Escondido Marriott Hotel and Mixed-Use Condominium Project TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT

Escondido Marriott Hotel and Mixed-Use Condominium Project TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT Prepared for Phelps Program Management 420 Sixth Avenue, Greeley, CO 80632 Prepared by 5050 Avenida Encinas, Suite 260, Carlsbad, CA 92008 CONTACT: ROBERT DAVIS 760.476.9193 rdavis@rbf.com Revised: April 17, 2006 JN 55-100241.002

TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction... 1 Analysis Methodology... 7 Existing Conditions... 10 Proposed Project... 16 Existing Plus Project Conditions - Without and With Maple Street Closure... 27 Existing Plus Cumulative Conditions Without and With Project... 35 Horizon Year 2030 Conditions Without and With Project... 54 Peak Hour Intersection Operations During Cruising Grand Event... 69 Peak Hour Intersection Operations During Farmers Market... 84 Significant Impacts and Mitigation... 99 Project Impact on Valley Parkway from I-15 to North Tulip Street... 104 Pedestrian Activity at Valley Parkway and Maple Street... 106 Conversion of Maple Street to Pedestrian Alley... 106 Conclusions... 107 APPENDICES Appendix A: Appendix B: Appendix C: Appendix D: Appendix E: Appendix F: Appendix G: Appendix H: Appendix I: City of Escondido Roadway Segment Capacity and LOS Criteria Traffic Count Sheets Existing Conditions HCM Worksheets SANDAG Trip Generation Rates Displaced Parking Redistribution Exhibits Existing Plus Project Conditions HCM Worksheets Existing Plus Cumulative Conditions Without Maple Street Closure HCM Worksheets Existing Plus Cumulative Conditions With Maple Street Closure HCM Worksheets Horizon Year 2030 Conditions Without Maple Street Closure HCM Worksheets

Appendix J: Horizon Year 2030 Conditions With Maple Street Closure HCM Worksheets Appendix K: Cruising Grand Revised Trip Distribution, Trip Assignment, Cumulative Project Trips Exhibits Appendix L: Cruising Grand Existing Conditions HCM Worksheets Appendix M: Cruising Grand Existing Plus Project Conditions HCM Worksheets Appendix N: Cruising Grand Existing Plus Cumulative Conditions Without Maple Street Closure HCM Worksheets Appendix O: Cruising Grand Existing Plus Cumulative Conditions With Maple Street Closure HCM Worksheets Appendix P: Peak Hour Counts During Farmers Market Appendix Q: Farmers Market Revised Trip Distribution, Trip Assignment, Cumulative Project Trips Exhibits Appendix R: Farmers Market Existing Conditions HCM Worksheets Appendix S: Farmers Market Existing Plus Project Conditions HCM Worksheets Appendix T: Farmers Market Existing Plus Cumulative Conditions Without Maple Street Closure HCM Worksheets Appendix U: Farmers Market Existing Plus Cumulative Conditions With Maple Street Closure HCM Worksheets Appendix V: HCM Worksheets With Recommended Mitigation Improvements Appendix W: HCM Worksheets With Recommended Mitigation Improvements For Cruising Grand and Farmers Market Scenarios LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Regional Project Vicinity... 2 Exhibit 2: Project Concept Plan... 4 Exhibit 3: Project Study Area... 6 Exhibit 4: Existing Intersection Lane Geometries... 11 Exhibit 5: Existing Peak Hour Intersection Volumes... 13 Exhibit 6: Existing ADT Volumes... 14 Exhibit 7A: Project Trip Distribution Hotel Land Use (Without Maple Street Closure)... 19 Exhibit 7B: Project Trip Distribution Condominium Land Use (Without Maple Street Closure)... 20 Exhibit 8A: Project Trip Distribution Hotel Land Use (With Maple Street Closure)... 21 Exhibit 8B: Project Trip Distribution Condominium Land Use (With Maple Street Closure)... 22 Exhibit 9: Peak Hour Project Trip Assignment (Without Maple Street Closure)... 23 Exhibit 10: Daily Project Trip Assignment (Without Maple Street Closure)... 24

Exhibit 11: Peak Hour Project Trip Assignment (With Maple Street Closure)... 25 Exhibit 12: Daily Project Trip Assignment (With Maple Street Closure)... 26 Exhibit 13: Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes (Without Maple Street Closure)... 28 Exhibit 14: Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes (With Maple Street Closure)... 29 Exhibit 15: Existing Plus Project ADT Volumes (Without Maple Street Closure)... 33 Exhibit 16: Existing Plus Project ADT Volumes (With Maple Street Closure)... 34 Exhibit 17: Cumulative Project Locations... 36 Exhibit 18: Peak Hour Cumulative Project Volumes... 37 Exhibit 19: Daily Cumulative Project Volumes... 38 Exhibit 20: Existing Plus Cumulative Peak Hour Intersection Volumes (Without Maple Street Closure)... 40 Exhibit 21: Existing Plus Cumulative Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes (Without Maple Street Closure)... 41 Exhibit 22: Existing Plus Cumulative ADT Volumes (Without Maple Street Closure)... 44 Exhibit 23: Existing Plus Cumulative Plus Project ADT Volumes (Without Maple Street Closure)... 45 Exhibit 24: Existing Plus Cumulative Peak Hour Intersection Volumes (With Maple Street Closure)... 48 Exhibit 25: Existing Plus Cumulative Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes (With Maple Street Closure)... 49 Exhibit 26: Existing Plus Cumulative ADT Volumes (With Maple Street Closure)... 51 Exhibit 27: Existing Plus Cumulative Plus Project ADT Volumes (With Maple Street Closure)... 52 Exhibit 28: Horizon Year Without Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes (Without Maple Street Closure)... 55 Exhibit 29: Horizon Year With Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes (Without Maple Street Closure)... 56 Exhibit 30: Horizon Year Without Project ADT Volumes (Without Maple Street Closure)... 59 Exhibit 31: Horizon Year With Project ADT Volumes (Without Maple Street Closure)... 60 Exhibit 32: Horizon Year Without Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes (With Maple Street Closure)... 63 Exhibit 33: Horizon Year With Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes (With Maple Street Closure)... 64

Exhibit 34: Horizon Year Without Project ADT Volumes (With Maple Street Closure)... 66 Exhibit 35: Horizon Year With Project ADT Volumes (With Maple Street Closure)... 67 Exhibit 36: Existing Intersection Lane Geometries During Cruising Grand Event... 71 Exhibit 37: Existing Peak Hour Intersection Volumes During Cruising Grand Event... 72 Exhibit 38: Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes During Cruising Grand Event (Without Maple Street Closure)... 74 Exhibit 39: Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes During Cruising Grand Event (With Maple Street Closure)... 75 Exhibit 40: Existing Plus Cumulative Peak Hour Intersection Volumes During Cruising Grand Event (Without Maple Street Closure)... 77 Exhibit 41: Existing Plus Cumulative Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes During Cruising Grand Event (Without Maple Street Closure)... 78 Exhibit 42: Existing Plus Cumulative Peak Hour Intersection Volumes During Cruising Grand Event (With Maple Street Closure)... 81 Exhibit 43: Existing Plus Cumulative Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes During Cruising Grand Event (With Maple Street Closure)... 82 Exhibit 44: Existing Intersection Lane Geometries During Farmers Market... 85 Exhibit 45: Existing Peak Hour Intersection Volumes During Farmers Market... 86 Exhibit 46: Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes During Farmers Market (Without Maple Street Closure)... 88 Exhibit 47: Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes During Farmers Market (With Maple Street Closure)... 89 Exhibit 48: Existing Plus Cumulative Peak Hour Intersection Volumes During Farmers Market (Without Maple Street Closure)... 92 Exhibit 49: Existing Plus Cumulative Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes During Farmers Market (Without Maple Street Closure)... 93 Exhibit 50: Existing Plus Cumulative Peak Hour Intersection Volumes During Farmers Market (With Maple Street Closure)... 96 Exhibit 51: Existing Plus Cumulative Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes During Farmers Market (With Maple Street Closure)... 97 Exhibit 52: Daily Project Trips on Valley Parkway and Couplet from I-15 to Centre City Parkway... 105

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Level of Service & Delay Range... 8 Table 2: Daily Level of Service Thresholds for Roadway Segments... 9 Table 3: Existing Peak Hour Intersection Conditions... 15 Table 4: Existing Daily Roadway Segment Conditions... 16 Table 5: Proposed Project Trip Generation Rates... 17 Table 6: Proposed Project Trip Generation... 17 Table 7: Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Conditions Without and With Maple Street Closure... 30 Table 8: Existing Plus Project Daily Roadway Segment Conditions Without Maple Street Closure... 31 Table 9: Existing Plus Project Daily Roadway Segment Conditions With Maple Street Closure... 32 Table 10: Cumulative Projects Trip Generation... 39 Table 11: Existing Plus Cumulative Peak Hour Intersection Conditions Without Maple Street Closure Without and With Project... 42 Table 12: Existing Plus Cumulative Daily Roadway Segment Conditions Without Maple Street Closure Without and With Project... 46 Table 13: Existing Plus Cumulative Peak Hour Intersection Conditions With Maple Street Closure Without and With Project... 47 Table 14: Existing Plus Cumulative Daily Roadway Segment Conditions With Maple Street Closure Without and With Project... 53 Table 15: Horizon Year 2030 Peak Hour Intersection Conditions Without Maple Street Closure Without and With Project... 57 Table 16: Horizon Year 2030 Daily Roadway Segment Conditions Without Maple Street Closure Without and With Project... 61 Table 17: Horizon Year 2030 Peak Hour Intersection Conditions With Maple Street Closure Without and With Project... 62 Table 18: Horizon Year 2030 Daily Roadway Segment Conditions With Maple Street Closure Without and With Project... 68 Table 19: Existing P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Conditions During Cruising Grand Event... 70 Table 20: Existing Plus Project P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Conditions During Cruising Grand Event Without and With Maple Street Closure... 73 Table 21: Existing Plus Cumulative P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Conditions During Cruising Grand Event Without Maple Street Closure Without and With Project... 79

Table 22: Existing Plus Cumulative P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Conditions During Cruising Grand Event With Maple Street Closure Without and With Project... 83 Table 23: Existing P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Conditions During Farmers Market... 87 Table 24: Existing Plus Project P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Conditions During Farmers Market Without and With Maple Street Closure... 90 Table 25: Existing Plus Cumulative P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Conditions During Farmers Market Without Maple Street Closure Without and With Project... 94 Table 26: Existing Plus Cumulative P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Conditions During Farmers Market With Maple Street Closure Without and With Project... 98 Table 27: Summary of Recommended Intersection Mitigation Measures... 99 Table 28: Summary of Intersection LOS Without and With Recommended Improvements... 100 Table 29: Summary of Intersection LOS Without and With Recommended Improvements Cruising Grand and Farmers Market Scenarios... 101 Table 30: Summary of Horizon Year 2030 With Project Roadway Segment LOS Without and With Mitigation Measures... 103 Table 31: Daily Project Trips on Valley Parkway and Couplet from I-15 to Centre City Parkway... 104

INTRODUCTION This study analyzes the forecast traffic impact of the proposed Escondido Marriott Hotel and multi-story mixed-use condominium, retail and parking structure project, located on the northwest and southeast corners of the intersection of Valley Parkway at Maple Street in the City of Escondido. Exhibit 1 shows the regional project vicinity. As required by the City of Escondido, this traffic impact study has been prepared in accordance with the City General Plan Circulation Element and the SANDAG Congestion Management Program (CMP) traffic impact study guidelines. The threshold to determine the need for traffic studies is 500 daily trips for non-conforming land uses and 1,000 daily trips for projects consistent with the City s General Plan land use. The proposed hotel, condominium and retail project is forecast to generate approximately 2,327 trips per day, with 150 trips occurring in the a.m. peak hour and 200 trips occurring in the p.m. peak hour. Project traffic was distributed on the roadway network based on a select zone analysis run conducted by SANDAG. A total of 15 intersections and 16 roadway segments are included in the study area. The City of Escondido is considering a project that would convert Maple Street to a pedestrian alley between Grand Avenue and the mid-block alley to the north. The City has requested that the traffic impact analysis evaluate each study scenario without and with the closure of this segment of Maple Street to vehicular traffic (with the exception of existing conditions). The City has also requested for two additional study scenarios to be added to the analysis during the p.m. peak period: during the Cruising Grand event, which takes place every Friday evening from early April to late September; and during the Farmer s Market, which takes place every Tuesday afternoon all year around. During the Cruising Grand event, Broadway between Valley Parkway and Second Avenue is closed to traffic from 4 p.m. to 9:30 p.m., and during the weekly Farmer s Market, Grand Avenue between Maple Street and Broadway is closed to traffic from 1:45 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. These additional scenarios will evaluate the peak hour operations of the intersections that are impacted by the two events under existing and existing plus cumulative conditions, without and with the proposed project. This traffic impact analysis includes the following study scenarios without and with the Maple Street closure (no Maple Street closure under existing conditions): Existing Conditions (includes Cruising Grand and Farmers Market scenarios) Existing Plus Project (includes Cruising Grand and Farmers Market scenarios) Existing Plus Cumulative Without Project (includes Cruising Grand and Farmers Market scenarios) Existing Plus Cumulative With Project (includes Cruising Grand and Farmers Market scenarios) Horizon Year 2030 Without Project (does not include Cruising Grand and Farmers Market scenarios) Horizon Year 2030 With Project (does not include Cruising Grand and Farmers Market scenarios) 1

Project Description The proposed Escondido Marriott Hotel and mixed-use multi-story condominium, retail and parking structure project is located on the northwest and southeast corners of the intersection of Valley Parkway at Maple Street in the City of Escondido. Exhibit 2 shows the project site plan for the proposed Marriott Hotel and condominium/retail project. As shown in the project site plan, the proposed project includes 196 hotel rooms, 127 condominium units, and 2,900 square-feet of specialty retail located on the ground floor of the condominium building. A 488-stall parking structure will be constructed beneath the ground floor of the condominium/retail building, which will provide 248 parking stalls for the condominium uses, 19 shared parking stalls for condominium/retail uses, and 221 parking stalls for public uses. The hotel site will provide 209 parking spaces. The condominium/retail building will displace 119 public parking spaces, and the hotel site will displace 75 public parking spaces. The provision of the 221 public parking stalls in the proposed parking structure will compensate for the loss of public parking as a result of construction of the project. Primary access to the hotel site will be provided on Valley Parkway at the intersection of Maple Street. Secondary access to the hotel will be provided on Valley Parkway, west of Maple Street. Access to the multi-story condominium/retail site will be provided from Maple Street, south of Valley Parkway. Study Area According to the SANDAG Congestion Management Program (CMP) guidelines, intersections and roadway segments where 50 or more peak hour trips are forecast to be added shall be selected for inclusion in this analysis. The proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 150 a.m. peak hour and 200 p.m. peak hour trips. Project-generated trips were assigned to the roadway network based on a select zone model run produced by the SANDAG Series 10 traffic model. A total of 15 intersections and 16 roadway segments were identified for inclusion in this traffic study. Based on the threshold set by the SANDAG CMP guidelines, the study area consists of the following intersections and roadway segments: Intersections 1) Valley Parkway / Centre City Parkway 2) Valley Parkway / Orange Street 3) Valley Parkway / Escondido Boulevard 4) Valley Parkway / Maple Street 5) Valley Parkway / Broadway 6) Grand Avenue / Centre City Parkway 7) Grand Avenue / Orange Street 8) Grand Avenue / Escondido Boulevard 3

Intersections (continued) 9) Grand Avenue / Maple Street 10) Grand Avenue / Broadway 11) Second Avenue / Centre City Parkway 12) Second Avenue / Orange Street 13) Second Avenue / Escondido Boulevard 14) Second Avenue / Maple Street 15) Second Avenue / Broadway Roadway Segments 1) Valley Parkway, Centre City Parkway to Orange Street 2) Valley Parkway, Orange Street to Escondido Boulevard 3) Valley Parkway, Escondido Boulevard to Maple Street 4) Valley Parkway, Maple Street to Broadway 5) Grand Avenue, Escondido Boulevard to Maple Street 6) Grand Avenue, Maple Street to Broadway 7) Second Avenue, Centre City Parkway to Orange Street 8) Second Avenue, Orange Street to Escondido Boulevard 9) Second Avenue, Escondido Boulevard to Maple Street 10) Second Avenue, Maple Street to Broadway 11) Escondido Boulevard, Valley Parkway to Grand Avenue 12) Escondido Boulevard, Grand Avenue to Second Avenue 13) Maple Street, Valley Parkway to Grand Avenue 14) Maple Street, Grand Avenue to Second Avenue 15) Broadway, Valley Parkway to Grand Avenue 16) Broadway, Grand Avenue to Second Avenue The project study area is shown in Exhibit 3. According to the SANDAG CMP, Valley Parkway, Centre City Parkway, and SR-78 (Broadway, Washington Avenue, Ash Street, and San Pasqual Valley Road) are classified as Regionally Significant Arterials (RSA). Therefore, all signalized intersections and roadway segments where 50 or more peak hour trips or 200 or more daily trips were added along these arterials were included in the analysis. 5

ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY In accordance with the SANDAG CMP traffic impact study guidelines and City of Escondido requirements, this study analyzes the followings study scenarios: Existing Conditions Analysis of existing traffic count volumes, intersection geometry and existing roadway network. Existing Plus Project Analysis of existing traffic volumes overlaid with the forecast project-generated traffic. The existing intersection geometry and roadway network were used in this analysis Existing Plus Cumulative Analysis of existing traffic volumes overlaid with traffic associated with approved or pending projects anticipated to be constructed by the projectopening year. Existing Plus Cumulative With Project Analysis of existing traffic volumes overlaid with cumulative project traffic and traffic generated by the proposed project. Horizon Year 2030 Without Project Analysis of Horizon Year 2030 conditions was conducted using the SANDAG Series 10 North San Diego County subarea traffic model. The Horizon Year 2030 volumes were post-processed and refined for the peak hours based on the forecast daily volumes in the traffic model provided by SANDAG. All build-out roadway improvements in the project study area are included in the analysis of Horizon Year 2030 Conditions. Horizon Year 2030 With Project Analysis of Horizon Year 2030 conditions with the proposed project uses the forecast volumes derived from the SANDAG Series 10 North San Diego County subarea traffic model plus the addition of project-generated traffic. All buildout roadway improvements in the project study area are included in the analysis of Horizon Year 2030 Conditions. The City of Escondido is considering a project that would convert Maple Street to a pedestrian alley between Grand Avenue and the mid-block alley to the north. The City has requested that the traffic impact analysis evaluate each study scenario (with the exception of existing conditions) without and with the closure of this segment of Maple Street. The traffic analysis includes this network change as an alternative in all future scenarios, and the traffic that would otherwise occur on this segment of Maple Street has been redistributed accordingly to the adjacent intersections. At the request of the City, two additional study scenarios were added during the p.m. peak period: during the Cruising Grand event, which takes place every Friday evening from early April to late September; and during the Farmer s Market, which takes place every Tuesday afternoon all year around. During the Cruising Grand event, Broadway between Valley Parkway and Second Avenue is closed to traffic from 4 p.m. to 9:30 p.m., and during the weekly Farmer s Market, Grand Avenue between Maple Street and Broadway is closed to traffic from 1:45 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. These additional scenarios will evaluate the peak hour operations of the intersections that are impacted by the two events under existing and existing plus cumulative conditions, without and with the proposed project. 7

Analysis of all intersections and roadway segments in the project study area is based on the guidelines set forth in the City of Escondido General Plan Circulation Element and the SANDAG CMP guidelines. As required, the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) operation methodology for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections was used to determine the operating Levels of Service (LOS) of the study intersections. The TRAFFIX software package was used to evaluate the study intersections using the HCM methodology. The HCM methodology describes the operation of an intersection using a range of levels of service (LOS) from LOS A (free-flow conditions) to LOS F (severely congested conditions), based on corresponding delay per vehicle thresholds for signalized and unsignalized intersections shown in Table 1. The City of Escondido considers mid-range LOS D or better to be acceptable intersection operating conditions. Table 1 Level of Service & Delay Ranges LOS Signalized Intersections Delay (seconds/vehicle) 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 (mid-range threshold) D (high-range threshold) > 35.0 to < 45.0 > 25.0 to < 30.0 > 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: 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. A daily roadway segment analysis was conducted for all study area roadways, which was based upon the 1993 City of Escondido Circulation Element and the Escondido LOS Criteria for street segments. The roadway segment level of service criteria is included in Table 2. The LOS thresholds and roadway classification table from the City of Escondido Circulation Element is provided in Appendix A. 8

Table 2 Daily Level of Service Thresholds for Roadway Segments Classification / Lanes Level of Service A B C Mid-Range D D E Prime Arterial / 6 15,000 30,000 42,000 46,500 51,000 60,000 Major Arterial / 4 14,800 24,700 29,600 31,500 33,400 37,000 One-Way / 5 (1) 18,600 28,000 37,300 39,600 41,900 46,600 One-Way / 3 (1) 14,000 21,000 28,000 29,750 31,500 35,000 / 4 (2) 13,700 22,800 27,400 29,100 30,800 34,200 / 4 (3) 5,000 10,000 14,000 15,500 17,000 20,000 Local / 2 (4) 2,500 5,000 7,000 11,250 8,500 10,000 Source: City of Escondido General Plan Circulation Element Update, 2000. (1) Valley Parkway from Centre City Parkway to Escondido Boulevard is constructed with five one-way travel lanes; other segments of Valley Parkway and the Second Avenue half of the couplet are constructed with three one-way travel lanes. (2) Parking prohibited. (3) Parking permitted. (4) The City Circulation Element does not include an Urban with permitted on-street parking, so the LOS thresholds and LOS E capacity for a Rural Two-Lane with on-street parking permitted was used in this case. According to the 1993 City of Escondido Circulation/Transportation Plan, the City s goal for acceptable service standards during daily and peak hour periods is LOS C for all roadway segments and intersections. General Plan Circulation Policy D2.3 of the 1993 Circulation/Transportation Plan contains the following excerpt describing the limitations of the City s goal for LOS C: Due to the physical design characteristics, environmental resource considerations, existing development, freeway interchange impacts and incomplete system improvements, level of service C may not be feasible in all areas at all times. However, level of service C should be pursued in the ultimate implementation of the circulation system. Notwithstanding the City s goal of providing LOS C or better, it is acknowledged that the provision may not need to be satisfied in all cases, particularly in the short term. The Citywide Facilities Plan, which implements the growth management element of the aforementioned Circulation/Transportation General Plan, contains the following excerpt taken from the June 1995 City of Escondido Environmental Quality Regulations Sec. 33-924, for determining if the violation of the LOS C threshold is allowable, and a negative declaration is acceptable for environmental purposes. After mitigation, a proposed project, or combination of proposed projects, do not cause the Level of service of a circulation element street to fall below the mid-range of level of service D. 9

Within the City of Escondido, a significant impact is forecast to occur if project-generated traffic increases the peak hour intersection delay by 2.0 seconds or more for intersections operating at deficient levels of service (mid-range LOS D or worse). A significant impact is forecast to occur on a roadway segment if it is projected to operate at a deficient level of service (mid-range LOS D or worse) and if the addition of project-generated traffic results in an increase in the V/C ratio by 0.020 or more. EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing Roadway Circulation System A detailed field review was conducted to determine the existing intersection geometry, traffic control devices, signal phasing and other factors, which may affect intersection or roadway segment capacity. The existing intersection geometry is illustrated in Exhibit 4. The following is a detailed description of roadways in the study area. Interstate 15 (I-15) provides regional access to Escondido as a major freeway facility, generally oriented in a north-south direction. Regional project access is provided at the Valley Parkway interchange with I-15. State Route 78 (SR-78) provides regional access to Escondido as a major freeway and highway facility, generally oriented in an east-west direction. Regional project access from the west is provided at the Centre City Parkway interchange with SR-78, and the intersection with Broadway, where SR-78 transitions from a freeway to a highway facility. As a highway facility, SR-78 extends southeast from Broadway on surface streets through the city and into the unincorporated areas of San Diego County. Valley Parkway is a three-lane to six-lane roadway extending in a southwest-northeast direction from Citracado Parkway to Valley Center Road. Valley Parkway is built as a four-lane Major Arterial from Citracado Parkway to Auto Park Way, and changes to a six-lane Prime Arterial from Auto Park Way to the western limit of the couplet with Second Avenue just east of Tulip Street. Between Tulip Street and Hickory Street, Valley Parkway is constructed as a three-lane, one-way extending in a westbound direction through downtown Escondido. East of Hickory Street, Valley Parkway is constructed as a two-way, four-lane Major Arterial. Valley Parkway is a Regionally Significant Arterial (RSA), as classified by the SANDAG CMP. Grand Avenue is located between Second Avenue and Valley Parkway and is a four-lane, two-way roadway. Grand Avenue begins as part of the eastbound couplet with Valley Parkway as a threelane, one-way collector, and then transitions to a four-lane, two-way street just west of Quince Street. The intersection of Grand Avenue/Centre City Parkway has recently been improved to allow left, through, and right turn movements at all four approaches of the intersection. Grand Avenue is generally oriented in an east-west direction and extends into the eastern portion of the city. Grand Avenue is included in the General Plan Circulation Element as a four-lane. 10

Second Avenue is a three-lane, one-way collector extending eastbound from Grand Avenue to Valley Parkway. Second Avenue is located two blocks south of Valley Parkway and forms the southern half of the couplet through downtown Escondido. Centre City Parkway is a four-lane Major Arterial generally oriented in a north-south direction, and extends from the northern to the southern limits of the city. Centre City Parkway is a Regionally Significant Arterial (RSA), as classified by the SANDAG CMP. Escondido Boulevard is a two-lane to four-lane generally oriented in a north-south direction, and extends from El Norte Parkway to Centre City Parkway at the southern end of the city. Maple Street is a two-lane local street oriented in a north-south direction, and extends from Valley Parkway to Felicita Avenue. Maple Street is not included as a City Circulation Element roadway. Broadway is built as a two-lane to four-lane roadway extending in a north-south direction from unincorporated areas north of the city to its southern terminus at 15 th Avenue. Broadway is a fourlane Major Arterial from Jesmene Dene Road at the north end of the city to Second Avenue in Escondido s downtown district. South of Second Avenue, Broadway is constructed as a two-lane local street. Between Lincoln Parkway and Washington Avenue, Broadway is part of State Route 78 and is classified by the SANDAG CMP as a Regionally Significant Arterial (RSA). Existing Level of Service Analysis To determine the existing operation of the study intersections, intersection movement counts were taken on a typical weekday during the a.m. (7:00 to 9:00 a.m.) and p.m. (4:00 to 6:00 p.m.) peak period. Exhibit 5 shows the existing a.m. and p.m. peak one-hour volumes at each of the study intersections based on the traffic count data collected for this study in April 2005. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes collected for this project are illustrated in Exhibit 6. Detailed count data is contained in Appendix B. Table 3 summarizes the existing a.m. and p.m. peak hour intersection LOS of the study intersections based on the existing peak hour intersection volumes and existing intersection geometry. Detailed HCM calculation sheets are contained in Appendix C. As shown in Table 3, all study intersections are currently operating at an acceptable LOS (mid-range D or better) during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours except for the following unsignalized minor-street stop-controlled intersections: Valley Parkway/Maple Street (LOS E: p.m. peak hour); Grand Avenue/Orange Street (LOS F: p.m. peak hour); and Second Avenue/Maple Street (LOS F: p.m. peak hour). 12

Study Intersection Table 3 Existing Peak Hour Intersection Conditions AM Delay LOS (sec.) PM Delay LOS (sec.) Valley Parkway / Centre City Parkway 25.4 C 25.3 C Valley Parkway / Orange Street 5.4 A 12.7 B Valley Parkway / Escondido Boulevard 17.7 B 19.4 B Valley Parkway / Maple Street (1) 38.6 E 22.8 C Valley Parkway / Broadway 16.6 B 17.1 B Grand Avenue / Centre City Parkway 16.9 B 22.4 C Grand Avenue / Orange Street (1) 16.8 C 55.1 F Grand Avenue / Escondido Boulevard 15.0 B 16.5 B Grand Avenue / Maple Street (2) 9.0 A 11.4 B Grand Avenue / Broadway 15.9 B 17.1 B Second Avenue / Centre City Parkway 21.4 C 24.5 C Second Avenue / Orange Street 3.5 A 7.8 A Second Avenue / Escondido Boulevard 18.4 B 20.9 C Second Avenue / Maple Street (1) 26.5 D 78.7 F Second Avenue / Broadway 12.1 B 13.6 B Note: Deficient intersection operation shown in bold. (1) Indicates an unsignalized two-way stop-controlled intersection, in which the highest approach delay, rather than the average delay, is reported for two-way stop-controlled intersections. (2) Indicates an unsignalized all-way stop-controlled intersection. Daily roadway segment levels of service were calculated based on the capacity of the roadway determined based on classification and ADT volumes. Table 4 presents the results of the existing conditions daily roadway segment level of service analysis. Valley Parkway and Second Avenue are both one-way streets, classified as collector roadways. One-way, three lane collector roadways are not included in the City Circulation Element; therefore capacity thresholds were not provided by the City. Using the Highway Capacity Manual saturation flow calculation methodology, the capacity of the roadway was calculated to be approximately 35,000 vpd for the LOS E (capacity) condition. As shown in Table 4, all of the study roadway segments currently operate at acceptable levels of service (mid-range D or better). 15

Table 4 Existing Daily Roadway Segment Conditions Roadway Location #Lanes/Class Valley Parkway Grand Avenue Second Avenue Escondido Boulevard Maple Street Centre City Parkway to Orange Street Orange Street to Escondido Boulevard Escondido Boulevard to Maple Street Maple Street to Broadway 5/One-Way 5/One-Way 3/One-Way 3/One-Way Daily Capacity Existing ADT V/C LOS 46,600 19,033 0.41 B 46,600 19,358 0.42 B 35,000 22,912 0.65 C 35,000 19,316 0.55 B Escondido Boulevard to Maple Street 4/ (1) 20,000 12,492 0.62 C Maple Street to Broadway 4/ (1) 20,000 12,665 0.63 C Centre City Parkway to Orange Street Orange Street to Escondido Boulevard Escondido Boulevard to Maple Street Maple Street to Broadway 3/One-Way 3/One-Way 3/One-Way 3/One-Way 35,000 17,821 0.51 B 35,000 18,833 0.54 B 35,000 18,478 0.53 B 35,000 18,184 0.52 B Valley Parkway to Grand Avenue 4/ 34,200 17,829 0.52 B Grand Avenue to Second Avenue 4/ 34,200 14,662 0.43 B Valley Parkway to Grand Avenue Grand Avenue to Second Avenue 2/Local (2) 10,000 2,419 0.24 A 2/Local (2) 10,000 1,900 0.19 A Valley Parkway to Grand Avenue 4/ (1)(3) 20,000 10,503 0.53 C Broadway 2/Local Grand Avenue to Second Avenue (2)(3) 10,000 6,159 0.62 C Note: Deficient roadway segment operation shown in bold. (1) Indicates a four-lane with on-street parking permitted. (2) Indicates a two-lane with on-street parking permitted. The City Circulation Element does not include an Urban with permitted on-street parking, so the LOS thresholds and LOS E capacity for a Rural Two-Lane with on-street parking permitted was used in this case. (3) The City of Escondido Circulation Element classifies Broadway as a four-lane Major Arterial from Second Avenue to the north end of the city. However, the segment from Valley Parkway to Grand Avenue is constructed with four travel lanes with permitted on-street parking, and the segment from Grand Avenue to Second Avenue is constructed with two travel lanes with permitted on-street parking. PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed Escondido Marriott Hotel and mixed-use multi-story condominium, retail and parking structure project is located on the northwest and southeast corners of the intersection of Valley Parkway at Maple Street in the City of Escondido. The proposed project includes 196 hotel rooms, 127 condominium units, and 2,900 square-feet of specialty retail located on the ground floor of the condominium building. A 488-stall parking structure will be constructed beneath the ground floor of the condominium/retail building, which will provide 248 parking stalls for the condominium uses, 19 shared parking stalls for condominium/retail uses, and 221 parking stalls for public uses. The hotel site will provide 209 parking spaces. 16

Project Trip Generation To determine the trips forecast to be generated by the proposed project, April 2002 SANDAG Trip Generation rates were utilized in accordance with the City of Escondido guidelines. The SANDAG (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (April 2002) showing the trip generation rate for the proposed land use is provided in Appendix D. Tables 5 and 6 summarize the project trip generation. As summarized in Table 6, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 2,327 trips per day, which includes approximately 150 a.m. peak hour trips and approximately 200 p.m. peak hour trips. It should be noted that based on the proximity of the proposed project to the downtown area and adjacent entertainment and commercial uses, a significant portion of the trips are likely to be pedestrian trips rather than vehicle trips. As such, the pedestrian mode-split used is conservative. Land Use Units Table 5 Proposed Project Trip Generation Rates Daily Rate (per unit) AM Peak Hour Rate Total (of daily) In Out PM Peak Hour Rate Total (of daily) Hotel (1) rooms 8 6% 60% 40% 8% 60% 40% Condominium (2) DU 6 8% 20% 80% 10% 70% 30% Specialty Retail KSF 40 3% 60% 40% 9% 50% 50% Source: SANDAG (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (April 2002). (1) The trip generation rate for the hotel land use is based on 80% occupancy of the hotel, which has been approved by City of Escondido staff. (2) The density of the condominium building site is more than 20 units per acre; therefore a rate of 6 trips per acre is used for highdensity multi-family dwelling units as recommended by SANDAG. Land Use Table 6 Proposed Project Trip Generation Intensity In Out Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trips Total In Out Total In Out Hotel Building Hotel 196 rooms 1,568 94 56 38 125 75 50 Hotel Pedestrian Mode-Split Reduction (1) -31-2 -1-1 -3-2 -1 Net Hotel Trips 1,537 92 55 37 123 74 49 Multi-Story Condominium/Retail Building Condominium 127 DU 762 61 12 49 76 53 23 Specialty Retail 2.9 KSF 116 3 2 1 10 5 5 Condominium/Retail Subtotal 878 64 14 50 86 58 28 Mixed-Use Trip Reduction (2) -88-6 -1-5 -9-6 -3 Net Condominium/Retail Trips 790 58 13 45 78 52 25 Total Net Project Trips 2,327 150 68 83 200 126 74 (1) Due to the proximity of the hotel to the downtown district, a 2% pedestrian mode-split reduction was applied to the hotel trip calculations. (2) As suggested by SANDAG, a trip reduction of up to 10% can be applied to mixed-use developments where residential and commercial are combined. 17

Project Trip Distribution Project traffic was distributed on the roadway network based on a Select Zone Assignment model run conducted by SANDAG. The project trip distribution was adjusted for the alternative that includes the closure of Maple Street between Grand Avenue and the mid-block alley to the north. Exhibits 7A and 7B show the project trip distribution percentages for the proposed hotel and condominium land uses, respectively, without the Maple Street closure. Exhibits 8A and 8B show the project trip distribution percentages for the proposed hotel and condominium land uses, respectively, with the Maple Street closure. Project Trip Assignment Utilizing the project trip distribution shown in Exhibits 7A through 8B, the forecast project-generated trips were assigned to the roadway network. Exhibits 9 and 10 illustrate the forecast assignment of project-generated peak hour and daily trips, respectively, without the Maple Street closure. Exhibits 11 and 12 illustrate the forecast assignment of project-generated peak hour and daily trips, respectively, with the Maple Street closure. Displaced Parking Traffic Redistribution The proposed hotel and condominium/retail/parking structure building will displace two public parking lots. The proposed Marriott Hotel will displace the California Center for the Arts and Entertainment (CCAE) parking lot, which consists of 75 public parking stalls. The multi-story condominium/retail/parking structure building will displace Public Lot 1, which consists of 119 public parking stalls. The proposed parking structure underneath the ground floor of the condominium/retail building will accommodate the displaced public parking. Daily and peak hour trips have been estimated for both the CCAE lot and Public Lot 1, which have been derived from existing peak hour counts entering and exiting the CCAE lot access driveway (north of Maple Street at Valley Parkway). The estimated trips from both public parking lots have been redistributed accordingly to enter and exit the proposed parking structure on Maple Street south of Valley Parkway. Exhibits illustrating the redistributed public parking trips are provided in Appendix E. 18

EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS WITHOUT AND WITH MAPLE STREET CLOSURE To determine the existing plus project operating conditions at the study intersections, the projectgenerated trips were added to the existing conditions volumes. Exhibit 13 shows the existing plus project a.m. and p.m. peak hour volumes without the Maple Street closure. Exhibit 14 shows the existing plus project a.m. and p.m. peak hour volumes with the Maple Street closure. Table 7 summarizes the existing plus project a.m. and p.m. peak hour intersection LOS. Detailed HCM calculation sheets are contained in Appendix F. As shown in Table 7, the following intersections are projected to operate at deficient levels of service (mid-range LOS D or worse) under existing plus project conditions without the Maple Street closure: Valley Parkway/Maple Street (AM/PM: LOS F); Grand Avenue/Orange Street (PM: LOS F); and Second Avenue/Maple Street (PM: LOS F). With the closure of Maple Street to vehicular traffic, the following intersections are projected to operate at mid-range LOS D or worse under existing plus project conditions: Valley Parkway/Maple Street (AM: LOS E; PM: LOS F); Grand Avenue/Orange Street (PM: LOS F); and Second Avenue/Maple Street (PM: LOS F). The addition of peak hour project trips to existing peak hour volumes increases the overall intersection approach delay by more than the significance threshold (2.0 seconds) for locations operating at deficient levels of service (worse than mid-range LOS D). Therefore, the addition of project traffic results in significant impacts at these locations for both Maple Street alternatives and mitigation measures are required. The results of the existing plus project daily roadway segment analysis, without and with the Maple Street closure, are presented in Tables 8 and 9, respectively. Existing plus project ADT volumes without and with the Maple Street closure are illustrated in Exhibits 15 and 16, respectively. As shown in Tables 8 and 9, all of the study roadway segments are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service (mid-range LOS D or better) under existing plus project conditions. 27

Study Intersection Table 7 Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Conditions Without and With Maple Street Closure AM Delay (1) LOS Existing PM Delay (1) LOS Existing Plus Project Without Maple Street Closure AM Delay (1) LOS PM Delay (1) LOS Change in Delay AM PM AM Delay (1) LOS Existing Plus Project With Maple Street Closure PM Delay (1) LOS Change in Delay Valley Parkway / Centre City Parkway 25.4 C 25.3 C 25.5 C 25.3 C 0.1 0.0 25.5 C 25.3 C 0.1 0.0 Valley Parkway / Orange Street 5.4 A 12.7 B 5.5 A 12.7 B 0.1 0.0 5.5 A 12.7 B 0.1 0.0 Valley Parkway / Escondido Boulevard 17.7 B 19.4 B 17.7 B 19.6 B 0.0 0.2 17.8 B 20.2 C 0.1 0.8 Valley Parkway / Maple Street (2) 38.6 E 22.8 C 105.2 F 200.4 F 66.6 177.6 44.2 E 141.2 F 5.6 118.4 Valley Parkway / Broadway 16.6 B 17.1 B 16.7 B 17.3 B 0.1 0.2 17.3 B 18.9 B 0.7 1.8 Grand Avenue / Centre City Parkway 16.9 B 22.4 C 16.9 B 22.4 C 0.0 0.0 16.9 B 22.4 C 0.0 0.0 Grand Avenue / Orange Street (2) 16.8 C 55.1 F 17.0 C 68.1 F 0.2 13.0 17.0 C 68.1 F 0.2 13.0 Grand Avenue / Escondido Boulevard 15.0 B 16.5 B 15.1 B 16.6 B 0.1 0.1 15.2 B 16.9 B 0.2 0.4 Grand Avenue / Maple Street (3) 9.0 A 11.4 B 9.4 A 12.1 B 0.4 0.7 9.1 A 11.5 B 0.1 0.1 Grand Avenue / Broadway 15.9 B 17.1 B 15.9 B 17.0 B 0.0-0.1 15.7 B 16.9 B -0.2-0.2 Second Avenue / Centre City Parkway 21.4 C 24.5 C 21.5 C 24.6 C 0.1 0.1 21.5 C 24.6 C 0.1 0.1 Second Avenue / Orange Street 3.5 A 7.8 A 3.5 A 7.8 A 0.0 0.0 3.5 A 7.8 A 0.0 0.0 Second Avenue / Escondido Boulevard 18.4 B 20.9 C 18.5 B 21.1 C 0.1 0.2 18.5 B 21.3 C 0.1 0.4 Second Avenue / Maple Street (2) 26.5 D 78.7 F 29.1 D 118.5 F 2.6 39.8 29.0 D 98.4 F 2.5 19.7 Second Avenue / Broadway 12.1 B 13.6 B 12.1 B 13.6 B 0.0 0.0 12.1 B 13.6 B 0.0 0.0 Maple Street / Parking Structure Access (2) 10.0 B 11.0 B 8.7 A 9.0 A Note: Deficient intersection operation shown in bold. Change in delay shown in bold indicates a project significant impact. (1) Seconds of delay per vehicle. (2) Indicates an unsignalized two-way stop-controlled intersection, in which the highest approach delay, rather than the average delay, is reported for two-way stop-controlled intersections. (3) Indicates an unsignalized all-way stop-controlled intersection. AM PM 30

Roadway Location #Lanes/Class Valley Parkway Grand Avenue Second Avenue Escondido Boulevard Maple Street Centre City Parkway to Orange Street Orange Street to Escondido Boulevard Escondido Boulevard to Maple Street Maple Street to Broadway Table 8 Existing Plus Project Daily Roadway Segment Conditions Without Maple Street Closure 5/One-Way 5/One-Way 3/One-Way 3/One-Way Daily Capacity Existing Without Project Existing Plus Project ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS Change In V/C 46,600 19,033 0.41 B 19,298 0.41 B 0.00 46,600 19,358 0.42 B 19,754 0.42 B 0.00 35,000 22,912 0.65 C 23,678 0.68 C 0.03 35,000 19,316 0.55 B 19,765 0.56 B 0.01 Escondido Boulevard to Maple Street 4/ (1) 20,000 12,492 0.62 C 13,089 0.65 C 0.03 Maple Street to Broadway 4/ (1) 20,000 12,665 0.63 C 13,138 0.66 C 0.03 Centre City Parkway to Orange Street Orange Street to Escondido Boulevard Escondido Boulevard to Maple Street Maple Street to Broadway 3/One-Way 3/One-Way 3/One-Way 3/One-Way 35,000 17,821 0.51 B 18,062 0.52 B 0.01 35,000 18,833 0.54 B 19,074 0.54 B 0.00 35,000 18,478 0.53 B 18,734 0.54 B 0.01 35,000 18,184 0.52 B 18,300 0.52 B 0.00 Valley Parkway to Grand Avenue 4/ 34,200 17,829 0.52 B 18,200 0.53 B 0.01 Grand Avenue to Second Avenue 4/ 34,200 14,662 0.43 B 14,795 0.43 B 0.00 Valley Parkway to Grand Avenue Grand Avenue to Second Avenue 2/Local (2) 10,000 2,419 0.24 A 4,030 0.40 B 0.16 2/Local (2) 10,000 1,900 0.19 A 2,149 0.21 A 0.03 Valley Parkway to Grand Avenue 4/ (1)(3) 20,000 10,503 0.53 C 10,836 0.54 C 0.01 Broadway 2/Local Grand Avenue to Second Avenue (2)(3) 10,000 6,159 0.62 C 6,244 0.62 C 0.00 Note: Deficient roadway segment operation shown in bold. (1) Indicates a four-lane with on-street parking permitted. (2) Indicates a two-lane with on-street parking permitted. The City Circulation Element does not include an Urban with permitted on-street parking, so the LOS thresholds and LOS E capacity for a Rural Two-Lane with on-street parking permitted was used in this case. (3) The City of Escondido Circulation Element classifies Broadway as a four-lane Major Arterial from Second Avenue to the north end of the city. However, the segment from Valley Parkway to Grand Avenue is constructed with four travel lanes with permitted on-street parking, and the segment from Grand Avenue to Second Avenue is constructed with two travel lanes with permitted on-street parking. 31

Roadway Location #Lanes/Class Valley Parkway Grand Avenue Second Avenue Escondido Boulevard Maple Street Centre City Parkway to Orange Street Orange Street to Escondido Boulevard Escondido Boulevard to Maple Street Maple Street to Broadway Table 9 Existing Plus Project Daily Roadway Segment Conditions With Maple Street Closure 5/One-Way 5/One-Way 3/One-Way 3/One-Way Daily Capacity Existing Without Project Existing Plus Project ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS Change In V/C 46,600 19,033 0.41 B 19,298 0.41 B 0.00 46,600 19,358 0.42 B 19,754 0.42 B 0.00 35,000 22,912 0.65 C 23,930 0.68 C 0.03 35,000 19,316 0.55 B 21,348 0.61 C 0.06 Escondido Boulevard to Maple Street 4/ (1) 20,000 12,492 0.62 C 13,997 0.70 C 0.08 Maple Street to Broadway 4/ (1) 20,000 12,665 0.63 C 13,947 0.70 C 0.07 Centre City Parkway to Orange Street Orange Street to Escondido Boulevard Escondido Boulevard to Maple Street Maple Street to Broadway 3/One-Way 3/One-Way 3/One-Way 3/One-Way 35,000 17,821 0.51 B 18,062 0.52 B 0.01 35,000 18,833 0.54 B 19,074 0.54 B 0.00 35,000 18,478 0.53 B 18,790 0.54 B 0.01 35,000 18,184 0.52 B 18,496 0.53 B 0.01 Valley Parkway to Grand Avenue 4/ 34,200 17,829 0.52 B 19,519 0.57 B 0.05 Grand Avenue to Second Avenue 4/ 34,200 14,662 0.43 B 14,795 0.43 B 0.00 Valley Parkway to Grand Avenue Grand Avenue to Second Avenue 2/Local (2) 10,000 2,419 0.24 A 4,050 0.41 B 0.17 2/Local (2) 10,000 1,900 0.19 A 1,900 0.19 A 0.00 Valley Parkway to Grand Avenue 4/ (1)(3) 20,000 10,503 0.53 C 12,678 0.63 C 0.10 Broadway 2/Local Grand Avenue to Second Avenue (2)(3) 10,000 6,159 0.62 C 6,548 0.65 C 0.03 Note: Deficient roadway segment operation shown in bold. (1) Indicates a four-lane with on-street parking permitted. (2) Indicates a two-lane with on-street parking permitted. The City Circulation Element does not include an Urban with permitted on-street parking, so the LOS thresholds and LOS E capacity for a Rural Two-Lane with on-street parking permitted was used in this case. (3) The City of Escondido Circulation Element classifies Broadway as a four-lane Major Arterial from Second Avenue to the north end of the city. However, the segment from Valley Parkway to Grand Avenue is constructed with four travel lanes with permitted on-street parking, and the segment from Grand Avenue to Second Avenue is constructed with two travel lanes with permitted on-street parking. 32

EXISTING PLUS CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS WITHOUT AND WITH PROJECT To determine the existing plus cumulative conditions in the project study area, forecast project traffic associated with City of Escondido approved or pending projects was added to existing traffic volumes. This formed the base conditions upon which traffic generated by the proposed project was added. The City of Escondido provided a list of sixteen (16) cumulative projects, summarized in Table 10. City staff provided cumulative project traffic data through the study area based on information from traffic impact studies prepared for some of the cumulative projects. Exhibit 17 shows the location of the cumulative projects. Exhibit 18 shows the peak hour cumulative project volumes at the study intersections, and Exhibit 19 shows the daily cumulative project volumes on the study roadway segments. As presented in Table 10, the cumulative projects are forecast to generate approximately 19,522 ADT, which includes approximately 1,160 a.m. peak hour trips and approximately 1,744 p.m. peak hour trips. Existing Plus Cumulative Level of Service Analysis Without Maple Street Closure, Without and With Project To determine the existing plus cumulative operating conditions with the proposed project, the forecast project-generated trips were added to the existing plus cumulative traffic volumes. Exhibits 20 and 21 show the existing plus cumulative a.m. and p.m. peak hour study intersection volumes without the Maple Street closure, without and with the project, respectively. Table 11 summarizes the existing plus cumulative peak hour intersection LOS without the Maple Street closure, without and with the proposed project. Detailed HCM calculation sheets are contained in Appendix G. 35