Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
LFMP 09; LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 09; LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 9; 1989-04-19
r ' CITY OF CARLSBAD GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 9 Prepared For: CITY OF CARLSBAD 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 Prepared By: SAMMIS PROPERTIES AUSTIN HANSEN FEHLMAN GROUP O'DAY CONSULTANTS URBAN SYSTEMS ANALYSIS PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING DATE: APRIL 19, 1989 INDIVIDUALS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PREPARAT~ON OF THIS PLAN SAMMIS PROPERTIES 2650 Camino Del Rio North suite 100 San Diego, CA 92108 619/298-7112 CONSULTANTS Austin, Hansen, Fehlman Group 9605 Scranton Road suite 202 San Diego, CA 92121 619/458-1361 Randy Coopersmith O'Day Consultants 7750-2H El Camino Real Rancho La Costa Carlsbad, CA 92009 619/944-1010 Hank Fletcher Urban Systems Analysis 4540 Kearny Villa Road suite 106 San Diego, CA 92123 619/560-4911 Sam Kab CITY OF CARLSBAD 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 619/438-1161 Philip o. Carter, Assistant to the city Manager Don Rideout, Senior Management Analyst Brian Hunter, Senior Planner Steven c. Jantz, Associate Civil Engineer I. II. III. IV. v. VI. VII. VIII. TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary Introduction Buildout Assumptions and Projections Phasing Zone Requirements for Public Facilities and Services Analysis of Public Facilities and Improvements 1. City Administrative Facilities 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Library Wastewater Treatment Capacity Parks Drainage Circulation Fire Open Space Schools Sewer Collection System Water Distribution System Financing Appendices A. Constraints Map B. Circulation Map c. Vertical/Horizontal Cross Sections D. Transportation Analysis Phasing E. EIR (84-3) F. Park Agreement G. Exten Ventures Letter H. Agenda Bill -Library PAGE NO. 1 21 29 33 39 41 49 55 63 73 83 100 102 103 108 118 128 I. Hydraulic Study -on file at City of Carlsbad Engineering office LIST OP EXHIBITS PAGE NO. I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXHIBIT l. EXHIBIT 2 EXHIBIT 3 EXHIBIT 4 EXHIBIT 5 II. INTRODUCTION EXHIBIT 6 EXHIBIT 7 EXHIBIT 8 EXHIBIT 9 EXHIBIT l.O Zone 9 Location Map Zone 9 summary Chart Zone 9 Public Facilities Summary Sheet General Conditions for Zone 9 Special Conditions for Zone 9 Local Facilities Mgt. Zone Boundaries Zone 9 Boundaries Zone 9 ownership Boundaries General Plan Zoning 8 9 10 11 13 24 25 26 27 28 III. BUILDOUT ASSUMPTIONS AND PROJECTIONS EXHIBIT 11. IV. PHASING EXHIBIT 12 EXHIBIT 12 EXHIBIT 13 EXHIBIT 14 Zone 9 Approved Development Projects 31 Citywide Residential Phasing (Part 1) 35 Citywide Residential Phasing (Part 2) 36 Zone 9 Residential Phasing Schedule 37 Zone 9 Non-Residential Phasing Schedule 38 V. ZONE REQUIREMENTS VI. CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES EXHIBIT 15 EXHIBIT 16 EXHIBIT 17 City Adm. Fae. Locations City Adm. Fae. Phasing Financing Matrix 41 45 48 VII. LIBRARY FACILITIES VIII. EXHIBIT 18 EXHIBIT 19 EXHIBIT 20 WASTEWATER EXHIBIT 21 EXHIBIT 22 EXHIBIT 23 Library Facilities Locations Library Phasing Financing Matrix 49 53 54 Wastewater Boundaries 56 Carlsbad Area Demand/Treatment Capacity 59 Financing Matrix 62 IX. PARKS EXHIBIT 24 EXHIBIT 25 EXHIBIT 26 EXHIBIT 27 EXHIBIT 28 X. DRAINAGE EXHIBIT 29 EXHIBIT 30 EXHIBIT 31 XI. CIRCULATION EXHIBIT 32 EXHIBIT 33 EXHIBIT 34 EXHIBIT 35 EXHIBIT 36 EXHIBIT 37 XII. FIRE EXHIBIT 38 XIII. IXV. OPEN SPACE SCHOOLS EXHIBIT 39 XV. SEWER EXHIBIT 40 EXHIBIT 41 EXHIBIT 42 EXHIBIT 43 XVI. WATER EXHIBIT 44 EXHIBIT 45 EXHIBIT 46 XVII. FINANCING Park Districts Boundaries Park Inventory Park Phasing without Mitigation Park Phasing with Mitigation Financing Matrix Major Drainage Major Drainage -Offsite Financing Matrix 1988 Existing Directional Distribution 1989 Directional Distribution 1990, 1991, 1995, 2000, and Buildout Directional Distribution Impacted Intersections Road Segments Financing Matrix Fire Response Time School Locations Sewer Districts Sewer Collection System Sewer Collection (outside Zone 9) Financing Matrix Costa Real Municipal Water District Water Distribution system Financing Matrix 63 64 70 71 72 74 75 82 85 86 87 91 94 99 100 103 109 111 112 117 119 120 127 EXHIBIT 47-54 Financing Matrix 129-136 I. EXBCUTIVB SUMMARY The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 was prepared pursuant to the city• s Growth Management Program, Title 21, Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The contents of the plan follow the outline established by Section 21.90.110 of the Growth Management Ordinance. The Zone 9 plan is consistent with the Citywide plan adopted September 23, 1986. The Zone 9 plan begins with assumptions used to generate the buildout projections for residential and non-residential development within the zone. The plan then phases or estimates the zone's development on a yearly basis until buildout. Phasing is done to predict future facility demands for each of the eleven facility categories. Each facility that is required to be addressed is then analyzed. The analysis includes an inventory of existing and proposed facilities, a phasing schedule that establishes the timing for the provision of facilities in relationship to demand, and a financing plan that establishes various methods of funding facilities and improvements that are identified by the plan as needed. Since this zone plan is a regulatory document, each facility section also contains conditions to ensure that public facilities will conform to the adopted performance standards. The conditions will be adopted as part of the Zone 9 approval, and mandatory compliance will regulate future development within the zone. Exhibit 1 graphically illustrates the location of Zone 9 within the city. (page 8) Exhibit 2 is a brief synopsis of the Local Facilities Plan for Zone 9. (page 9) Exhibit 3 is a one-page highlight of the synopsis. (page 10) FINANCE OVERVIEW The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 identifies one facility which currently does not conform with the adopted performance standards without special mitigation measures: Parks -A shortfall of 4. 36 acres in the southwest quadrant, Park District 3 currently exists. 1 As part of this Local Facilites Management Plan, an attempt has been made to bring these facilities into conformance with the adopted performance standards. During this process it has become clear that no one financing mechanism can satisfy the complex infrastructure requirements for this zone and of the southwest quadrant. However, a combination of financing techniques can address both the need for upgrading facilities enabling them to conform with the adopted performance standards and ensuring conformance of future facilities as development occurs. A common set of goals for the financing of the major facilities can be stated as follows: 1. Provide feasible financing techniques to ensure that all facilities are provided in conformance with with the adopted performance standards. 2. Provide for the implementation of financing techniques which consider the financial limitations associated with the high costs of infrastructure construction. 3. Provide for financing options which consider both the needs of the city and property owners. The adopted citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan identified the various ways that capital improvements could be financed. The capital facilities necessary to support the City of Carlsbad generally fall into two categories --those provided by developers as a condition of development approvals, and those provided by the City through a system of fees, taxes, or other financing sources. It is the City• s responsibility to plan for the construction and maintenance of City projects and to finance these projects in the best possible way. The following describes some of the financing options available: A. Cash/Pay-as-you-go financing. The City method of financing for most capital constructed to date. has used this improvements In concept, the City charges the development community a series of fees which provide the source of income to pay for capital projects. When· enough cash has been assembled, the City constructs the next capital project in order of priority. This method forces the City to delay construction of various projects until funds have been collected. These fees include: 2 B. c. 1. Public Facilities Fee 2. Park-in-Lieu Fees 3. Planned Local Drainage Fees 4. Traffic Impact Fees s. Bridge and Thoroughfare Benefit District Fees 6. Water Fees 7. sewer Fees Special Districts collect their own various fees. Reimbursement Agreements. In certain instances, a developer may ask the City to move a project forward in time and to construct a facility before funds have been collected. When this occurs, the City could adopt the policy of having the interested developer construct the project based on a reimbursement agreement. The City would pay the developer back for the portion of the project that was to be funded by City resources over a period of time. Payments would commence at the time the City had originally scheduled the construction of the facility in the Capital Improvements Program. Moving the project forward in time is for the benefit of the developer. Therefore, the City's repayment would be limited to the cost of the public portion of the project and no interest would accrue to the developer. The use of this method of project financing does not eliminate the developer's obligation to pay City fees. The developer must still pay all City fees associated with a development. credit for City Fees. When it is in the public interest to construct certain public facilities earlier than would be possible under a pay-as-you-go program, the City can consider giving a developer credit for fees that would otherwise be paid, up to the cost of the public improvement. These credits would reduce the amount of fees payable in future years from a certain development. Fee credits must be used carefully to avoid elimination of income from capital fees necessary to finance other projects. Two alternatives exist for fee credits: Full fee credit immediately: Under this option, the developer who builds a public improvement would be eligible to deduct 100% of the cost of the improvement from fees payable. Once the fee credit is exhausted, the developer begins paying fees as normally assessed by the City. Under this option the developer gets immediate credit for the total cost of a project. 3 Partial Fee Credit -credit over time: In this option, the developer who builds a public improvement receives a credit of the cost of a public improvement. However, the use of that credit is spread over a series of years. This allows the City to continue to receive at least a portion of fees designated for other capital projects while giving the developer credit for the construction of public improvements that would have otherwise been paid for by the city. No interest would accrue to the developer as a part of this arrangement. D. Debt Financing. A range of debt financing alternatives are available to the City. If it is in the public interest to push a project ahead and to construct an improvement before funds are on hand, debt financing may be the answer. If the project is being pushed forward for the convenience or benefit of a developer, that developer should bear the cost of issuance and interest over the life of the debt issue. The actual mechanics of a debt issue and how to determine the developer's responsibility to support these costs would be defined as the method of debt financing was chosen. Some of the debt financing vehicles available are shown below: ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS: Under Council Policy No. 33, the City may assist a developer in the construction of various public improvements that may be financed through the use of assessment districts if there is significant public benefit from the improvement. In cases where a City contribution is planned, the City may ask a developer to pay the City contribution, the developer could then be reimbursed at a later date (i.e., in the year that the capital project has been originally scheduled for construction) or through a system of credits as described earlier. ACQUISITION DISTRICTS: Under Council Policy No. 33, the City may assist a developer in the construction of various public improvements that may be financed through the use of acquisition districts if there is significant public benefit from the improvement. In cases where a City contribution is planned, the City may ask a developer to pay the City contribution. The developer could then be reimbursed at a later date (i.e., in the year that the capital project has been originally scheduled for construction} or through a system of credits as described earlier. 4 SPECIAL BENEFIT DISTRICTS: State Law allows the formation of a variety of special benefit districts. These districts may be used to fund the construction of parks, libraries, police or fire facilities, and street lighting systems to name a few. These districts may be formed by vote of the property owners who then assess themselves for the cost of improvements. The developer and/or land owner bears the burden of debt service payments. City participation in a district of this type is possible to the extent of public improvements that would have otherwise been the responsibility of the City. However, the movement of capital improvements forward-in-time would require some concession from the developer in offsetting interest, debt issue, or other additional costs. COMMUNITY FACILITY DISTRICT: (MELLO-ROOS) Under Council Policy No. 38., the City may assist through Mello-Roos financing the construction of public facilities in conjunction with development. Mello-Roos Community Facility Districts (CFD's) operate similiar to assessment districts, but provide a more flexible tool for governmental entities to finance a wider range of public infrastructure, again through the issuance of tax exempt bonds. Facilities which may be financed by a Mello-Roos District include parks, parkways, open space, schools, libraries, gas pipelines, telephone lines and can be used to eliminate special assessment liens. These districts may also pay operating costs to the extent the services are in addition to those already being provided prior to the formation of the district. REVENUE BONDS: The City may elect to issue revenue bonds to finance improvements related to utility functions or other City services that generate a fee for service, although other City functions could support the use of revenue bonds. If public improvements are being installed ahead of schedule to accommodate a developer, the City would expect the developer to offset many of the costs of such an issue as described above. TAX INCREMENT BONDS: Public Improvements in the City's redevelopment area can be financed through the use of tax increment bonds. The Redevelopment Agency has developed a plan for the construction of public improvements using this method of 5 financing. A developer asking for public improvements to be constructed ahead of schedule must consider the agency's ability and willingness to defer other projects. CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION: Certain public facilities such as buildings can be financed through Certificates of Participation. This is in effect a lease agreement between the City and another agency. A developer wishing to push projects forward might consider constructing facilities such as a library or fire station using this financing tool. The developer may be asked to bear certain costs or to accept credit in lieu of payment for certain improvements. GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS: The City has the ability to issue General Obligation Bonds to fund the construction of public improvements. This can only be done with the approval of 2/3 of the voters in an election. It is unlikely that the City will have the ability to use this method of funding public projects which benefit specific developments. FINANCING POLICIES: The adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan contains the following financing policies: 1. Recognize that those projects indentified in the Public Facilities Fee Calculation are the ultimate responsibility of the city to fund, however, the priority for funding projects is at the discretion of the City Council. 2. Recognize that the Capital Improvements Program will play a significant role in helping to establish compliance with the adopted performance standards. Priority for the funding of projects should go to infill areas or areas of the City where existing deficiencies exist. 3. Agree to consider assisting developers with credits against future fees, reimbursement agreements, forming assessment districts, etc. only when it is clearly in the public interest to do so or to rectify public facility deficiencies and not to induce growth by prematurely upgrading public facilities. 4. Recognize that all credit or reimbursement arrangements will be made based upon the City's plans for timing of certain public facilities. For 6 example, if a developer wanted to put in an improvement that the City had not planned for 5 years and was not necessary to rectify an existing deficiency, the City would not consider beginning to provide credits or reimbursements until the 5th year, if at all. 5. Recognize that public facility improvements made up front or ahead of City plans by developers must provide the funds necessary to cover annual operating costs for the facility until the time the City had previously planned to provide the facility. 6. With the recent reduction in residential densities and overall restriction on residential development, recognize that it may be necessary to start charging fees to commercial and industrial land uses in cases where they are not presently assessed. With the reduction in residential land uses and density, it may be necessary to charge commercial and industrial developments to make up the deficit. FINANCING SUMMARY This Local Facilities Management Plan has identified certain facilities that will fall below the adopted performance standards without the proposed mitigation at some time during the course of buildout. The developers in Zone 9 propose to provide mitigation to bring them into conformance with the adopted performance standards. The specific mitigation for each facility is shown in the corresponding facility sections of this plan. This plan also identifies when future public facilities are needed as growth occurs to ensure compliance with the adopted performance standards. A complete financing section is provided at the end of this plan which provides a description of the facility improvements to be made, timing of improvements, cost estimates, and funding priorities. 7 15 16 17 19 LOCATION OF ZONE 9 WITHIN THE LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONES LOCAL FACll.ITlES MANAGEMENT PLAN -ZONE 9 8 EXHIBIT 1 18 I EXH:IBIT 2 ZONB 9 PUBLIC FAC:ILITIES SUMMARY CHART City Administrative Facilities Library Wastewater Treatment Capacity Parks Drainage Circulation Fire Open Space Schools Sewer Collection Water Distribution Existing facilities meet the adopted performance standard until the year 2006. Existing facilities performance standard Existing facilities performance standard meet the adopted until the year 2003. meet the adopted until the year 2000. Park District 3 currently does not conform with the adopted performance standard. Until this facility is brought into conformance, no residential development may occur in the city's southwest quadrant. Existing facilities currently meet the adopted performance standard. Existing facilities meet the adopted standard. Future facilities will meet the performance standard to buildout with proposed mitigation measures. Existing facilities meet the adopted performance standard to the buildout of Zone 9. Existing open space performance standard. meets the adopted Existing facilities meet the adopted performance standard. Future facilities will meet the performance standard to buildout with proposed mitigation measures. Existing and proposed facilities meet the adopted performance standard to the buildout of Zone 9. Existing and proposed facilities meet the adopted performance standard to the buildout of Zone 9. 9 EXHJ:BIT 3 ZONE 9 PUBLIC FACILITIES SUMMARY SHEET Conformance with Adopted Standard: Citywide City Administrative Facilities Library 1) 2) 3) Wastewater Treatment Capacity Quadrant 4) Parks Zone 9 5) Drainage 6) Circulation 7) Fire 8) Open Space 9) Schools 10) Sewer Collection 11) Water Distribution Yes; until 2006 Yes; until 2003 Yes; until 2000 No* Yes; to buildout Yes; to buildout with proposed mitigation Yes; to buildout Yes; to buildout Yes; to buildout Yes; to buildout Yes; to buildout *This plan does not propose to mitigate the current Parks shortfall. 10 EXHIBIT 4 GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR ZONE 9 1. All development within Zone 9 shall conform to the provisions of Section 21. 90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and to the provisions and conditions of this Local Facilities Management Plan. 2. All development within Zone 9 shall be required to pay a public facility fee pursuant to the standards adopted by the city council on July 28, 1987, and as amended from time to time and all other applicable fees. Development in Zone 9 shall also be responsible for any additional fees to be incorporated into this plan that are found to be necessary to enable facilities to meet the adopted performance standard. 3. The city of Carlsbad shall monitor all facilities in Zone 9 pursuant to Subsections 21.90.130(c), (d) and (e) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 4. All development in Zone 9 shall be in conformance with the adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan as adopted by City Council Resolution 8797 on September 23, 1986. s. Periodic amendment to the Zone 9 Local Facilities Management Plan is anticipated to incorporate newly acquired data, to add conditions and upgrade standards as determined through the required monitoring program. Amendment to this Plan may be initiated by action of the Planning Commission, City Council or property owners at any time. 6. If a public facility or service is found not to be in conformance with an adopted performance standard during the yearly monitoring, or at any other time, the matter will be immediately brought before the City Council. If the City Council determines that a non-conformance does exist, then no future building or development permits shall be issued unless an amendment to the citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan or the Local Facilities Management Plan for this zone is approved by the City Council which address those facility shortfalls and brings those facilities into conformance with the adopted performance standards. 7. After adoption of this Plan by the City council, no building permits will be allowed unless the performance standards are complied with. This includes all projects which were exempt under Section 21.90.0JO(c) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 11 8. 9. Approval of this LFMP does not constitute prior environmental review for projects within Zone 9. All future projects within Zone 9 shall undergo environmental review per Title 19 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Any mitigation measures determined during a project's environmental review shall be complied with in their entirety unless findings of overriding consideration are made by the City Council. prior All the the for not Approval of this plan does not constitute discretionary review for projects within Zone 9. future projects shall undergo review per Title 21 of Carlsbad Municipal Code. The plan establishes maximum allowable number of residential units facilities planning purposes only. The plan does guarantee any specific residential density. 12 EXH:tB:tT 5 SPECIAL COND:tT:tONS FOR ZONE 9 The following special conditions apply specifically to development in Zone 9 and must be complied with in addition to the General conditions for Zone 9. These conditions are also listed separately under the analysis discussion of each facility. CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES. No special conditions are necessary at this time. LIBRARY No special conditions are necessary at this time. WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPACITY The following actions shall be pursued jointly by each sewer district to ensure adequate wastewater treatment capacity through the year 2000: 1. Monitor Encina treatment plant flows on a monthly basis to determine actual flow rates and to have an early warning of capacity problems. 2. Actively pursue acceleration and phasing of treatment plant Phase IV expansion to provide adequate capacity. 3. The six member agencies shall form an agreement to maximize the utilization of available treatment capacity at Encina WPCF. PARKS The facility analysis has indicated that the parks standard within the southwest quadrant is not being met. There£ ore, pursuant to Section 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, no residential development may be allowed in this quadrant until the performance standard is complied with. 13 DRAINAGE 1. Prior to the recordation of any final map, issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, for new development within Zone 9, the developers are required to: 2. 3. 4. 5. A. Pay the required drainage area fees established in the current Drainage Master Plan and; B. Execute an agreement to pay any drainage area fees established in the forthcoming revised Drainage Master Plan. Area II A" No additional facilities required Area "B" No additional facilities required Area "C. l" No additional facilities required Area 11 C.2" Prior to the recordation of any final map, issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, for development in Area c. 2, the developer shall provide a financial mechanism guaranteeing the construction of the following drainage facilities: A. Second-tier desiltation basin south of the existing desiltation basin serving area DB and, B. The construction of the 7 2 11 to 81" storm drains extending from Poinsettia Lane to the Batiqui tos Lagoon, and to include the construction of the desil ting basin on the west side of the railroad right-of-way at the lagoon together with the required connections to storm drains extending under the railroad tracks. ESTIMATED COST -Sl.221.620 The storm drain facilities identified to serve Area "C. 2 11 must be completed prior to the occupancy of the first development in Area "C.211 • 6. Area "C.3" Prior to the recordation of any final map, issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, for development in Area "C.3", the developer shall provide a 14 financial mechanism guaranteeing the construction of the following drainage facilities: A. Construction of the 72" to 8111 storm drains extending from Poinsettia Lane to the Batiqui tos Lagoon, and to include the construction of the desiliting basin on the west side of the railroad right-of-way at the lagoon together with the required connections to storm drains extending under the railroad tracks. Estimated Cost -$1,179.620 The storm drain facilities identified to serve Area "C.311 must be completed prior to the occupancy of the first development in Area "C.3". CIRCULATION 1. An on-going monitoring program shall be established to evaluate the aspects of improvements, development, and demand on circulation facilities. The required timing of improvements is based upon the projected demand of development in the zone and surrounding region. This timing may be modified without amendment to this plan, however, any deletions or additions to the improvements will require amending this local plan. 2. Prior to the recordation of any final map, issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first in Zone 9, a comprehensive financing program guaranteeing the construction of the following circulation facilities must be approved: A. B. Improvements Needed Now None Improvements Needed by 1989 1. WINDROSE CIRCLE -Complete the construction of the entire length of Windrose Circle to secondary arterial standards including the installation of a traffic signal at Windrose Circle and Avenida Encinas. Estimated Cost -$1,220,000 completion Date -1989 2. AVENIDA BATIQUITOS Construct Avenida Batiquitos between Carlsbad Boulevard and Windrose Circle to secondary arterial standard to include: 15 c. D. a) Construction of a bridge over AT&SF Railroad b) Intersection improvements including installation of traffic signals at the following intersections: 1. Shearwater Road at Avenida Batiquitos 2. Carlsbad Boulevard at Avenida Batiquitos 3. Windrose Circle at Avenida Batiquitos Estimated Cost -$4,506,400 Completion Date -1990 3. AVENIDA ENCINAS AND POINSETTIA LANE INTERSECTION -provide dual left turn lanes westbound Poinsettia Lane to southbound Avenida Encinas including necessary signal modifications. Estimated Cost -$15,000 Completion Date -1989 Improvements Needed by 1993 1. POINSETTIA LANE I-5 OVERPASS -Widen overpass to provide two through lanes in each direction, dual left turn lanes to the on- ramps and bike lanes. Estimated Cost -$5,000,000 Completion Date -1993 2. INTERIM IMPROVEMENTS -Poinsettia Lane at I-5 offramps. Install temporary traffic signals. Estimated Costs -$120,000 Completion Date -1993 Improvements Needed by 1995 1. POINSETTIA LANE -CARLSBAD BOULEVARD TO AVENIDA ENCINAS -complete the construction of Poinsettia Lane to ultimate major arterial standards to include: a) Bridge over AT&SF Railroad b) Landscaped median c) Ultimate intersection improvements to Poinsettia Lane and Carlsbad Boulevard Estimated Cost -$1,500,000 Completion Date -1995 16 E. F. Improvements Needed by 2000 1. POINSETTIA LANE/CARLSBAD BLVD. INTERSECTION - provide dual left turn lanes, southbound to eastbound within existing curbs. Estimated Cost -$15,000 Completion Date -2000 Improvements Needed at Buildout NONE No special conditions are necessary at this time. OPEN SPACE No special conditions are necessary at this time. SCHOOL Prior to the recordation of any final map, issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, in Zone 9, an agreement shall be entered into between Carlsbad Unified School District and the affected property owner(s) that shall provide for the following: 1. The deeding of an acceptable school site to the Carlsbad Unified School District if it is determined by the District a school within Zone 9 is warranted. 2. A financing plan approved by the City and Carlsbad Unified School District guaranteeing the construction of necessary elementary school facilities in Zone 9 pursuant to condition #1. 3. If any reimbursements and/or school fee credits are to be given, the school agreement/financing plan shall provide a mechanism to do so. 17 SEWER 1. 2. 3. 4. COLLECTION SYSTEM Area "A" No special conditions are required for Area "A". Area "B" No special conditions are required for Area II B". Area "C.111 No special conditions are required for Area 11 C.l". Area 11C. 2 11 Prior to the recordation of any final map, issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, a financial mechanism guaranteeding the construction of the following sewer facilities must be approved: a) Construction of the required sewage collection system to serve Area 11c.2 11 development; and b) Construction of a pump station and force main to convey sewage to the gravity main in Windrose Circle. c) Relocate three existing force mains carrying sewage from the Leucadia County Water Districts Batiquitos pump-station to the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility. The relocation is required for the construction of an at-grade intersection between Avenida Batiquitos and Carlsbad Boulevard. d) Additionally, prior to the recordation of any final map, issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, in Area 11 c.211 , a financial mechanism must be approved that will guarantee the financing of yearly operational and maintenance costs for the sewage pump station. 5. Area "C.3" Prior to the recordation of any final map, issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, in Area· 11 C.311 , a financial mechanism guaranteeing the construction of the following sewer facilities must be approved: a) construction of the required sewage collection system to serve Area "C.311 development; and b) Construction of a 10-inch gravity main across the Railroad right-of-way to convey sewage to the pump station in Area 11 c.211 • 18 c) Construction of a pump station and force main to convey sewage to the gravity main in Windrose Circle. d) Relocate three existing force mains carrying sewage from the Leucadia County Water District's Batiquitos pump station to the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility. The relocations are required for construction of an at-grade intersection between Avenida Batiquitos and Carlsbad Boulevard. e) Additionally, prior to the recordation of any final map, issuance of a building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first in Area "C. 3 11 , a financial mechanism must be approved that will guarantee the financing of yearly operational and maintenance costs for the sewage pump station in perpetuity. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 1. All development within Zone 9 shall pay the appropriate connection fee as required by the Costa Real Municipal Water District. 2. Prior to the recordation of a final map, issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first in Area "C.2", a financing mechanism guaranteeing the construction of the following water facilities shall be approved: Facility Number 1 & 5 3 & 4 2 4 7 Facility Location Windrose Circle Avenida Batiquitos & Carlsbad Blvd. Windrose Circle Carlsbad Blvd. Ponto Drive 19 Facility 1611 Water Main 1211 Water Main 10" Water Main 1211 Water Main P.R. Meter Sta. 1211 Water Main Length (feet) 1,500 6,690 1,741 1 each 600 3. Prior to the recordation of a final map, issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first in Area "C.3", a financing mechanism guaranteeing the construction of the following water facilities shall be approved: Facility Facility Number Location 1 & 5 Windrose Circle 3 & 4 Avenida Batiquitos & Carlsbad Blvd. 2 Windrose Circle 4 Carlsbad Blvd. 7 Ponto Drive 8 Shearwater Rd. & Hotel Access 20 Facility l.6 II Water Main l.2 II Water Main 1011 Water Main 1211 Water Main, P.R. Meter Sta. l.2 II Water Main 1011 Water Main Length (feet) 1,500 6,690 1,741 1 each 600 2,400 II. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) is to complete the second phase of the overall Growth Management Program for Zone 9. Phase One of the Growth Management Program established the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan based upon a phased buildout of the City's existing General Plan. Upon implementation of the LFMP, the third phase of the Growth Management Ordinance may be implemented. As new individual development projects are submitted, they shall include a public facilities adequacy analysis to ensure that the project is consistent with both the Citywide and Zone 9 Plan. For purposes of public facilities analysis, the city has been separated in 25 Local Facilities Management zones as shown on Exhibit 6, page 24 "Local Facilities Management Zone Boundaries. A. PLAN OVERVIEW This plan provides a detailed description and analysis of how this area of the City will develop from its current status to buildout. The Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan has identified eleven public facilities to be addressed in all LFMP's. The plan is divided into six parts as follows: I -Executive summary: Summarizes the plan and highlights all conditions proposed by the plan. II -Introduction: Provides an introduction to the format and content of the plan. III -Buildout Projections: Projects the ultimate amount of development in Zone 9, along with itemizing existing, developing, and future land uses. IV -Phasing: Attempts to project how and when development will be phased in Zone 9. V -Analysis of Public Facilities Requirements: Provides a complete description and analysis of when and how each facility will be provided and financed based on buildout projections and phasing assumptions. VI -Financing: Provides a summary of the financial alternatives available to fund each facility and a discussion of the LFMP's impact on City finances. VII -Appendices: Provides the technical materials used in preparation of this plan. 21 The plan demonstrates how and when each facility and improvement will be constructed in order to accommodate development within the zone. It also provides a complete description of how each facility and improvement will be financed when mitigation is necessary. If a facility is not conforming with the adopted performance standard, there will be a discussion describing this situation, a description of mitigation or alternatives, and a financing discussion. Each facility section will conclude with adequacy findings. Adequacy findings summarize whether or not the public facility conforms with the adopted performance standard. B. ZONE 9 OVERVIEW The plan for Zone 9 is consistent with all aspects of the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan and ensures that the adopted performance standards shall be complied with as development occurs. Local Facilities Management Zone 9 is located in the city's southwest quadrant as shown on Exhibit 1, page 7. It is bounded by Batiquitos Lagoon to the south, the Pacific Ocean to the west, Poinsettia Lane to the north, and Interstate 5 to the east. For purposes of this plan the zone has been divided into five areas. These areas, which are illustrated on Exhibit 7, page 25 include: AREA AREA AREA AREA AREA AREA AREA A - B c.1 -c.2 - C.3 - D E Lake Shore Garden Mobile Home Park Poinsettia Village BLEP Phase :c BLEP Phase :CJ: BLEP Phase :C:C:C Batiquitos Lagoon South Carlsbad state Beach 22 The major property ownerships in Zone 9 are shown on Exhibit a, page 26. General Plan designations for Zone 9 are illustrated on Exhibit 9, page 25. Batiquitos Lagoon and the south shore of the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park are classified os, Open Space. The State Beach is also within the Open Space category. The remainder of the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park is designated: RMH, Residential Medium High; RM, Residential Medium; P, Private School; RC, Recreation Commercial; N, Neighborhood Commercial; and TS/C, Travel Service Commercial. The Lake Shore Garden Mobile Home Park is designated RM, Residential Medium and Poinsettia Village is TS/C, Travel Service Commercial. Zoning Categories for Zone 9 are shown on Exhibit 10, page 28. 23 EXHIBIT 6 15 16 17 18 19 11 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE BOUNDARIES LOCAL FACLITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -ZONE 9 I 24 CARLSBAD ------...-----...__ ·----..........-.. ------------~ --- AREA C. 1 Batiqultos Lagoon AREA C.2 Educational Park AREA C.3 fl.. \E. \N1E.RS1 A Mobile Home Park ILVD. PACIFIC ZONE NO.9 BOUNDARIES LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE N0.9 ~~..@.qy CONSUL~~:~"-'"""•~""""°'•COlh "'"'"'"'-C•"OClls-G ,,uua.-c.1,t101""'•• .... lll••CYIIIG •~tu•-..••••• EXHIBIT 7 Area E State Park OCEAN 25 400 800 1200 i I, a l 11uu U U,16 II "· "· " 2:?, 23, 24, " ,. 27,ZI ,. ,. 32, "· " 3~. JG OIAR.Lll A.VD JILL 8101d0)1 C,O •HTt:fDALE • TUClEI CO. 9200 SCllSE'f IOCUVARD U)S &.'iG£U:.S, C.\ !IOOlt POl~SETTl I ASSOCIATES, CONS C,'O HOUIU I, !lEnOLDS :Z3H S,\.'i DIECO A'iE S,l."f DIEGO, C.\ 92110 STATE OF CALJFOR.'ilJ. STATE or C.\UFOk.'1U ATCHISml, TCPll.l &.'CD SUT& FE UILIAY ST.lff or C.11.EFOR.'CU .JOll!I Ill. &..la • coasTAltCE SA:.DltS 94.7 •• U CIUEGI II.YD., SVITt M LOS .l:IGltlS, Cl 900fi9 SUIILUIT !SSOCUTU l IJPPU lfPPOIIT PU:U. Dl.l',S !CffPORT 1£.Kll, C.\ 121180 UJOIIS PIIOHITIES 26!0 CAJ.11:IO DEL 110 JI,, '100 Sil DIEGO, CJ 92101 un., VLTrt:llS 295' CJJU~ DEL 110 lf., •302 SU D1!CQ, Cl Ul0I 81.TIQUtTOS POIYTI 21SO CUI,«> DEL aJO If., 1100 SD DIEGO, C1 hl08 S.u&IIIS HOPIIITIES 2850 C,UU!ID DIL 110 !I., #100 S.l.'f DIEGO, Co\ J210t 214-171-21 :ZU-171-H :ZU-430-01 218-030-0$ 211-030-3-4 211-0◄1-23 2111-0-t2-07 211•042•0i :::11-00-10 218-U0-07 2115-UO-OI 211-uo-22 211-U0-23 215-140-11 21.1-uo-:u 211-HO-Ja a18-l40-32 218-140-33 211-140-17 na-uo-11 211•1-tO-U ne .. 1-10-25 2115-U0-27 Ill z • .., AREA BLVD. FOR THESE SMALL LOTS SEE ENLARGED PLAN l7 THRO 1.15 BATIQCITCI ILC'FP 218-0-42-0J. :!650 C.WU,O DEC. l:IO 11., f'lOO THRO SAX DIECiO, C.I 92101 :;;;_--,,_ ---...------::----: --.,,. -----216-0,U-79 .::-_=::::---._ ------ PACIFIC LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -ZONE NO. 9 OWNERSHIP BOUNDARIES OCEAN EXHIBIT 8 400 0 400 800 l200 ,._._ , GRAPHIC SCALE 26 CARLSBAD LEGEND Residential, Medium Density (4-8 DU/AC) (68.9 AC) Neighborhood Commercial (6.4 AC) .. ~· .............. $'"'""'"'"""""' . ·rs.re .. -. .. .. .. .. . ~ .. .. .. . . . .. .. . BLVD. PACIFIC Residential, Medium -High Density (8-15 DU/AC) (32.7 AC) OCEAN PRIVATE SCHOOL (40.3 AC) Travel Service Commercial (44.14 AC) Open Space (208.3 AC) Recreation Commercial (12.8 AC) EXHIBIT 9 :-:G~E~N~E-::R:-A_L_P_L_A_N _________ T_c __ T_RA_N_s_PO_R_TA_:r_1o_N_c_o_R_R10_o_R __ 1 _1_1 _____________________ 2_7 [71]] LOCAL FACIL,ITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE N0.9 O_D ~ .w::i,ttc:" .. ', 400 0 400 800 1200 l.':"'-"= r2-; I :-.=-.: ~ --------------===- EXHIBIT 10 General Commercial Zone Qualified Development Overlay Zone Mobile Home Park CARLSBAD BLVD. _;_--: -~ ~ -:::-...::::::-:..._ ---~------__::::--...,_ ---Planned Community Zone - PACIFIC LEGEND • General Commercial, Ooalified Development ■ Residential Mobile Home Park ZONING TC TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR -li-rl -t-J--i- LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE N0.9 (!j J <;!J)tl/l~ CONSULT ANTS c,,11. lJICU11Ua,11eO n, .. :,. ,1.,-,..a """''"'· ••~1ot01.AC.O$T• .......... ,.,,_.,,.oc.111,ioc , ............. ,.1.,,0 ... , •••• SUIWIYP9G """Cl"I u,,.. .. 1111 OCEAN Planned Community Open Space ,oo o 400 800 ~ r-.-;. 1200 ; _._. ... .; .... ""'°"-•.IQ ... ,la(illorw:;,, -~-~ 28 AUllitt ,7"'7,i"T·f.,. h\:'iU~~ III. BUILDOO'l' ASSUMPTIONS AND PROJECTIONS To properly assess and plan for facilities to serve Zone 9 it is necessary to project the type and intensity of land use as the zone builds out. These buildout projections define land use intensity and corresponding facilities demands. The basis for this buildout projection is the existing Carlsbad General Plan. The methodology used in compiling this buildout projection is consistent with that used in the 1986 CFIP. The methodology is briefly described as follows: A. EXISTING LAND USES Only one existing land use is present within Zone 9. The Lake Shore Garden Mobile Home Park is an adult community of 384 dwelling units. The Lake Shore Garden Mobile Home Park represents 55.2 acres inclusive of Avenida Encinas. B. DEVELOPING LAND USES Two projects have been approved and are under development within zone 9. They are the 167.9 gross acre Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park (MP-175 approved by City Council Ordinance #9778) and the 21.8 acre Poinsettia Village, a retail and off ice complex. All phases of the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park Master Plan will be developed by 1991. Poinsettia Village is planned for completion in 1989 (CT 81-6B and SOP 82-JA/PUD-94). These two projects are summarized on Exhibit 11, page 31 "Zone 9 Approved Development Projects." C. VACANT AND POTENTIALLY DEVELOPABLE LAND All potentially developable land located within Zone 9 has been accounted for under the above categories, Existing Land Uses and Approved but Developable Land. All other land areas in Zone 9 are classified as constrained areas. Constrained areas are defined as all environmental and other constrained lands including beaches, permanent bodies of water, floodways, wetlands, riparian or woodland habitats, major roadways, railroad tracks, major power easements, slopes with inclinations of 25% or more and open space areas designated on the City's Land Use map. 29 Based upon the above information on the land area of Zone 9 can be broken down as follows: Existing Land Uses Developing Land Uses Constrained Areas Total 30 55.2 Acres 131.6 230.9 417.7 Acres EXHIBI'l' 11 ZONE 9 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PROJEC'l'S PLANNING LAND DWELLING FLOOR PROJECTS AREA USE UNITS POINSETTIA VILLAGE (AREA B) Retail Office TOTALS BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK (AREA C) A A A B C D E F G G H I J K L M N 0 p Institute R & D Office Multi-Fam. 52 Sgl. Fam. 77 Multi-Fam. 36 Multi-Fam. 144 Multi-Fam. 54 Multi-Fam. 70 Stud. Dorm 21 Sgl. Fam. 28 Rec./Comm. commercial Hotel/Suites Hotel Conf. Ctr. - Commercial 44 Open Space Open Space Open Space AREA (square feet) 169,462 21,233 ------- 190,695 220,000 318,700 192,300 122,200 58,000 120,000 61,000 TOTALS 526 1,092,200 31 SUITES GENERAL DORMS PLAN 435 220 150 370 Ste. 435 Dorms TS/C TS/C p p p RM RM RMH RMH RMH RMH RMH RMH RC TS/C TS/C TS/C N OS OS OS BUILDOUT PROJECTION RESIDENTIAL The residential buildout projection for Zone 9 was determined by applying the State Department of Finance average household size of 2.471 persons per dwelling unit. The dwelling unit and population breakdowns are as follows: Units Rate Population Existing 459 X 2.471 = 1134 Approved 451 X 2.471 = 1115 Future 0 X 2.471 = 0 Total 910 2,249 The buildout population projections are used consistently throughout this plan for the purpose of projecting demand for public facilities and improvements. NON-RESIDENTIAL The non-residential buildout for Zone 9 was determined by totaling the existing and approved square footage. The non- residential breakdown is as follows: Square Footage Existing Approved Future Total 32 54,141 1,228,754 0 1,282,895 :IV. PHASING It is necessary to provide a phasing schedule of development for the entire city, each quadrant and each of the 25 Local Facilities Management Zones for the purpose of: 1. Projecting future demands for public facilities on a yearly basis. 2. Establishing the thresholds which identify when a public facility is needed. 3. Assisting with the development of the City's Capital Improvement Program budget. In the Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan, phasing of residential development was projected to be 1,250 dwelling units per year as shown on Exhibit 12, pages 36 and 37. These projections were based on a review of the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) projections along with those utilized in the City's Capital Improvement Program and the Public Facilities Management Systems, Monitoring Report of April, 1986. In each Local Plan a key element will be the projected phasing schedule of development within that specific zone. These schedules are presented for the purpose of establishing thresholds for demand and future demands for public facilities. By projecting these future public facility demands the appropriate funds may be allocated into the Capital Improvement Budget to assure they are in place as development occurs. The phasing schedule is not presented to establish a rate of growth within the city. It will be used to assure that growth occurs only as public facilities are available to ensure compliance with the adopted performance standards. A. RESIDENTIAL LAND USE PHASING The specific residential phasing schedule for Zone 9 is shown on Exhibit 13, page 37 "Zone 9 Residential Phasing Schedule". The schedule assumes that residential development in the zone will be completely built out by 1990. These phasing projections are best guesses as to future development activity in Zone 9 • In all, it is projected that a total of 910 residential dwelling units will exist at the buildout of Zone 9. This dwelling unit total is in compliance with the Carlsbad Municipal Code as modified by the passage of Proposition Eon November 4, 1986 and incorporated into the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 33 B. NON-RESIDENTIAL LAND USE PHASING The specific non-residential phasing schedule for Zone 9 is shown on Exhibit 14, page 38 "Zone 9 Non-residential Phasing Schedule". The schedule assumes that non- residential development in the zone will be completely built out by 1991. The specific phasing of Zone 9 is presented for the expressed purpose of determining the future annual demand and thresholds for public facilities. It is impossible to predict the exact way development will occur in this zone, but through these phasing projections the City will be able to establish a direct link between development and the need for public facilities. This link will allow the city to ensure compliance with the adopted performance standards at all times as growth occurs. And if compliance is not maintained development will be stopped until it conforms with the adopted performance standards. 34 EXHIBIT 12, PAGE 1 OF 2 CITYWIDE RESIDENTIAL PHASING PROJECTIONS *** FOR FACILITY PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY *** •••.••••••.•..•••••••••.•..•••..••.•••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•.••..••••••••••••••••••••........•..............•••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • I I I I I LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLANS I I I I I I I I I 1·····················································································································································1 (STATUS I I YEAR I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (AS OF 1111 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 1 I a I 9 I 10 I 11 I 12 I 13 I 14 I 15 I ( I NOTES I I (1) I (2) I (3 ( (4) ( (5) ( (6) I I <7> I I I (8) I (9) I I I ( I··················································································································································································· I (EXISTING I I 1989 I 9,981 ( 2,457 ( 234 ( 3,065 ( 0 I 7,118 I 1,101 I 1 ( 459 ( 0 ( 954 ( 589 ( 0 ( 2 ( 521 I I· .............................................................................................................................................................................. . PROJECTED( 1989 212 ( 0 I 3 BLD OUT BLD OUT ( 300 I 291 ( 0 ( 286 117 ( 0 I I 1990 154 I o I 5 300 I 221 I 386 I 165 432 I 436 I ( 1991 81 I 23 I 3 300 I 130 I 325 BLD OUT 510 I 382 I I 1992 81 I 36 I 2 150 I 150 I 238 375 I 296 I I 1993 81 I 36 I 2 113 I 150 I 250 275 I 185 I I 1994 81 I 21 I 2 111 I 150 I 25 240 IBLD OUT j 1995 81 I 5 I • 81 I 140 BLD OUT 240 I 1996 81 IBLD OUT BLD OUT 50 BLD OUT 207 I 1991 81 I 50 164 I 1998 81 1 50 81 I 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 50 BLD OUT I ~ I ~ I 50 50 40 40 40 40 40 2009 81 I 40 2010 81 I 40 2011 81 I 25 2012 81 I 20 (BLD OUT 2013 81 I 20 I· .................................................................................................. . I TOTAL 12,220 I 2,578 I 252 I 3,065 I O ( 9,218 I 2,333 I 1,225 I 910 ( 0 I 3,595 I 1,888 I O I 2 I 521 I I··················································································································································································· I NOTES: (1) ZONE 1 LFHP, adopted Septent>er 1, 1987, C.C. Reso. No. 9221. (2) ZONE 2 LFHP, adopted J1.r1e 16, 1987, C.C. Reso. No. 9123. (3) ZONE 3 LFMP, adopted May 19,.1987, C.C. Reso. 9084. (4) ZONE 4 LFMP, adopted June 16, 1987, C.C. Reso. No. 9122. (5) ZONE 5 LFMP, adopted August 4, 1987, C.C. Reso. No. 9188 (6) ZONE 6 LFMP, adopted Noveri>er 10, 1987, c.c. Reso. No. 9291. (7) ZONE 8 LFHP, adopted February 7, 1989, C.C. Reso. No. 89·33. (8) ZONE 11 LFMP, adopted February 23, 1988, C.C. Rso. No. 88·46. (9) ZONE 12 LFHP, adopted February 23, 1987, C.C. Reso. No. 88·47. EXHIBIT 12 35 EXHIBIT 12, PAGE 2 OF 2 CITYWIDE RESIDENTIAL PHASING PROJECTIONS *HfQR FACILITY PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY*** ...... -... -----·---· ---------.... -----------.. -.... --.... --... -..... -... -. -----------------...... ---...... -.... ------------.............. --.......... ---.. ----------.... --........... -.............. -. -. -.. YEARS I LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLANS 11 TOTALS OF ADOPTED LMP'S 111986 CFIP I II II I I········································································. ····························I I································ I I··················· I AS OF 1/1 I I I I I I I I I I 11 TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL I I PHASED PHASED I I I I I I I I I I I II ADOPTED CITYWIDE CITYWIDE I IDU'S POPULATION! I 16 I 17 I 18 I 19 I 20 I 21 I 22 I 23 I 24 I 25 11 PHASED Oil'$ POPUlATION 11 I I I I <1> I <9> I <10> I I <11> I I <12> I 11 ou•s 111189 11 I ···············································································································ll································ll···················I 1989 I o I o I 1 1 2 I 28 1 o 1 268 I o 1 115 I 1 11 26,897 26,897 66,462 11 23,621 ss,367 I ····································································································· ·········ll································ll···················f 1989 I 139 110 182 11 I o 11 1,640 28,537 10,540 11 1,2so ss,367 I 1990 I 251 110 190 11 I 125 11 2,m 31,322 77,397 11 1,2so 61,456 I 1991 I 454 110 161 11 1 125 11 2,604 33,926 83,831 11 1,2so 64,545 I 1992 I 426 110 65 11 1 11 11 2,006 35,932 88,788 11 1,2so 67,633 I 1993 1 425 106 aLDarr II aLDouT II 1,623 37,555 92,799 II 1,2so 10,nz I 1994 1 410 106 11 11 1,146 38,101 95,630 11 1,2so n,s11 I 1995 I 332 106 II 11 986 39,687 98,067 11 1,2so 76,900 I 1996 1 351 106 11 11 795 40,482 100,031 11 1,2so 79,988 I 1991 1 256 106 11 11 657 41,139 101,655 11 1,2so 83,on I 1998 1 226 106 11 11 544 41,683 102,m I 1,2so 86,166 I 1999 aLo arr 106 11 II 237 41,920 103,585 1,2so 89,255 I 2000 106 II 11 231 42, 1s1 104,110 1,250 92,343 I 2001 106 II 11 237 42,394 1,0,756 1,2so 95,432 I 2002 106 II 11 231 42,631 105,341 1,2so 9s,s21 I 2003 106 II 11 231 42,868 1os,n1 1 ,2so 101,610 I 2004 106 II 11 221 43,095 106,488 1,2so 104,698 I 2005 106 11 11 221 43,322 101,049 1,2so 101, 1s1 I 2006 106 II 11 221 43,549 101,610 1,2so 110,s16 I 2001 106 II 11 221 43,776 1os,111 1,2so 113,965 I 2ooa 106 11 11 221 44,003 108,732 1,2so 111,os3 I 2009 106 II 11 221 44,230 109,293 1,2so 120,142 I 2010 106 II 11 221 44,457 109,314 1,2so 123,231 I 2011 106 11 11 212 44,669 110,311 1,2so 126,320 I 2012 9 II 11 110 44,779 110,649 1,2so 129,408 I 2013 I BLD OUT I II II 101 44,880 110,899 I 978 132,497 I ················· ········ ······ · · ······ · ·· ·· ········· ··· · · ·· ·· · ··· ··· ············II········ I·· ·······I········· I I································ I I··················· I D I D I 1 I 3,272 I 2,491 f D I 866 I I O f 442 I 1 11 44,880 11 I .... ····----·---..... ------................ -.................................. -------................ -.................................. · ......................................... -............................... .. NOTES: ( 9)ZDNE 19, LFMP, adopted Decedier 8, 1987, C.C. Resa. Na. 9322 (1D)ZDNE 20 LFMP, adopted Septl!tllber 6, 1988, C.C. Resa. Na. 88·322. (11)ZDNE 22 LFMP, adapted December 13, 1988, C.C. Reso. No. 88·428 C12)ZONE 24, LfMP, adopted Oec:l!tllber 2D, 1988, C.C. Reso. No. 88·437 EXHIBIT 12 36 EXHI:BI:T 13 ZONE 9 RESI:DENTI:AL PHASI:NG SCHEDULE YEAR SUBAREA LAND USE EXISTING A MOBILE HOME PARK C.1 SINGLE FAMILY RES 1989 C.2 C.2 1990 C.2 C.2, C.3 Existing Subtotals Cumulative Totals SINGLE FAMILY RES. MULTI-FAMILY RES. 1989 Subtotals Cumulative Totals STUDENT HOUSING MULTI FAMILY RES. 1990 Subtotals Cumulative Totals 37 DU'S 384 75 459 459 30 256 286 745 21 144 165 910 POPULATION 949 185 1134 1134 74 632 706 1840 52 356 408 2249 EXHIBIT 14 ZONE 9 NON-RESIDENTIAL PHASING SCHEDULE YEAR SUBAREA LAND USE FLOOR AREA 1988 1989 B B C C C C C C 1989 Subtotals Retail Office Institute Office Commercial R&D Health/Recreation Student Dorms Cumulative Total 1990 B Retail C Commercial C R&D C Conference C Hotel Suites C Student Dorms 1989 Subtotal Cumulative Total 1991 C Institute C R&D C Office C Hotel Suites 1990 Subtotal Cumulative Total 38 54,141 80,422 21,233 80,000 64,800 75,000 70,000 97,200 542,796 542,796 34,899 69,000 56,200 120,000 280,099 822,895 140,000 192,500 127,500 460,000 1,282,895 HOTEL/STUDENT UNITS 0 217 300 218 70 370 suites 435 Units V. ZONE REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 addresses eleven separate facilities: A. citywide Facilities: 1. City Administrative Facilities 2. Library 3. Wastewater Treatment Capacity B. Quadrant Facility: c. 4. Parks Local Facilities; s. Drainage 6. Circulation 7. Fire 8 • Open Space 9. Schools 10. Sewer Collection System 11. Water Distribution System Each of these facilities is evaluated to determine conformance with the adopted performance standard (City Council Resolution :#8796). The evaluation is made in three stages based on existing facilities demand, existing plus approved facility demand, and future (i.e. ultimate potential) facility demand at buildout. For each facility analysis the following is provided: 1. An illustrative map showing what facilities are existing and what will be needed as Zone 9 develops to its ultimate buildout. 2. District boundary maps where facilities are provided by special districts (i.e. school, water, sewer). 3. Adopted service level performance standards (City Council Resolution :#8796) which must be complied with at all times as development occurs. 4. A detailed facility adequacy and planning analysis. 5. A list of special conditions to ensure conformance with the adopted performance standard. 6. A discussion of mitigation measures and financing mechanisms. 39 Citywide facilities which include City Administrative Facilities, Library and Wastewater Treatment have been analyzed in the adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plans (City council Resolution #8797). These facilities are also included in this Local Facilities Management Plan to show compliance or to suggest alternatives that assure conformance with the adopted performance standard. This plan will show how each adopted performance standard will be complied with as development occurs within the zone. This plan includes financing of all public facilities and services where nonconformance with the performance standard requires mitigation. The Plan also includes a complete facility phasing schedule which is linked to development demands within the zone. 40 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT OFFICE EXHIBIT 15 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES I I §:~, Jr r..;: . SAFETY & SERVICE CENTER ,~Q,e. ,,, ...i~-, ... ~ ------.. ,_t'\"'.,.j,, T'7 -.~ --- LEGEND ■ EXISTING CITY ADMINISTRATION 0 FUTURE CITY ADMINISTRATION ,. --~---~t:i~~-· \o CITY ADMINISTRAT1VE FACILITIES LOCAL FACILmES MANAGEMENT PLAN -ZONE 9 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ' ' 41 rrB I .-lUSilN HANS:N Fcl-lLMAN -GROUP- VI. CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD 1,500 square feet per 1,000 population must be scheduled for construction within a five year period. II. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS The purpose of this analysis is to determine whether or not the performance standard is being met, and if the demand for Zone 9 complies with the overall Citywide analysis of City Administrative Facilities. Exhibit 15 on page 41 shows the location of the existing and future City Administrative Facilities. A. INVENTORY 1. Facility Demands: Population (Citywide/Zone) Existing (1/1/89) 66,462/1134 Buildout 134,914/2249 Required Square Footage (Citywide/Zone) 99,694/1701 202,371/3374 2. Existing City Administrative Facilities: Sq. Ft. Perm.Space City Hall 12,899 Finance Modular Purchasing/Risk Management Modular Leased Space Redevelopment Community Dev. Las Palmas Fae. Public Safety & Service Center (I) 22,627 Police & Fire 53,700 Vehicle Maint. 10,358 Subtotals 99,584 Temp. space 2,700 1,800 4,500 Leased Space Lease Expire Date 3,200 3/31/83 3,200 =============================== TOTAL EXISTING FACILITIES 107,284 42 Existing 187-1 92 Subtotal As indicated on the table on the previous page, approximately 23% of existing administrative facilities are leased and 4.2% are temporary (portable modular units). If the rental leases are terminated or the modulars are no longer used, the existing square footage of City Administrative Facilities will be reduced. At that time, the Management Plan for Zone 9, as well as the citywide Plan, will need to be amended to modify the phasing assumptions in order to plan for more City Administrative Facilities at an earlier time. 3. Facilities in city's Five Year capital Improvements Program: Item Sq.Ft. Year Amount Source -------------------------Public Safety Ctr. Phase II* Design 86-87 $ 255,000 PFF** Construction 62,000 92-97 $3,455,000 PFF/S/W** Total Facilities in City's Five Year Capital Improvements Program: CIP 62,000 Sq. Ft. $3,710,000 4. Existing City Administrative Facilities plus those budgeted in the adopted 1987-92 CIP are scheduled for construction within five years as follows: Permanent Temporary Leased (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) ----------------------------99,584 4,500 3,200 62,000 -----------------------------161,584 4,500 3,200 =========== ========== ========= TOTAL FACILITIES 169,284 * Public Safety Center Phase II Yard offices, Maintenance shops and Purchasing warehouse for the use of Utility Maintenance, Parks and Recreation Maintenance, Street Maintenance and Purchasing. Approximate size is 62,000 square feet. This includes a two-story Yard office and Purchasing Warehouse with a 6,400 foot mezzanine. ** PFF -Public Facilities Fee s -Sewer Enterprise Fund w -Water Enterprise Fund 43 From the population projections, a demand for city Administrative Facilities has been assessed. The specific phasing for Zone 9 is being projected based on the number of projects which are currently pending review, have received tentative approvals, or have received final approvals. The exact timing of these specific projects may vary. However, the timing of necessary public facility improvements would also vary accordingly. This will assure that the adopted performance standards will be met as development occurs. Exhibit 16, page 45 -is provided as a projection of growth throughout the City of Carlsbad on a yearly basis. 44 EXHIBIT 16 ZONE 9 • PHASING OF CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES (1,500 SQUARE FEET PER 1,000 l'OPI/LATIOII) !RESIDENTIAL DIIELLING UNITS I ADOPTED PHASING ADEQUACY ANALYSIS 11 •86 CFIP ADEQUACY ANALYSIS -... -.. --..... -----. --. -------.......... -...... --................. -...... --------.... ----.. ----..... -..... --... -...... --.................. --.. ---------------------.. ---------......... - I IN I IN ( IN TOTAL I ADOPTED I ADOPTED I PROJECTED PROJECTED 11 CITYIIIDE I CITYIIIDE I PROJECTED I STATUS NOTES I YEAR I OTHER I ZONE I ADOPTED I ZONES I ZONES I CITYIIIDE CITY I ADOPTED 11 POPULATION I DEMAND I CITYIIIDE I (AS OF 1/1 I ADOPTED I 9 I PLANS I POP. I DEMAND I ADMINISTRATION I ADEQUACY/ II PROJECTIONS! I ADEQUACY/ I I I ZONES I I I I I SUPPLY I (INADEQUACY) II I (INADEQUACY) I I I (1) I (2) I (3) I (4) I I I II I I -.. -... -.... -......... -.... --.................... -----......... ---.. -................ --....... -.. ----.. ---........ ----.. -----------. --· ... --........ -.. --. --... -........ -. ---.... -.... --.... --.. EXISTING I 1969 I 26,436 I 459 I 26,697 I 66,462 I 99,694 I 101,284 I 7,590 11 56,367 1 87,551 I 19,733 I .................................................. -------------··················----------------------···············-·· ......................................................... PROJECTED( 1969 1 1,354 266 1,640 1 70,515 105,m 107,284 1,512 11 58,367 87,551 19,733 I 1990 1 2,620 165 2,76s 1 77,397 116,096 107,284 (8,812>11 61,456 92,184 15,100 I 1991 1 2,604 BLD OUT 2,604 I 63,631 125,748 107,284 (18,464)11 64,545 96,817 10,467 I (5) 1992 I 2,006 0 2,00& 1 86,766 133,163 169,284 36,101 11 67,633 101,450 67,834 I 1993 I 1,623 0 1,623 1 92,799 139,199 169,284 30,066 11 70,722 106,063 63,201 I 1994 1 1,146 0 1,146 1 95,630 143,445 169,284 25,639 11 73,811 110,716 58,568 I 1995 I 966 0 966 1 98,067 147,100 169,284 22,184 11 76,900 115,349 53,935 I 1996 I 795 0 795 I 100,031 150,047 169,284 19,231 11 79,986 119,962 49,302 I 1997 I 657 D 657 I 101,655 152,483 169,284 16,ao2 11 63,077 124,616 44,668 I 1996 I 544 0 544 I 102,m 154,498 169,284 t4,786 11 66,166 129,249 40,035 I 1m I 237 0 237 103,565 155,377 169,284 13,907 11 69,255 133,862 35,402 I 2000 1 237 D 237 104,170 156,255 169,284 13,029 11 92,343 138,515 30,769 I 2001 I 237 0 237 104,756 157, 133 169,284 12, 151 11 95,432 143,148 26,136 I 2002 I 237 0 237 105,341 158,012 169,284 11,212 11 98,521 147,761 21,503 I 2003 t 237 0 237 105,927 158,890 169,284 10,394 11 101,610 152,414 16,870 I 2004 I 227 I 0 227 10&,486 I t59,732 169,284 9,ssz 11 104,698 157,047 12,237 I 2005 I 221 1 0 227 101,049 I 1&0,573 169,284 6,111 11 107,767 161,681 7,603 I 2006 I 221 1 0 227 101,610 1 161,414 169,284 7,870 11 110,676 166,314 2,970 I 2001 I 221 I 0 227 108, 111 1 162,251 169,284 1,026 11 113,965 170,947 (1,663)1 I 200s I 221 I 0 227 108, n2 I 163,098 169,284 6,186 11 117,053 175,580 <6,296> I I 2009 I 221 I 0 227 109,293 I 163,939 169,284 5,345 11 120,142 180,213 (10,929>1 I 2010 I 221 I 0 227 109,654 I 164,761 169,284 4,503 11 123,231 184,846 (15,562>1 I 2011 I 212 I 0 212 110,377 I 165,566 169,284 3,718 11 126,320 189,479 (20, 195>1 I 2012 I 110 I 0 110 110,649 I 165,973 169,284 3,311 11 129,408 194, 112 (24,628)1 BLD OUT I 20n I 101 I 0 101 110,899 I t&&,349 169,284 2,936 11 132,497 198,746 (29,462>1 TOTAL 43,970 I 910 I 44,880 I NOTES: 1. DIIELLING UNITS IN OTHER ADOPTED ZONE PLANS ARE THOSE PROJECTED IN THE LFMP FOR ZONES 1·6, 8, 11, 12, 19, 20, 22 and 24. 2. SOURCE • EXHIBIT 10. 3. TOTAL ADOPTED DIIELLING UNITS INCLUDE EXISTING AND APPROVED ZONES. 4. EXISTING CITYIIIDE POPULATION IS THE BASE POPULATION USED FOR PROJECTING ADOPTED ZONE PLAN POPULATIONS. 5. CITY SAFETY CENTER PHASE II. EXHIBIT 16 45 III. B. Phasing Population projections for the entire City were made within the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan which have been updated and are shown on Exhibit 16, page 45. This exhibit shows the yearly demand for City Administrative Facilities based on the projected citywide phasing. currently, Zone 9 has 459 dwelling units which generate 1,701 square feet of demand for City Administrative Facilities. As of January 1, 1989 the existing Citywide demand for City Administrative Facilities was 99,698 square feet, of which the existing demand for Zone 9 is included. Zone 9 has the potential to create an additional 1,673 square feet of demand by the time it is built out. c. Adequacy Findings A. B. City Administrative Facilities based upon the projected phasing of Citywide development and that of zone 9, will conform with the adopted standard until the year 2006. Exhibit 16, page 45 "City Administrative Facilities Phasing", shows the existing and committed facilities, projected Citywide demand, and Zone 9 1s phased demand. MITIGATION Special conditions for Zone 9 No special conditions are necessary at this time. Financing The City collects a Public Facility Fee (PFF) which is set at 3. 5% of permit valuation. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. In calculating the PFF, the following expenditures were projected for City Administrative Facilities: Las Palmas Purchase Public Safety Center Phase II City Hall -Future TOTAL 46 $ 2,500,000 $ 3,400,000 $23,100,000 $29,000,000 In addition to the PFF funds, the adopted '87-1 92 CIP indicates the use of $310,000 in sewer funds and water enterprise funds for part of the Public Safety Center Phase II. 47 I I ~ACILITY AMOUNT EXHIBIT 17 ZONE 9 • CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITY FINANCING AS OF 1/1/89 ESTIMATED COST TINING FUNDING OPTIONS FIRST SECOII> THIRD REFERENCE NOTES •=•a:a::za:za:a:a=:zz:sa:s:a:s::sa::aa:a::a:=:.=••• •==-====••••••(••••••••a••••(-•-=•===-:sza:r::a:==•--•-•-•----•• -====•••=======a= aaac•••••••• I I CITY ADMINISTRATION I I I 1. LAS PALMAS PURCHASE I I 2. SA FETT CENTER PHASE II I I l. NEIi CITY HALL I I I TOTAL CITY ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS I 22,627 SF 62,000 SF NIA 52,500,000 Sl,710,000 IS23, 100,000 I I IS29,110,000 I 1987·97 CITY 1992·97 CITY 1997+ CITY =======z:zaa::r.:a:••••--==••=-••-•••======•::r.nna--•••••-••••-••••••===••••a:rr■aaa_m_•--•••••••-••-=-==a•:sa:sma=•••=z■aaaa■••• .. ••• ( 1987·92 CIP HAS A BALANCE FORWARD OF S1O,589 FRON CITY HALL RENOOEL I I I I I········································································································································ I EXHIBIT 17 48 CIVIC CENTER LIBRARY LEGEND ■ EXISTING LIBRARIES □ FUTURE LIBRARIES LIBRARIES c~ ... :· i, SOUTH CARLSB LIBRARY (FUTURE) LA COSTA . BRANCH LIBRARY ,, ,, ~, ," ,a LOCAL FACILmES MANAGEMENT PLAN -ZONE 9 49 EXHIBIT 18 1 I ~ HANSEN F E 1-1 LM AN -GROU;:1- LIBRARY I. II. PERFORMANCE STANDARD 800 square feet per 1, ooo population must be scheduled for construction within a five year period. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS The purpose of this analysis is to determine whether or not the performance standard is being met and, if the demand for Zone 9 is consistent with the overall Citywide analysis of the Library. Exhibit 18 on page 49 shows the location of existing and future library facilities. A. Inventory 1. Facility Demand: Population (Citywide/Zone) Existing as of (1/1/89) 66,462/l,134 Buildout 134,914/2,249 2. Existing Facilities: Civic Center Library Adult Learning Center La Costa Area Library Warehouse Total owned Sq.Ft. 24,600 24,600 Total owned and leased space Required Square Footage (Citywide/Zone) 53,170/907 107,931/l,799 Leased Sq.Ft. 400 4,500 2,000 6,900 31,500 sq.ft. The Main City Library is located at 1250 Elm Avenue. The La Costa area library lease will terminate when a new City library is constructed. 3. Facilities in the five year Capital Improvements Program: The adopted Five Year C.I.P. includes $650,000 for the design of a main library in the southern part of the City. The City Council took further action on July 7, 1987, by approving a library site and directing the city 50 Manager to acquire the site and by earmarking funds for construction, beginning in the 1987-88 C.I.P. Design of the building will occur upon purchase of the site. Purchase is anticipated during 1989. The following time schedule has been developed: Description Land Acquisition Grading Design Construction Debt Financing Fiscal Year 1988-89 1988-89 1988-89 89-90 to 90-91 88-2008 cost('87 dollars) $1.1 million .9 million .6 million 8.4 million 7.1 million $18.1 million The library construction will involve building a 58,000 square foot facility of which 48,000 square feet will be occupied for library use in 1991. The additional 10,000 square feet will be leased until it is needed. It is projected this additional space would be needed in 1998 or 1999. B. Phasing Existing Library Facilities plus those budgeted in the adopted 1987-92 CIP for construction within 5 years are as follows: square Peet of Library space Added Subtracted Total 1/1/1989: Existing Civic Center Library Adult Learning center La Costa Area Library Warehouse 1992: S. Carlsbad Library (I) 48,000 Adult Learning Center La Costa Area Library Warehouse 1997: S. Carlsbad Library (II) 10,000 51 400 4,500 2,000 31,500 79,500 72,600 82,600 Population projections for the entire City were prepared on a yearly basis and are shown in Exhibit 19, page 53 -City Library, "Dwelling Unit and Population Projections". These projections are based on a review of the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) projections along with those utilized for the city's Capital Improvements Program and the Public Facilities Management System, Monitoring Report of April, 1986. The specific phasing for Zone 9 is being projected based on the number of projects which are currently pending review, have received tentative approvals, or have received final approvals. c. Adequacy Findings The City Council, on July 7, 1987, earmarked funds for the acquisition of a site and construction of a 58,000 square foot facility to be built by 1991. This action brings the Library facility into compliance with the performance standard. Attached as appendix His the Agenda Bill to the City Council which also describes the action taken and provides background information. It is projected this additional space will enable the City to comply with the Library standard until the year 2003. III. MITIGATION A. B. Special Conditions for Zone 9 No special conditions are necessary at this time. Financing The City Council has earmarked sufficient funds to acquire the site and to construct a 58,000 square foot Library facility as part of the action taken on July 7, 1987. The City Council has guaranteed the necessary funds to accomplish this project, al though the specific long-term financing mechanism has not been determined. A further explanation of "Library Facility Financing" is shown on Exhibit 20, page 59. 52 EXHIBIT 19 ZONE 9 • DIIELLING UNIT AND POPULATION PROJECTIONS (800 SQUARE FEET PER 1,000 POPULATION) fRESIDENTIAL DIIELLING UNITS J ADOPTED PHASING ADEQUACY ANALYSIS 11 186 Cf IP ADEQU,I.CY ANALYSIS I IN I IN !IN TOTAL I ADOPTED I PLANS I ADOPTED I ADOPTED I PROJECTED I ZONES I ZONES I Cl TYIIIDE I POP. I DEMAND I LIBRARY PROJECTED II CJTYIIIDE I CITYIIIDE I PROJECTED I CITYIIIDE STATUS EXISTING I PROJECTED! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I BLD ruT J NOTES (4) (5) I YEAR I OTIIER I ZONE JAS OF 1/1 J ADOPTED J 9 I I ZONES I I I c1 > I c2> I I I I SUPPLY I I <3> I I 1989 I 26,438 I 459 I 26,897 I 66,462 I s1, 110 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I l I I I I I 1989 1 1990 1 1991 I 1992 I 1993 I 1994 1 199s 1 1996 I 1991 I 1998 1 1999 1 2000 1 2001 I 2002 I 2003 I 2004 I 2005 1 2006 I 2001 t 2008 I 2009 1 2010 I 2011 I 2012 I 2013 I TOTAL 1,1s4 I 2,620 2,604 2,006 1,623 1,146 986 795 657 544 237 237 237 237 237 227 227 227 221 t 221 J 221 J 221 1 212 1 110 J 101 1 43,910 I 286 I 165 l BLO WT I o l o l o l o I o I o I o l o I o I o I o I o I o I o I o I o I o I o I o I o I o I o I 1,640 l 10,s1s 2,785 I n,397 z,604 I s3,a:s1 2,006 I 88,788 1,623 I 92,799 1,146 I 95,630 986 I 9a,001 795 l 99,923 657 J 101,546 544 J 102,892 237 I 103,476 231 I 104,062 231 I 104,647 231 I 105,233 231 I 1 os ,819 221 J 106,379 221 l 106,940 221 I 101,501 221 t 108,062 221 I 108,623 221 J 109,184 221 I 109,745 212 I 110,269 110 I 110,s41 101 I 110,790 910 J 44,aao I 56,412 I 61,918 67,065 71,030 74,240 76,504 78,406 79,939 81,237 82,312 82,781 83,249 83,718 84,186 84,655 85,104 85,552 86,001 86,450 86,898 87,347 87,796 88,215 88,432 88,632 I ADOPTED II POPULATION I DEMAND I ADEQUACY/ 11 PROJECTIONS( I (INADEQUACY) II I I II I 31,soo I 11,soo I 31,soo J 31,soo I 12,600 1 72,600 I 12,600 I 12,600 1 12,600 1 a2,600 I 82,600 J 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 82,600 (21,670>11 c24,912i 11 (30,418)11 <35,565> 11 1,510 11 c1,64o> 11 (3,904>11 (5,806>11 (7,339)11 1,363 11 288 11 c181 > 11 C649>J I (1, 118)1J (1,586)11 c2,0S5> 11 (2,504>1 I <2,952> 11 c1,401> 11 (3,850)11 (4,298)J J (4,747>11 c5, 196> 11 (5,615)11 C5,832>J J <6,032> 11 58,367 I 61,456 J 64,545 I 67,633 I 10, m I 73,811 l 76,900 I 79,988 I 83,on I 86,166 I 89,255 I 92,343 I 95,432 I 98,521 I 101,610 I 104,698 I 101,787 I 110,s16 I 113,965 I 111,os3 I 120,142 I 123,231 I 126,320 I 129,408 J 132,497 I 134,914 I I ADEQUACY/ I Cl NADEQUACY) I I I 46,694 I 49,165 51,636 54,107 56,578 59,049 61,520 63,991 66,462 68,933 71,404 73,875 76,346 78,817 81,288 83,759 I 86,230 I 88,101 l 91,112 I 93,643 I 96,114 I 98,585 I 101 ,os6 I 103,527 I 105,998 I 101,931 I c15, 194> I ···········I c11,665> 1 (20, 136)J (22,607) 16,022 13,551 11,080 8,609 6,138 13,667 11,196 8,725 6,254 3,783 1,312 c1, 159> I <3,630> I <6, 101> 1 cs,s12i 1 (11,043)J (13,514)1 c15,9B5> I c1s,,s6> I c20, 927l I c23,39B> 1 (25,331)1 NOTES: 1. DI/ELLING UIIITS IN OTHER AOOPTEO ZONE PLANS ARE THOSE PROJECTED IN THE LFMP FOR ZONES 1·6, 8, 11, 12, 19, 20, 22 ANO 24. 2. SOURCE • BUILDOUT ASSUl'IPTIOII • EXHIBIT B 3. EXISTING CITYIIIDE POPUI.ATION IS TKE BASE POPULATION USED FOR PROJECTING ADOPTED ZONE PLAN POPULATION. 4. PHASE I EXPANSION OF SOUTH CARLSBAD LIBRARY. 5. PHASE II EXPANSION OF SOUTH CARLSBAD LIBRARY. EXHIBIT 19 53 EXHIBIT 20 ZONE 9 • LIBRARY FACILITY FINANCING MATRIX AS OF 1/1/89 ·············· .... ····· -.............. -............. --............ ··-......... --......... ······ ------.... ·--. -............. -....... . !FACILITY ESTIMATED ·--~~~~~~~-~!~~~ ............ . AIOJNT COST TIMING (FIRST SECOND THIRD (REFERENCE( NOTES ••-•••m••• .. •••••••••••••-•--•-•--• .. ••••••••••••••••••••••••a=••=•=-••••••aa••••az•-==••••••••-••a•••-•••••••••••• 'LIBRARY FACILITIES ............................................... -·········· ------· ......... ·--· ....................................... --.............. ---...... . 1. LIBRARY REMODEL (NORTH) UNKNOWN $3,948,000 1997+ CITY·PFF PFF • PUBLIC FACILITY FEE 2. LIBRARY • FOR BUILD WT POPULATION 3. LIBRARY SOUTH CARLSBAD 15,331 SF 58,000 SF $5,060,000 $18,112,000 ············•·=-••· TOTAL LIBRARY COSTS S27, 120,000 1997+ CITY·PFF 1988· 2008 CITY·PFF ................................. --................. ····-···· -·-··· ............... ·-· .. -· .......... --· ······· .................................... --.. EXHIBIT 20 54 WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPACITY I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD . Sewer treatment plant capacity is adequate for at least a five year period. II. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS A. Inventory Wastewater Treatment in the City of Carlsbad is provided by three independent agencies: The City of Carlsbad Sewer Service District, Leucadia County water District (LCWD) and the San Marcos county water District (SMCWD) as shown on Exhibit 21 on page 56. Wastewater Treatment is provided primarily at the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) and also by satellite treatment facilities. Ownership as well as wastewater treatment capacity of Encina WPCF is shared on a percentage basis by six independent sewer districts. The chart below lists the six agencies and their permitted treatment capacity to the Encina WPCF as follows: CHART: ENCINA WPCF CAPACITY ANALYSIS I Satellite Available Capacity Remaining! I Percent Capacity at Treatment Treatment Adjusted For Existing Treatment Agency I Ownership Encina WPCF Capacity Capacity Leases Flow Capacity I (MGD) (MGD) (MGD) (MGD) (MGD) (MGD) -------------1--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes: I 2 3 -------------1--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Vista I 30.00 6.75 6.75 4.35 4.21 0.14 Carlsbad I 25.40 5.72 1.20 (1) 5.72 6.92 5.69 1.23 Buena I 4.59 1.03 1.25 2.28 1.90 1.81 0.09 San Marcos I 17.78 4.00 2.00 6.00 6.00 4.21 1.79 Leucadia I 16.67 3.75 0.75 4.50 6.23 3.83 2.40 Encinitas I 5.56 1.25 1.25 1.10 0.84 0.26 1----. -------------------------------------------------------------·-------------------- TOTAL I 100.00 22.50 5.20 26.50 26.50 20.59 5.91 NOTES: 1. Currently not operational. 2. Summary of Leases: 1) Vista to Carlsbad 1.2 MGD; 2) Vista to LCWD 1.2 MGD; 3) Buena to LCWD 0.375 MGO; 4) Encinitas to LCWD 0.15 MGD. 3. As of December 1988. 55 EXHIBIT 21 CALAVERA HILLS RECLAMATION/TREATMENT FACILITY (Existing But Not Operational) EN.CINA WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY ~ 19 .,.. .. ,_ • • ••• ••• GAFNER WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY MEADOWLARK RECLAMATION FACILITY WASTEWATER FACILITIES 15 • • L .. • • • • • • • •• • I COUNTY WATER DISTRICT SEWER SERVICE AREA 12 11 I • WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT-EXISTING NOTE: ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. 56 1 Currently, the Encina WPCF has capacity to treat 22. 5 million gallons per day (MGD). Ultimately, this facility will be able to treat up to 45 MGD. As shown below, Carlsbad sewer Service District owns limited treatment capacity in a smaller localized satellite treatment facility: Carlsbad Sewer Service District: Percentage of Encina Capacity (25.4) Calvera Hills Treatment Facility1 5.72 MGD 1.20 MGD TOTAL CAPACITY 6.92 MGD Capacity at the Encina WPCF is separated categories: Treatment capacity and outfall This analysis will deal primarily with capacity. into two capacity. treatment The Encina Ocean Outfall is a drainage line that transports the treated sewage (effluent) from the Encina WPCF and satellite facilities and discharges approximately 8,900 feet into the Pacific Ocean. currently, the Encina Ocean Outfall has a 40.5 million gallons per day (MGD) capacity. The outfall capacity is shared by six sewer districts and is projected to provide sufficient capacity to the year 2000. Outfall capacity just as treatment capacity, is shared on a percentage basis by the six sewer service districts. 1. Existing Facilities The City of Carlsbad has capacity available at two wastewater treatment plant facilities. Primary treatment capacity is provided through Encina WPCF which is a regional facility owned by six member agencies. The current rate of capacity of Encina WPCF is 22.5 MGD of which Carlsbad retains ownership of 25.4 percent or 5.72 MGD. The City of Carlsbad also holds title to the Calavera Hills Wastewater Treatment Plant which has a capacity of 1.2 MGD. The Calavera Hills Facility is not operational at this time and would require a $1.l to $1.5 million to make it operational. Operation at the Calavera Hills Plant is estimated to cost $360, ooo per year. Comparable treatment at the Encina WPCF is estimated at $135,000 per year. The Calavera Hills Plant is not economical to operate for treatment capacity except in the absence of needed capacity at Encina WPCF. Currently not in operation. 57 B. PHASING c. Exhibit 22 on page 59 shows the existing and projected demand and treatment capacity for Carlsbad sewer Service District. Existing demand is 5. 69 MGD1 with current capacity at the Encina WPCF at 5. 72 MGD. With the addition of Phase IV expansion of Encina WPCF in 1992, Carlsbad's capacity at Encina WPCF will become 9.24 MGD (25.68%). With the addition of Phase IV expansion of Encina, total capacity at Encina will be come 36.00 MGD. 1. Phasing and Service Demand Wastewater treatment service area population projections for the Encina WPCF service district is depicted in the following chart: ENCINA WPCF PLAN SEWER SERVICE AREA POPULATION PROJECTIONS 2 YEAR Service 1980 1990 1995 2000 Vista 35,300 46,200 49,100 52,700 Carlsbad 24,400 56,500 69,000 81,500 Buena 5,500 15,900 22,800 24,100 Vista 3 0 3,000 6,100 6,100 San Marcos 20,800 45,000 49,000 53,000 Leucadia 25,000 48,000 61,000 74,000 Encinitas 7.000 8.300 8.900 9.500 TOTAL 118,000 222,900 265,900 300,900 ADEQUACY FINDINGS Based on analysis of existing flow data in a range of projections, current treatment capacity will be reached in 1988, and additional interim capacity will be required to meet the standard. Exhibit 22 on page 59 estimates the necessary treatment capacity needed to accommodate growth within the Carlsbad sewer service area to the year 1995. 1 2 3 Carlsbad' ~fewer Service District currently assumes a flow rate of 220 gallons/EDU Projections approved by Joint Advisory Committee January 28, 1987. Portion of the City of Vista served by Buena Sanitation District 58 EXHIBIT 22 ZONE 9 CARLSBAD SERVICE AREA DEMAND AND AVAILABLE WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPACITY ---. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------STATUS NOTES: I END SERVICE FLOW AT 220 I ENCINA I LEASED TOTAL I I OF AREAS GAL/EDU !CAPACITY I CAPACITY CAPACITY I ADEQUACY/ I YEAR EDU 'S (M.G.D.) I (M.G.D.)I (M.G.D.) (M.G.D.) I (INADEQUACY) I I I I < 1 > I <2> I I I I 1------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I EXISTING! I 1988 I 25,818 I 5.68 I 5.72 I 0.6 I 6.32 I 0.64 1------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IPROJECTED I I 1989 I 21,045 I 5.95 I 5.n I o.6 I 6.32 I o.37 I I I 1990 I 28,318 I 6.23 I 5.12 I o.s I 6.52 I 0.29 I I I 1991 I 29,545 I 6.50 I s.12 I 1.2 I 6.92 I o.42 I I I 1992 I 30,113 I 6.11 I 9.24 I o.o I 9.24 I 2.47 I I I 1993 I 32,0,s I 1.os I 9.24 I o.o I 9.24 I 2.19 I I I 1994 I 33,682 I 1. 41 I 9. 24 I o. o I 9. 24 I 1 • 92 I I I 1995 I 34,soo I 7.59 I 9.24 I o.o I 9.24 I 1.65 NOTES: 1. Projected EDU's adjusted for an assumed three-percent vacancy rate. 2. MGD = Millions of Gallons per Day 59 The City Council in May 1987 adopted an action plan for sewer treatment capacity. This action plan is as follows: 1. Monitor Encina Treatment Plant flows on a monthly basis to determine actual flow rates and to have an early warning of capacity problems. 2. Actively pursue acceleration and treatment plant Phase IV expansion adequate capacity. phasing of to provide 3. When Carlsbad's share of Encina flow has reached 5.25 MGD, actively seek lease capacity from other Encina agencies. 4. When Carlsbad Encina flows reach 5.45 MGD, proceed to activation of the Calavera Hills Reclamation/Treatment Facility. Plant to be activated when more cost effective treatment measures are no longer feasible and Carlsbad Capacity at Encina has been reached. On September 13, 1988 the Carlsbad City Council approved a Treatment capacity Lease Agreement with the City of Vista. The lease provides up to 1. 2 MGD of additional Treatment Capacity at Encina WPCF for the Carlsbad sewer Service District. As indicated on Exhibit 22, this lease will provide adequate Treatment Capacity until the completion of the Phase IV Expansion of the Encina WPCF. A condition of the Lease Agreement with Vista is that Carlsbad complete and prepare for the activation of the Calavera Hills Treatment/Reclamation Facility. This is also in compliance with the City's action plan previously discussed. The City is currently pursuing alternatives to best activate this treatment facility in conformance with the terms of the lease agreement. With the increase in available treatment capacity due to the lease with the City of Vista, there exists adequate treatment capacity for the Carlsbad Sewer Service District so that conformance with the adopted performance standard will be maintained. 60 III MITIGATION The following actions shall be pursued jointly by each sewer district to ensure adequate wastewater treatment capacity through the year 2000: 1. Monitor Encina treatment plant flows on a monthly basis to determine actual flow rates and to have an early warning of capacity problems. 2. Actively pursue acceleration and phasing of treatment plant Phase IV to provide adequate capacity. 3. The six member agencies shall form an agreement to maximize the utilization of available treatment capacity at Encina WPCF. IV FINANCING Sewer connection fees provide the primary source of funding for both sewer line upgrades and expansion of treatment plant capacity. The timing of sewer facilities upgrades and the mechanism of financing are critical to analysis of the adequacy of funding for plant expansion. Carlsbad Sewer Service District has projected Capital Improvement Funds to provide for needed facilities. Exhibit 23 on page 62 shows a facility financing matrix for this facility. This matrix summarizes the individual facility to be financed, its estimated cost and timing of construction, the existing budgeted CIP monies available for the facility and the future funding options. 61 I FACILITY AMOUNT EXHIBIT 23 ZONE 9 -IIASTEIIATER FACILITY FINANCING MATRIX AS Of 1/1/89 ESTIMATED COST I FUNDING OPTIONS I -------------------------------------------------------------• --.••••••.•••• --•• --1 TIMING I FIRST I SECOND I THIRD I REFERENCE NOTES I l=••a=---=-===-=====•-a-==---::zz-:=aa:a:--==-------:zs-==--=---~-==---s:---------------::a-•----=--z:-~=••=------------------=-----==-=-------------------===1 I IIASTE\IATER FACILITIES I 1-------------• ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• --• -• --• -• · --· ----• • · · · • -• --· • ---• -------1 I ,_ Encina Outfall Upgrade I I SS,800,000 I 1992-1997 f Sewer Fees I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2. Encina Outfal I P~ #3 I I S325,ooo f 1987-88 I Sewer Fees I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3. Encina Phase IV Expansion I I S12,631 ,000 I 1987-91 f Sewer Fees I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 4. Encina Sol ids Management I I s10,000,000 I 1987-91 I Sewer Fees I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I --=-===:==I I I I I I I I TOTAL IIASTEIIA TER COSTS S31,756,000 f I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EXHIBIT 23 62 2 ZONE 9 PARK DISTRICTS LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -ZONE 9 63 EXHIBIT 24 ~ I AUSTIN HANSEN FirtLMAN -:;~ou=- LEGEND e EXISTING PARKS 0 FUTURE PARKS * SPECIAL USE AREAS PARKS LOCAL FACILIT1ES MANAGEMENT PLAN -ZONE 9 64 EXHIBIT 25 ' I 1 'rrB I AUSTIN HANS:N FEMLMAN -G~OU?- PARK FACJ:LJ:'l'J:ES I. II. PERFORMANCE STANDARD Three acres of Community Park or Special Use Area per 1, ooo population within a park district must be scheduled for construction within a 5-year period. FACILITY PLANNING ADEQUACY ANALYSIS The purpose of this analysis is to determine whether or not the park demand for Zone 9 complies with the adopted performance standard. Exhibit 25, page 64 shows the location of existing and future facilities. The Citywide Plan divides the City into four park districts which are the same as the four City quadrants. Zone 9 is located within Park District 3 (SW Quadrant) as shown on Exhibit 24, page 63. A. Inventory 1. Existing and Build out Park Demand: Park District 3 Existing 1/1/89 Buildout (2013) Population 12,120 27,683 Performance standard Park Demand (Acres) 36.36 83.04 Of this, the Zone 9 existing and projected buildout population and demand is: Zone 9 Existing 1/1/89 Buildout (2013) 2. Inventory District Community Parks ---------------Alta Mira of 3 65 Population 1,134 2,249 Performance Standard Park Demand (Acres) 3.40 6.75 Existing Part Fs!,cil,ities in Ps:r.:k Ownership Type Acres -------------- City Community 32.0 3. The inventory of existing parks as of 8/11/87, approved by the City council by Resolution No. 9129, noted that the 12 acre Alta Mira Park site could be credited toward future demand if adjacent acreage was purchased. Proposed Facilities: An inventory of projected park facilities was adopted by city Council Resolution No. 9129 on August 11, 1987. They are as follows: Community Parks Zone 19 Sammis/Alta Mira Macario ownership Hillman Sammis Purchase city Type Active Active Active Active Active Acres 24.25 10.00 25.00 10.00 12.00 City Acq/Alta Mira Alta Mira city Purchase City 81.25 *Special Use Area School Site CUSD Active 6.00 87.25 4. *There are no agreements existing between the City and the School District regarding the joint use of school facilities in this area. As new schools are built, the City will continue the practice of maximizing public facility use through such agreements. The site is shown for inventory purposes only. It is understood that no credit will be granted for this site until facilities are constructed and agreements are in effect. The total acreage noted in the Parks Facilities Inventory was 4.33 acres short of that required to meet projected buildout demand in Park District 3. The city's Capital Improvement Program 1987 to buildout provides for the acquisition and improvements of 4. 3 3 acres in the 1992 -1997 time frame. Projected Buildout Adequacy/Inadequacy of Parks Facilities The currently funded 32 acre Alta Mira Park Site is being applied toward meeting the adopted City Parks standard. The remaining 63. 48 acres of projected future park demand will be met through a combination of facilities contained in the adopted parks inventory and funded through the 66 City CIP coupled with the expansion of the Alta Mira Park Site. Assuming that those facilities identified in the adopted parks inventory that are under the direct control of the City of Carlsbad were scheduled and funded for construction prior to buildout, the projected buildout adequacy/inadequacy of park facilities in Park District 3 is as follows: Existing Facilities Proposed Future Facilities 85.58 Park District 3 Demand Projected Park District 3 Adequacy/(Inadequacy) B. PHASING 32.0 acres 53.58 83.04 2.54 Exhibit 26, page 70 shows Park District 3 supply and demand based on Park District 3 population projections. It shows that existing park facilities do not conform to the performance standard in Park District 3 and park facilities are projected to be inadequate through to buildout without the proposed mitigation as shown on Exhibit 27, page 71. As of January 1, 1989 the parks demand was 36.36 acres leaving a shortage at that time of 4. 36 acres of parks. This includes units within Park District 3 which have received discretionary approval. Upon approval of the Local Facilities Management Plans within the quadrant, these units could receive final maps and obtain building permits provided all the performance standards are met. For purposes of park facility planning, therefore, these units are considered as 'committed' units and are reflected in the Park District 3 demand. The adopted '8 7 to Bui ldout Capital Improvements Program includes funds for construction of specific parks in this quadrant. This information has been taken into account and included as a part of the mitigation contained herein. As shown on Exhibit 27, page 71 "Phasing of Park Facilities with Mitigation", the park standard is projected to be met through buildout of the zone. The 67 assumptions used in generating the phasing portion of this exhibit are as follows: 1. Pacific Rim Country Club and Resort (in Zone 19) will dedicate land, while other residential properties within District 3 will pay in-lieu fees. 2. Population projections based on 2. 471 persons per unit. 3. The 32 acre Alta Mira park site funded in the adopted 1987-88 to Buildout Capital Improvements Program for acquistion (1987-88) and construction (1989-90) is designated as "existing". 4. The Pacific Rim Country Club and resort (in Zone 19) will dedicate parkland in the amount of 24.25 acres and will guarantee the construction of 15 acres of parkland within 5 years of final map approval. s. Zone 20 developers will provide funding for the City acquisition of an additional 5 acres of park land adjacent to the Alta Mira park site. In addition, Zone 20 developers will be required to provide a letter of credit or other form of security that will ensure improvements of the 5 acre site. These measures must be in place prior to the issuance of any development permits within Zone 20. 6. The remaining 9.25 acres of park land to be dedicated by Zone 19 is improved as per the adopted phasing in the 1987-1988 to Buildout Capital Improvements Program (1992-1997). 7. 4.3 acres of land will be acquired (1992-97) and improved (1997+) through the City's adopted 1987-88 to Buildout Capital Improvements Program. 8. Macario Park credits will be available after 1997 as projected in the adopted 1987 to Buildout Capital Improvement Program. III. MITIGATION The property owners in Zone 9 have provided the City with $1,000,000 for the acquisition of park land in the southwest quadrant. However, the existing park facilities are still not in compliance with the performance standard. The Zone 9 property owners are 68 IV. not proposing to mitigate this current shortfall and are waiting until the City or some other Local Facilities Management Plan resolves the current park shortages. The facility analysis has indicated that the parks standard within the Southwest Quadrant is not being met. Therefore, pursuant to Section 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, no residential development may be allowed in this quadrant until the performance standard is complied with. FINANCING The City's approved Capital Improvements Budget contains the following funding for park facilities in Park District 3. PARK PROJECT 1987-88 1990-91 1992-97 1997+ Alta Mira Acquisition $1,300,000 Alta Mira Community Center {32 acres) community Park S/W Macario S/W Quad {credit) Unident. Park Site S/W Unident. Park Site S/W Improvements southwest Park Design TOTAL 190,000 3,680,000 1,soo,000 4,720,000 379,500 7,000,000 219,000 $1,490,000 3,680,000 6,599,500 7,219,000 ====== ====== ====== ======= A complete financing matrix is provided at Exhibit 28, page 72. 69 EXHIBIT 26 ZONE 9 • PHASING OF PARK FACILITIES WITHOUT MITIGATION PARK DISTRICT 3 ......................................... -................................ ---.. -.. -.. -............... ---. -. --................ -....................... ------.. -.................................................................................... -........................ -................ .. I I I STATUS I NOTES I I I LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLANS I ADOPTED LFMP DWELLING UNIT AND I ADEQUACY ANALYSIS I DWELLING UNITS I POPULATION ANALYSIS I I I································································································································ I···································· I I YEAR I I I I I I I I I YEARLY TOTAL YEARLY I SW SW ADEQUACY/ I IAS OF 1/1 I I I I I I I I I ADOPTED ADOPTED ADOPTED TOTAL I PARKS PARKS (INADEQUACY) I I I 4 I 6 I 9 I 19 I 20 I 21 I 22 I 23 I PHASED PROJECTED POPULATION ADOPTED !DEMAND SUPPLY (ACRES) I I I I I I (1) I I (2) I I I I DU'S DU'S INCREASE POPULATION I (ACRES) (ACRES) I ····································································································································································································I EXISTING I ("3) I 1969 I 3,065 I 407 I 910 I 2 I 253 I O I 266 I O I 4,905 4,905 12,120 12,120 I 36.36 32.00 •4.36 I ........ --...... -.... -...... -.. -........ -.............. -...... ----.... ----. --.... --.... -...... -.... -------...... -------.......................... --.. -.. ---.. -.. -----.. -... -...... -...................................... ----..... -........ ---.... -.. ---.......................... -........ PROJECTED 1969 BLD OUT 60 BLD OUT o I o I 162 242 5,147 596 12,718 36.15 32.00 ·6.15 1990 0 139 I 110 190 439 5,586 1,085 13,803 37.41 32.00 ·5.41 1991 0 251 I 110 161 522 6,108 1,290 15,093 41.34 32.00 ·9.34 1992 51 454 I 110 65 680 6,768 1,660 16,m 45.90 32.00 ·13.9 1993 50 426 I 110 BLD OUT 586 7,374 1,448 18,221 50.22 32.00 ·18.22 1994 0 425 I 106 531 7,905 1,312 19,533 54.15 32.00 ·22.15 1995 0 410 I 106 516 8,421 1,275 20,808 57.99 32.00 ·25.99 1996 31 332 I 106 469 8,690 1, 159 21,967 61.47 32.00 ·29.47 1997 BLD OUT 351 I 106 457 9,347 1,129 23,096 64.83 32.00 ·32.83 1998 256 I 106 362 9,709 895 23,991 67.53 32.00 ·35.53 1999 226 106 332 10,041 820 24,811 69.99 32.00 ·37.99 2000 BLD OUT 106 106 10, 147 262 25,073 70.80 32.00 ·38.8 2001 106 106 10,253 262 25,335 71.55 32.00 ·39.55 2002 106 106 10,359 262 25,597 72.33 32.00 ·40.33 2003 106 106 10,465 262 25,859 73.14 32.00 ·41.14 2004 106 106 10,571 262 26,121 73.92 32.00 ·41.92 2005 106 106 10,6n 262 26,383 74.70 32.00 ·42.7 2006 106 106 10,783 262 26,645 75.48 32.00 ·43.48 2007 106 106 10,889 262 26,907 76.26 l2.00 ·44.26 2006 1 106 106 10,995 262 27, 169 n.01 32.00 ·45.07 2009 I 106 106 11, 101 262 27,431 77.85 32.00 ·45.85 2010 1 102 102 11,203 252 27,663 78.60 32.00 ·46.6 2011 I IBLD OUT BLD OUT 11,203 0 27,683 78.60 32.00 ·46.6 2012 I I 11,203 0 27,663 78.60 32.00 ·46.6 BLD OUT 2013 I I 11,203 BLD OUT 27,663 78.60 32.00 ·46.6 I BLD OUT I .. --. ---.. ----.. ----. -... -. -. ---. ----..... -........ -. -.. --.. -.... --.. ---. -.. -.. -.. --.. ........................................................................................................ · I TOTAL 3,065 1 599 I 910 I 3,212 I 2,491 I 0 I 866 o I 11,203 .. --..... -. -.. --. -.. ------. -.... -........ -....... -.. -----..... -. ------------------------------....... -. ----. -..... --...... -......... -.... -. --............. --..... -----... -........ -.. ---........... -........ -.......... -. -.. ----.. --.. -----.. - NOTES: 1. EXISTING DWELLING UNITS FOR ZONE 9 INCLUDE 459 EXISTING, 30 DU'S FROM PHASE I AND 421 DU'S FROM PHASES II AND Ill BATIQUITOS LAGOON PROJECTIONS. 2, ZONE 20 EXISTING DIIELLING UNITS INCLUDE THE 28 EXISTING DIIELLING UNITS AND 225 DIIELLING UNITS APPROVED FOR COBBLESTONE SEA VILLAGE (CT·84·32). 3. ALTA MIRA COMMUNITY PARK. I EXHIBIT 26 70 EXHIBIT 27 ZONE 9 -PHASING Of PARK FACILITIES 111TH MITIGATION PARK DISTRICT 3 .... -.............. -........ --. -................. ---.......... -....... --.... ------·--. --. ----........................ --.......... ------------------............... ·---... -........................ ---.. ----.. -.............. -.. ---..................... .. LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLANS I ADOPTED LFMP DIIELLl!IG UNIT AND I ADEQUACY IINALYSIS I DIIELLING UNITS I POPULATION ANALYSIS I I··· -· ---· · · · · · · · · · · · · ··· · · · -· · · · · · · · · · · · · · --· · · · -· · · · · · · --· · · · -·· · · · · ·· · · · · · · · · --· · · · · · · -· · · · · -· · · · ·· · · · · ·· · · · · · · · · ---· ---------I························· -· · -----· · - STATUS NOTES YEAR I I I I I I I I I YEARLY TOTAL YEARL y I SIi Sil ADEQUACY/ IAS Of 1/1 I I I I I I I I I ADOPTED ADOPTED ADOPTED TOTAL I PARKS PARKS (INADEQUACY) I I 4 I 6 I 9 I 19 I 20 I 21 I 22 I 23 I PHASED PROJECTED POPULATION ADOPTED !DEMAND SUPPLY (ACRES) I I I I (1) I I (2) I I I I DU'S DU'S INCREASE POPULATION l<ACRES) (ACRES} EXISTING I (3) 1989 I 3,065 I 407 I 910 I 2 I 253 I o I 268 I o I 4,905 4,905 12,120 12,120 36.36 32.00 ·4.36 ······-------········-------·······------------······-······-·--········-··········---------·-··--·-------------------------··········-----------·-··········· ---------------------·············· PROJECTED I • 1989 BLD OUT 60 BLD OUT o I 0 1a2 I 242 5,147 598 12,718 38.15 32.00 ·6.15 I 1990 0 139 I 110 190 I 439 5,586 1,085 13,803 37.41 52.00 14.59 I 1991 0 251 I 110 161 I 522 6,108 1,290 15,093 41.34 52.00 10.66 I (4) 1992 51 454 I 110 65 680 6,788 1,680 16,m 45.90 52.00 6.1 I 1993 50 426 I 110 I BLD OUT 586 7,374 1,448 18,221 50.22 52.00 1.78 I 1994 0 425 I 106 I 531 7,905 1,312 19,533 54.15 52.00 ·2.15 I 1995 0 410 I 106 I 516 8,421 1,275 20,808 57.99 52.00 ·5.99 I 1996 31 332 I 106 I 469 8,890 1,159 21,967 61.47 52.00 ·9.47 I 1997 IBLD OUT 351 I 106 I 457 9,347 1,129 23,096 64.83 52.00 -12.83 (5) (6) 1998 I 256 I 106 I 362 9,709 895 23,991 67.53 65.55 ., .98 (7) 1999 I 226 106 I 332 10,041 820 24,811 69.99 90.55 20.56 2000 I BLD OUT 106 I 106 10,147 262 25,073 70.80 90.55 19.75 2001 I 106 I 106 10,253 262 25,335 71.55 90.55 19 2002 I 106 I 106 10,359 262 25,597 72.33 90.55 18.22 2003 I 106 I l 106 10,465 262 25,859 73.14 90.55 17.41 2004 I 106 I 106 10,571 262 26,121 73.92 90.55 16.63 2005 I 106 I 106 10,677 262 26,383 74.70 90.55 15.85 2006 I 106 I 106 10,783 262 26,645 75.48 90.55 15.07 2007 I 106 I 106 10,889 262 26,907 76.26 90.55 14.29 2008 I 106 I 106 10,995 262 27,169 77.07 90.55 13.48 2009 I 106 I 106 11,101 262 27,431 77.85 90.55 12.7 2010 I 102 I 102 11,203 252 27,683 78.60 90.55 11.95 2011 I IBLD OUT I BLD OUT 11,203 0 27,683 78.60 90.55 11. 95 2012 I I I 11,203 0 27,683 78.60 90.55 11.95 BLD OUT 2013 I I I 11,203 BLD OUT 27,683 78.60 90.55 11.95 I I I BLD OUT ·········-·-·--·--·····-----··········---··········-··-·-·---------------······ ··················-···········--···················---------······--·······--· ····----·······----·-··---······--·· TOTAL 3,065 I 599 I 910 I 3,272 I 2,491 I 0 I 866 0 I 11,203 ················--·--·--···-·······-·················----·····---············--················-------·-·······························-·-·······----····------·-·······--···---··················· NOTES: 1. EXISTING DIIELLING UNITS FOR ZONE 9 INCLUDE 459 EXISTING, 30 DU'S FROM PHASE I AND 421 DU'S FROM PHASES 11 AND Ill BATIQUITDS LAGOON PROJECTIONS. 2. ZONE 20 EXISTING DIIELLING UNITS INCLUDE THE 28 EXISTING DI/ELLING UNITS AND 225 DIIELLING UNITS APPROVED FOR COBBLESTONE SEA VILLAGE (CT·84·32). 3. ALTA MIRA COMMUNITY PARK. 4. 24.25 ACRES Of DEDICATION AND 15 ACRES Of CONSTRUCTION GUARANTEED BY HILLMAN. 5 ACRES Of ACQUISITION AND CONSTRUCTION GUARANTEED BY ZONE 20. 5. 9.25 DEDICATED BY ZONE 19 AND IMPROVED AS PER CIP. FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. NO FIXED DATE IN CIP. 6. 4.3 ACRES. FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. NO FIXED DATE IN CIP. 7. 25 ACRES Of MACARIO PARK. FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. NO FIXED DATE IN CIP. EXHIBIT 27 71 EXHIBIT 28 ZONE 9 • PARK FACILITY FINANCING MATRIX AS OF 1/1/89 I FACILITY FUND I NG OPTIONS ESTIMATED ···•··························•·····•································· AHCXJNT COST TIMING J FIRST SECOND THIRD J REFERENCE NOTES --==========z::z:z:::::::::::::::::::i::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::s:::::::::-::-:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::s::s:=============•=================================== IPARK FACILITIES • PARK DISTRICT 3 1. LAND ACQUISITION ALTA MIRA ADDITIONAL PARK LAND SUBTOTAL 2. IMPROVEMENTS ALTA MIRA ADD I Tl ONAL PARK LAND ZONE 19 ZONE 19 UNIDENTIFIED SCXJTHIIEST PARK SITE MACARI□ CANYON CREDIT CIP BUOGET: •a7• •ea 190· 191 192· 197 ,92. 197 192· 197 1997+ 1997+ 10 ACRES $1,300,000 10 ACRES $1,000,000 5 ACRES $ 500,000 4.33 ACRES s 219,500 24.25 ACRES DEDICATED ....................... ................... 53.5, ACRES S3,019 ,500 32,00 ACRES $3,680,000 S1,500,000 5.00 ACRES $ 575,000 15.00 ACRES $1,755,000 9.25 ACRES S1 ,082,250 4.33 ACRES s 379,500 25.00 ACRES $7,000,000 90.58 ACRES $15,971,750 TOTAL PARKS COSTS $18,991,250 $1,300,000 (ALTA MIRA) S3,680,000 (ALTA MIRA) S1 ,500,000 (ALTA MIRA) $4,720,000 (CCWIUNITY PARK) S 379,500 (UNIDENTIFIED PARK SITE) S7,000,000 (HACARIO) $ 219,500 (UNIDENTIFIED PARK SITE) 1988 CITY·PIL 1988 DEVELOPERS Of ZONE 9 111TH REIMBURSEMENT (LETTER OF CREDIT) 1989 DEVELOPERS OF ZONE 20 111TH REIMBURSEMENT 1997+ CITY • PIL 1989 DEVELOPER OF ZONE 19 111TH REIMBURSEMENT 1990·91 CITY • PFF 1992·97 CITY • PFF 1990·91 DEVELOPER 111TH REIMBURSEMENT 1990·93 DEVELOPER 111TH REIMBURSEMENT 1993 DEVELOPER 111TH REIMBURSEMENT 1992·97 CITY PFF 1997+ CITY PFF BALANCE FOR\IARD S 215,000 (SIi COMMUNITY PARK DESIGN, HACARIO • SIi) PIL = PARK· IN· LIEU FEE CIP = CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN PFF • PUBLIC FACILITY FEE EXHIBIT 28 72 DRAINAGE FACILITIES I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD Drainage facilities must be provided as required by the City concurrent with development. II. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS As was indicated in the citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, drainage is distinguished from all other public facilities and improvements because by its very nature it is more accurately assessed as specific development plans are finalized. However, certain facilities may be necessary which are larger than those required from a single development project and, therefore, need to be identified so that the proper funding can be collected for the construction of·these facilities. The natural storm drainage areas affecting Zone 9 are shown on Exhibits 29 and 30 on pages 74 and 75 as areas, DA, DB and an area of approximately 38 acres designated as area DG. Zone 9 is within part of the San Marcos creek/Batiquitos Lagoon watershed. Areas DB, DG and the southern portion of area DA drain through natural swales and storm drains to Batiquitos Lagoon. The northern portion of area DA flows overland and through storm drains into the Pacific ocean. The information contained in this section was extracted from the City of Carlsbad Master Drainage Plan and a hydraulic analysis by O'Day Consultants dated September, 1987, on file in the City Engineer's office. A. Inventory 1. Existing Facilities The existing major drainage facilities in Zone 9, as shown on Exhibit 29 on page 74, are listed below. ITEM NO. FACILITY 1 36 11 RCP 2 5411 RCP 73 LOCATION Runs from Poinsettia Lane and I-5 on-ramp to 5411 RCP in NE portion of Zone 9. Crosses Poinsettia Lane to Area "B" in Northeast portion of Zone 9 --- LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -ZONE NO. 9 MAJOR DRAINAGE 0 250 soo 710 1000 EXHIBIT 29 C:l!!!!EZZCE¾M/ll LEGEND 1 • SYMBOL DESCRIPTION ••••• ZOl'E 9 B)UNOA.RY ---·-m)F()SED S1"00M DRAIN -~-EXISTING STORM DRAIN -<~ EXISTING CONTO~ -DIRECTION OVERLAND FLOW .,1 I ••••--•••• DRAINAGE BCXJNOARY 74 AREA 'A" AREA •s• AREA 'C.1" AREA •c.2• AREA •c.3" i .... ,.-1 AREA ''E" ~ EXISTING INVENTORY I • AREA ·o·· AJTIJRE IMPROVEMENTS ' __________ , -. I I -I -I I I I ----- f/J.~WTANIS ..... ,.....-................. ........ ...-... ........~-.......... .... ........... PACIFIC OCEAN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -ZONE N0.9 MAJOR DRAINAGE 0 250 500 7 50 1000 EXHIBIT 30 LEGEND SYMBOL DESCRIPTION · ••••• ZONE 9 BOUNDARY __ •.. _ PROPOSED STORM ORAN :::::::::::::::::::------EXISTNG STORM ORAN •• ~-Lr'"°>- '-rss), Zt?NE-' -(5IJJ-EXISTNG CONTOURS -DFECIDN OVERLAND FLOW • • • • • • •••• DRAINAGE BOLNJARY (!) EXLSTNG NVENTOAY @ FUTURE MPROVEMENTS 75 (!j-'g)gv CONSULTANTS ._ .. _... n.,.1&.CMMJ.a~~ ... CIWILIIIGaU..-& ~.,.,...... ,._._ - ITEM NO. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 FACILITY 6011 RCP 6611 CIPP 3011 RCP 5411 RCP 3011 RCP 3011 RCP 2411 RCP 2411 RCP 2-2411 RCP 3-2411 CMP 76 LOCATION Northeast portion of Zone 9 from 54" RCP to 6611 CIPP. Bisects Windrose Circle between mobile home park and desilting basin. Drains portion of Windrose Circle in southeasterly portion of Zone 9. 130 L.F. + crossing under Poinsettia Lane overpass at railroad. Parallel to Poinsettia Lane from south of Avenida Encinas to railroad tracks and connected to existing temporary 2411 storm drain (Item No. 9) Drains portion of mobile home park north to existing P.C.C. brow ditch. Considered a temporary line at construction, parallels railroad from Poinsettia south + 2, 000 L.F. (Dwg. No. 234-4). Crosses under railroad at southwest corner of mobile home park. Crosses Ponto Ori ve west of railroad at boundary between Zones 9 and 22. Connects inlets to 30" CMP at existing Ponto Drive/Carlsbad Boulevard interchange. ITEM NO. 13 14 FACILITY 30" CMP Desilting Basin 2. Proposed Buildout Facilities LOCATION Connects to existing 2 4" CMP storm drains, crosses Carlsbad Boulevard and out falls into the ocean. At discharge end of 6611 CIPP (Item No. 4) Development in Areas C.2 and C.3 will require the construction of the on-site storm drain collection system. This will complete the facility requirements of master plan drainage area DB. Area DG will require an on-site storm drain collection system and the construction of a second desiltation basin east of the railroad at the south end of Area c.2. In the DA drainage area the master plan requires a major storm drain to be constructed to cross Carlsbad Boulevard and to out fall into the ocean through the ocean bluff. According to the Coastal Commission policy and in order to protect the beach bluff from further erosion the major storm drain should not be built as shown in the city master drainage plan but should continue south and drain into the Batiquitos Lagoon through a desiltation basin. The proposed routing of storm drainage to the Batiquitos Lagoon through desilting basins will conform to the State Coastal Commission's requirements to prevent further erosion to the lagoon and beach bluffs. Development of Area C.3 west of the railroad will require that this major storm drain pipe and desiltation basin be sized to serve the drainage area west of the railroad which includes land north and outside of Zone 9. The proposed major drainage facilities for Zone 9, as shown on Exhibit 29 on page 74 are as follows: ITEM NO. A FACILITY 7211 RCP 77 LOCATION Parallels railroad tracks from Poinsettia Lane south to existing 24 11 RCP storm drains near SE corner of mobile home park. ITEM NO. B C D E F G H. I. FACILITY 78" RCP 7811 RCP 8111 RCP 75" RCP Desilting Basin Desilting Basin 24 11 RCP 30" RCP LOCATION Connects 7 2" RCP and two 24" RCP storm drains at railroad with 78" RCP in Ponto Drive. Will include inlets to pick up local surface drainage. Runs south from Zone 9 boundary in Ponto Drive across proposed Avenida Batiquitos to 81" RCP. Parallels Carlsbad Boulevard from 78" RCP south to a proposed 7700 C.Y. desilting basin. Collects water from an existing natural swale and connects to 7 8 11 RCP in Ponto Drive. At discharge end of 81" RCP storm drains (Item D) Downstream of existing desilting basin. Required for Area "C. 211 development North side of Mobile Home Park.Connect existing 30" from Mobile Home Park (Item No. 8) to 3011 RCP (Item I) under R.R. tracks. Under R.R. tracks at north end of Mobile Home Park. Connects existing 30" RCP (Item No. 7) new 24 11 RCP (Item No. H) , and existing 54" RCP (Item No. 6) to 72 11 RCP (Item No. A) on west side of tracks. Note: See Hydrology Study by O'Day Consultants dated 9- 8-88 on file in the city Engineer's office for Item No. A, B, Hand I. 78 It should be noted that the size and location of the proposed storm drain facilities have been approximated only for the purpose of this plan. The actual sizes and locations will be designed per current city standards as the zone develops. B. PHASING The approach to phasing taken by this Local Facilities Management Plan is based on ensuring that needed facilities are in place prior to or commensurate with development. Phasing boundaries corresponding to development areas are shown on Exhibit 29 on page 74 and correlate with the natural drainage basins and the proposed facilities within the Zone. The threshold for the major drainage facilities within each area can be easily established, thereby determining the appropriate mitigation measures. The phasing boundaries allow for independent review and development for the drainage facilities within each boundary. However, the city may require improvements outside of the phase boundaries if deemed necessary to serve development. C. ADEQUACY ANALYSIS currently the drainage facilities are adequate for Area "A" since this area is fully developed and will not require additional on-site drainage facilities. Area "B" is a developing commercial area which will only require on-site drainage facilities to tie into the existing 60" storm drain. The major drainage facilities for Area C.l are adequate. The major undeveloped portion of Zone 9, Areas c. 2 and c. 3 will require additional facilities because a portion of this area drains into the Batiquitos Lagoon without desiltation. Portions of c.2 and C.3 now surface drains over the face of the existing bluff. Development of Areas c.2 and C.3 will require the completion of the facilities identified in the Master Drainage plan within Zone 9. (The current Master Drainage Plan is being updated. The revision may indicate additional facilities which will be required of future developments.) The local drainage system for the South Carlsbad State Beach is adequate for the beach park area itself. The system drains to the ocean through the ocean bluff and, although bluff erosion at the outlet is stabilized, no additional drainage should be added to the system from east of Carlsbad Boulevard. 79 III. MITIGATION A. SPECIAL CONDITIONS FOR ZONE 9 1. Prior to the recordation of any final map or issuance of a building or grading permit whichever occurs first, for new development within Zone 9, the developers are required to: 2. 3. 4. s. (a) Pay the required drainage area fees established in the current Drainage Master Plan and; (b) Execute an agreement to pay any drainage area fees established in the forthcoming revised Drainage Master Plan Area "A" No additional facilities required. Area II B" No additional facilities required. Area "C.111 No additional facilities required. Area 11 c.i11 Prior to the recordation of a final map, issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, for development in Area C.2, the developer shall provide a financial mechanism guaranteeing the construction of the following drainage facilities: (a) second-tier desiltation basin south of the existing desiltation basin serving area DB. (b) construction of the 72 11 to 8111 storm drains extending from Poinsettia Lane to the Batiqui tos Lagoon, and to include the construction of the desilting basin on the west side of the railroad right-of-way at the lagoon, together with the required connections to storm drains extending under the railroad tracks. Estimated Cost -Sl,221,620 The storm drain facilities identified to serve Area 11 c.211 must be completed prior to the occupancy of the first development in Area "C.2". 80 6. Area "C.3" Prior to the recordation of a final map, issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, for development in Area "C. 3", the developer shall provide a financial mechanism guaranteeing the construction of the following drainage facilities: construction of the 72" to 8111 storm drains extending from Poinsettia Lane to the Batiquitos Lagoon, and including the construction of the desilting basin on the west side of the railroad right-of-way at the lagoon, together with the required connections to storm drains extending under the railroad tracks. Estimated Cost -Sl.179.620 The storm drain facilities identified to serve Area "C.3" must be completed prior to the occupancy of the first development in Area "C.3". IV. FINANCING The major drainage facilities proposed by this plan are estimated to cost $1,221,620.00 and are to be financed and constructed by the development requiring the need for them. Since the drainage system proposed for Area "C.3" will also serve the upstream vacant lands north of Zone 9, construction funding should include contributions from the development of the land north of Zone 9. A drainage facilities financing matrix is included as Exhibit 31 on page 82. 81 EXHIBIT 31 ZONE 9 -DRAINAGE FACILITY FINANCING MATRIX AS OF 1/1/89 ........... -------... "' --.. -.. -------.. --. -....... -----. -......... -.. ------... --........... ----... -.. --...... --....... -.. --........ --.. -.... -.......... -------. -... -... -... ----............... -------.. -. --. FACILITY AHClJNT ESTIMATED COST I FUNDING OPTIONS I --------------------------------------------· -----. -. --·· ...................... ···I TIMING I ==z=============-••-••-===•====••••••-•============z==========amsamU-••=-•••=•-••••••=======••-••••-======a=====•===========•==•=============--1 I DRAINAGE FACILITIES I I FIRST I SECOND I THIRD I REFERENCE NOTES I I -· --·-----· ----·--------------------· ----· ·-· -· --· ----· --·------------------------------· ----· ----------· -------------------· -· -----------------·--· ----------I AREA "C.211 1. DESILTING BASIN 1 EA. $42,000 2. 2411 STCRM DRAIN 405 LF S32,400 3. 3011 STORM DRAIN 114 LF S11,400 4. 6611 STORM ORAi N 8 LF S1 ,280 5. n11 SiCRM OiU,H 1,963 Lr S353,340 6. 7811 STORM DRAIN 1,700 LF S340,000 7. 81 • STORM DRAIN 1,100 LF $242,000 a. CLEANOUTS 18 EA. saa,200 9. DESILTING BASIN , EA. S107,000 10. HEADWALL 1 EA. $4,000 TOTAL $1,221,620 AREA "C.311 1. 2411 STORM DRAIN 405 LF S32,400 2. 30• STORM DRAIN 114 LF $11,400 3. 66• STORM DRAIN 8 LF $1,280 4. 72" STORM DRAIN 1,963 LF S353,340 5. 78• STORM DRAIN 1,700 LF S340,000 6. 81• STORM DRAIN 1,100 LF $242,000 7. CLEANOUTS 18 EA. saa,200 8. DESILTING BASIN 1 EA. S107,000 9. HEADWALL 1 EA. $4,000 TOTAL S1, 179,620 Note: Reinhlrsements affect only drainage facilities identified in the current Drainage Master Plan. Concurrent/ Developer Devel o;:ment u . II . . II • u • • • • • Concurrent/ Developer Development • • . • • • ■ • II . . H • • • Developer with I I I I I Rei11D.Jrsement I H N Developer with Reint>ursement • . • II • . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Master Drainage District N Master Drainage District LF • Lineal Feet -........... -............................................................... --... ------------... -----.. ----........... ----............................. -----------........... ·----..... -----....... --------........................... -........ --............ ------- EXHIBIT 31 82 CIRCULATION FACILITIES I. II. PERFORMANCE STANDARD No road segment or intersection in the zone nor any road segment or intersection out of the zone which is impacted by development in the zone shall be projected to exceed a Service Level c during off-peak hours, nor Service Level D during peak hours. Impacted means where twenty percent or more of the traffic generated by the local facility management zone will use the road segment or intersection. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS The purpose of this analysis is to determine whether or not the circulation system within Zone 9 conforms to the adopted performance standards. It will also address all Circulation Element roads and intersections outside of Zone 9 impacted by twenty percent or more of the traffic generated by Zone 9 to ensure conformance with the adopted performance standard. A. Inventory As shown on Exhibit 32, page 85, the following circulation element road segments and intersections are located within Zone 9: Roadways Number of Lanes Existing Buildout Poinsettia Lane 2 (Carlsbad Blvd. to I-5) Carlsbad Boulevard 4 (Poinsettia Lane to La Costa Ave. ) Avenida Encinas 4 (Poinsettia Lane to Windrose Circle) Avenida Batiquitos (Carlsbad Blvd. to Windrose Circle) Windrose Circle (Ave. Encinas to Ave. Batiquitos) 83 4 4 4 4 4 Classification Secondary Arterial Major Arterial Secondary Arterial Secondary Arterial secondary Arterial Intersections Poinsettia Lane at Carlsbad Boulevard Poinsettia Lane at Avenida Encinas Poinsettia Lane at I-5 southbound off ramp Poinsettia Lane at I-5 northbound off ramp Avenida Encinas at Windrose Circle Avenida Batiquitos at Windrose Circle Avenida Batiquitos at Carlsbad Boulevard Avenida Batiquitos and Windrose Circle are future streets which will be constructed in conj unction with the development of the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park. The estimated trip distribution percentages of traffic leaving Zone 9 are shown in the Exhibits listed below: Existing 1988 1989 1990, 1991, 1995, 2000, Buildout Exhibit 32 33 34 Page 85 86 87 These estimates have determined that the following road segments and intersections outside of Zone 9 are impacted by 20% or more of Zone 9 traffic. Roadways Number of Lanes Existing Buildout Carlsbad Blvd. 4 between Poinsettia Lane and Palomar Airport Road Intersections 4 R-0-W Width Classification 102 Major Arterial Carlsbad Boulevard and Palomar Airport Road Carlsbad Boulevard and La Costa Avenue (outside of City Limits) 84 SJ".4.TE f;t'.4Clf 'lliTOS LAGOOIV l t~~_.,, .. -···-·-•.. .,---··· ---.. ;I I ! :::;·;~:::;,-·,, 0 ·:,,,}·. : ll,~ LEGEND EXHIBIT 32 PRIME ARTERIAL Ex,srn .. G MAJOR ARTERIALu,;.r1NG ___ SECONDARY ARTERIAL wsrn.G 1111111111111 PRIME ARTERIAL PROPOSED .............. MAJOR ARTERIAL PROPOStO -----SECONDARY ARTERIAL PROPO5EO 15% PERCENT OF ROAD TRAFFIC ON ROAD SEGMENT ZONE 9 -CIRCULATION EXISTING 1988 STUDY AREA & DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN 85 : . ,t.\-" ;~,:-) l s ii) i~ D ,-. ' . "Ai)', ·• .. >.,.,.,; ::~~-~:A.AIRPORT RD ,<• -.. c~ .. -. <~·"~ ... , ,.... , _, lr-·1 ... ,... ~••-'" --~I~-~:: • -~'1"" ,.. L-:,! I\, l-::~· \!_fl .. :~'.)£:,,):~ :~;~: .t·--.: \', .·>,,. i I ::,:ff'.t;:;i:1 i I . ::,, -. r ···· · · · c:~\ . : i ' t vc•,-,: :·' 1 , • .,, .... \ I i\ / --~~-, .J .. !\ ,,... .. \ --; j j i ,· ----.. , ~~~~~ J_s __ ~ i ::;;-,:;:: 1 . o ;·,d~s:~ l,&,)t;ll<J,H.j/:•_j: ;i :---··,J •J ZONE 9 -CIRCULATION LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN LEGEND EXHIBIT 33 PRIME ARTERIAL Ei<tSTllloG MAJOR ARTERIALei(1sn"G --SECONDARY ARTERIAL EAISTll,G 1111111111111 PRIME ARTERIAL PROPOSED 11111111111111 MAJOR ARTERIAL PROPOSED ____ ., SECONDARY ARTERIAL PROPOSED 15% PERCENT OF ROAD TRAFFIC ON ROAD SEGMENT YEAR 1969 DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION 86 sr:1 Tl:' Jj£4CII i : /',;-;:.~:2, . u.:,;,.,;.1,:: ;f'.F ji o_:~; ;:? • i t ? 1 · i ... AGOO/V l .-·--~ .. ,;;., LEGEND EXHIBIT 34 PRIME ARTERIAL f,<1ST1t,,G MAJOR ARTERIAL f,<1Sf1NG ---SECONDARY ARTERIAL f,<1ST1t,,G 1111111111111 PRIME ARTERIAL PROPOSED 11111111111111 MAJOR ARTERIAL PROPOSED -----SECONDARY ARTERIALPFtOPOSEO 15% PERCENT OF ROAD TRAFFIC ON ROAD SEGMENT ZONE 9 -CIRCULATION 199O,1991,1995,2OOO,BUILDOUT DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN 87 B. Phasing The Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park project, Poinsettia Village and other land uses within Zone 9 consists of 384 existing mobile homes, 105 single family dwelling units, 400 multi-family dwelling units, 174,563 square feet of retail space, 220,000 square feet of institutional uses, 224,743 square feet of office space, 144,000 square feet of commercial uses, 318,700 square feet of research and development area, 97,200 square feet of health/recreation facilities, 456 student dormitory rooms, and 370 hotel units with 120,000 square feet of conference facilities. since al 1 of the remaining development within Zone 9 has been planned for the period of 1988-1991, the Urban Systems Associates, Inc. (USA), Transportation Phasing Analysis dated May 4, 1988 (See Appendix D) has addressed Zone 9 circulation improvements in four phases: 1. 2. 3. 4. Phase Phase Phase Phase I II III IV -1988 -1989 1990 1991 The Urban Systems Transportation Analysis included in the appendix shows the trip distribution percentages for traffic from Zone 9 for the four phases of development. Buildout for Zone 9 is expected to be complete by the year 1991. The Mitigation Section describes the improvements necessary during each phase of development in Zone 9 which will assure compliance with the adopted performance standard. The traffic circulation network and the projected impacts resulting from traffic generated from Zone 9 were analyzed by utilizing data from the following reports: 1. Traffic Analysis Prepared by Urban Systems Associates, Inc., dated May 4, 1988. 2. The Barton-Aschman Citywide Traffic study. 3. SANDAG Traffic Projections {1986). The traffic analysis prepared by Urban Systems Associates, Inc. is a detailed study dealing with the specific traffic generated from within the boundaries of Zone 9. This study analyzes the impacts of traffic on existing and proposed road segments and intersections impacted by the traffic from this zone. This report also proposes mitigation plan to ensure conformance with the adopted performance standard through buildout of Zone 9. A copy of this document is included in Appendix D. 88 c. The Barton-Aschman citywide Traffic Study and the SANDAG Traffic Projections were used as reference data in the analysis of Zone 9 traffic. The Barton-Aschman study is used to determine the existing traffic while SANDAG is used to analyze the buildout traffic projections. The purpose of this analysis is to evaluate impacted road segments and intersections serving Zone 9 and propose a mitigation plan if these facilities are determined to operate below the adopted performance standard. The phasing of development and analysis of traffic impacts will be monitored on an annual basis. However, for the purpose of this study, the timing of the necessary improvements will be presented in the following increments: Improvements needed now Improvements needed prior to 1990 Improvements needed prior to 1993 Improvements needed prior to 1995 Improvements needed prior to 2000 Improvements needed prior to buildout The Phasing Schedule noted above shall not limit needed traffic improvements to the years mentioned. If a future traffic analysis indicates that the timing of the necessary improvements has changed, the required improvements shall also be adjusted to guarantee that conformance with the adopted performance standard will be maintained. Adequacy Findings This section will analyze the existing and proposed intersections and road segments impacted by the traffic generated from Zone 9. For the purpose of the analysis of the traffic facilities, this section will analyze intersections and road segments separately. In accordance with the adopted performance standard, the existing and proposed circulation facilities within and impacted by Zone 9 will be identified by an evaluated level of service. The performance standard determines that during peak hours a level of service A-D is acceptable and a level of service of E or worse is unacceptable. If a facility is determined to fall below the standard, a mitigation program must be prepared so that the facility will operate at an acceptable level of service. The proposed mitigation program will be discussed more thoroughly later in the Circulation Section. 89 1. Intersections Exhibit 35, page 91 lists the impacted intersections studied and indicates the operating levels of service evaluated by the phasing scenario previously discussed. The intersections were evaluated using data and methods contained in the Highway Capacity Manual and the City of Carlsbad "Guidelines and Instructions for the Preparation of Local Facilities Management Plan Transportation Impact studies," dated February 9, 1988. 90 EXHIBIT 35 IMPACTED INTERSECTIONS LEVEL OF SERVICE EXISTING 1988 1990 1993 1995 2000 BUILDWT bllTH 1111TH 1111TH li!TH l&IITH PROJECTED ll'JlROV. PROJECTED Il'PROV. PROJECTED ll'PR□V. PROJECTED l'FROV. PROJECTED Il'l'ROV, A.Pl. P.l'I. A.ff!. P.lfl. A,111, P.!11. A.l'I. P.l'I. A.l'I. P.l'I. A.l'I. P.l'I. A,111, P,l'I A.l'I. P.1'1, A •. ..,. P.lfl. A.Ill. P.l'I. A.l'I. P.l'I. LOCATION LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS POINSETTIA LAt.£/CARLSBAO BLVD, A A A A ------e C -----e D --B E A C A C -- POINSETTIA LAt.£/AVENIDA ENCINAS A A A A -----E D A B A C -----A D ----A e ------ POINSETTIA LAt.£/I-5 SOUTHBOUND OFF RAPP A A C C ----E E A e e C -----D C ------e B ----- POINSETTIA LANE/1-5 NORTHBOUMl OFF RAPP A A C C ---E E B e C C ---D D ------C C ------ AVENIDA ENCINAS/WINDROSE CIRCLE ------A A ------P. A ------e e ------e e -----e e ------ AVENIDA BATlQUITOS/llllWR05E CIRCLE ----A A -----A A ------A A ----A A ------A A ----- AVENIDA BATIQUITOS/PONTO DRIVE -----A A -----A A ------A A ------A A ---A P. ------ AVENIDA BATIQUITOS/CARLSBAO BLVD, ----A A -----P. P. ---h• e e --·-e e -----B e ----- PALOl'IAR AIRPORT RD./CARLSBAD BLVD. A A A A --· ---A A -----e e --A r. --· ---A C ------ 91 Currently all intersections within Zone 9 or impacted by Zone 9 traffic meet the adopted performance standard. By following the mitigation measures proposed in Part III of this section, the performance standard for intersections will continue to be met for each year of the phased development plan through City buildout in 2013. The chart below indicates the year of need for impacted intersection improvements if the performance standard is to be met. TIME TO PAILURB 1989 1990 1993 1995 2000 BUILDOUT INTERSECTION Poinsettia Lane/ Avenida Encinas --------------* Poinsettia Lane/ --------------* (1) I-5 southbound Offramp Poinsettia Lane/ --------------* (1) I-5 Northbound Offramp Poinsettia Lane at-------------------------* Carlsbad Blvd. (1) The Poinsettia Lane I-5 interchange is projected to fall below the performance standard in 1992. The on and off ramp intersection improvements will be constructed concurrently with the new interchange. 92 2. Road Segments The city of Carlsbad utilizes a two-tier evaluation to analyze the level of service for road segments. The two methods utilized are as follows: A. Daily Capacity B. Peak Hour Volumes The first level of analysis determines an approximate off peak level of service using. a ratio of existing Average Daily Traffic (ADT) to an .assumed average roadway capacity. This volume to capacity ratio provides an indication of level of service (A-F) of the road segments. This method is a very generalized approach in determining levels of service and is used as an indicator of the off peak level of service. According to the adopted performance standard, no road segment or intersection impacted by traffic generated from Zone 9 shall exceed a level of service C during off peak hours or a level of service D during peak hours. The daily capacity method, as described above, analyzes a road segment for a daily average volume and is not an indicator of peak hours volumes. Therefore, in conjunction with the performance standard, the evaluated levels of service utilizing the daily capacity method is indicative of off peak operating levels and a level of service C will not be exceeded. The second level of review for road segments analyzes peak hour capacities. This is a more detailed analysis and is performed when it can be shown that the road segment is functioning at a capacity greater than the assumed capacity. This method utilized traffic counts during peak hours to determine the appropriate level of service. This more detailed analysis is used to more accurately project the timing of failure of the road segment. This allows the needed improvements to be scheduled so that conformance with the adopted performance standard will be maintained. 93 EXHIBIT 36 ROAD SEGMENTS -LEVEL OF SERVICE BY 1990 BY 1995 BY 2000 BUILDaJT 1988 EXISTING 1989 NO IMP. II/IMP. IIO IMP. II/IMP. NO IMP. II/IMP. NO IMP. II/IMP. LOCATION ---··---------................... -----·-----·-······ ...................... -.......... --------·----............................. ····-······················-···----···------· ....................... . ....................... ............................... ----·-······-----·----·------········· .. .............................. POINSETTIA LANE A A A F B C B (AVENIDA ENCINAS • 1·5) POINSETTIA LANE A A A D A A A (AVENIDA ENCINAS • CARLSBAD BLVD.) CARLSBAD BLVD. A A A A A B (POINSETTIA LANE • PONTO DR. N.) CARLSBAD BLVD. A A A A A B (POINSETTIA LANE • AVEN. BATIQIJfTOS) CARLSBAD llaJLEVARD (AVENIDA BATIQIJITOS • LA COSTA AVE.) A A A A A B AVENIDA ENCINAS A A E A A A A· (POINSETTIA LANE • IIINDROSE CIRCLE) AVENIDA BATIQIJITOS NOT BUILT NOT BUILT A A A A (CARLSBAD BLVD. • IIINDROSE CIRCLE) Ill NDROSE Cl RCLE NOT BUILT NOT BUILT A A A A (AVENIDA ENCINAS • AVENIDA BATIQUITOS) 94 The time to failure for those street segments that would fail to meet the performance standard if required mitigation improvements were not constructed is shown in the chart below: TIME TO FAILURE WITHOUT MITIGATION ROAD SEGMENT 1989 1990 1995 2000 BUILOOUT Avenida Encinas ----------* (Poinsettia Ln. -Windrose Circle) Poinsettia Ln. -----------------* (Avenida Encinas -I-5) Poinsettia Ln. -----------------* (Avenida Encinas -Carlsbad Blvd) By following the mitigation measures proposed in Part III of this section, the performance standards for Circulation Facilities will continue to be met for each year of the phased development plan through Zone 9 buildout in 1991 and through City buildout in 2013. III. MITIGATION The proposed mitigation is divided into the categories established under the phasing portion of this section. The mitigation as presented below will ensure that the adopted performance standard will be maintained through buildout of Zone 9. It should be understood that all cost estimates presented in this plan are preliminary in nature and will need further refinement as the actual scope of work, utility needs and right-of-way dedications are determined. A. SPECIAL CONDITIONS FOR ZONE 9 1. An on-going monitoring program shall be established to evaluate the aspects of improvements, development, and demand on circulation facilities. The required timing of improvements is based upon the projected demand of development in the zone and the surrounding region. · This timing may be modified without amendment to this plan, however, any deletions or additions to the improvements will require amending this local plan. 95 A. B. 2. Prior to the recordation of any final map, issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first in Zone 9, a comprehensive financing program guaranteeing the construction of the following circulation facilities must be approved: Improvements Needed Now None Improvements Needed by 1989 1. WINDROSE CIRCLE -Complete the construction of the entire length of Windrose Circle to secondary arterial standards including the installation of a traffic signal at Windrose Circle and Avenida Encinas. Estimated Cost Completion Date -$1,220,000 -1989 2. AVENIDA BATIQUITOS -Construct Avenida Batiquitos between Carlsbad Boulevard and Windrose circle to secondary arterial standard to include: a) Construction of a bridge over AT&SF Railroad b) Intersection improvements including installation of traffic signals at the following intersections: 1. Shearwater Road at Avenida Batiquitos 2. Carlsbad Boulevard at Avenida Batiquitos 3. Windrose Circle at Avenida Batiquitos Estimated Cost -$4,506,400 Completion Date -1990 96 c. D. E. Improvements Needed by 1993 1. POINSETTIA LANE I-5 OVERPASS Widen overpass to provide two through lanes in each direction, dual left turn lanes to the on-ramps and bike lanes. Estimated Cost -$5,000,000 Completion Date -1993 2. INTERIM IMPROVEMENTS -Poinsettia Lane at I- 5 off ramps. Install temporary traffic signals. Estimated Cost -$120,000 Completion Date -1993 Improvements Needed by 1995 1. POINSETTIA LANE -CARLSBAD BOULEVARD TO AVENIDA ENCINAS -complete the construction of Poinsettia Lane to ultimate major arterial standards to include: a) Bridge over AT&SF Railroad b) Landscaped median c) Ultimate intersection improvements to Poinsettia Lane and Carlsbad Blvd. Estimated Cost -$1,500,000 Completion Date -1995 Improvements Needed by 2000 1. POINSETTIA LANE/CARLSBAD BLVD. INTERSECTION -provide dual left turn lanes, southbound to eastbound within existing curbs. Estimated Cost -$15,000 Completion Date -2000 97 IV. ISSUES POINSETTIA LANE -I-5 OVERPASS WIDENING The I-5/Poinsettia Lane overpass is assumed to be widened after 1991. The City's schedule of I-5 bridge improvements shows the start of construction of the overpass widening in 1991. However, if this schedule is optimistic, then a level of service determination should be made at the interchange ramps to determine how much more additional development would be allowed to go forward before the interchange improvements are completed. Poinsettia Lane between I-5 and Avenida Encinas should be reconstructed in conj unction with the overpass widening to provide extra lanes for the interchange ramps. The eastbound lanes are recommended to include two through lanes and a "trap" lane to the I-5 southbound ramp. The westbound lanes are recommended to include two through lanes from the overpass and a third west bound lane to accommodate a "free" right turn from the I-5 southbound off-ramp. FINANCING Financing for circulation facilities will be provided in a number of ways. Options ranging from City financing from existing Capital Improvement funds to direct developer financing are available. Exhibit 37 on page 99 shows a facility financing matrix for this facility. This matrix summarizes the individual facility to be financed, its estimated cost and timing of construction and the funding options. 98 EXHIBIT 37 ZONE 9 • CIRCULATION MATRIX ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... FUNDING OPTIONS I I FACILITY I ESTIMATED COST ····································································I AMOUNT TIMING jFIRST SECOND THIRD I REFERENCE NOTES I ---------====================a=••=============::==::============-----------======•===========:;:----=======:zs===;:=================•=======================:::==::==== I I jCIRCULATION FACILITIES I ·······························································································································································I jlNITIAL IMPROVEMENTS I jAvenida Encinas I jllindrose Circle I I 1989 IMPROVEMENTS I flllndrose Circle I fAvenlda Batiquitos I fAvenida Encinas/Poinsettia Lane I I 1993 IMPROVEMENTS I !Poinsettia Lane/1 ·5 I f Poinsettia Lane/1 ·5 I f 1995 IMPROVEMENTS I !Poinsettia Lane/Carlsbad Blvd. jTo Avenida Encinas I I I I I I I I I 14 Lanes I s 543,300 1988 !Developer jAcquistlon District I I I I I I 14 Lanes Southwest I s 947,700 1988 !Developer IAcquistion District I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 14 Lanes • 1/esterly I S1 ,222,000 1989 !Developer fAcqulsltion District! I I I I I 14 Lanes I S4,506,400 1989 !Developer !Acquisition District! I I I I I fDual Lefts 11/B·S/B I s 4,000 1989 fDeveloper !Acquisition District I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I pnstall T"""°rary Signalsf S 120,000 1993 !Developer !Acquisition Distrlctf I I I I I llliden Overpass I S5,000,000 1993 fDeveloper !Acquisition District! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I jAT&SF overpass I S1,500,000 1993 !Developer !Acquisition District I I I I I I 12000 IMPROVEMENTS I I I I I I I I I I I f Poinsettia Lane/Carlsbad Blvd. I I I I I I Intersection (Dual Left Turn I S 15,000 2000 !Developer !Acquisition District! f······························································································································································ EXHIBIT 37 99 LEGEND ~ _,. r 5-MINUTE .RESPONSE TIME, ~ STATION 2 0 5-MINUTE RESPONSE TIME, STATION 4 , FIRE-RESPONSE TIME LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE N0.9 . ~~,c@,(!JI CONSUL~~~,!~""'"'"°"'"' u,-cMO,•.:oua T • fllD •-. -~"'"'"-·••oct:ut...:. .;.A&\.i&&O c:~1.,•0llN• .,,... IUl'WtTtl'IG •MUMC. .. ,,..., ••• NORTH 23 - EXHIBIT 38 10 .-.onsc:11• .-..-----==-· UNmCIO.CA .... .. ........ 100 AUSflN HANSEN f£HLA1.~N -GRQU?- FI:RE I. II. III. PERFORMANCE STANDARD No more than 1,500 dwelling units outside of a five minute response time. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS A. B. c. Inventory Zone 9 is within the five minute response time of Station 4 which is located at 6885 Batiguitos Road near the intersection with Buttercup Road. The southern portion-of Zone 9 is also within the five minute response time of Station 2 which is located at 1906 Arenal Road. These Stations are shown on Exhibit 38, page 100. Phasing Because all existing plus future development in Zone 9 is within the five minute response time of Fire stations Nos. 4 and 2, Zone 9 will conform to the fire performance standards to buildout. Therefore, it was unnecessary to do a phasing analysis for fire services in Zone 9. Adequacy Findings During the preparation of the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, it was determined that Zone 9 presently meets the fire performance standard and will continue to conform to this standard to buildout of the city. MITIGATION A. Special Conditions for Zone 9 B. No special conditions are necessary at this time. Financing All fire facilities are in place for Zone 9 and the required performance standard has been met, therefore, no special funding mechanisms are required. 101 OPEN SPACE I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD II. Fifteen percent of the total land area in the zone exclusive of environmentally constrained non- developable land must be set aside for permanent open space and must be available concurrent with development. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS According to the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, Zone 9 is identified as already in compliance with the adopted performance standard. Therefore, no further analysis is required pertaining to open space. 102 I I "'--◄' 1 ~~' ~ ~ ," ,, .~ 0'~ \c, '·· I ~~ ... _ ii: {=::: l; ll:'.: 1 3 1'%t%%l~ef'~ ·-.v -~~t~ .___ \ --~•~ire• ' EXHIBIT 39 <'}~ ,;.~-..., 01 ~~~ LEGEND e EXISTING ELEMENTARY ■ EXISTING JUNIOR HIGH A. EXISTING HIGH SCHOOL SCHOOLS .. -~-:-.. -.. ' ' , ... ~ ...... 0 FUTURE ELEMENTARY 0 FUTURE JUNIOR HIGH ~ FUTURE HIGH SCHOOL LOCAL FACIUTIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -ZONE 9 1 103 ~ I AUSTIN HANSEN FEHLMAN -GROUP• SCHOOLS I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD School capacity to meet the projected enrollment within the zone as determined by the appropriate school district must be provided prior to projected occupancy. II. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS A. Inventory Existing and future school facilities are shown on Exhibit 39, page 103. Zone 9 is located entirely within the Carlsbad Unified School District. The following table describes schools which serve Zone 9 and their capacities. student School {Grades) Facilities Capacity Jefferson Elementary (K-3) 3743 Jefferson street Pine Elementary (4-6) 3333 Harding Street Valley Jr. High (7-8) 1645 Magnolia Avenue Carlsbad High School (9-12) La Palma contin. HS (9-12) 800 Chestnut Avenue 13 Permanent Classrooms 390 6 temporary 180 12 Permanent Classrooms 360 2 temporary 60 28 Permanent Classrooms 822 2 special ed. classrooms 20 38 Permanent Classrooms 1,140 2 special ed. classrooms 20 10 overage re-locatables 300 7 trailers -temporary 210 4 re-locatable classrooms 60 2 trailers TOTAL 3,562 Student capacity in permanent classroom facilities in these schools is 2712. Student capacity in leased or rented non-permanent/temporary facilities including 10 re-locatable at Carlsbad High School is 850. All of the District's facilities are approaching or currently operating at capacity. In addition to the Carlsbad Unified School District, City of Carlsbad residents are provided educational services by the San Marcos unified School District, Encinitas Union Elementary District, and San Dieguito Union High School District. The Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan identifies additional general locations 104 Year 1988 1989 1990 B. for future elementary, middle and high school sites throughout the city. These locations were developed in the School Location Master Plan of 1982 and 1983 and are still in use for general planning purposes. (See figures 16, 17, 47 and 48 of the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan of September 2 3, 1986.) Carlsbad Unified School District is in the process of computerizing and updating the School Master Plan to bring it into alignment with the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan -Management Zones, Planned Land Use, Phasing, and other significant factors. Phasing As of January 1, 1989, Zone 9 had 459 dwelling units. There is a potential for Zone 9 to have a buildout total of 910 dwelling units by 1990. However, this analysis will not include the 384 mobile home units, as it is assumed that the adult only park does not generate students or demand for additional facilities. The student dorms and hotel suites within the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Master Plan are also not considered student generating uses. At buildout a total of 526 dwelling units will generate 180 students. The Carlsbad Unified School District uses a student generation figure of . 27 students per multi-family detached unit and . 63 students per single family unit. The following table summarizes student generation from Zone 9 by year. Student Generation* Multi Total Single Family Total Family Students Gener-Students Dwelling Generation Multi-Dwelling ation Single-Total Units 0 256 165 421 Factor Family Units Factor Family student .27 0 75 .63 47 47 .27 69 30 .63 19 88 .27 45 0 .63 0 45 114 105 66 180 * Excludes adults only mobile home park. The map at the beginning of this section illustrates that generalized location of existing and proposed schools have not been established. This locational uncertainty is related to a number of factors, including legislation governing financing of school facilites and the timing of dedication of the Alga Road site. Major improvements are scheduled for both Valley Junior High School and Carlsbad High School. 105 Construction of 526 dwelling units could generate $1,775,250 at $1.50/square foot in fees on a one-time basis. At $.25 per square foot of commercial/industrial development, the total of 1,282,895 square feet within Zone 9 will generate an additional $320,723.75 on a one- time basis. c. Adequacy Findings Currently only 7 5 student producing residential uni ts exist in Zone 9, therefore, school facilities are adequate to serve the existing demand. However, Zone 9 will generate 180 students through buildout of the zone. New schools and or classrooms will have to be provided by the School District to accommodate this future demand. The timing and locations of future school facilities will be identified through the revision to the School Location Plan. III. MITIGATION A. B. Special Conditions for Zone 9 Prior to the recordation of any residential final map, issuance of a building or grading permit whichever occurs first, in Zone 9, an agreement shall be entered into between Carlsbad Unified School District and the affected property owner(s) that shall provide for the following: 1. The deeding of an acceptable school site Carlsbad unified School District if determined by the District a school within is warranted. to the it is Zone 9 2. A financing plan approved by the city and Carlsbad unified School District guaranteeing the construction of necessary elementary school facilities in Zone 9 pursuant to condition #1. If any reimbursements and/or school fee credits are to be given, the school agreement/financing plan shall provide a mechanism to do so. Financing · Previously, public schools facilities financing has been possible through the use of developer fees imposed under Policy 17 of the City of Carlsbad. In September, 1986, the State signed into law new schools facilities legislation which changed not only the procedure for collecting developer fees but also established a cap of $1. 50 per square foot of residential construction and $. 25 per square foot of 106 commercial/industrial development. On January 2, 1987, Carlsbad Unified School District, at a regularly scheduled meeting following a public hearing, established its fees at the cap. This immediately resulted in a 53% reduction in developer fees collected but also made it impossible for the District to fund school facilities through developer fees. Possible options for financing facilities in Zone 9 include: 1. Developer Fees -Established at $1.50 per square foot of residential "Covered or enclosed" space or $.25 per square foot of commercial/industrial development. Nexus must be shown for commercial/industrial fees. Legislation is presently being developed which may again drastically change developer fees. Developer fees are used for rental/lease, lease purchase or re-locatable, and trailers, as well as reconstruction of facilities. 2. State Allocation Board -Funding may be applied to construction of new facilities or reconstruction of facilities 30 years or more in age, providing the District's projects and overcrowding qualify for consideration. Final determination is made by the State Allocation Board, General Service Department, in Sacramento. Only limited amounts of funding are available. Time lag is 2 to 3 years on elementary projects and 3 to 5 years for secondary school projects. Reconstruction projects fund only 25% of the cost of the project, and the district must provide the remainder. · 3. General Obligation Bonds -Requires a two-thirds vote. 4. Mello-Roos Election/Bonds A Mello-Roos Election requires a two-thirds vote of approval. 5. Developer Contributions Developer contributions in which land or facilities are provided in mitigation could be a possibility for construction of certain neighborhood school facilities. Office of the State Architect approval would be necessary for projects involving classrooms. 107 SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD . Trunk line appropriate development. capacity to meet demand as determined by the sewer district must be provided concurrent with II. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS Sewer service in the City of Carlsbad is provided by three independent agencies: the City of Carlsbad Sewer Service District, San Marcos county Water District (SMCWD), and the Leucadia County Water District (LCWD). The three sewer district boundaries are shown on Exhibit 40, page 109. Zone 9 is located within the City of Carlsbad Sewer District and the Leucadia County Water District. However, since the Leucadia County Water District does not serve any development area within Zone 9, this plan will limit its analysis to the Carlsbad Sewer Service District. A. Inventory 1. Existing Facilities Existing and proposed trunk 1 ines, force mains and pump stations within Zone 9 are shown on Exhibit 41, on page 111. The existing facilities are as follows: No. Facility 1. 27-inch trunk line 2. 21-inch trunk 3. 18-inch trunk 4. Two 24-inch & one 1·4-inch Force Mains 5. Pump Station 6. Private Pump Station 7. Private Force Main Location East side of A.T. & S.F.R.R. right-of-way Avenida Encinas and Poinsettia Lane Carlsbad Blvd. Carlsbad Blvd. and Ponto Drive. Carlsbad Blvd State Beach State Beach 108 Sewer District Carlsbad Carlsbad LCWD LCWD LCWD Carlsbad Carlsbad CARLSBAD SEWER SERVICE DISTRICT ' I! 1 . ' ',~lGA -...... 19 EXHIBIT 40 SAN MARCOS COUNT' WATER DISTRICT I I I LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRlCT 109 SEWER DISTRICTS ~ ----•• 1 LOCAL FACILITlES MANAGEMENT PLAN -ZONE 9 I AUSTIN HANSEN F : M LM AN -GROUP- The existing sewer facilities serving Zone 9 outside the boundaries of Zone 9 are shown on Exhibit 42 on page 112 and are as follows: Sewer No. Facility Location District 8. 27-inch trunk line East side of A.T. & Carlsbad (NB-8) S.F.R.R. right of way 9. 39-inch trunk same as above * (NB-9) 10. 48-inch trunk East of Avenida Encinas * (NB-10) * owned jointly by the City of Carlsbad, 40%, the Leucadia County Water District, 40.3 % and the Encinitas Sanitary District, 19.7%. 2. NB= North Batiquitos Interceptor PROPOSED BUILDOUT FACILITIES The Carlsbad Sewage Master Plan entitled "City of Carlsbad Master Plan of Sewerage", prepared by Wilson Engineering, December 1987, describes and shows the North Batiquitos Interceptor System. The existing 4 8" , 3 9" , 2 7" and 21" sewers listed above are the final reaches of the North Batiquitos Interceptor System serving the North Batiquitos Drainage basin. The three force mains in Carlsbad Boulevard convey sewerage from the Leucadia County Water District to the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility. a. Buildout Assumptions In order to determine the adequacy of the City's sewer conveyance system, sewer flows were projected by the master plan, for each of the sewer drainage basins within the city. The individual basins were then used as contributions to the conveyance system to analyze the sewer trunk system for deficiencies and future needs. The master plan provides a summary of the existing, approved and future flows and ·equivalent dwelling units for the individual zones. Zone 9, at buildout, is projected to generate a flow of approximately 0.24 million gallons per day. 110 LEGEND SYMBOL .............. -------•••••••••• ·------·-·- DESCRIPTION EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS FOR AREA "C.1' PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS FOR AREA 'C.2' PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS FOR AREA 'C.3' SEWER DIST. BOUNDARY CD EXISTING INVENTORY LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN-ZONE NO.9 SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM 100 400 ~o 111 EXHIBIT 41 AREA AREA "D .. "E'' f!_~.._~(!Y CONSULT~~~ ..... ..,,.., •--••-u ......... -........... , ......... 11. .......... ._ , ... "....... ..._., ....... .. EXHIBIT 42 ------NCINA WATER POLLUTION ----..:: .: -- NTROL FACUTY ----.:: ----I i;csr ~-:r :E"----- :;,-----------~~ I NB8 NB? J J_ . Bali uitos ___ , __ ,_,m,--, , ,-1a· (LCWD>; f-2 ,,,________ 0 \, , Stub to serve Traier Park o. ' t-21" (LCWD) i-Two 24 • FM (LCWD) •'==-===~~_::.¼"F-...:C~fi-4°=:=;,-0:;_=_-__ -=--=-=-==== ___ -.::-.::=t]==-=~=----=--=--=-=j--I C - 6"" Private Force Mail OCEAN OUTFALL __ _, LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -ZONE N0.9 SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM PACIFIC OCEAN LEGEND Existing Major Interceptor --------Existing Force Main Existing Sewer Trunk Lire ([I] Direction of Gravity Flow Sewer Drainage Basin ,--....--Drainage Basin Boundary □ Existing Private Punp Station for State Beach ---Zone Boundary ~ 0 Facility: Designation Diameter NB7 21· NBS 21· NB9 39• NB10 48" vc 16 54• VC15 42" 112 * b. The following table shows the buildout affect on these lines from all contributing areas to the interceptor system: Peak Flow Size 21" 27" 39 11 48 II Reach Capacity (mgdl at buildout {mgd) NB7 NBS NB9 NBl0 4.18 7.30 19.47 25.40 3.49 4.38 17.24 * 21.14 * Includes flow from Leucadia County water District and Encinitas Sanitary District. Projected Buildout Demand The projected ultimate average sewer flows within Zone 9 at buildout are as follows: Land Area Use A RM B C C.1, C.2 RMH c. 3 p RC RM N TS/C TOTALS Total Buildout (Ac.) 51.9 18.5 32.7 40.3 12.8 17.6 6.4 22.6 202.8 (1) Equivalent Dwelling Units No. of E.D.U. (1) 332 86 402 245 91 129 23 1,567 Total Sewage/Day (2) 0.073 0.019 0.088 0.054 0.020 0.028 0.005 0.057 0.344 (2) Million Gallons Per Day calculated at 220 GPD per E.D.U 113 B. PHASING c. The approach to phasing taken by this Local Facility Management Plan is based on ensuring that needed facilities are in place prior to or commensurate with development. Phasing boundaries are shown on Exhibit 41 on page 111 and correlate with the natural drainage basins of the proposed facilities within the Zone. There are five separate phases and thresholds for the major sewer facilities within each phase can be easily established, thereby determining the appropriate mitigation measures. The phasing boundaries allow for independent review and development for the sewer facilities within each boundary. However, the districts may require improvements outside of the phase boundaries if deemed necessary to serve development. ADEQUACY FINDINGS Although the table entitled, "Equivalent Dwelling Units and Wastewater Flow Projections By Zone", included in Appendix "A" of the Sewer Master Plan for Sewer Zone 9 indicates a total future flow of 0.24 MGD, the total flow at buildout as shown on page 113, "Projected Buildout Demand", is calculated to be 0.34 MGD. Adding 0.10 MGD to the average flows at buildout shown in the Sewer Master Plan, the interceptor system downstream of Zone 9 will continue to conform to the adopted performance standard through buildout of Zone 9. Although the down stream trunk main capacity is adequate for Zone 9 development, Areas C.1, c. 2 and C. 3 will require additional facilities to serve future development within Zone 9. (see Mitigation) D. Reclaimed water Reclaimed water is generally used to irrigate open space areas. Potential areas of open spaces within Zone 9 that could possibly be irrigated with reclaimed water are common landscape areas. The City of Carlsbad is currently preparing a reclaimed water master plan. When adopted, future development in Zone 9 must conform to the guidelines identified in the master plan. 114 III. MITIGATION 1. Area "A" No special conditions are required for Area "A". 2. Area "B" 3. No special conditions are required for Area "B". Area "C.111 No special conditions are required for Area 11c.111 • 4. Area 11 c.2 11 Prior to the recordation of any final map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first in Area "C. 2 11 , a financial mechanism guaranteeing the construction of the following sewer facilities must be approved: a. Construction of the required sewage collection system to serve Area "C.211 development; and b. Construction of a pump station and force main to convey sewage to the gravity main in Windrose Circle. c. Relocate three existing force mains carrying sewage from the Leucadia County Water District's Batiquitos pump station to the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility. The relocations are required for the construction of an at-grade intersection between Avenida Batiquitos and Carlsbad Boulevard. d. Additionally, prior to the recordation of any final map, or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever comes first in Area 11 c. 2 11 , a financial mechanism must be approved that will guarantee the financing of yearly operational and maintenance costs for the sewage pump station in perpetuity. 5. Area "C.311 Prior to the recordation of any final map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first in Area "C. 3 11 , a financial mechanism guaranteeing the construction of the following sewer facilities must be approved: a. Construction of the required sewage collection system to serve Area "C.3" development; and 115 IV. FINANCING b. Construction of a 10-inch gravity main across the Railroad right-of-way to convey sewage to the pump station in Area "C.2" c. Construction of a pump station and force main to convey sewage to the gravity main in Windrose Circle. d. Relocate three existing force mains carrying sewage from the Leucadia County Water District's Batiquitos pump station to the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility. The relocations are required for construction of an at-grade intersection between Avenida Batiquitos and Carlsbad Boulevard. e. Additionally, prior to the recordation of any final map, or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever comes first in Area "C. 3", a financial mechanism must be approved that will guarantee the financing of yearly operational and maintenance costs for the sewage pump station in perpetuity. Area "C.2" -Developers of this area will be required to finance the necessary sewer improvements estimated to cost $1,242,185. Area "C.3" -Developers of this area will be required to finance the necessary sewer improvements estimated to cost $1,294,585. Developers of this area will be required to provide financing for operation and maintenance of the sewage pump station in perpetuity. A financing matrix for sewer facilities is included as Exhibit 43, page 117. 116 FACILITY AMOUNT EXHIBIT 43 ZONE 9 • SE\IER FACILITIES FINANCING MATRIX AS OF 1/1/89 ESTIMATED COST I FUNDING OPTIONS I .... ··············································································I TIMING I FIRST I SECOND I THIRD I REFERENCE NOTES I 1-=---=-=----------------:-zaa•••=--=--=-==----==---===-=-----=--------------=----------m===-----=-:::=:---••=••===--=-=-=----=--------====------==--===m= j I SEIIER FACILITIES I l······························································································································································I AREA "C.2" 1. 8" SEIIER MAIN 2. PUMP STATION 3. 6" FORCE MAIN 4. 14• FORCE MAIN 5. 24" FORCE MAIN TOTAL AREA C.3• 1. 10" sewer Main 2. PUMP STATION 3. 6" FORCE MAIN 4. 14" FORCE MAIN 5. 24" FORCE MAIN TOTAL 1,490 LF 1 EA 323 LF 2,600 LF 4,620 LF 1,990 LF 1 EA 323 LF I 2,600 LF I 4,620 LF I I I I I TOTAL SEIIER COSTS I I I I I s96,85o I I S250,000 I I S14,535 I I s234,ooo I S646,8oo I ············· I s1,242,1a5 I I I I s149,2so I s250,ooo I S14,535 I S234,ooo I S646,aoo I ············· I S1 ,294,585 I I =--------===-1 s1 ,391,435 l I Concurrent Iii th Development II " Concurrent Iii th Development • Developer Developer n II I LF = Lineal I Feet I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EXHIBIT 43 117 WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM I. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Line capacity to meet demand as determined by the appropriate water district must be provided concurrent with development. A minimum 10 day average storage capacity must be provided prior to any development. II. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS Water distribution services in the city of Carlsbad are provided by three independent agencies, Costa Real Municipal Water District (CRMWD), San Marcos County Water District (SMCWD), and the Olivenhain Municipal Water District (OMWD). Zone 9 is located entirely within the Costa Real Municipal Water District service area (See Exhibit 44 on page 119). A. Inventory 1. Existing Facilities: The existing major water facilities for the CRMWD that are in place within zone 9 are shown on Exhibit 45 on page 120 and are as follows: No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Facility 1211 main 1011 main 8 11 main Private 611 main (1) 1011 main 8 11 main 1611 main Location Poinsettia Lane, from Avenida Encinas to S'ly off-ramp of I-5. Avenida Encinas From Carlsbad Blvd. across Ponto Drive, across R.R. to Windrose Circle. State Beach (Extends to the north of Zone 9) Eastside of Carlsbad Blvd. from Poinsettia Lane s' ly to Exist. 8" W.L. Looped through Navigator Circle The S.E. 1/2 (180°) of Windrose Circle and Navigator circle 118 EXHIBIT 44 SAN MARCOS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT _··,· f:..-- 1 /;"~•1·,•--- 1 ({ : 119 COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Cl[] rm LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -ZONE 9 ~ ~@.f!!I CONSUL ;~~~~L CAMINO UAL. RANCHO LA com PLANNINli • •ROC£SSING CAALSIAO, CALIFOAl'IIA 91001 SVAVEYING •HON( 619/9-C .. 1010 I AUSTIN HANSEN FEHLMAN -GROUP- AL I LEGEND SYMBOL ------- IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL DESCRIPTION EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS FOR AREA 'C.1' PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS FOR AREA 'C.2' PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS FOR AREA 'C.3' WATER DIST. BOUNDARY l■l ■l ■l ■I ZONE 9 BOUNDARY ·---..f-;. ::.If'!!!AJ!L _ -=~';!~ !... .! L.!,_D.:.... -- 901/TII CAIIL9!'!!€_:-=-,;:~-"""-=----=- LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN-ZONE NO. 9 WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AREA 'C.1" AREA "C.2' AREA 'C.3'' AREA ADIi EXHIBIT 45 100 400 ------==" 0-.:r-.:.r 120 ~ : .. 'l!!.f!Y CONSULT~~!~"_, .. "" u..-u ,_,, IIL•--•f'C(Lt'1,1._. l4ALMMllAlttCM-•Nlllt waw••,-. """".,......,,.,. 2. 8. 8 11 & 1011 Mains 9. 8" "Hi Line" Main In Area B Poinsettia Village Shopping Center Windrose Circle to East -West Exist. 8 11 W.L. (1) The private 6-inch main provides water service to the South Carlsbad State Beach camping sites, irrigation lines, and the maintenance building located within the boundaries of Zone 9. However, the main originates north of Zone 9 and water consumption for the State Beach is not included in the Zone 9 analysis for total water demand. Water demand and service impacts related to the South Carlsbad State Beach campground were analyzed in the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 22. Source: Costa Real Municipal Water District, Master Plan for Public Water System, Woodside- Kubota, February, 1985. Costa Real Municipal Water District, Capital Improvement Plan, adopted July 15, 1987. Proposed Buildout Facilities The Costa Real Municipal Water District anticipates that the following facilities will be required to service water demand from future development: Facility 1. 16" main 2. 1011 main 3. 1211 main 4. 12" main 5. 16" main 121 Location The W'ly portion of Windrose Circle to Avenida Batiquitos Windrose Circle from Avenida Batiquitos to Avenida Encinas Avenida Batiqui tos, from Windrose Circle to Carlsbad Blvd. Carlsbad Blvd., from Avenida Batiquitos to La Costa Ave. including P.R. Meter Sta. (Water district intertie) Water easement, from Navigator Circle to I-5 B. c. No. Facility 6. 16" Main See CRMWD C.I.P. 7. 12" main 8. 1211 main 9. 12" main Location Across I-5 right-of-way Ponto Drive from Avenida Batiquitos to Existing 8" main Poinsettia Lane, E'ly off-ramp to off-ramp Poinsettia Lane, Avenida Encinas Carlsbad Blvd. from W'ly from to Source: Costa Real Municipal Water District, Master Plan for Public Water System, Woodside- Kubota, February, 1985. Phasing Costa Real Municipal Water District, Capital Improvement Plan, adopted July 15, 1987. The approach to phasing taken by this Local Facilities Management Plan is based on ensuring that needed facilities are· in place prior to or commensurate with development. Phasing boundaries are shown on Exhibit 45 on page 120 and correlate with property boundaries or logical boundaries for the proposed water facilities within the Zone. There are three separate phases which are labeled Areas "C.l", "C.2", and "C.3". Thresholds for the major water facilities within each phase can be easily established thereby determining the appropriate mitigation measures. The phasing boundaries allow for independent review and development for water facilities within each boundary. However, the water district will require installation of item no. 4 (12" intertie -P.R. Meter Sta.) as a condition of Phase II of B.L.E.P. (Area C.2). Adequacy Analysis 1. Technical Assumptions The following assumptions were used to determine water demand and are adapted from the Costa Real Municipal Water System, February 1985: 122 2. 3. Land Use Unit Demand Residential 350 GPD per D.U. at 7 D.U. per Acre Commercial 3,000 GPD per Acre Office/Educational 2,190 GPD per Acre Hotel Conference Center 3,500 GPD per Acre Open Spaces ------- Fire flow requirements per City of Carlsbad Marshall are as follows: Fire Land Use Residential Commercial current Water Demand Fire Flow (GPM) 1,500 2,500 Areas A and B shown on Exhibit 45 on page 120 are the only subareas within Zone 9 boundaries presently developed. The commercial center in Area B is presently under construction and will be considered as existing for computing the present water demand for Zone 9. The following chart illustrates the current water demand for existing development within Zone 9: Units Ave. Unit Land Acres or Demand Area Use o.u. GPO A RM 384 D.U. 350 B C 20 Acres 3,000 Total Note: GPO= Gallons Per Day Projected Buildout Demand The estimated buildout water demand for depicted on the fallowing chart "Zone 9 Water Demand": 123 Total Ave. Demand GPO 134,400 60.000 194,400 GPO Zone 9 is -Buildout chart Zone 9 Buildout Water Demand Area (1) Land Use Project B/0 {1) A B C.1 RM C Office/Ed c-Residential B-Residential 384 20 D.U. Acres 17.7 Acres 77 D.U. 52 D.U. Total Area c.1 Demand Office/Educational Residential AREA C.2 Office/Ed E-Residential F-Residential G-Residential H-Residential I-Recreational /Comm'l 22.6 144 54 170 28 Acres D.U. D.U. D.U. D.U. 12.8 Acres Total Area C.2 Demand Office/Educational Residential Recreational/Commercial AREA C.3 M & J commercial K & L Hotel and Conference Center Total Area C.3 Demand Commercial 11.1 Acres 17.9 Acres Hotel and Conference Center Total Zone 9 Demand Area "A" Area "B" Areas c.1, C.2 and C.3 124 Average Unit Demand. GPD {1) 350 3,000 2,190 450 225 Total 2,190 225 350 225 400 2,000 Total 3,000 3,500 Total Total Or Or Projected Ave. Water Demand. GPD 134,400 60,000 38,763 34,650 11,700 38,763 46.350 85,113 49,494 32,400 18,900 38,250 11,200 25,600 49,494 100,750 25.600 175,844 33,300 62,650 33,300 62.650 95,950 134,400 GP 60,000 GP 356,907 GP 551,307 GPD 0.551 MGPD 1.8 CFS The Costa Real Municipal Water District service to Zone 9 conforms with the adopted performance standard. Since the water district will condition development to install adequate domestic water and fire flow needs as a condition to future development, conformance with the adopted performance standards will be maintained to the ultimate buildout of Zone 9. D. Average Ten-Day storage Capacity Storage capacity within the system is currently 10. 9 days. The District's system design assures that a minimum of ten days storage supply will be available. Projections to 1993 indicate that growth demands on existing facilities will decrease storage to 10.0 days. The chart below shows the storage capacity for the district. CHART STORAGE CAPACITY storage Capacity Average Daily Demand Days of Storage Current -1988 168.0 MG 13.1 MG 10.9 E. Potential for Reclaiming Water Projected -1993 253.5 MG 18.0 MG 10.0 There are several acres of open space located within Management Zone 24. CRMWD has expressed an interest, if feasible, to irrigate any open space areas within their district with reclaimed water. III. MITIGATION A. All development within Zone 9 shall pay the appropriate connection fee as required by the Costa Real Municipal water District. B. Prior to the recordation of a final map, or issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first in Area "C.211 , a financing mechanism guaranteeing the construction of the following water facilities shall be approved: 125 Facility Facility Facility Length Number Location (ft.) 1 & 5 Windrose Circle 1611 Water Main 1,500 3 & 4 Avenida Batiquitos 1211 Water Main 6,690 & Carlsbad Blvd. 2 Windrose Circle 10" Water Main 1,741 4 Carlsbad Blvd. 12" Water Main, 1 each P.R. Meter Sta. 7 Ponto Drive 1211 Water Main 600 8 Shearwater Rd. 1011 Water Main 2,400 & Hotel Access c. Prior to the recordation of a final map, or issuance of a grading permit or building perm.it, whichever occurs first in Area "C.3", a financing mechanism guaranteeing the construction of the following water facilities shall be approved: Facility Facility Facility Length Number Location (ft.) 1 & 5 Windrose Circle 1611 Water Main 1,500 3 & 4 Avenida Batiquitos 1211 Water Main 6,690 & Carlsbad Blvd. 2 Windrose Circle 1011 Water Main 1,741 4 Carlsbad Blvd. 1211 Water Main, 1 each P.R. Meter Sta. 7 Ponto Drive 12" Water Main 600 IV. FINANCING The construction of regional water facilities servicing Zone 9 will be financed by the Costa Real Municipal Water District. Local facilities will be paid for through water connection fees paid by property owners and/or developers within Zone 9 prior to construction. Exhibit 46 on page 127 is a financing matrix describing the individual facilities to be financed, the estimated costs, and the timing of construction. 126 EXHIBIT 46 ZONE 9 • WATER FACILITIES FINANCING MATRIX AS OF 1/1/89 --------------·--··-···--····-----·----·······-------------------------· . ---------·------·--------------·-------------------·-··------·----------·-----------·-- FACILITY AIIOUNT ESTIMATED COST TINING I Fllll>IIG OPTIONS I .•..•..•......•...•. ·•·········• •••••••.................................... ---.. ·· I I FIRST I SECOND I THIRD I REFERENCE NOTES I 1==----•-:sm=zs===•••a==========•--•=••a:====---=m=::::--====-••-•m======•----========zzz=::c:=========••••••••==========•=•••••-==•=•==1 I WATER FACILITIES I I·············································· -······ ···•· ·••••· •········•·· ··· ·• ·· · ·· ····· · ·•·· ····· · ····· · · ••• • •· · · ···· ·· ·· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·· · ··· ·· ··· ·· ··· ·· · · I I I I 1. I 2. I 3. I 4. I I I I 1. 2. 3. 4, AREA •c.2• 1611 WATER MAIN 12" I/ATER MAIN 10" WATER MAUI 12• TIICJ-IIAY WATER METER & P.R. STA. TOTAL AREA C.311 1611 WATER MAIN 12• WATER MAIN 10• WATER MAIN 1211 TIIO·WA Y IIATER METER & P.R. STA. TOTAL 1,500 L.F. 7,29D L.F. 1,741 L.F. 1 EA. 1,500 L.F. 7,Z9D L.F. 4,144 L.f. 1 EA. I LF • Lineal I Feet s75,ooa I concurrent Developer I S34Z,63o I llith II I S57,453 I Developnent . I S75,000 I II II I ········•·•·· I I I I S550,083 I I I I I I I I I I S75,000 I concurrent Developer I $342,630 I With II I S136,653 I Developnent II I S75,DOO I II I ·············I I I I 5629,283 I I I I ......... --------------... ---...... -.. -... ---------........ ---------... ----.. -----.... ----.. --.. ----... -----..... -. -....... -----------. -------· -----.... -.... ----------------.. ---.. -. I I I I I I I I EXHIBIT 46 127 XVII. FINANCING The financing section presented in this plan summarizes how all future public facilities will be built and paid for as Zone 9 builds out. The specific financing of public facilities is critical to the overall ability of the developers in this zone to ensure that all facilities will maintain compliance with adopted performance standards as growth occurs. Zone 9 currently conforms ta the adopted performance standard for Fire facilities, therefore, no financing matrix is included for fire services. Open Space also conforms at this time, therefore, no financing matrix is necessary. The school district is currently preparing a facility master plan which will identify specific facilities and address funding needs. The plan has identified those facilites which currently fall below the adopted performance standards as growth occurs. FACILITY FINANCING MATRIX The financing section of this Local Facilities Management Plan completes the analysis by providing financing mechanisms available to fund these public facilities. A facility financing matrix is presented on Exhibit 47, beginning on Page 129. 128 FACILITY AMOUNT ZONE 9 • CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITY FINANCING ESTIMATED COST AS OF 1/1/89 TIMING FUNDING OPTIONS FIRST SECONO THIRD REFERENCE NOTES •-•-••■aaaaa■■•-•••••••••••=■s aaaaasa■•=•== =•••••••==•== :a:aaaaaaaa •••••••=•:a====:a•==••==========a =======•••••••• :aa:a:aa::ra:aa CITY .ADMINISTRATION 1. LAS PALMAS PURCHASE 22,627 SF s2,soo,000 1987·97 CITY·PPF PFF • PUBLIC 2. SAFETY CENTER PHASE 11 6Z,OOO SF S3,710,000 199Z·97 Cl TY•PPF FACILITY S/11 FEE J. NEIi ClTY HALL II/A $23,100,000 1997♦ CITY·PPF •====••••==-- TOTAL CITY ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS ls29,310,ooo ... saa:ams:aa:zasaaaasa:a:asmsaam._aaaa■aa:::::::=====-•-••--•-••===================-=•a•-•••••-••••==••==ssm::a:a:a:aaaaa■ I 1987·92 CIP HAS A BALANCE FORIIARD OF S10,589 FROM CITY HALL REMODEL I ................................................ --......... -----· --................... ----...... --....... -----... --..... -............ -.... ------........... -. EXHIBIT 47 129 EXHIBIT 48 ZONE 9 • LIBRARY FACILITY FINAIICING MATRIX AS OF 1/1/88 FUll)ING OPTIONS ESTIMATED • ••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •••• • AHCXJNT COST TINING !FIRST SECOND THIRD !REFERENCE! NOTES •••••••••••••••••-••-•-ss-■-••-------•■aaa:a:ax•••--••-•••---mz•-=--ss•-==az=••==•=======••••••••••-•• luBRARY FACILITIES 1. LIBRARY RENOOEL (NORTH) IJNIQIOWII $3,948,000 1997+ CITY·PFF PFF • PUBLIC 2. LIBRARY • FOR BUILD 15,331 SF SS,060,000 1997+ CITY·PFF FACILITY OUT POPUU TION FEE 1988· 3. LIBRARY SOUTH CARLSBAD 58,000 SF S18, 112,000 2008 CITY·PFF •=•-•••••••s•s:::i::a TOTAL LIBRARY COSTS S27, 120,000 130 FACILITY AMOUNT ZONE 9 • IIASTEWATER FACILITY FINANCING MATRIX AS OF 1/1/89 ESTIMATED COST TIMING I FUNDING OPTIONS I ····························································· . ····················I I FIRST I SECOND I THIRD I REFERENCE NOTES I ( =--==--:.:==--=-=----==•----=••••••a••===---=--==-=-==-=-=--==-----------=•=---------==--===-------------=-=--•=•=•-=---=-=-===•--=-------==••===-----------==== I I WASTEWATER FACILITIES I I······························································································································································ I I 1. Encina OUtfal"t Upgrade I I S8,800,000 I 1992·1997 I Sewer Fees I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2. Encina outfall Purp #3 I I S325,000 I 1987·88 I Sewer Fees I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3. Encina Phase IV Expansion I I $12,631,000 I 1987·91 I Sewer Fees I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 4. Encina Solids Management I I S10,000,000 I 1987·91 I Sewer Fees I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ----===••a==a I I I I I I I I TOTAL WASTEWATER COSTS S31, 756,000 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EXHIBIT 49 131 ZONE 9 • PARK FACILlrY FINANCING MATRIX AS OF 1/1/88 .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. l,ARK FACILITIES • PARK DISTRICT 3 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1. LAND ACQUJSJT I ON PIL • PARK·IN· ALTA MIRA 10 ACRES St,300,000 1988 CITY•PIL LIEU FEE 10 ACRES SI ,000,000 1988 DEVELOPERS Of ZONE CIP • 9 WITH REIMBURSEMENT CAPITAL (LETTER OF CREDIT) IMPROVEMENTS PUN 5 ACRES s 500,000 1989 DEVELOPERS OF ZONE 20 WITH REIMBURSEMENT ADDITIONAL PARK LANO 4.33 ACRES s 219,500 1997+ CITY • PIL 24.25 ACRES DEDICATED 1989 DEVELOPER OF ZONE 19 WITH REIHBURSEMENT ················--................... SUBTOTAL 53.58 ACRES $3,019,500 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2. IMPROVEMENTS ALTA MIRA ADDITIONAL PARK UNO ZONE 19 ZONE 19 UNIDENTIFIED SOUTHWEST PARK SITE, HACAR 10 CANTON CREDIT 32.00 ACRES S3,680,000 $1,500,000 5.00 ACRES s 575,000 15.00 ACRES Sl,755,000 9.25 ACRES S1,082,ZSO 4.33 ACRES s 379,500 25.00 ACRES S7,000,000 90.58 ACRES 115,971,750 ············-···· TOTAL PARKS COSTS S18,991,250 1990·91 1992•97 1990·91 1990·93 1993 1992·97 1997+ CITY • PFF CITY • PFF DEVELOPER WITH REIMBURSEMENT DEVELOPER WITH RE IMSURSEHENT DEVELOPER WITH REIMBURSEMENT CITY • PFF CITY • Pff PFF • PUBLIC FACILITY FEE .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. CIP BUDGET: 187-188 190•191 1,2-•91 192·•97 192•197 1997+ 1997+ $1,300,000 (AL TA MIRA) S3,680,000 (ALTA MIRA) Sl,500,000 (ALTA MIRA) 14,720,000 (COIMJNITY PARK) S 379,500 (UNIDENTIFIED PARlC SITE) S7,000,000 (MACARIOl S 219,500 (UNIDENTIFIED PARK SITE) BALANCE FORWARD S 215,000 (SW COMMUNITY PARK DESIGN, MACARIO • SW) ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... EXHIBIT 50 · 132 ZONE 9 • DRAINAGE FACILlTY FINANCING MATRIX AS Of 1/1/89 -.... ---.. -................ --. -----------. -------------. --.. --.. -............. -.. --------------------.--• .. --... -.. -. ---..... -·-·--------·------... -----. -.. -----------.... -........... ----· -----......... .. FACILITY AMOJNT ESTIMATED COST I FUNDING OPTIONS ( ···························································-······················ I TIMING I FIRST I SECOND I THIRD I REFERENCE NOTES I l=••••••••===•rm=armm•~=----=========•========-===•••-=•-=-=rmrm==••••==F===S2:aa::::a:===-•••=====s=====maaarmz=:s:::::=•mrm:z::mm•••mmf I DRAINAGE FACILITIES I I······························································································································································ I AREA "C.2" I I I I I ( LF " Lineal I 1. DESILTING BASIN 1 EA. I S42,000 Concurrent/ Developer I I Feet I 2. 24" STCRH DRAIN 405 LF I S32,400 Development . Developer Master I I 3. 3011 STORM DRAIN 114 LF I S11,400 • with Drainage I I 4. 66" STORM DRAIN 8 LF I S1,280 . II Rei rilurs-,it District I I 5. 72" SiCRN CAA.ii 1,963 LF I S353,340 . • I I 6. 78" STORM DRAIN · 1,700 LF I $340,000 .. " . . I I 7. 81• STORM DRAIN 1, 100 LF I S242,000 H " " II I I 8. CLEANClJTS 18 EA. ( S88,200 • " a • I I 9. DESILTING BASIN 1 EA. I $107,000 • • H " I I 10. HEADIIALL 1 EA. I S4,000 . . • I I I I I I TOTAL I S1,221,620 I I I I I I I I I I I AREA "C.311 I I I I I I I I I 1. 2411 STORM DRAIN 405 LF I S32,400 I Concurrent/ I Developer Developer Master I I I 2. 3011 STORM DIAi N 114 LF I s11,4oo 1 Development I " with Drainage I I I 3. 66° STORM DRAIN 8 LF I s1,250 1 • I II lleiatiurs-,it District I I I 4. 72" STORM DRAIN 1,963 LF f s353,34o f II I II • " I I I s. 7811 STORM DIAi N 1,700 LF I s34o,ooo I II I " • " I I I 6. 81" STORM DRAIN 1, 100 LF I S242,000 I • I . I I I 1. CLEANOOTS 18 EA. I S88,200 I • I II • " I I I 8. DESILTING BASIN 1 EA. f S107,000 I N I p n I I I 9. HEADIIALL 1 EA. I S4,ooo I H I . • H I I I I I I I I I TOTAL I s1,179,620 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Note: Reintiursements affeet only drainage facilities I I I I I identified in the current 'orainage Master Plan. I I I I I .... ----.... -.. ---..... -... ---.... -...... ---.. -----.. -.... --........ --------.. ----....... --------...... ---• 40 .. -.. ---... --.. ---..... --.... --... -.. -.. -----..... ---------.... ---.. --.. -....... --.... ---..... -........ -•• -..... -.. -.. EXHIBIT 51 133 jFACILITY I ZONE 9 • CIRCULATION MATRIX AMOUNT ESTIMATED COST FUNDING OPTIONS I ····································································I TIMI NG IF I RST SECOND THIRD f REFERENCE NOTES I =======a=iasa==••••••••=========c■■:i;a••=======••==•s========••=••=======•===::1■•■=a■c==========•===a11■■=a==c===============:::r■■==•••======•• .. •• .. ======•=••=•••===== I I I !CIRCULATION FACILITIES I ·······························································································································································I l!NITIAL IMPROVEMENTS I I I I I I I I I I l I I I I I I IAvenida Encinas 14 Lanes I $ 543,300 I 1988 !Developer IAcquistion District I I I I I I I I I I I I I I lllindrose Circle 14 Lanes Southwest I $ 947,700 I 1988 !Developer IAcquistion District I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11989 IMPROVEMENTS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I lllindrose Circle 14 Lanes • 1/esterly f 11,222,000 I 1989 !Developer !Acquisition District! I I I I I I I I I /Avenfda Batiquitos f4 Lanes I 14,506,400 I 1989 !Developer !Acquisition District( I I I I I I I I I fAvenlda Encinas/Poinsettia Lane Joual Lefts 11/B•S/B I $ 4,000 I 1989 !Developer !Acquisition District! I I I I I I I I I I 1993 IMPROVEMENTS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I !Poinsettia Lane/1·5 pnstall Temporary Signals! $ 120,000 I 1993 !Developer !Acquisition District! I I I I I 1 I I 1 !Poinsettia Lane/1 ·5 llliden Overpass I SS,000,000 1993 !Developer !Acquisition District! I I I I 1 I I I 11995 IMPROVEMENTS I I I I I I I I I I I I I !Poinsettia Lane/Carlsbad Blvd. I I I I I I !To Avenida Encinas IAT&SF overpass I s1,soo,000 1993 !Developer !Acquisition District! I I I I I I I I 12000 IMPROVEMENTS I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I !Poinsettia lane/Carlsbad Blvd. I I !Intersection !Dual Left Turn I S 15,000 I················································································ I I I I 2000 !Developer !Acquisition District I I I ......................... ~ ................................................. ·I EXHIBIT 52 134 FACILITY AM<XJNT ZONE 9 • SE\IER FACILITIES FINANCING MATRIX AS OF 1/1/89 ESTIMATED COST I FUNDING OPTIONS I --• ------------------------• ------------------------------------------------------1 TIMING I FIRST I SECOND I THIRD I REFERENCE NOTES I I :s:z:z:=::::=••=-ss=•=:m:ssaa::a:aza:a::a=•••••••a=s=======z===========•••============•-••••s::-======•z==::::::::za:a::aaa:sac•-•========•==•-=•••••=-=-===••s=== I I SEIIER FACILITIES I -------• ------------------------• -------------------------------------------------------------• --------------------• ------------------• -------------' ---------1 AREA •c.zu 1. 811 SEIIER MAIN 1,490 LF 2. PUMP STATION 1 EA J. 6• FORCE MAIN 323 Lf 4. 14• FORCE MAIN 2,600 LF 5. 24• FORCE MAIN 4,620 LF TOTAL AREA C.311 I 1. 10" Sewer Main 1,990 LF I 2. PUMP STATION 1 EA I J. 6" FORCE MAIN 323 LF I 4. 14" FORCE MAIN 2,600 LF I 5. 2411 FORCE MAIN 4,620 LF I I TOTAL I I I I TOTAL SEIIER COSTS I I I I I I $96,850 I Concurrent I $250,000 I 111th I $14,535 I Developoent I I $234,000 I H I I S646,8oo I • I I-------------! I I $1,242, 185 I I I I I I I I I I I I $149,250 I Concurrent I I S2SO,OOO ( 111th I I s14,535 I Development I I S234,000 I I I S646,soo I II I I -------------1 I I s1,294,sas I I I I I -----:,-=--=-=-1 I I I s1,391,435 I I I I Developer II H' Developer • I I I I I I I I LF • Lineal I Feet I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . --........ ----............... -...... --.... -... -.. --..... -......... -.. -........... -.... --. -.................. ---.. --... -.... ---. -..... -. ---. --.... ---....... -... - EXHIBIT 53 135 I I I I FACILITY AMOUNT ZONE 9 -WATER FACILITIES FINANCING MATRIX AS Of 1/1/89 ESTIMATED COST I FUNDING OPTIONS I ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 TINING I FIRST I SECOND I THIRD I REFERENCE NOTES I I I/ATER FACILITIES I ,------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I AREA "C.Z• I I I I 1. 16" I/ATER MAIN I 1,500 L.F. I z. 12" I/ATER MAIN I 7,290 L.F. I 3. 10" I/ATER MAIN I 1,741 L.F. I 4. 12" TIIO-IIAY I/ATER I 1 EA. I METER & P.R. STA. I I I I TOTAL I I I I I I AREA C.311 I I I I 1. 16° I/ATER MAIN I 1,500 L.F. I 2. 1211 WATER HAIN f 7,290 l.f. I 3. ton WATER MAIN I 4,144 L.f. I 4. 1211 TIIO•IIAY WATER I 1 EA. I HETER & P.R. STA. I I I I TOTAL I I s75,ooo I Concurrent S342,630 I 111th S57,453 I Oevelopnent_ s75,ooo I • -------------, I $550,083 I I I . I I s75,ooo t Concurrent 1342,630 I 111th $136,653 I Developa,ent S75,000 I .. ·------------, I S6Z9,283 I I Developer II • Developer II LF " Lineal Feet EXHIBIT 54 136 APPENDICES A. Constraints Map B. Circulation Map C. Vertical/Horizontal Cross Sections D. Transportation Analysis Phasing E. EIR84-3 F. Park Agreement G. Exten Ventures Letter H. Agenda Bill -Library I. Hydraulic Study ( on file at the City of Carlsbad Engineering Office) Appendix A. Constraints Map r i ( ,IJ I,, ··' ' J ·•· ! ; ''. '-' ., I. I., I ! .' i ;"" . -\ _.),: . I ' '\-. . ' . :: • ' I, • ~ 11i : ( it \ '1 ~ ' . ) :r --.. "' I ' : ii .f I , I , I I I , - I I ' #•-i'. ~ ' ,. ~;{~~ . . • .,,··7;P •, -~ ,ff ''h •. ' . ·1 -• . Ji} ~1~. . . 1 i ·· ,1 . . . .. ·, • ·· ¢,lit •:t/1 t \ ' . . ' . . . . . . . . . . . I " I I I I ! . <'. ' . I I, ' I i ' : (0 : ,:Q : ' . ' '' • 0' CJ' • N, N, 0• . . 0• \.) (J 0 z w CJ w _J • • • . ' • ' <( COUOW LL CJ I--:,::::i:::'. _J <!: >< -Cl z w a.. a.. <( Q........,. d Appendix B. Circulation Map • .. ' . , \ I •, ' ' . . ·•·•-c c',i,I . ' a: '' . , I U-1 • ,_i,, • I-', •,i I "% . \ \ I ' 'I ' ' . ' ' , ,, : I ! ,i . I ,:· .. I I : I ..... I . ' . I 1 . • I ' . ' ' I ' I . ' 1,' f 1w11:1:1.1.1:1y 1::1orvw :11:tnJ.n.:tJ 1'1U:l3J.t,y AIIVON0:>35 : :INY1 W'l.1J.3SNIOd ' ' ! J / I .. . . - , ·-' ,. ·, I -• ( i ' ' ,. / I ' I I / ·' ' ' ;' I I '• '•. Noooi,,7 .. l. ' . . - I ' :1ii ., .. I 'I ' ' r: I ' ' I ' I, I I' I I i/ I s ' I I , I ) I \ ' ' ' ' I I ,., . \ ,/ YOJ.:>311103 '.· f-.-::-...-i.. -... ·, __ ,..I ,,ci: ,_ a: w ... a:: ci: a:: 0 J :I , .. • fCI :i a fCI = "" ..I m: ct: 0 1 I i \. ' I " \ ' i ' I I ! I I ' 1 : :IINVi VIJ.J.3SNIOdl ' ,i j, I ·\ .. ' I I 'I () ' Lt_ ' ' I () '1'. Cl. 0 z w (9 w ...J ...J <( -L. L' ...J Ee ~ <( a: w >-Ee. a: <( c§ a: z 00 -:>() <( w :'2= (J) a: 0 l-o UJ ...J ...J 0 0 ...J <( -a: w 1- ...J a: <( <( -a: w >-I-a: a: <( <( 0 a: z 00 -:, 0 <( w 2 (J) WW a: a: :) :) I-I- :) :) LL LL -■ : ■ : . : . : ■ : ■ : . : ■ : ■ : ■ - 0 Appendix C. Vertical/Horizontal Cross Sections .. 'EXIST. GRADE ~AVENIDA BATIOUITOS 1--+'l--i ., .. .. .. EXIST. PONTO DRIV /CARLSBAD .. .. . ... Ill • Ill '° .. . . I-.. 0 .. ., w w :c -Cl) w w Cl) 801 LEV ARD INT RCHANGE 20-1-------1-----1----+-----l----+----+---+----+----t-----! Z::16 218 220 222 2:24 226 228 230 232 234. 236 f. NORTHBOUND LANES 60-, -,------,-----,----r---"-T---r----,-----~----r-----,--~ ___ .1,. ______ _ ·rFINISH -· ----:=:~.J-~-----~E---==1t==--:r--=--7=:~1---L--_J Ill GRADE 1-w o~-----~ GRADE ------0 .. --.. .. .. u.; • Ill '° .. 0 • 40 216 218 220 C II> .. C, .. a, I.: .. z ► .. '° . 0 -C .. 0 ., Cl _. .. ... cc Ill W (\.AVE NIDA > 0 BATIQUITOS I 222 224 226 228 230 232 i1t, SOUTHBOUND LANES PROFILE: CARLSBAD BOULEVARD. SCALE: HORIZ.--1" = 200' VERT. -1" = 20' ., u .. <► ·,c 0 ... z cc ww > 0 234 Cl) w w Cl) 236 APPENDIX C (SHEET 1) STREET PROFILES ZONE 9 40 0 ID ,t ... 0 ... ., 1-z w ll w ~ ii. .. . -0 ID ,c ..:c; -o < ~FINI::-_: _ ~ i I .,-EXIST. BRIDGE OVER BATIQIJlTC LAGOON t-~w+-----+-_:G~R~A'..'.'.D:E--+----+---"-_-_--fr-_-::-:::.::-.::,-._,_--=t:::::-:=-:--=:-~~1/'-----,G_RA_D_Ell ___ ll--7 20 ! -----J,. _____ 0 ______ >--,.-.-----,-,...----w "''. ,•,,,· .. ·1 w I I ------t- u, I I \ I '------0 236 238 240 242 244 246 248 250 252 254 'f NORTHBOUND LANES 40 .....,.:-=--~-=~::------,-----,------r---7----T---7----T-:--:BR:l~DG~E:7 --------~'EXIST. OVEIII -.__ GRADE BATIOIJJIT015 .,._ --LAGOON --... -...... < -~ --~ 20 b;W~----l-----+-----4----+----j~-=-==-:..,,._--::-~-i .. ~-~-=-=--=~=t~----7,---7 U) -------,..,~-----1----- 0 t..· ;. .. ~ · ..•. , '. Ill \. ---· --~ w I / ., I I 236 238 240 242 244 246 248 'f. SOUTHBOUND LANES PROFILE: CARLSBAD BOlJLEV ARD SCALE: HORIZ.~1" -200' VERT.-1"= 20' 250 252 I t, _____ _ 254 APPENDIX C (SHEET 2 > STREET PROFILES ZONE 9 tJ Jlif-,_ CXIIIMTA!ffl -=.:-=:£!17:::: .,,,._ .. ~ ....... &IWIICNDUGCSfA ~ ~~-= -. BRIDGE OVER A, T, & S.F. RAILROAD 200' A. T, & S.F. RAILROAD R/W 10<r 1-00 cc WINDROS z cc Q a o: z w CIRCLE w c., .. u CARLSI AD wW .. "' > .. ..: "' Q ... ,t BOULEVAR ~ R/W 0) 0 .,; :c .. cc ·> 0) "' ... "' "' .. w .. -80-... w co 0) .. . -co +,= .. ... 80 .. "'!: ... ... .. ., .. cc . ' .~.: .• : ,._I "' ... co m ·, .. -. • 0) 0) ~-.• '. "' \ Q I~ "' 0 (.) .. I~ ---,.::.-r--BRIDGE "l~ ... "'> co • 0: DECK -60 <, : ... ~ ~ 6~ -' .. -JRTH BOUND j!RIDGE ~ 'FINISH "' I :c ' :c ;;_EXIST,: __ \ ______ ~,I-.. GRADE I I-.. (.) co ::, 0: n "! ~ ____,,. / --------------... 0 0 ~ -'I "' ., ---:1, "' z I'-. ~ --. ' I ... -----. -------..--' ------EXIST. ,-r--I ----" '· \ -----GRADE 40 40 \ / , --✓ '------i------- EXIST. ~ONTO DRIVE 20 CARLSBAD B ~ VD. INTERCt ANGE 20 9 10 11 12 13-14 15 16 17 18 19 20 PROFILE: AVENIDA BATIQUITOS SCALE: HORIZ.-1"= 100' VERT. -1": 20' APPENDIX ·c (SHEET 3) STREET PROFILES ZONE 9 ~.,~·,, ... Cffll. Cl ~ COIIISULT~ILCAlalONM.. IIAMCNO LA COSTA ,,__ __ ~.CAL~•NIA1"NfS W•Yf'Y..,.._ ""'°"E 11~101• Appendix D. Transportation Analysis Phasing r APPENDIX D TRANSPORTATION PHASING ANALYSIS for BATIQOITOS LAGOOH EDUCAfIOHAL PARlt AND PACILITIBS HAHAGBHEH'l' ZONE 9 Prepared for Sammis Properties For Assistance Pli.,~e Contact: SAM P. KAB II Senior Project Manager URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOCIATES, INC. transportation engineering & planning consultants to business and government 4540 Kearny Villa Road, Suite 106 San Diego, CA 92123 (619) 560-4911 November 10, 1987 (Revised May 4, 1988) URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING & PLANNING Consultants to Business and Government 4540 Kearny Villa Road, Suite 106 San Diego, California 92123 (619) 560-4911 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUBJECT Introduction ••••• Existing Conditions •• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proposed Project Within F.M.Z. 9 • . . Trip Generation, Distribution, and Assignment ••• Impact and Mitigation Analysis. • • • • • •• . . . PAGE 1 3· 5 6 8 11 Transportation Improvements Phasing Plan SANDAG/Carlsbad Buildout Traffic Forecast . Conclusions and Recommendations ••••• • • • • 13 • 16 i r- L I s T 0 F F I G U R E S FIGURE NUMBER SUBJECT PAGE Figure 1 Project Location . . . . . . . . . . . . 3A Figure 2 Traffic Flow Map. . . . . . . . . . . . 4A Figure 3 Facilities Management Zone 9 . . SA Figure 4 Conceptual Site Plan . . . . . . . . . . 6B Figure 5-A Technical Site Plan, Phase I . . . . . . 6C Figure 5-B Technical Site Plan, Phase II . . . . . . . 60 Figure s-c Technical Site Plan, Phase III . . . . . . 6E Figure 6 1988 Existing Traffic Volumes. . . . . . 7A Figure 7 1988 ADT Phase 1 Plus Background . . . . 7B Figure 8 1989 ADT Phase 2 Plus Background . . . . 7C Figure 9 1990 ADT Phase 3 Plus Background . . . . 70 Figure 10 1991 ADT Phase 4-Plus Background . . . . 7E Figure 11 1995 ADT Zone 9 Plus Background. . . . . 7F Figure 12 2000 ADT Zone 9 Plus Background. . . 7G Figure 13 Buildout Unadjusted Traffic Volumes. . . 13A Figure 14 Buildout Recommended· Street Classifications . . . . . . . 13B ii ,r' ,.- L I S T 0 F TABLES TABLE NUMBER SUBJECT PAGE Table l Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 APPENDIX Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendices through Appendices through Land Use and Trip Generation . . . . Schedule of I-5 Bridge Improvements. Impacted Intersections LOS . . . . . street segment LOS (Impacted Locations). . . . . . . . Trans~ortation Improvements Phasing Facilities Management Zone 9 •••• Buildout Forecast Instersection LOS Intersections Impacted by FMZ 9 A P P E N D I C E S SUBJECT . . SANDAG Traffic Generation Rates. Revised Recommended Weekday Trip Generation Rates Summary •••. . . . . . . . . . . 6A 9A llA llB llC . 13C PAGE 18 19-21 Phase I Trip Distribution Percentages •. 22 Phase II Trip Distribution Percentages •. 23 Phase III Trip Distribution Percentages. 24 F-1 F-46 G-1 G-18 ICU Calculations at Impacted +ntersections, 1988-2000 ICU Calculations at Impacted Intersections at Buildout •. iii 25-70 . . . 71-88 - TRANSPORTATION PHASING ANALYSIS BATIQUITOS EDUCATIONAL PARK ANO AND FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 9 INTRODUCTION Urban Systems Associates, Inc. (Urban Systems) was retained by Sammis Properties, to address potential transportation impacts for the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park project and additional parcels within the City of Carlsbad Facilities Management Zone (F.M.Z.) 9. Once potential traffic impacts were identified, a transportation systems ·improvements "phasing plan" was developed to mitigate off site traffic impacts to meet the City of Carlsbad's "Growth Management Program Circulation System Performance Standard". In order to determine the transportation impacts which are likely to result from land uses wfthin F.M.Z. 9, Urban Systems obtained and evaluated existing traffic flow data for the area, future short term traffic, and projections for future long term traffic flow as provided by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) in their City of Carlsbad Constrained General Plan Land Use Traffic Forecast of August 29, 1986. Urban Systems' report, addressing potential transportation impacts for the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park project and other uses within F.M.Z. 9, is divided into the following sections: * Existing Conditions * The Proposed Projects within F.M.Z. 9 * Trip Generation, Distribution and Assignment * Impact and Mitigation Analysis * Transportation Improvements Phasing * SANOAG/Carlsbad Buildout Traffic Forecast * conclusions and Recommendations - May 4, 1988 FMZ 9 Transportation Phasing Urban systems Associates, Inc. In the impact and mitigation section of this report, specific improvements are identified and tabulated on a year by year basis for the entire subarea. The period covered is from 1988 through buildout of the project in 1991, 1995, and the year 2000. Also, for th~ project buildout period, not only is traffic generated within F.M.Z. 9 considered, but traffic from adjacent zones is also included. The results of the annual increments of growth are evaluated cumulatively and a table listing transportation improvements is included in the Transportation Improvements Phasing section of the report. Specific thresholds for each of the transportation improvements are also identified in the table. 006185 -2 -lagoon/18D May 4, 1988 FMZ 9 Transportation Phasing Urban systems Associates, Inc. EXISTING CONDITIONS· Existing and Planned Street System: The Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park and F.M.Z. 9 site, Figure 1, is essentially undeveloped today. Several streets, however, stub out to the limits of the project and thus provide access to the zone. On the north, Poinsettia Lane extends approximately one half mile west of Interstates. Poinsettia Lane is signalized at Carlsbad Boulevard and has a full diamond interchange with Interstate 5. While Poinsettia lane is classified as a major street, it is constructed with only two laries across Interstate 5 then widens to four lanes and extends to its current . . easterly limits. It is unconstructed for the remainder of the length to El Camino Real. La Costa Avenue, to the south of Zone 9, extends from the ocean easterly through to Rancho Santa Fe. It is presently two lanes, but is planned as a major arterial. Carlsbad Boulevard (old State Route 101), on the west side of the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park project, is constructed as a four lane major arterial. Avenida Encinas extends south from Poinsettia Lane as a partially improved secondary arterial and provides access to the existing mobile home park within Zone 9. Avenida Encinas is planned as a four lane secondary arterial, but is currently only improved to two lanes ending approximately 3,000 feet north of Poinsettia Lane. However, this street will ultimately be extended to the existing portion of Avenida Encinas extending south from Palomar Airport Road, through Zone 22. Regional access to the project area is provided by Interstate 5, an eight lane freeway running north/south throughout the entire county. 006185 -3 -lagoon/180 -- 9 28 9 \ I I I \ • ,:.,§_AN. DIE CARLSBA \ ~¥,---CIIIW'-----1111-...j_~~~--.},:-+.----t G~.R.!-5..~.~D. '"' ·.••· sXN olEGb I I I I \ SOURCE: B•sc MAP rROM ND SCALE AtRIAL PHOTO-MAP BOOK, AUGUST 1986 US[O WITH P[RMISSION r~~M AtRIAL PHOTOBANK, INC, FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCA TDN BATIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 ~----------U.S.A. INC. ----------"' t 1~87 (3-A) 006185 May 4, 1988 FMZ 9 Transportation Phasing Urban Systems Associates, Inc. Additional regional access on the east side of the project area is provided by Carlsbad Blvd. Existing daily traffic flows on adjacent streets, as obtained from SANDAG's 1987 Traffic Flow map, are shown in Pigura 2. 006185 -4 -lagoon/18D ,., AVERAGE WEEKDAY T"A,FtC VOLUMES SAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN AREA lttllPAIIIID H SAN DIIGO USOCIATION • o, GOVERNMENTS MAY tN7 VOLUMES SHOWN ON IIAP IN THOUSANDS 10001 FIGURE 2 TRAFFIC FLOW MAP BAT/OUITOS·LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 -------------U.S.A. INC. ----------~ (4-A) 006185 11/87_ May 4, 1988 FMZ 9 Transportation Phasing Urban systems Associates, Inc. THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITHIN F.M.Z. 9 The Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park project and other land uses within F.M.Z. 9 consists of 384 existing mobile homes, 105 single family · dwelling units, 400 multi-family dwelling units, 174,563 square feet of retail space, 220,000 square feet of institutional uses, 224,743 square feet of office space, 144,000 square -feet of commercial uses, 318,700 square feet of research and development area, 97,200 square feet of health/recreation, 453 student dormitory rooms, and 370 hotel rooms with 126,000 square feet of conference room area. Facilities Management Zone 9 has been divided into land use planning areas as shown in Pigure 3 006185 -5 -lagoon/18D SOURCE1 A ■atla. Haun. Felll■an Group FDURE 3 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 9 - BA TIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 5/88 U.S.A. INC. ----------00_6_1_,.s6 (S-A) May 4, 1988 FMZ 9 Transportation Phasing Urban Systems Associates, Inc. TRIP GENERATION, DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT The land use by year was tabulated in Table 1, the existing general plan trip generation table, by combining the land use categories provided in Pigure.4 and the conceptual land use phasing plans shown in Pigurea 5A, 5B, and SC. Table 1 lists the phased land use and trip generation for F.M.Z. 9. The trip generation rates are from SANDAG's Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region, June 1987, included in Appendiz A. This table lists the average daily traffic (ADT) generation as well as the A.M. and P.M. peak ho~r trip generation. For this analysis, hotel, office, retail and commercial land uses are considered to impact offsite locations based on cumulative· trip generation rates listed in Appendiz B. Institutional trip generation rate calculations are based on 5,000 total ADT from the EIR. Because of the mixed uses, Urban Systems assumed 25 percent internal trips for Phases II & III, and 30 percent internal trips for Phase IV. The trip distribution to and from F.M.Z. 9 varies by year with the locations of the planning areas being developed. The yearly distribution percentages are based on a "SANDAG F.M.Z. 9 Only" forecast; existing trip distribution at intersections and interchanges in the area; and engineering judgment. The trip distribution percentages developed for F.M.Z. 9 are included in Appendices c, D, and B. These trip distribution percentages also identify which adjacent street segments and intersections are impacted by twenty percent or more of the zone's yearly traffic. The trip distribution percentages were used to assign trips from F.M.Z. 9 to the existing street system. First, 1988 traffic volumes were 006185 -6 -lagoon/18D TABLE 1 LAND USE AND TRIP. GENERATION -ZONE 9 Sa..,,, .. 1"IP 1"IP All! IN/IIJT PIii YEAR/UM> USE PHASE MEA MIIJNT· RAT£• EN>S s• I AATIDI' IN 111T s• 1817 ~Pule 1 A 3M QI 5/111 1,920 9 113 317 52 121 11 1888 Rnilill'IUal (S.F.) 1 C 53 QI 10/lll 5:Jl 8 ~ 218 8 ~ 10 RNidlntial (111.F .) 1 C 52 QI 8/111 416 8 33 218 7 27 10 Sl8 TOTN.1 948 78 15 81 1• Ratail 1 8 1~,583 SF .0/l(!f' 5,383 3 181 814 97 85 9 Off.lee 1 B 321443 SF '2/J/l(!f' 1169 14 91 911 82 9 13 Institute 1 C 80,0IIJ SF 23/ICSf'H 1 ,IMO 4 74 812 59 15 8 Of't'.l.clt 1 C 64,SIIJ SF '21J/kSF 1,296 14 181 911 183 18 13 c-rcw 1 C 75,0IIJ SF' .a/KSF 3,IDl 3 !IJ 614 54 36 9 R & D 1 C '10.IDI SF' 8/KSF 560 16 !IJ 911 81 9 14 Health/Rae 1 C 97,211D SF tll/KSF' 3,888 4 156 814 93 62 9 Stumnt 01,r-. 1 C 228 ROIJII sirml 1,:l&II a 109 218 22 aa 11 flltlidln'tial (S.F.) 1 C 52QI 10/111 520 a 42 21a 8 33 10 flNidllltial (111.F.) 1 C 21M QI B/lll 1,632 8 131 218 26 104 10 ---- Sl8 TOTN.1 '2/J,135 1,124 BIS 439 ,., Ratail 2 a .O,OIIJ SF .cl/KY 1,600 3 .. 614 29 19 9 ~ 2 C ll8,0IIJ SF 40/KY 2,780 3 83 814 SIi 33 9 R l D 2 C 56,211D SF 8/KY 450 16 72 911 85 ., 14 C&lnf-2 C 120,1111 SF -------- Hotel Suit. 2 C DJ ROIJII 8/RIDI 2,d 6 144 614 81 SB 8 Studa'lt 01,r-. 2 C 228 Ami 6/RIDI 1,:l&II a HIS 218 22 88 11 ~ (111.F. ) 2 C 144 QI 8/111 1,152 a 92 218 18 74 10 ----Slll TOTAi.a 9,730 Sta 270 278 ,., rn.ututa l C 14011111 SF 23/l(SFH 3,220 • 129 812 ,m 28 8 R & D 3 C 1B2,5DOSF 8/KSF I 1 ,5411 1& 248 911 222 25 14 Of't'Ja 3 C 127,SIIJ SF 20/X!tF 2,550 14 357 911 321 38 13 HDtal 3 C ,0 RIJIIII 8/111111 560 6 34 814 2D 13 a ----!1.8 TOTM.a ?,8'10 188 1116 1111 TOTAi., .o,an 2,687 1,888 - • City of San DJ.ago Clallatiua tr.Ip nta (S. Appa,d1x B). " lnstituta la-' an S,ttJD tatal ADT fraa EIR. 4/88 BAT04 BA TIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 U.S.A. INC. (6-A) I 211 53 42 115 -.. 147 188 270 78 350 150 52 183 -1,IMI 144 248 83 -192 150 115 -913 258 218 331 45 -8411 4,011 ·- IN/till RATIIJII IN [IJT 814 127 .. ?al l? 18 ?al 29 12 Bl 28 Sas 242 242 218 17 67 515 74 ?• 218 34 135 515 135 135 119 8 71 814 210 140 713 105 45 71J 36 16 713 114 49 --975 m 515 72 72 SIS 124 12• 119 6 57 ---SaS 96 '!Ii 713 105 •s 713 81 35 ---429 515 129 129 119 22 194 218 68 265 Sas 22 22 --2311 810 1,882 2,125 006185 ,,...... O"I I OJ '-" ·.•-:---·;.· __ ·..:..-·· SOURCE, A .. tln, Hannn, Fehlman Group PACFlCOCUN Fl3URE 4 CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN 11/87 BA TJQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 U.S.A. INC. Cac..••-•-... .... NACIU•IC.._ ..... .. -··-· :·, -·--··--· -··-.. .. .. .. .. -··-....... , .. _ --···----·--·-··-... --•-•11-=~ ::::,~:. --·-.... ---... , ... ___ __ .............. ..... ., .. ...• .. .. .. . ., .. .. ,., ..... .. '=.,,;.,. ·-·- .. .. ---·-----······----. .......... ,_ ·--·---.... -·-··-•·• :;:: :.::_ ■--.. -·--·-•·• -·-·---... -•·•-----------· --------... -·-·-·---- _ .. SM ===.:-=-::,:,_., __ ) NO ICAU 006185 ,...... CJ'\ I () '--/ ) ................ F1hl111an Group SOURCE1 A•tln, HanHn, . FIGURE 6-A TECHNICAL SITE PLAN PHASE I PARK/F.M.Z. 9 BA TIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL 11/87 U.S.A. INC. . . ______ ) ~ NO SCALE 006185 ,,....,, °' I 0 ..._,,, SOUftCEa Au1tln, H1n11n, F1hlm1n Group FIGURE 5-B TECHNICAL SITE PLAN PHASE II BA TIQUITOS LA GOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 NO SCALE ~-----U.S.A. INC.----------------------------11/87 0061as ) ---51-_._ .. --· -------~ .. , -.-. SUL• -•• ._,.~ -----·-...... -----..... ~ .. ----- S~CEa Au1tln. HallNfl. Fehl11an Group FIGURE 6-C TECHNICAL SITE PLAN PHASE Ill BA TIOUITOS LA GOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 ~-----U.S.A. INC. 11/87 NO ICALC 006185 May 4, 1988 FMZ 9 Transportation Phasing Urban Systems Associates, Inc. obtained from available data or earlier data was adjusted by three percent each year to estimate 1988 traffic volumes. These 1988 base year volumes are shown in Pigure ,. In order to assume the projected increase in traffic from the adjacent management zones, the growth from Zone 22 to the north was estimated to be approximately the same as the regional growth of three percent per year through 1991 or an estimate of traffic was made for Zone 22 based on the phasing shown in that zone's draft local facility management plan. The listed phasing was shifted one year ahead to 1990 as the start date to account for a more reasonable start of development, and the growth for Zone 19 to the east was obtained from Urban systems' revised draft September l, 1987 "Transportation Phasing Analysis for Zone 19." In order to assure an adequate increase in traffic volumes on street links not directly loaded by a known amount of trips, it was assumed that a growth of three percent per year would occur in the region after 1988. A comparison was made between the increase due to loaded trips from adjacent zones and the three percent increase per year, with the higher value being used. The three percent assumption was used for the four years of phasing of Zone 9 and then also used to estimate the years 1995, 2000 and cumulative growth at buildout projected by SANDAG's "Series VI Forecasts" for the region. Pigures 7 through 12 show the cumulative growth on streets adjacent to F.M.Z. 22 for the years 1988 through 1991, the years 1995 and 2000. These figures include existing traffic from F.M.Z.'s 4, 9, 19, and 22 or a three percent cumulative growth, if greater. The possible traffic impacts resulting from these traffic volumes are analyzed in the following section of this report. 006185 -7 -lagoon/18D 8.5 LA NO SCALE ~CE: The hlghe1t volume from SANOAG 1987 Traffic Flew Map w Sart011/A......, Trafflt Count s ..... rte, ad,lustN 6 CJft Ynrtr Fl3UAE·8 1988 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES (IN THOUSANDS) BA TIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 U.S.A. INC. _________ _,,_ 4/88 (7-A) 008186 o. I I • <Rr NO SCALE LEGEND: XXX '" ZoM 9 only 1.3 3.4 .7 9.1 0.2 8.9 XXX • Zone 9_plue 111l1tl1.11 Jiu• 3'!6 lnorea11 fllr ••oh year FIGURE 7 PHASE I PLUS BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 1988 ADT (IN THOUSANDS) BATIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 U.S.A. INC. -----------4/88 (7-B) 006186 NO SCALE LEGEND: XXX • Zone 9 only XXX "' Zone 9 plus existing plus 3 '16 lnorn1t for IHh y1ar Ca11umlng 2 5 %Internal traffic:) 11.0 I I .O A FIGURE 8 PHASE II PLUS BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 1989 ADT (IN THOUSANDS) BA TIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCA T/ONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 "----------U.S.A. INC. -----------4/88 (7-C) 006186 NO SCALE LEGEND: XXX c Zone 9 only XXX :. Zone 9 ptu1 111l1tlng plu1 39' ._ .. for 1aoh year (Or Zone 22 Traffic If Grnter) 12.3 20.1 (Anu•lng 259' Internal Traffic) FIGURE 9 PHASE Ill PLUS BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 1990 ADT (IN THOUSANDS) BA TIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 '-----------U.S.A. INC. -----------4/88 C 7-D) 006115 NO SCALE LEGEND: XXX ·• Z11n1 9 only XXX c z-9 plu• 11l•tlng plua 31J1t --• f• Roh YNr (Or Zone 22 Traffic If Greater) CAuu11lng 301J1t Internal Traffic) 14.2 23.8 FIGURE 10 21.5 PHASE IV PLUS BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 1991 ACT (IN THOUSANDS) BA TIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 ~---------U.S.A. INC. ----------4/88 (7-E) 006186 - NO SCALE LEGEND: XXX .,. Zone 9 only 14.2 30.4 XXX c Zone 9 plu1 ul1tl119 plu1 3,. _._. f• •oll year <Or Zon, 22 Traffic It GrHter) CA11u111ln1 30,. Internal Traffic) 13.0 13.0 FIGURE 11 ZONE 9 PLUS BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 1995 ADT (IN THOUSANDS) BA TIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 "'-----------U.S.A. INC. ------------S/88 0-f) 006185 · NO SCALE LEGEND: XXX • Zone 9 only XXX ,. z-9 plu1 ul1tln9 plu1 3 'll, inar'N• for noh year 14.2 3 I .5 (Or Zone 22 Traf1'1c If Greater) CA11u11tng 30% lntarnal Traffic) FIGURE 12 38.6 ZONE 9 PLUS BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 2000 ADT (IN THOUSANDS) BA TIOUITOS LAGOON £DUCA TIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 '-----------U.S.A. INC. -----------5/88 (7-G) 006185 - May 4, 1988 Urban Systems Associates, Inc. FMZ 9 Transportation Phasing IMPACT AND MITIGATION ANALYSIS The following analysis is based on the projected cumulative traffic volumes, shown in Figures 7 through 12, from the proposed yearly development of F.M.Z. 9, plus the projected increase from the immediately adjacent zon~s 22 and 19, or a three percent yearly growth for the four years of development, if that increase was greater than actual loaded trips. The following street improvements accommodate traffic volumes that permit impacted street segments to operate at a level of service (LOS) "C" or better during the peak hours in accordance with the City's performance standards: A. Pigura 7 1988 ADT -PHASE 1 B. 1. Poinsettia Lane between I-5 and Avenida Encinas is partially improved as a four lane major arterial and may accommodate the projected traffic with restriping for lane channelization at Avenida Encinas. 2. Avenida Encinas between Windrose Circle and Poinsettia Lane should be constructed as a four lane secondacy arterial. 3. Signalization is needed at Poinsettia Lane and Avenida Encinas if traffic signal warrants are satisfied. 4. Windrose Circle can accommodate traffic as a two lane collector street. Pigura a 1989 ADT -PHASE 2 1. Windrose Circle should be constructed as a four lane collector street. 2. Avenida Batiquitos should be constructed as a four lane secondary arterial. 006185 -8 -lagoon/18D May 4, 1988 Urban Systems Associates, Inc. FMZ 9 Transportation Phasing C. Pigure 9 1990 ADT -PHASE 3 1. Poinsettia Lane/Avenida Encinas intersection to be provided with dual left turns at all intersection legs; additional right-of-way may be needed on Poinsettia Lane. 2. Signalization at Avenida Batiquitos and Ponto Drive. 3. Signalization at Avenida Batiquitos and Carlsbad Blvd. 4. Signalization at Windrose Circle and Avenida Encinas. 5. Signalization at Windrose Circle and Avenida Batiquitos. D. Pigure 10 1991 ADT -PHASE 4 1. The La Costa Avenue overpass currently accommodates 23,000 ADT at an LOS "D" without ramp intersection signalization. Therefore, signalization at the I-5 at Poinsettia Lane overpass ramp intersections will provide an acceptable level of service without the need for immediate overpass widening. Monitoring of the· ADT and level of service calculations should be done to determine the actual time of need for the overpass widening. The Poinsettia Lane overpass at the A.T.& S.F. railroad tracks should be widened concurrently with the I-5 overpass widening. 2. No additional improvements are needed at impacted locations to accommodate the buildout of Zone 9. E. Pigure 11 1995 ADT - 1. The I-5/Poinsettia Lane overpass is assumed to be widened after 006185 1991 as the 23,000 ADT threshold is reached. The City's schedule of I-5 bridge improvements, shown in Table 2, lists the start of construction of the overpass widening in 1990/1991. Poinsettia Lane between I-5 and Avenida Encinas should be reconstructed along -9 -lagoon/18D ,,..... \0 I )> .._,, 18/88 1 3 5 I I I TRAfflC DATA PR PALOMAR AIRPORT ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ROAD TRAf'flC PSR DATA LA COSTA ~ ~ ~ AVENUE TRAfflC DATA POINSETTIA ~ ~ ~ LANE BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS ON 1-5 SCHEDULE IN MONll-fS 12/88 6/89 12/89 6/90 7 9 11 lJ 15 17 19 21 2J 2~ 27 29 I I I I T I I I CAL TRANS fJNAL DUMMY ADVfRTISE ~ REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW ANO AWARD CONSULTANT TASI< % ~ ~ ~ ~ I I CAL TRANS ANO --~~ ~~ Cl .... ~ z CITY TASI< o:t-F 11>< iii ~F Q.:Z,< O::I F t-o w...-WF II>::, ~:::lz Diti ~ t!: ~w Oct:::I ..... ~ II> 1t:5§ II> II> ~ Zo ,~0 1o 0 4. PR CAL TRANS fJNAL DUMMY ADVERTISE REVIEW DESIGN RE"1EW AND AWARD ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 81 --~ti --~ Cl ~i z Q. o:t-F 1'11 In <F ~ ll.Q< F t-o ~:st-w,= ~ Ill:::, zi5 Bi~ ~ 0 0 0::1 II> 0: ..... ~ ~ 4. o:~a "'vi ~ o..Qo !8 0 I ~ 0 0.. I CAL TRANS FINAL DUMMY ADVERTISE PSR PR REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW AND AWARD ~ % ~ ~ ~ ~ % ~ ~ --~~ --~ Cl .... ~ z 0. 0:: ... ,= 111< ii'I ~F ~ Q. Z,< O::I F t-o w...-WF Ill::, ~i~ fM~ ~ ~ 0 IIC o~::I uft-0 &II 0. 1t:5G zVI < ~ 0. o..Qo j8 0 < y I ll. I I I I I I SOURCE1 City of Carlabad, En9ln11rln9 Department TABLE 2 SCHEDULE OF 1-5 BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS BA TIOUITOS LA GOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 ) ~-----U.S.A. INC.-------------------------"' 5/88 006185 ,- May 4, 1988 FMZ 9 Transportation Phasing Urban Systems Associates, Inc. with the I-5 overpass to provide extra lanes for the interchange ramps. The eastbound lanes are recommended to include two through lanes and a "trap" lane to the I-5 southbound on-ramp. The westbound lanes are recommended to include two through lanes from the ov~rpass and a third westbound lane to accommodate a "free" right turn from the I-5 southbound off-ramp. 2. No additional street improvements are needed to accommodate 1995 traffic at impacted locations after the I-5/Poinsettia Lane overpass is widened and the segment of Poinsettia Lane between I-5 and Avenida Encinas is widened to six lanes. F. ~igure 12 2000 ADT - 1. No additional street improvements are needed to accommodate year 2000 traffic at impacted locations. 006185 -10 -lagoon/18D -- May 4, 1988 FMZ 9 Transportation Phasing Urban Systems Associates, Inc. TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS PHASING PLAN The City of Carlsbad Growth Management Program of September 16, 1986 requires that circulation element roads be constructed so that the following performance standard is adhered to: "No road se4P'ent or intersection in the zone nor any road segment or intersection out of the zone which is impacted by development in the zone shall be projected to exceed a service level C during off-peak hours, nor service level D during peak hours. Impacted means where twenty ~ercent or more of the traffic generated by the local facility management zone will use the road segment or intersection." In order to demonstrate that F.M.Z. 9 meets that performance standard, Table_3 shows the intersection level of service by year of development for those locations impacted by twenty perc~nt or more of F.M.Z. 9 traffic. These locations were determined by refering to the trip distribution percentages by year included in Appendices c, D, and B. As shown in Tabla 3, all impacted locations will meet the City's performance· standard. Appendix F includes intersection capacity utilization (ICU calculations) of the levels of service at these impacted locations. Table 4 shows the street segment level of service by year of development for those street segments identified as being impacted by twenty percent or more of F.M.Z. 9 traffic. As shown in Table 4, all impacted street segments will meet the City's performance standard. Tal:»le 5, the Transportation Improvements Phasing table, recommends improvements that mitigate the traffic impacts from F.M.Z. 9 as well as the buildout of the remainder of the City of Carlsbad. 006185 -11 --lagoon/18D LOCATION POINSETTIA LANE/CARLSBAD BLVD. POINSETTIA LANE/AVENIDA ENCINAS POINSETTIA LANE/I-5 SOUTHBOUND OFF RAl'IP POINSETTIA LANE/I-5 NORTHBOUND OFF RAJIIP AVENIDA ENCINAS/WINORDSE CIRCLE AVENIDA BATIQUITOS/WINDROSE CIRCLE AVENIDA BATIQUITOS/PONTO DRIVE AVENIDA BATIQUITOS/CARLSBAD BLVD. LEGEN01 • Less Than 20% of Project S • Stop Sign Only, Not Signalized LOS ICU A s 0.00-0.60 B • 0,61-0,70 C s D,71-0,80 D • 0.81-0,90 E • □.91-1.00 F • NOT i'EANINGFUL TABLE 3 IMPACTED INTERSECTIONS LEVELS OF SERVICE EXISTING 1988 A."1. P.M. ICU LOS ICU LOS .48 A .48 A s A s A s A s A s A s A ---------- ------- --------- ----- A.Pl. ICU LOS ,5D A s B s A s A s A ---- ------ --- 1988 1989 P.l'l. A.f'i. P.l"I. ICU LOS ICU LOS !CV LOS .5D A .58 A .58 A s B .56 A .66 B s A s B s 8 s A s C s C s A s A s A ---s A s A ----s A s A ----s A 5 A 1990 1991 A.M, P.M. A,l'I P.PI, A.Pl, ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU ,42 A .42 A ,45 A .45 A .62 .43 A .53 A .51 A ,6D A .54 s C s C ,78 C • 73 C .66 s C s C .89 D .so C ,7S .SB A .61 A ,61 B .64 B .64 .4B A .so A ,54 A .57 A .56 .35 A .35 A ,4D A .40 A ,40 ,3D A .46 A ,33 A .49 A .64 1995 2000 8UILDOUT P.l'I. A,fYl, P.1'11. A,M, P.M. LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS B .86 D .ss A .75 C .ss A .79 C A ,78 C .54 A .82 0 .45 A .64 B B .76 C .82 0 .76 C .64 B 66 8 C , 71 C .es D .86 D .76 C , 73 C B .67 B .64 B .67 B .64 B .67 8 A .59 A .56 A .59 A .56 A .59 A A .43 A ,4D A .43 A .40 A .43 A B .61 B .SD A .46 A ,56 A .81 D URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOC/ATES, INC. ;.... __ ....;B:,:A~T~/~O~U.:.,:I T~O~S:,_L::,:A::,:G;,;O;:.:O~N:..:;E,:;,D.:,U.::,C A:;:.!..:Tl~O~N~A,:.,L .:.P~A:.:,:R~K""/,1..1F•.:::M:.:.:· Z~-..:9~---------------------' ( 11-A) 006185 it/815 TABLE 4 STREET SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE (IMPACTED LOCATIONS) 1988 tXISTIN: ,sea 1989 1990 1991 19SS 2tl'.ll llJIUXlJT L(lCATlON ClASS V C V/C LOS CLASS V C V/C LOS CLASS V C V/C LOS CLASS V C V/C LOS CLASS V C V/C LOS CLASS V C V/C LOS CLASS V C V/C LOS CLASS V C V/C LOS PQINSETTI• LAI£ (AIIENIOA ENCINAS -1-S) 2 SA e.s 16.7 0.51 A 2 SA 9.1 16. 7 0,54 • 4 SA 17. 1 33.J O.S1 A 4 SA 20.1 33,J 0.60 A 4 SA 2J.8 JJ.J 0,71 C 8 SA J0.4 44.S 0.68 B 6 SA 31.S 4A.S 0.71 C 6 SA 28., 44.5 0.6' 8 K!INSETTIA LA~ (AVENID• ENCINAS -CAPl.SBAD BLVD.) 2 SA 3.0 16.7 0.18 • 2 SA 3.4 16.7 0.20 • 2 SA 4.8 16.7 0.29 A 2 SA 6.0 16. 7 a.JS A 2 SA 6.7 16. 7 0.40 A 4 SA 13.0 JJ.3 O.J9 A 4 SA 114.2 JJ.3 O.IIJ A 4 SA ,o.e JJ.J O.J2 A CARLSBAD BW.EVARO (PQINSETTIA LAI£ -PIJITO DR. [HJ) 4PIA 10.9 44,S 0.24 A 4PIA 11,1 44,S 0,25 A 4 PIA 14,3 44,S O,J2 A .,,. 16.0 44.S O,JS A 4 PIA 17.1 44.S O,JS A 4 PIA 20.7 44.S 0.47 A A M 21.1 44,S 0,47 A ... 2l.J 44.S o.ss A CARLSBAD BW.EVARD (POINSETTIA LA1£-AV£HIOA BATICIJITOS) . "' 11 .2 44.S 0.25 • 4 PIA 11.A 44.S 0,26 • 4 PIA 13,S 44,S a.JO • A PIA 14.9 44.S O.JJ A 4 PIA 1s.e 44.S O.JS • 41'\A 2J.6 44.S a.SJ A A PIA 214.S 44.S o.ss • A PIA 22. 1 44.S 0,50 A CARLSBAC BW.[VARD 4 PIA (AVENIOA BATICUITOS -LA COSTA AVE.) 4 PIA 11 .2 44.5 0.25 • 4 PIA 11 •• 44.5 0.26 A 4 PIA 1s.2 44.S 0,3'1 • 18.6 44.S 0.42 A .4 PIA 23.B 44.S a.SJ • ... 24,0 44.S 0.54 A 4 PIA 214.J 44.S o,ss • 41'\A 26.7 44.5 0.64 A CARLSBAD BW.EVARO (SOOTH OF LA COSTA AVE.) 4 PIA 11.2 44,5 0.2s A 4 PIA 11.4 44,S 0.26 A 4 PIA 1J.7 44.S 0,31 A 4 II'. 16.3 44,S 0.37 A 4 PIA 19,6 44,S 0,44 • 41'\A 21.2 44,5 0,48 • A PIA 21.5 44.S O.AB A AM 18.7 44.S 0.42 A AW-NIDA ENCINAS (POINSETTIA LAI£ -Wlll>ROSE CIRC.E) 2 SA 2.0 16,7 0,12 A 4 SA 3,0 16.7 o.,e A 4 SA 12. 1 JJ.3 0.36 A 4 SA 16,.2 3J,3 D.49 A 4 SA 1e.s 33,J 0.56 • 4 SA 19.2 33.3 O.SB A A SA 119.2 33.3 o.se A 4 SA 11.e JJ.J o.sJ A AVEHIOA BATIQUITOS (CARLSBAD BLVD.4'IM:lfl!JSE CIRC.E) 4 SA e.o JJ.3 0,24 A • s, 11.0 JJ.3 0.3J A 4 SA 12.s JJ.3 D,JS • 4 SA 12.s JJ.3 0.38 A A SA 1:2.S JJ,3 O.JB A A SA 8.0 JJ.3 0.24 A WlhllROSE CIRC.E j (AV£HIOA ENCIN~AV£HIDA BATIMTDS) 4 SA 11.0 JJ.3 0,33 A 4 SA 11.0 JJ.3 O.JJ A 4 SA 13.0 JJ,3 0,38 A 4 SA 13.0 33.3 O.J9 A A SA 13.0 33.3 0.39 • A SA 13.0 33.J 0.39 A L[GENh V . Volune C • Capacity ARTtR!AL CLASSIFICATICtl ACCESS LOS 6 PA (N) • 6 Lane Primary Arterial NO 6 PA (S) • 6 Lane Primary Arterial 50'[ • O.oo-(1.60 6 SA . 4 Lane Secondny Arterial bl1th Extra Lanes YES B o.s,...0.10 4r,,,A . 4 Lane l'lajor '-rterial NO C o. 71..0.80 • s• . 4 Lane Secondary Arterial SDl'E 0 0,81-0.90 4 C (Y) . 4 Lane Collector YES £ 0.91-1.00 2 c M . 2 Lane Collect.or NO F NJT l'EANIIGU. 2 L . 2 Lane Local YES URBAN sys TEM s As SOC/ATES, INC. 1----:.BA~T1~o~u:.:.1 T:_:O::,:S~L A:::.G~o~o~N.:E;.:;D;.:U;.:C.:;:A.:.T~1o~N~A;.;L.P..::A.R,_K,_/ ..... .,_._z ._, _____________________ __ (11-B) li/88 BAT 006186 • TABLE 5 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS PHASING FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 9 YEAR*/PHASE IMPROVEMENTS .. F'MZ 9• .. THRESHOLD TRIP ENOS 1988 ,. AVENIDA ENCINAS TO BE CONSTRUCTED AS A rouR LANE SECONDARY ARTERIAL. (PHASE I) 2. TRArr1c SIGNAL INSTALLATION AT POINSETTIA LANE ANO AvENIDA ENCl~AS WHEN TRArr1c SIGNAL WARRANTS ARE MET. 3. THE SOUTHEAST PORTION or WINOROSE CIRCLE TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITH TWO LANES AS A PARTIAL rouR LANE SECONDARY ARTERIAL. 1989 ,. WINDROSE CIRCLE TO BE CONSTRUCTED AS A rouR LANE (PHASE II) SECONDARY ARTERIAL. 23.000 2. AvENIOA BATIOUITOS TO BE CONSTRUCTED AS A rouR LANE SECONDARY ARTERIAL. 3. PROVIDE DUAL LErT TURN LANES WESTBOUND ON POINSETTIA LANE AT AVENIOA ENCINAS. 23.000 23.000 1990 ,. TRArr1c SIGNAL INSTALLATION AT AVENIOA 8ATIQUITOS 32.700 (PHASE II I) ANO PONTO DRIVE. 1991 2. TRArr1c SIGNAL INSTALLATION AT AVENIOA 8ATIQUITOS 32.700 ANO CARLSBAD BOULEVARD. 3. TRArr1c SIGNAL INSTALLATION AT WINOROSE CIRCLE 32.700 ANO AVENIOA ENCINAS. 4. TRArr1c SIGNAL INSTALLATION AT WINDROSE CIRCLE 32.700 ANO AVENIOA 8ATIQUITOS. (PHASE IV) ,. THE AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC THRESHOLD roR IMPROVING THE POINSETTIA LANE OVERPASS AT 1-5 15 23,000 AOT WITHOUT RAMP INTERSECTION SIGNALIZATION. POINSETTIA LANE/1-5 RAMP INTERSECTIONS CAN BE TEMPORARILY SIGNALIZED PENDING THE ULTIMATE IMPROVEMENTS. THE LEVELS or SERVICE NEED TO BE MONITORED WHEN THE 23,000 AOT IS REACHED ON POINSETTIA LANE TO DETERMINE THE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT ALLOWED TO GO roRWARO WHILE THE OVERPASS IS BEING WIDENED. • •• ••• 40.600 THE YEAR or NEED roR IMPROVEMENTS IS DEPENDENT ON THE ACTUAL PHASING or ADJACENT ZONES. Ir ASSUMPTIONS USED TO DEVELOP THE INCREASE IN TRArr1c CHANGE. THEN THE YEAR or NEED WOULD BE REVISED TO REFLECT THE ACTUAL RATE OF DEVELOPMENT • ASSURED IMPROVEMENTS TO BE COMPLETED, UNDER CONTRACT. BONDED, SCHEDULED IN THE CITY'S CAPITOL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM OR PROGRAMMED IN THE STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM TO THE SATISrACTION or THE CITY ENGINEER. ·THRESHOLD TRIP ENos· RErLECTS THE AMOUNT OF FMZ 9 DEVELOPMENT THAT CAN BE ALLOWED BErORE CORRESPONDING IMPROVEMENTS ARE ASSURED TO THE SATISrACTION or THE CITY ENGINEER. THESE THRESHOLDS WOULD NEED TO BE REVISED Ir THE ACTUAL DEVELOMENT PHASING or THC ADJACENT ZONES 01,rERS rROM THE ASSUMED PHASING AT THE TIME OF THIS ANALYSIS. BA TIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 U.S.A. INC. ( 11 -C) 006185 May 4, 1988 FMZ 9 Transportation Phasing Urban Systems Associates, Inc. The transportation improvements recommended are based on the mitigation analysis of Pigur•• 7 through 12 in the previous section of this report. 006185 -12 -lagoon/18D May 4, 1988 FMZ 9 Transportation Phasing Urban Systems Associates, Inc. SANDAG/Carlsbad Buildout TRAFFIC FORECAST Future long term traffic projections are provided by SANDAG's City of Carlsbad Fully Constrained General Plan Land Use Traffic Forecast of August 29, 1986. Pigur• 13 shows the unrounded, adjusted traffic volumes from SANDAG'S buildout forecast. Pigur• 14 shows the recommended street classifications that accommodate the adjusted traffic volume projections shown in Pigure 13. Table 5 lists the forecast morning (a.m.) and afternoon (p.m.) peak hour levels of service (LOS) at the intersections adjacent to F.M.Z. 9 which are impacted by twenty percent or more of the traffic generated by F.M.Z. 9, as calculated in Appendices C through E. The forecast ~urn volumes at the listed intersections were provided by SANDAG from the "Fully Constrained Land Use Traffic Forecast". Appendix G contains the intersection capacity utilization calculations for determining the level of service at the listed locations. As shown in Table&, the adjacent intersections are projected to operate at LOS "D" or better during the peak hours. Since intersections are the controlling factors for street link levels of service, it can be concluded that street links adjacent to the intersections will operate at a similar LOS as the intersection. The City's performance standard is to be applied to locations for which the City has jurisdictional control. Obviously interstate highways are beyond the jurisdiction of the City and therefore highway improvements need not be identified on a project by project basis. Since highways such as I-5 carry through traffic from outside the City and serve all the communities along the Oceanside/Del Mar Corridor, freeway main lane improvements should be addressed on a regional basis. The need for freeway improvements is addressed by Caltrans during project study 006185 -13 -lagoon/18D ,- -- ('I -~ 47.3 24.3 AVENU 10.3 117.5 SOJRCE: SANOAG/Carluad Tram. Sllllly Ftllly Ceutrallled 8-al Plan. 8/29/86 FIGURE 13 (UNADJUSTED) TRAFFIC VOLUMES (ADT IN THOUSANDS) NO SCALE \.__ BA T/QU/TOS LA GOON EDUCATIONAL PARK /F.M.Z. 8 ...., ___________ U.S.A. INC. __________ 0_0_6.,,1ss ~188 (13-A) - •••••••••••• LEGEND1 .... ~ •6LaaPll!lmyArtlrlal ■■■ • 4 Lane -Second!l_ry Arterlal/Speclal Treat ■ent <Extra Lann At 1-!5 Interchange) t••·· • 4 Laa Majar Artarial/Special T,-111n ..... •4L.aMMaJl,Artlnal 00 00 0 ■ 4 l.MI Secandlry Artaial FIGURE 14 RECOMMENDED STREET CLASSIFICATIONS BA TIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 NO SCALE 5/88 U.S.A. INC. ----------o-oe-1"ss (13-8) -- - TABLE I BUILDOUT FORECAST INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE (INTERSECTIONS IMPACTED BY F.M.Z. 9 TRAFFIC) LOS A.M. LOS P.M. LOCATION PEAK BOUR PEAK BOUR Poinsettia Lane at I-5 East Ramps Poinsettia Lane at I-5 West Ramps Poinsettia Lane at Avenida Encinas Poinsettia Lane at Carlsbad Boulevard Carlsbad Boulevard at Avenida Batiquitos Avenida Batiquitos at Ponto Drive Carlsbad Boulevard at La Costa Avenue C(.76) C(.73) B(.64) B(.66) A(.45) B(.64) A(.58) C(.79) A(. 56) A(.40) B (. 61) D(. 81) A(.40) C(.80) See Appendix G for ICU Calculations. l BA T/OUITOS LA GOON EDUC A T/ONA L PARK /F.11.Z. 11 .... 51_0_0 ___________ U.S.A. INC. ___________ o_o_B_1'as 8AT02 (13-C) May 4, 1988 FMZ 9 Transportation Phasing Urban Systems Associates, Inc. report preparation for such City initiated improvements as the Palomar Airport Road, Poinsettia Lane, or La Costa Avenue overpass widening. However, to determine the scope of possible freeway improvements to I-5 near the Poinsettia Lane interchange, a peak hour analysis of the buildout forecast average daily traffic volumes is provided in the following assumptions. Assumptions: 1. Eight percent peak hour. 2. 60/40 directional split. 3. Four main travel lanes each direction. 4. 172,700 ADT forecast volume (see Piqure 14) at buildout year 2013. 172,700 x .08. x .6 • 2,072 Vehicles per lane per peak hour. 4 As this analysis shows, I-5 currently an eight lane freeway, has available capacity to accommodate the buildout forecast volume of 172,700 ADT during the peak hour. Although the ideal capacity of 2,000 vehicles per lane per hour is met, certain regional freeway segments currently exceed 2,200 vehicles per lane per hour, which indicates that 2,000 vehicles per lane in the horizon year is considered to be a demand that will be accommodated. Possible improvements to the freeway main lanes could include auxiliary lanes between the interchanges in connection with planned overpass widening, to increase the available lane capacity and facilitate on/off weaving movements. 006185 -14 -lagoon/18D May 4, 1988 FMZ 9 Transportation Phasing Urban Systems Associates, Inc. Additionally Caltrans may install a ramp meter at the freeway on ramps in the future to maintain free flow on the freeway main lanes. The result of ramp metering is to cause queueing at the freeway on ramps and possibly the adjacent surface streets during the peak periods. The effect of ramp metering is to cause motorists to arrive earlier or later during the peak period and spreading out the peak demand over a longer period than the standard one peak hour. Increased use of transit facilities, van/car pools, and alternative work scheduling are methods which help mitigate peak hour congestion and should be encouraged on a regional scale. 006185 -15 -lagoon/18D May 4, 1988 FMZ 9 Transportation Phasing Orban Systems Associates, Inc. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This study was initiated to identify traffic impacts which are likely to result from the phased development of the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park project and additional parcels within the City of Carlsbad F.M.Z. 9 and to determine what street system improvements might mitigate the traffic impacts. This study also evaluated F.M.Z. 9 traffic generation with regard to the City of Carlsbad Performance Standard. Growth Management Program Circulation Element Based on this analysis the following conclusions have been determined: 1. The phased development with a projected buildout year of 1991 of the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park project and additional parcels within F.M.Z. 9, plus an area wide background growth of three percent resulting in a six percent area wide growth rate, may be accommodated by the phased street improvements listed in Tal)le 5 of this report. 2. The cumulative average daily traffic projected at buildout of the Carlsbad Fully Constrained General Land Use Plan may be accommodated, adjacent to F.M.Z. 9 by the recommended street classifications shown in Pigure 14. 3. The projected traffic impacts from the buildout of F.M.Z. 9 to the adjacent street system may be mitigated so that the levels of service at impacted intersections and street sections conform to the City's Growth Management Program Performance Standard for the Circulation Element. 006185 -16 -lagoon/18D May 4, 1988 FMZ 9 Transportation Phasing Urban systems Associates, Inc. 4. It is recommended that ~able 5 be adopted as part of the City's Facilities and Improvements Plan for F.M.Z. 9 and that the street classifications recommended in ~igur• 1, be adopted as part of the City's General Plan Circulation Element for those streets adjacent to F.M.Z. 9. 006185 -17 -lagoon/18D -CD ~ .. n UIL·,to .\~~K-1.HIO'.\ or (iC t\"[H:\'.\11:X"~ APPENDIX A ,.,.,h !.14 M(,.tcol1 ,.,,. ,he: l-.1a 120C 11\,•IJ ..... , ... .... O•-.. ~ fo,n.-111(.U tl,tt 2Jt:i.lG'J Mllf GUii>£ OF VEHICULAR TRAFFtC GENERATION RATEi FOR THE SAN DIEGO REGION -·-IOOTI ,..._,_ _____ _, __ ., ___ ..,,. ___ ,_ _____ _._,. _..._ • .,.,_S.,.0--.T _____ ......,_,_ ________ _ ---,., __ ,,..,,_ _ _.,. ___ ,,_ ______ ...,.,_TNII'"--· ----...---------- lMl9U ..... ,, ............... , ----· o-........ o...r .... ----··-~ ... ·----~·.,·~· ~t: ... °llnatC9ftwert -----.... eo,,-. ...... 19'11ftJO_,.._..,.ltteA JOO.ODON tt ... 1........-1• 11t11orn .... t ~"''• p,_....c.-... ttO-JO ••"'-· text DDO·JOOOOO M tt .,wa..-.Jirl.....-tte,e .,...,, ..... , ..... .,, .... .............. "'-o.,,.C.,,.11, lL"6....,101C',_ .._,._ IOOIIIOM h _,.....,.,.., tt•~R01e6.'4tr0fet ~c•~ c.. ..... ,.,.,~-· c.,..,., .. .. c~...,• o_ ..... fwr1111fl~I,.,. l.,,.._.,,.,. ............ ...,., ... c. ....... .,.,.,,. --.... _., _c....,12 .... , lit ... lchMl ...... .,.. ..... ". ......... , ---. .. C•1111••• .. uMlfl11rttfll IITalATII WHHAY VIIIICll •1111t flAI NII ...... ■:IIIT .W Tall lillllAllH IATI .._.,_.A.. .._ •• ••· ,,... .. Uts,e. ID81tiap1. JOII-... ft•• ....... , .,,. .. , .. ., .. ,._ 2,n..,.._ -.. .,..,. ........ I00/1••.---.. •· ....... ....... , 110,ata1o011.t.,..,_.•• ... 1111 12"' 11 ■1 • ,,ooo.-........ , ................ ....... ....... , UG tOOO-• tCIOO·ac•.--... ,u, ....... 20(1 IOOOIQ ti 1100 K•a• ...... , ........ )()Ot\$00... .... ~ .... • ,.,, .. , '"'"" IO •ODOtct II IQO.-ac,a-... ... IOCkto Dnr·.,.tl'illle'" ... .... &lac••• IMIOQO •. ft .. 40/ecre• ....... ,. ... • .. I■ JI ··••11 ..,.a.,,.,, ....... , ......... ID/1000141. It .. lOOIIP9• n11,11 ■-11,■1 ,0,1000 M ft .. JOOlac,e• •• Jllll:•I ........ 120/\0DO .. h . 12GOl•re• .. ....... , 11•11 ■1 "8/IODOMh.,..,_,,.• " .. ,., ..... ,., IIO/IDDO •· ft .. IIOOllc•• •• """ n• 1111 IQOllOOO .. tt.•• ....... ....... 10/1000 .. ft . JODfac .. • •• 1111■•1 ........ 1/1000 .. h •••• , ••• ... .... ...... , IOIIOOO M h .• JODls,.• • ,.. ..... ■1111 ■1 eo,,ooo .. " . .-.1.,..,e•• , .... ,., ....... IOIIOOO .. 11 .. UOl•r•• • , .. 11.41 llllo l■:11 · ···~"'· .• ,.,.. ........ ... ,1,11 I lht..ant, IO/ec.,e• 12" It II 1111 II 11 '.,, .. .,."'· .,., .. 2111ol■21 , ... ., " IOlt1111•ftt.itOt•r1•• 2•• 11 II , .. ,u, I •1u11•n1, IOl•r1•• ....... .... ,.,, 20, ••• 2111000 ...... ..,.,.. ...1121 "" IJ 11 ,, ...... ... • • -· -......... ..., ............... ~1111: ...... .......,..,,., .... ~, ............................ u.11111 ......... , ........ ............ , ...... 1c .. ,., 11 .... c11a ~• ~inlllf~ .............. I L- '"-"' ..... ,.,~bl 11,..._...I ---........ -·--C-•lal-·--··---·"·' "'• ,_,..4iool C-.... Ollce ...... .._. IN.GOONI l1_1t11• .... o .... ,..,..."' &ewic c.-... , ... ,o,,_ _,.,.._,-v_i. -..... c,rvt••--• ..... --""•--A-..e,nea1t'f ....... l 1,i,-0•.-al• ........ ..., ....... -.-...... ..... l. ... ff,_ .. .,, ,._.,nee .. . c--.. a..,c...., .. .... ,_ llecGuatlralllHNI ... Clult y_,.•Couw• .... n '•illllN o..-s-Jlldtlol ...... ........ , ...... ,., ............ . .... ...... ... ·-•-... Oo-... , ... • D"lacrel c-.,n-.- laranvfflllllli•la,nilvlall -:aoou, .... , __ ,. ,., ..... Multi ......... ....,. ,...,_20DUl•••I ..... Home ............. ,c ............. ............. ............. o..,,., .,,._,., .. .,. ... ...... ,_,,_, .. , ............ . T,.,..., .. ,,.nfKlllt ... . .. _, ,, ... ,.,,,.,,,.., ., .. ., .. " T,en1,11 .. ,.,.1lleill . ,........, .......... ,,_ ,,.,,., --· ,, ...... aaa,ec,.· .I ... N •. ..,..,.-.......... ••ec:••· .,, __ ..... ,.-· 111000111 ........ . .,,_ .... _,a,._.,_. .,, ..... 1,_.,_,.. ,, ........ _ . ., ..... .................... -·-· .,,___ ....... . .,,... ........ . llllll-... 1t.--• IIIIOII0111.l1 .• IIIDIKN• JOIIGOD141 11 •• ,.,, __ .. _ .. IIDIICIOO• 11 .. ICNl'•re•• IDIIODG Ml-11 .• ..,_,.. .. ..... l ., .... . .,., .. . •leer•. llOlec•• 1........., ...._ ••• ... , •... .,... .. eoo,1aoot, ..,....._..,.,.. IOl'IODO 11 ...., .. ilw • .,_.. • JOltene. J00,1e,1• • • ,c....,.....·· llec,e IOalceu••• • . ,.., ... . ., ....... ,, .. JIOI•"· 40lcal,tn· JOh;ou,1•• ..,.,._ . .,,.... .,., •. o,, .... . •••• oa~ ... ,· IDII00014 II. l811M1• 10, ......... yn,1• ., .............. . .................... .., .... ..,.... •• "I_ •• u,........_.u ...... 1GOIIODO• 1, ......... JOOIIOIIOM1. It, t1CIII_,,• .. 1IOIIODO .. ,, . ICIDDI~• •• ,,.. ... ....... n•••• .... ,, .. , ..... , . ,._,.'!', ........ __.,, .. ...... " JM,11 ■1 ... .••. ....... lllo II II 14 .. II ■I ....... ........ 2"1111 -•■t ...... ...... ....... ...... ..... ,.. .... ...... -ll ■I •••• II 1ft ll ■I ...... -ll ■I ... .... 1ft II 11 ,. .. ., h 1111 ...... , ....... ..... ,, 1ft IJ 11 ... ... ........ 1" 1111 -···· ... ... ... II 21 ft IJ JI , .. n• IJ J• •'ll 1141 ....... ... "" .... DI" ... 111, .... , •. , .. ., It ... ,, .•. lft 11 JI ... ,2.■1 •••nJ• ft 1111 .. ..... '"I■., ftlJJI ...... , ...... , ... ... , ... .... ftM ■I ... ... , •••na, ,.,.,1" •• OI,_ '°"'c" IFf r, •• .,_,.,..,.,._.,. ,, .............. •--~•-.., .... SANDAG ICA&.T ......... ..... w•.•BEf. AG( .. ,:"',E<i c"~orf.~N1 Cthtli\V•s·~ C'lltJt,a,t, 0.,.IMat c,c.,,. ... , lnc,n.11 .• fy,,, .. .....,, lmJ.11•··· llt•ih' I•, ... .... ,,.:, .. G•°"e flrMti<>na C••-; Ote.trts,oa• Po!f.a., S,artO.t",.,-, '!",-inMa1c0 ~ 5',ta,tallPach v,,aa.nueo .... ,, ors..• r,. 1 ,: .,ir._~~ LIA-I~ M£U8£AS Caa,tato•a Orf.a:11,,.ICinf o' 1,,.n~fU'"1.tffCII' US ()pr,ann,enr ol VotrnsP -,wl J'f',a,•• <fil Ciif',t, •• ••· 'Vr•'f, ............ U.S.A. INC. BATIQUrTOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/FMZ. 9 11/87 008185 P I f 3 HI 0 LAIID 1151 ..,, ... ual Hultl·f-lly Unit (over 30 D.U./acra) Nultl·f-lly Unlt (und■r 30 D.U./acra) Stnal• r .. tly Dwalllna■ (■uburban araa) Slnal• fully Dwallln1■ (urb■nl&ad aru) latlr-nt/Sanlor Cltl&■n Hou■ln1 Noblla H-• c-rc&tl l■alonal Shopplna Canter, Over 1,2so,ooo aq. ft. 1,000,000 to 1,249,999 aq. ft. S00,000 to 999,999 ■q. ft. 225,000 to 499,999 aq. ft. c-.ntty Shopplna Center N■l1hborhoocl Shopplna Center Crocary Stora Convanlanca Stora fraa■tandln■ a.tall/Strip c-rclal Dlacount Stora Luaber/H-laprov-t Stora furniture Stora laaa.-r .. y Q.ullty laataurant (low turnover) Slt·down laataurant (Mdiua turnover) Stt·down la■taurant (blah turnover) fut·foocl l■■taurant Offtc:ea ~ra• C-rclal Offlca 9 (over 100,000 aq. ft.) S..ll C-rclal Offlca lO (under 100,000 ■q. ft,) Cova.-.-nt Office (other then lltV/Poat Offlca) Library D,,partaant of Notor Vahlclaa Poat Offlca Kadlcal Olf lea APPENDIX B City of San D1■10 ln1l-rl111 UMI Dllnloa-at Dllparta■nt Truaport.atlon UMI Traffic lnal-rq Dlvlaloa UVISID UONIIIWID WDmlY DIP GINlllflOII IIATIS SINWIY (Veblcle Trlpa) July 29, 19166 (llev. 2·2·11) IIIJVIWAY uns1 QNILATJW JNPA.Cr IATISl All c-.a1u .. Older Urlaanla .. c-.1u .. z l Sukarbaa c--,u-z I l 6 trlp■/D.U.3 T T I trlp■/D.U.3 10 trlp■/D.U.3 ·-.. I'' ...... s-a■ driveway rata■• 9 trlpa/D.U.3 J_ 4.5 trlpa/D. u.1 5.5 trlp■/D,U. ft 4,5 JO trlpa/1000 ■q. 24 lrlp■/1000 ■q. ft. 25 trlp■/1000 aq. ft. lS trlp■/1000 ■q. ft}" 28 lrlp■/1000 ■q. ft. JO trlpa/ 1000 ■q. ft. JI trlp■/1000 ■q. ft.3 JO trip■/ 1000 aq. ft. ]2 trlpa/1000 aq. ft. 60 trlpa/1000 ■q. ft.3 48 trlp■/1000 ■q. ft. 51 trlpa/1000 aq. ft. 70 trlp■/1000 aq. f§, 15 trlp■/1000 ■q. ft. 49 trlp■/1000 aq. ft, (700 trlp■/acra) 3 (]SO trlpa/acra) (490 trlp■/acra) 120 trlp■/1000 ■q. ftl 60 trlpa/1000 ■q. ft, 60 trlpa/1000 aq. ft. (1200 lrlpa/acra) 1 4 (600 trlpa/acra) (600 trlp■/acra) 150 trlp■/1000 ■q. ft.4• T T 430 trlp■/1000 ■q. ft (J600 trlp■/acr,)24 40 trlp■/1000 ■q. f\• 40 trtp■/1000 aq. ft. 40 trlp■/1000 aq. ft. (400 Lrlp■/acra) 5 (400 trlp■/acra) (400 trlp■/acra) 70 trlp■/1000 ■q. ft.6 30 trlp■/1000 ■q. ft.6 S■-•• driveway rat••• s-aa drlvavay rat ... 6 trlp■/1000 aq. ft. _J_ _1_ ft 3,6,12 T T 100 trlp■/1000 aq. I 200 trlp■/1000 ■q. ft:1,12 40 trlp■/1000 aq. ft. 40 trlpa/1000 aq. ft. J70 trlp■/1000 ■q. ft l,S, l2 (400 trlp■/acra) (400 trlp■/acra) 110 trlpa/1000 ■q. ft:1,s,12 _L __L --~-- trlpa/1000 ■q. ff.1 T T 16 (600 trlp■/acra) 1 20 trlp■/1000 aq. f\• (JOO trlp■/acra) 6 16 lrlp■/1000 ■q. ft. for 16 trlp■/1000 aq. ft. for 40 trlpa/1000 ■q. ft.6 UH■>l00,000 ■q. ft. I u■aa>I00,000 ■q. ft. I 46 lrlp■/1000 aq. ft.6 20 trlp■/1000 ■q. ft. for I 20 trlp■/1000 ■q. ft. for I 170 trlp■/1000 ■q. ft.6 u■aa<l00,000 aq. ft. I uaaa<l00,000 ■q. ft. I 140 trlp■/1000 aq. ft.1 I I 90 trlp■/1000 aq. f§• I I 800 trl II acre I 1 I I /87 ( p / ) 1 U.S.A. INC. BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 ) 006185 I N 0 UVISID IW,,,.,.,,., aa:DAY 'Dlf calllllTICII U.TII IIWff (Velllcl■ Trip■) Paa• 2 of l LAND 1151 Vblto.-S.nl91 C-rcltl llot■l/Not■l Tour:let C-a-clal/C-r:clal l■cr:aatlon klo S.nl91 r-r-,rcltl Car 0-1..- Caaollne S.r:vlc■ Statton P\e,pcltl 1 .. t1tutlee, Savlnaa and Loan ~k (eacluclln1 drlve·thru lane■) lallk (drlve·thru lan•• only) c,-:,a Ahpr!:f G.neral lvlatlon llrport Ja+eetrt•\ 9 LAra• lnduatr:lal S..ll InduatrlallO 9 LAra• lnduatrlal/lualn••• Park10 S..11 lnduatrlal/lualn••• Par:k Scientific laaearch and Devalo,-nt10 Wanboualna · Corporate llaadquartara lafttal Stona• Truell Teralnal laaUtuUwJ llouaa of Worahlp (Church or S111a101ua) Nllltary laaa lloapltal Coavaleacant Hoapltal .,._.tlcaal four·y .. r Unlvaralty or Coll•&• Tvo-year Coll•■• (Junlo.-Coll•■•) H11h School (S.conda.-y School) Junior Hiah School (Hlddla School) tl-lary School (Crada School) I 51 130 IIUVIIWAY IIATIS l All c-mtu .. trlpe/rooa1•5•6 •11 150-500 trlpa/acr:a1•1 l trlpa/1000 aq. f\• (400 trlpa/acra) 7 trlpa/1000 1q. ft. · (750 trlpa/acra) I 74 200 260 trlpa/1000 aquara trlpa/l0001at,•r• trlpa/ lane • ft5,,,121 ftl16,l2! 5 trlpa/acra1 2 trlpa/aver11• dally flt.1 I trlpi/1000 aq, ft,1 (100 trlpa/acra) l 14 trlpa/1000 aq. ft, (110 trlpa/acrea) 1 12 trlpa/1000 aq. ft,1 II trlpa/1000 aq. f\• (200 trlpa/acra) l I trlpa/1000 aq. !t• (85 trlpa/acra) 5 5 t.-lpa/1000 aq. ,t. (80 trlpa/acra) 3 9 trlpa/1000 aq. 'S• (149 trlpa/acr•i 2 trlpi/100 aq. ft, 1 (0.2 trlpa/1tora1• vault) 60 trlpa/acr• 60 2.5 20 ] 2.1 1.5 1.5 1.0 l.4 trlpa/acra6 6 (100 trlpa/Hch) ta-1pa/■t 1 l tuy/ • clvlllan ,aploye■ trlpa/bed4 trlpa/bad l ta-lpa/atudent1 trlpa/ student1 trlpM/atudent1 4 trlp11/11tuJent1• trlp11/atudent I I I I I I I July 29, 1916 (Rav. 2-2-16) QNILATIVI DIPACT IIATIS1 Ol•r ur:b■at_. c-.,u .. 2 I I s-aa ddveway rat••· ...L 40 trlpa/1000 aq. ff111 (400 trlpa/acra) 40 -o- .,-11 trlpa/1000 aq. ffl (400 trlpa/acra) ..L s-•• driveway rat••· s-•• driveway rat••• T s-•• drlvaway rat••• -- T s-•• drlvavay rat••• J_ T driveway a-at••• _L I T s-u driveway ratu • _l_ 40 trlpa/1000 aq, ff111 (400 trlpa/acra) -o- ,-11 40 trlpa/1000 1q. ffl (400 trlpa/acra) .L s-•• driveway ratu. s-•• drlvnay ratu. T S■-aa drlvavay ratu. -- S-u ..I_, ratu. J_ T s-•• driv-ay J_ ratu. I I /87 U.S.A. INC. BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.MZ. 9 ) 006185 I N -A r UYlSD IIDNtmllD IIIIIIDll nu GDll&ffOII llTIS SUIIUII (Vaa.&cle Tirl,-) Paa• l of l July 29, 1916 (llev. 2·2·11) DlllVIWAY IIATISI QHILATlff INPACI' IIATIS lfctfftlppal Park (W1developed) Park (developed) Golf CourH LAIID USI lay and Ocean leachea/Park Lake (vith boatlna) Z.oo ors .. Llf• Park Karlna Sporle hcUlly lacquetbell/Tennla/llealth Club 'nleateu !!!!1§.1 s 40 6 1000 so 100 4 1 40 LI l trlpa/acre1 trlpa/acre6 trlpa/acra l trlpa/1000 feet1ahore (70 trips/acre) trlpa/1000 f••§ ahore3 (6 trlpa/a5re) trlpa/acre l trlpa/berth l trlp/allendee l (42 trlpa/a~re) trlpa/court (4S lrlpa/1000 aq. ft,)3 tripe/Hat (800 trlpa/acre) T s-a• drlvevay rat••• 1 s-•• driveway rat••• s-u driveway rat••· 1"Dl'lveway rat-■" apply vhen the effect of paHerby trlp• la irrelevant auch •• when the project entrance• (and any distance beyond per the Tranaportatlon and Traffic ln1lneerln1 Dlvlalon) are belna analyzed. Thl• aay reault with either• aanual, non·coaputerlzed atudy or a coaputarlzed ■tudy (■•• DI ). Uae of the driveway rat•• for project apeclfic lapacta near lt■ entrance• doe• not neceaaarlly preclude the u■• of the cuaalatlve trlp rate• for analyzlna the affect■ on the c-lty ■treet ayatu. Guidance can be obtained froa the Tranaportatlon and Traffic lnal,-rlq DlvlalOll at.ff ln each ■ltuatlon. 2s.a "Ll■t of Older Urbani&■d C-.nltl■• and Suburban Co..anltle■ for Trlp Generation R■aponHa." Aleo •-■ "rtaure of Suburban C-ltl .. for Trlp Cenerationa. 3sANDAG/CALTIANS, Sap Dle10 Traffic C,nerator1 (1971·1986, includina atudlea not yet publiahed). 4Arizona Departa■nt of Tranaportation, Trle Generation lntenalty Pactora (l/1/79 v■r■lon). 51.T.I., Trip Generation (1982). 6CALDAMS Dl■trict 4, Trip l!gd1 Gentratlon l••••rch Count■ (1975·1982), 7cc»tSIS. Quick !••eon•• Urban Tray•\ lptlpetlon Jtchnlgu1• pnd Ir•P•J•r•bl• r,r■-ter,. NCHRP B•eort 1187 (1978). 1A ranae le ahovn due to the vld• varlety of land u■•• •••oclated vlth thl■ cateaory. See the "O.flnlllon■ of Land Uae Cataaorlea for Trip C.-ratlon Purpo■••" for additional inforaation, 9"Larae" la appllcabl• vhere bulldlna■ are over 100,000 ■q. ft. or where parcel■ are over 8 acre• ln ai&e. IO.,Sull" h applicable where bulldlna• are Wider 100,000 ■q. ft. vhere parcel■ a,:-e Wider 8 acre• in at&e, 11Includad in hotel/aotel trip aeneratlon rat•• la a City·vlde vacancy rate of 24.6 percent. 12nwa ca5tauranta and financial lnatitutlon■ rat ■• ■hovn apply to fr■eatandln1 facllltl•• only. If any of th••• u••• are part of a lara•r project \... <•-i·• an offlce bulldln1 or a ahoppln1 center) they would have the ■--rate•• the laraer proJ•ct haa. ~------U.S.A. INC. BATKlUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 006185 NO SCALE LEGEND: XX X • Zone Olltributlon XX X • Subarea Ol1trlbutlon LA APPENDIX C PHASE I .... I 096 TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENT AGES BATIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 U.S.A. INC.------------4/88 -22 -008186 - NO SCALE LEGEND: X X X = Zone Olltrtbutlon XXX = Subalu Ol1trtbutlon APPENDIX D PHASE II TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENT AGES BA TIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK /F.M.Z. 9 ~----------U.S.A. INC. -----------11 /87 -23 -008185 NO SCALE LEOEN01 XXX • Zone Dlltl'tbutlan XXX = SINIW. Dl1trllautlan APPENDIX E PHASE Ill AND IV TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES BA TIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 ~----------U.S.A. INC. ----------- 4/88 -24 -ooe1as • ICU Alt. A Mow• Capacity fr' &UE,.t, '"1/s "3"'00 l. ,~, ISOIJ r 3:lo \$00 ,oTAL ICU •11 .:to ·-2 I .~e 0 > -dl ~ IO tJt ..J c < u Move ICU Alt. 8 Capacity ICU . ;J.SL/ APPENDIX F-1 (9A~~oN-ASC'MMIIU1il) •••~.,.,111,T«.-,~,c ,111, flus ,4 Z.NC.lt&ASCI) ~•-Y•'4tl ,111,~ \~89 ''"'~ &#llff', • e1tPf'N,10N• (fl'M8%.) "-' f'5A" "ouR \q83 Po, N-SE..,.,, A. L,\NE 116.:Z ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU ' A L.0.1. L.O.I. L.0.1. N• Mltl1all•11 11/87 BATKlUITO: ~::::~ TMlNAL PA:•,:·~=:• ft -25 - / 00818f Po1NSET'T1A 330 ICU Alt. A Move Capacity t,,• '36£° l~OO ~ :2~S \"TOO 4 'I a.ti .... ,o /5D C. 1:·· '2 -as- 15 co tOilJL tCU Alt. I ICU Mcwe Capacity ICU . :) 'I • /7 •Io ,..,,·f'I •IS •6' APPENDIX F-2 l•T,.,,11.,._0 ... IST1f11G-Ta"Fl"lc., ,,. ....... ,S.ft.\4't, .. , .... ,.,. %Ne.AS.A~ s~ Foll,, ..... lfl ., Cllf\-' '"' BB ''"" 'Z,o,-JE. , 611fil'HS,..t,1 · (rK'-S.'%') • """ ~-"'-~01,1,R. LANE 78/ ICU Alt. C Mow• Capacity ICU l.O.1. 8 L.0.1. L.O.1. tf• .......... ,. Mlt111t1on .. ,u,all•" _/ -------------rusA l-------~- 11187 BATIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 26 -ooe 185 ~ APPENDIX F-3 Ill ~ .,.,., ... AT6C> e..irtS1"1NG "'ll" ~~•c ... 9y &.L•S,A, ll'oA '"'' ,.,""~ , 1 • ~ '1.NeCeA~rb !loll lt'.&AC ,._,'T ' --.., \I\ 18 ""' 'T!.-41 • •11.,.,.,, • ., ~ ~ ( r1tAH'J:) r111P•A"'-MoloiC \u I c, &3 " l ,.. -' 0. PDtN'S&'TYiA ~ t~Hi= 6e> !,58 \3 3 5..,0 11.5:L l '3 9 7 32 59,,-/17 ~'IS- I.,, 1 () C'C ~ <B> ~ ~ q: t ~ ~ 0.. \!- ~ ~ (':i t\'\ <::t a,.. - ICU Alt. A ICU A It. I ICU A It. C I Move Capacity ICU Mow• Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU r;. 5'-' C' .-:u, 17'°,+ s~e ., e I ~ CC' ~i:tr. '-' ---rt 11,-+ \1'4~. -~o ---,,,.u1.1vt l'"7t'f ~ .\o 31o1e• "";~ 4 14/i, "'~, • \0 J't, \ 'vi ~ 2. "'1 • I o \ 500 H: \I\ I !)r-• ~;"' ,/ .. '-42-.S--~B ., -&.I~~-• 2. B ISoo \ i -I~ • c, 1()1~'-. i:t'I JOTA/,. . ,, l.0.1. ~ t,,O.I . Ho ..... •••••n 1tl1etl~_n tilt•••• .. •" j ....._, ______ JUSA l _______ / 11187 RATIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/FM.Z. 9 -Z? -006185 e l. 0. I. - ICU Alt. A Move Capacity ICU l. ..11-•lo 1Soo llA,• t t :2,1 •/0 3 "40" AA1'l'1 t ,-,3 .,, -\SOO ToTAL .,, Move .. r-- Ql ICU Alt. B Capacity ICU . APPENDIX F-4 ( ,r.~Q..ToN. -'"CM MAH) e•,s,-,NG, TttA~F,c. ,~8" "'"' ,,. XNC"A .. &D Fol\. v"•~ ,,91-.,.J. \tl81 f'h,S. Z,NE 'I !Jt,.AIIISION• (,,_~'SE :t). AM P6A IC Ho.,~ 1~88 LA ellS"r A Av E L/'lf ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU L.0.1. 1-. L.0.1. L.O.I. No Mlllt•ll•11 Mlll1allea .......... ,. ~ .... ✓~-'7~-----------_-_-__ ( .. v-_-~--~-_-]-_----------.,-o--·n·n-~-1AC -- .- • ICU Alt. A Move C1p1c1tr ICU l. Jij 3 •fO •Soo "'-""' ff 14se •13 -3"400 r 23"1 •16 \~oo ToTAL .39 ICU Alt. 8 Move Capacity ICU APPENDIX F-6 { SA"-~o ... • ASC"MI\N) Ex,1'Ti111• rtu,,.,,c •~s, f'III$ ''· 'l'flAC.IUA c~o Fol .,.,. Ill \~ 8'1 .... l't II p\\lS 'ZONf. 5xpa.,a1,1e,11, (PMH& 2) PM P£Ak How~. \ '{t8 t.A C:OSTA AV~ ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU L.0.1. A L.0.1. L.0.1. No Mlt111t1•11 M ........ ,_ .......... ,. .-. ~---., -------------(-v-.-A-J----------_'"'!!.,-o---!'nn~R!!"'~ -- I fl~ \. t < ~ ·~ ',( ~ ~ ~ 4n I ICU Alt. A 1-4 Move Capacity ICU L... \ s, ~ 2'"Vt .,, -, ioo ,~ 131.t-\.(..,NC. -,~ 3o•o .,_... '305 . '' -' \ 9\ •• 7i,rAL •'17 ~ :r-• 'O &"\ 2 ~ 0 z - ~ ~ C"C ICU Alt. 8 Move Capacity . ICU APPENDIX_ F-6 ( &l'tt 'to"I-",c~ l'A~N) e:ic.,~T,NG-,.CP. ~F,e \I\ 8" P\uS , ·1. r "'c tt.r A s, t> rro I' '1'5' ~ c 1'181 ~ \I\ 99 ~\\1.5 ~ONE ' • £J(tANS\O N, ( t~~S& X.) "'-~~£At< "01.1..C. I '7'88 L~NE 778 33S ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU L.0.1. A L.0.1. L.0.1. No Mlt11at1on M1tl1atlon Mltl1at1on ~ .. -,a-1----------(VIA)----------o-oe-1~as BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/FM.Z. 9 ~ - - 111.S 631 " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ In I M ICU Alt. A Move Capacity ICU 4 1,s-:1,2 .'3, \ E,e-o ,~ ,~c,.1.1.-,e, ,, ! 3 t"'" i. er. • I 7 ~ ,,oo ToTAL .,, '),, 'A • -2 Q) 0,. 0 z - -(ll fl\ ICU Alt. Move Capacity a ICU APPENDIX F-7 (1JAlllTol'\J-~SC~M'1t.N) Ell..\'1.,-,Nc;. '\'"1'~fF\C. ,~e, (11\wS ,1 '%.NC ~&.#Iii,,~ Et) Fo~ Vt'A~ ,I\ e, •~ ,~ss f'\u..~ z.o"'e , • E1..i'-.NS\ON • (t"~SE:r.} 1'1'1' Pe'AI< ~v.Q. l~S! LANE ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU L.0.1. 8 L.0.1. L.O.a. No Mltltatlon Mitigation Mitigation ....., ___________ [_VI_A_]----------00-,~,as 11187 BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 -:21 - 0.. APPENDIX F-8 ! 0 ( B AR~N-~.,C~M"N) I' ~ Ct! ex,S'T\N~ ~f\Att~ \C:. ,~~ Pld ~ ,,. XNe«.ta#ll.'SE.'t> Fo~ YEA"' ~ \'\6'1 a..~ \~98 P\us -z.o,,1E, -~ 0 • () "' Q. g r-(: '-Y"N~\o~, (f'MI\S~'l') H C'( • -"M ~Ali( \-\OU~ I '138 Po1N41i.e;TT, P>.. LA.r-J E I./A6 ,.,.~ 1/o/ /75 631 669 2oS '18 ;J.& B /01 ~ ( i l"t Q) ~ C'( ~ ~ 0 ~ "' In ICU Alt. A M ICU Alt. 8 ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU MO V 8 Capacity ICU T !l.~6+ ,,s •).S \6 00 L... \ :I e •I/ \~00 _'tS. •Io -----I "TO 0 ToiAL • 1/6 L.0.1. A tia~ie'atlen L.0.1. j No .... •••••011 M•ttaatton _/ "----------{-V-SA-□-------~ I I 187 D & ~11"'\l ll'T'l'\G I & '-ll'\l"\U cn11r. .6. Tlnu .&. I D & C,1,t' IC' u 7 Q -3 2 -0 ~_81~85~ -- -- Po lNSi!TT1A 1/05 Move ~ L.. ---- 3'?3 205 168 ICU Alt. A Capacity ICU ~~\·\~ .J. 'I \ (,~O \~I ., C) \£00 2 o.S .,~ ,., 0 0 ToTAL .51 t ~ "' C'1 ~ \ll C) ~ ' VI ~ • "' ! I'\ ~ Cfl z ICU Alt. ■ Move Capacity l.O.a. A L.0.1. ICU APPENDIX F-9 ( I "t°"0"4 • ,i..~c H MAN) &a.,!lii\N .. ,.RAPP,e \~9, P\"'5 ,4 I.Nc;RaA,s.E.t:> FoR. y£Alf \~ &1 Q.~ \~ 88 P\1.1S -Z.oNE ct fJC.fl\N~ION• (.f>I\A~E ~) f'M PEAK H4''41( ,er~ L. A.f\J t! ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU L .O. 8. • No Mlll•atlen .......... ,. Ml .. 1•t1on ....... ,,-,a-7----------[-V_S_A_)--------_3_.3-~00~6185 BATIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 - ICU Alt. A Move Capacity ICU t ,,_.. i;3;~,o~ •/7 31.\ C,O L. ~,, . ,s 1500 r ,~~ .,~ .. l.!iOO ,,, ,o.,,.AL •1/,. Move r- 0 r- ICU Alt. 8 Capacity ICU APPENDIX F-10 (. & •4'TON. "Sc "'~•..i) 1-,.,-.~,N~ ~"ff:\~ ,~,, P\1&S ''• lNC-.& ",..._'t) trott. VIII', \4\ B, 1 \4' 8 8 c:.ww \'\ ,, P\u S • ~oNe • IEJ.PMlfllJN• (t'Jt"S'lr) ~llo' \1'1!11\K ~otAf 1qg4 f>o,N~e.,T,A LANE ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU L.D.I. A 1.0.1. L.0.1. Ne Mltl11t1111 Mltft•tl•n Mlt11at1on ,,~,.--1----------[,,..U_I_A_J---------~o---oe~~ BATIQUrTOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/FM.Z. 8 -34 - APPENDIX F-11 ~ •s-r,""•1"at> ••\ST\#"' "'•P•~ I'\ "' -•r ... ,1t Fol.,,,, '"'"'~ , ,. ~ ~"'eta.~sa.C) f&etl v._.ct ,. I"?, 1"lfi ... Q,eot ,4'e, Ph,.~ !:•NE., 51tt'AN•••N t ~ (f",_ ... S) - \i /.M f•1t1' ,,_.d . \ ~3q " ~ N Po rN«s£-rT, A \VI ~ 'O t-AIVe :i., 161( ..,~ '-'S'S -s,s 310 t!!J'lo J6 '"' ,o ll's!J. l/0 ~ 1 ~ © --~ "' "' 0 { U\ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ "'-~ ICU Alt. A ICU A It. I ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU Moye Capacity ICU rr; .. ~r.,r •/3 --:J ouw __. 2 0 ~\\ 0,1,. • IC ~ 31.{00 ..... " ,: • 1S-•\ C ,~co ~:"' ~ 3'3 , le /500 ,.,,._ r TIJ7 IU. . '1'3 1.0.1. A t,,O.I. l.0.1. ) tee .......... " lt11•••~-" Mlt111tlon ~ '-----------1 USA l------------:=0~08185 11187 lll.&TJnlllTnA I AGOON EC>UCATIOtrfAL PAAK/F.MZ. 8 _ -35 - ~ APPENDIX F-12 M ·•T1 M O,'re 0 • a., Vt,""-'t"'l'llllf-J.: "' .... 5y ►IAfl•fl1~U ~IA~ •i• ~ ll'ICjllAU.1> F•t. Vl'9/C \'I.ti, 141191! -.... \4' ,, ,\ll1, a::.c,.., E, ., .I(, .. ,.,, .... lJ ~ lP14~•zr). ~ -fN\ Pe A It M...,.<t (qi~ \ ..a ~ " -~ LANG. 't. 13'- 6~o l!,9c, 3Z JJlo J8o <I ~ "' 'IQ ~ ....... ~ "' .@ ICU lit. A ICU Alt. I ICU Alt. C Move C1p1clty ICU MDVI Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU r?:~ 6So '3 O~Q • ~ 2 __. \ ~ C •1~ 'h ~ • \ 0 3~00 Ill; \I\ ,;-~ ..l." 0 . \ \ ,s~o ~ If -\ 0. I iu~ NI' 11 -ro7AL • ~ '3 l.0.1. A ~-0.1 . .......... " 1111111,!tft .. 11,, .... " _/ ~----------1 USA l-------~3~6----::0~08185 BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 8 -- L.0.1. - ICU Alt. A Move Capacity l.. ..JJ_ 1500 f f 31, 3t.4GO r ,.,e ,~c,o 'Tr;TAL ICU •Io •/() •/J •3'- Move '() Ill r- ICU Alt. B Capacity APPENDIX F-13 { &~th"oN. ~C:" M~N) ax, ... .,., .. , .,.._P..Ff,c. ,~s, Ph1S ,, 'I111e«EA'lft> F'o~ YIAil. , ~,,,'"es .... , 41 ,, """ s - "ZoH£ 'I EX 1'ANS10N • (f'KA.SE D') AM PEAi< Noult '"~9 LA t:oSTA AvE BS Ii B .511 ICU Alt. C ICU Move Capacity ICU ' ' L.O.I. A &..0.1. L.0.1. Ne .......... ,. Mlt111lleft Mtt111t1on -,.-,e7----------[UIA]----------o~o~~ BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 -37 -" APPENDIX F-14 --{ 8~A."'t"oN. "~C:~MAN) ~-.\,r.'T\N' 'T"AF,,c. ,~ 80 P\..is f '. 'l.NC~£P,..~Et> Po« VeAR. \~P7, ,~i!o.....,/\~llf Pl11.S • ,Zo,JE 't ~x.PAr,1S10N• ( Pt\,-.stU) q ~ f,-., l)SA t(. \40W ~ \I 11~, ~ ~ -t..A Co ;-r VE 0 ,:is "> ,.,,,,. ft) :i. "/ D 7,:2., <t ~ "' J <:I. (( u l,o \l) 0 a \J\ C'( ~ <l ~ ' r-r- cYl ~ ' ICU Alt. A ICU A It. a ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU L. f ~;2 •Io 1500 1t Sos ./S ':i~ C,"' + ,a '-4 I • IE, -\SDC> -- , o -r!l L.. •'(/ &..0.1. A l.0.1. L.0.1. Ne .......... " Mftl••"•" ......... on ~ •• ~~-~7 -------L-v-,A-J---------~o~o-~1/8/lf. 1R • u .,, -- ICU Alt. A Move Capacity ICU L. ;c .,o I Soo u:., t t ~ !"1 . '" ~400 ..,. : ... r 130 • \ 0 ,sco N: f". ro,AL •30 ~ t' ICU Alt. 8 Move Capacity ICU 130 APPENDIX F-115 6 X\S.,-, NG,. 'T ~ A FF1 c. \"'\ e, ~\v.~ 1' -,. "fll!e'tf.AStlO Fo" )'aAc, \•\15, ,1 \"\06 Al"\d \"•' ~h.16 'Z"WfE. 4t SxPAtJS ION-( l'#ASl.lI~ AM PSA1< Hc,'41( AVENI C,/J 1$A7i Qu,1i,$ 1-//0 ICU AIL C Move Capacity ICU L.0.1. A L.D.I. L.O.I. No Mlll11lle11 .......... ,. .. Ul1•tton ~11-,e-1----------[UIA)----------~oo~~ RATll'.lUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/FM.Z. 9 -39 - ICU Alt. A Move Capacltr ICU Move L.. \ ~" • I" \~CO No;.,, ~, '3 'I.S° • I 'l ~~t'C, r ~'2 •IL{ -\ ~ o" To,-A L • ?~ " Q \(\ " l'1\ ...... ..... ICU Alt. Lil () l.'} ~ t1 () f't) \() e Capacity I,, Cf\ C"'( ICU APPENDIX F-18 e I(, ,.~ ...i Gr T«. ,., .. F ,c: \C\ 8' P\~S. I\ i. 'S.wc.«-•Me.~ ~.-« V-Act \t\ 9i., \ C\ 88 °""'" \I\ l'C, Pl\.o.S ,Z:;,N5 ct •1tf~N5\o~· ( PMASE lf) p,vi ~liAIC \-\o"'t \'i8~ Al/EN, '0~ 8AT14>t,,7oS ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU , L.0.1. A 1.0.1. l.0.1. No .......... " ........... ,_ M•t111t1on • ~.-.,A-'7--------(--V-IA-J--------~ ----a,--·•-&-•-···· -----·-·· _ _ • .dn _ 00818t s:,..o \. t ~ ~ ,:) ~ ~ h I ... ICU Alt. A Move Capacity ICU Move ....L. 2 ~s -1-::i o e • ~ 'I \600 i~ ,~S+f4..,,.SO • J 0 :s-•- _,__ .2 ,2. .,, -,-,~o ,o,AL • .5 I ~ - .... 0 ~ ~ • 2 0 z 0.. c,.. C'( ~ ' ICU Alt. Capacity 8 ICU APPENDIX F-17 (S~ftTON• ~'SC"M~tJ) •~\,.~'""'-~ttt.flf',c ,._ e, , '"' ''• :tllolCltl!A~IEt> t=oR. 'flAtf ,~s,, ,~s, .. 11\d ,~,,, Ph,s • -Zo...aE q E1..tANS.10N-l~MHUt) AM Pelill(~ouR ,qi ( L."Nc 358 -&-- ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU L.0.1. A L.0.1. L.0.1. No Mlt11atlon Mlll1at1on Mitigation ~.,-1-a1------------I-VI--A-]------------o-a_.a1as BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PAAK/F.M.Z. 9 -41 - --\ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ll\ • ICU Alt. A .... Move Capacity ICU Move J .. &.(06+ 28 8 •1/3 ,·&oo ,~ ~2"'1+1.!f-18, ~ODO .,.., ~'~ •/8 ....-\iOO -rD-rlU. •7.S t-- N ('t Q hi U\ ,. • 2 0 z " ~ ~ - ICU Alt. Capacity B ICU APPENDIX F-18 ( SA«. -,.ON • "~c" ""AN) ea.,~,-,fll~ 'TRA1-f,e ,qs, PI..S ,t ~NC«e ~SEo Fo1t. Y6AII: v,s,, '"''·"'" ,~,, p\1,,£$ • ZoNE ct e ,c P1-NS,0N• (Pl41\S81t) f'M \')l:AI< t,lo1o1.J. \qi, LA.NE: I ,-o l/33 47'{ ~ ICU Alt. C · Move Capacity ICU L.O.a. C. L.0.1. L.O.a. No .......... " Mltl1•t1on .. , .. ,atlon ~, ,-,s-1----------[VIA]----------~. BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PAAK/F.M.Z. 9 OOS 185 -42 - t APPENDIX F-19 ~ 0- (9A.-,'toN ·"S.C.'°'~""') -Q) ~ "' .A,s.,-,N~ Tft."F~,e \41\I' P\1.1S a •>. ~NetlE ASE.D Feet VE,4(( ~ ,~ ,, , ,~Ba All\., ,~ a, '"'s • .... In • "' B ~ -r-'ZoNe , ExPAN'StON•(PMASEtr) \n N z • AM P~AK l-lo1tR ... Po1NSeTT,A. l qi'1 LANe 'fS-B '-"J ,eo 700 711 :i l(g.. "" ,268 I :l. 9 -\\. ( ~ t ' ~ ~ Cf) ~ Q ' ';), ln I ICU Alt. A ... ICU Alt. 8 ICU Alt. C Move Cap•clty ICU Move C•paclty ICU Move Cap•clty ICU .., 143+\BO • l~ t,c:,o L. JJ!:4 • IJ. \500 __.... j\~ ,lo \"100 ~.-~ ' -r()1AL •'18 L.0.1. A L.0.1. L.0.1. ) No .......... " Mltl••110 " Mlt11at1on __,/ ~--------[-V-SA-1----------,,,a7 -·-·-··---. ----... --··-•-■-uao -•-u•-··--008185 - 1./1/ ICU Alt. A Move Capacity ~ ~C\'-' ~ 1.ll. \f»OO ~ \ 3S' -\ Seo ___. 2 2.:? \jOC ToTAL L.0.1. \. ! l 0 ~ \,\ In M '-t 1t \c ~ 0 'Cl ~ l,, I ... ICU Move •.3:3 • lo ,M,'11 . ,~ •~6 GI. ~ V\ ~ • ~ "' i M ~ K - 0 ~ I') ICU Alt. 8 Capacity ICU APPENDIX F-20 ( eo.4'."'io._.. "~C\4 Mt."") EJ...,S"'i1N6 Tlt~FF,c \~86 tl1t!. •% ~Ne~e~ .. £l) Fo~ Vl,4.t( \l\8"T1 \C\89 CMO( ,._,, Plus ZoNI! ct ~Y.. fANS.I o~. ( ~~ASf'Jr) fM PEAK '°'0"~ ( '{~ ~ lllNE 4> ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU A L.0.1. L.0.1. No Mlt11allon I I /A7 .. ..... tton Mltlg•llon ----------------_(l'~~ J ----_ .-.. -. -_-_ -__ -_ -.. -------4~4~---:::o~o-:-e_ 1 s s - ICU Alt. A Move Capacity ICU f~ 5'11\ ""\\C\1,, • I'\ 3&.\00 \., ' i.11 .,, '500 r 110 .Jo ,., c,c, tO'TAL •l/5" ICU Alt. B Move Capacity ICU . APPENDIX F-21 (1!1,Al.'Tol"l-A.'5C"M~N) ~,,t.,\HG, ,.(\ ,.,F,& \\8" f'\IAl 1:Zi,. XNt:IUA.~•t) F•"-Yf'A• \4'6,, \'1&8, ,~e, ~ ,,~0 ""'. Z.oN•, ~l( PAN1'1CN, (.flO,sf'.m.) PM PEAK l'°'OIA~ I er 'TV no 768 ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU : L.0.1. A L.0.1. L.0.1. N• Mlll11lleA Mlt11alleft .......... " .~.~,.~'7------------[-U_I_A_)---------.. -t:.---!!:o~~~e1a1 IV) APPENDIX F-22 \I, ~ ,,..,.,,,,.,,. r,o • • ,,,..,,., "Tt11 P.t1,.'c ..... IV&M•A Folt\11\86, P\1&!. l~i. ~ I ..,e, "•"'• • <> 111-0C\ YI A~ 141 I,> .... ~ ~ 1'\'91 \1\l'f -.-,t \~~• ''"'" \J • ~ 0.. -ZoH~ • 6xPttNCa,•"'·(t'l\~5e ml A* fSA k. H 014,t, ~ ' \ c, q D ~ PDIN$6-rT1A 9\ ~ '<) LAIV'E ,, 186 37 ,~() 1/18 1169 /7 :23.2 ;.e, 19.:,- t Cl to fo .... \'\ -~ V\ ~ <:t ll) C ~ (l ~ CC) ~ rn ICU Alt. A ICU Alt. e ICU A It. C Move Capacity ICU Moye Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU n-6'-le • .'l I :JDCQ ___.. '2o ,.,'\S/z • \0 --:--311\ 00 M,'"'I ~ \ \ s-• \0 I 500 ,,,.: .... J 31.\ •lo \i o" M;"' ,oTAL • 5 \ l.0.1. 1..0.1. l.O.a. ..1tt111ton Mttl11t1on ~-------------rusA l-----------~n~n~A1A.r::: Po1N$e-rr,A I ""2 I I 77¥ I I 372 I ICU Alt. A MOYI C1p1c1tr {? -,20 ,:SD() 0 __.., \l '34-a,~ ~ 2""00 ~ 2 6/S-_ ,sco ), -11.. I '?"o to7A l. l .O. I. ~ + ---- I . I"'-" -~ --T ' 11 ~,y I ~ .-- /P,:;J I -I 2,s ~ t'( ~-- "' ~ ~ ~ ~ --~ t ~ 0.. --ICU A It. t - '-- APPENDIX F-23 &,s'T,11111il,.&O &1-,,T,Nt. ,.,._,,,c IJY"' .. A ••" ''" P\1.LI. ,:a,-,. :lNCil&A,i,-.C> ~ Y6AA ,,,,, ,,1,,,,1 .. "-4 '"~o ,,~~ ) -ZotJI 4' IJC,AN'C1•N• (flAIIZC. PM (>eAII-Ho .. ff \9'tO t.A#J: 'i' /',IP ~ f:ll/ I ,,,---711...o i ,eao I 0 I '156 I """" t "' Q 4 ~ (Ii -•, -0 "' ~ I ICU Alt. C ICU Mow, Capacity ICU Mow, c·a p IC It 'Y ICU . ;; ,., • I"' ..... II\ • 16 ., 0 Mitll •60 A t,0.1. I.. 0. I. ... ....... ,,." ....... ~" ............ . -. ____ tusA l------____/ ICU Alt. A Move Capacity ICU ~ J.33 •/0 \,500 ,,,, .. ,,, tt M32-_ 21400 • 13 r ·~~ •l2 -,~oo lf)TAL .,s ICU Alt. 8 Move Capacity ICU . APPENDIX F-24 ( S"1'.°t'ON ---.sc~ ... AN) E1.,~.,., ... c. "T'l'tAFt:-.c. ,1119, PIIA!l ,,-i XNC~EA~Eb. ~o-. Y,11~ , ,,1, ,~ 89 , , ~ a, •"'Cl ,~" o t'tl4S. -Z.OHE. 't E JC PANS10 N• (PMUI! llr) AM PEAtt. How"-t'fqO '-~ C.O·St A /\ v E 183 ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU L.0.1. A L.D.I. L.0.1. N• Mltll•ll•1t Mltl1•t1•11 Mltllltlon ~ .. ,~a~1 ------------(V_I_A_J---------~oo'!'"'e~~ a a "PM"\lll"P l"\ Ill I & 8 • - - ICU Alt. A Move Capactt, l. 2,.3 ,s-oc, tt s,e '74/00 r ~'48 ,.5,,0 ToTAL L.0.1. ............... 11/87 ICU Move • 18 •Ii .,, •S2 A A&"P__...,11 .. ,.._8 I ICU Alt. B Capacity ICU APPENDIX F-25 ( IS~t~oN -ACC H""AN) i!ll.\S'?°\N~ TC\AFi::,c •~86 ,,i..s l'l4 1NC~i"~S1> Fer« Yl'IIR \4'111, ,1B8 ,,1i, ~ 11111~<> Plats_ 'Z.o-.lE q ~-... fAN~ION, (.PMA~•m) i'M Pe At< '°'ou~ ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU ' L.0.1. Mlt111t1on ________ .......,_.../ ..... ~--' • 49. 00818f ICU Alt. A Move Capacity ICU t... \3" • ID ,5r,t, fl,: • 1 t :2,.q ... , • Io :S'"' C, 0 ... ,·,. r jqo • I 3 I ~o• ioTAL .3"3 ICU Alt. B Move Capacity ICU 7.S- 190 APPENDIX F-28 ~X\ST\NG TRArF1C 11\B, f'l'-L~ 12.•,.1,...eC•A-S~OF~« YeAl(l'IS1 ,,~ss, 11\f,•-' lll'lo PI\.\S ZDNe' ~'I. fA/IJS\oN • ~M f'J;AI<. Ho"'t< ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU ' L.0.1. A 1..0.1. L,0.1. N• Mltlt•tl•ft Mlt11all•ft Mlt111t1on ,,.11-1a-1 ----------[_U_I_A_)----------0-0--- "•Tanun-n~ 1 AGt)ON EDUCATIONAL PAAK/F.M.Z. 9 -50 -618! - ea. > °" 0 <t C \fl ..J ~ ~ ICU Alt. A Move Capacity ICU Move l... 'I.\ 5" •ID 14Se,o r-,.,'Y\ 11 'I•~ •/~ :S,ateo r I.\ 05 .,; -l~•o . TtJTAL •'11 lo Q ' .. :,. \'f\ ~ ~ ~ (' r,.. -~ - ICU A It. 8 Capacity ICU APPENDIX F-27 llt, n-11+1 C. T'ff.A FF ,c ,,. Q' PIIA.S II. i. SNc:&•A-Sa.D Fo' Yllltt I'\,.,,,~ IS 1, 111,__, 11'fo Ph,,,S ~oNff 'ff 6-t. t'AN,10N PM PE/4~ Ho"'~ \qqv Jc7o sos ICU AIL C Move Capacity ICU ' L.0.1. A L.0.1. L.O.I. - . t i ... ............ ............ Mltl11Uon ~ .. -,,-1-----------(_V_I_A_]----------'"'!!'o~oe~<a: BAT10UrTO8 LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 -51 - --- - Po1NSETT1A /063 \ ~ :)-- " . 2 ~ '-0 -z ~ ~ \ll ~ t"( 1.,, \W) I H ~ - APPENDIX F-28 l fi.Mt'ToN • ASCt\ MAN) eA,si-,N, ,~A.fF, c ,~e, ,,\.l~ l~i. 1.tJC ~€As eC> ,...,~ ye.\i.. '" e,, '"ea, ,q, 9, ""-' ,,q, 0 PIia zo NE Cf E~ fANS10N • lf~ASfm) fi,,.f/11 C)e'A \"-'°'ow~ '"" .,__..,. 37B fqC\V L~/'IIE. 37? © 901 ICU Alt. A ICU A It. 8 ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU ~ !l. ,, .. -z 2 2 •32 _, 2 ~, ·2 0 \l:,elO \~00 ,v \•' -t"' ~•!IS • II ,}·• \{-!,,-1-U '3 •oo \!!)Oo ·II -----:J 79 •-l 2. 3-r i7 •22 ~ ,;o"' ,-, 0 " 10TA'-·65 10TAL .s~ L.0.1. f3 L.0.1. A L.0.1. No Mltleatlon Mitigation Mitigation -ll-/8_7 ____________ [,..VI--A-1------------0-0~8185 BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/FM.Z. 9 -52 - - -- '\.. I ~ ~ \) i:. ~ In A ICU Alt. A Move Capacity ICU Move -L. s ,a+~".3 ·S1 _, 1600 ,ye-\~'\ ,.4-.,'ll •13 , t·-o-3oc.o ...-"3 t-11 ''"" .Jo .-- 7'o7Al ·1• l O 8 D L.0.8. ,. ~ 0.. . 2 0-0 z ~ 0- (Y) ICU Alt. 8 Capacity S~B 1S-oe1 ,q,+a.i \ !;_ 0 0 '3 '-13, \iOO 10-rAL APPENDIX F-29 ( B~ft.'Tol'J. A'5•!ri M"N) h\iTul!G, 'Tft~l"F1C lil\ 9, PIU.S 124 1NCRtASl'O Fo« V•AA ,,s,, \ \8 6 J \ 'f9, 1/M'f,i I 4\ 4\0 Plie6 '%1Jf!IE if' E11PM,10N, (f't\ASE.DI) 9M Pt:Ak l-\£1t,1ft. lqqo LANe 1:2 3 ..,__-f .3f3 1/66 535 I CU A It. C ICU Move Capacity ICU -JS • I~ • .2 0 .1; C L.0.1. • · · Mltle•tlon Ho Mitigation Mitigation ..._,-,1-e1------------(-U_I_A_)-----------~o~o-=-e1as BATIOUITOS LAGOON ~~~C_:'TIONAL PARK/FM.Z. 9 - Move -r L- -- ioS /'). s I o'I ICU Alt. A Capacity ICU ,es-~'3~o ·32. 1600 l,j .,,. \"!>Do \2~ •lo 1-ioo ,t,rAL .5'( ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ' "' ~ t'i ~ 'O \I\ ~ • ~ g ~ ,. "' a - ICU A•t. I Move Capacity - ICU APPENDIX F-30 {Ga..lt"T'oN-~sc1ho,N) E,c,,s.T,NC. ,-1'AFF,c \~ 9, p\1,1.S \J.;. l,.NU5AS•t> 5=o'l YEii~ • I ,,1, \ ~ 18 I \ 4\ 94' o.ouf \ ~ ,o p(11S, Zof\l& q E.xPANS10..a.(.rMsUJ1) Sos- eo'I •cu Alt. C Move Capacity ICU l.O.a. A L.0.1. L.0.1. No .......... n .......... ,. Mlt11at1•n ~----------[_V_S_A_)------------::o:'.":'"oe1a5 11187 BATJQUrTOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 -S4 - \'11 11 !"!:-1 I !1/\ I I /' I 't' I '' t'· 'I ICU Att. A Move Capacity -r "3"12+l'l' I Ito o Li. \ 3~ 1sou ::z. -u:, ---. -, ,oo To,Al ICU .. 33 • /O At,-,, •I' '.5, It, 11 A I 'I' I 1111 I 1: I , I ; ' .. ,, f' 'f I I t •1-ti 1 ,, It "!", I,-f' ,,_ • f 1-, '• '' ,._,.,' ••• t I' I' l' I .,,,. I ~' ,1 1,1 -~-' .j ,, I -r I I ~ ; j ,: ' ICU Alt. I ICU A•t. C Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity •cu l.0.1. A 1.0.1. L.0.1. No ......... o" "'"••11•" .......... n ..... ,-,,-e1------------[-V_S_A_u------------o~o---e1as BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/FM.Z. 9 -55 - ' V, °' ) APPENDIX F-32 4, ICU All. A ..... caucllr ICU .,.i L Allo ~ 1. ... -"). i "1. ,')..I, -.... ".1000 r s 1.1. ,1.. C\ 1100 1"n'16..I--.1\ ICU All. 8 ..... coacllr ICU 'f E'N'--\C\C\ \ A.M f>r"b.-C. ~o .. ct.. lu\'lll. , .. ,.~, .. 'Slc..a.1~'- "'-""'1 s.,...,.,_. •..... cs ...... : A'l.'l\4 .... 8't s A IIT -w "'""'"' IIOUVt" "1"\l,&.u.,. -,p,.C.:'11).].,IIP" _t C ,!!,._A II. ,-,en,. ,.u ,,. .,. ..... Clp ■cllr ~-- ICU &.D,I. c_ l,1D11.1. I l.O.I. Ill Mllftallea II Ut Ill Mllltlltell 2..oc l'l.04 ;r t ·• <I I ·• -c 1! l' ~ ICU All. # I 11, •• c1pu11, · ,:.a r l.0.1. . . .J . .S. . >-. r-. --=-==-t , .. ~ ·.~, .. ,. !-~ ,.... ~ I ~ . -- -,: c::.J .~ I. I tit .. llltatlaa tllloa1•,. .; . .... -·t.· ------- ----.,__-· ... ~ . ...__, . ...,,.. =• 11 •. ..at:·.,,J&;-.• .. ------r~ --------[ml1-------~ ---------------· 'i1!;.l ------------- ~/88 BA TIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F • : J l•I •i • l.: I lrl -., ) ) APPENDIX F-:: 3 ------------------.----------,.-------------------------- ICU Alt. A 1cu· All . • Uovo Capacity ICU Mova Capacity '-'"" ..... -~ ,1- / 'l_C S 1Joo .11 ,, '"" _4b ~ --r.,""TN--iq l.D.I. 'II t.-D.I. ICU '1E"'-ll.. IC\<\ I A-JJ\. r1:. l\,-L .i..:.w fl \u \"T~ 11-liCfl•>-\ <;\C..JJ "-L. µE."'-"l a ... ~ .. .,., f!t-><1oD~••: ,s.)<A,.., f\.A.><{! ~ ,All T "TI.tl,i \fN. =-~Vf,. "1~"1'"C.."'li;ii."\f~ fJCTL"u ! CJ!,./' ~t• ,f,;, IIL·L Move Capacity 1.0.1. Mlll1allo11 ICU ... Mlll1allo11 y ........ .. '--------(VIA]-------- 1 .,_. _ __.J ~i.r=-"'- ..! -.! '-',· I • '"'f\,I _. ~ I Ill, ., ~di,---===- c~ .. ,. : --_,, c:... ----------------------------------- wz~-, ca.Ja:.1 • ---- -- L I: I . ... l .•. . .-J .. I j • : •I I •I ·1 ••flr•tl;-, .._ ______________ n ... -------------- ~/88 BA TIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCA TIOU,:. '" _.; < : 1 . .:. J l•J,i :.i u, CD ) ~ g J OIi 1)- ::: --- •cu Alt. A •cu 411. 8 Mo1rt C1pu:llr •cu Mow• Ctpaclty ICU L\. "?.SI .1.~. ISOO ft • 1s.+ '}4,X, , l. 1.. r ')."~ _,.., ,s,,o 10,,.,.l-t,'1.. l.0.1. ~ L.0.1. APPENDIX F-34 ~fAt. \C\'\S A..M-f'f:Al(.l.\c>ul!.. 7/b ~ •cu A•1. c Mo1rt Capacity L.O.a. M1t•1at1011 •cu /" MOYD C-- 11:" r l.0.1. ICU All. A Cap•clly ~ l'!><X' '1'1"7 ~ -si..s ~ ""t"0it.1- ... ............ ..11 ...... ,. ----------[USA)----------~• Mlll1at1011 <;) ~ \/E'A'1.. \9 '\ S ,:: ~ ~ P.M. PEA-!. I\O-JR... "' ' ::E ::s. -; ~ P~,>J~(Ti,.-. L/1.IJC ~ ~ ,tb I ~ ~ @_@ I 7-44 §. ~ Q ~ --It-~ ..,, ~ ~ J ~ ~ ' 0 -~ •cu Alt. a ICU Alt C ICU Mow• C ■p•cllr •cu Mow• Capacity ICU • ~ ">,_ .'l..., . l.4 J {, -p L.O.a. L.O.a. M1t•11llo11 ........... ,. !1/88 BA TIOUITOS LA GOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 006186 u, I.D ) APPE~DIX F-35 -----------------:---------... Ill '( ~ " 'fE,1>,-._ 1'\'\5 :t II -Cl !)EA,c. \~ 0"'<:l. ~ " N A.M. "' ~ 2 Ill ::,, ,t, -"( i;; "' ,... LA. E- 7 ICU lit. A ICU Alt. I ICU Alt. C ICU Alt. A ICU All. I ICU All. C ..... c1,ac11r ICU "''"' c.,. tltJ ICU ..... C1p1c1tr ICU. ..... Capacllr ICU Mou C1P1ellr ICU ..... C1pac11, ICU fr ..:z..1£_ . J.1 ~ :l} (!7S S.-o • "l. "I -'l.11 -.10>11111. --. °J400 ~,... n.s~,1. .I 3 ~= Ll.. i,1- 3C()o .10,'.\111. fr ~ • 'LS, ~-o Yr ""°~~ .,o...,., "-c.-:-:.; --.:!!'.}__ . II -~'tDO -n<T>-L. ,,;4 -rnTA• .78 1.0.,. A ~.o.,. L .o.,. ... 111,1,111111 111••11 •11 .......... .. '----------fY.SA }-------- &.o.,. c , .0.1. L .o.,. ... ............ .. ........ " .......... ... ---------WSAl--------- 5/88 BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 008186 ) APPENIDIX F-36 I .. rt\ ( '-~ ~ t-, '{£:.,1>.Q.. \ C\ C\ s I '(EAC... IC\'\ S 0 IL f,Q P. M. PEAK.. \~UR._ ~ A. M. P?,..K ~out_ (), ~ "' VJ l{l ~ H \IJ'i.e,, ,,._ L.AN E. 1.lt'f /331 1374 3H "i114 '2.01 q.p_ 1071 ~ l,.I~ T1<i!IJ l ~ ' °" 0 Ill ~ I µ ICU All. A ICU All. I ICU All. C ICU All. A ICU All. I ICU All. C ...... C1pac1tr ICU Mow1 t1p1cllr ICU Mow• C1p1cllr ICU Mow• C1pac1tr ICU Mow• C1p1c:l1r ICU ..... C1p1cllr ICU (? "ct"'10 , 1, ~ (j-5!0 .11 13000 -.... Ll -~'\<)() .11--'\ ""1.... -... Ar\/\ .u )A.\.. ~<. ,1~ .1.s )A\ ~ 17b, t1v<10 .i, 4-s~e;. --f"H1/\L.. ,u ..-1"TJSJ. 01(, l.o.,. '"B L·o.,. l.o.,. ... ............ 111,111111 .. ,11,111111 --------(USA)-------- Lo.,. c 1.0.1. L.o.,. J tc I II 111.tlllll litlll•• IIIII M 111,atllll _/ ._-------(USA)--------~ 5/88 BA T/QU/TOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 006185 °' ..... t 0 t!l 2 (;J ~ V) " I ' 14 ICU All. A ICU All. I Move Capacity ICU Mow• C•paclty ICU -1010 -~◄OC . )Z. -di 3,,41 ~ ·" ,y~ !ISO~ 51/> .~l AS:.o -row. .7 'S l.0.1. C l.0.1. APPENDIX F-37 '(GAP-I qC\~ "'• /(\, ~I( "°UR_ 2..110 1374 lf!,J. ~ ~ ~ ICU All. C ICU Alt. A 1-t ICU Alt. Mova Capacltr ICU Move Cep1cllr ICU Mow• Capacity -::::,V 7S7 .1.~ ")000 ----pl -~ • 1.0 ,Y, ~ ... , .. > ,1.'- 11:>TAL :7 I l.0.1. Mlll1•llo11 L.o.,. c. h·o·•· ) '(i:=.AP--\C\C\S fl. M . f' eA!<'. IW-I 2- '-l1S ~ I ICU Alt. C ICU Mow ■ C1p1cllr ICU ... ............ .. ........ 11 '---------[VIA)--------- l.0.1. MIii••"·" N• 1u11.■11111 111•• .. •11 --------{VIA)-------- 5/88 BA TIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 006186 ICU Alt. A Move Capacity ICU l~'--378 \Sue .1.s . t 1,o> l1oC -\ 1. r 44€ I :,0 \Geo \ 0\ f.\.. I -,bl . ii J u ti u '2 -3 Move ICU Alt. B Capacity ICU APPENDIX F-38 'feA" \'19~ 1000 Zf &~,L~ ~ .. M • PE Atl--\.\0" L 448 /652. ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU L.0.1. 'i2_ L.0.1. L.0.1. Ho Mlll91tlon p Mltlgitlon Mltlg1tlon ,_---------~UfiA)---------- 1..00 ICU Alt. A Move Capacity )l 320 110c 3~-::, t \'SCO ~ 'Lt>' --· I Sc,O -,-;., 1A L. ICU Alt. 8 ICU Move Capacity • I 9 .'l.'l ... " l 2> . sci ..J V ~ -u 3 ICU APPENDIX F-39 ~~µL \~.C\S, ")..ax:>; ~ G~l\.0-.,-.., (>. M .. PEA~ \-\ulACL ICU All. C Move Capacity ICU l.0.1. A l.0.1. l.0.1. Ho Mltl91t1011 Mlt19atlot1 Mltl91tlo11 ) -------[-µS-A]-------./ -6~ :: \'2..oo ICU Alt. A Move Capacity -'317+ \~"lo ~ ""L °'3~Cl r I '3...,. ,~oo ri.; ' -\'SOC ~ WV-'• ~ -T"~1/t,,L "' """ "' ICU Alt. I ICU Mow• C•p•clty • \ '1 • lOAw .\O~'\M. ,\OM\H. .~ ICU APPENDIX F-40 YE4l \qqs-, 2vc.io GM•'-~'-'T .P,M-f\=-A\l "\JU~ 1.00 ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU l.0.1. A L.0.1. L.0.1 . ... .......... " .......... ,. .. ,11, .... ,. "----------lJ.JSA l---------- -64 - • a, V, / ICU All. A Mo,1 c:u,cllr L•--?.So "iioo" 1 f,, 'M+~ '3"<» ? Ot\lOJ~~ .d~ \,:i'hl l.0.1. ~· .. 111,.11,11 5/88 IC:U • '1. ~. • "!, \ .10.-.,.., t-4 'p N yf=.MZ. '"'"' s - '-.. f,..-M f'EA~ µour_ ~ ::i ~ :;:E;:::a.. .... I~~ ri A'1Ul1"-' llA11G'41'TO~ -.,N'"l i M~)Q ~ rm ~] (_g;Q__ ~ ~ : ' y I ; ~ . l ICU All. I ICU All. C Mow• C:opocllr ICU Mow, C:ap ■cllr IC:U L.0.1. L.O.I. ... ........ 11 M•llaallon USA F-41 ~ ..., IC ! y Ill .J "' -( IC:U All. A ICU All. I Mow, C:1p1cll)' ICU Mo,1 C1p1cllr ICU 1..\ a,n .,,. ISOO tv-.si!!!ll' ;l..5 '?.-400 * "'1.'l,+-,,.-ui. '°'soc .n -rnTA• t l l.O,l. ~ l.0.1. ) 'I r; ML-I '\''.5 f, /J.. fE.A1'. 1\0 '-''- ~ ICU All. C Mo,1 C:1p1cllr L.o.,. lolllltlllon IC:U ... M1tl1•t1111 ........... 11 ----------[USA)-------- BA TIQUITOS LA GOON EDUC A TIONAi.. PARK/F.M.Z. 9 006186 I °' °' /' ICU All. A Move Capacllr (··. EL ,s.,o 11: » --2..E._ 1,.-a, r ~ ISOO 1:,, ........ l .0.1. ~· Mlt11at1a11 5/88 ICU ,1..'i. ''Z.1> ., 1 J, 1 'B APPENDIX F-42 ,~1 yi;;,..,,__ '"l.ooo ~- t p,.._,-A_Pra:,,i. ~..ijl. "' r-- "" ..... ~ - f'c, .. ~( 'T,. IA LII.N e ~ rrs7l ,----lm-W!..:!J @j I -u(-' , ~ .... .J ~ Q y ~ ~ :;, .., j ICU All. 8 ICU All. C Mova Capacllr ICU Mova Capacllr . ICU L'-·\ "lie .n. "'!,o.,o I<,,..¢ .,,.,.,.e. .1. ~ .,,.,,..t <; ",..t. ·' 'I ~<>,AL. .5 c; l.0.1. A L.O.I. .. • "•• ... II "00 11& u:q M•t11at1011 USA ~ ICU All. A Mova Capacltr ICU ~--~ ;ig. l'SOC. 11: ,1 ~ ~"""° ;!.o ' ...l,li_ ,'l..b ,~o0 -ro~ ~4 Q > .J Move ~\_ <;>->'-e f,..,,.e- •cu Al1. e C1p1cl1r ~ '!..:.<.>v S"""" 5""'~ -U.,,A'- ICU , \ 'l .~o .1...L :, ~ "fEA«.. '2.000 P.M. PEA,.t \\ovfl. ICU All. C Mova C1p1cllr ICU l.0.1. L.0.1. C.. l.0.1. ....... 11.11,11.,;:p 5/f.1'.,6//!. ... ,1,111011 .,_,_ .. _"_·•-•-•-•-••-"--------(USA) ..c: n T"'a>l BA TIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 006186 ) APPENDIX F-43 '#E'.A.11... l ooo A.II\. P~AI( flr.JUIL I us, ,-,,"I..S' " ..... C. °' u.s..: 11'\~ ""'-· t \HC:Q.e-;,...-.E T .. t..:,~G...i _, hi<'lc.~a ~~l.14 Vot... ,wi,-J PJ'\l~r, ,,,,. "\ ""'4... "...., '°''.i,.c;.,.,~.,. ~ .,,i ... 1,.::e-~ ~'-:;' l t.t \.o•~--•~ .-i l"'I" .. ., ~ .JI ~ 3,.'S('-~ .... , Iii: II! ~ ~ -:;;:-:;;lfl4 -~ ~ ~ 3 Q ~ I- j t t-:r :,. " ~ '( ~ ICU lit. A ICU .... I ICU A •t. C ICU lll. ,. ICU A•i. • •tu A It. C ... ,. C•pullr ICU ...... C111 ■c1tr ICU .... ,. Capacllr ICU. ... ,. c1s,1ct1r ICU lilo~ • C1p1cllr •cu ., .... C1p1cllr ICU r;-.22::?.... • l..A '}a:x> .· Ll 67.5 )oo(J .'2."'I -~ ---. "'.lai>O • ~01411! Yr ~ ,I} ~a,o ~\.. ,..,~ ~ ,10,...,., VI -"O, ... ~ ""-D ,li>,4,N «-~ • '). .s ~= -::=% A'IS' .15 ~ _gJ. . -r,:,TAL... . s4 1.0.1. A a..0.1. 1.0.1. tu .......... 11 .......... 11 .. •••••llt11 --------WSAl-------- l.O.I. J) l .O... l.0.1. .. ... , ....... ,.. ............ ..11., .... .. --------[USAl-------- 5/88 BA TIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 008186 I 0-, a, } ' ~ ~ ~ V) ~ ICU All. A ICU'AII. I l,lova Capaclti, ICU Mau Cap1clt1 rr II\ I ~x.• • '!,8 ..4,4'!, -~ . I'!. IA\ ~':Jh¼-10C ~, "KD<' -T'H"f• .it , .0.1. 1) L·O,I. ... 111111•11•11 111,,11111 ICU APPENDIX F-44 '(EM... LaxJ A-fl\-~ ... I(_ ~IL F.-. -Cot,-1,,, ~c,,.-.., "' r ... \ 7, ""~[.. '""s 'T""'ll""'", I'-,,,_~._.• S/f'l v r!:/(S '-~ 7 ~ ~,. i~t,'. ;"'" c~,o~~ 'J.1.~AP1 ICU All. C Mova Capacllr ICU L.0.1. .. ,11,,11a11 (."'--'IC'Ut,\t,.&. ~a.....--r-• ..:w- \J5'.. \~l{'l, "t"4C&,IJ\~ ,,_ .---.. ""1"\&...__,,C..,l ~~t" I!, ")l, 'S' (h~ n .. ) • • y;;ac~--••) ICU All. , Mova Capeclt- 1S4 lf 3".!00 I- l.0.1. ..... ,11,.11,11 C:.. , I .. ., ...... ... --------(VSAJ·---------------------'lJ.A 5/88 BA TIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK, ) ------~:~ ---- (: :J I I c:::. I • °' \.0 Q.. ~ s. ~ 7 0 '2 V'I I 1-4 " L "\le. ICU Alt. A ICU All. • Move C•p•clt" ICU Move Capacity •cu -~ -14<'0 • ~'l ..g ...!2.:.... ~= .n ... ,Yr , ..... ~ ... ~!><>l• ,"!:,S ~,,. ... !, s- L.0.1. 1) ~-0.1. ...... 11 •• 11.11 "••et1011 ) APPENDIX F-45 ~E:Nl '1.ooO A -M-PEAK "°"~ •cu ••1. c Move C•p•c••r ICU Move -di -- 1,Yr •cu Alt. A Cap•cltr "itH ~ 'JIS 3-400 1,P.(in~~•~ 451.lC. -rt-:fr-.L ICU .18 .14 -~4 H II. IL C ,0 } VI l'.i ICU Alt. a Move C•p•clly L.0.1. .. ..... 11011 l.O.I. 'T) L.0.1. ICU l 7"1 1 ICU Alt. C Move Cap•cltr L.0.1. ....... ,,.11 ICU --------(VIA)-------- ............. 11 y ....... 11011 -------~. (VIA)-------- 5/88 BA T/QU/TOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 006185 -., 0 ) ) ----------.---=------.------~A~P-:...PENDjlX F-4_e ______ --.--=----..--------. ICU All. A Move C1p•cllr '-' ~S'" l; ·. ,000 11.--~ y.o:. ~ \uOtW• 11f -✓ 4So0 "T~l\1.. ICU .,-z. . ,1.1 .101-1-. so < ~ 'j t:,I :< v ~j y ICU All. 8 Mov• C•P•tllr ICU l.0.1 A l.O .•. 1EAtl.. 'Ji)vb A.M. p,=i,..ll ,i...:.'-IR... 5l)() ~ ICU All. C MOY• C•p•cll)' L.0-1. Mlll1•11on ICU ... .,,11, .... 11 ... , ........ . ---------{USA]-------- ICU All. A ICU Alt. 8 Move C•P•cllr ICU Mov• C•p•cltr Ll\. 'l. E,3\ ~ .\0,..,11. ~ AH••"•l-41. .i.sco . " t 1 ... • 1f1, 1. l"\Ot• .).5 "Tc,"T.ll, . .4, l O I A l.0.1. . . . .. ........ " ICU v~A,(/... 1.ouo P. ,..,.... ('E-A-Z 1\.:,,.,il._ ICU A•1. C Move C•Patlly l,0.1. Mlt11•t1•n ICU ............. " --------lPS~)-------- ~/88 BA TIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 006186 I //1 • 1//30 \.. ~ ~ . ~ 2 APPENDIX G-1 s-~"'--~oQ~T ~11,\..bo\l'T C'oN~,.lt "'., at> ,;~IIIEtrAL PLAN ~AHO uU Aft'f P~lf k 140 .. tt I_ f\ 1\.)f: 1250 4 : \'I\ 0 ·~ So"'llCE: SAN'OA6 I-6-S, 1./11/:J. -"' 1./3 -1.//1/'I C'( z ~ I ~ L/003 ~ ~ ~ 'll ('. i!i ICU A It. A ICU A It. 8 ICU A It. C Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU _j !l.O'I . /'I ,soo -I S-1/1 • 1/6 -3900 ~:' ,.. !2'3'-l •I'-1Soo 7oTA'-•76 L.O.8. C L.0.1. L.O.1. No Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation .... ,,-1s_1 ____________ ~[VI--A-)------------o~o~e,as BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 -71 - Po1NSETT,A 31 DI :i,011 1064 A'I.'-Ff<EE' R1G-l\""f /ol, c/-:) oo = 861-f II-/ 3S -9,1/-= S7 t 1186. -!i1l = 6IS ICU A It. A Move Capacity ICU .-!J :z. C, 0 300• -10 ... ·----I'{"?>!. , Y.2 -3.l(Do (( \\ 06 ,Vo -=1000 -roTAL . f/:l L.0.8. E I.\. t C'\ . '6 ~ ~ ~ ~ le: 0 ~ ~ z ~ ~ '16 I\ < 'I In ..... I t1 ICU Alt. Move Capacity ::::!) j_PO -300• -1'13~ -3+'oo AOD _,PIS' FllEF .... .-...... 300<:> "ro TAl. L.0.1. Mitigation 8 APPENDIX G-2 SA .. ]),,tlo.c;. f'0 1'•~~, &\&iL'l>c,~ CoNS.TR,-.,Ne D (rliillfl!ilrAL f11-AN LANt> a..se f'"'1 P~A)c Ho"I( .,_ _ ____. I I/ 3t:.- ICU •\ 0 . . ... ~ .... • '1.2. .:l\ .7s C ICU Alt. Move Capacity L.0.8. Mitigation C ICU No Mitigation , .... ,-,a-1-----------[UIA]-----------o--o--e1as BATIQUIT~S LAGOON _E~~C~TIONAL PARK/FM.Z. 8 -l APPENDIX G-3 ~ 0 S ~0-roe1.1.c:.A .. T ~ ~ !»1.&, \. 1:) 01.tT CDN~'T'~Al~Et> G,Q,c1t,<..,H .. ~ ~ PLAN I..AN~ 1.e.~e. . ~ A/Ill. ('6111< Mou.IC ~ t't i ~ ~ ~ -z ~ I \-of .2 2. 6.:Z. . 681 '11.30 ~ \. ,0 ' - 1.//11:Z. --'f/1./3-'Ill/£! i! M - I ~ l/e,ci3 ~-~ "' I ... ICU Alt. A ICU Alt. B ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU rr-85S •.21 :;3coo -681 • .:J.a -3</tJO •. :l_ :J.:J B .,5 1::,00 'ToTAL . b'-I L.0.8. B L.0.1. Ho Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation --------------[,__U_S_A_)----------~o~oe1s5 1 1187 BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 -73 - L.0.1. - ~ t q " ~ ~ ~ "' I(\ I t-t 1318 I :28 I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "' "' ~ ICU Alt. A ti\ "' ,.. . '8 ca i "4 -z " • ~ ICU Alt. B APPENDIX G-4 .s ... N~• Fo"U.~T 8c..,l...t>o.,.T CoNST~A\NEt> (;~~fl.AL Pl.AA! 1..Al'I i> &A.SE PM PSA#C. uo .,,.t( 11:ll 606 LANe ~ ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU Mov·e Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU rr 806 •2, 3000 -938 .:zg -3.,,..,0 ... /ll 324; • If 2••o ToTAL . '" l.O.a. f3 L.0.1. No Mitigation Mlt19atlon Mitigation ---------[VSA)----- 11181 BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 -74 L.0.1. 008185 -- Po1NSeTT1A 311 'f I '"/le.// -3718 -'Ill/~ I '3711 ICU Alt. A Move Capacity y lb' .. 567/z lroo ~ 3 61-4 liOc..> r 3~1.1 -\!';PU 3 "'\I_. ~,l 'l./z. ~ ,,o ,. ToTAL ICU •). 6, • :l \ • :2 '2 •2 i.\ ,'f:J "' <[ '2 \J ~ \U Move 1 t;:~ ... ,..., l r-.-::.p . ---:- APPENDIX G-5 Si'NOio.<-s=oca.•~~ T &v,'-1>0~ Coi.aS,-ft"\l't&t> ~ff.A'- P\..l'lll-N 1.. ,i,,l'lt> 14~E /1\IIA PSA "-~o ""'~ /1'1:J. ( 5l> 7-~!f :: AvS.) ~-:. ~ r-" '° '\O -II) ICU Alt. I Capacity ICU 1. 'i3 • \ 0 °3"40U ..,. .... \ f;>c..( \?00 • I 2.. :?2L\ • II :Jc,oO ",!'il+4"l/, , I '2. 'l"tOO ToTAL .45 5,-, -3, '-I:: .t:i.ll .:,1.\?,-1;,1: (~ ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU . 1.0.a. £ L.O.I. A L.0.1. ) No ......... on Mltlgatton MIIID•llon ~ -----------fUSA l----------0~0~6185 11187 BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 -7 5 - APPENDIX G-6 ~ s ~S>JO,,C.. ~..:-... •r -"' a &c..u\.t) Oc.\"T <( CoN~TR.l\\N 11!0 Gb18A~L l -Pl~.., \..ANO LA~& IJ ~ PM HA."-'°'o~R. ill G r-, 0-::,, r- Po1Nse-r-r,A C't c:, LANI£ 279 '17S-31111\o ,#3 JOOS 2~'1B lb 1./7,. • 'I~ 0 C'( C'( l-°' 'O ci 111 & 311't ~ I ~ ~ " <! Q) 6 I.I J -~ J 2. = I/ I OVr,, ',.. .._,I · 'I/Ill -3718-1//'{,2 0 I -<' 3717 ~ (I- "' <;;(' r- ICU A It. A ICU A It. B ICU A It. C Moye Capacity ICU Move Capeclty ICU Moye Capacity ICU y "l."I '2 +o 1?'2/~ f 1 ,-'2 4 2. . s.o •rue •\ci 1-"7 C,.., ! 11;,i,T 3~c,o II,\,· \II ~ ~:?" L. '2 "7 -r ., 6 11ou •.'.?2 '~0<) 6 ~!. ,,,.. G ~ ::! .r 15"00 ·'-13 ,r--~I l,,j;7 +"'4 2h -~,7,+-..i21,. --:,-. :i. '1 ~ •IS -,, 00 '?'-I oo , 1nTAL I. 31/ To"iAL • 6'1 l.0.1. F L.0.1 . ... •ut1eit1on lllllgallon Mltl111tlon ~--------rusA ]------~~ 11187 BATIQUITOS LAGOON.EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 -76 -008186 ' 8 L.D.1. -- - '317/o I 3;,-, -4\41 "3i78 ICU Alt. A Move Capacity ICU f~ 801 +Uy2- • '17 31.(00 4 , e~ • I ;i.. t _5 00 .r,-:JBB • ,c, 1~00 ToTP..L • !;e :J" "' D > / co tl <( en V' J ~ 'l: Move 0 -Cb \"C l1 0.. " re ::,- V\ :1' t'\ -0 co Ii 'D 0 ICU Alt. B Capacity -'D t'\ ICU . APPENDIX G-7 .:S "1e D ~ ~o f-',ac:A~ T ~t.uLt)ou..T CoMS"Tfl.PI\NEt:> (;Et,f6'iltAL f'\..~H Lf\t,lt) 1,&.'56 A.M PISA k.. \\OCA.R Po, N~ETT,A LANE :2'-4 & :iee 960 ICU AIL C Move Capacity ICU . L.0.1. A L.0.1. L.0.1. No Mlt111tlon MtUeallon Mttl11tlon ,-1,~~~-----------[~U_I_A_J----------~11~--"'!o~o~e~1a5 BATIQUrTOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 r I 3778 ICU Alt. A -,-- ~ Ir. G) Cb r-1 - •• --::, V\ :r- 1'\ - --- -- ICU Alt. B APPENDIX G-8 -~ .. ,.,. 110P.MA&T ta.1A1\. b ov.T ' Co~1\,.\till~ c;e~•~L P\.~N Lf\N'b de AM ftl!AIC. \\ou..R (Ab.lUS.ce~ :2'4 ~ I ---~ !5341 I ---· :1es I i 9flo I I """ I ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU L. :J8B 3000 ToT~L .,SB L,0.1. ~• Mlll11t11ft 11/87 A L.0.1. L.0.1. )' Mltltatleft Mllltatlon _ [UIA l----------o~o~e1ss BATIQUrTOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PAFIK/F.M.Z. g -78 • 1"11, I 3-,77--1./1 "'' I 37?fi .ICU Alt. A Move _C • pa city ICU Move t ► .21.91/ + ,.t ft2. · 11 tt., .. , 3 ..,e,o ~ .2 ~ 7 • 1'8 l,.l. \5oo l'j-2'!~ , 101"''"'' q--:!,ooo ,oTAL ,t{q ICU Alt. 8 Capacity ICU !:!!!!. bt 1-+oo . 2,1 ~o.:i• .l ~,,.,. 2~~ ~v IQ • "MIN• 'lo7AL .il APPENDIX G-9 S~N'P ... G, ,=o•;l,ll!.C:AJoT &u,\.t> 01aT , CoNs.TRA,NEO c.•NaeAL PLAN LAlllt) ll~e P 1111 PEA IC Hou.~ ~7S Joos 530 ICU Alt. C Move Capacity IC.U L.O.1. E l.0.1. l) L.O.1. No Mlll11t11n Mltaeatlon Mitigation ,':",,~a1=-------------(USA ]------------"!:o~o~e1ss BATIQUJTOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 -79 - .- • l'lrt•s.:11,,, .. u '" • ·. ~-I I \ I ' I •. : ' • , , •. , ••. I Cl .. ,, t ...... , , r I .... 3-,7, I 3 '? ..,.,__ l/1 I.II I 37?8 ICU Alt. A Move Capacity ICU Move t~ l0\0 +~l,k .,3 tt(' 31.foo -~ :z. "7 • l'.8' 1.,.l.. \,500 tr 2 3'-' '1ooo .-,o~'"" q- -roTAL. . ", 0 5 r( r-c4\ .J) r--~ c--1 N 0 ~ "'" "' ICU A It. 8 Capacity ~olO -· 1-+oo 2 '-l lo.:>• 2-S'-' ~o 'lo7AL I Ii ' f I • f II u • ~ r ,, , .... 1 ,. ,. • ~ ,n 4 ""'"' 11-,.1 l.:..'1·,. I -:. _., .. I " "° r( ICU Alt. C ICU Move Capacity .s1 ,l9"w, ·\O • MIN• ' _..,, L.0.1. _,,,.. L.O.a. L.0.1. t ._ ICU N I Mllltltllft MIUt•II•" Mltl1at1on ..... 11 ... ,e_1-----------[UIA)---------80 ___ oo_e __ 1ss ·••r' ~ .. ~-.BATIQUrTOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 • • -- 3-ng I 3i.1.4 -37/.5 I 37,'i •cu Alt. A Move Capacity ICU ~ 2 z. _, 0 -\SO() a.; .. t t 6''!.4' •2.S" 3'4l"'CJ fr "J Bo \ ,:»oo . \ {) 10TAL • i\5 ~ Ci "' l'( C1 (). > / ~ D <C co (\ ..J ct. <( tJ :::r I""' II\ re ~ .. I'\ •cu A It. Move Capacity • bl 1ft " ~ C'( I'\ ... -- B •cu "' APPENDIX G-11 sMJo~C.. ~IIC"""ST Su,\..t>ou.T Col'JS•RP.,Ne D ~r,,l!:-IZ.AL PLAN I..P,.Nt) ~se AM PE:AK. \,IC\lR veMDA BA-,1Q1.c1Tos :J.80 621 ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU L.0.1. A L.0.1. L.0.1. No Mltl.atlon .......... " Mltl11llon --1-1/-87----------(,...U_I_A_]-------- BATIQUrTOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 ·81 -008185 ICU Alt. A Move Capacity ICU l. ..LL ., 0 \Soo .. : ... t f Jl-37 Jb 3&.{00 tr 280 -.IOM'"'· 300o -roTAL .S6 Move -rl , ~ '-~ ICU Alt. B Capacity ICU . APPENDIX G-12 s. ~~~-~.-:,,.5 T a ... ,~~o~'T Co~STRMNe t> ~NUt\L PLA.., Llli-Nt> \J.Se 1'M PeAI(. l,lov." A ~"'-~,ct> ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU l.0.1. A 1..0.1. L.D.I . ... .......... " ............ .. ........ " ""Ill, ... 11-s1 ___________ -(V_I_A_J----------~ooe~"'.'::186 BATIQUJTOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 • 82 • APPENDIX G-13 ·-S ,._~D"'-~~s"f 6u.i'.\..t>ou.T , Cor.1'5,"T~~\IIIE~ GeNeR.AL 'O P\..N4 l."-N~ ~SE :::r :),, f~ PSA K 1-\ou.~ \'( '() "' 0-, I() A'IE NI t>A 15 "\' ft\c tT0!5 :i, D > ';'3S -ex> 7:,0 {J 4 d) "' J " ~ 0 0 co c.-'( p\ :r 3,;9 C'( "' -· I en s,24-311S 'O I "'" II\ Ci r-ct 377'1 "" ::r () ::r JCU Alt. A ICU A It. 8 ICU Aft. C Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU I... 36 • l c, L.. .3'-~\O -1!;)00 \ 50" M;"' I\A;\,t tt ~'-\~O ·11 t t 2'-1.l.::> :f 14 00 34<,t, .7, .r .. "3 "3S-. (( "? ""1,.. •2'2 ___ _, .. , \ \5'0C> '3ooc, 7oTAL 1.0~ rnTAL . 'l I L.O.1. ,= L.O.1. t No Mlll1at1on Mlll1atlon Mitigation -.. -,a~1-----------[-V_S_A"""']-----------~oo~e:-:1·ss BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATDNAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 -83 - L.0.1. '3TT8 I ~,.2L{-'37IS I 377'1 ICU Alt. A -~ .. M IO 0-. ::r 0 :::r i C cJ ICU Alt. B APPENDIX G-1 _. s,.,. t,1E),-.G. ~c:.-.s-r elA~l.t>ou.T I . Co..S~"TIAuol&t> GeNeRAL Pl.IV' '-"" t> i.t SE P~ PSAk '°'o~l e-~~~T~J ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU Mova Capacity ICU l.. ~6 •lo \ ~CJ M;"I tt '2..o4o :r~oo .c.; 0 «-'3 JS: .II • '3000 7',T'AL . er L.0.1. -_p L.0.1. L.O.a. Ne Mlllt•ll•ft Mlt11atleft Mltl1at1on --, ,-,e--1----------[-U_I_A_J-------- eAmurros LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 -84 • 006185 --------·· ---- APPENDIX G-15 0( :,. ,A.N.D ;,,4 "bQ.IFc,t, ~r A ~1A.1Lt> ou."'C ~ CoN:S.,-R~u.aEt> CEll'SllAL P\..AN \..,>.Nt> \A.SE -z & ~M VI/SAIC. ~01.1.R ~ S4\ \a A'verv, DA BAT,Qu.,Tos IL/ 322 p_oo :1</,:J. 78 ,12 566 ss 300 li2 :liJ/ 70 " C'( .. ~ -277 V\ 0,. I c2 ~ '312.LI "'3 i IS--71 fl~ lu U) ~ 3 '1.7S ~ \0 ~ :z: "" ICU Alt. A \j\ ICU Alt. 8 ICU Alt. C Mov• Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU ) ; "7 .. \ 0 l~C 0 u." ...{ 654-'! •\ 0 11<' V ,..; ~ r --rs • , 0 \ ~ 0 u IA.\ '#t ~ \ "7 i • Io. -,, 0., f,#,•IIO ----roTAl -~o 1.0.a. A L.0.1. No ......... on M•t11•tlot1 Mitigation _/ -----------fUSA l---------'!8~5---==oo~e186 I I 187 BATIQUrros LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. g • - L .O .I. APPENDIX G-16 Cl (D gu,Lbou.-T ..':)A~Ao.'-~ll~o.sr o.c a CoMs.-T'~AlNet> G-ENEtlA\.. ~ PLAN L"Nt> u.56 PM PEAK ~DIA~ ~ ~ M -r-C"( AVE NIDA l3 A,, G)ul'Ta~ \ "l ~o't 1.:2., 730 1:1.0 i.:J.. 21/.S 6,2. ~ .., " & " (),. .111 ' ~ w 31.21.{ -37/S-J,lC. !i I 3 " t'( ;z-,g U1 r--:c (WI ...,. ICU Alt. A ICU Alt. 8 ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU ' 'J. £ •lO 1,Soc:, M:'-' ~ jL(~1 • \o 1,ou N,;" .r ,l.'1~ • \ 0 \ ~ oo M;'"' "ll.\ ~ • \ u -.... \ 100 M:.,._ . ToTAL .. &./o &..o.a. p,.. l.·1~i!i1ton L.O.I. J Ho .. • .. •••••" • Mitigation / ......_ __________ fUSA l-------------=-::oo~e1as I I 187 BATIQUrros LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK/F.M.Z. 9 -86 ~ APPENDIX G-17 \o ~ .... ~OouT S1'Nt>"'C.. ~IUK"Sf t-, C0'-1 S. 1' R Ao \We() t-E ti/£. llA L. D VLAN \..11>.Nt:> ILS~ ...... ::> AM Pe.A i'-1-\olA~ -(0 r-::.. "1 0 (') t"i '° LA COSTA l"I N /)..\IE 3o3 'lS'-1 147 \ !S 58'3 e~J./ 2.1'L.( '3:J.'1 ' 85 ¢ ¢ ~ Ill '< ~ :3,24 I A "'-'270-3'1"71 -L./t>O')_ <( -' m "' CJ'-I N In 11' :J.9'!/ J ~ ~ q: \\) t, ~ ICU Alt. A ICU Alt. B ICU Alt. C Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU Move Capacity ICU ~ ;263 -16 \Soo 1 t ~10 ·11 ~&.400 _J 'l.'-ll..\ . I' \ 500 -,~, ./ 0 170<> NI.',. ToTAl-· 6 I L.0.8. B L.0.1. Ho M1tl11t1on .. ltlgatlon tiAltlgallon .._ _________ fUSA !--------~ 11187 BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARKIF.M.Z. 9 -87 006185 l.0.8. 75'1 :n::i.Lf I :i10 -31"7'1 -1/002 I :1•91 ICU Alt. A Move Capacity ICU lk+ ;2\8 ., CIA,\N 3c:::oo t f '.l 2 q o ,67 31.f 00 _J Ii.I~ • \ 0 \ =ioo ..... : "' \L.I 0 .10 4---\,ou N ,'v, 10TAL . 'f7 Mow• t-\ 0 ~ I'(\ ~ r-C't 0 c'\ 0 ~ co ("\ ICU Alt. 8 Capacity ICU APPENDIX G-18 e,u,l..t>ou.T .S:"i-Jt)-11<.l"oa.u-.-.sf CON'!,"TR 11\IN&.tl G-~ERAL. Pl.AN LANb \.l~E PM t'SAK HOii.~ 3~0 II.lo /7 Move ICU Alt. C Capacity ICU - l.0.1. E ~i~i1'itlon L.0.1. / No Mltl11tlo11 Mitigation ....__ ________ fUSA l-------- 11181 BATIQUITOS LAGO~NN-UCATIONAL PARK/F.MZ. 9 _ RESIDENTIAL . \i\ I ,\~t ~ JfES I DEJ~l.1:JA I., __ _ --,,.---- ----- AVENIDA ENCINAS/ WINDROSE CIRCLE INTERSECTION AREA C.1 (!J .J f!i)a:y CONSULTANTS CIVIL ENGINEERING PLANNING PROCESSING SURVEY1 -IG RESIDENTIA_L RESIDENTIAL --- WINDROSE CIRCLE ---jl========-======-=-=-=-=-=::::::::.::---~ I ~· ------------.: OFFICE/EDUCATON ---- AVENIDA ENCINAS-WINDROSE CIRCLE ··INTERSECTION AREA C.2 AND C.3 , (!J ~<]j)av CONSULTANTS . CIVIL ENGINEERING PLANNING PROCESS IN< -- -- OFFICE/EDUCATION -~ . ~~ -·- -.e- COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL l . ,,,, 1~. ~I I ' I ' I tz I 21 I ·w ,_ > < < m WINDROSE CIRCLE -A-VENIDA BATIQUITOS INTERSECTION AREA C.2 AND C.3 (!J.., q/Jay CONSULT ANTS CIVIL ENGINEERING PLANNING PROCES, ,- COMMERCIAL I ___ _) ----- F!ONTO DRIVE ----- TEMPORARY PONTO DRIVE ACCESS \ COMMERCIAL I \ u, 0 f--::, 0 I COMMERCIAL FUTURE SHEARWATER ROAD \ . (PRIVATE} \ ~--- COMMERCIAL AVENIDA BATIQUITOS-PONTO DRIVE INTERSECTION AREA C.2 · (!J .J@ay CONSULTANTS CIVIL ENGINEERING PLAN NI· I I I SHEARWATER 1'1 (PRIVATE) ~.....+-~ ...... ,..,, . .. " ROAD AVENIDA BATIQUITOS -PONTO DRIVE INTERSECTION (ti J ~°# CONSULTANTS CIVIL ENGINEERING PLANNING PROCESSING B,tl<tE I < C -z w > < c·oMMERCIAL l COMMERCIAL , I ~ ! IA CARLSBAD .. _BLVD. I 6/Kc. ,,. ,1 ~1 I -----------------·-_J __ SOUTH CARLSBAD STATE BEACH CARLSBAD BLVD-AVENIDA BATIQUITOS INTERSECTION .-... •~·, AREA C.2 AND C.3 .... •. (lj.?<2/)a;v CONSULTANTS CIVIL ENGINEERING PLANNING PROCES~ \ ----EXISTING CAijLSBAD BLVD.-PONTO DR. INTERCHANGE @J (}J)ll1/ CONSULTANTS ,, Appendix E. EIR 84-3 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK MASTER PLAN EIR 811-3 Prepared for CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Prepared by RECCDN Regional Environmental Consultants -C:--,-S....211' SanO..OC,.CA 91110 27$-:JT.12 APPENDIX E- RECON NUMBER R-1488 MAR CH 7. 1985 r-- TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I • INTRODUCTION 1 II. SUMMARY ANALYSIS 3 A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3 B. CONCLUSIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 11 c. SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES AND ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED SHOULD THE PROPOSED PROJECT BE IMPLEMENTED 16 D. EFFECTS FOUND N.OT TO BE SIGNIFICANT 17 E. RELATIONSHIP OF LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF MAN'S ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEM~NT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY 18 F. GROWTH INDUCEMENT 19 -G. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION 20 1. No Project 20 2. Development of an Alternate Mix of Uses 20 Ill. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 2LJ A. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION 24 B. LANO USE 34 c. TOPOGRAPHY ANO VISUAL AESTHETICS 42 D. CULTURAL ANO PALEONTOLOCICAL RESOURCES 47 E. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 49 F. COMMUNITY SERVICES 55 G. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 58 H. ACRI CULTURAL RESOURCES 61 I. AIR QUALITY 68 J. UTILITIES AND ENERGY 75 -K. NOISE t9 L. GEOLOGY AND SOILS 83 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) IV. CERTIFICATION V. PERSONS AND AGENCIES CONSUL TED VI. REFERENCES CITED APPENDICES A: Project Data 8: Traffic Analysis C: Air Quality Data D: Geologic Reconnaissance FIGURES 1: Project location in San Diego County 2: Project location as shown on the U.S.G.S. map 3: Proposed master plan 4: Conceptual site plan 5: Existing and proposed circulation system 6: Distribution of project-generated traffic 7: Distribution of project-generated and future traffic 8: Carlsbad General Plan land use map 9: Carlsbad zoning map 10: Vegetation map of the subject property 11 : Soil types on the subject property 12: Noise contours from vehicular and train traffic TABLES 1: Trip Generation 2: Peak-Hour Trip Generation 3: Traffic Model Trip Generation 4: Conventional Zoning Requirements for Proposed Uses S: Schools Serving the Project Site 6: Analysis of Soils on Project Site 7: Ambient Air Quality Standards 8: Summaries of Air Quality Data 9: Summary of Emissions from the Proposed Project 85 86 87 4 5 6 7 25 29 31 35 36 so 63 80 27 28 30 38 55 64 70 71 73 I. INTRODUCTION This environmental impact report (EIR) has been prepared according to the requirements set forth by the City of Carlsbad and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended. It is an infor- mational document intended for both the decision maker and the public and, as such, it represents the relevant information concerning the proposed Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park Master Plan. Prior to this EI R. two EI Rs were prepared for projects on the subject property: Seabluff Property Annexation EIR and Batiquitos Pointe EIR (WESTEC 1982a; WESTEC 1982b). The Seabluff EIR covered the property between Interstate S (1-5) and the Atchison. Topeka & Santa Fe Railway (AT &SF), while the Batiquitos Pointe EIR addressed the area between the AT &SF Railway and Carlsbad Boulevard. The Seabluff project addressed annexation of the site to the City of Carlsbad and prezone to PC (Planned Community}. which would conform with the Carlsbad General Plan desig- nations of medium density residential (II-TO dwelling units per acre [ du/ ac] } on the northern portion of the property, medium-high density residential ( 10-20 du/ ac) on the southern part of the site, and open space for the area abutting Batiquitos Lagoon, including the bluffs. The proposed project was deemed compatible with the general plan designations. The project is located within the Coastal Zone and is currently under active cultivation. Since agriculture Is a major concern of the Cali- fornia Coast~i Commission, the property owners and the commission estab- lished an agreement which included the commitment of 64 acres through appropriate land use restrictions to agricultural use and the remaining 40 acres to development of up_ to 600 homes. Subsequent to approval of the annexation and prezone, development of the property would be proposed through a master plan and a planned unit development (PUO) and tract map. The Batiquitos Pointe EIR addressed an annexation and prezone over 35 acres. The prezone specified the northern 25-acre upland and bluff portion of the property as RO-M (Residential, 10-20 du/ac) and a motel. The motel would be subject to a conditional use permit and general plan amendment at some time in the future. The remaining 10 acres of the property, located to the south coincident with Batiquitos Lagoon and mudflats, were proposed as open space. Both of these proposals were approved by the City of Carlsbad and the Local Agency Formation Com- miss ion (LAFCO). The subject of this EIR is a master plan for approximately 165 acres of land located north of 8 atiquitos Lagoon between 1-5 and Carlsbad Boulevard. However, before the City of Carlsbad planning staff deter- mined the need for an EIR, an initial study was conducted. Through the initial study, planning staff determined that the proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment with respect to several issues, including traffic circulation, land use, topography and visual aesthetics, cultural and paleontological resources. biological resources, community services, hydrology and water quality, agricultural resources, air quality, utilities and energy, noise, and geology and soils. The EIR 1 I. SUMMARY ANALYSIS A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Project Location and Setting The 166-acre project site is located in the City of Carlsbad adjacent to and north of Batiquitos Lagoon between 1-5 and Carlsbad Boulevard. The property is bounded on the north by Lakeshore Gardens Mobile Home Park. Figures 1 and 2 show the regional location of the site and its relationship to the surrounding environs. The subject property consists of a mesa top and bluff area adjacent to 8atiquitos Lagoon. In addition to the maior highways on both the east and west boundaries, the AT &SF Railway tracks cross the property in a north-south direction about 700 feet from the western boundary. The mesa top is currently under cultivation in flowers, while the bluffs are covered in a natural condition with coastal sage scrub. Access to the site is available from Avenida Encinas on the east and Ponto Orive on the west. The project is designated in the city's general plan as resi- dential medium (4-10 du/ac) and residential medium-high { 10-20 du/ac). 2. Objective/Project Characteristics The applicant is seeking approval of an amendment to the existing zoning from RO-M-Q (Residential) to PC {Planned Community) and the approval of the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park Master Plan. Master plan approval is required before development can proceed within the PC zone. The master plan proposes a variety of interrelated land uses centered around an educational institution. The master plan has divided the property into· ten areas, each with a major land use. The proposed master plan is shown in Figure 3, with a conceptual site plan shown in Figure 4. A detailed outline of the uses by acreage and approx- imate square footage is provided in Appendix A, Project Data. The description of the proposed uses is provided by area in the following discussion. a. Area 1--Educational. This area is located east of the railroad tracks and is mostly surrounded by a circular road. The primary use will be an educational institution for graduate and research-oriented programs including, but not limited to, schools of law, architecture, real estate, land use, public affairs, journalism and media, Pacific Rim studies, and related technologies. This area will also include compat- ible private research and development facilities which will complement the educational institution in a primary or secondary l"'elationship. Support or ancillary services and corporate offices compatible with and necessary to the efficient operation of the educational institutions and research and development uses will be permitted. These uses may include, but are not limited to, heliports and heliport facilities, restaurants, ,.etail, and offices. Building height is limited to up to 25 percent of the allowable floor area, not to exceed 75 feet. 3 A) R-1488 0 {'I c1\ r • Fallbrook I RIVERSIDE COUNTY • Borrego ·------ Ocolillo Wells ...J < cc w a.. ~ ~r--lftr----F'~-~1-------.----:-~-+--l-----l-------li---+--- i FIGURE 1. THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT RELATIVE TO THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. M::u::.c:a:..a:a . . / 12/85 00 i3 0 FEET . ~ ~, . . . -----~~ . . -------\ ~· -~-"=--. ,. t -=-~ -,,.._ .. -. :~:.., ,, ....Ji \...... \ \ ··--. 2000 w ·, \ ,'.\ ·----,--_~ .. -, ....... •.~ ~~--•• : 1-~-. -.....:~.!,.=: BATIQUITOS PROJECT LOCATION ". ..; ,...., .... _,,.--· · .. _, __ ---· .-, ,·--.--~ I.A COSTA --~~ . ---.._. _..,. ...... .... : r.._ __ _ •' ..... ·, ) . ... " " ... "'-; :\ • ,. _ .. _ $1,=t~:S;"T ' " 11 ,, · .... __ .. FIGURE 2. PROJECT LOCATION AS SHOWN ON THE USGS MAP. ==========================================================:=P.ECmN 488 2/13/85 --- 5 7 ;· --~[N][Q) (ll)~~ W>~Wl SUMMARY J --·--· :t.:: -----::.:: I ::6-• MU rH.0001 TOTAi. J I .... JI .. • ! t.l I ..... 10 ,a.a J 118 113.000 '20 CU'S •2• STE'S ---- 8 BATIOUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK __ tfB SAMMIS PROPERTIES \S === -::tf~-It:;'~~ FIGURE 3. PROPOSED MASTER PLAN. I I l======:=============================::===P.ECaJN R-1488 2/13/85 ..,,, FIGURE 4 . CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN. AlfA 7 • ONH S,ACI fOI UCOOH A..._) MUI Pll\llVAIOf / f'UIUC ACcu, / f'.\S5M IIUUltCJN MTIQUllOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK A D(V(I ()Pr.f:NT Of SAMMS PROPlRllS LANO US( SUMMARY ::.:..-:::.:..._ =· =-=-- BRIAN PAll HO ASSOCIATIS AROITICTS NO PIAl'HRS W\'I.V-IR YAMADA NO ASSOOAUS IANOSCAPl ARCIIUCTS This area is 50. 5 acres in size, with 200,000 square feet of educational institution and 550,000 square feet of private research and development, office, and support facilities. b. Area 11--Residential. This area is situated adjacent to 1-5 and is set asid~ for different types of residential housing includ- ing, but not limited to, single-family, two-family, and multi-family units up to 15 units per acre. Also, no building shall be located within SO feet of the south-facing lagoon bluff edge and those buildings adja- cent to the bluff shall not exceed 25 feet in height. Area II is 27 .8 acres and is planned for 368 units. c. Area 111--Residential. This residential area is located along the edge of the bluff immediately east of the railroad tracks. It is proposed for single-story residential housing and/or vacation condo- minium lodges for residential or corporate facilities. In addition, no building shall be located within SO feet of the south-facing lagoon bluff edge and those buildings located adjacent to the bluff shall not exceed 25 feet in height. Area Ill is 4.9 acres, with 38 residential units or vacation condominium lodges. d. Area IV--Residential Located along the northern part of the property adjacent to the mobile-home park, this residential area is planned for a wide variety of housing types including, but not limited to, single-family, two-family, and multiple-family units up to ten units per gross acre. Area IV is 9.5 acres with 94 residential units. e. Area V--Recreation Center. The recreation center is located adjacent to the east side of the railway tracks in the southwest portion of the site. The center will include indoor and outdoor partici- pant and spectator sports: swimming pools, tennis courts, racquetball courts, a gymnasium, sports fields~ and locker rooms. This area is also planned for university housing units (two-bedroom condominiums) for student and summer vacation condominiums, common dining facilities (cafe- teria) as necessary to support the educational institute, and research and development facilities. The recreation center is 11.9 acres, with 11 tennis courts (including one competition court); 22,000 square feet for the gymnasium and indoor facility: 120 university housing or vacation condo- minium units, and an olympic swimming pool and sports fields. f. Area VI--Town and Country Center. Located immediately north of Ponto Road and west of the railroad tracks, the Town and Country Center is planned as a commercial facility providing retail, entertain- ment, and professional services directly to the educational park and recreation and residential uses within the community. It is also in-\.. tended to provide convenience commercial services to nearby park and 8 "'Creation areas and travelers on Carlsbad Boulevard. The proposed uses elude, but are not limited to, restaurants, lounges, retail, office and accessory uses, and automobile-related services. This 4.4-acre commercial center is planned as 50,000 square feet of retail shops, restaurants, and office space. g. Area VII--Executive Hotel and Conference Center. Located between Carlsbad Boulevard and the railroad tracks south of Ponto Road, this area of the plan is proposed as a hotel and executive conference center with ancillary recreation, office, banquet, and accessory retail uses. Other uses would be permitted that are compatible with the primary uses; for example, freestanding restaurants. Vacation condominium units are also permitted within the hotel facilities. Area VII is 22.2 acres, with 423 executive hotel suites (including 100 vacation condominiums}; a 40,000-square-foot conference center; and three freestanding restaurants totaling 21,000 square feet. h. Area Vllf--Recreation/Oeen Space. The recreation/open space. area is located between the railroad tracks and Carlsbad Boulevard in the southern part of the property and is proposed to preserve the lagoon and bluff areas on the property. In addition, it contains ero- sion-control facilities and passive recreation uses: picnic areas, bike and pedestrian trails, viewpoints, public access, and an interpretive "'.enter. Also, no buildings shall be located wlthin 45 feet of the south- 1cing lagoon bluff edge. The recreation/ open space area is 11. 9 acres. The bike and pedestrian trails are proposed adjacent to the lagoon, and about three acres has been set aside for picnic and public access areas along with an interpretive center. i. Area IX--Amphitheater/Open Space. Area IX is coincident with the major drainage found in the south-central part of the property. It is planned for both active and passive recreation uses including trails, viewpoints, lagoon and bluff preservation, erosion-control facil- ities, public access, amphitheater and outdoor entertainment facilities, and an interpretive center. The outdoor amphitheater is proposed in an existing drainage located east of the railway at the south end of the property. The bike and pedestrian trail is next to the lagoon. j. Area X--Natural Open Space. This area is generally coincident with the lagoon and is intended for preservation of the lagoon environment and adjacent bluffs. Public access will be limited to a bike and pedestrian trail adjacent to the lagoon and an interpretive center. Area X is 18. 3 acres in size. The master plan provided height specifications, which were .ncluded in the above area descriptions. The plan also indicates that 9 - - towers, gables, spires, steeples, scenery lofts, cupulas, and similar structures and necessary mechanical appurtenances may extend 20 feet above the maximum height specified. 10 B. CONCLUSIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1. Traffic a. Impacts. The Weston Pringle and Associates report ( 1985) (Appendix BJ indicates that a total of 26,500 daily trip ends would be generated by the uses associated with the proposed project. This total exceeds the traffic volumes indicated for the project area in the City of Carlsbad traffic model by 12, 780 trips. However. the net increase to the external road system is 2,700 trips when internal trips are accounted for. This traffic -volume will not exceed the capacities of any of the project area roadways. Peak-hour impacts at various intersections will result from implementation of the project and will require improvements to mitigate the potentially adverse effects. The Weston Pringle and Associates report ( 1985} indicates that the proposed project can be accommodated by the planned road system with the improvements outlined below. b. Mitigation. Mitigation measures to avoid potential impacts at various intersections include ( 1) signalization and dual southbound left-turn lanes at the Poinsettia Lane/ Avenida Encinas inter- section, (2) improvements to Avenida Encinas, and (3) evaluation of the Carlsbad Boulevard/project access intersection, 1-5 ramp intersections, and Poinsettia Lane should be completed when plans are available. Other measures recommended in the Weston Pringle and Associates report include monitoring of possible land use changes which could affect the traffic volumes and analysis of the internal roadway system when the design is available.· 2. Land Use a. Impacts. The proposed industrial and research devel- opment associated with the university-type institution would not be allowed under the PC zone, since the underlying general plan designation is not compatible. The greatest potential land use incompatibility is between the proposed project and Batiquitos Lagoon and the existing residential use (Lakeshore Gardens) along the northern property boundary. b. Mitigation. Design measures which have been incorporated into the project to reduce these potential impacts include 45-and SO- foot setbacks from the bluff edge at the southern part of the property; 25-foot height limitations for buildings adjacent to the bluff; and a 15- foot landscaped buffer along the northern property boundary. 3. Topography and Visual Aesthetics a. Impacts. Approval of the proposed master plan and PC zone would allow a higher density development on the property than is currently allowed by the existing zoning. Consequently,· the development will result in significant visual impacts associated with the· height of structures adjacent to (within SO feet of) the bluff. The future devel- opment will also affect the natural scenic views of Batiquitos Lagoon 1 1 - from Carlsbad Boulevard, a potential scenic highway in the City of Carlsbad General Plan, and from 1-5, which is part of the state scenic highway system. b. Mitigation. Several design controls have been incor- porated into the project to reduce visual impacts. Among them are bluff edge setbacks, building height limitations adjacent to the bluff, and an extensive landscaping program. In addition, it is recommended that building height in the area adjacent to the bluff be limited to 15 feet and maximum building height be limited to 40 feet instead of 75, which is proposed in the plan. 4. Archaeological and Paleontological Resources a. Impacts. Archaeological sites have been discovered on the subject property as a result of previous surveys performed by WESTEC. Loss of these resources from future grading will result in a potentially significant impact. Potential impacts to paleontology resources is not known since specific grading plans are not available. However, the Santiago Formation, which lies about ten feet beneath the surface, is likely to contain fossils. b. Mitigation. Potential impacts to archaeological re- sources on the subject property are currently being mitigated through a salvage excavation program under the supervision of Brian Smith. Docu- mentation of this effort will require City of Carlsbad approval before the potential impacts can be considered mitigated and the project ap- proved. Since there would be a potential for impacts to significant paleontological resources, it is recommended that a qualified paleon- tologist monitor grading in the vicinity of the identified stratum during project development. s. Biology a. Impacts. Potential significant indirect biological impacts will occur as a result of the proposed passive and active recre- ation areas: trails adjacent to the lagoon; viewpoints; picnic areas; interpretive center(s); and the amphitheater. These facilities will result in increased levels of human activity adjacent to the lagoon, which will have a direct effect on the lagoon's productivity. Nesting of several shorebird species and foraging and resting of a variety of bird species, including three listed as rare and endangered by state and federal agencies, would probably be inhibited. b. Mitigation. The potential impacts to biological re- sources can be mitigated by moving the proposed active and passive recre- ation facilities to the top of bluff and deleting or moving the amphi- theater. In addition, it is recommended that the lagoon wetland habitat on the property should be deeded to the State of California to be incor- porated into the Ecological Reserve administered by the Department of Fish and Game. This would insure preservation of this important biologi- cal resource. 12 I 6. Community Services a. Impacts. Project Implementation would contribute to the cumulative impact of new development on fire and police services. Fire service is considered inadequate at this time due to a response time in excess of five minutes. Tri-City Hospital is currently experiencing full utilization of its capacity. Adequate transit facilities are available, and consequently, no significant impact is anticipated. b. Mitigation. To offset the cost of providing school facilities for the 316 students expected to be generated by future devel- opment in accordance with the proposed land uses, the developer would be required to pay a school impact fee of $1,720 per dwelling unit which is currently charged by the Carlsbad Unified School District. A fire sta- tion at Poinsettia Lane and Paseo del Norte is proposed for completion in April 1986, which will provide service to the project site within two minutes. Tri-City Hospital is planning on expanding its facility by 108 beds with completion scheduled for 1987. 7. Agricultural Resources a. Impacts. The ultimate development of the project will result in the loss of agricultural land on the subject property. Although the property is not prime agricultural land, it is within the --coastal zone and is therefore subject to coastal policy, which calls for the preservation of agriculture. The project is not within an adopted --- .,cal Coastal Program (LCP); however, it was part of the San Dieguito LCP ..,efore it was adopted. At that time, about half of the site was set aside as agriculture. Therefore, inconsistency with coastal policy will result in a significant impact. b. Mitigation. Mitigation of the loss of agricultural land can be accomplished in two ways: preservation of half of the site as originally proposed in the San Dieguito LCP or payment of mitigation fees to the State Coastal Conservancy as provided by the Bradley bill. 8. Hydroloqy. and Water Quality a. Impacts. Potential impacts include erosion of the bluff from runoff. erosion of soils during construction. and altered chemical content of runoff into Batiquitos Lagoon from herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers to oil, grease, and heavy metals. b. Mitigation. The project includes two sedimentation basins which will control runoff sediment. The project should also include various measures to control sediment during construction. such as temporary landscaping to prevent erosion and the prohibition of grading from October 1 to April 1. In addition, a maintenance program to remove debris from paved surfaces would significantly reduce chemical contami- nants associated with runoff. 1 3 .- a. Impacts. Potential significant noise impacts are antici- pated from 1-5. the AT &SF Railway, and Carlsbad Boulevard. However, the area affected varies depending on the location of the 65-dBA noise contour on the property. b. Mitigation. Mitigation of potential noise impacts can be accomplished through sufficient setbacks of buildings outsJde of the 65- dBA noise contour. Other methods to reduce noise impacts include the construction of solid masonry walls between the noise source and receptor and special construction techniques. Both of these latter methods will require detailed analysis when more specific building locations and plans are known. 10. Air Quality a. Impacts. The proposed project does not conform with the land use assumptions utilized in the Series V population forecasts, upon which the Regional Air Quality Strategies (RAQS) were based. However, given the size of the project, the proposed master plan would not have a notable effect on the regional population distribution and, therefore, are not expected to affect the average trip length for the region. Consequently, approval of the proposed project should not have a signifi- cant impact on the effectiveness of RAQS. Emissions generated by future development of the project area would generate a small fraction of the forecasted emission levels of the entire basin. Since the San Diego Air Basin already has oxidants, reactive hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, and particulate concentrations in excess of state and federal standards, any increase in air pollutant emissions should be considered significant. b. Mitigation. RAQS strategies, such as the use of mass transit, carpools, park-and-ride facilities, and energy conservation measures, should be implemented to reduce air pollution. 11. Utilities and Energy a. Impacts. Development of the subject property would result in an increased demand for energy and utility services. b. Mitigation. While the project would not require dispro- portionate amounts of water and energy, conservation measures should be incorporated into the project design since these are limited natural resources. Although the proposed project should not have a significant impact on the capacity of the Encina sewage treatment plant, off-site improvements would be required to tie the proposed development into the existing sewer lines. A detailed study would have to be prepared in conjunction with future development plans for the subject propert¥ to determine the necessary off-site improvements. 14 12. Geology and Soils a. Impacts. Future development of the subject property could be affected by potential hazards resulting from secondary seismic effects. b. Mitigation. A detailed geotechnical study should be prepared prior to development which would outline specific engineering measures that would be required for development. 15 C. SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES ANO ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOlDED SHOULD THE PROPOSED PROJECT BE IMPLEMENTED 1. Topography and Visual Aesthetics Future development on the project site would have an unalter- able effect upon the visual character of the property and its surround- ings, in particular Batiquitos Lagoon, a regional resource. 2. Air Quality Air quality impacts are significant only on a regional basis. Any deve!.>pment that occurs which results in the emissions of measured pollutants will add to the cumulative concentrations within the San Diego Air Basin. 3. Cumulative Impacts Development of the proposed project would result in other unavoidable environmental effects, as identified in the Environmental Analysis section of this report and summarized below. Most of these effects, however, are not significant on the local level but are sig- nificant insofar as they would contribute to the cumulative effects of urb2nization in the region. These effects include short-term grading and construction impacts resulting from increased dust and noise emissions; an incremental increase in traffic on existing streets resulting in a demand for additional streets and/or improvements; a local increase in ambient noise levels associated with increased traffic volumes; an increased demand for urban services; and an increased demand for energy and water supplies. 16 D. EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT 1. Utilities and Energy Development on the subject property would result in an incre- mental increase in · the demand for utilities, which would contribute to a cumulative impact in the area. However. the anticipated demand is not expected to ex·ceed comparable developments within other areas of the San Diego region. and SDG&E's facilities are not expected to be significantly impacted by development of the project area. 17 -E. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF MAN'S ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCE- MENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY Approval of the proposed master plan and PC zone would allow development of a variety of land uses ranging from a university and industrial to residential and a hotel. Although this development would occur over a long period of time in relation to a person's life-span, this is a short-term use in a historical sense. The short-term effects of project implementation on the long-term productivity of the site include the physical alterations of the site and the impacts associated with occupation of the proposed development. Physical alterations include a reduction of open land in order to provide living space and commercial opportunities for new residents, alterations to the existing topography, loss of agricultural lands, and indirect effects to biological resources. Impacts associated with occupation of the proposed development include increases in traffic levels with con- comitant increases in noise and air pollution emissions. In addition, all public service agencies would experience an increase in the demand for their services. An additional long-term effect of the project would be the pro- vision of housing and additional commercial facilities for a rapidly expanding regional population. Associated economic impacts which could occur include an increase in land values, an expanded tax base for munic- ipal improvements, and an economic market for local businesses. However, there will be coincident increases in service demands. If development of the subject property did not occur, then the property would remain available for agricultural production, the demand for public services would not be created, the visual character of the undeveloped property would be maintained, and sensitive biological resources would not be affected. The long-term support of a rapidly expanding population should be examined with respect to the ability of the region to supply adequate services in the future. Energy has been, and will continue to be, a critical resource necessary for the maintenance of both residential and industrial growth. Implementation of energy conservation measures . becomes increasingly important as the demand for energy approaches the available supply and as the cost of energy continues to increase. Simi- larly, water in the San Diego region is becoming an increasingly scarce resource. Lack of potable water may limit the ability of the region to support the rapidly increasing population. Future agricultural produc- tion in the region would experience a decline if water resources, by necessity, were diverted to residential and industrial uses. 18 F. GROWTH INDUCEMENT The proposed project involves a master plan and a change in the zoning for the project site from residential RD-M-Q (Residential) to PC (Planned Community). Consequently, the proposed project would not be consistent with the anticipated growth patterns for the subject property. Growth inducement, which results In cumulative impacts on the existing environment, is generally dependent on the presence or lack of existing utilities and municipal or public services in a given area. Thus, the provision of such necessities .in an unserviced or isolated area can, theoretically, Induce growth between the newly serviced area and the community or development from which the facilities are obtained and linked. In addition, growth inducement can also be defined as growth that ( 1) makes it more feasible, both politically and economically, to Increase the density of development In surrounding areas and (2) raises property values in surrounding areas so that low-level land uses cannot compete. The proposed master plan and PC zone change Is not expected to result in similar requests on adjacent property since these areas are developed or under development. To the north is the Lakeshore Gardens Mobile Home Park; to the south is Batiq~itos Lagoon; to the west is Carlsbad Boulevard and South Carlsbad State Beach; and to the east is 1-5 and proposed residential development. North of the project and east of •.akeshore Gardens. is a graded site for a shopping center, while imme- 1iately north of this site,· north of Poinsettia Lane, is motel under construction. Development of the subject property would require construction of water and sewer lines and roadways to serve the project. Since most of the land in the area is either developed or under development, con- struction of these improvements would not result in significant growth- inducing impacts. 1 9 ,,-- - d. A hotel and conference center--on approximately 22. 2 acres; e. Natural open space--over approximately 18.3 acres; f. Recreational open space--lncludlng the amphitheater, over approximately 16.6 acres; and g. Neighborhood commercial uses--called Town and Country, over about 4.4 acres. For the most part, these uses are either consistent with, or allowed by Conditional Use Permit within, the existing RD-M zone, assum- ing some allowance can be made defining recreational and neighborhood commercial uses as ancillary uses. The only use mentioned above which does not fit into a typical multi-use residential area Is the industrial research and development. Therefore, rather than deal with a large number of combinations of potential uses, this alternative may be simpli- fied somewhat by considering the deletion of the industrial (and perhaps associated educational) uses. The Land Use Element of the general plan indicates that the largest areas of industrial development within the city will be around Palomar Airport. Some smaller areas are designated for industrial uses adjacent to Interstate S, the closest of which is approximately two miles north of the subject property. Because of the dominant residential nature of the proposed project, and the residential development in the nearby vicinity, within this alternative, consideration could be given to locating the type of joint private research/educational uses proposed to a more similar land use area--such as around Palomar Airport. While there is not necessarily an immediate conflict between residential and industrial uses, the latter may involve a scale of building types, an intensity of traffic o·r other activities, or emissions of noise or sub- stances, which are not compatible with ,-esidential or rec,-eational uses. Since precise uses have not yet been proposed fo,-the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park, an assessment of this potential conflict cannot be made. Nonetheless, such potential incompatibilities between industrial and residential or recreational uses could be avoided if the project involved a mix of uses which excluded Industrial activities. Without more precise information related to building design and activities within the proposed project, it is difficult to assign specific environmental benefits to this alternative. As a general rule, however, it may be argued that the proposed industrial research uses should be located in an area already devoted to similar uses in order to avoid even the potential for conflicts with differing adjacent uses. This alternative could translate into a reduction in potential visual impacts to the area of Batiquitos Lagoon and a reduction in potential disturbance to residential uses within the project and immediately to the north. Development in the industrial areas around Palomar Airport has been under way for several years now, and the pattern of development and uses is somewhat established. Thus, it may not be feasible to 2 1 ,- attract the type of academic research organizations envisioned by the proposed project into this established area. Without more information regarding the types of users intended for the Educational Park, the potential disadvantages of this alternative cannot be better identified. 3. Development at a Lower Intensity The major concern within this alternative is the heights of buildings adjacent to Batiquitos Lagoon or visible from the lagoon and recreation areas associated with it. Under the proposed project, build- ings would be set back either 45 or SO feet from the edge of the bluffs north of the lagoon and would have maximum heights of 25 feet in this area--with possible towers, gables, or other architectural ·structures extending 20 feet beyond this. In area I, the central education and research area which extends to the northern project boundary, buildings could be as high as 75 feet. In all other areas, the maximum height would be limited to 40 feet. While these limitations are not necessarily Inconsistent with the recommendations of the Batiquitos Lagoon Management Study, it is · likely that relatively intensive development with mid-rise buildings will be visible from the_ lagoon and its surrounding areas. If development were more limited in intensity or were more restricted In height, the potential visual impacts to the lagoon and its environs could be reduced. For example, buildings could be limited to a sing?e-story height in the areas just outside of the 45-or SO-foot bluff setbacks, and the maximum height of buildings throughout the project could be limited to 40 feet. The application of this alternative may reduce potential visual impacts to the lagoon, but it is rather arbitrary in its restric- tions. Essentially, the same type of visual mitigation can be ·achieved through a careful preparation and review of the required master plan for the ultimate development. A second consideration within this alternative concerns the design and uses allowed within the recreation areas adjacent to the lagoon. While it is generally accepted that passive recreational activi- ties, such as walking and observing the lagoon, are compatible with maintenance of its biological habitat values, the extent and design of more active uses may have adverse biological impacts. For example, bicycle trails and picnic areas along the shore of the lagoon may inter- fere with breeding behavior of certain bird species, or the activities and noise associated with the proposed outdoor amphitheater may interfere with normal wildlife functions. Specific alternatives could include placing the bicycle and pedestrian paths along the tops of the bluffs, providing panoramic views while simultaneously isolating the human uses from the lagoon habitat. The outdoor amphitheater could be either deleted or defined as a very low intensity use ar-ea through its design and intended functions. These types of reductions in the intensity of proposed uses would reduce the potential for direct and indirect impacts on the biological resources of Batiquitos Lagoon and its surrounding habitat areas. 22 - As with the topic of height restrictions, the precise defi- nition of the design and uses to be planned for the open space and recreation areas Is a matter that could best be accomplished in the preparation and review of the master plan for the property. 23 - 111. E_NVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS A. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION A traffic study has been prepared by Weston Pringle and Asso- ciates ( 1985) to determine the traffic and circulation Impacts associated with the proposed Batlquitos Lagoon Educational Park project located in the City of Carlsb·ad. The following discussion is based upon the infor- mation presented in the Weston Pringle and Associates report ( 1985), which is included as Appendix B. 1. Existing Conditions The 166-acre project site is located between Interstate 5 and Carlsbad Boulevard, just north of Batlquitos Lagoon. The AT&SF railroad tracks traverse the site and separate it into two areas, each with a single vehicular connection, Carlsbad Boulevard from the west and Avenida Encinas from the north. Figure 5 shows the location of the existing and proposed roadways in the project vicinity. Carlsbad Boulevard is currently a north-south four-lane divided arterial with limited access. It is classified as a major ar- terial on the Carlsbad circulation plan and has a 102-foot right-of-way and 82-foot curb-to-curb width. A partial grade-separated interchange exists at the proposed access point to the project site. This road serves as an access route to beach areas ancf as a connector between communities. Current daily traffic volumes on Carlsbad Boulevard are approxima~ely 10,000 vehicles per day. Traffic volumes vary considerably with seasonal activities along the coast. Poinsettia Lane Is an east-west arterial approximately 0.5 mile north of the project site which has a full interchange with 1-5. The diamond interchange with 1-5 and both ramp intersections are con- trolled by stop signs. Poinsettia Lane is currently a two-lane facility that terminates at Avenida Encinas; however, the circulation plan classi- fies the roadway as a major arterial. Construction of a two-lane exten- sion of Poinsettia Lane westerly to Carlsbad Boulevard will be completed in April. Currently, daily traffic volumes are approximately 1,500 west of 1-5 and 3,000 to the east. Avenida Encinas is a two-lane street that extends south.:rly from Poinsettia Lane to the project's northern boundary. Currently, development in the vicinity of Poinsettia Lane will result in improvement of Avenida Encinas to its classified width as a secondary arterial on the Carlsbad circulation plan. A secondary arterial requires an 84-foot right-of-way and a 64-foot curb-to-curb width. The street is proposed to extend through the project to Carlsbad Boulevard with this classifica- tion. At present, daily traffic volumes on Avenida Encinas are approxi- mately 1,500 vehicles. 2. Impacts Based on trip generation rates from studies conducted by a number of sources, including the City of San Diego, Carlsbad, and SANDAG, 24 - Q a: < > w ..J :::, 0 SOUTH CARLSBAD m STATE BEACH (NO SCALE) • • • • • • . • • a:: a:■ • a.: en• --aa: :f' 1-• ,,_ . ' <C" " BATIQUITOS L:AGOON w I- CC 0 z ..J w C 0 w en <C D. I FIGURE 5. EXISTING AND PROPOSED CIRCULATION SYSTEM _J ~-~---=---------------------PECmN I R-1488 2/18/85 the Weston Pringle and Associates ( 1985.) study determined the trip generation characterized for the various project land uses. Due to the uniqueness of several of the uses proposed for the project, assumptions and adjustments of standard rates were utilized. Table 1 depicts the projected trip generation for each of the various land uses by area. An estimated 28,200 vehicle trips per day would be generated by the project. A further discussion of the generation rates for each of the land uses is contained in Appendix 8. Estimates were also made of a.m. and p.m. peak-hour trips to be generated by the project, and these estimates are summarized in Table 2. A total of 2,040 trip ends are estimated for the a.m. peak hour and 2,535 trip ends are estimated for the p.m. peak hour. It should be understood that not all of these trips would be external to the site and this condition is discussed below. The distribution and assignment of project-generated traffic onto the local and arterial roadway system is based on a geographic trip distribution pattern for the principal uses on the site. The proposed land uses required that two separate distributions be used for project- generated traffic. One distribution pattern was used to represent the commercial and recreation uses and the second for the other remaining uses. Figure 6 shows the distribution of project traffic placed onto the roadway system. The impacts from the project-generated traffic in terms of daily traffic volumes were analyzed based on a City of Carlsbad traffic model that estimates daily traffic volumes on the arterial road system at buildout of the general plan. Table 3 summarizes the land use data, densities, trip generation rates, and trip · ends utilized in the traffic model for the two zones containing the project area. As indicated in Table 3, the model estimates a total of 12,820 trip ends to be generated from the project area. Comparison of this total with that estimated for the project in Table 1 indicates an increase of approximately 15,380 daily trip ends. This increase does not represent a total increase in trips external to the site, as some of the trips will remain internal (e.g., some residential units are planned for student use, thereby reduc- ing external trips from the residential areas). Thus, as a result of the various internal trips, the resultant external trip estimate is reduced to 15,500 daily trip ends as compared to the 28,200 indicated in Table t. The net increase on the external road system is therefore approximc2tely 2,700 daily trips above that depicted by the Carlsbad model. The trip distribution percentages were assigned to the 15,500 external project trips. This assignment for daily trips to the road system is illustrated in Figure 6. The resultant net increase in daily traffic over the current ultimate model projections for Avenida Encinas and at Carlsbad Boulevard are 400 and 5,000 trips, respectively. The current ultimate model daily traffic volumes and the volumes with the project are illustrated on Figure 7. Comparison of these ultimate vol- umes with the capacity for each roadway does not identify any deficien- cies. Thus, the planned road system can accommodate project traffic on a daily volume/capacity comparison basis. 26 TABLE 1 TRIP GENERATION Area I I 11 111 IV V V V V VI V 11 VII VIII IX X TOTAL Land Use Educational Research & development Residential Residential Residential Tennis courts Gymnasium Pool and sports fields Student housing/vacation condos Commercial Hotel and conference center Restaurants Recreation/open space Amphitheater/ open space Nc:tural open space acity of San Diego bsANDAG, 11Traffic Generators11 ccarlsbad Traffic Model done-quarter of City of San Diego rate *Negligible Descriptor Student 1,000 sq. ft. Dwelling unit Dwelling unit Dwelling unit Court 1,000 sq. ft. Dwelling unit 1,000 sq. ft. Room 1 , ooo sq. ft. Acre Acre Acre Units r,aoo sso 368 38 94 11 22 120 so 423 21 11.9 4.6 18.3 Trip Ends per Descriptor 2.88 s. 1a . 5c sc sc 10d 10d 5c 1208 ,oa 2008 ., - Trip Ends 5,000 4,500 2,200 300 800 100 200 * 700 6,000 4,200 4,200 • • * 28,200 Area Units I 1,800 students I 550,000 sq.ft. R&D II 368 dwelling units 111 38 dwelling units IV 9lt dwelling units V 11 tennis courts V Gymnasium V Pool and sports field V 120 dwelling units VI 50,000 sq.ft. VII !123 rooms VII Restaurants VI II Recreation/open space IX Amphitheater/open space X Natural open space TOTALS TABLE 2 PEAK-HOUR TRIP GENERATION A .M. Peak Hour In Out Trip Trip Rate Ends Rate Ends o. 12 215 0.03 S5 1 .oo 550 0.20 110 0.20 75 0 •. 60 220 0.20 10 0.80 30 0.20 20 0.80 75 Negligible Negligible Negligible 0.20 2S 0.60 7S 1.80 90 1.80 90 0.58 24S 0.29 125 0.85 20 0.46 10 Negligible Negligible Negligible 1,250 790 P .M. Peak Hour In Out Trip Trip Rate Ends Rate Ends 0.03 55 o. 10 180 0.30 165 1. 10 605 0.60 220 0.20 75 0.80 30 0.20 10 o.80 75 0.20 20 0.60 75 0.20 25 6.00 300 6.00 300 0.36 150 0.37 155 2.111 60 1.69 35 1,130 1,405 0 0 ... -... 0 0 CII C') w I-CC 0 z ..J w 0 0 w "' < 2 600 POINSETTIA LANE 1 760 a. -~---~-------~~~~---~---~---~ 0 CD ,... C') . CA a: '°< IO co> o ..-CII .... w .... IO..J IO ,... .... .,.=> ... yO SOUTH CARLSBAD CD STATE BEACH C < CD "' ..J I • • • • • • . a:: a:: a.: 0: act• 1-: <· :!I { ~~l~~~=~:-r:• 3,800 DAILY TWO WAY VOLUME DIRECTIONAL VOLUME 175/185 AM PEAK/PM PEAK (NO SCALE) IO CD .... -IO co y BATIQUITOS LAGOON 600 ( FIGURE 6. DISTRIBUTION OF PROJECT GENERA TED TRAFFIC 11 ~...;::;;;;--=--=--=====-=========-=-.=-=REC(IJN R-1488 2/18/85 TABLE 3 TRAFFIC MODEL TRIP GENERATION Tr-lps Ends Dwelllng Per DU Zone Land Use Acr-es Density Units or-Acr-e Tr-Ip Ends 278 Residential 2S 15 du/ac: 375 6 2,250 Beach 4 600 2,400 Open space 35 0 0 Subtotal 4,650 272 Residential 35 7 du/ac: 245 8 1,960 Residential 69 15 du/ac 1,035 6 6,210 Open space 136 0 0 Subtotal 8,170 TOTAL 12,820 .- SOUTH CARLSBAD STATE BEACH LEGEND (7. 100) CURRENT MODEL LANO USE 7 .300 WITH PROJECT (NO SCALE) .... 00 00 IOO fDQ .... ..... POINSETTIA LANE .... 00 00 ID CD a,CD Cl! CII - w l-a: 0 z ..J w Cl 0 w (/) < a. -----~-------~--~---+---T--: ( 14.100) · 0 a: <oo > 00 W ,.._CII ...I •• :::, .... at ....... 0 ..... m : 1 s.100 • . BA TIQUITOS LAGOON ll) w I-< (J') a: :· w ~ 1-z FIGURE 7. DISTRIBUTION OF PROJECT GENERATED AND FUTURE TRAFFIC I,- ~---------------------------P.ECmN R-1488 2/18/85 Project peak-hour volumes (2,040 in the a.m. and 2,535 in the p.m., as shown in Table 2) were also adjusted to account for internal trips and then analyzed by the traffic study. Peak-hour volumes at key locations are indicated in Figure 6 and discussed briefly below. a. The Intersection of the proposed site access and Carlsbad Boulevard is currently a partial grade-separated inter- change. This design results in a left lane on-and off- ramp condition for southbound traffic on Carlsbad Boule- vard. This nonstandard design can result in operational and safety problems. In addition, adverse peak-hour impacts could occur with the present design. The peak- hour volumes as shown on Figure 6 could, however, be accommodated by a standard at-grade intersection with signalization and provide a more standard driving condition. b. Projected peak-hour volumes on Avenida Encinas could pose significant constraints if the general plan improvements are not implemented. The general plan classification of Avenida Encinas as a secondary arterial would provide a 64-foot curb-to-curb width, allowing two lanes of travel in each direction and left-turn channelization with no on-street parking. c. The intersection of Poinsettia lane and Avenida Encinas, with a projected southbound left-turn volume of 530 vehicles during the a.m. peak, also could create adverse impacts, since the intersection is designed with only one left-turn pocket lane. The standard requirement for two left-turn pocket lanes is 300 or great~_r v_ehicles during a peak hour. Without two lanes, traffic queuing distance for this turning movement would exceed the length of the lane and would significantly inhibit traffic flow at peak hour. In addition, the relatively short distance between this intersection and the 1-5 southbound ramp intersec- tion could also create peak-hour congestion problems. With respect to the internal circulation of the proposed project, no specific roadway dimensions have been completed. However, the circular loop road east of the railroad tracks, based upon the avail- able information, has a width of 60 feet and radius of 725 feet. The access road to Carlsbad Boulevard from the west has an approximate width of 70 feet. These widths would appear to be adequate to accommodate two lanes in each direction with left-turn channelization and no on-street parking. However, the dimension of Avenida Encinas as it passes through the site does not conform to the standards for a secondary arterial as required in the Carlsbad Circulation Element. The Weston Pringle and Associates report ( 1985) suggested that since such a small number of daily through trips (2,700) would be made, the need for the secondary arterial classification could be eliminated. The potential internal road problems include pedestrian crossings, intersection location and spacing, visibility, and other traffic operational and safety factors, all of which should be addressed when mor-e detailed plans are known. 32 3. Mitigation The following measures have been recommended by Weston Pringle and Associates ( 1985) to mitigate potential traffic impacts from this project. a. A monitoring program should be initiated to identify use changes in the amphitheater, entertainment center, com- petition courts, and other areas that could result in traffic prob I ems. b. The design of the Carlsbad Boulevard/project access intersection should be analyzed with respect to improving traffic operations and safety when specific designs are provided. c. Traffic demands will require two lanes in each direction, left-turn channelization, and no on-street parking on A venida Encinas. d. A southbound· dual left-turn lane should be provided on Poinsettia Lane at Avenida Encinas. e. Signalization of the Poinsettia Lane/ Avenida Encinas intersection will be required by the project. · f. A detailed study of traffic operational needs on Poin- settia Lane, including the Avenida Encinas and 1-5 ramp intersections, should be completed with consideration of all potential development. g. When plans are available, the internal street system should be analyzed with respect to traffic operations and safety. h. The secondary arterial classification of a roadway through the project could be eliminated with the project approval. By implementing these measures, the project can be accommodated by the road system and avoid any adverse traffic circulation impacts. 33 B. LAND USE t. Existing Conditions The proposed Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park project is located on approximately 166 acres north of the westerly portion of Batiquitos Lagoon. The Land Use Element of the city's general plan currently designates this· area for residential uses of both medium den- sity (4-10 du/ac) and medium-high density (10-20 du/ac). The southern- most portion of the property, along the lagoon edge, is designated for open space uses. These land use designations for the property and for the surrounding areas are shown in Figure 8. In addition to the direct land use designations mentioned above, there are two overlay designations within the Land Use Element which affect the property: the Planned Community Overlay (City of Carls- bad 1974a:9 and Figure II) and the Special Treatment Overlay (City of Carlsbad 1974a: 31). Essentially, both of these overlays were applied to the property because of its proximity to Batiquitos Lagoon and the beach. They are intended to preserve the open space., conservation, and recre- ation potential of the area while allowing for reasonable development. Presently, two zones occur on the subject property, as shown in Figure 9. The RD-M zone, applied over all but the southern edge of the property, allows residential development of multiple densities and types consistent with the allowable densities in the general plan land use designations. The Q (Qualified Development) Overlay Zone has been applied to provide supplemental zoning regulations to insure that devel- opment regards the environmental and other resource values associated with the property. The Q Overlay Zone has been applied to all areas designated with the Special Treatment Overlay land use designation and · requires that development be preceded by the approval of a site develop- ment plan. · Currently, there is no adopted Local Coastal Program (LCP) whicli covers the subject property. At one time. it was part of-the San Dieguito LCP, but was removed from this control when annexed to the City of Carlsbad. The Carlsbad LCP was prepared prior to the annexation of this property to the city and, therefore, does not include the property. The city is currently attempting to reach an agreement with the Califor- nia Coastal Commission in order to assume administrative authority over the Carlsbad LCP. The subject property may be added to the LCP as an amendment. This would ultimately result in city administration of an LCP for the coastal zone, including the subject property. Under this authority, the city would be the coastal permit issuing agency pursuant to the certified LCP. Thus, a permit will be required, in any case, either by the city or by the coastal commission. Within the last year, the City of Carlsbad has prepared a Batiquitos Lagoon Management P Ian, which contains recommendations for development design and controls for areas within the viewshed of the lagoon. Although this plan has not been formally adopted by the Carlsbad City Council, it does provide a set of goals, policies, and development standards to which development in the lagoon vicinity can be compared to 34 - RM RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM (4-10 du/ac) RMH RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM HIGH ( 10-20 du /ac) N NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL C GENERAL COMMERCIAL E ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TS/C TRAVEL SERVICE COMMERCIAL OS OPEN SPACE (NO SCALE) RLM FIGURE 8. CARLSBAD GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP. I I 1-===============:===================P.ECrDN R-1488 2/ 13/85 R-1 ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (7,500 SQ FT MIN. LOT SIZE} 1-10 ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (10,000 SQ FT MIN. LOT SIZE} D-M RESIDENTIAL DENSITY-MUL TlPLE -M-Q RESIDENTIAL DENSITY-MULTIPLE "UALIFIEO ?VELOPMENT ,IIERLAY -1-Q NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL QUALIFIED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL P-C PLANNED COMMUNITY L-C LIMITED CONTROL (INTERIM ZONE) OS OPEN SPACE (NO SCALE) --- FIGURE 9. CARLSBAD ZONING MAP. -L1I 0: El ,. • II • • .,_ ______ ..... :::=========================:================================== P.£.C(l;N ====-iaa 21131as - - determine potential impacts to the lagoon resources. As a general rule, this plan maintains the land use designations which are part of the general plan land use element but provides additional detail regarding control of sedimentation, maintenance of habitat values, and preservation of natural views from the lagoon and its perimeter. The property is currently vacant and undeveloped and has been used for agricultural purposes for some years. Development in the nearby area includes the existing mobile-home park to the north (Lakeshore Cardens) and a small area of mixed uses to the northwest, including Coast Waste Management, Ponto Ministorage, and several residences. Slightly farther to the north, just west of Interstate 5, grading is under way for a commercial center south of Poinsettia Lane and a hotel north of the same roaJ. Poinsettia Lane is being extended westward to Carlsbad Boulevard. As part of the Coastal Development Permit conditions for the hotel and commercial center under development, a detention basin has been constructed in the drainage swale along the south edge of the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park property. New residential development is under way across Interstate 5, east of the property, and additional residential development is proposed along the north shore of Batiquitos Lagoon. 2.· Impacts The project proposes a variety of mixed uses centered around an educational institution/research park. A variety of residential uses would be provided, with options included in a. recreation center and hotel area for vacation condominium purchase. A hotel, conference center, and restaurants would be developed along with commercial estab- lishments to serve the needs of the immediate neighborhood. These uses are described in more detail in the Project Description section of this report. Table 4 presents a summary of the proposed uses and briefly notes the zoning requirements necessary to permit each use based on use of existing conventional zones in the city's zoning ordinance. As can be seen from Table 4, the proposal of certain mixed uses would require that the existing RD-M zone be changed and that Conditional Use Permits be obtained for certain aspects of the development. For example, the proposed industrial research and development center in subarea I, while associated with a university-type institution, would clearly represent the dominant use and have to be defined as private development subject to the regulations of an appropriate industrial zone. The combination of permanent residential uses with commercial recreation facilities in subarea V would be consistent with neither the existing RD-M zone nor a suitable commercial zone. It is obvious from this type of analysis that the project is best suited to the PC zone (Planned Community), which arrows for a mixture of land uses as defined in a master plan prepared in conformance with the requirements of the zone. The project area exceeds 100 acres and is controlled by a single developer and, thus, meets the general provisions for applicability of the zone (Section 21.38.030 of the zoning ordinance). The proposed mixed uses are not consistent with the current land use designations in the general plan for the property. The entire 37 I ' \.. TABLE 4 CONVENTIONAL ZONING REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPOSED USES Relation to Possible Zones Area Description Acres Uses (Ordinance Section) Educational 50.5 200,000 sq ft education al Need CUP in all zones (21.ll2.010(c)) 550,000 sq ft industrial Need P-M zone (21.3lJ.010) Heliport All zones but residential need CUP (21.42.010(5) (A)) II Residential 27.8 368 units, 15 du/ac max. Consistent with RD-M (21.24.010) 111 Residential 4.9 38 units/vacation condos Consistent with RD-M (21.24.010) IV Residential 9.5 94 units, 10 du/ac max. Consistent with RD-M (21.2ll.010) V Recreation 11.9 120 units/vacation condos Consistent -with RD-M (21. 24.010) Tennis courts, gym, pool Need C-T (21.29.0ll0(8) club or spa) or CUP In C-T (21.29.050(4)) or CUP In R-T (21.20.020(4),(10)) VI Town & Country 4.4 50,000 sq ft retail, Need C-1 ( 2 1 • 2 6 • 0 10 ) restaurants, offices VII Hotel I conference 22.2 423 rooms/condos Need CUP in RD-M (21.24.020(1)) center or C-T (21.29.030) or R-T (21.20.010) 40,000 sq ft conference Ancillary use in C-T or R-T (subject to interpretation) 21,000 sq ft restaurants Need C-T (21.29.030) and CUP If drive-In (21.29.050(5)) Area VII I IX X Description ) TABLE 4 CONVENTIONAL ZONING REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPOSED USES (continued) Relation to Possible Zones Acres Uses (Ordinance Section) R ecreatlon /open 11.9 Lagoon trail, picnicking Consistent with 0-S; may need space Interpretive center CUP (21.33.020-040) Amphitheater/ 4.6 Amphitheater Needs CUP (21.42.010(5) (P)) open space Trails, interpretive center Consistent with 0-5 (21.33.020-040) Natural open 18.3 Trails, interpretive center Consistent with 0-S (21.33.020-040) space_ property is designated for residential and open space uses. While tl1e residential designations may include "neighborhood commercial uses, generally less than 5 acres, as well as public facilities and open spaces, as legitimate supporting facilities and services" (City of Carls- bad 197qa: 22), the extent of industrial, hotel, and other uses proposed are beyond this provision. The PC zone requires that the mixed uses, defined within the master plan which controls development regulations, must be consistent with the land uses designated in the general plan or applicable specific plan (Section 21.38.020 of the zoning ordinance). This inconsistency between the proposed project and the current general plan and zoning requirements does not necessarily represent a significant land use impact, however. since it can be remedied by an appropriate general plan amendment to allow Planned Industrial and Neighborhood, Travel Services, and/or Recreation Commercial uses. If the city amends the general plan to allow the proposed uses, the city would run the risk that if the project were not built, the land use designations would allow future developments which could have a greater degree of incompatibility than this project. With respect to potential incompatibilities in actual land use between· the proposed project and surrounding developments or uses, the most significant potential impact would occur on Batiquitos Lagoon. The southern edge of the property extends to the shores of the lagoon itself, and approximately the southeastern half of the property lies --within the "critical planning boundary" or viewshed of the lagoon defined in the lagoon management plan (City of Carlsbad 19aq:Figure 4). Because the precise height and style of future buildings are not known at this time, and because the extent and activity levels associated with recre- ational uses adjacent to the lagoon cannot be clearly defined yet, potential conflicts between the proposed development and uses of the lagoon could occur. These conflicts would involve the recreational and aesthetic resources of the lagoon and their enjoyment by the public and the wildlife habitat value of the lagoon and adjacent land. Both of these topics are discussed in more detail in the appropriate sections of this report. To the north of the project, the residential uses in the existing mobile-home park would be juxtaposed to portions of the proposed education park (area I) and residential uses (area IV) within the proj- ect. Depending on the final intensity of development within the project and resulting activity levels and internal traffic, there could aiso be some land use conflicts in this area. 3. Mitigation The project involves several design measures intended to reduce the potential for land use impacts. Principal among these are the proposed design controls for the southern area of the property. Setbacks would be established between the southerly limit of development and the bluff edges adjacent to the lagoon in the recreation area (area V 111) and residential areas ( II and 111). These setbacks of SO and 45 feet, re- spectively, combined with building height restrictions to 25 feet in the areas adjacent to the bluffs, should minimize the visual intrusion of the q 0 ,- project into the lagoon viewshed and subsequent degradation of the recre- ational values of the lagoon area. A second aspect of the project which provides a mechanism to avoid impacts to the lagoon resources is the proposed PC zoning and the required master plan which forms part of the development approval process within the PC zone. Among other require- ments, the text of the master plan must include a detailed description of proposed uses, development regulations, and measures used to mitigate any adverse environmental impacts. Thus, the master-plan r-equirement pro- vides an additional tool to establish and implement measures to reduce potential impacts to the recreational and biological resources of the lagoon. Regarding potential conflicts with the existing residential development to the north, the proposed project includes the provision for a 15-foot landscaped· buffer along the northerly limit of the proper-ty. This measure should help m-inimize any disturbances that could be caused by internal traffic or-activities within ar-eas l and IV. II 1 C. TOPOGRAPHY AND VISUAL AESTHETICS 1. Existing Conditions The project area consists mostly of a mesa top, which slopes gently fr-om the east at 1-5 to a central north-south drainage. The drainage slopes southward, exiting into Satiquitos Lagoon. West of the drainage, the topography Is relatively flat, except for a depression to accommodate the railway tracks. The most significant topographic feature_ on the property is a bluff facing the lagoon located on the southern part of the property. The bluff height varies from 100 at the east end to 20 feet on the western end with slopes ranging from 50 to 75 percent. A portion of the lagoon and mudflat area adjacent to the bluff are also part of the property. The property is currently undeveloped except for agricultural production and the A T&SF Railway, which runs north-south across the western part of the property. There is also a small power line, which runs north-south in the vicinity of the railroad tracks. Areas of vege- tative cover include a small eucalyptus grove on the eastern part of the property at the crest of the hill and the bluff which is covered by coastal sage scrub. The drainage was once vegetated; however, it was recently graded to construct a detention basin for the agricultural operations. The Scenic Highways Element of the City of Carlsbad General Plan (City of Carlsbad 1975) identifies Carlsbad Boulevard and 1-5 as eligible for City of Carlsbad scenic highway designation. 1-5 has been designated as part of the state scenic highway system; however, It has not been granted official designation. The general objective of the element is to identify roadways that offer safe, visually pleasing drives through the City of Carlsbad and connections with recreation areas. From the southern part of project site near the bluff edge, there are extraordinary views of the lagoon and the Pacific Ocean. Views from the western part of the property are, for the most part, blocked by the vegetation associated with South Carlsbad State Beach. The northern part of the property Is adjacent to the mobile-home park, which is surrounded by a masonry wall varying in height from five to eight feet. The western part · of the property is the highest elevation on the site, with views of 1-5 in the foreground, Batiquitos Lagoon in the mldground, and the bluffs and rolling hills beyond the lagoon in the background. The project site is visible from the northbound lanes of 1-5 and Carlsbad Boulevard. From these locations for approximately 2,000 feet a(ong each roadway. the lagoon and bluffs are readily visible and provide an interesting view, with water in the foregound and densely vegetated dark green bluffs in the midground, rising. to a flat mesa top. South of the lagoon is a variety of land uses, ranging from a service station and picnic area adjacent to 1-5 to greenhouses and single-family homes. Most uses adjacent to the lagoon have an excellent view of the lagoon, the bluffs, and to a limited extent the mesa. Other off-site locations from which the project site is visible include the hills south of La Costa Avenue and east of 1-5, the southern part of the residential 42 .·-project immediately east of 1-5 nor-th of the lagoon, and the area west of Car-lsbad Boulevar-d south of the lagoon. The ar-ea associated with the lagoon has been recently studied in r-esponse to a r-equest from the city council. This study has culmi- nated in a r-epor-t entitled "Batiquitos Lagoon Management Plan." The plan has not been r-eviewed or adopted by the council; therefor-e, it has no legal status. Nonetheless, it does provide a visual analysis of the lagoon, along with specific policy and development standard recommenda- tions. This plan describes a Critical Planning Boundary, which defines the limits of the lagoon viewshed. The boundar-y crosses the property generally from the southwest corner to the northeast corner. The plan also describes a Lagoon Resource Line, which on the property ts located at the top edge of the bluff. The area between the Lagoon Resource· Line and the Critical Planning Boundary is called the Critical Planning Area. The policies and standards presented in the plan for the Critical Plan- ning Area that are relevant to the lagoon's visual resources include: a. 202.01. Development should be designed to protect the visual landscape. The present visual appearance of the viewshed (i.e., a predominance of nonurban topography and vegetation) should be maintained through land use control. b. 202.03. Natural ridge lines should be preserved. c. 202.04. Development should be set back from surrounding bluff edges. d. 202.07. Emphasis should be placed on retaining the natural topography. Minimal cut or fill should be permitted only to allow adequate structural location and not to create more prominent development. e. 203.01. Special public viewing points should be provided around the lagoon. f. 204.07. The most effective way to preserve the existing nonurban visual appearance of the area Is by allowing development which is of low enough density so as to "blend" into the environment. Large-lot subdivisions (minimum one-acre parcels) blend into the landscape and can be utilized as ranch or agricultural estates. g. 205.01. There should be a bicycle trail or lane around the lagoon. On the north, a bicycle trail adjacent to the lagoon may not be possible. It is the policy of the plan to have a bicycle trail as near to the north shore of the lagoon as possible. h. 205.02. Public picnic areas with visual access to the lagoon should be provided. 43 i. 201.021. All structures shall be set back a minimum of 50 feet from the Lagoon Resource Line. j. 201 .022. Grading (cutting or filling) shall not occur within SO feet of the Lagoon Resource Line. k. 202.040. All structures shall set back from bluff edges and ridgelines a minimum of 45 feet. No portion of any structure within 100 feet of a bluff edge shall exceed one story ( 15 feet) maximum height from the elevation of the bluff edge. I. 202.o•n. The maximum height for all new or remodeled structures within the Critical Planning Area shall be two stories (25 feet). except for especially view-sensitive areas (previously mentioned) where the maximum height has been specified as one story ( 15 feet). m. 202.071. Cut or fill shall not exceed 10 feet from the natural or original grade. n. 204.061. The property located on the lagoon's north shore between the railroad tracks and 1-5 shall be desig- nated for residential medium density (4-10 du/ac) with the condition that the density can be clustered (max. 15 du/ ac) on a portion of the -site with the remainder left in open space. The open space may be converted to residential use per the conditions set forth in the San Dieguito LCP. However. the maximum density shall be 10· du/ac. Although this plan is not adopted. the policies and develop- ment standards provide definitive guidelines for evaluating and assessing the visual aesthetics of the proiect. 2. Impacts The impacts anticipated from the proposed master plan are based on the ultimate development of the project. The impacts have been categorized in two ways: The first is plan-to-plan, in which the evalu- ation addresses the degree of impact as a result of the differences between the adopted general plan designations and zoning versus what is proposed in the master plan. The second is plan-to-ground, in which the impact is based on the change from the existing visual character to that which would result from ultimate development of the project. This analy- sis is somewhat limited since specific details of the ultimate project are unknown. Plan-to-P Ian Earlier development proposals over the subject property allowed for a mixture of residential densities and provided for a hotel use--uses which are similar to some of those proposed in the Educational Park project. The Seabluff project, which was approved over the eastern portion of the property, allowed residential development in its eastern area, reserved an area for agriculture to the west, and preserved the lagoon and bluff areas. The Batiquitos Pointe project, which covered the western portion of the property, specified residential development with an area for a future motel and open space over the bluffs and lagoon. These earlier proposals were generally consistent with the medium and medium-high residential designations on the property in the Land Use Element of the general plan. The extent of development in the proposed Educational Park project is very similar to that proposed in these earlier projects, and the open space areas proposed are similar in extent to the earlier plans and the Land Use Element. Over much of the property, then, the extent of development proposed in the Educational Park project is similar to that which would have occurred in the earlier proposals or which would occur in any devel- opment consistent with the general plan. The same conclusion is not true, however, when considering the San Dieguito Local Coastal Program that once included the subject property. This program. would have pre- served a 60-acre area for agricultural uses and to that extent would have allowed a smaller area of development, resulting in somewhat less visual impact to the area of the lagoon. From a strict viewpoint considering only preexisting plans, the project would have similar impacts to earlier proposals and somewhat more impact than development in accordance with the LCP that once covered the property. This somewhat narrow analysis does not consider elements of building style, height, landscaping, or other physical aspects of development. Plan-to-Ground The ultimate development on the property will significantly alter the visual appearance of this area. The construction of buildings within SO to 45 feet of the bluff will add man-made structures at the top of a natural scene consisting of the bluffs and lagoon to the views from 1-5. Carlsbad Boulevard. and the surrounding area. As proposed by the applicant, the height of buildings along the bluff edge would be 25 feet, excluding architectural design features which could add more height. This height is greater than that indicated in the Batiquitos Lagoon Management Plan (Section 202.040) and also is greater than that recom- mended by coastal commission staff (Damm, California Coastal Commission, San Diego District, 2/ 12/85). 3. Mitigation The master plan has incorporated many measures and design parameters that will reduce the significant visual impact. These include the preservation of the bluff and wetland area in open space; 50-and 45- foot building setbacks from the bluff edge; and building height limita- tions of 25 feet in areas adjacent to the bluff and of 40 feet for all areas except area 1, where the height is limited to 75 feet. Also, a public viewpoint and picnic area is included in Area VI II and public access is allowed in Areas IX and X for pedestrian trails and viewpoints. In addition, the conceptual site plan indicates an extensive landscaping program for the project, with special emphasis on a 15-foot buffer be- tween the project and Lakeshore Gardens Mobile Home Park. 45 ' j - Mitigation measures which have not been incorporated into the project and which would reduc~ the level of visual impact to a level of insignificance are reduction of the height of structures adjacent to the bluff to one story (15 feet), with no special allowances for architec- tural design features and a maximum height of 110 feet for all buildings. This limitation would put the project in "scale" with the surroundings. Since the project site is relatively flat, no special grading concepts are recommended other than maintaining the sloping topography at the southeastern end of the property through appropriate contour grading and varied siting techniques. These design measures can be considered in greater detail at the time a master plan is prepared and reviewed for the development. Since PC zoning is proposed, such a master plan will be required and does provide the correct forum for a more complete address- ment of these potential impacts. q 6 D. CULTURAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES 1. Existing Conditions a. Archaeology Two archaeological surveys conducted by WESTEC Services, Inc., covered the entire project area. In 1981, WESTEC surveyed the eastern section of the property to relocate previously recorded archaeo- logical sites. As· a result of this survey, four sites were found in the southern portion of the property. These sites were described by WESTEC (1982a:41) as follows: SDM-W-95. This site is a deposit of shells and stone tools located on a ridgetop. Numerous tools were noted during the survey. SOM-\V-97. This site incorporates two previously recorded sites, SOM-W-89 and SOM-W-2541. This site is also a midden deposit containing abundant cultural materials. SDM-W-88. This site is a light concentration of shell remains and stone tools. Midden deposits may be present. SDM-W-2551. This site was noted as containing midden soils and shell remains. No artifacts were observed at the time of the WESTEC survey. The western portion of the property was surveyed by WESTEC in 1982. One previously recorded archaeological site was found during this survey. The site, SOM-W-84, is described (WESTEC 1982b:3-29) as a large midden site with shell remains and stone tools. b. Paleontology The property Is an ancient marine terrace, composed of sediments and stones deposited during the Tertiary and Quaternary epochs. The level portions of the property are Lindavista Formation. This is underlain by the Santiago Formation, which is visible on the property in the southern bluffs. Quaternary alluvium has been deposited in the drainages on the property. The paleontological significance of the property is primarily in the Santiago Formation deposits. Although fossils have been found in the Llndavista Formation, the Santiago Formation contains a greater possibility for significant fossil finds. The highly fossilifer- ous Delmar Formation grades into the Santiago Formation (Kennedy 1975), which is also dense and clayey. The Santiago Formation is not clearly visible in the bluff area and is highly weathered; therefore, the exist- ing exposures are poor indicators of potential finds within the stratum. The Santiago Formation lies from 5 to 15 feet below the Lindavista Formation, which itself is from 2 to 12 feet thick (Woodward-Clyde 1984). 47 I l ... Therefore. the Santiago Formation lies from 7 to 30 feet below the sur- face. depending on location. It is nearest the surface along the bluffs overlooking the lagoon, where it is only 5 feet below current ground level. 2. Impacts Grading and other earth movement associated with project implementation will destroy the archaeological sites located within the property and ha~ the potential to destroy significant paleontological resources. 3. Mitigation The archaeological sites on the property wel"'e tested by Brian Smith in the fall of 1984. Smith tested four sites and found that three required mitigation of adverse impacts: SOM-W-95, SOM-W-84, and SOM-W- 97. One of the sites, SDM-W-88, was determined to be insignificant and no tests or studies were recommended. Test excavations at SOM-W-2250 demonstrated that no further_ studies were required. No test report was prepared on the results of Smith's excavations, but mitigation of impacts began in January, 1985, under Smith's supervision. The results of this mitigation program should be reviewed for adequacy before clearance is given to the project, since no test report was prepared. If adequate excavation and analysis has been accomplished, no further investigations will be necessary. However. in the absence of a test report and research design for the mitigation excavation, it is not possible to determine whether additional work will be required. Grading plans have not been developed for this project at this time. If the depth of the grading exceeds five feet along the bluffs, the Santiago Formation will be exposed and significant fossils may be destroyed or lost. The deposit may be impacted in other parts of the-project ar-ea as well, depending on the depth of grading proposed. Grading plans will need to be reviewed to determine where the formation will be impacted. If paleontological impacts cannot be avoided through shallower grading, monitoring during grading by a paleontologist should be required. "8 E. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The property was surveyed originally as two projects (Batiquitos Pointe and Seabluff Property Annexation) by biologists from WESTEC in 1982. The results of these surveys are reported in the draft EIRs for these projects and are summarized below. 1. Existing Conditions The master plan area is on the northern edge of Batiquitos Lagoon in the City of Carlsbad and includes the mesa top to the north of the lagoon, bluffs above the lagoon, and area within the lagoon itself. Eight habitat types were identified on the property: coastal· sage scrub, coastal s~:t marsh, mudflat, freshwater/brackish marsh, riparian, euca- lyptus grove, agricultural land, and disturbed fill material (Figure 10). The majority of the property, including most of the mesa top, is under current agricultural use for flower production. The small area of riparian habitat in the northern portion of the area is primarily arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepsis) and cattail (Typha sp.) growth associated with a drainage c~~nnel along the railroad tracks. A small stand of eucalyptus trees is ~p~esent along · the eastern border of the property. · · The bluffs between the mesa top and the lagoon support rela- tively undisturbed coastal sage scrub habitat predominated by lemonade- ·berry (Rhus integrifolia). California sagebrush· (Artemesia californica), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), black sage (Salvia mel- lifera), and Spanish dagger ( Yucca schidigera). Locally dense patches of coast cholla (Opuntia prolifera) occur on the eastern bluffs on the property and coastal prickly pear (Opuntia sp.) is abundant. A small, level bench of sandy fill in the southwestern corner of the property adjacent to Highway 101 is covered by nonnative sea-fig (Carpobrotus sp.). A small north-south-trending canyon through the property supported an area of cattail-dominated freshwater mar-sh bordered by coastal sage scrub-covered slopes at the time of the initial surveys. This mar-sh was probably dependent on irrigation runoff from the adjacent agricultural activities. The majority of both habitats was recently removed during construction of a detention basin in the canyon bottom. A small area of freshwater marsh still exists in the mouth of the canyon and cattails are beginning to develop in the basin. No plant species listed by state or federal agencies or the California Native Plant Society were observed or expected on the property. The disturbed nature habitat to wildlife species. The the wetlands habitats of the species, especially birds. of the mesa top limits the value of this coastal sage scrub on the bluffs and lagoon support a var-iety of wildlife 49 \· ....... , ' '· ' \ ' . ' ' ' DISTURBED \\'-., ·. ' ' . •. \...., \ .. ' .. .. .... \ \\ . ' ' --· ' \ \ \ ·, ' ' ' \ \ \ AGRICULTURE ' \ -~, \ \ ' ' \ ' ' ' '· \ : . ::i • , __ ..... ; _;, : / DENSE: CHO 1 INCH=soo FEET (APPROX.) 1 FRESHWATER/BRACKISH MARSH 2 DISTURBED CARPOBROTUS DOMINATED 3 LAGOON: COASTAL SALT MARSH/ MUD FLAT 4 COASTAL SAGE SCRUB 5 RIPARIAN 6 EUCALYPTUS FIGURE 10. VEGETATION MAP OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. SOURCE:WESTEC. 1982 _...._ ____________________________________________ -_-_-_-_______ ...;. ___ ..;;.;_;;;;. _________________ -_-_-__________________________________ --P.EC(])N __ .,. R-1488 2/13/85 . - California black-tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila melanura californica), a subspecies with a population that is declining within its range, have been observed in the coastal sage scrub habitat on the bluff. The dense coast cholla may also provide habitat for the locally declining coastal cactus wren ( Campylorhynchus brunneicapillum). Below the coastal sage scrub-covered bluffs, the property includes wetlands habitats within the lagoon, including coastal salt marsh, brackish marsh, mudflats, and open water. These habitats provide important feeding, nesting, and resting habitat for a high diversity of water-dependent bird species and important habitat for fish and aquatic invertebrates. Because of the importance of coastal lagoons to wildlife and because of the small proportion of originally existing lagoon habitat that has -,ot been destroyed or degraded, this habitat requires special consideration for preservation. A number of sensitive species have been observed in the vicinity of the project location or on the site. Three species listed by state and federal agencies as threatened or endangered are reported to use the wetland habitats on the site: California least tern (Sterna albifrons browni) and California brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis californicus) forage in the open water and rest on mudflats and Belding's savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi) was ob·served in the salt marsh vegetation. The California least tern has nested at the lagoon mouth to the immediate south of the project site in recent years. 2. Impacts Implementation of the master plan as proposed would result in the removal of current agricultural land, the small area of riparian habitat, and the _eucalyptus grove. The loss of these resources would not have a significant effect on the biological resources on the property. The master plan calls for development in areas V 111 , l X, and X which would Include • • • passive and active recreation areas including trails, view- points, • • • public access, outdoor entertainment facilities. interpretive center(s), • • • bike/pedestrian trail adjacent to lagoon, ••• [and] picnic areas •• · .. All of these uses would be below the level of the bluff on the slope or adjacent to the wetland. These activities would result in the removal of coastal sage scrub habitat and an undeterminable amount of wetland habi- tat. This would be a significant loss. The loss of adequate buffer and the resultant indirect impacts associated with the increased levels of human activity directly adjacent to the lagoon would have a significant effect on the biological productivity of the lagoon. These uses would also be potentially damaging to the adjacent ecological reserve managed by the California Department of Fish and Game. Nesting of several shorebird species in the lagoon habitats on and adjacent to the site and foraging and resting of a variety of species, including three birds listed by state and federal agencies, would probably be inhibited • 51 Any grading activity that contributes to runoff or erosion and sedimentation into the lagoon would have a significant adverse effect on the biological resources of the lagoon. The developrnent as proposed would not be consistent with the long-term goals of the City of Carlsbad for the lagoon and its resources. The City of Carlsbad Draft Batiquitos Lagoon Management Plan (August 28, 1984) identifies the portion of the property below the top of the bluff and including the fill bench in the southwestern corner of the property as a "lagoon resource" area. Policy statements that characterize the intent of the plan are as follows. 301.03 Development should not take place within the lagoon resource line until satisfactory investigation can be accomplished to identify mitigation that reduces impac~s to an insignificant level. This would include any proposed bicycle or pedestrian trails, which should be located outside of the Lagoon Resource Line and in the Critical Planning Area, as discussed below. 301. 04 Active recreation should not be allowed on the lagoon. , 301. OS Passive recreation on the lagoon should only be allowed if there is no substantial adverse impact to wildlife. (In other words, habitat protection has priority over recreation). Much of the remainder of the property is within a Critical Planning Area. Within the Critical Planning Boundary _ _(C~S), the goals for future development include 201.00 Minimize impacts on wildlife habitats that are function- ally related to the lagoon resource. Policies for development within the CPS include 201. 02 Human activity should be designed/ controlled so that it wilt not substantially adversely affect wildlife habitats that are functionally related to the lagoon. 202.04 Development should be setback from surrounding bluff edges. 203.03 There should be limi-ted public access to the wetlands shoreline. Access should only be at locations where there could be minimal impacts on the, lagoon ecosystem. 204.01 Human uses of the critical planning area should be com- patible with the primary use of the wetland as a natural wildlife environment. 52 205.01 There should be a bicycle trail or lane around the lagoon. On the north. a bicycle trail adjacent to the lagoon may not be possible. It is the policy of this plan to have a bicycle trail extending from El Camino Real to· Carlsbad Boulevard as near to the north shore of the lagoon as possible. The limited access points mentioned in policy 203.03 above should be accessed by bicycle. auto and foot. and should be properly signed. Additional guidelines are provided in the management plan for development standards: 201.021 All structures shall be setback a m1namum of SO-ft. from the Lagoon Resource Line (LRL) (see Figure 10). 202.0110 All structures shall be set back from bluff edges and ridgelines a minimum of 115 feet. No portion of any structure within 100 feet of a bluff edge shall exceed one story ( 15 feet) maximum height from the elevation of the bluff. 203.021 Public viewing points and a trail system (bicycle and hiking) shall be established around the lagoon within the Critical Planning Area. California Department of Fish and Game shall be allowed to restrict public access to sensitive habitat areas. 205.011 Large scale recreational facilities that require fencing or structures or that attract large concentrations of people shall be set back a minimum of 300 feet from the Lagoon Resource Line. 205.021 Small scale active recreational facilities (eg. family tennis courts and swimming pools) shall be set back a minimum of 150 feet from the LRL. 205.022 All active recreational facilities shall be screened by landscaping. 205.031 Passive recreational facilities shall not require a setback from the landward edge of the LRL. (Fencing may be necessary to restrict access to sensitive habitat areas). 3. Mitigation Mitigation of impacts to biological resources resulting from Implementation of the p,:oposed master plan for the property can be accom- plished through incorporation of the policies and goals of the Batiquitos Lagoon Management Plan into the project design. The following specific measures would substantially reduce the impacts of the project. 53 a. No development, Including bicycle and pedestrian trails, should occur below the top of the bluff. The proposed bicycle trail should be located . at the top of the bluff along the entire length of the property. In addition, this trail should be set back at least five feet from the edge of the bluff between the western edge of the drainage canyon to Highway 101. The setback would provide minimum buffering for a high bird activity area within the wetlands habitat of the lagoon. The construction of any structures or grading and filling In the floodway could require a Section 4011 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Because of the use of the property by federally endangered bird species, the 4011 Permit process would also involve consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act. b. The area of disturbed sea-fig covered fill in the south- west corner of the property should not be developed for either active or passive uses because of its proximity to sensitive wildlife and foraging habitat. c. All buildings should be set back a minimum of 45 feet from the edge of the bluff. Construction should include measures to minimize the impact of increased noise and light levels on the lagoon habitat. The area between the bluff top and development should be land- scaped to minimize the apparent presence of human activity to wildlife on the lagoon except at certain limited view access points. d. The amphitheater proposed for location-in the small north-south drainage in the south-central portion of the property should be located at least 300 feet outside the lagoon resource area to minimize the effects of noise and high levels of activity on the wildlife in the lagoon. The freshwater marsh habitat lost during construction of the detention basin in the drainage should be reestablished. e. The grading plan should incorporate measures to prevent runoff or erosion and sedimentation into the lagoon during construction and a design to permanently control these potentially damaging impacts to the lagoon. f. The lagoon wetland habitat on the property should be deeded to the State of California to be Incorporated Into the Ecological Reserve administered by the Department of Fish and Game. This would insure permanent preservation of this important biological resource. F. COMMUNITY SERVICES 1. Existing Conditions a. Fire Protection. The project area would be served by the City of Carlsbad Fir:e Department. The nearest existing station, Station Number 1, is located at 1275 Elm Avenue, approximately 5.3 miles north of the subject property, and has a response time of to minutes. Backup services can be provided by Station Number 2, 1906 Arenal Road, in 8.5 to 9 minutes. Paramedic service is provided by Station Number 3, 1307 Catalina Avenue, in 13 minutes (Dana, City of Carlsbad Fire Department, 2/8/85). b. Police Protection. Police protection is provided by the Carlsbad Police Department, 1200 Elm Avenue. The project is within beat unit assignment 44; the response time by a mobile unit is 2 to 5 minutes for emergency calls and up to 30 minutes for low-priority calls (Risen- hoover, Carlsbad Police Department, 2/8/85). c. Schools. The project site is located within the Carlsbad Unified School District. The schools that would serve the project area are listed in Table 5, along with their current enrollment and capacities. TABLE 5 SCHOOLS SERVING THE PROJECT SITE Generation School Grade Enrollment Capacity Factor Jefferson Elementary K-3 570 700 0.14 Pine Elementary 4-6 305 420 0.11 Valley Junior High 7-8 720 1,035 0.09 Carlsbad High 9-12 1,375 1,587 o. 17 TOTAL 2,970 3,7112 o.51 SOURCE: Dunlap, Carlsbad Unified School District, 2/12/85 New Students 87 68 56 105 316 d. Hospital Services. The nearest major medical facility available to the project is Tri-City Hospital, located at 11002 Vista Way in the city of Oceanside, approximately 9.S miles north of the project area. Tri-City is within the Tri-City Hospital District, which includes one other hospital, Tri-City West. Tri-City West is a smaller facility with 66 beds. The Tri-City Hospital District currently has 243 active physicians on staff, who are utilized by both hospitals. Tri-City offers a full line of medical services, including a 24-hour emergency facility, a nuclear medicine department, heart catheterization. a mental health 55 unit, a hemodialysis unit, and radiology and pathology equipment. The hospital is also in the process of qualifying for designation as a trauma center in April of 1985. Tri-City Hospital has a capacity of 260 beds and Is currently operating at capacity. The hospital Is experiencing overcrowding and, as a result, will add 108 beds by 1987 (Bankovitch, Tri-City Hospital, 2/ 11 /85). e. Public Transportation. The North County Transit System provides bus service in the subject area. Currently, route number 301 operates north and south along Carlsbad Boulevard, with service once every one half hour. 2. · Impacts a. Fire Protection. Fire protection services currently provided by the City of Carlsbad from Stations 1 and 2 would not be adequate due to the nine-to ten-minute response time. However, the City of Carlsbad is planning a new station at Poinsettia Lane and Paseo Del Norte, to be fully operational in April, 1986. From this station, the response time would be reduced to two minutes. Although the response time for paramedic services is also excessive, immediate care can be provided by fire· station personnel until paramedics arrive. Additional paramedic services are planned to be operational in approximately three years (Dana, Carlsbad Fire Department, 2/8/85). b. Police Protection. The response time for police protec- tion is acceptable. The project would contribute, however, to the cumu- lative impact of new development on police services, which requires additional officers and equipment as the city's population increases. c. Schools. Approval and development of the proposed proj- ect would result in the construction of 620 residential units. Based on generation factors utilized by the Carlsbad Unified School District, the proposed project would generate a total of 316 students. Capacity figures in Table 5 include temporary measures, such as portables, to accommodate students. At the present time, Jefferson Elementary School is the only facility experiencing serious overcrowding; Pine Elementary, Valley Junior High, and Carlsbad High are not at capacity. However, the school district plans to open a new K-3 school located in Calaveras Hills by the fall of 1986, which will alleviate the current situation (Dunlap, Carlsbad Unified School District, 2/12/85). d. Hospitals. The existing Tri-City Hospital in Oceanside will have an additional 108 beds in 1987 and will be considered to have adequate facilities to serve the proposed project. e. Public Transportation. It is not anticipated that the proposed development would have a significant impact on transit facili- ties, since bus service is currently provided along Carlsbad Boulevard. 3. Mitigation a. Fire Protection. Poinsettia Lane is operational, When the proposed the fire protection 56 fire station at service will be - adequate. Completion of the new station by the target date of April, 1986, set by the City of Carlsbad Fire Department will predate the beginning of construction on the subject property. b. Police Protection. The proposed project in itself would not require that additional police services be provided. However, additional police manpower and equipment eventually will be needed in response to the overall population increase within the city. c. Schools. The Carlsbad Unified School District currently charges a development impact fee of $1, 720 per dwelling unit to off set the cost of providing school facilities for students generated by new housing developments. These fees can be utilized to provide temporary teaching facilities (portable classrooms) but cannot be used for perma- nent facilities or staffing salaries. In exchange for the payment of fees, the school district provides a "will serve" letter, which ensures school service to new developments. In addition, the construction of the new K-3 elementary school is scheduled to be in operation before comple- tion of the proposed project. d. Hospital Services. No mitigation measures are deemed necessary at this time since adequate facilities will be available. e. Public Transportation. The proposed project would not require additional transit facilities. However, as development occurs in the vicinity of the project area, it may become feasible to expand transit service in the area. 57 ( ) G. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 1. Existing Conditions The project area lies next to the northwest corner of Bati- quitos Lagoon. Runoff waters either drain to the west or collect into natural swales which eventually lead into the lagoon. The site is char- acterized by sandy, well-draining soils and gentle grades which, in addition to its small watershed area, tend to limit runoff to the prop- erty boundaries. Runoff occurs only dur-lng intense and prolonged storms. No portion of the site floods except the sandy flats adjacent to the lagoon. The present potential for erosion and sedf mentation is kept at a minimum by the terrace agr-icultur-e and the dense native vegetation on the escarpment slopes. "Available evidence on general sedimentation rates in Batiquitos Lagoon indicates that sediment eroded from the 35- acre project site watershed has not caused a sedimentation problem in the lagoon (Mudie et al., 1976)" (WESTEC 1982a). A compr-ehensive discussion of the condition of the lagoon is provided in the Draft Environmental Impact Report, Seabluff Property ' Annexation, City of Carlsbad (WESTEC 1982a). Former natural drainage patterns have been considerably changed by the construction of the Califor-nia Southern Railroad ( 1883-88) and the Santa Fe Railroad (1934), the Pacific Coast Highway (1912 and 1927), and 1-5 (1965-66) which have crossed the lagoon chan- nel system. Consequently, the lagoon has no direct contact with the ocean, and thus has had virtually no contact with tidal action since at least the 1930s. The beach berm formed by sand depositions is occasionally opened by the County to release impounded runoff water into the ocean, but these channel openings have apparently not been sufficient to allow complete tidal excursion. As a result, tidal inflow has reached only to the 1-5 bridge in recent years and only for short periods of time. The beach berm is usually re-established· by wave action and the channel closed by sand accretion within a few weeks. In addi- tion, the construction of an upstream dam at Lake San Marcos on San Marcos Creek has greatly reduced the volume of floodwaters entering the lagoon. · The major effects of these phenomena have been to create seasonally fluctuating water quality conditions in the lagoon. These conditions include hypersalinity, hyposalinity, oxygen depletion, and high temperature variation. The California State Water Quality Control Board includes Batiquitos Lagoon under coastal waters. The Comprehensive Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin lists as potential beneficial uses: contact and noncontact water recreation; inland saline habitat for aquatic and wildlife resource; marine habitat; and preservation of rare and endangered species. 58 • 2. Impacts Construction as a result of the proposed development will eliminate the conditions which now insure absorption of rainwater on- site. Runoff from the paved surfaces will need to be contained to prevent erosion to the terrace and to the escarpment faces. During construction, there will be a high potential for erosion of unprotected soils, which could cause significant sedimentation problems in Batiquitos Lagoon. After completion of construction, paved surfaces, landscaping, and storm drains will reduce concentrations of suspended soils to less than five percent of existing levels. The planned urban uses of the project site will change the chemical content of the runoff waters that now flow from the property into the lagoon. Herbicides, pesticides, and bacteria, the current by-products of the site's agricultural use, will decrease while contami- nants such as oil, grease, and heavy metals from automotive sources will increase. However, water quality in Batiquitos Lagoon is not expected to be measurably degraded by runoff contaminants from the project site. Batiquitos Lagoon presently receives large quantities of runoff contaminants from existing urban and agricultural land uses within its watershed area and the contaminants derived from the project site would represent a very small incremental contribu- tion to the total contaminant load (WESTEC 1982b). Special provision will need to be made, however, for disposal of toxic wastes that could potentially be associated with university research • 3. Mitigation Implementation of the following measures will reduce the potential for impacts to an acceptable level. a. Sedimentation and erosion impacts can be reduced by implementation of the proposed sedimentation basin and energy dissipation structure in Area IX. Runoff from the western portion of the project site will be detained in a separate basin within Area VI 11. Provision for mainte- nance and removal of deposited sediment should be made. The plans for this structure should be approved by the City of Carlsbad Engineering Department. b. ·crading activity should be prohibited during the rainy season, from October 1 to April 1 of each year. c. Temporary runoff-control devices should be installed prior to any grading activities. A deepening of the sedimentation basin and controlled grading which would 59 direct runoff flow into the basin during these operations would reduce the potential for sediment deposition in the lagoon. d. All graded areas should be planted in temporary or per- manent landscape materials prior to October 1 of each year to reduce erosion potential. e. As the natural vegetation has provided effective erosion control on the escarpment slopes, it should be the pre- ferred landscaping for that area, the setback area of the terrace at the top of the slopes, and for al I other open space areas of the project. f. For the nonresidential areas, a parking lot maintenance program should be established to remove debris that collects on paved areas. Since chemical contaminants tend to adhere to dirt particles, frequent street-sweep- ing procedures would significantly reduce the chemical content of runoff water discharged into the lagoon. g. Use of fe~tilizers and pesticides should be by certified personnel and kept to the minimum possible. 60 H. ACRI CULTURAL RESOURCES 1. Existing Conditions a. Physical Characteristics Approximately 131 acres of the project site is currently utilized for agricultural production. Flowers. such as gladiolus and ranunculas. are grown. which are rotated with zucchini to provide a green fertiliz.er in order to enhance cut-flower production. Previous attempts to produce vegetable crops on the property have been unsuccessful. In the 1960s. attempts to produ·ce a tomato crop failed and zucchini crops did not have adequate yields or quality for harvest as ·food crops (Copley 1980). According to the Basic Data Report for the Agriculture Element (County of San Diego 1979), the coastal part of the North County Metropolitan Subregion possesses physical and cultural criteria suitable for commercial/agricultural production. Those cultural factors which favor long-range commercial production in this area include the following: 1) A large percentage of the land under cultivation is within the jurisdiction of the Coastal Commission. 2) LAFCO policies for evaluating the effects of annexa- tion of agricultural land are generally preservation- oriented. The cultural factors which would tend to reduce the potential for long-range commercial production in the coastal area (County of San Diego 1979:48) include: 1) The amount of agriculturally productive acreage within incorporated boundaries. 2) The extremely high value of coastal land. 3) County island annexation policies and county growth management policies in the coastal area. 4) Conflicts between urban and agricultural land uses. 5) The rapid growth in the North County subregion. The project site is located approximately 0.25 mile east of the Pacific Ocean and is situated in the maritime area-climate zone. This climate zone encompasses a continuous strip of land a few hundred yards to six or eight miles along the coast of California. Ocean condi- tions dominate this zone. resulting in seasonal and diurnal temperatures which are narrow and humidity that is high. Mean annual precipitation is 15 to 20 inches. Temperatures over the year range from 44° to 75°F. and the mean annual temperature is 60° to 62° F. ( Copley 1980). 61 The soil analysis for the subject property is based on information contained in the Soil Survey, San Diego Area, California (U.S. Department of Agriculture [ USDA J 1973). Figure 11 indicates the distribution of the soil types on the subject property, and Table 6 describes the agricultural ratings for soils within the project area. The Class and Storie ratings express the relative suitability of the soil for agricultural purposes. Storie indexes are based solely on agricul- tural features, with Grade 1 (best case) having few or no limitations for crop use and Grade 6 (worst case) being generally unsuitable for farming. Capability ratings encompass such factors as crop suitability, potential for soil damage, soil conservation, crop management, and land use re- strictions, with Class I (best case) soils having few or no agricultural limitations and Class VIII (worst case) soils having extensive limita- tions; Class VI II soils may be restricted to recreation, wildlife, or watershed uses. The letter 11e11 in the capability class number indicates that the main limitation is the risk of erosion unless close-growing plant cover is maintained. Risk or limitations due to soil surface characteristics are indicated by the letter "s". Prime agricultural land has been defined in the Califor- nia Government Code, Section 51201. This definition is also included in the Williamson Act, which is the State of California legislation allowing the creation of agricultural preserves. Prime agricultural land as defined by the act includes any of the following characteristics: 1) All land which qualifies for a rating as Class I or II on the Soil Conservation Service Land Use Capability ·c1assifications. 2) Land which qualifies for a rating of 80 to 100 on the Storie Index. 3) Land whfch supports· livestock u·sed for the production of food and fiber and which has an annual carrying capacity equivalent to at least one animal unit per acre, as defined by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. 4) Land planted with fruit-or nut-bearing trees, vines, bushes, or crops which have a nonbearing period of less than five years and which will normally return, during the commercial bearing period, on an annual basis, from the production of unprocessed agricul- tural plant production, not less than two hundred dollars ($200) per acre. The Capability Unit of the Terrace Escarpments (Tef) (Vllle-1) indicates that the soil is of no agricultural value and that risk of wind or water erosion is present. The Storie Index is less than 10 and reflects · severe limitations due to poor profile development, steep slope, and high erosion potential. Unlike Terrace Escarpment soils, the Marina loamy coarse sand (MlC) is suitable for agriculture. The Capa- bility Unit of 111 s-4 indicates that coarse sand may impose restrictions 62 1000 0 FEET - I FIGURE 11. R-1488 2/13/85 ...... ' . , ~. : ala:aaa••~~=-::s '::I==.:; :s7aa:a •a:~ ·-.... ,, •1. If• If " ,, ···~' :: . '•. ~. ., .... ·------ _.,;=••a aas••• ••.:: •a~ .::.s,: .... , ' .. ...._ LAGC BATJQUITOS ..... ·;-= ---·· ,, . ' . · .• ~-l . . SOIL TYPES ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. Soll Name Marina loamy coarse sand Terrace Escarpments SOURCES: Key: Good Fair N/R (s) TABLE 6 ANALYSIS OF SOILS ON PROJECT SITE Croe Sultablllt):'.'. If Approxl- Map Percent mate Storie Symbol Slope Acreage Class Index Avocados* Citrus* MlC 2-9 1qq 111 s-lf sq Good Good TeF 30-qo 22 VII le-1 <10 N/R N/R USDA 1973; Close et al. 1970 -No special management Is necessary. -Some special management is necessary. -Not rated, unsuited to agriculture. -Slope is the main limiting factor. I rrlgated ( see ke):'.'. below) Truck Crops Tomatoes Flowers Fair( s)t N/R Good N/R N/R N/R * Avocado crops are not climatlcally suited to the study parcel. Lemons are better suited than other citrus crops. tSlope is not a limiting factor on this particular study parcel. Therefore, this soil unit can be given a "Good" crop suitability rating for truck crops. on agriculture production and the moderately low agricultural rating (Storie Index of 54) is also attributed to the coarse sandy soil texture. None of the soils on the property are considered "prime" agricultural land according to the Williamson Act definition. In San Diego County, .almost all of the significant acreages of prime soils have been developed with urban uses. However, a wide variety of crops can be grown easily in nonprime soils with the proper climate and water. For this reason, the agricultural potential of soils in San Diego are mea- sured more accurately by the Soil Survey ratings because they take into account the kinds of production which occur in the county. This system rates soils as "good" or "fair" for five principal crops. Those soils whic:h do not meet the "fair" criteria are "not rated." · Terrace Escarpment soils (22 acres) are not rated for any of the five major crop types. However, four of the crops (avocado, citrus, truck, and flowers) are suitable to the Marina soil. Of these, only flower and truck crops are climatically suited to the site. Table 6 indicates soil suitability for the five principal crops grown in San DI ego County. San Diego is able to produce-off:"'season. or winter vege- tables, tomatoes, and nursery and floral crops due to the mild climatic conditions in the maritime and coastal zones. Because the county's climate allows the local harvest to reach markets in the off-season, high prices per unit volume contribute a high value of production per acre. Coastal-dependent crop production in San D lego is a significant portion of that grown statewide, as well as nationally. The majority of off- season vegetable production is centered around Otay Mesa in the southern portion of the county and near Carlsbad in the north (County of San Diego 1979). Tomatoes are one of the most profitable crops in this area. However, as indicated by the soils analysis and past farming history, the site is not suited to tomato production. The economic viability of agricultural use of the project site was studied by Copley International Corporation ( 1980) and it concluded that: 1) Even through an intense cropping program, an owner- farmer would not be able to obtain a positive rate of return. 2) On a leased basis, a farmer could obtain a positive rate of return. However, the landowner would have to subsidize the farmer $2,173 per acre per year. Annually, the subsidy amounts to $225,954. 3) Even on the rental basis, farm risks could signifi- cantly diminish rates of return. b. Agricultural Land Use Policies City of Carlsbad. The City of Carlsbad Ceneral Plan's Open Space and Conservation Element ( 1973) states as an objective that 65 the city should prevent the premature development of prime agricultural land and preserve the land wherever feasible. Also, in 1980 the Carlsbad City Council adopted an interim agricultural policy. In this policy, the council encourages the continued use of these lands for agricultural purposes on a temporary basis. The policy also states, however, that it shall not preclude the ultimate development of land used for agriculture provided the development is consi-stent with Carlsbad's ordinances and policies. In essence, agriculture Is viewed as a temporary form of land use for many areas currently cultivated. Carlsbad Local Coastal Program. In the absence of a local coastal program adopted by the City of Carlsbad, the state Coastal Commission formulated a program of their own. The background concerning the status of the LCP for this area is provided in the Land Use section. For the previously approved projects, nearly half of the project site was left in agriculture, reflecting compliance with the mixed residential and agricultural land use advocated by the Coastal Commission LCP. As stated in the findings for the San Dieguito Land Use Plan (City of Del Mar 1981): The Commission's goal is not merely to preserve the soil re- sources for future generations; actual production is also a key goal ••• -thus the Commission finds that a mixed use program that assures continued agriculture and stable boundaries between agriculture and urban development, meets the requirements of Section 30242 of the Coastal Act. Subsequent to these findings, the State Assembly passed Bill No. 3744, introduced by Assembly Member Bradley. This bill pro- hibits the levying or collecting of agricultural conversion fees under the agricultural subsidy program called for in the Carlsbad LCP. It does provide for the collection-of mitigation fees for. development on nonprime agricultural lands in the coastal zone in-the City of Carlsbad that lie outside the Mello I and Mello II areas. The proposed project falls within this category. The fee specified is not less than $5,000 nor more than $10,000 per acre. Presumably, the exact dollar amount per acre would be determined by the administering LCP agency. The funds would be provided to the State Coastal Conservancy for expenditure on various natural resource projects. 2. Impacts Future development of the proposed master plan would result in the conversion of agricultural land to urban land uses, which would result in the irretrievable loss of a limited resource. According to the USDA, 144 acres of the site are rated as being agricultural land. However, the site is not considered prirne agricultural land and agricul- tural operations on the property are not economically feasible. The Carlsbad LCP formulated by the Coastal _Commission, however, maintains that a mixed agricultural/urban land use is desirable. Since the project does not include any agriculture preservation, it will not comply with the Coastal Commission's program. The Coastal Commission will no doubt consider this an impact. 66 The ultimate determination of impact, however, must be made with reference to the policies of the appropriate jurisdiction, in this case the City of Carlsbad. It is recognized by the City of Carlsbad that in many areas agriculture can only be viewed as a temporary land use. While the city has taken steps to discourage the premature urbanization of agricultural land; the loss of nonprime agricultural land is not in itself viewed as an adverse effect. Therefore, the loss of this agricul- tural land does not contribute a significant impact. As a permit from the Coastal Commission is required for the project, compliance with the Bradley bill will also be necessary. 3. Mitigation As the loss of the nonprime agricultural land on the subject property is not viewed as a significant impact, no mitigation measures are required. The proposed development can accomplish mitigation of Coastal Commission agriculture impacts through implementing the provi- sions of the Bradley bill. " 67 l I. AIR QUALITY 1. Existing Conditions a. Climate. The project area, like the rest of San Diego County's coastal areas, has a semJarid Mediterranean climate character- ized by hot, dry summers and mild, wet winters. The dominating permanent meteorological feature affectins the region is the Pacific High Pressure Zone, which produces the prevailing westerly to northwesterly winds. The study area has a mean annual temperature of 62° F. and an average annual precipitation of ten inches, faUlng primarily from December to March. Winter low temperatures at the site average about 45° F., and summer high temperatures average about 75° F. (Close et al. 1970). Prevailing conditions along the coast are modified by the daily sea breeze/land breeze cycle. Fluctuations in the strength and pattern of winds from the Pacific High Pressure Zone interacting with the daily local cycle produce periodic temperature inversions that influence the dispersal or containment of air pollutants in the San Diego Air Basin. The afternoon temperature inversion height, beneath which pollu- tants are trapped, varies between 1,500 and 2,500 feet. The altitude beneath the inversion layer is the mixing depth for trapped pollutants. In winter, the morning inversion layer is about 800 feet, or about 620 feet above the project site. In summer, the morning inversion layer is about 1, 100 feet. A greater change between morning and afternoon mixing depth increases the ability of the atmosphere to disperse pollutants. Generally, therefore, air quality at the site is better in winter than in summer. The predominant pattern is sometimes interrupted by the so-called "Santa Ana" conditions, when high pressure over the Nevada-Utah area overcomes the prevailing westerlies, sending strong, steady, hot, dry winds east over the mountains and out to sea. Strong Santa Anas tend to blow pollutants out over the ocean, producing clear days. However, at the onset or breakdown of these conditions, or if the Santa Ana is weak, air quality may be adversely affected. In these cases, emissions from the South Coast Air Basin to the north are blown out over the ocean, and low pressure over Baja California draws this pollutant-laden air mass southwards. As the high pressure weakens, prevailing northwesterlies reassert themselves and send this cloud of contamination ashore in the San Diego Air Basin. There is a potential for such an occurrence about 45 days of the year. but San Diego is adversely impacted on only about five of them. When this impact does occur, the combination of trans- ported and locally produced contaminants produces the worst air quality measurements recorded in the basin. b. Air Quality. The site was formerly used for agriculture so very little air pollution emissions have been produced there. The project area is within the San Diego Air Basin ( SDAB). Air quality at a particular location is a function of the type and amount of pollutants being emitted into the air locally and throughout the basin and the dispersal rates of pollutants within the region. The major factors 68 affecting pollutant dispersion are wind speed and direction, the vertical dispersion of pollutants (which is affected by inversions), and the local topography. The concentration of pollutants in the air is measured at eight stations maintained by the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and the California Air Resources Board (ARB). Air quality measurements are expressed in the number of days on which air pollution levels exceed state standards set by ARB and federal standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA}. Table 7 lists the applicable state and federal standards for maximum air pollutant concentrations, and Table 8 lists the number of days these standards were exceeded at the monitoring statfon at Oceanside, the nearest coastal station (about 8 miles north}. Air quality standards are set by the federal Clean Air Act of 1970, as amended in 1977. In 1979, a. major revision to the San Diego portion of the state Air Quality lmpiementation Plan was prepared, since the standards for five air pollutants (ozone,. carbon monoxide, particulates, nitrogen dioxide, and lead) were not being met. The revision presented a new set of Regional Air Quality Strategies ( RAQS) and, with a deadline extension authorized by the Clean Air Act, showed attainment of ozone and carbon monoxide standards by December 1982. The granting of the extension required submission of another major revision of the implementation plan in 1982. That revision was able to report substantial improvements; the region had achieved the health standard for nitrogen dioxide and had violated neither the lead standard for 18 months nor the carbon monoxide standard for two years. The two remaining pollutants, ozone and particulates, present special control strategy difficulties in the SDAB because of climatological and meteorological factors. Ozone is the end product of the chain of chemical reactions that produces photochemical smog from hydrocarbon emissions. A major source of hydrocarbon emissions is motor vehicle exhausts. In the SDAB, only part of the ozone contamination is derived from local sources; under certain conditions, contaminants from the South Coast Air Basin (i.e •• the Los Angeles area} are windborne over the ocean into the SDAB. When this happens, the combination of local and transported pollutants produce!i the highest ozone levels measured in the basin. Local agencies can control neither the source nor the transportation of pollutants from outside the basin. The AP CD's policy, therefore, has been to control local sources effectively enough to reduce locally produced contamination to clean air standards. In 1982, it was apparent that while these controls had effectively reduced ozone contami- nation, they would not allow the SDAB to attain control standards. Therefore, the 1982 implementation plan revision proposed more stringent but reasonably applicable tactics which would reduce local contributions to below the safe standard by 1985, though population growth would once again raise concentrations dangerously close to the nonattainment level by 2000. APCD contended, however, that the long term of this increase 69 TABLE 7 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS Pollutant Oxidant (ozone) Carbon monoxide Sulfur dioxide Nitrogen dioxide Lead Suspended particulate matter Maximum Concentration Averaged over Specified Time Period State Standard Federal Standard 0.10 ppm (200 ug/m3) 1 hr. 9.1 PP'!I (10ug/m3) 8 hr. 0.05 ppm (131 ug/m3) 24 hr. 0.25 ppm (470 ug/m3) 1 hr. 1.5 ug/m3 30-day Average 100 ug/m3 24 hr. 0.12 ppm (235 ug/m3) 1 hr. 9.0 ppm ( 10 ug /ml) 8 hr. 0.14 ppm (365 ug/m3) 24 hr. 0.05 ppm (100 ug/m3) Annua I Average, 1.5 ug/m3 Calendar Quarter 260 ug/m3 24 hr. SOURCE: California Air Resources Board, California Air Qua I ity Data Summary, 1982. TABLE 8 SUMMARIES OF AIR QUALITY DATA Number of Days Number of Days Over State Standard Over Federal Standard Pollutant 1980 1981 1982 1983 1980 1981 1982 1983 OCEANSIDE MONITORING STATION Oxidant (ozone) 54 48 30 * 14 15 7 Carbon monoxide 0 0 0 O* 0 0 0 Sulfur dioxide 0 0 0 O* 0 0 0 Nitrogen dioxide 0 0 0 O* 0 0 0 Particulates 32 24 9 1 0 1 0 SOURCE: California Air Resources Board, California Air Quality Data Summary, (1980}, (1981), (1982). .(1983). *Incomplete data recordings for 1983. * O* O* O* 0 would allow development and implementation of new tactics as they were needed. This proposal was reviewed and approved by ARB and EPA and is now part of the RAQS for the basin. For several reasons hinging on the area's dry climate and coastal location, the SOAB has special difficulty in developing adequate tactics to meet present particulate standards. After considering modifi- cation of the particulate standard to a more appropriate health-related scale, the EPA has produced a proposal for a new standard, with implemen- tation action expected in 1985. With the exception of particulates, the APCO now has a regional strategy that can show present or near-future attainment of federal clean air standards for all locally produced pollu- tants. Nevertheless, because of the airborne transport of pollutants Into the air basin, it is not likely that the SDAB will become an attain- ment area for ozone by 1987. In preparing revisions to RAQS, the APCO bases projec- tions of future air pollutant emissions on population and employment growth estimates developed by the San Diego Association of Governments {SANDAG). The lastest revisions--in 1982--were based on SANDAG's Series V forecasts. A later set of forecasts--Series V 1--has been produced by SANDAG. Although Series VI forecasts have not been used to revise the 1982 regional air quality model, they do produce new information on the distribution of basic employment. Changes in basic {as opposed to local- servingJ employment can affect the projections of air pollutant emis- sions, since significant increases over expected basic employment are considered growth-inducing. For air quality analysis, such increases are equivalent to new emissions sources. 2. Impacts The primary air quality impacts whicb .would occur as a result of future development in accordance with tt,e proposed general plan land use designations and prezoning would be air pollutant emissions from automobile and truck traffic to and from the development, local emissions from the burning of natural gas for space and water heating in the devel- opment, and air basin-wide emissions from power plants generating elec- tricity for use in the development. A summary of the estimated emissions which would be generated by the proposed project are listed in Table 9, with more detailed information presented in Appendix C. The proposed project does not conform with the land use assumptions utilized in the Series V forecasts. However, given the size of the project, the proposed land use changes would not have a notable effect on the regional population distribution and, therefore, are not expected to affect the average trip length for the region. Consequently, the proposed project should not have a significant impact on the effec- tiveness of RAQS. Emissions generated by future development of the project area would generate a small fraction of the forecasted emission levels for the 72 Emission Source Vehicles Power Generation Domestic Heating TOTAL TABLE 9 SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM THE PROPOSED GPA (kilograms per day) Reactive Carbon Oxides of Sulfur Hydrocarbons Monoxide Nitrogen Dioxide 260.86 2,277.411 327.48 11. 71 94.19 1.28 1.69 8.44 o.os 260.86 2,290.84 430.11 1. 33 Particulates 23.50 0.84 24.34 , entire basin. Since the San Diego Air Basin already has oxidants, reac- tive hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, and particulate concentrations in excess of state and federal standards, any increase in air pollutant emissions should be considered significant. Future development of the site, in accordance with the pro- posed land uses, would also generate dust and other pollutants from grading and construction. This occurrence, however, would only take place for a relatively short time and would be subject to control in accordance with the rules of the San Diego APCD. 3. Mitigation The deterioration of air quality in the San Diego Air Basin is a regional problem; however, it can be addressed, in part, by imple- menting mitigating measures on a project-by-project basis. Mitigation strategies suggested for the reduction of emissions are stated in the adopted revised RAQS. Some specific RAQS strategies which can be implemented to reduce air pollution include: a. The extension and maximum use of public transit (tac- tic T-5) b. The maximum use of carpools and park-and-ride facilities (tactic T-24) c. Development of bicycle and pedestrian pathways (tactics T-7 and T-27) d. Utilization of energy conservation techniques in building construction to minimize on-site energy consumption, in- cluding provision of adequate wall and ceiling thickness, insulation, north-south orientation of building and windows, etc. (tactics C-24, C-2Sa, and C-25b) e. Implementation of construction techniques to particulate and chemical emissions, including down unpaved roadways and sites of construction turning off idling equipment not in use, etc. F-1 and F-6). minimize wetting activity, (tactics Strategy a would be implemented by the North County Transit District and strategy b by Caltrans and the City of Carlsbad. The City of Carlsbad would be responsible for implementing strategies c, d, and e. J. UTILITIES AND ENERGY 1. Existing Conditions a. Water. The project site is located within the retail service area of the Costa Real Municipal Water District ( CRMWO). Water is currently available to the project site for agricultural use. The CRMWO has an adopted master plan for an area that includes the project site. The master plan contains a major water facilities program which Identifies the capital facilities that are necessary and would, tn part, provide service to the project area. b. Sewer. The project will fall within the Carlsbad sewer service area, which is served by the Encina Treatment Plant. The Encina Treatment Plant has a capacity of 22.5 million gallons per day (MGO) and is currently using 14 MGD. The City of Carlsbad is entitled to 2S.!J percent of this capacity, or S. 72 MGD. At the present time, the city is only utilizing 3. 3 MGD of its capacity at the Encina plant. A force main is currently available to the mobile home park adjacent to the subject property on the north (Murray, City of Carlsbad, Department of Public Works, 2/13/85}. c. Solid Waste. Solid waste disposal service is provided by Coast Waste Management, a private company contracting to the city for solid waste disposal. Waste collected from the property is transported to the San Marcos landfill, which is projected to close in 1992. How- ever, the County of San Diego and the contractor of the San Marcos landfill have entered into an agreement and are currently in the planning stage for constructing a resource recovery plant at the San Marcos land- fill. The project was approv~d by the San Marcos City Council on Janu- ary 23, 1985 (Swanson, County of San Diego, Solid Waste Division, 2/ 12/85). The basic principle behind a resource recovery plant is that it converts municipal refuse into energy, utilizing a process known as mass burning. The mass-burning process involves burning unrecycled waste inside an enclosed building. The heat produced during burning is cap- tured as steam, which can then be sold as is to nearby customers or can be used to drive a turbine capable of generating electricity. As a result of burning the municipal refuse and decreasing its volum~. the life expectancy of the landfill would be significantly extended. d. Energy. Development of the proposed project would re- quire electric and natural gas service, both provided by San Diego Gas & Electric (SOG&E). Gas and electric distribution facilities can be made available to the project area in accordance with SDG&E1s rules, as filed, with approval by the California Public Utilities Commission. 2. Impacts Development of the subject property would result in an increased demand for energy and utility services. Estimates of utility and energy demands for future development of the property in accordance with the proposed land use designations and prezoning are calculated in Appendix A and are discussed below. 75 a. Water. Development of the project area in accordance with the proposed land uses would require approximately 521,636 gallons of water per day. It is important to note that approximately half of the water currently obtained from the Colorado River by the Southern Cali- fornia Metropolitan Water District will be cut off when the Central Arizona project goes into operation around 1985. This reduction in water supplies to southern California could result in the need for serious conservation measures in the future. On the whole, there is ample pipeline capacity available to accommodate the water demands of the proposed project (Goodwin, CRMWD, 2/6/85). As part of the CRMWD's plans for future expansion of the water system, several new or enlarged reservoirs are planned within the next five to seven years, which will improve service capabilities to the project site (Musser, CRMWO, 1 / S / 84) • b. Sewer. At the present time, there Is 5. 72 MGD of capac- ity available to the City of Carlsbad at the Encina plant. Consequently, future development of the project area, which would generate approxi- mately 285,475 gallons of effluent per day, should not have a significant impact on the capacity of the treatment plant. However, appropriate improvements would be required to tie the proposed development into the existing sewer lines. · c. Solid Waste. Development in accordance with the proposed land uses would generate about 21,157 pounds of solid waste per day. This development, in itself, would not have a significant adverse impact on solid waste disposal capabilities. d. Energy. Ultimate development of the project area would result in both short-and long-term increased demands for energy re- sources. During grading and construction phases of the project, short- ter:m energy demands would consist primarily of a demand for gasoline and diesel fuel. The most significant demand, however, would result from the long-term energy consumption associated with maintenance and operation of future commercial and retail uses and residences. The energy demand of the completed development would include a demand for electricity and natural gas, as well as gasoline. The projected rate of energy consumption for development in accordance with the proposed land uses is approximately 2,284,000 kilowatt-hours (kwh) of electricity per month, 56,580 therms of natural gas per month, and 8,747 gallons of gasoline per day for vehicle trans- portation to and from the project area. Estimates of the amount of fuel that would be consumed during project construction are not presently available. Development of the project area is. not expected to con- sume an excessive amount of energy for the type of development planned. However, it would result in a substantial increased demand for energy and would contribute to the cumulative demand for energy resulting from the new developments in the area. Although the energy demands are within the capacity of SDG&E's resources at this time, the cumulative effect of the proposed project and other new developments is a much increased demand 76 for energy resources. both in the local region and in the greater south- ern California area. While gas .and electric distribution facilities can be made available to the project area, according to SDC&E's rules filed with and approved by the California Public Utilities Commission, the continued availability of gas and electric energy for this project and other future projects is dependent on the supply of fuel and other essen- tial materials as well as governmental approval of facilities construc- tion (Rose, SDC&E, 10/6/S-1). 3. Mitigation a. Water. The CRMWD currently charges a fee of $1,000 for 2-inch pipe connection from the street to the meter. In addition, the district has established a major facilities charge which operates on a graduated schedule. The ceiling charge is $880 per EDU and as of July 1, 1984, is the current rate. Since water is a limited natural resource in California. the developer should incorporate water conservation measures into the proposed development. The use of low-volume flush toilets is now re- quired by Section 17921.3 of the California Health and Safety Code, and the use of low-volume showers and faucets is required by Section T40- 1406F, Title 24, of the California Administrative Code. Listed below are water conservation measures recommended by the State of California, Department· of Water Resources, which are applicable to the proposed project and which could be implemented at the developer's discretion. 1) Use of water-conserving dishwashers and other equipment. 2) · Use of drought-resistant plant species, wherever feasible. 3) Use of efficient irrigation systems to reduce runoff, particularly drip-irrigation systems, wherever feasible. 4) Preservation of existing natural drainage areas and encouragement for the incorporation of n~tural drain systems in new development to aid in groundwater recharge. b. Sewer. A detailed sewer study will have to be prepared in conjunction with future development plans for the subject property to determine the necessary off-site improvements to serve the project. In addition, the developer will be required to pay a sewer fee of $1,000 per equivalent dwelling unit, which is currently charged for treatment capacity and trunk system costs (Allen, City of Carlsbad, Department of Public Works, 2/ 13/85). Dependi_ng on the nature of the necessary off- site improvements, the construction of the off-site improvements may be credited toward the standard sewer fee. 77 .- c. Solid Waste. No mitigation measures with respect to solid waste disposal are deemed necessary. However, it should be noted that construction of the proposed resource-recovery plant at the San Marcos landflll would substantially increase the life expectancy of the landfill and would be a regional solution to the existing landfill problem. d. Energy. Although total mitigation of energy-related impacts is not possible, a number of energy conservation measures could be Incorporated Into the future development plans for the project area to reduce the anticipated increase in energy demand. These measures include the following: 1) Orient buildings to receive maximum benefit of active and passive solar access. 2) Shade structures with vegetation, using non deciduous trees on the north and deciduous trees on the south. 3) Design buildings to incorporate energy conservation practices to the extent feasible, including design and construction of heat-venting systems, low-energy- use and water-heating systems, window treatments, insulation, and weatherstripping. 4) Incorporate passive heating and coollhg into the design of each of the structures. 78 K. NOISE 1. . Existing Conditions The major sources of noise at the project site are vehicular traffic on 1-5 {adjacent to the east) and Carlsbad Boulevard (adjacent to the west) and train traffic on the AT &SF Railway tracks, which dissect the project site. WESTEC Services, Inc.. conducted noise studies in connection with the two previously certified EIRs (January and September 1982) for the subject property. from which the following material is excerpted. The City of Carlsbad Noise Element of the General Plan ( 1974b) does not define specific noise levels for different land use categories. The following acceptable noise level criteria are based on the Progress··Guide·-and General Plan (City of San Diego 1979). These standards were selected for use on this project since they are repre- sentative of standards used by many jurisdictions in San Diego County. ACCEPTABLE NOISE LEVELS BY LANO USE Residential and transient lodging Offices and professional below 65 dBA exterior below 70 dBA exterior Noise level measurements taken by WESTEC are the basis for the noise level contours shown in Figure 12. (A detailed description of measurement equipment and procedures is provided in the WESTEC report.} Noise levels from 1-5 are low because of the distance from the road to the receptors. Along the top of the embankment at the eastern boundary of the site, where there is a direct line-of-sight to 1-5, noise levels range from 70 to 67 dBA. However, the elevated position of the site with respect to the highway causes a significant attenuation of the traffic noise with increasing distance from the embankment tops. Periodic train noise is lessened as the tracks are substantially below the existing grade in that area. The relatively low noise level from Carlsbad Boule- vard to the project site is a result of a couple of factors. The traffic volume is currently 10,000 ADT (average daily traffic) ~ith a small number of heavy trucks. The small percentage of truck use is primarily for local deliveries, because most trucks use 1-5. 2. Impacts A prediction of future vehicular traffic noise levels was developed by WESTEC using the Wyle Methodology (CPO 1973). Each noise contour varies in its distance from the roadway, depending on the follow- ing variables: ADT; vehicle speed; number of lanes; percentage of trucks; gradient of roadway; the degree to which the roadway is elevated or depressed; and the surrounding topography. Although noise contours 79 • • • • • ~ \ .. .. .. • .. .. • • • • ', .. ' . ·, ' ·,. ' ·, ' ' PACIFIC OCEAN \ -. • • • • • • • • • • • ... .. • • .. • .. • • • '·, .. _.. .... , ... , \ ' \ BATIOUITOS LAGOO~J 1 INCH:500 FEET (APPROX.) I FIGURE 12. NOISE CONTOURS FROM VEHICULAR AND TRAIN TRAFFIC. --====================================================== RECWN ==== ... R-1488 2/13/85 for existing train traffic have been developed, projected noise levels have not because there Is no date available concerning future train usage. Figur-e 12 illustrates the following: a. The predicted lever of significant future noise is 65 dBA CNEL. Carlsbad Boulevard extends onto the western portion of the project area approximately 30 feet. b. Railway noise will significantly affect structures adja- cent to the tr-ain tracks. The zone of impact is r-educed toward the south of the mesatop due to topographic shielding from the depressed railroad; however, locations for-the contours are based on current track usage since future noise levels could not be calculated. c. With the exception of a narrow strip of land along the top of the roadway embankment adjacent to the eastern property boundary where there is a direct line-of-sight to 1-5, noise levels on the site are belo!' 65 dBA. The proposed project includes a helipad for helicopter opera- tions associated with the various commercial land uses in the master plan. The potential for noise impacts from the operation of a helicopter will depend on the aumber. of operations and flight path over the project and neighboring properties. Since this Information is not known, the significance of the impact cannot be determined. Therefore, a detailed noise study would need to be performed to determine the significance of this potential impact-. 3. Mitigation Unacceptable noise levels will be encountered -tmmediately adjacent to the eastern and western site boundaries and bordering the AT &SF rai I road tracks. a. Mitigation for traffic-related noise levels can be accom- plished by sufficient setback of structures {in open space) to provide for attenuation of noise levels by the embankment tops. b. Barriers in the form of solid block walls -.)r earthen berms could be used to reduce noise impacts from both traffic and the railroad. c. A reduction in interior noise levels can also be accom- plished by special construction techniques. Potential noise impacts from helicopter-operations can be reduced through locating the approach/departure route in such a manner as to minimize disturbance to sensitive land uses; that is, residential and the adjacent state park. A route which coincides with the railroad tracks to the south of the helipad should be considered. Also, an alter- nate location for the helipad may prove more desirable from a noise 81 standpoint. Finally, the Federal Aviation Administration and the Cali- fornia Aeronautical Boar-d will requir-e per-mits before the helipad may be used. In conducting the permit review, these agencies will investigate potential noise impacts. 82 L. GEOLOGY AND SOILS 1. Existing Conditions The project site lies on a gently sloping marine terrace which is cut by an escarpment on the southern part of the property, at the base of which are sandy lagoon flats. The terrace comprises 127 acres which gently slope upward to the east from 40 to 125 feet above mean sea level. The gradient for the terrace ranges from 1 to 10 per- cent, while the escarpment rises from 20 to 100 feet at a 50 to 75 per- cent slope. The flats of the lagoon are 10 to 20 feet above mean sea level and are within the San Marcos Creek floodplain. The marine terrace consists of sandy loams, typically four feet deep. These soils are well draining, do not exhibit plastic or expansive characteristics, and have little potential for erosion. The terrace area is underlain by weakly consolidated fine-to coarse-grained sandstone. The steep terrace escarpment portions of the site consist of a loamy soil, averaging seven inches in depth, which overlays the area's marine sandstone layer. Although the terrace escarpments are steep, no landslide masses have been mapped or sited on the project site. Since the perennial vegetation serves to minimize erosional activity and there is no evidence of active basal undercutting by wave action, the escarp- ments appear to be relatively stable. No geologic faults are · known to traverse the project site. The Elsinore fault is located 25 miles to the northeast and the Rose Canyon fault is inferred to extend northward approximately S miles west of the project site. An in-depth discussion of the seismic potential of these fault zones is provided in the Draft Environmental Impact Report, Seabluff Property Annexation, City of Carlsbad (WE1STEC 1982a). The Elsinore Fault Zone has been the source of several 5+ and one 6+ Richter magnitude earthquakes since 1900 (Real et al., 1978) and is considered capable of generating a maximum credible earth- quake of 7.3 (Richter magnitude), which would produce a peak bedrock acceleration on the site of appr-oximately o. 17 times the acceleration of gravity (g) (Greensfelder, 1974). This would be considered an earthquake of moderate magnitude. A nor-thward extension of the Rose Canyon fault has beeh mapped offshore approximately 5 miles west of the project site on the • basis of interpr-etation of subbottom acoustical profiling inves- tigations (Moore, 1972; Moore and Kennedy, 1975; Kennedy and Welday, 1980). Greensfelder ( 1974) estimated that this inferred fault has a potential maximum credible intensity (based on its postulated length) of 7.0 on the Richter scale. However, the existence of this inferr-ed northward extension, of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone has not been fully documented and some researchers have suggested that the scarp features that have been interpreted as an offshore fault are actually of nontectonic origin (Threet, 1979). 83 -- - Although the Inferred off shore fault has been postulated to be connected with the active Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone, which was responsible for the destructive Long Beach earthquake of 1933 (Moore, 1972; Moore and Kennedy, 1975; Kennedy et al. 1975). no geologic evidence has been established to support such a connec- tion. Furthermore, there has been no significant seismic activ- ity recorded within the offshore area near the inferred fault trace during historic time (Real et al.. 1978; Simmons, 1979). The probability of a major earthquake event along the Inferred offshore fault Is therefore very low (Crouse, 1979). With the exception of the Elsinore Fault Zone, there have been no earthquakes of a greater than 4.0 Richter magnitude recorded in San Diego County. As the most active seismic sources in southern Cali- fornia, such as the Los Angeles basin, Imperial Valley, and northern Mexico, are at a great distance, the probability of significant seismic- induced hazards at the project site is r:elatively low. 2. 1·mpacts There are no geologic conditions that will impose significant constraints on development of the project area. The underlying sand- stone can be excavated and graded by a bulldozer with rippers and will be suitable for fill construction and foundation support. A detailed geo- technical investigation will be necessary to properly assess the actual soil conditions. It will be necessary to address the location of pro- posed structures near the terrace escarpment to insure the stability of the slope. The only seismic hazard affecting the project site would be ground shaking resulting from activity of recognized active faults. Although it is reasonable to expect that the project site, like all of Southern California, will be subject to seismic-induced groundshaking in the future, the · relative distance of the site from recognized active faults, the relatively low tectonic history of San Diego County, and the firm ground on which the site is located indicate that the site is favorably situated with respect to the seismic risk of groundshaking (WESTEC 1982a). In the event of a major earthquake, buildings which meet the Uniform Building Code standards will most likely only incur repairable damage. 3. Mitigation The proposed development of the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park will impose no geotechnlcal impacts; thus, no mitigation is neces- sary. Construction will require a detailed subsurface soil and engineer- ing geology investigation to be done prior to final design. Seismic hazards will be effectively minimized by conformance with the State 1976 Uniform Building Code. 84 IV. CERTIFICATION This report presents a full disclosure and an independent analysis of all available information pertinent to the proposed action. \ ~-73 .. J \. . .,~ KM B. HOWLETTl' I Environmental Con9t.l!,tant The following persons participated in the preparation of this report. Joan z. Bonin, B.S. Biology Senior Technical Illustrator Maggie Cooper Production Typist Loretta L. Cornwell Production Supervisor Paul s. Framer, Jr., S.S. Zoology; M.S. Biology; Ph.D. candidate Zoology Certified Ecologist, E.S.A. Susan M. Hector, Ph.D. Anthropology Senior Archaeologist Kim 8. Howlett, B.A. Urban Studies and Business and Economics Environmental Consultant · John P. Larson, B.S. Chemistry Vice President Lee A. Sherwood, B.A. Geography; M.A. Geography Environmental Planner Sue A. Wade, B .A. Anthropology Assistant Analyst Susan Walter, Technical Illustrator 85 -- V. PERSONS AND AGENCIES CONSUL TED Austin, Hansen, Fehlman Group Randy Robbins California Coastal Comm lssion Chuck Damm California Department of Transportation Allen Philpot Carlsbad, City of Fire Department Tom Dana Pol ice Department Windell Risenhoover Department of Public Works Richard Allen Jim Murray Carlsbad Unified School District K. C. Dunlap Nancy Gillespie Costa Real Municipal Water District John Goodwin Kurt Musser William Meadows San Diego, County of Air Pollution Control District Ray Weeks Department of Public Works Eric Swanson San Diego Association of Governments Kim Pugh San Diego Gas & Electric Company Don Rose Mike Gleason Tri-City Hospital Katy Bankovitch 86 VI. REFERENCES CITED Air Pollution Control District 1976a Regional Air Quality Strategies for the San Diego Air Basin. Prepared by the San Diego Air Quality Planning Team. 1976b Air Quality Assessment . for Environmental Impact Reports. Mono- graph by Mike Sloop. San Diego. 1978 Revised Regional Air ·Quality Strategy. Prepared by the San Diego Air Quality Planning Team. California, State of 1980 California Air Quality Data Summary. Air Resources Board. 1981 CaHfornia Air Quality Data Summary. Air Resources Board. 1982 California Air Quality Data Summary. Air Resources Board. 1983 California Air Quality Data Summary. Air Resources Board. Carlsbad, City of 1973 Open Space and Conservation Element. General Plan. 1971'a-Land Use Element. General Plan. 1974b Noise Element. General Plan. 1975 Scenic Highways Element. General Plan. 1980 Sewer Ordinance. 1983 Zoning Ordinance. 1984a Traffic Model. 1984b Draft Batiquitos Lagoon Management Plan. Close, Daniel, et al. 1970 Climates of San Diego University of California Diego. County: Agricultural Agricultural · Extension Comprehensive Planning Organization (now SANDAG) Relationships. Service, San 1973 Development of Ground Transportation Systems Noise Contours for the San Diego Region. Wyle Labor-atories, Wyle Resear-ch Report WCR 73-8. Copley International Corporation 1980 A Study to Assess the Agricultural Viability of a Parcel of Land near Satiquitos Lagoon in terms of San Diego County Regulations. Seabluff Associates. 87 - Crouse, C. B. 1979 Probability of Earthquake Ground Acceleration in San Diego. Earthquakes and Other Perils in the San Diego Region, P. L. Abbott and W. J. Elliot (eds.). Del Mar, City of 198 t San Dieguito Land Use Plan. Creensf elder, R. V. 19711 Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes in Califor- nia. California Division of Mines. ancfCeology~ ·Map Sheet 23. Kennedy, Michael P., et at. 1975 Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area. California. Bulletin 200, California Division of Mines and Geology, Sacramento. Kennedy, M. P., and· E. E. Welday 1980 Recency and Character of Faulting Offshore from Metropolitan San Diego, California. California Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet 40. Moore, G. w. 1972 Offshore Extension of the Rose Canyon Fault, San Diego, Califor- nia. Geological Survey Research. uses Professional Paper 800-C, p. 113. Moore, G. W., and M. P. Kennedy 1975 Quaternary Faults at San Diego Bay, California. USGS Journal Research 3: 589. Real, C.R., T. R. Toppozada, and D. L. Parke 1978 Earthquake Epicenter Map of California. California Division of Mines and Geology. Map Sheet 39. Sammis Properties 1985 Batiguitos Lagoon Educational Park Land Use Summary. San Diego, City of t979a Traffic Generator Statistics. 1979b Progress Guide and General Plan. San Diego, County of 1978a Circulation Element. County of San Diego General Plan. 1978b Regional Emission Trends Projections for the San Diego Air Quality Management Plan. 1979 Basic Data Report for the Agricultural Element. San Diego Association of Governments 1978 Travel Behavior Survey. 1979 San Diego Traffic Generators. 88 - • Simmons, R. S. 1979 Instrumental Seismicity of the San Diego Area. Earthquakes and Other Perils, San Diego, California, P. L. Abbott and W. J. Elliot (eds.). San Diego Association of Geologists. Pp. 100-106. Threet, R. L. 1979 Rose Canyon Fault: An Alternative Interpretation. and Other Perils, San Diego, California, P. L. W. J. Elliot (eds.). San Diego Association of Pp. 61-71. Earthquakes Abbott and Geologists. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 1973 Soil Survey, San ... Diego. Area, ·california. Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service. Roy H. Bowman, ed. San Diego. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1977 Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors. Third edition. Publication No. AP-42. Resear-ch Triangle Park, N.C. August. WEST EC Ser-vices, Inc. 198-2a Dr-aft Environmental Impact Report, Seabluff Property Annexation, City of Carlsbad. January. 1982b Draft Environmental Impact Report, Batiquitos Pointe, City of Carlsbad. September. Weston Pringle and Associates 1985 Traffic Factor's Related to the Proposed Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Par-k, City of Carlsbad. Woodward-Clyde Consultants 1984 Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Batiquitos Bluff, Carlsbad, California. 89 APPENDICES - APPENDIX A - APPENDIX A PROJECT DA TA 1. Project· Area. The proposed land uses and associated descriptive statistics were provided by the applicant in the "Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park Preliminary Land Use Summary" (January 10, 1985). Addi- tional information was provided by Robbins (Austin, Hansen, Fehlman Group, 2/ 13/85). 2. Resident Population. The number of residents is based on popu- lation per household, 1980 calculations, for San Diego County (Pugh, SANDAG, 2/5/85}. 3. Student Generation. Student generation rates were obtained from the Carlsbad Unified School District (Gillespie, 2/5/85). These figures, averaged for single-and multi-family units, are o. 14 (K-3), 0.11 (4-6), 0.09 (7-8}, and 0.17 (9-12) student per dwelling. 4. Vehicle Trips. Vehicle trip generation data was provided for this project by Weston Pringle and Associates (Appendix B). 5. Vehicle Mileage. The' adjusted trip length of 6.15 miles per trip used in calculating vehicle mileage is based on data from T AZ 6705 and Centroid Node 678, within which the project is located (Philpot, Caltrans, 2/ 13/85). 6. Energy Consumption a. Electricity. Electricity consumption was calculated using rates obtained from Mike Gleason at SDG&E. These rates include 2 kwh per square foot of floor space per month for commercial uses ( including hotels) and 600 kwh per dwelling per month for residential uses. b. Natural Gas. Natural gas consumption is based on factors obtained from Mike Gleason at SOG&E. These rates include o. 3 therm per square foot of floor space per month for commercial uses, 0. 12 therm per- square foot of floor space per man th for hotels, and 45 therms per dwell- ing unit per month for residential. c. Gasoline. The estimated gasoline consumption was calculated from an average mileage of 18 miles per gallon for all vehicles, as contained in the report Travel Behavior Survey (SANDAG 1978). 7. Water Consumption. Commercial water consumption is calculated using a rate of 3, 124 gallons per acre per day. Residential water consumption is based on a factor of 150 gallons per resident per day (Meadows, Costa Real Municipal Water District, 5/9/"83). 8. Sewage Generation. Sewage generation is based on a factor of 248 gallons per day per residential equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) and utilizes the conversion factor of 1 EDU per 1,800 square feet of commer- cial building floor area (City of Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 13, Sewer Ordinance, 11/80). a-1 .·- 9. Solid Waste Ceneration. Commercial solid waste generation is calculated using a factor of 0.02 pound per square foot of floor space per day; for residential uses, it ls calculated using a factor of 2.85 pounds per resident per day; and for hotel use, using a factor of 3 pounds per room per day (Swanson, County of San Diego, Department of Public Works, 2/ 15/84). a-2 -- PROJECT STATISTICS Project Area Land Use Use Educational Institution Commercial Research and office Retail Hotel Conference center Residential Subtotal Recreation Gymnasium Tennis courts, fields, and pool Passive open space Amphitheater TOTAL Resident Population Area I VI IV Vil II 111 IV V V V VII I IX X IX 2. 62 residents/unit x 620 units Student Generation K-3 0.14 student/unit x 620 units 4-6 0.11 student/unit x 620 units 7-8 0.09 student/unit x 620 units 9-12 0.17 student/unit x 620 units Total Acres 50.5 4.4 22.2 27.8 4.9 9.5 11.9 11.9 4.6 18.3 166.0 166.0 acres Building Square Footage Units = = = = = 200,000 550,000 71,000 145,500 40,000 22,000 423 368 38 94 120 620 1,624.4 residents 87 students 68 students 56 students 105 students 316 students Vehicle Trips Educational institution Research and office Retail Hotel and conference center Residential Recreational Total Vehicle Mileage 6.15 miles/trip x 25,600 trips/day Energy Consumption Electricity Educational institution 2 kwh/sq.ft. /month x 200,000 sq.ft. Research and office 2 kwh/sq.ft./month x. 550,000 sq.ft. Retail 2 kwh/sq.ft. /month x 21,000 sq. ft. Hotel and conference center 2 kwh/sq.ft./month x 185,000 sq.ft. Residential 600 kwh/unit/month x 620 units Total Natural Gas Educational institution 0.03 therm/sq.ft./month X 200, 000 sq• ft. Research and office 0.03 therm/sq. ft. /month X 550,000 sq.ft. Retail 0.03 therm/sq. ft. /month X 21,000 sq. ft. Hotel and conference center 0.03 therm/sq. ft. /month X 185,000 sq.ft. Residential 45 therms/unit/month x 620 units Total Gasoline 157 ,1140 miles/day -: 18 miles/gallon = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 2,500 trips/day 11,500 trips/day 10,200 trips/day 11,200 trips/day 3,900 trips/day 300 trips/day 25,600 trips/day 157,440 miles/day 400,000 kwh/month 1,100,000 kwh/month 42,000. kwh/month 370,000 kwh/month 372,000 kwh/month 2,284,000 kwh/month 6,000 therms/month 16,500 therms/month 630 therms/month 5,550 th~rms/month 27,900 therms/month 56,580 therms/month 8,747 gallons/day -- .- Water Consumption Educational institution Research and off ice Recreation 3,124 gallons/day/acre x 66.8 acres Hotel and conference 3,124 gallons/day/acre x 22.2 acres Residential 150 gallons/day/capita x 1,624 residents Total Sewage Generation Educational institution 248 gallons/EDU/day X (200,000 sq.ft./1800) Research and office 2148 gallons/EDU/day X (550,000 sq.ft./1800) Retail 2118 gallons/EDU/day X (21,000 Sq.ft./1800) Hotel and conference center 2118 gallons/EDU/day X (185,000 sq.ft./1800) Residential 248 gallons/EDU/day x 620 units Total Solid Waste Generation Educational institution 0.02 pound/sq.ft./day x 200,000 Research and office 0.02 pound/sq.ft./day x 550,000 Retail 0.04 pound/sq.ft./day x 21,000 Hotel and conference center 3 pounds/room/day x 423 rooms 0.02 pound/sq.ft./day x 40,000 Subtotal Residential sq.ft. sq. ft. sq.ft. sq. ft. 2 pounds/capita/day x 1,624 residents Total = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 208,683 gallons/day 69,353 gallons/day 243,600 gallons/day 521,636 gallons/day 27,556 gallons/day 75,778 gallons/day · 2,893 gallons/day 25,488 gallons/ day 153,760 gallons/day 285,475 gallons/day 4,000 pounds/day 11,000 pounds/day 840 pounds/day 1,269 pounds/day 800 pounds/day 2,069 pounds/day 3,248 pounds/day 21,157 pounds/day APPENDIX B w .,. dll:) + p .. \... 6'> -.... .. MAil 7 1';i,J5 A W e6bm FW<gee cuul A33ociafe6 8ECO~ March 5 , 1985 Mr. Kim B. Howlett RECON 1094 Cudahy Place, Suite 204 San Diego, CA 92110 Dear Mr. Howlett: TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING This letter sumarizes our examination of traffic factors related to the proposed Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park in the City of Carlsbad. The study is based upon information provided by you, City Staff, Sammis Properties, previous studies and standard reference data. The project is located between the I-5 freeway and Carlsbad Boulevard northerly of Batiquitos Lagoon as illustrated on Figure 1. Vehicular access fs planned via Avenida Encinas and Carlsbad Boulevard. The Santa Fe Railroad north-south tr~cks traverse the ·site and separate it into two parts with a single vehicular connection. On site circulation consists of a circular loop east of the railroad and an east-west connection to Carlsbad Boulevard. A total of 166 lcres are contained on the site with proposed land uses of educational, _residential, recreational, research and development, hotel, commercial and open space. These uses are discussed in more detail in the Trip Generation section of this report. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Carlsbad Boulevard is a north-south arterial that was formerly State Route 101. It is classified as a Major Arterial on the Carlsbad Circulation Plan which has a 102 foot right-of-way and 82 foot curb-to-curb width. The street currently is a four lane, divided roadway with limited access. A partial grade-separated interchange exists at the proposed site access point. The road serves as an access route to beach areas and as a connector between communities. Current daily traffic volumes on Carlsbad Boulevard are approximately 10,000 vehicles per day. Traffic volumes vary considerably with seasonal activities along the coast. 2651 EAST CHAPMAN AVENUE • SUITE 110 • FULLERTON. CALIFORNIA 92631 • (714) 871-2931 PASEO EL NOR SITE CARLSBAD SOUTH CARLSBAD STATE BE A.CH .LOCATION MAP WESTON PRINGLE AMD ASSOCIATII BATIQUITOS LAGOON FIGURE I -3- development are generally available; however, this type of educational facility is unique. For this study, a rate equal to the rate utilized for four-year institutions by the City of San Diego has been utilized. There are three residential areas proposed within the project. Trip generation rates for these are based upon rates utilized in the City's Traffic Model for similar uses. For the tennis courts, gymnasium, pool and sports fields, a rate equal to one quarter of the rate utilized by the City of San Diego for these uses was assumed. This reduction is due to the private nature of these facilities and their primary users being from within the overall project. For the vacation condominium/university housing units, standard residential trip generation rates were utilized. The commercial retail uses assumed to be equivalent to a neighborhood commercial use. These uses would be anticipated to serve needs of the project and adjacent areas and not attract significant trips from beyond the immediate area. For the.hotel and conference center, the standard rates were applied. The prop~sed ~ree standing restaurants were treated as such and assumed to be· quality, sit-down type facilities. ,. The various open space, natural areas and others were ass~med to generate negligible amounts of traffic on a daily basis. While special events could result in significant trip generation, it is not anticipated that these will occur on a frequent basis. Some monitoring of use of amphitheater, entertainment center, competition courts and similar uses should be considered by the City due to the unspecified uses of these facilities. The daily rates utilized for each use are summarized .in Table 1 on an area-by- area basis.· A total of 28,200 daily trip ends are estimated to be generated r ,- Table 1 TRIP GENERATION Batiquitos Educational Park AREA LAND USE 1 Educational 1 Research & Development 2 Residential 3 Residential 4 Residential 5 Tennis Courts · 5 Gymnasium 5 Pool & Sports Fields 5 Student Housing/Vacation Condos 6 Conmercial 7 Hotel & Conference Center 7 Restaurants 8 Recreation/Open Space 9 Amphitheater/Open Space 10 Natural Open Space (a) City of San Diego (b) SANDAG, "Traffic Generators" (c) Carlsbad Traffic Model DESCRIPTOR UNITS Student 1800 1000 SF 550 Dwelling Unit 368 Dwelling Unit 38 Owe 11 i ng Uni t 94 Court 11 1000 SF 22 Dwelling Unit 120 1000 SF 50 Room 423 1000 SF 21 Acre 11.9 Acre 4.6 Acre 18.3 (d) One quarter of City of San Diego Rate (e) City of San Diego -4- TRIP ENDS PER TRIP DESCRIPTOR ENOS 2.8(a) 5000 8.1 (a) 4500 6{c) 2200 g(c) 300 9(C) 800 lO(d) 100 10Cd) 200 Negligible 6(c) ·700 12a(a) 6000 10 Ca) 4200 2oa{a) 4200 Negligible Negligible Negligible TOTAL 28,200 -5- by the proposed uses. Estimates were also made of AM and PM peak hour trfps to be generated by the project and these estimates are su11111arized in Table 2. A total of 2,040 trip ends are estimated for the AM peak hour and 2,535 trip ends are estimated for the PM peak hour. It should be understood that not all of these trips would be external-to the site and this condition is discussed in the Traffic Analyses section of this report. TRIP DISTRIBUTION A geographic trip distribution pattern was developed for the principal uses on the site. Review of these uses indicated that two separate distributions would be required for the site. One distribution represents the commercial and recreation uses and the second the remaining uses. These distributions are illustrated on Figures 2 and 3. By applying these distribution percentages to the estimated external trip generation, project traffic was assigned to the road system. · TRAFFIC ANALYSES The firs~ level of analysis of potential traffic impacts was completed on a daily traffic volume basis. A t,•affic model was recently completed for the City of Carlsbad that estimates daily traffic volumes on the arterial road system at buildout of the General Plan. This model is based upon specific land use assumptions for undeveloped land. Table 3 summarizes the land use data, densities, trip generation rates and trip ends utilized in the traffic model for the area containing this project. As indicated in Table 3, the model estimated 12,820 trip ends to be generated from the project area. Comparison of this total with that estimated for the project (Table 1) indicates an increase of approximately 15,380 dajly trip ends. This increase does not represent a total increase in trips external to the site as some will remain internal. As an example, some residential units are planned for use by students which would reduce external trips from the residential areas. Figure 4 illustrates the relationships between various uses on the site and the assumed internal trip allocation. Also indicated on AREA 1 1 2 3 4 5 5 5 5 6 7 7 8 9 10 UNITS 1800 Students 550,000 SF R&D 368 DU 38 DU 94 DU 11 Tennis Courts Gymnasium Pool & Sports Field 120 DU 50,000 SF 423 Rooms Restaurants Recreation/Open Space Table 2 PEAK HOUR TRIP GENERATION Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park AM PEAK HOUR IN OU'f Rate TE Rate TE 0.12 215 0.03 55 1.00 550 0.20 110 0.20 75 0.60 220 0.20 10 0.80 30 0.20 20 0.80 75 Negligible Negligible Negligible 0.20 25 0.60 75 1.80 90 1.80 90 0.58 245 0.29 125 0.85 20 0.46 10 Negligible Amphitheater/Open Space Negligible Natural Open Space Negligible Sub Totals '• 1,250 790 ) PM PEAK HOUR IR OOT Rate TE Rate TE 0.03 55 0.10 180 0.30 165 1.10 605 0.60 220 0.20 75 0.80 30 0.20 10 0.80 75 0.20 20 Negligible Negligible Negligible 0.60 75 0.20 25 6.00 300 6.00 300 0.36 150 0.37 155 2.74 60 1.69 35 Negligible Negligible Negligible I 0\ I 1,130 1,405 P ASE O EL NORTE "'O 0 -1 ~, ~I -i I :i:, I I I t IS% SITE CA RLSBAO SOUTH CARLSBAD STATE BEA.CH EXTERNAL DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION COMMERCIAL, RE CREATION Yflstr · ' P1UHGU AHD ASSOCIATIS BATIOUllOS LAGOON FUIURE r 41( PASEO EL NORT 10% :t. &;...F RWY SITE CARLSBAD SOUTH CARLSBAD STATE BEACH BATIQUITOS LAGOON EXTERNAL DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION EDUCATIONAL, RESIDENTIAL, R8D, HOTEL, RESTAURlNTS WESTOa.f PRINGLE AHD ASSOCIATES FIGURE 3 - - 15,500 EXTERNAL 2800 Rao (4500) 2500 ~---------+---~----~ EDUCATIONAL 2000 SIOO '300 2800 0 0 - RESIDENTIAL (4000) 0 0 - RECREATION (1000) (5000) 0 0 N - COMMERCIAL a- RESTAUR, (10,200) 0 0 .., - HOTEL (4200) s PROJECT DAILY INTERNAL/ EXTERNAL TRIP PROFILE WESTON PRINGLE RMD ASSOCIATES FIGIURE 4 ZONE LAND USE 278 Residential Beach Open Space .- 272 Residential Residential Open Space Table 3 TRAFFIC MODEL TRIP GENERATION Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park . ACRES DENSITY DWELLING UNITS 25 15 DU/AC 375 4 35 Subtotal Zone 278 35 7 DU/AC 245 69 15 DU/AC 1035 136 Subtotal Zone 272 GRAND TOTAL -7- TRIP ENDS TRIP PER DU ENOS QR ACRE 6 2250 600 2400 a 0 4650 8 1960 6 6210 0 a 8170 12,820 -8- Figure 4 is the resultant external trip estimate of 15,500 daily trip ends. The net increase on the external road system is therefore approximately 2,700 daily trips. Applying the trip distributions illustrated on Ffgure 2 and 3 to the external trips .indicated on Figure 4 provides an assignment of project trips to the road system. This assignment for daily trips is illustrated on Figure 5. The traffic model projects 7,100 daily trips on Avenida Encinas at the project boundary and 8,400 at Carlsbad Boulevard. As indicated in Table 3, the model also estimated 12,820 trips to be generated by the project area. The through trips on Avenida Encinas would then be approximately 2,700 per day (7,100 + 8,400 -12,820) and these could be assumed to remain with the project. This results fn a net increase in daily traffic of 200 trips on Avenida Encinas southerly of Poinsettia Lane and 5,000 daily trips at Carlsbad Boulevard over the model projections. The current model daily traffic volumes and the volumes with the project are illustrated on Figure 6. The daily traffic capacity of Carlsbad Boulevard and Poinsettia Lane is 20,000 to 40,000 vehicles per day and of Avenida Encinas the daily capacity is 10,000 to 20,000 vehicles per day. These capacities are the values adopted by the City of Carlsbad Engineering Department. Comparison of the ultimate volumes indicated on Figure 5 with these capacities does not identify any capacity deficiencies. While daily volume/capacity comparisons provide a general indication of traffic conditions, a peak hour analysis is necessary for more o~tailed evaluation. Project peak hour trip generation is listed in Table 2. These peak hour trip generation estimates were adjusted utilizing the procedure described above to account for internal trips. Peak hour volumes at key locations are indicated on Figure 5. As described under existing conditions, the intersection of the proposed site access and Carlsbad Boulevard is currently a unique, partial grade separated interchange. It fs understood that alternative designs of this interchange PASEO DEL NOR 3200 -..., en 0 LEGEND 3700-0AILY-TWO WAY VOLUME ----.1•~ DIRECTIONAL VOLUME 17 5/ 185 AM PEAK./ PM PEAK 200·/ ~ 1100 11s ,205 10 I CARLSBA.ll. -+--' /135 · IATIQUITOS LAGOON '5700 ~ ---.aS/185 SOUTH_1C ARLSBAD STATE BEA.CH 175/185 · PROJECT VOLUMES. WESTON PIIHGU AND ASIOCIATII PIGIU"B 5-,,; • 0 0 5600 PASEO DEL NOR (18,500) 19,000 (17,700) 19,200 CARLSBAD LEGEND (7100)-CURRENT LANO USE 7SOO-WITH PROJECT :I.S-FRWY SITE SOU T H C AR LS BAD ST ATE BE A.CH UL TIM ATE DAI LY VOLUMES WESTOM PllNGU AHD ASSOCIATES BATIQUITOS LAGOON (21,100) 26,800 -9- are befng prepared; however, these have not been provided for fnclusfon fn this study. The current desfgn results fn a left lane on and off ramp condition for southbound traffic on Carlsbad Boulevard. This fs a non-standard condition which can result in traffic opera-tional and safety problems. An at-grade intersection with sf gnalfzatf on can accomodate the peak hour volumes indicated on Figure 5 and would present a more standard driving condition. The final design for this fntersectfon should be reviewed by a traffic engineer. Projected peak hour volumes on Avenida Encinas are more significant and indicate the need for specific analyses. The General Plan Classification of Avenida Encinas as a Secondary Arterial would provide a 64 foot curb-to-curb width. This width would allow two lanes of travel in each direction and left turn channelization with no on-street parking. These geometrics are recommended to accommodate projected traffic demands from the project as well as exfstfng traffic and that from current development. The intersection of Poinsettia Lane and Avenida Encinas fs of special concern; Project volumes indicate a·southbound left turn volume of 530 vehicles during the AM peak which would require dual left turn lanes. A problem could also develop due to the relatively short distance between this intersection and the I-5 Southbound Ramp intersection. While insufficient data are available to analyze traffic operations at this intersection, a detailed study is recommended to include consideration of all potential and approved development in the area. This study should include the Poinsettia Lane/I-5 interchange. Full development of this and other projects will require expanding the Poinsettia Lane overcrossing to its ultimate width and the signaHzation of the ramp intersections. Construction of a par-clo type interchange may also be required to achieve acceptable Levels of Service. · The signalization of Poinsettia Lane and Avenida Encinas would be warranted by the subject project, if not by development under construction at this time. -10- No di•nsioned plans were provided for the project·•s internal road system. Based upon the available information, the ring road has a wfdth of 60 feet and radius of 725 feet. The access road to Carlsbad Boulevard has an approximate width of 70 feet. These widths would appear to be adequate to acc0111110date two lanes fn each direction with left tu-rn channelization and no on-street parking. The need for on-site traffic controls and designs should be examfned when the planning fs more complete. Potential problem areas include pedestrian crossfngs, fntersectfon location and spacing, visibilfty and other traffic operational and safety factors. r As stated previously, the Carlsbad Cfrculatfon Plan indicates a Secondary Arterial through the sfte from Avenida Encinas to Carlsbad Boulevard. While the plan proposes a vehicle connection of thfs·type, ft does not conform to Secondary Arterial standards. It was estimated that 2,700 daily trips would be made through the sfte which had no origin or destination within the site. This fs a relatively mfnor volu• and would indicate that the need for a Secondary Arterial is eliminated with this project. It is our reconnendation that the Secondary Arterial classfffcation be removed form Poinsettia Lane to Carlsbad Boulevard ff the project is approved as currently proposed. SUMMARY Thfs study has examined the traffic factors relative to the proposed Batfquitos Lagoon Educational Park in the Cfty of Carlsbad. Due to the unique land use proposals, specific assumptions were required to estimate trfp generation and assfgnant. Areas of potential traffic impacts were fdentiffed and mftf gat1on •asures or the need for additfonal ana.lyses were recomended. In general, the project can be accomnodated by the planned road system with improvements and/or modifications to the road system. The following are prfnc1pa1 findings of the study. 1. The project fs estimated to generate 25,700 daily trip ends with 2,040 occurring during the AM peak hour and 2,535 during the PH peak hour. 2. The apparent increase over the trip generation for the site in the current City Traffic Hodel 1s 15,500 daily trips; however, due to internal trips the net increase fn external trfps is 2,700 per day. -11- 3. The planned road system·can accomnodate the project traffic on a daily volume/capacity comparison basis. 4. Project peak hour volumes indicate potential problem areas that would require mitigation. 5. The internal road system appears to be adequate based upon the available information; however, it does not satisfy the standards of a Secondary Arterial. 6. An estimated 2,700 daily trips would desire to utilize the internal road system without having on-site origins or destinations (through trips). MITIGATION ·MEASURES The following measures are recommended to mitigate potential traffic impacts of the project. 1. A monitoring program should be initiated to identify changes in uses in. the amphitheater, entertainment center, competition courts and other ' areas that could result in traffic problems. 2. The design of the Carlsbad Boulevard/Project Access as a standard at-grade intersection would be acceptable and the final design should be reviewed by a traffic engineer. 3. Traffic demands will require two lanes in each direction, left turn channelization and no on-street parking on Avenida Encinas. 4. A southbound dual left turn lane should be provided on Poinsettia Lane at Avenida Encinas. 5. Signalization of the Poinsettia Lane/Avenida Encinas intersection will be required by the project. 6. A detailed study of traffic operational needs on Poinsettia Lane, including the Avenida Encinas and I-5 ramp intersections, should be completed with consideration of all potential development. -12- 7. When plans are available. the internal street system should be analyzed with respect to traffic operations and safety. 8. The Secondary Arterial classification of a roadway through the project could be eliminated with the project approval. * * * * We trust that this study will be of assistance to you and the City of Carlsbad in the preparation of an EIR for this project. If you have any questions or require additional information. please contact us. Respectfully submitted •. WESTON PRINGLE & ASSOCIATES ~ Weston S. Pringle. P.E. Registered Professional Engineer State of California Numbers C16828 & TR565 WSP:bas #841060' * APPENDIX C . - APPENDIX C AIR QUALITY DATA 1. Statistics. The statistical data used in the air quality compu- tations are found in Appendix A, Project Data. 2. Computations. The computations of the estimated emissions from the proposed project are based on methods found in Air Quality Assess- ment for Environmental Impact Reports (APCD 1976b). These emission estimates are calculated for the projected year of completion of the proposed project. Emissions were computed for the following source categories: a. Vehicles. This category includes emissions from motor vehicles of all types whose use can be attributed to the project. b. Power Generation. This category includes emissions produced in the San Diego Air Basin by the generation of electricity to supply the power needs of the project. c. Heating. This category includes emissions resulting from the burning of natural gas to provide water and space heating for the project. 3. Emission Factors. Emission c~lculations are based on "emission factors," which are statistical averages or quantitative estimates of the rate at which a pollutant is emitted into the atmosphere as the result of some activity (such as the combustion of gasoline in vehicles) divided by the level of that activity (e.g., gallons consumed). The emission factor thus relates the quantity of pollutants emitted to some indicator of activity, such as the quantity of fuel burned or the number of miles traveled. The emission factors used in this report are based on infor- mation found in Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (AP-IJ2) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1977) and information supplied by Ray Weeks, an environmental management specialist with the San Diego County APCD. It should be noted that emission factors and the emission esti- mates derived from their use are general estimates only and should not be considered as absolute predictions of future emissions. Emissions that would be generated by the proposed project are summarized below and in Tables C-1 and c-2 • c-1 - - AIR QUALITY COMPUTATIONS FOR THE YEAR 2000 Emissions from Motor Vehicles: Reactive Hydrocarbons DI stance-related 0.6 gram/mile x 157,440 miles/day Trip-related 6.5 grams/trip x 25,600 trips/day Total Carbon Monoxide Distance-ref ated 7.15 grams/mile x 157,440 miles/day Trip-related 44.99 grams/trip x 25,600 trips/day Total Oxides of Nitrogen Distance-related 2.08 grams/mile x 157 ,1140 miles/day Emissions from Power Generation: Carbon Monoxide 0.156 gram/kwh x 75,090 kwh/day Oxides of Nitrogen 1.12 grams/kwh x 75,090 kwh/day Sulfur Dioxide 0.017 gram/kwh x 75,090 kwh/day Particulates 0.313 gram/kwh x 75,090 kwh/day Emissions from Domestic Heating: Carbon Monoxide 0.907 gram/therm x 1860 therms/day Oxides of Nitrogen 4.511 grams/therm x 1860 therms/day Sulfur Dioxide 0. 027 gram/ therm x 1860 therms/ day Particulates 0.454 gram/therm x 1860 therms/day = = 94.46 kg/day 166.40 kg/day 260.86 kg/day = 1,125.70 kg/day = 1,151.74 kg/day 2,277.114 kg/day = 327.48 kg/day = 11.71 kg/day = 94.19 kg/day = 1.28 kg/day = 23.50 kg/ day = 1.69 kg/day = 8.44 kg/day = 0.05 kg/ day = 0.84 kg/day Emission Source Vehicles Power Generation Domestic Heating TOTAL TABLE C-1 SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM THE PROPOSED GPA (kilograms per day) Reactive Carbon Oxides of Su I fur Hydrocarbons Monoxide Nitrogen Dioxide 260.86 2,277.44 327.48 11. 71 gq. 19 1.28 1.69 8.qq o.os 260.86 2,290.84 q30.11 1.33 - Particulates 23,50 0.81J 21J.34 ) Pollutant Reactive Hydrocarbons Carbon Monoxide Oxides of Nitrogen Su If ur Dioxide Particulates ) TABLE C-2 PROJECT EMISSIONS CONTRIBUTION TO SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN TOTALS (2000) Project Total Baslnwide Total* (kg/day) (kg/day) 260.86 454,908 2,290.84 2,179,200 430. 11 333,236 1.33 t 24.34 402,244 Project's Contribution to Baslnwlde Totals (percentage) 0.06 0. 11 o. 13 t 0.006 Source: Regional Emission Trends Projections for the San Diego Air Quality Management Plan (County of San Diego 1978b:76,120,144,168). -. *Assumes control levels In effect In 1977 will continue unchanged. tNo projection Is available. - APPENDIX D Woodward-Clyde Consultants GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED BATIQUITOS BLUFF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Prepared for Sammis Properties 5030 Camino de la Siesta San Diego, California 92108 r ' C ' '- (_ l. ---- 3467 Kurtz Street San Diego, California 92110 (619) 224-2911 July 31, 1984 Project No. 53173K-SI01 Sammis Properties 5030 Camino de la Siesta San Diego, California 92108 Attention: Mr. John Briggs GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED BATIQUITOS BLUFF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Oentle[!len: Woodward-Clyde Consultants We are pleased to provide the accompanying report, which presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for the subject project. This study was performed in accordance with our letter of agreement dated May 20, 1983 and your request of July 15, 1984 to finalize the work. The report presents our conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the project, as well as the results of our field explorations and analyses. Very truly yours, Joseph G .-Kocherhans R .E. 23060 JGK/ks (6) Consulhng Eng,neers. Geologists ana Environmental Sc,entrs1s 011,ces ,n Orner Princ,oat C111es 3467 Kurtz Street San Diego, California 92110 (819) 224-2911 September 10, 1984 Project No. 53173K-SI01 Sammis Properties 5030 Camino de la Siesta San Diego, California 92108 Attention: Mr. John Briggs Woodward-Clyde Consultants ADDENDUM. TO GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT SLOPE STABILITY -CUT AND FILL SLOPES BATIQUITOS BLUFF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Gentlemen: We are submitting the attached slope stability calculation for the subject project at the request of Mr. Walter Brown of the City of Carlsbad. He is currently reviewing our report entitled "Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Batiquitos Bluff, Carlsbad, California," dated July 31, 1984. The estimated effective soil parameters used in our stability analysis are: y = 125 (pcf), o = 30 (deg), c = 500 (psf) In our opinion these soil parameters are relatively conservative for the actual soil conditions. We recommend that samples of representative soils encountered on the site during grading be tested in the laboratory for verification of their strength parameters and of the above recommended values. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Very truly yours, WOODWARD-CL Y:>E ;JONfLTANTS ~~ti /714✓vJ~~ qo;;;; a'. Kocherhans R.E. 23060 JGK/rj Consu11,ng Eng,neers GeoIog,s1s ano Environmental Sc,en1is1s Omces ,n Other Pr,nc,cal C,11es 53173K-Sl01 Batiquitos Bluff SLOPE STABILITY CUT AND FILL SLOPE Composed of Decomposed Metavolcanic Rock Assumptions: (1) Maximum height of slopes (2) . Maximum slope inclination (3) Unit weight of soil (4) Apparent angle of internal friction (5) Apparent cohesion (6) No seepage forces References: H = 25 2:1 y = 125 • = 30° C = 500 (1) Janbu, N., "Stability Analyst's of Slopes with Dimensionless Parameters," Havard Soil Mechanics Series No. 46, 1954. (2) Janbu, N., "Dimensionless Parameters of Homogeneous. Earth Slopes," JSMPD, No. SM6, November 1967. Analyses: Safety Factor, F.S. = C yH Where Ncf is the stabilf.ty number for slopes with both C and;. yH tan ♦ C = 12 5 ( 2 5 ) ' ( t an 3 O ) = 3 • 61 500 From· Fig. 10 of Reference (2) F.S. = 16.4 (500) = 2.73 120 (25) = 16.4 .- \. . , \. Project No. 53173K-S101 Woodward•Clyde Consultants TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT 2 FIELD INVESTIGATIONS 3 SITE CONDITIONS 3 Geologic Setting 3 Surface Conditions 3 Subsurface Soils 4 Structure 4 Landslides 5 Ground Water 5 DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5 Potential Geologic Hazards Faultin-g and Ground Breakage Landslide Potential Liquefaction Ground Water Slope Stability Analysis Site Preparation Excavation Characteristics Drainage Foundations Floor Slabs Retaining Walls and Lateral Loads UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS FIGURES 1. Site Plan APPENDIXES A. Field Investigation Figures A-1. Key to Logs A-2 through A-9. Logs of Test Borings B-1. Earthwork Specifications i 5 5 6 6 6 7 8 9 9 10 11 11 11 A-1 ( ( ( r .. ,--- , \. ( Project No. 53173K-SI01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED BATIQUITOS POINTE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation at the site of the proposed Batiquitos Bluff project. The site is located on the north side of Batiquitos Lagoon, east of the A. T. IS. F. railway, west of Interstate 5 Freeway, and south of Ponto Drive in Carlsbad, California. This report bas been prepared exclusively· for Sammis Properties and their consultants for use in evaluating the property and in project design. This report presents our conclusions and/.or recommendations regi:irding: 0 The geologic setting of the site 0 Potential geologic hazards 0 General subsurface soil conditions 0 General extent of existing fill soils ° Conditions of areas to receive fill 0 0 0 Cbarncteristics of proposed fill material Expansive soils Depth to water (if within the depths of our subsurface investigntion) ( ( C - ( (_ Project No. 53173K-SI01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants 0 Stability of proposed cut and fill slopes 0 Grading and earthwork 0 Types and depths of foundations 0 Allowable soil bearing pressures 0 Design pressures for retaining walls In addition, we are evaluating the erosion potential of the on-site soils and the bluff-face fronting the lagoon to aid the developer's compliance with Section 30253 of the 1976 Coastal Act. The results of that portion of our study will be reported under separate cover. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT For our study, we have discussed the proposed project with Mr. John Briggs of Sammis Properties and Mr. Patrick O'Day of O'Day Consultants. We have been provided a copy of the "Tentative Map of Batiquitos Bluff, Carlsbad Tract No. CT-84-25/P. U .D. 72" prepared by O'Day Consultants dated June 4, 1984. Finish floor elevations of the buildings and spot design elevations of streets are shown on these plans. Additionally, we have reviewed work performed by our firm on Batiquitos Pointe a similar site, approximately 1000 feet to the west, on the west side of the AT & SF Railway. We understand that the proposed project will include subdividing the parcel into 4 lots for single family and multi-unit residential structures. Site grading will create cut and fill slopes, constructed at maximum inclinations of 2: 1 (horizontal to vertical), to heights of less than 25 feet. Site improvements will consist of' l to 3 story structures of wood frame and masonry construction :md underground parking. Swimming pools and lined 2 ( ( t (_ Project No. 53173K-SI01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants shallow ponds are also planned. Tbe planned location and layout of the major project structures are shown on the Site Plan (Figure 1). FIELD INVESTIGATIONS Our field investigation included making a visual reconnaissance of the existing surface conditions, made observations of the erosion of the existing bluffs, making ten test borings on May 13 and 14, 1984 and obtaining representative soil samples. Tbe test borings were advanced to depths ranging from 16 to 33 feet. The locations of the borings are shown on Figure 1. A Key tn Logs is presented in Appendix A as Figure A-1. Final logs of the borings are presented in Appendix A· as Figures A-2 through A-11. Tbe descriptions on the logs are based on field logs and sample inspection. SITE CONDITIONS Geologic Setting The site lies on a generally west sloping, Quaternary age, marine terrace surface. The relatively horizontally bedded terrace materials have been deposited on a wavecut platform on the underlying, of the Tertiary age, Santiago Formation. Surface Conditions The surface of the site which appears to be little changed from the natural state, is partly under cultivation for flo,vers and is subject to daily irrigation. Lot 4 covers the terrace surface above the southeast and west facing GO-foot high bluff slopes. An existing 66-inch storm-drain extends north-south across Lot 3 into the desiltntion basin which has been constructed in the open space easement 3 ( ( ( - , ... (. l Project No. 53173K-SI01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants west of the site; an existing 8-inch water line (to be abandoned) extends east-west across the north end of Lot 1. Soil is currently being borrowed from the hilltop at the east property line, in conjunction with the construction of the desiltation basin. This cut- grading is removing an irrigation water storage pond embankment in that area. Minor man-made features on the site include irrigation pipe, fencing and roads. No fill soils were observed in our test borings, however, cultivation has resulted in a few scattered shallow fills and piles of organic debris across the site and along the bluff top. An undocumented "sliver" fill bas been placed along the top of the west-facing bluff slope above tbe desiltation basin • Subsurface Soils The site is underlain by 2 to 3 feet of slightly porous loose to medium dense, red brown, silty medium to fine sandy topsoil. This overburden is underlain by 2 to 30 feet of dense to very dense light brown, silty to clayey sands of the L_indavista Formation of Quaternary age. The upper part of this unit {within tbe proposed grading depth in some areas) contains some clay and may be moderately expansive. The Lindavista Formation is underlain by the Santiago Formation of Tertiary age, lYbicb consists of relatively horizontally bedded dense, light gray clayey sands and bard siltstones and claystones. Structure Exposures of Quaternary and Tertiary age sediments on and near the site exhibit horizontal or nearly horizontal bedding attitudes; however, actual regional bedding attitudes are difficult to evaluate due to cross-bedding in these units. No evidence of faulting was observed on or near the site during our field work. 4 - ... , \. -- Project No. 53173K-SI01 Woodward-C2yde Consultants Landslides Our field investigation and review of aerial photographs and available geologic literature disclosed no evidence of landsliding on the site area. Furthermore, no landslides have been mapped on or adjacent to the site. Ground Water Ground water was encountered in four test borings at the following depths: Test Boring No. 5 6 8 10 Depth to Water (Feet) 6 13 14 23 Other borings did not exhibit ground water at the time of drilling. No evidence of marshy areas or ground water seepage was noted during our reconnaissance. DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The discussions, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report are based on the results of our field and laboratory studies, analyses, and professional judgment. Potential Geologic Hazards Faulting and Ground _Breakage No foulting or evidence of faulting is known for the subject site. A few minor faults have been mapped in the seacliffs · south nf the site in the Leuc~dio aren, and in the bluffs above Bntiquitos Lagoon, but the closest 5 Project No. 53173K-SIOl Woodward-Clyde Consultants I fault of significant mapped length is the postulated offshore extension of the Rose Canyon zone, approximately 5 miles to the southwest. The closest faulting to the site with recorded earthquakes of magnitude 4 or greater is associate with the Elsinore Fault zone about 25 miles northe41 st of the site and the San Clemente Fault zone about 50 miles southwest of the site. No magnitude 4 or larger earthquakes ore associated with the Rose Canyon Fault or other faults in the general San Diego-Oceanside coastal area. Although no known faulting is indicated on the site, it is possible thot splinter faults or ground fractures may be encountered in the proposed excavations. Cut areas should be inspected by a geologist during grading and if such features are encountered, some remedial work or adjustment to the construction procedure may be required. Landslide Potential In our opinion, there are no apparent landslides on the site. Liquefaction The geologic units at the site are not recognized as having a potential for liquefaction. Ground Water Our investigation indicates that the "perched" water at various levels in the test borings may have resulted in part from surface irrigation as well as migration from the land area generolly north of the site. We recommend corefully observing cut slopes during grading. If water seeps are encountered during grading, we recommend that drains be designed when actunl slope conditions are exposed. 6 ( ... Project No. 53173K-S101 Woodward-Clyde Consultants Slope Stability Analysis The available plans indicate that the proposed cut and fill slopes on the order of 25 feet high (or less) at an inclination of 2: l (horizontal to vertical) are proposed • For tbi'5 condition, we have performed stability analyses by the Janbu method using parameters developed from the results of plasticity tests and direct shear tests performed on representative samples of similar soils from nearby areas, and our experience in the general site area. The results of our analyses indicate that 2: 1 inclined cut and/ or fill slopes having maximum heights of 25 feet have calculated factors of safety for deep-seated failure in excess of 1. 5 for static conditions. Stability analyses require using parameters selected from a range of possible values; thus there is a finite possibility that slopes having . calculated factors of safety as indicated above could become unstable. In our opinion. the probability of the slopes becoming unstable is low, and it is our professional judgment that the slopes can be constructed as indicated above. We recommend that an engineering geologist from our firm examine all cut slopes for possible adverse conditions during grading. Fill slopes. particularly those constructed at inclinations steeper than 2: 1, are susceptible to shallow slope sloughing in periods of rainfall, heavy irrigation , and/ or upslope runoff. Periodic slope maintenance may be required. Sloughing can be reduced by backrolling slopes at frequent intervals. As a minimum, we recommend that fill slopes be backrolled at maximum 4-foot height intervals. Additionally, we recommend that all fill slopes be trackwelked so that a dozer trnck covers all surfaces at least twice. 7 , Project No. 53173K-SI01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants Cut slopes in the central part of tbe site may encounter Santiago Formation mudstones at tbe toe. Tbis condition may require buttressing for stability. We recommend inspection of all cut slopes during ~ading by the engineering geologist. Recommendations for buttressing can be presented on an addendum report during grading if required. Site Preparation We recommend that the building areas and all fill areas be cleared of any existing vegetation, trash, and any debris or rubble. The undesirable materials generated during the clearing should be disposed of off the site. We recommend that all porous topsoils, and other natural loose soils or existing fills within the building areas or proposed fill areas 'not removed by planned grading be excavated or scarified as required, replaced, watered, and then recompacted prior to placing fill or structures. Based on our field investigation, we anticipate that up to 3 feet of topsoil may have to be removed. We recommend that the soil engineer evaluate the actual depth of excavation in the field at the time of grading. Building areas are generally defined as the building limits plus a horizontal distance of 5 feet beyond all settlement-sensitive portions of the building. If building locations are not known, we recommend that the recompacted zone extend over the entire level portion of the lots. We recommend that the upper 2 feet of materials in the f"lll areas be composed of nonexpansive soils. Nonexpansive soils are defined as granular soils that have a potential swell of less than 3 percent when recnmpacted to 90 percent. of maximum laboratory density at optimum moisture content, placed under an axial lond of 160 psf, and soaked in water. We recommend thnt all fill soils be placed between optimum moisture content and 3 percent above optimum moisturP. content. 8 r ,. - Project No. 53173K-SI01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants In our npinion, the formation soils on site should generally be suitable as select structural fill material and are considered to be nonexpansive or low to moderately expansive in nature; however, potentially expansive clay layers may be encountered within the sands of the Lindavista formation, or in the Santiago formation. Where these expansive soils are encountered at finish grade they should be undercut to a minimum depth of 2 feet and replaced with properly compacted nonexpansive soils. We recommend that all earthwork be done in accordance with the attached Specifications for Controlled Fill (Appendix B). Excavation Characteristics Based on the results of the test borings and on our experience with similar soils, it is our opinion that most of the on-site soils can generally be excavated by medium ripping with conventional excavation equipment. It is anticipated, however, that heavy ripping will be required for excavating the hard cemented zones that are usually encountered in the Lindavista formation. Drainage We recommend that positive measures be taken to properly finish grade each pad after structures and other improvements are completed so that drainage ,vaters from the pads and adjacent properties are directed off the pads and away from foundations, floor slabs, and slope tops. Even when these ineasures have been taken, experience has shown that a shallow ground-water or surface-water condition can and may develop in areas where no such water condition existed prior to site development; this is particularly true where the graded surface is near the Lindavista formation contact, and where a substantial increase in· surface-water infiltration results from landscaping irrigation. We recommend that all finished grnding be inspected to evaluate the possible need for subsurface drains. 9 Project No. 53173K-SI01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants Foundations Most of the proposed buildings, as presently located, will be supported on relatively unyielding formational soils; however, some buildings will be supported partially on formational and partially on compacted fill. In our opinion, the proposed structures can be supported on conventional spread or continuous strip foundations founded on either formational soils, properly compacted fill soils, or on a combination of both. We recommend that spread or continuous footings placed on either compacted fill or a combination of compacted fill and formationnl soil be designed using a maximum allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 psf. Footings founded in only formational material should be designed using a maximum allowable bearing capacity of 5,000 psf. Continuous footings should have a minimum width of is inches and spread footings should have a minimum width of 2 feet. All footings should be at least 18 inches deep measured from rough finish grade, or in the case of interior footings, from f"mish grade. A one-third increase in allowable soil bearing pressure may be used for design of footings to resist total load including wind and seismic forces. \Ye recommend that all continuous footings be reinforced top and bottom with at least one No. 4 reinforcing bar. We recommend that additional steel be placed in the footings at cut-fill locations. Footings should not be located within 8 feet of the top of II fill slope or 5 feet of the top of a cut slope. Footings located closer than 8 feet (or 5 feet) from the top of a slope should be extended in depth until the outer bottom edge of the footing is the required distance (8 or 5 feet) horizontally from the outside fnce of the slope. ,. , ... Project No. 53173K-S101 Woodward-Clyde Consultants Floor Slabs We recommend that the slab-on-grade noors have a minimum thickness of 4 inches and thot they be nominally reinfor~ed with 6 x 6, 10/10 wire mesh placed at the midpoint of the slab. Concrete slabs should be underlain by 4 inches of sand and a plastic vapor barrier in those areas where floor coverings are sensitive to moisture. Retaining Walls and Lateral Loads We recommend that retaining walls not restrained from movement at the top and required to support lateral earth pressures due tn differential soil height be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pcf. Retaining walls restrained from movement at the top, such as basement walls, should be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pcf plus a uniform . lateral pressure of lOH psf (R. = the height of retained earth in feet). These pressures are based on horizontal backfill surfaces, the use of on-site granular materials for backfilling the walls, and adequate drainage to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. If other conditions and/or particular loads, such as sloping backfill, adjacent footings or vehicle surcharge loads, are to be considered in the vicinity of retaining walls, we should be advised so that additional recommendations can be given as required. To provide resistance for lateral loads, we recommend that passive pressure be assumed equivalent to a fluid pressure of 300 pcf fo1• footings and shear keys poured neat against cut formational soils or properly compacted fill soils. The upper 12 inches of material in areas not protected by floor slabs or pavements should not be included in design for passive resistance to lateral loads. This lateral pressure is based on the assumption that the ground surface adjacent to the footing is nearly horizontnl for a minimum distance of 10 feet from the face of the footing or three times the height of the surface generating passive pressure, whichever is greater. 11 Project No. 53173K-SI01 Woodwarcl•Clyde Consultants In calculation of frictional resistance to lateral loads, we recommend using a value of O. 4 as the allowable coefficient of sliding friction between concrete and the underlying soil. If combined frictional and passive lateral resistance are utilized in design, we recommend using a frictional resistance of O .3. - We recommend that samples of representative soils encountered on site during grading be tested in the laboratory for varification of their strength parameters and of the above recommended values based for design. UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS We have observed only a small portion of the pertinent soil and ground-water conditions. The recommendations made herein are based on the assumption that soil conditions do not deviate appreciably from those found during our field investigation. We recommend that Woodward-Clyde Consultants review the foundation and grading plane to verify that the intent of the recommendations presented herein bas been properly interpreted and incorporated into the contract documents. We further recommend that Woodward-Clyde Consultants observe the site grading. sub grade preparation under concrete slabs and paved areas, and foundation excavations. If the plans for site development are changed, or if variations or undesirable geotechnical conditions are encountered during construction, the geotechnical consultant should be consulted for further recommendations. This report is intended for design purposes only and may not be sufficient to prepare an accurate bid. California, including San Diego, is an area of high seismic risk. It is generally considered economically unfeasible to build a totally earthquake-resistant project; it is therefore possible that a large or nearby earthquake could cause damage at the site. Geotechnical engineering and the geologic sciences are characterized by uncertainty. Professional judgments presented herein arc based partly on 12 ,. ' ,. I. Project No. 53173K-SI01 Woodward-C:yde Consultants our evaluations of the technical information gathered, partly on our understanding of the proposed construction, and partly on our general experience. Our engineering work and judgments rendered meet current professional standards: we do not guarantee the performance of the project in any respect. Inspection services allow the. testing of only a very small percentage of the fill placed at the site. Contractual arrangements with the grading contractor should contain the provision that he is responsible for excavating, placing, and compacting fill in accordan~e with the project specifications. Inspection by the geotechnical engineer during grading should not relieve the grading contractor of his primary responsibility to perform all work in accordance with the specifications. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for the safety of personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. 13 ,. r L ' ' Project No. 53173K-SI01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION Ten exploratory test borings were advanced at the approximate locations shown on the Site Plan (Figure 1). The drilling was performed on May 13 and 14, 1983 using a 6-incb diameter, continuous-flight power auger. In addition, we made a visual inspection of the existing bluffs to help evaluate the erosion potential of the near surface soils. Samples of the subsurface materials were obtained from the borings using a modified California drive sampler (2-inch inside dia_meter and 2½-inch outside diameter) with thin brass liners. ·The-sampler was generally driven 18 inches into the material at the bottom of the hole by a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The location of each boring and the elevation of the ground surface at each location were estimated from the grading plans provided us. A-1 , L • I Project No. 53173K-SI01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION Ten exploratory test b~rings were advanced at the approximate locations shown on the Site Plan (Figure 1). The drilling was performed on May 13 and 14, 1983 using a 6-inch diameter, continuous-flight power auger. In addition, we made a visual inspection of the existing bluffs to help evaluate the erosion potential of the near surface soils. Samples of the subsurface materials were obtained from the borings using a modified California drive sampler (2-inch inside diameter and 2½-inch outside diameter) with thin brass liners. The sampler was generally driven 18 inches into the material at the bottom of the hole by a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The location of each boring and the elevation of the ground surface at each location were estimated from the grading plans provided us. A-1 Location Boring Number Elevation D~~TH .,__T£_ST_D_A_T_A_...-(iooTHER SAMPLE FEET •MC •co •.:: TESTS NUMB~R SOIL DESCRIPTION • 12 110 65 1 -I 2 [ Very dense, damp, brown silty sand (S!i) . - " . '. ~ WATER.LEVEL J Al ume of drilhn9 or•• 1ndu:atlld. SOIL CLASSIFICATION Soil Cla111fic:auon1 era De.a on tne un,htd So•• Claiu,1,c:arior. Svneffl alld 1nctuae a:uor. mo1srure and cons,stencv. Field ancroauons n,.,. been madifoed to nf1eci rasulu of laooraitorv 1n1tv1n _...,. 10Droor11te. DISTURBED SAMPLE LOCATION Otnatnlld t,v co11ect1n9 1ne -.r cumn91 1n • 0111r,c or c1om aa,;. DRIVE SAMPLE LOCATION "4001FIEO CALIFORNIA SAMPLER S.mDte '"'"" recorded tllowt oer loo, was ccnainea -u, a Mod,hed Ca11fcrn1,1 drn.e samo1er t2"· in110• d11rrwter, 2.5·· ouu,oe 0,1me1er1 lined w,rn ama•• tubes. Tne umo1er wais oriven ,n10 tne ,011 at tne bonam of tne no1e w,tn a 140 ocund nammer lalhng JO 1ncnes. STANDARD P!:NETRA TION SAMPLER (•) Samale with recon:tad bl-• oer foot ·•u ootained using • uainoard sallt spoon &amoler ( t f • inside o,ameter. 2 f • ou&side diameter I. Tne sa•01er was d,"iven ,nto u,e soil at the Dot\-of \l\e hole wnn • 1110 pound nammer falling JD inc:nes ■nd u,e umpl■ placed in • p1■suc Dig. SHELSY TUBE SAMPLE LOCATION . ]•·O.O. Thin wall Snelb'!f Tuoe Sa111aler. °(1.0. = 2.875 inc:nes). Saimale is taken ay pushing witn nyaraulic 111ecnan1sm. '-------· INDICATES SAMPLE TESTED FOR OTHER PROPERTIES GS -G,■,n S,ze O1strtau11on CT -Conso110aiuon T ts1 LC -IJoorarorv Comoacuon UCS -Unconi,ned Cafflorns,on T rs: Tn, SOS -Slow Direct Snur Test Pl -A1ter0er9 Limns Tnt ST -Loaded Sw•II Test CC -Confined Camoress1on Tes1 OS -Otrect Snea, Test TX-Tr,ax,,1 Comoress,on Test 'R' -R-Value NOTE: In tn,s co1umn tne results of 1nese tes11 mav ae recoroec wnere aao11cao1e. '----------· BLOW COUNT Nu,._, ot 01ows neeoea to eav,nce samo1er one foot or as ,no11:a1ec. "-----------ORV DENSITY s-111a1■ 2. Pounas oe, CuDtc Foot ,__ ____________ MOISTURE CONTENT Pwrmnt of Orv W1,gnt NOTES ON FIELD INVESTIGATION 1. REFUSAL ,nd,c:atM ti\■ 1Nb1hr,, to n1■1"td nca.,.uon, prac:ucally, "''"' eau,anwnc c,e,119 uad '"..' 1ne 1nve1119a11on, Blow munts tor Suino1rd P■ne&rat,an Tue ■re 1ndic:a1ed by an asterisk (•). all otner b,ow councs ar■ for tne Moclir,ed Californ,■ S,1111a1er. KEY TO LOGS BATIQUITOS BLUFF OAAWNBY: mkc I 011:eK£DBY:'~£.:'.I P'AOJECTNO: 5-3173K.-SI01 I DATE: 7-25-84 I FICUAE NO: A-1 WOODWARO-CLYDE CONSUL TAHTS I ( ( - DEPTH TEST DATA IN FEET •MC •oo •ac 51 5 62/6' 10 15 I 100J 4" 20 25 30 35 40 •OTHER SAMPLE TESTS NUMBER 1-1 1-2 1-3 Boring 1 · Approximate El. 52' SOIL DESCRIPTION Loose, moist, light red brown silty fine sand (SM) CULTIVATED TOPSOIL Dense, moist to wet, red brown silty fine sand (SM) TERRACE DEPOSITS Hard, moist, light green to light green brown silty to sandy claystone (CL) SANTIAGO FORMATION Bottom of Hole • For descriouon of symbols. sH Figure A-1 LOG OF TEST BORING 1 BATIQUITOS BLUFF DRAWN BY: mkc l CHECKED BY: ·-~i-l PROJECT NO: 53173K-SI01 I DATE: 7-25-84 I FIGURE NO: A-2 WOODWARD-CL YOE CONSULTANTS r ' ,-- r l ,, I ,.-- \, -- DEPTH TEST DATA •OTHER IN TESTS FEET •Mc •00 •ac 74 s 38 10 15 I ao/6' "! 20 25 30 35 40 •For descricmon of svmbols, see Figure A-1 Boring 2 Approximate El. 103' SAMPLE SOIL DESCRIPTION NUMBER 2-1 Loose, moist to wet, red brown si ty ine sand (SM) CULTIVATED TOPSOIL 2-2 Dense, moist to wet, red brown slightly clayey silty sand (SM) TERRACE DEPOSITS Dense, wet, light brown to red brown silty fine sand (SM) (lightly cemented) 2-3 TERRACE DEPOSITS Rounded pebbles Hard, moist, light green silty to sandy 2-4 clay (CL) SANTIAGO FORMATION 2-s Becomes very stiff drilling at 21' Bottom of Hole LOG OF TEST BORING 2 BATIQUITOS BLUFF DRAWN av: mkc I CHECKED av:' .. .,~,( PROJECT NO: 53173K-SI01 I DAT£: 7-25-84 I FIGURE NO: A-3 WOODWARD-Cl YOE CONSULTANTS , ' -- DEPTH TEST DATA IN FEET •MC •00 •ac . . s-. ' . . . 10-. . . . . 15- . 20- . . 25 -. . 30 _ . . . 35- . . - 40 - 38 41 73/6" I I I i I I •OTHER SAMPLE TESTS NUMBER 3-1 Boring 3 Approximate El. 71' SOIL DESCRIPTION ·····•'.:: Loose, moist to wet, dark red brown I JC silty fine sand (SM) :::::~::l\.,.__ __________ CUL __ T_Iv_A_T_ED __ ro_P_s_o_IL __ _ . ...... -. Dense, wet, red brown silty fine sand !1!1ii (SM) TERRACE DEPOSITS ❖:•:•: 3-2 I ======~= :::::::::1 Becomes saturated ,. 3-3 [::::::::: ;;;;;;;;;n 3-4 3-5 Rounded pebbles Very dense, wet, light brown silty fine sand (SM) SANTIAGO FORMATION Hard, moist, light gray brown sandy clay to clayey sand (SC-CL) SANTIAGO FORMATION Bottom of Hole •For descriot,on of symbols, see Figure A-1 LOG OF TEST BORING 3 BATIQUITOS BLUFF DRAWN BY: mkc I CHECKED BY: ·-,.-::,-I PROJECT NO: 53173K-SI01 I DATE: 7-25-84 I FIGURE NO: A-4 WOODWARD-Cl YOE CONSULTANTS - .• f - - DEPTH TEST DATA •OTHER IN TESTS FHT •MC •00 •ac 67 5 10 65/6' 15 58/6' 20 25 30 35 40 • For detcr1otion of svmbols, see Figure A-1 Boring 4- SAMPLE SOIL DESCRIPTION NUMBER Loose, moist to wet, brown silty fine sand (SM) CULTIVATED TOPSOIL 4-1 Dense, moist to wet, slightly clayey to silty fine sand (SM) TERRACE DEPOSITS Rounded pebbles Very dense, moist, light gray brown clayey fine sand (SC) SANTIAGO FORMATION Very dense, moist, light green to gray, 4-2 slightly clayey to silty fine sand (SC-SM) SANTIAGO FORMATION Hard, moist, light green brown silty to sandy clay (CL) SANTIAGO FORMATION 4-3 Becomes gray brown Bottan of Hole LOG OF TEST BORING 4 BATIQUITOS BLUFF DRAWN BY: mkc I CHECKED BY: ,--:;-( PROJECT NO: 53173K-SI01 l DATE: 7-25-84 I FIGURE NO: A-5 WOODWARD-CL YOE CONSULTANTS r DEPTH TEST DATA IN FEET ·MC ·DD •ac 75/6" 5 70 10 I ~4/6" 15 20 25 30 35 40 •OTHER SAMPLE TESTS NUMBER 5-1 5-2 5-3 Boring 5 A roximate El. 60' SOIL DESCRIPTION Loose, moist to wet, dark brown silty sand (SM) CULTIVATED TOPSOIL Very dense, moist, light green brown to gray silty fine sand (SM) TERRACE DEPOSITS Dense, wet, red brown slightly clayey fine sand (SM) TE1UU¥CE DEPOSITS Dense, very wet, light green silty to clayey sand (SM-SC) TERRACE DEPOSITS Dense, saturated, red brown fine .sand (SM) TERRACE DEPOSITS Dense, saturated, light green to brown silty to sandy clay (CL) SANTIAGO FORMATION Becomes moist at 12' Bottan of Hole "For description of svmbols. see Figure A-1 LOG OF TEST BORING 5 BATIQUITOS BLUFF DRAWN BY: mkc l CHECKED BY: .'f•'~"-J PROJECT NO: 53173K-SI01 f DATE: 7-25-84 I FIGURE NO: A-6 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS - - Boring 6 Approximate El. 72' DEPTH TUT DATA •OTHER SAMPLE SOIL DESCRIPTION IN TESTS NUMBER FEET •MC •00 •ac ·::::~~: Loose, moist to wet, dark brown silty fine . t-=~=-·=~=~ sand (SM) CULTIVATED TOPSOIL 41 6-1 II Dense, wet, red brown silty to slightly clayey fine sand (SM) . ·=:~=-= 5_ '=I TERRACE DEPOSITS ;::~:.:: . !=; . . . ,.., ·••'<• ' ~I:== . :!:•::§ ?."::.:::: .r:z~. . ==~=== ❖:OX• 10-··=11 ;§:· . 157/6' ·*:;:: ~~::i . I tt.. 6-2 f:~::::: ~ . -~:!:§ ==~~~ . 15-~l~~~=~ . 1i Dense, saturated, gray silty fine sand (SM) SANTIAGO FORMATION 78/6" 6-3 .• .. ·.r'f(• 20-'.;;;;:. ::::::::. ;;~ft~ I Bottan of Hole 25 - . . 30- 35- . . 40 - • For descriotron of 1vmbols, we Figure A-1 LOG OF TEST BORING 6 BATIQUITOS BLUFF CRAWN BY: mkc I CHECKED BY: ;.-,:/11 PROJECT NO: 531 73K-SI01 I CATE: 7-25-84 I FIGURE NO: A-7 I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS ' DEPTH TEST DATA IN FEET •MC •DD •ac ----. 5--. - . 10_ . ' . -- 15-. - 20- - - - 25 - - ' 30- ' - - 35 - - - - - 40 - 37 33 75 75 52/6' 61/6' •OTHER SAMPI.E TESTS NUMBER 2-1 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 2-6 2-7 Boring 7 Approximate El. 120' SOIL DESCRIPTION Loose, moist to wet, red brown silty fine sand (SM) CULTIVATED TOPSOIL Dense, moist, to wet, light red-brown silty fine sand (SM) TERRACE DEPOSITS Dense, very moist, red brown silty fine sand (SM) with occasional clay binder TERRACE DEPOSITS Gravels Very dense, very moist, brown slightly clayey fine to medium sand (SM-SC) TERRACE DEPOSITS Very dense, moist, gray fine sand (SM) SANTIAGO FORMATION Bottom of Hole "For descr1011on of symbols, see Figure A-1 LOG OF TEST BORING 7 BATIQUITOS BLUFF DRAWN BY: mkc I CHECKED ev: .\.·,:-< I PROJECT NO: 53173K-SI0l I DATE: 7-25-84 I FIGURE NO: A-8 WOODWARO·Cl YOE CONSULTANTS DEPTH • __ T_E_ST_D_A_T_A_.....i•OTHER SAMPLE IN -FEET ·MC •00 •ec TESTS NUMBER -- - 5- - - . 10-. . - 15- -50/6' - 20 - I i I I 25 - 30- . 35- - - - - 40 - 'For descriotton ol symbols, see Figure A-1 Boring 8 Approximate El. 77' SOIL DESCRIPTION ~:;:;:;:; ··•····· •·•···· .•··· ··•';:;;_···· ····~❖= :::::❖: :•:•:•:•: ···•····· ::::::::: ......... ····· :-:-:❖: ::::::;:; ;~ Loose, moist to wet, red brown silty fine sand (SM) CULTIVATED TOPSOIL Dense, moist to wet, red brown silty fine sand (SM) !l'ERRACE DEPOSITS Dense, moist to wet, light brown to gray brown silty fine sand (SM) TERRACE DEPOSITS Perched water; boring caved to 14' Becomes saturated; rounded gravels Very dense, saturated, light gr.;.:; fine sand (SM-SP) SANTIAGO FORMATION Becomes moist to wet at 17' Bottom of Hole LOG OF TEST BORING 8 BATIQUITOS BLUFF DRAWN BY: mkc I CHECKED BY: ,-/.t-I PROJECT NO: 53173K-SI01 I DATE: 7-25-84 I FIGURE NO: A-9 WOOOWAAO-CLYDE CONSULTANTS Boring 9 Approximate El. 65' DEPTH TEST DATA •OTHER SAMPLE DESCRIPTION IN TESTS NUMBER SOIL FEET •MC •00 •ac :::~:: Loose, wet, red brown silty fine-sand (SM) . :::·===·= ~:ii: CULTIVATED TOPSOIL . . I :::ffl . 19 9-1 ~::::: Medium dense, wet, red brown silty fine .., .. -::§?:::: sand (SM) TERRACE DEPOSITS ffi::: s-'f«"•~ ii . -~~ -I~-: 34 9-2 C❖::: $;::: -~f{~~~; . :-:-~:-. 10-i1~r~i Dense, wet, light brown slightly silty -fine sand (SM) , lightly cemented -I~ TERRACE DEPOSITS -30 9-3 ::::::::: - i 15 _ - . . 85 9-4 ' ····~·· 20 -i ¥-Bec0111es saturated; estimated perched water ... : ... level (boring caved to 13 I) 25 -Dense, saturated, light gray clayey fine sand (SC) SANTIAGO FORMATION . Becomes moist 60/6' 9-5 . . 30 Bottom of Hole - - - 35 - - -. 40 - •Fo, descnpuon of symbols. see Figure A-1 LOG OF TEST BORING 9 BATIQUITOS BLUFF DRAWN BY: mkc I CHECKED BY: ..:....-!,f PROJECT HO: 53183K-SI01 I DATE: 7-25-84 I FIGURE NO: A-10 WOODWARD-CL VOE CONSULTANTS - - DEPTH,_ __ T_EPST_D_A_T~A----1•0THER SAMPlE IN FEET ·MC •oo •ac TESTS NUMBER . . 20 10-1 . s-. S2 10-2 -. 10- . ' . 98 10-3 - - 1s- - . 58/6" 10-4 . 20- . . 25- . . . . ' 30- . . . - 35-. . . 40_ •For desc,,pr,on of svmbols, see Figure A-1 Boring 10 Approximate El. 60' SOIL DESCRIPTION Loose, moist, to wet, red brown silty fine sand (SM) CULTIVATED TOPSOIL Medium dense, wet, red brown silty fine sand (SM) TERRACE DEPOSITS Becomes dense Dense, wet, red brown clayey fine sand (SC) TERRACE DEPOSITS Dense, very moist, brown silty fine sand (SM) TERRACE DEPOSITS Rounded gravels Dense, wet, gray brown sandy clay (CL) SANTIAGO FORMATION Bottom of Hole LOG OF TEST BORING 10 B1\TIQUITOS BLUFF DRAWN BY: mkc I CHECKED BY: .,,;;;'I PROJECT NO: 53173K-SI01 I DATE: 7-25-84 I FIGURE NO: A-11 I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS -f Project No. 53173K-SI01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants APPENDIX B GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONTROLLED FILL I. GENERAL These specifications cover preparation of existing surfaces to receive fills, the type of soil suitable for use in f"'Ills, the control of compaction, and the methods of testing compacted fills. It shall be the contractor's responsibility to place, spread, \Yater and compact the fill in strict accordance with these specifications. A soil engineer shall be the owner's representative to observe the construction of fills. Excavation and the placing of fill shall be under the direct observation of the soil engineer, and he shall give ,.,ritten notice of conformance with the specifications upon completion of grading. Deviations from these specifications will be permitted only upon written authorization from the soil engineer. A soil investigation has been made for this project; any recommendations made in the report of the soil investigation or subsequent reports shall become an addendum to these specifications. II. SCOPE The placement of controlled fill by the contractor shall include all clearing and grubbing, removal of existing unsatisfactory material, preparation of the areas to be filled, spreading and compaction of fill in the areas to be filled, and all other work necessary to complete the grading of the filled areas. III. l\1A TERIALS 1. Materials for compacted fill shall consist of any material imported or excav:ited from the cut areas that, in the opinion of the soil engineer, is suitable for use in constructing fills. The material shall cont::iin no rocks or hard lumps greater than 24 inches in size and shall contain at least B-1 ,..::..... Project No. 53173K-SI01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants 401 of material smaller than ¼ inch in size. (Materials greater than 6 inches in size shall be placed by the contractor so that they are surrounded by compacted fines; no nesting of rocks shall be permitted.) No material of a perishable. spongy. or otherwise improper nature shall be used in fills. 2. Material placed within 24 inches of rough grade shall be select material that contains no rocks or hard lumps greater than 6 inches in size and that swells less than 3% when compacted as hereinafter specified for compacted ftll and soaked under an axial pressure of 160 psf. 3. Representative samples of material to be used· for f"lll shall be tested in the laboratory by the soil engineer in order to determine the maximum density. optimum moisture content, and classification of the soil. In addition, the soil engineer shall determine the approximate bearing value of a recompacted, saturated sample by direct shear tests or other tests applicable to the particular soils. 4. · During grading operations, soil types other than those analyzed in the report of the soil investigation may be encountered by the contractor. The soil engineer shall be consulted to determine the suitability of these soils. IV. COMPACTED FILLS 1. General (a) Unless otherwise . specified, fill material shall be compacted by the contractor while at a moisture content near the optimum moisture content and to a density that is not less th~n 90% of the ma1..imum dry density determined in accordance with AS~l\1 Test No. D1557-78, or other density test methods that will obtain equivalent results. (b) Potentially expansive soils may be used in fills below a depth of 24 inches and shall be compacted at a moisture content greater than the optimum moisture content for the material. B-2 Project No. 53173K-SI01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants 2. Clearing and Preparing Areas to be Filled (a) All trees, brush, grass, and other objectional material shall be collected, piled, and burned or otherwise disposed of by the contractor so as to leave the areas that have been cleared with a neat and finished appearance free from unsightly debris. (b) All vegetable matter and objectionable material shall be removed by the contractor from the surface upon which the fill is to be placed, and any loose or porous soils shall be removed or compacted to tbe depth shown on the plans. The surface shall then be plowed or scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches until the surface is free from uneven features tbat would tend to prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. (c) Where fills are constructed on hillsides or slopes, the slope of the original ground on which the fill is to be placed shall be stepped or keyed by the contractor as shown on the figure included in these specifications. The steps shall extend completely through the soil mantle and into the underlying-formational materials. (d) After the foundation for the fill bas been cleared, plowed or scarified, it shall be disced or bladed by the contractor until it is uniform and free from large clods, brought to the proper moisture content, and compacted as specified for fill. 3. Placing, Spreading, and Compaction of Fill Material (a) The fill material shall be placed by the contractor in layers that, when compacted, shall not exceed 6 inches. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be' thoroughly mixed during the spreading to obtain uniformity of material in each layer. B-3 ; r . I Project No. 53113K-S101 Woodward-Clyde Consultants (b) When the moisture content of the ffll material is below that specified by the soil engineer, water shall be added by the contractor until the moisture content is as specified. ( c) When the moisture content of the rill material is above that specified by the soil engineer, the fill material shall be aerated by the contractor by blading, mixing, or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is as specified. (d) After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted by the contractor to the specified density. Compaction shall be accomplished by sheepsfoot rollers, vibratory rollers, · multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other types of acceptable grading equipment. Equipment shall be of such a design that it will be able to compact the fill to the specified density. Compaction shall be continuous over the entire area, and the equipment shall make sufficient trips so that the desired density has been obtained throughout the entire fill. (e) The surface of fill slopes shall be compacted and there shall be no excess loose soil on the slopes. V. INSPECTION 1. Observation and compaction tests shall be made by the soil engineer during the filling and compacting operations so that he can state his opinion that the fill was constructed in accordance with the specifications. 2. The soil engineer shall make field density tests in accordnnce with ASTM Test Nn. D1556-64. Density tests shall be made in the compacted materials below the surface where the surface 1s disturbed. When these tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill or portion thereof is below the specified density, the pnrticular layer or portion sholl be reworked until the specified density has been obtained. B-4 Project No. 53173K-SI01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants VI. PROTECTION OF WORK 1. •· During construction the contractor shall properly grade all excavated s~rfaces to provide positive drainage and prevent ponding of water. He shall control surface water to avoid damage to adjoining properties or to finished work on the site. The contractor shall take remedial measures to prevent erosion of freshly graded areas and until such time as permanent drainage and erosion control features have been installed. 2. After completion of grading and when the soil engineer has finished his observation of the work, no further excavation or filling shall be done except under the observation of the soil engineer. ·.: · .. Slope to be such that sloughing or sliding does not occur NOTES: Remove all topsoil as specified Original ground Slope ratio-= N ·····\•/:~·-·: ~ l A I See note M ~See note The outside edge of bottom key "A" shall be below topsoil or loose surface material. The minimum width of "B" Bench shall be 2 feet wider than the compaction equipment, and not less than 10 feet. Keys are required where the natural slope is steeper thnn 6 horizont~l to I vertical, or where specified by the soil engineer. ,. ,- Location Boring Number Elevation DEl"TH TEST DATA I-OTHER IN SAMPLE SOIL DESCRIPTION FEET •MC •00 ·-= TESTS NUMBER -12 110 65 1 r~ Very aense, damp, brown silty sand (SH) -S!--2 ._ ~ -WATER,lEVEL J l .. Al ,.,,,. of dl'ill1n9 or •• lftdlcated. I SOIL CLASSIFICATION Sail Cl■s11hcatNN11--on tne Undaed Sot1 Class1l1caroon Svnem and 1ftCluat1 m-. _m.,,. and conaanencv. F,elO aesc:riaroons ,.,..,. bNn madifiec:t to ,.,1ee1 ,...,,11 of laooratOl'Y ■nMvses wnere aooraoraa11. -DISTURBED SAMPLE LOCATION Obraeneca bV C011ea,ng 111• -., cutungs ,n • oauuc: or c:iarn aa;. DRIVE SAMPLE LOCATION MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLER S.mole -"' recanled bl-oer too, -• ocnatned wnn a Moo,lied Cahfomaa dr-umo•• IT .. ,aoe a,anw,er. 2.S .. ouu,a• 011me1er1 lmed -•" samoae tubes. Tn• samate, wu auwn ,nto rne sou ar rne banam of me noae -m a 140 pc,und hammer ta111n9 JO ,ni:nes. STANDARD PENETRATION SAMPLER (•) s-•• wltn remrded blows -foot was oCltained using • uancrard split si:a-o u~••r (tj• inside c••-ter, 21" -\side dia-&erl. The u•aoer was d.-iven anro UM soil at Ute -of tne hole •tln • UO pound hamffler tailing lD inc:nes and the Ample placed in a ptastic: iaag. SHELBY TUBE SAMPLE LOCA TlON 1•· 0.0. Thin wall Snelov Tu-Samc,ler. H.D. = 2. 875 incnasl. Samala is taken by pushing with nycraulic mecnan,sm. INDICATES SAMPLE TESTED FOR OTHER PROPERTIES GS -Gtatn S1H OasrroDutaon CT -Con101ica110n T e11 LC -LIDOHIOl'V Comaacuon UCS -Unconiin•d Comoreu,on Tes~ Tnt SOS -Slow Ottect Snear Test Pl -Anertiet'9 L,mnsTest 0S-OtrectSnu, Test ST -Loao&d Swell Test TX-T11ax11I Como,nsion Test CC-Conf,nect Comoression 'R'-R-Value Test NOTE: In rn,s maurnn IN results of rn ... ••sts ,.,.,., 01 recoroed _,e ICIPllcable. ,__ ________ , BLOW COUNT l'wu~ at blo-neeaea ro aavance ymo1et one t001 c,r H ina,c.aied, -----------DRY DENSITY Pou11a1 -Cua-c Foot .__ ____________ MOISTURE CONTENT Percanr af Orv We19n1 NOTES ON FIELD INVESTIGATION I. REFUSAL 1nd1carn 'lfte anabllnv 10 •• .. nd ••ca.,.uon. pr■cucallv. "''"' eq1us:anwn1 ••no ul■d 1n rn■ ,nve11191mon. Bio• caunts tar Suinaard Penerru,on T•st ■r• 1ndiared by an as1eri1k 1°1. all orner b-munts are for lh■ Modified Californ,■ SaaoDler. ICEYTO LOGS BATIQUITOS BLUFF SN Note l. DRAWN av: mkc I CHECKED av:•~.c I P'AOJECT NO: 5-Jl 73K-SIOl I DATE: 7-25-84 I FIOURE NO: A-1 WOODWARO•Ct YOE CONSULTANTS I Appendix F. Park Agreement .. •• :t -~:APPENDIX F AGREEMENT AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AND SAMMIS PROPERTIES REGARDING THE ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY FOR PARK PURPOSES AS REQUIRED FOR SUBDIVISION CT 85-14 AND HP-175. This Agreement is made this /~ day of 4:rr,p , 19 J'/ by and between the City of Carlsbad, California, a municipal corporation (hereinafter called 'City") and Sammis Properties (hereinafter called 'Subdivider*). R E C I T A L S A. Developer is required as a condition of Resolution No. 8764 of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, approving a Master Plan Parks Agreement between the City of Carlsbad and Sammis Properties to dedicate and provide certain property to wit: B. The acquisition of ten acres of property as an off-site park is essential to provide needed public facilities for the subdivision and to mitigate the public facilities burdens created by the subdivision. C. It is necessary that Subdivider secure said property in accordance with the Growth Management Plan and Public Facility and Service Performance Standards of the City of Carlsbad. D. Subdivider has been unable to acquire by a negotiated purchase the required property for park purposes for the subdivision, and requests that the City assist in the acquisition by exercise of the City's power of eminent domain. E. City desires to acquire an additional 20 acres of park land. =.:-:--.... _ .. , . .,.,,_.,: ...... , -"r ;'. :., •-;: : __ . . .. -2 - NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of th~ mutual covenants contained herein and of the recitals, it is mutually agreed by and between the parties as follows: City hereby exercises its rights under Paragraph 10 to assume primary responsibility for the subject litigation and to prosecute it to comple- tion. City will hire an appraiser, attorney and other professional services as may be necessary to prosecute the action to completion. It is understood by both parties that whenever in this agreement it says *Subdivider shall retain* a consultant or attorney, that the City has agreed to perform these services. 2. Subdivider and City agree to pursue a Joint condemnation. Subdivi- der agrees to pay its pro rata share of all costs based on its requirement to dedicate 10 acres. City's pro rata share will be based on the balance of land to be acquired which is estimated to be 20 acres more or less. Subdivider will pay the same percent of the land acquisition costs as the ten acres is of the total land area acquired. For example, Subdivider 10 acres, City 10 acres equals a 50% -50% cost split; Subdivider 10 acres, City 20 acres equals 33.33% 66.67~ cost split, etc • 3. Subdivider shall deposit with City the sum of $25,000 cash immediately upon signing of this agreement to be used to pay for consultant services. Said cash shall be fully credited toward Subdivider's obligation to acquire the ten acres. Subdivider shall furnish a letter of credit in a form acceptable to City upon completion of the appraisal and prior to an offer being made for the property. Said letter of credit shall be sufficient to cover the full amount of Subdivider's obligation to acquire ten acres of park land includ- ing purchase price, appraisal, title report, attorney fees and any other incid- ental costs or consultant fees as may be required in the prosecution of the -3 - acquisition. 4. Subdivider agrees to retain on behalf of the City of Carlsbad a qualified attorney or attorneys to prepare and file on behalf of the City all documents, pleadings and processing necessary to acquire the required property through an action in eminent domain. Said attorney or attorneys will either be associated with the City Attorney in the eminent domain proceeding or will independently pursue the eminent domain action on behalf of the City, as the City in its discretion determines. The attorney or attorneys shall be approved by the City Attorney and Subdivider agrees not to replace the attorney or attorneys without the City Attorney's consent. The City Attorney's approval or consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 5. Subdivider agrees to bear its pro rata share of all expenses, costs, fees, and charges, including attorneys, engineers, appraisers or other profes- sional services fees incurred or charged in connection with the acquisition of the property interest and the preparation and prosecution of eminent domain proceeding, and City shall assume no responsibility for said amounts. 6. It is understood and agreed that even though the City is party plaintiff, it shall assume no financial responsibility for Subdivider's pro rata share in said em.inent domain action and that as further proceedings are required, outside counsel shall assume primary responsibility and direction of any actions subject to any necessary approvals of the City. The City agrees to cooperate and assist in convnencing and prosecuting said condemnation action in an expeditious manner for the purpose of completing same as soon as reasonably possible in accordance with applicable laws. 7. Subdivider shall retain any appraiser, engineer or other expert witness, as mutually agreed upon by Subdivider and City, to provide any neces- -4 - sary appraisal, engineering or other informatjon in a form suitable for use in connection with said condemnation proceedings. 8. Subdivider shall pay its pro rata share of all amounts, plus interest, as required as-a result of any judgement or settlement in payment for property to be acquired. City shall assume no responsibility for said payments. 9. The parties hereby agree that they may, at the sole discretion of City, seek an order of immediate possession for the real property necessary for the improvements and facilities and related easements and comply with the legal procedure necessary therefor. The subdivider shall be responsible for the deposit of its pro rata share of funds, posting of security, or payment of any cost associated with the order of immediate possession. 10. City retains the right to assume primary responsibility for the subject litigation at any time and to prosecute it to completion with all costs, including attorney fees, to be borne by the Subdivider. 11. It is understood that prior to initiation of any eminent domain proceedings, it will be necessary for the City in its sole discretion to adopt a resolution on necessity for the acquisition of the property and to make the necessary findings required by law. City agrees to use due diligence in pro- cessing the matter to hearing before the City Council. Subdivider agrees that any failure by the City to use due diligence to proceed in a timely manner, shall not cause an invalidation of any condition of the tentative map or relieve the Subdivider of any obligation hereunder. 12. City agrees that upon the acceptance by City of a letter of credit in a form approved by City for the full amount of all costs of the acquisition of ten acres, and notwithstanding Paragraphs 1 and 7 of the B.L.E.P. Master Plan Parks Agreement, the acquisition and dedication of the ten acres shall be deemed ·.-.: ·_:.-.... ·. . .. ·. ~·:. ·-· .. . ,,.,, ...... · . -~ · . . ·.•·. .:·,_ · .. . : .. . .. •.: . . - • I -- ·.··" . . --.. -5 - to have occurred and occupancy. of building in Phase I of B.L.E.P. may be approved. No f i na 1 maps, however, may be approved for Phases I I or I I I unt i 1_ actual acquisition of the park has been accomplished and City becomes the owner. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year first above written. DATED: P-JI-J>r' Q:'ED AS TO FORM: ct;;? Q~. Assistant City AttorneyL0 ,, 2..,, 'Cl• ATTEST: Attach Notarial Acknowledgement here: CITY OF CARLSBAD A M ion f the ni ?(iv by,h-h~~:-=---:-!=:--:-=-r-~:-=-----' Mayor SAMMIS PROPERTIES 1· C .g .! I I! Q. ~~ 8 ti < ~ cb ,; ., !E.. ... I'-M 'i' _, < 0 d z :.< II .! Q. !! < rn (/) - ,.--..., -5 - to have occurred and occupancy of building in Phase I of B.L.E.P. may be approved. No final maps, however, may be approved for Phases II or III until actual acquisition of the park has been accomplished and City becomes the owner. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year first above written. r:z VED AS TO FORM: ~e (2·~. Assistant City Attorney!>.-C' 7. 2.,. ' Q • ATTEST: ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Cler STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF_~1. "Qi ~~9~---S.S. Onthisthe _;;i.1~1" dayof:f\.,L\l..L-19Ri-:-... th nd • i, . ....,,ore me, e u ers,gned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State personally appeared ' ____ 1)\l\0_Q l c,l -~'--~ '(l-1. H'.11 S .... . . personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the ____ President, and - k , personally nown to me or proved lo me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be • Secretary 01 the coq>oration that executed the within instrument on behalf of the corporation therein named and know !edged to 1h , ac -me at such corporation ex-uted the with' • 1 . -1n ins rumenl pursuant to its by-laws or a resolution of its board of directcrs. SkJnature-£t~$ ~ · ~ \.\,VyV) CITY OF CARLSBAD A Mu porati f the 1·# I I V , Mayor SAMMIS PROPERTIES FOR NOTARY SEAL OR STAMP a OFF!Clt.L ~,;_: • i_ JENl➔lfEfl L C0!..IJ;!'.' Notmy F'ubUc--C~l!f::~,1l:1 . -.-,N DIEGO COUNTY r, Mf Comm. Exp. Apr. 11, 1!)C'l ~ Appendix G. Exten Ventures Letter -- April 7, 1988 City of Carlsbad Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 To the City of Carlsbad: APPENDIX G VENTURES, INC. This letter will certify that Exten Ventures, Inc. hereby authorizes Sammis Properties to process their facilities plan C Zone 9 >. -Should you need any further information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, EXTEN VENTURES, INC. ;;;!Le:,Q-12 Q?h?~c. DePuy Chairman of ~:c JCD:cae 2655 Camino del Rio North. "302, San Diego, California 92108 Telephone 619/294-8001 Appendix H. Agenda Bill -Library -- -- .. z 0 ;:: --0 c( _, -0 z :> 0 0 APPENDIX H CITY OF CARLSBAD -AGENDA BILL AB# .l:Q?~I TITLE: LIBRARY SITE AND FUNDING RECOMMEN- MTG. 7/7/87 DATION FOR A NEW LIBRARY IN SOUTH DEPT. LIB -CARLSBAD RECOMMENDED ACTION: DEPT. HO.: __ CITY A TTY\/f;£_- CITY MG;;s.\-~' l. Approve the recommended library site and direct the City Manager to negotiate a purchase agreement with the owner. 2. Direct the City Manager to include funds in the CIP for land acquisition and construction of a library. J. Direct _the City Manager to evaluate alternative methods of financing and constructing the library (developer build vs. City bui'ld). ITEM EXPLANATION: On January 27, 1987 the City Council directed staff to negotiate the acquisitic~ of a library site and/or a devel~per proposal .to build and lease back a library facility. Council action was based upon the library site selection committee report which listed five sites for consideration. All five sites ~~t the selection criteria recommended in the Library Strategic Plan. Subsequent investigation and negotiations with Carlsbad Retail Associates has resulted in the selection'.of a preferred site. At it• meeting of April 16, 1987 the site selection committee endorsed Site E as the best site for a new library. the library board also has e.ndorsed the site. The asking price for the property appears to be consistent with other property in the area. Design funds of $650,000 are already budgeted in the CIP. Design of the building will occur upon purchase of the site. Purchase is anticipated during 1988. FISCAL IMPACT: The City has several alternatives available for funding· the acquisition of a ne~ library. All options depend on the City pledging public facilities fee funds. both existing and future, to this project. The ultimate decision on exactly how to finance the construction will determine the extent of public facilities fees collllllitted to the project in future years and the effect the library will have on the timing of other improvements. The library project costs are summarized in the following table: Fiscal Approximate Descri:etion Year Amount Received Land Acquisition 1988-89 $1.1 million CC'ading 86-89 0.9 million ·Design 88-89 0.6 million Construction 89-90 to 90-91 8.4 million Total Project Cost $11.0 million Operations 90-91 and $0.5 to 0.9 million thereafter Purchse of the library site and funding grading costs prior to 1989-90 may require dedication of all available public facilities fee revenues for 1987-88 and delay of certain existing PFF projects, The list of ptojects to be delayed includes Palomar Airport Road improvements, park improvements in the northeast and southwest quadrants, the Public Safety Center phase II and III and many -- Page 2 AB NO. f!/61 · ~/ This delay in funding other improvements is brought on by reduced PFF revenue duet~ the slowing of development activity. Existing resources must be allocated to only top priority projects. Staff is recommending that Council reserve funds for the acquisition of land and grading coses from 1987-88 revenue (assuming 87-88 revenues are sufficient to cover these and other committed costs). Actual purchase of the property would not occur until 1988-89. The long term financing of the building construction costs could be done in one of three ways: 1. Buildin·g construction funded by site developer with lease back agreement -under this concept the City would enter into a lease back agreement with the site developer to build the library to City specifications. The City would then enter into a long term lease back agreement with the developer p_ledging up co $1 million per year of public facilities fee revenue to lease payments over a 20 year peri0d. The actual lease payments will depend on construction coses and interest rates during this 20 year period. By allowing the site developer to build the build- ing, the City may be able to lower total construction costs by taking advantage of-certain economies of scale. 2. Certificates of Participation -The City may issue Certificates of Participation for the construction of the building. The public facilities fee fund would be pledged, along with City general fund revenues, to the repayment of the debt, as in the above approach the library debt would have first claim of PFF revenues. This alternative offers the City a lower interest rate due to our ability to issue tax exempt debt. Repayment would require up to $1 million per year for 20 years; however, due to lower interest races, the actual cost to the-City could be slightly less than alternative 11. 3. Mello-Roos District Reimbursement -Under this alternative the City must put together a series of financing steps. First, the building could be constructed by the site developer or by the City through the use of Mello-Roos tax exempt debt. !neither case the ultimate cost of the building would be supported by the Mello-Roos district. The developers supporting the district could have the annual_ assessment placed upon their district reduced by the amount· of public facilities fees payed by that developer. The cost co the City is limited to the amount of public facilities fees paid by develope't's within the district. Any shortfall could be assessed against property with the district. · Council is not required to select a funding alternative at this time. However, an understanding of the alternatives is necessary before the City moves forward with the project. Two important points found in all financing methods are l) Public facilities fees are pledged to repay the Page 3 AB No •. fl,z -# 1 cost of the building and, 2) The City vill be de·laying many public facilities fee projects to make way for library funding. The CIP which will be presented to Council in the next fev months will detail the fiscal impact of this project. The City vill require development of 400 to 600 dwelling units per year to fund the library construction. The operating costs for the nev library vill run from $500,000 to $900,000 per year depending on the level of operations. The City presently is unable to support this additional cost. Preliminary projections of General Fund revenue shov that an operating deficit of about $1.5 million vill exist in 1990-91, the first year of operatJons for this facility. The City must consider revenue enhancements or zone fees assessed against development to cover operating costs for the first year or two of operations. EXHIBITS: 1. Memo from Library Director to Site Selection Committee dated April 16, 1987. 2. Site plan. J. Letter from Johnson Wax Development Corporation to Frank Mannen date June 26, 1987. 4. Site map •. APRIL t 6, 1987 TO: SITE SELECTION COMMITTEE FROM: Library Director LIBRARY srTE SELECTION PROGrtESS REPORT Library and city staff have had six meetings with the developers who plan to build a shopping center on El Camino Real between Alga Road and Dove Lane. The result of those meetings has been the develooment of a tentative site plan for a library building. The next step will be to develop a final site plan. The addition of the new post office to this general site plan has caused some of the revisions we have developed. That has also required the developers to purchase an auditional seven acres of land to accommodate both the library and the post office. The developers are in the process of purchasing the property at this time. We have also been working with some preliminary financial data to purchase the site and the building. The follow- ing options appear to be possible: 1. Purctase the land from the developer and lease back the build- ing. . 2. Lease back the land and the building. 3. Purchase outright the land and the building from the developer after the building fs built. Any one or a combination of these options may be feasible. More work needs to be done on various financing alternatives. This proposed site appears to be the best possible site for the library in the southern half o( the city. The combination of a shopping center, post office and library will make for an ideal mix and should provide a convenient source of services to the public. The site satisfies all the major criteria we have used to evaluate various potential library sites. E. LANGE PAS Di stri but ion: G~off Armour John Cahil 1 Bebe Grosse Michael Holzmiller Ann ~ulchin SOUTH CARLSBAD LIBRARY SITES 00\'E N -~---------- Appendix I. Hydraulic Study - HYDRAULIC STUDY The Hydraulic Study is on file at the City of Carlsbad Engineering Office.