Loading...
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