TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SWEETWATER VISTAS · 2019. 2. 16. · LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers...

$: TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SWEETWATER VISTAS · 2019. 2. 16. · LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-15-2436 Sweetwater Vistas N:\2436\Report\5th Submittal\report_ 2436_clean.docx$
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

SWEETWATER VISTAS County of San Diego, California

April 20, 2017

LLG Ref. 3-15-2436

Prepared by: Under the Supervision of: Amelia Giacalone John Boarman, P.E. Transportation Planner III Principal

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-15-2436 Sweetwater Vistas

N:\2436\Report\5th Submittal\report_ 2436_clean.docx

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1

2.0 Project Description .................................................................................................................... 2

2.1 Project Description .............................................................................................................. 2

2.2 Project Location .................................................................................................................. 2

2.3 Access ................................................................................................................................. 2

3.0 Existing Conditions .................................................................................................................... 6

3.1 Existing Roadway Conditions............................................................................................. 6

3.2 Existing Traffic Volumes .................................................................................................... 7 3.2.1 Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ............................................................................ 7 3.2.2 Daily Segment Volumes ......................................................................................... 7

4.0 Analysis Approach and Methodology .................................................................................... 11

4.1 Intersections ...................................................................................................................... 11

4.2 Street Segments ................................................................................................................. 11

5.0 Significance Criteria ................................................................................................................ 12

5.1 Intersections ...................................................................................................................... 12

5.2 Road Segments .................................................................................................................. 13

6.0 Analysis of Existing Conditions .............................................................................................. 15

6.1 Existing Traffic ................................................................................................................. 15 6.1.1 Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service ............................................................. 15 6.1.2 Daily Street Segment Levels of Service ............................................................... 17

6.2 Rerouted Existing Traffic ................................................................................................. 18 6.2.1 Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service ............................................................. 18 6.2.2 Daily Street Segment Levels of Service ............................................................... 20

7.0 Trip Generation, Distribution and Assignment .................................................................... 22

7.1 Project Trip Generation ..................................................................................................... 22

7.2 Project Trip Distribution ................................................................................................... 22

7.3 Project Trip Assignment ................................................................................................... 22

8.0 Cumulative Projects ................................................................................................................. 27

8.1 Summary of Cumulative Projects Trips ............................................................................ 27

8.2 Description of Projects ...................................................................................................... 27

9.0 Near-Term Analysis ................................................................................................................. 33



ii

9.1 Rerouted Existing + Project .............................................................................................. 33 9.1.1 Intersection Analysis ............................................................................................. 33 9.1.2 Segment Operations .............................................................................................. 33

9.2 Rerouted Existing + Project + Cumulative Projects ......................................................... 33 9.2.1 Intersection Analysis ............................................................................................. 33 9.2.2 Segment Operations .............................................................................................. 34

10.0 Long-Term Assessment ........................................................................................................... 37

11.0 Access ........................................................................................................................................ 38

11.1 Project Access and On-Site Circulation ............................................................................ 38

12.0 Traffic Calming Measures ...................................................................................................... 39

13.0 Significance of Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................................................................ 41

13.1 Significance of Impacts..................................................................................................... 41 13.1.1 Direct Impacts ....................................................................................................... 41 13.1.2 Cumulative Impacts .............................................................................................. 41

13.2 Mitigation Measures ......................................................................................................... 41 13.2.1 Direct Impacts ....................................................................................................... 41 13.2.2 Cumulative Impacts .............................................................................................. 41

APPENDICES APPENDIX

A. Intersection and Segment Manual Count Sheets

B. County of San Diego Roadway Classification Table

C. Intersection Analysis Sheets

D. Project Trip Assignment Detail



iii

LIST OF FIGURES SECTION—FIGURE # PAGE

Figure 2–1 Vicinity Map ................................................................................................................... 3

Figure 2–2 Project Area Map ............................................................................................................ 4

Figure 2–3 Site Plan .......................................................................................................................... 5

Figure 3–1 Existing Conditions Diagram .......................................................................................... 9

Figure 3–2 Existing Traffic Volumes .............................................................................................. 10

Figure 6–1 Rerouted Existing Traffic Volumes (With Extension of Avenida Bosques) ................ 21

Figure 7–1 Project Traffic Distribution ........................................................................................... 24

Figure 7–2 Project Traffic Volumes ................................................................................................ 25

Figure 7–3 Rerouted Existing + Project Traffic Volumes .............................................................. 26

Figure 8–1 Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes ............................................................................ 31

Figure 8–2 Rerouted Existing + Project + Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes ............................ 32

Figure 12–1 Avenida Bosques – Traffic Calming Features .......................................................... 40

LIST OF TABLES SECTION—TABLE # PAGE

Table 3–1 Existing Traffic Volumes ..................................................................................................... 8

Table 5–1 Allowable Increases on Congested Intersections ............................................................... 12

Table 5–2 Allowable Increases on Congested Road Segments .......................................................... 14

Table 6–1 Existing Intersection Operations ........................................................................................ 16

Table 6–2 Existing Street Segment Operations .................................................................................. 17

Table 6–3 Rerouted Existing Intersection Operations ........................................................................ 19

Table 6–4 Rerouted Existing Street Segment Operations ................................................................... 20

Table 7–1 Project Trip Generation ..................................................................................................... 22

Table 9–1 Near-Term Intersection Operations (with Rerouted Traffic) ............................................. 35

Table 9–2 Near-Term Street Segment Operations (with Rerouted Traffic) ....................................... 36

Table 10–1 Project Trip Generation Comparison ............................................................................... 37

Table 11–1 Cumulative Impacts ......................................................................................................... 41



1

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

SWEETWATER VISTAS County of San Diego, California

April 20, 2017

1.0 INTRODUCTION Linscott, Law & Greenspan Engineers has prepared the following traffic impact analysis to assess the impacts to the street system as a result of Sweetwater Vistas project (Project). The project consists of three Lots (1, 2, and 3), totaling approximately 20 acres. The project site is located on the northwest corner of the Sweetwater Springs Boulevard/ Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54) intersection in the County of San Diego. The project proposes the construction of 218 multi-family residential units on the site. This study determines the potential traffic impacts of the proposed project on the study area roadway network.

The following sections are included in this report:

Project Description

Existing Conditions Assessment

Traffic Analysis Approach & Methodology

Significance Criteria

Analysis of Existing Conditions

Project Trip Generation, Distribution and Assignment

Cumulative Projects Discussion

Near-Term Analysis

Long-Term Assessment

Access Discussion

Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures



2

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 Project Description The project site would include the development of a new master planned community consisting of 218 multi-family residential units. The project is divided into Lot 1 (78 units), Lot 2 (65 units), and Lot 3 (75 units).

2.2 Project Location The proposed project is located on the northwest corner of the Sweetwater Springs Boulevard/ Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54) intersection in the County of San Diego.

Figure 2–1 shows the general vicinity of the project and Figure 2–2 shows a more detailed project area map.

2.3 Access Access to Lots 1 and 2 is proposed via an extension of Avenida Bosques that would extend south to connect to Pointe Parkway. The extension of Avenida Bosques will be constructed to County standards and will be 40’ wide with curbside parking provided on both sides. Lots 1 and 2 will be able to access Austin Road to the north via Avenida Bosques and Jamacha Boulevard to the south via Pointe Parkway.

Access to Lot 3 is proposed via a new driveway located on Sweetwater Springs Boulevard, north of Jamacha Boulevard. The driveway will provide full access to inbound traffic (left and right turns from Sweetwater Springs Boulevard into the site will be allowed) and right only outbound access (left turns out of the site will be prohibited). Outbound traffic wishing to travel north on Sweetwater Springs Boulevard will be required to turn right out of the Lot 3 driveway traveling south, and make a U-turn at the intersection of Jamacha Boulevard / Sweetwater Springs Boulevard. Southbound to northbound U-turns at this intersection are currently prohibited due to the existing southbound lane configuration (two dedicated right-turn lanes and a shared thru / left-turn lane) and roadway width. The Project proposes improvements to the southbound approach of the intersection to widen the approach and provide a dedicated right-turn lane, a thru lane, and a dedicated left-turn lane. This improvement will allow for southbound traffic to make U-turns at the intersection.

Figure 2–3 shows the proposed site plan.

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

"

" " " "

" "" " "

"""

""

"

" " " "

""

" " ""

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

""

""

""

"""

""

"""""

""

"""

"

"

"

"

"

""

"""""""

""""

"

"

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

""

"

""

""

"" " "

"

""

"

""

""

""""""

""

""

""

"

""

""

""

"""

""

""

""

""

"

""

""

"

"

""

""

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

""

""

"""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

"

""" " " " " "

""

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

" ""

"

""

"

"

"

""

""

""

""

"" " "

"""""

" " " " ""

"

""

""

"

""

""

"

"""

"

" "

"

"

"

"

"

""

""

""

""

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"" "

" " "

"

"

" " ""

""

"

" ""

"

"" "

"

"" "

" " "

"

""

"""

""

"

" "

""

""

" " " " "

""

"

"" " "

""

" "

"

""

" " " " ""

""

"

"""

"""

""

"""

"

"

"

" ""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

""

""

"

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

"

""

"

"

" "

""

""

"

""""

"

"

"""

"

"

"""

"""

"

" "

""

" ""

"

""

""""

""""

"""

""

""

""

""

""

""

"" "

""

"

"" "

" ""

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

"

""

"

"

""

""

"

""""""""""

"""

""

"

"""

""

""

"

""

""

""

"""

""

""

""

""

""

"

" "

""

"

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

"""

""

""

""

""

""

"

"

""" "

"

"

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

"

" "

"

"

""

""

"

""

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

""

""

""

""""

"

"

""

""

""""

"

"" "

""

"

"

""

""

"

""

"

" "" "

"

""""

""" "

"

"

"

""

"

"

""" " " " " " " "

"

""

"""

""""

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"""

""

""""""

"

"

"

"

""

"""

"

" "" "

"

""

"

""""

""""

"

""

""

""

""

""""

"

"

""

"""

"

"

""""

"

"""

""

""

"

"

" " "

"" "

""

"

"

"

""

" " " " " " "

"

"

""

""

"

"

" " "

"" "

"""

"

"

"

" "

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

" "

"

"

"

" " " "

"

""

" "

"

"

"

" ""

" "

""

"

"""

"

"

"

"

""

" " "

" " "

""" "

"

" ""

"

""

"

"

""

"

"

""

"

"

"

" "

"

"

"

"

""""

""

"

""

"

""""

""

"

"

""

""

"""

"

"""""""

"

""

"""""

"

""

"

""

""

""

""

""

"

"

""

"

""

""

"

""

""

""

""

"

"""

""

""

"" ""

"""""

""""

""

" "

"

"

"

"

"

"

" "

" " " " "

""

""

""

""

""

""

"

""

"

" " ""

""

""

""

"

"""

"

"""

"

"

""

""

""

""

""

""

" " " " "

"

"

""

""

""

""

""

" "

"""

""

"

""

""

"

"""""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

" " " " "

""

""

""

""

" ""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

""

""

""

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"""

"

"" "

"

" "

" " " ""

""

""

"

"

" ""

"

" "

" " " " " ""

"

" ""

" " " " "

"

" "

""

""

""

""

""

" " " " "

""

""

" " " " " " " """

""

""

" " " " " " ""

""

"

""

""

""

""

""

""

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

""

"

""

"""""

"

"

"

" ""

"

""

""

""

"

"

""

"

""" "

"

"

""

""

""

""

""

"

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

"" "

""

""

"

""

"

""""

"

"""""

"

"

""

"

"

""

"" "

"

"

" "

""

""

""

"

"

"""

""

""""

"

"

"" "

""

"

""

"

""

"""

"

""

"

"

"

"

""

"

""

""""

"

"

" " " " "

""

"

"

""

"

"

""

""

"

"

""

""

"

""

""

" "

""

" "

""

""

""

"

""

"

""

""

"

"

"

" "

"

" " " "

""""

"

" " " " "

""

" "

"

""

"

" "

" ""

" " "

"

"

""

""

"""

""

""

"

"

"""""""

"""

""

""

"

"

" "

"

""

"""""

"

""

""

"""

"

"

""

"

"

" "

"

"

""

" "

""" " "

"

"

""

""

""

"" "

"

""

"" " " " "

"

""

""

""

""""""

""

"

"""

"

"""

""

"

""

""

""""

"

"

"

"

""

" " ""

""

" ""

""

"

""

"

""

""

"""

""

"

"

"""

"

""

""

""

"

"

"" "

"

"

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

""

"

"

"

""

"

"

""

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

" " "

"

" " " " ""

""

"

"

"

"

" " " "

" " "

"

" " " " " " ""

""""""""""""

"

""

"

"

""

"""

"

""""

"

"""

"

"""

""""""""

""""

"

" "

""

""

""

""

""

"

""

"

""

" "

"""

""

""

"""

"

"

"" "

"

"

""

""" "

""

"

"

" "

"

" """

"""

"

"""

"

""

"

"

"

" "

"

" "

""

"""""

""

"

""

"""

"

"

"

""

""""

""

"

""

"

"

"

"

" " "

" ""

"

" " " " "

"

"

"

""

"

"

" " "

·|}905

P A C I F I C O C E A N

CARLSBAD ESCONDIDO

ENCINITAS

SAN DIEGO

SANTEE

POWAYSOLANA BEACH

DEL MAR

IMPERIALBEACH

CORONADO

NATIONALCITY

CHULA VISTA

LEMONGROVE

LA MESA

EL CAJON

SAN DIEGO

§̈¦5§̈¦15

§̈¦805

§̈¦8

§̈¦15

§̈¦5

§̈¦5§̈¦805

·|}125

·|}54

·|}125

·|}94

·|}94

·|}75

·|}15

·|}163

·|}67

§̈¦8·|}52

·|}56

·|}125

[

Legend

" " " " City BoundaryIncorporatedUnincorporated

1

0 42 Miles

Vicinity MapSweetwater Vistas

Figure 2-1N:\2436\FiguresDate: 06/15/15

PROJECT SITE

Project Area Map

Figure 2-2

Sweetwater Vistas

N:\2436\FiguresDate: 06/15/15

Project Site

Figure 2-3

Site Plan Sweetwater Vistas


cuyuch

Sticky Note

Completed set by cuyuch

cuyuch

Sticky Note

None set by cuyuch



6

3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS This study analyzes the following intersections and segments based on the anticipated assignment of project traffic.

Intersections

1. Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54)/ Campo Road (SR-94) 2. Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54)/ Calavo Drive/ Doubletree Road 3. Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54)/ Sweetwater Springs Boulevard 4. Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54)/ Pointe Parkway 5. Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54)/ Whitestone Road 6. Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54)/ Maya Street 7. Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54)/ Huron Street/ San Diego Street 8. Sweetwater Springs Boulevard/ Austin Drive 9. Campo Road (SR-94)/ SR-94 EB Ramps 10. Campo Road (SR-94)/ SR-94 WB On-Ramp/ Agua Dulce Boulevard 11. Sweetwater Springs Boulevard/ Proposed Project Driveway 12. Austin Drive/ Avenida Bosques 13. Avenida Bosques/ Calle Marinero 14. Calle Marinero/ Sweetwater Springs Boulevard

Segments

1. Sweetwater Springs Boulevard between SR-94 EB Ramps and Austin Drive 2. Sweetwater Springs Boulevard between Austin Drive and Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54) 3. Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54) between San Miguel Street and San Diego Street 4. Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54) between San Diego Street and Pointe Parkway 5. Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54) between Pointe Parkway and Sweetwater Springs Boulevard 6. Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54) between Sweetwater Springs Boulevard and Calavo Drive 7. Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54) between Calavo Drive and Campo Road (SR-94) 8. Austin Drive between Avenida Bosques and Sweetwater Springs Boulevard 9. Avenida Bosques between Austin Drive and Calle Marinero 10. Calle Marinero between Avenida Bosques and Sweetwater Springs Boulevard

3.1 Existing Roadway Conditions The following is a description of the nearby roadway network:

Sweetwater Springs Boulevard is classified as a 4.1A – Major Road with a raised median on the County of San Diego General Plan Mobility Element within the study area. It is currently constructed as a four-lane undivided roadway with a two-way left-turn lane. Bus stops and bike lanes are provided. Curbside parking is provided intermittently. The posted speed limit is 45 mph.

Jamacha Boulevard (State Route 54) is classified as a 4.1A – Major Road with a raised median on the County of San Diego General Plan Mobility Element within the study area. It is currently



7

constructed as a four-lane roadway with mid-block left-turn pockets and two-way left-turn lanes (TWLTL) provided intermittently. Bus stops and bike lanes are provided. Curbside parking is prohibited and the posted speed limit ranges between 45-50 mph.

Austin Drive is classified as a 2.2A – Light Collector with a raised median on the County of San Diego General Plan Mobility Element within the study area. It is currently constructed as a two-lane undivided roadway with a two-way left-turn lane. Bus stops are not provided. Bike lanes and curbside parking are provided. The posted speed limit is 40 mph.

The Sweetwater Springs Community School is located at 10129 Austin Drive, at the southwest corner of the intersection of Austin Drive and Avenida Bosques. The school provides instruction to students in kindergarten through 6th grade. School is in session between 8:00 AM and 2:20 PM on Monday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday and between 8:00 AM and 1:05 PM on Tuesday. Vehicular congestion has been observed for approximately 20- 30 minutes at a time during school drop-off and pickup times. However, the congestion is only during this relatively short amount of time and quickly dissipates after school begins or lets out.

Avenida Bosques is unclassified on the County of San Diego General Plan Mobility Element within the study area. It is currently constructed as a two-lane undivided roadway. Bus stops and bike lanes are not provided. Curbside parking is permitted. There is no posted speed limit.

Calle Marinero is unclassified on the County of San Diego General Plan Mobility Element within the study area. It is currently constructed as a two-lane undivided roadway. Bus stops and bike lanes are not provided. Curbside parking is permitted. There is no posted speed limit.

Figure 3–1 depicts the existing traffic conditions and the study area intersections and segments graphically.

3.2 Existing Traffic Volumes 3.2.1 Peak Hour Intersection Volumes Weekday AM/PM peak hour intersection turning movement volume counts were commissioned at four (4) of the thirteen (13) study area intersections on Tuesday, February 24, 2015 and Wednesday, February 25, 2015. Six (6) of the intersections were supplemented from other traffic studies that are currently under process by LLG. Four (4) of these intersection counts were conducted in March 2014, and two (2) were conducted in November 2013. The remaining three (3) intersections were counted in October 2015. The intersection counts were conducted between the hours of 7:00-9:00 AM and 4:00-6:00 PM to capture peak commuter activity.

3.2.2 Daily Segment Volumes Bi-directional daily traffic counts were conducted at two (2) of the ten (10) study area street segments on Tuesday, February 24, 2015. The traffic counts at five (5) of the street segments were supplemented from the other traffic studies that are currently under process by LLG. The traffic counts at three (3) of these street segments were conducted in March 2014, while the counts for the other two (2)



8

segments were conducted in November 2013. The remaining three (3) street segments were counted in October 2015. Table 3–1 is a summary of average daily traffic volumes (ADTs) for the key roadway segments in the project vicinity.

Appendix A contains the peak hour intersection and segment count sheets. Figure 3–2 shows the existing traffic volumes.

TABLE 3–1 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES

Street Segment ADTa Date Source

Sweetwater Springs Blvd SR-94 EB Ramps to Austin Dr 20,917 March 2014 LLG Austin Dr to Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54) 15,416 March 2014 LLG

Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) San Miguel St to San Diego St 17,056 March 2014 LLG San Diego St to Pointe Pkwy 20,434 February 2015 LLG Pointe Pkwy to Sweetwater Springs Blvd 24,511 February 2015 LLG Sweetwater Springs Blvd to Calavo Dr 15,225 November 2013 LLG Calavo Dr to Campo Rd (SR-94) 17,428 November 2013 LLG

Austin Drive Avenida Bosques to Sweetwater Springs Blvd 7,433 October 2015 LLG

Avenida Bosques Austin Dr to Calle Marinero 705 October 2015 LLG

Calle Marinero Avenida Bosques to Sweetwater Springs Blvd 1,230 October 2015 LLG

Footnotes:

a. Average Daily Traffic Volumes.

Existing Conditions Diagram

Figure 3-1

Sweetwater Vistas


!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(2

4

6

1

5

7

3

8

910

O O Ï

!( !( !(

!(!(!(

!( !( !( !(

!(!(!(!(

Proj Dwy Austin Dr

Campo Rd

Jamacha Bl

Clle Marinero

Agua Dulce BlSR-94 EB Rmps SR-94 WB RmpsAustin Dr

Jamacha Bl

Jamacha Bl Jamacha Bl Jamacha Bl

Jamacha Bl

Clle Marinero

987

4 5 6

321

11 12 13 14

10

}94

Sweet water SpringsBlvd

!

!

!

!Agua Dulce Blvd

Campo Rd

}54

Aust in Dr

Jamac

haBl

vd

Jamach

a Blvd

}54

San Diego St

Maya St

WhitestoneRd

Po inte P k wy

Project Site

Calavo Dr

DoubletreeRd

Huron StSan Miguel St

!

!

!

!

!(Avenida

Calle

12

!(14!(13

Bosques

Marinero

!(11

Jama

cha B

l

Doub

letre

e Rd

Calav

o Dr

Swee

twate

r Spr

Rd

Point

e Pkw

y

Whit

eston

e Rd

Maya

St

San D

iego S

tHu

ron S

t

Swee

twate

r Spr

Rd

Swee

twate

r Spr

Rd

Swee

twate

r Spr

Rd

Swee

twate

r Spr

Rd

Camp

o Rd

Avnd

a Bos

ques

Swee

twate

r Spr

Rd

Sweetwater

Reservoir

[Avnid

a Bos

ques

Gated

Acc

ess D

wy

4U45

50

4U

50

4U

4U

4U

4U 55

5D6D 45

Intersection Control

Divided / Undivided RoadwayTwo-Way Left Turn LaneTurn Lane Configurations

Bicycle LanePosted Speed LimitXX

# Number of Travel LanesD / U

Right-Turn OverlapRTOL

2U

2U

2U

2U

2U

2U

2U

4U

Swee

twate

r Sp

r Rd

Swee

twate

r Sp

r Rd

Swee

twate

r Sp

r Rd

Swee

twate

r Sp

r Rd

Avnd

ia Bo

sque

s

2U

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(705

15,225

7,433

17,056

1,230

24,511

17,4

28

20,4

34

15,416

20,917

2

4

6

1

5

7

3

8

9

10

O O Ï

!( !( !(

!(!(!(

!( !( !( !(

!(!(!(!(

0 / 1

0 / 4

1 / 2

2 / 3

3 / 1

3 / 3

4 / 5

7 / 2

8 / 9

9 / 2

9 / 6

6 / 1

13 / 12

4 / 10

4 / 17

47 /

0 53 / 8

14 / 5

60 /

0

7 / 2

4

8 / 1

6

9 / 25

15 / 11

11 / 26 11 /

35

32 / 90

10 /

16

10 / 30

12 / 17

12 / 26

12 /

63

13 / 51

15 /

1616

/ 19

16 / 24

20 / 36

21 /

13

23 / 16

23 / 74

25 /

58

26 /

19

28 /

21

72 /

32

28 /

22

31 /

20

32 / 36

29 /

13

35 / 37

38 /

17

30 /

20

45 / 76

50 /

19

52 / 24

53 /

17

58 /

61

97 /

8594

/ 86

84 /

12

59 / 89

71 /

62

69 / 21

64 / 72

64 /

24

201

/ 71

100

/ 69

107 / 79

108 / 50

125

/ 97

130

/ 71

221

/ 97

31 / 124

31 / 160

80 / 167

86 / 101

118

/ 174

386

/ 442

109 / 135

125

/ 195

128 / 224

144 / 108

144 / 140

149 / 194

167

/ 217

193

/ 108

258

/ 181

268

/ 332

290 / 394

395 / 296

301 / 195

322 / 557

346 / 279

347

/ 449

406

/ 548

539

/ 681

374 / 579383

/ 490

563

/ 725 582 / 574

593 / 595

601

/ 470

602 / 862

609

/ 312

624 / 539

626 / 653

631 / 636691 / 750706 / 820

716

/ 400

733

/ 731

847 / 401

851 / 697

992

/ 563

1,226 / 813

1,00

3 / 5

72

1,079 / 764

1,18

6 / 6

85

1,516 / 1,583

1,339 / 1,940

Proj Dwy Austin Dr

Campo Rd

Jamacha Bl

Clle Marinero


Jamacha Bl


Jamacha Bl

Clle Marinero

987

4 5 6

321

11 12 13 14

10

AM / PM IntersectionPeak Hour Volumes

AM / PM

Study Intersections!!#

Average DailyTraffic VolumesX,XXX

}94

Sweet w

ater Springs Blvd

!

!

!

!Agua Dulce Blvd

Campo Rd

}54

Aust in Dr

Jamac

ha B

lvd

Jamac

ha B

lvd

}54

San Diego St

Maya St

Whitestone Rd

Po

inte P k wy

Project Site

Calavo Dr

Doubletree Rd


!

!

!

!

!(Avenida

Calle

12

!(14!(13

Bosques

Marinero

!(11

Existing Traffic Volumes

Sweetwater Vistas


!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Jam

acha

Bl

Dou

blet

ree

Rd

Cal

avo

Dr

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Poin

te P

kwy

Whi

test

one

Rd

May

a St

San

Die

go S

tH

uron

St

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

dC

ampo

Rd

Avnd

a Bo

sque

s

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Future Dwy / Road Extension

Sweetwater

Reservoir

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

[Avni

da B

osqu

es

Gat

ed A

cces

s D

wy

!

!

!

!

!

!

!



11

4.0 ANALYSIS APPROACH AND 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 intersections, unsignalized intersections and roadway segments.

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 9) computer software. The delay values (represented in seconds) were qualified with a corresponding intersection Level of Service (LOS).

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 of the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), with the assistance of the Synchro (version 9) computer software.

4.2 Street Segments Street segment analysis is based upon the comparison of daily traffic volumes (ADTs) to the County of San Diego’s Roadway Classification, Level of Service, and ADT Table. This table provides segment capacities for different street classifications, based on traffic volumes and roadway characteristics. The County of San Diego’s Roadway Classification, Level of Service, and ADT Table is attached in Appendix B.



12

5.0 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA The following criterion was utilized to evaluate potential significant impacts, based on the County of San Diego Guidelines for Determining Significance—Transportation and Traffic, dated August 24, 2011. The County of San Diego’s General Plan Mobility Element discusses the County’s Level of Service criteria under Goal M-2. It requires that development projects provide associated road improvements necessary to achieve a level of service of “D” or higher on all Mobility Element roads except for those where a failing level of service has been accepted by the County. The County maintains a list of such roads.

5.1 Intersections This section provides guidance for evaluating adverse environmental effects a project may have on signalized and unsignalized intersections. Table 5–1 was obtained from County guidelines and summarizes the allowable increases in delay or traffic volumes at signalized and unsignalized intersections. Exceeding the thresholds in Table 5–1 would result in a significant impact.

TABLE 5–1 ALLOWABLE INCREASES ON CONGESTED INTERSECTIONS

Level of service Signalized Unsignalized

LOS E Delay of 2 seconds or less 20 or less peak hour trips on a critical

movement

LOS F Either a Delay of 1 second, or 5 peak

hour trips or less on a critical movement 5 or less peak hour trips on a critical

movement

General Notes:

1. A critical movement is an intersection movement (right-turn, left-turn, through-movement) that experiences excessive queues, which typically operate at LOS F.

2. By adding proposed project trips to all other trips from a list of projects, these same tables are used to determine if total cumulative impacts are significant. If cumulative impacts are found to be significant, each project is responsible for mitigating its share of the cumulative impact.

3. The County may also determine impacts have occurred on roads even when a project’s traffic or cumulative impacts do not trigger an unacceptable level of service, when such traffic uses a significant amount of remaining road capacity.

4. For determining significance at signalized intersections with LOS F conditions, the analysis must evaluate both the delay and the number of trips on a critical movement, exceedance of either criteria result in a significant impact.

Signalized Intersections - Traffic volume increases from public or private projects that result in one or more of the following criteria will have a significant traffic volume or level of service traffic impact on a signalized intersection:

The additional or redistributed ADT generated by the proposed project will significantly increase congestion on a signalized intersection currently operating at LOS E or LOS F, or will cause a signalized intersection to operate at a LOS E or LOS F as identified in Table 5–1.

Based upon an evaluation of existing accident rates, the signal priority list, intersection geometrics, proximity of adjacent driveways, sight distance or other factors, the project would significantly impact the operations of the intersection.



13

Unsignalized Intersections - The operating parameters and conditions for unsignalized intersections differ dramatically from those of signalized intersections. Very small volume increases on one leg or turn and/or through movement of an unsignalized intersection can substantially affect the calculated delay for the entire intersection. Significance criteria for unsignalized intersections are based upon a minimum number of trips added to a critical movement at an unsignalized intersection.

Traffic volume increases from public or private projects that result in one or more of the following criteria will have a significant traffic impact on an unsignalized intersection as listed in Table 5–1 and described as text below:

The additional or redistributed ADT generated by the proposed project will add 21 or more peak hour trips to a critical movement of an unsignalized intersection, and cause an unsignalized intersection to operate below LOS D, or

The additional or redistributed ADT generated by the proposed project will add 21 or more peak hour trips to a critical movement of an unsignalized intersection currently operating at LOS E, or

The additional or redistributed ADT generated by the proposed project will add 6 or more peak hour trips to a critical movement of an unsignalized intersection, and cause the unsignalized intersection to operate at LOS F, or

The additional or redistributed ADT generated by the proposed project will add 6 or more peak hour trips to a critical movement of an unsignalized intersection currently operating at LOS F, or

Based upon an evaluation of existing accident rates, the signal priority list, intersection geometrics, proximity of adjacent driveways, sight distance or other factors, the project would significantly impact the operations of the intersection.

5.2 Road Segments This section provides guidance for evaluating adverse environmental effects a project may have on street segments. The allowable ADT increases on LOS E/F operation roadways was obtained from County guidelines and are summarized in Table 5–2. The thresholds in Table 5–2 are based upon average operating conditions on County roadways. Exceeding the thresholds in Table 5-2 would result in a significant impact. It should be noted that these thresholds only establish general guidelines, and that the specific project location must be taken into account in conducting an analysis of traffic impact from new development.



14

TABLE 5–2 ALLOWABLE INCREASES ON CONGESTED ROAD SEGMENTS

Level of Service Two-Lane Road Four-Lane Road Six-Lane Road

LOS E 200 ADT 400 ADT 600 ADT

LOS F 100 ADT 200 ADT 300 ADT

General Notes:

1. By adding proposed project trips to all other trips from a list of projects, this same table must be used to determine if total cumulative impacts are significant. If cumulative impacts are found to be significant, each project that contributes additional trips must mitigate a share of the cumulative impacts.

2. The County may also determine impacts have occurred on roads even when a project’s traffic or cumulative impacts do not trigger an unacceptable level of service, when such traffic uses a significant amount of remaining road capacity.



15

6.0 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS 6.1 Existing Traffic 6.1.1 Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Table 6–1 summarizes the existing intersection operations in the project vicinity. As seen in Table 6–1, all intersections are calculated to currently operate at LOS D or better except for the following intersection:

Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54) / Campo Road (SR-94) – LOS E during the PM peak hour.

Appendix C contains the existing intersection analysis sheets.



16

TABLE 6–1 EXISTING INTERSECTION OPERATIONS


Type Peak Hour

Existing

Delaya LOSb

1. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Campo Rd (SR-94) Signal AM 41.4 D

PM 60.4 E

2. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Calavo Dr / Doubletree Rd Signal AM 22.5 C

PM 23.3 C

3. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Sweetwater Springs Blvd Signal AM 24.4 C

PM 22.4 C

4. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Pointe Pkwy Signal AM 12.0 B

PM 10.3 B

5. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Whitestone Rd Signal AM 12.7 B

PM 11.1 B

6. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Maya St Signal AM 10.7 B

PM 10.5 B

7. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / San Diego St / Huron St Signal AM 10.8 B

PM 8.1 A

8. Sweetwater Springs Blvd / Austin Dr Signal AM 36.3 D

PM 33.3 C

9. Campo Rd (SR-94) / SR 94 EB Ramps Signal AM 16.4 B

PM 24.6 C

10. Sweetwater Springs Blvd / SR-94 WB On-Ramp / Agua Dulce Blvd

Signal AM 37.3 D

PM 35.4 D

11. Sweetwater Springs Blvd / Project Driveway

DNEc AM - -

PM - -

12. Austin Drive / Avenida Bosques OWSCd AM 12.6 B

PM 10.7 B

13. Avenida Bosques / Calle Marinero OWSCe AM 7.3 A

PM 6.8 A

14. Calle Marinero / Sweetwater Springs Blvd OWSC AM 14.9 B

PM 10.1 B

Footnotes: a. Average delay expressed in seconds per vehicle. b. Level of Service. c. Does Not Exist. d. One-Way Stop-Controlled intersection. Minor street delay is

reported. e. This intersection currently has 1 stop sign. However, it

operates more like an all-way stop-controlled intersection and was therefore analyzed as such.

General Notes: 1. BOLD typeface indicates an LOS E (or worse) operating

intersections.

SIGNALIZED

UNSIGNALIZED

DELAY/LOS THRESHOLDS DELAY/LOS THRESHOLDS

Delay LOS Delay LOS

0.0 ≤ 10.0 A 0.0 ≤ 10.0 A

10.1 to 20.0 B 10.1 to 15.0 B

20.1 to 35.0 C 15.1 to 25.0 C

35.1 to 55.0 D 25.1 to 35.0 D

55.1 to 80.0 E 35.1 to 50.0 E

≥ 80.1 F ≥ 50.1 F



17

6.1.2 Daily Street Segment Levels of Service Table 6–2 summarizes the existing roadway segment operations. As seen in Table 6–2, all the study area segments are calculated to currently operate at LOS C or better.

TABLE 6–2 EXISTING STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS

Street Segment Functional Classification Capacity (LOS E) a

ADT b LOS c

Sweetwater Springs Blvd

SR-94 EB Ramps to Austin Dr 4.1B Major Road

with TWLTL 34,200 20,917 B

Austin Dr to Jamacha Blvd (SR 54) 4.1B Major Road

with TWLTL 34,200 15,416 B

Jamacha Blvd (SR 54)

San Miguel St to San Diego St 4.1B Major Road

with TWLTL 34,200 17,056 B

San Diego St to Pointe Pkwy 4.1B Major Road

with Intermittent Turn Lanes 34,200 20,434 B

Pointe Pkwy to Sweetwater Springs Blvd

4.1B Major Road with TWLTL 34,200 24,511 C

Sweetwater Springs Blvd to Calavo Dr

4.1B Major Road with TWLTL

34,200 15,225 B

Calavo Dr to Campo Rd (SR 94) 4.1B Major Road


Austin Drive

Avenida Bosques to Sweetwater Springs Blvd

2.2B Light Collector with TWLTL d

19,000 7,433 C

Avenida Bosques

Austin Drive to Calle Marinero Residential Collector 4,500 705 C+ e

Calle Marinero


Residential Collector 4,500 1,230 C+

Footnotes:

a. Capacities based on County of San Diego Roadway Classification Table.

b. Average Daily Traffic Volumes.

c. Level of Service.

d. Two-Way Left Turn Lane.

e. C+ = better than LOS C.



18

6.2 Rerouted Existing Traffic The Project proposes to extend Avenida Bosques between Calle Marinero to the existing terminus of Pointe Parkway. This new roadway connection may attract a portion of existing traffic currently utilizing Sweetwater Springs Boulevard. In order to simulate this shift in traffic, 10% of the existing traffic on Sweetwater Springs Boulevard was rerouted onto the new Avenida Bosques connection. This is considered a worst case amount.

6.2.1 Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Table 6–3 summarizes the rerouted existing intersection operations in the project vicinity. As seen in Table 6–3, all intersections are calculated to currently operate at LOS D or better except for the following intersection:


Figure 6–1 shows the rerouted existing traffic volumes.

Appendix C contains the rerouted existing intersection analysis sheets.



19

TABLE 6–3 REROUTED EXISTING INTERSECTION OPERATIONS


Type Peak Hour

Existing

Delaya LOSb

1. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Campo Rd (SR-94) Signal AM 41.4 D

PM 60.4 E

2. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Calavo Dr / Doubletree Rd Signal AM 22.5 C

PM 23.3 C

3. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Sweetwater Springs Blvd Signal AM 22.3 C

PM 21.5 C

4. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Pointe Pkwy Signal AM 11.9 B

PM 10.3 B

5. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Whitestone Rd Signal AM 12.7 B

PM 11.1 B

6. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Maya St Signal AM 10.7 B

PM 10.5 B

7. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / San Diego St / Huron St Signal AM 10.8 B

PM 8.1 A

8. Sweetwater Springs Blvd / Austin Dr Signal AM 34.7 C

PM 42.4 D

9. Campo Rd (SR-94) / SR 94 EB Ramps Signal AM 16.4 B

PM 24.6 C


Signal AM 37.3 D

PM 35.4 D

11. Sweetwater Springs Blvd / Project Driveway

DNEc AM - -

PM - -

12. Austin Drive / Avenida Bosques OWSCd AM 14.1 B

PM 10.9 B

13. Avenida Bosques / Calle Marinero AWSCe AM 8.0 A

PM 7.2 A

14. Calle Marinero / Sweetwater Springs Blvd OWSC AM 15.4 C

PM 10.3 B

Footnotes: a. Average delay expressed in seconds per vehicle. b. Level of Service. c. Does Not Exist. d. One-Way Stop-Controlled intersection. Minor street delay is

reported. e. All-Way Stop-Controlled intersection. Overall delay is

reported.

General Notes: 1. BOLD typeface indicates an LOS E (or worse) operating

intersections.

SIGNALIZED

UNSIGNALIZED


Delay LOS Delay LOS

0.0 ≤ 10.0 A 0.0 ≤ 10.0 A

10.1 to 20.0 B 10.1 to 15.0 B

20.1 to 35.0 C 15.1 to 25.0 C

35.1 to 55.0 D 25.1 to 35.0 D

55.1 to 80.0 E 35.1 to 50.0 E

≥ 80.1 F ≥ 50.1 F



20

6.2.2 Daily Street Segment Levels of Service Table 6–4 summarizes the rerouted existing roadway segment operations. As seen in Table 6–4, all the study area segments are calculated to currently operate at LOS C or better.

TABLE 6–4 REROUTED EXISTING STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS

Street Segment Functional Classification Capacity (LOS E) a

ADT b LOS c



with TWLTL 34,200 20,917 B


with TWLTL 34,200 14,028 B



with TWLTL 34,200 17,056 B



Pointe Pkwy to Sweetwater Springs Blvd

4.1B Major Road with TWLTL 34,200 24,511 C

Sweetwater Springs Blvd to Calavo Dr

4.1B Major Road with TWLTL

34,200 15,225 B



Austin Drive


2.2B Light Collector with TWLTL d

19,000 8,821 C

Avenida Bosques

Austin Drive to Calle Marinero Residential Collector 4,500 2,093 C+ e

Calle Marinero


Residential Collector 4,500 1,384 C+

Footnotes:

a. Capacities based on County of San Diego Roadway Classification Table.

b. Average Daily Traffic Volumes.

c. Level of Service.

d. Two-Way Left Turn Lane.

e. C+ = better than LOS C.

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(2,093

15,225

8,821

17,056

1,384

24,511

17,4

28

20,4

34

14,028

20,917

2

4

6

1

5

7

3

8

9

10

O O Ï

!( !( !(

!(!(!(

!( !( !( !(

!(!(!(!(

0 / 1

0 / 4

1 / 2

2 / 3

3 / 1

3 / 3

4 / 5

7 / 2

8 / 9

9 / 2

9 / 6

6 / 1

13 / 12

4 / 10

4 / 17

14 / 5

69 /

4

7 / 2

4

15 / 11

11 / 26 11 /

35

57 / 60

10 /

16

10 / 30

12 / 17

12 /

21

12 / 26

12 /

63

13 / 51

15 /

1616

/ 19

16 / 24

20 / 36

21 /

13

23 / 74

25 /

58

26 /

19

28 /

21

29 /

13

30 /

20

31 /

20

32 / 36

94 /

86

32 / 90

38 /

17

45 / 76

50 /

19

52 / 24

35 / 37

53 /

1734

/ 44

58 /

61

59 / 89

62 / 12

64 /

24

64 / 72

66 /

71

97 /

85

69 / 21

94 / 65

72 /

32

71 /

62

221

/ 97

100

/ 69

107 / 79

108 / 50

123

/ 36

125

/ 97

130

/ 71

160

/ 48

201

/ 71

31 / 124

31 / 160

80 / 167

86 / 101

118

/ 174

563

/ 725

109 / 135

128 / 224

144 / 108

144 / 140

149 / 194

159

/ 239

167

/ 217

193

/ 108

258

/ 181

268

/ 332

290 / 394322 / 557 34

5 / 4

41

346 / 279

582 / 574

347

/ 449

372

/ 592

374 / 579

377 / 231

386

/ 442

593 / 595

601

/ 470

395 / 296

501

/ 632

602 / 862

609

/ 312

624 / 539

626 / 653

631 / 636

640

/ 364

691 / 750

695

/ 682

706 / 820

762 / 361

851 / 697

907

/ 523

918

/ 532

1,226 / 813 1,079 / 764

1,18

6 / 6

85

1,516 / 1,583

1,339 / 1,940 4 / 5

Proj Dwy Austin Dr

Campo Rd

Jamacha Bl

Clle Marinero


Jamacha Bl


Jamacha Bl

Clle Marinero

987

4 5 6

321

11 12 13 14

10


AM / PM



}94

Sweet w

ater Springs Blvd

!

!

!

!Agua Dulce Blvd

Campo Rd

}54

Aust in Dr

Jamac

ha B

lvd

Jamac

ha B

lvd

}54

San Diego St

Maya St

Whitestone Rd

Po

inte P k wy

Project Site

Calavo Dr

Doubletree Rd


!

!

!

!

!(Avenida

Calle

12

!(14!(13

Bosques

Marinero

!(11

Rerouted Existing Traffic Volumes

Sweetwater Vistas


!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Jam

acha

Bl

Dou

blet

ree

Rd

Cal

avo

Dr

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Poin

te P

kwy

Whi

test

one

Rd

May

a St

San

Die

go S

tH

uron

St

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

dC

ampo

Rd

Avnd

a Bo

sque

s

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Sweetwater

Reservoir

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

[Avni

da B

osqu

es

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

1,542

!

!

!

(With Extension of Avenida Bosques)



22

7.0 TRIP GENERATION, DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT 7.1 Project Trip Generation The project proposes the development of 218 multi-family units in three lots on the site. Trip generation calculations for the proposed project were based on the highest SANDAG multi-family trip rate (8 ADT/home).

The total project is calculated to generate 1,744 ADT with 140 total AM peak hour trips (28 inbound/ 112 outbound) and 174 total PM peak hour trips (121 inbound/ 53 outbound). Table 7–1 shows the total trip generation summary for the proposed project.

TABLE 7–1 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION

Land Use (Lot)

Size

Daily Trip Ends (ADTs)

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Rate a Volume% of

ADT bIn:Out Volume % of

ADT In:Out Volume

Split In Out Split In Out

Multi-Family Residential

1 78 DUc 8/ DU 624 8% 20:80 10 40 10% 70:30 43 19

2 65 DU 8/ DU 520 8% 20:80 8 34 10% 70:30 36 16

3 75 DU 8/ DU 600 8% 20:80 10 38 10% 70:30 42 18

Total – 1,744 – – 28 112 – – 121 53

Footnotes: a. Rate is based on SANDAG’s (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region, April 2002. b. ADT = Average Daily Traffic c. DU = Dwelling Unit

7.2 Project Trip Distribution Project trip distribution was based on SANDAG Series 12 Select Zone Assignment. The Select Zone Assignment utilizes the land use and roadway network assumptions in the regional traffic model and distributes the project traffic. This distribution is based on project location and its proximity to freeways and major roads, employment, retail and educational opportunities in the vicinity etc.

Figure 7–1 depicts the project regional traffic distribution.

7.3 Project Trip Assignment The Project trips for Lot 3 were assigned through the proposed driveway on Sweetwater Springs Boulevard. The driveway to Lot 3 will provide full access to inbound traffic (left and right turns from Sweetwater Springs Boulevard into the site will be allowed) and right only outbound access (left turns



23

out of the site will be prohibited). Outbound traffic wishing to travel north on Sweetwater Springs Boulevard was assumed to turn right out of the Lot 3 driveway traveling south, and make a U-turn at the intersection of Jamacha Boulevard / Sweetwater Springs Boulevard. Southbound to northbound U-turns at this intersection are currently prohibited due to the existing southbound lane configuration (two dedicated right-turn lanes and a shared thru / left-turn lane) and roadway width. The Project proposes improvements to the southbound approach of the intersection to widen the approach and provide a dedicated right-turn lane, a thru lane, and a dedicated left-turn lane. This improvement will allow for southbound traffic to make U-turns at the intersection, and is shown on Figure 2-3.

The Project trips for Lots 1 and 2 were assigned onto the planned extension of Avenida Bosques. Two-thirds of the traffic from Lots 1 and 2 were directed north toward Austin Drive, while one-third was directed south onto Pointe Parkway. A detailed Project trip assignment can be found in Appendix D.

Figure 7–2 depicts the proposed project traffic volume assignment based on the distribution. Figure 7–3 depicts the Rerouted Existing + Project traffic volumes.

}94

Sweet water SpringsBlvd

!

!

!

!Agua Dulce Blvd

Campo Rd

}54

Aust in Dr

Jamac

haBl

vd

Jamach

a Blvd

}54

San Diego St

Maya St

WhitestoneRd

Po inte P k wy

Project Site

Calavo Dr

DoubletreeRd

San Miguel St

!

!

!

!

!

Avenida

Calle

Bosques

Marinero

Sweetwater

Reservoir

Regional Project Traffic DistributionFigure 7-1

Sweetwater Vistas


20%

11%

10%

1%

67%

2%65%

69%

2%

1%

2%

1%

1%

15%

Project Traffic DistributionXX%

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(192

263

598

189

175

587

349

471

8461,168

2

4

6

1

5

7

3

8

9

10

O O Ï

!( !( !(

!(!(!(

!( !( !( !(

!(!(!(!(

0 / 1

0 / 2

1 / 0

1 / 1

1 / 3

1 / 4

1 / 5

2 / 1

2 / 3

2 / 8

2 / 9

4 / 2

8 / 4

11 / 6

6 / 2

8

6 / 2

6

6 / 23

5 / 27

5 / 20

5 / 17

4 / 16

3 / 1

33 / 12

19 / 9

17 / 9

15 /

7

7 / 2

9

7 / 30

13 /

54

16 / 78

21 / 10

25 /

12

26 /

12

27 /

16

34 /

16

38 / 18

49 /

23

50 /

23

51 /

24

75 /

35

50 / 23

1 / 5

0 / 1

0 / 1

1 / 0

1 / 1

5 / 2

7

26 /

12

4 / 2

4 / 2

0 / 1

4 / 2

8 / 4

1 / 0

3 / 12

1 / 0

2 / 14 / 2

2 / 3

2 / 8

0 / 1

1 / 0

11 /

6

7 / 2

9

Proj Dwy Austin Dr

Campo Rd

Jamacha Bl

Clle Marinero

Agua Dulce BlSR-94 EB Rmps SR-94 WB Rmps

Jamacha Bl

Jamacha Bl

Clle Marinero

Jamacha BlJamacha Bl

Jamacha Bl

Austin Dr

987

4 5 6

321

11 12 13 14

10


AM / PM



}94

Sweet w

ater Springs Blvd

!

!

!

!Agua Dulce Blvd

Campo Rd

}54

Aust in Dr

Jamac

ha B

lvd

Jamac

ha B

lvd

}54

San Diego St

Maya St

Whitestone Rd

Po

inte P k wy

Project Site

Calavo Dr

Doubletree Rd


!

!

!

!

!(Avenida

Calle

12

!(14!(13

Bosques

Marinero

!(11

Project Traffic Volumes

Sweetwater Vistas

Figure 7-2N:\2436\Figures\July 2016Date: 07/19/16

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Jam

acha

Bl

Dou

blet

ree

Rd

Cal

avo

Dr

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Poin

te P

kwy

Whi

test

one

Rd

May

a St

San

Die

go S

tH

uron

St

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

dC

ampo

Rd

Avnd

a Bo

sque

s

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Sweetwater

Reservoir

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

[Avni

da B

osqu

es

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

846

1,133

35

175

1735

17

332

35

17

17

8 / 4

26 /

12

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(2,691

15,417

9,408

17,319

2,230

24,700

17,6

03

20,7

83

14,499

22,085

2

4

6

1

5

7

3

8

9

10

O O Ï

!( !( !(

!(!(!(

!( !( !( !(

!(!(!(!(

0 / 1

0 / 4

1 / 2

2 / 3

3 / 1

3 / 3

4 / 5

7 / 2

8 / 9

9 / 2

9 / 6

6 / 1

13 / 12

3 / 1

3

4 / 17

5 / 10

14 / 5

7 / 2

4

7 / 2

9

73 /

6

11 / 35

11 / 26

53 /

17

64 / 72

10 /

16

10 / 30

12 / 17

12 / 26

12 /

63

13 / 51

15 /

16

16 / 12

16 /

19

16 / 24

18 /

47

21 /

14

21 / 36

23 / 74

25 /

59

26 /

19

28 /

21

34 / 91

30 /

14

30 /

20

36 / 37

38 /

17

38 / 18

40 /

72

45 / 76

50 /

19

32 / 36

31 /

20

56 / 26

59 / 89

62 / 12

62 /

63

62 / 87

98 / 81

97 /

8594

/ 86

81 /

78

72 /

34

71 /

62

69 / 21

65 /

28

201

/ 71

101

/ 69

107 / 80

108 / 50

125

/ 97

130

/ 72

174

/ 60

210

/ 71

31 / 160

32 / 129

80 / 167

86 / 101

111 / 136

702

/ 711

146 / 117

505

/ 634

128 / 224

144 / 140

149 / 194

152

/ 190

164

/ 266

167

/ 217

193

/ 108

222

/ 100

258

/ 181

268

/ 332

293 / 406325 / 569

347 / 279

349

/ 452

353

/ 445

375 / 584

385

/ 646

574

/ 731 593 / 580

388

/ 445

395 / 297

610 / 604

618 / 940

628 / 541

631 / 670

635

/ 324

650

/ 493

650 / 645

665

/ 376

427 / 254

712 / 760714 / 824

764 / 369

856 / 717

933

/ 535

945

/ 548

1,26

1 / 7

20

1,085 / 7871,228 / 821

1,516 / 1,583

1,339 / 1,940

11 /

35

Proj Dwy Austin Dr

Campo Rd

Jamacha Bl

Clle Marinero


Jamacha Bl


Jamacha Bl

Clle Marinero

987

4 5 6

321

11 12 13 14

10


AM / PM



}94

Sweet w

ater Springs Blvd

!

!

!

!Agua Dulce Blvd

Campo Rd

}54

Aust in Dr

Jamac

ha B

lvd

Jamac

ha B

lvd

}54

San Diego St

Maya St

Whitestone Rd

Po

inte P k wy

Project Site

Calavo Dr

Doubletree Rd


!

!

!

!

!(Avenida

Calle

12

!(14!(13

Bosques

Marinero

!(11

Rerouted Existing + Project Traffic Volumes

Sweetwater Vistas


!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Jam

acha

Bl

Dou

blet

ree

Rd

Cal

avo

Dr

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Poin

te P

kwy

Whi

test

one

Rd

May

a St

San

Die

go S

tH

uron

St

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

dC

ampo

Rd

Avnd

a Bo

sque

s

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Sweetwater

Reservoir

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

[Avni

da B

osqu

es

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

126

/ 178

26 /

12



27

8.0 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS 8.1 Summary of Cumulative Projects Trips Cumulative projects are other projects in the study area that will add traffic to the local circulation system in the near future. LLG coordinated with the County of San Diego staff regarding the cumulative projects in the study area. LLG also researched other projects in the vicinity such as the Cuyamaca College Expansion, Simpson Farms, Jamul Indian Village, etc. and developed the following list:

8.2 Description of Projects 1. Cuyamaca College Facilities Master Plan Update proposes an increase in student enrollment

from the current 8,900 enrolled students to 11,100; a net increase of 2,200 students during the implementation of the Facilities Master Plan Update. The Cuyamaca College campus is bounded by Fury Lane to the east and Jamacha Road (SR 54) to the south, and is approximately three (3) miles east of the Community of Spring Valley and 5 miles south of the City of El Cajon, located within the Community of Valle De Oro in the County of San Diego. With the increased enrollment of 2,200 students for a total campus enrollment of 11,100 students, the college is calculated to generate an additional 2,640 ADT with 317 AM peak hour trips (254 inbound/63 outbound) and 238 AM peak hour trips (143 inbound/95 outbound).

2. Simpson Farms project is located on the northeast corner of the SR 94 / Jefferson Road intersection in the Jamul/Dulzura Planning Area of San Diego County. The project proposes to develop 120,000 square feet of commercial space and 94 single-family residential lots ranging between 1 to 2 acres in size. The project is calculated to generate approximately 7,360 new ADT with 305 trips during the AM peak hour (167 entering and 138 exiting trips) and 646 trips during the PM peak hour (346 entering and 300 exiting).

3. TPM 20550 (Morgan Minor Subdivision) proposes to construct 2 single-family estate homes. The project site is proposed north of the Procter Valley Road/Poplar Meadow Lane intersection. The project was manually calculated using SANDAG's Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region Trip Rates (April, 2002) for estate homes. The project trips were calculated to generate 24 ADT with 1inbound/1 outbound trip during the AM peak-hour and 1 inbound/1 outbound trip during the PM peak-hour.

4. TM 5154 RPL1 (Hendrix Subdivision) is located east of Campo Road on Las Palmas Road. The project proposes to develop 5 single-family estate homes. The project trips were manually calculated using SANDAG's Trip Rates (April, 2002) for estate homes. The project is calculated to generate 60 ADT with 2 inbound/3 outbound trips during the AM peak-hour and 4 inbound/2 outbound trips during the PM peak-hour.

5. TM 5213 RPL2 (Mintz Subdivision) is located north of Skyline Truck Trail and east of Hidden Trail drive. The project proposes to develop approximately 25 acres of land into 10 single-family estate homes. The project trips were manually calculated using SANDAG's Trip Rates (April,



28

2002) for estate homes. The project is calculated to generate 120 ADT with 3 inbound/7 outbound trips during the AM peak-hour and 8 inbound/4 outbound trips during the PM peak-hour.

6. TM 5289 RPL2 (Jamul Highlands Subdivision) proposes to construct 25 single-family estate homes. The project site is proposed south of the Valley Road/Jamul Highlands Road intersection. The project trips were manually calculated using SANDAG's Trip Rates (April, 2002) for estate homes. The project is calculated to generate 300 ADT with 7 inbound/l9 outbound trips during the AM peak-hour and 21 inbound/9 outbound trips during the PM peak-hour.

7. TPM 20626 proposes to construct 3 single-family estate homes. The project site is proposed on the west side of Procter Valley Road, just north of the Proctor Valley Road/Melody Road intersection. The project trips were manually calculated using SANDAG's Trip Rates (April, 2002) for estate homes. The project is calculated to generate 36 ADT with 1 inbound/2 outbound trips during the AM peak-hour and 3inbound/1 outbound trips during the PM peak-hour.

8. TPM 20628 RPLI (Yacoo Minor Subdivision) proposes to construct 4 single-family estate homes. The project site is proposed on Schlee Canyon Road north of Procter Valley Road. The project trips were manually calculated using SANDAG's Trip Rates (April, 2002) for estate homes. The project is calculated to generate 48 ADT with 1 inbound/3 outbound trips during the AM peak-hour and 4 inbound/1 outbound trips during the PM peak-hour.

9. Olive Hills Residential Development is located just east of the proposed project and south of Olive Vista Drive. The project proposes to develop 20 single-family estate homes. The project is calculated to generate 240 ADT with 6 inbound/13 outbound trips during the AM peak-hour and 17 inbound/7 outbound trips during the PM peak-hour.

10. TPM 20599 RPLI (Blanco Parcel Map) proposes to construct 4 single-family estate homes. The project site is proposed on the east side of SR-94, north of the Melody Road. The project trips were manually calculated using SANDAG's Trip Rates (April, 2002) for estate homes. The project is calculated to generate 48 ADT with l inbound/3 outbound trips during the AM peak hour and 4 inbound/1 outbound trips during the PM peak-hour.

11. TPM 20868 (Stein barth Minor Subdivision) is located just north of the proposed project and south of Olive Vista Drive. The project proposes to develop 2 single-family estate homes. The project trips were manually calculated using SANDAG's Trip Rates (April, 2002) for estate homes. The project is calculated to generate 24 ADT with 1 inbound/1 outbound trip during the AM peak-hour and 1 inbound/1 outbound trip during the PM peak-hour.

12. TPM 20594 (Pioneer Minor Subdivision) is located just west of the proposed project and north of Melody Lane. The project proposes to develop 3 single-family estate homes. The project trips were manually calculated using SANDAG's Trip Rates (April, 2002) for estate homes. The project is calculated to generate 36 ADT with 1 inbound/2 outbound trips during the AM peak hour and 3 inbound/1 outbound trips during the PM peak-hour.



29

13. Otay Ranch – Village 19 is located south west of the proposed project and south of Melody Lane. The project proposes to develop 20 single-family estate homes. The project trips were manually calculated using SANDAG's Trip Rates (April, 2002) for estate homes. The project is calculated to generate 240 ADT with 6 inbound/13 outbound trips during the AM peak-hour and 17 inbound/7 outbound trips during the PM peak-hour.

14. Jamul Estates II is located just north east of the proposed project. The maximum allowable developable lots are 68 single-family estate homes based on the current zoning. Therefore, the project trips were manually calculated using SANDAG's Trip Rates (April, 2002) for estate homes. The project is calculated to generate 816 ADT with 20 inbound/46 outbound trips during the AM peak-hour and 57 inbound/24 outbound trips during the PM peak-hour.

15. Peaceful Valley Ranch project proposes the subdivision of 181.31 acres for an estate residential development, equestrian uses and amenities, and fire service facilities. The project is located east of SR-94 and will use the intersection of SR-94 and Melody Road as a single access point. The total project is calculated to generate approximately 750 ADT with 43 inbound/46 outbound trips during the AM peak hour and 56 inbound/46 outbound trips during the PM peak hour.

16. Jamul Indian Village is a proposed tribal gaming project located on a 6.2 acre reservation held in trust by the United States for the benefit of the Jamul Indian Village. The project proposes to develop a gaming facility with a maximum total gaming area square footage of 70,000 square feet and 133,000 square feet for support uses such as food and beverage space, public space, gaming support areas, cage area, administration space, storage and mechanical space and an employee area. The total project is calculated to generate approximately 9,000 ADT with 420 inbound/179 outbound trips during the AM peak hour and 533 inbound/472 outbound trips during the PM peak hour.

17. Sweetwater Place (STP 14-015) project is located on the northeast corner of the Sweetwater Springs Boulevard/ Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54) intersection in the County of San Diego. The project proposes to develop 122 condominium units and a 2.08 acre public park on the site. The total project is calculated to generate 1,031 ADT with 84 total AM peak hour trips (18 inbound/ 66 outbound) and 103 total PM peak hour trips (72 inbound/ 31 outbound). The Sweetwater Place project proposes to construct a raised median within Sweetwater Springs Boulevard. The Sweetwater Vistas project coordinated with the Sweetwater Place project and the resulting access geometry is reflected in Figure 2-3.

18. College Prep Middle School is a proposed charter school located on the southeast corner of Madrid Way and Agua Dulce Boulevard in the County of San Diego. The total project is calculated to generate 875 ADT with 263 total AM peak hour trips (158 inbound/ 105 outbound) and 263 total PM peak hour trips (105 inbound/ 158 outbound).

It should be noted that the Sweetwater Village Shopping Center, located south of Austin Drive between Avenida Bosques and Sweetwater Springs Boulevard, may be replaced at some point with 90-100 condominiums. This potential future project was not included in the cumulative project list since it’s



30

unclear if the project will move forward, and will likely generate less traffic than the existing shopping center if it does.

Figure 8–1 shows the cumulative project traffic volumes assignment. The Existing + Project + Cumulative projects traffic volumes are shown on Figure 8–2.

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(3,015

2,405

2,95

4

1,532

1,510

2,405

2,40

5

2

4

6

1

5

7

3

8

9

10

O O Ï

!( !( !(

!(!(!(

!( !( !( !(

!(!(!(!(

2 / 6

0 / 1

1 / 1

2 / 1

9 / 14

14 /

9

43 /

2012 / 47

20 / 28

21 /

33

88 /

65

86 /

64

76 /

42

71 /

47

65 / 94

63 / 93

47 / 71

23 /

34

40 / 26

26 / 40

79 / 117

51 /

108

53 /

109

77 / 130

81 / 123

86 / 13311

9 / 1

57

392 / 587 101 / 147

280 / 459

86 /

64

51 /

108

65 / 94

26 /

40

81 / 123

65 / 94

65 / 94

81 / 123

81 / 123

Proj Dwy Austin Dr

Campo Rd

Jamacha Bl

Clle Marinero

Agua Dulce BlSR-94 EB Rmps SR-94 WB Rmps

Clle Marinero

Jamacha Bl Jamacha Bl

Austin Dr

Jamacha BlJamacha Bl

Jamacha Bl

987

4 5 6

321

11 12 13 14

10


AM / PM



}94

Sweet w

ater Springs Blvd

!

!

!

!Agua Dulce Blvd

Campo Rd

}54

Aust in Dr

Jamac

ha B

lvd

Jamac

ha B

lvd

}54

San Diego St

Maya St

Whitestone Rd

Po

inte P k wy

Project Site

Calavo Dr

Doubletree Rd


!

!

!

!

!(Avenida

Calle

12

!(14!(13

Bosques

Marinero

!(11

Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes

Sweetwater Vistas


!

!

!

!

Jam

acha

Bl

Dou

blet

ree

Rd

Cal

avo

Dr

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Poin

te P

kwy

Whi

test

one

Rd

May

a St

San

Die

go S

tH

uron

St

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

dC

ampo

Rd

Avnd

a Bo

sque

s

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Future Dwy / Road Extension

Sweetwater

Reservoir

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

[Avni

da B

osqu

es

Gat

ed A

cces

s D

wy

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(2,691

18,432

9,408

19,724

2,230

27,105

20,5

57

23,1

88

16,031

23,595

2

4

6

1

5

7

3

8

9

10

O O Ï

!( !( !(

!(!(!(

!( !( !( !(

!(!(!(!(

0 / 1

0 / 4

1 / 2

2 / 3

3 / 1

3 / 3

4 / 5

7 / 2

8 / 9

9 / 26

/ 11

3 / 123

/ 13

4 / 17

5 / 10

14 / 5

7 / 2

4

7 / 2

9

73 /

6

11 / 35

11 / 26

53 /

17

10 /

16

10 / 30

12 / 17

12 / 26

64 / 72

12 /

63

13 / 51

15 /

16

16 / 12

16 /

19

16 / 24

18 /

47

21 /

14

21 / 36

23 /

15

23 / 74

25 /

59

26 /

19

28 /

21

30 /

14

30 /

20

31 /

20

32 / 36

38 /

17

38 / 18

40 /

72

45 / 7636 / 37

50 /

19

34 / 91

56 / 26

59 / 89

62 / 12

62 /

63

62 / 87

98 / 81

97 /

8594

/ 86

81 /

78

72 /

34

71 /

62

69 / 21

65 /

28

31 / 16010

1 / 6

9

107 / 80

130

/ 72

134 / 90

174

/ 60

201

/ 71

210

/ 71

32 / 129

80 / 167

86 / 101

111 / 136

411 / 702

630 / 987

153 / 154

164

/ 266

166 / 145

175

/ 224

175 / 295

189 / 220

193

/ 108

193

/ 257

196

/ 144

222

/ 100

258

/ 181

268

/ 332

347 / 279

355

/ 446

370

/ 485

370 / 536

388

/ 446

395 / 297

427 / 254

436

/ 754

636

/ 325

675 / 698

438 / 677

556

/ 742

693

/ 513

693

/ 888 694 / 727 707 / 658

712 / 793

715 / 739

751

/ 440

755

/ 820

766 / 375

777 / 854779 / 918

937 / 840

1,33

7 / 7

62

1,02

1 / 6

00

1,03

1 / 6

12

1,166 / 9101,309 / 944

1,796 / 2,042

1,731 / 2,527

11 /

35

Proj Dwy Austin Dr

Campo Rd

Jamacha Bl

Clle Marinero


Jamacha Bl


Jamacha Bl

Clle Marinero

987

4 5 6

321

11 12 13 14

10


AM / PM



}94

Sweet w

ater Springs Blvd

!

!

!

!Agua Dulce Blvd

Campo Rd

}54

Aust in Dr

Jamac

ha B

lvd

Jamac

ha B

lvd

}54

San Diego St

Maya St

Whitestone Rd

Po

inte P k wy

Project Site

Calavo Dr

Doubletree Rd


!

!

!

!

!(Avenida

Calle

12

!(14!(13

Bosques

Marinero

!(11

Rerouted Existing + Project + Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes

Sweetwater Vistas


!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Jam

acha

Bl

Dou

blet

ree

Rd

Cal

avo

Dr

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Poin

te P

kwy

Whi

test

one

Rd

May

a St

San

Die

go S

tH

uron

St

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

dC

ampo

Rd

Avnd

a Bo

sque

s

Swee

twat

er S

pr R

d

Sweetwater

Reservoir

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

[Avni

da B

osqu

es

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

2,338

149

/ 212

26 /

12



33

9.0 NEAR-TERM ANALYSIS 9.1 Rerouted Existing + Project 9.1.1 Intersection Analysis Table 9–1 summarizes the Rerouted Existing + Project intersections level of service. As seen in Table 9–1, all intersections are calculated to continue to operate at LOS D or better, except for the following intersection:


Based on the County of San Diego’s significance criteria, no significant direct impacts are calculated on the above study area intersections as the project traffic contribution does not exceed the allowable thresholds.

Appendix C contains the Rerouted Existing + Project intersection analysis sheets.

9.1.2 Segment Operations Table 9–2 summarizes the Rerouted Existing + Project roadway segment level of service. As seen in Table 9–2, all the segments are calculated to continue to operate at LOS C or better.

Based on the County of San Diego’s significance criteria, no significant direct impacts are calculated on the study area street segments.

9.2 Rerouted Existing + Project + Cumulative Projects 9.2.1 Intersection Analysis Table 9–1 summarizes the Rerouted Existing + Project + Cumulative Projects intersections level of service. As seen in Table 9–1, all intersections are calculated to operate at LOS D or better, except the following intersection:

Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54) / Campo Road (SR-94) – LOS E/F during the AM/PM peak hours, respectively.

Based on the County of San Diego’s significance criteria, a significant cumulative impact is identified at the following intersection:

Jamacha Boulevard (SR-54) / Campo Road (SR-94) – LOS E/F during the AM/PM peak hours, respectively.

Mitigation measures for this impact are discussed in detail in Section 13.0.

Appendix C contains the Rerouted Existing + Project + Cumulative Projects intersection analysis sheets.



34

9.2.2 Segment Operations Table 9–2 summarizes the Rerouted Existing + Project + Cumulative Projects roadway segment level of service. As seen in Table 9–2, all the segments are calculated to operate at LOS C or better.

Based on the County of San Diego’s significance criteria, no significant cumulative impacts are calculated on the study area street segments.



35

TABLE 9–1 NEAR-TERM INTERSECTION OPERATIONS (WITH REROUTED TRAFFIC)


Type PeakHour

Rerouted Existing

Rerouted Existing + Project

Rerouted Existing + Project + Cumulative

Projects Impact Type

Delaya LOSb Delay LOS Δc Delay LOS Δ

1. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Campo Rd (SR-94)

SignalAM 41.4 D 43.2 D 1.2 62.3 E 20.9 Cumulative

PM 60.4 E 61.7 E 1.3 131.7 F 71.3 Cumulative

2. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Calavo Dr / Doubletree Rd

SignalAM 22.5 C 22.5 C 0.0 23.7 C 1.2 None

PM 23.3 C 23.4 C 0.1 24.6 C 1.3 None

3. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Sweetwater Springs Blvd

SignalAM 22.3 C 22.4 C 0.1 23.1 C 0.8 None

PM 21.5 C 23.3 C 1.8 25.5 C 4.0 None

4. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Pointe Pkwy SignalAM 11.9 B 11.9 B 0.0 13.1 B 1.2 None

PM 10.3 B 10.4 B 0.1 11.1 B 0.8 None

5. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Whitestone Rd SignalAM 12.7 B 12.9 B 0.2 14.9 B 2.2 None

PM 11.1 B 11.1 B 0.0 12.1 B 1.0 None

6. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Maya St SignalAM 10.7 B 10.8 B 0.1 11.4 B 0.7 None

PM 10.5 B 10.6 B 0.1 11.3 B 0.8 None

7. Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / San Diego St / Huron St

SignalAM 10.8 B 10.8 B 0.0 11.0 B 0.2 None

PM 8.1 A 8.2 A 0.1 8.2 A 0.1 None

8. Sweetwater Springs Blvd / Austin Dr SignalAM 34.7 C 36.5 D 1.8 41.7 D 4.0 None

PM 42.4 D 42.4 D 0.0 51.2 D 8.8 None

9. Campo Rd (SR-94) / SR 94 EB Ramps SignalAM 16.4 B 17.2 B 0.9 21.6 C 5.2 None

PM 24.6 C 25.1 C 0.5 30.4 C 5.8 None


SignalAM 37.3 D 40.1 D 2.8 53.4 D 16.1 None

PM 35.4 D 38.1 D 2.7 52.4 D 17.0 None

11. Sweetwater Springs Blvd / Proposed Project Driveway

OWSCdAM DNE DNE 10.3 B - 10.5 B - None

PM DNE DNE 10.8 B - 11.4 B - None

12. Austin Drive / Avenida Bosques OWSCAM 14.1 B 15.4 C 1.3 15.4 C 1.3 None

PM 10.9 B 11.2 B 0.3 11.2 B 0.3 None

13. Avenida Bosques / Calle Marinero AWSCeAM 8.0 A 8.5 A 0.5 8.5 A 0.5 None

PM 7.2 A 7.6 A 0.4 7.6 A 0.4 None

14. Calle Marinero / Sweetwater Springs Blvd

OWSCAM 15.4 C 15.4 C 0.0 15.6 C 0.2 None

PM 10.3 B 10.4 B 0.1 10.7 B 0.4 None

Footnotes: a. Average delay expressed in seconds per vehicle. b. LOS = Level of Service.

c. “Δ” denotes the project-induced increase in delay for signalized intersections and project traffic added to the critical movement for unsignalized intersections operating at LOS E or F only.

d. One-Way Stop-Controlled intersection. Minor street delay is reported. e. All-Way Stop-Controlled intersection. Overall delay is reported.

General Notes: 1. BOLD typeface indicates a potentially significant impact. 2. All delays include rerouted traffic due to the extension of Avenida Bosques.

SIGNALIZED

UNSIGNALIZED


Delay LOS Delay LOS

0.0 ≤ 10.0 A 0.0 ≤ 10.0 A

10.1 to 20.0 B 10.1 to 15.0 B

20.1 to 35.0 C 15.1 to 25.0 C

35.1 to 55.0 D 25.1 to 35.0 D

55.1 to 80.0 E 35.1 to 50.0 E

≥ 80.1 F ≥ 50.1 F



36

TABLE 9–2 NEAR-TERM STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS (WITH REROUTED TRAFFIC)

Street Segment Existing Classification Capacity(LOS E) a

Rerouted Existing

Rerouted Existing + Project

Rerouted Existing + Project + Cumulative

Projects Impact Type

ADTb LOSc ADT LOS ADT LOS



with TWLTL 34,200 20,917 B 22,085 B 23,595 C None


with TWLTL 34,200 14,028 B 14,499 B 16,031 B None





with Intermittent Turn Lanes34,200 20,434 B 20,783 B 23,188 C None

Pointe Pkwy to Sweetwater Springs Blvd 4.1B Major Road

with TWLTL 34,200 24,511 C 24,700 C 27,105 C None

Sweetwater Springs Blvd to Calavo Dr 4.1B Major Road



with Intermittent Turn Lanes34,200 17,428 B 17,603 B 20,557 B None

Austin Drive

Avenida Bosques to Sweetwater Springs Blvd2.2B Light Collector

with TWLTL d 19,000 8,821 C 9,408 C 9,408 C None

Avenida Bosques

Austin Drive to Calle Marinero Residential Collector 4,500 2,093 C+ e 2,691 C+ 2,691 C+ None

Calle Marinero

Avenida Bosques to Sweetwater Springs Blvd Residential Collector 4,500 1,384 C+ 2,230 C+ 2,230 C+ None

Footnotes:

a. Capacities based on County of San Diego Roadway Classification Table. b. ADT - Average Daily Traffic Volumes. c. LOS - Level of Service. d. Two-Way Left Turn Lane. e. C+ = better than LOS C.



37

10.0 LONG-TERM ASSESSMENT Table 10-1 shows the trip generation for the previously approved project in comparison to the currently proposed Project.

TABLE 10–1 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON

Land Use (Lot)

Size

Daily Trip Ends (ADTs a)

Rate b Volume

Previously Approved EIR

Resort 710 rooms 10/ room 7,100

Office 358 KSF c 20/ KSF 7,160

Equestrian Center 1.8 acres 40/ acre 75

Restaurant 36.5 KSF 100/ KSF 3,650

Total – 17,985

Currently Proposed Project

Multi-Family Residential 218 DU d 8/ DU 1,744

Total – 1,744

Footnotes: a. ADT = Average Daily Traffic b. Rate is based on SANDAG’s (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region, April 2002. c. KSF = 1,000 square feet d. DU = Dwelling Unit

A long-term analysis is not required as the proposed Project will produce significantly less project trips than the previously approved project at this site.



38

11.0 ACCESS The following section discusses the project access.

11.1 Project Access and On-Site Circulation Lots 1 & 2

Access to Lots 1 and 2 is via an extension of Avenida Bosques. Residents will be able to proceed north to Austin Drive via Avenida Bosques or south via Pointe Parkway to Jamacha Boulevard. The extension of Avenida Bosques will be constructed to County standards and will be 40’ wide with curbside parking provided on both sides.

Lot 3

The project proposes an access driveway to Lot 3 on Sweetwater Springs Boulevard. The driveway will be controlled by a stop sign and should be placed a minimum of 300 feet from Jamacha Boulevard.

The driveway to Lot 3 will provide full access to inbound traffic (left and right turns from Sweetwater Springs Boulevard into the site will be allowed) and right only outbound access (left turns out of the site will be prohibited). Outbound traffic wishing to travel north on Sweetwater Springs Boulevard will be required to turn right out of the Lot 3 driveway traveling south, and make a U-turn at the intersection of Jamacha Boulevard / Sweetwater Springs Boulevard. Southbound to northbound U-turns at this intersection are currently prohibited due to the existing southbound lane configuration (two dedicated right-turn lanes and a shared thru / left-turn lane) and roadway width. The Project proposes improvements to the southbound approach of the intersection to widen the approach and provide a dedicated right-turn lane, a thru lane, and a dedicated left-turn lane. This improvement will allow for southbound traffic to make U-turns at the intersection, and is shown on Figure 2-3.

It is recommended that the following improvement be constructed at the project driveway on Sweetwater Springs Boulevard:

Construct an exclusive northbound left-turn pocket on Sweetwater Springs Boulevard that provides 100 feet of storage with a 60-foot bay taper.

As shown in the analysis results of this study in Section 9.0, the Sweetwater Springs Boulevard driveway is calculated to operate at LOS B.



39

12.0 TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES The Project proposes to extend Avenida Bosques between Calle Marinero and the existing terminus of Pointe Parkway. The extension of Avenida Bosques will be constructed to County standards and will be 40’ wide with curbside parking provided on both sides. As previously discussed in Section 6.2 of this report, this new roadway connection may attract a portion of existing traffic currently utilizing Sweetwater Springs Boulevard. In order to limit the amount of traffic choosing to use Avenida Bosques as a short-cut, traffic calming measures were recommended.

Mini Roundabouts are proposed at the southernmost and northernmost project driveways with yield signs provided at each approach.

Figure 12-1 portrays the proposed conceptual traffic calming features for the new Avenida Bosques roadway connection.



41

13.0 SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Per the County’s significance thresholds and the analysis methodology presented in this report, project-related traffic (when added to cumulative project traffic) is calculated to cause significant impacts within the study area. The following section identifies the significance of impacts and recommended mitigation measures to address operating deficiencies. These improvements, if implemented, would improve efficiency of traffic flow and return intersection operations to below a level of significance.

13.1 Significance of Impacts 13.1.1 Direct Impacts Based on the County of San Diego’s significance criteria, no significant direct impacts are identified in the study area. Therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

13.1.2 Cumulative Impacts Under Existing + Project + Cumulative projects conditions, project related traffic is calculated to cause significant cumulative impacts within the study area, as summarized below in Table 11–1.

TABLE 11–1 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Facility Type Location

Intersections Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Campo Rd (SR-94)

Street Segments None

13.2 Mitigation Measures 13.2.1 Direct Impacts Intersections

Based on the County of San Diego’s significance criteria, no significant direct impacts are identified at the study area intersections. Therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

Street Segments

Based on the County of San Diego’s significance criteria, no significant direct impacts are calculated on the study area street segments. Therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

13.2.2 Cumulative Impacts Intersections

Under Existing + Project + Cumulative projects conditions, the project is calculated to have a significant cumulative impact at one (1) intersection. The following summarizes the recommended mitigation measures:

Jamacha Blvd (SR-54) / Campo Rd (SR-94) – Payment of the appropriate County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) will mitigate the cumulative impact at this intersection. The County Board



42

of Supervisors adopted a TIF ordinance, which provides a mechanism for the County to obtain funding to mitigate anticipated cumulative transportation/circulation impacts, by requiring payment of an impact fee designated in the ordinance. The County updated the TIF Program in December 2012. Under the provisions of State CEQA Guidelines section 15130(a)(3), payment of the fee “to implement or fund its fair share of a mitigation measure or measures designed to alleviate the cumulative impact” allows an EIR to “determine that a project’s contribution to a significant cumulative impact will be rendered less than cumulatively considerable and thus is not significant.”

Street Segments

Based on the County of San Diego’s significance criteria, no significant cumulative impacts are identified on the study area street segments. Therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

As described in Section 11.0, a northbound left turn lane should be provided on Sweetwater Springs Boulevard at the proposed project driveway.

End of Report

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SWEETWATER VISTAS · 2019. 2. 16. · LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers...

Documents

Transcript of TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SWEETWATER VISTAS · 2019. 2. 16. · LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers...