Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2023-05-01; Traffic and Mobility Commission; ; Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvements, Capital Improvement Program Project No. 6058
Meeting Date: May 1, 2023 To: Traffic & Mobility Commission Staff Contact: Tom Frank, Transportation Director/City Engineer tom.frank@carlsbadca.gov, 442‐339‐2766 Lauren Ferrell, Associate Engineer lauren.ferrell@carlsbadca.gov, 442‐339‐2558 Subject: Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvements, Capital Improvement Program Project No. 6058 Recommended Action Receive a report on traffic study results and other data regarding the Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvements Project, Capital Improvement Program Project No. 6058, and make a recommendation to the City Council on the preferred design option, signal or roundabout. Executive Summary The Traffic & Mobility Commission voted April 3 to put the Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvements Project on its May agenda with the goal of providing a recommendation to the City Council. When staff presented the project Feb. 6, 2023, the commission did not reach consensus on the preferred design. This report will present the options again, with added detail on the traffic study results and other data requested by the commission. The project is needed to enhance coastal access, improve walking and biking infrastructure, and improve traffic flow along Carlsbad’s busy coastline, while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The project was designed to comply with the May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 1 of 349 California Complete Streets Act, the City of Carlsbad’s General Plan Mobility Element and the City of Carlsbad’s Climate Action Plan. Project components include widening the sidewalk over the bridge just south of Tamarack Avenue, relocating bus stops and adding street parking. The options differ mainly in the widths of the sidewalks and bike lanes and how traffic flows through the intersection. One approach uses a traffic signal, and the other uses a roundabout. Since the project was first designed, the City of Carlsbad declared a traffic safety emergency, following a more than 200% increase in bike and e‐bike collisions since 2019. The project area is among several collision hot spots in the city. Discussion The Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project is intended to: Provide a safe and efficient intersection for all means of travel Improve beach access Promote walking, biking and other forms of active transportation Calm traffic along the coastline for safety Guiding principles The project improvements are proposed in accordance with local policies previously approved by the City Council, including the Mobility Element of the General Plan, the Sustainable Mobility Plan and the Climate Action Plan, and Engineering Standards. Mobility Element The overarching document that identifies the city’s core transportation goals is the city’s General Plan Mobility Element, which was approved by City Council in 2015. This replaced what was called the Circulation Element, a plan largely based on the circulation needs of a single mode of travel – the car. The Mobility Element sets forth several goals related to sustainable mobility: Keep the City of Carlsbad moving with complete streets that provide a safe, balanced, cost effective, multi‐modal transportation system (vehicles, pedestrians, bikes, transit), accommodating the mobility needs of all community members, including children, the elderly and the disabled. (Goal 3‐G.1) Improve connectivity for residents, visitors and businesses. (Goal 3‐G.2) Provide inviting streetscapes that encourage walking and promote complete streets. (Goal 3‐G.3) Implement transportation demand and traffic signal management techniques to improve mobility. (Goal 3‐G.5) May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 2 of 349 Protect and enhance the visual, environmental, and historical characteristics of the City of Carlsbad through sensitive planning and design of scenic transportation corridors. (Goal 3‐G.6) Provide for the safe and efficient movement of goods throughout the city. (Goal 3‐G.7) Identity street and coastal street Not all streets have the same purpose. Some serve residential neighborhoods, some are more traveled routes and some are major thoroughfares. That dictates how they are designed. Carlsbad Boulevard, north of the Tamarack Avenue intersection falls under the category of an identity street. These streets provide the primary access to and from the heart of the city ‐ the Village. They are designed to safely move all modes of travel while enhancing mobility for pedestrians and bicyclists. The identity street design elements state: Vehicle speeds should be managed to promote safe pedestrian and bicycle movement No pedestrian shall cross more than five vehicular travel and/or turn lanes In addition to ADA compliant ramps and sidewalks, sidewalks should support the adjacent land uses as follows: o Adjacent to retail uses, modified/new sidewalks should generally be a minimum of 10 feet (12 feet preferred) in width where feasible and taking into consideration the traffic volumes of the adjacent roadway, and allow for the land use to utilize the sidewalk with outdoor seating and other activities o Adjacent to residential uses, modified/new sidewalks should be a minimum of six feet in width. Elsewhere, modified/new sidewalks should be a minimum of eight feet in width Where feasible, bicycle lanes should be provided Vehicle speeds should complement the adjacent land uses Bicycle parking should be provided in retail areas May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 3 of 349 Bike racks should be readily provided within the public right‐of‐way and encouraged on private property Traffic calming devices, such as curb extensions (bulb‐outs) or enhanced pedestrian crossings should be considered and evaluated for implementation Street furniture shall be oriented toward the businesses Mid‐block pedestrian crossings could be provided at appropriate locations (e.g., where sight distance is adequate, and speeds are appropriate) On‐street vehicle parking should be provided. In areas with high parking demand, innovative parking management techniques should be implemented and/or considered Pedestrians should typically be “buffered” from vehicle traffic using landscaping or parked vehicles Carlsbad Boulevard, south of Tamarack Avenue, falls under the Mobility Element category of a coastal street, which is to have the following characteristics: Primary purpose is to move people along the city’s ocean waterfront and connect people to the beach, recreation, businesses and residences in close proximity to the waterfront. The street serves as a destination for people who seek to drive, walk and bicycle along the ocean waterfront. Designed to safely move all modes of travel while enhancing mobility for pedestrians and bicyclists. Vehicle speeds shall be managed to support uses along the coast. Enhanced bicycle and pedestrian crossings should be provided, including: o High visibility crosswalks o Enhanced pedestrian notifications (e.g., responsive push‐button devices) o Enhanced bicycle detection o Bicycle lanes, which can be further enhanced or complemented by other facilities (such as bicycle lane buffers or off‐street pathways). Pedestrian facilities should be a minimum of 5 feet and shall strive for 6 to 8 feet in width and shall conform to ADA requirements. Pedestrian crossing distances should be minimized. Trail facilities should be encouraged. Opportunities for mid‐block pedestrian crossings should be investigated. On‐street parking should be provided. Transit facility and operation improvements should be encouraged. Sustainable Mobility Plan The city’s Sustainable Mobility Plan includes specific guidance on the consideration of roundabouts for intersection control. It states, “The City of Carlsbad recognizes that roundabouts are an effective intersection traffic control measure to calm traffic and improve safety of intersections for pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles by reducing speeds and conflict points. Roundabouts have added benefits of improving efficiency of vehicle operations May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 4 of 349 of intersections, reducing greenhouse gas emissions from idling vehicles and enhancing aesthetics. Roundabouts will be considered on existing city streets where they could effectively address safety or traffic operations issues or in new development projects when intersection control is being considered…” Climate Action Plan All California cities are required to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. The City of Carlsbad’s strategy to meet this goal is outlined in its Climate Action Plan. The Climate Action Plan identifies transportation as the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in Carlsbad. To reduce GHGs, the plan calls for encouraging more walking and biking and reduce vehicle speeds. Roundabouts, with their continual, slow‐moving traffic, produce fewer GHGs than traffic signals. Engineering Standards The city’s Engineering Standards includes the study of roundabout in Volume 1 Chapter 3 – Public Street and Traffic Standards under Section 3.1 C. Intersections may require special design and the study shall conform with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD), Section 4C.01b and 01c regarding intersection control. An engineering study shall include consideration of a roundabout (yield control). If a roundabout is determined to provide a viable and practical solution, it shall be studied in lieu of, or in addition to a traffic control signal. State of emergency Traffic safety is top priority in the City of Carlsbad. On August 23, 2022, the City of Carlsbad declared a local emergency following a more than 200% increase in collisions involving bikes and e‐bikes since 2019. The City Council provided $2 million in emergency funding and asked staff to prioritize projects that would redesign streets to encourage safer behaviors. Traffic data analysis Staff evaluated a traffic signal option and a roundabout option for this project to determine which performed better based on specific metrics. Less traffic delay for roundabout option Studies were done to project the average time vehicles would wait at the intersection during peak hours under three scenarios: The existing conditions, which serves as the baseline. The expected conditions, which consider other projects in the area. The expected conditions in 2035, which consider growth projections from the San Diego Association of Government’s Regional Transportation Demand Model. May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 5 of 349 Under all three scenarios during all three peak periods, the roundabout option resulted in the least amount of delay for drivers. This means traffic will move more efficiently through the roundabout compared to the intersection with a traffic signal, even during the highest levels of traffic and with a high number of pedestrians and bicyclists. The traffic signal option would increase the number of crosswalks at the intersection from two to four and would increase the amount of time cars stop to wait for pedestrians. As the chart above shows, the roundabout would cause fewer seconds of delay for drivers under today’s conditions. During the Saturday peak hour, for example, the traffic signal would cause an average delay of 30.3 seconds per vehicle. With the roundabout option, during a Saturday peak hour, drivers would encounter on average, a 13.2 second delay, which results in a 57% reduction in wait time. Efficiency during peak hours and other times of the day Traffic signals are designed for maximum efficiency at peak hours of the day, which are identified as 7:45 to 8:45 a.m., 4 to 5 p.m. and 11:45 a.m. to 12:45 p.m. on Saturdays. While those are the peak hours, they only represent up to about 20% of the daily traffic. A traffic signal halts traffic even during non‐peak hours as it cycles through red and green lights for each direction of travel. Roundabouts allow for a steadier traffic flow, so they can accommodate heavy traffic during peak hours but also allow traffic to pass through efficiently without stopping during the non‐peak hours. May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 6 of 349 Traffic safety While roundabouts keep people moving, they do so at lower and more consistent speeds, which greatly reduces the risk of injury. According to the Transportation Research Board, part of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, roundabouts have been found to provide: More than 90% reduction in fatalities 67% reduction in injuries 35% reduction in all crashes Slower speeds that are generally safer for pedestrians The Federal Highway Administration reports that roundabouts reduce the frequency and severity of crashes by: Eliminating the most severe types of crashes: high angle movements including right‐ angle, left‐turn and head‐on collisions Decreasing relative speeds approaching and through the intersection. Lower speed is associated with better yielding rates and reduced vehicle stopping distance Minimizing the difference in speed between road users Shortening the pedestrian crossing distances and having pedestrians cross only one direction of traffic at a time at each approach Decreasing vehicle‐to‐vehicle, pedestrian‐to ‐vehicle and bicycle‐to‐vehicle conflict points Environmental benefits ‐ Less idling vehicles By reducing vehicle idling time at the intersections, roundabouts provide the additional advantage of reducing vehicle emissions and fuel consumption. This helps improve local air quality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Roundabouts on La Jolla Boulevard in San Diego’s Bird Rock neighborhood are estimated to each save 20,000 gallons of gasoline annually, avoiding 9.9 pounds of particulate pollution.1 One roundabout can eliminate 189 metric tons of what are known as carbon dioxide equivalent emissions annually, equivalent to taking 37 cars off the road. 2 Installing roundabouts in place of traffic signals or stop signs has been found to reduce carbon monoxide emissions by 15‐45%, nitrous oxide emissions by 21‐44%, carbon dioxide emissions by 23‐34% and hydrocarbon emissions by up to 40% 3. 1Silva-Send, Nilmini (2009) Reducing Greenhouse Gases from On-Road Transportation in San Diego County. Energy Policy Initiatives Center, USD; 2 US Environmental Protection Agency, (2008) Average Annual Emissions and Fuel Consumption for Gasoline- Fueled Passenger Cars and Light Trucks 3 Public opinion, traffic performance, the environment, and safety after the construction of double-lane roundabouts, Wen Hu, Anne T. McCartt, Jessica S.Jermakian, Srinivas Mandavilli, Transportation Research Record 2402 Truck and Bus Safety May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 7 of 349 More space to walk and bike along the coast For this specific area, the General Plan Mobility Element calls for: Sidewalks adjacent to residential uses, modified/new sidewalks should be a minimum of six feet in width. Elsewhere, modified/new sidewalks should be a minimum of eight feet in width Sidewalk north of Tamarack Sidewalk south of Tamarack Bike lane Bike lane buffers Current 5 feet 5 feet 5 to 7 ½ feet 0 to 2‐foot buffer Traffic signal 5 feet 9 to 16 feet 6 to 8 feet 0 to 3‐foot buffer Roundabout 10 feet 14 to 16 feet 7 to 8 feet 3‐foot buffer May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 8 of 349 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 9 of 349 Addressing community concerns Several community members have expressed concern about placing a roundabout at this intersection: How does a roundabout work in areas with high pedestrian use? Roundabouts increase safety and efficiency for those sharing the road, including when a high number of pedestrians are present, because they are designed for pedestrians to cross a shorter distance of only one direction of traffic at a time. Pedestrians have direct crossing paths from each corner of the roundabout. While a pedestrian crosses one leg of traffic, an average of 17.5 feet to the center island, the other movements in the roundabout are free flowing traffic. Speeds are greatly reduced to 15 – 20 mph approaching a roundabout so pedestrian safety is greatly increased. Additionally, there will be two pedestrian crossings for East ‐ West and from North – South, versus the existing condition has one crossing in each direction. This makes the roundabout well over 50% more efficient from a pedestrian standpoint. On the other hand, with a traffic signal, pedestrians need to cross 66 feet, and vehicle and bike traffic in both directions are stopped. May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 10 of 349 To address concerns that the intersection will be gridlocked with too many pedestrians crossing, the roundabout intersection will be built with the option to have signals for all directions of traffic, meaning certain movements can be paused to clear the intersection and keep traffic flowing. If there are traffic backup scenarios, the signal can help facilitate right‐of‐way for either pedestrians or car traffic. How would a roundabout handle traffic back up from cars entering the Tamarack Beach parking lot? This is an issue that any option would experience. To support peak entry periods to the Tamarack Beach parking lot, the roundabout option will include a metering signal at the entry of the parking lot. The driveway will include detection that will measure periods when cars are queued up the driveway and there is no parking available in the lot. May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 11 of 349 For vehicles approaching the roundabout from southbound Carlsbad Boulevard, a “no right turn” sign would turn on during full parking lot conditions For vehicles heading west in the roundabout, a red light with a green left turn arrow would turn on at the entry point of the parking lot, directing them to continue moving counterclockwise through the roundabout to allow continuous flow. When capacity becomes available the “no right turn” and red light and green arrow restrictions would turn off. How would a roundabout handle cars leaving the Tamarack Beach parking lot? To support traffic flow during heavy use of the Tamarack Beach parking lot, the roundabout option will include a metering signal at the exit of the parking lot. This means the vehicles approaching the roundabout from the parking lot will be metered in a similar fashion to a freeway on‐ramp to ensure any queue of vehicles and cyclists on Carlsbad Boulevard can clear the intersection. How will cars pull onto Tamarack Avenue or Carlsbad Boulevard from driveways with the roundabout nearby? Pulling into traffic should be easier with the roundabout because cars will be driving at a much slower speed. How do larges emergency vehicles drive through roundabouts? Roundabouts are designed with public safety vehicles in mind and in coordination with our Fire Department. The Fire Department’s largest ladder truck, 61‐feet‐long, can navigate the proposed roundabout without restrictions or mounding any curbs. A roundabout at this intersection is not expected to have any impact on emergency response times and is supported by our Fire Department. May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 12 of 349 How will this project fit along Carlsbad Boulevard? The General Plan Mobility Element lays out the changes envisioned for the entire length of Carlsbad Boulevard. The plan calls for making Carlsbad Boulevard a place that encourages walking and biking, with street designs that slow down traffic to create a safe and inviting environment for our coastline. The city has already made changes along other segments of Carlsbad Boulevard. The city’s first roundabout on Carlsbad Boulevard is north of the project site at State Street. The City Council has approved another roundabout at Cannon Road and Carlsbad Boulevard, south of Tamarack Avenue and the design is at approximately 90% complete. The city will soon complete initial conceptual design work on a segment from Manzano Drive to Island Way. How would bikes navigate the roundabout? The city has worked closely with the biking community in designing the Tamarack roundabout. Cyclists will have two options. Because people drive slowly through roundabouts, cyclists are able to merge into the lane and proceed through the roundabout. Or, they can take one of the shared‐use paths at all four corners of the intersection. May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 13 of 349 Shared‐use paths are shared by both pedestrians and slower moving bicyclists. They can be used by cyclists who don’t feel comfortable riding in the vehicle lane of a roundabout. To make sure bikers enter the shared‐use path at slower speeds from the bike lane, bike path entrances are designed at 45 degrees and are 5‐feet wide. Can roundabouts work in areas with a large visitor population? Roundabouts are utilized in many communities with large numbers of tourists, such as La Jolla, Santa Cruz, San Clemente and Sedona along with numerous locations around the world. When people are unfamiliar with how to use them, then tend to slow down and proceed cautiously through the intersection. Because the other cars in the roundabouts are moving slowly, they can accommodate someone using a little extra caution. Pedestrians and cyclists unfamiliar with roundabouts can simply look to the signs and watch others to get the hang of it. Next Steps City staff will present the project to the City Council with the Traffic & Mobility’s recommendation. City Council will then be asked to approve the project. After that, staff will complete the final engineering design, environmental analysis and permitting. Staff anticipates presenting the final project plans to the City Council in mid‐2025 to request authorization to seek construction bids. If construction starts in late 2025, the project should be completed by late 2026, however the ultimate timing is contingent upon coordination with State Parks and obtaining a coastal development permit. Exhibits 1. Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Alternatives Analysis 2. Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 14 of 349 ͳʹ To: ǡǡȀǦ Cc: Ǧ Ǧ From: ǡ Date: ʹͶǡʹͲʹ͵ Subject: INTRODUCTION ǡ ǤȋͶȌ ǣ • •ͳȂ͵Ǧ •ʹȂͶǦ •͵Ȃ Ǧǡ ʹǡʹͲʹʹǤ PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ǡǡ ǡ Ǥ ǡ ǯ Ǥ ǡ ǡǡ ǡ Ǥ ǡ ǡǡ ǯ Ǥ ǣ • •ǡ • • ǣȀȀǤ ǤȀȀ ǦȀ ȀǦ Ȁ ǦǦ Ǧ Ǥ džŚŝďŝƚϭ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 15 of 349 ʹʹ EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY INTERSECTION Ǥ ͳǤ ͳͲǦǦ ǤͶǦǦ Ǥ Ǥ Ǧ Ǥ ǣ ǣǦǦ Ǥ ͵ͲȋȌ ͵ͷ Ǥ ȋȌǡ Ǥ ǡǦ ǡ Ǧ ǦǤ Ǧ Ǥ ǣǡ ǦǦǦ ǦǤ ͵ͲȋȌ͵ͷǤ Ǧ Ǧ Ǥǡ Ǥ ǣ ǡ ǡ Ǥǡǡ ʹͷǤ Ǧ ǡǦ ǦǤ ADJACENT INTERSECTIONS ǣǦǦ Ǧ Ǧ ͵ͲͲ ǤDzdzǤ ǣǦǦ Ǧ Ǧ ͵ͲͲ Ǥ Dz ȀdzǤ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 16 of 349 ͵ʹ ͳǤ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 17 of 349 Ͷʹ PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLE, AND TRANSIT FACILITIES Existing Pedestrian Facilities ǡ Ǥ ͶͷǦǦ Ǥ ͺǦ Ǧ ǤƬ ǡ ǡ ǡ Ǥ Existing Bicycle Facilities ȋ͵Ȍ ǡ ǡǣ • ȋ Ȍ Ȃ Ǥ Ǧ ǡǦǦ ǡ Ǥ • ȋȌȂǦǦ ǡ ǦǦ Ǥ • ȋȌȂ Ǥ ȋȌ ǣ •Ǥ • Ǥ Existing Transit Facilities ȋȌ ǡ ȋȌ ǡ ǡ Ǥ ǡͳͲ ǡ Ǥ ǡǡ Ǧ Ǥ ͳͲͳȋDz dzȌǤǡͳͲͳ ͳͲͳ Ǥ ͵ͲǦ Ǥ CONCEPTUAL ALTERNATIVES PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES ǣ ǣ Ǥ ͵Ǧ ǣ ͳǡ ǣ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 18 of 349 ͷʹ • ǡ ͳͷ ǡ ͳͲͲǤ • Ƭ Ǥ • Ǥ •ǦȀ Ȁ Ȁ Ǥ •Ǧ Ǥ •Ǧ Ǥ •Ǧ Ǥ •ǦʹǦȋ ǦȌ Ǥ •Ǧ ͶʹͲ ͺǦ ͵Ǧ ǡ Ǥ •Ǧ ǡǦʹǦ Ǥ •Ǧ •ͳͲǦ ǡ Ǥ •ͷǦ Ǥ •ͻǦ ǡ ͳͳ ͳͷǤͷǦǤ •ͳͲǦ ͷǦ Ǥ • ͺͲ Ǥ • Ƭ Ǥ Ǥ •ͳͲǤͷǦͳͳǦͳͲǤͷǦͳͳǦǦ •ͳͲǦͳͲǤͷǦͳͲǦͳͲǤͷǦǦ •ͳͲǦ Ǧ •ͳͳǦ •ͳͳǦǦ • ʹͲǦǦ ǡ Ǥ • May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 19 of 349 ʹ • Ǧ ǦǤ • ͶʹͲ Ȁ Ǥ • Ǥ Ǥ ͵Ǧ ǡ Ǧ ǡǡ ǦȀǦǤ ͶǦ ǣ ʹǡ ͵Ǧ ǤͶǦ Ǥ Ͷǡ ǡ ͳͳǦǤǡ Ǥǡǡ ͵Ǧ Ǥ ǣ ͵ǡ ͵Ǧ ǡǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ͵Ǧ ǣ • Ǥ • •ͺǦ͵Ǧ Ǥ •ͺǦ͵Ǧȋ ǦȌ Ǥ •ͺǦ͵Ǧ Ǥ ʹǤ͵Ǧ Ǧ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 20 of 349 ʹ •Ǧ͵Ǧ ǡͺǦ͵Ǧ Ǥ •ͳͲǦ Ǥ Ǥ •ͻǤʹͳͲǦ Ǥ •ͳͶǦ ǡ ͳ ͳͷǦǤ •ͳͲǦ ͳͳǦ ǡ ͳͶ ͳ͵Ǧ Ǥ •ͳͲǤͷǦͳͳǦǡ Ǥ •ͳͳǦ ǡ Ǥ •ͳǦǤ • Ǥ • Ǥ •ͳͲǦǤ •ͳͳǦ ǡ Ǥ •ͳͳǤͷǦͳͲǦ ǡ Ǥ • ʹʹǦǦ ǡ Ǥ • Ǥ • Ǥ • Ǥ ȋȌ ȋȌ ͷͲͲǤ Ǧ Ǥ ͵Ǥ Ǧ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 21 of 349 ͺʹ Ǥ Ǥ ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS PROCESS Ǧ Ǥ PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLE, AND TRANSIT ENHANCEMENTS Ǥ ǡ Ǥ Ǥ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ Ǧǡ Ǥǡͺ Ǥ ǡ Ǧ Ǧ Ǥ Ǧ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ǡ ȋȌ Ǥ Dzdz ǡ Ǥ ǯ ǡ ȋǤǤǡ ͺǤ • • Ƭ • • • • May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 22 of 349 ͻʹ Ȍ ȋǤǤ ǡ ǡǡ ǡ ǤȌ ǡ ǡ ǡ͵Ǥ ǡǡ ǡ Ǧ Ǥ ͵ǦǤͶ ǡ Ǥ͵Ǧͳ ǯ ǡ Ǥ ǡ ǡ Ǥ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ͵Ǧ ͶǦǡ ǡ Ǥ ͳ Ǥͳǡ Ǥ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ǡǣ • ǣ oȂͷ ǡ ǡ ͶͷǤǡ Ǧ Ǣ ͺǤ Ǥ o ͵Ǧ Ȃ ǡ ǡͳͲǤͷǦ Ǥ ͻ ͳ Ǥ ͷ Ǥ ͷǤ Ǧ Ǥ o ͶǦ Ȃ ͵Ǧ ǣ ͻ ͳͳ Ǥ ͵Ǧ Ǥ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 23 of 349 ͳͲʹ oȂ ǡ ǡ ͳͲǤ ǡͻǤʹǤ ͳͶ ͳ Ǥ ͳͳͳͶǤ ʹʹǤ Ǥ Ǧ Ǥ • ǣ oȂ ǤͷǤͷǤ ͷ Ǥ ʹǦͷǦ Ǥ ͷǤ ͷ Ǥ o͵Ǧ ǦǦǡʹǦ ǡ͵Ǧ Ǥ ͻ Ǥ oͶǦ ȂǦǡʹǦ Ǥ ͵Ǧ Ǥ oȂͺǦ͵Ǧǡ ͵ǦǤ ʹ ǡ ͷͲΨ Ǧ Ǥ • ǣ oȂ Ǥ Ǧ Ǥ ǡͺǦ ǡ Ǥ ͳʹͲ ͷǤͷ ȋ ǡʹͲͳͷȌǤ ǡ Ǥ o ͵Ǧ Ȃ ǤͺǦͺͲǦǦͳͲǦǦǤ ǦǦǦ ʹǦǤ oͶǦ Ȃ ͵Ǧ Ǥ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 24 of 349 ͳͳʹ oȂͺǦͺͲǦǦͳͲǦǦ ǤǦǦ ͵ǦǤ ǡ ǡ ǡ Ǥ ǡ ǡ ǡ Ǥ ǡͷǦ ͷǦǡ ͳͲǦͳͳͳͶǦǡ Ǥǡ ǡͳͶͳǡ͵Ǧ ͻͳǡͶǦͻͳͳǤ ǡ Ǥ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 25 of 349 ͳʹʹ ͶǦ ȀȀȀȀȀȀȀȀȀ ͻͲ ͳͲͲ ͳͲͲ ͻͲ ͻͲ ͳͲͲ ͳͲͲ ͳͲͲ ͳͲͲ ͳͲͲ ͺͷ ͳͲͲ ͳͲͲ ͳͲͲ ͳͲͲ ͳͲͲ ͳͲͲ ͳͲͲ ͻͷ ͳͲͲ ͳͲͲ ͻͷ ͻͷ ͳͲͲ ͳͲͲ ͻͷ ͻͷ ͳͲͲ ͺͷ ͻͷ ͳͲͲ ͻͲ ͳͲͲ ͳͲͲ ͳͲͲ ͳͲͲ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 26 of 349 ͳ͵ʹ TRAFFIC IMPACTS AND PERFORMANCE ǣ Ȉǣ ʹͲʹʹ ǯǯǤ Ǥ ȈǣǦ Ǥ Ȉ ʹͲ͵ͷ ǣ ȋ Ȍ ȋ ȌʹΪȀʹͲʹͳȋȌǤ ǣ Ȉ Ȉ ȈȋȌ Level of Service Dz dzȋȌǤ ǡDzdzDz dz ǡ Ǥ Dzdz Ǧ ǡDz dzǦ Ǥ ǡ ǡǤ ʹ Ǥ ʹǡ Ǥ ʹǤƬ ȋȀȌͳ ȋȀȌʹ ȋȀȌ ͳ͵Ǥͻ ͳ͵Ǥ ͳ͵Ǥ͵ ʹ͵Ǥ ʹͶǤ ʹ͵Ǥ ʹͶǤͶ ʹͷǤͳ ʹͶǤͻ ͵Ǧ ͳǤ ͳǤͳ ͳǤʹ ʹǤͻ ʹǤͺ ʹǤ ͵ͲǤ͵ ͵ͲǤͺ ʹͻǤͺ ͶǦ ͳǤͶ ͳǤͺͳǤͳ ʹǤͲ ʹǤͻ ʹͷǤ ʹͻǤ ͵ͲǤ ʹͻǤͳ ͵Ǥͻ ͶǤͲ͵Ǥ ͳͺǤͺʹʹǤͲͳͷǤ ͳ͵Ǥʹ ͳͷǤͷ ͳʹǤͷ ǣ Ǥ ͷ Ǥ ȋȌ ǡDzdzDz dz May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 27 of 349 ͳͶʹ ȋȀȌͳ ȋȀȌʹ ȋȀȌ ǡ Ǥ ǡ ͼȋ ȌǤ Queuing ͻͷ Ǥ Ǥ ͵ͻͷ Ǥ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 28 of 349 ͳͷʹ ͵Ǥͻͷ ȋȌͳ ͻͷ ȋȌ Ͳ ͵ͳͳͻͳͲͻ͵ͲͳʹʹͳͶ͵͵ͳͳͳʹͳͳͲ ʹ͵Ͳ ͺͻͶͺͺʹͻͳͻ͵ͷͲʹ͵ʹͳͺͺͶͶʹͻͶ ͳͳͷ ͳͳ͵ͳ͵ʹͷͻͳ͵ͳͶ͵ͳͳ͵ͳͳͷͳ ʹ͵ͷ ͳͳ͵ ͳͶͷ ͳͻͶ ͳͳͷ ͳͶʹ ʹͳͷ ͳͳͳ ͳͷͲ ʹͲ Ͳ ͳͷ ʹ͵ͻͲͲʹ͵ͺͻͲʹͶͳͲͳ ʹ͵ͷ ͵ Ͷ ͻ ͵͵ ͳ ͺ ͵ͳ ͻ ͵Ͳ ͷ ʹʹ ʹͶ Ͳ ʹͶ ʹͻ Ͷ ʹ ʹͺ ͷͳʹͶͳͳͷͳʹͶͳʹͶͳͳͺͳ͵͵ͳͳ͵ͳͳͳʹͶ ͶͷͲ ͷ ͻ ͳʹ͵ ͺͲ ͳͲ͵ ͳ͵ͺ ͳͳ ͳͳͶ ͵Ǧ ͳͳͷ ͵ͺͳ͵͵ͳ͵͵͵ͻͳ͵͵ͳʹͻ͵ʹͳͳͻ ͳͲͷ ʹ͵Ͳ ͳͲͷͷ͵ͻ͵ͳͶͻͺͷ͵ͷ͵͵ʹ ͳͲ͵Ͷͻͷ͵Ͳͷ ͻ ͷͳʹʹͲͻͺͳͷʹͳ͵Ͷͳʹͳ͵ ʹ͵ͷ ͳ ʹͲͻ͵͵ ͳ ʹͲ͵͵Ͷͺ ͳ ʹʹʹ͵ʹͷ ʹ͵ͷ ͵Ͷ Ͷ ͷ ͵Ͷ ͵ ͷ ͶͲ ͷͻ Ͷ ͵Ͳ Ͳ ʹͺ Ͷ ͳͺ ʹ Ͳ Ͷ ʹͻ ͻ͵ͳ͵ͳ͵ͺͳͳͻͳͶͲͳͺͳͷͺͳʹͳʹ ͶͷͲ ͳʹͳ ͳʹ ͳͺ ͳͶ͵ ͳ͵ͷ ͳͻͶ ͳͶͲ ͳͲͺ ͳͷ ͶǦ ͳͳͷ ͵ͺͳ͵ͳʹͶ͵ͳ͵Ͳͳ͵͵Ͷͳͳͺͳ͵ʹ ʹ͵Ͳ ͳͲͶͷ͵͵ͳ ͳͲͻͷ͵ͷ͵͵ͷ ͳͲʹͷͲͲ͵ͳ ͻ ͵ͳͶͳͷͻͻͳ͵ͳͻʹͻͳ͵ͳͺ ʹ͵ͷ ͳʹͻ ͳͳ ʹ͵Ͷ ͳ͵ͻ ͳͷʹʹʹ ͳʹͲ ͳͷͶʹͲ ʹ͵ͷ ͵ Ͳ ͺ ͵ ͷ Ͳ ͵ʹ ͷͺ ͺ ͵Ͳ Ͳ ͳͲ͵ Ͷ ͳͻ ʹ Ͳ ͳ͵ ʹ͵ ͻ͵ͳͷͳ͵ͳͳͳͳͳͶ͵ͳʹͳͲͳ͵ʹͳͷ ͶͷͲ ͳ͵͵ ͳʹ ͳͲ ͳͷͲ ͳʹ ͳͻͲ ͳ͵Ͳ ͳͳͻ ͳ͵ ʹͳͷ ͳͳ ͺͷ ͺ ͳ͵ͷ ͻ ͻͻ ͺ͵ ʹʹͲ ͶͶ ʹͶ ͳͲͻ Ͷ ʹͷ ͳʹʹ Ͷͳ ʹ͵ ͳͲ ʹͲ ͷ ͳͲ ʹͺ ͷ ͳͲ ʹͻ ͷ ͳͲ ʹͺ ͶͷͲ ʹ͵ ʹͷ ʹͺ ʹͶ ʹͷ ͷ ʹͳ ʹʹ ͳ ǣ Ǥ ͷ Ǧ Ǥ ǡǤ ǣȋȌǡȋȌǡȋȌǡȋȌǡ ȋȌǡȋȌǡȋȌǡȋȌǡȋȌǡ ȋȌǡȋȌǡȋȌǡȋȌǤ ͵ǡ͵ǦͶǦ ǡ ǡǡ Ǧ Ǥ Ǧ͵ǦͶǦ ǣ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 29 of 349 ͳʹ •Ǧǣ o͵Ǧ ǣͳ͵ͷ oͶǦǣͳͶͲ Ǧ ͳͷͲ Ǥ Ǣǡ Ǥ •Ǧǣ o͵Ǧ ǣʹͳͷ oͶǦ ǣͳͻͷ Ǧ ͻǤ Ǥ •Ǧȋ Ȍǣ o͵Ǧ ǣͳͺͲ oͶǦ ǣͳͷ Ǧ ͻ͵Ǥ Ǥ ͵Ǧ ͶǦ Ǥ Ǧ ͵Ǧ ͵Ͷͺȋ ȌǤǦ ͶǦ ʹʹ ͵Ǧ Ǥ Ǧ ͷ͵ͻͷ͵͵ǦͶǦ ǡ ǡ Ǥ ǦȀǦ ǡǦ Ƭ Ǥ Ǧ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ȋ ȌȀ ǤǦ ǡ Ǧ ͶǦ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ Queueing at Redwood Avenue and Sequoia Avenue ǡ Ǥ Ǥ Ǧ ǦȀǦ͵ǦͶǦǤ Ǧ Ǥ ǡ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 30 of 349 ͳʹ ǤǦ Ǧ ͳ͵ǡ Ǧ ͵Ǧ ͶǦ Ǥ ǡ ǦȀǦ ͵Ǧ ͶǦǤ Ǧ ǡ Ǧ Ǥ ͻͷ Ǧ ʹͷǡ Ǥ ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS Biological Resources Ǥ Ǥ Ǥ ǡ Ǣǡ ǡ Ǥǡ Ǥ Cultural Resources Ǥ Ǥ Ǥ Ǥ Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Emissions ǡ Ǥ ȋȌ ȋ ȌǤ ǡ Ǥ ʹ Ǧ Ǥǡ Ǥ ǯǣ ǣDz Ǥǡ Ǥ Ȁ Ǥ ǡ ǡ Ǧ Ǥdz May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 31 of 349 ͳͺʹ Ǥ Ǧǡ͵ǦͶǦ Ǥ͵ǡ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ Ǥǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǧ ǡ Ǥǡ Ǥ SAFETY Collisions and Conflict Points Ǥ ȋ ʹͲͲͺ Ȃ ʹͲʹʹȌ ȋ Ȍ ǤͶ ǡ ȋǡ ǡǡ ǡȋȌȌǡ ȋǡǡǦǡ Ȍǡ ȋ ǡ ǡǡ ǤȌǡ ȋ ǡ ǡ ȌǤ ͶǤ ʹͲʹʹǣƬ Ǧ Ȁ Ƭ Ƭ ͵ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ ͳ ʹ Ͳ ͳ ͳ ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ ͳ ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ȁǣʹ ȀǣͲ ȀǣͲ Ƭ ͳͳͲͲͶͷʹͳʹͷͳͳͳ͵ͳͳʹͳ Ȁǣ Ȁǣͳ ȀǣͲ Ƭ ͵ Ͳ Ͳ ͳ ͳ ͳ Ͳ ͳ ʹ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ ͳ ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ȁǣʹ ȀǣͲ ȀǣͲ Ƭ ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ ͳ Ͳ ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ ͳ Ȁǣͳ ȀǣͲ ȀǣͲ ͳͺͲͲͷͺͷʹͶͺʹͳͳ͵͵͵ʹʹ Ͷǡ Ǥ Ǧǡ Ǥ ǡǡǡ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 32 of 349 ͳͻʹ ͷǤ Ǧ ȋ ǡʹͲͲͲȌǤ ǡ Ǥ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ȋȌ ȋʹͲͲͳȌ ȋ ȌȋʹͲͲȌǡ ǣ •ͻͲΨ •Ψ •͵ͷΨ • ǡ ȋʹͲͲͲȌ ǣ • Ȃ ǦǡǦ ǡ Ǥ • Ǥ Ǥ • • Ǥ • ǡ ǡ Ǥ ǡ ǡ ǡǡ Ǥ Ǥ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ Ǧ Ǥ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 33 of 349 ʹͲʹ Ǥ ȋ ǡʹͲͲͲȌǤ ͵ͲʹͲǡ ͳͲ Ǥ ǯ ͳʹ ͳͷ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ Ǧ ȋ Ǧ Ȍ Ǥ Ǧ ȋ ǡʹͲͲͲȌǤ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 34 of 349 ʹͳʹ Ǥ ǡǡ ǡ ǡȋ ǡʹͲͲͲȌǤ Speed Management Methods ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ͷǦǦ Ͷͷ Ǥ ǡ ȋȌ Ǥ ǡ͵ǦͶǦ ǦȀ ȋ ȌǤ ǡ Ǥ ͵Ǧ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ͶǦ ǡ ǯ ǤͶǦ Ǥ ǡ ͶǦ ǡ Ǥ ǡ͵ǦͶǦ Ǥǡǡ ǡ Ǥ BEACH ACCESS ǡ ǡ ǡ Ǥ ǡ ǡ ǣ • • • • ǡ Ǥ ǡǤ ǡ ǡǡ ǡ ǡ Ǥ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 35 of 349 ʹʹʹ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ǦǦǡ ǯ Ǥ AESTHETICS ǡ Ǥ ȀǦ Ǥǡ ʹǦ Ǥ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ǡ ǡ Ǥ ͵Ǧ ȋ ͶǦ Ȍ Ǥ ͺǤ͵Ǧ Ǥ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 36 of 349 ʹ͵ʹ ͻǤ͵Ǧ Ǥ ͳͲǤ Ǥ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 37 of 349 ʹͶʹ PROJECT ALTERNATIVES OVERALL EVALUATION ǡ ǡǡ ǡ ǡͷǡͶǡ͵ǡʹ ǡ ͳǤǡ Ǧ ͻͷ ͲǦͳͲͲǡͳͲͳǦʹͲͲ ͷǡʹͲͳǦ͵ͲͲͶǡ͵ͲͳǦͶͲͲ͵ǡͶͲͳǦͷͲͲ ʹǡͷͲͳΪͳǤͷ Ǥ ͷǡ ȋʹͳȌ ǡǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ Ǧ͵Ǧ ͳ ǡ ͶǦ ͳ Ǥ ͳʹǡ Ǥ ͳͳǤ Ǥ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 38 of 349 ʹͷʹ ͷǤ ͵Ǧ ͶǦ ͶͶͶͶ ͳͷ Ǧ ͳ ͳ ͳ ͷ ͳʹͳͳʹͳ ǣ εͼǡεͻǡεͺǡεǡεǡ εͷ ǣͶǦͷͶͶεͼǡͷͶͷǦͶͶεͻǡͶͷǦͶͶεͺǡͶͷǦͺͶͶεǡͺͶͷǦͻͶͶε ǡͻͶͷήεͷ ǡ ǡ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǧ Ǥ ǡ ǯͷǦǦ ͶͷǦǡ Ǥ ǡ ǯǤ ǡ ǡ ǡ ǡ ǡǡ Ǥ ǣ ǡ Ǥǡ ǡǤ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ǣ • ǡ ͵Ǧ ͶǦ Ǥ •ͷǦ ǡͳͲ Ǥ •Ȅ ȋͺǦ͵ǦȌǤ • Ǥ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 39 of 349 ʹʹ • Ǧ ǡ Ǥ • ǡ ǡ ǡ ǡǤ Ǥ Ǧǡ ǡ Ǥ • ǡ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ • ǡ Ǥ ǡȋ Ȍ Ǥ • ǡ Ǧ ǡ Ǥ ǡǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 40 of 349 Alternatives Analysis for Carlsbad Blvd & Tamarack Ave Intersection Improvement Project Sidewalk over Bridge Eastern Sidewalk on Carlsbad Blvd Bike Lane Safety Buffer for Bike Lanes Adds Parking Spaces Left turn to Sequoia Ave Bike & Vehicle Conflict Points Improves Safety Reduces Car Emissions Average MMLOS 2035 Worst-Case Traffic Level of Service (LOS) West Side North of Tamarack Ave Carlsbad Blvd Tamarack Ave Carlsbad Blvd Tamarack Ave Ped. Bicycle No Build Alternative 6 ft 5 ft 5 ft – 7.5 ft 7 ft 0 ft - 2 ft 0 No Yes 65 No No Improvement LOS D LOS A LOS C Alternative 1 - Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative 15.5 ft 5 ft 6 ft - 8 ft 6 ft - 7 ft 0 ft - 3 ft 0 Yes No 69 Better Minor Improvement LOS A LOS A LOS C Alternative 2 - Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternative 9.5 ft - 11 ft 5 ft 6 ft 6 ft - 7 ft 0 ft - 2 ft 0 Yes No 69 Good Minor Improvement LOS A LOS A LOS C Alternative 3 - Roundabout Intersection Alternative 15 ft - 16 ft 10 ft 7 ft - 8 ft 5.5 ft - 7 ft 3 ft 0 ft - 4 ft Yes Yes 27 Best Highest Improvement LOS A LOS A LOS B Table 6. Overall Alternatives Comparison 27 of 27 May 01, 2023 Item # 2 Page 41 of 349 APPENDICES: ǣ ǣ ǣ ǡ ǡǡ ǣ ǣ REFERENCES: Ǥǡ ǤǡǡǤǤǡʹͲʹʹǤ ͷʹǣǤ ǡ ǡǡǡǤǤǡʹͲͲǤ Dzǡ Ǥdz ǡ ǦǦͲͺǦͲͲǡ ǣȀȀǤǤȀȀǤǤȀȀʹͲʹʹǦͲȀͲͺͲͲǤ ǣ Ǥ ǡǡǤǤǡǡ ǤǣȀȀǤǤǤȀ Ȁ ȀȀͲͲͲȀͲͲͲǤ Dz ǣ Ǧ Ǥdz ͳͷͳǡ ȋȌǡ ȋȌǡǡǤǤǡʹͲͲͳǤ May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 42 of 349 Appendix A: Project Alternative Exhibits May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 43 of 349 BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS ONE PROJECT AT A TIME 2251 SAN DIEGO AVE. STE A-130 Tel 619.819.9240 Fax 619.512.5599SAN DIEGO, CA 92110 ℄ ℄ ℄ ℄ May 01, 2023 Item # 2 Page 44 of 349 BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS ONE PROJECT AT A TIME 2251 SAN DIEGO AVE. STE A-130 Tel 619.819.9240 Fax 619.512.5599SAN DIEGO, CA 92110 ℄ ℄ ℄ ℄ May 01, 2023 Item # 2 Page 45 of 349 BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS ONE PROJECT AT A TIME 2251 SAN DIEGO AVE. STE A-130 Tel 619.819.9240 Fax 619.512.5599SAN DIEGO, CA 92110 ℄ ℄ ℄ ℄ May 01, 2023 Item # 2 Page 46 of 349 Appendix B: Traffic Counts May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 47 of 349 File Name : CAR_Carl_Tam AM Site Code : 99922433 Start Date : 5/12/2022 Page No : 1 City of Carlsbad N/S: Carlsbad Boulevard E/W: Tamrack Avenue Weather: Clear Groups Printed- Total Volume Carlsbad Boulevard Southbound Tamrack Avenue Westbound Carlsbad Boulevard Northbound Beach Parking Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 871 0 7926 3 6 35 124 8 33 120 3150 07:15 AM 11 87 1 99 28 1 12 41 529 9 43 152 8191 07:30 AM 9 113 2 124 48 2 14 64 34317 63 101 2253 07:45 AM 6 118 0 124 57 3 25 85 14113 55 310 4268 Total 34 389 3 426 159 9 57 225 10 137 47 194 6 8 3 17 862 08:00 AM 14 104 9 127 62 2 16 80 14612 59 013 4270 08:15 AM 12 94 3 109 54 12 11 77 45319 76 134 8270 08:30 AM 14 93 6 113 53 8 19 80 87526 109 220 4306 08:45 AM 16 93 4 113 29 5 13 47 87120 99 125 8267 Total 56 384 22 462 198 27 59 284 21 245 77 343 4 8 12 24 1113 Grand Total 90 773 25 888 357 36 116 509 31 382 124 537 10 16 15 41 1975 Apprch %10.1 87 2.8 70.1 7.1 22.8 5.8 71.1 23.1 24.4 39 36.6 Total %4.6 39.1 1.3 45 18.1 1.8 5.9 25.8 1.6 19.3 6.3 27.2 0.5 0.8 0.8 2.1 Carlsbad Boulevard Southbound Tamrack Avenue Westbound Carlsbad Boulevard Northbound Beach Parking Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:45 AM 07:45 AM 6 118 0 124 57 3 25 85 14113 55 3 10 4268 08:00 AM 14 104 9 127 62 216 80 14612 59 013 4270 08:15 AM 12 94 3 109 54 12 11 77 45319 76 1 34 8270 08:30 AM 14 93 6 113 53 8 19 80 8 75 26 109 220 4306 Total Volume 46 409 18 473 226 25 71 322 14 215 70 299 6 7 7 20 1114 % App. Total 9.7 86.5 3.8 70.2 7.8 22 4.7 71.9 23.4 30 35 35 PHF .821 .867 .500 .931 .911 .521 .710 .947 .438 .717 .673 .686 .500 .583 .438 .625 .910 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 (951)268-6268 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 48 of 349 File Name : CAR_Carl_Tam AM Site Code : 99922433 Start Date : 5/12/2022 Page No : 2 City of Carlsbad N/S: Carlsbad Boulevard E/W: Tamrack Avenue Weather: Clear Carlsbad Boulevard B e a c h P a r k i n g T a m r a c k A v e n u e Carlsbad Boulevard Right 18 Thru 409 Left 46 InOut Total 292 473 765 Rig h t 71 Th r u 25 Le f t 22 6 Ou t To t a l In 12 3 3 2 2 4 4 5 Left 14 Thru 215 Right 70 Out TotalIn 642 299 941 Le f t 6 Th r u 7 Rig h t 7 To t a l Ou t In 57 2 0 7 7 Peak Hour Begins at 07:45 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 07:30 AM 07:45 AM 08:00 AM 08:00 AM +0 mins.9 113 2 124 57 3 25 85 14612 59 013 4 +15 mins.6 118 0 124 62 216 80 45319 76 1 3 4 8 +30 mins.14 104 9 127 54 12 11 77 8 75 26 109 2 20 4 +45 mins.12 94 3 109 53 8 19 80 87120 99 125 8 Total Volume 41 429 14 484 226 25 71 322 21 245 77 343 4 8 12 24 % App. Total 8.5 88.6 2.9 70.2 7.8 22 6.1 71.4 22.4 16.7 33.3 50 PHF .732 .909 .389 .953 .911 .521 .710 .947 .656 .817 .740 .787 .500 .667 .600 .750 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 (951)268-6268 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 49 of 349 File Name : CAR_Carl_Tam PM Site Code : 99922433 Start Date : 5/12/2022 Page No : 1 City of Carlsbad N/S: Carlsbad Boulevard E/W: Tamrack Avenue Weather: Clear Groups Printed- Total Volume Carlsbad Boulevard Southbound Tamrack Avenue Westbound Carlsbad Boulevard Northbound Beach Parking Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 04:00 PM 28 122 4 154 35 4 23 62 10 243 47 300 829 19535 04:15 PM 24 113 2 139 24 3 33 60 6 244 71 321 4310 17537 04:30 PM 22 115 7 144 27 7 18 52 9 274 73 356 275 14566 04:45 PM 24 101 2 127 24 1 5 30 7 215 98 320 233 8485 Total 98 451 15 564 110 15 79 204 32 976 289 1297 16 15 27 58 2123 05:00 PM 27 97 3 127 33 4 17 54 14 243 66 323 265 13517 05:15 PM 23 84 4 111 24 8 25 57 9 241 63 313 462 12493 05:30 PM 20 103 5 128 28 1 20 49 12 227 74 313 443 11501 05:45 PM 15 76 3 94 33 1 19 53 9 207 55 271 135 9427 Total 85 360 15 460 118 14 81 213 44 918 258 1220 11 19 15 45 1938 Grand Total 183 811 30 1024 228 29 160 417 76 1894 547 2517 27 34 42 103 4061 Apprch %17.9 79.2 2.9 54.7 7 38.4 3 75.2 21.7 26.2 33 40.8 Total %4.5 20 0.7 25.2 5.6 0.7 3.9 10.3 1.9 46.6 13.5 62 0.7 0.8 1 2.5 Carlsbad Boulevard Southbound Tamrack Avenue Westbound Carlsbad Boulevard Northbound Beach Parking Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:00 PM 04:00 PM 28 122 4 154 35 423 62 10 243 47 300 8 29 19 535 04:15 PM 24 113 2 139 24 3 33 60 6 244 71 321 4310 17 537 04:30 PM 22 115 7 144 27 7 18 52 9 274 73 356 2 7 514566 04:45 PM 24 101 2 127 24 1 5 30 7 215 98 320 233 8485 Total Volume 98 451 15 564 110 15 79 204 32 976 289 1297 16 15 27 58 2123 % App. Total 17.4 80 2.7 53.9 7.4 38.7 2.5 75.3 22.3 27.6 25.9 46.6 PHF .875 .924 .536 .916 .786 .536 .598 .823 .800 .891 .737 .911 .500 .536 .675 .763 .938 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 (951)268-6268 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 50 of 349 File Name : CAR_Carl_Tam PM Site Code : 99922433 Start Date : 5/12/2022 Page No : 2 City of Carlsbad N/S: Carlsbad Boulevard E/W: Tamrack Avenue Weather: Clear Carlsbad Boulevard B e a c h P a r k i n g T a m r a c k A v e n u e Carlsbad Boulevard Right 15 Thru 451 Left 98 InOut Total 1071 564 1635 Rig h t 79 Th r u 15 Le f t 11 0 Ou t To t a l In 40 2 2 0 4 6 0 6 Left 32 Thru 976 Right 289 Out TotalIn 588 1297 1885 Le f t 16 Th r u 15 Rig h t 27 To t a l Ou t In 62 5 8 1 2 0 Peak Hour Begins at 04:00 PM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 04:00 PM 05:00 PM 04:15 PM 04:00 PM +0 mins.28 122 4 154 33 417 54 6 244 71 321 8 29 19 +15 mins.24 113 2 139 24 825 57 9 274 73 356 4310 17 +30 mins.22 115 7 144 28 1 20 49 7 215 98 320 2 7 5 14 +45 mins.24 101 2 127 33 1 19 53 14 243 66 323 233 8 Total Volume 98 451 15 564 118 14 81 213 36 976 308 1320 16 15 27 58 % App. Total 17.4 80 2.7 55.4 6.6 38 2.7 73.9 23.3 27.6 25.9 46.6 PHF .875 .924 .536 .916 .894 .438 .810 .934 .643 .891 .786 .927 .500 .536 .675 .763 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 (951)268-6268 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 51 of 349 Location:Date: 5/12/2022 N/S:Day: Thursday E/W: NorthLeg EastLeg SouthLeg WestLeg CarlsbadBoulevard TamrackAvenue CarlsbadBoulevard TamrackAvenue Pedestrians Pedestrians Pedestrians Pedestrians 15 3 0 14 32 15 0 0 10 25 13 4 0 16 33 7301222 12 5 1 24 42 15 4 0 22 41 13 13 0 26 52 12 8 0 30 50 102 40 1 154 297 NorthLeg EastLeg SouthLeg WestLeg CarlsbadBoulevard TamrackAvenue CarlsbadBoulevard TamrackAvenue Pedestrians Pedestrians Pedestrians Pedestrians 21 6 0 15 42 23 4 0 19 46 10 1 2 25 38 22 10 0 26 58 18 3 0 33 54 42 12 0 25 79 38 12 0 20 70 16 4 0 17 37 190 52 2 180 424 5:15PM 5:30PM 5:45PM TOTALVOLUMES: 4:00PM 4:15PM 4:30PM 4:45PM 5:00PM 7:00AM 7:15AM 7:30AM 7:45AM TOTALVOLUMES: 8:00AM 8:15AM 8:30AM 8:45AM Carlsbad CarlsbadBoulevard TamrackAvenue PEDESTRIANS CountsUnlimited,Inc. POBox1178 Corona,CA92878 951Ͳ268Ͳ6268May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 52 of 349 Location:Date: 5/12/2022 N/S:Day: Thursday E/W: Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 060203011000 13 030101020000 7 030200002000 7 070000020000 9 020000024000 8 090250072000 25 030361170000 21 090000053010 18 0 42 0 10 11 5 1 26 12 0 1 0 108 Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 01300001110000 25 070100082000 18 0150100054000 25 01900030161011 41 130404051000 18 01005020100000 27 12903000105000 48 01714020143110 43 2 113 1 18 0 11 1 79 16 1 2 1 245 TamrackAvenue TOTALVOLUMES: CarlsbadBoulevard TamrackAvenue CarlsbadBoulevard TamrackAvenue Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound 5:30PM 5:45PM CarlsbadBoulevard TamrackAvenue CarlsbadBoulevard Eastbound TOTALVOLUMES: 4:00PM 4:15PM 4:30PM 4:45PM 5:00PM 5:15PM 7:45AM 8:00AM 8:15AM 8:30AM 8:45AM Southbound Westbound Northbound TamrackAvenue CarlsbadBoulevard Carlsbad BICYCLES 7:30AM 7:00AM 7:15AM CountsUnlimited,Inc. POBox1178 Corona,CA92878 951Ͳ268Ͳ6268May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 53 of 349 File Name : CAR_Carl_Tam 6-18 Site Code : 99922433 Start Date : 6/18/2022 Page No : 1 City of Carlsbad N/S: Carlsbad Boulevard E/W: Tamrack Avenue Weather: Clear Groups Printed- Total Volume Carlsbad Boulevard Southbound Tamrack Avenue Westbound Carlsbad Boulevard Northbound Beach Parking Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 11:00 AM 20 151 14 185 54 10 30 94 17 129 32 178 6611 23480 11:15 AM 20 132 7 159 34 4 29 67 12 163 25 200 337 13439 11:30 AM 24 142 9 175 27 6 18 51 15 172 40 227 865 19472 11:45 AM 27 163 3 193 45 5 22 72 11 206 41 258 345 12535 Total 91 588 33 712 160 25 99 284 55 670 138 863 20 19 28 67 1926 12:00 PM 30 125 4 159 44 12 32 88 8 164 50 222 2410 16485 12:15 PM 18 149 13 180 40 2 21 63 11 201 34 246 410 6 20 509 12:30 PM 29 168 11 208 41 0 36 77 10 230 37 277 0017 17579 12:45 PM 26 143 12 181 42 0 21 63 16 236 24 276 0014 14534 Total 103 585 40 728 167 14 110 291 45 831 145 1021 6 14 47 67 2107 Grand Total 194 1173 73 1440 327 39 209 575 100 1501 283 1884 26 33 75 134 4033 Apprch %13.5 81.5 5.1 56.9 6.8 36.3 5.3 79.7 15 19.4 24.6 56 Total %4.8 29.1 1.8 35.7 8.1 1 5.2 14.3 2.5 37.2 7 46.7 0.6 0.8 1.9 3.3 Carlsbad Boulevard Southbound Tamrack Avenue Westbound Carlsbad Boulevard Northbound Beach Parking Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 11:00 AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 11:45 AM 11:45 AM 27 163 3 193 45 522 7211 206 41 258 345 12535 12:00 PM 30 125 4 159 44 12 32 88 8 164 50 222 2410 16485 12:15 PM 18 149 13 180 40 2 21 63 11 201 34 246 410 6 20 509 12:30 PM 29 168 11 208 41 0 36 77 10 230 37 277 0017 17 579 Total Volume 104 605 31 740 170 19 111 300 40 801 162 1003 9 18 38 65 2108 % App. Total 14.1 81.8 4.2 56.7 6.3 37 4 79.9 16.2 13.8 27.7 58.5 PHF .867 .900 .596 .889 .944 .396 .771 .852 .909 .871 .810 .905 .563 .450 .559 .813 .910 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 (951)268-6268 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 54 of 349 File Name : CAR_Carl_Tam 6-18 Site Code : 99922433 Start Date : 6/18/2022 Page No : 2 City of Carlsbad N/S: Carlsbad Boulevard E/W: Tamrack Avenue Weather: Clear Carlsbad Boulevard B e a c h P a r k i n g T a m r a c k A v e n u e Carlsbad Boulevard Right 31 Thru 605 Left 104 InOut Total 921 740 1661 Rig h t 11 1 Th r u 19 Le f t 17 0 Ou t To t a l In 28 4 3 0 0 5 8 4 Left 40 Thru 801 Right 162 Out TotalIn 813 1003 1816 Le f t 9 Th r u 18 Rig h t 38 To t a l Ou t In 90 6 5 1 5 5 Peak Hour Begins at 11:45 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 11:00 AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 11:45 AM 11:45 AM 12:00 PM 11:00 AM +0 mins.27 163 3 193 45 522 72 8 164 50 222 6 611 23 +15 mins.30 125 4 159 44 12 32 88 11 201 34 246 337 13 +30 mins.18 149 13 180 40 2 21 63 10 230 37 277 8 65 19 +45 mins.29 168 11 208 41 0 36 77 16 236 24 276 345 12 Total Volume 104 605 31 740 170 19 111 300 45 831 145 1021 20 19 28 67 % App. Total 14.1 81.8 4.2 56.7 6.3 37 4.4 81.4 14.2 29.9 28.4 41.8 PHF .867 .900 .596 .889 .944 .396 .771 .852 .703 .880 .725 .921 .625 .792 .636 .728 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 (951)268-6268 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 55 of 349 Location: N/S: E/W: Date: 6/18/2022 Day: Saturday NorthLeg EastLeg SouthLeg WestLeg CarlsbadBoulevard TamrackAvenue CarlsbadBoulevard BeachParkingDriveway Pedestrians Pedestrians Pedestrians Pedestrians 28 11 0 8 47 57 12 0 4 73 49 16 0 12 77 26 7 0 10 43 41 11 0 15 67 36 17 0 4 57 58 23 0 1 82 39 12 0 1 52 334 109 0 55 498 11:00AM 11:15AM 11:30AM 11:45AM TOTALVOLUMES: 12:00PM 12:15PM 12:30PM 12:45PM Carlsbad CarlsbadBoulevard TamrackAvenue PEDESTRIANS CountsUnlimited,Inc. POBox1178 Corona,CA92878 951Ͳ268Ͳ6268May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 56 of 349 Location: N/S: E/W: Date: 6/18/2022 Day: Saturday Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 33102010341020 74 13714010406000 90 227180322110100 75 32302010271000 57 01801210291000 52 22224002174011 55 02206141112000 47 42885010273023 81 15 208 12 32 3 12 5 206 28 1 5 4 531 BeachParkingDriveway TOTALVOLUMES: CarlsbadBoulevard TamrackAvenue CarlsbadBoulevard Eastbound 11:45AM 12:00PM 12:15PM 12:30PM 12:45PM Southbound Westbound Northbound TamrackAvenue CarlsbadBoulevard Carlsbad BICYCLES 11:30AM 11:00AM 11:15AM CountsUnlimited,Inc. POBox1178 Corona,CA92878 951Ͳ268Ͳ6268May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 57 of 349 File Name : CAR_Carl_Tam 6-25 Site Code : 99922433 Start Date : 6/25/2022 Page No : 1 City of Carlsbad N/S: Carlsbad Boulevard E/W: Tamrack Avenue Weather: Clear Groups Printed- Total Volume Carlsbad Boulevard Southbound Tamrack Avenue Westbound Carlsbad Boulevard Northbound Beach Parking Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 11:00 AM 27 136 9 172 49 7 24 80 15 100 25 140 479 20412 11:15 AM 21 136 5 162 52 12 29 93 12 123 30 165 8723 38458 11:30 AM 21 143 12 176 45 6 32 83 12 128 29 169 3621 30458 11:45 AM 32 170 13 215 50 11 32 93 10 120 31 161 31210 25 494 Total 101 585 39 725 196 36 117 349 49 471 115 635 18 32 63 113 1822 12:00 PM 18 157 13 188 29 6 33 68 8 136 38 182 10 9 12 31 469 12:15 PM 31 139 8 178 32 8 28 68 12 122 26 160 4616 26432 12:30 PM 27 183 13 223 36 5 33 74 12 140 24 176 939 21494 12:45 PM 23 172 8 203 41 6 28 75 6 120 29 155 6814 28461 Total 99 651 42 792 138 25 122 285 38 518 117 673 29 26 51 106 1856 Grand Total 200 1236 81 1517 334 61 239 634 87 989 232 1308 47 58 114 219 3678 Apprch %13.2 81.5 5.3 52.7 9.6 37.7 6.7 75.6 17.7 21.5 26.5 52.1 Total %5.4 33.6 2.2 41.2 9.1 1.7 6.5 17.2 2.4 26.9 6.3 35.6 1.3 1.6 3.1 6 Carlsbad Boulevard Southbound Tamrack Avenue Westbound Carlsbad Boulevard Northbound Beach Parking Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 11:00 AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 11:45 AM 11:45 AM 32 170 13 215 50 11 32 93 10 120 31 161 3 12 10 25 494 12:00 PM 18 157 13 188 29 6 33 68 8 136 38 182 10 912 31 469 12:15 PM 31 139 8 178 32 8 28 68 12 122 26 160 4616 26 432 12:30 PM 27 183 13 223 36 5 33 74 12 140 24 176 939 21494 Total Volume 108 649 47 804 147 30 126 303 42 518 119 679 26 30 47 103 1889 % App. Total 13.4 80.7 5.8 48.5 9.9 41.6 6.2 76.3 17.5 25.2 29.1 45.6 PHF .844 .887 .904 .901 .735 .682 .955 .815 .875 .925 .783 .933 .650 .625 .734 .831 .956 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 (951)268-6268 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 58 of 349 File Name : CAR_Carl_Tam 6-25 Site Code : 99922433 Start Date : 6/25/2022 Page No : 2 City of Carlsbad N/S: Carlsbad Boulevard E/W: Tamrack Avenue Weather: Clear Carlsbad Boulevard B e a c h P a r k i n g T a m r a c k A v e n u e Carlsbad Boulevard Right 47 Thru 649 Left 108 InOut Total 670 804 1474 Rig h t 12 6 Th r u 30 Le f t 14 7 Ou t To t a l In 25 7 3 0 3 5 6 0 Left 42 Thru 518 Right 119 Out TotalIn 843 679 1522 Le f t 26 Th r u 30 Rig h t 47 To t a l Ou t In 11 9 1 0 3 2 2 2 Peak Hour Begins at 11:45 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 11:00 AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 11:45 AM 11:00 AM 11:45 AM 11:15 AM +0 mins.32 170 13 215 49 7 24 80 10 120 31 161 8723 38 +15 mins.18 157 13 188 52 12 29 93 8 136 38 182 3621 30 +30 mins.31 139 8 178 45 6 32 83 12 122 26 160 3 12 10 25 +45 mins.27 183 13 223 50 11 32 93 12 140 24 176 10 912 31 Total Volume 108 649 47 804 196 36 117 349 42 518 119 679 24 34 66 124 % App. Total 13.4 80.7 5.8 56.2 10.3 33.5 6.2 76.3 17.5 19.4 27.4 53.2 PHF .844 .887 .904 .901 .942 .750 .914 .938 .875 .925 .783 .933 .600 .708 .717 .816 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 (951)268-6268 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 59 of 349 Location: N/S: E/W: Date: 6/25/2022 Day: Saturday NorthLeg EastLeg SouthLeg WestLeg CarlsbadBoulevard TamrackAvenue CarlsbadBoulevard BeachParkingDriveway Pedestrians Pedestrians Pedestrians Pedestrians 38 15 0 15 68 45 18 1 12 76 58 22 0 5 85 35 16 0 1 52 38 14 0 11 63 52 18 1 14 85 56 17 0 2 75 45 14 0 4 63 367 134 2 64 567 12:15PM 12:30PM 12:45PM TOTALVOLUMES: 11:00AM 11:15AM 11:30AM 11:45AM 12:00PM Carlsbad CarlsbadBoulevard TamrackAvenue PEDESTRIANS CountsUnlimited,Inc. POBox1178 Corona,CA92878 951Ͳ268Ͳ6268May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 60 of 349 Location: N/S: E/W: Date: 6/25/2022 Day: Saturday Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 53544022393212 99 33136030300000 76 12601150292000 65 43406230216100 77 130210000344000 81 12709320221000 65 21803121293010 60 2200402091122 43 19 221 9 43 7 19 3 213 20 4 4 4 566 CarlsbadBoulevard TamrackAvenue CarlsbadBoulevard BeachParkingDriveway Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound 12:30PM 12:45PM TOTALVOLUMES: 11:00AM 11:15AM 11:30AM 11:45AM 12:00PM 12:15PM TamrackAvenue CarlsbadBoulevard Carlsbad BICYCLES CountsUnlimited,Inc. POBox1178 Corona,CA92878 951Ͳ268Ͳ6268May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 61 of 349 Page 1 City of Carlsbad Carlsbad Boulevard B/ Sequoia Avenue - Bridge 24 Hour Directional Volume Count CARCASE Site Code: 999-22433 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 Phone: (951) 268-6268 email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 6/30/2022 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined Totals Time Thu Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon 12:00 10 170 12 228 12:15 6 202 16 222 12:30 14 162 6 219 12:45 5 176 35 710 7 216 41 885 76 1595 01:00 6 195 7219 01:15 5 180 6225 01:30 2 198 2217 01:45 3 183 16 756 2159 17 820 33 1576 02:00 2 205 5193 02:15 1 189 1172 02:30 7 233 2186 02:45 1 251 11 878 2160 10 711 21 1589 03:00 1 226 119203:15 1 273 0187 03:30 0 239 8216 03:45 3 276 5 1014 5196 14 791 19 1805 04:00 1 270 420204:15 6 264 4161 04:30 3 291 9168 04:45 2 269 12 1094 8193 25 724 37 1818 05:00 4 272 15 183 05:15 6 301 23 173 05:30 13 304 33 200 05:45 15 286 38 1163 62 158 133 714 171 1877 06:00 22 235 69 158 06:15 27 175 76 196 06:30 37 215 90 171 06:45 36 186 122 811 120 152 355 677 477 1488 07:00 51 197 95 156 07:15 37 169 102 148 07:30 56 173 143 138 07:45 67 173 211 712 121 148 461 590 672 130208:00 69 156 137 151 08:15 86 156 155 119 08:30 99 102 146 102 08:45 91 100 345 514 146 82 584 454 929 96809:00 95 75 120 80 09:15 86 58 125 73 09:30 122 79 137 75 09:45 103 64 406 276 142 64 524 292 930 568 10:00 106 93 139 82 10:15 137 102 132 79 10:30 148 82 155 55 10:45 147 62 538 339 151 39 577 255 1115 594 11:00 154 54 181 31 11:15 163 42 176 15 11:30 166 25 178 14 11:45 152 17 635 138 261 19 796 79 1431 217 Total 2374 8405 2374 8405 3537 6992 3537 6992 5911 15397 Combined Total 10779 10779 10529 10529 21308 AM Peak - 11:00 - - - 11:00 - - - - - Vol. - 635 - - - 796 - - - - - P.H.F. 0.956 0.762 PM Peak - - 05:00 - - - 12:00 - - - -Vol. - - 1163 - - - 885 - - - - P.H.F. 0.956 0.970 Percentag e 22.0% 78.0% 33.6% 66.4% ADT/AADT ADT 21,308 AADT 21,308 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 62 of 349 Page 1 City of Carlsbad Carlsbad Boulevard B/ Sequoia Avenue - Bridge 24 Hour Directional Volume Count CARCASE_Sat Site Code: 999-22433 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 Phone: (951) 268-6268 email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 6/18/2022 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined Totals Time Sat Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon 12:00 26 211 25 184 12:15 18 231 28 198 12:30 19 237 13 228 12:45 13 240 76 919 13 203 79 813 155 1732 01:00 8 236 6222 01:15 9 207 7221 01:30 7 222 6 260 01:45 7 246 31 911 8 227 27 930 58 1841 02:00 9 205 5 241 02:15 8 229 8 234 02:30 7 202 518402:45 8 229 32 865 7229 25 888 57 1753 03:00 6 236 4214 03:15 4 215 2221 03:30 8 205 4240 03:45 8 208 26 864 4217 14 892 40 1756 04:00 5 203 3243 04:15 3 198 5178 04:30 3 181 6232 04:45 4 202 15 784 8205 22 858 37 1642 05:00 2 174 11 191 05:15 4 187 20 165 05:30 8 210 32 222 05:45 13 180 27 751 26 182 89 760 116 1511 06:00 16 185 29 160 06:15 20 178 35 161 06:30 29 157 64 169 06:45 33 158 98 678 48 145 176 635 274 1313 07:00 44 171 62 145 07:15 57 155 63 141 07:30 52 146 83 135 07:45 45 139 198 611 68 140 276 561 474 117208:00 52 143 84 138 08:15 62 140 94 131 08:30 105 131 89 124 08:45 85 119 304 533 113 108 380 501 684 103409:00 99 90 112 100 09:15 121 85 130 91 09:30 97 75 153 82 09:45 130 64 447 314 137 74 532 347 979 661 10:00 109 57 170 75 10:15 128 42 195 68 10:30 150 49 172 63 10:45 133 38 520 186 214 50 751 256 1271 442 11:00 178 35 222 46 11:15 194 29 169 35 11:30 214 25 185 27 11:45 248 23 834 112 225 20 801 128 1635 240 Total 2608 7528 2608 7528 3172 7569 3172 7569 5780 15097 Combined Total 10136 10136 10741 10741 20877 AM Peak - 11:00 - - - 10:15 - - - - - Vol. - 834 - - - 803 - - - - - P.H.F. 0.841 0.904 PM Peak - - 00:15 - - - 01:30 - - - - Vol. - - 944 - - - 962 - - - - P.H.F. 0.983 0.925 Percentage 25.7% 74.3% 29.5% 70.5% ADT/AADT ADT 20,877 AADT 20,877 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 63 of 349 Page 1 City of Carlsbad Carlsbad Boulevard B/ Sequoia Avenue - Bridge 24 Hour Directional Volume Count CARCASE_SAT2 Site Code: 999-22433 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 Phone: (951) 268-6268 email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 6/25/2022 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined Totals Time Sat Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon 12:00 26 202 25 184 12:15 17 162 27 171 12:30 22 182 10 204 12:45 13 154 78 700 14 201 76 760 154 1460 01:00 12 159 7181 01:15 10 174 6198 01:30 11 205 16 196 01:45 7 167 40 705 8194 37 769 77 1474 02:00 6 169 9 256 02:15 8 201 7 216 02:30 5 194 3 187 02:45 8 210 27 774 6 218 25 877 52 1651 03:00 2 213 520403:15 4 187 2197 03:30 4 183 3193 03:45 7 182 17 765 4192 14 786 31 1551 04:00 2 215 418404:15 3 161 5189 04:30 5 240 11 199 04:45 4 253 14 869 9206 29 778 43 1647 05:00 8 300 21 188 05:15 4 290 20 186 05:30 7 311 27 209 05:45 12 332 31 1233 30 181 98 764 129 1997 06:00 13 296 29 159 06:15 26 295 35 171 06:30 26 251 56 144 06:45 34 165 99 1007 66 146 186 620 285 1627 07:00 41 209 67 142 07:15 50 172 81 117 07:30 58 151 77 120 07:45 55 176 204 708 79 113 304 492 508 120008:00 85 145 98 136 08:15 101 137 88 132 08:30 107 127 117 112 08:45 111 61 404 470 121 106 424 486 828 95609:00 115 57 126 91 09:15 117 67 129 81 09:30 125 75 143 82 09:45 137 64 494 263 152 71 550 325 1044 588 10:00 148 55 149 72 10:15 150 39 157 58 10:30 170 51 187 60 10:45 161 41 629 186 157 56 650 246 1279 432 11:00 146 33 187 43 11:15 171 26 196 30 11:30 167 25 202 24 11:45 147 33 631 117 230 28 815 125 1446 242Total26687797266877973208702832087028587614825 Combined Total 10465 10465 10236 10236 20701 AM Peak - 10:30 - - - 11:00 - - - - -Vol. - 648 - - - 815 - - - - - P.H.F. 0.947 0.886 PM Peak - - 05:30 - - - 02:00 - - - - Vol. - - 1234 - - - 877 - - - - P.H.F. 0.929 0.856 Percentag e 25.5% 74.5% 31.3% 68.7% ADT/AADT ADT 20,701 AADT 20,701 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 64 of 349 Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: N-S STREET:DATE:LOCATION: E-W STREET:DAY:PROJECT# NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES:0 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 6:00 AM 6:15 AM 6:30 AM 6:45 AM 7:00 AM 0 59 1 1 161 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 225 7:15 AM 0 46 2 1 175 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 229 7:30 AM 0 77 1 0 228 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 307 7:45 AM 0 69 1 0 225 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 299 8:00 AM 0 89 2 0 164 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 259 8:15 AM 0 77 1 1 173 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 254 8:30 AM 0 82 0 2 155 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 241 8:45 AM 0 98 5 3 129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 235 9:00 AM 9:15 AM 9:30 AM 9:45 AM 10:00 AM 10:15 AM 10:30 AM 10:45 AM 11:00 AM 11:15 AM 11:30 AM 11:45 AM TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL Volumes 0 597 13 8 1410 0 0 0 0 16 0 5 2049 Approach %0.00 97.87 2.13 0.56 99.44 0.00 ############76.19 0.00 23.81 App/Depart 610 /602 1418 /1426 0 /21 21 /0 730 AM PEAK Volumes 0 312 5 1 790 0 0 0 0 10 0 1 1119 Approach %0.00 98.42 1.58 0.13 99.87 0.00 ############90.91 0.00 9.09 PEAK HR. FACTOR:0.911 33.146855, -117.344816 08/27/19 CarlsbadCarlsbad Blvd. Sequoia Ave.19-1419-002TUESDAY 0.867 AM Peak Hr Begins at: 0.688 WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.0000.871 1-Way Stop (WB) COMMENT 1: GPS: CONTROL: veracity grouptraffic May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 65 of 349 Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: N-S STREET:DATE:LOCATION: E-W STREET:DAY:PROJECT# NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES:0 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 6:00 AM 6:15 AM 6:30 AM 6:45 AM 7:00 AM 0 49 1 1 120 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 174 7:15 AM 0 42 2 1 114 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 163 7:30 AM 0 73 1 2 163 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 242 7:45 AM 0 67 0 0 184 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 254 8:00 AM 0 88 1 0 126 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 217 8:15 AM 0 83 0 3 133 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 220 8:30 AM 0 93 0 3 128 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 225 8:45 AM 0 87 3 1 99 0 0 0 0 3 0 4 197 9:00 AM 9:15 AM 9:30 AM 9:45 AM 10:00 AM 10:15 AM 10:30 AM 10:45 AM 11:00 AM 11:15 AM 11:30 AM 11:45 AM TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL Volumes 0 582 8 11 1067 0 0 0 0 9 0 15 1692 Approach %0.00 98.64 1.36 1.02 98.98 0.00 ############37.50 0.00 62.50 App/Depart 590 /597 1078 /1076 0 /19 24 /0 730 AM PEAK Volumes 0 311 2 5 606 0 0 0 0 4 0 5 933 Approach %0.00 99.36 0.64 0.82 99.18 0.00 ############44.44 0.00 55.56 PEAK HR. FACTOR:0.918 33.148205, -117.345909 08/27/19 CarlsbadCarlsbad Blvd. Redwood Ave.19-1419-003TUESDAY 0.830 AM Peak Hr Begins at: 0.750 WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.0000.879 1-Way Stop (WB) COMMENT 1: GPS: CONTROL: veracity grouptraffic May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 66 of 349 Appendix C: Cumulative Project List, Trip Generation, Distribution, and Assignments May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 67 of 349 3060 STATE STREET RESTAURANT - 3060 STATE STREET 1,358 sf restaurant & outdoor patio converted from existing vacant commercial building. In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total ͳǤ͵ͷͺ ͳǡͲͲͲǤ Ǥ ͳ ͳͻͳ ͺ ͳͷ ͻ ͳͷ ͳ͵ʹ ʹͶ ʹͲ ͶͶ 1917 8159 615132242044 CARLSBAD BY THE SEA SUMMERHOUSE - 2710 OCEAN STREET Carlsbad by the Sea Summerhouse: Consolodation of 5 parcels for new 40,000 sq ft professional services building for memory care and independent living. In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total ͷ ȀͶͲǡͲͲͲ ȀͳǡͲͲͲǤ Ǥ ͳ ͳͺ ͷͳʹͷ ͳʹͳͺͳ͵ͳͻ 1687 5125 71216861319 CHINQUAPIN COASTAL HOMES - 330 CHINQUAPIN AVENUE Chinquapin Coast Homes: Three Triplex buildings containing nine airspace condominium units. In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total ͻ ͳ ʹͳͷͷʹͻʹ͵ 72 1 5 6 5 2 7 79 2 3 7 GARFIELD BEACH HOMES - 3570 GARFIELD STREET Construction of 12 single family dwelling units. In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total ͳʹ ͳ ͳʹͲ͵ ͳͲͺ Ͷͳʹͳʹ͵ͳͳͻʹͲ 1203 7108 41212311920 VIGILUCCI'S SEAFOOD & STEAKHOUSE - 3878 CARLSBAD BOULEVARD Addition of a 1,925 sf to the patio area to accommodate 104 seats for dining use. In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total ͳǤͻʹͷ ȀͳͲͶ ȀͳǡͲͲͲǤ Ǥ ͳ ͳͻ͵ ͳ ͳ ʹ ͳͳ ͷ ͳ ʹ ʹͲ ͳͶ ͵Ͷ 193 1 1 2 11 5 16 267 20 14 34 Land Use Category Quantity Units Total Project Trips Notes: 1 GFA = Gross Floor Area 2 Trip rates are calculated based on SANDAG's Brief Guid of Vehicular Trip Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (April 2002). Equivalent number of beds was calculated using ITE trip rates for 1,000 sf of Assisted Living. 3 Trip rates are calculated based on ITE Trip Generation (11th Edition) average rates. Quantity Units Weekday2 SANDAG - Condominium (or any multi-family 6-20 DU/acre) Summer Saturday3 ITE 215 Single-Family Attached Housing Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Midday Peak Hour Midday Peak Hour Weekday2 SANDAG - Convalescent/Nursing (56 Beds) Notes: 1 GFA = Gross Floor Area 2 Trip rates are calculated based on SANDAG's Brief Guid of Vehicular Trip Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (April 2002) 3 Trip rates are calculated based on ITE Trip Generation (11th Edition) average rates. Quantity Units Weekday2 SANDAG - Sit-Down, High Turnover Restaurant (less 12% pass-by trips) Daily Total Project Trips PM Peak HourDailyAM Peak Hour Midday Peak Hour Summer Saturday3 ITE 930 Fast Casual Restaurant Land Use Category Summer Saturday3 ITE 245 Assisted Living (40,000 square feet) Ǧ Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Land Use Category Notes: 1 DU = Dwelling Units 2 Trip rates are calculated based on SANDAG's Brief Guid of Vehicular Trip Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (April 2002) 3 Trip rates are calculated based on ITE Trip Generation (11th Edition) average rates . Quantity Units Weekday2 SANDAG - Single-Family Detached (Average 3-6 DU/acre) Summer Saturday3 ITE 210 Single-Family Detached Housing Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Midday Peak Hour Land Use Category Total Project Trips Notes: 1 GFA = Gross Floor Area 2 Trip rates are calculated based on SANDAG's Brief Guid of Vehicular Trip Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (April 2002) 3 Trip rates are calculated based on ITE Trip Generation (11th Edition) average rates . Total Project Trips Notes: 1 DU = Dwelling Units 2 Trip rates are calculated based on SANDAG's Brief Guid of Vehicular Trip Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (April 2002) 3 Trip rates are calculated based on ITE Trip Generation (11th Edition) fitted curve equations. Quantity Units Weekday2 SANDAG - Quality Restaurant (1.925 square feet) Summer Saturday3 ITE 931 Fine Dining Restaurant (104 Seats) Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Land Use Category Midday Peak Hour Total Project Trips Cumulative_Project_Volumes.xlsxMay 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 68 of 349 3060 STATE STREET RESTAURANT INBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 20% OUTBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 20% CARLSBAD BY THE SEA SUMMERHOUSE INBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 50%20% OUTBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 20%50% CHINQUAPIN COASTAL HOMES INBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 20%80% OUTBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 50%50% GARFIELD BEACH HOMES INBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 40%20% OUTBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 60% VIGILUCCI'S SEAFOOD & STEAKHOUSE INBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 40%40% OUTBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 40%40% May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 69 of 349 3060 STATE STREET RESTAURANT AM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Summer Saturday INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 5 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CARLSBAD BY THE SEA SUMMERHOUSE AM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 4 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 PM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 3 0 1 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Summer Saturday INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 3 0 3 7 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 CHINQUAPIN COASTAL HOMES AM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 PM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 Summer Saturday INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 GARFIELD BEACH HOMES AM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 1 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 3 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Summer Saturday INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 4 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VIGILUCCI'S SEAFOOD & STEAKHOUSE AM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 0 4 4 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 Summer Saturday INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 0 8 8 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 70 of 349 Appendix D: MMLOS Worksheets May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 71 of 349 No Build Alternative Conditions – Existing May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 72 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes No * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):55 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?No No * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?No No * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Number of Through Lanes:22 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)No No Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'greater than 5' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?No No Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? Yes Yes Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Blvd (North Leg) Redwood Ave Tamarack Ave Coastals 18,500 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 70 | C NB SCORE | LOS 70 | C SB SCORE | LOS May require improvements and upgrades to fully support CAP goals! X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 73 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 68 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 00 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Blvd (North Leg) Redwood Ave Tamarack Ave Coastals 18,500 95 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X _____ *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 74 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?No No * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):56 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?No No * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?No No * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Number of Through Lanes:22 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)No No Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?No No Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? No No Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Blvd (South Leg) Tamarack Ave Sequoia Ave Coastals 21,400 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 45 | F NB SCORE | LOS 55 | E SB SCORE | LOS May require improvements and upgrades to fully support CAP goals! X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 75 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 66 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 42 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Blvd (South Leg) Tamarack Ave Sequoia Ave Coastals 21,400 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 76 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction EB WB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):55 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?No No * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?No No * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Number of Through Lanes:11 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)Yes Yes Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?No No Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? Yes Yes Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Tamarack Ave (East Leg) Carlsbad Blvd Garfield St Neighborhood Connector 6,900 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 80 | B EB SCORE | LOS 80 | B WB SCORE | LOS May require improvements and upgrades to fully support CAP goals! X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 77 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction EB WB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 66 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 00 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Tamarack Ave (East Leg) Carlsbad Blvd Garfield St Neighborhood Connector 6,900 95 | A EB SCORE | LOS 95 | A WB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 78 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?No No * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):55 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?No No * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?No No * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Number of Through Lanes:22 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)No No Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?No No Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? No No Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Blvd (Bridge Segment) Sequoia Ave South End of Bridge Coastals 21,400 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 45 | F NB SCORE | LOS 45 | F SB SCORE | LOS May require improvements and upgrades to fully support CAP goals! X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 79 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 66 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 44 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Blvd (Bridge Segment) Sequoia Ave South End of Bridge Coastals 21,400 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 80 of 349 Signalized 3- & 4-Lane Intersection Alternatives Conditions – Existing May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 81 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):510 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?Yes Yes * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Number of Through Lanes:22 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)No No Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'greater than 5' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?Yes Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes No Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? Yes Yes Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Boulevard (North Leg) Tamarack Avenue Redwood Avenue Identity (adjacent to residential) 18,500 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 95 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 82 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?Yes Yes Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 66 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 02 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Boulevard (North Leg) Tamarack Avenue Redwood Avenue Identity (adjacent to residential) 18,500 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X __ *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 83 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):10 7 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?Yes Yes * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Number of Through Lanes:22 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)No No Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?Yes Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes Yes Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? Yes Yes Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Boulevard (South Leg) Tamarack Avenue Sequoia Avenue Coastals 21,400 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 84 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?Yes Yes Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 66 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 00 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Boulevard (South Leg) Tamarack Avenue Sequoia Avenue Coastals 21,400 90 | A NB SCORE | LOS 90 | A SB SCORE | LOS X __ *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 85 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction EB WB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):66 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?No No * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Number of Through Lanes:11 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)Yes Yes Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?No Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes Yes Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? Yes Yes Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Tamarack Avenue (East Leg) Carlsbad Boulevard Garfield Street Neighborhood Connector 6,900 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A EB SCORE | LOS 100 | A WB SCORE | LOS May require improvements and upgrades to fully support CAP goals! X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 86 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction EB WB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 77 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 00 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Tamarack Avenue (East Leg) Carlsbad Boulevard Garfield Street Neighborhood Connector 6,900 95 | A EB SCORE | LOS 95 | A WB SCORE | LOS X __ *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 87 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):511 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?Yes Yes * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Number of Through Lanes:21 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)Yes Yes Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes Yes Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? No No Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?Yes Yes Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment-3-Ln Alt) Sequoia Ave South End of Bridge Coastals 21,400 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 95 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 88 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?Yes Yes Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 66 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 23 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment-3-Ln Alt) Sequoia Ave South End of Bridge Coastals 21,400 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 89 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):511 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?Yes Yes * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Number of Through Lanes:21 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)No No Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes Yes Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? No No Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?Yes Yes Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment-4-Ln Alt) Sequoia Ave South End of Bridge Coastals 21,400 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 85 | B NB SCORE | LOS 95 | A SB SCORE | LOS X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 90 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?Yes Yes Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 66 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 20 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment-4-Ln Alt) Sequoia Ave South End of Bridge Coastals 21,400 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 90 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 91 of 349 Roundabout Intersection Alternative Conditions - Existing May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 92 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):10 10 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?Yes Yes * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Number of Through Lanes:11 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)Yes Yes Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'greater than 5' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?Yes Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes Yes Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? No No Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Boulevard (North Leg) Tamarack Avenue Redwood Avenue Identity (adjacent to residential) 18,500 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 93 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 87 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 33 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Boulevard (North Leg) Tamarack Avenue Redwood Avenue Identity (adjacent to residential) 18,500 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 94 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):10 14 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?Yes Yes * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Number of Through Lanes:11 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)Yes Yes Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?Yes Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes Yes Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? No No Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Boulevard (South Leg) Tamarack Avenue Sequoia Avenue Coastals 21,400 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 95 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 78 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 33 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Boulevard (South Leg) Tamarack Avenue Sequoia Avenue Coastals 21,400 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 96 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction EB WB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):66 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?No No * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Number of Through Lanes:11 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)Yes Yes Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?Yes Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes Yes Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? No No Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Tamarack Avenue (East Leg) Carlsbad Boulevard Garfield Street Neighborhood Connector 6,900 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A EB SCORE | LOS 100 | A WB SCORE | LOS May require improvements and upgrades to fully support CAP goals! X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 97 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction EB WB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 5.5 6 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 00 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Tamarack Avenue (East Leg) Carlsbad Boulevard Garfield Street Neighborhood Connector 6,900 95 | A EB SCORE | LOS 95 | A WB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 98 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):13 14 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?Yes Yes * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Number of Through Lanes:11 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)Yes Yes Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes Yes Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? No No Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?Yes Yes Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment) Sequoia Ave South End of Bridge Coastals 21,400 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 99 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 88 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 33 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment) Sequoia Ave South End of Bridge Coastals 21,400 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 100 of 349 Appendix E: Collision Data May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 101 of 349 Public Works Department/Traffic & Mobility Division From 1/1/2008 to 8/17/2021 Total Collisions: 15 44425 Injury Collisions: 12 Fatal Collisions: 0Text1Text3Text4Text5Text8Text10 Text11 Text20 Text21 Text22 City Text6 Text7 Text9 Text18 Text19 Text12 Text13 Text14 Party No Party Type Dir of Travel Movement Gender Age Veh Type Sobriety Assoc Factor Safety Equip Special Info15-05955 8/19/2015 11:35 WednesdayCARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 137'Direction: South Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Unsafe Starting or Backing 22106 Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver North Stopped In Road Male Age: 24 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In UseParty 2 Driver North Proceeding Straight Male Age: 58 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use15-08388 11/21/2015 03:31 Saturday REDWOOD AV - CARLSBAD BL 15'Direction: East Dark - Street Lights Clear Pty at Fault:In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Hit ObjectFixed Object Unknown Hit & Run: Misdemeanor Property Damage Only # Inj: 0 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver East Making U Turn Not Stated Age: Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: Impairment Not Known Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not Stated16-02044 3/26/2016 09:02 Saturday CARLSBAD BL - REDWOOD AV 20'Direction: North Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Unsafe Speed 22350 Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver South Proceeding Straight Female Age: 85 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In UseParty 2 Driver South Stopped In Road Male Age: 51 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use 16-03420 5/14/2016 10:06 Saturday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 0'Direction: Not Stated Daylight Cloudy Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge BroadsideOther Motor Vehicle Traffic Signals and Signs 21453A Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver South Proceeding Straight Female Age: 26 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: Inattention Cell Phone Not In Use Party 2 Driver East Proceeding Straight Male Age: 61 Veh Type: Pickup Truck Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use16-06087 8/29/2016 20:08 Monday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 3'Direction: North Dark - Street Lights Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Other Bicycle Driving Under Influence 212005 Hit & Run: No Other Visible Injury # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Bicyclist South Traveling Wrong Way Male Age: 29 Veh Type: Bicycle Sobriety: HBD Under Influence Assoc Factor: Violation Not StatedParty 2 Driver West Making Right Turn Female Age: 23 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not Stated 16-06738 9/25/2016 20:31 Sunday TAMARACK AV - GARFIELD ST 0'Direction: Not Stated Dark - Street Lights Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge BroadsideOther Motor Vehicle Traffic Signals and Signs 22450A Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver East Proceeding Straight Female Age: 39 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use Party 2 Driver South Proceeding Straight Female Age: 34 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use17-03791 6/13/2017 02:00 Tuesday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 400'Direction: South Dark - Street Lights Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Hit ObjectFixed Object Driving Under Influence 23152A Hit & Run: No Other Visible Injury # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver North Other Unsafe Turning Female Age: 20 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HBD Under Influence Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not Stated17-05644 9/2/2017 18:00 Saturday CARLSBAD BL - SEQUOIA AV 81'Direction: North Daylight Cloudy Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Unsafe Speed 22350 Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 2 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver North Proceeding Straight Male Age: 29 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In UseParty 2 Driver North Stopped In Road Male Age: 48 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use 19-00295 1/14/2019 13:20 WednesdayCARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 60'Direction: SOUTH Daylight Raining Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Other Motor Vehicle Unsafe Speed 22350 Hit & Run: Other Visible Injury # Inj: 3 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver NORTH Proceeding Straight F Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap Belt Used Cell Phone Not In UseParty 2 Driver NORTH Stopped In Road F Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap Belt Used Cell Phone Not In UseParty 3 Driver NORTH Proceeding Straight F Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap Belt Used Cell Phone Not In Use19-05635 8/22/2019 14:02 Thursday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 0'Direction: Not Stated Daylight Cloudy Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge SideswipeOther Motor Vehicle Improper Turning 22100A Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver NORTH Making Right Turn M Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In UseParty 2 Driver NORTH Making Right Turn M Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: Under Drug Influence Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use 19-06000 9/8/2019 08:45 Sunday CARLSBAD BL - SEQUOIA AV 57'Direction: SOUTH Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge SideswipeMotor Vehicle on Other Roadway Improper Turning 22107 Hit & Run: Misdemeanor Property Damage Only # Inj: 0 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver SOUTH Changing Lanes Not Stated Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: Impairment Not Known Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not Stated Party 2 Driver SOUTH Proceeding Straight F Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use20-03812 6/27/2020 09:36 Saturday CARLSBAD BL - SEQUOIA AV 105'Direction: SOUTH Daylight Cloudy Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Other Than Driver Hit & Run: No Other Visible Injury # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver NORTH Proceeding Straight F Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: Other Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In UseParty 2 Driver NORTH Stopped In Road M Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use 21-00313 1/13/2021 16:45 WednesdayTAMARACK AV - CARLSBAD BL 79'Direction: EAST Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Unsafe Starting or Backing 22106 Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver WEST Backing F Age: 63 Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Unknown Not Stated Party 2 Driver WEST Stopped In Road F Age: 41 Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Not Stated21-01756 3/18/2021 18:11 Thursday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 33'Direction: SOUTH Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Driving Under Influence 23152(a)Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver NORTH Proceeding Straight F Age: 24 Veh Type: Sobriety: HBD Under Influence Assoc Factor: Violation Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In UseParty 2 Driver NORTH Stopped In Road M Age: 56 Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use 21-03637 5/30/2021 18:30 Sunday REDWOOD AV - CARLSBAD BL 0'Direction: Not Stated Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge SideswipeParked Motor Vehicle Improper Turning 22107 Hit & Run: No Property Damage Only # Inj: 0 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver EAST Making Right Turn M Age: 31 Veh Type: Sobriety: Under Drug Influence Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use Party 2 Parked Vehicle WEST Parked Not Stated Age: 0 Veh Type: Sobriety: Not Applicable Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not StatedParty 3 Parked Vehicle WEST Parked Not Stated Age: 0 Veh Type: Sobriety: Not Applicable Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not Stated May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 102 of 349 Collision Summary Report City of Carlsbad Public Works Department/Traffic & Mobility Division 7/25/22 From 8/21/2021 to 7/25/2022 Total Collisions: 3 Injury Collisions: 1 Fatal Collisions: 0 CARLSBAD BL & TAMARACK AV Page 1 of 1 21-07741 11/19/2021 09:30 Friday Rear-End Parked Motor Vehicle CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV Driving Under Influence 27'Direction: SOUTH Property Damage Only # Inj: 0 # Killed: 023152(a)Hit & Run: No Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 Cell Phone Not In UseLap/Shoulder Harness Used Age: 56M Assoc Factor: Violation Proceeding Straight Sobriety: HBD Under InfluencVeh Type: NORTDriverParty 1 2015 CHEVROLET MALIBU Passenger Car, Station Wagon, Jeep Cell Phone Not In Use Age: 0Not Sta Assoc Factor: None Apparent Stopped In Road Sobriety: HNBDVeh Type: NORTParked VehicleParty 2 2020 FORD EXPLORER Passenger Car, Station Wagon, Jeep 21-07914 11/25/2021 14:25 Thursday Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV Unsafe Speed 13'Direction: SOUTH Property Damage Only # Inj: 0 # Killed: 022350Hit & Run: Misde Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 Not Stated Age: 0Not Sta Assoc Factor: None Apparent Proceeding Straight Sobriety: Impairment Not KnoVeh Type: NORTDriverParty 1 1999 MAZDA PROTEGE Passenger Car, Station Wagon, Jeep Cell Phone Not In UseLap/Shoulder Harness Used Age: 67F Assoc Factor: None Apparent Stopped In Road Sobriety: HNBDVeh Type: NORTDriverParty 2 2021 LEXUS RX350 Passenger Car, Station Wagon, Jeep 22-00200 1/10/2022 15:42 Monday Sideswipe Other Motor Vehicle CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV Improper Turning 181'Direction: NORTH Other Visible Injury # Inj: 2 # Killed: 022107Hit & Run: No Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 Cell Phone Not In UseLap/Shoulder Harness Used Age: 28F Assoc Factor: Violation Proceeding Straight Sobriety: HNBDVeh Type: SOUTDriverParty 1 2018 LEXUS RX350 Passenger Car, Station Wagon, Jeep Cell Phone Not In UseLap/Shoulder Harness Used Age: 65M Assoc Factor: None Apparent Slowing / Stopping Sobriety: HNBDVeh Type: SOUTDriverParty 2 2004 LINCOLN NAVIGATOR Sport Utility Vehicle Settings for Query: Street: CARLSBAD BL Cross Street: TAMARACK AV Sorted By: Date and Time May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 103 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 1 of 19 Memorandum To: Lauren Ferrell, PE, QSD/P - City of Carlsbad Cc: Nathan Schmidt - City of Carlsbad From: Mario Tambellini, PE, TE Nicole Scappaticci, PE Date: December 2, 2022 Subject: Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis INTRODUCTION This memorandum has been prepared to present a mobility analysis for the proposed Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project (Project) located in the City of Carlsbad, California (City). This analysis evaluates vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian modes of travel through the study area. The mobility analysis includes evaluation of intersection level of service (LOS), queueing, operations, multimodal operations LOS (MMLOS), and safety. Four (4) Project alternatives are evaluated and compared under baseline and future conditions. This memorandum includes the following sections: •Existing Study Facilities •Project Alternatives and Study Analysis Scenarios •Analysis Methodology •Intersection Operations •Multimodal Level of Service •Safety Evaluation •Project Alternatives Evaluation •Conclusion EXISTING STUDY FACILITIES STUDY INTERSECTION This analysis focuses on the intersection Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue. The Project location and study limits are shown in Figure 1. Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue is currently signalized and contains pedestrian crosswalks on the north and east legs. The northbound and southbound approaches currently include protected left-turn phasing and the eastbound and westbound approaches include split phasing. The study area consists of the following roadway segments that make up the four approaches of the study intersection: Carlsbad Boulevard: A four-lane roadway that runs north-south between the City limits. The posted speed limit is 30 miles per hour (mph) north of Tamarack Avenue and 35 mph south of Tamarack Avenue. Based on the City of Carlsbad General Plan Mobility Element (Mobility Element), Carlsbad Boulevard is designated as an Identity Street north of Tamarack Avenue and as a Coastal Street south of Tamarack Avenue. The southbound approach of the study intersection includes two through lanes, a southbound left-turn pocket, Exhibit 2 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 104 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 2 of 19 and a signal-controlled channelized southbound right-turn lane. The northbound approach includes one through lane, a shared through-right turn lane, and a northbound left-turn pocket. Tamarack Avenue: Within the study area, Tamarack Avenue is a two-lane roadway with a two-way left-turn lane that generally runs east-west between Carlsbad Boulevard and College Boulevard. The posted speed limit is 30 mph west of Skyline Road and 35 mph east of Skyline Road. Tamarack Avenue forms the westbound approach of the study intersection and contains one shared through-right turn lane and a left- turn pocket. Based on the Mobility Element, Tamarack Avenue is designated as a Neighborhood Connector Street. Beach Access Road: The Beach Access Road is a local access road that provides access to a Tamarack State Beach parking lot. There is no posted speed on this road, however, speeds can be assumed to be 25 mph or less. The Beach Access Road forms the eastbound approach to the study intersection and contains a shared through-left turn lane, and a stop-controlled channelized right-turn lane. Redwood Avenue: Redwood Avenue is a two-lane east-west roadway that forms a full access side-street stop-controlled intersection with Carlsbad Boulevard approximately 300 feet north of Tamarack Avenue. Based on the Mobility Element, Redwood Avenue is designated as a Village Street. Sequoia Avenue: Sequoia Avenue is a two-lane east-west roadway that forms a full access side-street stop- controlled intersection with Carlsbad Boulevard approximately 300 feet south of Tamarack Avenue. Based on the Mobility Element, Sequoia Avenue is designated as a Local/Neighborhood Street MMLOS STUDY SEGMENTS MMLOS analysis was performed for the following roadway segments: • Carlsbad Boulevard between Tamarack Avenue and Sequoia Avenue (South Leg) • Carlsbad Boulevard between Redwood Avenue and Tamarack Avenue (North Leg) • Tamarack Avenue between Carlsbad Boulevard and Garfield Street (East Leg) • Carlsbad Boulevard between Sequoia Avenue and the south end of the Bridge (Bridge) May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 105 of 349 Study Area and Project LocationCarlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Mobility AnalysisCarlsbad, CA December 2022\\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\_GIS\Tasks\Location_and_Facilities_Map.mxd 9/1/2022 12:31:42 PM nscappaticci Figure 1 NORTH 0 500250 Feet Legend !(Study Intersection* * May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 106 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 4 of 19 PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLE, AND TRANSIT FACILITIES Existing Pedestrian Facilities Within the study area, sidewalks exist along both sides of Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue. Sidewalk along the west side of Carlsbad Boulevard south of Tamarack Avenue is relatively narrow and buffered by a guardrail. Sidewalk along the west side of Carlsbad Boulevard north of Tamarack Avenue is buffered by a landscaped area. Carlsbad Boulevard & Tamarack Avenue contains pedestrian crosswalks with push buttons, countdown signal heads, and curb ramps on the north and east legs of the intersection. Existing Bicycle Facilities The City of Carlsbad General Plan Mobility Element and Carlsbad Bikeway Master Plan references three (3) bikeway facility types, consistent with Caltrans definitions, as follows: • Class I Bikeway (bike path) – provides a separated corridor that is not served by streets and highways and is away from the influence of parallel streets. Class I bikeways are for non-vehicle use only with opportunities for direct access and recreational benefits, right-of-way for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians, and cross flow conflicts are minimized. • Class II Bikeway (bike lane) – provides a delineated right-of-way assigned to bicyclists to enable more predictable movements, accommodating bicyclists through corridors where insufficient room exists for side-by-side sharing of existing streets by motorists and bicyclists. • Class III Bikeway (bike route) – shared facility that serves either continuity to other bicycle facilities or designates preferred routes through high demand corridors. Class II bikeways (bike lanes) exist on the following facilities: • Northbound and southbound Carlsbad Boulevard within the study area. • Eastbound and westbound Tamarack Avenue within the study area. Existing Transit Facilities Transit in the City of Carlsbad includes North County Transit District (NCTD) transit service, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) paratransit service, the COASTER commuter rail, and Amtrak rail service. Bus stops exist within the immediate study area on northbound Carlsbad Boulevard, approximately 170 feet north of Tamarack Avenue, and on southbound Carlsbad Boulevard within the porkchop island on the west leg of the intersection. Both stops contain signage and benches, however, there are currently no pedestrian facilities providing access to the stop on southbound Carlsbad Boulevard. The bus stops are serviced by Route 101 of the NCTD (referred to as the “BREEZE”). Currently, Route 101 provides service along Highway 101 between Oceanside Transit Center in Oceanside and UTC Transit Center in San Diego. Service is provided seven days a week with approximately 30-minute headways throughout the day and hourly headways in the evenings. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES AND STUDY ANALYSIS SCENARIOS PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES This analysis studies the following four Project alternatives: No Build: This alternative represents a baseline condition in which no improvements have been made to the study intersection. Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative: This alternative represents a signalized condition in which the following improvements have been made: • New striping along Carlsbad Boulevard between Hemlock Avenue and just south of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon bridge, along Tamarack Avenue approximately 175 feet east of Carlsbad Boulevard, and along the Beach Access Road approximately 100 feet west of Carlsbad Boulevard. May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 107 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 5 of 19 • Addition of high visibility pedestrian crossings on all four legs of the study intersection and on the east leg of the Carlsbad Boulevard & Sequoia Avenue intersection. • Bulb-outs at pedestrian curb ramps. • A parking lane and buffered bike lane on the west side of Carlsbad Boulevard north of Tamarack Avenue. • Green-striped bike lane area. • A new midblock pedestrian crossing with Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) on Carlsbad Boulevard, approximately 680 feet south of the study intersection. • New pedestrian curb ramps at all crossings on the study intersection and on the east leg of the Carlsbad Boulevard & Sequoia Avenue intersection. • Removal of the southbound channelized right-turn lane and conversion of one southbound through lane to a shared-through right lane. • Bus stop pullouts on Carlsbad Boulevard north and south of Tamarack Avenue. • Reduction of southbound Carlsbad Boulevard to one lane just before the proposed midblock crossing. • Signal modification to include pedestrian phases for the west and south legs. The signal is assumed to remain actuated uncoordinated. Under the Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative, the intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard and Redwood Avenue would remain full-access, however, the intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard and Sequoia Avenue would be converted to right-in/right-out only. Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternative: This alternative represents a signalized condition that consists of all the improvements included in the Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative but omits the lane reduction on southbound Carlsbad Boulevard south of Tamarack Avenue. Carlsbad Boulevard would remain a 4-lane corridor throughout the project limits. Roundabout Intersection Alternative: This alternative consists of all the improvements included in the Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative, plus additional buffered bike lanes and wider sidewalks, but would construct a single lane roundabout at the study intersection. Carlsbad Boulevard would narrow to two lanes starting at Cherry Avenue and would widen back to four lanes south of the bridge. This alternative assumes installation of a metering signal on the eastbound approach (west leg) with queue detection on the northbound approach (south leg) located approximately 500 feet south of the yield line. The intersections of Carlsbad Boulevard with Redwood Avenue and Sequoia Avenue would remain full access. The three “improved” Project alternatives are shown in Attachment A. STUDY ANALYSIS SCENARIOS The Study intersection was evaluated under the following scenarios: • Existing Conditions: Existing traffic volumes from counts. • Cumulative Conditions: A near-term scenario representing existing traffic volumes plus traffic projected to be generated from approved and reasonably foreseeable pending projects that are expected to influence the study area and intersection. • Horizon Year 2035 Conditions: a future year scenario based on growth found in the Transportation Forecast Information Center (TFIC) as part of the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) ABM2+/2021 Regional Transportation Demand Model (RTDM). The study intersection was evaluated under the following time periods: • Typical Weekday AM peak hour • Typical Weekday PM peak hour • Summer Weekend (Saturday) midday peak hour May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 108 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 6 of 19 TRAFFIC VOLUMES Existing Traffic Volumes Vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian counts were collected at all existing study intersections during weekday AM (7AM-9AM) and PM (4PM-6PM) peak periods and weekend midday (11AM-1PM) peak periods. Intersection counts were collected on Thursday, May 12, 2022, when school was in session, as well as during two (2) summer Saturdays, June 18, 2022 and June 25, 2022. The two summer Saturday counts were taken to satisfy the City’s Local Coastal Program requirement that quantitative analyses be prepared using data from peak beach use periods collected during two weekends between Memorial Day and Labor Day. Both days of summer Saturday midday intersection counts were averaged for use in this analysis. AM and PM peak period counts for the intersections of Carlsbad Boulevard with Redwood Avenue and Sequoia Avenue were provided by the City and were collected on Tuesday, August 27, 2019. The 2019 counts at Redwood Avenue and Sequoia Avenue were adjusted/balanced to match new 2022 counts at the adjacent Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue intersection. 24-hr Average daily traffic (ADT) counts were collected on the segment of Carlsbad Boulevard south of Tamarack Avenue on Thursday, June 30, 2022, and during two (2) summer Saturdays, June 18, 2022 and June 25, 2022 for use in the MMLOS analysis. Traffic volume count sheets are included in Attachment B. Cumulative Conditions Traffic Volumes Cumulative conditions represent a future condition where traffic from approved and reasonably foreseeable pending projects is added to Existing volumes on the study roadway network. A list of cumulative projects was provided by City staff and is shown in Table 1 below. Trip generation, distribution, and assignment for each project is included in Attachment C. Table 1. Cumulative Projects Project Address Description 3060 State Street Restaurant 3060 State Street 1,358 sf restaurant & outdoor patio converted from existing vacant commercial building. Carlsbad by the Sea Summerhouse 2710 Ocean Street Consolidation of 5 Parcels for new 40,000 sq ft professional services building for memory care and independent living. Chinquapin Coastal Homes 330 Chinquapin Avenue Three triplex buildings containing nine airspace condominium units. Garfield Beach Homes 3570 Garfield Street Construction of 12 single family dwelling units. Vigilucci’s Seafood & Steakhouse 3878 Carlsbad Boulevard Addition of a 1,925 sf to the patio area to accommodate 104 seats for dining use. Horizon Year (2035) Conditions Traffic Volumes Horizon Year conditions represent a year 2035 condition with traffic volumes developed using SANDAG RTDM forecasts at the Project location. The current ABM2+/2021 model forecasts for 2016 and 2035 were used to find yearly growth rates for each leg of Carlsbad Boulevard & Tamarack Avenue. The model indicated no growth or negative growth at the intersection, ranging from -0.71% to 0.0% per year. Growth rates were applied to Cumulative conditions traffic volumes at the intersection between 2022 and 2035 to determine Horizon Year conditions traffic volumes. SANDAG RTDM ABM2+/2021 forecasts for 2016 and 2035 are contained in Attachment D. Intersection volumes at Carlsbad Boulevard & Tamarack Avenue under weekday AM, PM, and Summer Saturday conditions for Existing, Cumulative, and Horizon Year scenarios are shown in Figures 2 and 3. Note May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 109 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 7 of 19 that under the Signalized 3-Lane and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternatives, the westbound left-turn volumes and southbound left-turn volumes at the Carlsbad Boulevard and Sequoia Avenue intersection are re-routed to the Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue intersection. Figure 2. Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Figure 3. Summer Saturday Midday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE THRESHOLDS Traffic operations in this study have been quantified through the determination of “Level of Service” (LOS). Level of Service is a qualitative measure of traffic operating conditions, whereby a letter grade “A” through “F” is assigned to an intersection or roadway segment, representing progressively worsening traffic Existing AM(PM) Cumulative AM(PM) Horizon Year AM(PM) Existing SAT Cumulative SAT Horizon Year SAT May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 110 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 8 of 19 operations. LOS “A” represents free-flow conditions with little to no delays, while LOS “F” represents jammed or grid-lock conditions. Intersection LOS has been calculated for the roundabout and signalized intersection control types using methods documented in the Transportation Research Board Publication Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition (HCM). For signalized intersections and roundabouts, the intersection delays and LOS reported are the “average” values for the whole intersection. The delay based HCM 6th Edition LOS criteria are outlined in Table 2. Table 2. HCM 6th Edition Intersection LOS Thresholds Level of Service Description Intersection Control Delay for Signals and Roundabouts (seconds/vehicle) A Free-flow conditions with negligible to minimal delays. < 10 B Good progression with slight delays. > 10 – 20 C Relatively higher delays. > 20 – 35 D Somewhat congested conditions with longer but tolerable delays. > 35 – 55 E Congested conditions with significant delays. > 55 – 80 F Jammed or grid-lock type operating conditions. > 80 Source: HCM 6th Edition Exhibit 20-2. This analysis adheres to the City of Carlsbad Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (April 2018). Table 3- 1 of the General Plan Mobility Element indicates that based on the typologies of the three main approaches of Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue, the intersection is not subject to vehicular LOS standards. However, for the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that City roadways and intersections should strive to maintain LOS D or better operations during peak periods, when possible. SIMTRAFFIC SOFTWARE PARAMETERS SimTraffic 11 microsimulation software was used to evaluate the study intersections under the signalized No Build, Signalized 3-Lane, and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection alternatives. SimTraffic software was chosen because it can more accurately model the interaction of the study intersection with the closely spaced adjacent intersections of Redwood Avenue and Sequoia Avenue, as well as provide a more nuanced evaluation of the differences between the Signalized 3-Lane and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternative operations. The model network included the side-street stop-controlled intersections of Carlsbad Boulevard with Redwood Avenue and Sequoia Avenue. Existing signal timing data at the study intersection was provided by City staff. Ten (10), 1-hour model runs (with a 10-minute warm-up period) were run and averaged to obtain 95th percentile queueing results and intersection delay at all study intersections. SIDRA SOFTWARE PARAMETERS Sidra 9 roundabout analysis software was used to analyze the Roundabout Intersection Alternative. The HCM 6 Capacity Methodology in Sidra was used to analyze the intersection and includes various calibration factors. The Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment calibration factor is a parameter that can be adjusted to avoid underestimation of capacities at low circulating flows and for Unbalanced Flow conditions. Higher values result in reduced follow-up headway and critical gap values (increased capacity). Page 244 of the Sidra Intersection 9 User Guide states that Unbalanced Flow occurs at a roundabout when the circulating flow mostly originates from one (dominant) approach and is highly queued on the approach before entering the roundabout. Unbalanced Flow is projected to occur under PM peak hour conditions, with the northbound approach being the dominant approach. This analysis utilized a “High” Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment factor as it better accounts for the projected Unbalanced Flow conditions and reflects local driver familiarity with roundabouts due to the recently constructed and planned roundabouts on Carlsbad Boulevard at State May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 111 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 9 of 19 Street and Canon Road, respectively. In addition, the “High” Entry/Circulating Flow Adjustment factor results in Critical Gap and Follow-Up Headway values that are generally in line with measured values from multiple California sites presented in the Roundabout Geometric Design Guidance Final Report (Prepared for Caltrans by the University of Nevada, Reno, June 2007). This analysis also checked the “SIDRA Model for Unbalanced Flow Conditions for HCM 6” option in the Options tab to better model Unbalanced Flow conditions consistent with recommendations in the Sidra Intersection 9 User Guide. GENERAL MODELING ASSUMPTIONS A peak hour factor of 1.0 was used for all model scenarios in order to design the project to peak hour conditions instead of peak 15-minute conditions, and consistent with existing observed study area peak hour factors that are close to 1.0. Pedestrian and bicycle volumes were included in all SimTraffic and Sidra models in order to capture the effects of the relatively large multimodal volumes. QUEUEING ANALYSIS 95th Percentile queuing for all movements at Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue was evaluated against existing and proposed available storage space using SimTraffic and Sidra software. Storage space for turn lanes was based on turn pocket length and storage space for through movement was based on the distance to the nearest cross street. MMLOS THRESHOLDS MMLOS provides a qualitative “grade” assigned to specified travel modes, ranging from a LOS A to LOS F. As outlined in the City’s General Plan, LOS A reflects a high service standard for a travel mode (e.g., outstanding characteristics and experience for that mode) and LOS F would reflect a poor service standard for a travel mode (e.g. congestion for vehicles, no bicycle, pedestrian, or transit facilities, etc.) MMLOS evaluates the safety and quality of access and mobility for pedestrian, bicyclist, and transit users using methods documented in the Carlsbad General Plan Mobility Element, Chapter 3. The General Plan Mobility Element classifies and identifies street typology for each street in the City. As published in the General Plan Mobility Element, the MMLOS for the various travel modes were evaluated according to the following factors: • Vehicular LOS: Level of service was determined by the most recent version of the HCM. This methodology evaluates vehicles based on their freedom to maneuver and overall delay experienced at intersections. • Pedestrian LOS: Level of service was evaluated using the Carlsbad MMLOS method. This method evaluates the quality of the pedestrian system (e.g., number of vehicle lanes that need to be crossed and the speed of adjacent traffic) and the friendliness of the infrastructure at intersections (e.g. pedestrian countdown heads, dedicated pedestrian phases (e.g. a scramble phase), curb extensions, refuge median). • Bicycle LOS: Level of service was evaluated using the Carlsbad MMLOS method. This method evaluates the quality of the bicycle system (e.g., bicycle route, bicycle lanes, or bicycle pathway; presence of bicycle buffers from the vehicle travel way), the amenities of the system (e.g., presence of bicycle parking), and the friendliness of the infrastructure (e.g., bicycle detection at intersections, pavement conditions, presence of vehicle parking). • Transit LOS: Level of service was evaluated using the Carlsbad MMLOS method. This method evaluates the transit vehicle right-of-way (e.g., dedicated or shared, signal priority), hours and frequency of service (e.g., weekday/weekend hours, peak period headway); performance (e.g., on- time or late); amenities and safety (e.g., lighting, covered stop, bench, on-board bike/surfboard storage); and connectivity (e.g., to other transit routes, employment areas, schools, visitor attractions, and other major destinations). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 112 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 10 of 19 The Carlsbad MMLOS Tool is an Excel based qualitative mobility analysis spreadsheet and was used to complete the MMLOS analysis for the Project. The Carlsbad MMLOS Tool calculates a score and corresponding LOS for each direction of travel on a study segment. The total score thresholds are outlined in Table 3. Table 3. MMLOS Thresholds Level of Service Point Score A 90 – 100 B 80 – 89 C 70 – 79 D 60 – 69 E 50 – 59 F 0 – 49 Source: City of Carlsbad General Plan: Mobility Element The City’s General Plan classifies Carlsbad Boulevard as an Identity Street north of Tamarack Avenue and a Coastal Street south of Tamarack Avenue, and Tamarack Avenue is classified as a Neighborhood Connector Street. Identity Street, Coastal Street, and Neighborhood Street typologies are subject to a MMLOS standard for the following modes: Pedestrian and Bicycle travel. Per Policy 3-P.4 in the General Plan Mobility Element, the study area pedestrian and bicycle facilities should maintain LOS D or better. As published in Table 3-1 of the City’s General Plan, Transit is not subject to a MMLOS standard. INTERSECTION OPERATIONS INTERSECTION DELAY AND LOS Intersection LOS results are shown in Table 4 for all alternatives and scenarios. As shown in Table 4, the study intersection would operate at LOS C or better under all scenarios. The SimTraffic and Sidra delay outputs are included in Attachment E. May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 113 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 11 of 19 Table 4. Carlsbad Boulevard & Tamarack Avenue Intersection LOS Alternative Control Type Peak Hour Existing Cumulative Horizon Year Delay (s/veh)1 LOS Delay (s/veh) LOS Delay (s/veh) LOS No Build Signal AM 13.9 B 13.7 B 13.3 B PM 23.7 C 24.6 C 23.6 C SAT 24.4 C 25.1 C 24.9 C 3-Lane Alt Signal AM 17.6 B 17.1 B 17.2 B PM 26.9 C 26.8 C 26.6 C SAT 30.3 C 30.8 C 29.8 C 4-Lane Alt Signal AM 17.4 B 17.8 B 17.1 B PM 26.0 C 26.9 C 25.6 C SAT 29.6 C 30.6 C 29.1 C Roundabout Roundabout AM 3.9 A 4.0 A 3.6 A PM 18.8 B 22.0 C 15.7 B SAT 13.2 B 15.5 B 12.5 B Notes: Bold values indicate LOS E or F. 1Average control delay is reported for signalized and roundabout control types. INTERSECTION QUEUEING Table 5 shows the 95th percentile queueing at each movement compared to the available storage length. In the SimTraffic model, when 95th percentile queues for the northbound and southbound through movements exceeded the available storage (i.e., the distance between Tamarack Avenue and Redwood Avenue or between Tamarack Avenue and Sequoia Avenue), through queues were calculated by combining the corresponding northbound or southbound queue lengths at the Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue intersection and the next adjacent intersection in the model. SimTraffic and Sidra queueing results are included in Attachment E. May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 114 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 12 of 19 Table 5. 95th Percentile Intersection Queueing Alternative Movement Storage (ft)1 95th Percentile Queues (ft) Existing Cumulative Horizon Year AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT No Build NBL 70 37 119 109 30 122 143 31 112 110 NBT 230 89 488 291 93 502 321 88 446 294 SBL 115 61 136 132 59 137 143 61 131 151 SBT 235 113 145 194 115 142 215 111 150 206 SBR 70 15 23 90 0 23 89 0 24 101 EBT 235 36 64 69 33 61 78 31 69 76 EBR 30 5 22 24 0 24 29 4 27 28 WBL 75 124 115 124 124 118 133 113 117 124 WBT 450 65 97 123 80 103 138 76 117 114 3-Lane Alternative NBL 115 38 133 133 39 133 129 32 119 105 NBT 230 105 539 314 98 535 332 103 495 305 SBL 97 75 162 209 78 165 213 74 167 213 SBT 235 177 209 336 166 203 348 167 222 325 EBT 235 34 64 75 34 63 75 40 59 74 EBR 30 0 7 28 4 18 26 0 4 29 WBL 93 163 138 176 169 140 178 158 127 162 WBT 450 121 126 178 143 135 194 140 108 157 4-Lane Alternative NBL 115 38 137 124 37 130 136 34 118 132 NBT 230 104 536 316 109 535 335 102 500 317 SBL 97 73 146 159 69 137 192 69 137 168 SBT 235 129 171 234 139 152 272 120 154 260 EBT 235 37 60 78 37 65 70 32 58 68 EBR 30 0 10 36 4 19 26 0 13 23 WBL 93 165 136 171 171 143 172 160 132 157 WBT 450 133 126 160 150 127 190 130 119 137 Roundabout Alternative NB 215 7 117 85 8 135 97 7 99 83 SB 220 44 24 109 46 25 122 41 23 106 EB 260 5 10 28 5 10 29 5 10 28 WB 450 23 25 28 24 25 75 21 22 61 Notes: Bold values indicate queues that exceed storage length. 1Storage reported is available queueing length within a turn pocket or the length of a through lane before nearest conflicting cross- street. 2 Where multiple lanes exist for one movement, queue reported is the highest for that movement. Left-Turn Queueing As shown in Table 5, under the Signalized 3-Lane and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternatives, queueing would exceed proposed turn pocket length for the northbound, southbound, and westbound left-turn movement during at least one peak hour under all scenarios. Minimum turn pocket lengths to accommodate maximum projected left-turn queues under the Signalized 3-Lane and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternatives are as follows: May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 115 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 13 of 19 Northbound Left-Turn Pocket Length o Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative: 135 feet o Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternative: 140 feet • Southbound Left-Turn: o Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative: 215 feet o Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternative: 195 feet • Westbound Left-Turn: o Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative: 180 feet o Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternative: 175 feet If the above turn pocket lengths are not feasible to implement based on geometric constraints, it is recommended to make the turn pockets as long as feasible. Note that as shown in Attachment A, the Signalized 3-Lane and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternatives propose removal of the existing two-way left-turn median lane on Tamarack Avenue. Leaving a portion of the existing two-way left-turn lane could also accommodate southbound left-turn queueing without lengthening the turn pocket. Northbound and Southbound Through Movement Queueing Northbound and southbound queueing are projected to exceed available storage during at least one peak hour for all scenarios under the Signalized 3-Lane and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternatives. Worst- case southbound queues under the Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative would be 348 feet long (back of queue would pass Redwood Avenue Avenue) under Cumulative Summer Saturday conditions. Worst-case southbound queues under the Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternative would be 272 feet long and are projected to be better than those under the Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative due to the fact that the lane reduction of southbound Carlsbad Avenue south of Tamarack Avenue would not occur under this Alternative. It is recommended that “Keep Clear” striping is used on Carlsbad boulevard at Redwood Avenue to allow for full access (left-turns in and out) to be maintained at Redwood Avenue. Worst-case northbound queues are projected to be 539 feet and 536 feet long under the Signalized 3-Lane and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternatives, respectively, reaching back to the northern end of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon bridge. As the intersection of Sequoia Avenue and Carlsbad Boulevard would be converted to right-in/right-out only under these Alternatives, no queueing-related improvements are recommended at the Carlsbad Boulevard & Sequoia Avenue intersection. It should be noted that under worst-case conditions, both the northbound and southbound queues were observed to clear the intersection in one cycle. Under the Roundabout Intersection Alternative, queueing on all approaches is shown to fit within the available storage space. Eastbound Queueing Eastbound shared left/through queueing is projected to fit within available storage under all scenarios and alternatives. Eastbound right-turn queueing is shown to slightly exceed the short, channelized right-turn pocket during the Existing Summer Saturday Peak Hour for the Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternative. However as there is additional storage space along the drive aisle before reaching the beach parking lot, queue storage is assumed to be adequate for this approach under all scenarios and alternatives. Queueing at Redwood Avenue and Sequoia Avenue The effect of the Project alternatives on queueing at the intersections of Carlsbad Boulevard with Redwood Avenue and Sequoia Avenue was evaluated. Redwood Avenue is proposed to remain full-access under all alternatives and Sequoia Avenue is proposed to be converted to right-in/right-out only under the Signalized 3-Lane and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternatives. Results showed that worst-case queueing at Redwood Avenue occurred during the Existing Saturday peak hour under the Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative conditions. Maximum 95th percentile westbound May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 116 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 14 of 19 and southbound left-turn queues at Redwood Avenue are projected to be 40 feet and 30 feet, respectively, which would both fit within available storage space. Results showed that worst-case queueing at Sequoia Avenue occurred during the Cumulative PM peak hour under the Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative conditions. Maximum 95th percentile westbound queues at Sequoia Avenue are projected to be 26 feet, which would fit within available storage space. As worst-case northbound left-turn queueing at Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue is projected to be 137 feet, there may not be enough space to retain the southbound left-turn pocket at Sequoia Avenue under the Signalized 3-Lane and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternatives. Therefore, it is recommended that Sequoia Avenue operate with right-in/right-out control under the Signalized 3-Lane and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternatives as proposed. However, since there would be no northbound left-turn pocket at the Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue intersection under the Roundabout Intersection Alternative, there would be adequate room to provide a southbound left- turn pocket at Sequoia Avenue under the Roundabout Intersection Alternative. Maximum 95th percentile southbound left-turn queues at Sequoia Avenue are projected to be 25 feet, which would fit within available storage. MULTIMODAL LEVEL OF SERVICE Pedestrian and Bicycle MMLOS for the three main approaches of the Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue intersection, as well as the segment of Carlsbad Boulevard between Sequoia Avenue and the south end of the bridge, were evaluated for all alternatives under Existing conditions. Cumulative and Horizon Year scenario analysis was omitted because Cumulative ADT volumes showed only a very slight increase over Existing ADTs and projected Horizon Year ADTs were lower than Existing ADTs. As such, Horizon Year and Cumulative condition MMLOS results were projected to be the same as Existing MMLOS results. In addition to roadway ADT, the City MMLOS Tool takes into account inputs such as sidewalk and bike lane widths, speed limit, presence of pedestrian and bike lane buffers, and traffic calming features such as bulb-outs and high visibility crosswalks. MMLOS was evaluated for the No Build Alternative, the Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative, the Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternative, and the Roundabout Intersection Alternative. Pedestrian LOS for the segment of Carlsbad Boulevard between Sequoia Avenue and the south end of the bridge is better under the Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative and Roundabout Intersection Alternative than under the Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternative, as the roadway would be narrower at the midblock crossing, allowing pedestrians to cross fewer lanes. Table 6 shows the pedestrian and bicycle scores and LOS for each direction of the study segments. As shown in Table 6, the Project improvement alternatives were found to provide notably better pedestrian LOS and similar or better bicycle LOS over No Build. MMLOS reports can be found in Attachment F. May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 117 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 15 of 19 Table 6. MMLOS Results Segment No Build 3-Lane Alternative 4-Lane Alternative Roundabout Alternative Pedestrian Bicycle Pedestrian Bicycle Pedestrian Bicycle Pedestrian Bicycle NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB Score LOS Score LOS Score LOS Score LOS Score LOS Score LOS Score LOS Score LOS Score LOS Score LOS Score LOS Score LOS Score LOS Score LOS Score LOS Score LOS Carlsbad Blvd (south leg) – Sequoia Ave to Tamarack Ave 45 F 55 E 100 A 100 A 100 A 100 A 90 A 90 A 100 A 100 A 90 A 90 A 100 A 100 A 100 A 100 A Carlsbad Blvd (north leg) – Tamarack Ave to Redwood Ave 70 C 70 C 95 A 100 A 95 A 100 A 100 A 100 A 85 B 100 A 100 A 100 A 100 A 100 A 100 A 100 A Tamarack Ave (east leg) – Carlsbad Blvd to Garfield St 80 B 80 B 95 A 95 A 100 A 100 A 95 A 95 A 100 A 100 A 95 A 95 A 100 A 100 A 95 A 95 A Carlsbad Blvd (bridge) – Sequoia to south end of Bridge 45 F 45 F 100 A 100 A 95 A 100 A 100 A 100 A 85 B 95 A 100 A 90 A 100 A 100 A 100 A 100 A Notes: Source: City of Carlsbad MMLOS Tool May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 118 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 16 of 19 SAFETY EVALUATION This section discusses the collision history in the vicinity of the study intersection. Approximately fourteen years of crash data (January 2008 – July 2022) were provided by the City to identify high collision locations and common collision characteristics. Table 7 summarizes the collisions in the study area and describes the collision severity (fatal, serious injury, other visible injury, complaint of pain, and property damage (PDO)) and the collision type (broadside, sideswipe, rear-end, hit object). Table 7. Project Area Crash Data Summary: Severity & Type Intersection Severity Type Primary Collision Factor Cr a s h e s Fa t a l Se r i o u s I n j u r y Ot h e r V i s i b l e I n j u r y Co m p l a i n t o f P a i n PD O Br o a d s i d e Si d e s w i p e Re a r - E n d Hi t O b j e c t Ot h e r No t S t a t e d DU I Un s a f e S p e e d Im p r o p e r T u r n i n g Un s a f e St a r t / B a c k i n g Tr a f f i c S i g n a l s & Si g n s Ot h e r Carlsbad Boulevard & Redwood Avenue 3 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 Carlsbad Boulevard & Tamarack Avenue 11 0 0 4 5 2 1 2 5 1 1 1 4 2 2 2 1 0 Carlsbad Boulevard & Sequoia Avenue 3 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 Tamarack Avenue & Garfield Street 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Total 18 0 0 5 8 5 2 4 8 2 1 1 4 4 4 2 2 2 As shown in Table 7, the majority of collisions occurred at the intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue. The most common type of collision was rear-end, followed by sideswipe collisions. The most common primary collision factors were driving under the influence, unsafe speed, improper turning, and unsafe starting or backing. Implementation of traffic calming measures proposed in the Project improvement alternatives would potentially help reduce the number of collisions caused by unsafe speed. Installation of a roundabout at Carlsbad Boulevard & Tamarack Avenue could potentially reduce the number of collisions due to Traffic Signals and Signs. Attachment G contains raw collision data for the study area. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION The Project alternatives were evaluated based on a point system associated with the lowest projected vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle LOS for each alternative, where LOS A represents 6 points, LOS B represents 5 points, LOS C represents 4 points, LOS D represents 3 points, LOS E represents 2 points, and LOS F represents 1 point. Additionally, queueing was evaluated by assigning points based on the worst-case 95th percentile queues where 0-100 feet of queueing represents 6 points, 101-200 feet represents 5 points, 201-300 feet represents 4 points, 301-400 feet represents 3 points, 401-500 feet represents 2 points, and 501+ feet represent 1 point. Table 8 provides a comparison between each alternative based on this system. As shown in Table 8, the Roundabout Intersection Alternative provides the best overall score based on vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle LOS and queueing. In addition to providing acceptable LOS and reasonable queueing, the Roundabout Intersection Alternative would also enhance the pedestrian and bicycle experience and improve safety in the study area. May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 119 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 17 of 19 Table 8. Alternatives Comparison LOS Type Points No Build 3-Lane Alt 4-Lane Alt Roundabout Vehicular LOS 4 4 4 4 Pedestrian LOS 1 6 5 6 Bicycle LOS 6 6 6 6 Worst-Case Queueing 1 1 1 5 Total 12 17 16 21 Notes: LOS A = 6 points, LOS B = 5 points, LOS C = 4 points, LOS D = 3 points, LOS E = 2 points, LOS F = 1 point Queueing: 0-100 ft = 6 points, 101-200 ft = 5 points, 201-300 ft = 4 points, 301-400 ft = 3 points, 401- 500 ft = 2 pts, 501+ ft = 1 point CONCLUSION INTERSECTION LOS The intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard & Tamarack Avenue would operate at LOS D or better under all scenarios. INTERSECTION QUEUEING Under the Signalized 3-Lane and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternatives, queueing would exceed proposed turn pocket length for the northbound, southbound, and westbound left-turn movement during at least one peak hour under all scenarios. Minimum turn pocket lengths to accommodate maximum projected left-turn queues under the Signalized 3-Lane and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternatives are as follows: o Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative: 135 feet o Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternative: 140 feet • Southbound Left-Turn: o Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative: 215 feet o Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternative: 195 feet • Westbound Left-Turn: o Signalized 3-Lane Intersection Alternative: 180 feet o Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternative: 175 feet If the above turn pocket lengths are not feasible to implement based on geometric constraints, it is recommended to make the turn pockets as long as feasible. Worst-case northbound and southbound queues under the Signalized 3-Lane and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternatives would extend to the north end of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon bridge and past Redwood Avenue, respectively. It is recommended that “Keep Clear” striping is used on Carlsbad Boulevard at Redwood Avenue to allow for full access (left-turns in and out) to be maintained at Redwood Avenue. As the intersection of Sequoia Avenue and Carlsbad Boulevard would be converted to right-in/right-out only under these Alternatives, no queueing-related improvements are recommended at the Carlsbad Boulevard & Sequoia Avenue intersection. It should be noted that under worst-case conditions, both the northbound and southbound queues were observed to clear the intersection in one cycle. Northbound Left-Turn• n: May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 120 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 18 of 19 Under the Roundabout Intersection Alternative, queueing on all approaches are shown to fit within the available storage. Redwood Avenue is proposed to remain full-access under all alternatives and Sequoia Avenue is proposed to be converted to right-in/right-out only under the Signalized 3-Lane and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternatives. Worst-case queueing at Redwood Avenue and Sequoia Avenue was shown to fit within available storage space. As worst-case northbound left-turn queueing at Carlsbad Boulevard & Tamarack Avenue is projected to be 137 feet, there may not be enough space to retain the southbound left-turn pocket at Sequoia Avenue under the Signalized 3-Lane and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternatives. Therefore, it is recommended that Sequoia Avenue operate with right-in/right-out control under the Signalized 3-Lane and Signalized 4-Lane Intersection Alternatives as proposed. However, since there would be no northbound left- turn pocket at the Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue intersection under the Roundabout Intersection Alternative, there would be adequate room to provide a southbound left-turn pocket at Sequoia Avenue under the Roundabout Intersection Alternative. Maximum 95th percentile southbound left-turn queues at Sequoia Avenue are projected to be 25 feet, which would fit within available storage. MMLOS The Project improvement alternatives were found to provide notably better pedestrian LOS and similar or better bicycle LOS over No Build conditions. SAFETY EVALUATION The majority of collisions occurred at the intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue. The most common type of collision was rear-end, followed by sideswipe collisions. The most common primary collision factors were driving under the influence, unsafe speed, improper turning, and unsafe starting or backing. Implementation of traffic calming measures proposed in the Project improvement alternatives would potentially help reduce the number of collisions caused by unsafe speed. Installation of a roundabout at Carlsbad Boulevard & Tamarack Avenue could potentially reduce the number of collisions due to Traffic Signals and Signs. ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION The Project alternatives were evaluated based on a point system associated with the lowest projected vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle LOS for each alternative, where LOS A represents 6 points, LOS B represents 5 points, LOS C represents 4 points, LOS D represents 3 points, LOS E represents 2 points, and LOS F represents 1 point. Additionally, queueing was evaluated by assigning points based on the worst-case 95th percentile queues where 0-100 feet of queueing represents 6 points, 101-200 feet represents 5 points, 201-300 feet represents 4 points, 301-400 feet represents 3 points, 401-500 feet represents 2 points, and 501+ feet represent 1 point. The Roundabout Intersection Alternative provides the best overall score based on vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle LOS and queueing. In addition to providing acceptable LOS and reasonable queueing, the Roundabout Intersection Alternative would also enhance the pedestrian and bicycle experience and improve safety in the study area. May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 121 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 19 of 19 ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Project Alternative Exhibits Attachment B: Traffic Counts Attachment C: Cumulative Project List, Trip Generation, Distribution, and Assignment Attachment D: SANDAG RTDM ABM2/2019 Forecasts for 2016 and 2050 Attachment E: SimTraffic and Sidra Reports Attachment F: MMLOS Reports Attachment G: Collision Data May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 122 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis Attachment A: Project Alternative Exhibits May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 123 of 349 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 124 of 349 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 125 of 349 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 126 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis Attachment B: Traffic Counts May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 127 of 349 File Name : CAR_Carl_Tam AM Site Code : 99922433 Start Date : 5/12/2022 Page No : 1 City of Carlsbad N/S: Carlsbad Boulevard E/W: Tamrack Avenue Weather: Clear Groups Printed- Total Volume Carlsbad Boulevard Southbound Tamrack Avenue Westbound Carlsbad Boulevard Northbound Beach Parking Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 8 71 0 79 26 3 6 35 1 24 8 33 1 2 0 3 150 07:15 AM 11 87 1 99 28 1 12 41 5 29 9 43 1 5 2 8 191 07:30 AM 9 113 2 124 48 2 14 64 3 43 17 63 1 0 1 2 253 07:45 AM 6 118 0 124 57 3 25 85 1 41 13 55 3 1 0 4 268 Total 34 389 3 426 159 9 57 225 10 137 47 194 6 8 3 17 862 08:00 AM 14 104 9 127 62 2 16 80 1 46 12 59 0 1 3 4 270 08:15 AM 12 94 3 109 54 12 11 77 4 53 19 76 1 3 4 8 270 08:30 AM 14 93 6 113 53 8 19 80 8 75 26 109 2 2 0 4 306 08:45 AM 16 93 4 113 29 5 13 47 8 71 20 99 1 2 5 8 267 Total 56 384 22 462 198 27 59 284 21 245 77 343 4 8 12 24 1113 Grand Total 90 773 25 888 357 36 116 509 31 382 124 537 10 16 15 41 1975 Apprch %10.1 87 2.8 70.1 7.1 22.8 5.8 71.1 23.1 24.4 39 36.6 Total %4.6 39.1 1.3 45 18.1 1.8 5.9 25.8 1.6 19.3 6.3 27.2 0.5 0.8 0.8 2.1 Carlsbad Boulevard Southbound Tamrack Avenue Westbound Carlsbad Boulevard Northbound Beach Parking Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:45 AM 07:45 AM 6 118 0 124 57 3 25 85 1 41 13 55 3 1 0 4 268 08:00 AM 14 104 9 127 62 2 16 80 1 46 12 59 0 1 3 4 270 08:15 AM 12 94 3 109 54 12 11 77 4 53 19 76 1 3 4 8 270 08:30 AM 14 93 6 113 53 8 19 80 8 75 26 109 2 2 0 4 306 Total Volume 46 409 18 473 226 25 71 322 14 215 70 299 6 7 7 20 1114 % App. Total 9.7 86.5 3.8 70.2 7.8 22 4.7 71.9 23.4 30 35 35 PHF .821 .867 .500 .931 .911 .521 .710 .947 .438 .717 .673 .686 .500 .583 .438 .625 .910 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 (951)268-6268 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 128 of 349 File Name : CAR_Carl_Tam AM Site Code : 99922433 Start Date : 5/12/2022 Page No : 2 City of Carlsbad N/S: Carlsbad Boulevard E/W: Tamrack Avenue Weather: Clear Carlsbad Boulevard B e a c h P a r k i n g T a m r a c k A v e n u e Carlsbad Boulevard Right 18 Thru 409 Left 46 InOut Total 292 473 765 Ri g h t 71 Th r u 25 Le f t 22 6 Ou t To t a l In 12 3 32 2 44 5 Left 14 Thru 215 Right 70 Out TotalIn 642 299 941 Le f t 6 Th r u 7 Rig h t 7 To t a l Ou t In 57 20 77 Peak Hour Begins at 07:45 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 07:30 AM 07:45 AM 08:00 AM 08:00 AM +0 mins.9 113 2 124 57 3 25 85 1 46 12 59 0 1 3 4 +15 mins.6 118 0 124 62 2 16 80 4 53 19 76 1 3 4 8 +30 mins.14 104 9 127 54 12 11 77 8 75 26 109 2 2 0 4 +45 mins.12 94 3 109 53 8 19 80 8 71 20 99 1 2 5 8 Total Volume 41 429 14 484 226 25 71 322 21 245 77 343 4 8 12 24 % App. Total 8.5 88.6 2.9 70.2 7.8 22 6.1 71.4 22.4 16.7 33.3 50 PHF .732 .909 .389 .953 .911 .521 .710 .947 .656 .817 .740 .787 .500 .667 .600 .750 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 (951)268-6268 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 129 of 349 File Name : CAR_Carl_Tam PM Site Code : 99922433 Start Date : 5/12/2022 Page No : 1 City of Carlsbad N/S: Carlsbad Boulevard E/W: Tamrack Avenue Weather: Clear Groups Printed- Total Volume Carlsbad Boulevard Southbound Tamrack Avenue Westbound Carlsbad Boulevard Northbound Beach Parking Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 04:00 PM 28 122 4 154 35 4 23 62 10 243 47 300 8 2 9 19 535 04:15 PM 24 113 2 139 24 3 33 60 6 244 71 321 4 3 10 17 537 04:30 PM 22 115 7 144 27 7 18 52 9 274 73 356 2 7 5 14 566 04:45 PM 24 101 2 127 24 1 5 30 7 215 98 320 2 3 3 8 485 Total 98 451 15 564 110 15 79 204 32 976 289 1297 16 15 27 58 2123 05:00 PM 27 97 3 127 33 4 17 54 14 243 66 323 2 6 5 13 517 05:15 PM 23 84 4 111 24 8 25 57 9 241 63 313 4 6 2 12 493 05:30 PM 20 103 5 128 28 1 20 49 12 227 74 313 4 4 3 11 501 05:45 PM 15 76 3 94 33 1 19 53 9 207 55 271 1 3 5 9 427 Total 85 360 15 460 118 14 81 213 44 918 258 1220 11 19 15 45 1938 Grand Total 183 811 30 1024 228 29 160 417 76 1894 547 2517 27 34 42 103 4061 Apprch %17.9 79.2 2.9 54.7 7 38.4 3 75.2 21.7 26.2 33 40.8 Total %4.5 20 0.7 25.2 5.6 0.7 3.9 10.3 1.9 46.6 13.5 62 0.7 0.8 1 2.5 Carlsbad Boulevard Southbound Tamrack Avenue Westbound Carlsbad Boulevard Northbound Beach Parking Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:00 PM 04:00 PM 28 122 4 154 35 4 23 62 10 243 47 300 8 2 9 19 535 04:15 PM 24 113 2 139 24 3 33 60 6 244 71 321 4 3 10 17 537 04:30 PM 22 115 7 144 27 7 18 52 9 274 73 356 2 7 5 14 566 04:45 PM 24 101 2 127 24 1 5 30 7 215 98 320 2 3 3 8 485 Total Volume 98 451 15 564 110 15 79 204 32 976 289 1297 16 15 27 58 2123 % App. Total 17.4 80 2.7 53.9 7.4 38.7 2.5 75.3 22.3 27.6 25.9 46.6 PHF .875 .924 .536 .916 .786 .536 .598 .823 .800 .891 .737 .911 .500 .536 .675 .763 .938 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 (951)268-6268 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 130 of 349 File Name : CAR_Carl_Tam PM Site Code : 99922433 Start Date : 5/12/2022 Page No : 2 City of Carlsbad N/S: Carlsbad Boulevard E/W: Tamrack Avenue Weather: Clear Carlsbad Boulevard B e a c h P a r k i n g T a m r a c k A v e n u e Carlsbad Boulevard Right 15 Thru 451 Left 98 InOut Total 1071 564 1635 Ri g h t 79 Th r u 15 Le f t 11 0 Ou t To t a l In 40 2 20 4 60 6 Left 32 Thru 976 Right 289 Out TotalIn 588 1297 1885 Le f t 16 Th r u 15 Rig h t 27 To t a l Ou t In 62 58 12 0 Peak Hour Begins at 04:00 PM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 04:00 PM 05:00 PM 04:15 PM 04:00 PM +0 mins.28 122 4 154 33 4 17 54 6 244 71 321 8 2 9 19 +15 mins.24 113 2 139 24 8 25 57 9 274 73 356 4 3 10 17 +30 mins.22 115 7 144 28 1 20 49 7 215 98 320 2 7 5 14 +45 mins.24 101 2 127 33 1 19 53 14 243 66 323 2 3 3 8 Total Volume 98 451 15 564 118 14 81 213 36 976 308 1320 16 15 27 58 % App. Total 17.4 80 2.7 55.4 6.6 38 2.7 73.9 23.3 27.6 25.9 46.6 PHF .875 .924 .536 .916 .894 .438 .810 .934 .643 .891 .786 .927 .500 .536 .675 .763 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 (951)268-6268 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 131 of 349 Location: Date: 5/12/2022 N/S: Day: Thursday E/W: North Leg East Leg South Leg West Leg Carlsbad Boulevard Tamrack Avenue Carlsbad Boulevard Tamrack Avenue Pedestrians Pedestrians Pedestrians Pedestrians 15 3 0 14 32 15 0 0 10 25 13 4 0 16 33 7301222 12 5 1 24 42 15 4 0 22 41 13 13 0 26 52 12 8 0 30 50 102 40 1 154 297 North Leg East Leg South Leg West Leg Carlsbad Boulevard Tamrack Avenue Carlsbad Boulevard Tamrack Avenue Pedestrians Pedestrians Pedestrians Pedestrians 21 6 0 15 42 23 4 0 19 46 10 1 2 25 38 22 10 0 26 58 18 3 0 33 54 42 12 0 25 79 38 12 0 20 70 16 4 0 17 37 190 52 2 180 424 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM TOTAL VOLUMES: 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM TOTAL VOLUMES: 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM Carlsbad Carlsbad Boulevard Tamrack Avenue PEDESTRIANS Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 951‐268‐6268May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 132 of 349 Location: Date: 5/12/2022 N/S: Day: Thursday E/W: Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 060203011000 13 030101020000 7 030200002000 7 070000020000 9 020000024000 8 090250072000 25 030361170000 21 090000053010 18 0 42 0 10 11 5 1 26 12 0 1 0 108 Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 01300001110000 25 070100082000 18 0150100054000 25 01900030161011 41 130404051000 18 01005020100000 27 12903000105000 48 01714020143110 43 2 113 1 18 0 11 1 79 16 1 2 1 245 Tamrack Avenue TOTAL VOLUMES: Carlsbad Boulevard Tamrack Avenue Carlsbad Boulevard Tamrack Avenue Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound 5:30 PM 5:45 PM Carlsbad Boulevard Tamrack Avenue Carlsbad Boulevard Eastbound TOTAL VOLUMES: 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM Southbound Westbound Northbound Tamrack Avenue Carlsbad Boulevard Carlsbad BICYCLES 7:30 AM 7:00 AM 7:15 AM Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 951‐268‐6268May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 133 of 349 File Name : CAR_Carl_Tam 6-18 Site Code : 99922433 Start Date : 6/18/2022 Page No : 1 City of Carlsbad N/S: Carlsbad Boulevard E/W: Tamrack Avenue Weather: Clear Groups Printed- Total Volume Carlsbad Boulevard Southbound Tamrack Avenue Westbound Carlsbad Boulevard Northbound Beach Parking Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 11:00 AM 20 151 14 185 54 10 30 94 17 129 32 178 6 6 11 23 480 11:15 AM 20 132 7 159 34 4 29 67 12 163 25 200 3 3 7 13 439 11:30 AM 24 142 9 175 27 6 18 51 15 172 40 227 8 6 5 19 472 11:45 AM 27 163 3 193 45 5 22 72 11 206 41 258 3 4 5 12 535 Total 91 588 33 712 160 25 99 284 55 670 138 863 20 19 28 67 1926 12:00 PM 30 125 4 159 44 12 32 88 8 164 50 222 2 4 10 16 485 12:15 PM 18 149 13 180 40 2 21 63 11 201 34 246 4 10 6 20 509 12:30 PM 29 168 11 208 41 0 36 77 10 230 37 277 0 0 17 17 579 12:45 PM 26 143 12 181 42 0 21 63 16 236 24 276 0 0 14 14 534 Total 103 585 40 728 167 14 110 291 45 831 145 1021 6 14 47 67 2107 Grand Total 194 1173 73 1440 327 39 209 575 100 1501 283 1884 26 33 75 134 4033 Apprch %13.5 81.5 5.1 56.9 6.8 36.3 5.3 79.7 15 19.4 24.6 56 Total %4.8 29.1 1.8 35.7 8.1 1 5.2 14.3 2.5 37.2 7 46.7 0.6 0.8 1.9 3.3 Carlsbad Boulevard Southbound Tamrack Avenue Westbound Carlsbad Boulevard Northbound Beach Parking Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 11:00 AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 11:45 AM 11:45 AM 27 163 3 193 45 5 22 72 11 206 41 258 3 4 5 12 535 12:00 PM 30 125 4 159 44 12 32 88 8 164 50 222 2 4 10 16 485 12:15 PM 18 149 13 180 40 2 21 63 11 201 34 246 4 10 6 20 509 12:30 PM 29 168 11 208 41 0 36 77 10 230 37 277 0 0 17 17 579 Total Volume 104 605 31 740 170 19 111 300 40 801 162 1003 9 18 38 65 2108 % App. Total 14.1 81.8 4.2 56.7 6.3 37 4 79.9 16.2 13.8 27.7 58.5 PHF .867 .900 .596 .889 .944 .396 .771 .852 .909 .871 .810 .905 .563 .450 .559 .813 .910 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 (951)268-6268 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 134 of 349 File Name : CAR_Carl_Tam 6-18 Site Code : 99922433 Start Date : 6/18/2022 Page No : 2 City of Carlsbad N/S: Carlsbad Boulevard E/W: Tamrack Avenue Weather: Clear Carlsbad Boulevard B e a c h P a r k i n g T a m r a c k A v e n u e Carlsbad Boulevard Right 31 Thru 605 Left 104 InOut Total 921 740 1661 Ri g h t 11 1 Th r u 19 Le f t 17 0 Ou t To t a l In 28 4 30 0 58 4 Left 40 Thru 801 Right 162 Out TotalIn 813 1003 1816 Le f t 9 Th r u 18 Rig h t 38 To t a l Ou t In 90 65 15 5 Peak Hour Begins at 11:45 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 11:00 AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 11:45 AM 11:45 AM 12:00 PM 11:00 AM +0 mins.27 163 3 193 45 5 22 72 8 164 50 222 6 6 11 23 +15 mins.30 125 4 159 44 12 32 88 11 201 34 246 3 3 7 13 +30 mins.18 149 13 180 40 2 21 63 10 230 37 277 8 6 5 19 +45 mins.29 168 11 208 41 0 36 77 16 236 24 276 3 4 5 12 Total Volume 104 605 31 740 170 19 111 300 45 831 145 1021 20 19 28 67 % App. Total 14.1 81.8 4.2 56.7 6.3 37 4.4 81.4 14.2 29.9 28.4 41.8 PHF .867 .900 .596 .889 .944 .396 .771 .852 .703 .880 .725 .921 .625 .792 .636 .728 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 (951)268-6268 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 135 of 349 Location: N/S: E/W: Date: 6/18/2022 Day: Saturday North Leg East Leg South Leg West Leg Carlsbad Boulevard Tamrack Avenue Carlsbad Boulevard Beach Parking Driveway Pedestrians Pedestrians Pedestrians Pedestrians 28 11 0 8 47 57 12 0 4 73 49 16 0 12 77 26 7 0 10 43 41 11 0 15 67 36 17 0 4 57 58 23 0 1 82 39 12 0 1 52 334 109 0 55 498 11:00 AM 11:15 AM 11:30 AM 11:45 AM TOTAL VOLUMES: 12:00 PM 12:15 PM 12:30 PM 12:45 PM Carlsbad Carlsbad Boulevard Tamrack Avenue PEDESTRIANS Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 951‐268‐6268May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 136 of 349 Location: N/S: E/W: Date: 6/18/2022 Day: Saturday Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 33102010341020 74 13714010406000 90 227180322110100 75 32302010271000 57 01801210291000 52 22224002174011 55 02206141112000 47 42885010273023 81 15 208 12 32 3 12 5 206 28 1 5 4 531 Beach Parking Driveway TOTAL VOLUMES: Carlsbad Boulevard Tamrack Avenue Carlsbad Boulevard Eastbound 11:45 AM 12:00 PM 12:15 PM 12:30 PM 12:45 PM Southbound Westbound Northbound Tamrack Avenue Carlsbad Boulevard Carlsbad BICYCLES 11:30 AM 11:00 AM 11:15 AM Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 951‐268‐6268May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 137 of 349 File Name : CAR_Carl_Tam 6-25 Site Code : 99922433 Start Date : 6/25/2022 Page No : 1 City of Carlsbad N/S: Carlsbad Boulevard E/W: Tamrack Avenue Weather: Clear Groups Printed- Total Volume Carlsbad Boulevard Southbound Tamrack Avenue Westbound Carlsbad Boulevard Northbound Beach Parking Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 11:00 AM 27 136 9 172 49 7 24 80 15 100 25 140 4 7 9 20 412 11:15 AM 21 136 5 162 52 12 29 93 12 123 30 165 8 7 23 38 458 11:30 AM 21 143 12 176 45 6 32 83 12 128 29 169 3 6 21 30 458 11:45 AM 32 170 13 215 50 11 32 93 10 120 31 161 3 12 10 25 494 Total 101 585 39 725 196 36 117 349 49 471 115 635 18 32 63 113 1822 12:00 PM 18 157 13 188 29 6 33 68 8 136 38 182 10 9 12 31 469 12:15 PM 31 139 8 178 32 8 28 68 12 122 26 160 4 6 16 26 432 12:30 PM 27 183 13 223 36 5 33 74 12 140 24 176 9 3 9 21 494 12:45 PM 23 172 8 203 41 6 28 75 6 120 29 155 6 8 14 28 461 Total 99 651 42 792 138 25 122 285 38 518 117 673 29 26 51 106 1856 Grand Total 200 1236 81 1517 334 61 239 634 87 989 232 1308 47 58 114 219 3678 Apprch %13.2 81.5 5.3 52.7 9.6 37.7 6.7 75.6 17.7 21.5 26.5 52.1 Total %5.4 33.6 2.2 41.2 9.1 1.7 6.5 17.2 2.4 26.9 6.3 35.6 1.3 1.6 3.1 6 Carlsbad Boulevard Southbound Tamrack Avenue Westbound Carlsbad Boulevard Northbound Beach Parking Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 11:00 AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 11:45 AM 11:45 AM 32 170 13 215 50 11 32 93 10 120 31 161 3 12 10 25 494 12:00 PM 18 157 13 188 29 6 33 68 8 136 38 182 10 9 12 31 469 12:15 PM 31 139 8 178 32 8 28 68 12 122 26 160 4 6 16 26 432 12:30 PM 27 183 13 223 36 5 33 74 12 140 24 176 9 3 9 21 494 Total Volume 108 649 47 804 147 30 126 303 42 518 119 679 26 30 47 103 1889 % App. Total 13.4 80.7 5.8 48.5 9.9 41.6 6.2 76.3 17.5 25.2 29.1 45.6 PHF .844 .887 .904 .901 .735 .682 .955 .815 .875 .925 .783 .933 .650 .625 .734 .831 .956 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 (951)268-6268 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 138 of 349 File Name : CAR_Carl_Tam 6-25 Site Code : 99922433 Start Date : 6/25/2022 Page No : 2 City of Carlsbad N/S: Carlsbad Boulevard E/W: Tamrack Avenue Weather: Clear Carlsbad Boulevard B e a c h P a r k i n g T a m r a c k A v e n u e Carlsbad Boulevard Right 47 Thru 649 Left 108 InOut Total 670 804 1474 Ri g h t 12 6 Th r u 30 Le f t 14 7 Ou t To t a l In 25 7 30 3 56 0 Left 42 Thru 518 Right 119 Out TotalIn 843 679 1522 Le f t 26 Th r u 30 Rig h t 47 To t a l Ou t In 11 9 10 3 22 2 Peak Hour Begins at 11:45 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 11:00 AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 11:45 AM 11:00 AM 11:45 AM 11:15 AM +0 mins.32 170 13 215 49 7 24 80 10 120 31 161 8 7 23 38 +15 mins.18 157 13 188 52 12 29 93 8 136 38 182 3 6 21 30 +30 mins.31 139 8 178 45 6 32 83 12 122 26 160 3 12 10 25 +45 mins.27 183 13 223 50 11 32 93 12 140 24 176 10 9 12 31 Total Volume 108 649 47 804 196 36 117 349 42 518 119 679 24 34 66 124 % App. Total 13.4 80.7 5.8 56.2 10.3 33.5 6.2 76.3 17.5 19.4 27.4 53.2 PHF .844 .887 .904 .901 .942 .750 .914 .938 .875 .925 .783 .933 .600 .708 .717 .816 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 (951)268-6268 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 139 of 349 Location: N/S: E/W: Date: 6/25/2022 Day: Saturday North Leg East Leg South Leg West Leg Carlsbad Boulevard Tamrack Avenue Carlsbad Boulevard Beach Parking Driveway Pedestrians Pedestrians Pedestrians Pedestrians 38 15 0 15 68 45 18 1 12 76 58 22 0 5 85 35 16 0 1 52 38 14 0 11 63 52 18 1 14 85 56 17 0 2 75 45 14 0 4 63 367 134 2 64 567 12:15 PM 12:30 PM 12:45 PM TOTAL VOLUMES: 11:00 AM 11:15 AM 11:30 AM 11:45 AM 12:00 PM Carlsbad Carlsbad Boulevard Tamrack Avenue PEDESTRIANS Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 951‐268‐6268May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 140 of 349 Location: N/S: E/W: Date: 6/25/2022 Day: Saturday Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 53544022393212 99 33136030300000 76 12601150292000 65 43406230216100 77 130210000344000 81 12709320221000 65 21803121293010 60 2200402091122 43 19 221 9 43 7 19 3 213 20 4 4 4 566 Carlsbad Boulevard Tamrack Avenue Carlsbad Boulevard Beach Parking Driveway Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound 12:30 PM 12:45 PM TOTAL VOLUMES: 11:00 AM 11:15 AM 11:30 AM 11:45 AM 12:00 PM 12:15 PM Tamrack Avenue Carlsbad Boulevard Carlsbad BICYCLES Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 951‐268‐6268May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 141 of 349 Page 1 City of Carlsbad Carlsbad Boulevard B/ Sequoia Avenue - Bridge 24 Hour Directional Volume Count CARCASE Site Code: 999-22433 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 Phone: (951) 268-6268 email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 6/30/2022 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined Totals Time Thu Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon 12:00 10 170 12 228 12:15 6 202 16 222 12:30 14 162 6 219 12:45 5 176 35 710 7 216 41 885 76 1595 01:00 6 195 7 219 01:15 5 180 6 225 01:30 2 198 2 217 01:45 3 183 16 756 2 159 17 820 33 1576 02:00 2 205 5 193 02:15 1 189 1 172 02:30 7 233 2 186 02:45 1 251 11 878 2 160 10 711 21 1589 03:00 1 226 1 192 03:15 1 273 0 187 03:30 0 239 8 216 03:45 3 276 5 1014 5 196 14 791 19 1805 04:00 1 270 4 202 04:15 6 264 4 161 04:30 3 291 9 168 04:45 2 269 12 1094 8 193 25 724 37 1818 05:00 4 272 15 183 05:15 6 301 23 173 05:30 13 304 33 200 05:45 15 286 38 1163 62 158 133 714 171 1877 06:00 22 235 69 158 06:15 27 175 76 196 06:30 37 215 90 171 06:45 36 186 122 811 120 152 355 677 477 1488 07:00 51 197 95 156 07:15 37 169 102 148 07:30 56 173 143 138 07:45 67 173 211 712 121 148 461 590 672 1302 08:00 69 156 137 151 08:15 86 156 155 119 08:30 99 102 146 102 08:45 91 100 345 514 146 82 584 454 929 968 09:00 95 75 120 80 09:15 86 58 125 73 09:30 122 79 137 75 09:45 103 64 406 276 142 64 524 292 930 568 10:00 106 93 139 82 10:15 137 102 132 79 10:30 148 82 155 55 10:45 147 62 538 339 151 39 577 255 1115 594 11:00 154 54 181 31 11:15 163 42 176 15 11:30 166 25 178 14 11:45 152 17 635 138 261 19 796 79 1431 217 Total 2374 8405 2374 8405 3537 6992 3537 6992 5911 15397 Combined Total 10779 10779 10529 10529 21308 AM Peak - 11:00 --- 11:00 ----- Vol.- 635 --- 796 ----- P.H.F. 0.956 0.762 PM Peak -- 05:00 --- 12:00 ---- Vol.-- 1163 --- 885 ---- P.H.F. 0.956 0.970 Percentag e 22.0% 78.0% 33.6% 66.4% ADT/AADT ADT 21,308 AADT 21,308 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 142 of 349 Page 1 City of Carlsbad Carlsbad Boulevard B/ Sequoia Avenue - Bridge 24 Hour Directional Volume Count CARCASE_Sat Site Code: 999-22433 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 Phone: (951) 268-6268 email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 6/18/2022 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined Totals Time Sat Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon 12:00 26 211 25 184 12:15 18 231 28 198 12:30 19 237 13 228 12:45 13 240 76 919 13 203 79 813 155 1732 01:00 8 236 6 222 01:15 9 207 7 221 01:30 7 222 6 260 01:45 7 246 31 911 8 227 27 930 58 1841 02:00 9 205 5 241 02:15 8 229 8 234 02:30 7 202 5 184 02:45 8 229 32 865 7 229 25 888 57 1753 03:00 6 236 4 214 03:15 4 215 2 221 03:30 8 205 4 240 03:45 8 208 26 864 4 217 14 892 40 1756 04:00 5 203 3 243 04:15 3 198 5 178 04:30 3 181 6 232 04:45 4 202 15 784 8 205 22 858 37 1642 05:00 2 174 11 191 05:15 4 187 20 165 05:30 8 210 32 222 05:45 13 180 27 751 26 182 89 760 116 1511 06:00 16 185 29 160 06:15 20 178 35 161 06:30 29 157 64 169 06:45 33 158 98 678 48 145 176 635 274 1313 07:00 44 171 62 145 07:15 57 155 63 141 07:30 52 146 83 135 07:45 45 139 198 611 68 140 276 561 474 1172 08:00 52 143 84 138 08:15 62 140 94 131 08:30 105 131 89 124 08:45 85 119 304 533 113 108 380 501 684 1034 09:00 99 90 112 100 09:15 121 85 130 91 09:30 97 75 153 82 09:45 130 64 447 314 137 74 532 347 979 661 10:00 109 57 170 75 10:15 128 42 195 68 10:30 150 49 172 63 10:45 133 38 520 186 214 50 751 256 1271 442 11:00 178 35 222 46 11:15 194 29 169 35 11:30 214 25 185 27 11:45 248 23 834 112 225 20 801 128 1635 240 Total 2608 7528 2608 7528 3172 7569 3172 7569 5780 15097 Combined Total 10136 10136 10741 10741 20877 AM Peak - 11:00 --- 10:15 ----- Vol.- 834 --- 803 ----- P.H.F. 0.841 0.904 PM Peak -- 00:15 --- 01:30 ---- Vol.-- 944 --- 962 ---- P.H.F. 0.983 0.925 Percentag e 25.7% 74.3% 29.5% 70.5% ADT/AADT ADT 20,877 AADT 20,877 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 143 of 349 Page 1 City of Carlsbad Carlsbad Boulevard B/ Sequoia Avenue - Bridge 24 Hour Directional Volume Count CARCASE_SAT2 Site Code: 999-22433 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 Phone: (951) 268-6268 email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 6/25/2022 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined Totals Time Sat Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon 12:00 26 202 25 184 12:15 17 162 27 171 12:30 22 182 10 204 12:45 13 154 78 700 14 201 76 760 154 1460 01:00 12 159 7 181 01:15 10 174 6 198 01:30 11 205 16 196 01:45 7 167 40 705 8 194 37 769 77 1474 02:00 6 169 9 256 02:15 8 201 7 216 02:30 5 194 3 187 02:45 8 210 27 774 6 218 25 877 52 1651 03:00 2 213 5 204 03:15 4 187 2 197 03:30 4 183 3 193 03:45 7 182 17 765 4 192 14 786 31 1551 04:00 2 215 4 184 04:15 3 161 5 189 04:30 5 240 11 199 04:45 4 253 14 869 9 206 29 778 43 1647 05:00 8 300 21 188 05:15 4 290 20 186 05:30 7 311 27 209 05:45 12 332 31 1233 30 181 98 764 129 1997 06:00 13 296 29 159 06:15 26 295 35 171 06:30 26 251 56 144 06:45 34 165 99 1007 66 146 186 620 285 1627 07:00 41 209 67 142 07:15 50 172 81 117 07:30 58 151 77 120 07:45 55 176 204 708 79 113 304 492 508 1200 08:00 85 145 98 136 08:15 101 137 88 132 08:30 107 127 117 112 08:45 111 61 404 470 121 106 424 486 828 956 09:00 115 57 126 91 09:15 117 67 129 81 09:30 125 75 143 82 09:45 137 64 494 263 152 71 550 325 1044 588 10:00 148 55 149 72 10:15 150 39 157 58 10:30 170 51 187 60 10:45 161 41 629 186 157 56 650 246 1279 432 11:00 146 33 187 43 11:15 171 26 196 30 11:30 167 25 202 24 11:45 147 33 631 117 230 28 815 125 1446 242 Total 2668 7797 2668 7797 3208 7028 3208 7028 5876 14825 Combined Total 10465 10465 10236 10236 20701 AM Peak - 10:30 --- 11:00 ----- Vol.- 648 --- 815 ----- P.H.F. 0.947 0.886 PM Peak -- 05:30 --- 02:00 ---- Vol.-- 1234 --- 877 ---- P.H.F. 0.929 0.856 Percentag e 25.5% 74.5% 31.3% 68.7% ADT/AADT ADT 20,701 AADT 20,701 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 144 of 349 Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: N-S STREET:DATE:LOCATION: E-W STREET:DAY:PROJECT# NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES:0 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 6:00 AM 6:15 AM 6:30 AM 6:45 AM 7:00 AM 0 59 1 1 161 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 225 7:15 AM 0 46 2 1 175 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 229 7:30 AM 0 77 1 0 228 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 307 7:45 AM 0 69 1 0 225 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 299 8:00 AM 0 89 2 0 164 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 259 8:15 AM 0 77 1 1 173 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 254 8:30 AM 0 82 0 2 155 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 241 8:45 AM 0 98 5 3 129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 235 9:00 AM 9:15 AM 9:30 AM 9:45 AM 10:00 AM 10:15 AM 10:30 AM 10:45 AM 11:00 AM 11:15 AM 11:30 AM 11:45 AM TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL Volumes 0 597 13 8 1410 0 0 0 0 16 0 5 2049 Approach %0.00 97.87 2.13 0.56 99.44 0.00 ############76.19 0.00 23.81 App/Depart 610 /602 1418 /1426 0 /21 21 /0 730 AM PEAK Volumes 0 312 5 1 790 0 0 0 0 10 0 1 1119 Approach %0.00 98.42 1.58 0.13 99.87 0.00 ############90.91 0.00 9.09 PEAK HR. FACTOR:0.911 33.146855, -117.344816 08/27/19 CarlsbadCarlsbad Blvd. Sequoia Ave.19-1419-002TUESDAY 0.867 AM Peak Hr Begins at: 0.688 WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.0000.871 1-Way Stop (WB) COMMENT 1: GPS: CONTROL: veracity grouptraffic May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 145 of 349 Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: N-S STREET:DATE:LOCATION: E-W STREET:DAY:PROJECT# NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES:0 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 6:00 AM 6:15 AM 6:30 AM 6:45 AM 7:00 AM 0 49 1 1 120 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 174 7:15 AM 0 42 2 1 114 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 163 7:30 AM 0 73 1 2 163 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 242 7:45 AM 0 67 0 0 184 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 254 8:00 AM 0 88 1 0 126 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 217 8:15 AM 0 83 0 3 133 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 220 8:30 AM 0 93 0 3 128 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 225 8:45 AM 0 87 3 1 99 0 0 0 0 3 0 4 197 9:00 AM 9:15 AM 9:30 AM 9:45 AM 10:00 AM 10:15 AM 10:30 AM 10:45 AM 11:00 AM 11:15 AM 11:30 AM 11:45 AM TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL Volumes 0 582 8 11 1067 0 0 0 0 9 0 15 1692 Approach %0.00 98.64 1.36 1.02 98.98 0.00 ############37.50 0.00 62.50 App/Depart 590 /597 1078 /1076 0 /19 24 /0 730 AM PEAK Volumes 0 311 2 5 606 0 0 0 0 4 0 5 933 Approach %0.00 99.36 0.64 0.82 99.18 0.00 ############44.44 0.00 55.56 PEAK HR. FACTOR:0.918 33.148205, -117.345909 08/27/19 CarlsbadCarlsbad Blvd. Redwood Ave.19-1419-003TUESDAY 0.830 AM Peak Hr Begins at: 0.750 WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.0000.879 1-Way Stop (WB) COMMENT 1: GPS: CONTROL: veracity grouptraffic May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 146 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis Attachment C: Cumulative Projects List, Trip Generation, Distribution, and Assignment May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 147 of 349 3060 STATE STREET RESTAURANT - 3060 STATE STREET 1,358 sf restaurant & outdoor patio converted from existing vacant commercial building. In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total 1.358 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA1 191 7 8 15 9 6 15 132 24 20 44 191 7 8 15 9 6 15 132 24 20 44 CARLSBAD BY THE SEA SUMMERHOUSE - 2710 OCEAN STREET Carlsbad by the Sea Summerhouse: Consolodation of 5 parcels for new 40,000 sq ft professional services building for memory care and independent living. In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total 56 beds /40,000 sf beds /1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA1 168 7 5 12 5 7 12 168 6 13 19 168 7 5 12 5 7 12 168 6 13 19 CHINQUAPIN COASTAL HOMES - 330 CHINQUAPIN AVENUE Chinquapin Coast Homes: Three Triplex buildings containing nine airspace condominium units. In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total 9 DU1 72 1 5 6 5 2 7 79 2 3 7 72 1 5 6 5 2 7 79 2 3 7 GARFIELD BEACH HOMES - 3570 GARFIELD STREET Construction of 12 single family dwelling units. In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total 12 DU1 120 3 7 10 8 4 12 123 11 9 20 120 3 7 10 8 4 12 123 11 9 20 VIGILUCCI'S SEAFOOD & STEAKHOUSE - 3878 CARLSBAD BOULEVARD Addition of a 1,925 sf to the patio area to accommodate 104 seats for dining use. In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total 1.925 sf /104 seats Seats /1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA1 193 1 1 2 11 5 16 267 20 14 34 193 1 1 2 11 5 16 267 20 14 34 Land Use Category Quality Restaurant Quantity Units Total Project Trips Notes: 1 GFA = Gross Floor Area 2 Trip rates are calculated based on SANDAG's Brief Guid of Vehicular Trip Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (April 2002). Equivalent number of beds was calculated using ITE trip rates for 1,000 sf of Assisted Living. 3 Trip rates are calculated based on ITE Trip Generation (11th Edition) average rates. Quantity Units Weekday2 SANDAG - Condominium (or any multi-family 6-20 DU/acre) Summer Saturday3 ITE 215 Single-Family Attached Housing Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Midday Peak Hour Midday Peak Hour Weekday2 SANDAG - Convalescent/Nursing (56 Beds) Notes: 1 GFA = Gross Floor Area 2 Trip rates are calculated based on SANDAG's Brief Guid of Vehicular Trip Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (April 2002) 3 Trip rates are calculated based on ITE Trip Generation (11th Edition) average rates. Quantity Units Weekday2 SANDAG - Sit-Down, High Turnover Restaurant (less 12% pass-by trips) Daily Total Project Trips PM Peak HourDailyAM Peak Hour Midday Peak Hour Summer Saturday3 ITE 930 Fast Casual Restaurant Restaurant Land Use Category Summer Saturday3 ITE 245 Assisted Living (40,000 square feet) Single-Family Detached Housing Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Land Use Category Condominium Notes: 1 DU = Dwelling Units 2 Trip rates are calculated based on SANDAG's Brief Guid of Vehicular Trip Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (April 2002) 3 Trip rates are calculated based on ITE Trip Generation (11th Edition) average rates . Quantity Units Weekday2 SANDAG - Single-Family Detached (Average 3-6 DU/acre) Summer Saturday3 ITE 210 Single-Family Detached Housing Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Midday Peak Hour Land Use Category Assisted Living Total Project Trips Notes: 1 GFA = Gross Floor Area 2 Trip rates are calculated based on SANDAG's Brief Guid of Vehicular Trip Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (April 2002) 3 Trip rates are calculated based on ITE Trip Generation (11th Edition) average rates . Total Project Trips Notes: 1 DU = Dwelling Units 2 Trip rates are calculated based on SANDAG's Brief Guid of Vehicular Trip Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (April 2002) 3 Trip rates are calculated based on ITE Trip Generation (11th Edition) fitted curve equations. Quantity Units Weekday2 SANDAG - Quality Restaurant (1.925 square feet) Summer Saturday3 ITE 931 Fine Dining Restaurant (104 Seats) Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Land Use Category Midday Peak Hour Total Project Trips Cumulative_Project_Volumes.xlsxMay 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 148 of 349 3060 STATE STREET RESTAURANT INBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 20% OUTBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 20% CARLSBAD BY THE SEA SUMMERHOUSE INBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 50%20% OUTBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 20%50% CHINQUAPIN COASTAL HOMES INBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 20%80% OUTBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 50%50% GARFIELD BEACH HOMES INBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 40%20% OUTBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 60% VIGILUCCI'S SEAFOOD & STEAKHOUSE INBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 40%40% OUTBOUND INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 40%40% May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 149 of 349 3060 STATE STREET RESTAURANT AM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Summer Saturday INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 5 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CARLSBAD BY THE SEA SUMMERHOUSE AM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 4 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 PM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 3 0 1 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Summer Saturday INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 3 0 3 7 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 CHINQUAPIN COASTAL HOMES AM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 PM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 Summer Saturday INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 GARFIELD BEACH HOMES AM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 1 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 3 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Summer Saturday INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 4 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VIGILUCCI'S SEAFOOD & STEAKHOUSE AM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 0 4 4 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 Summer Saturday INTID NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR WBL WBT WBR EBL EBT EBR 1 0 0 8 8 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 150 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis Attachment D: SANDAG RTDM ABM2+/2021 Forecasts for 2016 and 2035 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 151 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis ABM2+/2021 Forecasts for 2016 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 152 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis ABM2+/2021 Forecasts for 2035 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 153 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis Attachment E: SimTraffic and Sidra Reports May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 154 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing AM Pk Hr - No Build 08/26/2022 01 Exist AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 4.3 3.7 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)32.6 37.6 1.2 14.4 12.3 4.9 33.4 14.8 7.0 29.3 13.6 1.4 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 0.5 0.4 39.4 3.8 12.0 0.7 11.2 3.7 2.4 22.8 0.8 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.1 0.0 2.6 0.2 0.6 0.2 1.3 0.3 0.5 2.3 0.0 Avg Speed (mph)5 5 19 17 19 21 5 9 12 5 10 19 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.9 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)15.3 15.5 30.7 29.2 30.9 35.6 17.3 25.2 38.4 18.3 25.0 50.7 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 11 1 3 0 2 0 0 6 0 CO Emissions (g)2 3 2 329 24 78 4 76 10 17 162 2 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 0 34 2 9 0 8 1 1 19 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.8 Total Del/Veh (s)13.9 Travel Dist (mi)98.1 Travel Time (hr)8.1 Avg Speed (mph)12 Fuel Used (gal)3.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg)27.9 HC Emissions (g)24 CO Emissions (g)710 NOx Emissions (g)75 Density (ft/veh)535 Occupancy (veh)8 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)6.1 3.4 1.3 1.3 4.0 1.5 1.5 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 0.4 15.8 0.1 2.0 240.2 258.7 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 8.3 9.1 Avg Speed (mph)16 17 22 17 27 29 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.1 6.8 7.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg)38.5 36.3 15.9 19.2 37.3 35.4 32.9 HC Emissions (g)0 0 13 0 0 63 76 CO Emissions (g)1 1 535 2 6 1140 1684 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 47 0 1 173 222 Density (ft/veh)1005 Occupancy (veh)0 0 1 0 0 8 9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 155 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing AM Pk Hr - No Build 08/26/2022 01 Exist AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)9.2 3.4 1.2 1.7 1.3 1.4 Travel Dist (mi)1.1 0.1 190.6 3.9 0.0 37.4 233.1 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.0 6.5 0.1 0.0 1.7 8.4 Avg Speed (mph)15 17 29 29 15 22 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 5.3 0.1 0.0 2.3 7.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)34.1 33.8 35.8 36.5 19.6 16.3 30.0 HC Emissions (g)0 0 47 1 0 29 77 CO Emissions (g)2 0 820 12 1 1150 1986 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 131 2 0 112 244 Density (ft/veh)977 Occupancy (veh)0 0 7 0 0 2 8 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.9 Total Del/Veh (s)18.0 Travel Dist (mi)1200.6 Travel Time (hr)47.3 Avg Speed (mph)26 Fuel Used (gal)36.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg)32.6 HC Emissions (g)342 CO Emissions (g)7436 NOx Emissions (g)993 Density (ft/veh)459 Occupancy (veh)47 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 156 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Existing AM Pk Hr - No Build 08/26/2022 01 Exist AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T T R Maximum Queue (ft)46 10 137 110 45 96 107 73 135 136 15 Average Queue (ft)11 0 69 24 12 45 45 28 60 65 1 95th Queue (ft)36 5 124 65 37 83 89 61 110 113 15 Link Distance (ft)288 916 221 221 227 227 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 75 70 115 70 Storage Blk Time (%)9 6 0 0 3 0 1 8 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 1 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB SB Directions Served LR L Maximum Queue (ft)31 6 Average Queue (ft)7 0 95th Queue (ft)28 6 Link Distance (ft)465 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)80 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB SB Directions Served LR L Maximum Queue (ft)35 6 Average Queue (ft)9 0 95th Queue (ft)31 4 Link Distance (ft)497 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)75 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 157 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing PM Pk Hr - No Build 08/26/2022 02 Exist PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.3 4.1 3.8 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)64.1 55.1 1.6 35.4 34.9 12.9 65.3 23.4 19.8 55.8 14.9 1.7 Travel Dist (mi)0.8 0.9 1.4 19.1 2.6 15.0 1.8 51.7 15.2 5.3 24.8 0.6 Travel Time (hr)0.3 0.3 0.1 1.9 0.2 0.9 0.7 8.1 2.3 1.8 2.7 0.0 Avg Speed (mph)3 3 18 11 11 17 3 6 7 3 9 19 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.5 0.2 3.1 0.8 0.5 1.1 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)9.7 10.4 23.8 22.7 24.8 31.2 9.2 16.5 19.7 11.0 23.0 52.4 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 6 0 6 0 19 5 1 7 0 CO Emissions (g)9 10 15 195 15 137 17 525 127 53 191 2 NOx Emissions (g)1 1 1 18 1 16 1 69 14 4 22 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 2 0 1 1 8 2 2 3 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (s)23.7 Travel Dist (mi)139.3 Travel Time (hr)19.3 Avg Speed (mph)7 Fuel Used (gal)7.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg)19.0 HC Emissions (g)46 CO Emissions (g)1294 NOx Emissions (g)150 Density (ft/veh)219 Occupancy (veh)19 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)22.0 9.4 1.9 2.3 10.5 1.7 2.0 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 0.8 60.5 0.6 3.8 282.6 348.6 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.1 2.7 0.0 0.2 9.8 12.8 Avg Speed (mph)9 13 23 17 25 29 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.1 8.0 11.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg)24.8 30.1 16.4 20.0 35.0 35.3 29.4 HC Emissions (g)0 0 45 0 0 76 122 CO Emissions (g)1 3 1553 8 10 1401 2977 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 191 1 1 212 406 Density (ft/veh)718 Occupancy (veh)0 0 3 0 0 10 13 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 158 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing PM Pk Hr - No Build 08/26/2022 02 Exist PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s)27.8 28.4 10.2 10.5 12.9 1.5 7.7 Travel Dist (mi)0.6 0.4 827.9 39.2 0.4 32.9 901.3 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.1 31.6 1.5 0.0 1.5 34.8 Avg Speed (mph)8 7 26 25 9 23 26 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 23.9 1.1 0.0 1.8 26.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg)22.9 22.3 34.7 34.8 19.7 17.9 33.5 HC Emissions (g)0 0 238 15 0 23 276 CO Emissions (g)2 1 4584 278 4 806 5676 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 671 42 0 88 801 Density (ft/veh)237 Occupancy (veh)0 0 32 2 0 1 35 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.4 Total Del/Veh (s)33.8 Travel Dist (mi)2414.9 Travel Time (hr)104.3 Avg Speed (mph)23 Fuel Used (gal)77.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.4 HC Emissions (g)763 CO Emissions (g)16406 NOx Emissions (g)2226 Density (ft/veh)207 Occupancy (veh)104 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 159 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Existing PM Pk Hr - No Build 08/26/2022 02 Exist PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T T R Maximum Queue (ft)75 41 135 154 159 242 256 168 167 172 32 Average Queue (ft)29 2 60 39 42 212 221 75 80 79 1 95th Queue (ft)64 22 115 97 119 259 254 136 145 141 23 Link Distance (ft)288 916 221 221 227 227 Upstream Blk Time (%)10 15 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)63 100 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 75 70 115 70 Storage Blk Time (%) 35 0 7 2 3 38 4 2 12 Queuing Penalty (veh) 9 0 7 2 16 12 9 2 2 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB NB SB SB Directions Served LR TR L T Maximum Queue (ft)50 3 31 7 Average Queue (ft)12 0 4 0 95th Queue (ft)39 3 21 7 Link Distance (ft)465 227 2686 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)80 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB SB Directions Served LR T TR L Maximum Queue (ft)43 268 314 37 Average Queue (ft)10 81 120 6 95th Queue (ft)34 214 267 26 Link Distance (ft)497 3442 3442 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)75 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 223 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 160 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing SAT Pk Hr - No Build 08/26/2022 03 Exist SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 4.0 3.6 0.5 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)47.2 45.3 1.6 24.9 25.9 13.2 52.6 26.9 22.2 45.9 20.3 2.6 Travel Dist (mi)0.9 1.2 2.1 27.8 4.1 21.5 2.1 35.4 7.4 5.6 33.4 2.0 Travel Time (hr)0.3 0.3 0.2 2.3 0.3 1.3 0.7 6.2 1.2 1.6 4.6 0.1 Avg Speed (mph)4 4 18 13 14 17 3 6 6 4 7 17 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.1 1.1 0.1 0.7 0.2 2.1 0.4 0.5 1.7 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)11.8 11.9 24.2 25.6 27.6 31.5 11.1 16.6 19.9 12.4 19.9 40.6 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 7 1 5 0 11 2 2 10 0 CO Emissions (g)9 14 20 242 27 151 17 326 48 59 276 9 NOx Emissions (g)1 1 2 22 2 15 2 37 5 5 32 1 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 2 0 1 1 6 1 2 5 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.4 Total Del/Veh (s)24.4 Travel Dist (mi)143.5 Travel Time (hr)19.0 Avg Speed (mph)8 Fuel Used (gal)7.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)20.3 HC Emissions (g)39 CO Emissions (g)1198 NOx Emissions (g)126 Density (ft/veh)225 Occupancy (veh)19 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)13.6 5.8 1.9 1.8 7.6 2.3 2.1 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 0.9 45.1 0.3 4.9 379.2 430.6 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.1 2.1 0.0 0.2 13.3 15.6 Avg Speed (mph)11 15 22 17 26 29 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.1 10.7 13.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)28.6 35.8 15.6 20.5 35.5 35.4 31.2 HC Emissions (g)0 0 34 0 1 101 136 CO Emissions (g)1 2 1272 4 14 1880 3173 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 144 0 2 280 427 Density (ft/veh)587 Occupancy (veh)0 0 2 0 0 13 16 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 161 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing SAT Pk Hr - No Build 08/26/2022 03 Exist SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)16.9 10.3 4.1 4.1 7.9 1.9 3.2 Travel Dist (mi)0.8 0.5 543.1 16.1 0.3 45.4 606.2 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.0 19.3 0.6 0.0 2.1 22.1 Avg Speed (mph)11 13 28 28 12 22 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 15.3 0.5 0.0 2.8 18.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg)28.0 32.0 35.5 35.7 18.9 16.5 32.7 HC Emissions (g)0 0 146 8 0 32 186 CO Emissions (g)3 1 2703 135 4 1160 4005 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 405 21 0 134 561 Density (ft/veh)372 Occupancy (veh)0 0 19 1 0 2 22 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.5 Total Del/Veh (s)31.2 Travel Dist (mi)2194.6 Travel Time (hr)93.7 Avg Speed (mph)23 Fuel Used (gal)69.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.6 HC Emissions (g)653 CO Emissions (g)14140 NOx Emissions (g)1901 Density (ft/veh)231 Occupancy (veh)93 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 162 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Existing SAT Pk Hr - No Build 08/26/2022 03 Exist SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T T R Maximum Queue (ft)80 36 149 169 159 233 243 165 217 222 159 Average Queue (ft)31 4 66 53 40 168 183 71 119 123 15 95th Queue (ft)69 24 124 123 109 246 255 132 191 194 90 Link Distance (ft)288 916 221 221 227 227 Upstream Blk Time (%)2 4 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)8 17 1 1 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 75 70 115 70 Storage Blk Time (%) 33 0 9 3 3 37 3 8 26 Queuing Penalty (veh) 14 0 13 5 10 15 9 8 10 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB SB SB SB Directions Served LR L T T Maximum Queue (ft)33 33 12 18 Average Queue (ft)11 4 0 1 95th Queue (ft)35 20 6 11 Link Distance (ft)465 2686 2686 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)80 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB SB Directions Served LR T TR L Maximum Queue (ft)37 86 122 30 Average Queue (ft)10 9 17 3 95th Queue (ft)33 45 70 18 Link Distance (ft)497 3442 3442 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)75 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 110 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 163 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative AM Pk Hr - No Build 09/15/2022 04 Cuml AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 4.1 3.7 0.9 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)35.8 33.6 1.1 15.0 14.0 5.1 33.2 15.0 6.0 29.3 13.1 1.5 Travel Dist (mi)0.2 0.4 0.3 38.6 4.4 13.1 0.5 11.6 3.8 2.6 23.1 0.8 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.1 0.0 2.5 0.3 0.6 0.1 1.3 0.3 0.5 2.3 0.0 Avg Speed (mph)5 5 20 17 18 21 5 9 12 5 10 19 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.9 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)16.8 16.2 31.7 29.0 31.0 35.4 18.0 25.1 39.7 18.3 25.2 49.2 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 13 1 4 0 3 0 0 6 0 CO Emissions (g)2 2 1 350 23 103 2 83 10 15 162 3 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 0 37 2 13 0 9 1 1 19 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.8 Total Del/Veh (s)13.7 Travel Dist (mi)99.5 Travel Time (hr)8.2 Avg Speed (mph)13 Fuel Used (gal)3.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg)28.0 HC Emissions (g)28 CO Emissions (g)757 NOx Emissions (g)83 Density (ft/veh)531 Occupancy (veh)8 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)8.5 3.3 1.4 1.7 5.1 1.4 1.5 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 0.4 16.4 0.2 2.9 243.5 263.6 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 8.4 9.3 Avg Speed (mph)15 17 22 17 27 29 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.1 6.9 8.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)33.9 37.6 15.7 18.2 36.7 35.2 32.7 HC Emissions (g)0 0 15 0 0 68 84 CO Emissions (g)1 1 591 4 9 1216 1821 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 54 0 1 188 244 Density (ft/veh)983 Occupancy (veh)0 0 1 0 0 8 9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 164 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative AM Pk Hr - No Build 09/15/2022 04 Cuml AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)8.5 4.3 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.3 Travel Dist (mi)0.8 0.1 192.9 3.4 0.0 37.4 234.6 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.0 6.6 0.1 0.0 1.7 8.5 Avg Speed (mph)15 17 29 29 18 22 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 5.4 0.1 0.0 2.3 7.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)35.0 38.8 35.5 35.3 21.7 16.4 29.9 HC Emissions (g)0 0 54 0 0 32 86 CO Emissions (g)2 0 936 10 0 1177 2125 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 149 1 0 118 269 Density (ft/veh)972 Occupancy (veh)0 0 7 0 0 2 8 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.9 Total Del/Veh (s)17.9 Travel Dist (mi)1213.7 Travel Time (hr)47.8 Avg Speed (mph)26 Fuel Used (gal)37.4 Fuel Eff. (mpg)32.5 HC Emissions (g)372 CO Emissions (g)7920 NOx Emissions (g)1076 Density (ft/veh)454 Occupancy (veh)48 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 165 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative AM Pk Hr - No Build 09/15/2022 04 Cuml AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT L TR L T TR L T T Maximum Queue (ft)41 144 140 37 100 119 67 130 137 Average Queue (ft)10 69 27 9 43 49 30 59 65 95th Queue (ft)33 124 80 30 81 93 59 109 115 Link Distance (ft)288 916 221 221 227 227 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)75 70 115 Storage Blk Time (%)8 6 0 3 1 8 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 6 1 0 0 1 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB SB Directions Served LR L Maximum Queue (ft)33 31 Average Queue (ft)8 2 95th Queue (ft)30 13 Link Distance (ft)465 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)80 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB SB Directions Served LR L Maximum Queue (ft)31 3 Average Queue (ft)8 0 95th Queue (ft)29 3 Link Distance (ft)497 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)75 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 166 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative PM Pk Hr - No Build 09/15/2022 05 Cuml PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 4.0 3.8 0.6 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)60.2 62.0 1.6 36.6 41.9 14.6 70.3 24.4 20.9 55.8 15.0 1.7 Travel Dist (mi)0.8 0.8 1.3 20.4 2.2 15.7 1.7 52.8 15.6 5.9 24.8 0.8 Travel Time (hr)0.3 0.3 0.1 2.1 0.2 1.0 0.7 8.5 2.5 1.9 2.7 0.0 Avg Speed (mph)3 3 18 11 10 16 2 6 6 3 9 19 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.1 0.9 0.1 0.5 0.2 3.3 0.8 0.5 1.1 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)10.3 9.8 23.2 22.5 23.3 30.5 8.6 16.1 19.0 10.8 22.9 49.7 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 8 0 6 0 22 5 2 7 0 CO Emissions (g)8 8 14 221 13 145 16 567 125 64 189 2 NOx Emissions (g)1 1 1 21 1 16 1 73 14 5 22 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 2 0 1 1 9 2 2 3 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (s)24.6 Travel Dist (mi)142.6 Travel Time (hr)20.3 Avg Speed (mph)7 Fuel Used (gal)7.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg)18.6 HC Emissions (g)50 CO Emissions (g)1371 NOx Emissions (g)157 Density (ft/veh)209 Occupancy (veh)20 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)22.2 10.1 1.9 2.4 13.9 1.8 2.0 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 0.6 61.6 0.7 3.9 289.4 356.6 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.2 10.1 13.1 Avg Speed (mph)9 13 22 17 24 29 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.1 8.2 12.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg)25.2 32.6 16.2 18.8 34.4 35.2 29.3 HC Emissions (g)0 0 51 0 0 81 132 CO Emissions (g)1 2 1682 11 11 1462 3168 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 206 1 2 223 432 Density (ft/veh)699 Occupancy (veh)0 0 3 0 0 10 13 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 167 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative PM Pk Hr - No Build 09/15/2022 05 Cuml PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s)26.0 40.0 11.1 10.2 17.6 1.4 8.4 Travel Dist (mi)0.6 0.4 851.8 36.6 0.3 33.2 922.9 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.1 32.8 1.4 0.0 1.5 35.9 Avg Speed (mph)8 6 26 25 7 23 26 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 24.7 1.0 0.0 1.9 27.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg)23.7 19.1 34.5 35.0 17.1 17.8 33.4 HC Emissions (g)0 0 250 10 0 23 283 CO Emissions (g)2 2 4814 195 4 818 5834 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 702 28 0 89 820 Density (ft/veh)230 Occupancy (veh)0 0 33 1 0 1 36 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.4 Total Del/Veh (s)35.1 Travel Dist (mi)2467.9 Travel Time (hr)107.5 Avg Speed (mph)23 Fuel Used (gal)79.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.2 HC Emissions (g)797 CO Emissions (g)17054 NOx Emissions (g)2307 Density (ft/veh)201 Occupancy (veh)107 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 168 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative PM Pk Hr - No Build 09/15/2022 05 Cuml PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T T R Maximum Queue (ft)83 35 144 150 159 246 251 159 170 159 31 Average Queue (ft)26 2 64 43 44 216 224 80 80 79 1 95th Queue (ft)61 24 118 103 122 256 253 137 142 138 23 Link Distance (ft)288 916 221 221 227 227 Upstream Blk Time (%)12 17 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)78 115 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 75 70 115 70 Storage Blk Time (%) 28 0 9 2 6 40 6 2 13 Queuing Penalty (veh) 8 0 9 3 27 13 13 2 2 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB NB SB Directions Served LR TR L Maximum Queue (ft)39 7 33 Average Queue (ft)11 0 5 95th Queue (ft)36 5 24 Link Distance (ft)465 227 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)80 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB SB Directions Served LR T TR L Maximum Queue (ft)37 257 310 30 Average Queue (ft)10 94 138 5 95th Queue (ft)33 232 281 23 Link Distance (ft)497 3442 3442 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)75 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 269 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 169 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative SAT Pk Hr - No Build 08/26/2022 06 Cuml SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 0.3 4.1 3.6 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)48.6 51.1 1.8 27.7 26.9 12.3 54.8 27.6 23.3 47.3 20.2 2.7 Travel Dist (mi)1.1 1.5 2.1 28.8 4.1 21.9 2.0 36.9 8.1 6.4 36.3 1.8 Travel Time (hr)0.3 0.4 0.2 2.5 0.3 1.3 0.7 6.6 1.4 1.8 4.9 0.1 Avg Speed (mph)4 3 18 12 13 17 3 6 6 4 7 17 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.1 1.2 0.2 0.7 0.2 2.3 0.4 0.5 1.8 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)11.5 11.1 23.4 25.0 26.7 31.7 10.7 16.1 19.2 12.1 19.7 39.1 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 9 1 6 0 13 2 2 11 0 CO Emissions (g)12 17 23 272 29 175 17 359 60 66 294 8 NOx Emissions (g)1 1 2 26 2 19 2 42 6 6 35 1 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 2 0 1 1 7 1 2 5 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.4 Total Del/Veh (s)25.1 Travel Dist (mi)150.9 Travel Time (hr)20.5 Avg Speed (mph)7 Fuel Used (gal)7.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg)19.8 HC Emissions (g)44 CO Emissions (g)1331 NOx Emissions (g)142 Density (ft/veh)208 Occupancy (veh)20 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)17.5 6.5 1.9 2.4 10.5 2.5 2.3 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 0.9 47.0 0.3 4.6 411.8 465.0 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.1 2.1 0.0 0.2 14.5 16.9 Avg Speed (mph)10 15 22 17 25 29 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.1 11.6 14.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)27.9 33.9 15.6 19.1 35.4 35.4 31.4 HC Emissions (g)0 0 38 0 1 109 147 CO Emissions (g)1 3 1360 6 13 2029 3411 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 154 1 2 300 457 Density (ft/veh)541 Occupancy (veh)0 0 2 0 0 14 17 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 170 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative SAT Pk Hr - No Build 08/26/2022 06 Cuml SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)18.5 11.3 4.8 4.0 8.7 1.9 3.5 Travel Dist (mi)0.7 0.5 566.7 16.9 0.3 48.9 633.9 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.0 20.3 0.6 0.0 2.3 23.3 Avg Speed (mph)10 12 28 27 11 22 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 16.0 0.5 0.0 2.9 19.4 Fuel Eff. (mpg)27.3 31.0 35.5 35.4 18.7 16.7 32.6 HC Emissions (g)0 0 157 7 0 32 196 CO Emissions (g)2 1 2893 119 3 1168 4185 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 434 18 0 138 590 Density (ft/veh)354 Occupancy (veh)0 0 20 1 0 2 23 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.5 Total Del/Veh (s)32.4 Travel Dist (mi)2322.0 Travel Time (hr)100.0 Avg Speed (mph)23 Fuel Used (gal)73.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.5 HC Emissions (g)692 CO Emissions (g)14981 NOx Emissions (g)2008 Density (ft/veh)217 Occupancy (veh)100 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 171 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative SAT Pk Hr - No Build 08/26/2022 06 Cuml SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T T R Maximum Queue (ft)99 57 155 207 160 243 246 170 210 240 142 Average Queue (ft)37 4 74 55 45 175 190 80 127 135 14 95th Queue (ft)78 29 133 138 120 254 261 143 196 215 89 Link Distance (ft)288 916 221 221 227 227 Upstream Blk Time (%)3 6 0 1 Queuing Penalty (veh)15 25 0 2 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 75 70 115 70 Storage Blk Time (%) 35 0 10 3 3 39 4 9 28 Queuing Penalty (veh) 15 0 15 5 9 16 13 11 11 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LR T L T T Maximum Queue (ft)37 6 33 17 28 Average Queue (ft)12 0 5 1 1 95th Queue (ft)36 0 24 11 12 Link Distance (ft)465 227 2686 2686 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)80 Storage Blk Time (%)0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB SB SB Directions Served LR T TR L T Maximum Queue (ft)39 100 136 33 6 Average Queue (ft)11 15 27 4 0 95th Queue (ft)35 69 100 20 6 Link Distance (ft)497 3442 3442 221 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)75 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 138 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 172 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year AM Pk Hr - No Build 09/15/2022 07 HY AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 4.5 3.7 0.7 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)29.9 37.4 1.0 13.6 13.0 4.8 29.7 14.3 5.6 28.1 13.5 1.3 Travel Dist (mi)0.2 0.3 0.3 38.1 4.1 11.9 0.6 11.3 3.6 2.4 23.1 0.8 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.1 0.0 2.4 0.2 0.6 0.1 1.2 0.3 0.5 2.4 0.0 Avg Speed (mph)5 4 19 17 18 22 5 9 13 5 10 20 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.9 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)16.6 15.8 31.9 29.7 30.0 35.3 18.9 25.4 40.6 18.8 25.3 53.4 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 12 1 4 0 3 0 0 6 0 CO Emissions (g)1 2 1 321 25 93 3 94 11 17 162 2 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 0 34 2 11 0 10 1 1 20 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.8 Total Del/Veh (s)13.3 Travel Dist (mi)96.8 Travel Time (hr)7.8 Avg Speed (mph)13 Fuel Used (gal)3.4 Fuel Eff. (mpg)28.3 HC Emissions (g)26 CO Emissions (g)731 NOx Emissions (g)79 Density (ft/veh)553 Occupancy (veh)8 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)7.1 3.1 1.3 1.6 4.1 1.4 1.5 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 0.5 15.8 0.1 2.9 241.2 260.9 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 8.3 9.2 Avg Speed (mph)15 18 22 17 27 29 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.1 6.8 7.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg)35.3 39.5 15.7 18.2 34.7 35.5 32.9 HC Emissions (g)0 0 16 0 0 64 80 CO Emissions (g)1 1 577 2 8 1158 1747 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 54 0 1 178 234 Density (ft/veh)994 Occupancy (veh)0 0 1 0 0 8 9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 173 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year AM Pk Hr - No Build 09/15/2022 07 HY AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)9.1 3.5 1.2 1.1 1.3 1.4 Travel Dist (mi)0.8 0.2 188.7 3.6 0.0 37.1 230.4 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.0 6.5 0.1 0.0 1.7 8.3 Avg Speed (mph)15 17 29 29 16 22 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 5.3 0.1 0.0 2.3 7.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg)34.1 37.3 35.5 35.4 23.8 16.3 29.8 HC Emissions (g)0 0 54 0 0 29 84 CO Emissions (g)2 0 923 10 0 1136 2071 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 150 1 0 112 264 Density (ft/veh)987 Occupancy (veh)0 0 6 0 0 2 8 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.9 Total Del/Veh (s)17.6 Travel Dist (mi)1194.3 Travel Time (hr)46.9 Avg Speed (mph)26 Fuel Used (gal)36.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg)32.6 HC Emissions (g)362 CO Emissions (g)7693 NOx Emissions (g)1049 Density (ft/veh)462 Occupancy (veh)47 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 174 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Horizon Year AM Pk Hr - No Build 09/15/2022 07 HY AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T T Maximum Queue (ft)42 4 140 149 36 102 107 78 123 125 Average Queue (ft)9 0 62 25 9 42 45 28 61 65 95th Queue (ft)31 4 113 76 31 80 88 61 108 111 Link Distance (ft)288 916 221 221 227 227 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 75 70 115 Storage Blk Time (%)8 5 0 0 2 0 1 8 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 4 1 0 0 0 0 1 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB SB Directions Served LR L Maximum Queue (ft)31 24 Average Queue (ft)8 1 95th Queue (ft)31 10 Link Distance (ft)465 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)80 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB SB Directions Served LR L Maximum Queue (ft)35 6 Average Queue (ft)8 0 95th Queue (ft)30 4 Link Distance (ft)497 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)75 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 8 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 175 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year PM Pk Hr - No Build 09/15/2022 08 HY PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.1 4.2 3.9 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)60.4 57.9 1.7 35.4 44.5 13.3 58.9 23.0 20.7 52.2 15.4 1.6 Travel Dist (mi)0.7 0.8 1.2 17.2 2.1 12.3 1.5 45.0 13.6 4.9 22.3 0.6 Travel Time (hr)0.2 0.3 0.1 1.7 0.2 0.7 0.5 6.9 2.1 1.5 2.5 0.0 Avg Speed (mph)3 3 18 11 10 17 3 6 6 3 9 19 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.4 0.2 2.7 0.7 0.4 1.0 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)9.6 10.7 23.7 22.8 23.2 31.0 9.7 16.8 19.3 11.5 22.6 48.2 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 5 0 3 0 16 4 1 7 0 CO Emissions (g)8 8 12 160 15 89 13 432 103 50 170 2 NOx Emissions (g)1 1 1 15 1 9 1 55 11 4 20 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 2 0 1 1 8 2 2 3 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (s)23.6 Travel Dist (mi)122.2 Travel Time (hr)17.0 Avg Speed (mph)7 Fuel Used (gal)6.4 Fuel Eff. (mpg)19.1 HC Emissions (g)36 CO Emissions (g)1061 NOx Emissions (g)118 Density (ft/veh)229 Occupancy (veh)18 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)26.6 7.0 1.9 2.4 12.9 1.8 2.0 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 0.5 52.3 0.6 3.8 257.5 315.1 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.2 9.0 11.5 Avg Speed (mph)8 14 23 17 24 29 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 0.1 7.3 10.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg)23.8 33.9 16.5 18.3 34.8 35.2 29.5 HC Emissions (g)0 0 39 0 0 70 109 CO Emissions (g)1 1 1350 11 12 1278 2653 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 163 1 1 193 359 Density (ft/veh)727 Occupancy (veh)0 0 3 0 0 10 13 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 176 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year PM Pk Hr - No Build 09/15/2022 08 HY PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)24.9 26.5 9.1 8.6 13.9 1.6 6.9 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 0.4 727.7 37.2 0.3 29.6 795.7 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.1 27.4 1.5 0.0 1.3 30.3 Avg Speed (mph)9 8 27 26 9 22 26 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 21.0 1.1 0.0 1.7 23.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)25.4 22.4 34.7 34.7 17.2 17.8 33.5 HC Emissions (g)0 0 199 8 0 20 227 CO Emissions (g)1 2 3878 155 4 711 4751 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 567 22 0 79 669 Density (ft/veh)249 Occupancy (veh)0 0 30 2 0 1 33 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.4 Total Del/Veh (s)32.7 Travel Dist (mi)2132.2 Travel Time (hr)91.7 Avg Speed (mph)23 Fuel Used (gal)68.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.4 HC Emissions (g)637 CO Emissions (g)13923 NOx Emissions (g)1874 Density (ft/veh)216 Occupancy (veh)100 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 177 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Horizon Year PM Pk Hr - No Build 09/15/2022 08 HY PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T T R Maximum Queue (ft)91 58 138 115 140 240 250 163 178 176 31 Average Queue (ft)27 3 59 35 38 204 216 72 80 84 1 95th Queue (ft)69 27 117 85 112 266 264 131 148 150 24 Link Distance (ft)288 916 221 221 227 227 Upstream Blk Time (%)8 14 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)50 85 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 75 70 115 70 Storage Blk Time (%) 31 0 8 1 3 37 4 2 13 Queuing Penalty (veh) 8 0 7 1 14 11 8 2 2 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB NB SB Directions Served LR TR L Maximum Queue (ft)39 2 44 Average Queue (ft)10 0 5 95th Queue (ft)34 2 24 Link Distance (ft)465 227 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)80 Storage Blk Time (%)0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB SB Directions Served LR T TR L Maximum Queue (ft)41 219 251 35 Average Queue (ft)8 64 100 5 95th Queue (ft)30 181 225 24 Link Distance (ft)497 3442 3442 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)75 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 189 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 178 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year SAT Pk Hr - No Build 08/26/2022 09 HY SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 4.1 3.7 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)47.0 47.6 1.7 26.9 28.9 11.7 50.6 26.8 21.7 46.9 21.0 2.9 Travel Dist (mi)1.0 1.5 2.0 27.1 4.0 20.5 2.0 33.9 7.4 6.1 34.5 1.9 Travel Time (hr)0.3 0.4 0.2 2.3 0.3 1.2 0.6 5.9 1.2 1.8 4.8 0.1 Avg Speed (mph)3 4 18 13 13 17 3 6 6 4 7 17 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.1 1.1 0.2 0.6 0.2 2.0 0.4 0.5 1.8 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)11.2 11.5 23.4 25.1 26.3 31.6 11.5 16.7 19.9 12.1 19.6 39.3 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 8 1 6 0 10 2 2 9 0 CO Emissions (g)12 17 23 260 28 163 16 296 52 65 265 8 NOx Emissions (g)1 1 2 25 2 17 1 34 5 6 31 1 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 2 0 1 1 6 1 2 5 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.4 Total Del/Veh (s)24.9 Travel Dist (mi)142.0 Travel Time (hr)19.1 Avg Speed (mph)8 Fuel Used (gal)7.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)20.0 HC Emissions (g)39 CO Emissions (g)1204 NOx Emissions (g)126 Density (ft/veh)222 Occupancy (veh)19 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)18.1 6.4 1.9 2.0 8.9 2.3 2.2 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 0.7 43.3 0.3 5.6 393.2 443.3 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.2 13.8 16.1 Avg Speed (mph)11 15 22 17 26 29 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.2 11.1 14.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)29.3 34.5 15.6 19.5 35.4 35.5 31.6 HC Emissions (g)0 0 33 0 1 103 137 CO Emissions (g)1 2 1236 5 17 1905 3166 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 139 1 2 280 423 Density (ft/veh)570 Occupancy (veh)0 0 2 0 0 14 16 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 179 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year SAT Pk Hr - No Build 08/26/2022 09 HY SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)17.5 7.0 4.0 3.3 9.8 2.0 3.0 Travel Dist (mi)0.6 0.6 523.7 15.0 0.3 46.5 586.6 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.0 18.5 0.5 0.0 2.2 21.4 Avg Speed (mph)11 15 28 28 12 21 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 14.8 0.4 0.0 2.8 18.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)28.4 34.2 35.5 36.2 19.6 16.6 32.6 HC Emissions (g)0 0 133 2 0 32 167 CO Emissions (g)1 1 2466 44 3 1149 3665 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 374 6 0 134 514 Density (ft/veh)386 Occupancy (veh)0 0 19 1 0 2 21 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.5 Total Del/Veh (s)31.7 Travel Dist (mi)2179.0 Travel Time (hr)93.3 Avg Speed (mph)23 Fuel Used (gal)69.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.5 HC Emissions (g)626 CO Emissions (g)13668 NOx Emissions (g)1828 Density (ft/veh)232 Occupancy (veh)93 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 180 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Horizon Year SAT Pk Hr - No Build 08/26/2022 09 HY SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T T R Maximum Queue (ft)90 56 145 148 150 236 240 191 218 233 141 Average Queue (ft)36 3 66 48 41 162 177 82 125 132 18 95th Queue (ft)76 28 124 114 110 243 250 151 193 206 101 Link Distance (ft)288 916 221 221 227 227 Upstream Blk Time (%)2 4 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)7 15 0 1 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 75 70 115 70 Storage Blk Time (%) 35 0 9 2 2 35 4 9 28 Queuing Penalty (veh) 15 0 13 4 6 13 12 11 11 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB SB SB SB Directions Served LR L T T Maximum Queue (ft)42 33 3 19 Average Queue (ft)10 5 0 1 95th Queue (ft)35 25 3 12 Link Distance (ft)465 2686 2686 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)80 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB SB Directions Served LR T TR L Maximum Queue (ft)37 82 123 32 Average Queue (ft)10 7 16 3 95th Queue (ft)32 42 73 18 Link Distance (ft)497 3442 3442 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)75 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 109 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 181 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing AM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 08/26/2022 01 Exist AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.2 4.0 3.6 0.5 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)33.7 27.4 0.8 23.5 21.2 7.3 35.0 16.1 7.6 33.0 16.1 8.0 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 0.3 0.4 41.8 4.2 12.4 0.8 11.7 3.9 2.5 21.9 0.9 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.1 0.0 3.3 0.3 0.6 0.2 1.4 0.3 0.5 2.6 0.1 Avg Speed (mph)4 5 19 14 15 20 4 9 12 5 9 11 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.2 1.0 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)16.2 16.9 34.7 26.3 28.4 34.2 17.0 24.4 37.8 16.0 21.8 35.4 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 12 1 4 0 3 1 1 7 0 CO Emissions (g)2 2 1 364 25 96 4 88 15 22 202 3 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 0 36 2 11 0 9 2 2 21 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 3 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.9 Total Del/Veh (s)17.6 Travel Dist (mi)101.1 Travel Time (hr)9.4 Avg Speed (mph)11 Fuel Used (gal)4.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)25.5 HC Emissions (g)28 CO Emissions (g)823 NOx Emissions (g)83 Density (ft/veh)437 Occupancy (veh)9 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)7.0 3.2 1.3 1.0 3.6 1.8 1.7 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 0.5 15.9 0.1 2.8 234.8 254.4 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 8.2 9.0 Avg Speed (mph)15 18 22 18 27 29 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.1 6.7 7.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)37.4 37.0 15.7 22.8 36.5 34.9 32.4 HC Emissions (g)0 0 17 0 0 61 78 CO Emissions (g)1 1 600 2 8 1171 1783 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 57 0 1 175 233 Density (ft/veh)1007 Occupancy (veh)0 0 1 0 0 8 9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 182 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing AM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 08/26/2022 01 Exist AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)3.0 0.2 0.0 2.0 1.4 Travel Dist (mi)0.1 20.2 0.3 37.8 58.4 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.7 0.0 1.8 2.5 Avg Speed (mph)17 29 22 21 23 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.5 0.0 2.3 2.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)36.7 37.4 54.1 16.5 20.6 HC Emissions (g)0 6 0 27 33 CO Emissions (g)0 90 0 982 1073 NOx Emissions (g)0 16 0 110 126 Density (ft/veh)713 Occupancy (veh)0 1 0 2 3 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.9 Total Del/Veh (s)23.7 Travel Dist (mi)1193.6 Travel Time (hr)48.9 Avg Speed (mph)25 Fuel Used (gal)37.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.8 HC Emissions (g)371 CO Emissions (g)8032 NOx Emissions (g)1081 Density (ft/veh)447 Occupancy (veh)49 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 183 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Existing AM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 08/26/2022 01 Exist AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)42 179 192 49 106 126 102 214 195 Average Queue (ft)10 101 51 12 49 59 34 102 62 95th Queue (ft)34 163 121 38 87 105 75 177 143 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft)93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%)9 13 1 0 0 10 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 13 1 0 1 5 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB SB SB Directions Served LR L T Maximum Queue (ft)31 22 16 Average Queue (ft)8 1 1 95th Queue (ft)30 11 9 Link Distance (ft)453 2676 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft)18 Average Queue (ft)1 95th Queue (ft)10 Link Distance (ft)469 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 20 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 184 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing PM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 08/26/2022 02 Exist PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.3 4.0 3.8 0.3 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)45.4 44.1 1.3 48.7 43.6 14.5 63.6 26.5 23.2 58.1 17.4 7.7 Travel Dist (mi)0.9 0.7 1.4 20.5 2.1 14.4 1.8 54.6 15.4 5.5 24.7 0.9 Travel Time (hr)0.3 0.2 0.1 2.5 0.2 0.9 0.7 9.3 2.6 1.9 3.0 0.1 Avg Speed (mph)3 4 18 9 10 16 3 6 6 3 8 12 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.1 1.0 0.1 0.5 0.2 3.5 0.8 0.5 1.2 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)12.0 12.2 25.8 20.6 22.8 30.4 9.3 15.7 18.1 10.3 20.1 35.5 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 6 0 5 0 18 5 1 8 0 CO Emissions (g)8 6 11 194 16 130 20 510 127 54 253 3 NOx Emissions (g)1 1 1 17 1 14 2 65 14 5 28 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 2 0 1 1 9 3 2 3 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (s)26.9 Travel Dist (mi)142.8 Travel Time (hr)21.6 Avg Speed (mph)7 Fuel Used (gal)8.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)17.8 HC Emissions (g)44 CO Emissions (g)1333 NOx Emissions (g)149 Density (ft/veh)187 Occupancy (veh)21 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)30.8 9.8 2.0 2.3 17.4 2.3 2.2 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 0.7 61.9 0.6 3.3 287.7 354.6 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.1 2.8 0.0 0.1 10.1 13.1 Avg Speed (mph)7 13 22 17 23 29 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.1 8.2 12.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg)22.5 31.8 16.3 20.2 34.3 35.0 29.1 HC Emissions (g)0 0 43 0 0 76 119 CO Emissions (g)1 2 1528 9 10 1478 3028 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 188 1 1 214 405 Density (ft/veh)691 Occupancy (veh)0 0 3 0 0 10 13 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 185 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing PM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 08/26/2022 02 Exist PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)42.5 8.0 8.2 2.5 6.4 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 88.3 4.0 34.6 127.4 Travel Time (hr)0.1 5.9 0.3 1.7 8.0 Avg Speed (mph)6 15 13 20 16 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 2.7 0.1 1.9 4.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)18.4 32.4 34.5 18.2 26.7 HC Emissions (g)0 19 1 21 41 CO Emissions (g)2 485 23 738 1247 NOx Emissions (g)0 59 3 83 145 Density (ft/veh)225 Occupancy (veh)0 6 0 2 8 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.5 Total Del/Veh (s)39.2 Travel Dist (mi)2459.7 Travel Time (hr)109.7 Avg Speed (mph)22 Fuel Used (gal)79.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg)30.9 HC Emissions (g)733 CO Emissions (g)16320 NOx Emissions (g)2165 Density (ft/veh)198 Occupancy (veh)109 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 186 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Existing PM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 08/26/2022 02 Exist PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)79 12 152 169 204 264 271 186 243 218 Average Queue (ft)26 0 77 59 43 232 241 88 130 80 95th Queue (ft)64 7 138 126 133 280 275 162 209 173 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)15 21 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)97 137 1 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%) 28 0 13 2 0 36 10 16 Queuing Penalty (veh) 8 0 13 3 2 11 22 17 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB NB SB SB Directions Served LR TR L T Maximum Queue (ft)37 5 31 24 Average Queue (ft)11 0 4 1 95th Queue (ft)35 5 22 13 Link Distance (ft)453 228 2676 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB B6 B6 SB SB Directions Served R T TR T T T T Maximum Queue (ft)36 314 356 22 48 20 9 Average Queue (ft)6 112 148 1 3 1 0 95th Queue (ft)25 264 306 17 27 12 7 Link Distance (ft)469 303 303 3061 3061 233 233 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 1 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 311 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 187 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing SAT Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 03 Exist SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.3 4.0 3.7 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)38.6 38.7 1.6 41.1 38.1 15.6 58.7 30.8 25.6 57.8 26.1 12.6 Travel Dist (mi)0.9 1.2 2.4 30.1 3.9 21.4 2.1 36.0 7.4 6.3 34.5 2.1 Travel Time (hr)0.2 0.3 0.2 3.2 0.4 1.4 0.7 6.9 1.3 2.2 5.8 0.2 Avg Speed (mph)4 4 17 10 11 16 3 5 6 3 6 9 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.1 1.4 0.2 0.7 0.2 2.3 0.4 0.6 2.1 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)12.9 12.4 25.6 22.0 24.5 30.5 10.3 15.5 18.3 9.9 16.1 25.8 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 8 1 5 0 11 2 2 13 0 CO Emissions (g)9 13 20 281 25 157 22 320 59 68 399 10 NOx Emissions (g)1 1 2 25 2 16 2 36 6 7 45 1 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 3 0 1 1 7 1 2 6 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.5 Total Del/Veh (s)30.3 Travel Dist (mi)148.2 Travel Time (hr)22.8 Avg Speed (mph)7 Fuel Used (gal)8.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg)17.9 HC Emissions (g)43 CO Emissions (g)1384 NOx Emissions (g)143 Density (ft/veh)178 Occupancy (veh)23 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)25.0 7.0 1.9 1.6 9.3 4.1 3.1 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 1.0 44.6 0.3 5.2 398.4 449.7 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.1 2.0 0.0 0.2 14.3 16.7 Avg Speed (mph)8 14 22 17 25 28 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.1 11.4 14.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg)23.2 33.0 15.6 19.0 36.3 34.9 31.0 HC Emissions (g)0 0 33 0 1 107 141 CO Emissions (g)1 3 1225 4 16 2233 3482 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 140 0 2 308 451 Density (ft/veh)544 Occupancy (veh)0 0 2 0 0 14 17 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 188 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing SAT Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 03 Exist SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)13.2 1.7 1.2 4.2 3.0 Travel Dist (mi)0.5 55.9 1.8 49.3 107.5 Travel Time (hr)0.0 2.3 0.1 2.8 5.2 Avg Speed (mph)12 25 20 18 21 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 1.4 0.0 2.9 4.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg)30.8 39.9 50.4 17.2 24.9 HC Emissions (g)0 12 0 31 43 CO Emissions (g)1 241 6 1106 1353 NOx Emissions (g)0 33 1 125 159 Density (ft/veh)345 Occupancy (veh)0 2 0 3 5 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.6 Total Del/Veh (s)39.9 Travel Dist (mi)2237.6 Travel Time (hr)100.8 Avg Speed (mph)22 Fuel Used (gal)73.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg)30.6 HC Emissions (g)674 CO Emissions (g)15104 NOx Emissions (g)1992 Density (ft/veh)216 Occupancy (veh)100 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 189 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Existing SAT Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 03 Exist SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)90 56 181 248 193 258 261 187 259 237 Average Queue (ft)31 4 104 86 48 188 206 115 193 157 95th Queue (ft)75 28 176 178 133 263 273 209 271 253 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)2 5 5 1 Queuing Penalty (veh)10 22 18 3 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%) 30 0 19 5 0 27 14 34 Queuing Penalty (veh) 13 0 27 8 0 11 43 38 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB SB SB SB Directions Served LR L T T Maximum Queue (ft)44 48 182 105 Average Queue (ft)13 5 26 5 95th Queue (ft)40 30 108 51 Link Distance (ft)453 2676 2676 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%)2 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB SB SB Directions Served R T TR T T Maximum Queue (ft)34 120 152 164 80 Average Queue (ft)5 11 19 8 3 95th Queue (ft)24 59 81 75 44 Link Distance (ft)469 303 303 233 233 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 190 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative AM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 04 Cuml AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.2 4.5 3.6 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)26.6 29.4 1.0 23.5 21.8 7.7 35.0 15.0 6.8 34.9 15.1 5.8 Travel Dist (mi)0.2 0.4 0.4 42.9 4.1 12.7 0.7 11.7 3.6 2.4 22.4 0.9 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.1 0.0 3.4 0.3 0.7 0.2 1.3 0.3 0.5 2.5 0.1 Avg Speed (mph)5 5 18 14 15 20 5 9 12 4 9 13 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.2 1.0 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)18.5 17.7 31.0 26.4 28.4 34.1 17.1 25.0 38.7 15.6 22.3 38.0 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 14 1 4 0 3 0 1 8 0 CO Emissions (g)1 2 2 393 26 102 4 81 10 20 219 3 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 0 39 2 12 0 9 1 2 24 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 3 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.9 Total Del/Veh (s)17.1 Travel Dist (mi)102.3 Travel Time (hr)9.4 Avg Speed (mph)11 Fuel Used (gal)4.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)25.8 HC Emissions (g)30 CO Emissions (g)864 NOx Emissions (g)90 Density (ft/veh)442 Occupancy (veh)9 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)7.9 3.2 1.3 1.5 4.0 1.9 1.7 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 0.4 16.1 0.1 2.4 238.1 257.5 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 8.3 9.2 Avg Speed (mph)14 18 23 17 27 29 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.1 6.8 7.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg)35.4 39.2 15.9 18.4 36.4 35.0 32.5 HC Emissions (g)0 0 14 0 0 73 88 CO Emissions (g)1 1 547 2 7 1376 1934 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 51 0 1 204 256 Density (ft/veh)993 Occupancy (veh)0 0 1 0 0 8 9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 191 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative AM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 04 Cuml AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)4.0 0.2 0.1 2.0 1.5 Travel Dist (mi)0.1 19.7 0.5 38.9 59.2 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.7 0.0 1.9 2.6 Avg Speed (mph)17 29 22 21 23 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.5 0.0 2.3 2.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg)35.1 37.2 54.4 16.6 20.5 HC Emissions (g)0 5 0 29 34 CO Emissions (g)0 77 1 1025 1103 NOx Emissions (g)0 14 0 116 130 Density (ft/veh)700 Occupancy (veh)0 1 0 2 3 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.9 Total Del/Veh (s)23.2 Travel Dist (mi)1209.7 Travel Time (hr)49.4 Avg Speed (mph)25 Fuel Used (gal)38.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.9 HC Emissions (g)381 CO Emissions (g)8193 NOx Emissions (g)1103 Density (ft/veh)442 Occupancy (veh)49 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 192 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative AM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 04 Cuml AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)39 4 180 216 49 105 120 129 192 167 Average Queue (ft)10 0 102 58 12 47 55 35 101 59 95th Queue (ft)34 4 169 143 39 84 98 78 166 129 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%)9 0 14 1 0 0 10 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 14 1 0 0 5 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB SB Directions Served LR L Maximum Queue (ft)33 18 Average Queue (ft)8 1 95th Queue (ft)30 9 Link Distance (ft)453 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft)18 Average Queue (ft)1 95th Queue (ft)11 Link Distance (ft)469 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 21 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 193 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative PM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 05 Cuml PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 4.2 3.8 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)42.4 49.0 1.4 47.2 45.2 15.2 66.8 26.1 23.0 61.3 16.4 9.3 Travel Dist (mi)0.8 0.8 1.4 21.3 2.6 14.2 1.6 54.1 16.2 6.0 24.6 0.8 Travel Time (hr)0.2 0.2 0.1 2.5 0.3 0.9 0.6 9.1 2.7 2.2 2.9 0.1 Avg Speed (mph)4 3 18 9 9 16 3 6 6 3 8 10 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.1 1.0 0.1 0.5 0.2 3.4 0.9 0.6 1.2 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)11.9 11.1 26.4 20.7 22.8 30.5 8.9 15.9 18.2 9.9 20.1 32.7 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 6 0 5 0 20 4 2 6 0 CO Emissions (g)8 8 12 194 17 131 19 534 121 68 225 3 NOx Emissions (g)1 1 1 17 1 14 2 68 14 6 24 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 2 0 1 1 9 3 2 3 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (s)26.8 Travel Dist (mi)144.3 Travel Time (hr)21.9 Avg Speed (mph)7 Fuel Used (gal)8.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)17.7 HC Emissions (g)44 CO Emissions (g)1340 NOx Emissions (g)148 Density (ft/veh)185 Occupancy (veh)22 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)24.9 11.7 2.0 2.1 12.2 2.4 2.2 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 0.6 61.2 0.7 3.4 291.0 357.2 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.1 2.7 0.0 0.1 10.2 13.2 Avg Speed (mph)8 12 22 17 23 29 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.1 8.3 12.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg)23.6 30.9 16.3 19.5 34.2 35.0 29.2 HC Emissions (g)0 0 47 0 0 83 130 CO Emissions (g)1 2 1594 11 10 1586 3203 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 195 1 1 230 428 Density (ft/veh)687 Occupancy (veh)0 0 3 0 0 10 13 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 194 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative PM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 05 Cuml PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)39.0 8.2 7.6 2.4 6.5 Travel Dist (mi)0.5 88.2 4.5 34.8 128.0 Travel Time (hr)0.1 6.0 0.3 1.7 8.1 Avg Speed (mph)6 15 13 21 16 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 2.7 0.1 1.9 4.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)19.9 32.2 34.6 18.1 26.6 HC Emissions (g)0 20 1 17 38 CO Emissions (g)2 500 26 691 1218 NOx Emissions (g)0 62 3 75 139 Density (ft/veh)223 Occupancy (veh)0 6 0 2 8 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.5 Total Del/Veh (s)38.9 Travel Dist (mi)2462.3 Travel Time (hr)110.0 Avg Speed (mph)22 Fuel Used (gal)79.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg)30.8 HC Emissions (g)748 CO Emissions (g)16568 NOx Emissions (g)2201 Density (ft/veh)198 Occupancy (veh)110 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 195 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative PM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 05 Cuml PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)77 34 170 192 204 267 274 185 234 212 Average Queue (ft)27 2 80 63 43 231 241 95 126 80 95th Queue (ft)63 18 140 135 133 281 275 165 203 170 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)14 20 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)93 133 1 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%) 29 0 12 3 0 35 13 15 Queuing Penalty (veh) 8 0 12 3 1 11 30 17 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB SB SB Directions Served LR L T Maximum Queue (ft)42 31 26 Average Queue (ft)10 3 1 95th Queue (ft)35 19 13 Link Distance (ft)453 2676 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB B6 B6 Directions Served R T TR T T Maximum Queue (ft)34 327 346 35 47 Average Queue (ft)6 115 146 2 3 95th Queue (ft)26 274 302 28 38 Link Distance (ft)469 303 303 3061 3061 Upstream Blk Time (%)1 1 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 309 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 196 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative SAT Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 06 Cuml SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.3 4.0 3.6 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)40.9 40.2 1.7 40.8 40.0 16.0 60.1 31.2 25.7 61.1 26.2 12.8 Travel Dist (mi)0.9 1.2 2.3 31.4 5.0 22.9 2.0 36.1 8.4 6.7 34.8 2.0 Travel Time (hr)0.2 0.3 0.2 3.4 0.5 1.5 0.7 7.0 1.5 2.4 5.9 0.2 Avg Speed (mph)4 4 17 10 10 16 3 5 6 3 6 9 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.1 1.4 0.2 0.8 0.2 2.4 0.5 0.7 2.2 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)12.5 12.3 25.1 22.2 24.1 30.3 10.2 15.3 18.2 9.6 16.0 25.5 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 10 1 9 0 12 2 4 14 0 CO Emissions (g)10 12 20 305 33 213 20 348 64 101 414 9 NOx Emissions (g)1 1 2 28 3 24 2 39 6 10 46 1 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 3 0 1 1 7 2 2 6 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.5 Total Del/Veh (s)30.8 Travel Dist (mi)153.6 Travel Time (hr)23.8 Avg Speed (mph)7 Fuel Used (gal)8.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg)17.9 HC Emissions (g)53 CO Emissions (g)1549 NOx Emissions (g)163 Density (ft/veh)170 Occupancy (veh)24 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)30.2 7.8 1.9 1.9 10.1 4.3 3.2 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 0.9 45.1 0.3 5.0 408.0 459.6 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.1 2.1 0.0 0.2 14.8 17.2 Avg Speed (mph)7 14 22 17 25 28 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.1 11.8 14.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg)22.1 33.6 15.5 20.6 34.2 34.7 30.9 HC Emissions (g)0 0 39 0 1 118 158 CO Emissions (g)1 3 1354 4 16 2417 3794 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 157 0 2 340 500 Density (ft/veh)530 Occupancy (veh)0 0 2 0 0 15 17 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 197 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative SAT Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 06 Cuml SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)12.2 1.9 1.0 4.1 3.0 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 57.2 1.6 49.9 109.1 Travel Time (hr)0.0 2.4 0.1 2.8 5.3 Avg Speed (mph)12 24 21 18 20 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 1.4 0.0 2.9 4.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.0 39.9 50.5 17.5 25.2 HC Emissions (g)0 13 1 31 45 CO Emissions (g)1 268 9 1100 1378 NOx Emissions (g)0 36 1 126 164 Density (ft/veh)338 Occupancy (veh)0 2 0 3 5 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.6 Total Del/Veh (s)40.6 Travel Dist (mi)2281.0 Travel Time (hr)103.4 Avg Speed (mph)22 Fuel Used (gal)74.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg)30.6 HC Emissions (g)741 CO Emissions (g)16224 NOx Emissions (g)2167 Density (ft/veh)211 Occupancy (veh)103 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 198 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative SAT Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 06 Cuml SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)98 51 180 259 191 255 266 187 272 243 Average Queue (ft)32 3 108 96 44 194 213 122 199 166 95th Queue (ft)75 26 178 194 129 266 279 213 275 262 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)3 7 5 1 Queuing Penalty (veh)14 29 22 4 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%) 31 0 19 6 0 29 18 36 Queuing Penalty (veh) 13 0 30 11 1 12 58 45 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB SB SB SB Directions Served LR L T T Maximum Queue (ft)39 36 207 125 Average Queue (ft)12 4 29 7 95th Queue (ft)37 21 120 59 Link Distance (ft)453 2676 2676 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%)2 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB SB SB Directions Served R T TR T T Maximum Queue (ft)34 113 142 94 64 Average Queue (ft)4 14 27 5 2 95th Queue (ft)22 68 99 52 39 Link Distance (ft)469 303 303 233 233 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 238 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 199 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year AM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 07 HY AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.2 4.4 3.7 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)26.1 31.7 0.9 24.9 21.7 7.0 32.7 15.7 7.6 33.6 15.0 5.1 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 0.4 0.4 38.6 4.2 12.5 0.6 11.4 3.9 2.4 22.7 1.0 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.1 0.0 3.1 0.3 0.6 0.1 1.3 0.3 0.5 2.5 0.1 Avg Speed (mph)5 5 19 13 15 20 5 9 11 5 9 13 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.2 1.0 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)18.3 16.2 32.2 25.9 27.7 34.3 17.7 24.9 37.1 15.9 22.4 40.7 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 11 1 4 0 3 0 0 7 0 CO Emissions (g)3 3 2 333 30 108 3 76 11 18 212 3 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 0 32 2 12 0 8 1 2 23 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 3 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.8 Total Del/Veh (s)17.2 Travel Dist (mi)98.5 Travel Time (hr)9.1 Avg Speed (mph)11 Fuel Used (gal)3.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg)25.6 HC Emissions (g)26 CO Emissions (g)800 NOx Emissions (g)82 Density (ft/veh)451 Occupancy (veh)9 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)7.9 3.4 1.3 1.3 4.1 1.8 1.7 Travel Dist (mi)0.2 0.4 15.9 0.1 2.6 242.8 262.0 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 8.4 9.3 Avg Speed (mph)14 17 22 18 27 29 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.1 6.9 8.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)34.8 37.9 15.8 24.1 35.7 35.1 32.6 HC Emissions (g)0 0 15 0 0 65 80 CO Emissions (g)0 1 568 2 7 1247 1825 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 53 0 1 186 240 Density (ft/veh)980 Occupancy (veh)0 0 1 0 0 8 9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 200 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year AM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 07 HY AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)4.8 0.2 0.0 2.0 1.5 Travel Dist (mi)0.1 19.5 0.3 37.8 57.7 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.7 0.0 1.8 2.5 Avg Speed (mph)17 29 22 21 23 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.5 0.0 2.2 2.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)38.3 37.3 54.4 16.8 20.7 HC Emissions (g)0 5 0 27 31 CO Emissions (g)0 72 0 965 1038 NOx Emissions (g)0 13 0 107 120 Density (ft/veh)722 Occupancy (veh)0 1 0 2 2 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.9 Total Del/Veh (s)23.2 Travel Dist (mi)1190.5 Travel Time (hr)48.6 Avg Speed (mph)25 Fuel Used (gal)37.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.9 HC Emissions (g)359 CO Emissions (g)7829 NOx Emissions (g)1052 Density (ft/veh)450 Occupancy (veh)48 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 201 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Horizon Year AM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 07 HY AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)50 174 210 40 102 123 105 196 178 Average Queue (ft)13 97 56 10 48 56 33 102 62 95th Queue (ft)40 158 140 32 86 103 74 167 140 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft)93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%) 10 12 1 0 0 10 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 11 2 0 0 5 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB SB SB Directions Served LR L T Maximum Queue (ft)31 19 3 Average Queue (ft)7 1 0 95th Queue (ft)27 10 3 Link Distance (ft)453 2676 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB SB SB Directions Served R T T Maximum Queue (ft)24 20 16 Average Queue (ft)1 1 1 95th Queue (ft)11 20 16 Link Distance (ft)469 233 233 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 18 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 202 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year PM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 08 HY PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 4.1 3.8 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)45.8 44.2 1.3 44.3 43.1 13.2 62.8 26.5 22.6 56.8 17.9 7.7 Travel Dist (mi)0.7 0.8 1.3 18.9 2.2 13.2 1.5 49.1 14.8 6.0 24.5 0.9 Travel Time (hr)0.2 0.2 0.1 2.1 0.2 0.8 0.5 8.3 2.4 2.0 3.1 0.1 Avg Speed (mph)3 3 18 9 10 17 3 6 6 3 8 11 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.9 0.1 0.4 0.2 3.1 0.8 0.6 1.2 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)11.7 12.0 26.6 21.3 23.2 31.0 9.6 16.0 18.6 10.4 19.8 35.1 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 5 0 6 0 17 4 1 9 0 CO Emissions (g)6 7 11 182 14 133 16 474 119 58 265 3 NOx Emissions (g)0 1 1 16 1 16 1 59 13 5 29 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 2 0 1 1 8 2 2 3 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (s)26.6 Travel Dist (mi)133.9 Travel Time (hr)20.2 Avg Speed (mph)7 Fuel Used (gal)7.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg)18.0 HC Emissions (g)44 CO Emissions (g)1287 NOx Emissions (g)143 Density (ft/veh)200 Occupancy (veh)20 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)24.0 9.0 1.9 2.3 12.2 2.5 2.3 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 0.7 55.6 0.6 3.8 291.0 351.9 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.1 2.5 0.0 0.2 10.2 13.0 Avg Speed (mph)9 13 22 17 24 29 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.1 8.3 11.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg)25.1 31.0 16.3 19.5 35.2 35.1 29.6 HC Emissions (g)0 0 43 0 0 83 126 CO Emissions (g)1 2 1462 9 10 1600 3084 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 178 1 2 235 415 Density (ft/veh)701 Occupancy (veh)0 0 2 0 0 10 13 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 203 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year PM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 08 HY PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)21.5 5.8 5.9 2.6 4.8 Travel Dist (mi)0.5 80.5 4.1 33.8 119.0 Travel Time (hr)0.1 4.6 0.3 1.6 6.6 Avg Speed (mph)8 17 14 21 18 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 2.3 0.1 1.9 4.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg)24.7 34.8 38.0 18.2 27.6 HC Emissions (g)0 19 1 22 42 CO Emissions (g)1 439 19 766 1226 NOx Emissions (g)0 55 2 86 143 Density (ft/veh)271 Occupancy (veh)0 5 0 2 7 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.4 Total Del/Veh (s)37.1 Travel Dist (mi)2308.9 Travel Time (hr)101.8 Avg Speed (mph)23 Fuel Used (gal)74.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.0 HC Emissions (g)732 CO Emissions (g)15991 NOx Emissions (g)2141 Density (ft/veh)214 Occupancy (veh)102 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 204 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Horizon Year PM Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 08 HY PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)74 8 153 148 204 253 273 183 244 226 Average Queue (ft)25 0 73 53 38 220 233 91 134 89 95th Queue (ft)59 4 127 108 119 285 279 167 222 189 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)10 16 1 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)63 100 2 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%) 28 0 9 2 33 11 17 Queuing Penalty (veh) 8 0 8 2 10 24 19 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB NB SB SB Directions Served LR TR L T Maximum Queue (ft)35 4 33 68 Average Queue (ft)10 0 4 4 95th Queue (ft)34 4 21 33 Link Distance (ft)453 228 2676 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%)0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB B6 B6 SB Directions Served R T TR T T T Maximum Queue (ft)34 286 313 3 12 5 Average Queue (ft)6 75 108 0 1 0 95th Queue (ft)25 214 262 3 13 5 Link Distance (ft)469 303 303 3061 3061 233 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 236 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 205 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year SAT Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 09 HY SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 0.2 4.0 3.7 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)37.4 36.3 1.6 40.0 37.1 14.1 54.7 30.8 24.8 56.9 25.8 12.3 Travel Dist (mi)0.9 1.3 2.2 27.9 3.9 20.1 2.0 34.3 7.8 6.7 34.1 2.1 Travel Time (hr)0.2 0.3 0.2 2.9 0.4 1.2 0.7 6.6 1.4 2.3 5.7 0.2 Avg Speed (mph)4 4 17 10 11 17 3 5 6 3 6 9 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.1 1.3 0.2 0.6 0.2 2.2 0.4 0.7 2.1 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)12.9 13.3 25.7 22.3 24.4 31.2 11.0 15.5 18.6 10.0 16.2 26.3 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 9 1 5 0 11 2 2 14 0 CO Emissions (g)9 13 19 279 25 146 20 326 55 72 402 10 NOx Emissions (g)1 1 2 26 2 15 2 37 6 7 45 1 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 3 0 1 1 7 1 2 6 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.4 Total Del/Veh (s)29.8 Travel Dist (mi)143.4 Travel Time (hr)22.1 Avg Speed (mph)7 Fuel Used (gal)8.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)18.0 HC Emissions (g)44 CO Emissions (g)1375 NOx Emissions (g)144 Density (ft/veh)184 Occupancy (veh)22 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)28.4 7.3 1.8 2.1 9.6 4.0 3.1 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 0.8 42.6 0.2 5.5 401.4 450.8 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.1 1.9 0.0 0.2 14.4 16.7 Avg Speed (mph)8 14 22 17 25 28 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.2 11.5 14.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg)24.1 32.7 15.6 19.9 34.6 34.8 31.1 HC Emissions (g)0 0 33 0 1 115 149 CO Emissions (g)1 2 1218 3 18 2353 3594 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 138 0 2 329 470 Density (ft/veh)544 Occupancy (veh)0 0 2 0 0 14 17 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 206 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year SAT Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 09 HY SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)8.4 1.5 1.0 4.0 2.8 Travel Dist (mi)0.5 54.1 1.6 48.0 104.1 Travel Time (hr)0.0 2.2 0.1 2.7 5.0 Avg Speed (mph)14 25 20 18 21 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 1.4 0.0 2.8 4.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg)35.5 40.0 50.6 17.4 25.1 HC Emissions (g)0 12 0 31 43 CO Emissions (g)1 235 2 1085 1324 NOx Emissions (g)0 32 0 123 156 Density (ft/veh)363 Occupancy (veh)0 2 0 3 5 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.6 Total Del/Veh (s)39.2 Travel Dist (mi)2178.9 Travel Time (hr)97.9 Avg Speed (mph)22 Fuel Used (gal)71.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg)30.6 HC Emissions (g)678 CO Emissions (g)15005 NOx Emissions (g)1989 Density (ft/veh)223 Occupancy (veh)98 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 207 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Horizon Year SAT Pk Hr - 3-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 09 HY SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)87 61 173 202 155 248 264 187 272 241 Average Queue (ft)33 4 95 77 38 181 200 123 192 154 95th Queue (ft)74 29 162 157 105 257 271 213 271 255 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)2 5 4 1 Queuing Penalty (veh)10 20 16 3 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%) 30 0 16 4 0 26 16 35 Queuing Penalty (veh) 13 0 23 7 0 10 49 43 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB SB SB SB Directions Served LR L T T Maximum Queue (ft)42 36 159 61 Average Queue (ft)11 4 21 3 95th Queue (ft)36 23 97 31 Link Distance (ft)453 2676 2676 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%)1 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB SB SB Directions Served R T TR T T Maximum Queue (ft)30 99 116 58 39 Average Queue (ft)5 8 18 3 1 95th Queue (ft)23 48 72 45 28 Link Distance (ft)469 303 303 233 233 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 193 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 208 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing AM Pk Hr -4-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 01 Exist AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 4.3 3.6 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)26.7 29.9 1.0 24.1 22.5 7.7 35.8 16.7 7.9 33.8 15.0 10.3 Travel Dist (mi)0.2 0.4 0.4 41.5 4.2 13.5 0.8 11.6 3.8 2.5 22.4 1.0 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.1 0.0 3.3 0.3 0.7 0.2 1.4 0.3 0.5 2.5 0.1 Avg Speed (mph)5 5 18 13 14 20 4 8 11 5 9 10 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.9 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)16.5 17.3 31.6 26.3 28.1 34.3 16.8 24.1 36.8 16.5 23.8 32.1 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 15 1 4 0 3 0 0 6 0 CO Emissions (g)1 2 2 400 26 105 4 78 12 17 162 3 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 0 42 2 12 0 8 1 1 19 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.8 Total Del/Veh (s)17.4 Travel Dist (mi)102.3 Travel Time (hr)9.5 Avg Speed (mph)11 Fuel Used (gal)3.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg)26.1 HC Emissions (g)29 CO Emissions (g)814 NOx Emissions (g)87 Density (ft/veh)435 Occupancy (veh)9 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)9.3 3.8 1.3 1.5 3.7 1.5 1.5 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 0.4 16.3 0.1 2.1 239.3 258.6 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 8.2 9.1 Avg Speed (mph)14 17 22 17 27 29 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.1 6.7 7.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg)34.9 36.5 15.5 19.8 34.1 35.6 32.9 HC Emissions (g)0 0 16 0 0 63 79 CO Emissions (g)1 1 593 2 6 1146 1750 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 55 0 1 178 234 Density (ft/veh)998 Occupancy (veh)0 0 1 0 0 8 9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 209 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing AM Pk Hr -4-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 01 Exist AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)1.2 1.1 1.2 1.2 Travel Dist (mi)0.0 191.2 3.7 38.4 233.4 Travel Time (hr)0.0 6.5 0.1 1.7 8.4 Avg Speed (mph)18 29 29 23 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 5.4 0.1 2.3 7.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)35.8 35.6 36.5 16.4 29.9 HC Emissions (g)0 50 0 32 82 CO Emissions (g)0 872 11 1189 2072 NOx Emissions (g)0 144 1 119 265 Density (ft/veh)949 Occupancy (veh)0 7 0 2 8 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.9 Total Del/Veh (s)21.5 Travel Dist (mi)1205.4 Travel Time (hr)48.6 Avg Speed (mph)25 Fuel Used (gal)37.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg)32.3 HC Emissions (g)368 CO Emissions (g)7896 NOx Emissions (g)1075 Density (ft/veh)435 Occupancy (veh)48 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 210 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Existing AM Pk Hr -4-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 01 Exist AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)45 179 186 47 105 122 104 156 154 Average Queue (ft)11 101 56 13 48 58 34 72 76 95th Queue (ft)37 165 133 38 85 104 73 127 129 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 Storage Bay Dist (ft)93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%)8 14 1 0 0 3 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 13 2 0 0 1 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB SB Directions Served LR L Maximum Queue (ft)33 22 Average Queue (ft)8 1 95th Queue (ft)31 10 Link Distance (ft)453 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft)9 Average Queue (ft)1 95th Queue (ft)7 Link Distance (ft)469 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 17 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 211 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing PM Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 02 Exist PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 4.1 3.8 0.4 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)45.2 44.8 1.3 46.1 46.6 14.4 64.9 25.6 22.5 53.3 16.8 14.0 Travel Dist (mi)0.8 0.7 1.4 20.2 2.4 13.9 1.8 53.6 15.8 5.6 25.3 0.8 Travel Time (hr)0.2 0.2 0.1 2.3 0.3 0.9 0.7 8.8 2.6 1.8 3.0 0.1 Avg Speed (mph)3 3 18 9 9 16 3 6 6 3 8 8 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.1 1.0 0.1 0.5 0.2 3.3 0.9 0.5 1.2 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)11.7 11.4 26.5 20.9 22.1 30.6 9.2 16.0 18.5 11.1 21.7 27.0 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 6 0 6 0 17 4 2 9 0 CO Emissions (g)7 7 11 202 18 140 21 490 113 60 227 3 NOx Emissions (g)1 1 1 18 1 16 2 62 12 5 26 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 2 0 1 1 9 3 2 3 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (s)26.0 Travel Dist (mi)142.3 Travel Time (hr)21.1 Avg Speed (mph)7 Fuel Used (gal)7.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)18.2 HC Emissions (g)45 CO Emissions (g)1295 NOx Emissions (g)144 Density (ft/veh)192 Occupancy (veh)21 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)20.0 9.2 2.0 2.3 13.1 1.9 2.1 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 0.6 60.4 0.7 4.2 293.4 359.7 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.1 2.7 0.0 0.2 10.2 13.2 Avg Speed (mph)9 13 22 17 24 29 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.1 8.3 12.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg)25.3 31.6 16.2 18.8 34.9 35.4 29.5 HC Emissions (g)0 0 43 0 1 89 133 CO Emissions (g)1 2 1514 11 12 1599 3139 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 185 1 2 245 433 Density (ft/veh)687 Occupancy (veh)0 0 3 0 0 10 13 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 212 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing PM Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 02 Exist PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s)35.8 11.4 12.9 1.4 8.5 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 841.8 40.2 35.4 917.8 Travel Time (hr)0.1 32.7 1.6 1.5 35.9 Avg Speed (mph)6 26 25 23 26 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 24.5 1.2 2.0 27.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg)19.1 34.4 34.5 17.9 33.2 HC Emissions (g)0 212 16 26 255 CO Emissions (g)1 4240 292 888 5421 NOx Emissions (g)0 605 44 99 748 Density (ft/veh)221 Occupancy (veh)0 33 2 2 36 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.5 Total Del/Veh (s)36.7 Travel Dist (mi)2461.2 Travel Time (hr)108.2 Avg Speed (mph)23 Fuel Used (gal)79.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.1 HC Emissions (g)747 CO Emissions (g)16282 NOx Emissions (g)2181 Density (ft/veh)195 Occupancy (veh)108 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 213 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Existing PM Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 02 Exist PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)73 17 160 170 180 264 271 174 193 198 Average Queue (ft)26 1 75 61 46 228 239 81 98 99 95th Queue (ft)60 10 136 126 137 281 273 146 171 170 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)13 19 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)82 123 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%) 28 0 10 2 0 34 8 8 Queuing Penalty (veh) 8 0 9 2 1 11 18 8 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB NB NB SB SB Directions Served LR T TR L T Maximum Queue (ft)37 4 3 28 3 Average Queue (ft)11 0 0 4 0 95th Queue (ft)35 4 3 21 3 Link Distance (ft)453 228 228 2676 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB Directions Served R T TR Maximum Queue (ft)29 316 341 Average Queue (ft)5 96 138 95th Queue (ft)24 253 303 Link Distance (ft)469 3422 3422 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 261 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 214 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing SAT Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 03 Exist SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 4.1 3.7 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)37.5 34.3 2.0 37.4 38.4 14.9 56.0 31.4 25.8 52.1 25.2 19.7 Travel Dist (mi)1.0 1.2 2.2 29.8 4.6 19.7 2.3 35.5 7.3 5.8 33.8 2.1 Travel Time (hr)0.3 0.3 0.2 3.0 0.4 1.2 0.7 6.9 1.3 1.8 5.5 0.3 Avg Speed (mph)4 4 17 10 11 16 3 5 6 3 6 7 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.1 1.3 0.2 0.6 0.2 2.3 0.4 0.5 1.9 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)13.2 13.4 25.3 22.7 23.9 30.8 10.8 15.3 18.3 11.2 17.5 21.5 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 9 1 6 0 11 2 2 11 0 CO Emissions (g)9 13 19 284 30 160 22 322 58 61 305 8 NOx Emissions (g)1 1 2 26 2 18 2 36 6 5 34 1 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 3 0 1 1 7 1 2 6 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.5 Total Del/Veh (s)29.6 Travel Dist (mi)145.4 Travel Time (hr)22.1 Avg Speed (mph)7 Fuel Used (gal)7.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg)18.4 HC Emissions (g)42 CO Emissions (g)1292 NOx Emissions (g)134 Density (ft/veh)184 Occupancy (veh)22 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)17.7 6.1 1.9 1.7 8.5 2.5 2.3 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 1.0 43.8 0.3 5.3 388.4 439.2 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.1 2.0 0.0 0.2 13.7 16.0 Avg Speed (mph)11 15 22 17 25 28 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.2 10.9 14.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)28.8 33.8 15.5 20.8 34.8 35.5 31.5 HC Emissions (g)0 0 35 0 1 105 141 CO Emissions (g)1 3 1253 4 16 1973 3250 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 143 0 2 288 435 Density (ft/veh)568 Occupancy (veh)0 0 2 0 0 14 16 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 215 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing SAT Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 03 Exist SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)8.4 4.2 4.3 1.8 3.0 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 534.9 17.9 48.5 601.6 Travel Time (hr)0.0 19.0 0.7 2.2 21.9 Avg Speed (mph)14 28 27 22 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 15.1 0.5 3.0 18.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg)34.1 35.5 36.0 16.3 32.4 HC Emissions (g)0 138 9 37 184 CO Emissions (g)1 2558 159 1308 4025 NOx Emissions (g)0 384 27 150 561 Density (ft/veh)362 Occupancy (veh)0 19 1 2 22 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.6 Total Del/Veh (s)36.1 Travel Dist (mi)2203.2 Travel Time (hr)97.1 Avg Speed (mph)23 Fuel Used (gal)70.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.2 HC Emissions (g)668 CO Emissions (g)14477 NOx Emissions (g)1938 Density (ft/veh)217 Occupancy (veh)97 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 216 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Existing SAT Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 03 Exist SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)97 63 181 212 193 248 265 183 234 252 Average Queue (ft)33 6 98 79 46 184 202 87 145 154 95th Queue (ft)78 36 171 160 124 263 277 159 219 234 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)3 6 1 1 Queuing Penalty (veh)12 23 2 5 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%) 29 1 15 4 0 28 8 21 Queuing Penalty (veh) 12 0 22 6 1 11 26 24 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LR TR L T T Maximum Queue (ft)39 3 31 36 63 Average Queue (ft)12 0 5 1 4 95th Queue (ft)38 0 22 18 30 Link Distance (ft)453 228 2676 2676 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%)0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB Directions Served R T TR Maximum Queue (ft)27 81 130 Average Queue (ft)3 9 21 95th Queue (ft)19 48 83 Link Distance (ft)469 3422 3422 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 145 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 217 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative AM Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 04 Cuml AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 4.1 3.6 0.9 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)33.1 29.2 1.1 24.4 22.6 8.0 35.5 17.1 8.1 36.4 15.2 9.9 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 0.3 0.4 43.3 4.5 13.5 0.7 12.2 4.0 2.6 23.4 1.0 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.1 0.0 3.5 0.3 0.7 0.2 1.5 0.4 0.6 2.6 0.1 Avg Speed (mph)5 5 18 13 14 20 5 8 11 4 9 10 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.2 1.0 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)15.8 16.1 31.5 26.1 27.7 33.7 17.2 23.8 36.3 15.5 23.5 33.1 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 14 1 5 0 3 0 0 7 0 CO Emissions (g)2 2 2 393 31 121 4 87 11 17 180 3 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 0 39 2 15 0 9 1 1 21 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 3 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.9 Total Del/Veh (s)17.8 Travel Dist (mi)106.4 Travel Time (hr)10.0 Avg Speed (mph)11 Fuel Used (gal)4.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)25.7 HC Emissions (g)30 CO Emissions (g)852 NOx Emissions (g)91 Density (ft/veh)412 Occupancy (veh)10 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)6.9 3.1 1.4 1.2 5.7 1.5 1.5 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 0.4 16.9 0.1 2.2 250.1 270.2 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.1 8.6 9.5 Avg Speed (mph)15 18 22 18 27 29 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.1 7.0 8.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg)35.6 38.4 15.6 20.0 36.2 35.6 32.9 HC Emissions (g)0 0 17 0 0 72 89 CO Emissions (g)1 1 620 3 7 1292 1924 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 60 0 1 201 263 Density (ft/veh)954 Occupancy (veh)0 0 1 0 0 9 10 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 218 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative AM Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 04 Cuml AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)4.1 1.2 0.9 1.2 1.2 Travel Dist (mi)0.1 201.7 3.4 40.2 245.4 Travel Time (hr)0.0 6.9 0.1 1.8 8.8 Avg Speed (mph)18 29 28 23 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 5.7 0.1 2.4 8.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg)40.2 35.7 38.0 16.5 30.0 HC Emissions (g)0 56 0 33 89 CO Emissions (g)0 969 9 1220 2198 NOx Emissions (g)0 160 1 122 283 Density (ft/veh)902 Occupancy (veh)0 7 0 2 9 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.9 Total Del/Veh (s)22.1 Travel Dist (mi)1262.1 Travel Time (hr)51.1 Avg Speed (mph)25 Fuel Used (gal)39.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)32.3 HC Emissions (g)394 CO Emissions (g)8385 NOx Emissions (g)1148 Density (ft/veh)414 Occupancy (veh)51 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 219 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative AM Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 04 Cuml AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)46 4 179 224 47 124 122 92 170 175 Average Queue (ft)11 0 105 62 12 53 60 34 72 78 95th Queue (ft)37 4 171 150 37 100 109 69 130 139 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%) 10 0 15 1 0 0 4 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 15 2 0 0 2 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB SB Directions Served LR L Maximum Queue (ft)33 18 Average Queue (ft)8 1 95th Queue (ft)30 9 Link Distance (ft)453 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft)21 Average Queue (ft)1 95th Queue (ft)12 Link Distance (ft)469 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 19 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 220 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative PM Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 05 Cuml PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 4.0 3.8 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)50.3 47.6 1.5 48.1 40.7 14.7 65.3 26.6 23.1 56.1 16.7 10.7 Travel Dist (mi)0.8 0.8 1.4 21.8 2.6 14.9 1.8 53.8 15.8 5.8 24.5 0.7 Travel Time (hr)0.2 0.2 0.1 2.6 0.3 0.9 0.7 9.1 2.6 2.0 3.0 0.1 Avg Speed (mph)3 3 18 9 10 16 3 6 6 3 8 10 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.1 1.1 0.1 0.5 0.2 3.4 0.9 0.5 1.1 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)11.2 11.3 27.0 20.6 23.4 30.6 9.1 15.8 18.2 10.8 21.5 32.2 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 7 0 5 0 20 4 2 5 0 CO Emissions (g)7 9 11 226 17 134 21 537 121 66 165 2 NOx Emissions (g)1 1 1 20 1 15 2 68 14 5 18 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 2 0 1 1 9 3 2 3 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (s)26.9 Travel Dist (mi)144.9 Travel Time (hr)21.8 Avg Speed (mph)7 Fuel Used (gal)8.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)18.0 HC Emissions (g)45 CO Emissions (g)1316 NOx Emissions (g)146 Density (ft/veh)185 Occupancy (veh)22 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)24.7 8.9 2.0 2.4 16.2 1.8 2.1 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 0.7 61.1 0.6 3.6 288.9 355.2 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.1 2.7 0.0 0.2 10.0 13.1 Avg Speed (mph)8 13 22 17 23 29 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.1 8.2 12.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)23.4 31.8 16.2 19.6 34.2 35.4 29.4 HC Emissions (g)0 0 47 0 0 87 135 CO Emissions (g)2 2 1600 9 10 1550 3173 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 196 1 1 238 437 Density (ft/veh)695 Occupancy (veh)0 0 3 0 0 10 13 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 221 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative PM Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 05 Cuml PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s)25.9 11.9 11.8 1.4 8.8 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 846.3 40.5 34.8 921.9 Travel Time (hr)0.0 33.0 1.6 1.5 36.1 Avg Speed (mph)8 26 25 23 26 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 24.6 1.2 2.0 27.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)23.4 34.4 33.8 17.6 33.2 HC Emissions (g)0 233 12 20 265 CO Emissions (g)1 4585 239 808 5633 NOx Emissions (g)0 659 35 83 778 Density (ft/veh)220 Occupancy (veh)0 33 2 2 36 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.5 Total Del/Veh (s)37.5 Travel Dist (mi)2464.2 Travel Time (hr)109.0 Avg Speed (mph)23 Fuel Used (gal)79.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.1 HC Emissions (g)758 CO Emissions (g)16547 NOx Emissions (g)2216 Density (ft/veh)193 Occupancy (veh)109 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 222 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative PM Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 05 Cuml PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)76 29 163 182 204 263 277 154 178 171 Average Queue (ft)27 2 83 61 44 234 241 81 90 91 95th Queue (ft)65 19 143 127 130 279 279 137 152 150 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)14 20 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)91 132 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%) 29 0 13 2 35 10 6 Queuing Penalty (veh) 8 0 12 3 11 24 7 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB SB SB SB Directions Served LR L T T Maximum Queue (ft)46 32 3 5 Average Queue (ft)11 4 0 0 95th Queue (ft)37 21 3 5 Link Distance (ft)453 2676 2676 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB Directions Served R T TR Maximum Queue (ft)32 303 346 Average Queue (ft)4 106 143 95th Queue (ft)22 258 302 Link Distance (ft)469 3422 3422 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 288 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 223 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative SAT Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 06 Cuml SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 4.0 3.6 0.7 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)37.9 38.8 1.5 40.9 39.6 17.1 56.8 31.9 27.7 55.9 25.1 18.3 Travel Dist (mi)0.9 1.1 2.1 30.9 4.4 23.1 2.3 37.1 8.3 6.8 35.8 2.1 Travel Time (hr)0.2 0.3 0.2 3.3 0.4 1.5 0.8 7.4 1.6 2.3 5.8 0.3 Avg Speed (mph)4 4 17 10 10 15 3 5 5 3 6 7 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.1 1.4 0.2 0.8 0.2 2.5 0.5 0.6 2.1 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)13.2 12.4 25.9 22.1 23.8 29.8 10.4 15.0 17.4 10.5 17.3 22.5 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 10 1 9 0 13 2 2 13 0 CO Emissions (g)8 11 17 308 29 222 24 358 63 79 333 8 NOx Emissions (g)1 1 2 29 2 25 2 41 6 7 38 1 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 3 0 2 1 7 2 2 6 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.4 Total Del/Veh (s)30.6 Travel Dist (mi)154.9 Travel Time (hr)24.1 Avg Speed (mph)7 Fuel Used (gal)8.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg)18.1 HC Emissions (g)50 CO Emissions (g)1461 NOx Emissions (g)154 Density (ft/veh)168 Occupancy (veh)24 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)19.0 8.1 1.9 2.0 11.2 2.8 2.5 Travel Dist (mi)0.2 1.0 46.4 0.4 5.1 416.1 469.2 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.1 2.1 0.0 0.2 14.7 17.2 Avg Speed (mph)9 14 22 17 24 28 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.2 11.7 14.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg)26.2 32.8 15.4 19.7 34.3 35.5 31.4 HC Emissions (g)0 0 39 0 1 114 154 CO Emissions (g)1 3 1378 6 14 2126 3527 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 158 1 2 316 477 Density (ft/veh)530 Occupancy (veh)0 0 2 0 0 15 17 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 224 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Cumulative SAT Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 06 Cuml SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)12.8 4.8 4.3 1.8 3.3 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 564.5 13.6 50.9 629.5 Travel Time (hr)0.0 20.2 0.5 2.3 23.1 Avg Speed (mph)11 28 27 22 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 15.9 0.4 3.1 19.4 Fuel Eff. (mpg)29.7 35.5 36.5 16.6 32.5 HC Emissions (g)0 157 9 37 203 CO Emissions (g)1 2882 153 1296 4331 NOx Emissions (g)0 439 25 154 618 Density (ft/veh)344 Occupancy (veh)0 20 1 2 23 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.6 Total Del/Veh (s)37.9 Travel Dist (mi)2327.3 Travel Time (hr)103.5 Avg Speed (mph)23 Fuel Used (gal)74.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.1 HC Emissions (g)729 CO Emissions (g)15617 NOx Emissions (g)2109 Density (ft/veh)204 Occupancy (veh)103 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 225 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative SAT Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 06 Cuml SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)96 50 181 238 182 254 265 187 241 246 Average Queue (ft)30 3 106 93 50 200 215 108 163 167 95th Queue (ft)70 26 172 190 136 272 278 192 243 246 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)4 8 1 2 Queuing Penalty (veh)17 35 6 7 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%) 30 0 21 7 0 31 13 23 Queuing Penalty (veh) 13 0 32 12 1 13 42 29 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LR TR L T T Maximum Queue (ft)42 8 36 67 91 Average Queue (ft)12 0 5 4 7 95th Queue (ft)37 6 24 32 44 Link Distance (ft)453 228 2676 2676 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%)0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB SB Directions Served R T TR T Maximum Queue (ft)30 122 146 30 Average Queue (ft)5 16 31 1 95th Queue (ft)23 72 102 31 Link Distance (ft)469 3422 3422 233 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 206 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 226 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year AM Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 07 HY AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.2 3.9 3.7 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)28.9 25.5 0.9 24.5 22.6 7.0 35.0 16.5 8.0 34.5 13.9 10.5 Travel Dist (mi)0.2 0.3 0.3 38.7 4.0 12.0 0.6 11.2 3.5 2.6 21.6 1.0 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.1 0.0 3.1 0.3 0.6 0.1 1.3 0.3 0.6 2.3 0.1 Avg Speed (mph)5 5 18 13 14 20 5 8 11 4 10 10 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.9 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)16.9 17.6 33.4 26.2 27.1 34.7 17.5 24.3 36.7 16.3 24.5 31.4 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 13 1 3 0 3 0 0 6 0 CO Emissions (g)1 2 1 357 27 86 4 80 10 16 162 3 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 0 36 2 10 0 9 1 1 19 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.8 Total Del/Veh (s)17.1 Travel Dist (mi)96.1 Travel Time (hr)8.9 Avg Speed (mph)11 Fuel Used (gal)3.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg)26.1 HC Emissions (g)26 CO Emissions (g)749 NOx Emissions (g)80 Density (ft/veh)465 Occupancy (veh)9 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)6.9 3.1 1.3 1.5 3.2 1.5 1.5 Travel Dist (mi)0.3 0.3 15.4 0.1 2.3 233.9 252.3 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 8.1 8.9 Avg Speed (mph)15 17 22 18 27 29 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.1 6.6 7.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg)35.7 38.8 15.8 19.9 36.6 35.5 33.0 HC Emissions (g)0 0 14 0 0 62 77 CO Emissions (g)1 1 544 2 7 1124 1678 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 51 0 1 172 224 Density (ft/veh)1022 Occupancy (veh)0 0 1 0 0 8 9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 227 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year AM Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 07 HY AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 Travel Dist (mi)0.0 181.8 3.2 36.7 221.8 Travel Time (hr)0.0 6.2 0.1 1.6 7.9 Avg Speed (mph)17 29 28 23 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 5.1 0.1 2.2 7.4 Fuel Eff. (mpg)36.1 35.5 36.9 16.7 30.0 HC Emissions (g)0 53 0 31 84 CO Emissions (g)0 908 10 1125 2043 NOx Emissions (g)0 150 1 112 263 Density (ft/veh)999 Occupancy (veh)0 6 0 2 8 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.9 Total Del/Veh (s)21.1 Travel Dist (mi)1150.9 Travel Time (hr)46.3 Avg Speed (mph)25 Fuel Used (gal)35.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg)32.4 HC Emissions (g)357 CO Emissions (g)7578 NOx Emissions (g)1035 Density (ft/veh)456 Occupancy (veh)46 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 228 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Horizon Year AM Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 07 HY AM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)41 4 175 190 43 112 118 80 134 139 Average Queue (ft)9 0 96 53 10 49 55 35 65 71 95th Queue (ft)32 0 160 130 34 91 102 69 116 120 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%)8 0 13 1 0 0 2 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 12 2 0 0 1 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB SB Directions Served LR L Maximum Queue (ft)31 18 Average Queue (ft)7 1 95th Queue (ft)27 9 Link Distance (ft)453 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft)15 Average Queue (ft)1 95th Queue (ft)7 Link Distance (ft)469 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 16 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 229 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year PM Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 08 HY PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 4.1 3.9 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)44.7 42.1 1.4 45.5 38.7 12.1 59.6 25.7 22.0 53.2 16.4 11.6 Travel Dist (mi)0.7 0.8 1.3 18.5 2.1 13.1 1.6 50.0 15.3 5.8 24.1 0.8 Travel Time (hr)0.2 0.2 0.1 2.1 0.2 0.8 0.6 8.3 2.5 1.8 2.9 0.1 Avg Speed (mph)3 4 18 9 11 18 3 6 6 3 8 9 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.9 0.1 0.4 0.2 3.1 0.8 0.5 1.1 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg)12.1 12.5 26.6 21.4 24.1 31.4 10.1 16.2 18.8 11.3 21.8 30.1 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 5 0 5 0 17 5 1 7 0 CO Emissions (g)6 8 11 176 14 129 17 476 127 55 190 2 NOx Emissions (g)0 1 1 16 1 15 1 58 14 4 22 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 2 0 1 1 8 2 2 3 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (s)25.6 Travel Dist (mi)134.3 Travel Time (hr)19.7 Avg Speed (mph)7 Fuel Used (gal)7.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg)18.5 HC Emissions (g)42 CO Emissions (g)1210 NOx Emissions (g)135 Density (ft/veh)205 Occupancy (veh)20 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)21.7 10.4 2.0 2.2 11.6 1.8 2.1 Travel Dist (mi)0.5 0.6 56.6 0.7 4.7 284.5 347.7 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.2 9.9 12.8 Avg Speed (mph)9 13 22 17 25 29 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.1 8.1 11.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)25.4 30.3 16.3 19.4 34.0 35.2 29.5 HC Emissions (g)0 0 44 0 1 77 122 CO Emissions (g)2 2 1486 11 14 1401 2916 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 182 1 2 212 397 Density (ft/veh)712 Occupancy (veh)0 0 3 0 0 10 13 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 230 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year PM Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 08 HY PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s)36.2 9.9 11.2 1.4 7.4 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 790.1 40.9 33.4 864.7 Travel Time (hr)0.1 30.1 1.6 1.4 33.2 Avg Speed (mph)6 26 25 23 26 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 22.9 1.2 1.9 25.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg)19.8 34.5 34.5 18.0 33.3 HC Emissions (g)0 221 14 23 259 CO Emissions (g)2 4297 269 822 5389 NOx Emissions (g)0 625 40 90 756 Density (ft/veh)239 Occupancy (veh)0 30 2 1 33 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.4 Total Del/Veh (s)35.3 Travel Dist (mi)2324.3 Travel Time (hr)101.3 Avg Speed (mph)23 Fuel Used (gal)74.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.2 HC Emissions (g)731 CO Emissions (g)15776 NOx Emissions (g)2128 Density (ft/veh)208 Occupancy (veh)101 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 231 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Horizon Year PM Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 09/15/2022 08 HY PM Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)65 20 149 168 191 255 269 157 182 184 Average Queue (ft)24 1 73 54 38 220 234 79 87 92 95th Queue (ft)58 13 132 119 118 285 282 137 153 154 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)11 17 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)65 102 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%) 27 0 10 1 0 32 8 6 Queuing Penalty (veh) 7 0 9 1 0 10 18 6 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB NB SB Directions Served LR TR L Maximum Queue (ft)44 5 35 Average Queue (ft)12 0 4 95th Queue (ft)38 4 22 Link Distance (ft)453 228 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB Directions Served R T TR Maximum Queue (ft)40 246 304 Average Queue (ft)5 75 117 95th Queue (ft)25 201 267 Link Distance (ft)469 3422 3422 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 218 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 232 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year SAT Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 09 HY SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 1 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 4.1 3.7 0.5 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)37.2 35.2 1.6 39.2 36.8 15.1 57.4 30.7 24.9 52.3 23.9 20.0 Travel Dist (mi)0.8 1.1 1.9 27.1 4.2 20.8 2.1 35.2 7.7 6.4 34.5 1.9 Travel Time (hr)0.2 0.3 0.2 2.8 0.4 1.3 0.7 6.7 1.4 2.0 5.4 0.3 Avg Speed (mph)4 4 17 10 11 16 3 5 6 3 6 7 Fuel Used (gal)0.1 0.1 0.1 1.2 0.2 0.7 0.2 2.3 0.4 0.6 1.9 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg)13.5 13.3 26.6 22.3 24.7 30.3 10.5 15.6 18.7 11.1 17.9 21.6 HC Emissions (g)0 0 0 8 1 6 0 12 2 2 11 0 CO Emissions (g)7 10 16 253 29 174 21 343 52 67 309 7 NOx Emissions (g)1 1 1 23 2 19 2 39 5 6 37 1 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh)0 0 0 3 0 1 1 7 1 2 5 0 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.4 Total Del/Veh (s)29.1 Travel Dist (mi)143.8 Travel Time (hr)21.7 Avg Speed (mph)7 Fuel Used (gal)7.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg)18.5 HC Emissions (g)43 CO Emissions (g)1289 NOx Emissions (g)137 Density (ft/veh)187 Occupancy (veh)21 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)18.0 7.3 1.9 1.8 8.4 2.6 2.4 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 0.9 43.6 0.3 4.2 398.1 447.5 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.1 2.0 0.0 0.2 14.0 16.3 Avg Speed (mph)9 14 22 17 25 28 28 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.1 11.2 14.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg)26.3 33.4 15.5 19.8 34.9 35.4 31.4 HC Emissions (g)0 0 36 0 1 112 148 CO Emissions (g)1 2 1262 6 13 2077 3362 NOx Emissions (g)0 0 148 1 2 307 457 Density (ft/veh)558 Occupancy (veh)0 0 2 0 0 14 16 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 233 of 349 SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year SAT Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 09 HY SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 2 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)10.0 4.2 4.1 1.8 3.0 Travel Dist (mi)0.4 529.0 14.6 48.1 592.1 Travel Time (hr)0.0 18.8 0.5 2.2 21.6 Avg Speed (mph)13 28 27 22 27 Fuel Used (gal)0.0 14.9 0.4 2.9 18.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.6 35.5 36.3 16.5 32.5 HC Emissions (g)0 144 2 34 179 CO Emissions (g)1 2633 45 1222 3902 NOx Emissions (g)0 400 6 142 548 Density (ft/veh)368 Occupancy (veh)0 19 1 2 22 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.5 Total Del/Veh (s)35.8 Travel Dist (mi)2192.6 Travel Time (hr)96.3 Avg Speed (mph)23 Fuel Used (gal)70.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg)31.2 HC Emissions (g)679 CO Emissions (g)14537 NOx Emissions (g)1969 Density (ft/veh)219 Occupancy (veh)96 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 234 of 349 Queuing and Blocking Report Horizon Year SAT Pk Hr - 4-Lane Alt 08/29/2022 09 HY SAT Calrsbad Blvd/Tamarack Avenue Mobility Analysis SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 1: Carlsbad Blvd & Beach Parking /Tamarack Ave Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LT R L TR L T TR L T TR Maximum Queue (ft)84 51 174 183 193 250 257 182 236 243 Average Queue (ft)29 3 93 72 46 183 198 93 147 154 95th Queue (ft)68 23 157 137 132 263 273 168 223 233 Link Distance (ft)273 929 233 233 228 228 Upstream Blk Time (%)2 5 1 1 Queuing Penalty (veh)10 19 3 4 Storage Bay Dist (ft)30 93 115 97 Storage Blk Time (%) 26 0 16 5 0 27 11 20 Queuing Penalty (veh) 11 0 22 8 0 10 33 25 Intersection: 2: Carlsbad Blvd & Redwood Ave Movement WB NB SB SB SB Directions Served LR TR L T T Maximum Queue (ft)46 2 35 55 66 Average Queue (ft)13 0 4 2 3 95th Queue (ft)39 2 20 27 32 Link Distance (ft)453 228 2676 2676 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)95 Storage Blk Time (%)0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 Intersection: 3: Carlsbad Blvd & Sequoia Ave Movement WB NB NB SB Directions Served R T TR T Maximum Queue (ft)30 118 132 28 Average Queue (ft)4 12 22 1 95th Queue (ft)22 64 84 28 Link Distance (ft)469 3422 3422 233 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 145 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 235 of 349 ROUNDABOUT ANALYSIS Site: 101 [Exist AM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Roundabout Basic Parameters Central Island Diam Circ Width Insc Diam Entry Radius Entry Angle Circ Lanes Entry Lanes Av.Entry Lane Width App. Dist Prop Queued Upstr Signal Extra BunchingLocationName ft ft ft ft °ft ft % South Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 52.0*42.0*1 1 15.00*3773.0 NA5 0.0 East Tamarack Ave 70.00*17.00*104.0* 50.0*12.0*1 1 16.00*985.0 NA5 0.0 North Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 40.0*26.0*1 1 14.00*3003.0 NA5 0.0 West Beach Parking 70.00*17.00*104.0* 46.0*39.0*1 218 18.00*349.0 NA5 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 5 Not Applicable (single Site analysis or unconnected Site in Network analysis). * These parameters do not affect estimated capacity values in the HCM 6 Capacity Model. 18 Exclusive slip/bypass lane is included in Entry Lanes count. Roundabout Entry and Circulating / Exiting Stream Parameters Critical GapTo Approach Turn Lane No Lane Type Opng Flow Opng Flow In- Bunch Hdwy Prop. Bunched Cap Const Effect Priority Sharing OD Factor HVE for Entry Follow- up Hdwy [ Hdwy Dist ] veh/h pcu/h sec sec ft sec South: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High West L2 1 Dominant 59 60 0.00 0.000 No No 0.989 1.00 4.35 93.5 2.28 North T1 1 Dominant 59 60 0.00 0.000 No No 0.989 1.02 4.35 93.5 2.28 East R2 1 Dominant 59 60 0.00 0.000 No No 0.989 1.02 4.35 93.5 2.28 East: Tamarack Ave Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High South L2 1 Dominant 254 249 0.00 0.000 No No 0.991 1.02 4.90 149.3 2.57 West T1 1 Dominant 254 249 0.00 0.000 No No 0.991 1.00 4.90 149.3 2.57 North R2 1 Dominant 254 249 0.00 0.000 No No 0.991 1.02 4.90 149.3 2.57 North: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High East L2 1 Dominant 282 278 0.00 0.000 No No 0.974 1.02 4.80 103.6 2.52 South T1 1 Dominant 282 278 0.00 0.000 No No 0.974 1.02 4.80 103.6 2.52 West R2 1 Dominant 282 278 0.00 0.000 No No 0.974 1.00 4.80 103.6 2.52 West: Beach Parking Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High North L2 1 Dominant 707 708 0.00 0.000 No No 0.922 1.00 4.54 122.5 2.54 East T1 1 Dominant 707 708 0.00 0.000 No No 0.922 1.00 4.54 122.5 2.54 South R2 2 Excl. Slip 661 661 0.00 0.000 No No 0.932 1.00 4.54 124.7 2.54 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Circulating Lane Flow Rates Circulating Flow RateCirc. Lane No May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 236 of 349 veh/h pcu/h Percent South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 59 60 100.0 Approach 59 60 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1 254 249 100.0 Approach 254 249 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 282 278 100.0 Approach 282 278 West: Beach Parking Lane 1 707 708 100.0 Approach 707 708 Roundabout Capacity Model: The US HCM 6 roundabout capacity model option is in use. This model considers only the total circulating flow and not the flow rates in individual circulating lanes. To model the effects of flow distribution in circulating lanes on the entry capacity results, you should use the SIDRA Standard roundabout capacity model. Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Lanes) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum DelayOpposed Lane Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd 1 10.23 0.84 9.39 0.918 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave 1 10.22 2.50 7.72 0.755 0.0 North: Carlsbad Blvd 1 10.23 2.82 7.41 0.724 0.0 West: Beach Parking 1 5.17 2.75 2.42 0.468 0.0 2 10.40 9.13 1.28 0.123 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Movements) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum Delay To Approach Turn Opsd Lane No Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd West L2 1 10.23 0.84 9.39 0.918 0.0 North T1 1 10.23 0.84 9.39 0.918 0.0 East R2 1 10.23 0.84 9.39 0.918 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave South L2 1 10.22 2.50 7.72 0.755 0.0 West T1 1 10.22 2.50 7.72 0.755 0.0 North R2 1 10.22 2.50 7.72 0.755 0.0 North: Carlsbad Blvd East L2 1 10.23 2.82 7.41 0.724 0.0 South T1 1 10.23 2.82 7.41 0.724 0.0 West R2 1 10.23 2.82 7.41 0.724 0.0 West: Beach Parking North L2 1 5.17 2.75 2.42 0.468 0.0 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 237 of 349 East T1 1 5.17 2.75 2.42 0.468 0.0 South R2 2 10.40 9.13 1.28 0.123 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:55:49AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 238 of 349 SITE LAYOUT Site: 101 [Exist AM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Thursday, September 1, 2022 11:06:07 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 239 of 349 INTERSECTION SUMMARY Site: 101 [Exist AM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Intersection Performance -Hourly Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Travel Speed (Average)36.0 mph 36.0 mph Travel Distance (Total)1283.7 veh-mi/h 1527.4 pers-mi/h Travel Time (Total)35.7 veh-h/h 42.5 pers-h/h Desired Speed (Program)38.1 mph Speed Efficiency 0.94 Travel Time Index 9.39 Congestion Coefficient 1.06 Demand Flows (Total)1177 veh/h 1400 pers/h Percent Heavy Vehicles (Demand)1.8 % Degree of Saturation 0.477 Practical Spare Capacity 78.3 % Effective Intersection Capacity 2469 veh/h Control Delay (Total)1.26 veh-h/h 1.50 pers-h/h Control Delay (Average)3.9 sec 3.9 sec Control Delay (Worst Lane)8.5 sec Control Delay (Worst Movement)8.5 sec 8.5 sec Geometric Delay (Average)0.0 sec Stop-Line Delay (Average)3.9 sec Idling Time (Average)0.6 sec Intersection Level of Service (LOS)LOS A 95% Back of Queue -Vehicles (Worst Lane)1.8 veh 95% Back of Queue -Distance (Worst Lane)43.6 ft Ave. Queue Storage Ratio (Worst Lane)0.01 Total Effective Stops 429 veh/h 511 pers/h Effective Stop Rate 0.36 0.37 Proportion Queued 0.38 0.38 Performance Index 45.8 45.8 Cost (Total)691.11 $/h 691.11 $/h Fuel Consumption (Total)39.8 gal/h Carbon Dioxide (Total)339.0 kg/h Hydrocarbons (Total)0.029 kg/h Carbon Monoxide (Total)0.456 kg/h NOx (Total)0.386 kg/h Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Intersection LOS value for Vehicles is based on average delay for all vehicle movements. Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Site Model Variability Index (Iterations 3 to N): 0.0 % Number of Iterations: 2 (Maximum: 10) Largest change in Lane Degrees of Saturation for the last three Flow-Capacity Iterations: 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Intersection Performance -Annual Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Demand Flows (Total)564,960 veh/y 671,906 pers/y Delay 606 veh-h/y 721 pers-h/y Effective Stops 206,115 veh/y 245,444 pers/y Travel Distance 616,197 veh-mi/y 733,147 pers-mi/y Travel Time 17,134 veh-h/y 20,385 pers-h/y May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 240 of 349 Cost 331,731 $/y 331,731 $/y Fuel Consumption 19,120 gal/y Carbon Dioxide 162,733 kg/y Hydrocarbons 14 kg/y Carbon Monoxide 219 kg/y NOx 185 kg/y SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:55:49AMProject: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 241 of 349 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Exist AM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Vehicle Movement Performance INPUT VOLUMES DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUE Mov ID Turn Deg. Satn Aver. Delay Level of Service Prop. Que Effective Stop Rate Aver. No. Cycles Aver. Speed [ Total HV ][ Total HV ][ Veh.Dist ] veh/h %veh/h %v/c sec veh ft mph South: Carlsbad Blvd 3 L2 15 0.0 15 0.0 0.224 1.8 LOS A 0.3 6.9 0.14 0.11 0.14 25.6 8 T1 233 2.0 233 2.0 0.224 1.8 LOS A 0.3 6.9 0.14 0.11 0.14 37.0 18 R2 76 2.0 76 2.0 0.224 1.8 LOS A 0.3 6.9 0.14 0.11 0.14 35.7 Approach 324 1.9 324 1.9 0.224 0.8 LOS A 0.3 6.9 0.14 0.11 0.14 36.3 East: Tamarack Ave 1 L2 231 2.0 231 2.0 0.321 3.2 LOS A 0.9 22.8 0.39 0.37 0.39 35.4 6 T1 36 0.0 36 0.0 0.321 3.2 LOS A 0.9 22.8 0.39 0.37 0.39 28.6 16 R2 72 2.0 72 2.0 0.321 3.2 LOS A 0.9 22.8 0.39 0.37 0.39 34.2 Approach 339 1.8 339 1.8 0.321 2.0 LOS A 0.9 22.8 0.39 0.37 0.39 34.9 North: Carlsbad Blvd 7 L2 46 2.0 46 2.0 0.477 5.5 LOS A 1.8 43.6 0.51 0.50 0.51 35.1 4 T1 430 2.0 430 2.0 0.477 5.5 LOS A 1.8 43.6 0.51 0.50 0.51 36.6 14 R2 18 0.0 18 0.0 0.477 5.5 LOS A 1.8 43.6 0.51 0.50 0.51 29.9 Approach 494 1.9 494 1.9 0.477 3.7 LOS A 1.8 43.6 0.51 0.50 0.51 36.4 West: Beach Parking 5 L2 6 0.0 6 0.0 0.078 6.6 LOS A 0.2 4.5 0.92 0.92 0.92 32.8 2 T1 7 0.0 7 0.0 0.078 6.6 LOS A 0.2 4.5 0.92 0.92 0.92 26.3 12 R2 7 0.0 7 0.0 0.040 8.5 LOS A 0.1 1.3 0.88 0.88 0.88 34.8 Approach 20 0.0 20 0.0 0.078 7.3 LOS A 0.2 4.5 0.90 0.90 0.90 32.3 All Vehicles 1177 1.8 1177 1.8 0.477 3.9 LOS A 1.8 43.6 0.38 0.36 0.38 36.0 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:55:49AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 242 of 349 LANE SUMMARY Site: 101 [Exist AM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Lane Use and Performance DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUECap.Deg. Satn Lane Util. Aver. Delay Level of Service Lane Config Lane Length Cap. Adj. Prob. Block. [ Total HV ][ Veh Dist ] veh/h %veh/h v/c %sec ft ft %% South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 324 1.9 1448 0.224 100 0.8 LOS A 0.3 6.9 Full 3773 0.0 0.0 Approach 324 1.9 0.224 0.8 LOS A 0.3 6.9 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1d 339 1.8 1058 0.321 100 2.0 LOS A 0.9 22.8 Full 985 0.0 0.0 Approach 339 1.8 0.321 2.0 LOS A 0.9 22.8 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 494 1.9 1036 0.477 100 3.7 LOS A 1.8 43.6 Full 3003 0.0 0.0 Approach 494 1.9 0.477 3.7 LOS A 1.8 43.6 West: Beach Parking Lane 1d 13 0.0 166 0.078 100 6.6 LOS A 0.2 4.5 Full 349 0.0 0.0 Lane 2 7 0.0 174 0.040 100 8.5 LOS A 0.1 1.3 Short 60 0.0 NA Approach 20 0.0 0.078 7.3 LOS A 0.2 4.5 Intersection 1177 1.8 0.477 3.9 LOS A 1.8 43.6 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach Approach Lane Flows (veh/h) South: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From S To Exit:W N E Lane 1 15 233 76 324 1.9 1448 0.224 100 NA NA Approach 15 233 76 324 1.9 0.224 East: Tamarack Ave Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From E To Exit:S W N Lane 1 231 36 72 339 1.8 1058 0.321 100 NA NA May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 243 of 349 Approach 231 36 72 339 1.8 0.321 North: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From N To Exit:E S W Lane 1 46 430 18 494 1.9 1036 0.477 100 NA NA Approach 46 430 18 494 1.9 0.477 West: Beach Parking Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From W To Exit:N E S Lane 1 6 7 -13 0.0 166 0.078 100 NA NA Lane 2 --7 7 0.0 174 0.040 100 0.0 1 Approach 6 7 7 20 0.0 0.078 Total %HV Deg.Satn (v/c) Intersection 1177 1.8 0.477 Lane flow rates given in this report are based on the arrival flow rates subject to upstream capacity constraint where applicable. Merge Analysis Exit Lane Number Short Lane Length Percent Opng in Lane Opposing Flow Rate Critical Gap Follow-up Headway Lane Flow Rate Capacity Deg. Satn Min. Delay Merge Delay ft %veh/h pcu/h sec sec veh/h veh/h v/c sec sec South Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. East Exit: Tamarack Ave Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. North Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. West Exit: Beach Parking Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:55:49AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 244 of 349 ROUNDABOUT ANALYSIS Site: 101 [Exist PM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Roundabout Basic Parameters Central Island Diam Circ Width Insc Diam Entry Radius Entry Angle Circ Lanes Entry Lanes Av.Entry Lane Width App. Dist Prop Queued Upstr Signal Extra BunchingLocationName ft ft ft ft °ft ft % South Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 52.0*42.0*1 1 15.00*3773.0 NA5 0.0 East Tamarack Ave 70.00*17.00*104.0* 50.0*12.0*1 1 16.00*985.0 NA5 0.0 North Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 40.0*26.0*1 1 14.00*3003.0 NA5 0.0 West Beach Parking 70.00*17.00*104.0* 46.0*39.0*1 218 18.00*349.0 NA5 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 5 Not Applicable (single Site analysis or unconnected Site in Network analysis). * These parameters do not affect estimated capacity values in the HCM 6 Capacity Model. 18 Exclusive slip/bypass lane is included in Entry Lanes count. Roundabout Entry and Circulating / Exiting Stream Parameters Critical GapTo Approach Turn Lane No Lane Type Opng Flow Opng Flow In- Bunch Hdwy Prop. Bunched Cap Const Effect Priority Sharing OD Factor HVE for Entry Follow- up Hdwy [ Hdwy Dist ] veh/h pcu/h sec sec ft sec South: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High West L2 1 Dominant 130 131 0.00 0.000 No No 0.944 1.00 4.07 87.7 2.13 North T1 1 Dominant 130 131 0.00 0.000 No No 0.944 1.02 4.07 87.7 2.13 East R2 1 Dominant 130 131 0.00 0.000 No No 0.944 1.02 4.07 87.7 2.13 East: Tamarack Ave Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High South L2 1 Dominant 1031 1031 0.00 0.000 No No 0.757 1.02 4.98 153.5 2.61 West T1 1 Dominant 1031 1031 0.00 0.000 No No 0.757 1.00 4.98 153.5 2.61 North R2 1 Dominant 1031 1031 0.00 0.000 No No 0.757 1.02 4.98 153.5 2.61 North: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High East L2 1 Dominant 159 160 0.00 0.000 No No 0.968 1.02 4.50 95.5 2.36 South T1 1 Dominant 159 160 0.00 0.000 No No 0.968 1.02 4.50 95.5 2.36 West R2 1 Dominant 159 160 0.00 0.000 No No 0.968 1.00 4.50 95.5 2.36 West: Beach Parking Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High North L2 1 Dominant 715 701 0.00 0.000 No No 0.938 1.00 4.54 127.5 2.54 East T1 1 Dominant 715 701 0.00 0.000 No No 0.938 1.00 4.54 127.5 2.54 South R2 2 Excl. Slip 617 601 0.00 0.000 No No 0.953 1.00 4.54 133.3 2.54 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Circulating Lane Flow Rates Circulating Flow RateCirc. Lane No May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 245 of 349 veh/h pcu/h Percent South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 130 131 100.0 Approach 130 131 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1 1031 1031 100.0 Approach 1031 1031 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 159 160 100.0 Approach 159 160 West: Beach Parking Lane 1 715 701 100.0 Approach 715 701 Roundabout Capacity Model: The US HCM 6 roundabout capacity model option is in use. This model considers only the total circulating flow and not the flow rates in individual circulating lanes. To model the effects of flow distribution in circulating lanes on the entry capacity results, you should use the SIDRA Standard roundabout capacity model. Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Lanes) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum DelayOpposed Lane Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd 1 6.15 0.85 5.30 0.861 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave 1 6.11 4.64 1.48 0.242 1.2 North: Carlsbad Blvd 1 6.15 1.14 5.02 0.815 0.0 West: Beach Parking 1 1.03 0.54 0.50 0.479 0.0 2 6.29 6.02 0.28 0.044 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Movements) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum Delay To Approach Turn Opsd Lane No Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd West L2 1 6.15 0.85 5.30 0.861 0.0 North T1 1 6.15 0.85 5.30 0.861 0.0 East R2 1 6.15 0.85 5.30 0.861 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave South L2 1 6.11 4.64 1.48 0.242 1.2 West T1 1 6.11 4.64 1.48 0.242 1.2 North R2 1 6.11 4.64 1.48 0.242 1.2 North: Carlsbad Blvd East L2 1 6.15 1.14 5.02 0.815 0.0 South T1 1 6.15 1.14 5.02 0.815 0.0 West R2 1 6.15 1.14 5.02 0.815 0.0 West: Beach Parking North L2 1 1.03 0.54 0.50 0.479 0.0 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 246 of 349 East T1 1 1.03 0.54 0.50 0.479 0.0 South R2 2 6.29 6.02 0.28 0.044 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:34:55AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 247 of 349 SITE LAYOUT Site: 101 [Exist PM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Thursday, September 1, 2022 11:08:11 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 248 of 349 INTERSECTION SUMMARY Site: 101 [Exist PM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Intersection Performance -Hourly Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Travel Speed (Average)32.6 mph 32.5 mph Travel Distance (Total)2571.1 veh-mi/h 3058.4 pers-mi/h Travel Time (Total)79.0 veh-h/h 94.0 pers-h/h Desired Speed (Program)38.0 mph Speed Efficiency 0.86 Travel Time Index 8.41 Congestion Coefficient 1.17 Demand Flows (Total)2232 veh/h 2657 pers/h Percent Heavy Vehicles (Demand)1.9 % Degree of Saturation 0.926 Practical Spare Capacity -8.2 % Effective Intersection Capacity 2410 veh/h Control Delay (Total)11.68 veh-h/h 13.93 pers-h/h Control Delay (Average)18.8 sec 18.9 sec Control Delay (Worst Lane)47.5 sec Control Delay (Worst Movement)47.5 sec 47.5 sec Geometric Delay (Average)0.0 sec Stop-Line Delay (Average)18.8 sec Idling Time (Average)12.0 sec Intersection Level of Service (LOS)LOS B 95% Back of Queue -Vehicles (Worst Lane)4.7 veh 95% Back of Queue -Distance (Worst Lane)116.8 ft Ave. Queue Storage Ratio (Worst Lane)0.02 Total Effective Stops 1490 veh/h 1775 pers/h Effective Stop Rate 0.67 0.67 Proportion Queued 0.66 0.67 Performance Index 108.7 108.7 Cost (Total)1500.96 $/h 1500.96 $/h Fuel Consumption (Total)82.4 gal/h Carbon Dioxide (Total)701.2 kg/h Hydrocarbons (Total)0.062 kg/h Carbon Monoxide (Total)0.934 kg/h NOx (Total)0.785 kg/h Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Intersection LOS value for Vehicles is based on average delay for all vehicle movements. Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Site Model Variability Index (Iterations 3 to N): 0.0 % Number of Iterations: 2 (Maximum: 10) Largest change in Lane Degrees of Saturation for the last three Flow-Capacity Iterations: 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Intersection Performance -Annual Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Demand Flows (Total)1,071,360 veh/y 1,275,168 pers/y Delay 5,606 veh-h/y 6,684 pers-h/y Effective Stops 715,075 veh/y 852,210 pers/y Travel Distance 1,234,141 veh-mi/y 1,468,022 pers-mi/y Travel Time 37,913 veh-h/y 45,113 pers-h/y May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 249 of 349 Cost 720,459 $/y 720,459 $/y Fuel Consumption 39,534 gal/y Carbon Dioxide 336,563 kg/y Hydrocarbons 30 kg/y Carbon Monoxide 448 kg/y NOx 377 kg/y SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:34:55AMProject: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 250 of 349 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Exist PM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Vehicle Movement Performance INPUT VOLUMES DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUE Mov ID Turn Deg. Satn Aver. Delay Level of Service Prop. Que Effective Stop Rate Aver. No. Cycles Aver. Speed [ Total HV ][ Total HV ][ Veh.Dist ] veh/h %veh/h %v/c sec veh ft mph South: Carlsbad Blvd 3 L2 33 0.0 33 0.0 0.926 24.2 LOS C 4.7 116.8 0.77 0.77 0.77 22.1 8 T1 1016 2.0 1016 2.0 0.926 24.2 LOS C 4.7 116.8 0.77 0.77 0.77 32.7 18 R2 296 2.0 296 2.0 0.926 24.2 LOS C 4.7 116.8 0.77 0.77 0.77 30.1 Approach 1345 2.0 1345 2.0 0.926 19.9 LOS B 4.7 116.8 0.77 0.77 0.77 32.0 East: Tamarack Ave 1 L2 112 2.0 112 2.0 0.626 20.8 LOS C 1.0 24.4 0.89 0.91 0.98 30.4 6 T1 15 0.0 15 0.0 0.626 20.8 LOS C 1.0 24.4 0.89 0.91 0.98 12.0 16 R2 82 2.0 82 2.0 0.626 20.8 LOS C 1.0 24.4 0.89 0.91 0.98 28.6 Approach 209 1.9 209 1.9 0.626 18.5 LOS B 1.0 24.4 0.89 0.91 0.98 28.7 North: Carlsbad Blvd 7 L2 98 2.0 98 2.0 0.497 5.3 LOS A 1.0 23.5 0.33 0.33 0.33 34.7 4 T1 505 2.0 505 2.0 0.497 5.3 LOS A 1.0 23.5 0.33 0.33 0.33 35.9 14 R2 15 0.0 15 0.0 0.497 5.3 LOS A 1.0 23.5 0.33 0.33 0.33 29.6 Approach 618 2.0 618 2.0 0.497 3.0 LOS A 1.0 23.5 0.33 0.33 0.33 35.7 West: Beach Parking 5 L2 16 0.0 16 0.0 0.565 16.0 LOS B 0.4 9.2 1.00 1.08 1.70 28.9 2 T1 16 0.0 16 0.0 0.565 16.0 LOS B 0.4 9.2 1.00 1.08 1.70 20.8 12 R2 28 0.0 28 0.0 0.450 47.5 LOS D 0.1 3.5 0.98 0.98 0.98 23.4 Approach 60 0.0 60 0.0 0.565 30.7 LOS C 0.4 9.2 0.99 1.03 1.36 24.3 All Vehicles 2232 1.9 2232 1.9 0.926 18.8 LOS B 4.7 116.8 0.66 0.67 0.68 32.6 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:34:55AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 251 of 349 LANE SUMMARY Site: 101 [Exist PM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Lane Use and Performance DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUECap.Deg. Satn Lane Util. Aver. Delay Level of Service Lane Config Lane Length Cap. Adj. Prob. Block. [ Total HV ][ Veh Dist ] veh/h %veh/h v/c %sec ft ft %% South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 1345 2.0 1452 0.926 100 19.9 LOS B 4.7 116.8 Full 3773 0.0 0.0 Approach 1345 2.0 0.926 19.9 LOS B 4.7 116.8 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1d 209 1.9 334 0.626 100 18.5 LOS B 1.0 24.4 Full 985 0.0 0.0 Approach 209 1.9 0.626 18.5 LOS B 1.0 24.4 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 618 2.0 1243 0.497 100 3.0 LOS A 1.0 23.5 Full 3003 0.0 0.0 Approach 618 2.0 0.497 3.0 LOS A 1.0 23.5 West: Beach Parking Lane 1d 32 0.0 57 0.565 100 16.0 LOS B 0.4 9.2 Full 349 0.0 0.0 Lane 2 28 0.0 62 0.450 100 47.5 LOS D 0.1 3.5 Short 60 0.0 NA Approach 60 0.0 0.565 30.7 LOS C 0.4 9.2 Intersection 2232 1.9 0.926 18.8 LOS B 4.7 116.8 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach Approach Lane Flows (veh/h) South: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From S To Exit:W N E Lane 1 33 1016 296 1345 2.0 1452 0.926 100 NA NA Approach 33 1016 296 1345 2.0 0.926 East: Tamarack Ave Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From E To Exit:S W N Lane 1 112 15 82 209 1.9 334 0.626 100 NA NA May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 252 of 349 Approach 112 15 82 209 1.9 0.626 North: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From N To Exit:E S W Lane 1 98 505 15 618 2.0 1243 0.497 100 NA NA Approach 98 505 15 618 2.0 0.497 West: Beach Parking Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From W To Exit:N E S Lane 1 16 16 -32 0.0 57 0.565 100 NA NA Lane 2 --28 28 0.0 62 0.450 100 0.0 1 Approach 16 16 28 60 0.0 0.565 Total %HV Deg.Satn (v/c) Intersection 2232 1.9 0.926 Lane flow rates given in this report are based on the arrival flow rates subject to upstream capacity constraint where applicable. Merge Analysis Exit Lane Number Short Lane Length Percent Opng in Lane Opposing Flow Rate Critical Gap Follow-up Headway Lane Flow Rate Capacity Deg. Satn Min. Delay Merge Delay ft %veh/h pcu/h sec sec veh/h veh/h v/c sec sec South Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. East Exit: Tamarack Ave Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. North Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. West Exit: Beach Parking Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:34:55AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 253 of 349 ROUNDABOUT ANALYSIS Site: 101 [Exist SAT Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Roundabout Basic Parameters Central Island Diam Circ Width Insc Diam Entry Radius Entry Angle Circ Lanes Entry Lanes Av.Entry Lane Width App. Dist Prop Queued Upstr Signal Extra BunchingLocationName ft ft ft ft °ft ft % South Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 52.0*42.0*1 1 15.00*3773.0 NA5 0.0 East Tamarack Ave 70.00*17.00*104.0* 50.0*12.0*1 1 16.00*985.0 NA5 0.0 North Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 40.0*26.0*1 1 14.00*3003.0 NA5 0.0 West Beach Parking 70.00*17.00*104.0* 46.0*39.0*1 218 18.00*349.0 NA5 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 5 Not Applicable (single Site analysis or unconnected Site in Network analysis). * These parameters do not affect estimated capacity values in the HCM 6 Capacity Model. 18 Exclusive slip/bypass lane is included in Entry Lanes count. Roundabout Entry and Circulating / Exiting Stream Parameters Critical GapTo Approach Turn Lane No Lane Type Opng Flow Opng Flow In- Bunch Hdwy Prop. Bunched Cap Const Effect Priority Sharing OD Factor HVE for Entry Follow- up Hdwy [ Hdwy Dist ] veh/h pcu/h sec sec ft sec South: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High West L2 1 Dominant 157 155 0.00 0.000 No No 0.966 1.00 4.28 93.9 2.24 North T1 1 Dominant 157 155 0.00 0.000 No No 0.966 1.02 4.28 93.9 2.24 East R2 1 Dominant 157 155 0.00 0.000 No No 0.966 1.02 4.28 93.9 2.24 East: Tamarack Ave Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High South L2 1 Dominant 817 783 0.00 0.000 No No 0.845 1.02 4.98 151.8 2.61 West T1 1 Dominant 817 783 0.00 0.000 No No 0.845 1.00 4.98 151.8 2.61 North R2 1 Dominant 817 783 0.00 0.000 No No 0.845 1.02 4.98 151.8 2.61 North: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High East L2 1 Dominant 253 243 0.00 0.000 No No 0.958 1.02 4.53 97.3 2.37 South T1 1 Dominant 253 243 0.00 0.000 No No 0.958 1.02 4.53 97.3 2.37 West R2 1 Dominant 253 243 0.00 0.000 No No 0.958 1.00 4.53 97.3 2.37 West: Beach Parking Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High North L2 1 Dominant 1017 975 0.00 0.000 No No 0.768 1.00 4.54 127.8 2.54 East T1 1 Dominant 1017 975 0.00 0.000 No No 0.768 1.00 4.54 127.8 2.54 South R2 2 Excl. Slip 904 863 0.00 0.000 No No 0.809 1.00 4.54 132.4 2.54 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Circulating Lane Flow Rates Circulating Flow RateCirc. Lane No May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 254 of 349 veh/h pcu/h Percent South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 157 155 100.0 Approach 157 155 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1 817 783 100.0 Approach 817 783 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 253 243 100.0 Approach 253 243 West: Beach Parking Lane 1 1017 975 100.0 Approach 1017 975 Roundabout Capacity Model: The US HCM 6 roundabout capacity model option is in use. This model considers only the total circulating flow and not the flow rates in individual circulating lanes. To model the effects of flow distribution in circulating lanes on the entry capacity results, you should use the SIDRA Standard roundabout capacity model. Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Lanes) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum DelayOpposed Lane Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd 1 10.32 1.85 8.48 0.821 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave 1 10.28 6.46 3.81 0.371 2.4 North: Carlsbad Blvd 1 10.32 2.68 7.64 0.741 0.0 West: Beach Parking 1 5.00 3.42 1.58 0.316 0.0 2 10.03 9.11 0.92 0.092 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Movements) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum Delay To Approach Turn Opsd Lane No Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd West L2 1 10.32 1.85 8.48 0.821 0.0 North T1 1 10.32 1.85 8.48 0.821 0.0 East R2 1 10.32 1.85 8.48 0.821 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave South L2 1 10.28 6.46 3.81 0.371 2.4 West T1 1 10.28 6.46 3.81 0.371 2.4 North R2 1 10.28 6.46 3.81 0.371 2.4 North: Carlsbad Blvd East L2 1 10.32 2.68 7.64 0.741 0.0 South T1 1 10.32 2.68 7.64 0.741 0.0 West R2 1 10.32 2.68 7.64 0.741 0.0 West: Beach Parking North L2 1 5.00 3.42 1.58 0.316 0.0 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 255 of 349 East T1 1 5.00 3.42 1.58 0.316 0.0 South R2 2 10.03 9.11 0.92 0.092 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:56:24AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 256 of 349 SITE LAYOUT Site: 101 [Exist SAT Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Thursday, September 1, 2022 11:09:39 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 257 of 349 INTERSECTION SUMMARY Site: 101 [Exist SAT Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Intersection Performance -Hourly Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Travel Speed (Average)32.9 mph 32.9 mph Travel Distance (Total)2540.3 veh-mi/h 2989.1 pers-mi/h Travel Time (Total)77.2 veh-h/h 90.8 pers-h/h Desired Speed (Program)35.8 mph Speed Efficiency 0.92 Travel Time Index 9.10 Congestion Coefficient 1.09 Demand Flows (Total)2252 veh/h 2652 pers/h Percent Heavy Vehicles (Demand)1.8 % Degree of Saturation 0.782 Practical Spare Capacity 8.7 % Effective Intersection Capacity 2880 veh/h Control Delay (Total)8.28 veh-h/h 9.75 pers-h/h Control Delay (Average)13.2 sec 13.2 sec Control Delay (Worst Lane)21.4 sec Control Delay (Worst Movement)21.4 sec 21.4 sec Geometric Delay (Average)0.0 sec Stop-Line Delay (Average)13.2 sec Idling Time (Average)6.7 sec Intersection Level of Service (LOS)LOS B 95% Back of Queue -Vehicles (Worst Lane)4.6 veh 95% Back of Queue -Distance (Worst Lane)108.5 ft Ave. Queue Storage Ratio (Worst Lane)0.03 Total Effective Stops 1582 veh/h 1864 pers/h Effective Stop Rate 0.70 0.70 Proportion Queued 0.71 0.71 Performance Index 125.4 125.4 Cost (Total)1398.33 $/h 1398.33 $/h Fuel Consumption (Total)74.2 gal/h Carbon Dioxide (Total)590.7 kg/h Hydrocarbons (Total)0.053 kg/h Carbon Monoxide (Total)0.785 kg/h NOx (Total)0.744 kg/h Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Intersection LOS value for Vehicles is based on average delay for all vehicle movements. Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Site Model Variability Index (Iterations 3 to N): 0.0 % Number of Iterations: 2 (Maximum: 10) Largest change in Lane Degrees of Saturation for the last three Flow-Capacity Iterations: 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Intersection Performance -Annual Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Demand Flows (Total)1,080,960 veh/y 1,273,152 pers/y Delay 3,974 veh-h/y 4,681 pers-h/y Effective Stops 759,599 veh/y 894,890 pers/y Travel Distance 1,219,333 veh-mi/y 1,434,751 pers-mi/y Travel Time 37,045 veh-h/y 43,599 pers-h/y May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 258 of 349 Cost 671,199 $/y 671,199 $/y Fuel Consumption 35,614 gal/y Carbon Dioxide 283,533 kg/y Hydrocarbons 25 kg/y Carbon Monoxide 377 kg/y NOx 357 kg/y SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:56:24AMProject: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 259 of 349 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Exist SAT Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Vehicle Movement Performance INPUT VOLUMES DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUE Mov ID Turn Deg. Satn Aver. Delay Level of Service Prop. Que Effective Stop Rate Aver. No. Cycles Aver. Speed [ Total HV ][ Total HV ][ Veh.Dist ] veh/h %veh/h %v/c sec veh ft mph South: Carlsbad Blvd 3 L2 43 0.0 43 0.0 0.721 10.3 LOS B 3.6 84.1 0.58 0.55 0.58 24.0 8 T1 755 2.0 755 2.0 0.721 10.3 LOS B 3.6 84.1 0.58 0.55 0.58 34.6 18 R2 152 2.0 152 2.0 0.721 10.3 LOS B 3.6 84.1 0.58 0.55 0.58 33.0 Approach 950 1.9 950 1.9 0.721 7.1 LOS A 3.6 84.1 0.58 0.55 0.58 34.0 East: Tamarack Ave 1 L2 180 2.0 180 2.0 0.656 18.1 LOS B 2.8 66.4 0.83 0.91 1.11 30.0 6 T1 30 0.0 30 0.0 0.656 18.1 LOS B 2.8 66.4 0.83 0.91 1.11 20.4 16 R2 126 2.0 126 2.0 0.656 18.1 LOS B 2.8 66.4 0.83 0.91 1.11 28.9 Approach 336 1.8 336 1.8 0.656 16.3 LOS B 2.8 66.4 0.83 0.91 1.11 29.2 North: Carlsbad Blvd 7 L2 113 2.0 113 2.0 0.782 14.3 LOS B 4.6 108.5 0.77 0.77 0.77 31.2 4 T1 724 2.0 724 2.0 0.782 14.3 LOS B 4.6 108.5 0.77 0.77 0.77 33.4 14 R2 41 0.0 41 0.0 0.782 14.3 LOS B 4.6 108.5 0.77 0.77 0.77 29.7 Approach 878 1.9 878 1.9 0.782 11.2 LOS B 4.6 108.5 0.77 0.77 0.77 33.1 West: Beach Parking 5 L2 19 0.0 19 0.0 0.392 9.2 LOS A 1.1 27.6 0.99 1.00 1.04 31.2 2 T1 25 0.0 25 0.0 0.392 9.2 LOS A 1.1 27.6 0.99 1.00 1.04 24.5 12 R2 44 0.0 44 0.0 0.337 21.4 LOS C 0.3 8.4 0.94 0.94 0.94 29.8 Approach 88 0.0 88 0.0 0.392 15.3 LOS B 1.1 27.6 0.96 0.97 0.99 29.3 All Vehicles 2252 1.8 2252 1.8 0.782 13.2 LOS B 4.6 108.5 0.71 0.70 0.75 32.9 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:56:24AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 260 of 349 LANE SUMMARY Site: 101 [Exist SAT Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Lane Use and Performance DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUECap.Deg. Satn Lane Util. Aver. Delay Level of Service Lane Config Lane Length Cap. Adj. Prob. Block. [ Total HV ][ Veh Dist ] veh/h %veh/h v/c %sec ft ft %% South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 950 1.9 1317 0.721 100 7.1 LOS A 3.6 84.1 Full 3773 0.0 0.0 Approach 950 1.9 0.721 7.1 LOS A 3.6 84.1 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1d 336 1.8 512 0.656 100 16.3 LOS B 2.8 66.4 Full 985 0.0 0.0 Approach 336 1.8 0.656 16.3 LOS B 2.8 66.4 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 878 1.9 1123 0.782 100 11.2 LOS B 4.6 108.5 Full 3003 0.0 0.0 Approach 878 1.9 0.782 11.2 LOS B 4.6 108.5 West: Beach Parking Lane 1d 44 0.0 112 0.392 100 9.2 LOS A 1.1 27.6 Full 349 0.0 0.0 Lane 2 44 0.0 130 0.337 100 21.4 LOS C 0.3 8.4 Short 60 0.0 NA Approach 88 0.0 0.392 15.3 LOS B 1.1 27.6 Intersection 2252 1.8 0.782 13.2 LOS B 4.6 108.5 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach Approach Lane Flows (veh/h) South: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From S To Exit:W N E Lane 1 43 755 152 950 1.9 1317 0.721 100 NA NA Approach 43 755 152 950 1.9 0.721 East: Tamarack Ave Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From E To Exit:S W N Lane 1 180 30 126 336 1.8 512 0.656 100 NA NA May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 261 of 349 Approach 180 30 126 336 1.8 0.656 North: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From N To Exit:E S W Lane 1 113 724 41 878 1.9 1123 0.782 100 NA NA Approach 113 724 41 878 1.9 0.782 West: Beach Parking Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From W To Exit:N E S Lane 1 19 25 -44 0.0 112 0.392 100 NA NA Lane 2 --44 44 0.0 130 0.337 100 0.0 1 Approach 19 25 44 88 0.0 0.392 Total %HV Deg.Satn (v/c) Intersection 2252 1.8 0.782 Lane flow rates given in this report are based on the arrival flow rates subject to upstream capacity constraint where applicable. Merge Analysis Exit Lane Number Short Lane Length Percent Opng in Lane Opposing Flow Rate Critical Gap Follow-up Headway Lane Flow Rate Capacity Deg. Satn Min. Delay Merge Delay ft %veh/h pcu/h sec sec veh/h veh/h v/c sec sec South Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. East Exit: Tamarack Ave Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. North Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. West Exit: Beach Parking Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:56:24AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 262 of 349 ROUNDABOUT ANALYSIS Site: 101 [Cumulative AM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Roundabout Basic Parameters Central Island Diam Circ Width Insc Diam Entry Radius Entry Angle Circ Lanes Entry Lanes Av.Entry Lane Width App. Dist Prop Queued Upstr Signal Extra BunchingLocationName ft ft ft ft °ft ft % South Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 52.0*42.0*1 1 15.00*3773.0 NA5 0.0 East Tamarack Ave 70.00*17.00*104.0* 50.0*12.0*1 1 16.00*985.0 NA5 0.0 North Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 40.0*26.0*1 1 14.00*3003.0 NA5 0.0 West Beach Parking 70.00*17.00*104.0* 46.0*39.0*1 218 18.00*349.0 NA5 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 5 Not Applicable (single Site analysis or unconnected Site in Network analysis). * These parameters do not affect estimated capacity values in the HCM 6 Capacity Model. 18 Exclusive slip/bypass lane is included in Entry Lanes count. Roundabout Entry and Circulating / Exiting Stream Parameters Critical GapTo Approach Turn Lane No Lane Type Opng Flow Opng Flow In- Bunch Hdwy Prop. Bunched Cap Const Effect Priority Sharing OD Factor HVE for Entry Follow- up Hdwy [ Hdwy Dist ] veh/h pcu/h sec sec ft sec South: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High West L2 1 Dominant 61 62 0.00 0.000 No No 0.989 1.00 4.36 93.4 2.28 North T1 1 Dominant 61 62 0.00 0.000 No No 0.989 1.02 4.36 93.4 2.28 East R2 1 Dominant 61 62 0.00 0.000 No No 0.989 1.02 4.36 93.4 2.28 East: Tamarack Ave Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High South L2 1 Dominant 260 255 0.00 0.000 No No 0.991 1.02 4.91 149.4 2.57 West T1 1 Dominant 260 255 0.00 0.000 No No 0.991 1.00 4.91 149.4 2.57 North R2 1 Dominant 260 255 0.00 0.000 No No 0.991 1.02 4.91 149.4 2.57 North: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High East L2 1 Dominant 285 281 0.00 0.000 No No 0.973 1.02 4.80 103.4 2.51 South T1 1 Dominant 285 281 0.00 0.000 No No 0.973 1.02 4.80 103.4 2.51 West R2 1 Dominant 285 281 0.00 0.000 No No 0.973 1.00 4.80 103.4 2.51 West: Beach Parking Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High North L2 1 Dominant 721 722 0.00 0.000 No No 0.918 1.00 4.54 122.6 2.54 East T1 1 Dominant 721 722 0.00 0.000 No No 0.918 1.00 4.54 122.6 2.54 South R2 2 Excl. Slip 673 673 0.00 0.000 No No 0.929 1.00 4.54 124.8 2.54 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Circulating Lane Flow Rates Circulating Flow RateCirc. Lane No May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 263 of 349 veh/h pcu/h Percent South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 61 62 100.0 Approach 61 62 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1 260 255 100.0 Approach 260 255 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 285 281 100.0 Approach 285 281 West: Beach Parking Lane 1 721 722 100.0 Approach 721 722 Roundabout Capacity Model: The US HCM 6 roundabout capacity model option is in use. This model considers only the total circulating flow and not the flow rates in individual circulating lanes. To model the effects of flow distribution in circulating lanes on the entry capacity results, you should use the SIDRA Standard roundabout capacity model. Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Lanes) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum DelayOpposed Lane Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd 1 10.23 0.86 9.37 0.916 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave 1 10.22 2.55 7.66 0.750 0.0 North: Carlsbad Blvd 1 10.23 2.85 7.38 0.722 0.0 West: Beach Parking 1 5.16 2.78 2.38 0.461 0.0 2 10.39 9.13 1.26 0.121 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Movements) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum Delay To Approach Turn Opsd Lane No Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd West L2 1 10.23 0.86 9.37 0.916 0.0 North T1 1 10.23 0.86 9.37 0.916 0.0 East R2 1 10.23 0.86 9.37 0.916 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave South L2 1 10.22 2.55 7.66 0.750 0.0 West T1 1 10.22 2.55 7.66 0.750 0.0 North R2 1 10.22 2.55 7.66 0.750 0.0 North: Carlsbad Blvd East L2 1 10.23 2.85 7.38 0.722 0.0 South T1 1 10.23 2.85 7.38 0.722 0.0 West R2 1 10.23 2.85 7.38 0.722 0.0 West: Beach Parking North L2 1 5.16 2.78 2.38 0.461 0.0 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 264 of 349 East T1 1 5.16 2.78 2.38 0.461 0.0 South R2 2 10.39 9.13 1.26 0.121 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, September 16, 2022 10:57:26 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 265 of 349 SITE LAYOUT Site: 101 [Cumulative AM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Friday, September 16, 2022 10:57:30 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 266 of 349 INTERSECTION SUMMARY Site: 101 [Cumulative AM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Intersection Performance -Hourly Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Travel Speed (Average)35.9 mph 35.9 mph Travel Distance (Total)1311.6 veh-mi/h 1560.7 pers-mi/h Travel Time (Total)36.5 veh-h/h 43.4 pers-h/h Desired Speed (Program)38.1 mph Speed Efficiency 0.94 Travel Time Index 9.38 Congestion Coefficient 1.06 Demand Flows (Total)1202 veh/h 1430 pers/h Percent Heavy Vehicles (Demand)1.9 % Degree of Saturation 0.489 Practical Spare Capacity 73.9 % Effective Intersection Capacity 2460 veh/h Control Delay (Total)1.34 veh-h/h 1.59 pers-h/h Control Delay (Average)4.0 sec 4.0 sec Control Delay (Worst Lane)8.5 sec Control Delay (Worst Movement)8.5 sec 8.5 sec Geometric Delay (Average)0.0 sec Stop-Line Delay (Average)4.0 sec Idling Time (Average)0.7 sec Intersection Level of Service (LOS)LOS A 95% Back of Queue -Vehicles (Worst Lane)1.8 veh 95% Back of Queue -Distance (Worst Lane)45.5 ft Ave. Queue Storage Ratio (Worst Lane)0.01 Total Effective Stops 450 veh/h 536 pers/h Effective Stop Rate 0.37 0.37 Proportion Queued 0.39 0.39 Performance Index 47.1 47.1 Cost (Total)706.92 $/h 706.92 $/h Fuel Consumption (Total)40.8 gal/h Carbon Dioxide (Total)347.2 kg/h Hydrocarbons (Total)0.030 kg/h Carbon Monoxide (Total)0.467 kg/h NOx (Total)0.395 kg/h Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Intersection LOS value for Vehicles is based on average delay for all vehicle movements. Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Site Model Variability Index (Iterations 3 to N): 0.0 % Number of Iterations: 2 (Maximum: 10) Largest change in Lane Degrees of Saturation for the last three Flow-Capacity Iterations: 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Intersection Performance -Annual Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Demand Flows (Total)576,960 veh/y 686,267 pers/y Delay 642 veh-h/y 764 pers-h/y Effective Stops 215,865 veh/y 257,072 pers/y Travel Distance 629,571 veh-mi/y 749,146 pers-mi/y Travel Time 17,515 veh-h/y 20,841 pers-h/y May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 267 of 349 Cost 339,322 $/y 339,322 $/y Fuel Consumption 19,569 gal/y Carbon Dioxide 166,663 kg/y Hydrocarbons 14 kg/y Carbon Monoxide 224 kg/y NOx 190 kg/y SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, September 16, 2022 10:57:26 AMProject: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 268 of 349 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Cumulative AM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Vehicle Movement Performance INPUT VOLUMES DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUE Mov ID Turn Deg. Satn Aver. Delay Level of Service Prop. Que Effective Stop Rate Aver. No. Cycles Aver. Speed [ Total HV ][ Total HV ][ Veh.Dist ] veh/h %veh/h %v/c sec veh ft mph South: Carlsbad Blvd 3 L2 15 0.0 15 0.0 0.229 1.9 LOS A 0.3 7.2 0.15 0.12 0.15 25.6 8 T1 239 2.0 239 2.0 0.229 1.9 LOS A 0.3 7.2 0.15 0.12 0.15 37.0 18 R2 77 2.0 77 2.0 0.229 1.9 LOS A 0.3 7.2 0.15 0.12 0.15 35.7 Approach 331 1.9 331 1.9 0.229 0.8 LOS A 0.3 7.2 0.15 0.12 0.15 36.3 East: Tamarack Ave 1 L2 234 2.0 234 2.0 0.329 3.3 LOS A 1.0 23.9 0.40 0.38 0.40 35.4 6 T1 36 0.0 36 0.0 0.329 3.3 LOS A 1.0 23.9 0.40 0.38 0.40 28.5 16 R2 76 2.0 76 2.0 0.329 3.3 LOS A 1.0 23.9 0.40 0.38 0.40 34.2 Approach 346 1.8 346 1.8 0.329 2.1 LOS A 1.0 23.9 0.40 0.38 0.40 34.9 North: Carlsbad Blvd 7 L2 48 2.0 48 2.0 0.489 5.7 LOS A 1.8 45.5 0.52 0.52 0.52 35.0 4 T1 439 2.0 439 2.0 0.489 5.7 LOS A 1.8 45.5 0.52 0.52 0.52 36.6 14 R2 18 0.0 18 0.0 0.489 5.7 LOS A 1.8 45.5 0.52 0.52 0.52 29.8 Approach 505 1.9 505 1.9 0.489 3.9 LOS A 1.8 45.5 0.52 0.52 0.52 36.3 West: Beach Parking 5 L2 6 0.0 6 0.0 0.079 6.7 LOS A 0.2 4.5 0.92 0.92 0.92 32.7 2 T1 7 0.0 7 0.0 0.079 6.7 LOS A 0.2 4.5 0.92 0.92 0.92 26.3 12 R2 7 0.0 7 0.0 0.041 8.5 LOS A 0.1 1.3 0.88 0.88 0.88 34.8 Approach 20 0.0 20 0.0 0.079 7.3 LOS A 0.2 4.5 0.91 0.91 0.91 32.3 All Vehicles 1202 1.9 1202 1.9 0.489 4.0 LOS A 1.8 45.5 0.39 0.37 0.39 35.9 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, September 16, 2022 10:57:26 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 269 of 349 LANE SUMMARY Site: 101 [Cumulative AM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Lane Use and Performance DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUECap.Deg. Satn Lane Util. Aver. Delay Level of Service Lane Config Lane Length Cap. Adj. Prob. Block. [ Total HV ][ Veh Dist ] veh/h %veh/h v/c %sec ft ft %% South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 331 1.9 1443 0.229 100 0.8 LOS A 0.3 7.2 Full 3773 0.0 0.0 Approach 331 1.9 0.229 0.8 LOS A 0.3 7.2 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1d 346 1.8 1050 0.329 100 2.1 LOS A 1.0 23.9 Full 985 0.0 0.0 Approach 346 1.8 0.329 2.1 LOS A 1.0 23.9 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 505 1.9 1033 0.489 100 3.9 LOS A 1.8 45.5 Full 3003 0.0 0.0 Approach 505 1.9 0.489 3.9 LOS A 1.8 45.5 West: Beach Parking Lane 1d 13 0.0 164 0.079 100 6.7 LOS A 0.2 4.5 Full 349 0.0 0.0 Lane 2 7 0.0 172 0.041 100 8.5 LOS A 0.1 1.3 Short 60 0.0 NA Approach 20 0.0 0.079 7.3 LOS A 0.2 4.5 Intersection 1202 1.9 0.489 4.0 LOS A 1.8 45.5 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach Approach Lane Flows (veh/h) South: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From S To Exit:W N E Lane 1 15 239 77 331 1.9 1443 0.229 100 NA NA Approach 15 239 77 331 1.9 0.229 East: Tamarack Ave Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From E To Exit:S W N Lane 1 234 36 76 346 1.8 1050 0.329 100 NA NA May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 270 of 349 Approach 234 36 76 346 1.8 0.329 North: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From N To Exit:E S W Lane 1 48 439 18 505 1.9 1033 0.489 100 NA NA Approach 48 439 18 505 1.9 0.489 West: Beach Parking Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From W To Exit:N E S Lane 1 6 7 -13 0.0 164 0.079 100 NA NA Lane 2 --7 7 0.0 172 0.041 100 0.0 1 Approach 6 7 7 20 0.0 0.079 Total %HV Deg.Satn (v/c) Intersection 1202 1.9 0.489 Lane flow rates given in this report are based on the arrival flow rates subject to upstream capacity constraint where applicable. Merge Analysis Exit Lane Number Short Lane Length Percent Opng in Lane Opposing Flow Rate Critical Gap Follow-up Headway Lane Flow Rate Capacity Deg. Satn Min. Delay Merge Delay ft %veh/h pcu/h sec sec veh/h veh/h v/c sec sec South Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. East Exit: Tamarack Ave Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. North Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. West Exit: Beach Parking Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, September 16, 2022 10:57:26 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 271 of 349 ROUNDABOUT ANALYSIS Site: 101 [Cumulative PM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Roundabout Basic Parameters Central Island Diam Circ Width Insc Diam Entry Radius Entry Angle Circ Lanes Entry Lanes Av.Entry Lane Width App. Dist Prop Queued Upstr Signal Extra BunchingLocationName ft ft ft ft °ft ft % South Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 52.0*42.0*1 1 15.00*3773.0 NA5 0.0 East Tamarack Ave 70.00*17.00*104.0* 50.0*12.0*1 1 16.00*985.0 NA5 0.0 North Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 40.0*26.0*1 1 14.00*3003.0 NA5 0.0 West Beach Parking 70.00*17.00*104.0* 46.0*39.0*1 218 18.00*349.0 NA5 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 5 Not Applicable (single Site analysis or unconnected Site in Network analysis). * These parameters do not affect estimated capacity values in the HCM 6 Capacity Model. 18 Exclusive slip/bypass lane is included in Entry Lanes count. Roundabout Entry and Circulating / Exiting Stream Parameters Critical GapTo Approach Turn Lane No Lane Type Opng Flow Opng Flow In- Bunch Hdwy Prop. Bunched Cap Const Effect Priority Sharing OD Factor HVE for Entry Follow- up Hdwy [ Hdwy Dist ] veh/h pcu/h sec sec ft sec South: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High West L2 1 Dominant 139 141 0.00 0.000 No No 0.944 1.00 4.10 87.9 2.15 North T1 1 Dominant 139 141 0.00 0.000 No No 0.944 1.02 4.10 87.9 2.15 East R2 1 Dominant 139 141 0.00 0.000 No No 0.944 1.02 4.10 87.9 2.15 East: Tamarack Ave Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High South L2 1 Dominant 1038 1038 0.00 0.000 No No 0.726 1.02 4.98 153.5 2.61 West T1 1 Dominant 1038 1038 0.00 0.000 No No 0.726 1.00 4.98 153.5 2.61 North R2 1 Dominant 1038 1038 0.00 0.000 No No 0.726 1.02 4.98 153.5 2.61 North: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High East L2 1 Dominant 162 163 0.00 0.000 No No 0.967 1.02 4.50 95.4 2.36 South T1 1 Dominant 162 163 0.00 0.000 No No 0.967 1.02 4.50 95.4 2.36 West R2 1 Dominant 162 163 0.00 0.000 No No 0.967 1.00 4.50 95.4 2.36 West: Beach Parking Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High North L2 1 Dominant 734 721 0.00 0.000 No No 0.933 1.00 4.54 127.1 2.54 East T1 1 Dominant 734 721 0.00 0.000 No No 0.933 1.00 4.54 127.1 2.54 South R2 2 Excl. Slip 627 612 0.00 0.000 No No 0.950 1.00 4.54 133.2 2.54 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Circulating Lane Flow Rates Circulating Flow RateCirc. Lane No May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 272 of 349 veh/h pcu/h Percent South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 139 141 100.0 Approach 139 141 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1 1038 1038 100.0 Approach 1038 1038 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 162 163 100.0 Approach 162 163 West: Beach Parking Lane 1 734 721 100.0 Approach 734 721 Roundabout Capacity Model: The US HCM 6 roundabout capacity model option is in use. This model considers only the total circulating flow and not the flow rates in individual circulating lanes. To model the effects of flow distribution in circulating lanes on the entry capacity results, you should use the SIDRA Standard roundabout capacity model. Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Lanes) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum DelayOpposed Lane Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd 1 6.15 0.90 5.25 0.853 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave 1 6.11 4.73 1.38 0.226 0.9 North: Carlsbad Blvd 1 6.15 1.16 4.99 0.812 0.0 West: Beach Parking 1 1.03 0.55 0.48 0.469 0.0 2 6.29 6.01 0.27 0.043 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Movements) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum Delay To Approach Turn Opsd Lane No Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd West L2 1 6.15 0.90 5.25 0.853 0.0 North T1 1 6.15 0.90 5.25 0.853 0.0 East R2 1 6.15 0.90 5.25 0.853 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave South L2 1 6.11 4.73 1.38 0.226 0.9 West T1 1 6.11 4.73 1.38 0.226 0.9 North R2 1 6.11 4.73 1.38 0.226 0.9 North: Carlsbad Blvd East L2 1 6.15 1.16 4.99 0.812 0.0 South T1 1 6.15 1.16 4.99 0.812 0.0 West R2 1 6.15 1.16 4.99 0.812 0.0 West: Beach Parking North L2 1 1.03 0.55 0.48 0.469 0.0 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 273 of 349 East T1 1 1.03 0.55 0.48 0.469 0.0 South R2 2 6.29 6.01 0.27 0.043 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, September 16, 2022 10:58:24 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 274 of 349 SITE LAYOUT Site: 101 [Cumulative PM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Friday, September 16, 2022 10:58:50 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 275 of 349 INTERSECTION SUMMARY Site: 101 [Cumulative PM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Intersection Performance -Hourly Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Travel Speed (Average)31.8 mph 31.8 mph Travel Distance (Total)2609.9 veh-mi/h 3104.9 pers-mi/h Travel Time (Total)82.1 veh-h/h 97.7 pers-h/h Desired Speed (Program)38.0 mph Speed Efficiency 0.84 Travel Time Index 8.17 Congestion Coefficient 1.20 Demand Flows (Total)2270 veh/h 2702 pers/h Percent Heavy Vehicles (Demand)1.9 % Degree of Saturation 0.951 Practical Spare Capacity -10.7 % Effective Intersection Capacity 2386 veh/h Control Delay (Total)13.85 veh-h/h 16.52 pers-h/h Control Delay (Average)22.0 sec 22.0 sec Control Delay (Worst Lane)48.5 sec Control Delay (Worst Movement)48.5 sec 48.5 sec Geometric Delay (Average)0.0 sec Stop-Line Delay (Average)22.0 sec Idling Time (Average)14.7 sec Intersection Level of Service (LOS)LOS C 95% Back of Queue -Vehicles (Worst Lane)5.4 veh 95% Back of Queue -Distance (Worst Lane)134.2 ft Ave. Queue Storage Ratio (Worst Lane)0.02 Total Effective Stops 1660 veh/h 1979 pers/h Effective Stop Rate 0.73 0.73 Proportion Queued 0.73 0.73 Performance Index 115.3 115.3 Cost (Total)1556.14 $/h 1556.14 $/h Fuel Consumption (Total)84.6 gal/h Carbon Dioxide (Total)720.9 kg/h Hydrocarbons (Total)0.064 kg/h Carbon Monoxide (Total)0.956 kg/h NOx (Total)0.805 kg/h Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Intersection LOS value for Vehicles is based on average delay for all vehicle movements. Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Site Model Variability Index (Iterations 3 to N): 0.0 % Number of Iterations: 2 (Maximum: 10) Largest change in Lane Degrees of Saturation for the last three Flow-Capacity Iterations: 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Intersection Performance -Annual Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Demand Flows (Total)1,089,600 veh/y 1,297,051 pers/y Delay 6,649 veh-h/y 7,929 pers-h/y Effective Stops 797,028 veh/y 950,021 pers/y Travel Distance 1,252,775 veh-mi/y 1,490,375 pers-mi/y Travel Time 39,422 veh-h/y 46,917 pers-h/y May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 276 of 349 Cost 746,949 $/y 746,949 $/y Fuel Consumption 40,612 gal/y Carbon Dioxide 346,023 kg/y Hydrocarbons 31 kg/y Carbon Monoxide 459 kg/y NOx 387 kg/y SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, September 16, 2022 10:58:24 AMProject: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 277 of 349 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Cumulative PM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Vehicle Movement Performance INPUT VOLUMES DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUE Mov ID Turn Deg. Satn Aver. Delay Level of Service Prop. Que Effective Stop Rate Aver. No. Cycles Aver. Speed [ Total HV ][ Total HV ][ Veh.Dist ] veh/h %veh/h %v/c sec veh ft mph South: Carlsbad Blvd 3 L2 33 0.0 33 0.0 0.951 28.4 LOS C 5.4 134.2 0.87 0.87 0.87 21.4 8 T1 1024 2.0 1024 2.0 0.951 28.4 LOS C 5.4 134.2 0.87 0.87 0.87 31.8 18 R2 303 2.0 303 2.0 0.951 28.4 LOS C 5.4 134.2 0.87 0.87 0.87 29.0 Approach 1360 2.0 1360 2.0 0.951 24.0 LOS C 5.4 134.2 0.87 0.87 0.87 31.0 East: Tamarack Ave 1 L2 115 2.0 115 2.0 0.691 26.6 LOS C 1.0 25.8 0.92 0.93 1.00 28.9 6 T1 15 0.0 15 0.0 0.691 26.6 LOS C 1.0 25.8 0.92 0.93 1.00 11.2 16 R2 86 2.0 86 2.0 0.691 26.6 LOS C 1.0 25.8 0.92 0.93 1.00 27.0 Approach 216 1.9 216 1.9 0.691 24.4 LOS C 1.0 25.8 0.92 0.93 1.00 27.2 North: Carlsbad Blvd 7 L2 107 2.0 107 2.0 0.512 5.6 LOS A 1.0 25.0 0.34 0.34 0.34 34.7 4 T1 512 2.0 512 2.0 0.512 5.6 LOS A 1.0 25.0 0.34 0.34 0.34 35.8 14 R2 15 0.0 15 0.0 0.512 5.6 LOS A 1.0 25.0 0.34 0.34 0.34 29.6 Approach 634 2.0 634 2.0 0.512 3.2 LOS A 1.0 25.0 0.34 0.34 0.34 35.6 West: Beach Parking 5 L2 16 0.0 16 0.0 0.577 17.5 LOS B 0.4 9.2 1.00 1.08 1.75 28.4 2 T1 16 0.0 16 0.0 0.577 17.5 LOS B 0.4 9.2 1.00 1.08 1.75 20.2 12 R2 28 0.0 28 0.0 0.455 48.5 LOS D 0.1 3.5 0.98 0.98 0.98 23.2 Approach 60 0.0 60 0.0 0.577 32.0 LOS C 0.4 9.2 0.99 1.03 1.39 24.0 All Vehicles 2270 1.9 2270 1.9 0.951 22.0 LOS C 5.4 134.2 0.73 0.73 0.75 31.8 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, September 16, 2022 10:58:24 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 278 of 349 LANE SUMMARY Site: 101 [Cumulative PM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Lane Use and Performance DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUECap.Deg. Satn Lane Util. Aver. Delay Level of Service Lane Config Lane Length Cap. Adj. Prob. Block. [ Total HV ][ Veh Dist ] veh/h %veh/h v/c %sec ft ft %% South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 1360 2.0 1429 0.951 100 24.0 LOS C 5.4 134.2 Full 3773 0.0 0.0 Approach 1360 2.0 0.951 24.0 LOS C 5.4 134.2 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1d 216 1.9 312 0.691 100 24.4 LOS C 1.0 25.8 Full 985 0.0 0.0 Approach 216 1.9 0.691 24.4 LOS C 1.0 25.8 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 634 2.0 1238 0.512 100 3.2 LOS A 1.0 25.0 Full 3003 0.0 0.0 Approach 634 2.0 0.512 3.2 LOS A 1.0 25.0 West: Beach Parking Lane 1d 32 0.0 56 0.577 100 17.5 LOS B 0.4 9.2 Full 349 0.0 0.0 Lane 2 28 0.0 61 0.455 100 48.5 LOS D 0.1 3.5 Short 60 0.0 NA Approach 60 0.0 0.577 32.0 LOS C 0.4 9.2 Intersection 2270 1.9 0.951 22.0 LOS C 5.4 134.2 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach Approach Lane Flows (veh/h) South: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From S To Exit:W N E Lane 1 33 1024 303 1360 2.0 1429 0.951 100 NA NA Approach 33 1024 303 1360 2.0 0.951 East: Tamarack Ave Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From E To Exit:S W N Lane 1 115 15 86 216 1.9 312 0.691 100 NA NA May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 279 of 349 Approach 115 15 86 216 1.9 0.691 North: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From N To Exit:E S W Lane 1 107 512 15 634 2.0 1238 0.512 100 NA NA Approach 107 512 15 634 2.0 0.512 West: Beach Parking Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From W To Exit:N E S Lane 1 16 16 -32 0.0 56 0.577 100 NA NA Lane 2 --28 28 0.0 61 0.455 100 0.0 1 Approach 16 16 28 60 0.0 0.577 Total %HV Deg.Satn (v/c) Intersection 2270 1.9 0.951 Lane flow rates given in this report are based on the arrival flow rates subject to upstream capacity constraint where applicable. Merge Analysis Exit Lane Number Short Lane Length Percent Opng in Lane Opposing Flow Rate Critical Gap Follow-up Headway Lane Flow Rate Capacity Deg. Satn Min. Delay Merge Delay ft %veh/h pcu/h sec sec veh/h veh/h v/c sec sec South Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. East Exit: Tamarack Ave Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. North Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. West Exit: Beach Parking Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, September 16, 2022 10:58:24 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 280 of 349 ROUNDABOUT ANALYSIS Site: 101 [Cumulative SAT Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Roundabout Basic Parameters Central Island Diam Circ Width Insc Diam Entry Radius Entry Angle Circ Lanes Entry Lanes Av.Entry Lane Width App. Dist Prop Queued Upstr Signal Extra BunchingLocationName ft ft ft ft °ft ft % South Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 52.0*42.0*1 1 15.00*3773.0 NA5 0.0 East Tamarack Ave 70.00*17.00*104.0* 50.0*12.0*1 1 16.00*985.0 NA5 0.0 North Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 40.0*26.0*1 1 14.00*3003.0 NA5 0.0 West Beach Parking 70.00*17.00*104.0* 46.0*39.0*1 218 18.00*349.0 NA5 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 5 Not Applicable (single Site analysis or unconnected Site in Network analysis). * These parameters do not affect estimated capacity values in the HCM 6 Capacity Model. 18 Exclusive slip/bypass lane is included in Entry Lanes count. Roundabout Entry and Circulating / Exiting Stream Parameters Critical GapTo Approach Turn Lane No Lane Type Opng Flow Opng Flow In- Bunch Hdwy Prop. Bunched Cap Const Effect Priority Sharing OD Factor HVE for Entry Follow- up Hdwy [ Hdwy Dist ] veh/h pcu/h sec sec ft sec South: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High West L2 1 Dominant 170 168 0.00 0.000 No No 0.964 1.00 4.31 94.0 2.26 North T1 1 Dominant 170 168 0.00 0.000 No No 0.964 1.02 4.31 94.0 2.26 East R2 1 Dominant 170 168 0.00 0.000 No No 0.964 1.02 4.31 94.0 2.26 East: Tamarack Ave Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High South L2 1 Dominant 829 795 0.00 0.000 No No 0.824 1.02 4.98 151.9 2.61 West T1 1 Dominant 829 795 0.00 0.000 No No 0.824 1.00 4.98 151.9 2.61 North R2 1 Dominant 829 795 0.00 0.000 No No 0.824 1.02 4.98 151.9 2.61 North: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High East L2 1 Dominant 261 251 0.00 0.000 No No 0.954 1.02 4.53 97.1 2.37 South T1 1 Dominant 261 251 0.00 0.000 No No 0.954 1.02 4.53 97.1 2.37 West R2 1 Dominant 261 251 0.00 0.000 No No 0.954 1.00 4.53 97.1 2.37 West: Beach Parking Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High North L2 1 Dominant 1054 1013 0.00 0.000 No No 0.738 1.00 4.54 127.3 2.54 East T1 1 Dominant 1054 1013 0.00 0.000 No No 0.738 1.00 4.54 127.3 2.54 South R2 2 Excl. Slip 928 888 0.00 0.000 No No 0.787 1.00 4.54 132.2 2.54 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Circulating Lane Flow Rates Circulating Flow RateCirc. Lane No May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 281 of 349 veh/h pcu/h Percent South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 170 168 100.0 Approach 170 168 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1 829 795 100.0 Approach 829 795 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 261 251 100.0 Approach 261 251 West: Beach Parking Lane 1 1054 1013 100.0 Approach 1054 1013 Roundabout Capacity Model: The US HCM 6 roundabout capacity model option is in use. This model considers only the total circulating flow and not the flow rates in individual circulating lanes. To model the effects of flow distribution in circulating lanes on the entry capacity results, you should use the SIDRA Standard roundabout capacity model. Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Lanes) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum DelayOpposed Lane Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd 1 10.32 1.98 8.34 0.808 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave 1 10.28 6.61 3.67 0.357 2.3 North: Carlsbad Blvd 1 10.32 2.76 7.56 0.732 0.0 West: Beach Parking 1 5.00 3.53 1.47 0.294 0.0 2 10.02 9.14 0.88 0.088 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Movements) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum Delay To Approach Turn Opsd Lane No Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd West L2 1 10.32 1.98 8.34 0.808 0.0 North T1 1 10.32 1.98 8.34 0.808 0.0 East R2 1 10.32 1.98 8.34 0.808 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave South L2 1 10.28 6.61 3.67 0.357 2.3 West T1 1 10.28 6.61 3.67 0.357 2.3 North R2 1 10.28 6.61 3.67 0.357 2.3 North: Carlsbad Blvd East L2 1 10.32 2.76 7.56 0.732 0.0 South T1 1 10.32 2.76 7.56 0.732 0.0 West R2 1 10.32 2.76 7.56 0.732 0.0 West: Beach Parking North L2 1 5.00 3.53 1.47 0.294 0.0 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 282 of 349 East T1 1 5.00 3.53 1.47 0.294 0.0 South R2 2 10.02 9.14 0.88 0.088 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:57:57AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 283 of 349 SITE LAYOUT Site: 101 [Cumulative SAT Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Thursday, September 1, 2022 11:14:52 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 284 of 349 INTERSECTION SUMMARY Site: 101 [Cumulative SAT Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Intersection Performance -Hourly Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Travel Speed (Average)32.4 mph 32.4 mph Travel Distance (Total)2610.4 veh-mi/h 3073.2 pers-mi/h Travel Time (Total)80.6 veh-h/h 94.9 pers-h/h Desired Speed (Program)35.9 mph Speed Efficiency 0.90 Travel Time Index 8.91 Congestion Coefficient 1.11 Demand Flows (Total)2320 veh/h 2734 pers/h Percent Heavy Vehicles (Demand)1.8 % Degree of Saturation 0.817 Practical Spare Capacity 4.1 % Effective Intersection Capacity 2841 veh/h Control Delay (Total)9.96 veh-h/h 11.74 pers-h/h Control Delay (Average)15.5 sec 15.5 sec Control Delay (Worst Lane)23.0 sec Control Delay (Worst Movement)23.0 sec 23.0 sec Geometric Delay (Average)0.0 sec Stop-Line Delay (Average)15.5 sec Idling Time (Average)8.5 sec Intersection Level of Service (LOS)LOS B 95% Back of Queue -Vehicles (Worst Lane)5.2 veh 95% Back of Queue -Distance (Worst Lane)121.5 ft Ave. Queue Storage Ratio (Worst Lane)0.03 Total Effective Stops 1769 veh/h 2085 pers/h Effective Stop Rate 0.76 0.76 Proportion Queued 0.76 0.76 Performance Index 134.4 134.4 Cost (Total)1461.25 $/h 1461.25 $/h Fuel Consumption (Total)77.3 gal/h Carbon Dioxide (Total)617.2 kg/h Hydrocarbons (Total)0.056 kg/h Carbon Monoxide (Total)0.818 kg/h NOx (Total)0.773 kg/h Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Intersection LOS value for Vehicles is based on average delay for all vehicle movements. Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Site Model Variability Index (Iterations 3 to N): 0.0 % Number of Iterations: 2 (Maximum: 10) Largest change in Lane Degrees of Saturation for the last three Flow-Capacity Iterations: 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Intersection Performance -Annual Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Demand Flows (Total)1,113,600 veh/y 1,312,315 pers/y Delay 4,781 veh-h/y 5,635 pers-h/y Effective Stops 849,042 veh/y 1,000,764 pers/y Travel Distance 1,252,978 veh-mi/y 1,475,119 pers-mi/y Travel Time 38,688 veh-h/y 45,558 pers-h/y May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 285 of 349 Cost 701,400 $/y 701,400 $/y Fuel Consumption 37,089 gal/y Carbon Dioxide 296,257 kg/y Hydrocarbons 27 kg/y Carbon Monoxide 393 kg/y NOx 371 kg/y SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:57:57AMProject: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 286 of 349 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Cumulative SAT Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Vehicle Movement Performance INPUT VOLUMES DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUE Mov ID Turn Deg. Satn Aver. Delay Level of Service Prop. Que Effective Stop Rate Aver. No. Cycles Aver. Speed [ Total HV ][ Total HV ][ Veh.Dist ] veh/h %veh/h %v/c sec veh ft mph South: Carlsbad Blvd 3 L2 43 0.0 43 0.0 0.755 11.8 LOS B 4.1 96.6 0.65 0.62 0.65 23.7 8 T1 767 2.0 767 2.0 0.755 11.8 LOS B 4.1 96.6 0.65 0.62 0.65 34.3 18 R2 162 2.0 162 2.0 0.755 11.8 LOS B 4.1 96.6 0.65 0.62 0.65 32.6 Approach 972 1.9 972 1.9 0.755 8.5 LOS A 4.1 96.6 0.65 0.62 0.65 33.6 East: Tamarack Ave 1 L2 188 2.0 188 2.0 0.716 22.3 LOS C 3.1 74.2 0.86 0.95 1.19 29.1 6 T1 30 0.0 30 0.0 0.716 22.3 LOS C 3.1 74.2 0.86 0.95 1.19 18.9 16 R2 135 2.0 135 2.0 0.716 22.3 LOS C 3.1 74.2 0.86 0.95 1.19 27.9 Approach 353 1.8 353 1.8 0.716 20.2 LOS C 3.1 74.2 0.86 0.95 1.19 28.2 North: Carlsbad Blvd 7 L2 126 2.0 126 2.0 0.817 16.6 LOS B 5.2 121.5 0.83 0.83 0.83 30.4 4 T1 740 2.0 740 2.0 0.817 16.6 LOS B 5.2 121.5 0.83 0.83 0.83 32.9 14 R2 41 0.0 41 0.0 0.817 16.6 LOS B 5.2 121.5 0.83 0.83 0.83 28.9 Approach 907 1.9 907 1.9 0.817 13.5 LOS B 5.2 121.5 0.83 0.83 0.83 32.5 West: Beach Parking 5 L2 19 0.0 19 0.0 0.422 9.7 LOS A 1.2 28.5 0.99 1.01 1.11 31.0 2 T1 25 0.0 25 0.0 0.422 9.7 LOS A 1.2 28.5 0.99 1.01 1.11 24.2 12 R2 44 0.0 44 0.0 0.354 23.0 LOS C 0.3 8.5 0.94 0.94 0.94 29.3 Approach 88 0.0 88 0.0 0.422 16.4 LOS B 1.2 28.5 0.97 0.98 1.03 28.9 All Vehicles 2320 1.8 2320 1.8 0.817 15.5 LOS B 5.2 121.5 0.76 0.76 0.81 32.4 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:57:57AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 287 of 349 LANE SUMMARY Site: 101 [Cumulative SAT Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Lane Use and Performance DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUECap.Deg. Satn Lane Util. Aver. Delay Level of Service Lane Config Lane Length Cap. Adj. Prob. Block. [ Total HV ][ Veh Dist ] veh/h %veh/h v/c %sec ft ft %% South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 972 1.9 1287 0.755 100 8.5 LOS A 4.1 96.6 Full 3773 0.0 0.0 Approach 972 1.9 0.755 8.5 LOS A 4.1 96.6 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1d 353 1.8 493 0.716 100 20.2 LOS C 3.1 74.2 Full 985 0.0 0.0 Approach 353 1.8 0.716 20.2 LOS C 3.1 74.2 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 907 1.9 1111 0.817 100 13.5 LOS B 5.2 121.5 Full 3003 0.0 0.0 Approach 907 1.9 0.817 13.5 LOS B 5.2 121.5 West: Beach Parking Lane 1d 44 0.0 104 0.422 100 9.7 LOS A 1.2 28.5 Full 349 0.0 0.0 Lane 2 44 0.0 124 0.354 100 23.0 LOS C 0.3 8.5 Short 60 0.0 NA Approach 88 0.0 0.422 16.4 LOS B 1.2 28.5 Intersection 2320 1.8 0.817 15.5 LOS B 5.2 121.5 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach Approach Lane Flows (veh/h) South: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From S To Exit:W N E Lane 1 43 767 162 972 1.9 1287 0.755 100 NA NA Approach 43 767 162 972 1.9 0.755 East: Tamarack Ave Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From E To Exit:S W N Lane 1 188 30 135 353 1.8 493 0.716 100 NA NA May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 288 of 349 Approach 188 30 135 353 1.8 0.716 North: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From N To Exit:E S W Lane 1 126 740 41 907 1.9 1111 0.817 100 NA NA Approach 126 740 41 907 1.9 0.817 West: Beach Parking Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From W To Exit:N E S Lane 1 19 25 -44 0.0 104 0.422 100 NA NA Lane 2 --44 44 0.0 124 0.354 100 0.0 1 Approach 19 25 44 88 0.0 0.422 Total %HV Deg.Satn (v/c) Intersection 2320 1.8 0.817 Lane flow rates given in this report are based on the arrival flow rates subject to upstream capacity constraint where applicable. Merge Analysis Exit Lane Number Short Lane Length Percent Opng in Lane Opposing Flow Rate Critical Gap Follow-up Headway Lane Flow Rate Capacity Deg. Satn Min. Delay Merge Delay ft %veh/h pcu/h sec sec veh/h veh/h v/c sec sec South Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. East Exit: Tamarack Ave Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. North Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. West Exit: Beach Parking Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:57:57AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 289 of 349 ROUNDABOUT ANALYSIS Site: 101 [Horizon Year AM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Roundabout Basic Parameters Central Island Diam Circ Width Insc Diam Entry Radius Entry Angle Circ Lanes Entry Lanes Av.Entry Lane Width App. Dist Prop Queued Upstr Signal Extra BunchingLocationName ft ft ft ft °ft ft % South Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 52.0*42.0*1 1 15.00*3773.0 NA5 0.0 East Tamarack Ave 70.00*17.00*104.0* 50.0*12.0*1 1 16.00*985.0 NA5 0.0 North Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 40.0*26.0*1 1 14.00*3003.0 NA5 0.0 West Beach Parking 70.00*17.00*104.0* 46.0*39.0*1 218 18.00*349.0 NA5 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 5 Not Applicable (single Site analysis or unconnected Site in Network analysis). * These parameters do not affect estimated capacity values in the HCM 6 Capacity Model. 18 Exclusive slip/bypass lane is included in Entry Lanes count. Roundabout Entry and Circulating / Exiting Stream Parameters Critical GapTo Approach Turn Lane No Lane Type Opng Flow Opng Flow In- Bunch Hdwy Prop. Bunched Cap Const Effect Priority Sharing OD Factor HVE for Entry Follow- up Hdwy [ Hdwy Dist ] veh/h pcu/h sec sec ft sec South: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High West L2 1 Dominant 60 61 0.00 0.000 No No 0.989 1.00 4.37 93.8 2.29 North T1 1 Dominant 60 61 0.00 0.000 No No 0.989 1.02 4.37 93.8 2.29 East R2 1 Dominant 60 61 0.00 0.000 No No 0.989 1.02 4.37 93.8 2.29 East: Tamarack Ave Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High South L2 1 Dominant 246 241 0.00 0.000 No No 0.992 1.02 4.92 149.5 2.58 West T1 1 Dominant 246 241 0.00 0.000 No No 0.992 1.00 4.92 149.5 2.58 North R2 1 Dominant 246 241 0.00 0.000 No No 0.992 1.02 4.92 149.5 2.58 North: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High East L2 1 Dominant 263 259 0.00 0.000 No No 0.977 1.02 4.77 103.1 2.50 South T1 1 Dominant 263 259 0.00 0.000 No No 0.977 1.02 4.77 103.1 2.50 West R2 1 Dominant 263 259 0.00 0.000 No No 0.977 1.00 4.77 103.1 2.50 West: Beach Parking Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High North L2 1 Dominant 688 689 0.00 0.000 No No 0.928 1.00 4.54 123.2 2.54 East T1 1 Dominant 688 689 0.00 0.000 No No 0.928 1.00 4.54 123.2 2.54 South R2 2 Excl. Slip 641 641 0.00 0.000 No No 0.938 1.00 4.54 125.5 2.54 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Circulating Lane Flow Rates Circulating Flow RateCirc. Lane No May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 290 of 349 veh/h pcu/h Percent South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 60 61 100.0 Approach 60 61 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1 246 241 100.0 Approach 246 241 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 263 259 100.0 Approach 263 259 West: Beach Parking Lane 1 688 689 100.0 Approach 688 689 Roundabout Capacity Model: The US HCM 6 roundabout capacity model option is in use. This model considers only the total circulating flow and not the flow rates in individual circulating lanes. To model the effects of flow distribution in circulating lanes on the entry capacity results, you should use the SIDRA Standard roundabout capacity model. Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Lanes) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum DelayOpposed Lane Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd 1 10.23 0.85 9.38 0.917 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave 1 10.22 2.44 7.78 0.761 0.0 North: Carlsbad Blvd 1 10.23 2.65 7.58 0.741 0.0 West: Beach Parking 1 5.18 2.70 2.48 0.478 0.0 2 10.43 9.12 1.31 0.125 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Movements) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum Delay To Approach Turn Opsd Lane No Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd West L2 1 10.23 0.85 9.38 0.917 0.0 North T1 1 10.23 0.85 9.38 0.917 0.0 East R2 1 10.23 0.85 9.38 0.917 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave South L2 1 10.22 2.44 7.78 0.761 0.0 West T1 1 10.22 2.44 7.78 0.761 0.0 North R2 1 10.22 2.44 7.78 0.761 0.0 North: Carlsbad Blvd East L2 1 10.23 2.65 7.58 0.741 0.0 South T1 1 10.23 2.65 7.58 0.741 0.0 West R2 1 10.23 2.65 7.58 0.741 0.0 West: Beach Parking North L2 1 5.18 2.70 2.48 0.478 0.0 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 291 of 349 East T1 1 5.18 2.70 2.48 0.478 0.0 South R2 2 10.43 9.12 1.31 0.125 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, September 16, 2022 10:59:35 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 292 of 349 SITE LAYOUT Site: 101 [Horizon Year AM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Friday, September 16, 2022 10:59:37 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 293 of 349 INTERSECTION SUMMARY Site: 101 [Horizon Year AM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Intersection Performance -Hourly Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Travel Speed (Average)36.0 mph 36.0 mph Travel Distance (Total)1247.3 veh-mi/h 1483.6 pers-mi/h Travel Time (Total)34.6 veh-h/h 41.2 pers-h/h Desired Speed (Program)38.0 mph Speed Efficiency 0.95 Travel Time Index 9.42 Congestion Coefficient 1.06 Demand Flows (Total)1140 veh/h 1355 pers/h Percent Heavy Vehicles (Demand)1.8 % Degree of Saturation 0.460 Practical Spare Capacity 84.6 % Effective Intersection Capacity 2476 veh/h Control Delay (Total)1.15 veh-h/h 1.37 pers-h/h Control Delay (Average)3.6 sec 3.6 sec Control Delay (Worst Lane)8.4 sec Control Delay (Worst Movement)8.4 sec 8.4 sec Geometric Delay (Average)0.0 sec Stop-Line Delay (Average)3.6 sec Idling Time (Average)0.5 sec Intersection Level of Service (LOS)LOS A 95% Back of Queue -Vehicles (Worst Lane)1.6 veh 95% Back of Queue -Distance (Worst Lane)40.4 ft Ave. Queue Storage Ratio (Worst Lane)0.01 Total Effective Stops 395 veh/h 470 pers/h Effective Stop Rate 0.35 0.35 Proportion Queued 0.36 0.36 Performance Index 43.9 43.9 Cost (Total)669.40 $/h 669.40 $/h Fuel Consumption (Total)38.5 gal/h Carbon Dioxide (Total)327.3 kg/h Hydrocarbons (Total)0.028 kg/h Carbon Monoxide (Total)0.440 kg/h NOx (Total)0.373 kg/h Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Intersection LOS value for Vehicles is based on average delay for all vehicle movements. Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Site Model Variability Index (Iterations 3 to N): 0.0 % Number of Iterations: 2 (Maximum: 10) Largest change in Lane Degrees of Saturation for the last three Flow-Capacity Iterations: 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Intersection Performance -Annual Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Demand Flows (Total)547,200 veh/y 650,591 pers/y Delay 554 veh-h/y 659 pers-h/y Effective Stops 189,366 veh/y 225,449 pers/y Travel Distance 598,680 veh-mi/y 712,124 pers-mi/y Travel Time 16,622 veh-h/y 19,771 pers-h/y May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 294 of 349 Cost 321,312 $/y 321,312 $/y Fuel Consumption 18,488 gal/y Carbon Dioxide 157,110 kg/y Hydrocarbons 14 kg/y Carbon Monoxide 211 kg/y NOx 179 kg/y SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, September 16, 2022 10:59:35 AMProject: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 295 of 349 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Horizon Year AM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Vehicle Movement Performance INPUT VOLUMES DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUE Mov ID Turn Deg. Satn Aver. Delay Level of Service Prop. Que Effective Stop Rate Aver. No. Cycles Aver. Speed [ Total HV ][ Total HV ][ Veh.Dist ] veh/h %veh/h %v/c sec veh ft mph South: Carlsbad Blvd 3 L2 15 0.0 15 0.0 0.217 1.8 LOS A 0.3 6.6 0.14 0.11 0.14 25.5 8 T1 225 2.0 225 2.0 0.217 1.8 LOS A 0.3 6.6 0.14 0.11 0.14 37.0 18 R2 72 2.0 72 2.0 0.217 1.8 LOS A 0.3 6.6 0.14 0.11 0.14 35.7 Approach 312 1.9 312 1.9 0.217 0.7 LOS A 0.3 6.6 0.14 0.11 0.14 36.2 East: Tamarack Ave 1 L2 214 2.0 214 2.0 0.298 2.9 LOS A 0.8 20.3 0.37 0.35 0.37 35.5 6 T1 34 0.0 34 0.0 0.298 2.9 LOS A 0.8 20.3 0.37 0.35 0.37 28.7 16 R2 69 2.0 69 2.0 0.298 2.9 LOS A 0.8 20.3 0.37 0.35 0.37 34.3 Approach 317 1.8 317 1.8 0.298 1.8 LOS A 0.8 20.3 0.37 0.35 0.37 34.9 North: Carlsbad Blvd 7 L2 47 2.0 47 2.0 0.460 5.1 LOS A 1.6 40.4 0.48 0.47 0.48 35.2 4 T1 427 2.0 427 2.0 0.460 5.1 LOS A 1.6 40.4 0.48 0.47 0.48 36.7 14 R2 17 0.0 17 0.0 0.460 5.1 LOS A 1.6 40.4 0.48 0.47 0.48 30.0 Approach 491 1.9 491 1.9 0.460 3.4 LOS A 1.6 40.4 0.48 0.47 0.48 36.5 West: Beach Parking 5 L2 6 0.0 6 0.0 0.077 6.6 LOS A 0.2 4.5 0.91 0.91 0.91 32.8 2 T1 7 0.0 7 0.0 0.077 6.6 LOS A 0.2 4.5 0.91 0.91 0.91 26.3 12 R2 7 0.0 7 0.0 0.039 8.4 LOS A 0.1 1.3 0.88 0.88 0.88 34.8 Approach 20 0.0 20 0.0 0.077 7.2 LOS A 0.2 4.5 0.90 0.90 0.90 32.3 All Vehicles 1140 1.8 1140 1.8 0.460 3.6 LOS A 1.6 40.4 0.36 0.35 0.36 36.0 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, September 16, 2022 10:59:35 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 296 of 349 LANE SUMMARY Site: 101 [Horizon Year AM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Lane Use and Performance DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUECap.Deg. Satn Lane Util. Aver. Delay Level of Service Lane Config Lane Length Cap. Adj. Prob. Block. [ Total HV ][ Veh Dist ] veh/h %veh/h v/c %sec ft ft %% South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 312 1.9 1440 0.217 100 0.7 LOS A 0.3 6.6 Full 3773 0.0 0.0 Approach 312 1.9 0.217 0.7 LOS A 0.3 6.6 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1d 317 1.8 1063 0.298 100 1.8 LOS A 0.8 20.3 Full 985 0.0 0.0 Approach 317 1.8 0.298 1.8 LOS A 0.8 20.3 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 491 1.9 1067 0.460 100 3.4 LOS A 1.6 40.4 Full 3003 0.0 0.0 Approach 491 1.9 0.460 3.4 LOS A 1.6 40.4 West: Beach Parking Lane 1d 13 0.0 170 0.077 100 6.6 LOS A 0.2 4.5 Full 349 0.0 0.0 Lane 2 7 0.0 178 0.039 100 8.4 LOS A 0.1 1.3 Short 60 0.0 NA Approach 20 0.0 0.077 7.2 LOS A 0.2 4.5 Intersection 1140 1.8 0.460 3.6 LOS A 1.6 40.4 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach Approach Lane Flows (veh/h) South: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From S To Exit:W N E Lane 1 15 225 72 312 1.9 1440 0.217 100 NA NA Approach 15 225 72 312 1.9 0.217 East: Tamarack Ave Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From E To Exit:S W N Lane 1 214 34 69 317 1.8 1063 0.298 100 NA NA May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 297 of 349 Approach 214 34 69 317 1.8 0.298 North: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From N To Exit:E S W Lane 1 47 427 17 491 1.9 1067 0.460 100 NA NA Approach 47 427 17 491 1.9 0.460 West: Beach Parking Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From W To Exit:N E S Lane 1 6 7 -13 0.0 170 0.077 100 NA NA Lane 2 --7 7 0.0 178 0.039 100 0.0 1 Approach 6 7 7 20 0.0 0.077 Total %HV Deg.Satn (v/c) Intersection 1140 1.8 0.460 Lane flow rates given in this report are based on the arrival flow rates subject to upstream capacity constraint where applicable. Merge Analysis Exit Lane Number Short Lane Length Percent Opng in Lane Opposing Flow Rate Critical Gap Follow-up Headway Lane Flow Rate Capacity Deg. Satn Min. Delay Merge Delay ft %veh/h pcu/h sec sec veh/h veh/h v/c sec sec South Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. East Exit: Tamarack Ave Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. North Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. West Exit: Beach Parking Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, September 16, 2022 10:59:35 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 298 of 349 ROUNDABOUT ANALYSIS Site: 101 [Horizon Year PM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Roundabout Basic Parameters Central Island Diam Circ Width Insc Diam Entry Radius Entry Angle Circ Lanes Entry Lanes Av.Entry Lane Width App. Dist Prop Queued Upstr Signal Extra BunchingLocationName ft ft ft ft °ft ft % South Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 52.0*42.0*1 1 15.00*3773.0 NA5 0.0 East Tamarack Ave 70.00*17.00*104.0* 50.0*12.0*1 1 16.00*985.0 NA5 0.0 North Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 40.0*26.0*1 1 14.00*3003.0 NA5 0.0 West Beach Parking 70.00*17.00*104.0* 46.0*39.0*1 218 18.00*349.0 NA5 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 5 Not Applicable (single Site analysis or unconnected Site in Network analysis). * These parameters do not affect estimated capacity values in the HCM 6 Capacity Model. 18 Exclusive slip/bypass lane is included in Entry Lanes count. Roundabout Entry and Circulating / Exiting Stream Parameters Critical GapTo Approach Turn Lane No Lane Type Opng Flow Opng Flow In- Bunch Hdwy Prop. Bunched Cap Const Effect Priority Sharing OD Factor HVE for Entry Follow- up Hdwy [ Hdwy Dist ] veh/h pcu/h sec sec ft sec South: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High West L2 1 Dominant 136 138 0.00 0.000 No No 0.944 1.00 4.11 88.3 2.15 North T1 1 Dominant 136 138 0.00 0.000 No No 0.944 1.02 4.11 88.3 2.15 East R2 1 Dominant 136 138 0.00 0.000 No No 0.944 1.02 4.11 88.3 2.15 East: Tamarack Ave Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High South L2 1 Dominant 980 979 0.00 0.000 No No 0.795 1.02 4.98 153.4 2.61 West T1 1 Dominant 980 979 0.00 0.000 No No 0.795 1.00 4.98 153.4 2.61 North R2 1 Dominant 980 979 0.00 0.000 No No 0.795 1.02 4.98 153.4 2.61 North: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High East L2 1 Dominant 151 152 0.00 0.000 No No 0.972 1.02 4.48 95.0 2.35 South T1 1 Dominant 151 152 0.00 0.000 No No 0.972 1.02 4.48 95.0 2.35 West R2 1 Dominant 151 152 0.00 0.000 No No 0.972 1.00 4.48 95.0 2.35 West: Beach Parking Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High North L2 1 Dominant 708 694 0.00 0.000 No No 0.941 1.00 4.54 127.5 2.54 East T1 1 Dominant 708 694 0.00 0.000 No No 0.941 1.00 4.54 127.5 2.54 South R2 2 Excl. Slip 604 588 0.00 0.000 No No 0.956 1.00 4.54 133.6 2.54 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Circulating Lane Flow Rates Circulating Flow RateCirc. Lane No May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 299 of 349 veh/h pcu/h Percent South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 136 138 100.0 Approach 136 138 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1 980 979 100.0 Approach 980 979 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 151 152 100.0 Approach 151 152 West: Beach Parking Lane 1 708 694 100.0 Approach 708 694 Roundabout Capacity Model: The US HCM 6 roundabout capacity model option is in use. This model considers only the total circulating flow and not the flow rates in individual circulating lanes. To model the effects of flow distribution in circulating lanes on the entry capacity results, you should use the SIDRA Standard roundabout capacity model. Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Lanes) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum DelayOpposed Lane Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd 1 6.15 0.89 5.27 0.856 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave 1 6.11 4.45 1.67 0.272 1.4 North: Carlsbad Blvd 1 6.15 1.08 5.07 0.824 0.0 West: Beach Parking 1 1.04 0.54 0.50 0.483 0.0 2 6.31 6.03 0.28 0.044 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Movements) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum Delay To Approach Turn Opsd Lane No Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd West L2 1 6.15 0.89 5.27 0.856 0.0 North T1 1 6.15 0.89 5.27 0.856 0.0 East R2 1 6.15 0.89 5.27 0.856 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave South L2 1 6.11 4.45 1.67 0.272 1.4 West T1 1 6.11 4.45 1.67 0.272 1.4 North R2 1 6.11 4.45 1.67 0.272 1.4 North: Carlsbad Blvd East L2 1 6.15 1.08 5.07 0.824 0.0 South T1 1 6.15 1.08 5.07 0.824 0.0 West R2 1 6.15 1.08 5.07 0.824 0.0 West: Beach Parking North L2 1 1.04 0.54 0.50 0.483 0.0 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 300 of 349 East T1 1 1.04 0.54 0.50 0.483 0.0 South R2 2 6.31 6.03 0.28 0.044 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, September 16, 2022 11:00:21 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 301 of 349 SITE LAYOUT Site: 101 [Horizon Year PM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Friday, September 16, 2022 11:00:27 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 302 of 349 INTERSECTION SUMMARY Site: 101 [Horizon Year PM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Intersection Performance -Hourly Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Travel Speed (Average)33.3 mph 33.3 mph Travel Distance (Total)2476.4 veh-mi/h 2944.7 pers-mi/h Travel Time (Total)74.4 veh-h/h 88.5 pers-h/h Desired Speed (Program)37.9 mph Speed Efficiency 0.88 Travel Time Index 8.64 Congestion Coefficient 1.14 Demand Flows (Total)2154 veh/h 2563 pers/h Percent Heavy Vehicles (Demand)1.9 % Degree of Saturation 0.894 Practical Spare Capacity -4.9 % Effective Intersection Capacity 2410 veh/h Control Delay (Total)9.39 veh-h/h 11.19 pers-h/h Control Delay (Average)15.7 sec 15.7 sec Control Delay (Worst Lane)46.1 sec Control Delay (Worst Movement)46.1 sec 46.1 sec Geometric Delay (Average)0.0 sec Stop-Line Delay (Average)15.7 sec Idling Time (Average)9.3 sec Intersection Level of Service (LOS)LOS B 95% Back of Queue -Vehicles (Worst Lane)4.0 veh 95% Back of Queue -Distance (Worst Lane)99.0 ft Ave. Queue Storage Ratio (Worst Lane)0.02 Total Effective Stops 1300 veh/h 1548 pers/h Effective Stop Rate 0.60 0.60 Proportion Queued 0.60 0.60 Performance Index 100.3 100.3 Cost (Total)1416.16 $/h 1416.16 $/h Fuel Consumption (Total)78.4 gal/h Carbon Dioxide (Total)665.8 kg/h Hydrocarbons (Total)0.058 kg/h Carbon Monoxide (Total)0.889 kg/h NOx (Total)0.749 kg/h Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Intersection LOS value for Vehicles is based on average delay for all vehicle movements. Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Site Model Variability Index (Iterations 3 to N): 0.0 % Number of Iterations: 2 (Maximum: 10) Largest change in Lane Degrees of Saturation for the last three Flow-Capacity Iterations: 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Intersection Performance -Annual Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Demand Flows (Total)1,033,920 veh/y 1,230,245 pers/y Delay 4,507 veh-h/y 5,372 pers-h/y Effective Stops 623,801 veh/y 743,183 pers/y Travel Distance 1,188,685 veh-mi/y 1,413,479 pers-mi/y Travel Time 35,700 veh-h/y 42,463 pers-h/y May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 303 of 349 Cost 679,755 $/y 679,755 $/y Fuel Consumption 37,620 gal/y Carbon Dioxide 319,603 kg/y Hydrocarbons 28 kg/y Carbon Monoxide 427 kg/y NOx 359 kg/y SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, September 16, 2022 11:00:21 AMProject: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 304 of 349 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Horizon Year PM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Vehicle Movement Performance INPUT VOLUMES DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUE Mov ID Turn Deg. Satn Aver. Delay Level of Service Prop. Que Effective Stop Rate Aver. No. Cycles Aver. Speed [ Total HV ][ Total HV ][ Veh.Dist ] veh/h %veh/h %v/c sec veh ft mph South: Carlsbad Blvd 3 L2 33 0.0 33 0.0 0.894 20.4 LOS C 4.0 99.0 0.68 0.68 0.68 22.7 8 T1 961 2.0 961 2.0 0.894 20.4 LOS C 4.0 99.0 0.68 0.68 0.68 33.5 18 R2 284 2.0 284 2.0 0.894 20.4 LOS C 4.0 99.0 0.68 0.68 0.68 31.1 Approach 1278 1.9 1278 1.9 0.894 16.2 LOS B 4.0 99.0 0.68 0.68 0.68 32.8 East: Tamarack Ave 1 L2 105 2.0 105 2.0 0.527 14.2 LOS B 0.9 22.0 0.85 0.87 0.93 32.3 6 T1 14 0.0 14 0.0 0.527 14.2 LOS B 0.9 22.0 0.85 0.87 0.93 13.0 16 R2 79 2.0 79 2.0 0.527 14.2 LOS B 0.9 22.0 0.85 0.87 0.93 30.6 Approach 198 1.9 198 1.9 0.527 12.1 LOS B 0.9 22.0 0.85 0.87 0.93 30.6 North: Carlsbad Blvd 7 L2 104 2.0 104 2.0 0.490 5.2 LOS A 0.9 22.3 0.31 0.31 0.31 34.8 4 T1 499 2.0 499 2.0 0.490 5.2 LOS A 0.9 22.3 0.31 0.31 0.31 35.9 14 R2 15 0.0 15 0.0 0.490 5.2 LOS A 0.9 22.3 0.31 0.31 0.31 29.7 Approach 618 2.0 618 2.0 0.490 2.9 LOS A 0.9 22.3 0.31 0.31 0.31 35.7 West: Beach Parking 5 L2 16 0.0 16 0.0 0.560 15.4 LOS B 0.4 9.1 1.00 1.07 1.68 29.1 2 T1 16 0.0 16 0.0 0.560 15.4 LOS B 0.4 9.1 1.00 1.07 1.68 21.1 12 R2 28 0.0 28 0.0 0.444 46.1 LOS D 0.1 3.5 0.97 0.97 0.97 23.6 Approach 60 0.0 60 0.0 0.560 29.8 LOS C 0.4 9.1 0.99 1.03 1.35 24.6 All Vehicles 2154 1.9 2154 1.9 0.894 15.7 LOS B 4.0 99.0 0.60 0.60 0.62 33.3 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, September 16, 2022 11:00:21 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 305 of 349 LANE SUMMARY Site: 101 [Horizon Year PM Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Lane Use and Performance DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUECap.Deg. Satn Lane Util. Aver. Delay Level of Service Lane Config Lane Length Cap. Adj. Prob. Block. [ Total HV ][ Veh Dist ] veh/h %veh/h v/c %sec ft ft %% South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 1278 1.9 1430 0.894 100 16.2 LOS B 4.0 99.0 Full 3773 0.0 0.0 Approach 1278 1.9 0.894 16.2 LOS B 4.0 99.0 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1d 198 1.9 376 0.527 100 12.1 LOS B 0.9 22.0 Full 985 0.0 0.0 Approach 198 1.9 0.527 12.1 LOS B 0.9 22.0 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 618 2.0 1262 0.490 100 2.9 LOS A 0.9 22.3 Full 3003 0.0 0.0 Approach 618 2.0 0.490 2.9 LOS A 0.9 22.3 West: Beach Parking Lane 1d 32 0.0 57 0.560 100 15.4 LOS B 0.4 9.1 Full 349 0.0 0.0 Lane 2 28 0.0 63 0.444 100 46.1 LOS D 0.1 3.5 Short 60 0.0 NA Approach 60 0.0 0.560 29.8 LOS C 0.4 9.1 Intersection 2154 1.9 0.894 15.7 LOS B 4.0 99.0 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach Approach Lane Flows (veh/h) South: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From S To Exit:W N E Lane 1 33 961 284 1278 1.9 1430 0.894 100 NA NA Approach 33 961 284 1278 1.9 0.894 East: Tamarack Ave Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From E To Exit:S W N Lane 1 105 14 79 198 1.9 376 0.527 100 NA NA May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 306 of 349 Approach 105 14 79 198 1.9 0.527 North: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From N To Exit:E S W Lane 1 104 499 15 618 2.0 1262 0.490 100 NA NA Approach 104 499 15 618 2.0 0.490 West: Beach Parking Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From W To Exit:N E S Lane 1 16 16 -32 0.0 57 0.560 100 NA NA Lane 2 --28 28 0.0 63 0.444 100 0.0 1 Approach 16 16 28 60 0.0 0.560 Total %HV Deg.Satn (v/c) Intersection 2154 1.9 0.894 Lane flow rates given in this report are based on the arrival flow rates subject to upstream capacity constraint where applicable. Merge Analysis Exit Lane Number Short Lane Length Percent Opng in Lane Opposing Flow Rate Critical Gap Follow-up Headway Lane Flow Rate Capacity Deg. Satn Min. Delay Merge Delay ft %veh/h pcu/h sec sec veh/h veh/h v/c sec sec South Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. East Exit: Tamarack Ave Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. North Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. West Exit: Beach Parking Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, September 16, 2022 11:00:21 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\productiondata\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 307 of 349 ROUNDABOUT ANALYSIS Site: 101 [Horizon Year SAT Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Roundabout Basic Parameters Central Island Diam Circ Width Insc Diam Entry Radius Entry Angle Circ Lanes Entry Lanes Av.Entry Lane Width App. Dist Prop Queued Upstr Signal Extra BunchingLocationName ft ft ft ft °ft ft % South Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 52.0*42.0*1 1 15.00*3773.0 NA5 0.0 East Tamarack Ave 70.00*17.00*104.0* 50.0*12.0*1 1 16.00*985.0 NA5 0.0 North Carlsbad Blvd 70.00*17.00*104.0* 40.0*26.0*1 1 14.00*3003.0 NA5 0.0 West Beach Parking 70.00*17.00*104.0* 46.0*39.0*1 218 18.00*349.0 NA5 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 5 Not Applicable (single Site analysis or unconnected Site in Network analysis). * These parameters do not affect estimated capacity values in the HCM 6 Capacity Model. 18 Exclusive slip/bypass lane is included in Entry Lanes count. Roundabout Entry and Circulating / Exiting Stream Parameters Critical GapTo Approach Turn Lane No Lane Type Opng Flow Opng Flow In- Bunch Hdwy Prop. Bunched Cap Const Effect Priority Sharing OD Factor HVE for Entry Follow- up Hdwy [ Hdwy Dist ] veh/h pcu/h sec sec ft sec South: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High West L2 1 Dominant 167 165 0.00 0.000 No No 0.966 1.00 4.32 94.4 2.27 North T1 1 Dominant 167 165 0.00 0.000 No No 0.966 1.02 4.32 94.4 2.27 East R2 1 Dominant 167 165 0.00 0.000 No No 0.966 1.02 4.32 94.4 2.27 East: Tamarack Ave Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High South L2 1 Dominant 786 751 0.00 0.000 No No 0.854 1.02 4.98 151.7 2.61 West T1 1 Dominant 786 751 0.00 0.000 No No 0.854 1.00 4.98 151.7 2.61 North R2 1 Dominant 786 751 0.00 0.000 No No 0.854 1.02 4.98 151.7 2.61 North: Carlsbad Blvd Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High East L2 1 Dominant 244 233 0.00 0.000 No No 0.961 1.02 4.51 96.7 2.37 South T1 1 Dominant 244 233 0.00 0.000 No No 0.961 1.02 4.51 96.7 2.37 West R2 1 Dominant 244 233 0.00 0.000 No No 0.961 1.00 4.51 96.7 2.37 West: Beach Parking Model Calibration Factor (HCM 6): 1.00 Entry/Circ Flow Adj (HCM 6): High North L2 1 Dominant 1017 975 0.00 0.000 No No 0.771 1.00 4.54 127.7 2.54 East T1 1 Dominant 1017 975 0.00 0.000 No No 0.771 1.00 4.54 127.7 2.54 South R2 2 Excl. Slip 894 853 0.00 0.000 No No 0.815 1.00 4.54 132.6 2.54 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Circulating Lane Flow Rates Circulating Flow RateCirc. Lane May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 308 of 349 No veh/h pcu/h Percent South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 167 165 100.0 Approach 167 165 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1 786 751 100.0 Approach 786 751 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1 244 233 100.0 Approach 244 233 West: Beach Parking Lane 1 1017 975 100.0 Approach 1017 975 Roundabout Capacity Model: The US HCM 6 roundabout capacity model option is in use. This model considers only the total circulating flow and not the flow rates in individual circulating lanes. To model the effects of flow distribution in circulating lanes on the entry capacity results, you should use the SIDRA Standard roundabout capacity model. Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Lanes) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum DelayOpposed Lane Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd 1 10.32 1.94 8.38 0.812 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave 1 10.28 6.30 3.98 0.387 2.3 North: Carlsbad Blvd 1 10.32 2.58 7.74 0.750 0.0 West: Beach Parking 1 5.00 3.41 1.59 0.318 0.0 2 10.04 9.10 0.94 0.093 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 Gap Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Movements) Cycle Time Blocked Time Unblocked Time Minimum Delay To Approach Turn Opsd Lane No Unblocked Time Ratio sec sec sec sec South: Carlsbad Blvd West L2 1 10.32 1.94 8.38 0.812 0.0 North T1 1 10.32 1.94 8.38 0.812 0.0 East R2 1 10.32 1.94 8.38 0.812 0.0 East: Tamarack Ave South L2 1 10.28 6.30 3.98 0.387 2.3 West T1 1 10.28 6.30 3.98 0.387 2.3 North R2 1 10.28 6.30 3.98 0.387 2.3 North: Carlsbad Blvd East L2 1 10.32 2.58 7.74 0.750 0.0 South T1 1 10.32 2.58 7.74 0.750 0.0 West R2 1 10.32 2.58 7.74 0.750 0.0 West: Beach Parking North L2 1 5.00 3.41 1.59 0.318 0.0 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 309 of 349 East T1 1 5.00 3.41 1.59 0.318 0.0 South R2 2 10.04 9.10 0.94 0.093 0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6 SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:58:58AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 310 of 349 SITE LAYOUT Site: 101 [Horizon Year SAT Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Thursday, September 1, 2022 11:19:34 AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 311 of 349 INTERSECTION SUMMARY Site: 101 [Horizon Year SAT Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Intersection Performance -Hourly Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Travel Speed (Average)33.0 mph 33.0 mph Travel Distance (Total)2494.6 veh-mi/h 2934.3 pers-mi/h Travel Time (Total)75.5 veh-h/h 88.8 pers-h/h Desired Speed (Program)35.8 mph Speed Efficiency 0.92 Travel Time Index 9.16 Congestion Coefficient 1.08 Demand Flows (Total)2216 veh/h 2609 pers/h Percent Heavy Vehicles (Demand)1.8 % Degree of Saturation 0.775 Practical Spare Capacity 9.7 % Effective Intersection Capacity 2861 veh/h Control Delay (Total)7.71 veh-h/h 9.08 pers-h/h Control Delay (Average)12.5 sec 12.5 sec Control Delay (Worst Lane)20.8 sec Control Delay (Worst Movement)20.8 sec 20.8 sec Geometric Delay (Average)0.0 sec Stop-Line Delay (Average)12.5 sec Idling Time (Average)6.1 sec Intersection Level of Service (LOS)LOS B 95% Back of Queue -Vehicles (Worst Lane)4.5 veh 95% Back of Queue -Distance (Worst Lane)105.8 ft Ave. Queue Storage Ratio (Worst Lane)0.03 Total Effective Stops 1537 veh/h 1810 pers/h Effective Stop Rate 0.69 0.69 Proportion Queued 0.70 0.70 Performance Index 122.1 122.1 Cost (Total)1366.54 $/h 1366.54 $/h Fuel Consumption (Total)72.6 gal/h Carbon Dioxide (Total)576.4 kg/h Hydrocarbons (Total)0.052 kg/h Carbon Monoxide (Total)0.766 kg/h NOx (Total)0.729 kg/h Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Intersection LOS value for Vehicles is based on average delay for all vehicle movements. Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Site Model Variability Index (Iterations 3 to N): 0.0 % Number of Iterations: 2 (Maximum: 10) Largest change in Lane Degrees of Saturation for the last three Flow-Capacity Iterations: 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Intersection Performance -Annual Values Performance Measure Vehicles Persons Demand Flows (Total)1,063,680 veh/y 1,252,419 pers/y Delay 3,701 veh-h/y 4,358 pers-h/y Effective Stops 737,685 veh/y 868,842 pers/y Travel Distance 1,197,423 veh-mi/y 1,408,463 pers-mi/y May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 312 of 349 Travel Time 36,234 veh-h/y 42,629 pers-h/y Cost 655,940 $/y 655,940 $/y Fuel Consumption 34,831 gal/y Carbon Dioxide 276,686 kg/y Hydrocarbons 25 kg/y Carbon Monoxide 368 kg/y NOx 350 kg/y SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:58:58AMProject: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 313 of 349 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Horizon Year SAT Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Vehicle Movement Performance INPUT VOLUMES DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUE Mov ID Turn Deg. Satn Aver. Delay Level of Service Prop. Que Effective Stop Rate Aver. No. Cycles Aver. Speed [ Total HV ][ Total HV ][ Veh.Dist ] veh/h %veh/h %v/c sec veh ft mph South: Carlsbad Blvd 3 L2 43 0.0 43 0.0 0.712 10.1 LOS B 3.5 82.4 0.59 0.55 0.59 24.0 8 T1 724 2.0 724 2.0 0.712 10.1 LOS B 3.5 82.4 0.59 0.55 0.59 34.6 18 R2 152 2.0 152 2.0 0.712 10.1 LOS B 3.5 82.4 0.59 0.55 0.59 33.0 Approach 919 1.9 919 1.9 0.712 7.0 LOS A 3.5 82.4 0.59 0.55 0.59 33.9 East: Tamarack Ave 1 L2 173 2.0 173 2.0 0.609 15.3 LOS B 2.6 60.6 0.80 0.86 1.03 30.8 6 T1 28 0.0 28 0.0 0.609 15.3 LOS B 2.6 60.6 0.80 0.86 1.03 21.6 16 R2 124 2.0 124 2.0 0.609 15.3 LOS B 2.6 60.6 0.80 0.86 1.03 29.8 Approach 325 1.8 325 1.8 0.609 13.6 LOS B 2.6 60.6 0.80 0.86 1.03 30.0 North: Carlsbad Blvd 7 L2 123 2.0 123 2.0 0.775 13.7 LOS B 4.5 105.8 0.75 0.75 0.75 31.4 4 T1 721 2.0 721 2.0 0.775 13.7 LOS B 4.5 105.8 0.75 0.75 0.75 33.5 14 R2 40 0.0 40 0.0 0.775 13.7 LOS B 4.5 105.8 0.75 0.75 0.75 29.9 Approach 884 1.9 884 1.9 0.775 10.6 LOS B 4.5 105.8 0.75 0.75 0.75 33.2 West: Beach Parking 5 L2 19 0.0 19 0.0 0.390 9.2 LOS A 1.1 27.6 0.98 0.99 1.03 31.2 2 T1 25 0.0 25 0.0 0.390 9.2 LOS A 1.1 27.6 0.98 0.99 1.03 24.6 12 R2 44 0.0 44 0.0 0.332 20.8 LOS C 0.3 8.4 0.94 0.94 0.94 30.0 Approach 88 0.0 88 0.0 0.390 15.0 LOS B 1.1 27.6 0.96 0.96 0.98 29.4 All Vehicles 2216 1.8 2216 1.8 0.775 12.5 LOS B 4.5 105.8 0.70 0.69 0.73 33.0 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:58:58AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 314 of 349 LANE SUMMARY Site: 101 [Horizon Year SAT Pk Hr -Signal (Site Folder: General)] New Site Site Category: (None) Roundabout Metering Lane Use and Performance DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUECap.Deg. Satn Lane Util. Aver. Delay Level of Service Lane Config Lane Length Cap. Adj. Prob. Block. [ Total HV ][ Veh Dist ] veh/h %veh/h v/c %sec ft ft %% South: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 919 1.9 1290 0.712 100 7.0 LOS A 3.5 82.4 Full 3773 0.0 0.0 Approach 919 1.9 0.712 7.0 LOS A 3.5 82.4 East: Tamarack Ave Lane 1d 325 1.8 534 0.609 100 13.6 LOS B 2.6 60.6 Full 985 0.0 0.0 Approach 325 1.8 0.609 13.6 LOS B 2.6 60.6 North: Carlsbad Blvd Lane 1d 884 1.9 1141 0.775 100 10.6 LOS B 4.5 105.8 Full 3003 0.0 0.0 Approach 884 1.9 0.775 10.6 LOS B 4.5 105.8 West: Beach Parking Lane 1d 44 0.0 113 0.390 100 9.2 LOS A 1.1 27.6 Full 349 0.0 0.0 Lane 2 44 0.0 133 0.332 100 20.8 LOS C 0.3 8.4 Short 60 0.0 NA Approach 88 0.0 0.390 15.0 LOS B 1.1 27.6 Intersection 2216 1.8 0.775 12.5 LOS B 4.5 105.8 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6. Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach Approach Lane Flows (veh/h) South: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From S To Exit:W N E Lane 1 43 724 152 919 1.9 1290 0.712 100 NA NA Approach 43 724 152 919 1.9 0.712 East: Tamarack Ave Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From E To Exit:S W N Lane 1 173 28 124 325 1.8 534 0.609 100 NA NA May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 315 of 349 Approach 173 28 124 325 1.8 0.609 North: Carlsbad Blvd Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From N To Exit:E S W Lane 1 123 721 40 884 1.9 1141 0.775 100 NA NA Approach 123 721 40 884 1.9 0.775 West: Beach Parking Mov.L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From W To Exit:N E S Lane 1 19 25 -44 0.0 113 0.390 100 NA NA Lane 2 --44 44 0.0 133 0.332 100 0.0 1 Approach 19 25 44 88 0.0 0.390 Total %HV Deg.Satn (v/c) Intersection 2216 1.8 0.775 Lane flow rates given in this report are based on the arrival flow rates subject to upstream capacity constraint where applicable. Merge Analysis Exit Lane Number Short Lane Length Percent Opng in Lane Opposing Flow Rate Critical Gap Follow-up Headway Lane Flow Rate Capacity Deg. Satn Min. Delay Merge Delay ft %veh/h pcu/h sec sec veh/h veh/h v/c sec sec South Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. East Exit: Tamarack Ave Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. North Exit: Carlsbad Blvd Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. West Exit: Beach Parking Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Thursday, September 1, 2022 10:58:58AM Project: \\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad Tamarack\400_FunctionalUnits\480 Traffic\Models\Sidra\Carlsbad - Tamarack Signal.sip9 May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 316 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis Attachment F: MMLOS Reports May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 317 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis No Build Conditions – Existing May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 318 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes No * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):5 5 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?No No * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?No No * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Number of Through Lanes:2 2 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)No No Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'greater than 5' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?No No Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? Yes Yes Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Blvd (North Leg) Redwood Ave Tamarack Ave Coastals 18,500 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 70 | C NB SCORE | LOS 70 | C SB SCORE | LOS May require improvements and upgrades to fully support CAP goals! X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 319 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 6 8 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 0 0 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Blvd (North Leg) Redwood Ave Tamarack Ave Coastals 18,500 95 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 320 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?No No * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):5 6 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?No No * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?No No * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Number of Through Lanes:2 2 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)No No Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?No No Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? No No Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Blvd (South Leg) Tamarack Ave Sequoia Ave Coastals 21,400 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 45 | F NB SCORE | LOS 55 | E SB SCORE | LOS May require improvements and upgrades to fully support CAP goals! X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 321 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 6 6 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 4 2 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Blvd (South Leg) Tamarack Ave Sequoia Ave Coastals 21,400 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 322 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction EB WB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):5 5 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?No No * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?No No * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Number of Through Lanes:1 1 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)Yes Yes Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?No No Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? Yes Yes Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Tamarack Ave (East Leg) Carlsbad Blvd Garfield St Neighborhood Connector 6,900 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 80 | B EB SCORE | LOS 80 | B WB SCORE | LOS May require improvements and upgrades to fully support CAP goals! X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 323 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction EB WB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 6 6 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 0 0 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Tamarack Ave (East Leg) Carlsbad Blvd Garfield St Neighborhood Connector 6,900 95 | A EB SCORE | LOS 95 | A WB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 324 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?No No * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):5 5 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?No No * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?No No * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Number of Through Lanes:2 2 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)No No Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?No No Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? No No Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Blvd (Bridge Segment) Sequoia Ave South End of Bridge Coastals 21,400 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 45 | F NB SCORE | LOS 45 | F SB SCORE | LOS May require improvements and upgrades to fully support CAP goals! X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 325 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 6 6 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 4 4 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Blvd (Bridge Segment) Sequoia Ave South End of Bridge Coastals 21,400 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 326 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 3 & 4-Lane Alternatives Conditions - Existing May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 327 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):5 10 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?Yes Yes * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Number of Through Lanes:2 2 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)No No Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'greater than 5' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?Yes Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes No Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? Yes Yes Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Boulevard (North Leg) Tamarack Avenue Redwood Avenue Identity (adjacent to residential) 18,500 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 95 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 328 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?Yes Yes Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 6 6 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 0 2 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Boulevard (North Leg) Tamarack Avenue Redwood Avenue Identity (adjacent to residential) 18,500 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 329 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):10 7 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?Yes Yes * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Number of Through Lanes:2 2 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)No No Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?Yes Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes Yes Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? Yes Yes Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Boulevard (South Leg) Tamarack Avenue Sequoia Avenue Coastals 21,400 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 330 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?Yes Yes Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 6 6 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 0 0 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Boulevard (South Leg) Tamarack Avenue Sequoia Avenue Coastals 21,400 90 | A NB SCORE | LOS 90 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 331 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction EB WB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):6 6 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?No No * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Number of Through Lanes:1 1 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)Yes Yes Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?No Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes Yes Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? Yes Yes Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Tamarack Avenue (East Leg) Carlsbad Boulevard Garfield Street Neighborhood Connector 6,900 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A EB SCORE | LOS 100 | A WB SCORE | LOS May require improvements and upgrades to fully support CAP goals! X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 332 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction EB WB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 7 7 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 0 0 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Tamarack Avenue (East Leg) Carlsbad Boulevard Garfield Street Neighborhood Connector 6,900 95 | A EB SCORE | LOS 95 | A WB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 333 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):5 11 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?Yes Yes * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Number of Through Lanes:2 1 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)Yes Yes Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes Yes Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? No No Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?Yes Yes Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment-3-Ln Alt) Sequoia Ave South End of Bridge Coastals 21,400 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 95 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 334 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?Yes Yes Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 6 6 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 2 3 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment-3-Ln Alt) Sequoia Ave South End of Bridge Coastals 21,400 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 335 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):5 11 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?Yes Yes * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Number of Through Lanes:2 1 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)No No Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes Yes Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? No No Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?Yes Yes Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment-4-Ln Alt) Sequoia Ave South End of Bridge Coastals 21,400 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 85 | B NB SCORE | LOS 95 | A SB SCORE | LOS X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 336 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?Yes Yes Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 6 6 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 2 0 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment-4-Ln Alt) Sequoia Ave South End of Bridge Coastals 21,400 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 90 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 337 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis Roundabout Conditions - Existing May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 338 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):10 10 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?Yes Yes * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Number of Through Lanes:1 1 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)Yes Yes Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'greater than 5' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?Yes Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes Yes Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? No No Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Boulevard (North Leg) Tamarack Avenue Redwood Avenue Identity (adjacent to residential) 18,500 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 339 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 8 7 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 3 3 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Boulevard (North Leg) Tamarack Avenue Redwood Avenue Identity (adjacent to residential) 18,500 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 340 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):10 14 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?Yes Yes * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Number of Through Lanes:1 1 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)Yes Yes Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?Yes Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes Yes Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? No No Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Boulevard (South Leg) Tamarack Avenue Sequoia Avenue Coastals 21,400 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 341 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 7 8 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 3 3 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Boulevard (South Leg) Tamarack Avenue Sequoia Avenue Coastals 21,400 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 342 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction EB WB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):6 6 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?No No * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Number of Through Lanes:1 1 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)Yes Yes Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?Yes Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes Yes Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? No No Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?No No Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Tamarack Avenue (East Leg) Carlsbad Boulevard Garfield Street Neighborhood Connector 6,900 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A EB SCORE | LOS 100 | A WB SCORE | LOS May require improvements and upgrades to fully support CAP goals! X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 343 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction EB WB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):30 mph 30 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 5.5 6 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 0 0 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Tamarack Avenue (East Leg) Carlsbad Boulevard Garfield Street Neighborhood Connector 6,900 95 | A EB SCORE | LOS 95 | A WB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 344 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) PEDESTRIAN Roadway Direction NB SB * Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD?Yes Yes * Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'):13 14 * Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g., cross-slope and trip hazards)?Yes Yes * Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements?Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate?Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Number of Through Lanes:1 1 Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count)Yes Yes Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian facility and vehicle travel way:0' to 2'0' to 2' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way?Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings?No No Are there any permanent speed control devices installed?No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)?No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility?Yes Yes Are there intersection enhancements provided for pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)? No No Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings?Yes Yes Is there pedestrian scale lighting?No No Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line?No No Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions?No No Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more than 50% of the sidewalk length?No No Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment) Sequoia Ave South End of Bridge Coastals 21,400 *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 345 of 349 ROADWAY INFO Roadway Name From To Street Typology from Mobility Element _ Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total) BICYCLE Roadway Direction NB SB * Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good (e.g., no pot holes)?Yes Yes * Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes * Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines?Yes Yes Is on-street parking provided?No No Speed limit (miles per hour - mph):35 mph 35 mph Does the bikeway on the study segment and side streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan?Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection provided at intersections?No No Any bicycle racks are provided along segment?No No Bicycle Facility Provided:Bike Lane Bike Lane Lane Width (ft)Lane Width (ft) 8 8 Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) 3 3 Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Bike lanes are striped continuously through the study segment? Yes Yes Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment) Sequoia Ave South End of Bridge Coastals 21,400 100 | A NB SCORE | LOS 100 | A SB SCORE | LOS X *Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 346 of 349 Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis Attachment G: Collision Data May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 347 of 349 Public Works Department/Traffic & Mobility Division From 1/1/2008 to 8/17/2021 Total Collisions: 15 44425 Injury Collisions: 12 Fatal Collisions: 0Text1Text3Text4Text5Text8Text10 Text11 Text20 Text21 Text22 City Text6 Text7 Text9 Text18 Text19 Text12 Text13 Text14 Party No Party Type Dir of Travel Movement Gender Age Veh Type Sobriety Assoc Factor Safety Equip Special Info15-05955 8/19/2015 11:35 WednesdayCARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 137'Direction: South Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Unsafe Starting or Backing 22106 Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver North Stopped In Road Male Age: 24 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In UseParty 2 Driver North Proceeding Straight Male Age: 58 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use15-08388 11/21/2015 03:31 Saturday REDWOOD AV - CARLSBAD BL 15'Direction: East Dark - Street Lights Clear Pty at Fault:In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Hit ObjectFixed Object Unknown Hit & Run: Misdemeanor Property Damage Only # Inj: 0 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver East Making U Turn Not Stated Age: Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: Impairment Not Known Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not Stated16-02044 3/26/2016 09:02 Saturday CARLSBAD BL - REDWOOD AV 20'Direction: North Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Unsafe Speed 22350 Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver South Proceeding Straight Female Age: 85 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In UseParty 2 Driver South Stopped In Road Male Age: 51 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use 16-03420 5/14/2016 10:06 Saturday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 0'Direction: Not Stated Daylight Cloudy Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge BroadsideOther Motor Vehicle Traffic Signals and Signs 21453A Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver South Proceeding Straight Female Age: 26 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: Inattention Cell Phone Not In Use Party 2 Driver East Proceeding Straight Male Age: 61 Veh Type: Pickup Truck Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use16-06087 8/29/2016 20:08 Monday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 3'Direction: North Dark - Street Lights Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Other Bicycle Driving Under Influence 212005 Hit & Run: No Other Visible Injury # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Bicyclist South Traveling Wrong Way Male Age: 29 Veh Type: Bicycle Sobriety: HBD Under Influence Assoc Factor: Violation Not StatedParty 2 Driver West Making Right Turn Female Age: 23 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not Stated 16-06738 9/25/2016 20:31 Sunday TAMARACK AV - GARFIELD ST 0'Direction: Not Stated Dark - Street Lights Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge BroadsideOther Motor Vehicle Traffic Signals and Signs 22450A Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver East Proceeding Straight Female Age: 39 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use Party 2 Driver South Proceeding Straight Female Age: 34 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use17-03791 6/13/2017 02:00 Tuesday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 400'Direction: South Dark - Street Lights Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Hit ObjectFixed Object Driving Under Influence 23152A Hit & Run: No Other Visible Injury # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver North Other Unsafe Turning Female Age: 20 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HBD Under Influence Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not Stated17-05644 9/2/2017 18:00 Saturday CARLSBAD BL - SEQUOIA AV 81'Direction: North Daylight Cloudy Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Unsafe Speed 22350 Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 2 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver North Proceeding Straight Male Age: 29 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In UseParty 2 Driver North Stopped In Road Male Age: 48 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use 19-00295 1/14/2019 13:20 WednesdayCARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 60'Direction: SOUTH Daylight Raining Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Other Motor Vehicle Unsafe Speed 22350 Hit & Run: Other Visible Injury # Inj: 3 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver NORTH Proceeding Straight F Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap Belt Used Cell Phone Not In UseParty 2 Driver NORTH Stopped In Road F Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap Belt Used Cell Phone Not In UseParty 3 Driver NORTH Proceeding Straight F Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap Belt Used Cell Phone Not In Use19-05635 8/22/2019 14:02 Thursday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 0'Direction: Not Stated Daylight Cloudy Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge SideswipeOther Motor Vehicle Improper Turning 22100A Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver NORTH Making Right Turn M Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In UseParty 2 Driver NORTH Making Right Turn M Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: Under Drug Influence Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use 19-06000 9/8/2019 08:45 Sunday CARLSBAD BL - SEQUOIA AV 57'Direction: SOUTH Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge SideswipeMotor Vehicle on Other Roadway Improper Turning 22107 Hit & Run: Misdemeanor Property Damage Only # Inj: 0 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver SOUTH Changing Lanes Not Stated Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: Impairment Not Known Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not Stated Party 2 Driver SOUTH Proceeding Straight F Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use20-03812 6/27/2020 09:36 Saturday CARLSBAD BL - SEQUOIA AV 105'Direction: SOUTH Daylight Cloudy Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Other Than Driver Hit & Run: No Other Visible Injury # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver NORTH Proceeding Straight F Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: Other Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In UseParty 2 Driver NORTH Stopped In Road M Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use 21-00313 1/13/2021 16:45 WednesdayTAMARACK AV - CARLSBAD BL 79'Direction: EAST Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Unsafe Starting or Backing 22106 Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver WEST Backing F Age: 63 Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Unknown Not Stated Party 2 Driver WEST Stopped In Road F Age: 41 Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Not Stated21-01756 3/18/2021 18:11 Thursday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 33'Direction: SOUTH Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Driving Under Influence 23152(a)Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver NORTH Proceeding Straight F Age: 24 Veh Type: Sobriety: HBD Under Influence Assoc Factor: Violation Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In UseParty 2 Driver NORTH Stopped In Road M Age: 56 Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use 21-03637 5/30/2021 18:30 Sunday REDWOOD AV - CARLSBAD BL 0'Direction: Not Stated Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge SideswipeParked Motor Vehicle Improper Turning 22107 Hit & Run: No Property Damage Only # Inj: 0 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver EAST Making Right Turn M Age: 31 Veh Type: Sobriety: Under Drug Influence Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use Party 2 Parked Vehicle WEST Parked Not Stated Age: 0 Veh Type: Sobriety: Not Applicable Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not StatedParty 3 Parked Vehicle WEST Parked Not Stated Age: 0 Veh Type: Sobriety: Not Applicable Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not Stated May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 348 of 349 Collision Summary Report City of Carlsbad Public Works Department/Traffic & Mobility Division 7/25/22 From 8/21/2021 to 7/25/2022 Total Collisions: 3 Injury Collisions: 1 Fatal Collisions: 0 CARLSBAD BL & TAMARACK AV Page 1 of 1 21-07741 11/19/2021 09:30 Friday Rear-End Parked Motor Vehicle CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV Driving Under Influence 27'Direction: SOUTH Property Damage Only # Inj: 0 # Killed: 023152(a)Hit & Run: No Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 Cell Phone Not In UseLap/Shoulder Harness Used Age: 56M Assoc Factor: Violation Proceeding Straight Sobriety: HBD Under InfluencVeh Type: NORTDriverParty 1 2015 CHEVROLET MALIBU Passenger Car, Station Wagon, Jeep Cell Phone Not In Use Age: 0Not Sta Assoc Factor: None Apparent Stopped In Road Sobriety: HNBDVeh Type: NORTParked VehicleParty 2 2020 FORD EXPLORER Passenger Car, Station Wagon, Jeep 21-07914 11/25/2021 14:25 Thursday Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV Unsafe Speed 13'Direction: SOUTH Property Damage Only # Inj: 0 # Killed: 022350Hit & Run: Misde Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 Not Stated Age: 0Not Sta Assoc Factor: None Apparent Proceeding Straight Sobriety: Impairment Not KnoVeh Type: NORTDriverParty 1 1999 MAZDA PROTEGE Passenger Car, Station Wagon, Jeep Cell Phone Not In UseLap/Shoulder Harness Used Age: 67F Assoc Factor: None Apparent Stopped In Road Sobriety: HNBDVeh Type: NORTDriverParty 2 2021 LEXUS RX350 Passenger Car, Station Wagon, Jeep 22-00200 1/10/2022 15:42 Monday Sideswipe Other Motor Vehicle CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV Improper Turning 181'Direction: NORTH Other Visible Injury # Inj: 2 # Killed: 022107Hit & Run: No Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 Cell Phone Not In UseLap/Shoulder Harness Used Age: 28F Assoc Factor: Violation Proceeding Straight Sobriety: HNBDVeh Type: SOUTDriverParty 1 2018 LEXUS RX350 Passenger Car, Station Wagon, Jeep Cell Phone Not In UseLap/Shoulder Harness Used Age: 65M Assoc Factor: None Apparent Slowing / Stopping Sobriety: HNBDVeh Type: SOUTDriverParty 2 2004 LINCOLN NAVIGATOR Sport Utility Vehicle Settings for Query: Street: CARLSBAD BL Cross Street: TAMARACK AV Sorted By: Date and Time May 1, 2023 Item #2 Page 349 of 349 From:Susie Murphy To:Traffic Subject:Agenda Item 2: CARLSBAD BOULEVARD AND TAMARACK AVENUE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT NO. 6058 Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 1:38:44 PM To Whom it may Concern: I am writing in support of staff's recommendation for the roundabout option at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. for the safety of the citizen's of Carlsbad as well asvisitors. Thank you. Susie Murphy (she/her) SDMBA Executive Director CAMTB Board MemberSPROCKIDS SAN DIEGO Board Member 619-316-1757 Join SDMBA today! CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Sergio Messina To:Traffic Subject:Roundabout at Tamarack Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 1:12:21 PM Dear Commissioners, My name is sergio Messina___ and I am resident of Carlsbad___ I'm writing to voice my enthusiastic support for a roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd.and Tamarack Ave. Roundabouts are proven to reduce serious or fatal crashes by up to eighty percent. Traffic safety is an emergency in Carlsbad, and we have no excuse not to choose the safestoption. Moreover, this option creates more space for wide sidewalks and bike lanes, which will make thissection of the Carlsbad coast a welcoming space for everyone, rather than just a throughway forhigh-speed traffic. I strongly encourage the Traffic and Mobility Commission to support this option. Sincerely, --sergio messina Thus it is and thus it will always be.... CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Katherine Smith-Brooks To:Traffic Subject:Roundabout Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 9:36:36 AM We support the roundabout at Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd — believe it would keep traffic moving rather than the backup that occurs presently. How would this affect the restaurant in the corner? The Brooks 619 991-2942 K 858 451-5787 H-RB Ncami@msn.com CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Ross Ridder To:Traffic Subject:Support Roundabout at Carlsbad Blvd & Tamarack Ave Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 1:14:08 PM Dear Commissioners, My name is Ross Ridder and I am resident of Encinitas. I'm writing to voice my enthusiastic SUPPORT for a roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. We have several roundabouts in Encinitas and I love them as both a motorist, abicyclist, and an electric scooter rider. Roundabouts are proven to reduce serious or fatal crashes by up to eighty percent. Trafficsafety is an emergency in Carlsbad, and we have no excuse not to choose the safestoption. Moreover, this option creates more space for wide sidewalks and bike lanes, which willmake this section of the Carlsbad coast a welcoming space for everyone, rather than just athroughway for high-speed traffic. I strongly encourage the Traffic and Mobility Commission to support this option. Sincerely, Ross Ridder CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Michael Lack To:Traffic Subject:Tamarack roundabout Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 1:11:07 PM Dear Commissioners, My name is Michael LAck and I am resident of Carlsbad. I'm writing to voice my enthusiastic support for a roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. Roundabouts are proven to reduce serious or fatal crashes by up to eighty percent. Traffic safety is an emergency in Carlsbad, and we have no excuse not to choose the safest option. Moreover, this option creates more space for wide sidewalks and bike lanes, which will make this section of the Carlsbad coast a welcoming space for everyone, rather than just a throughway for high-speed traffic. I strongly encourage the Traffic and Mobility Commission to support this option. Sincerely, Michael Lack -- Michael Lack 858/922-9233 cell michael.lack100@gmail.com CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Mike McMahon To:Traffic Subject:Item #2 CARLSBAD BOULEVARD AND TAMARACK AVENUE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 1:15:32 PM As a ten year resident and very frequent user of the beach walk and this intersection at Tamarack Ave and Carlsbad Blvd I fully support the Roundabout alternative. If anyone has done the reading of the staff report and its excellent supporting documentationyou can’t help but choose the roundabout alternative. It checks all the boxes of where we need to be headed as a city; compliance with the California Complete Streets Act, calming traffic;promoting walking/biking and beach access and better for the environment. We need to be promoting safer traffic along the coastline for everyone and not just a quick way to travel. To those who say it will delay traffic, look at Table 2 Exhibit 1 in the report andcompare a signal intersection to the roundabout intersection. The roundabout has much less delay in all peak times and meets or exceeds level of service compared to signaledintersections. The Roundabout helps our environment by reducing idling and therefore reducing our greenhouse gas emissions - good for our health, our city, and environment. The signaledalternative will just make it worse. Please vote for the roundabout. Thank you, Mike McMahon 26345 Sutter StreetCarlsbad, CA CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Dwayne Elliott To:Traffic Subject:Yes for roundabout on Carlsbad and Tamarack Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 3:28:53 PM Dear Commissioners, My name is Dwayne Elliott and I am resident of Oceanside. I'm writing to voice my enthusiastic support for a roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. Roundabouts are proven to reduce serious or fatal crashes by up to eighty percent. Traffic safety is an emergency in Carlsbad, and we have no excuse not to choose the safest option. Moreover, this option creates more space for wide sidewalks and bike lanes, which will make this section of the Carlsbad coast a welcoming space for everyone, rather than just a throughway for high-speed traffic. I strongly encourage the Traffic and Mobility Commission to support this option. Sincerely, Dwayne Elliott Cyclist enthusiast CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Lynn Selzer To:Traffic Subject:Traffic circle Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 3:33:43 PM Dear Commissioners, My name is Lynn Selzer and I am resident of Leucadia I'm writing to voice my enthusiastic support for a roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. Roundabouts are proven to reduce serious or fatal crashes by up to eighty percent. Traffic safety is an emergency in Carlsbad, and we have no excuse not to choose the safest option. Moreover, this option creates more space for wide sidewalks and bike lanes, which will make this section of the Carlsbad coast a welcoming space for everyone, rather than just a throughway for high-speed traffic. I strongly encourage the Traffic and Mobility Commission to support this option. Sincerely yours, Lynn Selzer Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Stephen Bartram To:Traffic Subject:Roundabout at Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 12:52:50 PM Dear Commissioners, My name is Steve Bartram and I am resident of 7964 Grado El Tupelo, Carlsbad CA 92009 I'm writing to voice my enthusiastic support for a roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. Roundabouts are proven to reduce serious or fatal crashes by up toeighty percent. Traffic safety is an emergency in Carlsbad, and we have no excuse not to choose the safest option. Moreover, this option creates more space for wide sidewalks and bike lanes, which will make this section of the Carlsbad coast a welcoming space for everyone, rather than just athroughway for high-speed traffic. I strongly encourage the Traffic and Mobility Commission to support this option. Sincerely, Steve Bartram CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Steve and Jayshree Gerken To:Traffic Subject:In support of a roundabout at Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 12:33:54 PM Dear Carlsbad Traffic and Mobility Commissioners,As a resident of Encinitas, I frequently visit Carlsbad for exercise, dining, health care, and shopping.I travel via bicycle and car and I strongly support all the safety and capital improvements that Carlsbadhas done to make it a safe city for all residents and visitors.I strongly support the roundabout option at Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd. becauseroundabouts have proven safety benefits for drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians alike. Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution are other great benefits ofroundabouts. Sincerely, Steve GerkenEncinitas residentCarlsbad frequent visitor CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Michael Von Neumann To:Traffic Subject:Roundabout At Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd. Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 2:37:44 PM Dear Commissioners, My name is Michael von Neumann and I am a resident of Encinitas, CA. While I amnot a Carlsbad resident I have cycled along Carlsbad Blvd. since the early 1990's aswell as many other Carlsbad streets. I completely and enthusiastically support a roundabout at the intersection of CarlsbadBlvd. and Tamarack Ave. The benefits of roundabouts are well known to trafficengineers and city planners. I believe the benefits of the proposed roundabout include less serious injuries fromcollisions, slower automobile speeds and a more welcoming environment forpedestrians and alternative types of mobility. While the general public often has concerns about roundabouts before they areinstalled, those fears and concerns fade away over time. Signalized intersections are a relic of past traffic engineering that prioritizedautomobiles. Streets are constructed for public transportation and there are othermodes of transportation than personal automobiles. I appreciate the efforts of Carlsbad to make cycling and walking safer for all people,Carlsbad residents and visitors. While personal automobiles will remain the mostused form of transportation for a long time there is no reason not to make streetssafer for everyone. While infrastructure improvements will make streets and roads safer, I encouragecities to also seriously reduce traffic speeds. Slower motor vehicles mean less seriousinjuries and possible fatalities from collisions. Isn't safety more important than gettingto a destination a minute or two faster? I encourage the Traffic & Mobility Commission to approve the roundabout andadvocate for it to the City Council. Respectfully, CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Dadla Ponizil To:Traffic Subject:Roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave--YES! Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 12:45:29 PM Dear Commissioners, My name is Dadla Ponizil and I am resident of Encinitas I'm writing to voice my enthusiastic support for a roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd.and Tamarack Ave. Roundabouts are proven to reduce serious or fatal crashes by up to eighty percent. We are lucky to have one in our neighborhood. Santa Fe and Devonshire. We lived herelong enough to see and experience the difference. That intersection was always dangerous. As youknow, for bikes and peds, one is always at risk from right and left turns. This is only getting worse,as we have more cars, bikes and peds on our roads. Roundabouts are not perfect, but they are better than any other traffic pattern management system. They create order from chaos. And only a bit ofcommon sense on the part of the users required. Way less than asking people to watch out for bikesand peds. So please build it. You and all our families will be better off. Gratefully, Dadla Ponizil 1145 Stratford Drive Encinitas, 92024 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Joanna Munday To:Traffic Subject:Support for Roundabout at Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack Avenue Date:Wednesday, April 19, 2023 8:25:54 PM Dear Commissioners, My name is __Joanna Munday _ and I am resident of Carlsbad. I'm writing to voice my enthusiastic support for a roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. Roundabouts are proven to reduce serious or fatal crashes by up toeighty percent. Traffic safety is an emergency in Carlsbad, and we have no excuse not to choose the safest option. Moreover, this option creates more space for wide sidewalks and bike lanes, which will makethis section of the Carlsbad coast a welcoming space for everyone, rather than just a throughway for high-speed traffic. I strongly encourage the Traffic and Mobility Commission to support this option. With gratitude Kind regards, Joanna Munday Jacks Mother ( 2004-2020) Jack was killed on carlsbad village drive at the age of 16! Joanna. 7608890257 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Trey Munday To:Traffic Subject:Support for Roundabout at Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack Avenue Date:Wednesday, April 19, 2023 8:27:56 PM Dear Commissioners, My name is Trey Munday and I am resident of Carlsbad. I'm writing to voice my enthusiastic support for a roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. Roundabouts are proven to reduce serious or fatal crashes by up to eighty percent. Traffic safety is an emergency in Carlsbad, and we have no excuse not to choose the safest option. Moreover, this option creates more space for wide sidewalks and bike lanes, which will make this section of the Carlsbad coast a welcoming space for everyone, rather than just a throughway for high-speed traffic. I strongly encourage the Traffic and Mobility Commission to support this option. Sincerely, Trey Munday CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Bill Baer To:Traffic Subject:Tamarack/Carlsbad Bl intersection improvement Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 1:09:19 PM Commissioners- I want you to vote against the roundabout option at the Tamarack/Carlsbad Bl intersection at your upcoming meeting. I have lived in Carlsbad for 50 years and improvements would be welcome there, but not that option. I am not against roundabouts, I think they are great and we could use more in the city. However, this is just a very bad location. There are too many pedestrians that will constantly be crossing, that it will generate huge traffic backups. Along with narrowing that area to just one lane for north and south, it will be a traffic nightmare. If you are worried about safety, how many pedestrians have been hit at that intersection that it needs to be made safer? I am more worried about the other crossings north of that intersection where the pedestrians push the light to walk. The commission should at least consider what Encinitas has done and included a speed hump along with the crossing. Thanks. Bill Baer 3210 James Dr Carlsbad, CA 92008 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Cheryl Haiman To:Traffic Subject:Agenda item #2 Commission meeting May 1 Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 10:12:27 AM Please, please do not go forward with plans to put a traffic circle at Tamarack and CarlsbadBlvd. We are frequent users of both the beach and sidewalks and foresee a huge problem with this idea of no traffic light to allow orderly flow of foot traffic, bicyclists and automobiles atthis intersection. On the weekends and during the summer this intersection is heavily used by all three along with work commuters. Imagine pedestrians trying to cross that major street amidst all thattraffic. Mark and Cheryl Haiman -- CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. To: Traffic From: Ste Date: Apr Subject: P project I was rece roundabo particular SAFETY CO Extremely The most roundabo which mir The State bicycle tra last 8+ ye collisions involved c 1 The roun 100 feet to 2 The Carls Boulevard/ c and Mobility eve Linke ril 28, 2023 Public comme ently the Vice out projects. H r location and ONCERNS y high collisio important co out at Carlsba rrors Table 4 Street round affic) compar ars at the rou (overturning, collisions wer dabout at Stat o the outside c sbad Boulevard /State Street in y Commission ent on May 1, e Chair of the However, I no d encourage e on numbers a oncern at this d Boulevard a on Page 18 o dabout carries ed to the cur undabout, tot , head‐on, an re both 300% te Street is very urbs with simi d/Tamarack Av ntersection ser n , 2023 Item # commission, o longer supp everybody to at the similar s location is sa and State Str f 27 of the Al s about 40% l rent signalize tal collisions w nd broadside) higher than t y similar to the larly configure venue serves ab rves about 14,0 1 #2: Carlsbad B and I have su port staff’s rec think very ca State Street afety, but col eet1 paints an ternatives An less vehicle tr ed intersectio were 367% hi were 450% h the signalized e one proposed ed splitter islan bout 24,000 ve 000 vehicles pe Boulevard/Tam upported mu commendatio refully about roundabout lision data fro n alarming pi nalysis in the raffic (and sig on at Tamarac igher, the mo higher, and to d intersection d at Tamarack nds/crosswalks ehicles per day er day based o marack Aven ltiple other ro on for a round t this. om the very s cture (see the staff report). gnificantly les ck Avenue2. H ore dangerou otal injury and n at Tamarack Avenue—a di s. y, while the Ca on traffic count ue intersectio oundabout/m dabout at thi similar e below table ss pedestrian However, ove s types of d bike/pedes k Avenue. Als iameter of abo rlsbad ts (2015‐2022) on mini‐ s e, and r the trian‐ o, out ). 2 while there were zero serious injuries at Tamarack, there were two at the roundabout. And all of these numbers could be adjusted even higher in predicting outcomes at Tamarack, based on the significantly higher volumes of all travel modes there. This newly compiled data confirms the finding in Carlsbad’s 2022 Local Roadway Safety Plan3 that identified the State Street roundabout as having the highest collision rate of all intersections in Carlsbad, and it extends those results to show that the collisions have included many injuries—some serious—and multiple collisions involving pedestrians/bicycles. It could be considered among the most dangerous intersections in Carlsbad. Unfortunately, things have not been getting better over time. Despite the addition of more lighting and users having more time to get accustomed to using the roundabout, collisions have remained very high over the past few years. Some also have argued that DUI collisions should be discounted or somehow treated differently. Beyond being a complicated value judgement, even if you filter out all of DUI collisions, the same safety concerns remain. Many generic claims are made about the alleged safety of roundabouts, and carefully selected statistics are cited, such as the claim of a 67% reduction in injuries and 35% reduction in all crashes in the staff report. However, those numbers are largely derived from studies of roundabouts in other countries (e.g., the United Kingdom, Australia, Sweden, and France), and most of the results are based on “prediction models”—not actual controlled comparisons. Also, data on pedestrian and bicycle safety in these studies is very limited. The more relevant direct experience right here in Carlsbad needs to be given more weight than these generic statistics. Roundabout pedestrian safety concerns While it is certainly true that the elimination of vehicle lanes and the roundabout splitter islands decrease the total vehicle lane widths pedestrians must cross at one time, the default plan includes no signal controls to stop vehicle and bicycle traffic. So, pedestrians just have to wait for a break in traffic or start across the crosswalk and hope that traffic stops for them. This is particularly unsafe for sight‐ impaired individuals. It has been suggested that signal controls can be added for pedestrians, but that adds complexity (roundabout and traffic signals combined), and the operational (congestion) consequences are unknown. Further, if cyclists fail to dismount and walk their bikes on the paths and crosswalks, pedestrians are at risk of being hit. Roundabout bicycle safety concerns Cyclists who are not comfortable in the center of the roundabout lane may stay to the right of the lane, encouraging vehicles to pass them in the roundabout, which is very unsafe due to the narrow lane. And cyclists who are uncomfortable taking the vehicle lane at all are forced to take a far more convoluted pedestrian route to traverse the intersection, which also introduces pedestrian risk. 3 Local Roadway Safety Plan adopted by City Council 3 OPERATIONAL CONCERNS Previous traffic studies showed significant congestion with the roundabout A new traffic study by a firm named Wood Rodgers (provided in the staff report) suggests that vehicle congestion would be low with the roundabout—and superior to the signalized option—level of service (LOS) staying at grade C or better (on a scale of A to F). However, I made public records requests for traffic studies that I knew had been done in the 2015‐2016 timeframe by Mark Thomas & Company, Fehr & Peers, and Michael Baker International. In contrast to the new study, the Mark Thomas & Company study showed that the roundabout options would lead to vehicle LOS failures of grade F (full traffic jams) and be significantly worse than traffic signals (Attachment 1). The other studies showed similar results. All of the studies are direct, apples‐to‐ apples comparisons between the signalized and roundabout options, based on the same average delay categories. The Mark Thomas & Company study concluded: Overall the poor operating conditions [of the roundabout] are due to the combination of decreased capacity and increased future 2035 volumes at this intersection. Based on industry standards, single‐lane roundabouts typically operate poorly at conflicting/circulating volumes above 1200 vehicles per hour. Present day and future 2035 volumes substantially exceed this threshold. Concerns were also expressed in one of the previous studies that the longer delays with the roundabout option may lead to vehicles intending to turn right onto Tamarack Avenue from northbound Carlsbad Boulevard choosing instead to bypass the intersection by taking Sequoia Avenue and Garfield Street. The older traffic studies also contain balanced assessments of the advantages and disadvantages of traffic signals and roundabouts, while the information being provided now presents roundabouts as always being the superior option with no disadvantages. The City of Carlsbad has a long history of poor transparency with traffic studies, for example, using unvalidated methods, cherry‐picking methods, maximizing “calibration (fudge) factors” within the methods, changing LOS scoring, etc. to reach desired conclusions. I requested access to both the previous and current roundabout analysis project files (SIDRA software) to determine why the results are so drastically different (LOS F vs. LOS B) for this roundabout. I had lined up a traffic consultant to conduct the SIDRA comparison, but the city only provided the project file for the new study. Staff has suggested that adding a metered entry into the roundabout from the western leg (the beach parking lot) may have helped the LOS grade, but I find it implausible that that could account for the huge change from LOS F to LOS B. Misleadin Last mont Street rou traffic flow Tamarack What wou of vehicle experienc roundabo Also, the v exclusivel seconds. T In contras despite th and you c even exte CONCLUS Due to th very caref ng traffic sign th, staff show undabout inte w in many sit k location and uld have been es, pedestrian ced at Tamara out video show videos were 5 y in the north That does not st, the rounda his highly bias can also see in ending off the SION e above‐desc fully. nal/roundabo wed overhead ersections wit uations, but t d were actual n very valuab s, and bicycli ack. That wou wn by staff ha 52 seconds in hbound direc t accurately r about video s sed selection n the video ho e right side. cribed safety a out compariso side‐by‐side th Carlsbad B these videos ly quite misle ble is an overh sts (from any uld show how ad one bicycl n length, but t tion on Carls represent ave showed traffic of timing, bo ow cars back and operatio 4 on video videos of the Boulevard. I ag did not provi eading. head view of a y city in the U w all of the mo ist and no pe the traffic in t bad Boulevar erage green ti c evenly split oth intersectio up in the nor nal concerns, e Tamarack A gree that rou de the inform a single‐lane nited States), odes interact edestrians, so the signalized rd and sitting imes on Carls between nor ons had simila rthbound dire , please consi Avenue signal undabouts can mation neede roundabout w , similar to w with each ot o it is not usef d intersection at a red light sbad Bouleva rth and south ar numbers o ection at the ider your reco ized and Stat n provide bet ed for the with high vol hat would be ther. The ful in that way n was almost t for 32 of the rd. hbound. Yet, of cars travers roundabout— ommendatio e tter umes e y. e 52 se it, — n 16795 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92606 www.markthomas.com Tel: (949) 477-9000 Fax: (949) 477-4102 M ARK THOMAS & COMPANY, INC. Providing Engineering, Surveying and Planning Services Design Memorandum To: City of Carlsbad File: SA-12129 From: Arturo Vivar/Mark Thomas & Company Date: 8/10/15 RE: Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection LOS Analysis. This memorandum will serve to describe and provide Level of Services (LOS) analysis for the four (4) design options being considered for the proposed improvements at the Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack Avenue intersection. Design options The initial three (3) options; Signalized intersection, interim improvements roundabout, and full improvements roundabout, were reviewed by the CCC Team to determine pro’s and con’s. Based on the preliminary analysis of the 3 initial options, the interim roundabout design did not provide enough benefits for the cost and was eliminated from consideration. The traffic signal design and the full improvements roundabout were chosen as the feasible alternatives, both of which could be analyzed as designed and also with a slight variation, the result is the four (4) design options analyzed and described herein. Option No. Description 1A. Signalized intersection with a southbound thru‐right #2 lane. 1B. Signalized intersection with a southbound trap #2 lane. 3A. Full improvements roundabout with a 60’ diameter inner circle. 3B. Full improvements roundabout with a 70’ diameter inner circle. See attached Exhibits for the preliminary layout of each design option, Attachment A‐1 to A‐4. LOS Analysis All 4 options were analyzed for present and future (2035) LOS at the Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack Avenue intersection. The existing volumes are shown Attachment B. The existing (2015) conditions operate at a LOS D or better for both intersections. The LOS analysis results are provided in Attachment C. In summary, for both Options 1A and 1B, the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack Ave operates acceptably during the weekday peak periods. However, during the weekend mid‐day peak, the intersection operates poorly at LOS E and LOS F under 2015 and 2035 conditions. Design Memorandum – Carlsbad/Tamarack LOS Analysis 8/10/15 2 For the roundabout options 3A and 3B, the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack Ave operates acceptably during the weekday AM peak period. Option 3A, with the smaller inscribed circle diameter, operates consistently with less delay than Option 3B. However, during the weekday PM peak period and weekend mid‐day peak, both design options operate poorly at LOS F under 2015 and 2035 conditions Overall the poor operating conditions described above are due to the combination of decreased capacity and increased future 2035 volumes at this intersection. Based on industry standards, single‐ lane roundabouts typically operate poorly at conflicting/circulating volumes above 1200 vehicles per hour. Present day and future 2035 volumes substantially exceed this threshold. Recommendations Upon the review of the roundabout design, the geometry of the west leg of Tamarack Avenue leading to the beach allows for vehicles to travel relatively fast. Thus, we recommend installing raised crosswalks in order to slow vehicles down and create a safer pedestrian environment. Please let me know if you have any questions. Arturo Vivar, Project Manager BIKELANE LANE BIKE BIKELANE 3+50 4+50 4+00 3+00 2+50 2+00 12+00 11+5011+00 10+008+50 9+00 10+509+50 11+ 5 0 11+ 0 0 10+ 50 10 + 0 0 STOP 30 30 BUS BUS LANEBIKE \\irvfile02\anteater\Projects\SA-12129(Carlsbad On-Call Services)\Carlsbad-Tamarack Improvements Project\Design\CAD\Exhibit\E007-Memo Exhibits\Exhibit Masters\LOS memo Exhibits.dgn NORTH 8/10/15 VISTA POINT CARLSBAD BLVDT A MA R A C K A V E Carlsbad Blvd/Tamarack Ave Intersection Option 1A - Signalized Intersection (Thru-right Lane) BIKELANE LANE BIKE BIKELANE 3+50 4+50 4+00 3+00 2+50 2+00 12+00 11+5011+00 10+008+50 9+00 10+509+50 11+ 5 0 11+ 0 0 10+ 50 10 + 0 0 STOP 30 30 LANEBIKE BUS ONLY \\irvfile02\anteater\Projects\SA-12129(Carlsbad On-Call Services)\Carlsbad-Tamarack Improvements Project\Design\CAD\Exhibit\E007-Memo Exhibits\Exhibit Masters\LOS memo Exhibits.dgn NORTH 8/10/15 VISTA POINT CARLSBAD BLVDT A MA R A C K A V E Carlsbad Blvd/Tamarack Ave Intersection Option 1B - Signalized Intersection (Trap Lane) BIKELANE LANE BIKE BIKELANE 3+50 4+50 4+00 3+00 2+50 2+00 12+00 11+5011+00 10+008+50 9+00 10+509+50 11+ 5 0 11+ 0 0 10+ 50 10 + 0 0 STOP 30 30 BUS ONLY \\irvfile02\anteater\Projects\SA-12129(Carlsbad On-Call Services)\Carlsbad-Tamarack Improvements Project\Design\CAD\Exhibit\E007-Memo Exhibits\Exhibit Masters\LOS memo Exhibits.dgn NORTH 8/10/15 VISTA POINT CARLSBAD BLVDT A MA R A C K A V E Option 3A - Full Improvements Roundabout (60' Dia.) Carlsbad Blvd/Tamarack Ave Intersection BIKELANE LANE BIKE BIKELANE 3+50 4+50 4+00 3+00 2+50 2+00 12+00 11+5011+00 10+008+50 9+00 10+509+50 11+ 5 0 11+ 0 0 10+ 50 10 + 0 0 STOP 30 30 BUS ONLY \\irvfile02\anteater\Projects\SA-12129(Carlsbad On-Call Services)\Carlsbad-Tamarack Improvements Project\Design\CAD\Exhibit\E007-Memo Exhibits\Exhibit Masters\LOS memo Exhibits.dgn NORTH 8/10/15 VISTA POINT CARLSBAD BLVDT A MA R A C K A V E Option 3B - Full Improvements Roundabout (72' Dia.) Carlsbad Blvd/Tamarack Ave Intersection Figure 1 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations - Carlsbad Boulevard / Tamarack ace 33 ( 5 9 ) [ 9 7 ] 23 9 ( 7 6 2 ) [ 6 5 4 ] 73 ( 1 8 2 ) [ 9 7 ] bf 4(22)[49] 8(19)[29] 14(53)[109] accf 3( 3 4 ) [ 7 0 ] 44 3 ( 5 5 0 ) [ 9 5 8 ] 31 ( 8 0 ) [ 1 0 1 ] ae 57(109)[127] 17(24)[49] 187(147)[236] EXISTING (2015) BASE ace d ace ae EXISTING PLUS OPTION 1A ace d acf ae EXISTING PLUS OPTION 1B d d d d EXISTING PLUS OPTION 3A OR 3B ace 40 ( 7 0 ) [ 1 1 0 ] 31 0 ( 9 4 0 ) [ 7 3 0 ] 14 0 ( 3 4 0 ) [ 1 4 0 ] bf 10(30)[60] 20(40)[40] 20(70)[120] accf10 ( 5 0 ) [ 8 0 ] 51 0 ( 6 6 0 ) [ 1 , 0 5 0 ] 70 ( 1 5 0 ) [ 1 5 0 ] ae 120(200)[180]30(40)[60] 310(260)[330] FUTURE (2035) BASE ace d ace ae FUTURE PLUS OPTION 1A ace d acf ae FUTURE PLUS OPTION 1B d d d d FUTURE PLUS OPTION 3A OR 3B N Tamarack Ave Ca r l s b a d B l v d Tamarack Ave Ca r l s b a d B l v d Tamarack Ave Ca r l s b a d B l v d Tamarack Ave Ca r l s b a d B l v d Tamarack Ave Ca r l s b a d B l v d Tamarack Ave Ca r l s b a d B l v d Tamarack Ave Ca r l s b a d B l v d Tamarack Ave Ca r l s b a d B l v d So u r c e : N : \Pr o j e c t s \20 1 5 _ P r o j e c t s \01 8 0 C a r l s b a d T a m a r a c k \Gr a p h i c s * Volumes same as Existing (2015) Base * Volumes same as Existing (2015) Base * Volumes same as Existing (2015) Base * Volumes same as Future (2035) Base * Volumes same as Future (2035) Base * Volumes same as Future (2035) Base 8/10/2015 Delay (sec/veh)1 LOS2,3 Delay (sec/veh)1 LOS2,3 Delay Change4 Delay (sec/veh)1 LOS2,3 Delay Change4 Delay (sec/veh)1 LOS5,3 Delay Change4 Delay (sec/veh)1 LOS5,3 Delay Change4 AM 18.1 B 25.9 C 7.8 28.4 C 10.3 8.4 A -9.7 8.2 A -9.9 PM 28.3 C 40.0 D 11.7 44.6 D 16.3 79.4 F 51.1 87 F 58.7 WKND 31.9 C 46.6 D 14.7 86.4 F 54.5 <180 F *<180 F * Delay (sec/veh)1 LOS2,3 Delay (sec/veh)1 LOS2,3 Delay Change4 Delay (sec/veh)1 LOS2,3 Delay Change4 Delay (sec/veh)1 LOS5,3 Delay Change4 Delay (sec/veh)1 LOS5,3 Delay Change4 AM 22.5 C 30.7 C 8.2 36.5 D 14.0 33.9 D 11.4 34.2 D 11.7 PM 37.3 D 53.5 D 16.2 55.6 E 18.3 <180 F *<180 F * WKND 36.3 D 64.2 E 27.9 114.3 F 78.0 <180 F *<180 F * Source: Fehr & Peers, 2015. Notes: 4 Difference in delay between the "Plus Project" scenario and the baseline or "Without Project" scenario. 5 Level of Service (LOS) calculations for roundabouts performed using the SIDRA Standard Capacity Model Future Plus Option 3B (SIDRA Standard Method)5 ** Indicates oversaturated conditions. Delay change cannot be calculated. 1 Whole intersection weighted average stopped delay expressed in seconds per vehicle for signalized intersections. For Roundabouts, the intersection LOS was reported based on average delay for all lanes. 2 Level of Service (LOS) calculations performed using the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) method. 3 Unacceptable seconds of delay per vehicle and LOS highlighted in bold. Existing Plus Option 3B (SIDRA Standard Method)5 1. Carlsbad Boulevard / Tamarack Avenue • Signalized (Existing, 1A, 1B) • Roundabout (3A, 3B) Peak Hour Future (2035) Conditions Future Plus Option 1A (SB Through/right) Future Plus Option 1B (Trap Right-Turn Lane) Future Plus Option 3A (SIDRA Standard Method)5 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) COMPARISON FOR CARLSBAD BOULEVARD/TAMARACK AVENUE Intersection Traffic Control Peak Hour Existing (2015) Conditions Existing Plus Option 1A (SB Through/right) Existing Plus Option 1B (Trap Right-Turn Lane) Existing Plus Option 3A (SIDRA Standard Method)5 From:Dave Lyon To:Traffic Subject:Intersection at tamarack and 101. Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 2:33:00 PM I oppose the round about traffic control proposal at the beach terminus of tamarack avenue. I can tell from using other local round abouts that the confusion created for cars, buses andpedestrians in this location will be a detrimental, expensive and unnecessary change. I use this intersection multiple times daily as a driver or pedestrian. With the traffic/pedestrianload increasing and the odd beach access/ exit to the state beach this situation is not optimum in any situation; but allowing more personal options for random decision making ( a result ofthe round about in my opinion) will be worse. I support HARD stop and go traffic control at this location. Sincerely David Lyon3975 Hibiscus Circle. 92008 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Linda Petrucci To:Traffic Subject:Tamarack & Carlsbad Blvd Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 11:20:57 AM I strongly oppose a roundabout at this intersection. Too much happens at this intersection, people are sometimes dazed by being at the beach, kids are a little more out of control,animals can react to new stimulation, there is just too much activity at this location. Moving the bus stop is a good idea. I think a clearly marked space with a traffic light is best. BTW, what would happen to the Carlsbad Marathon if an island is put in the roadway? Linda Petrucci Carlsbad, CA -- Linda CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Christine Smoczynski To:Traffic Subject:Tamarack /Carlsbad Blvd Date:Thursday, April 27, 2023 6:27:55 PM Once again! How many times do we need to ‘vote’? Option 1…. No roundabout, please! Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Christine Smoczynski To:Traffic Subject:Tamarack /Carlsbad Blvd Date:Thursday, April 27, 2023 6:27:55 PM Once again! How many times do we need to ‘vote’? Option 1…. No roundabout, please! Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:brittaarmstrong678@gmail.com To:Traffic Subject:Round about Date:Saturday, April 29, 2023 10:27:29 AM Please make a roundabout at the intersection of Tamarack and Carlsbad Bld! Best regards, Britta Armstrong 2621 Banbury Ct Carlsbad 92010 Skickat från min iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:thor94@me.com To:Traffic Subject:Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack Project Date:Saturday, April 29, 2023 10:46:49 AM Dear TMC and City Council, I wanted to provide some feedback on the proposed redesign of the Tamarack/Carlsbad intersection. We live at 111 Tamarack, on the southeast corner of this intersection. We walk through this intersection multiple times a day. We are strong advocates of Option 2 “Roundabout”. This seems like a very easy decision to be made. The roundabout option is much safer, provides for less congestion (despite public misunderstanding of this matter), it provides greater pedestrian and bike access, and also provides for more parking. The roundabout option is superior on all measures. Traffic is frequently backed up in front of our home from the traditional signal design. We’ve seen many places locally and around the states where roundabouts provide much less congestion. For us and other residents this will also mean much less pollution from the standing vehicles. There are many vehicles every day traveling north on Carlsbad Blvd that pull an illegal u-turn (or many times a 3- point turn) trying to access the beach to the south. Having a roundabout in place would eliminate that traffic hazard and make it easy for beach goers to access the southern beach. Thank you for considering the communities input. If we can provide any additional perspectives, fee free to reach out. -Don Don Thorstenson 480-299-2091 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Morgen Ruby To:Traffic Subject:Carlsbad Traffic Circle Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 9:47:04 PM Hello, I am writing in support of the roundabout at Tamarack and the 101. I cannot be present to cast a vote at the Monday, May 1 meeting, so I hope this email can serve as my vote. I have grown up and spent most of my life in Carlsbad. I have seen the coast Highwayintroduce enhancements overtime (mid block crossings, RRFBs, ped scramble) and believe it contributes to a safe, walkable environment for residents and tourists alike. I would love to seethe improvements continue with the addition of this roundabout. Morgen CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Paula Lack To:Traffic Subject:Support for Roundabout Date:Saturday, April 29, 2023 8:21:42 AM Hi, Just wanted to let you know as a cyclist, runner, and driver that uses the Tamarack intersection frequently...I support the roundabout, I believe it will be safer for all. Thanks for helping make it happen. -- pal Paula Ann Lack858-449-4450 cell 168 Sycamore Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Tim Thiele To:Traffic Subject:Traffic Mobility Commission Meeting 5/1 Date:Saturday, April 29, 2023 12:38:10 PM Carlsbad Traffic Commissioners and Traffic Engineers, Please accept this email as strong support for a Roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Boulevardand Tamarack.This is needed to reduce congestion and reduces greenhouse gases and speeding.Change is needed. Signals are old technology. Don't be swayed by nay-sayers. Statistics show thatbefore roundabouts are built, yes there is resistance but once in place, there is acceptance by a widemargin. The Del Mar roundabout was the same way. It has been there for a few years now and localslove it. Build the Roundabout. Tim Thiele3302 Febo CourtCarlsbad, CA CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Elena Thompson To:Traffic Subject:May 1 Agenda item- roundabout (RA)at Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd/Coast Hwy 101- PLEASE VOTE YES Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 9:43:04 PM Attachments:Understanding Roundabouts _ Carlsbad, CA.pdf Road-Diets P1-Fact-Sheet.pdf Hello, We fully continue to support the Roundabout at Tamarack. Roundabouts already exist and function well along the 101 in north county San Diego, and they serve several key and essential public safety purposes. There will be -and need to be- more roundabouts along the 101 in San Diego and California. Please vote yes to move this agenda item forward now. Traffic calming, lane diets and “complete street” designs are CRITICAL for the well-being and long term public safety in Carlsbad (and elsewhere), and for reduced vehicle emissions. Carlsbad sets the standard, is the model today, for safe and sound roadway design, when compared to other cities in the area. And Carlsbad leads the way for what makes sense going forward today in San Diego county (lane narrowing, speed reduction, Vision Zero, wider and safer bike lanes, viable ped access to public spaces, pop-outs, bulb- outs, roundabouts, etc.). Please do not delay moving forward on this key infrastructure improvement (a second time). Thank you for doing the right thing here, showing the best way forward. Respectfully, E Thompson Lifelong happy recreational bike rider, happy pedestrian and proud gas-powered vehicle owner From:Kelly To:Traffic Subject:Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack Ave. Intersection Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 6:47:15 PM Dear Commissioners, My name is Kelly Spratford and I am a resident of Oceanside. I'm writing to voice my enthusiastic support for a roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. I bike often in Carlsbad and I find it a little nerve-wracking. Roundabouts, as I’m sure you know, have been proven to be safer. Moreover, this option creates more space for wide sidewalks and bike lanes, which will make this section of the Carlsbad coast a welcoming space for everyone, rather than just a throughway for high-speed traffic. I strongly encourage the Traffic and Mobility Commission to support this option. Sincerely, Kelly Spratford CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:John Spencer To:Traffic Subject:Please Support Roundabout at Carlsbad Blvd & Tamarack Ave Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 8:16:02 PM Dear Commissioners, Thank you in advance for your consideration. I’m a 29 year resident of Encinitas and frequent customer of Carlsbad businesses. I am writing to voice my SUPPORT for a roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. Roundabouts make sense. They’re safe and efficient and keep people moving on their way. I strongly encourage the Traffic and Mobility Commission to support this option. Thanks, John Spencer CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:James Keane To:Traffic Subject:Support for New Roundabout at Intersection of Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack Ave Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 4:33:11 PM Dear Members of the Carlsbad Traffic and Mobility Commission, I am writing to express my full support for the proposed new roundabout at theintersection of Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack Ave. I believe that this roundabout willhelp to improve traffic flow and safety in the area, while also providing a moreefficient and environmentally-friendly transportation option for residents and visitorsalike. As you know, this intersection has been a source of concern for many years due to itshigh traffic volume and frequent accidents. I believe that a roundabout would be aneffective solution to these problems, as it would help to reduce congestion, improvesafety, and provide a more efficient way for drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians tonavigate this busy intersection. I urge you to consider my comments as you move forward with your decision-makingprocess regarding this important issue. Thank you for your time and attention. Sincerely, James Keane, Carlsbad CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Christine Boris Esteban To:Traffic Subject:re: roundabout support Date:Saturday, April 29, 2023 10:18:13 AM Dear Commissioners, My name is Christine Esteban and I am a 30+ year resident of Carlsbad. I'm writing to voice my enthusiastic support for a roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. Roundabouts are proven to reduce serious or fatal crashes by up to eighty percent. Traffic safety is an emergency in Carlsbad, and we have no excuse not to choose the safest option. People who oppose them, in part, simply do not like change and haven’t witnessed the benefits of traffic flow without stoplights. Moreover, this option creates more space for wide sidewalks and bike lanes, which will make this section of the Carlsbad coast a welcoming space for everyone, rather than just a throughway for high-speed traffic. I strongly encourage the Traffic and Mobility Commission to support this option. Sincerely, Christine Esteban Sent from Mail for Windows CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Elizabeth Skinner To:Traffic Subject:Traffic circle support for Tamarack Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 8:31:18 PM Dear Commissioners, My name is Elizabeth Skinner and I am resident of San Diego. I lived near the corner of Tamarack and Jefferson in Carlsbad for many years and I know how bad the traffic can at that stoplight. I'm writing to share my support for a roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. r traffic circles are great because they keep traffic moving but at a safe speed. I would feel safer in the area with one. I strongly encourage the Traffic and Mobility Commission to support this option. Sincerely, Elizabeth CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Mary Kent To:Traffic Subject:No more roundabouts! Date:Saturday, April 29, 2023 11:43:16 AM How many people will be killed going to the beach at Tamarack before you admit this Roundabout is and was a very bad idea? Just don’t do it! Mary KentCarlsbad resident -- M CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Kris Wright To:Traffic Subject:Tamarack Traffic Circle agenda item #2 TMC. Date:Saturday, April 29, 2023 9:08:34 AM Dear Members of the Traffic Safety and Mobility Commission:As a 40+ year resident of the City of Carlsbad, I am AGAINST theconstruction of a roundabout/traffic circle proposed at the intersection ofCarlsbad Blvd and Tamarack for the following reasons.1. According to a former Vice Chair of the TMC, studies have found that thecurrent roundabout at the northern border of our city at Carlsbad Blvd./StateSt has resulted in an approximate 367% higher degree of collisions at thatlocation. In addition, the City of Carlsbad itself adopted a Local RoadwaySafety Plan that identifies:"The roundabout at State Street is a very similar configuration (diameter andsplitter islands) to the one proposed at Tamarack Avenue. The City recentlyadopted a Local Roadway Safety Plan that identified that roundabout ashaving the highest collision frequency in the city--by a wide margin." 2. Our city adopted a rather expensive traffic signal synchronized system inthe 2010's which should alleviate any issues. 3. The expense of this project comes at a time when discussions arecoming from the City Manager's office to raise our sales tax. 4. There were ZERO serious traffic accidents at the signalized intersectionat Tamarack x Carlsbad Village Dr. as compared to the roundabout on Statex Carlsbad Blvd despite the significantly higher use at Tamarack. 5. We need double lanes on Carlsbad Blvd in each direction given the issuethat Carlsbad Blvd is an alternate route should ever the I-5 be closed due toan accident or major incident. 6. Multiple traffic studies performed on the Carlsbad Blvd xTamarack intersections (from 2015-16) showed that the roundabout optionswould be MORE congested rather than less with a roundabout. Somehowwith an increased population and a new study the roundabout option wouldprovide a magically different outcome showing the roundabout optionbetter. I tend to find this new study rather unbelievable. 7. Carlsbad drivers-or better yet, southern California drivers do not drive as European drivers. Roads are different in Europe and comparisons madebetween the two are laughable. My conclusions are that it would be a huge mistake to put a roundabout atTamarack x Carlsbad Blvd for the reasons stated above.Thank you. Kris WrightCarlsbad, CA -- Kris Wrightkriswrt222@gmail.com CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Teri Jacobs To:Traffic Subject:Tamarack Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 7:52:31 PM Traffic and Mobility, We do NOT need a traffic circle at Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd. On busy weekend days the traffic on Tamarackcan be backed up to the 5 freeway. I can only imagine the back up if a roundabout is installed.As a pedestrian crossing Carlsbad Blvd I cannot see residents, tourists, bikers and walkers all trying to navigate thatintersection. Families with young children and all of their beach gear make that crossing. It would absolutely not besafe with drivers unfamiliar with the rules of roundabouts.Being very familiar with the roundabout heading to Oceanside I disagree with its success. Again as a pedestrian Iwitness bikes, cars and pedestrians confused! The pedestrian traffic will be much greater at the Tamarackintersection.There is another roundabout on Kelly that is absolutely ridiculous. I cannot count the times that we have almost beenhit by vehicles not understanding when they are allowed to enter. We witnessed a truck completely cut across notwanting to take the time to go around the circle. Let’s just say that was somewhat shocking.I don’t know what is going on but drivers seem extremely aggravated and have little patience. We cannot assumethat they will slow down. They are in a hurry and oblivious to anyone and everyone.If Carlsbad really wants Safer Streets…then do the right thing. That being no roundabouts.Regards,Teri JacobsDist 1 Sent from my iPadCAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Tim Hart To:Traffic Subject:Traffic circle at Tamarack and Coast Highway Date:Saturday, April 29, 2023 9:11:08 AM This is a terrible idea. During the spring and summer all the beach goers who park east of the intersection on the side street will be walking in the crosswalk. That’ll make all the cars stop and back up for miles. Frustrated drivers maygo ahead anyway, and injure pedestrians and bicycle riders. The signal is much safer and traffic will run smootherTim Hart, Camino, Del, Prado, Carlsbad.Sent from my iPhoneCAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Joyce Hassell To:Traffic Subject:Roundabout at Tamararack Date:Saturday, April 29, 2023 10:38:34 AM Please reconsider this! Terrible location for this. Traffic will be backed up. It is not broken. Leave it the way it is!! Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Marilyn Bemiss To:Traffic Subject:No vote for the roundabout on Tamarack Ave & Carlsbad Blvd Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 10:07:27 PM I oppose the round about traffic control proposal at the beach terminus of tamarack avenue. I can tell from using other local round abouts that the confusion created for cars, buses and pedestrians in this location will be a detrimental, expensive and unnecessary change. I use this intersection multiple times daily as a driver or pedestrian. With the traffic/pedestrian load increasing and the odd beach access/ exit to the state beach this situation is not optimum in any situation; but allowing more personal options for random decision making ( a result of the round about in my opinion) will be worse. I support HARD stop and go traffic control at this location. Thank you, Marilyn Bemiss 3975 Hibiscus Circle Carlsbad, Ca 92008 Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Lin Ball To:Traffic Subject:Tamarack and Carlsbad blvd Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 7:00:05 PM I live on chinquapin near Jefferson and tamarack and I travel/walk the tamarack and Carlsbad blvd intersection all the time and have done for 17 years.I am not in favor of a roundabout but do support improving the sidewalks, bus stop, bridge and crossing changes.There is so much traffic at that intersection that I don’t believe a roundabout will be safer nor allow for good trafficflow. I have traveled other roundabouts including the other Carlsbad roundabout on Carlsbad blvd. Most recently Iwas at that roundaboutgoing south and traffic was backed up into oceanside because pedestrians were trying to cross at the roundabout.Some drivers appeared confused as to when to enter the roundabout. A few cars honked their horns.Can you imagine on a busy summer day or busy weekend what will happen at this intersection?Wider sidewalks and better crossing changes however are needed because of this high volume of bikers, pedestriansand cars. But not a roundabout.I support the alternative 3 or 4 lane changes.Thank you.Lin Ball4021 Canario stCarlsbadLinjball@gmail.com Sent from my iPhoneCAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Jennifer To:Traffic Subject:Tamarack and CBLVD Roundabout Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 7:12:53 PM Hello, I hope this note finds you well. I am writing as it is my understanding that a roundabout installation at Tamarack and Carlsbad BLVD is being discussed at the upcoming meeting and I’d like to express my opinion on the matter. I am very opposed to this change. I firmly believe the light we have is sufficient and necessary to provide the safest experience for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians compared to a roundabout. Roundabouts are great but not at that location. There are way too many bodies walking, running and biking in this area, and add that to a lot of reckless, distracted and rushed drives and you get a disaster waiting to happen. This is a beach town and CBLVD is extremely active. Vehicles are often in a hurry, distracted and careless. This is demonstrated daily with the pedestrian crosswalks we have. I walk from Tamarack to the State Street roundabout with my dog several times a week, and several times a week I could have been hit by drivers that don’t think the blinking cross walk light applies to them, and they blow right through. This happened yesterday, twice. I never use the Sate Street roundabout as a pedestrian because I do fear being hit by a car that is rushing. With the significant amount of vehicle activity it is vitally important to have a stop light to allow each type of traffic to have a safe, dedicated space to flow through. For the safety and wellbeing of our community and visitors alike please do not allow this roundabout proposal to move forward. Thank you, Jennifer Wall Chestnut Ave Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Doris Schiller To:Traffic Subject:Tamarack round about at Carlsbad Date:Friday, April 28, 2023 8:39:56 PM As a pedestrian I prefer to cross the street when cars are required to stop at a traffic light. Please leave the light at Tamarack. I do not want a traffic circle.Doris Schiller 6753 Oleander Way, Carlsbad, CA 92011 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:DoNnA SiLvErIa To:Traffic Date:Saturday, April 29, 2023 7:52:05 AM Don't ruin our Carlsbad coastline with a turnabout on tamarack and Coast highway. ACarlsbad resident for 50years. Thank you,Donna Silveria Thank you CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:John S. Wright To:Traffic Cc:Melanie Burkholder; Keith Blackburn Subject:Roundabout at Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd, Agenda Item #2 Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 7:41:35 AM Hi The current proposals for a traffic circle on Carlsbad Blvd. require bicycles to merge with cars and trucks at the entrance to the traffic circle, then navigate the traffic circle with them. This would increase the chances of collision vs. a protected bike lane at a light. As someone who has recently taught his daughter how to ride an ebike safely, I fear for the safety of children, especially. Please maintain full separation between cars and bicycles, bicycles and pedestrians, on Carlsbad Avenue. Either redesign the proposed traffic circles to maintain cycling lanes or, preferably, stick with lights. Thank you. Regards, John Wright 2727 Llama Ct. CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Kaygavin52@gmail.com To:kaygavin52@gmail.com Cc:Traffic; Melanie Burkholder; Keith Blackburn Subject:Re: Agenda Item#2 Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 8:02:46 AM I forgot to mention that listening to One segment of the population is dangerous especially in this instance. The San Diego Bike Coalition has rallied their membership to write in their support of the roundabout and so far,their voice is very strong, even though many of them live in cities outside of Carlsbad! Do you know Why cyclists are in favor?? Because they won’t have to stop their ride at a light and allow cars andpedestrians to cross. I also doubt they will properly yield to other traffic especially when in groups but guess whatthere’s no way to prevent them from doing this since no one will be there enforcing. I can see the weekend cyclegroups plowing thru already. FYI, I am not anti-bikes we own and ride bikes although not long distance. More disturbing is our ebikers who already are a danger & at high risk navigating this roundabout as So Many areyoung surfers. Carlsbad has spent considerable time & money trying to make roads safe for bikers but This Proposal does the ExactOpposite PLEASE DONT ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN Sent from my iPhone > On May 1, 2023, at 7:42 AM, kaygavin52@gmail.com wrote:>> > Hello, we are 35 yr residents of Carlsbad living off Tamarack & visit the beach daily for walks & afternoonrelaxation. We are Stunned that Carlsbad staff continues to push for a roudabout at this extremely busy intersection. May we remind them that Carlsbad is a tourist destination, not to mention all the events we host throughout the yearand also remind them that most cities & visitors are unfamiliar with how to properly navigate a round which makesThis particular location Extremely dangerous!!> > The current roundabout at State Street and Carlsbad Blvd has the highest collision rate of any intersection in thecity & there is Very little pedestrian traffic crossing the streets unlike the proposed Tamarack location. Putting oneat a busy intersection like Tamarack is sheer madness! The city has had several traffic firms study the feasibility ofa roundabout at this location in the past 7-8 years and all had pointed out that congestion would be extremely bad atpeak afternoon hours. The fact that the city has continued to push the issue and now has miraculously claimed therewould be no backups at all is quite troubling to me.>> I implore you to drop this dangerous solution & opted for the much safer light proposal.>> Regards>> Kevin & Kay Gavin>> Sent from my iPadCAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:tklane8459@aol.com To:Traffic Cc:keithblackburn@carlsbadca.gov; Melanie Burkholder Subject:Agenda Item #2 - Proposed Tamarac Roundabout Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 10:59:35 AM I previously emailed the Council and Traffic Commission to voice my opposition to theproposed Tamarac Traffic Roundabout. I stated it makes the interaction of bicyclistand motor vehicles more dangerous, as the bicycles have to fully merge with traffic tonavigate the Roundabout. Anyone who has rode a bike through the traffic roundaboutat the North end of Carlsbad (and I am willing to bet Council Members have not doneso) knows how harrowing an experience this can be to a bicyclist. You pray that thecars coming at you from all sides will allow you to safely pass through the circle. Itslike playing Russian roulette. I was shocked and amazed, that after the people WHO LIVE IN Carlsbadoverwhelmingly voiced their opposition to the Tamarac Roundabout, and the TrafficCommission made a recommendation against construction of the Roundabout, theproposal has again resurfaced for approval. Apparently, it is people and groups whodo not live in Carlsbad who want the Roundabout. The San Diego Bike Coalition isbased in downtown San Diego, and most of their members do not live in Carlsbad. As a avid bicyclist, who has a Masters Degree in Urban Planning, I am again voicingmy opposition to the proposed Tamarac Roundabout. Let me leave you with a quotefrom the bible of Urban Planners , "Site Planning" by Kevin Lynch, page 140 :"Crossings (Cycleways) should be offset, and T junctions are preferred. They shouldbe grade separated from motor traffic, or their crossings should be controlled atintersections with signals, since to merge cycleways back into heavy traffic mayactually cause a heavier accident rate than to have no cycleways at all". Vote against the construction of the Tamarac Roundabout. Thomas Lane2573 Navarra DriveCarlsbad, CA 92009. CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Dale Bodman To:Traffic Subject:Agenda Item#2 Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 9:32:18 AM I am writing in concerning the installation of a traffic circle at the intersection of Tamarack and the coast highway. I disapprove of this idea as these traffic circles do not reduce traffic and accidents. I am a professional engineer with over 45 years of experience in civil engineering. Actually- theses traffic circles are worse for traffic and accidents. Drivers do not know how to maneuver in a traffic circle and it creates more issues with other vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians. Do not approve this. Dale Bodman, PE CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Polly Williams To:Traffic Cc:Keith Blackburn; Melanie Burkholder Subject:Traffic & Mobility Commission Agenda Item #2 - Opposition to Roundabout Currently Under Consideration Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 10:13:06 AM Dear Traffic and Mobility Commission Members, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposal to put a roundabout at the intersection of Tamarack Avenueand Carlsbad Boulevard. As someone said to me last night, it’s sheer madness, especially given that the currentroundabout at State Street and Carlsbad Boulevard has the highest collision rate of any intersection in the City. To put my opposition into context, my family and I are full-time District 1 residents with a home in the 3400 blockof Carlsbad Boulevard. Our opposition to the roundabout takes two forms; both micro (impact to us personally asresidents on the street with two teenagers) and macro (safety, traffic flow, traffic volume, quality of life for all). Thepeak hour impact of a roundabout at that intersection would be catastrophic to our quality of life and the ability tomove freely through this part of Carlsbad. I invite anyone who is in favor of the roundabout to spend time watching that intersection operate on a busy day at abusy time. How about a summer Saturday or rush hour at any time of the year? Now imagine the back-up. Aninsanely long line of cars stretches in both directions as far as the eye can see (and beyond). Now introduce a heavy,but irregular stream of pedestrians trying to cross the street in all directions. They enter the crosswalk at will becausethere is no longer a traffic light. If you care about the pedestrians, you worry for their safety. If you’re upset aboutthe delay and have been sitting in the back-up and confusion created by the traffic circle, you’re furious every timesomeone steps out and further interrupts the flow. Now add in the requisite stream of bikes - from kids on electric tocyclists on their long rides. Madness. Sheer madness. I have been watching the traffic patterns on Carlsbad Boulevard more closely since this proposal was floated and Ican tell you anecdotally that there has been a marked shift in the last six months. Waze and the other traffic appshave started routing people onto Carlsbad Boulevard in a way they never have before as a workaround for the 5Freeway. We’ve had a series of days with a wall of cars out there for hours on end making it nearly impossible tomove through the neighborhood. If the traffic study and counts being used for this report aren’t brand new, you arenot getting information that accurately reflects the current reality on Carlsbad Boulevard. Just think about the impact of the 78 closure on our City streets. Look at what has been happening at the corner ofCarlsbad Village Drive and College Boulevard at peak hours. That’s an impact born of an unexpected disaster. Atraffic circle at Tamarack Avenue and Carlsbad Boulevard would be a disaster born of hubris. Thank you for listening. Sincerely,Polly WilliamsResident, Carlsbad BoulevardCAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:drdianeb@aol.com To:Traffic Subject:Agenda item #2 - today"s meeting Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 8:55:57 AM Dear Commissioners: I am a 31 year Carlsbad resident. Please do NOT vote for a roundabout at the Tamarack/Carlsbad Blvd.intersection! Please review the excellent research done by former Commissioner Steve Linke, whichshows that this is NOT a good intersection for a roundabout. There are places where roundabouts work. The ones on Santa Fe Dr. in Encinitas, and the ones in BirdRock, are in locations which are conducive to this type of flow. Tamarack/Carlsbad Blvd. is NOT such alocation! Even with the "pretty" renderings, it does not look safe to cross there as a pedestrian, and bikesneeding to merge with thru traffic is a horrible idea. Additionally, the backup due to the traffic will makeCarlsbad Blvd a parking lot. If we want to reduce carbon emissions, this is not the way to do it. Theintersection is not conducive to a roundabout that would be safe and work for all. Repetitive "form letter" emails from groups of cyclists, the majority of whom are not Carlsbad residents,do not reflect the community which appears to be mostly in opposition to this roundabout. I appreciated Commissioner Garcia's concerns at the previous meeting on this issue. I hope that no oneis pressuring her (and thus violating the Brown Act) to approve the roundabout. I appreciatedCommissioner Proulx, Commissioner Kohl, and Commissioner Newlands, who listened to the communityand understood the very real issues. Again, please say NO to this roundabout at this intersection. Our voting family of 4 opposes this roundabout. Thank you. Diane BedrosianD2 resident of 31 years CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Tom Steele To:Traffic Subject:Agenda item #2 Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 9:37:47 AM Please seriously reconsider construction of a roundabout on the boulevard at Tamarack. It is not the appropriate solution for such a busy and important intersection. I believe it will create more congestion and end up being moredangerous especially for cyclists and pedestrians.Sent from my iPhoneCAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Deirdre Cosby To:Traffic Subject:Agenda item #2 Meeting May 1 2023 Re: Tamarak roundabout proposal Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 12:21:42 PM Attachments:Item #2 Traffic and Mobility Commission.pdf Good afternoon, I am attaching and pasting into the body of this email as comments for the record to be evaluated by the Traffic and Mobility Commission on the subject of Item #2. Item #2 Traffic and Mobility Commission1 May 2023 Below is my opposition to the proposed extraneous, nonsensical “solution” to a not nearly as dangerous intersection as others in Carlsbad that costs residents heavily, offers minimal benefit to safety, and will certainly cause an increase in traffic and delays when traveling for all North County coastal travelers. My husband is a Carlsbad High School ‘89 graduate and we have lived in our current house off Tamarak and Adams for 9 years. We are a surfing family and travel up and down Tamarak and 101 multiple times A DAY all year long. When considering input - mostly opposition - from residents, I hope you can define what the actual GOAL is of slowing down the traffic at Tamarack and Coast Hwy besides the catch all word of “safety”. From my journal publication research on the subject, papers exist in support of roundabouts but the majority have been written about a small number of lanes in minimally traveled areas that have a high fatality rate associated with elevated speed - with the object of the roundabout being to slow traffic down. These articles indicate that the roundabout may result in less fatalities, but that wrecks and injuries to people and property are more prevalent. Key takeaways: roundabouts placed in minimally traveled roads with high fatality rates due to speed. Does the Tamarak and Coast Hwy intersection match most of what was studied? No. So conclusions that a roundabout would help are by extrapolation only from the literature available which is not comparable to our situation. Changing a well-operated, heavily traveled intersection into a roundabout to slow traffic down needs to be evaluated IN CONTEXT of the needs of the community who use the intersection - we need to look at the cost to benefit ratio. You are hearing from citizens to help decide how much of a benefit it would be to us - residents that actually use the roads regularly. And then weigh this against the cost - both figuratively and literally - for the taxpayer/residents. If I’m interpreting this proposal correctly then a roundabout is the suggested solution to speed related road fatality problem at this intersection. Roundabouts slow high speed traffic in order to reduce fatal traffic accidents which happen from speed. By this proposed solution, I would assume that the problem we are solving is that the Tamarak-Coast Hwy intersection is the most fatal to travelers both vehicular and non, hence why drastic configuration measures need to be taken to reduce speed. Is this true? Are the statistics of fatalities at this intersection consistent with the “problem” we are seeking solutions for? If the object for this commission is to prevent fatalities at this intersection via slowing speed - is the construction of a new roundabout the only solution? No it is not. Are any other proven measures available to us to prevent accidents while still keeping traffic running smoothly for cars, buses, bikes, skaters, and pedestrians? Yes - a few examples are: speed checks, DUI checkpoints, police presence, public education about traffic rules, and police-community engagement. Police and policing the roads SAVES LIVES and deters would-be law breakers….which, in turn, reduces speeding AND and reduces traffic wrecks and injuries (remember roundabouts have little to no evidence of lowering accidents or injuries…only fatalities from speed). How does enforcing current traffic laws work in our analysis of cost to benefit ratio in comparison to adding a roundabout at Tamarak and Coast Hwy? Let’s look further: the cost of a roundabout is substantial, essentially permanent, slows/stops traffic, creates confusion to drivers/riders/walkers not used to the concept, and is at the opposition of the majority of residents. The cost - benefit ratio appears to be not in favor of it’s construction. The benefit looks good on paper but the reality is that there are less fatalities at this already slow intersection that is notoriously safer than many other intersections in our town. If traffic and citizen safety is this council’s prerogative, then increasing police efforts to enforce current traffic laws will save lives and injuries. Putting our money to work in living, breathing officers of the law will make it safer all year round and throughout the community. This is a major benefit on many levels. We all know about the rise in crime here - fatal stabbing at Hosp, smash and grabs at our mall, massive thefts at local stores, massive petty theft, catalytic converter theft when a resident was filling her prescription at Rite Aid, increase in drug addicted/mentally challenged people on the streets, citizen altercations with criminals on the rail trail, railroad crossing deaths, and even wrecks and deaths in our sleepy four way stop sign intersections near Carlsbad High/Magnolia Elementary/Valley Middle School. We are living in an era where laundry detergent is behind locked cabinets at Walmart because of rampant criminal activity. The laws are there but what good are they if not enforced and if our police do not have a strong presence in our community? Adding officer support not only assists us with safety at this intersection, but all intersections and throughout our ENTIRE community 365 days per year. This fact is obviously more of a benefit than a cost. Instead of using taxpayer funds to restructure a non-problematic intersection – which I’m sure includes some lucky contractor’s overpriced landscape and art “beautifying” line item expense– - THE BEST USE of our money? Everyone knows how to use a crosswalk. NO ONE knows how to use a roundabout. This is clear by watching people at the Cbad/Oside loop - which has much less vehicle, foot and bike traffic, less lanes funneling into it. We aren’t Europe. A roundabout here would bring unnecessary havoc. The intersection in question is vital to traffic flow throughout North County and slowing it down works against residents and visitors by causing back up, confusion, and congestion. Speaking of congestion, has the projected emissions and surrounding air quality impact been addressed? Slowing and stopping traffic leads to idling cars and stagnant pollutants. This is not good for pedestrians walking, people dining at open air restaurants or enjoying the beach. I have yet to hear the data for this. Safety data should include perspectives from pedestrians, E-bikers, joggers, cyclists, wheelchair using and sight impaired/blind individuals. This assessment should also include scenarios where if there is an accident in the loop or even an emergency at the beach causing gridlock - THE ENTIRE contraption FAILS. There is no easy way of turning around or re-routing out of this size of a roundabout. What is the plan here? How do emergency vehicles access the injured and clear a wreck? Does everyone go in reverse? In conclusion - citizens want safety and applaud our city leaders investigations into helping BUT pouring our money into a minimally problematic intersection is not the answer. The cost-benefit ratio fails to benefit us. Just in the last few months we’ve had more deaths in Carlsbad on the train tracks and in 25mph zones by our schools than at that particular intersection. How about we look at the reality of our city’s needs and not some glorified fantasy that a roundabout at Tamarak would make our community safer. Enforce current laws, host community education forums, social media campaigns, and employ officers to hold drivers, riders, and pedestrians accountable. Thank you for hearing out residents who use that intersection regularly. Hopefully we are all provided with the evidence we need to make a thoughtful decision. Deirdre Cosby -- Deirdre Cosby DVM CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Christine Smoczynski To:Traffic Subject:Agenda Item #2 Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 9:47:44 AM No Roundabout, please! The current roundabout at State Street and Carlsbad Blvd has the highest collision rate of any intersection in the city! Putting one at a busy intersection like Tamarack is sheer madness! Congestion is already a problem! Can’t even imagine what it would be like with a roundabout! The other options look like a much better solution. Chris Smoczynski Carlsbad resident for 24 yrs. Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:RANDY LAINE To:Traffic Cc:Melanie Burkholder; Keith Blackburn Subject:Agenda Item 2 - Tamarack Coast Hwy. Intersection Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 10:33:40 AM Carlsbad City Council Members, We are City Carlsbad Residents since 1969 and own two Properties here. Please say NO to Agenda Item #2, the Proposed harmful changes to Tamarack & Coast Intersection [adding expensive & dangerous roundabout traffic circle] The City and County Traffic needs and facts DO NOT SUPPORT changing the Tamarack intersection/ Coast Hwy. to a dangerous Roundabout. Please DO NOT ever build a 'Roundabout' on any main City streets. Traffic Roundabouts at intersections are harmful and negative to the city, causing: confused drivers, increased accidents, more Bike injuries, bog down traffic flow all directions, and harm Tourism. State of California is already driving business's and Tourists away by forcing failed traffic policies on unsuspecting Cities. Just say NO to all: Roundabouts, removal of traffic lanes, 'road diets', and other destructive ideas. Thank you. Respectfully, Randy Laine 1060 HOOVER ST. CARLSBAD, CA 92008 C - 760-908-3379 O - 760-729-6569 F - 760-729-7647 From:Amber Brewer To:Keith Blackburn; Melanie Burkholder; Traffic Subject:Agenda Item#2 Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 5:34:29 AM Hello Good Morning, I am not in favor of the roundabout proposal for Tamarack Avenue and Carlsbad Blvd. Thatsection of Carlsbad has way too much traffic (cars, pedestrians and bicycles) in the Summer Months and almost any afternoon or sunny day. In my opinion there is not enough space for aroundabout to work properly at Tamarack Avenue and Carlsbad Blvd. Warm Regards, Amber Brewer 385 Walnut Ave, Carlsbad, CA 92008 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Lenny Anita Pupping To:Traffic; keith.blackburn@carlsbad.gov; melanie.burkholder@carlsbad.gov Subject:Fwd: Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. Intersection Comment Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 10:21:16 AM Mayor, Council and Traffic Commissioners: We continue to strongly disagree with the proposed roundabout on Tamarack Ave. and along Carlsbad Blvd. Please see previous email below and consider the impacts on our community. Thank you, Anita and Lenny Pupping Begin forwarded message: From: Pupping <puppingfamily@gmail.com>Date: February 4, 2023 at 2:19:04 AM GMT+1To: traffic@carlsbadca.govSubject: Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. Intersection Comment City of Carlsbad Mayor, Council and City Staff: We strongly disagree with approving any roundabouts on Carlsbad Blvd. Removing lanes provides a disservice to the community as a whole. Our beachesshould be accessible for all and not just those that live close enough to walk or bike. The design will not only further impact drivers but also impact emergencyresponse. Why should cyclist have precedence over drivers on the roadway when realistically there are more vehicle commuters. It is more dangerous tohave cyclist move into a busy single sharrow lane and through the roundabout with vehicles than it is to keep separate. As a driver of a vehicle and cyclist, I feelmore in danger with Option 2. If you must improve the intersection, go with Option 1. Thank you, Anita and Lenny Pupping CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Jim To:Traffic Subject:Fw: Carlsbad/Tamarack intersection improvement comments Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 10:02:28 AM Hello Carlsbad Traffic People, I emailed you back in February regarding the proposed improvements to thisintersection (copy is shown below). My opinion on this matter has not changed andI'd like to reassert for the record that I still think that a traffic circle in this location is avery bad idea. If you thought the ebike emergency was bad recently, wait until theseunlicensed electrical scofflaws can whoosh through an unregulated circle withimpunity. Not to mention the cycling gangs that will descend to abduct the entirecircle for their very own. I fear for the lives of the lowly pedestrians. Let's continue tomaintain good mechanical regulation of traffic flow at this intersection and notabandon it to mob rule. Thank you, Jim Harte Carlsbad, CA -----Forwarded Message-----From: Jim <jimmmy@earthlink.net> Sent: Feb 4, 2023 7:31 PMTo: <traffic@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Carlsbad/Tamarack intersection improvement comments Without spending a lot of time criticizing the minutiae of these proposals, I think atraffic circle is a really bad idea for this location. Although the improved aestheticsare alluring, I think it would make this intersection a nightmare in summer. Consider that no one, not pedestrian, not cyclist, not driver will be constrained byanything other than their own sense of giving right-of-way where right-of-way maybe due. I think we're talking anarchy here. In my opinion, it will make what isalready what can be a difficult intersection to navigate much worse. Jim Harte,1716 Cannas Ct., Carlsbad CA 92011 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Paulette DePaulo To:Traffic Cc:Melanie Burkholder; Keith Blackburn Subject:Item Agenda #2 - Tamarack Roundabout Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 10:50:54 AM Hi, We are long time Carlsbad residents (on Acacia west of Garfield) with family living on Maple since the 1970s andLincoln (around the Gage House). We are writing to express our strong opposition to a roundabout on Tamarack. Itappears that a majority of the proponents for the roundabout are not local residents, and therefore wouldn’t beeffected by the constant unrelenting traffic it would bring to the area. Tamarack is a high congestion intersection. Permitting a roundabout would take away the break in traffic that is needed on Carlsbad Blvd to permit throughtraffic from any of the adjacent streets. Without a light, you are pushing through traffic to Garfield and through thesuburbs of the village - exactly what the City should AVOID! Please consider the amount of incidents already involved at the State St. roundabout, the constant congestion thatwould occur on Carlsbad Blvd., and the impact it would have on the local residents, being unable to cross ontoCarlsbad Blvd. We are vehemently OPPOSED to a roundabout on Tamarack. We hope that you seek to do the right thing for the local community, and oppose the same. Best,Audney and Paulette DePaulo(619) 318-7817 Sent from my iPhone so please forgive any typosCAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Joyleen Tropel To:Traffic Cc:keith.blakburn@carlsbadca.gov; melanie.burkholder@carlsbadca.go Subject:Fwd: Traffic & Mobility Commission - Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd. (Agenda item #2) Date:Sunday, April 30, 2023 11:28:05 PM Hello, It seems that lobbyists are trying to take over our city. Come on Carlsbad! I am begging ourlocal traffic commission and city council to stand by your residents and reject special interests and the power of greed. Don’t be fooled! I voted for both of the active district 1 member andmayor and I hope you will reject this pressure to put an unsafe and unwanted traffic circle/round about at the Tamarack/Carlsbad Blvd intersection. Stop wasting our city moneydiscussing this issue. We will not get tired of advocating for ourselves and our city. I would like to personally and sincerely request that NO traffic circle be built at the intersection of Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd. I own and live in a home at Chinquapin and Jefferson. I am raising my young family right herein this neighborhood where decisions like this matter a great deal for us. For us we walk at this intersection multiple times a week and drive through it almost daily. Please no traffic circle! While I have seen traffic circles work in different parts of the world (I used to live in the United Kingdom), here in North County San Diego and Carlsbad specifically I haveexperienced them to be consistently dangerous and inefficient because people don’t know how to properly use them. No one here in Carlsbad can guarantee that this will be safe or moreefficient than a traditional intersection. Anyone who seems to argue otherwise doesn’t sincerely drive in this area. I can only recollect maybe one time when I drove through thenorthern city traffic circle without concern. People seem to think it’s a 3-way stop and not a traffic circle. Just by using the traffic circle north of the city, a person can easily tell thatpeople don’t know what they are doing (not acknowledging who has the right of way, varying/dangerous speeds - too fast & too slow, no courtesy use of blinkers). I am so fearfulthat the amount of traffic (walkers, bicyclists, and motorists) is a perfect storm for a tragic accident. In fact I hear that the northern traffic circle has the most critical accidents of all theintersections in our city. Now that’s a very serious data point that should be investigated and considered. The people involved in this future accident due to the unnecessary addition of atraffic circle might be me, my husband, or children. While traffic circles may generally/statistically help vehicle flow, it doesn’t help when people are very unfamiliar anddon’t know how to use them. A traffic circle is not a good choice for the Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd intersection with a large amount of pedestrians (residents and visitors) andthose just passing through our beautiful city. I am asking, begging, pleading that the Traffic Commission and ultimately the City of Carlsbad and its residents choose to NOT place a traffic circle at Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd. Sincerely,Joyleen Maravilla Concerned Carlsbad Resident-- Joyleen T. Maravilla CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and From:LoLo D To:Traffic Subject:Traffic and Mobility Commission Hearing - 01May2023 - Agenda Item No. 2 Date:Sunday, April 30, 2023 8:19:33 PM Hello, I am writing to voice my strong opposition to a roundabout at the intersection of CarlsbadBoulevard and Tamarack Avenue. As an avid cyclist and a resident of Carlsbad, I ride and drive through this area frequently. While roundabouts are often beneficial in many situations,a roundabout here is NOT the answer. The answer to calming traffic and getting people out of their cars is to provide easy, viable alternatives to driving. A roundabout will make driving inthe area frustrating and distasteful, it will not improve safety for anyone, and in the long run, will dissuade visitors from coming to our fine city instead of encouraging them. I reviewed the proposed designs and below are my comments on each. Current DesignI find the current setup works well, except for the narrow bridge walkway and bus stop location. Pedestrians and runners often travel north in the southbound bike lane because thesidewalk is too small. This forces cyclists into the traffic lane. Typically, this does not present a problem because any cars in the No. 2 lane adjacent to the bike lane can move left to the No.1 traffic lane. It's definitely more dicey in the warmer months due to the significantly increased amount of traffic and pedestrians, and reducing car travel lanes to one will notablyincrease the danger. Right turn from southbound Carlsbad Boulevard to the beach parking lot: The current design is good. It requires cars to merge into the bike lane before turningright, and therefore, lowers the risk of a cyclist getting "right hooked." The car is never turning across the bike lane. Proposed Designs I see all proposed designs include widening the pedestrian walkway over the bridge andmoving the bus stop. Excellent! Two improvements that should be done no matter what. Proposal with 3 or 4 Traffic Lanes This proposal is best because it provides the most space for the expected traffic levels whilestill including the bike lane. As with the current setup, if cyclists have to move into the traffic lane for any reason, the cars can move to the No. 1 lane to pass. This keeps traffic movingsafely. Right turn from southbound Carlsbad Boulevard to the beach parking lot: The rendering depicts a HORRIBLE design of the right turn from southbound CarlsbadBoulevard to the beach parking lot. The rendering shows the bike lane continuing on the right side of the traffic lane through the intersection encouraging cars to turn across thebike lane rather than merging into the bike lane and then turning. I understand this design is used on many streets, however, in situations where there is a high volume ofright turners, there is a turn lane to the right of the bike lane. When there is not a dedicated right turn lane, cars are supposed to merge into the bike lane before turning.Sadly, that happens only about 50% of the time. Drivers see that green paint and get all flustered, not to mention tourist drivers rarely are focused on the road. A better movewould be to leave as is or create a dedicated right turn lane to the right of the bike lane. Don't set us up for the right hook. Please! Northbound Bus Stop:This, too, is a poor design. By having the bus stop on the south side of Tamarack, after a bus is done discharging or taking on passengers, it will move left into the bike lane andtraffic lane as it approaches the intersection. If the light going northbound is red, the bus will block all traffic from turning right, and will force all cyclists into the No.2 trafficlane. The stop should be located on the north side of Tamarack to avoid these issues. Traffic Circle with 1 Traffic LaneThis is the worst design of all. It will not increase safety and it will gridlock travel for miles. The Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack intersection has a high volume of pedestrian trafficcrossing Carlsbad Boulevard every day. In the warmer months - 6-8 months of the year - that triples. If pedestrians are not controlled by a lighted crossing, they will flow across non-stop.Wait times for cars to get through the intersection will increase significantly. No sooner will one car be able to squeak through and there will be another pedestrian stopping traffic. Peopledrive to the beach. People want to see and experience the coastline, and until you make it easy to get to the beach without a car, traffic will not decrease. In addition to gridlocking the carsand adding pollution to the air, the reduction to one traffic lane pinches cyclists into the traffic lane with little to no room to merge. The drivers will be angry at being squeezed to one lane,and the many that believe cyclists asked for this will take out their anger on us. We didn't ask for this and we should not be the target of 4,000 lb vehicles. Bus Stops:According to the rendering, the bus stops are very close to the traffic circles. WIth the high volume of cars that will likely pass through here, especially on warm weatherweekends, buses attempting to merge back into traffic will create increased danger to both cars and cyclists. Buses focused on finding a gap between cars will be less likely tosee cyclists coming up in the bike lane. I recognize the goal is to slow traffic to improve the coastal experience for all. Also, I believe you hope to reduce traffic as well. Slowing traffic can easily be achieved by setting up strongand visible speed enforcement. Once drivers know exceeding the speed limit means a ticket, they will be more compliant. As for not using a car to get to the beach, that will happen onlywhen there are viable, easy alternatives. For instance, hardly anyone actually bikes to the beach to spend the day. They cannot carry their gear, and if they can, there is no place tosafely park/lock their bike while they soak up the sun. Why not build a secure guarded bike corral and charge $1.00 per bike to park for the day? I ride for sport and exercise but willnever run errands or go to a restaurant using my bike because there is no place to safely park it. Seriously. Why risk a huge financial loss so city planners can feel good about themselves? Another alternative would be to set up remote parking lots and implement small energyefficient (LPG/natural gas/electric) buses to transport people to the coast. For example, there are tons of unused corporate parking lots up the hill, some even owned by the City ofCarlsbad. People could be permitted to park there for free and then pay $1.00 to ride the little bus down to the beach. Provided the buses come frequently (every 10-15 min, no longer), Iwould much rather park and ride than have to deal with the parking "cluster" at the coast. Third, subsidize travel on the Coaster between Encinitas and Oceanside. I live fairly close to the Poinsettia station and thought it would be a great idea to take the Coaster up to CarlsbadVillage to avoid the traffic and parking hassle. Did you know it is $5.00 EACH way? $10.00 just for me. Add $10.00 for my friend and we could valet park in the Village with money leftover! Same if I travel to Encinitas or Oceanside. Why would I ever give up the convenience of my car if it is going to cost $20, or more? (Add a friend, add $10.) I hope you seriously consider the input from cyclists, residents, and other road users beforeyou implement this plan. (Unlike Encinitas.) There are ways to improve the coastal experience, however, your preferred designs do not work in this location. Regards,Lorraine Daly, 92011 -- "Failure is often just as illuminating as success" CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Robert Melton To:Traffic Subject:Roundabout at Tamarack Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 9:07:36 AM There are times when, as a long time resident of Carlsbad, that I want my voice and concerns heard loud and clear. The proposed roundabout at the intersection of Tamarack and the coast road is a gigantic mistake. In my previous post, I cited the fact that the car lane, the bike lane and the buffer will winnow down to one lane. This is a dangerous situation in itself, but add the fact that it is a busy crossing street for folks (visitors and residents )waiting to cross to and from the beach with hands full of items and anxious children in tow. It paints a very dangerous picture. Upmost in each and every council members mind should be that Carlsbad is a FAMILY town. Our loyalties should be first and foremost for the families and residents who enjoy and expect a safe way of crossing from one side of the coast road to the other. I’m not quite sure where or when the priority for bike lanes came to be, but it has consumed the rational thinking of the council. This roundabout is an extremely dangerous idea, not only for pedestrians, but also bike riders. The Tamarack intersection is NO place for a roundabout. Please give this your utmost consideration to find a safer plan for the city of Carlsbad and its residents. Sincerely, Joanne Melton Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Gregg Ferry To:Traffic Subject:Traffic Circle at Tamarack Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 6:41:54 AM Lectori Salutem As the proposals stand, they are bad for cyclists. Little foresight is needed to see that there will be more bicycle involved accidents. I regret, truly regret, that I cannot come up with a better solution than what exists today. -- Gregg Ferry 3344 Appian RdCarlsbad CA 92010 (805) 743-3779 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Kathleen Schmid-yancey To:Traffic Subject:Traffic Roundabouts are the safest for all of us. Date:Sunday, April 30, 2023 11:02:11 PM Dear Commissioners, My name is Kathleen Yancey and I am resident of Carlsbad.I'm writing to voice my enthusiastic support for a roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. Roundabouts are proven to reduce serious or fatal crashes by up to eighty percent. Traffic safety is an emergency in Carlsbad, and we have no excuse not to choose the safest option. Moreover, this option creates more space for wide sidewalks and bike lanes, which will make this section of the Carlsbad coast a welcoming space for everyone, rather than just a throughway for high-speed traffic. I strongly encourage the Traffic and Mobility Commission to support this option. Sincerely, Kathleen Yancey CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Circulate San Diego 233 A Street, Suite 206 San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 544-9255 @CirculateSD www.circulatesd.org Creating excellent mobility choices and vibrant, healthy neighborhoods. May 1, 2023 Traffic & Mobility Commission City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008. RE: Support for Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvements, Capital Improvement Program Project No. 6058 Dear Members of the City of Carlsbad Traffic & Mobility Commission, On behalf of Circulate San Diego, whose mission is to create excellent mobility choices and vibrant, healthy neighborhoods, we are writing to express our support for Carlsbad’s improvements to the Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue intersection. We understand that the option to use roundabouts will help facilitate mobility for residents and visitors wishing to walk or ride a bike in safer conditions as a result of reduced vehicle traveling speeds. We are supportive of the project including curb extensions, enhanced pedestrian crossings, and raised crosswalks, to create safer conditions for all ages and abilities using these roads, and to encourage more multi-modal transportation. We understand that this facility is intended to enhance coastal access, improve walking and biking infrastructure, and improve traffic flow along Carlsbad’s busy coastline, while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. As a nonprofit dedicated to supporting multi-modal transportation infrastructures and complete neighborhoods, we think this project will bring increased opportunities for Carlsbad’s residents to walk and bike, and to fully enjoy the beach and surrounding amenities. Thank you for your consideration of this important community project. Sincerely, Jesse O’Sullivan Policy Counsel Circulate San Diego From:Sammy DeMatteo To:Traffic Subject:Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvements Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 12:07:58 PM Hello, Submitting an email in support of the roundabout option for the Carlsbad Boulevard andTamarack Avenue Intersection Improvements. This will ease traffic flow and provide a greater degree of safety for bicyclists, motorcyclists,and vehicle drivers. thank you,Sam CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Melissa Peterson To:Traffic Subject:Tamarack Roundabout Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 11:40:18 AM As residents of Carlsbad we are totally in favor of putting a roundabout at Tamarack Avenue and the Pacific Coast Highway. It would make the intersection safer and more environmentally friendly by slowing traffic down and engine emissions. It would also make the intersection more aesthetically more pleasing. We support the change. Melissa and Kim Peterson Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Barbara Diamond To:Traffic Subject:roundabout Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 7:50:29 AM A roundabout located at Tamarack and Coast highway is an excellent planfor many reasons which have been elaborated on various occasions. I wantto add my support to this endeavor as a 24 year resident in the area. Inaddition to the safety and environmental considerations, it would potentiallyadd to the beauty of the area with new infrastructure and possibilities fordisplaying meaningful art sculptures similar to the one located north byState Street.Barbara Diamond3808 Skyline Rd, Carlsbad, CA 92008 -- ~Barbara Diamond~ CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Jill Cooper To:Traffic Subject:Carlsbad Blvd needs a roundabout! Date:Sunday, April 30, 2023 10:25:53 PM To the Traffic Commission: Please vote for the safest traffic plan: a roundabout at Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack. The Cityof Carlsbad website describes the many advantages of roundabouts in "Understanding Roundabouts," so I won't repeat them in detail here. What is needed now is the courage to stand up for what you know is the right design for theintersection. Many people resist change, positive that it isn't needed or will be harmful. You know that roundabouts are safer for all roadway users, including motorists, bicyclists, andpedestrians. You know that they reduce car emissions which are known to speed climate change. You know that travelers move through the intersection and nearby streets moreefficiently. You will have to listen to unpleasant, change-resistant people at your meeting, yet continue to support and ultimately vote for what you know is the best plan for Carlsbad: aroundabout. Do not let a tiny percentage of grumpy people at a couple of meetings influence how you vote. You are the experts, and you must do what is best for the city. Please vote for the roundaboutdesign. Sincerely, Jill Cooper (a frequent visitor to Carlsbad and BikeWalkSolana member)1019 San Patricio Drive Solana Beach CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Paige DeCino To:Traffic Subject:May 1 meeting, Item 2 Date:Sunday, April 30, 2023 7:26:55 PM Attachments:Outlook-bck5r51i.png Dear members of the Traffic and Mobility Commission, Today you vote on the proposed roundabout at Tamarack and Coast Highway. This is anexcellent plan to slow traffic and yet keep it flowing as the roundabout at the north end ofthe city does. In addition, it will help with bike and pedestrian safety which is a constantworry along our southern coast. I hope you agree with the staff's recommendation tomove forward with the roundabout. Thank you. Paige DeCino CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Judy Frankel To:Traffic Subject:Roundabout on behalf of BIKEWALK CARLSBAD Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 11:42:11 AM For Traffic Commission meeting please add to package On behalf of BikeWalk Carlsbad I’m writing again in support of option 2 for a roundabout at the Tamarack intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. We have come in person many times to support of this option. We see the same concern whenever roundabouts have been considered and always it is seen as a positive after the fact where they have been implemented. Roundabouts are 90% safer than signalized intersections for all users. Accidents can happen if any user does not follow the law or the right of way when using any facility but real studies show that crashes are much more likely in a signaled intersection than in a roundabout at lower speeds and with more attention being given. The roundabout allows for all traffic to keep moving and although speeds are slower and therefore safer, the throughput for all traffic is the same or better as it can keep moving without waiting for signals and being backed up at lights. Crossing for all pedestrians is safer as motorists are moving slower with more attention and not blowing through lights. As a runner I have often crossed at Tamarack where I have had to stop traffic when pushing the beg button and have almost been hit by motorists making a right turn across the crosswalk without waiting for pedestrians. With a roundabout pedestrian have motorists only coming from one direction and are only crossing half way at a time and are not stopping the flow of the roadway. Pedestrians, runners, children and dog walkers will greatly benefit from the wider sidewalks of this option and there will be less overflow into the street to pass. The roundabout at State street and Carlsbad Blvd was a huge improvement for bike and pedestrian safety. Cars coming off of state street were a huge safety issue for north bound cyclists in the past. There has been push back on roundabouts with users being unfamiliar with them, but after they go in the communities are extremely happy with the results. La Jolla is a great example of this. We hope Carlsbad will continue the use of roundabouts to keep traffic moving safely through the corridor. We’d like to see the coast become a beautiful space for all users and not just cars speeding through town.. Thank you Judy Frankel BikeWalk Carlsbad From:Karl Rudnick To:Traffic Subject:Supporting Roundabout at Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd Date:Sunday, April 30, 2023 10:05:02 PM Dear Carlsbad Traffic Commission I strongly support your roundabout option for improving the intersection of Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd. As a Solana Beach resident who regularly drives and bicycles our North County coast throughthis intersection, the primary benefit is improved safety for everyone who uses the road: motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians, and others. The safety improvements are well known byreducing the number of conflict points at a roundabout intersection, making the most injurious head-on and T-bone collisions between a motor vehicle and others virtually impossible. Theaccommodation for pedestrians in a modern roundabout shortens the distance a pedestrian is in conflict; furthermore, they only need to look for conflicts in one direction as they proceedto/from the pedestrian refuge in the splitter vane halfway. These safety improvements are important for your Vision Zero aspirations. Speeds will be reduced to a moderate 15-20 mph: slower speeds through the intersection againmake it safer for all. Average travel times through a single roundabout will shorten trips and eliminate waiting at traffic signals, where idling vehicles only add to pollution and noise, notto mention the aggravation of having to sit at a light. As a League of American Bicyclists certified cycling instructor, we teach that proceeding through a traffic calmed roundabout intersection is safest when fully integrating with vehicletraffic through the roundabout. The addition of sharrows per the CA MUTCD emphasizes that choice for cyclists who wish to make most efficient use through the intersection. Yet thedesign with the wide surrounding walkways with ramps from a bike lane provide the other option we teach to safely navigate through the roundabout for those who either aren'tconfident to use the road, are less concerned about time, or who may be riding with children. Please heed your experts on Staff who have carefully addressed previous concerns in their most recent report how the roundabout option will work to improve safety for all road users. Itis common for the general public who may not be familiar with modern roundabouts whose plans are often met with skepticism due to misinformation and hearsay. This may leadcommunity leaders to make poor decisions in order to placate vocal opposition by inadequately informed residents. Finally, your artist rendition for the proposed modern roundabout shows how you can createnot only a functional safety and efficiency improvement but beautify an otherwise utilitarian road intersection. This will be a wonderful place to drive, bicycle and walk, a model for otherintersections along our North County Coast. Karl Rudnick 1019 San Patricio Dr, Solana BeachBikeWalkSolana member, advising the CIty of Solana Beach for bicyclists & pedestrians League of American Bicyclists Cycling Instructor #3481North County Cycle Club Ride Leader From:Eric Zielke To:Traffic Subject:Tamarack Ave/ Carlsbad Blvd. Intersection Improvements Date:Sunday, April 30, 2023 6:15:49 PM Dear Sir or Madam, As a local resident who has lived in the Carlsbad Village for over 6-yrs, an avid bicyclist and surfer within the area, and father who loves to take my family (wife and two little kids) down to the Tamarack beach area, I am in 100% support of the roundabout option for this project. Reasons being are as follows: - vehicular traffic will be slowed down to a point that will feel more comfortable as a bicyclist and pedestrian (e.g., when I take my family down to the beach via bicycling and/ or wagon w/ beach toys). - more/ safer space will be provided to bicyclists and pedestrians - provides more “equitable” access to the beach for beachgoers who cannot afford the State parking lot - the “crossing space” is reduced and thus safer for pedestrians compared to a signalized intersection - the dropping to a single lane will allow for wider bicycle and pedestrian space at the bridge (as shown with the roundabout option) - the “traffic concern” that other residents have is only temporary and during “peak hours” and the majority of the time will actually be less congested than a signalized intersection (i.e., the roundabout option will actually be much less of a contributor of greenhouse gases (GHG) compared to a signalized intersection which will cause idling vehicles/ increased GHG emissions 24/7) - the roundabout will be designed to accommodate emergency vehicles - the roundabout is “modern” and will be designed using the latest and greatest design standards and methods. - it will be much more aesthetically pleasing than a traffic signal. The list could go on and on as to why I feel a roundabout option can work tremendously well at this intersection. Again, I am a resident and local who frequents this intersection on a daily basis (and live only about ~1mi away) and support the roundabout option. Local resident, Eric CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Kathy Parker To:Traffic Subject:Roundabout Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 7:27:32 AM Good idea! Do it! Kathy Parker, Carlsbad resident for 47 years... CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Joan LeBlanc To:Traffic Subject:Item2 Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 12:46:49 PM I live near the State St roundabout and appreciate the safety of that intersection design as apedestrian or motorist compared to a traffic light For those and other reasons I am strongly in favor of the roundabout option at TamarackJoan LeBlanc District 1 Resident Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:christina mcgoldrick To:Traffic; Nathan Schmidt Cc:Tom Frank; John Kim; Miriam Jim; Eliane Paiva; Lindy Pham; Eric Lardy; Carolyn Luna; Christie Calderwood; Alonso DeVelasco; christina mcgoldrick Subject:05/01/23 - Resident Support for Agenda Item #2 - Roundabout at Tamarack & Carlsbad Village Drive - Traffic &Mobility Commission Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 6:13:33 PM Dear Traffic & Mobility Commissioners, My name is Christina McGoldrick. I have been a homeowner, resident and taxpayer in Carlsbad for 8 years. My 3 sons attend Carlsbad public schools. Thank you all for serving on the Commission. Also, thank you to all of the staff for their hard work on the presentation, professional expertise and years of experience. Many residents do support roundabouts in Carlsbad, including the Tamarack and Carlsbad Village Drive intersection. This change is necessary because there has been a significant increase in speeding tickets, DUIs and fatalities in the past decade. Publicly available data from insurance companies and law offices show that San Diego County has some of the highest DUI rates in the nation, including at one time being 60% over the national average. Many residents prefer motorists colliding with a roundabout instead of another vehicle or individual. Carlsbad is no longer a small town. The population is over 115,000, we have 3rd generation Carlsbadians, and the city continues to grow. This is evidence that we are a community for all ages. People want to live here, raise their families here, vacation here, and retire here. We need to have a growth mindset and plan for the future. In the perspective of the 3 E’s in the Safer Streets Program: Education - The DMV has failed to provide life-long drivers with continuing education on the rules of the road as the laws change annually. Many drivers are operating from a mental motorist manual that is decades old and don’t get enough information from the annual January press release announcing new laws or how they apply when using public roads. As part of the ongoing EBike State of Emergency, the City has heroically taken on the task of Education and it has significantly helped the community. Enforcement - Based on their workload, response times, and relationship with the community, our police officers provide excellent customer service to the citizens, residents and tourists from around the world. It is unfair to place the majority of the burden on our police department, because we don’t have enough resources to realistically supervise and respond to the volume of people and their modes of transportation using the miles of public roads in Carlsbad. Engineering - These points underscore that today, Engineering is the best option for creating safer streets because the design of the street can keep things moving without congestion, include features that allow residents to get home safely, enhance access to businesses, reduce traffic noise, and beautify the streetscape. The engineering of the streets is the foundation that directly supports the success of education and enforcement. I am asking all Commissioners to support this roundabout, because 10 years from now we don’t want to look back and see a missed opportunity with a continued increase in tickets, DUIs and fatalities. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely,Christina McGoldrick Resident, District 2, CarlsbadProud Mom of 3 boys in 5th CHE, 7th CHMS and 9th SCHS(949) 433-4397 (cel) christina.mcgoldrick@gmail.com CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Jen Strawser To:Traffic Subject:Roundabout - Cbad Blvd & Tamarack Ave. Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 3:53:13 PM Dear Commissioners, My name is Jen Strawser and I frequently commute through the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack Ave. I'm writing to voice my enthusiastic support for a roundabout at the intersection of CarlsbadBlvd. and Tamarack Ave. Roundabouts are proven to reduce serious or fatal crashes by up to eighty percent. Traffic safety is an emergency in Carlsbad, and we have no excuse not tochoose the safest option. Moreover, this option creates more space for wide sidewalks and bike lanes, which will make this section of the Carlsbad coast a welcoming space for everyone, rather than just athroughway for high-speed traffic. I strongly encourage the Traffic and Mobility Commission to support this option. Sincerely, Jen CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Loren Chaffin To:Traffic Cc:Polly Williams Subject:Roundabout at Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 4:14:46 PM I’m firmly against the proposed roundabout. A roundabout by design is slow. Carlsbad Blvd is used as an alternative route when I5 is stopped. The increase in a snail’s pace procession of cars driving closer together during these times will: increase commute times, increase the number of fender benders, and thereby increase the production greenhouse gases because the traffic is there for a longer time. A roundabout has higher maintenance costs, and takes up more space. Alternative pathways will need to be constructed to take care of pedestrian traffic thereby raising the cost of construction. The proposed intersection is used heavily by pedestrians further slowing vehicle traffic. In addition to the inherent danger of cars looking more left than right, exit accidents will increase. The sight impaired pedestrians won’t stand a chance of successfully crossing the street. Cyclists will suffer due to vehicular blind spots, looking more left than right, and an increase in car vs bike accidents will occur. Finally, roundabouts are not suitable for emergency vehicles. Carlsbad Blvd is a major thoroughfare for both fire trucks and police vehicles. The roundabout will further delay response times at best. A roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack is a bad idea. It will turn Carlsbad Blvd into a virtual parking lot, increase accidents and degrade the city’s emergency vehicle response times. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Loren Chaffin Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Marilyn Adams To:Traffic Subject:No RoundAbout on Tamarack Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 3:49:43 PM Dear Carlsbad Traffic and Mobility Commission, Please do not place a roundabout at Tamarack and the Coast Highway (Carlsbad Blvd.). This will cause accidents and major congestion to this area. I drive this span of road daily and on the weekends. During the week the traffic is lighter, but the weekends are like busy summer days. From previous studies with roundabouts & with the current ones in place there have been fatalities & more accidents compared to areas without roundabouts. Tamarack area is not a little English town square located on the country side. A roundabout will not work! Please consider an alternate plan for this area. A roundabout will ruin this area & traffic! Thank you, Marilyn Adams Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Paula Clowar To:Traffic Subject:Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd. Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 4:04:01 PM To whom it may concern, we are opposed to the "traffic circle ". There is a great deal of foot traffic at this location therefore the vehicle traffic would be a nightmare. It's not like you havepolite people like it was 30 years ago. I have lived here since 1972, enough changes already, leave it like it is.Best regards, Paula Clowar CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Leslie Williams To:Traffic Subject:Tamarack round about Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 3:33:59 PM You only have to look at the fiasco that was Sunday April 2 to realize that the proposed plan to turn the Carlsbad Blvd / Tamarack intersection into a round about is ill-conceived. With Tamarack blocked by a train accident and the Carlsbad 5000 blocking northbound traffic into the village, the coast highway with 2 lanes at a standstill had no leeway for an emergency vehicle. What happens if there is only one lane, as proposed? What happens when the inevitable accident happens in the traffic circle itself? What is the access for emergency vehicles then? What about the intersection at Garfield and Tamarack? What happens when that intersection is backed up because cars can’t go forward because of the constant flow of pedestrian traffic in the summer months? How will this traffic circle impact access to the neighborhood off Garfield south of Tamarack? There is basically one way in and out of our neighborhood. The traffic circle will, in effect, adversely affect the safety of our neighborhood. Public safety should be the number one concern. That concern should extend to the neighborhoods that will be impacted by the traffic circle. Garfield will be the default through street. Sounds like liability issues for the city. Sincerely. Leslie Williams 327 Date Ave 92008 Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Clark To:Traffic Subject:Future Roundabout Planning- Tamarak & CV Dr Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 4:08:13 PM We've been living in Carlsbad for many many years. To plan another Round About on Tamarack & CV Dr. would be a disaster. The (lagoon) bridge "to far" was a disaster- with the city NOT having an End Date with the Contractor. Thishas to be one of the busiest intersections in the city, for bike, pedestrian and vehicle traffic. To neck this down from two lanes to one, coupled with pedestrian traffic with the right of way,would be a traffic nightmare. The only reason the round about on the N end of the city works, is due to the lack of pedestrians crossing there. Has enyone sat at the intersection of Basswood and Highland when the high school lets out?There can be an unending number of kids walking across the street. Just imagine the number of people walking to the beach in the summer months. I am definately opposed to making this change to the intersection of Tamarak & CV Dr. Clark Clowar CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Jake Chaffin To:Traffic Cc:Melanie Burkholder; Keith Blackburn Subject:Agenda Item#2 Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 1:51:05 PM Hi Carlsbad City Council, I am a high school student and Pacific Ridge High School and was writing today to protest the roundabout that might be built on Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd. This roundabout is a horrible idea that would make Carlsbad Boulevard a more unsafe place. I am saying this because many traffic study firms have shown that a roundabout would create long traffic backups during peak hours, it would also create a constant stream of cars in most directions. This continuous stream of cars would make it unsafe to turn onto Carlsbad Blvd from side streets and would make it near impossible for people living on Carlsbad Blvd to back out of their driveways. I have specific knowledge about that since I am a resident living on Carlsbad Blvd and a recently new driver. During the time since I got my permit, I have learned firsthand how challenging it is to back out of our driveway during rush hours. During those times the only consistent time that you can back out of our driveway is when the light on Tamarack and Carlsbad blvd turns red to thru traffic. I have also recently learned that the current roundabout at State Street and Carlsbad Blvd has the highest collision rate of any intersection in the city. So with that in mind, a roundabout between Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack would be even more dangerous. They are also dangerous for cyclists and would add to the large number of cyclists hit in Carlsbad each year. The roundabout would also slow the emergency services due to the large traffic backups that a roundabout would create. So please don't let this roundabout happen, it just isn't the right thing to do. Thanks, Jake CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:coastalcasitas To:Traffic Cc:debra cruse Subject:Comments concerning the proposed Tamarack roundabout Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 1:39:51 PM Objections towards the Tamarack roundabout project: 1) Traffic backups With lane reductions and increased pedestrian usage, I can see traffic always being backedup forcing agitated drivers into alternate routes through residential neighborhoods, Drivers heading southbound will divert over to Garfield St and overwhelm the designedtraffic flow there. Drivers heading Northbound will divert (via the bike lane) onto Sequoia where they will encounter a blind left hand turn onto Garfield St. Both directionscreate a constant traffic jam at the Tamarack & Garfield intersection 2) Bicycle and pedestrian safety With so many access points with no pedestrian lights, it appears to be a real safety concern. Bicyclists heading northbound will be in a conflict zone at Sequoia and Tamarack. 3 With the addition of 89 residential units housing over 450 new residents at Tamarack and Jefferson (Pacific Wind Apts.), there will undoubtedly be a substantial pedestrian increase ath the subject roundabout. Please consider the plan B option of keeping 4 lanes, no roundabout, and intersection improvements. Respectfully submitted, Gary & Debra Cruse -- ____________________________________________ Gary & Debra Cruse 3912 Garfield StCarlsbad, CA 92018o: 760.685.2675c. 760-672-7067 e: coastalcasitas@gmail.com CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Lisa Beveridge To:Traffic Subject:Proposed round-about @ Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 2:06:58 PM To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to request that you please seriously consider the fact that the majority of Carlsbad residents do NOT want a round-about placed at Carlsbad Blvd. and Tamarack Ave. This planwould undoubtedly cause far more collisions with cars, pedestrians, and bicyclists - if implemented. We have quite enough issues with crashes and injuries at the ill-conceived round-aboutcurrently at State Street and Carlsbad Blvd., without adding yet another disastrous round-about at Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd. as well. Please listen to the citizens of Carlsbad, and the cares and concerns of our community whenproposing to implement ideas that will cause a net negative impact upon a vast majority of us. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Sincerely,Lisa Beveridge Carlsbad Resident CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Craig Arterburn To:Traffic Cc:Melanie Burkholder; Keith Blackburn Subject:Agenda Item #2 Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 1:38:07 PM To the Traffic Board and City Council: As a resident of Carlsbad beginning in 1961, and now in Terramar since 1966, I implore youNOT to install a traffic roundabout or rotary at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. (HWY 101) and Tamarack Avenue. This intersection is too congested with combined vehicle, bike, andpedestrian traffic to make it a good safe option. You'll be setting the city up for numerous lawsuits at taxpayer expense. Roundabouts or rotaries are only safely viable in residential areas, not in downtown or anyother highly trafficked areas. Traffic lights tend to force people to obey the law much better than the whims of people who THINK they have the right of way. Look toward Oceanside more than Encinitas, when researching how and why theyimplemented their roundabouts. You'd better talk to these cities and not vote based on some traffic study. I would bet such studies are skewed by bike lobbyist groups because theirresults don't meet common sense. You need to determine the accident rates in Oceanside and Encinitas. The locations of their roundabouts will tell the story. Instead of kowtowing to the bike lobby, consider cracking down on bicyclists who ride 3-5abreast outside the bike lanes without much of an effort in passing, which is their go to excuse. Sometimes I wonder if a major goal of the green deal is to lower our living standardsto that of India, China, and many other overpopulated Asian countries. Keep the bicyclists on trails, not heavily trafficked streets. At some point they become nuisances. Craig Arterburn CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Melody Huelsebusch To:Traffic Subject:ITEM #2 Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 1:21:38 PM The proposed run-abput at Coast Hwy and Tamarack is a disaster on paper and at the coast. The loss of a traffic lane on this busy corridor makes no sense and will make the city look asmotonic as they did whith the great sculpture they approved at the beach had to be removed after the citizen outcry. Be smart and ban stupid. Our gift is grace, Melody Huelsebusch 1331 Knowles Ave. CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Craig Arterburn To:Traffic Cc:Melanie Burkholder; Keith Blackburn Subject:Agenda Item #2 Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 1:38:07 PM To the Traffic Board and City Council: As a resident of Carlsbad beginning in 1961, and now in Terramar since 1966, I implore youNOT to install a traffic roundabout or rotary at the intersection of Carlsbad Blvd. (HWY 101) and Tamarack Avenue. This intersection is too congested with combined vehicle, bike, andpedestrian traffic to make it a good safe option. You'll be setting the city up for numerous lawsuits at taxpayer expense. Roundabouts or rotaries are only safely viable in residential areas, not in downtown or anyother highly trafficked areas. Traffic lights tend to force people to obey the law much better than the whims of people who THINK they have the right of way. Look toward Oceanside more than Encinitas, when researching how and why theyimplemented their roundabouts. You'd better talk to these cities and not vote based on some traffic study. I would bet such studies are skewed by bike lobbyist groups because theirresults don't meet common sense. You need to determine the accident rates in Oceanside and Encinitas. The locations of their roundabouts will tell the story. Instead of kowtowing to the bike lobby, consider cracking down on bicyclists who ride 3-5abreast outside the bike lanes without much of an effort in passing, which is their go to excuse. Sometimes I wonder if a major goal of the green deal is to lower our living standardsto that of India, China, and many other overpopulated Asian countries. Keep the bicyclists on trails, not heavily trafficked streets. At some point they become nuisances. Craig Arterburn CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Lizzee To:Traffic Subject:Tamarack meeting Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 1:58:52 PM Roundabout on tamarack Dear commissioners, I am against the roundabout plan at Tamarack & carlsbad boulevard Though the commission has presented theories on how this will make the traffic better in that location, they have not been able to support it with facts. They present the success of the State St roundabout but that roundabout is very congested on the weekends and very few drivers in that roundabout know how to navigate it properly. Also,the safety statistics from that roundabout are omitted. That is a high accident roundabout. Also, the Commission always has their watercolor renderings depicting thatintersection being flat. There are significant inclines going south and there there is an incline coming from the from Garfield Street down to the boulevard plus the incline from thetamarack parking lot. That will affect visibility & speed. A roundabout will not make pedestrian crossing safer of give space to double wide strollers. I support a long term solution of widening the bridge over the lagoon mouth & providing aoverpass pedestrian crossing, perhaps at sequoia. Again I want to emphasis that most local residents DO NOT WANT A ROUNDABOUT ONTAMARACK. Elizabeth Banks Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. PROPOSED ROUNDABOUT AT TAMARACK AVENUE AND CARLSBAD BOULEVARD Dear Traffic and Mobility Commission: I do not support the reduction of traffic lanes along Carlsbad Boulevard to one lane in each direction. Reducing the traffic lanes to 50% of the current capacity isn’t conducive to vehicular flow during peak times. The staff has consistently been promoting recreational bike use over the daily transportation needs of the community. In observing the bicycle usage in Carlsbad, the preponderance of the traffic is for recreational purposes. People do not use bikes to go to the grocery store and few use bikes as transit to their work locations. The report supports roundabouts for achieving better safety and lower emissions which are both worthy goals. If a roundabout for the location can be designed which still allows 2 traffic lanes in each direction, I would support it. I regularly walk on the seawall and along Carlsbad Boulevard in the area. I believe that the sidewalk widths are currently adequate. The sidewalks do not need to be widened if it means that traffic lanes need to be sacrificed. Regards, Lu Ann Hall Carlsbad resident since 1987 From:Robert Melton To:Traffic Subject:Roundabout Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 1:19:30 PM I am a daily reader of the SD Union Tribune. When council meetings are posted in the Local Section, I read them diligently. I am wondering why the topic of the Tamarack roundabout was not listed in any notice the UT printed. Was this an oversight, or was this done on purpose? I’m highly suspicious of the omission of this most important topic., and very disappointed if this was a way to sway the bicycling club votes for this horrendous plan. Please explain where or when this was publicly reported. Sincerely, Joanne Melton Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Families for Safe Streets San Diego To:Traffic Subject:Item 2 - Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack Ave Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 12:57:54 PM Hello, I am writing in support of the roundabout on Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack Ave. Roundabouts are proven safety measures for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians alike. My name is Laura Keenan and I'm the Co-Founder of Families for Safe Streets San Diego.We're a group of families who've had loved ones killed in traffic collisions or are survivors ourselves. We advocate for safer streets to save lives and other families from our pain. Almostall of our family members were killed while walking or biking. My husband and baby’s father, Matt Keenan, was killed by a wrong-way driver while riding his bike a year and a half ago. Hewas only 42 years old. My almost 3-year old son will never have any memories of his own of his amazing loving, charming, smart and caring father. Roundabouts save lives because they limit the top speed of cars; they are proven to reduceserious or fatal crashes by up to 80%. The woman who hit my husband was going at least 35 mph. He didn't have a chance even though he was doing everything right, riding in the bikelane with his helmet on and using the brightest lights possible. He died on the scene. It is impossible to drive 35 mph in a roundabout, but it is easy to drive through a traffic light atthose speeds or faster. Like many cities in San Diego and the US, traffic safety is an emergency in Carlsbad. Please prioritize lives and choose the safest option. In addition, I know there's concern that roundabouts will create congestion and add to totaltravel time. However, that is not true. Since roundabouts allow for yields, rather than stops, travel times are not longer even though the top speeds are reduced. They allow for a morecontinual flow of traffic. My husband would be alive today helping me raise our son and seeing him grow up if the driver who hit him was going 15 mph, the speed this roundabout design dictates. Thank you for prioritizing lives by choosing the roundabout option. I and all of the Familiesfor For Safe Streets San Diego thank you. Sincerely, Laura Laura KeenanFounder of Families for Safe Streets San Diego sdsafestrees@gmail.comsdfamiliesforsafestreets.org CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Lynda Daniels To:Traffic Subject:Roundabout at tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 1:14:44 PM As a resident of Carlsbad who lives off Tamarack and go to the coast often I approve of a roundabout. Roundabouts are safer! For cars! For bikes! For pedestrians! Please approve one at this intersection! Thank you! Lynda Daniels 4547 Picadilly Ct Carlsbad 92010 Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:J.P. Timm To:Lauren Ferrell Cc:Traffic Subject:Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvements - Community input Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 1:56:56 PM Dear Ms. Ferrell and the Traffic & Mobility Commission, Saturday, we received notice of the Traffic & Mobility Commission meeting today at 4p.m. I hope that ourpreviously submitted concerns are still part of the discussion and the disclosure for this vote. The dialogand interaction with the city planners after the last solicitation of community input continues to display adegree of fait accompli and a lack of openness to considering constructive input and counter evidence. Ina brief review of the traffic study there is one significant question regarding the simulation in that thesoftware used to complete the evaluation for the traditional signaled intersection was not the samesoftware used to conduct the roundabout simulation. Is there empirical validation of the softwarecomparison between these two software’s which addresses the validity to use them as a comparator.There seems an apparent continued bias if this work has not been completed. In this context it isimportant to ensure that the traffic study includes pedestrian and bike traffic at levels representative ofpeek high-use scenarios, in terms of time of year, relevant weekdays, and known seasonal high-usedays. We would request the commission reject the study outright and insist the study be redone over aholiday or special event weekend to present the true degree of utilization of this intersection. We are happy to see the results of a simulation conducted with the high-use traffic and pedestrian surveydata comparing the current intersection to the proposed roundabout and alternative signal designproposals assuming that the evaluations comparisons are valid. Our experience with researching andcommunicating about this issue with the Commission has only amplified our objection to the installation ofa roundabout as currently conceived. Contrary to the north end of Carlsbad, wherethe roundabout connecting State Street to Carlsbad Boulevard works well, the Tamarack intersection ismuch more complex. Of additional consideration is that data was shared that that north end roundaboutintersection commonly referenced as equivalent and successful registered the second highest number ofaccidents in the city of Carlsbad, significantly greater than the current and functioning traffic light atTamarack. The city has repeatedly quoted statistics that the reduced energy of the accidents makesroundabouts safer. Our concern is not for the safety of persons in automobiles, but for the safety of thecyclists and pedestrians for whom any collision has a high potential for serious injury or death. TheTamarack intersection includes the entrance to Tamarack State Beach and the entrance to Vigilucci'sRestaurant, and has a high volume of pedestrian traffic for both access to the beach and to the sea wallpromenade. Further, the high volume of north/south Carlsbad Boulevard bike traffic is alreadyproblematic at this intersection. We fully supported the earlier proposal of dropping the number of vehiclelanes down to three and other measures of slowing traffic from the first time the city conducted a study ofthis intersection, but the conversion of this complex mixed-use intersection into a roundabout will create apinch point that will adversely affect the only north/south emergency vehicle access to the beach, ADAcompliance, traffic and access to neighboring streets (including our own), not to mention seriouslyendangering all non-vehicle users. We have lived in this area of Carlsbad for over 13 years, and have been watching this project closely.Each proposal cites studies from various sources i.e. "according to the Federal Highway Administration,"however, not only is this assertion devoid of context, we have not seen any study of this particularintersection which takes into consideration the high volume of pedestrian traffic (particularly non-residenttourists during summer) and the impact on efficiency and safety of the proposed all-segment-yieldpedestrian crossing. I believe that the first study conducted by the consultants contracted by the cityregarding this intersection found that a roundabout was not feasible. We continue to be interested inunderstanding how this revived proposal addresses those previously identified deficiencies. Havingresided in London for several years, we are very familiar with what a high-functioning roundabout canaccomplish. That being said, in London, where there is a high amount of pedestrian cross-traffic, eitherthere are stop signals incorporated into the roundabout, or pedestrian traffic is entirely diverted intounderground passages, neither of which have been considered in the proposed design concept. Further, From:gober2c@aol.com To:Traffic Cc:Nathan Schmidt; Melanie Burkholder; Keith Blackburn Subject:5/1/23 - T&MC Meeting Agenda Item - 2. CARLSBAD BOULEVARD AND TAMARACK AVENUE INTERSECTION,CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT NO. 6058 - Public Comment Date:Monday, May 1, 2023 1:35:28 PM Dear Traffic & Mobility Commission Members: In connection with the May 1, 2023, 4 p.m., meeting agenda Item - 2. CARLSBAD BOULEVARD ANDTAMARACK AVENUE INTERSECTION, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT NO. 6058,please find our community comments and input below. Once again, we strongly disagree with any design team’s suggested selection, or any report on trafficstudy results and other data, that may influence the Traffic & Mobility Commission Members'recommendation to the City Council to favor, support and recommend the Roundabout Alternative as thepreferred design option, instead of the Signal Light Alternative, for the following reasons: 1) By simply driving north and south along the coast during a mid-week rush hour period, it is readilyevident that the Traffic Signal Light Alternative, and the 4-Lane road provided (i.e. 2-Lanes in eachdirection), is necessary and advisable compared to the Roundabout Alternative (i.e. 1-Lane in eachdirection), considering the very high number of vehicles currently needing access to CarlsbadBoulevard, and utilizing this coastal roadway daily. 2) The Traffic Signal Light Alternative, and the 4-Lane road provided with traffic signals, is safer than theRoundabout Alternative proposed, especially for pedestrians, including elderly and disabled pedestrians with canes, walkers and wheelchairs desiring to quickly and safely cross this very busyintersection. 3) The Traffic Signal Light Alternative, and the 4-Lane road provided with traffic signals, is safer than theRoundabout Alternative proposed for pedestrians and bicyclists crossing the street when the blinding sun slowly goes down in the early evenings at this intersection impeding vision. 4) The Traffic Signal Light Alternative is safer for bicyclists because it provides for a single, continuous bicycle lane in each direction, with no need for bicyclists to "merge" with fast and large moving vehicles, preventing accidents, deaths, and improving traffic flows, especially during timesof heavy traffic. 5) Finally, under the Roundabout Alternative, how are westbound vehicles supposed to quickly andsafely transition onto northbound/southbound Carlsbad Boulevard during rush hour commuting times withheavy traffic (e.g. an endless number of rush hour vehicles going northbound/southbound at a high speedon Carlsbad Boulevard, with no traffic lights or stop signs to assist transitional vehicles, bicycles,pedestrian traffic, and with inconsiderate drivers not wanting to stop)? The Traffic Signal LightAlternative, and the 4-Lane road provided, is again highly advisable compared to the RoundaboutAlternative. Please properly consider the preceding matters carefully in connection with your recommendation to theCity Council on the preferred design option, signal or roundabout. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Anne and Giovanni Bertussi Carlsbad. CA CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. unlike previous proposals of the redevelopment, the inclusion of southbound traffic exiting from Sequoiaimplies that the southern lagoon pedestrian crossing has been eliminated from this design concept, adevelopment we find unfortunate. I do not know if you were on this project when previous public commentwas solicited, but I invite you to review the survey conducted at that time and read it for impartiality.Lastly, we were disappointed that the option to reduce the Coast Highway by one lane to improve boththe promenade and to increase beach access parking along the entire corridor south to Cannon seems tohave been dropped from consideration. In light of future redevelopment opportunities hopefully providedby use of the property previously occupied by the power station, this seems like an opportunity missed toexpand the beautiful beach access Carlsbad already provides. Thank you in advance for your consideration of my feedback, and for making yourself available toresidents. Sincerely, J.P Timm Owner and Resident 314 Date Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Project No. 6058 Tom Frank, Transportation Director/City Engineer Lauren Ferrell, Associate Engineer May 1, 2023 RECOMMENDED ACTION 1.Receive traffic study and other data 2.Make a recommendation to the City Council ITEM 2: Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS ITEM 2: Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Improve traffic flow Enhance safety for drivers, pedestrians and bicyclists Promote walking, biking, active transportation Calm traffic along coastline Enhance coastal access Reduce greenhouse gas emissions •California Complete Streets Act•General Plan Mobility Element•Sustainable Mobility Plan •Climate Action Plan•Engineering Standards•State of Emergency for Traffic Safety CITY OF CARLSBAD POLICIES GENERAL PLAN ITEM 2: Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue •Enhance all modes of transportation•Improve connectivity •Enhance, buffer and widen bike lanes •Design to safely move all modes of travel•Mobility and vehicle speed management to promote safe pedestrian and bicycle movement DIFFERENT STREETS = DIFFERENT PRIORITIES Project area IDENTITY AND COASTAL STREET Managing speeds Minimizing crossing distances Enhancing safety for bikers Reducing greenhouse gas emissions 1010 INTERSECTION SAFETY ITEM 2: Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue ROUNDABOUT SAFETY 43.7% Less conflict points Reduction in injuries 67% 90% Reduction in fatalities 35% Reduction in all crashes ITEM 2: Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue ANALYSES COMPLETED •Vehicular Level of Service and Delay•Roundabout Feasibility and Operations •Vehicular Queueing Analysis •Pedestrian Level of Service•Bicycle Level of Service•Project Area Collision Summary and Safety Evaluation ITEM 2: Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue 1616 AVERAGE SECONDS TO GET THROUGH INTERSECTION 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Roundabout Traffic signal Existing AM peak PM peak Saturday peak 57% Reduction in wait time 1717 DELAY PER CAR 13 seconds 30 seconds 90 feet to cross 1/3 Less distance to cross each time 2222 MORE SPACE TO WALK AND BIKE Sidewalk north of Tamarack Sidewalk south of Tamarack Bike lane Bike lane buffers Current 5 feet 5 feet 5 to 7 ½ feet 0 to 2-foot buffer Traffic signal 5 feet 9 to 16 feet 6 to 8 feet 0 to 3-foot buffer Roundabout 10 feet 14 to 16 feet 7 to 8 feet 3-foot buffer N EMERGENCY RESPONSE ITEM 2: Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue OVERALL BENEFITS ITEM 2: Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Improve traffic flow Enhance safety for drivers, pedestrians and bicyclists Promote walking, biking, active transportation Calm traffic along coastline Enhance coastal access Reduce greenhouse gas emissions RECOMMENDED ACTION 1.Receive traffic study and additional data 2.Make a recommendation to the City Council ITEM 2: Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue