4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1897 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2135 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 44 415 30 118 387 234 275 477 45 25 289 229 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 11 104 7 30 97 59 69 119 11 6 72 57 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.8030 0.8030 0.8030 0.8030 0.8030 0.8030 0.8030 0.8030 0.8030 0.8030 0.8030 0.8030 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 35 333 24 95 311 188 221 383 36 20 232 184 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 35 333 24 95 311 188 221 383 36 20 232 184 Name Lyon Avenue Lyon Avenue Cottonwood Avenue Cottonwood Avenue Volumes
Scenario 7: 7 BG+P+Improvements AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1898 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2136 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 14 0
Walk [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 51 0 0 51 0 0 69 0 0 69 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 30 0 0 30 0 0 30 0 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 6 0 0 2 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 8.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 120
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
Scenario 7: 7 BG+P+Improvements AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1899 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2137 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 513.06 222.88 338.27 212.50 344.59 353.36 380.31 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 20.52 8.92 13.53 8.50 13.78 14.13 15.21 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 357.92 129.55 217.37 121.95 222.32 229.22 250.52 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 14.32 5.18 8.69 4.88 8.89 9.17 10.02 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No No No Yes
Lane Group LOSDFCCDBB
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 43.67 91.81 30.57 27.65 50.35 18.14 19.27 X, volume / capacity 0.80 0.85 0.53 0.37 0.89 0.52 0.57 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 10.34 45.32 2.69 1.72 11.42 0.45 0.85 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.15 0.11 0.17 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 33.33 46.49 27.88 25.93 38.93 17.69 18.42 c, Capacity [veh/h] 614 138 735 625 310 995 946
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1478 945 1870 1589 883 1842 1693 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.33 0.12 0.21 0.15 0.31 0.28 0.32 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.54 0.54 0.54 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 47 47 47 47 65 65 65
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 120 120 120 120 120 120 120
Lane GroupCLCRLCC
Lane Group Calculations
Scenario 7: 7 BG+P+Improvements AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1900 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2138 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 43.67 43.67 43.67 91.81 30.57 27.65 50.35 18.14 18.14 19.27 19.27 19.27 Movement LOS D D D F C C D B B B B B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 43.67 39.42 29.25 19.27
Approach LOS D D C B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 32.81
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.698
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 0.0 11.0 0.0 0.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 0.00 49.50 0.00 0.00
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 0.000 3.142 0.000 0.000 Crosswalk LOS F C F F
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 783 783 1083 1083 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 22.20 22.20 12.60 12.60
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.366 2.779 2.875 2.456 Bicycle LOS B C C B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 - 6 - 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 - 2 - 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
Scenario 7: 7 BG+P+Improvements AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1901 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2139 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.884
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 46.9
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Warren Road / Ramona Expressway
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes No
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Warren Road Warren Road Ramona Expressway Ramona Expressway Intersection Setup
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1902 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2140 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 450 0 288 2 1 1 0 1141 479 342 1024 0 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 112 0 72 1 0 0 0 285 120 86 256 0 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9940 0.9940 0.9940 0.9940 0.9940 0.9940 0.9940 0.9940 0.9940 0.9940 0.9940 0.9940 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 447 0 286 2 1 1 0 1134 476 340 1018 0 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 447 0 286 2 1 1 0 1134 476 340 1018 0 Name Warren Road Warren Road Ramona Expressway Ramona Expressway Volumes
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1903 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2141 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 2.6 5.8 0.0 2.6 5.8 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 8 0 0 0 0
Walk [s] 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 6 0 0 0 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 2.5 0.0 3.0 2.5 0.0 1.5 3.0 0.0 1.5 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 38 58 0 11 31 0 10 22 0 29 41 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 5.0 0.0 3.0 5.0 0.0 3.6 5.8 0.0 3.6 5.8 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 7 6 0 7 6 0 5 8 0 5 8 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 3 8 0 7 4 0 5 2 0 1 6 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 16.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 120
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1904 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2142 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 570.68 307.96 4.39 4.28 0.00 645.12 564.43 446.50 355.30 355.30 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 22.83 12.32 0.18 0.17 0.00 25.80 22.58 17.86 14.21 14.21 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 405.55 193.81 2.44 2.38 0.00 467.77 400.35 303.62 230.74 230.74 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 16.22 7.75 0.10 0.10 0.00 18.71 16.01 12.14 9.23 9.23 Critical Lane Group Yes No No Yes No Yes No Yes No No
Lane Group LOSEDEEADEEBB
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 67.67 40.83 77.09 79.06 0.00 54.34 56.85 68.25 19.15 19.15 X, volume / capacity 0.95 0.68 0.26 0.31 0.00 0.95 0.89 0.94 0.51 0.51 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 24.56 1.43 17.51 19.41 0.00 15.74 19.31 21.11 1.80 1.80 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.38 0.08 0.11 0.08 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.23 0.50 0.50 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 43.11 39.40 59.58 59.65 0.00 38.60 37.54 47.15 17.35 17.35 c, Capacity [veh/h] 476 424861 1207 539 362 1013 1013
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1781 1589 1781 1718 1781 3560 1589 1781 1870 1870 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.25 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.30 0.19 0.27 0.27 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.27 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.20 0.54 0.54 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 32 32000 41 41 24 65 65
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.60 5.80 5.80 2.60 5.80 5.80 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 6.00 4.00 6.00 4.60 7.80 7.80 4.60 7.80 7.80 C, Cycle Length [s] 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Lane GroupLCLCLCRLCC
Lane Group Calculations
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1905 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2143 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 67.67 40.83 40.83 77.09 79.06 79.06 0.00 54.34 56.85 68.25 19.15 19.15 Movement LOS E D D E E E A D E E B B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 57.20 78.07 55.08 31.44
Approach LOS E E E C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 46.86
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.884
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 10.0 0.0 15.0 0.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 50.43 0.00 45.95 0.00
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.462 0.000 2.967 0.000 Crosswalk LOS B F C F
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 867 417 237 553 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 19.28 37.61 46.65 31.40
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.777 1.566 2.896 2.687 Bicycle LOS C A C B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1906 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2144 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.936
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 48.2
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Sanderson Avenue / Ramona Expressway
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Sanderson Avenue Sanderson Avenue Ramona Expressway Ramona Expressway Intersection Setup
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1907 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2145 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 440 1325 720 930 1660 368 395 741 349 347 548 614 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 110 331 180 232 415 92 99 185 87 87 137 154 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9690 0.9690 0.9690 0.9690 0.9690 0.9690 0.9690 0.9690 0.9690 0.9690 0.9690 0.9690 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 426 1284 698 901 1609 357 383 718 338 336 531 595 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 426 1284 698 901 1609 357 383 718 338 336 531 595 Name Sanderson Avenue Sanderson Avenue Ramona Expressway Ramona Expressway Volumes
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1908 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2146 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.7 5.0 5.0 2.7 5.0 5.0 2.7 5.0 5.0 2.7 5.0 5.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Walk [s] 0 7 7 0 7 7 0 7 7 0 7 7
Vehicle Extension [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Split [s] 18 33 33 31 46 46 17 21 21 15 19 19
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Amber [s] 3.7 6.0 6.0 3.7 6.0 6.0 3.7 6.0 6.0 3.7 6.0 6.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Minimum Green [s] 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 2,3 6,7 4,5 1,8
Signal Group 5 2 2 1 6 6 7 4 4 3 8 8
Control Type Protecte Permiss Overlap Protecte Permiss Overlap Protecte Permiss Overlap Protecte Permiss Overlap Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 16.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 100
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1909 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2147 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 239.93 485.60 839.59 471.50 451.61 198.86 217.33 305.23 288.83 205.40 201.02 528.76 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 9.60 19.42 33.58 18.86 18.06 7.95 8.69 12.21 11.55 8.22 8.04 21.15 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 142.16 335.42 611.54 318.90 307.76 112.05 125.48 186.79 179.10 116.79 113.61 370.85 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 5.69 13.42 24.46 12.76 12.31 4.48 5.02 7.47 7.16 4.67 4.54 14.83 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes No No No Lane Group LOS D E F F C B D F C D D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 48.42 60.20 73.93 51.94 31.73 12.50 47.31 69.65 29.65 53.24 45.81 37.03 X, volume / capacity 0.96 0.99 1.04 1.02 0.83 0.40 0.93 1.05 0.64 0.97 0.91 0.86 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 5.34 23.34 45.65 15.07 4.25 1.26 3.88 26.55 1.86 8.52 2.25 12.49 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.04 0.16 0.04 0.04 0.50 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 43.07 36.86 28.28 36.87 27.48 11.24 43.42 43.10 27.79 44.72 43.56 24.53 c, Capacity [veh/h] 460 1333 691 909 1994 929 426 705 543 357 603 717 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3459 5094 1589 3459 5094 1589 3459 5094 1589 3459 5094 1589 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.13 0.26 0.45 0.27 0.33 0.23 0.11 0.15 0.22 0.10 0.11 0.39 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.13 0.26 0.43 0.26 0.39 0.58 0.12 0.14 0.34 0.10 0.12 0.45 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 13 26 43 26 39 58 12 14 34 10 12 45 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.70 5.00 0.00 2.70 5.00 0.00 2.70 5.00 0.00 2.70 5.00 0.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.70 7.00 4.70 4.70 7.00 4.70 4.70 7.00 4.70 4.70 7.00 4.70 C, Cycle Length [s] 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Lane Group L C R L C R L C R L C R
Lane Group Calculations
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1910 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2148 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 48.42 60.20 73.93 51.94 31.73 12.50 47.31 69.65 29.65 53.24 45.81 37.03 Movement LOS D E F F C B D F C D D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 62.09 35.69 54.31 43.94
Approach LOS E D D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 48.22
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.936
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 39.62 39.62 39.62 39.62
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 3.378 3.427 3.162 3.277 Crosswalk LOS C C C C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 520 780 280 240 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 27.39 18.61 36.99 38.73
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.926 3.187 2.376 2.390 Bicycle LOS C C B B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1911 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2149 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.815
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 26.1
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: All-way stop
Intersection 6: Lyon Avenue / Ramona Boulevard
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Lyon Avenue Lyon Avenue Ramona Boulevard Ramona Boulevard Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 80 314 38 29 421 39 31 235 151 53 217 23 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 20 78 10 7 105 10 8 59 38 13 54 6 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9120 0.9120 0.9120 0.9120 0.9120 0.9120 0.9120 0.9120 0.9120 0.9120 0.9120 0.9120 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 73 286 35 26 384 36 28 214 138 48 198 21 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 73 286 35 26 384 36 28 214 138 48 198 21 Name Lyon Avenue Lyon Avenue Ramona Boulevard Ramona Boulevard Volumes
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1912 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2150 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Intersection LOS D
Intersection Delay [s/veh] 26.10
Approach LOS D C C D
Approach Delay [s/veh] 34.02 21.67 21.26 28.72
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft] 18.24 188.30 88.18 84.91 107.06 35.40 128.94 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh] 0.73 7.53 3.53 3.40 4.28 1.42 5.16 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Degree of Utilization, x 0.20 0.81 0.58 0.56 0.64 0.33 0.69 Capacity per Entry Lane [veh/h] 403 432 425 433 418 459 422 Lanes
Intersection Settings
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1913 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2151 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.558
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 14.7
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: All-way stop
Intersection 7: Lyon Avenue / De Anza Drive
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No Yes No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Lyon Avenue Lyon Avenue De Anza Drive De Anza Drive Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 95 391 85 101 440 95 55 16 55 56 27 38 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 24 98 21 25 110 24 14 4 14 14 7 9 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9280 0.9280 0.9280 0.9280 0.9280 0.9280 0.9280 0.9280 0.9280 0.9280 0.9280 0.9280 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 88 363 79 94 408 88 51 15 51 52 25 35 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 88 363 79 94 408 88 51 15 51 52 25 35 Name Lyon Avenue Lyon Avenue De Anza Drive De Anza Drive Volumes
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1914 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2152 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Intersection LOS B
Intersection Delay [s/veh] 14.67
Approach LOS B C B B
Approach Delay [s/veh] 14.83 15.87 11.19 11.27
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft] 71.49 64.44 85.40 76.50 10.32 11.78 10.54 10.90 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh] 2.86 2.58 3.42 3.06 0.41 0.47 0.42 0.44 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Degree of Utilization, x 0.51 0.48 0.56 0.53 0.12 0.14 0.12 0.13 Capacity per Entry Lane [veh/h] 563 597 570 605 451 519 451 509 Lanes
Intersection Settings
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1915 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2153 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.575
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 19.9
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 11: Lyon Avenue / Cottonwood Avenue
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No Yes No No
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Lyon Avenue Lyon Avenue Cottonwood Avenue Cottonwood Avenue Intersection Setup
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1916 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2154 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 64 386 41 54 386 102 110 343 66 21 301 49 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 16 96 10 13 96 25 28 86 17 5 75 12 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9510 0.9510 0.9510 0.9510 0.9510 0.9510 0.9510 0.9510 0.9510 0.9510 0.9510 0.9510 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 61 367 39 51 367 97 105 326 63 20 286 47 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 61 367 39 51 367 97 105 326 63 20 286 47 Name Lyon Avenue Lyon Avenue Cottonwood Avenue Cottonwood Avenue Volumes
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1917 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2155 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 14 0
Walk [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 48 0 0 48 0 0 47 0 0 47 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 30 0 0 30 0 0 30 0 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 6 0 0 2 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 8.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 95
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1918 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2156 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 248.11 27.93 190.37 42.71 118.72 302.87 273.87 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 9.92 1.12 7.61 1.71 4.75 12.11 10.95 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 148.26 15.52 105.96 23.73 65.96 189.88 167.69 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 5.93 0.62 4.24 0.95 2.64 7.60 6.71 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No No No Yes
Lane Group LOSBBBBDCC
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 14.60 12.32 12.79 10.25 39.06 26.15 25.55 X, volume / capacity 0.50 0.12 0.37 0.12 0.64 0.63 0.61 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.85 0.57 1.02 0.27 3.95 0.99 0.98 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 12.75 11.76 11.77 9.98 35.11 25.16 24.57 c, Capacity [veh/h] 976 442 1041 885 172 653 611
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1676 960 1870 1589 1031 1818 1589 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.29 0.06 0.21 0.06 0.11 0.22 0.23 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.36 0.36 0.36 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 53 53 53 53 34 34 34
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Lane GroupCLCRLCC
Lane Group Calculations
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1919 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2157 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 14.60 14.60 14.60 12.32 12.79 10.25 39.06 26.15 26.15 25.55 25.55 25.55 Movement LOS B B B B B B D C C C C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 14.60 12.26 28.89 25.55
Approach LOS B B C C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 19.91
Intersection LOS B
Intersection V/C 0.575
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 0.0 11.0 0.0 0.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 0.00 37.14 0.00 0.00
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 0.000 2.687 0.000 0.000 Crosswalk LOS F B F F
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 926 926 905 905 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 13.69 13.69 14.23 14.23
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.370 2.454 2.416 2.172 Bicycle LOS B B B B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 - 6 - 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 - 2 - 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
Scenario 8: 8 BG+P+Improvements PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1920 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2158 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Appendix G
CA MUTCD Peak Hour Traffic Signal Warrant Worksheets
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1921 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2159 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 6: Lyon Avenue / Ramona Boulevard Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E W
1 314 121 175 211
2 305 117 170 205
3 298 115 166 200
4 279 108 156 188
5 248 96 138 167
6 245 94 137 165
7 242 93 135 162
8 220 85 122 148
9 217 83 121 146
10 214 82 119 143
11 185 71 103 124
12 173 67 96 116
13 170 65 95 114
14 126 48 70 84
15 126 48 70 84
16 88 34 49 59
17 50 19 28 34
18 50 19 28 34
19 28 11 16 19
20 16 6 9 11
21 9 4 5 6
22 3 1 2 2
23 3 1 2 2
24 3 1 2 2
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E, W
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume No
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume No
#3 Peak Hour No
Warrants Summary
Scenario 1: 1 EX AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1922 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2160 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E W
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 11.8 10.3 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 1 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 0:34 0:36 Delay Condition Met No No
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 175 211 High Minor Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 821 821 Number of Approaches on Intersection 4 4
Total Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Approach No No
Warrant Met for Intersection No
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 2 435 2 211 No No Yes Yes No No No No No No
2 2 422 2 205 No No Yes Yes No No No No No No
3 2 413 2 200 No No No Yes No No No No No No
4 2 387 2 188 No No No Yes No No No No No No
5 2 344 2 167 No No No Yes No No No No No No
6 2 339 2 165 No No No Yes No No No No No No
7 2 335 2 162 No No No No No No No No No No
8 2 305 2 148 No No No No No No No No No No
9 2 300 2 146 No No No No No No No No No No
10 2 296 2 143 No No No No No No No No No No
11 2 256 2 124 No No No No No No No No No No
12 2 240 2 116 No No No No No No No No No No
13 2 235 2 114 No No No No No No No No No No
14 2 174 2 84 No No No No No No No No No No
15 2 174 2 84 No No No No No No No No No No
16 2 122 2 59 No No No No No No No No No No
17 2 69 2 34 No No No No No No No No No No
18 2 69 2 34 No No No No No No No No No No
19 2 39 2 19 No No No No No No No No No No
20 2 22 2 11 No No No No No No No No No No
21 2 13 2 6 No No No No No No No No No No
22 2 4 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
23 2 4 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
24 2 4 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 0 0 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 1: 1 EX AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1923 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2161 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 7: Lyon Avenue / De Anza Drive Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E
1 496 212 152
2 481 206 147
3 471 201 144
4 441 189 135
5 392 167 120
6 387 165 119
7 382 163 117
8 347 148 106
9 342 146 105
10 337 144 103
11 293 125 90
12 273 117 84
13 268 114 82
14 198 85 61
15 198 85 61
16 139 59 43
17 79 34 24
18 79 34 24
19 45 19 14
20 25 11 8
21 15 6 5
22 5 2 2
23 5 2 2
24 5 2 2
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume No
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#3 Peak Hour No
Warrants Summary
Scenario 1: 1 EX AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1924 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2162 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 12.4 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 0:31 Delay Condition Met No
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 152
High Minor Volume Condition Met Yes
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 860 Number of Approaches on Intersection 3
Total Volume Condition Met Yes
Warrant Met for Approach No
Warrant Met for Intersection No
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 1 708 2 152 No No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
2 1 687 2 147 No No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
3 1 672 2 144 No No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
4 1 630 2 135 No No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
5 1 559 2 120 No No No Yes No No Yes Yes No No
6 1 552 2 119 No No No Yes No No Yes Yes No No
7 1 545 2 117 No No No Yes No No Yes Yes No No
8 1 495 2 106 No No No No No No No Yes No No
9 1 488 2 105 No No No No No No No Yes No No
10 1 481 2 103 No No No No No No No Yes No No
11 1 418 2 90 No No No No No No No No No No
12 1 390 2 84 No No No No No No No No No No
13 1 382 2 82 No No No No No No No No No No
14 1 283 2 61 No No No No No No No No No No
15 1 283 2 61 No No No No No No No No No No
16 1 198 2 43 No No No No No No No No No No
17 1 113 2 24 No No No No No No No No No No
18 1 113 2 24 No No No No No No No No No No
19 1 64 2 14 No No No No No No No No No No
20 1 36 2 8 No No No No No No No No No No
21 1 21 2 5 No No No No No No No No No No
22 1 7 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
23 1 7 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
24 1 7 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 0 0 3 7 0 4 7 10 4 0
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 1: 1 EX AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1925 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2163 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 11: Lyon Avenue / Cottonwood Avenue Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E W
1 249 304 340 504
2 242 295 330 489
3 237 289 323 479
4 222 271 303 449
5 197 240 269 398
6 194 237 265 393
7 192 234 262 388
8 174 213 238 353
9 172 210 235 348
10 169 207 231 343
11 147 179 201 297
12 137 167 187 277
13 134 164 184 272
14 100 122 136 202
15 100 122 136 202
16 70 85 95 141
17 40 49 54 81
18 40 49 54 81
19 22 27 31 45
20 12 15 17 25
21 7 9 10 15
22 2 3 3 5
23 2 3 3 5
24 2 3 3 5
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E, W
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume No
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#3 Peak Hour Yes
Warrants Summary
Scenario 1: 1 EX AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1926 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2164 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E W
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 105.7 65 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 1 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 9:59 9:06 Delay Condition Met Yes Yes
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 340 504 High Minor Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 1397 1397 Number of Approaches on Intersection 4 4
Total Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Approach Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Intersection Yes
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 3 553 2 504 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes
2 3 537 2 489 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes
3 3 526 2 479 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes
4 3 493 2 449 No Yes Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes
5 3 437 2 398 No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes
6 3 431 2 393 No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes
7 3 426 2 388 No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes
8 3 387 2 353 No No No Yes No No No No Yes No
9 3 382 2 348 No No No Yes No No No No Yes No
10 3 376 2 343 No No No Yes No No No No Yes No
11 3 326 2 297 No No No No No No No No Yes No
12 3 304 2 277 No No No No No No No No No No
13 3 298 2 272 No No No No No No No No No No
14 3 222 2 202 No No No No No No No No No No
15 3 222 2 202 No No No No No No No No No No
16 3 155 2 141 No No No No No No No No No No
17 3 89 2 81 No No No No No No No No No No
18 3 89 2 81 No No No No No No No No No No
19 3 49 2 45 No No No No No No No No No No
20 3 27 2 25 No No No No No No No No No No
21 3 16 2 15 No No No No No No No No No No
22 3 5 2 5 No No No No No No No No No No
23 3 5 2 5 No No No No No No No No No No
24 3 5 2 5 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 0 4 7 10 0 0 0 3 11 7
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 1: 1 EX AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1927 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2165 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 6: Lyon Avenue / Ramona Boulevard Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E W
1 314 121 175 211
2 305 117 170 205
3 298 115 166 200
4 279 108 156 188
5 248 96 138 167
6 245 94 137 165
7 242 93 135 162
8 220 85 122 148
9 217 83 121 146
10 214 82 119 143
11 185 71 103 124
12 173 67 96 116
13 170 65 95 114
14 126 48 70 84
15 126 48 70 84
16 88 34 49 59
17 50 19 28 34
18 50 19 28 34
19 28 11 16 19
20 16 6 9 11
21 9 4 5 6
22 3 1 2 2
23 3 1 2 2
24 3 1 2 2
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E, W
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume No
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume No
#3 Peak Hour No
Warrants Summary
Scenario 2: 2 EX PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1928 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2166 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E W
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 12.3 10.8 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 1 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 0:36 0:37 Delay Condition Met No No
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 175 211 High Minor Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 821 821 Number of Approaches on Intersection 4 4
Total Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Approach No No
Warrant Met for Intersection No
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 2 435 2 211 No No Yes Yes No No No No No No
2 2 422 2 205 No No Yes Yes No No No No No No
3 2 413 2 200 No No No Yes No No No No No No
4 2 387 2 188 No No No Yes No No No No No No
5 2 344 2 167 No No No Yes No No No No No No
6 2 339 2 165 No No No Yes No No No No No No
7 2 335 2 162 No No No No No No No No No No
8 2 305 2 148 No No No No No No No No No No
9 2 300 2 146 No No No No No No No No No No
10 2 296 2 143 No No No No No No No No No No
11 2 256 2 124 No No No No No No No No No No
12 2 240 2 116 No No No No No No No No No No
13 2 235 2 114 No No No No No No No No No No
14 2 174 2 84 No No No No No No No No No No
15 2 174 2 84 No No No No No No No No No No
16 2 122 2 59 No No No No No No No No No No
17 2 69 2 34 No No No No No No No No No No
18 2 69 2 34 No No No No No No No No No No
19 2 39 2 19 No No No No No No No No No No
20 2 22 2 11 No No No No No No No No No No
21 2 13 2 6 No No No No No No No No No No
22 2 4 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
23 2 4 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
24 2 4 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 0 0 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 2: 2 EX PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1929 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2167 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 7: Lyon Avenue / De Anza Drive Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E
1 496 212 152
2 481 206 147
3 471 201 144
4 441 189 135
5 392 167 120
6 387 165 119
7 382 163 117
8 347 148 106
9 342 146 105
10 337 144 103
11 293 125 90
12 273 117 84
13 268 114 82
14 198 85 61
15 198 85 61
16 139 59 43
17 79 34 24
18 79 34 24
19 45 19 14
20 25 11 8
21 15 6 5
22 5 2 2
23 5 2 2
24 5 2 2
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume No
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#3 Peak Hour No
Warrants Summary
Scenario 2: 2 EX PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1930 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2168 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 10.7 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 0:27 Delay Condition Met No
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 152
High Minor Volume Condition Met Yes
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 860 Number of Approaches on Intersection 3
Total Volume Condition Met Yes
Warrant Met for Approach No
Warrant Met for Intersection No
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 1 708 2 152 No No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
2 1 687 2 147 No No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
3 1 672 2 144 No No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
4 1 630 2 135 No No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
5 1 559 2 120 No No No Yes No No Yes Yes No No
6 1 552 2 119 No No No Yes No No Yes Yes No No
7 1 545 2 117 No No No Yes No No Yes Yes No No
8 1 495 2 106 No No No No No No No Yes No No
9 1 488 2 105 No No No No No No No Yes No No
10 1 481 2 103 No No No No No No No Yes No No
11 1 418 2 90 No No No No No No No No No No
12 1 390 2 84 No No No No No No No No No No
13 1 382 2 82 No No No No No No No No No No
14 1 283 2 61 No No No No No No No No No No
15 1 283 2 61 No No No No No No No No No No
16 1 198 2 43 No No No No No No No No No No
17 1 113 2 24 No No No No No No No No No No
18 1 113 2 24 No No No No No No No No No No
19 1 64 2 14 No No No No No No No No No No
20 1 36 2 8 No No No No No No No No No No
21 1 21 2 5 No No No No No No No No No No
22 1 7 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
23 1 7 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
24 1 7 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 0 0 3 7 0 4 7 10 4 0
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 2: 2 EX PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1931 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2169 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 11: Lyon Avenue / Cottonwood Avenue Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E W
1 249 304 340 504
2 242 295 330 489
3 237 289 323 479
4 222 271 303 449
5 197 240 269 398
6 194 237 265 393
7 192 234 262 388
8 174 213 238 353
9 172 210 235 348
10 169 207 231 343
11 147 179 201 297
12 137 167 187 277
13 134 164 184 272
14 100 122 136 202
15 100 122 136 202
16 70 85 95 141
17 40 49 54 81
18 40 49 54 81
19 22 27 31 45
20 12 15 17 25
21 7 9 10 15
22 2 3 3 5
23 2 3 3 5
24 2 3 3 5
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E, W
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume No
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#3 Peak Hour Yes
Warrants Summary
Scenario 2: 2 EX PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1932 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2170 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E W
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 41.5 30.9 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 1 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 3:55 4:19 Delay Condition Met No No
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 340 504 High Minor Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 1397 1397 Number of Approaches on Intersection 4 4
Total Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Approach No No
Warrant Met for Intersection No
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 3 553 2 504 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes
2 3 537 2 489 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes
3 3 526 2 479 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes
4 3 493 2 449 No Yes Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes
5 3 437 2 398 No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes
6 3 431 2 393 No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes
7 3 426 2 388 No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes
8 3 387 2 353 No No No Yes No No No No Yes No
9 3 382 2 348 No No No Yes No No No No Yes No
10 3 376 2 343 No No No Yes No No No No Yes No
11 3 326 2 297 No No No No No No No No Yes No
12 3 304 2 277 No No No No No No No No No No
13 3 298 2 272 No No No No No No No No No No
14 3 222 2 202 No No No No No No No No No No
15 3 222 2 202 No No No No No No No No No No
16 3 155 2 141 No No No No No No No No No No
17 3 89 2 81 No No No No No No No No No No
18 3 89 2 81 No No No No No No No No No No
19 3 49 2 45 No No No No No No No No No No
20 3 27 2 25 No No No No No No No No No No
21 3 16 2 15 No No No No No No No No No No
22 3 5 2 5 No No No No No No No No No No
23 3 5 2 5 No No No No No No No No No No
24 3 5 2 5 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 0 4 7 10 0 0 0 3 11 7
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 2: 2 EX PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1933 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2171 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 6: Lyon Avenue / Ramona Boulevard Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E W
1 493 238 237 330
2 478 231 230 320
3 468 226 225 314
4 439 212 211 294
5 389 188 187 261
6 385 186 185 257
7 380 183 182 254
8 345 167 166 231
9 340 164 164 228
10 335 162 161 224
11 291 140 140 195
12 271 131 130 182
13 266 129 128 178
14 197 95 95 132
15 197 95 95 132
16 138 67 66 92
17 79 38 38 53
18 79 38 38 53
19 44 21 21 30
20 25 12 12 17
21 15 7 7 10
22 5 2 2 3
23 5 2 2 3
24 5 2 2 3
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E, W
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#3 Peak Hour Yes
Warrants Summary
Scenario 3: 3 BG AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1934 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2172 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E W
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 20.6 17.2 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 1 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 1:21 1:34 Delay Condition Met No No
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 237 330 High Minor Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 1298 1298 Number of Approaches on Intersection 4 4
Total Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Approach No No
Warrant Met for Intersection No
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 2 731 2 330 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
2 2 709 2 320 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
3 2 694 2 314 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
4 2 651 2 294 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
5 2 577 2 261 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
6 2 571 2 257 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
7 2 563 2 254 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
8 2 512 2 231 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
9 2 504 2 228 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
10 2 497 2 224 No Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No
11 2 431 2 195 No No Yes Yes No No No No No No
12 2 402 2 182 No No No Yes No No No No No No
13 2 395 2 178 No No No Yes No No No No No No
14 2 292 2 132 No No No No No No No No No No
15 2 292 2 132 No No No No No No No No No No
16 2 205 2 92 No No No No No No No No No No
17 2 117 2 53 No No No No No No No No No No
18 2 117 2 53 No No No No No No No No No No
19 2 65 2 30 No No No No No No No No No No
20 2 37 2 17 No No No No No No No No No No
21 2 22 2 10 No No No No No No No No No No
22 2 7 2 3 No No No No No No No No No No
23 2 7 2 3 No No No No No No No No No No
24 2 7 2 3 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 4 10 11 13 0 1 4 9 9 4
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 3: 3 BG AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1935 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2173 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 7: Lyon Avenue / De Anza Drive Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E
1 693 381 167
2 672 370 162
3 658 362 159
4 617 339 149
5 547 301 132
6 541 297 130
7 534 293 129
8 485 267 117
9 478 263 115
10 471 259 114
11 409 225 99
12 381 210 92
13 374 206 90
14 277 152 67
15 277 152 67
16 194 107 47
17 111 61 27
18 111 61 27
19 62 34 15
20 35 19 8
21 21 11 5
22 7 4 2
23 7 4 2
24 7 4 2
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#3 Peak Hour Yes
Warrants Summary
Scenario 3: 3 BG AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1936 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2174 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 13.8 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 0:38 Delay Condition Met No
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 167
High Minor Volume Condition Met Yes
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 1241 Number of Approaches on Intersection 3
Total Volume Condition Met Yes
Warrant Met for Approach No
Warrant Met for Intersection No
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 1 1074 2 167 No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
2 1 1042 2 162 No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
3 1 1020 2 159 No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
4 1 956 2 149 No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
5 1 848 2 132 No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
6 1 838 2 130 No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
7 1 827 2 129 No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
8 1 752 2 117 No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
9 1 741 2 115 No No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
10 1 730 2 114 No No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
11 1 634 2 99 No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No
12 1 591 2 92 No No No No No No Yes Yes No No
13 1 580 2 90 No No No No No No Yes Yes No No
14 1 429 2 67 No No No No No No No Yes No No
15 1 429 2 67 No No No No No No No Yes No No
16 1 301 2 47 No No No No No No No No No No
17 1 172 2 27 No No No No No No No No No No
18 1 172 2 27 No No No No No No No No No No
19 1 96 2 15 No No No No No No No No No No
20 1 54 2 8 No No No No No No No No No No
21 1 32 2 5 No No No No No No No No No No
22 1 11 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
23 1 11 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
24 1 11 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 0 2 4 10 8 11 13 15 10 3
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 3: 3 BG AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1937 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2175 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 11: Lyon Avenue / Cottonwood Avenue Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E W
1 369 517 434 638
2 358 501 421 619
3 351 491 412 606
4 328 460 386 568
5 292 408 343 504
6 288 403 339 498
7 284 398 334 491
8 258 362 304 447
9 255 357 299 440
10 251 352 295 434
11 218 305 256 376
12 203 284 239 351
13 199 279 234 345
14 148 207 174 255
15 148 207 174 255
16 103 145 122 179
17 59 83 69 102
18 59 83 69 102
19 33 47 39 57
20 18 26 22 32
21 11 16 13 19
22 4 5 4 6
23 4 5 4 6
24 4 5 4 6
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E, W
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#3 Peak Hour Yes
Warrants Summary
Scenario 3: 3 BG AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1938 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2176 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E W
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 302.6 190.2 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 1 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 36:29 33:42 Delay Condition Met Yes Yes
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 434 638 High Minor Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 1958 1958 Number of Approaches on Intersection 4 4
Total Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Approach Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Intersection Yes
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 3 886 2 638 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
2 3 859 2 619 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
3 3 842 2 606 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
4 3 788 2 568 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
5 3 700 2 504 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
6 3 691 2 498 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
7 3 682 2 491 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
8 3 620 2 447 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes
9 3 612 2 440 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes
10 3 603 2 434 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes
11 3 523 2 376 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes
12 3 487 2 351 No Yes Yes Yes No No No No Yes No
13 3 478 2 345 No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes No
14 3 355 2 255 No No No Yes No No No No No No
15 3 355 2 255 No No No Yes No No No No No No
16 3 248 2 179 No No No No No No No No No No
17 3 142 2 102 No No No No No No No No No No
18 3 142 2 102 No No No No No No No No No No
19 3 80 2 57 No No No No No No No No No No
20 3 44 2 32 No No No No No No No No No No
21 3 27 2 19 No No No No No No No No No No
22 3 9 2 6 No No No No No No No No No No
23 3 9 2 6 No No No No No No No No No No
24 3 9 2 6 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 10 12 13 15 0 4 7 11 13 11
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 3: 3 BG AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1939 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2177 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 6: Lyon Avenue / Ramona Boulevard Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E W
1 365 396 267 380
2 354 384 259 369
3 347 376 254 361
4 325 352 238 338
5 288 313 211 300
6 285 309 208 296
7 281 305 206 293
8 255 277 187 266
9 252 273 184 262
10 248 269 182 258
11 215 234 158 224
12 201 218 147 209
13 197 214 144 205
14 146 158 107 152
15 146 158 107 152
16 102 111 75 106
17 58 63 43 61
18 58 63 43 61
19 33 36 24 34
20 18 20 13 19
21 11 12 8 11
22 4 4 3 4
23 4 4 3 4
24 4 4 3 4
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E, W
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#3 Peak Hour Yes
Warrants Summary
Scenario 4: 4 BG PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1940 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2178 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E W
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 32.7 22.3 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 1 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 2:25 2:21 Delay Condition Met No No
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 267 380 High Minor Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 1408 1408 Number of Approaches on Intersection 4 4
Total Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Approach No No
Warrant Met for Intersection No
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 2 761 2 380 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
2 2 738 2 369 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
3 2 723 2 361 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
4 2 677 2 338 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
5 2 601 2 300 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
6 2 594 2 296 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
7 2 586 2 293 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
8 2 532 2 266 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
9 2 525 2 262 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
10 2 517 2 258 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
11 2 449 2 224 No No Yes Yes No No No No No No
12 2 419 2 209 No No No Yes No No No No No No
13 2 411 2 205 No No No Yes No No No No No No
14 2 304 2 152 No No No No No No No No No No
15 2 304 2 152 No No No No No No No No No No
16 2 213 2 106 No No No No No No No No No No
17 2 121 2 61 No No No No No No No No No No
18 2 121 2 61 No No No No No No No No No No
19 2 69 2 34 No No No No No No No No No No
20 2 38 2 19 No No No No No No No No No No
21 2 23 2 11 No No No No No No No No No No
22 2 8 2 4 No No No No No No No No No No
23 2 8 2 4 No No No No No No No No No No
24 2 8 2 4 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 5 10 11 13 0 3 4 10 10 4
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 4: 4 BG PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1941 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2179 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 7: Lyon Avenue / De Anza Drive Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E
1 442 502 87
2 429 487 84
3 420 477 83
4 393 447 77
5 349 397 69
6 345 392 68
7 340 387 67
8 309 351 61
9 305 346 60
10 301 341 59
11 261 296 51
12 243 276 48
13 239 271 47
14 177 201 35
15 177 201 35
16 124 141 24
17 71 80 14
18 71 80 14
19 40 45 8
20 22 25 4
21 13 15 3
22 4 5 1
23 4 5 1
24 4 5 1
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume No
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume No
#3 Peak Hour No
Warrants Summary
Scenario 4: 4 BG PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1942 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2180 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 10.3 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 0:14 Delay Condition Met No
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 87
High Minor Volume Condition Met No
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 1031 Number of Approaches on Intersection 3
Total Volume Condition Met Yes
Warrant Met for Approach No
Warrant Met for Intersection No
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 1 944 2 87 No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
2 1 916 2 84 No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
3 1 897 2 83 No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
4 1 840 2 77 No No No No No No Yes Yes No No
5 1 746 2 69 No No No No No No No Yes No No
6 1 737 2 68 No No No No No No No Yes No No
7 1 727 2 67 No No No No No No No Yes No No
8 1 660 2 61 No No No No No No No Yes No No
9 1 651 2 60 No No No No No No No Yes No No
10 1 642 2 59 No No No No No No No Yes No No
11 1 557 2 51 No No No No No No No No No No
12 1 519 2 48 No No No No No No No No No No
13 1 510 2 47 No No No No No No No No No No
14 1 378 2 35 No No No No No No No No No No
15 1 378 2 35 No No No No No No No No No No
16 1 265 2 24 No No No No No No No No No No
17 1 151 2 14 No No No No No No No No No No
18 1 151 2 14 No No No No No No No No No No
19 1 85 2 8 No No No No No No No No No No
20 1 47 2 4 No No No No No No No No No No
21 1 28 2 3 No No No No No No No No No No
22 1 9 2 1 No No No No No No No No No No
23 1 9 2 1 No No No No No No No No No No
24 1 9 2 1 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 10 3 0
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 4: 4 BG PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1943 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2181 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 11: Lyon Avenue / Cottonwood Avenue Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E W
1 392 464 348 486
2 380 450 338 471
3 372 441 331 462
4 349 413 310 433
5 310 367 275 384
6 306 362 271 379
7 302 357 268 374
8 274 325 244 340
9 270 320 240 335
10 267 316 237 330
11 231 274 205 287
12 216 255 191 267
13 212 251 188 262
14 157 186 139 194
15 157 186 139 194
16 110 130 97 136
17 63 74 56 78
18 63 74 56 78
19 35 42 31 44
20 20 23 17 24
21 12 14 10 15
22 4 5 3 5
23 4 5 3 5
24 4 5 3 5
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E, W
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#3 Peak Hour Yes
Warrants Summary
Scenario 4: 4 BG PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1944 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2182 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E W
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 84.6 97.9 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 1 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 8:10 13:13 Delay Condition Met Yes Yes
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 348 486 High Minor Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 1690 1690 Number of Approaches on Intersection 4 4
Total Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Approach Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Intersection Yes
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 3 856 2 486 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
2 3 830 2 471 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
3 3 813 2 462 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
4 3 762 2 433 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
5 3 677 2 384 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
6 3 668 2 379 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
7 3 659 2 374 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
8 3 599 2 340 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes
9 3 590 2 335 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes
10 3 583 2 330 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes
11 3 505 2 287 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
12 3 471 2 267 No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes No
13 3 463 2 262 No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes No
14 3 343 2 194 No No No Yes No No No No No No
15 3 343 2 194 No No No Yes No No No No No No
16 3 240 2 136 No No No No No No No No No No
17 3 137 2 78 No No No No No No No No No No
18 3 137 2 78 No No No No No No No No No No
19 3 77 2 44 No No No No No No No No No No
20 3 43 2 24 No No No No No No No No No No
21 3 26 2 15 No No No No No No No No No No
22 3 9 2 5 No No No No No No No No No No
23 3 9 2 5 No No No No No No No No No No
24 3 9 2 5 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 7 11 13 15 0 4 7 11 13 10
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 4: 4 BG PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1945 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2183 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 6: Lyon Avenue / Ramona Boulevard Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E W
1 537 253 237 330
2 521 245 230 320
3 510 240 225 314
4 478 225 211 294
5 424 200 187 261
6 419 197 185 257
7 413 195 182 254
8 376 177 166 231
9 371 175 164 228
10 365 172 161 224
11 317 149 140 195
12 295 139 130 182
13 290 137 128 178
14 215 101 95 132
15 215 101 95 132
16 150 71 66 92
17 86 40 38 53
18 86 40 38 53
19 48 23 21 30
20 27 13 12 17
21 16 8 7 10
22 5 3 2 3
23 5 3 2 3
24 5 3 2 3
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E, W
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#3 Peak Hour Yes
Warrants Summary
Scenario 5: 5 BG+P AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1946 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2184 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E W
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 21.2 17.7 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 1 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 1:23 1:37 Delay Condition Met No No
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 237 330 High Minor Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 1357 1357 Number of Approaches on Intersection 4 4
Total Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Approach No No
Warrant Met for Intersection No
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 2 790 2 330 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
2 2 766 2 320 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
3 2 750 2 314 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
4 2 703 2 294 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
5 2 624 2 261 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
6 2 616 2 257 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
7 2 608 2 254 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
8 2 553 2 231 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
9 2 546 2 228 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
10 2 537 2 224 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
11 2 466 2 195 No No Yes Yes No No No No No No
12 2 434 2 182 No No Yes Yes No No No No No No
13 2 427 2 178 No No Yes Yes No No No No No No
14 2 316 2 132 No No No No No No No No No No
15 2 316 2 132 No No No No No No No No No No
16 2 221 2 92 No No No No No No No No No No
17 2 126 2 53 No No No No No No No No No No
18 2 126 2 53 No No No No No No No No No No
19 2 71 2 30 No No No No No No No No No No
20 2 40 2 17 No No No No No No No No No No
21 2 24 2 10 No No No No No No No No No No
22 2 8 2 3 No No No No No No No No No No
23 2 8 2 3 No No No No No No No No No No
24 2 8 2 3 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 7 10 13 13 0 3 4 10 10 4
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 5: 5 BG+P AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1947 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2185 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 7: Lyon Avenue / De Anza Drive Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E W
1 720 408 175 176
2 698 396 170 171
3 684 388 166 167
4 641 363 156 157
5 569 322 138 139
6 562 318 137 137
7 554 314 135 136
8 504 286 122 123
9 497 282 121 121
10 490 277 119 120
11 425 241 103 104
12 396 224 96 97
13 389 220 95 95
14 288 163 70 70
15 288 163 70 70
16 202 114 49 49
17 115 65 28 28
18 115 65 28 28
19 65 37 16 16
20 36 20 9 9
21 22 12 5 5
22 7 4 2 2
23 7 4 2 2
24 7 4 2 2
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E, W
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#3 Peak Hour Yes
Warrants Summary
Scenario 5: 5 BG+P AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1948 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2186 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E W
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 16.4 14.7 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 2 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 0:47 0:43 Delay Condition Met No No
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 175 176 High Minor Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 1479 1479 Number of Approaches on Intersection 4 4
Total Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Approach No No
Warrant Met for Intersection No
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 1 1128 2 176 No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
2 1 1094 2 171 No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
3 1 1072 2 167 No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
4 1 1004 2 157 No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
5 1 891 2 139 No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
6 1 880 2 137 No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
7 1 868 2 136 No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
8 1 790 2 123 No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
9 1 779 2 121 No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
10 1 767 2 120 No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
11 1 666 2 104 No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No
12 1 620 2 97 No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No
13 1 609 2 95 No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No
14 1 451 2 70 No No No No No No No Yes No No
15 1 451 2 70 No No No No No No No Yes No No
16 1 316 2 49 No No No No No No No No No No
17 1 180 2 28 No No No No No No No No No No
18 1 180 2 28 No No No No No No No No No No
19 1 102 2 16 No No No No No No No No No No
20 1 56 2 9 No No No No No No No No No No
21 1 34 2 5 No No No No No No No No No No
22 1 11 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
23 1 11 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
24 1 11 2 2 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 0 3 4 10 10 13 13 15 10 4
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 5: 5 BG+P AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1949 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2187 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 11: Lyon Avenue / Cottonwood Avenue Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E W
1 392 594 436 640
2 380 576 423 621
3 372 564 414 608
4 349 529 388 570
5 310 469 344 506
6 306 463 340 499
7 302 457 336 493
8 274 416 305 448
9 270 410 301 442
10 267 404 296 435
11 231 350 257 378
12 216 327 240 352
13 212 321 235 346
14 157 238 174 256
15 157 238 174 256
16 110 166 122 179
17 63 95 70 102
18 63 95 70 102
19 35 53 39 58
20 20 30 22 32
21 12 18 13 19
22 4 6 4 6
23 4 6 4 6
24 4 6 4 6
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E, W
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#3 Peak Hour Yes
Warrants Summary
Scenario 5: 5 BG+P AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1950 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2188 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E W
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 337.9 206.5 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 1 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 40:55 36:43 Delay Condition Met Yes Yes
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 436 640 High Minor Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 2062 2062 Number of Approaches on Intersection 4 4
Total Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Approach Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Intersection Yes
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 3 986 2 640 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
2 3 956 2 621 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
3 3 936 2 608 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
4 3 878 2 570 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
5 3 779 2 506 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
6 3 769 2 499 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
7 3 759 2 493 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
8 3 690 2 448 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
9 3 680 2 442 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
10 3 671 2 435 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
11 3 581 2 378 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes
12 3 543 2 352 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes
13 3 533 2 346 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
14 3 395 2 256 No No No Yes No No No No No No
15 3 395 2 256 No No No Yes No No No No No No
16 3 276 2 179 No No No No No No No No No No
17 3 158 2 102 No No No No No No No No No No
18 3 158 2 102 No No No No No No No No No No
19 3 88 2 58 No No No No No No No No No No
20 3 50 2 32 No No No No No No No No No No
21 3 30 2 19 No No No No No No No No No No
22 3 10 2 6 No No No No No No No No No No
23 3 10 2 6 No No No No No No No No No No
24 3 10 2 6 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 10 13 13 15 3 7 10 13 13 12
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 5: 5 BG+P AM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1951 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2189 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 6: Lyon Avenue / Ramona Boulevard Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E W
1 394 446 267 380
2 382 433 259 369
3 374 424 254 361
4 351 397 238 338
5 311 352 211 300
6 307 348 208 296
7 303 343 206 293
8 276 312 187 266
9 272 308 184 262
10 268 303 182 258
11 232 263 158 224
12 217 245 147 209
13 213 241 144 205
14 158 178 107 152
15 158 178 107 152
16 110 125 75 106
17 63 71 43 61
18 63 71 43 61
19 35 40 24 34
20 20 22 13 19
21 12 13 8 11
22 4 4 3 4
23 4 4 3 4
24 4 4 3 4
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E, W
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#3 Peak Hour Yes
Warrants Summary
Scenario 6: 6 BG+P PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1952 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2190 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E W
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 34.1 23 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 1 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 2:31 2:25 Delay Condition Met No No
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 267 380 High Minor Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 1487 1487 Number of Approaches on Intersection 4 4
Total Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Approach No No
Warrant Met for Intersection No
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 2 840 2 380 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
2 2 815 2 369 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
3 2 798 2 361 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
4 2 748 2 338 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
5 2 663 2 300 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
6 2 655 2 296 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
7 2 646 2 293 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
8 2 588 2 266 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
9 2 580 2 262 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
10 2 571 2 258 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
11 2 495 2 224 No Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No
12 2 462 2 209 No No Yes Yes No No No No No No
13 2 454 2 205 No No Yes Yes No No No No No No
14 2 336 2 152 No No No Yes No No No No No No
15 2 336 2 152 No No No Yes No No No No No No
16 2 235 2 106 No No No No No No No No No No
17 2 134 2 61 No No No No No No No No No No
18 2 134 2 61 No No No No No No No No No No
19 2 75 2 34 No No No No No No No No No No
20 2 42 2 19 No No No No No No No No No No
21 2 25 2 11 No No No No No No No No No No
22 2 8 2 4 No No No No No No No No No No
23 2 8 2 4 No No No No No No No No No No
24 2 8 2 4 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 7 11 13 15 0 4 7 10 10 7
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 6: 6 BG+P PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1953 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2191 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 7: Lyon Avenue / De Anza Drive Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E W
1 530 590 112 117
2 514 572 109 113
3 504 561 106 111
4 472 525 100 104
5 419 466 88 92
6 413 460 87 91
7 408 454 86 90
8 371 413 78 82
9 366 407 77 81
10 360 401 76 80
11 313 348 66 69
12 292 325 62 64
13 286 319 60 63
14 212 236 45 47
15 212 236 45 47
16 148 165 31 33
17 85 94 18 19
18 85 94 18 19
19 48 53 10 11
20 27 30 6 6
21 16 18 3 4
22 5 6 1 1
23 5 6 1 1
24 5 6 1 1
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E, W
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#3 Peak Hour No
Warrants Summary
Scenario 6: 6 BG+P PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1954 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2192 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E W
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 12 11.9 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 2 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 0:22 0:23 Delay Condition Met No No
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 112 117 High Minor Volume Condition Met No No
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 1349 1349 Number of Approaches on Intersection 4 4
Total Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Approach No No
Warrant Met for Intersection No
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 1 1120 2 117 No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
2 1 1086 2 113 No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
3 1 1065 2 111 No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
4 1 997 2 104 No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
5 1 885 2 92 No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
6 1 873 2 91 No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
7 1 862 2 90 No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
8 1 784 2 82 No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No
9 1 773 2 81 No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No
10 1 761 2 80 No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No
11 1 661 2 69 No No No No No No No Yes No No
12 1 617 2 64 No No No No No No No Yes No No
13 1 605 2 63 No No No No No No No Yes No No
14 1 448 2 47 No No No No No No No No No No
15 1 448 2 47 No No No No No No No No No No
16 1 313 2 33 No No No No No No No No No No
17 1 179 2 19 No No No No No No No No No No
18 1 179 2 19 No No No No No No No No No No
19 1 101 2 11 No No No No No No No No No No
20 1 57 2 6 No No No No No No No No No No
21 1 34 2 4 No No No No No No No No No No
22 1 11 2 1 No No No No No No No No No No
23 1 11 2 1 No No No No No No No No No No
24 1 11 2 1 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 0 0 0 2 4 10 10 13 7 0
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 6: 6 BG+P PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1955 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2193 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Signal Warrants Report For Intersection 11: Lyon Avenue / Cottonwood Avenue Hour Major Streets Minor Streets
S N E W
1 467 515 353 494
2 453 500 342 479
3 444 489 335 469
4 416 458 314 440
5 369 407 279 390
6 364 402 275 385
7 360 397 272 380
8 327 361 247 346
9 322 355 244 341
10 318 350 240 336
11 276 304 208 291
12 257 283 194 272
13 252 278 191 267
14 187 206 141 198
15 187 206 141 198
16 131 144 99 138
17 75 82 56 79
18 75 82 56 79
19 42 46 32 44
20 23 26 18 25
21 14 15 11 15
22 5 5 4 5
23 5 5 4 5
24 5 5 4 5
Warrant Analysis Traffic Volumes
Major Approaches S, N
Minor Approaches E, W
Speed > 40mph Yes
Population < 10,000 No
Warrant Factor 70%
Intersection Warrants Parameters
Warrant Name Met?
#1 Eight Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#2 Four Hour Vehicular Volume Yes
#3 Peak Hour Yes
Warrants Summary
Scenario 6: 6 BG+P PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1956 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2194 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Orientation E W
Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle on Minor Approach (s) 99.8 105.5 Number of Lanes on Minor Street Approach 1 2
VehicleHours of Stopped Delay on Minor Approach ([h]h:mm) 9:47 14:28 Delay Condition Met Yes Yes
Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 353 494 High Minor Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Total Entering Volume on All Approaches During Same Hour 1829 1829 Number of Approaches on Intersection 4 4
Total Volume Condition Met Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Approach Yes Yes
Warrant Met for Intersection Yes
Warrant 3 Condition A
Hour Major Streets Minor Street Warrant 1 Condition A Warrant 1 Condition B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Number Volume Number Volume 100% 80% 70% 56% 100% 80% 70% 56% Condition B
1 3 982 2 494 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
2 3 953 2 479 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
3 3 933 2 469 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
4 3 874 2 440 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
5 3 776 2 390 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
6 3 766 2 385 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
7 3 757 2 380 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
8 3 688 2 346 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
9 3 677 2 341 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
10 3 668 2 336 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
11 3 580 2 291 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
12 3 540 2 272 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
13 3 530 2 267 No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
14 3 393 2 198 No No No Yes No No No No No No
15 3 393 2 198 No No No Yes No No No No No No
16 3 275 2 138 No No No No No No No No No No
17 3 157 2 79 No No No No No No No No No No
18 3 157 2 79 No No No No No No No No No No
19 3 88 2 44 No No No No No No No No No No
20 3 49 2 25 No No No No No No No No No No
21 3 29 2 15 No No No No No No No No No No
22 3 10 2 5 No No No No No No No No No No
23 3 10 2 5 No No No No No No No No No No
24 3 10 2 5 No No No No No No No No No No
Hours
Met 10 13 13 15 3 7 10 13 13 10
Warrant Analysis by Hour
Scenario 6: 6 BG+P PM
McLeish Ranch TIA, City of San Jacinto
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1957 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2195 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022)) Appendix H
VMT Screening Analysis Worksheets
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1958 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2196 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish Ranch Planned Development Permit & Tentative Tract Map 38203 (P22-022))
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1959 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2197 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1960 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2198 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1961 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2199 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1962 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2200 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1963 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2201 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish
4.1.r
Packet Pg. 1964 Attachment: Appendix I - Traffic Impact Study (McLeish
5.1.i
Packet Pg. 2202 Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report (McLeish February 4, 2025
TO: City Council
REQUESTED BY: Erika Gomez, Finance Director
APPROVED BY: Robert A. Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Introduce Ordinance No. 24-14, amending and updating the City’s TUMF Ordinance, for a first reading.
2. Adopts Resolution No. 4048, adopting a TUMF schedule.
BACKGROUND:
The City/County is a Member Jurisdiction of the Western Riverside Council of Governments (“WRCOG”), a joint powers agency comprised of the County of Riverside and eighteen (18) cities located in Western Riverside County. Acting in concert, in 2002-2003, the WRCOG Member Jurisdictions developed a plan whereby the shortfall in funds needed to enlarge the capacity of the Regional System of Highways and Arterials due to new development in Western Riverside County could be made up in part by a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (“TUMF”) on future residential, commercial and industrial development.
As a Member Jurisdiction of WRCOG and as a TUMF Participating Jurisdiction, the City participated in the preparation of a certain “Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Fee Nexus Study,” (“2002 Nexus Study”) later adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee.
Based on the 2002 Nexus Study, the City adopted and implemented an ordinance authorizing the City’s participation in a TUMF Program.
Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act (Gov. Code §§ 66000 et seq.), WRCOG has prepared a new nexus study (“2024 Nexus Study”) to update the fees. On September 9, 2024, the WRCOG Executive Committee reviewed the 2024 Nexus Study and recommended TUMF Participating Jurisdictions update their fees by amending their applicable TUMF ordinances to reflect changes in the TUMF network and the cost of construction.
DISCUSSION:
The proposed Ordinance provides the legal basis for a revised TUMF schedule. The actual TUMF schedule will be established through the Resolution.
In accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act, the proposed Ordinance and 2024 Nexus Study: (i) identify the purpose of the revised fees; (ii) identify the use to which the revised fees is to be put,
5.2 Packet Pg. 2203
including identification of any facilities to be financed; (iii) determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed; (iv) determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facilities and the type of development project upon which the fees are imposed; and (v) determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fees and the cost of the public facilities or portion or the public facility attributable to the development on which the fees are imposed.
The resolution will establish the Fee Schedule for TUMF as follows:
1. $12,380 per single family residential unit 1,800 square feet or less
2. $13,927 per single family residential unit between 1,801 and 2,300 square feet
3. $15,476 per single family residential unit between 2,301 and 2,700 square feet
4. $19,344 per single family residential unit greater than 2,700 square feet
5. $7,816 per multi-family residential unit
6. $2.33 per square foot of an industrial project
7. $7.72 per square foot of a retail commercial project
8. $4.89 per square foot of a service commercial project
9. $2.45 per square foot of a service Class A and B Office FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact to the City, as these fees are directly collected by WRCOG.
ATTACHMENTS:
Ordinance No. 24-14
Resolution No. 4048
Map of the Regional System (TUMF Ordinance Exhibit A)
5.2 Packet Pg. 2204
Ordinance No. 24-14
ORDINANCE NO. 24-14
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF SAN JACINTO )
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO
AMENDING AND SUPERSEDING ORDINANCE NO. 19-14
TO UPDATE PARTICIPATION IN THE WESTERN
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM
MITIGATION FEE (TUMF) PROGRAM
The City Council of the City of San Jacinto, California “(City”) ordains as follows:
Section 1. Title.
This Ordinance shall be known as the “Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program Ordinance of 2025” (“Ordinance”).
Section 2. Findings.
A. The City is a member agency of the Western Riverside Council of Governments (“WRCOG”), a joint powers agency comprised of the County of Riverside and 18 cities located in Western Riverside County. Acting in concert, the WRCOG Member Agencies developed a plan whereby the shortfall in funds needed to enlarge the capacity of the Regional System of Highways and Arterials in Western Riverside County (the “Regional System”) could be made up in part by a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (“TUMF”) on future residential, commercial and industrial development.
A map depicting the boundaries of Western Riverside County and the Regional System is attached here as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein. As a Member Agency of WRCOG and as a TUMF Participating Jurisdiction, the City participated in the preparation of a certain “Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Fee Nexus Study,” dated October 18, 2002 (the “2002 Nexus Study”) prepared in compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act (Gov. Code §§ 66000 et seq.) and adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee. Based on the 2002 Nexus Study, the City adopted and implemented an ordinance authorizing the City’s participation in a TUMF Program.
B. In 2016, the TUMF Nexus Study (“2016 Nexus Study”) was updated for the purpose of updating the fees. On July 10, 2017, the WRCOG Executive Committee reviewed the 2016 Nexus Study and TUMF Program and recommended TUMF Participating Jurisdictions amend their applicable TUMF ordinances to reflect changes in the TUMF network and the cost of construction in order to update the TUMF Program.
C. On September 5, 2017 the City adopted Ordinance No. 17-05 which adopted the 2016 Nexus Study and updated the TUMF.
5.2.a
Packet Pg. 2205 Attachment: Ordinance No. 24-14 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) Ordinance No. 24-14
D. In 2018, the TUMF Program was altered to adopt a process in which WRCOG calculates and collects TUMF on behalf of member agencies under the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program Ordinance of 2018.
E. The City adopted Ordinance No. 19-14 on August 6, 2019, allowing WRCOG to calculate and collect TUMF on behalf of the City.
F. WRCOG, with the assistance of TUMF Participating Jurisdictions, has prepared an updated nexus study entitled “Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Nexus Study: 2024 Update” (“2024 Nexus Study”) pursuant to California Government Code sections 66000 et seq. (the Mitigation Fee Act), for the purpose of updating the fees.
On September 9, 2024, the WRCOG Executive Committee reviewed the 2024 Nexus Study and TUMF Program and recommended TUMF Participating Jurisdictions amend their applicable TUMF ordinances to reflect changes in the TUMF network and the cost of construction in order to update the TUMF Program.
G. Consistent with its previous findings made in the adoption of Ordinance No. 19-14, the City Council has been informed and advised, and hereby finds, that if the capacity of the Regional System is not enlarged and unless development contributes to the cost of improving the Regional System, the result will be substantial traffic congestion in all parts of Western Riverside County, with unacceptable Levels of Service. Furthermore, the failure to mitigate growing traffic impacts on the Regional System will substantially impair the ability of public safety services (police and fire) to respond and, thus, adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare. Therefore, continuation of a TUMF Program is essential.
H. The City Council finds and determines that there is a reasonable and rational relationship between the use of the TUMF and the type of development projects on which the fees are imposed because the fees will be used to construct the transportation improvements that are necessary for the safety, health and welfare of the residential and non-residential users of the development in which the TUMF will be levied.
I. The City Council finds and determines that there is a reasonable and rational relationship between the need for the improvements to the Regional System and the type of development projects on which the TUMF is imposed because it will be necessary for the residential and non-residential users of such projects to have access to the Regional system. Such development will benefit from the Regional System improvements and the burden of such developments will be mitigated in part by payment of the TUMF.
J. The City Council finds and determines that the cost estimates set forth in the new 2024 Nexus Study are reasonable cost estimates for constructing the Regional System improvements and the facilities that compromise the Regional System, and that the amount of the TUMF expected to be generated by new development will not exceed the total fair share cost to such development.
5.2.a
Packet Pg. 2206 Attachment: Ordinance No. 24-14 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) Ordinance No. 24-14
K. The fees collected pursuant to this Ordinance shall be used to help pay for the design, planning, construction of and real acquisition for the Regional System improvements and its facilities as identified in the 2024 Nexus Study. The need for the improvements and facilities is related to new development because such development results in additional traffic and creates the demand for the improvements.
L. By notice duly given and published, the City Council set the time and place for a public hearing on the 2024 Nexus Study and the fees proposed thereunder and at least fourteen (14) days prior to this hearing, the City Council made the 2024 Nexus Study available to the public.
M. At the time and place set for the hearing, the City Council duly considered data and information provided by the public relative to the cost of the improvements and facilities for which the fees are proposed and all other comments, whether written or oral, submitted prior to the conclusion of the hearing.
N. The City Council finds that the 2024 Nexus Study proposes a fair and equitable method for distributing a portion of the unfunded costs of improvements and facilities to the Regional system.
O. The City Council hereby adopts the 2024 Nexus Study and its findings.
The 2024 Nexus Study is attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit “B.” P. The City Council hereby adopts this Ordinance to amend and supersede the provisions of Ordinance No. 19-14.
Section 3. Definitions.
For the purpose of this Ordinance, the following words, terms and phrases shall have the following meanings:
A. “Class ‘A’ Office” means an office building that is typically characterized by high quality design, use of high end building materials, state of the art technology for voice and data, on-site support services/maintenance, and often includes full service ancillary uses such as, but not limited to a bank, restaurant/office coffee shop, health club, printing shop, and reserved parking. The minimum requirements of an office building classified as Class ‘A” Office shall be as follows: (i) minimum of three stories (exception will be made for March JPA, where height requirements exist); (ii) minimum of 10,000 square feet per floor; (iii) steel frame construction; (iv) central, interior lobby; and (v) access to suites shall be from inside the building unless the building is located in a central business district with major foot traffic, in which case the first floor may be accessed from the street to provide entrances/ exits for commercial uses within the building.
B. “Class ‘B’ Office” means an office building that is typically characterized by high quality design, use of high end building materials, state of the art technology for voice and data, on-site support services/maintenance, and often includes full service ancillary uses such as, but not limited to a bank, restaurant/office coffee shop, health
5.2.a
Packet Pg. 2207 Attachment: Ordinance No. 24-14 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) Ordinance No. 24-14
club, printing shop, and reserved parking. The minimum requirements of an office building classified as Class ‘B” Office shall be as follows: (i) minimum of two stories; (ii) minimum of 15,000 square feet per floor; (iii) steel frame, concrete or masonry shell construction; (iv) central, interior lobby; and (v) access to suites shall be from inside the building unless the building is located in a central business district with major foot traffic, in which case the first floor may be accessed from the street to provide entrances/exits for commercial uses within the building.
C. “Development Project” or “Project” means any project undertaken for the purposes of development, including the issuance of a permit for construction.
D. “Gross Acreage” means the total property area as shown on a land division of a map of record, or described through a recorded legal description of the property. This area shall be bounded by road rights of way and property lines.
E. “Habitable Structure” means any structure or part thereof where persons reside, congregate or work and which is legally occupied in whole or part in accordance with applicable building codes, and state and local laws.
F. “Industrial Project” means any development project that proposes any industrial or manufacturing use allowed in the following Ordinance No. 24-14 zoning classifications: I-P, M-S-C, M-M, M-H, M-R, M-R-A, A-1, A-P, A-2, A-D, W-E, or SP with one of the aforementioned zones used as the base zone.
G. “Low Income Residential Housing” means ”Residential Affordable Units”: (A) for rental housing, the units shall be made available, rented and restricted to “lower income households” (as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 50079.5) at an “affordable rent” (as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 50053), ). Affordable units that are rental housing shall be made available, rented, and restricted to lower income households at an affordable rent for a period of at least fifty-five (55) years after the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for new residential development. and (B) for for-sale housing, the units shall be sold to “persons or families of low or moderate income” (as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 50093) at a purchase price that will not cause the purchaser’s monthly housing cost to exceed “affordable housing cost (as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 50052.5) Affordable units that are forsale housing units shall be restricted to ownership by persons and families of low or moderate income for at least forty-five (45) years after the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the new residential development.
H. “Multi-Family Residential Unit” means a structure with two or more legal independent residential dwelling units intended for human habitation.
I. “Non-Residential Unit” means retail commercial, service commercial and industrial development which is designed primarily for non-dwelling use, but shall include hotels and motels.
5.2.a
Packet Pg. 2208 Attachment: Ordinance No. 24-14 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) Ordinance No. 24-14
J. “Recognized Financing District” means a Financing District as defined in the TUMF Administrative Plan as may be amended from time to time.
K. “Residential Dwelling Unit” means a building or portion thereof used by one (1) family and containing but one (1) kitchen, which is designed primarily for residential occupancy including single-family and multi-family dwellings. “Residential Dwelling Unit” shall not include hotels or motels.
L. “Retail Commercial Project” means any development project that proposes any retail commercial activity use not defined as a service commercial project allowed in the following Ordinance No. 24-14 classifications: R-1, R-R, R-R-O, R-1-A, R-A, R-2, R-2-A, R-3, R-3-A, R-T, R-T-R, R-4, R-5, R-6, C-1/C-P, C-T, C-P-S, C-R, CO, R-V-C, C-V, W-2, R-D, N-A, W-2-M, W-1, or SP with one of the aforementioned zones used as the base zone, which can include any eating/dining facility residing on the retail commercial development premises.
M. “Service Commercial Project” means any development project that is predominately dedicated to business activities associated with professional or administrative services, and typically consists of corporate offices, financial institutions, legal, and medical offices eating/dining facilities, and other uses related to personal or professional services.
N. “Single Family Residential Unit” means each residential dwelling unit development which is situated on one lot which shares no common wall, foundation, or other interconnection with another dwelling unit.
O. “TUMF Participating Jurisdiction” means a jurisdiction in Western Riverside County which has adopted and implemented an ordinance authorizing participation in the TUMF Program and complies with all regulations established in the TUMF Administrative Plan, as adopted and amended from time to time by the WRCOG.
P. “Disabled Veteran” means any veteran who is retired or is in process of medical retirement from military service who is or was severely injured in a theatre of combat operations and has or received a letter of eligibility for the Veterans Administration Specially Adapted Housing (SAH) Grant Program.
Q. Government/public buildings, public schools, and public facilities means any owned and operated facilities by a government entity in accordance with Section G. Exemptions, Subsection 2. of this Ordinance. A new development that is subject to a long-term lease with a government agency for government/public buildings, public schools, and public facilities shall apply only if all of the following conditions are met:
(a) The new development being constructed is subject to a long-term lease with a government agency.
(b) The project shall have a deed restriction placed on the property that limits the use to government/public facility for the term of the lease,
5.2.a
Packet Pg. 2209 Attachment: Ordinance No. 24-14 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) Ordinance No. 24-14
including all extension options, for a period of not less than 20 years. Any change in the use of the facility from government shall trigger the payment of the TUMF in effect at the time of the change is made. (c) No less than ninety percent of the total square footage of the building is leased to the government agency during the term of deed restriction the long term and any extensions thereof.
(d) The new development is constructed at prevailing wage rates. (e) A copy of the lease is provided to the applicable jurisdiction and to WRCOG.
(f) Based on the facts and circumstances WRCOG determines that the intent of the lease is to provide for a long-term government use, and not to evade payment of TUMF.
R. “Non-profit Organization” means an organization operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and none of its earnings may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial port of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates. For the purposes of the TUMF Program, the non-profit may be a 501(c) (3) charitable organization as defined by the Internal Revenue Service.
S. “Long-Term Lease” as used in the TUMF Program, a “long-term lease” shall mean a lease with a term of no less than twenty years.
T. “Mixed-Use Development” as used in the TUMF Program, means Developments with the following criteria: (1) three or more significant revenue-producing uses, and (2) significant physical and functional integration of project components.
U. “Guest Dwellings” and “Detached Second Units” according to the State of California legal definition as following: 1) Complies with the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development Accessory Dwelling Unit Handbook and 2) Are ministerially approved by each jurisdiction’s local codes.
V. “TUMF Administrative Plan” means that the TUMF Administration Plan adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee May 5, 2003, as amended, setting forth detailed administration procedures and requirements for the TUMF program.
Section 4. Establishment of the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee.
A. Adoption of TUMF Schedule. The City Council shall adopt an applicable TUMF schedule through a separate resolution, which may be amended from time to time.
B. Fee Calculation. The fees shall be calculated by WRCOG according to the calculation methodology fee set forth in the WRCOG TUMF Fee Calculation Handbook adopted July 14, 2003, as amended from time to time. In addition to data in
5.2.a
Packet Pg. 2210 Attachment: Ordinance No. 24-14 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) Ordinance No. 24-14
the Fee Calculation Handbook, WRCOG Staff may consider the following items when establishing the appropriate fee calculation methodology:
• Underlying zoning of the site
• Land-use classifications in the latest Nexus Study
• Project specific traffic studies
• Latest Standardized reference manuals such as the Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Manual
• Previous TUMF calculations for similar uses
• WRCOG staff shall approve final draft credit / reimbursement agreement prior to execution
WRCOG shall have final determination regarding the appropriate methodology to calculate the fee based on the information provided by the local agency. In case of a conflict between the applicant, WRCOG, and/or the local agency regarding the fee calculation methodology, the dispute resolution process in the TUMF Administrative Plan will apply.
C. Fee Adjustment. The fee schedule may be periodically reviewed and the amounts adjusted by the WRCOG Executive Committee. By amendment to the Resolution reference is subsection A, above, the fees may be increased or decreased to reflect the changes in actual and estimated costs of the Regional System including, but not limited to, debt service, lease payments and construction costs. The adjustment of the fees may also reflect changes in the facilities required to be constructed, in estimated revenues received pursuant to this Ordinance, as well as the availability or lack thereof of other funds with which to construct the Regional System. WRCOG shall review the TUMF Program no less than every four (4) years after the effective date of this Ordinance.
D. Purpose. The purpose of the TUMF is to fund those certain improvements to the Regional System as depicted in Exhibit “A” and identified in the 2024 Nexus Study, Exhibit “B.”
E. Applicability. The TUMF shall apply to all new development within the City, unless otherwise exempt hereunder.
F. Exemptions. The following types of new development shall be exempt from the provisions of this Ordinance and in TUMF Administrative Plan:
1. Low income residential housing as described in Section 3 Definitions, Subsection G of this Ordinance and in the TUMF Administrative Plan.
2. Government/public buildings, public schools, and public facilities as described in Section 3. Definitions, Subsection Q. of this Ordinance and in the TUMF Administrative Plan. Airports that are public use airports and are appropriately permitted by Caltrans or other state agency.
5.2.a
Packet Pg. 2211 Attachment: Ordinance No. 24-14 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) Ordinance No. 24-14
3. Development Projects which are the subject of a Public Facilities Development Agreement entered into pursuant to Government Code section 65864 et seq, prior to the effective date of Ordinance No. 17-05 wherein the imposition of new fees are expressly prohibited, provided that if the term of such a Development Agreement is extended by amendment or by any other manner after the effective date of Ordinance No. 24-14, the TUMF shall be imposed.
4. The rehabilitation and/or reconstruction of any habitable structure in use on or after January 1, 2000, provided that the same or fewer traffic trips are generated as a result thereof.
5. Guest Dwellings and Detached Second Units as described in this Ordinance in Section 3. Definitions, Subsection U. and in the Administrative Plan
6. Kennels and Catteries established in connection with an existing single family residential unit.
7. Any sanctuary, or other activity under the same roof of a church or other house of worship that is not revenue generating and is eligible for a property tax exemption (excluding concert venues, coffee/snack shops, book stores, for-profit pre-school day-cares, etc., which would be assessed TUMF.)
8. Any nonprofit corporation or nonprofit organization offering and conducting full-time day school at the elementary, middle school or high school level for students between the ages of five and eighteen years.
9. New single-family homes, constructed by non-profit organizations, specially adapted and designed for maximum freedom of movement and independent living for qualified Disabled Veterans.”
10. Other uses may be exempt as determined by the WRCOG Executive Committee as further defined in the TUMF Administrative Plan.
G. Credit. Regional System improvements may be credited toward the TUMF in accordance with the TUMF Administrative Plan and the following:
Regional Tier
i. Arterial Credits: If a developer constructs arterial improvements identified on the Regional System, the developer shall receive credit for all costs associated with the arterial component based on approved Nexus Study for the Regional System effective at the time the credit agreement is entered into.
WRCOG staff must pre-approve any credit agreements that deviate from the standard WRCOG approved format.
ii. Other Credits: In special circumstances, when a developer constructs off-site improvements such as an interchange, bridge, or railroad grade separation, credits shall be determined by WRCOG and the City in consultation with the developer. All such credits must have prior written approval from WRCOG.
iii. The amount of the development fee credit shall not exceed the maximum amount determined by the Nexus Study for the Regional System at the time the credit agreement is entered into or actual costs, whichever is less.
5.2.a
Packet Pg. 2212 Attachment: Ordinance No. 24-14 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) Ordinance No. 24-14
Local Tier
i. The local jurisdictions shall compare facilities in local fee programs against the Regional System and eliminate any overlap in its local fee program except where there is a Recognized Financing District has been established. ii. If there is a Recognized Financing District established, the local agency may credit that portion of the facility identified in both programs against the TUMF in accordance with the TUMF Administrative Plan.
Section 5. Reimbursements.
Should the developer construct Regional System improvements in excess of the TUMF fee obligation, the developer may be reimbursed based on actual costs or the approved Nexus Study effective at the time the agreement was entered into, whichever is less. Reimbursements shall be enacted through an agreement between the developer and the City, contingent on funds being available and approved by WRCOG.
In all cases, however, reimbursements under such special agreements must coincide with construction of the transportation improvements as scheduled in the five-year Zone Transportation Improvement Program’s adopted annually by WRCOG.
Section 6. Procedures for the Levy, Collection and Disposition of Fees.
A. Authority of the Building Department. The Director of Building & Safety, or his/her designee, is hereby authorized to provide WRCOG with development project specifics for the calculation of TUMF in a manner consistent with the TUMF Administrative Plan.
B. Payment and Collection. Payment of the fees shall be as follows:
i. All fees collected hereunder shall be collected by WRCOG for deposit, investment, accounting and expenditure in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance, TUMF Administrative Plan, and the Mitigation Fee Act.
ii. The fees shall be paid at the time a certificate of occupancy is issued for the Development Project or upon final inspection, whichever comes first (the “Payment Date”). However this section should not be construed to prevent payment of the fees prior to issuance of an occupancy permit or final inspection. Fees may be paid at the issuance of a building permit, and the fee payment shall be calculated based on the fee in effect at that time, provided the developer tenders the full amount of his/her TUMF obligation. If the developer makes only a partial payment prior to the Payment Date, the amount of the fee due shall be based on the TUMF fee schedule in place on the Payment Date.
The fees shall be calculated according to fee schedule set forth in the Ordinance and the calculation methodology set forth in the Fee Calculation Handbook adopted July 14, 2003, as amended from time to time.
iii. The fees required to be paid shall be the fee amounts in effect at the time of payment is due under this Ordinance, not the date the Ordinance is
5.2.a
Packet Pg. 2213 Attachment: Ordinance No. 24-14 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) Ordinance No. 24-14
initially adopted. The City shall not enter into a development agreement which freezes future adjustments of the TUMF.
iv. If all or part of any development project is sold prior to payment of the fee, the property shall continue to be subject to the requirement for payment of the fee. The obligation to pay the fee shall run with the land and be binding on all the successors in interest to the property.
v. Fees shall not be waived.
C. Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. The City shall not issue a certificate of occupancy for any Development Project until WRCOG has provided written evidence that it has collected the fee.
D. Appeals. Appeals shall be filed with WRCOG in accordance with the provisions of the TUMF Administrative Plan. Appealable issues shall be the application of the fee, application of credits, application of reimbursement, application of the legal action stay and application of exemption.
E. Reports to WRCOG. The Director of Building and Safety, or his/her designee, shall prepare and deliver to the Executive Director of WRCOG, periodic reports as will be established under Section 7 of this Ordinance.
Section 7. Appointment of the TUMF Administrator.
WRCOG is hereby appointed as the Administrator of the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program. WRCOG is hereby authorized to collect all fees generated from the TUMF within the City, and to invest, account for and expend such fees in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance and the Mitigation Fee Act. The detailed administrative procedures concerning the implementation of this Ordnance shall be contained in the TUMF Administrative Plan. Furthermore, the TUMF Administrator shall use the Fee Calculation Handbook adopted July 14, 2003, as amended from time to time, for the purpose of calculating a developer’s TUMF obligation. In addition to detailing the methodology for calculating all TUMF obligations of different categories of new development, the purpose of the Fee Calculation Handbook is to clarify for the TUMF Administrator, where necessary, the definition and calculation methodology for uses not clearly defined in the respective TUMF ordinances.
WRCOG shall expend only that amount of the funds generated from the TUMF for staff support, audit, administrative expenses, and contract services that are necessary and reasonable to carry out its responsibilities and in no case shall the funds expended for salaries and benefits exceed two percent (2%) of the revenue raised by the TUMF Program. The TUMF Administrative Plan further outlines the fiscal responsibilities and limitations of the Administrator.
5.2.a
Packet Pg. 2214 Attachment: Ordinance No. 24-14 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) Ordinance No. 24-14
Section 8. Effect.
No provisions of this Ordinance shall entitle any person who has already paid the TUMF to receive a refund, credit or reimbursement of such payment. This Ordinance does not create any new TUMF.
Section 9. Severability.
If any one or more of the terms, provisions or sections of this Ordinance shall to any extent be judged invalid, unenforceable and/or voidable for any reason whatsoever by a court of competent jurisdiction, then each and all of the remaining terms, provisions and sections of this Ordinance shall not be affected thereby and shall be valid and enforceable.
Section 10. No Procedural Defenses.
Prohibition of Jurisdictions from raising procedural defenses, including without limitation a statute of limitations, laches, the California Government Tort Claims Act, and necessary parties in a dispute with WRCOG regarding the matters set forth herein.
Section 11. Judicial Review.
In accordance with State law, any judicial action or proceedings to attack, review, set aside, void or annul this Ordinance shall be commenced within 30 days of the date of adoption of this Ordinance.
Section 12. Ordinance No. 24-14
This Ordinance supersedes the provisions of Ordinance No. 19-14 provided this Ordinance is not declared invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction.
If, for whatever reason, this Ordinance is declared invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, Ordinance No. 19-14 all other related ordinances and policies shall remain in full force and effect.
Section 13. Effective Date.
This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of adoption.
Section 14. Publication.
The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage at least once, in a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of San Jacinto, California.
Section 15. CEQA.
5.2.a
Packet Pg. 2215 Attachment: Ordinance No. 24-14 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) Ordinance No. 24-14
The City Council finds that this Ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. In the alternative, and if a project, this Ordinance is exempt under State CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), the common sense exemption, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 18th day of February 2025 by the following vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
CITY OF SAN JACINTO:
_____________________________
Valerie Vandever, Mayor
ATTEST:
Julia Espinoza, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP
Craig Hayes, City Attorney
5.2.a
Packet Pg. 2216 Attachment: Ordinance No. 24-14 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) Ordinance No. 24-14
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF SAN JACINTO )
I, Julia Espinoza, City Clerk of the City of San Jacinto, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance No. 24-14 was passed, approved, and adopted at the Regular Meeting of the San Jacinto City Council held on the 18th day of February 2025.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL on the 18th day of February 2025. ______________________________
Julia Espinoza, City Clerk
City of San Jacinto
5.2.a
Packet Pg. 2217 Attachment: Ordinance No. 24-14 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) Ordinance No. 24
-14
EXHIBIT “A”
MAP OF REGIONAL SYSTEM
5.2.a
Packet Pg. 2218 Attachment: Ordinance No. 24-14 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) EXHIBIT “B”
NEXUS STUDY
5.2.a
Packet Pg. 2219 Attachment: Ordinance No. 24-14 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) RESOLUTION NO. 4048
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF SAN JACINTO )
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SAN JACINTO AMENDING THE APPLICABLE
TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE (TUMF)
APPLICABLE TO ALL DEVELOPMENTS IN THE CITY OF SAN
JACINTO
WHEREAS, the City of San Jacinto (“City”) is a member agency of the Western Riverside Council of Governments (“WRCOG”), a joint powers agency comprised of the County of Riverside and seventeen cities located in Western Riverside County; and WHEREAS, the member agencies of WRCOG recognized that there was insufficient funding to address the impacts of new development on the regional system of highways and arterials in Western Riverside County (the “Regional System”); and WHEREAS, in order to address this shortfall, the member agencies formulated a plan whereby a transportation mitigation fee would be assessed on new development and would be used to fund the necessary improvements for the Regional System; and WHEREAS, in furtherance of this plan, the WRCOG Executive Committee adopted the “Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Fee Nexus Study”, dated October 18, 2002 (the “2002 Nexus Study”); and
WHEREAS, based on the 2002 Nexus Study, the City adopted Ordinance No. 03-03 on April 3, 2003 (the “TUMF Ordinance”) pursuant to California Government Code sections 66000 et seq. authorizing the City to impose the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (“TUMF”) upon new development; and
WHEREAS, in 2016, the TUMF Nexus Study (“2016 Nexus Study”) was updated for the purpose of updating the fees. On July 10, 2017, the WRCOG Executive Committee reviewed the 2016 Nexus Study and TUMF Program and recommended TUMF Participating Jurisdictions amend their applicable TUMF ordinances to reflect changes in the TUMF network and the cost of construction in order to update the TUMF Program; and
WHEREAS, on September 5, 2017, the City adopted Ordinance No. 17-05 which adopted the 2016 Nexus Study and updated the TUMF; and
WHEREAS, in 2018, the TUMF Program was altered to adopt a process in which WRCOG calculates and collects TUMF on behalf of member agencies under the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program Ordinance of 2018; and
5.2.b
Packet Pg. 2220 Attachment: Resolution No. 4048 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) WHEREAS, the City adopted Ordinance No. 19-14 August 6, 2019, allowing WRCOG to calculate and collect TUMF on behalf of the City; and WHEREAS, WRCOG, with the assistance of TUMF Participating Jurisdictions, has prepared an updated nexus study entitled “Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Nexus Study: 2024 Update” (“2024 Nexus Study”) pursuant to California Government Code sections 66000 et seq. (the Mitigation Fee Act), for the purpose of updating the fees. On September 9, 2024, the WRCOG Executive Committee reviewed the 2024 Nexus Study and TUMF Program and recommended TUMF Participating Jurisdictions amend their applicable TUMF ordinances to reflect changes in the TUMF network and the cost of construction in order to update the TUMF Program.
WHEREAS, consistent with its previous findings made in the adoption of Ordinance No. 19-14, the City Council has been informed and advised, and hereby finds, that if the capacity of the Regional System is not enlarged and unless development contributes to the cost of improving the Regional System, the result will be substantial traffic congestion in all parts of Western Riverside County, with unacceptable Levels of Service. Furthermore, the failure to mitigate growing traffic impacts on the Regional System will substantially impair the ability of public safety services (police and fire) to respond and, thus, adversely affect public health, safety, and welfare. Therefore, continuation of a TUMF Program is essential.
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that there is a reasonable and rational relationship between the use of the TUMF and the type of development projects on which the fees are imposed because the fees will be used to construct the transportation improvements that are necessary for the safety, health, and welfare of the residential and non-residential users of the development in which the TUMF will be levied.
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that there is a reasonable and rational relationship between the need for the improvements to the Regional System and the type of development projects on which the TUMF is imposed because it will be necessary for the residential and non-residential users of such projects to have access to the Regional system. Such development will benefit from the Regional System improvements and the burden of such developments will be mitigated in part by payment of the TUMF.
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that the cost estimates set forth in the new 2024 Nexus Study are reasonable cost estimates for constructing the Regional System improvements and the facilities that compromise the Regional System, and that the amount of the TUMF expected to be generated by new development will not exceed the total fair share cost to such development.
WHEREAS, the fees collected pursuant to the TUMF Ordinance shall be used to help pay for the design, planning, construction of, and real acquisition of the Regional System improvements and its facilities as identified in the 2024 Nexus Study. The need for the improvements and facilities is related to new development because such
5.2.b
Packet Pg. 2221 Attachment: Resolution No. 4048 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) development results in additional traffic and creates the demand for the improvements.
WHEREAS, by notice duly given and published, the City Council set the time and place for a public hearing on the 2024 Nexus Study and the fees proposed thereunder and at least ten (10) days prior to this hearing, the City Council made the 2024 Nexus Study available to the public.
WHEREAS, at the time and place set for the hearing, the City Council duly considered data and information provided by the public relative to the cost of the improvements and facilities for which the fees are proposed and all other comments, whether written or oral, submitted prior to the conclusion of the hearing.
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the 2024 Nexus Study proposes a fair and equitable method for distributing a portion of the unfunded costs of improvements and facilities to the Regional system.
WHEREAS, section Section 4.C. of Ordinance No. 24-14 authorizes periodic review and adjustment to the applicable TUMF in accordance with any adjustments made by the WRCOG Executive Committee; and
WHEREAS, the fees collected pursuant to this Resolution shall be used to finance the public facilities described or identified in the Nexus Study; and WHEREAS, the levying of TUMF has been reviewed by the City Council and staff in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the CEQA Guidelines and it has been determined that the adoption of this ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of San Jacinto does resolve as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The recitals set forth above are hereby adopted as findings in support of this Resolution. In addition, the City Council re-adopts the findings contained in Section 2 of Ordinance No. 24-14 in support of the adjusted TUMF contained herein.
SECTION 2. TUMF Schedule. In accordance with Section 4.C. of Ordinance No. 24-14, there is hereby adopted the following fee schedule for the TUMF which replaces the fee schedule set forth in Sections 2 and 3 of Resolution No. 3889 in its entirety as of , provided that the fee for retail commercial projects shall go into effect upon the Effective Date set forth in Section 5, below:
A. There is hereby adopted the following TUMF schedule:
(1) $12,380 per single family residential unit 1,800 square feet or less (2) $13,927 per single family residential unit between 1,801 and 2,300 square feet
(3) $15,476 per single family residential unit between 2,301 and 2,700
5.2.b
Packet Pg. 2222 Attachment: Resolution No. 4048 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule) square feet
(4) $19,344 per single family residential unit greater than 2,700 square feet
(2) $7,816 per multi-family residential unit
(3) $2.33 per square foot of an industrial project
(4) $7.72 per square foot of a retail commercial project (5) $4.89 per square foot of a service commercial
project
(6) $2.45 per square foot of a service Class A and B Office SECTION 3. Adoption of 2024 Nexus Study. The City Council hereby adopts the 2024 Nexus Study and its findings. The 2024 Nexus Study is attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit “B.”
SECTION 4. CEQA Findings. The City Council hereby finds that in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the CEQA Guidelines the adoption of this Resolution is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3).
SECTION 5. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective on April 1, 2025.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 4
th day of February 2025 by the
following vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
CITY OF SAN JACINTO:
_____________________________
Valerie Vandever, Mayor
ATTEST:
Julia Espinoza, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP
Craig Hayes, City Attorney
5.2.b
Packet Pg. 2223 Attachment: Resolution No. 4048 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule)
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF SAN JACINTO )
I, Julia Espinoza, City Clerk of the City of San Jacinto, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 4048 was passed, approved, and adopted at the Regular Meeting of the San Jacinto City Council held on the 4 th
day of February 2025.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL on the 4th day of February 2025. ______________________________
Julia Espinoza, City Clerk
City of San Jacinto
5.2.b
Packet Pg. 2224 Attachment: Resolution No. 4048 (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program, Resolution Adopting a TUMF Schedule)
5.2.c
Packet Pg. 2225 Attachment: Map of the Regional System (TUMF Ordinance Exhibit A) (Proposed Ordinance to Update Participation in the TUMF Program,