DATE: December 10, 2024
TO: Tina Andersen, T&B Planning, Inc.
FROM: Alex So, Urban Crossroads, Inc.
JOB NO: 14556-02 Alternatives VMT
TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
(VMT) ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
Urban Crossroads, Inc. has completed the following Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Alternatives Analysis for the Town Center at Moreno Valley ( Project), which is located northwest corner of the intersection of Nason Street & Alessandro Boulevard in the City of Moreno Valley. The purpose of this alternatives analysis is to evaluate potential changes in VMT for three (3) land use alternatives.
ALTERNATIVES OVERVIEW
The following 3 land use alternatives are evaluated as part of this analysis:
• Alternative 1: Reduced Development – Less Residential • Alternative 2: Reduced Development – Less Commercial
• Alternative 3: Reduced Development – Less Residential and Less Commercial Each alternative has been estimated using the same methodology and procedures o
utlined by the City of Moreno Valley Traffic Impact Analysis Preparation Guide for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service Assessment (June 2020) ( City Guidelines), which calls for the use of the RIV COM t ravel demand model to estimate VMT by alternative.
ALTERNATIVE 1: REDUCED DEVELOPMENT – LESS RESIDENTIAL
Under Alternative 1, this alternative would assume a reduction in residential units compared to the Project “assumed development scenario” in the EIR, but the same amount of commercial/civic use as the assumed development scenario. • 300 units
• 229,459 square feet (SF) of non-residential, consistent with the development scenario in the EIR:
o General Retail - 105,890 SF
o Business Professional Office - 15,000 SF (typical professional/general office uses)
o Eating Establishment/High-turnover Restaurant - 20,160 SF (including a 3,500 SF drive through)
o Hotel – 58,409 SF
o Civic Use – 30,000 SF
URBAN CROSSROADS
Tina Andersen, T&B Planning, Inc.
December 10, 2024
14556-02 Alternatives VMT
TABLE 1: ALTERNATIVE 1 VMT PER CAPITA
Alternative 1
VMT 12,839
Population 1,155
VMT per capita 11.1
ALTERNATIVE 2: REDUCED DEVELOPMENT – LESS COMMERCIAL
Under Alternative 2, this alternative would assume a reduction in non -residential intensity compared to the assumed development scenario in the EIR, but the same amount of residential. • 800 units
• 150,000 SF non-residential – an overall reduction of approximately 35%. The calculations below retain the required 30,000 SF civic building and then proportionately break out the remaining 120,000 SF at a consistent 40% reduction:
o General Retail – 63,900 SF
o Business Professional Office - 9,000 SF (typical professional/general office uses) o Eating Establishment/High-turnover Restaurant – 12,100 SF (including a 2,100 SF drive through)
o Hotel – 35,000 SF
o Civic Use – 30,000 SF
TABLE 2: ALTERNATIVE 2 VMT PER CAPITA
Alternative 2
VMT 15,620
Population 3,080
VMT per capita 5.1
ALTERNATIVE 3: REDUCED DEVELOPMENT – LESS RESIDENTIAL AND LESS
COMMERCIAL
Under Alternative 3, this would have reduced residential and reduced commercial compared to the assumed development scenario in the EIR.
• 700 units
• 175,000 SF non-residential – an overall reduction of approximately 24%. The calculations below retain the required 30,000 SF civic building and then proportionately break out the remaining 145,000 SF at a consistent 27% reduction:
o General Retail – 77,150 SF
o Business Professional Office – 10,800 SF (typical professional/general office uses) o Eating Establishment/High-turnover Restaurant – 14,570 SF (including a 2,600 SF drive thru)
o Hotel – 42,480 SF
o Civic Use – 30,000 SF
URBAN I CROSSROADS
Tina Andersen, T&B Planning, Inc.
December 10, 2024
14556-02 Alternatives VMT
TABLE 3: ALTERNATIVE 3 VMT PER CAPITA
Alternative 3
VMT 16,393
Population 2,695
VMT per capita 6.1
ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS VMT COMPARISON
Each of the land use alternatives has been modeled using the RIVCOM travel demand model to estimate VMT. Table 4 summarizes the results for each scenario.
TABLE 4: PROJECT VMT COMPARISONS WITH WRCOG VMT PER CAPITA Proposed
Project
Alternative 1:
Less Residential
Alternative 2:
Less Commercial
Alternative 3:
Less Residential and
Less Commercial
VMT 17,034 12,839 15,620 16,393
Population 3,080 1,155 3,080 2,695
VMT per Capita 5.5 11.1 5.1 6.1
City threshold 15.9 15.9 15.9 15.9
Exceeds City Threshold No No No No
Project generated VMT per capita for all the Alternatives would be below the City of Moreno Valley adopted impact threshold, consistent with the proposed Project.
If you have any questions, please contact me directly at [email protected].
URBAN I CROSSROADS