HomeMy WebLinkAbout!Ch 05.03 Traffic 5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-1
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
This section describes existing traffic conditions and evaluates potential impacts to transportation and
traffic due to implementation of the SPA Plan and TM.
As stated in Section 2.3, Purpose and Legal Authority, this EIR tiers from the 2013 GPA/GDPA SEIR (09-
01). The SEIR identified significant but mitigable impacts to roadway and freeway segments in the City of
Chula Vista. The traffic analysis contained in this section is primarily based on the Otay Ranch Village 8
West Traffic Impact Analysis Report prepared by RBF Consulting in March 2013, which is included as
Appendix B to this EIR. This report updates the applicable information contained in the SEIR. The traffic
analysis includes both project-generated traffic and traffic that would be generated by cumulative
growth through buildout of the SPA Plan and TM. Therefore, the project’s direct and cumulative traffic
impacts are addressed in this section. The name of Rock Mountain Road was changed to Main Street as
part of the GPA/GDPA.
5.3.1 Existing Conditions
A. Regulatory Framework
1. State
a. Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
The California 2010 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), approved by the U.S.
Department of Transportation in October 2009, is a multi-year, statewide, intermodal program of
transportation projects that is consistent with the statewide transportation plan and planning process es,
metropolitan plans, and Title 23 of the CFR. The STIP is prepared by Caltrans in cooperation with the
metropolitan planning organizations and the regional transportation planning agencies. The STIP
contains all capital and non-capital transportation projects or identified phases of transportation
projects for funding under the Federal Transit Act and Title 23 of the CFR, including federally funded
projects.
b. Congestion Management Program
State Proposition 111, passed by voters in 1990, established a requirement that urbanized areas prepare
and regularly update a congestion management program, which is a part of SANDAG’s Regional
Transportation Plan. The purpose of the management program is to monitor the performance of the
region’s transportation system, develop programs to address near-term and long-term congestion, and
better integrate transportation and land use planning. The San Diego region has elected to be exempt
from the California congestion management program. As a result, existing monitoring, threshold levels,
guidelines and mitigation strategies are incorporated into other SANDAG plans and/or programs.
2. Regional
SANDAG serves as the forum for decision-making on regional issues such as growth, transportation, land
use, economy, environment, and criminal justice. SANDAG builds consensus, makes strategic plans,
obtains and allocates resources, and provides information on a broad range of topics pertinent to the
region’s quality of life. SANDAG is governed by a Board of Directors composed of mayors, council
members, and supervisors from each of the San Diego region’s 19 local governments.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-2
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
As the metropolitan planning organization and regional transportation planning agency for the San
Diego region, SANDAG has produced the following documents that identify transportation plans and
policies in the San Diego area.
a. 2050 Regional Transportation Plan
SANDAG adopted the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) on
October 28, 2011. The 2050 Regional Transportation Plan maps out a system designed to maximize
transit enhancements, integrate biking and walking elements, and promote programs to reduce demand
and increase efficiency. The Regional Transportation Plan also identifies the plan for investing in local,
state and federal transportation facilities in the region over the next 40 years. The SCS integrates land
use and housing planning within the transportation plan. The SCS also addresses how the transportation
system will be developed in such a way that the region is able to reduce per-capita GHG emissions to
state-mandated levels.
b. 2010 Regional Transportation Improvement Program
The Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) is a multi-year program of proposed major
highway, arterial, transit, and bikeway projects. The 2010 RTIP is a prioritized program designed to
implement the region’s overall strategy for providing mobility and improving the eff iciency and safety of
efforts to attain federal and state air quality standards for the region. The 2010 RTIP also incrementally
implements the latest update to the Regional Transportation Plan. The 2010 RTIP covers fiscal years
2011 to 2015. The 2010 RTIP, including an air quality emissions analysis for all regionally significant
projects, was adopted on December 14, 2010.
3. Local
a. City of Chula Vista General Plan
The Chula Vista General Plan, known as Vision 2020, was adopted by the City of Chula Vista on
December 13, 2005. The Chula Vista General Plan contains objectives and policies in the Land Use and
Transportation Element that support transit (Objective LUT 17), encourage alternative transportation
measures (Objectives LUT 18 and LUT 23), encourage regional transportation coordination (Objective
LUT 19), develop transit-friendly roads (Objective LUT 20), support parking management policies
(Objectives LUT 30 through LUT 33), and ensure pedestrian-oriented environments (Objective LUT 63).
The 2013 GPA included changes to the adopted Circulation Plan, including road reclassifications,
renaming of Rock Mountain Road, elimination of the southerly extension of La Media Road, and
establishing an acceptable level of service for town centers.
b. Otay Ranch General Development Plan
The Otay Ranch GDP includes goals, objectives and policies to guide development of a circulation system
in Otay Ranch. The GDP envisions a safe, efficient, multi-modal transportation network that reduces
reliance on the automobile. The GDP encourages development that integrates residential and
commercial uses with a mobility system that accommodates alternative modes of transportation, and is
organized to create a pedestrian friendly community. The GDP includes policies related to transit, street
systems within town centers, and parking.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-3
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
c. City of Chula Vista’s Guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies in the City of Chula Vista
The Chula Vista General Plan and the City of Chula Vista’s Guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies in the City
of Chula Vista (February 2001) establish the acceptable level of service standards for intersections,
roadway segments, and Caltrans facilities, as described below.
Intersections
In accordance with city requirements, the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology for signalized
and unsignalized intersections is used to determine the operating level of service of intersections. The
methodology in the manual describes the operation of an intersection using a range of LOS A (free-flow
conditions) to LOS F (severely congested conditions), based on corresponding average stopped delay per
vehicle, as shown in Table 5.3-1.
Table 5.3-1 Intersection Level of Service Thresholds and Delay Ranges
LOS
Delay (seconds/vehicle)
Signalized Intersections Unsignalized Intersections
A < 10.0 < 10.0
B > 10.0 to < 20.0 > 10.0 to < 15.0
C > 20.0 to < 35.0 > 15.0 to < 25.0
D > 35.0 to < 55.0 > 25.0 to < 35.0
E > 55.0 to < 80.0 > 35.0 to < 50.0
F > 80.0 > 50.0
Source: RBF 2013
Roadway Segments
Roadway segment analyses are based upon roadway classifications and capacity thresholds as defined in
the Chula Vista Transportation Element. Roadway segment level of service criteria are shown in
Table 5.3-2.
Table 5.3-2 Level of Service Thresholds for Roadway Segments
Classification (# Lanes)
Level of Service (percent of capacity)
A (60%) B (70%) C (80%) D (90%) E (100%)
Expressway (8) 52,500 61,300 70,000 78,800 87,500
Prime Arterial (6) (1) 37,500 43,800 50,000 56,300 62,500
Major Street (6) 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000
Major Street (4) 22,500 26,300 30,000 33,800 37,500
Class I Collector (4) 16,500 19,300 22,000 24,800 27,500
Class II Collector (2) 9,000 10,500 12,000 13,500 15,000
Class III Collector (2) 5,600 6,600 7,500 8,400 9,400
Town Center Arterial (6) 37,500 43,800 50,000 56,300 62,500
Gateway Arterial (6) 40,500 47,500 54,500 61,200 68,700
(1) For Village 8 West, the technical analysis includes the evaluation of augmented arterials near the freeway on and off ramps.
The augmented arterials include auxiliary lanes in advance of the freeway ramps to serve the higher traffic volumes that
typically occur. When auxiliary lanes are provided, the capacity of the segment is increased by the equivalent single lane
capacity (10,500 vehicles per day per lane for LOS E) to account for the benefit in overall operations that is achieved with the
construction of auxiliary lanes near the ramps.
Source: City of Chula Vista 2005a
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-4
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Caltrans Facilities
Caltrans facilities analyses are based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, Caltrans Highway Design
Manual, and the SANTEC/ITE Traffic Impact Study Guidelines. The Intersection Lane Volume Analysis
(ILV) methodology for Caltrans facilities evaluates the traffic demand at an intersection to the available
capacity at the intersection. Combining traffic signal phasing and intersection geometry with peak hour
traffic volumes, the ILV methodology determines if a ramp is either stable, unstable or at capacity. The
thresholds for operating conditions using the ILV methodology are summarized in Table 5.3-3.
Table 5.3-3 Intersection Lane Volume Operational Thresholds
ILV/hr Description
<1,200 Stable Stable flow with slight, but acceptable delay. Occasional signal loading may develop.
Free midblock operations.
1,200 to 1,500 Unstable Unstable flow with considerable delays possible. Some vehicles occasionally wait two
or more cycles to pass through the intersection. Continuous backup occurs on some
approaches.
>1,500 Capacity Stop-and-go operation with severe delay and heavy congestion. Traffic volume is
limited by maximum discharge rates of each phase. Continuous backup in varying
degrees occurs on all approaches. Where downstream capacity is restrictive, mainline
congestion can impede orderly discharge through the intersection.
Source: RBF 2013
d. Growth Management Ordinance
The Chula Vista GMO (Municipal Code Section 19.09) prohibits new development unless adequate
public facilities are available concurrently with development. Regarding traffic, the GMO states that
future large-scale developments planned for the area east of I-805 will require the provision of major
facilities including facilities within the SR-125 corridor to accommodate projected traffic and other
needs of development in accordance with the city-adopted traffic threshold standards. The GMO
establishes a city-wide standard to maintain LOS C or better as measured by observed average travel
speed on all signalized arterial segments, except during peak hours, when an LOS D can occur for no
more than two hours of the day.
B. Existing Traffic and Circulation Conditions
Intersections and roadway segments throughout the project vicinity were evaluated as part of the
Traffic Impact Analysis Report for Village 8 West. The following discussion provides a description of the
existing conditions for these roadway segments and intersections, and where applicable, future
improvements planned for these roadways or intersections.
1. Roadway Segments
A description of existing and future roadways for the Village 8 West is provided below. Future roadway
conditions are provided in this section to provide context for the analysis of project impacts under
future conditions. Existing intersection geometry is provided in Appendix B.
Interstate 805 currently provides regional access through the South San Diego County area as a major
freeway facility and is oriented in a north-south direction. Regional project access is provided at Olympic
Parkway and Main Street. I-805 is generally an eight-lane freeway between I-5 and SR-54. By Horizon
Year 2030, I-805 is planned to include eight lanes plus four managed lanes north of East Palomar Street.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-5
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
State Route 125 is currently a combination freeway/tollway that provides north-south access through
eastern Chula Vista, east of I-805. SR-125 is a four-lane freeway facility that extends from SR-52 in
Santee to SR-54. The southern portion of SR-125 from SR-54 to SR-905 is a toll road, also known as the
South Bay Expressway.
Olympic Parkway is currently classified as a six-lane prime arterial from I-805 to Hunte Parkway and as a
four-lane major road east of Hunte Parkway. To serve high traffic volumes in the vicinity of SR-125,
Olympic Parkway is classified as an eight-lane expressway from SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway. Olympic
Parkway provides local access to and from I-805 and east-west connections through the surrounding
areas to Otay Ranch. Bike lanes are provided and on-street parking is prohibited. The posted speed limit
is 45 miles per hour (mph).
Main Street (formerly Rock Mountain Road) is currently constructed as a six-lane prime arterial from I-
805 to its existing terminus at Heritage Road. The extension of Main Street is identified in the
Transportation Element to extend from the existing terminus to connect with Hunte Parkway. The
extension of Main Street will provide an additional east-west route between I-805 and SR-125, parallel
to Olympic Parkway. Main Street would be constructed as a four-lane couplet through the project site
with two lanes eastbound and two lanes westbound. The speed through the couplet would be set at 25
to 35 mph to complement the pedestrian oriented development and to support on -street parking within
the Town Center. Sidewalks and bicycle lanes would be provided along Main Street.
Brandywine Avenue is currently a four-lane Class I collector road and narrows to two lanes with a two-
way left-turn lane north of Main Street. Brandywine Avenue is oriented in a north-south direction and
provides connections to Telegraph Canyon Road, East Palomar Street, Olympic Parkway, and Main
Street. Bike lanes are provided along Brandywine Avenue. The posted speed limit is 25 mph. On -street
parking is prohibited except along the two-lane section of Brandywine Avenue.
Heritage Road is currently constructed as a six-lane prime arterial north of Olympic Parkway and is
generally oriented in a north-south direction, providing access from Olympic Parkway north to Telegraph
Canyon Road where the road turns into Paseo Ranchero. There is currently a gap in Heritage Road
between Olympic Parkway and Main Street. Currently, Heritage Road south of Main Street is striped as a
two- to four-lane collector with a posted speed limit of 40 mph. Bike lanes and sidewalks are provided;
on-street parking is prohibited. A future extension of Heritage Road is planned and would be
constructed as a six-lane prime arterial from Olympic Parkway to Main Street and would be the only
roadway connection from Chula Vista to the Otay Mesa in the city of San Diego between I-805 and
SR-125.
La Media Road is currently constructed as a six-lane prime arterial road and is oriented in a north-south
direction, providing access between Telegraph Canyon Road, the northerly property line of Village 8
West, and south of Birch Road. The posted speed limit is 40 mph. On-street parking is prohibited to
accommodate bike lanes. The Transportation Element identifies an extension of La Media south into the
proposed Village 8 West as a six-lane prime arterial. La Media Road would be constructed as a four-lane
couplet through the project site with two lanes southbound and two lanes northbound. The couplet
speeds would be set between 25 and 35 mph to complement the pedestrian oriented development and
to support the proposed on-street parking. Sidewalks would also be provided both within the couplet
and along the six-lane sections of La Media Road.
Eastlake Parkway is currently constructed as a six-lane roadway between Olympic Parkway and Hunte
Parkway and is oriented in a north-south direction immediately east of SR-125. Bike lanes are provided
and on-street parking is prohibited. Eastlake Parkway is a four-lane roadway north of Olympic Parkway,
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-6
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
a six-lane roadway between Olympic Parkway and Hunte Parkway/Main Street. Eastlake Parkway
provides access from its southern terminus at Hunte Parkway to north of Otay Lakes Road. The Chula
Vista Transportation Element includes the extension of Eastlake Parkway south of Hunte Parkway into
the future University site.
Hunte Parkway is currently constructed as a six-lane prime arterial from Olympic Parkway to Eastlake
Parkway. Bike lanes and sidewalks are provided. A greenbelt trail is located along the south side of
Hunte Parkway. The posted speed limit is 45 mph.
Birch Road is currently constructed as a six-lane road from La Media Road to Eastlake Parkway and is
oriented in an east-west direction, providing access to La Media Road, SR-125, and Eastlake Parkway.
Birch Road is classified as a six-lane major arterial from La Media Road to SR-125. From SR-125 to
Eastlake Parkway, Birch Road is classified as a six-lane prime arterial.
Magdalena Avenue is currently constructed as a two to four lane local road that connects Main Street
to Birch Road through Village 7. It provides access to the local high school and residential areas on the
west side of SR-125. Although local roads are typically not subject to the level of service requirements
established for Circulation Element roads, the segment of Magdalena Avenue from Birch Road to Main
Street is included in the analysis because of its close proximity to the project site and because the
intersection of Main Street/Magdalena Avenue is direct access point from Village 8 West to Birch Road
and La Media Road.
Santa Victoria is currently partially constructed. At buildout (Year 2030), the roadway will be a two-lane
road that will extend west from the Birch Road/La Media Road intersection and extend northwesterly to
connect with Olympic Parkway. The road is planned as part of the Village 2 roadway network.
Otay Valley Road is a future four-lane major road that would be connected to the southern terminus of
the Main Street/La Media Road Couplet and would continue southeasterly to the future extension of
Eastlake Parkway. San Diego Metropolitan Transit System plans to use the Otay Valley Road as part of
the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) route.
Main Street/La Media Road Couplet. Within Village 8 West, the intersection of La Media Road and Main
Street would be constructed as a pair of one-way streets that form a couplet. A total of four new
signalized intersections would be constructed within the couplet to allow higher volumes traffic to move
efficiently between Main Street and La Media Road.
2. Existing Roadway Segment Operations
Existing roadway segment level of service was calculated based on established capacity thresholds
defined by roadway classification and Average Daily Trip (ADT) volumes. Table 5.3-4 presents the results
of the existing conditions roadway segment level of service analysis for Village 8 West. As shown in this
table, all roadway segments currently operate at acceptable levels of service, except for the Olympic
Parkway segment from Heritage Road to La Media Road.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-7
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-4 Existing Study Roadway Segment Level of Service
Roadway Segment
Existing Conditions
Classification
(# Lanes)
LOS C
Capacity ADT V/C LOS
Olympic Parkway
I-805 to Brandywine Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 47,000 0.75 C
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 48,721 0.78 C
Heritage Road to La Media Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 50,538 0.81 D
La Media Road to SR-125 ramps Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 43,563 0.70 C
SR-125 ramps to Eastlake Pkwy Prime Arterial (8) 70,000 40,478 0.46 A
Eastlake Pkwy to Hunte Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 13,926 0.22 A
East of Hunte Pkwy Major Street (4) 30,000 7,846 0.21 A
Birch Road
La Media to SR-125 Major Arterial (6) 40,000 11,084 0.22 A
SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway Major Arterial (6) 40,000 10,250 0.16 A
Main Street
I-805 to Brandywine Avenue Prime Arterial (6A) 58,500 26,896 0.37 A
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 18,729 0.30 A
Heritage Road to Couplet Does Not Exist
Couplet to Magdalena Avenue Does Not Exist
Magdalena Avenue to SR-125 ramps Does Not Exist
SR-125 ramps to Village 9 Access Road Does Not Exist
Village 9 Access Road to Eastlake Pkwy Does Not Exist
Hunte Parkway
Eastlake Pkwy to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 1,406 0.02 A
Olympic Pkwy to Otay Lakes Road Major Street (4) 30,000 9,580 0.26 A
Heritage Road
Telegraph Cyn Road to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 12,383 0.20 A
Olympic Pkwy to Main Street Does Not Exist
Main Street to Entertainment Circle Class I Collector (2A) 12,000 10,035 0.67 B
Entertainment Circle to
Avenue de Las Vistas (City of SD) Class I Collector (2A) 12,000 9,846 0.66 B
La Media Road
Telegraph Cyn Road to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 12,658 0.20 A
Olympic Pkwy to Birch Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 11,037 0.18 A
Birch Road to Couplet Does Not Exist
Magdalena Avenue Birch Road to Main Street Class II Collector (2) 12,000 9,122 0.61 B
Eastlake Parkway
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 18,945 0.30 A
Olympic Pkwy to Birch Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 9,199 0.15 A
Birch Road to Hunte Pkwy-Main Street Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 1,310 0.03 A
Main Street to Otay Valley Road Does Not Exist
Otay Valley Road
Couplet to Village 9 Access Road Does Not Exist
Village 9 Access Road to SR-125 ramps Does Not Exist
SR-125 ramps to University Does Not Exist
Note: 6A = six lane augments arterial. Augmented arterials include additional turn lanes that provide the necessary capacity in
advance of key intersections such as freeway ramps. The additional lanes improve the overall performance of the link nearest
the intersection where the greatest delay typically occurs. The performance of the segment benefits from this additional
capacity; therefore, the overall capacity of the link is increased by the equivalent single lane volume for this classification (10,500
vehicles per day per lane).
Source: RBF 2013
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-8
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
3. Intersections
The following 25 intersections were evaluated as part of the traffic analysis for Village 8 West, and are
shown in Figure 5.3-1:
1. Olympic Parkway/I-805 southbound ramps
2. Olympic Parkway/I-805 northbound ramps
3. Olympic Parkway/Brandywine Avenue
4. Olympic Parkway/Santa Victoria
5. Olympic Parkway/Heritage Road
6. Olympic Parkway/La Media Road
7. Olympic Parkway/SR-125 southbound ramps
8. Olympic Parkway/SR-125 northbound ramps
9. Olympic Parkway/Eastlake Parkway
10. Olympic Parkway/Hunte Parkway
11. Santa Victoria/Heritage Road
12. Birch Road/La Media Road
13. Birch Road/SR-125 southbound ramps
14. Birch Road/SR-125 northbound ramps
15. Birch Road/Eastlake Parkway
16. Main Street/I-805 southbound ramps
17. Main Street/I-805 northbound ramps
18. Main Street/Heritage Road
19. Main Street/La Media Road (Couplet)
20. Main Street/Magdalena Avenue
21. Main Street/SR-125 southbound ramps
22. Main Street/SR-125 northbound ramps
23. Main Street/Eastlake Parkway
24. Otay Valley Road/SR-125 southbound ramps
25. Otay Valley Road/SR-125 northbound ramps
To determine the existing conditions at the 25 study area intersections, turning movement counts were
taken on a typical weekday during the AM (7:00 to 9:00 a.m.) and PM (4:00 to 6:00 p.m.) peak hour
periods. ADT volumes were also collected along most roadway segments over a 24 -hour period. Table
5.3-5 summarizes the existing AM and PM peak hour level of service of the study intersections based on
the existing peak hour intersection volumes and existing intersection geometry. As shown in this table,
all intersections are currently operating at an acceptable level of service (LOS D or better) during the AM
and PM peak hours, with the exception of the Olympic Parkway/I-805 northbound ramps intersection,
which operates at LOS F during the AM peak hour.
4. Alternative Transportation
Under existing conditions, public transportation is currently provided by Chula Vista Transit, a
component of the San Diego Metropolitan Transit System. Routes 712 and 709 serve the Otay Ranch
area. However, neither route currently provides service to Village 8 West. Currently, the nearest public
transportation stop to Village 8 West is located approximately 1.5 miles north of the project area.
±Source: RBF 2013
OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST EIR
Not to Scale STUDY AREA
FIGURE 5.3-1
Study Intersection
Future Roadway
16 17
1 2
3
4
5
11
18
#
12
6
7
8
13 14 15
23
9
10
21
2019
19
19
19
24
25
22
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-10
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-5 Existing Intersection Level of Service
Study Intersection Control
AM Peak Hour
Delay-LOS
PM Peak Hour
Delay-LOS
1. Olympic Parkway/I-805 southbound ramps Signalized 41.7 D 41.6 D
2. Olympic Parkway/I-805 northbound ramps Signalized 118.4 F 37.8 D
3. Olympic Parkway/Brandywine Avenue Signalized 30.2 C 31.6 C
4. Olympic Parkway/Santa Victoria Road Does Not Exist
5. Olympic Parkway/Heritage Road Signalized 18.5 B 15.6 B
6. Olympic Parkway/La Media Road Signalized 37.6 D 25.4 C
7. Olympic Parkway/SR-125 southbound ramps Signalized 2.8 A 4.7 A
8. Olympic Parkway/SR-125 northbound ramps Signalized 1.3 A 2.4 A
9. Olympic Parkway/Eastlake Parkway Signalized 29.2 C 31.5 C
10. Olympic Parkway/Hunte Parkway Signalized 33.4 C 34.2 C
11. Santa Victoria Road/Heritage Road Does Not Exist
12. Birch Road/La Media Road Signalized 27.0 C 22.6 C
13. Birch Road/SR-125 southbound ramps Signalized 11.8 7.4 B A 11.2 7.6 B A
14. Birch Road/SR-125 northbound ramps Signalized 1.6 A 5.7 A
15. Birch Road/Eastlake Parkway Signalized 35.2 D 32.7 C
16. Main Street/I-805 southbound ramps Signalized 27.8 C 29.7 C
17. Main Street/I-805 northbound ramps Signalized 27.7 C 28.9 C
18. Main Street/Heritage Street Signalized 2.8 A 0.9 A
19. Main Street/La Media Road (Couplet) Does Not Exist
20. Main Street (Rock Mtn Road)/Magdalena Avenue Uncontrolled 2.8 A 0.9 A
21. Main Street/SR-125 southbound ramps Does Not Exist
22. Main Street/SR-125 northbound ramps Does Not Exist
23. Main Street/Eastlake Parkway Signalized 13.6 B 12.9 B
24. Otay Valley Road/SR-125 southbound ramps Does Not Exist
25. Otay Valley Road/SR-125 northbound ramps Does Not Exist
Note: Deficient intersection operation shown in bold and shading.
Source: RBF 2013
5.3.2 Thresholds of Significance
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the project would have a significant impact on traffic
and circulation if it would:
■ Threshold 1: Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of
effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of
transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the
circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways, and freeways,
pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit.
■ Threshold 2: Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not
limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards
established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-11
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
■ Threshold 3: Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels
or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks.
■ Threshold 4: Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment).
■ Threshold 5: Result in inadequate emergency access.
■ Threshold 6: Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs regarding the circulation
network, public transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance
or safety of such facilities.
Project impacts are defined as either project specific or cumulative. Project specific impacts are those
impacts for which the addition of project trips results in an identifiable degradation in level of service,
triggering the need for specific project-related improvements. Cumulative impacts are those in which
project trips contribute to an unacceptable level of service. Both direct and cumulative impacts are
addressed below under Threshold 1. The City of Chula Vista goal for acceptable operating conditions is
LOS D or better for signalized and unsignalized intersections and LOS C or better for roadway segments.
For urban core arterials (town center and gateway classifications), the threshold for acceptable level of
service is LOS D along roadway segments. For intersections, roadway segments and freeway sections,
impacts are defined when the acceptable level of service is breached either by the project or as a
cumulative effect of multiple projects. The criteria for determining whether the project results in either
a project specific or cumulative impact are defined both for short term and long term conditions, as
defined below:
A. Short Term Impacts (0-4 Years)
For purposes of the short-term analysis roadway sections are defined as either links or segments. A link
is typically that section of roadway between two adjacent circulation element intersections and a
segment is defined as that combination of contiguous links used in the GMO Traffic Monitoring Program.
Analysis of roadway links under short-term conditions may require a more detailed analysis using the
GMOC methodology if the typical planning analysis using volume to capacity ratios on an individual link
indicates a potential impact to that link. The GMOC analysis uses the Highway Capacity Manual
methodology of average travel speed based on actual measurements on the segments as listed in the
GMO Traffic Monitoring Program.
Intersections
1. Project specific impact if both the following criteria are met:
i. Level of service is LOS E or F.
ii. Project trips comprise five percent or more of entering volume.
2. Cumulative impact if only 1.i above is met.
Street Links/Segments
If the planning analysis using the volume to capacity ratio indicates LOS C or better, there is no impact. If
the planning analysis indicates LOS D, E or F, the GMOC method should be utilized. The following criteria
would then be utilized:
1. Project specific impact if all the following criteria are met:
i. Level of service is LOS D for more than two hours or LOS E/F for one hour
ii. Project trips comprise five percent or more of segment volume
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-12
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
iii. Project adds greater than 800 ADT to the segment.
2. Cumulative impact if only 1.i above is met.
Freeways
1. Project specific impact if both the following criteria are met:
i. Freeway segment is LOS E or LOS F
ii. Project comprises five percent or more of the total forecasted ADT on that freeway segment
2. Cumulative impact is only 1.i above is met.
B. Long Term Impacts (5 or more Years)
Intersections
1. Project specific impact if both the following criteria are met:
i. Level of service is LOS E or LOS F
ii. Project trips comprise five percent or more of entering volume
2. Cumulative impact if only 1.i above is met.
Street Segments
Use the planning analysis using the volume to capacity ratio methodology only. The GMOC analysis
methodology is not applicable beyond a four-year horizon.
1. Project specific impact if all three of the following criteria are met:
i. Level of service is LOS D, LOS E, or LOS F
ii. Project trips comprise five percent or more of segment volume
iii. Project adds greater than 800 ADT to the segment.
2. Cumulative impact if only 1.i above is met. However, if the intersections along a LOS D or LOS E
segment all operate at LOS D or better, the segment impact is considered not significant since
intersection analysis is more indicative of actual roadway system operations than street
segment analysis. If a segment is LOS F, an impact is significant regardless of intersection level of
service.
3. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the impact identified in paragraph 1 above occurs at study
horizon year 10 or later, and is off the site and not adjacent to the project, the impact is
considered cumulative. Study year 10 may be that typical SANDAG model year which is between
eight and thirteen years in the future. In this case of a traffic study being performed in the
period of 2000 to 2002, because the typical model will only evaluate traffic at years divisible by
5 (i.e. 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2020) study horizon year 10 would correspond to the SANDAG
model for Year 2010 and would be eight years in the future. If the model year is less than seven
years in the future, study horizon year 10 would be thirteen years in the future.
4. In the event a direct identified project specific impact in paragraph 1 above occurs at study
horizon year 5 or earlier and the impact is off site and not adjacent to this project, but the
property immediately adjacent to the identified project specific impact is also proposed to be
developed in approximately the same time frame, an additional analysis may be required to
determine whether or not the identified project specific impact would still occur if the
development of the adjacent property does not take place. If the additional analysis concludes
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-13
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
that the identified project specific impact is no longer a direct impact, then the impact shall be
considered cumulative.
Freeways
1. Project specific impact if both the following criteria are met
i. Freeway segment is LOS E or LOS F
ii. Project comprises five percent or more of the total forecasted ADT on that freeway
segment.
2. Cumulative impact if only item 1.i above is met.
5.3.3 Impact Analysis
A. Threshold 1: Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation
system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit
and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system,
including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways, and freeways,
pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit.
Potential traffic impacts that would result from construction and operation of the project are discussed
below. The construction traffic analysis incorporates the operation analysis; therefore, the operation
analysis is discussed first, followed by potential construction impacts.
1. Operation
The traffic impact analysis for operation of Village 8 West (included as Appendix B to this EIR) evaluated
traffic impacts that would occur upon implementation of the project under the following scenarios: Year
2015, Year 2020, Year 2025, and Year 2030. Additionally, an "Existing Plus Project" scenario was
evaluated. The following discussion summarizes the results of the traffic impact analysis for Village 8
West. The operational analysis includes traffic that would potentially be generated by all proposed uses
in the SPA Plan and TM, including residential units, commercial development, schools, parks, and
community purpose facilities. The assumed phasing of these facilities is described in each scenario
below.
a. Traffic Impact Scenarios
Each of the following scenarios includes certain roadway system assumptions that are discussed in each
impact section, as well as on-site access and frontage improvements required by Municipal Code Section
12.24.
Existing Plus Project
The existing plus project scenario includes all project-generated trips associated with buildout of Village
8 West added to the existing roadway network. However, the project is planned to be constructed in a
series of phases over a period of up to 20 years. This phasing would not require construction of all
circulation improvement at once because the increase in trips as a result of the project would be phased
along with development. Rather, such improvements would be constructed as is needed to mitigate
impact of phased development, as discussed in the Year 2015, Year 2020, Year 2025, and Year 2030
scenarios. Development in each interim scenario is based on the development phasing forecast in the
Village 8 West Public Facilities Finance Plan.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-14
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Year 2015
The scenario for Year 2015 includes project-generated trips associated with the construction of 105
single-family and 246 multi-family residential dwelling units in Village 8 West.
Year 2020
The Year 2020 scenario includes the development assumed to occur by the Year 2015, in addition to
project-generated trips associated with the construction of 354 single-family residential dwelling units,
824 multi-family residential dwelling units, 50,000 square feet of office use, 40,000 square feet of
commercial retail, and 5.5 acres of park within Village 8 West.
Year 2025
The Year 2025 scenario includes the development assumed to occur by Year 2020, in addition to project-
generated trips associated with the construction of 162 single-family residential dwelling units, 359
multi-family residential dwelling units, an elementary school, 150,000 square feet of commercial retail,
and 13.1 acres of park space.
Year 2030
The scenario for Year 2030 includes the development assumed to occur by Year 2025, in addition to the
construction of a middle school, 60,000 square feet of commercial retail, and 9.4 acres of park space.
b. Traffic Model Methodology
For Village 8 West traffic analysis, future year traffic volumes were forecast using the Series 11 South
Bay Sub Area traffic model developed by SANDAG. In collaboration with the City of Chula Vista and
SANDAG, RBF Consulting provided the land use and network designations for each scenario year. Interim
forecast data was determined for each study year beginning in Year 2015 with the model providing ADT
for roadway segments.
Traffic model runs accounted for the construction of future roads, in order to understand how future
traffic patterns may change when new capacity is added to the roadway network. The traffic analysis
also assumed that the existing roadway network exists until mitigation measures are determined to be
necessary, which may include the addition of links modeled with the SANDAG traffic model. In each
scenario, manual adjustments were made to the model volumes to remove the future links. The future
link volumes were reassigned to existing roadways in order to forecast traffic volumes on the existing
roadway network. Manual adjustments and forecast traffic patterns for the future year conditions were
compared to existing traffic patterns and volumes to ensure reasonable growth and traffic flow.
Peak hour intersection turning volumes were post-processed for each scenario year based on the model
ADT and the relationship between existing peak hour volumes to existing ADT as well as anticipated
growth in the surrounding area. For new intersections, peak hour volumes were post processed based
on the distribution of ADT volumes on the network. Relationships between links, understanding of
proposed land and traffic trends on existing, similar roadways were used to refine the peak hour
volumes.
The SANDAG model assigned limited volumes to the ramps along SR-125. The post-processing of ramp
volumes were refined to equalize the use of ramps through each of the interchanges to reflect existing
traffic patterns at existing ramps along the SR-125 corridor. Further refinements to the distribution of
traffic during the peak hour were made around the ramps to reflect peak period demand and turning
movement volumes.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-15
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
For the basic freeway segment analysis, segments of northbound and southbound I-805 between
Telegraph Canyon Road and Main Street were analyzed under 2030 with and without the project peak
hour conditions using the 2000 Highway Capacity Software (HCS) Basic Freeway Segment analysis
methodology. A four percent heavy truck factor was applied in addition to a measured free-flow speed
of 65 mph was used in the HCS calculations for multi-lane segments.
c. Trip Generation and Trip Distribution
The SANDAG trip generation rates were utilized to determine daily and peak hour trips to be generated
by the project. Trip reduction factors were applied to the forecasted trip generation for the project to
reflect internally captured trips (trips that do not leave the village), non-motorized trips (pedestrian and
bike trips), and transit trips. In addition, a five percent reduction was applied for transit uses for all study
years 2020 through 2030, based on SANDAG transit reduction rates. Distribution of project-generated
traffic was determined using the SANDAG Series 11 South Bay Sub Area Select Zone analysis for each
scenario year.
Table 5.3-6 identifies the forecasted project-generated daily and peak hour trips, including internal
capture and transit reductions, for buildout of the project. At buildout, the project is forecast to
generate a total of approximately 43,084 daily trips, including 3,467 AM peak hour trips and 4,286 PM
peak hour trips (before internal capture and transit reductions). With internal capture and transit
reductions, the project is forecast to generate approximately 26,104 trips per day, including 2,662 AM
and 2,769 PM peak hour trips. Due to the lack of existing transit service and the isolated nature of the
project in the existing condition, neither internal capture nor transit reductions was applied in the
Existing Plus Project scenario. The distribution of these trips is shown in Figure 5.3-2. The phased daily
trips generated by project development assumed for each scenario year is shown in Table 5.3-7.
Table 5.3-6 Project-Generated Average Daily Trips at Project Buildout (Year 2030)
Land Use Size
Daily
Trips
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Total Inbound Outbound Total Inbound Outbound
Park (Active Recreation) 17.4 AC 870 35 17 17 70 35 35
Urban/Neighborhood Park 10.6 AC 53 2 1 1 4 2 2
Single-family Residential 621 DU 6,210 497 149 348 621 435 186
Multi-family Residential 1,429 DU 11,432 915 183 732 1,143 800 343
Elementary School 11.4 AC 1,140 365 219 146 103 41 62
Middle School 21 AC 2,205 706 423 282 198 79 119
Office (<100KSF) 50 KSF 1,000 140 126 14 130 26 104
Commercial Retail 250 KSF 20,000 800 480 320 2,000 1,000 1,000
Community Purpose Facility 5.8 AC 174 9 5 3 14 7 7
Subtotal 43,084 3,467 1,604 1,864 4,283 2,425 1,858
Internal Capture(1) -14,826 -632 -316 -316 -1,300 -650 -650
Transit Reduction(2) -2,154 -173 -80 -93 -214 -121 -93
Total 26,104 2,662 1,208 1,455 2,769 1,654 1,115
Note: Based on SANDAG, Not So Brief Guide, April 2002.
AC = acres, DU = dwelling units, KSF = thousand square feet
(1) Internal Capture Rates provided from ITE Trip Generation Handbook. Internal capture rates vary by each combination of
land uses.
(2) Transit Reduction Rates provided from SANDAG; a transit reduction of 5% is assumed by project buildout.
Source: RBF 2013
905905
15805
O ly m p ic P k w yO ly m p ic P k w yBirch R dBirchRd
P a l o m a r StP a l o m a r StT e legraphCanyonR d
T e legraphCanyonR d
BrandywineAveBrandywineAveOl
eanderAveOl
eanderAveN a p l es
S
t
N a p l es
S
t PaseoLad
er
aPaseoLad
er
aE J
St
E J
St
P
a
seodelReyP
a
seodelReyEast
l
ake PkwyEast
l
ake PkwyHunte PkwyHunte PkwyO
c
e
an
ViewHill
s
P
kwy
O
c
e
an
ViewHill
s
P
kwyDenneryRdDenneryRd Herita
geRdHerita
geRdLone Star RdLone Star RdMagdalenaMagdalenaAvAeMain StMain St
E n t e r t a i n m e n t
C i rEntertainment
C i r
Av e . D e La s
Vi s t a sAve. D e La s
Vi s t a sHeritageRd 125125LaMediaRdee 7834,699
2 6 1
2612
6
12
6
1
2612612
6
1 1,5662,8711 ,04 4
4,438 6,2651,5661,566261261
261
0
0
0
3,916
4,699 3,9161,8271,044
1
,30
5
8 W8W1,566±Source: RBF 2013
OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST EIR
PROJECTED GENERATED TRIPS (YEAR 2030)
FIGURE 5.3-2Not to Scale
Average Daily Trafficx,xxx
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-17
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-7 Phased Project Trip Generation
Scenario Daily Trips
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Total Inbound Outbound Total Inbound Outbound
Year 2015 3,018 241 57 185 302 211 91
Year 2020 13,875 1,150 375 775 1,422 924 498
Year 2025 22,338 1,932 756 1,175 2,332 1,454 878
Year 2030 26,104 2,662 1,208 1,455 2,769 1,654 1,115
Source: RBF 2013
Existing Plus Project
CEQA mandates the assessment of existing conditions with project buildout conditions. The Existing Plus
Project scenario assumes the existing street network with existing traffic count data as the baseline in
order to analyze impacts from the project at buildout. Under buildout conditions, the project is forecast
to generate 26,104 trips per day. Table 5.3-8 summarizes the peak hour level of service for intersections
under the Existing Plus Project scenario. As shown in this table, the intersections of Olympic Parkway/I-
805 northbound ramps and Main Street/Magdalena were calculated to operate at deficient level of
service. For each of these two impacted intersections, the project trips added to the intersections
exceed the City of Chula Vista’s five percent threshold of significance. Therefore, both intersections
were calculated to result in direct project impacts.
Table 5.3-8 Existing Plus Project Intersection Level of Service
Intersection
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1. Olympic Pkwy/I-805 southbound ramps 40.4 D 47.9 D
2. Olympic Pkwy/I-805 northbound ramps 120.6 F 49.7 D
3. Olympic Pkwy/Brandywine Avenue 31.6 C 41.5 D
4. Olympic Pkwy/Santa Victoria Does Not Exist
5. Olympic Pkwy/Heritage Road 21.9 C 20.2 D
6. Olympic Pkwy/La Media Road 51.5 D 38.8 D
7. Olympic Pkwy/SR-125 southbound ramps 2.7 A 4.4 A
8. Olympic Pkwy/SR-125 northbound ramps 1.3 A 2.4 A
9. Olympic Pkwy/Eastlake Parkway 29.8 C 32.1 C
10. Olympic Pkwy/Hunte Pkwy 33.6 C 34.7 C
11. Santa Victoria/Heritage Road Does Not Exist
12. Birch Road/La Media Road 30.6 C 25.1 C
13. Birch Road/SR-125 southbound ramps 15.8 9.8 B A 17.0 11.0 B
14. Birch Road/SR-125 northbound ramps 5.2 A 12.4 B
15. Birch Road/Eastlake Pkwy 35.8 D 33.8 C
16. Main Street/I-805 southbound ramps 27.8 C 31.9 C
17. Main Street/I-805 northbound ramps 27.0 C 28.9 C
18. Main Street/Heritage Street 2.7 A 0.9 A
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-18
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-8 Existing Plus Project Intersection Level of Service (continued)
Intersection
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS
19. Main Street/La Media Road (Couplet)
Westbound Main Street/southbound La Media Road 0.0 A 0.1 A
Westbound Main Street/northbound La Media Road 8.5 A 8.4 A
Eastbound Main Street/southbound La Media Road 0.0 A 0.1 A
Eastbound Main Street/northbound La Media Road 4.5 A 6.3 A
20. Main Street/Magdalena Avenue 78.8 E 164.1 F
21. Main Street/SR-125 southbound ramps Does Not Exist
22. Main Street/SR-125 northbound ramps Does Not Exist
23. Main Street/Eastlake Pkwy 13.6 B 12.9 B
24. Otay Valley Road/SR-125 southbound ramps Does Not Exist
25. Otay Valley Road/SR-125 northbound ramps Does Not Exist
Note: Deficient intersection operation shown in bold and shading.
Source: RBF 2013
Table 5.3-9 presents the results of the Existing Plus Project conditions roadway segment level of service.
As shown in this table, the following roadway segments would operate at deficient level of service: 1)
Olympic Parkway from I-805 to Brandywine Avenue (LOS E); 2) Olympic Parkway from Brandywine
Avenue to Heritage Road (LOS E); 3) Olympic Parkway from Heritage Road to La Media Road (LOS F); and
4) Magdalena Avenue from Birch Road to Main Street (LOS F). The project trips added to these deficient
segments would exceed the City of Chula Vista’s five percent threshold of significance. Therefore, all
four segments would be directly impacted by the project. Existing ADT volumes without the project are
shown in Exhibit 7 of Appendix B, Existing Conditions ADT Volumes, and the existing plus project ADT
volumes are shown in Exhibit 24 in Appendix B, Existing Plus Project Build-Out Conditions Average Daily
Traffic.
Table 5.3-9 Existing Plus Project Roadway Segment Level of Service
Roadway Segment
Classification
(# Lanes)
LOS C
Capacity ADT LOS
Olympic Parkway
I-805 to Brandywine Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 56,478 E
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 59,061 E
Heritage Road to La Media Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 65,617 F
La Media Road to SR-125 ramps Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 48,302 C
SR-125 ramps to Eastlake Pkwy Expressway (8) 70,000 44,786 A
Eastlake Pkwy to Hunte Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 18,324 A
East of Hunte Pkwy Major Street (4) 30,000 10,000 A
Birch Road
La Media to SR-125 Major Arterial (6) 40,000 22,717 A
SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway Major Arterial (6) 40,000 18,005 A
Main Street
I-805 to Brandywine Avenue Prime Arterial (6A) 58,500 27,327 A
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 18,729 A
Heritage Road to Couplet Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 Does Not Exist
Couplet to Magdalena Avenue Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 11,633 A
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-19
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-9 Existing Plus Project Roadway Segment Level of Service (continued)
Roadway Segment
Classification
(# Lanes)
LOS C
Capacity ADT LOS
Main Street
Magdalena Avenue to SR-125 ramps Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 Does Not Exist
SR-125 ramps to Village 9 Access Road Gateway Arterial (6) 68,700 Does Not Exist
Village 9 Access Road to Eastlake Pkwy Gateway Arterial (6) 68,700 Does Not Exist
Hunte Parkway
Eastlake Pkwy to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 2,699 A
Olympic Pkwy to Otay Lakes Road Major Street (4) 30,000 10,734 A
Heritage Road
Telegraph Cyn Road to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 17,553 A
Olympic Pkwy to Main Street Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 Does Not Exist
Main Street to Entertainment Circle Class I Collector (2A) 15,000 10,035 B
Entertainment Circle to
Avenue. de Las Vistas (City of SD) Class I Collector (2A) 15,000 9,846 B
La Media Road
Telegraph Cyn Road to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 19,982 A
Olympic Pkwy to Birch Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 38,180 A
Birch Road to Couplet Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 31,458 A
Magdalena Ave Birch Road to Main Street Class II Collector (20) 12,000 20,755 F
Eastlake Parkway
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 24,115 A
Olympic Pkwy to Birch Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 14,369 A
Birch Road to Hunte Parkway-Main St Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 3,895 A
Main Street to Otay Valley Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 Does Not Exist
Otay Valley Road
Couplet to Street A Major Street (4) 30,000 Does Not Exist
Street A to SR-125 ramps Major Street (4) 30,000 Does Not Exist
SR-125 ramps to Village 9 Access Major Street (4) 30,000 Does Not Exist
Note: Deficient conditions shown in bold and shading.
Source: RBF 2013
Year 2015
Average Daily Trips
By the Year 2015, Village 8 West would include up to 105 single-family and 246 multi-family residential
dwelling units. Table 5.3-7 summarizes projected trip generation for the project under the Year 2015
scenario. As shown in this table, by Year 2015 the project is anticipated to result in 3,018 ADT.
Section 12.24 of the city municipal code requires access and frontage improvements to be provided
concurrently with the development; therefore as part of the project, the following on-site roadway
improvements are required by Year 2015 to provide access to the initial phases of development within
Village 8 West: 1) two lanes of La Media Road from the existing terminus to Main Street; and 2) two
lanes of Main Street from La Media Road to Magdalena Avenue. Access to Village 8 West under the Year
2015 would be provided along Main Street, La Media Road and Magdalena Avenue. The Year 2015
roadway system and ADT volumes are shown in Exhibit 28 of Appendix B, 2015 Conditions Average Daily
Traffic. A potentially significant impact would occur if these on-site access and frontage improvements
are not developed concurrent with need.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-20
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Traffic Impacts
Intersections. Table 5.3-10 summarizes the AM and PM peak hour intersection level of service for Year
2015. As shown in this table, one intersection would operate at a deficient level upon implementation of
the project under the Year 2015 scenario: Olympic Parkway and I-805 northbound ramps (LOS F – AM
Peak Hour).
Olympic Parkway/I-805 northbound ramps. At the intersection of Olympic Parkway/I-805 northbound
ramps, the percentage of segment trips attributable to implementation of the project in the Year 2015
would be 0.6 percent. This percentage does not exceed the city thresholds of significance for a direct
impact. Therefore, no direct impact to this intersection would occur. However, a cumulative impact
would occur.
Table 5.3-10 Year 2015 Intersection Level of Service
Intersection
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1. Olympic Pkwy/I-805 southbound ramps 48.4 D 49.0 D
2. Olympic Pkwy/I-805 northbound ramps 116.2 F 42.7 D
3. Olympic Pkwy/Brandywine Avenue 23.1 C 29.6 C
4. Olympic Pkwy/Santa Victoria Does Not Exist
5. Olympic Pkwy/Heritage Road 33.1 C 41.9 D
6. Olympic Pkwy/La Media Road 42.3 D 32.8 C
7. Olympic Pkwy/SR-125 southbound ramps 5.2 A 4.8 A
8. Olympic Pkwy/SR-125 northbound ramps 2.2 A 4.0 A
9. Olympic Pkwy/Eastlake Parkway 31.5 C 32.6 C
10. Olympic Pkwy/Hunte Pkwy 34.6 C 34.7 C
11. Santa Victoria/Heritage Road Does Not Exist
12. Birch Road/La Media Road 33.0 C 31.8 C
13. Birch Road/SR-125 southbound ramps 7.2 A 8.2 A
14. Birch Road/SR-125 northbound ramps 16.0 B 15.8 B
15. Birch Road/Eastlake Pkwy 35.3 D 34.9 C
16. Main Street/I-805 southbound ramps 30.2 C 40.5 D
17. Main Street/I-805 northbound ramps 29.6 C 30.7 C
18. Main Street/Heritage Street 4.1 A 4.8 A
19. Main Street/La Media Road (Couplet) 10.4 B 9.0 A
20. Main Street/Magdalena Avenue 13.5 B 17.5 B
21. Main Street/SR-125 southbound ramps Does Not Exist
22. Main Street/SR-125 northbound ramps Does Not Exist
23. Main Street/Eastlake Pkwy 14.0 B 13.6 B
24. Otay Valley Road/SR-125 southbound ramps Does Not Exist
25. Otay Valley Road/SR-125 northbound ramps Does Not Exist
Note: Deficient intersection operation shown in bold and shading.
Source: RBF 2013
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-21
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Roadway Segments. Table 5.3-11 presents the results of the Year 2015 roadway segment level of
service analysis under implementation of the project. As shown in this table, the following roadway
segments would operate at deficient level of service under the Year 2015 scenario:
■ Olympic Parkway: I-805 to Brandywine Avenue (LOS D)
■ Olympic Parkway: Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road (LOS D)
■ Olympic Parkway: Heritage Road to La Media Road (LOS D)
■ Olympic Parkway: La Media Road to SR-125 ramps (LOS E)
■ Heritage Road: Main Street to Entertainment Circle (LOS E)
■ Heritage Road: Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas (LOS E)
Olympic Parkway Roadway Segments. The project would add less than 800 trips to all four roadway
segments of Olympic Parkway, and would not exceed five percent of the total volume of any segment.
Therefore, no significant direct project impacts would occur for any segment of Olympic Parkway. As a
part of the City’s Growth Management Program, the City monitors the operating conditions along
Olympic Parkway on an annual basis. As such, an expanded traffic analysis was prepared to monitor new
development in the eastern territories with respect to the existing available capacity on Olympic
Parkway east of I-805. The study determined if GMO thresholds are projected to be reached or
exceeded, and whether mitigation measures are necessary to remain compliant with the requirements
of the Growth Management Program. The analysis demonstrated that GMO thresholds would not be
reached along Olympic Parkway until building permits for 2,463 dwelling units have been issued for
projects east of I-805. The 2,463 dwelling unit limit is not forecasted to be exceeded by Year 2015;
therefore, a cumulative impact would not occur to Olympic Parkway under this scenario. See the
discussion under the Growth Management Ordinance heading regarding potentially significant impacts
related to the GMO and Olympic Parkway.
Heritage Road. Implementation of the project would not add any trips to the two deficient roadway
segments along Heritage Road under the Year 2015 scenario. Therefore, the project would not result in
a direct impact to Heritage Road, or contribute to a cumulative impact to either Heritage Road segment.
Growth Management Ordinance. Olympic Parkway is forecast to operate at a deficient level of service
by Year 2015 based on the standard volume to capacity ratio methodology. As a part of the city growth
management program, an expanded traffic analysis was prepared to determine if GMO thresholds for
Olympic Parkway are projected to be reached or exceeded, and whether mitigation measures are
necessary to remain compliant with the requirements of the Growth Management Program.
Recent GMOC traffic studies have indicated that the segment of westbound Olympic Parkway between
Heritage Road and Oleander Avenue during the AM peak hours would be the first to fall below city
growth management traffic threshold standards as traffic volumes increase over time with this project
and other projects east of I-805. In conformance with the requirements of the growth management
program, a peak-hour arterial analysis was conducted on the segment of westbound Olympic Parkway
between Heritage Road and Oleander Avenue under near-term conditions based on city transportation
management plan methodology. The Chula Vista transportation management plan is used to assess the
operating performance of the city’s arterial street system in order to determine compliance with the
threshold standards of the growth management program.
At the time the traffic impact analysis was completed, the GMO threshold of 2,463 equivalent dwelling
units was not forecast to be exceeded by Year 2015. However, the threshold is likely to be reached
during implementation of the SPA Plan and TM. Buildout of Village 8 West would result in development
of 2,050 units total east of I-805. Once this threshold is reached, the project would contribute to a
significant cumulative impact to traffic on Olympic Parkway.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-22
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-11 Year 2015 Roadway Segment Level of Service
Roadway Segment
Classification
(# Lanes)
LOS C
Capacity ADT LOS
Olympic Parkway
I-805 to Brandywine Prime Arterial (6A) 50,000 52,150 D
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 54,000 D
Heritage Road to La Media Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 55,350 D
La Media Road to SR-125 ramps Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 57,300 E
SR-125 ramps to Eastlake Pkwy Expressway (8) 70,000 45,000 A
Eastlake Pkwy to Hunte Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 31,400 A
East of Hunte Pkwy Major Street (4) 30,000 11,700 A
Birch Road
La Media to SR-125 Major Street (6) 40,000 17,700 A
SR-125 to Eastlake Pkwy Major Street (6) 40,000 17,400 A
Main Street
I-805 to Brandywine Avenue Prime Arterial (6A) 58,500 37,800 B
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 24,500 A
Heritage Road to La Media Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 Does Not Exist
La Media Road to Magdalena Avenue Class I Collector 12,000 1,000 A
Magdalena Avenue to SR-125 ramps Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 Does Not Exist
SR-125 ramps to Village 9 Street A Gateway Arterial (6) 68,700 Does Not Exist
Village 9 Street A to Eastlake Pkwy Gateway Arterial (6) 61,200(1) Does Not Exist
Hunte Parkway
Eastlake Pkwy to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 7,300 A
Olympic Pkwy to Otay Lakes Road Major Street (4) 30,000 11,000 A
Heritage Road
Telegraph Cyn to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 32,300 A
Olympic Pkwy to Main Street Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 Does Not Exist
Main Street to Entertainment Circle Class I Collector (2A) 12,000 14,700 E
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de
Las Vistas (City of San Diego) Class I Collector (2A) 12,000 14,900 E
La Media Road
Telegraph Cyn to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 13,000 A
Olympic Pkwy to Birch Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 15,700 A
Birch Road to Main Street Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 2,500 A
Magdalena Avenue Birch Road to Main Street Class II Collector (2) 12,000 10,400 B
Eastlake Parkway
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 17,200 A
Olympic Pkwy to Birch Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 18,200 A
Birch Road to Main Street Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 15,100 A
Main Street to Otay Valley Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 Does Not Exist
Otay Valley Road
Couplet to Street A Major Street (4) 30,000 Does Not Exist
Street A to SR-125 ramps Major Street (4) 30,000 Does Not Exist
SR-125 ramps to Village 9 Major Street (4) 30,000 Does Not Exist
Village 9 Access to University Major Street (4) 30,000 Does Not Exist
(1) Town Center and gateway arterials are “urban core” classifications. Urban Core facilities are evaluated against a LOS D or
better standard.
Note: Deficient conditions shown in bold and shading.
Source: RBF 2013
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-23
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Year 2020
Average Daily Trips
In addition to the development assumed for Year 2015, an additional 354 single-family and 824 multi-
family residential dwelling units, 50,000 square feet of office use, 40,000 square feet of commercial
retail, and 5.5 acres of park would be constructed within Village 8 West under the Year 2020 scenario.
Table 5.3-7 summarizes the forecasted Village 8 West project trip generation under the Year 2020
scenario.
Section 12.24 of the city municipal code requires access and frontage improvements to be provided
concurrently with the development; therefore as part of the project, the following on-site roadway
improvement is required by the Year 2020 to provide access to the applicable phases of development
within Village 8 West: construction of Otay Valley Road from south of Main Street to Village 8 West
Street A as a four-lane major roadway. A potentially significant impact would occur if this on-site access
and frontage improvement is not developed concurrent with need.
In addition, the Year 2020 scenario assumes that the mitigation measures identified for the Year 2015
scenario (see Section 5.3.5) would be implemented plus the following off-site improvements:
1) construction of Main Street from Village 9 Street A to Eastlake Parkway; and 2) Otay Valley Road from
Village 9 Street A to the University Site (see Table 13, 2015 Roadway Segment LOS, and Table 17, 2020
Conditions Roadway Segment LOS, of Appendix B). The Year 2020 roadway system and ADT volumes are
shown in Exhibit 31 of Appendix B, 2020 Conditions Average Daily Traffic. If the mitigation measures
from the Year 2015 scenario and the assumed off-site improvements are not constructed prior to Year
2020, significant impacts would occur.
Traffic Impacts
Intersections. Table 5.3-12 summarizes the peak hour intersection level of service under the Year 2020
scenario. As shown in this table, the following intersections would operate at a deficient level of service
in Year 2020:
■ Olympic Parkway/I-805 northbound ramps (AM – LOS F)
■ Olympic Parkway/Brandywine Avenue (PM – LOS F)
Olympic Parkway/I-805 northbound ramps. The percentage of project trips added from implementation
of the project would be less than five percent at the Olympic Parkway/I-805 northbound ramps
intersection. Therefore, direct impacts are considered less than significant. However, cumulative
impacts would be significant.
Olympic Parkway/Brandywine Avenue. The percentage of project trips added from implementation of
the project in the Year 2020 scenario would be more than five percent at the Olympic
Parkway/Brandywine Avenue intersection. Therefore, implementation of the project would result in a
significant direct impact to the Olympic Parkway/Brandywine Avenue intersection. Because the project
would result in a significant direct impact, it would also contribute to cumulative impacts to this
intersection.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-24
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-12 Year 2020 Project Intersection Level of Service
Intersection
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1. Olympic Pkwy/I-805 southbound ramps 51.9 D 54.0 D
2. Olympic Pkwy/I-805 northbound ramps 117.7 F 50.5 D
3. Olympic Pkwy/Brandywine Avenue 42.9 D 80.4 F
4. Olympic Pkwy/Santa Victoria Does Not Exist
5. Olympic Pkwy/Heritage Road 46.7 D 54.6 D
6. Olympic Pkwy/La Media Road 40.0 D 35.1 D
7. Olympic Pkwy/SR-125 southbound ramps 5.3 A 5.6 A
8. Olympic Pkwy/SR-125 northbound ramps 4.3 A 5.0 A
9. Olympic Pkwy/Eastlake Parkway 33.5 C 32.6 C
10. Olympic Pkwy/Hunte Pkwy 35.4 D 35.9 D
11. Santa Victoria/Heritage Road Does Not Exist
12. Birch Road/La Media Road 45.9 D 51.1 D
13. Birch Road/SR-125 southbound ramps 5.1 A 5.2 A
14. Birch Road/SR-125 northbound ramps 13.4 B 14.3 B
15. Birch Road/Eastlake Pkwy 40.4 D 47.3 D
16. Main Street/I-805 southbound ramps 30.6 C 43.6 D
17. Main Street/I-805 northbound ramps 29.8 C 35.7 D
18. Main Street/Heritage Street 4.0 A 5.8 A
19. Main Street/La Media Road 11.2 B 10.2 B
20. Main Street/Magdalena Avenue 22.5 C 24.3 C
21. Main Street/SR-125 southbound ramps Does Not Exist
22. Main Street/SR-125 northbound ramps Does Not Exist
23. Main Street/Eastlake Pkwy 22.5 C 24.1 C
24. Otay Valley Road/SR-125 southbound ramps Does Not Exist
25. Otay Valley Road/SR-125 northbound ramps Does Not Exist
Note: Deficient intersection operation shown in bold and shading.
Source: RBF 2013
Roadway Segments. Table 5.3-13 presents the results of the Year 2020 scenario roadway segment level
of service. As shown in this table, the following segments were calculated to operate at deficient level of
service:
■ Olympic Parkway: I-805 to Brandywine Avenue (LOS D)
■ Olympic Parkway: Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road (LOS E)
■ Olympic Parkway: Heritage Road to La Media Road (LOS E)
■ Olympic Parkway: La Media Road to SR-125 ramps (LOS E)
■ Heritage Road: Main Street to Entertainment Circle (LOS F)
■ Heritage Road: Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas (LOS F)
■ Magdalena Avenue: Main Street to Birch Road (LOS D)
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-25
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-13 Year 2020 Project Roadway Segment Level of Service
Roadway Segment
Classification
(# Lanes)
LOS C
Capacity ADT LOS
Olympic Parkway
I-805 to Brandywine Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 54,600 D
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 58,200 E
Heritage Road to La Media Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 60,800 E
La Media Road to SR-125 ramps Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 58,700 E
SR-125 ramps to Eastlake Pkwy Expressway (8) 70,000 46,700 A
Eastlake Pkwy to Hunte Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 33,600 A
East of Hunte Pkwy Major Street (4) 30,000 14,700 A
Birch Road
La Media to SR-125 Major Street (6) 40,000 37,000 C
SR-125 to Eastlake Pkwy Major Street (6) 40,000 37,200 C
Main Street
I-805 to Brandywine Avenue Prime Arterial (6A) 58,500 39,400 A
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 27,700 A
Heritage Road to Couplet Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 Does Not Exist
Couplet to Magdalena Avenue Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 12,000 A
Magdalena Avenue to SR-125 Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 Does Not Exist
SR-125 ramps to Village 9 Street A Gateway Arterial (6) 68,700 Does Not Exist
Village 9 Street A to Eastlake Pkwy Gateway Arterial (6) 61,200 17,900 A
Hunte Parkway
Eastlake Pkwy to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 11,700 A
Olympic Pkwy to Otay Lakes Road Major Street (4) 30,000 12,800 A
Heritage Road
Telegraph Cyn to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 40,500 B
Olympic Pkwy to Main Street Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 Does Not Exist
Main Street to Entertainment Circle Class I Collector(2A) 12,000 17,300 F
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas Class I Collector(2A) 12,000 16,300 F
La Media Road
Telegraph Cyn to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 19,500 A
Olympic Pkwy to Birch Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 34,600 A
Birch Road to Couplet Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 33,700 A
Magdalena Avenue Birch Road to Main Street Class II Collector (2) 12,000 12,500 D
Eastlake Parkway
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 20,700 A
Olympic Pkwy to Birch Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 23,200 A
Birch Road to Main Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 31,400 A
Main Street to Otay Valley Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 Does Not Exist
Otay Valley Road
Couplet to Street A Major Street (4) 30,000 4,300 A
La Media to SR-125 ramps Major Street (4) 30,000 Does Not Exist
SR-125 ramps to Village 9 Street A Major Street (4) 30,000 Does Not Exist
Village 9 Street A to University Major Street (4) 30,000 1,600 A
Note: Deficient conditions shown in bold and shading.
Source: RBF 2013
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-26
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Olympic Parkway: I-805 to Brandywine Avenue. Implementation of the project would contribute 1,943
daily trips to this roadway segment, which accounts for 3.6 percent of traffic on this segment and falls
below the threshold of significance for a direct impact. However, a cumulative impact would occur.
Olympic Parkway: Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road. Implementation of the project would add 2,498
trips to this roadway segment, which accounts for 4.3 percent of traffic and falls below the thresholds of
significance for a direct impact. However, a cumulative impact would occur.
Olympic Parkway: Heritage Road to La Media Road. Implementation of the project would add 4,995 trips
to this roadway segment, which accounts for 8.2 percent of traffic and exceeds the city thresholds of
significance. Therefore, implementation of the project would result in a direct impact to this roadway
segment. Because the project would result in a significant direct impact, it would also contribute to
cumulative impacts to this roadway segment.
Olympic Parkway: La Media Road to SR-125 Ramps. Although this roadway segment is forecast to
operate at LOS E, all intersections along the segment were calculated to operate at LOS D or better.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Heritage Road: Main Street to Avenida de Las Vistas. Implementation of the project would not add any
project trips to either deficient segment of Heritage Road. Therefore, a direct impact to Heritage Road
would not occur. However, a cumulative impact would occur.
Magdalena Avenue: Main Street to Birch Road. Magdalena Avenue is not a circulation element road and
is not subject to the GDP level of service standards. A LOS D operating condition indicates that the
forecast ADT volume in the Year 2020 is approximately 70 to 80 percent of the overall capacity of the
road and acceptable traffic flow will occur. Therefore, LOS D is an acceptable level of service for this
roadway segment and a potentially significant impact would not occur.
Year 2025
Average Daily Trips
In addition to the development assumed in the Year 2015 and Year 2020 scenarios, an additional 162
single-family residential dwelling units, 359 multi-family residential dwelling units, an elementary school,
150,000 square feet of commercial retail, and 13 acres of park space were assumed to be constructed in
Village 8 West by Year 2025. Table 5.3-7 summarizes the forecasted Village 8 West project trip
generation for the Year 2025 scenario.
Section 12.24 of the city municipal code requires access and frontage improvements to be provided
concurrently with the development; therefore as part of the project, the following on-site roadway
improvements are required by the Year 2025 to provide access to the applicable phases of development
within Village 8 West: 1) construction of an additional two lanes of Main Street through couplet;
2) construction of an additional two lanes of La Media Road through couplet; 3) construction of Otay
Valley Road from Street A to the southeastern project boundary as a four-lane major arterial; and 4)
install a traffic signal at the Main Street/Magdalena Avenue intersection and restripe to include dual
eastbound left-turn lanes and out eastbound through lane.
In addition, the Year 2025 scenario assumes that the mitigation measures identified for the Year 2020
scenario (see Section 5.3.5) would be implemented plus the following off-site improvements:
1) construction of Heritage Road (from Olympic Parkway to Main Street); 2) re-striping of southbound
Heritage Road to include dual left turn lanes, three through lanes and one right turn lane; 3) widening of
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-27
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Heritage Road from Main Street to Avenida de las Vistas from a Class II collector to a six lane Prime;
4) construction of the Olympic Parkway/Santa Victoria Road intersection; and 5) construction of the
Santa Victoria Road/Heritage Road intersection (see Table 16, 2020 Peak Hour Intersection Levels of
Service, and Table 20, 2025 Conditions Peak Hour Study Intersection Level of Service, of Appendix B).
The Year 2025 roadway system and ADT volumes are shown in Exhibit 34 of Appendix B, 2025
Conditions Average Daily Traffic. If the mitigation measures from the Year 2020 scenario and the
assumed off-site improvements are not constructed prior to the Year 2025, significant impacts would
occur.
Traffic Impacts
Intersections. Table 5.3-14 summarizes the Year 2025 scenario peak hour intersection level of service.
As shown in this table, the following intersections were calculated to operate at deficient conditions
under the Year 2025 scenario:
■ Birch Road/La Media Road (AM – LOS F, PM – LOS F)
■ Birch Road/Eastlake Parkway (AM – LOS F, PM – LOS F)
■ Main Street/Eastlake Parkway (AM – LOS F, PM – LOS F)
Birch Road/La Media Road, Birch Road/Eastlake Parkway, and Main Street/Eastlake Parkway.
Implementation of the project would exceed the city thresholds of significance for all three of these
intersections because project traffic would account for more than five percent of traffic volume.
Therefore, implementation of the project would result in a direct impact to all three of these
intersections.
Table 5.3-14 Year 2025 Project Intersection Level of Service
Intersection
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1. Olympic Pkwy/I-805 southbound ramps 43.3 D 46.2 D
2. Olympic Pkwy/I-805 northbound ramps 43.5 D 34.3 C
3. Olympic Pkwy/Brandywine Avenue 30.0 C 36.8 D
4. Olympic Pkwy/Santa Victoria 26.6 C 37.8 D
5. Olympic Pkwy/Heritage Road 37.8 D 50.5 D
6. Olympic Pkwy/La Media Road 45.7 D 47.9 D
7. Olympic Pkwy/SR-125 southbound ramps 5.4 A 5.8 A
8. Olympic Pkwy/SR-125 northbound ramps 4.1 A 4.9 A
9. Olympic Pkwy/Eastlake Parkway 34.9 C 36.8 D
10. Olympic Pkwy/Hunte Pkwy 36.9 D 36.6 D
11. Santa Victoria/Heritage Road 37.5 D 39.5 D
12. Birch Road/La Media Road 234.8 F 190.5 F
13. Birch Road/SR-125 southbound ramps 10.6 B 11.4 B
14. Birch Road/SR-125 northbound ramps 46.7 D 46.1 D
15. Birch Road/Eastlake Pkwy 443.0 F 454.5 F
16. Main Street/I-805 southbound ramps 32.6 C 53.0 D
17. Main Street/I-805 northbound ramps 39.0 D 48.3 D
18. Main Street/Heritage Street 21.2 C 16.5 B
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-28
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-14 Year 2025 Intersection Level of Service (continued)
Intersection
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS
19. Main Street/La Media Road (Couplet):
Westbound Main Street/southbound La Media Road 10.4 B 12.3 B
Westbound Main Street/northbound La Media Road 18.7 B 17.3 B
Eastbound Main Street/southbound La Media Road 0.1 A 0.1 A
Eastbound Main Street/northbound La Media Road 9.5 A 14.2 B
20. Main Street/Magdalena Avenue 26.2 C 41.4 D
21. Main Street/SR-125 southbound ramps Does Not Exist
22. Main Street/SR-125 northbound ramps Does Not Exist
23. Main Street/Eastlake Pkwy 274.4 F 242.8 F
24. Otay Valley Road/SR-125 southbound ramps Does Not Exist
25. Otay Valley Road/SR-125 northbound ramps Does Not Exist
Note: Deficient intersection operation shown in bold and shading.
Source: RBF 2013
Roadways. Table 5.3-15 presents the calculated Year 2025 roadway segment level of service. As shown
in this table, the following segments were calculated to operate at deficient levels of service under the
Year 2025 scenario:
■ Olympic Parkway: Heritage Road to La Media Road (LOS F)
■ Olympic Parkway: La Media Road to SR-125 ramps (LOS D)
■ Birch Road: La Media to SR-125 (LOS F)
■ Magdalena Avenue: Birch Road to Main Street (LOS F)
■ Eastlake Parkway: Birch Road to Main Street (LOS F)
Olympic Parkway: Heritage Road to La Media Road. Implementation of the project would add 3,051 trips
to this roadway segment, which accounts for 4.8 percent of total traffic and does not exceed the city
thresholds of significance. Therefore, implementation of the project would not result in a direct
significant impact to this roadway segment. However, a cumulative impact would occur.
Olympic Parkway: La Media Road to SR-125 ramps. Although this roadway segment is forecast to
operate at LOS D, all intersections along the segment are forecast to operate at an acceptable level of
service. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Birch Road: La Media to SR-125. Implementation of the project would add 10,275 trips to this roadway
segment, which accounts for 20.1 percent of total traffic and exceeds the city thresholds of significance.
Therefore, implementation of the project would result in a direct impact to this roadway segment.
Because the project would result in a significant direct impact, it would also contribut e to cumulative
impacts to this roadway segment.
Magdalena Avenue: Birch Road to Main Street. Implementation of the project would add 5,337 trips to
this roadway segment, which accounts for 26.6 percent of total traffic and exceeds the city thresholds of
significance. Therefore, implementation of the project would result in a direct impact to this roadway
segment. Because the project would result in a significant direct impact, it would also contribute to
cumulative impacts to this roadway segment.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-29
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-15 Year 2025 Project Roadway Segment Level of Service
Roadway Segment
Classification
(# Lanes)
LOS C
Capacity ADT LOS
Olympic Parkway
I-805 to Brandywine Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 43,300 B
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 42,600 B
Heritage Road to La Media Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 62,900 F
La Media Road to SR-125 ramps Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 56,200 D
SR-125 ramps to Eastlake Pkwy Expressway (8) 70,000 49,700 A
Eastlake Pkwy to Hunte Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 35,300 A
East of Hunte Pkwy Major Street (4) 30,000 18,400 A
Birch Road
La Media to SR-125 Major Street (6) 40,000 51,100 F
SR-125 to Eastlake Pkwy Major Street (6) 40,000 47,000 C
Main Street
I-805 to Brandywine Avenue Prime Arterial (6A) 58,500 41,600 C
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 31,200 B
Heritage Road to Couplet Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 Does Not Exist
Couplet to Magdalena Avenue Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 5,200 A
Magdalena Avenue to SR-125 ramps Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 Does Not Exist
SR-125 ramps to Village 9 Street A Gateway Arterial (6) 68,700 Does Not Exist
Village 9 Street A to Eastlake Pkwy Gateway Arterial (6) 61,200 22,600 A
Hunte Parkway
Eastlake Pkwy to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 24,800 A
Olympic Pkwy to Otay Lakes Road Major Street (4) 30,000 16,000 A
Heritage Road
Telegraph Cyn to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 43,100 B
Olympic Pkwy to Main Street Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 32,500 A
Main Street to Entertainment Circle Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 19,500 A
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas
(City of San Diego) Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 19,500 A
La Media Road
Telegraph Cyn to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 19,600 A
Olympic Pkwy to Birch Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 35,900 A
Birch Road to Couplet Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 35,000 A
Magdalena Avenue Birch Road Main Street Class II Collector (2) 12,000 20,100 F
Eastlake Parkway
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 21,200 A
Olympic Pkwy to Birch Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 24,700 A
Birch Road to Main Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 54,600 F
Main Street to Otay Valley Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 Does Not Exist
Otay Valley Road
Couplet to Street A Major Street (4) 30,000 7,600 A
Street A to SR-125 ramps Major Street (4) 30,000 Does Not Exist
SR-125 ramps to Village 9 Major Street (4) 30,000 Does Not Exist
Village 9 Access Road to University Major Street (4) 30,000 9,700 A
Note: Deficient conditions shown in bold and shading.
Source: RBF 2013
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-30
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Eastlake Parkway: Birch Road to Main Street. Implementation of the project would add 5,584 trips to
this roadway segment, which accounts for 10.2 percent of total traffic and exceeds the city thresholds of
significance. Therefore, implementation of the project would result in a direct impact to this roadway
segment. Because the project would result in a significant direct impact, it would also contribute to
cumulative impacts to this roadway segment.
Year 2030
Average Daily Trips
In addition to the developments assumed through the Year 2025 scenario described above, the Year
2030 scenario assumes buildout of Village 8 West, which would include the construction of a middle
school, an additional 60,000 square feet of commercial retail, and 9.4 acres of park space. The Year 2030
scenario assumes the 2025 mitigated street network (see Section 5.3.5). Table 5.3-7 summarizes the
forecasted Village 8 West project trip generation under the Year 2030 scenario. The distribution of
project traffic in Year 2030 is shown in Figure 5.3-2.
Section 12.24 of the city municipal code requires access and frontage improvements to be provided
concurrently with the development; therefore as part of the project, the following on-site roadway
improvement is required by the Year 2030 to provide access to the applicable phases of development
within Village 8 West: construction of Street A from Main Street to Otay Valley Road as a two-lane local
road. A potentially significant impact would occur if this on-site access and frontage improvement is not
developed concurrent with need.
In addition, the Year 2030 scenario assumes that the mitigation measures identified for the Year 2025
scenario (see Section 5.3.5) would be implemented, plus the following offsite improvement:
construction of Main Street from Heritage Road to La Media Road. If the mitigation measures from the
Year 2025 scenario are not constructed prior to the Year 2030, significant impacts would occur.
Traffic Impacts
Intersections. Table 5.3-16 summarizes the Year 2030 scenario AM and PM peak hour intersection level
of service. As shown in this table, the following intersections were calculated to operate at deficient
levels of service (LOS E or F) under the Year 2030 scenario:
■ Birch Road/La Media Road (AM – LOS F, PM – LOS F)
■ Birch Road/SR-125 northbound ramps (AM – LOS F)
■ Birch Road/Eastlake Parkway (AM – LOS F, PM – LOS E)
■ Main Street/I-805 southbound ramps (PM – LOS E)
■ Main Street/I-805 northbound ramps (PM – LOS E)
■ Main Street/La Media Road Couplet
Westbound Main Street/northbound La Media (AM – LOS F)
Eastbound Main Street/southbound La Media (AM – LOS F, PM – LOS F)
Eastbound Main Street/northbound La Media (AM – LOS F)
■ Main Street/Magdalena (AM – LOS F, PM – LOS F)
■ Main Street/Eastlake Parkway (AM – LOS F)
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-31
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-16 Year 2030 Intersection Level of Service
Intersection
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1. Olympic Pkwy/I-805 southbound ramps 29.1 C 34.8 C
2. Olympic Pkwy/I-805 northbound ramps 23.7 C 23.2 C
3. Olympic Pkwy/Brandywine Avenue 27.9 C 39.2 C
4. Olympic Pkwy/Santa Victoria 12.7 B 13.3 B
5. Olympic Pkwy/Heritage Road 37.4 D 54.4 D
6. Olympic Pkwy/La Media Road 37.6 D 39.2 D
7. Olympic Pkwy/SR-125 southbound ramps 6.6 A 7.8 A
8. Olympic Pkwy/SR-125 northbound ramps 2.6 A 3.0 A
9. Olympic Pkwy/Eastlake Parkway 33.8 C 36.5 D
10. Olympic Pkwy/Hunte Pkwy 38.9 D 39.2 D
11. Santa Victoria/Heritage Road 37.0 D 42.3 D
12. Birch Road/La Media Road 91.0 F 116.2 F
13. Birch Road/SR-125 southbound ramps 7.8 A 6.1 A
14. Birch Road/SR-125 northbound ramps 112.4 F 31.8 C
15. Birch Road/Eastlake Pkwy 117.2 F 65.8 E
16. Main Street/I-805 southbound ramps 46.2 D 55.9 E
17. Main Street/I-805 northbound ramps 39.6 D 57.8 E
18. Main Street/Heritage Street 32.2 C 42.0 D
19. Main Street/La Media Road (Couplet):
Westbound Main Street/southbound La Media Road 26.9 C 23.3 C
Westbound Main Street/northbound La Media Road 103.2 F 48.0 D
Eastbound Main Street/southbound La Media Road 140.3 F 95.2 F
Eastbound Main Street/northbound La Media Road 80.9 F 42.5 D
20. Main Street/Magdalena Avenue 131.3 F 143.8 F
21. Main Street/SR-125 southbound ramps Does Not Exist
22. Main Street/SR-125 northbound ramps Does Not Exist
23. Main Street/Eastlake Pkwy 141.9 F 52.1 D
24. Otay Valley Road/SR-125 southbound ramps Does Not Exist
25. Otay Valley Road/SR-125 northbound ramps Does Not Exist
Note: Deficient intersection operation shown in bold and shading.
Source: RBF 2013
Birch Road Intersections. Implementation of the project would account for more than five percent of
traffic at these intersections and would exceed the city thresholds of significance for all identified Birch
Road intersections. Therefore, implementation of the project would result in a direct impact to the
intersections of Birch Road with La Media Road, the SR-125 northbound ramps, and Eastlake Parkway.
Because the project would result in significant direct impacts, it would also contribute to cumulative
impacts to these intersections.
Main Street Intersections. Implementation of the project would account for more than five percent of
traffic on three Main Street intersections and the couplet. Therefore, the project would result in a direct
impact to the couplet and the intersections of Main Street with the I-805 northbound ramp, Magdalena
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-32
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Avenue, and Eastlake Parkway. The Main Street/I-805 southbound ramp intersection would experience
a cumulative impact and not a direct impact.
Roadway Segments. Table 5.3-17 and Figure 5.3-3 presents the results of the Year 2030 scenario
roadway segment level of service. As shown in this table, the following segments were calculated to
operate at deficient levels of service:
■ Olympic Parkway: east of Hunte Parkway (LOS D)
■ Birch Road: La Media to SR-125 (LOS F)
■ Birch Road: SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway (LOS F)
■ Main Street: I-805 to Brandywine Avenue (LOS D)
■ Main Street: Brandywine to Heritage Road (LOS D)
■ Heritage Road: Telegraph Canyon to Olympic Parkway (LOS D)
■ Heritage Road: Main Street to Entertainment Circle (LOS E)
■ Heritage Road: Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas (LOS D)
■ Magdalena Avenue: Birch Road to Main Street (LOS D)
■ Eastlake Parkway: Birch Road to Main Street (LOS D)
Olympic Parkway: east of Hunte Parkway. Although this roadway segment is forecast to operate at
LOS D, all intersections along the segment operate at LOS D or better. Therefore, direct and cumulative
impacts would be less than significant.
Birch Road: La Media to SR-125. Implementation of the project would add 1,044 trips to this roadway
segment, which accounts for 1.9 percent of traffic volume and does not exceed the city thresholds of
significance. Therefore, implementation of the project would not result in a direct significant impact to
this roadway segment. However, a cumulative impact would occur.
Birch Road: SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway. Implementation of the project would add 1,044 trips to this
roadway segment, which accounts for 1.6 percent of traffic volume and does not exceed the city
thresholds of significance. Therefore, implementation of the project would not result in a direct
significant impact to this roadway segment. However, a cumulative impact would occur.
Main Street: I-805 to Brandywine Avenue. Implementation of the project would add 3,916 trips to this
roadway segment, which accounts for 6.4 percent of traffic volume and exceeds the city thresholds of
significance. Therefore, implementation of the project would result in a direct signifi cant impact to this
roadway segment. Because the project would result in a significant direct impact, it would also
contribute to cumulative impacts to this roadway segment.
Main Street: Brandywine to Heritage Road. Implementation of the project would add 4,438 trips to this
roadway segment, which accounts for 8.5 percent of traffic volume and would exceed the city
thresholds of significance. Therefore, implementation of the project would result in a direct significant
impact to this roadway segment. Because the project would result in a significant direct impact, it would
also contribute to cumulative impacts to this roadway segment.
Heritage Road: Telegraph Canyon to Olympic Parkway. Although this roadway segment is forecast to
operate at LOS D, all intersections along the segment operate at LOS D or better. Therefore, direct and
cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
905905
15805
O lym p ic P k w yO lym p ic P k w yBirch R dBirchRd
P a l o m a r StP a l o m a r StT e legraphCanyonR d
T e legraphCanyonR d
BrandywineAveBrandywineAveOl
eanderAveOl
eanderAveN a p l es
S
t
N a p l es
S
t PaseoLad
er
aPaseoLad
er
aE J
St
E J
St
P
a
seodelReyP
a
seodelReyEast
l
ake PkwyEast
l
ake PkwyHunte PkwyHunte PkwyO
c
e
an
ViewHill
s
P
kwy
O
c
e
an
ViewHill
s
P
kwyDenneryRdDenneryRd Herita
geRdHerita
geRdLone Star RdLone Star RdMagdalenaMagdalenaAvAeMain StMain St
E n t e r t a i n m e n t
C i rEntertainment
C i r
Av e. D e L as
Vi s t a sAve. D e L as
Vi s t a sHeritageRd 125125LaMediaRd48,3 0 0 40,0003 4 ,8 0 0
33,10
0
3 3 ,3 0 0
30,100
2
0
,
7
0
0
2
4
,
0
0
0
27,60041,3005
0
,
7
0
0 29,90038,0004 3 ,9 0 0
5 4 ,2 0 0
65,200
52,200
4 4 ,9 0 0
3 5 ,4 0 0
61,40049,400 3 4 ,2 0 0
61,300 42,30052,60028,3008 W8W12,700±Sourc e: RBF 2013
OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST EIR
UNMITIGATED YEAR 2030 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC
FIGURE 5.3-3Not to Scale
Average Daily Trafficx,xxx
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-34
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-17 Year 2030 Roadway Segment Level of Service
Roadway Segment
Classification
(# Lanes)
LOS C
Capacity ADT LOS
Olympic Parkway I-805 to Brandywine Avenue Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 48,300 C
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 34,800 A
Heritage Road to La Media Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 33,300 A
La Media Road to SR-125 ramps Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 43,900 C
SR-125 ramps to Eastlake Pkwy Expressway (8) 70,000 49,400 A
Eastlake Pkwy to Hunte Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 34,200 A
East of Hunte Pkwy Major Street (4) 30,000 30,100 D
Birch Road La Media to SR-125 Major Street (6) 40,000 54,200 F
SR-125 to Eastlake Pkwy Major Street (6) 40,000 65,200 F
Main Street
I-805 to Brandywine Avenue Prime Arterial (6A) 58,000 61,300 D
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 52,200 D
Heritage Road to Couplet Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 44,900 C
Couplet to Magdalena Avenue Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 25,100 A
Magdalena Avenue to SR-125 ramps Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 33,100 A
SR-125 to Village 9 Street A Gateway Arterial (6) 68,700 35,400 A
Village 9 Street A to Eastlake Pkwy Gateway Arterial (6) 68,700 24,500 A
Hunte Parkway Eastlake Pkwy to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 40,000 B
Olympic Pkwy to Otay Lakes Road Major Street (4) 30,000 20,700 A
Heritage Road Telegraph Cyn to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 50,700 D
Olympic Pkwy to Main Street Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 42,300 B
Main Street to Entertainment Circle Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 61,400 E
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 52,600 D
La Media Road Telegraph Cyn to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 29,900 A
Olympic Pkwy to Birch Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 28,300 A
Birch Road to Couplet Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 38,000 B
Magdalena Ave Birch Road to Main Street Class II Collector (2) 12,000 12,700 D
Eastlake Parkway Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Pkwy Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 24,000 A
Olympic Pkwy to Birch Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 27,600 A
Birch Road to Main Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 41,300 D
Main Street to Otay Valley Road Prime Arterial (6) 50,000 Does Not Exist
Otay Valley Road Couplet to Street A Major Street (4) 30,000 7,300 A
Street A to SR-125 ramps Major Street (4) 30,000 Does Not Exist
SR-125 ramps to Village 9 Major Street (4) 30,000 Does Not Exist
Village 9 Access Road to University Major Street (4) 30,000 9,500 A
Note: Deficient conditions shown in bold and shading.
Source: RBF 2013
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-35
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Heritage Road: Main Street to Entertainment Circle. Implementation of the project would add 1,566
trips to this roadway segment, which accounts for 2.6 percent of traffic volume and does not exceed the
city thresholds of significance. Therefore, implementation of the project would not result in a direct
significant impact to this roadway segment. However, a cumulative impact would occur.
Heritage Road: Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas. Implementation of the project would add
1,566 trips to this roadway segment, which accounts for three percent of traffic volume and does not
exceed the city thresholds of significance. Therefore, implementation of the project would not result in
a direct significant impact to this roadway segment. However, a cumulative impact would occur.
Magdalena Avenue: Main Street to Birch Road. Magdalena Avenue is not a circulation element road and
is not subject to the GDP level of service standards. Therefore, LOS D is an acceptable level of service for
this roadway segment. The intersection of Main Street/Magdalena Avenue is forecast to operate at an
acceptable level of service with the project. Therefore, the project would not result in a significant direct
or cumulative impact on Magdalena Avenue.
Eastlake Parkway: Birch Road to Main Street. Implementation of the project would add 261 trips to this
roadway segment, which accounts for 0.6 percent of traffic volume and does not exceed the city
thresholds of significance. Therefore, implementation of the project would not result in a direct
significant impact to this roadway segment. However, a cumulative impact would occur.
Freeway Mainline Segment Analysis. Segments of northbound and southbound I-805 between
Telegraph Canyon Road and Main Street were analyzed under the Year 2030 scenario, both with
implementation of the project and without implementation of the project. The results of the freeway
segment level of service are shown in Table 5.3-18.
Table 5.3-18 2030 Conditions Freeway Mainline Segment Level of Service Analysis (I-805)
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Volume LOS APCS D Volume LOS APCS D
2030 Without Project Conditions
2030 Conditions (Northbound)
From Main Street to Olympic Parkway 7,810 C 64.6 25.9 10,113 E 57.8 37.6
From Olympic Parkway to Telegraph Canyon Road 7,738 C 64.7 25.7 10,020 E 58.3 36.9
2030 Conditions (Southbound)
From Telegraph Canyon Road to Olympic Parkway 9,544 D 60.6 33.8 9,261 D 61.6 32.3
From Olympic Parkway to Main Street 9,633 D 60.2 34.4 9,347 D 61.3 32.7
2030 With Project Conditions
2030 Conditions (Northbound)
From Main Street to Olympic Parkway 7,886 D 64.6 26.2 10,172 E 57.5 38.0
From Olympic Parkway to Telegraph Canyon Road 7,839 D 64.6 26.0 10,099 E 57.9 37.5
2030 Conditions (Southbound)
From Telegraph Canyon Road to Olympic Parkway 9,628 D 60.2 34.3 9,377 D 61.2 32.9
From Olympic Parkway to Main Street 9,696 D 59.9 34.8 9,434 D 61.0 33.2
APCS = Average Passenger Car Speed (mph)
D = Density, Passenger Cars per Mile per Lane
Note: Deficient freeway segment operation shown in bold and shading.
Source: RBF 2013
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-36
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
The acceptable level of service for freeways is LOS D. As shown in Table 5.3-18, the freeway mainline
segments would operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS D or better) under 2030 with and without
implementation of the project; except for I-805 northbound between Main Street and Telegraph Canyon
Road, which is forecast to operate at LOS E during the PM peak hour. According to the Chula Vista Traffic
Study Guidelines, a significant impact would occur if a project adds a 1 mile per hour (mph) speed delay
or greater to a segment operating at LOS D, E, or F. The results of the 2030 With Project mainline
segment analysis identify a change in delay of less than 1 mph for each study segment. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
Intersection Lane Volume Analysis. Caltrans requires that an ILV analysis be conducted for all state-
owned facilities that may be impacted by a project. Due to the fact that Village 8 West is located near
the ramp to I-805, the ILV method was conducted for the interchanges within the project study area.
Table 5.3-19 summarizes the results of the ILV analysis. The results of the analysis for 2030 with and
without project scenarios show that the peak hour volumes during the AM and PM peak hours exceed
the threshold for the “unstable” flow classification at Olympic Parkway/I-805 northbound ramps under
both scenarios. The Olympic Parkway/I-805 southbound ramps are also forecasted to exceed the
threshold for “unstable” conditions with and without the project. The Main Street/I-805 southbound
ramps would exceed the threshold for unstable conditions with implementation of the project. Traffic
conditions that experience “unstable” flow usually experience considerable delays during the morning
and evening peak hours. Therefore, a direct impact would occur as a result of the project. I-805
northbound ramps at Main Street were calculated to operate at “Capacity” conditions, according to the
Caltrans ILV thresholds. The “Capacity” condition consists of stop-and-go operations with severe delay
and heavy congestion. This condition would occur without or without implementation of the project;
therefore, a cumulative impact would occur, but the project would not result in a significant direct
impact.
Table 5.3-19 2030 Intersection Lane Volume Analysis
Intersection
2030 Without
Project
2030 With
Project
Olympic Parkway/I-805 southbound ramps AM Stable Stable
PM Unstable Unstable
Olympic Parkway/I-805 northbound ramps AM Unstable Unstable
PM Unstable Unstable
Main Street/I-805 southbound ramps AM Stable Unstable
PM Capacity Capacity
Main Street/I-805 northbound ramps AM Capacity Capacity
PM Capacity Capacity
Note: Deficient ramp operation shown in bold and shading.
Source: RBF 2013
On-site Intersection Analysis. An operational analysis of all internal intersections where the project
would connect to the roadway network was conducted for the Year 2030. Forecast Year 2030 traffic
volumes for the on-site project intersections are illustrated in Figure 5.3-4. Table 5.3-20 summarizes the
results of the operational analysis of the key internal project intersections. As shown in this table, all
intersections were calculated to operate at an acceptable level of service. Therefore, impacts would be
less than significant.
0400 800
Feet
Source: RBF 2012
OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST EIR
ON-SITE TRAFFIC VOLUMES (YEAR 2030)
FIGURE 5.3-4Not to Scale ±
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-38
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-20 Year 2030 Internal Intersection Operational Analysis
Internal Intersection
AM PM
Delay LOS Delay LOS
Westbound Main Street/Street A 6.1 A 5.1 A
Eastbound Main Street/Street A 30.0 C 29.9 C
Otay Valley Road/Street C 5.5 A 5.4 A
Otay Valley Road/Street A 34.5 C 45.0 D
Street A/Street B 20.4 C 24.4 C
Source: RBF 2013
For each of the proposed signalized intersections, a preliminary traffic signal warrant analysis was
conducted to demonstrate that, by Year 2030, traffic signals would be appropriately placed at these
intersections. The traffic signal warrant analysis was conducted based on the California Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) planning level warrant which uses daily traffic volume as a
threshold for analysis. Table 5.3-21 provides the forecast daily traffic volume for the intersections where
traffic signals are warranted along with the thresholds established in the MUTCD. As shown in this table,
all proposed traffic signal locations were calculated to meet the minimum traffic signal warrants by Year
2030. The volumes used in this analysis are the Year 2030 mitigated conditions, which include the Otay
Valley Road connection over SR-125 and the Main Street interchange at SR-125.
It should be noted that during interim years, the traffic signals may not be warranted. As an interim
traffic control measure stop signs may be a more appropriate traffic control device until the traffic on
the side street or along the major street approaches the thresholds identified in Table 5.3-21. The
appropriate traffic control device would be determined during each phase of construction based on
traffic volume, connections to the overall circulation system and other factors.
Table 5.3-21 2030 Traffic Signal Warrants and Daily Traffic Volumes
Intersection Street (Major or Minor)
Year 2030
ADT
ADT Thresholds(1)
Signal
Warranted?
Condition A:
Minimum
Volume
Condition B:
Interruption of
Continuous Traffic
WB Main Street/ Street A Major: Main Street 12,550 9,600 14,400 Yes
(Condition A) Minor: Street A 2,730 2,400 1,200
EB Main Street/ Street A Major: Main Street 12,550 9,600 14,000 Yes
(Condition A) Minor: Street A 5,460 2,400 1,200
Otay Valley Road/ Street
C
Major: Otay Valley Road 12,400 9,600 14,000 Yes
(Combination) Minor: Street C 2,000 2,400 1,200
Otay Valley Road/ Street
A
Major: Otay Valley Road 11,400 9,600 14,000 Yes
(Combination) Minor: Street A 1,975 2,400 1,200
Street A/ Street B Major: Street A 9,000 8,000 12,000 Yes
(Condition A) Minor: Street B 2,500 2,400 1,200
(1) California MUTCD minimum estimated average daily traffic thresholds for major and minor streets. Daily traffic volume on
the major street is two-way volume and ADT volume on the minor street is the highest one-way approach volume. Volumes
are based upon the Year 2030 with mitigation conditions. When either Condition A or Condition B is not met, then the
Combination of Warrants should be considered. The Combination of Warrants is met if both Condition A and Condition B
are fulfilled 80% or more.
Source: RBF 2013
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-39
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
2. Construction
Construction of the project would have the potential to generate traffic from worker trips, and building
material and equipment deliveries. During grading of the site, cut and fill would be balanced on site;
therefore, there will be limited need to haul material to or from the site. If any trench backfill materials
would be required, material would most likely be provided from the existing quarry located within
Village 4. Materials for road construction would also be provided from the quarry. Therefore, most if not
all material hauling will occur within the Otay Ranch, which limits the sphere of potential construction
impacts from haul trips to the Otay Ranch area. Up to 140 workers would be required on site for
construction within Village 8 West. Assuming each worker drives to and from the jobsite in their own
personal vehicle, and approximately 50 percent of them leave the site once a day for lunch, materials,
meetings, etc, the trip generation rate per construction worker is approximately three trips per day with
one trip occurring the AM peak hour and one trip occurring in the PM peak hour. The ADT generation
would be 420 trips per day with 140 trips occurring in the AM peak hour and 140 occurring during the
PM peak hour.
Construction traffic is not anticipated to generate enough traffic on its own to result in a significant
impact; however, construction of the SPA Plan and TM would occur in phases. Therefore, construction
traffic would result in a temporary addition to operational traffic generated by the project. As discussed
previously, operation of the project would have the potential to generate substantial traffic during each
phase of buildout (Year 2015, Year 2020, Year 2025, and Year 2030). Construction traffic would
incrementally contribute to these impacts; therefore, impacts from construction traffic would be
potentially significant.
B. Threshold 2: Conflict with an applicable congestion management program,
including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand
measures, or other standards established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways.
The city level of service standards are the applicable standard to determine if the project would result in
traffic that would conflict with regional congestion management plans, such as the 2050 Regional
Transportation Plan. Additionally, the SPA Plan and TM would result in a conflict with the 2050 Regional
Transportation Plan if it would not encourage uses of alternative forms of transportation and overall and
reductions in vehicle miles traveled.
Village 8 West would be accessible by bus service, including BRT. Additionally, Class II bicycle facilities
are planned along all circulation element roadways through Village 8 West. Sidewalks would also be
provided throughout Village 8 West and would include bulb-outs at key locations to reduce pedestrian
crossing distances. As discussed under Threshold 1, the proposed transit facilities would reduce total
vehicles trips by approximately 39 percent compared to project with similar land uses that does not
propose the same transit and alternative transportation facilities. Additionally, as discussed in Section
5.10, Global Climate Change, these facilities would reduce the ADT length for Village 8 West to 4.62
miles compared to the regional average daily vehicle trip length of 5.8 miles. Therefore, the project
would not result in any conflicts with the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan goals to reduce vehicle trips
and vehicle miles traveled.
However, as discussed under Threshold 1, implementation of the SPA Plan and TM would have the
potential to exceed the city level of service standards for intersections and roadways under the Existing
Plus Project, Year 2015, Year 2020, Year 2025, and buildout (Year 2030) scenarios. Therefore, the project
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-40
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
would contribute to regional congestion and a potentially significant impact would occur related to level
of service standards.
C. Threshold 3: Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial
safety risks.
Village 8 West is located approximately 1.5 miles to the northeast of Brown Field airport, a City of San
Diego municipal airport. Village 8 West is located within the approach area for Brown Field subject to
over flights from both Brown Field and the Tijuana Airport, a commercial facility just over one mile to
the south of Brown Field. Aircraft operations at Brown Field would be required to comply with all
applicable Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations that are intended to ensure safe operation
of aircraft. Flights to and from the Tijuana Airport in U.S. airspace over the project area would be
required to coordinate with FAA traffic controllers. Additionally, Mexico is rated Category 1, the top
category, in FAA's International Aviation Safety Assessment Program (Aviation Safety Network 2011).
This program focuses on a country's ability to adhere to international standards and recommended
practices for aircraft operations and maintenance established by the United Nation's technical agency
for aviation, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO ) (FAA 2010). With continued compliance
with safety regulations and standards, it is not reasonably foreseeable that continued operations at
Brown Field or the Tijuana Airport would result in a safety hazard to Village 8 West.
However, as discussed in greater detail in Section 5.13, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the project
area is located within the FAA Height Notification Boundary, Part 77 Airspace Surfaces, Airport
Overflight Notification Area for residential development, and Review Area 2 of the Airport Influence
Area. Due to the height limits proposed in the Village 8 West SPA, it is not anticipated that development
of even the tallest structures would result an obstruction to air traffic. However, because the project
area is located within the FAA Height Notification Boundary and Airport Overflight Notification Area,
proper notification in compliance with the Brown Field ALUCP is required to reduce this impact to a less
than significant level.
D. Threshold 4: Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g.
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm
equipment).
The circulation design for the project provides roadways within Vil lage 8 West and connecting to the
surrounding roads. As part of the design review process, site access and circulation Village 8 West would
be reviewed by the City of Chula Vista's Public Works and Engineering Departments. Additionally, the La
Media Road and Main Street urban couplets through the pedestrian-oriented Town Center would
include traffic calming measures to increase safety. Reduced street width, shade trees, minimized
setbacks, and urban uses would be required along the couplet to create a visua l street frame and a
pedestrian friendly atmosphere. This one-way street system would reduce left turn delays and create
safer turning movements at each intersection, which benefits automobile drivers, bicyclists, and
pedestrians. Traffic calming measures would also promote pedestrian and bicycle safety as well as
vehicle safety by controlling the speed and distribution of vehicles travelling throughout Village 8 West.
In addition to urban couplets, Village 8 West would include intersection bulb outs to nar row the through
travel way at intersections, narrow, multi-modal streets to slow vehicular traffic, and multiple
connections to evenly distribute traffic. Thus, the project would not result in significant impacts related
to hazards due to a design feature.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-41
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
As discussed in Section 5.1, Land Use and Planning, implementation of the project would not result in
any land use incompatibilities. The land uses planned for the areas surrounding the project would be
similar to those proposed for Village 8 West and would generate similar types of traffic. As discussed in
Section 5.12, Agricultural Resources, potential agriculture use in Village 8 West would be phased out and
would not be allowed following development of the project. Therefore, hazard impacts due to
incompatible uses would be less than significant.
E. Threshold 5: Result in inadequate emergency access.
As discussed under Threshold 7 in Section 5.13, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, implementation of
the project would not interfere with city emergency response plans because it does not interfere with
any existing roadways or evacuation routes. Evacuation from and emergency response within Village 8
West would be enhanced by the proposed circulation system, which provides multiple accesses to any
point within the site and to the surrounding regional circulation system. Additionally, the circulation
design of the project facilitates emergency vehicle access to all areas of the villages. Individual
developments within Village 8 West would be required to demonstrate adequate emergency access as
part of the city design review process, including review by the Chula Vista Fire Department. In addition,
construction activities including staging would occur in accordance with city requirements, which would
ensure that adequate emergency access would be provided during construction of the project.
Therefore, impacts related to emergency access would be less than significant.
F. Threshold 6: Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs regarding the
circulation network, public transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities, or
otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities.
A consistency analysis of the SPA Plan with applicable General Plan transportation and transit policies is
provided in Table 5.3-22, and a consistency analysis with the GDP is provided in Table 5.3-23. As shown
in these tables, the project would not conflict with any General Plan or GDP policies; therefore, impact
would be less than significant.
Table 5.3-22 Project Consistency with Applicable General Plan Transportation Policies
Policy Project Consistency
Objective LUT 14: Coordinate with appropriate regional and
local agencies to create an effective regional transportation
network that links Chula Vista to the surrounding region and
Mexico.
Policy LUT 14.1: Support the study, design, expansion, and
construction of a regional freeway system that will have the
capacity to carry forecasted regional traffic demand in and
through Chula Vista.
Policy LUT 14.2: Support planning for regional freeways and
state highways to allow mitigation of anticipated impacts from
external trips on the Chula Vista circulation system.
Policy LUT 14.3: Plan for high capacity regional freeway and
Transit First facilities to adequately serve the regional travel
demand resulting from the land uses associated with adjacent
areas.
Consistent. The circulation system proposed for Village 8 West in
Chapter 5 of the SPA Plan, Circulation and Corridor Design, would
connect to the regional transportation network and effectively
link the project area to the region. As discussed in Section
3.5.1.2, Mobility, La Media Road/Otay Valley Road and Main
Street are major streets proposed in the project area that would
connect Village 8 West to surrounding villages. These roadways
would ultimately connect to the SR-125 freeway. Main Street is a
major east-west roadway that would effectively distribute traffic
from Village 8 West and surrounding villages to the SR-125. The
project also proposes residential collector streets and parkway
residential streets. The roadways are sized throughout the area
to have the appropriate capacity to carry traffic in each area. The
proposed circulation network includes sidewalks and trails,
bicycle routes, and transit stops to connect to regional
alternative transportation systems.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-42
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-22 Project Consistency with Applicable General Plan Transportation Policies (continued)
Policy Project Consistency
Policy LUT 14.4: Focus regional traffic corridors traversing the
General Plan area to I-5, I-805, SR- 54, and SR-125. Major east-
west roads should be used to effectively distribute traffic to the
freeways and tollways.
Policy LUT 14.5: Continue to actively participate in regional
organizations and processes to ensure the integration of Chula
Vista circulation system facilities with circulation systems
planned for by other agencies.
Policy LUT 14.6: Define and evaluate quality of life standards for
transportation, and establish an implementation plan for
financing needed facilities.
Policy LUT 14.7: Coordinate with regional agencies to ensure
adequate transportation links with regional population,
employment and activity centers.
Policy LUT 14.8: In order to provide direct access to the
University, RTP, Village 9 town center, and to provide regional
transit service across the Otay Valley, support the construction
of the Rock Mountain and Otay Valley Road interchanges with
SR-125, as warranted in accordance with the City of Chula Vista
Toll Road Agreement with San Diego Expressway Limited
Partnership and Agreement Affecting Real Property, as
amended.
With implementation of mitigation measures 5.3-1 through 5.3-
20, the project would implement or pay its fair share into the
Chula Vista’s Transportation Development Impact Fee program
for intersection and roadway improvements required as a result
of project-generated traffic.
Chapter 5 of the SPA Plan, Circulation and Corridor Design,
defines the quality of life standards for transportation in the area
and the PFFP established the financing plan for transportation
facilities. Besides connecting Village 8 West to the region via the
SR-125, as described above, the proposed circulation network
would connect Village 8 West to employment and activity centers
in surrounding villages.
As discussed above, implementation of the project would include
paying its fair share into the Chula Vista Transportation
Development Impact Fee program for regional transportation
improvements.
Policy LUT 16.3: Provide direct and convenient access to public
transit stops within residential, commercial, and industrial
areas.
Consistent. La Media Road/Otay Valley Road and Main Street are
major streets proposed in the area that would connect land uses
within Village 8 West, and connect Village 8 West to surrounding
villages. Main Street and La Media/Otay Valley Road would
include sidewalks and Class II bike lanes that would connect to
surrounding planning areas.
Policy LUT 16.4: Develop plans, policies, and standards for
enhancing interchanges and bridge crossings along (or
over/under) the I-5, I-805, SR-54, and SR-125 corridors to
support transit, vehicular, non-motorized, and pedestrian
connections.
Consistent. Village 8 West supports implementation of the
overpasses and ramp systems at SR-125 and Main Street and at
Otay Valley Road when the need for these facilities is
demonstrated.
Objective LUT 17: Plan and coordinate development to be
compatible and supportive of planned transit.
Policy LUT 17.1: Designate sufficient land at appropriate
densities to support planned transit and require that
development be transit-oriented, as appropriate to its proximity
to transit facilities.
Policy LUT 17.2: Direct higher intensity and mixed use
developments to areas within walking distance of transit,
including San Diego Trolley stations along E, H, and Palomar
Streets, and new stations along future transit lines, including
BRT.
Policy LUT 17.3: Establish new town centers in the East
Planning Area to be transit-oriented and include a transit stop
or station.
Policy LUT 17.4: Require developers to consult and coordinate
with SANDAG and the City of Chula Vista to ensure that
development is compatible with and supports the planned
implementation of public transit.
Consistent. The project is consistent with these relevant policies
because the inclusion of a couplet system within the Town
Center would create a transit oriented center which would
include a transit station. Village 8 West density would also reflect
the density approved in the GPA/GDPA and is designed to be
transit-oriented. A BRT route and transit station would be located
within Village 8 West and the OLC has been coordinating with
SANDAG regarding the location and design of the BRT route and
transit stations.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-43
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-22 Project Consistency with Applicable General Plan Transportation Policies (continued)
Policy Project Consistency
Objective LUT 18: Reduce traffic demand through
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies,
increased use of transit, bicycles, walking, and other trip
reduction measures.
Policy LUT 18.1: Support and encourage the use of public
transit.
Policy LUT 18.2: Provide an efficient and effective paratransit
service for elderly and handicapped persons unable to use
conventional transit service.
Policy LUT 18.3: Provide and enhance all feasible alternatives to
the automobile, such as bicycling and walking, and encourage
public transit ridership on existing and future transit routes.
Policy LUT 18.4: Use master planning techniques in new
development and redevelopment projects to enable effective
use of public transit.
Policy LUT 18.5: Implement TDM strategies, such as carpooling,
vanpooling, and flexible work hours that encourage alternatives
to driving alone during peak hours.
Policy LUT 18.6: Encourage employer-based TDM strategies,
such as employee transportation allowances; preferential
parking for rideshare vehicles; workplace-based carpool
programs; and shuttle services.
Policy LUT 18.7: Support the location of private “telework”
centers.
Policy LUT 18.8: Encourage establishment of park-and-ride
facilities near or at transit stations, as appropriate to the area's
character and surrounding land uses.
Consistent. Village 8 West would reduce traffic demand and
support the use of public transit by providing a central mixed-use
town center and residential and commercial development
throughout area in order to provide jobs and resident-serving
retail in close proximity to all homes within Village 8 West. All
areas of the project would be accessible to pedestrians and
cyclists, including the proposed transit stops in the Town Center.
Location of the transit stops in the Town Center would encourage
the use of public transit by providing a destination for transit
users outside of the area, and making access to public transit
centrally located and convenient for Village 8 West residents.
Transit stops are also proposed in the surroundings planning
areas to create an accessible transit network to connect the
planning areas within Otay Ranch, and to connect Otay Ranch to
the region.
All sidewalks would be ADA compliant; therefore transit service
would be accessible to handicapped persons. Transit service that
would serve Village 8 West is anticipated to consist of bus
service, including BRT. The front of every Chula Vista Transit bus
has priority seating for our Senior and Disabled riders. All buses
have lift or ramp mechanisms to assist customers in wheelchairs
or with other mobility impairments to board. Many buses also
have a "kneeling" feature that allows the front of the bus to
lower towards the curb, easing the first step into the bus.
"Kneeling" buses are designated at the front door. The
Metropolitan Transit System operates a paratransit service that
currently services the city of Chula Vista. Provision of transit
stops in the Town Center would encourage extension of this
service to Village 8 West.
The SPA Plan cannot implement carpooling, van pooling, flexible
work hours, or other employer-based strategies on behalf of the
employers that would be located within Village 8 West; however,
as discussed above, Village 8 West provides opportunities for
alternative transportation that would reduce vehicle trips.
The SPA Plan states in Section 4.3.7, Parking Lots and Structure,
that a pedestrian-friendly town center must provide adequate
parking. Parking would be provided in surface lots, parking
structures, below grade parking garages or any combination of
these. The SPA Plan includes design guidelines to ensure that
parking areas would be compatible with the surrounding
character and land use. The proposed transit stations would also
be located in the Town Center; therefore, parking would be
available near the transit center.
Objective LUT 20: Make transit-friendly roads a top
consideration in land use and development design.
Policy LUT 20.1: Incorporate transit-friendly and pedestrian-
friendly elements into roadway design standards, such as signal
priority for transit and adequate sidewalk widths for
pedestrians.
Consistent. The SPA Plan is consistent with these relevant
policies because it would incorporate transit and pedestrian
friendly roadway design. Within the project area, each road
would consist of no more than two travel lanes and would
include sidewalks, parallel parking, and a striped bike lane.
Reduced street width, shade trees, minimized setbacks, and
urban uses would be required along the couplet to create a visual
street frame and a pedestrian friendly atmosphere. This one-way
street system would reduce left turn delays and create safer
turning movements at each intersection, which benefits
automobile drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-44
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-22 Project Consistency with Applicable General Plan Transportation Policies (continued)
Policy Project Consistency
Traffic calming measures would also promote pedestrian and
bicycle safety as well as vehicle safety by controlling the speed
and distribution of vehicles travelling through the project area. In
addition to urban couplets, Village 8 West would include
intersection bulb outs to narrow the through travel way at
intersections, narrow, multi-modal streets to slow vehicular
traffic, and multiple connections to evenly distribute traffic.
Objective LUT 23: Promote the use of non-polluting and
renewable alternatives for mobility through a system of bicycle
and pedestrian paths and trails that are safe, attractive and
convenient forms of transportation.
Policy LUT 23.1: Encourage the use of bicycles and walking as
alternatives to driving
Policy LUT 23.2: Foster the development of a system of inter-
connecting bicycle routes throughout the city and region.
Policy LUT 23.3: Preserve, restore, or provide the opportunity
for a cyclist to ride a bicycle to virtually any chosen destination,
in order to make the bicycle a viable transportation alternative.
Policy LUT 23.4: Link major residential areas with principal trip
destinations, such as schools; parks; community centers; and
shopping centers.
Policy LUT 23.5: Provide linkages between bicycle facilities that
utilize circulation element alignments and open space corridors.
Policy LUT 23.6: In addition to using open space corridors, off-
street bicycle trails should use flood control and utility
easements. The trails shall be designed to minimize interaction
with automobile cross traffic.
Policy LUT 23.7: Provide bicycle support facilities at all major
bicycle usage locations.
Policy LUT 23.10: Promote the system of trails envisioned
within the Chula Vista Greenbelt.
Policy LUT 23.11: Implement recommendations of the city
Bikeway Master Plan or Greenbelt Master Plan.
Policy LUT 23.12: Provide opportunities for use of personal
mobility devices.
Policy LUT 23.13: New overpasses and interchanges should be
designed to accommodate bicycles and pedestrians.
Policy LUT 23.14: Require new development projects to provide
internal bikeway systems with connections to the citywide
bicycle networks.
Consistent. The project is consistent with these relevant policies
because it would provide bicycle and walking facilities. Within the
Village 8 West Town Center, on-street bike lanes would be
provided so that bicycles do not conflict with the high levels of
pedestrian activity anticipated in this urban center. The 10-foot
wide, paved trails would run parallel to public roadways and are
shown on the cross section of the adjacent street. Main vehicular
thoroughfares would include dedicated, striped, on-street Class II
bike lanes. Local streets would not provide dedicated lanes for
bicycles; however, the traffic volumes on parkway residential
streets would be low enough to accommodate bicycles as well as
vehicles. The SPA Plan also includes requirements for bicycle
parking in all development zones.
The pedestrian circulation network would include an
interconnected system of village pathways, sidewalks, and rural
trails. A Village Pathway that currently terminates at the south
end of Magdalena Avenue would be extended through Village 8
West and a connection would be provided to Village 8 East via
Street B and Village 3 and 4 via Main Street. The Village Pathways
in Otay Ranch would provide an off-street, interconnected multi-
use trail that allows bicycles and pedestrians to travel between
various village cores and town centers. A greenbelt trail would
begin at the southerly terminus of Street A, follow the alignment
of a proposed sewer main, and would ultimately connect to the
Greenbelt/Otay Valley Regional Park trail system. This trail, which
would double as a utility access road for sewer utilities, would be
open to bicycles as well as pedestrians and non-motorized
vehicles. Some park pathways would be designed to
accommodate bicycles subject to City of Chula Vista approval.
The alignment of these pathways would be determined by the
individual park site master plan.
All streets in Village 8 West would also include a sidewalk,
providing connections between destinations including residential
neighborhoods, the Town Center, parks, schools, and rural trails
through open space. Neighborhoods trails would include off-
street trails that would provide pedestrian connections between
neighborhoods and they would typically occur where direct
connections between the Town Center and adjacent villages are
needed. The intent of Village 8 West would be to promote
walkability by providing more direct pedestrian connections than
would otherwise occur along public roadways.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-45
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-22 Project Consistency with Applicable General Plan Transportation Policies (continued)
Policy Project Consistency
Objective LUT 30: Use parking management to better utilize
parking facilities and implement policies to reduce parking
demand before considering public expenditures for additional
parking facilities.
Policy LUT 30.1: Consider limiting parking in appropriate areas
to discourage single occupant vehicle commuting and to
reinforce non-auto travel modes, but not so limiting as to
adversely affect the viability and vitality of the area.
Policy LUT 30.2: Consider establishment of maximum
allowances for off-street parking spaces in mixed use zones
where parking demand could be offset by close proximity of
uses or availability of transit.
Policy LUT 30.3: Emphasize the provision of short-term parking
(e.g., parking duration limits, time-of-day, restricted parking
zones) over long-term parking in commercial areas.
Consistent. Village 8 West is consistent with this relevant policy
because within the Town Center, building configurations are
limited to those that provide limited or no setbacks, strong
pedestrian-scaled frontages, and opportunities to de-emphasize
parking. Additionally, on-street parking and off-street parking
would be provided at the minimum level necessary, to reduce
the impact of parking lots and structures on the streetscape and
promote the use of bicycles, transit, and alternative modes of
travel.
Objective LUT 31: Provide parking facilities that are
appropriately integrated with land uses, maximize efficiency,
accommodate alternative vehicles, and reduce parking impacts.
Policy LUT 31.1: Strategically locate parking structures to serve
commercial and employment centers, and to provide park and
ride opportunities for use of express shuttle, trolley service, and
other transit.
Policy LUT 31.2: Encourage consolidation of surface parking lots
into structured parking facilities where appropriately located
and well-designed.
Policy LUT 31.3: Provide parking and recharging facilities for
alternative vehicles such, as bicycles and electric and low-
emission vehicles.
Consistent. Village 8 West is consistent with these relevant
policies because the project would provide extensive bicycle
facilities and parking. Within Village 8 West, bicycle parking
facilities would be located in highly visible areas to the greatest
extent feasible in order to minimize theft and vandalism and
encourage use. Bicycle parking would also be located to prevent
parked bicycles from blocking sidewalks and other pedestrian
corridors, maintaining a minimum of four feet for pedestrians to
pass. Streets within Village 8 West would be designed as
‘Complete Streets’ which consider all modes of travel including
automobiles, bicycles, pedestrians, transit, low speed electric
vehicles, and alternative vehicles. Large parking facilities such as
parking structures would only be allowed in the Town Center to
support town center commercial and office development, and to
provide parking close to the proposed transit stop. Parking in all
zones would be required to comply with design requirements to
ensure that parking is well designed and does not interfere with
the public right-of-way.
Objective LUT 32: Evaluate the use and applicability of various
strategies to provide parking.
Policy LUT 32.1: Consider the joint use of parking facilities in
mixed use areas where peak parking occurs at different times of
the day or week and the parking facility is within one quarter
mile of the uses it will serve.
Policy LUT 32.2: Consider the establishment of parking districts
that may include a variety of public parking facilities, including
surface lots and parking structures, to provide parking for a
bounded geographical area.
Policy LUT 32.3: Consider the use of parking credits for
developers in exchange for transit facility placement, bicycle
facilities, and/or monetary contribution toward public parking.
Policy LUT 32.4: Consider the use of in-lieu fees, whereby a
specified amount is submitted to the city for each parking space
not provided on site, which the city shall subsequently use for
the construction of public parking facilities.
Consistent. Village 8 West is consistent with these policies
because parking requirements for uses within the Town Center
would be shared between uses pursuant to the implementation
of a parking district or shared parking agreements approved by
the City of Chula Vista.
Additionally, Village 8 West would establish a shared parking
district for commercial uses that would: 1) allow required parking
to be provided off site; 2) consider shared parking for uses with
different peak periods; and 3) account for available on-street
parking in order to reduce the parking footprint within the Town
Center. The SPA Plan includes parking requirements to ensure
that adequate parking is provided for the proposed land uses.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-46
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-22 Project Consistency with Applicable General Plan Transportation Policies (continued)
Policy Project Consistency
Objective LUT 33: Ensure that parking facilities are
appropriately sited and well-designed in order to minimize
adverse effects on the pedestrian-oriented environment, and to
enhance aesthetic qualities.
Policy LUT 33.1: Off-street surface parking areas should be
located and designed in a manner that supports and does not
conflict with pedestrian activity, such as to the side or rear of
buildings, wherever feasible. In pedestrian-oriented areas,
locate surface parking lots to the rear or side of buildings,
wherever feasible. Strategically locate parking structures to
serve commercial and employment centers, and to provide park
and ride opportunities for use of express shuttle, trolley service,
and other transit.
Policy LUT 33.2: Establish design guidelines for the siting and
creation of parking structures, including the requirement that
parking structures adjacent to street frontage have ground floor
commercial uses along the frontage and that their facades
incorporate design features that enhance the street frontage.
Encourage consolidation of surface parking lots into structured
parking facilities where appropriately located and well-
designed.
Consistent. The SPA Plan is consistent with these relevant
policies because the project would provide parking facilities in a
manner that would enhance aesthetic qualities and minimize
adverse effects on the pedestrian-oriented environment. Section
4.3.7 of the SPA Plan establishes design guidelines for parking
lots and structures. Off-street parking lots are required to be
located behind or to the side of buildings and to be set back from
public rights-of-way. Guidelines for parking structures include
providing a pedestrian interface, such a retail spaces on the
ground floor, attractive design elements, and a pedestrian entry
space. For example, each road within Village 8 West would
consist of no more than two travel lanes and would include
sidewalks, parallel parking, and a striped bike lane. Reduced
street width, shade trees, minimized setbacks, and urban uses
required along the couplet create a visual street frame and a
pedestrian friendly atmosphere. Additionally, on-street parking
and only the minimum required off-street parking would be
provided to reduce the impact of parking lots and structures on
the streetscape and promote the use of bicycles, transit, and
alternative modes of travel.
Objective LUT 63: Provide efficient multi-modal access and
connections to and between activity centers.
Policy LUT 63.1: Provide roads, transit service, bike routes, and
pedestrian pathways that connect activity centers to their
surrounding neighborhoods, adjacent villages, and each other,
such that access is safe and convenient for residents and
visitors.
Consistent. The SPA Plan is consistent with this relevant policy
because the project would provide roads, transit service, bike
routes, and pedestrian pathways to connect activity centers.
Village 8 West has been designed to be transit ready for future
extension of transit service into the area. Transit service would
be provided by BRT or Rapid Bus Service. A pedestrian circulation
system would be constructed and would include an
interconnected system of village pathways, sidewalks, and rural
trails. Additionally, main vehicular thoroughfares would include
dedicated, striped, on-street Class II bike lanes.
Objective LUT 73: Promote alternative modes of transportation,
which are intended to encourage a healthy lifestyle and reduce
reliance on the automobile, and support the viability of transit
through land use distribution and design.
Policy LUT 73.1: Provide for walking and biking on streets
designed to link neighborhoods, activity centers, and
community destinations.
Policy LUT 73.2: Town centers and village cores should include a
transit station that is appropriately sited to increase commuter
ridership and promote activity and viability of nearby
commercial and office developments.
Policy LUT 73.3: Higher residential densities in town centers
and village cores should be located within a one-quarter mile
radius of transit stations.
Policy LUT 73.4: Locate High to Medium-High density
residential within ¼-mile radius to the village core(s), town
center(s) or transit.
Policy LUT 73.5: Locate activity centers adjacent to transit
stations, which should be designed with inviting pedestrian
access and public spaces.
Consistent. The proposed circulation network is designed to be
multi-model, including a safe and efficient network for
pedestrians, bicycles, transit, and LSVs with connections to the
Greenbelt trail system.
Streets within Village 8 West would be designed as ‘Complete
Streets’ which consider all modes of travel including automobiles,
bicycles, pedestrians, transit, LSVs, and alternative vehicles.
Bicycle lanes and sidewalks are proposed on all major roadways,
as well as on off-street village pathway, greenbelt trail, and
regional pathway.
Transit stops for bus service, including BRT, are proposed in the
Town Center, within ¼-mile of residential and commercial
development.
The Town Center is proposed to be a 24-hour activity center and
would include a town square and other public spaces.
The Town Center would be designed to be pedestrian oriented,
including the use of an urban couplet and traffic-calming
measures. As described above, bicycles facilities would be
provided throughout Village 8 West, and a BRT stop is proposed
in the Town Center.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-47
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-22 Project Consistency with Applicable General Plan Transportation Policies (continued)
Policy Project Consistency
Policy LUT 73.6: Use town centers to promote pedestrian travel
within the villages and the use of bicycles and BRT for trips
outside the villages.
Policy LUT 73.7: Incorporate pedestrian-oriented design
features on streets that move vehicular traffic through the town
center's pedestrian environment, including potential use of a
town center arterial couplet design.
Policy LUT 73.8: Incorporate pedestrian-oriented design
features on streets that move vehicular traffic through the town
center's pedestrian environment, including potential use of a
town center arterial couplet design.
Objective LUT 82: Ensure a cohesive relationship between the
town center and adjoining land uses within Village 8.
Policy LUT 82.4: Provide transit service throughout Village 8.
Consistent. A proposed transit stop would be centrally located
within the Town Center and would be accessible to pedestrians
and cyclists.
Table 5.3-23 Project Consistency with Applicable GDP Transportation Policies
Applicable Policies Evaluation of Consistency
Part II, Chapter 1, Section B: Goals, Objectives, and Policies
Goal: Reduce reliance on the automobile and promote
alternative modes of transportation.
Objective: Develop villages and town centers which integrate
residential and commercial uses with a mobility system that
accommodates alternative modes of transportation, including
pedestrian, bicycle, low-speed/neighborhood electric vehicle,
bus, rapid transit, and other modes of transportation.
Objective: Develop residential land uses which encourage the
use of alternative modes of transportation through the
provision of bus and rapid transit right-of-way, and the inclusion
of a bicycle and pedestrian network.
Objective: Commercial uses should be sized to meet the needs
of the immediate and adjacent villages and town centers.
Village and commercial land uses preempt large regional
commercial opportunities within villages and town centers and
relegate them to the EUC or freeway commercial areas.
Objective: Develop the EUC to promote alternative modes of
transportation. Specifically, through the provision of light rail
right-of-way and the incorporation of multi-model access from
residential neighborhoods and villages.
Consistent. Land uses within Village 8 West are designed to
provide for the daily needs of the residents by including uses
such as mixed use, community purpose facility, park and school
uses, The provision for a land use mix that minimizes the need for
automobile travel coupled with the pedestrian oriented design of
the villages. The Town Center incorporates transit routes through
the project area and would accommodate BRT. The SPA Plan
provides for future dedicated transit lanes along Main Street,
through the Town Center. Two stops/stations, one for each
direction of travel are proposed within the Town Center.
Part II, Chapter 1, Section D: Land Use Design, Character, and Policies
1a. Village/Town Center Land Use Policies
Goal: Organize land uses based upon the village/town center
concept to produce a cohesive, pedestrian friendly community.
Encourage non-vehicular trips and foster interaction amongst
residents.
Policy: Connect open spaces, schools, parks and neighborhoods
with convenient and safe pedestrian walkways and bikeways.
Consistent. The project incorporates the village concept, in an
intensified land use pattern. All areas of the plan would be
connected by an extensive sidewalk and bikeway system. These
pedestrian and bicycle routes reinforce a pedestrian friendly
concept as well as promote the use of alternative modes of
transportation. A regional trail would directly connect secondary
areas to the Town Center. The location of medium and high-
density residential, elementary school, shopping, work,
entertainment and neighborhood park uses near the Town
Center would also encourage non-vehicular trips.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-48
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-23 Project Consistency with Applicable GDP Transportation Policies (continued)
Policy Project Consistency
Policy: Pedestrian and bicycle routes shall connect the more
distant portions of a village to the village core. Generally, such
routes shall be co-located with streets, although connections
may be provided along transit corridors or within greenbelts.
Policy: Promenade Streets shall extend from secondary areas
into the village core or town center to accommodate pedestrian
and bike access.
Policy: Non-auto circulation systems, such as pedestrian
walkways and bike ways, shall be provided between villages and
town centers. Where appropriate and feasible, a grade
separated arterial crossings should be provided to encourage
pedestrian activity between villages/town centers.
1f. Transit Policies
Policy: Transit stops and/or stations shall be approximately
located at the SPA level and will be conditioned for dedication
at the Tentative Map level in village core/town center areas.
Policy: Villages and town centers shall provide for a variety of
modes of transportation, including walking, automobiles, low-
speed neighborhood electric vehicles, bus, rail, specialized
transit and bicycles.
Policy: Transportation components, such as park-and-ride
facilities, bus stops, pedestrian bridges and pedestrian
walkways and bike ways, shall be sited and designed to
facilitate connections between transportation modes.
Policy: Provide adequate space for bus service or a feeder
network to support transit within each village core or town
center.
Policy: Locate commercial uses close to primary village transit
stops.
Policy: Small park-and-ride lots for village/town center
residents may be provided within the village core or town
center. Regional surface park-and-ride lots shall be located
outside of villages and town centers, with feeder bus service to
the transit station.
Policy: A transit right-of-way shall be identified at the SPA level
and will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map
level within town center arterials and/or village entry streets
designated as transit routes.
Policy: Bicycle parking shall be provided at transit stations and,
in general, activity nodes throughout the village core or town
center.
Policy: The design of transit facilities should complement the
surrounding architecture.
Consistent. The project proposes transit stops, one in each
direction, on Main Street. Pedestrian, bicycle, LSV, and transit
facilities are also proposed throughout the project area. All areas
of the project are connected by pedestrian and bicycle facilities
and low speed streets, including connections to transit routes.
The SPA Plan provides for future dedicated transit lanes along
Main Street, through the Town Center, to support future bus
service, including BRT.
Consistent. The proposed transit stops are located in the Town
Center, the primary commercial center of the project area.
Parking for transit would be allowed in the Town Center, but a
regional park and ride lot is not proposed. Bicycle parking would
be provided throughout the area. The SPA Plan includes design
guidelines for buildings as well as bus stops and streetscapes to
ensure compatible design.
1g. Village/Town Center Street System Policies
Policy: Access from villages to prime arterials roads should be
limited to maintain prime arterials as high-capacity regional
connections.
Policy: Provide four-lane road connections for pedestrian,
automobile and buses between villages, reflective of
topographic conditions.
Consistent. Access to prime arterial roadways is limited to Main
Street and La Media Road/Otay Valley Road. These roadways
would also be the only through roads in the area. Pedestrian and
bicycled facilities would be provided along all circulation network
roads. The project includes a grid system of streets formed by
urban couplets within the proposed Town Center to provide
pedestrian-friendly access throughout the core area. Other than
the major arterial roads, roads in the area would generally
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-49
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-23 Project Consistency with Applicable GDP Transportation Policies (continued)
Policy Project Consistency
Policy: Reduce through traffic within villages by utilizing two-
lane roads and couplets within villages (except for Village Entry
Streets), and permitting levels of service less than LOS C within
villages. Level of service for roads outside of villages is LOS C,
pursuant to GDP/SRP facility thresholds.
Policy: With the exception of town centers, prohibit direct
routes through villages to discourage through traffic.
Policy: Cul-de-sacs shall be permitted if, at the end of the cul-
de-sacs, pedestrians are provided access to the village core or
other desired destinations. Dead end cul-de-sacs are permitted
only in perimeter locations.
Policy: Streets shall balance the needs of pedestrians, buses,
and automobiles. Intersections shall encourage pedestrian
movement, reduce the number of turning lanes (where
feasible), reduce auto speed while ensuring public safety, and
provide for emergency vehicle access.
Policy: Alleys within the village core may serve residential and
commercial areas and encourage service access at the rear of
buildings.
Policy: Town center arterials serve the town centers by bringing
arterial traffic into the town centers with a pedestrian-oriented
grid system of streets. These arterials provide for pedestrians,
vehicles and transit in a walkable environment. Town center
arterials are typically a pair of two lane one-way streets
(couplets) that provide the equivalent capacity as a four lane
arterial. Couplets allow for integration of pedestrians by
providing slower travel speeds and narrower street width
without reducing overall travel time through the town center.
These pairs of one-way streets allow for better integration of
pedestrian traffic by allowing for slower automobile speeds and
minimizing street crossing widths without reducing road
carrying capacity. This arterial design allows for comfortable
pedestrian movement through the high activity of a town
center. The grid-like pattern of the town center arterial in the
town center also offer more frequent block intersections
promoting more store-front businesses among other mixed-
uses. Shorter block lengths are a feature in the town centers,
which increase the vitality of commercial service areas, and at
the same time avoid “strip commercial” development. The one-
way town center arterial resolves problems experienced on
traditional high volume traffic arterials requiring a wider
roadway.
consist of two lanes. Cul-de-sacs would only be developed in
residential neighborhoods. Pedestrian access and facilities would
also be required through neighborhoods. Alleys would be
permitted in the Town Center to serve commercial development,
and would be required to comply with building and design
regulations. The project proposes complete streets that balance
the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, transit, and vehicles.
Reduced vehicle speeds would be encouraged through the Town
Center to promote pedestrian activity.
1h. Parking Policies
Policy: Parking facilities shall allow for easy pedestrian access.
Policy: Parking facilities shall be segmented into reasonably
sized areas to prevent vast expanses of asphalt.
Policy: Parking facilities shall be located and designed for visual
accessibility to the driving public.
Policy: Parking lots should be designed to accommodate future
redevelopment into buildings with integrated parking
structures.
Consistent. The SPA Plan includes guidelines and regulations for
parking facilities. Street parking would be allowed throughout
the area to promote pedestrian friendly sidewalks. Parking
structures would be permitted in the Town Center to avoid large
lots. Surface parking lots would be located behind or to the side
of buildings to reduce their frontage on the public street. Parking
lots more than 100 feet in length would be avoided. Above-
ground structures would provide a pedestrian interface, including
ground floor retail and pedestrian entry spaces. Shared parking in
encouraged for uses with different peak periods. Primary building
entrances are required to be located on the main street
whenever possible.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-50
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-23 Project Consistency with Applicable GDP Transportation Policies (continued)
Policy Project Consistency
Policy: Parking structures are permitted. Encourage ground
floor retail use.
Policy: On-street parallel or diagonal parking adjacent to
sidewalks is encouraged. On-street parking may be allowed on
the same side of the street as village greens and/or parks.
Policy: Encourage joint use of parking facilities by uses which
have differing peak hours. A reduction of required parking
spaces may be permitted for shared parking programs and
implemented with a joint use agreement.
Policy: Within the village core or town center, parking shall be
located on-street, to encourage pedestrian accessibility, and in
locations which minimize large expanses of asphalt. Parking
may be visually accessible from main thoroughfares, but shall
minimize visibility by locating lots to the rear of buildings
wherever possible.
Policy: Primary building entrances shall be located on the main
street whenever possible. Secondary entrances for large anchor
buildings may be provided from parking lots located at the rear.
Policy: Parking may be provided in structures with potential for
use of the ground level for retail space.
Part II, Chapter 2 - Mobility
Goal: Provide a safe and efficient transportation system within
Otay Ranch with convenient linkages to regional transportation
elements abutting the Otay Ranch.
Objective: Ensure timely provision of adequate local circulation
system capacity to respond to planned growth, maintaining
acceptable levels of service.
Objective: Plan and implement a circulation system such that
the operational goal of LOS C for circulation element arterial
and major roads and intersections can be achieved and
maintained outside village cores and town centers. Sections of
Main Streets and internal village streets/ roads are not
expected to meet this standard.
Objective: Encourage other transportation modes through
street/road design standards within the village, while
accommodating the automobile. Design standards are not
focused on achieving level of service standards or providing
auto convenience.
Objective: Provide an efficient circulation system that
minimizes impacts on residential neighborhood and
environmentally sensitive areas.
Policy: Otay Ranch shall contribute its fair share toward
financing the transportation facilities necessary to serve the
demand created by the development of Otay Ranch.
Policy: Support the design and construction of a regional
circulation system that will have the capacity to carry the
forecasted regional demand volumes through the area.
Consistent. Streets surrounding and internal to Village 8 West are
designed in compliance with the goals and objectives of the GDP.
Street design and phasing strives to provide balanced, efficient,
and appropriate levels of service for all modes of transportation.
The proposed circulation system provides for accommodation of
public transportation. Internal streets would be designed to
accommodate bicycles, and a series of pedestrian paths are
provided throughout the village to provide alternatives to
automobile travel. The Village 8 West plan utilizes various
circulation elements such as couplets and bulb-outs to promote
pedestrian safety and comfort. The proposed mitigation
measures for Threshold 1 require the applicant to implement
traffic improvements and to pay the development’s fair share of
regional circulation improvements.
Goal: Achieve a balanced transportation system which
emphasizes alternatives to automobile use and is responsive to
the needs of residents.
Objective: Study, identify, and designate corridors, if
appropriate, for transit facilities.
Consistent. The land plan for Village 8 West is intended to de-
emphasize automobile use and promote transit opportunities
with a balanced transportation system and a mixed-use town
center. Pedestrian and bicycle circulation would be provided to
all areas. Village 8 West has provided for future dedicated transit
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-51
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-23 Project Consistency with Applicable GDP Transportation Policies (continued)
Policy Project Consistency
Policy: Support and encourage the use of alternative forms of
transportation such as public transit and car/van pools to
reduce both roadway congestion and pollution.
Objective: Promote alternative forms of transportation, such as
bicycle and low-speed electric vehicle paths, riding and hiking
trails, and pedestrian walkways as an integral part of the
circulation system.
Policy: Promote alternative forms of transportation, such as
bicycle and low-speed electric vehicle paths, riding and hiking
trails, and pedestrian walkways as an integral part of the
circulation system.
Policy: Provide a thorough and comprehensive bicycle
circulation system, emphasizing bicycle paths segregated from
vehicular traffic between major destinations within and
adjacent to the Otay Ranch Project Area.
Policy: Develop patterns of land use which will allow the
elimination of automobile trips and encourage pedestrian
movement through pedestrian-friendly environments and
proper land use mix.
lanes and two stops/stations (one in each direction) along Main
Street, through the Town Center to implement these objectives.
Part II, Chapter 6 – Air Quality
Goal: Create a safe and efficient multi-modal transportation
network which minimizes the number and length of single
passenger vehicle trips.
Objective: Minimize the number and length of single passenger
vehicle trips to and from employment and commercial centers
to achieve an average of 1.5 persons per passenger vehicle
during weekday commute hours.
Policy: Encourage, as appropriate, alternative transportation
incentives offered to employees, alternative work hour
programs, alternative transportation promotional materials,
information on car pool and van pool matching services, transit
pass information, space for car pool and van pool riders-wanted
advertisements, information about transit and rail service, as
well as information about bicycle facilities, routes, storage, and
location of nearby shower and locker facilities.
Policy: Promote telecommuting and teleconferencing programs
and policies in employment centers.
Policy: Establish or participate in education based commute
programs, which minimize the number and length of single
passenger vehicle trips.
Policy: Provide on-site amenities in commercial and
employment centers, to include childcare facilities, post offices,
banking services, cafeterias/delis/ restaurants, etc.
Policy: Should Otay Ranch include a college or university, the
facility should comply with Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS)
TDM strategies relating to such uses.
Consistent. The SPA Plan incorporates a planned regional transit-
corridor, accommodating a bus line and stops with an extensive
system of pedestrian and bike paths. Employment and
commercial centers would be located within the Town Center.
Close proximity between work, shopping, and public facilities
within the Town Center and surrounding area would reduce long
trips out of the community for these needs and higher density
development would reduce trips altogether by making walking
and transit a viable alternative.
Objective: Expand the capacity of both the highway and transit
components of the regional transportation system to minimize
congestion and facilitate the movement of people and goods.
Consistent. Development of Village 8 West would contribute to
highway and transit improvements through the Transportation
Development Impact Fee (TDIF) and contribution of its fair share
to regional circulation improvements, as required as mitigation
for significant impacts to the regional circulation system
(Threshold 1).
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-52
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-23 Project Consistency with Applicable GDP Transportation Policies (continued)
Policy Project Consistency
Objective: Provide a safe, thorough and comprehensive bicycle
network which includes bicycle paths between major
destinations within, and adjacent to, Otay Ranch.
Consistent. The SPA Plan requires bicycle access to all internal
streets. A network of bicycle lanes along major perimeter roads
offers routes to destinations outside of the villages.
Objective: Design arterial and major roads and their traffic
signals to minimize travel time, stops and delays.
Policy: Bicycle facilities should be designated for bicycle use,
and pedestrian facilities for pedestrian use to the extent
necessary to provide safe, accessible facilities.
Policy: Bicycling shall be promoted through bicycle lane maps
and bicycle destination signage.
Policy: Provide secure bicycle storage facilities at transit stops,
and employment and retail centers.
Policy: Convenient bicycle access shall be provided to transit
nodes.
Consistent. The major roads internal to Village 8 West have been
designed in accordance with city standards. Traffic signals would
be located as determined by the traffic impact analysis (Table
5.3-21) to facilitate traffic flow and to provide access to
neighboring land uses.
Objective: Design arterial and major roads and their traffic
signals to minimize travel time, stops and delays.
Policy: Optimize traffic signals control systems at all activity
centers to minimize travel time, stops and delays. Consider
providing priority signal treatment for tenant systems.
Policy: Minimize the number of ingress and egress to major
arterial roads.
Policy: Traffic signals at the street end of freeway on and off-
ramps shall be coordinated and integrated with the surrounding
street systems.
Policy: Promote street design to give first priority to transit
vehicles.
Consistent. The traffic impact analysis determined which
intersections in the project area would require a traffic signal.
See Table 5.3-21.
Objective: Facilitate access to public transit
Policy: Bus facilities, park-and-ride lots and other ridesharing
facilities should be addressed early in the design of villages.
Policy: Bus shelters and sidewalks should be designed for
transit rider and pedestrian safety, by being well-lit, secure and
free of physical barriers.
Policy: Streets and intersections used by transit vehicles should
be built to accommodate the weight and size of these larger
vehicles.
Policy: Streets should consider transit circulation patterns,
minimizing turning movements between stops.
Policy: Bicycle lanes, and secure bike racks/storage areas should
be located near transit stops.
Consistent. Pedestrian and bicycle paths would link all uses in
Village 8 West to public transit lines. A transit stop would be
located in the Town Center and additional bus stops will be
provided around and/or within the surrounding villages to offer
residents and area employees an alternative mode of
transportation.
Objective: Encourage pedestrian traffic as an alternative to
single vehicle passenger travel.
Policy: Sidewalks should directly connect schools, parks, open
spaces and transit facilities and village core areas.
Policy: Distances between higher density residential areas and
bus stops should reflect the average walking distances of
pedestrians (approximately 1/4 mile).
Policy: Provide multiple pedestrian area walkways to residential
areas to reduce walking distances.
Consistent. The extensive system of trails and pathways
throughout Village 8 West would provide pedestrian and bicycle
access to destinations such as the Town Center, schools and
parks, and neighboring land uses. The mixed-use town center
concept encourages pedestrian activity through design by
combining uses within walking distance.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-53
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-23 Project Consistency with Applicable GDP Transportation Policies (continued)
Policy Project Consistency
Policy: Access between a transit stop and the entrance to a
building or cluster of buildings should be clearly visible and as
direct as possible.
Policy: Buildings should be connected to abutting land uses
with paved walkways.
Policy: Buffer walkways with landscaping such as berms, trees
and other vegetation.
Policy: Scale the size of facilities, including walkways, to
correspond to anticipated pedestrian volumes and include
signs, benches and trash receptacles.
Policy: Provide well-equipped pedestrian facilities at transit
stops, including shelters to protect patrons from the weather,
benches with seat backs, lighting, landscaping and community
information.
Objective: Locate and design buildings within cores to facilitate
transit and pedestrian access.
Consistent. Buildings within Village 8 West would be clustered to
minimize walking distances and oriented to the street to
encourage pedestrian access. Paths within the Town Center
would provide links to future public transit stations.
Objective: Manage parking facilities transit, ridesharing and
pedestrian access.
Objective: Manage parking facilities to encourage a reduction in
the number of single vehicle trips.
Policy: Locate parking to the sides and backs of buildings so that
access from public transportation does not require walking
through large parking lots to reach building entrances.
Policy: Allow preferential (free or reduced fee parking) parking
for carpools and vanpools, near entrances to activity centers.
Policy: Joint parking is strongly encouraged for proximate uses.
Retail, office, entertainment, and some housing could share
parking areas and quantities.
Consistent. Parking areas within Village 8 West would be located
to maintain a pedestrian-oriented village streetscape and direct
access. Preferential parking is encouraged. Parallel parking will be
provided on public streets and within parking lots and/or
structures. Joint parking use may be proposed in the Town
Center.
Objective: Configure internal village streets to give pedestrian
traffic a priority.
Policy: Arterials should not traverse village cores.
Policy: Provide multiple routes to village core areas.
Policy: Encourage the extensive planting of street trees, while
remaining consistent with water conservation goals.
Consistent. Village streets would be designed for direct access
and pedestrian comfort with sidewalks, landscaping, and street
furnishings. Streets may be narrowed to slow traffic and de-
emphasize the automobile. Bulb-outs at intersections would
reduce vehicle speeds and improve pedestrian visibility.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-54
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
5.3.4 Level of Significance Prior to Mitigation
A. Traffic and Level of Service Standards
1. Access and Frontage
According to Section 12.24 of the City’s municipal code, access related impacts would occur if access and
frontage improvements are not provided concurrent with development; therefore, a potentially
significant impact would occur.
2. Intersections
a. Existing Plus Project
Under the Existing Plus Project scenario, the following intersections would experience a direct impact
from implementation of the project:
■ Olympic Parkway/I-805 northbound ramps (AM – LOS F)
■ Main Street /Magdalena Avenue (AM – LOS E, PM – LOS F)
However, the project is planned to be constructed in a series of phases over a period of up to 20 years.
This phasing would not require construction of all circulation improvements to address these impacts at
once because the increase in trips as a result of the project would be phased along with development.
Rather, such improvements would be constructed as is needed to mitigate impact of phased
development, as discussed in the Year 2015, Year 2020, Year 2025, and Year 2030 scenarios.
b. Year 2015
Under the Year 2015 scenario, no direct impacts to intersections would occur from implementation of
the project. However, one intersection would experience a cumulative impact:
■ Olympic Parkway/I-805 northbound ramps (AM – LOS F) (0.6%)
c. Year 2020
Under the Year 2020 scenario, the following intersection would experience a direct impact from
implementation of the project:
■ Olympic Parkway/Brandywine Avenue (PM – LOS F)
Under the Year 2020 scenario, the following intersection would experience a cumulative impact:
■ Olympic Parkway/I-805 northbound ramps (AM – LOS F)
d. Year 2025
Under the Year 2025 scenario, the following intersections would experience a direct impact from
implementation of the project:
■ Birch Road/La Media Road (AM – LOS F, PM – LOS F)
■ Birch Road/Eastlake Parkway (AM – LOS F, PM – LOS F)
■ Main Street/Eastlake Parkway (AM – LOS F, PM – LOS F)
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-55
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
e. Year 2030
Under the Year 2030 scenario, the following intersections would experience a direct impact from
implementation of the project:
■ Birch Road/La Media Road (AM – LOS F, PM – LOS F)
■ Birch Road/SR-125 northbound ramps (AM – LOS F)
■ Birch Road/Eastlake Parkway (AM – LOS F, PM – LOS E)
■ Main Street/I-805 northbound ramps (PM – LOS E)
■ Main Street/La Media Couplet
Westbound Main Street/northbound La Media Road (AM – LOS F)
Eastbound Main Street/southbound La Media Road (AM – LOS F, PM – LOS F)
Eastbound Main Street/northbound La Media Road (AM – LOS F)
■ Main Street/Magdalena Avenue (AM – LOS F, PM – LOS F)
■ Main Street/Eastlake Parkway (AM – LOS F)
Under the Year 2030 scenario, the following intersection would experience a cumulative impact:
■ Main Street/I-805 southbound ramps (PM – LOS E)
Based on the ILV Analysis, a significant direct impact would occur to the I-805 southbound ramps at
Main Street, and a cumulative impact would occur to the I-805 northbound ramps at Main Street.
3. Roadway Segments
a. Existing Plus Project
Under the Existing Plus Project scenario, the following roadway segments would experience a direct
impact from implementation of the project:
■ Olympic Parkway: I-805 to Brandywine Avenue (LOS E)
■ Olympic Parkway: Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road (LOS E)
■ Olympic Parkway: Heritage Road to La Media Road (LOS F)
■ Magdalena Avenue: Birch Road to Main Street (LOS F)
However, the project is planned to be constructed in a series of phases over a period of up to 20 years.
This phasing would not require construction of all circulation improvements to address these impacts at
once because the increase in trips as a result of the project would be phased along with development .
Rather, such improvements would be constructed as is needed to mitigate impact of phased
development, as discussed in the Year 2015, Year 2020, Year 2025, and Year 2030 scenarios.
b. Year 2015
Under the Year 2015 scenario, no direct or cumulative impacts to roadway segments would occur from
implementation of the project. However, a potentially significant impact would occur related to
compliance with the GMO.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-56
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
c. Year 2020
Under the Year 2020 scenario, the following roadway segment would experience a direct impact from
implementation of the project:
■ Olympic Parkway: Heritage Road to La Media Road (LOS E)
Under the Year 2020 scenario, the following roadway segments would experience a cumulative impact:
■ Olympic Parkway: I-805 northbound ramps to Brandywine Avenue (LOS D)
■ Olympic Parkway: Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road (LOS E)
■ Heritage Road: Main Street to Entertainment Circle (LOS F)
■ Heritage Road: Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas (LOS F)
d. Year 2025
Under the Year 2025 scenario, the following roadway segments would experience a direct impact from
implementation of the project:
■ Birch Road: La Media Road to SR-125 (LOS F)
■ Magdalena Avenue: Birch Road to Main Street (LOS F)
■ Eastlake Parkway: Birch Road to Main Street (LOS F)
Under the Year 2025 scenario, the following roadway segment would experience a cumulative impact:
■ Olympic Parkway: Heritage Road to La Media Road (LOS F)
e. Year 2030
Under the Year 2030 scenario, the following roadway segments would experience a direct impact from
implementation of the project:
■ Main Street: I-805 to Brandywine Avenue (LOS D)
■ Main Street: Brandywine to Heritage Road (LOS D)
Under the Year 2030 scenario, the following roadway segments would experience a cumulative impact
from implementation of the project:
■ Birch Road: La Media Road to SR-125 (LOS F)
■ Birch Road: SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway (LOS F)
■ Heritage Road: Main Street to Entertainment Circle (LOS E)
■ Heritage Road: Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas (LOS D)
■ Eastlake Parkway: Birch Road to Main Street (LOS D)
4. Circulation System Assumptions
If the assumed roadway improvements are not in place prior to commencement of each scenario,
additional traffic impacts could occur. Therefore, a potentially significant impact would occur if assumed
improvements are not developed as prescribed in the traffic impact analysis.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-57
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
B. Congestion Management
The project would have the potential to exceed the city level of service standards under the Existing Plus
Project, Year 2015, Year 2020, Year 2025, and Year 2030 scenarios. Impacts related to congestion
management would be significant.
C. Air Traffic Patterns
Potentially significant impacts could result from the location of structures proposed in Village 8 West
within a FAA notification area.
D. Road Safety
Implementation of the project would not result in a significant direct impact related to road safety.
Cumulative impacts are addressed in Chapter 6, Cumulative Impacts.
E. Emergency Access
Implementation of the project would not result in a significant direct impact related emergency access.
Cumulative impacts are addressed in Chapter 6, Cumulative Impacts.
F. Consistency with Transportation Policies
Implementation of the project would not result in a significant direct impact related consistency with
transportation policies. Cumulative impacts are addressed in Chapter 6, Cumulative Impacts.
5.3.5 Mitigation Measures
A. Traffic and Level of Service Standards
The following mitigation measures have been identified to reduce intersection, roadway, and ILV
impacts associated with construction and operation of the land uses proposed in the SPA Plan and TM to
below a level of significance.
1. Existing Plus Project
The project is planned to be constructed in a series of phases over a period of up to 20 years. This
phasing would not require construction of all circulation improvements to address these impacts at once
because the increase in trips as a result of the project would be phased along with development. Such
improvements would be constructed as is needed to mitigate impact of phased development, as
discussed in the Year 2015, Year 2020, Year 2025, and Year 2030 scenarios. Therefore, the mitigation
measures identified for the Year 2015, Year 2020, Year 2025, and Year 2030 scenarios would mitigate
intersection and roadway segment impacts that would occur under the existing plus project scenario.
2. Growth Management Ordinance Compliance (Section 19.09 of the CVMC)
5.3-1 Olympic Parkway: Heritage Road to Oleander Avenue: Prior to the issuance of the building
permit for the 2,463rd dwelling unit for development east of I-805 (commencing from April 4,
2011), the applicant may:
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-58
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
i. Prepare a traffic study that demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, that the
circulation system has additional capacity without exceeding the Growth Management
Ordinance traffic threshold standards; or
ii. Demonstrate that other improvements are constructed which provide the additional
necessary capacity to comply with the Growth Management Ordinance traffic threshold to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer; or
iii. Agree to the City Engineer's selection of an alternative method of maintaining Growth
Management Ordinance traffic threshold compliance; or
iv. Enter into agreement, approved by the City, with other Otay Ranch applicants that alleviates
congestion and achieves Growth Management Ordinance traffic threshold compliance for
Olympic Parkway. The agreement will identify the deficiencies in transportation
infrastructure that will need to be constructed, the parties that will construct said needed
infrastructure, a timeline for such construction, and provide assurances for construction, in
accordance with the city's customary requirements, for said infrastructure.
If Growth Management Ordinance compliance cannot be achieved through i, ii, iii, or iv above,
then the City may, in its sole discretion, stop issuing new building permits within the project
area, after building permits for 2,463 dwelling units have been issued for any development east
of I-805 after April 4, 2011, until such time that Growth Management Ordinance traffic
threshold standard compliance can be assured to the satisfaction of the City Manager.
These measures shall constitute full compliance with growth management objectives and
policies in accordance with the requirements of the General Plan, Chapter 10 with regard to
traffic thresholds set forth in the Growth Management Ordinance.
a. On-site Circulation Mitigation
5.3-2 Main Street/La Media Road Intersection: Prior to the issuance of the final map that contains
the first equivalent dwelling unit, the applicant shall secure or construct a traffic signal at the
intersection of Main Street and La Media Road.
5.3-3 Main Street/Magdalena Avenue Intersection: Prior to the issuance of the final map that
contains the first equivalent dwelling unit, the applicant shall secure or construct the west leg of
this intersection and modify existing striping to provide access to Village 8 West. The applicant
shall secure or construct a stop sign on the southbound approach.
5.3-4 Main Street: Prior to the issuance of the final map that contains the first equivalent dwelling
unit, the applicant shall secure or construct Main Street from La Media Road to Magdalena
Avenue as a two-lane, two-way street to provide access to Village 8 West.
5.3-5 La Media Road: Prior to the issuance of the final map that contains the first equivalent dwelling
unit, the applicant shall secure or construct La Media Road from existing terminus south of
Santa Luna Street to Planning Areas N, I and J south of Main Street as a two-lane, two-way street
to provide access to Village 8 West.
5.3-6 Otay Valley Road: Prior to the issuance of the final map that contains the 302nd equivalent
dwelling unit, the applicant shall secure or construct Otay Valley Road from south of Main Street
to Village 8 West Street A as four-lane major roadway, or construct the improvement at the first
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-59
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
final map for the applicable planning areas as listed in Table 4.1.4 of the Public Facilities Finance
Plan, whichever comes first.
5.3-7 Main Street (La Media Road to Magdalena Avenue): Prior to the issuance of the final map that
contains the 1,388th equivalent dwelling unit, the applicant shall secure or construct the
remaining two lanes of Main Street through the couplet, install traffic signals at new couplet
intersections, and restripe Main Street as a one-way segment for each leg of couplet, or
construct the improvements at the first final map for the applicable planning areas as listed in
Table 4.1.4 of the Public Facilities Finance Plan, whichever comes first.
5.3-8 La Media Road: Prior to the issuance of the final map that contains the 1,388th equivalent
dwelling unit, the applicant shall secure or construct the remaining two lanes of La Media Road
through the couplet, install traffic signals at new couplet intersections, and restripe La Media
Road as a one-way segment for each leg of couplet, or construct the improvements at the first
final map for the applicable planning areas as listed in Table 4.1.4 of the Public Facilities Finance
Plan, whichever comes first.
5.3-9 Otay Valley Road: Prior to the issuance of the final map that contains the 1,388th equivalent
dwelling unit, the applicant shall secure or construct Otay Valley Road as a four -lane major
roadway from Village 8 West Street A to the Village 8 West eastern project boundary and install
stop control on side streets until a traffic signal is warranted, or construct the improvements at
the first final map for the applicable planning areas as listed in Table 4.1.4 of the Public Facilities
Finance Plan, whichever comes first.
5.3-10 Main Street/Magdalena Avenue Intersection: Prior to the issuance of the final map that
contains the 1,388th equivalent dwelling unit, the applicant shall re-stripe the Main
Street/Magdalena Avenue intersection to include dual eastbound left turn lanes and one
eastbound through lane, and secure or construct a traffic signal, or construct the improvements
at the first final map for the applicable planning areas as listed in Table 4.1.4 of the Public
Facilities Finance Plan, whichever comes first.
5.3-11 Village 8 West Street A: Prior to the issuance of the final map that contains the 2,234th
equivalent dwelling unit, the applicant shall secure or construct Street A as a local street from
Main Street to Otay Valley Road and provide signalized access at Otay Valley Road and at Main
Street, or construct the improvements at the first final map for the applicable planning areas as
listed in Table 4.1.4 of the Public Facilities Finance Plan (whichever comes first).
b. Direct Impact Mitigation
5.3-12 Olympic Parkway/Brandywine Avenue Intersection: Prior to the issuance of the final map that
contains the 1,388nd equivalent dwelling unit, the applicant shall: 1) secure or construct a
northbound right turn overlap phase to reduce delay to the northbound right turning volume
and provide a overall capacity improvement to the intersection, and 2) secure or construct the
extension of the westbound left turn pocket, if not already completed by 2015.
5.3-13 Olympic Parkway: Heritage Road to La Media Road: Prior to the issuance of the final map that
contains the 1,388nd equivalent dwelling unit, the applicant shall secure or construct Santa
Victoria Road from Heritage Road to La Media Road and shall construct Heritage Road from
Olympic Parkway to Santa Victoria Road.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-60
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
5.3-14 Birch Road/La Media Road, Birch Road/Eastlake Parkway, and Main Street/Eastlake Parkway
Intersections; Birch Road from La Media to SR-125; Magdalena Avenue from Birch Road to
Main Street; and Eastlake Parkway from Birch Road to Main Street: Prior to the issuance of the
final map that contains the 2,234th equivalent dwelling unit, the applicant shall secure or
construct Main Street from the existing terminus east of Village 8 West to Eastlake Parkway,
including the construction of an overcrossing at SR-125.
5.3-15 Birch Road/La Media Road, Birch Road/SR-125 Northbound Ramps, Birch Road/Eastlake
Parkway, Main Street/I-805 Southbound Ramps, and Main Street/I-805 Northbound Ramps
Intersections; Birch Road, La Media to SR-125; Birch Road, SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway; Main
Street, I-805 to Brandywine Avenue; and Main Street, Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road :
Prior to the issuance of the final map that contains the 2,610th equivalent dwelling unit, the
applicant shall construct SR-125 northbound and southbound ramps at Main Street.
5.3-16 Main Street/La Media Road Couplet, Main Street/Magdalena Avenue, and Main Street/
Eastlake Parkway Intersections: Prior to the issuance of the final map that contains the 2,610th
equivalent dwelling unit, the applicant shall secure or construct Otay Valley Road from the
Village 8 West eastern boundary to Village 9 Street A, including the construction of an
overcrossing at SR-125.
c. Cumulative Impact Mitigation
5.3-17 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the applicant shall pay their fair share into Chula
Vista’s Transportation Development Impact Fee program for cumulative impacts related to:
i. Olympic Parkway/I-805 northbound ramps intersection
ii. Olympic Parkway: I-805 to Brandywine roadway segment
iii. Olympic Parkway: Brandywine to Heritage Road roadway segment
iv. Olympic Parkway: Heritage Road to La Media Road
v. Heritage Road: Main Street to Entertainment Circle roadway segment
vi. Heritage Road: Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas roadway segment
vii. Eastlake Parkway: Birch Road to Main Street roadway segment
d. Circulation System Assumptions
5.3-18 The Year 2020 scenario assumes the following roadway improvements:
i. Construction of Main Street from Village 9 Street A to Eastlake Parkway as a six-lane
gateway
ii. Construction of Otay Valley Road, from Village 9 Street A to the University site four-lane
major street.
If the project equivalent dwelling unit limit for study Year 2015 (302 equivalent dwelling units) is
exceeded prior to these roadway segments being constructed and open to traffic, then one of
the following steps shall be taken as determined by the City Engineer:
i. Development in Village 8 West shall stop until those assumed future roadways are
constructed by others; or
ii. City and the applicant shall meet to determine the need for the incomplete roadway
segments. A number of factors, including changes to the tolling structure at SR-125, may
affect the traffic patterns in the Otay Ranch. Additional traffic analysis of the roadway
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-61
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
network and levels of service assessment may be necessary to determine if such
improvements are necessary and the scope and timing of additional circulation
improvements; or
iii. Applicant shall construct the missing roadway links and receive a transportation
development impact fee credit for those improvements as applicable; or
iv. An alternative measure is selected by the city in accordance with the city of Chula Vista
Growth Management Ordinance.
v. All to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
5.3-19 The Year 2025 scenario assumes the following intersection and roadway improvements:
i. Construction of Olympic Parkway/Santa Victoria intersection
ii. Construction of Santa Victoria/Heritage Road intersection
iii. Construction of Heritage Road from Olympic Parkway to Main Street; re-stripe southbound
Heritage Road from Olympic Parkway to Main Street to include dual left turn lanes, three
through lanes, and one right turn lane
iv. Widening of Heritage Road from Main Street to Avenida de la Vistas from a Class II collector
to a six-lane prime arterial.
If the project equivalent dwelling unit limit for study Year 2020 (1,388 equivalent dwelling units)
is exceeded prior to these intersections or roadway segments being constructed and open to
traffic, then one of the following steps shall be taken as determined by the City Engineer:
i. Development in Village 8 West shall stop until those assumed future roadways are
constructed by others; or
ii. City and the applicant shall meet to determine the need for the incomplete roadway
segments. A number of factors, including changes to the tolling structure at SR-125, may
affect the traffic patterns in the Otay Ranch. Additional traffic analysis of the roadway
network and levels of service assessment may be necessary to determine if such
improvements are necessary and the scope and timing of additional circulation
improvements; or
iii. Applicant shall construct the missing roadway links and receive a transportation
development impact fee credit for those improvements as applicable; or
iv. An alternative measure is selected by the city in accordance with the Chula Vista Growth
Management Ordinance.
v. All to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
5.3-20 The Year 2030 scenario assumes the following roadway improvement:
i. Construction of Main Street from Heritage Road to La Media Road as a six-lane prime
arterial
If the project equivalent dwelling unit limit for study Year 2025 (2,234 equivalent dwelling unit)
is exceeded prior to this roadway segment being constructed and open to traffic, then one of
the following steps shall be taken as determined by the City Engineer:
i. Development in Village 8 West shall stop until the assumed future roadway is constructed
by others; or
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-62
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
ii. City and the applicant shall meet to determine the need for the incomplete roadway
segment. A number of factors, including changes to the tolling structure at SR-125, may
affect the traffic patterns in the Otay Ranch. Additional traffic analysis of the roadway
network and levels of service assessment may be necessary to determine if such
improvements are necessary and the scope and timing of additional circulation
improvements; or
iii. Applicant shall construct the missing roadway link and receive a transportation
development impact fee credit for those improvements as applicable; or
iv. An alternative measure is selected by the city in accordance with the Chula Vista Growth
Management Ordinance.
v. All to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
B. Congestion Management
The project would have the potential to exceed the city level of service standards under the Existing Plus
Project, Year 2015, Year 2020, Year 2025, and Year 2030 scenarios. Impacts related to congestion
management would be significant. Direct and cumulative congestion management impacts would be
mitigated with measures 5.3-1 through 5.3-20.
C. Air Traffic Patterns
Mitigation measures 5.13-2 through 5.13-4 in Section 5.13, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, would
reduce impacts related to air traffic patterns.
D. Road Safety
No mitigation measures are required.
E. Emergency Access
No mitigation measures are required.
F. Consistency with Transportation Policies
No mitigation measures are required.
5.3.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation
A. Traffic and Level of Service Standards
Table 5.3-24 compares the calculated level of service at the impacted intersections with and without
mitigation. Table 5.3-25 compares the calculated level of service at the impacted roadway segments
with and without mitigation. TDIF fees paid by the project would not directly result in a change in delay
or level of service at an intersection or roadway; therefore, mitigation measures requiring TDIF payment
are not included in Tables 5.3-24 and 5.3-25. Table 27, 2030 Study Intersections LOS With Mitigation,
and Table 28, 2030 Study Roadway Segment LOS With Mitigation, in Appendix B provide the level of
service for all study area intersections and roadway segments following mitigation. With
implementation of mitigation measures 5.3-1 through 5.3-20, roadway and intersection impacts related
to the implementation of the SPA Plan and TM would be reduced to below a level of significance. The
mitigated Year 2030 circulation network is shown in Figure 5.3-5.
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-63
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-24 Recommended Mitigation Measures – Intersections
Location
Study Year LOS
Impact Recommended Mitigation
LOS with Mitigation
AM Delay
– LOS
PM Delay
– LOS
AM Delay
– LOS
PM Delay
– LOS
2015 (302 Equivalent Dwelling Units)
The cumulative impact to Olympic Pkwy/I-805 northbound ramps would be mitigated by the TDIF fee.
2020 (1,388 Equivalent Dwelling Units)
Olympic Pkwy/
Brandywine Ave 42.9 – D 80.4 – F Direct
Mitigation measure 5.3-12:
Install northbound right turn
overlap and extend
westbound left turn pocket.
42.9 – D 46.4 – D
The cumulative impact to Olympic Pkwy/I-805 northbound ramps would be mitigated by the TDIF fee.
2025 (2,234 Equivalent Dwelling Units)
Birch Road/La Media Road 234.8 – F 190.5 – F Direct Mitigation measure 5.3-14:
Construct Main Street from
Village 8 West eastern
boundary to Eastlake Parkway
including bridge over SR-125.
37.9 – D 37.1 – D
Birch Road/Eastlake Pkwy 443.0 – F 454.5 – F Direct 39.0 – D 40.3 – D
Main Street/Eastlake Pkwy 274.4 – F 242.8 – F Direct 24.6 – C 24.1 – C
2030 (2,610 Equivalent Dwelling Units)
Birch Road/La Media Road 91.0 – F 116.2 – F Direct
Mitigation measure 5.3-15:
Construct SR-125 northbound
and southbound ramps at
Main Street.
37.6 – D 41.9 – D
Birch Road/
SR-125 NB ramps
112.4 – F 31.8 - C Direct 13.0 – B 6.2 – A
Birch Road/Eastlake Pkwy 117.2 – F 65.8 – E Direct 37.2 – D 38.7 – D
Main Street /
I-805 SB ramps
46.2 – D 55.9 – E Cumulative 34.5 – C 55.0 – D
Main Street/
I-805 NB ramps
39.6 – D 57.8 – E Direct 39.2 – D 54.7 – D
Main Street/La Media Road Couplet
WB Main Street/
NB La Media
103.2 – F 48.0 – D Direct
Mitigation measure 5.3-16:
Construct Otay Valley Road
from Village 8 West eastern
boundary to Village 9 Street A
including SR-125 overcrossing.
43.0 – D 41.1 – D
EB Main Street/
SB La Media
140.3 – F 95.2 – F Direct 44.0 – D 47.5 – D
EB Main Street/
NB La Media
80.9 – F 42.5 - D Direct 26.7 – C 36.1 – D
Main Street /
Magdalena Avenue
131.3 – F 143.8 – F Direct 32.1 – C 35.7 – D
Main Street/Eastlake Pkwy 141.9 – F 52.1 – D Direct 52.5 – D 27.2 – C
NB = northbound; SB = southbound; WB = westbound; EB = eastbound
Source: RBF 2013
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-64
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Table 5.3-25 Recommended Mitigation Measures – Roadway Segments
Study Roadway Segment
Study Year LOS
Impact
Recommended
Mitigation
LOS With Mitigation
LOS C
Capacity ADT LOS ADT LOS
2015 (302 Equivalent Dwelling Units)
No calculated impacts
2020 (1,388 Equivalent Dwelling Units)
Olympic Parkway: Heritage
Road to La Media Road 50,000 60,800 E Direct
Mitigation measure
5.3-13: Construct
Santa Victoria from
Heritage Road to La
Media and Heritage
Road from Olympic
Parkway to Santa
Victoria.
55,600 D
The cumulative impacts to Olympic Pkwy from I-805 to Heritage Road and Heritage Road from Main Street to Avenida de Las
Vistas would be mitigated by the TDIF fee.
2025 (2,234 Equivalent Dwelling Units)
Birch Road: La Media to
SR-125 40,000 51,100 F Direct Mitigation measure
5.3-14: Construct
Main Street from
Village 8 West eastern
boundary to Eastlake
Parkway including
bridge over SR-125.
23,200 A
Magdalena Avenue: Birch
Road to Main Street 12,000 20,100 F Direct 11,500 C
Eastlake Parkway: Birch Road
to Main Street 40,000 54,600 F Direct 35,400 C
The cumulative impact to Olympic Pkwy from Heritage Road to La Media Road would be mitigated by the TDIF fee.
2030 (2,610 Equivalent Dwelling Units)
Birch Road: La Media Road to
SR-125 40,000 54,200 F Cumulative
Mitigation measure
5.3-15: Construct SR-
125 northbound and
southbound ramps at
Main Street
26,200 A
Birch Road: SR-125 to
Eastlake Parkway 40,000 65,200 F Cumulative 37,200 C
Main Street: I-805 to
Brandywine Avenue 58,000 61,300 D Direct 59,300 D
Main Street: Brandywine to
Heritage Road 50,000 52,200 D Direct 50,200 D
The cumulative impacts to Heritage Road from Main Street to Avenida de Las Vistas and Eastlake Parkway from Birch Road to
Main Street would be mitigated by the TDIF fee.
Source: RBF 2013
8W
±Source: RBF 2013
OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST EIR
MITIGATED YEAR 2030 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC
FIGURE 5.3-5Not to Scale
Project Mitigation
x,xxx Average Daily Traffic
5.3 Transportation/Traffic
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.3-66
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
B. Congestion Management
Mitigation measures 5.3-1 through 5.3-20 would also reduce impacts related to congestion
management to a less than significant level.
C. Air Traffic Patterns
With the implementation of mitigation measures 5.13-2 through 5.13-4 in Section 5.13, Hazards and
Hazardous Materials, impacts related to the air traffic patterns would be reduced to below a level of
significance.
D. Road Safety
Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
E. Emergency Access
Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
F. Consistency with Transportation Policies
Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.