14264-02 FS Letter REV
TABLE 1: PROPOSED PROJECT TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
WICKERD ROAD CLASSIFICATION
In order to determine the ultimate roadway classification for the portion of Wickerd Road bisecting the development, the long-range future traffic forecasts assuming buildout of the City were reviewed. General Plan Buildout with Project daily traffic volumes are shown on Exhibit 1.
As shown on Exhibit 1, the volumes along Wickerd Road are no more than 9,000 vehicles per day.
Due to the low volume anticipated, it was determined that a “collector” roadway would be sufficient to accommodate the anticipated future traffic volume (which has a daily volume capacity of 13,000 vehicles per day). It is recommended that the portion of Wickerd Road through the development be designed and constructed to accommodate a modified industrial collector cross-section, which has a curb-to-curb width of 56-feet (accommodates two 10-foot shoulders, two 12-foot through lanes, and a 12-foot painted median/left turn lane). In addition, there would be two 12 to 21-foot-wide sidewalk/parkway areas which results in an ultimate right-of-way of 98- feet.
ITE
Land Use1 Code Units2 In Out Total In Out Total Daily
Single Family Detached Residential 220 DU 0.18 0.52 0.70 0.59 0.35 0.94 9.43 1 Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual , Eleventh Edition (2021). 2 DU = dwelling units
Project Quantity Units1 In Out Total In Out Total Daily Golden Meadows (TTM No. 31194) 571 DU 104 296 400 338 199 537 5,386 1 DU = dwelling units
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Mr. Alen Estrada-Rodas
Placeworks
June 13, 2022
14264-02 FS Letter REV
EXHIBIT 1: GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH PROJECT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT)
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS
The term "signal warrants" refers to the list of established criteria used by the Caltrans and other public agencies to quantitatively justify or ascertain the potential need for installation of a traffic signal at an otherwise unsignalized intersection. This assessment uses the signal warrant criteria presented in the latest edition of the Caltrans California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). The Peak Hour Volume -based Warrant 3 is the appropriate representative traffic signal warrant analysis for existing study area intersections. Warrant 3 is appropriate to use because it provides specialized warrant criteria for intersections with rural characteristics (e.g., located in communities with populations of less than 10,000 persons or with adjacent major streets operating above 40 miles per hour).
A traffic signal warrant analysis has been conducted for the intersection of Haun Road and Wickerd Road to determine when a traffic signal would be warranted at this location. Based on the traffic signal warrant analysis, the intersection of Haun Road and Wickerd Road would
Mr. Alen Estrada-Rodas
Placeworks
June 13, 2022
14264-02 FS Letter REV
warrant a traffic signal after the 275 th dwelling unit. Attachment B includes the traffic signal warrants at existing conditions, up to 275 dwelling units, and at Project Buildout.
REGIONAL AND LOCAL FUNDING MECHANISMS
Transportation improvements within the City of Menifee are funded through a combination of improvements constructed by the Project , development impact fee programs or fair share contributions. Fee programs applicable to the Project are described below.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE (TUMF) The Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee ( TUMF) program is administered by the Western Riverside Council of Governments ( WRCOG) based upon a regional Nexus Study most recently updated in 2016 to address major changes in right of way acquisition and improvement cost factors. This regional program was put into place to ensure that development pays its fair share, and that funding is in place for construction of facilities needed to maintain the requisite level of service and critical to mobility in the region. TUMF is a truly regional mitigation fee program and is imposed and implemented in every jurisdiction in Western Riverside County. The proposed Project is located within the Central TUMF Zone.
CITY OF MENIFEE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE (DIF) PROGRAM
The Project will also be subject to City of Menifee’s DIF program which includes a component for roads and signals. The City’s DIF program has been updated in July 2021 and discusses the local (as opposed to regional) streets and signal improvements planned for the City through build-out of the existing City limits.
SCOTT ROAD AND BRIDGE BENEFIT DISTRICT (RBBD)
The City of Menifee is anticipated to experience substantial growth. Extensive improvements are necessitated by new development within the region. In particular, Riverside County recognized the effects of this growth on the vicinity of the study area when it formed the Scott Road RBBD.
The proposed Project lies within Zone B of the Scott Road RBBD. Zone B is generally bounded by the I-215 Freeway to the east, Sunset Avenue to the west, Holland Road to the north, and Baxter Road to the south. As discussed above, the facilities improvements that will be ultimately constructed as a result of the collection of these fees and assessments.
FAIR SHARE CONTRIBUTION
Project improvements may include a combination of fee payments to established programs, construction of specific improvements, payment of a fair share contribution toward future improvements or a combination of these approaches. Improvements found to be included in the TUMF, DIF, and/or the Scott Road RBBD will be identified as such. Improvements constructed by development may be eligible for a fee credit or reimbursement through the program where appropriate (to be determined at the City’s discretion). These fees are collected with the proceeds Mr. Alen Estrada-Rodas
Placeworks
June 13, 2022
14264-02 FS Letter REV
solely used as part of a funding mechanism aimed at ensuring that regional highways and arterial expansions keep pace with the projected population increases.
For improvements that do not appear to be in any of the pre-existing fee programs or constructed by the Project, a fair share contribution based on the Project’s proportional share may be imposed in order to address the Project’s share of deficiencies in lieu of construction. It should be noted that fair share calculations are for informational purposes only and th e City Traffic Engineer will determine the appropriate improvements to be implemented by a project (to be identified in the conditions of approval). Per the City of Menifee traffic study guidelines, all fair share contributions shall be calculated using the following equation:
Fair Share Percentage = Proposed Project Trips / [ (Future Volumes – Existing Volumes)] Detailed fair share calculations, for each peak hour, have been provided on Table 2 for the applicable study area intersections . The proposed Project trips are based on the current trip generation and the distribution identified in the 2004 Traffic Study. Data from the 2004 Traffic Study are also shown on Table 2, which include s the Post 2025 With Project traffic volumes.
Existing traffic volumes have been derived from 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022 traffic counts or have been estimated based on the observed growth between 2004 and the current traffic counts for near-by intersections. Consistent with the City’s Guidelines , the updated Project fair share percentage for each intersection has been determined by dividing the currently proposed Project volume by the Total New Traffic, where Total New Traffic is Future Year traffic less Existing traffic.
The resulting fair share percentages for the proposed Project are shown in the column on the far right. Excerpts from the Traffic Study are included in Attachment A. The fair share cost shall be determined at a future date based on engineering cost estimates of the proposed improvements in conjunction with the fair share percentages identified in Table 2.
If you have any questions or comments, I can be reached at (949) 861-0177.
Respectfully submitted,
URBAN CROSSROADS, INC.
Charlene So, PE
Principal
Mr. Alen Estrada-Rodas
Placeworks
June 13, 2022
14264-02 FS Letter REV
TABLE 2: PROJECT FAIR SHARE CALCULATIONS
# Intersection Existing
Proposed
Project Future Year
Total New
Traffic1
Project Fair
Share2
1 Murrieta Rd. & Holland Rd.
AM: 2,488 40 3,510 1,022 3.91%
PM: 1,442 54 4,440 2,998 1.80%
2 Murrieta Rd. & Garbani Rd.
AM: 2,896 100 4,136 1,240 8.06%
PM: 1,374 135 2,887 1,513 8.92%
3 Murrieta Rd. & Scott Rd.
AM: 2,500 60 4,000 1,500 4.00%
PM: 2,491 81 5,108 2,617 3.09%
4 Evans Rd. & Garbani Rd.
AM: 663 120 1,986 1,323 9.07%
PM: 137 162 2,271 2,134 7.59%
5 Evans Rd. & Scott Rd.
AM: 2,003 0 3,889 1,886 0.00%
PM: 2,301 0 4,582 2,281 0.00%
6 Garbani Rd. & Wickerd Rd.
AM: 18 179 1,611 1,593 11.24%
PM: 7 241 1,762 1,755 13.73%
7 Haun Rd. & Newport Rd.
AM: 4,919 80 6,368 1,449 5.52%
PM: 5,914 108 8,628 2,714 3.98%
8 Haun Rd. & Holland Rd.
AM: 1,782 80 4,367 2,585 3.10%
PM: 1,046 108 5,608 4,562 2.37%
9 Haun Rd. & Craig Av.
AM: 1,063 80 1,972 909 8.80%
PM: 584 108 2,598 2,014 5.36%
10 Haun Rd. & Garbani Rd.
AM: 1,063 139 3,398 2,335 5.95%
PM: 584 188 4,040 3,456 5.44%
11 Haun Rd. & Wickerd Rd.3
AM: 1,226 220 2,059 833 26.41%
PM: 1,300 296 2,599 1,299 22.79%
12 Haun Rd. & Scott Rd.
AM: 1,575 120 5,367 3,792 3.16%
PM: 1,534 161 7,149 5,615 2.87%
13 I-215 SB Ramps & Newport Rd.
AM: 5,649 80 7,315 1,666 4.80%
PM: 6,066 108 9,026 2,960 3.65%
14 I-215 SB Ramps & Scott Rd.
AM: 3,484 120 5,703 2,219 5.41%
PM: 3,487 161 7,919 4,432 3.63%
15 I-215 NB Ramps & Newport Rd.
AM: 5,475 59 7,677 2,202 2.68%
PM: 6,165 40 9,403 3,238 1.24%
16 I-215 NB Ramps & Scott Rd.
AM: 3,178 46 6,192 3,014 1.53%
PM: 4,000 112 9,729 5,729 1.95%
BOLD = Fair share percentage for the Project based on the highest peak hour. 1 Total New Traffic = Future Year - Existing
2 Project Fair Share = Proposed Project / Total New Traffic 3 A traffic signal is anticipated to meet peak hour volume-based warrants after the 275th dwelling unit.
14264-02 FS Letter REV
ATTACHMENT A: EXCERPTS FROM TENTATIVE TRACT 31194 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, DATED MAY 24, 2004
14264-02 FS Letter REV
ATTACHMENT B: TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS
WORKSHEETS
California MUTCD 2014 Edition
(FHWA's MUTCD 2009, as amended for use in California)
Figure 4C-4. Warrant 3, Peak Hour (70% Factor)
Traffic Conditions = Existing Conditions - Weekday PM Peak Hour Major Street Name = Haun Rd. Total of Both Approaches (VPH) = 1280 Number of Approach Lanes Major Street = 1
Minor Street Name = Wickerd Rd. High Volume Approach (VPH) = 18 Number of Approach Lanes Minor Street = 1
(COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 64 km/h OR ABOVE 40 mph ON MAJOR STREET)
SIGNAL WARRANT NOT SATISFIED
*Note: 100 vph applies as the lower threshold for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold for a minor-street approach with one lane 128018
0 100
200
300
400
500
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
Minor Street - Higher-Volume Approach (VPH)
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches (VPH)
1 Lane (Major) & 1 Lane (Minor)
2+ Lanes (Major) & 1 Lane (Minor) OR 1 Lane (Major) & 2+ Lanes (Minor) 2+ Lanes (Major) & 2+ Lanes (Minor)
Major Street Approaches
Minor Street Approaches
California MUTCD 2014 Edition
(FHWA's MUTCD 2009, as amended for use in California)
Figure 4C-4. Warrant 3, Peak Hour (70% Factor)
Traffic Conditions = Up to 275 Dwelling Units - Weekday PM Peak Hour Major Street Name = Haun Rd. Total of Both Approaches (VPH) = 1370 Number of Approach Lanes Major Street = 1
Minor Street Name = Wickerd Rd. High Volume Approach (VPH) = 71 Number of Approach Lanes Minor Street = 1
(COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 64 km/h OR ABOVE 40 mph ON MAJOR STREET)
SIGNAL WARRANT NOT SATISFIED
*Note: 100 vph applies as the lower threshold for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold for a minor-street approach with one lane 1300
71 0
100
200
300
400
500
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
Minor Street - Higher-Volume Approach (VPH)
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches (VPH)
1 Lane (Major) & 1 Lane (Minor)
2+ Lanes (Major) & 1 Lane (Minor) OR 1 Lane (Major) & 2+ Lanes (Minor) 2+ Lanes (Major) & 2+ Lanes (Minor)
Major Street Approaches
Minor Street Approaches
California MUTCD 2014 Edition
(FHWA's MUTCD 2009, as amended for use in California)
Figure 4C-4. Warrant 3, Peak Hour (70% Factor)
Traffic Conditions = Project Buildout - Weekday PM Peak Hour Major Street Name = Haun Rd. Total of Both Approaches (VPH) = 1466 Number of Approach Lanes Major Street = 1
Minor Street Name = Wickerd Rd. High Volume Approach (VPH) = 128 Number of Approach Lanes Minor Street = 1
(COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 64 km/h OR ABOVE 40 mph ON MAJOR STREET)
WARRANTED FOR A SIGNAL
*Note: 100 vph applies as the lower threshold for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold for a minor-street approach with one lane 1300
128
0 100
200
300
400
500
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
Minor Street - Higher-Volume Approach (VPH)
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches (VPH)
1 Lane (Major) & 1 Lane (Minor)
2+ Lanes (Major) & 1 Lane (Minor) OR 1 Lane (Major) & 2+ Lanes (Minor) 2+ Lanes (Major) & 2+ Lanes (Minor)
Major Street Approaches
Minor Street Approaches
This page intentionally left blank.