HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-12-02; Traffic and Mobility Commission; ; FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2017-18 ANNUAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT MONITORING REPORT UPDATEItem #1
Meeting Date: Dec. 2, 2019
To: Traffic and Mobility Commission
Staff Contact: Hossein Ajideh, Engineering Manager
hossein.ajideh@carlsbadca.gov, 760-602-2756
Subject: Fiscal Year (FY) 2017-18 Annual Growth Management Monitoring Report
Update
Recommended Action
This report includes the following items related to the city’s Growth Management Plan (GMP):
1. Receive an informational report on the use of transportation systems management and
transportation demand management programs to advance the city’s mobility and
climate goals, which will be presented to the City Council on Dec. 10, 2019.
2. Provide Traffic and Mobility Commission’s recommendation on proposed actions that
will be presented to the City Council on Dec. 17, 2019. The recommended action is for
the Traffic and Mobility Commission to support staff’s recommendation to the City
Council as follows:
a. Determine that the following street facilities are deficient because they do not
meet the level of service (LOS) performance standard required by the city’s GMP:
• Southbound El Camino Real from the Oceanside city limits to Marron Road
• Northbound El Camino Regal from Marron Road to the Oceanside city limits
• Southbound College Boulevard from Ashton Avenue to Palomar Airport Road
• Southbound Melrose Drive from Vista city limits to Palomar Airport Road
b. Exempt the following street facilities from the LOS performance standard, in
accordance with the General Plan Mobility Element criteria:
• Southbound El Camino Real from the Oceanside city limits to Marron Road
• Northbound El Camino Regal from Marron Road to the Oceanside city limits
• Southbound Melrose Drive from Vista city limits to Palomar Airport Road
c. Expedite Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Project No. 6028, to address the
deficiency southbound College Boulevard from Aston Avenue to Palomar Airport
Road, and waive the right-of-way open space boundary adjustment requirement
under General Plan Open Space Element
d. Expedite CIP Project No. 6034, to improve traffic operations southbound
Melrose Drive from the Vista city limits to Palomar Airport Road, and waive the
right-of-way open space boundary adjustment requirement under General Plan
Open Space Element
Executive Summary
The first section of this report explains how transportation systems management strategies are
used to manage existing traffic and how transportation demand management strategies are
used to reduce the demand to drive, particularly during peak commuting hours.
The second section describes four of the eight roadway segments which do not meet the GMP
circulation standard. Each year, staff collects traffic data in accordance with the GMP
monitoring program to determine if the performance standard is being met for each facility.
Eight street facilities in the city were identified in the Annual Growth Management Monitoring
Report for FY 2017-18 as falling short of the LOS performance standard (Exhibit 2). These eight
street facilities1 are:
1. Southbound El Camino Real from the Oceanside city limits to Marron Road
2. Northbound El Camino Real from Marron Road to the Oceanside city limits
3. Southbound College Boulevard from Aston Avenue to Palomar Airport Road
4. Southbound Melrose Drive from the Vista city limits to Palomar Airport Road
5. Southbound El Camino Real from Cannon Road to College Boulevard
6. Northbound El Camino Real from College Boulevard to Cannon Road
7. Eastbound Cannon Road from El Camino Real to College Boulevard
8. Westbound Cannon Road from College Boulevard to El Camino Real
This staff report identifies measures to address deficiencies on the first four street facilities
listed above. A future staff report will be presented to the Traffic and Mobility Commission to
discuss options to address the traffic flow deficiencies on the four remaining street facilities
that do not meet the required level of service.
Discussion
This report is a summary of two City Council staff reports stemming from a discussion at the
July 16, 2019 City Council meeting. At that meeting, staff presented a report on how these eight
deficient street facilities had been identified in the Annual Growth Management Monitoring
Report for FY 2017-18 as falling short of the LOS performance standard.
City Council directed staff to consider additional options to address the deficiencies and
indicated a need for a detailed discussion with additional information before the City Council
would take action on the matter. As a result, the City Manager asked that the matter be
continued to a future City Council meeting to allow time for staff to prepare presentations
related to:
1) The different ways the transportation system and transportation demand management
programs work to manage traffic congestion and improve mobility
1 This report uses the term “street facility” and the July 16, 2019 staff report referred to deficient “street
segments”. “Street facility” is a section of roadway that shares the same roadway characteristics, and
which is composed of one or more street segments, while a “street segment” is the portion of a street
facility between two intersections. In some cases, such as with the four deficient sections of roadway
discussed in this report, a street segment is also a street facility. The term “street facility” is being used
in this report for greater consistency with terminology from the General Plan Mobility Element.
2) Recommendations on addressing the deficient level of service on four street facilities
located outside Local Facility Management Zone (LFMZ) 15
3) Additional options to address the deficiencies in level of service on four street facilities
affecting LFMZ 15, which relates to the uncompleted portion of College Boulevard
The first and second presentations are described in this report. The third report will be
presented to the Traffic and Mobility Commission prior to staff’s City Council presentation of
that item.
The first of these presentations to the City Council will occur on Dec. 10, 2019, when staff will
present an informational report on how the city manages traffic with transportation system and
transportation demand management programs.
The second report will be presented at the Dec. 17, 2019 City Council meeting, which will
address the four street facilities outside of the LFMZ 15 that have been identified as falling
below the city’s required LOS standard.
The third report has not yet been scheduled but will be presented to both the Traffic and
Mobility Commission and the City Council thereafter and will address the four deficient street
facilities affecting LFMZ 15.
Transportation Systems Management and Transportation Demand Management
The city can no longer build its way out of traffic congestion. And the traffic that flows through
the city is expected to continue to increase. Meanwhile the city has aggressive plans to try to
improve mobility around Carlsbad while helping to fight climate change by reducing
greenhouse gasses.
That’s why the city moved from road construction to transportation system and demand
management.
Transportation system management and transportation demand management share common
goals: to manage and reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality by cutting down on
greenhouse gases and reduce or eliminate the need for improvements to the city’s
transportation infrastructure.
But while they are complimentary, they are very different approaches. One is focused on
enhancing the flow of traffic on the existing roadways, the other on changing commuter
behavior over time.
These strategies are designed to increase the reliability and efficiency of the city’s streets while
providing and encouraging alternatives that can get cars off the road.
Transportation system management is aimed at vehicles on the roads now
Six large screens cover one wall in the city’s Traffic Management Center at the Faraday Center.
They show video images of key intersections around the city, charts showing how many cars are
passing given points and other up-to-the-minute data. A technician monitoring this data can
adjust the timing of traffic signals to manage slowdowns caused by traffic accidents, or other
unpredictable problems. On one busy corridor, along Rancho Santa Fe Road, an automated
system adjusts the timing of traffic lights in real time to try to prevent avoidable congestion. It
also flags unexpected problems, including equipment malfunctions, so that the technician can
step in to try to keep traffic moving.
The Traffic Management Center and the adaptive traffic signals pilot project along Rancho
Santa Fe Road are examples of transportation system management, which uses technology and
infrastructure to move people and goods through an area as efficiently as possible.
The strategy enables the city to get the best performance possible from our existing
transportation infrastructure without having to build new roads, widen existing ones, or make
other infrastructure improvements.
Transportation system management is useful when:
• A roadway is approaching congestion, but increasing its physical capacity may not be
feasible or desirable
• Increasing the roadway’s capacity is too costly
• Traffic congestion exists only at specific bottlenecks, which can be addressed with
improvements to the system
Examples of transportation system management strategies that improve traffic flow include:
• Coordinating traffic signal timing
• Improving vehicle detection and monitoring
• Limiting access to main thoroughfares
• Setting aside lanes for public transit vehicles or multi-occupant vehicles, either
permanently or only during peak hours
• Limiting on-street parking
• Creating one-way street networks to reduce turning movements and congestion
• Designating turn-only lanes
• Putting railroads above or below streets
• Deploying a system that directs commuters to available on or off-street parking
All of these systems management efforts are focused on managing today’s traffic and
transportation infrastructure to try to make it flow more efficiently and reliably.
Transportation demand management is aimed at reducing the demand to drive
The city recently launched the Carlsbad Connector, an on-demand service that shuttles
commuters between the Poinsettia train station and nearby workplaces. Another new city
program encourages parents to use carpools to get their children to and from school.
These are examples of traffic demand management.
Unlike transportation system management, which tries to help traffic flow smoothly,
transportation demand management is an effort to reduce the demand to drive, particularly
during the morning and evening rush hours.
And while transportation system management affects all travelers through an area, the city’s
current transportation demand management program is focused on people commuting to and
from work or school. That’s because those trips are predictable, scheduled and flexible, unlike,
for example, a quick trip to the supermarket or an emergency trip to a doctor’s office.
Those predictable daily trips are also the main cause of the normal weekday traffic congestion
that can slow traffic to a crawl. Building new roadways or physically widening existing ones will
not provide the lasting effects that can be realized by reducing the number of single-occupancy
vehicles.
Transportation demand management includes a collection of elements designed to cut down
on the demand to drive, particularly during the peak commute hours. Some of these elements
include:
• Providing ridesharing services like the Carlsbad Connector, which help commuters travel
that “last mile” from a transit station to their destinations
• Working with employers to offer alternate work schedules and encourage and support
the use of public or alternate forms of transportation
• Requiring developments to create plans for getting employees to and from work in ways
that cut down on single-occupant vehicle trips
Carlsbad’s Transportation Demand Ordinance, which became effective in April 2019, requires
all new non-residential developments that meet a certain threshold (a minimum of 110 average
daily trips) to develop and implement transportation demand management plans. Such plans
try to reduce the number of people driving to and from work alone by encouraging carpooling,
the use of public transit, bicycling, walking, vanpooling, compressed work weeks and
telecommuting.
Some employers have voluntarily offered commuter benefit packages to attract and retain
quality workers. These Carlsbad employers voluntarily participate in the San Diego Association
of Government’s regional transportation demand management program and have been able to
get about 30% of their employees to use alternative means of transportation:
• Thermo Fisher Scientific: The 2,000 employees at this biotechnology company get better
parking spots if they commute by carpool and have access to on-site showers and
lockers for commuting by bicycle. The company also subsidizes a van pool, encourages
the use of public transit and has a monthly commuting challenge and other programs to
help employees break the habit of commuting alone by car.
• CommonGrounds: This co-working space provides on-site bicycling facilities that include
a repair station and a bike share program, racks, showers and lockers. Transit riders get
complimentary COASTER passes and other incentives. An on-site café and on-site
services such as dry cleaning alleviate the need to run errands during peak traffic hours.
• Viasat: This communications company provides on-site bikes to its 2,500 employees for
short trips between buildings. It also offers shower facilities, a café and coffee shop as
well as a fitness center, a carpool partnership and other on-site amenities to try to
reduce vehicle trips.
The city’s practice of allowing some employees to work flexible work schedules, such as
working 80 hours over nine days instead of ten days, is an example of transportation demand
management. The city is working to implement a more flexible work schedule program for its
workers to get more vehicles off the road. With help from the transportation demand
management consultant, UrbanTrans, the city will be developing a system to evaluate the
success of the program using surveys and other data.
The city has also launched a pilot campaign to encourage carpooling to and from schools and
will consider how homeowner associations could also be involved in transportation demand
management efforts.
How these programs relate to the Mobility Plan
The Mobility Element of the city’s General Plan calls for transportation system and demand
management measures to be implemented whenever a project adds a certain amount of
vehicle traffic to a roadway designated by the City Council as exempt from requirements it be
renovated. (General Plan Mobility Element Goals & Policies 3-P.9 and 3-P.11.)
A project is any residential or non-residential development. Transportation system and demand
management efforts are required when a project is expected to add 110 daily vehicle trips or 11
peak hour vehicle trips to an exempt roadway.
Transportation system measures consist of the developer installing traffic signal control
systems, or paying a fair share of the cost of a traffic signal control system.
Transportation demand management measures consist of developing a demand management
plan in accordance with the city’s Transportation Demand Management Handbook. Such plans
include requirements for monitoring and reporting results.
How the success of transportation systems and demand management is measured
We used to measure success in transportation by how fast we could get vehicles to move from
one point to another. But data and trends indicate the volume of traffic will continue to
increase, continuing to strain the limited capacity of Carlsbad’s roads. In addition, the city now
is following plans to improve mobility and to reduce the greenhouse gases that contribute to
climate change.
So the success of transportation systems management is a measurement of how efficiently
people and goods move through and around the city, as well as how reliably the city’s
transportation infrastructure performs. It’s assessed by how well the city manages the
predictable congestion of the morning and evening commutes as well as the non-recurring
congestion of crashes and construction. Another benchmark is how the city handles and avoids
equipment failures.
More specifically, we can see the benefits of transportation system management along Rancho
Santa Fe Road, where the adaptive signals pilot program has increased speeds of traffic along
the thoroughfare and reduced delays on side streets during midday hours.
Improved transportation system management has also reduced complaints about the reliability
of the system, that is, streetlights that are broken and flashing red, as city technicians are now
automatically notified of such problems.
Recently collected data show that transportation system management have been helping traffic
flow more smoothly at lower volumes, but, because the roads have limited capacity and cannot
bear additional traffic, congestion is expected to occur at the same levels as before.
Success in demand management is a measure of how many vehicle trips through and around
the city can be avoided. It’s about changing behavior, so the results can be tough to track.
The impact of transportation demand management will be assessed through surveys of workers
to gauge their commuting habits. The city makes these surveys mandatory for employers who
meet the thresholds stated above. City staff are also looking into using transit ridership figure
and other possible sources of data to try to track results.
As the city continues working to improve traffic conditions, it’s helpful to remember how these
two programs interact with one another. Transportation system management tends to
minimize traffic jams by improving traffic flow. It’s intended to alleviate congestion and not to
get cars off the road. Transportation demand management provides encouragement and
incentives to get commuters to turn to alternative modes of transportation for their daily
commute. There is a balance struck between these efforts, and it’s important to keep the city’s
broader goals in mind.
A very small number of cities in the region have successful city programs for implementing
transportation system management and none has a formal transportation demand
management program. Many cities have begun the process and are working on programs to
address traffic congestion and the related air pollution, but Carlsbad appears to be further
along than most in these efforts and has an opportunity to be a leader in how cities can
effectively manage traffic now and in the future.
Deficient Street Facilities under the City’s GMP
A primary objective of the city’s GMP is to ensure that adequate public facilities are provided
concurrent with growth as established by Proposition E, which was passed by voters in 1986.
Proposition E established broad guidelines for determining adequacy of public facilities. An
important component of the Growth Management Program is the Citywide Facilities and
Improvements Plan (CFIP) that includes specific performance standards for each of the 11
public facilities, including circulation that addresses the livable streets network. The following
performance standard was defined for the livable streets network:
Implement a comprehensive livable streets network that serves all users of the system –
vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles and public transit. Maintain LOS D or better for all modes
that are subject to this multi-modal level of service (MMLOS) standard, as identified in
Table 3-1 of the General Plan Mobility Element, excluding LOS exempt intersections and
streets approved by the City Council.
The CFIP divided the city into 25 LFMZs. Each LFMZ is required to have an adopted Local
Facilities Management Plan that must describe the following:
• How the LFMZ will be developed
• How compliance with the GMP standards will be achieved
• What public facilities will be required to maintain each performance measure
• What financing mechanisms will be used to fund these facilities
The GMP requires development activity to stop in an LFMZ if a performance standard is not
being met, unless arrangements satisfactory to the City Council are made guaranteeing the
facilities and improvements that will address the deficiency. No development permits or
building permits can be issued in the affected LFMZ until the problem is resolved.
FY 2017-18 Annual Monitoring Report and Four Street Facility Deficiencies
Each year, staff monitors the 11 different public facility systems, including for circulation, and
submits a report to City Council comparing performance data against the adopted standards.
The Annual Growth Management Monitoring Report for FY 2017-18 identified a total of eight
street facilities that do not have exemptions from the performance standard and that do not
meet the performance standard. This staff report identifies measures to address deficiencies on
four of these street facilities. A future staff report will discuss the remaining four deficient
street facilities.
Table 1 summarizes the monitoring data and recommended actions needed to address the
deficiencies on these four street facilities. The table presents: a) the LOS reported in the report
(“Without Actions”), b) the LOS expected after the recommended action is taken (“With
Actions”), and c) the LFMZs that would be affected by the deficiency if the recommended
actions are not implemented.
Table 1
Proposed Actions to Address Deficiencies at Four Street Facilities
Deficient
Street Facility From To
Recommended Actions
LOS Affected
LFMZ (*) Without
Actions
With
Actions
1. El Camino
Real
Oceanside
City Limits
Marron
Road
Exempt from LOS D
standard (**)
E E 1
2. El Camino
Real
Marron
Road
Oceanside
City Limits
Exempt from LOS D
standard (**)
E E 2
3. College
Boulevard
Aston
Avenue
Palomar
Airport
Road
Implement CIP No. 6028
(add 2nd through lane)
F B 5
4. Melrose
Drive
Vista City
Limits
Palomar
Airport
Road
Exempt from LOS D
standard (**);
Implement CIP No. 6034
(add 3rd through lane);
F E 18
Notes:
* Local Facility Management Zone (LFMZ) that is affected by deficiency
** Transportation Demand Management (TDM)/Transportation System Management (TSM) measures
will be applied to development adding traffic to the street facilities exempt from the LOS D standard
Based on this information, staff recommends that City Council determine that a deficiency
exists at each of the street facilities listed in Table 1 per Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) Section
21.90.130 (c):
If at any time it appears to the satisfaction of the city manager that facilities or
improvements within a facilities management zone or zones are inadequate to
accommodate any further development within that zone or that the performance
standards adopted pursuant to Section 21.90.100 are not being met he or she shall
immediately report the deficiency to the council. If the council determines that a
deficiency exists then no further building or development permits shall be issued within
the affected zone or zones and development shall cease until an amendment to the city-
wide facilities and improvements plan or applicable local facilities management plan
which addresses the deficiency is approved by the city council and the performance
standard is met.
Measures to Address Street Facility Deficiencies
When a street facility deficiency is determined to exist, in accordance with CMC Section
21.90.080 and 21.90.130, the following options exist:
• Where a feasible improvement project exists to achieve the performance standard:
o City Council can identify and fund a city improvement project that will result in
the street facility meeting the performance standard
o City Council can adopt an arrangement guaranteeing the improvement project
that will result in the street facility meeting the performance standard
• Where no feasible improvement project exists to achieve the performance standard:
o City Council can determine the street facility is built out and exempt from the
LOS D standard under General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-P.9. Apply
TDM/TSM strategies to development that adds vehicle traffic to the exempt
street facilities.
If a feasible improvement project exists that the city will not undertake, and there is no private
arrangement guaranteeing the improvement project, then City Council would prohibit issuing
development and building permits in affected LFMZs until the performance standard is met or
an arrangement guaranteeing the improvement is adopted.
The General Plan Mobility Element acknowledges that the city cannot always rely on adding
roadway capacity to address deficiencies. In other words, the city cannot always build our way
out of traffic congestion. The City Council has the authority to deem a street facility “built out”
and exempt from the LOS D standard when the following build-out criteria are met in
accordance with General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-P.9:
Develop and maintain a list of street facilities where specified modes of travel are exempt
from the LOS standard (LOS exempt street facilities), as approved by the City Council. For
LOS exempt street facilities, the city will not implement improvements to maintain the LOS
standard outlined in Policy 3-P.4 if such improvements are beyond what is identified as
appropriate at build out of the General Plan. In the case of street facilities where the vehicle
mode of travel is exempt from the LOS standard, other non-vehicle capacity-building
improvements will be required to improve mobility through implementation of
transportation demand and transportation system management measures as outlined in
Policy 3-P.11, to the extent feasible, and/or to implement the livable streets goals and
policies of this Mobility Element. Evaluate the list of exempt street facilities, as part of the
Growth Management monitoring program, to determine if such exemptions are still
warranted. To exempt the vehicle mode of travel from the LOS standard at a particular
street intersection or segment, the intersection or street segment must be identified as built-
out by the City Council because:
a. acquiring the rights of way is not feasible; or
b. the proposed improvements would significantly impact the environment in an
unacceptable way and mitigation would not contribute to the nine core values of the
Carlsbad Community Vision; or
c. the proposed improvements would result in unacceptable impacts to other
community values or General Plan policies; or
d. the proposed improvements would require more than three through travel lanes in
each direction.
General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-P.11 requires new development that adds vehicular
traffic to street facilities that are exempt from the vehicle LOS D standard to implement:
• Transportation demand management strategies that reduce the reliance on single-
occupant automobile and assist in achieving the city’s livable streets vision; and
• Transportation system management strategies that improve traffic signal coordination
and improve transit service.
Recommended Actions to Address the Four Deficient Street Facilities
Staff has considered the feasible improvement project options to address these deficiencies
and recommends that the City Council adopt the following measures to address the four street
facility deficiencies covered in this report:
1. Southbound El Camino Real from Oceanside City Limits to Marron Road
Staff recommends the City Council determine this street facility to be built out and exempt
from the LOS D standard, under General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-P.9 (d), because
addressing this deficiency through roadway improvements would require widening El Camino
Real to create an additional through lane. This would require more than three through travel
lanes in each direction.
This street facility is located in LFMZ 1. Under General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-P.11,
future development that adds traffic to this exempt street facility will be required to implement
appropriate transportation demand management and transportation system management
strategies.
2. Northbound El Camino Real from Marron Road to Oceanside City Limits
Staff recommends the City Council also determine this street facility to be built out and exempt
from the LOS D standard, under General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-P.9 (d), because
addressing this deficiency through roadway improvements would require widening El Camino
Real to create an additional through lane. This would require more than three through travel
lanes in each direction.
This street facility is located in LFMZ 2. Under General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-P.11,
future development that adds traffic to this exempt street facility will be required to implement
appropriate transportation demand management and transportation system management
strategies. The transportation system management strategies will include collaborating with
the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the City of Oceanside staff to
improve traffic signal operations across jurisdictional boundaries.
3. Southbound College Boulevard from Aston Avenue to Palomar Airport Road
Staff recommends the City Council expedite CIP Project No. 6028 to improve the traffic flow on
College Boulevard by adding a second southbound through lane within the existing right-of-way
as shown with before and after layout in Exhibit 3. This project is expected to address the
reported deficiency and bring the stretch of roadway up to the desired level of service.
The previous recommendation to City Council was different because it was based on concerns
that restriping the roadway to add a through lane would eliminate a bicycle lane, raising safety
issues and conflicting with the Mobility Element’s guidelines on bike lanes per Table 3-1, and
that the small strip of land needed to widen the roadway while keeping the bike lane was
protected by the city’s Habitat Management Plan (HMP).
After further analysis and review, staff has determined that the road widening described in CIP
Project No. 6028 will not encroach on hardline HMP-protected habitat land, and that the
project can be redesigned to keep the required bike lane. After completion of this project, the
street facility is expected to meet the LOS D performance standard.
4. Southbound Melrose Drive from Vista City Limits to Palomar Airport Road
Staff recommends the City Council expedite CIP Project No. 6034 to improve the traffic flow in
this stretch of roadway. This project would add a southbound right turn lane on Melrose Drive
and re-stripe the existing lanes to provide a third southbound through lane approaching the
intersection with Palomar Airport Road as shown with before and after layout in Exhibit 4.
This project is expected to improve traffic circulation, as described in Table 1, but is not
expected to meet the LOS D performance standard. Therefore, the street facility is expected to
remain deficient after completion of the project.
Staff recommends the City Council also determine this street facility to be built out and exempt
from the LOS D standard, under General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-P.9 (d). CIP Project No.
6034 only adds a third through lane; however, future roadway improvements to address the
anticipated remaining deficiency would require further widening of Melrose Drive to
accommodate a fourth through lane, which would conflict with General Plan Mobility Element
Policy 3-P.9 (d).
This stretch of roadway is located in LFMZ 18. Under General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-
P.11, future development that adds traffic to this exempt street facility will be required to
implement appropriate transportation demand management and transportation system
management strategies.
Next Steps
The TDM/TSM informational presentation will be provided to City Council on Dec. 10, 2019.
Staff will present the report on the first four deficient street facilities to the City Council on Dec.
17, 2019. Per the Traffic and Mobility Commission Communication Plan, the Traffic and Mobility
Commission Chair, or designee, is required to affirm the commission’s recommendation and
provide input to City Council during the meeting on Dec. 17, 2019.
Public Notification
This item was noticed in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act and was available for public
viewing and review at least 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting date.
Exhibits
1. Annual Growth Management Monitoring Report for fiscal year 2017-18: Circulation Section
2. Map of Deficient Street Facilities with Local Facility Management Zones
3. Location Map for College Boulevard and Palomar Airport Road, CIP Project No. 6028
4. Location Map for Melrose Drive and Palomar Airport Road, CIP Project No. 6034
Exhibit 1
CIRCULATION
A. Performance Standard
Implement a comprehensive livable streets network that serves all users of the system –
vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles and public transit. Maintain level of service (LOS) D or
better for all modes that are subject to this multi-modal level of service (MMLOS)
standard, as identified in Table 3-1 of the General Plan Mobility Element, excluding LOS
exempt intersections and streets approved by the City Council.
The service levels for each travel mode are represented as a “grade” ranging from LOS A
to LOS F: LOS A reflects a high level of service for a travel mode (e.g. outstanding
characteristics and experience for that mode) and LOS F would reflect an inadequate level
of service for a travel mode (e.g. excessive congestion for vehicles, inadequate facilities
for bicycle, pedestrian, or transit users).
B. Livable Streets
The California Complete Streets Act (2008) requires cities in California to plan for a
balanced, multi-modal transportation system that meets the needs of all travel modes.
Accomplishing this state mandate requires a fundamental shift in how the city plans and
designs the street system – recognizing the street as a public space that serves all users
of the system (elderly, children, bicyclists, pedestrians, etc.) within the urban context of
that system (e.g. accounting for the adjacent land uses).
• Prior to adoption of the General Plan Mobility Element on September 22, 2015, the
growth management circulation performance standard was based on the circulation
needs of a single mode of travel – the automobile.
• The General Plan Mobility Element identifies a new livable streets strategy for mobility
within the city.
• The livable streets strategy focuses on creating a ‘multi-modal’ street network that
supports the mobility needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, and vehicles.
• Providing travel mode options that reduce dependence on the vehicle also supports
the city’s Climate Action Plan in achieving its goals of reducing greenhouse gas
emissions within the city.
C. Street Typology
The city’s approach to provide livable streets recognizes that improving the LOS for one
mode of transportation can sometimes degrade the LOS for another mode. For example,
pedestrian friendly streets are designed to encourage pedestrian uses and typically have
slow vehicle travel speeds and short-distance pedestrian crossings that restrict vehicle
mobility. Therefore, the General Plan Mobility Element’s livable streets approach
Exhibit 1
identifies, based on the location and type of street (street typology), the travel modes for
which service levels should be enhanced and maintained per the MMLOS standard (LOS
D or better).
• Mobility Element Table 3-1 describes the livable street typologies and Figure 3-1
depicts the livable street system.
• The street typology identifies which modes of transportation are subject to, and which
modes are not subject to, the MMLOS standard.
• The vehicle mode of travel is subject to the MMLOS standard only on the following
street typologies: Freeways, Arterial Streets, Arterial Connector Streets, and Industrial
Streets.
• The city has historically monitored vehicle LOS along 26 street segments.
o When the Mobility Element was adopted in 2015, eight of those street
segments were designated with street typologies where the vehicle is
accommodated but is not subject to the MMLOS standard.
o These eight street segments are streets where the LOS of other travel modes
(pedestrian, bicycle, transit) is a priority.
o These eight street segments were not monitored for vehicular LOS in this
report.
o Vehicular LOS data was collected along the remaining eighteen (26-8=18)
street segments as discussed below.
D. Methods to Measure Multi-Modal Level of Service (MMLOS)
• Vehicle LOS is measured as described below.
• The method to measure pedestrian, bicycle and transit LOS is based on the approach
used in preparation of the General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which
identifies attributes of a location and identifies a qualitative LOS grade based on the
attributes of the pedestrian, bicycle or transit facility. Each attribute contributes to a
point system that, when the total points for all attributes are added together,
corresponds to a qualitative letter grade. Following the adoption of the General Plan
Mobility Element and the MMLOS standard, city staff developed the MMLOS Tool,
which refines the method used in the General Plan EIR.
E. Changing How Vehicle LOS is Measured
During this reporting period, changes were made to how vehicle LOS is measured, in
comparison to previous years. The changes are summarized below and were made to
be consistent with the General Plan Mobility Element, recent changes to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the latest version of the Highway Capacity
Manual (HCM).
Exhibit 1
• Eliminated intersection vehicle LOS analysis.
The city has historically monitored vehicle LOS using both intersection and street
segment methodologies. The city eliminated the use of intersection LOS analysis and
now evaluates vehicle LOS using only street segment LOS analysis.
• Updated street segment vehicle LOS analysis.
The methodology used to evaluate vehicle LOS along street segments was updated to
be consistent with the Highway Capacity Manual, per the General Plan Mobility
Element. This update resulted in significantly reduced roadway capacities which
subsequently led to significantly lower LOS results on most roadway segments.
• Re-Defined street segments to monitor.
The 18 street segments that were historically monitored and will continue to be
monitored for vehicle LOS have been divided into 43 smaller street segments.
Changes in the number of lanes, signal spacing or speed limit define the segment
division. For this reporting period, traffic counts were not collected for all 43 street
segments. Rather, traffic counts were collected at the same 18 historical locations as
in previous years, and vehicle LOS is reported for the 18 street segments that align
with the historical locations. The other 25 street segments (43-18=25) were not
monitored in this report. All 43 street segments will be monitored in 2019.
• Changing vehicle LOS monitoring from summer conditions to average spring/fall
conditions.
The schedule for collecting field data for vehicle LOS was changed from summer to
spring and fall data collection. The industry standard is to monitor traffic in the spring
and fall to reflect typical conditions when school is in session. This report reflects
traffic data gathered in the fall of 2018. Traffic data is scheduled to be collected in the
spring of 2019.
Exhibit 1
F. LOS D Exemptions
The City Council has the authority to exempt a street facility from the LOS D standard if
the street facility meets one or more of the following criteria from General Plan Mobility
Element Policy 3-P.9:
To exempt the vehicle mode of travel from the LOS standard at a particular street
intersection or segment, the intersection or street segment must be identified as built-out
by the City Council because:
a. Acquiring the rights of way is not feasible; or
b. The proposed improvements would significantly impact the environment in an
unacceptable way and mitigation would not contribute to the nine core values of
the Carlsbad Community Vision; or
c. The proposed improvements would result in unacceptable impacts to other
community values or General Plan policies; or
d. The proposed improvements would require more than three through travel lanes
in each direction.
The following street facilities were identified in the General Plan and are expected to
provide a vehicle level of service below LOS D at buildout. Per General Plan Mobility
Element Policy 3-P.10, the following street facilities, including the intersections along
these segments, are exempt from the vehicle level of service standard:
• La Costa Avenue between Interstate-5 and El Camino Real
• El Camino Real between Palomar Airport Road and La Costa Avenue
• Palomar Airport Road between Interstate-5 and College Boulevard
• Palomar Airport Road between El Camino Real and Melrose Drive
G. FY 2017-18 Facility Adequacy Analysis
This report includes circulation facility adequacy analysis for FY 2017-18. The details of
all LOS results are found in the 2018 GMP traffic monitoring data. The following table
summarizes the street segments where vehicle and other modes of transportation exceed
(do not meet) the MMLOS standard (LOS D or higher).
1. Street Segments with Vehicle LOS Exceeding LOS D Standard
Compared to previous growth management monitoring reports, this report identifies
more street segments that do not meet the MMLOS standard – LOS D or higher. The
increase in segments with a LOS below D is primarily due to the changes in how vehicle
LOS is measured (as summarized above), and to a lesser degree changes in volume of
vehicles compared to previous years. Following this report, city staff will deliver a
Exhibit 1
more detailed report to the City Council on the vehicle LOS reported in the table below
and shown in Figure 4.
Deficient
Roadway
Segment
From To
Level of Service
(LOS) Adjacent Facility
Management Zone
(LFMZ) AM PM
El Camino Real Oceanside
City Limits
Marron Road E E 1, 2
El Camino Real Marron Road Oceanside
City Limits
E E 1, 2
El Camino Real College Blvd Cannon Road C F 5, 8, 14, 15, 24
El Camino Real Cannon Road College Blvd F B 5, 8, 14, 15, 24
College Blvd. Aston
Avenue
Palomar
Airport Rd.
B F 5
Melrose Drive Vista City
Limits
Palomar
Airport Rd.
F E 5, 18
Cannon Road El Camino
Real
College Blvd D F 8, 14, 15, 24
Cannon Road College Blvd El Camino
Real
E D 8, 14, 15, 24
2. Roadway Segments with Pedestrian LOS Exceeding LOS D Standard
None (all of the roadway segments monitored met the LOS standard)
3. Roadway Segments with Bicycle Los Exceeding LOS D Standard
None (all of the roadway segments monitored met the LOS standard)
4. Roadway Segments with Transit LOS Exceeding LOS D Standard
None (the recently adopted Travel Demand Management ordinance addresses all
outstanding issues)
Exhibit 1
Figure 4: Deficient Street Segments and LFMZ
Exhibit 1
H. Buildout Facility Adequacy Analysis
The Environmental Impact Report for the 2015 General Plan evaluated how buildout of
the land uses planned by the General Plan will impact the vehicle, pedestrian, bicycle and
transit levels of service, and identified that additional circulation facilities may need to be
constructed in order to meet the GMP performance standard at buildout. The following
summarizes the results of that evaluation:
Vehicle Level of Service at Buildout
• Additional future road segments (extensions of College Boulevard, Poinsettia Lane
and Camino Junipero) needed to accommodate the city’s future growth were
identified as part of the General Plan update. The General Plan Mobility Element
identifies these needed future road segments as “Planned City of Carlsbad Street
Capacity Improvements.”
• The General Plan also called out the need to implement the scheduled Interstate-5
North Coast Project and Interstate-5/Interstate-78 Interchange Improvement Project
that are needed to accommodate future growth.
• The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) funds projects that will upgrade the LOS
including several roadway widenings along El Camino Real near: College Road
(northbound), La Costa Avenue (southbound), and Cassia Road (northbound).
• The General Plan EIR identifies travel demand management (TDM) and traffic system
management (TSM) as mitigation measures for roadway sections that have been
given LOS exemptions.
Pedestrian, Bicycle and Transit Level of Service at Buildout
Improvements to pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities may be needed to ensure
compliance with the MMLOS standard at buildout. Needed improvements will be
identified after the city has completed an evaluation of the facility according to the
roadway typology.
I. Next Steps
Carlsbad Municipal Code ∮21.90.130 (c) states:
If at any time it appears to the satisfaction of the city manager that facilities or
improvements within a facilities management zone or zones are inadequate to
accommodate any further development within that zone or that the performance
standards adopted pursuant to Section 21.90.100 are not being met, he or she
shall immediately report the deficiency to the council. If the council determines
that a deficiency exists, then no further building or development permits shall be
issued within the affected zone or zones and development shall cease until an
Exhibit 1
amendment to the city-wide facilities and improvements plan or applicable local
facilities management plan which addresses the deficiency is approved by the city
council and the performance standard is met.
A staff report will be sent to the City Council that includes the following:
• a list of the street segments subject to the LOS D standard and do not meet this
standard;
• a list of these deficient street segments that meet the conditions for an
exemption;
• a list of projects that could be implemented to meet the LOS D standard;
• a request that City Council determine which of these segments is deficient,
identify which ones should gain exemptions, and identify which projects to fund
in order to meet the LOS D standard.
Pocl/k
Oce-Ol'I
t
t
f ' 1 I t
--Deficient Street Segment
Highway
== Major Street
------------Planned Street
_.__._-+----+----< Railroad
Lagoon
{ City of
Carlsbad
Deficient Street Segments
With Local Facility
Management Zones
ft-=Fe 't, D 3,000
Exhibit 2
LOCATION MAP
BEFORE AFTER
I
\l
PALOMAR AIRPORT RD. PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT NAME
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
PACIFIC OCEAN
COLLEGE BOULEVARD & PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT NUMBER
6028
PLOTTED B't SCOTT EVANS PLOT DA7E::B/J1/11 PA1H:F: \AURORAMV....PROJEC7S\AUTOCAD\FOR BRANDON OCT 2O19\FORBRANDONNOV2O19_CO/..LEGfA1PAR_J.DWG
EXHIBIT 3
g
cE
~ L.w ...J cS (.)
g
cE
~ L.w ...J cS (.)
VICINITY
MAP
PROJECT NAME
LOCATION MAP
BEFORE AFTER
a:: a:: Q Q
� 0 � 0 Cl::: I Cl::: cd cd :::e :::e t
PALOMAR AIRPORT RD. PALOMAR AIRPORT RD.
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PACIFIC OCEAN
MELROSE DRIVE & PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT NUMBER
6034
EXHIBIT 4
PLOTTED B't Aurora Moreno-Valdez PLOT DA7r:11/15/19 PATH:F: \AURORAMV_pROJEC7S\AUTOCAD\FOR BRANDON OCT 2O19\FORBRANDONNOV2O19JIELROSEA7PAR_J.DWG