HomeMy WebLinkAbout5708
RESOLUTION NO, 5708
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ARCADIA ADOPTING AMENDED
REGULA nONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENTS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT BY
ESTABLISHING GUlDE,LIN"ES FOR CONGESTION
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM TRANSPORTATION
IMP ACT ANALYSIS
WHEREAS, the Congestion Management Program (CMP) for Los
Angeles County requires the adoption of guidelines for Transportation
Impact Analysis (TIA);
WHEREASf said guidelines are to be used in the analysis of
transportation impacts of development projects which require the
preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR~.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ARCADIA AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. This resolution shall become effective April 1, 1993.
SECTION 2, That the transportation impacts for development projects
which require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report shall be
evaluated following the guidelines set forth in attached Exhibit A.
SECTION 3, The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this
resolution.
Passed, approved and adopted this 19th day of January, 1993,
\
of Arcadia
~
ATTEST:
~
ia
1
5708
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS:
CITY OF ARCADIA )
I, JUNE D. ALFORD, City Clerk of the city of Arcadia, hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 5708 was passed and
adopted by the city Council of the City of Arcadia, signed by the
Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk at a regular meeting of
said Council held on the 19th day of January, 1993 and that said
Resolution was adopted by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Councilmember Ciraulo, Harbicht, Lojeski, Margett
and Fasching
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
~
f Arcadia
5708
APPENDIX D. GlJIDEUNES fOR eMF TRANSPORTATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PAGE D,l
APPENDIX D
GUIDELINES FOR CMP TRANSPORTATION IMPACf ANALYSIS
D.l OBJECI'IVE OF GUIDELINES
The following guidelines are intended to assist local agencies in evaluating impacts of land
use decisions on the Congestion Management Program (CMP) system, through preparation
of a regional transportation impact analysis (TIA). The following are the basic objectives
of these guidelines:
. Promote consistency in the studies conducted by different jurisdictions, while maintaining
flexibility for the variety of project types which could be affected by these guidelines.
\
. Establish procedures which can be implemented within existing project review processes,
and without ongoing review by MTA
. Provide guidelines which can be implemented immediately, with the full intention of
subsequent review and possible revision.
These guidelines are based on specific requirements of the Congestion Management
Program, and travel data sources available specifically for Los Angeles County. Basic
references are listed in Section D.10 which provide additional information on possible
methodologies and resources for conducting TIAs.
D.2 GENERAL PROVISIONS
CMP TIA requirements should be fulfilled within existing processes for environmental
review, by extending local traffic impact studies presently being conducted to the regional
system. In order to monitor activities affected by these requirements, Notices of Preparation
(NOPs) must be submitted to MTA as a responsible agency. Formal MTA approval of
individual TIAs is not required.
The following sections describe CMP TIA requirements in detail. In general, the competing
objectives of consistency & flexibility have been addressed by specifying standard, or
minimum, requirements and requiring documentation when a TlA varies from these
standards.
D.3 PROJECfS SUBJECI' TO ANALYSIS
Chapter 7 discusses in detail the circumstances under which a TIA must be conducted, A
CMP TIA is required for projects required to prepare an Environmental Impact Repon
based on local determination,
Congestion Managem~lIt Program Filial DrtJft
Revis~d S~pt~mb~r 1992
ElliIBIT "A"
~ 57o~
APPENDIX D. GUlDEllNES POR CMP TRANSPORTATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PAG!! D-2
0.4 STUDY AREA
The geographic area examined in the TIA must include the following, at a minimum:
. All CMP arterial monitoring intersections, including freeway on- or off-ramp
intersections, where the proposed project will add 50 or more trips during either the AM
or PM weekday peak hours (of adjacent street traffic).
. Mainline freeway monitoring locations where the project will add 150 or more trips, in
either direction, during either the AM or PM weekday peak hours.
. Caltrans must also be consulted through the Notice of Preparation (NOP) process to
identify other specific locations to be analyzed on the state highway system.
If, based on these criteria, the TIA identifies no facilities for study, no further traffic analysis
is required. However, projects must still consider transit impacts (Section 0.8.3).
D.S BACKGROUND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
The following sections describe the procedures for documenting and estimating background,
or non-project related, traffic conditions. Note that for the purpose of a TIA, these
background estimates must include traffic from all sources without regard to the exemptions
specified in CMP statute (e.g., traffic generated by the provision of low and very low income
housing, or trips originating outside Los Angeles County). Such exemptions relate to the
annual finding of local jurisdiction conformance with the CMP, an issue which is separate
from the analysis of land use impacts provided in a TIA
0.5.1 EJisting Trame Conditions. Existing traffic volumes and levels of service (LOS) on
the CMP highway system within the study area must be documented. Traffic counts must
be less than one year old at the time the study is initiated, and collected in accordance with
CMP highway monitoring requirements (see Appendix A). Section 0.8.1 describes TIA
LOS calculation requirements in greater detail. Freeway traffic volume and LOS data
provided by Caltrans is also provided in Appendix A.
0.5.1 Selection or Horizon Year and Background Trame Growth. Horizon year(s)
selection is left to the lead agency, based on individual characteristics of the project being
analyzed. In general, the horizon year should reflect a realistic estimate of the project
completion date. For large developments phased over several years, review of intermediate
milestones prior to buildout should also be considered.
At a minimum, horizon year background traffic growth estimates must use the generalized
growth factors shown in Exhibit 0-1. These growth factorS are based on regional modeling,
ccmgution MtlIUlgmaent hogrQm FiMl Dnlft
Revised September 1992
APPENDIX D - GUIDELINES fOR CMP TRANSPORTATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PAGE D-3
efforts, and estimate the general effect of cumulative development and other socioeconomic
changes on traffic throughout the region. Beyond this minimum, selection among the
various methodologies available to estimate horizon year background traffic is left to the
lead agency. Suggested approaches include consultation with the jurisdiction in which the
intersection under study is located, in order to obtain more detailed traffic estimates based
on ongoing development in the vicinity.
D.6 PROPOSED PROJECI' TRAFFIC GENERATION
Traffic generation estimates must conform to the procedures of the current edition of.:rrm
Generation. by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). If an alternative
methodology is used, the basis for this methodology must be fully documented.
Increases in site traffic generation may be reduced for existing land uses to be removed, if
the existing use was operating during the year the traffic counts were collected. Current
traffic generation should be substantiated by actual driveway counts; however, if infeasible,
traffic may be estimated based on a methodology consistent with that used for the proposed
use.
D.7 TRIP DISTRIBUTION
For trip distribution by direct/manual assignment, generalized trip distribution factors are
provided in Exhibits 0-2 and 0-3 based on regional modeling efforts. These factors indicate
Regional Statistical Area (RSA)-level trip making for work and non-work trip purposes. '
These RSAs are illustrated in Exhibit D-4. For locations where it is difficult to determine
the project site RSA, census tract/RSA correspondence tables are available from MT A '
Exhibit D.S provides factors which indicate trip purpose breakdowns for various land use
types. Exhibit D-6 describes a general approach to applying the preceding factors. Project
trip distribution must be consistent with these trip distribution and purpose factors; the basis
for variation must be documented,
Local agency travel demand models disaggregated from the SCAG regional model are
presumed to conform to this requirement, as long as the trip distribution functions are
consistent with the regional distribution patterns, Development of more specific consistency
criteria is being considered by MTA
For retail commercial developments, alternative trip distribution factors may be appropriate
based on the market area for the specific planned use, Such market area analysis must
clearly identify the basis for the trip distribution pattern expected.
Congestion MQ1UZgemenl ~ Final Draft
Revised September 1992
APPENDIX O. GUIDELINES POR CMP TRANSPORTATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PAGE 0-4
0.8 IMPACf ANALYSIS
0.8.1 Intersection Level or Service ADalysis. The LA County CMP recognizes that
individual jurisdictions have wide ranging experience with LOS 8Dalysis, reflecting the
variety of community characteristics, traffic controls and street standards throughout the
County. As a result, the CMP acknowledges the possibility that no single set of assumptions
should be mandated for all TlAs within the county.
However, in order to promote consistency in the TlAs prepared by different jurisdictions,
CMP TlAs must conduct intersection LOS calculations using either of the following
methods:
(a) The Intersection Capacity Uti1ization (lCU) method as specified for CMP highway
monitoring (see Appendix A); or
(b) The Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) / Circular 212 method.
Variation from the standard assumptions under either of these methods for circumstances
at particular intersections must be fully documented.
TIAs using the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) operational analysis must provide
converted volume-ta-capacity based LOS values, as specified for CMP highway monitoring
in Appendix A
0.8.1 Freeway Segment (Mainline) ADalysis. For the purpose of CMP,TIAs, a simplified
analysis of freeway impacts is required. This analysis consists of a volume-to-capacity
calculation for the affected segments, and is indicated in Exhibit 0-7.
0.8.3 Transit Impact ADalysis. As discussed in Chapter ,6 of the CMP, projects which
conduct an EIR must' consult with transit operators regarding possible impact to transit
services. The optional worksheets of Exhibit D-8 can facilitate this consultation.
A local jurisdiction or project proponent completes Part A of the worksheets, then transmits
the worksheets to the applicable transit operators along with the EIR Notice of Preparation
(NOP). Completion of Part B of the worksheet and returning the completed worksheets
during the NOP comment period is optional for the transit operator. Appropriate
incorporation of transit operator responses within the EIR is then the responsibility of the
lead agency.
0.9 IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF MITIGATION
0.9.1 Criteria ror Determining a Significant Impact. For the purpose of a CMP TlA, a
significant project impact occurs when the proposed project causes a CMP facility to degrade
to LOS F, or increases traffic demand within LOS F, by 2% of capacity or more. The lead
agency may apply more stringent criteria if desired.
Congution MiINIgmtellt 1'rogfrml FiMl Drrlft
Revised Septtmbtr 1992
APPENDIX 0 . GUIDELINES FOR CMP TRANSPORTATIONAL OOACI ANALYSIS
PAGE 0.5
D3.2 Identiftcation of Mitigation. Once the project has been determined to cause a
significant impact, the lead agency must investigate measures which will mitigate the impact
of the project. Mitigation measures proposed must clearly indicate the following:
(a) Cost estimates, indicating the fair share costs to mitigate the impact of the proposed
project. If the improvement from a proposed mitigation measure will exceed the
impact of the project, the TIA must indicate the proportion of total mitigation costs
which is attributable to the project. This fulfills the statutory requirement to exclude
the costs of mitigating inter-regional trips. '
(b) Implementation responsibilities. Where the agency responsible for implementing
mitigation is not the lead agency, the TIA must document consultation with the
implementing agency regarding project impacts, mitigation feasibility and
responsibility.
Final selection of mitigation measures remains at the discretion of the lead agency. The
TIA must, however, provide a summary of impacts and mitigation measures, Once a
mitigation program is selected, the jurisdiction self-monitors implementation through the
mitigation monitoring requirements contained in CEQA
D.9.1 Project Contribution to Planned Regionallmpl'Ovements. If the TIA concludes that
project impacts will be mitigated by anticipated regional transportation improvements, such
as rail transit or high occupancy vehicle facilities, the TIA must document:
(a) The project's contribution to the improvement, and
(b) The means by which trips generated at the site will access the regional facility.
D.9.2 Transportation Demand Management (TDM). If the TIA concludes or assumes that
project impacts will be reduced through the implementation of roM measures, the TIA
must document specific actions to be implemented by the project which substantiate these
conclusions,
Congesrion M01Iagemt"1 Program Final Draft
Revised September 1992
APPENDIX D. GtJIDEUNES FOR CMP TRANSPORTATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PAGE D.o
D.IO REFERENCES
1. Traffic Accers and Impact Studies for Sile Development: A Recommended Pradice,
Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1991.
2. Trip Generation, 5th Edition, Institute of Transportation P.,gineers, 1991.
3. Travel Forecast Summary: 1987 Base Model . Los A1IIf!le.s &gional Transportation Study
(LARTS), California State Department of Transportation (Caltrans), February 1990.
4. Traffic Study Guidelines, City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT),
July 1991.
5. Traffic/Access Guidelines, County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works.
6. Building Better Communities, Sourcebook, Coordinating Land Use and Transit Planning,
American Public Transit Association.
7. Design Guidelines for Bus Fadlities, Orange County Transit District, 2nd Edition,
November 1987.o
8. Coordination of Transit and Project Development, Orange County Transit District, 1988.
9. Encouraging Public Transportation Through Effective Land Use Actions, Municipality of
Metropolitan Seattle, May 1987.
Congestion MlINIge11Ient ,Pmgnzm Final Draft
Rmsed September 1992
APPENDIX D . GUIDELINES FOR eMf TRANSPORTATIONAL lMPACI' ANALYSIS
PAGE D-7
EXHIBIT 1).1
GENERAL TRAFFIC VOLUME GROWI'H FACI'ORS
Area
.!22Q
1m
lQQQ
1QQS.
lQlQ
Central 1.00 1.10 1.15 1.18 1.20
North County 1.00 1.10 1.15 1.18 1.20
San Fernando Vly 1.00 1.10 1.15 1.18 1.20
San Gabriel Vly 1.00 1.10 1.15 1.18 1.20
South Bay 1.00 1.10 1.15 1.18 1.20
Southeast 1.00' 1.10 1.15 1.18 1.20
Westside 1.00 1.10 1.15 1.18 1.20
Note: This information is preliminary, and subject to revision based on further review by
CMP technical working groups. '
Congestion Management /'rogTtJm Final Draft
Revised September 1992
APPI!NDIX D - GUIDELINES FOR eMP TRANSPORTATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PAGE D-8
EXHIBIT D.l
1990 TRIP DISTRIBUTION FAcroRS
See following sheets
Note: This information will be finalized upon review by CMP technical working groups.
CongeSriOIl MQllogem~lII Program Firrol Drrzft '
Revis~d S~pl~mb~, 1992
REGIONAL TRIP DISTRIBUTION FACTORS -1990
WORK TRIPS
ATTRACTION
R S A
P
R
o
o
u
C
T
I
o
N
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Ven Ora S8 Riv Ker TOTAL
7 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
8 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
9 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
10 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
11 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
12 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
13 x x x x x x x x x x ,x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
14 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
15 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
16 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
17 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
18 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
19 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
20 x x x x x x x x x x 'x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
21 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
22 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
23 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
24 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 'x x x x x x x x x X
25 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
26 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
27 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
Ven x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
Ora x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
S8 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
RIv x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
Ker x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
OTAl X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
R
S
A
T
NON-WORK Tfl,IPS
ATTRACTION
R S A
P
R
o
o
u
C
T
I
o
N
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Ven Ora S8 RIv Ker TOTAL
7 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
8 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
9 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
10 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
11 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
12 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
13 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
14 x x x x x' x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
15 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
16 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
17 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
18 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
19 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
20 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
21 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
22 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
23 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
24 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
25 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
26 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
27 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
Ven x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
Ora x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
S8 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
Rlv x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
Ker x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
OTAl X X X X X X' X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
R
S
A
T
APPENDIX D - GUIDELINES FOR eMF TRANSPORTATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PAGE D-9
EXHIBIT D.3
2010 TRIP DISTRIBUTION FAcroRS
See following sheets
Note: This information will be finalized upon review by CMP technical working groups.
Congestion Manogemenll7ogrom Finol Draft
Revised September 1992
REGIONAL TRIP DISTRIBUTION FACTORS - 2010
WORK TRIPS
ATTRACT
o N
R 5 A
P
R
o
o
u
C
T
I
o
N
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2223 24 25 26 'l:1 Ven Ora 58 RIv Ker TOTAL
7 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
8 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
9 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
10 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
11 x , x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Ie X Ie Ie Ie Ie Ie X
12 x x Ie X Ie Ie X X Ie Ie X X X Ie Ie X X X X X Ie X X Ie X X X
13 Ie Ie Ie Ie X Ie Ie X Ie Ie X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
14 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
15 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
16 x x Ie X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Ie X X X X
17 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
18 x x x x x x x Ie X X X X X X X X X X Ie X X X X X X X X
19 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
20 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
21 x x x x Ie X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
22 x x x x x x x x x x x x x Ie X X X X X Ie X X X X X X X
23 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
24 x x x x x x x I( x I( I( I( I( x I( I( I( x I( I( x I( x x I( I( X
25 x I( x x x x I( x I( x I( I( x x x I( x x I( I( x I( x I( I( I( X
26 x I( x x I( x I( x x x I( x x x I( I( x x x I( x I( x I( I( I( X
'l:1 x I( I( x x x I( I( x Ie I( X X X Ie I( I( X I( I( Ie X X I( X I( X
Ven x x I( x x x I( x x I( x I( x x~ x I( x I( x x I( X
Ora x I( I( x x x x x x I( I( I( I( I( x I( x x x I( I( X
sa x x I( x x x x x I( I( x I( x x I( x I( x x x I( X
Riv x I( x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X
Ker x x x x x I( x x x x x x x I( I( I( x x x x x X
OTAl X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
R
5
A
T
NON-WORK TRIP5
ATTRACTION
R 5 A
P
R
o
o
u
C
T
I
o
N
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2223 24 2526 'l:1 Yen Ora sa Riv Ker TOTAL
7 x x I( I( I( x I( I( x x x x x x I( x I( x x x x I( x x I( I( X
8 I( x x Ie X I( X X I( X X I( I( x x I( I( I( x x x x Ie X X X X
9 x x x x x x x x x x x I( x x x I( x x I( x I( x x x x x X
10 x x x Ie I( X x' x x x x x I( x I( I( x I( x x x x x x I( I( X
11 x x I( x x I( I( x x x x x x I( I( x I( I( x x x x x I( x x X
12 'x x I( I( x I( I( x x x I( x x I( I( I( x x x x Ie X X X X I( X
13 x x x x Ie I( X Ie X X X X X X X I( I( x x I( I( I( x x I( I( X
14 x x x x Ie I( X X X X X X X I( X I( X X X X X X X X X X X
15 Ie x I( I( x I( x x x x x I( x x I( I( x x x x x x x x I( I( X
16 x x I( x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x I( I( x X
17 x x I( x x x x x x x x x x I( x I( x I( x x x x x x x x X
18 I( x I( x x x x x x I( x x I( x x x x I( x Ie X I( X X I( I( X
19 I( x x x x x x x x x x I( x x x x x I( x x x x x x x x X
20 x x x x x X x x x x X X X X X X I( X X X X X X X I( X X
21 I( I( X X X X X X X X X X X X X I( X X X X X X X X X I( X
22 x x x I( x x x x x x x x x x I( X X X X X X I( X X X X X
23 x x I( ,I( x x I( x I( x x x x x x x x x x x x I( I( I( I( I( X
24 I( X I( I( x I( I( I( I( x x x I( I( x x X x X X X X X X X X X
25 x x I( I( I( x I( x x x x x I( I( x x x x x x x I( x I( I( I( X
26 x I( I( x x x I( I( I( x x x x x x x I( x I( x x x x x x x X
'l:1 x x x x x x x x x x x I( I( x I( I( x x x x x I( x x x x X
Ven x I( I( I( x I( x X X X X I( X I( I( I( I( I( x I( X X
Ora I( I( I( I( I( I( x I( I( I( x I( I( x I( I( I( I( I( I( I( X
58 I( x I( I( I( I( I( I( I( I( x I( I( I( x x x x x X I( 'X
Riv I( I( I( I( I( I( I( x I( I( I( I( I( I( I( I( I( I( I( I( I( X
Ker I( x I( I( x I( x I( I( I( I( I( I( I( I( I( I( I( x x x X
OTAl X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
R
5
A
T
APPENDIX D - GUIDELINES FOR CMP TRANSPORTATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PAGE D-lO
EXHIBIT D4
REGIONAL STATISTICAL AREAS
See following sheets
Congestion MQ1logemenr l'rogram Final Draft
Revised September 1992
Regional Statistical Areas (RSA's)
LARTS Modeling Region
10
PAlMDALE
~
N
1
,
\
9
LANCASTER
,
\
MAUllU
SAN CLEMENTE
Source: Caltrans, 1987 Travel Forecast Summary
, . ,
Regional Statistical Areas (RSA's)
North County
~l:!>&
.-
~..
...
11
:t
..
...
~
Regional Statistical Areas (RSA's)
San Fernando Valley, Westside, South Bay
15
12
~
'0
RTE,lloj.
~
!'o
Regional Statistical Areas (RSA's)
San Gabriel Valley
~,it'Q
26
Ii
..
Regional Statistical Areas (RSA's)
Central, Southeast
!!
~
APPENDIX 0 - GUlDEUNES FOR eMP TRANSPORTATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PAGE D-ll
J
EXHIBIT D-S
TRIP PURPOSE BREAKDOWNS BY LAND USE 1YPE
Land Use Work Non-Work Total
Residential 25% 75% 100%
Shopping Center 10% 90% 100%
Office 80% 20% 100%
Hotel/Motel 15% 85% 100%
Industrial/Manufacturing 100% 0% 100%
Note: This information will be finalized upon review by CMP technical working groups.
Congrstion Manllgrment Program Final Draft
Revised September 1992
APPENDIX D - GUIDELINES FOR CMP TRANSPORTATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PAGE D-ll
EXHIBIT D-6
GENERAL PROCEDURE FOR CALCULATING TRIP DISTRIBUTION
1. Using Exhibit 0-5 as guidance, determine the proportion of project trip generation which
is work v. non-work. Assumptions and sources, if applicable, for land uses not listed in
Exhibit 0-5 must be documented.
2. Using Exhibit 0-4, determine the RSA in which the project is located (the "project
RSA").
3. Using Exhibits 0-2 and 0-3, determine the RSA-Ievel work and non-work trip
distributions for the project. Residential project (production) trip distribution is
obtained by totalling across the project RSA row; non-residential project (attraction)
distribution is obtained by totalling down the project RSA colUmn.
4. While specific characteristics of the project and study area must be considered, traffic
assignment should be conducted according to the following guidelines:
a. Trips internal to the project RSA should be primarily assigned to non-CMP routes; .
b. Trips from the project RSA to immediately adjacent RSAs should be primarily
assigned to eMP arterials or freeways, if present; and
c. Trips from the. project RSA to RSAs not adjacent to the project RSA should be
primarily assigned to freeways, if present.
C01Igmi01l MQIlagrment Pmgram Final Draft
Revised September 1992
APPENDIX D - GUIDELINES fOR eMP TRANSPORTATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PAGE D-13
EXHIBIT D.7
GENERAL PROCEDURE FOR FREEWAY SEGMENT (MAINLINE) ANALYSIS
1. Existing traffic conditions at eMP freeway monitoring stations are provided in
Appendix A Included are AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes, capacity, and level
of service (LOS) designations. Freeway mainline LOS is estimated through calculation
of the volume-to-capacity (V Ie) ratio and associated LOS according to the following
table:
.. V Ie Ratio .. ws .:>fV/C Rallo ""'. I.:.. ws
. .. - ...
. .
0.00 - 0.60 A ....:. > 1.00 . 1.25 F(O)
.,',
> 0.60 - 0.70 B > 1.25 . 1.35 F(I)
> 0.70 - 0.80 e > 1.35 - 1.45 F(2)
> 0.80 - 0.90 0 .). > 1.45 F(3)
> 0.90 - 1.00 E . .
Calculation of LOS based on V Ie ratios is a surrogate for the speed-based LOS used
by Caltrans for traffic operational analysis. LOS F(I) through F(3) designations are
assigned where severely congested conditions prevail for more than one hour, converted
to an estimate of peak hour demand in the table above. Note also that in some cases,
LOS FU is assigned although observed peak hour volumes are less than capacity. This
is due to the decreased throughput which occurs during highly congested conditions.
2. At a minimum, estimate horizon year(s) traffic volumes by applying the traffic growth
factors in Exhibit 0-1. More refined traffic estimates may be obtained through
consultation with Caltrans, or through consistent subarea modelling.
Determine horizon year LOS using the table above. Any assumptions regarding future
improvements to be operational by the horizon year must be fully documented, including
consultation with the responsible agency(ies).
3. Calculate the impact of the project during AM and PM peak hours. This is deCined by:
A) Incremental Effect - The increase in V Ie ratio due to the proposed project [ project
traffic I horizon year capacity ].
B) Resultim! LOS . The LOS due to the total of horizon year and proposed project
traffic [ (horizon year traffic + proposed project traffic) I horizon year capacity ],
and using the table above.
Section 0.9.1 defines the criteria for a significant impact. Mitigation measures and
associated cost estimates should focus on mitigating the incremental effect calculated
above.
Congesti01l Mll/IQgrmellt Program Final Draft .
Revised September 1992
APPENDIX D - GUIDELINES FOR CMP TRANsPORTATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PAGE D-14
EXHIBIT D-8
TRANSIT IMPACf REVIEW WORKSHEET
Valid 'Ibrougb 11/1/'3 (nest CMP update)
EIR NOP eOMMENT AND WORKSHEET COMPLETION DEADLINE:
Part A is completed and submitted to the transit operator upon the start of the EIR NOP
comment period. H the transit operator comments on the project, they may use Part B of
this worksheet to indicate responses. Comments are submitted to the person identified
under Part A below by the end of the NOP comment period.
PART A: To be completed by Developer or Local Jurisdiction.
Name 01 Penon Completing PART A.
lurisdklion/Company NIIIfUI
Add1rss
Telephone Number
PART B: To be completed by Transit Operator.
Name 01 Penon Comp/ttitlg PART B.
lurisdiaion/Company.NIIIfUI
Add1rss
Telephone NIU1Ibu
NOTE: The eMP requires consultation with transit operators through the Notice of
Preparation (NOP) when a project prepares an EIR. Use of these worksheets,
or similar, is suggested as a means to facilitate .this communication.
CongesP01I MfINIlltment I'rogram Final Draft
Revised Septmtlnr 1992
APPENDIX D . GUIDELINES FOR eMP TRANSPORTATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PAGE D-15
PART A: To Be Completed by Developer or Local JurisclktioD.
DEVEWPMENT PROJECf DESCRlmON
Local Jurisdiction
Development Project Name
I
1. Provide map of Development Project showing specific location and major streets.
2. Indicate development project type(s). Check more than one for mixed use projects.
o Commercial
o Hotel
o Industrial
o Office
o
o Single-Family Residential
Multi-Family Residential
o Retail
Other:
o
3. Indicate size for each use identiCied above:
Property Acreage or Square Feet
Dwelling Units .
Building Gross Square Feet (excluding parking structures/areas)
Other:
4. Provide trip generation and mode assignment information by time of day (if available).
AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR DAILY
Specify _ Specify
Total Trips Generated
Trips Assigned to
Transit
Congestion Managrmenl Program Final Draft
Revised September 1992
APPENDIX D - GUIDELINES FOR CMP TRANSPORTATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PAGe D.16
PART A: To Be Completed by Developer or Local Jurlsclictlon (continued)
5. What assumptions/analyses were used to determine the number lpercent of trips assigned
to transit (as indicated in Question 4)? Attach any working papers/CEQA documents,
if available, to document approach.
6. Will the development project include any facilities andlor programs to encourage public
transit use?
DYes
o No
H yes, provide a complete listing below. Be sure to include not only the local
jurisdiction's roM Ordinance measures but also include other project specific (e.g.,
condition of approval) measures. Attach additional information as needed.
8. Submit Worksheet (with Part A complete) to local fixed route bus operator(s) within
1 mile of the project and express bus and rail transit operators within 2 miles.
Transit Operator
Date Sent
C01Igm;01I MaNlgrmou Program Filial Draft
Revised September 1992
APPENDIX D - GUIDELINES FORCMP TRANSPORTATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PAGE D-I7
PART B: To Be Completed by Transit Operator(s)
TRANSIT OPERATOR REVIEW
1. Is proposed project transit use (part A. questions 4 and 5), given measures encouraging
transit use (Part A. question 6), consistent with current transit ridership in the area?
DYes
o No
o No Opinion
2. Is project assigning trips to transit?
DYes
o No
IrYes, then complete Tables B-1 and B-2 and return Worksheet to Part A contact by the
deadline date. Do not complete Table B-2 if there are no suggested improvements.
Ir No, and the question 1 response is yes, then do not complete Tables B-1 and B-2 and
return Worksheet to Part A contact by the deadline date.
Table B-llnstrudions. Complete Table B-1 below for current and plllJUled transit services.
Include local fixed-route bus service within a 1/4 mile radius and express bus and rail
services within a 2 mile radius of the proposed development. You may identify services
beyond the speciCied radii if you demonstrate that such services will be affected by the
development. Make copies of this Table as needed for providing information on additional
Lines/Routes.
Table B.l
TRANSIT SERVICE MATRIX
...;',. . lJDe/Route No. lJDe/Route No. lJDe/Route No.
. .- .
'-.. ".' ,".,
. . .
. .
,
New Trips Aaslped
AM Peak
PM Peak
Base
AdcllUoaaJ CapBclly Needed
AM Peak
PM Peak
Base
C01Igem01l Ml1NIge1flenl Program FiMJ Draft
Revised September 1992
APPENDIX D - GUIDELINES FOR CMP TRANSPORTATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PAGe D-lS
Table 8-2
TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS
Impromaellll for LiDefRoute LocaIlurisdiction
Route is: 0 Local fixed-route bus within 1/4 mile radius of development project.
0 Express bus route within 2 mile radius of development project.
0 Rail service within 2 mile radius of development project.
Transit operator may identify improvements for services beyond the specified radii if
the operator can demonstrate that such services will be affected by the development.
Make copies of this Table as needed for providing information on additional
lines/Routes.
Identify potential/desirable improvements below by filling in the improvement
column and completing adjacent columns. Provide map of improvement location as
needed.
.SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS-
Is Im.prlMIIlelIt HaYe Fuo'" lleea
Impr'O\lemeDt Eltlmated AIrad1I'1auetr. - AII_t.cI for
(FW ID bIaDka below Priority Cost ($000) Impromaeat?
u aeeded.) Ya
No Ya No
C01Igestion MlWIg01Ie1It .~um Final Draft
Revised September 1992