LSA is a business name of LSA Associates, Inc.
CARLSBAD
CLOVIS
IRVINE
LOS ANGELES
PALM SPRINGS
POINT RICHMOND
RIVERSIDE
ROSEVILLE
SAN LUIS OBISPO
1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200, Riverside, California 92507 951.781.9310 www.lsa.net
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 9, 2024
TO: Nicolas Fidler, City of Menifee
Christopher Heron, City of Menifee
Ryan Fowler, Principal Planner, City of Menifee
FROM: Ambarish Mukherjee, AICP, PE
SUBJECT: Menifee Valley Specific Plan Project Truck Trip Distribution under Improvement Scenario (LSA Project # CIM2106)
This memorandum has been prepared to demonstrate the proposed truck traffic distribution with regards to the Menifee Valley Specific Plan (MVSP) Traffic Study (TS). The proposed MVSP project divides 590.3 acres of land into 13 planning areas (PAs). Overall, th e project includes 1,328 single‐ family residential dwelling units (DUs), 390 multifamily residential DUs, one elementary school with 750 students, 5,510,000 square feet (sf) of industrial uses, 560,000 sf of retail, 120,000 sf of public facility uses, and a sports park that includes a 54,000 sf aquatic sports ce nter and other sports amenities. These aforementioned land uses are divided into thirteen separate planning areas (PAs).
Among these PAs, PA 10, 11, and 12 is primarily proposed to include industrial and warehouse land uses. As such, these three PAs are estimated to generate significant amount of truck traffic.
While preparation of the Traffic Study (T S) for the project, the project trip distribution for each PAs, including the estimated project truck traffic distribution from the project were developed using the select zone model run of the Riverside County Transportation Model (RIVCOM), and further refinement considering the surrounding and regional land uses, regional roadway network, an d designated truck routes. As such, it was estimated that approximately 95 percent of the project truck traffic will be accessing the Interstate 215 (I‐215) using either the I‐215 and State Route (SR) 74 interchange, or the McCall Boulevard Interchange.
However, based on the project location, the closest fr eeway interchange for the project is the I‐ 215/Ethanac Road interchange. But, given the existing circulation network, there is no direct connection from the project site to access this interchange. As such, as shown in Chapters 5 and 6 of the TS, northbound regional project traffic is likely to use th e I‐215/SR‐74 interchange while southbound regional project traffic is likely to use the I‐215/McCall Boulevard interchange due to lack of direct connection from the project site to access the interchange I‐215/Ethanac Road interchange.
Based on discussion with project applicant and city staff during preparation of the TS, th e project is being conditioned to extend McLaughlin Road to connect to Case Road‐Matthews Road. As part of this extension, trucks would be restricted to travel south along Menifee Road beyond McLaughlin 1/9/24 (P:\CIM2106 MVSP EIR\02 Technical Study ‐ Peer Review\2.1 Traffic ‐ VMT\July 2023\Report\MVSP Traffic Study Truck Distribution Memorandum.docx) 2 Road but would instead be required to use the McLaughlin Road extension to travel to the I‐ 215/Ethanac Road interchange.
Because of this trip redistribution, project truck traffic distributions were assigned and studied in the Traffic Study along SR‐74 and Ethanac Road to access the I‐215 ramps. Figures 1‐A through 3‐B illustrate the updated regional truck traffic distribution at these corridors for PAs 10, 11 and 12 respectively under this improvement scenario.
Detailed description of this improvement along with other project related improvements are described and discussed in Section 8.0 of the TS. This section also reports the corresponding LOS and delay with implementation of project specific improvements and other cumulative improvements identified as part of the analysis. This includes improvements to both study intersections and roadway segments.
Should you have any comments or require further information, please do not hesitate to contact me at (951)‐781‐9310.
ATTACHMENTS:
Figures For Truck Trip Re‐distribution (Improvement Scenario) Figure 1‐A: PA‐10 Regional Trip Distribution – Trucks ‐ Zone 2 (Improvement Scenario) Figure 1‐B: PA‐10 Regional Trip Distribution – Trucks ‐ Zone 3 (Improvement Scenario) Figure 2‐A: PA‐11 Regional Trip Distribution – Trucks ‐ Zone 2 (Improvement Scenario) Figure 2‐B: PA‐11 Regional Trip Distribution – Trucks ‐ Zone 3 (Improvement Scenario) Figure 3‐A: PA‐12 Regional Trip Distribution – Trucks ‐ Zone 2 (Improvement Scenario) Figure 3‐B: PA‐12 Regional Trip Distribution – Trucks ‐ Zone 3 (Improvement Scenario) 48%
48%
48%
48%
48%
((!
!
48%
48%
(
!
! !
48%
! ! ! ! !
SOURCE: ESRI
I:\CIM2106\Reports\Zones\Distribution Figures\Zone2\PA13_Zone2.mxd (1/8/2024) Figure 1-A
Menifee Valley Specific Plan
Traffic Study
PA-10 Regional Trip Distribution - Trucks - Zone 2 (Improvement Scenario) 0 1625 3250
FEET
S!!N
LEGEND
Project Location
! Study Area Intersections
( Project Trip Distribution
(
47%
((
(
((
(
47%47%474 %7%
47%
((((
47%47%47%47%
47%
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
((
(
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
8% 8%
5% 5% 5%
40%
48%
40%
13%
87%
SOURCE: ESRI
I:\CIM2106\Reports\Zones\Distribution Figures\Zone3\PA13_Zone3.mxd (1/8/2024) Figure 1-B
Menifee Valley Specific Plan
Traffic Study
PA-10 Regional Trip Distribution - Trucks - Zone 3 (Improvement Scenario) 0 750 1500
FEET
S!!N
LEGEND
Project Location
! Study Area Intersections
( Project Trip Distribution
47%
!
48%
48%
48%
48%
48%
((!
!
48%
48%
(
!
! !
48%
! ! ! ! !
SOURCE: ESRI
I:\CIM2106\Reports\Zones\Distribution Figures\Zone2\PA13_Zone2.mxd (1/8/2024) Figure 2-A
Menifee Valley Specific Plan
Traffic Study
PA-11 Regional Trip Distribution - Trucks - Zone 2 (Improvement Scenario) 0 1625 3250
FEET
S!!N
LEGEND
Project Location
! Study Area Intersections
( Project Trip Distribution
(
47%
(
47%
( 47%(47%(47%
(
47%
(47%(47%(((
47% 47%
47%
(
(
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
5% 5%
47%
SOURCE: ESRI
I:\CIM2106\Reports\Zones\Distribution Figures\Zone3\PA13_Zone3.mxd (1/8/2024) Figure 2-B
Menifee Valley Specific Plan
Traffic Study
PA-11 Regional Trip Distribution - Trucks - Zone 3 (Improvement Scenario) 0 750 1500
FEET
S!!N
LEGEND
Project Location
! Study Area Intersections
( Project Trip Distribution
48%
(
8%
4%
31%
16%
16%
16%
1%
8%
!!
(
16%
(
32%
!
(8%
(
16%(
1%
(
31%
47%
48%
48%
48%
48%
((!
!
48%
48%
(
!
! !
48%
! ! ! ! !
SOURCE: ESRI
I:\CIM2106\Reports\Zones\Distribution Figures\Zone2\PA13_Zone2.mxd (1/8/2024) Figure 3-A
Menifee Valley Specific Plan
Traffic Study
PA-12 Regional Trip Distribution - Trucks - Zone 2 (Improvement Scenario) 0 1625 3250
FEET
S!!N
LEGEND
Project Location
! Study Area Intersections
( Project Trip Distribution
(
48%(
47%
47%((( 474 %7%
(
47%
(( 47%47%(((
47%47%
47%
(
(
(
(
(
(
((
(
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
5% 5% 5%
16%
48% 32% 32%
16%
63%
SOURCE: ESRI
I:\CIM2106\Reports\Zones\Distribution Figures\Zone3\PA13_Zone3.mxd (1/8/2024) Figure 3-B
Menifee Valley Specific Plan
Traffic Study
PA-12 Regional Trip Distribution - Trucks - Zone 3 (Improvement Scenario) 0 750 1500
FEET
S!!N
LEGEND
Project Location
! Study Area Intersections
( Project Trip Distribution
47% !
(
37%