HomeMy WebLinkAboutRP 99-11; STAYBRIDGE SUITES; Redevelopment Permits (RP) (4)RECEIVED
FEB 22 2000
CITY OF CARLSBAD HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Staybridge Suites Carlsbad
Circulation Impact Analysis
Redevelopment Permit Application #RP99-11
Draft: February 17,2000
Prepared by:
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
2251 San Diego Avenue, Suite B-110
San Dlego, California 92110
(619) 683-2933 Fax (619) 683-7982
Prepared for:
Shapery Enterprises
423 West "B" Street
San Diego, CA 92101
JA0319
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1
2.0 METHODOLOGIES 5
STUDY TIMEFRAMES 5
PROJECT STUDY AREA 5
ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES 5
TRAFFIC COUNT DATA 7
3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 8
EXISTING CIRCULATION NETWORK 8
MAINLINE FREEWAY SEGMENT CONDFTIONS 11
PEAK HOUR RAMP METER CONDFTIONS 11
PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE 13
4.0 PROJECT TRAFFIC 15
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION 15
PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION 15
PROJECT ACCESS 15
5.0 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS 18
DAILY ROADWAY SEGMENT PERFORMANCE 18
PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE 20
MAINLINE FREEWAY SEGMENT PERFORMANCE 21
PEAK HOUR RAMP METER CONDITIONS 22
6.0 HORIZON YEAR CONDITIONS 24
PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE 25
7.0 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS 27
EXISTING CONDITIONS 27
NEAR-TERM CONDITIONS 27
BUILDOUT CONDITIONS 27
8.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 29
Staybridge Suites Hotel
Circulation Impact Analysis
aa Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
List of Figures
FIGURE 1 - PROJECT ViciNrrY 2
FIGURE 2 - PROJECT LOCATION 3
FIGURE 3 - PROJECT SFTE PLAN 4
FIGURE 4 - EXISTING CIRCULATION NETWORK 9
FIGURE 5 - EXISTING DAILY ROADWAY SEGMENT CONDFTIONS 12
FIGURE 6 - EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CONDFTIONS 14
FIGURE 7 - PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION 16
FIGURE 8 - DAILY & PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRIP ASSIGNMENT 17
FIGURE 9 - EXISTING AND EXISTING PLUS PROJECT SEGMENT CONDFTIONS 19
FIGURE 10 - EXISTING AND EXISTING PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION CONDFTIONS 23
FIGURE 12 - HORIZON YEAR INTERSECTION CONDFTIONS ...26
List of Tables
TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF DAILY ROADWAY SEGMENT PERFORMANCE EXISTING CoNDrriONS 10
TABLE 2 EXISTING MAINLINE FREEWAY SEGMENT CONDFTIONS 11
TABLE 3 PEAK HOUR RAMP METERING DELAYS EXISTING CONDFTIONS 11
TABLE 4 SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE EXISTING CONDFTIONS 13
TABLE 5 TRIP GENERATION FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT - NEAR TERM CoNDrnoNS 15
TABLE 6 SUMMARY OF DAILY ROADWAY SEGMENT PERFORMANCE EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDFTIONS 18
TABLE 7 SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDFTIONS 20
TABLE 8 MAINLINE FREEWAY SEGMENTS EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDFTIONS 21
TABLE 9 PEAK HOUR RAMP METERING DELAYS EXISTING CONDFTIONS 22
TABLE 12 PEAK HOUR RAMP METERING DELAYS HORIZON YEAR CONDFTIONS 24
TABLE 13 SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE HORIZON YEAR CONDFTIONS 25
Appendices
APPENDIX A LEVEL OF SERVICE CONCEPTS ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES STANDARDS OF SIGNIRCANCE
APPENDIX B EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS
APPENDIX C SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT TRIP GENERATION MODEL
APPENDIX D PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS BUILDOUT FUTURE CONDFTIONS
Staybridge Suites Hotel
Circulation Impact Analysis
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
1.0 Introduction
This circulation impact analysis has been prepared in support of an application to allow for the
redevelopment of lots 15, 18, 20 and 34 of map number 1661 to an extended stay motel from
Grand Avenue to Laguna Avenue next to Interstate 5 in the City of Carisbad. The project sits in 2
zones: District 7 and District 3. However, by City Ordinances 9313 and 9314, the property was
specifically zoned for a 106-room motel. A Redevelopment Permit is needed to begin the project
because the property lies within the redevelopment zone. Several single-family dwelling units
currently occupy the project site.
Projecf Descripfion
Current plans for the project show that a 106-room hotel facility will be constructed. Access to the
site will be provided via Grand Avenue with an emergency access driveway located on Laguna
Drive. Using the recommended SANDAG trip generation rates for a business hotel, the project will
generate a total of 848 daily trips. Single-family dwelling units that are assumed to generate
negligible amount of daily trips currently occupy the site.
In order to gain approval for the project, a circulation impact analysis must be prepared to fulfill the
requirements of the yet to be finalized SANTEC^ Guidelines. Once these guidelines are finalized
the City of Carlsbad will adopt them as their own. As the project will not generate 2,400 daily trips
or 200 peak hour trips, this study is not required to conform to the Congestion Management
Program.
^ San Diego Traffic Engineers Council, October 1999.
Staybridge Suites Hotel
Circulation Impact Analysis
N
Not To Scale
Coronado
National City^ (|
Chula Vista
Imperial Beach
Last Revised: February 15, ZOOO
[Katz, Okitsu & Associates
TfMffic Engiiutn wd TrmHSfcrutiOH TUniun
Figure 1
Project Vicinity Staybridge Suites
Traffic Analysis
N
Not To Scale
Project Site
^ Study Intersection Locations
Last Revised: February -15, ZOOO.
|Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Trt^u Bnpnun Mi TrdHSfortdtun ftmniurs
Figure 2
Project Location Staybridge Suites
Traffic Analysis
COMPACT mux (C|
N
Not To Scale
Last Revised: February 15, ZOOO
itz, Okitsu & Assodates
Trt(pc Eagtucn nd TtMsfrtstim lUmmn
Figure 3
Project Site Plan Staybridge Suites
Traffic Analysis
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
2.0 Methodologies
This chapter documents the methodologies and assumptions used to conduct the circulation impact
analysis for the Staybridge Suites Hotel project. This section contains the following background
information:
• Study timeframes;
• Study area description; and
• Capacity analysis methodologies.
Sfudy Timeframes
This report presents an analysis of the following timeframes:
• Existing (Year 2000);
• Existing Plus Project (Year 2000); and
• Horizon (Year 2020).
Project Sfudy Area
The City of Carisbad requires a circulation impact analysis for any project that will result in an
increase of 500 daily trips if the development is not in conformance with the adopted general plan
and 1,000 daily trips if the project is in conformance with the general plan. The study must analyze
site access and all locations adjacent to the project and the first major signalized intersection in
each direction. The study must also analyze all known congested or potentially congested locations
that may be impacted by the project.
The study area for this project generally takes into account, all roadway segments and intersections
that experience 20 percent or more of the project trips.
Analysis Mefliodoiogies
This section presents a brief overview of traffic analysis methodologies and concepts used in this
study. Street system operating conditions are typically described in terms of "level of service."
Level of service is a report-card scale used to indicate the quality of traffic flow on roadway
segments and at intersections. Level of service (LOS) ranges from LOS A (free flow, little
congestion) to LOS F (forced flow, extreme congestion). A more detailed description of the
concepts described in this section is provided in Appendix A, Table A-1 of this document.
Roadway Segment Capacity Analysis
The SANTEC Guidelines used by the City of Carlsbad has published daily traffic volume standards
for roadways. To determine existing service levels on study area roadway segments, we compared
the appropriate Average Daily Traffic thresholds for level of service, the daily capacity of the study
area roadway segments, and the existing volumes in the study area. The thresholds for
determining level of service used in this analysis are summarized in Appendix A, Table A-2.
The values shown in Table A-2 are not intended to serve as an exact description of the actual
operating level of service on a particular roadway segment. The capacity of roadway facilities is
affected by a number of factors, including pavement width, access to cross streets and driveways,
intersection signal timing, geometry, and on-street parking. The actual functional capacity is based
Staybridge Suites Hotel
5 Circulation Impact Analysis
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
on the ability of arterial intersections to accommodate peak hour volumes. Efficient designs of
intersections to achieve acceptable levels of service could result in higher capacities. Thus, higher
volumes may occur on arterial segments than those shown in these tables.
Intersection Capacity Analysis
The analysis of peak hour intersection performance was conducted using the Traffix analysis
software program developed by Dowling Associates.
All signalized intersections were analyzed based on the "operational analysis" procedure for
signalized intersections, as defined in the 1997 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). This technique
uses 1,900 passenger cars per hour of green per lane (pcphgpl), as the maximum saturation flow
of a single lane at an intersection. This saturation flow rate is adjusted to account for lane width,
on-street parking, conflicting pedestrian flow, traffic composition, (i.e., percent of trucks) and
shared lane movements (e.g., through and right-turn movements from the same lane). Level of
service for signalized intersections is based on the average time (seconds) that vehicles entering
an intersection are stopped or delayed. Appendix A, Table A-3 lists the HCM LOS/delay criteria for
signalized intersections.
Intersections with stop control were analyzed using the method detailed in the 1997 HCM. This
method based on the average delay per vehicle. Delay is reported per approach as well as the
intersection as a whole. Appendix A, Table A-5 and A-6 summarizes the level of service criteria for
stop-controlled intersections.
Freeway Mainline Analysis
The analysis of freeway mainline operations is also part of the typical traffic study as required by
the City of Carlsbad. The current and future operations on the Interstate 5 north and south of
Carlsbad Village Drive were assessed based on the recommended procedure described in the
1997 Caltrans Highway Manual. The method for calculating freeway level of service is based on the
volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio using the following equation:
Lane v/c=(AADT * Peak hour percent * Directional factor)
Lane Capacity
Where: Lanes (one-way) = 4
AADT = average annual daily traffic volume (2-way)
Peak hour percent = the proportion of ADT that occurs during the peak hour
Directional factor = the proportion of peak hour traffic traveling In the peak direction
Capacity = 2,300 vehicles per hour per lane
Caltrans staff provided data on existing average annual daily traffic volumes, sample hourly
volumes and sample directional data. The resultant v/c is compared to the standard v/c thresholds
for level of service and detailed in Appendix A, Table A-1.
Peak Hour Ramp Meter Analysis
Freeway ramp meters are designed to maximize mainline freeway capacity, reduce traffic
congestion and reduce peak period delays. This is accomplished by regulating the flow of vehicles
entering the freeway, allowing for traffic flow on the mainline to achieve reasonable speeds. If
excess demand exists at freeway on-ramps, delays and considerable queue lengths could result on
ramps and adjacent surface roadways. Ramp meters are planned to control most of the freeway
on-ramps in the study area. Caltrans has provided planned peak hour demands flow rates for each
Staybridge Suites Hotel
6 Circulation Impact Analysis
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
of the locations where meters are planned. The maximum peak hour delay In minutes for each
metered location was estimated by first calculating the "excess demand" (the difference between
the meter flow rate and the peak hour demand), and then by calculating the time required for the
excess demand to discharge (given the meter flow rate). The maximum queue length was
estimated by multiplying the excess demand by the length of a vehicle in a standing queue, which
Caltrans assumes to be roughly 29 feet, allowing for a certain amount of spacing between vehicles.
Analysis of Significance
To determine project impacts, SANTEC has developed a series of thresholds based on allowable
increases in volume-to-capacity ratios, which become more stringent as level of service worsens.
Appendix A, Table A-7 summarizes these thresholds. The analysis of significance for project
impacts is characterized in the summary tables in the far right column. Where the roadway
segment is forecast to operate at LOS E or F and the increase in volume to capacity ratio exceeds
0.02, that increase is shown in bold type to indicate a significant project impact that requires
mitigation. If the roadway is forecast to operate at LOS E or F, but the increase in volume to
capacity ratio is 0.02 or less, the impact is insignificant. For signalized intersections the procedure
for determining significant impacts is similar. Where the intersection is forecast to operate at LOS
E or F and the increase in delay exceeds 2 seconds, that increase is shown in bold type to indicate
a significant project impact that requires mitigation. If the intersection is forecast to operate at LOS
E or F, but the increase is 2 seconds or less, the impact is considered insignificant.
Traffic Counf Dafa
Existing peak hour data at study intersections were collected on February 2, 2000. Since these
counts are less than one year old, they are considered recent enough to use for this analysis.
Staybridge Suites Hotel
Circulation Impact Analysis
SBI Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
3.0 Existing Conditions
Existing Circulation Network
Streets and highways in the site vicinity that could be impacted by the proposed project include:
Grand Avenue, Jefferson Street, Carisbad Village Drive and Interstate 5. Figure 4 illustrates the
existing circulation network and Intersection geometry.
Interstate 5
Interstate 5 is an eight-lane north-south freeway providing regional access between the Mexican
Border and Oregon. In the San Diego region, Interstate 5 serves as the primary north-south route
for the coastal communities. The posted speed limit is 65 miles per hour.
Carlsbad Village Drive
Carisbad Village Drive is classified as a major arterial. It has two travel lanes each direction with a
raised median. The intersections along Carisbad Village Drive are signalized and left turn lanes are
provided. The posted speed limit is 25 MPH. No bike or parking lanes are provided. Fronting land
uses include mixed commercial, fast food restaurants and gas stations. Carisbad Village Drive
provides access to Interstate 5.
Harding Street
Harding Street is classified as a controlled collector street. It has 2 travel lanes and no left turn
lanes. The speed limit is 25 MPH. It has bike lanes in both directions.
Jefferson Street
Jefferson Street is classified as a collector street with 2 travel lanes. As stated before, the
intersection of Jefferson Street at Grand Avenue is unsignalized. The intersection of Jefferson
Street at Carlsbad Village Drive is signalized. There are no protected left turn lanes. The posted
speed limit is 35 MPH. Bike lanes are provided in each direction. Parking is provided on each side
of the street. The street has fronting residential land uses.
Grand Avenue
Grand Avenue is classified as a collector street. It is constructed with 4 travel lanes. It has shared
through/left turn lanes. A traffic signal is located at Jefferson Street and Grand Avenue. The
intersection of Grand Avenue and Harding Street is unsignalized. Traffic speed limits are restricted
to 25 MPH to facilitate a "village-like" atmosphere. Bike lanes are provided in each direction.
Parking is provided on each side of the street. Grand Avenue has fronting mixed commercial land
uses. East of Jefferson Street it is fronted by residential land uses. The road dead-ends at the
project access site.
Staybridge Suites Hotel
Circulation Impact Analysis
N
Not To Scale
Last Revised: February 15, ZOOO.
|Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Tragic EngiHun and TmtisfonMwn PUnntn
Figure 4
Existing Circulation Network Staybridge Suites
Traffic Analysis
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Daily Roadway Segment Operations
The SANTEC Guidelines used by the City of Carisbad has published daily traffic volume standards
for roadways. To determine existing service levels on study area roadway segments, we compared
the SANTEC Guidelines adopted average daily traffic thresholds for level of service, the daily
capacity of the study area roadway segments, and the existing volumes in the study area. When
evaluating traffic conditions, level of service A-D is considered acceptable for urbanized areas
where further improvement in level of service is not feasible or practical. The thresholds for
determining level of service on City of Carisbad roadways are summarized in Appendix A Table A-
2. Figure 5 graphically presents the results of this analysis.
Table 1
Summary of Daily Roadway Segment Performance
Existing Conditions
Roadway Segment Existing Configuration/ LOSE Average. Volume to Level of
Lanes Capacity Daily Traffic Capacity Service
(ADT) Ratio
Carlsbad Viiiage Drive
1-5 NB ramps to 1-5 SB ramps Major Arterial - 4 lanes 40,000 23,900 0.60 C
1-5 southbound ramps to Harding Street Major Arterial - 4 lanes 40,000 27,548 0.69 C
Harding Street to Jefferson Street Major Arterial - 4 lanes 40,000 20,350 0.51 B
IHarding Street
Carlsbad Village Drive to Grand Controlled Collector - 2 8,000 4,310 0.54 C
Avenue lanes
Jefferson Street
Carlsbad Village Drive to Grand Collector - 2 lanes 8,000 5,530 0.69 D
Avenue
Grand Street
Jefferson Street to Harding Street Collector - 4 lanes 10,000 4,620 0.46 B
As shown in Table 1, all study area roadway segments operate at LOS D or better under existing
conditions.
10
Staybridge Suites Hotel
Circulation Impact Analysis
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Mainline Freeway Segment Condifions
The current and future operations on Interstate 5 near the project area were assessed based on
the recommended procedure described in the 1997 Highway Capacity Manual. Freeway segment
volumes were obtained from the most recent data collected by Caltrans. Table 3 summarizes the
existing level of service on area freeway mainlines.
Table 2
Existing Mainline Freeway Segment Conditions
Fteeway Limits Average
DatyTiaffic
Peak Hour
Peak-Dkeclion
Capady
PeekHour
Vokwne-Peek
DkecSon
Vohmeto
CapadtyRs/k)
Levelof
Service
Interstate 5 North of Carlsbad Village
Drive*
185,000 9,200 7,887 0.86 D
Interstate 5 South of Carlsbad Village Drive 188,000 9,200 8,015 0.87 D
Source: Califomia State Highways Traffic Volumes District 11 1988-1999. Yet to be published by Caltrans District 11.
Note: *The peak hour/peak direction percentage for the adjacent freeway segment was used to calculate the peak hour/peak direction
because no information was available for this segment.
Peak Hour Ramp Meter Condifions
Currently in the study area, the southbound freeway on-ramp is subject to ramp metering during the
AM peak hour. Conditions at the study area freeway on-ramps that are planned for ramp metering
during peak hours were evaluated based on the recommended procedure provided by Caltrans.
Ramp meter rates and demand volumes for existing conditions are summarized in Table 4. The
table shows the resulting delay and queue under existing flow rates.
Table 3
Peak Hour Ramp Metering Delays
Existing Conditions
Location Peak Demand Flow Excess Delay Queue
Rate Demand (Minutes) (Feet)
1-5/SB Carlsbad Village AM 582 409 173 25 5,017
Drive
11
staybridge Suites Hotel
Circulation Impact Analysis
N
Not To Scale
Average Daily Traffic
(Thousands)/ Level of
Service
Last Revised: February 15, ZOOO.
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Enginun and Transfortation Ftanntn
Figure 5
Existing Daily
Roadway Segment Conditions Staybridge Suites
Traffic Analysis
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Peak Hour Intersection Performance
Traffic conditions are evaluated using the procedures outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual,
1997 Edition (HCM). Appendix A contains a summary of this analysis method as well as the level
of service criteria used. Level of service A-D is considered acceptable for peak hour intersection
operations under the SANTEC Guidelines. The following table summarizes the existing peak hour
operating conditions for the study intersections. Figure 6 shows existing morning and evening peak
hour traffic volumes and levels of service for study intersections. Appendix B contains the
worksheets used in this analysis.
Table 4
Summary of Peak Hour Intersection Performance
Existing Conditions
Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Average Level of Average Level of
Intersection Service Intersection Service
Delay (sec.) Delay (sec.)
Harding Street/Grand Avenue* 10.6 B 11.9 B
Jefferson Street/Grand Avenue 30.5 C 38.7 D
Jefferson Street /Carlsbad Village Drive 28.1 C 34.8 C
Harding Street/Carlsbad Village Drive 27.7 C 35.8 D
1-5 SB Ramps/Carlsbad Village Drive 24.4 C 23.2 C
1-5 NB Ramps/Carlsbad Village Drive 24.9 C 29.2 C
Notes: "Unsignalized Intersection.
As shown in Table 2, all study area intersections operate at LOS C or better during the morning
peak hour and LOS D or better during the evening peak hour.
13
Staybridge Suites Hotel
Circulation Impact Analysis
N
Not To Scale
I A*^ Peak Hour Volumes: ° ' ' AM/FM
(Sec/Veh)/ LOS:
Last Revised: February 15, ZOOO.
|Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Enpnurs and Transfortation Flannert
Figure 6
Existing Peak Hour
Intersection Conditions Staybridge Suites
Traffic Analysis
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
4.0 Project Traffic
The proposed project would construct an extended stay hotel on lots 15, 18, 20 and 34 of map
number 1661 Carisbad Lands. The 2.41-acre site is located between Grand Avenue and Laguna
Avenue next to Interstate 5.
Project Trip Generation
Trip generation is a measure or forecast of the number of trips that begin or end at the project site.
All or part of these trips will result in traffic increases on the streets where they occur. The traffic
generated is a function of the extent and type of development proposed for the site.
Vehicular traffic generation characteristics for projects are estimated based on rates In the
SANDAG Traffic Generators Manual dated March 3, 1993. This manual provides standards and
recommendations for the probable traffic generation of various land uses based upon local,
regional and nation-wide studies of existing developments in comparable settings. Appendix C
contains excerpts from the trip generation manual used in this analysis. The following table
summarizes the trips generated by the proposed apartment/motel complex. We assume that the
existing land use, an extended stay hotel, generates trips comparable to a resort hotel.
Table 5
Trip Generation for the Proposed Project - Near Term Conditions
LaxlUse Tip Rate Per DaiyTrips AMTripsC/o) h(RaBo) Out PMTiips h(Rseo) out
(Ratky) (%) (Ratio)
Motel 106 rooms 8 room 848 68 (8%) 27 (.4) 41 (.6) 76 (9%) 45 (.6) 31 (.4)
Source: SANDAG Traffic Generators Manual, March 3, 1993.
The proposed extended stay hotel complex could potentially generate a total of 848 daily trips.
Approximately 68 of these new trips would occur in the AM peak hour and 76 new trips would occur
in the PM peak hour.
Project Trip Distribution
Trip distribution is the process of identifying the probable destinations, directions, or traffic routes
that project related traffic will likely affect. The potential interaction between the proposed
development and surrounding residential areas, sen/ices, and regional access routes are
considered in order to identify the routes where project traffic will distribute.
Trip distribution information can be estimated from observed traffic patterns, experience, or
previous studies. It can also be obtained from regional traffic forecasting models developed to
analyze future traffic conditions on roadways. For this study, we have a manual trip distribution
pattern.
Figure 7 shows the project distribution of project traffic that will use various street segments.
Figure 8 shows the total daily and peak hour trips that the project would generate. These trip
estimates are obtained by combining the traffic distribution shown in Figure 7 with the project trip
generation presented in Table 4.
Project Access
The project will take access from the end of Grand Avenue,
located at the end of Laguna Drive.
An emergency vehicle access is
15
Staybridge Suites Hotel
Circulation Impact Analysis
N
Not To Scale
Project Trip Distribution
Last Revised: February 15, ZOOO.
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Enginurs and Transimtamn fianmrs
Figure 7
Project Trip Distribution Staybridge Suites
Traffic Analysis
N
Not To Scale
AM/PM Peak Hour
Project Trips
Daily Project Trips
Last Revised: February 15, ZOOO.
Katz, Okitsu & Assodates
Traffic Enpnurs and Trans/rcrtamn Ftanntn
Figure 8
Project Trip Assignment Staybridge Suites
Traffic Analysis
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
5.0 Existing Plus Project Conditions
This section documents the existing plus project conditions in the project site vicinity. The existing
plus project analysis takes into account any traffic associated with other planned developments in
the study area. Based on a field review of the project area, there are no other developments in
proximity to the site. Thus, to the existing base, project trips are added. Through a comparison of
the resulting change in delay and level of service, existing plus project impacts are identified.
Daily Roadway Segment Performance
The SANTEC Guidelines used by the City of Carisbad has published daily traffic volume standards
for roadways. To determine existing service levels on study area roadway segments, we compared
the SANTEC Guidelines adopted average daily traffic thresholds for level of service, the daily
capacity of the study area roadway segments, and the existing volumes in the study area. The
following table summarizes the results of this comparison for existing plus project conditions.
Figure 9 graphically presents the results of this analysis. Table 6 also summarizes the proposed
project's significance of impact based on the SANTEC's thresholds for incremental increases in
peak hour delay.
Table 6
Summary of Daily Roadway Segment Performance
Existing Plus Project Conditions
Exisling Conddons E)dslBng Plus Projed Conettons
Roadway Segment Oassilicabon^ LOSE ADT Vdum^ LOS Forecast VdLMne/ LOS kYOBase Signi-
Lanes Capadty Volume Capadty
Ratio
ADT
Vdume
Capadty
REtk)
hVC Heart?
Carisbad Viiiage
Drive
1-5 NB ramps to 1-5 Major Arterial 40,000 23,900 0.60 C 24,133 0.60 C 0.00 N
SB ramps - 4 lanes
1-5 southbound Major Arterial 40,000 27,548 0.69 c 28,142 0.70 c 0.01 N
ramps to Harding - 4 lanes
Street
Harding Street to Major Arterial 40,000 20,350 0.51 B 20,350 0.51 B 0.00 N
Jefferson Street - 4 lanes
IHarding Street
Carlsbad Village Controlled 8,000 4,310 0.54 c 4,904 0.61 c 0.07 N
Drive to Grand Collector - 2
Avenue lanes
Jefferson Street
Carlsbad Village Collector - 2 8,000 5,530 0.69 D 5,657 0.71 D 0.02 N
Drive to Grand lanes
Avenue
Grand Street
Jefferson Street to Collector - 4 10,000 4,620 0.46 B 4,874 0.49 B 0.03 N
Harding Street lanes
Note: Bold Type Indicates a Significant Project Impact that Requires Mitigation.
As shown in Table 6, all study area roadway segments except Jefferson Street between Carisbad
Village Drive and Grand Avenue operate at LOS C or better under existing daily traffic volumes
without or with the project. The segment of Jefferson Street between Carisbad Village Drive and
Grand Avenue operates at LOS D. The project will not cause any significant impacts to any study
roadway segment.
18
Staybridge Suites Hotel
Circulation Impact Analysis
N
Not To Scale
Last Revised: February 15, ZOOO.
|Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Enginurs and Transforiaiion Planners
Figure 9
Existing Plus Project Peak Hour
Intersection Conditions Staybridge Suites
Traffic Analysis
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Peak Hour Intersection Performance
Peak hour intersection volumes under existing plus project conditions were forecast based on
existing volumes plus the traffic associated with any other cumulative projects. The sum of these
volumes formed the background base upon which project trips were added to determine the
relative impact of the project. Table 7 summarizes the results of this analysis. Table 7 also shows
the significance of the project's impacts. Figure 10 shows morning and evening peak hour existing
plus project traffic volumes with the project traffic added. Appendix B contains the worksheets
used in this analysis.
Table 7
Summary of Peak Hour Intersection Performance
Existing Plus Project Conditions
Intersection Existing Existing Plus Project
Average Level of Average Level of Change Significant?
Intersection Service Intersection Service In Delay
Delay (sec.) Delay (sec.) (-/+)
MA Peak Hour
Harding St./Grand Ave.* 10.6 B 11.5 B 0.9 N
Jefferson St./Grand Ave. 30.5 C 30.7 C 0.2 N
Jefferson St./Carlsbad Village Drive 28.1 C 28.2 C 0.1 N
Harding St./Carlsbad Village Drive 27.7 C 28.6 C 0.9 N
1-5 SB Ramps/Carlsbad Village Drive 24.4 C 24.5 C 0.1 N
1-5 NB Ramps/Carlsbad Village Drive 24.9 C 25.5 C 0.6 N
PiVI Peak Hour
Harding St./Grand Ave.* 11.9 B 13.3 B 1.4 N
Jefferson St./Grand Ave. 38.7 D 39.0 D 0.3 N
Jefferson St./Carlsbad Village Drive 34.8 C 34.9 C 0.1 N
Harding St./Carlsbad Village Drive 35.8 D 37.3 D 1.5 N
1-5 SB Ramps/Carlsbad Village Drive 23.2 C 23.4 C 0.2 N
1-5 NB Ramps/Carlsbad Village Drive 29.2 C 29.5 C 0.3 N
Notes: * Unsignalized
As shown in Table 7, in the morning peak all intersections operate at LOS C or better without or
with the project. In the evening peak hour all intersections operate at LOS D or better without or
with the project. The project causes no significant impacts to the study vicinity.
20
Staybridge Suites Hotel
Circulation Impact Analysis
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Mainline Freeway Segment Performance
Forecast daily volumes without and with project traffic are summarized in Table 8. This table
shows that the freeways will operate at LOS D under both existing and existing plus project
conditions. The project will have an insignificant effect on mainline freeway segment operations.
Table 8
Mainline Freeway Segments
Existing Plus Project Conditions
EjdsBngConMons Exisling Plus nojed CondUons
Freeway LMls AvBiage
Ddfy
Peak Hour PeekHour
VdiMne-
Vdune
to
Levd
d
Average
Ddfy
PeekHour
Vdume
Vdune
to
Levd
d cart?
7/affib Dkedkxi
Capadly Dkedion
Capaciiy
RaBo
Service TtdSc f LUI
Diiecdon
Cspadfy
Ratio
Senioe
Interstate 5 North of
Carlsbad
185,000 9,200 7,887 0.86 D 185,233 7,896 0.86 D N
Village Drive
Interstate 5 South of
Carlsbad
188,000 9,200 8,015 0.87 D 188,360 8,028 0.87 D N
Village Drive
Source: California State Highways Traffic Volumes District 11 1988-1999. Yet to be published by Caltrans District 11.
Note: *The peak hour/peak direction percentage for the adjacent freeway segment was used to calculate the peak hour/peak direction
because no information was available for this segment.
21
Staybridge Suites Hotel
Circulation Impact Analysis
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Peak Hour Ramp Meter Condifions
Conditions at the study area freeway on-ramps that are planned for ramp metering during peak
hours were evaluated based on the recommended procedure provided by Caltrans. Forecast ramp
meter rates and demand volumes without and with project traffic are summarized in Table 9.
Table 9
Peak Hour Ramp Metering Delays
Existing Conditions
Without Project
Location Peak Demand Flow
Rate
Excess
Demand
Delay
(Minutes)
Queue
(Feet)
1-5/SB Carlsbad Village
Drive
AM 582 409 173 25 5,017
With Project
Location Peak Demand Flow
Rate
Excess
Demand
Delay
(Minutes)
Queue
(Feet)
1-5/SB Cartsbad Village
Drive
AM 599 409 190 28 5,510
22
Staybridge Suites Hotel
Circulation Impact Analysis
N
Not To Scale
LEGEND
38.4/C
39.9/C
A.D.T.(1000s)/ L.O.S.
Without Project
^^th Project
Last Revised: February 15, ZOOO.
tz, Okitsu & Assodates
Traffic £iigiiu<K and Transforiation Ptanntn
Figure 10
Existing and Existing Plus Project
Daily Roadway Segment Conditions Staybridge Suites
Traffic Analysis
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
6.0 Horizon Year Conditions
Horizon Year daily and peak hour traffic volumes are based on the City of Carisbad General Plan.
It is assumed the community plan accounts for the proposed land use. There are no planned
changes for the buildout intersection geometries or circulation network.
Peak Hour Ramp Meter Condifions
Conditions at the study area freeway on-ramps that are planned for ramp metering during peak
hours were evaluated based on the recommended procedure provided by Caltrans. Forecast ramp
meter rates and demand volumes are summarized in Table 12. Table 12 shows the resulting delay
and queue under planned flow rates. As shown, in the horizon year no delay is expected.
Table 12
Peak Hour Ramp Metering Delays
Horizon Year Conditions
Location Peak Demand Flow Excess Delay Oueue
Rate Demand (Minutes) (Feet)
1-5/SB Carlsbad Village
Drive
AM 352 409 0 0 0
24
Staybridge Suites Hotel
Circulation Impact Analysis
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Peak Hour Intersection Performance
Horizon year peak hour traffic volumes are based on the City of Carisbad General Plan. It is
assumed the general plan accounts for the proposed land use. There are no planned changes for
the buildout intersection geometries. Table 13 summarizes the results of this analysis. Figure 14
shows morning and evening peak hour horizon year traffic volumes. Appendix D contains the
worksheets used in this analysis.
Tablets
Summary of Peak Hour Intersection Performance
Horizon Year Conditions
Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Average Level of Average Level of
Intersection Service Intersection Service
Delay (sec.) Delay (sec.)
Harding Street/Grand Avenue* 15.9 C 24.8 C
Jefferson Street/Grand Avenue 79.4 E 316.3 F
Jefferson Street /Carlsbad Village Drive 39.7 D 340.0 F
Harding Street/Cartsbad Village Drive 29.6 C 61.1 E
1-5 SB Ramps/Cartsbad Village Drive 19.7 B 23.0 C
1-5 NB Ramps/Cartsbad Village Drive 20.9 C 28.2 C
Notes: 'Unsignalized
As shown in Table 11, all intersections operate at LOS D or better in the morning peak hour and
LOS F or better under horizon year conditions.
25
Staybridge Suites Hotel
Circulation Impact Analysis
N
Not To Scale
Rl/A'^ Peak Hour Volumes: ° ' ' AM/PM
fSec/Veh)/ LOS:
Last Revised: February 15, ZOOO.
|Katz, Okitsu & Assodates
Traffic Enginurs and Transforution Planners
Figure 12
Buildout Peak Hour Intersection
Conditions V^thout Project Staybridge Suites
Traffic Analysis
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
7.0 Summary of Impacts
Exisfing Condifions
This circulation impact analysis has been prepared in support of an application to allow for the
redevelopment of lots 15, 18, 20 and 34 of map number 1661 to an extended stay motel from
Grand Avenue to Laguna Drive next to Interstate 5 in the City of Carisbad. The project sits in 2
zones: District 7 and District 3. However, by City Ordinances 9313 and 9314, the property was
specifically zoned for a 106-room motel. A Redevelopment Permit Is needed to begin the project
because the property lies within the redevelopment zone. Several single-family dwelling units
currently occupy the project site.
Level of service A-D is considered acceptable for peak hour intersection operations in the City of
Carlsbad. All study area intersections operate at LOS D or better during peak hours under existing
traffic conditions.
The current and future operations on Interstate 5 near the project area were assessed based on
the recommended procedure described in the 1997 Caltrans Highway Manual. Freeway segment
volumes were obtained from the most recent data collected by Caltrans. During peak hours all
study area mainline freeway segments operate at LOS D or better under existing condltons.
Currently, the southbound ramp on Carlsbad Village Drive is metered in the morning peak hours.
Delay at this ramp is calculated at twenty-five minutes in the morning peak hour.
Exisfing Plus Projecf Condifions
The existing plus project analysis takes into account existing traffic volumes plus the traffic
associated with other planned developments in the study area. Based on a field review of the
project area, there are no other developments in proximity to the site. Thus, to the existing base,
project trips are added. Through a comparison of the resulting change in delay and level of
service, existing plus project impacts are identified.
Under existing plus project conditions all study area roadway segments except Jefferson Street
from Carlsbad Village Drive to Grand Avenue operate at LOS C or better without or with the project.
The segment of except Jefferson Street from Carlsbad Village Drive to Grand Avenue continues to
operate at LOS D with the project. The project will not cause significant impacts to the any
roadway segment in the project study area.
In the morning peak hour, all intersections operate at LOS C or better without or with the project. In
the evening peak hour all intersections operate at LOS D or better without or with the project. The
project causes no significant impacts to any of the study intersections.
The freeways will continue to operate at LOS D under existing plus project conditions. The project
will not have a significant effect on mainline freeway segment operations.
Horizon Year Condifions
Horizon year peak hour traffic volumes are based on the City of Carisbad General Plan. It is
assumed the general plan accounts for the proposed land use. There are no planned changes for
the buildout intersection geometries. All intersections operate at LOS D or better in the morning
peak hour and LOS F or better under horizon year conditions.
Staybridge Suites Hotel
27 Circulation Impact Analysis
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Conditions at the study area freeway on-ramps that are planned for ramp metering during peak
hours were evaluated based on the recommended procedure provided by Caltrans. As shown, in
the horizon year no delay is expected.
Staybridge Suites Hotel
28 Circulation Impact Analysis
Katz, Oldtsu & Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
8.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
Katz, Okitsu & Associates recommend the following:
• Agree to pay any appropriate development fees; and
• Make any appropriate improvements to property frontage at Laguna Drive and Grand Avenue
as recommended by the City of Carlsbad.
Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions. It has been a pleasure working with
the City and the project team on this project. Special thanks to the City of Carlsbad staff for their
help with this report.
Sincerely,
Katz, Okitsu & Associates
J. Arnold Torma, P.E.
Principal Engineer
Staybridge Suites Hotel
29 Circulation Impact Analysis
CASE
DATE:
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORH - PART I
(To be Completed by APPLICANT)
Applicant* C^P^^SBAD VILLAGE SUITES, LLC (c/o SHAPERY ENTERPRISES)
Address of Applicant: 423 West "B" Street
San Diego, CA 32101
Phone Number: ( 619) 239-4700
Name, address and phone number of person to be contacted (if other than
Applicant): Sandor W. Shapery (same address & telephone)
GENERAL INFORMATION: (Please be specific)
Project Description: STAYBRIDGE SUITES - CARLSBAD
106 GUEST SUITES, 1 LOBBY, 1 BUILDING, 3-STORY HOTEL COMPLEX
WITH 127 VEHICLE PARKING SPACES AND 1 SWIMMING POOL •
Project Location/Address: GRAND AVENUE (NO NUMBER YET), CARLSBAD, CA
92009 (IMMEDIATE WEST SIDE OF FREEWAY 5 OFF-RAMP, BETWEEN GRAND
AVENUE AND LAGUNA DRIVE
Assessor Parcel Number: _203_^_130___^20, 15, AND 34
18 + 20 = V-R
General Plan/Zone of Subject Property: R.M.H. - 0 / 15 + 34 = R-P
Citv Ordinance #9313 provides for
a 106-room hotel Local Facilities Management Zone: ZONF HNK
Is the site within Carlsbad's Coastal Zone? NO COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
IS REQUIRED
Please describe the area surrounding the site to the
SENIOR CITIZENS APARTMENTS
North: vi^^^^s LAS CARLSBAD East: FREEWAY 5 ^
SMALLER SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND
South: DENNYS RESTAURANT West: APARTMENT COMPLEXES
GAS STATION
MOTEL 8
List all other applicable permits & approvals related to this project:
CITY OF CARLSBAD ORDINANCE 9 313 ALLOWS FOR A 106 ROOM HOTEL
ON THE SUBJECT SITE
^INSTRUCTION SHEET FOR FILLING OUT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORH - PART I
This Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Form - Part I will be used to
determine what type of environmental documentation (i.e. Environmental Impact
Report, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Negative Declaration or Exemption) will
be required to be prepared for your application, per the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) and Title 19 of Carlsbad's Municipal Code. The clarity and
accuracy of the information you provide is critical for purposes of quickly
determining the specific environmental effects of your project.
Recent judicial decisions have held that a "naked checklist", that is a checklist
that is merely checked "yes" or "no", is insufficient to comply with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. Each "yes" or "no"
answer must be accompanied by a written explanation justifying the "yes" or "no"
answer. This is especially important when a Negative Declaration is being
sought. The more information provided in this form, the easier and quicker it
will be for staff to complete the Environmental Impact Assessment Form - Part
II.
(Please be Specific. Attach Additional Pages or Exhibits, if necessarv)
1. Please descr^fe the project site, including^stinguishing natural and
manmade characteristics. Also provide precise slope analysis when a slope
of 15' or higher and 15% grade or greater is present on the site.
THE 2.42 ACRE SITE IS ESSENTIALLY FLAT WITH APPROX. 8' DROP FROM NORTHEAST
TO SOUTHWEST, BOUNDED ON EAST BY FREEWAY 5 OFF RAMP, WITH HOMES AND APARTMENTS,
A MOTEL, GAS STATION AND DENNYS TO THE SOUTH ANB SENIOR CITIZENS APARTMENTS
TO TKE NORTH. THERE ARE 4 EXISTING HOMES ON THE SITE AND NO SIGNIFICANT
LAND.^CAFE OR TREES
2. Please descnbe energy conservation measures incorporated into the design
and/or operation of the project.
THERMAL WINDOWS AND INSULATION IN THE WALLS AND ROOFS TO MEET STATE TITLE 2 4
ENERGY CRITERIA. ENERGY EFFICIENT FLOURESCENT LIGHTING WILL BE USED
THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE PROJECT.
3. PLEASE AHACH A PROOECT SUMHARY SHEET WHICH SHOWS THE FOLLOWING:
a. If a residential project identify the number of units, type of units,
schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of
household size expected, average daily traffic generation (latest SANDAG
rates).
NOT APPLICABLE
b. If a commercial project, indicate the exact type, activity(ies),
square footage of sales area, average daily traffic generation
(latest SANDAG rates), parking provided, and loading facilities.
106 GUEST SUITES. 1 LOBBY, 1 BUILDING, 3-STORY HOTEL COMPLEX WITH PARKING
SPACES AND 1' POOL. ACTIVITIES -INCLUDE NORMAL TO LONGER TERM GUEST STAYS
WITH 484 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GENERATION.
c. If an industrial project, indicate the exact type or industry(ies),
average daily traffic generation (latest SANDAG rates), estimated
employment per shift, time of shifts, and loading facilities.
NOT APPLICABLE
d. If an Institutional project, indicate the major project/site
function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy,
loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the
project.
NOT APPLICABLE
I. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
Please Answer each of the following questions by placing a check in the
appropriate space. Then, fully discuss and explain why each item was
checked yes or no. Provide supporting data if applicable. Attach
additional sheets as necessary.
YES 1^10
1) Could the project significantly impact or change
present or future land uses in the vicinity of the
activity? ^
EXPLANATION: PROPOSED PROJECT COMPLIES WITH EXISTING ZONING, CITY
COUNCIL RESOLUTION #9313, AND ADJACENT LAND USES INCLUDING OTHER
COMPATIBLE SERVICES SUCH AS RESTAURANTS, GAS STATION AND OTHER
MOTELS
2) Could the activity affect the use of a recreational
area, or area of aesthetic value? ^
EXPLANATION: THERE ARE NO RECREATIONAL AREAS
AND NO AREAS OF AESTHETIC VALUE ADJACENT
TO THE SITE.
3) Could the activity affect the functioning of an
established community or neighborhood? x
EXPLANATION: IT WILL IN FACT IMPROVE AN AREA
OF OLD SUBSTANDARD HOUSES AND VACANT LOTS
4) Could the activity result in the displacement of
community residents? ^
EXPLANATION- THERE ARE 4 HOUSES ON THE SITE.
THE PROPOSED
EXTENDED STAY HOTEL WILL PROVIDE LONGER TERM VISITOR AND
RELOCATION HOUSING.
YtS NO
5) Could the actmty increase the number of low^li
;t nousinq units in the city? moderate cost nousing units in the city? ^
EXPLANATION: THE PROPOSED HOTEL SHOULD HAVE NO
EFFECT ON LOW AND MODERATE COST HOUSING.
6) Could the activity significantly affect existing
housing or create a demand for additional housing? X
EXPLANATION: HOTEL WILL PROVIDE FOR TEMPORARY GUEST STAYS
AND SHORTER TERM HOUSING. THE PROJECT WILL CREATE ADDITIONALJOBS
LOCALLY IN THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF TKE PROJECT.
7) Are any of the natural or man-made features in the
activity area unique, that is, not found in-other
parts of the county, state or nation? ^
EXPLANATION: THERE ARE NO UNIQUE NATURAL OR
MAN-MADE FEATURES IN THE ACTIVITY AREA.
8) Could the activity significantly affect an
historical or archaeological site or its settings? ^
THERE ARE NO HISTORICAL OR ARCHEOLOGICAL EXPLANATION:
FEATUPJES OR SITES ON OR IN THE PROPERTY.
9) Could.the activity-significantly affect the
potential use, extraction, or conservation of a x
scarce natural resource?
EXPLANATION* ™^^^ SCARCE NATURAL
RESOURCES ON THE SITE.
YES NO.-
10) Could the activity significantly affect fish,
wildlife or plant resources? 2-
EXPLANATION: THERE ARE NO FISH. VULDLIFE OR
PLANT RESOURCES ON OR NEAR THE SITE.
11) Are there any rare or endangered plant or animal
species in the activity area?
EXPLANATION: THERE ARE NO RARE OR ENDANGERED PLANT
OR ANIMAL SPECIES ON OR NEAR THE SITE.
FEATURES ON OR NEAR THE SITE.
14) Could the activity serve to encourage development
of presently- undeveloped areas or intensify develop-
ment of already developed areas?
EXPLANATION: THIS PROJECT CONSTITUTES
THE REDEVELOPMENT OF AN ECONOMICALLY
OBSOLETE AREA.
X
12) Could the activity change existing features of any
of the city's stream, lagoons, bays, tidelands
or beaches?
EXPLANATION: NONE OF THOSE ELEMENTS OR
13) Could the activity result in the erosion or elimin-
ation of agricultural lands? ^
EXPLANATION: THE SITE IS NOT ADJACENT TO OR
NEAR AGRICULTURAL LANDS, EXCEPT THAT APPROX.
V
ONE ACRE IS BEING FARMED AS BACKYARD GARDEN.
X
15) Will the actl^y require a variance from esti^
llshed environmental standards (air, water, noise, y
etc.)?
EXPLANATION: THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL NOT REOUIRE
A VARIANCE TO THESE ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS.
16) Is the activity carried out as part of a larger
project or series of projects? ^
EXPLANATION: THIS PROJECT is A SINGULAR AND
SELF-CONTAINED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
17) Will the activity require certification, authoriza-
tion or Issuance of a permit by any local, state
or federal environmental control agency? X
EXPLANATION: THE PROJECT IS NOT REQUIRED TO SEEK ANY
ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZATION BEYOND WHAT THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD MAY REOUIRE FOR A NORMAL REDEVELOPMENT
PERMIT AND BUILDING PERMIT.
18) Will the activity require issuance of a variance or
conditional use permit by the City? x_
EXPLANATION: NO DEVELOPMENT OR CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT IS REOUIRED.
19) Wm the activity Involve the application, use, or
disposal of potentially hazardous materials? ^
EXPLANATION: THERE WILL NOT NEED TO BE ANY USE OR DISPOSAL
OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS NOW EXISTING NOR DURING OR
AFTER CONSTRUCTION.
YES NO
20) Will the act4^y involve construction of faci^i.es
in a flood plain? ' ^
EXPLANATION: THE PROJECT IS NOT ON OR NEAR
A FLOOD PLAIN.
21) Will the activity involve construction of facilities x
in the area of an active fault?
EXPLANATION:
THERE ARE NO KNOWN ACTIVE FAULTS ON THE SITE.
22) Could the activity result in the generation of
significant amounts of dust? X
EXPLANATION: ONLY NORMALLY EXPECTED AMOUNT DURING
CONSTRUCTION AND NONE THEREAFTER. WATERING WILL BE
USED TO MINIMIZE DUST DURING PRELIMINARY GRADING.
23) Will the activity involve the burning of brush,
trees, or other materials? x
EXPLANATION: NONE OF THE ABOVE MATERIALS WILI^ BE
BURNED DURING OR AFTER CONSTRUCTION.
24) 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.)* .
EXPLANATION: SURFACE, SHALLOW GROUND OR
OFF-SHORE WATER EXISTS ON OR NEAR THE SITE
NOR WILL AIR QUALITY BE SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECTED.
YES
25) Win the pWject substantially Increase fuel
consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.)?
EXPLANATION: EACH SUITE WILL UTILIZE THE MOST
ENERGY EFFICIENT FIXTURES AND EQUIPMENT TO
MINIMIZE ENERGY CONSUMPTION
NO
26) Will the activity involve construction of facilities
on a slope of 25 percent or greater?
EXPLANATION: THE SITE IS RELATIVELY FLAT WITH
NO SLOPES GREATER THAN 5' to 10' ACROSS ITS
ENTIRE 2.4 ACRE PARCEL
X
27) Will there be a significant change to existing
land form?
(a) Indicate estimated grading to be done in
cubic yards: ONLY FINISH GRADIJ^G
(b) Percentage of alteration to the present
land form: 2-5% .
(c) Maximum height of cut or fill slopes:
3' -4' .
EXPLANATION: THERE IS NO SUBSTANTIAL GRADING
OR BELOW G.RADE STRUCTURES, OR CONSTRUCTION,
ALL IS ON A FINISH GRADE LEVEL.
X
28) Will the activity result in substantial Increases
in the use of utilities, sewers, drains or streets?
EXPLANATION: 1-1 EQUIVALENT DWELLING UNITS FOR
SEWER IS 106. OTHER UTILITIES, AND STREET USAGE
(GRAND AVENUE) WILL BE BELOW COMPARABLE USE OF A
NORMAL HOTEL IN THAT THIS PROJECT IS AN EXTENDED
STAY FACILITY, CATERING TO CORPORATE RELOCATIONS,
TRAINING AND TEMPORARY WORK ASSIGNMENTS.
X
I
YES NO-
29) Will the project significantly increase wind or
water erosion of soils? ^
EXPLANATION: THE PROJECT WILL NOT INCREASE WIND
OR WATER EROSION. IT WILL ALLEVIATE EROSION
SINCE THE SITE IS CURRENTLY NOT LANDSCAPTED.
30) Could the project significantly affect existing
fish or wildlife habitat? 2.
EXPLANATION: NO FISH OR WILDLIFE HABITAT EXISTS
ON OR NEAR THE SITE.
31) Will the project significantly produce new light
or glare?
EXPLANATION: HIGHLY REFLECTIVE SURFACES WILL
BE USED OR INSTALLED. EXTERIOR NIGHT LIGHTING
WILL BE COMPATIBLE WITH TYPICAL HOTELS OF THIS SIZE.
10
. II. STATEMENT Of r||^"THITFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFF^
If you have answered yes to any of the questions irl Section I but think
the activity will have no significant environmental effects, indicate your
reasons below:
NOT APPLICABLE
III. COMMENTS OR ELABORATIONS TO ANY OF THE OUESTIONS IN SECTION I
(If additional space is needed for answering any questions, attach
additional sheets as needed.)
Signature
Date Signed
(Person Completing R^rt)
acily , 1999
11
PRELIMINARY NOISE REPORT
Staybridge Suites Hotel (RP99-11)
A 2.4 Acre Vacant Parcel Located
Between Grand Avenue and Laguna Drive, Weet of i-5
CityofCarlsbad
San Dlego County, Califomia
Prepared for:
Shapery Enterprises
Sandoor W. Siiapery
423 West "Bystreet
San Diego, CA 92101
(619)239 4700
Prepared by:
George H. Mannaghani, P.E.
9805Scranton Road
Suite 100
San Dlego, CA 92121
(858)450 7337
September 28,1999 RECEIVED
OCT 1.2 1993
OITY OF CARLSIAD HOUSING ARESEVILOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAYBRIDGE SUITES HOTEL
AppHcadonNo. RP99-U
Preliminary Noise Study
Project Settimg:
This project involves the construction ofa 106 room hotel, located norfh ofCarlsbad Village
Drive between Gtand Averaic and Lagima Drive tei^^
Carlsbad.
The proposed devetopment is oomprised of buildings, paridng aicas» sidewaUcs. and landscaping
totiiliQg approximately 2.4' acres.
Legal Description:
Legal Description : APN 203-130-18,20,15, +34
Lots 18.20,15 and 34 of Map No. 1661 Carlsbad Lands
City of Carisbad Noise Study Requirements:
Based on thc Aiigfust 16,1999 letter issued by the City ofCarlsbad, this preliminaiy noise report
has been prepared bi absence of post development tiaffic volumes, or site and buHding plans
detailing the location and orientation of stnidures, this preliminaiy noise repoit addresses
exterior noise levels on the pioject site. In addition, this preliminaiy noise report lecomraends
possible methods to atfcaiuate die predicted noise levels to fhe City ofCarlsbad standards, as
outlined inthe "City ofCarlsbad Noise Guidelines Manual", dated September 1995. The'
lecommendoticms in this pceliminaiy noise report are based on noise contours depicted on Figure
B-2 (Future Noise Exposure Contours) of lhe above mentioned manual and irtfOTmation leceivcd
fiom tibe client.
Future Noise Levels and Attiawmtion Measures;
Although the hotel site is subject to trafBc noise ftom both local streets and 1-5,1-5 traffic is die
primary noise source at the site. The adjacent cul-dc-sacs would not be significant contributors.
This is partly due 1» the "dead end" condition of tbe cul-de-sacs where vdiicular traffic will be
operating at very low speeds, and volumes. The aforementioned noise contours identified in
Figure B-2 ofthe **Noise GuiddinBs Manual** indicate tbat future noise levels for the
devdopmeat site will be qjproxiniately 70 db CNEL.
STAYBRIDGE SUITES HOTEL
Application No. RP99-11
In compliance with tiie recommendations outlined in Figure iii, Page vi of the '"Noise Guidelines
Manual", for this proposed motel (transient lodging) type development a detailed analysis of
noise reduction measures will be prepared. In adytum, using tiie architectural plans, tiie requiied
details for noise insulation features will be proposed. With tbe conventional constniction
proposed tiar this hotel, typical interior noise mitigation measures will include closed windows,
central air coiiKtitioning system £61: fiesh air drouiation, and double or triple glazed windows.
For interior noiae mitigation, archilBctural drawings indicating the location, orientation, and
constmction material types will be needed prior to acoustic specialist/engineer can reconunend
interior noise mitigation measures. Exterior noise mitigation will be influenced by the future
building pad elevations. In absence of detailed grading plans, and based on infoimation received
fixnn tiie applicaiit, proposed hotel site grading wHl substantially lower the existing ground
elevation in relation to the fieeway level which will in tum reduce tbe exterior noise. More
detailed noise analysis based on additional topographic infbmiation will be perfoimed and
siibimttod.
CERTIFICATION
The infoimation and recommendations contained in this preliminaiy report are based on
mfoimation obtained fiom the City of Carlsbad and the olieiit is true and Actual.
George H. Mamagbani, PE
Noise Control Engineer
Preliminary/Feasibility Report
Shapery Enterprises Hotel Site
Carlsbad, Califomia
Page 2
Geology and Seismicity
The soils are alluvial/colluvial materials derived from the hills to the east. The closest active faults
are the offshore Rose Canyon fault 2 to 3 miles to the west, the Elsinore fault zone approximately 25
miles to the east and the San Andrea fault zone approximately 55 miles to the east.
Conclusions
1. The site appears suitable for the proposed hotel development. There are no readily apparent
geotechmcal constraints that would preclude construction as planned.
2. The proposed relatively light hotel building can probably be supported on conventional
footings and slabs. Anticipated allowable soil bearing values are on the order of 2000 pounds
per square foot for dead plus live loads.
3. Site grading should anticipate recompaction of surface soils. There may be buried
obstructions associated with existing or previously existing buildings.
4. Pavement thicknesses should not be unduly great.
This opportunity to be of service is appreciated. If you have any questions, please call.
Very truly yours.
Martin R. Owen PE, GE
Geotechmcal Engineer
Copies: Addressee (2)
JUL-31-2000 MON 10:40 AM CITY OF CARLSBAD FAX NO. 760 602 8559 P. 01
Noise Guidelines Manual CITY OF CARLSBAD
FIGURE - iii
LAND USE COMPATIBIUTY FOR COMMUNITY NOISE ENVIRONMENTS MATRIX
Land V— CaiAgory-
Rtsidvntial - {sill
SingI* Fimily,
Dupltx. Mobilvhomo.
Mtilti'F»m>lY, tic.
Tr«n«ivn( Lodging
Mot«l. Hot«l
School, Library.
Church, Hospital,
Nurting Homa
Auditorium, Concart
Hall, Amphithaaiar
Sporta Arana, Outdoor
Spaciator Sport!
RavO'ound,
Naighborhood Park
Golf Coursa, Ridmg
Stabia, Waiar
Racraation, Camatary
Offica Building,
Businaaa Commarcial
Plannad Induitrial
and ProfasaionaJ
Ganarai Induatria),
Manufacturing,
Utilitiaa,
Agricultura
INTERPRETATION;
NormaUy AccapiabU
SpaciKad land uaa ia aadtfactory,
baaad upon lha aiaumption that
any buildinga involvad ara of
normal eonvantional construction,
without any apacial noiaa
inaulation raquiramanta.
Conditionally Acoapiabia
N«iw conatruction or davalopmani
ahould ba undartakan only aftar a
datailad analyaia of tha noiaa
raduction raquiramanta ia nrtada
and naadod noiaa inaulation
facturaa ineludad in tha daaign.
Convantional conatruction, but
with eloaad wirtdown and fraah
air supply ayitama or air
eor^ditioning wiH normally suffica.
Normally UnaceaptabU
Naw conatruction or davaiopmant
ihould gar>arally ba diacouragad.
If now conatruction or
davaiopmant doaa prooood, a
datailad analyaia of tha noiaa
raduction raquiramanta muat ba
mada artd naadad noiaa inaulation
fa«turaa ineludad in tha datign.
Land Ua* EHacouragad
Naw conatruction or davaiopmant
ahould ganaralty not ba
uridartakan.
NOTE: MeQallan Palomar Airport
Noiaa ia ragulatad by tha Airport
Comprohanaivo Land U«« P1«n
(CLUP). Sao tha CLUP for airport
noifo compatibility guidoilnaa.
Summary vi
City of Carlsbad
Planning Department
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Project Address/Location:
Project Description:
The project site is located adjacent and west of Interstate 5, north of
Grand Avenue and south of Laguna Drive. Assessors parcel numbers
203-130-15, 18, 20 and 34.
A 106 suite hotel including 53 studio units, 35 one-bedroom units, and
18 two-bedroom units within a three story structure on a 2.41 acre site
located adjacent and west of Interstate 5, north of Grand Avenue and
south of Laguna Drive. Project includes the frontage improvements to
Grand Avenue and Laguna Drive and the demolition of four existing
single-family residences.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an enviromnental review of the above described project
pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act and
the Enviromnental Protection Ordinance ofthe City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the
initial study (EIA Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1)
revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the
proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the
effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment
would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City
that the project "as revised" may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a
Mitigated Negative Declaration is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this
action is on file in the Planning Department.
A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the
Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, Califomia 92008. Comments from the
public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 20
days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Van Lynch in the Planning
Department at (760) 602-4613.
DATED: APRIL 24, 2000
CASE NO: RP 99-11
CASE NAME: STAYBRIDGE SUITES
PUBLISH DATE: APRIL 24, 2000
MICHAEL J. HGfcZMIbLER
Planning Director
1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 ^
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II
CASE NO: RP 99-11
DATE: April 13.2000
BACKGROUND
1.
2.
3.
4.
CASE NAME: Staybridge Suites
APPLICANT: Shapery Enterprises
ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 423 West B Street. San Diego. CA
92101 -(619) 239-4700
DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: July 16. 1999
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A 106 suite hotel including 53 studio units, 35 one-bedroom units,
and 18 two-bedroom units within a three storv structure and associated parking area on a 2.41
acre site located adiacent and west of Interstate 5. north of Grand Avenue and south of Laguna
Drive. Proiect includes the frontage improvements to Grand Avenue and Laguna Drive and the
demolition of four existing single-family residences.
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," or "Potentially Significant Impact
Unless Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
I I Land Use and Planning
I I Population and Housing
I I Geological Problems
Q Water
Air Quality
Transportation/Circulation Public Services
I I Biological Resources Q Utilities & Service Systems
I I Energy & Mineral Resources Aesthetics
I I Hazards Q Cultural Resources
Noise Recreation
I I Mandatory Findings of Significance
Rev. 03/28/96
DETERMINATION.
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
I I I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I I I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I I I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
X I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but at
least one potentially significant effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be
addressed.
I I I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier Master Environmental
Impact Review (MEIR 93-01) pursuant to apphcable standards and (b) have been voided
or mitigated pursuant to that earlier Master Environmental Review (MEIR 93-01),
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared.
Planner Signature Date
Planning DirectoW Sigikture Date
Rev. 03/28/96
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Secfion 15063 requires that the City
conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant
effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following
pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human
factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to
use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative
Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration.
• A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each
question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information
sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A
"No Impact" answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or
it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards.
• "Less Than Significant Impact" applies where there is supporting evidence that the
potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopted
general standards and policies.
• "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation
of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a
"Less Than Significant Impact." The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the
City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the
effect to a less than significant level.
• "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect is significant.
• Based on an "EIA-Part II", if a proposed project could have a potentially significant
effect on the environment, but aU potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable
standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated
Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon
the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or
supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior
environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional
environmental document is required (Prior Compliance).
• When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required
to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a "Statement of
Overriding Considerations" has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR.
• A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that
the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment.
Rev. 03/28/96
• If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an
EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and
those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this
case, the appropriate "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated"
may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared.
• An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked, and including
but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has
not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and
the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less than
significant; (2) a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" for the significant impact has
not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce
the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part II analysis it is not
possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or
determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant
effect to below a level of significance.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the
form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attenfion
should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined
significant.
Rev. 03/28/96
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:.
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source #l:Pgs 5.6-1 -5.6-18)
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the
project? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18)
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
(#l:Pgs 5.6-1 -5.6-18)
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts
to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible
land uses)? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18)
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income or
minority community) ? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18)
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? (#l:Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6)
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)? (#l:Pgs 5.5-1 -
5.5-6)
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? (#l:Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6)
III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15, # 2)
b) Seismic ground shaking? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15, # 2)
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (#l:Pgs
5.1-1 -5.1.15, #2)
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 -
5.1-15)
e) Landslides or mudflows? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1-5.1-15)
f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? (#l:Pgs
5.1-1 -5.1-15, #2)
g) Subsidence ofthe land? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1-5.1-15)
h) Expansive soils? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15, # 2)
i) Unique geologic or physical features? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 -
5.1-15, #2)
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage pattems, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-
11)
b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11)
c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11)
Potentially Potentially
Significant Significant
Impact Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than No
Significant Impact
Impact
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • X •
• • • X
• • • X • • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X • • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
Rev. 03/28/96
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 -5..2-11)
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11)
f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11)
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
(#l:Pgs 5.2-1 -5..2-11)
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-
11)
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies? (#l:Pgs
5.2-1 -5..2-11)
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (#l:Pgs 5.3-
1-5.3-12)
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (#l:Pgs 5.3-1
- 5.3-12)
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate? (#l:Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-12)
d) Create objectionable odors? (#1 :Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-12)
Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
• • • S
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (#l:Pgs
5.7-1 - 5.7.22)
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g. farm equipmenO? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7.22)
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22)
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22)
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22)
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting altemative
transportation (e.g. bus tumouts, bicycle racks)?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22)
g) Rail, waterbome or air traffic impacts? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -
5.7.22)
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result
in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animals, and birds)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24)
b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)?
(#l:Pgs 5.4-1 -5.4-24)
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24)
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
X • • •
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • •
• • •
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
Rev. 03/28/96
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vemal pool)?
(#l:Pgs 5.4-1 -5.4-24)
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? (#1 :Pgs 5.4-1
- 5.4-24)
Potentially
Significant
Impact
•
•
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
•
•
Less Than
Significant
Impact
•
•
No
Impact
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
(#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 & 5.13-1 - 5.13-9)
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 -5.12.1-5 & 5.13-
1-5.13-9)
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of future value to the region and
the residents ofthe State? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5
& 5.13-1 -5.13-9)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• • K
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5)
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 -
5.10.1-5)
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5)
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5)
e) Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable bmsh,
grass, or trees? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1-5.10.1-5)
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? (#l:Pgs 5.9-1 - 5.9-
15)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (#l:Pgs 5.9-
1 -5.9-15, #3)
XL PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered govemment
services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.5-1 - 5.12.5-6)
b) Police protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.6-1 - 5.12.6-4)
c) Schools? (#l:Pgs 5.12.7.1 - 5.12.7-5)
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
(#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 -5.12.8-7)
e) Other govemmental services? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 -
5.12.8-7)
• • •
• • •
• • • X
• • • X • • • X
• • • X
• • • X
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 &
5.13-1-5.13-9) • • • K
7 Rev. 03/28/96
• •
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
•
Incorporated
• X b) Communications systems? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.8-7) • • • X
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution • • • X facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3-7) • • • X
d) Sewer or septic tanks? (#l:Pgs 5.12.3-1 - 5.12.3-7) • • • X e) Storm water drainage? (#l:Pg 5.2-8) • • • X
f) Solid waste disposal? (#l:Pgs 5.12.4-1 - 5.12.4-3) • • • X
g) Local or regional water supplies? (#l:Pgs 5.12.2-1 -• • • X 5.12.3-7) • • • X
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? (#l:Pgs • • • X 5.11-1-5.11-5) • • • X
b) Have or demonstrate a negative aesthetic effect? • • • (#l:Pgs 5.11-1 -5.11-5) • • •
c) Create lighter glare? (#l:Pgs 5.11-1-5.11-5) • • Kl U
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paieontological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-
10)
b) Disturb archaeological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-
10)
c) Affect historical resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1-5.8-10)
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values? (#l:Pgs
5.8-1-5.8-10)
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1-5.8-10)
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional ^
parks or other recreational facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.8-1 -
5.12.8-7)
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (#l:Pgs I I I I I I
5.12.8-1-5.12.8-7) '—' '—^ —11^
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of Califomia history or
prehistory?
• • • K
Rev. 03/28/96
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
•
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
•
• •
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
• m
• m
Rev. 03/28/96
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the
following on attached sheets:
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available
for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist
were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant
to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mifigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-
specific conditions for the project.
10 Rev. 03/28/96
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The proposed project consists of a 106 suite extended stay hotel. The project includes 53 studio
units, 35 one-bedroom units, and 18 two-bedroom units with a total floor area of 72,435 square
feet. The hotel is to be one building which forms a U-shape and will be three levels with an
overall roof height of 44 feet, one inch. A variance request to exceed the building height is
required. On-site improvements include a swimming pool, circulation drive isle, 127 parking
spaces, trash enclosure, exterior hghts, six foot tall masonry perimeter wall, and street
improvements in the form of curb, sidewalk and gutter to Grand Avenue and Laguna Drive.
Grading for the project is 11,600 cubic yards of material and is balanced grading.
The site is currently occupied by four single-family residences, one outbuilding, and omamental
landscaping. The remainder ofthe property is vacant and is under cultivation with tomato crops.
The site is relatively flat with a eight foot elevation change descending to the west. The property
to the east is Interstate 5 freeway, to the south is a restaurant and hotel, four single-family
residential units border the site to the west, and a senior care facility (Villas De Carlsbad) is to
the north.
The project site does not contain any significant natural, cultural, or biological resources. The
existing streets, with the mitigation measure, are adequate to handle the traffic generated by the
project and the existing infrastmcture is in place to provide services to the project.
11 Rev. 03/28/96
II. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
B. Environmental Impact Discussion
Air Quality
The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated
1994 General Plan will result in increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle miles
traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide, reactive
organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended particulates. These aerosols are the
major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Since the
San Diego Air Basin is a "non-attainment basin," any additional air emissions are considered
cumulatively significant: therefore, continued development to buildout as proposed in the
updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air quality of the region.
To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan buildout, a variety
of mitigation measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provisions
for roadway and intersection improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2) measures
to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of Congestion and Transportation Demand
Management; 3) provisions to encourage altemative modes of transportation including mass
transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; and 5)
participation in regional growth management strategies when adopted. The applicable and
appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the
design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval.
Operation-related emissions are considered cumulatively significant because the project is
located within a "non-attainment basin," therefore, the "Initial Study" checklist is marked
"Potentially Significant Impact." This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the
preparation of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City
Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" for air
quality impacts. This "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" applies to all subsequent
projects covered by the General Plan's Final Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no
further environmental review of air quality impacts is required. This document is available at the
Planning Department.
Transportation/Circulation
The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated
1994 General Plan will result in increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate
to accommodate buildout traffic; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections will be severely
impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional control. These
generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad
Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections
are projected to fail the City's adopted Growth Management performance standards at buildout.
To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan buildout, numerous
mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1)
measures to ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to
develop altemative modes of transportation such as trails, bicycle routes, additional sidewalks,
pedestrian linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulation
12 Rev. 03/28/96
strategies when adopted. The diversion of regional through-traffic from a failing Interstate or
State Highway onto City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the City to
control. The applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have either
been incorporated into the design ofthe project or are included as conditions of project approval.
Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of the
failure of intersections at buildout of the General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefore,
the "Initial Study" checklist is marked "Potentially Significant Impact." This project is
consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the
recent certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included
a "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" for circulation impacts. This "Statement Of
Overriding Considerations" applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General Plan's
Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of circulation
impacts is required.
Noise
The stmcture will attenuate noise from the freeway for the residential units adjacent. The project
will be subject to noise from the 1-5 freeway and is conditioned to prepare a detailed acoustical
analysis prior to the issuance of a building permit. Noise attenuation measures may include
closed windows, central air conditioning, and double glazed windows.
Aesthetics - Light and glare
Parking lot lighting has the potential to impact the adjacent residential area. The project will be
conditioned to install lights which are shielded to prevent the spill-over of light onto the adjacent
residential property to mitigate any potential impact.
III. EARLIER ANALYSES USED
The following documents were used in the analysis ofthis project and are on file in the City of
Carlsbad Planning Department located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA. 92008, (760)
602-4605.
1. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update
(MEIR 93-01), dated March 1994, City of Carisbad Planning Department.
2. Report of Preliminary/Feasibility Investigation Proposed 106 room Hotel, Owen Geotech,
dated September 27, 1999
3. Preliminary Noise Report, Staybridge Suites Hotel, Shapery Enterprises, dated September 28,
1999.
13 Rev. 03/28/96
LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES
1. The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of an exterior lighting
plan including parking areas. All lighting shall be designed to reflect downward and avoid
any impacts on adjacent homes or property.
2. To mitigate potential noise impacts, a detailed indoor noise analysis is required to determine
the building upgrades for the hotel units adjacent to Interstate 5 prior to building permit
issuance.
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE)
See attached
14 Rev. 03/28/96
APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND
CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
Date Signature ^
15 Rev. 03/28/96
1
PROJECTNAME: STAYBRIDGE SUITES
APPROVAL DATE:
FILE NUMBERS: RP 99-11
MITIGATED NEG. DEC: April 13. 2000
The following environmental mitigation measures were incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for this project in order to mitigate
identified environmental impacts to a level of insignificance. A completed and signed checklist for each mitigation measure indicates that
this mitigation measure has been complied with and implemented, and fulfills the City's monitoring requirements with respect to Assembly
Bill 3180 (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6).
m z <
o
m
Mitigation Measure Monitoring
Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on
Plans
Verified
Implementation Remarks
^he Developer shall submit and obtain Planning
Birector approval of an exterior lighting plan including
parking areas. All lighting shall be designed to reflect
downward and avoid any innpacts on adjacent honnes
or property.
Project Planning
To mitigate potential noise impacts, a detailed indoor
noise analysis is required to determine the building
upgrades forthe hotel units adjacent to Interstate 5
priorto building permit issuance.
Project Planning
o z
o
z
G)
O m o
7s
CO
•D
fi) tn
(D
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular
mitigation measure.
*Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be
initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented,
this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other
information.
RD - Appendix P.
Notice of Determination 000451
To: Office ofPlanning and Research
P.O. Box 3044
Sacramento, CA 95812
County Clerk
County of San Diego
Mailstop 833, Attn: MITA
PO Box 121750
San Diego, CA 92112-1750
g5Si8(«GliM"*^*F CARLSBAD
^J^^ning Department
1635 Faraday Avenue
CarlsJbad, CA 92009
602-46(
BV
J ID)
gory J. Smith, Recordar/Counly Clerk
AUG 1 4 2000
DEPUTY
Project No: RP 99-11
Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 ofthe Public
Resources Code.
STAYBRIDGE SUITES
Project Title
N/A City of Carlsbad, Van Lynch (760) 602- 4613
State Clearinghouse No. Lead Agency, Contact Person Telephone Number
Project Locations (include County) Site is located adiacent and west of Interstate 5, north of
Grand Avenue and south of Laguna Drive. APN: 203-130-15,18, 20, and 34, San Diego County.
Project Description: A 106 suite hotel including 53 studio units, 35 one-bedroom units, and 18
two-bedroom units within a three story stmcture and associated parking area on a 2.41 acre site.
Project includes street frontage improvements and the demolition of four existing single-family
residences. >
This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad has approved the above-described project on August 1,
2000, and has made the following determination regarding the above-described project.
1. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment
2. A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of
CEQA.
3. Mitigation measures were made a condition of the approval of the project.
4. A statement of Overriding Considerations were not adopted for this project.
5. Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
This is to certify that the final Negative Declaration with comments and responses and record of
project approval is available to the General Public at THE CITY OF CARLSBAD.
MICHAEL J. H0LZMLLER(4>lanning Director
Date received for filing at OPR:
Date
Revised October 1989
Citv of Carlsbad
Planning Department
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Project Address/Location:
Project Description:
The project site is located adjacent and west of Interstate 5, north of
Grand Avenue and south of Laguna Drive. Assessors parcel numbers
203-130-15, 18, 20 and 34.
A 106 suite hotel including 53 studio units, 35 one-bedroom units, and
18 two-bedroom units within a three story stmcture on a 2.41 acre site
located adjacent and west of Interstate 5, north of Grand Avenue and
south of Laguna Drive. Project includes the frontage improvements to
Grand Avenue and Laguna Drive and the demolition of four existing
single-family residences.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project
pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act and
the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the
initial study (EIA Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1)
revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the apphcant before the
proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the
effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment
would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City
that the project "as revised" may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a
Mitigated Negative Declaration is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this
action is on file in the Planning Department.
A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the
Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, Cahfomia 92008. Comments from the
public are invited. Please subrnit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 20
days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Van Lynch in the Planning
Department at (760) 602-4613.
DATED:
CASE NO:
CASE NAME:
PUBLISH DATE:
APRIL 24, 2000
RP 99-11
STAYBRIDGE SUITES
APRIL 24, 2000
JOtCHAEL J. HOL^] -LL^CJV
FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY CL§^|ng Director
SAN DIEGO COUNTY ON ^ ^ ™
pn^TFH ^'-^ ^ ^ ^ REMOVED SFP 1 4 2000
RETURNED TO AGENCY ON
DEPUTY ^
SEP 1 4 2000
1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 ^