2023-07-18; City Council; ; Selecting Intersection Traffic Control for the Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Intersection Improvements Project — Carlsbad City Council, July 18, 2023 (part 2 of 2)

This model considers only the total circulating flow and not the flow rates in individual circulatin g lanes.

T
o
model
the
ef
fects
of
flow
distribution
in
circulating
lanes
on
the
entry
capacity
results,
you
sh
ould
use
the
SIDRA

Standa
rd
roundabout capacity model.

Gap
Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Lanes)
Cycle
T
ime
Blocked
T
ime
Unblocked
T
ime
Minimum
Delay
Opposed
Lane
Unblocked
T
ime Ratio
sec
sec
sec
sec
South: Carlsbad Blvd
1 10.32

1.94 8.38

0.812

0.0 East:

T
amarack
A
ve
1 10.28

6.30 3.98

0.387

2.3 North: Carlsbad Blvd
1 10.32

2.58 7.74

0.750

0.0 W
est: Beach Parking
1 5.00

3.41 1.59

0.318

0.0 2

10.04 9.10

0.94 0.093

0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model:

US HCM 6
Gap
Acceptance Cycle Parameters (Movements)
Cycle
T
ime
Blocked
T
ime
Unblocked
T
ime
Minimum
Delay
T
o
Approach
T
urn
Opsd
Lane
No
Unblocked
T
ime Ratio
sec
sec
sec
sec
South: Carlsbad Blvd
W
est
L2
1 10.32

1.94 8.38

0.812

0.0 North
T1
1 10.32

1.94 8.38

0.812

0.0 East
R2
1 10.32

1.94 8.38

0.812

0.0 East:

T
amarack
A
ve
South
L2
1 10.28

6.30 3.98

0.387

2.3 W
est
T1
1 10.28

6.30 3.98

0.387

2.3 North
R2
1 10.28

6.30 3.98

0.387

2.3 North: Carlsbad Blvd
East
L2
1 10.32

2.58 7.74

0.750

0.0 South
T1
1 10.32

2.58 7.74

0.750

0.0 W
est
R2
1 10.32

2.58 7.74

0.750

0.0 W
est: Beach Parking
North
L2
1 5.00

3.41 1.59

0.318

0.0 July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 314 of 356
East
T1
1 5.00

3.41 1.59

0.318

0.0 South
R2
2 10.04

9.10 0.94

0.093

0.0 Roundabout Capacity Model:

US HCM 6
SIDRA
INTERSECTION 9.0
|
Copyright © 2000
-
2020
Akcelik and
Associates Pty Ltd
|
sidrasolutions.com
Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.
|
Licence: PLUS / 1PC
|
Processed:

Thursday
, S
eptember 1, 2022 10:58:58
AM
Project:
\\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad T
amarack\400_FunctionalU
nits\480
T
raf
fic\Models\S
idra\Carlsbad
-
T
amarack Signal.sip9
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 315 of 356

SITE LA
YOUT
Site: 101 [Horizon
Y
ear SA
T Pk Hr
-
Signal (Site Folder:

General)]
New Site
Site Category: (None)
Roundabout Metering
Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data.

They are not design drawin
gs.

SIDRA
INTERSECTION 9.0
|
Copyright © 2000
-
2020
Akcelik and
Associates Pty Ltd
|
sidrasolutions.com
Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.
|
Licence: PLUS / 1PC
|
Created:

Thursday
, Sep
tember 1, 2022 1
1:19:34
A
M
Project:
\\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8863_001_Carlsbad T
amarack\400_FunctionalU
nits\480
T
raf
fic\Models\S
idra\Carlsbad
-
T
amarack Signal.sip9
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 316 of 356

INTERSECTION SUMMAR
Y
Site: 101 [Horizon
Y
ear SA
T Pk Hr
-
Signal (Site Folder:

General)]
New Site
Site Category: (None)
Roundabout Metering
Intersection Performance
-
Hourly V
alues
Performance Measure
V
ehicles
Persons
T
ravel Speed (A
verage)

33.0 mph

33.0 mph
T
ravel Distance (T
otal)
2494.6
veh
-
mi/h
2934.3
pers
-
mi/h
T
ravel
T
ime (T
otal)

75.5 veh
-
h/h

88.8 pers
-
h/h
Desired Speed (Program)

35.8 mph
Speed Ef
ficiency

0.92 T
ravel
T
ime Index

9.16 Congestion Coef
ficient

1.08 Demand Flows (T
otal)
2216
veh/h
2609
pers/h
Percent Heavy V
ehicles (Demand)

1.8 %
Degree of Saturation

0.775
Practical Spare Capacity

9.7 %
Ef
fective Intersection Capacity
2861
veh/h
Control Delay (T
otal)

7.71 veh
-
h/h

9.08 pers
-
h/h
Control Delay (A
verage)

12.5 sec

12.5 sec
Control Delay (W
orst Lane)

20.8 sec
Control Delay (W
orst Movement)

20.8 sec

20.8 sec
Geometric Delay (A
verage)

0.0 sec
Stop
-
Line Delay (A
verage)

12.5 sec
Idling
T
ime (A
verage)

6.1 sec
Intersection Level of Service (LOS)
LOS B
95% Back of Queue
-
V
ehicles (W
orst Lane)

4.5 veh
95% Back of Queue
-
Distance (W
orst Lane)
105.8
ft
A
ve. Queue Storage Ratio (W
orst Lane)

0.03 T
otal Ef
fective Stops
1537
veh/h
1810
pers/h
Ef
fective Stop Rate

0.69 0.69
Proportion Queued

0.70 0.70
Performance Index
122.1
122.1
Cost (T
otal)
1366.54
$/h
1366.54
$/h
Fuel Consumption (T
otal)

72.6 gal/h
Carbon Dioxide (T
otal)
576.4
kg/h
Hydrocarbons (T
otal)

0.052
kg/h
Carbon Monoxide (T
otal)

0.766
kg/h
NOx (T
otal)

0.729
kg/h
Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parame ter Settings dialog (Site
tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections.

Intersection LOS value for V
ehicles is based on average delay for all vehicle movements.

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Site Model V
ariability Index (Iterations 3 to N): 0.0 %
Number of Iterations: 2 (Maximum: 10)
Largest change in Lane Degrees of Saturation for the last three Flow -
Capacity Iterations: 0.0% 0.
0% 0.0%
Intersection Performance
-
Annual V
alues
Performance Measure
V
ehicles
Persons
Demand Flows (T
otal)
1,063,680
veh/y
1,252,419
pers/y
Delay
3,701
veh
-
h/y
4,358
pers
-
h/y
Ef
fective Stops
737,685
veh/y
868,842
pers/y
T
ravel Distance
1,197,423
veh
-
mi/y
1,408,463
pers
-
mi/y
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 317 of 356
T
ravel
T
ime
36,234
veh
-
h/y
42,629
pers
-
h/y
Cost
655,940
$/y
655,940
$/y
Fuel Consumption
34,831
gal/y
Carbon Dioxide
276,686
kg/y
Hydrocarbons
25 kg/y
Carbon Monoxide
368
kg/y
NOx
350
kg/y
SIDRA
INTERSECTION 9.0
|
Copyright © 2000
-
2020
Akcelik and
Associates Pty Ltd
|
sidrasolutions.com
Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.
|
Licence: PLUS / 1PC
|
Processed:

MOVEMENT SUMMAR
Y
Site: 101 [Horizon
Y
ear SA
T Pk Hr
-
Signal (Site Folder:

General)]
New Site
Site Category: (None)
Roundabout Metering
V
ehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
T
urn
Deg.

Satn
A
ver
.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Ef
fective
Stop
Rate
A
ver
.

No.

Cycles
A
ver
.

Speed
[
T
otal
HV ]
[
T
otal
HV ]
[ V
eh.

Dist ]
veh/h
%
veh/h
%
v/c
sec
veh
ft
mph
South: Carlsbad Blvd
3 L2
43 0.0
43 0.0

0.712

10.1 LOS B

3.5 82.4

0.59 0.55

0.59 24.0
8 T1
724

2.0 724

2.0 0.712

10.1 LOS B

3.5 82.4

0.59 0.55

0.59 34.6
18 R2
152

2.0 152

2.0 0.712

10.1 LOS B

3.5 82.4

0.59 0.55

0.59 33.0
Approach
919

1.9 919

1.9 0.712

7.0 LOS
A

3.5 82.4

0.59 0.55

0.59 33.9
East:

T
amarack
A
ve
1 L2
173

2.0 173

2.0 0.609

15.3 LOS B

2.6 60.6

0.80 0.86

1.03 30.8
6 T1
28 0.0
28 0.0

0.609

15.3 LOS B

2.6 60.6

0.80 0.86

1.03 21.6
16 R2
124

2.0 124

2.0 0.609

15.3 LOS B

2.6 60.6

0.80 0.86

1.03 29.8
Approach
325

1.8 325

1.8 0.609

13.6 LOS B

2.6 60.6

0.80 0.86

1.03 30.0
North: Carlsbad Blvd
7 L2
123

2.0 123

2.0 0.775

13.7 LOS B

4.5 105.8

0.75 0.75

0.75 31.4
4 T1
721

2.0 721

2.0 0.775

13.7 LOS B

4.5 105.8

0.75 0.75

0.75 33.5
14 R2
40 0.0
40 0.0

0.775

13.7 LOS B

4.5 105.8

0.75 0.75

0.75 29.9
Approach
884

1.9 884

1.9 0.775

10.6 LOS B

4.5 105.8

0.75 0.75

0.75 33.2
W
est: Beach Parking
5 L2
19 0.0
19 0.0

0.390

9.2 LOS
A

1.1 27.6

0.98 0.99

1.03 31.2
2 T1
25 0.0
25 0.0

0.390

9.2 LOS
A

1.1 27.6

0.98 0.99

1.03 24.6
12 R2
44 0.0
44 0.0

0.332

20.8 LOS C

0.3 8.4

0.94 0.94

0.94 30.0
Approach
88 0.0
88 0.0

0.390

15.0 LOS B

1.1 27.6

0.96 0.96

0.98 29.4
All V
ehicles
2216

1.8 2216

1.8 0.775

12.5 LOS B

4.5 105.8

0.70 0.69

0.73 33.0
Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parame ter Settings dialog (Site
tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections.

V
ehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per mov ement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches an d intersection).

Intersection and
Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap
-
Acceptance Capacity:

T
raditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for
All Movement Classes of
All Heavy V
ehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA
INTERSECTION 9.0
|
Copyright © 2000
-
2020
Akcelik and
Associates Pty Ltd
|
sidrasolutions.com
Organisation: WOOD RODGERS, INC.
|
Licence: PLUS / 1PC
|
Processed:

LANE SUMMAR
Y
Site: 101 [Horizon
Y
ear SA
T Pk Hr
-
Signal (Site Folder:

General)]
New Site
Site Category: (None)
Roundabout Metering
Lane Use and Performance
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Cap.

Deg.

Satn
Lane
Util.

A
ver
.

Delay
Level of
Service
Lane
Config
Lane
Length
Cap.

Adj.

Prob.

Block.
[
T
otal
HV ]
[ V
eh
Dist ]
veh/h
%
veh/h
v/c
%
sec
ft
ft
%
%
South: Carlsbad Blvd
Lane 1
d
919

1.9 1290

0.712
100

7.0 LOS
A

3.5 82.4
Full
3773

0.0 0.0
Approach
919

1.9 0.712

7.0 LOS
A

3.5 82.4
East:

T
amarack
A
ve
Lane 1
d
325

1.8 534

0.609
100

13.6 LOS B

2.6 60.6
Full
985

0.0 0.0
Approach
325

1.8 0.609

13.6 LOS B

2.6 60.6
North: Carlsbad Blvd
Lane 1
d
884

1.9 1
141

0.775
100

10.6 LOS B

4.5 105.8
Full
3003

0.0 0.0
Approach
884

1.9 0.775

10.6 LOS B

4.5 105.8
W
est: Beach Parking
Lane 1
d
44 0.0
1 13

0.390
100

9.2 LOS
A

1.1 27.6
Full
349

0.0 0.0
Lane 2
44 0.0
133

0.332
100

20.8 LOS C

0.3 8.4
Short
60 0.0
NA
Approach
88 0.0

0.390

15.0 LOS B

1.1 27.6
Intersection
2216

1.8 0.775

12.5 LOS B

4.5 105.8
Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parame ter Settings dialog (Site
tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections.

Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and in tersection).

Intersection and
Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as spec ified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap
-
Acceptance Capacity:

T
raditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for
All Movement Classes of
All Heavy V
ehicle Model Designation.
d
Dominant lane on roundabout approach
Approach Lane Flows (veh/h)
South: Carlsbad Blvd
Mov
.

L2
T1
R2
T
otal
%HV
Cap.
veh/h
Deg.

Satn
v/c
Lane
Util.
%
Prob.

SL
Ov
.
%
Ov
.

Lane
No.

From S
T
o Exit:

W
N
E
Lane 1
43 724
152
919

1.9 1290

0.712
100
NA
NA
Approach
43 724
152
919

1.9 0.712
East:

T
amarack
A
ve
Mov
.

L2
T1
R2
T
otal
%HV
Cap.
veh/h
Deg.

Satn
v/c
Lane
Util.
%
Prob.

SL
Ov
.
%
Ov
.

Lane
No.

From E
T
o Exit:

S
W
N
Lane 1
173
28 124
325

1.8 534

0.609
100
NA
NA
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 320 of 356
Approach
173
28 124
325

1.8 0.609
North: Carlsbad Blvd
Mov
.

L2
T1
R2
T
otal
%HV
Cap.
veh/h
Deg.

Satn
v/c
Lane
Util.
%
Prob.

SL
Ov
.
%
Ov
.

Lane
No.

From N
T
o Exit:

E
S
W
Lane 1
123
721
40 884

1.9 1
141

0.775
100
NA
NA
Approach
123
721
40 884

1.9 0.775
W
est: Beach Parking
Mov
.

L2
T1
R2
T
otal
%HV
Cap.
veh/h
Deg.

Satn
v/c
Lane
Util.
%
Prob.

SL
Ov
.
%
Ov
.

Lane
No.

From W
T
o Exit:

N
E
S
Lane 1
19 25
-
44 0.0
1 13

0.390
100
NA
NA
Lane 2
-
-
44 44

0.0 133

0.332
100

0.0 1
Approach
19 25
44 88

0.0 0.390
T
otal
%HV
Deg.Satn (v/c)
Intersection
2216

1.8 0.775
Lane flow rates given in this report are based on the arrival flow rates subject to upstream capaci ty constraint where appli
cable.

Merge
Analysis
Exit
Lane
Number
Short
Lane
Length
Percent
Opng in
Lane
Opposing
Flow Rate
Critical
Gap
Follow
-
up
Headway
Lane
Flow
Rate
Capacity
Deg.

Satn
Min.

Delay
Merge
Delay
ft
%
veh/h
pcu/h
sec
sec
veh/h
veh/h
v/c
sec
sec
South Exit: Carlsbad Blvd
Merge
T
ype:

Not
Applied
Full Length Lane
1 Merge
Analysis not applied.

East Exit:

T
amarack
A
ve
Merge
T
ype:

Not
Applied
Full Length Lane
1 Merge
Analysis not applied.

North Exit: Carlsbad Blvd
Merge
T
ype:

Not
Applied
Full Length Lane
1 Merge
Analysis not applied.

W
est Exit: Beach Parking
Merge
T
ype:

Not
Applied
Full Length Lane
1 Merge
Analysis not applied.

Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis Attachment F:

MMLOS Reports

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 322 of 356

Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis No Build Conditions – Existing

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 323 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

PEDESTRIAN
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD? Yes No
* Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum
ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'): 5 5
* Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g.,
cross-slope and trip hazards)? No No
* Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA
requirements? No No
* Do the street light locations appear adequate? Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 30 mph 30 mph
Number of Through Lanes: 2 2
Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count) No No
Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian
facility and vehicle travel way: 0' to 2' greater than 5' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way? Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings? No No
Are there any permanent speed control devices installed? No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)? No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility? No No
Are there intersection enhancements provided for
pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)?
Yes Yes
Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings? No No
Is there pedestrian scale lighting? No No
Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line? No No
Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions? No No
Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more
than 50% of the sidewalk length? No No
Carlsbad Blvd (North Leg)
Redwood Ave
Tamarack Ave
Coastals
18,500
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 70 | C
NB SCORE | LOS
70 | C
SB SCORE | LOS
May require improvements and
upgrades to fully support CAP goals!
X
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 324 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

BICYCLE
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good
(e.g., no pot holes)? Yes Yes
* Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of
obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes
* Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines? Yes Yes
Is on-street parking provided? No No
Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 30 mph 30 mph
Does the bikeway on the study segment and side
streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan? Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection
provided at intersections? No No
Any bicycle racks are provided along segment? No No
Bicycle Facility Provided: Bike Lane Bike Lane
Lane Width (ft) Lane Width (ft)
6 8
Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)
0 0
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Yes Yes
Carlsbad Blvd (North Leg)
Redwood Ave
Tamarack Ave
Coastals
18,500
95 | A
NB SCORE | LOS
100 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP).

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 325 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

PEDESTRIAN
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD? No No
* Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum
ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'): 5 6
* Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g.,
cross-slope and trip hazards)? No No
* Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements? No No * Do the street light locations appear adequate? Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 35 mph 35 mph
Number of Through Lanes: 2 2
Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count) No No
Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian
facility and vehicle travel way: 0' to 2' 0' to 2'
Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way? Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings? No No
Are there any permanent speed control devices installed? No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)? No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility? No No
Are there intersection enhancements provided for
pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)?
No No
Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings? No No
Is there pedestrian scale lighting? No No
Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line? No No
Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions? No No
Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more
than 50% of the sidewalk length? No No
Carlsbad Blvd (South Leg)
Tamarack Ave
Sequoia Ave
Coastals
21,400
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 45 | F
NB SCORE | LOS
55 | E
SB SCORE | LOS
May require improvements and
upgrades to fully support CAP goals!
X
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 326 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

BICYCLE
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good
(e.g., no pot holes)? Yes Yes
* Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of
obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes
* Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines? Yes Yes
Is on-street parking provided? No No
Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 35 mph 35 mph
Does the bikeway on the study segment and side
streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan? Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection
provided at intersections? No No
Any bicycle racks are provided along segment? No No
Bicycle Facility Provided: Bike Lane Bike Lane
Lane Width (ft) Lane Width (ft)
6 6
Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)
4 2
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Yes Yes
Carlsbad Blvd (South Leg)
Tamarack Ave
Sequoia Ave
Coastals
21,400
100 | A
NB SCORE | LOS
100 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP).

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 327 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

PEDESTRIAN
Roadway Direction
EB WB
* Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD? Yes Yes
* Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum
ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'): 5 5
* Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g.,
cross-slope and trip hazards)? No No
* Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements? No No * Do the street light locations appear adequate? Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 30 mph 30 mph
Number of Through Lanes: 1 1
Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count) Yes Yes
Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian
facility and vehicle travel way: 0' to 2' 0' to 2'
Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way? Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings? No No
Are there any permanent speed control devices installed? No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)? No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility? No No
Are there intersection enhancements provided for
pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)?
Yes Yes
Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings? No No
Is there pedestrian scale lighting? No No
Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line? No No
Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions? No No
Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more
than 50% of the sidewalk length? No No
Tamarack Ave (East Leg)
Carlsbad Blvd
Garfield St
Neighborhood Connector
6,900
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 80 | B
EB SCORE | LOS
80 | B
WB SCORE | LOS
May require improvements and
upgrades to fully support CAP goals!
X
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 328 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

BICYCLE
Roadway Direction
EB WB
* Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good
(e.g., no pot holes)? Yes Yes
* Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of
obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes
* Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines? Yes Yes
Is on-street parking provided? No No
Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 30 mph 30 mph
Does the bikeway on the study segment and side
streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan? Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection
provided at intersections? No No
Any bicycle racks are provided along segment? No No
Bicycle Facility Provided: Bike Lane Bike Lane
Lane Width (ft) Lane Width (ft)
6 6
Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)
0 0
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Yes Yes
Tamarack Ave (East Leg)
Carlsbad Blvd
Garfield St
Neighborhood Connector
6,900
95 | A
EB SCORE | LOS
95 | A
WB SCORE | LOS
X
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP).

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 329 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

PEDESTRIAN
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD? No No
* Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum
ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'): 5 5
* Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g.,
cross-slope and trip hazards)? No No
* Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements? No No * Do the street light locations appear adequate? Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 35 mph 35 mph
Number of Through Lanes: 2 2
Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count) No No
Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian
facility and vehicle travel way: 0' to 2' 0' to 2'
Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way? Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings? No No
Are there any permanent speed control devices installed? No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)? No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility? No No
Are there intersection enhancements provided for
pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)?
No No
Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings? No No
Is there pedestrian scale lighting? No No
Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line? No No
Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions? No No
Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more
than 50% of the sidewalk length? No No
Carlsbad Blvd (Bridge Segment)
Sequoia Ave
South End of Bridge
Coastals
21,400
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 45 | F
NB SCORE | LOS
45 | F
SB SCORE | LOS
May require improvements and
upgrades to fully support CAP goals!
X
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 330 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

BICYCLE
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good
(e.g., no pot holes)? Yes Yes
* Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of
obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes
* Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines? Yes Yes
Is on-street parking provided? No No
Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 35 mph 35 mph
Does the bikeway on the study segment and side
streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan? Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection
provided at intersections? No No
Any bicycle racks are provided along segment? No No
Bicycle Facility Provided: Bike Lane Bike Lane
Lane Width (ft) Lane Width (ft)
6 6
Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)
4 4
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Yes Yes
Carlsbad Blvd (Bridge Segment)
Sequoia Ave
South End of Bridge
Coastals
21,400
100 | A
NB SCORE | LOS
100 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP).

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 331 of 356

Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis 3 & 4-Lane Alternatives Conditions - Existing

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 332 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

PEDESTRIAN
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD? Yes Yes
* Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum
ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'): 5 10
* Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g.,
cross-slope and trip hazards)? Yes Yes
* Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA
requirements? Yes Yes
* Do the street light locations appear adequate? Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 30 mph 30 mph
Number of Through Lanes: 2 2
Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count) No No
Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian
facility and vehicle travel way: 0' to 2' greater than 5' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way? Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings? No No
Are there any permanent speed control devices installed? No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)? Yes Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility? Yes No
Are there intersection enhancements provided for
pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)?
Yes Yes
Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings? No No
Is there pedestrian scale lighting? No No
Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line? No No
Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions? No No
Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more
than 50% of the sidewalk length? No No
Carlsbad Boulevard (North Leg)
Tamarack Avenue
Redwood Avenue
Identity (adjacent to residential)
18,500
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 95 | A
NB SCORE | LOS
100 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 333 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

BICYCLE
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good
(e.g., no pot holes)? Yes Yes
* Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of
obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes
* Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines? Yes Yes
Is on-street parking provided? No No
Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 30 mph 30 mph
Does the bikeway on the study segment and side
streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan? Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection
provided at intersections? Yes Yes
Any bicycle racks are provided along segment? No No
Bicycle Facility Provided: Bike Lane Bike Lane
Lane Width (ft) Lane Width (ft)
6 6
Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)
0 2
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Yes Yes
Carlsbad Boulevard (North Leg)
Tamarack Avenue
Redwood Avenue
Identity (adjacent to residential)
18,500
100 | A
NB SCORE | LOS
100 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP).

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 334 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

PEDESTRIAN
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD? Yes Yes
* Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum
ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'): 10 7
* Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g.,
cross-slope and trip hazards)? Yes Yes
* Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA
requirements? Yes Yes
* Do the street light locations appear adequate? Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 35 mph 35 mph
Number of Through Lanes: 2 2
Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count) No No
Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian
facility and vehicle travel way: 0' to 2' 0' to 2'
Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way? Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings? No No
Are there any permanent speed control devices installed? No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)? Yes Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility? Yes Yes
Are there intersection enhancements provided for
pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)?
Yes Yes
Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings? No No
Is there pedestrian scale lighting? No No
Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line? No No
Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions? No No
Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more
than 50% of the sidewalk length? No No
Carlsbad Boulevard (South Leg)
Tamarack Avenue
Sequoia Avenue
Coastals
21,400
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A
NB SCORE | LOS
100 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 335 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

BICYCLE
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good
(e.g., no pot holes)? Yes Yes
* Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of
obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes
* Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines? Yes Yes
Is on-street parking provided? No No
Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 35 mph 35 mph
Does the bikeway on the study segment and side
streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan? Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection
provided at intersections? Yes Yes
Any bicycle racks are provided along segment? No No
Bicycle Facility Provided: Bike Lane Bike Lane
Lane Width (ft) Lane Width (ft)
6 6
Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)
0 0
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Yes Yes
Carlsbad Boulevard (South Leg)
Tamarack Avenue
Sequoia Avenue
Coastals
21,400
90 | A
NB SCORE | LOS
90 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP).

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 336 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

PEDESTRIAN
Roadway Direction
EB WB
* Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD? Yes Yes
* Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum
ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'): 6 6
* Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g.,
cross-slope and trip hazards)? No No
* Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA
requirements? Yes Yes
* Do the street light locations appear adequate? Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 30 mph 30 mph
Number of Through Lanes: 1 1
Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count) Yes Yes
Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian
facility and vehicle travel way: 0' to 2' 0' to 2'
Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way? Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings? No No
Are there any permanent speed control devices installed? No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)? No Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility? Yes Yes
Are there intersection enhancements provided for
pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)?
Yes Yes
Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings? No No
Is there pedestrian scale lighting? No No
Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line? No No
Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions? No No
Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more
than 50% of the sidewalk length? No No
Tamarack Avenue (East Leg)
Carlsbad Boulevard
Garfield Street
Neighborhood Connector
6,900
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A
EB SCORE | LOS
100 | A
WB SCORE | LOS
May require improvements and
upgrades to fully support CAP goals!
X
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 337 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

BICYCLE
Roadway Direction
EB WB
* Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good
(e.g., no pot holes)? Yes Yes
* Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of
obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes
* Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines? Yes Yes
Is on-street parking provided? No No
Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 30 mph 30 mph
Does the bikeway on the study segment and side
streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan? Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection
provided at intersections? No No
Any bicycle racks are provided along segment? No No
Bicycle Facility Provided: Bike Lane Bike Lane
Lane Width (ft) Lane Width (ft)
7 7
Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)
0 0
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Yes Yes
Tamarack Avenue (East Leg)
Carlsbad Boulevard
Garfield Street
Neighborhood Connector
6,900
95 | A
EB SCORE | LOS
95 | A
WB SCORE | LOS
X
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP).

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 338 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

PEDESTRIAN
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD? Yes Yes
* Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum
ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'): 5 11
* Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g.,
cross-slope and trip hazards)? Yes Yes
* Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements? Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate? Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 35 mph 35 mph
Number of Through Lanes: 2 1
Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count) Yes Yes
Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian
facility and vehicle travel way: 0' to 2' 0' to 2'
Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way? Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings? No No
Are there any permanent speed control devices installed? No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)? No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility? Yes Yes
Are there intersection enhancements provided for
pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)?
No No
Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings? Yes Yes
Is there pedestrian scale lighting? No No
Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line? No No
Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions? No No
Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more
than 50% of the sidewalk length? No No
Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment-3-Ln Alt)
Sequoia Ave
South End of Bridge
Coastals
21,400
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 95 | A
NB SCORE | LOS
100 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 339 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

BICYCLE
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good
(e.g., no pot holes)? Yes Yes
* Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of
obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes
* Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines? Yes Yes
Is on-street parking provided? No No
Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 35 mph 35 mph
Does the bikeway on the study segment and side
streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan? Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection
provided at intersections? Yes Yes
Any bicycle racks are provided along segment? No No
Bicycle Facility Provided: Bike Lane Bike Lane
Lane Width (ft) Lane Width (ft)
6 6
Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)
2 3
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Yes Yes
Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment-3-Ln Alt)
Sequoia Ave
South End of Bridge
Coastals
21,400
100 | A
NB SCORE | LOS
100 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP).

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 340 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

PEDESTRIAN
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD? Yes Yes
* Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum
ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'): 5 11
* Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g.,
cross-slope and trip hazards)? Yes Yes
* Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements? Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate? Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 35 mph 35 mph
Number of Through Lanes: 2 1
Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count) No No
Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian
facility and vehicle travel way: 0' to 2' 0' to 2'
Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way? Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings? No No
Are there any permanent speed control devices installed? No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)? No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility? Yes Yes
Are there intersection enhancements provided for
pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)?
No No
Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings? Yes Yes
Is there pedestrian scale lighting? No No
Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line? No No
Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions? No No
Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more
than 50% of the sidewalk length? No No
Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment-4-Ln Alt)
Sequoia Ave
South End of Bridge
Coastals
21,400
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 85 | B
NB SCORE | LOS
95 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 341 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

BICYCLE
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good
(e.g., no pot holes)? Yes Yes
* Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of
obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes
* Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines? Yes Yes
Is on-street parking provided? No No
Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 35 mph 35 mph
Does the bikeway on the study segment and side
streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan? Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection
provided at intersections? Yes Yes
Any bicycle racks are provided along segment? No No
Bicycle Facility Provided: Bike Lane Bike Lane
Lane Width (ft) Lane Width (ft)
6 6
Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)
2 0
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Yes Yes
Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment-4-Ln Alt)
Sequoia Ave
South End of Bridge
Coastals
21,400
100 | A
NB SCORE | LOS
90 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP).

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 342 of 356

Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis Roundabout Conditions - Existing

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 343 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

PEDESTRIAN
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD? Yes Yes
* Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum
ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'): 10 10
* Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g.,
cross-slope and trip hazards)? Yes Yes
* Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements? Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate? Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 30 mph 30 mph
Number of Through Lanes: 1 1
Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count) Yes Yes
Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian
facility and vehicle travel way: 0' to 2' greater than 5' Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way? Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings? No No
Are there any permanent speed control devices installed? No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)? Yes Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility? Yes Yes
Are there intersection enhancements provided for
pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)?
No No
Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings? No No
Is there pedestrian scale lighting? No No
Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line? No No
Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions? No No
Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more
than 50% of the sidewalk length? No No
Carlsbad Boulevard (North Leg)
Tamarack Avenue
Redwood Avenue
Identity (adjacent to residential)
18,500
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A
NB SCORE | LOS
100 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 344 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

BICYCLE
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good
(e.g., no pot holes)? Yes Yes
* Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of
obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes
* Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines? Yes Yes
Is on-street parking provided? No No
Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 30 mph 30 mph
Does the bikeway on the study segment and side
streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan? Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection
provided at intersections? No No
Any bicycle racks are provided along segment? No No
Bicycle Facility Provided: Bike Lane Bike Lane
Lane Width (ft) Lane Width (ft)
8 7
Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)
3 3
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Yes Yes
Carlsbad Boulevard (North Leg)
Tamarack Avenue
Redwood Avenue
Identity (adjacent to residential)
18,500
100 | A
NB SCORE | LOS
100 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP).

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 345 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

PEDESTRIAN
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD? Yes Yes
* Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum
ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'): 10 14
* Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g.,
cross-slope and trip hazards)? Yes Yes
* Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements? Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate? Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 35 mph 35 mph
Number of Through Lanes: 1 1
Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count) Yes Yes
Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian
facility and vehicle travel way: 0' to 2' 0' to 2'
Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way? Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings? No No
Are there any permanent speed control devices installed? No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)? Yes Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility? Yes Yes
Are there intersection enhancements provided for
pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)?
No No
Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings? No No
Is there pedestrian scale lighting? No No
Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line? No No
Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions? No No
Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more
than 50% of the sidewalk length? No No
Carlsbad Boulevard (South Leg)
Tamarack Avenue
Sequoia Avenue
Coastals
21,400
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A
NB SCORE | LOS
100 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 346 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

BICYCLE
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good
(e.g., no pot holes)? Yes Yes
* Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of
obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes
* Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines? Yes Yes
Is on-street parking provided? No No
Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 35 mph 35 mph
Does the bikeway on the study segment and side
streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan? Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection
provided at intersections? No No
Any bicycle racks are provided along segment? No No
Bicycle Facility Provided: Bike Lane Bike Lane
Lane Width (ft) Lane Width (ft)
7 8
Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)
3 3
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Yes Yes
Carlsbad Boulevard (South Leg)
Tamarack Avenue
Sequoia Avenue
Coastals
21,400
100 | A
NB SCORE | LOS
100 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP).

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 347 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

PEDESTRIAN
Roadway Direction
EB WB
* Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD? Yes Yes
* Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum
ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'): 6 6
* Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g.,
cross-slope and trip hazards)? No No
* Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements? Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate? Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 30 mph 30 mph
Number of Through Lanes: 1 1
Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count) Yes Yes
Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian
facility and vehicle travel way: 0' to 2' 0' to 2'
Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way? Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings? No No
Are there any permanent speed control devices installed? No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)? Yes Yes Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility? Yes Yes
Are there intersection enhancements provided for
pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)?
No No
Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings? No No
Is there pedestrian scale lighting? No No
Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line? No No
Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions? No No
Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more
than 50% of the sidewalk length? No No
Tamarack Avenue (East Leg)
Carlsbad Boulevard
Garfield Street
Neighborhood Connector
6,900
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A
EB SCORE | LOS
100 | A
WB SCORE | LOS
May require improvements and
upgrades to fully support CAP goals!
X
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 348 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

5.5 6
Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)
0 0
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Yes Yes
Tamarack Avenue (East Leg)
Carlsbad Boulevard
Garfield Street
Neighborhood Connector
6,900
95 | A
EB SCORE | LOS
95 | A
WB SCORE | LOS
X
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP).

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 349 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

PEDESTRIAN
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do pedestrian crossings appear consistent with the CA MUTCD? Yes Yes
* Minimum Sidewalk Unobstructed Width in Feet (Minimum
ADA unobstructed width requirement is 4'): 13 14
* Do sidewalks appear to meet ADA requirements (e.g.,
cross-slope and trip hazards)? Yes Yes
* Do ramps and landings appear to meet ADA requirements? Yes Yes * Do the street light locations appear adequate? Yes Yes Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 35 mph 35 mph
Number of Through Lanes: 1 1
Are there 3 lanes or less to be crossed without pedestrian refuge? (Include turn lanes in count) Yes Yes
Width (ft.) of landscaped buffer between pedestrian
facility and vehicle travel way: 0' to 2' 0' to 2'
Does on-street parking or a bike lane provide 6' or more buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel way? Yes Yes Any apparent sight distance issues at intersections and pedestrian crossings? No No
Are there any permanent speed control devices installed? No No Are there traffic calming measures that reduce crossing width (e.g., bulbouts, chokers, right-turn median island)? No No Do crosswalks appear to be high visibility? Yes Yes
Are there intersection enhancements provided for
pedestrians (e.g., pedestrian signal phasing, countdown heads)?
No No
Are there Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at street crossings? Yes Yes
Is there pedestrian scale lighting? No No
Do active building frontages appear to be present on 80% of street curb line? No No
Does the street furniture appear to be oriented towards businesses or attractions? No No
Do the street trees appear to provide shade over more
than 50% of the sidewalk length? No No
Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment)
Sequoia Ave
South End of Bridge
Coastals
21,400
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP). 100 | A
NB SCORE | LOS
100 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 350 of 356

ROADWAY INFO
Roadway Name
From
To
Street Typology from Mobility Element _
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume (2-way total)

BICYCLE
Roadway Direction
NB SB
* Do the roadway pavement conditions appear to be good
(e.g., no pot holes)? Yes Yes
* Does bike facility on roadway appear to be free of
obstructions (e.g., drainage grates)? Yes Yes
* Does the bicycle facility appear to meet MUTCD signing and striping design guidelines? Yes Yes
Is on-street parking provided? No No
Speed limit (miles per hour - mph): 35 mph 35 mph
Does the bikeway on the study segment and side
streets meet and/or exceed the Bicycle Master Plan? Both Both Is there enhanced bicycle detection or video detection
provided at intersections? No No
Any bicycle racks are provided along segment? No No
Bicycle Facility Provided: Bike Lane Bike Lane
Lane Width (ft) Lane Width (ft)
8 8
Bicycle Buffer Width (ft) Bicycle Buffer Width (ft)
3 3
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Bike lanes are striped
continuously through
the study segment?
Yes Yes
Carlsbad Boulevard (Bridge Segment)
Sequoia Ave
South End of Bridge
Coastals
21,400
100 | A
NB SCORE | LOS
100 | A
SB SCORE | LOS
X
* Indicates an essential feature that strongly supports and promotes the goals identifed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP).

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 351 of 356

Final Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue Pedestrian Improvement Project Mobility Analysis Attachment G:

Collision Data
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 352 of 356
Public Works
Department/Traffic &
Mobility Division From 1/1/2008 to 8/17/2021 Total Collisions: 15 44425 Injury Collisions: 12 Fatal Collisions: 0 Text1 Text3 Text4 Text5 Text8 Text10 Text11 Text20 Text21 Text22 City Text6 Text7 Text9 Text18 Text19 Text12 Text13 Text14 Party No Party Type Dir of Travel Movement Gender Age Veh Type Sobriety Assoc Factor Safety Equip Special Info 15-05955 8/19/2015 11:35 Wednesday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 137' Direction: South Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Unsafe Starting or Backing 22106 Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver North Stopped In Road Male Age: 24 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use Party 2 Driver North Proceeding Straight Male Age: 58 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use 15-08388 11/21/2015 03:31 Saturday REDWOOD AV - CARLSBAD BL 15' Direction: East Dark - Street Lights Clear Pty at Fault: In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Hit Object Fixed Object Unknown Hit & Run: Misdemeanor Property Damage Only # Inj: 0 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver East Making U Turn Not Stated Age: Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: Impairment Not Known Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not Stated 16-02044 3/26/2016 09:02 Saturday CARLSBAD BL - REDWOOD AV 20' Direction: North Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Unsafe Speed 22350 Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver South Proceeding Straight Female Age: 85 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use Party 2 Driver South Stopped In Road Male Age: 51 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use 16-03420 5/14/2016 10:06 Saturday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 0' Direction: Not Stated Daylight Cloudy Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Broadside Other Motor Vehicle Traffic Signals and Signs 21453A Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver South Proceeding Straight Female Age: 26 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: Inattention Cell Phone Not In Use Party 2 Driver East Proceeding Straight Male Age: 61 Veh Type: Pickup Truck Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use 16-06087 8/29/2016 20:08 Monday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 3' Direction: North Dark - Street Lights Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Other Bicycle Driving Under Influence 212005 Hit & Run: No Other Visible Injury # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Bicyclist South Traveling Wrong Way Male Age: 29 Veh Type: Bicycle Sobriety: HBD Under Influence Assoc Factor: Violation Not Stated Party 2 Driver West Making Right Turn Female Age: 23 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not Stated 16-06738 9/25/2016 20:31 Sunday TAMARACK AV - GARFIELD ST 0' Direction: Not Stated Dark - Street Lights Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Broadside Other Motor Vehicle Traffic Signals and Signs 22450A Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver East Proceeding Straight Female Age: 39 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use Party 2 Driver South Proceeding Straight Female Age: 34 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use 17-03791 6/13/2017 02:00 Tuesday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 400' Direction: South Dark - Street Lights Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Hit Object Fixed Object Driving Under Influence 23152A Hit & Run: No Other Visible Injury # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver North Other Unsafe Turning Female Age: 20 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HBD Under Influence Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not Stated 17-05644 9/2/2017 18:00 Saturday CARLSBAD BL - SEQUOIA AV 81' Direction: North Daylight Cloudy Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Unsafe Speed 22350 Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 2 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver North Proceeding Straight Male Age: 29 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use Party 2 Driver North Stopped In Road Male Age: 48 Veh Type: Passenger Car Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Cell Phone Not In Use 19-00295 1/14/2019 13:20 Wednesday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 60' Direction: SOUTH Daylight Raining Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Other Motor Vehicle Unsafe Speed 22350 Hit & Run: Other Visible Injury # Inj: 3 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver NORTH Proceeding Straight F Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap Belt Used Cell Phone Not In Use Party 2 Driver NORTH Stopped In Road F Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap Belt Used Cell Phone Not In Use Party 3 Driver NORTH Proceeding Straight F Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap Belt Used Cell Phone Not In Use 19-05635 8/22/2019 14:02 Thursday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 0' Direction: Not Stated Daylight Cloudy Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Sideswipe Other Motor Vehicle Improper Turning 22100A Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver NORTH Making Right Turn M Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use Party 2 Driver NORTH Making Right Turn M Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: Under Drug Influence Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use 19-06000 9/8/2019 08:45 Sunday CARLSBAD BL - SEQUOIA AV 57' Direction: SOUTH Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Sideswipe Motor Vehicle on Other Roadway Improper Turning 22107 Hit & Run: Misdemeanor Property Damage Only # Inj: 0 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver SOUTH Changing Lanes Not Stated Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: Impairment Not Known Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not Stated Party 2 Driver SOUTH Proceeding Straight F Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use 20-03812 6/27/2020 09:36 Saturday CARLSBAD BL - SEQUOIA AV 105' Direction: SOUTH Daylight Cloudy Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Other Than Driver Hit & Run: No Other Visible Injury # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver NORTH Proceeding Straight F Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: Other Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use Party 2 Driver NORTH Stopped In Road M Age: Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use 21-00313 1/13/2021 16:45 Wednesday TAMARACK AV - CARLSBAD BL 79' Direction: EAST Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Unsafe Starting or Backing 22106 Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver WEST Backing F Age: 63 Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Unknown Not Stated Party 2 Driver WEST Stopped In Road F Age: 41 Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Not Stated 21-01756 3/18/2021 18:11 Thursday CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV 33' Direction: SOUTH Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle Driving Under Influence 23152(a) Hit & Run: No Complaint of Pain # Inj: 1 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver NORTH Proceeding Straight F Age: 24 Veh Type: Sobriety: HBD Under Influence Assoc Factor: Violation Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use Party 2 Driver NORTH Stopped In Road M Age: 56 Veh Type: Sobriety: HNBD Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use 21-03637 5/30/2021 18:30 Sunday REDWOOD AV - CARLSBAD BL 0' Direction: Not Stated Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1 In Area: CarlsbadRedwoodBridge Sideswipe Parked Motor Vehicle Improper Turning 22107 Hit & Run: No Property Damage Only # Inj: 0 # Killed: 0 Party 1 Driver EAST Making Right Turn M Age: 31 Veh Type: Sobriety: Under Drug Influence Assoc Factor: None Apparent Lap/Shoulder Harness Used Cell Phone Not In Use Party 2 Parked Vehicle WEST Parked Not Stated Age: 0 Veh Type: Sobriety: Not Applicable Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not Stated Party 3 Parked Vehicle WEST Parked Not Stated Age: 0 Veh Type: Sobriety: Not Applicable Assoc Factor: None Apparent Not Stated July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 353 of 356
Collision Summary Report
City of Carlsbad
Public Works Department/Traffic & Mobility Division
7/25/22
From 8/21/2021 to 7/25/2022
Total Collisions: 3
Injury Collisions: 1
Fatal Collisions: 0
CARLSBAD BL & TAMARACK AV Page 1 of 1
21-07741 11/19/2021 09:30 Friday
Rear-End Parked Motor Vehicle

CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV
Driving Under Influence
27' Direction: SOUTH
Property Damage Only # Inj: 0 # Killed: 023152(a) Hit & Run: No Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1
Cell Phone Not In UseLap/Shoulder Harness Used
Age: 56M
Assoc Factor: Violation
Proceeding Straight
Sobriety: HBD Under InfluencVeh Type:

NORTDriverParty 1 2015 CHEVROLET MALIBU Passenger Car, Station Wagon, Jeep Cell Phone Not In Use
Age: 0Not Sta
Assoc Factor: None Apparent
Stopped In Road
Sobriety: HNBDVeh Type:

NORTParked VehicleParty 2 2020 FORD EXPLORER Passenger Car, Station Wagon, Jeep 21-07914 11/25/2021 14:25 Thursday
Rear-End Other Motor Vehicle

CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV
Unsafe Speed
13' Direction: SOUTH
Property Damage Only # Inj: 0 # Killed: 022350 Hit & Run: Misde Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1
Not Stated
Age: 0Not Sta
Assoc Factor: None Apparent
Proceeding Straight
Sobriety: Impairment Not KnoVeh Type:

NORTDriverParty 1 1999 MAZDA PROTEGE Passenger Car, Station Wagon, Jeep Cell Phone Not In UseLap/Shoulder Harness Used
Age: 67F
Assoc Factor: None Apparent
Stopped In Road
Sobriety: HNBDVeh Type:

NORTDriverParty 2 2021 LEXUS RX350 Passenger Car, Station Wagon, Jeep 22-00200 1/10/2022 15:42 Monday
Sideswipe Other Motor Vehicle

CARLSBAD BL - TAMARACK AV
Improper Turning
181' Direction: NORTH
Other Visible Injury # Inj: 2 # Killed: 022107 Hit & Run: No Daylight Clear Pty at Fault:1
Cell Phone Not In UseLap/Shoulder Harness Used
Age: 28F
Assoc Factor: Violation
Proceeding Straight
Sobriety: HNBDVeh Type:

SOUTDriverParty 1 2018 LEXUS RX350 Passenger Car, Station Wagon, Jeep Cell Phone Not In UseLap/Shoulder Harness Used
Age: 65M
Assoc Factor: None Apparent
Slowing / Stopping
Sobriety: HNBDVeh Type:

SOUTDriverParty 2 2004 LINCOLN NAVIGATOR Sport Utility Vehicle Settings for Query:

Street: CARLSBAD BL
Cross Street: TAMARACK AV
Sorted By: Date and Time
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 354 of 356
Exhibit 5

Traffic & Mobility Commission Feb. 6, 2023, meeting
minutes (on file in the Office of the City Clerk)

July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 355 of 356
Exhibit 6
Tra
ffic & Mobility Commission May 1, 2023, meeting
minutes (on file in the Office of the City Clerk)
July 18, 2023
Item #10 Page 356 of 356
Proposed
f iZ-~ SE~ TE()

QISTRIBUTED DURING PUBLIC

COMMENT AT COUNCIL
MEETING OF 1 ltg/1)1, l\(.w\ *'~
Carlsbad Boulevard-Tamarack Avenue
roundabout
Steve Linke
7/18/2023 City Council meeting

SUMMARY
• Concerns
-Safety (dangerous/injury crashes)
-Operationa I (congestion/gridlock)
Carlsbad Boulevard roundaboutc comparison
State Street roundabout (9 year history) Proposed Tamarack Avenue roundabout VAKI r-,r,.,..rn,¢11 i 1-·-BUS STATION\
PULLOUT \
- ---.... ...._

BUS STATION

PULLOUT
Would service about 70% more total traffic

SAFETY CONCERNS
• Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP)
-Analysis of crash data from police .
reports {2015-2019)
-Identifies safety improvements

CITY OF CARLSBAD
Local Roadway Safely Plan
LRSP: State Street roundabout in top three
intersection crash frequency
Figure 2-2
High Collision Freq11e11ry Intersections
H" b Fr~ u~ncy Collisions
• 15-18
• 12-14
0 10-11
School
State St -----~ ---. ··a -----·-1
~ .......,1\6 • i.___ ~r-.
ror::ibout\ 0 }_::; I ~ "' v---,,... I
_,e #' ' , I
. 4 I
'~ ~ \~ I " \ I ( \ \ ... 4 '----... \
11s/a
'·i • \ ---
oe ,,
I
\ -:~
\
'\,_
c.....,.11# -f,J>•~ L
--r.7 r.i----1 San
~~
•
-~ L.!J MMCOS 1
\
{\.,
\ ., \
i. i -r.
l
'
p,(R/ECR PAR/~elrose
~ ...,,....,. ~i ,.,.. ~ .
,"' "'"' ,, .

I,
~1\6 ' ~ :,
,_
i
!. -' I
Pa0llc"
... __ ~
J
Lt¾,.. l I
e,,"'°s_.~
C,,0 ... --.
__ _j
LRSP: State Street roundabout has
highest intersection crash rate
Table 2-5 Intersection Crash Rates
car1sbad Boulevard & State Street
Tamarack Avenue & Carlsbad Village Drive Signal 0.340 8 7 1 cansbad Boulevard & cerezo Drive Signal 0.337 9 4 1 1 1 2 Roosevelt Street & Carlsbad Village Drive Signal 0.285 7 2 1 Paseo Avellano & Calle Barcelona Signal 0.276 5 2 1 1
Washington Street & Carlsbad Village Drive Side Stop 0.274 6 1 3 1 State Street & Carlsbad Village Drive Signal 0.238 5 1 2 2 Monroe Street & Marron Road Signal 0.229 5 1 2 1
Harding Street & Carlsbad Village Drive Signal 0.209 8 3 1 1 Carlsbad Boulevard & Avenida Encinas Signal 0.188 5 1 2 1 1 4 1
2 1
3 .1
• ([)
C
n
OJ
a. -· OJ
. CJ
-< a.
~
0 C
:::J
a.

OJ
co
C
,-+
(/)
Expansion of LRSP analysis for State Street
and Tamarack Avenue intersections
• LRSP: 2015 -2019 ➔ 5 years
• Expanded analysis: May 2014 -June 2023 ➔ 9 years
-State Street roundabout and Tamarack Avenue signal at Carlsbad Blvd -Same underlying data and methods
Police report collision and injury severities
• Crashes • Injuries
-Less dangerous -Property damage only
• Hit object
• Sideswipe -Complaint of pain
• Rear-end -Visible injury
-More dangerous -Severe injury
• Broadside -Death
• Head-on
• Overturn
Crash/injury rates "'Sx higher at State Street roundabout Crashes/
Injuries
Total collisions
Dangerous
Total injuries
Visible
Tamarack
Ave (signal)
14 4
I '
7 --
3 ---,,
Severe ,I 0 I!
1 Adjusted for traffic volume
(May 2014-June 2023)
1i
State St
(roundabout)
40 11
18 -
10 --
2 ii
:1
-
Higher rates at
State vs.

Tamarack1

4.9x

4.7x

4.4x
-----

5.7x
00 I I
I I
Rates
excluding
solo DUIs2

2.7x
--.

2.6x

2.7x

3.4x
00 2 Solo DUI crashes at State Street roundabout included 7 injuries-4 of them visible -u
([)
a.
([)
V,
r-+ ., -· OJ
::J
n 0
3 I '
0 .,
r-+
"
V,
( 1 QJ
I
I ' ( {
' ( ([)
{
r-+
( ''
f
-<
n < n
-· (I)
r-1-
n
0 3
I '
0 ....,
r-1-
...............
(I)
QJ
I '
( • I
m
r-1-
i
'.f <
{
( ( .

OPERATIONAL CONCERNS
6 F~d;;;t Hign;;~;
~4.,,,-Administration
• Road diet/single-lane roundabout capacities
-16,000-20,000 vehicles per day
-875-1,200 vehicles per hour (directional)
City of Carlsbad
Agenda #10 .
f ~ E18-r•rfl~ V
etGTRIBUTEO DURING PUBLIC

COMMENT AT COUNCIL
MEETING OF 1 j 1~ I z,~ \l!M±rlO
Selecting Intersection Control
for the Carlsbad Blvd and
Tamarack Avenue Project
Kris Wright
Carlsbad resident
July 17, 2023

OPERATIONAL CONCERNS
6 F~d;;;tHig;;~;
~..,. Administration
• Road diet/single-lane roundabout capacities
• 16,000-20,000 vehicles per day
• 875-1,200 vehicles per hour (dir~ctional)
Design Memorandum
Carlsbad Bouleva1·d and Tamarark Avenue Intersertion LOS Analysis.

Level of service: F
Overall the poor operating conditions described above are due to the combination of decreased capacity and increased future 2035 volumes at this intersection. Based on industry standards, single lane roundabouts typically operate poorly at conflicting/circulating volumes above 1200 vehicles per hour. Present day and future 2035 volumes substantially exceed this threshold. (./) .
0 C
r-+
-:::s-
0-
0 C
:::J
Cl.
n
QJ
1 -(./)
0-
QJ
Cl.

OJ -< Cl.
..---.
n
C
1 1
(D
:::J
r-t-.....__...

Beach parking lot entra nee (current)
l/)
0 C
r-+
~
0-
0 C
::::J
Q.
n
QJ
--. -l/')
0-
QJ
Q.

CJJ -< Q.
...--...
n
C
--. --.
(D
::::J
r-+ ...__.,
l/)
0 C
r-+
:::r
0-
0 C
:::5

0....
n
OJ
7 -V>
0-
OJ

0....

OJ -< 0....
...--...
7 0
C
( ::) . \
( .· 0....
. ' OJ
f
(
0-'. f 0
C
r-+
'--""'
From the Traffic Dept. video
-~,,-, I'~~~
Unbalanced entry from Carlsbad Blvd vs. Tamarack
Ave
• Example during peak hours
• 88% on Blvd/12% on Tamarack
• Averages about 80%/20%
Therefore drivers during rush hours
from arteriole streets may have
limited access to the roundabout ·.

Traffic Sign a I Program
at Traffic Management Center
• Links traffic signals to a centralized computer system • Remotely accesses Traffic Signals and can adjust for high volumes of traffic • As of 2013, the City of Carlsbad has connected 130 traffic signals within the City to the Traffic Management Center and approved an additional $1.75M to purchase and install additional equipment. r ·p-
~Cityof
Carlsbad
California
Conclusion
Updating and keeping the Traffic signalization on the Tamarack x Carlsbad Blvd intersection is:

1. Safer for pedestrians

2. Will allow for smoother flow of traffic as indicated by two City C.onsultants

3. Congestion at this intersection will limit the capability of the traffic circle to provide even traffic flow if a roundabout is installed. . .
*Please keep the traffic signals at Tamarack and Carlsbad Blvd. *

Tom Frank, Transportation Director, City Engineer
Lauren Ferrell, Associate Engineer
July 18, 2023
Selecting intersection traffic control
for Carlsbad Blvd and Tamarack Ave
1 RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Authorize staff to move forward with the environmental review, permitting and final engineering design for a roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue
Or

2. Authorize staff to move forward with the environmental review. permitting and final engineering design for a traffic signal at the intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue
ITEM 10: CARLSBAD BLVD AND TAMARACK
2 3
4 PROJECT OPPORTUNITIES
Add safety features
Manage speeding
Create more parking
Reduce traffic congestion
Reduce air pollution
ITEM 10: CARLSBAD BLVD AND TAMARACK
5 PROJECT OPTIONS
Option 1: A roundabout
Option 2: A traffic signal
6 ITEM 10: CARLSBAD BLVD AND TAMARACK
6 77

Option 1 - Roundabout
8 Option 1 - Roundabout
9 Option 2 – Traffic signal
10 Option 2 – Traffic signal
11 12

CAUSES OF SEVERE COLLISIONS IN CARLSBAD
July 2017 to March 2023
13 CAUSES OF FATAL COLLISIONS IN CARLSBAD
14 July 2017 to March 2023

15 INTERSECTION SAFETY
ITEM 10: CARLSBAD BLVD AND TAMARACK
16 ITEM 10: CARLSBAD BLVD AND TAMARACK
17 ROUNDABOUT SAFETY
Reduction in
injuries
67%
90%
Reduction in
fatalities
35%
Reduction in
all crashes

STATE STREET ROUNDABOUT
ITEM 10: CARLSBAD BLVD AND TAMARACK
1818
1/3
Less distance to cross
each time
19 20
20 AVERAGE SECONDS TO GET THROUGH INTERSECTION
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Roundabout
Traffic signal
Existing
AM peak PM peak Saturday peak
57%
Reduction in wait time
21 EMERGENCY RESPONSE
ITEM 10: CARLSBAD BLVD AND TAMARACK
22 COMMUNITY FEEDBACK
ITEM 10: CARLSBAD BLVD AND TAMARACK
23 NEXT STEPS
• Complete environmental review, permitting and
final design
• Present final design to Traffic & Mobility
Commission (mid-2025)
• Request City Council approval of plans and
authorization to bid
• Construction anticipated late 2025 – late 2026
ITEM 10: CARLSBAD BLVD AND TAMARACK
24 RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Authorize staff to move forward with the environmental review, permitting and final engineering design for a roundabout at the intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard and Tamarack Avenue
Or

Carlsbad City CouncilJuly 18, 2023

Carlsbad City Council
July 18, 2023