N:\3766 - Quick Quack Car Wash\City Council Comments\RTC Memo_final.docx Therefore, the evaluation of potential transportation impacts associated with the Project reflects consistency with City of Vista Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, Senate Bill 743, and the CEQA Section 15064.3, which establishes VMT and not LOS as the appropriate metric to evaluate transportation impacts. LOS/delay is no longer a CEQA issue; therefore, there is no significant impact identified pursuant to CEQA.
8. Exhibit B to Austin Legal Group Letter, page 2 of Urban Systems Letter: The comment states the site plan driveway “appears to conflict with the existing bus stop” which will “need to be moved.” The comment states the “impact” should be evaluated and disclosed.
The commenter does not provide specifics and simply states that the driveway “appears to be in conflict” and additionally also refers to the conflict as an “impact”. Pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC Section 21099 (b)(2)), CEQA Section 15064.3, automobile delay, as described solely by level of service (LOS) or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion shall not be used as the metric to evaluate transportation impacts on the environment for a land use project after July 1, 2020. Guidelines, Senate Bill 743, and the CEQA Section 15064.3, which establishes VMT as the appropriate metric to evaluate transportation impacts.
Per the Project’s site plan design, the bus stop is located approximately 20’ feet clear west of the Project driveway without any conflict. Based on this, Figure 13-3 correctly shows the existing bus stop west of the proposed location of the driveway, which means that neither the existing bus stop nor the proposed driveway is required to move and therefore, a proper analysis was conducted.
Per the City of Vista project conditions of approval, the applicant is required to provide bus stop improvements to provide accessible transit connections for this development and adjacent businesses at the existing BREEZE 332 bus stop (ID: 22361 Poinsettia Av & Business Park Dr). The subject stop is defined as a “Bench Stop” in the NCTD bus stop manual and the required improvements include a new bench, trash receptacle, and an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessible area. Final design and configuration of said bus stop will be submitted to NCTD for review and approval prior to installation of improvements.
Attachments:
A: Austin Legal Group Letter (dated April 16, 2024) and Exhibit B: Urban Systems Letter.
cc: File
Austin Legal Group
LAWYERS
3990 OLD TOWN AVE, STE A-112
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
LICENSED IN
CALIFORNIA, HAWAII & TEXAS
TELEPHONE
(619)924-9600
FACSIMILE
(619)881-0045
Writer’s Email:
[email protected]
April 16, 2024
VIA EMAIL
City of Vista City Council
200 Civic Center Drive
Vista, CA 92084
RE: Appeal of Special Use Permit and Site Development Permit for Quick Quack Car Wash Dear City Council:
This letter is submitted on behalf of our client, Genie Vista, LLC (“GVL”). For the reasons more fully explained below, GVL requests the City Council grant the appeal and deny the project or in the alternative continue this hearing until such time as proper review of the project has occurred.
BACKGROUND
Newmark Merrill Companies, Inc. applied for a Special Use Permit and a Site Development Permit for a car wash on the northeast corner of Business Park Drive and Poinsettia Avenue on APN 221-661-03-00 (the “Project”). GVL became aware of the Project only when customers notified it of the posting of the Notice of Hearing on the City’s website only days before the Planning Commission hearing on March 5, 2024.
GVL submitted written opposition to the Planning Commission (“PC Letter”) regarding the insufficiencies of the environmental analysis and proposed exemption based upon the documents provided by staff and uploaded to the City website. (See Exhibit A attached hereto.) As a result of GLV’s letter, staff supplemented and augmented the staff report in an attempt to cure the deficiencies. This additional information remains insufficient for the application of any CEQA exemption because the Project has the potential to create a significant environmental impact.
DISCUSSION
A.CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 Is Improper Because the Project Is Not Consistent With All Applicable General Plan Policies
As explained in the PC Letter, CEQA exemption 15332 requires projects to be consistent with all applicable general plan policies and zoning designations. In addition, the project must not have the potential for significant impacts to traffic, noise, air quality, or water and if the land is
Vista City Council
April 16, 2024
vacant must be devoid of sensitive habitat. “The City's approval must be based on a determination that the Project is consistent with such policies or the policies do not apply.”1 A public agency bears the burden to demonstrate its exemption determination is supported by substantial evidence.2 The City’s burden is to determine the Project’s impact on the goals and policies of each of the applicable General Plan Elements.3
While staff attempted to supplement the record by u ploading technical letters the day of the planning commission hearing, the record remains replete with instances of General Plan policies that are inconsistent with the Project and a project that has the potential for significant environmental impacts. Because various General Plan policies are inconsistent with the Project, CEQA exemption 15332 is improper.
The Project Is Inconsistent with Resource Conservation & Sustainability Policy 4.6 The applicants own technical report indicates that the Project is inconsistent with Resource Conservation & Sustainability (“RCS”) Policy 4.6. RES Policy 4.6 requires the incorporation of low impact development techniques. The Project turns 0.73 acres of currently pervious land into impervious pavement. Page 27 of the Storm Water Quality Management Plan asserts that “Due to the high volume of traffic, the use of permeable pavement for these driveways in not recommended….” No other low impact development techniques were incorporated. While the necessary findings may be able to be made for a mitigated negative declaration or other environmental document, due to the inconsistency with RCS Policy 4.6, CEQA exemption 15332 is statutorily prohibited due to this inconsistency.
The Project Is Inconsistent with Resource Conservation & Sustainability Policy 5.2 RCS Policy 5.2 requires projects adjacent to sensitive vegetation and / or wildlife to be designed to ensure minimal impacts to those resources including mitigating impacts from drainage, noise, and light. The applicant’s own technical studies conclude there is sensitive habitat but the Project is not designed to insure mitigating those impacts. Because of the sensitive biology any such mitigation measures would necessarily prohibit the use of CEQA exemption 15332.
The Project Is Inconsistent with Circulation Element Policy 1.2 and Policy 1.5 Circulation Policy 1.2 set the goal of a level of service (LOS) of D or better throughout the City. Circulation Policy 1.5 requires improvements and changes when LOS reaches D or below. As explained in the letter by Urban Systems Associates, attached as Exhibit “B”, this goal is not met because the LOS will be “F” at the intersection of Poinsettia and Business Park and no improvements have been proposed to mitigate for this. For this reason alone, the 15332 Exemption is not applicable.
1 United Neighborhoods for Los Angeles v. City of Los Angeles (2023) 93 Cal.App.5th 1074, 1088. 2 Citizens for Environmental Responsibility v. State ex rel. 14th Dist. Ag. Assn. (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 555, 568. 3 United Neighborhoods for Los Angeles v. City of Los Angeles (2023) 93 Cal.App.5th 1074, 1090.
Vista City Council
April 16, 2024
B.CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 Is Improper Because the Project Site Has Value as Habitat For Endangered Rare Or Threatened Species
In order to utilize CEQA exemption 15332, the statute requires multiple criteria be met including the “project site has no value, as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species”.4 Staff failed to analyze or even reference the Alden Biology letter report (“Alden Letter”) provided by the applicant because it expressly identifies sensitive habitat on the Project site including coastal sage that precludes the use of the 15332 Exemption5.
Staff’s unique interpretation that the project site lacks habitat value unless the development disturbs the sensitive habitat is without merit and unsupported by the law. Contrary to the City Attorney’s assertion, Protect Tustin Ranch v. City of Tustin6 does not support this interpretation.
Rather, in Protect Tustin Ranch, the court found that (i) there was substantial evidence in the record that the project was in fact less than five acres such that the exemption applied and (ii) the exceptional circumstances exception did not apply. The court did not conclude what constituted a “project site.” 7
In this instance there is no evidence in the record that the “project site” has no value as habitat. Every document in the record identifies the “project site” as the 43,266 sq ft. parcel identified as APN 221-661-03-00. At no point has the City ever limited the “project site” to only the area south of the sensitive habitat. Even accepting this unconventional interpretation, the applicant’s own biology report identifies potential habitat within and surrounding the Project, creating the potential for habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
The Alden letter did not conclude that the Project site has no value as habitat. Rather, the Alden letter identified coastal sage and stated that the development footprint as proposed would not disturb the coastal sage. Consequently, CEQA exemption 15332 is inappropriate.
C.A CEQA Exemption Is Improper Because There Is A Reasonable Possibility The Project Will Cause A Significant Traffic Impact
Categorical exemptions are improper whenever there are unusual circumstances. The “unusual circumstances” exception precludes the use of any categorical exemption when there is a “reasonable possibility” that the project “will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.”8 Unusual circumstances refer to factors or conditions that distinguish a project from others due to the fact that the project creates the potential for significant environmental impacts.
4 Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 § 15332 (c).
5 In an effort to overcome objections in the PC Letter, staff apparently requested a new environmental letter from Alden Environmental dated March 5, 2024 (the date of the hearing) as compared to the November 1, 2023 environmental letter staff used to make its recommendation. The March 5th letter attempts to discount the coastal sage by stating that it is outside the project footprint area. 6 Protect Tustin Ranch v. City of Tustin. (2021) 70 Cal.App.5th 951. 7 Id.
8 Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 § 15300.2(c).
Vista City Council
April 16, 2024
A CEQA exemption is not appropriate “whenever it can be fairly argued on the basis of substantial evidence that the project may have a significant environmental impact.”9 CEQA broadly defines substantial evidence to include any “relevant information and reasonable inferences” that can be drawn from this information, including “facts, reasonable assumptions predicated upon facts, and expert opinion supported by facts.”10
As explained in the attached memorandum from Urban Systems Associates, Inc. (Exhibit B), the LLG Study provided by the applicant is inadequate as it does not address the all potential traffic impacts and safety concerns of the Project. First, the LLG Study used trip generation assumptions from the 1980s and 1990s that do not take into account modern car washes. Using the proper assumptions will dramatically alter the traffic impacts creating an LOS of F at the intersection of Business Park and Poinsettia. 11 Second, the near term cumulative conditions in the LLG Study are deficient and do not meet the City’s guidelines. Incorporation of the proper near term cumulative conditions is also likely to lead to significant traffic impacts. Finally, the location of the driveway requires moving the bus stop or the driveway which was not accounted for in the LLG Study. A proper analysis cannot be performed without determining the actual location of the bus stop and drive way.
Because there is a fair argument that the Project will create a significant traffic impact, a CEQA exemption is improper and the City must conduct proper environmental review.
D.A CEQA Exemption Is Improper Because There Is A Reasonable Possibility The Project Will Cause A Significant Noise Impact
A separate and independent reason the Project should not be approved is the likelihood of a significant noise impact. The study provided by MD Acoustics is flawed and cannot be relied upon.
RNS Acoustics conducted a peer review of MD Acoustics' Noise Impact Study and found significant errors in its analysis and assumptions. (See Exhibit C.) In using the applicant’s own assumptions, when properly analyzed at the nearest property line, the noise levels would actually be at least of 14.5 dB over the permitted limit. The MD Acoustics study is also flawed in its ambient noise assessment because it only evaluated 1 hour in the morning and the car wash hours would be from 7am to 9pm.
Based on the RNS Acoustics analysis, substantial evidence exists that the Project will create a significant noise impact. Once the Project is evaluated with the proper parameters, it is clear that the Project would exceed the City's CEQA significance thresholds and violate the City’s municipal code. Once evidence is found to be substantial, it is not appropriate for an agency to weigh that evidence against other contrary evidence.12 Rather, once there is substantial evidence in the record of a significant impact, the City has an obligation to conduct further environmental review and prepare an EIR.13
9 No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal.3d 68, 75. 10 Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 (a), (b).
11 LLG has used higher and more appropriate assumptions in other recent studies. See example attached to Exhibit B. 12 Pocket Protectors v. City of Sacramento (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 903,935. 13 Gentry v. City of Murrieta (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 1359.
Vista City Council
April 16, 2024
CONCLUSION
In light of the foregoing discussion, it is evident the Project raises significant concerns regarding its compliance with applicable regulations and its potential environmental impacts. The insufficiencies in the environmental analysis, inconsistencies with General Plan policies, and the presence of sensitive habitat underscore the necessity for thorough review and mitigation. The inadequacies in addressing traffic and noise impacts further emphasize the need for further environmental review before approving the Project.
Therefore, in the interest of upholding environmental standards and ensuring proper scrutiny of the Project, we respectfully urge the City Council to grant the appeal denying the project, or alternatively, to continue the hearing until comprehensive environmental review and proper mitigation measures have been undertaken.
Sincerely,
AUSTIN LEGAL GROUP, APC
Gina M. Austin, Esq.
cc: Michael Ressler
Patsy Chow
Esmeralda Romero
John Conley
Exhibit B
Urban Systems Letter
ATTN:
Genie Vista, LLC
c/o Gina Austin, Esq.
E-Mail:
▼[email protected]
om
FROM:Justin P. Schlaefli PE TE TOTAL PAGES (Including Cover):2+Attachment s
DATE:April 3, 2024
TIME: 5:35:02
PM JOB NUMBER:N/A
SUBJECT:Business Park & Poinsettia Car Wash Transportation Comments (Peer Review)
Confidential Communications
This transmittal is intended for the recipient named above. Unless otherwise expressly indicated, this entire communication is confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not disclose, copy, distribute or use this information. If you received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by telephone, at our expense and destroy the information.
As requested, we have reviewed the Business Park & Poinsettia Car Wash project Local Transportation Study dated September 2023 and prepared by LLG Engineers. This peer review was conducted to determine consistency with applicable guidelines and practice within the transportation industry and based on substantial experience preparing and reviewing similar studies throughout the Southern California region. This includes studies of other car washes throughout the region. Based on this review, we find the study to not adequately address the whole potential transportation and safety impacts of the project.
As stated in the City of Vista, Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (page 20), the purpose of a Local Transportation Study is as follows:
“City Planning, in coordination with Traffic Engineering, determines the need for a transportation analysis in conformance with the CEQA guidelines and City policies. The City recognizes the changes to CEQA regarding SB 743 implementation and the requirements for VMT analysis. Additionally, the City recognizes the need to maintain consistency with the most recently adopted General Plan’s Circulation Element and may require a Local Transportation Study or Local Transportation Assessment.” Further, the Guidelines state:
“An LTS will analyze the project’s influence on the surrounding intersections and roadway network utilizing level of service (LOS) for all project scenarios. The document also includes the identification 1 8451 Miralani Drive, Suite A • San Diego, CA 92126 • (858) 560-4911
© Urban Systems Associates, Inc.
April 3, 2024
of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit amenities. The purpose of an LTS is to ensure the goals, objectives, and policies adopted by the City are supported and implemented while monitoring the traffic safety, capacity, and daily operations of the roadway network”.
Comments:
1. Trip Generation Assumptions are based on SANDAG studies which were conducted in the 1980’s and 1990’s. The SANDAG reference used does not reflect modern car washes and therefore, may not be the most representative trip generation based on other studies. Consulting our file for similar car washes with more recent data, the attached study was found. The trip generation rates from the study, conducted by the same consultant, would indicate that modern car wash designs, similar to what is proposed for the site have unique characteristics which could significantly alter the trip generation assumptions contained in the study. The trip generation and resulting scoping, study area, distribution and other transportation related items based on the trip generation should be updated consistent with the most recent data and studies. As noted in the City Guidelines (page 11), “In the event the land use is unique, the project applicant, in agreement with the City Traffic Engineer, should collect trip generation data at a minimum of two similar project sites”. As reflected in the attached study, trip generation for the type of car wash proposed is distinguishable from the type of car wash contained in the SANDAG reference and therefore, not necessarily reflective of what is expected to be constructed on the site.
2. The Near Term Cumulative conditions contained in the study appear to be deficient. The list of “other projects” only contains projects within the City of Vista jurisdiction even though the City of Carlsbad is adjacent. These conditions should be updated to include City of Carlsbad projects. It is noted that the City Guidelines (Page 22) do not exclude projects in adjacent jurisdictions and discuss this condition as follows: “The near-term base condition is determined by first applying a 1% annual growth factor to existing traffic volumes to account for background ambient growth in traffic. Next, traffic volumes generated by other approved or pending development projects anticipated to be constructed by the proposed project opening year are added to the adjusted existing traffic volume.”
3. There is a significant capacity constraint shown at the intersection of Business Park/Poinsettia in the Southbound Left Turn direction. According to the study, this movement is significantly exacerbated by the project resulting in an unacceptable level of service (175.1 second delay/ level of service “F”). This delay and level of service would significant impact operations at this intersection and should be corrected through adjusting the timing assumptions within the analysis software to re-allocate green time and alleviate this deficient condition.
4. The site plan driveway appears to conflict with the existing bus stop. The location of the bus stop will need to be moved which could impact transit service. This impact should be evaluated and disclosed.
Based on the forgoing comments, there appears to be insufficient information to support a determination that the proposed project would avoid significant and unmitigable transportation impacts or be inconsistent with General Plan Policies and Goals. The study should be corrected to address the comments above. Should additional impacts arise or conclusions change, the study should address the new items which may arise in addressing the comments.
2 8451 Miralani Drive, Suite A • San Diego, CA 92126 • (858) 560-4911
ARBOR CAR WASH
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
SEPTEMBER 24, 2018
Prepared for:
Mr. Alan Smith
Southwest Design Group
12223 Highland Ave., Ste. 106-201
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739
Prepared by:
Scott Sato, P.E.
4225 Oceanside Blvd., 354H
Oceanside, CA 92056
(760) 291-1400
TRAMES SOLUTIONS INC.TRAMES SOLUTIONS INC.
(0301-0001-03)
ARBOR CAR WASH TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS TRAMES SOLUTIONS, INC.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA (0301-0001-03_ARBOR CAR WASH TRAFFIC STUDY REPORT.DOC;)
4.0 PROJECTED FUTURE TRAFFIC
This section of the report quantifies the number of trips generated by the proposed project and other known developments in the area.
A. Project Traffic
1.Ambient Growth Rate
Some traffic volume increases on roadways can be attributed to vehicles originating outside of the study area. These types of trips either end up within the study area or pass-through onto an outside destination. Therefore, to account for these trips (termed ³ambient growth´), a growth rate can be applied to existing traffic volumes.
A 2 ambient growth rate that has been used in this study to account for traffic not attributed to the project or other planned developments within the study area. The City of Rancho Cucamonga Transportation Department staff has previously reviewed and approved this rate.
2.Project Trip Generation
Trip generation represents the amount of traffic which is attracted and produced by a development. The trip generation for the project is based upon the specific land use which has been planned for this development. For the purpose of this analysis, the following land use assumption is evaluated:
x An automated car wash facility with a 140 foot long tunnel The amount of vehicular trips generated by a project is typically determined from the trip rates included in the ITE Trip Generation manual. The latest version (10th edition) only provides the PM peak hour rate for one observation. Therefore, due to the small data set collected by ITE for an automated car wash, empirical count data has been collected at a Fast 5 ;press car wash in the City of Murrieta (Murrieta Hot Springs Road at Jackson Ave.) to determine the amount of peak hour and daily vehicles that occur at this facility. Trip generation rates for the proposed development are driven by the amount of cars that can be washed during the peak hour. It is our understanding that a higher number of cars can be washed as the length of the service tunnel is increased. Therefore, the peak hour and daily trip rates shown in Table 4-1 were based on tunnel length.
The daily and peak hour trip generations for the proposed project are shown on Table 4-2. The proposed development is projected to generate a total of approximately 710 new trip-ends per day with 37 new vehicle trips per hour during the AM peak hour and 66 new vehicle trips per hour during the PM peak hour. It should be noted that a pass by reduction (AM-37, PM-35) and a 5 internal trip 15 ARBOR CAR WASH TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS TRAMES SOLUTIONS, INC.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA (0301-0001-03_ARBOR CAR WASH TRAFFIC STUDY REPORT.DOC;) reduction was assumed. The pass-by reduction percentages were based on a survey conducted at the Lighting Express Car Wash (17111 Hawthorne Blvd., Lawndale, CA).
TABLE 4-1
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION RATES
LAND USE
SOURCE QUANTITY
PEAK HOUR TRIP RATES1
DAILY
AM PM
IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL
Automated Car Wash Empirical
Data 140 Feet 0.25 0.21 0.46 0.38 0.41 0.79 8.45
1 Source: Fast 5 ;press car wash in the City of Murrieta (Murrieta Hot Springs Road at Jackson Ave.) TABLE 4-2
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
LAND USE QUANTITY
PEAK HOUR
DAILY
AM PM
IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL
Arbor Car Wash 140 Feet 35 29 64 53 57 111 1,183
Pass-by Reduction (AM–37%:PM–35%)1 -13 -11 -24 -19 -20 -39 -414 Internal Trip Reduction (5%) -2 -1 -3 -3 -3 -6 -59
TOTAL PROJECT TRIPS 20 17 37 31 34 66 710
1 Pass-by reduction percentages were based on surveys at Lightning Express Car Wash, 17111 Hawthorne Blvd, Lawndale, CA
3. Project Trip Distribution and Assignment
Trip distribution represents the directional orientation of traffic to and from the project site. The project’s trip distribution patterns are based on the proximity of the project to the proposed driveway locations, the surrounding trip attractors, and the regional freeway interchanges. The trip distribution pattern for the project is illustrated on Figure 4-A.
4. Other Trip Generation Factors
The project land use is comprised of primary, pass-by and internal traffic. Primary traffic refers to trips that are intending to go to the project as their primary destination. Pass-by traffic consists of vehicles that stop at the site on their way to a primary destination. Internal traffic consists of trips that are anticipated to occur between the future gas station and those that go to the project. A 5 reduction in traffic has been assumed for these trips.
16 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT
NEWPORT POINTE
Menifee, California
April 28, 2021
(Update of the April 5, 2021 Report)
Prepared for:
Salim Development Group, LLC
1307 W. 6th Street, Suite 202
Corona, CA 92882
LLG Ref. 2-18-3987-1
Prepared by: Under the Supervision of:
Zawwar Saiyed, P.E. Keil D. Maberry, P.E.
Senior Transportation Engineer Principal
&
Justin Tucker
Transportation Engineer II
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-18-3987-1 Newport Pointe, Menifee
N:\3900\2183987 - Newport Pointe, Menifee\1 - Report\3987 - Newport Pointe Project Final TIA, 04-28-21.docx 13 5.0 PROJECT TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS
5.1 Project Trip Generation Forecast
Trip generation is expressed in vehicle trip ends, defined as one-way vehicular movements, either entering or exiting the generating land use. Generation equations and/or rates used in the traffic forecasting procedure are found in the 10th Edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) [Washington D.C., 2017].
Table 5-1 summarizes the trip generation rates used in forecasting the vehicular trips generated by the proposed Project. As shown in Table 5-1, the trip generation potential for the proposed Project was estimated using ITE Land Use Code 492: Health Fitness Club rates, ITE Land Use Code 565:
Day Care Center rates, ITE Land Use Code 850: Supermarket rates, ITE Land Use Code 930: Fast Casual Restaurant rates, ITE Land Use Code 934: Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Thru Window rates, and Express Car Wash rates derived from traffic counts conducted on Friday, February 7, 2014 at the Victorville Speedwash located at 12147 Industrial Boulevard. Appendix B also contains the traffic count data for the Victorville Speedwash.
Table 5-2 presents the daily and peak hour Project traffic volume forecast for a “typical” weekday.
The bottom portion of Table 5-2 indicates that the proposed Project is forecast to generate 5,518 daily trips, with 246 trips (141 inbound, 105 outbound) produced in the AM peak hour and 456 trips (240 inbound, 216 outbound) produced in the PM peak hour.
Please note that the aforementioned overall project trip generation includes adjustments for internal capture and for pass-by as recommended by ITE. The Project trip generation for the grocery store, fast-food restaurant, express car wash, and fast casual restaurant project components include adjustments for pass-by trips per the Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition, published by ITE (2014), to account for trips that are already in the everyday traffic stream on the adjoining streets (i.e. Newport Road) and will stop as they pass by the Project site as a matter of convenience on their path to another destination. Per the Trip Generation Handbook, pass-by reduction factors for the express car wash land use are not provided, thus pass-by reduction factors for ITE Land Use 820:
Shopping Center were utilized, which has a PM peak hour pass-by percentage of 34%. The daily and AM peak hour pass-by percentages for the express car wash land use were estimated to be 10%.
The daily and AM peak hour pass-by percentages were estimated to be 10% for the express car wash land use. The Trip Generation Handbook recommends a PM peak hour pass-by percentage of 36% for the grocery store land use. The daily and AM peak hour pass-by percentages were estimated to be 10% for the grocery store land use. The Trip Generation Handbook recommends an AM peak hour pass-by percentage of 49% and a PM peak hour pass-by percentage of 50% for the fast-food restaurant land use. The daily pass-by percentage was estimated to be 25% for the fast-food restaurant land use. Given that the Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition does not provide pass-by reduction factors for the fast casual restaurant land use, pass-by reduction factors for ITE Land Use 932: High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant were utilized, which has a PM peak hour pass-by percentage of 43%. The daily and AM peak hour pass-by percentages for the fast casual restaurant land use were estimated to be 10%.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-18-3987-1 Newport Pointe, Menifee
N:\3900\2183987 - Newport Pointe, Menifee\1 - Report\3987 - Newport Pointe Project Final TIA, 04-28-21.docx 14 The trip generation methodology and forecasts were approved by City of Menifee staff prior to proceeding with further analysis.
5.2 Project Trip Distribution and Assignment
The general, directional trip distribution pattern for the proposed Project is presented in Figure 5-1.
Project traffic volumes both entering and exiting the site have been distributed and assigned to the adjacent street system based on the following considerations:
▪the site's proximity to major traffic carriers (i.e. Newport Road, the I-215 Freeway, etc.), ▪expected localized traffic flow patterns based on adjacent street channelization and presence of traffic signals,
▪ingress/egress availability at the Project site, and
▪input from City of Menifee staff.
The anticipated AM and PM peak hour Project volumes associated with the proposed Project are presented in Figures 5-2 and 5-3, respectively. In addition, Figure 5-3 also presents the daily traffic volumes for the key study roadway segments. The traffic volume assignments presented in Figures 5-2 and 5-3 reflect the trip distribution characteristics shown in Figure 5-1 and the trip generation forecast presented in Table 5-1.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-18-3987-1 Newport Pointe, Menifee
N:\3900\2183987 - Newport Pointe, Menifee\1 - Report\3987 - Newport Pointe Project Final TIA, 04-28-21.docx 15 TABLE 5-1
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION RATES8
F
ITE Land Use Code /
Project Description
Daily
2-Way
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total
Project Trip Generation Factors:
▪492: Health Fitness Club (TE/TSF)34.509 0.67 0.64 1.31 1.97 1.48 3.45 ▪565: Day Care Center (TE/Student)4.09 0.41 0.37 0.78 0.37 0.42 0.79 ▪850: Supermarket (TE/TSF)106.78 2.29 1.53 3.82 4.71 4.53 9.24 ▪930: Fast Casual Restaurant (TE/TSF)315.17 1.39 0.68 2.07 7.77 6.36 14.13 ▪934: Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Thru Window (TE/TSF)470.95 20.50 19.69 40.19 16.99 15.68 32.67 ▪Express Car Wash (TW/LFWT)10
F 11.87 0.38 0.28 0.66 0.62 0.63 1.25
Note:
▪TE/Student = trip end per student
▪TE/TSF = trip end per thousand square feet
▪TE/LFWT = trip end per linear foot of wash tunnel
8 Source: Trip Generation, 10th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, (ITE) [Washington, D.C. (2017)]. 9 Trip Generation, 10th Edition does not include the daily trip generation rate for the health fitness club land use. As such, the daily trip rate is assumed to be 10 times the PM peak hour rate.
10 Trip Generation, 10th Edition does not include trip generation rates for the express car wash land use. The trip rates are derived from traffic counts on Friday, February 7, 2014 at the Victorville Speedwash located at 12147 Industrial Boulevard. Appendix B contains the traffic count data for the Victorville Speedwash.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-18-3987-1 Newport Pointe, Menifee
N:\3900\2183987 - Newport Pointe, Menifee\1 - Report\3987 - Newport Pointe Project Final TIA, 04-28-21.docx 16 TABLE 5-2
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION FORECAST11
F
ITE Land Use Code /
Project Description
Daily
2-Way
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total
Project Trip Generation Forecast:
▪Fast Casual Restaurants (10,370 SF)3,268 14 7 21 81 66 147 Internal Capture Reduction (Daily: 36%, AM: 48%, PM: 37%)12 -1,172 -7 -3 -10 -25 -29 -54 Subtotal 2,096 7 4 11 56 37 93
Pass-By Reduction (Daily: 10%, AM: 10%, PM: 43%)13 -210 -1 0 -1 -24 -16 -40 Fast Casual Restaurants Total 1,886 6 4 10 32 21 53
▪Grocery Store (18,041 SF)1,926 41 28 69 85 82 167
Internal Capture Reduction (Daily: 43%, AM: 28%, PM: 25%)12 -821 -13 -6 -19 -24 -17 -41 Subtotal 1,105 28 22 50 61 65 126
Pass-By Reduction (Daily: 10%, AM: 10%, PM: 36%)13 -111 -3 -2 -5 -22 -23 -45 Grocery Store Total 994 25 20 45 39 42 81
▪Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through (800 SF)377 16 16 32 14 12 26 Internal Capture Reduction (Daily: 36%, AM: 47%, PM: 39%)12 -135 -8 -7 -15 -5 -5 -10 Subtotal 242 8 9 17 9 7 16
Pass-By Reduction (Daily: 25%, AM: 49%, PM: 50%)13 -61 -4 -4 -8 -5 -3 -8 Grocery Store Total 181 4 5 9 4 4 8
▪Day Care Center (160 Students)654 66 59 125 59 67 126
Internal Capture Reduction (Daily: 12%, AM: 24%, PM: 7%)12 -81 -8 -22 -30 -2 -7 -9 Day Care Center Total 573 58 37 95 57 60 117
▪Express Car Wash (110 Linear Feet of Wash Tunnel)1,306 41 31 72 68 70 138 Internal Capture Reduction (Daily: 43%, AM: 28%, PM: 25%)12 -556 -14 -6 -20 -20 -14 -34 Subtotal 750 27 25 52 48 56 104
Pass-By Reduction (Daily: 10%, AM: 10%, PM: 34%)13 -75 -3 -2 -5 -16 -19 -35 Express Car Wash Total 675 24 23 47 32 37 69
▪Health Fitness Club (40,000 SF)1,380 27 25 52 79 59 138 Internal Capture Reduction (Daily: 12%, AM: 23%, PM: 7%)12 -171 -3 -9 -12 -3 -7 -10 Health Fitness Club Total 1,209 24 16 40 76 52 128
Gross Project Trip Generation (No Reductions) 8,911 205 166 371 386 356 742 Net Driveway Trip Generation (Internal Capture Reduction Only) 5,975 152 113 265 307 277 584 Total Net Project Trip Generation (Int. Cap. & Pass-By Reductions)5,518 141 105 246 240 216 456 11 Source: Trip Generation, 10th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, (ITE) [Washington, D.C. (2017)]. 12 Consistent with the Trip Generation Handbook, published by ITE (2014), Project trip generation was adjusted to account for internal capture between the retail, grocery store, restaurant, day care, car wash, gas station, and oil/lube service station components of th e Project. 13 Source: Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition, published by ITE (2014). Pass-by trips are trips made as intermediate stops on the way from an origin to a primary trip destination. Pass-by trips are attracted from traffic passing the site on adjacent streets, which contain direct access to the generator.
EXHIBIT "3"
AZ Office CA Office 4960 S. Gilbert Rd, Suite 1-461 1197 Los Angeles Ave, Suite C-256 Chandler, AZ 85249 Simi Valley, CA 93065
p. (602) 774-1950 p. (805) 426-4477
www.mdacoustics.com
MD Acoustics, LLC 1
JN: 10982303_RTC2
April 22, 2024
City of Vista
Planning Commission
200 Civic Center Drive
Vista, CA 92084
Subject: Special Use Permit P23-0298, Noise Impact Study City of Vista, CA Response to Comments
MD Acoustics, LLC (MD) has been working with SALEM Engineering on the project located at the northeast corner of Poinsettia Avenue and Business Park Drive in the City of Vista, California, regarding the Noise Study. MD received the following comments from the letter sent to the City Planning Commission by Austin Legal Group. MD has provided the following responses to the comments:
Comment 1
From Austin Legal Group Letter dated April 16, 2024, Page 4, letter D: “In using the applicant’s own assumptions, when properly analyzed at the nearest property line, the noise levels would actually be at least of 14.5 dB over the permitted limit.”
Response to Comment 1
To ensure no noise impact, this analysis represents the maximum possible assumptions for the site, including the loudest possible equipment operating constantly, a full queue of idling cars, and no stopping or idling of equipment in between use. This is the maximum Leq(h) noise level that could be produced by the project. Typical operating conditions would be below this level.
MD has now included a planned retaining wall at the site's northern property line in the model and a receiver at the northern property line. The wall model has been modeled with ISO 9613-2 specifications.
The model also includes an update in noise levels based on recent sound power data taken of Sonny’s blowers by MD in an anechoic chamber in January 2024. This updated data has also been confirmed in the field with multiple existing identical Quick Quack car wash tunnels. This data lines up with levels seen in the field of 105 dBA Leq just outside of the turbulent flow of the blower closest to the exit. With this updated model, the noise level is below the 70 dBA Leq commercial limit at the northern property line.
See the model below.
In the initial report, noise levels were projected to locations where people could be more than just in passing. To the north is a high-graded landscaping area that is not a usable outdoor area. Per NE Policy
2.3 of the General Plan, setbacks, berms, and landscaping are noise abatement techniques, and as such, a landscaped area would not be an area where noise could be received. Additionally, noise-sensitive areas are defined by the General Plan as residences, schools, hospitals, libraries, golf courses, and passive recreation sites. Although these sensitive locations were not near the project site, the noise report conservatively included non-sensitive receptors at locations where people could likely be present for a few minutes at a time or more.
Quick Quack Car Wash – Business Park Dr & Poinsettia Ave Noise Impact Study
City of Vista, CA – Response to Comments#1
JN:10982303_RTC2
The project is in line with NE Goal 1 and NE Goal 2, which aim to protect people who live, work, and recreate in the city from noise impacts.
Comment 2
From Austin Legal Group Letter dated March 16, 2024, Page 4, letter D: “The MD Acoustics study is also flawed in its ambient noise assessment because it only evaluated 1 hour in the morning and the car wash hours would be from 7am to 9pm.”
Response to Comment 2
When comparing the noise level from 8:30 AM to 9:30 AM, the ambient noise level in that region would be anticipated to be up to 2 dB quieter in the evening based on typical traffic patterns in the region. This reflects an ambient noise level of 67 dBA Leq. The Project would still only increase the noise level by up to 1 dB at the analyzed locations and would still be anticipated to result in a less than significant noise impact by not exceeding the City’s noise limits. Overall levels will still be below the 70 dBA Leq commercial limit at all adjacent properties. Taking the ambient noise measurement at any other time during operational hours would not affect the conclusions of the analysis.
Summary
No noise-sensitive receptors are present in the area per the General Plan, and the analysis has conservatively chosen locations that are not noise-sensitive but where people could possibly be present for a few minutes at a time or more to ensure that there is no noise impact to “people who live, work, and recreate in the city”. This project clearly will not cause “discomfort or annoyance to persons of normal sensitivity” or endanger “the comfort, health or peace of residents in the area” (8.32.060 of the Municipal Code). Additionally, the 70 dBA Leq limit will be met at all adjacent properties. The impact is, therefore, less than significant.
The Project will be conditioned to ensure compliance with the City’s noise ordinance, which shall be tested and documented prior to final inspection and opening of the car wash.
MD is pleased to provide this response to comments. The noise impact study demonstrates compliance with the City’s noise regulations. If you have any questions, call our office at (805) 426-4477.
Sincerely,
MD Acoustics, LLC
Mike Dickerson, INCE-USA Claire Pincock Principal Acoustical Consultant
10982303_QQ Vista Noise
Noise Level Contours
12 Sonny Blower System
Standard Tunnel
Signs and symbols
57 50
58 51
59 52 Level table, dBA
Buildings
Tunnel Enclosure
Point Source (Turbine & Vacuums)
Point Receivers
Car Lane
Turbine Enclosure
Levels in dB(A)
=65
Length scale 1:150
0 50 100 200 300
feet
1 62
261
3 57
4 69
5 66
11478500
11478500
11478750
11478750
36 6
6 2
5 0
36 6
6 2
5 0
©MD Acoustics, LLC | All Rights Reserved 1 Sound Solutions for Planning and Design
Statement of Qualifications
©MD Acoustics, LLC | All Rights Reserved 2 Claire Pincock graduated from Brigham Young University in the top 5% of her graduating class with a Bachelor of Science degree in Applied Physics with an emphasis in acoustics and a minor in Mathematics. Before joining MD Acoustics, she was a research assistant at BYU.
Her research was focused on speech acoustics, specifically on how speech radiates from the mouth. https://www.physics.byu.edu/thesis/archive/2017 In 2017, Claire presented her research with Dr. Timothy Leishman on speech directivity at the Acoustical Society of America, spring Boston conference where she placed 2nd in the student competition on speech acoustics. http://asa.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1121/1.4987652 This research is also presented in the following paper published in the Journal of the Acoustical Society of America in 2021: https://asa.scitation.org/doi/10.1121/10.0003363 Below is a non-comprehensive list of many of the car wash projects completed by Claire over the past three years. Most of the projects listed below are environmental noise impact studies. Other types of car wash projects Claire has worked on in the past three years include categorical exemption letter reports, interior noise reports, post-construction surveys, compliance design recommendations, and blower laboratory testing.
Claire Pincock
Sr. Acoustic Consultant
Representative Project Experience
• Wild Wash Express Car Wash, Pasadena, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Oakley, CA
• Super Star Car Wash, Oceanside, CA
• Super Star Car Wash, El Cajon, CA
• Super Star Car Wash, Lake Elsinore, CA
• Super Star Car Wash W Valencia, Tucson, AZ
• Super Star Car Wash, Murrieta, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Fontana, CA
• Super Star Car Wash, Broomfield, CO
• Super Star Car Wash, Lone Tree, CO
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Yucca Valley, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, El Dorado Hills, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Orangevale, CA
• Super Star Car Wash Oracle, Tucson, AZ
• Super Star Car Wash Valencia, Tucson, AZ
• Glendora Express Car Wash, Glendora, CA
• Chevron Car Wash, Mountain View, CA
• Whitter Xpress Wash, Whittier, CA
• Motor Werks Car Wash, Barrington, IL
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Whittier, CA
• Super Star Car Wash, Chandler, AZ
• Super Star Car Wash, Tempe, AZ
• Super Star Car Wash, Thornton, CO
• Tracy Car Wash, Tracy, CA
• ModWash Car Wash, Red Lion, PA
©MD Acoustics, LLC | All Rights Reserved 3 • Quick Quack Car Wash, Fullerton, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Van Buren Riverside, CA
• ModWash Car Wash, York, PA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Hemet, CA
• Car Wash Pro Designers, Mundelein, IL
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Lancaster, CA
• ModWash Car Wash, Delran, NJ
• Car Wash Pro Designers, Lisle, IL
• ModWash Car Wash, Washington, NJ
• ModWash Car Wash, Willow Grove, PA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, American Canyon, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Stratford Dixon, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Dorset Dixon, CA
• Super Star Car Wash, Lake Elsinore, CA
• Car Wash Pro Designers, Aurora, IL
• Car Wash Pro Designers, Rockwall, TX
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Placerville, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Covina, CA
• Truman Street Express Car Wash, San Fernando, CA
• Car Wash Pro Designers, Waukegan, IL
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Roseville, CA
• ModWash Car Wash, Pittsburgh, PA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Rocklin, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, French Valley, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Upland, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Yucaipa, CA
• ModWash Car Wash, Clemson, SC
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Eastvale, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Oceanside , CA
• Express Car Wash Tracy, Tracy, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, La Quinta, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Sacramento County, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Taylorsville, UT
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Twentynine Palms, CA
• Corral Hollow Car Wash, Tracy, CA
• Sunland Boulevard Car Wash, Los Angeles, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, West Valley, UT
• Super Star Car Wash, Avondale, AZ
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Carson, CA
• Surf Thru Express, Fresno, CA
• Rockwall Retail Car Wash, Rockwall, TX
• Super Star Car Wash, Surprise, AZ
• Super Star Car Wash, San Jacinto, CA
• Super Star Car Wash, Dallas, TX
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Henderson, NV
• Allen Road Car Wash, Rosedale, CA
• ModWash Car Wash, Pinellas Park, FL
• Super Star Car Wash, Glendale, AZ
• Super Star Car Wash Speedway, Tucson, AZ
• Car Wash Pro Designers, Mesquite, TX
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Murrieta, CA
• Central Ave Service Station and Car Wash, Los
Angeles, CA
• Ultra Clean Express Car Wash, Glendale, AZ
• Super Star Car Wash, Frederick, CO
• Super Star Car Wash, San Diego, CA
• Super Star Car Wash, Tolleson, AZ
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Norwalk, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, North Hollywood, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Murrieta Hot Springs
Murrieta, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, San Bernardino, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Watsonville, CA
• Super Star Car Wash, Vista , CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Harbor City, CA
• Foothill Boulevard Car Wash, Los Angeles, CA
• Bliss Car Wash, Panorama City, CA
• Super Star Car Wash, Banning, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Pittsburg, CA
• Super Star Car Wash, Cleburne, TX
• Anita’s Mobil Car Wash, Los Angeles, CA
• Super Star Car Wash, Westlake, TX
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Tustin, CA
• Super Star Car Wash, Winchester, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Santa Maria, CA
• Super Star Car Wash, Phoenix, AZ
• Quick Quack Car Wash Alessandro, Riverside, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash Vineyard, Roseville, CA
• Super Star Car Wash, Buckeye, AZ
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Loomis, CA
• Riverwalk Chevron Car Wash, Riverside, CA
• Sky Canyon Retail Center Car Wash & Tire Store,
Temecula, CA
Claire Pincock
Representative Project Experience - continued
Go Back to Meet the Team ↑
©MD Acoustics, LLC | All Rights Reserved 4 • Super Star Car Wash, San Diego, CA
• Catt Crossing, Wildomar, CA
• Laurel Canyon Car Wash Peer Review, Los Angeles,
CA
• Vermont Avenue Car Wash, Los Angeles, CA
• Quick Quack Car Wash, Fontana, CA
Claire Pincock
Representative Project Experience - continued
Go Back to Meet the Team ↑