Loading...
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