The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCUP 286; Texaco; Conditional Use Permit (CUP)PRELIMCVARY REVIEW APPLICATI TEXACO SERVICE STATION #0025 PROJECT NAME: 945 TAMARACK AVE, CART.<;RAn^ CA APPLICANT NAME: Frank J. Faudoa DBA: Gary Knginppr^ng^ jnc MAILING ADDRESS: 4901 Morena Blvd. . Suite 304, s.n Ti-i»g^^r& Q?IT; PHONE NUMBER: (619) 483-0620 Pa^. r61Q) 48-^-9QA-^ PROJECT ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER(S) (APN): 206-050-20 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL (ADD ATTACHMENT IF NECESSARY): Texaco proposes to c1n.c;p down (2) existing, nnn-npprar-inn^l li.T^o K^yo in order tn PvpanH <-hp f^^.^ ^,0^-^- sale.g area. A "QSR", gtnV.k service restaurant. would share floor .qparp within the fnnri mari- The building anri rannpy wniilrl rppiPirp far^p-lift ; _: WOULD YOU LIKE TO ORALLY PRESENT YOUR PROPOSAL TO YOUR ASSIGNED STAFF PLANNER/ENGINEER? YES NO S • PLEASE LIST THE NAMES OF ALL STAFF MEMBERS YOU HAVE PREVIOUSLY SPOKEN TO REGARDING THIS PROJECT. IF NONE, PLEASE SO STATE. Jeff Gibson - Planning nppaT-t-,^^n{- FOR CITY USE ONLY PROJECT NUMBER: yf-F'tiy:'^''--g0mfy:i • Ci lLy9} FEE REQUIRED/DATE TEE PAID: 190 - }ij?6fn RECEIPT NO. RECEIVED BY: FRM0025 3/96 PAGE 3 of 3 /,- Li ^) CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 CARLSBAdfiLLAGE DRtVE CARLSBAD, 434-2867 .IFORNIA 92008 r'\ 0 ' REC'D FROM C%,r>i i Ou.G < (^0 h i ,y.,q \}^J^JL^ t DATE It-.95-% ACCOUNT NO. DESCRIPTION AMOUNT \"^{ f. 1 \^\i\i\ a {IX t- u \ 1 ^ t y)F oo 1230 11/26/96 0001 01 02 r-pf'MT 1? RECEIPT NO. 3B023 NOT VALID UNLESS VAUDATED BY TOTAL '$'/.:>/• (yy 1200 ELM ^ CITY OF CARLSBAD ^ WENUE CARLSBAD. CALIFOmi CARLSBAD, CALIFC 438-5621 A 92008 REC'D FROM. y • ' /' : • -' / y ^ F / •yyyyy yyc DATE ACCOUNT NO. DESCRIPTION AMOUNT Y/'F''y'CY' CC--F9// c^y ^ , /' •'' • /7- ( .yr^^^rsyp^y. y: '\y/A.. i . '"-.y .y.: A. , -y / y/ r / • yy - (Pf/cv-^ / yc \ - i> n (M r- \ \ • ] [ [ RECEIPT NO. 57501 TOTAL (A LAIMD US#PLAI\INING APPLICATION DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS REQUEST nzone Change • General Plan Amendment • Tentative Tract Map • Major Planned Unit Development • Master Plan • Major Redevelopment Permit • Minor Redevelcproent Permit • Precise Development Plan (check other boxes if ^propriate) •Specific Plan •Site Development Plan ^Conditional Use Permit •Variance •Planning Commission Detennination •Special Use Permit •Structure Relocation •Major Condcminium Permit •Coastal Permit (Portion of Redevelopment Area Only) Carplete Description of Project (attach additional sheets if necessary) SITE IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH A SERVICE STATION PROJECT CONSISTS OF CONVERTING THE EXISTING LUBE BAY INTO A CONVENIENCE STORE AND UPGRADE EXTERIOR OF BUILDING AND CANOPY. Legal Description (ccarplete) ATTACHED Assessors Parcel Number 206-050-20 General Plan CBD Zone VR Existing Land Use SERVICE STATION Propos^ Zone VR Pix^sed General Plan CBD Site Acreage 16,850 S.F, LesseeLONG TERM LEASE Name (Print or IVpe) TEXACO REFINING & MARKETING iNC ATTN: DAVE MATTSON j^l icant Name (Print or Type) FRED FIEDLER & ASSOCIATES ATTN: PATRICK FIEDLER Mailing Address 2322 W. 3RD ST. Mailing Address P. O: BOX 3756 City and State LOS ANGELES, CA Zip Telephone 90051-(818) 1756 505-2420. I certify that I am Divn.Mktg. Mgr. of Texaco Refining & Market- City and State Zip Telephone LOS ANGELES, CA 90057- (213) 381-7891 ins Inc. that all and long term lessee, and the above information is I CERTIFY THAT I AM - LESSEE'S REPRESENTATIVE AND IHAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO IHE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. correc t ge and to the belief best of SIGNATURE DATE ftec'd Iteceived B By Reoeipt No. sudk Assigned Nuaber' 'ii..::'F--F •:mF:F:'i .fi-'ifts-^^^-Bisii^isj .'f'; ••'^mMMmmmimm'i^'^'xWVAkSim I. SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS General Plan Amendment/Zone Change TI Application Form 2. General Requirement Items F-0 3. Reproducible 1:500 scale map of subject property showing requested zoning and surrounding zoning and land uses. 4. Fee: General Plan Amendment $765.00 + $5.00 per lot or acre, whichever is higher. Zone Change; $655.00 Master Plan/Specific Plan 1. Application Form 2. General Requirement Items: - fifteen (15) copies of items B-D - items E-0 3. Fee: Master Plan $1,635 + $5.00 per/acre Specific Plan $1,090.00 Master Plan Amendment: Major $545.00 + 5.00 acre Minor $185.00 + 2.00 acre Specific Plan Amendment: Major $440.00 Minor $ 75.00 Tentative Tract Map 1. Application Form 2. General Requirement Items fifteen (15) copies of item A items E-P 3. Fee: $530.00 (1-25 lots or units) $765.00 (26-100 lots or units) $1,310 (100 + lots or units) Revision: $330.00 (1-25 units or lots) $545.00 (26-100 units or lots) $765.00 (100+ units or lots) $150.00 Revision that does not change design of subdivision Major Planned Development (5 or more units) 1. Application Form 2. General Requirement Items: fifteen (15) copies of items B-D items E-0 3. Conversion to Condominiums - list of names and addresses of all tenants of the project, proof of notification of the tenants 60 days prior to filing tentative map. that further information ^ required, you will be so advised. APPLICANT: AGENT: TEXACO REFINING & MARKETING INC. Naitle (individual, partnership, joint venture, corporation, syndication) 10 UNIVERSAL CITY PLAZA. UNIVERSAL CITY. CA 90051-1756 Business Address (818) 505-2420 Telephone Nuinber FRED FIEDLER & ASSOCIATES Name 2322 W. 3RD ST., LOS ANGELES, CA 90057-1906 Business Mdress (213) 381-7891 Telephone Nuinber MEMBEHS: Name -{individual, partner, joint venture, corporation, syndication) Home Address Business Address Telephone Nussber Telephone Number . Nana Eome Address 3'asiness Address Telephone Nuaber Telephone Number (Attach more sheets if necessary) I/We declare under penalty of perjury that the information contained in this dis- closure is true and correct and that it will remain true and correct and may be- relied upon as being true and correct until amended. Agpticant STATEMENT OF AGREEMENT TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP CITY OF CARLSBAD The Subdivision Map Act and the Carlsbad Municipal Code sets a fifty (50) day time restriction on Planning Commission processing of Tentative Maps and a thirty (30) day time limit for City Council action. These time limits can only be extended by the mutual concurrence of the applicant and the City. By accepting applications for Tentative Maps concurrently with applications for other approvals which are prerequisites to the map; i.e., Environmental Assessment, Environmental Impact Report, Condominium Plan, Planned Unit Development, etc., the fifty (50) day time limits and the thirty (30) day time limits are often exceeded. If you wish to have your application processed concurrently, this agreement must be signed by the applicant or his agent. If you choose not to sign the statement, the City will not accept your application for the Tentative Map until all prior necessary entitlements have been processed and approved. The undersigned understands that the processing time required By the City may exceed the time limits, therefore the undersigned agrees to extend the time limits for Planning Commission and City Council action and fully concurs with any extensions of time up to one year from the date the application was accepted as complete to properly review all of the applications. Signature Date Name (Print) Relationship to Application (Property Owner-Agent) FORM: PLANNING 37, REVISED 3/80 t ' TITLE INSURANCE Issuing Office; 1RXAC0 REFlMtHG & MARKETING <E> UNIVERSAL IN PLKZh OMIVKRSAL crry. CA Attention: OAVE MATI'80!! 1301 THIRD AVE NUR P.O. BOX 1590 SAti DIEGO. CALIFORMIA 92112 (619) 232-4031 Your Ref Our No I D-6 6 7 740 Dat«xi as of October 3, at 7:30 a.m. In response to the above rtfertfocsd appi icaic lon for a policy of title insurance, SAfECO TiTUS IHSURAMCB Cf»{PANY hereby reports that It Is prepared to Issue, or cause to bw issued, as oi t\rm date hereof, a Policy or Pallcles of Title Insurance describing the land and ch© «stac« or lnter«8t therein hereinafter fust forth, ini»urlng against lom vhich may be suiscsin&d by reason of any defect, lien ar encumbrance not shown or ref«rrtsi to aa an Exception tn Scheduie 8 or not excluded frora coverage purinuant co the printed Schedules, Conditions and Stipulations of tua id Policy foraa. The printed Exceptions ami Exclusions frow the coverage of said Policy or Policies are sec forth In tbe attached Hat. Copies of ths Policy forms should be read. They are available! froa the office which Issued this report. THIS REFORt (AND ANY SUPPLEMBHTS OR AmHDMBim HEKRTO) IS ISSUSD SOULY FOR rm FURFOSB OF PACILITATIHC THE ISSOAIKX OP A POLICY OP TITUS INSURAMCe AND NO LIABILITY IS ASSOMBD IKRBBY. IP IT IS OeSIREO THAT UABILITY BS ASSUMBD PRIOR TO THE ISSVMCE OF A POLICY OP TITUK INSURAHOC, A BINBBR (M C«ttnTiei4T SHOULD m RSQOESTED. The form of policy of title Inaurance conteaplated by this report la: 1. California Lai*i Title Association Standard Cover««35« Policy 2. ^«rican tand Title Association Owner's Policy Form B 3. AiBcrican Land Title Assoclation Residential Title Inaurance Policy 4. A-H^rican Land Title Asaociation Lom Pollcy Titl^ (Xfleer DON^ROE TITLE INSURANCE Order flo. 0-667740 3c»E^Dtnje A 1. Th» eatate or Interest in che land hereinafter described or referred to covered by thta report Is: A FEE 2. title to aald eatate or interest ac che dace hereof Is vested in: CJ. HELTSRIOLE, a married aan, aa to an undivided one-haif interest; and EUaw: L. CKIL. a «ddo«er, aii joint cenanta, »a to an undivided one-half interest, aubijact to lt<M No, 10 of Schedule B. 3. The land referred to in chis report ts situated In the State of Cali- fornia, County of San Dlego, and ia described as follo«B t Parcel 4 in the City of Carlab^ , Q>unty of San Dlego, Scate of California aa ahown on Pi^c 501 of Parcel H»p» ^ filed In the Office of the County Recorder of San Dlego Coiwty, April 16, 1971. TITLE INSURANCE Order l*>. D-667740 Schedule! B Pa??e 1 At the date hereof exceptions to coverage In addition to che printed Exceptlona and ExcluBlons in the policy fom designated on the face page of this Report %K>uld be aa follows: 1. Property taxes, including any asaesanenta collected with taxea, to be levied for the fiscal year 1985-1986 which are a lien not yet payable* 2. Property taxea, including any personal property taxes and any collected with taxes, for th*; fiscal year 1984-1985. 1st Installnent! $792.38 Paid 2nd Inutallment! 792.38 Paid isaeasraent.*} Homeowner a Sxeiapclon: Code Area: Asaeaatsent None 09000 206-050-20 3. The Lien of Suppleaental Taxes, If any, aaaessed purauant to the provlaions of Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 75) of the Reveni^ and Taxation Code of the State of Caltfornia. 4. Tiie privilege and rlf^ht to extend drainage atructurea and excavation and eabanioaent slopea beyond the Itnlts of highway where required for the eonatruction and maintenance of said hlghuay aa contained In the daad Recorded} Noveaber 9, 1951 in Book 4287, page 97, Official Recoids 5. An unrecorded leaae wich certain terma, covenanca, conditions and prcvtalons mt forth therein. Le»!ior: Eugene L. Oftil and Harriet Oail, huaband and tflfe aa joint tenants as to an undivided one half interest, and C J. Heltlbrtdle , a married man as to an uoidivlded one half Interesc Texaco Inc., a DBlav«are corporation Heraoranduc) of Lease October 16, 1963 aa Fll« Mo. 134821, Official Recorda Lessee: Olacloaed by: Recorded J 6. The privilege and right to extend drainage atructurea and excavation and embaniment slopeti beyond the llaita of adjacent State Highmy lAiere required for the construction and maintenance of aaid highway ae contained in the deed Recorded: August 15, 1967 as Pile fe. 121157, Official Itecords 7. An easeaient for the purpose ahoim below and rlghca incidental thereto am set forth in a docuinent Granted tot The Clcy of Carlsbad i^io Representation la made a» to the present oMierahip of aaid eaaemenc) Purpose: Publlc atreet and hit?hway purposes i TITLE INSURANCE Order to. 0-667740 Schedule B Pag* 2 Recorded : Affects i October 19, 1971 aa File No. 241454, «flctal Recorda The route there<if affects a portion of said lani as more fully deiscrlbed in aaid doctaenc 8. The lien of any federal estate tax by reason of tba death of the decedent named below who uas a former owner of «ald land Decedent; Harriet Gell 9. Mf lien for California estate tax payable by reason of the death of Harriet Cell. 10. The community Interest of the apouae of the veste« named below. Vestee i C. J. H#^rtibr idle END OF SC«DOLE 8 NOTS NO. I: The requlreraent that there be eatabllahed of record the death of the decedent named below, whose interest was eatabllahed In the deed Executed by: Irving GUaiainga and %jth S. Cummlnga, huabaisi and wife To: C. J. Hertlbrldle , a married aan, as to an undivided 1/2 Interest { and Eti^em L. Cell and Harriet Cell , huaband and tilfte, aa joint tenants, aa to an end lv ided 1/2 incereat Decedent: Harriet Cell Recorded: October 17, 1956 aa l3ocuaent No. 146172, Mflclal Records ml PARCEL MAP N'-60 I f/VtCSi. SPLIT /V /M -FTO. < tVAV T-/£- ^ /^A/L- IN CO/vC MO^OiVerMT P£ff MAP S-*O* AccEPTCD AS /AjTerf^secnoiv or Ao*^s s-rfttCB-r SCALP Tt C*YSI' Rl' OO'E 30 Qi 0 »»e/r sr Mtvr: ft otv /MAF* 4..0 J7BI FO ^/f' F'>F>eS rAOCEO L S £9^0 A/O f^COFtO — oo ^ASEA^frr ro err- 0^ CA/fLSOAO F>S» oacLMteMT M* _ OATEO — , - y 'r-^ JO' ^0"£ PAfXEL. I^tt_t_ 1.923 ACNES SJ,7»9 se FY \3 P'AFPCEL. /yo Z 2a, 779 SR rr y \T yi F^ARC EL ISf" S l.aoa ACRES 7S, 739 sa. PT 9o'ot' rs" fY 6J' io-iO'£ ^D. TAG IM CONC A/a A^ecoffo - ro cir-r c ^^..smAO .BIT- tfocc'-^^vr A-* OATWO. 'F /t.0O9 so FT L. » /.* £0' .'s -t* FO C£rAO ^ TACK f£r/f sr //KiYF t..O S79I ro cur M n iNrc/fsecT.oN TAMAfiACK Ave ( AOAi..fS ST MAfS SAJt, f tiii TAMAf^ACK AVENUE fo. Bo{.rs f SN/f/cfis MTS^/f SECTION or TA MA/TACK Aft f .je-rre/rsoN sr F'SR M/KFS Sf/eer z a/- j PARCEL MAP A SuWOiV/siON or A PORTION or rrfAcr ^ST af=- TA/t/A^ LAJVOS, /l^AO C/Fy OF CA/rtSaAO. OK/A/rir or- SAN oieao. STATS- or cALiroPN/A 4.ecEND: o ser t' f>iP£s FAaaeo L S 3ffa2 • rooNO AS SNo^y.^/ 9 rouNO r>iF>£s TAaaeo RC e /3,8n A/O /f£COflO ruore: AAONu>A£NTS SMotvN SST ro a£ ser tv/r/viN so OAfs Arre-^ coMr'i.e-rioN or- F^E.}a>'^£o /MF'f^cn.'e'VreN rs BASIS OF BEAFRINGSJ^ TNer ce-Nrei=>i.iN£ or- TA^A/^ACX AveNue r'£fi o£eo, i£ s 6/'.^o• .*s'w tf" fi. or s ^»si SURVBVOfiS CERT/Pi/CAT£: TNIS A/TAP tVAS PP£F>ARE:D BY ME O/i i/NOEfi MX oi/?£criON ANO IS BAseo ur>oN A ncLO SL/^YETf IN COl^r Off/t^A.^E *V/r"V ril£ SUao/l/ISIOfJ AAAP ACT AT THE REauesT or OAy-TO/l^ ENTERPRISES INC. , AVD Cir>' CNCI NEER Ai ro PAfKEL f/' A IN MA/fCH, 1*71. Z HEREey cE/^riPy T//AT AL/. PROVII SI O.M S or rt/E- APP^/CASLE SrAr£- CAtV ANO COCA' /3/rOINAA/CES NA^£ SEEN COAAPLIED INITH, 4..S S0O2. C/rV £NG/A/££R S CERnFICATE: TN.S MAP NAS B£EN EXAMlNEO T%//S /.» OAy or ^pf,,... 197/ xrorr coA^roiP/yiA/vce w/r// T^£ /r£-Ol/'P£A4£''Yrs or SECT/ON //STS' OP^ /-/-iT St'ROll/lSION AilAP ACT cmr £A4eiNEEri, IS,Oia RECORDJft's CERTIF/CA TEy xv^«- A/' jisie i ^/LfO TAi/s /b DA-r ^/^^F£~ '»7/ AT y:OZ ^cLoc/z_/^./^ /A4 a OOK or PARCEL IVI A PS AT PACE S'Wj AT 7W£- REQUEST Or^ NA*',er' /.. rRUAX NAITLE'r' r a£./>0-lH, COL/A/Tf /fECO.ROE^ m^: y^^t^^O OEfMT'^ fEE: SOO Hail to; sute Cleirfnghouse, 1400 Tenth Street. Rm. 121, Sacrsmento, CA 95814 -- 916/445-0613 NOTIC^fccMPLETION AND ENVIRGNME-TTAL DOCUMENT FORM 1. Project Title: Texaco CUP-286 See NOTE Belov* SCH * 2. Lead Agencv: City Of Carlsbad 3a. Street Addrsss: 1200 Elm Avenue 3. Contaj:t Person: Brian Hunter 3b. Cltv: Carlsbad 3c. Cour.ty:__San_Die£0_ PROJECT iocAT::.t 4. County: San Diego 3d. Zip: 92008 3e. Phone: (619) 438-5591 4b.(optional) Assessor's Parcel No._ 206-050-20 4a. C1ty/Conmunity:_Ca_rlsbad_ 4c. Section Twp. _Range_ 5a. Cross Streets: TaiHarack / P.i 0 Pi CO 6. Within 2 miles of: a. State Hwy No. 1-5 7. DOCUMENT TYPE 5b. For Rural, N ea res t Commun i ty: b. Airports c. Waterways PacifiC Ocean CEgA 01 ^HOP 02 ^Early Cons 03 X Neg Oec 04 Draft EIR 05 Supplement/ Subsequent EIR (if so, prior SCH # 06 07 08 NEPA Motice of Intent ^Envir. Assessment/ ^FONSI ^Draft EIS OTHER'' 09 Information Only 10 Final Document 11 Other 8. LOCAL ACTION TYPE 01 General Plan Update 02 New Element 03 General Plan Amendment 04 Master Plan OS Annexation 06 Specific Plan 07 Redevelopment 08 Rezone 09 Land Division (Subdivision, Parcel Map. Tract Map, etc.) 10 X Use Permit 11 Cancel Ag Preserve 12 Other 10. DEVELOPMgNT TYPE 01 ^Residential: Units_ 02 Office: Sq.Ft. Acres Acres _Employees_ 03 X Shopplnq/Coinnercial: Sa.Ft. 1374 SQ.ft. Acres Emp 1 oy ees 04 05 06 07 03 09 10 Jndustrial: Sq.Ft. Acres _Employees_ _Sewer: MGO_ Water: MGD Transportatton-: Type _Minersl ExtratcCtont Mineral, _Power SaBeratl-cjttv Wattage ' Type: . . . Other: 9. TOTAL ACRES: 11. PROJECT ISSUES DISCUSSED IN DOCUMENT 01 Aesthetic/Visual oa Geologic/Seismic 15 Sewer Capacity 22 Water Supply 02 Agricultural Land 09 Jobs/Housing Balance 16 Soil Erosion 23_ Wetland/Riparian 03 Air Quality 10 Minerals 17 Solid Waste 24 ;,4ildlife 04 Archaeological/Historical 11 Noise 18 Toxic/Hazardous 25 Growth Inducing 05 Coastal 12 ^Public Services 19 Traffic/Circulation 26 Incompatible Landuse 06 Fire Hazard 13 Schools 20 Vegetation 27 Cumulative Effects 07 Flooding/Drainage 14 ^Septic Systems 21 Water Quality 23 Other State $ Total S 12. FUNDING(approx.) Federal S 13. PRESENT LAND USE AHD ZONING: Gas station/ commericial 14. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The addition to an existing service station facility of a convenience store at 945 Tamarack Avenue 15. SIGHATURE CF LEAO AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE:. 4^ Date .liine 9, 1986 NOTE: Clearinghouse -will assign Identification numbers for all new projects. If a SCH Number already exists for a project " (e.g. from a Notice of Preparation or previous draft cocunent) please fill It in. KtVihWiNb AtihlNClEi) Resources Agency Air Resources Board Conservation Fish and Game Coastal Commission Caltrans District Caltrans - Planning Caltrans - Aeronautics California Highway Patrol Boating and Waterways Forestry State Water Resources Control Board - Headquarters Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region Division of Water Rights (SWRCB) Division of Water Quality (SWRCB) Department of Water Resources Reclamation Board Solid Waste Management Board Colorado River Board CTRPA (CalTRPA) TRPA (Tahoe RPA) Bay Conservation & Dev't Comm Parks and Recreation Office of Historic Preservation Native American Heritage Comm State Lands Comm Public Utilities Comm Energy Comm Food and Agriculture Health Services Statewide Health Planning (hospitals) Housing and Community Dev't Corrections General Services Office of Local Assistance Public Works Board Office of Appropriate Technology (OPR) Local Government Unit (OPR) Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy Other FOR SCH USE ONLY Date Received at SCH Date Review Starts _ Date to Agencies Date to SCH Catalog Number Proponent J Clearance Date Notes: Consultant Contact Address Phone NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, August 13, 1986, to consider approval of an addition to an existing service station facility of a convenience store on property located on 945 Tamarack Avenue and more particularly described as: A portion of Tract 237 of Thum Lands, in the County of San Diego, according to Map thereof No. 1681. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. If you have any questions please call the Planning Department at 438-5591. If you challenge the Conditional Use Permit in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: CUP-286 APPLICANT: TEXACO PUBLISH: August 2, 1986 CITY OP CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION Carlsbad Joumal Decreed a Legal Nev/spaper by the Superior Court of Son Diego County 3138 ROOSEVELT ST. e P.O. BOX 248 • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 e 729-2345 Proof of Publication STATE OF CALIFORNIA, gs. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, I am a citizen of the I am over the age of I om principal clerk published twice weekly newspaper is published which newspaper at all subscribers, and which City of Carlsbad, Cou NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City ofCarlsbad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Cham- bers, 1200 Elm Avenue. Carlsbad. California, af 6:00 p.m. on Wednes-day. August 13. 1986. to consider approval of an addition to an ex- isting service station facility of a convenience store on property lo- cated on 945 Tamarack Avenue and more particularly described as: A portion of Tract 237 of Thum Lands, in the County of San Diego, according to Map thereof No, 1681. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially in- vited to attend the public hearing. If you have any questions please call the Planning Department at 438-5591, ^. . , If you challenge the Conditional Use Permit in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspon- dence delivered to the City of Carls- bad at or prior to the public hearing, CASE FILE: CUP-286 APPLICANT: TEXACO CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION TEXACO CUP-286 California, for a period exceeding one year next preceding the date of publication of the notice hereinafter referred to; and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: August .2., 1986 . 19 . 19 19 19 . I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Carlsbad, County of San Diego, state of California on the 2nd , day of August. 1986 ^^^^/di^4t^ Clerk of the Printer a 4238: August 2, 1986 Carlsbad Journal Decreed a Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of Son Diego County 3138 ROOSEVELT ST. • P.O. BOX 248 • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 • 729-2345 Proof of Publication STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 55, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am prmcipa I clerk of the printer of the Carlsbad Joumal a newspaper of general circulation, published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of Son Diego, State of California, and which newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general character, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, and which newspaper has been established and published at regular intervals in the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding one year next preceding the date of publication of the notice hereinafter referred to; and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dotes, to-wit: NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCA- TION: 945 Tamarack Ave,, Carls- bad. California. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Con- version of existing lube bay in ser vice station to convenience store. The City of Carlsbad has con- ducted an environmental review of the above described project pur- suant to the Guidelines for Imple- mentation of the California Envi- ronmental Quality Aet and the En- vironmental Protection Ordinance ofthe City ofCarlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declara- tion (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justi- fication for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declara- tion with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department. City Hall. 1200 Elm Aventie. Carls- bad. CA 92008. Comments Hfom the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Plan- ning Department within ten (10) days of date of issuance. Dated: May 10.1986 Case No: CUP—286 Applicant: Texaco MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director CJ 4068: May 10. 1986 May. 10, 1986.. 19.. 19 19. . 19 I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Carlsbad, County of San Diego, state of California on the IOth day of May. 19R6 #202-2M-9/85 X^i/iCrr. . ^ / Clerk of the Printer OWNF]RSHTP LIST WITHIN 300' OF 94 5 TAMARACK AVE., CARLSBAD 205-270-36,37 1 Forest Fisher 1417 Antigua Wy Nev;port Beach, cA 9 26 60 205-270-44 2 Dicx::ese of San Diego Ed & W. P 0 Box 80428 San Diego, CA 92138 206-050-16 3 Dayton Corp, Cons C/O Safev/ay Stores P O Box 3399 Terminal Annx Los Angeles, CA 90051 206-050-17 4 Tharas Hinds 9720 Wilshire Blvd, S. #204 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 206-050-18 Carlsvalley Assoc., Cons P 0 Box 92333 Worldway Postal Center Los Angeles, CA 90009 206-050-20 6 Heltibridle C J, MMNS 1/2 Geil L. & Harriet, HWJT 1/2 P 0 Box 599 Oceanside, CA 92054 206-050-23 7 /oodridge Carlslpad LTD C/O First Pacific Properties 3251 Holiday Court #202 La Jolla, CA 92037 206-050-21 8 Wakeham Derrick & Selma, HWJT Sattler J M TR, NSNS 32.22X 17952 Athens AVe. Villa Park, CA 92667 206-050-22 Parker Oakley, MMNS 3215 Maezel Land Carlsbad, CA 92008 Fred Fiedler & Assoc. 2322 W. Third St. Los Angeles, CA 90057 Attn: Patrick Fiedler Appellant: David Mattson Texaco Refining, Inc. 10 Universal City Plaza Fourth Floor Universal City, CA 91608-1097 Robert Vargo Westcoast Mapping 4431 W. Rosecrans #500 Hawthorne, CA 90 250 OCCUPANT WITHIN 300' OF 9 45 TAMARACK AVE., CARLSBAD Occupant 970 Tamarack AVe Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occrupant 981 Taraarack AVe. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 977 Tannarack AVe. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occ:rupant 973 Tamarack Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 969 Tamarack Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 959 Tamarack AVe. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 985 Tamerack Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. # 101 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occcupant 3969 Adams Ave. #102 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Mams AVe. #103 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #104 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #105 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. # 106 Carlsbad, cA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #107 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #108 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #109 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #110 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #111 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #112 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occ:upant 3969 Adams Ave. #113 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #114 Carlsbad, <CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #115 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #116 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #117 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #118 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #119 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #201 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Page 2 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. # 202 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #203 Carlsbad, CA 92008 0c<3upant 3969 Adams AVe. #204 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #205 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Oct^pant 3969 Adams Ave. #206 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #207 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. 208 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #209 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #210 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #211 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #212 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #213 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #214 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #215 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #216 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #217 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe.#218 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #219 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. # 120 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #121 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #122 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #123 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occnipant 3969 Adams AVe. #124 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #125 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #126 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #127 CArlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #128 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Page 3 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #129 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Oc(2upant 3969 Adams Ave. #130 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe.#131 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #132 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #133 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #134 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave.#135 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #136 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. # 137 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe. #138 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #139 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #220 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave.#221 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave.#221 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #222 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #223 Carlsbad, iCA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #224 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #225 CArlsbad, CA 92008 Occnipant 3969 Adams AVe. #226 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #227 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe.#228 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. #229 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams AVe.#230 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 3969 Adams Ave. # 231 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin Ave, Carlsbad, CA 92008 #1 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 #2 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 #3 Page 4 Occjupant 1060 Chinquapin Ave. # 4 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin Ave. #5 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin Ave. #6 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin AVe. #7 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin Ave. #8 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin AVe. #9 Carlsbad,c CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin AVe. 10 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin #11 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin #12 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin Ave. #13 CArlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin #14 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin #15 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin 16 CArlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin #17 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin #18 CArlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin AVe. #19 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chin(guapin AVe. #20 CArlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin AVe. #21 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin Ave. #22 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin AVe. #23 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin Ave. #24 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chinquapin Ave. #25 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1060 Chiniguapin Ave. #26 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin AVe. #1 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1050 Chin(guapin AVe. #2 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin Ave. #3 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin AVe. #4 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Page 5 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin Ave. #5 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin Ave. #6 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin Ave. #7 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 10 50 Chinquapin Ave, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1050 Chinaquapin Ave. #9 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 10 50 Chinquapin Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 10 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin Av.e 11 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin Ave, CArlsbad, CA 92008 12 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin Ave, Carlsbad, CA 92008 13 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 14 1050 Chinquapin Ave.15 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin Ave, Carlsbad, CA 92008 #16 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin Ave. #17 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin Ave. #18 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant .1050 Chinquapin Ave.#19 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin AVe.#20 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin Ave, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant #21 10 50 Chinquapin Ave, Carlsbad, CA 92008 #22 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin Ave.#23 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1050 Chinquapin AVe. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant #24 1000 Chinquapin AVe Carlsbad, CA 92008 #A1 Occupant 1000 Chinquapin Ave.#A2 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1000 Chinquapin AVe. #A3 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1000 Chinquapin Ave. #A4 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1000 Chinquapin AVe. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant #A5 1000 Chinquapin Ave.#A6 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1000 Chinquapin AVe, Carlsbad, CA 92008 #B1 Page 6 Occupant 1000 Chinquapin Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant #B2 1000 Chinquapin AVe Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant #B3 1000 Chinquapin AVe Carlsbad, CA 92008 #B4 Occupant 1000 Chinquapin AVe. #B5 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant 1000 Chinquapin AVe Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant #B6 1000 Chinquapin Ave, Carlsbad, CA 92008 #B7 Occupant 1000 Chinquapin AVe. #B8 Carlsbad, GA 92008 Occupant 1000 chinquapin Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Occupant #A7 1000 Chinquapin Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 #A8 DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES LAND USE PLANNING OFFICE 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CA 92008-1989 (619) 438-5591 Cit? of Carlfl(bab NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: 945 Tamarack Avenue, Carlsbad, California. PROJSCT DESCRIPTION: Conversion of existing lube bay in service station to convenience store. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration tiiat the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in 1±e Planning Department. A copy of t±ie Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA,, 92008. Comments fran the public are invited. Please submit ccanments in writing to t±ie Planning Department within ten (10) days of date of issuance. DATED: May 10, 1986 CASE NO: CUP-286 APPLICANT: Texaco PUBLISH DATE: May 10, 1986 MICHAEL J. EmZMII Planning Director R ND4 11/85 *^ FEE: • $175.00 RECEIPT NO: C7 S<P^ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - Part I (To Be Completed by APPLICANT) CASE NO: DATE: Applicant: TEXACO REFINING & MARKETING Address of Applicant: 10 UNIVERSAL CITY PLAZA UNIVERSAL CITY. CA 90051-1756 Phone Number: ( 818 ) 505-2420 Name, address and phone number of person to be contacted (if other than Applicant): DAVE MATTSON GENERAL INFORMATION; Description of Project: CONVERT EXISTING SERVICE STATION BUTT.DTNr. INTO CONVENIENCE STORE Project Location/Address: 945 TAMARACK AVENUE Assessor Parcel Number: 206 - 050 - 20 Zone of Subject Property: VR Proposed Use of Site: SITE IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH A SERVICE STATION. PROJECT CONSISTS OF CONVERTING EXISTING ; LUBE BAY INTO CONVENIENCE STORE. List all other applicable applications related to this project: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Environmental Impact Assessments for grading permits must be accompanied with a gradina plan and grading profile. \ 2 Describe the activity area, including distiguishing natural and man- * * made characteristics; also provide precise slope analysis when appropriate. SITE IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH A SERVICE STATION. 3. Describe energy conservation measures incorporated into the design and/or operation of the project. THE BUILDING CONVERSION IS DESIGNED TO CONFORM WITH CALIFORNIA TITLE 24 ENERGY CONSERVATION GUIDELINES. 4 If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household size expected. N/A 5. If commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities. THE PROJECT IS NEIGHBORHOOD AND HIGHWAY ORIENTATED. THE SALES AREA OF THE CONVENIENCE STORE IS 1,300 S.F. 6. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities. N/A 7. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project. N/A -2- I. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT^NALYSIS Answer the following questions by placing a check in the appropriate space. (Discuss all items checked "yes". Attach additional sheets as necessary.) YES NO 1) Could the project significantly change present land uses in the vicinity of the activity? X 2) Could the activity affect the use of a recreational area, or area of important aesthetic value? 3) Could the activity affect the functioning of an established community or neighborhood? 11) Could the activity significantly affect fish, wildlife or plant life? 12) Are there any rare or endangered plant species in the activity ,area? 13) Could the activity change existing features of any of the city's lagoons, bays, or tidelands? 14) Could the activity change existing features of any of the city's beaches? 15) Could the activity result in the erosion or elimination of agricultural lands? 16) Could the activity serve to encourage development of presently undeveloped areas or intensify develop- ment of already developed areas? -3- X X 4) Could the activity result in the displacement of community residents? 5) Could the activity increase the number of low and modest cost housing units in the city? ^ 6) Could the activity decrease the number of low and modest cost housing units in the city? ^ 7) Are any of the natural or man-made features in the activity area unique, that is, not found in other X parts of the county, state or nation? 8) Could the activity significantly affect an historical or archaeological site or its settings? ^ 9) Could the activity significantly affect the potential use, extraction, or conservation of a scarce natural resource? X 10) Does the activity significantly affect the potential use, extraction, or conservation of a scarce natural resource? X X X X X X X YES NO 17) Will the activity require a variance from established environmental standards (air, water, noise, etc.)? X_ 18) Will the activity require certification, authoriza- tion or issuance of a permit by any local, state or federal environmental control agency? X 19) Will the activity require issuance of a variance or conditional use permit by the City? X 20) Will the activity involve the application, use, or disposal of potentially hazardous materials? X_ 21) Will the activity involve construction of facilities in a flood plain? X_ 22) Will the activity involve construction of facilities in the area of an active fault? X_ 23) Will the activity involve construction of facilities on a slope of 25 percent or greater? X_ 24) Could the activity result in the generation of significant amounts of noise? X_ 25) Could the activity result in the generation of significant amounts of dust? X_ 26) Will the activity involve the burning of brush, trees, or other materials? X_ 27) Could the activity result in a significant change in the quality of any portion of the region's air or water resources? (Should note surface, ground water, off-shore.) X_ 28) Will the project substantially increase fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.)? X_ 29) Will there be a significant change to existing land form? X_ (a) Indicate estimated grading to be done in cubic yards: . (b) Percentage of alteration to the present land form: (c) Maximum height of cut or fill slopes: 31) 30) Will the activity result in substantial increases in the use of utilities, sewers, drains or streets? X Is the activity carried out as part of a larger project or series of projects? X -4- II. STATEMENT OF NON-SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS If you have answered yes to one or more of the questions in Section I but you think the activity will have no significant environmental effectSf indicate your reasons below: 18. SAN DIEGO COUNTY ENVIROMENTAL HEALTH FOR FOOD SALES. 19. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONVERT EXISTING LUBE-BAYS INTO CONVENIENCE STORE. III. COMMENTS OR ELABORATIONS TO ANY OF THE QUESTIONS IN SECTION I (If additional space is needed for answering any questions, attach additional sheets as needed.) Signature , /^ -//^TW^'- (Person Completing Report) Date Signed ^C^^ ->^S^ -5- LEGAL DESCRIPTION All that portion of Tract 237 of Thiom Lands, in the County of San Diego, State of Califomia, according to Map thereof No. 1681, filed in the office of the County Recorder of said San Diego County, December 9, 1915, described as a whole as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the center line of Adams Street and the center line of Tamarack Avenue, South 61°20'45" West 515.31 feet to the most Northerly corner of land described in Parcel 2 of the Relinquishment to the City of Carlsbad, recorded July 26, 1954 as Document No. 97644, in Book 5312, page 91 of Official Records; thence along the Northeasterly line of said land, South 29°08'27" East 30 feet to the North- westerly line of said Tract 237, being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along said Northwesterly line, North 61^20'45" East 117.31 feet to a point distant thereon South 61°20'45" West 368 feet from the most Northerly corner of said Tract 237; thence South 28°39'15" East 68 feet; thence South 4°41'30" East 49.24 feet; thence South 61O20'45" West 160 feet to an intersection with the Easterly line of the aforementioned land described in said Relinquishment to the City of Carlsbad; thence along said Easterly line, North 12O23'10" West (Deed North 12027'32" West), to the beginning of a 40 foot radius curve concave Easterly; thence Northeasterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 73°43'55" a distance of 51.47 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Memorandum To: ASSOCIATE PLANNER, Elaine Blackburn From: ASSOCIATE ENGINEER, Clyde Wickham Date: 18 December 1996 Re: Preliminary Review 96-59, Tamarack Texaco Station I have reviewed the above mentioned application and hereby offer the following suggestions or comments to the project. The developer should show circulation and parking onsite. (existing & proposed) The developer should plot semi-truck turn templates and preserve the area to accommodate future fuel deliveries. We use Cal Trans turn template # 407-D. The developer should show existing and proposed NPDES drainage systems. ( usually Oil and Grease separators / filters are required.) The developer should show Fire access and circulation. It looks like the trash enclosure is blocking a fire lane. We recommend relocation to a better location. The developer should include details for the proposed "QSR" remodel. What is specifically going to be remodeled and or removed. Will seating be provided? The developer should consider repair and replacement of adjacent curb, gutter and sidewalk along with this project. Show specific information regarding existing and proposed development ofthe entire site. (walls, buildings, and trash enclosure) The vicinity map should be corrected to show the correct location of this station. It is directly across from Pio Pico Dr. and adjacent to the 1-5 freeway off-ramp. The applicant or Engineer should fill in the site and project information on the plan, (right side) December 18, 1996 • The previous application for this use was DENIED by the Planning Commission and the denial was upheld by the City Council. The applicant should try to build on the proposed project and improve the adjacent circulation and access. The previous project was CUP 286. I have attached the preliminary site plan with red-lined comments to better relay our comments and suggestions. If you need additional information or assistance, please contact this office. Clyde Wickham Associate Engineer Land Use Review Division <<< OOO AT vlHcn^euY QSiU^yyJ)Ci. Add^^-^'*^ WAY AarxjCEf/r To 7>^H ^^LSS '^ST^" ^Km<^ li-^PAcr:^ <eP6><r ^Dis^ CUP T^ \s pie s>Terr. / 01 u s 'yaiy t -1 i IJ ^^OY AT ) H'T^cs^CV''01-4 ^^'"••^*'..\C'^'^£^ - COUID ftii&'nyg: T<;>;4\£U LAME KHO Av^e^oUHD fDK feOT ex^vr uE^r • t)iMir--^feC t^^u'f-i'Y OReAT^ici. oer^VTY ^ Tw^f^E ••^'j*^ V^O^^HL CJ<2J^ , g»EA<^U m^^^C^ \K^C?t4UD (i?0 's) L-<?T s<tes c< f«icit^t3 *!j\feH6 te^t^fr CAUL TC^ V^'^ C^AJ^^LLJ t^C^X. c-or/lAiLVANjTr. -7 Pk(c^ T<^^L EASt VMOULD Ucj^ "0\1.H^K> PMoE*^' C^^IKC^'^ CHARTS* O4o^-J UOS eve i^j. I'iyy'. September 18, 1985 TO: MIKE HOWES, PLANNING DEPARTMENT FRUM: Kent Sears, Engineering Department RE: TEXACO MINI MARKET - TRAFFIC STUDY I have reviewed the referenced study for expansion of the Texaco Station on Pio Pico and Tamarack. The study seems complete and accurate and I suggest we accept the conclusion that no impacts will result. It is unfortunate that all of the recommended changes are city responsibility but I agree with their assessment. I assume you will be contacting Texaco to proceed. Attached is a copy of the study to send with your correspondence. KENT SEARS Traffic Engineer KS:cb SEP 19B5 RECEIVED LAND USE fycyyj City of Carlsbad Planning Departnnent December 20, 1996 Frank J. Faudoa Gary Engineering, Inc. 4901 Morena Blvd., Suite 304 San Diego, CA 92117 SUBJECT: PRE 96-59 - TEXACO SERVICE STATION #0025 APN: 206-050-20 A preliminary review of your project was conducted on December 19, 1996. Listed beiow are the issues raised by staff. Please note that the purpose of a preliminary review is to provide you with direction and comments on the overall concept of your project. The preliminarv review does not represent an in-depth analvsis of vour project. Additional issues of concern mav be raised after vour application is submitted and processed for a more specific and detailed review. Planninq: 1. The plan sheet has too little information on it to enable staff to provide detailed comments regarding some aspects of the proposed use and design. The plan indicates a "QSR" (a "quick service restaurant"), but does not show how much of the building the "QSR" would occupy. It is also unclear how the QSR would function (e.g., carry-out only or seating, microwave heating of pizza/burgers or cooking, etc.). 2. It is unlikely that staff would support the proposed project. In 1986, the City processed an application for a CUP (CUP 286) for the addition of a convenience store to the existing gas sales. That request was denied by the Planning Commission, and the denial was upheld by the City Council on appeal. The primary issue associated with that request was exacerbation of existing traffic and circulation problems. The QSR use proposed appears to be similar to the previous request in that it would also result in increased traffic and circulation problems on the site. Engineering: 1. The developer should show circulation and parking onsite. (existing & proposed) 2. The developer should plot semi-truck turn templates and preserve the area to accommodate future fuel deliveries. We use CalTrans turn template #407-D. 3. The developer should show existing and proposed NPDES drainage systems, (usually Oil and Grease separators/filters are required.) 2075 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (619) 438-1161 • FAX (619) 438-0894 PRE 96-59 - TEXACO SEWICE STATION #0025 DECEMBER 20, 1996 PAGE 2 4. The developer should show Fire access and circulation. It looks like the trash enclosure is blocking a fire lane. We recommend relocation to a better location. 5. The developer should include details for the proposed "QSR" remodel. What is specifically going to be remodeled and or removed. Will seating be provided? 6. The developer should consider repair and replacement of adjacent curb, gutter and sidewalk along with this project. 7. Show specific information regarding existing and proposed development of the entire site, (walls, buildings, and trash enclosure) 8. The vicinity map should be corrected to show the correct location of this station. It is directly across from Pio Pico Dr. and adjacent to the 1-5 freeway off-ramp. 9. The applicant or Engineer should fill in the site and project information on the plan, (right side) 10. The previous application for this use was DENIED by the Planning Commission and the denial was upheld by the City Council. The applicant should try to build on the proposed project and improve the adjacent circulation and access. The previous project was CUP 286. Staff has enclosed a red-lined checkprint for your use. Please contact Elaine Blackburn at (619) 438-1161, extension 4471 if you have any questions. Sinc;Brely, / If] GARY/, WAYNE Assistant Planning Director GEW:EB:kr c: Michael J. Holzmiller Bobbie Hoder File Copy Data Entry DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES LA WD USE PLANNING OFFfCE 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-1989 (619) 438-5591 Citp of Carlsitiab July 30, 1986 TEXACO REFINING & MARKETING INC. 10 Universal City Plaza Universal City, CA 90051-1756 SUBJECT: CUP-286 - Texaco Preliminary Staff Report The preliminary staff report for the above referenced project will be available for you to pick up on Friday, August 1, 1986, after 8 a.m. This preliminary report will be discussed by staff at the Development Coordinating Committee (D.C.C.) meeting which will be held on August 4, 1986. A twenty (20) minute appointment has been set aside for you at 9:30 a.m. If you have any questions concerning your project, you should attend the D.C.C. meeting. It is necessary that yoa bring your reqaired colored exhibit:!s) with yoa to this meeting in order for yoar project to go forward to Planning Coaaission. If yoa do not plan to attend this aeeting, please make arrangeaents to have yoar colored exhibitis) here by the schedaled tiae above. If you need additional information concerning this matter, please contact the Planning Department at 438-5591. CITY OF CARLSBAD MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director By : J^^yu>/u.'^- Qn-n^,.^ Planning Department MJH:ad DEVELOPMENTAL •^^B^H 1200 ELM AVENUE SERVICES ei M CARLSBAD, CA 92008-1989 , (619) 438-5591 LAND USE PLANNINQ OFFICE ^M^^ \i- Citp of Cadffbab March 3, 1986 Texaco Doug Mattson P.O Box 37 56 Los Angeles, California 90051-1756 RE: CUP-286 The Planning Director and the City Engineer have reviewed the application you submitted for the above-referenced project. Based upon this review, it has been determined that there are major problems associated with your application which must be addressed before this application can be scheduled for a Planning Commission hearing. The problems or issues are listed below. Also, the name of the project planner and project engineer is provided. You should set-up a meeting to discuss the issues with the appropriate staff member. Once the problems/issues have been addressed, your application will then be scheduled for a hearing. Problems/Issues 1. Traffic, lot dimensions Project Planner (See attached checklist) Brian Hunter Project Engineer Dan Clark TE XACO E xr*AJSrS EON TRAFFIC IlVnPACX STUDY SEPTEMBER 1985 Prepared for the City of Carlsbad Prepared by BSI Consultants, Inc. San Diego, California M CONSULTANTS, INC. Consultants to Govemmental Agencies September 10, 1985 Mr. Marty Bouman Engineering Department City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: TAMAHACK AVENUE/PIG PICO DRIVE TEXACO STATION EXPANSION TRAFFIC IMPACT Dear Mr. Bouman: Pursuant to your recent authorization, BSI CONSULTANTS, INC. is pleased to submit this traffic impact report on the expansion of the Texaco station at 945 Tamarack Avenue in the City of Carlsbad. This report presents existing traffic conditions, the anticipated traffic generation of the proposed expansion project, an analysis of the development as it would affect existing roadway characteristics, and descriptions of necessary mitigation measures that would be required as a result of the project. It has been a pleasure to provide you with the information contained in this report. Should you have any additional questions relative to the overall analysis results or the methodologies employed, please do not hesitate to call me at (714) 558-1952. Very truly yours, BSI Consultants, Inc. Jerrj^L. Crabill, P.E. Urban Systems Division 16BBD West Bernardo Drive • San Diego, California 92127 • (619] 451-B1Q0 A Berryman Sk Stephenson Industries Company TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 EXISTING STREET NETWORK 1 PUBLIC TRANSIT 5 TRAFFIC FORECASTING METHODOLOGY 5 TRAFFIC GENERATION 5 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT 7 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 7 Existing Conditions 9 Existing Plus Project 10 INTERSECTION MITIGATION MEASURES 10 ROADWAY LINK ANALYSIS 11 ACCESS AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION 11 APPENDIX LIST QF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. KEY PROJECT INTERSECTIONS 1 LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT PAGE 1. VICINITY MAP 2 2. EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES 3 3. SITE PLAN 4 4. PROJECT TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENTS 8 5. PROPOSED ON-SITE IMPROVEMENTS 12 INTRODUCTION This report was prepared to evaluate traffic and circulation impacts associated with the proposed expansion of the Texaco service station located at the intersection of Tamarack Avenue and Pio Pico Drive in the City of Carlsbad. The project is located east of Interstate 5 and west of Adams Street on Tamarack Avenue, as shown in Exhibit 1. The project site is convenient to the Interstate 5 Freeway, with local access provided by Tamarack Avenue and Pio Pico Drive. Exhibit 2 illustrates the existing peak hour traffic volumes along these facilities. A visual inspection was made of the project area as well as the streets and highways which would serve the site. Peak hour counts were performed by BSI Consultants, Inc. while existing traffic data and other daily traffic volume information were obtained from the City of Carlsbad. In addition to the preparation of a traffic generation forecast for the project, existing and future peak period levels of service were evaluated at four key intersections by means of the Critical Movement Analysis raethod. Street improvements needed to support the various analysis scenarios were also identified. Table 1 identifies the key intersections studied. Table 1 Key Project Area Intersections 1. Tamarack Avenue and Interstate 5 northbound 2. Tamarack Avenue and Interstate 5 southbound 3. Tamarack Avenue and Pio Pico Drive 4. Tamarack Avenue and Highland Drive PROJECT DESCRIPTION As currently proposed, the expansion of the Texaco station would consist of adding a mini market to the existing development. The new services at this location would include a small convenience market selling such items as soft drinks, cold sandwiches, snacks, and other items. A site plan is illustrated in Exhibit 3. EXISTING STREET NETWORK The Interstate 5 freeway provides regional access to the site. It is located west of the project area and is aligned in a northwest- southeast direction. It currently services traffic volumes at the Tamarack interchange area at the average of 96,000 vehicles per day (VPD).i The subject 96,000 VPD consumes approximately 83 percent of the freeway capacity at level of service LOS D operation (considered most appropriate for freeway analysis). ^ 1983 Traffic Volumes, State of California, Department of Transportation -1- Exhibit 1 - VICINITY MAP TEXACO STATION EXPANSION -2- 312—> 103 LU 3 Z UJ > < o z < -J z a z OCM CO an p TAMARACK AVENUE Ji| 10 • 193 • 8 370-V7//* 137_^«*r* 700 I I I 18^-|« e PROJECT SITE 57-^ 419-» ... htr xxx EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES NOTE: 1. nom. LESS THAN 5 VEHICLES (NOMINAL) 2. VOLUMES PER SPECIFIC INTERSECTION PEAK HOURS SCHEMATIC NOT TO SCALE Exhibit 2 - EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES TEXACO STATION EXPANSION -3- > I > > 0 < Exhibit 3 - SITE PLAN TEXACO STATION EXPANSION -4- In the project area, Tamarack Avenue runs in an east-west direction and currently services an estimated 14,500 VPD. It is classified by the City of Carlsbad as a Secondary Arterial between Jefferson Street and Adams Street, implying a 64 foot curb to curb pavement width within an 84 foot right-of-way. The existing VPD uses an estimated 73 percent of the 20,000 VPD LOS G capacity. Pio Pico Drive is classified as a local street. Existing daily traffic volumes along this facility are on the order of 3,600 VPD. This represents 72 percent utilization of the 5,000 VPD documented as "environmental capacity" for local streets. PUBLIC TRANSIT The North County Transit District (NCTD) provides transit service to the City. Route 322 operates in the vicinity of the site at the intersection of Tamarack Avenue and Pio Pico Drive. There are approximately one hour headways at this stop, with two buses an hour. TRAFFIC FORECASTING METHODOLOGY The process of estimating the vehicular traffic resulting from a particular land use is referred to as travel demand forecasting. This includes trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment. (Mode split was not used for the subject analysis in view of the proposed development type.) Trip generation is concerned with the prediction of the number of trips per specified time period made to and from a given development. The traffic generation potential for the proposed Texaco Mini-Mart is expressed in "vehicle trip ends", where a trip end is a one-way vehicular movement either entering or departing the given land use. Each vehicle trip has two ends - one at its origin and one at its destination. It is noted that when the traffic generated by a particular site would have external travel orientations, the number of vehicles added to the street system would exactly equal the number of trip ends produced. TRAFFIC GENERATION In this case, the traffic generation potential for the site has been developed from three sources. These include information published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), and information developed from two independent studies of similar developments. The generation values should be considered as conservative in that a worst case type of analysis was used to estimate traffic generation of the site. •5- In the development of the generation forecast for the proposed expansion, it was recognized that all of the traffic generated from the site would have destinations external to the project, and the overall traffic generation forecast would be made up of three primary components (i.e., not all of the site-related traffic would be new to the street system). The three trip making components mentioned above include trips that are already being made to the existing service station, trips that will be new to the site but linked to a stop for gasoline (i.e. the added attraction of the mini-mart creates new stop-off business), and new trips that would be specifically directed to the convenience shopping portion of the site (new trips to the street system) and independent of the purchase of gasoline. Because the service station is already in operation, many of the trips that would be "generated" by the site are already on the street system. For example, area residents are already using this location to obtain gasoline. Similarly, given the location of the station near the freeway, much of the stations business is already attributable to freeway travelers. Also, once the project is completed, there will be some new patrons to the site who will stop for two purposes - one to obtain gasoline and another to shop in the market. As clarification, prior to expansion a person returning home from work could stop and fill up with gas and then continue home. Subsequent to the completion of the project however, the same stop could be linked to a visit into the mini-mart. The same reasoning could be applied to freeway travelers. Under these conditions, the "traffic generation" of the site would be overstated unless appropriate adjustments were made. To evaluate the extent of new trips to area roadways (specific or linked trips) and hence, the necessary adjustments described above, the results of two independent studies of similar developments were reviewed and compared to values published by ITE. The first study was developed in the City of Santa Ana for another Texaco site; the second was conducted in the City of Yorba Linda. Results of the studies indicate the trips that were directed only to the convenience areas of the service stations were quite small (i.e., new trips). In comparison to total arriving traffic at these locations, values of 23 percent and 16 percent were respectively calculated for the Santa Ana and the Yorba Linda locations. The greatest utilization of both locations was for gasoline, as evidenced by percentages of 56 percent in Santa Ana and 66 percent in Yorba Linda. Finally, the dual utilization of the sites for both gas and the convenience market (i.e., linked trip) were respectively found to be 10 percent and 16 percent. Premised upon the above-referenced information, it is estimated that 300 new trips would be generated by the proposed Carlsbad project on a daily basis (150 inbound and 150 outbound). During the critical afternoon peak hour, the above studies indicated that a nominal total of 30 vehicle trips (i.e., 10 percent of VPD) would be generated. Based on ITE-documentation, the peak hour trips would be evenly distributed into 15 inbound and 15 outbound trip ends. TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT Traffic distribution and assignment, as the final stages of the travel demand forecast process, involves determination of the directional orientation of trips generated to and from the proposed development. In this case, the distribution of generated vehicle trips was based on several sources. These include a review of the proposed operational characteristics of the site, a review of the existing street and highway system, and an analysis of the site's location and access points relative to the adjacent street and freeway interchange system. The primary consideration in the distribution analysis concerned the fact that it is doubtful that many of the new trips generated by the project would use the freeway. The primary distribution would therefore occur over surface streets and given the location of the residential and commercial developments in the area, most of the trips would occur via Tamarack Avenue east of the site. On that basis, it is estimated that approximately 10 percent of project traffic would be oriented to and from the north and south along Interstate 5. Another 20 percent would use Pio Pico Drive with 40 percent traveling to and from the east along Tamarack Avenue (east of the freeway). The remaining 20 percent would arrive and depart along Tamarack Avenue from areas west of the freeway. Exhibit 4 presents project traffic assignments to area roadways. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS The overall traffic analysis for the Texaco station on Tamarack Avenue consists of two parts. These include an evaluation of intersection operation and an evaluation of the effect of project traffic on midblock conditions (also called roadway "links"). The intersection evaluation incorporates the affects of geometry and signal operation (or non-signal operation) while the roadway link analysis compares individual and/or cumulative traffic volumes to the theoretical carrying capacity of a roadway. The impact of project and other traffic volumes on key intersec- tions described in Table 1 was quantified via the Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) techniques for signalized and unsignalized intersections. -7- (10%) (20%) IU 3 Z UJ > < o z < ..J z o (40%) TAMARACK AVENUE *6b 6 ior PROJECT SITE XX _ xxx PM PK HR VOLS DAILY VOLS SCHEMATIC NOT TO SCALE Exhibit 4 - PROJECT TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENTS TEXACO STATION EXPANSION -8- Level of service is a relative measure of driver satisfaction which ranges from LOS A (free flowing traffic conditions) to LOS F (forced flow). LOS D is traditionally considered the minimum acceptable level for peak hour conditions in urbanized or developing areas. At that level and assuming that an intersection is signalized, most traffic clears on the first available green phase, but short accumulations of vehicles may occur. For the purposes of this study, LOS C was considered as the limiting criteria. The same general reasoning applies to unsignalized intersections except that contrary to the signalized intersection approach which looks at the intersection as a whole, the unsignalized intersection approach looks at each individual approach to the intersection. CMA calculations at the key project intersections have been performed for existing conditions, and for existing plus project condit ions. Existing Conditions The following information presents a summary of the Critical Movement Analysis for the key intersections. It is noted that because the intersection of Tamarack Avenue and Pio Pico Drive is signalized, a separate method was used for this intersection (signalized intersection analysis) than was used for the other three intersections described in Table 1 (unsignalized intersection analysis). Tamarack Avenue and Interstate 5 northbound on and off ramps are controlled by a one-way stop sign on the northbound off ramp. The northbound right turns were found to be operating at LOS C, indicating that this approach is experiencing average and/or acceptable delays. Northbound left turns, however, were determined to operate at LOS E; this means that at peak hour there is congestion and/or unacceptable traffic delays for the subject movement. The eastbound left turns are at LOS A and have little or no delay. Tamarack Avenue and Interstate 5 southbound on and off ramps are also controlled by a one-way stop sign on the off ramp. The southbound right turns have little or no delay at peak hour as shown by a LOS A condition. For southbound left turns however, congestion occurs as is characterized by a calculated service level E condition. Tamarack Avenue and Highland Avenue is a four-way stop controlled intersection and was found to be operating at service level A. It is noted that this intersection is also comparatively distant from the Texaco station and would have little effect on any traffic congestion which may occur at other locations. -9- Tamarack Avenue and Pio Pico Drive is a signalized intersection. A high level of service A was calculated for existing conditions at this location. Existing Plus Project In view of the minimal 300 VPD and 30 peak hour trip ends forecasted to be generated by full development and occupancy of the project site, the overall impact in this case will be light. Indeed, based on a review of projected volumes as shown in Exhibit 4 and a recalculation of CMA's for the respective intersection locations, the previously developed intersection service levels will remain in their pre-project condition. It is therefore apparent that the contribution of project traffic to area intersection conditions will be negligible. INTERSECTION MITIGATION MEASURES Although the previous analysis indicates that additional intersection measures are not required as part of project development, the results of the CMA data indicates that signalization may be required at the Tamarack Avenue intersections with the northbound and southbound freeway ramps. Although directional traffic count information is unavailable for a precise traffic signal warrant analysis, a generalized review of recent two-way counts and turning volumes were employed for this purpose. The existing two-way traffic volume along Tamarack Avenue is on the order of 14,000 vehicles per day. Assuming an equal split in the eastbound and the westbound directions and combining these volumes with daily traffic volumes using the ramps, it appears that the Minimum Vehicular Warrant as prescribed by the State may be satisfied. Since only one of several warrants need to be satisfied, this information would strongly suggest that both of the Tamarack Avenue freeway intersections should be signalized. It is noted that if this were to be done, the resulting intersection service levels at both locations would fall well within the minimum acceptable service level C condition. Although not associated with the impact of project traffic, another recommendation relative to upgrading intersection operation concerns the Tamarack intersection with Pio Pico. In this case, our field review indicated that for northbound traffic exiting the Texaco service station, a non-standard signal indication is used to control the various outbound movements. Instead of the normal sequence of green-yellow-red, this indication displays yellow-yellow-red. Since this could lead to driver confusion, longer vehicular delays, and an increased accident potential, the initial yellow ball should be changed to green. 10- ROADWAY LINK ANALYSIS While the CMA technique provides a reliable estimate as to projected intersection operation, another procedure is commonly used as a supplement to the overall analysis and includes a review of existing and future 24 hour volume totals (daily volumes) along the roadway approaches to the various intersections (also called roadway "links"). Based on projected volume levels, typical roadway capacities, and other information relating to intersection capacity and vehicular storage requirements, the combined evaluation provides an estimate as to the number of lanes that will be required to service future traffic. Similar to the Critical Movement Analysis, the evaluation in this regard has been organized in terms of existing traffic and the added increment of traffic produced from the expansion of the Texaco statioh. Volume to Capacity (V/C) ratios were then calculated based on a typical two lane carrying capacity of 5,000 vehicles per day as well as 20,000 vehicles per day for a four lane facility. The limiting value for these relationships is a V/C ratio of 1.0 (100 percent). When this value is reached, the demand volume or usage on a particular roadway has theoretically reached its design capacity. This is based on assumed peak hour service level conditions. When the V/C ratio is 1.0 or greater, additional improvements, such as extra lanes, signal interconnect, and/or minimum driveway spacing should be implemented. As indicated below, both the existing roadway link condition and the existing plus project condition fall well within acceptable limits. Currently, Tamarack Avenue is operating at a V/C ratio of 0.73 (14,500 vpd/20,000 vpd) while Pio Pico is operating at a V/C ratio of 0.72 (3,600 vpd/5,000 vpd). With the addition of project traffic, near imperceptible increases in the respective ratios are expected. Along Tamarack Avenue, the project will add a maximum daily volume tabulation of about 120 vehicles per day, maintaining the V/C ratio of 0.73. Along Pio Pico, the impact of about 60 vehicles per day will be imperceptible as shown by a calculated V/C ratio of 0.73. Since both of these values fall well within the limiting value of 1.00, no additional improvements to area roadways are required due to the impact of project traffic. ACCESS AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION Field review of the site noted relatively minor problems which may easily be mitigated prior to the completion of the project. The first problem, as previously discussed, concerns a green signal indication that is missing from the traffic signal which controls all traffic leaving the gas station by its easterly exit. However, since this is within the responsibility of signal maintenance, the implementation and responsibility of corrective measures should not be directed toward the development. -11- I I For the existing intersection channelization, it is recommended that moderate striping modifications be completed along the Pio Pico approach to Tamarack Avenue into the project. The reason for this is that the curvature of existing striping channels southbound traffic to the west. Inasmuch as prohibitions are not in affect for southbound left turns or through maneuvers, this current striping condition creates a confusing situation for traffic destined for the east or traffic which would continue south into the project site. Due to the width of the Pio Pico approach, adequate mitigation for this condition would be available through the creation of two southbound approach lanes. One lane could be used for southbound through and left turns while the other lane could be used for right turns only. A suggested configuration for this concept is presented in Exhibit 5. The extent of on-site improvements recommended for the project are minor. To ensure that certain existing problems are not allowed to continue, and also to ensure that on-site circulation is enhanced, consideration should be given to the modification of the site's westerly driveway to produce right turn in and right turn out movements only. This can be accomplished by installing a "No Left Turn" sign for vehicles leaving the gas station at the westerly exit. Although a potential still exists for left turns into the site at this location, it is doubtful that this would occur given the location of the traffic signal and hence, the opportunity for easier entrance into the project from that point as compared with the westerly driveway. These improvements will result in better utilization of the traffic signal, the potential for accidents at the western drive at the gas station will be reduced, and area safety will be enhanced since all outbound left turns will be made at the eastern-most signalized driveway. These improvements are shown in Exhibit 5. 12- 1-5 NORTHBOUND^ ON-RAMP TAMARACK AVENUE £ tc/r'/F/^^r/c OFF-RAMF»^ 1 < Install R17 - No Left Turn Sign For Project Site Driveway to PROJECT SITE KEY EXISTINQ STRIPING PROPOSED STRIPING —PROPOSED NO LEFT TURN SIGN Exhibit 5 - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TEXACO STATION EXPANSION -13- APPENDIX INTERSECTION TURN HOVENENT COUNT East/Hest Street: North/South Street: TAHARACK AVE. INTERSTATE S SOUTH, onraip and oHraap Date of Count: 06/2S/BS Counts Taken by: P. RODGERS Day of Heek: TUESDAY Data Input by: P. RODGERS TINE 0 F D A Y (P.N.) PEAK HOUR 4:00 4:15 4:30 4:45 5:00 5:15 5:30 5:45 4:15 TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO DIRECTION HOVENENT 4:15 4:30 4:45 5:00 5:15 5:30 5:45 6:00 5:15 LEFT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 THR0U6H 70 72 88 78 74 66 72 78 312 EASTBOUND RIGHT 24 23 28 26 26 26 40 37 103 U-TURN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 94 95 116 104 100 92 112 0 415 LEFT 37 28 58 58 43 41 58 71 187 THROUGH 77 70 79 71 71 57 79 80 291 NESTBOUND RIGHT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U-TURN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 114 98 137 129 114 98 137 151 478 LEFT . 35 85 60 85 86 63 84 70 316 THROUGH 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 SOUTHBOUND RIGHT 24 46 52 47 41 SO 52 46 186 U-TURN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 59 132 112 132 127 113 136 116 503 LEFT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 THROUGH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NORTHBOUND RIGHT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U-TURN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 =s=sr==sss=ssssss====s Essssssrss ======== sssczssxs =======1 sscsssaa 8SSSSZBSS .SSSS3SSI Essssasss sssssssss TOTAL INTERSECTION 267 325 365 365 341 303 385 267 1396 INTERSECTION TURN HOVEHENT COUNT East/Hest Street: North/South Street: Date of Count: Day of Heek: TAHARACK AVE. INTERSTATE 5 NORTH, onraap and offraep 06/19/85 l£DNESDAY Counts Taken by: Data Input by: P. RODGERS P. RODGERS TINE 0 F D A Y (P.H.) PEAK HOUR 4:00 4:15 4:30 4:45 5:00 5:15 5:30 5:45 4:45 TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO DIRECTION HOVENENT 4:15 4:30 4:45 5:00 5:15 5:30 5:45 6:00 5:45 LEFT 19 28 30 31 29 44 32 42 136 THROUGH 79 105 95 101 96 100 73 117 370 EASTBOUND RIGHT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U-TURN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 98 133 125 132 125 144 105 0 506 LEFT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 THROUGH 69 83 92 77 73 72 116 84 338 NESTBOUND RIGHT 22 47 42 50 46 52 31 53 179 U-TURN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 91 130 134 127 119 124 147 137 517 LEFT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 THROUGH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SOUTHBOUND RIGHT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U-TURN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEFT 38 51 28 33 43 70 47 SO 193 THROUGH 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 NORTHBOUND RIGHT 67 72 98 121 134 139 150 134 544 U-TURN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 105 124 127 155 177 209 197 184 738 ESSSSSSSXSSSS TOTAL INTERSECTION 294 387 386 414 421 477 449 321 1608 INTERSECTION TURN HOVEHENT COUNT East/Hest Street: North/South Street: TAHARACK AVE. PIO PICO DR. Date of Count: 06/26/85 Counts Taken by: P. RODGERS Day of Heek: HEDNESDAY Data Input by: P. RODGERS TINE 0 F D A Y (P.N.) PEAK HOUR 4:00 4:15 4:30 4:45 5:00 5:15 5:30 5:45 4:45 TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO DIRECTION HOVENENT 4:15 4:30 4:45 5:00 5:15 5:30 5:45 6:00 5:45 LEFT 27 29 34 24 39 36 38 30 137 THROUGH 131 148 198 139 188 190 183 150 700 EASTBOUND RIGHT 3 3 5 4 2 4 8 6 18 U-TURN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 161 180 237 167 229 230 229 0 855 LEFT 1 4 2 0 2 1 1 5 4 THROUGH 79 64 122 95 87 101 116 91 399 NESTBOUND RIGHT 9 17 26 5 6 18 21 20 50 U-TURN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 89 85 150 100 95 120 138 116 453 LEFT 24 23 14 20 18 17 26 13 81 THROUGH I 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 4 SOUTHBOUND RIGHT 28 11 25 11 36 20 25 13 92 U-TURN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 53 34 39 34 54 38 51 26 177 LEFT 0 2 3 0 0 8 3 6 11 THROUGH 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 NORTHBOUND RIGHT 5 I 3 8 4 2 2 3 16 U-TURN 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 TOTAL 5 3 6 8 4 11 5 9 28 sssass ssxsssxxa sssasss sssssxsBcussssasszaaassa Bssxaasxa esxxsssxxr TOTAL INTERSECTION 308 302 432 309 382 399 423 151 1425 INTERSECTION TURN HOVEHENT COUNT East/Hest Street: North/South Street: TAHARACK AVE. HIGHLAND AVE. Date of Count: Day of Heek: 06/27/85 THURSDAY Counts Taken by: P. Data Input by: P. RODGERS RODGERS TINE 0 F D A Y (P.H.) PEAK HOUR 4:00 4:15 4:30 4:45 5:00 5:15 5:30 5:45 4:30 TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO DIRECTION HOVENENT 4:15 4:30 4:45 5:00 5:15 5:30 5:45 6:00 5:30 LEFT 15 12 12 15 20 10 IS 4 57 THROUGH 87 61 90 91 142 96 88 79 419 EASTBOUND RIGHT 13 21 19 19 18 18 17 12 74 U-TURN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 115 94 121 125 180 124 120 0 550 LEFT 1 5 2 1 2 3 1 1 8 THROUGH 59 51 54 41 63 35 47 30 193 NESTBOUND RIGHT 4 4 3 2 2 3 13 2 10 U-TURN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 64 60 59 44 67 41 61 33 211 LEFT 10 13 6 8 9 10 4 10 33 THROUGH 6 2 9 5 12 6 8 2 32 SOUTHBOUND RIGHT 7 2 I 5 6 8 5 2 20 U-TURN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 23 17 16 18 27 24 17 14 85 LEFT IS 5 13 16 15 12 13 8 56 THROlffiH 6 10 1 6 10 4 3 2 21 NORTHBOUND RIGHT 3 0 5 0 3 1 0 0 9 U-TURN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 24 IS 19 22 28 17 16 10 86 SSSSSSSSS3SSS SSSSSSS SSSSSSS S38SSSSS SSSSSSSSSS _______ __________ TOTAL INTERSECTION 226 186 215 209 302 206 214 57 912 Unsignalized "T' Intersection Capacity Calculation Form Intersection. nr Location Plan: «1_ Hourly Demand Ttaffic Volumes from -V'/S to S.'IS,, Appioach » T A T c MovctT»era BILC AT — c^ Volume 107 pch (see Tahic 1 p 537 3/t Step 1 Rigiit 'Him nrom C Step3 Conflicting Flows = Mj, = (from Fig. I) Critical Cap from Table 2 T, = Capacity from Fig. 2 = Shared Lane - See Step 3 No Shared Lane Demand = Available Reserve = I!>elay & Level of Service (Table 3) Step 2 Left TUm fram A Conflicting Flows = M|, = (from Fig. 1) Critical Gap from Table 2 T, = Capacity ftom Fig. 2 = Demand - Capacity Used = Impedance Factor from Fig. 3 = Available Reserve = Delay SL Level of Service (Table 3) Left Tiim from C Conflicting Flows = M« = (ftom Fig. I) Critical Gap from Table 2 T, ' Capacity from Fig. 2 = Adjust for Impedance No Shared Lane Demand = Available Reserve = Delay & Level of Service (Table 3) Shared Lane Demand = Shared Lane with Right Tum Capacity of Shared Lane = Available Reserve - Delay A Level of Service (Table 3) WA, + O + Ar sec Mv.= M, M,-c, = ^23.^ /U7T4^ ^ /t^ z>e4Ayr7n B, + Br - /g>3 + 3/2. = ^/S ^ •S'^ sec I00«6t/M,)=»_^32_» c, WA« + AT- + Bi + Br • O ^/itf^. O +312.^ ^/SB ^ C, + Ci = C^ = (CjMit M„ = _ -pr» Mil — C. -O D«y - Time. CoMiol. Picvailing Speed. 3cD Q>^Bvh»H- jF-JieEiAMi// J?AA/7/> i^£-^-r -nrJ/iPA/C^ MAU^ STTy^gTAnST aaii/&f^:s^/GAy ^^oJiAfryf^^ rrr ;f^r4^ Unsignalized "T" Intersection Capacity Calculation Form Intersection TA/FiA/PMr^k' ^Uf?A//^e/:3rA/-n=-/iSr-A7S- S C/V/0/^A>) Location Plan: Hourly Demand Traffic Volumes from f.'^S to JT:^ . p m Approach c 'V* Movement Bn ^ A. r Mr — Volume 17*^-37<g pch i<«.vTihlr II ^'y:y.:c 272f <1P5 Step! Step3 Right "nim from C Conflicting Flows * Mj, = (from Fig I) Critical Gap from Table 2 T, = Capaciiy from Fig. 2 = Shared Lane - See Step 3 No Shared Lane Demand = Availabte Reserve = Delay & Level of Service (Table 3) Step 2 Left Tbrn from jry^ Conflicting Flows = M« = (fromFig. I) Critical Gap from Table 2 T, - Capacity from Fig . 2 » Demand = Capacity Used = Impedance Factor from Fig. 3 = Available Reserve = Delay & Level of Service (Table 3) Left Tlim from C Conflicting Flows = M|, = (ftom Fig. U Critical Gap from Table 2 T, = Capacity from Fig. 2 >° Adjust for Impedance No Shared Lane Demand = Available Reserve = Delay ft Level of Service (Table 3) Shared Lane Demand = Shared Lane with Right Tum Capacity of Shared Lane ^ Avaiiabie Reserve - Delay A Level of Service (Table 3) •/4A, + Ar = Mv. = M, = .43^, M.-c,=.2fs:^ B» 33g = S-g sec M»w * M, =. ioo(^liyM,)». M» - Jll • SO. c, ^ 'AA, + Ar + Bi + Br = n,P sec M/M " - wrk M«.xP. = M, = _LlZ,rt M,-Ci ^13 M„ = c« + Ci = c„ = _ 'C, -t- Ci) (CVM,) + (Ci/M,) M,j = _ Mil - • — -IID c Day /^i>raiVSy/>Ay Twne -^'^ r-^- Prevailing Speed. v^^fi^ ^eauM\r fyiAio ^err -rcVt/f/S MJHAIT strryei^yH^ CQ^^ES7?DA/ •^nwT^fif^ AT j>EAj^ rAks^j A^sa ^t/zy/T- -7i»/i/.s ^/ia/>n fnnm^M^ C3 C i? I T I C A L M 0 V £ « £ N T ANALYSIS ADplication: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION OPERATIONS & DESIGN Street No. 1 (APPROACHES 1 & 2); TAMARACK AVENUE Street No. 2 (APPROACHES 3 & 4): PIO PICO DRIVE Locafion: CITY OF CARLSBAD Problem Statement: CALCULATE EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE Code:PICO Run Oate: 5/25/85 Data Input 8y J. Lower 3/8(3) £/S(l)—I—»/B(2) Design Hour: 4:45 PM TO 5:45 PH N/8(4) 't*tttt**t*****t*****t»»*»***tt*t***t****t*t»****M***************^ CALCULATE PERIOD VOLUMES (Passenger Cars/Hour): HOURLY OPPOSE TRUCK LOCAL PASS. CAR PERIOD APPROACH DIRECTION MOVEMENT PHASE VOLUME VOLUME (%) 8US/HR VOLUME PHF VOLUME 1 EASTBOUND LEFT B2 137 449 5.6 0 145 .93 156 THROUGH AIT 700 N/A 5.6 0 739 .93 795 RIGHT AIR 18 N/A 5.6 0 19 .93 20 2 WESTBOUND LEFT 81 4 718 5.6 0 4 .82 5 • THROUGH A2T 399 N/A 5.6 Q 421 .82 514 RIGHT A2R 50 N/A 5.6 0 53 .82 64 3 SOUTHBOUND LEFT 84 81 17 5.6 0 86 .82 104 • THROUGH A3T 4 N/A 5.6 0 4 .82 5 • RIGHT A3R 92 N/A 5.6 0 97 .82 118 4 NORTHBOUND LEFT B3 11 96 5.6 Q 12 .64 18 • THROUGH A4T 1 N/A 5.6 0 1 .64 2 • RIGHT A4R 16 N/A 5.6 0 17 .64 26 ADJUST VOLUMES FOR TURN MOVEMENTS, PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY, LANE UTILIZATION. & LANE HIDTH: SEPARATE PED/ TURN EFFECT. UTIL. WIDTH ADJUST. NO. VOLUME/ APPROACH MOVEMENT PHASE? LANE? HOUR FACTOR VOLUME ADJ. ADJ. VOLUME LANES LANE 1 LEFT NO YES < 99 2.00 311 1.00 1.00 311 1 311 THROUGH YES YES < 99 1.00 795 1.05 1.00 855 2 428 + RIGHT NO NO < 99 1.00 20 1.00 1.00 2 LEFT + NO NO < 99 4.00 21 1.00 1.00 THROUGH YES NO < 99 1.00 514 1.00 1.00 599 1 599 • RIGHT NO NO < 99 1.00 64 1.00 1.00 3 LEFT + NO NO < 99 1.00 104 1.00 1.00 THROUGH YES NO < 99 1.00 5 1.00 1.00 228 1 228 + RIGHT NO NO < 99 1.00 118 1.00 1.00 4 LEFT + NO NO < 99 1.00 18 1.00 1.00 THROUGH YES NO < 99 1.Q0 2 1.00 1.00 46 1 46 + RIGHT NO NO < 99 1.00 26 1.00 1.00 DESIGNATE PROBABLE PHASING & ADJUST FOR OVERLAP: NUMBER OF PHASES: iii*'>it**t***t*****t**t»***$*******»*}t»^ * « CRITICAL VOLUME SUMMATION: 1083 « « NOT APPLICABLE Al OR 82 OR A2B1 A384 OR A483 855 228 LEVEL OF SERVICE: A- «a*s«*s«s«««««««»««*«*««««*««»x»x«x«»« « RECALCULATE? ««ss»««««»«y««»«x««««««««4««««»«««*«»«x«»«s»»«s«»»«««««««««««»««»»» CRITICAL MOVEMENT ANALYSIS Application: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION OPERATIONS i DESIGN Street No. 1 (APPROACHES 1 & 2): TAHARACK AVENUE Street No. 2 (APPROACHES 3 & 4): HIGHLAND DRIVE Location: CITY OF CARLSBAD ProbleB Statenent: CALCULATE EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE Code:rAHH Run Date:08/05/85 Data Input By D. JONES S/B(3) E/B(l)--W/8(2) N/B(4) Design Hour: 4:30 PH TO 5:30 PM CALCULATE PERIOD VOLUMES (Passenger Cars/Hour): HOURLY OPPOSE TRUCK LOCAL PASS. CAR PERIOD APPROACH DIRECTION MOVEMENT PHASE VOLUME VOLUME (I) BUS/HR VOLUME PHF VOLUME 1 EASTBOUND LEFT B2 57 203 5.6 0 60 .76 79 THROUGH AIT 419 N/A 5.6 0 442 .76 582 H RIGHT AIR 74 N/A 5.6 0 78 .76 103 2 WESTBOUND LEFT Bl 8 493 5.6 0 8 .79 11 u THROUGH A2T 193 N/A 5.6 0 204 .79 258 II RIGHT A2R 10 N/A 5.6 0 11 .79 13 3 SOUTHBOUND LEFT B4 .33 30 5.6 0 35 .79 44 " THROUGH A3T 32 N/A 5.6 0 34 .79 43 » RIGHT A3R 20 N/A 5.6 0 21 .79 27 4 NORTHBOUND LEFT B3 56 52 5.6 0 59 .77 77 THROUGH A4T 21 N/A 5.6 0 22 .77 29 It RIGHT A4R 9 N/A 5.6 0 10 .77 12 tinntnntnnnm-iinU'iiutnniitnmntmmHitnnmnmnm ADJUST VOLUMES FOR TURN MOVEMENTS, PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY, LANE UTILIZATION, & LANE WIDTH: SEPARATE FED/ APPROACH MOVEMENT PHASE? LANE? HOUR F, 1 LEFT + THROUGH + RIGHT LEFT t THROUGH t RIGHT LEFT + THROUGH + RIGHT LEFT + THROUGH + RIGHT NO YES NO NO YES YES NO NO YES ( ( { NO < NO ( NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 ******************************************* URN EFFECT. UTIL. WIDTH CTOR VOLUME ADJ. ADJ. ADJUST. NO. VOLUME/ VOLUME LANES LANE 00 00 79 582 103 21 258 13 44 43 27 77 29 12 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 764 293 114 118 764 293 114 118 'ii:tui'if'itutiiu**nuu**u*unnHunnH'*mHunn*n DESIGNATE PROBABLE PHASING & ADJUST FOR OVERLAP: NUMBER OF PHASES: ***)(:*********»m********************* NOT APPLICABLE * CRITICAL VOLUME SUMMATION: 882 * A1B2 OR A2B1 764 (A1B2) * A3B4 OR A4B3 118 (A463) ************************************** * LEVEL OF SERVICE: A+ * ************************************** * RECALCULATE? ******************************************************************************************************* CRITICAL MOVEMENT ANALYSIS Application: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION OPERATIONS I DESIGH Street No. 1 (APPROACHES 1 & 2): TAMARACK AVENUE Street No. 2 (APPROACHES 3 & 4): INTERSTATE 5 SOUTH ON/OFF RAMPS Location: CITY OF CARLSBAD Problea Stateaent: CALCULATE EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE Code:TAMIS Run Date:08/05/85 Data Input By D. JONES S/B(3) E/B(l) -W/B(2) Design Hour: 4:15 PH TO 5:15 PM N/B(4) ******************************************************************************************************* CALCULATE PERIOD VOLUMES (Passenger Cars/Hour): HOURLY OPPOSE TRUCK LOCAL PASS. CAR PERIOD APPROACH DIRECTION MOVEMENT PHASE VOLUME VOLUME {%) BUS/HR VOLUME PHF VOLUME 1 EASTBOUND LEFT B2 0 291 5.6 0 0 .89 0 II THROUGH AIT 312 N/A 5.6 0 329 .89 370 » RIGHT AIR 103 N/A 5.6 0 109 .89 122 2 WESTBOUND LEFT Bl 187 415 5.6 0 197 .87 227 II THROUGH A2T 291 N/A 5.6 0 307 .87 353 u RIGHT A2R 0 N/A 5.6 0 0 .87 0 3 SOUTHBOUND LEFT B4 316 0 5.6 0 334 .95 351 tl THROUGH A3T 1 N/A 5.6 0 1 .95 1 RIGHT A3R 186 N/A 5.6 0 196 .95 207 4 NORTHBOUND LEFT B3 0 187 5.6 0 0 0 0 THROUGH AAT 0 N/A 5.6 0 0 0 0 It RIGHT A4R 0 N/A 5.6 0 0 0 0 ******************************************************************************************************* ADJUST VOLUMES FOR TURN MOVEMENTS, PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY, LANE UTILIZATION, & LANE WIDTH: APPROACH MOVEMENT SEPARATE PHASE? LANE? PED/ TURN FACTOR EFFECT. VOLUME UTIL. ADJ. WIDTH ADJ. ADJUST. VOLUME LANES VOLUME/ LANE LEFT THROUGH + RIGHT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT LEFT + THROUGH RIGHT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT YES YES YES NO NO NO YES YES . NO YES NO YES NO NO 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0 370 122 454 353 0 351 1 207 0 0 0 00 00 00 05 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 492 454 371 397 207 492 454 185 397 207 ******************************************************************************************************* DESIGNATE PROBABLE PHASING & ADJUST FOR OVERLAP: NUMBER OF PHASES: ************************************** NOT APPLICABLE * CRITICAL VOLUME SUMMATION: 889 * Al OR Bl OR A2 492 (Al) * 84 OR A3R 397 (B4) ************************************** * LEVEL OF SERVICE: A+ * ************************************** * RECALCULATE? *******************************************************.************************************************ CRITICAL MOVEMENT ANALYSIS Application: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION OPERATIONS & DESIGN Street No. 1 (APPROACHES 1 i 2): TAHARACK AVENUE Street No. 2 (APPROACHES 3 8, 4): INTERSTATE 5 NORTH ON/OFF RAHPS Location: CITY OF CARLSBAD Probieu Stateaent: CALCULATE EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE Code:TAMIN Run Date:08/05/85 Data Input By D. JONES S/B(3) E/B(l) —W/B(2) Design Hour: 4:45 PH TO 5:45 PM N/B(4) ******************************************************************************************************* CALCULATE PERIOD VOLUMES (Passenger Cars/Hour): HOURLY OPPOSE TRUCK LOCAL PASS. CAR PERIOD APPROACH DIRECTION MOVEMENT PHASE VOLUME VOLUME il) BUS/HR VOLUME PHF VOLUME 1 EASTBOUND LEFT B2 136 517 5.6 0 144 .88 163 THROUGH AIT 370 N/A 5.6 0 391 .88 444 tl RIGHT AIR 0 N/A 5.6 0 0 .88 0 2 WESTBOUND LEFT Bl 0 370 5.6 0 0 .88 0 THROUGH A2T 338 H/A 5.6 0 357 .88 406 n RIGHT A2R 179 N/A 5.6 0 189 .88 215 3 SOUTHBOUND LEFT B4 0 545 5.6 0 0 0 0 THROUGH A3T 0 N/A 5.6 0 0 0 0 RIGHT A3R 0 H/A 5.6 0 0 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND LEFT B3 193 0 5.6 0 204 .88 232 B THROUGH A4T 1 N/A 5.6 0 1 .88 1 It RIGHT A4R 544 N/A 5.6 0 574 .88 653 ******************************************************************************************************* ADJUST VOLUMES FOR TURN MOVEMENTS, PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY, LANE UTILIZATION, i LANE WIDTH: SEPARATE PED/ TURN EFFECT. UTIL. WIDTH ADJUST. NO. VOLUME/ APPROACH MOVEMENT PHASE? LANE? HOUR FACTOR VOLUME ADJ. ADJ. VOLUME LANES LANE 1 LEFT NO YES ( 99 2.00 326 1.00 1.00 326 1 326 THROUGH YES YES ( 99 1.00 444 1.05 1.00 466 2 233 RIGHT NO NO ( 99 1.00 0 1.00 1.00 2 LEFT NO NO ( 99 2.00 0 1.00 1.00 THROUGH YES NO ( 99 1.00 406 1.00 1.00 620 1 620 + RIGHT NO NO { 99 1.00 215 1.00 1.00 3 LEFT NO NO < 99 2.00 0 1.00 1.00 THROUGH NO NO { 99 1.00 0 1.00 1.00 RIGHT NO NO ( 99 1.00 0 1.00 1.00 4 LEFT + NO YES ( 99 1.00 232 1.00 1.00 233 1 233 THROUGH YES NO < 99 1.00 1 1.00 1.00 RIGHT NO YES ( 99 1.00 653 1.00 1.00 653 1 653 ********************************************************************** DESIGNATE PROBABLE PHASING & ADJUST FOR OVERLAP: NUMBER OF PHASES: 2 NOT APPLICABLE * CRITICAL VOLUME SUMMATION: 1273 * Al OR B2 OR A2 620 (A2) * B3A4T OR A4R 653 (A4R) ************************************** * LEVEL OF SERVICE: B- * ************************************** * RECALCULATE? ******************************************************************************************************* V STAFF REPORT / , \ / : DATE: AUGUST 1 3 , 1 9 86 ' ... TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: CUP-286 - TEXACO - The addition to an existing service station facility of a convenience store at 945 Tamarack Avenue. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission APPROVE the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and ADOPT Resolution No. 2575 APPROVING CUP-286 based on the findings contained therein. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to convert an existing service station facility at 945 Tamarack Avenue into a convenience store and retail gasoline outlet. The site is surrounded by a shopping center to the east and south, 1-5 to the west, and another gas station to the north. The plan includes conversion of the existing lubrication bay, exterior renovation of the building, enlargement of the canopy, addition of planter areas, and new signage. Total food mart area is 1,374 square feet. The applicant is providing seven parking spaces. III. ANALYSIS Planning Issues 1) Can the four findings required for approval of a conditional use permit, be made? Specifically: a) That the requested use is necessary or desirable for the development of the community; is essentially in harmony with various elements and objectives of the General Plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be located; b) That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use; c) That all of the yards, setbacks, wall, fences, landscaping and other features necessary to adjust the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be provided and maintained; d) That the street system serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle all traffic generated by the proposed use. 2) Does the proposed project comply with the development standards required for approval of a conditional use permit for an automobile service station? (See Exhibit "X" for details.) DISCUSSION The required use is necessary for the development of the community. The service station facility provides an essential service adjacent to a major interstate freeway allowing transient vehicles to minimally impact the neighborhood surrounding this commercial area while providing a convenience for this same neighborhood. This site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use. The site is large enough to accommodate all of the required parking onsite and still provide for substantial landscape areas. As the site is adjacent to a freeway and otherwise surrounded by commercial development, there is no necessity to adjust the use to other uses in the neighborhood; it is already compatible. Engineering staff believes the proposed site design provides for safe and adequate traffic circulation The attached traffic impact study presents existing traffic conditions, the anticipated traffic generation of the proposed expansion project, an analysis of the development as it would affect existing roadway characteristics, and descriptions of the necessary mitigation measures that are the conditions of approval for this project. Review of the project indicates substantial conformance to the minimum requirements of a service station facility (Exhibit "X") with the exception of planter areas and proposed signage. The proposed perimeter planter areas have a minimum width of four feet. The proposed signage exceeds the amount allowable under existing ordinance. Staff has conditioned the approval of this project to meet the minimum requirements. As conditioned, staff believes that the use is appropriate for the site, consistent with the zoning and General Plan, and compatible with surrounding uses. Staff further believes that all of the findings necessary for approval of a conditional use permit can be made. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Planning Director has determined that this project will not have a significant impact on the environment and, therefore, issued a Negative Declaration on May 10, 1986, -2- i ATTACHMENTS 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2575 2. Location Map 3. Background Data Sheet 4. Disclosure Form 5. Exhibits "A" - "E", dated February 7, 1986 6. Texaco Expansion Traffic Impact Study, September 1985 7. Exhibit "X", dated April 3, 1986 BWH:ad 7/3/86 -3- 1„ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2575 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO 4 AN EXISTING SERVICE STATION OF A CONVENIENCE STORE ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT 945 5 TAMARACK AVENUE. APPLICANT: TEXACO 6 CASE NO; CUP-286 7 WHEREAS, a verified application has been filed with the 8 City of Carlsbad and referred to the Planning Commission; and 9 WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request 10 as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and 11 WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, 12 the Planning Commission did, on the 13th day of August, 1986, hold 13 a duly noticed public hearing to consider said application on property described as: 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 A portion of Tract 237 of Thum Lands, in the County of San Diego, according to Map thereof No. 1681, i i WHEREAS, at said hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to CUP-286. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning i I Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows: (A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. ' I (B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the! Commission APPROVES CUP-286, based on the following findings ' and subject to the following conditions: i Finding s; 1) The site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the development since the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate commercial development at the intensity pro- posed . 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2) The project is consistent with all City public facility pol- icies and ordinances since: a) The Planning Commission has, by inclusion of an appropriate condition to this project, ensured building permits will not be issued for the project unless the City Engineer determines that sewer service is available, and building cannot occur within the project unless sewer service remains available, and the Planning Commission is satisfied that the requirements of the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan have been met insofar as they apply to sewer service for this project. b) All necessary public improvements have been provided or will be required as conditions of approval. c) The applicant has agreed and is required by the inclusion of an appropriate condition to pay a public facilities fee. Performance of that contract and payment of the fee will enable this body to find that public facilities will be available concurrent with need as required by the General Plan. 3) This project will not cause any significant environmental impacts and a Negative Declaration has been issued by the Planning Director on May 10, 1986 and approved by the Planning Commission on August 13, 1986. 4) This project requires the construction of the improvements or facilities listed in the conditions of approval or the payment of fees in lieu of construction. This project creates a direct need for the improvements or facilities for the reasons stated in the staff report. If the improvements or facilities are not provided, the project will create an unmitigated burden on existing improvements and facilities. Further, the improvements and facilities are necessary to provide safe, adequate and appropriate service to future residents of the project consistent with City goals, policies and plans. 5) The applicant is by condition, required to pay any increase in public facility fee, or new construction tax, or development fees, and has agreed to abide by any additional requirements established by a development management or public facility program ultimately adopted by the City of Carlsbad. This will ensure continued availability of public facilities and will mitigate any cumulative impacts created by the project. 6) That the proposed use is necesary and desirable for the development of the community, is essentially in harmony with the various elements and objectives of the General Plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in this zone. The service station facility provides an essential service adjacent to the freeway for both transient and local vehicles in a commercial area. PC RESO NO. 2575 -2 ^ 7) That the subject property is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use. The site is large enough to 2 accommodate all required parking and still provide for substantial landscaping. 3 8) All of the yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping and ^ other features necessary to adjust the requested use to existing and permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be ^ provided and maintained. Due to location and the nature of surrounding uses, the project is already compatible. 6 9) The street system serving the subject property is adequate to handle all traffic generated by the proposed use. The attached traffic impact study presents existing traffic " conditions, the anticipated traffic generation of the proposed expansion project, an analysis of the development as it would affect existing roadway characteristics, and descriptions of the necessary mitigation measures that are the conditions of approval for this project. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Conditions: 1) Approval is granted for CUP-286, as shown on Exhibits "A" - "E", dated February 7, 1986, incorporated by reference and on file in the Planning Department. Development shall occur substantially as shown unless otherwise noted in these conditions. 2) This project is approved upon the express condition that building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property unless the City Engineer determines that sewer facilities are available at the time of application for such sewer permits and will continue to be available until time of occupancy. This note shall be placed on the final map . 3) This project is also approved under the express condition that the applicant pay the additional public facilities fee adopted by the City Council on April 22, 1986 and any development fees established by the City Council pursuant to Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code for the City wide facility and improvement plan and the Local Facilities Management Plan and, to fulfill the applicant's agreement to pay the public facilities fee dated July 7, 1986, and the agreement to pay fees for facilities and improvements, copies of which are on file with the City Clerk and is incorporated by this reference. If the fees are not paid this application will not be consistent with the General Plan and approval for this project shall be void. 4) Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time of building permit issuance. 28 ^^''^ESO NO. 2575 -3- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5) Water shall be provided to this project pursuant to the Water Service agreement between the City of Carlsbad and the Costa Real Water District, dated May 25, 1983. 6) The applicant shall prepare a 24"x36" reproducible mylar of the final site plan incorporating the conditions contained herein. Said site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permit s. 7) All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris. 8) Any signs proposed for this development shall be designed in conformance with the City's Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval of the Planning Director prior to installation of such signs. 9) Trash receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a six-foot high masonry wall with gates pursuant to City standards. Location of said receptacles shall be approved by the Planning D irector. 10) All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be architecturally integrated and concealed from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets, pursuant to Building Department Policy No. 80-6, to the satisfaction of the Directors of Planning and Building. 1 1 ) This conditional use permit is granted for a period of five years. This conditional use permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Director on a yearly basis to determine if all conditions of this permit have been met and that the use does not have a significant detrimental impact on surround- ing properties or the public health and welfare. If the Planning Director determines that the use has such significant adverse impacts, the manager shall recommend that the Planning Commission, after providing the permittee the opportunity to be heard, add additional conditions to mitigate the significant adverse impacts. This permit may be revoked at any time after a public hearing, if it is found that the use has a significant detrimental effect on surrounding land uses and the public's health and welfare, or the conditions imposed herein have not been met. This permit may be extended for a reasonable period of time not to exceed five years upon written application of the permittee made not less than 90 days prior to the expiration date. In granting such extension, the Planning Commission shall find that no substantial adverse effect on surrounding land uses or the public's health and welfare will result because of the continuation of the permitted use. If a substantial adverse effect on surrounding land uses or the public's health and welfare is found, the extension shall be considered as an original application for a conditional use permit. There is no limit to the number of extensions the Planning Commission may grant. PC RESO NO. 2575 -4- 1 12) Building identification and/or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings so as to be plainly visible 2 from the street or access road; color of identification and/or addresses shall contrast to their background color. 13) If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the payment of any fees in lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this project are challenged, this approval shall be suspended as provided in Government Code Section 65913.5. If any such condition is determined to be invalid this approval shall be invalid unless the City Council determines that the project without the condition complies with all requirements of law. 8 14) Before obtaining a final map or building perrait, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall full comply withe the 9 provisions of Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code •^0 15) The project shall provide perimeter planter areas of a minimum of six feet in width 11 16) The applicant shall pay the traffic impact fee adopted by the 12 City Council for this area of the City. Engineering Conditions 16) The developer shall install "no left turn" signs for vehicles leaving the station at the westerly driveway 17) The developer shall provide a minimum 9-foot wide vehicle •^^ access way adjacent to the sales area. The area shall be posted or striped for no parking to the satisfaction of the l"** City Engineer. This area shall be designed to allow westbound vehicles to exit at the easterly driveway, 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 18) The developer shall install a wheelchair ramp at the northeast corner of Tamarack Avenue and the northbound freeway offramp. //// //// //// //// //// //// //// 28 Pc'^RESO NO. 2575 -5- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 13th day of August, 1986, by the following vote, to wit: AYES : NOES : ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CLARENCE SCHLEHUBER, Chairman CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER PLANNING DIRECTOR PC RESO NO. 2575 -6- OCATION MA LOCATION TEXACO CUP-286 BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: aJP-286 APPLICANT: Texaco REQUEST AND LOCATION: The addition to an existing service station facility of a convenience store at 945 Tamarack Avenue LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A portion of Tract 237 of Thum Lands, in the County of San Diego, according to Map thereof No. 1681 AJN: 206-050-20 Acres .39 Proposed No. of Lots/Units GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation Neighborhood Commercial Density Allowed NA Density Proposed NA Existing Zone Cl Proposed Zone Cl Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: zoning Land Use Site Cl Neighborhood Commercial North Cl Travel Service South Cl Neighborhood Commercial East Cl Neighborhood Commercial West 1-5 1-5 PUBLIC FACILITIES School District Carlsbad Water Carlsbad Sewer Carlsbad EDU's Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated December 3, 1985 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT X Negative Declaration, issued May 10, 1986 E.I.R. Certified, dated Other, TE X ACO E XI=» AJSrS ION TRAFFIC: iivnpACT STUDY SKF'TKMBER 1 Q85 Prepared for the City of Carlsbad Prepared by BSI Consultants, Inc. San Diego, California TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 EXISTING STREET NETWORK I PUBLIC TRANSIT 5 TRAFFIC FORECASTING METHODOLOGY 5 TRAFFIC GENERATION 5 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT 7 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 7 Existing Conditions 9 Existing Plus Project 10 INTERSECTION MITIGATION MEASURES 10 ROADWAY LINK ANALYSIS 11 ACCESS AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION 11 APPENDIX LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. KEY PROJECT INTERSECTIONS 1 LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT PAGE 1 . VICINTTY MAP 2 2. EXISTING Tr?AFFIC VOLUMES 3 3. SITE PLAN 4 4. PROJECT TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENTS 8 5. PROPOSED ON-SITE IMPROVEMENTS 12 INTRODUCTION This report was prepared to evaluate traffic and circulation impacts associated with the proposed expansion of the Texaco service station located at the intersection of Tamarack Avenue and Pio Pico Drive in the City of Carlsbad. The project is located east of Interstate 5 and west of Adams Street on Tamarack Avenue, as shown in Exhibit 1. The project site is convenient to the Interstate 5 Freeway, with local access provided by Tamarack Avenue and Pio Pico Drive. Exhibit 2 illustrates the existing peak hour traffic volumes along these facilities. A visual inspection was made of the project area as well as the streets and highways which would serve the site. Peak hour counts were performed by BSI Consultants, Inc. while existing traffic data and other daily traffic volume information were obtained from the City of Carlsbad. In addition to the preparation of a traffic generation forecast for the project, existing and future peak period levels of service were evaluated at four key intersections by means of the Critical Movement Analysis method. Street improvements needed to support the various analysis scenarios were also identified. Table 1 identifies the key intersections studied. Table 1 Key Pro.ject Area Intersections 1. Tamarack Avenue and Interstate 5 northbound 2. Tamarack Avenue and Interstate 5 southbound 3. Tamarack Avenue and Pio Pico Drive 4. Tamarack Avenue and Highland Drive PROJECT DESCRIPTION As currently proposed, the expansion of the Texaco station would consist of adding a mini market to the existing development. The new services at this location would include a small convenience market selling such items as soft drinks, cold sandwiches, snacks, and other items. A site plan is illustrated in Exhibit 3. EXISTING STREET NETWORK The Interstate 5 freeway provides regional access to the site. It is located west of the project area and is aligned in a northwest- southeast direction. It currently services traffic volumes at the Tamarack interchange area at the average of 96,000 vehicles per day (VPD).i The subject 96,000 VPD consumes approximately 83 percent of the freeway capacity at level of service LOS D operation (considered most appropriate for freeway analysis). 1 1983 Traffic Transportation Volumes, State of California, Department of •1- -2- UJ D Z UJ > < X a .50 .399 •nom CM CO CO TAMARACK AVENUE Ji| 10 •193 8 18 -> ;:E<O c PROJECT SITE 57-^ 419—f XXX = EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES NOTE: 1. nom. LESS THAN 5 VEHICLES (NOMINAL) 2. VOLUMES PER SPECIFIC INTERSECTION PEAK HOURS SCHEMATIC NOT TO SCALE Exhibit 2 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES TEXACO STATION EXPANSION -3- UJ 3 Z ai > < o < GC < < 5 Zi 33''i's Exhibit 3 - SITE PLAN TEXACO STATION EXPANSION -4- In the project area, Tamarack Avenue runs in an east-west direction and currently services an estimated 14,500 VPD. It is classified by the City of Carlsbad as a Secondary Arterial between Jefferson Street and Adams Street, implying a 64 foot curb to curb pavement width within an 84 foot right-of-way. The existing VPD uses an estimated 73 percent of the 20,000 VPD LOS C capacity. Pio Pico Drive is classified as a local street. Existing daily traffic volumes along this facility are on the order of 3,600 VPD. This represents 72 percent utilization of the 5,000 VPD documented as "environmental capacity" for local streets. PUBLIC TRANSIT The North County Transit District (NCTD) provides transit service to the City. Route 322 operates in the vicinity of the site at the intersection of Tamarack Avenue and Pio Pico Drive. There are approximately one hour headways at this stop, with two buses an hour. TRAFFIC FORECASTING METHODOLOGY The process of estimating the vehicular traffic resulting from a particular land use is referred to as travel demand forecasting. This includes trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment. (Mode split was not used for the subject analysis in view of the proposed development type.) Trip generation is concerned with the prediction of the number of trips per specified time period made to and from a given development. The traffic generation potential for the proposed Texaco Mini-Mart is expressed in "vehicle trip ends", where a trip end is a one-way vehicular movement either entering or departing the given land use. Each vehicle trip has two ends - one at its origin and one at its destination. It is noted that when the traffic generated by a particular site would have external travel orientations, the number of vehicles added to the street system would exactly equal the number of trip ends produced. TRAFFIC GENERATION Tn this case, the hrnffic generation potential for the site has been developed from t h r" e e s o u c e s . These include L n f o r ni a t i o ii published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), and information developed from two independent studies of similar developments. The generation values should be considered as conservative in that a worst case type of analysis was used to estimate traffic generation of the site. In the development of the generation forecast for the proposed expansion, it was recognized that all of the traffic generated from the site would have destinations external to the project, and the overall traffic generation forecast would be made up of three primary components (i.e., not all of the site-related traffic would be new to the street system). The three trip making components mentioned above include trips that are already being made to the existing service station, trips that will be new to the site but linked to a stop for gasoline (i.e. the added attraction of the mini-mart creates new stop-off business), and new trips that would be specifically directed to the convenience shopping portion of the site (new trips to the street system) and independent of the purchase of gasoline. Because the service station is already in operation, many of the trips that would be "generated" by the site are already on the street system. For example, area residents are already using this location to obtain gasoline. Similarly, given the location of the station near the freeway, much of the stations business is already attributable to freeway travelers. Also, once the project is completed, there will be some new patrons to the site who will stop for two purposes - one to obtain gasoline and another to shop in the market. As clarification, prior to expansion a person returning home from work could stop and fill up with gas and then continue home. Subsequent to the completion of the project however, the same stop could be linked to a visit into the mini-mart. The same reasoning could be applied to freeway travelers. Under these conditions, the "traffic generation" of the site would be overstated unless appropriate adjustments were made. To evaluate the extent of new trips to area roadways (specific or linked trips) and hence, the necessary adjustments described above, the results of two independent studies of similar developments were reviewed and compared to values published by ITE. The first study was developed in the City of Santa Ana for another Texaco site; the second was conducted in the City of Yorba Linda. Results of the studies indicate the trips that were directed only to the convenience areas of the service stations were <5uite small (i.e., new trips). In comparison to total arriving traffic at these locations, values of 23 percent and 16 percent were respectively calculated for the Santa Ana and the Yorba Linda locations. The greatest utilization of both locations was for gasoline, as evidenced by percentages of 56 percent in Santa Ana and 66 percent in Yorba Linda. Finally, the dual utilization of the sites for both gas and the convenience market (i.e., linked trip) were respectively found to be 10 percent and 16 percent. -6- Premised upon the above-referenced information, it is estimated that 300 new trips would be generated by the proposed Carlsbad project on a daily basis (150 inbound and 150 outbound). During the critical afternoon peak hour, the above studies indicated that a nominal total of 30 vehicle trips (i.e., 10 percent of VPD) would be generated. Based on ITE-documentat ion, the peak hour trips would be evenly distributed into 15 inbound and 15 outbound trip ends. TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT Traffic distribution and assignment, as the final stages of the travel demand forecast process, involves determination of the directional orientation of trips generated to and from the proposed development. In this case, the distribution of generated vehicle trips was based on several sources. These include a review of the proposed operational characteristics of the site, a review of the existing street and highway system, and an analysis of the site's location and access points relative to the adjacent street and freeway interchange system. The primary consideration in the distribution analysis concerned the fact that it is doubtful that many of the new trips generated by the project would use the freeway. The primary distribution would therefore occur over surface streets and given the location of the residential and commercial developments in the area, most of the trips would occur via Tamarack Avenue east of the site. On that basis, it is estimated that approximately 10 percent of project traffic would be oriented to and from the north and south along Interstate 5. Another 20 percent would use Pio Pico Drive with 40 percent traveling to and from the east along Tamarack Avenue (east of the freeway). The remaining 20 percent would arrive and depart along Tamarack Avenue from areas west of the freeway. Exhibit 4 presents project traffic assignments to area roadways. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS The overall traffic analysis for the Texaco station on Tamarack Avenue consists of two parts. These include an evaluation of intersection operation and an evaluation of the effect of project traffic on midblock conditions (also called roadway "links"). The intersection evaluation incorporates the affects of geometry and signal operation (or non-signal operation) while the roadway link analysis compares individual and/or cumulative traffic volumes to the theoretical carrying capacity of a roadway. The impact of project and other traffic volumes on key intersec- tions described in Table 1 was quantified via the Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) techniques for signalized and unsignalized intersect ions. -7- (10%) (20%) UJ D Z UJ > < o z < _l I o X (40%) TAMARACK AVENUE 6 eo' PROJECT SITE (10%) KEY XX xxx PM PK HR VOLS DAILY VOLS SCHEMATIC NOT TO SCALE Exhibit 4 - PROJECT TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENTS TEXACO STATION EXPANSION -8- Level of service is a relative measure of driver satisfaction which ranges from LOS A (free flowing traffic conditions) to LOS F (forced flow). LOS D is traditionally considered the minimum acceptable level for peak hour conditions in urbanized or developing areas. At that level and assuming that an intersection is signalized, most traffic clears on the first phase, but short accumulations of vehicles may purposes of this study, LOS C was considered criteria. The same general reasoning applies intersections except that contrary to the signalized intersection approach which looks at the intersection as a whole, the unsignalized intersection approach looks at each individual approach to the intersection. available green occur. For the as the limiting unsignalized to CMA calculations at the key project intersections have been performed for existing conditions, and for existing plus project conditions. Existing Conditions The following information presents a summary of the Critical Movement Analysis for the key intersections. It is noted that because the intersection of Tamarack Avenue and Pio Pico Drive is signalized, a separate method was used for this intersection (signalized intersection analysis) than was used for the other three intersections described in Table 1 (unsignalized intersection analysis). venue and Interstate 5 northbound on and off ramps are by a one-way stop sign on the northbound off ramp. The right turns were found to be operating at LOS C, that this approach is experiencing average and/or delays. Northbound left turns, however, were to operate at LOS E; this means that at peak hour there and/or unacceptable traffic delays for the subject eastbound left turns are at LOS A and have little or Tamarack A controlled northbound indicat ing acceptable determined is congest movement no delay ion The Tamarack Avenue and Interstate 5 southbound on and off ramps are also controlled by a one-way stop sign on the off ramp. The southbound right turns have little or no delay at peak hour as shown by a LOS A condition. For southbound left turns however, congestion ocjcurs level E condition. as is characterized a calculated servic Tamarack Avenue and Highland Avenue is a four-way stop controlled intersection and was found to be operating at service level A. It is noted that this intersection is also comparatively distant from the Texaco station and would have little effect on any traffic congestion which may occur at other locations. •9- Tamarack Avenue and Pio Pico Drive is a signalized intersection. A high level of service A was calculated for existing conditions at this location. Existing Plus Pro.ject In view of the minimal 300 VPD and 30 peak hour trip ends forecasted to be generated by full development and occupancy of the project site, the overall impact in this case will be light. Indeed, based on a review of projected volumes as shown in Exhibit 4 and a recalculation of CMA's for the respective intersection locations, the previously developed intersection service levels will remain in their pre-project condition. It is therefore apparent that the contribution of project traffic to area intersection conditions will be negligible. INTERSECTTON MITIGATION MEASURES Although the previous analysis indicates that additional intersection measures are not required as part of project development, the results of the CMA data indicates that signalization may be required at the Tamarack Avenue intersections with the northbound and southbound freeway ramps. Although directional traffic count information is unavailable for a precise traffic signal warrant analysis, a generalized review of recent two-way counts and turning volumes were employed for this purpose. The existing two-way traffic volume along Tamarack Avenue is on the order of 14,000 vehicles per day. Assuming an equal split in the eastbound and the westbound directions and combining these volumes with daily traffic volumes using the ramps, it appears that the Minimum Vehicular Warrant as prescribed by the State may be satisfied. Since only one of several warrants need to be satisfied, this information would strongly suggest that both of the Tamarack Avenue freeway intersections should be signalized. It is noted that if this were to be done, the resulting intersection service levels at both locations would fall well within the minimum acceptable service level C condition. Although not associated with the impact of project traffic, another recommendation relative to upgrading intersection operation concerns the Tamarack intersection with Pio Pico. Tn this case, our field review indicated that for northbound traffic exiting the Texaco service station, a non-standard signal indication is used to control the various outbound movements. Instead of the normal sequence of green-yellow-red, this indication displays yellow-yellow-red. Since this could lead to driver confusion, longer vehicular delays, and an increased accident potential, the initial yellow ball should be changed to green. -10- ROADWAY LINK ANALYSIS While the CMA technique provides a reliable estimate as to projected intersection operation, another procedure is commonly used as a supplement to the overall analysis and includes a review of existing and future 24 hour volume totals (daily volumes) along the roadway approaches to the various intersections (also called roadway "links"). Based on projected volume levels, typical roadway capacities, and other information relating to intersection capacity and vehicular storage requirements, the combined evaluation provides an estimate as to the number of lanes that will be required to service future traffic. Similar to the Critical Movement Analysis, the evaluation in this regard has been organized in terms of existing traffic and the added increment of traffic produced from the expansion of the Texaco station. Volume to Capacity (V/C) ratios were then calculated based on a typical two lane carrying capacity of 5,000 vehicles per day as well as 20,000 vehicles per day for a four lane facility. The limiting value for these relationships is a V/C ratio of 1.0 (100 percent). When this value is reached, the demand volume or usage on a particular roadway has theoretically reached its design capacity. This is based on assumed peak hour service level conditions. When the V/C ratio is 1.0 or greater, additional improvements, such as extra lanes, signal interconnect, and/or minimum driveway spacing should be implemented. As indicated below, both the existing roadway link condition and the existing plus project condition fall well within acceptable limits. Currently, Tamarack Avenue is operating at a V/C ratio of 0.73 (14,500 vpd/20,000 vpd) while Pio Pico is operating at a V/C ratio of 0.72 (3,600 vpd/5,000 vpd). With the addition of project traffic, near imperceptible increases in the respective ratios are expected. Along Tamarack Avenue, the project will add a maximum daily volume tabulation of about 120 vehicles per day, maintaining the V/C ratio of 0.73. Along Pio Pico, the impact of about 60 vehicles per day will be imperceptible as shown by a calculated V/C ratio of 0.73. Since both of these values fall well within the limiting value of 1.00, no additional improvements to area roadways are requi r'ed due to the impact of project traffic. ACCESS AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION Field review of the site noted relatively minor problems which may easily be mitigated prior to the completion of the project. The first problem, as previously discussed, concerns a green signal indication that is missing from the traffic signal which controls all traffic leaving the gas station by its easterly exit. However, since this is within the responsibility of signal maintenance, the implementation and responsibility of corrective measures should not be directed toward the developraent. -11- For the existing intersection channelization, it is recommended that moderate striping modifications be completed along the Pio Pico approach to Tamarack Avenue into the project. The reason for this is that the curvature of existing striping channels southbound traffic to the west. Inasmuch as prohibitions are not in affect for southbound left turns or through maneuvers, this current striping condition creates a confusing situation for traffic destined for the east or traffic which would continue south into the project site. Due to the width of the Pio Pico approach, adequate mitigation for this condition would be available through the creation of two southbound approach lanes. One lane could be used for southbound through and left turns while the other lane could be used for right turns only. A suggested configuration for this concept is presented in Exhibit 5. The extent of on-site improvements recommended for the project are minor. To ensure that certain existing problems are not allowed to continue, and also to ensure that on-site circulation is enhanced, consideration should be given to the modification of the site's westerly driveway to produce right turn in and right turn out movements only. This can be accomplished by installing a "No Left Turn" sign for vehicles leaving the gas station at the westerly exit. Although a potential still exists for left turns into the site at this location, it is doubtful that this would occur given the location of the traffic signal and hence, the opportunity for easier entrance into the project from that point as compared with the westerly driveway. These improvements will result in better utilization of the traffic signal, the potential for accidents at the western drive at the gas station will be reduced, and area safety will be enhanced since all outbound left turns will be made at the eastern-most signalized driveway. These iraprovements are shown in Exhibit 5. 1-5 NORTHBOUND ON-RAMP TAMARACK AVENUE £ t/y/fM^r/c ^aryo 5c.iii£ 1-5 .NORTHBOUND OFF-RAMP / 1 Sl' > Install R17 - No Left Turn Sign For Project Site Driveway -st- PROJECT SITE (Vl ro KEY EXISTING STRIPING PROPOSED STRIPING * PROPOSED NO LEFT TURN SIGN Exhibit 5 - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TEXACO STATION EXPANSION -13- _r attar tns xnuQrracii-j.uiu ^<wu j^^^^ that further informati^is required, you will be so a^ised. • / . ^J- A°PL1CANT: TEXACO REFINING & .MARKETING INC AGENT: Name (individual, partinership, joint venture, corporation, syndication) 10 UNIVERSAL CITY PLAZA. UNIVERSAL CITY, CA 90051-1756 Business Address (818) 505-2420 Telephone Number FRED FIEDLER & ASSOCIATES Name 2322 W. 3RD ST., LOS ANGELES, CA 90057-1906 Business Address (213) 381-7891 . Telephone Number MEMBERS: Name -(individual, partner, joint ventxrre, corporation, syndication) Home Address Business Address Telephone Nuaber Telephone dumber Eome Address Business .Address Teleohone Ncnbsr Telephone llunber (Attach more sheets if necessary) declare under penalty of perjury that the information contained in this dis- closure is true and correct and that it will remain true and correct and may be* relied upon as being true and correct until amended. ..AgenCy 0-.-.'ner, Partner Section 21.42.010(7){B) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. (3) In the event a permit is granted for an automobile service station, the following standards of development therefore shall be required as conditions of such granting: (i) Planning Department approval of architectural elevations to ensure that the use will harmonize with the neighborhood. (ii) Approval by the Planning Department of landscape plans consisting of at least the following: (I) Perimeter planter areas of a minimum of six feet in width and planter areas adjacent to the structure. (II) Six-inch concrete curb bounding all planter areas. (Ill) Landscaping including a combination of flowers, shrubs, and trees. (IV) A sprinkler system providing total and effective coverage to all landscaped areas. (V) A statement delineating a maintenance schedule and responsibility for maintenance of landscaped areas. (iii) A six-foot high masonry wall shall be constructed on all sides of the subject property which adjoins residential or professional zoned property. (iv) All exterior lighting shall be shielded or oriented in such way so as not to glare on adjacent properties. (v) All displays and storage shall be contained within the main structure. (vi) Trash containers shall be contained within a six-foot high enclosure. (vii) All signs shall be in conformance with the City's sign ordinance. (viii) Full public improvements as may be required for public convenience and necessity. EXHIBIT "X" APRIL 3, 1986