TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS MELROSE OCEANSIDE
Transcript of TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS MELROSE OCEANSIDE
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS MELROSE + OCEANSIDE
Oceanside, California July 13, 2017
LLG Ref. 3-14-2406
Prepared by: Under the Supervision of: Narasimha Prasad John Boarman, P. E. Senior Transportation Engineer Principal
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose + Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG) have been retained to assess the traffic impacts associated with the Melrose + Oceanside project (hereby referred to as the proposed “Project”). The Project site is located both east and west of N. Melrose Drive on approximately 37.6 gross developable acres at the intersection of N. Melrose Drive and Oceanside Boulevard/West Bobier Drive at the eastern edge of the City of Oceanside.
The Project proposes to develop the existing vacant property with a mix of residential, office, and restaurant uses. The site is separated into three (3) distinct Planning Areas: PA-1 consists of a maximum of 78 townhomes 10,000 square feet of office and 10,000 square feet of restaurant space; PA-2 consists of a maximum of 37 single family residential units; and PA-3 consists of a maximum of 198 residential units consisting of 83 two-story townhomes and 115 three-story townhomes. Four access driveways are proposed, two right-in/right-out driveways on Oceanside Boulevard to PA-1, one right-in/right-out driveway to PA-2 via N. Melrose Drive, and one full access driveway to PA-3 via Sports Park Way.
Using standard published SANDAG traffic generation rates, the Project is anticipated to generate a net total of 4,059 ADT with 340 total AM peak hour trips and 360 total PM peak hour trips.
Based on City of Oceanside and City of Vista significance criteria, six (6) significant impacts were calculated with the addition of Project traffic. Mitigation measures are proposed in this report at each location. In addition, in order to improve traffic flow, an improvement is recommended at a 7th (Access Driveway/N. Melrose Drive intersection) location where a significant impact was not calculated.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose + Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. i
Appendices ........................................................................................................................................... v
List of Figures ..................................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables ..................................................................................................................................... vii
1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
2.0 Project Description .................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Project Location .................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Project Description .............................................................................................................. 4
3.0 Existing Conditions .................................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Existing Street System ........................................................................................................ 7 3.2 Existing Traffic Volumes .................................................................................................... 8
4.0 Analysis Approach and Methodology .................................................................................... 12 4.1 Study Area ........................................................................................................................ 12 4.2 Analysis Approach ............................................................................................................ 13 4.3 Analysis Scenarios ............................................................................................................ 14 4.4 Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 14
4.4.1 Intersections .......................................................................................................... 14 4.4.2 Street Segments ..................................................................................................... 15 4.4.3 Metered Freeway Ramps ...................................................................................... 17
5.0 Significance Criteria ................................................................................................................ 18 5.1 City of Oceanside .............................................................................................................. 18 5.2 City of Vista ...................................................................................................................... 19
5.2.1 Intersections .......................................................................................................... 19 5.2.2 Street Segments ..................................................................................................... 19
5.3 Direct vs. Cumulative Impacts .......................................................................................... 20
6.0 Analysis of Existing Conditions .............................................................................................. 21 6.1 Peak Hour Intersection Operations ................................................................................... 21 6.2 Daily Street Segment Operations ...................................................................................... 21 6.3 Ramp Meter Operations .................................................................................................... 21
7.0 Trip Generation/Distribution/Assignment ............................................................................ 26 7.1 Project Trip Generation ..................................................................................................... 26
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose + Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
iii
7.2 Trip Distribution/Assignment ........................................................................................... 26
8.0 Analysis of Existing + Project Conditions ............................................................................. 31 8.1 Peak Hour Intersection Operations ................................................................................... 31 8.2 Daily Street Segment Operations ...................................................................................... 31 8.3 Ramp Meter Operations .................................................................................................... 36 8.4 Peak Hour Arterial Analysis ............................................................................................. 37
9.0 Near-Term Cumulative Projects ............................................................................................ 38
10.0 Analysis of Near-Term Scenarios ........................................................................................... 42 10.1 Existing + Near-Term Cumulative Projects ...................................................................... 42
10.1.1 Intersection Analysis ............................................................................................. 42 10.1.2 Segment Operations .............................................................................................. 42 10.1.3 Ramp Meter Operations ........................................................................................ 42
10.2 Existing + Near-Term Cumulative Projects + Project ...................................................... 42 10.2.1 Intersection Analysis ............................................................................................. 42 10.2.2 Segment Operations .............................................................................................. 43 10.2.3 Ramp Meter Operations ........................................................................................ 48 10.2.4 Peak Hour Arterial Analysis ................................................................................. 49
11.0 Buildout (Year 2030) Conditions ............................................................................................ 50 11.1 Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 Network Conditions .................................................... 50 11.2 Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 Traffic Volumes .......................................................... 50 11.3 Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 Without Project ........................................................... 51
11.3.1 Intersection Analysis ............................................................................................. 51 11.3.2 Segment Operations .............................................................................................. 51
11.4 Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 With Project ................................................................ 51 11.4.1 Intersection Analysis ............................................................................................. 51 11.4.2 Segment Operations .............................................................................................. 52
11.5 Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 Network Conditions .................................................... 52 11.6 Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 Traffic Volumes .......................................................... 58 11.7 Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 Without Project ........................................................... 58
11.7.1 Intersection Analysis ............................................................................................. 58 11.7.2 Segment Operations .............................................................................................. 58
11.8 Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 With Project ................................................................ 59 11.8.1 Intersection Analysis ............................................................................................. 59 11.8.2 Segment Operations .............................................................................................. 59
11.9 Queuing Analysis .............................................................................................................. 65 11.10 Weaving Analysis ......................................................................................................... 65 11.11 Peak Hour Arterial Analysis ......................................................................................... 66
12.0 Access Assessment .................................................................................................................... 73
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose + Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
iv
12.1 Planning Area 1................................................................................................................. 73 12.2 Planning Area 2................................................................................................................. 74 12.3 Planning Area 3................................................................................................................. 75 12.4 Total Project ...................................................................................................................... 76
13.0 Project Improvement Phasing ................................................................................................ 77 13.1 Frontage Improvements .................................................................................................... 77 13.2 Off-Site Improvements ..................................................................................................... 78
14.0 Significance of Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................................................................ 79 14.1 Significance of Impacts..................................................................................................... 79
14.1.1 Near-Term Direct Impacts .................................................................................... 79 14.1.2 Buildout (Year 2030) Direct Impact ..................................................................... 79
14.2 Mitigation Measures ......................................................................................................... 79 14.2.1 Near-Term Direct Mitigation Measures ................................................................ 79 14.2.2 Buildout (Year 2030) Direct Mitigation Measure ................................................ 80
14.3 Project Conditions of Approval (City of Oceanside) ........................................................ 81
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose + Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
v
APPENDICES APPENDIX
A. Existing Intersection Peak Hour Counts, Segment Counts, and Signal Timing Plans
B. Existing Intersection Analysis Worksheets
C. Existing + Project Intersection Analysis Worksheets
D. Near-Term Cumulative Projects Assignment
E. Existing + Near-Term Cumulative Projects Intersection Analysis Worksheets
F. Existing + Near-Term Cumulative Projects + Project Intersection Analysis Worksheets
G. Year 2030 Without N. Melrose Drive and With N. Melrose Drive ADT Volumes, Oceanside Circulation Element Roadway Conditions and Forecasted Volumes
H. Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 Intersection Analysis Worksheets
I. Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 Intersection Analysis Worksheets
J. Weaving Analysis Worksheets and Queuing Analysis Worksheets
K. Mitigated Intersection Analysis Worksheets and Fair Share Calculations
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose + Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
vi
LIST OF FIGURES SECTION—FIGURE # FOLLOWING PAGE
Figure 1–1 Vicinity Map ................................................................................................................... 2
Figure 1–2 Project Area Map ............................................................................................................ 3
Figure 2–1 Conceptual Site Plan ....................................................................................................... 6
Figure 3–1 Existing Conditions Diagram ........................................................................................ 10
Figure 3–2 Existing Traffic Volumes .............................................................................................. 11
Figure 7–1 Project Traffic Distribution ........................................................................................... 28
Figure 7–2 Project Traffic Volumes ................................................................................................ 29
Figure 7–3 Existing + Project Traffic Volumes .............................................................................. 30
Figure 9–1 Near-Term Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes ........................................................ 39
Figure 9–2 Existing + Near-Term Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes ...................................... 40
Figure 9–3 Existing + Near-Term Cumulative Projects + Project Traffic Volumes ...................... 41
Figure 11–1 Buildout (Year 2030) Conditions Diagram – Alternative 1 Conditions (No N. Melrose Drive Connection) ....................................................................................................... 67
Figure 11–2 Buildout (Year 2030) Without Project Traffic Volumes - Alternate 1 Conditions (No N. Melrose Drive Connection)................................................................................................... 68
Figure 11–3 Buildout (Year 2030) With Project Traffic Volumes - Alternate 1 Conditions (No N. Melrose Drive Connection) ....................................................................................................... 69
Figure 11–4 Buildout (Year 2030) Conditions Diagram – Alternative 2 Conditions (With N. Melrose Drive Connection) ....................................................................................................... 70
Figure 11–5 Buildout (Year 2030) Without Project Traffic Volumes - Alternate 2 Conditions (With N. Melrose Drive Connection) ........................................................................................ 71
Figure 11–6 Buildout (Year 2030) With Project Traffic Volumes - Alternate 2 Conditions (With N. Melrose Drive Connection)................................................................................................... 72
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose + Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
vii
LIST OF TABLES SECTION—TABLE # PAGE
Table 3–1 Existing Traffic Volumes ..................................................................................................... 8
Table 4–1 Level of Service Thresholds For Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections ................... 15
Table 4–2 City Of Oceanside Circulation Element Roadway Classifications .................................... 16
Table 4–3 City Of Vista Circulation Element Roadway Classifications ............................................ 17
Table 5–1 Traffic Impact Significant Thresholds ............................................................................... 18
Table 6–1 Existing Intersection Operations ........................................................................................ 22
Table 6–2 Existing Street Segment Operations .................................................................................. 24
Table 6–3 Existing Ramp Meter Operations ...................................................................................... 25
Table 7–1 Project Trip Generation ..................................................................................................... 27
Table 8–1 Existing + Project Intersection Operations ........................................................................ 32
Table 8–2 Existing + Project Street Segment Operations ................................................................... 34
Table 8–3 Existing + Project Ramp Meter Operations ....................................................................... 36
Table 8–4 Existing + Project Peak Hour Segment Operations ........................................................... 37
Table 9–1 Cumulative Projects Summary .......................................................................................... 38
Table 10–1 Near-Term Intersection Operations ................................................................................. 44
Table 10–2 Near-Term Street Segment Operations ............................................................................ 46
Table 10–3 Near-Term Ramp Meter Operations ................................................................................ 48
Table 10–4 Near-Term + Project Peak Hour Segment Operations ..................................................... 49
Table 11–1 Buildout Alternate 1 Intersection Operations .................................................................. 53
Table 11–2 Buildout Alternate 1 Street Segment Operations ............................................................. 56
Table 11–3 Buildout Alternate 2 Intersection Operations ................................................................. 60
Table 11–4 Buildout Alternate 2 Street Segment Operations ............................................................. 63
Table 11–5 Queuing analysis Year 2030 ............................................................................................ 65
Table 11–6 Weaving Analysis – N. Melrose Drive at PA-2 Driveway .............................................. 66
Table 11–7 Year 2030 (Alternate 1) + Project Peak Hour Segment Operations ................................ 66
Table 14–1 Impact / Mitigation Measures Summary ......................................................................... 82
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
1
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS MELROSE + OCEANSIDE
Oceanside, California July 13, 2017
1.0 INTRODUCTION The following traffic study has been prepared to determine and evaluate the traffic impacts on the local circulation system due to the development of the Melrose + Oceanside multi-family residential project with office and restaurant space (proposed “Project”) in the City of Oceanside. The purpose of this study is to assess the potential impacts to the local circulation system as a result of the Project.
Included in this traffic study are the following:
Project Description Existing Conditions Study Area, Analysis Approach, & Methodology Significance Criteria Analysis of Existing Conditions Trip Generation, Distribution and Assignment Analysis of Existing + Project Conditions Near-Term Cumulative Projects Conditions Analysis of Near-Term Scenarios Buildout (Year 2030) Conditions Access Assessment Project Development Phasing Significance of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Figure 1–1 shows the vicinity map. Figure 1–2 shows a more detailed Project area map.
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!!
!!
!!!
!
!
!!
!
!!
! ! !
!!
!!
!!
!! !
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
! ! ! ! ! ! !
!
!!
!!
!!
!
!!
!!
! ! ! !
!!
!
!
!! !
!
!!!
!!
! !
!!
! !
!!
!!
!!
! ! ! !
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!!
!!
!!
!
!!
!
! ! ! ! ! ! !
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
! ! !
!
! !
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!!
!!
!
!!
!!
!
! ! ! !!
!!
!!!!!!
!!
!
! !
! !
!
!
!
! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
! !
!
!!
!!
!!
!
!!
!
!!
!
! !
!!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!!!!!
!!
!!
!
!!!!
!!
!
! !
!!
!!
!
!
! !
!
!
! !
!!
!
!
! !
!! ! ! !
!!
!!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!!
!!
!
! !
!
!
!! !
!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
! !!
!!
!
!
!
!
Proj
ect A
rea
Map
Melrose + Oceanside
Figu
re 1
-2N:
\2406
\Fig
ures
\Sep
t 201
6Da
te: 0
9/16/1
6
[
}78
Proj
ect
Site
}76
Osbo
rne S
t
Oceansi
deBl
MesaDr
College Bl
N. Melrose Dr
Olive
Ave
Santa Fe Ave
Bobie
r Dr
E. Vista Wy
Vale
Terra
c eDr
Civic Center Dr
VistaVillageDr
N.Ri
ver R
d
Rancho Del O
ro Dr
El Camino Real
Mission
Ave
Frazee
Rd
City
ofOc
eans
ide
City
ofVi
staUninc
orpo
rate
dCo
unty
Mead
owbr
ook
Dr
N.Sa
ntaFe
Ave
Vista
Wy
Hacie
ndaD
r
Sage
wood
Dr
Nrot h
A ve
Temple Heights Dr
W.
N.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
4
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 Project Location The Project is situated on three sites totaling approximately 71.2 gross acres of land located at the intersection of North Melrose Drive and Oceanside Boulevard/West Bobier Drive at the eastern edge of the City of Oceanside. Regional access to the Project area is provided via State Highway 78, located approximately 1.9 miles south of the Plan Area, which provides east-west access between Interstate 5 (I-5) to the west and Interstate 15 (I-15) to the east. Regional access also is afforded by State Highway 76, an east-west oriented facility located approximately 2.3 roadway miles northwest of the Plan Area.
Figure 2-1 depicts the Conceptual Site Plan
2.2 Project Description The proposed Project includes applications for a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Zoning Amendment (ZA) and conditional use permit for mixed use development to establish appropriate land use and zoning designations for proposed residential and open space areas. The underlying land use designations for the site are currently Professional Commercial (PC) and Estate B – Residential. The GPA will maintain the PC designation to support mixed use area in Planning Area 1 while also establishing the following land use designations on site: Medium Density-A- Residential (MDA-R in Planning Area 2, Medium Density- B- Residential (MDB-R) in Planning Area 3, and Open Space (OS) preserved north of Planning Area 2 and 3. The GPA will establish the following land use designations on the site: Medium Density - C - Residential (MDC-R) and Open Space (OS). The existing zoning categories on site are Neighborhood Commercial (CN) and Residential Estate B / Scenic Park Overlay (RE -B- SP). The proposed ZA will designate the property as Planned Development (PD) with a Planned Development Plan (PD Plan) serving as the regulating document for development of the property. The PD Plan established the development regulation for the mixed use area as part of Planning Area 1.
The Project proposes a maximum of 313 units and 20,000 Square Feet (SF) of office space on two distinct parcels of property. The western portion of the PD Plan area is located at the northwestern corner of Oceanside Boulevard and North Melrose Drive. The eastern portion of the PD Plan area is located at the northeastern corner of North Melrose Drive and West Bobier Drive. Sports Park Way, a north-south oriented roadway providing access to the Vista Sports Park, is located near the eastern boundary of the property, while the eastern terminus of Meadowbrook Drive abuts the northwestern boundary of the PD Plan area.
The Melrose Heights PD Plan provides for the coordinated development of a variety of multi-family residential uses within three separate Planning Areas (PAs) on approximately 37.6 gross developable acres across the Project site. The Plan also designates the preservation of approximately 30.4 acres of natural open space comprising the northern-most portion of the site area.
The residential Planning Areas are described as follows:
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
5
Planning Area 1 (PA-1) is comprised of approximately 9.7 gross acres of land located in the southwestern portion of the PD Plan area at the northwest corner of Oceanside Boulevard and North Melrose Drive. Access to PA-1 is provided via two private driveways (right-in/right-out) off of Oceanside Boulevard, one each to the residential and office land uses. PA-1 is planned for the development of a maximum of 78 3-story town home units, 10,000 SF of restaurant space, and 10,000 SF office.
Planning Area 2 (PA-2) is comprised of approximately 8.8 gross acres located in the west-central portion of the PD Plan area situated along the north side of North Melrose Drive. Primary access to PA-2 is provided via a private driveway (right-in/right-out) off North Melrose Drive. Secondary access for PA-2 is provided via an internal drive that connects to the access point on Sports Park Way via Planning Area 3. PA-2 is planned for the development of a maximum of 37 single family dwelling units.
Planning Area 3 (PA-3) is comprised of approximately 19.1 gross acres located in the eastern portion of the PD Plan area along the north side of Oceanside Boulevard/West Bobier Drive. Primary access to PA-3 is provided via a private driveway at Sports Park Way. Secondary access for PA-3 is provided via an internal drive that connecting to North Melrose Drive via Planning Area 2. PA-3 is planned for the development of a maximum of 198 dwelling units consisting of 83 2-story town home units and 115 3-story town home units.
It is anticipated that development of PD Plan area will occur over several years through multiple Project phases. Necessary infrastructure and utilities will be developed accordingly as planned and required in conjunction with specific development proposals within each Planning Area. As part of the infrastructure improvements proposed by the Project, improvements along N. Melrose Drive would be constructed to ultimately construct N. Melrose Drive along the Project frontage to 6-Lane Prime Arterial standards. A more detailed discussion of the widening of N. Melrose Drive along the Project frontage to six lanes is provided in the mitigation section of this report.
A “trigger” analysis identifying the maximum number of units which could be built prior to the implementation of mitigation measures for any traffic-related significant impact during the phased construction of the Project is also provided in the mitigation section of this report.
As stated, access is proposed via Oceanside Boulevard, N. Melrose Drive and Sports Park Way. A more detailed discussion on Project access is included in Section 12.0 of this report.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
7
3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3.1 Existing Street System The following provides a brief description of the street system in the Project area. Figure 3–1 illustrates existing conditions in terms of traffic lanes and intersection controls.
College Boulevard is classified on the City of Oceanside Circulation Element 2030 Master Transportation Roadway Plan as a 4-Lane Major Arterial from SR-76 to Old Grove Road and a 6-Lane Major Arterial between Old Grove Road and SR-78. It is currently built as a four-lane divided north/south roadway between SR-76 and SR-78. The posted speed limit ranges between 40 and 45mph. Class II bicycle lanes are provided and on-street parking is generally prohibited.
State Route 76 (SR-76) is identified on the City of Oceanside Circulation Element 2030 Master Transportation Roadway Plan as “Expressway 76”. It is generally an east-west facility and is currently built as a four-lane divided expressway within the Project study area. The posted speed limit is 55 mph. Class II bicycle lanes are provided on both sides of the roadway and on-street parking is prohibited.
Oceanside Boulevard is classified on the City of Oceanside Circulation Element 2030 Master Transportation Roadway Plan as a 4-Lane Major Arterial between College Boulevard and N. Melrose Drive. Oceanside Boulevard is currently built as a four-lane divided east-west roadway between College Boulevard and N. Melrose Drive. The posted speed limit is 50 mph. Class II bicycle lanes are provided and on-street parking is prohibited.
Bobier Drive is classified on the City of Oceanside Circulation Element 2030 Master Transportation Roadway Plan as a 4-Lane Major Arterial between N. Melrose Drive and the City of Vista city limits. Within the City of Vista, Bobier Drive is classified as a 4-Lane Major Arterial. Bobier Drive is currently built as a four-lane undivided roadway providing a TWLTL median between N. Melrose Drive and North Santa Fe Avenue. The posted speed limit is 40 mph. Class II bicycle lanes are provided and on-street parking is generally prohibited.
North Santa Fe Avenue is classified on the City of Oceanside Circulation Element 2030 Master Transportation Roadway Plan as a 4-Lane Major Arterial between SR-76 and N. Melrose Drive. Within the City of Vista jurisdiction, North Santa Fe Avenue is classified as a 4-Lane Major on the City of Vista Circulation Element. North Santa Fe Avenue is currently built as a four-lane divided roadway between SR-76 and N. Melrose Drive. Within the City of Vista, North Santa Fe Avenue is currently constructed as a four-lane undivided roadway providing a TWLTL median before transitioning to a two-lane undivided roadway with intermittent TWLTL medians. South of Bobier Drive, Santa Fe Avenue widens to a four-lane divided roadway. The posted speed limit ranges between 35 and 45 mph. Class II bicycle lanes are provided and on-street parking is generally prohibited.
N. Melrose Drive is classified on the City of Oceanside Circulation Element 2030 Master Transportation Roadway Plan as a 6-Lane Major Arterial between SR-76 and North Santa Fe
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
8
Avenue and a Prime Arterial from Santa Fe Avenue to Oceanside Boulevard. Within the City of Vista jurisdiction, N. Melrose Drive is classified as a 6-Lane Urban Major on the City of Vista Circulation Element. N. Melrose Drive is currently built as a two-lane undivided roadway between North Santa Fe Avenue and Sagewood Drive, and a three-lane divided (2-southbound, 1 northbound travel lanes) roadway between Sagewood Drive and Meadowbrook Drive before transitioning to a two-lane divided roadway between Meadowbrook Drive and Oceanside Boulevard. Although this two-lane portion of N. Melrose Drive provides an 18’ raised median constructed in anticipation of the full widening of this segment to 6-Lane Prime Arterial standards, for purposes of being conservative, it was analyzed with a capacity of 10,000 ADT. South of Oceanside Boulevard, N. Melrose Drive is currently constructed as a four-lane undivided roadway providing a Two-Way Left-Turn Lane (TWLTL) median. The posted speed limit ranges between 40 and 45 mph. Class II bicycle lanes are provided and on-street parking is generally prohibited.
W. Vista Way is classified on the City of Vista Circulation Element as a 6-Lane Prime Arterial between N. Melrose Drive and Vista Village Drive and is currently built as a six-lane divided roadway. Between N. Melrose Drive and the SR-78 westbound on-ramp it narrows to four lanes. The posted speed limit is 40 mph. Bicycle lanes are not provided and on-street parking is prohibited.
3.2 Existing Traffic Volumes Existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volume counts at key area intersections and 24-hour street segment counts were completed during the third week of November 2014 while schools were in session.
Table 3–1 shows the existing street segment Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes in the Project area. Figure 3–2 shows the existing AM/PM peak hour turning movements and ADT volumes. Appendix A contains the existing intersection and segment manual count sheets.
TABLE 3–1 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Street Segment ADT a
SR-76
Town Center Drive to College Boulevard 43,500
College Boulevard to N. Santa Fe Avenue 50,000
N. Santa Fe Avenue to Guajome Lake Road 47,100
CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
9
TABLE 3–1 (CONTINUED) EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Street Segment ADT a a
Oceanside Boulevard Avenida Del Oro to College Boulevard 30,600
College Boulevard to Temple Heights Drive 27,500
Temple Heights Drive to Catalina Circle 20,800
Catalina Circle to PA-1 Access 19,700
PA-1 Access to N. Melrose Drive 20,600
N. Melrose Drive to Sports Park Way 21,100 aa
Bobier Drive Sports Park Way to N. Santa Fe Avenue 19,400
aa N. Santa Fe Avenue
SR-76 to Mesa Drive 24,800
Mesa Drive to N. Melrose Drive 26,600
N. Melrose Drive to Osborne Street 19,100 aa
Sports Park Way PA-3 Access to Bobier Drive 1,300
aa N. Melrose Drive
N. Santa Fe Avenue to Sagewood Drive 17,100
Sagewood Drive to Meadowbrook Drive 18,500
Meadowbrook Drive to Oceanside Boulevard 21,100
Oceanside Boulevard to North Avenue 28,000
North Avenue to Olive Avenue 28,300
Olive Avenue to W. Vista Way 35,800
W. Vista Way to SR-78 EB Off-Ramp 36,900 SR-78 EB Off-Ramp to Hacienda Drive 33,600
aa W. Vista Way
SR-78 WB On-Ramp to N. Melrose Drive 19,900
N. Melrose Drive to Vista Village Drive 19,600
Footnotes: a. Average Daily Traffic Volume counts commissioned by LLG in November 2014.
Existing Conditions Diagram
Figure 3-1
Melrose + Oceanside
N:\2406\Figures\JSept 2016Date: 09/16/16
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
1
9
5
4
3
2
7
8
6
16
1110
13
12
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Dwy
Mesa
Dr
Colle
ge B
l
Via M
anos
Catal
ina C
ir
N. M
elros
e Dr
Temp
le Ht
s Bl
Spor
ts Pa
rk W
y
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
SR-76
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr North Ave
W. Vista Wy
Oceanside Bl
Sagewood DrN. Santa Fe Ave
Meadowbrook Dr
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
N. Santa Fe Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside BlOceanside Bl
W. Vista Wy
9
5 6 7 8
4321
13 14 15 16
121110
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Hacienda Dr
SR-7
8 WB
On-R
amp
N. Santa Fe Ave
Sagewood Dr
Mesa
Dr
Meadowbrook DrTempleHeightsDr
North Ave
Olive AveOceanside Bl
College Bl
VistaVillage Dr
Catalina Cir
Dwy A
Dwy B
ProjectSite
W. Vista Wy
N.Me
lrose
Dr
N.Me
lrose
Dr
}78
1415}78
14
15
W. Vista Wy
RTOL RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
Bobier Dr
Oceansi
de Bl
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOLRTOL
}76
SR-76
Colle
ge B
l
N. MelroseDr
N. M
elros
e Dr
4D
4D
4U
2U
4U
2U
4D
4D
6D
4D
2U
2U
2U3D
4D
2U4U
4D
2U
2U
4U
2U
2U 2U
4U
4U2U
4U 6D4U
45MPH
45MPH
35MPH
45 MPH
45 MPH
50MPH
55MPH
45MPH
25MPH
25MPH
45MPH
MPH
25MPH
45MPH
40MPH
35MPH
40MPH
4D
40MPH
Intersection Control
Posted Speed LimitXXTwo-Way Left Turn Lane
No Street Parking
D / U Divided / Undivided Roadway# Number of Travel Lanes
Turn Lane Configurations
Bike Lane with Street ParkingBike Lane / No Street Parking
Right Turn OverlapRTOL
6D
4D
4D
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
1,300
19,400
47,100
35,8
00
30,600
19,700
21,100
19,600
27,50
0
26,600
18,5
00
43,500
19,100
17,1
00
50,000
28,300
19,900
24,800
20,60020,800
28,000
33,600
36,900
21,100
1
9
5
4
3
2
7
8
6
16
1110
13
12
Existing Traffic VolumesMelrose + Oceanside
Figure 3-2N:\2406\Figures\Sept 2016Date: 09/16/16
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
Ï
Dwy
Mesa
Dr
Colle
ge B
l
Via
Mano
s
Catal
ina C
ir
N. M
elros
e Dr
Temp
le Ht
s Bl
Spor
ts Pa
rk W
y
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. S
anta
Fe A
veSR-76
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr North Ave
W. Vista Wy
Oceanside Bl
Sagewood DrN. Santa Fe Ave
Meadowbrook Dr
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
N. Santa Fe Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside BlOceanside Bl
W. Vista Wy
0 / 3
1 / 1
1 / 2
2 / 2
2 / 5
2 / 8
2 / 9
3 / 2
4 / 3
5 / 1
5 / 2
8 / 2
8 / 11
11 / 5
20 / 5
22 / 3
31 / 9
5 / 15
5 / 27
7 / 22
12 / 5
9 / 61
11 / 44
11 / 43
12 / 13
12 / 1
8
13 / 7
2
16 / 1
6
16 / 4917
/ 12
19 / 16
23 / 74
27 / 46
29 / 9
8
39 / 5
5 39 / 6741
/ 25
43 / 64
44 / 2
0
45 / 21
51 / 3
0
51 / 6
761
/ 35
70 / 45
76 / 65
86 / 6
1
87 / 6
6
91 / 6
5
93 / 75
99 / 82
97 / 39
95 / 7
9
85 / 1
12
65 / 113
159 /
96
160 /
92
162 / 73
178 /
81
205 /
83
99 / 1
47
66 / 10874
/ 151
77 / 1
35
144 /
94
95 / 155
400 /
211
110 / 144
145 / 115
179 / 110
180 / 116
208 / 168
194 /
160
190 /
229
183 / 318
181 /
247
212 / 207
215 / 147
167 / 18516
6 / 19
9
163 /
212
153 / 153
151 / 145149 / 227
148 / 130
217 /
201
144 / 148140 / 330
138 /
226
138 /
109
137 /
266
134 / 103
133 / 340
129 /
255
121 /
179
121 / 176
120 /
169
222 / 12510
4 / 13
610
3 / 13
8
102 / 100
232 /
371
235 / 207
237 /
275
241 / 330
248 / 158
249 /
391
252 /
273
254 / 461
256 / 214
282 /
362
324 / 352
328 /
563
331 / 488
346 / 312
383 / 442
399 / 917
400 / 521
402 / 288
414 /
461
421 /
499
425 /
753
428 / 300
455 /
959
464 / 70446
7 / 66
7474 / 631
504 / 789
506 /
628
510 / 206
514 /
741
535 / 469 559 /
403
583 / 452
587 / 428
629 / 694
632 /
694
657 / 633
659 /
941
665 / 528
667 / 646679 / 483
719 / 569
748 / 966
769 / 880797 / 388
800 /
534
857 /
735
871 /
594
890 / 677
912 /
609
914 /
630
951 / 929
1,129 / 642
1,147
/ 877
1,367
/ 962
1,422 / 805
1,685 / 985
616 / 1,086
646 /
1,03
772
8 / 1,
452
736 / 1,612
803 / 1,382
808 /
1,41
6
835 /
1,41
9
1,019
/ 1,14
6
5 / 2 3 / 2
5 / 1
9
5 6 7 8
4321
13 14 15 16
121110
Hacienda Dr
SR-7
8 WB
On-R
amp
N. Santa Fe Ave
Sagewood Dr
Mesa
Dr
Meadowbrook DrTemple Heights Dr
North Ave
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
College Bl
Vista Village Dr
Catalina Cir
Dwy A
Dwy B
ProjectSite
W. Vista Wy
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
}78 [14
15}7814
15
W. Vista Wy N. MelroseDr
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
AM / PM IntersectionPeak Hour Volumes
AM / PM
Study Intersections!!#
Average DailyTraffic VolumesX,XXX
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Bobier Dr
Oceansi
de Bl
Colle
ge B
lSR-76
}76
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!Wy
Sports Park
OsborneSt
N. M
elros
e Dr
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
12
4.0 ANALYSIS APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY 4.1 Study Area The study area was based on the criteria identified in the San Diego Traffic Engineering Council (SANTEC)/Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies in the San Diego Region, March 2, 2000. Based on this criteria, the traffic study must include “all local roadway segments, intersections, and mainline freeway locations where the Project will add 50 or more peak hour trips in either direction or freeway ramp meter locations where the Project will add 20 or more peak hour trips in either direction to the existing traffic conditions.
Based on the above criteria, the Project study area includes the following signalized locations:
Intersections 1. State Route 76 (SR-76) / N. Santa Fe Avenue 2. Santa Fe Avenue / Mesa Drive 3. N. Melrose Drive / Santa Fe Avenue 4. N. Melrose Drive / Sagewood Drive 5. N. Melrose Drive / Meadowbrook Drive 6. Oceanside Boulevard / College Boulevard 7. Oceanside Boulevard / Temple Heights Drive 8. Oceanside Boulevard / Catalina Circle 9. Oceanside Boulevard / N. Melrose Drive 10. Bobier Drive / Sports Park Way 11. Bobier Drive / Santa Fe Avenue 12. N. Melrose Drive / North Avenue 13. N. Melrose Drive / Olive Avenue 14. W. Vista Way / SR-78 WB On-Ramp 15. W. Vista Way / N. Melrose Drive 16. State Route 76 (SR-76) / College Boulevard 17. State Route 76 (SR-76) / N. Melrose Drive (Year 2030 only)
Street Segments State Route 76 (SR-76)
Town Center Drive to College Boulevard College Boulevard to N. Santa Fe Avenue N. Santa Fe Avenue to Guajome Lake Road
Oceanside Boulevard Avenida Del Oro to College Boulevard College Boulevard to Temple Heights Drive Temple Heights Drive to Catalina Circle Catalina Circle to Planning Area 1 Access
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
13
Planning Area 1 Access to N. Melrose Drive N. Melrose Drive to Sports Park Way
Bobier Drive Sports Park Way to N. Santa Fe Avenue
N. Santa Fe Avenue SR-76 to Mesa Drive Mesa Drive to N. Melrose Drive N. Melrose Drive to Osborne Street
Sports Park Way Planning Area 3 Access to Bobier Drive
N. Melrose Drive SR-76 to N. Santa Fe Avenue (Year 2030 Only) N. Santa Fe Avenue to Sagewood Drive Sagewood Drive to Meadowbrook Drive Meadowbrook Drive to Oceanside Boulevard Oceanside Boulevard to North Avenue North Avenue to Olive Avenue Olive Avenue to W. Vista Way W. Vista Way to SR-78 EB Off-Ramp SR-78 EB Off-Ramp to Hacienda Drive
W. Vista Way SR-78 WB On-Ramp to N. Melrose Drive N. Melrose Drive to Vista Village Drive
Freeway Ramp Meters
State Route 78 SR-78 / W. Vista Way WB On-Ramp (AM peak hour only)
4.2 Analysis Approach The exact phasing of the proposed Project is unknown at this time. Therefore, in order to provide for a worst-case analysis, significant impacts were measured assuming construction of the entire Project all at one time.
Access is proposed via three (3) Project-constructed access points: one (1) to Oceanside Boulevard; one (1) to N. Melrose Drive; and one (1) to Sports Park Way (an internal access between PA-2 and PA-3 is also proposed). Frontage improvements to N. Melrose Drive are proposed as part of the Project (discussed in further detail in Section 13.0 of this report). However, in accordance with City guidelines, the existing and near-term conditions are analyzed against the existing on-the-ground street network.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
14
Under existing and near-term conditions, the addition of Project traffic was analyzed assuming the existing on-the-ground street network. For the Year 2030 conditions, the addition of Project traffic was measured against the Oceanside Circulation Element buildout capacities of the street system. Year 2030 Project traffic volumes are calculated net of currently zoned General Plan land uses.
4.3 Analysis Scenarios The following near-term and long-term analyses are included in this report.
EXISTING & NEAR-TERM SCENARIOS Existing Existing + Project Existing + Near-Term Cumulative Projects Existing + Near-Term Cumulative Projects + Project
BUILDOUT SCENARIOS
Buildout (Year 2030) Buildout (Year 2030) With Project
4.4 Methodology Level of service (LOS) is the term used to denote the different operating conditions which occur on a given roadway segment under various traffic volume loads. It is a qualitative measure used to describe a quantitative analysis taking into account factors such as roadway geometries, signal phasing, speed, travel delay, freedom to maneuver, and safety. Level of service provides an index to the operational qualities of a roadway segment or an intersection. Level of service designations range from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F representing the worst operating conditions. Level of service designation is reported differently for signalized and unsignalized intersections, as well as for roadway segments.
4.4.1 Intersections Signalized intersections were analyzed under AM and PM peak hour conditions. Average vehicle delay was determined utilizing the methodology found in Chapter 16 of the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), with the assistance of the Synchro (version 7) computer software. The delay values (represented in seconds) were qualified with a corresponding intersection Level of Service (LOS).
Signalized intersections were analyzed using City signal timing plans, where available. Timing inputs for intersections where plans were not available were based on field observations. All Caltrans facilities were analyzed using the most recent Caltrans signal timing plans.
Unsignalized intersections were analyzed under AM and PM peak hour conditions. Average vehicle delay and Levels of Service (LOS) was determined based upon the procedures found in Chapter 17
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
15
of the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), with the assistance of the Synchro (version 7) computer software.
Table 4–1 summarizes the LOS and corresponding intersection delay for signalized and unsignalized intersections.
TABLE 4–1 LEVEL OF SERVICE THRESHOLDS FOR SIGNALIZED AND UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
Level of Service
Average Control Delay Per Vehicle in Seconds/Vehicle
Signalized Intersections Unsignalized Intersections
A 0.0 < 10.0 0.0 < 10.0
B 10.1 to 20.0 10.1 to 15.0
C 21.1 to 35.0 15.1 to 25.0
D 35.1 to 55.0 25.1 to 35.0
E 55.1 to 80.0 35.1 to 50.0
F > 80.1 > 50.1
4.4.2 Street Segments Street segments were analyzed based upon the comparison of ADT to the City of Oceanside and the City of Vista Average Daily Vehicle Trips tables. These tables provide segment capacities for different street classifications, based on traffic volumes and roadway characteristics for the respective cities.
The street segments that are located in the City of Oceanside were analyzed based on the capacities listed in Table 4–2 and Table 4–3 summarizes roadway capacities within the City of Vista.
Any proposed development project that affects a street segment that already operates or is projected to operate worse than LOS D, regardless of peak hour analysis, the developer shall propose, prepare, and provide mitigation measure(s) for the City to review. If there are no feasible mitigation measures that would fully mitigate traffic impacts, the developer shall propose, prepare, and provide various mitigation measures, such as Traffic Management Center tools and resources, which may not include physical improvements to the impacted facility. Where various mitigation measures have been prepared, agreed upon by the City, and will be implemented, yet are not sufficient to fully mitigate the traffic impacts, then LOS E during the peak periods will be considered acceptable. A project’s fair share contributions may also be considered by the City for predetermined project improvements (e.g., TMC, adaptive signals) in lieu of prepared and implemented mitigation measures.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
16
TABLE 4–2 CITY OF OCEANSIDE CIRCULATION ELEMENT ROADWAY CLASSIFICATIONS
Class
Lanes
Cross Section a
Level of Service
A B C D E
Expressway 6 102/160 122/200
30,000 42,000 60,000 70,000 80,000
Expressway 4 102/160 122/200
25,000 35,000 50,000 55,000 60,000
Prime Arterial 6 104/124 25,000 35,000 50,000 55,000 60,000
6-Lane Major Arterial 6 104/124* 20,000 28,000 40,000 45,000 50,000
5-Lane Major Arterial b 5 102/122 17,500 24,500 35,000 40,000 45,000
4-Lane Major Arterial 4 80/100 15,000 21,000 30,000 35,000 40,000
Secondary Collector (with 2-way left-turn lane)
4 64/84* 10,000 14,000 20,000 25,000 30,000
Secondary Collector (without 2-way left-turn lane, with left-turn pockets)
4 40/60 9,000 13,000 18,000 22,000 25,000
Collector (commercial fronting, with 2-way left-turn lane) c
2 50/72 5,000 7,000 10,000 13,000 15,000
Collector (residential streets in the CE or industrial fronting)
2 50/72 4,000 5,500 7,500 9,000 10,000
Local Street (residential streets NOT in the CE)
2 40/60 − − 2,200 − −
Footnotes: a. Curb-to-curb width/total right-of-way width, in feet b. Vandegrift Boulevard and El Camino Real are the only Circulation Element roadways designated as a 5-lane Major Arterial. It is not intended
that other roadways be built to 5-lane Major Arterial standards. c. Same capacity applied to one-way, two-lane collector.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
17
TABLE 4–3 CITY OF VISTA CIRCULATION ELEMENT ROADWAY CLASSIFICATIONS
CAPACITY AND LEVELS OF SERVICE
Roadway Classification ADT Level of Service
A B C D E
6-Lane Prime Arterial (divided) <36,000 <42,000 <48,000 <54,000 <60,000
6-Lane Urban Major (undivided) <30,000 <35,000 <40,000 <45,000 <50,000
4-Lane Major Arterial (divided) <24,000 <28,000 <32,000 <36,000 <40,000
4-Lane Collector (undivided) <15,000 <17,500 <20,000 <22,500 <25,000
2-Lane Collector w/ TWLTL a <9,000 <10,500 <12,000 <13,500 <15,000
2-Lane Collector (divided) <5,280 <6,160 <7,040 <7,920 <8,800
2-Lane Semi-Rural b (w/ Continuous left turn lane)
— — — — <7,900
Footnotes:
a. TWLTL = Two-Way Left-Turn Lane (striped center median) b. Semi-Rural Streets – capacities identified are the maximum recommended volumes to maintain this classification. If volumes
exceed this capacity, either a classification modification should be considered or measures should be taken to reduce through traffic.
4.4.3 Metered Freeway Ramps A ramp meter analysis was conducted at the metered ramps in the study area, to which the project will add traffic. The following metered on-ramp is analyzed.
WB W. Vista Way to WB SR-78 BACKGROUND The measure of effectiveness (MOE) for this analysis is delay in minutes. Ramp meter flow rates characteristically vary throughout the peak hour based on the performance of the freeway mainline. As the mainline becomes more congested, the ramp meter rates decline, allowing fewer vehicles onto the freeway in the same time period.
ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY The ramp meters were analyzed using the Fixed Rate Method. With the Fixed Rate Method, using the most restrictive flow rate during the peak hour, the total discharge and delay (in minutes) are calculated and the corresponding queue lengths are calculated.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
18
5.0 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA 5.1 City of Oceanside The City of Oceanside uses the published SANTEC/ITE guidelines for the determination of the significance of impacts. A project is considered to have a significant impact if the new project traffic has decreased the operations of surrounding roadways by a defined threshold. The defined thresholds are shown in Table 5–1 below for freeway segments, roadway segments, intersections, and ramp meter facilities.
If the project exceeds the thresholds in Table 5–1, then the project may be considered to have a significant project impact. A feasible mitigation measure will need to be identified to return the impact within the thresholds (pre-project + allowable increase) or the impact will be considered significant and unmitigated.
TABLE 5–1 TRAFFIC IMPACT SIGNIFICANT THRESHOLDS
Level of Service with Project a
Allowable Increase Due to Project Impacts b
Freeways Roadway Segments Intersections Ramp Metering
V/C Speed (mph) V/C Speed
(mph) Delay (sec.)
Delay (min.)
E & F (or ramp meter delays
above 15 minutes) 0.01 1 0.02 1 2 2 c
Source: SANTEC/ITE Guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies in the San Diego Region, March 2, 2000. Footnotes: a. All level of service measurements are based upon HCM procedures for peak-hour conditions. However, V/C ratios for Roadway
Segments may be estimated on an ADT/24-hour traffic volume basis (using Table 2 or a similar LOS chart for each jurisdiction). The acceptable LOS for freeways, roadways, and intersections is generally “D” (“C” for undeveloped or not densely developed locations per jurisdiction definitions). For metered freeway ramps, LOS does not apply. However, ramp meter delays above 15 minutes are considered excessive.
b. If a proposed project’s traffic causes the values shown in the table to be exceeded, the impacts are deemed to be significant. These impact changes may be measured from appropriate computer programs or expanded manual spreadsheets. The project applicant shall then identify feasible mitigations (within the Traffic Impact Study [TIS] report) that will maintain the traffic facility at an acceptable LOS. If the LOS with the proposed project becomes unacceptable (see note a above), or if the project adds a significant amount of peak hour trips to cause any traffic queues to exceed on- or off-ramp storage capacities, the project applicant shall be responsible for mitigating significant impact changes.
c. The impact is only considered significant if the total delay exceeds 15 minutes.
General Notes: 1. V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio 2. Speed = Arterial speed measured in miles per hour 3. Delay = Average stopped delay per vehicle measured in seconds for intersections, or minutes for ramp meters. 4. LOS = Level of Service
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
19
5.2 City of Vista 5.2.1 Intersections The City of Vista has adopted the following standards to determine significant impacts. A project is considered to have a significant impact on the operation of an intersection when one of the following occurs:
The addition of project traffic results in a Level of Service dropping from LOS D or better to LOS E or F. Under this condition, the project applicant would be responsible for direct project impact mitigation necessary to restore the intersection Level of Service to LOS D conditions or better.
When an intersection is operating at LOS E or F under the no-project scenario and the project adds more than an additional 2 seconds of average vehicle delay. Under this condition, the project applicant would be responsible for direct project impact mitigation necessary to restore the intersection LOS to pre-development conditions or better.
In the longer-range cumulative condition, if the addition of project traffic results in a Level of Service dropping from LOS D or better to LOS E or F, or if an intersection is operating at LOS E or F and the project contributes to the average vehicle delay, the project is determined to have a cumulatively significant impact. Under this condition, the project applicant would be responsible for contributing a fair share towards mitigating the intersection LOS to pre-development conditions or better.
5.2.2 Street Segments The City of Vista has adopted the following standards to determine significant impacts. A project is considered to have a significant impact on the operation of a street segment when one of the following occurs:
The addition of project traffic results in a Level of Service dropping from LOS D or better to LOS E or F. Under this condition, the project applicant would be responsible for direct project impact mitigation necessary to restore the street segment Level of Service to LOS D conditions or better.
When a street segment is operating at LOS E or F under the no-project scenario and the project causes an increase in V/C of over 0.02. Under this condition, the project applicant would be responsible for direct project impact mitigation necessary to restore the street segment LOS to pre-development conditions or better.
In the longer-range cumulative condition, if the addition of project traffic results in a Level of Service dropping from LOS D or better to LOS E or F, or if a street segment is operating at LOS E or F and the project causes an increase in V/C of over 0.02, the project is determined to have a cumulatively significant impact. Under this condition, the project applicant would be responsible for contributing a fair share towards mitigating the street segment LOS to pre-development conditions or better.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
20
5.3 Direct vs. Cumulative Impacts Using the applied significance criteria, impacts calculated in the Existing + Project scenario and in the Existing + Near-Term Cumulative Projects + Project scenarios compared against the corresponding “without Project” baseline conditions are considered “direct”. Impacts calculated in the Buildout (Year 2030) With Project time frame against Buildout (Year 2030) baseline conditions are considered “cumulative”.
Direct impacts require the implementation of physical mitigation measures such as road widening, the addition of approach lanes at an intersection, roadway striping, etc. in order to return impacted locations to pre-Project conditions.
For cumulative impacts, a monetary contribution toward future improvements that would maintain pre-Project conditions would be required. A project’s “fair share” contribution toward a cumulative impact at an off-site study area location is determined based on the following calculation:
Fair Share % = Project Traffic
(Buildout Year 2030 Traffic + Project Traffic – Existing Traffic )
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
21
6.0 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS The following section presents the analysis of existing study area locations.
6.1 Peak Hour Intersection Operations Signalized intersections were analyzed using signal timing plans, where available. Timing inputs for intersections where plans were not available were based on field observations. The two intersections along SR-76 and the SR78 interchanges were analyzed using the most recent Caltrans signal timing plans. The two intersections in the City of Vista were also analyzed using the signal timing plans obtained from the City. In general, the cycle length for intersections along SR-76 is 160 seconds during the AM and 180 seconds during the PM peak hour.
The signal timing plans utilized in this analysis are included in Appendix A.
Table 6–1 summarizes the existing intersection operations LOS. As seen in Table 6–1, all intersections are calculated to currently operate at LOS D or better except for the following:
#1. SR-76 / N. Santa Fe Avenue – LOS F during the PM peak hour #6. Oceanside Boulevard / College Boulevard – LOS E during the PM peak hour #16. SR-76 / College Boulevard – LOS E during the AM and PM peak hours
Appendix B contains the existing intersection analysis worksheets.
6.2 Daily Street Segment Operations Table 6–2 summarizes the existing roadway segment operations. As seen in Table 6–2, the study area segments are calculated to currently operate at LOS D or better except for the following:
N. Melrose Drive: N. Santa Fe Avenue to Sagewood Drive – LOS F N. Melrose Drive: Meadowbrook Drive to Oceanside Boulevard – LOS F
6.3 Ramp Meter Operations Ramp meter analyses were conducted at the SR-78 westbound on-ramp from W. Vista Way under Existing conditions.
Table 6–3 summarizes the results of the ramp meter analysis. As seen in Table 6–3, under Existing conditions, no delay is calculated at the subject ramp.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
22
TABLE 6–1 EXISTING INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Intersection Jurisdiction Control Type
Peak Hour
Delay a LOS b
1. SR-76 / N. Santa Fe Ave Caltrans Signal AM 54.1 D PM 91.3 F
2. N. Santa Fe Ave. / Mesa Dr Oceanside Signal AM 16.1 B PM 15.2 B
3. Melrose Dr. / N. Santa Fe Ave Oceanside Signal AM 21.4 C PM 22.0 C
4. Melrose Dr. / Sagewood Dr Oceanside Signal AM 14.3 B PM 23.8 C
5. Melrose Dr. / Meadowbrook Dr Oceanside Signal AM 13.2 B PM 9.8 A
6. Oceanside Blvd. / College Blvd Oceanside Signal AM 41.3 D PM 57.5 E
7. Oceanside Blvd. /Temple Heights Dr Oceanside Signal AM 36.1 D PM 37.6 D
8. Oceanside Blvd. / Catalina Cir Oceanside Signal AM 7.9 A PM 6.8 A
9. Oceanside Blvd. / Melrose Dr Oceanside Signal AM 42.3 D PM 38.5 D
10. Bobier Dr. / Sports Park Wy Oceanside Signal AM 4.1 A PM 7.2 A
11. Bobier Dr. / N. Santa Fe Ave Oceanside Signal AM 31.2 C PM 35.1 D
12. Melrose Dr. / North Ave Vista Signal AM 35.2 D PM 31.3 C
CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
23
SIGNALIZED
Delay LOS
0.0 ≤ 10.0 A 10.1 to 20.0 B 20.1 to 35.0 C 35.1 to 55.0 D 55.1 to 80.0 E ≥ 80.1 F
TABLE 6–1 (CONTINUED) EXISTING INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Intersection Jurisdiction Control Type
Peak Hour
Delay a LOS b
13. Melrose Dr. / Olive Ave Vista Signal AM 36.3 D PM 36.1 D
14. W. Vista Wy. / SR-78 WB On-Ramp Caltrans Signal AM 9.5 A PM 10.4 B
15. Melrose Dr. / W. Vista Wy Vista Signal AM 44.1 D PM 52.1 D
16. SR-76 / College Boulevard Oceanside Signal AM 58.4 E
PM 71.5 E
Footnotes: a. Average delay expressed in seconds per vehicle. b. Level of Service.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
24
TABLE 6–2 EXISTING STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Street Segment Jurisdiction Functional Classification
Existing Capacity (LOS E)a
ADT b LOS c V/C d
SR-76 Town Center Dr. to College Blvd. Caltrans 4-Lane Expressway 60,000 43,500 C 0.725 College Blvd. to N. Santa Fe Ave. Caltrans 4-Lane Expressway 60,000 50,000 C 0.833 N. Santa Fe Ave. to Guajome Lake Rd. Caltrans 4-Lane Expressway 60,000 47,100 C 0.785
Oceanside Boulevard
Avenida Del Oro to College Blvd. Oceanside 6-Lane Prime 60,000 30,600 B 0.510 College Blvd. to Temple Heights Dr. Oceanside 4-Lane Major 40,000 27,500 C 0.688 Temple Heights Dr. to Catalina Cir. Oceanside 4-Lane Major 40,000 20,800 B 0.520 Catalina Cir. to PA-1 Access Oceanside 4-Lane Major 40,000 19,700 B 0.493 PA-1 Access to Melrose Dr. Oceanside 4-Lane Major 40,000 20,600 B 0.515 Melrose Dr. to Sports Park Wy. Oceanside 4-Lane Major 40,000 21,100 C 0.528
Bobier Drive Sports Park Wy. to N. Santa Fe Ave Vista 4-Lane Major 40,000 19,400 A 0.485
N. Santa Fe Avenue SR-76. to Mesa Dr. Oceanside 4-Lane Major 40,000 24,800 C 0.620 Mesa Dr. to Melrose Dr. Oceanside 4-Lane Major 40,000 26,600 C 0.665 Melrose Dr. to Osborne St Vista 4-Lane Collector 25,000 19,100 C 0.764
Sports Park Way
PA-3 Access to Bobier Dr Vista 2-Lane Collector 8,800 1,300 A 0.148 N. Melrose Drive SR-76 to N. Santa Fe Ave (2030 only) Oceanside 4-Lane Major DNE DNE DNE DNE N. Santa Fe Ave. to Sagewood Dr Oceanside Industrial 10,000 17,100 F 1.710 Sagewood Dr. to Meadowbrook Dr Oceanside 4-Lane Major e 30,000 18,500 B 0.617 Meadowbrook Dr. to Oceanside Blvd Oceanside 4-Lane Major f 10,000 21,100 F 2.110 Oceanside Blvd. to North Ave Vista 4-Lane Major 40,000 28,000 B 0.700 North Ave. to Olive Ave Vista 4-Lane Major 40,000 28,300 C 0.708 Olive Ave. to W. Vista Wy Vista 4-Lane Major 40,000 35,800 D 0.895 W. Vista Wy. to SR-78 EB Off-Ramp Vista 6-Lane Prime 60,000 36,900 B 0.615 SR-78 EB Off-Ramp to Hacienda Dr Vista 6-Lane Prime 60,000 33,600 A 0.560
(CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE)
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
25
TABLE 6–2 (CONTINUED) EXISTING STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Street Segment Jurisdiction Functional Classification
Existing Capacity (LOS E)a
ADT b LOS c V/C d
W. Vista Way
SR-78 WB On-Ramp to Melrose Dr Vista 4-Lane Collector 25,000 19,900 C 0.796 Melrose Dr. to Vista Village Dr Vista 6-Lane Prime 60,000 19,600 A 0.327
Footnotes: a. Capacities based on City of Oceanside and City of Vista Roadway Classification & LOS table. b. Average Daily Traffic. c. Level of Service. d. Volume to Capacity ratio. e. This section of N. Melrose Drive is generally a four-lane Major Road and a portion is three lanes. Hence a lower capacity of 30,000 (75% of a
Major Road) is assumed. f. Although this two-lane portion of N. Melrose Drive provides an 18’ raised median constructed in anticipation of the full widening of this
segment to 6-Lane Prime Arterial standards, for purposes of being conservative, it was analyzed with a capacity of 10,000 ADT.
TABLE 6–3 EXISTING RAMP METER OPERATIONS
SR-78 Peak Hour
Peak Hour Demand
D a
Flow
F b
Excess Demand
E
Delay (min)
Queue (ft) c
W. Vista Way WB to SR-78 WB (2 SOV) d AM 348 559 0 0 0
Footnotes: a. Lane Utilization factor accounted for in peak hour demand calculation. (Assumed 10 % for HOV). Demand flow is per lane. b. Meter Rates obtained from CALTRANS c. Queue calculated assuming vehicle length = 25’ d. SOV – Single Occupancy Vehicle.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
26
7.0 TRIP GENERATION/DISTRIBUTION/ASSIGNMENT The Project proposes to construct 313 dwelling units on three separate sites as well as 10,000 SF of restaurant and 10,000 SF of office space.
7.1 Project Trip Generation The appropriate trip generation rates for the proposed project were obtained from the SANDAG (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region, April 2002. The condominium rate of eight (8) trips per dwelling unit was used for the town homes and a rate of ten (10) trips per unit was used for the single family units. The restaurant trip generation was calculated using the sit-down restaurant rate of 160/KSF (1,000 square feet). Using SANDAG trip generation rates, the Project is expected to generate 4,059 ADT with 340 AM peak hour (102 125 inbound/215 outbound) and 360 PM peak hour (230 230 inbound/130 outbound) trips.
Table 7–1 summarizes the Project traffic generation.
7.2 Trip Distribution/Assignment The distribution provided in the Urban Crossroads Melrose Heights Traffic Impact Analysis, August 2012, prepared for this Project was used. Professional engineering judgment was made to determine the travel patterns of residential trips during the AM and PM peak periods and over the course of the day. LLG concurs with the assumptions made in the Urban Crossroads study. A few minor changes were made with regard to accessing the freeway, but the overall regional distribution remains the same.
For Buildout (Year 2030) Project trip distribution, Urban Crossroads used a SANDAG computerized traffic model to conduct a Select Zone Assignment (SZA). This SZA included the future connection of N. Melrose Drive from its current terminus at N. Santa Fe Avenue to Spur Avenue. Ten percent (10%) of Project traffic was assumed to use this future connection oriented to/from State Route 76.
Figure 7–1 shows the regional and local distribution of Project trips. Figure 7–2 depicts the Project traffic assignment and Figure 7–3 depicts the Existing + Project traffic volumes.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
27
TABLE 7–1 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Land Use Size Daily Trip Ends (ADTs) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
% of ADT
In:Out Split
Volume % of ADT
In:Out Split
Volume
Rate a Volume In Out Total In Out Total PA-1
Condominiums 78 DU 8 /DU b 624 8% 2:8 10 40 50 10% 7:3 43 19 62
Office 10 KSF 20 /KSF c 200 14% 9:1 25 3 28 13% 2:8 5 21 26
Restaurant 10 KSF 160 /KSF 1,600 8% 5:5 64 64 128 8% 6:4 77 51 128
Mixed-use Reduction d 5% (80) (3) (3) (6) (4) (3) (7)
Pass-by Reduction e 20% (25) (15) (10) (25)
Subtotal PA-1 2,319
96 104 200
106 78 184
Transit Reduction 5% (116) (5) (5) (10) (5) (4) (9)
Final PA-1 2,203 91 99 190 101 74 175
PA-2
Single Family 37 DU 10 /DU 370 8% 3:7 9 21 30 10% 7:3 26 11 37
Transit Reduction 5% (19) — (1) (1) (1) (1) (2)
Final PA-2 351 9 20 29 25 10 35
PA-3
Townhomes 198 DU 8 /DU 1,584 8% 2:8 26 101 127 10% 7:3 110 48 158
Transit Reduction 5% (79) (1) (5) (6) (6) (2) (8)
Final PA-3 1,505 25 96 121 104 46 150
Total Project 313 DU 4,059
125 215 340
230 130 360
Footnotes: a. Rates obtained from a Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region, April 2002, published by SANDAG. b. DU – Dwelling Units c. 1 KSF = 1,000 SF. d. Up to 10% daily trip reduction for mixed-use developments where residential and commercial retail are combined. (SANDAG, 2002. Footnote T[2]). e. Suggested pass-by percentage for trip rate reduction during PM peak period. (SANDAG, 2002. Footnote S) f. 5% daily trip reduction for land uses with transit access or near transit stations accessible within ¼ mile. (SANDAG, 2002. Footnote T[1]).
Project Traffic Distribution
Figure 7-1
Melrose + Oceanside
N:\2406\Figures\Sept 2016Date: 09/16/16
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
1
9
5
4
3
2
7
8
6
16
1110
13
12
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
Ï
Dwy
Mesa
Dr
Colle
ge B
l
Via
Mano
s
Catal
ina C
ir
N. M
elros
e Dr
Temp
le Ht
s Bl
Spor
ts Pa
rk W
y
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
SR-76
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr North Ave
W. Vista Wy
Oceanside Bl
Sagewood DrN. Santa Fe Ave
Meadowbrook Dr
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
N. Santa Fe Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside BlOceanside Bl
W. Vista Wy
9
5 6 7 8
4321
13 14 15 16
121110
Hacienda Dr
SR-7
8 WB
On-R
amp
N. Santa Fe Ave
Sagewood Dr
Mesa
Dr
Meadowbrook DrTempleHeightsDr
North Ave
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
College Bl
VistaVillage Dr
Catalina Cir
Dwy A
Dwy B
ProjectSite
W. Vista Wy
N.Me
lrose
Dr
N.Me
lrose
Dr
}78
1415}78
14
15
W. Vista Wy N. MelroseDr
Colle
ge B
l
SR-76
Bobier Dr
Oceansi
de Bl
Wy
Sports Park
OsborneSt
}76
N. M
elros
e Dr
11%
11%
10%1%
9%2%
4%
8%
2%
4%
2%
2%
10%15%
10%
2% 27%
3%
30%
28%
3%
23%
2%
32%31%
2%
27%
2%
6%
9%
2%
1%10%1%
5%
1%
5%
10%
15%
15%
10%
10%
25%
2%
25%2%
27%
27% 3%
3%
30^%
30%
30%
9%
6%
8%9%6%
8%23%
2%
3%23%2%
3%
28%
8%8% / 8
%9% 14
% / 2
%
14%9% 9%
3% / 14%3% / 13%14%
41%5%
4%6%
41%
5%
5%5% 5%
5%
31%
1%
31%
1%2%
27%
2%
2% 27%
2%
11%
17%
10%
11%
15%
1%
XX%
Regional Distribution
Local Distribution
XX%
XX% Inbound Distribution Only
Outbound Distribution OnlyXX%Local CaptureX%
20%28%
9%
8%7% / 8%
3% / 13%
10%
2%
3%10%2%
3%
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
410
370
450
930
120
610
1,510
1,10
0
240
2,720
1,7101,22
0
1,260
1,010
1,6101,140
1,300
410
240
1,100
410
450
2,720
1,22
0
1
9
5
4
3
2
7
8
6
16
1110
13
12
Project Traffic VolumesMelrose + Oceanside
Figure 7-2N:\2406\Figures\Sept 2016Date: 09/16/16
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
Ï
Dwy
Mesa
Dr
Colle
ge B
l
Via
Mano
s
Catal
ina C
ir
N. M
elros
e Dr
Temp
le Ht
s Bl
Spor
ts Pa
rk W
y
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. S
anta
Fe A
veSR-76
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr North Ave
W. Vista Wy
Oceanside Bl
Sagewood DrN. Santa Fe Ave
Meadowbrook Dr
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
N. Santa Fe Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside BlOceanside Bl
W. Vista Wy1 /
1
1 / 32 /
1
2 / 5
3 / 4
3 / 5
3 / 7
3 / 8
4 / 2
5 / 3
5 / 76 /
3
7 / 3
5 / 11
6 / 1111 / 6
11 / 7
10 / 5
14 / 7
2 / 10
13 / 8
12 / 8
8 / 14
8 / 34
9 / 12
18 / 11
22 / 1
4
21 / 15
19 / 35
19 / 12
21 / 3
917 / 36
13 / 4
0
13 / 23
12 / 22
12 / 21
10 / 1
8
23 / 94
24 / 1
429 / 16
29 / 3
2
30 / 14
30 / 53
31 / 57
32 / 2
0
32 / 24
34 / 3
3
34 / 62
36 / 23
36 / 64
39 / 6
9
39 / 7
1
50 / 31
54 / 3458
/ 35
58 / 3
658 / 58
61 / 36
65 / 3
9
67 / 4
0
71 / 5486
/ 41
65 / 3
9
13 / 23
32 / 2
0
3 / 4
34 / 6
2
3 / 5
7 / 3
24 / 14
39 / 6
9
3 / 7
4 / 2
4 / 2
4 / 2
7 / 3
9
5 6 7 8
4321
13 14 15 16
121110
Hacienda Dr
SR-7
8 WB
On-R
amp
N. Santa Fe Ave
Sagewood Dr
Mesa
Dr
Meadowbrook DrTemple Heights Dr
North Ave
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
College Bl
Vista Village Dr
Catalina Cir
Dwy A
Dwy B
ProjectSite
W. Vista Wy
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
}78 [14
15}7814
15
W. Vista Wy N. MelroseDr
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
AM / PM IntersectionPeak Hour Volumes
AM / PM
Study Intersections!!#
Average DailyTraffic VolumesX,XXX
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Bobier Dr
Oceansi
de Bl
Colle
ge B
lSR-76
3 / 8
10 / 3
2
34 / 3
36 /
3
}76
!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!Wy
Sports Park
OsborneSt
25 / 2933 / 2917 / 3632 / 24
N. M
elros
e Dr
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
2,810
19,810
47,510
36,9
00
30,970
22,420
22,810
20,050
28,43
0
27,700
19,7
20
43,910
19,220
18,3
20
50,610
29,560
20,350
25,810
23,320
22,71021,940
29,300
33,840
37,140
1
9
5
4
3
2
7
8
6
16
1110
13
12
Existing + Project Traffic VolumesMelrose + Oceanside
Figure 7-3N:\2406\Figures\Sept 2016Date: 09/16/16
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
Ï
Dwy
Mesa
Dr
Colle
ge B
l
Via
Mano
s
Catal
ina C
ir
N. M
elros
e Dr
Temp
le Ht
s Bl
Spor
ts Pa
rk W
y
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. S
anta
Fe A
veSR-76
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr North Ave
W. Vista Wy
Oceanside Bl
Sagewood DrN. Santa Fe Ave
Meadowbrook Dr
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
N. Santa Fe Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside BlOceanside Bl
W. Vista Wy
0 / 3
1 / 1
1 / 2
2 / 2
2 / 5
2 / 8
2 / 9
3 / 2
4 / 3
5 / 1
5 / 2
8 / 2
8 / 11
11 / 5
20 / 5
22 / 3
31 / 9
5 / 15
5 / 27
7 / 22
12 / 5
11 / 44
12 / 13
12 / 1
8
13 / 53
16 / 1
6
16 / 4917
/ 12
19 / 16
19 / 6
6
27 / 46
29 / 9
8
39 / 5
5 39 / 6741
/ 25
43 / 64
44 / 2
0
45 / 21
51 / 3
0
51 / 6
761
/ 35
70 / 45
74 / 56
76 / 65
86 / 6
1
87 / 6
6
94 / 78
96 / 6
8
99 / 82
65 / 113
84 / 119
99 / 1
19
99 / 1
13126 / 55
205 /
83
46 / 168
163 /
99
74 / 1
51
77 / 1
35
162 / 73
159 /
96
145 /
95
142 /
111
183 / 112
129 /
112
113 / 148
152 / 118
180 / 116
222 / 125
217 /
201
215 / 147
212 / 207
208 / 168
196 / 341
191 /
121
190 /
229
223 /
192
181 /
247
180 / 154
225 / 24317
2 / 21
0
163 /
212
153 / 153 232 /
371
151 / 145149 / 227
147 /
284
146 / 153
235 / 207
140 / 330
140 /
227
137 /
289
134 / 103
133 / 34023
7 / 27
5
128 /
183
121 /
179
121 / 176
241 / 330
107 /
141
106 / 161
103 /
138
102 /
151
102 / 100
253 / 165
254 / 461
255 /
278
256 / 214
256 /
394
282 /
362
324 / 352
328 /
563
331 / 488
350 / 314
390 / 445
400 / 521
406 / 290
414 /
461
424 /
225
424 /
506
425 /
753
429 / 970
441 / 308
458 /
967
481 / 740 485 / 638
514 /
741
516 / 810
525 /
703
538 /
648
540 / 22055
9 / 40
3571 / 492 588 / 463
606 / 463
629 / 694
667 / 646
676 / 645
689 / 54269
9 / 73
4
713 / 545
724 /
980
760 / 974
769 / 600
806 /
537
809 / 410823 / 914
879 /
749
910 /
663
944 /
629
951 / 713953 /
699
982 / 986
711 /
1,07
6
1,147
/ 877
1,425
/ 997
1,443 / 820
1,685 / 985
652 / 1,150
1,138 / 654
736 / 1,61276
2 / 1,
514
816 / 1,405
829 /
1,45
5
835 /
1,41
9
1,058
/ 1,21
7
5 / 1
5 / 2
9
5 6 7 8
4321
13 14 15 16
121110
Hacienda Dr
SR-7
8 WB
On-R
amp
N. Santa Fe Ave
Sagewood Dr
Mesa
Dr
Meadowbrook DrTemple Heights Dr
North Ave
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
College Bl
Vista Village Dr
Catalina Cir
Dwy A
Dwy B
ProjectSite
W. Vista Wy
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
}78 [14
15}7814
15
W. Vista Wy N. MelroseDr
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
AM / PM IntersectionPeak Hour Volumes
AM / PM
Study Intersections!!#
Average DailyTraffic VolumesX,XXX
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Bobier Dr
Oceansi
de Bl
Colle
ge B
lSR-76
}76
!!
!!
!
N. M
elros
e Dr
!
!
!
!
!
!
!Wy
Sports Park
OsborneSt
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
31
8.0 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING + PROJECT CONDITIONS The following section presents the analysis of existing study area locations with the addition of Project traffic.
8.1 Peak Hour Intersection Operations As mentioned in the Existing analysis, the two intersections along SR-76 and the SR78 interchanges were analyzed using the most recent available Caltrans signal timing plans. The two intersections in the City of Vista were also analyzed using the signal timing plans obtained from the City of Vista. Timing inputs for intersections where plans were not available were based on field observations.
Table 8–1 summarizes the Existing + Project intersections LOS. As seen in Table 8–1, with the addition of Project traffic, all intersections are calculated to continue to operate at LOS D or better except for the following:
#1. SR-76 / N. Santa Fe Avenue – LOS E/F during the AM/PM peak hours #6. Oceanside Boulevard / College Boulevard – LOS E during the PM peak hour #16. SR-76 / College Boulevard – LOS E during the AM and PM peak hours
Based on City of Oceanside significance criteria, with the addition of Project traffic, a significant direct impact is calculated at the SR-76 / N. Santa Fe Avenue intersection. The increases in delay at the remaining intersections are less than the allowable threshold of 2.0 seconds and hence no significant direct impact is calculated.
Appendix C contains the Existing + Project intersection analysis worksheets.
8.2 Daily Street Segment Operations Table 8–2 summarizes the Existing + Project roadway segment operations. As seen in Table 8–2, with the addition of Project traffic, the study area segments are calculated to continue to operate at LOS D or better except for the following:
N. Melrose Drive: N. Santa Fe Avenue to Sagewood Drive – LOS F N. Melrose Drive: Meadowbrook Drive to Oceanside Boulevard – LOS F N. Melrose Drive: Olive Avenue to W. Vista Way – LOS E
Based on City of Oceanside and City of Vista significance criteria, significant impacts were calculated with the addition of Project traffic on the three (3) N. Melrose Drive segments listed above. As previously mentioned in Section 4.4.2, the City of Oceanside requires mitigation for significantly impacted street segments, regardless of peak hour analysis.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
32
TABLE 8–1 EXISTING + PROJECT INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Intersection Jurisdiction Control Type Peak Hour Existing Existing + Project ∆ Delay c
Impact Type
Delay a LOS b Delay LOS
1. SR-76 / N. Santa Fe Ave
Caltrans Signal
AM 54.1 D 60.3 E 6.2 Direct PM 91.3 F 99.1 F 7.8 Direct
2. N. Santa Fe Ave. / Mesa Dr.
Oceanside Signal
AM 16.1 B 16.1 B 0.0 None
PM 15.2 B 15.7 B 0.5 None
3. Melrose Dr. / N. Santa Fe Ave.
Oceanside Signal
AM 21.4 C 22.6 C 1.2 None
PM 22.0 C 22.6 C 0.6 None
4. Melrose Dr. / Sagewood Dr.
Oceanside Signal
AM 14.3 B 14.5 B 0.2 None
PM 23.8 C 24.9 C 1.1 None
5. Melrose Dr. / Meadowbrook Dr.
Oceanside Signal
AM 13.2 B 13.6 B 0.4 None
PM 9.8 A 10.0 A 0.2 None
6. Oceanside Blvd. / College Blvd.
Oceanside Signal
AM 41.3 D 42.0 D 0.7 None
PM 57.5 E 58.8 E 1.3 None d
7. Oceanside Blvd. /Temple Heights Dr.
Oceanside Signal
AM 36.1 D 36.9 D 0.8 None
PM 37.6 D 39.1 D 1.5 None
8. Oceanside Blvd. / Catalina Cir.
Oceanside Signal
AM 7.9 A 8.9 A 1.0 None
PM 6.8 A 8.2 A 1.4 None
9. Oceanside Blvd. / Melrose Dr.
Oceanside Signal
AM 42.3 D 44.8 D 2.5 None
PM 38.5 D 42.4 D 3.9 None
CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
33
SIGNALIZED
Delay LOS
0.0 ≤ 10.0 A 10.1 to 20.0 B 20.1 to 35.0 C 35.1 to 55.0 D 55.1 to 80.0 E ≥ 80.1 F
TABLE 8–1 (CONTINUED) EXISTING + PROJECT INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Intersection Jurisdiction Control Type Peak Hour Existing Existing + Project ∆ Delay c
Impact Type
Delay a LOS b Delay LOS
10. Bobier Dr. / Sports Park Wy.
Oceanside Signal
AM 4.1 A 6.8 A 2.7 None
PM 7.2 A 9.6 A 2.4 None
11. Bobier Dr. / N. Santa Fe Ave.
Vista Signal
AM 31.2 C 31.4 C 0.2 None
PM 35.1 D 35.3 D 0.2 None
12. Melrose Dr. / North Ave
Vista Signal
AM 35.2 D 35.4 D 0.2 None
PM 31.3 C 32.3 C 1.0 None
13. Melrose Dr. / Olive Ave.
Vista Signal
AM 36.3 D 39.1 D 2.8 None
PM 36.1 D 37.9 D 1.8 None
14. W. Vista Wy. / SR-78 WB On-Ramp
Vista Signal
AM 9.5 A 9.6 A 0.1 None
PM 10.4 B 10.4 B 0.0 None
15. Melrose Dr. / W. Vista Wy.
Vista Signal
AM 44.1 D 49.4 D 5.3 None PM 52.1 D 54.1 D 2.0 None
16. SR-76 / College Blvd Caltrans Signal AM 58.4 E 59.2 E 0.8 None
PM 71.5 E 73.0 E 1.5 None
Footnotes: a. Average delay expressed in seconds per vehicle. b. Level of Service. c. Increase in delay due to project traffic. d. The increase in delay due to the project is less than the allowable 2.0 seconds under the significance criteria. Therefore no significant impact is calculated.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
34
TABLE 8–2 EXISTING + PROJECT STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Street Segment Jurisdiction Existing LOS E Capacity a
Existing Existing + Project ∆ V/C e Impact Type ADT b LOS c V/C d ADT LOS V/C
SR-76
Town Center Dr. to College Blvd. Caltrans 60,000 43,500 C 0.725 43,910 C 0.732 0.007 None College Blvd. to N. Santa Fe Ave. Caltrans 60,000 50,000 C 0.833 50,610 D 0.844 0.011 None N. Santa Fe Ave. to Guajome Lake Rd. Caltrans 60,000 47,100 C 0.785 47,510 C 0.792 0.007 None
Oceanside Boulevard
Avenida Del Oro to College Blvd. Oceanside 60,000 30,600 B 0.510 30,970 B 0.516 0.006 None College Blvd. to Temple Heights Dr. Oceanside 40,000 27,500 C 0.688 28,430 C 0.711 0.023 None Temple Heights Dr. to Catalina Cir. Oceanside 40,000 20,800 B 0.520 21,940 C 0.549 0.029 None Catalina Cir. to PA-1 Access Oceanside 40,000 19,700 B 0.493 22,420 C 0.561 0.068 None PA-1 Access to Melrose Dr. Oceanside 40,000 20,600 B 0.515 23,320 C 0.583 0.068 None Melrose Dr. to Sports Park Wy. Oceanside 40,000 21,100 C 0.528 22,710 C 0.568 0.040 None
Bobier Drive Sports Park Wy. to N. Santa Fe Ave. Vista 40,000 19,400 A 0.485 19,810 A 0.495 0.010 None
N. Santa Fe Avenue SR-76. to Mesa Dr. Oceanside 40,000 24,800 C 0.620 25,810 C 0.645 0.025 None Mesa Dr. to Melrose Dr. Oceanside 40,000 26,600 C 0.665 27,700 C 0.693 0.028 None Melrose Dr. to Osborne St. Vista 25,000 19,100 C 0.764 19,220 C 0.769 0.005 None
(CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE)
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
35
TABLE 8–2 (CONTINUED) EXISTING + PROJECT STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Street Segment Jurisdiction Existing LOS E Capacity a
Existing Existing + Project ∆ V/C e Impact Type ADT b LOS c V/C d ADT LOS V/C
Sports Park Way
PA-3 Access to Bobier Dr. Vista 8,800 1,300 A 0.148 2,810 A 0.319 0.171 None N. Melrose Drive N. Santa Fe Ave. to Sagewood Dr. Oceanside 10,000 17,100 F 1.710 18,320 F 1.832 0.122 Direct Sagewood Dr. to Meadowbrook Dr. f Oceanside 30,000 18,500 B 0.617 19,720 B 0.657 0.040 None Meadowbrook Dr. to Oceanside Blvd. g Oceanside 10,000 21,100 F 2.110 22,810 F 2.281 0.171 Direct Oceanside Blvd. to North Ave. Vista 40,000 28,000 B 0.700 29,300 C 0.733 0.033 None North Ave. to Olive Ave. Vista 40,000 28,300 C 0.708 29,560 C 0.739 0.031 None Olive Ave. to W. Vista Wy. Vista 40,000 35,800 D 0.895 36,900 E 0.923 0.028 Direct W. Vista Wy. to SR-78 EB Off-Ramp Vista 60,000 36,900 B 0.615 37,140 B 0.619 0.004 None SR-78 EB Off-Ramp to Hacienda Dr. Vista 60,000 33,600 A 0.560 33,840 A 0.564 0.004 None
W. Vista Way
SR-78 WB On-Ramp to Melrose Dr. Vista 25,000 19,900 C 0.796 20,350 D 0.814 0.018 None Melrose Dr. to Vista Village Dr. Vista 60,000 19,600 A 0.327 20,050 A 0.334 0.007 None
Footnotes: a. Capacities based on City of Oceanside and City of Vista Roadway Classification & LOS table. b. Average Daily Traffic. c. Level of Service. d. Volume to Capacity ratio. e. Δ denotes a Project-induced increase in the Volume to Capacity ratio. f. This section of N. Melrose Drive is a four-lane Major Road and a portion is three lanes. Hence a lower capacity of 30,000 (75% of a Major Road) is assumed. g. Although this two-lane portion of N. Melrose Drive provides an 18’ raised median constructed in anticipation of the full widening of this segment to 6-Lane Prime Arterial standards, for purposes
of being conservative, it was analyzed with a capacity of 10,000 ADT.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
36
8.3 Ramp Meter Operations Ramp meter analyses were conducted at the SR-78 westbound on-ramp from W. Vista Way under Existing + Project conditions. Table 8–3 summarizes the results of the ramp meter analysis. As seen in Table 8–3, with the addition of Project traffic, there is no delay calculated.
TABLE 8–3 EXISTING + PROJECT RAMP METER OPERATIONS
SR-78 Peak Hour
Peak Hour Demand
(per Lane) D a
Flow (per Lane)
F b
Excess Demand
E
Delay (min)
Queue (ft) c
W. Vista Way WB to SR-78 WB (2 SOV) d
Existing AM 348 559 0 0 0
Existing + Project AM 360 559 0 0 0
Project Increase AM 12 N/A N/A 0 0
Footnotes: a. Lane Utilization factor accounted for in peak hour demand calculation. b. Meter Rates obtained from CALTRANS c. Queue calculated assuming vehicle length = 25’ d. SOV – Single Occupancy Vehicle.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
37
8.4 Peak Hour Arterial Analysis Peak hour arterial analysis was conducted for the study area street segments calculated to operate at LOS E or worse on a daily basis with the addition of Project traffic. Table 8–4 summarizes the results of the peak hour arterial analysis. As noted in Section 8.2, significant impacts were calculated at each of the three locations, based on daily analysis per SANTEC/ITE and City guidelines. The results shown below are without mitigation.
The peak hour arterial analysis worksheets for this scenario are included in Appendix C.
TABLE 8–4 EXISTING + PROJECT PEAK HOUR SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Street Segment Direction Existing + Project
AM PM
Speed LOS Speed LOS N. Melrose Drive: N. Santa Fe Ave to Sagewood Dr NB 7.0 F 7.1 F
SB 18.2 D 14.4 E N. Melrose Drive: Meadowbrook Dr to Oceanside Blvd NB 23.0 C 24.8 C
SB 10.8 F 13.1 E N. Melrose Drive: Olive Ave to W. Vista Way NB 10.4 F 7.1 F
SB 2.1 F 6.8 F
Footnotes: a. Speed measured in miles per hour. b. LOS = Level of Service
General Notes Dir. = Direction
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
38
9.0 NEAR-TERM CUMULATIVE PROJECTS Cumulative projects are other projects in the study area that will add traffic to the local circulation system in the near future. LLG consulted with City of Oceanside and City of Vista staff to identify relevant, pending cumulative projects in the study area that could be constructed and generating traffic in the Project vicinity. Based on information received from City staff, nine (9) cumulative projects are planned for the area. Traffic generated by these projects was added to the existing traffic volumes to develop the Existing + Near-Term Cumulative Projects conditions. Project traffic was added to the near-term traffic volumes to arrive at the Existing + Near-Term Cumulative Projects + Project conditions.
Table 9–1 summarizes the near-term cumulative projects trip generation. As seen in Table 9–1, the cumulative projects are calculated to generate 43,062 daily trips with 2,830 inbound and 750 outbound during the AM peak hour and 1,342 inbound and 3,175 outbound during the PM peak hour.
TABLE 9–1 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS SUMMARY
Name ADT AM PM
In Out In Out
1. Ocean Ranch (70% occupied) a 7,151 706 85 170 668
2. Pacific Coast Business Park (20% occupied) 17,278 1770 218 460 1664
3. El Corazon Master Plan (Phases I&II only) 13,275 234 169 387 662
4. Oceanside Marketplace (75% occupied) 525 19 9 24 24
5. Hi Hope Ranch 930 22 65 72 28
6. Vista Pacific Condos 170 4 10 12 5
7. NCTD Mixed Use (100% occupied) 1,125 31 35 53 46
8. Spring Creek Senior Living 328 8 5 13 13
9. N. Melrose Drive Apartments 2,280 36 154 151 65
Total 43,062 2,830 750 1,342 3,175 General Note: a. For cumulative projects with partial occupancy, the trips generated by the remaining portion of the projects were assigned to the street system.
Figure 9–1 depicts the Near-Term Cumulative projects traffic volumes. Figure 9–2 depicts the Existing + Near-Term Cumulative projects traffic volumes and Figure 9–3 depicts the Existing + Near-Term Cumulative projects + Project traffic volumes.
Appendix D contains the Near-Term Cumulative projects assignment data.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
70
200
810
970
870
400
2,760
3,270
1,99
0
6,640
600
5,100
1,150
5,700
4,060
3,140
2,410
4,040
3,940
1,380
5,100
810
5,700
1
9
5
4
3
2
7
8
6
16
1110
13
12
Near-Term Cumulative Projects Traffic VolumesMelrose + Oceanside
Figure 9-1N:\2406\Figures\Sept 2016Date: 09/16/16
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
Ï
Dwy
Mesa
Dr
Colle
ge B
l
Via
Mano
s
Catal
ina C
ir
N. M
elros
e Dr
Temp
le Ht
s Bl
Spor
ts Pa
rk W
y
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. S
anta
Fe A
veSR-76
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr North Ave
W. Vista Wy
Oceanside Bl
Sagewood DrN. Santa Fe Ave
Meadowbrook Dr
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
N. Santa Fe Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside BlOceanside Bl
W. Vista Wy
0 / 1
0 / 9
1 / 2
1 / 4
2 / 0
2 / 1
2 / 3
2 / 4
2 / 6
2 / 7
3 / 2
3 / 9
4 / 1
4 / 2
4 / 5 4 / 6
4 / 8
5 / 2
5 / 5
5 / 8
6 / 2
7 / 3
7 / 6
7 / 8
11 / 6
0 / 10
10 / 5
10 / 4
12 / 6
16 / 7
16 / 8
2 / 10
4 / 22
25 / 7
3 / 16
4 / 13
4 / 14
4 / 19
4 / 21
8 / 15
5 / 13
5 / 17
6 / 16
6 / 25
7 / 17
50 / 1
1
11 / 2
418 / 62
15 / 3
1
14 / 30 12 / 42
19 / 1
7
10 / 1
6
20 / 4
3
23 / 7225
/ 29
26 / 22
26 / 5
8
28 / 4
130
/ 36
37 / 47
40 / 4
6
41 / 14
42 / 5445 / 37
47 / 3
7
56 / 3
6
59 / 57
72 / 3
2
73 / 3
3
76 / 35
109 /
63
123 / 59
128 /
65
133 /
59
184 / 22
20 / 1
59 204 / 56
21 / 1
90
221 / 85
23 / 12923
/ 140
29 / 1
28
30 / 3
51
302 /
52
32 / 100
37 / 13237 / 228
49 / 20463 / 37467 / 155
71 / 1
04
77 / 1
74
80 / 304
90 / 100
160 /
118
354 / 166
283 / 138
63 / 374
354 / 166
2 / 10
2 / 0
0 / 1
2 / 0
2 / 3
9
5 6 7 8
4321
13 14 15 16
121110
Hacienda Dr
SR-7
8 WB
On-R
amp
N. Santa Fe Ave
Sagewood Dr
Mesa
Dr
Meadowbrook DrTemple Heights Dr
North Ave
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
College Bl
Vista Village Dr
Catalina Cir
Dwy A
Dwy B
ProjectSite
W. Vista Wy
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
}78 [14
15}7814
15
W. Vista Wy N. MelroseDr
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
AM / PM IntersectionPeak Hour Volumes
AM / PM
Study Intersections!!#
Average DailyTraffic VolumesX,XXX
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Bobier Dr
Oceansi
de Bl
Colle
ge B
lSR-76
}76
!!
!!
!
Wy
Sports Park
OsborneSt
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
1,300
22,160
50,370
37,7
90
37,240
24,800
22,250
19,800
33,20
0
27,410
19,4
70
47,560
19,170
17,9
70
53,140
30,710
20,300
25,610
25,700
25,14026,500
31,940
34,200
38,280
1
9
5
4
3
2
7
8
6
16
1110
13
12
Existing + Near-Term Cumulative Projects Traffic VolumesMelrose + Oceanside
Figure 9-2N:\2406\Figures\Sept 2016Date: 09/16/16
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
Ï
Dwy
Mesa
Dr
Colle
ge B
l
Via
Mano
s
Catal
ina C
ir
N. M
elros
e Dr
Temp
le Ht
s Bl
Spor
ts Pa
rk W
y
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. S
anta
Fe A
veSR-76
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr North Ave
W. Vista Wy
Oceanside Bl
Sagewood DrN. Santa Fe Ave
Meadowbrook Dr
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
N. Santa Fe Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside BlOceanside Bl
W. Vista Wy
0 / 3
1 / 1
1 / 2
2 / 2
2 / 5
2 / 8
2 / 9
3 / 2
4 / 3
5 / 1
5 / 2
8 / 2
8 / 11
11 / 5
20 / 5
22 / 3
33 / 9
5 / 15
5 / 27
7 / 22
12 / 5
11 / 44
12 / 13
12 / 1
8
13 / 8
215
/ 31
16 / 1
6
16 / 4917
/ 12
19 / 16
20 / 8
997 / 39
27 / 46
27 / 96
28 / 4
1
36 / 50
37 / 47
39 / 5
5
40 / 4
6
97 / 81
41 / 2
5
43 / 64
47 / 2
2
47 / 25
51 / 3
0
53 / 7
0
55 / 75
61 / 3
5
77 / 53
78 / 75
89 / 7
3
95 / 7
9
96 / 7
7
99 / 1
47
94 / 3
10
106 / 85
107 /
72
128 /
65
148 /
99
160 /
92
167 / 81
178 /
81
205 /
83
23 / 129
32 / 1
07
69 / 132
87 / 1
39
89 / 1
20
706 / 511
511 / 763
114 / 157
118 / 227
145 / 115
150 /
115
165 /
112
179 / 110
182 / 117
189 / 343
181 /
247
190 /
229167 / 185
194 /
160
163 /
221
158 /
456
154 / 244
153 / 153
153 / 148
150 /
205
208 / 168
148 / 130
147 / 164
215 / 147
144 /
228
140 / 330
135 / 107
130 /
194
129 /
255
121 /
179
121 / 176
216 / 209
217 /
201
103 /
138
102 / 100
227 / 130
237 / 207
238 /
231
238 /
277
240 /
386
248 / 159
251 /
391
254 /
283
254 / 461
256 / 214
270 / 164
282 /
372
290 / 534
317 / 362
328 /
563
329 / 354
335 / 502
356 / 317
383 / 442
407 / 527
421 /
499
436 /
777
447 / 325
450 /
222
455 /
959
469 / 314
485 /
565
492 /
696
510 / 206
510 /
629
533 /
758
559 /
403
571 / 944
589 / 434
629 / 694
667 / 646691 / 525
706 /
978
741 / 563
747 / 733
792 /
812
795 / 90280
0 / 53
4808 / 394
818 / 607
862 /
748
891 /
637
965 / 959
985 /
642
1073 / 7351,023
/ 693
1,244 / 843
1,350 / 727
1,464 / 859
462 / 1,291
544 / 1,008
679 / 1,460
702 /
1,07
375
7 / 1,
580
768 / 1,712
785 / 1,194
821 / 1,444
831 /
1,55
6
1,744 / 1,042
1,096
/ 1,32
0
1,137
/ 1,47
1
1,177
/ 1,2
28
1,500
/ 1,02
15 /
2 3 / 2
5 / 2
9
5 6 7 8
4321
13 14 15 16
121110
Hacienda Dr
SR-7
8 WB
On-R
amp
N. Santa Fe Ave
Sagewood Dr
Mesa
Dr
Meadowbrook DrTemple Heights Dr
North Ave
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
College Bl
Vista Village Dr
Catalina Cir
Dwy A
Dwy B
ProjectSite
W. Vista Wy
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
}78 [14
15}7814
15
W. Vista Wy N. MelroseDr
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
AM / PM IntersectionPeak Hour Volumes
AM / PM
Study Intersections!!#
Average DailyTraffic VolumesX,XXX
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Bobier Dr
Oceansi
de Bl
Colle
ge B
lSR-76
}76
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!Wy
Sports Park
OsborneSt
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
2,810
22,570
50,780
38,8
90
37,610
27,520
23,960
20,250
34,13
0
28,510
20,6
90
47,970
19,290
19,1
90
53,750
31,970
20,750
26,620
28,420
26,75027,640
33,240
34,440
38,520
1
9
5
4
3
2
7
8
6
16
1110
13
12
Existing + Near-Term Cumulative Projects + Project Traffic VolumesMelrose + Oceanside
Figure 9-3N:\2406\Figures\Sept 2016Date: 09/16/16
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
Ï
Dwy
Mesa
Dr
Colle
ge B
l
Via
Mano
s
Catal
ina C
ir
N. M
elros
e Dr
Temp
le Ht
s Bl
Spor
ts Pa
rk W
y
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. S
anta
Fe A
veSR-76
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr North Ave
W. Vista Wy
Oceanside Bl
Sagewood DrN. Santa Fe Ave
Meadowbrook Dr
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
N. Santa Fe Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside BlOceanside Bl
W. Vista Wy
0 / 31 / 0
1 / 1
1 / 2
2 / 2
2 / 5
2 / 8
2 / 9
3 / 2
4 / 3
5 / 1
5 / 2
8 / 2
8 / 11
11 / 5
20 / 5
22 / 3
33 / 9
5 / 15
5 / 27
7 / 22
12 / 5
11 / 44
12 / 13
12 / 1
8
15 / 3
1
16 / 1
6
16 / 4917
/ 12
19 / 16
23 / 8
7
27 / 46
98 / 84
28 / 4
1
37 / 47
38 / 60
39 / 5
5
40 / 4
6
41 / 2
5
43 / 64
47 / 2
2
47 / 25
51 / 3
0
53 / 7
0
55 / 75
61 / 3
5
74 / 56
77 / 53
78 / 75
89 / 7
3
96 / 7
7
112 /
75
94 / 3
10
106 / 85
126 / 55
128 /
65
163 /
99
167 / 81
205 /
83
23 / 129
32 / 1
07
50 / 190
69 / 132
87 / 1
39
711 / 522
117 / 161
129 /
112
152 / 118
154 /
117
165 /
112
182 / 117
183 / 112
217 /
201
216 / 209
215 / 147208 / 168
202 / 366
191 /
121
190 /
229
223 /
192225 / 243
181 /
247
180 / 154
168 /
474
227 / 130
163 /
221
158 /
219
154 / 244
237 / 207153 / 153
153 / 148
238 /
277
149 / 169
149 /
100
146 /
229
140 / 330
137 /
289
135 / 107
133 /
199
129 / 233
240 /
386
121 /
179
121 / 176
244 /
242
106 /
130
103 /
138
103 /
127
102 /
151
102 / 100
253 / 166
254 / 461
256 / 214
257 /
288
258 /
394
282 /
372
288 / 175
290 / 534
317 / 362
328 /
563
329 / 354
335 / 502
360 / 319
390 / 445
407 / 527
424 /
506
436 /
777
451 / 327
458 /
967
474 /
236
482 / 322
485 /
565
522 / 770
533 /
758
540 / 220
542 /
649
550 /
732
559 /
403
583 / 965
608 / 469
629 / 694
667 / 646725 / 587
765 / 577
766 / 745
806 /
537
820 / 416849 / 936
854 / 630 859 /
852
884 /
762
930 /
706
767 /
1,11
2
1,017
/ 662
1,123 / 766 1,305 / 879
1,359 / 739
1,485 / 874
492 / 1,344
561 / 1,044
715 / 1,524
1,062
/ 762
768 / 1,712
771 /
1,01
7
791 /
1,64
2
797 / 1,202
834 / 1,467
852 /
1,59
5
996 / 1,016
1,744 / 1,042
1,135
/ 1,39
1
1,137
/ 1,47
1
1,177
/ 1,2
28
1,558
/ 1,05
6
5 / 2
5 / 2
9
5 6 7 8
4321
13 14 15 16
121110
Hacienda Dr
SR-7
8 WB
On-R
amp
N. Santa Fe Ave
Sagewood Dr
Mesa
Dr
Meadowbrook DrTemple Heights Dr
North Ave
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
College Bl
Vista Village Dr
Catalina Cir
Dwy A
Dwy B
ProjectSite
W. Vista Wy
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
}78 [14
15}7814
15
W. Vista Wy N. MelroseDr
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
AM / PM IntersectionPeak Hour Volumes
AM / PM
Study Intersections!!#
Average DailyTraffic VolumesX,XXX
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Bobier Dr
Oceansi
de Bl
Colle
ge B
lSR-76
}76
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!Wy
Sports Park
OsborneSt
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
42
10.0 ANALYSIS OF NEAR-TERM SCENARIOS The following section presents the near-term cumulative analysis of existing study area locations without and with Project traffic. The existing intersection and segment lane configurations were assumed in this scenario.
10.1 Existing + Near-Term Cumulative Projects 10.1.1 Intersection Analysis Table 10–1 summarizes the peak hour intersection operations for the Existing + Near-Term Cumulative projects condition. As seen in Table 10–1, with the addition of Cumulative projects traffic, the following intersections are calculated to operate at LOS F:
#1. SR-76/ N. Santa Fe Avenue – LOS E/F during the AM/PM peak hours #6. Oceanside Boulevard/ College Boulevard – LOS F during the PM peak hour #15. N. Melrose Drive / W. Vista Way – LOS E during the AM and PM peak hours #16. SR-76 / College Boulevard – LOS E/F during the AM/PM peak hours
Appendix E contains the peak hour intersection analysis worksheets for the Existing + Near-Term Cumulative projects condition.
10.1.2 Segment Operations Table 10–2 summarizes the key segment operations in the study area for the Existing + Near-Term Cumulative projects condition. As seen in Table 10–2, with the addition of Cumulative projects traffic, the following street segments are calculated to operate at LOS E or F:
N. Melrose Drive: N. Santa Fe Avenue to Sagewood Drive – LOS F N. Melrose Drive: Meadowbrook Drive to Oceanside Boulevard – LOS F N. Melrose Drive: Olive Avenue to W. Vista Way – LOS E
10.1.3 Ramp Meter Operations Ramp meter analysis was conducted at the SR-78 westbound on-ramp from W. Vista Way under Existing + Near-Term Cumulative projects conditions. Table 10–3 summarizes the results of the ramp meter analysis. As seen in Table 10–3, with the addition of Cumulative projects traffic, there is no delay calculated.
10.2 Existing + Near-Term Cumulative Projects + Project 10.2.1 Intersection Analysis Table 10–1 summarizes the peak hour intersection operations for Existing + Near-Term Cumulative projects + Project condition. As seen in Table 10–1, with the addition of Project traffic the following intersections are calculated to continue to operate at LOS F:
#1. SR-76/ N. Santa Fe Avenue – LOS E/F during the AM/PM peak hours #6. Oceanside Boulevard/ College Boulevard – LOS F during the PM peak hour
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
43
#15. N. Melrose Drive / W. Vista Way – LOS E during the AM and PM peak hours #16. SR-76 / College Boulevard – LOS E/F during the AM/PM peak hours
Based on City of Oceanside and City of Vista significance criteria, with the addition of Project traffic, significant direct impacts are calculated at the SR-76 / N. Santa Fe Avenue and the N. Melrose Drive / W. Vista Way intersections. The increases in delay at the remaining two intersections are less than the allowable threshold of 2.0 seconds and hence no significant impact is calculated.
Appendix F contains the peak hour intersection analysis worksheets for the Existing + Near-Term Cumulative projects + Project condition.
10.2.2 Segment Operations Table 10–2 summarizes the key segment operations in the study area for the Existing + Near-Term Cumulative projects + Project conditions. As seen in Table 10–2, with the addition of Project traffic, the following street segments are calculated to operate at LOS E or F:
N. Melrose Drive: N. Santa Fe Avenue to Sagewood Drive – LOS F N. Melrose Drive: Meadowbrook Drive to Oceanside Boulevard – LOS F N. Melrose Drive: Olive Avenue to W. Vista Way – LOS E
Based on City of Oceanside and City of Vista significance criteria, significant impacts were calculated with the addition of Project traffic on the three N. Melrose Drive segments.
As previously mentioned in Section 4.4.2, acceptable levels of service at adjacent intersections during peak hours along a segment are a valid indicator of adequate segment operations since intersection analysis is more indicative of actual roadway system operations than street segment analysis. As shown in Table 10–1, the intersections adjacent to the above N. Melrose Drive segments were calculated to operate at LOS D or better. However, since the Project-related increase in V/C exceeds City thresholds, significant impacts were identified along these segments.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
44
TABLE 10–1 NEAR-TERM INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Intersection Jurisdiction Control Type Peak Hour Existing + Cumulative Projects
Existing + Cumulative Projects + Project
∆ Delay c
Impact Type
Delay a LOS b Delay LOS
1. SR-76 /
N. Santa Fe Ave Caltrans Signal AM 58.6 E 62.7 E 4.1 Direct PM 110.1 F 118.3 F 8.2 Direct
2. N. Santa Fe Ave. /
Mesa Dr Oceanside Signal AM 16.2 B 16.3 B 0.1 None
PM 15.5 B 15.9 B 0.4 None 3. Melrose Dr. /
N. Santa Fe Ave Oceanside Signal AM 21.8 C 23.1 C 1.3 None
PM 22.4 C 23.1 C 0.7 None 4. Melrose Dr. /
Sagewood Dr Oceanside Signal AM 15.6 B 16.3 B 0.7 None
PM 25.2 C 27.1 C 1.9 None 5. Melrose Dr. /
Meadowbrook Dr Oceanside Signal AM 13.6 B 14.0 B 0.4 None
PM 10.1 B 10.3 B 0.2 None 6. Oceanside Blvd. /
College Blvd Oceanside Signal AM 52.8 D 54.1 D 1.3 None
PM 83.5 F 85.2 F 1.7 None d 7. Oceanside Blvd. /
Temple Heights Dr Oceanside Signal AM 42.3 D 43.9 D 1.6 None
PM 48.6 D 52.9 D 4.3 None 8. Oceanside Blvd. /
Catalina Cir Oceanside Signal AM 8.1 A 9.3 A 1.2 None
PM 7.8 A 9.0 A 1.2 None 9. Oceanside Blvd. /
Melrose Dr Oceanside Signal AM 45.7 D 49.5 D 3.8 None
PM 45.5 D 51.3 D 5.8 None
CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
45
SIGNALIZED
Delay LOS
0.0 ≤ 10.0 A 10.1 to 20.0 B 20.1 to 35.0 C 35.1 to 55.0 D 55.1 to 80.0 E ≥ 80.1 F
TABLE 10–1 (CONTINUED) NEAR-TERM INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Intersection Jurisdiction Control Type
Peak Hour Existing + Cumulative Projects
Existing + Cumulative Projects + Project
∆ Delay c
Impact Type
Delay a LOS b Delay LOS
10. Bobier Dr. /
Sports Park Wy Oceanside Signal AM 5.2 A 7.4 A 2.2 None PM 8.3 A 11.2 B 2.9 None
11. Bobier Dr. /
N. Santa Fe Ave Vista Signal AM 35.6 D 36.1 D 0.5 None PM 38.7 D 39.4 D 0.7 None
12. Melrose Dr. /
North Ave Vista Signal AM 35.7 D 36.0 D 0.3 None PM 35.3 D 38.8 D 3.5 None
13. Melrose Dr. / Olive Ave Vista Signal
AM 44.9 D 50.9 D 6.0 Direct PM 41.1 D 45.2 D 4.1 None
14. W. Vista Wy. / SR-78 WB On-Ramp Vista Signal
AM 9.8 A 9.9 A 0.1 None PM 10.6 B 10.7 B 0.1 None
15. Melrose Dr. /
W. Vista Wy Vista Signal AM 59.2 E 65.9 E 6.7 Direct PM 60.7 E 63.9 E 3.2 Direct
16. SR-76 / College Boulevard Caltrans Signal
AM 57.4 E 57.5 E 0.1 None d
PM 81.3 F 83.0 F 1.7 None d
Footnotes: a. Average delay expressed in seconds per vehicle. b. Level of Service. c. Increase in delay due to project traffic. d. The increase in delay is less than the allowable threshold of 2 seconds and hence a significant impact is not calculated.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
46
TABLE 10–2 NEAR-TERM STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Street Segment Jurisdiction Functional Road Class
Existing LOS Ea
Capacity
Existing + Cumulative Projects
Existing + Cumulative Projects + Project
∆ V/C e Impact Type
ADT b LOS c V/C d ADT LOS V/C SR-76
Town Center Dr. to College Blvd. Caltrans 4-Lane Expressway 60,000 47,560 C 0.793 47,970 C 0.800 0.007 None College Blvd. to N. Santa Fe Ave. Caltrans 4-Lane Expressway 60,000 53,140 D 0.886 53,750 D 0.896 0.010 None N. Santa Fe Ave. to Guajome Lake
Caltrans 4-Lane Expressway 60,000 50,370 D 0.840 50,780 D 0.846 0.006 None
Oceanside Boulevard
Avenida Del Oro to College Blvd. Oceanside 6-Lane Prime 60,000 37,240 B 0.621 37,610 B 0.627 0.006 None College Blvd. to Temple Heights Dr. Oceanside 4-Lane Major 40,000 33,200 D 0.830 34,130 D 0.853 0.023 None Temple Heights Dr. to Catalina Cir. Oceanside 4-Lane Major 40,000 26,500 C 0.663 27,640 C 0.691 0.028 None Catalina Cir. to PA-1 Access Oceanside 4-Lane Major 40,000 24,800 C 0.620 27,520 C 0.688 0.068 None PA-1 Access to Melrose Dr. Oceanside 4-Lane Major 40,000 25,700 C 0.643 28,420 C 0.711 0.068 None Melrose Dr. to Sports Park Wy. Oceanside 4-Lane Major 40,000 25,140 C 0.629 26,750 C 0.669 0.040 None
Bobier Drive Sports Park Wy. to N. Santa Fe Ave. Vista 4-Lane Major 40,000 22,160 A 0.554 22,570 A 0.564 0.010 None
N. Santa Fe Avenue SR-76. to Mesa Dr. Oceanside 4-Lane Major 40,000 25,610 C 0.640 26,620 C 0.666 0.026 None Mesa Dr. to Melrose Dr. Oceanside 4-Lane Major 40,000 27,410 C 0.685 28,510 C 0.713 0.028 None Melrose Dr. to Osborne St. Vista 4-Lane Collector 25,000 19,170 C 0.767 19,290 C 0.772 0.005 None
(CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE)
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
47
TABLE 10–2 (CONTINUED) NEAR-TERM STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Street Segment Jurisdiction Functional Road Class
Existing LOS E a Capacity
Existing + Cumulative Projects
Existing + Cumulative Projects + Project ∆ V/C e
Impact Type
ADT b LOS c V/C d ADT LOS V/C Sports Park Way
PA-3 Access to Bobier Dr. Vista 2-Lane Collector 8,800 1,300 A 0.148 2,810 A 0.319 0.171 None N. Melrose Drive N. Santa Fe Ave. to Sagewood Dr. Oceanside 2-Lane Collector 10,000 17,970 F 1.797 19,190 F 1.919 0.122 Direct Sagewood Dr. to Meadowbrook Dr. Oceanside 4-Lane Major 30,000 f 19,470 B 0.649 20,690 B 0.690 0.041 None Meadowbrook Dr. to Oceanside Blvd. Oceanside 2-Lane Collector 10,000 g 22,250 F 2.225 23,960 F 2.396 0.171 Direct Oceanside Blvd. to North Ave. Vista 4-Lane Major 40,000 31,940 C 0.799 33,240 D 0.831 0.032 None North Ave. to Olive Ave. Vista 4-Lane Major 40,000 30,710 C 0.768 31,970 C 0.799 0.031 None Olive Ave. to W. Vista Wy. Vista 4-Lane Major 40,000 37,790 E 0.945 38,890 E 0.972 0.027 Direct W. Vista Wy. to SR-78 EB Off-Ramp Vista 6-Lane Prime 60,000 38,280 B 0.638 38,520 B 0.642 0.004 None SR-78 EB Off-Ramp to Hacienda Dr. Vista 6-Lane Prime 60,000 34,200 A 0.570 34,440 A 0.574 0.004 None
W. Vista Way
SR-78 WB On-Ramp to Melrose Dr. Vista 4-Lane Collector 25,000 20,300 D 0.812 20,750 D 0.830 0.018 None Melrose Dr. to Vista Village Dr. Vista 6-Lane Prime 60,000 19,800 A 0.330 20,250 A 0.338 0.008 None
Footnotes: a. Capacities based on City of Oceanside and City of Vista Roadway Classification & LOS table. b. Average Daily Traffic. c. Level of Service. d. Volume to Capacity ratio. e. Δ denotes a Project-induced increase in the Volume to Capacity ratio. f. This section of N. Melrose Drive is generally a four-lane Major Road and a portion is three lanes. Hence a lower capacity of 30,000 (75% of a Major Road) is assumed. g. Although this two-lane portion of N. Melrose Drive provides an 18’ raised median constructed in anticipation of the full widening of this segment to 6-Lane Prime Arterial standards, for purposes
of being conservative, it was analyzed with a capacity of 10,000 ADT.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
48
10.2.3 Ramp Meter Operations Ramp meter analyses were conducted at the SR-78 westbound on-ramp from W. Vista Way and at the SR-78 eastbound on-ramp from Vista Village Drive under Existing + Near-Term Cumulative Projects + Project conditions. Table 10–3 presents the results.
As seen in Table 10–3, with the addition of cumulative projects and Project traffic, no delay is calculated.
TABLE 10–3 NEAR-TERM RAMP METER OPERATIONS
SR-78 Peak Hour
Peak Hour Demand
(per Lane) D a
Flow (per Lane)
F b
Excess Demand
E
Delay (min)
Queue (ft) c
W. Vista Way WB to SR-78 WB (2 SOV) d
Existing + Cumulative Projects AM 387 559 0 0 0
Existing + Cumulative Projects + Project AM 399 559 0 0 0
Project Increase AM 12 N/A N/A 0 0
Footnotes: a. Lane Utilization factor accounted for in peak hour demand calculation. b. Meter Rates obtained from CALTRANS c. Queue calculated assuming vehicle length = 25’ d. SOV – Single Occupancy Vehicle.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
49
10.2.4 Peak Hour Arterial Analysis Peak hour arterial analysis was conducted for the study area street segments calculated to operate at LOS E or worse on a daily basis with the addition of Project traffic. Table 10–4 summarizes the results of the peak hour arterial analysis. As noted in Section 10.2.2, significant impacts were calculated each of the three locations, based on daily analysis per SANTEC/ITE and City guidelines. The results shown below are without mitigation.
The peak hour arterial analysis worksheets for this scenario are included in Appendix F.
TABLE 10–4 NEAR-TERM + PROJECT PEAK HOUR SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Street Segment Direction Near-Term + Project
AM PM
Speed LOS Speed LOS
N. Melrose Drive: N. Santa Fe Ave to Sagewood Dr NB 6.8 F 6.9 F
SB 18.1 D 14.2 E N. Melrose Drive: Meadowbrook Dr to Oceanside Blvd NB 23.0 C 24.9 C
SB 10.5 F 12.7 F N. Melrose Drive: Olive Ave to W. Vista Way NB 10.3 F 5.7 F
SB 1.6 F 6.0 F
Footnotes: a. Speed measured in miles per hour. b. LOS = Level of Service
General Notes Dir. = Direction
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
50
11.0 BUILDOUT (YEAR 2030) CONDITIONS Two alternatives were analyzed in the long-term. Alternate 1 assumes N. Melrose Drive is not connected between Spur Avenue and N. Santa Fe Avenue. Alternate 2 assumes N. Melrose Drive is connected between Spur Avenue and N. Santa Fe Avenue as a 4-Lane Major Road.
11.1 Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 Network Conditions The Buildout (Year 2030) network was developed as part of the City of Oceanside Circulation Element, April 2012. The network changes described in the Oceanside Circulation Element are included in the buildout analysis for this traffic impact study. The 2030 Circulation Element Roadway Plan, as shown in Figure 11–1, represents the planned roadway system along with the classifications of those streets. There are several pieces of the transportation network that change from existing conditions to the 2030 Circulation Element Plan. The major changes to the circulation network include:
SR-76 widened to six lanes N. Santa Fe Avenue as a four lane divided roadway from N. Melrose Drive and Bobier
Drive N. Melrose Drive not extended to SR-76 N. Melrose Drive as six lanes from N. Santa Fe Avenue to Hacienda Drive North Avenue widened to four lanes Olive Avenue widened to four lanes
Appendix G contains the City of Oceanside Year 2030 Circulation Element (CE) Roadway Plans and the forecasted volumes from the CE.
11.2 Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 Traffic Volumes The Buildout (Year 2030) baseline traffic volumes for both intersections and street segments were obtained from the SANDAG Series 11 Sub-Area traffic model prepared for the 2030 Master Transportation Roadway Plan.
Where peak hour intersection volumes were not available in the Circulation Element, volumes at an intersection were estimated from future ADT volumes using the relationship between existing peak hour turning movements and the existing ADT volumes. This same relationship can be assumed to generally continue in the future. Some Circulation Element volumes were adjusted to account for traffic patterns reflected in the most recent traffic counts at study area locations.
In order to forecast the Year 2030 With Project traffic volumes, LLG tabulated the ADT generated within traffic analysis zone (TAZ) 334, which contains the entire Project area, by the SANDAG Series 11 traffic model. This volume was compared to the ADT that would be generated in Year 2030 by the same TAZ with the development of the proposed Project. In general, the Project results in increased residential density and decreased commercial development as compared to the land uses assumed in the Series 11 model. Projects adds a net of 3,534 ADT (with 295 AM peak hour trips
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
51
and 315 PM peak hour trips) above currently modeled land uses in Year 2030. A table comparing the trips generated by TAZ 334 as included in the Series 11 model and with the addition of the project traffic is included in Appendix G. The net trips were distributed to the street system using the same distribution as the near-term Project volumes in order to arrive at Year 2030 With Project Alternate 1 volumes. A map depicting the boundaries of TAZ 334 is also included in Appendix G.
Figure 11–2 depicts the Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 Without Project traffic volumes. Figure 11–3 depicts the Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 With Project traffic volumes.
11.3 Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 Without Project 11.3.1 Intersection Analysis Table 11–1 summarizes the peak hour intersection operations for the Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 Without Project condition. As seen in Table 11–1, the following intersections are calculated to operate at LOS E or F:
#1. SR-76 / N. Santa Fe Avenue – LOS E during the AM and PM peak hours #16. SR -76 / College Boulevard – LOS E/F during the AM/PM peak hours #17. SR-76 / N. Melrose Drive – LOS F/E during the AM/PM peak hours
Appendix H contains the peak hour intersection analysis worksheets for the Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 Without Project condition.
11.3.2 Segment Operations Table 11–2 summarizes the key segment operations in the study area for the Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 Without Project condition. As seen in Table 11–2, one street segment is calculated to operate at LOS E or F:
N. Santa Fe Avenue: Mesa Drive to N. Melrose Drive – LOS E
11.4 Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 With Project 11.4.1 Intersection Analysis Table 11–1 summarizes the peak hour intersection operations for the Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 With Project condition. As seen in Table 11–1, with the addition of Project traffic, the following intersections are calculated to operate at LOS E or F:
#1. SR-76 / N. Santa Fe Avenue – LOS E during the AM and PM peak hours #9. Oceanside Blvd / N. Melrose Drive – LOS E during the PM peak hour #16. SR-76 / College Boulevard – LOS E/F during the AM/PM peak hours #17. SR-76 / N. Melrose Drive – LOS F/E during the AM/PM peak hours
Based on City of Oceanside significance criteria, a significant impact is calculated at the Oceanside Boulevard / N. Melrose Drive intersection. The increase in delay at the all three remaining intersections is less than the allowable threshold of 2.0 seconds and hence no significant impact is calculated.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
52
Appendix H contains the peak hour intersection analysis worksheets for the Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 With Project condition.
11.4.2 Segment Operations Table 11–2 summarizes the key segment operations in the study area for the Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 1 With Project condition. As seen in Table 11–2, with the addition of Project traffic, one study area street segment is calculated to operate at LOS E or worse:
N. Santa Fe Avenue: Mesa Drive to N. Melrose Drive – LOS E
However, this potential impact is not considered significant since there is no significant impact in the buildout condition with the currently adopted City Circulation Element (Alternative 2 network).
11.5 Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 Network Conditions The Buildout (Year 2030) network was developed as part of the City of Oceanside Circulation Element, April 2012. The network changes described in the Oceanside Circulation Element are included in the buildout analysis for this traffic impact study. The 2030 Circulation Element Roadway Plan, as shown in Figure 11–4, represents the planned roadway system along with the classifications of those streets. There are several pieces of the transportation network that change from existing conditions to the 2030 Circulation Element Plan. The major changes to the circulation network include:
SR-76 widened to six lanes N. Santa Fe Avenue as a four lane divided roadway from N. Melrose Drive and Bobier
Drive Extension of N. Melrose Drive to SR-76 N. Melrose Drive as four lanes from SR-76 to N. Santa Fe Avenue and six lanes from N.
Santa Fe Avenue to Hacienda Drive North Avenue widened to four lanes Olive Avenue widened to four lanes
Appendix G contains the City of Oceanside Year 2030 Circulation Element (CE) Roadway Plans and the forecasted volumes from the CE.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
53
TABLE 11–1 BUILDOUT ALTERNATE 1 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
(YEAR 2030 WITHOUT N. MELROSE DRIVE CONNECTION) Intersection Jurisdiction Control
Type Peak Hour
Buildout Without Project Buildout With Project ∆ Delay c Impact Type
Delay a LOS b Delay LOS
1. SR-76 / N. Santa Fe Ave
Oceanside Signal AM 62.2 E 63.6 E 1.4 None d
PM 66.4 E 68.1 E 1.7 None d
2. N. Santa Fe Ave. /
Mesa Dr. Oceanside Signal AM 18.8 B 19.1 B 0.3 None
PM 16.8 B 17.2 B 0.4 None
3. Melrose Dr. / N. Santa Fe Ave.
Oceanside Signal AM 24.9 C 26.2 C 1.3 None
PM 20.2 C 20.8 C 0.6 None
4. Melrose Dr. / Sagewood Dr.
Oceanside Signal AM 12.3 B 12.4 B 0.1 None
PM 15.1 B 15.3 B 0.2 None
5. Melrose Dr. / Meadowbrook Dr.
Oceanside Signal AM 12.6 B 12.9 B 0.3 None
PM 12.3 B 12.4 B 0.1 None
6. Oceanside Blvd. / College Blvd.
Oceanside Signal AM 37.6 D 38.2 D 0.6 None
PM 40.4 D 41.1 D 0.7 None
7. Oceanside Blvd. / Temple Heights Dr.
Oceanside Signal AM 39.3 D 40.2 D 0.9 None
PM 52.0 D 54.7 D 2.7 None
8. Oceanside Blvd. / Catalina Cir.
Oceanside Signal AM 9.4 A 10.7 B 1.3 None
PM 14.9 B 19.6 B 4.7 None
CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
54
TABLE 11–1 (CONTINUED) BUILDOUT ALTERNATE 1 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
(YEAR 2030 WITHOUT N. MELROSE DRIVE CONNECTION) Intersection Jurisdiction Control
Type Peak Hour
Buildout Without Project Buildout With Project ∆ Delay c Impact Type
Delay a LOS b Delay LOS
9. Oceanside Blvd. /
Melrose Dr. Oceanside Signal AM 37.5 D 39.6 D 2.1 None
PM 48.9 D 57.1 E 8.2 Direct
10. Bobier Dr. / Sports Park Wy.
Oceanside Signal AM 5.1 A 6.8 A 1.7 None
PM 7.5 A 9.6 A 2.1 None
11. Bobier Dr. / N. Santa Fe Ave.
Vista Signal AM 31.9 C 32.2 C 0.3 None
PM 47.9 D 48.4 D 0.5 None
12. N. Melrose Dr. / North Ave
Vista Signal AM 37.8 D 38.6 D 0.8 None
PM 41.6 D 42.6 D 1.0 None
13. N. Melrose Dr. / Olive Ave.
Vista Signal AM 30.8 C 31.2 C 0.4 None
PM 36.5 D 37.2 D 0.7 None
14. W. Vista Wy. / SR-78 WB On-Ramp
Caltrans / Vista
Signal AM 9.9 A 10.0 A 0.1 None
PM 11.3 B 11.4 B 0.1 None
15. N. Melrose Dr. / W. Vista Wy.
Caltrans / Vista
Signal AM 34.1 C 34.3 C 0.2 None
PM 48.0 D 49.3 D 1.3 None
CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
55
SIGNALIZED
Delay LOS
0.0 ≤ 10.0 A 10.1 to 20.0 B 20.1 to 35.0 C 35.1 to 55.0 D 55.1 to 80.0 E ≥ 80.1 F
TABLE 11–1 (CONTINUED) BUILDOUT ALTERNATE 1 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
(YEAR 2030 WITHOUT N. MELROSE DRIVE CONNECTION) Intersection Jurisdiction Control
Type Peak Hour
Buildout Without Project Buildout With Project ∆ Delay c Impact Type
Delay a LOS b Delay LOS
16. SR-76 /
College Blvd Caltrans Signal AM 70.4 E 70.5 E 0.1 None d
PM 111.9 F 113.3 F 1.4 None d
17. SR-76 /
N. Melrose Drive Caltrans Signal AM 94.6 F 95.8 F 1.2 None d
PM 56.5 E 57.0 E 0.5 None d
Footnotes: a. Average delay expressed in seconds per vehicle. b. Level of Service. c. Increase in delay due to project d. The increase in delay is less than the allowable threshold of 2 seconds and hence a significant impact is not calculated.
General Notes: Bold indicates a potential significant impact.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
56
TABLE 11–2 BUILDOUT ALTERNATE 1 STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS (YEAR 2030 WITHOUT N. MELROSE DRIVE CONNECTION)
Street Segment Jurisdiction Buildout Capacity (LOS E) a
Buildout Without Project Buildout With Project ∆ V/C e Impact Type
ADT b LOS c V/C d ADT LOS V/C
SR-76 Town Center Dr. to College Blvd Caltrans 80,000 53,400 C 0.668 53,750 C 0.672 0.004 None
College Blvd. to N. Santa Fe Ave Caltrans 80,000 61,000 D 0.763 61,530 D 0.769 0.006 None N. Santa Fe Ave. to Guajome Lake Rd Caltrans 80,000 69,000 D 0.863 69,350 D 0.867 0.004 None
Oceanside Boulevard
Avenida Del Oro to College Blvd. Oceanside 60,000 41,300 C 0.688 41,620 C 0.694 0.006 None
College Blvd. to Temple Heights Dr Oceanside 40,000 28,900 C 0.723 29,710 C 0.743 0.020 None Temple Heights Dr. to Catalina Cir Oceanside 40,000 26,800 C 0.670 27,790 C 0.695 0.025 None
Catalina Cir. to PA-1 Access Oceanside 40,000 26,800 C 0.670 29,170 C 0.729 0.059 None PA-1 Access to Melrose Dr Oceanside 40,000 28,800 C 0.720 31,170 D 0.779 0.059 None Melrose Dr. to Sports Park Wy Oceanside 40,000 31,200 D 0.780 32,600 D 0.815 0.035 None
Bobier Drive
Sports Park Wy. to N. Santa Fe Ave Vista 40,000 32,500 D 0.813 32,850 D 0.821 0.008 None N. Santa Fe Avenue SR-76. to Mesa Dr Oceanside 40,000 32,900 D 0.823 33,780 D 0.845 0.022 None Mesa Dr. to Melrose Dr Oceanside 40,000 35,900 E 0.898 36,850 E 0.921 0.023 None f
Melrose Dr. to Osborne St Vista 40,000 27,800 B 0.695 27,910 B 0.698 0.003 None
(CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE)
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
57
TABLE 11–2 (CONTINUED) BUILDOUT ALTERNATE 1 STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS (YEAR 2030 WITHOUT N. MELROSE DRIVE CONNECTION)
Street Segment Jurisdiction Buildout Capacity (LOS E) a
Buildout Without Project Buildout With Project ∆ V/C e Impact Type
ADT b LOS c V/C d ADT LOS V/C
Sports Park Way
PA-3 Access to Bobier Dr Vista 8,800 3,700 A 0.420 5,010 A 0.569 0.149 None N. Melrose Drive N. Santa Fe Ave. to Sagewood Dr Oceanside 60,000 27,300 B 0.455 28,360 B 0.473 0.018 None Sagewood Dr. to Meadowbrook Dr Oceanside 60,000 23,400 A 0.390 24,460 A 0.408 0.018 None Meadowbrook Dr. to Oceanside Blvd Oceanside 60,000 25,200 B 0.420 26,690 B 0.445 0.025 None Oceanside Blvd. to North Ave Vista 60,000 37,600 B 0.627 38,730 B 0.646 0.019 None North Ave. to Olive Ave Vista 60,000 32,300 A 0.538 33,400 A 0.557 0.019 None Olive Ave. to W. Vista Wy Vista 60,000 33,100 A 0.552 34,050 A 0.568 0.016 None W. Vista Wy. to SR-78 EB Off-Ramp Vista 60,000 33,100 A 0.552 33,310 A 0.555 0.003 None SR-78 EB Off-Ramp to Hacienda Dr Vista 60,000 30,300 A 0.505 30,510 A 0.509 0.004 None
W. Vista Way
SR-78 WB On-Ramp to Melrose Dr Vista 40,000 21,900 A 0.548 22,290 A 0.557 0.009 None Melrose Dr. to Vista Village Dr Vista 60,000 12,500 A 0.208 12,890 A 0.215 0.007 None
Footnotes: a. Capacities based on City of Oceanside and City of Vista Roadway Classification & LOS tables. b. Average Daily Traffic. c. Level of Service. d. Volume to Capacity ratio. e. Δ denotes a Project-induced increase in the Volume to Capacity ratio. f. This impact is not considered significant since there is no significant impact in the buildout condition with the currently adopted City Circulation Element (Alternative 2 network)
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
58
11.6 Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 Traffic Volumes The Buildout (Year 2030) baseline traffic volumes for both intersections and street segments were obtained from the SANDAG Series 11 Sub-Area traffic model prepared for the 2030 Master Transportation Roadway Plan which are also graphically represented in the City of Oceanside Circulation Element.
Where peak hour intersection volumes were not available in the Circulation Element, volumes at an intersection were estimated from future ADT volumes using the relationship between existing peak hour turning movements and the existing ADT volumes. This same relationship can be assumed to generally continue in the future. Some volumes from the Circulation Element were adjusted to account for traffic patterns reflected in more recent traffic counts at study area locations.
Year 2030 Alternate 2 Project traffic volumes are generally the same as for Alternate 1, derived by the process described in Section 11.2. The only difference is the distribution of Project traffic in the vicinity of the N. Melrose Drive extension. The 10% of Project traffic (353 ADT, 30AM and 32 PM) traveling to/from SR-76 east of N. Santa Fe Avenue is assumed to remain on and access SR-76 via N. Melrose Drive, rather than via N. Santa Fe Avenue as in the near-term and Year 2030 Alternate 1 scenarios.
Figure 11–5 depicts the Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 Without Project traffic volumes. Figure 11–6 depicts the Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 With Project traffic volumes.
11.7 Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 Without Project 11.7.1 Intersection Analysis Table 11–3 summarizes the peak hour intersection operations for the Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 Without Project condition. As seen in Table 11–3, the following intersections are calculated to operate at LOS E or F:
#15. Melrose Drive / W. Vista Way – LOS E during the PM peak hour #16. SR-76 / College Boulevard – LOS E/F during the AM/PM peak hours #17. SR-76 / N. Melrose Drive – LOS E during the AM peak hour
Appendix I contains the peak hour intersection analysis worksheets for the Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 Without Project condition.
11.7.2 Segment Operations Table 11–4 summarizes the key segment operations in the study area for the Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 Without Project condition. As seen in Table 11–4, all study area street segments are calculated to operate at LOS D or better.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
59
11.8 Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 With Project 11.8.1 Intersection Analysis Table 11–3 summarizes the peak hour intersection operations for the Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 With Project condition. As seen in Table 11–3, with the addition of Project traffic, the following intersections are calculated to operate at LOS E or F:
#9. Oceanside Blvd / N. Melrose Drive – LOS E during the PM peak hour #15. Melrose Drive / W. Vista Way – LOS E during the PM peak hour #16. SR-76 / College Boulevard – LOS E/F during the AM/PM peak hours #17. SR-76 / N. Melrose Drive – LOS E during the AM peak hour
Based on City of Oceanside and City of Vista significance criteria, significant impacts are calculated at the Oceanside Blvd / N. Melrose Drive and the Melrose Drive / W. Vista Way intersections. The increases in delay at the remaining two intersections are less than the allowable threshold of 2.0 seconds and hence no significant impact is calculated.
Appendix I contains the peak hour intersection analysis worksheets for the Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 With Project condition.
11.8.2 Segment Operations Table 11–4 summarizes the key segment operations in the study area for the Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2 With Project condition. As seen in Table 11–4, with the addition of Project traffic, all study area street segments are calculated to continue to operate at LOS D or better. Hence, no significant segment impacts are calculated for Buildout (Year 2030) Alternate 2.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
60
TABLE 11–3 BUILDOUT ALTERNATE 2 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS (YEAR 2030 WITH N. MELROSE DRIVE CONNECTION)
Intersection Jurisdiction Control Type
Peak Hour
Buildout Without Project Buildout With Project ∆ Delay c Impact Type
Delay a LOS b Delay LOS
1. SR-76 / N. Santa Fe Ave Oceanside Signal AM 50.2 D 51.6 D 1.4 None
PM 47.8 D 51.2 D 3.4 None
2. N. Santa Fe Ave. / Mesa Dr. Oceanside Signal AM 16.6 B 16.7 B 0.1 None
PM 16.4 B 16.6 B 0.2 None
3. Melrose Dr. / N. Santa Fe Ave. Oceanside Signal AM 49.8 D 52.1 D 2.3 None PM 45.4 D 46.0 D 0.6 None
4. Melrose Dr. / Sagewood Dr. Oceanside Signal AM 12.6 B 12.7 B 0.1 None
PM 17.7 B 18.3 B 0.6 None
5. Melrose Dr. / Meadowbrook Dr. Oceanside Signal AM 12.8 B 13.2 B 0.4 None PM 12.6 B 12.8 B 0.2 None
6. Oceanside Blvd. / College Blvd. Oceanside Signal AM 39.2 D 39.9 D 0.7 None
PM 40.4 D 41.0 D 0.6 None
7. Oceanside Blvd. / Temple Heights Dr. Oceanside Signal AM 39.9 D 40.9 D 1.0 None PM 52.1 D 54.8 D 2.7 None
8. Oceanside Blvd. / Catalina Cir. Oceanside Signal AM 9.6 A 10.6 B 1.0 None
PM 12.9 B 15.5 B 2.6 None
CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
61
TABLE 11–3 (CONTINUED) BUILDOUT ALTERNATE 2 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS (YEAR 2030 WITH N. MELROSE DRIVE CONNECTION)
Intersection Jurisdiction Control Type
Peak Hour
Buildout Without Project Buildout With Project ∆ Delay c Impact Type
Delay a LOS b Delay LOS
9. Oceanside Blvd. / Melrose Dr. Oceanside Signal AM 40.7 D 42.7 D 2.0 None
PM 51.2 D 58.4 E 7.2 Direct
10. Bobier Dr. / Sports Park Wy. Vista Signal AM 5.1 A 6.9 A 1.8 None
PM 7.5 A 9.6 A 2.1 None
11. Bobier Dr. / N. Santa Fe Ave. Vista Signal AM 31.9 C 32.1 C 0.2 None
PM 47.9 D 48.4 D 0.5 None
12. Melrose Dr. / North Ave Vista Signal AM 41.5 D 42.8 D 1.3 None
PM 41.3 D 42.2 D 0.9 None
13. Melrose Dr. / Olive Ave. Vista Signal AM 32.2 C 32.6 C 0.4 None
PM 37.9 D 38.6 D 0.7 None
14. W. Vista Wy. / SR-78 WB On-Ramp Vista Signal AM 9.8 A 9.9 A 0.1 None
PM 11.3 B 11.4 B 0.1 None
15. Melrose Dr. / W. Vista Wy. Vista Signal AM 34.6 C 34.9 C 0.3 None
PM 57.0 E 60.4 E 3.4 Cumulative
CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
62
SIGNALIZED
Delay LOS
0.0 ≤ 10.0 A 10.1 to 20.0 B 20.1 to 35.0 C 35.1 to 55.0 D 55.1 to 80.0 E ≥ 80.1 F
TABLE 11–3 (CONTINUED) BUILDOUT ALTERNATE 2 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS (YEAR 2030 WITH N. MELROSE DRIVE CONNECTION)
Intersection Jurisdiction Control Type
Peak Hour
Buildout Without Project Buildout With Project ∆ Delay c Impact Type
Delay a LOS b Delay LOS
16. SR-76 / College Blvd Caltrans Signal AM 73.8 E 75.1 E 1.3 None d
PM 107.7 F 109.2 F 1.5 None d
17. SR-76 / N. Melrose Drive Caltrans Signal AM 71.8 E 71.8 E 0.0 None d
PM 52.4 D 52.6 D 0.2 None
Footnotes: a. Average delay expressed in seconds per vehicle. b. Level of Service. c. Increase in delay due to project d. The increase in delay is less than the allowable threshold of 2 seconds and hence a significant impact is not calculated.
General Notes: Bold indicates a potential significant impact.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
63
TABLE 11–4 BUILDOUT ALTERNATE 2 STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS
(YEAR 2030 WITH N. MELROSE DRIVE CONNECTION) Street Segment Jurisdiction Buildout
Capacity (LOS E) a
Buildout Without Project Buildout With Project ∆ V/C e Impact Type
ADT b LOS c V/C d ADT LOS V/C
SR-76 Town Center Dr. to College Blvd Caltrans 80,000 51,500 C 0.644 51,850 C 0.648 0.004 None
College Blvd. to N. Santa Fe Ave Caltrans 80,000 56,200 C 0.703 56,730 C 0.709 0.006 None N. Santa Fe Ave. to Guajome Lake Rd Caltrans 80,000 58,000 C 0.725 58,000 C 0.725 0.000 None
Oceanside Boulevard
Avenida Del Oro to College Blvd. Oceanside 60,000 41,400 C 0.690 41,720 C 0.695 0.005 None College Blvd. to Temple Heights Dr Oceanside 40,000 29,500 C 0.738 30,310 D 0.758 0.020 None Temple Heights Dr. to Catalina Cir Oceanside 40,000 29,500 C 0.738 30,490 D 0.762 0.024 None
Catalina Cir. to PA-1 Access Oceanside 40,000 29,500 C 0.738 31,870 D 0.797 0.059 None PA-1 Access to Melrose Dr Oceanside 40,000 29,500 C 0.738 31,870 D 0.797 0.059 None Melrose Dr. to Sports Park Wy Oceanside 40,000 28,000 C 0.700 29,400 C 0.735 0.035 None
Bobier Drive
Sports Park Wy. to N. Santa Fe Ave Vista 40,000 28,400 C 0.710 28,750 C 0.719 0.009 None N. Santa Fe Avenue SR-76. to Mesa Dr Oceanside 40,000 25,700 C 0.643 26,230 C 0.656 0.013 None Mesa Dr. to Melrose Dr Oceanside 40,000 27,500 C 0.688 28,100 C 0.703 0.015 None
Melrose Dr. to Osborne St Vista 40,000 25,600 B 0.640 25,710 B 0.643 0.003 None
(CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE)
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
64
TABLE 11–4 (CONTINUED) BUILDOUT ALTERNATE 2 STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS
(YEAR 2030 WITH N. MELROSE DRIVE CONNECTION) Street Segment Jurisdiction Buildout
Capacity (LOS E) a
Buildout Without Project Buildout With Project ∆ V/C e Impact Type
ADT b LOS c V/C d ADT LOS V/C
Sports Park Way
PA-3 Access to Bobier Dr Vista 8,800 3,700 A 0.420 5,010 A 0.569 0.149 None
N. Melrose Drive SR-76 to N. Santa Fe Ave Oceanside 40,000 26,500 C 0.663 26,850 C 0.671 0.008 None N. Santa Fe Ave. to Sagewood Dr Oceanside 60,000 36,600 C 0.610 37,660 C 0.628 0.018 None Sagewood Dr. to Meadowbrook Dr Oceanside 60,000 36,600 C 0.610 37,660 C 0.628 0.018 None Meadowbrook Dr. to Oceanside Blvd Oceanside 60,000 36,600 C 0.610 38,090 C 0.635 0.025 None Oceanside Blvd. to North Ave Vista 60,000 43,800 C 0.730 44,930 C 0.749 0.019 None North Ave. to Olive Ave Vista 60,000 38,400 B 0.640 39,500 B 0.658 0.018 None Olive Ave. to W. Vista Wy Vista 60,000 37,700 B 0.628 38,650 B 0.644 0.016 None W. Vista Wy. to SR-78 EB Off-Ramp Vista 60,000 37,700 B 0.628 37,910 B 0.632 0.004 None SR-78 EB Off-Ramp to Hacienda Dr Vista 60,000 34,500 A 0.575 34,710 A 0.579 0.004 None
W. Vista Way
SR-78 WB On-Ramp to Melrose Dr Vista 40,000 15,800 A 0.395 16,190 A 0.405 0.010 None Melrose Dr. to Vista Village Dr Vista 60,000 17,000 A 0.283 17,390 A 0.290 0.007 None
Footnotes: a. Capacities based on City of Oceanside and City of Vista Roadway Classification & LOS tables. b. Average Daily Traffic. c. Level of Service. d. Volume to Capacity ratio. e. Δ denotes a Project-induced increase in the Volume to Capacity ratio.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
65
11.9 Queuing Analysis A Year 2030 queuing analysis was conducted at three intersections along Oceanside Boulevard and N. Melrose Drive, in the project vicinity where the project adds U-turns at these intersections. The calculated queue lengths in the left-turn movements, where the project adds U-turns are summarized in Table 11–5.
As seen in Table 11–5, the maximum forecasted queues at these intersections may exceed the existing storage lengths. The recommended storage lengths indicated in Table 11–5 should be provided to accommodate these calculated queue lengths.
Appendix J includes the Queuing analysis worksheets.
TABLE 11–5 QUEUING ANALYSIS YEAR 2030
Intersection Movement Existing / Recommended
Storage Length in feet
Forecasted Queue length in Feet ─ Maximum of AM / PM Peak Hours
Without N. Melrose Drive Connection
With N. Melrose Drive Connection
5. N. Melrose Dr/ Meadowbrook Dr NBL 170 / 210 170 210
8. Catalina Cr / Oceanside Blvd WBL 110 / 210 180 210
9. N. Melrose Dr/ Oceanside Blvd EBL 200 / 250 230 250
SBL 175 / 250 250 250
11.10 Weaving Analysis A weaving analysis was conducted at the PA-2 access driveway on N. Melrose Drive to determine the impacts if any, of the weaving due to the driveway on the segment operations on N. Melrose Drive. The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology for weaving analysis on freeways was utilized. Since this is a surface street, lower speed of 45 mph and lane capacity of 1,800 vehicles per hour per lane was used to simulate the surface road conditions. The Highway Capacity Software (HCS) was used in the analysis.
Table 11–6 summarizes the results of the weaving analysis for both Year 2030 Alternatives. As seen in Table 11–6, with both alternatives, the calculated weaving LOS is B or better. Hence, the weaving from PA-2 Driveway to Meadowbrook Drive will operate adequately.
Appendix K includes the HCS weaving analysis worksheets.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
66
TABLE 11–6 WEAVING ANALYSIS – N. MELROSE DRIVE AT PA-2 DRIVEWAY
Peak Hour Without N. Melrose Drive Connection With N. Melrose Drive Connection
Weaving Segment Density pc/mi/ln
LOS Weaving Segment Density pc/mi/ln
LOS
AM 8.8 A 9.4 A
PM 14.5 B 17.9 B
11.11 Peak Hour Arterial Analysis Peak hour arterial analysis was conducted for the study area street segments calculated to operate at LOS E or worse on a daily basis with the addition of Project traffic. One segment operates at LOS E in Alternate 1, while in Alternate 2 all segments operate at LOS D or better. Table 11–7 summarizes the results of the peak hour arterial analysis. As noted in Section 11.3.2, determination of significant impacts is based on daily analysis per SANTEC/ITE and City guidelines, and no significant impact is calculated at this location in the Year 2030 (Alternate 1) scenario. No mitigation is assumed in the results below. The peak hour arterial analysis worksheets for this scenario are included in Appendix I.
TABLE 11–7 YEAR 2030 (ALTERNATE 1) + PROJECT PEAK HOUR SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Street Segment Direction Year 2030 (Alternate 1) + Project
AM PM
Speed LOS Speed LOS N. Santa Fe Ave: Mesa Dr to Melrose Dr EB 10.2 F 11.8 F
WB 27.0 D 25.1 D
Footnotes: a. Speed measured in miles per hour. b. LOS = Level of Service
Buildout (Year 2030) Conditions DiagramFigure 11-1
Melrose + Oceanside
N:\2406\Figures\Sept 2016Date: 09/16/16
Alternative 1 Conditions (No Melrose Drive Connection)
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
1
9
5
4
3
2
7
8
6
16
1110
13
12
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
!(
Dwy
Mesa
Dr
Colle
ge B
l
Via
Mano
s
Catal
ina C
ir
N. M
elros
e Dr
Temp
le Ht
s Bl
Spor
ts Pa
rk W
y
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
SR-76
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr North Ave
W. Vista Wy
Oceanside Bl
Sagewood DrN. Santa Fe Ave
Meadowbrook Dr
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
N. Santa Fe Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside BlOceanside Bl
W. Vista Wy
9
5 6 7 8
4321
13 14 15 16
121110
17
Hacienda Dr
SR-7
8 WB
On-R
amp
N. Santa Fe Ave
Sagewood Dr
Mesa
Dr
Meadowbrook DrTempleHeightsDr
North Ave
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
College Bl
VistaVillage Dr
Catalina Cir
Dwy A
Dwy B
ProjectSite
W. Vista Wy
N.Me
lrose
Dr
N.Me
lrose
Dr
}78
1415}78
14
15
W. Vista Wy N. MelroseDr
Bobier Dr
Oceansi
de Bl
SR-76
Colle
ge B
l
SR-76
N. M
elros
e Dr
Êeee
}76
!
!
!
!
!
!
!Wy
Sports Park
OsborneSt
N. Melrose Dr
17
4D
4D
4D
4D
4D
2U
4D
4D
2U
2U
6D6D
2U
4D
4D4U
2U
6D
2U
4U 4U
6D
4U
4D
6D
6D
4D
6D
6D
6D6D
4U
4U
2U
RTOL
RTOL
RTOLRTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
Intersection Control
Posted Speed LimitXXTwo-Way Left Turn Lane
D / U Divided / Undivided Roadway# Number of Travel Lanes
Turn Lane Configurations
Right Turn OverlapRTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
69,000
26,800
3,700
35,900
41,300
30,300
28,90
0
33,100
61,000
32,900
25,200
31,200
23,4
00
28,800
27,800
27,3
00
32,50037,600
32,300
21,90012,500
26,80
0
33,1
00
1
9
5
4
3
2
7
8
6
16
1110
13
12
Buildout (Year 2030) Without Project Traffic Volumes
Melrose + Oceanside
Figure 11-2N:\2406\Figures\Sept 2016Date: 09/16/16
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!(
Dwy
Mesa
Dr
Colle
ge B
l
Via
Mano
s
Catal
ina C
ir
N. M
elros
e Dr
Temp
le Ht
s Bl
Spor
ts Pa
rk W
y
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. S
anta
Fe A
veSR-76
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr North Ave
W. Vista Wy
Oceanside Bl
Sagewood DrN. Santa Fe Ave
Meadowbrook Dr
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
N. Santa Fe Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside BlOceanside Bl
W. Vista Wy
5 / 5
0 / 5
5 / 10
0 / 2010 / 5
10 / 10
10 / 3
0
10 / 4
0
10 / 6
0
15 / 20
15 / 60
20 / 10
20 / 20
20 / 30
20 / 8
0
25 / 2
0
30 / 1030
/ 15
30 / 70
30 / 80
30 / 85
40 / 2
0
40 / 90
50 / 2
0
50 / 30
60 / 8
0
60 / 9
0
65 / 4
0
70 / 3
0
70 / 50
70 / 7080
/ 70
90 / 7
0
90 / 8
0
60 / 110
90 / 110
110 /
70
100 / 90
210 /
90
40 / 1
00
20 / 130
70 / 120
80 / 1
50
170 / 80 90 / 1
70
130 / 110
500 / 780470 / 880
440 / 530
430 / 330
420 /
250
400 / 250
390 / 495
380 / 450
370 / 800
350 /
410
350 / 320
340 /
670
330 / 450
320 /
420
290 / 480
290 /
400
290 /
300
260 /
300
260 / 240
240 / 210
230 /
180
230 / 130
220 /
280
220 / 150210 / 220
210 / 210
210 /
170
200 /
375
200 / 29520
0 / 26
0
200 / 180
190 / 335
190 /
100
180 /
250
180 /
230
180 / 120
170 / 340
170 /
240
170 /
210
165 /
280
160 /
100
155 /
450 150 / 280
150 / 200
150 / 160
150 / 150
150 / 120
145 /
270
140 / 360
140 /
160
130 / 220
505 /
495
125 /
180
105 /
160
100 /
250
100 / 200
100 / 180
100 /
150
100 / 105
520 / 355
520 / 510
520 / 920
560 /
850
570 /
660
580 /
520
585 / 580
600 / 370
650 / 560
650 / 600
670 / 630
680 /
720
710 / 640
720 / 750
750 / 700800 / 650
820 / 740
830 / 450
880 /
800
900 /
730
995 / 950
710 /
1010
1,100
/ 700
1,160
/ 86
0
1,165 / 980
1,195
/ 910
1,200
/ 900
1,280
/ 945
1,370
/ 970
500 / 1,240
650 /
1,09
0
750 / 1,450
770 / 1,32082
0 / 1,
510
830 /
1,33
0
840 /
1,23
0
840 /
1,45
0
850 /
1,55
0
940 / 1,470
950 / 1,200
1,110 / 1,720
1,850 / 1,260
1,050
/ 1,40
0
1,300 / 1,100
1,450 / 1,130
560 /
850
5 / 5
150 / 150
100 / 90
20 / 3
0
180 / 12018
0 / 25
0
5 / 10
15 / 2
0
30 / 10
150 /
150
5 / 10
10 / 1
0
10 / 60
15 / 2
0
25 / 20
9
5 6 7 8
4321
13 14 15 16
121110
17
Hacienda Dr
SR-7
8 WB
On-R
amp
N. Santa Fe Ave
Sagewood Dr
Mesa
Dr
Meadowbrook DrTemple Heights Dr
North Ave
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
College Bl
Vista Village Dr
Catalina Cir
Dwy A
Dwy B
ProjectSite
W. Vista Wy
Melro
se D
r
N. M
elros
e Dr
}78 [14
15}7814
15
W. Vista Wy N. MelroseDr
Comm
. Dwy
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
AM / PM IntersectionPeak Hour VolumesAM / PM
Study Intersections!!#
Average DailyTraffic VolumesX,XXX
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Bobier Dr
Oceansi
de Bl
SR-76Co
llege
Bl
Alternative 1 Conditions (No Melrose Drive Connection)
N. Melrose Dr
17
!
!
!
!
!
SR-76
N. M
elros
e Dr
100 / 150
1,050 / 1,510280 / 360
500 /
370
50 / 5
020
0 / 11
0
50 / 201,950 / 1,650140 / 12015
0 / 12
050
/ 30
50 / 2
0}76
!
!
!
!
!
!
!Wy
Sports Park
OsborneSt
53,400
N. M
elros
e Dr
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(53,750
29,71
0
41,620
32,850
61,530
33,310
69,350
34,0
50
36,850
5,010
27,910
32,600
24,4
60
29,170
28,3
60
27,790
33,780
31,170
33,400
26,690
38,730
12,890
30,510
1
9
5
4
3
2
7
8
6
16
1110
13
12
Buildout (Year 2030) With Project Traffic Volumes
Melrose + Oceanside
Figure 11-3N:\2406\Figures\Sept 2016Date: 09/16/16
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!(
Dwy
Mesa
Dr
Colle
ge B
l
Via
Mano
s
Catal
ina C
ir
N. M
elros
e Dr
Temp
le Ht
s Bl
Spor
ts Pa
rk W
y
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. S
anta
Fe A
veSR-76
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr North Ave
W. Vista Wy
Oceanside Bl
Sagewood DrN. Santa Fe Ave
Meadowbrook Dr
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
N. Santa Fe Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside BlOceanside Bl
W. Vista Wy
5 / 5
0 / 5
5 / 10
0 / 2010 / 5
10 / 10
10 / 3
0
10 / 4
010 / 60
15 / 20
15 / 60
18 / 6
4
20 / 10
20 / 20
20 / 30
25 / 2
0
30 / 1030
/ 15
30 / 70
30 / 80
40 / 2
0
40 / 90
50 / 2
0
50 / 30
60 / 8
0
60 / 9
0
65 / 4
0
70 / 3
0
70 / 50
70 / 7080
/ 70
90 / 7
0
94 / 8
2
90 / 110
110 /
70
96 / 1
15
100 / 90
210 /
90
170 / 80 80 / 1
50
22 / 139
40 / 1
00
49 / 168
70 / 120
102 / 90
611 /
882
115 / 189
126 / 119130 / 110
441 / 337
440 / 530
440 /
262
403 / 257
391 / 470
390 / 495
370 / 800
353 / 323
350 /
410
340 /
670
330 / 450
325 /
423
290 / 480
290 /
400
290 /
300
262 /
304
260 / 240
240 / 386
240 / 210
239 /
200
230 /
180
230 / 130
227 / 316
226 /
403
220 /
280
220 / 150210 / 220
210 / 210
200 /
260
200 / 180
200 /
135
184 / 122
182 /
254
182 /
231
180 /
250
180 / 120
175 /
219
171 /
292
170 / 340
170 /
240
163 /
107
162 /
479
156 / 123
154 /
286
152 /
151
151 / 154
150 / 280
150 / 200
150 / 160
150 / 150
142 /
162
140 / 360
133 / 225
484 / 912
505 /
495
125 /
180
121 / 157
509 / 786109 / 205
105 /
160
102 /
176
102 /
154
100 /
250
526 / 513
530 / 938
547 / 367
560 /
850
573 /
666
580 /
520
604 / 372
617 / 600 656 / 571
666 / 630
690 / 642
709 /
737
720 / 750
727 / 651
750 / 700829 / 704
841 / 470
863 / 767
899 /
812
905 /
732
1,048 / 982
1,129
/ 717
1,174 / 991
1,192
/ 92
1
1,227
/ 971
1,257
/ 934
1,280
/ 945
525 / 1,286
653 /
1,09
7
710 /
1,01
0
780 / 1,327
780 / 1,507
839 /
1,54
5
840 /
1,45
0
880 /
1,60
588
6 / 1,
365
896 /
1,26
5951 / 1,490
998 / 1,229
1,110 / 1,720
1,850 / 1,260
1,084
/ 1,46
4
1,327 / 1,150
1,421
/ 1,00
0
1,469 / 1,142
15 / 2
0
20 / 3
0
25 / 20
30 / 10
5 / 5
5 / 10
5 / 10
10 / 1
0
15 / 2
0
9
5 6 7 8
4321
13 14 15 16
121110
17
Hacienda Dr
SR-7
8 WB
On-R
amp
N. Santa Fe Ave
Sagewood Dr
Mesa
Dr
Meadowbrook DrTemple Heights Dr
North Ave
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
College Bl
Vista Village Dr
Catalina Cir
Dwy A
Dwy B
ProjectSite
W. Vista Wy
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
}78 [14
15}7814
15
W. Vista Wy N. MelroseDr
Comm
. Dwy
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
AM / PM IntersectionPeak Hour VolumesAM / PM
Study Intersections!!#
Average DailyTraffic VolumesX,XXX
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Bobier Dr
Oceansi
de Bl
SR-76Co
llege
Bl
Alternative 1 Conditions (No Melrose Drive Connection)
N. Melrose Dr
17
!
!
!
!
!
SR-76
N. M
elros
e Dr
100 / 150
1,065 / 1,520280 / 360
500 /
370
50 / 5
020
0 / 11
0
50 / 201,958 / 1,667140/ 12015
0 / 12
050
/ 30
50 / 2
0}76
!
!
!
!
!
!
!Wy
Sports Park
OsborneSt
N. M
elros
e Dr
22,290
Buildout (Year 2030) Conditions DiagramFigure 11-4
Melrose + Oceanside
N:\2406\Figures\Sept 2016Date: 09/16/16
Alternative 2 Conditions (With Melrose Drive Connection)
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
1
9
5
4
3
2
7
8
6
16
1110
13
12
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
Êeee
!(
Dwy
Mesa
Dr
Colle
ge B
l
Via
Mano
s
Catal
ina C
ir
N. M
elros
e Dr
Temp
le Ht
s Bl
Spor
ts Pa
rk W
y
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
SR-76
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr North Ave
W. Vista Wy
Oceanside Bl
Sagewood DrN. Santa Fe Ave
Meadowbrook Dr
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
N. Santa Fe Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside BlOceanside Bl
W. Vista Wy
9
5 6 7 8
4321
13 14 15 16
121110
17
Hacienda Dr
SR-7
8 WB
On-R
amp
N. Santa Fe Ave
Sagewood Dr
Mesa
Dr
Meadowbrook DrTempleHeightsDr
North Ave
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
College Bl
VistaVillage Dr
Catalina Cir
Dwy A
Dwy B
ProjectSite
W. Vista Wy
N.Me
lrose
Dr
N.Me
lrose
Dr
}78
1415}78
14
15
W. Vista Wy N. MelroseDr
Bobier Dr
Oceansi
de Bl
SR-76
Colle
ge B
l
SR-76
N. M
elros
e Dr
Êeee
17
}76
!
!
!
!
!
!
!Wy
Sports Park
OsborneSt
N. M
elros
e Dr
4D
4D
4D
4D
4D
2U
4D
4D
2U
2U
6D6D
2U
4D
4D4U
2U
6D
2U
4U 4U
6D
4U
4D
4D
6D
6D
4D
6D
6D
6D6D
4U
4U
2U
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
RTOL
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
58,000
29,500
3,700
27,500
41,400
34,500
37,700
56,200
26,5
00
25,700
36,600
28,000
25,600
28,40043,800
38,400
15,80017,000 37
,700
29,50
0
29,50
0
29,500
36,6
0036
,600
1
9
5
4
3
2
7
8
6
16
1110
13
12
Buildout (Year 2030) Without Project Traffic Volumes
Melrose + Oceanside
Figure 11-5N:\2406\Figures\Sept 2016Date: 09/16/16
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!(
Dwy
Mesa
Dr
Colle
ge B
l
Via
Mano
s
Catal
ina C
ir
N. M
elros
e Dr
Temp
le Ht
s Bl
Spor
ts Pa
rk W
y
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. S
anta
Fe A
veSR-76
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr North Ave
W. Vista Wy
Oceanside Bl
Sagewood DrN. Santa Fe Ave
Meadowbrook Dr
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
N. Santa Fe Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside BlOceanside Bl
W. Vista Wy
5 / 5
0 / 5
5 / 10
0 / 2010 / 5
10 / 10
10 / 2
0
10 / 3
0
10 / 4
010 / 60
10 / 7
0
15 / 20
15 / 60
20 / 10
20 / 20
20 / 30
20 / 8
0
25 / 20
30 / 10
30 / 1
530 / 70
30 / 80
30 / 85
40 / 10
40 / 2
0
40 / 90
50 / 2
0
50 / 30
60 / 8
0
60 / 9
0
65 / 4
0
70 / 3
0
70 / 70
80 / 7
0
90 / 7
0
80 / 110
110 /
70
90 / 110
100 /
80
20 / 13021
0 / 90
40 / 1
00
70 / 120
70 / 250
170 / 80 80 / 1
50
100 / 90
90 / 1
70
140 / 110
110 /
250
430 /
300
390 / 495
380 / 550
370 / 800
350 /
670
350 /
410
350 / 320 350 / 250
330 / 450
320 /
400
320 /
250
290 /
400
280 / 480
280 / 260
270 /
300
260 / 240
260 /
230
250 /
300
240 / 210
230 /
180
230 / 130
220 /
280
220 / 210
220 /
190
220 / 150
210 /
950
210 / 220
200 / 18020
0 / 17
0
190 / 435
190 /
260
190 /
250
190 /
100
180 /
230
180 /
220
180 / 120
170 / 340
170 /
240
170 /
210
165 /
280
160 / 160
160 / 150
160 /
140
160 /
100
155 /
425 150 / 280
150 / 200
150 /
150
150 / 120
145 /
270
140 / 360
140 /
160
430 / 330
130 / 250
130 / 230
130 /
180
430 / 530
105 /
160
100 / 300
100 / 20010
0 / 1
50
100 / 105
450 / 400
480 / 780500 / 880
505 /
495510 / 920
520 / 300
520 / 510
550 /
700
560 /
850
570 / 550
570 /
690
580 /
520
585 / 580
600 / 370
600 /
450
640 /
650
650 / 450
650 / 560
670 / 630
710 / 640
750 / 380780 / 900
820 / 740 995 / 845
840 /
1450
1425
/ 945
1,000 / 950
1,080
/ 930
1,165 / 9001,3
80 / 8
40
550 / 1,250
700 /
1,34
0
710 /
1,01
0
750 / 1,32081
0 / 1,
670
820 / 1,550
890 /
1,68
0
900 /
1,58
0
900 /
1,72
0
940 / 1,420
1,460
/ 1,11
0
1,110 / 1,720
1,850 / 1,300
1,350
/ 1,00
0
1,420
/ 1,1
30
1,450
/ 1,06
01,450 / 1,100
1,100
/ 1,40
0
600 / 450180 / 120
70 / 7020
/ 20
5 / 5
100 / 90
150 / 150
5 / 10
10 / 1
0
5 / 10
15 / 2
0
20 / 3
0
9
5 6 7 8
4321
13 14 15 16
121110
17
Hacienda Dr
SR-7
8 WB
On-R
amp
N. Santa Fe Ave
Sagewood Dr
Mesa
Dr
Meadowbrook DrTemple Heights Dr
North Ave
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
College Bl
Vista Village Dr
Catalina Cir
Dwy A
Dwy B
ProjectSite
W. Vista Wy
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
}78 [14
15}7814
15
W. Vista Wy N. MelroseDr
Comm
. Dwy
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
AM / PM IntersectionPeak Hour VolumesAM / PM
Study Intersections!!#
Average DailyTraffic VolumesX,XXX
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Bobier Dr
Oceansi
de Bl
SR-76Co
llege
Bl
Alternative 2 Conditions (With Melrose Drive Connection)
!
!
!
!
!
SR-76
N. M
elros
e Dr
30 / 100
230 / 400340 / 300
410 /
350
200 /
850
300 /
500
30 / 301,750 / 1,300550 / 45010
0 / 50
100 /
5050
/ 20
}76
17
!
!
!
!
!
!
!Wy
Sports Park
OsborneSt
N. M
elros
e Dr
51,500
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(51,850
30,31
0
41,720
28,750
56,730
38,650
58,000
39,5
00
28,100
5,010
25,710
29,400
37,6
60
31,870
26,8
50
30,490
26,230
44,930
38,090
16,190
37,910
37,660
31,870
1
9
5
4
3
2
7
8
6
16
1110
13
12
Buildout (Year 2030) With Project Traffic Volumes
Melrose + Oceanside
Figure 11-6N:\2406\Figures\Sept 2016Date: 09/16/16
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!(
!(
Dwy
Mesa
Dr
Colle
ge B
l
Via
Mano
s
Catal
ina C
ir
N. M
elros
e Dr
Temp
le Ht
s Bl
Spor
ts Pa
rk W
y
N. S
anta
Fe A
ve
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. S
anta
Fe A
veSR-76
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr North Ave
W. Vista Wy
Oceanside Bl
Sagewood DrN. Santa Fe Ave
Meadowbrook Dr
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
N. Santa Fe Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside BlOceanside Bl
W. Vista Wy
5 / 5
0 / 5
5 / 10
0 / 2010 / 5
10 / 10
10 / 2
0
10 / 3
0
10 / 4
010 / 60
15 / 20
15 / 60
18 / 7
4
20 / 10
20 / 20
20 / 30
25 / 20
30 / 10
30 / 1
530 / 70
30 / 80
40 / 10
40 / 2
0
40 / 90
50 / 2
0
50 / 30
60 / 8
0
60 / 9
0
65 / 4
0
70 / 3
0
70 / 70
80 / 7
0
90 / 7
0
110 /
70
80 / 110
96 / 1
15
100 / 90
104 /
82
170 / 80
210 /
9022 / 139
40 / 1
00
49 / 168
70 / 120
70 / 250
102 / 90
80 / 1
50
140 / 11061
1 / 47
0
110 /
250
126 / 119
430 / 530
391 / 570
390 / 495
370 / 800
353 / 323 353 / 257
352 /
420
350 /
670
350 /
410
330 / 450
325 /
253
307 / 28129
0 / 40
0
286 /
258
280 / 480
272 /
304
260 / 240
250 /
300
249 /
220
240 / 486
240 / 210
230 /
180
230 / 130
229 /
962
220 /
280
220 / 210
220 / 150210 / 220
200 / 18020
0 / 17
0
200 /
135
190 /
260
190 /
250
184 / 122
182 /
231
182 /
224
180 / 120
175 /
219
171 /
292
170 / 340
170 /
240
163 /
107
162 /
454
160 / 160
160 / 150
160 /
140
156 / 123
154 /
286
152 /
151
151 / 157
151 / 154
150 / 280
150 / 200
145 / 239
142 /
162
140 / 360
441 / 337
133 / 255
130 /
180
450 /
312
450 / 400
109 / 205
105 /
160
102 /
176
102 /
154
100 / 300
489 / 786
505 /
495
514 / 912
520 / 938
526 / 513
547 / 312
550 /
700
560 /
850
573 /
696
580 /
520
586 / 580
604 / 372
617 / 600
618 / 484650 / 450
656 / 571
669 /
667
690 / 642
727 / 651
750 / 380809 / 917
863 / 767
1,174 / 911
1,016 / 980
1,085
/ 932
1,048 / 877
1,409
/ 857
1,425
/ 945
575 / 1,296
703 /
1,34
7
710 /
1,01
0
760 / 1,32782
9 / 1,
705
840 /
1,45
0850 / 1,607
930 /
1,77
594
6 / 1,
715
951 / 1,44095
6 / 1,
615
1,511
/ 1,14
0
1,110 / 1,720
1,469 / 1,112
1,850 / 1,3001,4
52 / 1
,191
1,407
/ 1,03
41,4
82 / 1
,121
1,134
/ 1,46
4
20 / 2
0
20 / 3
0
70 / 70
5 / 5
5 / 10
5 / 10
10 / 1
0
15 / 2
0
9
5 6 7 8
4321
13 14 15 16
121110
17
Hacienda Dr
SR-7
8 WB
On-R
amp
N. Santa Fe Ave
Sagewood Dr
Mesa
Dr
Meadowbrook DrTemple Heights Dr
North Ave
Olive Ave
Bobier Dr
Oceanside Bl
College Bl
Vista Village Dr
Catalina Cir
Dwy A
Dwy B
ProjectSite
W. Vista Wy
N. M
elros
e Dr
N. M
elros
e Dr
}78 [14
15}7814
15
W. Vista Wy N. MelroseDr
Comm
. Dwy
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
AM / PM IntersectionPeak Hour VolumesAM / PM
Study Intersections!!#
Average DailyTraffic VolumesX,XXX
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Bobier Dr
Oceansi
de Bl
SR-76Co
llege
Bl
Alternative 2 Conditions (With Melrose Drive Connection)
!
!
!
!
!
SR-76
N. M
elros
e Dr
30 / 100
230 / 400340 / 300
410 /
350
200 /
850
315 /
510
30 / 301,750 / 1,300558 / 46710
0 / 50
100 /
5050
/ 20
!
!
!
!
!
17
}76
!
!
!
!
!
!
!Wy
Sports Park
OsborneSt
N. M
elros
e Dr
34,710
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
73
12.0 ACCESS ASSESSMENT The following is a discussion of the proposed access for each of the three Planning Areas.
12.1 Planning Area 1 As described previously in Section 2.0 (Project Description), two right-in / right-out access driveways are planned for Planning Area 1, one to the residential and one to the office/ restaurant land uses. Planning Area 1 is bound to the south by Oceanside Boulevard and the east by N. Melrose Drive. Project access is proposed via a right-in/right-out driveway on Oceanside Boulevard located approximately 600 feet west of the Oceanside Boulevard/Bobier Drive/N. Melrose Drive intersection.
Oceanside Boulevard is classified as a Major Arterial and constructed as a four-lane divided roadway (raised median) between College Boulevard and N. Melrose Drive, along the Project frontage. The posted speed limit is 50 mph. Class II bicycle lanes are provided and on-street parking is prohibited. As such, no frontage improvements to Oceanside Boulevard are proposed or required for this driveway proposal. Frontage improvements are proposed to PA-1’s eastern boundary along N. Melrose Drive, as discussed in Section 13.2 below.
Planning Area 1 is calculated to generate 2,203 ADT, with 89 total inbound trips during both the PM (higher) peak hour, of which approximately 28 total trips would be oriented to the site from the west (11 trips to the residential driveway; 17 trips to the office/restaurant driveway). Additionally, N. Melrose Drive will be built to 6-Lane Prime Arterial standards, which will result in green time at the Oceanside Boulevard/Bobier Drive/N. Melrose Drive intersection being biased towards N. Melrose
Planning Area 1
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
74
Drive. This will result in gaps in westbound traffic on Oceanside Boulevard that would allow inbound left-turning vehicles to enter PA-1.
Based on the relatively low volume of inbound trips and the increase in gaps in opposing traffic on Oceanside Boulevard, an eastbound left-turn in to the site at the residential driveway would be acceptable. However, an inbound (eastbound) left-turn lane at this driveway was not assumed in the analysis. Outbound left-turns should be physically prohibited.
12.2 Planning Area 2 Planning Area 2 is bound to the west by N. Melrose Drive and to the north by Meadowbrook Drive. Project access is proposed via a right-in/right-out driveway on N. Melrose Drive located approximately 580 feet south of the N. Melrose Drive/ Meadowbrook Drive intersection. No access is proposed via Meadowbrook Drive to the north side of the site.
N. Melrose Drive is classified as a Prime Arterial (6-lanes) but currently constructed as a two-lane divided roadway (raised median) between Meadowbrook Drive and Oceanside Boulevard/Bobier Drive. The Project proposes frontage improvements to both sides of N. Melrose Drive for this segment to improve it to 6-Lane Prime Arterial standards. The distance between Meadowbrook Drive and Oceanside Boulevard/Bobier Drive is approximately 1,500’, which is commensurate with a 6-Lane Major Arterial, with a design speed of 55 mph.
Planning Area 2 is calculated to generate 351 ADT, with 25 total inbound trips during the PM peak hour, all of which would be northbound right-turning trips.
Planning Area 2
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
75
Based on the potential speeds on N. Melrose Drive due to the tangent section and down-grade in the northbound direction, a dedicated northbound right-turn lane should be constructed. No acceleration lane would be possible due to the short distance from the driveway to Meadowbrook Drive (approximately 600 feet).
Outbound vehicles destined for southbound locations would conduct a northbound to southbound U-turn at the signal at Meadowbrook Drive. Exiting the site, these vehicles would need to evaluate gaps in the three lanes of northbound traffic. They would then need to weave across three lanes within the approximate 600’ distance from the driveway to Meadowbrook Drive. This will be more difficult during the PM peak hour, when peak flow is in the northbound direction. However, this is also when outbound traffic volumes are lowest (10 trips calculated, or approximately one trip every six minutes). Adequate gaps are expected to occur due to the signal operations at Oceanside Boulevard/Bobier Drive, and any queuing that could occur while waiting for gaps would be onsite, with no interruption to traffic operations on the City’s street.
12.3 Planning Area 3 Planning Area 3 is bound to the south by Bobier Drive and to the east by Sports Park Way. Access is proposed via an existing full access unsignalized “T” driveway on Sports Park Way (constructed, but not operational) ultimately connecting to Oceanside Boulevard.
Planning Area 3 is calculated to generate 1,505 ADT, with 104 total inbound trips during the PM peak hour (the highest inbound volume of either peak hour). Based on low ambient volumes on Sports Park Way, no additional improvements would be expected at the driveway.
Planning Area 3
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
76
12.4 Total Project The total project traffic from all three planning Areas, PA 1, 2 and 3 is shown in the figure below.
Total Project
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
77
13.0 PROJECT IMPROVEMENT PHASING The eight (8) significant impacts associated with the Project are summarized below. TRA-4 (Melrose Drive: Meadowbrook Drive to Oceanside Boulevard) and TRA-8 (Access Driveway / N. Melrose Drive) are frontage improvements. The other five are off-site impacts and the mitigation should be completed commensurate with the number of units that trigger the impact. TRA 2 & 7 (N. Melrose Drive / W. Vista Way) is a Near- as well as a Long-Term impact and hence not listed twice.
TRA-1: SR-76 / N. Santa Fe Avenue TRA-2 & 7: N. Melrose Drive / W. Vista Way (Near- and Long-Term) TRA-3: N. Melrose Drive: N. Santa Fe Avenue to Sagewood Drive TRA-4: N. Melrose Drive: Meadowbrook Drive to Oceanside Boulevard (Frontage Improvement) TRA-5: N. Melrose Drive: Olive Avenue to W. Vista Way TRA-6: Oceanside Boulevard / N. Melrose Drive TRA-8 Access Driveway / N. Melrose Drive – Access to Planning Area 2 (Frontage Improvement)
Section 13.1 discusses the Phasing associated with the two frontage improvements and Section 13.2 discusses the phasing associated with the off-site improvements.
13.1 Frontage Improvements As discussed throughout this report, the Project site consists of three (3) separate Planning Areas (PA’s). The PA’s are located such that PA-1 and PA-2 front a portion of N. Melrose Drive currently built to a substandard classification. This portion of N. Melrose Drive between Meadowbrook Drive and Oceanside Boulevard (TRA-4) is constructed as a two-lane divided roadway and currently provides an 18’-wide raised median in anticipation of the full widening to 6-Lane Prime Arterial standards. With the development of PA-1 and PA-2, frontage improvements to N. Melrose Drive would be required. In accordance with this requirement, the Project will provide half-width improvements to N. Melrose Drive along the both sides of the roadway, subject to the development sequence of PA-1 and PA-2. For example, should PA-1 develop prior to PA-2, half-width improvements would occur along the west side of the roadway (southbound direction), contiguous with PA-1’s site boundary. Should PA-2 develop prior to PA-1, half-width improvements would occur along the east side of the roadway (northbound direction), contiguous with PA-2’s site boundary. A minimum of four (4) lanes should be provided on Melrose Drive between Meadowbrook Drive and Oceanside Boulevard commensurate with any frontage improvements and the improvements should be constructed prior to the issuance of the first occupancy building permitwithin the ___ Planning Area.
TRA-8 should be built prior to the issuance of the first building permit occupancy within Planning Area 2.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
78
13.2 Off-Site Improvements As mentioned above, the following off-site (non-frontage) significant impacts were identified in the traffic study:
TRA-1: SR-76 / N. Santa Fe Avenue TRA-2: N. Melrose Drive / W. Vista Way (Near- and Long-Term) TRA-3: N. Melrose Drive: N. Santa Fe Avenue to Sagewood Drive TRA-5: N. Melrose Drive: Olive Avenue to W. Vista Way TRA-6: Oceanside Boulevard / N. Melrose Drive
A trial and error exercise was conducted to determine the amount of project traffic that could be added to the intersection or segment before a significant impact is triggered, using the City of Oceanside significance criteria. This amount of Project traffic was then translated into the number of dwelling units which would correspond to the Project traffic amounts assuming each unit generates 8 ADT. The following triggers were calculated:
TRA-1: SR-76 / N. Santa Fe Avenue – 270 Units TRA-2: N. Melrose Drive / W. Vista Way – 78 Units TRA-3: N. Melrose Drive: N. Santa Fe Avenue to Sagewood Drive – 83 78 Units TRA-5: N. Melrose Drive: Olive Avenue to W. Vista Way – 370 Units TRA-6: Oceanside Boulevard / N. Melrose Drive – 97 Units
Construction of the restaurant is equivalent to 200 units and construction of the office is the equivalent of 25 units. Section 14.0 of the traffic study indicates the improvements and the trigger amounts for each significant impact.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
79
14.0 SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Per City of Oceanside and City of Vista significance thresholds and the analysis methodology presented in this report, Project and cumulative traffic is calculated to result in the following significant impacts. Mitigation measures to address operating deficiencies are also included in this section.
14.1 Significance of Impacts 14.1.1 Near-Term Direct Impacts Based on the City of Oceanside and City of Vista significance criteria, the Project is calculated to have the following significant direct impacts:
INTERSECTION TRA-1. SR-76 / N. Santa Fe Avenue (City of Oceanside) TRA-2. N. Melrose Drive / W. Vista Way (City of Vista)
STREET SEGMENTS TRA-3. N. Melrose Drive: N. Santa Fe Avenue to Sagewood Drive (City of
Oceanside) TRA-4. N. Melrose Drive: Meadowbrook Drive to Oceanside Boulevard (City of
Oceanside) TRA-5. N. Melrose Drive: Olive Avenue to W. Vista Way (City of Vista)
14.1.2 Buildout (Year 2030) Direct Impact The project is a General Plan Amendment and hence all significant impacts are direct. Thus, based on the City of Oceanside significance criteria, the Project is calculated to have one (1) significant direct impact to the following study area intersection:
INTERSECTION TRA-6. Oceanside Boulevard / N. Melrose Drive (City of Oceanside) TRA-7. N. Melrose Drive / W. Vista Way (City of Vista)
14.2 Mitigation Measures 14.2.1 Near-Term Direct Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures are recommended to mitigate the near-term direct impacts:
INTERSECTIONS TRA-1. SR-76 / N. Santa Fe Avenue (City of Oceanside) – The following mitigation
measures are recommended: A. Relocate the bike lane on northbound N. Santa Fe Avenue from the curb to between
the through/left and right-turn lanes.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
80
B. Extend the storage in the #1 northbound left-turn lane on N. Santa Fe Avenue by 400 feet.
A maximum of 270 EDUs generating 2,160 ADT could be occupied prior to implementation of these mitigation measures.
TRA-2. N. Melrose Drive / W. Vista Way (City of Vista) – Contribute a fair share to City of Vista Capital Improvements Program (CIP) project to add a third SB through lane on Melrose Drive between Ascot Drive and W. Vista Way.
STREET SEGMENTS TRA-3. N. Melrose Drive: N. Santa Fe Avenue to Sagewood Drive (City of Oceanside) –
Prior to issuance of an occupancythe building permit for the 83rd 78th EDU, the Project Applicant shall widen Melrose Drive between North Santa Fe Avenue and Sagewood Drive to a total width of 65 feet to accommodate four travel lanes. The widening of this segment of Melrose Drive shall be contingent upon the City’s acquisition of the necessary right-of-way from adjacent property owners. Based upon the cost of the widening, the applicant should be credited equal to or less than their total thoroughfare fees, but not greater. If the credit of thoroughfare fees is less that the total cost of widening this segment of Melrose Drive, then, the City shall enter uponinto a reimbursement agreement with the project applicant. Reimbursement will come in the form of area projects fair share contributions collected over time by the City with a ten year sunset.
TRA-4. N. Melrose Drive: Meadowbrook Drive and Oceanside Boulevard (City of Oceanside) – Construct the west side of N. Melrose Drive between Meadowbrook Drive and Oceanside Boulevard to 4-Lane Major Arterial standards with dedication to the half width of a 6-Lane Prime Arterial standards with the development of PA-1. Construct the east side of N. Melrose Drive between Meadowbrook Drive and Oceanside Boulevard to the half width of a4-Lane Major Arterial standards with dedication to 6-Lane Prime Arterial standards with the development of PA-2 or PA-3. If only one of the planning areas is constructed, a 4-Lane N. Melrose Drive can accommodate the forecasted traffic. A six-lane N. Melrose Drive shall be provided prior to development of the final planning area. A maximum of 62 EDUs generating less than 500 ADT could be occupied prior to implementation of this mitigation measure.
TRA-5. N. Melrose Drive: Olive Avenue and W. Vista Way (City of Vista) –The mitigation recommended for Impact TRA-2 will mitigate this impact to a level below significance. .
14.2.2 Buildout (Year 2030) Direct Mitigation Measure The following mitigation measures are recommended to mitigate the buildout (Year 2030) cumulative impacts:
INTERSECTIONS
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx
81
TRA-6. Oceanside Boulevard/ N. Melrose Drive (City of Oceanside) – Provide a second southbound left-turn lane, a third southbound through lane, and northbound Right-Turn-Overlap (RTOL) phasing. The westbound U-turn movement on Oceanside Boulevard would need to be prohibited with a R3-4 (No-U-turn symbol) sign. The project should coordinate with the City and SANDAG before finalizing the improvement plans at this intersection to match up with the Inland Rail Trail (IRT) designs. Also required is the upgrade and relocation of affected existing signal hardware, conduit, fiber optic connections and pedestrian count down timer in order to accommodate the recommended improvements. A maximum of 97 units (generating 780 ADT) could be occupied prior to implementation of this mitigation measure.
TRA-7. N. Melrose Drive / W. Vista Way (City of Vista) – The mitigation recommended for Impact TRA-2 will mitigate this impact to a level below significance.
Provision of a right turn lane on westbound Oceanside Boulevard was considered, but rejected. The Year 2030 volumes in this movement are a maximum of 123 in either the AM or PM peak hour. In order to create a right turn pocket, the redesign of the corner of W. Bobier (Oceanside) & Melrose would require the relocation of the Class 1 multi-purpose trail and further encroachment into the developable footprint.
Table 14–1 shows a summary of the impacts and proposed mitigation measures, where appropriate.
14.3 Project Conditions of Approval (City of Oceanside) TRA-8. Not related to a significant impact, TRA-8 is recommended to improve traffic flow at the
Access Driveway / N. Melrose Drive (Access to Planning Area 2) intersection – Provide a dedicated right-turn lane on Northbound Melrose Drive at the driveway to Planning Area 2.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx 82
TABLE 14–1 IMPACT / MITIGATION MEASURES SUMMARY
MM# Intersection Peak Hour
Pre-Mitigation Operations Impact Type
Mitigation Measure Post Mitigation Mitigated to Below a Level of
Significance
Occupied Units Prior to Impact c Without Project With Project
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
INTERSECTION IMPACTS TRA-1 SR-76 /
N. Santa Fe Ave (Oceanside)
AM 60.0 E 62.5 E Direct Relocate the existing bicycle lane to between the right and left-turn lanes. Extend the NB left turn pocket by 400 feet.
58.2 E Yes 270 units (2,160 ADT)
PM 104.9 F 108.2 F 87.2 F
TRA-2 Melrose Dr / W. Vista Wy (Vista)
AM — — — — Direct Contribute 33% fair share to City of Vista CIP project to add a third SB through lane on Melrose Drive between Ascot Drive and W. Vista Way.
— — Yes Prior to issuing of the first
permit1 unit PM 60.7 E 63.9 E 56.9 E
TRA-6 Oceanside Blvd/ N. Melrose Dr d
(Oceanside)
AM — — — — Direct Second SB left-turn lane, third SB thru lane and a Right-Turn Overlap (RTOL) phase for the NB approach. Prohibit WB U-turn movement with a R3-4 (No U-Turn) sign. Upgrade and relocate the affected existing signal hardware, conduit, fiber optic connections and pedestrian count down timer as appropriate.
— — Yes 97 units (780 ADT)
PM 51.2 D 58.4 E 41.6 D
TRA-7 Melrose Dr / W. Vista Wy (PA-2) (Vista)
AM — — — — Cumulative The mitigation recommended for Impact TRA-2 will mitigate this impact
— — Yes NA
PM 57.0 E 60.4 E 51.4 D
CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx 83
TABLE 14–1 (CONTINUED) IMPACTS / MITIGATION MEASURES SUMMARY
MM# Street Segment Capacity Pre-Mitigation Operations Impact Type
Mitigation Measure Post Mitigation Mitigated to Below a Level of Significance
Occupied Units Prior to Impact
Without Project With Project LOS V/C LOS V/C Capacity LOS V/C
SEGMENT IMPACTS TRA-3 N. Melrose
Drive: N. Santa Fe Ave to Sagewood Dr (Oceanside)
10,000 a F 1.797 F 1.919 Direct Widen Melrose Drive between North Santa Fe Avenue and Sagewood Drive to a total width of 65 feet to accommodate four travel lanes. The widening of this segment of Melrose Drive shall be contingent upon the City’s acquisition of the necessary right-of-way from adjacent property owners. Based upon the cost of the widening, the applicant should be credited equal to or less than their total thoroughfare fees, but not greater. If the credit of thoroughfare fees is less that the total cost of widening this segment of Melrose Drive, then, the City shall enter upon a reimbursement agreement with the project applicant. Reimbursement will come in the form of area projects fair share contributions collected over time by the City with a ten-year sunset.
30,000 B 0.599 Yes 83 78 units (667 ADT)
TRA-4 N. Melrose Drive: Meadowbrook Drive to Oceanside Blvd (Oceanside)
10,000 F 2.225 F 2.396 Direct Construct the west side of N. Melrose Drive between Meadowbrook Drive and Oceanside Boulevard to 4-Lane Major Arterial standards with dedication to 6-Lane Prime Arterial standards with the development of PA-1. Construct the east side of N. Melrose Drive between Meadowbrook Drive and Oceanside Boulevard to 4-Lane Major Arterial standards with dedication to 6-Lane Prime Arterial standards with the development of PA-2 or PA-3.
15,00030,000
FD 1.5970.799
Yes b
62 units
(500 ADT) 1 unit
CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-14-2406 Melrose+Oceanside
N:\2406\Report\1. Apr 2017\TIA April 2017.2406.docx 84
TABLE 14–1 (CONTINUED) IMPACTS / MITIGATION MEASURES SUMMARY
MM# Street Segment Capacity Pre-Mitigation Operations Impact Type
Mitigation Measure Post Mitigation Mitigated to Below a Level of
Significance
Occupied Units Prior to Impact Without Project With Project
LOS V/C LOS V/C Capacity LOS V/C
SEGMENT IMPACTS TRA-5 N. Melrose
Drive: Olive Ave to W. Vista Wy (Vista)
40,000 E 0.945 E 0.972 Direct MM# TRA-2 would improve operations along this segment.
50,000 C 0.778 Yes Prior to issuing of the first
permit1 unit
Footnotes:
a. Without Project traffic, this roadway substantially exceeds its existing capacity (17,970 ADT on a 10,000 ADT capacity two-lane roadway). Theoretically, on a 4-Lane Major Arterial with increased lane widths and a raised median, one travel lane can accommodate 10,000 ADT (four lanes = 40,000 ADT). The amount of Project traffic added to this segment accounts for a relatively low volume increase of 910 ADT. Therefore, 100% of the cost toward the full improvements of widening this roadway to four lanes (an increase in capacity of 30,000 ADT) would be disproportionate to the amount of capacity needed to mitigate the Project impact.
b. Street segments operating at LOS F with a V/C reduced to pre-Project conditions are considered mitigated to below a level of significance. c. Occupancy Building permit threshold is stated in terms of residential units and ADT. If Project phasing dictates that the office portion of the Project is to be occupied prior to reaching the residential unit threshold, the ADT threshold should be
used and appropriate trip generation calculations done to ensure proper timing of mitigation measures. d. This impact only occurs in with Alternate 2 with the N. Melrose Drive extension. General Notes:
MM# = Mitigation measure number. Pre-mitigation and post-mitigation analysis shown for “Direct” impacts is for the Existing + Cumulative Projects and Existing + Cumulative Projects + Project conditions. For “Cumulative” impacts, the Year 2030 (Buildout) scenarios are shown.