HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix K - Traffic Study
Fontana Corporate Center
TRAFFIC STUDY
CITY OF FONTANA
PREPARED BY:
Aric Evatt, PTP
aevatt@urbanxroads.com
Charlene So, PE
cso@urbanxroads.com
DECEMBER 21, 2021
14102-02 TS Report.docx
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................. I
APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................................ III
LIST OF EXHIBITS ................................................................................................................................... I
LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................................... I
LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS ............................................................................................................... I
1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Summary of Findings ..................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Project Overview ........................................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Analysis Scenarios ......................................................................................................................... 3
1.4 Study Area ..................................................................................................................................... 5
1.5 Deficiencies ................................................................................................................................... 7
1.6 Recommendations ........................................................................................................................ 8
1.7 Queuing Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 10
1.8 Truck Access ................................................................................................................................ 12
1.9 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis ....................................................................................... 12
2 METHODOLOGIES .................................................................................................................... 15
2.1 Level of Service ........................................................................................................................... 15
2.2 Intersection Capacity Analysis .................................................................................................... 15
2.3 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Methodology ............................................................................. 17
2.4 Minimum Level of Service (LOS) ................................................................................................. 18
2.5 Deficiency Criteria ....................................................................................................................... 18
2.6 Project Fair Share Calculation Methodology .............................................................................. 19
3 AREA CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................... 21
3.1 Existing Circulation Network ....................................................................................................... 21
3.2 General Plan Circulation Elements .............................................................................................. 21
3.3 Truck Routes ............................................................................................................................... 24
3.4 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities ..................................................................................................... 24
3.5 Transit Service ............................................................................................................................. 24
3.6 Existing Traffic Counts ................................................................................................................. 24
3.7 Existing (2021) Intersection Operations Analysis ....................................................................... 29
3.8 Existing (2021) Traffic Signal Warrants Analysis ......................................................................... 31
4 PROJECTED FUTURE TRAFFIC .................................................................................................... 33
4.1 Project Trip Generation ............................................................................................................... 33
4.2 Project Trip Distribution .............................................................................................................. 38
4.3 Modal Split .................................................................................................................................. 38
4.4 Project Trip Assignment .............................................................................................................. 38
4.5 Background Traffic ...................................................................................................................... 38
4.6 Cumulative Development Traffic ................................................................................................ 42
45
4.7 Near-Term Traffic Conditions...................................................................................................... 45
5 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ...................................................... 47
5.1 Roadway Improvements ............................................................................................................. 47
5.2 Opening Year Cumulative (2023) Without Project Traffic Volume Forecasts ............................ 47
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV II
5.3 Opening Year Cumulative (2023) With Project Traffic Volume Forecasts .................................. 47
5.4 Intersection Operations Analysis ................................................................................................ 50
5.5 Traffic Signal Warrants Analysis .................................................................................................. 50
5.6 Deficiencies and Improvements ................................................................................................. 51
6 LOCAL AND REGIONAL FUNDING MECHANISMS ....................................................................... 53
6.1 Measure “I” Funds ...................................................................................................................... 53
6.2 City of Fontana Development Impact Fee (DIF) .......................................................................... 53
6.3 Fair Share Contribution ............................................................................................................... 54
7 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ........................................................................................................ 55
7.1 Project Screening ........................................................................................................................ 55
7.2 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 57
8 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 59
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV III
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1.1: APPROVED TRAFFIC STUDY SCOPING AGREEMENT
APPENDIX 3.1: EXISTING & HISTORICAL TRAFFIC COUNTS
APPENDIX 3.2: EXISTING (2021) CONDITIONS INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS
APPENDIX 3.3: EXISTING (2021) CONDITIONS TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS
APPENDIX 5.1: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) WITHOUT PROJECT CONDITIONS INTERSECTION
OPERATIONS ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS
APPENDIX 5.2: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) WITH PROJECT CONDITIONS INTERSECTION
OPERATIONS ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS
APPENDIX 5.3: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) WITH PROJECT CONDITIONS TRAFFIC SIGNAL
WARRANT ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS
APPENDIX 5.4: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) WITH PROJECT CONDITIONS INTERSECTION
OPERATIONS ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS WITH IMPROVEMENTS
APPENDIX 5.5: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) WITH PROJECT CONDITIONS QUEUING ANALYSIS
APPENDIX 7.1: SBCTA VMT SCREENING EVALUATION
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV IV
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV I
LIST OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT 1-1: LOCATION MAP ................................................................................................................ 2
EXHIBIT 1-2: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN .................................................................................................. 4
EXHIBIT 1-3: STUDY AREA .................................................................................................................... 6
EXHIBIT 1-4: SITE ADJACENT ROADWAY AND SITE ACCESS RECOMMENDATIONS ................................. 9
EXHIBIT 1-5: TRUCK ACCESS AT DRIVEWAY 2 ...................................................................................... 13
EXHIBIT 1-6: TRUCK ACCESS AT DRIVEWAY 3 ...................................................................................... 14
EXHIBIT 3-1: EXISTING NUMBER OF THROUGH LANES AND INTERSECTION CONTROL ......................... 22
EXHIBIT 3-2: CITY OF FONTANA HIERARCHY OF STREETS .................................................................... 23
EXHIBIT 3-3: CITY OF FONTANA TRUCK ROUTES ................................................................................. 25
EXHIBIT 3-4: CITY OF FONTANA BICYCLE FACILITIES ............................................................................ 26
EXHIBIT 3-5: EXISTING PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES ................................................................................... 27
EXHIBIT 3-6: EXISTING TRANSIT ROUTES ............................................................................................ 28
EXHIBIT 3-7: EXISTING (2021) TRAFFIC VOLUMES ............................................................................... 30
EXHIBIT 4-1: PROJECT (PASSENGER CAR) TRIP DISTRIBUTION ............................................................. 39
EXHIBIT 4-2: PROJECT (TRUCKS) TRIP DISTRIBUTION .......................................................................... 40
EXHIBIT 4-3: PROJECT ONLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES ................................................................................. 41
EXHIBIT 4-4: CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT LOCATION MAP ............................................................... 43
EXHIBIT 4-5: CUMULATIVE ONLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES .......................................................................... 44
EXHIBIT 5-1: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES ................. 48
EXHIBIT 5-2: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES ........................ 49
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS LOCATIONS ................................................................................. 5
TABLE 1-2: SUMMARY OF LOS .............................................................................................................. 7
TABLE 1-3: SUMMARY OF IMPROVEMENTS AND ROUGH ORDER OF MAGNITUDE COSTS ................... 11
TABLE 1-4: QUEUING ANALYSIS FOR OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT
.......................................................................................................................................................... 12
TABLE 2-1: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LOS THRESHOLDS ................................................................... 16
TABLE 2-2: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LOS THRESHOLDS .............................................................. 17
TABLE 2-3: TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS LOCATIONS ............................................................ 18
TABLE 2-4: DETERMINATION OF EFECT ............................................................................................... 18
TABLE 3-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING (2021) CONDITIONS ............................................ 29
TABLE 4-1: EXISTING SURVEY DATA FOR EXISTING USE ...................................................................... 34
TABLE 4-2: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION RATES ................................................................................... 35
TABLE 4-3: TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY (ACTUAL VEHICLES) ........................................................... 35
TABLE 4-4: TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY (PCE) ................................................................................. 36
TABLE 4-5: TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON (PCE) ............................................................................ 36
TABLE 4-6: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION BASED ON 11TH EDITION ...................................................... 37
TABLE 4-7: CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT LAND USE SUMMARY ......................................................... 45
TABLE 5-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) CONDITIONS ............. 50
TABLE 5-2: INTERSECTION DEFICIENCIES AND IMPROVEMENTS FOR OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE
(2023) CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................................... 51
TABLE 6-1: PROJECT FAIR SHARE CALCULATIONS FOR INTERSECTIONS ............................................... 54
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV II
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV II
LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS
(1) Reference
ADT Average Daily Traffic
APN Assessor’s Parcel Number
CA MUTCD California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CMP Congestion Management Program
DIF Development Impact Fee
FAR Floor to Area Ratio
HCM Highway Capacity Manual
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
LOS Level of Service
OPR Office of Planning and Research
PHF Peak Hour Factor
Project Fontana Corporate Center
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
SB 743 Senate Bill 743
SBCTA San Bernardino County Transportation Authority
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
SED Socio-Economic Data
TAZ Traffic Analysis Zone
TIA Traffic Impact Analysis
TPA Transit Priority Area
TS Traffic Study
V/C Volume to Capacity
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV IIII
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 11
1 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the Traffic Study (TS) for the proposed Fontana Corporate
Center development (“Project”), which is located on the northeast corner of Commerce Way and
Slover Avenue in the City of Fontana as shown on Exhibit 1-1.
The purpose of this TS is to evaluate the potential deficiencies related to traffic, identify
circulation system deficiencies that may result from the development of the proposed Project,
and to recommend improvements to resolve identified deficiencies in order to achieve
acceptable operational conditions at study area intersections and ensure consistency with the
City’s General Plan. This TS has been prepared in accordance with the City of Fontana’s Traffic
Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service Assessment
(October 21, 2020) and through consultation with City of Fontana staff during the scoping process.
(1) The Project traffic study scoping agreement is provided in Appendix 1.1 of this TS, which has
been approved by the City of Fontana.
1.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The Project is to construct the following improvements as design features in conjunction with
development of the site:
• Project to construct Slover Avenue at its ultimate half-width as a Primary Highway (104-foot right-
of-way) from the Project’s western boundary to Business Drive consistent with the City’s
standards.
Additional details and intersection lane geometrics are provided in Section 1.6 Recommendations
of this report.
There are no off-site improvements recommended as the addition of Project traffic is not
anticipated to result in any deficiencies based on the City’s thresholds. As such, the Project
Applicant’s shall pay its requisite fees towards future regional roadway improvements consistent
with the City’s requirements (see Section 6 Local and Regional Funding Mechanisms).
As required by City Guidelines, a project level VMT analysis was conducted consistent with the
requirements identified for single use warehouse projects. The Project was not found to exceed
15% below the County of San Bernardino’s baseline regional average VMT per Service Population
measures of VMT. The Project’s impact to VMT is therefore presumed to be less than significant.
Detail traffic analysis can be found in Section 7 Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis of this TS.
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 22
EXHIBIT 1-1: LOCATION MAP
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 33
1.2 PROJECT OVERVIEW
The proposed Project is located north of Slover Avenue and west of Business Drive in the City of
Fontana is proposing to redevelop the site with 2 warehouse buildings totaling 355,370 square
feet. Building 1 to the east is to consist of 212,677 square feet of warehouse use and Building 2
to the west is to consist of 142,693 square feet of warehousing use. The Project is anticipated to
be developed within a single phase with an Opening Year of 2023. The preliminary site plan for
the proposed Project is shown on Exhibit 1-2. As indicated on Exhibit 1-2, access to the Project
site will be provided to Slover Avenue via two driveways for each building. Driveway 1 is
proposed to restrict access to right-in/right-out access only based on its proximity to Commerce
Way. Driveway 2 would prohibit left-out access based on its proximity to the railroad. Driveway
3 would prohibit left-in access only also based on its proximity to the adjacent railroad. Driveway
4 would accommodate full access. Regional access to the Project site is available from the I-10
Freeway via Etiwanda Avenue and Cherry Avenue interchanges.
Trips generated by the Project’s proposed land uses have been estimated based on trip
generation rates collected by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation
Manual, (10th Edition, 2017). The Project is anticipated to generate a total of 622 trip-ends per
day with 59 AM peak hour trips and 68 PM peak hour trips (actual vehicles). The assumptions
and methods used to estimate the Project’s trip generation characteristics are discussed in
greater detail in Section 4.1 Project Trip Generation of this report.
1.3 ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
For the purposes of this traffic study, potential deficiencies to traffic and circulation have been
assessed for each of the following conditions:
• Existing (2021)
• Opening Year Cumulative (2023) Without Project
• Opening Year Cumulative (2023) With Project
Per the City’s Guidelines, projects that generate between 50 and 100 two-way peak hour trips
only require an opening year assessment. As such, no future long-range (buildout) traffic
conditions have been evaluated for the purposes of this TS.
1.3.1 EXISTING (2021) CONDITIONS
Information for Existing (2021) conditions is disclosed to represent the baseline traffic conditions
as they existed at the time this report was prepared.
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 44
EXHIBIT 1-2: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 55
1.3.2 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) CONDITIONS
The Opening Year Cumulative (2023) conditions analysis determines the potential near-term
cumulative circulation system deficiencies. To account for background traffic growth, traffic
associated with other known cumulative development projects in conjunction with an ambient
growth from Existing (2021) conditions of 2.33% is included for Opening Year Cumulative (2023)
traffic conditions. The near-term conditions analysis will be utilized to determine if
improvements funded through regional transportation fee programs, such as the City’s
Development Impact Fee (DIF) program, or other approved funding mechanisms can
accommodate the long-range cumulative traffic at the target level of service (LOS) identified by
the City of Fontana (lead agency). Other improvements needed beyond the “funded”
improvements (such as localized improvements to non-DIF facilities) are identified as such.
1.4 STUDY AREA
To ensure that this TS satisfies the City of Fontana’s traffic study requirements, Urban Crossroads,
Inc. prepared a Project traffic study scoping package for review by City of Fontana staff prior to
the preparation of this report. This agreement provides an outline of the Project study area, trip
generation, trip distribution, and analysis methodology. The agreement approved by the City of
Fontana is included in Appendix 1.1 of this TS.
The 6 study area intersections shown on Exhibit 1-3 and listed in Table 1-1 were selected for
evaluation in this TS based on consultation with City of Fontana staff. The study area includes
intersections where the Project is anticipated to contribute 50 or more peak hour trips per the
City of Fontana’s traffic study guidelines. (1) The “50 peak hour trip” criteria represent a
minimum number of trips at which a typical intersection would have the potential to be
substantively affected by a given development proposal. The 50 peak hour trip criterion is a
traffic engineering rule of thumb that is accepted and widely used within San Bernardino County
for estimating a potential area of influence (i.e., study area).
TABLE 1-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS LOCATIONS
ID Intersection Location Jurisdiction CMP?
1 Commerce Wy. & Slover Av. City of Fontana No
2 Driveway 1 & Slover Av. City of Fontana No
3 Driveway 2 & Slover Av. City of Fontana No
4 Driveway 3 & Slover Av. City of Fontana No
5 Driveway 4/Business Dr. & Slover Av. City of Fontana No
6 Mulberry Av. & Slover Av. City of Fontana No
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 66
EXHIBIT 1-3: STUDY AREA
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 77
The intent of a Congestion Management Program (CMP) is to more directly link land use,
transportation, and air quality, thereby prompting reasonable growth management programs
that will effectively utilize new transportation funds, alleviate traffic congestion and related
deficiencies, and improve air quality. Counties within California have developed CMPs with
varying methods and strategies to meet the intent of the CMP legislation. Study area
intersections that are identified as CMP facilities in the County of San Bernardino per the San
Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) CMP are indicated on Table 1-1. (4)
1.5 DEFICIENCIES
This section provides a summary of deficiencies by analysis scenario. Section 2 Methodologies
provides information on the methodologies used in the analysis and Section 5 Opening Year
Cumulative (2023) Traffic Conditions includes the detailed analysis. A summary of LOS results for
all analysis scenarios is presented on Table 1-2.
TABLE 1-2: SUMMARY OF LOS
1.5.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
None of study area intersections is currently operating at an unacceptable LOS (i.e., LOS D or
worse) during the peak hours under Existing (2021) traffic conditions.
1.5.2 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS
None of study area intersections is anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS (i.e., LOS D or
worse) during the peak hours under Opening Year Cumulative (2023) Without Project traffic
conditions. One intersection is anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS (i.e., LOS D or
worse) during the peak hours under Opening Year Cumulative (2023) With Project traffic
conditions:
• Driveway 4/Business Dr & Slover Av (#5) – LOS D in PM Peak Hour Only
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 88
1.6 RECOMMENDATIONS
1.6.1 SITE ADJACENT AND SITE ACCESS RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are based on the minimum improvements needed to
accommodate site access and maintain acceptable peak hour operations. The site adjacent
recommendations are shown on Exhibit 1-4.
Recommendation 1 – Driveway 1 and Slover Avenue (#2) – The following improvements are
necessary to accommodate site access:
• Project to install a stop control on the southbound approach (Project driveway).
• Project to accommodate right turn lane on southbound approach.
• Driveway will be restricted to right-in/right-out access only.
Recommendation 2 – Driveway 2 and Slover Avenue (#3) – The following improvements are
necessary to accommodate site access:
• Project to install a stop control on the southbound approach (Project driveway).
• Project to accommodate right turn lane on southbound approach.
• Project to accommodate left turn lane on eastbound approach.
• Driveway will be restricted to left-out access.
Recommendation 3 – Driveway 3 and Slover Avenue (#4) – The following improvements are
necessary to accommodate site access:
• Project to install a stop control on the southbound approach (Project driveway).
• Project to accommodate shared left-right turn lane on southbound approach.
• Driveway will be restricted to left-in access.
Recommendation 4 – Driveway 4 & Slover Avenue (#5) – The following improvements are
necessary to accommodate site access:
• Project to install a stop control on the southbound approach (Project driveway).
• Project to accommodate shared left-through lane and right turn lane on southbound approach.
• Project to accommodate left turn lane on eastbound approach by restriping the painted median
on Slover Avenue.
On-site traffic signing and striping should be implemented agreeable with the provisions of the
California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) and in conjunction with
detailed construction plans for the Project site.
Sight distance at each project access point should be reviewed with respect to standard Caltrans
and City of Fontana sight distance standards at the time of preparation of final grading,
landscape, and street improvement plans.
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 99
EXHIBIT 1-4: SITE ADJACENT ROADWAY AND SITE ACCESS RECOMMENDATIONS
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 10
1.6.2 OFF-SITE RECOMMENDATIONS
Under Opening Year Cumulative (2023) With Project traffic conditions, one intersection is
anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS (LOS D) during the PM peak hour only. The
addition of Project traffic to Opening Year Cumulative (2023) Without Project traffic conditions
is anticipated to result in a new deficiency. As such, the Project should contribute its
proportionate share towards the improvements needed to bring the intersection operations back
to acceptable LOS (see Table 1-3). It should be noted that the intersection of Driveway 4/Business
Drive at Slover Avenue currently meets peak hour volume-based traffic signal warrants but is not
needed as it currently operates at an acceptable LOS. Lastly, the Project would be required to
pay fair share fees consistent with the City’s requirements (see Section 6 Local and Regional
Funding Mechanisms).
1.7 QUEUING ANALYSIS
A queuing analysis was conducted along the site adjacent roadways of Slover Avenue and at the
Project’s driveways for Opening Year Cumulative (2023) traffic conditions to determine the turn
pocket lengths and lane geometric necessary to accommodate near-term 95th percentile queues
and recommend storage lengths for the turning movements shown on Exhibit 1-4. The analysis
was conducted for the weekday AM and weekday PM peak hours using the SimTraffic modeling
software. The Opening Year Cumulative (2023) queuing results are provided in Table 1-4 and
Appendix 5.5 of this TS.
SimTraffic is designed to model networks of signalized and unsignalized intersections, with the
primary purpose of checking and fine-tuning signal operations. SimTraffic uses the input
parameters from Synchro (Version 11) to generate random simulations. The 95th percentile
queue is not necessarily ever observed; it is simply based on statistical calculations (or Average
Queue plus 1.65 standard deviations). The random simulations generated by SimTraffic have
been utilized to determine the 95th percentile queue lengths observed for each turn lane. A
SimTraffic simulation has been recorded 5 times, during the weekday AM and weekday PM peak
hours, and has been seeded for 30-minute periods with 60-minute recording intervals.
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 11
TABLE 1-3: SUMMARY OF IMPROVEMENTS AND ROUGH ORDER OF MAGNITUDE COSTS
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV
12
TABLE 1-4: QUEUING ANALYSIS FOR OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT
1.8 TRUCK ACCESS
Due to the typical wide turning radius of large trucks, a truck turning template has been overlaid
on the site plan at each applicable Project driveway anticipated to be utilized by heavy trucks in
order to determine appropriate curb radii and to verify that trucks will have sufficient space to
execute turning maneuvers. A WB-67 truck (53-foot trailer) has been utilized for the purposes of
this analysis. Exhibit 1-5 shows the ingress and egress truck turns from Driveway 2. Exhibit 1-6
shows the ingress and egress truck turns from Driveway 3.
1.9 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) ANALYSIS
The Project was evaluated against City Guideline’s stated VMT screening criteria but was found
to not meet the available screening thresholds. As required by City Guidelines, a project level
VMT analysis was conducted consistent with the requirements identified for single use
warehouse projects. The Project was not found to exceed 15% below the County of San
Bernardino’s baseline regional average VMT per Service Population measures of VMT. The
Project’s impact to VMT is therefore presumed to be less than significant. Detail traffic analysis
can be found in Section 7 Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis of this TS.
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV
13
EXHIBIT 1-5: TRUCK ACCESS AT DRIVEWAY 2
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV
14
EXHIBIT 1-6: TRUCK ACCESS AT DRIVEWAY 3
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV
15
2 METHODOLOGIES
This section of the report presents the methodologies used to perform the traffic analyses
summarized in this report. The methodologies described are generally consistent with the City
of Fontana’s traffic study guidelines. (1)
2.1 LEVEL OF SERVICE
Traffic operations of roadway facilities are described using the term "Level of Service" (LOS). LOS
is a qualitative description of traffic flow based on several factors such as speed, travel time,
delay, and freedom to maneuver. Six levels are typically defined ranging from LOS A,
representing completely free-flow conditions, to LOS F, representing breakdown in flow resulting
in stop-and-go conditions. LOS E represents operations at or near capacity, an unstable level where
vehicles are operating with the minimum spacing for maintaining uniform flow.
2.2 INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS
The definitions of LOS for interrupted traffic flow (flow restrained by the existence of traffic
signals and other traffic control devices) differ slightly depending on the type of traffic control.
The LOS is typically dependent on the quality of traffic flow at the intersections along a roadway.
The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology expresses the LOS at an intersection in terms
of delay time for the various intersection approaches. (5) The HCM uses different procedures
depending on the type of intersection control.
2.2.1 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
The City of Fontana requires signalized intersection operations analysis based on the
methodology described in the HCM (6th Edition). Intersection LOS operations are based on an
intersection’s average control delay. Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue
move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. For signalized intersections, LOS is
directly related to the average control delay per vehicle and is correlated to a LOS designation as
described in Table 2-1. Study area intersections have been evaluated using the Synchro (Version
11) analysis software package.
The traffic modeling and signal timing optimization software package Synchro (Version 11) is
utilized to analyze signalized intersections within the study area. Synchro is a macroscopic traffic
software program that is based on the signalized intersection capacity analysis as specified in the
HCM. Macroscopic level models represent traffic in terms of aggregate measures for each
movement at the study intersections. Equations are used to determine measures of
effectiveness such as delay and queue length. The level of service and capacity analysis
performed by Synchro takes into consideration optimization and coordination of signalized
intersections within a network.
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV
16
TABLE 2-1: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LOS THRESHOLDS
Description
Average Control
Delay (Seconds), V/C ≤ 1.0
Level of
Service, V/C ≤ 1.0
Level of
Service, V/C > 1.0
Operations with very low delay occurring with favorable
progression and/or short cycle length. 0 to 10.00 A F
Operations with low delay occurring with good
progression and/or short cycle lengths. 10.01 to 20.00 B F
Operations with average delays resulting from fair
progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures begin to appear. 20.01 to 35.00 C F
Operations with longer delays due to a combination of
unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high V/C
ratios. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures
are noticeable.
35.01 to 55.00 D F
Operations with high delay values indicating poor
progression, long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios.
Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. This
is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay.
55.01 to 80.00 E F
Operation with delays unacceptable to most drivers
occurring due to over saturation, poor progression, or
very long cycle lengths
80.01 and up F F
Source: HCM, 6th Edition
A saturation flow rate of 1900 has been utilized for all study area intersections located within the
City of Fontana. The peak hour traffic volumes are adjusted using a peak hour factor (PHF) to
reflect peak 15-minute volumes. Common practice for LOS analysis is to use a peak 15-minute
rate of flow. However, flow rates are typically expressed in vehicles per hour. The PHF is the
relationship between the peak 15-minute flow rate and the full hourly volume (e.g., PHF = [Hourly
Volume] / [4 x Peak 15-minute Flow Rate]). The use of a 15-minute PHF produces a more detailed
analysis as compared to analyzing vehicles per hour. Existing PHFs have been used for all analysis
scenarios. Per the HCM, PHF values over 0.95 often are indicative of high traffic volumes with
capacity constraints on peak hour flows while lower PHF values are indicative of greater
variability of flow during the peak hour. (5)
2.2.2 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
The City of Fontana require the operations of unsignalized intersections be evaluated using the
methodology described the HCM. (5) The LOS rating is based on the weighted average control
delay expressed in seconds per vehicle (see Table 2-2).
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV
17
TABLE 2-2: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LOS THRESHOLDS
Description
Average Control
Delay Per Vehicle
(Seconds)
Level of
Service, V/C
≤ 1.0
Level of
Service, V/C
> 1.0
Little or no delays. 0 to 10.00 A F
Short traffic delays. 10.01 to 15.00 B F
Average traffic delays. 15.01 to 25.00 C F
Long traffic delays. 25.01 to 35.00 D F
Very long traffic delays. 35.01 to 50.00 E F
Extreme traffic delays with intersection capacity exceeded. > 50.00 F F
Source: HCM, 6th Edition
At two-way or side-street stop-controlled intersections, LOS is calculated for each controlled
movement and for the left turn movement from the major street, as well as for the intersection
as a whole. For approaches composed of a single lane, the delay is computed as the average of
all movements in that lane. Per the HCM, the highest delay and associated LOS on the minor
approach is reported for two-way stop-controlled intersections. For all-way stop controlled
intersections, LOS is computed for the intersection as a whole and the average delay is reported
(similar to signalized intersections).
2.3 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
The term "signal warrants" refers to the list of established criteria used by the Caltrans and other
public agencies to quantitatively justify or ascertain the potential need for installation of a traffic
signal at an otherwise unsignalized intersection. This TS uses the signal warrant criteria
presented in the latest edition of the Caltrans California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices (CA MUTCD). (6)
The signal warrant criteria for Existing conditions are based upon several factors, including
volume of vehicular and pedestrian traffic, frequency of accidents, and location of school areas.
The Caltrans CA MUTCD indicates that the installation of a traffic signal should be considered if
one or more of the signal warrants are met. (6) Specifically, this TS utilizes the Peak Hour Volume-
based Warrant 3 as the appropriate representative traffic signal warrant analysis for existing
study area intersections for all analysis scenarios. Warrant 3 is appropriate to use for this TS
because it provides specialized warrant criteria for intersections with rural characteristics (e.g.,
located in communities with populations of less than 10,000 persons or with adjacent major
streets operating above 40 miles per hour). For the purposes of this study, the speed limit was
the basis for determining whether Urban or Rural warrants were used for a given intersection.
Traffic signal warrant analyses were performed for the following unsignalized study area
intersection shown in Table 2-3:
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV
18
TABLE 2-3: TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS LOCATIONS
ID Intersection Location Jurisdiction
3 Driveway 2 & Slover Av. Fontana
4 Driveway 3 & Slover Av. Fontana
5 Driveway 4/Business Dr. & Slover Av. Fontana
The Existing conditions traffic signal warrant analysis is presented in the subsequent section,
Section 3 Area Conditions of this report. The traffic signal warrant analyses for future conditions
are presented in Section 5 Opening Year Cumulative (2023) Traffic Conditions of this report. It is
important to note that a signal warrant defines the minimum condition under which the
installation of a traffic signal might be warranted. Meeting this threshold condition does not
require that a traffic control signal be installed at a particular location, but rather, that other
traffic factors and conditions be evaluated in order to determine whether the signal is truly
justified. It should also be noted that signal warrants do not necessarily correlate with LOS. An
intersection may satisfy a signal warrant condition and operate at or above acceptable LOS or
operate below acceptable LOS and not meet a signal warrant. Traffic signal warrant analysis has
not been performed for unsignalized intersections with limited access/turn restrictions (e.g.,
right-in/right-out only).
2.4 MINIMUM LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)
The City’s General Plan recommends a LOS standard of LOS C. Intersections which are forecast to
operate at unsatisfactory conditions (i.e., at LOS worse than LOS C for City intersections) shall be
identified as cumulatively deficient intersections. Therefore, any intersection operating at LOS
D, E, or F will be considered deficient for the purposes of this analysis. (1)
2.5 DEFICIENCY CRITERIA
For the intersections that lie within the City of Fontana, determination of direct project-related
deficiencies will be based on a comparison of without and with project levels of service for each
analysis year. A project-related deficiency occurs if project traffic increases the average delay at
an intersection by more than the thresholds identified on Table 2-4. The thresholds for LOS A, B,
and C do not apply to projects consistent with the General Plan.
TABLE 2-4: DETERMINATION OF EFECT
Pre-Project LOS Threshold1
A/B 10.0 Seconds
C 8.0 Seconds
D 5.0 Seconds
E 3.0 Seconds
F 1.0 Second
Source: Fontana Traffic Study Guidelines, October 21, 2020.
1 Increase in delay
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV
19
A Project’s contribution to a deficiency can be reduced/improved if the Project is required to
implement or fund its fair share of improvements designed to alleviate the potential deficiency.
2.6 PROJECT FAIR SHARE CALCULATION METHODOLOGY
In cases where this TS identifies that the proposed Project would have a cumulative effect to a
roadway facility, and the recommended improvement is a fair share monetary contribution, the
following methodology was applied to determine the fair share contribution. A project’s fair
share contribution at an off-site study area intersection is determined based on the following
equation, which is the ratio of Project traffic to net new traffic, where net new traffic is total
future traffic (Opening Year Cumulative conditions) subtracts less baseline traffic:
Project Fair Share % = Project Traffic / (Opening Year Cumulative Total Traffic – Existing Baseline
Traffic)
The Project fair share contribution calculations are presented in Section 6 Local and Regional
Funding Mechanisms of this TS.
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV
20
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV
21
3 AREA CONDITIONS
This section provides a summary of the existing circulation network, the City of Fontana General
Plan Circulation Network, and a review of existing peak hour intersection operations and traffic
signal warrant analyses.
3.1 EXISTING CIRCULATION NETWORK
Pursuant to the scoping agreement with City of Fontana staff (Appendix 1.1), the study area
includes a total of 6 existing and future intersections as shown on Exhibit 3-1. Exhibit 3-1
illustrates the study area intersections located near the proposed Project and identifies the
number of through traffic lanes for existing roadways and intersection traffic controls.
3.2 GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENTS
As noted previously, the Project site is located within the City of Fontana. The roadway
classifications and planned (ultimate) roadway cross-sections of the major roadways within the
study area, as identified on City of Fontana General Plan Hierarchy of Streets, are described
subsequently. Exhibit 3-2 shows the City of Fontana General Plan Circulation Element. The City
of Fontana General Plan does not include roadway cross-sections in its General Plan.
Primary Highways are four-lane roadways and may include a painted median. These roadways
typically direct traffic through major development areas. The following study area roadway
within the City of Fontana is classified as a Primary Highways:
• Slover Avenue
• Mulberry Avenue
Modified Industrial Collector are two-lane streets, providing one lane in each direction. The
following study area roadway within the study area is classified as a Modified Industrial Collector:
• Commerce Way, south of Slover Avenue
• Business Drive, south of Slover Avenue
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV
22
EXHIBIT 3-1: EXISTING NUMBER OF THROUGH LANES AND INTERSECTION CONTROL
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV
23
EXHIBIT 3-2: CITY OF FONTANA HIERARCHY OF STREETS
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV
24
3.3 TRUCK ROUTES
Exhibit 3-3 shows the City of Fontana truck routes. As shown, Slover Avenue and Mulberry
Avenue are identified as truck routes. These truck routes have been utilized to route truck traffic
associated with the proposed Project and future cumulative development projects for the
purposes of this TS.
3.4 BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
The City of Fontana bike facilities are shown on Exhibit 3-4. There are no existing bike facilities
within the study area. However, Slover Avenue from Mulberry Avenue eastward is proposed
Class II bike facilities. Exhibit 3-5 illustrates the existing pedestrian facilities, including sidewalks
and crosswalks. As shown on Exhibit 3-5, there are limited pedestrian facilities within the study
area.
3.5 TRANSIT SERVICE
There are no transit services is provided within the study area. However, there are some transit
services served by Omnitrans Transit Agency in the nearby roadways:
• North of the Project - San Bernardino Avenue via Route 61 and I-10 via Route 290
• South of the Project - Jurupa Avenue via Route 82
The transit services are illustrated on Exhibit 3-6. Transit service is reviewed and updated by
Omnitrans periodically to address ridership, budget, and community demand needs. Changes in
land use can affect these periodic adjustments which may lead to either enhanced or reduced
service where appropriate.
3.6 EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNTS
The intersection LOS analysis is based on the traffic volumes observed during the peak hour
conditions using traffic count data collected in September 2021. The following peak hours were
selected for analysis:
• Weekday AM Peak Hour (peak hour between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM)
• Weekday PM Peak Hour (peak hour between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM)
There were no observations made in the field that would indicate atypical traffic conditions on
the count dates, such as construction activity or detour routes and near-by schools were in
session and operating on normal schedules. The raw manual peak hour turning movement traffic
count data sheets are included in Appendix 3.1.
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV
25
EXHIBIT 3-3: CITY OF FONTANA TRUCK ROUTES
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV
26
EXHIBIT 3-4: CITY OF FONTANA BICYCLE FACILITIES
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 27
EXHIBIT 3-5: EXISTING PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 28
EXHIBIT 3-6: EXISTING TRANSIT ROUTES
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 29
Slover Avenue between Commerce Way and Business Drive was collected via 24-hour tube count
in September 2021, which was utilized to develop a peak-to-daily relationship in order to
calculate daily traffic on other roadway segments. Where actual 24-hour tube count data was
not available, Existing ADT volumes were based upon factored intersection peak hour counts
collected by Urban Crossroads, Inc. using the following formula for each intersection leg:
Weekday PM Peak Hour (Approach Volume + Exit Volume) x 12.08 = Leg Volume
A comparison of the PM peak hour and daily traffic volumes indicated that the peak-to-daily
relationship is approximately 8.28 percent. As such, the above equation utilizing a factor of 12.08
estimates the ADT volumes on the study area roadway segments assuming a peak-to-daily
relationship of approximately 8.28 percent (i.e., 1/0.0828 = 12.08) and was assumed to
sufficiently estimate ADT volumes for planning-level analyses. Existing weekday AM and
weekday PM peak hour intersection volumes are shown on Exhibit 3-7.
3.7 EXISTING (2021) INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
Existing peak hour traffic operations have been evaluated for the study area intersections based
on the analysis methodologies presented in Section 2.2 Intersection Capacity Analysis of this
report. The intersection operations analysis results are summarized in Table 3-1 which indicates
that all the study area intersections are currently operating at an acceptable LOS during the peak
hours. The intersection operations analysis worksheets are included in Appendix 3.2 of this TS.
TABLE 3-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING (2021) CONDITIONS
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 30
EXHIBIT 3-7: EXISTING (2021) TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 31
3.8 EXISTING (2021) TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS ANALYSIS
Traffic signal warrants for Existing traffic conditions are based on existing peak hour intersection
turning volumes. The following unsignalized study area intersection currently meets peak hour
volume-based traffic signal warrants for Existing (2021) traffic conditions (see Appendix 3.3):
• Driveway 4/Business Dr & Slover Av (#5)
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 32
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 33
4 PROJECTED FUTURE TRAFFIC
The proposed Project is located north of Slover Avenue and west of Business Drive in the City of
Fontana is proposing to redevelop the site with 2 warehouse buildings totaling 355,370 square
feet. Building 1 to the east is to consist of 212,677 square feet of warehouse use and Building 2
to the west is to consist of 142,693 square feet of warehousing use. The Project is anticipated to
be developed within a single phase with an Opening Year of 2023. Access to the Project site will
be provided to Slover Avenue via two driveways for each building. Driveway 1 is proposed to
restrict access to right-in/right-out access only based on its proximity to Commerce Way.
Driveway 2 would prohibit left-out access based on its proximity to the railroad. Driveway 3
would prohibit left-in access only also based on its proximity to the adjacent railroad. Driveway
4 would accommodate full access. Regional access to the Project site is available from the I-10
Freeway via Etiwanda Avenue and Cherry Avenue interchanges.
4.1 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
4.1.1 EXISTING USE
The site is currently occupied by a plant for a manufacturer of prefabricated building systems
located at 13592 Slover Avenue in the City of Fontana. As such, for the purposes of this
assessment, a credit has been taken for the trips associated with the existing uses. Traffic counts
were collected at the driveways for the existing use on June 9th and 10th, 2021 (see Appendix 1.1).
Table 4-1 summarizes the total trip generation for the existing site (accounting for all driveways).
As shown on Table 4-1, the existing use generates 163 two-way trips per day, with 6 trips during
the AM peak hour and 8 trips during the PM peak hour.
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 34
TABLE 4-1: EXISTING SURVEY DATA FOR EXISTING USE
4.1.2 PROPOSED PROJECT
In order to develop the traffic characteristics of the proposed project, trip-generation statistics
published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition,
2017) was used to estimate the trip generation. Trip generation rates for the Project are shown
in Table 4-2.
Land Use In Out Total In Out Total Daily
Day 1: June 9, 2021
Passenger Cars: 6 1 7 0 8 8 153
2-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
3-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
4+-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
Total Truck Trips: 0 0 0 0 0 0 16
Total Trips1 6 1 7 0 8 8 169
Day 2: June 10, 2021
Passenger Cars: 3 0 3 1 7 8 144
2-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
3-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4+-axle Trucks: 1 1 2 0 0 0 2
Total Truck Trips: 1 1 2 0 0 0 12
Total Trips1 4 1 5 1 7 8 156
2-Day Average Trip Generation:
Passenger Cars: 5 1 5 1 8 8 149
2-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
3-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
4+-axle Trucks: 1 1 1 0 0 0 4
Total Truck Trips: 1 1 1 0 0 0 14
Total Trips1 5 1 6 1 8 8 163
* Note: data collected on June 9 and 10, 2021.
1 Total Trips = Passenger Cars + Truck Trips.
2 Trip generation represents the sum of all driveways, by day.
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 35
TABLE 4-2: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION RATES
The trip generation summary for the Project in actual vehicles is shown on Table 4-3. As shown
on Table 4-3, the Project is anticipated to generate a total of 622 two-way trips per day with 59 AM
peak hour trips and 68 PM peak hour trips.
TABLE 4-3: TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY (ACTUAL VEHICLES)
The trip generation summary for the Project in passenger car equivalent (PCE) is shown on Table
4-4. As shown on Table 4-4, the Project is anticipated to generate a total of 878 PCE two-way trips
per day with 72 PCE AM peak hour trips and 83 PCE PM peak hour trips.
ITE LU AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use1 Units2 Code In Out Total In Out Total
Actual Vehicle Trip Generation Rates:
Warehousing3 TSF 150 0.131 0.039 0.170 0.051 0.139 0.190 1.740
Passenger Cars 0.114 0.034 0.148 0.044 0.118 0.162 1.270
2-Axle Trucks 0.003 0.001 0.004 0.001 0.003 0.005 0.078
3-Axle Trucks 0.004 0.001 0.005 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.097
4+-Axle Trucks 0.011 0.003 0.014 0.005 0.013 0.018 0.294
Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE) Trip Generation Rates:4
Warehousing3 TSF 150 0.131 0.039 0.170 0.051 0.139 0.190 1.740
Passenger Cars 0.114 0.034 0.148 0.044 0.118 0.162 1.270
2-Axle Trucks (PCE = 2.0)0.004 0.001 0.006 0.002 0.005 0.007 0.118
3-Axle Trucks (PCE = 2.5)0.007 0.002 0.009 0.003 0.009 0.012 0.194
4+-Axle Trucks (PCE = 3.0)0.032 0.010 0.042 0.014 0.039 0.054 0.882
1 Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, Tenth Edition (2017).
2 TSF = thousand square feet
3 Vehicle Mix Source: ITE Trip Generation Handbook Supplement (2020), Appendix C.
Truck Mix: South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) recommended truck mix, by axle type.
Normalized % - Without Cold Storage: 16.7% 2-Axle trucks, 20.7% 3-Axle trucks, 62.6% 4-Axle trucks.
4 PCE factors per City's Guidelines: 2-axle = 2.0; 3-axle = 2.5; 4+-axle = 3.0.
Daily
Land Use Quantity Units1 In Out Total In Out Total Daily
Actual Vehicles:
Warehousing 355.370 TSF
Passenger Cars: 40 12 52 15 42 57 452
2-axle Trucks: 1 0 1 0 1 1 28
3-axle Trucks: 1 0 1 1 2 3 36
4+-axle Trucks: 4 1 5 2 5 7 106
Total Trucks:6 1 7 3 8 11 170
Total Trips (Actual Vehicles)2 46 13 59 18 50 68 622
1 TSF = thousand square feet
2 Total Trips = Passenger Cars + Truck Trips.
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 36
TABLE 4-4: TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY (PCE)
4.1.3 TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON
Table 4-5 shows the trip generation comparison and the resulting net change in trips between
the existing use and the proposed Project. As shown on Table 4-5, the proposed Project would
result in a net increase of 697 two-way PCE trips per day and net increase of 60 PCE AM peak
hour trips and 74 PCE PM peak hour trips.
TABLE 4-5: TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON (PCE)
4.1.4 11TH EDITION ITE TRIP GENERATION RATES
After the approved scope and while wrapping up the initial draft of the TS, the ITE released its
latest Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021). Upon review of the updated trip generation
rates for the proposed Warehousing use (ITE Land Use Code 150) shown on Table 4-6, it was
determined that while there is a slight increase in daily traffic (based on PCE only) the trip
Land Use Quantity Units1 In Out Total In Out Total Daily
Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE):
Warehousing 355.370 TSF
Passenger Cars: 40 12 52 15 42 57 452
2-axle Trucks: 2 0 2 1 2 3 42
3-axle Trucks: 3 1 4 1 3 4 70
4+-axle Trucks: 11 3 14 5 14 19 314
Total Trucks (PCE):16 4 20 7 19 26 426
Total Trips (PCE)2 56 16 72 22 61 83 878
1 TSF = thousand square feet
2 Total Trips = Passenger Cars + Truck Trips.
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Trip Generation Comparison Quantity Units1 In Out Total In Out Total Daily
Proposed Project 355.370 TSF
Passenger Cars: 40 12 52 15 42 57 452
Total Truck Trips (PCE): 16 4 20 7 19 26 426
Total Trips2 56 16 72 22 61 83 878
Existing Use
Passenger Cars: 5 1 6 1 8 9 149
Total Truck Trips (PCE): 3 3 6 0 0 0 32
Total Trips2 8 4 12 1 8 9 181
Variance
Passenger Cars: 35 11 46 14 34 48 303
Total Truck Trips (PCE): 13 1 14 7 19 26 394
Total Trips2 48 12 60 21 53 74 697
1 TSF = thousand square feet
2 Total Trips = Passenger Cars + Truck Trips.
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 37
generation for the AM and PM peak hours show reductions in total traffic as compared to the
10th Edition based trip generation currently utilized in the traffic study for the operations
analyses. As such, the analysis currently based on the 10th Edition rates are more conservative.
TABLE 4-6: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION BASED ON 11TH EDITION
ITE LU AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use1 Units2 Code In Out Total In Out Total
Actual Vehicle Trip Generation Rates:
Warehousing3 TSF 150 0.131 0.039 0.170 0.050 0.130 0.180 1.710
Passenger Cars 0.116 0.034 0.150 0.042 0.108 0.150 1.110
2-Axle Trucks 0.002 0.001 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.005 0.100
3-Axle Trucks 0.002 0.002 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.006 0.124
4+-Axle Trucks 0.007 0.006 0.013 0.010 0.009 0.019 0.376
Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE) Trip Generation Rates:4
Warehousing3 TSF 150 0.131 0.039 0.170 0.050 0.130 0.180 1.710
Passenger Cars 0.116 0.034 0.150 0.042 0.108 0.150 1.110
2-Axle Trucks (PCE = 2.0)0.003 0.002 0.005 0.005 0.003 0.008 0.150
3-Axle Trucks (PCE = 2.5)0.004 0.004 0.008 0.006 0.006 0.012 0.248
4+-Axle Trucks (PCE = 3.0)0.021 0.017 0.038 0.030 0.026 0.056 1.127
1 Trip Generation & Vehicle Mix Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, Eleventh Edition (2021).
2 TSF = thousand square feet
3 Truck Mix: South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) recommended truck mix, by axle type.
Normalized % - Without Cold Storage: 16.7% 2-Axle trucks, 20.7% 3-Axle trucks, 62.6% 4-Axle trucks.
4 PCE factors per City's Guidelines: 2-axle = 2.0; 3-axle = 2.5; 4+-axle = 3.0.
Land Use Quantity Units1 In Out Total In Out Total Daily
Actual Vehicles:
Warehousing 355.370 TSF
Passenger Cars: 41 12 53 15 38 53 394
2-axle Trucks: 1 0 1 1 1 2 36
3-axle Trucks: 1 1 2 1 1 2 44
4+-axle Trucks: 2 2 4 4 3 7 134
Total Trucks:4 3 7 6 5 11 214
Total Trips (Actual Vehicles)2 45 15 60 21 43 64 608
Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE):
Warehousing 355.370 TSF
Passenger Cars: 41 12 53 15 38 53 394
2-axle Trucks: 1 1 2 2 1 3 54
3-axle Trucks: 1 2 3 2 2 4 88
4+-axle Trucks: 7 6 13 11 9 20 400
Total Trucks (PCE):9 9 18 15 12 27 542
Total Trips (PCE)2 50 21 71 30 50 80 936
Project PCE (Table 4-3)56 16 72 22 61 83 878
Variance -6 5 -1 8 -11 -3 58
1 TSF = thousand square feet
2 Total Trips = Passenger Cars + Truck Trips.
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 38
4.2 PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION
The Project trip distribution and assignment process represents the directional orientation of
traffic to and from the Project site. Trip distribution is the process of identifying the probable
destinations, directions or traffic routes that will be utilized by Project traffic. The potential
interaction between the planned land uses and surrounding regional access routes are
considered, to identify the route where the Project traffic would distribute. Separate
distributions have been developed for passenger cars and trucks. Exhibits 4-1 and 4-2 illustrate
the passenger car and truck trip distribution patterns through the study area intersections,
respectively.
4.3 MODAL SPLIT
The traffic reducing potential of public transit, walking, or bicycling have not been considered in
this TS. Essentially, the traffic projections are "conservative" in that these alternative travel
modes might be able to reduce the forecasted traffic volumes.
4.4 PROJECT TRIP ASSIGNMENT
The assignment of traffic from the Project area to the adjoining roadway system is based upon
the Project trip generation, trip distribution, and the arterial highway and local street system
improvements that would be in place by the time of initial occupancy of the Project. Based on
the identified Project traffic generation and trip distribution patterns, the Project only ADT and
peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibit 4-3.
4.5 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC
Future year traffic forecasts have been based upon background (ambient) growth at 1.16% per
year for 2023 traffic conditions, consistent with other recent studies performed in the area. The
total ambient growth is 2.33% for 2023 traffic conditions (compounded growth of 1.16 percent
per year over 2 years or 1.01162 years). The ambient growth factor is intended to approximate
regional traffic growth. This ambient growth rate is added to existing traffic volumes to account
for area-wide growth not reflected by cumulative development projects. Ambient growth has
been added to daily and peak hour traffic volumes on surrounding roadways, in addition to traffic
generated by the development of future projects that have been approved but not yet built
and/or for which development applications have been filed and are under consideration by
governing agencies. Opening Year Cumulative (2023) traffic volumes are provided in Section 5 of
this TS. The traffic generated by the proposed Project was then manually added to the base
volume to determine Opening Year Cumulative “With Project” forecasts.
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 39
EXHIBIT 4-1: PROJECT (PASSENGER CAR) TRIP DISTRIBUTION
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 40
EXHIBIT 4-2: PROJECT (TRUCKS) TRIP DISTRIBUTION
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 41
EXHIBIT 4-3: PROJECT ONLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 42
4.6 CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC
A cumulative project list was developed for the purposes of this analysis through consultation
with planning and engineering staff from the City of Fontana. The cumulative project list includes
known and foreseeable projects that are anticipated to contribute traffic to the study area
intersections.
Where applicable, cumulative projects anticipated to contribute measurable traffic (i.e., 50 or
more peak hour trips) to study area intersections have been manually added to the study area
network to generate Opening Year Cumulative (2023) forecasts. In other words, this list of
cumulative development projects has been reviewed to determine which projects would likely
contribute measurable traffic through the study area intersections (e.g., those cumulative
projects in close proximity to the proposed Project). For the purposes of this analysis, the
cumulative projects that were determined to affect one or more of the study area intersections
are shown on Exhibit 4-4, listed in Table 4-7, and have been considered for inclusion.
Although it is unlikely that all of these cumulative projects would be fully built and occupied by
Years 2023, they have been included in an effort to conduct a conservative analysis and overstate
as opposed to understate potential traffic deficiencies. Any other cumulative projects located
beyond the cumulative study area that are not expected to contribute measurable traffic to study
area intersections have not been included since the traffic would dissipate due to the distance
from the Project site and study area intersections. Any additional traffic generated by other
projects not on the cumulative projects list is likely accounted for through background ambient
growth factors that have been applied to the peak hour volumes at study area intersections as
discussed in Section 4.5 Background Traffic. Cumulative Only ADT and peak hour intersection
turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibit 4-5.
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 43
EXHIBIT 4-4: CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT LOCATION MAP
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 44
EXHIBIT 4-5: CUMULATIVE ONLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 45
TABLE 4-7: CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT LAND USE SUMMARY
4.7 NEAR-TERM TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
The “buildup” approach combines existing traffic counts with a background ambient growth
factor to forecast the near-term 2023 traffic conditions. An ambient growth factor of 1.16% per
year, compounded annually, accounts for background (area-wide) traffic increases that occur
over time up to the years 2023 from the year 2021. Traffic volumes generated by cumulative
development projects are then added to assess the Opening Year Cumulative (2023) traffic
conditions. Lastly, Project traffic is added to assess “With Project” traffic conditions. The 2023
roadway network is similar to the existing conditions roadway network with the exception of
intersections proposed to be developed by the Project. The near-term traffic analysis includes
the following traffic conditions, with the various traffic components:
• Opening Year Cumulative (2023) Without Project
o Adjusted Existing 2021 counts
o Ambient growth traffic (2.33%)
o Cumulative Development Project traffic
• Opening Year Cumulative (2023) With Project
o Adjusted Existing 2021 counts
o Ambient growth traffic (2.33%)
o Cumulative Development Project traffic
o Project traffic
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 46
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 47
5 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
This section discusses the methods used to develop Opening Year Cumulative (2023) Without
and With Project traffic forecasts, and the resulting intersection operations and traffic signal
warrant analyses.
5.1 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The lane configurations and traffic controls assumed to be in place for Opening Year Cumulative
(2023) conditions are consistent with those shown previously on Exhibit 3-1, with the exception
of the following:
• Project driveways and those facilities assumed to be constructed by the Project to provide site
access are also assumed to be in place for Opening Year Cumulative conditions only (e.g.,
intersection and roadway improvements along the Project’s frontage and driveways).
• Driveways and those facilities assumed to be constructed by cumulative developments to provide
site access are also assumed to be in place for Opening Year Cumulative conditions only (e.g.,
intersection and roadway improvements along the cumulative development’s frontages and
driveways).
5.2 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS
This scenario includes Existing traffic volumes plus an ambient growth factor of 2.33% plus traffic
from pending and approved but not yet constructed known development projects in the area.
The ADT and peak hour intersection turning movement volumes which can be expected for
Opening Year Cumulative (2023) Without Project conditions are shown on Exhibit 5-1.
5.3 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS
This scenario includes Existing traffic volumes, an ambient growth factor of 2.33%, traffic from
pending and approved but not yet constructed known development projects in the area and the
addition of Project traffic. The ADT and peak hour intersection turning movement volumes which
can be expected for Opening Year Cumulative (2023) With Project conditions are shown on
Exhibit 5-2.
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 48
EXHIBIT 5-1: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 49
EXHIBIT 5-2: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 50
5.4 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
5.4.1 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
Opening Year Cumulative (2023) peak hour traffic operations have been evaluated for the study
area intersections based on the analysis methodologies presented in Section 2.2 Intersection
Capacity Analysis of this report. The intersection analysis results are summarized in Table 5-1,
which indicate that none of study area intersections is anticipated to operate at an unacceptable
LOS during the peak hours under Opening Year Cumulative (2023) Without Project. The
intersection operations analysis worksheets for Opening Year Cumulative Without Project traffic
conditions are included in Appendix 5.1 of this TS.
TABLE 5-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) CONDITIONS
5.4.2 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2023) WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
As shown in Table 5-1, there is one of study area intersections anticipated to operate at an
unacceptable LOS with the addition of Project traffic under Opening Year Cumulative (2023) With
Project traffic conditions:
• Driveway 4/Business Dr & Slover Av (#5)
The intersection operations analysis worksheets for Opening Year Cumulative (2023) With
Project traffic conditions are included in Appendix 5.2 of this TS.
5.5 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS ANALYSIS
Traffic signal warrants have been performed (based on CA MUTCD) for Opening Year Cumulative
(2023) traffic conditions based on peak hour intersection turning movements volumes or
planning level (ADT) volumes. No additional unsignalized study area intersections is anticipated
to meet a traffic signal warrant under Opening Year Cumulative (2023) With Project traffic
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 51
conditions. Traffic signal warrants for Opening Year Cumulative (2023) With Project traffic
conditions are included in Appendix 5.3.
5.6 DEFICIENCIES AND IMPROVEMENTS
This section provides a summary of deficiencies, based on the City of Fontana’s deficiency criteria
discussed in Section 2.6 Deficiency Criteria, and improvements needed to improve operations
back to acceptable levels. The addition of Project traffic is anticipated to result in a peak hour
operations deficiency during the PM peak hour at the intersection of Driveway 4/Business Drive
and Slover Avenue. As such, the following improvements have been recommended for those
intersections exceeding the City’s thresholds as listed in Table 2-4 in order to bring the
intersection operations back to acceptable levels. It should be noted that the intersection
currently meets peak hour volume-based traffic signal warrants for Existing conditions. The
intersection operations analysis worksheets for Opening Year Cumulative (2023) With Project
with improvements are included in Appendix 5.4 of this TS.
TABLE 5-2: INTERSECTION DEFICIENCIES AND IMPROVEMENTS FOR OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE
(2023) CONDITIONS
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 52
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 53
6 LOCAL AND REGIONAL FUNDING MECHANISMS
Transportation improvements within the City of Fontana are funded through a combination of
construction of off-site improvements, development impact fee programs or fair share
contributions, such as the City of Fontana DIF program. Identification and timing of needed
improvements is generally determined through local jurisdictions based upon a variety of factors.
6.1 MEASURE “I” FUNDS
In 2004, the voters of San Bernardino County approved the 30-year extension of Measure “I”, a
one-half of one percent sales tax on retail transactions, through the year 2040, for transportation
projects including, but not limited to, infrastructure improvements, commuter rail, public transit,
and other identified improvements. The Measure “I” extension requires that a regional traffic
impact fee be created to ensure development is paying its fair share. A regional Nexus study was
prepared by SBCTA and concluded that each jurisdiction should include a regional fee component
in their local programs in order to meet the Measure “I” requirement. The regional component
assigns specific facilities and cost sharing formulas to each jurisdiction and was most recently
updated in May 2018. Revenues collected through these programs are used in tandem with
Measure “I” funds to deliver projects identified in the Nexus Study.
While Measure “I” is a self-executing sales tax administered by SBCTA, it bears discussion here
because the funds raised through Measure “I” have funded in the past and will continue to fund
new transportation facilities in San Bernardino County, including within the City of Fontana.
6.2 CITY OF FONTANA DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE (DIF)
The City of Fontana adopted the latest update to their DIF program in February 2016. Fees from
new residential, commercial, and industrial development are collected to fund Measure “I”
compliant regional facilities as well as local facilities. Under the City’s DIF program, the City may
grant to developers a credit against specific components of fees when those developers construct
certain facilities and landscaped medians identified in the list of improvements funded by the DIF
program.
After the City’s DIF fees are collected, they are placed in a separate restricted use account
pursuant to the requirements of Government Code sections 66000 et seq. The timing to use the
DIF fees is established through periodic capital improvement programs which are overseen by
the City’s Engineering Department. Periodic traffic counts, review of traffic accidents, and a
review of traffic trends throughout the City are also periodically performed by City staff and
consultants. The City uses this data to determine the timing of the improvements listed in its
facilities list. The City also uses this data to ensure that the improvements listed on the facilities
list are constructed before the LOS falls below the LOS performance standards adopted by the
City. In this way, the improvements are constructed before the LOS falls below the City’s LOS
performance thresholds. The City’s DIF program establishes a timeline to fund, design, and build
the improvements.
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 54
6.3 FAIR SHARE CONTRIBUTION
Project improvement may include a combination of fee payments to established programs,
construction of specific improvements, payment of a fair share contribution toward future
improvements or a combination of these approaches. Improvements constructed by
development may be eligible for a fee credit or reimbursement through the program where
appropriate (to be determined at the City’s discretion).
When off-site improvements are identified with a minor share of responsibility assigned to
proposed development, the approving jurisdiction may elect to collect a fair share contribution
or require the development to construct improvements. Detailed fair share calculations, for each
peak hour, has been provided on Table 6-1 for the applicable deficient study area intersections.
These fees are collected with the proceeds solely used as part of a funding mechanism aimed at
ensuring that regional highways and arterial expansions keep pace with the projected population
increases.
TABLE 6-1: PROJECT FAIR SHARE CALCULATIONS FOR INTERSECTIONS
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 55
7 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
Changes to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines were adopted in December
2018, which require all lead agencies to adopt VMT as a replacement for automobile delay-based
LOS as the measure for identifying transportation impacts for land use projects. This statewide
mandate went into effect July 1, 2020. To aid in this transition, the Governor’s Office of Planning
and Research (OPR) released a Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA
(December of 2018) (Technical Advisory). (8) Based on OPR’s Technical Advisory specific
procedures for complying with the new CEQA requirements for VMT analysis the City of Fontana
adopted Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service
Assessment (City Guidelines), which documents the City’s VMT analysis methodology and
approved impact thresholds. The VMT screening evaluation presented in this report has been
developed based on the adopted City Guidelines. (1) The City Guidelines identify that the SBCTA
VMT Screening Tool (Screening Tool) is utilized to assess project VMT screening criteria. The
Screening Tool uses the project’s assessor’s parcel number (APN) to determine if its location
meets one or more of the VMT screening thresholds for land use projects.
7.1 PROJECT SCREENING
The City Guidelines provides information on appropriate screening thresholds that can be used
to identify when a proposed land use project is anticipated to result in a less than significant
impact without conducting a more detailed project-level assessment. Screening thresholds are
broken into the following four steps:
• Step 1: Transit Priority Area (TPA) Screening
• Step 2: Low VMT Area Screening
• Step 3: Low Project Type Screening
• Step 4: Project net daily trips less than 500 ADT
7.1.1 STEP 1: TPA SCREENING
Consistent with guidance identified in the City Guidelines, projects located within a Transit
Priority Area (TPA) (i.e., within ½ mile of an existing “major transit stop”1 or an existing stop along
a “high-quality transit corridor”2) may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent
substantial evidence to the contrary. However, the presumption may NOT be appropriate if a
project:
• Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75;
1 Pub. Resources Code, § 21064.3 (“‘Major transit stop’ means a site containing an existing rail transit station, a
ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes
with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute
periods.”).
2 Pub. Resources Code, § 21155 (“For purposes of this section, a high-quality transit corridor means a corridor with
fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.”).
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 56
• Includes more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than
required by the jurisdiction (if the jurisdiction requires the project to supply parking);
• Is inconsistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy (as determined by
the lead agency, with input from the Metropolitan Planning Organization); or
• Replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income
residential units.
Based on the Screening Tool results presented in Attachment A, the Project site is not located
within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop, or along a high-quality transit corridor.
TPA screening criteria is not met.
7.1.2 STEP 2: LOW VMT AREA SCREENING
As described in the City Guidelines, “residential and office projects located within a low VMT
generating area may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial
evidence to the contrary. In addition, other employment-related and mixed-use land use projects
may qualify for the use of screening if the project can reasonably be expected to generate VMT
per resident, per worker, or per service population that is similar to the existing land uses in the
low VMT area.”
The Screening Tool uses the sub-regional SBTAM to measure VMT performance within individual
traffic analysis zones (TAZ’s) within the City. The Project’s physical location based on parcel
number is selected in the Screening Tool to determine project generated VMT as compared to
the City’s threshold. The parcel containing the proposed Project was selected and the Screening
Tool was run for the Production/Attraction (PA) VMT per service population measure of VMT.
The Project is not located within a low VMT generating zone as compared to the City threshold
of 15% below baseline County of San Bernardino PA VMT per service population (see Appendix
7.1).
Low VMT Area screening criteria is not met.
7.1.3 STEP 3: LOW PROJECT TYPE SCREENING
City Guidelines state that local serving retail projects less than 50,000 square feet may be
presumed to have a less than significant impact. In addition to local serving retail, other local
serving land uses such as public facilities, day care centers, gas stations, etc. would tend to
provide local services and result in reducing overall VMT.
Project Type screening criteria is not met.
7.1.4 STEP 4: PROJECT NET DAILY TRIPS LESS THAN 500 ADT SCREENING
Identified in City Guidelines, Projects that generate fewer than 500 ADT would not cause a
substantial increase in the total citywide or regional VMT and are therefore presumed to have
less than significant impact on VMT. Trips generated by the Project’s proposed land use have
been estimated based on trip generation rates collected by the ITE Trip Generation Manual. (2)
The existing land use has been estimated to generate 163 vehicle trip-ends per day. Whereas the
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 57
proposed Project is estimated to generate 622 vehicle trip-ends per day. Resulting in a net new
increase of 459 vehicle trip-ends per day, which would not exceed the City’s screening threshold
of 500 ADT.
Project net daily trips less than 500 ADT screening criteria is met.
7.2 CONCLUSION
Based on our findings, the Project was found to meet the project net daily trips less than 500 ADT
screening criteria. Therefore, the Project would result in a less than significant impact for VMT;
no further VMT analysis required.
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 58
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 59
8 REFERENCES
1. City of Fontana Public Works Department. Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service Assessment. Fontana : s.n., October 21, 2020.
2. Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Trip Generation Manual. 10th Edition. 2017.
3. WSP. High Cube Warehouse Trip Generation Study. January 29, 2019.
4. San Bernardino Associated Governments. Congestion Management Program for County of San
Bernardino. County of San Bernardino : s.n., Updated June 2016.
5. Transportation Research Board. Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). 6th Edition. s.l. : National Academy
of Sciences, 2016.
6. California Department of Transportation. California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(MUTCD). [book auth.] California Department of Transportation. California Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices (CAMUTCD). 2017.
7. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation Manaul Supplement. February 2020.
8. Office of Planning and Research. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA.
State of California : s.n., December 2018.
9. San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). Recommended Traffic Impact Analysis
Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service Assessment. February 2020.
10. Southern California Association of Governments. Employment Density Study. October 2001.
Fontana Corporate Center Traffic Study
14102-02 TS Report REV 60
This Page Intentionally Left Blank