LSA
Physiological Effects of Noise
Physical damage to human hearing begins at prolonged exposure to noise levels higher than 85 dBA.
Exposure to high noise levels affects the entire system, with prolonged noise exposure in excess of 75 dBA increasing body tensions, thereby affecting blood pressure and functions of the heart and the nervous system. In comparison, extended periods of noise exposure above 90 dBA would result in permanent cell damage. When the noise level reaches 120 dBA, a tickling sensation occurs in the human ear even with short-term exposure.This level of noise is called the threshold of feeling.As the sound reaches 140 dBA,the tickling sensation is replaced by the feeling of pain in the ear.This is called the threshold of pain.A sound level of 160-165 dBA will result in dizziness or loss of equilibrium.The ambient or background noise problem is widespread and generally more concentrated in urban areas than in outlying less developed areas.
Table A lists full definitions of acoustical terms, and Table B shows common sound levels and their sources.
Table A: Definitions of Acoustical Terms
Term Definition
Decibel,dB A unit of level that denotes the ratio between two quantities proportional to power;the number of decibels is 10 times the logarithm(to the base 10)of this ratio.
Frequency,Hz Of a function periodic in time,the number of times that the quantity repeats itself in one second(i.e.,number of cycles per second).
A-Weighted Sound Level, The sound level obtained by use of A-weighting.The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the dBA very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise.All sound levels in this assessment are A-weighted,unless reported otherwise.
Lot,L10,L50,L90 The fast A-weighted noise levels equaled or exceeded by a fluctuating sound level for 1 percent,10 percent,50 percent,and 90 percent of a stated time period.
Equivalent Continuous The level of a steady sound that,in a stated time period and at a stated location,has the Noise Level, Len same A-weighted sound energy as the time-varying sound.
Community Noise The 24-hour A-weighted average sound level from midnight to midnight,obtained after Equivalent Level,CNEL the addition of 5 dB to sound levels occurring in the evening from 7:00 p.m.to 10:00 p.m. and after the addition of 10 dB to sound levels occurring in the night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
Day/Night Noise Level,Ldn The 24-hour A-weighted average sound level from midnight to midnight,obtained after the addition of 10 dB to sound levels occurring in the night between 10:00 p.m.and 7:00 a.m.
Lmax,Lmin The maximum and minimum A-weighted sound levels measured on a sound level meter, during a designated time interval,using fast time averaging.
Ambient Noise Level The all-encompassing noise associated with a given environment at a specified time, usually a composite of sound from many sources at many directions,near and far;no particular sound is dominant.
Intrusive The noise that intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location.The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its amplitude,duration,frequency,and time of occurrence and tonal or informational content,as well as the prevailing ambient noise level.
Source 1:Technical Noise Supplement(California Department of Transportation 2013).
Source 2:Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual(Federal Transit Administration 2018). 11/22/24 u\\aznasunifiler2\projects\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San Antonio 4 Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docxn
LSA
Table B: Common Sound Levels and Noise Sources
Noise Level
Common Outdoor Sound Levels dB(A) Common Indoor Sound Levels a 1' Rock Band
Commercial Jet Flyover at 1000 Feet
100
Gas Lawn Mower at 3 Feet
90 Inside Subway Train(New York)
Diesel Truck at 50 Feet -
Food Blender at 3 Feet
Concrete Mixer at 50 Feet
Garbage Disposal at 3 Feet
Air Compressor at 50 Feet Shouting at 3 Feet
Vacuum Cleaner at 10 Feet
Lawn Tiller at 50 Feet
60 Normal Speech at 3 Feet
Large Business Office
Quiet Urban Daytime 50
Dishwasher Next Room
Quiet Urban Nighttime 40 Small Theater,Large Conference Room Quiet Suburban Nighttime (Background)
30 Library
Quiet Rural Nighttime 20 Bedroom at Night
Concert Hall(Background)
10 Broadcast and Recording Studio
0 Threshold of Hearing
Source:LSA(2016).
dBA=A-weighted decibel
CHARACTERISTICS OF VIBRATION
Vibration refers to ground-borne noise and perceptible motion. Ground-borne vibration is almost exclusively a concern inside buildings and is rarely perceived as a problem outdoors, where the motion may not be discernible.Typically,there is more adverse reaction to effects associated with the shaking of a building. Vibration energy propagates from a source through intervening soil and rock layers to the foundations of nearby buildings.The vibration then propagates from the foundation throughout the remainder of the structure. Building vibration may be perceived by occupants as the motion of building surfaces, the rattling of items on shelves or hanging on walls, or a low-frequency rumbling noise.The rumbling noise is caused by the vibration of walls,floors, and ceilings that radiate sound waves.Annoyance from vibration often occurs when the vibration exceeds the threshold of perception by 10 dB or less.This is an order of magnitude below the damage threshold for normal buildings.
11/22/24 u\\aznasunifiler2\projects\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San Antonio 5 Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docxn
LSA
Typical sources of ground-borne vibration are construction activities(e.g., blasting, pile driving, and operating heavy-duty earthmoving equipment), steel-wheeled trains, and occasional traffic on rough roads. Problems with both ground-borne vibration and noise from these sources are usually localized to areas within approximately 100 feet of the vibration source, although there are examples of ground-borne vibration causing interference to distances greater than 200 feet(Federal Transit Administration [FTA] 2018). When roadways are smooth,vibration from traffic, even heavy trucks, is rarely perceptible. It is assumed for most projects that the roadway surface will be smooth enough that ground-borne vibration from street traffic will not exceed the impact criteria; however, the construction of a project could result in ground-borne vibration that may be perceptible and annoying.
Ground-borne vibration has the potential to disturb people and damage buildings. Although it is very rare for typical construction activities to cause even cosmetic building damage, it is not uncommon for construction processes such as blasting and pile driving to cause vibration of sufficient amplitudes to damage nearby buildings (FTA 2018). Ground-borne vibration is usually measured in terms of vibration velocity, either the root-mean-square (RMS)velocity or peak particle velocity(PPV).The RMS is best for characterizing human response to building vibration, and PPV is used to characterize potential for damage. Decibel notation acts to compress the range of numbers required to describe vibration.Vibration velocity level in decibels is defined as:
Lv= 20 logio [V/Vref]
where L„is the vibration velocity in decibels (VdB),V is the RMS velocity amplitude, and Vref is the reference velocity amplitude, or 1 x 10'inches/second (in/sec) used in the United States.
APPLICABLE NOISE STANDARDS
The following information provides standards to which potential noise impacts will be compared.
Where exceedances have been identified, impacts are described, and mitigation recommended.
City of Upland General Plan
The Safety Element of the City's General Plan is intended to identify sources of noise and provide goals and policies that ensure that noise from various sources does not create an unacceptable noise environment. Overall,the City's Safety Element describes the noise environment (including noise sources) in the city; addresses noise mitigation regulations, strategies, and programs; and delineates federal, State, and City jurisdiction relative to rail, automotive, aircraft, and nuisance noise.
The City's noise standards correlate with land use zoning classifications to maintain identified ambient noise levels and to limit, mitigate, or eliminate intrusive noise that exceeds the ambient noise levels within a specified zone. As shown in Table C, the City has adopted local guidelines based, in part, on the community noise compatibility guidelines established by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research for use in assessing the compatibility of various land use types with a range of noise levels.
11/22/24 u\\aznasunifiler2\projects\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San Antonio 6 Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docxn
LSA
Table C: City of Upland Exterior Noise Compatibility Standards Highest Level of Noise Exposure
that is Regarded as
"Normally Acceptable"
Land Use Type (Ldn of CNEL)
Residential—Low Density Single-Family,Duplex,Mobile I hones 60 dBA Residential—Multi-family 63(IBA
Mixed-Use 70 dBA
Transient Lodging—I totels,Motels 65 dBA
Schools,Libraries,Churches,I lospitals,Nursing!tomes 70 dBA Auditoriums,Concert halls,Amphitheaters Mitigation based on site-specific study Sports Arena,Outdoors Spectator Sports Mitigation based on site-specific study Playgrounds,Neighborhood Parks 7E1 dBA
Golf Courses,Riding Stables,Water Recreation,Cemeteries 75 dBA Office Buildings—Commercial,Office/Professional 7f1 dBA Industrial,Manufacturing,Utilities,Agriculture 75 dI3A Source:Governor's Office of Planning and Research,State of California General Plan Guidelines 2003,2003,pages 244-254.
Source:General Plan,Safety Element(City of Upland 2015).
CNEL=Community Noise Equivalent Level
Las=Day-Night Noise Level
dBA=A-weighted decibel
City of Upland Municipal Code
The City of Upland Municipal Code Chapter 9.40, Unnecessary Noise, limits the noise level generated on a property that can cross to a neighboring property.The City's noise ordinance limits are presented in terms of a 1-hour average sound level and apply to residential uses only. As prescribed in Section 9.40.040, the exterior noise standards for sensitive residential uses are 55 dBA between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. (daytime) and 45 dBA between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. (nighttime).
Ordinance limits generally apply to "stationary" sources such as mechanical equipment, manufacturing activities, or vehicles operating on private property (City of Upland 2024).
Additionally, section 9.40.100 (M) limits construction activities to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays (City of Upland 2024).
Federal Transit Administration
Although the City does not have daytime construction noise level limits for activities that occur within the specified hours of the City's Municipal Code,to determine potential California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) noise impacts, construction noise was assessed using criteria from the Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual(FTA Manual) (FTA 2018). 11/22/24 u\\aznasunifiler2\projects\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration Draft Report\San Antonio 7 Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docxn
LSA
Table D shows the FTA's Detailed Assessment Construction Noise Criteria based on the composite noise levels per construction phase.
Table D: Detailed Assessment Daytime Construction Noise Criteria Land Use Daytime 1-hour Ley(dBA)
Residential _ 80
Commercial 85
Industrial 90
Source:Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual(FTA 2018). dBA=A-weighted decibels
Leg=equivalent continuous sound level
APPLICABLE VIBRATION STANDARDS
The following information provides standards to which potential vibration impacts will be compared. Where exceedances have been identified, impacts are discussed, and mitigation recommended.
Federal Transit Administration
Vibration standards included in the FTA Manual are used in this analysis for ground-borne vibration impacts on human annoyance (FTA 2018).Table E provides the criteria for assessing the potential for interference or annoyance from vibration levels in a building.
Table E: Criteria for Potential Vibration Annoyance
Land Use Max L„(VdB)1 Description of Use
Workshop 90 Distinctly feelable vibration.Appropriate to workshops and non-sensitive areas.
Office 84 Feelable vibration.Appropriate to offices and non-sensitive areas.
Residential Day 78 Feelable vibration.Appropriate for computer equipment and low-power optical microscopes(up to 20X).
Residential Night and Vibration not feelable,but ground-borne noise may be audible inside quiet Operating Rooms
72 rooms.Suitable for medium-power microscopes(100X)and other equipment of low sensitivity.
Source:Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual(FTA 2018). 1 As measured in 1/3-octave bands of frequency over the frequency range 8 to 80 Hz.
FTA=Federal Transit Administration Max=maximum
Hz=hertz VdB=vibration velocity decibels
Lv=velocity in decibels
The criteria for environmental impacts resulting from ground-borne vibration and noise are based on the maximum levels for a single event.The City's Municipal Code does not include specific criteria for assessing vibration impacts associated with damage.Therefore,for the purpose of determining the significance of vibration impacts experienced at sensitive uses surrounding the project site,the guidelines within the 2018 FTA Manual have been used to determine vibration impacts (refer to Table F, below).
11/22/24 u\\aznasunifiler2\projects\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San Antonio 8 Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docxn
LSA
Table F: Construction Vibration Damage Criteria
Building Category PPV(in/sec)
Reinforced concrete,steel,or timber(no plaster) 0.50
Engineered concrete and masonry(no plaster) 0.30
Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.20
Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12 Source:Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual(FTA 2018).
FTA=Federal Transit Administration
in/sec=inches per second
PPV=peak particle velocity
The FTA Manual (2018)guidelines show that a vibration level of up to 0.2 in/sec in PPV is considered safe for non-engineered timber and masonry buildings and would not result in any construction vibration damage.Therefore, in order to be conservative,the 0.2 in/sec in the PPV threshold has been used when evaluating vibration impacts at the nearest structures to the site.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act(State CEQA Guidelines),Appendix G, Public Resources Code, Sections 15000-15387, a project will normally have a significant effect on the environment related to noise if it will substantially increase the ambient noise levels for adjoining areas or conflict with adopted environmental plans and the goals of the community in which it is located.
The State CEQA Guidelines indicate that a project would have a significant impact on noise if it would result in:
• Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies;
• Generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels; or • For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or,where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
OVERVIEW OF THE EXISTING NOISE ENVIRONMENT
The primary existing noise sources in the project area are transportation facilities, including SR 210 to the south.To assess the existing noise conditions in the area, long-term noise measurements were conducted at the project site.Two long-term, 24-hour measurements were taken from July 16, 2024,to July 17, 2024.The locations of the noise measurements are shown on Figure 3, and the results are summarized in Table G. Noise measurement data information is provided in Attachment C of this analysis.
11/22/24 u\\aznasunifiler2\projects\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San Antonio 9 Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docxn
LSA
Table G: Existing Noise Level Measurements
Daytime Noise Evening Nighttime Noise Average Daily Location Location Description Levels' Noise Levels2 Levels3 Noise Levels Number
(dBA Leq) (dBA Ley) (dBA Ley) (dBA CNEL)
On a light pole at the end of
20th Street across from the
northeastern corner of the
LT-1 project site,approximately 490 59.8-67.4 60.6-61.9 57.9-64.9 68.1 feet away from the SR 210
centerline and 355 feet away
from the North Campus Avenue
centerline
On a light pole across from the
southwestern corner of the
LT-2 project site,approximately 175 63.4-68.9 63.6-64.4 61.1-65.0 70.1 feet away from the SR 210
centerline.
Source:Compiled by LSA(2024).
1 Daytime Noise Levels=noise levels during the hours of 7:00 a.m.to 7:00 p.m.
Z Evening Noise Levels=noise levels during the hours of 7:00 p.m.to 10:00 p.m.
Nighttime Noise Levels=noise levels during the hours of 10:00 p.m.to 7:00 a.m.
CNEL=Community Noise Equivalent Level
dBA=A-weighted decibels
ft=foot/feet
Leq=equivalent continuous sound level
Sensitive Land Uses in the Project Vicinity
Certain land uses are considered more sensitive to noise than others. Examples of these include residential areas, educational facilities, hospitals, childcare facilities, and senior housing. The project site is surrounded primarily by residential uses to the west. Land uses adjacent to the project site include the following:
• North: Existing single-family homes opposite East 20th Street, approximately 95 feet from the project site property line.
• East: Undeveloped open space.
• South: SR 210.
• West: Existing single-family homes opposite Flower Court, approximately 60 feet from the project site property line.
Aircraft Noise
The project site is approximately 2.6 miles northeast of Cable Airport. Noise impacts related to aircraft operations may contribute to the aircraft noise in the project area; however,the project site is located well outside of the 60 dBA CNEL contour. Because the project site and surrounding 11/22/24 v\\aznasunifiler2\projects\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San 10 Antonio Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docxn
LSA
sensitive uses are all outside of the 60 dBA CNEL contours of airports in the vicinity, no further analysis is necessary.
PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS
The proposed project would result in short-term construction noise and vibration impacts and long- term mobile source noise and vibration impacts, as described below.
Short-Term Construction-Related Impacts
Project construction would result in short-term noise and vibration impacts on adjacent land uses.
Maximum construction impacts would be short-term,generally intermittent depending on the construction phase and variable depending on receiver distance from the active construction zone.
The duration of impacts generally would be from 1 day to several weeks depending on the phase of construction.The following describes the level and types of impacts that would occur during construction.
Construction Noise Impacts
Two types of short-term noise impacts could occur during the construction of the proposed project.
First, construction crew commutes and the transport of construction equipment and materials to the site for the proposed project would incrementally increase noise levels on access roads leading to the site. Although there would be a relatively high single-event noise-exposure potential causing intermittent noise nuisance (passing trucks at 50 feet would generate up to 84 dBA Lmax),the effect on longer-term ambient noise levels would be small compared to existing daily traffic volumes on East 20th Street.The results of the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod)for the proposed project indicate during the paving phase an additional 39 passenger car equivalent (PCE) vehicles, composed of worker and hauling trips, would be added to the adjacent roadway to the project site. Based on the Traffic Impact Analysis (LSA 2024)the existing traffic volume on East 20th Street, assumed to be the main construction access, is 80 vehicles.The expected traffic noise level increase would be approximately 1.7 dBA.A noise level increase of less than 3 dBA would not be perceptible to the human ear in an outdoor environment.Therefore, short-term, construction- related impacts associated with worker commute and equipment transport to the project site would be less than significant.
The second type of short-term noise impact is related to noise generated during construction, which includes site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating on the project site. Construction is completed in discrete steps, each of which has its own mix of equipment and, consequently, its own noise characteristics.These various sequential phases would change the character of the noise generated on the site and, therefore,the noise levels surrounding the site as construction progresses. Despite the variety in the type and size of construction equipment, similarities in the dominant noise sources and patterns of operation allow construction-related noise ranges to be categorized by work phase.Table H lists typical construction equipment noise levels recommended for noise impact assessments, based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and a noise receptor,taken from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model(FHWA 2006).
11/22/24 v\\aznasunifiler2\projects\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San 11 Antonio Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docxn
LSA
In addition to the reference maximum noise level,the usage factor provided in Table H is used to calculate the hourly noise level impact for each piece of equipment based on the following equation:
Leq(equip)= E.L.+10 log(U.F.)—20 log 50
where: Leq(equip) = Leq at a receiver resulting from the operation of a single piece of equipment over a specified time period.
E.L. = noise emission level of the particular piece of equipment at a reference distance of 50 feet.
U.F. = usage factor that accounts for the fraction of time that the equipment is in use over the specified period of time.
D = distance from the receiver to the piece of equipment.
Table H: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels
Equipment Description Acoustical Usage Factor(%)1 Maximum Noise Level(Lmax)at 50 Feet2 Auger Drill Rig 20 84
Backhoes 40 80
Compactor(ground) 20 80 _
Compressor _ 40 80 _
Cranes 16 85
Dozers 40 85
Dump Trucks 40 84
Excavators 40 85
Flat Bed Trucks 40 84
Forklift 20 85
Front-end Loaders 40 80
Graders 40 85
Impact Pile Drivers 20 95
Jackhammers 20 85
Paver 50 77
Pickup Truck 40 55
Pneumatic Tools 50 85
Pumps 50 77
Rollers 20 85
Scrapers _ 40 85
Tractors 40 84
Trencher 50 80
Welder 40 73
Source:FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User's Guide,Table 1(FHWA 2006).
Note:Noise levels reported in this table are rounded to the nearest whole number. 1 Usage factor is the percentage of time during a construction noise operation that a piece of construction equipment is operating at full power.
z Maximum noise levels were developed based on Specification 721.560 from the Central Artery/Tunnel program to be consistent with the City of Boston's Noise Code for the"Big Dig"project.
FHWA=Federal Highway Administration
L,,,, =maximum instantaneous sound level
11/22/24"\\aznasunifiler2\projects\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San 12 Antonio Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docxn
LSA
Each piece of construction equipment operates as an individual point source. Using the following equation, a composite noise level can be calculated when multiple sources of noise operate simultaneously:
n
Ln
Leq (composite) = 10 * log10 1 1010
1 Using the equations from the methodology above, the reference information in Table H, and the construction equipment list provided,the composite noise level of each construction phase was calculated.The project construction composite noise levels at a distance of 50 feet would range from 74 dBA Leq to 86 dBA Leq, with the highest noise levels occurring during the grading phase.
Once composite noise levels are calculated, reference noise levels can then be adjusted for distance using the following equation:
Leq (at distance X) = Leq (at 50 feet) — 20 * to g10 (—X 50) In general,this equation shows that doubling the distance would decrease noise levels by 6 dBA while halving the distance would increase noise levels by 6 dBA.
Table I shows the nearest sensitive uses to the project site,their distance from the center of construction activities, and composite noise levels expected during construction.These noise level projections do not consider intervening topography or barriers. Construction equipment calculations are provided in Attachment D.
Table I: Potential Construction Noise Impacts at Nearest Receptor Composite Noise Level(dBA Leq) Composite Noise
Receptor(Location) at 50 feed Distance(feet) Level(dBA Leg) Residential(North) 250 72
Residential(West) 86 405 68
Source:Compiled by LSA(2024).
1 The composite construction noise level represents the grading phase which is expected to result in the greatest noise level as compared to other phases.
dBA Leq=average A-weighted hourly noise level
While construction noise will vary, it is expected that composite noise levels during construction at the nearest sensitive residential uses to the north and west would approach 72 dBA Leq and 68 dBA Leq, respectively, during daytime hours.These predicted noise levels would only occur when all construction equipment is operating simultaneously and,therefore, are assumed to be rather conservative in nature. While construction-related short-term noise levels have the potential to be higher than existing ambient noise levels in the project area under existing conditions, the noise impacts would no longer occur once project construction is completed.
As stated above,the City's Noise Ordinance regulates noise impacts associated with construction activities.The proposed project would comply with the construction hours specified in the City's 11/22/24 v\\aznasunifiler2\projects\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San 13 Antonio Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docxn
LSA
Noise Ordinance,which states that construction activities are allowed between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays (City of Upland 2024).
As it relates to off-site uses, construction-related noise impacts would remain below the 80 dBA Leg 1-hour construction noise level criteria for daytime construction noise level criteria as established by the FTA for residential land uses;therefore,the impact would be considered less than significant.
Construction Vibration Building Damage Potential
Ground-borne noise and vibration from construction activity would be mostly low.Table J provides reference PPV values and vibration levels (in terms of VdB)from typical construction vibration sources at 25 feet. Although the specific pieces of equipment that would be used on the site are unknown at this time,to provide an analysis of potential vibration levels expected for a project of this size, a large bulldozer would generate 0.089 PPV(in/sec) of ground-borne vibration when measured at 25 feet, based on the FTA Manual (FTA 2018).As shown in Table F, it would take a minimum of 0.2 PPV(in/sec)to cause any potential building damage to non-engineered timber and masonry buildings.
Table J: Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment Reference PPV/Lv at 25 ft
Equipment PPV(in/sec) Lv(VdB)1
Hoe Ram 0.089 87
Large Bulldozer 0.089 87
Caisson Drilling 0.089 87
Loaded Trucks 0.076 86
Jackhammer 0.035 79
Small Bulldozer 0.003 58
Source:Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual(FTA 2018).
RMS VdB re 1 µin/sec.
(Lin/sec=micro-inches per second Lv=velocity in decibels ft=foot/feet PPV=peak particle velocity
FTA=Federal Transit Administration RMS=root-mean-square in/sec=inches per second VdB=vibration velocity in decibels The distance to the nearest buildings for vibration impact analysis is measured between the nearest off-site buildings and the project construction boundary(assuming the construction equipment would be used at or near the project setback line).The formula for vibration transmission is provided below:
LvdB (D) = LvdB (25 feet)—30 Log(D/25)
PPVequip= PPVref X (25/D)1.s
The closest structures, which are associated with the residential uses to the west, are approximately 60 feet from the western project construction boundary. Using the reference data from Table J and the equation above, it is expected that vibration levels generated by dump trucks and other large equipment would generate ground-borne vibration levels of up to 0.024 PPV(in/sec) at the closest 11/22/24 v\\aznasunifiler2\projects\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San 14 Antonio Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docxn
LSA
structure to the project site.This vibration level would not exceed the 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold considered safe for non-engineered timber and masonry buildings.Therefore, construction would not result in any vibration damage, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Construction Vibration Human Annoyance Potential
As stated above,the existing residences, located approximately 250 feet to the north from the center of the project site, is the nearest sensitive receptor and would experience vibration levels approaching 57 VdB based on the following equation:
LvdB (D) = LvdB (25 feet)-30 Log(D/25)
Based on the standards provided in Table E, this level of ground-borne vibration is below the threshold of distinctly perceptible, which is approximately 72 VdB for frequent events at uses where people sleep and would not exceed the FTA vibration threshold for human annoyance at the nearest sensitive use, and project construction would not result in vibration levels that would typically result in human annoyance.Therefore, this level of ground-borne vibration would be less than significant for human annoyance. No mitigation is required.
Long-Term Off-Site Traffic Noise Impacts
The guidelines included in the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77 108) were used to evaluate highway traffic-related noise conditions along roadway segments in the project vicinity.This model requires various parameters, including traffic volumes,vehicle mix, vehicle speed, and roadway geometry to compute typical equivalent noise levels during daytime, evening, and nighttime hours.The resultant noise levels are weighted and summed over 24-hour periods to determine the CNEL values.Table K provides the traffic noise levels for the opening year and horizon year with and without project scenarios.These noise levels represent the worst-case scenario, which assumes no shielding is provided between the traffic and the location where the noise contours are drawn.
The without and with project scenario traffic volumes were obtained from Traffic Impact Analysis for the San Antonio Water Headquarters (LSA 2024).Attachment E provides the specific assumptions used in developing these noise levels and model printouts.Although Table K shows that the increase in project-related traffic noise would be greater than 3 dBA, which is perceptible to the human ear in an outdoor environment,the generated CNEL noise levels would be below 60 dBA CNEL,which is acceptable for low-density residential uses as specified in the City's General Plan.Therefore,traffic noise impacts from project-related traffic on off-site sensitive receptors would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required.
Long-Term Ground-Borne Noise and Vibration from Vehicular Traffic The proposed project would not generate noticeable vibration levels related to on-site operations.
Trucks traveling to and from the project site as well as loading and unloading activities may generate vibration levels. However,the closest off-site uses are greater than 25 feet away and vibration levels generated from trucks would not be perceptible. In addition,vibration levels generated from 11/22/24 v\\aznasunifiler2\projects\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San 15 Antonio Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docxn
LSA
project-related traffic on the adjacent roadways are unusual for on-road vehicles because the rubber tires and suspension systems of on-road vehicles provide vibration isolation. Based on a reference vibration level of 0.089 in/sec PPV, structures greater than 25 feet from the roadways that contain project trips would experience vibration levels below the most conservative standard of
0.12 in/sec PPV; therefore,vibration levels generated from project-related traffic on the adjacent roadways would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required. 11/22/24 v\\aznasunifiler2\projects\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San 16 Antonio Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docxn
LSA
Table K: Traffic Noise Levels Without and With Proposed Project Existing Existing-With Project Opening Year(2027) Opening Year(2027)-With Project CNEL(dBA) CNEL(dBA) Increase CNEL(dBA) CNEL(dBA) Increase Roadway Segment 50 ft from 50 ft from from 50 ft from 50 ft from from ADT Centerline of ADT Centerline of Baseline ADT Centerline of ADT Centerline of Baseline Outermost Outermost Conditions Outermost Outermost Conditions Lane Lane (dBA) Lane Lane (dBA)
20th Street West of 80 42.4 190 46.1 3.7 100 43.4 210 46.6 3.2 Winston Court
20th Street East of 0 23.4 30 38.1 14.7 0 23.4 30 38.1 14.7 Winston Court
20th Street East of 7,910 62.0 8,070 62.0 0.0 8,570 62.3 8,730 62.4 0.1 Campus Avenue
Campus Avenue North 7,910 63.8 7,910 63.8 0.0 8,540 64.1 8,540 64.1 0.0 of 20th Street
Source:Compiled by LSA(2024).
Note:Shaded cells indicate roadway segments adjacent to the project site.
ADT=average daily traffic dBA=A-weighted decibels
CNEL=Community Noise Equivalent Level ft=foot/feet
Table K: Traffic Noise Levels Without and With Proposed Project (Continued) Horizon Year(2050) Horizon Year(2050)-With Project CNEL(dBA)50 ft CNEL(dBA)50 ft Increase from
Roadway Segment ADT from Centerline ADT from Centerline Baseline of Outermost of Outermost Conditions
Lane Lane (dBA)
20th Street West of Winston Court 100 43.4 210 46.6 3.2 20th Street East of Winston Court 0 23.4 30 38.1 14.7 20th Street East of Campus Avenue 9,290 62.6 9,450 62.7 0.1 Campus Avenue North of 20th Street 9,260 64.4 9,260 64.4 0.0 Source:Compiled by LSA(2024).
Note:Shaded cells indicate roadway segments adjacent to the project site.
ADT=average daily traffic dBA=A-weighted decibels
CNEL=Community Noise Equivalent Level ft=foot/feet
11/22/24 v\\aznasunifiler2\projects\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docx» 17
LSA
Long-Term Off-Site Operational Noise Impacts
Adjacent off-site land uses would be potentially exposed to stationary-source noise impacts from rooftop heating,ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment and proposed truck arrival and departure activities.The potential noise impacts to off-site sensitive land uses from the proposed operations are discussed below.
Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Equipment
The project would have various rooftop mechanical equipment, including HVAC units, atop the proposed buildings. Based on the project site plan,the project is assumed to have two rooftop HVAC units atop each proposed building (Main Building and Maintenance Building) and assumed to operate 24 hours per day.The HVAC equipment could operate 24 hours per day and would generate sound power levels (Lw) of up to 87 dBA Lw or 72 dBA Leq at 5 feet, based on manufacturer data (Trane n.d.).
Truck Arrival and Departure Activities
Noise levels generated by delivery trucks would be similar to noise readings from truck loading and unloading activities,which generate a noise level of 75 dBA Leq at 20 feet based on measurements taken by LSA(Operational Noise Impact Analysis for Richmond Wholesale Meat Distribution Center [LSA 2016]). Shorter term noise levels that occur during the docking process taken by LSA for the Operational Noise Impact Analysis for Richmond Wholesale Meat Distribution Center were measured to be 76.3 dBA L8 at 20 feet.These noise level measurements are relevant to the project because delivery trucks are anticipated during operation of the project. Delivery trucks would arrive on site and maneuver their trailers so that trailers would be parked within the loading docks. During this process, noise levels are associated with the truck engine noise, air brakes, and back-up alarms while the truck is backing into the dock.These noise levels would occur for a shorter period of time (less than 5 minutes). After a truck enters the loading dock,the doors would be closed, and the remainder of the truck loading activities would be enclosed and therefore much less perceptible.
Consistent with the Traffic Impact Analysis for the San Antonio Water Company Headquarters Project(LSA 2024), it is assumed that truck arrivals and departure activities could occur at 6 parking spaces during peak hour for a period of less than 5 minutes each.
Cumulative Operations Noise Assessment
Tables L and M below show the combined hourly noise levels generated by HVAC equipment and truck delivery activities at the closest off-site land uses.The results indicated that operational noise levels would be below the daytime hourly noise level standards of 55 dBA Leq for residential uses.
Although the operational noise levels may exceed the nighttime hourly noise level standards of 45 dBA Leq, ambient noise levels would not increase by 5 dBA or more.Therefore, operations of the proposed project would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.Attachment F presents the operational noise source calculations.
11/22/24 v\\aznasunifiler2\projects\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San 18 Antonio Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docxn
LSA
Table L: Daytime Exterior Noise Level Impacts
Existing Quietest Project Generated Potential
Receptor Direction Daytime Noise Level Noise Levels Operational Noise (dBA Leq) (dBA Leq) Impact?1
Residential North 59.8 47.0 No
Residential West 63.4 46.7 No
Source:Compiled by LSA(2024).
' A potential operational noise impact would occur if(1)the quietest daytime ambient hour is less 55 dBA Leq at the nearest residential uses and project noise impacts are greater 55 dBA Lq at the nearest residential uses,or(2)the quietest daytime ambient hour is greater than 55 dBA Leq at the nearest residential uses and project noise impacts are 3 dBA greater than the quietest daytime ambient hour.
dBA Lq=average A-weighted hourly noise level
Table M: Nighttime Exterior Noise Level Impacts
Existing Quietest Project Generated Potential
Receptor Direction Nighttime Noise Noise Levels Operational Noise Level(dBA Leq) (dBA Leq) Impact?1
Residential North 57.9 47.0 No
Residential West 61.1 46.7 No
Source:Compiled by LSA(2024).
A potential operational noise impact would occur if(1)the quietest nighttime ambient hour is less 45 dBA L,at the nearest residential uses and project noise impacts are greater than 45 dBA Leq at the nearest residential uses,or(2)the quietest nighttime ambient hour is greater than 45 dBA L,at the nearest residential uses and project noise impacts are 3 dBA greater than the quietest nighttime ambient hour.
dBA Leq=average A-weighted hourly noise level
In conclusion, the proposed project would not generate noise levels from operations above the quietest ambient noise levels during daytime and nighttime hours. Furthermore, due to the relatively high ambient noise levels,the project would not contribute to the overall ambient noise levels.The project is also not anticipated to generate vibration levels above the FTA limits to off-site receptors with the implementation of project design features that limit the location of heavy equipment operations.Therefore,the proposed project would comply with the City's noise and vibration standards, and no noise reduction features are required.
Attachments: A: References
B: Figures
C: Noise Measurement Data
D: Construction Noise Calculations
E: FHWA Traffic Noise Printouts
F: Operational Noise Level Calculations
11/22/24 v\\aznasunifiler2\projects\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San 19 Antonio Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docxn
NOISE AND VIBRATION IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADOUARrERS LSA A
NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA J lL.
ATTACHMENT A
REFERENCES
City of Upland. 2015.General Plan,Safety Element. September. . 2024.Municipal Code, Noise Ordinances. March 13.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2006.Roadway Construction Noise Model User's Guide.
January.Washington, D.C.Website: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/ construction_noise/rcnm/rcnm.pdf(accessed November 2024).
Federal Transit Administration (FTA).2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA Manual). FTA Report 0123. Office of Planning and Environment.September.
LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA). 2016. Operational Noise impact Analysis for Richmond Wholesale Meat Distribution Center.
. 2024. Traffic impact Analysis for the San Antonio Water Headquarters.
Trane. n.d. Fan Performance-Product Specifications RT-PRCO23AU-EN. 1laznasunifiler2lprojects12024120241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCE5lTechnical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San Antonio Water A-1 Headquarters Noise Memo.docx(11/22124)
NOISE AND VIBRATION IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQIIARrERS L L A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA J lL.
ATTACHMENT B
FIGURES
Figure 1: Project Location
Figure 2: Conceptual Site Plan
Figure 3: Noise Monitoring Locations
\\aznasunifiler2lprojects12024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCES\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docx(11/22124)
k,....456,
. J.:, ,
— ,,,, - , --/ ii*Ifirdifit , . Li- \ • \---- -------:7-. _ ,7. . • -,..,..,,,,k114.- ,
so
, „ ,
Iliwti f ! r' Y
„Alma AF-ie ,._ ,
_. i „
I
ie SIP { Wend.os4)- VI/Ts
I i ,
•� S` ° ' I it ' ...
r,.--....__,......._. vrigiOiroi' -
l� G _• r C A:• •
MVf , � __ - - I � 7- - i
zi
i III l r 7� ��j! ,• �,1
�; [ ii r5: � ' ;� Tom:-�3 ,..-- •'-- . %.\ I _
cri: .. ; ,, ,, : f..,..,
,. '�r E ,,.' .a'S !S j ,
{
E7ead Bash
;.• darn =_ _ J
1 1 •t s� rr �r BASIN '�- �'
91 j ��: .'---17r 1 lz
1: ; t dung Based; „�t'J 'j i'
Dam n
x Tli Project Vicinity � . - =x�, • ss 1 1 A'eYs
na _
j 1 cress 1rNs `
[ ci I ` _ ,. a. _
s r
c 1I. iti j I � . •.•_Y F. 1 -
uh5 ton
I -.111.! 1 I well •_Itereoloilor- Etssin —- --- • --- I lo-. 13,ERN;ARD1NO II sr pes4rroirc P - "c'yl • ; , f 16o 83 II;
t ' - t
'a
, 1.- --
i �� lt I c RSIff If �
' : CUC A MVNCA
s .
LS A r—) Project Location FIG RI- 1
ti
0 Iwo
2€ 0 San Antonio Water Company Headquarters FEET Project Location and Vicinity
SOURCE:Mr.8aldy CA,7.5'Quad(U5G5 1988)
f;\2U24\2o241723\GIS\Pro\5an Anton o Water Company Headquarters\San Antonio Water Company Headquerters.aprx(8/21/2024) Page 1099 of 1374
�\,_ ) e I —
E 20TH STREET 6'-D'HIGH STEEL FENCE.SEE DETAIL THIS SHEET gw6S AApENANCEVEHICLE PRIVATE E 20TH STREET 4'O'WIDE X 6.HIGH STEEL GATE _ l6y 'V y REMOVEEKZe 6'V o OPEN DURING BUSINESS HOURS \ HIGH CMU WALL O _ O PROPERTY LINE --_-
6STEELRENCE SEE
EXISTING 6N HIGH DEGD MBW -0"HIGHDPAYMENTRG� CITRUS GROVE BUFFER I SAWCOSEEKINGEASEMENT
f ACROSS EDISON R.O.W.
VISITOR c srompe o IGo WIDE HIGH STEEL GATE OPEN
DURING BUSINESS HOURS
MOTORCYCLE IA LNG r '
PARKING,III �'n
EXISSING WATER H/C PARKING WAN) _ ,
STORAGE TANK
( z
JyI6
w r iE VE 61
_ m1 121. a _ - j,
Fo FLAGPOLE D �F _P
ATIO ° G;ER G}RR{p T
o EXIISTING IL;YF IAARRKI
UMP APN 1044-0*,"-22
D G D STATION OWER
0 400 E.20TH RE I /PARpNG°N E
Z Lu n
IHRepmllcKH...- MAIN EN.�..LD4 — — Co a((((( b51 SIG Al RACKS STORAGE BULL
PIPE WE
p
GRAVEL AND \
SAND STORAGE SECURE OUTDOOR
TING
STORAGE n fEeccwAN
OUND
WALL
L SA FIGURE 2
11 0 60 120
—
San Antonio Water Company Headquarters
FEET
SOURCE:CEDG,Inc. Conceptual Site Plan I:\2024\20241723\G\Site_Plan.ai (6/20/2025) Page 1100 of 1374
•
I `
!el
-.k51; 0 co y • 1 , ;; 'y • '
L.' .' '---".1 - . ,1. it,.? e -..- -N. f-i - kr. . rot. i 1-2.--'• \ ' ' • ' . : - . f P' -•
'-.I.
' - " l. ._, 1 -. . _.
c.
i 1 F` .. _ •.t�T M � fir' • `=� ,l^,N.. ',',.. i •' `'' r- t
{ ,g. $ yr• `' N •H, , t,L 'y•s ;"' t`� Fit, ltile }
' .1"48-4'._ •.:!. •# Zir fin = i ' 1: [_ 'I' 0. ',17,40 . r .,' .,..,. '•'.,..‘ .' :%"1 -•t ',4/ ,i,,: :- W w- � 1 .. _ :. "� .. -. e — ,. a ., u `I a
\ _ i r .e _ '. _ N i� ''1 if 5 { �1 I'� _ yl yy L .y�i I `i� �'e ' ~•. 'e
a +1i r
iir
v Ai*Y i q — wee. IF -• ., _ — .,1 n R g = . 1 L SA LEGEND FIGURE 3
Project Site Boundary
11 ❑BM Long-term Noise Monitoring Location
0 125 250
San Antonio Water Company Headquarters
FEET
SOURCE:Google Earth 2024 Noise Monitoring Locations •
I:\2024\20241723\G\Noise_Locs.ai (12/23/2024) age o
NOISE AND VIBRATION IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADOUARrERS L A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA J lL.
ATTACHMENT C
NOISE MEASUREMENT DATA
\\aznasunifiler2lprojects12024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCES\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docx a11/22/24s
Noise Measurement Survey - 24 HR
Project Number: 20241723 Test Personnel: Amber Haaelrigg Project Name: San Antonio Equipment: Spark 706RC (SN: 18517) Site Number: LT-1 Date: 7/16124 Time: From 12pm To 12pm Site Location: The monitor was hung on a light pole at the end of 20th street across from the northeastern side of the project site. It is approximately 490 feet to the 210 Freeway centerline and 355 feet to North Campus Avenue centerline.
Primary Noise Sources: The primary noise would be residential.
Comments:
Photo:
i
_ . —
54r
- . _ 8 1;• e
gll: .'.fie
ire:
,..
•�_ •
Long-Term (24-Hour) Noise Level Measurement Results at LT-1 Start Time Date Noise Level(dBA)
Leq ',max Lmin
12:00 PM 7/16/24 60.8 71.0 56.1
•1:00 PM 7/16/24 61.3 68.4 56.4
2:00 PM 7/16/24 61.5 74.0 55.0
3:00 PM 7/16/24 63.1 73.0 55.7
4:00 PM 7/16/24 61.8 73.4 55.9
5:00 PM 7/16/24 61.6 70.4 55.8
6:00 PM 7/16/24 60.3 70.3 54.5
7:00 PM 7/16/24 60.1 65.8 54.4
8:00 PM 7/16/24 61.9 76.9 57.8
9:00 PM 7/16/24 60.0 68.4 53.7
10:00 PM 7/16/24 59.9 69.8 53.8
11:00 PM 7/16/24 59.6 66.2 52.7
12:00 AM 7/17/24 59.3 69.1 -
51.9 _
1:00 AM 7/17/24 57.9 64.0 50.5
2:00 AM 7/17/24 58.5 69.0 51.5
3:00 AM 7/17/24 60.8 67.8 51.9
4:00 AM 7/17/24 64.9 70.7 58.6
5:00 AM 7/17/24 63.3 73.1 57.9
6:00 AM 7/17/24 62.6 68.9 57.8
7:00 AM 7/17/24 62.3 69.3 57.1
8:00 AM 7/17/24 59.8 70.7 54.7
9:00 AM i 7/17/24 61.3 68.0 56.1 10:00 AM 7/17/24 59.8 65.7 54.9
11:00 AM 7/17/24 67.4 87.7 56.5
Source:Compiled by LSA Associates,Inc.(2024).
dBA=A-weighted decibel L.=maximum instantaneous noise level Ley=equivalent continuous sound level Lmin=minimum measured sound level Long-Term (24-Hour) Noise Level Measurement
LT-1
100.0
90.0 80.0 A
▪ 60.0 1 I i i I i i I I 1 I i1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I >▪ 50❑ I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 Leq
40.0 E 111111 1111111111111 11
z 20.0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Lm nx
10.D IIII11I11 1111I1I11 11
I
0.0 III1111111111111111111
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 2 8 8 8 8 8 8 0 8 8 8 8 eti ., ri ni v .'ri ,o r: of vi o " r.i Ai v , .a cc a o Time of Ray
Noise Measurement Survey - 24 HR
Project Number: 20241723 Test Personnel: Amber Haaelrigg Project Name: San Antonio Equipment: Spark 706RC (SN: 17206) Site Number: LT-2 Date: 7/16124 Time: From 1 pm To 1 pm Site Location: The monitor was hung on a light pole on the across from the southwestern side of the project site. It is approximately 175 feet to the 210 freeway centerline and 72 feet from Flower Court.
Primary Noise Sources: The primary noise source is the 210 freeway.
Comments:
Photo:
4 f--
I, j . . Il . MN 1111 .r. -:. , kil'i,e, , 11111 !MINI !.'I "' c
.4, ,vik, regASOffr. ' .... . : 7"7"77:,11111ORT,. 1411WiAttote., ,., & _ x -Y r;. - i.�.Tt.:, ... .
Long-Term (24-Hour) Noise Level Measurement Results at LT-2 Start Time Date Noise Level (dBA)
Ley Law Lin
1:00 PM 7/16/11 65.4 75.8 59.7
2:00 PM 7/16/11 65.0 73.4 59.1
3:00 PM 7/16/11 66.0 79.6 60.3
4:00 PM 7/16/11 64.5 70.4 58.0
5:00 PM 7/16/11 68.9 83.7 57.6
6:00 PM 7/16/11 64.1 86.5 57.7
7:00 PM 7/16/11 63.7 81.7 54.9
8:00 PM 7/16/11 64.4 73.7 59.8
9:00 PM 7/16/11 63.6 71.3 56.3
10:00 PM 7/16/11 63.1 69.7 55.6
11:00 PM 7/16/11 62.2 69.3 53.3
12:00 AM 7/17/11 61.6 69.1 53.8
1:00 AM 7/17/11 61.1 68.4 52.5
2:00 AM 7/17/11 61.1 71.3 51.6
3:00 AM 7/17/11 62.2 67.7 54.4
4:00 AM 7/17/11 64,6 71.1 58.1
5:00 AM 7/17/11 64.5 71.3 60.2
6:00 AM 7/17/11 65.0 73.1 60.4
7:00 AM 7/17/11 65.0 72.5 61.6
8:00 AM 7/17/11 63.4 73.7 57.3
9:00 AM 7/17/11 64.7 73.2 59.4
10:00 AM 7/17/11 64.6 72.9 59.7
11:00 AM 7/17/11 65.1 72.2 60.7
12:00 PM 7/17/11 65.4 72.1 60.8
Source:Compiled by LSA Associates,Inc.(2024).
dBA=A-weighted decibel L.=maximum instantaneous noise level Leg=equivalent continuous sound level L ni„=minimum measured sound level Long-Term (24-Hour) Noise Level Measurement
LT-2
100.0
90.0 80.0
m 60.0 "-i I T t
To 5D D IIIIII I III
1 Lei
400 IIIIIIIIIII I
z 2qo I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I -Lma,
10.0 IIIIIIIIIIII I
D.D I 1 I III 11 1S1 SS gg I
a a a a a a a a e a ¢ 3 3 3 3 a 2 8 g 8 s s 8 8 3 0 4 g S o e o 0 o e g Q p p , eV Ai V N ..Cl 1� 66 Oi O ry N N C:6 C N u n pp V: O g N Time of Day
NOISE AND VIBRATION IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADOUARrERS L A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA J lL.
ATTACHMENT D
CONSTRUCTION NOISE CALCULATIONS
\\aznasunifiler2lprojects12024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCES\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docx 4 1112 2/24n
Construction Calculations
Phase:Site Preparation
Equipment Quantity Reference(dBA) Usage Distance to Ground Noise Level(dBA) 50 ft Lmax Factor'
Receptor(ft) Effects Lmax Leq
Grader 1 85 40 50 0.5 85 81
Scraper 1 84 40 50 0.5 84 80
Tractor 1 84 40 50 0.5 84 80
Combined at 50 feet 89 85
Combined at Receptor 250 feet 75 71
Phase:Grading
Equipment Quantity Reference(dBA) Usage Distance to Ground Noise Level(dBA) 50 ft Lmax Factor' Receptor(ft) Effects Lmax Leq Grader 1 85 40 i 50 0.5 85 81 Dozer 1 82 40 50 0.5 82 78
Tractor 2 84 40 50 0.5 84 83
Combined at 50 feet 89 86
Combined at Receptor 250 feet 75 72
Combined at Receptor 405 feet 70 68
Phase:Building Construstion
Equipment Quantity Reference(dBA) Usage Distance to Ground Noise Level(dBA) 50 ft Lmax Factor'
Receptor(ft) Effects Lmax Leq
Crane 1 81 16 50 - 0.5 81 73 Man Lift 1 75 20 50 0.5 75 68
Tractor 1 84 40 50 _ 0.5 84 80 Generator 1 81 50 50 0.5 81 78
Welder/Torch 3 74 40 50 0.5 74 75 Combined at 50 feet 87 83
Combined at Receptor 250 feet 74 69
Phase:Paving
Equipment Quantity Reference(dBA) Usage Distance to Ground Noise Level(dBA) 50 ft Lmax Factor'
Receptor(ft) Effects Lmax Leq
Drum Mixer 1 80 50 50 0.5 80 77
Paver 1 77 50 50 0.5 77 74
Tractor 1 84 40 50 0.5 84 80
Roller 1 80 20 50 0.5 80 73
All Other Equipment>5 hp 1 85 50 50 0.5 85 82 Combined at 50 feet 89 85
Combined at Receptor 250 feet 75 72
Phase:Architectural Coating
Equipment Quantity Reference(dBA) Usage Distance to Ground Noise Level(dBA) 50 ft Lmax Factor' Receptor(ft) Effects Lmax Leq Compressor(air) 1 78 40 50 0.5 78 74 Combined at 50 feet 78 74
Combined at Receptor 250 feet 64 60
Sources:RCNM
I-Percentage of time that a piece of equipment is operating at full power. dBA-A-weighted Decibels
Lmax-Maximum Level
Leq-Equivalent Level
NOISE AND VIBRATION IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADOUARrERS L A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA J lL.
ATTACHMENT E
FHWA TRAFFIC NOISE PRINTOUTS
\\aznasunifiler2lprojects12024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCES\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docx 4 1112 2/24n
TABLE Existing -01
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street West of Winston Court NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Existing * * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 80 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 42.39
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0
TABLE Existing -02
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street East of Winston Court NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Existing * * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 0 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 . 02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 23.36
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0
TABLE Existing -03
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street East of Campus Avenue NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Existing * * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 7910 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 . 02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 20 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 61. 95
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 92 .7 195. 9
TABLE Existing -04
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Campus Avenue North of 20th Street NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Existing * * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 7910 SPEED (MPH) : 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 . 02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 63.76
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 54 .4 113. 6 242 . 9
TABLE Existing With Project -01
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street West of Winston Court NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Existing With Project * * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 190 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 . 02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 46.14
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0
TABLE Existing With Project -02
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street East of Winston Court NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Existing With Project * * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 30 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 . 02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 38.13
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0
TABLE Existing With Project -03
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street East of Campus Avenue NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Existing With Project * * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 8070 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 . 02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 20 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 62.04
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 93. 9 198.5
TABLE Existing With Project -04
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Campus Avenue North of 20th Street NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Existing With Project * * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 7910 SPEED (MPH) : 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 . 02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 63.76
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 54 .4 113. 6 242 . 9
TABLE Opening Year (2027) Without Project-01
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street West of Winston Court NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Opening Year (2027) Without Project
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 100 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 43.36
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0
TABLE Opening Year (2027) Without Project-02
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street East of Winston Court NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Opening Year (2027) Without Project
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 0 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 23.36
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0
TABLE Opening Year (2027) Without Project-03
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street East of Campus Avenue NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Opening Year (2027) Without Project
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 8570 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 20 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 62.30
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 97 .5 206. 6
TABLE Opening Year (2027) Without Project-04
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Campus Avenue North of 20th Street NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Opening Year (2027) Without Project
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 8540 SPEED (MPH) : 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 64.09
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 57 . 0 119.4 255. 6
TABLE Opening Year (2027) With Project-01
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street West of Winston Court NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Opening Year (2027) With Project
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 210 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 46.58
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0
TABLE Opening Year (2027) With Project-02
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street East of Winston Court NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Opening Year (2027) With Project
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 30 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 38.13
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0
TABLE Opening Year (2027) With Project-03
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street East of Campus Avenue NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Opening Year (2027) With Project
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 8730 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 20 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 62.38
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 98 .7 209.1
TABLE Opening Year (2027) With Project-04
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Campus Avenue North of 20th Street NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Opening Year (2027) With Project
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 8540 SPEED (MPH) : 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 64.09
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 57 . 0 119.4 255. 6
TABLE Horizon 2050 (Without) Project-01
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street West of Winston Court NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Horizon 2050 (Without) Project
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 100 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 43.36
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0
TABLE Horizon 2050 (Without) Project-02
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street East of Winston Court NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Horizon 2050 (Without) Project
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 0 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 23.36
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0
TABLE Horizon 2050 (Without) Project-03
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street East of Campus Avenue NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Horizon 2050 (Without) Project
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 9290 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 20 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 62. 65
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 102 .7 217 . 9
TABLE Horizon 2050 (Without) Project-04
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Campus Avenue North of 20th Street NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Horizon 2050 (Without) Project
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 9260 SPEED (MPH) : 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 64.44
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 60. 0 125. 9 269.7
TABLE Horizon (2050) With Project-01
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street West of Winston Court NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Horizon (2050) With Project
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 210 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 46.58
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0
TABLE Horizon (2050) With Project-02
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street East of Winston Court NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Horizon (2050) With Project
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 30 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 38.13
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0
TABLE Horizon (2050) With Project-03
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: 20th Street East of Campus Avenue NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Horizon (2050) With Project
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 9450 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 20 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 62.72
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 0. 0 103.8 220.4
TABLE Horizon (2050) With Project-04
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 10/31/2024
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Campus Avenue North of 20th Street NOTES: San Antonio Water Headquarters Project - Horizon (2050) With Project
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 9260 SPEED (MPH) : 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
AUTOS
75.51 12 .57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0 .09 0 .19
H-TRUCKS
0. 64 0 .02 0 .08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 15 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 64.44
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
0.0 60. 0 125. 9 269.7
NOISE AND VIBRATION IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADOUARrERS L A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA J lL.
ATTACHMENT F
OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL CALCULATIONS
\\aznasunifiler2lprojects12024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCES\Technical Studies\Noise and Vibration\Draft Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters Noise Memo.docx 4 1112 2/24n
Stationary Noise
Peak Hour Off-Peak
Daytime Nighttime Peak Hour Daytime Off-Peak Nighttime Reference Noise Reference Noise Distance Reference Noise Reference Noise Level at 50 ft Level at 50 ft Reference Attenuation Level at Receptor Level at Receptor Land Use Direction Noise Source (dBA Leq) (dBA Leq) Distance(ft) Distance(ft) (dBA) (dBA Leq) (dBA Leq) 1 Residential West Truck Load/Unload Activity 72.0 72.0 20 395 25.9 46.1 46.1 HVAC 1 75.0 75.0 5 520 40.3 34.7 34.7 HVAC 2 75.0 75.0 5 525 40.4 34.6 34.6 Combined 46.7 46.7
1 Residential North Truck Load/Unload Activity 72.0 72.0 20 410 26.2 45.8 45.8 HVAC 1 75.0 75.0 5 335 36.5 38.5 38.5 HVAC 2 75.0 75.0 5 410 38.3 36.7 36.7
INITIAL STIIOYJMl1ISATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION SAN ANT ON I WATER COMPANY HEADQUARTERS PROTECT ` s A AUGUST 2025 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA rL.
APPENDIX G
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
P:\2O24\2O241723San Antonia Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\CEQA\Public Review❑raft\5an Antonio Water Headquarters ISMND_08.08.25.docx(08/08/25)
L A SAN ANTONIO WATER COMPANY HEADQUARTERS PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION r`. UPLAND,CALIFORNIA AUGUST 2025
This page intentionally left blank
P:12024420241723 San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PROOi1CTS\CECLA\Pubtic Review Oratt45an Antonio Water Headquarters ISMND_O8.0825.dotx[08108125)
CARLSBAD
L SA CLOVIS
IRVINE
LOS ANGELES
PALM SPRINGS
POINT RICHMOND
RIVERSIDE
ROSEVILLE
SAN LUIS OBISPO
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 15, 2025
To: Brian Lee, General Manager, San Antonio Water Company FROM: Ambarish Mukherjee,AICP, PE
SUBJECT: San Antonio Water Company Headquarters Project—Driveway Sensitivity Analysis Memorandum (LSA Project#20241723)
This memorandum has been prepared to determine the project's effect on the study area previously analyzed in the San Antonio Water Headquarters Traffic Impact Analysis, dated November 2024 (referred as November 2024 TIA) as a result of modifications to the proposed project driveways after submittal of the November 2024 TIA. Figure 1 illustrates the updated conceptual site plan for the proposed project.The updated site plan's changes include removal of the proposed Project Driveway 2 previously analyzed in November 2024 TIA,while the project land use intensities and description remain the same.The project is anticipated to be screened out from a VMT analysis and no revisions for the VMT analysis will be required.
Project Description
The revised site plan has the same land use intensities and project description that was analyzed in the November 2024 TIA. As described in the November 2024 TIA, the proposed project proposes to develop a new 3,698-square-foot SAWCO headquarters and associated improvements including a 4,066-square-foot maintenance building, maintenance yard, driveway, parking, solar cover, landscaping, and utility improvements.The existing water storage tank, pump station, and signal buildings and tower would remain in place.The project is anticipated to be completed by 2027.
As analyzed in the November 2024 TIA, the project was accessed via three full-access driveways:
• Project Driveway 1 on 20th Street:This westerly driveway along the northern property boundary provides access for SAWCO patrons and customers;
• Project Driveway 2 on 20th Street:This driveway is located in the middle of the northeastern corner of the project site and provides access for the SAWCO employee parking area and maintenance facilities;This driveway was removed in the updated conceptual site plan and • Project Driveway 3 on Campus Avenue:This easterly driveway located on the northeastern corner of the project site and will be a future connection with the intersection of Campus Avenue and 20th Street.
1500 Iowa Avenue,Suite 200,Riverside,California 92507 951.781.9310 www.lsa.net
LSA is a business name of LSA Associates,Inc.
LSA
As shown in Figure 1, the updated site plan shows the project can be accessed via two full-access driveways:
• Project Driveway 1 on 20th Street:This westerly driveway along the northern property boundary provides access for SAWCO patrons and customers; and • Project Driveway 2 on Campus Avenue (previously Project Driveway 3 in November 2024 TIA):This easterly driveway is located on the northeastern corner of the project site and will provide a future connection with the intersection of Campus Avenue and 20th Street.
Study Area
The November 2024 TIA examined traffic operations at the proposed 3 project driveways along 20th Street. Since the updated site plan removed the previous middle driveway this memorandum will examine traffic operations at the following intersections:
1. Project Driveway 1 on 20th Street
2. Project Driveway 2 on Campus Avenue (previously Project Driveway 3 in November 2024 TIA):
Traffic operations at all study intersections will be analyzed during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours.The a.m. peak hour is defined as the one hour period of the highest traffic volume occurring between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m. while the p.m. peak hour is defined as the one hour period of the highest traffic volume occurring between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. Intersection LOS will be calculated using the Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition (HCM 7) analysis methodologies and by using the Synchro 12 software.Thus this memorandum's intersection methodology is consistent with that in the November 2024 TIA.
Project Trip Generation
Since the project land use intensities and description remains unchanged,the project trip generation remains the same as analyzed in November 2024 TIA. As described in the November 2024 TIA,the trip generation for the proposed project was developed as follows:
Employee Trip Generation
The project is anticipated to have 10 full-time employees.The November 2024 TIA, analyzed all 10 employees are anticipated to arrive at the facility in the a.m. peak hour and leave the facility in the p.m. peak hour.Therefore, the project is estimated to generate 20 daily employee trips with 10 inbound a.m. peak hour trips and 10 outbound p.m. peak hour trips.
Additionally, based on the project description and operational information,the project was anticipated to have six trucks for the operations. Based on information from the applicant,the truck trips were described as follows:
• Truck#1 (Two-Axle Light-Duty Truck):This truck is considered a standby vehicle and will average around 80-90 miles per day.
7/15/25(P:\2024\20241723 San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\Report\Driveway Sensitivity 2 Analysis Memorandum.docx)
L SA
• Truck#2 (Two-Axle Light-Duty Truck):Truck#2 is considered a retired standby vehicle/support vehicle for construction jobs and will average around 20-25 miles per day. • Truck#3 (Two-Axle Light-Duty Truck):This truck is considered a general maintenance/support vehicle for construction jobs and will average around 20-25 miles per day. It is likely only to be driven for around 75 percent of work week.
• Truck#4(Two-Axle Medium-Duty Truck):Truck#4 is considered a dump truck.This vehicle will average 20-25 miles per day and is usually only driven about 4-5 days per month. • Truck#5 (Two-Axle Medium-Duty Truck):This truck is considered a service truck and planned to be used for larger construction jobs and heavy maintenance.This vehicle will average around 20-25 miles per day and likely only to be driven for around 75 percent of the work week. • Truck#6(Two-Axle Light-Duty Truck):This vehicle has an auxiliary fuel tank that will be used for refueling the project's tractors. Occasionally used for short runs for parts and supplies. It will average around 20-25 miles per day and likely only to be driven for around 5-6 days per month.
In the November 2024 TIA, all trucks were considered to be two-axle trucks and operating within the same day as a conservative estimate.Therefore, it was estimated that the project will be generating 12 daily employee truck trips (inbound and outbound combined). Based on the operational hours, these trips could be estimated as peak-hour trips,with six outbound truck trips occurring during a.m. peak hour and six inbound truck trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour. All truck trips were converted to PCE trips using a 1.5 PCE factor for two-axle trucks based on the traffic guidelines.
Customer Trip Generation
• Headquarter Building:The trip generation for this component was developed using rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual(11th Edition)for Land Use 712—"Small Office Building."
Table A summarizes the project trip generation as included in the November 2024 TIA. As shown in Table A,the project was anticipated to generate 91 total net daily PCE trips, with 25 net PCE trips occurring during the a.m. peak hour and 27 net PCE trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour.
Project Trip Distribution
The removal of Project Driveway 2 causes employee's passenger vehicle project trips to be rerouted from Project Driveway 2 (November 2024 TIA)to Project Driveway 2 on Campus Avenue (previously Project Driveway 3 in November 2024 TIA).All other distributions analyzed in November 2024 TIA remain the same.
Figure 2 illustrates the project trip distribution for the employees. Figure 3 illustrates the project trip distribution for the maintenance trucks. Figure 4 illustrates the customer trip distribution.The project trip assignment at the study intersections is the product of the project trip generation and the corresponding trip distribution percentages. Figure 5 illustrates the total project trip assignment. 7/15/25(P:\2024\20241723 San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\Report\Driveway Sensitivity 3 Analysis Memorandum.docx)
L SA
Volume Development
For purposes of this analysis,the same analysis scenarios analyzed in the November 2024 TIA has been included in this analysis. As such,the "without project" scenarios traffic volumes from the November 2024 TIA were used for this analysis.
Due to the removal of the previously analyzed Project Driveway 2 in the November 2024 TIA, all "plus project" scenarios include re-routing of employee project trips to the easterly driveway on Campus Avenue (previously Project Driveway 3 in November 2024 TIA). Figure 6 illustrates the Opening Year(2027) plus project volumes, and Horizon Year(2050) plus project traffic volumes.
Detailed volume development worksheets are included in Appendix A.
Level of Service Analysis
The intersection LOS analysis was conducted using methodologies consistent with that of the November 2024 TIA.Tables B and C summarize the results of the LOS analysis under all plus project scenarios.As shown in Tables B and C, all study intersections are forecast to operate at a satisfactory LOS with the removal of the middle driveway and rerouted project trips. Detailed LOS worksheets are included in Appendix B.
Conclusion
In summary,the revised site plan changes include a removal of the middle project driveway from the November 2024 TIA. Additionally, since the project land use intensities and description remain unchanged except for the removal of middle project driveway,the LOS analysis shows no additional traffic operations deficiencies are forecast to occur similar to the results in the November 2024 TIA.
Since the project description and land use intensities remain unchanged,the project is screened out from a VMT analysis and no revisions for the VMT analysis will be required.
ATTACHMENTS:
Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Site Plan
Figure 2: Project Trip Distribution— Employee
Figure 3: Project Trip Distribution - Maintenance Trucks Figure 4: Project Trip Distribution -Customers
Figure 5:Total Project Trip Assignment
Figure 6: Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Tables
Table A: Project Trip Generation
Table B: Opening Year(2027) Intersection Levels of Service Table C: Horizon Year(2050) Intersection Levels of Service 7/15/25(P:\2024\20241723 San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\Report\Driveway Sensitivity 4 Analysis Memorandum.docx)
L SA
Appendix
Appendix A: Volume Development Worksheets
Appendix B: Intersection Levels of Service Worksheets
7/15/25(P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\Report\Driveway Sensitivity 5 Analysis Memorandum.docx)
LSA
TABLES
7/15/25(P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\Report\Driveway Sensitivity 6 Analysis Memorandum.docx)
LSA
Table A:Project Trip Generation
A.M.Peak Hour P.M.Peak Hour
Land Uses Units In Out Total In Out Total Daily San Antonio Water Headquarters&Maintenance Buildings
Employee Trip Generation' 10 0 10 0 10 10 20
Employee Maintenance Truck Trip Generation2 0 6 6 6 0 6 12 Employee Maintenance Truck PCE Trip Generation3 0 9 9 9 0 9 18 Headquarter Building
Headquarters Building Trip/Unit4 3.698 TSF 1.37 0.30 1.67 0.73 1.43 2.16 14.39 Headquarters Building Customer Trip Generation 5 1 6 3 5 8 53 Total PCE Trip Generation 15 10 25 12 15 27 91
Notes:
TSF=thousand square-feet
1 The employee trip generation was developed based on the project description and operational information. 2 The maintenance truck trip generation was developed based on the project's operational information.All trucks are 2-axle trucks. 3 All maintenance truck trips were converted to passenger PCEs using a 1.5 PCE factor for 2-axle trucks based on City of Upland's Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines,dated July 2020. a Rates from Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE)Trip Generation Manual,(11th Edition)for Land Use 712-"Small Office Building",Setting/Location-'General Urban/Suburban'.
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\Trip Generation.xlsx\Trip Gen_(7/15/2025) Page 1144 of 1374
LSA
Table B: Opening Year (2027) Intersection Levels of Service Plus Project
A.M. Peak Hour P.M.Peak Hour
LOS Delay Delay
Intersection Jurisdiction Standard Control (sec.) LOS (sec.) LOS 1 . Winston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Upland D TWSC 8.7 A 8.7 A 2 . Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 2-20th Streets Upland D TWSC 5.6 A 10.5 B Notes:
OWSC=One-Way Stop Control;TWSC=Two-Way Stop Control; LOS=Level of Service Delay=Average control delay in seconds(For OWSC/TWSC intersections,reported delay is for worst-case movement). * Exceeds LOS Standard
' For the purpose of this analysis,intersection was analyzed as a OWSC under'without project"and TWSC under'plus project'scenarios.Delay reported from SimTraffic under'plus project'scenarios.
Table C: Horizon Year (2050) Intersection Levels of Service Plus Project
A.M. Peak Hour P.M.Peak Hour
LOS Delay Delay
Intersection Jurisdiction Standard Control (sec.) LOS (sec.) LOS 1 . Winston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Upland D TWSC 8.6 A 8.6 A 2 . Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 2-20th Street1 Upland D TWSC 5.4 A 10.6 B Notes:
OWSC=One-Way Stop Control;TWSC=Two-Way Stop Control; LOS=Level of Service Delay=Average control delay in seconds(For OWSC/TWSC intersections,reported delay is for worst-case movement). * Exceeds LOS Standard
' For the purpose of this analysis,intersection was analyzed as a OWSC under'without project"and TWSC under'plus project'scenarios.Delay reported from SimTraffic under'plus project'scenarios.
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\Intersection LOS.xlsx\ALL (7/15/2025)
LSA
FIGURES
7/15/25(P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\Report\Driveway Sensitivity 7 Analysis Memorandum.docx)
E 20TH STREET °0'HIGH STEEL FEN`E.SEE DEi"LMIS SHEE PRIVATE E 20TH STREET sA W GD MAINTENANCE VEHICLE
DETAIL THIS JO OPEN
HIGH 1. Y REMOVESTAT 6'O ACCESS ROAD
OPEN DURING BUSINESS HOURS I 2d� I HIGH CMU WALL 0 PROPERTY LINE ' I
EXISTING 6G HIGH DECORATIVE CMU WALL— 6'-G'HIGH STEEL FENCE SEE \ CRRUS GROVE ) . (
PAYMENT BOX -.------------------____�.
VISITOR
MOTORCYCLE C NG R
1 PARKING.IS) PAf °
EXISTING WATER H/C PARKING IVAN)
STORAGE TANK
W min(2) a _ .."..L o ,4
LU SR—FLAGPOLE , E R,��
L ,' i o m
o EXISTING APN 1044-022IlteW `
❑O STATION TOWER
O E, 400 E.20TH STREE aa'ITr`E
i
G-
W
Y � MAIN
LT2? w BUI
SANDGRACE �PREx= AGE
SECURE AG m E
unNG
OUN
L SA FIGURE 1
N
San Antonio Water Company Headquarters
0 60 120 Driveway Sensitivity Analysis Memorandum FEET
SOURCE:CEDG Architects,Inc.,October 2024 Conceptual Site Plan P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\Fig 1_Conceptual Site Plan.ai(7/3/2025) Page 1147 of 1374
1 r W
W
j
Q vz
o of
2 CI 4
O
Z U
20TH10
STREET ''r~- 20THSTREET
rr
rifb
•
dB
EGEND
Project Location
• Study Intersections
111 n Isa 300
—— Project Driveway
err --• Future Driveway
_ _ 100%
(100%)
II
Winston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street II
Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 2-20th Street
LS FIGURE 2
XXX%(YYY%) --.Project Driveway San Antonio Water Company Headquarters Inbound(Outbound)Distribution --Future Driveway Driveway Sensitivity Analysis Memorandum Project Trip Distribution—Employees
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\z12_Dist_Employee_PV.xlsx 7/15/2025
w
z
o a
C to
z z
ID
z v
k
1 20TH STREET I r.' r 20TH STREET
I • r
I r
t
0 di
LEGEND
0 Project Location
• Study Intersections
o 150 300 1 ___' Project Driveway
=EE7 ---. Future Driveway
- 100%
(100%) —
II
Winston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street 11Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 2-20th Street
LS FIGURE 3
XXX%(YYY%) -- Project Driveway San Antonio Water Company Headquarters Inbound(Outbound)Distribution --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Project Trip Distribution-Maintenance Trucks
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\z12_Dist_Employee_TR.xlsx 7/15/2025
w
a
j
o
U cn
2 a
4 \Z V
r_ 20THSTREET
20TH STREET ..."•.... i
,
/ i
l
LEGEND
0 Project Location
ti • Study Intersections
' o Asa aou "-- Project Driveway
=EET , ---. Future Driveway
100% -,
8 IIWinston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street II Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 2-20th Street LS FIGURE 4
XXX%(YYY%) —— Project Driveway San Antonio Water Company Headquarters Inbound(Outbound)Distribution --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Project Trip Distribution—Customers
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\z12_Dist_Customer.xlsx 7/15/2025
� w
U
z �
20TH STREET ! 20TH STREET
+ 1
�• 1
■
210
LEGEND
0 Project Location
'
• Study Intersections.---• Project Driveway
n i o inn
FEET ---• Future Driveway
_ 10/9
5/3 9/10
La
II Winston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 2. 20th Street
LS FIGURE 5
XX/YY --Project Driveway San Antonio Water Company Headquarters AM/PM Peak Hour PCE Trips --Future Driveway Driveway Sensitivity Analysis Memorandum Total Project Trip Assignment
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\z12_Asgn-Total.xlsx 7/15/2025
EGEND
Project Location
i Study Intersections
--• Project Driveway
,ECT
--• Future Driveway
a
re
0 q
C,7 en
a
k
t
�or�f STREET MP `'. 1 zarrr STREET
r
it lib
i
Opening Year(2027)plus Project Horizon Year(2050)plus Project M - t 214/258 . M -. t 361/271
co t 2/0 N N , 10/9 co t 2/0 N F 10/9 4/0 _ y L sr 3/4 I 4/0 _ .. .0 3/4 3/6 _T i 9/10 - T r-' 3/6 _T i 9/10 - T r-> 4/0 - u•' - `o I 4/0 - u•' co in
5/3 -I, N 5/3 CV
0 Winston Cart-Project Driveway 1/20th Street ©Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 2-20th Street 0 Winston Cart-Project Driveway 1/20th Street ©Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 2-20th Street I. S A FIGURE 6
XXX/YYY --Project Driveway San Antonio Water Company Headquarters AM/PM PCE Peak Hour Trips --Future Driveway Driveway Sensitivity Analysis Memorandum Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\z12_Vol_All.xlsx 7/15/2025 Page 1152 of 1374
LSA
APPENDICES
7/15/25(P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\Report\Driveway Sensitivity 8 Analysis Memorandum.docx)
LSA
Appendix A-Opening Year(2027)Peak Hour PCE Volume Summary AM Peak Hour _ PM Peak Hour
Existing 2024 Approved OY(2027) OY(2027) Existing 2024 Approved OY(2027) OY(2027) w/o Project to 2027 and Pending w/o Project Project w/Project w/o Project to 2027 and Pending w/o Project Project w/Project Volumes Growth Project Trips Volumes Trips Volumes Volumes Growth Project Trips Volumes Trips Volumes 1 Winston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street
NBL 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 5 5
NBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SET 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBR 5 0 1 6 0 6 3 0 1 4 0 4
EBL 2 0 1 3 0 3 5 0 1 6 0 6
EBT 4 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0
EBR 0 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 3 3
WBL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WBT 4 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 WBR 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 North Leg
Approach 5 0 1 6 0 6 3 0 1 4 0 4 Departure 4 0 1 5 0 5 5 0 1 6 0 6 Total 9 0 2 11 0 11 8 0 2 10 0 10 South Leg
Approach 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 5 5 Departure 0 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 3 3 Total 0 0 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 0 8 8 East Leg
Approach 6 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 Departure 4 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 10 0 0 10 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 West Leg
Approach 6 0 1 7 5 12 5 0 1 6 3 9 Departure 9 0 1 10 1 11 3 0 1 4 5 9 Total 15 0 2 17 6 23 8 0 2 10 8 18 Total Approaches
Approach 17 0 2 19 6 25 8 0 2 10 8 18 Departure 17 0 2 19 6 25 8 0 2 10 8 18 Total 34 0 4 38 12 50 16 0 4 20 16 36 P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\model.xlsx\2027 OY TM(7/3/2025)
LSA
Appendix A-Opening Year(2027)Peak Hour PCE Volume Summary AM Peak Hour _ PM Peak Hour
Existing 2024 Approved OY(2027) OY(2027) Existing 2024 Approved OY(2027) OY(2027) w/o Project to 2027 and Pending w/o Project Project w/Project w/o Project to 2027 and Pending w/o Project Project w/Project Volumes Growth Project Trips Volumes Trips Volumes Volumes Growth Project Trips Volumes Trips Volumes 2 Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 2-20th Street
NBL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 3 3 0 3
NBR 0 0 2 2 0 2 0 0 5 5 0 5
SBL 247 15 3 265 0 265 551 33 6 590 0 590 SET 0 0 2 2 0 2 0 0 3 3 0 3
SBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
EBL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
EBT 0 0 0 0 9 9 0 0 0 0 10 10
EBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WBL 0 0 3 3 0 3 0 0 4 4 0 4 WBT 0 0 0 0 10 10 0 0 0 0 9 9 WBR 197 12 5 214 0 214 240 14 4 258 0 258 North Leg
Approach 247 15 5 267 0 267 551 33 9 593 0 593 Departure 197 12 6 215 0 215 240 14 7 261 0 261 Total 444 27 11 482 0 482 791 47 16 854 0 854 South Leg
Approach 0 0 3 3 0 3 0 0 8 8 0 8 Departure 0 0 5 5 0 5 0 0 7 7 0 7 Total 0 0 8 8 0 8 0 0 15 15 0 15 East Leg
Approach 197 12 8 217 10 227 240 14 8 262 9 271 Departure 247 15 5 267 9 276 551 33 11 595 10 605 Total 444 27 13 484 19 503 791 47 19 857 19 876 West Leg
Approach 0 0 0 0 9 9 0 0 0 0 10 10 Departure 0 0 0 0 10 10 0 0 0 0 9 9 Total 0 0 0 0 19 19 0 0 0 0 19 19 Total Approaches
Approach 444 27 16 487 19 506 791 47 25 863 19 882 Departure 444 27 16 487 19 506 791 47 25 863 19 882 Total 888 54 32 974 38 1,012 1,582 94 50 1,726 38 1,764 P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\model.xlsx\2027 OY TM(7/3/2025)
LSA
Appendix A- Horizon Year(2050)Peak Hour Volume Summary
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
HY(2050) HY(2050) HY(2050) HY(2050)
w/o Project Project w/Project w/o Project Project w/Project Volumes Trips Volumes Volumes Trips Volumes
1 Winston Court-Project Driveway 1/2Oth Street
NBL 0 1 1 0 5 5
NBT 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBR 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBL 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBT 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBR 6 0 6 4 0 4
EBL 3 0 3 6 0 6
EBT 4 0 4 0 0 0
EBR 0 5 5 0 3 3
WBL 0 0 0 0 0 0
WBT 4 0 4 0 0 0
WBR 2 0 2 0 0 0
North Leg
Approach 6 0 6 4 0 4
Departure 5 0 5 6 0 6
Total 11 0 11 10 0 10
South Leg
Approach 0 1 1 0 5 5
Departure 0 5 5 0 3 3
Total 0 6 6 0 8 8
East Leg
Approach 6 0 6 0 0 0
Departure 4 0 4 0 0 0
Total 10 0 10 0 0 0
West Leg
Approach 7 5 12 6 3 9
Departure 10 1 11 4 5 9
Total 17 6 23 10 8 18
Total Approaches
Approach 19 6 25 10 8 18
Departure 19 6 25 10 8 18
Total 38 12 50 20 16 36
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\model.xlsx\Build-Out TM (7/3/2025) Page 1156 of 1374
LSA
Appendix A- Horizon Year(2050)Peak Hour Volume Summary
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
HY(2050) HY(2050) HY(2050) HY(2050)
w/o Project Project w/Project w/o Project Project w/Project Volumes Trips Volumes Volumes Trips Volumes
2 Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 2-2Oth Street
NBL 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBT 1 0 1 3 0 3
NBR 2 0 2 5 0 5
SBL 278 0 278 649 0 649 SBT 2 0 2 3 0 3
SBR 0 0 0 0 0 0
EBL 0 0 0 0 0 0
EBT 0 9 9 0 10 10
EBR 0 0 0 0 0 0
WBL 3 0 3 4 0 4
WBT 0 10 10 0 9 9
WBR 361 0 361 271 0 271 North Leg
Approach 280 0 280 652 0 652 Departure 362 0 362 274 0 274 Total 642 0 642 926 0 926 South Leg
Approach 3 0 3 8 0 8
Departure 5 0 5 7 0 7
Total 8 0 8 15 0 15
East Leg
Approach 364 10 374 275 9 284
Departure 280 9 289 654 10 664 Total 644 19 663 929 19 948 West Leg
Approach 0 9 9 0 10 10
Departure 0 10 10 0 9 9
Total 0 19 19 0 19 19
Total Approaches
Approach 647 19 666 935 19 954
Departure 647 19 666 935 19 954 Total 1,294 38 1,332 1,870 38 1,908 P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Dwy Sensitivity Memo\model.xlsx\Build-Out TM (7/3/2025) Page 1157 of 1374
HCM 7th TWSC San Antonio Water Headquarters
1: Project Driveway 1/Winston Court & 20th Street Opening Year (2027) plus Project_AM Peak Hour Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 3.2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 4 4 4
Traffic Vol,veh/h 3 4 5 0 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 6 Future Vol,veh/h 3 4 5 0 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 6 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 4 5 7 0 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 8 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 8 0 0 12 0 0 22 25 9 20 27 7 Stage 1 - - - - - - 17 17 - 7 7 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 5 8 - 13 20 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - 4.1 - - 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - 2.2 - - 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1625 - - 1620 - - 995 873 1079 998 870 1082 Stage 1 - - - - - - 1008 886 - 1020 894 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 1022 893 - 1012 883 - Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1625 - - 1620 - - 986 870 1079 996 868 1082 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 986 870 - 996 868 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 1006 883 - 1020 894 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 1014 893 - 1010 880 - Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Ctrl Dly,s/v 1.81 0 8.66 8.35
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 986 405 - - 1620 - - 1082 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 0.002 - - - - - 0.007 HCM Ctrl Dly(s/v) 8.7 7.2 0 - 0 - - 8.4 HCM Lane LOS A A A - A - - A HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0 0 - - 0 - - 0 LSA Synchro 12 Report
07/03/2025 Page 1
San Antonio Water Headquarters
SimTraffic Performance Report Opening Year (2027) plus Project_AM Peak Hour 2: Private Driveway /Campus Avenue & Project Driveway 2/20th Street Performance by approach Approach EB WB NB SB All
Denied Delay(hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.2 Total Delay(hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 Total Del/Veh(s) 5.6 0.9 2.7 0.9 1.0 Stop Delay(hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 3.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.1 LSA SimTraffic Report
07/03/2025 Page 1
HCM 7th TWSC San Antonio Water Headquarters
1: Project Driveway 1/Winston Court & 20th Street Opening Year (2027) plus Project_PM Peak Hour Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 6.3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 4 4 4
Traffic Vol,veh/h 6 0 3 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 4 Future Vol,veh/h 6 0 3 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 4 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 9 0 4 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 6 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 1 0 0 4 0 0 22 22 2 19 24 1 Stage 1 - - - - - - 20 20 - 1 1 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 1 1 - 18 22 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - 4.1 - - 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - 2.2 - - 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1634 - - 1630 - - 996 876 1088 999 874 1089 Stage 1 - - - - - - 1004 883 - 1027 899 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 1027 899 - 1007 881 - Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1634 - - 1630 - - 985 871 1088 994 869 1089 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 985 871 - 994 869 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 998 878 - 1027 899 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 1021 899 - 1001 876 - Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Ctrl Dly,s/v 4.81 0 8.68 8.32
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 985 1000 - - 1630 - - 1089 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.008 0.005 - - - - - 0.005 HCM Ctrl Dly(s/v) 8.7 7.2 0 - 0 - - 8.3 HCM Lane LOS A A A - A - - A HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0 0 - - 0 - - 0 LSA Synchro 12 Report
07/03/2025 Page 1
San Antonio Water Headquarters
SimTraffic Performance Report Opening Year (2027) plus Project_PM Peak Hour 2: Private Driveway /Campus Avenue & Project Driveway 2/20th Street Performance by approach Approach EB WB NB SB All
Denied Delay(hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.5 Total Delay(hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.6 Total Del/Veh(s) 10.5 1.2 6.4 2.2 2.1 Stop Delay(hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 8.3 0.0 5.0 0.1 0.2 LSA SimTraffic Report
07/03/2025 Page 1
HCM 7th TWSC San Antonio Water Headquarters
1: Project Driveway 1/Winston Court & 20th Street Horizon Year (2050) plus Project_AM Peak Hour Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 3.2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 4 4 4
Traffic Vol,veh/h 3 4 5 0 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 6 Future Vol,veh/h 3 4 5 0 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 6 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 3 4 5 0 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 6 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 6 0 0 9 0 0 17 19 7 16 21 5 Stage 1 - - - - - - 13 13 - 5 5 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 4 6 - 11 16 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - 4.1 - - 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - 2.2 - - 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1628 - - 1623 - - 1002 878 1082 1005 877 1084 Stage 1 - - - - - - 1012 889 - 1022 895 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 1023 894 - 1016 886 - Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1628 - - 1623 - - 995 877 1082 1003 875 1084 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 995 877 - 1003 875 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 1010 887 - 1022 895 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 1017 894 - 1014 885 - Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Ctrl Dly,s/v 1.8 0 8.62 8.34
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 995 405 - - 1623 - - 1084 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 0.002 - - - - - 0.006 HCM Ctrl Dly(s/v) 8.6 7.2 0 - 0 - - 8.3 HCM Lane LOS A A A - A - - A HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0 0 - - 0 - - 0 LSA Synchro 12 Report
07/03/2025 Page 1
San Antonio Water Headquarters
SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year (2050) plus Project_AM Peak Hour 2: Private Driveway /Campus Avenue & Project Driveway 2/20th Street Performance by approach Approach EB WB NB SB All
Denied Delay(hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.3 Total Delay(hr) 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.3 Total Del/Veh(s) 5.4 1.6 2.7 1.1 1.5 Stop Delay(hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 2.9 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.1 LSA SimTraffic Report
07/03/2025 Page 1
HCM 7th TWSC San Antonio Water Headquarters
1: Project Driveway 1/Winston Court & 20th Street Horizon Year (2050) plus Project_PM Peak Hour Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 6.3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 4 4 4
Traffic Vol,veh/h 6 0 3 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 4 Future Vol,veh/h 6 0 3 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 4 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 6 0 3 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 4 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 1 0 0 3 0 0 15 15 2 14 17 1 Stage 1 - - - - - - 14 14 - 1 1 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 1 1 - 13 16 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - 4.1 - - 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - 2.2 - - 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1635 - - 1632 - - 1005 883 1089 1008 881 1089 Stage 1 - - - - - - 1011 888 - 1027 899 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 1027 899 - 1013 886 - Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1635 - - 1632 - - 998 880 1089 1004 878 1089 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 998 880 - 1004 878 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 1007 884 - 1027 899 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 1023 899 - 1009 883 - Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Ctrl Dly,s/v 4.81 0 8.63 8.32
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 998 1000 - - 1632 - - 1089 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 0.004 - - - - - 0.004 HCM Ctrl Dly(s/v) 8.6 7.2 0 - 0 - - 8.3 HCM Lane LOS A A A - A - - A HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0 0 - - 0 - - 0 LSA Synchro 12 Report
07/03/2025 Page 1
San Antonio Water Headquarters
SimTraffic Performance Report Horizon Year (2050) plus Project_PM Peak Hour 2: Private Driveway /Campus Avenue & Project Driveway 2/20th Street Performance by approach Approach EB WB NB SB All
Denied Delay(hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.5 Total Delay(hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.6 Total Del/Veh(s) 10.6 1.4 7.0 2.3 2.2 Stop Delay(hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 8.4 0.1 5.7 0.1 0.2 LSA SimTraffic Report
07/03/2025 Page 1
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS PROJECT
CITY OF UPLAND
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
This Traffic Impact Analysis has been prepared under the supervision of Ambarish Mukherjee, P.E.
L SA
November 2024
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS PROJECT
CITY OF UPLAND
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
Alan French, Principal Engineer
City of Upland
460 North Euclid Avenue
Upland, California 91786
Prepared by:
LSA
1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200
Riverside, California 92507
(951) 781-9310
Project No. 20241723
L SA
November 2024
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L SA NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA I`'■L
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FIGURES AND TABLES iii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS iv
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1-1
1.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS SUMMARY 1-2
1.2 OPENING YEAR (2027) CONDITIONS SUMMARY 1-2
1.3 HORIZON YEAR (2050) CONDITIONS SUMMARY 1-2
1.4 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ASSESSMENT—VEHICLE MILES
TRAVELED ANALYSIS AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC TRANSIT ANALYSIS SUMMARY 1-2
1.4.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Summary 1-2
1.4.2 Active Transportation and Public Transit Analysis Summary 1-3
1.5 Recommended Improvements SUMMARY 1-3
2.0 INTRODUCTION 2-1
2.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2-1
2.2 LIST OF CHAPTER 2.0 FIGURES 2-2
3.0 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY AND CRITERIA 3-1
3.1 LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS 3-1
3.2 LEVEL OF SERVICE PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA 3-1
3.3 LIST OF CHAPTER 3.0 TABLES 3-1
4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 4-1
4.1 STUDY AREA 4-1
4.1.1 Study Intersections 4-1
4.2 EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK 4-1
4.3 BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN, TRANSIT, AND TRUCK FACILITIES 4-2
4.3.1 Bicycle Facilities 4-2
4.3.2 Pedestrian Facilities 4-2
4.3.3 Transit Facilities 4-2
4.3.4 Truck Facilities 4-2
4.4 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES 4-3
4.5 EXISTING LEVELS OF SERVICE 4-3
4.5.1 Study Intersections 4-3
4.6 LIST OF CHAPTER 4.0 FIGURES AND TABLES 4-3
5.0 PROJECT TRAFFIC 5-1
5.1 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION 5-1
5.1.1 Employee Trip Generation 5-1
5.1.2 Customer Trip Generation 5-2
5.2 PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT 5-2
5.3 LIST OF CHAPTER 5.0 FIGURES AND TABLES 5-2
6.0 OPENING YEAR ANALYSIS 6-1
6.1 OPENING YEAR (2027) WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES 6-1 P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx(12/23/24)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L SA NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA rs■L
6.2 OPENING YEAR (2027) PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES 6-1
6.3 OPENING YEAR (2027) WITHOUT PROJECT LEVELS OF SERVICE 6-1
6.3.1 Study Intersections 6-1
6.4 OPENING YEAR (2027) PLUS PROJECT LEVELS OF SERVICE 6-1
6.4.1 Study Intersections 6-1
6.5 LIST OF CHAPTER 6.0 FIGURES AND TABLES 6-2
7.0 HORIZON YEAR ANALYSIS 7-1
7.1 HORIZON YEAR (2050) WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES 7-1
7.2 HORIZON YEAR (2050) PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES 7-1
7.3 HORIZON YEAR (2050)WITHOUT PROJECT LEVELS OF SERVICE 7-1
7.3.1 Study Intersections 7-1
7.4 HORIZON YEAR (2050) PLUS PROJECT LEVELS OF SERVICE 7-1
7.4.1 Study Intersections 7-1
7.5 LIST OF CHAPTER 7.0 FIGURES AND TABLES 7-1
8.0 SITE ACCESS ANALYSIS 8-1
8.1 SIGHT DISTANCE ANALYSIS 8-1
8.2 BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN, AND TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY 8-2
8.2.1 Bicycle Accessibility 8-2
8.2.2 Pedestrian Accessibility 8-2
8.2.3 Transit Accessibility 8-2
8.3 LIST OF CHAPTER 8.0 FIGURES 8-2
9.0 CEQA ASSESSMENT—VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC TRANSIT ANALYSIS 9-1
9.1 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS 9-1
9.2 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC TRANSIT ANALYSIS 9-1
10.0 CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS AND FUNDING SOURCES 10-1
10.1 RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS 10-1
APPENDICES
A: SCOPING AGREEMENT
B:TRAFFIC COUNT SHEETS
C:VOLUME DEVELOPMENT WORKSHEETS
D: INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE WORKSHEETS
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx(12/23/24) I I
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L C A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA _Vl/`-■`
FIGURES AND TABLES
FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Regional and Project Location 2-3
Figure 2-2: Conceptual Site Plan 2-4
Figure 4-1: Study Area Intersections 4-4 Figure 4-2: Existing Study Intersection Geometrics and Traffic Control 4-5 Figure 4-3: Study Intersection Geometrics and Traffic Control under'Without Project' Scenarios 4-6
Figure 4-4: Study Intersection Geometrics and Traffic Control under'Plus Project' Scenarios 4-7 Figure 4-5: City of Upland Roadway Classification 4-8 Figure 4-6: City of Upland Bicycle Routes 4-9
Figure 4-7: City of Upland Pedestrian Facilities 4-10 Figure 4-8: City of Upland Truck Routes 4-11
Figure 4-9: Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 4-12 Figure 5-1: Project Trip Distribution—Employees 5-3 Figure 5-2: Project Trip Distribution—Maintenance Trucks 5-4 Figure 5-3: Project Trip Distribution—Customers 5-5 Figure 5-4: Project Trip Assignment—Employees 5-6 Figure 5-5: Project Trip Assignment—Maintenance Trucks 5-7 Figure 5-6: Project Trip Assignment—Customers 5-8 Figure 5-7:Total Project Trip Assignment 5-9
Figure 6-1: Approved and Pending Project Locations 6-3 Figure 6-2: Approved and Pending Project Trip Assignment 6-4 Figure 6-3: Opening Year(2027)without Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 6-5 Figure 6-4: Opening Year(2027) plus Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 6-6 Figure 7-1: Horizon Year(2050) without Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 7-2 Figure 7-2: Horizon Year(2050) plus Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 7-3 Figure 8-1: Corner Sight Distance at Project Driveway 1 8-3 Figure 8-2: Corner Sight Distance at Project Driveway 2 8-4 Figure 8-3: Corner Sight Distance at Project Driveway 3 8-5 TABLES
Table 3.A: Intersection Level of Service Definitions 3-2 Table 3.B: Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized and Signalized Intersections 3-2 Table 4.A: Existing Intersection Levels of Service 4-13 Table 5.A: Project Trip Generation 5-10
Table 6-A: Approved and Pending Projects Trip Generation 6-7 Table 6-B: Opening Year(2027) Intersection Levels of Service 6-8 Table 7.A: Horizon Year (2050) Intersection Levels of Service 7-4 P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx(11/27/24)I I
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L C A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA _Vl/`-■`
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
City City of Upland
CMP Congestion Management Plan
General Plan City of Upland General Plan 2035
HCM Highway Capacity Manual
HDM Caltrans Highway Design Manual
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
LOS level(s) of service
mph mile(s) per hour
PCE passenger car equivalent
project San Antonio Water Headquarters Project
SAWCO San Antonio Water Co.
SBCTA San Bernardino County Transportation Authority SCE Southern California Edison
SR-210 State Route 210
TIA Traffic Impact Analysis
TPA Transit Priority Area
VMT vehicle miles traveled
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx iv (11/27/24)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L C A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA _Vl/`-■`
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposed San Antonio Water Headquarters Project (project) in Upland proposes to develop a new 3,698-square-foot San Antonio Water Co. (SAWCO) headquarters and associated improvements, including a 4,066-square-foot maintenance building, a maintenance yard, a driveway, parking, solar cover, landscaping, and utility improvements.The existing water storage tank, pump station, and signal buildings and tower would remain in place.
The project is located at 400 East 20th Street in Upland. In addition, the project site is located in northwest Upland in an area primarily consisting of residential, commercial, and industrial uses. The project site is bound by East 20th Street to the north, Southern California Edison (SCE) easement (open space)to the east, State Route 210 (SR-210) to the south, and Flower Court to the west.There are currently existing structures on the project site: a 1-million-gallon water storage tank located at the northwestern corner of the parcel, a pump station located at the southwestern corner of the parcel, and a signal building and tower located at the southeastern corner of the parcel.The project is anticipated to be completed by 2027.
The project can be accessed via three full-access driveways:
• Project Driveway 1 on 20th Street:This westerly driveway along the northern property boundary provides access for SAWCO patrons and customers;
• Project Driveway 2 on 20th Street:This driveway is located in the middle of the northeastern corner of the project site and provides access for the SAWCO employee parking area and maintenance facilities; and
• Project Driveway 3 on Campus Avenue:This easterly driveway located on the northeastern corner of the project site and will be a future connection with the intersection of Campus Avenue and 20th Street.
The project is forecast to generate 25 net passenger car equivalent(PCE)trips in the a.m. peak hour, 27 net PCE trips in the p.m. peak hour, and 91 net PCE daily trips.
The study area for the project was finalized based on the criteria defined in the City of Upland (City) Traffic Impact Analysis(TIA) Guidelines (dated July 2020). Based on the City's TIA Guidelines and discussions with City staff during the scoping agreement process,the study area includes three intersections.
Traffic conditions were examined for the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak-hour conditions under the following scenarios:
• Existing Condition
• Opening Year without Project Conditions
• Opening Year plus Project Conditions
• Horizon Year without Project Conditions
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 1-1 (11/27/24)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L Sr`■L A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA
• Horizon Year plus Project Conditions
1.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS SUMMARY
Based on the criteria as discussed in Section 3.2, Level of Service Procedures and Criteria, of this report, all study intersections are currently operating at a satisfactory level of service (LOS) under existing conditions.
1.2 OPENING YEAR (2027) CONDITIONS SUMMARY
Based on the criteria as discussed in Section 3.2, Level of Service Procedures and Criteria, of this report, under both opening year without and plus project conditions, all intersections are forecast to operate at a satisfactory LOS.
1.3 HORIZON YEAR (2050) CONDITIONS SUMMARY
Based on the criteria as discussed in Section 3.2, Level of Service Procedures and Criteria, of this report, under both horizon year without and plus project conditions, all intersections are forecast to operate at a satisfactory LOS.
1.4 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ASSESSMENT—VEHICLE MILES
TRAVELED ANALYSIS AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC TRANSIT
ANALYSIS SUMMARY
1.4.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Summary
A vehicle mile traveled (VMT) analysis was prepared to meet California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements for the proposed project.The project VMT analysis is prepared consistent with the City's TIA Guidelines.The TIA Guidelines include the VMT screening criteria, VMT analysis methodology,VMT impact thresholds, and VMT mitigation measures (if required)for the City.
The TIA Guidelines provide multiple screening criteria for land use projects.The VMT screening criteria in the "Analysis Methodology" section of the TIA Guidelines were reviewed to determine whether the proposed project could be screened out from a VMT analysis. Following is a brief description of the proposed project in relation to the VMT screening criteria:
• Project Located in Transit Priority Area (TPA):The proposed project is not located within a TPA; therefore,this screening criterion does not apply.
• Residential or Office Project Located in Low-VMT Area:The project is not a residential or office project; therefore, this criterion does not apply.
• Project Type (Land Use)Screening: According to the TIA Guidelines, "Projects generating less than 250 daily vehicle trips" may be presumed to have a less than significant impact.The proposed project is anticipated to generate fewer than 250 daily vehicle trips.
Since the project meets the Project Type (Land Use) Screening criteria,the project is presumed to have less than significant VMT impact and may be screened from a full VMT analysis.
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 1-2 (11/27/24)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L Sr`■L A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA
1.4.2 Active Transportation and Public Transit Analysis Summary The project does not conflict with any existing or proposed bicycle, pedestrian, or public transit facilities.Therefore, it can be considered to conform to all adopted policies, plans, or programs concerning these facilities and will not have a significant impact. It should be noted that at present, there are no proposed service changes in Omnitrans'transit network.
1.5 RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS SUMMARY
Based on the results of the LOS analysis and VMT screening analysis, all study intersections are forecast to operate at a satisfactory LOS under all scenarios and the project is not anticipated to have any significant VMT impact.Therefore, no circulation improvements or VMT related improvements are required for the project.
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 1-3 (11/27/24)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L C A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA _Vl/`-■`
2.0 INTRODUCTION
The TIA has been prepared for the proposed project to be located at 400 East 20th Street in Upland.
The project site is located in northwest Upland in an area primarily consisting of residential, commercial, and industrial uses.The project site is bound by East 20th Street to the north, SCE easement (open space)to the east, SR-210 to the south, and Flower Court to the west.There are currently existing structures on the project site: a 1-million-gallon water storage tank at the northwestern corner of the parcel, a pump station at the southwestern corner of the parcel, and a signal building and tower at the southeastern corner of the parcel.The existing structures will continue to operate and remain on-site after the project is built. Figure 2-1 illustrates the regional and project location. (Figures and tables are located at the end of each chapter.) This report is intended to satisfy the requirements established by the City of Upland Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service Assessment(dated July 2020).The scope of work for this TIA, including trip generation,trip distribution, study area, and analysis methodologies, has been approved by City staff via the Scoping Agreement process. A copy of the Scoping Agreement is included in Appendix A.
This study examines traffic operations in the vicinity of the proposed project under the following five scenarios:
• Existing Conditions;
• Project Opening Year without Project Conditions;
• Project Opening Year plus Project Conditions;
• Horizon Year without Project Conditions; and
• Horizon Year plus Project Conditions.
Traffic conditions were examined for the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak-hour conditions.The a.m. peak hour is defined as the 1 hour of highest traffic volumes occurring between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m.
The p.m. peak hour is the 1 hour of highest traffic volumes occurring between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m.
2.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project proposes to develop new 3,698-square-foot SAWCO headquarters and associated improvements including a 4,066-square-foot maintenance building, maintenance yard, driveway, parking, solar cover, landscaping, and utility improvements.The existing water storage tank, pump station, and signal buildings and tower would remain in place.The project is anticipated to be completed by 2027. Figure 2-2 illustrates the conceptual site plan for the proposed project.
As shown on Figure 2-2,the project can be accessed via three full-access driveways:
• Project Driveway 1 on 20th Street:This westerly driveway along the northern property boundary provides access for SAWCO patrons and customers;
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 2-1 (11/27/24)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L 7/`-■`A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA
• Project Driveway 2 on 20th Street:This driveway is located in the middle of the northeastern corner of the project site and provides access for the SAWCO employee parking area and maintenance facilities; and
• Project Driveway 3 on Campus Avenue:This easterly driveway located on the northeastern corner of the project site and will be a future connection with the intersection of Campus Avenue and 20th Street.
2.2 LIST OF CHAPTER 2.0 FIGURES
• Figure 2-1: Regional and Project Location
• Figure 2-2: Conceptual Site Plan
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 2-2 (11/27/24)
r y-,drr`f"t"::... II•V 410.1.- . -T ,rey •r A ~ `_ .:91r. i "4r `...t i r' ,an' :�Z ' • alive14 .• + ' , te'. w• 1. .+[ , • 1irk .
V..1„',,,:..
'?, r4....4
4E,-„P
„-.-,
'r�� 4 tir,- 2 5,7R r .iN ...t:,..-,. ?'.z - :.>M& i A ' e__R,,:„-.'i;.,„4#„1,,,
1/4
'• 'may• •
- •�'I�.H .!!"'!! ]}� e
tif •• 23RU STREET-' _ f � .' ifr i ' i- •• }' ,�• .1 r 1!.L ` l{r 1 $- ' “,11-•.!,;1..;c;-i—t.P$4'Z4els:e4Ri:4.A#',t,.,,,1l,44.-. ~•.. ;I' ,••`''. F •ttr •' ' - \ n - rer „ ' ;C n 1
a; �" '; f" 4' ' ICI•fir, . `s �e =- ' f � .`(%:
sti►1yif,, .• .r i c22{I!(]�577 7�.'' ,� r' k-} ~' i • ■ 4i ..I:4:14
pit ., r, r i' v
05,4
- .. ..,-I = ' 'r. 7.,4". 1 "', .4.9: , ' -../rrita0041. ..,I,. '440.-J.A. li ...II ,., ?;,,,y- .4,4 .
Sti/.-ik
i NI ' H. • #V 4f4+gx'u•.-,. i.." 211STs•TREET '' ' t. „ .. . .. (F µ
.re •,, . I
r f a
■R Lf�+ '
' '4'. "' ••••••••/1.,4'• AI' 121119§11. lit \ . .w-r�,yrw� ' ._21 0__. _ - - � •- ,.,.w-.•rw.w.21 0� ..i •p+Q i�.J .f - � � I'�1d I y,�•J,�i• '�t.:e /r / § n.
IMit-
11 '..f�,� .•a•• .•y� •i:-;":. ^!64 Ai Ct``r•.:
• ..!'t AX,-m,
• • ' ;"ir.,...V.,;PC ' r X-1.4 - .('-' '44,:„Ty' 1:_iV. i, . 6 - fr064,11.: . - *t4rr..; ....;•-"..,''' , .N. -...4";.:!...:•-•',-, • ...,•.-,\...• -' • it
;,,„•t
�;,', ,', yx.4-, ',ir i.8-. Ili 1 r ■ I A + -,'..-':',i.,+4':-' Pro ect Vicinity -7 ++ "► .a� ;'*• .�"
II: . . 1 2 ,. t 7.=' . .t%f.. **-'; - .- .. WI .,- — _,' -it_. -"•.; - I': -4** �r. 1..w 76TH;STREE,f4k- '0 i, lu,w :• €
1.[1 S rrroppiriquirr.
ti:� ti t =`4�i:.. • w' r ._` !',- r� 4't AN,, , i liI. k \ ,� ILI7Iti[, �' ,.1 . 00 ' jr. r r i F' 1 l 1• I L [1 l: N l Y' --/ Av we .:a.•aj •;:C ;sw •, riiM T ''I 4"•� r- • a.. ' 0 r �,ism r-. --,i , 1? , i Fib jlirku. t-�.;• 1.5rHST• EE.7 �,"'�I...,._LI:,_...�, .__ _ r Xi'',y,. ;: kr, , r , t. ,.. gf 'L , i� I [ II``i.. +r ye •° '• '; sit' COUNTY: R S4101)4.1-i -,.,. : l'r.e• r •'i' H1,1114 'I � Z' ��' a ,i L SA LEGEND FIGURE 2-1
[1=i Project Location
San Antonio Water Headquarters
sao 1660 Traffic Impact Analysis
FEET
Regional and Project Location
SOFIRCE:ESRI Streetmap,2021;Google Earth,2023
i:12024120241723\GIS\ifro\San Antonia Water Company Headquarters\san Antonio Water Company Iteadquarters.aprx 0.2123/2024) Page 1177 of 1374
rm.'mamla 10l.�o J K-Ie
20TR ETRIIT .dR km.=.-0.wo"ra1 IE ""'.."W' # MOM , r ee vvcn.e.. CAMPUS AVENUE OM
a9 _e v. o
MEW rpHo" °CO eC�glrvA e: e e e• 7 Q.04 a -,.• .G �. ,..a.-,. ev rYma�r m:. e 0 e QQ e� O C e WIC
••. [`�M arrwaxrc�n ir�,a arrw wx
rs
.11
III
K\741 47
n ,
Y.
I y � 5rra --IIIRIA1bG1laM11O �' lAOt .�..�
,4 MIi1R(M v esrae� k ♦ [♦➢kAw
Pf IL111alVIL
y
L SA FIGURE 2-2
N
San Antonio Water Headquarters
o 550 Traffic Impact Analysis
FEET
SOURCE:CEDG,Inc.,August 2023 Conceptual Site Plan P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion APRODUCTS17echnical Studies\?raffic Analys}s\GiS\teportWFig 2_Conceptual Site Plan.ai{fi/12/2024) Page 1178 of 1374
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L C A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA _Vl/`-■`
3.0 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY AND CRITERIA
3.1 LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS
Level of service (LOS) can be characterized for the whole intersection, by each intersection approach, and by each lane group. Control delay alone is used to characterize LOS for the entire intersection. Control delay quantifies the increase in travel time due to the traffic signal control and is a surrogate measure of driver discomfort and fuel consumption.
A complete description of the meaning of LOS can be found in the Transportation Research Board Special Report 209, Highway Capacity Manual(HCM).The HCM establishes LOS A through F for intersections. A description of LOS for signalized and unsignalized intersections is summarized in Table 3.A.
Table 3.B shows the LOS criteria for unsignalized and signalized intersections. For all study area intersections, the Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition (HCM 7) analysis methodologies were used to determine intersection LOS. Intersection LOS was calculated using the Synchro 12 software, which uses the HCM 7 methodologies.
3.2 LEVEL OF SERVICE PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA
Study intersections analyzed in this report are under the jurisdiction of the City of Upland.The City uses LOS D as its minimum level of service criterion for all intersections.
3.3 LIST OF CHAPTER 3.0 TABLES
• Table 3.A: Intersection Level of Service Definitions • Table 3.B: Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized and Signalized Intersections P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 3-1 (11/27/24)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L sr`■L A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA
Table 3.A: Intersection Level of Service Definitions
LOS Description
A Traffic operations with a control delay of 10 seconds per vehicle or less and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is low and either progression is exceptionally favorable or the cycle length is very short.If LOS A is the result of favorable progression,most vehicles arrive during the green indication and travel through the intersection without stopping.
B Traffic operations with control delay between 10 seconds per vehicle and 20 seconds per vehicle and a volume- to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is low and either progression is highly favorable or the cycle length is short.More vehicles stop than with LOS A.
C Traffic operations with control delay between 20 and 35 seconds per vehicle and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.This level is typically assigned when progression is favorable or the cycle length is moderate.
Individual cycle failures(i.e.,one or more queued vehicles are not able to depart as a result of the insufficient capacity during the cycle)may begin to appear at this level.The number of vehicles stopping is significant, although many vehicles still pass through the intersection without stopping.
D Traffic operations with control delay between 35 and 55 seconds per vehicle and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is high and either progression is ineffective or the cycle length is long.Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable.
E Traffic operations with control delay between 55 and 80 seconds per vehicle and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.This level is typically assigned when volume-to-capacity ratio is high,progression is unfavorable,and the cycle length is long.Individual cycle failures are frequent.
F Traffic operations with control delay exceeding 80 seconds per vehicle or a volume-to-capacity ratio greater than
1.0.This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is very high,progression is very poor,and the cycle length is long.Most cycles fail to clear the queue.
Source:Highway Capacity Manual(7th Edition).
LOS=level(s)of service
Table 3.B: Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized and Signalized Intersections Level of Unsignalized Intersection Signalized Intersection Service Average Delay per Vehicle(sec.) Average Delay per Vehicle(sec.) A 10 and 10 and 15 and 20and 25and 35and 35and 55and 50 >80 Source:Highway Capacity Manual(7th Edition).
sec=second(s)
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 3-2 (11/27/24)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L C A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA _Vl/`-■`
4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
4.1 STUDY AREA
Based on the City's TIA Guidelines, at a minimum, the study area must include all freeway links with 100 or more two-way peak-hour project trips and other Congestion Management Plan (CMP) roadways with 50 or more two-way peak-hour project trips within 5 miles of the project site. The project is not anticipated to add 100 or more two-way peak-hour trips to any freeway segment.
Therefore, no freeway links were analyzed as part of this analysis. All analysis intersections were approved by the City as part of the scoping process.
4.1.1 Study Intersections
Per the Scoping Agreement(Appendix A), intersections analyzed in this study are as follows:
1. Winston Court—Project Driveway 1/20th Street (Upland);
2. Project Driveway 2/20th Street (Upland); and
3. Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street (Upland); Figure 4-1 illustrates the locations of all study intersections.
4.2 EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK
This section provides a description of the circulation network within the study area. Within Upland, all major roadways are classified based on the Existing Roadway System and Classifications provided in the Circulation Element of the City of Upland General Plan 2035(General Plan). Following is a brief description of major roadways within the study area:
• 20th Street: Within the study area, 20th Street is segmented into two separate sections as 20th Street terminates at the SCE easement.The segment of 20th Street west of the SCE easement is a two-lane undivided Collector.The segment of 20th Street east of the SCE easement is a two- lane undivided Secondary Arterial with a posted speed limit of 35 miles per hour(mph).There are no bike facilities along either direction of these segments. There is provision for on-street parking on either side of both segments.
• Winston Court: Within the study area, Winston Court is a two-lane undivided local street with a speed limit of 25 mph. Winston Court terminates as a cul-de-sac directly north of the project site.There are no bike facilities along either direction of this segment.There is provision for on- street parking on either side of this segment.
• Campus Avenue: Within the study area, Campus Avenue is a two-lane undivided Secondary Arterial with a posted speed limit of 40 mph.There are no bike facilities along either direction of this segment.There is no provision for on-street parking on either side of this segment.
Figure 4-2 illustrates the existing study intersection geometrics and traffic control. Figure 4-3 illustrates the study intersection geometrics and traffic control under future "without project" P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 4-1 (11/27/24)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L 7/`-■`A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA
scenarios Figure 4-4 illustrates the study intersection geometrics and traffic control under future "plus project" scenarios. Figure 4-5 illustrates the Master Plan of Roadways for the City.
4.3 BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN, TRANSIT, AND TRUCK FACILITIES
4.3.1 Bicycle Facilities
The City of Upland promotes bicycling for recreation and mobility. Bicycling can be a viable alternative to local work commutes and offers children a healthy way to get to school.To facilitate and encourage bicycle trips,the City has adopted a Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan that includes a network of proposed facilities and capital improvement projects.
According to the City of Upland General Plan, the bikeway network within Upland is classified into three categories: Class I—Off-Street Bike Paths and Class II/III—On-Street Bike Lanes. Class I bike routes are physically separated by automobile traffic and may be used by both bicyclists and pedestrians. Class II bike routes are marked routes delineated by signs and striped bicycle lanes.
Class Ill bike routes are similar to Class II bike routes, with the exception that the bicycle lanes are not striped along the facility and are typically delineated with signage.
As part of the City's Bikeway Network, Class Ill bike routes exist on both directions of Campus Avenue north of SR-210 within the study area. Figure 4-6 illustrates the existing and proposed bikeways within Upland.
4.3.2 Pedestrian Facilities
The implementation of enhanced pedestrian linkage with a comprehensive trails system links residential areas, schools, parks, and commercial centers so that residents can travel within the community without driving. Safe and attractive sidewalks and walkways improve the walkability of Upland. Citywide, sidewalks are generally provided on both sides of the streets. Additionally, standard paved trails and nonstandard unpaved trails are frequently used by bicyclists and pedestrians in the city. Some trails are also available for equestrian riders.The existence of trails and sidewalks provides accessible facilities, provides safety features, and improves walkability in Upland.
According to the City's General Plan,the study area on Campus Avenue and 20th Street east of the SCE easement has been identified as areas that needs sidewalks. Figure 4-7 illustrates the pedestrian facilities within the city.
4.3.3 Transit Facilities
Omnitrans is the Public Transit Agency for San Bernardino County and is responsible for coordinating transit services throughout the approximately 480-square-mile service area. Omnitrans provides both local and regional services throughout the region, with 30 fixed routes and 5 OmniGo routes using 178 vehicles.There are no Omnitrans bus routes that operate within the study area.
4.3.4 Truck Facilities
According to the City of Upland General Plan,the City has a specific ordinance (Ordinance No. 1540) that defines weight restrictions, specifies the ability of trucks to enter areas not designated as truck routes, and defines the truck routes within the city. Truck routes are defined by weight restrictions P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 4-2 (11/27/24)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L 7/`-■`A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA
and classified as "Unrestricted Access," "Restricted to 18 Tons," and "Restricted to 5 Tons." Figure 4- 8 illustrates the network of truck routes within Upland.
4.4 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Traffic volumes for existing conditions were developed using existing count data collected by Counts Unlimited in October 2024 at study intersections when schools were in session.Vehicle classification counts were collected at selected study area intersections. Detailed count sheets are included in Appendix B.
Vehicle classification counts were conducted at all study intersections.At these locations, counts were converted to PCE volumes.The concept of PCEs accounts for the larger impact of trucks on traffic operations. It does so by assigning each type of truck a PCE factor that represents the number of passenger vehicles that could travel through an intersection in the same time that a particular type of truck could. PCE volumes at study intersections were computed using a factor of 1.5 for two- axle trucks, 2.0 for three-axle trucks, and 3.0 for trucks with four or more axles, consistent with City of Upland TIA guidelines.
Detailed volume development worksheets are included in Appendix C.
4.5 EXISTING LEVELS OF SERVICE
4.5.1 Study Intersections
An intersection LOS analysis was conducted for existing conditions using the methodologies previously discussed.Table 4.A summarizes the results of this analysis and shows that all intersections are currently operating at a satisfactory LOS under existing conditions. Detailed LOS worksheets are included in Appendix D.
4.6 LIST OF CHAPTER 4.0 FIGURES AND TABLES
• Figure 4-1: Study Area Intersections
• Figure 4-2: Existing Study Intersection Geometrics and Traffic Control • Figure 4-3: Study Intersection Geometrics and Traffic Control under'Without Project' Scenarios • Figure 4-4: Study Intersection Geometrics and Traffic Control under'Plus Project' Scenarios • Figure 4-5: City of Upland Roadway Classification
• Figure 4-6: City of Upland Bicycle Routes
• Figure 4-7: City of Upland Pedestrian Facilities
• Figure 4-8: City of Upland Truck Routes
• Figure 4-9: Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
• Table 4.A: Existing Intersection Levels of Service P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 4-3 (11/27/24)
r LLI
Z
Ul
1111;"n
Q
y
Z o
20TH STREET � •
.' I- 20TH STREET
e 1
It db
1 L S A LEGEND FIGURE 4-1
Q Project Location
Study Intersections
N
---. Project Driveway
San Antonio Water Headquarters
0 150 300 --— Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis FEET
Study Area Intersections
SOURCE:
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\GIS\Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters\San Antonio Fanta1484rtori 37 2024)
W
Q (/)
a.
` ❑ Z
. 1 2
20TH STREET t r ,.''~~ I
20TH STREET
r e
r f •
tel- a
LEGEND
Q Project Location
) 0
v Study Intersections
is❑ 300 ___. Project Driveway
FEE, --- Future Driveway
4014-r 4 Z
Future Intersection
iiWinston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street ©Project Driveway 2/20th Street ©Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street L S A
FIGURE 4-2
Legend ——'Project Driveway -.- Stop Sign San Antonio Water Headquarters --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis
Existing Study Intersection Geometrics and Traffic Control P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\g12_Geo_Existing.xlsx(11/21/2024)
W
Q En
` ❑ Z
. 1 2
20TH STREET . 1 .,.''~~ • 20TH STREET II 1 . r
1 I 1 I
tel- a
LEGEND
Q Project Location
) 0
Study Intersections
is❑ 300 ___. Project Driveway
FEE, --- Future Driveway
'4' t'
Future Intersection
iiWinston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street ©Project Driveway 2/20th Street ©Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street L S A
FIGURE 4-3
Legend --'Project Driveway — Stop Sign San Antonio Water Headquarters ——-Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis
Study Intersection Geometrics and Traffic Control under Future 'Without Project' Scenarios P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\g12_Geo_Without Project.xlsx(11/21/2024)
r W
I- Z
tx kJ
U El)
\ ❑ &
rq
2 U
s 2 .0."
2OTH STREET • �#. 1 20TH STREET
rI I
- I
hi I
dtb a
LEGEND
0 Project Location
) 0
ry • Study Intersections
ISO 300 ---. Project Driveway
1- ET ---• Future Driveway
r
+ 4- '43- +] 4-
-e-
1. iiWinston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street ©Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street L S A
FIGURE 4-4
Legend ——'Project Driveway -.- Stop Sign San Antonio Water Headquarters --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis
Study Intersection Geometrics and Traffic Control under Future 'Plus Project' Scenarios P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\g12_Geo_Plus Project.xlsx(11/21/2024)
L._
•
•
;r c
r
C7UNTAlNPNW cLIpILE`
------ -L ----- ---r._._. City of
r� Rancho Cucamonga
j1 r 73RD sT
II •n
'71
f Jj:
City of c i
21STST L
Claremonti.
N-Fy y
„c61-- ,
..41
14TH St
__=4:1;__
J
T BASELINEST ISTH ST. +�,
r U' V• 1 ul
a
Ua O
-.17 QI 2 Iasi
YCable S OF 19TH ST. I a
o „ Ai rt
Z !I
zi
4' F
SOOTHfLL BLVD. 66 ii f
/f
Ili
i .E1 5 ( sf ..-
I6 m ARROW HWY. — -
o -
BTH ST. r I l I f
1 City of I 7TH ST. I City of
1 i Montclair ■
-" "�` Ontario
a
10 2
A 0
L S A so-e�Lrypa FIGURE 4-5
©�o•nq„.-rich
-+hnara M L d�aire Nape AM1a.4va
=CLv ter^•"- -Saae my,Arlen.
Upland►arcal CoNnaor Savo.Sonhem WaiA.Troll
Rai Line
f Mervllnk Snrim San Antonio Water Headquarters Traffic Impact Analysis
SOURCE:City of Upland General Plan Circulation Element City of Upland Roadway Classification P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic AnalysislGIS\Repart\Fig4.4_Raadway.ai(10/24/2024) Page 1188 of 1374
Iii
— {arCI-^.'7137 B Class II Bikeway(Hike Lane) P i::^p;—:16-';.. ::,: San Bernardino Mountains Provides a striped lane for one•way,
rigfi -.&t} :r 1[•1',-(:uz1 •bike Er2vel on:a;scree'-or high :. • --_ ._� ' r — .— — j " Jj
— — — — —I
- r
, . ...r p
: . ,...
fi -.......-- . . ,
. .,
..
. .
. ,
/ /
,..: . 01
�r OUNTA�
l [icy of
ii Rancho Cucamonga
�•� J 2SRD ST.
•• - I
1s
1 City of = 21 ST ST- F
Claremont ]ir
210.. .t —
1PTHST.
/ 70
IBASELINE ST.. 1STH ST.
Z. t
G U :+c' rr
4 0
m Q 2
o Cable c a 14TH ST et a i r/
Air rt C
g m w
FOOTHILL SLY- •.-•
/1
I
li
�IY5s
Q 4- ARROW HWy. .41
i�
filass III h.waY[Sli P L w1,.
ith Opfid7al�5har[�P if
14 arkiith41' odes i 7 a ••use
aTH ST. ith+motor.4eh�la�letrafYic"SrafYic"S
C.l Cy Of 7TH ST. 11111PAIIIII04
Montclair �— + .
s
S
c
e
a
d ,
4TH ST.
L S &
1._.J city Limits Existing Bicycle Routes FIGURE 4-6 —__ -cia�s I
I-_� Sphere of Influence
County Boundary Class IIRII
`j Hetrolink Station m Existing Class III;Upgrade to Class II —1`— Rail Line y
Future Bicycle Routes
-Class i San Antonio Water Headquarters
--- Southern Pacific Trail
Priority Bike Lanes* Traffic Impact Analysis
SOURCE:City of Upland General Plan Circulation Element City of Upland Bicycle Routes P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\GIS\Report\Fig4-5_Bicycle Routes.ai(10/24/2024) Page 1189 of 1374
7 ta_
P��` Cu0
1NCUN,Akt RL�
r 1 'Z k City of
r----•--- i r------------.__._---
1' i ' Rancho Cucamonga
j _" 23RD ST.
' r,
l/
City of ' 21fT It
y Claremont . !J SD*',r,,. 1
/ 6E� ,r`
I 9TH!T.
j 80 —�S
1 1 �V ;
1 {
BASELINE ST SBTH ST. /I
______ .._..p.._ ,..........,,,,..-/./"..7
-i:'1 y i
a � J
c° II W a r'' f
1r a a I 'v'
Qa Cable a O 14TH ST. 'a a I
v j j Airport ? a o
r 0 N cu V �.
1�m g I
FOOTHILL BLVCI B8 ii {
f
a' cc
-' 2 i ' ��:Cr 011,
I-
w
1 v usARROW HWY
r I I
yy
City of I 7TH ST. 1 City of
9 Montclair ------• -- - --.� -- = ----. .--_._ Ontario fir,
a
0 L SA FIGURE 4-7
county Boundary i Pedestrian Multimodal Priority Area° I -I Sphere of Influence Pedesh4an Needs Priority Area"• I�.J City Limits
Upland Parcel
—" Southern PacifcTrali
San Antonio Water Headquarters
—r— Rail line
Traffic Impact Analysis
C Metrolink Station
SOURCE:City of Upland General Plan Circulation Element City of Upland Pedestrian Facilities P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\GIS\Report\Fig4-fi_Pedestrian Facilities.ai(10124/2024) Page 1190 of 1374
I ,1
/' 1
1 j to
c 1
1 CUNT 1'
r'— i City of
Rancho Cucamonga
City of , ' -----t .-------
:,:T n
Claremont .
H FT.
80 li"‘
fit►ire�..�
BASELINE 5T. id 16TH$T. — -1 - _
� Zs i
Cr:
a .i
1..! :° Cable ioro
2 IN
f 4TH IT.
Air rer
_ FDDTHILL BLVD. 66,' _ /f
1 as
A— ....-
aF ARROW Hwr, I
_I_ F F F I F [ - n /
FM ST. �` - I
City of I 7TH ST. I 1 City of
Montclair J �; Ontario
q
Io N
LS A County Boundary Truck Routes FIGURE 4-8 Sphere of Influence -Unrestricted Access
1 ..1 City Limits Restricted to iSTons
(tr) seie.
Upland Parcel
-Restricted to S Tons
- Southern Pacific Trail
San Antonio Water Headquarters
—/— Rail Line Traffic Impact Analysis
,..._, Metralink Station City of Upland Truck Routes SOURCE:City of Upland General Plan Circulation Element
P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\GIS\Report\Fig4.7_Truck Routes.ai(10/24/2024) Page 1191 of 1374
r tu
I
o a
c.) En
z
o a
Z
U
• I
1 2 _
20TH STREET .#' ~~ 1 2OTli STREET
• 1
drif it
LEGEND
Project Location
) -i[1
ry * Study Intersections
o is❑ aoo `--. Project Driveway
---• Future Driveway
i@
M
In t 2/0 N
4/0 Future Intersection 197/240
2/5 _
4/0
IIIWnston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street LS A FIGURE 4-9
XXX/YYY ——'Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters AM/PM PCE Peak Hour Trips --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Vol_Existing.xlsx 11/21/2024
Table 4.A: Existing Intersection Levels of Service
Without Project
A.M.Peak Hour P.M.Peak Hour
LOS Delay Delay
Intersection Jurisdiction Standard Control (sec.) LOS (sec.) LOS 1 . Winston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Upland D OWSC 8.3 A 8.3 A 2 . Project Driveway 2/20th Street Upland D -- Future Intersection Future Intersection 3 . Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street Upland D -- No Conflicting Movements No Conflicting Movements Notes:
OWSC=One-Way Stop Control;LOS=Level of Service
Delay=Average control delay in seconds(For OWSC/TWSC intersections,reported delay is for worst-case movement). * Exceeds LOS Standard
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Intersection LOS.xlsx\Exist LOS (11/21/2024)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L C A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA _Vl/`-■`
5.0 PROJECT TRAFFIC
5.1 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
The trip generation for the proposed project was developed as follows.
5.1.1 Employee Trip Generation
Based on the project description and operational information,the project is anticipated to have 10 full-time employees. For purposes of this analysis, all 10 employees are anticipated to arrive at the facility in the a.m. peak hour and leave the facility in the p.m. peak hour.Therefore, the project is estimated to generate 20 daily employee trips with 10 inbound a.m. peak-hour trips and 10 outbound p.m. peak-hour trips.
Additionally, based on the project description and operational information,the project is anticipated to have six trucks for the operations. Based on information from the applicant,the truck trips are described as followed:
• Truck#1 (Two-Axle Light-Duty Truck):This truck is considered a standby vehicle and will average around 80-90 miles per day.
• Truck#2 (Two-Axle Light-Duty Truck):Truck#2 is considered a retired standby vehicle/support vehicle for construction jobs and will average around 20-25 miles per day. • Truck#3 (Two-Axle Light-Duty Truck):This truck is considered a general maintenance/support vehicle for construction jobs and will average around 20-25 miles per day. It is likely only to be driven for around 75 percent of work week.
• Truck#4(Two-Axle Medium-Duty Truck):Truck#4 is considered a dump truck.This vehicle will average 20-25 miles per day and is usually only driven about 4-5 days per month. • Truck#5 (Two-Axle Medium-Duty Truck):This truck is considered a service truck and planned to be used for larger construction jobs and heavy maintenance.This vehicle will average around 20-25 miles per day and likely only to be driven for around 75 percent of the work week. • Truck#6(Two-Axle Light-Duty Truck):This vehicle has an auxiliary fuel tank that will be used for refueling the project's tractors. Occasionally used for short runs for parts and supplies. It will average around 20-25 miles per day and likely only to be driven for around 5-6 days per month.
For purposes of this analysis, all trucks were considered to be two-axle trucks and operating within the same day as a conservative estimate.Therefore, it could be estimated that the project will be generating 12 daily employee truck trips (inbound and outbound combined). Based on the operational hours,these trips could be estimated as peak-hour trips, with six outbound truck trips occurring during a.m. peak hour and six inbound truck trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour.
All truck trips were converted to PCE trips using a 1.5 PCE factor for two-axle trucks based on the TIA Guidelines.
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 5-1 (11/27/24)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L 7/`-■`A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA
5.1.2 Customer Trip Generation
• Headquarter Building:The trip generation for this component was developed using rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual(11th Edition)for Land Use 712—"Small Office Building."
The project trip generation is summarized in Table 5.A.As shown in Table 5.A, the project is anticipated to generate 91 total net daily PCE trips, with 25 net PCE trips occurring during the a.m. peak hour and 27 net PCE trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour.
5.2 PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT
The project trip distribution patterns were based on the regional roadway network and the location of residential, employment, and commercial centers in relation to the proposed project. Figure 5-1 illustrates the project trip distribution for the employees. Figure 5-2 illustrates the project trip distribution for the maintenance trucks. Figure 5-3 illustrates the customer trip distribution.
The project trip assignment at the study intersections is the product of the project trip generation and the corresponding trip distribution percentages. Figure 5-4 illustrates the trip assignment for employees. Figure 5-5 illustrates the trip assignment for maintenance trucks trips. Figure 5-6 illustrates the trip assignment for customers. Figure 5-7 illustrates the total project trip assignment.
5.3 LIST OF CHAPTER 5.0 FIGURES AND TABLES
• Figure 5-1: Project Trip Distribution—Employees
• Figure 5-2: Project Trip Distribution—Maintenance Trucks • Figure 5-3: Project Trip Distribution—Customers
• Figure 5-4: Project Trip Assignment—Employees
• Figure 5-5: Project Trip Assignment—Maintenance Trucks • Figure 5-6: Project Trip Assignment—Customers
• Figure 5-7:Total Project Trip Assignment
• Table 5.A: Project Trip Generation
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 5-2 (11/27/24)
r w
Z IL
0 a
U co
\ Z
zO U
1 1 2
20TH STREET ' '--~~ 20TH STREET
I
,
a gib
LEGEND
t1 Project Location
N
L5❑ 300 • Study Intersections
---• Project Driveway
I)FEET ---• Future Driveway
(30%) 70%
30% 30% 1, '1 (70%)
M
IIWinston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street LS A FIGURE 5-1
XX%(YY%) --Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters Inbound(Outbound)Distribution --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Project Trip Distribution—Employees
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Dist_Employee_PV.xlsx 11/21/2024
r w
Z IL
0 a
U to
\ Z
zO U
1 1 2
20TH STREET '.'0.~~ r 20TH STREET
r
,
a gib
LEGEND
t1 Project Location
N
L5❑ 300 • Study Intersections
---• Project Driveway
I)FEET ---• Future Driveway
100%
(100%) -
IIWinston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street LS A FIGURE 5-2
XXX%(YYY%) --Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters Inbound(Outbound)Distribution --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Project Trip Distribution-Maintenance Trucks
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Dist_Employee_TR.xlsx 11/21/2024
r w
Z IL
a a
U to
\ Z
zO U
1 1 2
20TH STREET . ~~0.
r 20TH STREET
r
,
a gib
LEGEND
t1 Project Location
N
L5❑ 300 • Study Intersections
---• Project Driveway
L'
FEET ---• Future Driveway
100% -,
8 IIWinston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street LS A FIGURE 5-3
XXX%(YYY%) --Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters Inbound(Outbound)Distribution --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Project Trip Distribution-Customers
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Dist_Customer.xlsx 11/21/2024
I
I
r a
z
i p
I a
U 0
fl
a.
co a
Z U
1 1
1 2
20TH STREET f..r~~- 20TH STREET
I I .' I
I I i I
I I
it- a
LEGEND
Q Project Location
v • Study Intersections
' 0 ,so auo ---. Project Driveway
FEET ---• Future Driveway
0/3 - 7/0
3/0 - 3/0 1, 0/7
co
O
II Winston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street II Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-Zan Street
LS A FIGURE 5-4
XX/YY --,Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters AM/PM Peak Hour Trips --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Project Trip Assignment-Employees
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Asgn-Employee_PV.xlsx 11/21/2024
I
I
r a
z
, Eti p
I a
U 0
fl
a.
en a
•Z U
1 1
1 2
20TH STREET f..r~~- 20TH STREET
I I .' I
I I i I
1 it- a
LEGEND
Q Project Location
v • Study Intersections
' 0
,so 300 ---. Project Driveway
FEET ---• Future Driveway
0/9
9/0
IIWinston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-Zan Street LS A FIGURE 5-5
XX/YY ——,Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters AM/PM Peak Hour PCE Trips --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Project Trip Assignment-Maintenance Trucks
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Asgn-Employee_TR.xlsx 11/21/2024
a
z
a a
0 o
z
z �
20TH STREET •
,.''~~— ';` 20TH STREET
1 ilb
LEGEND
Q Project Location
• Study Intersections
' ❑ ss❑ a❑o +--. Project Driveway
FEET ---• Future Driveway
5/3 1,
La
II
Winston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-Zan Street LS A FIGURE 5-6
XX/YY --Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters AM/PM Peak Hour Trips --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Project Trip Assignment—Customers
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Asgn-Customer.xlsx 11/21/2024
r I0 en
20TH STREET 1 s2 ,. "~- 20TH STREET • ' 1
III 1
i .
el- ilb
LEGEND
0 Project Location
) .---
ID Study Intersections
0 iso Silo
---• Project Driveway
FEET ---• Future Driveway
0/3 F 7/9
3/0 'i 3/0 1, 9/7
5/3 1, "' `o
0 IIWinston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street Lw A FIGURE 5-7
XX//YYY --Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters AM/PM Peak Hour PCE Trips --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Total Project Trip Assignment
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Asgn-Total.xlsx 11/21/2024
LSA
Table 5.A:Project Trip Generation
A.M.Peak Hour P.M.Peak Hour
Land Uses Units In Out Total In Out Total Daily San Antonio Water Headquarters&Maintenance Buildings
Employee Trip Generation' 10 0 10 0 10 10 20
Employee Maintenance Truck Trip Generation' 0 6 6 6 0 6 12 Employee Maintenance Truck PCE Trip Generation' 0 9 9 9 0 9 18 Headquarter Building
Headquarters Building Trip/Unit4 3.698 TSF 1.37 0.30 1.67 0.73 1.43 2.16 14.39 Headquarters Building Customer Trip Generation 5 1 6 3 5 8 53 Total PCE Trip Generation 15 10 25 12 15 27 91
I
Notes:
TSF=thousand square-feet
The employee trip generation was developed based on the project description and operational information. 2 The maintenance truck trip generation was developed based on the project's operational information.All trucks are 2-axle trucks. s All maintenance truck trips were converted to passenger PCEs using a 1.5 PCE factor for 2-axle trucks based on City of Upland's Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines,dated July 2020. 4 Rates from Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE)Trip Generation Manual,(11th Edition)for Land Use 712-"Small Office Building",Setting/Location-'General Urban/Suburban'.
P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Trip Generation.xlsx\Trip Gen_(10/23/2024) Page 1203 of 1374
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L Sr`■L A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA
6.0 OPENING YEAR ANALYSIS
6.1 OPENING YEAR (2027) WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES As approved during the City's scoping agreement process (Appendix A),traffic volumes for opening year without project conditions were developed by applying a growth of 2 percent per annum to existing traffic volumes and adding trips from approved and pending development projects in the area.This methodology was applied for study intersections. Information concerning approved and pending development projects in the vicinity of the proposed project was obtained from City staff and nearby jurisdictions. Figure 6-1 illustrates the approved and pending development projects' locations.Trip generation for approved and pending development projects was either obtained from the respective traffic studies prepared for the projects or developed using rates from the ITE Trip Generation Manual(11th Edition).Table 6.A lists the approved and pending development projects included in this analysis and shows the approved and pending development projects are estimated to generate 232 net trips in the a.m. peak hour, 363 net trips in the p.m. peak hour, and 3,938 net daily trips.
Approved and pending development project trips were assigned to the roadway network based on their locations in relation to surrounding land uses and regional arterials. Figure 6-2 illustrates the total peak-hour approved and pending development project trip assignment at study area intersections. Figure 6-3 illustrates the peak-hour traffic volumes at study intersections under opening year without project conditions.
6.2 OPENING YEAR (2027) PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Opening year plus project traffic volumes were developed by adding proposed project traffic to the opening year without project traffic volumes. Figure 6-4 illustrates the opening year plus project peak-hour traffic volumes at study intersections.
Detailed volume development worksheets are included in Appendix C.
6.3 OPENING YEAR (2027) WITHOUT PROJECT LEVELS OF SERVICE
6.3.1 Study Intersections
An intersection LOS analysis was conducted for opening year without project conditions using the methodologies previously discussed.Table 6.B summarizes the results of the analysis and shows that all intersections are forecast to operate at a satisfactory LOS under opening year without project conditions. Detailed LOS worksheets are included in Appendix D.
6.4 OPENING YEAR (2027) PLUS PROJECT LEVELS OF SERVICE
6.4.1 Study Intersections
An intersection LOS analysis was conducted for opening year plus project conditions using the methodologies previously discussed.Table 6.B summarizes the results of the analysis and shows that all intersections are forecast to operate at a satisfactory LOS under opening year plus project conditions. Detailed LOS worksheets are included in Appendix D.
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 6-1 (11/27/24)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L C A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA _Vl/`-■`
6.5 LIST OF CHAPTER 6.0 FIGURES AND TABLES
• Figure 6-1: Approved and Pending Project Locations • Figure 6-2: Approved and Pending Project Trip Assignment • Figure 6-3: Opening Year(2027)without Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes • Figure 6-4: Opening Year(2027) plus Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes • Table 6.A:Approved and Pending Projects Trip Generation • Table 6.B: Opening Year(2027) Intersection Levels of Service P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 6-2 (11/27/24)
-'�ilit +..Flottr•oN c. 0'9'4:.' �wr f i, 'a,1�. -as. A,,7.;'. .la_r 1 ,k. s & •I. '�` 7. F'• �E T' "Tr.3 : : : . .. : QVr°„ r. :, t +t44L f L 1Y Ay +R '. •tip.> `v° 'P +VittoYmi '' .'.r !. .ii; P r':.: i L ..�Y,a3q� •~ 4i .. ITEE1T ;` e E "� t "�, �j'�"i' �Ai r. r • !t• ° b7. ttc .�ri?C..i .:tf ";r l rti o •r* , •Z ` - ` Y i• r V. `j }�Y '�`•� �c' •
".�iss' e '* .} ;14i:.1•e►; { • D„glIREET .- ,.i' C; v4 �titir •• sp •0• r tt� ,? •• .• i i•1 ; ili ,i!"' •rr 1 A.��'1H
; 1(x 1 -".• Y y \,• 'i J�1+ r Y :Iwi.w �� {` ]a y,[gj��i .� � #���• •�, r �� _I� •y •�' l ;{.� i i,�x r P. .4
1'1 • f 1px it! r•,f3iS'T' -�REE� •� ' ' ��]I.t 1 �.!)[y 'q•lryf )!{ ` �• •
�• �iLe . ,i r�/'+ �f, ��yy,�,eyyy 4r.^`}; •1 ', .d.x. ''ZY 'S' '1 M • ''.. 'J)I �i3X% !7'S• W' :"" ''," _ i4i)(1:,•%, ' �.: � tit, 4 e
;• r•i n:I:,:ki,� ,'"• ,i , ,,, ,M1 r 2UtTH STREET' ''Si 3 1 r M- J 1 r rr�_�.lw. —
210 — 210. lam.. •__
•
.4'••A.,•iM tir.'&q w'i-•n•,•
.•,,,,j '! ..r kLi'. d p STREET .1 ....3. L r t u_. ...r,,;' `i,i:, 4, \
* �].. fir. . F y r •. ? Ctr' ~!rS4t• ?' �`• ( 1+' t _ f'! i 11t 1}�i fti14: 5i• 1r y4tir �..- r.' •;. ,jL'- . A 5 • :'',• "1 - .A • •• 'am� �W t� • i '.r ��'"�' i.a�----�'=:J~'ti�•-I. � .� "# . A.� �..A.:��_ S M.�s,�
_ -' a r71: % :.� r, i s u M .i . .. ' 1 i " a- C..1.46.i..H SFRES'y.,2+ 1 .'" ....+.1.;. y.- - 4: .'� .,vE RO4 D :1 rilA : i it,tt r1 i�:Fri ' '.y.. 'la'1. S�`: .: .111-.f"�^�_• RY n t .���• s 'ti •d-n ,lam �F yam � rT1 *7• 1 �. ice"'. ii.•7 q''��1•�yy6� *~ rr' .... '.{,.- F•• •. ••� 1,ryF I 1.f',n �, +1.W41i1. rN .Wa: V.• 4 'p ~, •
•
.,c �:, 7:,115TH'57REET, A� �.'• .� _ 'F. sP.+ f .. . • r • ,.? d. � * ;I,t Ali r *• ..k; 'y tillka:* 4.' 'K •711 i:' ,y1'r• y 7 Vi
tti'%1 1' ..; ,„ T' { *r - : R '' ': 1i R AO.. a • ' 174,ii•1 .11 , 1 .•••' �.; •x, ;; . ,• 1 +�.'I. 3 i• ray r•. A'\ ,: 3 f•5 •r I h1' { *', ;. 1' r't'• m, ':•) •'14. '11'-• " t '
Rom': �� >?: • ., •... 1'1 . 2 .,FOOTHILL BOULEVARD' 41 P. 11iW.: ,, tip" #� Vela A - le. ..5 ]L �r� y .
A .� '
* .b ' - 11 ' .,'! • ,... , ....,,,, , --,...,(„). ,... . 1 ix„,„. p„.,...,,.. jp4/=. 1,.' fr ti •• - •• '. ,, ... ,.• , -..i 4 ,.• ,.! I. N,..,,„: ,L1!AI irl i L „ P+ar a� �a.: `f it r
wt Art•
e
d 1' 4 � .y r
'..-r A tN-,..' ' 4.,,- .,:-.. „„,. ,..
.,..r',./,, ;. ::- .....
. . ..1
Iv , A..:'`):.:','," -''',,' " Pt I.'•P A'' ' ,' •
'l. '11 - : , ....rt ._ .. • -.I - Y. - . . ^�'•T'• -a51� , ':. •�,li ', f 1 ,.1•i Li ti rr.
i�tW� •• r diI -�
11 :!if;iL 711•i:°. • _i1a. . ' ,. :11 L S A LEGEND FIGURE 6-1
[C=] Project Location
Cumulative Projects
1 San Antonio Water Headquarters
a boo- zaoa Traffic Impact Analysis 1 p
Fern Approved and Pending Project Locations SOURCE:ESRI Sireetmap,2021,Google Earth,2023
1;120241202417231G151Pro1San Antonio Water Company Headquarters\San Antonio Water Company Headquarters.aprx(12/23/2024) Page 1206 of 1374
r tu
I
o a
c.) En
z
, \o a
Z
U
I
1 2 _
2OTH STREET .�' ~~ 1 20TH STREET
• 1
drif it
LEGEND
Project Location
) -i[1
ry * Study Intersections
o is❑ aoo `--. Project Driveway
---• Future Driveway
co cO
N M t 5/4
1/1 Future Intersection y T 3�4
M in
N
IIWnston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street LFIGURE 6-2
X/Y --,Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters AM/PM PCE Peak Hour Trips --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Approved and Pending Project Trip Assignment
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Vol_Approved and Pending Projects.xlsx 11/21/2024
c. U.I
a w
a
v
U ()
2 4
z U
3 20TH STREET r.''~~ -9 20TH STREET
•
• ,
• a
•
a-
LEGEND
0 Project Location
ry • Study Intersections
4 15❑ 340 ---. Project Driveway
FEET ---. Future Driveway
r
V M Lio
co t 2/0 N R. t 214/258
,I 4/0 Future Intersection 1 ,r 3/4 3/6 2 T r>
4/0 co Ln
r N
IIWinston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street LS A FIGURE 6-3
XXX/YYY --Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters AM/PM PCE Peak Hour Trips --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Opening Year(2027)without Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Vol_Opening Yr NP.xlsx 11/21/2024
r tu
i
1 v a
c�
z
, \9 a
Z
I
1 1 2 _
20TH STREET .�' ~~ 1 20TH STREET
• 1
it
LEGEND
Project Location
) ..[[
ry * Study Intersections
o is❑ aoo `--. Project Driveway
---• Future Driveway
M �— t 214/258
t 2/0 N 7/9
4/3 - 6/0 y L sr 3/4
3/6 3 4/0 '1 9/7 - t r'
7/0 u' 3/0 -I, M m in
O — N
5/3 1,
IIIWnston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street LS A FIGURE 6-4
XXX/YYY ——'Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters AM/PM PCE Peak Hour Trips --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Opening Year(2027) plus Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Vol_Opening Yr PP.xlsx 11/21/2024
L S
A Table 6.A:Approved and Pending Projects Trip Generation Project A.M.Peak Hour P.M.Peak Hour
Daily
No. Land Use/Builder/Applicant/Project Name Units In Out Total In Out Total
1. Amazon Fresh
235 East Foothill Boulevard
Supermarket 35.000 TSF
Trips/Unit' 1.69 1.17 2.86 4.48 4.47 8.95 93.84 Trip Generation 59 41 100 157 156 313 3,284 Pass-by Trips' 0 0 0 (38) (37) (75) (788) Net New Trips 59 41 100 119 119 238 2,496
2. Starbucks
275 East Foothill Boulevard
Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window 1.200 TSF Trips/Unit3 43.80 42.08 85.88 19.50 19.49 38.99 533.57 Trip Generation 53 50 103 23 23 46 640 Pass-by Trips4 (27) (25) (52) (13) (12) (25) (336) Net New Trips 27 25 52 10 11 21 304
3. The Colonies Self Storage
Southeast Corner of 20th Street and Campus Avenue
Mini Warehouse 164.570 TSF
Trip Generation' 10 6 16 13 15 28 249
4. Colony Condos
1160 East 19th Street
Multifamily Housing(Low-Rise)Not Close to Rail Transit 60 DU Trips/Unit6 0.10 0.30 0.40 0.32 0.19 0.51 6.74 Trip Generation 6 18 24 19 11 30 404 5 . Villa Serena
15th Street,between Fernando Avenue and Monte Verde Avenue Single-Family Detached Housing 65 DU
Trips/Unit' 0.18 0.52 0.70 0.59 0.35 0.94 9.43 Trip Generation 12 34 46 38 23 61 613
6. Upland Oncology Center
1113 North Alta Avenue
Medical-Dental Office Building-Stand-Alone 3.361 TSF Trips/Units 2.45 0.65 3.10 1.18 2.75 3.93 36.00 Trip Generation 8 2 10 4 9 13 121 Gross Trip Generation 138 145 283 241 222 463 5,062 Pass-By Trips (27) (25) (52) (51) (49) (100) (1,124) Total Net Trip Generation 112 120 232 190 173 363 3,938 Notes:
DU=Dwelling Units;TSF=Thousand Square Feet.
Rates from Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE)Trip Generation Manual,(11th Edition) Land Use 850-"Supermarket",Setting/Location-'General Urban/Suburban'. 7 Pass-by rates from the ITE Trip Generation Manual(11th Edition)for Land Use 850-'Supermarket.'A pass-by rate of 24%was used for the p.m.peak hour.Since daily pass-by rates are not available for this land use in the ITE Trip Generation Manual,the p.m.pass-by rate was used as the daily pass-by rate. 3 Rates from ITE Trip Generation Manual,(11th Edition),Land Use 937-"Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window",Setting/Location-'General Urban/Suburban'.
Pass-by rates from the ITE Trip Generation Manual(11th Edition)for Land Use 937-'Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window.'A pass-by rate of 50%was used for the a.m.peak hour and a pass-by rate of 55%was used for the p.m.peak hour.Since daily pass-by rates are not available for this land use in the ITE Trip Generation Manual,the average of a.m and p.m.pass-by rate was used as the daily pass-by rate.
5 Trip generation taken from"Proposed Self-Storage Facility"transportation impact assesment by Overland Traffic Consultants(May 2021). 6 Rates from ITE Trip Generation Manual,(11th Edition),Land Use 220-"Multifamily Housing(Low-Rise)Not Close to Rail Transit",Setting/Location-'General Urban/Suburban'. 7 Rates from ITE Trip Generation Manual,(11th Edition),Land Use 210-"Single-Family Detached Housing",Setting/Location-'General Urban/Suburban'.
Rates from ITE Trip Generation Manual,(11th Edition),Land Use 720-"Medical-Dental Office Building-Stand-Alone",Setting/Location-'General Urban/Suburban'.
P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Cumulative Projects_11th Edition.xlsx\Trip Gen Cumulative(10/23/2024)
A
1 Table 6.B:Opening Year(2027)Intersection Levels of Service _ Without Project Plus Project
A.M.Peak Hour P.M.Peak Hour A.M.Peak Hour P.M.Peak Hour LOS Delay Delay Delay Delay
Intersection Jurisdiction Standard Control (sec.) LOS (sec.) LOS Control (sec.) LOS (sec.) LOS
1. Winston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Upland D OWSC 8.4 A 8.3 A TWSC 8.7 A 8.7 A
2. Project Driveway 2/20th Street Upland D -- Future Intersection Future Intersection OWSC 0.0 A 8.5 A
3. Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street' Upland D OWSC 8.3 A 8.3 A TWSC 4.9 A 7.2 A Notes:
OWSC=One-Way Stop Control;TWSC=Two-Way Stop Control;LOS=Level of Service Delay=Average control delay in seconds(For OWSC/TWSC intersections,reported delay is for worst-case movement). *Exceeds LOS Standard
'For the purpose of this analysis,intersection was analyzed as a OWSC under'without project"and TWSC under'plus project'scenarios.Delay reported from SimTraffic under'plus project'scenarios.
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Intersection LOS.xlsx\OY LOS(11/21/2024)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L C A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA _Vl/`-■`
7.0 HORIZON YEAR ANALYSIS
7.1 HORIZON YEAR (2050) WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES Traffic volumes for horizon year without project conditions were developed by using forecast traffic volumes obtained from the San Bernardino Transportation Analysis Model (SBTAM).The methodology to develop horizon year without project volumes at study area intersections is consistent with the SBCTA procedures for post-processing of modeled traffic volumes.
Figure 7-1 illustrates horizon year without project peak-hour traffic volumes at study intersections.
7.2 HORIZON YEAR (2050) PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES Horizon year plus project traffic volumes were developed by adding proposed project traffic to the horizon year without project traffic volumes.
Figure 7-2 illustrates horizon year plus project peak-hour traffic volumes at study intersections.
Detailed volume development worksheets are included in Appendix C.
7.3 HORIZON YEAR (2050) WITHOUT PROJECT LEVELS OF SERVICE
7.3.1 Study Intersections
An intersection LOS analysis was conducted for horizon year without project conditions using the methodologies previously discussed.Table 7.A summarizes the results of the analysis and shows that all intersections are forecast to operate at a satisfactory LOS under horizon year without project conditions.
7.4 HORIZON YEAR (2050) PLUS PROJECT LEVELS OF SERVICE
7.4.1 Study Intersections
An intersection LOS analysis was conducted for horizon year plus project conditions using the methodologies previously discussed. Previously referenced Table 7.A summarizes the results of the analysis and shows that all intersections are forecast to operate at a satisfactory LOS under horizon year plus project conditions. Detailed LOS worksheets are included in Appendix D.
7.5 LIST OF CHAPTER 7.0 FIGURES AND TABLES
• Figure 7-1: Horizon Year(2050) without Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes • Figure 7-2: Horizon Year(2050) plus Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes • Table 7.A: Horizon Year (2050) Intersection Levels of Service P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 7-1 (11/27/24)
c. U.I
a w
a
v
U v}
2 4
z U
3 20TH STREET r.''~~ -9 20TH STREET
•
• ,
• a
•
a-
LEGEND
0 Project Location
ry • Study Intersections
4 15❑ 340 ---. Project Driveway
FEET --- Future Driveway
r
i
V co
co t 2/0 N N t 361/271
J - 4/0 1 1 3/4
3/6 Future Intersection P r
4/0 co Ln
r N
II Winston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street II Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street
L S
A FIGURE 7-1
XXX//YYY --Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters AM/PM PCE Peak Hour Trips --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Horizon Year(2050)without Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Vol_HZ Yr NP.xlsx 11/21/2024
U.I
a w
a
v
U ()
2 a 4
3 20TH STREET r.''~~ -9 20TH STREET
•
• a
• a
•
•
a-
LEGEND
0 Project Location
ry • Study Intersections
4 15❑ 340 ---. Project Driveway
FEET ---. Future Driveway
v co t 361/271
co t 2/0 N N 7/9
J - 4/3 - 6/0 1 .r 3/4
3/6 is 4/0 9/7 - t r-
co LO
5/3 -1, o N
II Winston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street II Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-Zan Street
L S
A FIGURE 7-2
XXX//YYY --Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters AM/PM PCE Peak Hour Trips --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Horizon Year(2050) plus Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Vol_HZ Yr PP.xlsx 11/21/2024
A
1 Table 7.A:Horizon Year(2050)Intersection Levels of Service _ Without Project Plus Project
A.M.Peak Hour P.M.Peak Hour A.M.Peak Hour P.M.Peak Hour LOS Delay Delay Delay Delay
Intersection Jurisdiction Standard Control (sec.) LOS (sec.) LOS Control (sec.) LOS (sec.) LOS
1. Winston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Upland D OWSC 8.3 A 8.3 A TWSC 8.6 A 8.6 A
2. Project Driveway 2/20th Street Upland D -- Future Intersection Future Intersection OWSC 0.0 A 8.5 A
3. Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street' Upland D OWSC 8.3 A 8.3 A TWSC 5.1 A 8.5 A Notes:
OWSC=One-Way Stop Control;TWSC=Two-Way Stop Control;LOS=Level of Service Delay=Average control delay in seconds(For OWSC/TWSC intersections,reported delay is for worst-case movement). *Exceeds LOS Standard
'For the purpose of this analysis,intersection was analyzed as a OWSC under'without project"and TWSC under'plus project'scenarios.Delay reported from SimTraffic under'plus project'scenarios.
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Intersection LOS.xlsx\HY LOS(11/21/2024)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L C A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA _Vl/`-■`
8.0 SITE ACCESS ANALYSIS
8.1 SIGHT DISTANCE ANALYSIS
Per request by City staff, a sight distance analysis was conducted at the project driveways along 20th Street and Campus Avenue to evaluate safe access in and out of the project. Sight distance is the length of the visible roadway a driver can see approaching vehicles before their line of sight is blocked by any object. For purposes of this analysis, both the stopping sight distance and corner sight distance have been evaluated.That is because those are the two sight distance issues that would affect safe maneuver of ingress/egress traffic from the project driveway.
According to the Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM) (dated July 2020), the stopping sight distance is the minimum sight distance along a roadway required to allow a driver to decrease their speed from the design speed to a complete stop. The corner sight distance is the minimum sight distance in which a driver at a stop-controlled approach can see oncoming traffic on the major street to safely maneuver onto the roadway.
The stopping sight distance was evaluated on the street abutting the project (i.e., 20th Street).The posted speed limit on 20th Street is 35 mph. For purposes of this analysis, the posted speed limit has been considered as the design speed.As stated in Table 201.1 of the HDM,the minimum stopping distance is 250 feet for a design speed of 35 mph.Therefore,the minimum stopping sight distances for Project Driveway 1 and Project Driveway 2 have been considered as 250 feet. In addition, the posted speed limit on Campus Avenue is 40 mph. As stated in Table 201.1 of the HDM, the minimum stopping distance is 250 feet for a design speed of 35 mph.Therefore,the minimum stopping sight distance for the Project Driveway 3 was considered as 300 feet.
As for corner sight distance, Section 405.1 of the HDM states that corner sight distance requirements are not applicable for urban driveways unless signalized. However, as a conservative approach, corner sight distances were also evaluated for the project driveways.The minimum corner sight distance was based on design speed,time gap, and type of vehicles from the minor roads (project driveways)to enter the major roads (20th Street). Based on the requirements established in the HDM, it was determined that a minimum corner sight distance of 390 feet for left- turn maneuvers and 335 feet for right-turn maneuvers coming out of Project Driveway 1 and Project Driveway 2 would be required.
Furthermore,for Project Driveway 3, as previously mentioned minimum corner sight distance was based on design speed,time gap, and type of vehicles from the minor roads (project driveways)to enter the major roads (Campus Avenue). Given the location of this project driveway, it should be noted that vehicles can possibly be traveling less than allowed speed limit. However, as a conservative measure, corner sight distances were calculated using metrics for combination trucks and speed limit of 40 mph.Thus, based on the requirements established in the HDM, it was determined that a minimum corner sight distance of 680 feet for left-turn maneuvers and 620 feet for right-turn maneuvers coming out of Project Driveway 3 would be required.
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 8-1 (11/27/24)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L S/`-■`A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA
Since the corner sight distance required at the project driveways would be greater than the stopping sight distance, sight triangle figures were created using corner sight distance as a conservative approach. Project Driveway 1 will provide adequate sight distance for left-turn maneuvers as shown by the sight distance triangles illustrated on Figure 8-1. Project Driveway 2 will provide adequate sight distance for left-turn maneuvers, as shown by the sight distance triangle illustrated on Figure 8-2. Project Driveway 3 will provide adequate sight distance for left-turn maneuvers as shown by the sight distance triangles illustrated on Figure 8-3.
8.2 BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN, AND TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY
8.2.1 Bicycle Accessibility
As part of the City's Bikeway Network, Class III bike routes exist on both directions of Campus Avenue north of SR-210 within the study area. Since there are no existing bike facilities along 20th Street, bicyclists currently will not be able to access the project site.
8.2.2 Pedestrian Accessibility
According to the City's General Plan,the study area on Campus Avenue and 20th Street east of the SCE easement has been identified as the areas that needs sidewalks, as shown on Figure 4-7.
8.2.3 Transit Accessibility
Omnitrans provides both local and regional services throughout the region, with 30 fixed routes and 5 OmniGo routes using 178 vehicles.There are no Omnitrans bus routes that operate within the study area.
8.3 LIST OF CHAPTER 8.0 FIGURES
• Figure 8-1: Corner Sight Distance at Project Driveway 1 • Figure 8-2: Corner Sight Distance at Project Driveway 2 • Figure 8-3: Corner Sight Distance at Project Driveway 3 P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 8-2 (11/27/24)
-
NI .
, - - ' .. 111111' Ile.- . - .---- pa II.) S 771g4 W...27100 ligiWir . '..: ift'Qv-A,' "rn • I I 4 ' .- - . •
III 4 glii ._
. • - - ''' ''...7" .Jr 41, -;4.17,, .1 ..6 mist. 1
11 • t-';'0 .4 -.1.-, .• ,-
Ar ' . .--- *
• 4., _ ,,,A. . tt y,
' ''''' .'3. ,,!• Y.'fr- 1 r-
I. I, lis : ..., __. . •40 • ••-- -''• ' -Q VA . • . . - 1..):•-• ,4 1.._...,6, . to*,. A
. ••••••A 'T I, 1- • .
- '• "4 Pt k
1 i ,
, -1 :::4:. .... ,-;;1141-._70,, ..i.: ''', : ''.• I ' •ty• ',. ,
-;:v-- . - • •
., ...,:, 1,- • .,:. ; NIct , ,r --., 2, t.,te...,•. - -.. •s P_ 1 IS ? •Ole Ir, 4- '...: ''?.- _-4,.‘"i II•...4;111:14 .i., ' ,.. '1,•,•11 . -,- b , •, •I
••....,,,,,a It-11.• .....
I
• - ..
1:'"'KP 4 71".;...! 40;4 4".... .,, ,..._:,...,::...1.'-: , 11 -4.,% lip I ii,.
v" II 'I '- . '
....V
... .
. II Mr
41r?t, . , '114. , '.-. . lat ' ill
.. , '
111111 ' I ir 11.:••• ,ti, , Vr' ,
4'0. ,\-• ' 1 1 11 ,41404001 ilk , PIP 11 -I
•s!, ,
a •% 4. -
.. . _ . •I '''.. !'
- 7 •, ft,,';'4,1''' 4 X a- a I pi
i ' a
... .,....._ . taa-.Z.1..-aba". • aa•
'a . • tt, -11
: . ' , , ••• •• Pr .-
!.•-• - i• . -,. 4 it lk:ilkilic.. , 0..' ,lc, .. •• '' - ,'11't
a..‘,.. 4Alli. u)
_ -...
_.:_..,—11111n
cc
(...)
et
LLI
.."- 1
li'' ''•• .
I. .%,,!44.1' . •:;.J.
ta. )
, •. pt. I
"I- .0.,-,lei.
--
.. -
, ,Auii,... ....„..,
.
[..
, _ , -814
•. • . is: „...,
-.71 le • . •
...
.. •
,174'jii:^, • .•
15"... t:./..N...i. , fr..i: , 7_5 Is.- • ;.._________1111111trr. . . , 1
a ,,,/, ,-
N._..•...rt,.._"44. _ - - . .- 44/11401 / M O.
2 +I
0 • $
I #- .-pc't A, ..• __
m, iifilike_ _
,.-
'.4 ,,,iw A 1 . 3*-4 .
. - i 111; 1
, i 1
. jri 0
LI ' -54,. A till
'
...`14 ,.• . ,-,
I. . a . ,
•
74.4....
re , a.... .,
_ •_
.... •
en
z
I /
II eiti ,
,----„ , • _ ......,...4_,... , •___ _ 0 . . _. ,. .,... .... . tVz 20TH STREET _ . 20TH STREET
.---I
- - ill.•
[390 3l
E•
• -----____--- 1
)[ ' • ,.-
, '''''"-------____(____-----------
4—
NI•of
V Illipl 140°4°%I.0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0000 0 0, °?..-"0 0 • ,• ',. 00000 000 0000 #14) „ . 0
1 I
e• fib 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) CriViref, c'° \------- oe c.pri, ,e,4.:,
co•°,(800' cldir--;''''T''14' e i— - --- ••••••;..-,at,,-1141 .
OP IV .0.4•.or 12#?Alr' ;`±',.'1-. , 0
.z....R.,.;,V. p
. et 0(411t%tir4raiWillittacb:111P '40. 0;‘-;„41 loi . occ
. ,.. .I` •iir-.4..ml...'2,,,....,,,..,1,1z; „i:4....•pe,..',N,....1.? ,.........wi...':$.;.:400.1.0!il r —1 it''' .._- c•--ilkio 0 . 1-`?"-, .1".;••••.:?4: :-7:t";6' ga1111.a.col-IlV 1 I II I I I 1 I CI! , ,-....,,,t , i, t .. .1),,, 7,..., ' ,,,• .-_-:,_ ,,,,„
— - ILI ....:,•
111P~_...)—1.111P14161 114,44 ,1'..!::-'''''': 111P-: I _i tl I I i I I I i 7:. - • - ''' tr.;, ecii'l, ' ' . ''''1; lair -i-•
... 2
iiesi .4, 0 .
0 0 ii.• ''
iv. mow
-Lij 1,, •p• .-is ,
I • .1tOr _ -',, • , ' 1
gmAk 1 gf11 [11 II I
. ,
, 1
I • 1 ...1- . • 0. '110,
vet'
' -•
i LI CI 0 .4,1 er-.. - li,"•11 ., , II',• ,01 II:-•; ..- ''r - 1 l'. ''
. "I- \I :V:, ,ra
-..- r 4. mar :,) ) .0
. ,. _ ....
_c . .„...,... „,
L SA FIGURE 8-1
111;
San Antonio Water Headquarters
0 40' ao• Traffic Impact Analysis . 1.1
FEET Corner Sight Distance at Winston Court - Project Driveway 1/20th Street SOURCE:CEDG,Inc.,August 2023
P:\2024\20241723_5n Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTATechnical Studies‘Traffic Analys[s\Sight Distance\20240729_1SA_CAD BASE.dwg(10129/2024) Page 1218 of 1374
_ • -701. ''?'-:1 '=V*7) r-''• '--.1-.- IIli 47 .. ,
044-.4i ,:- - . .•.-.-....,- '..-0;.; :,-,-.
.. . .;;• .--4 • :- - * -...,.-k.li.p,r1, 2.1..... /-1r- . 1!;ii ... •-.•
......•
., .,
• l'•
. ".• .-.
...
...I., . , 3 ...,- ..,,riii. , •
...1 . La
0 . i -a . . '`'. -410-).._)• ire••
. ... I
4113:11:
-•1 4.4. 4. '..•411e. , •P. ICAO•Sol-
.
- - •.t.------7--- ._ 101111r.-.
. .-- IL
.. .. ...• ..: '0 ,_ .,..:
:iall„,-. i 3- •,-.a • ...„,-
, --- --—.
•"—-— iipi ta- Ifi: "•F'Lleit 4 _ "wr' 01141.1014 ...j1 Y I..., • .!...4 „IL.11.,:
-,t; -1*. .. . .. _„...,t. „.•„, •• . . •- .4 •1_ . .• , ..... .., „ ... ..,..„ . e : . . . Cl) cr 0... ..ts:
,.., ,.. ., . -.1.1 .4fo. • _ . . ,q,- > = ..t. , • . 0 .. •. ." •bi-'
M ''' it'•:.'....11.1.":' , . ''.*;;;;, ' ..,00 • - Oir .1 .-1.: ' ., I,- i ,,m- O. . • ,e,1'1!''-i;°••.':" '. 2 0 :e'lliii'°'a.--• .., • . ;,. MID ..., .r• ' .40 I •Pit • A..
C.) ._.-./.e..4111
•••
I • , r.J.* 41.. - .
4E• ' "I. I, . r t .
• 4 '..-j'A.--•• ,
AI - 5
. ---__
• . '11.•:74 , V. -I, ifik, j" 't .../, •:.- 1 _ Illr litt.
-.114.. ..• - s i
_ .
0 di I- •. , .' , t.tir,. if :
_. cc 1 -.- - .... -.;:* ilr. ..- ' LL - --I 1 ..1,,,,:• ,,.., N --..61,...,...A %.1 t,' ..."- .
_ _, _ L). .'1/4 y ' II Alkiel 1. ' - • '.1'4 4. 4 .. ' 94. - . ,..- it i Ci
' 4. A
Ilk - .
' ' Iii Z
- --...
lialaii , - .
" . . I—
CI) . 1 T'
WirAIP--11-4Mij 111111 a.
. AN, J. .. _ . ,14,1110W,Al•—•••—'r'''l
---.7•••
;: . - • .-
. _ . . .
. . -•. _.." Z
2:...........)- *IP'
STREET 390' 201\\--- ___I 4110 ,:04*1110 11-- 20TH1 STREET
----/
... , . I k
. .._
,-,,-,, ,-.C5 OOY75 (:-1 • , . _ .
- - -
7 as o.
1111101:c9r000000 COO 0 0 0 0 ovaP 0,....1„, 0 Es - . . . ...,
,• -,,L 00000 000 0000 0&04) ,,.. . 0
4-..." ' 9 • • 1110 •
0 save a \‘..._.--------------------
II c.ro0 vo0-sw .0.0.8.0.0..1c1.P.,.„,„.._ 7 ...i;„..4.,,:.,.•...c.;.,,,„..i-.nr1:
01.1 11
.' !411'.i.S• tL.
,-'j•
At• itrilraitigaitia •,-ir,.-jr- •
ight:--wiMENtillit 2.,z.g."00:440/1 .. _,:,_ - ;• a., ',Ik ,-:$' NP' Alf' 10 II .
.. . •-r-4.` - '.•r.' 1.(1.1c4t, •...., -' I 0", . '''..r•I
....-••••••-..7/1 0 flikail•473, 107111111111i Allte• litCbee ,°.•.."411117-...!--?::00".•
-t, .0... .••
0 ki.4Y '.1-7-. .4,-;117'a - a".114P.-••' ; ',-;-'.- -'-\',-4•..4..p.,,•,.:;.XL,F. / e ,....-- ••••' i
.11.14.1...:74.:**ff,, . ,,,,.:......- ;•%:*14::: ";153,-:`,""--.. fill* ' Irrdeltallkill MOP
rile'
•,2 0
,„ .
40.1.•
INFAgra 0 .6.110
AIM . 0,,_oc7 1 I
111- .4° J •.,. 1
,
, 1111 . .tel .•. .•....
11 '
, ..
• ..
•1 i 1
4. .
11111 :rg.
i 4'4.-,
1 .r
ird.41' '-.' F'•1,tr.-4 - ,
- I
. t Z.. •
':-
11i - 7
• . I.'
i.'0' •
••h--.._ •.
. •:•.:. — ...
L__...A al- ' 1 0 II MICr e, . ., .., •1 lot lir •...
-'441hr "'•
111\111\ 13 D CI
., 1 :IP, 0. : 411111rtinirlIKO 0 000
I .. _ •••
. .
-1.• ,. .. ..-- . • ' - -• -. 3,.
••„, .. II'. , y... ,:: Alk,t•..., ' ..- -. : ..t • IQ
J ..... -hityl;,
. ,
r
I/ I
) .
1 t. 1 . 1°
‘:-
1 _r
ifYY).
L S A FIGURE 8-2 111;
San Antonio Water Headquarters
0 40' 80' Traffic Impact Analysis . 1..
FEET Corner Sight Distance at Project Driveway 2/20th Street SOURCE;_CEDG,Inc„August 2023
F:\2024\20241723.San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Anarysis\Sight Distance\20240729.,LSA.,CAD SASE.dwg(10/29/2024) Page 1219 of 1374
1-
• ' ...L-t W - I:- • ..
• ,
. Jr:. •'.'s'• . .
r /
• 'I • • ..._ . -- '
7 4‘.: 41--. :IV.,
- 4,410.- . '•••-
i • .---- .'.....-:.'i+t. .0d•*,,,,..s'i... ..._4..,-1,1'7.•.1 i••.T•••,.L I"........,.,i,- •r..4.x.,,1,',i_t..4„.-,-,'.-.7•, 11:P:'4,..vti!..l'q.- _,,L,-3 -.. •,• • .•O._..lt4, ,•-!- _.,, •.•.•- 7..l•;.4ir•..----F., .I•—„.
N- . ••I#le
•••
- • •
,.. -, • !-41 ' .1 t.'.- C.,l' ::AO - .. . ". .• • -iv le tt- , •I , 1 . •p 0.4;::.• •. •-•••• c .,.'4.- ..16 ;••t,,-. , .. • it, • _. V- .+.• • ••. „ .• ... .,• --• ii . • le • ' .1 . -L. .. it- -4,•- • • •,..• - #.; ,.: •. . . •i --1, 1, . , . „v... • -.••.,. ..,,.k.,-....... ..1 e-• I .- .. , • t ., •
:e t■ • ...- )It '. ^ • if". --.L.• '',4 .7.4e. , .- 4 7, - . . .. ....._,-... . F, IN.-1'j•., .. -• ....... •.• 'r
-- '- - 11 !
- •-.! -3- -. _ -, 4 • I' -e. .?';.,..4..- ............ . .. .. :) 1 ilt. .- - ..e- •..44::A. .-4
,-....j1 • . -A. . -4,..., , ... !t . . „...i-k4 -...,. . . „..-„, _ . . fi ,._...,!.474 • ;' ' le -
,.. 1 . ..)... 1 - ••••-• - - . - 7'A* , i i • —,,_ .# •. -1.....ei..i ..„ • • 1, • • .. , • • t "• I , •• ....,, •
ii,,'• • 1‘:• .•0(ii.' ..44."..X.
•••••- V- ‘)11•L-11-lq-19‹ • -• Li''. - lvil. •',-` . ; ... , ..,•-.-. lio---. ‘,....x„. 41. ....._.‘ .. •. , ...lip ... . . 7.: '•ar" .1.' . . ..,•••?.. ' iP• Wilt:II. ..7'1 C. . . t.---"-IP 7 ' '. 011103
•
• 1.• -''.... ' :•• .' 1 1110'1:1:jA i'V1 iig •-• ..11.-- .', , • - .
P • %-•P., 19i) 1 L •- -: t. '..-.1," , , , . .. . mist--." . - i(1) -J'41.1411111.."117 •• ... . d'h,•::" 'IA. ..-11k.".-7;1 ..-'-.114.1.- k,:;t,' '' -.-' ,..:4:!:,40•4 1: ":11. ..1 ' . -1.• . ... • ..;,,. )_ ii.;, r• •..:'4. , i 1•lir.,• . 1,.., .., A , :i'••3' J •.!..k • ' -•,1-1 . , ,is' • . ._. ,,,00.• $ - ,.q.'Jr . . '-.Z. - IIRIPP.117! •',1'' ..••*.; •''.., i iii 14 25-••°. -,,-4--••••or, , :% -4,. ... .-.Vic114,ir r:.• .--. - ?L-TA- ;• ;•.-,..'...‘4,1 •'....._.;-. -. •,;('-'-....-".''' • •• -•'• :I •••-3,-1".+403‘•..--••:"L'.1 , .
i.P• ; ii.t• ' .' 1-,i7 • • - ' .?. i''''r •• ' • •-• 1' .„ ••• . `'.1 ..Z.V. ' . • Ilirr..f •..• . -4.1.."-• .ei . ' ...... -tt -.;,.. 4, „.- . • - ; A . _ -. • , . , .,,,. ... •t;e,,,,..), ,....,4 • , , -. " le** 4' LeillIEW.-4,. T '•ii- . .. , • • lif--c.,"i-..-4, i,..-. ' r '•lk.,,-L .#': - .._-. ri 1111 ; ..,, i.. 4., •../Lart:e Air.— .../ -• ,, 11-9.' • . .% .. ,„
tiik.-.••
. . . 404.-:41, ot oli /1.
f.'44-: ,
•
. ... op „.••••• ,3;„ ,.-.ii..-34;x4„-,!• ._ .••• ,•. .„›, • • - .1 -.- ." • I. '!.,-.•4,,!.'t- ... ... ' 41i* ..01641411— • 1 er.. •— .. i 5' 6'4 • ' ' -.4.1 •,..74.4....n. "4 • , -, • t4 I • ,
_. _ .•., -.• .r. ....;,. t - .... ..,,, .„.... 1 .i• ' ---. • .!' ..,..„,•ir
.._•--0 . •_..1 ....0 iti. ,1 .. .7. ,.....z. ..., . . , ...,• . , .,,, I‘ 1„. ,, •---,..4.f. ' ''I:-• • '1# I .. 9p#,- ,.... , -NO,- • I'' ' . . 4% . ‘410 4* , ..r. '. . . , ri
. if, - '.. 't•- .
• ..• • 7 .lapp vo •,..'...., - .r•I'l.!.,.. It, . ..,... •. • , •. . •
r V . - kv. .. .1 •
SION, .. el 6 :1.1'1 t 41 A Y% • • 48`‘-me e 0 101110 ...-- • . ( . 4.•. ,1. ..I • I
•., - v . •,•;.... ,.$....o.•... •tyk .,r Fit • - ••• -''----- '1, 'or 1111T. .4C1:71.41ryt.:01..:0-111;•0•710....Z„i.,..t--,,,,.. .44..... p . „.
LI.'.,,,!' * pA' ', 4,-• 1 •. - 1_1 . .., ,4, . . .-F . t7,0-.. . . • ,.,.. ..._41 ,-•. • , • • ',I:.
, • „..-•••- ,•AL ,-.-- iiv.-4$-•,* - IA,' • . 4i)..11,.- • 0. ••• ••.,.4-.54,
---...:.-. '' '`-0 -AIL--':••• • t -,•. • . _ •17 ; • . , ,,c jilt ' •
,- -* -,••-• • . . ,-,,,_..N. -
; .4jek Av . lv.:v..irt.. . .. , • „
, Nii.....4_:•- [...i.
J. :, , . ..„..., .,...:.. , . .... .6:7..:„t„......--......,...,„„ .. 4 • r.,4 ...- milt, , . . , -
-..1 .' irt...:91Z1r>•
:t
•••• .,• .• k-r--..r-..el'1-...Z-' 7 41kf / .:-Ij.1•.41'- ;". - ta:C.' :. .•...4 41''''''''-.:.r."...: 14e.. ;.1'''. 1; "ir.• tk, ..), ;..V.• . ... ,. ,•4 .i• _0
• :f7'f t . II •• ' ••-.-_.- •-...•"1 -t•*
Ilt. ... -
514.°. . z .. ...m. to. ....-.•&... ..
. _ -..- ._.. mi.
. ...• - 4-7• .07-A.:.•. ' ,,!. •
' r , i . ._•.,...
''. :,lf ''''45. 1.... . t-... t_ P -.-
..,
.• . • - - ' • .
• 680'
- - .- , ._ .• • ,
t illi .
t. Tiff/
fr I.f f
.ti., :V- . .--;,•4" HIF., ...r-t: ':Vq.. '.4._A- • ; .•,-, -- -• 71,t*--::
ilirois,...16-.-7 '•• •It. 1,4., .. 41„,.',.. - 7: 'al' .. :. : • • ... 11-110•1.-.... :7* 'Z' + :littei.r'.•, • .• ? • ' •: . 1' . . . I'ill •• 1
• ••••41h-. •1 il'io:1; 111 -..r-..:, .iii;o'st.4 e_.1' s' .•.A ii 43.. " ,- - •
- .•:' -. • ...
se ot
-- , i •7iik.... v.T.,... ... ...
-- ., *J., .. - , .. -7, .;.c •,,,...-. 1, ' -Aiiiii.L1.1-310 • # . . - il'i i• ...e.. .4,1
44.,..
.0 -... -4.,
*".AP irr4:1°.17"'I.1.-- 1141,13 r. '' 0 Olt t- t#14P..''Itri 1 )I• 1,
,V1 . ...-,1 " ' . 11
„ . . ..0.7 *14.:?) 41-4,"-.erli111:.• " '
•,.„....i -4...1„ . . 5. ,4„u„--107:-L.,e.c..' i•'•;-... .. , 1 t .,..,,, a]
Ilk. fl . '' - 4.41_ N, ' '.-------. -'•'
•
- 4 -, - wir- ..... Till -
..4 •:.'Vir- -:', . .9 . .. ,
li or1 _-
„ ,r .'; ii*. ' : '-'.L.'V d. •r4 .4 f ., , .• .... • ,,,.. ft.4... .0.- .
r.3 1,0`,.; .•,L, . < .,6. • I• . • ItSio!',•,.. ...4,x,iitr- #, :.!•-•• •‘';. ; • , 0 •
.. ..,_., II.?-14.01•17M- . '4.4N. ..,ir,..i.', ..4.-•, .4' ,• • . -A / •.
C,, 1; .
• r...1
Dr:
1,'" ... ..--" ' . . . •
. .,
2 .. . • • • 11-$1,_ ift.-c. iiity • 4.-Y .-*ow ,. - _-- • ... .- .'•-•i'-w. 40,4 r• , ..,-. .. . _ 0 ,.,, • .. . . , . .,., ,... i , ,,, ,,,.. „Hi . •
.,
.4
. .,..,..,,..• fivs . -,1„-iitAgr ,
, ,.. .,:.,.•!.
1.“..'-' l.• . .
. 'f".• . . ' 'Or. - . 1-4,1 L 1 •..,... . . ,-•-• ... ' +.; rum
---,_ _,
! H, It ' 0* 1
J ..0 .-. . . - . '' •
- ' - 3 ‘• .: .• ..1 'It'-
1' r l'e ..-IV• ' . '• / . 4• • qb t :I. ..'.1'I .••• . ,•Ni:. ... .
-
J".•'1 , ...i :-.: ... ..: ••• '+•• . , • .. '• irii 1'.I'71:4•4•,$'74 •. •t,-• ' 1
. .2,..,_ .•....;•• . ..., p ___i' '. lit • i
altr.1..'1,.• T...'. .:.c_...........) r,t.,i IP.,I.,3...1-.'e.t'.'•I ..•.1'Ac.t•.4" I,•t,of..t •i,."...-4...• ..-- .. I
I g"11 111 1. . % '2 I„.. 1 41 111111111!1/1111 1 20TH STREET ' -_. i L 411I! ' i IIIIIIWIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIMgj...ppmimpnimmll • . .-. . . • ..4
' • 4.0 . ..-. IIP• . '... _ . ..r.7.
*filitlit*1 - .• - • - ,
) ow or....Po o • -•/- , _- _
.- 7.... . - ••••• •111L ID'im.4
-- .,1 ::..;' II-- iN•L • . • lilLji:pr,"
00110 0 . •••- -44••••411Pullt I, • •.- .•
\..._____,......_•7. ..------7-- •. ' - '" It.'' - ' • • t
_ _ - • .• '' ' - -.• ; . • • -• -•-' " . .. - . .,
- --••'.. •-;• • ... .....
a
l' f2.'1,5:F;,14-r•gi
.v.,_:„..vc..i-r4- •.. .9 B
_'p•5...-'-•••f;'•7411:41ki 0.
41Int
'';f4i0r.iii•OF ••' r
'"-41171** • ° 41
--....1.,•:••••1! es s
./....... ..0- - • . - .. 0 I- i -I
1111fr . . . ... . . • I." • -... N. ( 1 ,...: -; ' •4. ..'114;•CP' ' Al.' r'OD-•. ,„of "ir . ....' .i.„ , ., ....• • . . -!•••-•,•,..• - •4.!..;.6••••..... .. , 1 . • •S• ' ' L.AP'... I.-
1 I I 1
.•-•• ._.:- .s..‹,•-e''....;..'..7 1.•ZIA. , `• ' -... -. : . • I • - .... • ...AP ,.••— -...- . • $."+"... ) 1 1 I
4 k L4s: k. 1:..... _ x _ .- Ai-. . . - • • .-- Iii
'''.... ...r..._iF.:-... ",.
. sk: . !.. . .....
L SA FIGURE 8-3
San Antonio Water Headquarters
0 40' 80'
Traffic Impact Analysis
FEET
Corner Sight Distance at Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street SOURCE,C8 PG,Inc.,August 2023
Pu1...41,4..41.m san mr.,..rnr,..way Ea,alvaroegnpul,.70-Knear..15mrkewronc Analysis.1:4.ht Chaanyead141,1_15AS.Aa WE.6.2(Sig/NMI
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS LSA NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA
9.0 CEQA ASSESSMENT-VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS AND ACTIVE
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC TRANSIT ANALYSIS
9.1 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS
On December 28, 2018,the California Office of Administrative Law cleared the revised California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines for use. Among the changes to the CEQA Guidelines was the removal of vehicle delay and LOS from consideration under CEQA. With the adopted CEQA Guidelines,transportation impacts are to be evaluated based on a project's effect on VMT.
LSA utilized the TIA Guidelines for the VMT analysis of the proposed project. The City's TIA Guidelines include screening criteria,VMT analysis methodology,VMT impact thresholds, and VMT mitigation measures.
The TIA Guidelines provide multiple screening criteria for land use projects.The VMT screening criteria in the "Analysis Methodology" section of the TIA Guidelines were reviewed to determine whether the proposed project could be screened out from a VMT analysis. Following is a brief description of the proposed project in relation to the VMT screening criteria:
• Project Located in TPA:The proposed project is not located within a TPA; therefore,this screening criterion does not apply.
• Residential or Office Project Located in Low-VMT Area:The project is not a residential or office project; therefore, this criterion does not apply.
• Project Type (Land Use) Screening: According to the TIA Guidelines, "Projects generating less than 250 daily vehicle trips" are presumed to have a less than significant impact. As shown in Table 5.A,the project generates 91 daily vehicle trips.Therefore,the project is not estimated to have any significant VMT impact and may be screened out from a detailed VMT analysis.
9.2 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC TRANSIT ANALYSIS According to the City's TIA Guidelines, a significant impact occurs when a project conflicts with adopted plans, policies, or programs regarding active transportation or public transit facilities, or otherwise decreases the performance or safety of such facilities.
Based on the City's Bikeway Network, Class III bike routes exist on both directions of Campus Avenue north of SR-210 within the study area.The project would not modify the existing bike routes along Campus Avenue.As such,the project would not decrease the performance or safety of any existing or proposed bicycle facility.
According to the City's General Plan,the study area on Campus Avenue has been identified as the area that needs sidewalks.The project would not modify any existing sidewalks. As such,the project would not decrease the performance or safety of any existing or proposed pedestrian facility.
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 9-1 (11/27/24)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L 7/`-■`A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA
Omnitrans provides both local and regional services throughout the region, with 30 fixed routes and 5 OmniGo routes using 178 vehicles.There are no Omnitrans bus routes that operate within the study area.The project would not modify or affect any public transit access within the study area.
The project does not conflict with any existing or proposed bicycle, pedestrian, or public transit facilities.Therefore, it can be considered to conform to all adopted policies, plans, or programs concerning these facilities and would not have a significant impact.
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 9.2 (11/27/24)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L C A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA _Vl r`■L
10.0 CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS AND FUNDING SOURCES
10.1 RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Based on the results of the LOS analysis, all study intersections are forecast to operate at a satisfactory LOS under all scenarios.Therefore, no circulation improvements are recommended at this time.
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx 10.1 (11/27/24)
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L sr`■L A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA
APPENDIX A
SCOPING AGREEMENT
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx(11/27/24)
CARLSBAD
L SA CLOVIS
IRVINE
LOS ANGELES
PALM SPRINGS
POINT RICHMOND
RIVERSIDE
ROSEVILLE
SAN LUIS OBISPO
August 28, 2024
Mr.Alan French
Principal Engineer
City of Upland
460 N. Euclid Avenue
Upland, California 91786
Subject: Scope of Work for the San Antonio Water Headquarters Traffic Impact Analysis (LSA Project No.20241723)
Dear Alan:
LSA is preparing a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA)for the San Antonio Water Headquarters Project (project) located at 400 East 20th Street in the City of Upland (City).The project site is located in northwest Upland in an area primarily consisting of residential, commercial, and industrial uses.The Project site is bound by East 20th Street to the north, Southern California Edison (SCE) easement (open space)to the east, State Route 210 (SR-210) to the south, and Flower Court to the west.There are currently existing structures on the project site: a one-million-gallon water storage tank located at the northwestern corner of the parcel, a pump station located at the southwestern corner of the parcel, and a signal building and tower located at the southeastern corner of the parcel. Figure 1 (all figures,tables, and appendices attached) illustrates the regional and project location.
The proposed project proposes to develop a new 3,698 square-foot San Antonio Water Co. (SAWCO) headquarters and associated improvements including a 4,066 square-foot maintenance building, maintenance yard, driveway, parking, solar cover, landscaping, and utility improvements.The existing water storage tank, pump station, and signal buildings and tower would remain in place.
Based on the project description and operational information provided, it is anticipated that approximately 10 people would be employed on the Project site. Access to the project site will be provided via two driveways on 20th Street and one driveway on Campus Avenue. The westerly driveway on E. 20th Street along the northern property boundary provides access for SAWCO patrons and customers.The middle driveway located on the northeastern corner of the project site provides access to the SAWCO employee parking area and maintenance facilities.The easterly driveway located on the northeastern corner of the project site would connect to the intersection of Campus Avenue and E. 20th Street. This easterly driveway would require acquisition of right-of-way from the existing SCE easement. For purposes of this analysis, all driveways have been considered as full-access driveways. Figure 2 illustrates the conceptual site plan for the project.
LSA anticipates that the following scope of work will be required to prepare the TIA for the proposed project.
8/28/24(P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Scoping\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA Scoping Agreement.docx)
1500 Iowa Avenue,Suite 200,Riverside,California 92507 951.781.9310 www.lsa.net
LSA
SCOPE OF WORK
The scope of work has been prepared as per the City of Upland Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines (TIA Guidelines), dated July 2020. As per the City's TIA Guidelines, the TIA should include two components—1) a Level of Service (LOS) Analysis for General Plan consistency purposes and 2) a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)Analysis and an Active Transportation and Public Transit Analysis for California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) requirements.
LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
Study Area
As per the City's TIA guidelines, at a minimum,the study area must include intersections with 51 or more two-way peak-hour project trips. However, based on comments provided by City staff, a LOS analysis will need to be prepared to determine the potential operational issues concerning the project driveways, including the driveway connecting to the intersection of Campus Avenue/20th Street. As such,the following intersections were included in the TIA:
Study Intersections:
1. Winston Court—Project Driveway 1/20th Street;
2. Project Driveway 2/20th Street; and
3. Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street.
Figure 3 illustrates the study area intersections.
Traffic operations at all study intersections will be analyzed during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours.The a.m. peak hour is defined as the one hour period of the highest traffic volume occurring between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m. while the p.m. peak hour is defined as the one hour period of the highest traffic volume occurring between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. Intersection LOS will be calculated using the Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition (HCM 7) analysis methodologies and by using the Synchro 12 software.
Project Trip Generation,Trip Distribution, and Trip Assignment The trip generation for the proposed project was developed as follows:
Employee Trip Generation
Based on the project description and operational information,the project is anticipated to have 10 full-time employees. For purposes of this analysis, all 10 employees are anticipated to arrive at the facility in the a.m. peak hour and leave the facility in the p.m. peak hour.Therefore,the project is estimated to generate 20 daily employee trips with 10 inbound a.m. peak hour trips and 10 outbound p.m. peak hour trips.
8/28/2024(P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Scoping\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA Scoping Agreement.docx) 2
L SA
Additionally, based on the project description and operational information,the project is anticipated to have 6 trucks for the operations. Based on information from the applicant,the truck trips are described as followed:
• Truck#1 (2-axle light duty truck): Truck is considered as a standby vehicle and will average around 80-90 miles per day.
• Truck#2 (2-axle light duty truck): Truck is considered as a retired standby vehicle/support vehicle for construction jobs and will average around 20-25 miles per day. • Truck#3 (2-axle light duty truck): Truck is considered as a general maintenance/support vehicle for construction jobs and will average around 20-25 miles per day. It is likely only to be driven for around 75%of work week.
• Truck#4 (2-axle medium duty truck):Truck is considered as a dump truck. This vehicle will average 20-25 miles per day and is usually only driven about 4-5 days a month. • Truck#5 (2-axle medium duty truck):Truck is considered as a service truck and planned to be used for larger construction jobs and heavy maintenance.This vehicle will average around 20-25 miles per day and likely only to be driven for around 75%of the work week. • Truck#6 (2-axle light duty truck): This vehicle has an auxiliary fuel tank that will be used for refueling the project's tractors. Occasionally used for short runs for parts and supplies. It will average around 20-25 miles per day and likely only to be driven for around 5-6 days a month.
For purposes of this analysis, all trucks were considered to be 2-axle trucks and operating within the same day as a conservative estimate.Therefore, it could be estimated that the project will be generating 12 daily employee truck trips (inbound and outbound combined). Based on the operational hours,these trips could be estimated as peak hour trips, with 6 outbound truck trips occurring during a.m. peak hour, and 6 inbound truck trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour.All truck trips were converted to passenger car equivalent(PCE)trips using a 1.5 PCE factor for 2-axle trucks based on TIA Guidelines.
Customer Trip Generation
• Headquarter Building—The trip generation for this component was developed using rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual(11th Edition) for Land Use 712—"Small Office Building."
The project trip generation is summarized in Table A. As shown in Table A,the project is anticipated to generate 91 total net PCE daily trips, with 25 net PCE trips occurring during the a.m. peak hour and 27 net PCE trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour.
The distribution of project trips is based on the regional roadway network and the location of residential, employment and commercial center in relation to the proposed project. Figure 4 8/28/2024(P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Scoping\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA Scoping Agreement.docx) 3
LSA
illustrates the project trip distribution for the employees. Figure 5 illustrates the project trip distribution for the maintenance trucks. Figure 6 illustrates the customer trip distribution.The project trip assignment at the study intersections is the product of the project trip generation and the corresponding trip distribution percentages. Figure 7 illustrates the trip assignment for employees. Figure 8 illustrates the trip assignment for maintenance trucks. Figure 9 illustrates the trip assignment for customers. Figure 10 illustrates the total project trip assignment.
Analysis Scenarios
The TIA will be prepared based on consultation with City staff to meet the requirements of the City.
The TIA will examine traffic operations at the study area intersections under the following scenarios:
• Existing Conditions;
• Project Opening Year without Project Conditions;
• Project Opening Year plus Project Conditions;
• Horizon Year without Project Conditions; and
• Horizon Year plus Project Conditions.
The Project Opening Year is estimated to be Year 2027.The Horizon Year is considered to be Year 2045.
Volume Development and Analysis Methodology
Traffic volumes for existing conditions are typically developed using existing count data collected at study area intersections.
Traffic volumes for project opening year without project conditions will be developed by applying an ambient growth rate of 2 percent per annum to existing traffic volumes and adding traffic volumes from approved and pending projects in the vicinity of the proposed project. LSA contacted City staff and the adjacent jurisdiction of San Bernardino County for information regarding cumulative projects. Cumulative projects to be included in this study are summarized in Table B. Locations of cumulative projects are illustrated in Figure 11.
Traffic volumes for horizon year without project conditions will be developed by using forecast traffic volumes obtained from the San Bernardino Transportation Analysis Model (SBTAM).The methodology to develop horizon year without project traffic volumes at study area intersections will be consistent with the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority(SBCTA) procedures for post-processing of modeled traffic volumes.
Project opening year and horizon year plus project traffic volumes will be developed by adding project traffic to the traffic volumes for the corresponding without project scenarios.
Analysis of Traffic Operations and Recommended Circulation Improvements Levels of service without the project will be compared with levels of service plus the project for all analysis scenarios to determine operational deficiencies based on the LOS standards and operational 8/28/2024(P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Scoping\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA Scoping Agreement.docx) 4
LSA
deficiency criteria as applicable for the City. Furthermore, necessary improvements will be recommended to offset any operational deficiencies. Improvements may include addition of intersection turn lanes, segment lane additions, signalization, etc.The LOS with the proposed improvements will be calculated and summarized, along with a comparison of the LOS without improvements.
Signal Warrant Analysis (if Required)
A signal warrant analysis would be conducted at unsignalized intersections if a signal is recommended as an improvement. Peak hour approach volumes for study intersections will be examined to determine whether signalization may be warranted per the criteria defined in the California supplement of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA-MUTCD).
Sight Distance Analysis
A sight distance analysis will be conducted for the project driveways.This analysis will evaluate the sight distance and other potential safety issues pertaining to left-turn movements out of the project driveways.
Fair-Share Contributions (if Required)
A fair share percentage will be calculated for intersection improvements recommended in the TIA that are not included in the City's Development Fee (DIF) program, the SBCTA Nexus Study Fee program, or any other funding program.The percentage of fair share for the project will be calculated at each location using the total trips generated by the project divided by the total "new" traffic,which is the net increase in traffic volumes from existing to horizon year conditions.
CEQA ASSESSMENT-VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS
The TIA will include a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis to meet CEQA requirements.The project VMT analysis will be prepared consistent with the City's TIA Guidelines. Per the City's TIA Guidelines, the project may be screened out because it is anticipated to generate fewer than 250 daily vehicle trips.Therefore, as per the City's TIA Guidelines,the project may be presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact and may be screened from a VMT analysis.
CEQA ASSESSMENT—ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC TRANSIT ANALYSIS The TIA will include an analysis of potential project impacts on public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Significant impacts would be determined based on whether the project conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or programs for these facilities, or whether the project decreases the performance or safety of these facilities.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (951) 781-9310 or email me at [email protected].
8/28/2024(P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Scoping\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA Scoping Agreement.docx) 5
LSA
Sincerely,
LSA ASSOCIATES INC.
Ambarish Mukherjee, AICP, PE
Principal
ATTACHMENTS
Figures
Figure 1: Regional and Project Location
Figure 2: Conceptual Site Plan
Figure 3: Study Area Intersections
Figure 4: Project Trip Distribution— Employees
Figure 5: Project Trip Distribution—Maintenance Trucks
Figure 6: Project Trip Distribution—Customers
Figure 7: Project Trip Assignment—Employees
Figure 8: Project Trip Assignment—Maintenance Trucks
Figure 9: Project Trip Assignment—Customers
Figure 10:Total Project Trip Assignment
Figure 11: Cumulative Project Locations
Tables
Table A: Project Trip Generation
Table B: Cumulative Projects
8/28/2024(P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Scoping\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA Scoping Agreement.docx) 6
LSA
FIGURES
•
-`Y, ,.a :. ,„ oft. .#^ 1[ '#, 4 ,_ -1 ,14.
T - ;!`r .. ,7 9S% ? !'I
.. ` .._... 1 24TH STREET,: r-• �' , -,- I .• il•r ' i.7A:
?...! . • A ofte4416,WP-'-
' IL(' ' ' ...* .i 4`114*-•• .r,e."-• 1 - 1'4 - ..:t_ (,.• ....:,i r- •.'',i,7 ''' Ilea, 161,
14 il
S , 17�' .r i' .. •of �y,, 1 r •1 �. - !•.•ram - - '�w#./s, it. a. . .k. :
•r' z ,. ;, 1 ja=, - l \ 7.
..4.1.;44,, .
.> 1 �rf r . fz�Ah. a E` j iy • ' -1'- 'cam., 1 1 °• T ,rrr T Sr. i 22Nd STREET•. q ,„ AIAA x •. „
.i( .1 t: .1'vv,.-.' 7 1; fain '_ y ! _ Fr13 lye•'
. 46„4".rte r
- •" _ i�► "2QT 'ST+BEET• gry..• �i r . .,-,.. 1 ..4 k; i.r Y}, Y'I •
210 _..�. - _ - - - -_ ._ �--210
r .4:
,r _..,I p iti,t. ,.. ...t.: . ... .. _,.. .1 ,. •
...... ,. ..... .,.
•'i.: ' r, •1 ,j• 19TH SiTREET= V �l• •.% •_1• t+a.�• +.. P.F iIt.-1.•'• .40t....,.i -1 ti r -_ ',' • " i ^ 7, „ '..% -' Ptr-a1• :II 9. F "qt J J . -, ?8TH STREET _ "`+
.1. it ,. _ i
r _v-7t yryy
-.1, ^N* ••: 4,..i�1�1.r .T`1{-• n' k 1e
".is '+�y},,} , .X • L. y .' ,r{ 1• if.......-. •
Y. .it.- • s, ' • ..11r-.. „,,,.„. ....\ t.401.• •..�:'. * ..* n''i' 1•r�ii►• ''� 1A ` ' !, - •' :l... 'S•i." �fp y ` r'" 4 •,• ° 1 -f� +;..r is••- ' T * r �.
Project Vicinity I `r. .1y . C ,•r �i . . •�+' ; •
yy �,r �y }}r
�!. ��yyjjpp ,
L0S SA N
I 1 •.ram .P1p • i ••• :,•f • tiJl�lali lgl+�iuf 1 ANGELES f }3ERNARDiNO :: ••• 1 ` ik, . y,p��.
COUNTY i COUNTY • •pg' i.r .,r. .0 ;, Ry � i�`.• r. '{•J '� s , i •,4.r ......orr ►1 wir t r �-% „•T' *r ` oki� i>al ~~'4.+ ""'Mrs s i.
tli rit a , 10 _----- I'L -71.V. ...1 : :: . . - : t .f O. °Ir. I- --.- ET "'Z..4.7 li I- '.'' : it *r.
LA..:.,1111..101ft ill!! fi',1 _ izt.-•:7:-:i...•'"'- ''''11:-*-'4'-' i.
60 11! RIVERS+I.I]+E ,. r y' ! = *L rrrcr 4- t `�. COUNTY ''714i.f' iti Hillai F :. �! .f7E'� t ���I 11 li111 k 1P� .4 Lilt 'r � y I- I l5 3.+. lam? "i I,x-'b' k,- •.i L!' 7 I k k ,!.. '_Yr ,„, L SI LEGEND FIGURE 1
FT Project Location
San Antonio Water Headquarters
o 830 1660 Traffic Impact Analysis FEET Regional and Project Location
SOURCE:ESRI Streetmap,2021;Google Earth,2023
P:120241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS'rechnical Studies\Traffic Analysi51GI51,Report\Fig 1_Regional Project LocationlFig 1_Regional Projep al- 1SIt1j 1211a74,
rm.'mamma 10l.�oa J K-Ie
20TH ETRIIT .dR km.=1-0.wo"ra1 IE ""'.."W' # MOM , r ee vvcn.e.. CAMPUS AVENUE OM
a9 _e v. o
MEW rpHo" °CO eC�glrvA e: e e e• 7 Q.04 a -,.• .G �. ,..a.-,. ev rYma�r m:. e 0 e QQ e� O C e WIC
••. [`�M arrwaxrc�n ir�,a arrw wx
rs
.11
III
K\741 47
n ,
Y.
I y � 5rra --IIIRIA1bG1laM11O �' lAOt .�..�
,4 MIi1R(M v esrae� k ♦ [♦➢kAw
R1na1eY1
y
L SA FIGURE 2
N
San Antonio Water Headquarters
o Aso Traffic Impact Analysis
FEET
SOURCE:CEDG,Inc.,August 2023 Conceptual Site Plan P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion APRODUCTS17echnical Studies\?raffic Analys}s\GiS\teportWFig 2_Conceptual Site Plan.ai(6/12/2024) Page 1233 of 1374
r W
Z
0 Q
iI.1 C"i , 141
C) CO
Z
o Z
Z CQ)
k
20TH STREET ,.''-I-1) 20TH STREET
•
•
tir
ari
•
1 L SA LEGEND FIGURE 3
Q Project Location
Study Intersections
N
--- Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters o =so 300 ——— Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis FEET
Study Area Intersections
SOURCE:
P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\GIS\Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters\San Antonio WaterfAedasiarle234x6#21/37¢
r uJ
t~ x
Cr ILI
o
o CO
\§-
el.Q
•
1 2
20TH STREET ,.-" 20TH STREET
1 I 0. II
1 I , I
[ 1 •
I
1110
1112,
ri EGEND
0 Project Location
• Study Intersections
' 0 lso 3flo ""' Driveway
FEET i --' Future Driveway
- (30%) 70%
30% 30% 1, F i (70%) — i
I
I
i
IIWinston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street LFIGURE 4
XX%(YY%) --.Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters Inbound (Outbound) Distribution --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Project Trip Distribution—Employees
P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Dist_Employee_PV.xlsx 8/28/2024
r uJ
�.
a x
Cr
o
0 CO
\§-
ti.M
' U
•
2 -rrr
20TH STREET I .." I 20TH STREET
1 I ,f 1
I I , I
[ 1 •
I
111,
I
ri EGEND
0 Project Location
• • Study Intersections
' 0 lso 300 r r' Driveway
FEET i rr' Future Driveway
100%
(100%) i
I
I
I
I
i
IIWinston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street LFIGURE 5
XXX%(YYY%) —— Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters Inbound (Outbound) Distribution --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Project Trip Distribution—Maintenance Trucks
P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Dist_Employee_TR.xlsx 8/28/2024
r
Ili
i. x
a lu
o mt
a co
a
, cQs
•
1 2
20TH STREET ,.-" 20TH STREET
1 I ,' I
1 I , I
t i •
IV
I
ri EGEND
0 Project Location
• • Study Intersections
' 0 lso 300 ''.'' Driveway
FEET i --' Future Driveway
100% -, El I
8 i
I
I
i
IIWinston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street LFIGURE 6
XXX%(YYY%) --Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters Inbound (Outbound) Distribution --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Project Trip Distribution—Customers
P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Dist_Customer.xlsx 8/28/2024
I w
a
I-.
w
o a
u en
o Z
(1 U
1 2
20TH STREET '.�r r 20TH STREET
210
Arl
EGEND
Project Location
ti • Study Intersections
' 3DO --• Driveway
=ear --- Future Driveway
0/3 - 7/0
3/0 — I 3/0 -, I M 0/7
I I
I I
I I
I I
IIIW nston court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street carpus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street LSA FIGURE 7
XX/YY --,Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters AM/PM Peak Hour Trips --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Project Trip Assignment—Employees
P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Asgn-Employee_PV.xlsx 8/28/2024
I w
a
' a w
o a
u en
o Z
(1 U
1 2
20TH STREET ,.-r - 2OTH STREET
210
Arl
EGEND
Project Location
ti • :: '°"
' � way
=eer --- Future Driveway
- 0/9
9/0
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Winston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street Cairpus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street LSA FIGURE 8
XX/YY --,Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters AM/PM Peak Hour PCE Trips --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Project Trip Assignment-Maintenance Trucks
P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Asgn-Employee_TR.xlsx 8/28/2024
I w
a w
o a
u en
o a.
� U
1 2
20TH STREET ..�r r 20TH STREET
1 •
711
210
Arl
EGEND
Project ti
ti � :: '°"
Locaon' 3�� way
=eer --- Future Driveway
5/3 -11 to
I � I
I I
I I
I I
IIWinston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street Campus Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street LFIGURE 9
XX/YY ——.Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters AM/PM Peak Hour Trips --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Project Trip Assignment—Customers
P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Asgn-Customer.xlsx 8/28/2024
I w
a
ct w
a
o a
O Cl)
a 4
a
z cos
1 2 ���
20TH STREET -- 20TH STREET
I I r
I
1 / I
I I I
I
IV
I
LEGEND
Q Project Location
y • Study Intersections
1s0 300 ---' Driveway
BEET i ---• Future ❑riveway
F 0/3 - 7/9
3/0 - 3/0 -, 9/7
5/3 -1, I LO I M
I - I
I I
I I
I I
IIWinston Court-Project Driveway 1/20th Street Project Driveway 2/20th Street Car pt s Avenue/Project Driveway 3-20th Street LSA FIGURE 10
XX/YY ——.Project Driveway San Antonio Water Headquarters AM/PM Peak Hour PCE Trips --Future Driveway Traffic Impact Analysis Total Project Trip Assignment
P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\z12_Asgn-Total.xlsx 8/28/2024
... _ . y,• h •r x, r ,J7..';..e: I'1. .r ram ' (r y, s t. .' 4 j.. 4_,'. S. .• i ;,,,24,TH S WET ' 4 e.5 1 % r• r"1 r ,7 *' '" r f,4.' X.17. , i 4.:.,- , '!fJ R•. .sp -r�' t1,-"[ L'„F ,t i-tr1, .,4'' ' 28RyD'STREET;- 1•.- 1t-•. _4 [ m""""'. y 1 •,,.aw.. •�.1f M fjM' i"• ! 5', }iY• f w✓.KyyLi_.1 L •' ~ rl[ •{-`•'1■ '1} ... 4;•::"st
l.
.} j J.7
r1, ; •.. ,t , 22ND4S,TRE-E-T F.i t:2,
f� STREET. r '.AJ•K': � '
4,41
w_ • ' AI STREE.-T• • .:I ts• Q_ J _ .' . . - _ _. . ._. _ ,- _ -710 -- ... _ , . r .,—
'; l :'�' • ,19T/4:STREET . r_ '
. - f'''• ', 1 41000 I Il ' ,-1
' _ :+'`.. f18TH STREET' = '. 4
• I
;'.:.• .- .•
' • fJ( i STREET •+ - BASE DM ROAD
. " I.'-",-. . it :iii- • . ' itili 4;.,..- I^ - ' . _:
4 ".-ty. 1.-•-=` , - . •
Ji S r
•
•
, ! - o I BOULEVARDf O' N.' .- w'i-
it
am- w .1 `i il t.,1.
ii 1 Y•' •1 1 iik '.FL ^L .
I.
I- r. '
•
.. a-.s1 •I N_ ..; y
L SA LEGEND FIGURE 11
r7 Project Location
OCumulative Projects
N
San Antonio Water Headquarters
0 1000 2000
Traffic Impact Analysis
'FEET Cumulative Project Locations
SOURCE:ESRI Streetmap,2021;Google Earth,2023
P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\GIS\Report\Fig 1_Regional Project Location\Fig 1_Regional Projl(rktoaOiol. c2S7/g/2p731y4
LSA
TABLES
LSA
Table A-Project Trip Generation
A.M.Peak Hour P.M.Peak Hour
Land Uses Units In Out Total In Out Total Daily San Antonio Water Headquarters&Maintenance Buildings
Employee Trip Generation 1 10 0 10 0 10 10 20
Employee Maintenance Truck Trip Generation2 0 6 6 6 0 6 12 Employee Maintenance Truck PCE Trip Generation' 0 9 9 9 0 9 18 Headquarter Building
Headquarters Building Trip/Unit4 3.698 TSF 1.37 0.30 1.67 0.73 1.43 2.16 14.39 Headquarters Building Customer Trip Generation 5 1 6 3 5 8 53 Total PCE Trip Generation 15 10 25 12 15 27 91
Notes:
TSF=thousand square-feet
3 The employee trip generation was developed based on the project description and operational information. 2 The maintenance truck trip generation was developed based on the project's operational information.All trucks are 2-axle trucks. 3 All maintenance truck trips were converted to passenger PCEs using a 1.5 PCE factor for 2-axle trucks based on City of Upland's Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines,dated July 2020. 4 Rates from Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE)Trip Generation Manual,(11th Edition)for Land Use 712-"Small Office Building",Setting/Location-'General Urban/Suburban'.
P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Trip Generation.xlsx\Trip Gen_(8/28/2024) Page 1244 of 1374
LSA
Table B-Cumulative Projects
Project Name/Reference Address/Location Project Description Project Units/Area/Other ID Jurisdiction
1 Upland Amazon Fresh 235 East Foothill Boulevard Grocery Store 35.000TSF 2 Upland Starbucks 275 East Foothill Boulevard Drive-Through Coffee Shop 1.200 TSF 3 Upland The Colonies Self Storage Southeast Corner of 20th Street and Campus Avenue Self Storage 164.570 TSF 4 Upland Colony Condos 1160 East 19th Street Multi-Family Residential 60 DU 15th Street,between Fernando Avenue and Monte Verde
5 Upland Villa Serena Single-Family Residential 65 DU Avenue
6 Upland Upland Oncology Center 1113 North Alta Avenue Medical Building 3.361 TSF Notes:
DU=Dwelling Units;TSF=Thousand Square Feet.
P:\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Cumulative Projects_llth Edition.xlsx\List(8/28/2024) Page 1245 of 1374
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAN ANTONIO WATER HEADQUARTERS L sr`■L A NOVEMBER 2024 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA
APPENDIX B
TRAFFIC COUNT SHEETS
P:\2024\20241723_San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\Technical Studies\Traffic Analysis\Final Report\San Antonio Water Headquarters TIA.docx(11/27/24)
Counts Unlimited, Inc.
PO Box 1178
Corona,CA 92878
(951)268-6268
City of Upland File Name :01_UPL_Win_20th AM N/S:Winston Court Site Code :00324879
E/W: E 20th Street Start Date : 10/10/2024
Weather:Clear Page No : 1
Groups Printed-Passenger Vehicles-Large 2 Axle Vehicles-3 Axle Vehicles-4+Axle Trucks Winston Court E 20th Street E 20th Street
Southbound Westbound Eastbound
Start Time Left Right App.Total Thru Right App.Total Left Thru App.Total Int.Total 07:00 AM 0 1 1 1 0 1 2 0 2 4 07:15 AM 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 2 07:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 2 07:45 AM 0 3 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 4 Total ' 0 4 4 3 1 4 2 2 4 12 08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 08:15 AM 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 08:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 08:45 AM 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 2 3 Total 0 3 3 0 0 0 4 0 4 7 Grand Total 0 7 7 3 1 4 6 2 8 19 Apprch% 0 100 75 25 75 25
Total% 0 36.8 36.8 15.8 5.3 21.1 31.6 10.5 42.1 Passenger Vehicles 0 6 6 1 0 1 6 0 6 13 %Passenger Vehicles 0 85.7 85.7 33.3 0 25 100 0 75 68.4 Large 2 Axle Vehicles 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 1 1 3 %Large 2 Axle Vehicles 0 0 0 66.7 0 50 0 50 12.5 15.8 3 Axle Vehicles 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 3 3 Axle Vehicles 0 14.3 14.3 0 100 25 0 50 12.5 15.8 4+Axle Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 %4+Axle Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Winston Court E 20th Street E 20th Street
Southbound Westbound Eastbound
Start Time Left Right App.Total Thru Right App.Total Left Thru App.Total Int.Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM-Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:00 AM
07:00 AM 0 1 1 1 0 1 2 0 2 4 07:15 AM 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 2 07:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 2 07:45 AM 0 3 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 4 Total Volume 0 4 4 3 1 4 2 2 4 12 %App.Total 0 100 75 25 50 50
P H F .000 .333 .333 .750 .250 1.00 .250 .500 .500 .750
Counts Unlimited, Inc.
PO Box 1178
Corona,CA 92878
(951)268-6268
City of Upland File Name :01_UPL_Win_20th AM N/S:Winston Court Site Code :00324879
E/W: E 20th Street Start Date : 10/10/2024
Weather:Clear Page No :2
Winston Court
OutI In 1 a Total
71 l 4I of
Right Leo
Peak Hour Data
o
I
North — N
N A
$� m
J 3 O
5. cn
o C— — w Peak Hour Begins at 07:00 AAA f —A 5 w H� Passenger Vehicles ~cc V, —
5 — Large 2 Axle Vehicles — -I
0 3 Axle Vehicles °
4+Axle Trucks a,co
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM-Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
07:30 AM 07:00 AM 07:00 AM
+0 mins. 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 2
+15 mins. 0 3 3 1 0 1 0 1 1
+30 mins. 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 +45 mins. 0 2 2 0 1 1 0 0 0
Total Volume 0 5 5 3 1 4 2 2 4 %App.Total 0 100 75 25 50 50
PHF .000 .417 .417 .750 .250 1.000 .250 .500 .500