3)
10% (7:3)
10% (7:3)
11% (7:3)
12% (6:4)10% (6:4)
8% (5:5)
8% (7:3)6% (6:4)
8% (5:5)
8% (5:5)
15% (3:7)
• Primary source: San D/ego Traffic Generators.
" Other sources: ITE Trip Generation Report, Trip Generation Rates (other agencies), various SANDAG & CALTRANS studies, reports
and estimates.
-16-
I
I
I
I
\
I
\
I
I
Traffic Impact Fee Calculation
In order to calculate the revised TIP, it is necessary to inventory all trip types and distribute the
cost based on the various land use categories. Consistent with the La Costa area TIP and the
City's Bridge and Thoroughfare District, it is recommended that Commercial, Office and Industrial
trip generations be adjusted to reflect double-counting. The proposed structure adjusts
Commercial and Industrial trips to 40% of the SANDAG published rate. This adjustment reflects
the assumption of those studies that 60% of the trip ends assigned to Commercial and Industrial
uses originate from residences within the City. Table 8 gives a summary of remaining trips.
TABLE 8
FUTURE TRIP SUMMARY
Land Use
Residential
Commercial/Industrial
Total
Future Trip
244,000 Trips
575,000 Trips
81 9,000 Trips
Trip Rate Adjusted
244,000 Trips
230,000 Trips
474,000 Equivalent Trips
The fee per residential equivalent trip is:
$ 36,363,000 + 474,000 = $ 76.72/trip
The Commercial and Industrial fee is adjusted to 40% of this rate or $30.69 per trip. Table 9
summarizes the fee adjustments, which have been rounded to the nearest dollar per trip.
TABLE 9
TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE
EXISTING AND PROPOSED FEE
Existing
La Costa Fee
Residential $67/Trip
Other (including $27/Trip
Commercial,
Industrial and Office)
City-Wide
Proposed Fee
Residential $77/Trip
Industrial/
Commercial $31 /Trip
Percentage
Increase
14.9
14.8
Existing
North Carlsbad Interim Fee
Residential $60/Trip
Industrial/Other $15/Trip
Commercial/Office $1 0/Trip
City-Wide
Proposed Fee
Residential $77/Trip
Industrial/Other $31 /Trip
Commercial/Office $31 /Trip
Percentage
Increase
28.3
106.7
210.0
I - 17-
V ALTERNATIVE AND PHASING ANALYSIS
As a part of the SAN DAG modeling effort, six (6) different networks were analyzed for the 1995,
2000, and buildout periods. Analysis of these alternatives allow the staff to evaluate for each of
the time periods the impact of missing links on the performance of the remaining system. Figure
5 highlights the major missing circulation links and those that are found to be critical for
adherence to Growth Management Standards in the future.
Critical missing links are those roadway segments that if not installed within a particular time
frame will result in potential failures along other routes within the system. Critical links and the
critical periods are shown in Table 10 and on Figures 5, 6, and 7.
TABLE 10
CRITICAL LINK PHASING
Roadway
Cannon Road
Cannon Road
Cannon Road
College Boulevard
Faraday Avenue
Calle Barcelona
Avenida Encinas
Leucadia Boulevard
Limits
I-5 to El Camino Real (Reaches 1 & 2)
El Camino Real to College Boulevard (Reach 3)
College Boulevard to Oceanside (Reach 4)
Cannon Road to Carlsbad Village Drive
Orion Way to Melrose Drive
El Camino Real to Rancho Santa Fe Road
End to Carlsbad Boulevard
El Camino Real to existing terminus
Phasing
Year
2000
1995
2000
1995
2000
1995
1991
2000
The remaining missing links shown on Figure 5 serve primarily local demand and will be
constructed concurrent with development within the areas served. Construction of these routes
will be the responsibility of individual project development.
In addition to construction of critical missing links, several existing roadways have not been
developed to their full general plan width. Traffic projections were analyzed to determine when
these roadways will require widening to avoid capacity failures. These projects are listed in Table
11 and shown on Figures 6 and 7. This information will be utilized to prepare the Annual Capital
Improvement Program.
-18-
\
TABLE 11
ROAD SEGMENT WIDENING PROGRAM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Roadway
Carlsbad Boulevard
Palomar Airport Road
Palomar Airport Road
Poinsettia Lane
La Costa Avenue
Rancho Santa Fe Road
Olivenhain Road
El Camino Real
Limits
Cannon Road to Manzano Street
4-lanes
Carlsbad Boulevard to I-5
4-lanes
El Camino Real to Business Park
6-lanes
Carlsbad Boulevard to Avenida Encinas
4-lanes
El Camino Real to I-5
4-lanes
Melrose Drive to La Costa Avenue
4-lanes
6 lanes
El Camino Real to Amargosa
4-lanes
6-lanes
Poinsettia Lane to La Costa Avenue
6-lanes
Phasing
1995
1995
1995
1995
1995
1995
2000
1995
L 2000
2000
-20-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
&
M
I
I
Phasing Policy
In order to insure the orderly and timely development of the circulation network it is
recommended that a policy be established that prevents circulation mitigation measures beyond
those required to accommodate buildout traffic. Those measures are identified in the General
Plan Circulation Element and the mitigation identified within this report.
If implemented, such a policy would require growth management planning to incorporate phasing
and financing of critical missing links into the zone planning process as identified within this
report. Development that impacts roadway segments or intersections beyond planned levels
would not be allowed to proceed until a financial guarantee for construction of the appropriate
missing links has been approved and adopted by formal action of the City Council.
. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the following policy:
No interim mitigation improvements beyond those identified for construction at buildout of the
§ City will be allowed. Where buildout mitigation is not adequate to meet Growth Management
Standards, construction of the appropriate missing circulation segments is the only acceptable
mitigation measure.
I When such missing segments are required, development within the Local Facilities Management
Zone shall proceed only upon adoption by the City Council of a finance plan guaranteeing
I construction of the missing segment.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
VI. ISSUES
I Carlsbad's circulation planning occurs within a greater regional context that is intimately linked
to the freeway network and the circulation and land use planning of neighboring jurisdictions.
I Most of the transportation issues facing Carlsbad in the future relate to this regional interface.
Resolution of these issues to optimize the circulation system will require continued full
involvement in regional transportation planning efforts.
I Cannon Road
By far the most significant missing link within Carlsbad at this time is Cannon Road. This major
I east/west connector extending between State Route 78 and Interstate Highway 5 has been
recognized as a regionally significant relief facility for the Route 78 corridor and has received $4.6
million from the Route 78 Corridor reserve funds to facilitate its completion. Cannon Road will
significantly reduce traffic on all major circulation links north of Palomar Airport Road.
I Additionally, Route 78 is relieved by up to 20,000 trips per day; segments of 1-5 are reduced
32,000 trips per day; and Palomar Airport Road is reduced by approximately 15,000 trips per day.
_ Carlsbad Village Drive, El Camino Real and Tamarack Avenue all receive relief with the
I completion of Cannon Road. Although Cannon Road is a vital local and regional link, it does not
appear to be critical until near the year 2000.
Plans are currently being completed for Villages Q and T of the Calavera Hills Master Plan.
I These plans include road construction of College Boulevard from the City of Oceanside-to
Carlsbad Village Drive. "This connection is functionally equivalent to portions of Cannon Road
I and may be completed by 1993. To assess the impact of the College/Tamarack connection,
computer model projections were conducted for 1995, 2000 and buildout. The volume impacts
I at 1995 and buildout are shown on Figures 8 and 9.
The primary impact of the College/Tamarack connection would be to the intersections of
Tamarack Avenue at El Camino Real and Tamarack Avenue at Carlsbad Village Drive. These two
intersections are projected to approach capacity in 1995. Mitigation for these intersections is the
construction of College Avenue to Cannon Road and Cannon Road to El Camino Real. This
connection provides traffic relief by establishing a bypass route for regional and industrially
oriented traffic away from Tamarack Avenue. Figures 6 and 7 incorporate the proposed
construction phasing.
-24-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
In general, the connection of Melrose Drive has limited impact on the City of Carlsbad circulation
I with the exceptions of where Melrose Drive combines with Rancho Santa Fe Road in the vicinity
I
I
I
I
I
Local Facilities Management Zone Plans should be revised to reflect the proposed timing of
roadway improvements.
Melrose Drive Extension
The Circulation Element of the General Plan designates Melrose Drive as a significant
north/south prime arterial. It will extend from Route 78 to an undisclosed terminus point in the
vicinity of the proposed State Route 56 south of the San Dieguito River valley located outside the
City of Carlsbad.
Melrose Drive is not included within the Circulation Element of the City of Encinitas and is a
subject being considered in the SANDAG-sponsored Mid-Counties Transportation Study. This
study indicates that Melrose Drive serves as a major regional link relieving congestion on
Interstate 5 and Interstate 15, including several local collector streets within the communities of
Olivenhain, Encinitas and Rancho Santa Fe.
of Questhaven Road. Traffic projections in this area approach 75,000 average daily trips. Such
large volumes far exceed the capacity of the prime arterial classification and would require
unusual mitigation measures to satisfactorily accommodate traffic flow.
I
I
The Mid-Counties study is currently proceeding. A sub-committee has been formed to evaluate
I the viability of the Melrose Drive extension, to review environmental constraints and explore the
potential for collector level streets to provide intermediate traffic relief.
I
Upon conclusion of these studies, the Circulation Element issue of Melrose Drive and the
extension of La Costa Avenue should be revised consistent with adopted regional plans.
Rancho Del Pro Interchange
Traffic studies indicate that construction of a new interchange at Rancho Del Oro Drive and Route
78 will provide significant traffic relief to El Camino Real and College Boulevard and at other
interchanges with Route 78. However, the majority of relief would occur northerly of Route 78 in
the City of Oceanside.
-27-
I Relief provided in the City of Carlsbad is primarily to the future extension of Marron Road and
proposed development within LFM Zone 25.
I
Caltrans completed a Project Study Report on the proposed interchange in November of 1990,
I and the City of Carlsbad completed a financial evaluation in December of 1990. The proposed
I
I
I
I
I
project, including the extension of roadway between Marron Road and West Vista Way, is
estimated to cost approximately $26 million. The NBS/Lowry December 31,1990 study indicates
that the City of Oceanside benefits from $13.45 million and Carlsbad $12.45 million. Even given
significant cost sharing from Oceanside, the economics and environmental viability of this project
is in question.
It would appear that funding of the proposed interchange will require intensive land uses within
LFM Zone 25, partially offsetting gains received from the improvements. Additional traffic
attracted to Marron Road may have significant adverse impacts on the Intersections of Marron
Road with College Boulevard and El Camino Real.
Detailed issues of land use intensity and financing should be further studied in relationship to the
Local Facilities Management Plan. These studies should include a spectrum of land use
alternatives taken within the context of environmental constraints.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Arenal Road Extension
I Computer model analysis included review of the impact of completing the connection of Arenal
Road between El Camino Real and Batiquitos Lane. This connection was studied in some detail
I as a part of the Phase I Aviara plan. The physical viability of various alternatives were
established; however, construction would involve significant reconstruction of the existing
I roadway westerly of El Camino Real with potential of environmental concerns to surrounding
residences.
Traffic projections indicate that at buildout of the City the roadway would attract approximately
6,000 average daily trips, 3,300 of which would be diverted from the Alga Road/El Camino Real
intersection. The standards at the Alga Road/El Camino Real intersection can be accommodated
with conventional mitigation measures incorporated into the Traffic Impact Fee program.
-28-
Given currently planned land use intensities within Aviara, it is concluded that Arenal Road
extension will not be required.
Carlsbad Boulevard
Carlsbad Boulevard is unique in character in that it provides primary beach access and closely
parallels Interstate Highway 5 (1-5). Because it abuts the ocean, all major intersections are "T"
intersections that tend to have high turning movement demands. SANDAG projections indicate
that greater than 50% of Carlsbad Boulevard traffic is regional in nature and uses Carlsbad
Boulevard as an alternative to 1-5 for through circulation. It can be expected that this trend will
continue as congestion on 1-5 increases.
As indicated on Figure 10, I-5 intersections and major Carlsbad Boulevard intersections have
been identified as future hot spots. Consequently, these locations of future impact that primarily
serve regional traffic are within limited control of the City. At buildout, either physical or
jurisdictional constraints may prevent attainment of Level of Service D requirements.
Available mitigation measures primarily involve regional actions and implementation of
Transportation Demand Management strategies.
Freeway Ramp Metering
The Regional Transportation Plan has established the goal of installing ramp meters on all
freeway interchanges in the region by 1995. Potential significant impacts to local jurisdictions
may result.
A ramp meter is a traffic control device placed on freeway on-ramps to meter traffic entering the
freeway. These devices are designed to maximize freeway flow by limiting access to the freeway
and to reduce friction caused by unregulated flow entering the freeway.
Ramp meters installed on freeway segments that have exceeded their functional capacity will
tend to create delay at freeway interchanges and can result in diversion of traffic to alternative
parallel routes. Interstate 5 ramp meters will serve primarily north-south traffic. Diversions from
this route will impact Carlsbad Boulevard and El Camino Real.
-29-
The most significant structural mitigation to the 1-5 problem is the provision of facilities within the
Melrose corridor and commuter rails systems and feeders.
;
Ramp metering includes provision for high occupancy vehicle (HOV) preference lanes. These
facilities enhance carpools, vanpools and other transportation demand features. The magnitude
of work trips in the Palomar Airport Road corridor make these types of features particularly
effective and desirable.
Transportation Demand Management
It has become apparent in recent years that buildout of the San Diego region will result in
significant increase in traffic congestion and generally poor levels of service on the roadway
network. Interstates 5 and 15 are the only major north-south arteries, and even when widened
and retro-fitted with high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes will not accept the demand placed on
them.
Maintenance of acceptable levels of transportation services will require:
• Land Use revisions to enhance transit viability
I • Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
I Transportation Demand Management primarily targets peak hour and special event trips with a
strategy to reduce the number of drive alone trips-and to alter the time distribution of 4he peak
I hour.
I Strategies include:
• Employee flex-time
I • Carpool programs
• Vanpool programs
I - • Parking management . -•- -,.-..-- ..„__-.•
• Work place transit incentive programs
i • Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
I SANDAG and the Air Pollution Control District are actively pursuing the implementation of the
-31 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Transportation Demand Management program. Some form of regional ordinance and program
will be adopted in the near future to comply with the California Clean Air Act of 1988.
Given that 70% of all trips are Commercial/Industrial related with nearly 50%, or over 200,000, of
I the daily trips are in the Industrial/Palomar Airport Road corridor, Transportation Demand
Management has a high potential to alleviate many of the future regionally based transportation
I concerns. Nearly all future hot spots within the City can be positively impacted with a
comprehensive targeted transportation management program.
I
-32-
I VII SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
I In this report, an attempt has been made to outline the existing state of circulation planning in
the City of Carlsbad and to generally point out areas which require future actions to maintain
I adequate levels of service through buildout of the City. The following are areas addressed:
• Identification of circulation area deficiencies
I • Proposed mitigation to enhance roadway system
• Recommended Traffic Impact Fee program
I • Schedule for development of roadway missing links
• Identification of future circulation issue areas of concern
' The proposed Traffic Impact Fee program deals with all circulation areas under the direct control
I of the City. Studies indicate the reduction of development intensities implemented with growth
management have insured the adequacy of Carlsbad's internal circulation system. Failures
I foreseeable in the future all relate to the City's interface with the regional system. Increased
emphasis on regional planning issues and Transportation Demand Management will be required
. in the future to improve transportation performance.
Recommendations;
| • Direct staff to implement the revised uniform Traffic Impact Fee and Program.
• Promote resolution of Melrose Drive classification and alignment issues.
I • Require detailed land use circulation and finance studies of Local Facilities Management Zone
25 focused on construction of the Rancho Del Oro Interchange.
I • • Eliminate consideration of Arenal road extension between El Camino Real and Batiquitos
Lane.
I • Establish a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program consistent with regional
program directives.
I • Interim mitigation improvements beyond those required to accommodate traffic at buildout of
the City will not be approved. Where buildout mitigation is not adequate to meet Growth
I Management Standards, construction of the appropriate unconstructed circulation element
is the only acceptable mitigation measure.
I When such unconstructed segments are required, development within the Local Facilities
Management Zone shall proceed only upon adoption by the City Council of a finance plan
I for the construction of the missing circulation element segment.
-33-
B
I
I
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CIRCULATION IMPLEMENTATION
PROGRAM AND
TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE STUDY
APPENDICES
Traffic Impact
Fees
Program
April 1991
Prepared by:
Engineering Department F
I
I APPENDICES INDEX
E
Appendix A - Capacity Analysis
I Appendix B - Project Cost Estimates
* Appendix C - Sidewalk Priority Listing
• Appendix D - La Costa Traffic Impact Fee Agenda Bill
I
I
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
l
i
i
i
APPENDIX A
Capacity Analysis
F
I APPENDIX A - INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY
LOCATION
El Camino Real at Marron Rd.
El Camino Real at Carlsbad Village Dr.
El Camino Real at Chestnut St.
El Camino Real at Tamarack Ave.
El Camino Real at Kelly Dr.
El Camino Real at Cannon Rd.*
El Camino Real at College Blvd.*
El Camino Real at Faraday Ave.*
El Camino Real at Palomar Airport Rd.
El Camino Real at Camino Vida Roble
El Camino Real at Poinsettia Ln.
El Camino Real at Alga Rd.*
El Camino Real at La Costa Ave.*
El Camino Real at Levante Street
El Camino Real at Calle Barcelona
El Camino Real at Olivenhain Rd.
Palomar Airport Rd. at Avenida Encinas
LEVEL OF SERVICE
AM EM
D
C
C
D
B
C
C
C
D
B
D
C
F
C
D
D
A
Palomar Airport Rd. at Paseo del Norte j C
Palomar Airport Rd. at Hidden Valley Road
Paiomar Airport Rd. at College Blvd.
Palomar Airport Rd. at Camino Vida Roble
Palomar Airport Rd. at El Fuerte
Palomar Airport Rd. at Melrose Ave.*
Palomar Airport Rd. at Business Park Way
Rancho Santa Fe Rd. at Olivenhain Rd.
Rancho Santa Fe Rd. at Calle Barcelona
Rancho Santa Fe Rd. at Camino de las Coches
Rancho Santa Fe Rd. at La Costa Ave.
Rancho Santa Fe Rd. at Questhaven Rd. *
Rancho Santa Fe Rd. at Melrose Ave. *
Rancho Santa Fe Rd. at Calle Acervo
Carlsbad Blvd. at State St.
A
C
B
D
C
C
C
A
A
B
C
F
C
C
D
B
A
C
A
D
D
D
D
B
D
D
F
C
D
D
D
D
A
D
A
D
D
B
C
A
A
C
C
F
B
C
* - HEAVY DEMAND ANALYSIS
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
i
APPENDIX A - INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY
* - HEAVY DEMAND ANALYSIS
LOCATION
Carlsbad Blvd. at Grand Ave.
Carlsbad Blvd. at Carlsbad Village Dr.*
Carlsbad Blvd. at Tamarack Ave.*
Carlsbad Blvd. at Cannon Rd.*
Carlsbad Blvd. at Palomar Airport Road*
Carlsbad Blvd. at Poinsettia Ln.*
Poinsettia Ln. at Avenida Encinas
Poinsettia Ln. at Paseo del Norte
Poinsettia Ln. at Batiquitos Dr.
Poinsettia Ln. at Alga Rd.
Cannon Rd. at Avenida Encinas
Cannon Rd. at Paseo del Norte*
Cannon Rd. at Hidden Valley Road
Cannon Rd. at Faraday Ave.
Cannon Rd. at College Blvd.*
College Blvd. at Tamarack Ave.
College Blvd. at Carlsbad Village Dr.
College Blvd. at Faraday Ave.
Melrose Ave. at Faraday Ave.*
Melrose Ave. at Carrillo Way
Melrose Ave. at Alga Rd.
Melrose Ave. at La Costa Ave.
La Costa Ave. at Saxony Rd.
La Costa Ave. at Camino de las Coches
El Fuerte at Alga Rd.
El Fuerte at Carrillo Way
Carlsbad Village Dr. at Tamarack Ave.
Marron Rd. at Jefferson St.*
Marron Rd. at Monroe St.
LEVEL OF SERVICE
AM PM
D
C
E
F
E
D
D
D
C
D
B
B
C
B
B
C
D
C
F
D
B
A
C
A
B
D
A
B
C
D
C
D
D
F
E
D
D
C
D
B
C
D
C
D
B
D
A
E
D
D
A
C
A
A
C
A
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: MARRON ROAD AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
80
42
42
525
L
1500
2
2
1
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
1352
1191
219
799
T
1700
3
3
2
2
TR
1700
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
193
117
49
10
R
1500
0
. 0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Left Thru Right
(VPH of Green) Turn Turn
Northbound 2700 5100 0
Southbound 2700 5100 0
Eastbound 1500 3400 0
Westbound 1500 3400 0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Left Thru Right
Turn Turn
Northbound 3.0% 30.3% 0.0%
Southbound 1.6% 25.6% 0.0%
Eastbound 2.8% 7.9% 0.0%
Westbound 35.0% 23.8% 0.0%
03/19/91
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : MARRON ROAD
BUILDOUT PROJE
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
42 '
O1 Q£ i y
49 ,
V
117 1191
I I
<--' V
0 3
1
2
0
2 3
^ A
I I
80 1352
42
I
'-->
2
0
I
193
A
0 ' 10
2 < 799
1 , 525
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
3.0%
1.6%
2.8%
35.0%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
30.3%
25.6%
7.9%
23.8%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
84.7% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE ---- > D
0. 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: MARRON ROAD PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
97
36
33
293
L
1500
2
2
1
1
Left
Turn
2700
2700
1500
1500
Left
Turn
3.6%
1.3%
2.2%
19.5%
Thru
1188
1339
552
494
LT T
1500 1700
0 3
0 3
0 2
0 2
Thru
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
34.3%
28.1%
17.5%
14.9%
Right
Turn
559
95
44
11
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
000
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
03/19/91
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: COLLEGE BLVD. AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
227
37
143
614
L LT
1800 1800
2 0
2 0
2 0
2 0
Left
Turn
3240
3240
3240
3240
Lett
Turn
7.0%
1.1%
4.4%
19.0%
Thru
599
1622
222
743
T
2000
3
3
2
2
Thru
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
10.0%
27.0%
5.9%
18.8%
Right
Turn
280
684
12
9
TR R LR
2000 1800 1800
0 1 0
0 1 0
000
000
Right
Turn
1800
1800
0
0
Right
Turn
15.6%
38.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
!
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR. AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
62
126
174
22
L
1500
2
2
1
1
Left
Turn
2700
2700
1500
1500
Left
Turn
2.3%
4.7%
11.6%
1.5%
Thru
992
1514
126
344
LT T
1500 1700
0 2
0 2
0 1
0 1
Thru
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
19.7%
32.3%
6.4%
21.5%
Right
Turn
12
134
92
388
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJE
EW : CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR. AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
174 '
19R
92 ,
V
134
i1
<--'
0
1
2
0
2
I
62
1514 126
1 iI I
v '-->
3 2
3 0
I I
992 12
0 • 388
2 < 344
1 , 22
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
2.3%
4.7%
11.6%
1.5%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
19.7%
32.3%
6.4%
21.5%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 77.7%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR. PM PEAK
I
I
I
i
i
i
i
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
62
286
123
18
L
1500
2
2
1
1
Lett
Turn
2700
2700
1500
1500
Lett
Turn
2.3%
10.6%
8.2%
1.2%
Thru
992
1098
343
290
LT T
1500 1700
0 2
0 2
0 1
0 1
Thru
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
19.7%
26.4%
14.7%
18.5%
Right
Turn
12
248
156
339
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
1 0 0
1 0 0
100
1 0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR. PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
248 1098 286
I I i
<—' v '-->
0 3 2
123 ' 1 0 ' 339
343 2 2 < 290
156 , 0 1 , 18
v v
230
<--. * ,~>
III
62 992 12 |
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
2700
2700
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
2.3%
10.6%
8.2%
1.2%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
19.7%
26.4%
14.7%
18.5%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
67.0% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE' > B
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW: CHESTNUT AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
88
32
94
17
L
1500
1
1
1
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
883
1501
28
253
T
1700
3
3
1
1
TR
1700
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
3
95
68
89
R
1500
0
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
JP CAPACITY
een)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Thru
5100
5100
1700
1700
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Left
Turn
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
5.9%
2.1%
6.3%
1.1%
Thru
17.4%
31.3%
5.6%
20.1%
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: ELCAMINOREAL
EW : CHESTNUT AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJEI
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
94 '
9ft
68
V
95 1501
I I
<— ' v
0 3
1
-
0
1 3
I I
88 883
32
I
'-->
1
0
I
3
A
0 ' 89
1 <• 2531 %» <LsJvJ
1 , 17
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
5.9%
2.1%
6.3%
1.1%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
1700
1700
Thru
17.4%
31.3%
5.6%
20.1%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 73.5%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: CHESTNUT AVE. PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
97
112
45
6
L
1500
1
1
1
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
1451
1016
68
98
T
1700
3
3
1
1
TR
1700
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
12
144
120
46
R
1500
0
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
JP CAPACITY
een)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Thru
5100
5100
1700
1700
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Lett Thru Right
Turn Turn
Northbound 6.5% 28.7% 0.0%
Southbound 7.5% 22.7% 0.0%
Eastbound 3.0% 11.1% 0.0%
Westbound 0.4% 8.5% 0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW: CHESTNUT AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJE
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
45 '
eo
120 ,
V
144
I
0
1
1
0
1
I
97
1016 112
I I
v ' — >
3 1
3 0
A — — ^
I I
1451 12
A
0 ' 46
1 , 6
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
6.5%
7.5%
3.0%
0.4%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
1700
1700
Thru
28.7%
22.7%
11.1%
8.5%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 57.6%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > A
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW: TAMARACK AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
162
0
72
345
L
1500
2
2
1
1
Lett
Turn
2700
2700
1500
1500
Left
Turn
6.0%
0.0%
4.8%
23.0%
Thru
901
1562
127
321
LT T
1500 1700
0 2
0 2
0 1
0 1
Thru
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
18.5%
31.1%
14.8%
9.4%
Right
Turn
44
25
375
0
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
1 0 0
1 00
1 0 0
1 0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : TAMARACK AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJEt
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
72 '
107
375 ,
v
25 1562
i iI l
<— ' v
0 3
1
2
0
2 3
I I
162 901
0
iI
'-->
2
0
I
44
A
0 ' 0
2 < 321
1 , 345
v
A
1
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
2700
2700
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
6.0%
0.0%
4.8%
23.0%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
18.5%
31.1%
14.8%
9.4%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 84.9%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: TAMARACK AVE. PM PEAK
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
491
0
34
94
L
1500
2
2
1
1
Lett
Turn
2700
2700
1500
1500
Left
Turn
18.2%
0.0%
2.3%
6.3%
Thru
1526
1080
267
257
LT T
1500 1700
0 2
0 2
0 1
0 1
Thru
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
33.3%
22.4%
13.8%
7.6%
Right
Turn
173
62
201
0
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : TAMARACK AVE.
BUILDOUT F
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETF
62 1080
I I
< — ' v
0 3
34 ' 1
9£7 9
201 , 0
V
2 3
I I
491 1526
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Left
Turn
Default Capacity 1500
Northbound 2700
Southbound 2700
Eastbound 1500
Westbound 1500
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 18.2%
Southbound 0.0%
Eastbound 2.3%
Westbound 6.3%
0
I
'-->
2
0
I
173
Thru
1700
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
33.3%
22.4%
13.8%
7.6%
A
0 '
2 «xV.— — — ~
1 , —
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 70.6%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
0
257
94
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: KELLY DR. AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
17
0
60
0
L
1500
1
0
1
0
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
1048
2248
0
0
T
1700
3
2
0
0
TR
1700
0
1
0
0
Right
Turn
0
35
76
0
R
1500
0
0
1
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
0
1500
0
Left
Turn
1.1%
0.0%
4.0%
0.0%
Thru
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
20.5%
44.8%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
0
0
1500
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
5.1%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : KELLY DR.
BUILDOUT PROJE
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE
A
60 '
76 ,
V
35
1
< — '
0
1
0
1
1
I
17
2248 0
I I
v '-->
3 0
3 0
A -w
I I
1048 0
GEOMETRY
A
0 ' 0
0 < 0
0 , 0
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
0
1500
0
RATIO
Left
Turn
1.1%
0.0%
4.0%
0.0%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
20.5%
44.8%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
1500
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
5.1%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 61.0%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > B
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: KELLY DR. PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number o( Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
57
0
34
0
L
1500
1
0
1
0
Left
Turn
1500
0
1500
0
Left
Turn
3.8%
0.0%
2.3%
0.0%
Thru
2157
1306
0
0
LT T
1500 1700
0 3
0 2
0 0
0 0
Thru
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
42.3%
27.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
0
69
29
0
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
1 0 0
0 1 0
000
Right
Turn
0
0
1500
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
1.9%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : KELLY DR.
BUILDOUT PROJEi
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
34 — -'
29 ,
V
69 1306
1 1
<--' v
0 3
1
0
1
1 3
j A
I I
57 2157
0
I
'-->
0
0
I
0
A
0 ' 0
0 < 0
0 , 0
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
1500
0
1500
0
RATIO
Left
Turn
3.8%
0.0%
2.3%
0.0%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
42.3%
27.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
1500
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
1.9%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 54.6%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > A
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: CANNON RD. AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
90
74
200
190
L LT
1800 1800
2 0
2 0
2 0
2 0
Left
Turn
3240
3240
3240
3240
Lett
Turn
2.8%
2.3%
6.2%
5.9%
Thru
691
1830
588
1084
T
2000
3
3
2
2
Thru
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
11.8%
30.5%
19.7%
29.4%
Right
Turn
18
558
198
92
TR R LR
2000 1800 1800
000
0 1 0
000
000
Right
Turn
0
1800
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
31.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : CANNON RD.
BUILDOUT PROJE
AM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
200 '
COQOwO
198 ,
V
558
I
<--'
1
2
2
0
2
I
90
1830 74
I I
v '-->
3 2
3 0
I I
691 18
A
0 '
2 <
2 ,
V
A
I
North
92
1084
190
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
3240
3240
3240
3240
RATIO
Left
Turn
2.8%
2.3%
6.2%
5.9%
Thru
2000
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
11.8%
30.5%
19.7%
29.4%
Right
Turn
1800
0
1800
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
31.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 78.9%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: CANNON RD. PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
138
177
404
38
L
1800
2
2
2
2
LT
1800
0
0
0
0
Thru
1783
961
916
559
T
2000
3
3
2
2
TR
2000
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
364
198
224
173
R
1800
0
1
0
0
LR
1800
0
0
0
0
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
3240
3240
3240
3240
Lett
Turn
.4.3%
5.5%
12.5%
1.2%
Thru
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
35.8%
16.0%
28.5%
18.3%
Right
Turn
0
1800
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
11.0%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : CANNON RD.
BUILDOUT PROJB
PM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
404 '
QIC
224 ,
V
198 961
I II
<--' V
1 3
2
2
0
2 3
j, A
I I
138 1783
177
1I
2
0
I
364
A
0 ' 173
2 < 559
2 , 38
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1800
3240
3240
3240
3240
RATIO
Left
Turn
4.3%
5.5%
12.5%
1.2%
Thru
2000
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
35.8%
16.0%
28.5%
18.3%
Right
Turn
1800
0
1800
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
11.09*
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 82.0%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : COLLEGE BLVD.
BUILDOUT PROJE
AM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
143 '
999 -.. -
12 .
V
684
11
0
2
2
0
1
I
227
1622 37
1 |1 1
v '-->
2 1
2 0
A — — "^
I I
599 280
A
0 ' 9
2 < 743
2 , 614
V
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1800
3240
3240
3240
3240
RATIO
Left
Turn
7.0%
1.1%
4.4%
19.0%
Thru
2000
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
10.0%
27.0%
5.9%
18.8%
Right
Turn
1800
1800
1800
0
0
Right
Turn
15.6%
38.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 72.8%
LEVEL OF SERVICE —-> C
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW: COLLEGE BLVD.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
18
98
416
431
Thru
1887
808
769
328
Right
Turn
760
303
37
58
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
L
1800
2
2
2
2
LT
1800
0
0
0
0
T
2000
3
3
2
2
TR
2000
0
0
0
0
R
1800
1
1
0
0
LR
1800
0
0
0
0
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Lett
(VPH of Green) Turn
Thru Right
Turn
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
3240
3240
3240
3240
6000
6000
4000
4000
1800
1800
0
0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Left
Turn
Thru Right
Turn
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
0.6%
3.0%
12.8%
13.3%
31.5%
13.5%
20.2%
9.7%
42.2%
16.8%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : COLLEGE BLVD.
BUILDOUT PROJE
PM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
303
1
0
416 ' 2
•7CQ 9
37 , 0
V
1
I
18
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Left
Turn
Default Capacity 1800
Northbound 3240
Southbound 3240
Eastbound 3240
Westbound 3240
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 0.6%
Southbound 3.0%
Eastbound 12.8%
Westbound 13.3%
808 98
I I
v '-->
2 1
2 0
* **
I I
1887 760
Thru
2000
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
31.5%
13.5%
20.2%
9.7%
A
0 '
2 <
2 ,— -
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1800
1800
1800
0
0
Right
Turn
42.2%
16.8%
0.0%
0.0%
58
328
431
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
85.7% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE —-> D
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : MARRON ROAD
BUILDOUT PROJE
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
33 '
ceo
44 ,
V
95 1339
I I
<--' V
0 3
1
2
0
2 3
j, A
I I
97 1188
36
I
2
0
I
559
0 ' 11
2 < 494
1 , 293
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
3.6%
1.3%
2.2%
19.5%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
34.3%
28.1%
17.5%
14.9%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
82.7% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: FARADAY AVE. AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
437
307
50
126
L
1800
2
2
1
1
LT
1800
0
0
0
0
Thru
1029
1801
241
847
T
2000
3
3
2
2
TR
2000
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
68
300
219
360
R
1800
1
1
1
1
LR
1800
0
0
0
0
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Left Thru Right
(VPH of Green) Turn Turn
Northbound 3240 6000 1800
Southbound 3240 6000 1800
Eastbound 1800 4000 1800
Westbound 1800 4000 1800
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Left Thru Right
Turn Turn
Northbound 13.5% • 17.2% 3.8%
Southbound 9.5% 30.0% 16.7%
Eastbound 2.8% 6.0% 12.2%
Westbound 7.0% 21.2% 20.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : FARADAY AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJE
AM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
50 '
941
219 .
V
300
I
1
1
2
1
2
I
437
1801 307
I I
v '— >
3 2
3 1
A *^
I I
1029 68
A
1 ' 360
2 < 847
1 , 126
V
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1800
3240
3240
1800
1800
RATIO
Left
Turn
13.5%
9.5%
2.8%
7.0%
Thru
2000
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
17.2%
30.0%
6.0%
21.2%
Right
Turn
1800
1800 '
1800
1800
1800
Right
Turn
3.8%
16.7%
12.2%
20.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 77.5%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: FARADAY AVE. PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
124
386
257
100
L
1800
2
2
1
1
LT
1800
0
0
0
0
Thru
2042
1113
582
221
T
2000
3
3
2
2
TR
2000
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
117
123
302
442
R
1800
1
1
1
1
LR
1800
0
0
0
0
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
3240
3240
1800
1800
Left
Turn
3.8%
11.9%
14.3%
5.6%
Thru
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
34.0%
18.6%
14.6%
5.5%
Right
Turn
1800
1800
1800
1800
Right
Turn
6.5%
6.8%
16.8%
24.6%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : FARADAY AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJEi
PM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
257 '
COO
302 ,
V
123 1113
I I
<--' V
1 3
1
1
2 3
j A
| |
124 2042
386
I
'-->
2
1
I
117
A
1 • 442
2 *- 991^— •* — ~ &£. \
1 , 100
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
3240
3240
1800
1800
RATIO
Left
Turn
3.8%
11.9%
14.3%
5.6%
Thru
2000
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
34.0%
18.6%
14.6%
5.5%
Right
Turn
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
Right
Turn
6.5%
6.8%
16.8%
24.6%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 80.5%
LEVEL OF SERVICE ' > D
1
1
1
1
1
•1
•
1
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS : EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
31
475
77
205
L
1500
2
2
2
2
Lett
Turn
2700
2700
2700
2700
Left
Turn
1.1%
17.6%
2.9%
7.6%
Thru
1032
1320
613
1314
LT T
1500 1700
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
Thru
5100
5100
5100
6600
Thru
26.0%
31.0%
12.1%
28.4%
Right
Turn
294
261
4
562
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 1 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD
BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
77 '
CIO
4 ,
V
261
I
<— '
0
2
0
2
I
31
1 320 475
I I
v '-->
3 2
3 0
I I
1032 294
A
1 ' 562
rt 1 71 A
2 , 205
V
A
1
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
2700
2700
RATIO
Left
Turn
1.1%
17.6%
2.9%
7.6%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
5100
6600
Thru
26.0%
31.0%
12.1%
28.4%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
«. ,~
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 84.9%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
1
1
1
1
1^B
1
1
1
1
1
•
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS : EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUMEyCAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
8
431
372
252
L
1500
2
2
2
2
Left
Turn
2700
2700
2700
2700
Left
Turn
0.3%
16.0%
13.8%
9.3%
Thru
1271
1055
1105
666
LT T
1500 1700
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
Thru
5100
5100
5100
6600
Thru
29.0%
23.2%
22.1%
19.2%
Right
Turn
207
130
21
599
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 1'0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD
BUILDOUT PROJEi
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
130 1055
I I
<— ' v
0 3
372 ' 2
1 10R 3
21 , 0
V
2 3
^— — A
I I
8 1271
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Lett
Turn
Default Capacity 1500
Northbound 2700
Southbound 2700
Eastbound 2700
Westbound 2700
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 0.3%
Southbound 16.0%
Eastbound 13.8%
Westbound 9.3%
431
I
'— >
2
0
I
207
Thru
1700
5100
5100
5100
6600
Thru
29.0%
23.2%
22.1%
19.2%
A
1 ' 599
3 <- gcfi\J *«» ~ — ~ V\J\J
2 , 252
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 87.9%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: CAMINO VIDA ROBLE AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound '
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
729
149
30
26
L LT
1500 1500
2 0
2 0
1 0
1 0
Left
Turn
2700
2700
1500
1500
Lett
Turn
27.0%
5.5%
2.0%
1.7%
Thru
1665
767
51
22
T
1700
2
2
1
1
Thru
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
33.1%
20.5%
3.6%
1.9%
Right
Turn
24
278
70
42
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: CAMINO VIDA ROBLE AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
30 '
C1
70 ,
278 767 149
I I I
<— ' v '-->
032
1
2- £
0
•
o • —
0 <•e, ^.~
1 ,
42
22££
26
230
<—, * ,-- >
III
729 1665 24 |
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
2700
2700
1500
1500
RATIO
Lett
Turn
27.0%
5.5%
2.0%
1.7%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
33.1%
20.5%
3.6%
1.9%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
62.8% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > B
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: CAMINO VIDA ROBLE PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
131
61
172
26
L
1500
2
2
1
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
885
1437
35
60
T
1700
2
2
1
1
TR
1700
1
1
1
1
Right
Turn
8
72
511
134
R
1500
0
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Left Thru Right
(VPH of Green) Turn Turn
Northbound 2700 5100 0
Southbound 2700 5100 0
Eastbound 1500 3400 0
Westbound 1500 3400 0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Left Thru Right
Turn Turn
Northbound 4.9% 17.5% 0.0%
Southbound 2.3% 29.6% 0.0%
Eastbound 11.5% 16.1% 0.0%
Westbound 1.7% 5.7% 0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : CAMINO VIDA ROBLE
BUILDOUT PROJB
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
172 '
•5C
511 ,
V
72 1437
I iI
<--' V
0 3
1
2
0
2 3
I I
131 885
61
2
0
I
8
0 ' 134
2 < 60
1 , 26
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
2700
2700
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
4.9%
2.3%
1 1 .5%
1.7%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
17.5%
29.6%
16.1%
5.7%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
62.2% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > B
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: POINSETTIA LN. AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
26
10
215
389
L
1500
2
2
2
2
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
1927
816
547
461
T
1700
2
2
2
2
TR
1700
1
1
0
0
Right
Turn
346
37
132
276
R
1500
0
0
0
0
-
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Left Thru Right
(VPH of Green) Turn Turn
Northbound 2700 5100 0
Southbound 2700 5100 0
Eastbound 2700 3400 0
Westbound 2700 3400 0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Left Thru Right
Turn Turn
Northbound 1.0% 44.6% 0.0%
Southbound • 0.4% 16.7% 0.0%
Eastbound 8.0% 20.0% 0.0%
Westbound 14.4% 21.7% 0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: POINSETTIA LN. AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
10
0 ' ---- 276
2 < ---- 461
2 , ---- 389
A
215 '
CA7 _ __
132 .
37 816
I I
< — ' v
0 3
2
0
26 1927 346 |
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
2700
2700
RATIO
Lett
Turn
1.0%
0.4%
8.0%
14.4%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
44.6%
16.7%
20.0%
21.7%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
89.3% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
1
•
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
EW : POINSETTIA LN.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
70
144
76
353
L
1500
2
2
2
2
Left
Turn
2700
2700
2700
2700
Lett
Turn
2.6%
5.3%
2.8%
13.1%
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
PM PEAK
Thru
936
1719
624
537
LT T TR
1500 1700 1700
Q 2 1
0 2 1
020
020
Thru
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
27.4%
36.7%
20.2%
16.1%
Right
Turn
460
155
63
11
R LR
1500 1500
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : POINSETTIA LN.
BUILDOUT PROJEi
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
155
I
<--'
0
76 — -' 2
fi94. 9
63 , 0
V
2
I
70
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Left
Turn
Default Capacity 1500
Northbound 2700
Southbound 2700
Eastbound 2700
Westbound 2700
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 2.6%
Southbound 5.3%
Eastbound 2.8%
Westbound 13.1%
1719 144
I I
v '— >
3 2
3 0
A -^
I I
936 460
Thru
1700
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
27.4%
36.7%
20.2%
16.1%
A
0 ' 11
2 < 5^7b **»"" "" ~ •" \J\Ji
2 , 353
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
82.6% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
i
i
i
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: ALGA RD. AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
456
86
178
688
L
1800
2
2
2
2
LT
1800
0
0
0
0
Thru
1847
1272
205
385
T
2000
3
3
2
2
TR
2000
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
496
102
479
200
R
1800
1
0
1
0
LR
1800
0
0
0
0
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Left Thru Right
(VPH of Green) Turn Turn
Northbound 3240 6000 1800
Southbound 3240 6000 0
Eastbound 3240 4000 1800
Westbound 3240 4000 0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Lett Thru Right
Turn Turn
Northbound. 14.1% 30.8% 27.6%
Southbound 2.7% 22.9% 0.0%
Eastbound 5.5% 5.1% 26.6%
Westbound 21.2% 14.6% 0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO
EW : ALGA RD.
REAL BUILDOUT PROJB
AM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
178 ' 2
one o
479 , 1
V
102 1272
I I
<— ' v
0 3
2 3
- A
I I
456 1847
86
I
'— >
2
1
I
496
A
0 ' 200
2 f -ageC- ^- OO^
2 , 688
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
3240
3240
3240
3240
Thru
2000
6000
6000
4000
4000
Right
Turn
1800
1800
0
1800
0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
14.1%
2.7%
5.5%
21.2%
Thru
30.8%
22.9%
5.1%
14.6%
Right
Turn
27.6%
0.0%
26.6%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 73.6%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
i
i
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW: ALGA RD.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
570
229
120
584
L
1800
2
2
2
2
Lett
Turn
3240
3240
3240
3240
Left
Turn
17.6%
7.1%
3.7%
18.0%
Thru
1230
1650
342
347
LT T
1800 2000
0 3
0 3
0 2
0 2
Thru
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
20.5%
30.3%
8.6%
10.5%
Right
Turn
521
167
535
73
TR R LR
2000 1800 1800
0 1 0
000
0 1 0
000
Right
Turn
1800
0
1800
0
Right
Turn
28.9% .
0.0%
29.7%
0.0%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : ALGA RD.
BUILDOUT PROJE'
PM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS /LANE GEOMETRY
120 '
535 ,
V
167 1650
I I
< — ' v
0 3
2
2
1
2 3
^ A
I I
570 1230
229
I
2
1
I
521
0 ' 73
2 < 347
2 , 584
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
3240
3240
3240
3240
RATIO
Left
Turn
17.6%
7.1%
3.7%
18.0%
Thru
2000
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
20.5%
30.3%
8.6%
10.5%
Right
Turn
1800
1800
0
1800
0
Right
Turn
28.9%
0.0%
29.7%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
87.6% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
i
K
B
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
i
i
I
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: LA COSTA AVE. AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
423
107
820
37
L
1800
2
2
2
2
LT
1800
0
0
0
0
Thru
1866
1632
277
865
T
2000
3
3
2
2
TR
2000
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
20
750
167
183
R
1800
0
1
0
0
LR
1800
0
0
0
0
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
3240
3240
3240
3240
Left
Turn
13.1%
3.3%
25.3%
1.1%
Thru
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
31.4%
27.2%
11.1%
26.2%
Right
Turn
0
1800
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
41.7%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : LA COSTA AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJEi
AM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
820 '
077
167 ,
V
750 1632
i iI I
<--' V
1 3
2
2
0
2 3
— A
I I
423 1866
107
iI
1 — >
2
0
1
20
0 • 183
2 < 865
2 , 37
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1800
3240
3240
3240
3240
RATIO
Left
Turn
13.1%
3.3%
25.3%
1.1%
Thru
2000
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
31.4%
27.2%
11.1%
26.2%
Right
Turn
1800
0
1800
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
41.7%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
103.2% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > F
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: LA COSTA AVE. PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
328
253
514
22
L LT
1800 1800
2 0
2 0
2 0
2 0
Left
Turn
3240
3240
3240
3240
Lett
Turn
10.1%
7.8%
15.9%
0.7%
Thru
1726
1526
554
643
T
2000
3
3
2
2
Thru
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
30.7%
25.4%
16.9%
19.9%
Right
Turn
118
1060
123
153
TR R LR
2000 1800 1800
000
0 1 0
000
000
Right
Turn
0
1800
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
58.9%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: LA COSTA AVE. PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
1060 1526 253
1
514 ' 2
554 2
123 . 0
V
230
<--, * ,—>
III
328 1726 118 |
North
V
3
'— >
2 A
o
2 <
2 ,
153
643
22
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
—
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
. 1800
3240
3240
3240
3240
RATIO
Left
Turn
10.1%
7.8%
15.9%
0.7%
Thru
2000
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
30.7%
25.4%
16.9%
19.9%
Right
Turn
1800
0
1800
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
58.9%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
104.7% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > F
I
I
r
iiii
("v
r
t
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: LEVANTE STREET AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
0
82
0
167
L
1500
0
1
0
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
2125
1755
0
0
T
1700
3
3
0
0
TR
1700
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
70
0
0
184
R
1500
0
0
0
1
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Lett Thru Right
(VPH of Green) Turn Turn
Northbound 0 5100 0
Southbound 1500 5100 0
Eastbound 000
Westbound 1500 0 1500
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Left Thru Right
Turn Turn
Northbound 0.0% 43.0% 0.0%
Southbound 5.5% 34.4% ' 0.0%
Eastbound 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Westbound 11.1% 0.0% 12.3%
02/06/91
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : LEVANTE STREET
BUILDOUT PROJE
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
0 '
0 ,
V
0 1755
I I
<— ' v
0 3
0
0
0
0 3
I I
0 2125
82
I
1
0
I
70
A
1 ' 184
0 < 0
1 , 167
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
0
1500
0
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
5.5%
0.0%
11.1%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
43.0%
34.4%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
1500
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
12.3%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
70.8% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE ---- > C
0. 1
I
I
•v
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
i
l
l
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: LEVANTE STREET PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
134
0
94
L
1500
0
1
0
1
Left
Turn
0
1500
0
1500
Lett
Turn
0.0%
8.9%
0.0%
6.3%
Thru
2033
1538
0
0
LT T
1500 1700
0 3
0 3
0 0
0 0
Thru
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
44.0%
30.2%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
211
0
0
139
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
000
0 1 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
1500
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
9.3%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
02/06/91
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : LEVANTE STREET
BUILDOUT PROJE'
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
0 1538
i iI I
<--' V
0 3
0 ' 0
n
0 , 0
V
0 3
-» *
I I
O 2033
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Lett
Turn
Default Capacity 1500
Northbound 0
Southbound 1500
Eastbound 0
Westbound 1500
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Lett
Turn
Northbound 0.0%
Southbound 8.9%
Eastbound 0.0%
Westbound 6.3%
134
iI
1
0
I
211
Thru
1700
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
44.0%
30.2%
0.0%
0.0%
1 • 139
0 < 0
1 ,— - 94
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
1500
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
9.3%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
72.2% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
I
i
i
i
I
i
i
i
i
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: CALLE BARCELLONA AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
395
101
161
467
L
1500
2
2
2
2
Left
Turn
2700
2700
2700
2700
Left
Turn
14.6%
3.7%
6.0%
17.3%
Thru
1819
1334
55
182
LT T
1500 1700
0 2
0 2
0 1
0 1
Thru
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
38.1%
33.2%
6.0%
11.5%
Right
Turn
123
359
150
209
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW : CALLE BARCELLONA
BUILDOUT PROJEi
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
161 '
-_
150 ,
V
359 1334
I I
<--' V
0 3
2
0
2 3
I I
395 1819
101
I
'— >
2
0
I
123
A
0 ' 209
2 <- 109^» I O£
2 , 467
V
.
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
2700
2700
RATIO
Left
Turn
14.6%
3.7%
6.0%
17.3%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
38.1%
33.2%
6.0%
11.5%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
81.2% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
iIi
i
i
i
I
i
i
i
i
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: CALLE BARCELLONA PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
231
279
372
180
L LT
1500 1500
2 0
2 0
2 0
2 0
Left
Turn
2700
2700
2700
2700
Lett
Turn
8.6%
10.3%
13.8%
6.7%
Thru
1562
1140
190
99
T
1700
2
2
1
1
Thru
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
38.3%
28.0%
16.5%
5.9%
Right
Turn
389
286
370
100
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: CALLE BARCELLONA PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
286 1140 279
•
372 '
ton
370 .
<--'
0
2
0
v '— >
3 2 *
0 '
2 ..-^. — — — —
2 ,
100
QQyy
180
V
230
<--. * ,~>
III
231 1562 389 |
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
2700
2700
2700
2700
RATIO
Left
Turn
8.6%
10.3%
13.8%
6.7%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
38.3%
28.0%
16.5%
5.9%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
81.7% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
I
i
I
i
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: OLIVENHAIN RD. PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
122
345
164
220
L
1500
2
2
2
2
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
1756
1250
878
436
T
1700
3
3
2
2
TR
1700
0
0
1
1
Right
Turn
165
97
40
262
R
1500
0
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Lett Thru Right
(VPH of Green) Turn Turn
Northbound 2700 5100 0
Southbound 2700 5100 0
Eastbound 2700 5100 0
Westbound 2700 5100 0
\PACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
4.5%
12.8%
. 6.1%
8.1%
Thru
37.7%
26.4%
18.0%
13.7%
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: OLIVENHAIN RD. PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
164 '
070
40
97
I
<--'
0
2
0o
0
1250
I
V
3
345
I
'— >
2 A
0 '
•1 <-o ^*
2 ,
262
436*TwV7
220
122 1756 165 |
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
2700
2700
RATIO
Left
Turn
4.5%
12.8%
6.1%
8.1%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
5100
5100
Thru
37.7%
26.4%
18.0%
13.7%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
86.6% . Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE —-> D
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL
EW: OLIVENHAIN RD.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
48
149
.177
227
L LT
1500 1500
2 0
2 0
2 0
2 0
Lett
Turn
2700
2700
2700
2700
Left
Turn
1.8%
5.5%
6.6%
8.4%
Thru
1573
1463
587
875
T
1700
3
3
2
2
Thru
5100
5100
5100
5100
Thru
32.8%
35.3%
13.3%
28.7%
Right
Turn
98
339
93
587
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
1 0 0
1 0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL CAMINO REAL BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: OLIVENHAIN RD. AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
339 1463 149
A
177 '
coy
93 ,
<— ' v
0 3
2
0*J
0
— >
2
0 •
•3 <-O ^k
2 .
587
8750 f \J
227
48 1573 98 |
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
2700
2700
RATIO
Left
Turn
1.8%
5.5%
6.6%
8.4%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
5100
5100
Thru
32.8%
35.3%
13.3%
28.7%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
83.5% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: AVENIDA ENCINAS BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD AM PEAK
c
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
30
42
28
237
L LT
1500 1500
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Lett
Turn
2.0%
2.8%
1.9%
15.8%
Thru
83
273
249
663
T
1700
2
2
2
2
Thru
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
11.8%
8.4%
10.3%
21.4<!*
Right
Turn
317
11
102
63
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
000
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
02/06/91
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : AVENIDA ENCINAS
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD
BUILDOUT PROJEi
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE
*
28 '
OAQ
102 ,
V
11 273
I I
< — ' v
0 2
1
0
1 2
j A
I I
30 83
42
I
' — >
1
0
I
317
GEOMETRY
A
0 ' 63
y <• CR-J£ ^» — — — — DOO
1 , 237
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
Thru
1700
3400
3400
3400
3400
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
2.0%
2.8%
1.9%
15.8%
Thru
11.8%
8.4%
10.3%
21 .4%
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
50.7% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > A
0.1
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: AVENIDA ENCINAS BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD PM PEAK
1
£
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
83
178
11
361
L LT
1500 1500
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Left
Turn
5.5%
11.9%
0.7%
24.1%
Thru
235
87
643
716
T
1700
2
2
2
2
Thru
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
16.0%
3.9%
20.7%
22.0%
Right
Turn
310
47
62
31
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
000
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
02/06/91
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: AVENIDA ENCINAS
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD
BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
11 '
ftA*^
62 ,
V
47 87
I I
<--' V
0 2
1
0
1 2
I I
83 235
178
I
'-->
1
0
I
310
A
o • —
p ^£ *»
1 ,
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
5.5%
11.9%
0.7%
24.1%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
16.0%
3.9%
20.7%
22.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
31
361
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
82.7% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : PASEO DEL NORTE
EW: PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
AM PEAK
''if
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
536
293
97
42
L LT
1500 1500
2 0
2 0
2 0
2 0
Left
Turn
2700
2700
2700
2700
Left
Turn
19.9%
10.9%
3.6%
1.6%
Thru
258
125
1622
1099
T
1700
1
1
2
2
Thru
3400
3400
5100
5100
Thru
16.7%
8.2%
32.4%
24.9%
Right
Turn
311
155
29
173
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
10 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : PASEO DEL NORTE
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
BUILDOUT PROJB
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
97 '
29 ----,
V
155 125
I I
<— ' v
0 2
2
3
0
2 2
j, A
I I
536 258
293
I
2
0
I
311
A
0 ' 173
3 < 1099
2 , 42
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
2700
2700
RATIO
Left
Turn
19.9%
10.9%
3.6%
1.6%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
5100
5100
Thru
16.7%
8.2%
32.4%
24.9%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1.
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
72.0% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: PASEO DEL NORTE BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: PALOMAR AIRPORT RD. PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
229
332
208
79
L LT
1500 1500
2 0
2 0
2 0
2 0
Left
Turn
2700
2700
2700
2700
Left
Turn
8.5%
12.3%
7.7%
2.9%
Thru
237
323
1147
1898
T TR
1700 1700
1 1
1 1
2 1
2 1
Thru
3400
3400
5100
5100
Thru
8.9%
16.7%
25.8%
43.2%
Right
Turn
65
245
169
306
R LR
1500 1500
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
r
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : PASEO DEL NORTE
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
BUILDOUT PROJE*
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
245 323
1 1
< — ' v
0 2
208 ' 2
11x7 _ o
169 , 0
V
2 2
— A
I I
229 237
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Left
Turn
Default Capacity 1500
Northbound 2700
Southbound 2700
Eastbound 2700
Westbound 2700
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 8.5%
Southbound 12.3%
Eastbound 7.7%
Westbound 2.9%
332
I
1 — >
2
0
1
65
Thru
1700
3400
3400
5100
5100
Thru
8.9%
16.7%
25.8%
43.2%
*
0 ' 306
•3 <• IflQfl«J ^»— ~ — — < O9u
2 , 79
V
A
1
North
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
86.1% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: HIDDEN VALLEY RD. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: PALOMAR AIRPORT RD. AM PEAK
L
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
142
3
162
61
L LT
1500 1500
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Left
Turn
9.5%
0.2%
10.8%
4.1%
Thru
5
1
1628
1149
T
1700
1
1
2
2
Thru
3400
3400
5100
5100
Thru
1.9%
0.9%
33.8%
22.9%
Right
Turn
61
28
96
20
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : HIDDEN VALLEY RD.
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
BUILDOUT PROJEi
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
162 '
1 ft^fl
96 .
V
28 1
I I
<--' V
0 2
1
0o
0
1 2
I I
142 5
3
I
' — >
1
0
I
61
A
0 ' 20
3 ^_ 11AQ^.— — — || H y
1 , 61
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Lett
Turn
9.5%
0.2%
10.8%
4.1%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
5100
5100
Thru
1.9%
0.9%
33.8%
22.9%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
58.2% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > A
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: HIDDEN VALLEY RD. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: PALOMAR AIRPORT RD. PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
115
43
50
- 19
L LT
1500 1500
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
Lett
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Left
Turn
7.7%
2.9%
3.3%
1.3%
Thru
1
10
1445
1472
T
1700
1
1
2
2
Thru
3400
3400
5100
5100
Thru
1.1%
5.1%
30.9%
29.0%
Right
Turn
37
164
131
B
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : HIDDEN VALLEY RD.
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
BUILDOUT PROJEi
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
50 '
1 AA*\
131 ,
V
164 10
I I
<--' V
0 2
1
3
0
1 2
I I
115 1
43
I
1
0
I
37
A
0 ' 8
3 < 1472
1 , 19
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
Thru
1700
3400
3400
5100
5100
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
7.7%
2.9%
3.3%
1.3%
Thru
1.1%
5.1%
30.9%
29.0%
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
55.1% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE ---- > A
0. 1
fi
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: COLLEGE BLVD. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: PALOMAR AIRPORT RD. AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
320
97
521
28
L
1500
2
2
2
2
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
629
209
1044
630
T
1700
1
1
2
2
TR
1700
1
1
1
1
Right
Turn
357
279
128
59
R
1500
0
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
i
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
2700
2700
2700
2700
Left
Turn
11.9%
3.6%
19.3%
1.0%
Thru
3400
3400
5100
5100
Thru
29.0%
14.4%
23.0%
13.5%
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : COLLEGE BLVD.
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
BUILDOUT PROJEt
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
521 '
1 A4.4
128 ,
V
279 209
I I
<--' V
0 2
2
0tj
0
2 2
I I
320 629
97
I
'-->
2
0
I
357
A
0 ' 59
o <• contj ^- OOv
2 , 28
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
2700
2700
RATIO
Left
Turn
11.9%
3.6%
19.3%
1.0%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
5100
5100
Thru
29.0%
14.4%
23.0%
13.5%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
75.4% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
[i
f-
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: COLLEGE BLVD. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: PALOMAR AIRPORT RD. PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
111
77
186
409
L
1500
2
2
2
2
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
194
828
856
1087
T
1700
1
1
2
2
TR
1700
1
1
1
1
Right
Turn
50
300
484
69
R
1500
0
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Left Thru Right
(VPH of Green) Turn Turn
Northbound 2700 3400 0
Southbound 2700 3400 0
Eastbound 2700 5100 0
Westbound 2700 5100 0
i \PACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
4.1%
2.9%
6.9%
15.1%
Thru
7.2%
33.2%
26.3%
22.7%
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : COLLEGE BLVD.
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
BUILDOUT PROJEI
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
186 ' ,
OCR
484 .
V
300 828
I I
<— ' v
0 2
2
3
0
2 2
^—i A
I I
111 194
77
I
2
0
I
50
A
0 ' 69
3 < 1087
2 , 409
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
2700
2700
RATIO
Lett
Turn
4.1%
2.9%
6.9%
15.1%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
5100
5100
Thru
7.2%
33.2%
26.3%
22.7%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
88.7% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE —-> D
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : CAMINO VIDA ROBLE
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
220
57
256
0
L
1500
1
1
1
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
149
20
696
752
T
1700
1
1
2
2
TR
1700
1
1
1
1
Right
Turn
0
48
196
359
R
1500
0
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
JP CAPACITY
sen)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Thru
3400
3400
5100
5100
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
OPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
14.7%
3.8%
17.1%
0.0%
Thru
4.40/b
2.0%
17.5%
21.8%
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%'
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : CAMINO VIDA ROBLE
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
BUILDOUT PROJEI
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
256 '
ftQft
196 ,
V
48 20
I I
< — ' V
0 2
1
3
0
1 2
rf*1 *
1 1
220 149
57
I
1
0
I
0
0 ' 359
3 < 752
1 , 0
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
14.7%
3.8%
17.1%
0.0%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
5100
5100
Thru
4.4%
2.0%
17.5%
21.8%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
65.5% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > B
0.1
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : CAMINO VIDA ROBLE
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
PM PEAK
B
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
194
273
81
1
L
1500
1
1
1
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
36
111
879
741
T
1700
1
1
2
2
TR
1700
1
1
1
1
Right
Turn
1
248
248
108
R
1500
0
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
JP CAPACITY
Ben)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Thru
3400
3400
5100
5100
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
\PACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
12.9%
18.2%
5.4%
0.1%
Thru
1.1%
10.6%
22.1%
16.6%
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : CAMINO VIDA ROBLE
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
BUILDOUT PROJEl
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
81 '
R7Q - -_-
248 ,
V
248 111
I I
<--' V
0 2
1
3
0
1 2
j. A
I I
194 36
273
I
1
0
I
1
A
0 ' 108
3 < 741
1 , 1
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
12.9%
18.2%
5.4%
0.1%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
5100
5100
Thru
1.1%
10.6%
22.1%
16.6%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
55.7% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > A
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
r
NS : EL FUERTE ST.
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
211
11
91
2
L
1500
1
1
1
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
380
163
1032
2142
T
1700
1
1
2
2
TR
1700
1
1
1
1
Right
Turn
242
173
16
81
R
1500
0
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
JP CAPACITY
Ben)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Thru
3400
3400
5100
5100
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
I VOLUMeCAPACITY RATIO Left
Turn
Northbound
Southbound'
Eastbound
Westbound
14.1%
0.7%
6.1%
0.1%
Thru
18.3%
9.9%
20.5%
43.6%
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL FUERTE ST. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: PALOMAR AIRPORT RD. AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
91 '
1 fyw
16 -— ,
V
173 163
I I
< — ' v
0 2
1
•jo
0
1 2
^ A
I I
211 380
11
I
' — >
1
0
I
242
A
o • —
1 fJ ^.— — — —
1 ,
V
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
14.1%
0.7%
6.1%
0.1%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
5100
5100
Thru
18.3%
9.9%
20.5%
43.6%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
83.6% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE ——> D
81
2
2
r
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL FUERTE ST. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: PALOMAR AIRPORT RD. PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
49
42
30
151
L
1500
1
1
1
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
206
644
1836
1339
T
1700
1
1
2
2
TR
1700
1
1
1
1
Right
Turn
26
43
39
6
R
1500
0
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
JP CAPACITY
een)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Thru
3400
3400
5100
5100
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Left Thru Right
Turn Turn
Northbound 3.3% 6.8% 0.0%
Southbound 2.8% 20.2% 0.0%
Eastbound 2.0% 36.8% 0.0%
Westbound 10.1% 26.4% 0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL FUERTE ST.
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
BUILDOUT F
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETF
A
30 '
1 A*3£
39 ,
V
43 644
I I
<--' V
0 2
1
Q
0
1 2
rf*" A
I I
49 206
42
I
' — >
1
0
I
26
A
o • —
0 <-o ^
1 ,
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
3.3%
2.8%
2.0%
10.1%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
5100
5100
Thru
6.8%
20.2%
36.8%
26.4%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
80.3% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
6
9
151
rr
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS: MELROSE AVE BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: PALOMARAIRPORTRD AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
257
26
229
151
L LT
1800 1800
2 0
2 0
2 0
2 0
Left
Turn
3240
3240
3240
3240
Lett
Turn
7.9%
0.8%
7.1%
4.7%
Thru
1918
1214
805
1553
T TR
2000 2000
3 0
3 0
3 0
3 0
Thru
6000
6000
6000
6000
Thru
34.6%
20.2%
15.5%
25.9%
Right
Turn
155
523
125
291
R LR
1800 1800
0 0
1 0
0 0
1 0
Right
Turn
0
1800
0
1800
Right
Turn
0.0%
29.1%
0.0%
16.2%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : MELROSE AVE
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD
BUILDOUT PROJEi
AM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
229 '
125 ,
V
523 1214
I I
<— ' v
1 3
2
0
2 3
^ A
I I
257 1918
26
I
2
0
I
155
A
1 • 291
3 < 1553
2 , 151
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1800
3240
3240
3240
3240
RATIO
Left
Turn
7.9%
0.8%
7.1%
4.7%
Thru
2000
6000
6000
6000
6000
Thru
34.6%
20.2%
15.5%
25.9%
Right
Turn
1800
0
1800
0
1800
Right
Turn
0.0%
29.1%
0.0%
16.2%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 78.3%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS: MELROSE AVE BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: PALOMAR AIRPORT RD PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES Left Thru Right
(Vehicles per Hour) Turn Turn
Northbound 175 1567 172
Southbound 173 1488 193
Eastbound 473 1192 189
Westbound 311 1009 238
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes) L LT T TR R LR LTR
Default Capacity 1500 1500 1700 1700 1500 1500 1500
I
P
Northbound 2030000
Southbound 2031000
Eastbound 2030000
Westbound 2 0 3 0 1 00
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Left Thru Right
(VPH of Green) Turn Turn
Northbound 2700 5100 0
Southbound 2700 6800 0
Eastbound 2700 5100 0
Westbound 2700 5100 1500
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Left Thru Right
Turn Turn
Northbound 6.5% 34.1% 0.0%
Southbound 6.4% 24.7% 0.0%
Eastbound 17.5% 27.1% 0.0%
Westbound 11.5% 19.8% 15.9%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : MELROSE AVE
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD
BUILDOUT PROJEi
PM PEAK- HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
473 '
1 1Q9 _
189 ,
V
193 1488
I I
< — ' v
0 4
2
0
2 3
j A
I I
175 1567
173
I
4 — >
2
0
I
172
A
1 ' 238
Q 1 f\f\Q
2 , 311
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
2700
2700 '
RATIO
Left
Turn
6.5%
6.4%
17.5%
11.5%
Thru
1700
5100
6800
5100
5100
Thru
34.1%
24.7%
27.1%
19.8%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
1500
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
15.9%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
89.1% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
c
R
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
S: BUSINESS PARK WAY BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: PALOMAR AIRPORT RD. AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
181
206
0
L
1500
0
2
2
0
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
0
0
767
1713
T
1700
0
0
2
2
TR
1700
0
0
o
1
Right
Turn
0
459
0
104
R
1500
0
2
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
i
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
2700
2700
0
Left
Turn
0.0%
6.7%
7.6%
0.0%
Thru
0
0
3400
5100
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
22.6%
35.6%
Right
Turn
0
2700
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
17.0%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: BUSINESS PARK WAY BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD. AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
459 0 181
•
206 '
7R7 -_ __
0 ,
V
< — '
2
2
2
0
0
1
0
v '-->
0 2
0 0
I I
0 0
A
0 ' 104
3 < 1713
0 , 0
V
»
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
0
2700
2700
0
Thru
1700
0
0
3400
5100
Right
Turn
1500
0
2700
0
0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0.0%
6.7%
7.6%
0.0%
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
22.6%
35.6%
Right
Turn
0.0%
17.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
70.3% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
G
r
1
S: BUSINESS PARK WAY
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
0
128
223
0
L
1500
0
2
2
0
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
0
0
1432
1088
T
1700
0
0
2
2
TR
1700
0
0
0
1
Right
Turn
0
421
0
110
R
1500
0
2
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
2700
2700
0
Left
Turn
0.0%
4.7%
8.3%
0.0%
Thru
0
0
3400
5100
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
42.1%
23.5%
Right
Turn
0
2700
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
15.6%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: BUSINESS PARK WAY BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: PALOMAR AIRPORT RD. PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
421 0 128
I I I
<—' v '—>
202*
223 ' 2 0 ' 110
0 , 0 0 , 0
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
0
2700
2700
0
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
4.7%
8.3%
0.0%
Thru
1700
0
0
3400
5100
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
42.1%
23.5%
Right
Turn
1500
0
2700
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
15.6%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
67.7% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > B
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: OLIVENHAIN RD.
EW: RANCHO SANTA FE RD.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
AM PEAK
f
1
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
31
0
423
L LT
1500 1500
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Left
Turn
0.0%
2.1%
0.0%
28.2%
Thru
2
9
530
460
T
1700
0
1
3
3
Thru
3200
1700
5100
5100
Thru
20.9%
0.5%
10.4%
9.0%
Right
Turn
667
0
0
0
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
1 1 0
000
000
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : OLIVENHAIN RD.
EW : RANCHO SANTA FE RD.
BUILDOUT PROJEI
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
•
0 '
CO/%
0 ,
V
0 9
1 1
0 v
0 2
1
0
1 2
I I
0 2
31
I
'-->
1
0
I
667
A
o • — o
2 ^ Afin^.— — — — HOW
1 , 423
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
2.1%
0.0%
28.2%
Thru
1700
3200
1700
5100
5100
Thru
20.9%
0.5%
10.4%
9.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
71.6% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
B
P
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: OLIVENHAIN RD. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: RANCHO SANTA FE RD. PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
17
0
548
L
1500
1
1
1
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
4
6
588
317
T
1700
0
1
3
3
TR
1700
1
0
0
0
Right
Turn
578
0
0
0
R
1500
1
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Lett Thru Right
(VPH of Green) Turn Turn
I
Northbound 1500 3200 0
Southbound 1500 1700 0
Eastbound 1500 5100 0
Westbound 1500 5100 0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Lett Thru Right
Turn Turn
Northbound 0.0% 18.2% 0.0%
Southbound 1.1% 0.4% 0.0%
Eastbound 0.0% 11.5% 0.0%
Westbound 36.5% 6.2% 0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : OLIVENHAIN RD.
EW : RANCHO SANTA FE RD.
BUILDOUT PROJEI
PMPEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
0 '
coo
0 ,
V
0 6
1 1
0 v
0 1
1
n
0
1 1
j • A
I I
0 4
17
I
'-->
1
1
I
578
A
0 ' 0
<i f -JITO ^» O 1 1
1 , 548
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
1.1%
0.0%
36.5%
Thru
1700
3200
1700
5100
5100
Thru
18.2%
0.4%
11.5%
6.2%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
77.4% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
I-
r
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : RANCHO SANTA FE RD. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
E: CALLE BARCELLONA AM PEAK
i
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
9
0
186
0
L LT
1500 1500
0 0
1 0
0 0
1 0
Left
Turn
0
1500
0
1500
Left
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Thru
1219
871
0
0
T
1700
3
3
0
0
Thru
5100
5100
0
1700
Thru
24.1%
28.4%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
0
579
11
0
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
00 0
000
000
1 0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : RANCHO SANTA FE RD.
EW: CALLE BARCELLONA
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
186 '
11 ,
579
I
<--'
1
1
ow
1
871
I
V
3
0
0
0
1 3 0
I I
9 1219 0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
North
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
0
1500
0
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
0
1700
Thru
24.1%
28.4%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
38.4% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE ---- > A
0.1
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: RANCHO SANTA FE RD. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
E: CALLE BARCELLONA PM PEAK
r:
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
15
0
497
0
L LT
1500 1500
0 0
1 0
0 0
1 0
Left
Turn
0
1500
0
1500
Left
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Thru
1169
862
0
0
T
1700
3
3
0
0
Thru
5100
5100
0
1700
Thru
23.2%
22.7%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
0
294
4
0
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
0 0 0
1 0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : RANCHO SANTA FE RD. BUILDOUT PROJEi
EW : CALLE BARCELLONA PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
497 '
4 ,
V
294 862
i i1 1
<— ' v
1 3
1
0
1
1 3
^ A
I I
15 1169
0
ii
0
0
I
0
A
0 ' 0
0 < 0
0 , 0
V
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
0
1500
0
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
0
1700
Thru
23.2%
22.7%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
33.2% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > A
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: RANCHO SANTA FE RD. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
W: CAMINO DE LAS COCHES AM PEAK
I
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
7
0
143
L LT
1500 1500
0 0
1 0
0 0
1 0
Left
Turn
0
1500
0
1500
Left
Turn
0.0%
0.5%
0.0%
9.5%
Thru
1379
1237
0
0
T
1700
3
3
0
0
Thru
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
29.4%
24.3%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
122
0
0
2
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
000
0 1 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
1500
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : RANCHO SANTA FE RD. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: CAMINO DE LAS COCHES AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
0 1237 7
A
0 '
n
0
V
<-- V
0 3
0
0
0 3
- A
I I
0 1379
— >
1
0
I
122
A
1 ' 2
0 <r^ A^ — — — — \J
1 , 143
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
0
1500
0
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
0.5%
0.0%
9.5%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
29.4%
24.3%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
1500
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
49.4% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > A
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: RANCHO SANTA FE RD. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
W: CAMINO DE LAS COCHES PM PEAK
I
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
4
0
119
L LT
1500 1500
0 0
1 0
0 0
1 0
Left
Turn
0
1500
0
1500
Left
Turn
0.0%
0.3%
0.0%
7.9%
Thru
1484
1107
0
0
T
1700
3
3
0
0
Thru
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
32.4%
21.7%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
170
0
0
7
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
000
0 1 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
1500
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : RANCHO SANTA FE RD.
EW : CAMINO DE LAS COCHES
BUILDOUT F
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETF
A
o — •
o
0 ,
V
0 1107
I I
<— ' v
0 3
0
n\J
0
0 3
ji A
I I
0 1484
4
I
'— >
1
0
I
170
A
1 '
0 -.^— — _ -»
1 ,
V
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
0
1500
0
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
0.3%
0.0%
7.9%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
32.4%
21.7%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
1500
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
50.6% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > A
7
119
p
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: RANCHO SANTA FE RD. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: LA COSTA AVE. AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
27
0
158
0
L
1500
1
1
1
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
1424
1136
225
237
T
1700
2
2
1
1
TR
1700
1
1
1
1
Right
Turn
4
360
51
64
R
1500
0
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Left Thru Right
(VPH of Green) Turn Turn
Northbound 1500 5100 0
Southbound 1500 5100 0
Eastbound 1500 3400 0
Westbound 1500 3400 0
i \PACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1.8%
0.0%
10.5%
0.0%
Thru
28.0%
29.3%
8.1%
8.9%
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : RANCHO SANTA FE RD.
EW : LA COSTA AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
158 '
ooc
51 ,
V
360 1136
I I
<--' V
0 3
1
0£
0
1 3
^ A
I I
27 1424
0
I
'-->
1
0
I
4
A
0 ' 64
o f 007£ ^ £.JI
1 , 0
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
1.8%
0.0%
10.5%
0.0%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
28.0%
29.3%
8.1%
8.9%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
60.5% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > B
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: RANCHO SANTA FE RD.
EW: LA COSTA AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
79
0
244
0
L
1500
1
1
1
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
1366
1146
268
417
T
1700
2
2
1
1
TR
1700
1
1
1
1
Right
Turn
4
305
21
35
R
1500
0
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
JP CAPACITY
sen)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Thru
5100
5100
3400
3400
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
i VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Lett
Turn
Thru Right
Turn
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
5.3%
0.0%
16.3%
0.0%
26.9%
28.5%
8.5%
13.3%
0.0%
'0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : RANCHO SANTA FE RD.
EW : LA COSTA AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
305 1146 0
I I I
<--' v '-->
0 3 1
244 '
268
21 ,
1
2
0
0 ' 35
2 < 417
1 , 0
1 3 0
<--• * .-->
I I I
79 1366 4
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
I
North
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
5.3%
0.0%
16.3%
0.0%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
3400
3400
Thru
26.9%
28.5%
8.5%
13.3%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
73.3% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : RANCHO SANTA FE RD.
W: QUESTHAVEN RD.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
0
n
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
422
0
600
L LT
1800 1800
0 0
2 0
0 0
2 0
Left
Turn
0
3240
0
3240
Lett
Turn
0.0%
13.0%
0.0%
18.5%
Thru
1267
1122
0
0
T
2000
3
3
0
0
Thru
6000
6000
0
0
Thru
21.1%
18.7%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
566
0
0
1119
TR R LR
2000 1800 1800
020
000
000
020
Right
Turn
3240
0
0
3240
Right
Turn
17.5%
0.0%
0.0%
34.5%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : RANCHO SANTA FE RD.
EW : QUESTHAVEN RD.
BUILDOUT PROJEi
AM PEAK-HEAVY 1
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
0 '
n
0 .
V
0 1122
I I
< — ' v
0 3
0
0
0
0 3
I I
0 1267
422
1
1 — >
2
2
1
566
*
2 ' 1119
0 < 0
2 , 600
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
0
3240
0
3240
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
13.0%
0.0%
18.5%
Thru
2000
6000
6000
0
0
Thru
21.1%
18.7%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1800
3240
0
0
3240
Right
Turn
17.5%
0.0%
0.0%
34.5%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 78.7%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: RANCHO SANTA FE RD. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
W: QUESTHAVEN RD. PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
I
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
961
0
496
L LT
1800 1800
0 0
2 0
0 0
2 0
Left
Turn
0
3240
0
3240
Lett
Turn
0.0%
29.7%
0.0%
15.3%
Thru
1185
1242
0
0
T
2000
3
3
0
0
Thru
6000
6000
0
0
Thru
19.8%
20.7%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
629
0
0
594
TR R LR
2000 1800 1800
020
000
000
020
Right
Turn
3240
0
0
3240
Right
Turn
19.4%
0.0%
0.0%
18.3%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : RANCHO SANTA FE RD.
EW : OUESTHAVEN RD.
BUILDOUT PR(DJEI
PM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
0 1242
I I
<--' V
0 3
0 ' 0
Q — — ••— 0
o — , o
V
0 3
^ A
I I
0 1185
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Left
Turn
Default Capacity 1800
Northbound 0
Southbound 3240
Eastbound 0
Westbound 3240
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 0.0%
Southbound 29.7%
Eastbound 0.0%
Westbound 15.3%
961
I
'-->
2
2
I
629
Thru
2000
6000
6000
0
0
Thru
19.8%
20.7%
0.0%
0.0%
•
2 •
0 ^.v»— — — —
2 ,
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1800
3240
0
0
3240
Right
Turn
19.4%
0.0%
0.0%
18.3%
594
496
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 77.7%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS: MELROSE AVE BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: RANCHO SANTA FE AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES Left Thru Right
(Vehicles per Hour) Turn Turn
Northbound 000
Southbound 318 0 759
Eastbound 1647 636 0
Westbound 0 999 582
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes) L LT T TR R LR LTR
Default Capacity 1800 1800 2000 2000 1800 1800 1800
Northbound 0000000
Southbound 2000200
Eastbound 2030000
Westbound 00301 00
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Left Thru Right
(VPH of Green) Turn Turn
Northbound 000
Southbound 324-0 0 3240
Eastbound 3240 6000 0
Westbound 0 6000 1800
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Left Thru Right
Turn Turn
Northbound 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Southbound 9.8% 0.0% 23.4%
Eastbound 50.8% 10.6% 0.0%
Westbound 0.0% 16.7% 32.3%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: MELROSE AVE BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: RANCHO SANTA FE AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
759 0 318
I I I
<--' v '—>
202'
T647 ' 2 1 ' 582
g36 3 3 < ggg
0 , 0 0 . 0
v v
000
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
0
3240
3240
0
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
9.8%
50.8%
0.0%
Thru
2000
0
0
6000
6000
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
10.6%
16.7%
Right
Turn
1800
0
3240
0
1800
Right
Turn
0.0%
23.4%
0.0%
32.3%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
100.9% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > F
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS: MELROSE AVE
EW: RANCHO SANTA FE
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
[
r
i
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
426
1050
0
L LT
1800 1800
0 0
2 0
2 0
0 0
Lett
Turn
0
3240
3240
0
Lett
Turn
0.0%
13.1%
32.4%
0.0%
Thru
0
0
888
707
T
2000
0
0
3
3
Thru
0
0
6000
6000
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
14.8%
11.8%
Right
Turn
0
1489
0
509
TR R LR
2000 1800 1800
000
020
000
0 1 0
Right
Turn
0
3240
0
1800
Right
Turn
0.0%
46.0%
0.0%
28.3%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : MELROSE AVE
EW : RANCHO SANTA FE
BUILDOUT PROJE<
PM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
1050 '
000
0 ,
V
1489 0
i iI i
<--' V
2 0
2
3
0
0 0
^ A
1 1
0 0
426
iI
2
0
I
0
A
1 ' 509
3 < 707
0 , 0
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
0
3240
3240
0
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
13.1%
32.4%
0.0%
Thru
2000
0
0
6000
6000
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
14.8%
11.8%
Right
Turn
1800
0
3240
0
1800
Right
Turn
0.0%
46.0%
0.0%
28.3%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
100.1% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE ---- > F
0. 1
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
n
NS : RANCHO SANTA FE
EW: CALLE ACERVO
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Left
Turn
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
1500
1500
1500
1500
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Left
Turn
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
0.9%
4.1%
13.1%
6.4%
BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
AM PEAK
Left
Turn
13
62
197
96
Thru
1203
640
0
0
Right
Turn
39
54
30
262
L
1500
1
1
1
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
T
1700
2
2
1
1
TR
1700
0
0
0
0
R
1500
. 0
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru Right
Turn
3400
3400
1700
1700
Thru
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
36.5%
20.4%
1.8%
15.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
10/05/90
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : RANCHO SANTA FE
EW: CALLEACERVO
BUILDOUT PROJEi
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
197 '
30 ,
V
54 640
i iI l
<— ' v
0 2
1
1
0
1 2
rf"" *
I I
13 1203
62
iI
1
0
I
39
A
0 ' 262
1 < 0
1 , 96
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.9%
4.1%
13.1%
6.4%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
1700
1700
Thru
36.5%
20.4%
1.8%
15.4%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
79.2% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: RANCHO SANTA FE BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: CALLE ACERVO PM PEAK
U
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
29
230
88
43
L
1500
1
1
1
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
870
1003
0
0
T
1700
2
2
1
1
TR
1700
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
102
165
20
120
R
1500
0
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
JP CAPACITY
sen)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Thru
3400
3400
1700
1700
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
k
L
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Left Thru Right
Turn Turn
Northbound 1.9% 28.6% 0.0%
Southbound 15.3% 34.4% 0.0%
Eastbound 5.9% 1.2% 0.0%
Westbound 2.9% 7.1% 0.0%
10/05/90
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : RANCHO SANTA FE
EW : CALLE ACERVO
BUILDOUT PROJE(
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE
A
88 '
_
20 ,
V
165 1003
I I
<--' V
0 2
1
1
0
1 2
I I
29 870
230
I
' — >
1
0
I
102
GEOMETRY
A
0 '— — 120
1 < 0
1 , 43
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
Thru
1700
3400
3400
1700
1700
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1.9%
15.3%
5.9%
2.9%
Thru
28.6%
34.4%
1.2%
7.1%
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
66.8% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > B
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD. BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: STATE STREET AM PEAK
)LUMES
er Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
0
217
0
8
Thru
2115
2288
0
0
Right
Turn
32
0
0
20
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
r
' Lanes)
pacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
L
1500
0
1
0
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
T
1700
2
2
0
0
TR
1700
1
0
0
0
R
1500
0
0
0
1
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Lett Thru Right
(VPH of Green) Turn Turn
i
L
Northbound 0 5100 0
Southbound 1500 3400 0
Eastbound 000
Westbound 1500 0 1500
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Lett Thru Right
Turn Turn
Northbound 0.0% 42.1% 0.0%
Southbound 14.5% 67.3% 0.0%
Eastbound 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Westbound 0.5% 0.0% 1.3%
10/05/90
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD. BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: STATE STREET AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
0 2288 217
I I I
<--' v '-->
021*
0 ---- ' 0 1 ' ---- 20
0 ..... 0 0 < ---- 0
0 ---- . 0 1 , ---- 8
030
<--. A ,-->
III
0 2115 32 |
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
0
1500
0
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
14.5%
0.0%
0.5%
Thru
1700
5100
3400
0
0
Thru
42.1%
67.3%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
1500
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.3%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
78.6% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD. BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: STATE STREET PM PEAK
i
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
345
0
14
L LT
1500 1500
0 0
2 0
0 0
1 0
Left
Turn
0
2700
0
1500
Left
Turn
0.0%
12.8%
0.0%
0.9%
Thru
2299
2194
0
0
T
1700
2
2
0
0
Thru
5100
3400
0
0
Thru
45.6%
64.5%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
27
0
0
30
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
1 0 0
000
000
0 1 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
1500
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
2.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
10/05/90
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD. BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: STATE STREET PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
•
0 '
o
0 .
V
0 2194
I I
<— ' v
0 2
0
n\J
0
0 3
I I
0 2299
345
I
' — >
2
0
I
27
•
A
1 ' 30
n 4? n
1 , 14
V
.
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
0
2700
0
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
12.8%
0.0%
0.9%
Thru
1700
5100
3400
0
0
Thru
45.6%
64.5%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
1500
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
2.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
76.5% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
•
I
1
iV
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : CARLSBAD BLVD
EW : GRAND AVENUE
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
10/05/90
Lett
Turn
15
2
25
22
L
1500
1
1
1
1
Lett
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Left
Turn
1.0%
0.1%
1.7%
1.5%
BUILDOUT
AM PEAK
Thru
2049
2197
62
47
LT T
1500 1700
0 2
0 2
0 1
0 1
Thru
3400
3400
1700
1700
Thru
61.1%
65.1%
5.1%
4.2%
PROJECTIONS
Right
Turn
29
15
24
24
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
000
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : CARLSBAD BLVD.
EW : GRAND AVENUE
BUILDOUT F
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETF
-
25 '
CO
24
V
15 2197
I I
<— ' v
0 2
1
1i
0
1 2
rf** A
I I
15 2049
2
I
'-->
1
0
I
29
•
o • —
^ ^1 ,
V
«
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO '
Left
Turn
1.0%
0.1%
1.7%
1.5%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
1700
1700
Thru
61.1%
65.1%
5.1%
4.2%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
24
22
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
82.6% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
1
1 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : CARLSBAD BLVD.
1
1
1
••r
1
1'
1
•
*
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
EW : GRAND AVENUE
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
10/05/90
Left
Turn
30
2
29
42
L
1500
1
1
1
1
Lett
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Left
Turn
2.0%
0.1%
1.9%
2.8%
BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
PM PEAK
Thru
2140
2110
65
81
LT T TR
1500 1700 1700
020
020
0 1 0
0 1 0
Thru
3400
3400
1700
1700
Thru
64.0%
62.8%
5.4%
9.2%
•
Right
Turn
37
25
26
75
R LR
1500 1500
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
.
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD.
EW : GRAND AVENUE
BUILDOUT PROJE'
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
29 '
ec
26 ,
V
25 2110
i i1 1
<--' V
0 2
1
1
0
1 2
I I
30 2140
2
i1
1
0
I
37
A
0 ' 75
1 < 81
1 , 42
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
2.0%
0.1%
1.9%
2.8%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
1700
1700
Thru
64.0%
62.8%
5.4%
9.2%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
85.9% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD.
EW : CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR.
BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
0
62
0
230
L
1800
1
1
1
1
LT
1800
0
0
0
1
Thru
2063
2171
0
0
T
2000
2
2
1
1
TR
2000
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
208
0
0
42
R
1800
0
0
0
0
LR
1800
0
0
0
0
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
JP CAPACITY
9en)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
1800
1800
0
Thru
4000
4000
2000
5600
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
\PACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0.0%
3.4%
0.0%
0.0%
Thru
56.8%
54.3%
0.0%
4.9%
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
02/01/91
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : CARLSBAD BLVD.
EW : CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR.
BUILDOUT PRiOJB
AM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
0 2171
I I
<--' V
0 2
0 ' 1
0 _ 1
0 , 0
V
1 2
^— — A
I I
0 2063
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Lett
Turn
Default Capacity 1800
Northbound 1800
Southbound 1800
Eastbound 1800
Westbound 0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 0.0%
Southbound 3.4%
Eastbound 0.0%
Westbound 0.0%
62
I
'— >
1
0
I
208
Thru
2000
4000
4000
2000
5600
Thru
56.8%
54.3%
0.0%
4.9%
•
0 '
2 -.^.— — — —
1 ,
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1800
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0,0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
42
230
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 75.1%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD.
EW : CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR.
BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
32
0
414
L
1800
1
1
1
1
Left
Turn
1800
1800
1800
0
Lett
Turn
0.0%
1.8%
0.0%
0.0%
Thru
2113
2153
0
0
LT T
1800 2000
0 2
0 2
0 1
1 1
Thru
4000
4000
2000
5600
Thru
.
57.5%
53.8%
0.0%
8.9%
Right
Turn
185
0
0
86
TR R LR
2000 1800 1800
000
000
0 0 0
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
02/01/91
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : CARLSBAD BLVD.
EW : CARLSBAD VILLAG E DR.
BUILDOUT PROJEi
PM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
0 '
0 ,
V
0 2153
i i1 1
< — ' v
0 2
1
1
0
1 2
^ *
I I
0 2113
32
iI
1
0
I
185
A
0 ' 86
2 < 0
1 , 414
V
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
1800
1800
1800
0
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
1.8%
0.0%
0.0%
Thru
2000
4000
4000
2000
5600
Thru
57.5%
53.8%
0.0%
8.9%
Right
Turn
1800
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 78.2%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD. BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: TAMARACK AVENUE AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
0
29
0
730
Thru
2025
2350
2
5
Right
Turn
134
0
0
52
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
L
1800
1
1
0
2
LT
1800
0
0
1
0
T
2000
2
2
0
0
TR
2000
0
0
0
1
R
1800
0
0
1
0
LR
1800
0
0
0
0
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
1800
0
3240
Left
Turn
0.0%
1.6%
0.0%
22.5%
Thru
4000
4000
1800
2000
Thru
54.0%
58.8%
0.1%
2.9%
Right
Turn
0
0
1800
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
' 0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
02/04/91
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : CARLSBAD BLVD.
EW : TAMARACK AVENUE
BUILDOUT PROJE
AM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
0 '
2 .
0 ,
V
0 2350
i i1 1
<--' V
0 2
0
1
1
1 2
^ A
I I
0 2025
29
iI
1
0
I
134
0 ' 52
1 < 5
2 , 730
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
1800
1800
0
3240
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
1.6%
0.0%
22.5%
Thru
2000
4000
4000
1800
2000
Thru
54.0%
58.8%
0.1%
2.9%
Right
Turn
1800
0
0
1800
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 91.4%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > E
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD. BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: TAMARACK AVENUE PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
59
1
318
L
1800
1
1
0
2
LT
1800
0
0
1
0
Thru
2187
2156
4
4
T
2000
2
2
0
0
TR
2000
0
0
0
1
Right
Turn
230
0
0
94
R
1800
0
0
1
0
LR
1800
0
0
0
0
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
1800
0
3240
Lett
Turn
0.0%
3.3%
0.0%
9.8%
Thru
4000
4000
1800
2000
Thru
60.4%
53.9%
0.3%
4.9%
Right
Turn
0
0
1800
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
02/01/91
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD.
EW : TAMARACK AVENUE
BUILDOUT PROJE
PM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
1 '
0 ,
V
0 2156
I I
< — ' v
0 2
0
1
1
1 2
I I
0 2187
59
I
1
0
I
230
A
0 ' 94
1 < 4
2 , 318
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
1800
1800
0
3240
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
3.3%
0.0%
9.8%
Thru
2000
4000
4000
1800
2000
Thru
60.4%
53.9%
0.3%
4.9%
Right
Turn
1800
0
0
1800
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 83.8%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD
EW: CANNON ROAD
BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
0
622
2
199
-• ... -
L
1800
1
1
1
1
Left
Turn
1800
1800
1800
1800
Lett
Turn
0.0%
34.6%
0.1%
11.1%
Thru
2118
2464
15
5
LT T
1800 2000
0 2
0 2
0 1
0 1
Thru
4000
4000
2000
2000
Thru
53.0%
61.6%
0.9%
0.3%
Right
Turn
304
0
2
31
TR R LR
2000 1800 1800
0 1 0
000
000
0 1 0
Right
Turn
1800
0
0
1800
Right
Turn
16.9%
0.0%
0.0%
1.7%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : CARLSBAD BLVD
EW : CANNON ROAD
BUILDOUT PRIOJE
AM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
2 '
1C
2 - — ,
V
0 2464
1 1
<--' V
0 2
1
-
0
1 2
rf* A
I I
0 2118
622
I
'-->
1
1
I
304
»
1 •
j
1 ,
V
-
I
North
31
199
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
34.6%
0.1%
11.1%
Thru
2000
4000
4000
2000
2000
Thru
53.0%
61.6%
0.9%
0.3%
Right
Turn
1800
1800
0
0
1800
Right
Turn
16.9%
0.0%
0.0%
1.7%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
109.4% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > F
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: CANNON ROAD PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
2
209
1
130
L
1800
1
1
1
1
Left
Turn
1800
1800
1800
1800
Left
Turn
0.1%
11.6%
0.1%
7.2%
Thru
2286
2252
1
14
LT T
1800 2000
0 2
0 2
0 1
0 1
Thru
4000
4000
2000
2000
Thru
57.2%
56.4%
0.4%
0.7%
Right
Turn
428
2
7
131
TR R LR
2000 1800 1800
0 1 0
000
000
0 1 0
Right
Turn
1800
0
0
1800
Right
Turn
23.8%
0.0%
0.0%
7.3%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : CARLSBAD BLVD
EW : CANNON ROAD
BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
2 2252 209
1A
1 '
7 ,
< —
0
1
1i
0
V
2
131
14
130
1 1
I I
2 2286 428
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
North
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.1%
11.6%
0.1%
7.2%
Thru
2000
4000
4000
2000
2000
Thru
57.2%
56.4%
0.4%
0.7%
Right
Turn
1800
1800
0
0
1800
Right
Turn
23.8%
0.0%
0.0%
7.3%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 86.4%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD.
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
0
233
0
259
L
1800
0
2
0
1
LT
1800
0
0
0
0
Thru
2071
2413
0
0
T
2000
2
2
0
0
TR
2000
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
146
0
0
446
R
1800
1
0
0
1
LR
1800
0
0
0
1
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
3240
0
1800
Left
Turn
0.0%
7.2%
0.0%
14.4%
Thru
4000
4000
0
0
Thru
51.8%
60.3%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1800
0
0
1800
Right
Turn
8.1%
0.0%
0.0%
24.8%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : CARLSBAD BLVD.
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
BUILDOUT PRiOJEi
AM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
0 '
0 ,
V
0 2413
I I
<— ' v
0 2
0
-
0
0 2
j. A
I I
0 2071
233
I
' — >
2
1
I
146
A
1.5 '
0 ^-___^ —••
1.5 ,
V
A
I
North
446
259
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1800
0
3240
0
1800
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
7.2%
0.0%
14.4%
Thru
2000
4000
4000
0
0
Thru
51.8%
60.3%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1800
1800
0
0
1800
Right
Turn
8.1%
0.0%
0.0%
24.8%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 95.1%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > E
1
1
1
1
1
1•V
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS : CARLSBAD BLVD.
EW : PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES Lett
(Vehicles per Hour) Turn
Northbound 0
Southbound 537
Eastbound 0
Westbound 364
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes) L
MODEL
BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
PM PEAK-HEAVY
Thru
2286
1983
0
0
LT T TR
Default Capacity 1800 1800 2000 2000
Northbound 0
Southbound 2
Eastbound 0
Westbound 1
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Lett
(VPH of Green) Turn
Northbound 0
Southbound 3240
Eastbound 0
Westbound 1800
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Lett
Turn
Northbound 0.0%
Southbound 16.6%
Eastbound 0.0%
Westbound 20.2%
020
020
000
000
Thru
4000
4000
0
0
Thru
57.2%
49.6%
0.0%
0.0%
DEMAND
Right
Turn
179
0
0
481
R LR
1800 1800
1 0
0 0
0 0
1 1
Right
Turn
1800
0
0
1800
Right
Turn
9.9%
0.0%
0.0%
26.7%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
1
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD. BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: PALOMAR AIRPORT RD. PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
0 1983 537
A
o — •
..
0 ,
V
<--' V
0 2
0
0 -
0
0 2
-, A
1 1
0 2286
'— >
2
1.5
1.5
1
I
179
A
1 481
^ n^*— ——— \j
, 364
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
0
3240
0
1800
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
16.6%
0.0%
20.2%
Thru
2000
4000
4000
0
0
Thru
57.2%
49.6%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1800
1800
0
0
1800
Right
Turn
9.9%
0.0%
0.0%
26.7%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
110.4% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE ——> F
I
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: POINSETTIA LANE AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
0
243
0
213
L
1800
0
2
0
2
LT
1800
0
0
0
0
Thru
2075
2574
0
0
T
2000
2
2
0
0
TR
2000
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
672
0
0
137
R
1800
1
0
0
1
LR
1800
0
0
0
0
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
3240
0
3240
Left
Turn
0.0%
7.5%
0.0%
6.6%
Thru
4000
4000
0
0
Thru
51.9%
64.4%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1800
0
0
1800
Right
Turn
37.3%
0.0%
0.0%
7.6%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : CARLSBAD BLVD
EW : POINSETTIA LANE
BUILDOUT PROJEi
AM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE
0 2574
I 1
< — ' v
0 2
0 ' 0
0 0
0 — -. 0
V
0 2
^«-— A
1 1
0 2075
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Left
Turn
Default Capacity 1800
Northbound 0
Southbound 3240
East bound 0
Westbound 3240
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 0.0%
Southbound 7.5%
Eastbound 0.0%
Westbound 6.6%
243
I
1 — >
2
1
I
672
Thru
2000
4000
4000
0
0
Thru
51.9%
64.4%
0.0%
0.0%
GEOMETRY
A
1 '
o <
\J **— — — —
2 ,-—
V
I
North
Right
Turn
1800
1800
0
0
1800
Right
Turn
37.3%
0.0%
0.0%
7.6%
137
o\J
213
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 82.0%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: POINSETTIA LANE PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
224
0
557
L LT
1800 1800
0 0
2 0
0 0
2 0
Left
Turn
0
3240
0
3240
Left
Turn
0.0%
6.9%
0.0%
17.2%
Thru
2411
2205
0
0
T
2000
2
2
0
0
Thru
4000
4000
0
0
Thru
60.3%
55.1%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
341
0
0
204
TR R LR
2000 1800 1800
0 1 0
000
0 0 0
0 1 0
Right
Turn
1800
0
0
1800
Right
Turn
18.9%
0.0%
0.0%
11.3%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: CARLSBAD BLVD BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: POINSETTIA LANE PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
0 2205 224
A
o — •
0 -----
0 ,
V
<--' V
0 2
0
0
0 2
rf* A
1 1
0 2411
— >
2
1
I
341
-
1 • 204
0 ^— — — — O
2 , 557
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1800
0
3240
0
3240
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.0%
6.9%
0.0%
17.2%
Thru
2000
4000
4000
0
0
Thru
60.3%
55.1%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1800
1800
0
0
1800
Right
Turn
18.9%
0.0%
0.0%
11.3%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
94.4% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > E
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: AVENIDA ENCINAS BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: POINSETT1A LN AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
26
245
34
502
L
1500
2
2
2
2
Left
Turn
2700
2700
2700
2700
Lett
Turn
1.0%
9.1%
1.3%
18.6%
Thru
415
178
845
295
LT T
1500 1700
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
Thru
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
21.2%
6.1%
25.9%
23.7%
Right
Turn
307
28
36
511
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
000
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : AVENIDA ENCINAS
EW : POINSETTIA LN
BUILDOUT PROJE'
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
34 '
36 ,
V
28
Ii
0
2
2
0
2
1
26
178 245
i iI I
v '-->
2 2
2 0
A ^
I I
415 307
A
0 ' 511
2 < 295
2 , 502
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
2700
2700
RATIO
Left
Turn
1.0%
9.1%
1.3%
18.6%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
21.2%
6.1%
25.9%
23.7%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 84.8%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: AVENIDA ENCINAS BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: POINSETTIA LN PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
58
492
51
361
L
1500
2
2
2
2
Left
Turn
2700
2700
2700
2700
Left
Turn
. 2.1%
18.2%
1.9%
13.4%
Thru
335
442
464
615
LT T
1500 1700
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
Thru
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
27.3%
15.6%
15.1%
25.8%
Right
Turn
592
87
50
263
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
000
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: AVENIOA ENCINAS BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: POINSETTIA LN PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
87 442 492
I I I
A
51 — -'
ACA
50 ,
v
< — '
0
2
o<C
0
2
I
58
v '-->
2 2
2 0
I I
335 592
*
0 ' 263
2 ^--.__ fti*;^— — — — o |^
2 , 361
v
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
2700
2700
RATIO
Left
Turn
2.1%
18.2%
1.9%
13.4%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
27.3%
15.6%
15.1%
25.8%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 84.0%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
1
1 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : PASEO DEL NORTE
1
.
1
-
•
1
1
1
•
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
EW : POINSETTIA LN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
63
39
368
23
L
1500
1
1
2
1
Left
Turn
1500
1500
2700
1500
Left
Turn
4.2%
2.6%
13.6%
1.5%
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
AM PEAK
Thru
29
9
1181
1642
LT T TR
1500 1700 1700
0 0 1
0 1 0
020
020
Thru
1700
1700
3400
3400
Thru
3.4%
0.5%
36.0%
58.8%
Right
Turn
29
93
43
357
R LR
1500 1500
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
Riflht
Turn
0
1500
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
6.2%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : PASEO DEL NORTE
EW : POINSETTIA LN
BUILDOUT PROJE<
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
93
1
<— '
1
368 ' 2
1 1 fl1 __ 9
43 . 0
V
1
I
63
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Left
Turn
Default Capacity 1500
Northbound 1500
Southbound 1500
Eastbound 2700
Westbound 1500
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 4.2%
Southbound 2.6%
Eastbound 13.6%
Westbound 1.5%
9 39
I I
v '-->
1 1
1 0
A *.
I I
29 29
Thru
1700
1700
1700
3400
3400
Thru
3.4%
0.5%
36.0%
58.8%
A
0 ' 357
2 < 1642
1 , 23
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1500
0
1500
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
6.2%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
88.6% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : PASEO DEL NORTE
EW: POINSETTIA LN
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
65
165
239
42
L
1500
1
1
2
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
22
30
1616
1678
T
1700
0
1
2
2
TR
1700
1
0
0
0
Right
Turn
36
124
69
165
R
1500
0
1
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
2700
1500
Left
Turn
4.3%
11.0%
8.9%
2.8%
Thru
1700
1700
3400
3400
Thru
3.4%
1.8%
49.6%
54.2%
Right
Turn
0
1500
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
8.3%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : PASEO DEL NORTE
EW : POINSETTIA LN
BUILDOUT PROJE
PMPEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE
124
I
< — '
1
239 ' 2
1fi1ft ..... 9
69 , 0
V
1
I
65
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Left
Turn
Default Capacity 1500
Northbound 1500
Southbound 1500
Eastbound 2700
Westbound 1500
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Lett
Turn
Northbound 4.3%
Southbound 11.0%
Eastbound 8.9%
Westbound 2.8%
30 165
I I
v '-->
1 1
1 0
A ^
1 1
22 36
Thru
1700
1700
1700
3400
3400
Thru
3.4%
1.8%
49.6%
54.2%
GEOMETRY
A
0 ' 165
2 < 1678
1 , 42
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1500
0
1500
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
8.3%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
87.5% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: BATIQUITOS DR. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: POINSETTIA LN AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
428
39
42
12
L
1500
2
1
1
1
Lett
Turn
2700
1500
1500
1500
Left
Turn
15.9%
2.6%
2.8%
0.8%
Thru
2
2
1055
1471
LT T
1500 1700
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
Thru
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
1.3%
3.7%
35.5%
43.6%
Right
Turn
41
124
153
10
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
00 0
000
0 00
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : BATIQUITOS DR.
EW : POINSETTIA LN
BUILDOUT PROJE
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
42 '
153 ,
V
124
I
0
1
2
0
2
I
428
2 39
I I
v '— >
2 1
2 0
A ^
I I
2 41
0 ' 10
2 < 1471
1 , 12
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
15.9%
2.6%
2.8%
0.8%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
1.3%
3.7%
35.5%
43.6%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
75.9% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: BATIQUITOS DR.
EW: POINSETTIA LN
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
217
16
110
46
L
1500
2
1
1
1
Left
Turn
2700
1500
1500
1500
Left
Turn
8.0%
1.1%
7.3%
3.1%
Thru
2
3
1311
1611
LT T
1500 1700
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
Thru
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
0.5%
1.8%
50.2%
48.4%
Right
Turn
14
57
395
33
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
00 0
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : BATIQUITOS DR.
EW : POINSETTIA LN
BUILDOUT PROJEi
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
110 '
1 01 1 _
395 ,
V
57
I
0
1
2
0
2
I
217
3 16
I I
v '-->
2 1
2 0
I I
2 14
A
0 ' 33
2 < 1611
1 , 46
V
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Lett
Turn
8.0%
1.1%
7.3%
3.1%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
0.5%
1.8%
50.2%
48.4%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
75.5% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE ——> C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : ALGA RD.
EW : POINSETTIA LN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
Left
Turn
337
127
415
10
L
1500
2
2
2
2
Left
Turn
2700
2700
2700
2700
Left
Turn
12.5%
4.7%
15.4%
0.4%
AM PEAK
Thru
637
280
612
903
LT T TR
1500 1700 1700
020
020
020
020
Thru
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
20.4%
8.2%
21.8%
31.7%
Right
Turn
55
153
129
176
R LR
1500 1500
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
Right
Turn
0
1500
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
10.2%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
- 'IN? ERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : ALGA RD.
EW : POINSETTIA LN
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
415 '
£1 9O 1 £
129 ,
153 280
I I
< — ' v
1 2
2
0
127
I
'-->
2 «
0 '
2 4*
^,— — — —
2 ,
176
on ^%7Uw
10
I I I
337 637 55
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
North
-*-•
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
2700
2700
RATIO
Left
Turn
12.5%
4.7%
15.4%
0.4%
Thru
,„_
1700
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
20.4%
8.2%
21.8%
31.7%
Right
Turn
1500
0
1500
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
10.2%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
82.2% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE —-> D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: AVENIDA ENCINAS
EW: CANNON ROAD
BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
9
0
0
397
L
1500
1
0
0
1
Left
Turn
2250
0
0
1500
Left
Turn
0.4%
0.0%
0.0%
26.5%
Thru
0
0
967
337
LT T
1500 1700
0 0
0 0
0 2
0 2
Thru
0
0
3400
3400
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
30.1%
9.9%
Right
Turn
60
0
56
0
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
0 1 1
000
000
000
Right
Turn
2250
0
0
0
Right
Turn
2.7%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
02/06/91
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: AVENIDA ENCINAS BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: CANNON ROAD AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
o —• o o •— o
967 2 2 < 337
56 , 0 1 , 397
v v
1.5 0 1.5
<--, * ,-->
III
9 0 60 |
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2250
0
0
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.4%
0.0%
0.0%
26.5%
Thru
1700
0
0
3400
3400
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
30.1%
9.9%
Right
Turn
1500
2250
0
0
0
Right
Turn
2.7%
0.0%
0,0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
69.2% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > B
I
I INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
NS : ALGA RD.
EW : POINSETTIA LN.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
PM PEAK
Left
Turn
274
293
.82
26
L
1500
2
2
2
2
Lett
Turn
2700
2700
2700
2700
Left
Turn
10.1%
10.9%
3.0%
1.0%
Thru
354
705
943
826
LT T
1500 1700
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
Thru
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
11.3%
20.7%
34.7%
25.4%
Right
Turn
30
590
236
39
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
0 1 0
000
000
Right
Turn
0
1500
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
39.3%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : ALGA RD.
EW : POINSETTIA LN.
BUILDOUT PROJE
PMPEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
82 '
04.0
236 ,
V
590
1
1
2
2
0
2
I
274
705 293
I I
v ' — >
2 2
2 0
A ^
I I
354 30
A
0 ' 39
2 < 826
2 , 26
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
2700
2700
RATIO
Left
Turn
10.1%
10.9%
3.0%
1.0%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
11.3%
20.7%
34.7%
25.4%
Right
Turn
1500
0
1500
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
39.3%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
85.0% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: AVENIDA ENCINAS BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: CANNON ROAD PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
37
0
0
231
L
1500
1
0
0
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
0
0
736
351
T
1700
0
0
2
2
TR
1700
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
328
0
22
0
R
1500
1
0
0
0
LR
1500
1
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
2250
0
0
1500
Left
Turn
1.6%
0.0%
0.0%
15.4%
Thru
0
0
3400
3400
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
22.3%
10.3%
Right
Turn
2250
0
0
0
Right
Turn
14.6%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
02/06/91
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : AVENIDA
EW : CANNON
ENCINAS
ROAD
BUILDOUT PROJE
PMPEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
0 '
yOC
22 - — ,
V
0
1
< — '
0
0
0£
0
1.5
I
37
0 0
I I
v '-->
0 0
0 1.5
A ^
I I
0 328
A
0 '— - 0
9 <* V\1
1 , 231
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2250
0
0
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
1.6%
0.0%
0.0%
15.4%
Thru
1700
0
0
3400
3400
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
22.3%
10.3%
Right
Turn
1500
2250
0
0
0
Right
Turn
14.6%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
62.3% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE ---- > B
0.1
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: PASEO DEL NORTE BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: CANNON ROAD PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
220
424
586
92
L
1800
2
2
2
2
LT
1800
0
0
0
0
Thru
197
270
1063
637
T
2000
2
1
2
2
TR
2000
0
1
0
0
Right
Turn
217
815
248
334
R
1800
0
1
0
0
LR
1800
0
0
0
0
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Lett Thru Right
(VPH of Green) Turn Turn
Northbound 3240 4000 0
Southbound 3240 5800 0
Eastbound 3240 4000 0
Westbound 3240 4000 0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Lett Thru Right
Turn Turn
Northbound 6.8% 10.4% 0.0%
Southbound 13.1% 18.7% 0.0%
Eastbound 18.1% 32.8% 0.0%
Westbound 2.8% 24.3% 0.0%
02/06/91
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : PASEO DEL NORTE
EW : CANNON ROAD
BUILDOUT PROJE'
PM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
»
586 '
1 /\CQ
248 .
V
815
I
< — '
1
2
0
2
I
220
270 424
I I
v '— >
2 2
2 0
A »^
I I
197 217
A
0 ' 334
O ^ ft*57
2 , 92
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1800
3240
3240
3240
3240
RATIO
Left
Turn
6.8%
13.1%
18.1%
2.8%
Thru
2000
4000
5800
4000
4000
Thru
10.4%
18.7%
32.8%
24.3%
Right
Turn
1800
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
77.9% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
1
1
1
E
1
1
•1^p
i
•
ik
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : PASEO DEL NORTE BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW : CANNON ROAD
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
Left
Turn
68
212
597
127
L
1800
2
2
2
2
Left
Turn
3240
3240
3240
3240
Left
Turn
2.1%
6.5%
18.4%
3.9%
Thru
162
150
1343
616
LT T
1800 2000
0 2
0 1
0 2
0 2
Thru
4000
5800
4000
4000
Thru
6.7%
8.6%
40.6%
22.4%
Right
Turn
107
347
279
279
TR R LR
2000 1800 1800
000
1 1 0
000
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
I
I
I
I
I
02/06/91
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : PASEO DEL NORTE
EW : CANNON ROAD
BUILDOUT PROJEi
AM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
597 '
HOXO ...
279 ,
V
347
1
1
2
2
0
2
I
68
150 212
I I
v '-->
2 2
2 0
A ^
I I
162 107
0 ' 279
2 , 127
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
3240
3240
3240
3240
RATIO
Lett
Turn
2.1%
6.5%
18.4%
3.9%
Thru
2000
4000
5800
4000
4000
Thru
6.7%
8.6%
40.6%
22.4%
Right
Turn
1800
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
67.7% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE ---- > B
0.1
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
i
I
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
N: HIDDEN VALLEY BLIILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: CANNON RD. AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
58
0
0
607
L
1500
1
0
0
2
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
0
0
1142
965
T
1700
0
0
2
2
TR
1700
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
138
0
520
0
R
1500
1
0
1
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
0
0
2700
Lett
Turn
3.9%
0.0%
0.0%
22.5%
Thru
0
0
3400
3400
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
33.6%
28.4%
Right
Turn
1500
0
1500
0
Right
Turn
9.2%
0.0%
34.7%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : HIDDEN VALLEY BUILDOUT PROJE
EW : CANNON RD.AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
0 - — '
1 1 A9 _
520 ,
V
0
I
<— '
0
0
2
1
1
I
58
0 0
I I
v '— >
0 0
0 1
A ^
I I
0 138
A
o • — o
2 < 965
2 , 607
V
-
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
1500
0
0
2700
RATIO
Left
Turn
3.9%
0.0%
0.0%
22.5%
Thru
1700
0
0
3400
3400
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
33.6%
28.4%
Right
Turn
1500
1500
0
1500
0
Right
Turn
9.2%
0.0%
34.7%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
75.3% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
1
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
i
I
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
N: HIDDEN VALLEY BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: CANNON RD. PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
375
0
0
270
L
1500
1
0
0
2
Left
Turn
1500
0
0
2700
Left
Turn
25.0%
0.0%
0.0%
10.0%
Thru
0
0
1372
688
LT T
1500 1700
0 0
0 0
0 2
0 2
Thru
0
0
3400
3400
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
40.4%
20.2%
Right
Turn
405
0
332
0
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
0 1 0
000
01 0
000
Right
Turn
1500
0
1500
0
Right
Turn
27.0%
0.0%
22.1%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : HIDDEN VALLEY
EW : CANNON RD.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
PMPEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
0 '
1 *V79 - __-
332 ,
V
I
< — '
0
0
2
1
1
I
375
I I
v '— >
0 0
0 1
A *^
I I
0 405
A
o • — o
2 < 688
2 , 270
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
0
0
2700
RATIO
Left
Turn
25.0%
0.0%
0.0%
10.0%
Thru
1700
0
0
3400
3400
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
40.4%
20.2%
Right
Turn
1500
1500
0
1500
0
Right
Turn
27.0%
0.0%
22.1%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 87.4%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
i
i
I
i
I
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
S: FARADAY AVE.
EW: CANNON RD.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
i
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
Left
Turn
24
0
0
329
L
1500
1
0
0
2
Lett
Turn
1500
0
0
2700
Left
Turn
1.6%
0.0%
0.0%
12.2%
AM PEAK
Thru
0
0
761
1549
LT T TR
1500 1700 1700
000
000
020
020
Thru
0
0
3400
3400
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
37.6%
45.6%
Right
Turn
8
0
519
0
R LR
1500 1500
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : FARADAY AVE.
EW : CANNON RD.
INTERSECTION TURNING MOV
0
1
<--'
0
0 ' 0
7fii o
519 . 0
V
1
I
24
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Left
Turn
Default Capacity 1500
Northbound 1500
Southbound 0
Eastbound 0
Westbound 2700
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 1.6%
Southbound 0.0%
Eastbound 0.0%
Westbound 12.2%
EMENTS/LAf
0 0
I I
v '-->
0 0
0 1
A ^
I I
0 8
Thru
1700
0
0
3400
3400
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
37.6%
45.6%
BUILDOUT F
AM PEAK
JE GEOMETf
A
o • —
o ^£ ^»~~ ~~
2 ,
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1500
1500
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0
49
329
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
61.4% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > B
0.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
S: FARADAY AVE.
EW: CANNON RD.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
Left
Turn
187
0
0
7
L
1500
1
0
0
2
Lett
Turn
1500
0
0
2700
Left
Turn
12.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
PM PEAK
Thru
0
0
1609
771
LT T TR
1500 1700 1700
000
000
020
0 2 0
Thru
0
0
3400
3400
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
52.3%
22.7%
Right
Turn
58
0
168
0
R LR
1500 1500
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
Right
Turn
3.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: FARADAY AVE. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: CANNON RD. PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
<--' v '-->
0 0 0
0 ' 0 0 ' 0
1609 2 2 < 771
168 , 0 2 , 7
v v
101
<--. * ,~>
III
187 0 58 |
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
1500
0
0
2700
RATIO
Left
Turn
12.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
Thru
1700
0
0
3400
3400
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
52.3%
22.7%
Right
Turn
1500
1500
0
0
0
Right
Turn
3.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
75.0% ' Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NS : COLLEGE BLVD.
EW : CANNON RD.
BUILDOUT PROJE'
AM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
240 '
85 .
V
196
I
1
2
2
0
2
I
62
1099 44
II
v ' — >
3 2
3 0
A _^
I I
601 162
A
0 ' 151
2 < 965
2 . 371
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1800
3240
3240
3240
3240
RATIO
Lett
Turn
1.9%
1.4%
7.4%
11.5%
Thru
2000
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
12.7%
18.3%
12.4%
27.9%
Right
Turn
1800
0
1800
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
10.9%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 65.5%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > B
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: COLLEGE BLVD. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: CANNON RD. AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
62
44
240
371
L LT
1800 1800
2 0
2 0
2 0
2 0
Left
Turn
3240
3240
3240
3240
Left
Turn
1.9%
1.4%
7.4%
11.5%
Thru
601
1099
411
965
T TR
2000 2000
3 0
3 0
2 0
2 0
Thru
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
12.7%
18.3%
12.4%
27.9%
Right
Turn
162
196
85
151
R LR
1800 1800
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
Right
Turn
0
1800
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
10.9%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
i
i
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: COLLEGE BLVD.
EW: CANNON RD.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
55
142
93
508
L
1800
2
2
2
2
LT
1800
0
0
0
0
Thru
1380
773
1199
217
T
2000
3
3
2
2
TR
2000
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
286
206
34
113
R
1800
0
1
0
0
LR
1800
0
0
0
0
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY Left
(VPH of Green) Turn
Northbound 3240
Southbound 3240
Eastbound 3240
Westbound 3240
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Left
Turn
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
1.7%
4.4%
2.9%
15.7%
Thru
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
27.8%
12.9%
30.8%
8.3%
Right
Turn
0
1800
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
11.4%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : COLLEGE BLVD.
EW : CANNON RD.
BUILDOUT PROJE<
PM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
93 '
11 QQ
34 .
V
206 773i i1 1
<— ' v
1 3
2
2
0
2 3
— A
I I
55 1380
142
i1
2
0
1
286
A
0 ' 113
2 < 217
2 , 508
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1800
3240
3240
3240
3240
RATIO
Left
Turn
1.7%
4.4%
2.9%
15.7%
Thru
2000
6000
6000
4000
4000
Thru
27.8%
12.9%
30.8%
8.3%
Right
Turn
1800
0
1800
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
11.4%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
88.7% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
1
1
I
1'
1
1
i
i
i
i
t
i
I
i
i
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : COLLEGE BLVD.
W: TAMARACK AVE
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
0
180
0
L LT
1500 1500
1 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
Left
Turn
1500
0
1500
0
Left
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
12.0%
0.0%
BUILDOUT
AM PEAK
Thru
1155
1665
0
0
T
1700
2
2
0
0
Thru
3400
3400
0
0
Thru
34.0%
51.1%
0.0%
0.0%
PROJECTION
Right
Turn
0
73
0
0
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
0 1 0
000
Right
Turn
0
0
1500
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : COLLEGE BLVD.
EW : TAMARACK AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJE'
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
73 1665
I I
<--' V
0 2
180 ' 1
0 , 1
V
1 2
j, A
I I
0 1155
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Left
Turn
Default Capacity 1500
Northbound 1500
Southbound 0
Eastbound 1500
Westbound 0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 0.0%
Southbound 0.0%
Eastbound 12.0%
Westbound 0.0%
0
I
'-->
0
0
I
0
Thru
1700
3400
3400
0
0
Thru
34.0%
51.1%
0.0%
0.0%
A
o • — o
O f n^v~~~ ~ V
0 , 0
V
A .
I
North
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
1500
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
73.1% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
I
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: COLLEGE BLVD.
W: TAMARACK AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
PM PEAK *
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
0
0
84
0
L
1500
1
0
1
0
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
1388
1531
0
0
T
1700
2
2
0
0
TR
1700
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0
196
0
0
R
1500
0
0
1
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
0
1500
0
Left
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
5.6%
0.0%
Thru
3400
3400
0
0
Thru
40.8%
50.8%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
0
0
1500
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : COLLEGE BLVD.
EW : TAMARACK AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
PMPEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
196 1531 0
84
0
0
1
0
1
o •
0 <
0 ,
0
0
0
1 2 0
0 1388 0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
North
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
0
1500
0
RATIO
Lett
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
5.6%
0.0%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
0
0
Thru
40.8%
50.8%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
1500
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
66.4% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > B
1
1
1
1
•
1
1
1
1
K
1
1m
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS : COLLEGE BLVD.
EW: ELM AVE.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
MODEL
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
Left
Turn
247
54
178
46
L
AM PEAK
Thru
881
1160
25
82
LT T TR
1500 1500 1700 1700
2
1
1
1
Left
Turn
2700
1500
1500
1500
Left
Turn
9.1%
3.6%
11.9%
3.1%
020
020
020
020
Thru
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
27.0%
47.4%
4.9%
5.2%
Right
Turn
38
451
140
96
R LR
1500 1500
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : COLLEGE BLVD.
EW : ELM AVE,
BUILDOUT PROJEi
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE
A
178 '
OK, _____
140 ,
V
451 1160
I I
<— ' v
0 2
1
2£.
0
2 2
<--.
I I
247 881
54
I
'-->
1
0
i — >
1
38
GEOMETRY
•
0 ' 96
2 <• R2f, **~ U£i
1 ,-— 46
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
2700
1500
> 1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
9.1%
3.6%
11.9%
3.1%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
27.0%
47.4%
4.9%
5.2%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
83.6% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
I
i
i
i
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: COLLEGE BLVD.
EW: ELM AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
PMPEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
i
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
391
101
178
41
L
1500
2
1
1
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
1154
971
56
55
T
1700
2
2
2
2
TR
1700
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
76
459
186
55
R
1500
0
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
JP CAPACITY
een)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
2700
1500
1500
1500
Thru
3400
3400
3400
3400
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO Lett
Turn
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
14.5%
6.7%
11.9%
2.7%
Thru
36.2%
42.1%
7.1%
3.2%
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : COLLEGE BLVD.
EW : ELM AVE
BUILDOUT F
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETF
»
178 '
Efi
186 ,
V
459 971
I I
<— ' v
0 2
1
2£
0
2 2
I I
391 1154
101
I
'— >
1
0
I
76
A
o • —
2 <£ ^i» ~™
1 ,
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
14.5%
6.7%
11.9%
2.7%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
36.2%
42.1%
7.1%
3.2%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
55
41
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
81.6% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: FARADAY AVE.
EW: COLLEGE AVE.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
Left
Turn
249
94
24
48
L
1500
2
1
1
1
Lett
Turn
2700
1500
1500
1500
Lett
Turn
9.2%
6.3%
1.6%
3.2%
PMPEAK
Thru
151
211
703
625
LT T TR
1500 1700 1700
0 1 1
0 1 1
0 1 1
0 1 1
Thru
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
10.0%
7.8%
26.1%
20.1%
Right
Turn
190
55
186
57
R LR
1500 1500
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : FARADAY AVE.
EW : COLLEGE AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJB
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
24 '
186 .
V
55
iI
0
1
2
0
2
I
249
211 94
i i1 1
v '-->
2 1
2 0
A ^
I I
151 190
A
0 ' 57
2 < 625
1 , 48
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
9.2%
6.3%
1.6%
3.2%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
10.0%
7.8%
26.1%
20.1%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
56.4% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE — — > A
0.1
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: FARADAY AVE.
EW: COLLEGE AVE.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
AM PEAK
Left
Turn
472
62
44
92
L
1500
2
1
1
1
Left
Turn
2700
1500
1500
1500
Left
Turn
17.5%
4.1%
2.9%
6.1%
Thru
96
443
406
899
LT T
1500 1700
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
Thru
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
3.8%
20.1%
19.2%
29.3%
Right
Turn
34
239
246
98
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : FARADAY AVE.
EW : COLLEGE AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJE
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
239
1
< — '
0
44 ' 1
Af\fi 9*rvD £.
246 , 0
V
2
I
472
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Left
Turn
Default Capacity 1500
Northbound 2700
Southbound 1500
Eastbound 1500
Westbound 1500
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 17.5%
Southbound 4.1%
Eastbound 2.9%
Westbound 6.1%
443 62
I I
v '-->
2 1
2 0
A ^
| '"
96 34
Thru
1700
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
3.8%
20.1%
19.2%
29.3%
A
0 ' 98
2 < 899
1 , 92
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
79.8% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS : MELROSE AVE
EW : FARADAY AVE
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
Lett
Turn
560
0
260
0
L
1800
2
0
2
0
Left
Turn
3240
0
3240
0
Lett
Turn
17.3%
0.0%
8.0%
0.0%
AM PEAK-HEAVY
Thru
1520
2353
0
0
LT T TR
1800 2000 2000
030
0 2 1
000
000
Thru
6000
6000
0
0
Thru
25.3%
72.1%
0.0%
0.0%
DEMAND
Right
Turn
0
1975
73
0
R LR
1800 1800
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
1800
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
4.1%
0.0%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : MELROSE AVE
EW : FARADAY AVE
BUILDOUT PROJEi
AM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
260 '
73 .
V
1975 2353
i ii i
<— ' v
0 3
2
1
2 3
^ A
I I
560 1520
0
iI
0
0
I
* 0
0 ' 0
0 < 0
0 ,- — 0
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
3240
0
3240
0
RATIO
Lett
Turn
17.3%
0.0%
8.0%
0.0%
Thru
2000
6000
6000
0
0
Thru
25.3%
72.1%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1800
0
0
1800
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
4.1%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
107.4% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > F
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS : MELROSE AVE
EW : FARADAY AVE
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
Lett
Turn
157
0
1446
0
L
1800
2
0
2
0
Left
Turn
3240
0
3240
0
Lett
Turn
4.8%
0.0%
44.6%
0.0%
PM PEAK-HEAVY
Thru
2618
1471
0
0
LT T TR
1800 2000 2000
030
0 2 1
000
000
Thru
6000
6000
0
0
Thru
. 43.6%
31.7%
0.0%
0.0%
DEMAND
Right
Turn
0
429
213
0
R LR
1800 1800
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
1800
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
11.8%
0.0%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: MELROSE AVE BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: FARADAY AVE PM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
1446 '
213 ,
V
429 1471
I \
<—' V
0 3
2
nV
1
2 3
^ A
1 1
157 2618
0
I
' — >
0
0
I
0
A
o • — o
0 < n^* ~~ V
0 ,— - 0
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
3240
0
3240
0
RATIO
Left
Turn
4.8%
0.0%
44.6%
0.0%
Thru
2000
6000
6000
0
0
Thru
43.6%
31.7%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1800
0
0
1800
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
1 1 .8%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 98.3%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > E
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS : MELROSE AVE
EW: CARRILLOWAY
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
559
0
632
0
L
1500
2
2
2
0
Left
Turn
2700
2700
2700
0
Left
Turn
20.7%
0.0%
23.4%
0.0%
BUILDOUT
AM PEAK
Thru
1698
643
0
0
LT T
1500 1700
0 3
0 2
0 0
0 0
Thru
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
33.3%
29.2%
0.0%
0.0%
PROJECTION
Right
Turn
0
847
67
0
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
1 0 0
020
000
Right
Turn
0
0
2700
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
2.5%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : MELROSE AVE
EW : CARRILLO WAY
8UILDOUT PROJEi
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
632 '
0 _-
67 -— ,
V
847 643
1 1
<— ' v
0 3
2
2
2 3
^ A
1 1
559 1698
0
I
'-- >
0
0
I
0
A
0 ' 0
0 ^~ ~ ~ ~ 0
0 , 0
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
2700
0
RATIO
Left
Turn
20.7%
0.0%
23.4%
0.0%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
33.3%
29.2%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
2700
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
2.5%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
83.3% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
1
1
1
1
1
1
•
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
NS : MELROSE AVE
EW: CARRILLOWAY
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
Lett
Turn
134
0
363
0
L
1500
2
2
2
0
Lett
Turn
2700
2700
2700
0
Lett
Turn
5.0%
0.0%
13.4%
0.0%
PMPEAK
Thru
1059
1352
0
0
LT T TR
1500 1700 1700
030
0 2 1
000
000
Thru
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
20.8%
39.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
0
635
855
0
R LR
1500 1500
0 0
0 0
2 0
0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
2700
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
31.7%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : MELROSE AVE
EW : CARRILLO WAY
BUILDOUT PROJEi
PMPEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
•
363 '
855 ,
V
635 1352
I I
<--' v
0 3
2
0
2
2 3
^ A
I I
134 1059
0
I
'-->
0
0
I
0
•
0 ' 0
0 < 0
0 ,— - 0
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
East bound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
2700
2700
0
RATIO
Left
Turn
5.0%
0.0%
13.4%
0.0%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
20.8%
39.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
2700
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
31.7%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
85.6% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS : MELROSE AVE
EW : ALGA ROAD
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
625
0
391
0
L
1500
2
0
2
0
Lett
Turn
2700
0
2700
0
Lett
Turn
23.1%
0.0%
14.5%
0.0%
BUILDOUT
AM PEAK
Thru
1606
652
0
0
LT T
1500 1700
0 3
0 2
0 0
0 0
Thru
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
31.5%
15.9%
0.0%
0.0%
PROJECTION
Right
Turn
0
160
354
0
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
1 0 0
0 2 0
000
Right
Turn
0
0
2700
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
13.1%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : MELROSE AVE
EW : ALGA ROAD
BUILDOUT F
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETF
A
391 '
0 _____
354 ,
V
160 652
I I
<--' V
0 3
2
2
2 3
— A
I I
625 1606
0
I
'-->
0
0
I
0
A
o • —
0 4*^v____
0 ,- —
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
0
2700
0
RATIO
Left
Turn
23.1%
0.0%
14.5%
0.0%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
31.5%
15.9%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
2700
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
13.1%
0.0%
0
0
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 63.6%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > B
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS : MELROSE AVE
EW : ALGA ROAD
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
Left
Turn
484
0
129
0
L
1500
2
0
2
0
Lett
Turn
2700
0
2700
0
Left
Turn
17.9%
0.0%
4.8%
0.0%
PM PEAK
Thru
1015
1288
0
0
LT T TR
1500 1700 1700
030
0 2 1
000
000
Thru
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
19.9%
31.1%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
0
298
600
0
R LR
1500 1500
0 0
0 0
2 0
0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
2700
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
22.2%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : MELROSE AVE
EW : ALGA ROAD
BUILDOUT PROJEi
PMPEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
129 '
600 ,
V
298 1288
I I
<— ' v
0 3
2
0
2
2 3
I I
484 1015
0
I
0
0
I
0
0 ' 0
0 < 0
0 , 0
V
*
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
2700
0
2700
0
RATIO
Left
Turn
17.9%
0.0%
4.8%
0.0%
Thru
1700
5100
5100
0
0
Thru
19.9%
31.1%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
2700
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
22.2%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 81.2%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS : MELROSE AVE.
EW : LA COSTA AVE.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
Left
Turn
0
0
116
0
L
1500
0
0
2
0
Left
Turn
0
0
2700
0
Lett
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
4.3%
0.0%
PM PEAK
Thru
0
0
0
0
LT T TR
1500 1700 1700
000
000
0 0 0
000
Thru
0
0
0
0
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
0
158
0
0
R LR
1500 1500
0 0
2 0
0 0
0 0
Right
Turn
0
2700
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
5.9%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : MELROSE AVE.
EW : LA COSTA AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJE
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
158 0
I I
<— ' v
2 0
116 ' 2o
0 , 0
V
0 0
^ A
I I
0 0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Lett
Turn
Default Capacity 1500
Northbound 0
Southbound 0
Eastbound 2700
Westbound 0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 0.0%
Southbound 0.0%
Eastbound 4.3%
Westbound 0.0%
0
I
'— >
0
0
I
0
Thru
1700
0
0
0
0
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
A
0 ' 0
0 <———-• 0
0 , 0
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1500
0
2700
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
5.9%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
20.1% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE ---- > A
0.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NS : MELROSE AVE.
EW : LA COSTA AVE.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
Left
Turn
0
0
78
0
L
1500
0
0
2
0
Lett
Turn
0
0
2700
0
Left
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
2.9%
0.0%
AM PEAK
Thru
0
0
0
0
LT T TR
1500 1700 1700
000
000
000
000
Thru
0
0
0
0
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Right
Turn
0
149
0
0
R LR
1500 1500
0 0
2 0
0 0
0 0
Right
Turn
0
2700
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
5.5%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : MELROSE AVE.
EW : LA COSTA AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJEi
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
149 0
i iI I
<--' V
2 0
78 ' 2
n ft
0 - — . 0
V
0 0
j A
I I
0 0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Left
Turn
Default Capacity 1500
Northbound 0
Southbound 0
Eastbound 2700
Westbound 0
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 0.0%
Southbound 0.0%
Eastbound 2.9%
Westbound 0.0%
0
iI
0
0
I
0
Thru
1700
0
0
0
0
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
A
0 ' 0
0 < 0
0 , 0
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1500
0
2700
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
5.5%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
18.4% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > A
0.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
N: SAXONY RD.
EW: LA COSTA AVE.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
Left
Turn
238
0
0
110
L LT
1500 1500
1 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
Left
Turn
1500
0
0
1500
Lett
Turn
15.9%
0.0%
0.0%
7.3%
AM PEAK
Thru
0
0
960
1770
T
1700
0
0
2
2
Thru
0
0
3400
3400
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
30.8%
52.1%
Right
Turn
72
0
87
0
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
0 1 0
000
000
000
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
Right
Turn
4.8%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : SAXONY RD.
EW : LA COSTA AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJEi
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
o - — •
QOT\
87 - — ,
V
0
1
<— '
0
0
0
1
I
238
0 0
I I
v '-->
0 0
0 1
A ^
I I
0 72
A
0 ' 0
2 ** - 177fi^,— — — — \ t i \j
1 , 110
V
*
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
0
0
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
15.9%
0.0%
0.0%
7.3%
Thru
1700
0
0
3400
3400
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
30.8%
52.1%
Right
Turn
1500
1500
0
0
0
Right
Turn
4.8%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
77.9% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
N: SAXONY RD.
EW: LA COSTA AVE.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
Left
Turn
153
0
0
161
L
1500
1
0
0
1
Left
Turn
1500
0
0
1500
Left
Turn
10.2%
0.0%
0.0%
10.7%
PMPEAK
Thru
0
0
1216
1772
LT T
1500 1700
0 0
0 0
0 2
0 2
Thru
0
0
3400
3400
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
41.8%
52.1%
Right
Turn
106
0
206
0
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
0 1 0
000
000
000
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
Right
Turn
7.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : SAXONY RD.
EW : LA COSTA AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJE
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
0
1
<— '
0
0 ' 0
191ft .... 9
206 . 0
V
1
I
153
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Left
Turn
Default Capacity 1500
Northbound 1500
Southbound 0
Eastbound 0
Westbound 1500
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 10.2%
Southbound 0.0%
Eastbound 0.0%
Westbound 10.7%
0 0
I I
v '— >
0 0
0 1
A ^
I I
0 106
Thru
1700
0
0
3400
3400
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
41.8%
52.1%
A
0 ' 0
2 *r ... 1779^— •»»•* \ f t £:
1 , 161
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1500
1500
0
0
0
Right
Turn
7.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
72.8% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
N: CAMINO DE LAS COCHES BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: LA COSTA AVE. AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
20
0
0
80
L LT
1500 1500
1 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
Left
Turn
1500
0
0
1500
Lett
Turn
1.3%
0.0%
0.0%
5.3%
Thru
0
0
7
103
T
1700
0
0
1
1
Thru
0
0
3400
1700
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
1.9%
6.1%
Right
Turn
18
0
59
0
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
0 1 0
000
1 0 0
000
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
Right
Turn
1.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : CAMINO DE LAS COCHES BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: LA COSTA AVE. AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
0 0
I I
<—' v
0 0o —• o o •— o
7 2 1 < 103
59 , 0 1 , 80
v v
1 0 1
<--. * ,-->
III
20 0 18 |
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
0
0
1500
RATIO
Lett
Turn
1.3%
0.0%
0.0%
5.3%
Thru
1700
0
0
3400
1700
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
1.9%
6.1%
Right
Turn
1500
1500
0
0
0
Right
Turn
1.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
18.6% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > A
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
N: CAMINO DE LAS COCHES BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: LA COSTA AVE. PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
53
0
0
40
L
1500
1
0
0
1
LT
1500
0
0
0
0
Thru
0
0
30
105
T
1700
0
0
1
1
TR
1700
0
0
1
0
Right
Turn
66
0
94
0
R
1500
1
0
0
0
LR
1500
0
0
0
0
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
0
0
1500
Left
Turn
3.5%
0.0%
0.0%
2.7%
Thru
0
0
3400
1700
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
3.6%
6.2%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
Right
Turn
4.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : CAMINO DE LAS COCHES
EW : LA COSTA AVE.
BUILDOUT PROJB
PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
0 0
1 1
<--' V
0 0
0 ' 0
Of) 0
94 , 0
V
1 0
<" — _ *
I I
53 0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Left
Turn
Default Capacity 1500
Northbound 1500
Southbound 0
Eastbound 0
Westbound 1500
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 3.5%
Southbound 0.0%
Eastbound 0.0%
Westbound 2.7%
0
I
' — >
6
1
I
66
Thru
1700
0
0
3400
1700
Thru
0.0%
0.0%
3.6%
6.2%
•
0 ' 0
1 <r ins1 ^* ••»— 1 V J
1 , 40
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1500
1500
0
0
0
Right
Turn
4.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
20.7% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > A
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL FUERTE ST
EW : ALGA RD.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
32
9
211
13
L
1500
1
1
1
1
Lett
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Left
Turn
2.1%
0.6%
14.1%
0.9%
BUILDOUT
AM PEAK
Thru
146
22
604
464
LT T
1500 1700
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
Thru
1700
1700
3400
3400
Thru
11.7%
1.9%
17.9%
25.8%
PROJECTION
Right
Turn
53
11
6
413
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
1 0 0
1 0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL FUERTE ST
EW : ALGA RD
BUILDOUT PROJE'
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
211 '
fif\A.
6 ,
V
11
I
<--'
0
1
0
1
I
32
22 9
I I
v '—>
1 1
1 0
A s^
I I
146 53
«
0 ' 413
9 *r A.&A
1 . 13
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Lett
Turn
2.1%
0.6%
14.1%
0.9%
Thru
1700
1700
1700
3400
3400
Thru
11.7%
1.9%
17.9%
25.8%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
62.2% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > B
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL FUERTE ST
EW : ALGA RD.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
12
341
6
39
L
1500
1
1
1
1
Lett
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Left
Turn
0.8%
22.7%
0.4%
2.6%
BUILDOUT
PMPEAK
Thru
40
77
439
662
LT T
1500 1700
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
Thru
1700
1700
3400
3400
Thru
3.9%
19.2%
13.6%
19.8%
PROJECTION
Right
Turn
26
250
22
11
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
1 0 0
1 0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL FUERTE ST
EW : ALGA RD
BUILDOUT PROJE
PMPEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
6 '
JftQ•toy
22 — -.
V
250
1
< — '
0
1
2
0
1
I
12
77 341
I I
v '-->
1 1
1 0
A ^
I I
40 26
A
0 ' 11
2 < 662
1 , 39
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.8%
22.7%
0.4%
2.6%
Thru
1700
1700
1700
3400
3400
Thru
3.9%
"19.2%
13.6%
19.8%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
56.8% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE ---- > A
0. 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL FUERTE ST
EW : CARRILLQ WAY
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
AM PEAK
Left
Turn
49
0
75
19
L LT
1500 1500
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Lett
Turn
3.3%
0.0%
5.0%
1.3%
Thru
820
48
660
1305
T
1700
2
2
2
2
Thru
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
24.8%
2.1%
19.7%
41.3%
Right
Turn
24
25
9
98
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
000
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL FUERTE ST BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: CARRILLO WAY AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
75 '
cen
9 ,
25
1
<--'
0
1
0
48
I
v
2
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
81.1% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
0 ' ---- 98
2 < ---- 1305
1 , ---- 19
v v
1 2 0
<--, * ,-->
III.*
49 820 24 |
North
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
3.3%
0.0%
5.0%
1.3%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
24.8%
2.1%
19.7%
41.3%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : EL FUERTE ST
EW: CARRILLOWAY
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
BUILDOUT PROJECTION
Lett
Turn
12
0
71
46
L
1500
1
1
1
1
Lett
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Lett
Turn
0.8%
0.0%
4.7%
3.1%
PMPEAK
Thru
79
699
1254
658
LT T TR
1500 1700 1700
020
020
020
020
Thru
'
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
3.1% ..
26.4%
38.5%
20.3%
Right
Turn
27
198
54
33
R LR
1500 1500
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: EL FUERTE ST BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: CARRILLO WAY PM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
198 699 0
I I I
<--' v '—>
021
71 ' 1 0 ' 33
1254 2 2 < 658
54 , 0 1 , 46
v v
1 2 0
<--, * ,-->
III
12 79 27 I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.8%
0.0%
4.7%
3.1%
Thru
1700
3400
3400
3400
3400
Thru
3.1%
26.4%
38.5%
20.3%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
78.7% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE > C
I
i
\
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: TAMARACK AVE. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR. AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
9
0
0
326
L LT
1500 1500
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Lett
Turn
0.6%
0.0%
0.0%
21.7%
Thru
0
33
178
516
T
1700
1
1
2
2
Thru
1700
1700
3400
3400
Thru
9.2%
1.9%
5.2%
15.2%
Right
Turn
157
0
0
0
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
000
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : TAMARACK AVE. BUILDOUT PROJE'
EW : CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR. AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
o — •
17ft _-
0 ,
V
0
I
0
1
2
0
1
I
9
33 0
I I
v '-->
1 1
1 0
A ^
I I
0 157
A
o •- — o
2 < 516
1 , 326
V
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
0.6%
0.0%
0.0%
21.7%
Thru
1700
1700
1700
3400
3400
Thru
9.2%
1.9%
5.2%
15.2%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 46.2%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > A
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
i
I
i
i
I
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: TAMARACK AVE. BUILDOUT PROJECTION
EW: CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR. PM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
34
0
0
231
L LT
1500 1500
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Lett
Turn
2.3%
0.0%
0.0%
15.4%
Thru
0
14
306
600
T
1700
1
1
2
2
Thru
1700
1700
3400
3400
Thru
11.2%
0.8%
9.0%
17.6%
Right
Turn
190
0
0
0
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
000
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : TAMARACK AVE.
EW : CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR.
BUILDOUT PROJEl
PMPEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
0 14
I I
<--' V
0 1
0 ' 1
0 — -. 0
V
1 1
j._^ A
I I
34 0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Left
Turn
Delau It Capacity 1 500
Northbound 1500
Southbound 1500
Eastbound 1500
Westbound 1500
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Lett
Turn
Northbound 2.3%
Southbound 0.0%
Eastbound 0.0%
Westbound 15.4%
0
I
' — >
1
0
I
190
Thru
1700
1700
1700
3400
3400
Thru
11.2%
0.8%
9.0%
17.6%
•
o • — o
2 < 600£. ^— — — — OWW
1 , 231
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 45.6%
LEVEL OF SERVICE —-> A
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
i
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: MARRONROAD BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: JEFFERSON STREET AM PEAK-HEAVY DEMAND
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
175
473
151
0
L LT
1800 1800
1 0
2 0
1 0
1 0
Left
Turn
1800
3240
1800
1800
Left
Turn
9.7%
14.6%
8.4%
0.0%
Thru
81
126
75
116
T
2000
2
2
1
1
Thru
4000
4000
2000
2000
Thru
2.0%
14.3%
7.1%
17.7%
Right
Turn
0
444
67
237
TR R LR
2000 1800 1800
000
000
000
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
02/28/91
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
NS : MARRON ROAD
EW : JEFFERSON STREET
BUILDOUT PR(OJEi
AM PEAK-HEAVY I
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
A
151 '
ye
67
V
444 126
I I
<--' V
0 2
1
j
0
1 2
^ A
I I
175 81
473
I
'— >
2
0
I
0
A
o • —
J
1 ,
V
A
I
North
237
1 ifi1 1 O
0
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
1800
1800
3240
1800
1800
RATIO
Left
Turn
9.7%
14.6%
8.4%
0.0%
Thru
2000
4000
4000
2000
2000
Thru
2.0%
14.3%
7.1%
17.7%
Right
Turn
1800
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 60.0%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > B
1
1
I
1
iIr
1
(•
1
1
/N
1
1
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : MARRON ROAD BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW : JEFFERSON STREET
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
142
451
152
0
L
1800
1
2
1
1
Left
Turn
1800
3240
1800
1800
Left
Turn
7.9%
13.9%
8.4%
0.0%
PM PEAK-HEAVY
Thru
40
244
87
355
LT T TR
1800 2000 2000
020
020
0 1 0
0 1 0
Thru
4000
4000
2000
2000
Thru
1.0%
13.0%
5.7%
46.9%
DEMAND
Right
Turn
0
275
26
582
R LR
1800 1800
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1800
0
0
0
0
I
I
I
I
02/28/91
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
i
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : MARRON ROAD
EW : JEFFERSON STREET
BUILDOUT I
PM PEAK-H
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETI
275 244
1 1
<--' V
0 2
152 ' 1
fi7 1
26 , 0
V
1 2
^—— A
I ' I
142 40
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Left
Turn
Default Capacity 1800
Northbound 1800
Southbound 3240
Eastbound 1800
Westbound 1800
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Left
Turn
Northbound 7.9%
Southbound 13.9%
Eastbound 8.4%
Westbound 0.0%
451
I
'— >
2
0
I
0
Thru
2000
4000
4000
2000
2000
Thru
1.0%
13.0%
5.7%
46.9%
A
0 '
1 <— — --
1 . —
V
A
I
North
Right
Turn
1800
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Percent Utilization 86.2%
LEVEL OF SERVICE > D
582
0
i
I
t
\
I
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: MONROE STREET BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: MARRON STREET AM PEAK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Left
Turn
70
168
0
404
L
1500
1
1
1
1
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Lett
Turn
4.7%
11.2%
0.0%
26.9%
Thru
174
120
155
186
LT T
1500 1700
0 1
0 1
0 2
0 2
Thru
1700
1700
3400
3400
Thru
22.9%
7.1%
5.7%
16.0%
Right
Turn
216
0
38
358
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
000
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
10/05/90
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS : MONROE STREET
EW : MARRON STREET
BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
AM PEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY
120 168
I I
v '—>
1 1
o — •
•ICC __..
38
V
1
2
0
1
I
70
1 0
A ..— ^
I I
174 216
0 ' 358
2 < 186
1 , 404
V
A
1
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
RATIO
Left
Turn
4.7%
11.2%
0.0%
26.9%
Thru
1700
1700
1700
3400
3400
Thru
22.9%
7.1<>/fa
5.7%
16.0%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
76.8% Percent Utilization
LEVEL OF SERVICE ---- >
0. 1
(V
I
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
7 NS: MONROE STREET BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: MARRON STREET PM PEAK
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
i
i
i
i
i
t
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(Vehicles per Hour)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
(Number of Lanes)
Default Capacity
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
(VPH of Green)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Lett
Turn
22
320
0
321
L LT
1500 1500
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
Lett
Turn
1.5%
21.3%
0.0%
21.4%
Thru
167
333
199
161
T
1700
1
1
2
2
Thru
1700
1700
3400
3400
Thru
21.8%
19.6%
7.9%
16.7%
Right
Turn
203
0
71
407
TR R LR
1700 1500 1500
000
000
000
000
Right
Turn
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
LTR
1500
0
0
0
0
10/05/90
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION MODEL
NS: MONROE STREET - BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS
EW: MARRON STREET PMFEAK
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS / LANE GEOMETRY•:; -.'v ' •
A
0 '
1 0Q -.
71
v .
0 333
I I
< — ' v
b 1
1
0
1 1
^— — A
I I
22 167
320
1
'—>
1
0
I
203
A
0 ' 407
2 «r 1 C1<;---- 1D1
1 , 321
v
A
I
North
LANE GROUP CAPACITY
Default Capacity
^Northbound
"Sbuthtjpiind -
Eastbound
' Westbound
VOLUME/CAPACITY
Northbound
Southbound
\j3a»£ito»-
^'westbound
Left
Turn
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500-
RATIO
Left
Turn
1.5%
21.3%
0<0%
21:.4%
Thru
1700
1700
1700
3400
3400
Thru
21.8%
19.6%
; 7.9%
16^7%
Right
Turn
1500
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%^"
0.0%
EFFICIENCY LOST FACTOR 0.1
CAPACITY UTILIZAtiON
82.4% Percent Utilization
LEVEL'OF SERVICE ——> D
t
I
APPENDIX B
Project Cost Estimates
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE
PROJECTS AND COST ESTIMATES
INTERSECTIONS
Intersection
1 . Cannon Rd. - Interstate 5
2. Cannon Rd - Paseo Del None
3. E! Camino Real - Alga Road
4. El Camino Real - Cannon Road
5. El Camino Real - Camino Vida Roble
6. El Camino Real - Carlsbad Village Dr.
7. El Camino Real - Faraday Ave.
8. El Camino Real - Palomar Airport Rd.
9. El Camino Real - Tamarack Ave.
1 0. Faraday Ave. - Orion Street
1 1 . Faraday Ave. - College Blvd.
12. Melrose Dr. - Alga Rd.
13. Palomar Airport Road - College Btvd.
14. Palomar Airport Road - Paseo Del None
Project Description
Road and Ramp Widening
Signal Installation at Ramp
termini
Add one thru lane in each
direction
Add dual left turn signal
modifications
Add southbound right turn lane
Left turn lanes
Dual left on El Camino Real
Dual left turn lanes on El
Camino • right turn lanes
eastbound, westbound and
southbound
Intersection reconstruction.
Add left turn, thru and right
turn lanes on all legs - phased
construction
Close free right turn lane signal
modification for dual lefts and
left turn phasing, (reimburse
Foote Development)
Traffic Signal
Dual left turn northbound and
southbound
Dual left turn lanes
northbound, southbound
eastbound and westbound
Dual left turn lane southbound
Dual left turns all legs
TOTAL
Estimated
Cost
$1,750,000
$435,000
$250,000
$130,000
$320,000
$320,000
$710,000
$1,750,000
$170,000
$100,000
-0-
Already
Constructed
$480,000
$160,000
$525,000
$7,100,000
I
I
I
I
I
1
i
i
i
i
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930 jsheet 1 of 1
'Project Title: CANNON ROAD/INTERSTATE 5 INTERCHANGE IProject No.:
^Location:iRef.:
.Project Description: RAMP WIDENING (FOUR RAMPS) AND RESTRIPING CANNON ROAD
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN
i X ! Conceptual j
Date: 2-27-91 Checked Bv:
Preliminary • Design
Date:
! 'Final
ITEM
NO.
j
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Mobilization
Clear and Grub
Remove Curb and Gutter
Embankment and Import
Curb and Gutter
Asphalt Concrete 6*
Aggregate Base 12"
Stripe and Sign
Traffic Signals
Traffic Control
Slope Planting and Irrigation
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
12
13 J
14
Design at 8%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 7%
Contingencies at 25 % of Total
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
1
4,000
60,000
4,000
48,000
56,000
1
2
1
1
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.F.
C.Y.
L.F.
S.F.
S.F.
L.S.
Each
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
$35,000.00
$50,000.00
$5.00
$10.00
$10.00
$1.30
$1.45
$9,000.00
$100,000.00
$20,000.00
$100.000.00
1
I
1
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
TOTAL COST
ITEM
COST
S35.000
S50.000 „
S20.000
$600.000
S40.000
$62.400
$81.200
$9.000
$200.000
$20.000
$100,000
$1,217,600
$97,408 :
$85,232 :
$350.060 :
$1,750,300 I
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED): $ 1,750,000
TERSTATE
IMPROVEMENTS:
ADD LANE TO EACH
RAMP AND INSTALL
SIGNALS AT RAMP
TERMINUS.
r
i
\
\
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
IENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930
Project Title: CANNON ROAD
Location: INTERSTATE 5 TO PASEO
project Description: WIDEN TWELVE
.Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN
DEL NORTE
Sheet 1
Project No.:
of 1
Ref.:
FEET ON BOTH NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES
JDate: 2-27-91 i Checked By:Date:
X I Conceptual 1 Preliminary | Design Final
ITEM
NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION
1 I Mobilization
2
•7
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Clear and Grub
Remove Curb and Gutter
Excavation and Export
Curb and Gutter, Type "G"
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (6')
Aggregate Base (12*)
7.5" Concrete Driveway
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Median Curb
Stamped Concrete
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUTION
14
15
16
17
18
Design at 7%
Construction Admin. & Inspection it 8*
Right-of-Way
Right-of-Way Acquisition Costs
Contingencies at 25 %
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
1
2000
4500
1000
12000
14000
1
1
1
1
500
10800
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.F.
C.Y.
L.F.
S.F.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.F.
S.F.
UNIT
PRICE
525,000.00
$15,000.00
$5.00
$10.00
$10.00
$1.30
$1.45
$5,000.00
$1.500.00
$1,500.00
$20,000.00
$10.00
$3.00
1
1
6000
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
$15.00
$20,000.00
ITEM
COST
S25.000
$15.000
$10.000
$45.000
$10.000
$15,600
$20.300
S5.000
$1.500
SI. 500 j
$20,000
$5.000
$32.400
$206,300
$14,441
$16,504
$90.000
$20,000
$86.811
TOTAL COST| $434,056
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED): $435,000
i
i
INTERSTATE
5
PASEO DEL NORTE
I
o>
o-z.
o
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
IENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930
[Project Title: EL CAMINO REAL AND ALGA ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
JLocation: EL CAMINO REAL AND ALGA ROAD
Sheet 1 of 1
Project No.: ;
Ref.:
iProject Description: TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION. DUAL LEFT TURNS AND MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS
Date: 4-15-91 i Checked By:
X Conceptual [Preliminary Design ] ! Final
ITEM
NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION
1 [Traffic Signal Mod., Turn lanes & Median
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
UNIT
L.S.
UNIT i ITEM
PRICE I COST
! 5250,000
TOTAL $250,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$250,000 i
I
I
\
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
m I
o
o
PCm
i I
I I
I i
r
.GA ROAD
i i
i i
IMPROVEMENTS
INCLUDE SIGNAL
MODIFICATIONS
ACCOMODATE
LEFT TURNS
O
DU
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930
Project Title: EL CAMINO REAL AND CANNON ROAD INTERSECTION
Location: EL CAMINO REAL AND CANNON ROAD
Project Description: RIGHT TURN LANE ON THE SOUTH BOUND SIDE OF EL
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN Date: 10-30-90 | Checked By:
X [Conceptual j (Preliminary j JDesign
Sheet 1 of 1
Project No.:
Ref.:
CAMINO REAL
'Date:
i 'Final
ITEM
NO.
[ESTIMATED
ITEM DESCRIPTION 1 QUANTITY
1 ! Mobilization
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Relocate Utilities
Remove Curb and Gutter
Excavation /Fill
Curb and Gutter, Type "G"
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (5')
Aggregate Base (12")
4' P.C.C. Sidewalk
Handicapped Ramp
Curb Inlet, Type "B-l'
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
Traffic Signal Relocation
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
15
16
17
18
19
Design at 9%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 8%
Righi-of-Way
Righl-of-Way Acquisition Costs
Contingencies at 25 % of Total
j
1
500
1100
500
180
300
2500
1
1
1000
1
1
1
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.F.
C.Y.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
Each
Each
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
ITEM i
COST
S4.000.00 $4.000 :
$5.000.00
$5.00
$10.00
$12.00
$35.00
$20.00
$2.00
$600.00
$3.000.00
$1.00
$1,000.00
$2,000.00
$15.000.00
1
1
5000
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
$4.00
$5,000.00
TOTAL COST
$5,000
$2.500 !
$u.ooo !
$6.000
$6,300
$6.000
$5,000
$600
$3,000
$1,000
$1,000
$2,000
$15,000
$68,400
$6,156
$5,472
$20,000
$5,000
$26,257
$131,285
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED): $ 130,000
o
o
m
CANNON ROAD
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DrviSlON
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Project Title: EL CAMINO REAL AND
'ENRCNDEXFORLA 5930
CAMINO VIDA ROBLE INTERSECTION
Location: EL CAMINO REAL AND CAMINO V1DA ROBLE
Project Description: DUAL LEFT TURN
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN
X Conceptual
Sheet 1 of 1
.Project No.:
Ref.:
POCKETS ON EL CAMINO REAL
Date: 3-15-91
Preliminary
Checked Bv:
Design
Dale:
Final
ITEM
NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION
1 Mobilization
2 Relocate Utilities
' 3 Remove Curb tnd Gutter
i 4 Excavation/Fill
I 5 'Curb and Gutter. Type *G*
1 6 ; Mediin Curb, Type "B-2'
ESTIMATED
! QUANTITY
1
1 1
' 1500
1 1100
I 500
1 1000
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.F.
C.Y.
L.F.
S.F.
; UNIT
i PRJCE
S4.000.00
i S5.000.00
i S5.00 ;
I $10.00 :
j $12.00 !
I $12.00 ]
ITEM
COST
$4.000
S3. 000
S7.500
Sll.OOO
S6.000
$12.000
7 Asphalt Concrete Pavement (5°)
8 Aggregate Base (12*)
9 !4' P.C.C. Sidewalk
10 ; Handicapped Ramp
11
12
13
14
15
16
Curb Inlet, Type 'B-l'
Mediae Stamped Concrete
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
Traffic Signal Relocation
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
17
IS
19
20
21
Design at 9 %
Construction Admin. 4 Inspection at 8%
Right-of-Way
Righl-of-Way Acquiaibcai Co*u
ContingeociM at 25* of Total
180
300
2500
1
1
1000
1000
1
1
1
Ton
Ton
S.F.
Each
Each
S.F.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
$35.00
$20.00
$2.00
$600.00
$3,000.00
$3.00
$1.00
$1,000.00
S6.300
$6.000 '
S5.000 •
S600 i
$3.000
$3.000 1
$1.000!
$1.000 |
$2,000.00 1 $2.000 :
$15,000.00
1
1
5000
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
$4.00
$5,000.00
TOTAL COST PER LANE
TWO LEFT TURN LANES: 2 X $160,535 -
$15.000 ;
$88,400 i
$7.956 i
$7.072 1
$20.000 |
$5,000 I
$32.107
$160,535
$321,070
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$320,000
:AMINO VIDA ROBLE
i
FUTURE
m
o
s
•z.o
m
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
\
I
I
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930
Project Title: EL CAMINO REAL AND CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE INTERS
'Location: EL CAMINO REAL AND CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
Sheet 1
i Project No.:
Ref.:
of 1
Project Description: DUAL LEFT TURN POCKETS ON EL CAMINO REAL
; Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN Date: 3-15-91 '.Checked By:
i X Conceptual j Preliminary I {Design
'Date:
! Final
ITEM
NO.
ESTIMATED
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY
1 Mobilization
2 'Relocate Utilities
3 i Remove Curb and Gutter
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Excavation/Fill
Curb and Gutter, Type 'G"
Median Curb. Type 'B-2"
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (5")
Aggregate Base (12")
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk
Handicapped Ramp
Curb Inlet, Type "B-l'
Median Stamped Concrete
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
Traffic Signal Relocation
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
17
18
19
20
21
Design at 9%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 8%
Right-of-Wty
Right-of-Wiy Ac^is&oD Cotti
Contingencies at 25* of Total
1
t
1500
1100
500
1000
180
300
2500
1
1
1000
1000
1
1
1
UNIT
UNIT
PRICE
ITEM
COST
L.S. $4.000.00 | $4.000
L.S.
L.F.
C.Y.
L.F.
S.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
Each
Each
S.F.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
S5.000.00
$5.00
$10.00
$12.00
$12.00
$35.00
$20.00
$2.00
$600.00
$3,000.00
$3.00
$1.00
$1,000.00
$2,000.00
$15,000.00
1
1
5000
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
$4.00
$5,000.00
TOTAL COST PER LANE
TWO LEFT TURNS: 2 X $160,535 -
$5.000
$7.500
$11.000 i
$6,000 i
$12,000.00
$6.300
$6,000 1
$5,000
$600
$3,000
$3.000.00
$1.000
$1,000
$2,000
$15.000
$88,400
$7,956
$7,072
$20,000
$5.000
$32,107
$160,535
$321,070.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED): $320,000
\ I i
m-r~
o
CARLSBAD VILLAGE
DRIVE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
! Project Title: FARADAY AVENUE AND
•Location: FARADAY AVENUE AND EL
IENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930
EL CAMINO REAL INTERSECTION
CAMINO REAL
: Project Description: RIGHT TURN LANES ON BOTH LEGS
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN
1 X ! Conceptual j
JDate: 10-30-90
iPreliminary
OF FARADAY &
! Checked Bv:
i Design
i Sheet
Project
Ref.:
1
No.
NORTH LEG
of 1
OF EL CAMINO
Date:
Final
REAL
ITEM] . .ESTIMATED
NO. 1 ITEM DESCRIPTION | QUANTITY
1 Mobilization 1
2 Relocate Utilities ! 1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Remove Curb and Gutter
Excavation/Fill
Curb and Gutter, Type "G'
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (5')
Aggregate Base (12')
4' P.C.C. Sidewalk
Handicapped Ramp
Curb Inlet, Type 'B-l'
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
Traffic Signal Relocation
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
15
16
17
18
19
Design at 9%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 8%
Right-of-Way
Right-of-Way Acquisition Cottt
Contiagencie* at 25% of Total
500
1100
500
ISO
300
2500
1
1
1000
1
1
1
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.F.
C.Y.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
Each
Each
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT ; ITEM
PRICE i COST
S4.000.00 i S4.000
$5.000.00 S5.000 ;
$5.00 $2.500 i
$10.00 $11.000
$12.00 $6.000
$35.00 $6,300
$20.00 $6,000
$2.00
$600.00
$3,000.00
$1.00
$1.000.00
$2.000.00
$15,000.00
1
1
5000
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
$4.00
$5,000.00
TOTAL COST PER LANE
THREE RIGHT TURNS: 3 X $131, 285-
TWO LEFT TURNS: 2 X $160,535 - (SEE PREVIOUS COST EST. SHEET FOR DETAILS)
TOTAL COST
$5.000
$600
$3,000
$1.000
$1,000
$2,000
$15,000
$68,400
$6.156
$5,472
$20,000
$5,000
$26.257
$131,285
$393,855
$321,070
$714,925
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED): $710.000
\
(rFARADAY AVENUE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
!ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930
Project Title: EL CAMINO REAL AND PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD
Location: INTERSECTION PLUS 1000 FEET OF EACH LEG
! Sheet 1
: Project No.:
'Ref.:
of I
Project Description: REBUILD AND WIDEN INTERSECTION
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN iDate: 3-22-91 iChecked By:
| X ! Conceptual i Preliminary ; ; Design
Date:
Final
ITEM
NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1 j Mobilization < 1
2 Relocate Utilities
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Remove Curb and Gutter
Remove Sidewalk
Remove Pavement
Remove & Rehabilitate Pavement
Grading (Cut & Fill)
Curb and Gutter, Type "G"
Median Curb, Type "B-2"
Pavement (6" A.C. & 20' A.B.)
4' P.C.C. Sidewalk
Handicapped Ramp
Streetlight
Median Stamped Concrete
Median Landscaping and Irrigation
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Signal Modification
Utility Undergrouading
Traffic Control
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
25
26
29
Design at 6%
Construction Admin. A Inspection at 5 %
Contingencie* at 25% of Total
1
2,000
15,000
40,000
10,000
15,000
6,000
6,000
110,000
30,000
4
12
35,000
20,000
70,000
1
1
I
1
UNIT
UNIT
PRICE
ITEM
COST
L.S. S25.000.00 i $25.000
L.S.
L.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
C.Y.
L.F.
L.F.
S.F.
S.F.
Each
Each
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
$50.000.00
$5.00
$1.00
$1.50
$5.00
$7.00
$10.00
$10.00
$2.80
$2.00
$750.00
$3,000.00
$3.00
$3.00
$1.00
$5,000.00
$50,000.00
$100,000.00
$25,000.00
1
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
TOTAL COST
S50.000
S10.000 ;
$15.000
$60,000
$50.000
$105.000 |
$60.000
$60.000 i
$308,000 '
$60.000
$3.000
$36.000
$105.000
$60.000
$70,000
$5.000
$50.000
$100,000
$25.000
$1,257,000
$75,420
$62.850
$348,818
$1.744,088
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$1,750,000
~0>
Si—i ii
o '
§1
EL CAMiNO REAL
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
!ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930 ^Sheet 1 of 1
project Title: TAMARACK AVENUE AND EL CAMINO REAL INTERSECTION jproject No.:
j Location: TAMARACK AVENUE AND EL CAMINO REAL :Ref.:
Project Description: DUAL LEFT TURN POCKETS WESTBOUND, CLOSE FREE RIGHT
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN iDate: 3-15-91 [Checked By:Date:
X I Conceptual j Preliminary ! Design Final
ITEM
SO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Mobilization
Relocate Utilities
Remove Curb and Gutter
Excavation /Fill
Curb and Gutter, Type "G'
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (5')
Aggregate Base (12*)
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk
Handicapped Ramp
Curb Inlet, Type -fl-l"
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
Traffic Signal Relocation
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
15
16
17
18
19
Design at 9%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 8%
Right-of-Wiy
Right-of-Way Acquisition Costa
Contingencies at 25% of Total
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
1
1500
1100
1500
180
300
2500
1
1
1000
1
1
1
UNIT
UNIT
PRICE
L.S. $10.000.00
L.S.
L.F.
C.Y.
L.F.
Ton
P" Ton
S.F.
Each
Each
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
S5.000.00
$5.00
$10.00
$12.00
$35.00
$20.00
$2.00
$600.00
$3,000.00
$1.00
$1,000.00
$2.000.00
$20,000.00
1
1
soool
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
$4.00
$5,000.00
TOTAL COST
ITEM
COST
SIO.OOO
$5,000
$7,500 :
$11,000 i
$18,000 1
$6,300 i
$6,000
$5,000 i
$600 i
$3.000 ';
$1.000
$1,000 i
$2,000 |
$20.000 |
$96,400 !
$8.676 j
$7.712
$20,000
$5,000
$34.447
$172,235
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$170,000
m
o
^0m
I
o
• OCOm
mm
o
TAMARACK
AVENUE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930 Sheet 1 of
iProject Title: FARADAY AVENUE AND ORION STREET TRAFFIC SIGNAL jProject No.:
Location: FARADAY AVENUE AND ORION STREET Ref.:
Project Description: TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS TO ACCOMODATE DUAL LEFT TURNS
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN Date: 4-15-91
X Conceptual | j Preliminary
ITEM
NO.
1
2
3
4
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Traffic Signal
Design at 7%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 8%
Contingencies at 25 %
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
Checked By.
Design
Date:
: Final
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
ITEM ;
COST
$71,500
$5.005 !
$5.720 i
$17.875 i
TOTAL COST[$100,100
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$100,000 ;
>^c
m-z.cm
tni ORION WAY
IMPROVEMENTS:
TRAFFIC SIGNAL TO
BE INSTALLED AT
INTERSECTION
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
'ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930
Project Title: MELROSE AVENUE AND ALGA ROAD INTERSECTION
Location: MELROSE AVENUE AND ALGA ROAD
Sheet 1 of 1
Project No.:
Ref.:
Project Description: DUAL LEFT TURN POCKETS AT ALL LEFT TURN POCKETS
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN JDate: 3-15-91 Checked By:
j X ! Conceptual | Preliminary | {Design
Date:
! ;Final
ITEM
NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION
1 Mobilization
2 | Relocate Utilities
3 'Remove Curb and Gutter
4
5
6
7
g
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Excavation/Fill
Curb and Gutter, Type "G"
Median Curb, Type "B-2'
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (5*)
Aggregate Base (12*)
4' P.C.C. Sidewalk
Handicapped Ramp
Curb Inlet, Type 'B- 1"
Median Stamped Concrete
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
Traffic Signal Relocation
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
17
18
19
20
21
Design at 9%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 8%
Right-of-Way
Right-of-Way Acqnuiliam Cottt
Contingencies at 25% of Total
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
I
1500
1100
500
1000
180
300
2500
1
1
1000
1000
1
1
1
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.F.
C.Y.
L.F.
S.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
Each
Each
S.F.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
$4,000.00
$5,000.00
$5.00
$10.00
$12.00
$12.00
$35.00
$20.00
$2.00
$600.00
$3,000.00
$3.00]
$1.00
$1,000.00
$2,000.00
$15,000.00
1
1
5000
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
$4.00
$5.000.00
TOTAL COST
THREE DUAL LEFT TURNS: 3 X $160,535 -
ITEM
COST
S4.000
$5.000
$7,500
$11,000
$6,000
$12.000
$6,300
$6.000
$5,000 i
$600
$3,000
$3,000
$1,000 j
$1,000
$2,000
$15,000
$88.400
$7,956
$7.072
$20,000
$5,000
$32.107
$160.535
$481,605
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$480,000
r C <>; J•*w j- -
ALGA ROAD
I
m
c:m
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):
ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930
Project Title: PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD & COLLEGE BOULEVARD INTERSECTION
Location: PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD AND COLLEGE BOULEVARD
Sheet 1 of 1 i
Project No.:
Ref.:
Project Description: DUAL LEFT TURN POCKET AT SOUTH BOUND COLLEGE BOULEVARD
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN Date: 3-15-91
X [Conceptual Preliminary
ITEM
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Mobilization
Relocate Utilities
Remove Curb and Gutter
Excavation/Fill
Curb and Gutter, Type "G"
Median Curb, Type "B-2"
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (5°)
Aggregate Base (12')
4' P.C.C. Sidewalk
Handicapped Ramp
Curb Inlet, Type "B-l"
Median Stamped Concrete
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
Traffic Signal Relocation
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
17
18
19
20
21
Design at 9%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 8%
Right-of-Way
Right-of-Way Acquisition Costs
Contingencies at 25 % of Total
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
1
1500
1100
500
1000
180
300
2500
1
1
1000
1000
1
1
1
1
1
5000
1
1
Checked By: iDate: :
(Design
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.F.
C.Y.
L.F.
S.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
Each
Each
S.F.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
$4,000.00
S5.000.00
$5.00
$10.00
$12.00
$12.00
$35.00
$20.00
$2.00
$600.00
$3,000.00
$3.00
$1.00
$1,000.00
$2,000.00
$15,000.00
L.S.
L.S.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
$4.00
$5,000.00
TOTAL COST
! Final
ITEM i
COST !
$4,000
$5,000 |
$7.500
SI 1.000
$6,000
$12.000
$6,300
$6.000
$5,000
$600
S3 .000
$3,000
$1.000
$1.000
$2,000
$15,000
$88,400
$7,956
$7,072
$20,000
$5,000
$32,107
$160,535
$160,000
N
T)
p_
O
j>
50
>
~D
O
— 1
o
O
£
\ \
111
111111
\\
COLLEGE BLVD.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
|ENR INDEX FOR LA.- 5930
Project Title: PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD AND PASEO DEL NORTE INTERSECTION
Location: PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD AND PASEO DEL NORTE
Sheet 1 of 1
Project No.:
Ref.:
Project Description: DUAL LEFT TURN POCKETS - ALL LEGS OF INTERSECTION
Estimated By: ROBERT JOHNSON ~|Date: 5-8-91
X Conceptual ] Preliminary
ITEM
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Mobilizatioo
Relocate Utilities
Remove Curb and Gutter
Remove Sidewalk
Remove Pavement
Curb & Gutter, Type "G"
Median Curb, Type "B-2"
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (5")
Aggregate Base (12*)
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk
7.5" Concrete Driveway
Handicapped Ramp
Curb Inlet, Type 'B-l"
Median Stamped Concrete
Median Landscaping and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
Traffic Signal
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
19
20
21
Design at 10%
Construction Admin.*. Inspection at 10%
Contingencies at 20% of Total
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
1
800
3000
1000
500
2000
200
400
2500
2
4
4
6000
1
I
1
1
Checked By: iDate:
] Design | : Final
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.F.
S.F.
S.F.
L.F.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
Each
Each
Each
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
$40.000.00
$100.000.00
$5.00
$1.00
$1.50
$10.00
$10.00
$35.00
$20.00
$2.00
2000
$1,500.00
$3,000.00
$3.00
5000
$6,000.00
$15,000.00
$100,000.00
1
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
ITEM
COST
S40.000
5100.000
54,000
53,000
51,500 i
55,000 i
520,000
57,000
58,000 '
55,000
54,000
56,000
$12,000
518.000
55,000 j
56,000
$15.000
$100,000
$359,500
$35,950
$35.950
$86,280
TOTAL COST
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):
$517,680
$525,000
I I
• I !
"D i>r~O
-y : : i
! ;
§1 III
i !
PASEO DEL NORTE
i !
L
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE
PROJECTS AND COST ESTIMATES
ROADWAY SEGMENTS
Project
1 . Alga Road
2. Avenida Encinas
3. Carlsbad Boulevard
4. Carlsbad Village Drive
5. Carlsbad Village Drive*
6. El Camino Real
7. El Camino Real
8. La Costa Avenue
9. La Costa Avenue*
10. Leucadia Boulevard**
1 1 . Olivenhain Road &
Rancho Santa Fe Rd. **
12. Poinsettia Lane
Description
Widen south side from
Mimosa Drive to El Camino Real
Widen south of
Palomar Airport Road
Widen from Manzano Drive to
600 ft. north of Cannon Road
Widen from Pontiac Drive to
Victoria Avenue
Widen east of B Camino Real
Widen from Tamarack Avenue to
Chestnut Avenue
Widen from La Costa Avenue to
Arenal Road
Widen from I-5 to B Camino Real
Mitigation for widening
Construct from existing terminus
east to B Camino Real
Widen from B Camino Real to
Melrose Drive
Widen from I-5 to Batiquitos Lane
TOTAL
Cost
$ 300,000
525,000
2,100,000
1,360,000
450,000
1,760,000
450,000
6,710,000
765,000
3,500,000
6,000,000
1,870,000
$25,790,000
Construction completed
**City contribution only-not full project
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
;ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930 ! Sheet 1 of I
Project Title: ALGA ROAD j Project No.:
! Location: MIMOSA DRIVE TO EL CAMINO REAL JRef.:
Project Description: ADDITION OF ONE THRU LANE AND BIKE LANE ON THE SOUTH SIDE
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN 'Date: 10-30-90 jChecked By:Date:
X j Conceptual ; Preliminary •Design Final
ITEM
NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION
1 ; Mobilization
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Relocate Utilities
Remove Curb and Gutter
Excavation/Fill
Curb and Gutter. Type *G"
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (5*)
Aggregate Base (12*)
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk
Handicapped Ramp
Curb Inlet, Type 'B-r
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
Traffic Signal Relocation
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
15
16
17
18
19
Design at 9%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 8%
Right-of-Wiy
Righl-of-Way Acquisition Cost*
Contingencies at 25 X of Total
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
1
1250
2000
1250
400
700
6300
4
2
10000
1
1
1
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.F.
C.Y.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
Each
Each
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
$15.000.00
$10,000.00
$5.00
$10.00
$12.00
$35.00
$20.00
$2.00
$600.00
$3,000.00
$1.00
$5,000.00
$7,500.00
$25,000.00
1
1
10000
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
[ S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
$4.00
$10,000.00
TOTAL COST
ITEM
COST
S15.000
$10.000 :
S6.250 ;
$20.000
$15,000
$14.000
$14.000
$12,600
$2,400
$6.000
$10.000 i
$5.000
$7,500
$25.000
$162,750
$14.648
$13.020
$40.000
$10,000
$60,104
$300,522
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$300,000
O.
E
UUl
ca
i
O
|
UUl
3E0.
a.
2
oUl
ca.
O
UJoIo
(0
a.c
^UJ
Q
&
Ifs&
23
II09 _•
HC 00 2
UJ
cQ.
1V3H ONIWVO 13
0 a
W 5 UJ
2 0. K
00- 2> O UJ1 O
(0
3AIBQ NOSWdO
133blS VilNVZNVK
O
HI^o
DC
0.
3AIHQ
Oi
§§
III
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930
(Project Title: AVEN1DA ENCINAS
[Location: PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD TO 2700 FEET SOUTH
Sheet 1 of I
Project No.:
Ref.:
| Project Description: WIDEN WEST SIDE OF STREET TO COMPLETE TO STANDARD
'Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN Date: 10-31-90 'Checked By:Date:
X 'Conceptual jPreliminary [Design Final
ITEM
NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION
1 ; Mobilization
2 Fill
3 Curb and Gutter, Type "G"
4 (Asphalt Concrete Pavement (4")
5
6
7
8
9
Aggregate Base (12")
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk
Streetlight
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
8,000
2,700
1,940
6,000
13,500
5
1
1
UNIT
L.S.
C.Y.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
Each
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
$35.000.00
$7.00
$12.00
$35.00
$20.00
$2.00
$3,000.00
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
10
11
12
Design at 8%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 7%
Contingencies at 25 % of Total
1
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
TOTAL COST
ITEM
COST
$35.000
$56.000
$32.400
$67.900
$120,000
$27,000
$15,000
$5.000
$5.000
$363,300
$29,064
$25,431
$104,449
$522,244
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$525,000
a£LIIo
O CO
H <
§ o
a LJJ
t Z
UJ
LU3tc
|
OUJ
a
8-
IIo
Q.
•5
OE
E
oca.
ui
I**
I
i
^ w111
11!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
iENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930 'Sheet 1 of 1
i Project Title: CARLSBAD BOULEVARD
'Location: MANZANO DRIVE TO 600 FEET NORTH OF CANNON ROAD
Project No.:
Ref.:
|Project Description: REBUILD AND WIDEN TO FOUR LANES WITH MEDIAN
'Estimated Bv: RICHARD ALLEN
I-
IDate: 3-22-91 j Checked By:Date:
X ! Conceptual I Preliminary [Design
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):
'Final
ITEM
NO.
1
2
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Mobilization
Relocate Utilities
3 | Remove Curb and Gutter
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Remove Pavement
Excavation
Fill
Curb and Gutter, Type "G"
Median Curb, Type 'B-2*
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (5")
Aggregate Base (12*)
4' P.C.C. Sidewalk
5.5" Concrete Driveway
Handicapped Ramp
Curb Inlet, Type "B-r
Streetlight
Median Stamped Concrete
Median Landscaping and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
20
21
22
Design at 8%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 1%
Contingencies at 25% of Total
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
1
3,000
40,000
15,000
5,000
6,400
6,400
6,000
15,000
32,000
20
4
4
6
30,000
10,000
1
1
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.F.
S.F.
C.Y.
C.Y.
L.F.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
Each
Each
Each
Each
S.F.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
$100,000.00
S 100.000.00
$5.00
$1.50
$10.00
$5.00
$10.00
$10.00
$35.00
$20.00
$2.00
$500.00
$750.00
$3,000.00
$3,000.00
$3.00
$10.00
$5,000.00
$25,000.00
TOTAL COST
ITEM
COST !
$100,000
S100.000
S15.000 i
S60.000 i
$150.000
$25.000 i
$64.000 !
$64.000
$210.000
S300.000 I
$64,000 |
$10,000 !
$3.000
$12,000
$18,000
$90,000
$100,000
$5.000
$25,000
$1,415,000
$113.200
$99,050
$406,813
$2,034,063
$2,100,000
o
z ~~
2 uj
£ 9
w Quj CC
H 2O UJm _JI 8
cc<o
oo
wI
o
UJ
4 f.i i.CANNON ROADA.T.4 S.F
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II
. RAILROAD
1 1 1 i I i i I 1 I M IT
3AIUOV 1O9UV 13
BAIdd DRIVE^ CEREZOS3T8OU SOT
1 I I
3AIUQ ONVZNVW \O
UJ->Occ
Q.
QV8S1UVO hiII !
ISu
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930
'Project Title: CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
[Location: PONTIAC DRIVE TO EAST OF VICTORIA STREET
I Sheet
IP reject
JRef.:
1 of
No.:
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
iProject Description: CONSTRUCT HALF STREET WIDENING ON EAST SIDE
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN Date: 3-13-91
X ] Conceptual | Preliminary
ITEM
NO.
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Mobilization
Clear and Grub
Excavation
Fill (Import)
Curb and Gutter, Type "G"
Median Curb, Type 'B-2"
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (4")
Aggregate Base (10")
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk
30" R.C.P.
Curb Inlet, Type "B-l'
Streetlight
Metal Beam Guardrail
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
17
18
19
Design at 7 %
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 5%
Contingencies at 25% of Total
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
1
5,000
50,000
3,300
2,000
2,280
5,934
16,500
100
2
6
900
130,000
1
1
Checked By: Date:
[Design ! ; Final
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
C.Y.
C.Y.
L.F.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
L.F.
Each
Each
L.F.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT j ITEM
PRICE 1 COST
$25.000.00
$50,000.00
$3.00
$8.00
$10.00
$10.00
$35.00
$18.00
$2.00
$120.00
$3,000.00
$3,000.00
$30.00
$1.00
$2.000.00
$10,000.00
1
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
TOTAL COST
S25.000
$50.000
S15.000
$400.000
$33.000
$20,000 j
$79,800 !
$106.812
$33,000
S12.000 '
$6,000
$18,000 !
$27.000 i
$130,000
$2,000
$10,000
$967,612
$67,733
$48,381
$270,931
$1,354,657
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$1,360,000
o
£cco
WUJO
o
UJ
oocCL
a.
o
UJo
UJ
UJ
UJ
oUJscca.
a.
Ioo
tn
I
O
I
O
<A
S
ccotf>UJo
111
Bca
§
I
l»!4 11
s?
I!»
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
] Project Title: EL CAMINO REAL
ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930
JLocation: TAMARACK AVENUE TO CHESTNUT AVENUE
i Sheet 1 of
i Project No.:
|Ref.:
1
Project Description: WIDEN TO SIX LANES - ADD ONE LANE EACH DIRECTION
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN j Date: 10-31-90 IChecked By: Date:
X ;Conceptual | i Preliminary | j Design Final
ITEM
NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION
1 Mobilization
2 Clear and Grub
3 'Excavation and Export
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Curb and Gutter, Type "G"
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (6")
Aggregate Base (12')
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk
Brow Ditch
Streetlight
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
Ij
1
72,000
2,400
1,730
3,800
14,000
2,400
10
108,000
1
1
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
C.Y.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
L.F.
Each
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
$50.000.00
$15,000.00
$10.00
$10.00
$35.00
$20.00
$2.00
$10.00
$3,000.00
$1.00J
$5,000.00
$15,000.00
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
13
14
15
16
17
Design at 6%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 5 %
Right-of-Way
Right-of-Way Acquisition Costs
Contingencies at 25 % of Total
1
1
140,000
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
$0.80
$10,000.00
TOTAL COST
ITEM
COST
S50.000
$15.000 ,.
$720,000 •
S24.000
$60,550 :
$76.000 !
$28,000 .
$24,000 '
$30.000 ':
$108,000 !
$5,000 !
$15,000 j
$1,155,550 I
S69.333 1
$57,778 |
$112.000 i
$10,000 |
$351,165 I
$1,755,826 |
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$1,760,000
IUJ
o
1 u.aDCuw
UJo
oo
0)
.o
g
§
oUJ§
s
1
o
CD
•5
I
oUl
ora
1
ULac
a
oP
u
3
o111
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
IENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930
'Project Title: EL CAMINO REAL
Location: LA COSTA AVENUE TO ARENAL ROAD
| Sheet 1 of
i Project No.:
iRef.:
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
jProject Description: WIDEN BY ADDING SOUTHBOUND LANE
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN bate: 10-31-90
X
ITEM
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Conceptual | i Preliminary
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Mobilization
Clear and Grub
Curb and Gutter, Type 'G'
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (5")
Aggregate Base (12*)
4' P.C.C. Sidewalk
Brow Ditch
Streetlight
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
12
13
14
Design at 8%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 6%
Contingencies at 25 % of Total
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
1
2400
1730
3800
14000
2000
10
1
1
1
Checked Bv: Date:
! Design ; Final
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
L.F.
Each
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
ITEM
COST
$25,000.00 | 525.000
S25. 000.00
$10.00
$35.00
$20.00
$2.00
$10.00
$3,000.00
$10,000.00
$5.000.00
$10,000.00
1
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
TOTAL COST
S25.000
$24,000 '.
$60,550 '
$76,000 |
$28.000 i
$20.000 '
$30,000 '
$10.000
$5.000
$10.000
$313,550
$25,084
$18.813
$89,362
$446,809
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED): $450,000
a.£
uiQ
O
UI
oca.
a.
u
occ
incr
UJ
co
8*
o
cc0.
u.
UJcc
o
I<o
.1
II
qTaa °NIWVO 73
z
oo
otra.
1
9
i-i11!ii
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
I
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LA COSTA AVENUE
From 1-5 to El Camino Real
DESIGN ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE:
1-19-89 Construction Cost =
(Enr LA Index = 5773)
Current Enr LA Index
1.0372
5988
5988
5773
1.0372 x 4,798,379 =
Round to
Design @ 5.3%
Design & Contract Admin.
& Insp. @ 2.3%
Contingency @ 15% of Const.
Right-of-Way Cost
Estimated By: Richard Allen
Date: 10-30-90
$4,798,379
$4,977,081
$5,000,000 Const. Cost
265,000
115,000
750.000
$6,130,000
580.000
$6,710,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST $6,710,000
o
0.Eu(A
UJo
o
UJ
cra.
a
u
UJa
UJ
UJ
8o
o
uUJ
a.
$I
•5
•Bins.
s.
i
sI« o-
•9
O
£
s>
W ,
z 2
a r-uHI3S
|lJ
I I
ONIWVO T3
^UJ
3
Z
UJ
><
"^O ^111 -^^
-9
Occa.
QVOU ANOXVS
?l -
§!
os»
a1
§
ii!
S
?
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930 I Sheet 1 of
1 Project Title: LEUCAD1A BOULEVARD j Project No.:
JLocation: EXISTING LEUCADIA BOULEVARD EASTBOUND TO EL CAMINO REALJRef.:
jproject Description: CONSTRUCT A FOUR LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL STREET - CITY CONTRIBUTION
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN
X (Conceptual j
Date: 4-15-91
Preliminary
ITEM
NO.
1
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Estimated Contribution
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
Checked By: iDate:
'Design ! Final
UNIT
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL COST
ITEM
COST
$3.500.000
$3,500,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$3,500,000
O
a.£otnIDO
OUJ
cca.
a
o
O
zaio
DCC
O1o
oai
CCa.
O
D.E
UJo
oca.o uj
oCD
•g£
u
UJ
1V3H
a
S
(J
3
o
oca.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930 {Sheet 1 of 1
Project Title: OLIVENHA1N ROAD AND RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD [Project No.:
Location: EL CAMINO REAL TO MELROSE DRIVE Ref.:
I Project Description: CONSTRUCT A SIX LANE PRIME ARTERIAL AT SEVERAL LOCATIONS - CITY CONTR1BU1ON
X jConceptual
ITEM
NO.
1
Preliminary
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Estimated Contribution
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
[Design IFinal
UNIT
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL COST
ITEM
COST
S6. 000, 000
$6,000,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$6,000,000
Q
I
UJ
1 is —
I 1
S *
3
o
«£
3
UJ
UJO
X)0)
r•5
.3"tr
Io
V1NVS
a.
o z<
§Q
O
UJ
1
I 5 1
ill!I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
l
I
i
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
Project Title: POINSETTIA LANE
ENR INDEX FOR LA
Location: INTERSTATE 5 TO PASEO DEL NORTE
5930 ; Sheet 1
IProject No.:
JRef.:
of I
Project Description: WIDEN STREET
Estimated Bv: RICHARD ALLEN Date: 11-1-90 Checked By:;Date:
X Conceptual iPreliminary I Design 'Final
ITEM
NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION
1 Mobilization
2 | Relocate Utilities
3 1 Remove Curb and Gutter
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Remove Sidewalk
Excavation
Curb and Gutter, Type "G"
Median Curb, Type "B-2"
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (5*)
Aggregate Base (12")
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk
Curb Inlet, Type 'B-l'
Sound Wall, 8' High
Streetlight (Relocate)
Median Stamped Concrete
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
17
18
19
2'0
21
Design at 7%
Construction Admin, it Inspection at 8%
Right-of-Way
Right-of-Way Acquisition Costs
Contingencies »t 25% of Total
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
1
950
950
5000
950
700
300
780
4750
2
300
1
1200
1
1
1
1
5326
1
1
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.F.
S.F.
C.Y.
L.F.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
Each
L.F.
L.S.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
S40.000.00
$10,000.00
S5.00
Sl.OO
$10.00
SIO.OO
$10.00
$35.00
$20.00^
$2.00
$3,000.00
$240.00
$10,000.00
$3.00
$5,000.00
$5.000.00
$15.00
$20,000.00
TOTAL COST
ITEM
COST
540,000
S10.000
$4,750
S950 i
$50,000
$9.500
$7.000
$10.500 i
$15,600
$9.500 !
S6.000 !
$72.000
$10.000
$3,600
$5,000
$5.000J
$259,400
$18.158
$20,752
$79,890
$20,000
$99,550
$497,750
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$500,000
CD
illQ
11)
111CO
6Q_
I
U§
%ao
ina>S
S
n
i-
M
o
Q.
WUlQ
UUJ
cca.
<n o
"Ic '*€58
OUlUl
U
CCa
31UON T3Q O3SVd
O
5
Z
u.
UUl
D.
1
i
1
i
*i
si
s
fO
i
uU L3 :
U.Construction ||§
11
1
1
1
2 8j 1 :£ *" n « •£
« 3 5 1 I =i i 1 f 1 ft
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
I
\
I
I
I
I
I
-1
I
I
IENRINDEX
iProjecl Title: POINSETTIA LANE
i Location: PASEO DEL NORTE TO BATIQUITOS DRIVE
FOR LA: 5930 i Sheet 1
| Project No.:
:.Ref.:
of 1
[Project Description: WIDEN STREET TO SIX LANES
JEstimated By: RICHARD ALLEN JDate: 1-3-91
j X 'Conceptual ;Preliminary
'Checked By:
i {Design
'Date:
i Final
ITEM
NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1 i Mobilization 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 j
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Construction Staking and Marking
Traffic Control
Excavation (Fill)
Excavation (Haul)
Curb and Gutter
Sidewalk
Drainage
Retaining Wall
Full Depth AC Paving
Existing AC (Fog S«al)
Metal Beam Guard Rail
Traffic Signal - New
Traffic Signals - Modify
Signs
Landscape and Irrigation
Temporary Work/Removal
Striping and Marking
Survey Work
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
Design at 7 %
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 5%
Right-of-Way & Utility Relocation
Contingency at 25 % of Total
1
1
975
65
2900
2100
1
1750
22900
5160
300
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
C.Y.
C.Y.
L.F.
L.F.
L.S.
S.F.
S.F.
S.Y.
L.F.
Each
Each
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
ITEM
COST
565,000.00 i S65.000
$18,700.00
$62,400.00
$17.00
$22.00
$12.00
$15.00
$31,200.00
$30.00
$4.10
$0.10
$25.00
$120,000.00
$120,000.00
$2,000.00
$18,700.00
$6.200.00
$6,200.00
$5,000.00
$18.700''
$62,400
$16,575
$1,430
$34,800
$31.500
S3 1.200
$52,500
$93,890
$516 i
$7.500 i
$120,000 1
$120,000 i
$2.000]
$18,700
$6,200
$6,200
$5.000
$694,111
1
1
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
$310,000.00
TOTAL COST
$48,588
$34,706
$310.000
$271,851
$1,359.255
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED): $1,370.000
CO
o
0>
111o
OPI
uUJ3cc
LU iIIo
iC/3
Oo.
c
4
'I I
len this:h directiI
*o>if
UJ
3NVT sonnoiiva
o
HI—)o
CC.
Q.
31UON 130 O3SVd
O
OQ
3ccQ.
§
X
UJ
I S
11!
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
I
I
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930
Project Title: ALGA ROAD
Location: MIMOSA DRIVE TO EL CAMINO REAL
Project Description: ADDITION OF ONE
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN
y Conceptual ;
Sheet 1 of I
Project No.:
Ref.:
THRU LANE AND BIKE LANE ON THE SOUTH SIDE
Date: 10-30-90
Preliminary
ITEM
; NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION
Checked By:
Design
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY UNIT
Date:
Final
UNIT j
PRICE 1
ITES1
COST
; Mobilization L.S.$15,000.00 SI 5.000
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Relocate Utilities •
Remove Curb and Gutter
Excavation/Fill
Curb and Gutter. Type "G"
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (5")
Aggregate Base (12*)
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk
Handicapped Ramp
Curb Inlet. Type 'B-l'
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
Traffic Signal Relocation
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
Design at 9%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 8%
Right-of-Way
Right-of-Way Acquisition Co»ti
Contingencies at 25% of Tool
I
1250
2000
1250
400
700
6300
4
2
10000
10000
1
1
L.S.
L.F.
C.Y.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
Each
Each
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
$10,000.00
$5.00
$10.00
$12.00
$35.00
$20.00
$2.00
$600.00
$3,000.00
$1.00
$5,000.00
$7.500.00
$25,000.00
$4.00
$10.000.00
TOTAL COST
S10.000
S6.250 •
S20.000
SI5.000 '
$14.000 !
$14.000
$12.600
S2.400
$6.000
$10.000
$5,000
$7,500
$25,000
$162,750
$14.648j
$13.020
$40.000
$10.000
$60.104
$300,522
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$300,000
0.i
UlQ
5Ul
Q.
CJ
8
3oc
o
UJ2
O<r i
ivaa ONIWVO na
CO ± UJ
Z 0- Ko?; 2
> O ui
X O(0
0.
i
o
oUl
3AIUQ
I
133U1S
o
UJ^occ
Q.
3AIHQ
§
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930
! Project Title: AVEN1DA ENCINAS
i Location: PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD TO 2700 FEET SOUTH
': Sheet 1
j Project No.:
IRef.:
of 1
• Project Description: WIDEN WEST SIDE OF STREET TO COMPLETE TO STANDARD
•Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN Date: 10-31-90 Checked By:Date:
X \ Conceptual I Preliminary : Design Final
ITEM |
. NO. ! ITEM DESCRIPTION
1 ; Mobilization
2 Fill
3 iCurb and Gutter, Type "G"
4 Asphalt Concrete Pavement (4*)
5
6
7
8
9
Aggregate Base (12')
4' P.C.C. Sidewalk
Streetlight
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
8,000
2,700
1,940
6,000
13,500
5
1
I
UNIT
L.S.
C.Y.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
1 Each
L.S.
L.S.
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
10
11
12
Design at 8%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 7%
Contingencies at 25 % of Total
1
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT ITEM
PRICE i COST
$35,000.00
S7.00
$12.00
$35.00
L $20.00
$2.00
$3,000.00
$5.000.00
$5,000.00
TOTAL COST
S35.000
S56.000
S32.-100
$67,900 :
$120.000 i
$27,000 :
$15,000 ;
$5.000 I
S5.000 i
$363,300 i
$29.064 i
$25.431 i
$104.449 1
$522,244
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$525,000
cc
u.CO
io
o
££
a
&
HIIQL
HI
O
u01
QL
•8
1
Ill
t 2
oo
I
in•o
1
i i f>- «k b» t
I
I
I
I
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
IENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930 Sheet 1
Project Title: CARLSBAD BOULEVARD
: Location: MANZANO DRIVE TO 600 FEET
'Project Description: REBUILD AND WIDEN
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN
! X ! Conceptual j
NORTH OF CANNON ROAD
of 1
Project No.:
Ref.:
TO FOUR LANES WITH MEDIAN
iDate: 3-22-91 jCheclced By:
[Preliminary |Design
Date:
' 'Final
ITEM
NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION
1 Mobilization
2 ; Relocate Utilities
3 i Remove Curb and Gutter
• 4 i Remove Pavement
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Excavation
Fill
Curb and Gutter, Type "G"
Median Curb, Type "B-2*
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (5*)
Aggregate Base (12")
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk
5.5" Concrete Driveway
Handicapped Ramp
Curb Inlet, Type "B-r
Streetlight
Median Stamped Concrete
Median Landscaping and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
20
21
22
Design at 8%
Construction Admin. A Inspection at 7 %
Contingencies at 25% of Total
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
I
3,000
40,000
15,000
5,000
6,400
6,400
6,000
15,000
32,000
20
4
4
6
30,000
10,000
1
1
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.F.
S.F.
C.Y.
C.Y.
L.F.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
Each
Each
Each
Each
S.F.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
S100.000.00
S100.000.00 ]
J5.00
SI. 50
$10.00
$5.00
$10.00
$10.00
$35.00
$20.00
$2.00
$500.00
$750.00
$3,000.00
$3,000.00
$3.00
$10.00
$5,000.00
$25,000.00
TOTAL COST
ITEM
COST
S100.000
$100.000
S15.000 .
$60.000-
$150.000 i
$25,000
$64.000
S64.000 :
$210,000
^ S300.000
$64,0001
$10.000 i
$3.000 i
$12.000 i
$18,000 1
$90.000
$100,000
$5.000
$25.000
$1,415.000
$113.200
$99,050
$406.813
$2.034,063
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$2,100,000
o
o
a.
£uinuto
5UJ
DC0.
O
LJJ
O
OCO
UJ
I i0.
o 2
2o
4} 4
CANNON ROADA.T.& S.F. RAILROAD
3AIUQ
DRIVETO9UV 13
3AIUQ S318OU SOH
^ CEREZOy MANZANO DRIVEO
HI•^o
(E
Q.
avasnavo ill I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENR INDEX FOR LA
Project Title: CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
Location: PONTIAC DRIVE TO EAST OF VICTORIA STREET
.Project Description: CONSTRUCT HALF STREET WIDENING ON
'Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN Date: 3-13-91
! X IConceptual i ^Preliminary
: 5930
EAST SIDE
1 Checked By:
1 j Design
Sheet 1
'Project No.:
;Ref.:
of 1
Date:
: Final
ITEM
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Mobilization
Clear and Grub
Excavation
Fill (Import)
Curb and Gutter, Type "G"
Median Curb, Type "B-2"
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (4*)
Aggregate Base (10')
4' P.C.C. Sidewalk
30' R.C.P.
Curb Intel, Type'B- 1"
Streetlight
Metal Beam Guardrail
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
Design at 7-%
Construction Admin. & Inspection it 5 *
Contingencies at 25% of Total
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
I
1
5,000
50,000
3,300
2,000
2,280
5,934
16,500
100
2
6
900
130,000
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
C.Y.
C.Y.
L.F.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
L.F.
Each
Each
L.F.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
$25,000.00
$50,000.00
$3.00
$8.00
$10.00
$10.00
$35.00
$18.00
$2.00
$120.00
$3,000.00
$3,000.00
$30.00
$1.00
$2,000.00
$10,000.00
TOTAL COST
ITEM
COST
$25.000
S50.000
S15.000
S400.000
$33,000
$20.000
$79.800 .
$106.812
$33,000
$12.000
$6.000
$18,000 •
$27,000 .
$130.000 i
$2.000 i
$10,000 !
$967,612 !
$67.733 i
$48.381 !
$270.931 j
$1,354,657|
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED): $ 1,360,000 |
O
uio
oUJ
O
a
u
O
LU
LU
2
UJ
§s
UJI
CO
.3
I
•8
a.
£a.
O
I
-
§
I
§1
\
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
'ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930 ; sheet i of I
IProject Title: EL CAMINO REAL project No.:
location: TAMARACK AVENUE TO CHESTNUT AVENUE iRef.:
'Project Description: WIDEN TO SIX LANES - ADD ONE LANE EACH DIRECTION
'Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN !Date: 10-31-90 ^Checked By:Date:
X Conceptual ^Preliminary : Design Final
ITEM
NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION
1 Mobilization
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Clear and Grub
Excavation and Export
Curb and Gutter, Type "G"
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (6*)
Aggregate Base (12")
4- P.C.C. Sidewalk
Brow Ditch
Streetlight
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
1
72.000
2,400
1,730
3,800
14,000
2,400
10
108,000
1
1
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
C.Y.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
L.F.
Each
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
ITEM
COST
$50.000.00 $50.000
SI5.000.00
$10.00
S15.000
S720.000
$10.00 ! S24.000
$35.00
$20.00
$2.00
$10.00
$3,000.00
$1.00
$5,000.00
$15.000.00
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
13
14
15
16^~l
17
Design at 6%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 5%
Right-of-Way
Right-of-Way Acquisition Cost*
Contingencies at 25% of Total
1
1
140,000
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
$0.80
$10.000.00
TOTAL COST
560,550 .
$76.000 '
$28.000
$24.000
$30,000 :
5108,000 '•
$5,000 :
$15.000'
$1,155,550 i
$69.333 i
$57.778 !
$112.000]
$10,000 !
$351.165 1
$1,755,826 |
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$1,760,000 !
LU
z
LU
O
P LUO.
E
01O
O 5
3 1
9 tl£O
E za LU
2 Q° §
LLGC
O
<o
2
S
I
oo
oUl
oc0.
oo
i
I
*n
o
UJ
•5
o.Eo(A8
o
LU
tra.
hiIII
u
?
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930
Project Title: EL CAMINO REAL
Location: LA COSTA AVENUE TO ARENAL ROAD
\ Sheet I
: Project No.:
'Ref.:
of 1
Project Description: WIDEN BY ADDING SOUTHBOUND LANE
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN bate: 10-31-90
X Conceptual j i Preliminary
ITEM
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Mobilization
Clear and Grub
Curb and Gutter, Type "G"
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (5*)
Aggregate Base (12*)
4' P.C.C. Sidewalk
Brow Ditch
Streetlight
Slope Planting and Irrigation
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
12
13
14
Design at 8*
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 6%
Contingencies at 25 % of Total
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
1
2400
1730
3800
14000
2000
10
t
1
1
1
I
1
Checked By: Date:
: Design Final
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
L.F.
Each
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
S25.000.00
ITEM
COST
S25.000
$25.000.00 | $25.000
$10.00
$35.00
S20.00
$2.00
$10.00
$3.000.00
$10,000.00
$5.000.00
$10,000.00
TOTAL COST
$24.000
$60.550
$76,000 I
$28.000
$20,000
$30,000
$10.000 ;
$5.000 1
$10.000
$313,550 1
$25.084 '
$18.813
$89.362
$446,809
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED): $450.000
I *
<o
<
(0
.,v>HIo
o01
3
£ *i_j< LUl
t O
'fr
u
DC I
o
LU
a.
z
cQ.I
gMS
S3£
s
u £II
m
3
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
LA COSTA AVENUE
From 1-5 to El Camino Real
DESIGN ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE:
1-19-89 Construction Cost =
(Enr LA Index = 5773)
Current Enr LA Index = 5988
5988 m , Oq72
5773
1.0372x4,798,379 =
Round to
Design @ 5.3%
Design & Contract Admin.
& Insp. @ 2.3%
Contingency @ 15% of Const.
Right-of-Way Cost
Estimated By: Richard Allen
Date: 10-30-90
$4,798,379
$4,977,081
$5,000,000 Const. Cost
265,000
115,000
750.000
$6,130,000
580.000
$6,710,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST $6,710,000
o z
I0.Euv>
5ULU
Oc0.
0.
o
LU
z
CO
8
o
§
ea
Q.
OIo
raCD
tn {5
2 O
If
cc
£
8
ccQ.
s.
i
Ul
1V3U ONWVO 13
3
£
«ill
ill
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930 !Sheet of
Project Title: LEUCADIA BOULEVARD jProject No.:
;Location: EXISTING LEUCADIA BOULEVARD EASTBOUND TO EL CAM1NO REALjRef.:
!Project Description: CONSTRUCT A FOUR LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL STREET - CITY CONTRIBUTION
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN Date: 4-15-91
! VI •*•
jITEM
1 NO.
! i
1
Conceptual j i Preliminary
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Estimated Contribution
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
Checked By:
{Design
Date:
;Final
UNIT
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
ITEM
COST
S3. 500. 000
TOTAL COST] $3,500.000
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$3,500,000
IPTIONtro
WLU
Q
001
3cQ.2<o
oz
LU
Q
>•^
QIT
LU_l
O
CO
O
u
UJ
mo>cc
f
Tr,
§
1O
UJ
1V3U
1
i I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930 I Sheet 1 of I
Project Title: OL1VENHA1N ROAD AND RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD !Project No.:
Location: EL CAMINO REAL TO MELROSE DRIVE !Ref.:
.Project Description: CONSTRUCT A SIX LANE PRIME ARTERIAL AT SEVERAL LOCATIONS - CITY CONTRIBU1OS
'Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN Date: 4-15-91
i X 'Conceptual | | Preliminary
; ITEM
i NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION
| 1 Estimated Contribution
! i
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
Checked By: ' Date:
[Design Final
UNIT
L.S.
UNIT ITEM
PRICE COST
$6 000.000
1
TOTAL COST| $6.000.000
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):$6,000,000
cc111
z <I I
E w
co Ow X
d 1s *§ *Q. O
I 10 1LU
I
£
UJ
V1NV8
in H
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IENR INDEX FOR LA= 5930
Project Title: POINSETTIA LANE
Location: INTERSTATE 5 TO PASEO DEL NORTE
Sheet 1 of 1
Project No.:
Ref.:
[Project Description: WIDEN STREET
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED):
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN JDate: 11-1-90
X jConceptual iPreliminary
ITEM
NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION
1 Mobilization
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Relocate Utilities
Remove Curb and Gutter
Remove Sidewalk
Excavation
Curb and Gutter, Type "G"
Median Curb, Type "B-2"
Asphalt Concrete Pavement (5")
Aggregate Base (12")
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk
Curb Inlet, Type "B-l"
Sound Wall, 8' High
Streetlight (Relocate)
Median Stamped Concrete
Signing and Striping
Traffic Control
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
17
18
19
20
21
Design at 7 %
Construction Admin. Sc. Inspection at 8 %
Right-of-Way
Right-of-Way Acquisition Costs
Contingencies at 25% of Total
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
1
950
950
5000
950
700
300
780
4750
2
300
I
1200
1
1
1
1
5326
1
1
Checked By:
iDesign
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.F.
S.F.
C.Y.
L.F.
L.F.
Ton
Ton
S.F.
Each
L.F.
L.S.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
S.F.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
$40,000.00
Date:
'Final
ITEM
COST
$40,000 :
$10,000.00 I $10,000 i
$5.00
$1.00
$10.00
$10.00
$10.00
$35.00
$20.00
$2.00
$3,000.00
$240.00
$10,000.00
$3.00
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
$15.00
$20,000.00
TOTAL COST
$4,750
S950
$50.000
$9,500
$7.000
$10.500
$15,600
$9.500
$6,000
$72.000
$10.000
$3.600
$5,000
$5,000
$259,400
$18.158
$20.752
$79,890
$20,000
$99,550
$497,750
$500,000
O
LU
HI
Oo
o
trQ.
I
a
CO
OQ.
a
I
OIo
oLU
8tca.
I
Q.
O
in
SE0)
O£E
£
3
S
3ECa
*o
s ™ i
h 1 !
«0>
S "5
? £
31UON 130 OBSVd
i
I if
III H
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROJECTS DIVISION
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE WORK SHEET
ENR INDEX FOR LA: 5930
Project Title: POINSETTIA LANE
Location: PASEO DEL NORTE TO BATIQUITOS DRIVE
Sheet 1 of 1
Project No.:
Ref.:
Project Description: WIDEN STREET TO SIX LANES
Estimated By: RICHARD ALLEN Date: 1-3-91
X
ITEM
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Conceptual | Preliminary
. ITEM DESCRIPTION
Mobilization
Construction Staking and Marking
Traffic Control
Excavation (Fill)
Excavation (Haul)
Curb and Gutter
Sidewalk
Drainage
Retaining Wall
Full Depth AC Paving
Existing AC (Fog Seal)
Metal Beam Guard Rail
Traffic Signal - New
Traffic Signals - Modify
Signs
Landscape and Irrigation
Temporary Work/Removal
Striping and Marking
Survey Work
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION
Design at 7%
Construction Admin. & Inspection at 5%
Right-of-Wty & Utility Relocation
Contingency at 25% of Total
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
1
1
1
975
65
2900
2100
1
1750
22900
5160
300
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Checked By:
Design
UNIT
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
C.Y.
C.Y.
L.F.
L.F.
L.S.
S.F.
S.F.
S.Y.
L.F.
Each
Each
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
UNIT
PRICE
$65,000.00
$18,700.00
$62,400.00
$17.00
$22.00
$12.00
$15.00
$31,200.00
$30.00
$4.10
$0.10
$25.00
$120,000.00
$120,000.00
$2,000.00
$18,700.00
$6,200.00
$6,200.00
$5,000.00
Date:
iFinal
ITEM
COST
$65,000 ;
518,700 1
$62,400 i
$16,575 !
$1,430
$34,800 !
$31,500 '
$31,200
$52,500
$93,890
$516
$7.500
$120,000
$120,000
$2,000
$18,700
$6,200
$6,200
$5,000
$694,111
1
1
1
1
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
$310,000.00
TOTAL COST
$48.588
$34.706
$310,000
$271.851
$1,359,255
TOTAL PROJECT COST (ROUNDED): $ 1,370,000
o
a
£O(0uiQ
OHI
3cca.
a<u
CD
HIQ
ill
LU
2
O
!
§i
Q.
<
<Oo
u
LU
ia
Tam
o
I
"5O
J f2
.*. co
*
wI•5
c I
< sP r
** MH
APPENDIX C
Sidewalk Priority Listing
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PRIORITY
RANK
1.
2.
3.
LOCATION
TAMARACK AVENUE
VALLEY STREET
CAMINO V1DA ROBLE
4.MONROE STREET
5 CHESTNUT AVENUE
6. HIGHLAND DRIVE
VICTORIA AVENUE
TAMARACK AVENUE
JEFFERSON STREET
BASSWOOD AVENUE
PARK DRIVE
9.PINE AVENUE
SIDEWALK INVENTORY
PRIORITY LISTING
SIDEWALK EST.
SEGMENT POINTS COST
E • Park Dr. to 214.01 West 90.00
C - Basswood Ave. to 335.01 North 82.50
B • Yarrow Dr. to Cone Del Abeto 82.31
C - Cone Del Nogal to 260.CC South 82.31
D • Palomar Airport Rd. to Cone Del Nogal 82.31
E • 528.0' e/o Palomar Oaks Wy. to 123.0' East 82.31
F - Owens Ave. to 117.0* East 82.31
G - 528.0' w/o Owens Ave. to 121.0' West 82.31
H - El Camino Real to Las Palmas Dr. 82.31
J - Las Palmas Dr. to Palomar Oaks Wy. 82.31
K • Palomar Oaks Wy. to Palomar Airport Rd. 82.31
A - Park Dr. to 350.0" North 80.00
C - 103.0' n/o Karren Ln. to 81.0* North 80.00
D - Basswood Ave. to 52.0' South CUUP 92) 80.00
E - Magnolia Ave. to 430.0' South 80.00
F - Basswood Ave. to 451.0' South (UUP 92) 80.00
H • Magnolia Ave. to 137.01 North 80.00
E - Donna Dr. to 152.0" West 78.00
E - Chestnut Ave. to 331.0* North 75.00
N - Hillview Ct. to Magnolia Ave. 75.00
0 - Chestnut Ave. to 314.0* South 75.00
P - Basswood Ave. to Chestnut Ave. 75.00
A - 125.0' w/o Elm Ave. to 101.0* West 70.00
F - La Portalada Dr. to 363.0* West 70.00
B - Chinquapin Ave. to Citrus PI. 70.00
C - Citrus PI. to Tamarack Ave. 70.00
D • Tamarack Ave. to Chinquapin Ave. 70.00
E - 99.0* s/o Magnolia Ave. to 101.0' South 70.00
A - Donna Dr. to 78.0* West 65.00
D - Valley St. to Maezel Ln. 65.00
E • Maezel Ln. to Canyon St. 65.00
L • Donna Dr. to Belle Ln. 65.00
B - Monroe St. to 463.0* South 65.00
C - 68.0* s/o Tamarack Ave. to 51.0* South (OP 95-2000) 65.00
D - 119.0* s/o Tamarack Ave. to 78.0* South (OP 95-2000) 65.00
E - 192.0* s/o Tamarack Ave. to 226.0* South (OP 95-2000) 65.00
1 - 112.0* s/o Monroe St. to 262.0* South 65.00
J - Tamarack Ave. to 462.0* North 65.00
C - Lincoln St. to 184.0* West 60.00
D - Garfield St. to 82.0* West 60.00
E - Lincoln St. to 19.0* West " 60.00
TOTAL $434,050.00
SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION - PROJECT COORDINATION
HR - HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT (Programmed Fiscal Year)
UUP - UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING PROGRAM (Programmed Fiscal Year)
CIP - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (Programmed Fiscal Year)
B-l
SIDEWALK PRIORITY LIST (Continued)
PRIORITY
RANK
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
SIDEWALK
LOCATION
VALLEY STREET
OCEAN STREET
CHESTNUT AVENUE
MAGNOLIA AVENUE
MAGNOLIA AVENUE
LACUNA DRIVE
GRAND AVENUE
VALLEY STREET
CAM1NO VIDA ROBLE
GRAND AVENUE
MONROE STREET
HIGHLAND DRIVE
PINE AVENUE
STATE STREET
HIGHLAND DRIVE
CONSTRUCTION - PROJECT
SIDEWALK
SEGMENT
B • Magnolia Ave. to 610.0* South
A - Oak Ave. to 71 .ff South
B - Elm Ave. to Grand Ave.
C - Christiansen Wy. to Grand Ave.
D - Beech Ave. to 232.0' South
F - Pacific Ave. to 395.01 North
G • Pacific Ave. to Cypress Ave.
I - Elm Ave. to 510.01 South
J • Christiansen Wy. to Grand Ave.
L - Pacific Ave. to Cypress Ave.
M - Pacific Ave. to 163.01 North
N - Mountain View Dr. to Garfield St.
F - 90.01 w/o Seaview Wy. to Donna Dr.
J - Westhaven Dr. to 485. 01 East
C - Highland Dr. to 25.01 East
E • Valley St. to 437.0" East
F • Monroe St. to 389.0' West
I - Valley St. to 176.01 East
K - Monroe St. to 189. 0* West
A - Pio Pico Dr. to Adams St.
G - Pio Pico Dr. to 189.0* East
H - Adams St. to 275.0' East
J - Highland Dr. to 243.0* West
C - Jefferson St. to 197.0* West (UUP 91)
F - Roosevelt St. to Madison St. (UUP 91)
G - 248.0' w/o Jefferson St. to 206.0* West (UUP 91)
B - Jefferson St. to 226.0* West (OP 91)
H - Basswood Ave. to Oak Ave.
A - El Camino Real to Yarrow Dr.
I • Las Palmas Dr. to Las Palmas Dr.
A - Carlsbad Blvd. to Ocean St.
B - Park Dr. to Sunnyhill Dr.
G - Park Dr. to Sunnyhill Dr.
D - Tamarack Ave. to 792.01 North
F • Chestnut Ave. to Magnolia Ave.
M - Magnolia Ave. to Tamarack Ave.
B - Garfield St. to 206.01 East
B - Carlsbad Blvd. to 244.01 South (UUP 91)
I - Arland Rd. to Las Flores Dr.
K - Butters Rd. to 125.0* North
R - Forest Rd. to Las Flores Dr.
S • Butters Rd. to Forest Rd.
T - Yourell Ave. to Butters Rd.
COORDINATION
POINTS
56.50
55.00
55.00
55.00
55.00
55.00
55.00
55.00
55.00
55.00
55.00
55.00
49.00
49.00
46.50
46.50
46.50
46.50
46.50
45.00
45.00
45.00
45.00
44.69
44.69
44.69
42,50
41.25
41.16
41.16
40.00
40.00
40.00
37.50
37.50
37.50
35.00
35.00
35.00
35.00
35.00
35.00
35.00
TOTAL
EST.
COST
$24,400.00
2,800.00
22,800.00
12,200.00
13,200.00
22,600.00
21,700.00
20,400.00
12,200.00
21,700.00
9,300.00
5,500.00
8,850.00
19,100.00
1,000.00
17,500.00
15,550.00
3,950.00
7,550.00
20,800.00
7,450.00
6,200.00
9,550.00
14,650.00
20,100.00
15,300.00
9,050.00
42,250.00
41,600.00
35,650.00
16,900.00
30,200.00
30,200.00
31,700.00
31,700.00
42,250.00
8,100.00
23,200.00
4,000.00
2,800.00
23,350.00
4,400.00
1.500.00
$735,200.00
HR - HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT (Programmed Fiscal Year)
UUP - UTILITY UNDERGROUNDS PROGRAM (Programmed Fiscal Year)
CIP - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (Programmed Fiscal Year)
B-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PRIORITY
RANK LOCATION
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
BASSWOOD AVENUE
LA COSTA AVENUE
WASHINGTON STREET
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD
PRIESTLY DRIVE
RUTHERFORD ROAD
BUENA VISTA WAY
VALLEY STREET
OCEAN STREET
EL CAMINO REAL
WALNUT AVENUE
PACIFIC AVENUE
KNOWLES AVENUE
ALICANTE ROAD
CYPRESS AVENUE
GARFIELD STREET
SIDEWALK PRIORITY LIST (Continued)
SIDEWALK
SEGMENT
B - 128.0* e/o Eureka PI. to Highland Dr.
C - 2540.0' e/o El Camino Real to 205.0' West
D - 2740.0* e/o El Camino Real to 105.0' West
E - 697.0' w/o Nueva Casrilla to 156.0' West
F • 470.0' w/o Nueva Casrilla to 157.0' West
G • 600.0' w/o Nueva Casrilla to 97.0' West
H - 271.0' w/o Nueva Castilla to 179.0' West
I - Nueva Castilla to 183.0' West
J - 94.0' w/o Viejo Casrilla to 71.0' West
K - 528.0' w/o Gibraltar St. to 159.0' West
L - Gibraltar St. to 60.01 West
A • Elm Ave. to Oak Ave.
E - Tamarack Ave. to 35.0* North
A • Faraday Ave. to Rutherford Rd.
B - Rutherford Rd. to La Place Ct.
A - Geiger Ct. to Landau Ct.
B - Pascal Ct. to Priestly Dr.
C • Landau Ct. to Pascal Ct.
C - Arland Rd. to Elmwood St.
H - Pio Pico Dr. to 172.0* East
A - Magnolia Ave. to Chestnut Ave.
F • Chestnut Ave. to Magnolia Ave.
E - Cypress Ave. to Beech Ave.
H - Elm Ave. to 447.0* North
K • Cypress Ave. to Beech Ave.
K - Elm Ave. to 1056.0* South
A - Lincoln St. to 198.0* West
B - Lincoln St. to 79.0* East
B • Ocean St. to Mountain View Dr.
B - Gregory Dr. to Pio Pico Dr.
A - Altisma Wy. to 528.0* East
A - Ocean St. to Carlsbad Blvd.
B - Garfield St. to 260.0* East
C • Ocean St. to Garfield St.
F - 105.0* n/o Elm Ave. to 151.0* North
G - Cypress Ave. to 169.0* South
M - Pine Ave. to 73.0* South
N - 101.0* n/o Beech Ave. to Cypress Ave.
0 - Pacific Ave. to 157.01 North
SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION - PROJECT COORDINATION
HR - HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT (Programmed Fiscal Year)
UUP - UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING PROGRAM (Programmed Fiscal Year)
CIP - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (Programmed Fiscal Year)
B-3
POINTS
32.50
30.25
30.25
30.25
30.25
30.25
30.25
30.25
30.25
30.25
30.25
30.00
30.00
30.00
30.00
30.00
30.00
30.00
30.00
30.00
28.25
28.25
27.50
27.50
27.50
25.86
25.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
TOTAL
EST.
COST
$48.700.00
4,600.00
2,350.00
3,500.00
3,550.00
2,200.00
4,050.00
4,100.00
1,600.00
3,600.00
1,350.00
16,500.00
1,400.00
17,800.00
11,900.00
11,900.00
17,800.00
11,900.00
20,500.00
9,400.00
36,400.00
36,400.00
34,200.00
25,600.00
34,200.00
23,750.00
7,900.00
3,150.00
21,100.00
4,400.00
11.900.00
23,900.00
10,400.00
6,800.00
6,000.00
6,800.00
1,650.00
17,400.00
9.000.00
$519,650.00
SIDEWALK PRIORITY LIST (Continued)
PRIORITY
RANK LOCATION
28.
(com)
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
LINCOLN STREET
ADAMS STREET
CHESTNUT AVENUE
EL FUERTE STREET
POINSETOA LANE
MAGNOLIA AVENUE
TAMARACK AVENUE
MAGNOLIA AVENUE
LACUNA DRIVE
MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE
PACIFIC AVENUE
ELM AVENUE
GAYLE WAY
FOREST AVENUE
VALLEY STREET
STATE STREET
HIGHLAND DRIVE
ALGA ROAD
39.OAK AVENUE
SIDEWALK
SEGMENT
A - 161.0" s/o Oak Ave. to 263.01 South
B - Chestnut Ave. to 217.0" North
C • Chestnut Ave. to Walnut Ave.
D - Walnut Ave. to Pine Ave.
F - Pine Ave. to 87.0' North
G - 145.01 n/o Pine Ave. to 166.01 North
C - Tamarack Ave. to Magnolia Ave.
G - 169.0' s/o Magnolia Ave. to 270.0" South
K - Cameo Rd. to El Camino Real
B - Unicomio St. to Cacatua St.
B • 100.0' e/o Avenida Encinas to 528.0' East
D - Valley St. to 811' West
H - 124.01 e/o Carlsbad Blvd. to 315.0' East (OP 90-91)
B - 114.0' e/o Adams St to 1056.0" East
B - State St. to Buena Vista Cir. (UUP 91)
D - Buena Vista Cir. to 438.0" East (UUP 91)
E • State St. to Roosevelt St. (UUP 91)
A - Ocean St. to Carlsbad Blvd.
A - Ocean St. to Garfield St.
A - Glasgow Dr. to Tamarack Ave.
B - Monroe St. to Ann Dr.
C - Ann Dr. to Donna Dr.
B • Highland Dr. to Highland Dr.
C - Pio Pico Dr. to 187.0" East
D • Spruce St. to 348.0" East
F - Highland Dr. to Wilson St.
G - Magnolia Ave. to 1108.0" South
A - Laguna Dr. to Carlsbad Blvd.
H - Elmwood St. to Elm Ave.
J • Forest Rd. to Ariand Rd.
Q - Elmwood St. to Elm Ave.
D • Corinda St. to 1056.0" East
E - El Camino Real to Estrella De Mar
F - Estrella De Mar to Almaden Ln.
G • Almaden Ln. to Alicante Rd.
K - Santa Isabel St. to El Fuerte St.
L - Xana Wy. to 792.0" West
A • State St. to 132.0" West (HR 91)
B • Roosevelt St. to State St. (HR 91)
POINTS
25.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
24.50
24.26
23.44
23.25
22.75
22.50
22.35
22.35
22.35
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
18.83
17.50
17.50
17.50
17.50
17.50
17.50
17.50
17.50
17.50
17.50
16.00
16.00
TOTAL
EST.
COST
$10,500.00
8,700.00
17,800.00
17,600.00
3,500.00
6,650.00
23,700.00
10,600.00
41,600.00
23,800.00
11,900.00
32,450.00
23,450.00
41,600.00
36,750.00
32,600.00
29,600.00
16,100.00
2,000.00
79,200.00
9,600.00
13,900.00
6,650.00
13,900.00
19,000.00
19,300.00
96,500.00
41,150.00
41,150.00
46,100.00
42,250.00
23,750.00
17,800.00
23,750.00
5,950.00
17,800.00
17,800.00
5,300.00
12.400.00
$944,150.00
SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION - PROJECT COORDINATION
HR - HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT (Programmed Fiscal Year)
UUP - UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING PROGRAM (Programmed Fiscal Year)
C1P - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (Programmed Fiscal Year)
B-4
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
SIDEWALK PRIORITY LIST (Continued)
PRIORITY SIDEWALK
RANK LOCATION SEGMENT
40. LA COSTA AVENUE O - 528.01 e/o El Camino Real to 1584.0' East
P - Nueva Castilla to 1584.0" West
Q • Nueva Castilla to Calle Madero
R - Calle Madero to Romeria St.
41. MADISON STREET A - 106.0' n/o Grand Ave. to 207.0' North
B - Laguna Dr. to 528.0* South
C - 211.0' s/o Laguna Dr. to 528.0' South
B - Janis Wy. to 79.01 South
H - Janis Wy. to 111.0' South
I - Gayle Wy. to Janis Wy.
D - Valley St. to Arland Rd.
G - Elm Ave. to Basswood Ave.
A - Palomar Airport Rd. to Camino Vida Roble
C - Cacatua St. to Chorlito St.
A - Pio Pico Dr. to Highland Dr.
A - Carlsbad Blvd. to 467.0' East (OP 90-91)
I - Chestnut Ave. to 1056.0" South (OP 91-92)
J - Chestnut Ave. to 1056.0" North
B - 70.01 e/o El Camino Real to 2376.01 East
A - Camino Vida Roble to Camino Vida Roble
A • Monroe St. to Donna Dr.
B - Impala Dr. to Faraday Ave.
B - 33.0' e/o Pio Pico Dr. to Elmwood St.
I - 270.0* e/o Pio Pico Dr. to Elmwood St.
J - Valley St. to Elmwood St.
A - Crest Dr. to Highland Dr.
G - Wilson St. to Crest Dr.
50. PARK DRIVE F - 140.0* s/o Grady PI. to 248.01 South
G - 322.01 n/o Marina Dr. to 462.0' North
51. ALGA ROAD A - El Camino Real to 1320.01 West
C • Corinria St. to Cazadero Dr.
I - Cazadero Dr. to Corinria St.
J - Corintia St. to Santa Isabel St.
M - Xana Wy. to Melrose Dr.
52. KNOWLES AVENUE C • Elmwood St. to Gregory Dr.
E - Elmwood St. to Pio Pico Dr.
D - Magnolia Ave. to Chestnut Ave.
E - Chestnut Ave. to Basswood Ave.
H - Chestnut Ave. to Basswood Ave.
53. ROOSEVELT STREET A - Laguna Dr. to 109.0" South
B - Laguna Dr. to 71.0" South
C - 154.0" s/o Laguna Dr. to 126.0" South
D - 125.0" n/o Beech Ave. to 125.0" North
SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION - PROJECT COORDINATION
HR - HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT (Programmed Fiscal Year)
UUP - UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING PROGRAM (Programmed Fiscal Year)
C1P - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (Programmed Fiscal Year)
DONNA DRIVE
BUENA VISTA WAY
HIGHLAND DRIVE
YARROW DRIVE
EL FUERTE STREET
PINE AVENUE
TAMARACK AVENUE
EL CAMINO REAL
LA COSTA AVENUE
LAS PALMAS DRIVE
GAYLE WAY
PALMER WAY/
COUGAR DRIVE
BUENA VISTA WAY
FOREST AVENUE
PARK DRIVE
ALGA ROAD
KNOWLES AVENUE
ADAMS STREET
ROOSEVELT STREET
POINTS
15.13
15.13
15.13
15.13
15.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
13.25
12.91
12.13
11.67
11.38
10.24
10.24
10.08
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
9.00
9.00
8.75
8.75
8.75
8.75
8.75
8.33
8.33
8.33
8.33
8.33
8.13
8.13
8.13
8.13
TOTAL SI
EST.
COST
535,650.00
35,650.00
35,650.00
29,700.00
4,650.00
21,100.00
21,100.00
3.150.00
4,450.00
13,900.00
36,300.00
124,700.00
71.300.00
35,600.00
89,600.00
25,700.00
23,750.00
23,750.00
53,450.00
95,000.00
27,000.00
21,100.00
92,800.00
67,400.00
51,300.00
26,000.00
28,600.00
9,900.00
18,500.00
29,700.00
29,700.00
29,700.00
41,600.00
29,700.00
58,900.00
78,500.00
70,600.00
70,600.00
70,600.00
2,450.00
2,850.00
2,850.00
2,800.00
,647,300.00
B-5
PRIORITY
RANK LOCATION
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
BUENA VISTA WAY
TAMARACK AVENUE
DONNA DRIVE
FOREST AVENUE
CANNON ROAD
CORTE DE LA PINA
ALGA ROAD
ARLANDROAD
BUENA VISTA WAY
ADAMS STREET
EL CAMINO REAL
LA PORTALADA DRIVE
ALTISMA WAY
ARENAL ROAD
VENADO STREET
CHESTNUT AVENUE
VALLEY STREET
DONNA DRIVE
CHINQUAPIN AVENUE
GARFIELD STREET
WESTHAVEN DRIVE
CORTE DEL ABETO
CORTE DEL NOGAL
SIDEWALK PRIORITY LIST (Continued)
SIDEWALK
SEGMENT
E - Wilson St. to Valley St.
F - Crest Dr. to Wilson St.
B - Garfield St. to Hibiscus Cir. (OP 90-91)
I - Garfield St. to Hibiscus Cir. (OP 90-91)
J - Gayle Wy. to Basswood Ave.
E - Pio Pico Dr. to Highland Dr.
B • Los Robles Dr. to Carlsbad Blvd. (UUP 91)
A • Yarrow Dr. to Cosmos Ct.
H - Alicante Rd. to Cazadero Dr.
A - Buena Vista Wy. to Highland Dr.
K - Crest Dr. to Valley St.
B - Chinquapin Ave. to 326.CC North
F • Chinquapin Ave. to Harrison St.
S - Chestnut Ave. to 1848.0" South (OP 91-92)
A - Milano Dr. to Tamarack Ave.
A - 49.01 n/o Alicante Rd. to 211.0 North
A - El Camino Real to Esuella De Mar
A - 28.0" w/o Esfera St. to 83.0" West
A - Lincoln St. to 285.0" East
B - Lincoln St. to Garfield St.
G - Washington St. to 400.0" West
H - Garfield St. to 143.01 East
D - Oak Ave. to 208.01 North
E - McCauley Ln. to Buena Vista Wy.
I - Elm Ave. to Buena Vista Wy.
A - Chestnut Ave. to 528.0" North
C - Basswood Ave. to Janis Wy.
D - Falcon Dr. to Basswood Ave.
E • Falcon Dr. to 138.0' North
F - Chestnut Ave. to Charleen Cir.
G - Charleen Cir. to 112.0" North
K - Falcon Dr. to Basswood Ave.
L - Falcon Dr. to 134.0" North
A - West end of street to 150.0' East
D - Jefferson St. to 164.01 East
F - Adams St. to 240.0" East
G - Highland Dr. to 249.01 West
H - West end of street to 218.0" East
1 - Harrison St. to Adams St.
J - Highland Dr. to 249.0" West
D - Chestnut Ave. to 29.0" North
B - Chestnut Ave. to Park Dr.
D • Chestnut Ave. to Park Dr.
A - Camino Vida Roble to end of street
. A - Camino Vida Roble to end of street
POINTS
8.00
8.00
7.58
7.58
7.50
6.67
6.08
6.00
5.83
5.33
5.33
5.26
5.26
5.17
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
TOTAL $1
EST.
COST
$35,300.00
35,300.00
78,550.00
78,550.00
42,250.00
71,100.00
46,300.00
23,800.00
89,100.00
87,150.00
70,600.00
7,350.00
21,100.00
169,200.00
4,280.00
4,750.00
5,950.00
1,850.00
11,400.00
8,400.00
16,000.00
5,700.00
8,200.00
17,700.00
23,500.00
11,900.00
73,900.00
7,150.00
3,100.00
4,800.00
2,500.00
7,100.00
3,000.00
6,000.00
3,700.00
9,600.00
9,950.00
8,700.00
21,100.00
9,950.00
1,150.00
12,300.00
15,250.00
47,500.00
47.500.00
,269,530.00
SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION - PROJECT COORDINATION
HR - HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT (Programmed Fiscal Year)
UUP - UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING PROGRAM (Programmed Fiscal Year)
CIR - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (Programmed Fiscal Year)
B-6
SIDEWALK PRIORITY LIST (Continued)
PRIORITY
RANK LOCATION
64.
(con:)
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
OAK AVENUE
BASSWOOD AVENUE
SKYLINE ROAD
PARK DRIVE
ALGA ROAD.
CANNON ROAD
EL FUERTE STREET
PARK DRIVE
COVE DRIVE
GARFIELD STREET
SUNNYHILL DRIVE
HILLSIDE DRIVE
OAK AVENUE
PALMER WAY/
COUGAR DRIVE
BASSWOOD AVENUE
SKYLINE ROAD
HIGHLAND DRIVE
ADAMS STREET
OAK AVENUE
LACUNA DRIVE
BASSWOOD AVENUE
SKYLINE ROAD
HIGHLAND DRIVE
ELCAMINOREAL
SIDEWALK
SEGMENT
D - Highland Dr. :o 203.0* East
G • Easterly end of street to 107.0* West
F - Donna Dr. to Ridgecrest Dr.
I - Highland Dr. to 165.01 West
J - Monroe St. to 237.01 West
K - Monroe St. to Belle Ln.
M - Donna Dr. to Ridgecrest Dr.
A • MacArthur Ave. to 528.01 South
L - Hillside Dr. to 792.0' South
B - Cazadero Dr. :o El Camino Real
A - Los Robles Dr. to El Arboi Dr. (UUP 91)
A - Santa Isabel St. to 2112.0" South
K - Tamarack Ave. to 1584.0" South
A - End of street to 792.0" North
J - Southerly end of street to 1056.0" North
C • Tamarack Ave. to Monroe St.
E - Tamarack Ave. to Monroe St.
A - Park Dr. to Highland Dr. (OP 95-2000)
B - Park Dr. to Highland Dr. (OP 95-2000)
F - Highland Dr. to Pio Pico Dr.
A - Impala Dr. to El Camino Real
G • Adams St. to 434.0" East
H - Eureka PI. to 415.0" East
C - Tamarack Ave. to 1056.0" North
D - Alder Ave. to Westhaven Dr.
A • Chinquapin Ave. to Hoover St. (OP 95-2000)
C - Tamarack Ave. to Chinquapin Ave. (OP 95-2000)
L - Chinquapin Ave. to Hoover St. COP 95-2000)
A - Harrison St. to Park Dr.
C - Highland Dr. to Pio Pico Dr.
A - Elmwood St. to 57.0" e/o Pio Pico Dr.
I - Elmwood SL to 85.0" e/o Pio Pico Dr.
C - Valley St. to 181.0" West
B • Tamarack Ave. to 1584.0" North
B - Hoover SL to Adams St.
B - La Costa Ave. to 3168.0" North
C - Arenal Rd. to 2640.0" North
EST.
POINTS COST
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
S.OO
S.OO
5.00
4.50
4.38
4.05
3.10
3.00
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.18
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.36
1.36
TOTAL
58,000.00
4,200.00
5,200.00
6,500.00
9,300.00
8,800.00
5,200.00
16.825.00
31,700.00
142,550.00
64,050.00
316,800.00
84,500.00
31,700.00
41,600.00
41,600.00
41,600.00
31,700.00
42,250.00
45,450.00
102,200.00
28,200.00
27,750.00
33,650.00
33,650.00
25,250.00
50,500.00
25,250.00
346,500.00
62,350.00
58,400.00
58,400.00
62,100.00
50,500.00
134,600.00
71,300.00
59.400.00
$2,209,525.00
SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION - PROJECT COORDINATION
HR - HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT (Programmed Fiscal Year)
UUP - UTILITY UNDERGROUNDS PROGRAM (Programmed Fiscal Year)
CIP - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (Programmed Fiscal Year)
B-7
PRIORITY
RANK LOCATION
74. BEECH AVENUE
MILANO DRIVE
GRAND AVENUE
SUNNYHILL DRIVE
PARK DRIVE
75. LA COSTA AVENUE
76. LA COSTA AVENUE
77. SUNNYHILL DRIVE
HOOVER STREET
78. PARK DRIVE
CREST DRIVE
SIDEWALK PRIORITY LIST (Continued)
SIDEWALK
SEGMENT
F • Garfield St. to 99.0' East
A - Trieste Dr. to La Portal ada Dr.
B • La Portalada Dr. to 346.0* East
C - Hope Ave. to end of street
D - 16.0* e/o Hope Ave. to 92.01 East
A - 208.0" n/o Hillside Dr. to MacArthur Ave.
B - 83.01 s/o Tamarack Ave. to MacArthur Ave.
H - Monroe St. to Westhaven Dr.
A - Piraeus St. to El Camino Real (OP 93-94)
N - Piraeus St. to El Camino Real (dP 93-94)
M - Rancho Santa Fe Rd. to 2376.0' East
D - Tamarack Ave. to 1320.0' South
A • Highland Dr. to Adams St.
A - Monroe St. to Westhaven Dr.
A - Buena Vista Wy. to Forest Ave.
POINTS
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.91
0.91
0.54
0.33
0.33
0.20
0.20
TOTAL $2
EST.
COST
$2,200.00
7,050.00
7.800.00
16,850.00
3,600.00
21,100.00
18,500.00
16,850.00
760,150.00
760,150.00
53,450.00
52,800.00
63,400.00
165,100.00
160.100.00
,109,100.00
PROJECT TOTAL $9,868,505.00
SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION • PROJECT COORDINATION
HR - HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT (Programmed Fiscal Year)
UUP - UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING PROGRAM (Programmed Fiscal Year)
GP - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (Programmed Fiscal Year)
B-8
APPENDIX D
La Costa Area Traffic
Impact Fee Agenda Bill
CITY OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA BILL
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o
•o«u
"Oou
•o
«
a
4)06
a.o•o10
u
ou
aoICMCM
O
Oo
MTQ
DEPT.
AUTHORIZING A TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE FOR
THE LA COSTA AREA.
DEPT.
CITY
CITY
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1. ADOPT Ordinance No.
a traffic impact fe
Carlsbad.
2. ADOPT Resolution No.
to be funded by the T
ITEM EXPLANATION
authorizing the collection of
La Costa area of the City of
_, APPROVING the list of projects
mpact Fee.
At the City Council meeting of July 23, 1985 the Council adopted
Resolution No. 8118 which authorized the collection of an interim
traffic impact fee of $25.00 per daily trip generated by all land
uses in the La Costa area. Said fee wa» to remain in effect
pending the results of a Traffic Impact Pee Study which was
subsequently awarded to the consulting firm of Barton-Aschman
Associates of Pasadena. That study has been concluded and forms
the basis for the recommended action. An B**ct»*iwev ftuMnary of the
report is attached as Exhibit 1. A draft of the report is
available in the Planning Department.
The area from which'the fee is to be collected is shown on Exhibit
2, and is bounded roughly by Interstate 5 on the west, Poinsettia -
Carrillo on the north, and the City Limits on the east and south.
The study concluded that 46 construction projects would b« required
to mitigate traffic problems in the La Costa area at buildout of
the City's General Plan. The projects ranged from minor lane
additions at intersections, to traffic signal construction or
upgrading, to major highway widening and improvement. The total
estimated cost in 1986 dollars is slightly over $34 million.
It is significant that the study dealt in total needs (some of
which exist today) without regard for potential funding sources
other than an impact fee. A detailed review of the project list by
staff revealed that a number of the proposed projects should more
logically be funded by developers, assessment districts, or Public
Facilities Fees (PFF). Further, 16 of the projects were deemed
"not practical" because of environmental, physical, or right-of-way
constraints.
Accordingly, the traffic impact fee project list has been reduced
to 20 projects, with a total cost of $7,914.000. The list of
projects is attached to Resolution No. f^"2^ (Exhibit 3). It
includes the perceived staff priority of each project. Adoption
of the resolution would approve the project list.
I
I
Page 2 of Agenda Bill No. f«?&0 -^l
It is significant that all future traffic problems in the La Costa
area cannot be mitigated if there is buildout to the density level
of the General Plan. Poor peak-hour levels of service will prevail
at places such as La Costa Avenue at Rancho Santa Fe Road, La Cos^
Avenue at 1-5, La Costa Avenue at El Camino Real, and Alga Road a!
El Camino Real. The mitigation measures needed to attain good ™
peak-hour levels of service at those locations are simply not
practical to initiate. That is not uncommon in many Southern •
California urban areas. |
The recommended list of traffic impact fee projects totaling •
$7,914.00, will require a fee of $67.00, per daily trip generated!
by each new residential unit, and a fee of $27.00, per daily trip!
generated by all other land uses. The SANDAG table of regional
trip generation would be the basis for the number of trips I
generated. The reason for having two different fees is to overcol
the traffic generation phenomenon of "double-counting". For
example, approximately 60% of the daily trips generated by a •
neighborhood shopping center are trips coming from the nearby I
residential areas, where they were already counted once. Under tn
proposal, the traffic impact fee to be charged a single family hoA
(which generates ten daily trips) is $670.00. That compares to •
established interim fee of $250. Attached as exhibit 4 is •
Ordinance No. f\ o7 which would impose the fee.
At the present time, seven projects in the La Costa area, with a|
total of 639 residential units, are "on-hold" pending determinatio
by the City Council of the Traffic Impact Fee, and subsequent
approval of the projects by the Planning Commission.
Several factors are inherent in the recommendation:
1) A consistent monitoring and review process is required.!
Traffic growth prediction is not an exact science. The
fee structure should be reviewed and subject to change •:
least every two years. I
2) Some of the projects deal with traffic problems that ar*
existent today. But it will take several years for the!
traffic impact fee to generate meaningful revenues.
Consideration should be given to allowing the Traffic
Impact Fee fund to "borrow" from other City sources, tew
repaid with interest when the fund is able to do so. !
I
I
I
Page 3 of Agenda Bill No. £3 fr o -*
• Also, it may be possible in some cases to have developers
build the needed improvements, and "credited" for otherIfuture improvements, or reimbursed when the fund is
solvent. However, it is significant that the recommended
fee structure makes no provision for debt service. Any
(borrowing with an interest requirement would require an
upward re-evaluation of the fee.
3) In reducing the consultant's original project list from 46Ito 20 projects, it was assumed that several major projects
would be funded by either a bridge and thoroughfare
assessment district, or a developer (single-party)
(assessment district. Should either of these methods fail
through protest or inaction, major upward adjustments
would be necessary in the traffic impact fee.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4) With respect to dealing with locations at which all future
problems cannot be mitigated, the City appears to have at
least two options:
a) Settle for a lower level of service at certain
intersections during a one or two-hour peak period.
As previously stated, that is not uncommon in many
Southern California urban areas.
b) Consider lowering the allowable density of the General
Plan. That would have two major effects. It would
lower traffic generation, thus lowering some
improvement needs. But it would also reduce the
number of units from which a fee could be collected.
At present, a review of the La Costa Master Plan is
taking place and could consider the ramifications of
reduced density. Any consideration of reducing
densities in the La Costa area should include the
regional significance of streets such as La Costa
Avenue, El Camino Real, Rancho Santa Fe Road, and
Olivenhain Road. While Carlsbad might reduce its
traffic generation, surrounding communities such as
Encinitas, San Marcos, Vista, Escondido, Oceanside,
and county areas will continue to grow and impact
Carlsbad's street network, and perhaps even increasing
their densities over those now contemplated.
5) As a follow-on to this item dealing with the La Costa
area, the concept of a City-wide traffic impact fee should
be explored before development impacts similar to those in
La Costa are felt in other parts of the City.
3
Page 4 of Agenda Bill No. £3. (*Q -** f
FISCAL IMPACT
positive: Tax-free funding of $7 million in needed traffic
improvements.
Negative: Fund administration costs estimated at $20,000 per
year.
EXHIBITS
1. Executive Summary of Barton-Aschman Report
2. Map of Boundaries of Pee Area
3. Resolution No. f3W , Project List
4. Ordinance No. JTJo7 * Imposing Pee
EXHIBIT A
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
s
CJ
CD s
*(0
«
COI
2
04 4*1
gj
ffN
s
m
1
M
i
3
I
S
U-l
I
3
3
u
t
I
3
2
m E«1;
I i
I
3
in
m
10
S <
25
3^< ctf
I
2
1
S
63
4J(M
V
•a
u
CO
d)
z
mv.
s
B3
CO «{
10
1
2
^
o
S
Mel3
CM
S
a* 4»
u
1
CJ
•'653 a
i!
(01
•
OS
o
s
!5
25
i
•
S
10
*S^
s
a
a
t
1
3,**H WW d)
a
a
o
4J
t
I
«m aX O»
S c(0•H
4J
CO
g3
4Js14
S'
C
s
in
•HQ
•8
03
SiS3
s
.5
r^
5
fj
»f^ Oac (—i
3
S
C
'(0€
<o
0) <N
*o-
U
I
CM
s
C
00
<w2
J51-
S
I
in
3
.s
fl2
a; in> cs
•0 </><n-
Oin
O
S
I
'w
S
C