City of Moreno Valley
Traffic Impact Preparation Guide
June 2020
34 EXHIBIT A
Project Scoping Form
This scoping form shall be submitted to the Lead Agency to assist in identifying infrastructure improvements that may be required to support traffic from the proposed project.
Project Identification:
Case Number:
Related Cases:
SP No.
EIR No.
GPA No.
CZ No.
Project Name:
Project Address:
Project Opening
Year:
Project
Description:
Consultant: Developer:
Name:
Address:
Telephone:
Email:
Trip Generation Information:
Trip Generation Data Source:
Moreno Valley Festival Specific Plan (SP No. 205)
Moreno Valley Business Park - Phase II (SPA No. 2)
Southeast Corner of Heacock Street & Ironwood Avenue
2023
Urban Crossroads - Charlene So
1133 Camelback St, #8329
Newport Beach, CA 92658
949-861-0177
[email protected]
(Representative)
Applied Planning - Ross Geller
11762 De Palma Rd, 1-C 310
Corona, CA 92883
ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021)
220,390 square foot warehouse; where 154,270 SF will be evaluated assuming warehousing, 33,060 SF of manufacturing use, and 33,060 SF of high-cube cold storage warehouse use
City of Moreno Valley
Traffic Impact Preparation Guide
June 2020
35 Current General Plan Land Use:
Proposed General Plan Land Use:
Current Zoning:
Proposed Zoning:
Existing Trip Generation Proposed Trip Generation
In Out Total In Out Total
AM Trips
PM Trips
Trip Internalization: Yes No ( % Trip Discount)
Pass-By Allowance: Yes No ( % Trip Discount)
Potential Screening Checks
Is your project screened from specific analyses (see Page 3 of the guidelines related to LOS assessment and Pages 22-23 for VMT screening criteria).
Is the project screened from LOS assessment? Yes No
LOS screening justification (see Page 3 of the guidelines):
Commercial
Business Park/Light Industrial
(PCE)
41 17
58 23
42 65
SP No. 205 (Retail Commercial)
SP No. 205 (Mix of Uses)
Project generates less than 100 peak hour trips (both actual vehicles and PCE) City of Moreno Valley
Traffic Impact Preparation Guide
June 2020
36 Is the project screened from VMT assessment? Yes No VMT screening justification (see Pages 22-23 of the guidelines):
Level of Service Scoping
• Proposed Trip Distribution (Attach Graphic for Detailed Distribution):
North South East West
% % % %
Link level of service and data collection:
____ will be required
____ will not be required
• Attach list of study intersections (and roadway segments if applicable) • Attach site plan
• Other specific items to be addressed:
o Site access
o On-site circulation
o Parking
o Consistency with Plans supporting Bikes/Peds/Transit
o Other
• Date of Traffic Counts
• Attach proposed analysis scenarios (years plus proposed forecasting approach) • Attach proposed phasing approach (if the project is phased) X
Not Applicable
See attched
See attached memo
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Not Applicable
City of Moreno Valley
Traffic Impact Preparation Guide
June 2020
37 VMT Scoping
For projects that are not screened, identify the following:
• Travel Demand Forecasting Model Used
• Attach WRCOG Screening VMT Assessment output or describe why it is not appropriate for use
• Attach proposed Model Land Use Inputs and Assumed Conversion Factors (attach)
See attached memo
RIVTAM w/ GPU for cumulative year (unmodified
for base year)
14397-03 Scope
December 14, 2021
Wei Sun
City of Moreno Valley
14177 Frederick Street
Moreno Valley, CA 92552
SUBJECT: MORENO VALLEY BUSINESS PARK – PHASE II TRIP GENERATION ASSESSMENT AND VMT Dear Wei Sun:
Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to submit this scoping letter to City of Moreno Valley regarding the proposed Moreno Valley Business Park – Phase II development (Project), which is located east of Heacock Street and north of the SR -60 Freeway in the City of Moreno Valley. The purpose of this work effort is to determine whether additional traffic analysis is necessary for the proposed Project based on the City of Moreno Valley’s Transportation Impact Analysis Preparation Guide for Vehicles Miles Traveled and Level of Service Assessment (June 2020) (City’s Guidelines).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Project is to consist of 220,390 square foot industrial building (Building 5) which will be evaluated assuming 154,270 square feet of warehousing use (70% of the overall square footage), 33,060 square feet of manufacturing use (15% of the overall square footage), and 33,060 square feet of high- cube cold storage warehouse use (15% of the overall square footage) for a total of 220,390 square feet of industrial uses. A preliminary site plan for the proposed Project is shown on Exhibit 1. It is anticipated that the Project would be developed in a single phase with an anticipated Opening Year of 2023. As indicated on Exhibit 1, access to the Project site will be provided to Heacock Street via two driveways and Ironwood Avenue via 1 driveway.
Wei Sun
City of Moreno Valley
December 14, 2021
14397-03 Scope
EXHIBIT 1: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
Wei Sun
City of Moreno Valley
December 14, 2021
14397-03 Scope
TRIP GENERATION
Trip generation represents the amount of traffic that is attracted and produced by a development and is based upon the specific land uses planned for a given project. The trip generation rates shown on Table 1 are based upon information co llected by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) as provided in their Trip Generation Manual (11
th Edition, 2021) for the proposed uses.
For purposes of this assessment , the following ITE land use codes and vehicle mixes have been utilized for the purposes of calculating the proposed Project trip generation:
• ITE land use code 140 (Manufacturing) has been used to derive site specific trip generation estimates for up to 33,060 square feet of the propose d Project. A manufacturing facility is an area where the primary activity is the conversion of raw materials or parts into finished products.
Size and type of activity may vary substantially from one facility to another. In addition to the actual production of goods, manufacturing facilities general ly also have office, warehouse, research, and associated functions. The vehicle mix has been obtained from the ITE’s latest Trip Generation Manual . The truck percentages were further broken down by axle type per the following SCAQMD recommended truck mix: 2-Axle = 16.7%; 3-Axle = 20.7%; 4+-Axle = 62.6%. • ITE land use code 150 (Warehousing) has been used to derive site specific trip generation estimates for up to 154,270 square feet of the proposed Project . A warehouse is primarily devoted to the storage of materials but may also include office and maintenance areas. The vehicle mix has also been obtained from the ITE’s latest Trip Generation Manual . The truck percentages were further broken down by axle type per the following SCAQMD recommended truck mix: 2-Axle = 16.7%; 3-Axle = 20.7%; 4+-Axle = 62.6%. • ITE land use code 157 (High-Cube Cold Storage Warehouse) has been used to derive site specific trip generation estimates for up to 33,060 square feet of the proposed Project. High -cube cold storage warehouses include warehouses characterized by the storage and/or consolidation of manufactured goods (and to a lesser extent, raw materials) prior to their distribution to retail locations or other warehouses. H igh-cube cold storage warehouses are facilities typified by temperature-controlled environments for frozen food or other perishable products. The High - Cube Cold Storage Warehouse vehicle mix (passenger cars versus trucks) has been obtained from the ITE’s latest Trip Generation Manual. The truck percentages were further broken down by axle type per the following SCAQMD recommended truck mix: 2 -Axle = 34.7%; 3 -Axle = 11.0%; 4+ - Axle = 54.3%.
Wei Sun
City of Moreno Valley
December 14, 2021
14397-03 Scope
TABLE 1: ITE TRIP GENERATION RATES
ITE LU AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use1 Units2 Code In Out Total In Out Total
Actual Vehicle Trip Generation Rates
Manufacturing 3 TSF 140 0.517 0.163 0.680 0.229 0.511 0.740 4.750 Passenger Cars 0.494 0.156 0.650 0.220 0.490 0.710 4.300 2-Axl e Trucks 0.003 0.002 0.005 0.002 0.003 0.005 0.075 3-Axl e Trucks 0.003 0.003 0.006 0.003 0.004 0.006 0.093 4+-Axl e Trucks 0.011 0.008 0.019 0.008 0.011 0.019 0.282 Warehousing 3 TSF 150 0.131 0.039 0.170 0.050 0.130 0.180 1.710 Passenger Cars 0.116 0.034 0.150 0.042 0.108 0.150 1.110 2-Axl e Trucks 0.002 0.001 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.005 0.100 3-Axl e Trucks 0.002 0.002 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.006 0.124 4+-Axl e Trucks 0.007 0.006 0.013 0.010 0.009 0.019 0.376 High-Cube Cold Storage Warehouse 3 TSF 157 0.085 0.025 0.110 0.034 0.086 0.120 2.120 Passenger Cars 0.062 0.018 0.080 0.025 0.065 0.090 1.665 2-Axl e Trucks 0.003 0.007 0.010 0.005 0.005 0.010 0.260 3-Axl e Trucks 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.002 0.001 0.003 0.083 4+-Axl e Trucks 0.005 0.011 0.016 0.008 0.008 0.016 0.113 Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE) Trip Generation Rates4
Manufacturing 3 TSF 140 0.517 0.163 0.680 0.229 0.511 0.740 4.750 Passenger Cars 0.494 0.156 0.650 0.220 0.490 0.710 4.300 2-Axle Trucks (PCE = 1.5) 0.005 0.003 0.008 0.003 0.004 0.008 0.113 3-Axle Trucks (PCE = 2.0) 0.006 0.006 0.012 0.005 0.007 0.012 0.186 4+-Axl e Trucks (PCE = 3.0) 0.033 0.023 0.056 0.023 0.033 0.056 0.845 Warehousing 3 TSF 150 0.131 0.039 0.170 0.050 0.130 0.180 1.710 Passenger Cars 0.116 0.034 0.150 0.042 0.108 0.150 1.110 2-Axle Trucks (PCE = 1.5) 0.003 0.002 0.005 0.005 0.003 0.008 0.150 3-Axle Trucks (PCE = 2.0) 0.004 0.004 0.008 0.006 0.006 0.012 0.248 4+-Axl e Trucks (PCE = 3.0) 0.021 0.017 0.038 0.030 0.026 0.056 1.127 High-Cube Cold Storage Warehouse 3 TSF 157 0.085 0.025 0.110 0.034 0.086 0.120 2.120 Passenger Cars 0.062 0.018 0.080 0.025 0.065 0.090 1.665 2-Axle Trucks (PCE = 1.5) 0.005 0.011 0.016 0.008 0.008 0.016 0.390 3-Axle Trucks (PCE = 2.0) 0.002 0.005 0.007 0.004 0.003 0.007 0.165 4+-Axl e Trucks (PCE = 3.0) 0.015 0.034 0.049 0.024 0.025 0.049 0.338 1 Trip Generation & Vehicle Mix Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual , Eleventh Edition (2021). 2 TSF = thousand square feet
3 Truck Mix: South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) recommended truck mix, by axle type.
Normalized % - Without Cold Storage: 16.7% 2-Axle trucks, 20.7% 3-Axle trucks, 62.6% 4-Axle trucks.
Normalized % - With Cold Storage: 34.7% 2-Axle trucks, 11.0% 3-Axle trucks, 54.3% 4-Axle trucks. 4 PCE factors: 2-axle = 1.5; 3-axle = 2.0; 4+-axle = 3.0.
Daily
Wei Sun
City of Moreno Valley
December 14, 2021
14397-03 Scope
Passenger car equivalent (PCE) factors were applied to the trip generation rates for heavy trucks (large 2-axles, 3-axles, 4+-axles). PCEs allow the typical “real-world” mix of vehicle types to be represented as a single, standardized unit, such as the passenger car, to be used for the purposes of capacity and level of service analyses. The PCE factors are consistent with the recommended PCE factors in the City’s Guidelines.
Any operations analyses performed as part of a Traffic Analysis would be required to utilize the PCE trip generation consistent with the City’s Guidelines. The trip generation summary illustrating daily and peak hour trip generation estimates for the proposed Project in actual vehicles and PCE are shown on Table 2 and Table 3 , respectively. T he proposed Projec t is anticipated to generate 498 two-way trips per day with 49 AM peak hour trips and 52 PM peak hour trips (of which 128 two-way trips per day are associated with trucks with 2 AM peak hour truck trips and 3 PM peak hour truck trips) (see Table 2 ). Table 3 indicates the Project would generate 676 two-way PCE trips per day with 58 PCE AM peak hour trips and 65 PCE PM peak hour trips.
T
ABLE 2: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY (ACTUAL VEHICLES)
Land Use Quantity Units1 In Out Total In Out Total Daily Actual Vehicles:
Manufacturing 33.060 TSF
Passenger Cars: 16 5 21 7 16 23 142
2-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
3-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
4+-axl e Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
Total Truck Trips (A ctual Ve hicle s): 0 0 0 0 0 0 16
Subotal Trips (Actual Vehicles)2 16 5 21 7 16 23 158
Warehousing 154.270 TSF
Passenger Cars: 18 5 23 6 17 23 172
2-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 0 0 0 16
3-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 0 0 0 20
4+-axl e Trucks: 1 1 2 2 1 3 58
Total Truck Trips (A ctual Ve hicle s): 1 1 2 2 1 3 94
Subotal Trips (Actual Vehicles)2 19 6 25 8 18 26 266
High-Cube Cold Storage 33.060 TSF
Passenger Cars: 2 1 3 1 2 3 56
2-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
3-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
4+-axl e Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Total Truck Trips (A ctual Ve hicle s): 0 0 0 0 0 0 18
Subotal Trips (Actual Vehicles)2 2 1 3 1 2 3 74
Passenger Cars 36 11 47 14 35 49 370
Trucks 1 1 2 2 1 3 128
Project Total Trips (Actual Vehicles)2 37 12 49 16 36 52 498 1 TSF = thousand square feet
2 Total Trips = Passenger Cars + Truck Trips.
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Wei Sun
City of Moreno Valley
December 14, 2021
14397-03 Scope
TABLE 3: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY (PCE)
The existing Moreno Valley General Plan land use designation for the site is commercial. Although the maximum allowable floor to area ratio (FAR) is 1.00 for the General Plan Commercial Land Use designation, an FAR of 0.51 has been utilized for the purposes of this assessment. As such, the maximum allowable commercial building square footage for the site has been calculated by multiplying the 0.51 FAR by 9.98 acres and converting acres to square footage (9.98 acres x 43,56 0 square feet/acre x 0.51 FAR = 220,390 square feet). Table 4 summarizes the trip generation for 220,390 square feet of commercial retail use. As shown on Table 4, the currently approved land use is anticipated to generate 5,384 two-way trips per day with 185 AM peak hour trips and 506 PM peak hour trips (less pass -by trip reductions per the ITE Trip Generation Handbook for the commercial retail use, which is 34% in the PM and daily only).
Land Use Quantity Units1 In Out Total In Out Total Daily Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE):
Manufacturing 33.060 TSF
Passenger Cars: 16 5 21 7 16 23 142
2-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
3-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
4+-axl e Trucks: 1 1 2 1 1 2 28
Total Truck Trips (PCE): 1 1 2 1 1 2 38
Subtotal Trips (PCE)2 17 6 23 8 17 25 180
Warehousing 154.270 TSF
Passenger Cars: 18 5 23 6 17 23 172
2-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 1 0 1 24
3-axl e Trucks : 1 1 2 1 1 2 38
4+-axl e Trucks: 3 3 6 5 4 9 174
Total Truck Trips (PCE): 4 4 8 7 5 12 236
Subtotal Trips (PCE)2 22 9 31 13 22 35 408
High-Cube Cold Storage 33.060 TSF
Passenger Cars: 2 1 3 1 2 3 56
2-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 0 0 0 14
3-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
4+-axl e Trucks: 0 1 1 1 1 2 12
Total Truck Trips (PCE): 0 1 1 1 1 2 32
Subtotal Trips (PCE)2 2 2 4 2 3 5 88
Passenger Cars 36 11 47 14 35 49 370
Trucks 5 6 11 9 7 16 306
Project Total Trips (PCE)2 41 17 58 23 42 65 676
1 TSF = thousand square feet
2 Total Trips = Passenger Cars + Truck Trips.
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Wei Sun
City of Moreno Valley
December 14, 2021
14397-03 Scope
TABLE 4: CURRENTLY APPROVED LAND USE TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
Table 5 compares the trip generation for the currently approved Commercial Retail land use and the proposed warehousing Project. For the proposed Project, the comparison conservatively utilizes the PCE trip generation. As shown on Table 5, the proposed Project is anticipated to generate 4,708 fewer two- way trips per day with 127 fewer AM peak hour trips and 441 fewer PM peak hour trips (overall net reduction in trips).
TABLE 5: TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON
CONCLUSION
The traffic study area is to be defined in conformance with the requirements of the City’s G uidelines, which state that the requirement to prepare a traffic study will be based upon whether a project is anticipated to generate 100 or more peak hour trips. Based on this criterion, the Project is anticipated to generate fewer than 100 peak hour trips during any peak hour and would contribute fewer than 50 peak hour trips to any off- site study area intersection. As such, additional traffic analysis beyond this trip generation assessment does not appear to be necessary.
ITE LU AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use1 Units2 Code In Out Total In Out Total
Commercial Retail (>150,000 SF) TSF 820 0.52 0.32 0.84 1.63 1.77 3.40 37.01 1 Trip Generation & Vehicle Mix Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual , Eleventh Edition (2021). 2 TSF = thousand square feet
Land Use Quantity Units1 In Out Total In Out Total Daily Com m e rcail Re tail 220.390 TSF 115 70 185 360 390 750 8,158 Pass-by Reductions: 0 0 0 -122 -122 -244 -2,774
Total Trips 115 70 185 238 268 506 5,384
1 TSF = thousand square feet
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily
Land Use Quantity Units1 In Out Total In Out Total Daily Approved: Commerci al Retai l 220.390 TSF 115 70 185 238 268 506 5,384 Proposed: Warehousing (in PCE) 220.390 TSF 41 17 58 23 42 65 676 Variance -74 -53 -127 -215 -226 -441 -4,708
1 TSF = thousand square feet
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Wei Sun
City of Moreno Valley
December 14, 2021
14397-03 Scope
If you have any questions, please contact me directly at (949) 861-0177.
Respectfully submitted,
URBAN CROSSROADS, INC.
Charlene So, PE
Associate Principal
Attachments
14397-02 VMT.docx
January 3, 2022
Mr. Ross Geller
Applied Planning, Inc.
11762 De Palma Road, 1-C 310
Corona, CA 92883
SUBJECT: MORENO VALLEY BUSINESS PARK – PHASE II VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) ANALYSIS Dear Mr. Ross Geller:
The following vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis has been prepared for the proposed Moreno Valley Business Park – Phase II (Project), which is located east of Heacock Street and north of the 60 Freeway in the City of Moreno Valley.
PROJECT OVERVIEW
It is our understanding that the proposed Project is to consist of 220,390 square foot industrial building (Building 5) , which will be evaluated assuming 154,270 square feet of warehousing use (70% of the overall square footage), 33,060 square feet of manufacturing use (15% of the overall square footage), and 33,060 square feet of high-cube cold storage warehouse use (15% of the overall square footage) for a total of 220,390 square feet of industrial uses. A preliminary site plan for the proposed Project is shown on Attachment A.
BACKGROUND
Changes to California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) Guidelines were adopted in December 201 8, which require all lead agencies to adopt VMT as a replacement for automobile delay -based level of service (LOS ) as the new measure for identifying transportation impacts for land use projects . This statewide mandate went into effect July 1, 2020. To aid in this transition, the Governor’s Office o f Planning and Research (OPR) released a Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (December 2018) (Technical Advisory) (1). Based on OPR’s Technical Advisory, the City of Moreno Valley has developed their own City of Moreno Valley Traffic Impact Analysis Preparation Guide for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service Assessment (June 2020) (City Guidelines) (2). The following analysis has been prepared utilizing the City Guidelines and the City’s recently develop General Plan Buildout traffic model for the cumulative year analysis, which was directed by City staff.
VMT SCREENING ASSESSMENT
City’s Guidelines list standardized screening methods for project level VMT analysis that can be used to identify when a proposed land use development project is anticipated to result in a less than significant Mr. Ross Geller
Applied Planning, Inc.
January 3, 2022
14397-02 VMT.docx
impact thereby eliminating the need to conduc t a full VMT analysis . To aid in the project-level VMT screening process , the City of Moreno Valley utilizes the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) VMT Screening Tool (Screening Tool). The web-based Screening Tool allows a user to select an assessor’s parcel number (APN) to d etermine if a project’s physical location meets one or more of the land use screening methods documented in the City Guidelines. The City of Moreno Valley VMT screening steps, as described within the City Guidelines, are listed below:
• Step 1: Transit Priority Area (TPA) Screening
• Step 2: Low VMT Area Screening
• Step 3: Project Type Screening
A land use development project need only meet one of the above screening methods to result in a less than significant impact.
TPA SCREENING
The Technical Advisory and City Guidelines describe that projects located within a Transit Priority Area (TPA) (i.e., within ½ mile of an existing “ major transit stop ”1 or an existing stop along a “ high-quality transit corridor”2) may be presumed to have a less than s ignificant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary.
However, the presumption may not be appropriate if a project:
• Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75;
• Includes more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than required by the jurisdiction (if the jurisdiction requires the project to supply parking); • Is inconsistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy (as determined by the lead agency, with input from the Metropolitan Planning Organization); or • Replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income residential units.
Based on the Screening Tool results presented in Attachment B, the Project site is not located within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop, or along a high-quality transit corridor.
TPA screening is not met.
1 Pub. Resources Code, § 21064.3 (“‘Major transit stop’ means a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.”). 2 Pub. Resources Code, § 21155 (“For purposes of this section, a high-quality transit corridor means a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.”).
Mr. Ross Geller
Applied Planning, Inc.
January 3, 2022
14397-02 VMT.docx
LOW VMT AREA SCREENING
The City Guidelines state that, “residential and office projects located within a low VMT-generating area may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. In addition, other employment -related and mixed -use land use projects may qualify fo r the use of screening if the project can reasonably be expected to generate VMT per resident, per worker, or per service population that is similar to the existing land uses in the low VMT area.” 3 The Project’s physical
location, based on parcel number, is input into the Screening Tool to determine project generated VMT as compared to the City’s impact threshold. The parcel containing the proposed Project was selected and the Screening Tool was evaluated for the VMT per employee metric of VMT. Based on the Screening Tool results, the Project resides within TAZ 3,67 5 and was shown to generate 8.26 VMT per employee, whereas the City’s impact threshold (i.e., City of Moreno Valley net VMT per employee) is 11.01 VMT per employee (See Attachment B). However, the Project is proposing a General Plan Amendment and is therefore not eligible for low VMT area screening.
Low VMT area screening is not met.
PROJECT TYPE SCREENING
The City Guidelines identify that local serving retail buildings with less than 50,000 square feet or other local serving essential services (e.g., day care centers, public schools, medical/dental office buildings, etc.) are presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. In addition, small projects anticipated that generate low traffic volumes (i.e., fewer than 400 daily trips) and by association low greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are also assumed to cause a less than significant impact. Trips generated by the Project’s proposed land use have been estimated based on trip generation rates collected by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 20 21. (3) The Project is estimated to generate 498 vehicle trip- ends per day and would exceed the 400 daily trip threshold. (See Attachment C) Small project screening is not met.
Based on a more detailed review of the applicable VMT screening s teps, it was determined that the Project is not eligible for screening and a VMT analysis should be performed consistent with City Guidelines.
VMT ANALYSIS
VMT MODELING
City Guidelines i dentifies RIVTAM/RIVCOM as appropriate tools for conducting VMT analysis for land development projects in the City of Moreno Valley. Based on discussion with City staff, it was determined
3 City Guidelines; page 23.
Mr. Ross Geller
Applied Planning, Inc.
January 3, 2022
14397-02 VMT.docx
that this analysis would be prepared based on an unmodified version of RIVTAM for the base year model and a modified version of RIVTAM inclusive of the recent City of Moreno Valley General Plan update for the cumulative year model.
VMT METRIC AND SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD
As stated in the City Guidelines, f or projects that are office and industrial land use types, the City Guidelines identify VMT per employee as the appropriate VMT metric. Therefore, the Project’s industrial warehouse land uses should be evaluated based on the metric VMT per employee. The City Guidelines describes the following significance thresholds for VMT analyses4:
• A project would have a significant VMT impact if, in the Existing Plus Project per employee (for office and industrial projects) exceeds the per employee VMT for Moreno Valley. • If a project is not consistent with the RTP/SCS, then it would have a significant VMT impact if , for office and industrial projects its net VMT per employee exceeds the average VMT per employee for Moreno Valley in the RTP/SCS horizon year , or in this case the City of Moreno Valley General Plan buildout conditions.
WRCOG publishes jurisdictional averages for its member agencies and for the City of Moreno Valley the current base year (2012) VMT per employee is 11.01. It should be noted that the current (2006) City of Moreno Valley general plan VMT per employee is 14.51 for the cumulative year (2040). However, based on City staff’s direction, for the cumulative year, a no project RIVTAM cumulative year model run was performed inclusive of the City’s General Plan Update, as provided by the City of Moreno Valley General Plan Update EIR. The General Plan Update EIR shows the City of Moreno Valley citywide average VMT per employee in the horizon (cumulative) year to be 14.40.
PROJECT LAND USE CONVERSION
In order to evaluate Project VMT, standard land use information must first be converted into a RIVTAM compatible dataset. The RIVTAM model utilizes socio-economic data (SED) (e.g., population, households, employment, etc.) instead of land use information for the purposes of vehicle trip estimation. Project land use informatio n such as building square footage must first be converted to SED for input into RIVTAM. Utilization of e mployment generation factors were taken from the Riverside County General Plan (4). Table 1 presents the estimated number of Project employees by land use type used to populate the RIVTAM model.
TABLE 1: EMPLOYMENT ESTIMATES
Land Use Building Area Conversion Factor5 Estimated Employees Industrial 220,390 SF 1,030 SF per employee 214 Industrial Employees
4 City Guidelines; Page 26
5 Riverside County General Plan; Appendix E-2
Mr. Ross Geller
Applied Planning, Inc.
January 3, 2022
14397-02 VMT.docx
The RIVTAM model was then run inclusive of the Project’s SED inputs.
PROJECT VMT CALCULATION AND COMPARISON TO IMPACT THRESHOLD As noted previously, RIVTAM was utilized to calculate project generated VMT for the Project. That value was then divided by the Project’s employment estimate to derive the efficiency metric of VMT per employee in the base year and the cumulative year inclusive of the City’s General Plan Update . Table 2 presents home-based work VMT for the Project’s TAZ for both base year and cumulative year conditions, the number of Project employees, and the resulting VMT per employee.
TABLE 2: PROJECT VMT PER EMPLOYEE
Project Base Year Project Cumulative Year
VMT 1,751 2,475
Employment 214 214
VMT per Employee6 8.18 11.57
Table 3 provides a comparison between Project VMT per employee to the City’s significance threshold of 11.01 in base year conditions and 14.40 for cumulative year inclusive of the City’s General Plan update conditions.
TABLE 3: PROJECT VMT PER EMPLOYEE COMPARISON
Base Year Cumulative Year
City Threshold 11.01 14.40
Project 8.18 11.57
Percent Change -25.70% -19.65%
Potentially Significant? No No
The Project’s VMT per employee was found not to exceed the City’s significance threshold in either the base year or cumulative year. Therefore, the Project potential impact to VMT is less than significant.
CONCLUSION
In summary, the Project was evaluated against the City’s applicable VMT screening steps and did not qualify for screening. A full VMT analysis using the VMT metric of VMT per employee was performed consistent with City Guidelines . The Project’s VMT per employee was found to not exceed the City’s impact thresholds for either base year or cumulative year conditions . The Project’s potential impact to VMT is therefore considered less than significant.
6 HBW VMT per Employee is a measure of all auto trips between home and work and does not include heavy duty truck trips or freight, which is consistent with OPR direction and City Guidelines.
Mr. Ross Geller
Applied Planning, Inc.
January 3, 2022
14397-02 VMT.docx
If you have any questions, please contact me directly at (949) 660-1994.
Respectfully submitted,
URBAN CROSSROADS, INC.
Alex So
Senior Analyst
Mr. Ross Geller
Applied Planning, Inc.
January 3, 2022
14397-02 VMT.docx
REFERENCES
1. Office of Planning and Research. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA.
State of California : s.n., December 2018.
2. City of Moreno Valley. Traffic Impact Analysis Peparation Guide for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service Assessment. City of Moreno Valley : s.n., June 2020.
3. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation Manual. 11th Edition. 2021.
4. County of Riverside. Appendix E: Socioeconomic Build-Out Assumptions and Methodology. County of Riverside : s.n., April 2017.
14397-02 VMT.docx
ATTACHMENT A
PRELIMINARY PROJECT SITE PLAN
14397-02 VMT.docx
14397-02 VMT.docx
ATTACHMENT B
WRCOG VMT SCREENING TOOL
14397-02 VMT.docx
14397-02 VMT.docx
ATTACHMENT C
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
14397-02 VMT.docx
TABLE 1: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION RATES
ITE LU AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use1 Units2 Code In Out Total In Out Total
Actual Vehicle Trip Generation Rates
Manufacturing 3 TSF 140 0.517 0.163 0.680 0.229 0.511 0.740 4.750 Passenger Cars 0.494 0.156 0.650 0.220 0.490 0.710 4.300 2-Axl e Trucks 0.003 0.002 0.005 0.002 0.003 0.005 0.075 3-Axl e Trucks 0.003 0.003 0.006 0.003 0.004 0.006 0.093 4+-Axl e Trucks 0.011 0.008 0.019 0.008 0.011 0.019 0.282 Warehousing 3 TSF 150 0.131 0.039 0.170 0.050 0.130 0.180 1.710 Passenger Cars 0.116 0.034 0.150 0.042 0.108 0.150 1.110 2-Axl e Trucks 0.002 0.001 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.005 0.100 3-Axl e Trucks 0.002 0.002 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.006 0.124 4+-Axl e Trucks 0.007 0.006 0.013 0.010 0.009 0.019 0.376 High-Cube Cold Storage Warehouse 3 TSF 157 0.085 0.025 0.110 0.034 0.086 0.120 2.120 Passenger Cars 0.062 0.018 0.080 0.025 0.065 0.090 1.665 2-Axl e Trucks 0.003 0.007 0.010 0.005 0.005 0.010 0.260 3-Axl e Trucks 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.002 0.001 0.003 0.083 4+-Axl e Trucks 0.005 0.011 0.016 0.008 0.008 0.016 0.113 1 Trip Generation & Vehicle Mix Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual , Eleventh Edition (2021). 2 TSF = thousand square feet
3 Truck Mix: South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) recommended truck mix, by axle type.
Normalized % - Without Cold Storage: 16.7% 2-Axle trucks, 20.7% 3-Axle trucks, 62.6% 4-Axle trucks.
Normalized % - With Cold Storage: 34.7% 2-Axle trucks, 11.0% 3-Axle trucks, 54.3% 4-Axle trucks.
Daily
14397-02 VMT.docx
TABLE 2: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
Land Use Quantity Units1 In Out Total In Out Total Daily Actual Vehicles:
Manufacturing 33.060 TSF
Passenger Cars: 16 5 21 7 16 23 142
2-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
3-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
4+-axl e Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
Total Truck Trips (A ctual Ve hicle s): 0 0 0 0 0 0 16
Subotal Trips (Actual Vehicles)2 16 5 21 7 16 23 158
Warehousing 154.270 TSF
Passenger Cars: 18 5 23 6 17 23 172
2-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 0 0 0 16
3-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 0 0 0 20
4+-axl e Trucks: 1 1 2 2 1 3 58
Total Truck Trips (A ctual Ve hicle s): 1 1 2 2 1 3 94
Subotal Trips (Actual Vehicles)2 19 6 25 8 18 26 266
High-Cube Cold Storage 33.060 TSF
Passenger Cars: 2 1 3 1 2 3 56
2-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
3-axl e Trucks : 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
4+-axl e Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Total Truck Trips (A ctual Ve hicle s): 0 0 0 0 0 0 18
Subotal Trips (Actual Vehicles)2 2 1 3 1 2 3 74
Passenger Cars 36 11 47 14 35 49 370
Trucks 1 1 2 2 1 3 128
Project Total Trips (Actual Vehicles)2 37 12 49 16 36 52 498 1 TSF = thousand square feet
2 Total Trips = Passenger Cars + Truck Trips.
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour