HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 00-21; HOLLY SPRINGS; HOLLY SPRINGS PROPERTY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS; 2003-11-13\A7WILLDAN
Serving Public Agencies
27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 270
Foothill Ranch, California 92610
949/470-8840 fax 949/770-9041
www.willdan.com
November 13, 2000
REVISED - January 10, 2003
Mr. David M. Bentley
Bentley-Monarch, LLC
PMB#433
4740 E. Sunrise Drive
Tucson, AZ 85718
SUBJECT: HOLLY SPRINGS PROPERTY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Dear Mr. Bentley:
This study provides a summaryof traffic factors related to the proposed development of
the Holly Springs Property in the City of Carlsbad. The analyses contained in this study
are based upon information provided by your representatives, our past work in the City,
previously completed analyses for the study area, updated traffic information, and standard
reference materials.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Holly Springs project is generally located southerly of Cannon Road (future)
and easterly of College Boulevard (future). Access to the project is planned at (future)
College Boulevard via the proposed "C" Street. The future planned Holly Springs Road
and "N" Street would provide internal project access. Figure 1 illustrates the location of
the project, while Figure 2 shows a tentative map for the proposed project.
The currently proposed Holly Springs project is planned to provide 39 single family dwelling
units (SFDU) plus four future single family lots for a total of 43 SFDU, which would be
Wilidan Holly Springs Property Traffic Analysis
#12857 City of Carlsbad -1-
C1oo411
-
' -1,11 14
114, (*
I. ,. \
IfiDWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC.
703 PfP1OMRF) RIIWORI
5U178 300
CA8iS8D (18 92009
PRONE 700, 438.3182 fftE (700) 438 Ci 1 C
I
,,fr'rr'fC
S I T E
\ \ \ \ \ \\\
ix
/ . P WPIPll'P IPU \,
1 PU)
/
w /7i I V
1....... .•..
-' , If ?. P.
\__•' - UP
'- . ..'// •4i (,,).,
-1 - I J
JOB# 12857
WILLDAN PROJECT LOCATION FIGURE 1
3090
\ \
\ -JAY - ,-IikiItI-iI
HOLLY **
'Z/ TENATIVE MAP
----------
FIJTURE CANNON
\\\
PARCEL A
21
14 Z-O
- - - - -
- - - :° 2N q
287.0 4
3 FUTURE LOT
106 2 41 FLTU LET
1'/JJJ!i I
iiIJ III-J !LiltLiIJJJJ
,i iL.j
LAD WIG DESIGN GROUP, INC.
703 PRLOMAA 01720084000
SUITE 000
(0010470. CA 92009 L-1040 10/47/02 74081€ (700) 430-3172 FAX (700)438-0173
JOB# 12857
WILLDAN PROJECT SITE PLAN FIGURE 2
located to the east of College Boulevard and directly north of the Cantarini development.
It should be noted that the previously proposed multi-family dwelling units of the Holly
Springs project are now included as a part of the Cantarini project development'. The
proposed Holly Springs project cannot be developed until the construction of College
Boulevard occurs., near the project site, and extends to reach an existing arterial street.
The project traffic would access College Boulevard via "C" Street. This collector road ("C"
Street) is planned to have a 40 foot curb-to-curb width.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The typical existing conditions are not pertinent in this study area, since the majority of
critical arterial roadways do not presently exist. The section of College Boulevard, near the
proposed Holly Springs project site, which would provide project access does not exist.
In addition, the part of Cannon Road, northerly of the project site is not yet constructed.
Existing traffic conditions in the study area are subject to significant change as the
additional arterial roadway connections (College Boulevard and Cannon Road) are
completed. In addition, a "Zone 15, Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment"
("Zone 15, LFMPA") for the terraces has been completed. (A new amendment to reflect
current proposals will be processed.) This document serves as a basis to determine
whether the currently proposed project and surrounding development are consistent with
this existing Plan.
TRAFFIC ANALYSES
The Zone 15, LFMPA (for the terraces) provides specific mitigations for potential land uses
- in several "Development Areas" of the overall Zone. These circulation mitigations
address the roadway system that is required to support the planned development
Current land use information was referenced from the most recently completed traffic
study for the study area: "Cantarini Property Traffic Analysis' Willdan; November
28, 2001 and REVISED - January 10, 2003.
2 "Zone 15, Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment" ("Zone 15, LFMPA") for the
terraces; Hofman Planning Associates, Man/ton Engineering, Urban Systems Associates;
June 10, 1998.
Willdan Holly Springs Property Traffic Analysis
#12857 -4- City of Carlsbad
[assumed in the Zone 15, LFMPA (for the terraces)] and also provide a Financing Plan for
the road improvements.
A primary issue, therefore, is whether the currently proposed project is consistent (from a
traffic viewpoint) with the land uses assumed in the Zone 15, LFMPA (for the terraces).
In addition to this evaluation, there are other pertinent issues related to the current project,
which are addressed in these analyses. The traffic factors evaluated are:
A comparison of the current project to the previously assumed uses
of the project site.
An update of the current plans for development in the other portions
of Zone 15 (other than Holly Springs), which are expected to change.
All of these areas are now planned to have reduced development.
Review of buildout traffic conditions at two key intersections based
upon the updated traffic model runs recently completed by the City of
Carlsbad (through SANDAG).
Evaluation of the proposed roadway adjacent to the project site, "C"
Street (which would provide project access), to determine whether the
proposed 40 foot curb-to-curb width is adequate.
Analyses of the intersection of "C" Street at College Boulevard to
determine if added street width is required to serve the currently
planned land use.
1. Proposed Project versus Previously Assumed Land Uses
Trip generation analyses were performed for the currently proposed Holly Springs project,
then compared to the trip potential for the previously planned uses. The currently
proposed project consists of 43 SFDU. The trip generation potential for the proposed Holly
Springs project is shown in Table land totals 520 daily trip ends, of which 40 (10 In, 30
Out) trip ends and 50 (35 In, 15 Out) trip ends would occur during the AM and PM peak
hours, respectively.
Wilidan Holly Springs Property Traffic Analysis
#12857 City of Carlsbad
TABLE I
TRIP GENERATION
Holly Springs Project - Carlsbad
:
PMPEAK HOUR
1itQUT.
'
WORM
TRIP GENERATION RATES ") (Applied to the Proposed Holly Springs Project):
Residential - Single Family per DU 12.0 0.29 0.67 0.84 0.36
TRIP ENDS GENERA TED:
+ Previously Assumed Land Uses (2):
- Single Family (RLM-2) 443 DU (2) 4,430 105 250 310 135
- Single Family (RLM-2A) 134 DU (2) 1,340 30 75 95 40
TOTAL - Previous Plan 5,770 135 325 405 175
+ Proposed Project - Holly Springs:
.Single Family I43 DU (3) 520 10 30 35 15
TOTAL - Current Project 520 10 30 35 15
DU = Dwelling Units
San Diego Traffic Generators; San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG); updated July 1998.
Referenced from the Zone 15, LFMPA (for the terraces).
The 43 single family dwelling units (SFDU) consist of 39 SFDU and 4 future single family lots.
Previously assumed land uses for the project site were referenced from the Zone 15,
LFMPA (for the terraces) [Exhibit 14, combined with review of the maps]. The previous
land uses were assumed to provide 443 SFDU and 134 SFDU on the Holly Springs
Property. Trip potential for these previously assumed developments is 5,770 daily trip
ends, with 460 (135 In, 325 Out) AM peak hour trip ends and 580 (405 In, 175 Out) PM
peak hour trip ends.
It can be seen in Table I that the trip potential for the currently proposed project is
significantly less than for the development that was previously assumed. The Holly
Springs site is, therefore, anticipated to generate less traffic than allowed under the current
Zone 15, LFMPA (for the terraces).
Other Areas in Zone 15 with Revised Development Plans
We were informed that some other areas within Zone 15 are anticipated to be developed
at a less intensive level. Table 2 lists the other locations in Zone 15 where changes to the
LFMPA assumptions are expected. It can be seen in Table 2 that a substantial reduction
in residential units is expected based upon current development plans.
Table I, which was presented above, documented the anticipated reduction in trip
generation for the Holly Springs project. Trip generation analyses were also completed for
the other areas of Zone 15, which are known to have reduced development plans. The
results of these analyses are shown in Table 3.
Table 3 shows that the daily trip generation potential would be reduced from 9,200 trip
ends [based upon the Zone 15, LFMPA (for the terraces) land use assumptions] to 3,490
trip ends. The peak hour totals would be reduced from 730 to 280 trip ends during the AM
peak hour and 920 to 355 trip ends for the PM peak hour.
Updated Buildout Conditions Analyses
The City of Carlsbad has been recently working with the San Diego Association of
Governments (SANDAG) to develop updated buildout traffic projections. The current
Wilidan Holly Springs Property Traffic Analysis
#12857 -7- City of Carlsbad
TABLE 2
LAND USE COMPARISON
ZONE 15, LFMPA (FOR THE TERRACES) VS. EXPECTED DEVELOPMENT
Holly Springs Project - Carlsbad
RES 1, 0 N
'2 &29 - State of California & Tchang RLM-1 379 SFDU 0
3 - Cantarini RLM-4A & 351 SFDU 105 SFDU
Portion of RLM-2 80 MFDU
23 - Western Land Exchange RLM-3A 31 SFDU 0
(Included With
Cantarini Project)
4 & 12 - Costa Real M.W.D. and RLM-2 443 SFDU 0
Holly Springs, Ltd. (Partial) (Included With
(PROJECT) Cantarini Project)
12 - Holly Springs, Ltd. (Partial) RLM-2A & 134 SFDU 43 SFDU (2)
(PROJECT) Portion of RLM-2
23 - Western Land (Partial) RLM-3 159 SFDU 159 SFDU
TOTAL - Including Holly Springs 1,497 DU 387 DU
TOTAL - Excluding Holly Springs 920 DU 344 DU
SFDU = Single Family Dwelling Units (Residential)
MFDU = Multi-Family Dwelling Units (Residential)
Source: Based on information provided by the Ladwig Design Group, Inc. and the Zone 15, LFMPA (for the terraces)
[including Exhibits 6, 7, 14, and the "LFMPA Constraints Maps.
Zone 15, LFMPA (for the terraces); Exhibits 6 and 7.
The 43 single family dwelling units (SFDU) consist of 39 SFDU and 4 future single family lots.
TABLE 3
TRIP GENERATION REDUCTIONS
OTHER AREAS WITHIN ZONE 15
Holly Springs Project - Carlsbad
f 0, =UIR - SIZE ____________________ H_wellwat, "sill
ZONE15,LFMPA (for theterraces):
2&29 - SFDU 379 DU 3,790 90 210 265 115
3 - SFDU 351 DU 3,510 85 195 245 105
23 - SFDU 31 DU 310 5 15 20 10
23 -SFDU 159DU 1,590 40 90 110 50
PREVIOUSLY ASSUMED TOTAL 9,200 220 510 640 280
EXPECTED DEVELOPMENT:
2 & 29 - Open Space 0 - - - - -
3 - SFDU
- MFDU
105 DU
80 DU
1,260
640
30
10
70
40
90
45
40
20
23-(1) 0 - - - - -
23 -SFDU 159 DU 1,590 40 90 110 50
CURRENT ANTICIPATED TOTAL 3,490 80 200
[
245 110
DU = Dwelling Units
SFDU = Single Family Dwelling Units
MFDU = Multi-Family Dwelling Units
(1) Included with the proposed Cantarini project.
-.-
projections (utilized in this study) are the result of significant efforts of the City and other
professionals and should be representative of projections that will be formally adopted by
the City.
A comparison was made of peak hour traffic volumes at two critical intersections [College
Boulevard I El Camino Real (ECR) and College Boulevard / Cannon Road] for buildout
conditions. The volumes utilized in this study from Appendix B were compared to those
in the "Bridge and Thoroughfare District #4" traffic study. Table 4 lists the values by
movement for each source. Review of the data in Table 4 indicates no significant
differences.
These locations (College / ECR and College / Cannon) were analyzed using the
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology for the buildout traffic conditions.
These analyses were conducted to verify that the updated projections do not result in any
unanticipated adverse conditions.
The ICU methodology utilizes a comparison of intersection volumes to available
intersection capacity, which results in an ICU value. The ICU value then relates to various
Levels of Service (LOS), which range from "A" (the best) to "F" (the worst). For the City of
Carlsbad, LOS A through Dare considered acceptable, while LOS E and F are considered
over capacity. A more detailed explanation of ICU and its relationship to LOS is provided
in Appendix A.
Table 5 provides the results of the ICU analyses at the two critical study intersections. The
ICU analyses worksheets can be found in Appendix B. It can be seen that both College
/ ECR and College I Cannon have acceptable operations (LOS D or better) for buildout
conditions. This indicates that the updated model runs are not anticipated to result in
adverse conditions and the Zone 15, LFMPA (for the terraces) conditions, which are
presently in effect, should remain as applicable.
"Carlsbad Bridge and Thoroughfare District #4' Urban Systems Associates, Inc.;
January 29, 2001; Figures 8-2 and 8-3 (2020).
Wilidan Holly Springs Property Traffic Analysis
#12857 -10- City of Carlsbad
TABLE 4
TRAFFIC VOLUME COMPARISON
BRIDGE & THOROUGHFARE DISTRICT #4 I HOLLY SPRINGS
Holly Springs Project - Carlsbad
_
COLLEGE BOULEVARD & EL CAMINO REAL (ECR)
NL 150 147 90 91
NT 995 996 1545 1543
NR 605 604 980 981
SL 80 80 50 49
ST 2029 2029 970 971
SR 725 725 310 310
EL 215 212 585 585
ET 305 304 650 652
ER 170 170 175 173
WL 730 730 535 534
'JljT 595 594 300 301
WR 25 24 25 25
COLLEGE BOULEVARD & CANNON ROAD
NL 110 109 120 119
NT 760 758 815 815
NR 365 363 550 547
SL 55 53 55 56
ST 640 640 745 744
SR 515 516 200 198
EL 205 205 350 349
ET 390 389 840 839
ER 50 48 115 114
WL 400 397 365 363
WT 815 814 475 474
WR 45 46 60 1 59
(1) "Carlsbad Bridge and Thoroughfare District #4; Urban Systems Associates, Inc.; January 29,2001; Figures 8-2
and 8-3 (2020).
-11-
TABLE 5
INTERSECTION ANALYSES SUMMARY
FUTURE BUILDOUT CONDITIONS
Holly Springs Project - Carlsbad
1+ = Separate right turns operate, but a specific lane may not be striped.
-12-
It should also be remembered that the SANDAG buildout model runs would be based upon
adopted land use information and would not include the current development objectives
presented in this study. The intersection analyses, therefore, represent a "worst case"
condition, since it was shown above that significant reductions in development and trip
generation potential are anticipated.
4. "C" Street as a 40 Foot Wide Collector Road
The project is proposed to be served by one collector road, presently identified as "C"
Street. It is planned to have a curb-to-curb width of 40 feet and .is representative of the
critical section of the internal collectors, as it would carry the highest volume of traffic.
This roadway would not only serve the Holly Springs project, but also various adjacent
parcels as well. Based upon the proposed road system, the land use information
contained in the zone plan, and proposed development updates provided to us, the
collector ("C" Street ) was evaluated.
It was necessary to determine the trip generation potential of the properties that are
expected to have access through "C" Street. The most updated land use assumptions
were referenced and trip generation analyses were completed. Table 6 provides a
summary of the trip totals of the traffic which is oriented to "C" Street. A review of Table
6 shows a total daily traffic volume of 3,380 daily trip ends for "C" Street.
The City of Carlsbad, "Street Design Criteria" indicates daily traffic ranges of 1,200 to
10,000 for Collector Streets with 40 foot curb-to-curb widths. Access to adjacent property
is indicated as "limited - subject to approval". The projected volume on "C" Street is near
the lower end of the daily traffic range, with a daily volume of 3,380. A few, individual,
single family lots on "C" Street would have direct vehicular access, which would require City
approval. These lots are located some distance from College Boulevard and would have
volumes less than the identified maximum.
Wilidan Holly Springs Property Traffic Analysis
#12857 City of Carlsbad
-13-
TABLE 6
TRIP GENERATION
"C" STREET ANALYSES
Holly Springs Project - Carlsbad
DU = Dwelling Units
SFDU = Single Family Dwelling Units
MFDU = Multi-Family Dwelling Units
In this study, only 50 percent of the single family development traffic from the Cantarm! project (#3) is utilized in these
analyses, since the Cantar!ni single family development is assumed to use both the future "C" and "A" Streets.
In this study, it is assumed that all of the Cantarini multi-family residential traffic would utilize "C" Street.
Included with the proposed Cantarini project.
The 43 single family dwelling units (SFDU) consist of 39 SFDU and 4 future single family lots.
—14—
It can be seen that the projected daily volume of 3,380 trip ends on "C" Street is well below
the theoretical roadway capacity of 10,000. The volume to capacity (V/C) ratio for "C',
Street is 0.34, which results in a Level of Service (LOS) A for this roadway.
This indicates that the proposed roadway section (40 feet curb-to-curb) is adequate to
serve the projected traffic volumes anticipated to utilize "C" Street.
5. Analyses of College I "C" Street
The one intersection (College / "C" Street) which would serve as access to the proposed
Holly Springs project, as well as adjacent properties, was analyzed for the specific
developments being considered. The SANDAG traffic model, through necessity, contains
more generalized assumptions with regard to land uses. As noted in Section "4" above
and detailed in Table 6, trip generation analyses were provided for the specific
developments anticipated and the distribution of these trip ends was also considered.
The SANDAG model volumes entering and exiting "C" Street were previously updated in
the Cantarini project study. Based upon the trip generations shown in Table 6, the
intersection impacts would be further reduced by the Holly Springs project plans. The
intersection analyses (ICU methodology) previously performed for buildout (long range
future) traffic conditions were maintained in this study as a "worst case" evaluation. The
results are summarized in Table 5 (presented earlier in this study), which also identifies
the lane geometric assumptions. The actual worksheets, which also contain the traffic
volume and lane geometric assumptions, are provided in Appendix B.
The access intersection of College I "C" Street would have LOS A operations, which are
well within the acceptable range. This indicates that the proposed roadway would provide
acceptable operations at the study intersection, as well as for the roadway section (as
determined above in Section "4").
Wilidan Holly Springs Property Traffic Analysis
#12857 -15- City of Carlsbad
SUMMARY
This study has examined traffic factors related to the proposed Holly Springs project, which
is planned to be located generally to the south of the future Cannon Road and to the east
of a future section of College Boulevard in the City of Carlsbad. This study was primarily
conducted to determine if the proposed project is consistent (from a traffic viewpoint) with
the land uses assumed in the Zone 15, LFMPA (forthe terraces). Trip generation analyses
were performed for the proposed project and compared to the trip generation of the
previously assumed uses. Buildout traffic conditions were examined at three intersections
related to the proposed project. A.planned access to the proposed project, "C" Street, was
also evaluated as a part of these traffic analyses.
The following are the principal findings of this study.
The proposed Holly Springs project [43 total SFDU (39 single family dwelling units
plus four future single family lots)] is estimated to generate a total of 520 daily trip
ends, of which 40 (10 In, 30 Out) trip ends would occur during the AM peak hour
and 50 (35 In, 15 Out) trip ends would occur during the PM peak hour.
When compared to the development that was previously assumed for the project
site in the Zone 15, LFMPA (for the terraces), the currently proposed Holly Springs
project is shown to have a significantly lower trip potential (Table 1). The Holly
Springs project is anticipated to generate less traffic than allowed under the current
Zone 15, LFMPA (for the terraces).
It was indicated that some of the other areas within Zone 15 are anticipated to be
developed at a less intensive level. Based upon current development plans, a
substantial reduction in residential units is expected (Table 2). Trip generation
analyses were completed for the other areas in Zone 15 and it is shown that under
the reduced development plans (currently expected), the trip generation potential
would be reduced considerably from 9,200 to 3,490 daily trip ends, 730 to 280 AM
peak hour'trip ends, and 920 to 355 PM peak hour trip ends (Table 3).
Wilidan Holly Springs Property Traffic Analysis
#12857 City of Carlsbad -16-
ICU analyses were conducted at the two intersections most critical to the proposed
project for buildout traffic conditions. Both the intersections of College I ECR and
College I Cannon would have acceptable operations (LOS D or better) under
buildout traffic conditions (Table 5). These intersection analyses were based upon
SANDAG buildout model runs, which do not include the current reduced
development plans presented in this study; therefore, these intersection analyses
represent a "worst case" condition.
The proposed design of "C" Street was reviewed from a traffic perspective. The 40
foot, curb-to-curb design is shown to provide adequate roadway capacity in order
to serve the proposed project, as well as the other adjacent developments which
would utilize this collector.
The intersection of College! "C" Street was analyzed under buildout conditions with
modifications to account for the specific projects that are anticipated to utilize this
roadway. This intersection was found to operate at LOS A, which is well within
accepted standards.
Willdan Holly Springs Property Traffic Analysis
#12857
-17- City of Carlsbad
We trust that these analyses will be of assistance to you and the City of Carlsbad. If you
have any questions or require additional information, please contact us.
Respectfully submitted,
WILLDAN
Weston. S. Pringle,
Registered Professional Engineer
State of California Numbers C16828 & TR565
P.E.
Registered Professional Engineer
State of California Number C48774
cc. Mr. Bob Ladwig
WSP: RSB:CC
#12857
Wiidan Holly Springs Property Traffic Analysis
#12857 City of Carlsbad -18-
LEVEL OF SERVICE
APPEND1XA
EXPLANATION OF INTERSECTION CAPACITY: UTIL1Z flON
The capacity of a street is nearly always greater between intersections and less at
intersections. The reason for this is that the traffic flows continuously between
intersections and only part of the time at intersections. To study intersection capacity, a
technique known as Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) has been. developed. ICU
analysis consists of (a) dötermining the proportion of signal time needed to .erve each
Am movement, (b) summing the times for the movements, and (c) comparing the
total time required to the time available. For• example, if for north-sôufh traffic the
northbound traffic is 1,000 vehicles per hour, the southbound traffic 16 '860'" vehicles per
hour, and the capacity of either approach is 2,000 vehicles per hour of green, then
northbound traffic is critical and requires 1,0000/2,000 or 50 percent of the signal time. If
for the east-west traffic, 40 percent of the signal time is required, then it can be seen that
the ICU is 50 pIus 40, or 90 percent. . When left-turn phases exist, they are incorporated
into the analysis. As lCU's approach 100.. percent, the quality of traffic service approaches
Level of Service (LOS) E, as defined in the Highway capac Manual, Special Report 87,
Highway Research Board, 1965.
Level of Service is used to describe quality of traffic flow. Levels of Service A to C operate
quite well. Level of Service D is typically the Level of Service for which an urban street is
designed. Level of Service E is the maximum volume a facility can accommodate and will
result. in- possible stoppages of momentaryduration. Level of Service F occurs when a
facility is Overloaded and is characterized by stop-and-go traffic With stoppages of long
duration. A description of the variCus Levels Of Service appears on the following page.
The ICU calculationsassurne that an intersection is signalized and that the signal is ideally
timed. It is possible to have an ICU- well below tO; yet have severe.traffic congestion..
This would occur because one or more movements is not getting enough time to satisfy
its demand, with excess time existing on other moves. Although: calculating ICU for an
unsignalized intersection is not necessaiily valid, it can be performed withthé presumption
that a signal can be installed and the calculatiOns show whether the :geornetrjcs are
capable of accommodating. the expected volumes.
Capacity is often defined in terms of roadway width. However, standard lanes have
approximately the same capacity whether they are 11 foot or 14 foot lahes. Our data
indicates that a typical lane, whether a through lane or a left-turn lane, has a capacity as
high as approximately 2200 vehicles per lane per hour of green time. The 1985 Highwy
Capacity Manual found capacities of 1800 vehicles per lane per hour of green time. These
studies show that values in the 1600 to 1700 range should result in a conservative
analysis.
APPENDIX A.'
LEVEL OF NOMINAL RAWG
SERVICE MCI oPicu' - ..
Low volumes; high pee.spe 0 spot rsttiqtd byoWer vehicles; all
A sina( cycles cl ear with -.74-mehicles, all signal cycles clear with no 000-060 vehV6166 waiting through more than one signal cycle. .
Operating speeds beginning to be affected by other traffic; between
B one and ten percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles o 61-0 70 which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic
periods. : . . ...
:
•.••
.•
..
Operating speeds and maneuverability closely controlled by other
C. traffic, between 11 and 30 percent of the signal cycles have one or 071-080 more vehicles which wait through more than ohe signal cycle during
peak traffic periods, recommended ideal design standard
Tolerable operating speeds; 31 to 70 percent of the signal cycles
D %
have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal 0.81-0.90: • cycle' durihgtraffic periods;. often Used as dé.ign standárdin urban
areas. . .
. :. ..
Capacity; the maximum traffic volumes an.'.intersection . can
accórAmodate; restricted speeds; 71 to 100 percent of'-ft . signal 0.91-1.00 cycles have one or M. vehicles which wait through more than one
signal cycle dunng peak traffic penods
Long queues of traffic, unstable flow, stoppages of long duration,
F trifflà volume and: traffic speedcan drop to. zero; fraftiö volume will be Not Meaningful less than the volume which occurs at Level of Service E
(a) ICU (Intersection Capacity Utilization) at various Levels of Service versus Level of Service E
for urban arterial streets.
SOURCE: Highway Capacity Manual; Special Report 87; Highway Research Board; 1965.
APP Nbx B:
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS
MOVEIvIEN
INI,
NT
NR
I SL
I ST
I SR
I EL
I ET
ER
l WL
I\VT
IWR
PROJECT: CANFARXNI PROPERTY - CARLSBAD (HEAVY DEMAND PROCEDURE)
INTERVAL: AM PEAK HOUR
INTERSECTION: COLLEGE BLVD. & EL CAMINO REAL
EXISTING I EX.-i-OT.HER. EXIST I PROP I EXISTING I PROPOSED J EXISTING I OTHER. I BJJLDOUT I EXISTING I I + OTHER I I +PRO]ECT I I BUIWOUT I I LANES I LANES I CAPACITY I CAPACITY I: VOLUME VOLUME J VOLUME I. V/C I I V/c i vic I I V/C I I
o i 21 3240 1 I I 212 1 I *1 0.07 I I 0 I 2 1 I 40001 1 I 304 1 I I I I I I 0.08 I • I 0 I 1 1 I 1800 I 1 I 170 1 I I I I I I 0.09 I I 0 I 2 I I 3240 1 I I 730 I I I I I I I o. I * 0 I 2 4000. I I 594 I * F * I * I o.i I 01 01 I 01. 1 I 241 1 1 I I I 01 if I 18001 I I 801. I * I * I • 0. 01 0 1 : 3 1 I 6000 1 I I 2029 1 I I I I I I 0.34 I * 0 I 1 1 I 1800 I I . I 7251 I I I I I I oAO 0 I 11 1 18001 I I 1411 I I . I I I I 0.08 I * 0 I 31 I 6000.1 I I 996.1. I • I I * I. * I 0.17 0 I 11 I 1800.1 . I . I 604. I I
-
I 0.34 I I
- ocTinTrrIr (!fl1TT(AT. TThA I n flfl I fl flfl
- ------------ ------- ----- u.vu 0.31 ICU SPREADSHEET FILE NAME COL&ECR.
- EAST/WEST CRiTICAL SUMS I 0.00 r 0.00 n fin I N = NORTHBOUND, S = SOUTHBOUND
E = EASTBOUND, W =WESTBOUND
L = LEFT, T = THROUGI] K = RIGHT
N.S. = NOT SIGNALIZED
LOS. = LEVEL OF SERVICE
* DENOTES CRITICAL MOVEMENTS
I I
CLEARANCE = 1 0.10 I 0.10 I 0.10 I 0.10
ICU VALUE I 0.10 I 0.10 I 0.10 I 0.83
LOS= I A TI A I A I D I.
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS
PROJECT: CPjNTAF.INI PROPERTY - CARLSBAD (HEAVY DEMANDPRDCEDURE)
INTERVAL PM PEAK HOUR
INTERSECTION: COLLEGE BLVD. & EL CAMINO REAL
-
- I I I I I I I EXISTING I EX+OTHER
MOVEMEN I EXIST I PROP I EXISTING PROPOSED I EXISTING I OTHER. I BT.JILOUT I EXISTING I I• + OTHER I I +PROJBCT I BUIIDOUT I I LANES I LANES I CAPACITY I CAPACITY I VOLUME I VOLUME I VOLUME I
I==I
V/C I I V/C I I V/C I i v/c i
NL I : 2 1 I 32401 I I 5851 NT I I 2 1 I .4000 1 I I 6521 I I I I I o.i I * NE. I 1 1 I 1.800 1 I I 173 1 . I . I I I I o.io I I I SL I I 2 1 I 3240.1 I I 5341 I I I I I I 0.16 I * I I ST I I 2 1 I 4000 1 I I 301 * I * I I I o.O8 I I I SR I I .0 1 I 0 I I 25 I I EL I I 'I I 1800 1 I 1 49 1 I * .1 r i I * I 0.03 I * I ET I I 3 1 I 60001 I I 971 1 I I I I I I 0.16 I I I ER. I .1 1 1, I 1800 1 I I 310 1 I .I I I I 0.17 I I WL I 11 1 18001 91. I . i I o.o I I WT I I 3 1 . I 60001 I I 1543 1 * I I * * I 0.26 I * WE. I I 1 I
- -
I 1800 I 981
-.
0.55 I I
- . NORTH/SOUTB CRITICAL SUM = 0.00 0.00 I 0.00 0.32 ICU SPREADSHEET FILE NAME COL&.ECR I I -. - - - - - - -. - - - EAST/WEST CRITICAL SUMS = . I 0.00 I 0.00 . I 0.00 0.29 N = NORTHBOUND, S = SOUTHBOUND
E = EASTBOUND, W = WESTBOUND . CLEARANCE I 0.10 I 0.10 I 0.10 I 0.10 L=LEFT,T=TEROUGBR=iUGBT
N.S. = NOT SIGNALIZED ICU VALUE . I 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.71 LOS = LEVEL OF SERVICE
* DENOTES CRITICAL MOVEMENTS LOS = I A. L A . I A
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS
PROJECT: CANTARINI PROPERTY - CARLSBAD (HEAVY DEMAND PROCEDURE) INTERVAL: AM PEAK HOUR
INTERSECTION: COLLEGE BLVD. & CANNON
I I I I I I I I I I EXISTING I I EX.4OTBBR
MOVEMEN I EXIST I PROP I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING OTHER I BUILDOUT I EXISTING I I + OTHER I I +PROJECT I BUILDOUT I I I LANES I LANES I CAPACITY I CAPACITY I VOLUME I VOLUME I VOLUME I V/C I I V/C I I V/C I I V/C I I
NL I 01. 11 1800 I I I 109 1 * I * I * I 0.04 I * I NT I 01 2 1 I 4000 1 I I 759 1 I I I I I I 0.19 I I NB. I 0 I 1 I I 1800 I I I 363 1 I I I I I 0.20 I I SL I 01 'I I 1800 I I I 53 I F I I I 0.03 I I ST I 0 I 2 1 I 4000 1 I I 640 1 I I I * I * I 0.16 I * SR I 0 I 11 I 1800 1 I I 516 1 I I I I I I 0.29 I I EL I 01 11 I 18001 I I 2051 1* I I * I $ I 0.11 I I ET I 0 I 2 1 I 4000 1 I I 389 I I I I I I I 0.10 I * I ER I 01 11 I 1800 1 I I 48 1 I I I I I 0.03 I I I WL I 0 I 1 I I 1800 I I I 397 1 I . I I I I I 0.22 I * VT I o f 2 1 I . 4000 1 I I 814 1 I * . I * I * 0.20 I I WR I 01 11 I 18001 1 i 461
0.031 I
- NORTH/SOUTH CRiTICAL SUMS - I 0.00 I 0.00 0.00 I 0.22 ICU SPREADSHEET PILE NAME COL&CAN
- EAST/WEST CRITICAL SUMS = I 0.00 I 0.00 0.00 I 0.3k I N = NORTHBOUND, S = SOUTHBOUND
. I - - - . - - - - - - - - - - -
- E = EASTBOUND, W = WESTBOUND CLEARANCE I 0.10 I 0.10 0.10. 0.16 I L=LEFr,T=THROuGgR=RIGHT
N.S. —NOT SIGNALIZED . ICU VALUE I 0.10 . I 0.10 . 0.10 I 0.64 I LOS = LEVEL OF SERVICE
DENOTES CRITICAL MOVEMENTS LOS- I A IA
INTERSECTION CAPACiTY IJIILIZATION ANALYSIS
PROJECT: CANTABiLNI PROPERTY - CAELSBAD (HEAVY DEMAND PROCEDURE)
INTERVAL: PM PEAK HOUR
INTERSECTION: COLLEGE BLVD. & CANNON
EXISTING I I EX.+oTEER MOVEMEN I EXIST I PROP I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING OTHER BUILDOUT I EXISTING I + OTHER. I I +PROJECT I I BD]IDOUT I I I LANES LANES I CAPACITY I CAPACITY I VOLUME I VOLUME I VOLUME I V/C I I V/C vic i Vic I
NL I 1 I 1800 I .119 1. I * 1 0.07 I * NT 1 2 1 I 4000 1 I I 815 1 I I I I I I 0.20 I NR I I I I I 1800 1 I I 547 1, I I I I I I 0.30 I SL I I I I I 1800 1 I I 56 1. I I I I I I 0.03 I I ST I 2 1 I 40001 I 7441 I * I * • 0.19 I * SR 'I I 1800 I I I 198 I I I. I I I 0.11 EL I 11 1800 I I1 3491 1 I * I I * 0.19 I I ET I I 2 1 I 4000 I I I 8391 0.21 I * I ER I I 1 1 I 1800 I I I 114 1 I I I I I 0.06 I WL I I 1 1 I 1800 I I I 363 I I I I I I * I WT I I 2 1 I 4000 I I I 474 1 I * I * I 0;1 I IWR I I ii I 18001
H
591 LL_ II 0.03 I
- NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMS 0.00 l 0.00 I 0.00 I 0.2 I ICU SPREADSHEET FILE NM'JE COL&CAN
- EAST/WEST CRiTICAL SUMS = I 0.00 I 0.00 I 0.00 0.41 I N = NORTHBOUND, S = SOUTHBOUND
E= EASTBOUND, W='WESTBOUND CLEARANCE = I 0.10 I 0.10 0.10 I 0.10 L= LEFT, T=TEROUGBR=RIGHT
-. == == == I N.S. =NOT SIGNALIZED ICU VALUE I 0.10 I 0.10 0.10 I 0.77 LOS =LEVEL OF SERVICE
DENOTES c2UTICALMOVEMS14TS LOS= IA IA __L_c
]NTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS
PROJECT: CANTARINI PROPERTY - CARLSBAD (HEAVY DEMAND PROCEDURE)
INTERVAL: AM PEAK HOUR
INTERSECTION: COLLEGE BLVD. & 'C' ST.
I I I I
I MOVEMENT I EXIST I PROP I
I I
EXISTING I PROPOSED -1
I I
EXISTING I OTHER BUILDOUT I EXISTING
I I LANES I LANES I CAPACITY I CAPACiTY I VOLUME VOLUME I VOLUME I V/C
NL I 01 ii I 18001 I I 21
I NT I 0 I 2 I 1 4000 1 I 9671
I NB. I 0 I ii I 1800 1 I I 50
I SL I 01 ii I 18001 I I lOt
I ST 0 I 2 1 I 4000 1 I I 1029 1
I SR I 01 1 1 18001 I I 91
I EL I 01 ii I 18001 I I 441
I ET I 01 ii I 20001 I I 11
I ER 01 01 I 01 I I 'I
I WI.. I 0 I ii I 18001 I I 125 1
I WT I 0 I 1 I I 2000 1 I I I.
I WR I 01 01 I 01 I I 201
- NORTH/SOUTHCRITICAL SUMS = I 0.00
ICU SPREADSHEET FILE NAME COL&C
- EAST/WEST CRITICAL SUMS I 0.00
N = NORTHBOUND, S = SOUTHBOUND I - B = EASTBOUND, W = WESTBOUND CLEARANCE = I 0.10 L = LEFT, T = THROUGA R = RIGHT . I N.S. =NOT SIGNALIZED ICU VALUE I 0.10 LOS = LEVEL OF SERVICE I - * DENOTES CRITICAL MOVEMENTS LOS= I A
F EXISTING I I EX.+OTHERI I
I I + OTHER I I +PROJECT I I BUILDOUT
I IV/C I
I I ==
IV/C I IV/C
I
1*1 II
I 1=1
1*1 0.00
I I I I I 0.24
I I I I I I 0.03
I I I I I 0.01
1*1 1*1 1*1 0.26
1 I I I I 0.01
1*1 1*1 1*1 0.02
I I I I I I 0.00
0.07
I I I• I I
0.pi
I
I 0.00 I 0.00 I 0.26
I 0.00. I 0.00 I 0.07
I 0.10 I 0.10 0.10
I 0.10 0.10 I 0.43
IA I A IA
INTERSECTION CAPACiTY UTJUZATION ANALYSIS
PROJECT: CANrARINI PROPERTY - CAELSBAD (HEAVY DEMAND PROCEDURE)
INTERVAL: PM PEAK HOUR
INTERSECTION: COLLEGE BLVD. & 'C. ST.
I I I I I I I I I I EXISTING I I E+OTflER I I I MOVEMENT I EXIST I PROP I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I OTHER I miJLtioUT I. EXISTING . I I + OTHER. I +PROIBCT I I BUUDOUT I I I LANES I LANES I CAPACITY I CAPACiTY I
- —I --.-------.—1
VOLUME I VOLUME I VOLUME I
-.----------.-I ---.--.---I
VIc I I vic vic I i vic .
NL I I 11 I 18001 I . I ill • I • I • I o.o I I NT I I 2 1 I 4000 1 I . I 1387 1- I I I I I. I 0.35-1 * I NB. I I 1 I I 1800 I I I 160 1 I I I I I 0.09. I F SL I I 1 I I 1800 1 . I I 25-1 I I I I I 0.01 I ST I I 2 1 I 40001, I I 992 1 * I * I I * 0.22 I I SR I I 1 I I 18001 I I 661 I I I I I I o.o I I FL I I 1 I I 1800 I I I 19 1 I * I * I I * I 0.,01 I I ET I I 1 I I 2000 1 I I 2 1 I 1 I I I I 0.00 I I ER. I I 0 I I 0 I I I 1! I I I I I I I I WL I 1 I I 18001 I I 70 1 I I I I I I 0.04 I * I 11T I I 1 I I 2000 1 I I 2 I *
. I I . I * 0.01 I: IWR I I 01 I 01 I .101. II I i
- NORTH/SOUTHcEI11CAL SUMS = I. 0.00 I •0.00 . 0.00 0.6 ICU SPREADSHEET FILE NAME COL&C I . I - - -. - - •.- - -. - . - - - - -
- EAST/WEST CRiTICAL SUMS I . 0.00. I 0.00 I . 0.00 I 0.04 N = NORTHBOUND, S = SOUTHBOUND
E=EASTBOUND, W=WESTBOUND
. . c1.ANcE= I 0.10 I 0.10 0.10 I . o.io L= LEFT, T=THROUGHR=RIGHT
N.S. =NOT SIGNAlIZED ICU VALUE 1 0.10 I 0.10 0.10 I 0.50 LOS = LEVEL OF SERVICE
DENOTES
.
CRITICAL MOVEMENTS j•cj5= . -A IA A
--
IA