3.16 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC

3.16 Transportation and Traffic

San Marcos General Plan EIR 3.16-1 November 2011

3.16 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC

This section describes transportation and traffic conditions in the planning area and analyzes the changes that would occur as a result of implementation of the proposed General Plan. Information presented in the discussion and subsequent analysis was drawn from technical analyses performed by Fehr & Peers and provided in Appendix H of this EIR. This analysis is consistent with the SANDAG Congestion Management Procedures.

3.16.1 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

Existing Roadway System

The City of San Marcos transportation system consists of highways, streets, pedestrian paths, transit routes, and bikeways. The existing roadway network of the San Marcos planning area is shown in Figure 3.16-1. The San Marcos circulation network is connected to a larger regional system. State Route 78 (SR-78) bisects the planning area into north and south sections. SR-78 carries west- and east-bound travel lanes connecting to Interstate 5 (I-5) to west, to Interstate 15 (I-15) to the east, and provides access to destinations throughout southern California through these connections. Within the planning area, access to SR-78 is provided from S. Rancho Santa Fe Road, Las Posas /Via Vera Cruz, San Marcos Boulevard, Twin Oaks Valley Road, E. Barham Drive/Woodland Parkway, and Nordahl Road. Surface streets connect San Marcos to the cities of Vista, Carlsbad, Escondido and unincorporated areas of the county.

Roadway Classification Standards

The planning area was developed with established traffic patterns. Some of the communities currently undergoing development do not yet have fully established traffic patterns. The planning area roadway system includes a range of facilities serving both regional and local connectivity.

The current street classification in the planning area roadway system includes a state freeway; prime arterials, major arterials, rural arterials, secondary arterials; industrials, collector streets; local access streets; and private streets. Two major functions of a roadway are to serve through-traffic and to provide access to adjacent property, and roadways prioritize these two functions differently. Arterials, which mostly consist of the bigger roadways, generally prioritize the movement of traffic over access to individual adjacent properties. Local streets, which mostly consist of smaller roadways, prioritize access to private properties over through-traffic.

Roadways are also intended to provide bicycle and pedestrian access and circulation, and are the backbone of the bicycle and pedestrian network. Figure 3.16-1 illustrates the major routes and street typologies of the San Marcos roadway system, and displays the functional classification for each of these roadways. The entire current roadway system is categorized below.

Figure 3.16-1

City of San Marcos

Existing Roadway Network



Regional System

Freeways are intended to serve inter-regional travel, carry traffic efficiently from one end of the city to the other, and/or provide connections from one city to other cities and counties. Freeways are access-controlled with two or more lanes in each direction. The one major freeway that provides direct access to and from the City is State Route 78 (SR-78). Interstate 15 (I-15) and Interstate 5 (I-5) provide indirect access to and from the City, by way of SR-78.

SR-78 has three lanes, in general, in each direction in the vicinity of San Marcos, and it provides direct access to and from the City via on- and off-ramps located at Rancho Santa Fe Road, Via Vera Cruz/Las Posas Road, San Marcos Boulevard, Twin Oaks Valley Road, Barham Drive/Woodland Parkway and Nordahl Road. SR-78 generally runs in the east-west direction through the City. Traveling westbound, SR-78 originates at the I-15 interchange in the City of Escondido; westbound, it terminates at the I-5 interchange in the City of Oceanside. In addition, I-15 and I-5 provide indirect access to and from the City by way of interchanges with State Route 78 (SR-78). Both I-15 and I-5 generally run in the north-south direction, and provide a means of inter-regional travel, as the freeways travel to the north into Riverside and Orange County, respectively. Both I-15 and I-5 have four lanes, in general, in each direction where they intersect with SR-78. These freeways serve as the foundation of San Marcos’ regional transportation network.

Arterials

Arterials are designed to move large volumes of traffic and provide a high level of mobility between major residential, employment, and activity centers. They are also intended to move traffic between freeways and local/collector roads. They are intended not just for motor vehicle circulation but also for transit, bicycle and pedestrian circulation.

The San Marcos General Plan provides general guidance for the form and function of arterial roadways and divides arterial roadways into four different sub-categories: prime, major, secondary and rural. The prime, major, secondary and rural arterials, together with the freeways, form a network carrying relatively long-distance, high-speed traffic; a secondary arterial provides service for trips of moderate length at somewhat slower speeds than major arterials.

Additionally, major arterial roadways provides for at least four travel lanes, a raised or painted median, and bike lanes, whereas a minor arterial roadway provides two travel lanes and bike lanes. Parking is prohibited on arterials. The existing major arterials are discussed below and identified in Figure 3.16-1.

Twin Oaks Valley Road/San Elijo Road is a north-south arterial that has two to eight lanes throughout the planning area. Twin Oaks Valley Road extends from unincorporated San Diego County through the City of San Marcos, and transitions to San Elijo Road in the San Elijo Hills community. Within the City of San Marcos, it fluctuates between a two-lane facility (to the north) and an eight-lane facility (near SR-78). Twin Oaks Valley Road is classified in the General Plan as a six-lane prime arterial from Border Road to Village Drive, and as a four-lane major arterial south of Village Drive.



Rancho Santa Fe Road is a north-south arterial that has four to six lanes throughout the planning area. Rancho Santa Fe Road extends from Mission Road to the Carlsbad city limits. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Congestion Management Plan (CMP) classifies Rancho Santa Fe Road as a Regionally Significant Arterial (RSA).

Las Posas Road is a north-south arterial that has four to six lanes throughout the planning area. Las Posas Road extends from the City of San Marcos’s northern boundary and terminates a few hundred feet south of San Marcos Boulevard.

Mission Road is an east-west arterial that has four to six lanes throughout the Planning area. Mission Road extends east from Rancho Santa Fe Road across the City of San Marcos into Escondido. West of Rancho Santa Fe Road, Mission Road becomes South Santa Fe Avenue.

San Marcos Boulevard is an east-west arterial that has four to six lanes throughout the City. San Marcos Boulevard extends east from Business Park Drive at the City’s western boundary to Mission Road in the eastern portion of the City. San Marcos Boulevard is designated as a six-lane prime arterial in the City of San Marcos. The SANDAG CMP classifies San Marcos Boulevard as an RSA.

Barham Drive generally runs in an east-west direction and has two to five lanes throughout the City. Barham Road extends east from Twin Oaks Valley Road and terminates at Mission Road in the City of Escondido.

Nordahl Road generally travels in a north-south direction and has two to four lanes throughout the planning area.

Woodland Parkway is a north-south arterial that has two to four lanes throughout the planning area. Woodland Parkway extends south from Borden Road at the San Marcos-Escondido city boundary and terminates at Barham Drive.

Discovery Street generally runs in an east-west direction with two-lanes. Discovery Street extends from San Marcos Boulevard to Craven Road/Bent Avenue.

Collectors

Collectors are intended to “collect” traffic from local roadways and carry it to roadways higher in the street classification hierarchy. These roadways serve as intermediaries between arterials and local roads, and provide direct access to parcels in both residential and non-residential areas. These roadways typically have one lane of traffic in each direction and can carry a maximum of up to 15,000 vehicles daily.



Neighborhood Streets

Neighborhood streets are intended to serve adjacent properties and should enhance community livability. These roadways provide direct access to properties and connect to collectors and secondary arterials. They carry limited through-traffic. Speed limits on local roadways normally do not exceed 25 miles per hour. These roadways typically carry less than 1,000 vehicles per day, and through-traffic is discouraged.

Private Streets

Many developments within the City are connected to the neighborhood street system by means of private streets. Although the maintenance of these facilities is not the responsibility of the City, the design of all private streets is reviewed by the City Engineer, in conformance to San Marcos’s Roadway Design Standards.

PERFORMANCE CRITERIA – LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS

The performance criteria used in San Marcos are based on two primary measures. The first is “capacity,” which establishes the vehicle carrying ability of a roadway and the second is “volume.” The volume measure is either a traffic count (in the case of existing volumes) or a forecast for a future point in time. The ratio between the volume and the capacity give a volume/capacity (V/C) ration and based on that V/C ratio, a corresponding level of service is determined. A level of service scale is used to evaluate roadway performance based on V/C ratios. The level of service (LOS) levels range from “A” to “F,” with LOS A representing free flow conditions and LOS F representing severe traffic congestion. Generally, level of service descriptions are described below in terms of driver experience:

• LOS A represents free flow travel for vehicles. Individual users are virtually unaffected by others in the traffic stream.

• LOS B represents stable flow, but the presence of other users in the traffic stream begins to be noticeable.

• LOS C represents a range in which the influence of traffic density on operations becomes noticeable. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream and to select an operating speed is now clearly affected by the presence of other vehicles.

• LOS D borders on unstable flow. Speeds and ability to maneuver are severely restricted because of traffic congestion.

• LOS E represents unstable operating conditions at or near the capacity level where maneuverability is severely limited. LOS E represents “at capacity” operations.

• LOS F is used to define forced or a breakdown traffic flow where unsignalized and signalized intersections exceed 50 and 80 seconds of delay, respectively.



Various level of service standards have been established to evaluate observed traffic conditions, future development plans, and street network modifications. At the regional planning level, SANDAG specifies LOS E as the operating standard for CMP intersections in San Diego County.

At the local level, evaluation of volumes, capacities, and levels of service on the planning area street system is based on peak hour intersection data, since intersections are the primary limiting factor affecting traffic flow on surface streets. Table 3.16-1 provides descriptions of traffic flow characteristics associated with each level of service. The proposed General Plan establishes vehicular LOS D as an acceptable level of operations based on street typology for the freeway, industrial streets, Mission Road, Rancho Santa Fe Road, and Twin Oaks Valley Road; a vehicular LOS E is acceptable for San Marcos Boulevard (between Discovery and Grand), Collector Streets, Neighborhood Streets, and Main Street (within the University District); a Flexible LOS allowing LOS below those identified above, is allowed in the core of San Marcos and where it is considered environmentally, politically, or socially infeasible to provide acceptable service levels. For vehicles, the Mobility Element identifies flexible LOS standards will be needed on, Rancho Santa Fe Road, and Twin Oaks Valley Road. Figure 3.16-2 presents existing planning area roadway segments ADT and LOS.

Table 3.16-1 Signalized and Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria

Level of Service Description

Signalized Average

Control Delay per Vehicle (Seconds)

UnsignalizedAverage Control

Per Vehicle (Seconds)

A Operations with very low delay occurring with favorable progression and/or short cycle length.

< 10.0 < 10.0

B Operations with low delay occurring with good progression and/or short cycle lengths.

> 10.0 to 20.0 > 10.0 to 15.0

C Operations with average delays resulting from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures begin to appear.

> 20.0 to 35.0 > 15.0 to 25.0

D

Operations with longer delays due to a combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high V/C ratios. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable.

> 35.0 to 55.0 > 25.0 to 35.0

E

Operations with high delay values indicating poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay.

> 55.0 to 80.0 > 35.0 to 50.0

F Operation with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring due to over saturation, poor progression, or very long cycle lengths.

> 80.0

Figure 3.16-2

City of San Marcos

Existing Roadway Segment ADT and LOS

GRAND

AV

W SAN

MA

RCOS BL

E MISSIO

N RD

BARHAM

DR

MULBERRY DR

BORD

EN RD

RANCHO SANTA FE RD

BORD

EN RD

SAN ELIJO RD

N TWIN OAKS VALLEY RD

MISSIO

N RD

OLIVE ST

VIA VERA CRUZ

RANCHEROS DR

WOODWARD ST

BENNETT AV

WOODLAND PY

N LAS POSAS RD

LINDA VISTA DR

ROC

K SPRING

S RD

DISCO

VERY ST

BUEN

A CREEK RD

S TWIN OAKS VALLEY RD

CRAVEN RD

S PACIFIC ST

KNOB HILL RD

LA M

OREE RD

MELRO

SE DR

NORDAHL RD

LOS VALLECITO

S BL

S SANTA FE AV

SMILAX RD

S BENT AV

RICHM

AR AV

LA MIRADA DR

LAS POSAS RD

KNOLL RD

LAKE RIDGE DR

MO

NTIEL RD

RICHLAND RD

DESCANSO AV

CORONADO HILLS DR

OLEAN

DER AV

ROSE RANCH RD

E LA CIENEGA RD

CENTER DR

QUESTHAVEN RD

ELFIN FO

REST EAST

VIRGINIA PL

SECURITY PL

MISSIO

N RD

SAN ELIJO RD

BUENA CREEK RD

11,44011,440

14,3

30

14,3

30

36, 1

20

36, 1

20

29, 8

10

29, 8

10

24,9

50

24,9

50

12,540

12,540

14,2

20

14, 2

20

1 7 , 4 0 01 7 , 4 0 0

2 1 , 3 7 02 1 , 3 7 0

2 9 , 4 7 0

2 9 , 4 7 0

9,300

9,300

1 6 , 1 8 01 6 , 1 8 0

2 6 , 6 4 0

2 6 , 6 4 0

28,9

60

28,9

60

32,140

32,14044,6

40

44,6

40

30,8

90

30,8

90

30,3

10

30,3

10

1 3, 9

80

1 3, 9

80

1 9 , 1 7 01 9 , 1 7 0

1 5 , 7 3 01 5 , 7 3 0

25,4

90

25,4

90

39,52039,520

8,4

50

8,4

50

· | }þ 78

§̈¦ 15

EX

ISTIN

G R

OA

DW

AY

SE

GM

EN

T AD

TA

ND

LEV

EL O

F S

ER

VIC

E (LO

S)

LEGEN

D

N

NO

T TO S

CA

LE

Level of ServiceA - BCAverage D

aily Traffic

#

Sphere of Influence

#

DF

FIGU

RE

1N

:\Projects\OC

_Projects\OC

09-0139\Fig2_ExR

oadwayS

egmentA

DTandLO

S.m

xd



This page intentionally left blank.



EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS

The existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes on the circulation system are illustrated in Figure 3.16-2. The level of service was calculated for key roadway segments in San Marcos’ regional roadway system to evaluate existing traffic conditions. Daily capacity thresholds are in accordance with the SANTEC/ITE guidelines, and are shown in Table 3.16-2. This table establishes the daily roadway capacities by street typology. Table 3.16-3 summarizes existing daily roadway volumes and LOS.

The San Marcos Boulevard, east of Rancho Santa Fe Road, roadway segments were identified as operating at LOS F based on existing geometrics and daily volume capacities.

It should be noted that, although the volume to capacity assessment for San Marcos Boulevard indicates that it is operating at an unacceptable level, the City has recently implemented adaptive signal synchronization along the San Marcos Boulevard corridor. As such, the facility operates much more efficiently with higher capacity than the capacity assessment indicates.

Table 3.16-2 Daily Roadway Segment Capacity

Street Typology Typical Lane Configuration

Vehicular Level of Service

LOS A LOS B LOS C LOS D LOS E

Arterial 8 lanes 29,200 40,800 58,300 64,200 70,000

Arterial 6 lanes 25,000 35,000 50,000 55,000 60,000

Arterial with Class II or Class III Bike Lanes

4 lanes 15,000 21,000 30,000 35,000 40,000

Arterial with Enhanced Bike Facilities

4 lanes 15,000 21,000 30,000 35,000 40,000

Multi-Way Boulevard 4 lanes for through trips,

two lanes for local serving trips1

16,800 25,200 31,500 37,800 42,000

Industrial Collector 4 lanes 10,000 14,000 20,000 25,000 30,000

Collector& Main Street 2 lanes plus TWLTL 5,000 7,000 10,000 13,000 15,000

Collector & Main Street 2 lanes2 2,500 3,500 5,000 6,500 8,000

Freeway Mixed-Flow Lane3 - - 1,760 1,980 2,200

Freeway HOV Lanes3 - - 1,440 1,620 1,800

Note: These are general capacities for planning purposes. Specific operational characteristics, such as signal coordination, can enhance operations significantly. 1 LOS thresholds were calculated based on V/C ratios of the daily threshold volumes for the corresponding roadway

classification. Multi-way boulevard capacity assumes a similar capacity as a 4-lane arterial plus an additional 1,000 ADT capacity per lane for the local service roadway.

2 With fronting commercial or residential property 3 Per lane capacities presented. Source: SANTEC/ITE Guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies in the San Diego Region, 2000.



Table 3.16-3 Daily Roadway Volumes and Levels of Service

Roadway Segment Classifi-cation Lanes

LOS D Capacity ADT LOS

Santa Fe Avenue West of Smilax Road1 Collector 2 13,000 Future --

West of Rancho Santa Fe Road Major 4 35,000 13,980 A

Rancho Santa Fe Road

between Mission Road and Capalina Road

Major 4 35,000 12,540 A

between Grand Avenue and Linda Vista Drive

Major 4 35,000 30,890 D

between Grandon Avenue and Security Place

Major 4 35,000 28,960 C

South of San Marcos Boulevard Major 4 35,000 32,140 D

between Melrose Drive and San Elijo Road

Prime 6 55,000 26,640 B

San Elijo Road East of Rancho Santa Fe Road Major 4 35,000 16,180 B

Las Posas Road

North of Borden Road1 Major 2 13,000 Future --

North of Descanso Avenue Prime 6 55,000 30,310 B

North of Linda Vista Drive Major 4 35,000 8,450 A

Twin Valley Oaks Road

North of Windy Way2 Rural 4 35,000 24,950 C

North of Richmar Avenue Major 4 35,000 25,490 C

between San Marcos Boulevard and SR-78 WB Ramp

Prime 6 55,000 36,120 C

North of Barham Drive Prime 8 64,200 29,810 B

South of South Village Drive Major 5 40,000 14,220 A

Woodland Parkway South of El Norte Parkway Major 4 35,000 9,300 A

North of Mission Road Major 4 35,000 14,330 A

Borden Road East of Vineyard Road2 Collector 2 13,000 Future --

Mission Road

East of Las Posas Road Major 4 35,000 17,400 B

West of Aberdeen Avenue Major 4 35,000 19,170 B

between Knoll Road and Fitzpatrick Road

Major 4 35,000 15,730 B

East of Mulberry Drive Prime 6 55,000 21,370 A

San Marcos Boulevard

West of Rancho Santa Fe Road Major 5 40,000 29,470 C

Rancho Santa Fe Road to Bent Avenue

Major 4 35,000 44,640 F

between Bent Avenue and Grand Avenue

Prime 6 55,000 39,520 C

Discovery Street West of Twin Valley Oaks Road2 Collector 2 13,000 Future --

Barham Drive West of La Moree Road Major 5 40,000 11,440 A

East of Twin Valley Oaks Road2 Major 5 40,000 Future -- 1 Roadway segment would be analyzed in future scenario as a two lane roadway within a right of way consistent with the County

of San Diego’s General Plan. 2 The Level of Service of the roadway segment is analyzed using the criteria of Major Arterial (4 lanes).



The incorporated City of San Marcos has 31 major intersections including 11 freeway ramps that have been evaluated based on input received from City Staff. Figure 3.16-3a and 3.16-3b shows locations and existing traffic volumes at each study intersection. Figure 3.16-4 provides the roadway geometry for each of these intersections along with traffic control and the speed limit on each approach. Of the 31 major intersections within the City, 28 intersections are signalized, one is Side-Street-Stop-Controlled (SSSC) and two are All-Way-Stop-Controlled (AWSC).

In conformance with the SANTEC/ITE traffic study guidelines, existing AM and PM peak hour operating conditions for the signalized and unsignalized intersections were evaluated using the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 2000) methodology. The Traffix software package was used to evaluate the study intersections using the HCM methodology. Table 3.16-4 provides the study intersections and level-of-service during the AM and PM peak hours.

In general, all the 31 study intersections operate at LOS D or better during both of the peak periods.

Parking

Parking availability is important for the overall quality of life in San Marcos and the vitality of tax-generating commercial, retail, entertainment and service uses. A lack of parking frustrates residents, businesses, and visitors, while too much parking wastes valuable land and impedes the area’s economic, aesthetic, and environmental objectives. Greater management of parking spaces in the planning area can help achieve mobility, environmental, and community development goals. As portions of the planning area develop or redevelop, additional parking may be necessary to accommodate greater intensity of development. Current parking standards of the Zoning Ordinance, as compared to similar jurisdictions and updated parking codes, provide marginally less parking for commercial uses and marginally more parking for public and service uses. Utilization and availability of parking within the planning area are adequate for standard daily use.

Alternative Transportation

Public transportation and alternative modes of travel are an important component of a comprehensive circulation system. Public and alternative modes of transportation offer an alternative to the use of automobiles and help reduce air pollution and road congestion. To promote the increased usage of these modes of transportation, adequate facilities are required.

Public Bus Service

Public bus service in San Marcos is operated by North County Transit District (NCTD). Figure 3.16-5 indicates the location of NCTD BREEZE bus routes serving the planning area. Bus routes provide access within San Marcos and provide connective access to other Cities including Vista, Carlsbad, Encinitas and Escondido. These routes link housing, jobs, higher education campuses, retail and recreation areas in the planning area and the greater North County area. NCTD currently operates six fixed Breeze bus service



Table 3.16-4 Existing Intersection Level of Service

Intersection Signal Control

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Delay LOS Delay LOS

1. Smilax Road/Poinsettia Avenue AWSC 11.0 B 11.5 B

2. Smilax Road/Mimosa Avenue SSSC 12.6 B 12.8 B

3. Rancho Santa Fe Road/Santa Fe Avenue/ Mission Road

Signalized 22.9 C 25.3 C

4. Rancho Santa Fe Road/SR-78 Westbound Ramps Signalized 29.7 C 26.7 C

5. Rancho Santa Fe Road.SR-78 Eastbound Ramps Signalized 21.3 C 20.8 C

6. Rancho Santa Fe Road/Linda Vista Drive Signalized 17.1 B 18.5 B

7. Rancho Santa Fe Road/San Marcos Boulevard Signalized 30.6 C 39.7 D

8. Rancho Santa Fe Road/Melrose Drive Signalized 31.8 C 28.7 C

9. Rancho Santa Fe Road/San Elijo Road Signalized 24.7 C 37.0 D

10. Las Posas Road/Mission Road Signalized 34.1 C 41.8 D

11. Las Posas Road/SR-78 Westbound Ramps Signalized 27.9 C 34.2 C

12. Las Posas Road/Grand Avenue Signalized 24.3 C 31.6 C

13. SR-78 Eastbound Ramps/Via Vera Cruz/ Grand Avenue

Signalized 34.8 C 37.5 D

14. Las Posas Road/San Marcos Boulevard Signalized 20.2 C 32.0 C

15. Grand Avenue/San Marcos Boulevard Signalized 12.6 B 32.7 C

16. SR-78 Eastbound Ramps/San Marcos Boulevard Signalized 14.9 B 22.7 C

17. Knoll Road/Mission Road Signalized 19.3 B 23.1 C

18. SR-78 Westbound Ramps/Knoll Road/ San Marcos Boulevard

Signalized 34.9 C 34.0 C

19. Buena Creek Road/Twin Oaks Valley Road Signalized 18.7 B 22.3 C

20. Borden Road/Twin Oaks Valley Road Signalized 45.6 D 21.8 C

21. Twin Oaks Valley Road/San Marcos Boulevard Signalized 36.2 D 42.1 D

22. San Marcos Boulevard/Mission Road Signalized 29.2 C 28.8 C

23. Twin Oaks Valley Road/SR-78 Westbound Ramps Signalized 17.6 B 15.2 B

24. Twin Oaks Valley Road/SR-78 Eastbound Ramps Signalized 39.1 D 27.3 C

25. Twin Oaks Valley Road/Barham Drive Signalized 27.3 C 27.9 C

26. Twin Oaks Valley Road/Craven Drive Signalized 29.7 C 34.3 C

27. SR-78 Eastbound Off-Ramp/Barham Drive Signalized 22.2 C 16.4 B

28. SR-78 Westbound Ramps/Rancheros Drive AWSC 15.8 C 17.3 C

29. Woodland Parkway/Mission Road Signalized 33.1 C 32.6 C

30. Nordahl Road/SR-78 Westbound Ramps Signalized 24.8 C 26.4 C

31. Nordahl Road/SR-78 Eastbound Ramps Signalized 24.9 C 26.8 C

Source: Fehr & Peers 2011

routes that provide access from, to and within the planning area; routes are identified and summarized on Table 3.16-5. Routes 304, 305, 347 and 445 all serve or stop at the Palomar Community College Transit Station providing increased transit accessibility by connecting to the SPRINTER Rail line and Coaster/Amtrak lines via Poinsettia Station in Carlsbad.

Figure 3.16-3a

City of San Marcos

Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes

Figure 3.16-3b

City of San Marcos

Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (Cont.)

Figure 3.16-4

City of San Marcos

Intersection Geometry



Table 3.16-5 NCTD Bus Routes Serving San Marcos (2011)

Route Description Communities Served

304/404 San Marcos to Encinitas via Rancho Santa Fe Road

Access to Encinitas from Business/Industrial, Lake San Marcos, Questhaven/La Costa along Rancho Santa Fe Road

305 Escondido to Vista Transit Center via Mission Road

Access through San Marcos to Escondido and Vista from Business/Industrial District, College Area, Richmar, and Richland neighborhoods

332 South Vista and Vista Business Park Access to Vista from Business/Industrial District at Poinsettia/La Mirada

340 California State University San Marcos Shuttle

CSUSM on-campus only

347 Escondido to Palomar Community College via California State University San Marcos

Access from Palomar Community College through San Marcos to Escondido from College, Business/Industrial District, Barham/Discovery Community, and Richland Neighborhood

358/359 El Norte Parkway into Escondido Minimal access from Richland to Escondido

445 Carlsbad Poinsettia – Coaster Connection

From Palomar Community College Transit Station through San Marcos and Carlsbad to the Poinsettia Station.

Source: www.gonctd.com/breeze

Passenger Rail Service

There are two major rails lines serving the planning area. Figure 3.16-5 indicates the location of passenger rail service in San Marcos. One of the major rail lines provides direct service to San Marcos. This line is referred to as The SPRINTER, and is considered a light-rail passenger service that operates from approximately 4 am-9 pm Monday through Friday with service every 30 minutes in both directions. Service runs every 30 minutes for westbound trips between 9:33 am and 5:33 pm and for eastbound trips between 10:33 am and 6:33 pm, with hourly service before and after these times, in the mornings and evenings on Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays. Transit Stations serving the SPRINTER are located at the Buena Creek, Palomar Community College, San Marcos Civic Center, California State University San Marcos, and Nordahl Road areas within the vicinity of San Marcos. The SPRINTER provides services from the Oceanside Transit Center to the Escondido Transit Center. In between the transit centers, it also provides service to the City of Vista. Free parking lots are available at all Transit Stations, except for the California State University San Marcos and the San Marcos Civic Center Transit Stations. The SPRINTER offers easy connections to Breeze network.

The other major rail line that provides indirect service to San Marcos is the Coaster. The Coaster is considered a commuter rail passenger service that operates from approximately 5 am to 8 pm Monday through Friday. Service during the AM peak period is provided with approximate headways of 27 to 37 minutes traveling southbound, from Oceanside. Service during the PM peak period is provided with approximate headways of 30 to 45 minutes traveling northbound, from Downtown San Diego. The Coaster provides indirect service to San Marcos, via the SPRINTER and the Breeze. In order to travel between San Marcos and Downtown San Diego, riders must transfer to the Coaster at the Oceanside

Figure 3.16-5

City of San Marcos

NCTD and Transit Routes



Transit Center. In between San Marcos and Downtown San Diego, the Coaster provides service to Old Town San Diego, Sorrento Valley, Solana Beach, Encinitas, Carlsbad Poinsettia, and Carlsbad Village. Parking is available free of charge at all stations, except for the Downtown San Diego at Santa Fe Depot station, where metered parking is available.

The Coaster rail line west of I-5 provides indirect service to San Marcos. Residents can access the Coaster by public transit through two connection routes. From Palomar Community College Transit Station, riders can access the Coaster via NCTD Breeze route 445 connecting to the Poinsettia Station. The SPRINTER from any of the four San Marcos stations will connect to the Coaster via the Oceanside Transit Center. The Coaster rail line connects San Marcos to the greater San Diego region and shares tracks with AmTrak, allowing access to California and the Pacific Northwest.

Bikeways

San Marcos updated the San Marcos Bicycle Master Plan in 2001 identifying existing and planned bikeway facilities. Existing bikeways serve all San Marcos communities and limited areas of the SOI. There are several Class I Bikeway facilities in the planning area. Several of the facilities are of considerable length, such as those facilities along Melrose Drive, San Elijo Road, Twin Oaks Valley Road, La Cienega Road, and north of the intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and South Santa Fe Avenue/Mission Road. It should be noted that, although many of the Class I facilities are paved, some are comprised of compacted decomposed granite (DG).In addition, the Inland Rail Trail from the East City Limits to Pacific Street is also designated as a Class I Bikeway. There are several Class II Bikeway facilities, as well. Most of the facilities run along the major arterials within the City, such as Rancho Santa Fe Road, San Marcos Boulevard, Twin Oaks Valley Road, Mission Road, and Barham Drive. There are only short segments of Grand Avenue, Richland Road, Knob Hill Road etc. that are classified as a Class III facility. Figure 3.16-6 provides an overview of existing bicycle facilities in San Marcos.

Pedestrian and Trail Facilities

Pedestrian paths are primarily developed as part of the roadway and trail systems of a city and reflect the interconnected nature of circulation and transportation systems as a whole. Currently sidewalks are provided along most of the major routes within the City. However, there are some gaps especially in the older areas and in the Business/Industrial District and Barham/Discovery Community and Richland neighborhoods predating 1990. In addition, in order to provide safe routes to school for San Marcos students and residents, the City recently completed improvements to Rock Springs Road and Richland Road. The project involved construction of curb, gutter, sidewalks, medians, a roundabout, road improvements and associated work along Rock Springs Road from Richland Road to Woodland Parkway. The project also includes sidewalk along the west side of Richland Road from Elizabeth Street to Mission Hills High School. The project was completed in Spring/Summer in 2010.

The planning area has an integrated trail system that aims to provide recreational access and alternative circulation for non-motorized users through an interlinked city-wide system of trails connecting

Figure 3.16-6

City of San Marcos

Existing and Proposed Bicycle Routes and Facilities



neighborhoods to local and amusing parks, schools, Palomar Community College and CSUSM. The system is also designed to connect with the wider regional trails system as planned by adjacent cities, such as Carlsbad, Vista, Escondido, and Encinitas, and the County of San Diego. Figure 3.16-7 provides an overview of existing and future trail facilities within the City.

According to the City of San Marcos Master Trails Plan (adopted in 1991), two types of trail corridors have been designated: an Urban Trail corridor, and a Multi-Use Trail corridor. The Urban Trails provide recreation and alternative means of circulation for bicyclists and pedestrians located primarily in the more intensively developed valley areas of the City. The Multi-use Trails provide recreational access to the less intensively developed areas of the City for bicyclists, pedestrians, and equestrians. The trails are located throughout the City, totaling approximately 102 miles of trails according to the Master Trails Plan. Of the 102 miles of trail proposed in the Master Trails Plan, approximately 21 miles would be designated “Urban Trails”, while the remaining 81 miles would be designated as “Multiuse Trails”. The system currently has 58 miles of constructed trails.

Even though bikeway master plans specifically address bicycle facilities on paved road-ways, a community’s trails are relevant, even if they are unpaved and are not intended to meet Caltrans bikeway standards. This is especially true wherever connections can be made that enhance intra-community connectivity by linking the two systems. Therefore, these two non-motorized systems can be regarded as complementary extensions of each other.

Truck Routes and Freight

Currently, there are 9 truck routes in the planning area, which are listed below:

• Mission Road from Rancho Santa Fe Road to the eastern City limits

• South Santa Fe Avenue; from Rancho Santa Fe Road to the western City limits

• Grand Avenue; from Rancho Santa Fe Road to Las Posas Road (in the future, the truck route will extend along the Grand Avenue southerly extension to the future Discovery Street extension)

• Linda Vista Drive, from Rancho Santa Fe Road to Las Posas Road

• Barham Drive, from the future Discovery Street extension at Twin Oaks Valley Road to the eastern City Limit

• Rancho Santa Fe Road, from the southern City Limit to Mission Road

• Las Posas Road, from Linda Vista Drive to Mission Road

• Twin Oaks Valley Road, from Barham Drive to San Marcos Boulevard

• Woodland Parkway; from Mission Road to Barham Road

Truck routes are subject to public hearings and consideration by the Traffic Safety Commission and City Council prior to their adoption. Figure 3.16-8 identified existing truck routes.

Figure 3.16-7

City of San Marcos

Existing and Proposed Trails



The freight line that runs through San Marcos is parallel to SR-78. The freight rail line is operated by Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF). The rail right-of-way is used by both freight and commuter (SPRINTER) rail services. BNSF is one of the largest railway companies in the United States with more than 390 different railroad lines.

Aviation Facilities

The two nearby airports – McClellan-Palomar Airport located 2.5 miles west of the planning area boundary, and San Diego International Airport (SDIA)/Lindbergh Field located approximately 35 miles south of the City, offer air service to the City. McClellan-Palomar Airport is a gateway to and from San Diego’s North County, which is a general aviation airport used primarily for business and recreational purposes. Lindbergh Field is the region’s primary commercial airport. One heli-pad owned and utilized by the San Diego County Sherriff’s Department existing within the planning area.

3.16.2 REGULATORY SETTING

The following provides a general description of the applicable regulatory requirements for the planning area, including federal, state, regional, and local guidelines.

Federal Regulations

Department of Transportation Act of 1966

Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 specifies that a transportation project requiring the use of publicly owned parks, recreation areas, historic sites (including those owned privately), wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and many other types of resources can be approved only if there is no feasible and prudent alternate to using that land and if the project is planned to minimize harm to the property.

General procedures are as follows:

A specific finding is required. Section 4(f) lands may be used for Federal Aid highways only if:

1. There is no prudent and feasible alternative to using that land; and

2. The program or project includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the park, recreation area, wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or historic site resulting from the use.

Each project proposal must include a Section 4(f) avoidance alternative (Caltrans 2011).

Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA)

In 1982, the federal government passed the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA). This act requires states to allow larger trucks on the “National Network”, which is compared of the Interstate

Figure 3.16-8

City of San Marcos

Existing and Future Truck Routes



System plus the non-Interstate Federal-Aid Primary System. “Larger trucks” includes (1) doubles with 28.5 foot trailers, (2) singles with 48-foot semi-trailers and unlimited kingpin-to-rear axle (KPRA) distance, (3) unlimited length for both vehicle combinations, and (4) widths up to 102 inches. SR-78 in the planning area is defined as STAA routes.

State Regulations

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)

Caltrans is the primary state agency responsible for transportation issues. One of its duties is the construction and maintenance of the state highway system. Caltrans has established standards for roadway traffic flow and has developed procedures to determine if intersections require improvements. For projects that may physically affect facilities under its administration, Caltrans requires encroachment permits before any construction work may be undertaken. For projects that would not physically affect facilities, but may influence traffic flow and levels of services at such facilities, Caltrans may recommend measures to mitigate the traffic impacts of such projects.

California Transportation Commission (CTC)

The CTC consists of nine members appointed by the Governor. CTC is responsible for the programming and allocating of funds for the construction of highway, passenger rail, and transit improvements throughout the state. CTC is responsible for adopting the State Transportation Improvement Program and the State Highway Operation and Protection Program.

Assembly Bill (AB) 32

With AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, the State of California committed itself to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is coordinating the response to comply with AB 32.

In 2007, CARB adopted a list of early action programs that could be put in place by January 1, 2010. In 2008, CARB defined its 1990 baseline level of emissions, and by 2011 it will complete its major rule making for reducing GHG emissions. Rules on emissions, as well as market-based mechanisms like the proposed cap and trade program, will take effect January 1, 2012.

On December 11, 2008, CARB adopted its Proposed Scoping Plan for AB 32. This scoping plan included the approval of Senate Bill (SB) 375 as the means for achieving regional transportation-related GHG targets. SB 375 provides guidance on how curbing emissions from cars and light trucks can help the state comply with AB 32.

SB 375

SB 375 has four key components. First, SB 375 requires regional GHG emissions targets. CARB’s Regional Targets Advisory Committee will guide the adoption of targets to be met by 2020 and 2035 for



each Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) in the state. For Cal Poly Pomona, the MPO is the SCAG (see below). These targets, which MPOs may propose themselves, will be updated every 8 years in conjunction with the revision schedule for housing and transportation elements.

Second, MPOs will be required to create a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that provides a plan for meeting regional targets. The SCS and the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) must be consistent with each other, including action items and financing decisions. If the SCS does not meet the regional target, the MPO must produce an Alternative Planning Strategy that details an alternative plan to meet the target.

Third, SB 375 requires that regional housing elements and transportation plans (also prepared by SCAG as the MPO for Los Angeles) be synchronized on 8-year schedules. In addition, Regional Housing Needs Assessment allocation numbers must conform to the SCS. If local jurisdictions are required to rezone land as a result of changes in the housing element, rezoning must take place within three years.

Finally, MPOs must use transportation and air emissions modeling techniques consistent with guidelines prepared by the CTC. Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (such as SANDAG) are encouraged, but not required, to use t ravel demand models consistent with the CTC guidelines.

The SANDAG region will be the first region in the State that will adopt a Sustainable Communities Strategies (SCS) and Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) update under SB 375.

AB 1358 – California Complete Streets Act of 2008

Supporting some of the previously referenced regulations/requirements, the California Complete Streets Act of 2008 (AB 1358) requires circulation elements as of January 1, 2011, to accommodate the transportation system from a multi-modal perspective, including public transit, walking and biking, which have traditionally been marginalized in comparison to autos in contemporary American urban planning.

Local Plans and Policies

SANDAG Regional Transportation Plan

SANDAG is the regional transportation planning agency in San Diego County. As such, they are responsible for planning and funding transportation projects throughout the region. SANDAG has completed its 2050 RTP. The RTP was adopted on October 28, 2011. The following projects have been identified in the study area to improve mobility:

• Extension of LRT to Escondido

• Express LRT along the transit corridor

• High frequency local bus routes within the City

• Streetcar/shuttle route in the core of San Marcos

• Managed highway lanes on SR-78



Congestion Management Program (CMP)

The 2008 Congestion Management Program (CMP) for San Diego County was developed to meet the requirements of Section 65089 of the California Government Code. The CMP requires that, when an environmental impact report is prepared for a project, traffic and transit impact analyses be conducted for select regional facilities based on the quantity of project traffic expected to use these facilities. Currently the planning area has three designated CMP facilities: SR-78, San Marcos Boulevard, and Rancho Santa Fe Road.

The City of San Marcos Bikeway Master Plan

The 2005 Bikeway Master Plan is an update to the city’s original master plan adopted in 2001. Goals of the master plan were to obtain State Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) grant funds and improve bicycle facilities throughout the city for safer routes to school, connections to adjacent cities and incorporate an environmental inventory analysis. One of the goals of the master plan was to connect the City’s trails to bicycle facilities to complete a safe and enjoyable trail and bikeway system (City of San Marcos 2005).

City of San Marcos Municipal Code

Section 9.04 of the City of San Marcos Municipal Code includes the general provisions and regulations for parks, trails and recreation facilities.

3.16.3 THRESHOLDS FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE

The impact of the proposed project related to transportation and traffic would be considered significant if it would exceed the following thresholds of significance, in accordance with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines:

• Conflict with an a applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and nonmotorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersection, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit;

• Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways;

• Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks;

• Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment);

• Result in inadequate emergency access; or



• Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities.

3.16.4 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Impact analysis in this section used the San Marcos Traffic Demand Model.

For purposes of this impact analysis that follows, CMP-designated facilities are addressed. For non-CMP designated facilities, the following criteria are applied:

The addition of project traffic causes the LOS for any travel mode to degrade at a study facility from an acceptable level to an unacceptable level based on the criteria outlined in Table 3.16-6:

• The project increases the delay at a study intersection currently operating at an unacceptably level by 2 or more seconds; or

• The project causes the volume-to-capacity ratio to increase at study roadway segments currently operating at an unacceptable level by 0.02 or more.

Table 3.16-6 LOS Parameters

Street Typology Street

Mode Preference

Transit Bicycle Pedestrian Vehicular

Multi-Way Boulevard LOS D LOS D LOS C LOS E

Arterial with Class II or Class III bike facility and sidewalks

LOS E LOS E LOS E LOS D

Arterial with Enhanced Bike/ Ped Facilities

LOS D LOS D LOS C LOS D

Freeway LOS E N/A N/A LOS D

Collector LOS E LOS D LOS C LOS E

Class I Bike/Ped Path N/A LOS D LOS C N/A

Neighborhood Street LOS E LOS D LOS C LOS E

Industrial Streets LOS E LOS E LOS E LOS D

Main Street Concept LOS D LOS D LOS C LOS E Notes: N/A = Mode not permissible.

In general, the study area for this assessment is from San Elijo Road to the south, the City Limit to the north, Smilax Road to the west, and E. Mission Road to the east.

Please note that the General Plan provides for extensive bicycle, pedestrian, and transit amenities throughout the City. It is assumed that the City will design the bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities sufficiently to achieve the level of service parameters identified above, Additionally, as identified in the implementation component of the Mobility Element, the City should further define operating levels for



alternative mode facilities. As such, this assessment focuses on the vehicle operating level of service, with the assumption that implementation of the mobility element will ultimately provide acceptable levels of service for the other travel modes.

Additionally, area freeway segments were addressed consistent with the requirements set forth in the Congestion Management Program (CMP).

It should be noted that an existing plus project impact assessment for a General Plan (which has a development life of 20 years or more) is an unrealistic assessment. However, based on recent CEQA litigation (specifically the Sunnyvale West Neighborhood Association vs. City of Sunnyvale City Council), the court ruled that the project must be evaluated against the CEQA baseline condition. As such, this scenario has been included, albeit unrealistic, to develop impacts and mitigation measures assuming full development of the proposed project as if it were constructed today.

Please note that this assessment includes planned capacity traffic volumes resulting from implementation from the proposed General Plan travel demand forecast runs, but assumes the existing roadway segment lane configurations and intersection geometrics.

Conflict with an Applicable Plan Establishing Measures of Effectiveness for the Circulation System Performance

Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service

Implementation of the proposed General Plan would result in general intensification of the planning area. Development at equal or more intense levels is permitted by the proposed General Plan, especially in mixed use and non-residential areas along primary circulation corridors of the Business/Industrial District, Richmar, Richland and Barham/Discovery Community neighborhoods.

According to the proposed General Plan criteria, the following vehicular LOS criteria are applied based on street typology to identify acceptable operations:

• LOS D for the freeway, industrial streets, Mission Road, Rancho Santa Fe Road, and Twin Oaks Valley Road

• LOS E for San Marcos Boulevard (between Discovery and Grand), Collector Streets, Neighborhood Streets, and Main Street (within the University District)

• Flexible LOS, allowing LOS below those identified above, is allowed in the core of San Marcos and where it is considered environmentally, politically, or socially infeasible to provide acceptable service levels. For vehicles, the Mobility Element identifies flexible LOS standards will be needed on, Rancho Santa Fe Road, Las Posas Road, and Twin Oaks Valley Road.

Development or intensification activities is expected to result in increases to the resident population, number of employees, and number of visitors to the planning area, resulting in increases in traffic



volumes. Table 3.16-7 presents a comparison of existing and future LOS and delay at study intersections in the planning area. Figure 3.16-9 illustrates intersection LOS resulting from planned development capacity of the proposed General Plan; shaded boxes indicate significant impacts. For eight of these intersections, service LOS would be reduced and delay time would increase; these changes that would result from implementation of the proposed General Plan would be a significant impact. Implementation of the project would result in the following intersections operating below the service levels identified in Table 3.16-6:

• Rancho Santa Fe Road/San Marcos Boulevard – PM Peak Hour – The City is implementing flexible LOS standards at this intersection to reduce impacts for pedestrians and bicycles near the high school. Therefore, although it is congested during the PM peak hour, the project impact is considered less-than-significant.

• Rancho Santa Fe Road/Melrose Drive – AM Peak Hour – The impact is considered significant and is therefore subject to mitigation.

• Rancho Santa Fe Road/San Elijo Road – PM Peak Hour – The impact is considered significant and is therefore subject to mitigation.

• Las Posas Road/SR-78 Westbound Ramps – PM Peak Hour – The City is implementing flexible LOS standards at this intersection to reduce impacts for pedestrians and bicycles through the corridor and minimize impacts to the urban environment. Therefore, although it is congested during the PM peak hour, the project impact is considered less-than-significant.

• Buena Creek Road/Twin Oaks Valley Road – AM and PM Peak Hours – The impact is considered significant and mitigation is required.

• Borden Road/Twin Oaks Valley Road – AM and PM Peak Hours – The impact is considered significant and mitigation is required.

• Twin Oaks Valley Road/San Marcos Boulevard – AM and PM Peak Hours – The City is implementing flexible LOS standards at this intersection to reduce impacts for pedestrians and bicycles through the corridor and minimize impacts to the urban environment. Therefore, although it is congested during the AM and PM peak hours, the project impact is considered less than significant.

• Twin Oaks Valley Road/SR-78 Eastbound Ramps – AM and PM Peak Hours – The City is implementing flexible LOS standards at this intersection to reduce impacts for pedestrians and bicycles through the corridor and minimize impacts to the urban environment. Therefore, although it is congested during the AM and PM peak hours, the project impact is considered less than significant.

Figure 3.16-9 (Cont. )

City of San Marcos

Cumulative Project Intersection LOS



Table 3.16-7

Proposed General Plan Intersection Level of service


Planned Capacity of Proposed General Plan Existing Conditions

Change In Delay

AM Peak Hour

PM Peak Hour

AM Peak Hour

PM Peak Hour

AM Peak Hour

PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS

1. Smilax Road/ Poinsettia Avenue

SSSC 15.6 C 15.8 C 17.0 C 20.7 C -1.4 -4.9

2. Smilax Road/ Mimosa Avenue

SSSC 20.7 C 21.9 C 18.2 C >120 F 2.5 N/A

3. Rancho Santa Fe Road/Santa Fe Avenue/Mission Road

S 20.5 C 21.9 C 22.9 C 24.3 C -2.4 -2.4

4. Rancho Santa Fe Road/SR-78 Westbound Ramps

S 25.9 C 24.6 C 26.8 C 24.4 C -0.9 0.2

5. Rancho Santa Fe Road/SR-78 Eastbound Ramps

S 20.0 C 20.7 C 20.4 C 21.4 C -0.4 -0.7

6. Rancho Santa Fe Road/Linda Vista Drive

S 17.5 B 20.9 C 21.8 C 27.4 C -4.3 -6.5

7. Rancho Santa Fe Road/San Marcos Boulevard

S 32.6 C 79.0 E 31.3 C 56.3 E 1.3 22.7

8. Rancho Santa Fe Road/Melrose Drive

S 70.4 E 37.5 D 33.7 C 30.3 C 36.7 7.2

9. Rancho Santa Fe Road/San Elijo Road

S 51.9 D >120 F 23.2 C 22.1 C 28.7 N/A

10. Las Posas Road/Mission Road

S 29.6 C 40.7 D 31.0 C 42.2 D -1.4 -1.5

11. Las Posas Road/SR-78 Westbound Ramps

S 51.9 D 106.6 F 96.7 F 106.9 F -44.8 -0.3

12. Las Posas Road/Grand Avenue

S 23.8 C 30.8 C 25.0 C 35.6 D -1.2 -4.8

13. SR-78 Eastbound Ramps/Via Vera Cruz/Grand Avenue

S 46.5 D 50.8 D 49.3 D 42.0 D -2.8 8.8

14. Las Posas Road/ San Marcos Boulevard

S 19.2 B 33.3 C 26.4 C 96.0 F -7.2 -62.7

15. Grand Avenue/ San Marcos Boulevard

S 12.4 B 28.3 C 14.5 B 31.9 C -2.1 -3.6

16. SR-78 Eastbound Ramps/San Marcos Boulevard

S 20.8 C 22.7 C 17.1 B 23.0 C 3.7 -0.3

17. Knoll Road/ Mission Road

S 24.3 C 36.9 D 24.3 C 33.7 C 0.0 3.2

18. SR-78 Westbound Ramps/Knoll Road/ San Marcos Boulevard

S 36.6 D 37.2 D 41.7 D 26.1 D -5.1 11.1

19. Buena Creek Road/Twin Oaks Valley Road

S 90.7 F 112.2 F 81.4 F 95.6 F 9.3 16.6



Table 3.16-7 Proposed General Plan Intersection Level of service


Planned Capacity of Proposed General Plan Existing Conditions

Change In Delay

AM Peak Hour

PM Peak Hour

AM Peak Hour

PM Peak Hour

AM Peak Hour

PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS

20. Borden Road/Twin Oaks Valley Road

S >120 F >120 F >120 F 80.5 F N/A N/A

21. Twin Oaks Valley Road/San Marcos Boulevard

S >120 F 99.8 F 41.0 D 34.7 C N/A 65.1

22. San Marcos Boulevard/Mission Road

S 42.4 D 40.0 D 24.5 C 26.7 C 17.9 13.3

23. Twin Oaks Valley Road/SR-78 Westbound Ramps

S 18.5 B 18.7 B 18.1 B 16.3 B 0.4 2.4

24. Twin Oaks Valley Road/SR-78 Eastbound Ramps

S 100.7 F 58.6 E 63.0 E 37.5 D 37.7 21.1

25. Twin Oaks Valley Road/Barham Drive

S 30.1 C 33.0 C 30.96 C 34.9 C -0.9 -1.9

26. Twin Oaks Valley Road/Craven Drive

S 31.6 C 40.8 D 37.1 D 43.2 D -5.5 -2.4

27. SR-78 Eastbound Off-Ramp/Barham Drive

S 29.1 C 23.5 C 38.2 D 41.3 D -9.1 -3.1

28. SR-78 Westbound Ramps/Rancheros Drive

AWSC 26.5 D 25.8 D 18.7 C 20.1 C 7.8 5.7

29. Woodland Parkway/Mission Road

S 38.7 D 42.1 D 32.3 C 37.0 D 6.4 5.1

30. Nordahl Road/SR-78 Westbound Ramps

S 23.9 C 24.9 C 23.3 C 27.3 C 0.6 -2.4

31. Nordahl Road/SR-78 Eastbound Ramps

S 25.0 C 27.1 C 24.9 C 26.8 C 0.1 0.3

Note: BOLD identifies significant impact Italics indicates locations where flexible levels of service are being applied.

The Mobility Element of the proposed General Plan includes policies to enhance traffic circulation, two future truck routes to add to current routes, and reduce vehicle trips. These policies require new development to prepare and implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs to minimize vehicle trip generation and promote alternative modes of travel, improve connectivity within the City by closing gaps in the circulation network, implementing “Complete Streets”, utilize technology and intelligent transportation systems to stabilize street system flow and efficiency as an alternative to roadway widening, and establish an intra-city shuttle system that connects the central development nodes of the City. The proposed General Plan also proposes improvements to the circulation network of the planning area including but not limited to, two interchange improvements, three intersection improvements including Rancho Santa Fe Rd./W San Marcos Blvd. and Linda Vista Dr./S Bent Ave.,



increase a portion of Rancho Santa Fe Rd. to 6 lanes, two SR-78 overpasses, several pedestrian bridges and two SPRINTER grade separations. See Figure 3.16-10.

Intensification of the planning area associated with the proposed General Plan would result in a significant impact to peak hour intersection level of service at the program level; mitigation is required.

Daily and Peak Hour Roadway Segment Volumes

Impacts of increased traffic volume resulting from the proposed General Plan are compared to existing daily and peak hour traffic volumes in Table 3.16-8 and Figure 3.16-11. The Mobility Element of the proposed General Plan includes policies to safely and efficiently accommodate traffic generated by development, require new development to prepare and implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs to minimize vehicle trip generation and promote alternative modes of travel, continue to consult with Caltrans on transportation planning, operations, and funding to develop the City’s circulation system as it relates to State Route 78, strive to ensure that streets within San Marcos shall be complete streets where feasible, increase access, safety and connectivity of multimodal circulation networks to reduce vehicle trips, establish an intra-city shuttle system that connects the central development nodes of the City, and maximizing the service areas covered by the complete transit system. These policies are designed to improve the system as a whole, provide greater options for non-vehicle trips and generally reduce traffic congestion.

The Land Use and Community Design Element includes land use planning methods and policies that mingle compatible uses in mixed use configurations, promote development near existing transit facilities and expand trails to provide an increased level of alternative transportation service.

Implementation of the proposed land use plan, Figure 2.0-3, would result in an increased level of traffic on some local roadways. Based on the roadway segment assessment, see Table 3.16-7, reduced LOS would occur along the following segments with implementation of the General Plan. However, the proposed Mobility Element includes a policy to implement flexible Level of Service Standards in certain locations within the urban core. All of the following roadway segments are within the urban core. Application of the flexible LOS standard as applied to these segments would avoid significant impacts to these locations. The General Plan would have a less than significant impact on roadway segment operations.

• Rancho Santa Fe Road between Grand and Linda Vista - The City is implementing flexible LOS standards at this location to reduce impacts for pedestrians and bicycles in the core of San Marcos. Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant.

• Rancho Santa Fe Road between Grandon Avenue and Security Place - The City is implementing flexible LOS standards at this location to reduce impacts for pedestrians and bicycles in the core of San Marcos. Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant.

Figure 3.16-10

City of San Marcos

Proposed Mobility Improvements

Figure 3.16-11

City of San Marcos

Cumulative with Project ADT and LOS

GRAND

AV

W SAN

MARCO

S BL

E MISSIO

N RD

BARHAM

DR

MULBERRY DR

BORD

EN RD

RANCHO SANTA FE RD

BORD

EN RD

SAN ELIJO RD

N TWIN OAKS VALLEY RD

W M

ISSION

RD

OLIVE ST

VIA VERA CRUZ

RANCHEROS DR

WOODWARD ST

BENNETT AV

WOODLAND PY

N LAS POSAS RD

LIND

A VISTA DR

ROCK SPRIN

GS RD

DISCO

VERY ST

BUEN

A C R EE K RD

S TWIN OAKS VALLEY RD

CRAVEN RD

S PACIFIC ST

KNOB HILL RD

LA M

OREE RD

MELRO

SE DR

NORDAHL RD

LOS VALLECITO

S BL

S SANTA FE AV

SMILAX RD

S BENT AV

RICHM

AR AV

LA MIRAD

A DR

LAS POSAS RD

KNOLL RD

LAKE RIDGE DR

MO

NTIEL RD

RICHLAND RD

DESCAN

SO AV

CORONADO HILLS DR

OLEAN

DER AV

ROSE RANCH RD

E LA CIENEGA RD

CENTER DR

QUESTHAVEN RD

ELFIN FO

REST EAST

VIRGINIA PL

SECURITY PL

MISSIO

N RD

SAN ELIJO RD

BUENA CREEK RD

9,0

00

9,0

00

9,0

50

9,0

50

1 1 , 3 4 01 1 , 3 4 0

41,1

10

41,1

10

37, 6

20

37, 6

20

41, 8

10

41, 8

10

39,53039,530

26,50026,500

27,74027,740

36,3

50

36,3

50

33,9

90

33,9

90

12,550

12,550

25,5

20

25, 5

20

1 7 , 6 3 01 7 , 6 3 0

1 7 , 4 1 01 7 , 4 1 0

2 9 , 0 7 02 9 , 0 7 0

27, 3

00

27, 3

00

2 6 , 6 5 0

2 6 , 6 5 0

40,840

40,840

3 0 , 9 7 0

3 0 , 9 7 0

36,8

90

36,8

90

2 6 , 9 8 02 6 , 9 8 0

17,7

30

17,7

30

14,200

14,200

3 1 , 3 0 03 1 , 3 0 037,9

60

37,9

60

47,9

40

47,9

40

1 9 , 1 8 01 9 , 1 8 0

1 3, 99 0

1 3, 99 0

· | }þ 78

§̈¦ 15

CU

MU

LATIV

E W

ITH P

RO

JEC

T RO

AD

WA

Y S

EG

ME

NT A

DT

AN

D LE

VE

L OF S

ER

VIC

E (LO

S)

FIGU

RE

5

LEGEN

D

N

NO

T TO S

CA

LE

Level of ServiceA - BC

#DF EAverage D

aily Traffic

Sphere of Influence

#

N:\Projects\O

C_Projects\O

C09-0139\Fig5_cum

uWP

Roadw

aySegm

entADTandLO

S.m

xd



• Twin Oaks Valley Road north of Windy Way - The City is implementing flexible LOS standards at this location to reduce impacts for pedestrians and bicycles in the core of San Marcos. Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant.

Table 3.16-8 Proposed General Plan Daily Roadway Volumes and Levels of Service

Existing Conditions Proposed General Plan

Expected Capacity

Roadway Segment Lanes Acceptable

Capacity ADT LOS Acceptable

Capacity ADT LOS

Santa Fe Avenue

West of Smilax Road1 4 35,000 29,110 C 35,000 27,310 C

West of Rancho Santa Fe Road 4 35,000 13,990 A 35,000 13,990 A

Rancho Santa Fe Road

between Mission Road and Capalina Road

6 55,000 12,550 A 55,000 12,550 A

between Grand Avenue and Linda Vista Drive

4 35,000 30,900 D 35,000 36,890 E

between Grandon Avenue and Security Place

4 35,000 28,970 C 35,000 37,960 E

South of San Marcos Boulevard

6 35,000 37,340 C 55,000 40,840 C

between Melrose Drive and San Elijo Road

6 55,000 26,650 C 55,000 26,650 C

San Elijo Road

East of Rancho Santa Fe Road 4 35,000 16,190 B 35,000 26,980 C

Las Posas Road

North of Borden Road1 4 35,000 8,410 A 35,000 9,000 A

North of Descanso Avenue 6 55,000 39,510 C 55,000 41,110 C

North of Linda Vista Drive 4 35,000 16,250 B 35,000 9,050 A

Twin Valley Oaks Road

North of Windy Way2 4 35,000 33,050 D 35,000 36,350 E

North of Richmar Avenue 6 55,000 31,390 B 55,000 33,990 B

between San Marcos Boulevard and SR-78 WB Ramp

6 55,000 42,620 C 55,000 37,620 C

North of Barham Drive 8 64,200 41,010 C 64,200 41,810 C

South of South Village Drive 4 35,000 21,520 C 35,000 25,520 C

Woodland Parkway

South of El Norte Parkway 4 35,000 12,100 A 35,000 14,200 A

North of Mission Road 4 35,000 18,430 B 35,000 17,730 B

Borden Road East of Vineyard Road1 4 35,000 10,240 A 35,000 11,340 A

Mission Road

East of Las Posas Road 4 35,000 17,410 B 35,000 17,410 B

West of Aberdeen Avenue 4 35,000 19,180 B 35,000 19,180 B

between Knoll Road and Fitzpatrick Road

4 35,000 17,230 B 35,000 17,630 B

East of Mulberry Drive 6 55,000 23,770 A 55,000 29,070 B

San Marcos Boulevard

West of Rancho Santa Fe Road 6 55,000 32,770 B 55,000 30,970 B

East of Rancho Santa Fe Road 6 55,000 53,740 D 55,000 47,940 C

between Bent Avenue and Grand Avenue 4 6 55,000 40,220 C 42,500 39,530 E

Discovery Street

West of Twin Valley Oaks Road1

6 55,000 29,410 B 55,000 31,310 B



Table 3.16-8 Proposed General Plan Daily Roadway Volumes and Levels of Service

Existing Conditions Proposed General Plan

Expected Capacity

Roadway Segment Lanes Acceptable

Capacity ADT LOS Acceptable

Capacity ADT LOS

Barham Drive West of La Moree Road 6 55,000 31,610 B 55,000 26,510 B

East of Twin Valley Oaks Road1

6 55,000 27,540 B 55,000 27,740 B

Note: Italics indicate protected intersection where flexible LOS are being applied. 1 Roadway segment would be analyzed in future scenario as a two lane roadway within a right of way consistent with the County of

San Diego’s General Plan. 2 The Level of Service of the roadway segment is analyzed using the criteria of Major Arterial (4 lanes).

Congestion Management Program (CMP) Level of Service

CMP standards in the SANDAG region allow for an acceptable LOS E on their facilities; consistent with the thresholds identified in Table 3.16-6 within the City. Currently the planning area has three designated CMP facilities: SR-78, San Marcos Boulevard, and Rancho Santa Fe Road.

The Mobility Element of the proposed General Plan includes policies to reduce traffic and congestion. Policies that utilize technology and intelligent transportation systems to stabilize street system flow and efficiency as an alternative to roadway widening, and establish an intra-city shuttle system that connects the central development nodes of the City would be especially critical in the management of congestion throughout the planning area. The General Plan also includes goals and policies in support of the CMP related to TDM measures and other trip reduction standards. In addition, flexible LOS standards are proposed to manage demand and meet City service standards.

In addition to proposed improvements to the circulation network discussed above, improvements to manage congestion include eight bridge/overcrossing/undercrossings, seven pedestrian bridges, and two SPRINTER grade separations. See Figure 3.16-9.

Implementation of these measures are generally consistent with CMP requirements. Additionally, CMP roadways within the City (notably San Marcos Boulevard and Rancho Santa Fe Road) will operate at LOS E or better, consistent with CMP requirements. Given the General Plan’s consistency with CMP requirements, the impact is considered less than significant.

Air Traffic Patterns

The McClellan-Palomar Airport Sphere of Influence Review Area 2 includes a substantial portion of the planning area. The ALUCP requires limitation of structure height within Review Area 1 and 2; however, structures allowed under the proposed General Plan would not be permitted to reach heights that could interfere or be inconsistent with the ALUCP. Implementation of the proposed General Plan would result in no impact to air traffic patterns.



Design Hazards

Traffic generated by new development allowed under the proposed General Plan would not increase hazards due to design features or incompatible uses. No new major roadways are planned within the planning area; those roadways that are proposed for expansion or alteration would be subject to existing City design standards for roadways. Improvements to the existing roadway system, as identified by the proposed General Plan include grade crossings and enhancements for both the freeway and railroad crossing areas. See Figure 3.16-9. The proposed General Plan includes policies and a land use plan designed to minimize conflicts between incompatible uses. Additional policies indicate the City will develop and update a set of roadway standards that will ensure the safe and efficient movement for all modes of travel.

With adherence to the policies and improvements of the proposed General Plan, and existing City of San Marcos design standards, program-level design hazard impacts would be less than-significant.

Emergency Access

The intersection LOS impacts summarized in Table 3.16-7 will generate traffic congestion at intersections that will also have the potential to impeded emergency access.

Policies in the proposed General Plan include a variety of actions aimed at ensuring emergency response readiness. The Safety Element in particular contains policies specifically written to address impacts related to emergency preparedness.

With adherence to current state and federal regulations, and the implementation of the proposed General Plan policies, and the City’s existing Emergency Management System and Hazard Mitigation Plan, program-level impacts to emergency access would be less than significant.

Public Transit, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Facilities

Planned development capacity in the San Marcos planning area under the proposed General Plan would occur primarily through infill and redevelopment activities in the approved specific plan areas and the Focus Areas identified in Appendix D. Implementation of the proposed General Plan would increase the density and mix of uses, subsequently increasing sidewalks and other pedestrian infrastructure available throughout the planning area. The San Marcos Mobility Element provides a comprehensive system of bicycle lanes, trails, and pathways to enhance connectivity within the planning area. The Mobility Element also provides a series of policies to enhance both the SPRINTER and bus transit systems. Additionally, an intra-city shuttle system is planned in the San Marcos Creek and University District areas to further enhance transit mobility. Additionally, the Mobility Element identifies a series of goals and policies to ensure the integrity and service levels of these facilities are maintained.

With adherence to and implementation of the propose General Plan policies, program-level impacts to alternative transportation would be less than significant.



3.16.5 MITIGATION MEASURES

Implementation of the San Marcos General Plan would result in significant impacts related the effectiveness of the circulation system performance. The following mitigation measures are general and programmatic in nature, and would be refined in project-specific CEQA documents. Implementation of the following programmatic mitigation measures, will reduce potential impacts.



TT-1 Consider the following improvements to intersections that have not been identified as protected intersections:

• Rancho Santa Fe Road/Melrose Drive – Add a westbound right turn lane. With this improvement, the intersection would operate at LOS D, an acceptable level.

• Rancho Santa Fe Road/San Elijo Road – Consider a northbound right-turn overlap phase (note – this would prohibit westbound U-turns at the intersection). With the improvement, the intersection would operate at LOS D, an acceptable level.

• Buena Creek Road/Twin Oaks Valley Road – Add a second eastbound left turn lane and an eastbound overlap right-turn phase (note – this would prohibit northbound U-turns at the intersection). With this modification, the intersection would operate at LOS D.

• Borden Road/Twin Oaks Valley Road – Add a second eastbound left-turn lane, add a southbound overlap right-turn phase (note – this would prohibit eastbound U-turns at the intersection), and provide for protected left-turn phasing for the northbound and southbound approaches. With this modification, the intersection would operate at LOS C.

TT-2 Support alternative modes of travel by continuously developing and supporting these modes of travel. This can continually occur by:

• Continued implementation and update of the Bicycle Master Plan and integrating it with a Pedestrian Master Plan;

• Update and maintain City Roadway Standards to consider the public realm of the street and implement complete streets, as appropriate;

• Consider development of a neighborhood electric vehicle (NEV) master plan to encourage use of no emission vehicles on appropriate facilities. Coordinate with SANDAG and the State Legislature to allow NEVs on public roadways with greater than 35 miles per hour posted speed limit;



• Develop innovative funding mechanisms (such as fee districts or Transnet funding) to assist in implementing, operating, and maintaining the proposed shuttle system and bike share facilities within the City;

• Work with developers to integrate bicycle and pedestrian amenities within their development plans.

(Implementation Program M-3.1)


Impacts related to daily and peak hour roadway segment volumes are less than significant based on existing environmental setting and regulations, and the policies of the proposed General Plan. No mitigation is required.

Congestion Management Program (CMP) Level of Service

Impacts related to CMP intersection level of service are less than significant based on existing environmental setting and regulations, and the policies of the proposed General Plan. No mitigation is required.


No impact related to air traffic patterns would occur. No mitigation is required.

Design Hazards

Impacts related to design hazards are less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Emergency Access

Impacts related to emergency access are less than significant. No mitigation is required.


Impacts related to transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities are less than significant. No mitigation is required.



3.16.6 SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION



Mitigation Measures TT-1 and TT-2 are proposed to address the impact on peak hour intersection level of service. Mitigation Measure TT-1 identifies intersections for flexible LOS standards or identifies improvements to each impacted intersection. Mitigation Measure TT-1 also identifies potential improvements to intersections that would reduce impacts to intersection LOS. Mitigation Measure TT-2 supports alternative modes of travel by various methods to generally reduce vehicle trips within the planning area.

Implementation of Mitigation Measures TT-1 and TT-2, in combination with the policies of the proposed General Plan, would reduce program level impacts associated with peak hour intersection level of service to a less than significant level.


Impacts related to daily and peak hour roadway segment volumes are less than significant based on existing environmental and regulatory settings in combination with the policies of the proposed General Plan.

Congestion Management Program (CMP) Segment Level of Service

Impacts related to CMP level of service are less than significant.

Design Hazards

Impacts to design hazards are less than significant.


No impact to air traffic patterns would occur.

Emergency Access

Impacts to emergency access are less than significant.


Impacts to public transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities are less than significant.

3.16 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC

Documents

Transcript of 3.16 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC