HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix I - Trip Generation and Vehicle Miles Traveled Study❖APPENDICES ❖
APPENDIX I
VMT Assessment
RK17157.doc
JN:0788-2021-02
February 11, 2022
Mr. Bobby Allard
ALLARD ENGINEERING
16866 Seville Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
Subject: Citrus Avenue Residential Project Trip Generation & Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) Study, City of Fontana, CA
Dear Mr. Allard:
A. Introduction
RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. (RK) is pleased to provide this Trip Generation Analysis and
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis for the proposed Citrus Avenue Residential
Development project.
B. Project Description
The project site is located along the east side of Citrus Avenue, south of Highland Avenue,
in the City of Fontana.
The project consists of constructing 68 dwelling units of multifamily residential uses on
approximately 4.63 acres vacant site.
Access for the proposed project is planned as follows:
• One full access driveway along the Citrus Avenue.
Exhibit A shows the location of the proposed project. Exhibit B shows the proposed site
plan.
Citrus Avenue Residential Project Trip Generation & VMT Analysis, City of Fontana, CA
Page 2
RK17157.doc
JN:0789-2021-02
C. Project Trip Generation
Trip generation represents the amount of traffic that is attracted and produced by a
development.
Trip generation is typically estimated based on the trip generation rates from the latest
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual. The latest and most
recent version (11th Edition, 2021) of the ITE Manual has been utilized for this trip
generation analysis. This publication provides a comprehensive evaluation of trip
generation rates for a variety of land uses.
The ITE trip generation rates for the proposed land uses are shown in Table 1.
Table 1
ITE Trip Generation Rates1
Land Use Units2 ITE Code
Weekday
AM PM Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Multifamily Residential (Low-Rise) DU 220 0.10 0.30 0.40 0.32 0.19 0.51 6.74
1 Source: 2021 ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition;
2 DU = dwelling units.
Utilizing the ITE trip generation rates in Table 1, Table 2 shows the trip generation for the
proposed uses.
Table 2
Project Trip Generation1
Land Use (ITE Code) Quantity Units2
Weekday
AM PM Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Multifamily Residential (Low-Rise) 68 DU 7 21 27 22 13 35 458
1 Source: 2021 ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition;
2 DU = dwelling units
Citrus Avenue Residential Project Trip Generation & VMT Analysis, City of Fontana, CA
Page 3
RK17157.doc
JN:0789-2021-02
The City of Fontana, as described in the City of Fontana Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA)
Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service Assessment, October
2020, establishes guidelines and thresholds when determining if a development project will
require a full level traffic impact analysis. The following is an excerpt from the City’s
guidelines:
“If a project generates less than 50 peak hour trips, a traffic analysis shall not be required,
and a trip generation memo will be considered sufficient unless the City has specific
concerns related to project access and interaction with adjacent intersections.”
As shown in Table 2, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 458 daily
trips, including approximately 27 AM peak hour trips and approximately 35 PM peak hour
trips.
Hence, the project does not require preparation of full traffic study and is expected to not
result in a significant adverse impact on the operations of the roadway network and
intersections.
D. VMT Screening
Effective July 1st, 2020, the longstanding metric of roadway level of service (LOS), which is
typically measured in terms of vehicle delay, roadway capacity and congestion, will no
longer be considered a significant impact under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.3, VMT is now the most appropriate
measure of transportation impacts.
The City of Fontana has updated their transportation impact guidelines, City of Fontana
Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for Vehicles Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of
Service Assessment (October 2020) to provide recommendations in the form of thresholds
of significance and methodology for identifying VMT related impacts.
The City of Fontana has developed four types of screening criteria that can be applied to
effectively screen projects from project-level assessment. These are summarized below:
Transit Priority Area (TPA) Screening
Low- VMT Area Screening
Citrus Avenue Residential Project Trip Generation & VMT Analysis, City of Fontana, CA
Page 4
RK17157.doc
JN:0789-2021-02
Low Project Type Screening
Project net daily trips less than 500 ADT
Presumption of Project net daily trips less than 500 ADT
Based on the City of Fontana Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for Vehicles Miles
Traveled (VMT), October 2020, “Projects that generate fewer than 500 average daily trips
(ADT) would not cause a substantial increase in the total citywide or regional VMT and are
therefore presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT.”
As shown in Table 2, based on the recent ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, the
proposed project is expected to generate approximately 458 daily trips and as a result, the
proposed project is screened out based on Project net daily trips less than 500 ADT
screening and may be presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT under
CEQA. Therefore, no further VMT analysis is required.
The City of Fontana TIA and VMT guidelines are provided in Appendix A.
RK Engineering Group, Inc. appreciates this opportunity to assist on this project. If you
have any questions regarding this study, please do not hesitate to contact us at (949) 474-
0809.
Sincerely,
RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
Bryan Estrada, AICP Darshan Shivaiah, CEP-IT
Principal Environmental Specialist II
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Exhibits
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Appendices
Appendix A
City of Fontana
TIA & VMT Guidelines
1
THE CITY OF FONTANA
DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING
Traffic Engineering Division
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS (TIA) GUIDELINES
FOR
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) AND LEVEL OF SERICE ASSESSMENT
October 21, 2020
2
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 3
2.0 PURPOSE OF THE GUIDELINES ................................................................................................... 3
3.0 WHEN A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS IS REQUIRED .................................................................... 3
4.0 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................... 4
4.1 Intersection Analysis ........................................................................................................... 4
4.2 Roadway Link Analysis ........................................................................................................ 4
4.3 Freeway analysis ................................................................................................................. 4
5.0 STUDY AREA ............................................................................................................................... 4
6.0 ANALYSIS SCENARIOS ................................................................................................................. 5
7.0 ANALYSIS PROCESS .................................................................................................................... 6
7.1 Scoping ................................................................................................................................ 6
7.2 Trip Generation ................................................................................................................... 6
7.3 Trip Distribution .................................................................................................................. 7
7.4 Background Volume Development .................................................................................... 7
7.5 Level of Service Analysis ..................................................................................................... 7
8.0 DETERMINATION OF IMPACTS .................................................................................................. 8
9.0 CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS ................................................................................................. 8
9.1 Circulation Improvements .................................................................................................. 8
9.2 Mitigation Measures .......................................................................................................... 8
9.3 Mitigation Fair-share Cost Calculations .............................................................................. 9
9.4 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis ........................................................................................... 9
10.0 SITE ACCESS AND SAFETY ANALYSIS....................................................................................... 9
11.0 SPECIAL ISSUES ..................................................................................................................... 10
12.0 CEQA ASSESSMENT - VMT ANALYSIS ................................................................................... 10
12.1 Analysis Methodology ...................................................................................................... 10
12.2 Project Screening .............................................................................................................. 11
12.3 VMT Assessment for Non-Screened Development .......................................................... 14
13.0 CEQA VMT Impact Thresholds ............................................................................................. 16
14.0 CEQA VMT Mitigation Measures .......................................................................................... 16
15.0 CEQA Assessment – Active Transportation and Public Transit Analysis .............................. 17
16.0 Transportation Impact Study Format ................................................................................... 17
3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) assesses the impacts of traffic generated by a development project
on the surrounding transportation network. It serves as a tool for the City to evaluate the effects a
development will have on the City’s transportation infrastructure, identify improvements required
to maintain the City’s Level of Service (LOS) standards and address Section XV
(Transportation/Traffic) of Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines. A TIA also help the City identify timing of infrastructure improvements and assists the
City in prioritizing infrastructure projects.
The City of Fontana is located in San Bernardino County and as such, the San Bernardino Associated
Governments (SANBAG) Congestion Management Plan (CMP) applies to the City. These guidelines
generally follow the SANBAG TIA Guidelines, but also address new CEQA requirements and changes
some of the requirements in the SANBAG TIA guidelines to address the changes in procedures due
to the SANBAG Measure I Nexus Study. For example, with the approval of the Nexus Study, fair
share calculations for the programmed improvements are no longer required. This also eliminates
the 5-mile limit stated in the SANBAG Nexus Study to address new CEQA rulings.
2.0 PURPOSE OF THE GUIDELINES
These TIA guidelines describe the key elements required for preparing TIA reports. The purpose of
these guidelines is to formalize a process for the preparation of TIAs within the City, thereby
reducing inconsistencies in analysis parameters as well as assist in the subsequent preparation of
environmental documents.
3.0 WHEN A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS IS REQUIRED
Based on the parameters from the SANBAG CMP TIA Guidelines, a TIA must be prepared when a
proposed change in land use, development project, or at local discretion, a group of projects are
forecast to equal or exceed the CMP threshold of 250 two-way peak hour trips generated, based on
trip generation rates published for the applicable use or uses in the Institute of Transportation
Engineers’ Trip Generation Manual or other approved data source. Pass-by trips shall not be
considered in the threshold determination. However, industrial, warehousing and truck projects
shall convert trucks to PCE’s before applying the above threshold.
It should be noted that based on the parameters from the SANBAG CMP TIA Guidelines,
jurisdictions that have implemented qualifying development mitigation fee programs that achieve
development contribution requirements established by the SANBAG Development Mitigation
Nexus Study are not required to prepare TIA reports for SANBAG review. Fontana is a participant in
the SANBAG Measure I Nexus Study fee program and therefore, SANBAG review is not applicable to
projects in Fontana. However, Fontana doesn’t have agreements with Caltrans regarding State
highway facilities within the City, and therefore, based on the CMP, any project meeting the CMP
threshold of 250 two-way peak hour trips that expects to add at least 50 two-way peak hour trips
4
to a State highway facility is required to prepare a TIA report for City and Caltrans’ review.
If a project is forecast to generate between 100 and 249 two-way peak hour trips, a traffic
impact analysis will be required, but the extent of the analysis will be lesser.
If a project generates between 50 and 100 two-way peak hour trips, a focused traffic analysis
will be required.
If a project generates less than 50 peak hour trips, a traffic analysis shall not be required, and a
trip generation memo will be considered sufficient unless the City has specific concerns related
to project access and interaction with adjacent intersections.
4.0 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
This section discusses the methodologies to be used in a traffic impact analysis.
4.1 Intersection Analysis
The traffic impact analysis shall include all intersections with more than 50 peak hour project
trips. The City may, at its discretion, require analysis of additional intersections that do not
meet the 50-trip threshold. Intersection analysis will be conducted using the latest Highway
Capacity Manual (HCM) analysis procedures. In addition, HCM 2000 worksheets should also be
provided if requested by the City. It is recommended that a software program that can output
multiple HCM methodologies be used for analysis.
4.2 Roadway Link Analysis
Urban segments (i.e., segments on roadways that are generally signalized with spacing less than
2 miles) do not require segment analysis. Segment requirements can normally be determined
by the analysis of lane requirements at intersections. At locations where the ultimate street
cross sections are not constructed, a segment analysis could be required. Roadway link analysis
could be conducted either based on daily traffic volumes or based on peak hour volumes using
vehicle-to-capacity ratios.
4.3 Freeway analysis
Based on SANBAG guidelines, freeway segments with more than 100 two-way peak hour
project trips will require analysis and analysis of freeway merge-diverge operations will be
required if there are more than 50 peak hour project trips entering (or exiting) the freeway.
These thresholds will be based on total vehicles (i.e. passenger cars and trucks if applicable) not
on passenger car equivalents because the PCE factors are different for freeway mainline
operations and freeway ramps. Freeway analyses shall be conducted using the latest Highway
Capacity Manual (HCM) analysis procedures.
5.0 STUDY AREA
Intersections with more than 50 peak hour project trips will require analysis. In addition, roadway
segments with more than 50 peak hour project trips could require analysis at locations where the
5
ultimate street cross sections are not constructed, a segment analysis could be required. Freeway
segments with more than 100 two-way project trips and merge diverge areas with more than 50
peak hour project trips will also be required.
A meeting with Department of Engineering will generally be necessary to discuss the specific scope
of the study prior to preparing the traffic study.
6.0 ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
The TIA shall include the following analysis scenarios for roadway and intersection analysis:
1. Existing Conditions - The existing conditions analysis determines the current baseline for the
analysis. The existing conditions analysis also forms the basis for all future analysis scenarios.
(Identify any existing deficiencies). This will be based on traffic counts conducted for study
intersections. Unless otherwise noted, a.m. and p.m. peak period counts will be conducted for
all study intersections. Traffic counts older than one year at the time the scoping letter is
submitted will not be acceptable, unless approved by City Traffic Engineering staff.
2. Opening Year Without Project Conditions — Opening year without project conditions will be
based on application of a growth rate and/or adding traffic from reasonably foreseeable
cumulative projects in the area, or by interpolating traffic volumes based on a traffic model.
3. Opening Year With Project Conditions — Project traffic will be added to opening year without
project traffic volumes to determine opening year with project traffic volumes.
4. Opening Year With Project Conditions With Mitigation, if necessary.
5. Future Build-out Year Without Project Conditions — Future Year without project traffic
volumes will be based on either a traffic model (SBTAM) or based on application of growth
rates and addition of cumulative traffic volumes to be determined based on consultation with
City staff. Future year will be 20 years from the opening day of the project, rounded up to the
nearest multiple of 5.
6. Future Build-out Year With Project Conditions — Project traffic will be added to year 2040
without project traffic volumes to determine year 2040 with project traffic volumes.
7. Future Build-out Year With Project Conditions With Mitigation, if necessary.
If a project generates between 50 and 100 two-way peak hour trips, the analysis will
only require Scenarios 1 through 4 identified above as part of a focused traffic analysis.
If a project is forecast to generate between 100 and 249 peak hour trips, year 2040
traffic volumes may be based on either an application of growth rate and addition of
traffic from cumulative projects or based on the San Bernardino Transportation analysis
Model (SBTAM) or other approved model.
If a project is forecast to generate more than 250 peak hour trips, year 2040 traffic
volumes shall be based on the San Bernardino Transportation analysis Model (SBTAM)
6
or other approved model.
For phased projects, the phases shall be identified and analyzed.
7.0 ANALYSIS PROCESS
This section discusses the traffic impact analysis process.
7.1 Scoping
Staff Consultation is an important part of preparation of a TIA. The consultant shall
submit a scoping letter to the City describing the project and including, at minimum, the
following information:
Project Description
Existing and proposed land uses
Project Trip Generation
Study Intersections and Roadway Segments (if required)
Project Trip Distribution
Project Trip Assignment
Analysis Scenarios and Methodologies
The City will review the information provided and discuss the analysis requirements
with the Consultant. The study area or other parameters could be changed by the City
at this stage. See attached copy, Scoping Agreement for Traffic Impact Study in
Appendix A. Copy of the approved scoping agreement should be included in the study
appendices.
7.2 Trip Generation
The project trip generation shall be based on the latest edition of the ITE Trip
Generation Manual. Approval must be obtained from the City prior to using other data
sources. Pass by and diverted link trip calculations can be conducted based on the Trip
Generation Manual. Pass by and diverted link trips shall be compared to traffic counts
on project adjacent roadways to identify if existing traffic can support the pass by
reductions. For mixed use projects, internal trip capture can be based on either the Trip
Generation Manual or the traffic model.
For industrial uses, the ITE trip generation rates shall be converted to PCE trips based on
vehicle splits from the Truck Trip Generation Study prepared by the City of Fontana.
Passenger car and truck trips shall be identified separately, as well as the total PCE trips.
Unknown Trip Generation Rates:
For unique trip generators, a trip generation survey might be required. Some unique
types of development or uses may not have rates/formulas published by ITE. In this
case, a trip generation study may be conducted at a similar existing facility in order to
determine acceptable trip generation rates to be used in the study. The type and
location of the similar existing facility and the study methodology must be pre-approved
by the City Engineer.
7
7.3 Trip Distribution
The project trip distribution shall be based on discussion with City staff. For projects
generating more than 250 peak hour trips, the trip distribution shall be based on a
traffic model. Distribution of truck traffic shall not be based on the traffic model since
other factors such as truck routes play an important role in truck routing.
7.4 Background Volume Development
7.4.1 Existing Traffic – Existing traffic counts shall be conducted on a Tuesday,
Wednesday, or Thursday on non-holiday weeks. Counts in the vicinity of a
school should be taken when the school in session. For the analysis, traffic
counts shall be converted to Passenger Car Equivalents (PCEs) based on vehicle
classification counts conducted on at least one intersection at each CMP facility.
The following PCE conversion factors shall be used:
2-Axle Trucks: 2.0 PCE
3-Axle Trucks: 2.5 PCE
4- and more AxIe Trucks: 3.0 PCE
Intersections at which classification counts are not available shall be converted
to PCEs using a factor of 2.5 PCE for all trucks. Traffic volumes at adjacent
intersections with inconsistent traffic counts (more than 3% variance in
approaches and departures) shall be balanced with the higher traffic volume
approach to account for inconsistencies in traffic counts.
For freeway mainline volume development, traffic counts from the most recent
Caltrans Counts database shall be used. Truck traffic shall be converted to PCEs
based on a PCE factor of 1.5 for all trucks.
7.4.2 Forecast Traffic – All traffic forecasts will be based on PCEs. If a traffic model is
used, forecast link volumes shall be identified in PCEs. Standard model post
processing techniques shall be used consistent to SANBAG methodologies and
then converted to turn volumes based on NCHRP-255 methodologies
7.5 Level of Service Analysis
Level of service analysis shall be based on HCM methodologies. The input parameters
shall be consistent to the Highway Capacity Manual. The main parameters are
summarized below:
Input Parameter Value
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1900 pc/hr/ln.
Heavy Vehicle Factor Based on traffic volumes if PCE conversion not
conducted. If PCE conversion conducted, then 0%.
Cycle Length 60-130 second.
Minimum Green Time 10 seconds (for through movements only). In high
8
pedestrian areas, the minimum green times shall be
based on the CAMUTCD walk time calculations.
Lost Time 2 seconds per phase.
Peak Hour Factor
Based on counts for existing and near term (less
than 5 years) conditions. 0.95 for later scenarios
(unless existing PHFs) are higher.
8.0 DETERMINATION OF EFFECTS
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.
Determination of deficient intersections will be based on a comparison of without and with project
levels of service for each analysis year. An intersection effect occurs if project traffic increases the
average delay at an intersection by more than the thresholds identified below.
Thresholds of Significant Impact
With Project LOS Significant Impact Threshold
A/B 10.0 Seconds
C 8.0 Seconds
D 5.0 Seconds
E 3.0 Seconds
F 1.0 Seconds
The thresholds for LOS A, B and C do not apply to projects consistent with the General Plan.
9.0 CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS
9.1 Circulation Improvements
The City’s General Plan1 recommends a LOS standard of LOS C. Circulation
improvements shall be recommended for every analysis location where the LOS
standard is not met.
Only feasible circulation improvements shall be recommended. Circulation
improvements that are determined to be infeasible and factors causing the
improvement to be infeasible shall be discussed in the TIA. Funding mechanisms for all
circulation improvements identified.
9.2 Intersection Improvements
At locations where a project is forecast to have an effect on a deficient intersection,
1 These standards are subject to change; please review the General Plan to ensure the most recent standards are utilized.
9
improvements shall be identified to offset the projects' effects. It will be the project’s
responsibility to improve all intersections to an acceptable LOS. Project fair share costs
should be calculated. If improvements are included in a fee program, the cost of
implementing the improvements could be credited against fees payable by the project.
9.3 Improvement Fair-share Cost Calculations
The percentage of fair-share for the project shall be calculated at each location using
the total trips generated by the project divided by the total “new” traffic, which is the
net increase in traffic volume from all proposed projects (Other Projects plus Project)
and growth using the following formula:
Project Trips
Fair share % = x 100%
Project Trips + Future Development Trips
Trips noted above should correspond to the peak hour where the impact occurs for
intersection or daily trips for roadway segment impacts. If a project has impacts during
both peak hours, then the analysis should identify the peak hour for fair share
assessment that has the highest project burden for fair share contribution.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Project Applicant/Owner shall participate
in the City’s Development Impact Fee (DIF) program by paying the requisite DIF fee at
the time of building permit, or as agreed to by the City and Project Applicant/Owner, for
the improvements not included in a pre-existing fee program.
The cost of improvements shall be estimated using verifiable cost estimates from
reliable and recognized sources such as the CMP guidelines. Fair-share cost of
improvements shall be calculated using the fair-share percentage of the project
volumes multiplied by total estimated cost of mitigation.
9.4 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
Intersections at which traffic signals are identified as improvements shall be evaluated
for traffic signal warrants based on the California MUTCD for peak hour signal warrants
unless data shows that other warrants could be applicable. The warrants analysis
should be included in the study appendices.
10.0 SITE ACCESS AND SAFETY ANALYSIS
A site access analysis shall be conducted to verify driveway spacing, sight distances, and
consistency with the City of Fontana Access Management Plan. The following analysis are
recommended to improve project access circulation and to limit driveways and local access on
arterial streets:
a. Intersection Sight Distance – All on-site intersections, project access driveways or streets to
10
public roadways should provide adequate sight distance. Adequate intersection sight distance
should be determined using the Caltrans Highway Design Manual.
b. Driveway Length and Gated Entrance – Primary project driveways should have a throat of
sufficient length to allow vehicles to enter the project area without causing subsequent vehicles
to back out onto the City street system. A turn around should be provided at all gated
entrances.
c. Limit Driveway Impacts – Driveways and local streets access on arterial streets should be
limited to minimize the impacts on arterial streets. Driveways should be located so as to
maintain a reasonable distance from an adjacent intersection and/or driveway. Whenever
possible, driveways shall be consolidated with adjacent properties.
d. Corner Clearance – A driveway should be a sufficient distance from a signalized intersection so
that right-turn egress movements do not interfere with the right-turn queue at the
intersection. In addition, every effort should be made to provide right-turn egress movements
with sufficient distance to enter the left-turn pocket at the adjacent intersection.
e. Right Turn Lanes at Driveways – If the project right turn peak hour volume is 50 or more
vehicles, a right-turn deceleration lane should be reviewed for appropriateness, when feasible,
on all driveways accessing major and primary arterials. The length of right turn lane should be
sufficient to allow a vehicle traveling at the posted speed to decelerate before entering the
driveway as outlined in the Caltrans Highway Design Manual.
f. Adequacy of pedestrian Facilities.
g. Bicycle accessibility.
h. Accessibility from adjacent transit stops.
11.0 SPECIAL ISSUES
Although the above guidelines are applicable for most land development projects, special uses such
as churches, school, special events venues, etc. might require additional or different analysis
parameters. Please consult with City staff to verify analyses needs for special uses.
12.0 CEQA ASSESSMENT - VMT ANALYSIS
A key element of SB 743, signed in 2013, is the elimination of automobile delay and LOS as the sole
basis of determining CEQA impacts. The most recent CEQA guidelines, released in December 2018,
recommend VMT as the most appropriate measure of project transportation impacts. However, SB
743 does not prevent a city or county from continuing to analyze delay or LOS as part of other plans
(i.e., the general plan), studies, or ongoing network monitoring.
The following recommendations assist in determining VMT impact thresholds and mitigation
requirements for various land use project’s Transportation Impact Studies.
12.1 Analysis Methodology
For purposes of SB 743 compliance, a VMT analysis should be conducted for land use projects
as deemed necessary by the Traffic Division and would apply to projects that have the potential
to increase the average VMT per service population (e.g. population plus employment)
11
compared to the County’s boundary. Normalizing VMT per service population essentially
provides a transportation efficiency metric that the analysis is based on. Using this efficiency
metric allows the user to compare the project to the remainder of the unincorporated area for
purposes of identifying transportation impacts.
These guidelines are based on the SBCTA SB 743 Implementation Study which provides options
for both methodologies and VMT screening. The methodologies and significance thresholds
presented below are based on SBCTA recommendations from the Implementation Study.
12.2 Project Screening
There are four types of screening that lead agencies can apply to effectively screen projects
from project-level assessment. These screening steps are summarized below:
Step 1: Transit Priority Area (TPA) Screening
Projects located within a TPA2 may be presumed to have a less than significant impact
absent substantial evidence to the contrary. This presumption may NOT be appropriate if the
project:
1. Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75;
2. Includes more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than
required by the City requirements;
3. Is inconsistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy (as determined by
the lead agency, with input from the Metropolitan Planning Organization); or
4. Replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate or high-income
residential units.
Step 2: Low VMT Area Screening
Residential and office projects located within a low VMT- generating area may be presumed
to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. In
addition, other employment-related and mixed-use land use projects may qualify for the
use of screening if the project can reasonably be expected to generate VMT per resident,
per worker, or per service population that is similar to the existing land uses in the low VMT
area.
2 A TPA is defined as a half mile area around an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high quality transit corridor per
the definitions below.
Pub. Resources Code, § 21064.3 - ‘Major transit stop’ means a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by
either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes
or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.
Pub. Resources Code, § 21155 - For purposes of this section, a ‘high-quality transit corridor’ means a corridor with fixed route bus
service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.
12
For this screening in the SBCTA area, the SBTAM travel forecasting model was used to
measure VMT performance for City of Fontana and for individual traffic analysis zones
(TAZs). TAZs are geographic polygons similar to Census block groups used to represent
areas of homogenous travel behavior. Total daily VMT per service population (population
plus employment) was estimated for each TAZ. This presumption may not be appropriate if
the project land uses would alter the existing built environment in such a way as to increase
the rate or length of vehicle trips.
To identify if the project is in a low VMT-generating area, the analyst may review the SBCTA
screening tool and apply the appropriate threshold, identified in Section 13.0, within the
tool. Additionally, as noted above, the analyst must identify if the project is consistent with
the existing land use within that TAZ and use professional judgement that there is nothing
unique about the project that would otherwise be mis-represented utilizing the data from
the travel demand model.
The SBCTA screening tool can be accessed at the following location:
https://sbcta.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=779a71bc659041ad995
cd48d9ef4052b users may identify the San Bernardino Transportation Analysis Model
(SBTAM) traffic analysis zone (TAZ) in which the project is located.
Projects located in TAZs without baseline VMT data should perform VMT modeling using
SBTAM to determine the appropriate project VMT rate.
Step 3: Low Project Type Screening
Local serving retail projects less than 50,000 square feet may be presumed to have a less than
significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. Local serving retail generally
improves the convenience of shopping close to home and has the effect of reducing vehicle
travel. Local serving3 retail include the following:
Supermarket
Restaurant/café/bar
Coffee/donut shop
Dry cleaners
Barbershop
Hair/nails salon
Walk-in medical clinic
3 Other local serving uses may be eligible for screening at the direction of the Planning or Engineering Directors.
13
Urgent care
Auto repair/tire shop
Gyms/health club
Dance/yoga/fitness/material arts studio
In addition to local serving retail, the following local serving uses can also be presumed to have
a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary as their uses are local
serving in nature:
Local-serving K-12 schools
Local parks
Day care centers
Local-serving gas stations
Local-serving banks
Local-serving hotels (e.g. non-destination hotels)
Student housing projects on or adjacent to college campuses
Local-serving assembly uses (places of worship, community organizations)
Community institutions (Public libraries, fire stations, local government)
Local serving community colleges that are consistent with the assumptions noted in the
RTP/SCS
Affordable or supportive housing
Assisted living facilities
Senior housing (as defined by HUD)
Step 4: Project net daily trips less than 500 ADT
Projects that generate fewer than 500 average daily trips (ADT) would not cause a substantial
increase in the total citywide or regional VMT and are therefore presumed to have a less than
significant impact on VMT. Appendix B, City of Fontana SB 743 Small Project Testing, provides
additional discussion and analysis regarding the application of the 500 ADT screening criteria
and how it has been established within the context of CEQA.
The latest edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual is
the preferred source for calculating trip generation in the City of Fontana. The use of other
sources of trip generation must be approved by the Engineering Department. The screening
criteria trip limit is based on net trip generation after considering pass-by, internal capture,
affordable housing, and/or existing land use trips.
14
Pass-by trips include the portion of the project traffic that is already on the adjacent
roadway and passes by the site as an intermediate stop. Typically applied to
retail/commercial uses only. Pass-by should be consistent with ITE or other verified
sources.
Internal capture trips are trips that both begin and end on the project site. Commonly
found in mixed-use developments, internal capture trips are often taken as walking or
bicycling trips and can significantly reduce VMT. Internal capture credits should be
consistent with the NCHRP Report 684 Enhancing Trip Capture Estimation for Mixed-
Use Developments or other verified sources.
Affordable housing trip credits can be taken for any dwelling unit within a project that is
deemed affordable, as defined by the Planning Department.
Existing land use trip credits can be taken for land uses on a project site that are
currently or have been operational within 6 months from the time the application is
filed.
Projects which generate less than 500 ADT include the following:
Single family residential – 52 Dwelling Units or fewer
Multi-family residential – 68 Dwelling Units or fewer
General Office – 51,000 square feet or less
Light Industrial – 100,000 square feet or less
Warehousing – 287,000 square feet or less
High-Cube Fulfillment Center Warehouse – 357,000 square feet or less
12.3 VMT Assessment for Non-Screened Development
Projects not screened through the steps above should complete VMT analysis and forecasting
through the SBTAM model to determine if they have a significant VMT impact. This analysis
should include ‘project generated VMT’ and ‘project effect on VMT’ estimates for the project
TAZ (or TAZs) under the following scenarios:
Baseline conditions - This data is already available in the web screening map.
Baseline plus project for the project - The project land use would be added to the
project TAZ or a separate TAZ would be created to contain the project land uses. A full
base year model run would be performed and VMT changes would be isolated for the
project TAZ and across the full model network. The model output must include
reasonableness checks of the production and attraction balancing to ensure the project
15
effect is accurately captured. If this scenario results in a less-than-significant impact,
then additional cumulative scenario analysis may not be required.
Cumulative no project - This data is available from SBCTA.
Cumulative plus project - The project land use would either be added to the project TAZ
or a separate TAZ would be created to contain the project land uses. The addition of
project land uses should be accompanied by a reallocation of a similar amount of land
use from other TAZs; especially if the proposed project is significant in size such that it
would change other future developments. Land use projects will generally not change
the cumulative no project control totals for population and employment growth.
Instead, they will influence the land use supply through changes in general plan land
use designations and zoning. If project land uses are simply added to the cumulative no
project scenario, then the analysis should reflect this limitation in the methodology and
acknowledge that the analysis may overestimate the project’s effect on VMT.
The model output should include total VMT, which includes all vehicle trips and trip purposes,
and VMT per service population (population plus employment). Total VMT (by speed bin) is
needed as an input for air quality, greenhouse gas (GHG), and energy impact analysis while
total VMT per service population is recommended for transportation impact analysis4.
Both “plus project” scenarios noted above will summarize two types of VMT: (1) project
generated VMT per service population and comparing it back to the appropriate benchmark
noted in the thresholds of significance, and (2) the project effect on VMT, comparing how the
project changes VMT on the network looking at Citywide VMT per service population or a sub-
regional VMT per service population and comparing it to the no project condition.
Project-generated VMT shall be extracted from the travel demand forecasting model using the
origin-destination trip matrix and shall multiply that matrix by the final assignment skims. The
project-effect on VMT shall be estimated using a sub-regional boundary and extracting the total
link-level VMT for both the no project and with project condition.
In some cases, it may be appropriate to extract the Project-generated VMT using the
production-attraction trip matrix. This may be appropriate when a project is entirely composed
of retail or office uses, and there is a need to isolate the home-based-work (HBW) VMT for the
purposes of isolating commute VMT. The City should evaluate the appropriate methodology
based on the project land use types and context.
4 This assumes that the lead agency will use VMT per service population for its impact threshold. If a lead agency decides
to isolate VMT by trip purpose, then the lead agency would need to update this section of the recommended guidelines.
16
13.0 CEQA VMT Impact Thresholds
A project would result in a significant project-generated VMT impact if either of the following
conditions are satisfied:
1. The baseline project-generated VMT per service population exceeds 15% below the
baseline County of San Bernardino VMT per service population, or
2. The cumulative project-generated VMT per service population exceeds 15% below the
baseline County of San Bernardino VMT per service population.
The project’s effect on VMT would be considered significant if it resulted in either of the
following conditions to be satisfied:
1. The baseline link-level boundary VMT per service population (City boundary) to increase
under the plus project condition compared to the no project condition), or
2. The cumulative link-level boundary VMT per service population (City boundary) to
increase under the plus project condition compared to the no project condition).
Please note that the cumulative no project shall reflect the adopted RTP/SCS; as such, if a
project is consistent with the regional RTP/SCS, then the cumulative impacts shall be
considered less than significant subject to consideration of other substantial evidence
14.0 CEQA VMT Mitigation Measures
To mitigate VMT impacts, the following choices are available to the applicant:
Modify the project’s built environment characteristics to reduce VMT generated by the project.
Implement transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures to reduce VMT generated by
the project.
o Implement pedestrian and sidewalk improvements that meet or exceed the minimum
requirements of the City of Fontana Municipal Code.
o If constructing pedestrian network improvements is not necessary or feasible on or
adjacent to the project site, then provide a fair share payment to a fund designated for
off-site pedestrian network improvements somewhere else in the City (may require a
nexus study)
o Construct bicycle network improvements along the project’s frontage consistent with
the Community Mobility and Circulation of the adapted General Plan.
o If constructing bicycle network improvements is not necessary or feasible on or
adjacent to the project site, then provide a fair share payment to fund designated off-
site bicycle network improvements somewhere else in the City (may require a nexus
study).
17
Participate in a VMT fee program and/or VMT mitigation exchange/banking program (if they
exist) to reduce VMT from the project or other land uses to achieve acceptable levels.
As part of the SBCTA Implementation Study, key TDM measures that are appropriate to the region
were identified. Measures appropriate for most of the SBCTA region are summarized in the
technical memorandum “SB743 Implementation Mitigation and TDM Strategy Assessment”
(provided in Appendix C). Evaluation of VMT reductions should be evaluated using state-of-the-
practice methodologies recognizing that many of the TDM strategies are dependent on building
tenant performance over time. As such, actual VMT reduction cannot be reliably predicted, and
monitoring may be necessary to gauge performance related to mitigation expectations.
15.0 CEQA Assessment – Active Transportation and Public Transit Analysis
Potential impacts to public transit, pedestrian facilities and travel, and bicycle facilities and
travel can be evaluated using the following criteria.
A significant impact occurs if the project conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decreases the
performance or safety of such facilities.
Therefore, the TIA should include analysis of a project to examine if it is inconsistent with adopted
policies, plans, or programs regarding active transportation or public transit facilities, or otherwise
decreases the performance or safety of such facilities and make a determination as to whether it
has the potential to conflict with existing or proposed facilities supporting these travel modes
16.0 Transportation Impact Study Format
The recommended TIA format is as follows:
1. Executive Summary
a. Table summarizing significant impacts and mitigation measures
2. Introduction
a. Purpose of the TIA and study objective
b. Project location and vicinity map (Exhibit)
c. Project size and description
d. Existing and proposed land use and zoning
e. Site plan and proposed project (Exhibit)
f. Proposed project opening year and analysis scenarios
3. Methodology and Impact Thresholds
18
4. Existing Conditions
a. Existing roadway network
b. Existing traffic control and intersection geometrics (Exhibit)
c. Existing traffic volumes – AM and PM peak hour and ADT (Exhibit)
d. Existing level of service (LOS) at intersections (Table)
e. Existing bicycle facilities (Exhibit)
f. Existing transit facilities (Exhibit)
g. Existing pedestrian facilities
5. Project Traffic
a. Trip generation (Table)
b. Trip distribution and assignment (Exhibit)
c. Project peak hour turning movements and ADT (Exhibit)
6. Background Conditions (Opening Year) Analysis
a. No Project analysis
i. Committed (funded) roadway improvements
ii. Approved project trip generation (Table, if required)
iii. Approved project trip assignment and distribution (Exhibit, if required)
iv. Peak turning movement and ADT (Exhibit)
v. Intersection level of service (Table)
vi. Roadway segment level of service (Table)
b. Plus Project analysis
i. Plus Project peak turning movement and ADT (Exhibit)
ii. Intersection level of service (Table)
iii. Roadway segment level of service (Table)
iv. Identification of intersection and roadway segment deficiencies
7. Cumulative Year Analysis
a. No Project analysis
i. Committed (funded) roadway improvements
ii. Pending projects and verification of how they are included in the travel demand
forecasting model
iii. Cumulative Year peak turning movement and ADT (Exhibit)
iv. Intersection level of service (Table)
v. Roadway segment level of service (Table)
b. Plus Project Analysis
19
i. Plus Project peak turning movement and ADT (Exhibit)
ii. Intersection level of service (Table)
iii. Roadway segment level of service (Table)
iv. Identification of intersection and roadway segment deficiencies
8. Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
9. Site Access Analysis
10. Safety and Operation Improvement Analysis
11. Active Transportation and Public Transit Analysis
12. Improvements and Recommendations
a. Proposed improvements at intersections
b. Proposed improvements at roadway segments
c. Recommended Improvements categorized by whether they are included in fee plan or
not. (Identify if these improvements are included in an adopted fee program)
13. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis
a. Project VMT per person/employee for all analysis scenarios
b. Project effect on VMT for all analysis scenarios
c. Identification of VMT impacts
d. Proposed VMT Mitigation Measures
14. Appendix
a. Approved scope of work
b. Traffic counts
c. Intersection analysis worksheets
d. VMT and TDM calculations
e. VMT and TDM mitigation calculations
f. Signal warrant worksheets