CHESTNUT CROSSING MIXED USE PROJECT CITY OF LOMPOC ... · D 35.1 - 55.0 25.1 - 35.0 Conditions approaching unstable flow, delays are moderate to heavy, significant signal time deficiencies

CHESTNUT CROSSING MIXED USE PROJECTCITY OF LOMPOC, CALIFORNIA

TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION STUDY

February 7, 2006 ATE Project #05164

Prepared for:

City of Lompoc100 Civic Center Plaza, P.O. Box 8001Lompoc, CA 93438

ASSOCIATED TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS100 N. Hope Avenue, Suite 4, Santa Barbara, CA 93110-1686 ! (805) 687-4418 ! FAX (805) 682-8509

February 7, 2006

Lucille BreeseAssistant PlannerCity of Lompoc100 Civic Center Plaza, P.O. Box 8001Lompoc, CA 93438

REVISED TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION STUDY FOR THECHESTNUT CROSSING MIXED USE PROJECT- CITY OF LOMPOC

Associated Transportation Engineers has prepared the following revised traffic and circulationstudy for the Chestnut Crossing Mixed Use Project, proposed in City of Lompoc. The studywas revised to address City comments. It is our understanding that the revised traffic studywill be used by the City in developing the environmental review documents for the project.

We appreciate the opportunity to assist you with the project.

Associated Transportation Engineers

Richard L. Pool. P.E. Scott A. Schell, AICPPrincipal Engineer Principal Transportation Planner

i

CONTENTS

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1a. Existing Traffic Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1b. Future Traffic Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1c. Recommended Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2.0 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2a. Project Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2b. Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2a. Street Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2b. Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7c. City of Lompoc Standards and Significance Thresholds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7d. Existing Levels of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9e. Relevant Circulation Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10f. Alternative Transportation Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

4.0 CIRCULATION ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13a. Project Trip Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13b. Project Trip Distribution and Assignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14c. Project-Specific Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17d. Site Access and Circulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19e. Cumulative Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21f. Cumulative + Project Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23g. General Plan Buildout Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

5.0 RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

6.0 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

7.0 STUDY PARTICIPANTS AND REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

8.0 TECHNICAL APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

ii

TABLES

Table 1 Intersection Level of Service Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Table 2 Existing Intersection Control Type and LOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Table 3 Office and Condominium Trip Generation Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Table 4 Retail and Condominium Trip Generation Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Table 5 Project Trip Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Table 6a Existing + Project A.M. Peak Hour LOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17Table 6b Existing + Project P.M. Peak Hour LOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17Table 7 Cumulative A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Table 8a Cumulative and Cumulative + Project A.M. Peak Hour LOS . . . . . . . . . 23Table 8b Cumulative and Cumulative + Project P.M. Peak Hour LOS . . . . . . . . . 23Table 9 General Plan Buildout Net Project Trip Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Table 10 General Plan Scenarios - P.M. Peak Hour LOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26Table 11a CMP LOS - A.M. Peak Hour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27Table 1b CMP LOS - P.M. Peak Hour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

FIGURES

Figure 1 Project Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Figure 2 Vicinity Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Figure 3 Conceptual Site Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Figure 4 Existing Street Network & Intersection Configurations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Figure 5 Existing Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Figure 6 City of Lompoc Circulation Element Roadway Classifications . . . . . . . . . 11Figure 7 Typical Cross Sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12Figure 8 Project Trip Distribution Percentages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15Figure 9 Project-Added Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Figure 10 Existing + Project Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18Figure 11 Project Driveway Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Figure 12 Cumulative Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22Figure 13 Cumulative + Project Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Chestnut Crossing Mixed Use Project Associated Transportation EngineersTraffic and Circulation Study - 1 - February 7, 2006

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

a. Existing Traffic Conditions

The study-area street network is comprised of arterial, collector and local streets, including"H" Street, College Avenue, Ocean Avenue, and "O" Street. Traffic counts were collected onWednesday December 7, 2005 to assess existing operations at the key intersections in thestudy-area. The analysis found that all of the intersections currently operate at Level ofService (LOS) C or better, which meets the City's performance standard.

b. Future Traffic Conditions

Development of the Chestnut Crossing Mixed Use Project is estimated to generate 1,293average daily trips (ADT), 47 A.M. peak hour trips and 97 P.M. peak hour trips. The Existing+ Project analysis found that the study-area intersections would continue to operate at LOS Cor better with project-added traffic. The Cumulative analysis and General Plan Buildoutanalysis both found that the study-area intersections would continue to operate at LOS C orbetter with project-added traffic.

c. Recommended Improvements

The project would be required to construct frontage improvements (street improvements,curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveways, etc.) according to City requirements along ChestnutAvenue, “H” Street, and “G” Street. No other off-site improvements were recommended.


2.0 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

a. Project Location

The Chestnut Crossing Mixed Use Project is located in the central area of the City of Lompoc,as shown on Figure 1. The vicinity map, illustrated in Figure 2, shows that the project site islocated on the southeast and southwest corners of the Chestnut Avenue/”H” Streetintersection.

b. Project Description

The Chestnut Crossing Mixed Use Project is proposing to develop 34 condominium units,including 19 market rate, 5 affordable and 10 live/work units. The project also proposes todevelop 27,550 square feet of commercial space including 6,250 square feet designated forthe live/work units. There are 3 residential units and two commercial buildings which total9,250 square feet that exist on the project site. Former uses associated with the commercialbuildings include an auto dealership and associated service buildings and the space is nowbeing temporarily used by the Mural Society. The existing General Plan and Zoningdesignation for lots 1-5 is Old Town Commercial and the designation for lot 6 is C-2Commercial. The project proposes to change the designation of lot 6 to mixed-use to allowthe residential component of the project. The conceptual site plan, included as Figure 3,illustrates the site access, circulation and parking layout for the site.

3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS

a. Street Network

The project site is served by a circulation system comprised of arterial, collector and localstreets, which are illustrated in Figure 4. The major components of the existing street networkare discussed in the following text.

"H" Street (State Route 1), located along the project’s frontage, is a north-south roadway thatis classified as a Major Arterial in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. "H" Street isa divided four-lane roadway with left-turn channelization in the study area. The posted speedlimit is 30 MPH south of College Avenue. The project proposes one driveway on “H” Street.

Chestnut Avenue, located along the project’s northern frontage, is a east-west street thatextends from west of “U” Street on the west to 9 Street on the east. This two-lane undividedth

street is classified as a Collector Street in the Circulation Element. The project proposes twodriveways on Chestnut Street.

"O" Street, located west of the project site, is a two-lane north-south street that extends fromthe Lompoc Airport on the north to Olive Street on the south. This road is classified as aMinor Arterial. The posted speed limit is 30 MPH north and south of Chestnut Avenue.


Figure 1 Project Location


Figure 2 Vicinity Map


Figure 3 Conceptual Site Plan


Figure 4 Existing Street Network & Intersection Configurations


Ocean Avenue, located south of the project, is an east-west roadway that is classified as aMajor Arterial in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Ocean Avenue is a dividedfour-lane roadway with left-turn channelization in the study area. The posted speed limit is25 MPH east and west of “H” Street in the downtown area.

b. Traffic Volumes

Existing A.M. and P.M. peak hour turning volumes for the four intersections included in theanalysis are illustrated in Figure 5. Because traffic flow on the City's street network is mostconstrained at intersections, a detailed analysis of traffic flow must examine the operatingconditions of critical intersections during peak travel periods. The morning and eveningtraffic counts were collected to establish the extent that the existing peak hour intersectioncapacities are being utilized by existing traffic volumes, and the directional orientation oftraffic in the area. The peak hour intersection volumes were counted on WednesdayDecember 7, 2005 (see Technical Appendix for traffic count data).

c. City of Lompoc Standards and Significance Thresholds

In determining the operational characteristics of intersections with existing or future trafficvolumes, "Levels of Service" (LOS) A through F are applied, with LOS A indicating very goodoperations with little congestion and LOS F indicating poor operations with heavy congestion.The City has adopted a Circulation Element policy that states that the City will attempt toachieve and maintain LOS C as a system performance standard for traffic on the roadwaysystem and as a basic design guideline for roadways and intersections in the City. Any projectwhich cannot meet the performance standard is considered to have a significant impact.


Figure 5 Existing Traffic Volumes


Peak hour traffic creates the heaviest demand upon the circulation system and the laneconfiguration at intersections is limiting factor in roadway capacity; therefore, peak hourintersection capacity analyses address "worst-case" conditions. Table 1 shows the intersectionlevel of service criteria used by the City.

Table 1Intersection Level of Service Criteria

LOS

Delaya

Signals Stop Control Definition

A < 10.0 sec. < 10.0 sec.Conditions of free unobstructed flow, no delays and all signal phases

sufficient in duration to clear all approaching vehicles.

B 10.1 - 20.0 10.1 - 15.0Conditions of stable flow, very little delay, a few phases are unable to

handle all approaching vehicles.

C 20.1 - 35.0 15.1 - 25.0Conditions of stable flow, delays are low to moderate, full use of peak

direction signal phases is experienced.

D 35.1 - 55.0 25.1 - 35.0

Conditions approaching unstable flow, delays are moderate to heavy,

significant signal time deficiencies are experienced for short durations

during the peak traffic period.

E 55.1 - 80.0 35.1 - 50.0

Conditions of unstable flow, delays are significant, signal phase timing is

generally insufficient, congestion exist for extended duration throughout

the peak period.

F > 80.0 > 50.0

Conditions of forced flow, travel speeds are low and volumes are well

above capacity. This condition is often caused when vehicles released

by upstream signal are unable to proceed because of back-ups from a

downstream signal.

Average control delay per vehicle in seconds.a

d. Existing Levels of Service

Levels of service were calculated for the study-area intersections using the Highway CapacityManual methodology (LOS calculation worksheets are contained in the Technical Appendix).The Highway Capacity Manual levels of service are based on the average number of secondsof delay per vehicle using the intersection during the peak one-hour period. Table 2 lists thecontrol type and the A.M. and P.M. peak hour levels of service for the study-area intersections.

City of Lompoc Circulation Element: Background Study, Endo Engineering, 1996. 1


Table 2Existing Intersection Control Type and LOS

Intersection Control Type

Delay/LOS

A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour

College Avenue/”H” Street Signal 21.0 sec/LOS C 28.8 sec/LOS C

Chestnut Avenue/"H" Street Signal 14.0 sec/LOS B 12.4 sec/LOS B

Ocean Avenue/"H" Street Signal 18.2 sec/LOS B 28.7 sec/LOS C

Chestnut Avenue/"O" Street 2-way stop 13.3 sec/LOS B 13.0 sec/LOS B

The data presented in Table 2 show that the study-area intersections operate at LOS C orbetter, which meets the City's performance standard.

e. Relevant Circulation Plans

City of Lompoc Circulation Element. The City's Circulation Element roadway classificationsare illustrated in Figure 6. The right of way requirements and typical cross-sections1

associated with the roadway classifications are shown on Figure 7. The Circulation Elementroadway classifications include expressways, major arterials, minor arterials, collectors andlocal roads. Arterial roads are major thoroughfares used primarily for through traffic andaccess to commercial uses via limited access connections. Collector roads collect traffic fromthe local roads and serve as connectors between arterials and local roads. Local roadsprovide access to individual properties.

Congestion Management Program. The Santa Barbara County Association of Governmentshas been designated as the Congestion Management Agency for the County and is thereforeresponsible for administration of the Congestion Management Program (CMP). The CMPestablishes a minimum level of service along roadways and intersections which are includedin the CMP network. A separate section of this report addresses the project's potential impactto the CMP system.


Figure 6 City of Lompoc Circulation Element Roadway Classifications


Figure 7 Typical Cross Sections

Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 7 Edition, 2003.2 th


f. Alternative Transportation Modes

The study area transportation system includes transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Cityof Lompoc Transit (COLT) provides public transit service within Lompoc, Mission Hills, andVandenberg Village. COLT Route 5 stops at the Chestnut Street/”H” Avenue intersection andwould serve the Chestnut Crossing Mixed Use Project site. Service is provided from 6:30A.M. to 8:00 P.M. on weekdays; and from 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. on Saturday. Curb-to-curbservice is available for seniors and persons with disabilities.

Sidewalks are provided along “H” Street and the project site plan shows sidewalks along theproject frontages on Chestnut Avenue and “G” Street.

The City’s Circulation Element shows College Avenue as a bike route with Class II (on-street)bike lanes.

4.0 CIRCULATION ANALYSIS

a. Project Trip Generation

Trip generation estimates for the proposed project were calculated based on the ratespresented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation report . The2

Residential Condominium/Townhouse rates (ITE Land Use Code #230) were used for theresidential portion of the proposed project. It is unclear at this time whether the commercialportion of the mixed use project will be used as office or retail, so two trip generationscenarios were calculated as outlined in Tables 3 and 4. Table 3 shows the trip generationestimates for the Office scenario (ITE Land Use Code # 710) and Table 4 shows the estimatesfor the Retail scenario (ITE Land Use Code # 814). A 10% mixed-use factor was applied tothe office/retail uses to account for the live/work uses proposed on the site.

Table 3Office and Condominium Trip Generation Estimates

Land Use Size

ADT A.M. PHT P.M. Peak

Rate Trips Rate Trips Rate Trips

Condominiums 34 units 5.86 199 0.44 15 0.52 18

General Office Building 27,550 sf 17.95 494 2.43 67 2.61 72

10% Mixed Use -49 -7 -7

Total 644 75 83


Table 4Retail and Condominium Trip Generation Estimates

Land Use Size



Condominiums 34 units 5.86 199 0.44 15 0.52 18

Specialty Retail 27,550 sf 44.15 1216 1.31 36 3.18 88

10% Mixed Use -122 -4 -9

Total 1293 47 97

The data presented in Table 3 show that the Office scenario would generate 644 ADT, 75A.M. peak hour trips and 83 P.M. peak hour trips.

The data presented in Table 4 show that the Retail scenario would generate 1,293 ADT, 47A.M. peak hour trips and 97 P.M. peak hour trips. The Retail scenario is greater, thereforepotential impacts were analyzed for the Retail scenario as a worst-case analysis.

b. Project Trip Distribution and Assignment

Trip distribution percentages were developed for the project traffic based on existing trafficpatterns observed in the area and consideration of the population centers in the LompocValley. Table 5 and Figure 8 show the trip distribution percentages developed for the project.Figure 9 illustrates the project-added traffic on the study-area street system.

Table 5Project Trip Distribution

Origin/Destination Direction Residential % Retail %

H Street

H Street

O Street

O Street

College Avenue

College Avenue

Chestnut Avenue

Chestnut Avenue

Ocean Avenue

Ocean Avenue

North

South

Southwest

Northwest

Northwest

Northeast

West

East

Southwest

Southeast

25%

5%

5%

4%

10%

5%

1%

5%

10%

30%

25%

10%

5%

4%

10%

10%

1%

10%

10%

15%


Figure 8 Project Trip Distribution Percentages


Figure 9 Project-Added Traffic Volumes


c. Project-Specific Analysis

Traffic Volumes. Figure 10 shows the Existing + Project volumes for the study-areaintersections.

Intersection Operations. Tables 6a and 6b list the A.M. and P.M. peak hour levels of servicefor the Existing + Project scenario and compare them to existing conditions.

Table 6aExisting + Project A.M. Peak Hour LOS

Intersection

Delay/LOS

Existing Existing + Project

College Avenue/"H" Street 21.0 sec/LOS C 19.9 sec/LOS B

Chestnut Avenue/"H" Street 14.0 sec/LOS B 14.0 sec/LOS B

Ocean Avenue/"H" Street 18.2 sec/LOS B 19.7 sec/LOS B

Chestnut Avenue/"O" Street 13.3 sec/LOS B 13.4 sec/LOS B

Table 6bExisting + Project P.M. Peak Hour LOS

Intersection

Delay/LOS

Existing Existing + Project

College Avenue/"H" Street 28.8 sec/LOS C 28.8 sec/LOS C


Ocean Avenue/"H" Street 28.7 sec/LOS C 28.6 sec/LOS C


The data presented in Tables 6a and 6b indicate that the study-area intersections are forecastto operate at LOS C or better with Existing + Project traffic. These service levels meet theCity's performance standard and the project-added traffic would not significantly impact theoperation of the intersections based on City standards.


Figure 10 Existing + Project Traffic Volumes


d. Site Access and Circulation

Review of the site plan found that the proposed site access and circulation system wouldaccommodate the projected traffic volumes. As shown on Figure 2, the proposed uses on thesouthwest corner of the "H" Street/Chestnut Avenue intersection would be served by theexisting alleyway that connects to Chestnut Avenue. The alleyway runs between ChestnutAvenue and Walnut Avenue about midway between "H" Street and "I" Street. There are twoexisting driveway connections to the alleyway that serve this portion of the project site. Thenortherly driveway closest to Chestnut Avenue would be closed. The proposed project wouldbe served by a single driveway located near the south end of the property.

The uses proposed on the southeast corner of the "H" Street/Chestnut Avenue intersectionwould be served by one driveway on "H" Street, the alleyway that connects to ChestnutAvenue, and one driveway on "G" Street. There are several driveways on the east side of "H"Street that currently serve the property. Those driveways would be closed. The newdriveway proposed on "H" Street would be a right-turn in/out only driveway. There is araised median on "H" Street that would prohibit left turns. Thus, the proposed access systemwould reduce turning movement conflicts in this area of "H" Street. There are several accesspoints along the alleyway that serve the site uses. The alleyway runs between ChestnutAvenue and Walnut Avenue about midway between "G" Street and "H" Street. The drivewayproposed on "G" Street is a midblock driveway. Traffic volumes are anticipated to be low atthis location. Figure 11 shows the project’s volumes at the alleyway connections to ChestnutAvenue as well as at the proposed driveway on “H” Street.


Figure 11 Project Driveway Volumes


e. Cumulative Analysis

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that a project's impact beconsidered in conjunction with closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeablefuture projects (cumulative setting). A list of approved and pending projects was provided byCity staff for the cumulative analysis (copy of the list is included in the Technical Appendix).

Traffic Forecasts. Cumulative traffic volumes for the study-area roadways and intersectionsare shown in Figure 12. Trip generation estimates were calculated for the cumulative projectsusing the rates published in the ITE Trip Generation report (see trip generation calculationsin the Technical Appendix). The trips generated by the cumulative projects were thendistributed and assigned to the study-area street network based on patterns developed forother projects in the City as well as the existing traffic patterns observed in the area.

Intersection Operations. Study area intersections were analyzed to assess possible impactsunder Cumulative conditions. Cumulative level service forecasts are shown in Table 7.

Table 7Cumulative A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS

Intersection

Delay/LOS

A.M. Peak P.M. Peak



Ocean Avenue/"H" Street 19.6 sec/LOS B 30.0 sec/LOS C


As shown in Table 7, all study area intersections are forecast to operate at LOS C or betterwith the traffic generated by the cumulative projects, which meets the City’s performancestandards.


Figure 12 Cumulative Traffic Volumes


f. Cumulative + Project Analysis

Traffic Volumes. Figure 13 shows the Cumulative + Project traffic forecasts for the study-areaintersections. Intersections. Levels of service were calculated for the study intersections assuming theCumulative + Project volumes, and the results are shown in Tables 8a and 8b.

Table 8aCumulative and Cumulative + Project A.M. Peak Hour LOS

Intersection

Delay/LOS

Cumulative Cumulative+Project



Ocean Avenue/"H" Street 19.6 sec/LOS B 18.9 sec/LOS B


Table 8bCumulative and Cumulative + Project P.M. Peak Hour LOS

Intersection

Delay/LOS

Cumulative Cumulative+Project



Ocean Avenue/"H" Street 30.0 sec/LOS C 33.9 sec/LOS C


Tables 8a and 8b show that all study-area intersections are forecast to operate at LOS C orbetter during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours under Cumulative+Project conditions, whichmeets the City’s performance standards.


Figure 13 Cumulative + Project Traffic Volumes


g. General Plan Buildout Analysis

The project proposes to change the zoning designation of lot 6 from C-2 to mixed-use toallow the residential component of the project. The General Plan traffic analysis assumes a25% floor to area ratio (FAR) for the General Plan buildout of the site, which equates to20,149 square feet of building area. Conforming with the current zoning of C-2 and OTC(Old Town Commercial), trip generation estimates were produced using the ITE SpecialtyRetail Center rates (ITE Land Use Code #814). Table 4 compares the General Plan buildouttrip generation estimates for the site with the proposed project’s trip generation estimates.

Table 9Chestnut Crossing Mixed Use Project

General Plan Trip Generation Comparison

Land Use Scenario Size SF



Existing C-2 Zoning 1.85 Acres 20,149 sf 44.65 900 1.34 27 3.47 70

Proposed Mixed-Use

Project

1,293 44 97

Net Increase +393 +17 +27

Table 9 shows that the buildout of the proposed project site under the current General Plandesignation would generate 900 ADT, 27 A.M. peak hour trips and 70 P.M. peak hour trips.The proposed mixed-use project is forecast to generate 393 more ADT, 17 more A.M. peakhour trips and 27 more P.M. peak hour trips compared to the existing zoning. These netproject generated trips were added to General Plan Buildout P.M. peak hour volumes toassess potential impacts for the General Plan scenario. General Plan volumes were obtainedfrom the Circulation Element. The Aquatic Center General Plan amendment was also includedin the General Plan analysis. Figures showing the General Plan Buildout and General PlanBuildout + Project traffic volumes are included in the Technical Appendix for reference.Table 10 lists the levels of service for the study area intersections for the General PlanBuildout and General Plan Buildout + Project scenarios.


Table 10General Plan Scenarios - P.M. Peak Hour LOS

Intersection

Delay/LOS

G.P. BuildoutG.P. Buildout

+ Project

College Avenue/"H" Street 21.1 sec/C 21.2 sec/C

Chestnut Avenue/"H" Street 17.5 sec/B 17.8 sec/B

Ocean Avenue/"H" Street 24.1 sec/C 24.2 sec/C

Chestnut Avenue/"O" Street 15.5 sec/C 15.6 sec/B

As shown in Table 10, the study area intersections are forecast to operate at LOS C or betterunder the General Plan Buildout and General Plan Buildout +project scenarios, which meetthe City’s performance standards.

5.0 RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS

The following improvement recommendations have been developed for the project.

Frontage Improvements: The Chestnut Crossing Mixed Use Project would be responsible forconstructing frontage improvements (street improvements, curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveways,etc.) according to City requirements along Chestnut Avenue, “H” Street, and “G” Street.

6.0 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ANALYSIS

The Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG) has developed a set of trafficimpact guidelines to assess the impacts of land use decisions made by local jurisdictions onregional transportation facilities within the County CMP roadway system. The followingguidelines were developed by SBCAG to determine the significance of project-generatedtraffic impacts on the regional CMP system.

1. For any roadway or intersection operating at "Level of Service" (LOS) A or B, a decreaseof two levels of service resulting from the addition of project-generated traffic.

2. For any roadway or intersection operating at LOS C, project-added traffic that results inLOS D or worse.

3. For intersections within the CMP system with existing congestion, the following tabledefines significant impacts.


Level of ServiceProject-Added

Peak Hour Trips

LOS D

LOS E

LOS F

20

10

10

4. For freeway or highway segments with existing congestion, the following table definessignificant impacts.

Level of ServiceProject-Added

Peak Hour Trips

LOS D

LOS E

LOS F

100

50

50

Intersection Analysis

The “H” Street/College Avenue and “H” Street/Ocean Avenue intersections are part of theCMP roadway network. Levels of service were calculated for these intersections using theIntersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology required by SBCAG. This methodologyis different than the Highway Capacity Manual methodology used by the City of Lompoc.Tables 11a and 11b show the results of the ICU calculations.

Table 11aCMP LOS - A.M. Peak Hour

Intersection

ICU/LOS

ExistingExisting

+ ProjectCumulative

Cumulative

+Project

Project

Trips

College Avenue/

“H” Street0.54/LOS A 0.54/LOS A 0.57/LOS A 0.57/LOS A 20 Trips

Ocean Avenue/

“H” Street0.54/LOS A 0.55/LOS A 0.57/LOS A 0.57/LOS A 18 Trips


Table 11bCMP LOS - P.M. Peak Hour

Intersection

ICU/LOS

ExistingExisting

+ ProjectCumulative

Cumulative

+Project

Project

Trips

College Avenue/

“H” Street0.73/LOS C 0.74/LOS C 0.76/LOS C 0.77/LOS C 44 Trips

Ocean Avenue/

“H” Street0.64/LOS B 0.65/LOS B 0.68/LOS B 0.69/LOS B 37 Trips

The data presented in Tables 11a and 11b show that the College Avenue/"H" Street andOcean Avenue/”H” Street intersections would operate in the LOS C range or better withExisting, Existing + Project, Cumulative and Cumulative + Project traffic. These service levelsmeet the CMP standards.


7.0 STUDY PARTICIPANTS AND REFERENCES

ATE Participants

Richard L. Pool, P.E., Principal EngineerScott Schell, AICP, Principal Transportation PlannerDan Dawson, Supervising Transportation PlannerJonathan Brigham, Traffic TechnicianRusty Harrington, Traffic Technician

References

City of Lompoc Circulation Element: Background Study, Endo Engineering, 1996.

Congestion Management Program, Santa Barbara County Biennial Update, Santa BarbaraCounty Association of Governments, November 2003.

Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Special Report 209, National ResearchCouncil, 2000.

Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 7th Edition, 2003.

Persons Contacted

McCune, Kevin, City of Lompoc Public Works DepartmentBreeze, Lucille, City of Lompoc


8.0 TECHNICAL APPENDIX

CONTENTS:

CUMULATIVE PROJECT TRIP GENERATION INFORMATION

HCM INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE CALCULATION WORKSHEETS

Reference 1 - College Avenue/"H" StreetReference 1 - Chestnut Avenue/"H" StreetReference 2 - Chestnut Avenue/"O" StreetReference 3 - Ocean Avenue/"V" Street

CMP LEVEL OF SERVICE CALCULATION WORKSHEETS

Reference 1 - College Avenue/"H" StreetReference 2 - Ocean Avenue/"H" Street

GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS

INTERSECTION TRAFFIC COUNT DATA

CUMULATIVE PROJECT INFORMATION

INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE CALCULATION WORKSHEETS

Reference 1 - College Avenue/”H” Street

Reference 2 - Chestnut Avenue/”H” Street

Reference 3 - Ocean Avenue/"H" Street

Reference 4 - Chestnut Avenue/”O” Street

CMP LEVEL OF SERVICE CALCULATION WORKSHEETS

Reference 1 - College Avenue/"H" Street

Reference 2 - Ocean Avenue/"H" Street

GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRAFFIC SCENARIOS

Documents

CHESTNUT CROSSING MIXED USE PROJECT CITY OF LOMPOC ... · D 35.1 - 55.0 25.1 - 35.0 Conditions approaching unstable flow, delays are moderate to heavy, significant signal time deficiencies