Economic Development Committee
May 25, 2022

Economic Development Committee
City of Rialto
Regular Meeting - Final
Rialto City Hall, Council Chambers, 150 S. Palm
Ave. Rialto CA 92376
1:00 PMWednesday, May 25, 2022

ROLL CALL

PUBLIC COMMENTS

REVIEW/APPROVAL OF MINUTES
EDC-22-503 Minutes from the April 27, 2022 meeting.

REPORTS/DISCUSSION ITEMS
1 EDC-22-490 Traffic Impact Analysis - Draft VMT and LOS Guidelines (SB743) (ACTION ITEM)
2 EDC-22-504 Citywide Truck Route, Speed and Volume Studies Update 3 EDC-22-439 Kaptial Partners - Proposed Best Western Hotel 4 EDC-22-435 Commercial- and Residential- Mixed Use Districts of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan
5 EDC-22-436 Smart Cities Plan to Mitigate Impacts of Warehousing and Logistics 6 EDC-22-445 Items to be considered on the EDC Agenda

OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS

ADJOURNMENT

1 City of Rialto
Legislation Text
File #: EDC-22-503, Version: 1, Agenda #:

Minutes from the April 27, 2022 meeting.

City of Rialto Printed on 5/20/2022Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
2 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

MINUTES
Wednesday, April 27, 2022

Call to Order/Roll Call 1:13 PM

EDC MEMBER PRESENT
Mayor Deborah Robertson
Mayor Pro Tem Ed Scott

CITY/AGENCY STAFF PRESENT:

Marcus Fuller, City Manager
Robert Messinger, Deputy City Attorney
Paul Gonzales, Community Development Manager
Jesse Sanchez, Chief Building Official
Kathy Brann, Economic Development Manager
Angela Perry, City Council/City Manager’s Executive Assistant

Additional Attendees: Resident John Peukert
Public Comments – None
Review/Approval of Minutes
EDC-22-152 Minutes from the March 23, 2022 – Accepted for the Record.

REPORTS/DISCUSSION ITEMS

1. Consider Establishment of a Fee Schedule for Use of City Owned Electric Vehicle Charging Stations, Recommending Preferred Charging Station Brand for Future Charging Stations (Charge Ready 2 Program), and Recommendations for Additional Locations for Charge Ready 2 Applications.

Amy gave the presentation

Committee Comments/Questions/Recommendations
Mayor Pro Tem Scott asked why was Easton setup as a free of kilowatt charge, just parking fee. Amy said she doesn’t know, but the rest of the stations are no parking fee, but a charge for kilowatts. He said he is only supporting Level 3 charging stations, instead of putting in something that won’t benefit us, just because of a grant.

Mayor Robertson said that we need to see what type of efficiency we are getting.

Amy said we have a year maintenance plan. Mayor Robertson asked what happens after a year. Amy said, we have to renew the plan. Mayor Pro Tem asked how long we have to keep the current charging stations. Amy said, they have to be in place for 3 years with 3 MSRC. The ones through Charge Ready Program, they have to be in place for 10 years through the Edison’s program.

Mayor Pro Tem said we should be going with a private company, not a big utility company.

We need a vendor to install it and maintain it and work with Edison. They will have an expectant that they would update their equipment as technology changes.

Marcus said, he will work with Amy on replacing the level 2 stations to level 3. He said, we will not pursue the Edison Grant for the additional sites. Mayor wants to see the fee schedule balanced against the vendor.

Mayor Pro Tem asked if Edison’s contract limits the amount you can charge. Amy said the Grant restricts us on fees. He asked if we have any Edison chargers. A my said no, we have only submitted application and no further action has been taken. She said, all the City’s charging stations have the capability to charge for charging services; currently, the City does not have a fee schedule established for that.

Mayor Pro Tem asked how long ago these fees were charged or established. He said if the fees were set a year ago, electricity has doubled in a year. Amy will work on getting that information. Mayor said that we can start with 35 cents and $10 idle fee. Marcus said that this needs to be brought to Council. Robert said what is the lead time before idling 25 minutes. MPT said once established, we need to be able to go back and reevaluate.

Marcus asked how many kilowatt hours it will take to charge. Robert s aid depending on the level of battery; on level 3 charging, it takes about 30 minutes to give 90 miles range.

Marcus said, if we set a 35 cents kilowatt/hour for level 2, what would that mean as an overall cost. He asked if it’s going to be an idle fee after the 25 minutes for a short -time frame or long-time frame; once the vehicle is fully charged, how much time we are giving before we charge idle fee to move their car.

Mayor Robertson asked if we have changed the ones on the Easton parking lot. Amy said, those are level 2. Mayor Robertson asked Amy if those were not part of the SR.

Amy said yes. Mayor asked how long they have been built. Amy said, she will do a research on that.

MPT asked Amy if Renaissance was included in the list of locations. Marcus said, it is not because it didn’t meet Edison’s requirements. Marcus said that we will make sure that’s done.

Amy said she will reach out to Edison and withdraw our applications. Mayor Pro Tem said, the request to apply for those grants comes before the City Council.

2. 6th Cycle Housing Element Rezone Strategy
Paul gave the presentation.

Committee Comments/Questions/Recommendations
Paul said they can keep the planned zoning, accept the overlay or totally rezone.

MPT asked do they have will serve letters for the 8,000 houses being built to provide water? Paul said they do not.

Mayor Pro Tem said, we can’t supply water to the 8,000 houses.

Mayor Robertson said, 8,000 is a cumulative number because we haven’t completed 5th cycle. Marcus said, environmentally, there are no resources to support all this units.

Mayor Robertson said, we need to notify to water agencies. 4 Paul said we just have to show the State that we do have the ability. Marcus said it was submitted to the state and we are waiting for it to come back. Mayor Pro Tem talked about the overlay of Pepper Ave, knowing it is on an earthquake fault. Think it’s a way to just show the numbers. Marcus said, the State will not issue us any grants at all, if we don’t submit the information.

Paul said that they did listen to council carefully when moving forward with the 6 th Cycle.

Mayor said that she has a problem with reaching out via phone instead in writing.

Committee want copies of the letters from property owners. Mayor Pro Tem asked how many people came to the meeting, it was only property owners or property owners within the radius. He asked, what is the radius for reaching out to property owners ; Paul said the City policy limits 1,000 feet. Mayor Pro Tem asked if Randall is an overlay or rezone.

Paul said overlay. State said that we have 60 days from resubmittal.

Mayor would like to know what is happening with some of the properties that are boarded up and could be used for something else? Paul will research those areas.

Mayor Pro Tem said, this it’s not about developers, it’s about the people who live here.

He said the area is next to Bloomington, it’s all agriculture. Mayor Robertson said, if we have to take action, we have to bring it publicly. She heard they need it to be submitted; the Cycles have been rejected from HCD (1:11:38).

Mayor Robertson asked what’s the State’s answer. Marcus said, they have 60 days to review what we resubmitted.

Mayor Robertson asked Paul if he include the project on Foothill (Linden and Foothill), they already have a Specific Plan. She said somebody told them they can’t do residential without doing mixed use. Paul said, he will work on that.

Mayor Pro Tem asked Paul North Riverside and Easton ; he wants to know if we’ve reached the property owner. Paul said yes. Mayor Pro Tem asked if they were ok with the residential. Paul said he doesn’t recall anyone being opposed to that.

Paul said that they will have community meetings with all locations. Mayor Pro Tem said to make sure that the Council is contacted regarding those meetings. Mayor wants to know the status on what was submitted already.

Mayor Robertson wants to know about a parcel on Rialto Ave and Date St. lot, why it is vacant. She asked Paul why we identified it as a potential for overlay for residential.

Marcus said it might have been identified in the 5 th Cycle for an opportunity area. Mayor Robertson talked about Randall Ave., she said it’s not just a residential overlay, the paper says, “a zoning classification that will be multifamily residential, proposed to zone change,” not overlay. Mayor Robertson said, you can’t zone existing housing. Mayor Pro Tem told Paul; we are making changes on areas on residential properties when we promised they could remain agriculture. Marcus agreed we need to see what was submitted in the 5th Cycle.

The Committee said that they do not want to move forward, wait for the state. Marcus said we should wait for the State to catch up. Paul will make sure that there was not a zone change for Randall area.

2. Foothill Central Specific Plan
Kathy said this was put on per the Mayor.
5 Committee Comments/Recommendations
Mayor Pro Tem was not happy that they presented this information out at the Eggstravaganza. Marcus agreed. Paul said they presented the Plan at the Farmer’s Market as well. There is concern that the Council didn’t know what was being done.

Mayor Robertson asked if we are updating the 48-year-old Market Study. She asked if we have a Specific Plan for Central. Marcus said yes, it needs to be updated. Mayor Robertson wants to know why we haven’t done a new Market Study. Mayor Robertson said, the Grant said it was a sustainable community program. Marcus said that it was a SCAG program. Mayor Pro Tem was concern for not prioritizing community’s input on the study poll. Mayor wants to see the data showing how many people participated during the Eggstravaganza, did it track whether they were Rialto residents? She added, if we don’t track, we are getting a mixture of input. He said, we need to include the business community. Mayor Pro Tem said if we need to revitalize downtown, we need to build housing around and bring some income. He said, regarding Foothill, nobody is going to invest money rebuilding when they struggle to survive because they don’t have the customer base. Mayor Robertson agreed.

Marcus said they will talk to consultant and circle back start from the beginning with introduction to EDC. Also, developing a process to get the stakeholder input that will formulate how do we want to move this forward.

Mayor Pro Tem requested to see the results from the poll. Paul will look into that.

Marcus asked Paul if there is a deadline associate with SCAG. Paul said no.

Mayor Robertson said there is a clear vision standard for developers to s implify the process for the City; however, she is concerned about business owners that are already there. Marcus told Paul if they are focusing on the downtown development guidelines ; we need to get the information.

UPCOMING MEETINGS/OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS
- Marcus will have the Truck route study for the next meeting.

- Mayor Pro Tem Scott wants an update on the Renaissance properties and where we at on the housing. Marcus asked Kathy to bring information about the bids for the next EDC meeting so they can get an agreement with Lewis.

Amendment to Renaissance Specific Plan. Kathy said, they should have a schedule back from the consultant next week.

- Mayor Robertson wants updates for the next meeting about things people are coming in regarding developing projects ; w ho’s maintaining what. She wants to see the sign ordinance. Marcus said, he asked the chief to outline how we will go forward with sign enforcement. Mayor Robertson asked about how are we addressing commercial owners on how they are maintaining the property; landscape areas are looking pretty bad. Marcus said, he will follow up with Tim on those issues.

- Mayor Pro Tem asked about the Rite Aid in the north part of City. Kathy has reached out to the owner, he hasn’t replied.
6 - Mayor Robertson asked Paul for an alphabetical list of what is currently moving through the organization on the planning and commercial development.

Mayor Robertson talked about signs on clear projects, like the one across from Stater Bros, between Foothill and Acacia . She also mentioned securing the corner on Eucalyptus and Foothill, there are many distraction s, such as the night balloon selling.

Marcus said, we have to educate and remind the community about the regulations for signs.

- Paul talked about Best Western Hotel information coming to EDC.

Adjournment
Meeting adjourned at 2:57 p.m.
7 City of Rialto
Legislation Text
File #: EDC-22-490, Version: 1, Agenda #: 1
For Economic Development Committee Meeting [May 25, 2022] TO: Honorable Chairperson and Committee
APPROVAL: Paul Gonzales, Community Development Manager
FROM: Justin Schlaefli, Consultant Engineer, TKE Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis - Draft VMT and LOS Guidelines (SB743) (ACTION ITEM)
BACKGROUND:

Senate Bill (SB) 743 mandates a change to how transportation impacts are measured under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) from using vehicle Level of Service (LOS) to using Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). The new VMT metric for transportation analysis focuses on the overall miles traveled by vehicles within a region. This approach has an added inherent emphasis on reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Historically, delay and congestion (LOS) were the metrics used when evaluating Transportation impacts. Adopting VMT thresholds do not however preclude the City from using LOS analysis to comply with Congestion Management Plan requirements or to conduct project specific transportation analysis.

Summary:
· A change to VMT as a metric for transportation impacts under CEQA is mandated by the State · VMT is an efficiency metric rather than a volume metric. The threshold is an efficiency comparison to the County average rather than a strict amount of Vehicle Miles Traveled (i.e. more efficient than the County average VMT per resident) · VMT is measured only for passenger vehicle trips and does not include truck trips or other modes of transportation
· The change is intended to facilitate the following:
o Reduce GHG emissions
o Prioritize transit oriented and infill development
o Reduce overall miles traveled to improve efficiency of the transportation system o Disincentivize sprawl development
· Level of Service (LOS) metrics directly measure level of congestion and therefore remain a subject of necessary study. However, this is now completed outside of the CEQA context and under the City’s police powers
· All projects must either prepare a VMT assessment or be screened out of VMT assessment (i.e. small project, Transit Priority Area, Affordable housing, locally-serving retail etc…) City of Rialto Printed on 5/20/2022Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
8 File #: EDC-22-490, Version: 1, Agenda #: 1
· Fundamentally, there will be little change for the City of Rialto from current practice · Projects requiring mitigation will provide mitigation which improve the efficiency of the project promoting other forms of transportation, providing services near population centers, increasing density to achieve an economy of scale, promoting carpooling and more.

Previous Action:

The draft guidelines were reviewed by the City of Rialto, Transportation Commission and the City of Rialto, Planning Commission at a joint meeting in June 2021 and further reviewed by the Transportation Commission in November 2021. These draft Guidelines were recommended for approval by the Transportation Commission with no change.

Conclusion
SB 743, signed by the Governor in 2013, changed the way transportation impacts are identified at a State level. Specifically, the legislation directed the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to look at different metrics for identifying transportation as a CEQA impact. The Final OPR guidelines approved vehicle miles of travel (VMT) as the preferred metric moving forward. The Natural Resources Agency completed the rule to modify the CEQA guidelines in December of 2018.

The proposed Guidelines ensure the City’scompliance with the above requirements. In addition, continued Level of Service Assessment will be required consistent with the City’sGeneral Plan and applicable policies. The updated Guidelines provide further clarity for applicants and outline the process in alignment with State Law and regional requirements. In some cases, common practices from other jurisdictions were incorporated to provide additional information and ensure deficiencies in the transportation system are identified and improved. Finally, the Guidelines provide a unified/updated document which incorporates common practice for the City of Rialto for the recent past.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

It is recommended that the Economic Development Committee recommend adoption of revised guidlelines outlining Vehicle Miles Traveled thresholds for California Environmental Quality Act compliance related to transportation analysis consistent with the intent of SB743.

City of Rialto Printed on 5/20/2022Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
9 Transportation Commission Regular Meeting Minutes – November 3, 2021 Page 1

REGULAR MEETING
of the

TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

MINUTES
October 6, 2021

The regular meeting of the Transportation Commission of the City of Rialto was held in the City Council Chambers located at 150 South Palm Avenue, Rialto, CA 92376, on Wednesday, November 3, 2021 o0o
This meeting was in accordance with the provision of the Government Code §54956 of the State of California. o0o
CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Allan Kirst called the meeting to order at 6:10 p.m.
o0o
ROLL CALL The roll call was taken by Commission Clerk, Michele Aguirre.

Present: Chairperson Allan Kirst
Vice-Chairperson Joshua Holeman
Commissioner Kelvin Moore

Absent: Mayor Deborah Robertson
Commissioner Stacy Augustine
Commissioner Johan Rodriguez

City Staff Present: Michael Tahan, Interim Public
Works Director
David Hammer, City Engineer
Justin Schlaefli, Consultant Traffic
Engineer, TKE Engineering
Sergeant Daniel Smith, Rialto
Police Department
Daniel Casey, Senior Planner ,
Community Development
o0o

APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Regular Meeting of June 2, 2021
Minutes from the June 2, 2021, meeting was deferred for approval to the next regularly scheduled meeting
o0o
Regular Meeting of October 6, 2021 Minutes from the October 6, 2021, meeting was deferred for approval to the next regularly scheduled meeting.
o0o
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None.
o0o

10 Transportation Commission Regular Meeting Minutes – November 3, 2021 Page 2 POLICE DEPARTMENT LIAISON REPORT Sgt. Smith provided an update on the following items:
 The concerns brought forth from Vice -Chairperson
Holeman regarding Fitzgerald school and crossing
guards at Terra Vista Drive and Alder Avenue.
 Received $46,000 grant from the Office of Traffic
Safety (OTS) for added enforcement
 The collaboration Rialto is conducting with San
Bernardino Police Department.
 Fatal collision statistics for the first quarter of 2021 are down and evening out.

Commissioner Issues
 Vice-Chairperson Holeman reported that the speeds
on Riverside Avenue north of SR -210 have
increased greatly.
o0o
RUSD LIAISON REPORT No Report
o0o

NEW BUSINESS
Traffic Impact Analysis – Foothill Apartment TIA –
234 Foothill Boulevard
Michael Tahan introduced Justin Schlaefli who reviewed
that staff report and recommendations for this item.

Questions & Comments
Schlaefli, Tahan and Hammer answered questions and
responded to comments regarding:
 If the location on page 7 of the staff report indicates that there would be a full three (3) lane width that
includes landscaping a median.
 If the median would be raised, not painted.
 If this would be a gated community.
 The future concerns with the driveway and medians
for the surrounding business owners.

Suggestions/Requests/Recommendations
 Chairperson Kirst expressed concerns with the left
turn in/out of the project and how drivers trying to
move straight through that median would be
prevented.
➢ A discussion ensured regarding this issue.
 Chairperson Kirst advised that he could not see how
a restricted left turn in/out would be installed that
was not too wide to allow vehicles to travel straight
through and requested for that to be looked at.
➢ Hammer provided an explanation of how this
would work. He advised that medians were
being looked at on a case-by-case basis.
 Chairperson Kirst expressed his concern with the
lack of fair share funding as it seemed like the
11 Transportation Commission Regular Meeting Minutes – November 3, 2021 Page 3 amount of traffic being generated was going to
increase and requested that to be explored further.

Action
 Vice-Chairperson Holeman motioned to approve
staff’s recommendation with the recommendation
to:
➢ Explore installing a traffic signal at that location
especially for pedestrians crossing.
➢ Review the left in/out in the median to prevent
straight through drivers.
➢ Review the need for fair share funding due to
the increase amount of traffic the project would
bring.
 Commissioner Moore seconded the motion.
 All voted in favor of approving staff’s
recommendation with the recommendation to:
➢ Explore installing a traffic signal at that location
especially for pedestrians crossing.
➢ Review the left in/out in the median to prevent
straight through drivers.
➢ Review the need for fair share funding due to
the increase amount of traffic the project would
bring.
o0o
Draft Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service
Guidelines (SB743)
Schlaefli reviewed that staff report and recommendations for this item.

Questions & Comments
Schlaefli, answered questions and responded to
comments regarding:
 Clarification on i f these guidelines make it more
expensive for developers to have projects.
 If this would allow obtaining fair shares for
improvements.
 If all cities would need to follow these guidelines.

Action
 Commissioner Moore made a motion to approve
staff’s recommendations.
 Vice-Chairperson Holeman seconded the motion
 All voted in favor of approving staff
recommendations.
o0o
ENGINEER’S REPORT Schlaefli, Tahan and Hammer provided an update on the following items:
 Baseline Road and Eucalyptus Avenue Timing
 Casmalia Street Striping
➢ A discussion ensued regarding this item at this
location.
12 Transportation Commission Regular Meeting Minutes – November 3, 2021 Page 4

Commission Questions/Comments/Concerns
 Chairperson Kirst advised that he was disappointed
with whomever is developing the timing plan as he
was finding various locations that were not working
and reported that it took three (3) cycles to get
through Cedar Avenue and Foothill Boulevard.
 Chairperson Kirst asked if there was a way to tighten up the video detection, so motorists do not have to
wait for five (5) second as he was seeing this issue
at all left turn cross sections.

Requests/Suggestions/Recommendations
 Chairperson Kirst suggested using video detection
for far distances.
➢ Schlaefli advised that he would follow up on
this item.
o0o
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS  No new additions or deletions.
o0o
COMMISSIONER REPORTS  Commissioner Moore reported:
➢ The traffic signal timing on Linden Avenue was
very long.
➢ The traffic signal at Riverside Avenue at the
SR210 east bound exit is not working properly.
 Vice-Chairperson Holeman reported:
➢ The traffic signal at Riverside Avenue and
Ayala Drive was also not working well
➢ There was an issue with traffic at Riverside and
Slover Avenues and requested to see if it was
possible to make the through lane into an
optional 2nd turn lane.
 Chairperson Kirst reported a safety issue on
Riverside Avenue at Wabash Street on the south
each corner.
o0o
ADJOURNMENT  Commissioner Moore made a motion to adjourn.  Vice-Chairperson Holeman seconded the motion.
 The motion was carried, and the meeting adjourned
at 7:09 p.m.

13 1

Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level
of Service Assessment (LOS)
October 2021

14 2

Table of Contents
Authority 3
Purpose 3
General Procedures 5
Level of Service Thresholds and Methodology 6
Submittal Requirements 8
TIA Report Content & Criteria……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 13 VMT Guidelines & Guidance 18
VMT Methodology 19
VMT Assessment 22
CEQA VMT Impact Thresholds 23
VMT Mitigation Measures 24
CEQA Assessment Active Transportation & Public Transit 26 Detailed VMT Forecasting 27
TDM Strategy Evaluation Matrix 30
VMT Report Submittal 32
Exhibits 33
A. Scoping Agreement
• TIA
• VMT
B. Signalized Intersection Analysis Input Parameters
C. Traffic Impact Analysis Format
D. Background Information
E. Traffic Impact Analysis Submittal Form

15 CITY OF RIALTO TIA Guidelines
October 2021

3 AUTHORITY
The City of Rialto regulates development within the City through its General Plan Policies, and Municipal Code, in addition to conformance with Local Agreements (CMP) and State Laws (CEQA) and (NEPA).

The City of Rialto General Plan Level of Service (LOS) threshold is contained in Policy 4 -1.2.0 and Policy 4-1.21 and shown on page 8 of this document.

Consistent with Municipal Code XXX, the City of Rialto Transportation Commission reviews all Traffic Impact Analysis reports and proposed mitigation including the payment of improvement fair share contribution for consideration and approval.

STATE LAWS / CEQA
SB 743, signed by the Governor in 2013, changed the way transportation impacts are identified at a State level. Specifically, the legislation directed the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to look at different metrics for identifying transportation as a CEQA impact. The Final OPR guidelines approved vehicle miles of travel (VMT) as the preferred metric moving forward. The Natural Resources Agency completed the rule to modify the CEQA guidelines in December of 2018.

Congestion Management Plan (CMP)
In 1989, the State of California added Chapter 2.6 by statute along with Chapter 106, Section 9 to address Congestion Management. In 2002, the statute was amended with Section 65088 being added. In this section, the state concluded the economy was c ritically dependent upon transportation and that the street and roadway system in existence was designed for far fewer vehicles than were currently using the system. It established the requirement for federal, state and local agencies to join with transit districts, business, private and environmental interests to develop and implement comprehensive strategies to develop appropriate responses to transportation needs. Section 65089 mandated a congestion management program that required biannual updates for every county that included an urbanized area and it required inclusion of every city as well as the county. The City of Rialto joined with the County of San Bernardino and the surrounding cities in developing a unified Congestion Management Plan that was first adopted November 4, 1992 and subsequently amended.

The enactment of the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) law as contained in Government Code Sections 65088 and 65089 (last updated in 2016) and the City's adoption of the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Plan set forth the requirements for Traffic Impact Analysis Reports for specific projects. The City of Rialto LOS threshold shall apply to all Congestion Management Program roadways/intersections; in some cases, thresholds may be more conse rvative than CMP requirements.

Requirement for Traffic Impact and VMT Analyses
To ensure conformance with the Rialto General Plan, Rialto Municipal Code, Federal and State environmental legislation, SB 743 and the Congestion Management Plan, the City of Rialto requires 16 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
4 development projects to analyze and report on traffic and circulation impacts caused by new development or re -development. This requirement also applies to General Plan Amendments (GPA), Specific Plans (SP), and Specific Plan Amendments (SPA ). This requirement for analysis is accomplished with a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) submittal , reviewed and approved by the Rialto Public Works Director/City Engineer. The TIA must be prepared in conformance with requirements established by the City of Rialto, and must be prepared, signed and sealed by the Traffic or Civil Engineer, registered in the State of California, who is qualified to practice traffic and/or civil engineering in the State of California.
17 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
5 PURPOSE
The purpose of these Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines is to provide general instructions for analyzing the potential transportation impacts of proposed development projects and land use changes (e.g., General Plan Amendments and zoning changes). These recommendations are general guidelines, and the City of Rialto City Engineer has the discretion to modify the TIA requirements based on the unique characteristics of a particular project.

A TIA is generally required to identify potential traffic impacts and to determine appropriate traffic mitigation measures as a part of various types of environmental documents, or as a separate document required by the City, to adequately assess the impac ts of a proposed project. Unless exempted by City (see Submittal Requirements , page 10 ), a TIA will be required in the following cases:
• Proposed Development: Any development project that is likely to have a traffic impact on the City's circulation system. Traffic impacts to be considered are increased traffic volumes on any street; any operational traffic issues (i.e. traffic signal operations, increased delay, restricted pedestrian movements, modified roadway access, limited sight distance, inadequate ingress/egress, inadequate storage volume for required turning movements, etc.), or other concerns identified by the City.
• General Plan Amendments and Specific Plans: Will the circulation system for the area be able to provide the required level of service (LOS) with the additional traffic generated by the proposed land use changes? If not, what improvements will be required to provide the required acceptable Level of Service?

GENERAL PROCEDURES FOR EVALUATING TRAFFIC IMPACTS AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED • These guidelines incorporate specific approved City of Rialto requirements & past practices for the preparation of LOS analysis.
• These guidelines include California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) expectations prompted by Senate Bill 743 (SB 743).

The City of Rialto does not prepare Project Traffic Impact Analysis. The technical report is part of the Project requirement and approval process.

Project Scoping Agreement
To avoid unnecessary delays or revisions and to streamline the TIA preparation and review process, the City requires applicant to submit a Project Scoping Agreement to the City Planning Department. Even if a Project is exempt from level of service analysis, the Project Scoping must provide proposed VMT analysis or document screening criteria.

The City Engineer will review and approve the Scoping Agreement.

Approval of the Scoping Agreement in no way relieves the developer from conditions of approval established by the City in a more complete project review process conducted by the Development 18 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
6 Review Committee (DRC), the Transportation Commission, Planning Commission and/or City Council.

A meeting with the Congestion Management Agency and/or Caltrans, where applicable, is also encouraged to address issues associated with large or extraordinary projects.

Level of Service Impact Analysis
The Scoping Agreement includes analyzed trip generation and project average daily traffic which defines the extent of a LOS analysis, ie: full vs. focused study. Generally, if Project AM/PM peak hour trip generation is 1-49 trips the minor (focused) study requirements apply. Over 50 peak hour trips trigger the full (major) study.

Certain types of projects, because of their size, nature, or locati on, may be exempt from the requirement of preparing a TIA.
*See complete list of type of development which may be exempt on page 16-17.

Upon acceptance of the completed TIA (minor or major) by the City Engineer, the report will be presented to the Transportation Commission for approval and Conditions of Approval.

VMT Analysis
In accordance with SB 743, all Projects must address vehicle miles traveled. Screening criteria may be applicable however the screening process must be documented in a memorandum. *See Screening criteria is in VMT section of these guidelines.

The analysis and/or screening conclusions will be included in the Project CEQA documentation.

Thresholds & Methodology

LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS (INTERSECTIONS)
The City of Rialto 2010 General Plan Update identifies policies applicable to minimum Level of Service within the City, as follows:

Policy 4-1.20: Design City streets so that signalized intersections operate at Level of Service (LOS) D or better during the morning and evening pea k hours, and require new development to mitigate traffic impacts that degrade LOS below that level. The one exception will be Riverside Avenue south of the Metrolink tracks all the way to the City’s southern border, which can operate at LOS E.

Policy 4-1.21: Design City streets so that unsignalized intersections operate with no vehicular movement having an average delay greater than 120 seconds during the morning and evening peak hours, and require new development to mitigate traffic impacts that increase delay above that level.
19 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
7 New development is required to mitigate traffic impacts exceeding these levels.

Infrastructure deficiencies are deemed to occur at any intersection in which the project causes the LOS to fall below level D or the peak hour delay increases as follows:

LOS A/B = By 10.0 seconds
LOS C = By 8.0 seconds
LOS D = By 5.0 seconds
LOS E = By 2.0 Seconds
LOS F = By 1.0 seconds
Roadway segments may or may not be governed by signalized intersections at the ends of the segment. If the segment s exceed 1,500 feet and the V/C ratio exceeds 1.0, the segment must be mitigated even if improved intersections at the ends do not exceed LOS D. Additional study may be required or presented to support allowing V/C to exceed 1.0, but are subject to the di scretion of the Public Works Director/City Engineer and Transportation Commission, on a case by case basis, as to the acceptability of allowing such segments being un-mitigated.

CITY OF RIALTO ROADWAY SEGMENT CAPACITY (1)

Roadway Classification No. of
Lanes
Two-Way Traffic Volume (ADT)(2)
Service Level
C
Service Level
D
Service Level
E
Local 2 2,500-2,799 2,800-3,099 3,100 +
Collector (60' or 64') 2 9,900-11,199 11,200-12,499 12,500 + Industrial (45') 2 9,900-11,199 11,200-12,499 12,500 +
Arterial (3) 2 14,400-16,199 16,200-17,999 18,000 +
Secondary Highway 4 16,900-19,399 19,400-21,199 22,000 + Modified Arterial (100') 4 26,200-29,599 29,600-32,999 33,000 + Arterial (120') 6 38,700-44,099 44,100-49,499 49,500 +
Notes:
(1) All capacity figures are based on optimum conditions and are intended as guidelines for planning purposes only
(2) Maximum two-way ADT values are based on the 1999 Modified Highway Capacity Manual Level of Service Tables.
(3) Two lane roads designated as future arteri als that conform to arterial design standards for vertical and horizontal alignments are analyzed as arterials. 20 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
8 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT)
For purposes of SB 743 compliance, a VMT analysis shall be conducted for land use projects as deemed necessary by the Public Works/City Engineer and will apply to projects that have the potential to increase the average VMT per service population (e.g. population plus employment) above the County of San Bernardino benchmark VMT average of 32.7%.

Screening
Project Screening Criteria, both by daily trip thresholds and by project type, can be found in the VMT Section of this Report.

Methodology/Modeling
Project-generated VMT shall be extracted from the travel demand forecasting model using the origin-destination trip matrix

In some cases, the City will allow calculation of Project-generated VMT using the production- attraction trip matrix. This will be determined at Project Scoping step.

Methodology/Threshold
The City of Rialto project -generated VMT Methodology, Threshold option is consistent with RTP/SCS Future Year VMT Projections and is better than the General Plan horizon year reflecting the goals and values of the community.

A project would result in a significant project-generated VMT impact if either of the following conditions are satisfied:

1. The baseline project -generated VMT per service population exceeds the San Bernardino County regional average baseline of 32.7% VMT per service population, or

2. The cumulative project -generated VMT per service population exceeds the San Bernardino County regional average baseline of 32.7% VMT per service population
Submittal requirements

TIA SCOPING AGREEMENT
It is in the interest of all parties that the participants fully understand and come to agreement on the assumptions and methodology prior to conducting the actual analysis. This is particularly important when considering using assumptions that vary from the norm. The Scoping Agreement, Exhibit A of this document, requires signature before proceeding to report preparation or the collection of traffic counts.
21 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
9 The Project Scoping Agreement shall include a memorandum to introduce the project; with site plan, exhibits showing the study intersections, trip generation table , trip distribution assumptions, existing intersection geometry and type of control, proposed access points & specific issues to be addressed in the study.

Trip Generation for Truck Intensive Uses
All warehousing shall use the ITE Warehouse Land Use (LU 150) trip generation rate unless otherwise approved.
• The City of Rialto does not accept High Cube (LU 152) trip generation rate without prior approval unless a specific tenant has been identified by the developer and is the owner of the property or has a minimum 10 -year lease and can demonstrate both high levels of mechanization and palletized operations.

Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE)
Industrial, warehousing, surface mining, distribution centers and all heavy use truck projects shall convert trucks to passenger car equivalent (PCE’s).

The City of Rialto no longer accepts the City of Fontana, Truck Trip Generation Study (2003) as a basis for determining the percentage of truck trips generated by a warehousing project. Instead, the City implements the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) recommendations requiring that warehousing use a minimum truck rate of 40% of total project traffic.

Additionally, the City requires that the truck mix for warehousing to be in accordance with the current measured rates within Rialto, as follows: 70% 4-axel, 28% 3-axel, and 2% 2-axel trucks. PCE conversion rates, in accordance with the SB CMP shall be applied as follows: PCE = 3 for 4-axel and above, PCE =2 for 3-axel and PCE + 1.5 for 2-axel trucks.

Trip Distribution
Local truck routing shall be identified for review and approval. Truck distribution shall be routed in the direction of intended travel to the nearest freeway access point in the desired direction of travel.

Opposite direction of travel to freeway ramps is not permitted. Accordingly, the Truck Distribution exhibits must be included in the TIA Scope.

Vehicle Miles Traveled
Preliminary VMT assessment should be included to assess project screening criteria and/or need for modeling evaluation.

Scoping Conclusions: At a minimum, the submittal for evaluating Project impacts and analyzing the potential transportation infrastructure deficiencies of a proposed development includes the preparation and approval of each of the following:
22 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
10 • VMT Screening Analysis / Modeling Report
• Project Scoping Agreement
If the Project Scoping concludes further studies are needed the applicant shall proceed with a Draft TIA. The type or extent of study; full analys is or focused analysis, will also be determined by the City upon approval of the Scoping Agreement.

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS / LEVEL OF SERVICE

PROJECTS EXEMPT FROM LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
Certain types of projects, because of their size, nature, or location, may be exempt from the requirement of preparing a TIA.

However, the Public Works Director, City Engineer or Transportation Commission may require that a TIA be prepared for any project , regardless of size, nature or location if there are concerns of traffic safety, operational issues, or if a project is located in an area significantly impacted by traffic.

The following types of development projects may be exempt with approval from the Public Works Director/City Engineer:

1. Residential Parcel Maps (4 lots or less)

2. Single Family residential subdivisions (10 lots or less)

3. Apartments and other Multiple Family projects (50 units or less)

4. Plot Plans and Use Cases for projects of one acre or less

5. Lodges, Community Centers, Neighborhood Parks and Community Parks.

6. Commercial Storage Facilities (less than 10 acres)

7. Congregate Care Facilities that contain significant special services, such as medical facilities, dining facilities, recreations facilities and support retail facilities.

8. Projects with 51-100 or less peak-hour trips in areas where there exists a current (less than one year old) comprehensive traffic analysis, where infrastructure funding mechanisms are in place, or the roadway system is built out in accordance with the General Plan within a 0.50 mile radius.

The Public Works Director/City Engineer may require a local/focused TIA for projects that have the potential to create adverse impacts to the circulation system.

9. Any proposed use which can demonstrate, based on the most current Trip Generation Manual, published by the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE), or other approved trip generation data, that there will be less than 50 vehicle trips during peak hours and no other operational concerns exist
These exemptions will apply in most cases; however, the Public Works Director/City Engineer reserves the right to require a TIA for any development, regardless of size and/or type. The level of analysis shall be determined by the Public Works Director/City Engineer on an individual basis. The following are examples of situations and/or conditions where an exemption would not be granted:
a. The presence of an existing safety problem
b. The location/development is likely to create or has the potential to create a safety problem c. The location of the development is in an environmentally or otherwise sensitive area, or in an area which is likely to generate public controversy.
23 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
11 d. The presence of a nearby substandard street or intersection. This is normally any street or intersection at Level of Service (LOS) D or worse or where substandard improvements exist (street width, pavement section, improvements, substandard signals etc.) e. There is a need for a focused study due to access, circulation or operational issues. f. A request for any affected agency (adjacent City, County, Caltrans) which is deemed by the Public Works Director/City Engineer to be reasonable and rational.

If not exempt:

If the TIA Scoping Agreement has determined that a Traffic Impact Analysis for Level of Service is required; the type of study will also be approved.

CEQA COMPLIANCE
• VMT Applies to every Project regardless of need for or type of TIA analysis. Screening may be applicable; however, the screening process steps must be documented in a standalone document.

Full Study (major) Traffic Impact Analysis (LOS)
A major traffic study is required for any Project that generates 50 or more trips during any peak hour without consideration of pass-by trips.
• At a minimum, the study area shall include any intersection of “Collector” to higher classification street, with “Collector” or higher classification, shown on Rialto Circulation Element, at which the proposed project will add 50 or more A.M. or P.M. peak hour trips within 5 miles of the Project. PCE factors apply to this threshold.

TRUCK INTENSIVE USE TRIP GENERATION FOR CITY OF RIALTO (applies to all studies) Industrial, warehousing, surface mining, distribution centers and all heavy use truck projects shall convert trucks to passenger car equivalent (PCE’s) to apply this threshold.

All warehousing shall use the ITE Warehouse (LU 150) trip generation rate unless otherwise approved.

The City of Rialto does not accept High Cube (LU 152) trip generation rate without prior a pproval unless a specific tenant has been identified by the developer and is the owner of the property, or has a minimum 10-year lease and can demonstrate both high levels of mechanization and palletized operations.

PCE
The City of Rialto no longer accept s the City of Fontana, Truck Trip Generation Study (2003) as a basis for determining the percentage of truck trips generated by a warehousing project. Instead, the City implements the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) recommendations requiring that warehousing use a minimum truck rate of 40% of total project traffic. Additionally, 24 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
12 the City requires that the truck mix for warehousing to be in accordance with the current measured rates within Rialto, as follows: 70% 4-axel, 28% 3-axel, and 2% 2-axel trucks. PCE conversion rates, in accordance with the SB CMP shall be applied as follows: PCE = 3 for 4 -axel and above, PCE =2 for 3-axel and PCE + 1.5 for 2-axel trucks.

Local truck routing shall be identified for review and approval. Truck distribution shall be routed in the direction of intended travel to the nearest freeway access point in the desired direction of travel.

Opposite direction of travel to freeway ramps is not permitted. Truck Distribution exhibits must be included in the TIA Scope.

Study Analysis Scenarios (major study)
SINGLE SITE DEVELOPMENTS, TRACTS, PLOT PLANS, USE CASES, ETC.

The analysis of traffic operations and LOS is to be provided for the following conditions and is to include an assessment of traffic mitigation requirem ents (if needed) for project opening day and future conditions. Obtain both ADT and Peak Hour volumes to determine the baseline year. Prior counts, up to 6 months old, may be approved upon request.

1. Existing conditions – the conditions at the time of TIA preparation without the inclusion of the project generated trips. Existing deficiencies should be identified, but mitigation analysis is not required. The existing conditions analysis must include the full project impact area as defined above.

2. Project opening day conditions - Existing + Ambient + w & w/o Project. The conditions on the opening day of the project for two scenarios: 1) excluding the project traffic and 2) including the project traffic. Include ambient growth rate of 1.5% to 5% as approved by City.
• Assume full trip generation impact of the site. The peak traffic generation hour of the development, if different from peak AM and PM hours, must also be identified and the total vehicle trips during the peak -hour of the generator must be estimated. This will facilitate a decision regarding the need to evaluate time periods other than the peak - hours of the adjacent streets.

3. Future conditions – Existing + Ambient + Project + Cumulative. Full mitigation analysis is to be performed for future conditions. Cumulative projects include projects approved but not yet completed which may add traffic to study intersection/segment links within 1 mile to those being analyzed.
• This analysis shall include any freeway ramp location expected to accept 20% of project traffic.
• If the LOS cannot be maintained or a deficiency occurs and cannot be mitigated through existing CMP impact fees or other approved funding mechanisms, or if the requirement for the mitigation exists upon completion of project; the developer may be required to complete the improvement as a condition of approval. Such work may be subject to development agreements, reimbursement agreements or other mechanisms at the sole discretion of the City.
25 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
13 4. Proposed Mitigation Measures
• Consideration shall be made for existing right -of-way, intersection geometry and transitions, environmental constraints, utility conflicts, and improvement costs. Should the City determine that mitigation is infeasible, the unresolved impacts shall be itemized.
• All TIAs which propose increasing travel lanes on a segment or intersection that is either beyond the existing conditions or General Plan buildout conditions, shall clearly identify the impacts with such a change. The TIA shall also identify a funding mechanism for said improvements.
• Feasibility diagrams of said improvements must be included.

5. Project Phasing
• In the event project phasing is proposed; traffic conditions must be analyzed for each year with mitigation per phase as required.

6. General Plan Traffic Conditions. Traffic projections for General Plan Buildout conditions shall utilize the City’s traffic model, growth projections to buildout of the General Plan or other approved model. The Engineer shall use the model projections as the basis for determining turning movement volumes for the required intersection analysis. A manual assignment of project traffic added to the General Plan Buildout traffic volumes may be used to determine total future traffic. This analysis will determine if the Circulation Element of the General Plan is adequate to accommodate projected traffic at the target LOS, or if additional delay reduction measures or fair-share contributions are necessary.

Focused (minor) Traffic Study (LOS)
Alternatively, a focused traffic study may be required for any Project that generates 1-49 trips during any peak hour without consideration of pass -by trips to the existing circulation system; or as directed by the City Engineer. The City of Rialto reserves the right to require that a TIA be prepared for any development, if there are safety concerns, operational issues, or if located in an area known to be impacted by traffic. At a minimum, the focused study shall assess the project’s points of access and adjacent intersections in the immediate vicinity of the project.

In addition, focused traffic studies will be required for all maps which were previously approved by a Specific Plan to identify Project specific impacts and mitigation, including fair share analysis of DIF funded improvements. The study area, in this instance, will default to:
• At a minimum , the study area shall include any intersection of “Collector” to higher classification street, with “Collector” or higher classification, shown on Hesperia Circulation Element, at which the proposed p roject will add 50 or more A.M. or P.M. peak hour trips.

PCE factors apply to this threshold.

Study Analysis Scenarios (Focused Study)
Focused studies analysis scenarios are not as stringent as focused studies and are as follows:
26 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
14 Existing; Project Opening Year with Background Traffic; Project Opening Year with Background Traffic and Proposed Project; Project Opening Year with Background Traffic and Proposed Project plus Mitigation.

TIA Report Content & Criteria
The following outline represents the recommended structure for all TIA Reports. The report must be prepared, signed and sealed by a Traffic or Civil Engineer, registered and qualified to practice traffic and/or civil engineering in the State of California. See Exhibit C for specific format structure.

Project Introduction
Set the stage for the analysis, providing background information necessary for the unfamiliar reader to understand the magnitude of the project, location of the project and special characteristics.

Project, General Plan, or Specific Plan description
The description must include project size by land use type, location of project, location of proposed access points to the local and regional roadway system and movements from adjacent streets allowed into and out of the p roject. This should be shown on the SITE diagram. Special characteristics of the site, such as unusual daily or seasonal peaking characteristics or heavy involvement of truck traffic, should be noted.

Methodology & Study Area
Provide a general description (overview) of the process used to analyze the project. Analysis years/scenarios should be specified and the approach to the modeling/traffic forecasting process should be explained. The sources of information should be identified.

Signalized intersection/Level of Service shall be analyzed using the Operational Method as described in Chapter 16, Section II of the Transportation Research Board (TRB ) Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). Reference Exhibit B for default input parameters. Establish those not listed through Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Chapters 16 & 17 (most recent edition) to assess both signalized and unsignalized intersection.

Additionally, all study intersections which are not signalized shall be analyzed for signal warrants per the CA MUTCD criteria. The calculation worksheets shall be added to the appendices.

Generally (Major Study):

1. At a minimum, the study area shall include any intersection of “Collector” to higher classification street, with “Collector” or higher classification , shown on Rialto Circulation Element, at which the proposed project will a dd 50 or more A.M. or P.M. peak hour trips within 5 miles of the Project. PCE factors apply to this threshold. 27 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
15 2. The study area shall also include any freeway interchanges within 2 miles that is designated to take more than 40% of total traffic from the project, irrespective of the total number.

3. Potential of a LOS deficiency downgrade of any of the following, to include LOS C during any peak hours using HCM methods of analysis on any individual existing traffic movement. • Existing Roadway Street Section
• Existing Signalized Intersection
• Un-signalized intersection

4. Signalized intersections to which project traffic decreases performance, (V/C ratios exceeding 1.0) must submit an effective solution to mitigate impacts. Signal timing modifications or right turn prohibitions can be incorporated in a signalized intersection analysis, but any timing changes must be specifically identified in the TIA.

5. If the timing changes include a coordinated system, the TIA must analyze the entire system.

6. Project driveways, and school zone intersections if within immediate vicinity of trip distribution.

CMP:

In addition, all freeway links with 100 or more peak-hour project trips (two-way); and CMP roadways with 50 or more peak-hour project trips (two-way).

Also, within the defined study area, all "key intersections," as listed in the most c urrent CMP, must be analyzed. Key intersections represent intersections of CMP roadways plus those additional intersections recognized by local jurisdictions and/or San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) to be important to mobility on CMP roadways. At a minimum, key intersections will include CMP signalized intersections operating at LOS E or below. The distribution of traffic must be shown for all roadways on which project trips occur (except those for internal circulation), whether or not they are on the CMP network.

Roadway Link Analysis
Roadway link analysis shall be perf ormed by comparing the Average D aily Traffic (ADT) on a segment to the Roadway Segment Analysis as shown in Thresholds and Methodology Sections.

Roadway link analysis is always required for a TIA analyzing a GPA, SP or SPA and may be required for other studies.

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS, SPECIFIC PLANS, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENTS OR LANE USE

CHANGES
Development proposals that include any of the above or other approval s that increases traffic beyond the approved General Plan will be required to perform an additional build-out analysis to evaluate long term impacts. This analysis should evaluate proposed changes to applicable plans.

The required analysis will determine if the Circulation Element of the General Plan is adequate to accommodate the projected traffic at the target LOS, or if additional mitigation is necessary. A 28 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
16 phasing plan for all Specific Plans or Specific Plan Amendments that identifies mitigation for ea ch development phase is also required.

If any of the above projects create traffic impacts greater than the projections in the current traffic models, a Build-Out analysis may be requested utilizing a model approved by the City; to develop a more detailed focused model run to determine the projected Build- Out traffic. The consulting traffic engineer shall use the traffic model projections as the basis for determining turning movement volumes to be used in the intersection analysis. A post processing method ology in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) may be used to calculate AM and PM peak hour turning movement volumes from the link volume ADT. A manual assignment of the project traffic added to the Build- Out traffic typically is used to determine total Build -Out traffic with Project. The TIA shall include a discussion of how manual turning movement assignments were developed.

Funding Mechanisms / Fair Share Analysis (major and focused reports) Project contribution to total new volumes ( forecast minus existing) on analyzed links and intersections.

Project Mitigation
The mitigation of project impacts is designed to identify potential LOS infrastructure deficiencies and address them to support the City of Rialto goals and objectives; before they occur. Additionally, impacts beyond the boundaries of the jurisdiction must be identified in the same fashion as impacts within the jurisdictional boundary. Impacted local agencies outside the boundary will be provided an opportunity for review of the TIA Report. Negotiations with these outside jurisdictions and with Caltrans are a possible outcome for the development proponent, depending on the magnitude and nature of the impacts.

For the CMP, the mitigatio ns must bring the roadway into conformance with the LOS standards established for the CMP. However, the City of Rialto requires a minimum LOS D within its jurisdictional boundaries.

Fair Share Analysis
Compute the ratio of traffic generated by the proposed development to the total new traffic (including project traffic) generated between the existing condition and forecast year for each analyzed link or intersection.
• The purpose of this calculation is to identify the proportion of volume increase that can be attributed to the proposed project. The calculations are to be conducted for all applicable peak hours. The results must be formulated in a Fair Share Table by percentages to the nearest tenth of a percent.

29 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
17 COST ESTIMATES
An industry standard cost estimate must be included & calculated using the above percentages, per mitigation improvement.

The costs of mitigating deficiencies must be estim ated for deficiencies that occur either within or outside the boundaries of the jurisdiction. The costs must be identified separately for each jurisdiction and for Caltrans roadways. Prior studies and cost estimates by SBCTA , Caltrans and other jurisdictions may be referenced. If a mitigation measure is identified as necessary to bring a deficiency into conformance with the LOS standard, but physical or environmental constraints make the improvement impractical, an equivalent contribution may be considered to improve the LOS elsewhere on the system or another location PROVIDING DIRECT RELIEF.

PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
Projects may request design features such as traffic signal at project entrance. In such case, the proposed signal must be analyzed for signal warrants, progression analysis on the corridor to include existing and planned signalized intersections upstream and downstream, signal spacing and queuing analysis for adjacent existing or proposed signals and/or un-signalized storage pocket queues.

In all cases, if the City allows the installation based on analysis results, the Project proponent will be responsible for all costs. The Project Design feature shall be listed on the Fair Share Table & clearly indicate payment responsibility.

OTHER TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS ALREADY PROGRAMMED AND FULLY FUNDED Only transportation improvements that are fully funded and programmed should be assumed in forecast.

Summary List of Typical Figures and Tables to Be Included in a TIA Report:
• Project location and 1-mile limit study area (map)
• Project size by land use (table)
• Trips generated by land use for AM and PM weekday peak-hours of adjacent street traffic and for daily traffic inbound and outbound (table) and other applicable peak-hours • List of other planned transportation improvements affecting the project • Existing intersection and link volumes and levels of service (map) • Distribution and assignment of project trips (map)
• Forecast traffic without project and with project for applicable peak-hours (map or table) • LOS without project and with project (map or table) • Improvements required to mitigate project opening day and forecast year scenario impacts (map and/or table) 30 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
18 • Fair Share - Ratio of project traffic to new traffic (new traffic means the difference between existing and forecast) on analyzed links or intersections (map or table) • Improvement costs by jurisdiction and for Caltrans roadways

31 CITY OF RIALTO TIA Guidelines
October 2021

19 VMT GUIDELINES & GUIDANCE

32 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
20 The City of Rialto has produced these VMT Guidelines to outline the specific steps for complying with the new CEQA expectations for VMT analysis.

Organized as follows for CEQA assessment (e.g. VMT analysis).

1. CEQA Assessment - VMT Analysis

2. CEQA Assessment - Active Transportation and Public Transit Analysis

3. VMT Transportation Impact Analysis Format
The following criterions will assist in determining VMT impact thresholds and mitigation requirements for various land use projects’ TIAs in the City of Rialto.

The City of Rialto project -generated VMT Methodology, Threshold option is consistent with RTP/SCS Future Year VMT Projections and is better than the General Plan horizon year reflecting the goals and values of the community.

Analysis Methodology
For purposes of SB 743 compliance, a VMT analysis shall be conducted for land use projects as deemed necessary by the Public Works/City Engineer and will apply to projects that have the potential to increase the average VMT per service population (e.g. pop ulation plus employment) compared to the County of San Bernardino VMT average of 32.7 Normalizing VMT per service population essentially provides a transportation efficiency metric that the analysis is based on.

Using this efficiency metric allows the us er to compare the project to the remainder of the unincorporated area for purposes of identifying transportation impacts.

Project Screening
Projects which “screen out” must provide documentation memorandum to support conclusion using the following methods:

There are three types of screening to effectively screen projects from project -level assessment.

These screening steps are summarized below:

Step 1: Transit Priority Area (TPA) Screening
Projects located within a TPA 1 may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. This presumption may NOT be appropriate if the project:

1 A TPA is defined as a half mile area around an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high- quality transit corridor per the definitions below.

33 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
21 1. Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75;

2. 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);

3. Is inconsistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy (as determined by the lead agency, with input from the Metropolitan Planning Organization); or

4. Replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income residential units.

The SBCTA screening tool can currently be accessed at the following location:

Copy & Paste link into browser.
https://devapps.fehrandpeers.com/sbctavmt/
*Please note this Screening Tool will be migrated onto the SBCTA website in the near future; at that time the above link will no longer be valid.

Step 2: Low VMT Area Screening
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 for 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.

For this screening in the SBCTA area, the SBTAM travel f orecasting model was used to measure VMT performance for individual jurisdictions and for individual traffic analysis zones (TAZs). TAZs are geographic polygons similar to Census block groups used to represent areas of homogenous travel behavior. Total daily VMT per service population (population plus employment) was estimated for each TAZ. This presumption may not be appropriate if the project land uses would alter the existing built environment in such a way as to increase the rate or length of vehicle trips.

To identify if the project is in a low VMT -generating area, the analyst may review the SBCTA screening tool and compare the appropriate baseline TAZ VMT to current County of San Bernardino VMT threshold of 32.7 VMT/Service Population. Additionally, as noted above, the analyst must identify if the project is consistent with the existing land use within that TAZ and use

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.

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.
34 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
22 professional judgement that there is nothing unique about the project that would otherwise be mis-represented utilizing the data from the travel demand model.

The SBCTA screening tool can be accessed at the following location:

Copy & Paste link into browser.
https://devapps.fehrandpeers.com/sbctavmt/
*Please note this Screening Tool will be migrated onto the SBCTA website in the near future; at that time the above link will no longer be valid.

Step 3: Project Type Screening
• Projects generating less than 110 daily vehicle trips2 o This generally corresponds to the following “typical” development potentials:
 11 single family housing units
 16 multi-family, condominiums, or townhouse housing units  10,000 sq. ft. of office
Local serving retail projects less than 50,000 square feet may be presumed to have a less than significant impact a bsent substantial evidence to the contrary. Local serving retail generally improves the convenience of shopping close to home and has the effect of reducing vehicle travel.

In addition to local serving retail, the following uses can also be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary as their uses are local serving in nature:
• Local-serving K-12 schools
• Local parks
• Day care centers
• Local-serving gas stations
• Local-serving banks

2 This threshold ties directly to the OPR technical advisory and notes that CEQA provides a categorical exemption for existing facilities, including additions to existing structures of up to 10,000 square feet, so long as the project is in an area where public infrastructure is available to allow for maximum planned development and the project is not in an environmentally sensitive area. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15301, subd. (e)(2).) Typical project types for which trip generation increases relatively linearly with building footprint (i.e., general office building, single tenant office building, office park, and business park) generate or attract an additional 110-124 trips per 10,000 square feet. Therefore, absent substantial evidence otherwise, it is reasonable to conclude that the addition of 110 or fewer trips could be considered not to lead to a significant impact.
35 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
23 • Local-serving hotels (e.g. non-destination hotels) • Local-serving medical
• Student housing projects on or adjacent to college campuses • Local-serving assembly uses (places of worship, community organizations) • Community institutions (Public libraries, fire stations, local government) • Local serving community colleges that are consistent with the assumptions noted in the

RTP/SCS
• Affordable or supportive housing
• Assisted living facilities
• Senior housing (as defined by HUD)
• 15,000 sq. ft. of light industrial
• 63,000 sq. ft. of warehousing
• 79,000 sq. ft. of high cube transload and short-term storage warehouse VMT Assessment for Non-Screened Development
Projects not screened through the steps above should proceed with VMT analysis and forecasting through the SBTAM model to determine if they have a significant VMT impact. This analysis should include ‘project generated VMT’ and ‘project effect on VMT’ estimates for the project TAZ (or TAZs) under the following scenarios:
• Baseline conditions - This data is already available in the web screening map.

• Baseline plus project for the project - The project land use would be added to the project TAZ or a separate TAZ would be created to contain the project land uses. A full base year model run would be performed and VMT changes would be isolated for the project TAZ and across the full model network. The model output must include reasonableness checks of the production and attraction balancing to ensure the project effect is accurately captured. If this scenario results in a less-than-significant impact, then additional cumulative scenario analysis may not be required (more information about this outcome can be found in the Thresholds Evaluation discussion later in this chapter).

• Cumulative no project - This data is available from SBCTA.

• Cumulative plus project - The project land use would either be added to the project TAZ or a separate TAZ would be created to contain the project land uses. The addition of project land uses should be accompanied by a reallocation of a similar amount of land use from other TAZs; especially if the proposed project is significant in size such that it would change other future developments. Land use projects will generally not change 36 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
24 the cumulative no project control totals for population and employment growth. Instead, they will influence the land use supply through changes in general plan land use designations and zoning. If project land uses are simply added to the cumulative no project scenario, then the analysis should reflect this limitation in the methodology and acknowledge that the analysis may overestimate the project’s effect on VMT.

The model output should include total VMT, which includes all vehicle trips and trip purposes, and VMT per service population (population plus employment). Total VMT (by speed bin) is needed as an input for air quality, greenhouse gas (GHG), and energy impact analysis while total VMT per service population is recommended for transportation impact analysis .

Both “plus project” scenarios noted above will summarize two types of VMT: (1) project generated VMT per service population and comparing it back to the appropriate benchmark noted in the thresholds of significance, and (2) the project effect on VMT, compa ring how the project changes VMT on the network looking at Citywide VMT per service population or a sub -regional VMT per service population and comparing it to the no project condition.

Project-generated VMT shall be extracted from the travel demand forecasting model using the origin-destination trip matrix and shall multiply that matrix by the final assignment skims. The project-effect on VMT shall be estimated using a sub -regional boundary (such as a City limit or County line) and extracting the total link -level VMT for both the no project and with project condition.

In some cases, it may be appropriate to extract the Project-generated VMT using the production- attraction trip matrix. This may be appropriate when a project is entirely composed of retail or office uses, and there is a need to isolate the home -based-work (HBW) VMT for the purposes of isolating commute VMT. The City should evaluate the appropriate methodology based on the project land use types and context during the project scoping/Scoping Agreement.

A detailed description of this process is attached to these guidelines.

CEQA VMT Impact Thresholds
VMT Impacts
Total VMT (by speed bin) is needed as an input for air quality, greenhouse gas (GHG), and energy impact analysis while total VMT per service population is recommended for transportation impact analysis

3. 3 The City of Rialto will use VMT per service population for its impact threshold. 37 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
25 VMT thresholds provided below are to be applied to determine potential project generated VMT impacts and project’s effect on VMT impacts.

A project would result in a significant project-generated VMT impact if either of the following conditions are satisfied:

3. The baseline project -generated VMT per service population exceeds the San Bernardino County regional average baseline of 32.7 VMT per service population, or

4. The cumulative project -generated VMT per service population exceeds the San Bernardino County regional average baseline of 32.7 VMT per service population.

The project’s effect on VMT would be considered significant if it resulted in either of the following conditions to be satisfied:

1. The baseline link -level boundary (County of San Bernardino) VMT per service population increases under the plus project condition compared to the no project condition, or

2. The cumulative link -level boundary (County of San Bernardino) VMT per service population increases under the plus project condition compared to the no project condition.

Please note that the cumulative no project shall reflect the adopted RTP/SCS; as such, if a project is consistent with the regional RTP/SCS, then the cumulative impacts shall be considered less than significant subject to consideration of other substantial evidence VMT Mitigation Measures
Mitigation should consist of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures analyzed under a VMT-reduction methodology consistent with Chapter 7 of the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures (August 2010).

Please note that the CAPCOA Mitigation Measures document is currently being updated.

Once adopted, the most recent version of CAPCOA will be utilized.

The overall goal is to reduce trip lengths or the number of trips generated through the use of transportation demand management (TDM) measures
To mitigate VMT impacts, the following choices are available to the applicant:

1. Modify the project’s -built environment characteristics to reduce VMT generated by the project

2. Implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures to reduce VMT generated by the project. Measures feasible for most of the SBCTA region/City of Rialto are 38 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
26 summarized on page 30-31 of this document and also found in the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures (August 2010). This Table includes new relevant information since the 2010 publication date which may further progress VMT reduction.

3. Participate in a VMT fee program and/or VMT mitigation exchange/banking program (if they exist) to reduce VMT from the project or other land uses to achieve acceptable levels.

Evaluation of VMT reductions should be evaluated using state -of-the-practice methodologies recognizing that many of the TDM strategies are dependent on building tenant performance over time. As such, actual VMT reduction cannot be reliably predicted and monitoring may be necessary to gauge performance related to mitigation expectations.

39 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
27 CEQA Assessment - Active
Transportation and Public
Transit Analysis
40 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
28 Potential impacts to public transit, pedestrian facilities and travel, and bicycle facilities and travel can be evaluated using the following criteria.
• A significant impact occurs if the project conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decreases the performance or safety of such facilities.

Therefore, the TIA should include analysis of a project to examine if it is inconsistent with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding active transportation or public transit facilities, or otherwise decreases the performance or safety of such facilities and make a determination as to whether it has the potential to conflict with existing or proposed facilities supporting these travel modes.

Detailed VMT Forecasting Information
Most trip-based models generate daily person trip-ends for each TAZ across various trip purposes (HBW, HBO, and NHB, for example) based on population, household, and employment variables.

This may create challenges for complying with the VMT guidance because t rip generation is not directly tied to specific land use categories. The following methodology addresses this particular challenge among others.

Production and attraction trip-ends are separately calculated for each zone, and generally:
production trip-ends are generated by residential land uses and attraction trip-ends are generated by non -residential land uses. OPR's guidance addresses residential, office, and retail land uses.

Focusing on residential and office land uses, the first step to forecasting VMT requires translating the land use into model terms, the closest approximations are:
• Residential: home-based production trips
• Office: home-based work attraction trips
Note that this excludes all non -home-based trips including work -based other and other -based other trips.

The challenges with computing VMT for these two types of trips in a trip -based model are 1) production and attraction trip-ends are not distinguishable after the PA to OD conversion process and 2) trip purposes are not maintained after th e mode choice step. For these reasons, it not possible to use the VMT results from the standard vehicle assignment (even using a select zone re- assignment). A separate post -process must be developed to re- estimate VMT for each zone that includes trip-end types and trip purposes. Two potential approaches to tackle this problem are described below.
41 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
29 Simplified
This approach uses standard model output files and requires minimal custom calculations. It is based on a regional MPO trip-based model with peak (PK) and off-peak (OP) skims and person trip production-attraction (PA) matrices.
• Calculate custom vehicle trip PA matrices from PK and OP person trip matrices o Keep trip purposes and modes separate
o Use average vehicle occupancy rates for drive-alone and shared ride trips • Use the final congested drive- alone PK and OP skim matrices to estimate trip length between zones
• Multiply the skim matrices by vehicle trip matrices to estimate VMT • Sum the PK and OP results to estimate daily VMT and aggregate mode trip purpose and mode
• Calculate automobile VMT for individual TAZs using marginal totals:
o Residential (home-based) - row total
o Office (home-based work) - column total
Detailed
The process described above simplifies the approach but does not account for different congestion patterns throughout the day (AM, MD, PM, and NT), the direction of travel (all productions are origins and all attractions are destinations), or the benefits of exclusive lanes (HOV or HOT lanes).

This more detailed approach attempts to address these limitations and better estimate the VMT produced by the vehicle assignment model.
• Re-skim final loaded congested networks for each mode and time period • Run a custom PA to OD process that replicates actual model steps, but:
o Keeps departure and return trips separate
o Keeps trip purpose and mode separate
o Converts person trips to vehicle trips based on auto occupancy rates and isolates automobile trips
o Factors vehicle trips into assignment time periods
• Multiply appropriate distance skim matrices by custom OD matrices to estimate VMT • Sum matrices by time period, mode, and trip purpose to calculate daily automobile VMT • Calculate automobile VMT for individual TAZs using marginal totals:
o Residential (home-based) - row of departure matrix plus column of return matrix o Office (home-based work) - column of departure matrix plus row of return matrix Appropriateness Checks
Regardless of which method is used, the number of vehicle trips from the custom PA to OD process and the total VMT should match as closely as po ssible with the results from the traditional model process. The estimated results should be checked against the results from a full model run to 42 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
30 understand the degree of accuracy. Note that depending on how each model is setup, these custom processes may or may not include IX/XI trips, truck trips, or special generator trips (airport, seaport, stadium, etc.).

When calculating VMT for comparison at the study area, citywide, or regional geography, the same methodology that was used to estimate project -specific VMT should be used. The VMT for these comparisons can be easily calculated by aggregating the row or column totals for all zones that are within the desired geography.

43 CITY OF RIALTO TIA Guidelines
October 2021

31 44
City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
32 45
City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
33 VMT Report Submittal
• The final TIA will also include a separate Appendix for the VMT report and analysis. • If screening was applicable for the Project; the screening process must be documented within a memorandum.

The recommended VMT Report format is as follows:

1. Executive Summary (Clearly state VMT findings)

2. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis—Prepare To Be Extracted as a Standalone Document – Signature Sheet & Professional Seal Required
a. Project VMT per person/employee for all analysis scenarios b. Project effect on VMT for all analysis scenarios
c. Identification of VMT impacts
d. Proposed VMT Mitigation Measures

3. Appendix
a. Approved scope of work
b. Traffic counts
c. Intersection analysis worksheets
d. VMT and TDM calculations
e. VMT and TDM mitigation calculations

46 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021
34 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
Preparation Guide
Exhibits

A. Scoping Agreement

• TIA
• VMT

B. Signalized Intersection Analysis Input Parameters

C. Traffic Impact Analysis Format

D. Background Information

E. Traffic Impact Analysis Submittal Form

47 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021

Exhibit A

SCOPING AGREEMENT FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
This following form shall be used to acknowledge preliminary approval of the scope for the traffic impact analysis (TIA) of the following project. The TIA must follow the City of Rialto Traffic Impact Analysis – Report Guidelines and Requirements, adopted by the City Council on ________________.

City of Rialto
Traffic Impact Analysis
Scoping Agreement
Case No.

Related Cases -
SP No.

EIR No.

GPA No.

ZC No.

Project Name:

Project Address:

Project Description:

Consultant Developer
Name:

Address:

Telephone:

Fax:

48 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021

1. Trip Generation Source:

Existing GP Land Use Proposed Land Use
Current Zoning: Proposed Zoning:

Total Daily Project Trips:

Current Trip Generation Proposed Trip Generation
In Out Total In Out Total
AM Trips
PM Trips
Internal Trip Allowance Yes No ( % Trip Discount)
Pass-By Trip Allowance Yes No ( % Trip Discount)
For appropriate land uses, a pass-by trip discount may be allowed not to exceed 25%. Discount trips shall be indicated on a report figure for intersections and access locations.

2. Trip Geographic Distribution: N % S % E % W %
(Detailed exhibits of trip distribution must be attached with Trucks as a separate exhibit)

3. Background Growth Traffic
Project Completion Year: Annual Background Growth Rate: % Other Phase Years
Other area projects to be considered:
(Contact Planning for Lists. Correlate projects to exhibit map and also indicate which projects have been included in study area forecasts for existing + background growth + project + cumulative)
Model/Forecast methodology:

4. Study Intersections: (NOTE: Subject to revision after other projects, trip generation and distribution are determined, or comments from other agencies received.)

1. 6.

2. 7.

3. 8.

4. 9.

5. 10.
49 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021

5. Study Roadway Segments: (NOTE: Subject to revision after other projects, trip generation and distribution are determined, or comments from other agencies received.)

1. 6.

2. 7.

3. 8.

4. 9.

5. 10.

6. Other Jurisdictional Impacts
Is this project within any other Agency's Sphere of Influence or within one-mile of another jurisdictional boundary?
YES
NO
If so, name of Jurisdiction:

7. Site Plan (please attach 11" x 17" legible copy)

8. Specific issues to be addressed in the Study (in addition to the standard analysis described in the Guideline) (to be filled out by the City of Rialto Public Works Department) (NOTE: If the traffic study states that "a traffic signal is warranted" (or "a traffic signal appears to be w arranted," or similar statement) at an existing un-signalized intersection under existing conditions, 8-hour approach traffic volume information must be submitted in addition to the peak hourly turning movement counts for that intersection.)

9. Existing Conditions
Traffic count data must be new or within one year. Provide traffic count dates if using other than new counts.

Date of counts:

NOTE Fees are due and must be submitted with, or prior to submittal of this form. The City will not process the Scoping Agreement prior to the receipt of the processing fee.

Fees Paid: Date
50 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021

Recommended:

Scoping Agreement Submittal date
Scoping Agreement Resubmittal date

Applicant/Engineer Date

Land Use Concurrence:

Development Services Department Date

Approved by:

Public Works Department Date

NOTE:

The Applicant/Engineer acknowledges that the Scoping Agreement is intended to assist in the preparation of any required TIA. It is preliminary in nature and the City does not have sufficient data to determine the ultimate conditions that may be imposed for the project. It does not provide nor limit the requirements imposed on the Project but is intended only to provide initial input into the parameters for review of the traffic generated by the Project and the initial areas to be considered and studied. Subsequent changes to scope of required analysis to be included in the TIA may be required by the Transportation Commission, Planning Commission, and/or the City Council upon Public Works Director/City Engineer review and approval. 51 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021

VMT Analysis Project Scoping Form
This scoping form shall be submitted to the City of Rialto 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:

Fax/Email:

Trip Generation Information:

Trip Generation Data Source:

Current General Plan Land Use:

Proposed General Plan Land Use:

Current Zoning:

Proposed Zoning:

52 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021

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 the project screened from VMT assessment? Yes No
VMT screening justification

VMT Scoping
For projects that are not screened, identify the following:
• Travel Demand Forecasting Model Used
• Attach SBCTA Screening VMT Assessment output or describe why it is not appropriate for use
• Attach proposed Model Land Use Inputs and Assumed Conversion Factors (attach)

53 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021

Approved by:

Public Works Department Date

NOTE:

The Applicant/Engineer acknowledges that the Scoping Agreement is intended to assist in the preparation of any required TIA. It is preliminary in nature and the City does not have sufficient data to determine the ultimate conditions that may be imposed for the project. It does not provide nor limit the requirements imposed on the Project but is intended only to provide initial input into the parameters for review of the traffic generated by the Project and the initial areas to be considered and studied. Subsequent changes to scope of required analysis to be included in the TIA may be required by the Transportation Commission, Planning Commission, and/or the City Council upon Public Works Director/City Engineer review and approval 54 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021

Exhibit B

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS INPUT PARAMETERS

PARAMETER VALUE
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1900 pc/hr/ln
Heavy Vehicle Factor: Determine % heavy vehicles in existing traffic stream based on count data or consultation with the City Public Works Department. Projects with truck intensive uses must
convert project trips to passenger car equivalents. Truck Intensive uses include heavy industrial, warehousing or as determined by the Department of Public Works.

Grade Include as appropriate
Exclusive left turn lane peak hour volume > 100
Exclusive right turn lane peak hour volume > 350
Dual left turn lanes peak hour volume > 200
Protected left turn phasing peak hour volume > 120 **
Minimum Green time 7 sec. each movement (10 sec. including change) in areas of light pedestrian activity. In areas of high pedestrian activity, the minimum green shall be calculated based on the methodology in the HCM.

Cycle length 50 seconds to 130 seconds
Lost Time Per HCM Exhibit 10-17 (below)
Major street Minor street Number of phases L(sec)
Protected Protected 4 16
Protected Permitted 3 12
Permitted Permitted 3 12
Permitted Permitted 2 8
*All values are taken from HCM 2016 Chapters 10 and 16. Any deviation from these parameters requires prior approval from the City of Rialto Public Works Department. Refer to HCM 2016 for any default values not specifically identified here
Intersection analyses should be conducted utilizing acceptable software based on HCM methodology. Closely spaced intersections are to be analyzed using analysis tools capable of accounting for turn lane storage, queue length, blockage, etc. such as Synchro. Other programs must be approved in advance of use.

Actual signal timing and peak hour factors should be collected in the field and utilized in existing and near term analyses. In cases where traffic is added from a significant number of cumulative projects, the consultant shall use their engineering judgment in the application of peak hour factors to maintain consistency with the existing conditions analyses. A peak hour factor of 1.0 shall be applied to build out traffic conditions. 55 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021

56 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021

Exhibit C

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FORMAT
The Traffic Impact Analysis Report shall generally include the following items, unless specifically waived by the Department of Public Works/City Engineer. Required Exhibits and Tables are indicated.

Executive Summary
I Introduction
A. Purpose of the TIA and Study Objectives
B. Site Plan, location and the Study Area (Exhibit)
C. Development project identification - City of Rialto Case Number, Planning Number and related numbers i.e. GPA/SP, EIR etc.

D. Development project description.

1. Project size and description

2. Existing land use and zoning

3. Proposed land use and zoning

4. Site plan of proposed project (reduced) (Exhibit)

5. Proposed project opening year

6. Any proposed project phasing

7. Indicated if project is within another agency Sphere of Influence or within 1- mile of jurisdictional boundary
II Area Conditions
A. Identify Study Area and Intersections
B. Existing traffic controls and intersection geometrics (Exhibit) - include descriptions of existing roads (number of lanes, signals, etc.) C. Existing traffic volumes - AM and PM peak hour turning movements and roadway links (Exhibit). Peak hour counts during mid-day or weekends may be required.

D. Existing delay and LOS at Study intersections/roadway links (Table) E. Copy of General Plan Circulation Element in the project vicinity (Exhibit) F. Description of Transit Services and routes (if any) within the Study Area III Projected Future Traffic
A. Project Traffic and Project Phasing (each study year)

1. Trip Generation (Table) – Passenger vehicle trips shall be estimated using the rates and methodologies outlined in the Trip Generation Manual, current edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Other sources require prior approval by the Public Works Director/City Engineer.

The trips generated by most residential uses should be based on the number of dwelling units. The trips generated by most commercial and industrial uses should be based on gross. Some unique types of uses may not have rates published by ITE or ITE rates have been determined from too few sites to be applicable. In these cases, the Applicant/Engineer may 57 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021

propose and submit for consideration data collected at similar existing facilities and if acceptable to the Department may use the agreed upon data for forecasting trips. The City may require additional information from sites it selects to adequately address traffic trip projections.

2. Trip Distribution and assignment (Exhibit) – A separate Trip Distribution is required for each land use proposed. Also, separate trip distribution is required for truck traffic, if applicable. Exhibits showing the percentages and volumes of the project traffic (ADT, AM, and PM) logically distributed (in the direction of ultimate travel) on the roadway system must be provided.

3. Other factors affecting trip generation (pass-by trips, internal trips, or modal choice) require prior approval by the Public Works Director/City Engineer and must be based on accepted traffic engineering documentation. Pass - by factor shall not be assumed at more than 25% and internal capture shall not be assumed at more than 10% if allowed. If permitted, reduced or net trips generated by the project shall not be used to analyze project driveways and intersections immediately adjacent to the project site. Instead, a full trip generation shall be used. Discounted factors are typically only applicable to new fast-food, gas stations and shopping centers.

B. Existing Traffic Plus Background Growth Plus Project Traffic

1. Ambient growth rate

2. Delay and Level of Service for existing traffic conditions without project but with existing improvements (Table).

3. Existing plus ambient plus Project ADT, AM, and PM peak hour volumes (Exhibits)

4. Existing plus ambient plus Project ADT, AM, and PM peak hour LOS (Table) C. Cumulative (existing+ambient+cumulative) with and without Project Traffic

1. Identify location and description of other approved or proposed development projects (Table and Exhibit)

2. Background growth rate

3. Trip generation of other development projects (Table)

4. Trip distribution and assignment of other development projects (Exhibits)

5. Delay and Level of Service (LOS) with project, with existing and committed improvements (Table)

6. Cumulative with and without project ADT, AM, and PM peak hour volumes, delay and LOS (Table)
58 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021

IV Mitigation Measures
The TIA must link the project and the traffic impacts to the City street system and how the Level of Service (LOS) will be maintained. It should describe how Significant Impacts will be brought to a level of insignificance. This nexus will include only improvements currently scheduled for construction prior to project completion. If improvements are funded for future implementation by some regional mechanism, this shall be shown. (Table and Exhibits)
Traffic Signal warrant analysis – indicate intersections found to meet traffic signal warrants at the study year and the share of project contribution (use peak hour for existing intersections and delay for new intersections).

The Project is subject to implementation of direct Project mitigation requirements (100% project responsibility). The Project may also be subject to contributions toward larger, longer range, improvement projects (on "Fair Share" basis). The City is concerned with Project Equity – where one project's mitigation is completing a "first phase" (i.e. an easier less expensive improvement or mitigation fee payment) of an improvement, while a significantly larger portion of the improvements remains for other future phases or other developments. The City is also concerned with immediate impacts of the Project. That is, does the Project create or exacerbate an existing problem to a level that requires immediate mitigation. The City shall determine if a Project's mitigation responsibility should be "direct mitigation", Fair Share contributions, mitigation of the immediate concern (with fee offsets, reimbursement agreements, or development agreements) or some combination thereof. It is noted that Fair Share improvements are developer based on the ultimate area-wide roadway improvements needed.

V. Findings and Recommendations
A. Improvements – Proposed on-site and off-site mitigation measures to achieve required LOS at impacted intersections and roadways. Identify if improvements are scheduled for construction, funded for future construction, or unfunded.

Identify the funding mechanism in place, if none indicate "None".

B. Traffic Signal Warrant analysis – Indicate on-site intersections found to meet traffic signal warrants at study year (and at future phases if project is phased).

For off-site intersections indicate if traffic signal warrants are met for study year with background, project and Cumulative growth and "fair share" based on traffic contribution. Use peak hour for existing intersections and daily for new intersections.

C. Circulation Recommendations

1. On site (Exhibit)

2. Study Area – Provide an exhibit showing roadway improvements and signal locations

3. Phasing for both on and off site.

D. Safety and operational improvements – Complete Sight Distance analysis if warranted by the conditions.

59 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021

E. Fair Share calculations – Project fair share mitigation costs calculations shall be completed by the Project Engineer in a detailed manner (include design, right of way acquisition, improvements, project administration etc. in a detailed cost estimate) and included in the appendices. It shall include intersections requiring mitigation improvements, roadway improvements (not including site specific per code), transitions, drainage and other required or recommended mitigations.

Calculations shall show existing traffic, project traffic, cumulative traffic at build out and % of new traffic attributed to the Project.

F. Specific Plan signalization analysis (SP only)
G. General Plan Conformance (GPA and SP only) (GP Amendments in Exhibit) H. Identify existing or proposed Regional funding mechanisms that may be applicable to any of the mitigations.
60 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021

Exhibit D

BACKGROUND INFORMATION
On February 5, 2014, the City of Rialto approved Traffic Impact Analysis Report Guidelines and Requirements to regulate development, provide consistency with the City’s adoption of the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Plan and comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to identify potentially significant project impacts on the roadway system.

This adopted criteria will be maintained. These policies are contained in general plans and therefore apply to discretionary approvals of new land use and transportation projects. Network intersections within City of Rialto shall perform according to City Policy 4-1.20 and Policy 4-1.21 The LOS guidelines consider SBCTA Congestion Management Plan (CMP) guidelines updated in 2016 and incorporate Rialto’s guidelines of 2014.

CEQA changes
Subsequently, SB 743, signed by the Governor in 2013, changed the way transportation impacts are identified. Specifically, the legislation directed the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to look at different metrics for identifying transportation as a CEQA impact. The Final OPR guidelines were released in December 2018 and identified vehicle miles of travel (VMT) as the preferred metric moving forward. The Natural Resources Agency completed the rule making process to modify the CEQA guidelines in December of 2018. The CEQA Guidelines identify that, by July of 2020 all lead agencies must use VMT as the new transportation metric for identifying impacts for land use project.

SBCTA Implementation Study
In anticipation of the change to VMT, SBCTA completed a SB 743 Implementation Study to assist their member organizations with answering important implementation questions about the methodology, thresholds, and mitigation approaches for VMT impact analysis.

The SBCTA study documents prepared by Fehr & Peers are on the SBCTA website and include:
• Thresholds Evaluation Memorandum – Potential thresholds SBCTA agencies could consider when establishing thresholds of significance for VMT assessment • Methodologies and Calculation Memorandum – Types of tools that could be considered for impact assessment
• Tools Evaluation Memorandum – Types of tools that could be used to estimate VMT and the pros/cons associated with each tool
• Mitigation Memorandum – Types of mitigation that can be considered for VMT mitigation • VMT Screening Tool – An on-line GIS tool that can be used for VMT screening. 61 City of Rialto TIA Guidelines
October 2021

The City of Rialto utilized the information produced through the Implementation Study to adopt methodology and significance thresholds for use in CEQA compliance. As noted in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(b) below, lead agencies were encouraged to formally adopt their significance thresholds, and this is key part of the SB 743 implementation process. (b) Each public agency is encouraged to develop and publish thresholds of significance that the agency uses in the determination of the significance of environmental effects. Thresholds of significance to be adopted for general use as part of the lead agency’s environmental re view process must be adopted by ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulation, and developed through a public review process and be supported by substantial evidence. Lead agencies may also use thresholds on a case-by-case basis as provided in Section 15064(b)(2). 62 CITY OF RIALTO TIA Guidelines
October 2021

Exhibit E

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SUBMITTAL FORM

DATE OF SUBMITTAL:

CASE NO. APN NO.

Related Cases:

APPLICANT INFORMATION CONSULTANT INFORMATION

PROJECT NAME:

LAND USE:

PROJECT LOCATION:

NEAREST MAJOR INTERSECTION:

THOMAS BROS PAGE/GRID:

FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY
STAFF ASSIGNED:

FEE RECIEPT NO.

PUBIC WORKS ASSIGNED STAFF:

63 Revised City
Transportation
Study
Guidelines
SB 743
Update
VMT Guidelines
May 25, 2022
Economic Development
Committee
64 Legislative History
+10 California Climate
change Executive Orders
since 2004
SB 375
AB 32
SB 97
SB 226
SB 743
AB 2245
AB 417
AB 1358
+10 California Climate
change Executive Orders
since 2004
65 Background
SB 743 Legislative Intent
(1) Ensure that the environmental impacts of traffic, such as noise, air pollution, and safety concerns, continue to be properly addressed and mitigated through the California Environmental Quality Act.
(2) More appropriately balance the needs of congestion
management with statewide goals related to infill
development, promotion of public health through active
transportation, and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. 66 Background
What Does SB 743 Do?
• Eliminates LOS/Delay as a significance threshold
• Adds VMT as a CEQA significance threshold
• Provides methods and thresholds guidance
• Changes where significant impacts occur
• Changes mitigation focus
67 Timing
Sep. 2013
Governor
Signed Bill
Dec. 2018
CEQA
Guidelines
updated
Apr. 2019
LOS
Prohibited in
CEQA for LU
projects
Jul. 2020
VMT is
Mandatory for
LU projects
68 What is VMT?
VMT = Vehicle Trips x Trip Length
69 Project Screening
Lead agency may screen out VMT impacts using:
• project size
• location at a low-VMT generating area
• transit availability
• provision of affordable housing
• Projects reducing VMT
70 VMT Mitigation
• Two types of VMT reduction strategies
 Built-environment changes
 Transportation demand management (TDM) strategies
• Built Environment
 Is changing the project land use or transportation network feasible?
• Travel Demand Management
 Effectiveness depends on project site context and tenants  Requires monitoring
71 Level of Service (LOS)
• Can the City of Rialto require the study of LOS under CEQA?
 The City cannot require direct analysis of LOS as a CEQA subject.
• Why would the City of Rialto still require evaluation of LOS?
 The City requires evaluation of LOS to ensure compliance with the General Plan, provide information for noise and air quality analysis, ensure public safety and more under the City’s police powers.
72 City of Rialto
Legislation Text
File #: EDC-22-504, Version: 1, Agenda #: 2
For Economic Development Committee [May 20, 2022]
TO: Honorable Economic Development Committee Members
APPROVAL: Paul Gonzales, Community Development Manager FROM: John Dorado, PE, Advantec Consulting Engineers, Inc Citywide Truck Route, Speed and Volume Studies Update

BACKGROUND
Engineering and Traffic Study (E&TS)
In June 2011, an Engineering and Traffic Study (E&TS) was conducted and completed for the City of Rialto. The E&TS led to the City of Rialto subsequently updating the speed limits with the adoption of Ordinance No. 1516 on September 11, 2012. Since this time, there have been no updated traffic studies.

A new draft E&TS were completed and presented to the Economic Development Committee (EDC) on October 27th, 2021, for consideration. Since the last survey was completed in 2011, new roadways were developed along with changes to traffic patterns due to new development within and around the City. The latest E&TS update justifies the posted speed limits and enables the Rialto Police Department and other law enforcement agencies to perform radar enforcement that is defendable by the court of law pursuant to the criteria outlined in CVC Section 40802.

The speed and volume survey incorporates E&TS related requirements, standards, and guidance from the California Manual and Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD) Section 2B.13. Since October 27, 2021, additional legislation also came out and was included in the final draft study. This included criteria contained in the CAMUTCD and State approved Assembly Bill No. 43 (effective on January 1, 2022) with criteria and requirements to establish speed limits. This will ultimately provide more flexibility for the City Engineer to maintain or reduce speed limits. An online tool will need to be created and implemented by June 30, 2024, for the adjudication of traffic infractions, among other requirements per AB 43.

AB 43 also allows existing speed surveys to be extended or recertified up to 14 years. The criteria to extend or recertify existing speed surveys is stated under Section 40802 from the CVC. This criterion will allow several existing posted speed limits in the City to remain.

As discussed at the last EDC meeting, the recommendation is to declare many of the City’s residential collector streets (e.g. Etiwanda Ave., Linden Ave., Sycamore Ave., Willow Ave.) as a “ResidenceDistrict”pursuant to CVC Section 515 where there are at least 13 homes on one side of the street within ¼ mile, or at least 16 homes total on both sides of the street within ¼ mile.

Pursuant to CVC 22353, the speed limit on a residential collector roadway within a residence district City of Rialto Printed on 5/20/2022Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
73 File #: EDC-22-504, Version: 1, Agenda #: 2
is declared at 25 mph.

If adopted, the study will be a legal document to be acted on by the City Council to formally adopt and/or change specific speed limits at the surveyed locations. The Rialto Police Department and the courts will rely upon the document in the day-to-day legal defense activities of the established speed limits.

The final draft speed survey is anticipated to be scheduled for a future City Council meeting for consideration.

Truck Route Study
Along with the Speed and Volume Studies, the Truck Route Study was also presented to the EDC at the October 27th, 2021, meeting. To accommodate the large increase in volume of truck traffic for businesses in the City, designated City arterials have been identified as Truck Routes per the City’s 2010 General Plan. This network was developed to facilitate commercial vehicles/trucks for goods movement along strategic corridors to minimize impacts on collector and local streets and to protect the residential neighborhoods from truck traffic.

The City of Rialto’sMunicipal Code, Chapter 10.40, “Trucks”,addresses trucks routes. This includes guidance, resolutions, requirements, and policies to designate truck routes as well as prohibiting trucks on certain streets..

As a logistics hub for national companies, an updated study was deemed necessary by the City of Rialto to analyze the existing truck routes, evaluate new truck routes, and utilize city policies including current state and local truck regulations that are consistent with the California Vehicle Code (CVC), and to provide recommended truck routes. This included recommendations for removal of existing truck routes.

The important point to be made here is that the City’s Truck Route Map should only show the through truck routes for commercial vehicles that are driving through the City with no destination within the City. To that end, the Truck Route Map should have limited truck routes, and need not show short or isolated truck routes to any specific logistics warehouse or area. This is due to the fact that CVC Section 35703 allows a commercial vehicle to drive on any local street provided that street is on the most direct route to their destination in the City.

CVC Section 35703 states:

No ordinance adopted pursuant to Section 35701 shall prohibit any commercial vehicles coming from an unrestricted street having ingress and egress by direct route to and from a restricted street when necessary for the purpose of making pickups or deliveries of goods, wares, and merchandise from or to any building or structure located on the restricted street or for the purpose of delivering materials to be used in the actual and bona fide repair, alteration, remodeling, or construction of any building or structure upon the restricted street for which a building permit has previously been obtained.

The recommendation is to eliminate truck routes and simplify the Truck Route Map to only show City of Rialto Printed on 5/20/2022Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
74 File #: EDC-22-504, Version: 1, Agenda #: 2
through truck routes.

When finalized, the study will provide city staff with a systemic approach to update the Circulation Element of the General Plan and Municipal Code with an inclusive and comprehensive truck route system. This will aid in planning for current and future developments, identify truck route signage enhancements and placement, and serve as a tool where City staff can focus future funds on improvements of key roadways impacted by heavy truck traffic.

The Citywide Truck Route Study Tasks included evaluating existing truck volume and operations, identifying a network of truck routes, and providing truck route signs for placement on approved corridors. The truck routes will serve all commercial and industrial facilities within the City with the objective of providing mitigations to minimize truck traffic diversion into residential neighborhoods and improve the quality of life in our community.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Review the recommended speed limit changes from the E&TS, confirm the establishment of residence districts to declare a 25 mph prima facie speed limit on residential collector streets where applicable, and direct staff to proceed with review and approval of the E&TS by the Transportation Commission and City Council.

2. Review the recommended Truck Route Map to designated new and eliminate existing truck routes, and direct staff to proceed with review and approval of the Truck Route Map by Planning Commission and City Council, inclusive of a General Plan Update to the Circulation Element to implement the new Truck Route Map.

Included with this report are the following attachments:

Attachment 1 - Recommended Truck Routes (To be discussed), Recommended Speed Limits, Recommended Speed Limits That Decreased Only, Recommended Speed Limits That Increased Only, and Recommended Collector to Local Street
City of Rialto Printed on 5/20/2022Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
75 Attachment 1
–
Recommended Truck Routes (To be discussed)
Recommend removal of
existing truck route
Items to
Discuss
It
should
be
noted
that
under
CVC,
Section
35703
:

No
ordinance
adopted
pursuant
to
Section
35701
shall
prohibit
any
commercial
vehicles
coming
from
an
unrestricted
street
having
ingress
and
egress
by
direct
route
to
and
from
a
restricted
street
when
necessary
for
the
purpose
of
making
pickups
or
deliveries
of
goods,
wares,
and
merchandise
from
or
to
any
building
or
structure
located
on
the
restricted
street
or
for
the
purpose
of
delivering
materials
to
be
used
in
the
actual
and
bona
fide
repair,
alteration,
remodeling,
or
construction
of
any
building
or
structure
upon
the
restricted
street
for
which
a
building
permit
has
previously
been
obtained
.

Discuss if corridor
should be added
76 Attachment 2
–
Recommended Speed Limits
See the legend. This map includes
speeds that stayed the same,
increased, and decreased.
77 Attachment 3
–
Recommended Speed Limits That Decreased Only
78 Attachment 4
–
Recommended Speed Limits That Increased Only
79 Attachment 5
–
Recommended Collector to Local Street
80 City of Rialto
Legislation Text
File #: EDC-22-439, Version: 3, Agenda #: 3
For Economic Development Committee [May 25, 2022]
TO: Honorable Economic Development Committee Members
APPROVAL: Marcus Fuller, City Manager
FROM: Dionne Harris, Senior Planner
Kaptial Partners - Proposed Best Western Hotel
DISCUSSION:

Kaptial Partners, the applicant, proposes to develop an approximately 44,758 square foot 4-story hotel building, with 86 guestrooms, located at the south side of Foothill Boulevard and east side of Spruce Avenue. The project site consists of one parcel of land totaling 1.12 acres in size. The project is adjacent to two other parcels that have reciprocal parking and will accommodate some of the Hotel’sparking spaces. The project site is currently zoned Commercial- Mixed Use (C-MU) of the Foothill Specific Plan.

Kaptial Partners will conduct a presentation during the meeting, a copy of which is attached as Attachment No. 1.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the EDC review the proposal and provide general direction to the applicant and staff.

Attachments:

1. Kaptial Partners/Best Western Hotel Presentation
City of Rialto Printed on 5/20/2022Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
City of Rialto
Legislation Text
File #: EDC-22-435, Version: 1, Agenda #: 4
For Economic Development Committee May 25, 2022
TO: Honorable Economic Development Committee Members
APPROVAL: Marcus Fuller, City Manager
FROM: Siri Champion, Senior Planner
Commercial- and Residential- Mixed Use Districts of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan

BACKGROUND
The Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan includes two mixed use districts. They are Commercial-Mixed Use and Residential-Mixed Use.

The Commercial-Mixed Use district is intended to provide a flexible mix of commercial and residential uses and allow for intense, multi-story development. Commercial mixed-use developments must consist of at least 50% commercial uses.

The Residential-Mixed Use district is intended to focus on higher density residential uses, with some less-intense commercial uses. There is no minimum percentage of residential for residential mixed- use developments.

ANALYSIS/DISCUSSION
Potential developers have requested information about the development of projects in both districts.

Two examples are provided as follows.

City of Rialto Printed on 5/20/2022Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
93 File #: EDC-22-435, Version: 1, Agenda #: 4
Car Wash in Residential-Mixed Use District
Multiple parties have expressed interest in developing a service station and/or car wash on a vacant parcel at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Linden Avenue. The subject parcel is designated Residential-Mixed Use. Renaissance Center is located directly to the east on the same block. The shopping center is designated Commercial-Pedestrian and includes Food 4 Less, McDonald’s,Wienerschnitzel, a Food 4 Less gas station, and a variety of other retail and service uses.

According to the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan Table 3.1 - Permitted Uses (included as an attachment), vehicle services stations, fuel dispensing, auto washing, and vehicle repair and services are not permitted in the Residential-Mixed Use district. To meet the goals of the potential developers, a Specific Plan Amendment is necessary to change the designation of the subject parcel from Residential-Mixed Use to Commercial-Pedestrian to be consistent with the designation of the Renaissance Center. A Specific Plan Amendment can be developer or City sponsored. As part of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan update, such a change is feasible.

City of Rialto Printed on 5/20/2022Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
94 File #: EDC-22-435, Version: 1, Agenda #: 4
Residential Development in a Commercial-Mixed Use District A potential developer has requested to develop a multi-family residential project with no commercial on a parcel located southeast of Foothill Boulevard and Cactus Avenue. The subject property is designated Commercial-Mixed Use, which requires that 50% of the site include commercial uses. To meet the developer’sintent, a Specific Plan Amendment is necessary to change the designation of the subject parcel from Commercial-Mixed Use to Residential-Mixed Use or to remove the requirement that 50% of the property be made up of commercial uses. A Specific Plan Amendment can be developer or City sponsored. As part of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan update, such a change is feasible.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the EDC review the examples and provide direction as deemed appropriate.

City of Rialto Printed on 5/20/2022Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
95 3 – Land Use

Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan 29

18.111.070 - Permitted, Conditional, and Accessory Uses

Uses permitted within the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan shall include those listed in the following table. Each Land Use operates in compliance with the intent and purpose, st andards, and requirements of the respective land use district s of this Specific Plan and shall be conducted wholly within a completely enclosed building. Certain uses, due to their characteristics, may have the potential to impact surrounding properties and therefore require additional consideration and potential limitations to reduce or eliminate potential impacts. Such uses are subj ect to approval of a Conditional Development Permit, as described in the Rialto Municipal Code. Outdoor uses, including storage, shall also be subject to approval and conditions of a Conditional Development Permit (CDP).

Uses identified as Permitted (P) require a Precise Pl an of Design Application be processed and approved through the Planning Division.

Uses not listed in the following table shall not be allo wed, unless found to be similar in characteristics to permitted uses, by the Planning and Development Services Director pursuant to the provisions of Section

18.111.030.C-Administration.

Table 3.1 – Permitted Uses
Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan – Permitted Uses Table Land Use Districts: Commercial-Pedestrian (C-P) Commercial-Mixed Use (C-MU) Residential -Mixed Use (R-MU) Residential - High Density (R-HD) P = Permitted C = Conditional Development Permit (CDP) Required Blank = Not Allowed Type of Use C-P C-MU R-MU R-HD Notes
Residential
Single-Family Dwellings, Attached
& Detached
Located on ground floor
Located above ground floor

C

C
P

P
P

P
P
See Development Standards for
minimum project size and permitted
densities.

Multi-Family Dwellings
Located on ground floor
Located above ground floor

C

C
P

P
P

P
P
See Development Standards for
minimum project size, permitted
densities & professional
management requirements (Section

18.111.100F)
Live-Work Units C P P P See Development Standards for
special requirements
Home Occupations P P P P Subject to Chapter 5.68 R.M.C.

Child Day-Care, Small (8 or fewer
children) & Large Family (14 or
fewer children)

P P P P
Accessory Uses & Structures
customarily incidental to permitted
residential uses

P P P P
96 30 Adopted August 2010
Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan – Permitted Uses Table Land Use Districts: Commercial-Pedestrian (C-P) Commercial-Mixed Use (C-MU) Residential -Mixed Use (R-MU) Residential - High Density (R-HD) P = Permitted C = Conditional Development Permit (CDP) Required Blank = Not Allowed Type of Use C-P C-MU R-MU R-HD Notes
Offices/Professional
Administrative, Business, Executive,
Governmental, Legal, or Professional
Offices
P P P P Subject to a Home Occupation
Permit for R-HD Land Use Districts,
Chapter 5.68-Home Occupations
R.M.C.

Accounting, Auditing, Bookkeeping,
Clerical, and Tax Services Offices
P P P P Subject to a Home Occupation
Permit for R-HD Land Use District,
Chapter 5.68-Home Occupations
R.M.C.

Banks & Financial Institutions P P P Drive-through facilities subject to CDP
Insurance & Investment Offices P P P P Subject to a Home Occupation Permit for R-HD Land Use Districts,
Chapter 5.68-Home Occupations
R.M.C.

Medical, Dental, and Health- Related
Offices & Services including
Laboratories
P P P
Real Estate, Title, & Escrow Offices P P P
Commercial/Retail/Restaurants
Adult Businesses Subject to Chapter 18.105 R.M.C.

Art & Photographic Galleries &
Studios
P P P P Subject to a Home Occupation
Permit for R-HD Land Use Districts,
Chapter 5.68-Home Occupations
R.M.C.

Bakeries & Catering Establishments
Employing 10 or less persons
Employing more than 10 persons

P
C

P
C

P

Building and Landscape Materials
Sales
C C C
Convenience Markets C C C Subject to Conditional Development Permit pursuant to Chapter 18.110
R.M.C. & Chapter 18.106 R.M.C.

Drive-Through Facilities for any use C C Subject to Conditional Development Permit pursuant to Chapter 18.110
R.M.C.
97 3 – Land Use

Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan 31
Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan – Permitted Uses Table Land Use Districts: Commercial-Pedestrian (C-P) Commercial-Mixed Use (C-MU) Residential -Mixed Use (R-MU) Residential - High Density (R-HD) P = Permitted C = Conditional Development Permit (CDP) Required Blank = Not Allowed Type of Use C-P C-MU R-MU R-HD Notes
Drinking Establishment (only
permitted as an ancillary use to a
bona fide eating establishment)
Open until 10:00 PM
Open after 10:00 PM

P
C

P
C

P
C
Drive-through Facilities subject
Conditional Development Permit
pursuant to Chapter 18.110 R.M.C.

Subject to Chapter 18.110 R.M.C.

General & Specialty Retail Stores,
including but not limited to:

Apparel, Jewelry, Shoe, Art, Auto
Parts, Book, Music, Video,
Electronics, Food/Drug, Florist,
Hardware, Home Improvement,
Interior Decorating, Home
Furnishings, Appliance, Stationary
& Office Supplies, Sporting Goods,
& Toy Stores
P P P
Liquor Stores C C C Liquor Store requires off-sale alcohol license subject to Conditional
Development Permit pursuant to
Chapter 18.110 R.M.C.

Outdoor Sales C C Subject to Special Section A-
Outdoor Displays and Sales , in
additional uses section
Pawn Shops, Second-Hand Stores,
and Thrift Stores
C C
Recreation and Entertainment Uses,
including Theaters, Bowling Alleys,
Skating Rinks, Arcades, Game
Courts & Arenas, Pool/Billiard Halls,
Dance Halls, & Arcades
C C
Restaurant, café, sandwich shop,
cafeterias, dining rooms, grills and
diners
P P P Drive-through facilities subject to
Conditional Development Permit
pursuant to Chapter 18.110 R.M.C.

Vehicle Sales and Rental, including
auto, trucks, motorcycles, trailers,
watercraft, and similar vehicles
C C
Services
Animal Care Facilities, including
Animal Grooming, Animal Hospitals,
Veterinarians, & Pet Stores
P C C
Dry Cleaning (Pick-up & Delivery
Only) & Self Service Laundries
P P P
98 32 Adopted August 2010
Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan – Permitted Uses Table Land Use Districts: Commercial-Pedestrian (C-P) Commercial-Mixed Use (C-MU) Residential -Mixed Use (R-MU) Residential - High Density (R-HD) P = Permitted C = Conditional Development Permit (CDP) Required Blank = Not Allowed Type of Use C-P C-MU R-MU R-HD Notes
Dry Cleaning (On-site plant) &
Commercial Laundries
C C
Employment Agencies P P P
Equipment Rental & Repair P C No outdoor repair or storage Gyms; Athletic, Health & Fitness
Clubs; Dance Studios
P P P
Hotels & Motels C C C C
Museums and Art Galleries P P P
Music Instruction P P P P Subject to a Home Occupation
Permit for R-HD Land Use Districts,
Chapter 5.68-Home Occupations
R.M.C.

Personal Services, includin g
Barbershops, Hair Salons, Beaut y
Shops, & Nail Salons
P P P
Printing, Copying, Reproduction, &
Postal Services
P P P
Recycling Facilities C C Subject to Conditional Development Permit pursuant to Chapter 18.110
R.M.C. & Chapter 18.108 R.M.C
Repair of Personal & Household
Items, including Watch & Jewelry
Repair, Shoe Repair, small
appliances, electronics
P P P P Subject to a Home Occupation
Permit for R-HD Land Use Districts,
Chapter 5.68-Home Occupations
R.M.C.

Repair of major appliances &
equipment, furniture repair &
refinishing, upholstery shops
C C
Tailors, Dressmakers, & Milliners P P P P Subject to a Home Occupation Permit for R-HD Land Use Districts,
Chapter 5.68-Home Occupations
R.M.C.

Ticket & Travel Agencies

P P P
Vehicle Service Stations & Fuel
Dispensing, Auto Washing, Vehicle
Repair & Service
C C Not including engine overhaul, body
& paint shops. Any complete or
partial conversion of service station
to another use is subject to a
Conditional Development Permit
pursuant to Chapter 18.110 R.M.C.

99 3 – Land Use

Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan 33
Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan – Permitted Uses Table Land Use Districts: Commercial-Pedestrian (C-P) Commercial-Mixed Use (C-MU) Residential -Mixed Use (R-MU) Residential - High Density (R-HD) P = Permitted C = Conditional Development Permit (CDP) Required Blank = Not Allowed Type of Use C-P C-MU R-MU R-HD Notes
Public Assembly, Religious, &
Institutional

Charitable, Philanthropic, & Non-
Profit Institutions
C C C
Child Day Care (more than 14
children) & Pre-Schools
C C C
Churches and Religious Institutions C C C
Educational Institutions (including
private schools), Libraries, &
Museums
C C C
Hospitals & Convalescent Facilities C C C
Private Clubs & Lodges (including
fraternal organizations, YMCA, Boys
and Girls Clubs, and similar
C C C
Public Assembly Buildings (as a
separate use, such as Banquet
Facilities).

C C C
Public Utilities or Public Services
Buildings
C C C
Temporary Uses
Temporary Use Subject to a Temporary Use Permit,
and provisions set forth in
Additional Uses B- Provisional
Uses, below.

Other Uses
Other uses are subject to a Conditional Development Permit. (See Chapter 18.66 R.M.C.).

NOTES:

Rialto Municipal Code (R.M.C.)

Additional Uses:

A. Outdoor Displays, Parking Lot and Sidewalk Sales

1. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to ensu re that outdoor displays and sales are compatible with surrounding properties and to establish development standards to preserve the integrity of adjacent land uses.
100
Mixed Use Zones
Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan
101
Two Mixed Use Zones
102
6th Cycle Housing Element Update
R-MU
Gas
station/car
wash not
permitted
C-P
Gas station/car
wash permitted
with a CDP
103
6th Cycle Housing Element Update
C-MU
Gas station/car
wash not
permitted
R-1C
104
Options
•Developer sponsored Specific Plan Amendment
or
•City sponsored Specific Plan Amendment
105
City of Rialto
Legislation Text
File #: EDC-22-436, Version: 1, Agenda #: 5
For Economic Development Committee May 25, 2022
TO: Honorable Economic Development Committee Members
APPROVAL: Marcus Fuller, City Manager
FROM: Siri Champion, Senior Planner
Smart Cities Plan to Mitigate Impacts of Warehousing and Logistics

BACKGROUND
On April 13, 2021, the City Council directed staff to apply to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for a Smart Cities Plan to Mitigate Impacts of Warehousing and Logistics. The application recognized that warehousing and logistics are important to Rialto’seconomy while also impacting traffic, air quality, and pavement conditions.

The proposed project would study existing warehousing and logistics conditions. It is intended to define, and quantify costs and benefits, evaluate technological and pricing solutions, and include goals, policies, programs, a pilot project, and an implementation plan for regulatory changes and investment in intelligent transportation infrastructure. Potential solutions include electric and/or autonomous vehicles, zero/near-zero emissions vehicles, truck traffic management, pavement management and cost recovery, and/or other options.

SCAG’sRegional Council approved the application on July 1, 2021. Thereafter, SCAG released a Request for Proposals and received two responses. The review committee, made up of SCAG and city staff, selected one of the two proposals. SCAG anticipates project kick off to take place as early as June 2022.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
Staff time for a Senior Planner to manage the project is budgeted and available in General Fund Account No. 010-500-4260-1001. The consultant would be funded by SCAG’s Sustainable Communities Program.

RECOMMENDATION
Receive staff report and provide direction to proceed with project.

City of Rialto Printed on 5/20/2022Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
106
City of Rialto
Legislation Text
File #: EDC-22-445, Version: 1, Agenda #: 6
For Economic Development Committee [May 25, 2022]
TO: Honorable Economic Development Committee Members
FROM: Kathy Brann, Economic Development Manager
Items to be considered on the EDC Agenda

ANALYSIS/DISCUSSION
Which items should staff bring to the EDC for consideration, approval, review, and discussion?

1. General Plan Amendments, Zone Amendments, Master Plans, Specific Plans,

2. Proposals regarding Successor Agency or City owned properties,

3. Renaissance Projects that require City Council approval,

4. Proposals/projects that effect City budget,
Special projects as requested by the EDC

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the EDC review and provide general direction to staff.

City of Rialto Printed on 5/20/2022Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
107