Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2011-11-08; City Council; 20738 ATTACHMENTS; LA COSTA IMPROVEMENT PLAN
CITY OF `v CARLSBAD La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan August 2011 HHE Pat Noyes ■ & Associates La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Contents Background................................................................................................................................ 2 Planning Objective for La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan ...................................................... 2 Conditions at the Beginning of the Planning Process................................................................. 2 TrafficFactors........................................................................................................................ 3 Plan Development Process........................................................................................................ 3 CommunitySurvey................................................................................................................. 4 CommunityWorkshops.......................................................................................................... 5 Community -Preferred Plan for La Costa Avenue Improvements ................................................ 6 Projected Costs and Traffic Conditions.....................................................................................12 Fundingand Phasing Options...................................................................................................12 Appendix1................................................................................................................................14 La Costa Avenue Study Community Survey - Summary of Comments..................................14 Appendix2................................................................................................................................36 Summary of Comments on Proposed Plan............................................................................36 Appendix3................................................................................................................................42 Technical Memorandum: La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan — Level of Service Analysis Planningand Cost Estimate..................................................................................................42 8/17/11 Page 1 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Background La Costa Avenue between Rancho Santa Fe Road and El Camino Real was developed when the La Costa area was part of the County of San Diego, prior to annexation to the City of Carlsbad in 1972. Over the years, traffic has increased along the heavily traveled road, which links eastern Carlsbad with Interstate 5 and the coast. Driveways open directly onto the road, which has a 45-mile-per-hour speed limit, making it challenging to enter and exit residences during busy traffic times. The City previously worked with a select group of residents along La Costa Avenue to address safety concerns. The results of these studies provide base data for this community -focused planning process. Some of the initial efforts by the City to address safety include speed displays and increased enforcement. More recently, the General Plan update is expected to create multi -modal standards introducing quality of life issues, providing an opportunity to consider broader objectives and options for La Costa Avenue. City traffic engineers initiated this study to identify additional changes to balance traffic safety and the needs of motorists with the quality of life for those who live in the neighborhood. Planning Objective for La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan The planning objective approved by the Carlsbad City Council for the La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan is to develop a cost effective, Community -Preferred Plan to address traffic speeds and safety on La Costa Avenue in a way that respects the residential character and arterial function of the roadway. Conditions at the Beginning of the Planning Process La Costa Avenue is designated as a "secondary arterial" between El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe Road and functions as a major connector to the area's roadway system. There are 8/17/11 Page 2 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan four travel lanes, two in each direction, narrowing to one eastbound lane at Gibraltar Street. On -street parking is currently accommodated on the north side of the street west of Romeria Street and on the south side east of Romeria Street. A continuous striped median exists along the entire study segment, providing left turn access to driveways and cross streets. A striped bike lane exists either as a designated lane or a shared lane with parking for westbound bicyclists from Rancho Santa Fe Road to El Camino Real, and for eastbound bicyclists east of Romeria Street. There is residential frontage with direct driveway access to La Costa on the north side of the street west of Romeria Street and on the south side east of Romeria Street. Sidewalks along both the north and side sides of La Costa Avenue are attached to the street and there are numerous locations where the sidewalk is missing or contains physical encroachments such as mailboxes. The posted speed limit on La Costa Avenue is 45 miles per hour. Traffic Factors La Costa Avenue is classified as a Secondary Arterial by the City of Carlsbad. The segment from El Camino Real to Rancho Santa Fe Road is approximately two miles long with a roadway width of 64 feet curb -to -curb. The roadway grades vary from 1 % to 8% with numerous closely spaced driveways and limited street lighting. There are attached sidewalks along La Costa Avenue with missing segments of sidewalks, varying from short segments to multiple blocks of missing sidewalk along the south side of the street. Mailboxes in front of residences on the north side encroach into the sidewalk, limiting the width for pedestrians. The average daily traffic varies from approximately 17,900 vehicles per day west of Nueva Castilla Way to approximately 12,300 west of Cadencia Street. There are currently traffic signals at each end of the study area and at Cadencia Street, Romeria Street, and Viejo Castilla Way. La Costa Avenue is designated as a bike route in the current Circulation Element of the General Plan. The City of Carlsbad conducts traffic studies on La Costa Avenue to determine the average daily traffic, 85th percentile speed, and collision rates. Table 1 shows recent traffic data collected on La Costa Avenue. Table 1: Traffic Data Location 85 th Percentile Speed* 10 mph Pace Speed** West of Nueva Castilla Way 47 mph 39-49 mph East of Viejo Castilla Way 47 mph 38-48 mph East of Gibraltar Street 47 mph 38-48 mph West of Esfera Street 45 mph 37-47 mph " 85 percent of the traffic travels at this speed or below "The 10 mile per hour grouping with the greatest number of vehicles During the two-year period between March 1, 2009 and February 28, 2011, there were 26 total collisions reported in this segment of La Costa Avenue. Of those, four were reported as speed - related collisions. Plan Development Process The City of Carlsbad initiated the planning process to develop an ultimate improvement plan for La Costa Avenue between El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe Road in April 2011. The first step in the process was to send notices and surveys to all residents in the La Costa 8/17/11 Page 3 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan neighborhood to determine the critical issues to address in the study. The survey was also posted on the City of Carlsbad website to solicit broader input from the public. The City hosted a series of three community workshops to develop a community preferred plan. These meetings were held on April 28, May 26, and June 23, 2011, at the Stage Coach Community Center. Members of the Carlsbad community were invited to participate in the development of the La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan through these meetings. The City provided meeting summaries and posted presentation materials from each meeting on the City's website. Comment surveys were also posted online for participants and other community members to provide additional input on each step of the planning process. Community Survey The City received 965 responses to the community survey and the results were compiled and presented at the first meeting with the neighborhood. Table 2 shows the results of the neighborhood survey: Table 2: Summary of Neighborhood Survey Question Response 1. Please indicate your level of concern for Ranked as very concerned. - each of the following traffic issues on La Traffic speeds - 52% Costa Avenue. Pedestrian safety - 49% Bicycle safety - 57% Traffic noise — 24% Availability of on -street parking - 8% Operation of on -street parking - 10% Street maintenance - 28% Street landscaping — 20% 2. What, if any, concerns do you have about Visibility - 59% driving safety on La Costa Avenue? Street width - 31 % Signing - 20% Traffic speeds — 69% Right-of-way controls — 34% Street curvature and grades — 39% 3. What activities do you or members of Walking/jogging — 40% your household use La Costa Avenue for Bicycling — 30% regularly? Driving — 93% 4. If there are school children in your house, Automobile — 80% what is the most common method of travel Walking — 43% to and from school? Bicycling — 23% 5. What types of traffic control devices do Signs— 52% you feel would be appropriate for use on La Pavement markings — 40% Costa Avenue? Landscaping — 37% Pedestrian crossings — 42% Sidewalks— 51 % Physical changes to the street— 32% Raised medians— 31 % In addition to the tabulated results, there were numerous comments. All comments were captured and included in Appendix 1 of this report. 8/17/11 Page 4 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Community Workshops The City and community residents met on April 28, May 26, and June 23, to work through each step of the planning process. The first meeting provided an overview of the study objective and planning process, a summary of the survey results, and information about potential improvement options and devices. Over 100 members of the Carlsbad community attended the April 28 meeting for the La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan. City staff and the consultant presented an overview of the project, a summary of responses to the community survey, and a description of the devices and options the city is considering for use in developing the La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan. Participants were then invited to visit various work stations to identify specific issues and concerns along La Costa Avenue and consider the different types of improvements under consideration. Participants were also asked to complete a comment sheet to provide additional information on the issues, what they like or don't like about various devices, and what they consider is important in developing a successful plan for La Costa Avenue. Approximately 70 members of the Carlsbad community attended the May 26 meeting for the La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan. City staff and the consultant reviewed the community input from the first meeting, including specific concerns and preferences for various devices being considered for installation on La Costa, and three concept plans developed to gain additional information on preferred options for La Costa Avenue. Each of the concept alternatives was developed to determine preferences for the various tradeoffs involved in making improvements to La Costa Avenue. The major elements of the three alternatives were: Concept A — Four lanes with medians - Two lanes in each direction - Landscaped medians - Restricted parking - No new bike lanes - No left turns into or out of driveways Concept B — Two lanes with roundabouts - One lane in each direction - Landscaped medians - Roundabouts at two intersections - Bike lanes in both directions Concept C — Two lanes with partial medians and bulb outs - One lane in each direction - Partial medians - Bulb outs at intersections - Landscaping opportunities on medians and bulb outs - Bike lanes in each direction Participants were then invited to review the three concept alternatives and provide input on how well each met the planning objectives and addressed the community concerns. Comment sheets were provided to gain additional insight into why participants preferred certain options or features in each of the alternatives. At the June 23 meeting, attended by approximately 50 members of the Carlsbad community, City staff and the consultant reviewed the planning process and how the input from the community survey and first two workshops were used to develop the draft plan presented at the meeting. They reviewed the planning objective for the La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan to 8/17/11 Page 5 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan develop a cost effective, Community -Preferred Plan to address traffic speeds and safety on La Costa Avenue in a way that respects the residential character and arterial function of the roadway. This objective was further defined through the first two community workshops and the following planning objectives provided the basis for developing a draft plan: • Increase safety for all users — Accommodate all modes of transportation (auto, bike, and pedestrian) — Reduce travel speeds — Increase sight distance for driveway access • Design a roadway in keeping with the residential neighborhood — Accommodate on -street parking in front of residential areas — Minimize the number of traffic signals — Increase landscaping — Design improvements to be effective without enforcement • Don't divert traffic to other residential streets — Do not penalize drivers traveling at the posted speed limit (i.e., design should be consistent with high volume roadway classification) — Avoid congestion • Develop a cost effective plan The draft plan for La Costa Avenue was presented for discussion and refinement. The conceptual plan would reduce La Costa Avenue to one travel lane in each direction between Fairway Lane and Esfera Street. The lane configuration would allow a bike lane in each direction of travel and roundabouts as an alternative to traffic signals. The roadway capacity would be maintained near the primary entrance points at El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe Road. Analysis of the traffic flow indicates that the proposed configuration would meet the City's level of service standards under existing and forecasted conditions. The proposed plan was estimated to cost approximately $3 million, not including sidewalks and depending on engineering design considerations. The City currently has approximately $1 million in the budget for traffic signals on La Costa Avenue and it is anticipated that these funds would be re- allocated toward these long-term improvements. Participants were asked to provide input on potential phasing preferences. The community members attending the meeting generally supported the proposed plan, but there were still concerns about longer travel times resulting from congestion and the proposed speed reduction measures. Public comments on the draft plan, from the meeting participants and the Carlsbad community input on the City's webpage, were used to finalize the community - preferred improvement plan. Community -Preferred Plan for La Costa Avenue Improvements Figures 1-4 show the proposed conceptual plan for improvements to La Costa Avenue. Figures 1 and 3 provide a plan view of the proposed improvements which are further illustrated in photo simulations in Figures 2 and 4. These graphics show the reconfiguration of travel lanes from four lanes to two lanes through the study area, with the addition of continuous, designated bike lanes in each direction, and a system of landscaped medians, curb extensions (bulb outs), and roundabouts to create a more curvilinear roadway with landscaping to provide visual breaks along the street. Roundabouts are a preferred treatment at intersections where enhanced safety and reduced vehicle speeds are desired. The Community -Preferred Plan proposes roundabouts at two locations, based on preliminary cost estimates and stakeholder comments. Additional roundabouts should be considered at other intersection locations based on actual 8/17/11 Page 6 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan construction costs and need to further reduce vehicle speed. Reduced speeds on La Costa Avenue will improve safety along La Costa Avenue by improving sight distance at driveways and side streets. This system of devices is designed to slow traffic, minimize delay at the intersections, and enhance safety for vehicles, bikes and pedestrians. These improvements are consistent with the planning objectives developed through the community workshops and reflect a number of the core values articulated in Envision Carlsbad: • Access to Recreation and Active, Healthy Lifestyles Promote active lifestyles and community health by furthering access to trails, parks, beaches, and other recreation opportunities. • Walking, Biking, Public Transportation, and Connectivity Increase travel options through enhanced walking, bicycling, and public transportation systems. Enhance mobility through increased connectivity and intelligent transportation management. Neighborhood Revitalization, Community Design, and Livability Revitalize neighborhoods and enhance citywide community design and livability. Promote a greater mix of uses citywide, more activities along the coastline, and link density to public transportation. Revitalize the Village as a community focal point and a unique and memorable center for visitors, and rejuvenate the historic Barrio neighborhood. The Community -Preferred Plan is a conceptual plan. The specific location of devices has not been determined and may shift based on topography, access locations, drainage, utilities, construction cost, and other considerations through the subsequent steps of environmental review and engineering design. For example, additional roundabouts not identified in the Community -Preferred Plan may be added at other locations if they are found to be the most effective alternative for reducing speeds and enhancing safety. Additional parking restrictions may be required to meet the stopping sight distance for safe operation of La Costa Avenue. 8/17/11 Page 7 _ � , ,. �— � A = - `OR PO�EIfTIAL ROUNDA80UT OPTION LA COSTA AVENUE IMPROVEMENT PLAN _ � --� � ry CONCEPT PLAN..,F77n w, --= -... WEST SIDE t PARTIAL MEDIAN NARROWING(B) OWING (C) w M ENTRY.MEDIAN NUROWING CONSTRUCT SW MISSING LINKS 4 - ram° �aMr�� CONSTR043W� •MISSING LINKS. a e �. LANE TRANSITION FROM 4 to 2 LANES.- NEST a �� -� .. r a ' � t R OUNDABOUY " r r . w A NARRQWINGj OPTION !, NOTE: ONSTREO PARKING PROHIBITIONS MAYBE IMPLEMENTED TO rNCREASE SIGHT DISTANCE , -�► i , # I Looking Easthound Looldng Essthwnd Lookingh , I UJSTING - SWNG— ,,, 4+1 r► - r- �i NEW NEW - NEW - Y- La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Figure 2: Existing and Photo Simulation of Proposed Roundabout at Nueva Castilla Way 8/17/I1 Page 9 LA COSTA AVENUE IMPROVEMENT PUN CONCEPT PLAN..., EAST SIDE ARTKL MEDIAN & FF FACILITATE L U-TURNS , AN, h �AR RO V4 N G ('c) 1POTENTIACWIMABOUT OPTION ?v sWING &IAL MEDiAN t 4AR WING %ENTRY MEDIA 'v jl.ANL'>TRANSM0*R0NI - 2 to LANE WESTBOUND _7 P A f "ROUNDABOUT -.AL SECTION (D) oking Eastbound E 4 4'SIGNAL 1k- -4 STREET PAR DI INCREASE T4 E La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Figure 4: Existing and Photo Simulation of Proposed Bulb Out and Median at Cadencia Street 8/17/11 Page 11 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Projected Costs and Traffic Conditions The Community -Preferred Plan represents an ultimate vision for La Costa Avenue. The estimated cost for the ultimate plan, including the construction of missing sidewalk segments, is approximately $3.5-4.5 million. The cost estimates were developed by the city's consultant and are discussed in more detail in the Technical Memorandum La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan — Level of Service Analysis Planning and Cost Estimate included as Appendix C. That memorandum also considered current and estimated levels -of -service (LOS) for the proposed improvements and found that the traffic conditions are expected to meet city standards under current and future conditions, as shown in Table 3. Table 3: Level of Service Estimates # Intersection Existing Volumes & Planned Geometric Conditions Horizon Volumes & Planned Geometric Conditions Control AM Peak Hour 1 La Costa Avenue at Nueva Castilla Way B D Roundabout 2 La Costa Avenue at Viejo Castillo Way B B Signal 3 La Costa Avenue at Romeria Street A A Roundabout 4 La Costa Avenue at Cadencia Street A A Signal PM Peak Hour 1 La Costa Avenue at Nueva Castilla Way A C Roundabout 2 La Costa Avenue at Viejo Castillo Way A B Ri nal 3 La Costa Avenue at Romeria Street A A Roundabout 4 La Costa Avenue at Cadencia Street A B Ri nal Funding and Phasing Options The city has $1 million in the budget for new signals on La Costa Avenue that could be reallocated for improvements. Additional funding would need to be identified to complete the improvements and could be available through grants or other funding sources. Therefore, it is important to consider potential phasing opportunities that would allow cost effective implementation of the plan over time and as funding becomes available. The restriping of La Costa Avenue the entire length to accommodate wider medians and bike lanes would be the first action needed. All of the other improvements are based on the reconfiguration of the lanes to two through lanes, bike lanes and reconfigured medians. Subsequent construction could be implemented in a number of different ways to address funding constraints, traffic speed and safety. During the third community workshop, participants were asked to provide input on potential phasing options. These include, but are not limited to: • Install medians west of Viejo Castilla Way • Install medians east of Viejo Castilla Way • Install roundabout at Nueva Castilla Way • Install roundabout at Romeria Street 8/17/11 Page 12 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan • Construct curb extensions/narrowing • Build missing sidewalks Comment forms available at the workshop and online asked respondents to indicate their preferred order of phasing for these elements. Averaging the responses received indicated preferences in the following order: 1. Install roundabout at Nueva Castilla Way 2. Install roundabout at Romeria Street 3. Construct curb extensions/narrowing 4. Install medians west of Viejo Castilla Way 5. Install medians east of Viejo Castilla Way 6. Build missing sidewalks Although there may be specific considerations based on available funding, construction challenges, or opportunities to combine elements to reduce costs or impacts to the street, these community preferences should be considered in developing a phasing plan for improvements. 8/17/11 Page 13 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Appendix 1 La Costa Avenue Study Community Survey Summary of Comments May 2011 1. Serious traffic problem at top of La Costa Ave at Rancho Santa Fe. Long, long lines to turn left onto RSF. cars waiting on La Costa do not want to let cars on Levante get into left-hand turn lane. Dangerous condition. Something needs to be done immediately. 2. Please do not create traffic jams by reducing the number of lanes on La Costa 3. Tear it up and start all over again. The raceway is now obsolete! until something is done the lawsuits will continue 4. Need Police just below Nuevo Castillo 5. Speed enforcement of 45 mph will do wonders. No raised medians. Do not spend money to change La Costa Ave. 6. This stretch of La Costa Ave is a big black hole for bicyclists. It is difficult to go eastbound w/o bike lanes or lower speeds. But La Costa Ave west of El Camino Real & El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe are major bike corridors. This link needs to be made bike friendly. 7. 1 am really concerned about the speed people drive on La Costa Blvd. I have a 11 and 3 yr old kids and I do not let them go outside at all unless we are driving. People drive extremely fast on this street. Something should be done as soon as possible. 8. Since I have lived here for the past 15 years, the traffic noise, especially from El Camino Real, had increased dramatically due to development. 9. Raised & landscaped medians combined with less lanes would help most. Sidewalks & crosswalks would help too. 10. Stop light at Nueva Castilla due to poor visibility when entering La Costa Av 11. People honk at me when I pull out of my driveway because they are going 60-80 mph when I pull out. Visitors don't even park on the street because it's impossible to get out of the car safely. 12. So let me see if I got this right. The vast majority of home owners on La Costa AV bought their homes knowing fully well that it is a major roadway with periods of heavy traffic. That it would require specific driving skills to enter/exit via a driveway but felt compelled to do so anyway now want the city to penalize the rest of the community to make up for their errors of judgment. Want to walk or ride a bike. Try Calle. 13. A traffic signals at the corner of La Costa Av and Nueva Castilla Wy is greatly needed. Turning left onto La Costa Av from Nueva Castilla Wy is very dangerous a majority of the time. A crosswalk and completion of the sidewalk at that intersection is needed as well. 14. Many drivers use La Costa Ave instead of Rancho Santa Fe Rd. It is quite busy around 4:00 - 5:30. It backs up from Rancho Santa Fe Dr to Caloma Circle. 15. 1 am glad you're willing to look at this problem. 16. My kids walk to school when I see car speeding. Worry about my kids because they have to go around and pass La Costa Av. 17. Rancho Santa Fe gets to keep their street stop signs even though they were meant to have a freeway. Why do they get to "impede" traffic and we don't? Money? Power? Politics? From Cadencia to Romeria going west, cars fly by. 5 accidents in the last 2 years alone. 8/17/11 Page 14 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 18. 1 have had problems getting out of my driveway turning right. At my house, there are blind spots and on street parking that make it very difficult to get out. The street parking should, at least, give 450' of clear distance with the current speed limit. 19. Speed on La Costa Ave similar to other roads. 55 mph between El Camino Real and 1-5 proper speed. 45 mph elsewhere good speed. 20. The speed indicators (signs) are great. They remind drivers how fast they are going. They should be a speed limit sign next to each though. 21. 1 like the new "slow down" sign. I do not like spending a lot of money on reworking the road. do not put bike lanes in 22. no roundabouts. Don't redirect traffic onto Levante due to "improvements" to La Costa. Traffic signals @ Levante & La Costa. don't reduce traffic lanes on La Costa. Consider a traffic police officer to monitor traffic. No "big box" store on empty lot near La Costa & RSF 23. Definitely need a light signal on La Costa and Esfera. Very dangerous to make a left turn. Also bushes make it hard to see if cars are coming when trying to make a left turn. Need more signals on La Costa. New speed devices are excellent. really has cars slowing. New condo development will definitely need to have signals put in and turn lanes. 24. Do not like the increased traffic because of Albertsons/strip stores. 25. Please do something for Cadencia- too many cars- speed over 60mph 26. La Costa Ave is now a main access street to San Marcos. restricting traffic or speed will only create more problems. La Costa needs to be 2 lanes in each direction or the traffic jams during rush hour will be unbearable. 27. Speed is too dangerous. 28. Make 4 lanes divided median similar to La Costa between 1-5 and El Camino Real. Do not decrease lanes or put in roundabouts 29. Do not allow bike lanes- bikers are a problem- don't stay in their lanes & they slow flow of traffic. 30. Reduce speed on La Costa Ave. Improve bicycle & pedestrian safety on La Costa 31. The exit of Nueva Castilla to La Costa is very dangerous. 32. Limit parking on street. Traffic that is backed up from Racho Santa Fe impedes pulling out/in Levante safely 33. Too Fast! People drive like it's a freeway & always tailgate when you go the speed limit. Traffic should not be re-routed to Levante. 34. Traffic noise on La Costa has been a growing problem. we had to move from our home. we found a place just a few blocks away 35. 1 would like to see roundabouts and more landscaping to reduce traffic speed and noise & make it more pedestrian friendly 36. Raised medians with landscaping similar to Aviara Pkwy near corner of El Camino Real would be aesthetically appealing as well as provide safety- for stretches of road that do not need a turn lane for entry to driveways. bike lanes are needed for both sides of road. sidewalks are also needed for both sides of road. 37. Whatever is done, make sure it does not increase traffic on Levante 38. No Roundabouts 39. need multilane left turn onto RSF at intersection especially rush hour 40. The speed signs are a good start add more 41. 1 think the main concern will be to reduce speed as much as possible 42. The speed and noise are the only real down sides of La Costa Ave. 43. People need to slow down in residential areas 44. La Costa Ave needs traffic diet sooner than later 8/17/11 Page 15 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 45. Please Please enforce traffic law. I obey the speed limit and people ride my bumper, curb aggressive driving! 46. the most effective deterrent to speeding is the presence of Law enforcement 47. No need for traffic circles or center median. Reducing lanes is ridiculous waste of money 48. No problems the way it is! 49. The left turn signal at Vieja Castilla Way is a scary place to be. Where cars are speeding past you in both directions at 60 mph 50. Increased traffic enforcement for aggressive driving. I often feel hunted when driving this road if I go the speed limit cars race around to pass. 51. The visibility going into my neighborhood from Dehesa Road. The visibility going in and out! 52. Please do not change La Costa Avenue into one lane. Keep at least two lanes. 53. Speed limit is too fast for blind curves. Bikes cannot ride safety. Need revamping! 54. Please no roundabouts they are dangerous. Landscape not up to La Costa resort standards. Needs major improvement. Traffic signal needed at Nueva Castilla Way 55. Speeding cars are the biggest issue. Curves& fast cars great a hazardous environment 56. Garage sales on La Costa Ave weekly are a huge problem. Cars park in the street create a safety issue. These garage sales are like a weekly business 57. Raised 2 children on La Costa Ave and always fear accidents. Have had one already. Roundabouts, landscaping, 40 mph max, fewer and wider lanes would add to safety, street appeal, and home values 58. It is very unsafe to allow parking along La Costa Avenue 59. 1. Need to Slow the speeds 2. any changes made to LCA to slow traffic speeds will push traffic over to Levante, Anillo. This happened during the construction due to the hill failure. 60. Bike riding is dangerous. As an athletic person, but novice road bike rider I avoid La Costa Avenue completely. Far too dangerous, esp. eastbound. I would walk much more on LCA if sidewalks were more suitable. not too worried about speed but I've been around these roads since the 70's so I know where all the bumps, curves & cops are. 61. 1 could see where the east bound speed limit might stay the same- as there's no parking on the street, and maybe the west bound speed is lowered to 35mph 62. Roundabout 63. La Costa Ave has become a treacherous street for the residents who live there. Not only is it unsafe to exit your driveway, we have had someone run off the round and hit our house, as well as numerous cases where debris from car accidents has ended up in our yard. Roundabouts and a raised median would help, but traffic lights are needed as well. 64. The street is fine. The radar speed warning have reduced speed sufficiently. It is a waste of taxpayer money to try and manage the traffic or enhance the "beauty" of the avenue. 65. What would be most helpful for pedestrians is an *off street* path to the coast for bicycles, walking and jogging - preferably along the marsh. La Costa avenue is so busy it is really scary and not that enjoyable. 66. We don't believe decreasing the number of lanes on La Costa Ave is going to slow traffic. It will only make the traffic problems worse. We understand the concerns of homeowners along La Costa Ave, but that IS a major thoroughfare and not a small residential street. Homeowners need to understand that. We use La Costa Ave several times per day to take our kids to LCH Elem School and LCC H.S. A traffic signal at 8/17/11 Page 16 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Esfera & La Costa Ave would be most helpful in accessing La Costa from Esfera in the morning and late afternoons. Thank you! 67. 1 can understand that residents on this street might object to traffic. However, this is a major east -west thoroughfare and the City of Carlsbad must consider the needs of the motorist as well as those of the resident. The speed limit of 45 mph is reasonable for a curved and undulating roadway and if any improvement is needed, it is the addition of a second lane on the Eastern extremity of this road. 68. Very dangerous road. need more stop lights. 69. 1 sympathize with the residents on this road who I am sure want to see all traffic move much slower. However, I personally as a driver mostly using La Costa as an efficient throughway do not want to see traffic speeds significantly slowed or see changes to the road that would introduce bottlenecks or traffic delays. Having said that, as I mentioned above, speaking as a pedestrian rather than a driver, I do feel that additional controls on vehicles are necessary to improve the safety of pedestrians, particularly at the intersection of La Costa and El Camino. Thank you for soliciting our feedback! 70. 1 use La Costa Ave west end everyday and its fine, save your money and do nothing. For once do the right thing, the people love it rural, it fits our community. Don't let one accident or mishap change our streets. 71. Widen it! Do not, do not, do not make La Costa 2 lanes 72. Please do not narrow La Costa Avenue. That would be very counterproductive as the area grows. 73. leave it alone 74. the road is fine 75. no roundabouts 76. leave it like it is 77. leave La Costa alone 78. enforcement 79. enforcement 80. no roundabouts 81. do not reduce lanes 82. do not slow traffic down 83. Levante is my concern 84. leave it the way it is 85. enforce the speed limit 86. sidewalks 87. it's fine the way it is! 88. one lane each way is absurd 89. This is a non -issue 90. more enforcement 91. one lane each way is a bad idea 92. Bad idea to make this a one lane route 93. La Costa Ave does not need to be changed 94. No parking on La Costa Ave 95. 2 lanes each way 96. My ONE biggest gripe is the synchronization of the traffic signals at Town Ctr & El Camino Real, especially on the Westbound lanes. Several times I have personally needed to call Traffic to re -set the signals to allow synchronized passage west -bound thru the 2 signals. When these are NOT in sync, I need to ADD an extra TEN minutes to any La Costa Av. Westbound trip I make. 97. Pot holes. I believe traffic speed should be reduced to 35 miles per hour 8/17/11 Page 17 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 98. 1 would never walk on La Costa Ave because it is too dangerous, loud, cars & trucks create too much formes. Plus there are no sidewalks cars go too fast. 99. 1 actually LIKE the fact I live near an efficient roadway I would like to see more sidewalks 100. would like to see bike lanes 101. Please change the timing of the light by the Albertsons center. Left turn lights should be added on the north & south entrance to La Costa 102. If it aint broke, don't fix it. 103. Turning off La Costa to go home people are speeding behindme. I have my turn signal on & they don't slow up. I always think I'm going to get hit. 104. East of LCA before Romeria turn it back to 2 lanes right turn only. People merge left & the back right- it's not good now making a right turn from Cadencia to La Costa Ave is difficult- 105. There needs to be bicycle lanes on both sides of La Costa Ave 106. bicyclists ride 2 or 3 abreast which puts them in the auto area- can something be done about this? 107. No roundabouts at any intersection 108. Reduce the speed limit to 35 Mph 109. Too many cars to fast! scary ride 110. 1 am concerned that any changes made to La Costa will increase the likelihood that Levante will become a bypass. I am more concerned about peds & bikes than I am about residents who purchased homes with access problems. I don't want public funds to fix a private problem 111. We really appreciate your attention to this very vital issue Thank You! 112. 1 don't have any problems except for street maintenance 113. Review street parking to insure least obstructed views for all traffic trying to merge on to La Costa- example: looking east when stopped at Gibralter Street parked cars block view, which is short due to oncoming traffic coming over hill. 114. 1 would like to see evidence that traffic or street changes on La Costa Ave will not result in more traffic on Levante St which is already overwhelmed with overflow and speeding traffic 115. The stop signs they have along Levante has helped to slow traffic as well as all those stop signs in Del Mar 116. It is a Major street- do not make it smaller or slower! 117. Improved landscaping is desperately needed! Traffic safety for La Costa Ave residents! 118. While traffic on La Costa Ave is a concern I feel the city has much bigger problems it should be dealing with. 119. People in general drive very fast. I'm concern about people who are working and people that are on bikes 120. You insist that it must "function as a main east -west corridor" and it is "designated as a "secondary arterial" this is nonsense. Think outside the bureaucratic box... Undesignate it or propose to the appropriate gov't agency that it be redesignated. When your main premise is incorrect, nothing that follows will be correct. thank you for this opportunity to give input. 121. This request has been seriously started a long time ago and need to be done soon before more accidents or death or law suit 122. The street should not be modified. we need availability of current access to work, shopping & freeway. I would rather see more speed signs to keep speeders from exceeding the limit. Traffic will only increase. 123. radar/random speed enforcement 8/17/11 Page 18 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 124. Overall I am happy with La Costa Ave as it currently is. 125. The speed limit of 45 is appropriate but no one drives it! people easily drive 60 on that road. The new "slow Down" signs on north side of street are working well. add some to south side as well. 126. 1. Will there be a shopping plaza opposite CVS? if so -think about the traffic then 2. If going to 2 lanes- we need more lights to get out of side streets Nueva Castilla Way 127. Main Concerns 1, safe exit on to La Costa Ave from my house 2. Traffic Speeds 3. Traffic Noise 4. Traffic pollution 5. Lack of sidewalks 128. Red no Parking Zones block my vision coming out of driveway. cars park right behind it no parking at all east up the hill would be better 129. 1 like the one lane each direction. Idea but wonder if that won't cause more issues during peak houre (5-7pm east bound is bad) Please, No Roundabouts!! 130. Any change in La Costa Ave. must also insure that Levante does not become an alternative route. Levante already has a speed problem posing a added risk to the La Costa Heights elementary school children who walk to and from their homes. many residents also jog along Levante& cross street. 131. Left turn lane onto Vieja Castilla dangerous. While waiting for green arrow, always concerned about being hit head-on by oncoming traffic. 132. No parking should be allowed on La Costa Ave. The condos have specific parking and owners should park in their designated areas. In turning out of our subdivision on Fairway Ln, it is dangerous to try to look around all the autos parked and get onto the street with the oncoming traffic going 45-50 miles per hour. 133. Please do not reduce the number of lanes. Too many cars in a single lane will put the cars closer together, which may actually increase the likelihood of accidents. 134. The mph/slow down signs seem to have had an impact. 135. Do not agree that number of lanes need to be reduced. Synchronized lights to posted speed limit. 136. Would want bike lane on both side of street and public transportation. 137. Do not choke the traffic by lane reduction. Traffic signals can be an effective flow control. 138. Reducing travel lanes to one in each direction is not wise. It will create traffic jams, block emergency vehicles, and cause driver frustration and risky behavior. As traffic volume increases over time, more lanes will be required. 139. How in the city planning do central traffic on Levante St a residential street with 25 mph limit, which is more often then not ignored by drivers? If traffic is restricted on La Costa Ave the over flow will inevitebly come to Levante St since it is the closest thru streets between El Camino Real and RSF. 140. More radar cops to control speed, use money from speeders to keep La Costa safer and clean up landscape east of El Camino Real. We need median just east of Bank of America. Cars are going to fast crossing into oncoming traffic and plowing into fence where people walk. Also hard to do speed limit going west, due to downhill grading. 141. From La Costa - making a left to Calle Madero is scary because I use the middle lane - but people coming from the opposite direction use the same place to make the left to Gibraltar. So many times I've almost got into an accident. It would be nice to have a bike lane 142. It's turned into a dangerous freeway. 8/17/11 Page 19 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 143. We would like to see the traffic speed on La Costa reduced significantly if possible. Thank you. 144. Make two lanes - center landscaping with roundabouts at every intersection. That way, there would be no cars idling (fumes) and motorcycles revving at stop lights and traffic would be slowed significantly. La Costa is a neighborhood street, not a freeway, it is currently being used as a freeway. Roundabouts would allow a continual flow of traffic at reduced speed, and would possibly encourage commuters to use other "arteries" to the freeway (from San Elijo, etc.) 145. Motorcyclists and cars seem to routinely race, screech tires, rev engines while driving/stopping on La Costa Ave. 146. La Costa is a major artery. Future development at RSF commercial will increase use. Only one lane on La Costa will result in more use of Levante - and a neighborhood safety concern for all children and families. 147. 1 would like to see palm tres planted in medians between El Camino Real and 1-5 148. It's manageable as it is, but please don't embark upon some multi -month, multi -million dollar improvement. It ain't broke, please DO NOT try and fix it. 149. La Costa Ave is dangerous for pedestrians and has become a major artery for San Marcos residents. Carlsbad's lack of planning and overgrowth has created problems that can never be mitigated. Good luck. 150. 1 take LC Ave from Nueva Cassilla Way to RSF. I don't see much of a problem in that stretch. 151. This road is a major artery. It should not be changed to 2 lanes. Not appropriate! 152. Carlsbad PD/Volunteers might be a visible deterrent during peak travel times if possible. 153. Discontinue on street parking. Landscape medians. Do not use roundabouts or decrease number of lanes. 154. Cars come racing down hill toward El Camino Real. Very dangerous to pull out to street from apartments - especially when parked cars block view - noise very similar to the Daytona 500 - Thank you for your concern with this area. 155. We have witnessed (heard) way too many accidents at Calle Madero since moving here in 2004. Speeds are too fast and visibility from Calle Madero is impaired give traffic speed. Should not be a "secondary arterial" in the first place. That's what RSF is for! 156. Traffic light on Dehesa folks coming from the 78 on RSF then turn onto La Costa at a speed you wouldn't believe to the downhill slope. It's downright scary! Traffic light on Dehesa Court - often there are lines up to turn right to go to Encinitas. You are blocked by bumper to bumper traffic wanting to turn left of RSF. 157. Pulling out of La Costa vale neighborhood from Dadencia onto La Costa making a right towards RSF it is a blind corner and the speed of vehicles is too fast. Something needs to be done on that corner. 158. I've lived here for 46 years and have been driving for 30 years. I've seen this area grow but La Costa Ave has always been a main traffic street. I am guessing that most of these homeowners purchased their homes after 1972. With that said, they choose to live on La Costa Ave with the issues it has. I only know of one street that has had several accidents and that street should get a stop light. To avoid parked cars being hit all of La Costa Ave could be a no parking street or the speed limit could be lowered. 159. Visibility at Nuevo Castillo onto La Costa - growth of foliage on south west corner is dangerous. 160. La Costa should be 4 lanes from i-5 to RSF. Going down from 4 to 2 and back up makes no sense. Further projections should determine number of lanes to RSF. 161. The traffic lights that are in place adequately control the flow of traffic on La Costa Ave. 8/17/11 Page 20 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 162. Make the road less friendly to motorists. Enforce speeds. Use cameras. Use roundabouts. Make heavy hauling trucks and also heavy equipment use Palomar Rd. It is very important to have rapid action on this project. 163. Please reconsider keeping La Costa Ave four lanes. My concern is emergency evacuation in the event of a harmony grove repeat. Delays in police, fire and paramedics. The letter does not address delays in emergency services. 164. Having a like scale from 0-3 is no efficient for this survey because it reduces variability and increases the chances of a ceiling or floor effect when reviewing the data - which can make interpreting the data difficult. 165. It is very unsafe to right exit Albertsons on the south side, hedge blocks the view to left side of car, hedge needs to be trimmed. 166. Lived on La Costa Ave since 1979. It was a mess then with all garbage trucks using it. That was resolved but with new construction it just gets worse! With the new project planned at La Costa and RSF its going to be a MESS! 167. Please address safety issues related to a left turn from Nueva Castillo to La Costa. Worried about increased traffic on out street (Levante) if changes are made to La Costa. 168. Having radar police is the best deterrent. I wouldn't oppose signals, but would oppose roundabouts or raised speed humps. 169. Enforce the speed limit. Do not reduce the number of lanes. This wil create more traffic conditions also the side walk is over grown. Unable to walk without entering the street. Bushes and weeds need to be cut back and fences need to be repaired. 170. The new signs, speed monitors, and prior existing signs are too much. Its rather irritating and gives a negative over bearing feel to my drive now. 171. The street is fine. Poor drivers and people racing or impaired cause the problems. Do not waste any money or time on their witch hunt. 172. 1. There should be attended school crossings at several points in La Costa druing school hours. 2. We have had two serious accidents in front of our home due to speed. In one a truck flipped over and totaled our sons car. 173. The lane reduction invites drivers to accelerate. 174. Would like to have a convex mirror at Levante and La Costa Ave so cars coming out of Levante can see traffic in both directions on La Costa. 175. In general La Costa Ave works in spite of curves in road. The signs, speed monitors appear to be working well. I've seen no accidents in 9 years. I'd limit future development on La Costa itself to minimize future use along the actual road. Have less density in projects along the active winding section of road. Thanks. 176. This would stop many issues with people pulling in and out of their houses. Only one direction of traffic. 177. Reduce speed and have police presence during busy hours. Do NOT reduce lanes as traffic will divert to Levante which has a grammar school. 178. La Costa Ave needs to have regular speed control, people drive 55 through residential area often. 179. A warning sign would be helpful approaching Nueva Castilla going east on La Costa. It is extremely hazardous when turning west on La Costa from Nueva Castella. I have lived here since 1979 and realize that more traffic is natural - however speeds on La Costa should be monitored with a flashing sign if possible. 180. My main concern is the appearance where the landslide was. The aesthetics have not been dealt with years later. 181. Pavement markings to make the street look narrower - widen bike lane. Cut hedges at every side street to enter and exit La Costa Ave. Bike lanes ought to be EXTRA wide. 8/17/11 Page 21 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 182. 1. If the city is going to put more traffic lights on La Costa Ave, make sure they are sequenced to allow smooth traffic flow. 2. Making La Costa into 1 lane is a dumb idea. 183. This is whining people who made a mistake buying a house on a main artery screw up La Costa and people will use LeVante as an alternative causing even more problems and whiners. 184. Definitely need good bike lanes with visible signs especially going east - very dangerous. 185. 1 suggest leaving the existing median and 2 eastbound lanes. Reduce westbound to one lane so homeowners can have more room to back out of their garages. 186. Don't make changes if you slow it down traffic will back up and cars will be there all the time. 187. It needs to be 4 lane between El Camino Real and RSF. 188. Thank you for working to ensure safety and still preserve the "residential" feel of La Costa Ave. 189. Please build sidewalks all along both sides of La Costa Ave. 190. Question #1 - What is Meant by: Operation of on -street parking? Recommend the use of noise reduction pavement materials that were used in other Carlsbad areas. 191. It seems to me that the radius of the curvature of the road changes abruptly in some places. This causes some drivers to drift away from the center of the lane, possibly into another lane. 192. Do not decrease the number of lanes on La Costa Ave. Traffic would be a nightmare. 193. We have never experienced a problem. We believe that reducing lanes is a horrible idea! This is NOT how we should be using out limited dollars. Instead enforce speed limits. Thank you for including the community in your planning. 194. Not really sure how to deal with speed on LCA... Im even guilty sometimes. More CPD presence would help(sometimes) maybe speed trailer. But there definitely needs to be bike lanes on entire upper section(east of ECR) 195. Carlsbad police with radar guns to control speeding. A bad plan to reduce La Costa Ave to 2 lanes. Concern about getting into and out of my driveway. Need center medium to make left turn into many driveways. 196. Change speed limit, control u-turns, raise medians so residents cant turn east from driveways. Flashing speed signs great idea. 197. Need other street connections between El Camio & RSF that are easily accessible. 198. If houses had to be built on La Costa Ave circular driveways should have been mandated to drivers would not have to back out into traffic. 199. Why change to 2 lanes when proper traffic officers and fines would eliminate those that speed. 200. 1 only use La Costa Ave from Albertsons shopping center. It is impossible to make a right on a red - no visibility and cars speeding down hill. 201. The biggest contributor of the noise is the 45 mph speed limit. It would be great if the speed limit was reduced as some, if not many, of the houses on La Costa Ave are very close to the street. 202. Roads were made for cars, bicycle lanes were made for bicycles, sidewalks were designed for people. Two lane roads are for cars - not one lane for bicycles and runners. 203. Install stop signs to slow traffic at RSF thru Olivenhain except longer intervals between stop signs. 204. Over 20 years and speed is not kept in control. 8/17/11 Page 22 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 205. Reduce to one lane in each direction. This is already the case with a good portion on La Costa and implementing if for the rest of the portion between El Camio and RSF would allow us to safely get out of our driveways and merge into the lane. 206. 1 am concerned that the planned changes will cause people to drive through the surface streets in our neighborhood in order to avoid La Costa Ave. We already have people speeding down Segovia Way to avoid traffic on RSF. 207. If you make changes to slow traffic on La Costa you need to address traffic on Levante too. Our neighborhood is already being used by people cutting through from El Camino Real to RSF to avoid traffic on La Costa Ave. They speed through our neighborhood at excessive levels and blow thru the stop signs. Maybe you could install speed bumps on Levante while you are upgrading La Costa. 208. Install landscape center medians and sidewalks. 209. Please do NOT reduce lanes to 2. It would cause more traffic problems. 210. La Costa Ave needs guard rails on all curves and enforcement of speed limit or lowering of that limit. Possibly high mph speed bumps might help. 211. Thanks for light and green turn arrow at Uregu Castillo. 212. So exciting to see what comes of this! Thank you for asking for public opinion. 213. Reduce speed. 214. 1. Enhance character and aesthetics of street by providing or requiring all mailboxes be uniform and of attractive design. Current hodge-podge of boxes is a detractor and negative impact on street. 2. Maintain 2 lanes both ways. 215. Do NOT cut the number of lanes!! 216. Sides secondary street signings are not visible. The drivers slow down on La Costa to find the address. Traffic speed and noises are most concerned 217. Create better community street character and traffic will slow down. 218. Place no roundabouts 219. The speed at which cars drive from RSF towards ECR is typically above the speed limit. My main concern is the high speed and the many blind intersections. 220. People speed horribly and there are too many cars using La Costa. It's awful and unsafe. 221. Traffic speed isn't the problem. Don't make it out to be one. Proper controls make life easier for those of us who live here. 222. We need turnabouts, traffic lights, anything to slow down traffic. 223. 1 have seen to many accidents on a street with driveway access. I live 2 blocks off La Costa and still hear motorcycles and cars racing into early morning. I drive out of my way to access la Costa at a light because there are to many t-bones by my closest access to La Costa. 224. Never thought it to be much of a problem in the 1 st place. 225. There have been many accidents on La Costa Ave and Nueva Castilla. People go to fast! Same is true on Levante. Most don't even stop at the stop signs! 226. People drive in fast lane going east because drainage dips in road, cars bottom out. Traffic use on Levante St is increasing due to high volume on La Costa Ave which makes it hard to back out of driveways. 227. We drive this street daily and walk it several times a week. We must make a left turn on Esfera to reach our house. We have no problems with current conditions. Do not add lights! Do not reduce lanes! Changes would make driving La Costa more difficult and frustrating. Roundabouts would be horrid. I hate them in Encinitas. Dont listen to a vocal few. Remember that traffic will increase if the shopping plaza opens - dont even think about reducing lanes. 228. Reduce speed limits, add more traffic lights, particularly at "T" intersection. 8/17/11 Page 23 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 229. 1 walk my children to school and have to cross La Costa - it is very scary with the speed of the traffic. A crosswalk at Esfera & La Costa would help I feel to slow traffic down. Also at the corner the trees are so thick you can't see oncoming traffic unless you stick far out in the street. 230. We would be opposed to traffic circles as drivers misuse them and they impede traffic flow. We are open to a change in speed limit or other small changes to make driving on La Costa Ave. 231. The "your speed is XXV is good warning to slow down. Need right turn only lane for east bound La Costa at RSF. Perhaps widen or 2 left turn lanes onto RSF. 232. Leave the street as it is. Do not pander to a small group of citizens who would be happy to stop all automobile traffic. 233. No street parking. 234. The speed of vehicles rounding the blind curve between RSF and Dehesa Ct is excessive but speed limits are not enforced on the curve. We never see policemen controlling speed in this location. 235. Street signs are placed too far back on corners - not visible until after drivers pass street result is a lot of turning around and 'u' turns at corners and intersections - dangerous - caused many accidents. Drivers are inattentive - always doing something — cell phone, texting, reading, looking at other passengers and talking while driving - reaching for something on back seat. 236. We love our home, but our constantly concerned about our safety from the speeding vehicles. We believe that roundabouts and more stop lights as they have on Leucadia Blvd would help immensely. It is only a matter of time before a horrendous accident is going to occur. 237. Resurfacing needed. 238. Signs/Lights have not changed speeder habits. There needs to be "actual" slow down barriers to inhibit speeds. It it not safe to cross La Costa Ave even at the lights. People do not heed pedestrians or bikes. 239. It could be made safer. 45 seems fast. Don't turn in into a street with a light every block so it takes 15 min to get to the freeway or beach. 240. If La Costa Ave becomes less of a thru streets will Levante take its place? I hope not. 241. La Costa Ave is UNSAFE for bicycles. Should promote Levante as a more suitable bike route. 242. The intersection of La Costa and Cadencia is extremely dangerous. Right turning traffic from Cadencia onto La Costa (east bound) should not be permitted on red. 243. Please, NO ROUNDABOUTS!!! The concept works for some areas, but not for La Costa Ave. 244. Please do something about the motorcycles "bikes" that race up La Costa Ave. I will not believe they are street legal. Sometimes 5 to 10 go up the street at one time, the noise is deafening. 245. Nuevo Castillo entry onto La Costa is very dangerous. 246. Perfect the way it is. 247. Way too much traffic and too fast. Especially in few blocks near Nuevo Castillo intersection. Lots of speeding there. 248. 1 drive safely and follow the speed limit. It's a main road and I don't see any problems. I've lived here in the same house for 35 years. The people that bought a house RIGHT on La Costa Ave are on a main street and that's too bad for them. They bought knowing they were on a main street. They have to be careful when they back out of their driveways. What do you expect- lower the speed limit to 25- that's not realistic. I don't think there are any problems with La Costa Ave. It's a main thoroughfare just like Melrose Ave. or Alga Rd. 8/17/11 Page 24 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 249. The issue of blocked visibility on the south west corner of Nueva Castilla/La Costa Ave. intersection is ongoing and dangerous. 250. -4 lanes must be maintained -Control speed with stop signs/lights -No bicycle traffic - road too narrow - cyclists can use Calle Barcalona -Roundabouts are a WASTE of money! -Forget Landscaping! -Remember - No amount of money or legislation can correct stupidity! 251. Suggest a no -right turn on red lights. La Costa Ave @ Saxony Rd. 252. Do not add raised medians if there are speed bumps or turnarounds or roundabouts. 253. No roundabouts or street lights. Carlsbad lights are poorly managed. Roundabouts are still known to cause accidents and many do not know how to drive them. 254. 1 feel that changing La Costa to 1 lane will impact traffic in a negative way. If people drive the speed limit of 45 it should solve your problem. 255. La Costa Ave. and Tamarack Ave. are very dangerous. Build roundabouts!!! 256. Sidewalks are a major concern for my family. We would really like to use the sidewalk to jog or walk between El Camino Real and Vieja Castilla, but do not feel safe doing so. Much of the northern sidewalk along La Costa is obstructed by mailboxes, plants, or other overgrown vegetation, and are impossible with a baby stroller. The only option is to veer into the bike lane if it isn't blocked by parked cars. If it is, you must approach the vehicle lanes to pass by. A partial solution would include more landscape maintenance of overgrown vegetation, and also legislation to prohibit mailboxes or other obstruction of the side walk by residents property. 257. Making a right turn onto La Costa from Gibraltor Street is dangerous when the stop light at Romeria is green. The speed or many cars is extreme -heading up hill to the west. I suggested to the police that the motorcycle cops hang out at the top of the hill, just east of Gibraltar, but the officer I spoke with got angry for my suggestion making a left turn onto Gibraltar St is also dangerous because of the high speed cars com up the hill heading west. Often my household members will head over to Romeria to turn right on La Costa because we have a better view of the cars speeding, than if we turn right onto La Costa from Gibraltar St. There are quite a few seniors in the Gibraltar St./Jerez neighborhood. My household likes the idea of only one lane in each direction for La Costa. When I drive the speed limit on La Costa, I often get tail gated, honked at, an extended finger, etc. I think another stop light is needed to slow traffic. One of the two streets on the south side of La Costa just west of Gibraltar. All of the stop lights on La Costa should turn red more often, stopping La Costa Ave traffic, not just when there is cross traffic from the side streets (Romeria, Vieja, Castilla). 258. We don't need any more useless signals. We need to GET PLACES! and that road is a main artery! Time the lights we have now better! We are always sitting at lights you need to change the lights to exact opposite of what they are now! We all go down the road after waiting for 5 min. At a light, they HIT A YELLOW/RED LIGHT! DO THE EXACT OPPOSITE! We need to get places and your allowing the side road people priority is ridiculous. 259. My primary safety concerns are cars turning onto La Costa in an unsafe manner and encroachment onto the road by carless bicyclist. 260. Suggest the city consider a demonstration project to reduce traffic lanes to 2 or 3 place a W rail barrier between d/w access and through traffic if it workds consturct permanent improvements driveways. 261. 1 am concerned if the street is narrowed to a 2 lane road it will create even more traffic since it's the main way to get to 1-5 8/17/11 Page 25 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Reducing speeds using roundabouts at intersections and creating a center median will allow people to merge onto the road, reduce speeds, and limit left hand turns into traffic. 262. The road diet plan is a very poor solution to the drive and safety issues on La Costa. Reducing four lanes to two is like trying to step back in time before all the housing and commercial developments. With the additional future housing and commercial developments it will make local residents drive time horrible. No parking and no left turns will be inconvenient for home owners on the east side of La Costa, however they will be safer. It will be difficult to have a traffic plan that will satisfy all residents. So some difficulty for the hundred or so residents on the east side of La Costa is reasonable compared to the extended drive time for the thousands of residents that use La Costa as their main thoroughfare. 263. Please do not put up with stopsign/ stop lights etc. that will impede the commuters using this main east -west road to get to the freeway. Anyone who was dumb enough to buy a house on La Costa Ave deserved to have difficulty to deal with the noise. Why should 98% of people using this road be concerned because of a few dumb people who now regret they bought there? 264. Roundabouts are not appropriate! Sidewalks are needed Stop lights could ease up the problem of residents merging into traffice We need that road "Wide & Flowing" for the amount of traffic it services Medians would push traffic closer to the driveways of residents. 265. NO MORE TRAFFICE LIGHTS 266. We live on Levante St, which parallels La Costa Ave. If many changes are made to La Costa Ave, we are concerned that drivers will choose Levante as an alternate, which could create other problems. La Costa Ave. is too unsafe for bicycles. It shouldn't have bike lanes & should have signs directing bikes to take the safer Levante Street. Consider installing a low dividing wall on center divider at dangerous curve locations, similar to what exists on Torrey Pines Road grade in San Diego. 267. The staya both going into Albertson needs turn signal on N-S sides. The speed on Vieja Castilo is bad - up & down. They just zoom. 268. NO ROUNDABOUTS! 269. Close La Costa Ave at Rancho Santa Fe as it originally was. Provide access to emergency vehicles only. 270. 1 have been a resident just off of Gibralter and La Costa for many years, and use the road to get everywhere since there is no other road out. The construction of San Elijo Hills added a huge amount of traffic, which the City is responsible for allowing. The traffic implications should have been taken into consideration before that construction was started. I heard one plan was to reduce the number of lanes down to one each way on La Costa. This would be unacceptable as it would mean huge traffic delays especially during rush hour. Roundabouts are a good idea that seem to work well in England. 271. It is outrageous to turn La Costa Ave. into one lane each way. There are many sensible ways to control the traffic. Please don't make this thoroughfare smaller which will cause gridlock. 272. No roundabouts! 273. Am a cyclist who lives directly off La Costa Ave. I occasionally ride westbound, but am even nervous about this as I sometimes need to come out into lanes of traffic to avoid parked cars. I NEVER would consider riding on the east side of the road and am worried when I see cyclists doing so - no bike lanes, high rates of car speed, and blind curves. It is only a matter of time before someone is killed. 8/17/11 Page 26 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 274. Simply reducing the speed to 35 would have significant impact at minimal expense. People are afraid of getting tickets on La Costa already and reducing the speed limit would have a net effect of significantly decreased speeds and improved safety. La Costa is not a bottleneck and reducing the speed will not change this however reducing lanes might without the desired results. Please do not create a bottleneck on La Costa with your good intentions. At the end of La Costa though, changing the lanes on East bound La Costa at the Rancho Santa Fe intersection to two left turn lanes and a single straight lane or one left, one left & straight lane and a single straight lane would also solve the bottleneck issue at this intersection although the second option would require a change to the light timing if there is any. Reducing the speed on La Costa would have no impact on this daily bottleneck and resulting safety issue. In the end, please employ KISS and simply reduce the speed limit before spending taxpayer money. 275. A sign that says 'entering residential area' doesn't tell me anything more then seeing houses along the street. Eliminate all parking near driveways, that will help a lot. 276. La Costa Avenue is too big and busy a street for myself and many of our neighbors to feel safe enough to let our school age children walk to and from school across La Costa Ave. 277. We travel La Costa Avenue daily and feel reducing the speed limit in the residential areas would be the best solution. If La Costa Avenue is narrowed to one lane each direction, there would be major traffic jams daily. In addition, residents attempting to enter the stream of traffic would have to wait an inordinate length of time. 278. It is a high volume road and will need to remain especially when La Costa and Rancho Santa Fe gets built. My family of six have lived on Cadencia St for 31 yrs and never had a problem. It was clear 31 yrs ago it was a main road. Circles and stop signs or speed bumps will only create flow problems for the entire area. If people wanted to live on a 30 MPH road, they should have moved on one. 279. Lighted crosswalk similar to those on Carlsbad Blvd. N. of Tamarack beach (intersections where traffic lights are at present). 280. We feel that La Costa Ave. works well as it is. The street is only unsafe if a driver violates the speed limit. A police presence and huge fines are appropriate as well as better attorneys to defend our city against law breakers who are negligent and sue. 281. 1 am an avid runner and cyclist, and cannot bike on La Costa because there are no lanes for a large portion of the street, and everyone speeds on it! I am thankful the City of Carlsbad is looking at this problem now. Thank you. 282. Cycling near El Camino Real/ La Costa Blvd /especially along the Coast Hwy can be very dangerous cars are too fast and signage needs to be posted warning of cyclists and pedestrians. 283. The operational speed of La Costa Avenue is 10-15 mph higher than appropriate for the adjacent land use, which is solely residential between the Chabad House and Rancho Santa Fe Road. The ratio of drivers using La Costa Avenue to access Rancho Santa Fe Road to those living in residences along La Costa Avenue is too high. Measures discouraging through traffic should be implemented. 284. improve safety for cyclists and pedestrians - can use landscaping features, bike lanes, sidewalks 285. Lowering the speed limit to 35 or 40 may help because most people go between 50-55 mph. 286. 1 work in Carlsbad and bicycle frequently in the area 8/17/11 Page 27 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 287. the bike lane up the last part of the hill is great, but there are sections with no bike lane and it's a blind or semi blind corner for drivers. I bike and drive it several times a week. 288. Make the street more bike friendly for safety. 289. thanks for trying to make it better. 290. Currently we can only safely turn right out of our driveway. As drivers, we need somewhere to safely u-turn (at Vieja Castilla). As pedestrians, we would like to be able to cross at Calle Madero so we can walk to the elementary school. It's a lower priority for us, but currently there are locations on the existing sidewalk where it is not possible to fit a stroller through - the lampposts and mailboxes impede on the walking space. Strollers have to pass on the road and if there is a car parked in that location, strollers have to pass in the line of traffic. Mailboxes often impede the path and so runners are often in the parking lanes. It is very dangerous. 291. La Costa Avenue between El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe needs speed restrictions and better bicycle lanes. 292. We live in a high use bicycle area. Tourists, residents, and folks enjoying the north coastal region need safe bike lanes. Thanks. 293. 1 do not want to see the number of lanes reduced on La Costa Avenue. This would be a step backward! This road has been a busy and ugly road since I moved here almost 25 years ago. Many Carlsbad residents rely on this road for quick access to 1-5 and El Camino Real. Reducing the speed, adding traffic signals, and reducing lanes will only make travel more difficult. When the commercial area is built up, more cars will use this road to get to the new shopping centers and there will be greater congestion. While it is probably true that it is difficult for residents to leave their driveways quickly, if they wait for the lights to change and use care, I believe that they can leave safely. I would like to see this road made more attractive with plants and trees and a true bike lane. 294. With the weather we enjoy in So Cal, there really should be more bike lanes for folks to use for both commuting and for recreation! 295. 1 have major trouble getting from Levante, turning right on La Costa and left on RSF. There is always a line up to turn left and no way to get across traffic to get over in that lane from Levante. Maybe 2 left turn lanes would help. Also, bike lanes going east would be a huge asset. Thanks. 296. Please distinguish between La Costa avenue East of Rancho Santa Fe Road and the rest of La Costa Avenue. The eastern portion is a route children use to get to schools, including La Costa Canyon and Mission Estancia. Also --I have heard that the city is planning to decrease the number of lanes on La Costa Avenue. I am strongly opposed to that solution, as traffic is only likely to increase as the La Costa Town Center (planned for corner of RSF Road) progresses. 297. Bike lanes are needed .... lots of cyclists use this road and cars travel very fast in both directions. 298. Signs reminding drivers to share the road w/cyclists, reminding them that cyclists have the right to ride along LC Ave safely. Also, some kind of signage indicating to yield to cyclists when turning onto 5-N heading westbound on La Costa would help --very dangerous there 299. This is one of a few east -west corridors and I do not feel safe on my bicycle. I currently have to go quite a distance out of my way if on my bike. 300. Make one side for Bike/walk path for both east and west bike and walk traffic similar to the north side of san elijo rd from Schoolhouse way to Questhaven. 301. A bike lane like they used to have years ago would be great. Riding up that hill is very unsafe due to widening of the lanes for cars 302. Road conditions of La Costa east of El Camino are somewhat dangerous for cyclists. 8/17/11 Page 28 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 303. Continuing the way La Costa Avenue was fixed between El Camino Real and the coast would be a great thing. Another excellent plan to copy is the La Costa Valley one. We really don't need to reinvent the wheel - just do what we know works well and looks great. 304. Let's make our roads safer for people who are being green and keeping healthy as well. 305. I've ridden my bike on La Costa Ave for over 30 years now. Those blind curves, narrow bike lanes and high traffic speeds coupled w/drivers disdain for the rights of cyclists make it a very dangerous place to ride. I avoid it whenever possible. 306. 1 ride my bike along La Costa and enjoy the hills and rolling terrain but am concerned with traffic, high speeds by vehicles and lack of respect towards cyclists (i.e., driving in the bike lanes, turning right quickly cutting off bikes, honking and yelling of obscenities, etc). I give a wide berth to vehicles and observe traffic laws by not running red lights, riding no greater than two -wide, and stopping at stop signs, as this leads to ill -will towards other cyclists that motorists will see after me. 307. Going East on La Costa is very unsafe for cyclist 308. WE NEED BIKE LANES!!!! 309. Many elderly people drive this area. Also, people speed and use cell phones while driving. Special attention needs to be paid to the intersection near the freeway entrances so bicyclists can merge & pass with safety. Place red plastic cones, painted lines need improving, and add a few blinking lights. Add yield to bicyclists too. 310. As a cyclist I'm very concerned for my safety and others. 311. Enlarged bike lane required 312. Thank you so much for allowing us to voice our opinions. 313. Bike lanes we needed it ASAP 314. 1 came to visit friends who live on La Costa Ave. My Gosh,,, I thought I was back in Texas at the Texas Speedway.. A very dangerous street with no apparent regard from other drivers for safety for themselves or others, I mean walkers, Bikers, or just getting out of drive ways onto this SPEEDWAY. Normally I would not take the time to fill out any surveys„ but when my friends ask for my input as an out of towner,,,, You Bet, here it is. Also NO BIKE LANES OR WALKER LANES,,, WHO DESIGNED THIS STREET??? YIKES Speed bumps are aggravating as all heck,,, but they do slow people down „ even in Calf. Especially on this racetrack... 315. A continuous dedicated bicycle lane is needed. Currently on street parking encroaches and in sections eliminates safe bicycle passage. 316. This is very dangerous road for east and westbound cycles as well as pedestrians on south side or trying to cross. Visibility over hills is poor and autos go very fast through this section. 317. Bicycle lanes are too dangerous, I will not use them. If bicycles could be routed to Levante or other parallel street, then the existing bike lanes could be used for traffic instead 318. The segment from Rancho Santa Fe Rd west to Romeria with 3 lanes seems to work well. It provides bike lanes in both directions, safe parking in front of housing and doesn't constrict traffic flow. Bike lanes are critically important. During the construction of the retaining wall in the 2300 block, the reduction to 3 lanes did not seem to interrupt the traffic flow. Raised landscape medians would be beautiful, but I would start with the 3 lanes leaving the turn lane and see if that would work before spending the money on the medians and increasing the maintenance. 319. 1 feel closing down lanes on La Costa is only a short term fix and will simply move traffic to other streets such as Levante which is currently 25. 8/17/11 Page 29 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 320. 1 live off of La Costa Ave. Yes the traffic has increased, but blame the City for allowing more homes to be built off of Rancho Santa Fe Ave. thereby increasing traffic. 321. ANY construction on La Costa will impact Levante. As our property overlooks La Costa, we are very concerned that options such as widening La Costa will impact our property values and resale potential. I understand that those whose driveways enter directly on La Costa have significant problems, but those homes are relatively few. Perhaps speed controls might be a better option. 322. My greatest concern is bicyclists using La Costa eastbound from El Camino Real where there are no bike lanes and the road is very curvy. it is a suicide wish certain days/times of the week. 323. Would like to see one lane each direction, slower speeds, easier entry/exit from/to side streets, wide/safe bike lanes, and safe sidewalks/pedestrian accommodations; maybe even traffic circles. These changes may push through traffic to Calle Barcelona; so plan should take into consideration that roadway as well. Would like to see above changes to both La Costa and Calle Barcelona. There's no need for these 4-lane, high-speed expressways through our neighborhoods. 324. Need to lower speed limits, make the road have two lanes on both sides all the way between El Camino real and Rancho Santa Fe. 325. Need to provide sidewalks on BOTH sides of the street!! 326. Just once I would like to see the City of Carlsbad do something (anything!) to speed up, rather than slow down, traffic. There is absolutely no imagination within the city when it comes to solutions to move traffic. Since I moved to Carlsbad in 1992 1 have seen one major street after another (Palomar Airport Road, La Costa Ave, Carlsbad Blvd, Carlsbad Village Drive, El Camino Real, Rancho Santa Fe Road, etc.) ruined by traffic signals and stop signs. The city cares nothing about the costs associated with slowing down the primary flow of traffic, including the cost of my time, the additional pollution, the wear and tear on my vehicle, and especially the wasted gasoline. Just once I'd like to see some creativity: one way streets, reversible lanes, round -a -bouts, left -turns yield on green, left turns banned during certain hours of the day, etc. Instead, all we get are 'solutions' that serve no purpose other than to enable left-hand turns. Enough! 327. There is insufficient road going North/South. Encinitas fixed a problem by erecting 7 stop signs on RSF road. This throws more traffic on La Costa Blvd. We need more police supervision as there are a lot of wild and speeding drivers 328. 1 think the city should look at a landscaped sidewalk buffer similar to Leucadia Blvd. It has been shown that a buffer makes the streets safer and more pleasant for pedestrian use, and narrow streets cause drivers to slow down and be more careful. This in addition to replacing traffic signals with roundabouts would improve the flow of traffic while keeping speeds lower, just as with the Leucadia streetscape project. should mention that this situation is really the result of poor planning. Wide, long, winding roads flanked by low density residential and distant commercial centers is an inefficient use of land (in the form of roads and parking), building materials and utilities, and it encourages high speeds and wasting fuel. The city should be more focused on building livable communities with smaller lots, mixed -use, greenways, building up instead of out, where walking, biking and public transit are encouraged and competitive with the private vehicle industry that drives (pun intended) current planning policies. These measures will help save money, reduce gas and water use, pollution levels, waistlines and traffic, thus making the city much more attractive as well as prepared for economic and environmental conditions. 329. 1 do not want to see the lanes reduced on La Costa Avenue. This would be a disaster when the new shopping center goes in at Rancho Santa Fe Road, and it would not help residents who need to turn from their driveways onto the street. It would, in fact, make 8/17/11 Page 30 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan that situation worse because one long line of traffic would lengthen the wait for traffic to clear so that a vehicle could enter the roadway from a driveway. I know that the city plans to install traffic signals at every intersection between Rancho Santa Fe and El Camino Real, and I emphatically do not want to see this happen. Please consider the use of landscaped roundabouts instead. These are efficient at slowing traffic and impede progress less than traffic signals do, plus they would help to beautify the roadway. Thank you. 330. The speed of 45mph is TOO fast for a residential street! Lowering it to 35mph would be 100 percent better! 331. 1 drive La Costa at least twice daily and see no problem with it the way it is. 332. Safety concerns on La Costa will be even greater than they are now after the huge commercial developments at La Costa and Rancho Santa Fe are completed. 333. 1 checked "physical changes". I'm looking for a 4 lane road with 2 lanes each direction. 334. One way to reduce traffic on La Costa is to connect and open Poinsetta Ln. I live in San Elijo/San Marcos and even I I have to travel 1-5 North I will use La Costa because it is quicker to the 5 than Alga or Palomar Airport. In fact, I think MapQuest and the others show La Coast as a much quicker route to the freeway than the others. 335. Turning onto La Costa Ave from Alga (from East going South) is very difficult due to the way the media rises up and the second lane turns. 336. The on -street parking should be eliminated because the cars block visibility and can be a hazard when pulling in/out and especially to cyclists. A center median that prevents cars from crossing in front of on -coming traffic to enter/exit driveways would improve safety and aesthetics. I'm concerned that reducing the number of lanes to a single lane each direction the length of La Costa Ave would increase congestion and shift traffic to other streets, therefore, I don't favor reducing the number of through lanes. Roundabouts might be preferable to stop signs or other control measures. 337. Although this may get me, police officers "hide" in the same spots. Everyone knows where they sit, so they only slow down when approaching those spots. 338. Works fine. Don't waste money making changes that aren't needed. 339. No more traffic lights please! 340. Save the money! there are much bigger concerns 341. No Roundabouts 342. Home driveway on La Costa Ave 343. maintenance, holes, dips, cracks ,bad dips at drains 344. new signs which flash speed are good 345. Do Not go to a single lane! 346. repair the pot holes on navarra 347. Fine as is 348. The main reason I am expressing my concern is the development of the proposed center at La Costa & Rancho Sante Fe. There are SERIOUS traffic issues NOW that will only be magnified with increased development of this area. 349. La Costa is fine as is 350. Opposed to median or any landscape to push traffic closer to driveways. I don not live on this street but use it as main east west access often and an very concerned about driveway to street interface. 351. 1 am sure the many residents can supply viable and imaginative solutions 352. The narrow two lanes between Cadencia and Rancho Santa Fe forces people to use Cadencia as a major street to connect to Rancho Santa Fe and La Costa Ave. 353. STOP this action. You have listened to a vocal minority and failed to consult with other area residents. It is flat wrong to intentionally mess up traffic flow on one of the cities 8/17/11 Page 31 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan few thoroughfares that works well. YOU MUST CONSULT LOCAL RESIDENTS BEFORE DOING ANYTHING THIS STUPID, 354. This street needs to be widened to accommodate all the traffic coming off the 1-5 355. Leave as is! 356. While these are not my concerns, I am sensitive to the concerns of people who live on La Costa Ave 357. 1 have been living here 25 years and the noise just seems to be getting louder. At night you here speeding cars and motorcycles speeding. 358. Roundabouts would only lead to more problems. are you crazy!! 359. i would consider slowing traffic down with roundabouts- not take any lanes out. speed traps that pay for police time. lowering speed limit to 40 MPH 360. Speed limits are way too high. as you cross Rancho Santa Fe heading east on La Costa Ave, the speed limit is 45. you approach apartments and the lane narrows to 1 lane, with on street parking. this is much to fast. also it's almost impossible to turn right onto La Costa Ave. from Levante to then go left on Rancho Sante Fe in the mornings and afternoons. the traffic is a nightmare on this road 361. Speeds are too high for residential area. roundabouts would be a good idea. more space needed for walking/jogging/biking 25 MPH speed limit. like Willowsprins in Encinitas 362. Raised medians are some times more a hazard. when marbella was being done the 25 mph speed was in effect. I had to ride my brakes to maintain a 25 mph speed. I have traveled the corridor for 10 yrs at various times and have never seen a serious accident of any kind. not even a minor one. 363. One Lane each direction would slow traffic down. each one way lane should be wider than the current lane is. allow for more on street parking for residents & keep wide entrance/ exit area clear for visibility or merging into traffic lane. 364. 2 main problems: right of way with Nueva Castilla and Left turn(lights) onto rancho Santa Fe Rd insufficient for traffic 365. The Construction that sometime close one lane with the cone suddenly merge two lanes can be dangerous and almost cause accident 366. Ticketing too -fast drivers would slow people down. have police out -visible especially at peak traffic times don't narrow the road! 367. As president of La Costa da marbella HOA- I have concerns about the future of La Costa Ave. I believe that the road should be one lane either way with center medians and turn and safety lane. In addition we need sidewalks on both sides of the road along with bicycles lane. finally, roundabouts as the best way to control cross traffic on crossroads. 368. We appreciate this questionnaire 369. Since the addition of the traffic light at Albertsons center more and more people are using Levante street as the connecting route and always exceeding the speed limit. please realize the impact that the changes will have on Levante. 370. 1. reduce speed to 25 MPH 2. Make it "Two Lane" road not four. 3. change the designation to residential 4. provide parking & bike lane & landscaping on the residential site. 5. plant large trees in the middle of the road 6. provide street signals & roundabouts 7.roundabouts 1 st then street signals 8. enforce the law from 6am-8am & 3pm-9pm 9. monitor midnight traffic 371. another concern I have is the use of Cadenica St. as a cut thru from La Costa to Romeria. Our street has become far too busy & drivers are driving very fast on the street. Heaviest use is by La Costa Heights school parents around 8am & again around 2:30pm. Can we get speed humps? or close Cadencia off from La Costa Ave? 8/17/11 Page 32 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 372. Downtown workers (who pay taxes) need access to home in San Marcos. No changes necessary 373. 1 believe the concerns can be solved with decreased speed limits and additional lighting and signs. To go into the dark ages and revert back to a 2 lane highway makes no sense. That option will create bottlenecked traffic and toxic fumes as a result of standing traffic. From a tax payer's perspective; I am curious as to why this wasn't addressed before unnecessary construction, and more condos were added to La Costa Ave.? The last thing this community needs is to spend more money on unnecessary and inefficient changes. I appreciate the opportunity to give feedback; please consider simple options, when properly implemented they will be more effective. 374. Currently La Costa Avenue is similar to a wide open racetrack when compared to a neighboring street like Aviara Parkway that has landscaping, medians, and signage. And when you consider that La Costa Avenue has numerous homes with driveways right on the street (and Aviara Parkway doesn't) it seems as if the wrong street was given all the attention. 375. 1 strongly feel the plan of round -a -bouts and reducing the traffic lanes to one (each way) would improve the road noise and safety for each home directly on La Costa. Will for sure help home values once traffic is reduced and brought to an appropriate housing community level. 376. 1 have lived on La Costa Ave for 5 years. It have seen the traffic flow, and speed increase. Safety for pedestrians and pulling out of my driveway has become decreasingly unsafe. 377. 1 think a median strategy should be explored prior to reducing capacity by removing lanes. 378. Very dangerous street sometimes. Once experienced near -accident when encountering a driver making a U turn. (Could not be seen due to hill and curvature of road.) Speeds too great to allow for safe entering and exiting residential driveways. Sometimes difficult to access side streets. Very distracting due to work on road, too many signs, general activity around parked cars. Not safe to cross. Having said that --it is a beautiful well -maintained street with nice views. Thank you. 379. Our major concern is that the City of Carlsbad does attempt to NOT widen La Costa Ave or to facilitate the increase of traffic in any way. 380. Need sidewalks on both sides of street from El Camino to Rancho Santa Fe road. Medians similar to those on Aviara Parkway would be good. 381. Wider sidewalks and bike lanes would go a long way to slowing traffic in addition to reducing L.C.Ave to two lanes along the entire length. Making L.C. Ave. walkable is my goal. 382. The current building project and any future building projects has made La Costa Ave a hazard to be on and since the past retrofitting of foundations that were sliding, why would the city allow another potential erosion project to move forward. 383. We have been long time residents of La Costa and use La Costa Ave every day for direct freeway access. That's what it was developed for and is very necessary. Please, no more stop lights or slowing down of traffic. If you want to improve safety: 1) take the Public Parking off of the street and 2) stop the building of properties with additional driveways with direct access to the road. Residents who live along La Costa Ave purchased their existing properties knowing the traffic situation. Obviously it was a desirable choice to buy their residences and choose to live along La Costa Ave. Why would Carlsbad continue to approve permits for more building on La Costa Ave that only adds to the problem? The new town homes with direct access to La Costa Ave should have never been approved. Please, no more construction. Thank you for the opportunity to voice concerns. 8/17/11 Page 33 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 384. All cross streets have traffic signals. You can't put a Stop sign or Traffic signal where no intersection occurs. Most of La Costa Ave already has sidewalks. Widening the street would most likely involve eminent domain issues (you will have a nasty fight there). More traffic from the east needs to be routed to Aviara. Is it obvious that poor community planning has allowed this mini -mess to have taken place, instead of routing traffic on Santa Fe / Leucadia Blvd? Close La Costa Ave off to all but "Local Traffic"? 385. 1 live on Dehesa Court. It is dangerous turning left from Dehesa onto La Costa because the road downhill from Rancho Santa Fe is a blind curve. Traffic going up the hill on La Costa to Rancho Santa Fe really backs up in the afternoon rush hour. Riding a bike on La Costa going east from El Camino Real is not safe. There are no bike lanes, the lane is narrow and there are blind curves. I am a cyclist and I won't ride there (I detour up Levante), but some people do and I've had close calls. There should either be a bike lane added or maybe signs just prohibiting bikes going east on that section of La Costa. 386. speed limit reduced. need flashing ped lights at areas where condos/townhomes are so they can get out of the complex. do like the 101 and put up ped crossing signs and lines 387. This is residential street and I've watched your speed signs say slow down on almost every car. Not only that but between 6am to 8am and 5pm to 8pm there is a parade of cars using LCA as a cut trough from 5 to RSF. They should be using Leucadia/RSF or Melrose/Alga to get through but they use LCA because they can speed up and down that road. I have talked to many who do that. Changing the road to have roundabouts, one lane and other traffic calming methods will return the road to La Costa residents and those who want to cut trough without speeding. 388. Speed is a major concern, vehicle turning off of La Costa Ave onto Gibraltor or Romerea at high rates of speed. Those two side streets are very dangerous. Could recommend, police set up some type of sting to catch speeding and wreckless vehicles. Best time is 6-7 am and 5-6pm. Drivers easily reach excessive speeds on these streets. I've only see police patrol these streets once or twice in 2 years. I live off of Jerez Court. Please send police out to ticket the speeders on these streets. After a few days of doing this, I guarantee you'll have a substantial amount of tickets written which will bring in some form of new revenue to the city. Again, please stop the speeders on these streets. 389. Need a signal at Esfera 390. Single lanes in each direction (as it was several years ago) works well east of Cadencia and would slow traffic west of Cadencia. This would also allow for bike lanes in both directions. 391. 1 have lived on this street for 9 years and it has gotten worse every year. Cars fly down the road and I am scared a child or animal will get hit. Please do everything you can to slow cars down, increase safety, reduce the amount of traffic, and especially, reduce the amount of noise. 392. Stop signs would add auto emissions. Roundabouts are ridiculous on a major artery. Additional signals are a last resort and would contribute to traffic backups; especially at Rancho Santa Fe Eastbound. 393. Existing markings, speed limits etc. are perfectly fine as long as they are obeyed and enforced. The speed gauge sign is very helpful when driving. 394. 1 drive W on LC every morning btwn 7 and 730am and E on LC every evening around 5pm. I do not see any traffic problems and speed has been under control since CPD began regular enforcement. 395. For physical changes it would be nice to have bicycle lanes on both side of the rode 396. Reduce speed limit. Make it residential road. Narrow the road way to two lane road. Provide bike lane and parking along the street. Install tall trees and very heavy bushy tress in the middle or the road. Provide roundabouts with fully landscape with bushy and 8/17/11 Page 34 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan fat tress in them. Provide some statues monuments and other street calming materials in the medians 397. Please add No Parking zones where parking plus road curvature make for zero visibility of on -coming vehicles and entering the road safely a crap shoot. 398. More of the digital speed indicators and speed cameras to increase revenue and slow traffic. 399. Change speed limit to 35 MPH east of Fairway Ln to El Camino Real. Eliminate parking in front of condominiums & Fairway Ln development. 400. There needs to be something to slow down traffic especially before the Chabad. Too many cars veering off -road or in to other cars in this area. 8/17/11 Page 35 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Appendix 2 Summary of Comments on Proposed Plan June 2011 How well do you feel the proposed plan meets the study objective for La Costa Avenue? Excellent! The plan will slow traffic, giving pedestrians a fighting chance to get across the street while beautifying the neighborhood - raising property values (and taxes.) While roundabouts will slow traffic, it will not stop it unnecessarily like traffic signals. In addition, screeching stops and peeling out from signals will stop. The only real complaints heard in the meetings were either from those who think 45 MPH is too slow for the street (get over it!) or overflow would go to Levante. Neither are true. Overflow will be minimal - at morning and evening rush hours only and will likely go to Calle Barcelona, Alga, Leucadia Blvd and even Palomar Airport Road for those who use La Costa Avenue to get to 1-5. All of the alternatives are much better suited for more and faster traffic. About half or a little more. The new model is more a practice of application of technical methodology to self -impress those who are designing than it is an attempt to actually solve the exactness of the problems with a good long term viable solution that will be lasting. It was evident during the group sessions, as is so often the case with the city of Carlsbad, that the design group was facilitating an attempt at selling buy -in to their pre -conceived solution more so than actually seeking input from the concerned citizenry who took their time to voice their concerns and ideas. I am very encouraged by this plan. It incorporates all the safety items necessary to make La Costa Ave safer, return it to a residential street while maintaining a smooth flow of traffic for those who use it as a commuter road. It would be wonderful if the traffic speed laws took into account the residential nature of La Costa Ave. instead of just the traffic flow speeds. Most of the safety issues could be resolved just by lowering the speed limit to 35 mph. This would add less than one minute to the trip. Our primary concern, safety on La Costa Avenue, has been met; by slowing the traffic pattern. Also, visually it will be a much more pleasing to the eye and will only present our avenue as more of a "community" and will give it more of a neighborhood feel. We think it will add to our property values as well. Excellent Plan. Meets study objectives very well. Very well planned draft. Perfect — love it — make it a neighborhood and will increase hove values for all. Very well thought out and planned for those living/commuting on LCA while focusing on safety and speed. No more wasting 3 mins. at each light! Awesome 8/17/11 Page 36 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Perfectly Very well done. The sooner the better! Very well! I think it is very good job you have done Best that can be done in reasonable budget. Very good. I am very pleased with the proposed plan. I think that it meets all of the objectives that we have discussed at all of the meetings. What do you like most about the plan? Why? One lane in each direction will slow traffic and widen shared median space or allow for serentine medians for left -turns, particularly at Gibraltar and Calle Madero where opposing traffic traveling at 45 MPH or above now competes for the same -100 ft. of turn lane. When one driver has to give way to the other, he too often has to swerve into the adjacent lane, side swiping another vehicle. That won't happen under the new plan. Bulb -outs will protect parked cars. Roundabouts will keep traffic moving, but slower - as intended. Through time, however, should be no slower overall. Lastly, trees and shrubs in the medians will add beauty and add value to the neighborhood, maintaining the upscale essence of the community - in constrast to adding more and more asphalt and traffic signals that deteriorate home values. That someone is moving forward and attempting to make some improvement to a situation which has appear as a growing problem which seemingly will continue to grow. Bike lanes, sidewalks that are complete and wide enough to navigate with a stroller, wheelchair. or two people walking abreast are a good start. A single lane in both directions will accomodate traffic and allow space for the bike lanes and sidewalk improvements. The round abouts work well for me, but I think a lot of people will think they will slow them down too much ( In the absence of speed limit reductions, this appears to be a necessary item to calm the traffic and yet keep it moving). The raised center medians will improve the look of the street and provide additional safety. It meets the "calming" effect we were all looking for. Lane reduction 1) Appears that it will allow flow so traffic won't be pushed to Levante (I like roundabouts!) 2) Makes the street more attractive (I like partial medians and landscaping) Meets all conditions: sight distance, parking, bikes, speed, emissions, beautification, cost. Add lighting - too dark. Roundabouts - makes it residential neighborly - slows traffic and volume - perfect 8/17/11 Page 37 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Roundabouts; focus on safety Roundabouts, safe traffic It is safe and it makes sense Roundabouts & curb extensions Lane reductions east & west Yes it serves the good of the city 1) Will slow speeds — giving everybody safety 2) Give La Costa Ave some good look & class vs. weeds & dirt 3) Maybe cause some thru traffic do divert to other major roads The most important part of the plan is slowing traffic to prevent continuing accidents and recognizing the La Costa Avenue is a residential street. What do you like least about the plan? Why? Nothing, except possibly the cost. But as noted above, property values, and therefore the tax base, should be increased helping repay the investment over time. The use of roundabouts. They are death traps. I have taken the time to park my car and observe the mired of things that happen on Leucadia Boulevard' various roundabouts, which is one of the very few places in the county where stupidity has found it necessary to complicate matters with an inept solution. Look at the curbs, they are black from tire marks because the roundabout are not within the effect design proportion and dimension of how a roundabout is supposed to facilitate traffic control. The circles are way to small, which puts the design in favor of any victim's lawsuit. Because the Leucadia roundabouts are too small they don't effectively cause the driver to slow the vehicle, but rather to make attempts to steer and veer it through the roundabout at the approaching speed. On several occasions, I watch car tires hit the curb with such force that the control of the vehicle was temporally lost by the drive and different reactions resulted. One was to panic and brake the car to a stop causing the following vehicles to react and veer up other curbs or into oncoming traffic to avoid a rear end collision. Another was to whip steer the car through the rodeo wildness cause by hitting the curb with the hope of not hitting another car. It is my understanding that roundabout were invented in and are primarily used in England, Australia, etc. where it has to be noted that the driver sits on the other side of the car, which provides a very different perspective to the roundabout when it is approached. The whole mindset is different and any reactionary result is also different from the American driving position. The installation of roundabouts will eventually result in deaths. Those who are purporting this stupidity will be then guilty of murder. If I am in the area, I will at every opportunity encourage the victim's family to sue the city and all involved with roundabout installation and use the multiple -million dollar settlement of my aunt's roundabout death as establish grounds for the worthlessness of roundabouts as a solution to traffic problems The cost is an issue, but hopefully help can be obtained from adjoining cities whose residents use La Costa Ave for thier commute. None found 8/17/11 Page 38 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Did not include restricting size of vehicles able to park on the street. Should have size limits; i.e., nor more than 7 feet high and one car length long. Should strictly prohibit RVs on the street. They should be on the owner's property. LCA is too hazardous and RVs make a mockery of the safety measures being implemented. Carlsbad is no longer the 70's beach town that it was. Carlsbad is now a sophisticated city and RVs should have restrictions, not only on LCA but citywide. Perhaps some landscaping at both ends (ECR & RSF) so it looks "complete." Not enough roundabouts — but they are expensive so I understand Fear of the traffic back up during AM/PM hours. Too little street parking, taking too long. Start immediately! Nothing Need additional roundabouts at Cadenica and Viejo Castilla. Parking in front of residential driveways. Not to reduce the speed limit to 25 mph Time to implement it I am a little uncertain about the roundabouts. I strongly believe that traffic needs to be slowed so roundabouts may be the best answer. Expect that the "plan" will lead to substantial increase in traffic on Levante Street — why — because we have many children (and an elementary school) on Levante St — we live on Levante St. >30 yrs. How could the plan be improved to meet the study objective more effectively? We think every objective was addressed and the response to each was very positive and resulted in an appealing, esthetic plan. Take a deep breath and just implement something with paint stripes before huge amounts of money are expended on something that the citizens of Carlsbad will be forced to live with an tolerate, because there is never enough money to fix bad design in government, never, unless there is death involved. When the plan is implemented, speeds will be reduced and hopefully the speed limit can then be lawfully reduced and enforced. We like the proposed plan as it is. As stated above PLUS: There should be a raised median at the area between the Marbella condos on the south side and Alta Verde, Alteeza, Tres Verde condos on the north side. This is a high density area and left hand turns should be controlled by a raised median. 8/17/11 Page 39 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan The Marbella condo is right across the street from two single family home driveways, as well as the Tres Verde condos. No suggestions No need to improve — I love it Nothing, I think it's great Nothing Wider parkways, take away from the medians. Start east, Romeria to Cadencia, consider children to and from La Costa Heights Elem. from homes north of La Costa Ave. No parking in front of driveways; or, at least, limit size of vehicles ie. no RVs and no vehicles above 7 feet high or, longer than one car Do all you have proposed & reduce speed limit and change it to residential designation. Continue to stress: - "changes are not just for those who live on La Costa but for tho9se who travel it — it takes two cars to make an accident" — speeders and those who leave driveways I think that the current proposed plan will meet all objectives that I had in mind. I can think of no further improvements at this time. Do away with "on -street" parking on La Costa Ave — reduce width of "turn lane" continue to have 2 lanes of traffic. Traffic representative said they would study impact on Levante St. at 6/23 meeting. How well do you feel the La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan process addressed the community's preferences and concerns? Beautifully - literally. La Costa Avenue will have slower traffic, fewer accidents, be a safe place for pedestrians and bicyclists. It will cut down on noise and add character and beauty to the community. We cannot wait! It really doesn't. It is a crafty and cleaver manipulation of experimentation that has been very well perpetuated upon the citizenry in a very slick manner to create buy -in with delayed timing, mock meetings and much political massage. The city has made it clear without verbiage that the goal is to do what they want to satisfy the court requirements at any and all costs first and foremost. This is the goal and the attempts to make the citizenry feel that they have been participatory and that they have been listened to is merely frosting on an otherwise nearly impalatable cake. I applaud the efforts to correct the long needed safety on La Costaq Ave. I FEEL THAT THE INTERIM PLAN SHOULD INCLUDE AN EAST BOUND BIKE LANE, ESPECIALLY BETWEEN FAIRWAY AND VIEJO CASTILLA. IT IS THE MOST NARROW PORTION OF THE ROAD, WITH THE SLOWIST BIKE SPEEDS. Excellent job and we want to thank all those involved in the project. We have lived on the avenue for over 25 years and plan on staying. With the traffic calming modalities in place, and medians with landscaping, not only will this be a safer place to life, but also for people using our 8/17/11 Page 40 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan road to get from El Camino to Rancho Santa Fe Rd. And again, it will give our area a sense of being a residential neighborhood, which is what it has always been. And all in all it will certainly add to our property values. As I said before, the Plan is excellent and visionary. Tweaking it a bit to include the aforementioned median by Marbella and the other condos, as well as the vehicle size restrictions, would make it perfect. ALL OF THE PEOPLE, DOUG, SKIP, PAT are amazing! This was an extreme challenge but they navigated the waters beautifully. Thought it was a excellent process, conducted very well. City/consultants clearly listened to community input. Excellent process — I apologize for my neighbors' comments!! Pat, Doug, Skip great job Perfect — you've won my heart! Thank you for a program well run For the crowd->50/50 but I agree 95% positive This plan couldn't be more effective. It addresses safety ant that's what's most important! Well done. Excellent — kudos to everyone involved. Now, Council should do their job and get it done! The staff has done very good job so far Good meetings — professionally done — might need some special time with Levante people showing why non -local people will not logically use it as by-pass — most increase will be from those who live there; not using La Costa & cut up to where they live Not everyone will be pleased by any plan as is evident from the public hearings. The third meeting however showed a great response from citizens, nearly all but a few stating that they were happy with the proposed plan. Good and organized efforts! Not everyones! 8/17/11 Page 41 La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Appendix 3 Technical Memorandum La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan — Level of Service Analysis Planning and Cost Estimate August 2011 8/17/11 Page 42 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM To: Doug Bilse, City of Carlsbad From: Arnold Torma, KOA Corporation KOA No.: JB14055 Date: August 16, 2011 Re: La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan — Level of Service Analysis Planning and Cost Estimate INTRODUCTION Background This technical memorandum is intended to provide the analytic information that, in combination with the La Costa Avenue Road Diet Arterial Traffic Calming Project, is the outcome of the La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan. A separate report describing the process and outcome has been prepared by Pat Noyes & Associates, dated July 2011. Over time, traffic volumes on La Costa Avenue are expected to increase beyond the current level. The weekday, daily traffic volumes on La Costa Avenue vary between 15,000 and 17,000 vehicles, and is expected to increase as high as 20,000 in the future according to SANDAG. Driveways open directly onto the road, which has a 45-mile-per-hour speed limit, making it challenging to enter and exit residences during busy traffic times. Therefore, the City of Carlsbad has commissioned KOA Corporation to prepare the La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan to develop a cost effective, community -preferred plan to address traffic speeds and safety on La Costa Avenue in a way that respects the residential character and arterial function of the roadway. Purpose In order to understand how well the concept plan would function, this documents the intersection and segmental analysis for the La Costa Avenue Improvement Project. The results in this memorandum are presented for the following scenarios: 1. Existing Conditions Without & With Project 2. Future Conditions Without & With Project Figures in Attachment A illustrate the existing and proposed geometries for the following four intersections: 1. La Costa Avenue at Nueva Castilla Way 2. La Costa Avenue at Viejo Castillo Way 3. La Costa Avenue at Romeria Street 4. La Costa Avenue at Cadencia Street These intersections were chosen specifically for future implementation of either signal control or proposed roundabouts. The turning movement counts for each intersection can be found in Attachment B. KOA Corporation August 16, 2011 Roadway peak hour segmental LOS analysis was conducted for the following three locations on La Costa Avenue: 1. West of Nueva Castilla Way 2. West of Calle Madero 3. West of Cadencia Street These segmental intersections were chosen specifically because they are located in between the four intersections previously being analyzed. CONCEPT Conceptual Striping Plan A conceptual striping plan intended to respond to concerns about speeds on La Costa Avenue has been prepared. Attachment C shows the proposed striping concept for the La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan. It makes utmost use of the existing median position, reduces the through lanes to one lane in each direction adjacent to residential units, introduces a Class II bikeway and it maintains on -street parking along portions of the roadway. METHODS Intersection Levels of Service Analysis The intersections along the length of the project have been analyzed to determine what the existing and future levels of service are with the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) for existing and future conditions without project. A satisfactory operating intersection is a LOS D or greater during peak hours. The analysis printouts are included in Attachment D. Roundabout Analysis SIDRA, a roundabout software that offers a roundabout capacity model based on US research on roundabouts, was used for this analysis. For the with project scenario the two locations that were analyzed as one -lane roundabouts as part of the La Costa Ave Improvement Plan are listed below. Some additional locations are addressed later in this memo 1. La Costa Avenue and Nueva Castilla Way 2. La Costa Avenue and Romeria Street. A satisfactory operating roundabout is a LOS D or greater. The analysis printouts are included in Attachment D. Segmental Analysis With the use of midblock segmental LOS analysis, the existing and future levels of service for the roadway segments along the length of the project have been determined. This method takes an hourly directional/traffic volume divided by a pre -determined capacity value to produce a volume/capacity ratio. The City of Carlsbad uses a value of 1,800 vehicles per hour per lane for roadway capacity. A satisfactory operating segment is a LOS D or greater. The analysis printouts are included in Attachment D. KOA Corporation 2 August 16, 2011 EXISITING CONDITIONS La Costa Avenue is shown within the City of Carlsbad's Circulation Element as a secondary arterial roadway, which is fed by other local roads leading to regional connections. Therefore, it is currently 2 lanes westbound from Levante Street to Romeria Street and 2 lanes eastbound from Gibraltar Street to Romeria Street. From Gibraltar Street to Levante Street it is three lanes, with two lanes in the westbound direction and one lane in the eastbound direction. Figures in Attachment B show the existing geometry of La Costa Avenue. The results of the effect of the proposed improvement plan with the current roadway configuration scenario for both segments and intersections for existing conditions are shown in Tables 1 through 3. Table 1 Existing Roadway Segment Conditions Without Project Existing geometry Eastbound Westbound Lane Capacity Lanes Hourly Volume V/C LOS Lanes Hourly Volume V/C LOS West of Nueva Castilla Way AM Peak Hour 1800 2 502 0.14 A 2 983 0.27 A PM Peak Hour 1800 2 1111 0.31 A 2 624 0.17 A West of Calle Madero AM Peak Hour 1800 2 525 0.15 A 2 838 0.23 A PM Peak Hour 1800 2 935 0.26 A 2 581 0.16 A West of Cadencia Street AM Peak Hour 1800 2 445 0.12 A 2 667 0.19 A PM Peak Hour 1800 2 629 0.17 A 2 458 0.13 A Table 2 Existing Roadway Segment Conditions With Project Existing geometry Eastbound Westbound Lane Capacity Lanes Hourly Volume V/C LOS Lanes Hourly Volume V/C LOS West of Nueva Castilla Way AM Peak Hour 1800 1 502 0.28 A 1 983 0.55 A PM Peak Hour 1800 1 1111 0.62 B 1 624 0.35 A West of Calle Madero AM Peak Hour 1800 1 525 0.29 A 1 838 0.47 A PM Peak Hour 1800 1 935 0.52 B 1 581 0.32 A West of Cadencia Street AM Peak Hour 1 1800 1 445 0.25 A 1 667 0.37 A PM Peak Hour 1 1800 1 1 J 629 1 0.35 1 B 1 1 1 458 1 0.25 1 A As can be seen in the above tables, there will only be a shift from a LOS A to LOS B with the implementation of the project during the PM peak hour heading eastbound; therefore, all three segmental intersections will continue to operate at a satisfactory level. KOA Corporation 3 August 16, 2011 Table 3 Existing Intersection Conditions Existing Existing # Intersection Without Project With Project Intersection ICU LOS Intersectio ICU LOS Control n Control AM Peak Hour 1 La Costa Ave and Nueva Castilla Side Street A Roundabout B Way St .36 .66 2 La Costa Ave and Viejo Castilla Way Signal .36 A Signal .57 B 3 La Costa Ave and Romeria St Signal .35 A Roundabout .35 A 4 La Costa Ave and Cadencia St Signal .39 A Signal .42 A PM Peak Hour 1 La Costa Ave and Nueva Castilla Side Street Way Stop .33 A Roundabout .58 A 2 La Costa Ave and Viejo Castilla Way Signal .32 A Signal .51 A 3 La Costa Ave and Romeria St Signal .53 A Roundabout .46 A 4 La Costa Ave and Cadencia St Signal .50 A Signal .50 A As can be seen from the above table, there will only be a shift from a LOS A to LOS B with the implementation of the project during the AM peak hour at Nueva Castilla Way and Viejo Castilla Way; therefore, all four intersections will continue to operate at a satisfactory level. FUTURE CONDITIONS 2030 Year Analysis The results of the proposed improvement plan with the without project scenario for both segments and intersections for future conditions are shown in Table 4 through 6. Table 4 Future Roadway Segment Conditions Without Project Existing geometry Eastbound Westbound Lane Capacity Lanes Hourly Volume V/C LOS Lanes Hourly Volume V/C LOS West of Nueva Castilla Way AM Peak Hour 1800 2 602 0.17 A 2 1180 0.33 A PM Peak Hour 1800 2 1333 0.37 A 2 749 0.21 A West of Calle Madero AM Peak Hour —+ 1800 2 630 0.18 A 2 1006 0.28 A PM Peak Hour 1800 2 1122 0.31 A 2 697 0.19 A West of Cadencia Street AM Peak Hour 1800 2 534 0.15 A 2 800 0.22 A PM Peak Hour 1800 2 755 0.21 A 2 550 0.15 A KOA Corporation 4 August 16, 2011 Table 5 Future Roadway Segment Conditions With Project Existing geometry Eastbound Westbound Lane Capacity Lanes Hourly Volume V/C LOS Lanes Hourly Volume V/C LOS West of Nueva Castilla Way AM Peak Hour 1800 1 602 0.33 A 1 1180 0.66 A PM Peak Hour 1800 1 1333 0.74 B 1 749 0.42 A West of Calle Madero AM Peak Hour 1800 1 630 0.35 A 1 1006 0.56 A PM Peak Hour 1800 1 1122 0.62 B 1 697 0.39 A West of Cadencia Street AM Peak Hour 1800 1 534 0.30 A 1 800 0.44 A PM Peak Hour 1800 1 755 0.42 B 1 550 0.31 A As can be seen from the above tables, there will only be a shift from a LOS A to LOS B with the implementation of the project during the PM peak hour heading eastbound; therefore, all three segmental intersections will continue to operate at a satisfactory level. Table 6 Future Intersection Conditions # Intersection 2030 Without Project 2030 With Project Intersection Control ICU LOS Intersectio n Control ICU LOS AM Peak Hour 1 La Costa Ave and Nueva Castilla Way Side Sotreet .41 A Roundabout .80 D 2 La Costa Ave and Viejo Castilla Way Signal .42 A Signal .69 B 3 La Costa Ave and Romeria St Signal .38 A Roundabout .50 A 4 La Costa Ave and Cadencia St Signal .42 A Signal .46 A PM Peak Hour 1 La Costa Ave and Nueva Castilla Way Side Sotreet 38 A Roundabout .70 C 2 La Costa Ave and Viejo Castilla Way Signal .36 A Signal .60 B 3 La Costa Ave and Romeria St Signal .60 B Roundabout .56 A 4 La Costa Ave and Cadencia St Signal .55 B Signal .55 B As can be seen from the above table, the greatest change in level of service will shift from an A to a D at Nueva Castilla Way. This is due to the high volumes of the through movements on La Costa Avenue. All four intersections will continue to operate at a satisfactory level. Based on the segment and intersection analysis shown above the with project conditions produce acceptable level of service. KOA Corporation 5 August 16, 2011 OTHER LOCATIONS The City might eventually consider implementing roundabouts at three additional locations along the same corridor. These locations are not included in the La Costa Improvement Plan and are not in the cost estimates provided in the appendix. However, in case locations are considered further, additional analyses of roundabouts at Cadencia, Gibraltar, and Calle Madero along La Costa Avenue are discussed. The results are shown in tables 7 and 8 below. Table 7 Existing Intersection Conditions Existing Existing Without Project With Project # Intersection Intersection ICU LOS Intersectio ICU LOS Control n Control AM Peak Hour 4 La Costa Ave and Cadencia St Signal .39 A Roundabout .28 A 5 La Costa Ave and Calle Madero Side Sotreet A Roundabout A .33 .59 6 La Costa Ave and Gibraltor St Side Sotreet 32 A Roundabout A .50 PM Peak Hour 4 La Costa Ave and Cadencia St Signal .50 A Roundabout .44 A 5 La Costa Ave and Calle Madero Side Sotreet 32 A Roundabout A .50 6 La Costa Ave and Gibraltor St Side Sotreet A Roundabout A .30 .47 As can be seen from the above table, all intersections will continue to operate at a satisfactory level as a roundabout. Table 7 Future Intersection Conditions 2030 2030 Without Project With Project # Intersection Intersectio ICU LOS Intersection ICU LOS Control n Control AM Peak Hour 41 La Costa Ave and Cadencia St Signal .43 A Roundabout .34 A 5 La Costa Ave and Calle Madero Side Sotreet 38 A Roundabout C .71 6 La Costa Ave and Gibraltor St Side Sotreet .37 A Roundabout B .60 PM Peak Hour 4 La Costa Ave and Cadencia St Signal .56 B Roundabout .53 A 5 La Costa Ave and Calle Madero Side Sotreet A Roundabout A .36 .60 6 La Costa Ave and Gibraltor St Side Sotreet A Roundabout B .34 .63 KOA Corporation 6 August 16, 2011 As can be seen from the above table, the greatest change in level of service will shift from an A to a C at Calle Madero, however all three intersections would continue to operate at a satisfactory level DISCUSSION OF PHASE 1/11 VERSUS LA COSTA AVENUE IMPROVEMENT PLAN There have been two phases to the La Costa Avenue study process. The earlier, Phase 1/11 examination of traffic issues for La Costa Avenue culminated in a report entitled the La Costa Avenue Road Diet Arterial Traffic Calming Project, and was published September of 2008 by KOA. Shortly thereafter the process of moving forward was halted to allow for a new approach and greater involvement of the community. That original study was commissioned to address concerns about speeding and traffic safety, and the focus was to see if a "road diet" was applicable to these concerns. Data was accumulated for this study and presented in the report for both daily and peak periods, and comparisons between having no project versus the conditions with a road diet project were developed in the text and tables. Several methods to assess the adequacy of the road and intersection conditions were applied to determine measures of congestion both for existing and future conditions. More recently the City and the project team have undertaken a process involving community engagement over a series of three public meetings beginning on April 28, 2011, again on May 26, 2011, with the third such meeting occurring on June 23, 2011. This technical memorandum presents new information regarding the traffic volumes and conditions along the length of the project defined for the second and most recent evaluation. The current process is called the La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan. There are some differences in the data and in the results obtained for this Improvement Plan evaluation when compared to the Phase 1/11 report. The differences are discussed in the next paragraphs. Traffic counts were originally taken from May 2007 to January 2008 for the Phase 1/11 report at ten different segmental locations and at another 14 intersections. More recently, the City of Carlsbad has obtained traffic counts from 2010 and 2011 as part of the ongoing monitoring program of street conditions as well as commissioning a series of "before" and "after" counts to understand what, if any, volume changes may occur as La Costa Avenue begins to have some changes made to it to address speeds and other issues. Interestingly, at the three locations that overlap between the Phase 1/II and Improvement Plan work, we observe that at each location, the volumes have decreased since the original counts. The average decrease on the daily volumes is between two and three percent. Forecasted traffic available from SANDAG for the period between now and the "horizon" year of 2030 is used as the basis for determining the likely growth in the study area. This growth between two representative years in their forecasts is applied to the existing traffic counts for segmental volumes and intersection volumes to obtain future peak hour volumes for analysis. Since the preparation of the Phase 1/11 report and now, several years have passed, so the proportion of growth between the "existing" year and the "horizon" year involves fewer years which has an effect on how the future year volumes are calculated. The result is the growth percentages, and therefore, the future volumes are not as high for the Improvement Plan work as they were for the Phase 1/11 analysis. KOA Corporation 7 August 16, 2011 The methods to assess congestion and the techniques employed differ between the Phase 1/11 and Improvement Plan reports. For daily, segmental analysis the Phase I report uses a process called the "SANTEC" method published by SANDAG. These are general guidelines for what the upper limit of daily traffic might be on different types of roadway classifications in the region without consideration of the actual conditions during the peak period. The Phase 1/II report also looks at another approach called the "Florida DOT" method to understand the adequacy of roadway segments in the peak hour and in the peak direction. The application of the Florida DOT method in the Phase 1/II report in 2008 necessitates the use of a customized spreadsheet that involves the use of side street volumes rather than one-way volumes as is now the case in the nationally distributed software versions of this same technique that were not available when the Phase 1/11 report was prepared. As a result, volumes could have been over -represented leading to the appearance of more congestion than otherwise would occur. For intersections, the techniques described by the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) are employed for the Phase 1/II report, and this method determines the amount of delay that a driver would experience on the average at either signalized intersections, or it would be the delay to enter from the side street at stop -controlled intersections. Results using the HCM method rather than the ICU method preferred by the City of Carlsbad can lead to slightly different results. In the Improvement Plan process, this technical memorandum employs a method for the adequacy of operation by using the methodology defined in the City of Carlsbad's Traffic Monitoring Program. These techniques are the same methods used to assess a developer impact study presented for a land use decision and environmental study. The ICU method is the regularly used method for TIS and the growth monitoring studies. For roadway segments, the actual hourly, directional traffic volume is divided by the idealized capacity of 1,800 vehicles per hour per lane to obtain a ratio. Depending on whether the ratio is between certain limits the level of service is determined with a ratio of 1.00 being the "capacity" of the roadway lane, or its carrying capacity of 1,800 vehicles per hour in a direction. The intersection process, called the Intersection Capacity Utilization method (ICU), uses a slightly different method to arrive at another measure of utilization based on the conflicts of vehicles within the intersection. Again, the results are expressed as a decimal with 1.00 representing the "capacity". This method has long been employed throughout the County for decades and enjoys the benefit of being simple, easily reproducible and understandable. All of these methods and the software that drives them have a series of default parameters that the analyst can choose to use or revise as appropriate. One example is the percentage of trucks that are assumed to be part of the traffic stream. In the roundabout software the default percentage for trucks is twenty percent, a relatively large percentage for any street, much less La Costa Avenue which the City prohibits from being used for through trucking movements. Depending on how these parameters are adjusted or not to reflect reality can affect the results. Presented Appendix E Aare side -by -side comparison tables of the results of all of these methods as they were reported originally in the Phase 1/II report and as they are now being calculated for the Improvement Plan work which is explained in the other sections of this memo. COST ESTIMATE KOA Corporation 8 August 16, 2011 To estimate costs for the proposed improvements along La Costa Avenue, conceptual drawings were measured and scaled to get approximate quantities. For planning -level estimates, itemized quantities were limited to the primary measurable items such as removal of pavement or concrete, construction of curb, gutter, sidewalk, or full depth asphalt concrete, striping, etc. These estimates were done for each location seen on the concept plans and reference numbers shown in a key map graphic. In addition to the specific concept locations, project -wide improvements such as striping and sidewalk construction were shown. Due to the uncertainty of prices and to be able to bracket the likely cost, we have applied lower and a higher pay item prices. The result is a project cost price range between $3.1 and $4.7 million. Without the "missing link" sidewalk portion of construction, the price range is calculated between $2.3 and $3.5 million. As with all cost estimations, assumptions were made to determine the quantities and costs. The major assumptions made include: • Contingency of 20% of each location total • Traffic Control and Mobilization at 8% of the project construction total • Design, construction management, and administration at 20% of the project construction total • Masonry retaining walls approximately 5 feet high needed for 50% of "missing link" sidewalk construction • Roundabouts would not require major pavement grade reconstruction The complete print out of the planning level cost estimates and key map graphic are included in Appendix F. Attachment A: Figures Attachment B: Counts Attachment C: Concept Attachment D: Analysis Printouts Attachment E: PHASE 1/II Versus Comparison Tables Attachment F: Cost Estimate KOA Corporation 9 August 16, 2011 Attachment A: Figures Exia,nu duionm Sf LEGEND Geometric Configuration 0 Ile" 10 j Peak Hour Volumes Not To ScatL 68 0 AM PM lq�w'wmS,- Peak Hour PCWWrLI St, Peak Hour St, 13 1024 ,x 5,07- 71* 0 IT h. Peak Hour Peak Hour :� , -, 13, La Costa Avenue fisting & 2030 Conditions v 3�0 w °J a V 3. C o ��a Ave. cY c v o O-W C° 0. Ln c, �a�tia �a a 0 Colo 0 0 Esfera S� o0n LEGEND ° ©d `Dd eheO oad R Fe Geometric Configuration 3 `rocanta Qj �a Traffic Signal /Stop Sign o \,eva N 10 J Peak Hour Volumes Not To Scale La Costa Ave. & pr Cadencia St EVLa Costa Ave. & Calle Madero La Costa Ave. & Cadencia St La Costa Ave. & Calle Madero La Costa Ave. & IF Cadencia St La Costa Ave. & Calle F Madero N <--827 <-491 L see Figure 1 r see Fi ure 1 g �19 see Figure 1 �8 i� d 'Y' for volumes 450--� j 26--,�, CO r for volumes 756-� S 32� co d AM PM La Costa Ave. & Gibraltar St La Costa Ave. & Gibraltar St . La Costa Ave. & Gibraltar St Peak Hour Peak Hour IM C H -r F N �3 �794 _ N <-475 W7 -1 33-" 457 731---) La Costa Ave. & Cadencia St. La Costa Ave. & Calle Madero La Costa Ave. & Cadencia St La Costa Ave. & Calle Madero La Costa Ave. & Cadencia St La Costa Ave. & Calle Madero see Figure 1 F-992 C23 see Figure 1 E-589 e-10 E for volumes 540- for volumes 907-� n �1� 1f 31 --�, 38--�k d 2030 2030 Gibraltar Ste & Gibralta Ste & Gibraltar StW'La Costa e. & AM PM J)1T� Peak Hour "-4 Peak Hour _ M '�- F-953 <-570 I 8 40 a u 548-> 877 ---) Figure 2 - Existing & 2030 Conditions KOA Corporation August 2011 La Costa Avenue Existing Conditions LEGEND —15— Average Daily Traffic Figure 3 Existing Roadway Segment Average Daily Traffic Not To Scale KOA Corporation August 2011 La Costa Avenue Existine Conditions LEGEND -15/16- AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Figure 4 Existing AM & PM Peak Hour Segment Volumes Not To Scale KOA Corporation August 2011 La Costa Avenue 2030 Year Conditions LEGEND f —15— Average Daily Traffic Figure 5 N 2030 Roadway Segment Average Daily Traffic Not To Scale KOA Corporation August 2011 La Costa Avenue 2030 Year Conditions LEGEND -15/16- AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Figure 6 2030 AM & PM Peak Hour Segment Volumes Not To Scale KOA Corporation August 2011 Attachment B: Counts Growth Rate 1.20 Corridor '- WEST OF NUEVA CASTILLA WAY -`UN vbtxP= ;I EXISTING L Road Diet VOLUME I UiRI GtPA ITY' vol%CAP LOS EXISTING LANES [APACITY VOL/GAP LCIS' I Road Diet DATE DAY DIR PEAKTIME VOLUME LANES CAPACITY VOL/CAP LOS LANES CAPACITY VOL/CAP LOSF2082 ANES CAPACITY VOL/CAP LOS LANES CAPACITY VOL/CAP LOS 5/25/2010 5/25/2010 TU TU EB WB AM PEAK 7:15-8:15 502 2 3600 0.14 A 1 1800 0.28 A2 3600 0.17 A 1 1800 0.33 A PM PEAK 5:00-6:00 1111 2 3600 0.31 A 1 1800 0.62 B2 3600 0.37 A 1 1800 0.74 D AM PEAK 7:15 - 8A5 983 2 3600 0.27 A 1 1800 0.55 A2 3600 0.33 A 1 1800 0.66 C PM PEAK 2:30-3:30 624 2 3600 0.17 A 1 1800 0.35 A2 3600 0.2.1 A 1 1800 0.42 A AM TOTAL 2485 PM TOTAL 1735 DATE DAY DIR PEAK TIME VOLUME LANESCAPACITY VOL/CAP LOS LANES CAPACITY VOL/CAP LOS VOLUME LANES CAPACITY VOL/CAP LOS LANES CAPACITY VOL/CAP LOS 5/25/2010 5/25/2010 TU TU EB WB AM PEAK 7:00-8:00 525 2 3600 0.15 A 1 1800 0.29 A 630 2 3600 0.18 A 1 1800 0.35 A PM PEAK 5:00-6:00 935 2 3600 0.26 A 1 1800 0.52 A 1122 2 3600 0.31 A 1 1800 0.62 A AM PEAK 7:15 - 8:15 838 2 3600 0.23 A 1 1800 0.47 A 1006 2 3600 0.28 A 1 1800 0.56 B PM PEAK 2:30-330 581 2 3600 0.16 A 1 1800 0.32 A 697 2 3600 0.19 A 1 1800 0.39 A AM TOTAL 1363 1636 PM TOTAL 1516 1819 DATE DAY DIR PEAK TIME VOLUME LANES CAPACITY VOL/CAP LOS LANES CAPACITY VOL/CAP LOS VOLUME LANES CAPACITY VOL/CAP LOS LANES CAPACITY VOL/CAP LOS 5/19/2011 5/19/2011 W W EB WB AM PEAK 1 7:00 - 8:00 445 1 1800 0.25 A 1 1800 0.25 A 534 1 1800 0.30 A 1 1800 0.30 A PM PEAK 5:00-6:00 629 1 1800 0.35 A 1 1800 0.35 A 755 1 1800 0.42 B 1 1800 0.42 B AM PEAK 7:00 - 8:00 677 2 3600 0.19 A 1 1800 0.38 A 812 2 3600 0.23 A 1 1800 0.45 A PM PEAK 3:00-4:00 458 2 3600 0.13 A 1 1800 0.25 A 550 2 3600 0.15 A 1 1800 0.31 A AM TOTAL 1122 1346 PM TOTAL 1087 1304 Existing 2030 Daily Traffic ADT ADT WEST OF NUEVA CASTILLA WAY 17869 21443 15371 18445 12708 15250 Site Name Jurisdiction Study Type Location Code Direction Date Real Time Start Date Start Time Sample Time Operator Number Machine Number Tuesday, May 25, 2010 HR Begin 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 La Costa Avenue-350' w/o Nueva Castilla Way Carlsbad Volume (ch1) 1 East 5/24/2010 15:38 5/24/2010 16:00 00:15 77 27442 Channel 1 HR Total 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-00 48 16 10 12 10 29 7 6 7 9 18 6 3 9 0 6 3 1 1 1 11 1 3 2 5 52 3 6 19 24 158 23 25 49 61 493 352 90 99'' 163 921 '' '� 80 "1 81 348 82 94 73 99 399 90 88 100 121 412 110 106 94 102 476 121 1361 104 115 517 103 115 143 156 605 128 160 169 148 708 175 190 155' 188' 852 206 214 211 221 11111L26?. 1971 2: . 2811 206 188 872 631 168 156' 168 139 468 136 118 105 109 372 125 87 81'' 79' 203 56 51 54 42 97 26 26 33' 12 Total Channel 2 HR Total 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-00 Total Channel 1 + Channel 2 HR Total 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-00 Total Site Name Jurisdiction Study Type Location Code Direction Date Real Time Start Date Start Time Sample Time Operator Number Machine Number Tuesday, May 25, 2010 HR Begin 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 La Costa Avenue-465' w/o Nueva Castilla Way Carlsbad Volume (chl) 3 West 5/24/2010 15:51 5/24/2010 16:00 00:15 77 17341 Channell HR Total 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-00 16 9 4 2 1', 12 4 4 2 2' 4 1 1 1 1 6 0 2 2 2 62 9 17 13 23 175 22 43 48 62 533 97 114 152 170 935 815 185 4331 234'_ 206 275 203 941 173 585 155 132 161 137 476 110 126 122 118 455 115 94 121 125 492 135 133 116 108 469 115 97 140 117 546 548° 85 134 12317' M 138 128 134 547 148 127 583 150 143 153 137 456 1331 1051 99 119 364 99 89` 90 86 244 49 68 - 67 60 186 45 47 48 46 78 32 15' 16 15 44 16 6 9 13 8b31 ]Total Channel 2 HR Total 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-00 Total Channel 1 + Channel 2 HR Total 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-00 Total Site Name Jurisdiction Study Type Location Code Direction Date Real Time Start Date Start Time Sample Time Operator Number Machine Number Tuesday, May 25, 2010 La Costa Avenue-545' e/o Viejo Castilla Way Carlsbad Volume (chi) 2 East 5/24/2010 15:43 5/24/2010 16:00 00:15 77 105329 Channel 1 HR HR Begin Total 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-00 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 48 21 10 9 8 26 6 6 6 8 16 6 2 8 0 4 2 1 0 1 9 0 2 2 5 52 4 7 15 26 155 211 64 525 331 97 96 1104 72 312 76 r 89 343 81 102 342 92 85 390 101 107 84 98 405 82 95 104 124 527 101 140 1491 137' 594 147 152 133 162 732 175 180 186 191' 935- 172 2201 170 149 711 510 138 123 123 126 373 114 95' 94' 70 296 98 68 65 65' 167 47 43' 41 36 89 25 24' 30 10 7892 Total Channel 2 Channel 1 + Channel 2 HR HR Total 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-00 Total 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-00 Total Total Site Name La Costa Avenue-545' e/o Viejo Castilla Way Jurisdiction Carlsbad Study Type Volume (ch1) Location Code 2 Direction West Date 5/24/2010 Real Time 15:46 Start Date 5/24/2010 Start Time 16:00 Sample Time 00:15 Operator Number 77 Machine Number 98242 Tuesday, May 25, 2010 Channel 1 HR HR Begin Total 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-00 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 18 11 5 1 1 11 4 4 1 2 4 1 1 1 1 7 1 1 1 4 55 8 12 12 23 149 23 33 36 57 457 861 102 1231 146 802 681 167 2031 196 172 2} 166 2091 140 485 1401 110 122 113 395 96 102 101 96 381 88 73 111 109 411 114 108- 95 94 400 93 80 '' 124 103 492 4821 72 1221 100 119 98 123 490 '' 129 120 539 139 128 151 121 428 119 101 97 111 295 79 79 73 64 199 40 55 49 55 183 44 51 46 42 77 30 13`' 19 15 38 18 3 8 9 �f4191 I otal Channel 2 HR Total 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-00 Total HR Total 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-00 Total N N O O i f0 .--1 U •q . 2.-� * � a� U N U) 01 C N Ln 06 U) fo 2 4- U U O 06 r�o � z ;o C a fo n. a, a a \ 41 U CL to (ll J C O O -Z i fo U J L1=- V) m U a HLn = fro m LA m w u'f oo oo v, n N —4 Ln r- to m 0. CT N... v- ,- CT cN -1 .4 o0 r\ t0 01 O c � 0 00 � 'D 0 00 � w M 14 CY r, .4 00 V, Cl 00 V Ln CD r, N to N ,-I a% N to N en M M � V' Lo to Ln Vr M r-1 r-i ', 00 � N Ln N O � N O 1� to ~ C o L N M 0 0 0 Cl 0 00 0 0 0 O 0 O a 0 0 0 0 0 O' O O' 0 0 0 0 T- p Y C4 C,q o a'' O 0 O C) O a o a O a o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 o O O N f E f :c 0 r• 00o0oao0'oo00o00o0a00;00;00 o 0 o < p oc:O'oaoc00000roOooao0o000oo 0 o tp a Q� O 0 O O, O O +1 N. V- C' ,--4 N, r1 N N ri Ln -4 r1 a'. O a'. o c) M c O o o c o Ln CU � N CD o(p .M- o� E c o oc 00 O CD O C)o. O o 4 C) a C) 0 0 00 00 00, O 0 0' O 0 rl -� 00 , 1 0 o 0 0 o � r` O O: 0 0 o 0 o a O a O 0' O O o a o a o O o a` o O o o N � N Z O O Ca O CD O O O a O +-i'.. O C) O Cl N N: O +--I' +--1 -4 O a O O O 0, O\ "� \ O ,.y I� \ O N Z a)00 D O O E'c o o f to o .-1 o a o cn m N Ln C31 � 00 N as c 00 r, (ON m r, � M Ln rn O o ^ o C) C)0 M o 00 0 �} N M .-4 N .--I N N ^ fV O .- 0 o � C 0 0 0 0 0 0: o r1 N C) N N O N O Cl O .-1. O O O 0. O a O r, N M p N A C:) O O 00 C, m r\ Q , 14 M �jy M .-1 O ri N Ln N C)rl a1 M N O OR O C V, d" l0 cf' rl LMff t0 M 1-4 (OYi M N 'crCJO t00 N o ID 3 f O > (V N tp 00 M Ln �' '� Qi to cj' (j1 ri N l!1 .1 Qp Lfl 10 N 11I .--1 ll3 In oo \ o \ 0 00 Oo \ o 00 t0 M r-4' M M 0.. M M m cp O N to _ S3 N M M N M to , O Ln .�-1 Lin CO O rl M'. N N —4 N:. co CV (M tl' V, W) V, m N Iq 14 M 00 N 1l M M Ln rl IMff M O LA r• 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-4 O N--1 0' co N Cl) O N Ln O M O 0'i O 0 N o � o N� o p Ln C N O C,0)O p .. 'i o + CV IL Y C4 o E o E a Q a O_ a 2 a \= 3 Ca rn G> Q� 0 0 O 0 O O C)8.. C) O O 0. CDC3 O 0 O 0 O O O 0. C)a.. 0 0 0 0 O' o M w Y Y O N O O O O G? O O IR O O I?0 0 . LO N 00M fQ p 3 d N CL 1p O rl N rn v- Ln to r*, oo di O •-1' N V- tD 0) CD "4 N M 0 0 0 a O 0 0 0' O 0. 4 •4 .--I -4 -4 r-1 ,-1 *-1 -1 ♦ 4 N C 4 N N 0 n 00 ,--i (� In 01 N t\ O lO O N Ol t0 O O 00 .--i Ln n LD t0 O Q o p o p n 00 o p r +-1 + M ri LIl n N O Ln O V- O O Ln M Ln M M r-I d' 00 M Q O Ln ^ 00 Ln O 1-4 M l0 Ln M CO N M M 'T C' V d' M N N .-i N o O N v ^o V M Ln V- � o 3 ~ fn CC o Lr o I M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o j 0 ruV > -0 (n I U N C-4 O a a a 0 0 0 a 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 O v u ELr 0 0 L > a r- O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r o -C r Q O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Lp r I tn a a� U O O O O O O M %0 M .-q V- r4 N N M tO N N r-1 4 O O O O M-g a, o OO 0 c, O a in o Ln a OO > � 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O C;d L i c o fa � C a �p P. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O lV U fV o � I mV o Z ° 0 O O O O O O O N M N�4 O+ i rq N M . 4 r4 r-1 . 4 r1 O •--I O r� 00 00 00 Z Q CY N 0 0 0 M M Oo Ln O Co >° a� a Q Li: O O O O O N Ln N N N M r-1 O -4 "q M V V' H N +-1 -4 . q N 0 N I O O O , 4 , 4 r-I . q -4 -4 r-1 ,-4 , 4 N 00 O^ n o O t' O O 1 O U C O O O O O O r-4 O +--1 O O O O O M+ O O N O O O O O Q c N o O �o c O M fT OO O O O O � � a I fu +-� ,--� N l0 Gr-FO ^ Ln �-1 n. M M o O^ O o O M kO v M M LNn v v kD LO I' 'A ," +-11 N N Ln ^ ^ ko tO E M ri `, Ln j O) o '� o M h. O Ln 01 O Lf'f O N V 00 O V O V N O) n N m 00 N M o o Oo CDo -4 N O� h M M CDri N to v O Z0 00 . q ON N N N ap uM'f CDr� N N -4 -4 N 00 N rn I, Ln a) ^ N V N O N in O O O O O O [t' f" M .-1 M V, .--1 1-4 -4 1 N N O .--1 O O O (4 a, a^ OO 70 0 ,M-1 0 a O n N L. C) '1 d a a Ln `° a.N C g a c E a c E Ln Q a c _ _ a d m d o 0 o O CD 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 CD fn w o R> o m> C N � 0 000 0 O' CD O O CD CD CD O O O CD O O O O O O p Q fu ;. O 9 N M� LCf %b h 00 ai O rb N M I Lfi l0 n 00 01 O .4 N M �p 0 0 0 CO 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 -4 .-1 .-1 -4 1 .-1 rl -4 -4-4N N cV r4 � o x x d N O O _0 u1 V)'T i i LD rl U •4 ?+ ztk W U V) Q1 C O N o6 Lin S La f0 C C fo 0 U O as Zm O CY Ly a � Li Q \ n t' O O U d � J O O fo v O U J w Ln fa U O M N T O M N d p N O O� 1-4 N *-4 M N r, N r\ N M 1-1 O m r, r\ N tD m M N m Qp o V- to N N M O O O M m to M .--I w m m M -T -I m 1-1 00 to to LA r\ to 00 O C) C)w %D m M N ^ 00 1.4 rl 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b o 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 o O o O O O O O o 0 0 0 O O O O O OV- CO r\ 14 Ln V M d" ul N N M N rq O o O CD 0 0 0 0 o O f o .-+ o O o 0 0 0 0 0 o C) 0 C) CD 0 0 Cl O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 o C) CD O o O o O O O 0 0 0 0 0 M M N O M M N v N O O+ 4 O O O 11' M r\ t0 �. 4 -4 O O� M O M M O tO V to V N N M O O O O O O -4 r-+ M O N N O N M +-4 O-4 N O O O O O W o 0 n I, to l0 m 0 o N to N N O to w 1-4 V- -4 M M V V N +-+ O N rl Lf) M W OI- V M O 00 W N v-Lto u1 M O V O O1 N O M M O^ o N ri .-i M M1 tD LLn Ln V- uu) Ln N 0000 ' N Ln V- N-. ,-i-i 00 N -4 V- O 000 O O O O O O: V- co co M V- *q N M I M N N M +q O O O� o Ln O to a a o O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O Ca o O O O O O O O Yl w 0 0 0 o O o o O o 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o �p c fn V- LA' to N 00 Ot CD *4 N M � Ln t0 N 00 O% CD * 4 N M +� O CD CD CD CD CD CD Cl C)O 11 1-4 -4 1-4 1-1 .4 ri 1-4 1-4 ri N N N N� O 0, O N 0 N O N 0 0 0 0 Cl O 0 p M N 0 Ln CD Ln 0 O O CDOO M 00 0 O o OO N Ln u'f nN-� O two C O Cn M OM ^O O N c O m CD O O L � a o E o = 3 " > 0 IL e V- O NO M O 00 00 tD r:,: o c h E o =3 °I Ly a 0 E N n ti 0 0 0 0 O Lp �Ia re) 0 C)n u1 C] > N O 000� u) 4 M c O Cn ON N M Ln .-1 O CD Cl) o 1 ko n M O O Ln O M 0 O N 4 aL � 'o E 0 o Y 0 a f s. 0 0 LO Q1 n �IQ E M LO 0 0) Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project ID: CA11_4144_001 Day: THURSDAY City: City of Carlsbad Date: 5/19/2011 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 0 7:00 AM 9 7 110 4 2 200 332 7:15 AM 11 7 146 4 4 241 413 7:30 AM 7 7 77 5 6 264 366 7:45 AM 15 6 90 6 4 234 355 8:00 AM 13 1 82 8 4 208 316 8:15 AM 7 2 67 4 1 194 275 8:30 AM 11 1 91 2 2 182 289 8:45 AM 19 3 78 4 2 179 285 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 92 0 34 0 0 0 0 741 37 25 1702 0 2631 APPROACH %'s : 73.02% 0.00% 26.98% #DIV/0! #DN/01 #DIV/01 1 0.00% 95.24% 4.76% 1.45% 98.55% 0.00% CONTROL : I -Way Stop (NB) Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project ID: CA11_4144_001 Day: THURSDAY City: City of Carlsbad Date: 5/19/2011 PM NS/EW Streets: NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 0 4:00 PM 10 0 178 9 3 154 354 4:15 PM 7 6 192 15 2 146 368 4:30 PM 9 3 194 19 0 117 342 4:45 PM 7 1 204 11 0 119 342 5:00 PM 5 1 203 16 5 115 345 5:15 PM 5 3 235 19 4 130 396 5:30 PM 9 6 207 22 3 152 399 5:45 PM 8 1 185 20 7 116 337 NL NT NR I SL ST SR EL ET ER I WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 60 0 21 0 0 0 0 1598 131 24 1049 0 2883 APPROACH %'s : 74.07% 0.00% 25.93% #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/01 1 0.00% 92.42% 7.58% 2.24% 97.76% 0.00% CONTROL: 1-Way Stop (NB) ITM Peak Hour Summary Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Nueva Castilla Way and La Costa Ave, City of Carlsbad C-. ft,im Start End AM 7:00 AM 9:00 AM NOON PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM Total Ins & Outs Total Volume Per Leg Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project ID: CA11_4144_002 Day: THURSDAY City: City of Carlsbad Date: 5/19/2011 AM NS/EW Streets: WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 2 0 7:00 AM 8 34 5 113 174 1 335 7:15 AM 18 23 6 148 216 6 417 7:30 AM 8 21 7 73 248 4 361 7:45 AM 10 24 3 97 215 4 353 8:00 AM 3 24 4 78 189 6 304 8:15 AM 4 28 5 60 167 2 266 8:30 AM 5 31 3 88 155 3 285 8:45 AM 5 30 6 76 148 1 266 NIL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAI TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 0 61 0 215 39 733 0 0 1512 27 2587 APPROACH %'s : #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 22.10% 0.00% 77.90% 5.05% 94.95% 0.00% 0.00% 98.25% 1.75% CONTROL : 1-Way Stop (SB) Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project ID: CA11_4144_002 Day: THURSDAY City: City of Carlsbad Date: 5/19/2011 PM NS/EW Streets: EASTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 2 0 4:00 PM 4 11 23 158 143 8 347 4:15 PM 1 17 17 185 133 3 356 4:30 PM 5 10 20 174 106 2 317 4:45 PM 1 9 18 188 109 7 332 5:00 PM 4 15 14 188 104 10 335 5:15 PM 2 9 25 211 125 14 386 5:30 PM 5 16 22 193 136 7 379 5:45 PM S 18 22 163 108 6 322 NIL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 0 27 0 105 161 1460 0 0 964 57 2774 APPROACH Ws : #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 20.45% 0.00% 79.55% 9.93% 90.07% 0.00% 0.00% 94.42% 5.58% CONTROL : 1-Way Stop (SB) ITM Peak Hour Summary Prepared by: Nflia National Data & Surveying Services Vieio Castilla Way and La Costa Ave, City of Carlsbad cowl ft.iws Start End AM 7:00 AM 9:00 AM NOON PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM Total Ins & Outs Total Volume Per Leg ROMERIA ST Southbound Start Time _ _ Left I Thru j Right r Pads i 07:00 2 0 1 0 07:15 3 0 4 0 07:30 4 0 4 0 07:45 1 0 1 0 Total 10 0 10 0 08:00 5 0 2 0 08:15 1 0 3 0 08:30 1 0 3 0 08:45 7 0 2 0 Total 14 0 10 0 *** BREAK *** 16:00 1 0 0 0 16:15 1 0 2 0 16:30 4 0 1 0 16:45 _ _ 1 1 5 0 Total 7 1 8 0 17:00 6 2 0 0 17:15 2 0 4 0 17:30 2 0 1 0 17:45 1 0 4 0 Total C 11 2 9 0 Grand Total 42 3 37 0 Appreh % 51.2 3.7 45.1 0 Total % 1 1 0.1 0.9 0 True Count 4401 Twain Ave, Suite 27 San Diego, CA 92120 File Name : 1175.011A COSTA AVE.ROMERIA ST Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 7/6/2011 Page No : 1 Groups Printed_- Vehicles LA COSTA AVE ROMERIA ST LA COSTA AVE Westbound Northbound Eastbound Left I _ i Right 9 I Pads. Leh � Flog t Fg I ` Pads Left Thru Right - Pads _ Int. Total 1 39 2 0 185 0 118 2 0 11 0 1 0 1 59 3 0 202 0 146 1 0 14 0 1 0 0 58 5 0 233 _0 _ 0 0 12 0 _ _ -0 0 : 0 75 3 _ 0 252 5 060 43 0 4 0 2 231 13 0 872 0 107 0 0 13 0 0 0 2 66 1 0 196 0 119 3 0 9 0 0 0 0 67 2 0 204 1 126 1 0 9 0 3 0 0 79 4 0 227 0 132 1 0 10 0 2_ 0 _ 0 107 4 0: 265 1 484 5 0 41 0 5 0 2 319 11 0 892 0 117 3 0 8 0 1 0 2 132 4 0 268 2 79 1 0 7 0 4 0 0 154 10 0 260 0 89 2 0 9 1 2 0 0 161 6 0 275 0 85 5 0 _ 14 0 4 0 3_ 151 14 0 _ 283 2 370 11 0 38 1 11 0 5 598 34 0 1086 1 87 5 0 6 0 5 0 1 162 9 0 284 0 120 5 0 8 0 t 0 4 169 7 0 320 1 78 5 0 8 l 6 0 2 160 12 0 276 4 11 0 301 2 369 20 0 35 11 16 0 11 666 39 0, 1181 81 6 1778 39 0 157 2 36 0 20 1814 97 0 4031 0.3 97.5 2.1 0 80.5 1 18.5 0 1 93.9 5 0 0.1 44.1 1 0 3.9 0 0.9 0 0.5 45 2.4 0 True Count 4401 Twain Ave, Suite 27 San Diego, CA 92120 File Name : 1175.011A COSTA AVE.ROMERIA ST Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 7/6/2011 Page No :2 ROMERIA ST LA COSTA AVE ROMERIA ST LA COSTA AVE Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right Peds A Left Thru ` 1 Right l Peds Left Thru Right g 1 Peds Left Thru Right Peds APP• I Total Total Total Total Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 to 11:45 - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 08:00 1 5 0 2 0 7 0 107 0 0 107 13 0 0 0 13 2 66 1 0 69 196 08:15 1 0 3 0 4 j 0 119 3 0 122 9 0 0 0 9 0 67 2 0 69 204 08:30 1 1 0 3 0 4 1 126 1 0 128 9 0 3 0 12 0 79 4 0 83 227 08:45 7 0 2 0 9 0 132 1 0 133 10 0 2 0 12 0 107 4 0 111 265 _ Total _ 14 0 10 0 24 1 484 5 0 490 41 0 5 0 46 2 319 11 0 332 �, 892 Volume 58.3 0 41.7 0 0.2 98.8 1 0 189.1 0 10.9 0 0.6 96.1 3.3 0 Total PHF .500 .000 .833 .000 .667 .250 .917 .417 .000 .921 .788 .000 .417 .000 .885 .250 .745 .688 .000 .748 .842 RUMERIA S 1 Out In Total 7I I 24 li 31I 101 0_ 14' 0 Right Thru Left Peds Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 Vehicles Left ai Thru O s RightPeds0 12I 46 581 Out In Total RnMFRIA CT rA 0 D c p C A'] Cn CD < rr (D N'p 6 — N O True Count 4401 Twain Ave, Suite 27 San Diego, CA 92120 ROMERIA ST LA COSTA AVE Southbound Westbound Start Time Left Thru Right Peds Left Thru Right T Peds TAotai i- Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 to 17:45 - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 17:00 17:00 6 2 0 0 8 1, 1 87 5 0 17:15 2 0 4 0 61 0 120 5 0 17:30 2 0 1 0 3 1 1 78 5 0 17:45 1 0 4 0 5 0 84 5 0 Total Volume 11 2 9 0 22 2 369 20 0 `4pp- Total 50 9.1 40.9 0 0.5 94.4 5.1 0 PHF .458 250 .563 .000 688 .500 .769 1.00 .000 File Name : 1175.01.1-A COSTA AVE.ROMERIA ST Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 7/6/2011 Page No : 3 ROMERIA ST LA COSTA AVE Northbound Eastbound A Left Thru Right Peds APP• APP• Int. Left Thru Right Peds Total 111 ` -. j Total Total Total 9 93 6 0 5 0 11 1 162 9 0 172 284 125 8 0 1 0 9 4 169 7 0 180 320 84 8 1 6 0 15 2 160 12 0 174 276 89 j 13 0 4 0 17 4 175 11 _ 0 190 301 391 35 1 16 0 52 11 666 39 0 716 1181 67.3 1.9 30.8 0 1.5 93 5.4 0 782 .673 .250 .667 .000 .765 .688 .951 .813 .000 i .942 I .923 True Count 4401 Twain Ave, Suite 27 San Diego, CA 92120 File Name : 1175.021A COSTA AVE.CADENCIA ST Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 7/6/2011 Page No :1 Groups Printed_- Vehicles CADENCIA ST LA COSTA AVE CADENCIA ST LA COSTA AVE SOhthbO Westbound Northbound Eastbound EThSub Start Time . Left ` Rndt g Peds Left hSubOURi ht g i Peds Left t Peds 9 , . _- - Left 4 Peds Int. Total 07:00 9 0 10 0 2 102 4 0 0 0 2 0 3 44 1 0 177 07:15 9 0 19 0 0 90 3 0 3 0 2 0 4 54 0 0 184 07:30 7 1 23 0 1 t00 3 0 2 0 5 0 5 59 0 0 206 07:45 6 0 29 0 2 130 1 0 2 2 5 0 5 74 0 0 256 Total 31 1 81 0 5 422 11 0 7 2 14 0 17 231 1 0 823 08:00 7 0 23 0 2 72 5 0 0 1 6 0 8 63 2 0 189 08:15 7 0 16 0 0 94 6 0 0 1 3 0 6 61 1 0 195 08:30 11 1 23 0 6 99 1 0 1 1 2 0 6 81 1 0 233 08:45 16 1 21 0 2 93 9 0 3 0 3 0 12 98 0 0 258 Total, 41 2 83 0 10 358 21 0 _ 4 3 14 0 32 303 4 0 875 *** BREAK *** 16:00 6 0 13 0 3 88 17 0, 1 0 1 0 8 109 1 0 247 16:15 8 2 12 0 1 4 66 9 0 0 4 4 0 13 127 4 0 253 16:30 8 0 13 0 6 72 6 0 2 2 1 0 13 110 2 0 235 16:45 12 4 11 0 2 68 9 0 1 2 3 0 14 123 4 0 j 253 Total 34 6 49 0 15 294 41 01 4 8 9 01 48 469 11 0 988 17:00 10 3 11 0 6 64 11 0 3 0 8 0 16 135 1 0 268 17:15 10 2 15 0, 4 108 13 0 4 0 2 0 16 118 3 0 295 17:30 5 1 6 0 1 75 15 0 0 1 5 0 16 130 5 0 260 17:45 8 2 12 0 3 60 9 0 1 3 5 0 1 14 109 _ 4 0 230 Total 33 8 44 0 14 307 48 0 8 4 20 0 I 62 492 13 0 1053 Grand Total 'ii 139 17 257 0 44 1381 121 0 23 17 57 0 159 1495 29 0 I 3739 Apprch % 33.7 4.1 62.2 0 2.8 89.3 7.8 0 23.7 17.5 58.8 0 9.4 88.8 1.7 0 Total %' 3.7 0.5 6.9 0 1.2 36.9 3.2 0 0.6 0.5 1.5 0 4.3 40 0.8 0 True Count 4401 Twain Ave, Suite 27 San Diego, CA 92120 File Name: 1175.02.1 A COSTA AVE.CADENCIA ST Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 7/6/2011 Page No : 2 CADENCIA ST LA COSTA AVE CADENCIA ST LA COSTA AVE Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right Peds A Total i Left Thru Right I Pods Total Left Thru '.I Right Peds A Total Left Thru Right Peds APP• Total Int. 'I Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 to 11:45 - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 08:00 7 0 23 0 30 2 72 5 0 79 0 1 6 0 7 li 8 63 2 0 73 189 08:15 7 0 16 0 23 0 94 6 0 100 0 1 3 0 4 1 6 61 1 0 68 195 08:30 1 11 1 23 0 35 6 99 1 0 106 I 1 2 0 4 6 81 l 0 88 233 08:45 16 1 21 0 38 2 93 9 0 104 3 0 3 _ _ _ 0 _ 6 12 98 0 0 110 _ 258Total Volume 41 2 83 0 126 j 10 358 21 0 389 4 3 14 0 21 32 303 4 0 339 875 Total 32.5 Tota L6 65.9 0 2.6 92 5.4 0 19 14.3 66.7 0 9.4 89.4 L2 0 PHF .641 .500 .902 .000 .829 .417 .904 .583 .000 .917 .333 .750 .583 .000 .750 .667 .773 .500 .000 .770 .848 CADENCIA ST Out In Total 56 I 126 18� 831 2 41'' 01 Right Thru Left Peds 4 1 / Peak Hour Data m ao 04 ch r A pI� F— J f� O LU North ODIC D Q �Q) < C <n F Peak Hour Begins at 08:0d �'�W C '� �W ��= O co D O Vehicles CD 1 x o < hm O,. -4 a CL 4I Left Thru Right Peds 41 31 141 OII 16 21i I 37I Out In Total True Count 4401 Twain Ave, Suite 27 San Diego, CA 92120 File Name : 1175.021A COSTA AVE.CADENCIA ST Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 7/6/2011 Page No :3 CADENCIA ST LA COSTA AVE CADENCIA ST LA COSTA AVE Souhbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right Peds Total Left Thru Right I Peds _Total Left r_ Thru Right Peds Total Left Thru ! Right I Pods Total Total Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 to 17:45 - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 16:45 16:45 12 4 11 0 27 2 68 9 0 79 1 2 3 0 6 14 123 4 0 141 253 17:00', 10 3 11 0 24 6 64 11 0 81 3 0 8 0 11 1 16 135 1 0 152 1 268 17:15 10 2 15 0 27 4 108 13 0 125 4 0 2 0 6' 16 118 3 0 137 295 17:30 5 1 6 0 12 1 75 15 0 91 0 1_ _ 5 0 6 I 16 130 5 0 151 260 Total 37 10 43 0 90 13 315 48 0 376 8 3 18 0 29 62 506 13 0 581 1076 Volume 41. I 11. l 47.8 0 3.5 83.8 12.8 0 27.6 10.3 62.1 0 10.7 87.1 2.2 0 Total PHF .771 .625 .717 .000 .833 i .542 .729 .800 .000 .752 t.500 .375 .563 .000 .659, .969 .937 .650 .000 .956 .912 CADENCIA ST Out In Total 1131 l go; 203 443E 10 371 0 Right Thru Left Peds 4� 1 ► Peak Hour Data t <D Hrn J ?00 rn'CO > North a!!,ul co L ► ~ 4 ?'w c U) Peak Hour Begins at 16:49 g � J D Orn 1 Vehicles . C',� D W m O 0 m T ID 'D'O^ I,W d o_ moll Left Thru Right Peds 81 3 181 11 01 36i l 291 65l Out In Total ccum NO, . Start End AM 7:00 AM 9:00 AM NOON PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM Total Ins & Outs ITM Peak Hour Summary Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Ca/le Madero and La Costa Ave, City of Carlsbad Total Volume Per Leg C... P.n.. Start End AM 7:00 AM 9:00 AM NOON PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM Total Ins & Outs ITM Peak Hour Summary Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Gibraltar St and La Costa Ave, City of Carlsbad Total Volume Per Leg Attachment C: Concept TYPICAL SECTION (A) Looking Eastbound may'- EXISTING o I;-�_< `�s: h NEW TYPICAL SECTION (B) Looking Eastbound 0 TYPICAL SECTION (C) Looking Eastbound EXISTING ,._ 4 4 NEW -KING 0 tv w ,- " I I 7, ,,, 1,0 TYPICAL SECTION (C) Looking Eastbound EXISTING NEW t4+) TYPICAL SECTION (D) Looking Eastbound R', NMI m TYPICAL SECTION (C) Looking Eastbound EXISTING NEW t4+) TYPICAL SECTION (D) Looking Eastbound R', NMI m Attachment D: Analysis Printouts Existing Conditions Intersection Capacity Utilization 3: La Costa Avenue & Nueva Castilla Way Timing Plan: AM Movement ,... _ WBt. s Lane Configurations tt r tt Vi Volume (vph) 423 19 16 939 42 27 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 423 19 16 939 42 27 Lane Utilization Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 3618 1615 1805 3618 1805 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%p.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No Reference Time (s) 14.0 1.4 1.1 31.1 2.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 18.0 8.0 8.0 35.1 8.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 1809 120 1809 120 Reference Time A (s) 14.0 16.0 31.1 41.9 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 14.0 31.1 Adj Reference Time (s) 18.0 35.1 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 14.0 1.1 31.1 2.8 Ref Time Seperate (s) 14.0 1.1 31.1 2.8 Reference Time (s) 14.0 31.1 31.1 2.8 Adj Reference Time (s) 18.0 35.1 35.1 8.0 Summary EB W Protected Option (s) 35.1 NA Permitted Option (s) 35.1 Err Split Option (s) 53.2 8.0 Minimum (s) 35.1 8.0 43.1 Righf Tums _ NCR „z Adj Reference Time (s) 8.0 8.0 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 0.0 18.0 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 8.0 0.0 Combined (s) 16.0 26.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.0% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. Existing AM without Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 1 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Intersection Capacity Utilization 4: La Costa Avenue & Viejo Castilla Wy Timing Plan: AM ."* -I. 4-, \I. 41 Lane Configurations fit tt r r Volume (vph) 21 431 853 15 44 102 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 21 431 853 15 44 102 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 3618 3618 1615 1805 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No Reference Time (s) 1.4 14.3 28.3 1.1 7.6 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.0 18.3 32.3 12.0 11.6 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1809 1809 120 Reference Time A (s) 20.9 14.3 28.3 43.9 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 20.9 28.3 Adj Reference Time (s) 24.9 32.3 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 1.4 14.3 28.3 2.9 Ref Time Seperate (s) 1.4 14.3 28.3 2.9 Reference Time (s) 14.3 14.3 28.3 2.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 18.3 18.3 32.3 9.0 _. . Sum ';_ = G -E Protected Option (s) 41.3 NA Permitted Option (s) 32.3 Err Split Option (s) 50.6 9.0 Minimum (s) 32.3 9.0 41.3 R�Jign. Tull, ... .. WBA z - ,.. Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 11.6 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 0.0 32.3 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.0 0.0 Combined (s) 21.0 43.9 Kite eta Stim a - - .3=: _ �. Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.6% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. Existing AM without Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 2 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Intersection Capacity Utilization 7: La Costa Avenue & Romeria St Timing Plan: AM Lane Configurations t r '� tt r *T r +T r Volume (vph) 2 319 11 1 484 5 41 0 5 14 0 10 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 2 319 11 1 484 5 0 41 5 0 14 10 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 1900 1615 1805 3618 1615 0 1805 1615 0 1805 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No No Reference Time (s) 0.1 20.1 0.8 0.1 16.1 0.4 0.4 0.7 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.0 24.1 12.0 9.0 20.1 12.0 9.0 9.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1900 120 1809 0 120 0 120 Reference Time A (s) 2.0 20.1 1.0 16.1 0.0 40.9 0.0 14.0 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA 10.7 10.7 8.9 8.9 Reference Time (s) 20.1 16.1 10.7 8.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 24.1 20.1 14.7 12.9 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 0.1 20.1 0.1 16.1 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.9 Ref Time Seperate (s) 0.1 20.1 0.1 16.1 2.7 0.0 0.9 0.0 Reference Time (s) 20.1 20.1 16.1 16.1 2.7 2.7 0.9 0.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 24.1 24.1 20.1 20.1 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Protected Option (s) 33.1 NA Permitted Option (s) 24.1 14.7 Split Option (s) 44.2 18.0 Minimum (s) 24.1 14.7 38.9 RWZ erns � WBR, , NBR B - ® Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 12.0 9.0 9.0 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 24.1 20.1 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Combined (s) 30.0 30.0 42.1 38.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 35.1 % ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. Existing AM without Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 3 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Intersection Capacity Utilization 9: La Costa Avenue & Cadencia St Timing Plan: AM --* --P� -,* f- .4--- 4�- 4\ I l0. \0` t Lane Configurations t r tt r 4 r *T r Volume (vph) 32 303 4 10 358 21 4 3 14 41 2 83 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 32 303 4 10 358 21 0 7 14 0 43 83 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.97 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 1900 1615 1805 3618 1615 0 1846 1615 0 1809 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No No Reference Time (s) 2.1 19.1 0.3 0.7 11.9 1.6 1.0 6.2 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.0 23.1 12.0 9.0 15.9 12.0 9.0 10.2 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1900 120 1809 0 188 0 124 Reference Time A (s) 31.9 19.1 10.0 11.9 0.0 4.5 0.0 41.5 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA 8.3 8.5 10.7 10.9 Reference Time (s) 31.9 11.9 4.5 10.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 35.9 15.9 9.0 14.9 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 2.1 19.1 0.7 11.9 0.0 0.5 0.0 2.9 Ref Time Seperate (s) 2.1 19.1 0.7 11.9 0.3 0.2 2.7 0.1 Reference Time (s) 19.1 19.1 11.9 11.9 0.5 0.5 2.9 2.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 23.1 23.1 15.9 15.9 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 31 `yVS. � e� _ _ Protected Option (s) 32.1 NA Permitted Option (s) 35.9 14.9 Split Option (s) 39.0 18.0 Minimum (s) 32.1 14.9 47.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 12.0 9.0 10.2 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 23.1 15.9 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Combined (s) 30.0 30.0 41.1 35.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.2% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan Existing AM without Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 4 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Intersection Capacity Utilization 3: La Costa Avenue & Nueva Castilla Way Timing Plan: PM Lane Configurations tt r Vi tt Vi r Volume (vph) 849 68 12 516 26 11 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 849 68 12 516 26 11 Lane Utilization Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 3618 1615 1805 3618 1805 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%)1.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No Reference Time (s) 28.2 5.1 0.8 17.1 0.8 Adj Reference Time (s) 32.2 9.1 8.0 21.1 8.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 1809 120 1809 120 Reference Time A (s) 28.2 12.0 17.1 25.9 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 28.2 17.1 Adj Reference Time (s) 32.2 21.1 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 28.2 0.8 17.1 1.7 Ref Time Seperate (s) 28.2 0.8 17.1 1.7 Reference Time (s) 28.2 17.1 17.1 1.7 Adj Reference Time (s) 32.2 21.1 21.1 8.0 _ �_ 3 ES • _ dried Protected Option (s) 40.2 NA Permitted Option (s) 32.2 Err Split Option (s) 53.3 8.0 Minimum (s) 32.2 8.0 40.2 Existing PM without Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 1 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Intersection Capacity Utilization 4: La Costa Avenue & Viejo Castilla Wy Timing Plan: PM 'A � � \0. Lane Configurations tt tt r r Volume (vph) 79 780 474 38 12 49 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 79 780 474 38 12 49 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 3618 3618 1615 1805 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No Reference Time (s) 5.3 25.9 15.7 2.8 3.6 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.3 29.9 19.7 12.0 9.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1809 1809 120 Reference Time A (s) 78.8 25.9 15.7 12.0 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 78.8 15.7 Adj Reference Time (s) 82.8 19.7 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 5.3 25.9 15.7 0.8 Ref Time Seperate (s) 5.3 25.9 15.7 0.8 Reference Time (s) 25.9 25.9 15.7 0.8 Adj Reference Time (s) 29.9 29.9 19.7 9.0 ;,�' -- Protected Option (s) 29.9 NA Permitted Option (s) 82.8 Err Split Option (s) 49.6 9.0 Minimum (s) 29.9 9.0 38.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 9.0 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 0.0 19.7 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.3 0.0 Combined (s) 21.3 28.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 32.4% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan Existing PM without Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 2 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Intersection Capacity Utilization 7: La Costa Avenue & Romeria St Timing Plan: PM Lane Configurations t r tt r +T r 4 r Volume (vph) 11 666 39 2 369 20 35 1 16 11 2 9 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 11 666 39 2 369 20 0 36 16 0 13 9 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.96 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 1900 1615 1805 3618 1615 0 1808 1615 0 1820 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No No Reference Time (s) 0.7 42.1 2.9 0.1 12.2 1.5 1.2 0.7 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.0 46.1 12.0 9.0 16.2 12.0 9.0 9.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1900 120 1809 0 123 0 136 Reference Time A (s) 11.0 42.1 2.0 12.2 0.0 35.2 0.0 11.5 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA 10.3 10.4 8.7 8.9 Reference Time (s) 42.1 12.2 10.4 8.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 46.1 16.2 14.4 12.9 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 0.7 42.1 0.1 12.2 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.9 Ref Time Seperate (s) 0.7 42.1 0.1 12.2 2.3 0.1 0.7 0.1 Reference Time (s) 42.1 42.1 12.2 12.2 2.4 2.4 0.9 0.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 46.1 46.1 16.2 16.2 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Sumrrt r _ N8 �st#ai Protected Option (s) 55.1 NA Permitted Option (s) 46.1 14.4 Split Option (s) 62.3 18.0 Minimum (s) 46.1 14.4 60.5 "N ttlrr ERR 111BR NCR I Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 12.0 9.0 9.0 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 46.1 16.2 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Combined (s) 30.0 30.0 64.1 34.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.4% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. Existing PM without Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 3 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Intersection Capacity Utilization 9: La Costa Avenue & Cadencia St Timing Plan: PM v . E 3$ 3 Lane Configurations r tt r 4 r 4 r Volume (vph) 62 506 13 13 315 48 8 3 18 37 10 43 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 62 506 13 13 315 48 0 11 18 0 47 43 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.96 0.85 0.95 0.96 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 1900 1615 1805 3618 1615 0 1831 1615 0 1825 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No No Reference Time (s) 4.1 32.0 1.0 0.9 10.4 3.6 1.3 3.2 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.0 36.0 12.0 9.0 14.4 12.0 9.0 9.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1900 120 1809 0 153 0 144 Reference Time A (s) 61.8 32.0 13.0 10.4 0.0 8.6 0.0 39.2 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA 8.5 8.7 10.5 11.1 Reference Time (s) 61.8 13.0 8.6 11.1 Adj Reference Time (s) 65.8 17.0 12.6 15.1 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 4.1 32.0 0.9 10.4 0.0 0.7 0.0 3.1 Ref Time Seperate (s) 4.1 32.0 0.9 10.4 0.5 0.2 2.5 0.6 Reference Time (s) 32.0 32.0 10.4 10.4 0.7 0.7 3.1 3.1 Adj Reference Time (s) 36.0 36.0 14.4 14.4 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 umcn . -. Protected Option (s) 45.0 NA Permitted Option (s) 65.8 15.1 Split Option (s) 50.4 18.0 Minimum (s) 45.0 15.1 60.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 12.0 9.0 9.0 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 36.0 14.4 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Combined (s) 30.0 30.0 54.0 32.4 e In ,,, „ _ . rt - Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.0% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. Existing PM without Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 4 Katz, Okitsu & Associates '7,i E') INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Nuevo Castilla Way - Ex AM With Project Intersection Type Roundabout N CU ch U) cip Iq �.__ J 42 21 E , Nueva Castillo No color code in this display Site: Ex AM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\July 2011\LOS Analysis\Sidra\Nueva Castilla Wy.aap Processed Jul 08, 2011 11:06:28AM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Nuevo Castilla Way Ex AM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent -------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. °Exit Cap. 0-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ---------------------------------------------------------------------- West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 17 0.0 17 0 N 0.998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- South: Nueva Castillo Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 445 0.0 445 0 N 0.988 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- East: E. La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 44 0.0 44 0 N 0.993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Table SAS - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Nuevo Castilla Way Ex AM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 2T T 445 1505 0.296 6.8 A 2.5 62 2R R 20 68 0.294 7.6 A 2.5 62 ----------------------------------------------------------------- South: Nueva Castillo 3L L 44 562 0.078 14.2 A 0.5 13 8R R 28 358 0.078 10.0 A 0.5 13 ----------------------------------------------------------------- East: E. La Costa Ave 1L L 17 26 0.654 12.3 B 9.6 241 6T T 988 1487 0.664* 7.1 B 9.6 241 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL VEHICLES: 1542 0.664 B 9.6 241 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) Intersection Capacity Utilization 4: La Costa Avenue & Viejo Castilla Wy Timing Plan: AM 'A -40. 4-1 1* 41 Lane Configurations t t r r Volume (vph) 21 431 853 15 44 102 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 21 431 853 15 44 102 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 1900 1900 1615 1805 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No Reference Time (s) 1.4 27.2 53.9 1.1 7.6 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.0 31.2 57.9 12.0 11.6 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1900 1900 120 Reference Time A (s) 20.9 27.2 53.9 43.9 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 27.2 53.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 31.2 57.9 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 1.4 27.2 53.9 2.9 Ref Time Seperate (s) 1.4 27.2 53.9 2.9 Reference Time (s) 27.2 27.2 53.9 2.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 31.2 31.2 57.9 9.0 ilCt1'. - Protected Option (s) 66.9 NA Permitted Option (s) 57.9 Err Split Option (s) 89.1 9.0 Minimum (s) 57.9 9.0 66.9 „ Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 11.6 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 0.0 57.9 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.0 0.0 Combined (s) 21.0 69.5 In cic�_ a Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.9% ICU Level of Service B Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan Existing AM with Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 1 Katz, Okitsu & Associates INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Romeria St - Ex AM With Project Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display ►-4 Site: Ex AM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\July 2011\LOS Ana lysis\Sidra\Romeria St.aap Processed Jul 08, 2011 11:13:09AM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Romeria St Ex AM With Project Intersection ID: 3 Roundabout ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent -------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. %Exit Cap. 0-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ---------------------------------------------------------------------- West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 17 0.0 17 0 N 0.997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- South: S Romeria St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 353 0.0 353 0 N 0.991 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- East: E La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 46 0.0 46 0 N 0.994 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- North: N Romeria St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 554 0.0 554 0 N 0.969 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Table SAS - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Romeria St Ex AM With Project Intersection ID: 3 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 51, L 2 9 0.222 11.9 A 1.8 46 2T T 336 1485 0.226 6.8 A 1.8 46 2R R 12 53 0.226 7.6 A 1.8 46 ----------------------------------------------------------------- South: S Romeria St 3L L 43 867 0.050 13.6 A 0.3 8 8T T 1 20 0.050 8.5 A 0.3 8 8R R 5 101 0.050 9.3 A 0.3 8 ----------------------------------------------------------------- East: E La Costa Ave 1L L 1 3 0.333 12.1 A 3.2 80 6T T 509 1433 0.355 7.0 A 3.2 80 6R R 5 14 0.357* 7.8 A 3.2 80 ----------------------------------------------------------------- North: N Romeria St 7L L 15 464 0.032 14.8 A 0.2 5 4T T 1 31 0.032 9.6 A 0.2 5 4R R 11 340 0.032 10.5 A 0.2 5 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL VEHICLES: 941 0.357 A 3.2 80 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) Intersection Capacity Utilization 9: La Costa Avenue & Cadencia St Timing Plan: AM -,* -• -,* f- 4\ t 0* 1 4/ E 'F BR _L. i�T °-_1C = ° tl, _ :; `w`.. , .SSR Lane Configurations t r t r Volume (vph) 32 303 4 10 358 21 4 3 14 41 2 83 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 32 303 4 10 358 21 0 7 14 0 43 83 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.97 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 1900 1615 1805 1900 1615 0 1846 1615 0 1809 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No No Reference Time (s) 2.1 19.1 0.3 0.7 22.6 1.6 1.0 6.2 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.0 23.1 12.0 9.0 26.6 12.0 9.0 10.2 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1900 120 1900 0 188 0 124 Reference Time A (s) 31.9 19.1 10.0 22.6 0.0 4.5 0.0 41.5 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA 8.3 8.5 10.7 10.9 Reference Time (s) 31.9 22.6 4.5 10.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 35.9 26.6 9.0 14.9 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 2.1 19.1 0.7 22.6 0.0 0.5 0.0 2.9 Ref Time Seperate (s) 2.1 19.1 0.7 22.6 0.3 0.2 2.7 0.1 Reference Time (s) 19.1 19.1 22.6 22.6 0.5 0.5 2.9 2.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 23.1 23.1 26.6 26.6 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Surft ., _ Ettl B Sly ° Gom_ _ - - - - Protected Option (s) 35.6 NA Permitted Option (s) 35.9 14.9 Split Option (s) 49.7 18.0 Minimum (s) 35.6 14.9 50.5 Ri .:: - EBBNBIR Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 12.0 9.0 10.2 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 23.1 26.6 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Combined (s) 30.0 30.0 41.1 45.8 r=: Intqrse0W,S a4 _ N.., Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.1 % ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. Existing AM with Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 2 Katz, Okitsu & Associates 1 INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Nueva Castilla Way - Ex PM With Project Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display r 0 �j C CD Site: Ex PM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\July 2011\LOS Analysis\Sidra\Nueva Castilla Wy.aap Processed Jul 08, 2011 11:06:28AM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Nueva Castilla Way Ex PM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent -------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow oHV Adjust. °Exit Cap. 0-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ---------------------------------------------------------------------- West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 13 0.0 13 0 N 0.999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- South: Nueva Castillo Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 894 0.0 894 0 N 0.958 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- East: E. La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 27 0.0 27 0 N 0.994 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Table SAS - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Nueva Castilla Way Ex PM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 2T T 894 1525 0.586* 6.8 A 6.9 173 2R R 72 123 0.585 7.7 A 6.9 173 ----------------------------------------------------------------- South: Nueva Castillo 3L L 27 436 0.062 18.2 A 0.5 11 8R R 12 194 0.062 13.9 A 0.5 11 ----------------------------------------------------------------- East: E. La Costa Ave 1L L 13 36 0.361 12.0 A 3.6 90 6T T 543 1491 0.364 6.8 A 3.6 90 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL VEHICLES: 1561 0.586 A 6.9 173 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) Intersection Capacity Utilization 4: La Costa Avenue & Viejo Castilla Wy Timing Plan: PM --10. 4--- 4., 4/ Lane Configurations t t r r Volume (vph) 79 780 474 38 12 49 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 79 780 474 38 12 49 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 1900 1900 1615 1805 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No Reference Time (s) 5.3 49.3 29.9 2.8 3.6 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.3 53.3 33.9 12.0 9.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1900 1900 120 Reference Time A (s) 78.8 49.3 29.9 12.0 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 78.8 29.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 82.8 33.9 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 5.3 49.3 29.9 0.8 Ref Time Seperate (s) 5.3 49.3 29.9 0.8 Reference Time (s) 49.3 49.3 29.9 0.8 Adj Reference Time (s) 53.3 53.3 33.9 9.0 tE B 11i11 _ - _ �ritill AN _ r_ . Protected Option (s) 53.3 NA Permitted Option (s) 82.8 Err Split Option (s) 87.2 9.0 Minimum (s) 53.3 9.0 62.3 Right Too Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 9.0 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 0.0 33.9 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.3 0.0 Combined (s) 21.3 42.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.9% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. Existing PM with Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 1 Katz, Okitsu & Associates INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Romeria St - Ex PM With Project 2-r N Romeria St S Romeria St J W Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display Site: Ex PM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Eva ulation-Phase II\July 2011\LOS Ana lysis\Sidra\Romeria St.aap Processed Jul 08, 2011 11:13:09AM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Romeria St Ex PM With Project Intersection ID: 3 Roundabout ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent -------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. %Exit Cap. 0-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ---------------------------------------------------------------------- West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 16 0.0 16 0 N 0.998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- South: S Romeria St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 724 0.0 724 0 N 0.969 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- East: E La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 49 0.0 49 0 N 0.993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- North: N Romeria St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 427 0.0 427 0 N 0.979 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Table SAS - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Romeria St Ex PM With Project Intersection ID: 3 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 5L L 12 26 0.462 11.9 A 4.9 124 2T T 701 1500 0.467* 6.8 A 4.9 124 2R R 41 88 0.466 7.7 A 4.9 124 ----------------------------------------------------------------- South: S Romeria St 3L L 37 494 0.075 16.3 A 0.5 13 8T T 1 13 0.077 11.2 A 0.5 13 8R R 17 227 0.075 12.1 A 0.5 13 ----------------------------------------------------------------- East: E La Costa Ave 1L L 2 7 0.286 12.1 A 2.5 61 6T T 388 1340 0.290 7.0 A 2.5 61 6R R 21 72 0.292 7.8 A 2.5 61 ----------------------------------------------------------------- North: N Romeria St 7L L 12 482 0.025 13.9 A 0.2 4 4T T 2 80 0.025 8.8 A 0.2 4 4R R 9 362 0.025 9.7 A 0.2 4 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL VEHICLES: 1243 0.467 A 4.9 124 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) Intersection Capacity Utilization 9: La Costa Avenue & Cadencia St Timing Plan: PM -1, --1. -'�v f- ♦- 4- 4\ t It. 1 -V Lane Configurations I t r t r 4 r ft r Volume (vph) 62 506 13 13 315 48 8 3 18 37 10 43 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 62 506 13 13 315 48 0 11 18 0 47 43 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.96 0.85 0.95 0.96 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 1900 1615 1805 1900 1615 0 1831 1615 0 1825 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No No Reference Time (s) 4.1 32.0 1.0 0.9 19.9 3.6 1.3 3.2 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.0 36.0 12.0 9.0 23.9 12.0 9.0 9.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1900 120 1900 0 153 0 144 Reference Time A (s) 61.8 32.0 13.0 19.9 0.0 8.6 0.0 39.2 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA 8.5 8.7 10.5 11.1 Reference Time (s) 61.8 19.9 8.6 11.1 Adj Reference Time (s) 65.8 23.9 12.6 15.1 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 4.1 32.0 0.9 19.9 0.0 0.7 0.0 3.1 Ref Time Seperate (s) 4.1 32.0 0.9 19.9 0.5 0.2 2.5 0.6 Reference Time (s) 32.0 32.0 19.9 19.9 0.7 0.7 3.1 3.1 Adj Reference Time (s) 36.0 36.0 23.9 23.9 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Su NB 4 = r _ . Protected Option (s) 45.0 NA Permitted Option (s) 65.8 15.1 Split Option (s) 59.9 18.0 Minimum (s) 45.0 15.1 60.0 RIO t Turns _ R vi S t, SIM _ Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 12.0 9.0 9.0 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 36.0 23.9 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Combined (s) 30.0 30.0 54.0 41.9 L rsectkS m _, ,.... „. v«..WLm, n .. s . T,.. _. _...... Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.0% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. Existing PM with Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 2 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Future Conditions Intersection Capacity Utilization 3: La Costa Avenue & Nueva Castilla Way Timing Plan: AM err = EBR _ N = Lane Configurations tt r tt Volume (vph) 508 23 19 1127 50 32 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 508 23 19 1127 50 32 Lane Utilization Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 3618 1615 1805 3618 1805 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%p.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No Reference Time (s) 16.9 1.7 1.3 37.4 2.4 Adj Reference Time (s) 20.9 8.0 8.0 41.4 8.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 1809 120 1809 120 Reference Time A (s) 16.9 18.9 37.4 49.9 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 16.9 37.4 Adj Reference Time (s) 20.9 41.4 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 16.9 1.3 37.4 3.3 Ref Time Seperate (s) 16.9 1.3 37.4 3.3 Reference Time (s) 16.9 37.4 37.4 3.3 Adj Reference Time (s) 20.9 41.4 41.4 8.0 urrrra`. N eti Protected Option (s) 41.4 NA Permitted Option (s) 41.4 Err Split Option (s) 62.2 8.0 Minimum (s) 41.4 8.0 49.4 F` `Fume EBR NBRkv Adj Reference Time (s) 8.0 8.0 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 0.0 20.9 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 8.0 0.0 Combined (s) 16.0 28.9 tnte orr Su f Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.2% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. 2030 AM without Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 1 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Intersection Capacity Utilization 4: La Costa Avenue & Viejo Castilla Wy Timing Plan: AM Lane Configurations tt tt r r Volume (vph) 25 517 1024 18 53 122 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1960 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 25 517 1024 18 53 122 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 3618 3618 1615 1805 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No Reference Time (s) 1.7 17.1 34.0 1.3 9.1 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.0 21.1 38.0 12.0 13.1 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1809 1809 120 Reference Time A (s) 24.9 17.1 34.0 52.9 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 24.9 34.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 28.9 38.0 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 1.7 17.1 34.0 3.5 Ref Time Seperate (s) 1.7 17.1 34.0 3.5 Reference Time (s) 17.1 17.1 34.0 3.5 Adj Reference Time (s) 21.1 21.1 38.0 9.0 Summary Protected Option (s) 47.0 NA Permitted Option (s) 38.0 Err Split Option (s) 59.1 9.0 Minimum (s) 38.0 9.0 47.0 t TO*"3 .WBR -_ R - Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 13.1 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 0.0 38.0 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.0 0.0 Combined (s) 21.0 51.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.5% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. 2030 AM without Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 2 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Intersection Capacity Utilization 7: La Costa Avenue & Romeria St Timing Plan: AM - Lane Configurations t r tt r3 + r - *T Volume (vph) 2 383 13 1 581 6 49 0 6 17 0 12 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 2 383 13 1 581 6 0 49 6 0 17 12 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 1900 1615 1805 3618 1615 0 1805 1615 0 1805 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No No Reference Time (s) 0.1 24.2 1.0 0.1 19.3 0.4 0.4 0.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.0 28.2 12.0 9.0 23.3 12.0 9.0 9.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1900 120 1809 0 120 0 120 Reference Time A (s) 2.0 24.2 1.0 19.3 0.0 48.9 0.0 17.0 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA 11.3 11.3 9.1 9.1 Reference Time (s) 24.2 19.3 11.3 9.1 Adj Reference Time (s) 28.2 23.3 15.3 13.1 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 0.1 24.2 0.1 19.3 0.0 3.3 0.0 1.1 Ref Time Seperate (s) 0.1 24.2 0.1 19.3 3.3 0.0 1.1 0.0 Reference Time (s) 24.2 24.2 19.3 19.3 3.3 3.3 1.1 1.1 Adj Reference Time (s) 28.2 28.2 23.3 23.3 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 , urri aR B xr m„ - -; Protected Option (s) 37.2 NA Permitted Option (s) 28.2 15.3 Split Option (s) 51.5 18.0 Minimum (s) 28.2 15.3 43.4 NEB _, r �.. Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 12.0 9.0 9.0 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 28.2 23.3 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Combined (s) 30.0 30.0 46.2 41.3 .. Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.5% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. 2030 AM without Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 3 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Intersection Capacity Utilization 9: La Costa Avenue & Cadencia St Timing Plan: AM M . e _ ,�N € BT EBR ; Wit:` T E ,:, .� BT °° SAIL =: _::SCR Lane Configurations + r tt r r Volume (vph) 38 364 5 12 430 25 5 4 17 49 2 100 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 , Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 38 364 5 12 430 25 0 9 17 0 51 100 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.97 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 1900 1615 1805 3618 1615 0 1847 1615 0 1809 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No No Reference Time (s) 2.5 23.0 0.4 0.8 14.3 1.9 1.3 7.4 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.0 27.0 12.0 9.0 18.3 12.0 9.0 11.4 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1900 120 1809 0 193 0 124 Reference Time A (s) 37.9 23.0 12.0 14.3 0.0 5.6 0.0 49.5 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA 8.3 8.6 11.3 11.4 Reference Time (s) 37.9 14.3 5.6 11.4 Adj Reference Time (s) 41.9 18.3 9.6 15.4 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 2.5 23.0 0.8 14.3 0.0 0.6 0.0 3.4 Ref Time Seperate (s) 2.5 23.0 0.8 14.3 0.3 0.3 3.3 0.1 Reference Time (s) 23.0 23.0 14.3 14.3 0.6 0.6 3.4 3.4 Adj Reference Time (s) 27.0 27.0 18.3 18.3 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 _ S NO SB:ma.,. Protected Option (s) 36.0 NA Permitted Option (s) 41.9 15.4 Split Option (s) 45.3 18.0 Minimum (s) 36.0 15.4 51.4 EBR WBR Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 12.0 9.0 11.4 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 27.0 18.3 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Combined (s) 30.0 30.0 45.0 38.7 n Sty.: m 3r E, Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.8% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. 2030 AM without Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 4 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Intersection Capacity Utilization 3: La Costa Avenue & Nueva Castilla Way Timing Plan: PM a. N OR Lane Configurations tt r tt Volume (vph) 1019 82 14 619 31 13 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 1019 82 14 619 31 13 Lane Utilization Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 3618 1615 1805 3618 1805 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%)0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No Reference Time (s) 33.8 6.1 0.9 20.5 1.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 37.8 10.1 8.0 24.5 8.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 1809 120 1809 120 Reference Time A (s) 33.8 14.0 20.5 30.9 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 33.8 20.5 Adj Reference Time (s) 37.8 24.5 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 33.8 0.9 20.5 2.1 Ref Time Seperate (s) 33.8 0.9 20.5 2.1 Reference Time (s) 33.8 20.5 20.5 2.1 Adj Reference Time (s) 37.8 24.5 24.5 8.0 Protected Option (s) 45.8 NA Permitted Option (s) 37.8 Err Split Option (s) 62.3 8.0 Minimum (s) 37.8 8.0 45.8 RI Adj Reference Time (s) 10.1 8.0 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 0.0 37.8 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 8.0 0.0 Combined (s) 18.1 45.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.2% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan 2030 PM without Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 1 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Intersection Capacity Utilization 4: La Costa Avenue & Viejo Castilla Wy Timing Plan: PM -I. A, \40. 4/ Lane Configurations tt tt r r Volume (vph) 95 936 569 46 14 59 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 95 936 569 46 14 59 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 3618 3618 1615 1805 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No Reference Time (s) 6.3 31.0 18.9 3.4 4.4 Adj Reference Time (s) 10.3 35.0 22.9 12.0 9.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1809 1809 120 Reference Time A (s) 94.7 31.0 18.9 14.0 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 94.7 18.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 98.7 22.9 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 6.3 31.0 18.9 0.9 Ref Time Seperate (s) 6.3 31.0 18.9 0.9 Reference Time (s) 31.0 31.0 18.9 0.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 35.0 35.0 22.9 9.0 Sur*ary EB 1W 1... COM, i Protected Option (s) 35.0 NA Permitted Option (s) 98.7 Err Split Option (s) 57.9 9.0 Minimum (s) 35.0 9.0 44.0 Right Turns. SBt Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 9.0 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 0.0 22.9 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 10.3 0.0 Combined (s) 22.3 31.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.7% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. 2030 PM without Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 2 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Intersection Capacity Utilization 7: La Costa Avenue & Romeria St Timing Plan: PM Lane Configurations t r tt r +T r +T r Volume (vph) 13 799 47 2 443 24 42 1 19 13 2 11 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 13 799 47 2 443 24 0 43 19 0 15 11 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.96 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 1900 1615 1805 3618 1615 0 1807 1615 0 1818 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No No Reference Time (s) 0.9 50.5 3.5 0.1 14.7 1.8 1.4 0.8 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.0 54.5 12.0 9.0 18.7 12.0 9.0 9.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1900 120 1809 0 122 0 133 Reference Time A (s) 13.0 50.5 2.0 14.7 0.0 42.2 0.0 13.5 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA 10.8 10.9 8.9 9.0 Reference Time (s) 50.5 14.7 10.9 9.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 54.5 18.7 14.9 13.0 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 0.9 50.5 0.1 14.7 0.0 2.9 0.0 1.0 Ref Time Seperate (s) 0.9 50.5 0.1 14.7 2.8 0.1 0.9 0.1 Reference Time (s) 50.5 50.5 14.7 14.7 2.9 2.9 1.0 1.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 54.5 54.5 18.7 18.7 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 .. Protected Option (s) 63.5 NA Permitted Option (s) 54.5 14.9 Split Option (s) 73.2 18.0 Minimum (s) 54.5 14.9 69.3 =►lBR °„ SCR Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 12.0 9.0 9.0 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 54.5 18.7 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Combined (s) 30.0 30.0 72.5 36.7 Intet Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.4% ICU Level of Service B Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan 2030 PM without Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 3 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Intersection Capacity Utilization 9: La Costa Avenue & Cadencia St Timing Plan: PM "Eft ES3 , ,NOR Lane Configurations t r tt r +T r Volume (vph) 74 607 16 16 378 58 10 4 22 44 12 52 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 74 607 16 16 378 58 0 14 22 0 56 52 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.96 0.85 0.95 0.96 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 1900 1615 1805 3618 1615 0 1832 1615 0 1825 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) • 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No No Reference Time (s) 4.9 38.3 1.2 1.1 12.5 4.3 1.6 3.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.0 42.3 12.0 9.0 16.5 12.0 9.0 9.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1900 120 1809 0 156 0 144 Reference Time A (s) 73.8 38.3 16.0 12.5 0.0 10.8 0.0 46.6 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA 8.7 8.9 10.9 11.7 Reference Time (s) 73.8 16.0 8.9 11.7 Adj Reference Time (s) 77.8 20.0 12.9 15.7 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 4.9 38.3 1.1 12.5 0.0 0.9 0.0 3.7 Ref Time Seperate (s) 4.9 38.3 1.1 12.5 0.7 0.3 2.9 0.8 Reference Time (s) 38.3 38.3 12.5 12.5 0.9 0.9 3.7 3.7 Adj Reference Time (s) 42.3 42.3 16.5 16.5 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 umma ES WB INS $B Comb _ _ Protected Option (s) 51.3 NA Permitted Option (s) 77.8 15.7 Split Option (s) 58.9 18.0 Minimum (s) 51.3 15.7 67.0 Right Tum . NBR SSR = Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 12.0 9.0 9.0 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 42.3 16.5 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Combined (s) 30.0 30.0 60.3 34.5 lntersecflott:$006ftry- Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.8% ICU Level of Service B Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. 2030 PM without Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 4 Katz, Okitsu & Associates `1 D INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Nueva Castilla Way - 2030 AM With Project Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display r 0 cn m Site: 2030 AM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\July 2011\LOS Analysis\Sidra\Nueva Castilla Wy.aap Processed Jul 08, 2011 11:06:28AM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Nueva Castilla Way 2030 AM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent -------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. %Exit Cap. 0-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ---------------------------------------------------------------------- West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 20 0.0 20 0. N 0.997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- South: Nueva Castillo Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 535 0.0 535 0 N 0.980 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- East: E. La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 53 0.0 53 0 N 0.991 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Table S.15 - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Nueva Castilla Way 2030 AM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 2T T 535 1499 0.357 6.8 A 3.4 84 2R R 24 67 0.358 7.7 A 3.4 84 ----------------------------------------------------------------- South: Nueva Castillo 3L L 53 522 0.102 14.9 A 0.7 17 8R ----------------------------------------------------------------- R 34 335 0.101 10.6 A 0.7 17 East: E. La Costa Ave 1L L 20 25 0.800 12.6 C 16.6 416 6T T 1186 1475 0.804* 7.5 D 16.6 416 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL VEHICLES: 1852 0.804 D 16.6 416 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) Intersection Capacity Utilization 4: La Costa Avenue & Viejo Castilla Wy Timing Plan: AM 3=Ix'sT SO ': z SQL 8R = _ Lane Configurations t t Volume (vph) 25 517 1024 18 53 122 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 25 517 1042 0 53 122 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 1900 1895 0 1805 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No Reference Time (s) 1.7 32.7 66.0 0.0 9.1 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.0 36.7 70.0 0.0 13.1 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1900 1895 120 Reference Time A (s) 24.9 32.7 66.0 52.9 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 32.7 66.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 36.7 70.0 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 1.7 32.7 66.0 3.5 Ref Time Seperate (s) 1.7 32.7 64.8 3.5 Reference Time (s) 32.7 32.7 66.0 3.5 Adj Reference Time (s) 36.7 36.7 70.0 9.0 Protected Option (s) 79.0 NA Permitted Option (s) 70.0 Err Split Option (s) 106.6 9.0 Minimum (s) 70.0 9.0 79.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 13.1 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 70.0 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 0.0 Combined (s) 83.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.2% ICU Level of Service C Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. 2030 AM with Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 1 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Romeria St - 2030 AM With Project N Rpmeria St Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display CD CU 4-4 t/7 Q CU J Site: 2030 AM With Project N:\KOA11\814055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\July 2011\LOS Ana lysis\Sidra\Romeria St.aap Processed Jul 08, 2011 11:13:09AM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutio,ns.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Romeria St 2030 AM With Project Intersection ID: 3 Roundabout Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent -------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow oHV Adjust. °Exit Cap. 0-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ---------------------------------------------------------------------- West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 20 0.0 20 0 N 0.996 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- South: S Romeria St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 423 0.0 423 0 N 0.987 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- East: E La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 55 0.0 55 0 N 0.992 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- North: N Romeria St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 664 0.0 664 0 N 0.949 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Table SAS - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Romeria St 2030 AM With Project Intersection ID: 3 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 5L L 2 7 0.286 11.9 A 2.4 59 2T T 403 1483 0.272 6.8 A 2.4 59 2R ----------------------------------------------------------------- R 14 52 0.269 7.7 A 2.4 59 South: S Romeria St 3L L 52 824 0.063 14.0 A 0.4 10 8T T 1 16 0.062 8.9 A 0.4 10 8R ----------------------------------------------------------------- R 6 95 0.063 9.8 A 0.4 10 East: E La Costa Ave 1L L 1 2 0.500* 12.2 A 4.3 106 6T T 612 1422 0.430 7.0 A 4.3 106 6R R 6 14 0.429 7.9 A 4.3 106 ----------------------------------------------------------------- North: N Romeria St 7L L 18 424 0.042 15.7 A 0.3 7 4T T 1 24 0.042 10.5 A 0.3 7 4R ----------------------------------------------------------------- R 13 306 0.042 11.4 A 0.3 7 ALL VEHICLES: 1129 0.500 A 4.3 106 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) Intersection Capacity Utilization 9: La Costa Avenue & Cadencia St Timing Plan: AM Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right „ ' T EBR 1N ` �,, WBR -F-` ,ITT WIR t r V t r +T r 38 364 5 12 430 25 5 4 17 49 M M M i 4 F 2 100 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 38 364 5 12 430 25 0 9 17 0 51 100 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.97 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 1900 1615 1805 1900 1615 0 1847 1615 0 1809 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No No Reference Time (s) 2.5 23.0 0.4 0.8 27.2 1.9 1.3 7.4 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.0 27.0 12.0 9.0 31.2 12.0 9.0 11.4 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1900 120 1900 0 193 0 124 Reference Time A (s) 37.9 23.0 12.0 27.2 0.0 5.6 0.0 49.5 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA 8.3 8.6 11.3 11.4 Reference Time (s) 37.9 27.2 5.6 11.4 Adj Reference Time (s) 41.9 31.2 9.6 15.4 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 2.5 23.0 0.8 27.2 0.0 0.6 0.0 3.4 Ref Time Seperate (s) 2.5 23.0 0.8 27.2 0.3 0.3 3.3 0.1 Reference Time (s) 23.0 23.0 27.2 27.2 0.6 0.6 3.4 3.4 Adj Reference Time (s) 27.0 27.0 31.2 31.2 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Sum EBWR B Protected Option (s) 40.2 NA Permitted Option (s) 41.9 15.4 Split Option (s) 58.1 18.0 Minimum (s) 40.2 15.4 55.5 Right Turns EBR CAR MBR BBR Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 12.0 9.0 11.4 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 27.0 31.2 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Combined (s) 30.0 30.0 45.0 51.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.3% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. 2030 AM with Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 2 Katz, Okitsu & Associates L1DR.INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Nueva Castilla Way - 2030 PM With Project Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display Nueva Castilla Site: 2030 PM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\July 2011\LOS Analysis\Sidra\Nueva Castilla Wy.aap Processed Jul 08, 2011 11:06:28AM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Nueva Castilla Way 2030 PM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent -------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. °Exit Cap. O-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ---------------------------------------------------------------------- West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 15 0.0 15 0 N 0.999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- South: Nueva Castillo Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 1073 0.0 1073 0 N 0.925 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- East: E. La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 33 0.0 33 0 N 0.992 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Table SAS - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Nueva Castilla Way 2030 PM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- A) A) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 2T T 1073 1523 0.705* 6.8 C 10.8 270 2R ----------------------------------------------------------------- R 86 122 0.705* 7.7 C 10.8 270 South: Nueva Castillo 3L L 33 356 0.093 21.4 A 0.7 18 8R ----------------------------------------------------------------- R 14 151 0.093 17.1 A 0.7 18 East: E. La Costa Ave 1L L 15 34 0.441 12.0 A 4.9 122 6T ----------------------------------------------------------------- T 652 1483 0.440 6.9 A 4.9 122 ALL ----------------------------------------------------------------- VEHICLES: 1873 0.705 C 10.8 270 Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) Intersection Capacity Utilization 4: La Costa Avenue & Viejo Castilla Wy Timing Plan: PM �- k, \0- 4/ mpyoment : '; EBL"„ t T MOT Lane Configurations t t r Volume (vph) 95 936 569 46 14 59 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 95 936 569 46 14 59 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 1900 1900 1615 1805 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No Reference Time (s) 6.3 59.1 35.9 3.4 4.4 Adj Reference Time (s) 10.3 63.1 39.9 12.0 9.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1900 1900 120 Reference Time A (s) 94.7 59.1 35.9 14.0 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 94.7 35.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 98.7 39.9 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 6.3 59.1 35.9 0.9 Ref Time Seperate (s) 6.3 59.1 35.9 0.9 Reference Time (s) 59.1 59.1 35.9 0.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 63.1 63.1 39.9 9.0 SUmm WB WjxK C0 Protected Option (s) 63.1 NA Permitted Option (s) 98.7 Err Split Option (s) 103.1 9.0 Minimum (s) 63.1 9.0 72.1 Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 9.0 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 0.0 39.9 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 10.3 0.0 Combined (s) 22.3 48.9 Inr 114 mar Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.1% ICU Level of Service B Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. 2030 PM with Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 1 Katz, Okitsu & Associates EDP INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Romeria St - 2030 PM With Project N Romeria St M lT' S Romeria St Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display Site: 2030 PM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\July 2011\LOS Ana lysis\Sidra\Romeria St.aap Processed Jul 08, 2011 11:13:09AM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Romeria St 2030 PM With Project Intersection ID: 3 Roundabout Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent -------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. °Exit Cap. 0-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ---------------------------------------------------------------------- West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 18 0.0 18 0 N 0.997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- South: S Romeria St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 868 0.0 868 0 N 0.948 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- East: E La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 59 0.0 59 0 N 0.99`1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- North: N Romeria St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 513 0.0 513 0 N 0.967 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Table SAS - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Romeria St 2030 PM With Project Intersection ID: 3 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 5L L 14 25 0.560 11.9 A 6.9 173 2T T 841 1501 0.560 6.8 A 6.9 173 2R R 49 87 0.563* 7.7 A 6.9 173 ----------------------------------------------------------------- South: S Romeria St 3L L 44 432 0.102 18.0 A 0.8 19 8T T 1 10 0.100 12.9 A 0.8 19 8R R 20 196 0.102 13.8 A 0.8 19 ----------------------------------------------------------------- East: E La Costa Ave 1L L 2 6 0.333 12.2 A 3.2 80 6T T 466 1328 0.351 7.0 A 3.2 80 6R R 25 71 0.352 7.9 A 3.2 80 ----------------------------------------------------------------- North: N Romeria St 7L L 14 429 0.033 14.5 A 0.2 5 4T T 2 61 0.033 9.4 A 0.2 5 4R R 12 368 0.033 10.3 A 0.2 5 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL VEHICLES: 1490 0.563 A 6.9 173 ---------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) Intersection Capacity Utilization 9: La Costa Avenue & Cadencia St Timing Plan: PM . 1 A�err�ent - _EB TR w - - »;_SIBIR Lane Configurations I t r ' t r Volume (vph) 74 607 16 16 378 58 10 4 22 44 12 52 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 Volume Combined (vph) 74 607 16 16 378 58 0 14 22 0 56 52 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.96 0.85 0.95 0.96 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 1900 1615 1805 1900 1615 0 1832 1615 0 1825 1615 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes No No Reference Time (s) 4.9 38.3 1.2 1.1 23.9 4.3 1.6 3.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.0 42.3 12.0 9.0 27.9 12.0 9.0 9.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1900 120 1900 0 156 0 144 Reference Time A (s) 73.8 38.3 16.0 23.9 0.0 10.8 0.0 46.6 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA 8.7 8.9 10.9 11.7 Reference Time (s) 73.8 23.9 8.9 11.7 Adj Reference Time (s) 77.8 27.9 12.9 15.7 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 4.9 38.3 1.1 23.9 0.0 0.9 0.0 3.7 Ref Time Seperate (s) 4.9 38.3 1.1 23.9 0.7 0.3 2.9 0.8 Reference Time (s) 38.3 38.3 23.9 23.9 0.9 0.9 3.7 3.7 Adj Reference Time (s) 42.3 42.3 27.9 27.9 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Sum IAUROftled_ Protected Option (s) 51.3 NA Permitted Option (s) 77.8 15.7 Split Option (s) 70.2 18.0 Minimum (s) 51.3 15.7 67.0 Right Turns W.BR NBRBR Adj Reference Time (s) 12.0 12.0 9.0 9.0 Cross Thru Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 42.3 27.9 Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Combined (s) 30.0 30.0 60.3 45.9 Intersection Su Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.8% ICU Level of Service B Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan. 2030 PM with Project Synchro 6 Report KOA Corporation. Formerly Page 2 Katz, Okitsu & Associates Additional Roundabout Locations 'D _ A INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Cadencia St Ex AM With Project Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display I� �1 Site: Ex AM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\Deliverables\July 2011\LOS Analysis\Sidra\Cadencia.aap Processed Aug 15, 2011 01:17:44PM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Cadencia St Ex AM With Project Intersection ID: 3 Roundabout --------------------------------------------------------------------- Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent ---------------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. %Exit Cap. O-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 56 0.0 56 0 N 0.993 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ South: Cadencia St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 396 0.0 396 0 N 0.981 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ East: E La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 41 0.0 41 0 N 0.998 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ North: Cadencia St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 392 0.0 392 0 N 0.983 Table 5.15 - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Cadencia St Ex AM With Project Intersection ID: 3 Roundabout Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 5L L 34 132 0.258 12.1 A 2.1 51 2T T 319 1242 0.257 7.0 A 2.1 51 2R R 4 16 0.250 7.9 A 2.1 51 ----------------------------------------------------------------- South: Cadencia St 3L L 4 172 0.023 13.8 A 0.1 4 8T T 3 129 0.023 8.6 A 0.1 4 8R R 15 646 0.023 9.5 A 0.1 4 ----------------------------------------------------------------- East: E La Costa Ave 1L L 11 39 0.282* 12.0 A 2.2 55 6T T 377 1336 0.282* 6.9 A 2.2 55 6R R 22 78 0.282* 7.8 A 2.2 55 ----------------------------------------------------------------- North: Cadencia St 7L L 43 310 0.139 14.0 A 0.9 23 4T T 2 14 0.143 8.9 A 0.9 23 4R R 87 628 0.139 9.8 A 0.9 23 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL VEHICLES: 921 0.282 A 2.2 55 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) 3 D , t� t. INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Cadencia St Ex PM With Project Cadencia St r o n Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display Site: Ex PM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\Deliverables\July 2011\LOS Analysis\Sidra\Cadencia.aap Processed Aug 15, 2011 01:17:44PM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Cadencia St Ex PM With Project Intersection ID: 3 Roundabout ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent ---------------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. %Exit Cap. 0-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 63 0.0 63 0 N 0.993 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ South: Cadencia St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 637 0.0 637 0 N 0.949 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ East: E La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 77 0.0 77 0 N 0.995 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ North: Cadencia St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 354 0.0 354 0 N 0.978 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table SAS - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Cadencia St Ex PM With Project Intersection ID: 3 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 5L L 65 150 0.433 12.2 A 4.2 104 2T T 533 1233 0.432 7.1 A 4.2 104 2R ----------------------------------------------------------------- R 14 32 0.438* 8.0 A 4.2 104 South: Cadencia St 3L L 8 205 0.039 15.4 A 0.3 7 8T T 3 77 0.039 10.3 A 0.3 7 8R ----------------------------------------------------------------- R 19 487 0.039 11.2 A 0.3 7 East: E La Costa Ave 1L L 14 48 0.292 12.3 A 2.3 58 6T T 332 1128 0.294 7.1 A 2.3 58 6R R 51 173 0.295 8.0 A 2.3 58 ----------------------------------------------------------------- North: Cadencia St 7L L 39 400 0.097 13.7 A 0.7 16 4T T 11 113 0.097 8.6 A 0.7 16 4R R 45 461 0.098 9.4 A 0.7 16 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL ----------------------------------------------------------------- VEHICLES: 1134 0.438 A 4.2 104 Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) I D R INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Cadencia St 2030 AM With Project FW 0) Cadencia St Cadencia St Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display d 2 Ch U U J W Site: 2030 AM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Eva ulation-Phase II\Deliverables\July 2011\LOS Analysis\Sidra\Cadencia.aap Processed Aug 15, 2011 01:17:45PM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Cadencia St 2030 AM With Project Intersection ID: 3 Roundabout ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent ---------------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. %Exit Cap. 0-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 66 0.0 66 0 N 0.991 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ South: Cadencia St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 475 0.0 475 0 N 0.972 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ East: E La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 49 0.0 49 0 N 0.997 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ North: Cadencia St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 471 0.0 471 0 N 0.975 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table SAS - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Cadencia St 2030 AM With Project Intersection ID: 3 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 5L L 40 129 0.310 12.2 A 2.6 66 2T T 383 1233 0.311 7.1 A 2.6 66 2R R 4 13 0.308 7.9 A 2.6 66 ----------------------------------------------------------------- South: Cadencia St 3L L 5 164 0.030 14.2 A 0.2 5 8T T 4 131 0.031 9.1 A 0.2 5 8R ----------------------------------------------------------------- R 18 591 0.030 10.0 A 0.2 5 East: E La Costa Ave 1L L 13 38 0.342* 12.1 A 2.8 71 6T T 453 1326 0.342* 7.0 A 2.8 71 6R R 26 76 0.342* 7.9 A 2.8 71 ----------------------------------------------------------------- North: Cadencia St 7L L 52 292 0.178 14.6 A 1.3 31 4T T 2 11 0.182 9.5 A 1.3 31 4R R 105 589 0.178 10.4 A 1.3 31 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL VEHICLES: 1105 0.342 A 2.8 71 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) iINTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Cadencia St 2030 PM With Project Cadencia St N CU 4-J M 0 J i W Cadencia St Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display Site: 2030 PM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\Deliverables\July 2011\LOS Ana lysis\Sidra\Cadencia.aap Processed Aug 15, 2011 01:17:45PM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Cadencia St 2030 PM With Project Intersection ID: 3 Roundabout ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent ---------------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. %Exit Cap. 0-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 76 0.0 76 0 N 0.991 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ South: Cadencia St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 763 0.0 763 0 N 0.914 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ East: E La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 93 0.0 93 0 N 0.993 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ North: Cadencia St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 425 0.0 425 0 N 0.967 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table SAS - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Cadencia St 2030 PM With Project Intersection ID: 3 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 5L L 78 149 0.523 12.4 A 5.7 143 2T T 639 1217 0.525 7.3 A 5.7 143 2R R 17 32 0.531* 8.2 A 5.7 143 ----------------------------------------------------------------- South: Cadencia St 3L L 11 194 0.057 16.6 A 0.4 10 8T T 4 71 0.056 11.5 A 0.4 10 8R ----------------------------------------------------------------- R 23 407 0.057 12.4 A 0.4 10 East: E La Costa Ave 1L L 17 47 0.362 12.4 A 3.1 76 6T T 398 1110 0.359 7.3 A 3.1 76 6R R 61 170 0.359 8.1 A 3.1 76 ----------------------------------------------------------------- North: Cadencia St 7L L 46 369 0.125 14.2 A 0.9 22 4T T 13 104 0.125 9.1 A 0.9 22 4R R 55 441 0.125 9.9 A 0.9 22 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL VEHICLES: 1362 0.531 A 5.7 143 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) _1DR,2 INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Calle Madero Ex AM With Project 3 1� Calle Madera Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display Site: Ex AM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\Deliverables\July 2011\LOS Analysis\Sidra\Calle Madero.aap Processed Aug 15, 2011 01:35:44PM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Calle Madero Ex AM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent ---------------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. °Exit Cap. 0-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 20 0.0 20 0 N 0.998 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ South: Calle Madero Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 474 0.0 474 0 N 0.985 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ East: E. La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 39 0.0 39 0 N 0.994 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table SAS - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Calle Madero Ex AM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 2T T 474 1476 0.321 6.8 A 2.7 67 2R R 27 84 0.321 7.7 A 2.7 67 ----------------------------------------------------------------- South: Calle Madero 3L L 39 662 0.059 14.3 A 0.4 10 8R ----------------------------------------------------------------- R 14 238 0.059 10.1 A 0.4 10 East: E. La Costa Ave 1L L 20 34 0.588* 12.1 A 7.4 186 6T T 871 1487 0.586 7.0 A 7.4 186 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL VEHICLES: 1445 0.588 A 7.4 186 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) D , -0\ INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Calle Madero Ex PM With Project i Cale Madero rU W Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display Site: Ex PM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\Deliverables\July 2011\LOS Analysis\Sidra\Calle Madero.aap Processed Aug 15, 2011 01:39:23PM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Calle Madero Ex PM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent ---------------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. %Exit Cap. 0-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 8 0.0 8 0 N 1.000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ South: Calle Madero Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 796 0.0 796 0 N 0.976 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ East: E. La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 20 0.0 20 0 N 0.996 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table SAS - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Calle Madero Ex PM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) ----------------------------------------------------------------- West: W La Costa Ave 2T T 796 1598 0.498 6.7 A 5.1 126 2R R 34 68 0.500* 7.6 A 5.1 126 ----------------------------------------------------------------- South: Calle Madero 3L L 20 499 0.040 16.9 A 0.3 7 8R R 8 200 0.040 12.6 A 0.3 7 ----------------------------------------------------------------- East: E. La Costa Ave 1L L 8 24 0.333 11.9 A 3.2 80 6T T 517 1537 0.336 6.8 A 3.2 80 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL VEHICLES: 1383 0.500 A 5.1 126 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) S -i D INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Calle Madero 2030 AM With Project r 0 G� N Calle Madera Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display Site: 2030 AM With Project N:\KOAll\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\Deliverables\July 2011\LOS Analysis\Sidra\Calle Madero.aap Processed Aug 15, 2011 09:46:31AM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Calle Madero 2030 AM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent ---------------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. %Exit Cap. O-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 24 0.0 24 0 N 0.997 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ South: Calle Madero Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 568 0.0 568 0 N 0.976 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ East: E. La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 46 0.0 46 0 N 0.992 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table SAS - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Calle Madero 2030 AM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- /h) A) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 2T T 568 1467 0.387 6.8 A 3.6 90 2R ----------------------------------------------------------------- R 33 85 0.388 7.7 A 3.6 90 South: Calle Madero 3L L 46 607 0.076 15.0 A 0.5 13 8R ----------------------------------------------------------------- R 17 224 0.076 10.8 A 0.5 13 East: E. La Costa Ave 1L L 24 34 0.706 12.3 C 11.3 284 6T ----------------------------------------------------------------- T 1044 1475 0.708* 7.2 C 11.3 284 ALL ----------------------------------------------------------------- VEHICLES: 1732 0.708 C 11.3 284 Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) n ... D ' `'e INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Calle Madero 2030 PM With Project Calle Madero Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display Site: 2030 PM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\Deliverables\July 2011\LOS Analysis\Sidra\Calle Madero.aap Processed Aug 15, 2011 09:49:36AM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Calle Madero 2030 PM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent ---------------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. %Exit Cap. O-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 11 0.0 11 0 N 0.999 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ South: Calle Madero Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 955 0.0 955 0 N 0.958 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ East: E. La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 24 0.0 24 0 N 0.994 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table S.15 - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Calle Madero 2030 PM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 2T T 955 1594 0.599* 6.8 A 7.2 181 2R R 40 67 0.597 7.7 A 7.2 181 ----------------------------------------------------------------- South: Calle Madero 3L L 24 408 0.059 19.0 A 0.4 11 8R R 11 187 0.059 14.8 A 0.4 11 ----------------------------------------------------------------- East: E. La Costa Ave 1L L 11 27 0.407 12.0 A 4.3 107 6T T 620 1525 0.407 6.8 A 4.3 107 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL VEHICLES: 1661 0.599 A 7.2 181 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) S I D Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Gibraltar St C r D C CD J W Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display Site: Ex AM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\Deliverables\July 2011\LOS Ana lysis\Sidra\Gibraltar.aap Processed Aug 15, 2011 01:29:53PM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Gibraltar St Ex AM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent ---------------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. %Exit Cap. O-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 55 0.0 55 0 N 0.989 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ East: E. La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 7 0.0 7 0 N 0.999 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ North: Gibraltar St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 836 0.0 836 0 N 0.976 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table SAS - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Gibraltar St Ex AM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 5L L 7 20 0.350 12.1 A 3.2 81 2T T 481 1393 0.345 7.0 A 3.2 81 ----------------------------------------------------------------- East: E. La Costa Ave 6T T 836 1667 0.501* 6.7 A 5.3 133 6R R 3 6 0.500 7.6 A 5.3 133 ----------------------------------------------------------------- North: Gibraltar St 7L L 55 652 0.084 17.6 A 0.6 15 4R R 2 24 0.083 13.3 A 0.6 15 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL VEHICLES: 1384 0.501 A 5.3 133 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Gibraltar St Ex PM With Project Gibraltar St 26 1 i r- _ 0 o -� e rd Uj Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display Site: Ex PM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\Deliverables\July 2011\LOS Analysis\Sidra\Gibraltar.aap Processed Aug 15, 2011 01:31:08PM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Gibraltar St Ex PM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent ---------------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. %Exit Cap. 0-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 1 0.0 1 0 N 1.000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ East: E. La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 35 0.0 35 0 N 1.000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ North: Gibraltar St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 500 0.0 500 0 N 0.979 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table SAS - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Gibraltar St Ex PM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) ----------------------------------------------------------------- West: W La Costa Ave 5L L 35 74 0.473* 11.8 A 5.2 130 2T T 769 1636 0.470 6.7 A 5.2 130 ----------------------------------------------------------------- East: E. La Costa Ave 6T T 500 1479 0.338 6.9 A 2.7 67 6R R 6 18 0.333 7.8 A 2.7 67 ----------------------------------------------------------------- North: Gibraltar St 7L L 1 31 0.032 14.4 A 0.2 5 4R R 27 845 0.032 10.2 A 0.2 5 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL VEHICLES: 1338 0.473 A 5.2 130 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) c-51 I E--) R A, INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Gibraltar St 2030 AM With Project Gibraltar St R3 0 Q J n Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display Site: 2030 AM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\Deliverables\July 2011\LOS Analysis\Sidra\Gibraltar.aap Processed Aug 15, 2011 10:21:07AM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd www.sidrasolutions.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Gibraltar St 2030 AM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent ---------------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. %Exit Cap. O-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 65 0.0 65 0 N 0.986 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ East: E. La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 8 0.0 8 0 N 0.999 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ North: Gibraltar St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 1003 0.0 1003 0 N 0.958 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table 5.15 - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Gibraltar St 2030 AM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) ----------------------------------------------------------------- West: W La Costa Ave 5L L 8 19 0.421 12.2 A 4.3 108 2T T 577 1377 0.419 7.1 A 4.3 108 ----------------------------------------------------------------- East: E. La Costa Ave 6T T 1003 1666 0.602* 6.8 B 7.6 191 6R R 4 7 0.571 7.6 A 7.6 191 ----------------------------------------------------------------- North: Gibraltar St 7L L 65 550 0.118 20.2 A 0.9 23 4R R 2 17 0.118 15.9 A 0.9 23 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL VEHICLES: 1659 0.602 B 7.6 191 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) INTERSECTION Input Volumes Total flow rates as given by the user (veh/60 min) La Costa Ave Gibraltar St 2030 PM With Project Intersection Type Roundabout No color code in this display Site: 2030 PM With Project N:\KOA11\B14055 La Costa Road Evaulation-Phase II\Deliverables\July 2011\LOS Analysis\Sidra\Gibraltar.aap Processed Aug 15, 2011 10:48:29AM A1620, KOA Corporation, Small Office Produced by SIDRA Intersection 3.1.061208.34 Copyright 2000-2006 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd w vtiFc.sidrasoludons.com Table R.0 - Roundabout Basic Parameters La Costa Ave Gibraltar St 2030 PM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Circulating/Exiting Stream Cent Circ Insc No.of No.of Av.Ent ---------------------------------------- Island Width Diam. Circ. Entry Lane Flow %HV Adjust. %Exit Cap. 0-D Diam Lanes Lanes Width (veh/ Flow Incl. Constr. Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) h) (pcu/h) Effect ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ West: W La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 33 0.0 33 0 N 0.994 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ East: E. La Costa Ave Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 42 0.0 42 0 N 0.997 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ North: Gibraltar St Environment Factor: 1.00 Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment: Medium 52 18 88 1 1 13.00 600 0.0 600 0 N 0.963 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table 5.15 - Capacity and Level of Service La Costa Ave Gibraltar St 2030 PM With Project Intersection ID: 1 Roundabout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mov Mov Total Total Deg. Aver. LOS Longest Queue ID Typ Flow Cap. of Delay 95% Back (veh (veh Satn (vehs) (ft) ----------------------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: W La Costa Ave 5L L 42 67 0.627* 12.1 B 8.6 216 2T T 923 1483 0.622 7.0 B 8.6 216 ----------------------------------------------------------------- East: E. La Costa Ave 6T T 600 1465 0.410 6.9 A 3.8 94 6R R 7 17 0.412 7.8 A 3.8 94 ----------------------------------------------------------------- North: Gibraltar St 7L L 33 779 0.042 15.1 A 0.3 7 4R R 1 24 0.042 10.9 A 0.3 7 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALL VEHICLES: 1606 0.627 B 8.6 216 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service calculations are based on v/c ratio (ICU criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green periods " Movement Level of service has been determined using adjacent lane v/c ratio rather than short lane v/c ratio (v/c=1.0) Attachment E: PHASE 1/11 Versus Comparison Tables Table 7 Existing Conditions Segmental Comparison # Segment Location Phase 1/11 La Costa Improvement Plan SANTEC Florida Carlsbad Daily AM- WB PM- EB AM-WB PM-EB Existing Without Project 1 West of Nueva Castilla Way C C C A A 2 West of Calle Madero C C C A A 3 West of Cadencia 1 Street C D D A A Existing With Project 1 West of Nueva Castilla Way F C F A B 2 West of Calle Madero F C D A B 3 West of Cadencia 1 Street E D D A B Table 8 Future Conditions Segmental Comparison # Segment Location Phase 1/11 La Costa Improvement Plan SANTEC Florida Carlsbad Daily AM- WB PM- EB AM-WB PM-EB Future Without Project 1 West of Nueva Castilla Way D C C A A 2 West of Calle Madero C C D A A 3 West of Cadencia 1 Street D D D A A Future With Project 1 West of Nueva Castilla Way F F F A B 2 West of Calle Madero F F F A B 3 West of Cadencia 1 Street F D F A B Table 9 Existing Conditions Intersection Comparison Phase 1/II — HCM La Costa Avenue Improvement (de ay) Plan — ICU v/c LOS LOS Intersection AM I PM AM PM # Location Control Control Existing Without Project Side La Costa Avenue at Street Side Street 1 Nueva Castilla Way Stop C F Stop A B La Costa Avenue at Viejo Castillo 2 Way Signal A A Signal A B La Costa Avenue at 3 Romeria Street Signal A A Signal A A La Costa Avenue at 4 1 Cadencia Street I Signal I A I B I Signal I A I A Existing With Project La Costa Avenue at 1 Nueva Castilla Way Signal A A Roundabout A A La Costa Avenue at Viejo Castillo 2 Way Signal A A Signal A A La Costa Avenue at 3 Romeria Street Signal B A Roundabout A A La Costa Avenue at 4 1 Cadencia Street Signal I B A Signal A A Table 10 Future Conditions Intersection Comparison Phase 1/II — HCM La Costa Avenue Improvement (de ay) Plan — ICU v/c LOS LOS Intersection AM I PM AM F PM # Location Control Control Future Without Project Side La Costa Avenue at Street Side Street 1 Nueva Castilla Way Stop A A Stop A A La Costa Avenue at Viejo Castillo 2 Way Signal A A Signal A A La Costa Avenue at 3 Romeria Street Signal B A Signal A B La Costa Avenue at 4 1 Cadencia Street I Signal I B I B I Signal I A I B Future With Project La Costa Avenue at 1 Nueva Castilla Way Signal A C Roundabout D C La Costa Avenue at Viejo Castillo 2 Way Signal A B Signal B B La Costa Avenue at 3 Romeria Street Signal B A Roundabout A A La Costa Avenue at 4 1 Cadencia Street Signal I B B Signal A B Attachment F: Cost Estimate Order of Magnitude, Planning -Level Cost Estimate CONSTRUCTION COSTS LOW HIGH LOCATION 1 $ 180,000 $ 290,000 LOCATION 2 $ 100,000 $ 160,000 LOCATION 3 $ 110,000 $ 170,000 LOCATION 4 $ 100,000 $ 150,000 LOCATION 5 $ 210,000 $ 320,000 LOCATION 6 $ 120,000 $ 180,000 LOCATION 7 $ 80,000 $ 120,000 LOCATION 8 $ 100,000 $ 160,000 LOCATION 9 $ 290,000 $ 450,000 LOCATION 10 $ 160,000 $ 250,000 LOCATION 11 $ 30,000 $ 50,000 LOCATION 12 $ 40,000 $ 60,000 LOCATION 13 $ 180,000 $ 270,000 STRIPING (ENTIRE PROJECT) $ 100,000 $ 140,000 SIDEWALK (MISSING LINKS) $ 640,000 $ 870,000 SUBTOTAL $ 2,440,000 $ 3,640,000 ENGINEERING, ADMINISTRATIVE, AND OTHER COSTS TRAFFIC CONTROL AND MOBILIZATION @ 8% $ 195,200 $ 291,200 DESIGN, CM, AND ADMIN. @ 20% $ 488,000 $ 728,000 TOTAL $ 3,123,200 $ 4,6S9,200 LOCATION I - ENTRY, MEDIAN, & NARROWING (A) Removal Items AC Pavement Removal Concrete Removal Construction Items Full Depth AC Concrete Sidewalk Curb and Gutter Median Curb Landscape SUBTOTAL Contingency @ 20% TOTAL LOW LOW Unit Price TOTAL 8520 sqft $ 1.50 $ 12,780 3000 sqft $ 3.00 $ 9,000 HIGH HIGH Unit Price TOTAL $ 3.00 $ 25,560 $ 5.00 $ 15,000 1680 sqft $ 8.00 $ 13,440 $ 10.00 $ 16,800 3000 sqft $ 5.00 $ 15,000 $ 6.00 $ 18,000 600 ft $ 20.00 $ 12,000 $ 34.00 $ 20,400 240 ft $ 12.00 $ 2,880 $ 16.00 $ 3,840 6840 sqft $ 12.00 $ 82,080 $ 20.00 $ 136,800 $ 147,180 $ 236,400 $ 29,440 $ 47,280 $ 180,000 $ 290,000 LOCATION 2 - PARTIAL MEDIAN & NARROWING (B) LOW LOW HIGH HIGH Removal Items Unit Price TOTAL Unit Price TOTAL AC Pavement Removal 4680 sqft $ 1.50 $ 7,020 $ 3.00 $ 14,040 Concrete Removal 1500 sqft $ 3.00 $ 4,500 $ 5.00 $ 7,500 Construction Items Full Depth AC 1080 sqft $ 8.00 $ 8,640 $ 10.00 $ 10,800 Concrete Sidewalk 1500 sqft $ 5.00 $ 7,500 $ 6.00 $ 9,000 Curb and Gutter 300 ft $ 20.00 $ 6,000 $ 34.00 $ 10,200 Median Curb 240 ft $ 12.00 $ 2,880 $ 16.00 $ 3,840 Landscape 3600 sqft $ 12.00 $ 43,200 $ 20.00 $ 72,000 SUBTOTAL $ 79,740 $ 127,380 Contingency @ 20% TOTAL $ 15,950 $ 100,000 $ 25,480 $ 160,000 LOCATION 3 - NARROWING (C) Removal Items AC Pavement Removal Concrete Removal Construction Items Full Depth AC Concrete Sidewalk Curb and Gutter Concrete Driveway Landscape SUBTOTAL Contingency @ 20% TOTAL LOW LOW HIGH HIGH Unit Price TOTAL Unit Price TOTAL 3040 sqft $ 1.50 $ 4,560 $ 3.00 $ 9,120 3000 sqft $ 3.00 $ 9,000 $ 5.00 $ 15,000 1200 sqft $ 8.00 $ 9,600 $ 10.00 $ 12,000 3000 sqft $ 5.00 $ 15,000 $ 6.00 $ 18,000 600 ft $ 20.00 $ 12,000 $ 34.00 $ 20,400 2000 sqft $ 8.00 $ 16,000 $ 12.00 $ 24,000 1840 sqft $ 12.00 $ 22,080 $ 20.00 $ 36,800 $ 88,240 $ 17,650 $ 110,000 $ 135,320 $ 27,070 $ 170,000 LOCATION 4 - NARROWING (C) & PARTIAL MEDIAN LOW LOW Removal Items Unit Price TOTAL AC Pavement Removal 4880 sqft $ 1.50 $ 7,320 Concrete Removal 2000 sqft $ 3.00 $ 6,000 Construction Items Full Depth AC Concrete Sidewalk Curb and Gutter Median Curb Concrete Driveway Landscape SUBTOTAL ContingencX @ 20% TOTAL HIGH HIGH Unit Price TOTAL $ 3.00 $ 14,640 $ 5.00 $ 10,000 1520 sqft $ 8.00 $ 12,160 $ 10.00 $ 15,200 2000 sqft $ 5.00 $ 10,000 $ 6.00 $ 12,000 400 ft $ 20.00 $ 8,000 $ 34.00 $ 13,600 360 ft $ 12.00 $ 4,320 $ 16.00 $ 5,760 2000 sqft $ 8.00 $ 16,000 $ 12.00 $ 24,000 1360 sqft $ 12.00 $ 16,320 $ 20.00 $ 27,200 $ 80,120 $ 16,030 $ 100,000 $ 122,400 $ 24,480 $ 150,000 LOCATION 5 - ROUNDABOUT (NUEVA CASTILLA WAY) LOW LOW HIGH HIGH Removal Items Unit Price TOTAL Unit Price TOTAL AC Pavement Removal 10800 sqft $ 1.50 $ 16,200 $ 3.00 $ 32,400 Concrete Removal 3750 sqft $ 3.00 $ 11,250 $ 5.00 $ 18,750 Construction Items Full Depth AC 3500 sqft $ 8.00 $ 28,000 $ 10.00 $ 35,000 Concrete Sidewalk 3750 sqft $ 5.00 $ 18,750 $ 6.00 $ 22,500 Curb and Gutter 750 ft $ 20.00 $ 15,000 $ 34.00 $ 25,500 Median Curb 250 ft $ 12.00 $ 3,000 $ 16.00 $ 4,000 Concrete Driveway 2500 sqft $ 8.00 $ 20,000 $ 12.00 $ 30,000 Landscape 4800 sqft $ 12.00 $ 57,600 $ 20.00 $ 96,000 SUBTOTAL $ 169,800 $ 264,150 ContingencX @ 20% TOTAL $ 33,960 $ 210,000 $ 52,830 $ 320,000 LOCATION 6 - NARROWING (C ) Removal Items AC Pavement Removal Concrete Removal Construction Items Full Depth AC Concrete Sidewalk Curb and Gutter Concrete Driveway Landscape SUBTOTAL Contingency @ 20% TOTAL LOW LOW HIGH HIGH Unit Price TOTAL Unit Price TOTAL 5040 sqft $ 1.50 $ 7,560 $ 3.00 $ 15,120 3000 sqft $ 3.00 $ 9,000 $ 5.00 $ 15,000 1200 sqft $ 8.00 $ 9,600 $ 10.00 $ 12,000 3000 sqft $ 5.00 $ 15,000 $ 6.00 $ 18,000 600 ft $ 20.00 $ 12,000 $ 34.00 $ 20,400 1250 sqft $ 8.00 $ 10,000 $ 12.00 $ 15,000 2590 sqft $ 12.00 $ 31,080 $ 20.00 $ 51,800 $ 94,240 $ 18,850 $ 120,000 $ 147,320 $ 29,470 $ 180,000 LOCATION 7 - PARTIAL MEDIAN & LEFT -TURN MEDIAN LOW LOW HIGH HIGH Removal Items Unit Price TOTAL Unit Price TOTAL AC Pavement Removal 4320 sqft $ 1.50 $ 6,480 $ 3.00 $ 12,960 Construction Items Full Depth AC 1280 sqft Median curb 640 ft Landscape 3040 sqft SUBTOTAL $ 8.00 $ 10,240 $ 12.00 $ 7,680 $ 12.00 $ 36,480 $ 60,880 $ 10.00 $ 12,800 $ 16.00 $ 10,240 $ 20.00 $ 60,800 $ 96,800 Contingency @ 20% $ 12,180 $ 19,360 TOTAL $ 80,000 $ 120,000 LOCATION 8 - PARTIAL MEDIAN & NARROWING Removal Items AC Pavement Removal Concrete Removal Construction Items Full Depth AC Concrete Sidewalk Curb and Gutter Median Curb Landscape SUBTOTAL Contingency @ 20% TOTAL LOW LOW Unit Price TOTAL 4680 sqft $ 1.50 $ 7,020 1500 sqft $ 3.00 $ 4,500 HIGH HIGH Unit Price TOTAL $ 3.00 $ 14,040 $ 5.00 $ 7,500 1080 sqft $ 8.00 $ 8,640 $ 10.00 $ 10,800 1500 sqft $ 5.00 $ 7,500 $ 6.00 $ 9,000 300 ft $ 20.00 $ 6,000 $ 34.00 $ 10,200 240 ft $ 12.00 $ 2,880 $ 16.00 $ 3,840 3600 sqft $ 12.00 $ 43,200 $ 20.00 $ 72,000 $ 79,740 $ 127,380 $ 15,950 $ 25,480 $ 100,000 $ 160,000 LOCATION 9 - ROUNDABOUT (ROMERIA ST) Removal Items AC Pavement Removal Concrete Removal Traffic Signal Removal Construction Items Full Depth AC Concrete Sidewalk Curb and Gutter Median Curb Concrete Driveway Landscape SUBTOTAL ContingencX @ 20% TOTAL 13000 sqft 5000 sqft I ea LOW LOW Unit Price TOTAL $ 1.50 $ 19,500 $ 3.00 $ 15,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 HIGH HIGH Unit Price TOTAL $ 3.00 $ 39,000 $ 5.00 $ 25,000 $ 30,000.00 $ 30,000 4600 sqft $ 8.00 $ 36,800 $ 10.00 $ 46,000 5000 sqft $ 5.00 $ 25,000 $ 6.00 $ 30,000 1000 ft $ 20.00 $ 20,000 $ 34.00 $ 34,000 300 ft $ 12.00 $ 3,600 $ 16.00 $ 4,800 750 sqft $ 8.00 $ 6,000 $ 12.00 $ 9,000 7650 sqft $ 12.00 $ 91,800 $ 20.00 $ 153,000 $ 237,700 $ 370,800 $ 47,540 $ 74,160 $ 290,000 $ 450,000 LOCATION 10 - NARROWING & PARTIAL MEDIAN LOW LOW HIGH HIGH Removal Items Unit Price TOTAL Unit Price TOTAL AC Pavement Removal 8280 sqft $ 1.50 $ 12,420 $ 3.00 $ 24,840 Concrete Removal 1500 sqft $ 3.00 $ 4,500 $ 5.00 $ 7,500 Construction Items Full Depth AC 1800 sqft $ 8.00 $ 14,400 $ 10.00 $ 18,000 Concrete Sidewalk 2700 sqft $ 5.00 $ 13,500 $ 6.00 $ 16,200 Curb and Gutter 540 ft $ 20.00 $ 10,800 $ 34.00 $ 18,360 Median Curb 360 ft $ 12.00 $ 4,320 $ 16.00 $ 5,760 Concrete Driveway 1500 sqft $ 8.00 $ 12,000 $ 12.00 $ 18,000 Landscape 4980 sqft $ 12.00 $ 59,760 $ 20.00 $ 99,600 SUBTOTAL $ 131,700 $ 208,260 ContingencX @ 20% TOTAL $ 26,340 $ 160,000 $ 41,660 $ 250,000 LOCATION I 1 - NARROWING Removal Items AC Pavement Removal Concrete Removal Construction Items Full Depth AC Concrete Sidewalk Curb and Gutter Landscape SUBTOTAL Contingencx @ 20% TOTAL 1400 sgft 500 sgft LOW LOW Unit Price TOTAL $ 1.50 $ 2,100 $ 3.00 $ 1,500 HIGH HIGH Unit Price TOTAL $ 3.00 $ 4,200 $ 5.00 $ 2,500 200 sgft $ 8.00 $ 1,600 $ 10.00 $ 2,000 500 sgft $ 5.00 $ 2,500 $ 6.00 $ 3,000 100 ft $ 20.00 $ 2,000 $ 34.00 $ 3,400 1200 sqft $ 12.00 $ 14,400 $ 20.00 $ 24,000 $ 24,100 $ 39,100 $ 4,820 $ 7,820 $ 30,000 $ 50,000 LOCATION 12 - ENTRY MEDIAN (D) Removal Items AC Pavement Removal Construction Items Full Depth AC Median curb Landscape SUBTOTAL LOW LOW HIGH HIGH Unit Price TOTAL Unit Price TOTAL 1960 sgft $ 1.50 $ 2,940 $ 3.00 $ 5,880 560 sgft $ 8.00 $ 4,480 $ 10.00 $ 5,600 280 ft $ 12.00 $ 3,360 $ 16.00 $ 4,480 1400 sqft $ 12.00 $ 16,800 $ 20.00 $ 28,000 $ 27,580 $ 43,960 Contingency @ 20% $ 5,520 $ 8,800 TOTAL $ 40,000 $ 60,000 LOCATION 13 - FUTURE SIGNAL (LEVANE ST) Construction Items Traffic Signal SUBTOTAL I ea LOW LOW Unit Price TOTAL $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 HIGH HIGH Unit Price TOTAL $ 220,000 $ 220,000 $ 220,000 Contingency @ 20% $ 30,000 $ 44,000 TOTAL $ 180,000 $ 270,000 STRIPING LOW LOW HIGH HIGH Removal Items Unit Price TOTAL Unit Price TOTAL Striping Removal I LS $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 40,000 $ 40,000 Construction Items Striping 75000 ft $ 0.75 $ 56,250 $ 1.00 $ 75,000 SUBTOTAL $ 76,250 $ 115,000 ContingencX @ 20% $ 15,250 $ 23,000 TOTAL $ 100,000 $ 140,000 SIDEWALK (MISSING LINKS) Removal Items Curb & Gutter Removal 5400 ft Construction Items Concrete Sidewalk 27000 sgft Retaining Wall* 15500 sgft * Est. @ 50% of S/W length SUBTOTAL Contingency @ 20% TOTAL LOW LOW Unit Price TOTAL $ 2.00 $ 10,800 HIGH HIGH Unit Price TOTAL $ 3.00 $ 16,200 $ 5.00 $ 135,000 $ 6.00 $ 162,000 $ 25.00 $ 387,500 $ 35.00 $ 542,500 $ 533,300 $ 720,700 $ 106,660 $ 144,140 $ 640,000 $ 870,000 TYPICAL SECTION Looking Eastbound EXISTINGLA 9 f NEW T TYPICAL SECTION (B) Looking Eastbound EXISTING t h NEW TYPICAL SECTION (C) Looking Eastbound EXISTING —� j NEW PMM STRIPING NOTES: FA/RwA ® PAINT PER CALTRANS DETAIL XX. Y LA = 150' TR�"WN �"'E !' NE ® REMOVE EXISTING CONFLICTING MARKERS AND STRIPING BY OW"40. R PAINT PAVEMENT MARKING AS INDICATED. err ® PAINT 12" WHITE LINE • 45' AND 25' O.C., TYPICAL Z 31 AID t 8'pAR ® REMOVE RAISED PAVEMENT MARKERS CY IRA � +A LAW ` Ot u a ,r LA COSTA AVENUE DW GENERAL NOTES - SIGNING & STRIPING: L4 1. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL SKIING AND STRIPING. + 11' 7RAYEt LANE — COSTA ' 2. SIGHING. STRIPING AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL CONFORM TO THE CALIFORNIA MANUAL GIN UNIFORM TRAFFIC DEVICES (LATEST VENSIO N) AND THE CALTRANS STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS (LATEST VERSION). THESE PLANS,AND THE SPECIAL PROVISIONS — 3. ALL SIGNING AND STRIPING IS SIOB,IECT TO THE APPROVAL of THE do ENK,YNEF OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE — — — — — — PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 4. ANY DEVIATION FROM THESE SIGNING AND STRIPING PLANS SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO ANY CHANGE IN THE FIELD. S. ALL SIGNING AND STRIPING SHALL BE REFLECTIVE PER CALTRANS SPECIFM.ATKINS. STRIPING SHALL BE REPAINTED TWO WEEKS AFTER INITIAL PAINTING SIGNING SHALL USE ENCAPSULATED LENS REFLECTIVE SHEETING (HIGH INTENSITY OR EQUAL). S. EXACT LOCATION OF STRIPING AND LIMIT LINES SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 7. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL CONFLICTING PAINTED LINES, MARKINGS AND PAVEMENT LEGENDS BY GRIDIG DEBRIS SHALL BE PROMPTLY REMOVED BY THE CONTRACTOR. & ALL PAVEMENT LEGENDS SHALL BE THE LATEST VERSION OF THE CALTRANS METRIC STENCILS. 9. LIMIT LINES AND CROSSWALKS SHALL BE FIELD LOCATED. CROSSWALKS SHALL HAVE 10' INSIDE DIMENSION UNLESS 07NMUSE SPECIFIED. P11 'BIKE LANr +Awoo / , rM � 1 \ /NIP PROPOSED DRIVEWAY i p co5� / GENERAL NOTES - CONTINUED: / 10. ALL CROSSWALKS LIMIT LINES, STOP BARS. PAVEMENT ARROWS AND PAVEMENT LEGENDS SHALL BE THERMOPLASTIC UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. / 11. ALL SIGNS SHALL BE STANDARD SIZE AS SHOWN IN THE CALIFORNIA MUTCD (LATEST VERSION) UNLESS / UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. 12- SIGN POSTS SHALL BE SQUARE PERFORATED STEEL TUBING WITH BREAKAWAY BASE PER SAN DIEGO i gCALL. 1-401 REGIONAL STANDARD DRAWING M-45, 13. WHEN A SIGN IS ATTACHED TO A POLE. IT SHALL BE MOUNTED USING A STANDARD CITY MOUNTING BRACKET WITH STRAPS. 14. EXISTING SIGNS THAT ARE REMOVED SHALL BECOME THE PROPERTY OF THE CONTRACTOR. 15. ALL SIGNS SHOWN GIN THESE PLANS SHALL BE NEW SIMS PROVIDED BY AND INSTALLED BY THE CONTRACTOR EXCEPT THOSE SKINS SPECIFICALLY SHOWN AS EXISTING TO BE RELOCATED OR TO REMAIN. \ W � \ n \ 2 s s = o IpOFE53lq�( 'M BUILT a( No. a P.E Z E XP. 3 DATE sf �lY1� E 'lF MF CALIVWP4 i91 INSPECTOR DATE k L L Q J F� v _ o ti 'eEa 1A1� j ram, -Y +ARlOOW � _ LA COSTA AVENVE _ �;rk STQRA(a Q g x 54+00 6f ` IPAWI REMSIDN DESCRIPTION AP R��ED 62ftw�— I rJAWMA2t6R 662 M mx lww Eli. 6 2 DA DIN BY: JM [M�WMTNO. DRANtIG ND. ar FOL BY: 471-8 AVENUE 5 G i Her wNF-I SNCR \\y / / / s STRIPING NOTES: � ® PAINT PER CALTRANS DETAIL )OC s ® FESS NR REMOVE E]OSTING CDICTIIG STRIPING BY cxttNDlNc. �QE�o�t• T 'Fs� 'AS BUILT ® PAINT PAVEMENT MARKING AS INDICATED. M �6�15 � P.E«% Fes. 6 o DATE p e PAINT le SFEITE LINE • 45' AND 25' G.C.. TYPICAL �r'F7 Cl Y REVIEWED E f OF CAUFOP ® REMOVE RAISED PAVEMENT MARKERS INSPECTOR DATE L 7 ISO' iR,V,Ng WALL 1'-W 'sr — FA/RWA Y E DOST. WI-2 W13-1 (35) — !ft \ \ V GENERAL NOTES - SIGNING & STRIPING: r 1. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL SEXING AND STRIPING COS%A AVE�y E — ANDUC 2 DEVICES LATEST VERSION) PAVEMENT ECALTRANS MARKINGS SMALL CONFORM CI THE CALIFORNIA MANUAL fIN UNIFORM TRAFFIC � ANDDEVT6 (LATEST bPROVISI S. THE CALTRANS srAIDARo sPEgFiCATIONS (LATEST VERSION), THESE PLANS. AND THE D�EaAI_ PROVISIONS. — — - 3. ALL DGI" AND STRIPING IS SUB.ECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE _ — PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. — 4. ANY DEVIATION FROM THESE SIGNING AND STRIPING PLANS SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO ANY CHANGE IN THE FIELD. S. ALL SIGNING AND STRIPING SHALL BE REFLECTIVE PER CALTRANS SPECIFICATIONS STRIPING SHALL BE REPAINTED TWO WEEKS AFTER INITIAL PAINTING SIGNING SHALL USE ENCAPSULATED LENS REFLECTIVE SEETWG (HIGH INTENSITY OR EQUAL). B. EXACT LOCATION OF STRIPING AND LINT LINES SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 7. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL CONFLICTING PAINTED LINES, MARI(MNGS AND PAVEIENT LEGENDS BY GRINDING,DEBRIS SHALL BE PROMPTLY REMOVED BY THE CONTRACTOR. G ALL PAVEMENT LEGENDS SHALL BE THE LATEST VERSION OF THE CALTRANS METRIC STENCILS 9. LIMIT LINES AND CROSSWALKS SHALL BE FIELD LOCATED. CROSSWALKS SHALL HAZE 10'INSIDE DIMENSION UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. EXIST. SPEED FEFDBAOC SIGN EIOST. -J� � CC LA COSTA AVENUE x. DIST. TWITCH FOR J DRIVEWAYS'. — N / I I / I PROPOSED � \ DRIVEWAY LEGEND: 00S7q 4 t N \ s G 0 m a IN EN5RED am i X FNG s PROPOSED ND PARKIN' (SIGNS) PROPOSED NO PAWWFG (RED CIVIB) u GENERAL NOTES - CONTINUED: y�W�E�o�W T. ��� •As Burr c 10. ALL CROSSWALKS, LIMIT LIES, STOP BARS, PAVEMENT ARROWS AND PAVEMENT LEGENDS SHALL BE p,E,CS�67 Ems. G�7�3 DATE THERMOPLASTIC UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. �W,wpII 4 4 UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECALL SIGNS SHALL BE IFIED. T SIZE AS SHOWN IN E CALIFORNIA MUTCO (LATEST VERSION) UNLESS �JF � N Y 1 � oP,l��' Y: E OF OAl1F 12 SIGN POSTS SHALL BE SQUARE PERFORATED STEEL TUBING WITH BREAKAWAY BASE PER SAN SEGO INSPECTOR DATE REGIONAL STANDARD DRAWING M-la �CITY OF CARLSBAD 4 � 13. MEN A SIN IS ATTACHED TO A POLE. IT SHALL BE MOUNTED USING A STANDARD CITY MOUNTING � TRANSPORTATION DEPARYENT � BRACKET WITH STRAPS. T i 9IMC AND SNIPING PLAN 14. EXISTING SIGNS THAT ARE REMOVED SHALL BECOME THE PROPERTY OF THE CONTRACTOR. uA INSTALLED BY THE LA COSTA AVENUE PARKING PLAN MA�WAY _ pR1VE 15. COON TRAILS EXCEPT CEPOWN OT THOSE SIGNS SPECIFICALLY SHOWN EXISTING BYTHESE PLANS SHALL BE NEW SIGINS PROVIDED AND BE RELOCATED OR TO REMAIN. c Lo1a..a ff vx - -- - one APwtwK an APPpOVIA H"'•• I l I I I A; \ LA COSTENUE to' TRANa LANE � / a b ! WL DOST. R2-1(45) o R26 in El �� \ O U N W LA COSTA AVENUE c 13 LF. i 5q 15 LF, R26 W U Qr U Q O Q U W LAJ N LLJ LA COSTA AVENUE sr 10' TRAVEL LANE 4 WATCH FOR — _ A15' -7F/L sm RC 16 L . r RC 10 LF. RC 13 LF. MC 14 LF. Re 2 LF. RC 13 LF. THE 0 yo- n VAA� �v SCAB: ,•-W Z tJ1 SIGNING NOTES: �1 Nsuu NEW S1CN(S) oN NEW TREE�AR PM AS SHOML F]051N0 SM (F MY) a1ALL eE NNaLx1m ABOVE NEN 9aNs ❑Z MRAIL NEW SON(S) ON DE51N0 WPM uort POLE AS %MML E70 M SM OF ANY) WQL K NDM M MM 1EW =a STRIPING NOTES: OPANT NED D/® M CALIRANS MT& a O PANT M1E LNE • 45' AND 25' O.G. TWW& OPANT RFD CIM AS WATER. LEGEND: noun EIMM RED CL M PRDPCIMD NO PAWNS (SM) N� PROPO',WD NO PAWN (RED a=) 6 t to"a6TEssNy4/ 'AS BUILT G/NO. _/ ZDA / # EmLVA 0W �► P.E CSLLLi EXP. �L;p/� If OF ckL'O P RISPECTpt DAIS L JC Q J a R2tSPEED - a W B FEEDBACK j SIGN � E)asi — EAST. EAST. ) R4-4 DOST A R2-1(45) � � Q R5-2 REWSM DeXWTM 1RMF9WA R� 3JOM Eli. t 2 DYM B`F. m *ND Br FR CT ND. ORANIMG NQ FELD Br. 6039 471-M c� Pi Q� 40 0 >RM� = MPH EXIST. LA COSTA AVENUE EXIST. EXIST. _ 'WATCH FOR - -1(40) - EAST. R2 1(45) Wh2 — — — — E7AST. R26 DRIVEWAYS — — A1D RBIB SIGN err lip is TRAVEL LAW Zi 'fir 4 �✓ — — — — ! EXIST. T _ — — — EXIST. EXIST. PARR SICK _ — — — — — — 'NTERm IL R2-4(45) RG 7 LF. Rc 13 LF. RC 12 LF! RESMLA COSTA AVENUE A� AVENUE LPCOS1j��- Q FTASHK / BEACON f \ \ / TnA EXIST. MN / / 'WATCH FOR / DRIVEWAYS' _ R SIGNAIN - a m ,ate 35 ° EXIST. WI-1 r A f / i / g i 3fNE MR / Rc 12 LF. RC 7 LF. %T EXIST. RC 12 LF. FEEDBA(K. / SIGN RC 14 lF. p MPH OF MF R26 6 Tw 2 SIGNING NOTES: EHST- NEW 9IN(S) O1 NEW TFIESPAR PM AS 910W11. EIWW MM (IF ANY) 41A11 BE MOIMIED ABOVE NETT 9015 NSTALL KW 9WS) ON EDISING SRFET LM POLE AS 910W EJISW SM (I' MY) SNML BE MONIED ABOVE NIEW SIO& 0 r r r EASING RED CURB PROPOSED NO PAINM (SM) PROPOSED NO PARIM (RED a=) STRIPING NOTES: OPANT RED MM PER CKTRM6 DUAL )M OPANT ME1E LM • 4S MD 2S D.C. TYP & OPAW RFD CUB AS IDNJHIED. E�'two FETSI 'AS BUILT " a /illm 3�eT - # EWi 6H3MA13 W P.E EXP. 6/T DATE IE OF CAL\ 1114SPECTOR DATE Y L Jc # g Kira Linberg Agenda item + From: Terry Anderson <nofreee@gmail.com> CITY COUNCIL Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 1:46 PM ACM,_DCM `—CA --cc_ To: Council Internet Email Date i t gCity Manager'" Subject: La Costa Ave Planned Changes Dear Mayor Matt Hall Mayor Pro Tem Ann J. Kulchin Council Member Mark Packard Council Member Keith Blackburn Council Member Farrah Golshan Douglas I'm writing you to discuss the upcoming plans for potential changes to La Costa Ave. From what I've gathered, there appears to be a complete disregard for the masses and a strong favoring towards the minority on the matters of the lane modifications. The relatively small number of houses directly on La Costa Ave are going to impose significant delays on the road for all other motorists who travel that route, just to save them a minute or two pulling out of their driveways and cross streets. Most of the houses now have significantly more room to pull out and see oncoming traffic with the lane changes that have already been made on the north side of the street. The proposed decrease to 40mph and installation of traffic circles and other devices to further decrease traffic speed are complete overkill and a waste of city time and money. While I understand the concern for safety, there are certainly cheaper and more effective way to protect the drivers pulling out and yet still maintaining flow of traffic. A center divider with openings for U-turns at predetermined locations that could provide ample views of oncoming traffic would be ideal. If the true goal of this is safety, then I believe this divider would be the best solution while still retaining adequate traffic flow. Regardless of what decision is made, please consider the effect it will have on ALL the surrounding communities, not just the homes directly along La Costa Ave itself. There are far more people in the area that will be negatively impacted by the proposed changes than will be benefited. Even if you exclude all commuters, you must take into account all the neighborhoods that live directly off of La Costa Ave. Without a doubt, every single one of my neighbors I've spoken to on Cadencia street and side streets oppose the changes. Please do what it is right and what will benefit the masses. Thank you, Terry Anderson Delgado PI Carlsbad Date: (11TA Distribution: City Clerk Asst. City Clerk .� Deputy Clerk Book Kira Linberg From: Peggy Thompson <ppeeggggyytt@gmail. com> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 3:43 PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: Proposed Traffic Changes on La Costa Ave. Although I live south of El Camino Real, near the lagoon, I travel La Costa Avenue daily. The turn-abouts and curbs that make the roads narrower ("traffic calming", as you all say) is s0000 unfriendly and, in my opinion. I travel the ones North of Poinsettia, by Aliconte and the ones on Leucadia Blvd, also. I'm always afraid I'm going to run smack into one of those curbs. 52 years of driving have me expecting to have curbs continue along the same lines in similar situations. It's like someone sticking their foot out to trip you as you go by. And, I'm always afraid to go on one of those "round-abouts" if there is a car in the circle, because I have no idea what they plan to do (U-turn, Left -turn, go strait)??? I ask you, PLEASE do not do this to us! Seems to me that the road works well as it is. This proposed plan will make it much worse! Peggy Thompson 1850 Lilac Ct. Carlsbad 92011 Kira Linberg From: Suzanne Wilson <suzlwils@earthlink.net> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 5:55 PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: La Costa Avenue MaUor Matt Haff -f- Cw foil (►^t y"k(j C>°lt'i" &Ja5 serr} -tt'6- et"), To my neighbors, The original motorcycle accident which spurred the changes proposed by the City was caused on 12/31/2008 when a careless resident made a left turn from their driveway across traffic on La Costa Ave, near Calle Madero. The changes proposed by the City are designed to increase congestion on La Costa Avenue but do nothing to address the original problem of dangerous left turns. The City plans to reduce travel to one lane in each direction, cutting the speed limit, and adding obstacles such traffic circles and curb bulb -outs at other intersections. The long-range plan calls for removing all three traffic signals at Cadencia, Romeria, and Vieja Castilla, replacing them with 1-lane traffic circles. If you have ever driven on the western portion of Leucadia Blvd during the evening rush hour (the most critical time of day), you will know that traffic is virtually gridlocked there, and the average speed through the traffic circles is at most 10 mph. A similar situation exists during rush hour in Olivenhain on Rancho Santa Fe Road due to the many stop signs there, creating congestion and nearly two miles of bumper -to -bumper traffic. A much simpler solution would be to simply install a raised median on La Costa Avenue, preventing dangerous left turns out of driveways with poor visibility. If required, an additional traffic signal could be installed at any intersection where it is needed. The City's plans to increase congestion may please residents at the 40-50 driveways on the western portion of La Costa Avenue, but they will create congestion, delay, and frustration for the other 20,000 daily commuters who use the road. The City's plans also do nothing to address the original problem, namely dangerous left,turns across traffic on La Costa Avenue. I would like to encourage everyone in our neighborhood who is opposed to increased congestion and miles -long backed -up traffic to call the City Council members today and tomorrow and express your views. It will help even more if you will attend the council meeting in person and speak in opposition to the expensive, unnecessary, and ineffective change. Sincerely, Alan Thompson Kira Linberg From: Janet Fisher <janetfisher100@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 4:23 PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: La Costa Avenue - No More Changes Hello, I am writing to you about the La Costa Avenue road situation. The changes that have already been made to La Costa Ave had dramatically slowed it down. If you happen to get behind a super slow driver then you are stuck until it opens up almost to El Camino. Why would any of you agree to slow it down more? Have you driven this road? It is not going to be safer just a ton of traffic. Look what happened to the round abouts at Leucadia... traffic traffic trafficM Why would we CHOOSE to do that here? Please tell them this is not already decided. Who benefits from it being a traffic nightmare? Why screw it up more? Let me know what your intentions are. Thanks, Janet Fisher 760 522-5739 November 8, 2011 Carlsbad City Council 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: Proposed La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Dear Councilmembers Hall, Kulchin, Packard, Blackburn, and Douglas: The above referenced -item has been placed on the next City Council meeting agenda by City staff with two important actions: (1) a request to reduce the speed limit, and (2) a request to accept the La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan. I encourage you to consider the following information and vote against these two actions. SPEED LIMIT REDUCTION Alleged sight distance problem is likely very limited —warning signs sufficient At a speed of 45 MPH, the recommended stopping sight distance is 360 feet. After the lane elimination and parking restrictions were implemented as part of the Interim Striping and Parking Plan, there are allegedly a small number of driveways (between 7 and 10 according to staff) that still have insufficient sight distances. However, these driveways are likely concentrated in two relatively small areas (probably a few hundred feet in length), and the sight distance deficiency is likely within -10% of the recommended level. Staff has acknowledged that there is no published study to verify the numbers. Numerous large yellow signs have been installed warning drivers of the residential driveways, and these signs are associated with additional speed advisory signs (35 or 40 MPH) in the areas with the allegedly non -compliant driveways (Figure 1). It seems advisable and perfectly acceptable to use these warning signs with speed advisories to ensure driver awareness in the very limited problem areas, or limit the reduction to a smaller area, rather than reducing the speed limit for the entire two-mile corridor. I _-....pry. Linke Correspondence This appears to be standard practice elsewhere, including within Carlsbad. For example, the speed limit on Cadencia Street north of La Costa Avenue is 40 MPH, and there are six residential driveways along a curved portion preceded by a 35 MPH advisory speed sign. If the same standard that is being applied to La Costa Avenue were applied to Cadencia Street, the entire length should be reduced to 35 MPH or below. This is likely true for many roads around Carlsbad. Artificially low speed limit will create violators out of 53% of drivers The most recent speed survey conducted on La Costa Avenue (September 2011) shows that an overwhelming (and unacceptable) 53% of drivers would become violators with the reduction to 40 MPH (i.e., they currently travel at a very safe 41-45 MPH). Inconsistent with previous stopping sight distance data Although staff has not revealed specific addresses, the 7-10 affected driveways seem to be located in two "blind curve" areas —one between Viejo Castilla Way and Gibraltar Street near the middle, and one between Quinta Street and Cadencia Street in the eastern portion. This is based on a statement in the September 2011 speed survey that speed advisory signs have been placed at locations near the affected driveways, and the speed advisory signs are only in the two blind curve areas (Figure 2). And, although staff has not revealed specific sight distance numbers, it is likely that the affected driveways are within -10% of the recommended distance, as staff has stated that they are within the recommended distance for 40 MPH (300 feet). 1 LUTOF WORK Motorcycle accident Figure 2. Blind curves (red) and site of motorcycle accident. Inconsistent with this, staff previously reported that the Interim Striping and Parking Plan would create a sight distance of 380 feet at the site of the 2008 motorcycle accident, well in excess of the 360 feet recommended at 45 MPH (Figure 3). And this is one of the sites with the lowest sight distance on the road due to its presence in the blind curve near the middle. 2 Linke Correspondence motorcycle accident on blind curve. Ability of special 5 MPH reduction to pass legal review City staff is seeking to use a special provision in the California Vehicle Code to justify the 5 MPH reduction from the current 45 MPH to 40 MPH based on the sight distance being a "condition not readily apparent to drivers." I communicated with Doug Bilse earlier this year when the 85th percentile speed was 48 MPH, which meant that the enforceable speed limit was 50 MPH. On several occasions, I suggested the special 5 MPH reduction could be used to enforce the existing 45 MPH speed limit with the exact same justifications being cited now by staff for their further speed limit reduction. However, whenever I raised this possibility, Mr. Bilse said that the justification would not pass legal review. If the justification will not pass legal review, as previously claimed by staff, they should not be using it. Ironically, they are using it now after sight distances have been substantially increased. Lack of public notice Although I am on the La Costa Avenue update email list, the speed limit reduction request came as a complete surprise when I downloaded the Agenda Bill that became available late Friday. Staff also did not inform the email list about a Traffic Safety Commission (TSC) meeting held Monday afternoon where they sought a recommendation on the reduction. Nor did they inform me of the TSC meeting when I spoke with them at City Hall on Monday morning. TSC agendas are not published for the public, so it is not accurate to assume that TSC meetings are legitimate forums for public input. 3 Linke Correspondence Speed survey irregularities Regarding the speed survey itself, there are also some questions about the manner in which it was conducted. For example, such surveys are supposed to be done at "...locations sufficiently removed from any stop signs, traffic signals, or other traffic flow interruptions that significantly affect operating speeds." However, one of the survey locations was apparently directly adjacent to a traffic signal. In addition, the survey was conducted only a month after a major reconfiguration to the road when drivers may have still been adjusting to the change. LEGEND* TRAFFIC SIGNAL SPEED SURVEY LOCATION Figure 4. Locations of speed surveying. Exaggeration of liability Staff also appears to exaggerate the magnitude of the issue by claiming that their "[d]eterm i nation is further supported by the recent court ruling that there was a clear and present danger on La Costa Avenue when the posted speed limit was 45 MPH at the time of the collision." "Clear and present danger" is used to describe the government's ability to silence speech under extreme circumstances, such as encouraging subordination in wartime or falsely inciting mass panic. I believe that the judge in the motorcycle accident liability case found that there was enough evidence that there could be a "dangerous condition" that contributed to the accident due to a combination of factors, including sight distance, the allowance of dangerous left turns, etc. I do not believe that the judge ruled that the presence of a few driveways with sight distances slightly less than 360 feet would definitely create a clear and present danger on the entirety of La Costa Avenue, as seemingly implied by staff. If that were the case, there are likely many places in Carlsbad that are dangerous conditions that are subjecting the City to great liability, which should be a higher priority. 4 Linke Correspondence LA COSTA AVENUE IMPROVEMENT PLAN City staffs written objective I spoke with Doug Bilse before this entire process started, and he speculated that the best approach would be a full road diet with some roundabouts, medians, and curb extensions to calm traffic and give the area a more residential feel. But he added that he did not have any preconceived notions, and to wait for the public input and studies to be done to see what came out. Staff may honestly believe that their proposed project will work, and that it is the best thing for the community and city. However, as the process has unfolded, it has become clear to me that Mr. Bilse's early speculation was indeed a preconceived vision, and that staff has massaged and manipulated the public input and traffic studies to match that vision. Staff has shown their written objective at every opportunity. In fact, they have virtually treated it as if it had been etched in stone and handed to them on a mountaintop: Develop a cost effective, community -preferred plan to address traffic speeds and safety on La Costa Avenue in a way that respects the residential character and arterial function of the roadway. However, whenever public opinion or alternative design options were presented that were not consistent with the preconceived roundabout vision, staff dismissed them as being inconsistent with their written objective. Their preconceived vision has been interpreted as the only one that is consistent with their objective, making it a self-fulfilling prophecy. That said, I question whether their final plan really even meets their objective, as detailed below. Does the long-term plan address traffic speeds and safety? Yes, but they have already been addressed without it. As described by staff, numerous signs have been added, including warnings that drivers are "ENTERING RESIDENTIAL AREA" and to "WATCH FOR DRIVEWAYS" (Figure 1). Some of these signs also contain advisory speeds of "35 MPH" or "40 MPH" (below the current 45 MPH speed limit). In addition, there are speed feedback signs showing drivers their current speed and warning them to "SLOW DOWN." City staff has indicated that speeds have already decreased, allowing the enforceable speed limit under the California Vehicle Code to be decreased from 50 MPH to 45 MPH, and staff is now requesting a further reduction to 40 MPH. More significantly, the road was restriped to eliminate a travel lane in areas with residential driveways, and parking was restricted on two "blind" curves (see red areas on Figure 1). These changes provide a much greater distance from residences and parked cars to the travel lane, and they provide a very large buffer for residents to enter traffic from their driveways, significantly improving safety (Figure 5). Thus, both safety and the liability issue have been addressed, and the City has the design immunity intended by the changes. 5 Linke Correspondence Figure 5. Large SUV entering traffic after restriping. I believe the alternative plan I previously suggested (eliminating the center left turn lane rather than a travel lane to create the buffer) could also have worked. The loss of a travel lane can be annoying at times (e.g., inability to bypass some very slow moving vehicles or being tailgated by vehicles who wish to bypass me). However, I think most commuters and I can accept it as a compromise for the purposes of safety and convenience of the local residents. My interpretation of the City Council's original goal on the matter of La Costa Avenue was to use cost-effective means to improve safety for residents and to address the liability issue created by the 2008 motorcycle accident that resulted in a costly lawsuit settlement. The City has already made the extensive changes described above at areasonable cost (—$50,000), and they have addressed the safety and liability issue, as confirmed to me by Mr. Bilse in a recent email. Thus, further disruption of traffic should not be necessary. Safety problems with roundabouts One area of concern about the long-term plan is that it could actually decrease safety. There is an elementary school a few blocks away from the Romeria Street intersection, where an unmetered roundabout is proposed to replace an existing traffic signal (Figure 6). Children and cars are accustomed to the traffic signal that is there now. After installation of the roundabout, pedestrians will be expected to take a leap of faith and cross, assuming that cars will yield in this unfamiliar situation. For similar reasons, roundabouts are dangerous for sight and cognitively impaired individuals who depend on signals and sounds of traffic to know when it is safe to cross. 6 Linke Correspondence Figure U. Draft design of roundabout at Romeria Street to replace traffic signal. Other problems with the roundabouts Roundabouts can serve a useful purpose when implemented in intersections with modest levels of traffic that is relatively balanced between the two cross -streets. Rather than having a series of stop -and -go cycles between the two streets, all cars slow down but keep moving. However, in the case of the two intersections proposed for roundabouts on La Costa Avenue, greater than 90% of the traffic originates on La Costa Avenue with very low side street traffic, and the green time at traffic lights is virtually always on La Costa Avenue. Without the roundabouts, a stop condition is relatively infrequent in the direction where >90% of the traffic is moving at 45 MPH. However, at the roundabouts, all of that traffic has to slow down to 10-20 MPH to maneuver around the roundabout. This would cause delay/congestion that is unnecessary, since the safety and liability issues have already been addressed. Figure 7. Locations jLv g of proposed roundabouts (red circles showing percentage of LCA traffic) and traffic signals. Another bizarre design choice for the La Costa Avenue roundabouts is the location of a traffic signal at an intersection that is less than a block away from one of the roundabouts (Figure 7). This does not make any sense from the standpoint of maintaining traffic flow through the roundabouts. It also raises serious questions about traffic queuing up at the light and extending through the nearby roundabout, which has not been accounted for in the preliminary traffic study. 7 Linke Correspondence Is the long-term plan cost-effective? Not Approximately $212,000 has already been spent on contradictory and questionable studies. Because the safety and liability issues have been addressed, the plan currently proposed by City staff is largely intended to beautify the neighborhood and increase its residential character. However, it is estimated to cost $3.1 million to $4.7 million for further design and installation, not including the ongoing annual costs of maintenance for landscaping. This far exceeds the $810,000 remaining in the budget for improvements. City staff has suggested grants, private funding, and special assessments on property taxes to make up the difference. Gas taxes, grants, and assessments are all scarce funds that come from taxpayers throughout Carlsbad and beyond, and there are opportunity costs when they are used. For example, if the City were to conduct detailed sight distance studies at other driveways and intersections throughout the city, as they have on La Costa Avenue, I am convinced that many other liability and safety issues would become evident. One nearby example is Cadencia Street approaching La Costa Avenue. It is essentially a collector street with one travel lane in each direction with parking on both sides and residential driveways. The speed limit is 40 MPH, and there is a relatively steep grade. With cars parked directly adjacent to driveways (no buffer to traffic), it is very unlikely that sight distances are adequate for 40 MPH. There are likely a multitude of similar situations across Carlsbad. I feel that it would be a better use of scarce taxpayer dollars to address safety/liability issues elsewhere (or other more pressing issues) than to beautify La Costa Avenue for a very limited number of residents, while disrupting traffic flow for tens of thousands of others. Does the long-term plan respect the arterial function of roadway? Not You, as public officials, rely on reports from City staff to help guide your decisions on things such as traffic impact. However, the process is subject to extensive manipulation. It seems that any desired answer can be produced, and there have been a number of irregularities since the La Costa Avenue studies were first authorized back in 2007. Unfortunately, the manipulations have continued with the latest traffic studies that include the roundabouts, presumably to help justify the feasibility of staff's preconceived vision. I believe that, if legitimate methods were used, they would show that the roundabouts fail the City's level of service (LOS) requirements. I think the traffic impact study process needs to be reformed for this project, as well as city-wide for its annual traffic monitoring program (TMP) and traffic impact study requirements. For the latest report, the traffic forecasts can be split into three types: (1) roadway segments (mid -block; areas between intersections), (2) regular intersections (non -roundabouts), and (3) roundabout intersections. 1. Roadway segment analysis There are a variety of methods that can be used to assess segments. In the Phase I report, KOA used the SANTEC (published by SANDAG) and Florida DOT methods. Another closely related one is the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) method. The Florida DOT and HCM methods have undergone extensive validation, and complex formulas are used to determine lane capacities, depending on the specific characteristics of the road. The 8 Linke Correspondence capacity is defined as the transition of level service (LOS) "E" to "F" on the familiar grading scale. Essentially, a road can start with a capacity of about 2,000 vehicles per lane per hour (vplph). That is similar to the capacity of a straight, uninterrupted freeway segment with cars platooned together with less than two -second following distances. However, this capacity is reduced based on unique characteristics of city roads, such as curved road geometry, traffic signal spacing, and the presence of driveways, parking, and pedestrian traffic, etc. Entire books are written on the subject. The SANTEC, Florida DOT, and HCM method calculations place the capacity of a road like La Costa Avenue in the 750 to 880 vplph range for the peak hour. In contrast, the Carlsbad method being used by City staff assumes a ridiculously optimistic 1,800 vplph--more than twice that of the validated methods (Figure 8). And, while the validated methods logically assign different capacities based on unique road characteristics, the Carlsbad method uses its 1,800 vplph capacity for every traffic lane in Carlsbad, from a two-lane local street lined with driveways and parking to a major six -lane artery with few interruptions. Carlsbad SANTECJITE O t N Florida (Class II) a� .r M HCM (Class 11) Peak hour "Level of Service" by volume (vehicles per lane per hour) 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 Nueva Castilla Way Figure 8. Faulty carlsbad vs. validated methods for road segment analysis, showing examples of forecasted traffic volume near Nueva Castilla Way. The LOSs projected for some of the road segments on La Costa Avenue after a road diet go from "A" (under the Carlsbad method) to "E" (under the validated methods), or from "B" to "F" (Tables 1 and 2). 9 Linke Correspondence Carlsbad HCM (Class II) HCM (Class ill) Florida SANTEC Vehicles per lane per hour for LOS "E" 1800 840 800 780 750 Road segment Westbound AM peak hour cars LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS 350' w/o Nueva Castilla Way to Nueva Castilla Way 930 B F F F F Nueva Castilla Way to Viejo Castilla Way 736 A D D E E Viejo Castilla Way to Calle Madero 800 B D E F F Calle Madero to Gibraltar Street 740 A D D E E Gibraltar Street to Romeria Street 679 A D D D D Table 1. Segment LOSS for various methods. Future Conditions Segmental Comparison # Segment Location Phase lilt La Costa Improvement Plan SANTEC Florida Carlsbad Daily AM- WB PM- EB AM-WB PM-EB Future Without Project 1 West of Nueva Castilla Way D C C A A 2 West of Calle Madero C C D A A 3 West of Cadencia Street D D D A A Future With Project 1 West of Nueva Castilla Way F F F A B 2 West of Calle Madero F F F A B 3 West of Cadencia Street F D F A B Table 2. Staff report table showing changes from old to new segment analysis. City staff claims that it is legitimate to use this method, because it is simple and has been used for many years as part of Carlsbad's Traffic Monitoring Program (TMP). Not surprisingly, almost every road in Carlsbad gets an LOS of "A" in the TMP surveys. In fact, using the Carlsbad method, it is unlikely that any road could ever reach failure (grade "E" or "F") under real -world circumstances, no matter the actual congestion level. However, that information is worse than meaningless. It is misleading to you, the decision -makers, and this policy needs to be changed. Past usage of a bad method is not a legitimate justification to continue using it, including for the La Costa Avenue traffic calming projects or other proposed developments, let alone the TMP. 2. Regular intersections There is also an HCM method for intersections. It takes into account the potential impact of other intersections, as well as other unique characteristics of the road. In contrast, the City of Carlsbad uses the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method, which does not account for other intersections or certain other unique characteristics. Again, City staff argues that it is legitimate, because it is "simple" and has been used for many years. 10 Linke Correspondence While the ICU method is likely not as ridiculous as Carlsbad's segment analysis, there are still some serious questions about how it is being applied here. The results are supposed to be very similar to the HCM method (within one grade or less). However, in the Phase I report, KOA used the HCM method and found several intersections with LOS "D" or "F" after a road diet. Yet, all intersections are LOS "A" or "B" in the new ICU analysis (e.g., see Table 3). One example is Calle Madero, which was a "D" in the AM peak hour and "F" in the PM peak hour in the original HCM analysis, but it is an "A" in both in the new ICU analysis. Such disparate results raise serious questions about the process and usefulness of these studies. Existing Conditions Intersection Comparison Phase 1/11- HCM La Costa Avenue Improvement Bela Plan - ICU vie LOS LOS Intersection AM pM AM PM # Location Control Control Existina Without Pro' ct Side La Costa Avenue at Street Side Street 1 Nueva Castilla Way Stop C F Stop A B La Costa Avenue at Viejo Castillo 2 Way Signal A A Signal A B La Costa Avenue at 3 Romeria Street Signal A A Signal A A La Costa Avenue at 4 Cadencia Street Signal A B Signal A A Table 3. Staff report table showina chanaes from old to new reaular intersectio 3. Roundabout intersections n analysis. A software program called SIDRA was used to make projections at the roundabouts. City staff claim that the analysis was based on real -world US roundabout usage, and that the roundabouts will function just fine with projected traffic levels. However, when I looked more closely at the analysis, I noticed that there is a "fudge factor" in the software called the "environment factor." This fudge factor is supposed to be set at 1.2 for US -based roundabouts, which would likely set the capacities at -1,100 vphpi. That is also consistent with capacities determined by the HCM roundabout method (Figure 4). However, the environment factor was set at 1.0 for the La Costa Avenue analysis, inflating the capacities by about 30% to -1,450 vphpl. With an environment setting of 1.0, the roundabout proposed for Nueva Castilla Way has LOSs of "B" to "D". However, with the proper setting of 1.2, it fails with LOSs of "E" to "F". When I inquired of Mr. Bilse how they could justify manipulating the fudge factor and whether they would redo the roundabout analysis with the correct factor, he unsatisfactorily answered that Carlsbad does not have a written standard for roundabout analysis and that "[t]he analysis in the current plan was conducted to ensure the proposed roundabouts were a feasible alternative." 11 Linke Correspondence 1 aull 11 1101 ±I III 14N1 40I if W0 A1111 ?10J \INI J/110 I.INNI I.1'NI 1,±IN11.11NI 1.41111 1,;IN1 Lomi 1.7III/ 1.810 0 SIDRA --s— 1 IZ i'irculluine Fhw Rain Ipcu h) Figure 9. Roundabout lane capacities using SIDRA with environment factor 1.0 (light blue) vs. HCM/NCHRP method (dark blue triangles). SIDRA using environment factor of 1.2 is very similar to the HCM/NCHRP method. Unreliability of Traffic Impact Studies Over the years, City staff has overseen the generation of multiple conflicting traffic impact study drafts and reports by KOA Corporation, a company that seems eager to provide staff with whatever results staff desires. An early Phase I draft report from 2008 used several methods that demonstrated LOS failures with a road diet, but one uncharacterized method suggested feasibility. KOA recommended that a road diet was OK based on that one method. However, staff at that time apparently did not like that results, so they had KOA re -focus on the methods that showed failure, resulting in a recommendation against the road diet in the final 2008 Phase I report The more recent staff, which is clearly more excited about road diets and traffic calming, had KOA re-evaluate the old data again using their very optimistic methods to downplay projected traffic congestion. They have also collected new data to analyze with their optimistic methods, including what appears to be a misleading roundabout forecast method. This has resulted in a return to the recommendation in favor of a road diet and further traffic calming. Methods can be changed and/or parameters can be manipulated to arrive at any desired conclusion, including confirmation of the feasibility of preconceived visions. Staff points out in the Agenda Bill that, at the three locations that overlap between the Phase 1/II and Improvement Plan work, they observed volumes decreases since the original counts. This, they say may help account for the change back to a recommendation. However, it is ironic that staff is relying on daily volumes to make this claim, when they have repeatedly emphasized to me that peak hour volumes are the only thing that is important. In fact, peak hour volumes have increased since the original counts were done. And even if volumes had actually decreased 12 Linke Correspondence slightly since 2007, it seemingly would be inappropriate to use that to lower tong -term volume projections, as it is well-known that temporary reductions occur during recessions/times of high unemployment. Staff also claims: "The true capacity of the roadway is not metered by the number of lanes on La Costa but rather is constrained by the major traffic signalized intersections at El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe Road." This is consistent with staffs apparent preference to use only simple forecasting methods that make broad baseless assumptions. This statement assumes an uninterrupted closed system between those two intersections. With two lanes in each direction, you could probably get 2,000 cars per hour through each of those intersections, and it is naive to think that 4,000 cars converging through a single lane roundabout with turns and cross -traffic and parked cars and pedestrians could really work. Does the long-term plan increase the residential character of the neighborhood? The plan would certainly serve to create a more "residential feel' on the road by adding extensive roundabouts, curb extensions, and medians with associated landscaping, and some of the local residents have expressed their enthusiasm for the potential increase in their property values. However, tens of thousands of commuters per day could have to deal with significant congestion and/or suffer the inconvenience of diverting to Calle Barcelona, not to mention bearing the monetary costs of this beautification. A review of real estate sales data indicates that about 901/6 of the homes along the road were purchased after the 45 MPH speed limit was adopted in 1996. In addition, about 99% of the homes were purchased with a four -lane configuration without bike lanes (striped in 1988). In fact, prior to that, the road was four lanes with no center left turn lane. Further, the road has always been an arterial with a freeway exit. I do not want to focus on a resident -to -resident dispute. However, I do not feel that the La Costa Avenue residents should have any expectation that the rest of the taxpayers must fund the conversion of their road into a residential street, as the La Costa Avenue residents were fully aware of the character of the neighborhood when they chose to live there. Is the long-term plan "community -preferred"? Only the local community, not the broader community composed of the majority of those who use the road. City staff claim that their plan is "community -preferred". However, it was conceived largely by staff and traffic calming consultants and is only "community -preferred" if you consider the "community" to be the local residents —those with driveways directly on the road. The early public opinion survey garnered feedback from a much more diverse set of Carlsbad residents than the workshops. The survey did not ask questions in a way that any preference for City staffs plan could be easily determined. However, the solicited additional comments clearly indicate a preference against the massive changes now being proposed by staff. In fact, many wanted the road to be left alone, and some even expressed a desire to make it a major arterial, although I realize that those were not realistic outcomes. As further examples, about 90% of respondents who took a position on elimination of travel lanes were opposed, and very few of the respondents expressed a desire for roundabouts. 13 Linke Correspondence At the subsequent three community meetings, support for more extensive changes was higher, but that is because the few dozen attendees were largely residents from La Costa Avenue with some Levante Street residents concerned about diversion of traffic to their street. Public discussion of controversial aspects of the project was not tolerated at these meetings. I previously expressed my disappointment with the public input process in more detail. It is telling, though, that a Traffic Safety Commission (TSC) member who publicly announced the existence of TSC meetings at the first community meeting was quietly reprimanded and later resigned his position on the TSC for reasons likely linked to that event. More importantly, City staff has systematically used their written objective to ignore any dissenting opinions or design options as being incompatible. if this was a local residential street with modest changes being proposed to further enhance its residential character, the process would be acceptable. However, La Costa Avenue is an arterial road that serves tens of thousands of trips per day by commuters far from the immediate community. Therefore, the City Council needs to better address their concerns, for example through a new opinion survey that details the proposed plan. Respectfully yours, Steven P. Linke, Ph.D. 7513 Quinta St Carlsbad, CA 92009 14 Linke Correspondence < I)a CITY OF CARLSBAD Memorandum October 28, 2011 To: Lisa Hildabrand, City Manager From: Skip Hammann, Transportation Director Bryan Jones, Transportation Deputy Director Via: Cynthia Haas, Deputy City Manager Re: La Costa Avenue Agenda Bill Reports All Receive For the Information of the: CITY COUNCIL ACM_ DCM_ CA L-'CC'� Date I SJ City Manager Lt-4-- B% e,- "* 4 (6,j Attached are two documents for your review as we bring forward the La Costa Avenue Agenda Bill for City Council's review and acceptance on Tuesday, November 8, 2011. The first document is the "Before and After Study" prepared by RBF Consulting, which studied the effects of the Emergency Interim Striping and Parking Plan City Council approved for staff to implement at their June 28, 2011 meeting. The data collected in the study showed that the concerns by some residents for a substantial shift in traffic volumes to alternative routes (specific Levante Street) and delays on La Costa Avenue after implementation were not observed. The La Costa Avenue Interim Striping and Parking Plan, warning signs, and speed feedback signs achieved the goal of changing the character of La Costa Avenue to enhance driver safety at residential driveway access points and reducing the critical speed along the corridor. The new speed data reflects reductions in critical speed by 3-5 MPH. For example the critical speed at one location on La Costa Avenue was reduced from 50 MPH to 46 MPH. The California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) recommends that speed limits be re-evaluated after roadways have undergone a significant change in roadway characteristics. Due to the recently implemented La Costa Interim Striping and Parking Plan, staff has re- evaluated the speed zone on La Costa Avenue. Staff will be presenting the findings and making a recommendation on a change in the speed limit at the City Council meeting on November 6, 2011. • The second document is the "La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan" prepared by Pat Noyes & Associates, which shares the community consensus building process and vision developed in a collaborative effort by Pat Noyes, city staff, and residents and stakeholders in the La Costa Area. Date: i D1stribut10 City Clerk Asst. City Clerk Duty Clerk Book ✓ M Transportation Department i 1635 Faraday Ave. I Carlsbad, CA 92008 1 760-602-2730 1 760-602-8562 fax I www.carisbadca.gov