The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAppendix D - Draft Traffic Study❖ APPENDICES ❖ APPENDIX D DRAFT TRAFFIC STUDY WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS (PLANNING AREA 27 OF THE WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN) Prepared for: INTEX City of Fontana, California July 17, 2024 Prepared by: LOS ANGELES 201 S. Figueroa Street Suite 240 Los Angeles, CA 90012 213.337.3679 ONTARIO 4141 E. Inland Empire Blvd Suite 250 Ontario, CA 91764 909.481.5757 SAN DIEGO 600 B Street, Suite 1600 San Diego, CA 92101 619. 400.0600 SANTA CLARITA 25152 Springfield Court Suite 350 Santa Clarita, CA 91355-1096 661.284.7400 TEMECULA 41951 Remington Avenue Suite 220 Temecula, CA 92590-3745 951.294.9300 TUSTIN 17782 17th Street Suite 200 Tustin, CA 92780-1947 714.665.4500 VICTORVILLE 14297 Cajon Avenue Suite 101 760.524.9100 www.deainc.com DRAFT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS Traffic Impact Analysis Page 1 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project Contents I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................. 1 A. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 1 B. Project Description .................................................................................................................................................. 1 C. Traffic Impact Study Scenarios ................................................................................................................................ 1 D. Level of Service Deficiency and Significant Impact Threshold Definitions ............................................................. 4 E. Existing (2024) Conditions Analysis Scenario .......................................................................................................... 4 F. Comparison of Opening Year 2027 Baseline and Opening Year 2027 + Project Conditions ................................... 5 G. Comparison of Future Year 2050 Baseline and 2050 Baseline + Project Conditions ............................................. 5 H. Identification of Impacts and Mitigation of Intersection Level of Service Deficits ................................................ 6 1. Opening Year 2027 + Project Conditions with Mitigation................................................................................... 6 2. Future Year 2050 + Project Conditions with Mitigation ..................................................................................... 8 II. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................................... 10 A. Scenario Definitions .............................................................................................................................................. 10 B. Study Intersections ............................................................................................................................................... 10 III. EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................................................. 11 A. Existing Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................................................................ 11 B. Capacity Analysis Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 11 C. Level of Service Deficiency and Significant Impact Threshold Definitions ........................................................... 12 D. Existing Conditions Traffic Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 17 IV. OPENING YEAR 2027 BASELINE CONDITIONS .......................................................................................................... 18 A. Growth Projections ............................................................................................................................................... 18 B. Opening Year 2027 Traffic Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 18 V. OPENING YEAR 2027 + PROJECT CONDITIONS ......................................................................................................... 21 A. Project Description ............................................................................................................................................... 21 B. Project Trip Generation......................................................................................................................................... 21 C. Project Trip Distribution and Assignment ............................................................................................................. 22 D. Opening Year 2027 + Project Traffic Analysis ....................................................................................................... 22 VI. FUTURE YEAR 2050 BASELINE CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................ 25 A. Growth Projections ............................................................................................................................................... 25 B. Future Year 2050 Baseline Traffic Analysis ........................................................................................................... 25 VII. FUTURE YEAR 2050 + PROJECT CONDITIONS.......................................................................................................... 28 A. Future Year 2050 + Project Traffic Analysis .......................................................................................................... 28 VIII. IDENTIFICATION OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION OF INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFICITS ........................ 31 1. Opening Year 2027 + Project Conditions with Mitigation................................................................................. 31 2. Future Year 2050 + Project Conditions with Mitigation ................................................................................... 34 IX. APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................................................. 38 Traffic Impact Analysis Page 2 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project List of Tables Table I-1: Existing Intersection Capacity Analysis ........................................................................................................... 4 Table I-2: Comparison of Opening Year 2027 Baseline and Opening Year 2027 + Project Intersection Capacity Analysis............................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Table I-3: Comparison of Future Year 2050 Baseline and 2050 Baseline + Project Intersection Capacity Analysis ....... 6 Table I-4: Comparison of Opening Year 2027 Baseline and Opening Year 2027 + Project Conditions with Mitigation . 7 Table I-5: Comparison of Future Year 2050 Baseline and Future Year 2050 + Project Conditions with Mitigation ....... 8 Table III-1: Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections .................................................................................. 12 Table III-2: Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized TWSC and AWSC Intersections .................................................. 12 Table III-3: Existing Conditions Intersection Levels of Service ...................................................................................... 17 Table IV-1: Opening Year 2027 Baseline Intersection Capacity Analysis ...................................................................... 18 Table V-1: Estimated Project Trip Generation .............................................................................................................. 21 Table V-2: Comparison of Opening Year 2027 Baseline and Opening Year 2027 + Project Intersection Capacity Analysis.......................................................................................................................................................................... 22 Table VI-1: Comparison of Future Year 2050 Baseline and 2050 Baseline + Project Intersection Capacity Analysis ... 25 Table VII-1: Comparison of Future (Year 2040) and Future + Project Intersection Levels of Service ........................... 28 Table I-4: Comparison of Opening Year 2027 Baseline and Opening Year 2027 + Project Conditions with Mitigation 31 Table I-5: Comparison of Future Year 2050 Baseline and Future Year 2050 + Project Conditions with Mitigation ..... 34 List of Figures Figure 1: Vicinity Map and Study Area ............................................................................................................................ 2 Figure 2: Project Site Plan ............................................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 3: Existing Traffic Volumes (Intersection 1-10) .................................................................................................. 13 Figure 4: Existing Traffic Volumes (Intersection 11-21) ................................................................................................ 14 Figure 5: Existing Intersection Geometrics (Intersection 1-10) .................................................................................... 15 Figure 6: Existing Intersection Geometrics (Intersection 11-21) .................................................................................. 16 Figure 7: Opening Year 2027 Baseline Traffic Volumes (Intersections 1-10) ................................................................ 19 Figure 8: Opening Year 2027 Baseline Traffic Volumes (Intersections 11-21) .............................................................. 20 Figure 9: Opening Year 2027 + Project Traffic Volumes (Intersections 1-10) ............................................................... 23 Figure 10: Opening Year 2027 + Project Traffic Volumes (Intersections 11-21) ........................................................... 24 Figure 11: Future Year 2050 Baseline Traffic Volumes (Intersections 1-10) ................................................................. 26 Figure 12: Future Year 2050 Baseline Traffic Volumes (Intersections 11-21) ............................................................... 27 Figure 13: Future Year 2050 Plus Project Traffic Volumes (Intersections 1-10) ........................................................... 29 Figure 14: Future Year 2050 Plus Project Traffic Volumes (Intersections 11-21) ......................................................... 30 Figure 15: Opening Year 2027 Plus Project Intersection Geometrics (Intersection 1-10) ............................................ 32 Figure 16: Opening Year 2027 Plus Project Intersection Geometrics (Intersection 11-21) .......................................... 33 Figure 17: Future Year 2050 Plus Project Intersection Geometrics (Intersection 1-10) ............................................... 36 Figure 18: Future Year 2050 Plus Project Intersection Geometrics (Intersection 11-21) ............................................. 37 Appendices Appendix A: Approved Scope Agreement Appendix B: Traffic Counts Appendix C: Model Plots Appendix D: Westgate Project Trips Appendix E: Capacity Analysis Appendix F: Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Traffic Impact Analysis Page 1 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Introduction This addendum of the Transportation / Traffic chapter in Volume 1 of the January 2015 Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Westgate Specific Plan is a traffic impact analysis of the proposed Westgate Medical Campus development, located in Planning Area 27 of the Westgate Specific Plan. This study is consistent with the scope of work approved by the City of Fontana. B. Project Description As detailed in the Westgate Specific Plan Final EIR, the Westgate Specific Plan encompasses 964 acres in the northwestern part of the City of Fontana. The community is comprised of four villages. The land uses within each village are incorporated into 68 development areas, designated as “Planning Areas” (PAs). The approved land uses in Planning Area 27 include 272,511 square feet (SF) of Office Park and 48,090 SF of Industrial Park. Planning area 27 has a General Plan land use designation of Mixed Use – 1 (MU-1). This designation permits medical facilities and offices including medical, dental, and health related services of all types for humans, including laboratories. The applicant proposes to construct two four-story medical office buildings totaling 208,000 SF on Planning Area 27. The proposed project is bounded to the north by the I-210 freeway, to the south by Highland Avenue, to the west by a Southern California Edison high tension line corridor, and to the east by San Sevaine Road. The project vicinity is illustrated in Figure 1. Figure 2 illustrates the proposed site plan. As shown on the site plan, access to the site is proposed from two full access driveways along Highland Avenue and one full access driveway along San Sevaine Road. On Highland Avenue, the primary driveway (designated by note #1 on the site plan) is approximately 720 feet west of San Sevaine Road (centerline to centerline) and the secondary driveway (designated by note #2 on the site plan) is approximately 1,250 feet west of San Sevaine Road. The third driveway located on San Sevaine road is approximately 275 feet north of Highland Avenue. C. Traffic Impact Study Scenarios The addendum analyzes the five scenarios described below. · Existing Conditions: This scenario evaluates the year 2024 typical weekday AM peak hour occurring within the period between 7:00-9:00 AM and typical weekday PM peak hour occurring between 4:00-6:00 PM. Counts conducted at different times of the year required adjustments for consistency. · Opening Year 2027 Baseline Conditions: This scenario evaluates conditions in the proposed opening year of 2027 without implementation of the project. This scenario includes the completion of the Cherry Avenue improvements (RAISE Grant project) expected to be operational in the year 2027. · Opening Year 2027 + Project Conditions: This scenario evaluates the Opening Year 2027 Baseline Conditions with the addition of the proposed Project. · Future Year 2050 Baseline Conditions: This scenario establishes baseline cumulative conditions representing the year 2050 without implementation of the project. This scenario assumes full buildout of the Westgate Specific Plan except for the proposed project and includes the completion of the Cherry Avenue improvements (RAISE Grant project) expected to be operational in the year 2027. · Future year 2050 + Project Conditions: This scenario evaluates the Future Year 2050 Baseline Conditions with the addition of the proposed project. © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 8 : 1 5 p m b y : Tn m FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP AND STUDY AREAWESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA #- STUDY INTERSECTIONS LEGEND Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e 2 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 8 : 1 5 p m b y : Tn m FIGURE 2: PROJECT SITE PLAN WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA NO T T O S C A L E Traffic Impact Analysis Page 4 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project D. Level of Service Deficiency and Significant Impact Threshold Definitions The level of service criteria for identifying transportation impacts is from the City of Fontana’s General Plan polices at the time the DEIR was prepared. The General Plan identified a LOS C as the minimum acceptable standard for intersection operations during the peak hours. Intersections operating at a LOS D, E, or F are considered deficient and should be mitigated to a LOS C or better where feasible. Where attaining LOS C is not feasible, particularly because of existing development, then a LOS D may be considered acceptable. For facilities in the Congestion Management Program system such as roads and intersections operated by Caltrans, the criteria defining a deficient facility is a LOS D during the peak hour with an average delay not exceeding 45 seconds per vehicle. Significant impact thresholds in the Westgate Specific Plan DEIR reference the city’s General Plan circulation element stating that the General Plan transportation system and its impacts have been evaluated, mitigated, and adopted in accordance with CEQA. Therefore, any roadway improvement consistent with the General Plan is not considered a significant impact, so long as the project contributes its “fair share” funding for improvements. The threshold for identifying a significant impact to intersection level of service is for the project to “substantially and adversely change the LOS at any off-site location projected to experience deficient operations (a LOS D, E, or F) under foreseeable cumulative conditions.” E. Existing (2024) Conditions Analysis Scenario The existing conditions intersection capacity analysis is based on the existing intersection geometrics and year 2024 typical weekday AM peak hour (hour between 7:00-9:00 AM with the highest traffic volume) and PM peak hour (hour between 4:00-6:00 PM with the highest traffic volume). Traffic counts conducted during the Summer when school was not in session were adjusted to reflect non-Summer conditions using a city-approved methodology. The results of the analysis are shown in Table I-1. Table I-1: Existing Intersection Capacity Analysis Intersection Control Type AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS 1. Cherry Ave (NS) at Beech Ave (EW) TS 119.7 F 71.2 E 2. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Southbound Ramps (NS) TS 17.6 B 8.6 A 3. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 21.6 C 52.8 D 4. Beech Ave (EW) at Summit Ave (NS) TS 116.6 F 120.4 F 5. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Westbound Ramps (EW) TS 44.0 D 34.8 C 6. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Eastbound Ramps (EW) TS 25.2 C 46.8 D 7. Cherry Ave (NS) at S Highland Ave (EW) TS 34.0 C 27.5 C 8. S. Highland Ave (EW) at San Sevaine Rd (NS) AWSC 16.7 C 21.1 C 9. S Highland Ave (EW) at Hemlock Ave (NS) SSSC 12.7 B 16.1 C 10. S Highland Ave (EW) at Beech Ave (NS) TS 100.9 F 191.2 F 11. Cherry Ave (NS) at Victoria St (EW) TS 38.3 D 15.9 B 12. Cherry Ave (NS) at Walnut St (EW) SSSC 33.4 D 65.8 F 13. Baseline Ave (EW) at East Avenue (NS) TS 178.1 F 115.2 F 14. Baseline Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 20.9 C 29.3 C 15. Cherry Ave (NS) at Baseline Ave (EW) TS 192.8 F 279.7 F 16. Cherry Ave (NS) at Roanoke Rd (EW) TS 33.2 C 42.3 D 17. Cherry Ave (NS) at Meyer Canyon Rd (EW) TS 49.8 D 47.9 D 18. Cherry Ave (NS) at Foothill Blvd (EW) TS 193.5 F 214.3 F Abbreviations: TS – Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection, AWSC – All Way Stop Controlled Intersection, SSSC – Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection, Delay – seconds per vehicle, LOS – Level of Service Traffic Impact Analysis Page 5 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project F. Comparison of Opening Year 2027 Baseline and Opening Year 2027 + Project Conditions Table I-2 compares opening year 2027 baseline conditions with Opening Year 2027 + project conditions. Table I-2: Comparison of Opening Year 2027 Baseline and Opening Year 2027 + Project Intersection Capacity Analysis Intersection Control Type Opening Year 2027 Baseline Conditions Opening Year 2027 Baseline + Project Conditions AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS 1. Cherry Ave (NS) at Beech Ave (EW) TS 122.3 F 74.8 E 127.8 F 75.1 E 2. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Southbound Ramps (NS) TS 21.4 C 9.1 A 28.6 C 9.4 A 3. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 22.8 C 65.3 E 23.5 C 73.4 E 4. Beech Ave (EW) at Summit Ave (NS) TS 127.1 F 120.5 F 129.1 F 124.0 F 5. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Westbound Ramps (EW) TS 47.9 D 35.6 D 53.4 D 38.6 D 6. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Eastbound Ramps (EW) TS 35.1 D 36.6 D 35.9 D 41.0 D 7. Cherry Ave (NS) at S Highland Ave (EW) TS 25.8 C 23.3 C 27.7 C 29.1 C 8. S. Highland Ave (EW) at San Sevaine Rd (NS) AWSC 19.8 C 27.3 D 29.3 D 55.1 F 9. S Highland Ave (EW) at Hemlock Ave (NS) SSSC 14.1 B 20.3 C 15.4 C 24.6 C 10. S Highland Ave (EW) at Beech Ave (NS) TS 101.5 F 198.0 F 102.9 F 199.9 F 11. Cherry Ave (NS) at Victoria St (EW) TS Realigned Realigned 12. Cherry Ave (NS) at Walnut St (EW) SSSC 37.8 D 34.6 C 37.8 D 39.2 D 13. Baseline Ave (EW) at East Avenue (NS) TS 198.8 F 122.2 F 199.1 F 125.8 F 14. Baseline Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 22.3 C 33.6 C 26.3 C 34.9 C 15. Cherry Ave (NS) at Baseline Ave (EW) TS 210.9 F 298.1 F 216.7 F 301.0 F 16. Cherry Ave (NS) at Roanoke Rd (EW) TS 34.4 C 46.2 D 34.4 C 46.2 D 17. Cherry Ave (NS) at Meyer Canyon Rd (EW) TS 49.9 D 49.5 D 50.0 D 50.1 D 18. Cherry Ave (NS) at Foothill Blvd (EW) TS 212.8 F 228.3 F 215.5 F 233.9 F 19. S. Highland Ave (EW) at Project Driveway "A" (NS) SSSC Not Applicable 12.8 B 16.6 C 20. S. Highland Ave (EW) at Project Driveway "B" (NS) SSSC 30.3 D 225.4 F 21. San Sevaine Rd (NS) at Project Driveway "C" (EW) SSSC 12.7 B 12.6 B Abbreviations: TS – Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection, AWSC – All Way Stop Controlled Intersection, SSSC – Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection, Delay – seconds per vehicle, LOS – Level of Service G. Comparison of Future Year 2050 Baseline and 2050 Baseline + Project Conditions Table I-3, on the following page, compares future year 2050 baseline conditions with future year 2050 + project conditions. Traffic Impact Analysis Page 6 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project Table I-3: Comparison of Future Year 2050 Baseline and 2050 Baseline + Project Intersection Capacity Analysis Intersection Control Type Future (Year 2050) Baseline Condition Future (Year 2050) Baseline + Project Condition AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS 1. Cherry Ave (NS) at Beech Ave (EW) TS 138.4 F 112.0 F 148.7 F 117.7 F 2. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Southbound Ramps (NS) TS 120.5 F 13.8 B 121.1 F 15.2 B 3. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 23.7 C 136.5 F 24.2 C 144.5 F 4. Beech Ave (EW) at Summit Ave (NS) TS 182.3 F 386.4 F 182.6 F 387.3 F 5. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Westbound Ramps (EW) TS 54.5 D 38.7 D 54.6 D 42.3 D 6. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Eastbound Ramps (EW) TS 36.3 D 41.5 D 43.1 D 49.6 D 7. Cherry Ave (NS) at S Highland Ave (EW) TS 36.7 D 30.7 C 37.1 D 31.1 C 8. S. Highland Ave (EW) at San Sevaine Rd (NS) AWSC 86.1 F 127.9 F 112.2 F 157.7 F 9. S Highland Ave (EW) at Hemlock Ave (NS) SSSC 47.3 E 146.1 F 63.3 F 210.6 F 10. S Highland Ave (EW) at Beech Ave (NS) TS 113.5 F 201.1 F 115.3 F 211.4 F 11. Cherry Ave (NS) at Victoria St (EW) TS Realigned Realigned 12. Cherry Ave (NS) at Walnut St (EW) SSSC 47.5 D 41.6 D 48.4 D 43.9 D 13. Baseline Ave (EW) at East Avenue (NS) TS 341.5 F 162.0 F 342.2 F 163.5 F 14. Baseline Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 19.6 B 88.5 F 21.7 C 88.7 F 15. Cherry Ave (NS) at Baseline Ave (EW) TS 149.0 F 301.9 F 151.7 F 301.9 F 16. Cherry Ave (NS) at Roanoke Rd (EW) TS 34.6 C 47.1 D 34.9 C 50.9 D 17. Cherry Ave (NS) at Meyer Canyon Rd (EW) TS 50.2 D 50.6 D 50.8 D 51.8 D 18. Cherry Ave (NS) at Foothill Blvd (EW) TS 219.9 F 269.4 F 220.8 F 274.2 F 19. S. Highland Ave (EW) at Project Driveway "A" (NS) SSSC Not Applicable 12.3 B 15.3 C 20. S. Highland Ave (EW) at Project Driveway "B" (NS) SSSC 39.8 E 129.5 F 21. San Sevaine Rd (NS) at Project Driveway "C" (EW) SSSC 17.6 C 20.7 C Abbreviations: TS – Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection, SSSC – Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection, Delay – seconds per vehicle, LOS – Level of Service H. Identification of Impacts and Mitigation of Intersection Level of Service Deficits 1. Opening Year 2027 + Project Conditions with Mitigation Table I-4, on the following page, presents intersections levels of service with implementation of mitigation measures. The last two columns in the table show the change in intersection delay in the peak hours. For each intersection the first row shows the increase in delay with the project’s traffic added to the opening year 2027 baseline conditions. The second row shows the change in delay with the project’s traffic added to the opening year 2027 baseline conditions with implementation of feasible mitigation measures. Negative changes in delay reflect an improvement in the intersection’s opening year 2027 baseline conditions meaning that the proposed mitigation offsets the delay caused by the addition of the project’s traffic. Positive changes in delay are associated with implementation of traffic control device mitigation measures (e.g., converting stop control to signal control) but which eliminates level of service deficits altogether (e.g., LOS improves to LOS C or better). · Signal Timing Optimization. Most of the study intersections are in built out areas of Fontana with development fronting the streets approaching the intersection with no excess right of way in which to add additional lanes. At these intersections—those which are signalized—the recommended mitigation is to optimize the traffic signal timing while maintaining the city’s 130 second cycle length requirement. As shown in Table I-4, this measure reduces the project’s delay below the intersection’s baseline delay, thus off- setting the project’s increase in delay and eliminating the project’s impacts. Traffic Impact Analysis Page 7 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project Table I-4: Comparison of Opening Year 2027 Baseline and Opening Year 2027 + Project Conditions with Mitigation Intersection [a] Control Type Opening Year 2027 Baseline Conditions Opening Year 2027 Baseline + Project Conditions Change in Delay (Seconds) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS AM PM 1. Cherry Ave (NS) at Beech Ave (EW) TS 122.3 F 74.8 E 127.8 F 75.1 E 5.5 0.3 Improvement: optimize timing 120.7 F 70.9 E -1.6 -3.9 3. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 22.8 C 65.3 E 23.5 C 73.4 E 0.7 8.1 Improvement: optimize timing 22.7 C 64.7 E -0.1 -0.6 4. Beech Ave (EW) at Summit Ave (NS) TS 127.1 F 120.5 F 129.1 F 124.0 F 2.0 3.5 Improvement: optimize timing 123.4 F 120.0 F -3.7 -0.5 5. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Westbound Ramps (EW) TS 47.9 D 35.6 D 53.4 D 38.6 D 5.5 3.0 Improvement: optimize timing 51.2 D 35.5 D 3.3 -0.1 8. S. Highland Ave (EW) at San Sevaine Rd (NS) AWSC 19.8 C 27.3 D 29.3 D 55.1 F 9.5 27.8 Improvement: Install traffic signal with north/south protected left turn phasing TS 29.0 C 33.7 C 9.2 6.4 10. S Highland Ave (EW) at Beech Ave (NS) TS 101.5 F 198.0 F 102.9 F 199.9 F 1.4 1.9 Improvement: optimize timing 100.0 F 183.0 F -1.5 -15.0 13. Baseline Ave (EW) at East Avenue (NS) TS 198.8 F 122.2 F 199.1 F 125.8 F 0.3 3.6 Improvement: optimize timing 191.7 F 115.4 F -7.1 -6.8 15. Cherry Ave (NS) at Baseline Ave (EW) TS 210.9 F 298.1 F 216.7 F 301.0 F 5.8 2.9 Improvement: optimize timing 207.3 F 277.4 F -3.6 -20.7 18. Cherry Ave (NS) at Foothill Blvd (EW) TS 212.8 F 228.3 F 215.5 F 233.9 F 2.7 5.6 Improvement: optimize timing Not Applicable 203.4 F 218.8 F -9.4 -9.5 20. S. Highland Ave (EW) at Project Driveway "B" (NS) SSSC 30.3 D 225.4 F Not Applicable Improvement: Install traffic signal with protected left turn phasing TS 6.8 A 13.9 B Notes: [a] Study intersections not included in this table have negligible or no project-related impacts or are included in the Westgate Specific Plan FEIR - Addendum for the Cherry Avenue and Victoria Street Complete Streets Infrastructure Project (RAISE) whose improvements have been integrated into this analysis. Abbreviations: TS – Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection, SSSC – Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection, Delay – seconds per vehicle, LOS – Level of Service · Traffic Signal Installation. The project’s effect at the study intersection of S. Highland Avenue at San Sevaine Road does “substantially and adversely change the LOS at an off-site location projected to experience deficient operations (a LOS D, E, or F) under foreseeable cumulative conditions”. The addition of project traffic at this all-way-stop-controlled intersection changes the level of service from a LOS C and LOS D to a LOS D and LOS F in the morning and afternoon peak hours respectively. Further, this intersection meets warrants for the installation of a traffic signal.1 The proposed mitigation measure for this intersection is for the project to contribute a fair-share to the cost of the design and construction of the traffic signal. · Project Driveways. The primary project access driveway on S. Highland Avenue—analyzed as a full-access driveway with side-street stop-control—is projected to operate at a LOS D and a LOS F in the morning and afternoon peak hours respectively. The deficient level of service can be mitigated with the installation of a traffic signal. The driveway meets warrants for the installation of a traffic signal1. A traffic signal at this driveway should be synchronized with the proposed traffic signal at S. Highland Avenue at San Sevaine Road. 1 Warrant 3 (Peak Hour) from the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). Provided in Appendix F. Traffic Impact Analysis Page 8 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project 2. Future Year 2050 + Project Conditions with Mitigation Table I-5 presents intersections levels of service with implementation of mitigation measures. The table presents the same information as the previous table identifying the change in delay with the addition of the project’s traffic to future year 2050 baseline traffic projections and the change in delay after implementation of proposed improvements. Table I-5: Comparison of Future Year 2050 Baseline and Future Year 2050 + Project Conditions with Mitigation Intersection [a] Control Type Future (Year 2050) Condition Future (Year 2050) + Project Condition Change in Delay (Seconds) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS AM PM 1. Cherry Ave (NS) at Beech Ave (EW) TS 138.4 F 112.0 F 148.7 F 117.7 F 10.3 5.7 Improvement: optimize timing 130.3 F 109.6 F -8.1 -2.4 3. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 23.7 C 136.5 F 24.2 C 144.5 F 0.5 8.0 Improvement: optimize timing 22.8 C 133.5 F -0.9 -3.0 6. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Eastbound Ramps (EW) TS 36.3 D 41.5 D 43.1 D 49.6 D 6.8 8.1 Improvement: optimize timing 36.0 D 39.9 D -0.3 -1.6 8. S. Highland Ave (EW) at San Sevaine Rd (NS) AWSC 86.1 F 127.9 F 112.2 F 157.7 F 26.1 29.8 Improvement: Install traffic signal with north/south protected left turn phasing TS 41.2 D 54.9 D -44.9 -73.0 9. S Highland Ave (EW) at Hemlock Ave (NS) SSSC 47.3 E 146.1 F 63.3 F 210.6 F 16.0 64.5 Improvement: Convert to All-Way-Stop-Control AWSC 16.2 C 26.3 D -31.1 -119.8 10. S Highland Ave (EW) at Beech Ave (NS) TS 113.5 F 201.1 F 115.3 F 211.4 F 1.8 10.3 Improvement: optimize timing 110.0 F 183.9 F -3.5 -17.2 13. Baseline Ave (EW) at East Avenue (NS) TS 341.5 F 162.0 F 342.2 F 163.5 F 0.7 1.5 Improvement: optimize timing 336.4 F 160.1 F -5.1 -1.9 15. Cherry Ave (NS) at Baseline Ave (EW) TS 149.0 F 301.9 F 151.7 F 301.9 F 2.7 0.0 Improvement: optimize timing 138.4 F 298.2 F -10.6 -3.7 18. Cherry Ave (NS) at Foothill Blvd (EW) TS 219.9 F 269.4 F 220.8 F 274.2 F 0.9 4.8 Improvement: optimize timing Not Applicable 218.3 F 263.7 F -1.6 -5.7 20. S. Highland Ave (EW) at Project Driveway "B" (NS) SSSC 39.8 E 129.5 F Not Applicable Improvement: Install traffic signal with protected left turn phasing TS 7.2 A 14.0 B Notes: [a] Study intersections not included in this table have negligible or no project-related impacts or are included in the Westgate Specific Plan FEIR - Addendum for the Cherry Avenue and Victoria Street Complete Streets Infrastructure Project (RAISE) whose improvements have been integrated into this analysis. Abbreviations: TS – Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection, SSSC – Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection, Delay – seconds per vehicle, LOS – Level of Service · Signal Timing Optimization. In future year 2050 conditions, as traffic volumes and patterns change over time, signal timing optimization remains an effective way to reduce the project’s delay to levels less than the intersection’s baseline delay, thus off-setting the project’s increase in delay and eliminating the project’s impacts. · Traffic Signal Installation. No additional traffic signals are required under future year 2050 conditions. · All-Way-Stop-Control Installation. The project’s effect at the study intersection of S. Highland Avenue and Hemlock Avenue does “substantially and adversely change the LOS at an off-site location projected to experience deficient operations (a LOS D, E, or F) under foreseeable cumulative conditions”. The addition of project traffic at this side-street-stop-controlled intersection contributes substantial delay to the baseline LOS F conditions in both peak hours. The proposed mitigation measure for this intersection is for the project to pay the cost to implement all-way-stop-control and associated pavement markings for the City of Fontana to install when warranted. Traffic Impact Analysis Page 9 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project · Project Driveways. No additional mitigation is required beyond the proposed mitigation under opening year 2027 conditions. Traffic Impact Analysis Page 10 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project II. INTRODUCTION A. Scenario Definitions The addendum analyzes the five scenarios described below. · Existing Conditions: This scenario evaluates the year 2024 typical weekday AM peak hour occurring within the period between 7:00-9:00 AM and typical weekday PM peak hour occurring between 4:00- 6:00 PM. Counts conducted at different times of the year required adjustments for consistency. · Opening Year 2027 Baseline Conditions: This scenario evaluates conditions in the proposed opening year of 2027 without implementation of the project. This scenario includes the completion of the Cherry Avenue improvements (RAISE Grant project) expected to be operational in the year 2027. · Opening Year 2027 + Project Conditions: This scenario evaluates the Opening Year 2027 Baseline Conditions with the addition of the proposed Project. · Future Year 2050 Baseline Conditions: This scenario establishes baseline cumulative conditions representing the year 2050 without implementation of the project. This scenario assumes full buildout of the Westgate Specific Plan except for the proposed project and includes the completion of the Cherry Avenue improvements (RAISE Grant project) expected to be operational in the year 2027. · Future year 2050 + Project Conditions: This scenario evaluates the Future Year 2050 Baseline Conditions with the addition of the proposed project. B. Study Intersections Study intersections for a focused traffic study include eighteen existing intersections identified for analysis. 1. Cherry Ave (NS) at Beech Ave (EW) 2. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Southbound Ramps (NS) 3. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) 4. Beech Ave (EW) at Summit Ave (NS) 5. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Westbound Ramps (EW) 6. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Eastbound Ramps (EW) 7. Cherry Ave (NS) at S Highland Ave (EW) 8. S Highland Ave (EW) at San Sevaine Rd (NS) 9. S Highland Ave (EW) at Hemlock Ave (NS) 10. S Highland Ave (EW) at Beech Ave (NS) 11. Cherry Ave (NS) at Victoria St (EW) 12. Cherry Ave (NS) at Walnut St (EW) 13. Baseline Ave (EW) at East Avenue (NS) 14. Baseline Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) 15. Cherry Ave (NS) at Baseline Ave (EW) 16. Cherry Ave (NS) at Roanoke Rd (EW) 17. Cherry Ave (NS) at Meyer Canyon Rd (EW) 18. Cherry Ave (NS) at Foothill Blvd (EW) 19. S Highland Ave (EW) at Project Driveway “A” (NS) 20. S Highland Ave (EW) at Project Driveway “B” (NS) 21. San Sevaine Rd (NS) at Project Driveway “C” (EW) The intersections of Cherry Ave at Beech Ave, Beech Ave at I-15 Southbound Ramps, Beech Ave at I-15 Northbound Ramps, Beech Ave at Summit Ave, Cherry Ave at I-210 Westbound Ramps, Cherry Ave at I-210 Eastbound Ramps, Cherry Ave at S Highland Ave, S Highland Ave at Beech Ave, Cherry Ave at Victoria St, Baseline Ave at East Avenue is currently traffic signal controlled. The intersections of S Highland Ave at Hemlock Ave, and Cherry Ave at Walnut St are currently side street stop-controlled intersections. The intersection of S Highland Ave at San Sevaine Rd is currently all-way stop controlled. The study intersections are presented in Figure 1. Traffic Impact Analysis Page 11 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project III. EXISTING CONDITIONS This section describes and analyzes the existing transportation system that serves as regional and local access to the project site. A. Existing Traffic Volumes Turn movement counts were conducted in June 2023, August 2023, and June 2024 by Counts Unlimited, an independent traffic data collection company. The counts were collected during the AM (7:00-9:00 AM) and PM (4:00-6:00 PM) peak periods. The raw turning movement counts are included in Appendix B of this study. The truck percentages utilized in the capacity analysis were developed from the turn movement counts by movement. In coordination with the City Staff, it was agreed that summer (June 2024) counts could be utilized for analysis with a summer adjustment factor applied to the counts to produce non-summer volumes. A ratio was developed from historical non-summer volumes compared to summer volumes at six intersections. The total intersection approach volumes were used in the calculation. The summer adjustment factor utilized in this analysis was developed as an average from the six study intersections. The summer adjustment factor is 1.55 for the AM peak hour and 1.16 for the PM peak hour was applied to the June 2024 counts. Figure 3 shows existing peak hour traffic volumes for intersections 1-10 in the study area and Figure 4 shows volumes for intersections 11-21 in the study area. Figure 5 illustrates the existing lane geometrics for intersections 1-10 in the study area and Figure 6 illustrates the geometrics for intersections 11-21 in the study area. B. Capacity Analysis Methodology Intersection capacity analysis is conducted using Synchro software2, which implements the methods of the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition (HCM 6)3 used in this report. The intersection capacity analyses utilize existing intersection geometrics and existing and forecasted traffic volumes in analyzing AM and PM peak hour intersection operations. The traffic analysis methodology concepts presented in Chapters 19 and 20 of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 6) are utilized to calculate intersection level of service (LOS) based on the average control delay (in seconds per vehicle) of vehicles utilizing the intersections. The analysis assigns a letter grade of LOS (A through F) that quantitatively describes the operating characteristics of signalized and unsignalized intersections based on a range of control delay. Table III-1, on the following page, provides the LOS thresholds for signalized intersections as provided in the HCM 6 Chapter 19. Under existing conditions, the signalized intersections were optimized while maintaining the City of Fontana’s maximum cycle length of 130 seconds. The existing conditions optimized signal timing was carried forward and used for all forecast scenarios. This is the customary practice in many jurisdictions. The city’s guidelines do not include any direction with respect to signal timing optimization. 2 Trafficware Ltd, Version 10. 3 Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., 2010. Traffic Impact Analysis Page 12 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project Table III-1: Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections LOS by Volume-to-Capacity Ratio (V/C) Control Delay (seconds /vehicle) Volume / Capacity Ratio ≤ 0.99 Volume / Capacity Ratio < 1.0 ≤ 10 A F > 10 - 20 B F > 20 - 35 C F > 35 - 55 D F > 55 - 80 E F > 80 F F Notes: For approach-based and intersection-wide assessments, level of service is defined solely by control delay. Source: Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition, Exhibit 19-8. The level of service for a two-way or side-street stop-controlled (TWSC) or all-way stop-controlled intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay. For TWSC the level of service is calculated for each minor street movement (or shared movement) by using the criteria provided in Table III-2, referenced from HCM 6 Chapter 20 but the level of service is reported for the approach or movement with the high delay and thus the worst level of service. For AWSC the level of service is averaged for each approach using the criteria provided in Table III-2 and the level of service is presented at an average for the entire intersection. Table III-2: Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized TWSC and AWSC Intersections Control Delay (seconds/vehicle) LOS by Volume-to-Capacity Ratio (V/C) Volume / Capacity Ratio ≤ 0.99 Volume / Capacity Ratio < 1.0 0 - 10 A F > 10 -15 B F > 15 - 25 C F > 25 - 35 D F > 35 - 50 E F > 50 F F Notes: The criteria apply to each lane on each approach of the stop-controlled minor street. LOS is not calculated for uncontrolled major-street approaches or for the entire intersection. Source: Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition, Exhibit 20-2. C. Level of Service Deficiency and Significant Impact Threshold Definitions The level of service criteria for identifying transportation impacts is from the City of Fontana’s General Plan polices at the time the DEIR was prepared. The General Plan identified a LOS C as the minimum acceptable standard for intersection operations during the peak hours. Intersections operating at a LOS D, E, or F are considered deficient and should be mitigated to a LOS C or better where feasible. Where attaining LOS C is not feasible, particularly because of existing development, then a LOS D may be considered acceptable. For facilities in the Congestion Management Program system such as roads and intersections operated by Caltrans, the criteria defining a deficient facility is a LOS D during the peak hour with an average delay not exceeding 45 seconds per vehicle. Significant impact thresholds in the Westgate Specific Plan DEIR reference the city’s General Plan circulation element stating that the General Plan transportation system and its impacts have been evaluated, mitigated, and adopted in accordance with CEQA. Therefore, any roadway improvement consistent with the General Plan is not considered a significant impact, so long as the project contributes its “fair share” funding for improvements. © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e 3 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 1 0 : 1 5 p m b y : Tn m 1 CHERRY AVE (NS) / BEECH AVE (EW) 6 CHERRY AVE (NS) / I-210 EB RAMPS (EW) 2 BEECH AVE (EW) / I-15 SB RAMPS (NS) 7 CHERRY AVE (NS) / S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) 3 BEECH AVE (EW) / I-15 NB RAMPS (NS) 8 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / SAN SEVAINE RD (NS) 4 BEECH AVE (EW) / SUMMIT AVE (NS) 9 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / HEMLOCK AVE (NS) 5 CHERRY AVE (NS) / I-210 WB RAMPS (EW) 10 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / BEECH AVE (NS) FIGURE 3: EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES (INTERSECTIONS 1 - 10) WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA NO T T O S C A L E LEGEND - AM/PM TRAFFIC VOLUMESXX% # - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - STOP CONTROLLED APPROACH - STUDY INTERSECTION 220/97 13 2 / 3 3 5 32 1 / 1 8 7 99 / 1 2 2 88 / 1 9 1 147/106 255/275 45/146 217/204 98/301 30 9 / 2 1 4 13 6 / 5 7 379/555 273/125 279/495 564/376 24 6 / 2 5 9 25 6 / 1 0 7 544/657 81/157 772/696 228/436 51 5 / 7 9 6 71 / 1 7 5 64/103 15 0 / 2 5 4 28 5 / 2 3 4 76 / 1 1 3 39 / 1 0 9 29/65 209/427 405/443 248/282 81/82 68 / 8 5 44 6 / 2 1 0 331/335 29 8 / 6 0 7 44 6 / 3 7 3 30 2 / 2 9 3 3/1 108/189 23 5 / 1 8 3 48 6 / 6 0 5 65 5 / 6 3 1 30 4 / 3 6 2 315/406 4/7 114/295 12 2 / 7 7 370/116 68 6 / 8 7 2 91 1 / 8 6 9 19 5 / 2 8 0 104/95 59 / 1 6 8 56/87 57 2 / 4 1 9 45 3 / 3 7 0 34 / 2 6 81 / 9 7 37/55 152/376 121/87 153/154 82/94 50 / 1 3 0 56 / 8 1 18/82 2/ 3 2/ 2 52 / 2 1 85 / 6 7 20/52 220/458 7/24 262/157 7/22 14 / 2 56 / 1 9 32/31 13 0 / 1 6 6 14 0 / 9 2 46 / 3 2 39 / 8 2 15/29 175/377 64/42 322/140 16/26 33 / 7 5 10 6 / 3 9 © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e 4 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 9 : 1 0 p m b y : Tn m 11 CHERRY AVE (NS) / VICTORIA ST (EW) 16 CHERRY AVE (NS) / ROANOKE RD (EW) 12 CHERRY AVE (NS) / WALNUT ST (EW) 17 CHERRY AVE (NS) / MEYER CANYON RD (EW) 13 14 BASELINE AVE (EW) / I-15 NB RAMPS (NS)15 CHERRY AVE (NS) / BASELINE AVE (EW) 18 CHERRY AVE (NS) / FOOTHILL BLVD (EW) BASELINE AVE (EW) / EAST AVENUE (NS) NO T T O S C A L E 58 9 / 9 6 8 87 0 / 7 9 8 33 9 / 1 3 2 380/181 292/184 41 1 / 1 8 7 22/23 80 5 / 1 0 7 9 11 4 0 / 8 9 6 59 / 2 9 6 123/21 11 0 / 8 3 109/78 13 0 / 1 9 5 15 7 / 1 0 2 20 6 / 1 3 5 24 6 / 2 3 8 245/270 605/1042 34/124 1581/778 206/253 17 4 / 8 4 38 3 / 2 5 3 25 6 / 3 1 4 39 2 / 9 6 9 684/895 341/469 1640/795 175/180 416/296 53 2 / 9 5 6 60 6 / 4 5 6 58 / 1 4 3 16 2 / 3 1 7 109/81 544/1042 253/284 1436/576 127/70 82 / 9 9 31 7 / 1 1 8 73 3 / 1 3 6 5 12 7 3 / 7 3 3 56 / 8 8 56 / 4 9 74/65 281/260 25 6 / 1 8 3 25/37 79 5 / 1 1 4 7 10 1 1 / 7 7 4 68 / 1 0 3 71 / 3 6 115/66 42/19 36/38 17/17 90/159 16 7 / 6 1 22 / 2 7 194/95 50 1 / 9 0 7 83 5 / 4 6 7 18 6 / 2 6 6 11 6 / 1 5 8 143/117 442/898 237/220 1023/639 127/148 26 0 / 3 1 6 15 3 / 1 4 5 FIGURE 4: EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES (INTERSECTIONS 11 - 21) WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA LEGEND - AM/PM TRAFFIC VOLUMESXX% # - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - STOP CONTROLLED APPROACH - STUDY INTERSECTION 19 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / PROJECT DRIVEWAY "A" (NS) 21 PROJECT DRIVEWAY "C" (EW) / SAN SEVAINE RD (NS) 20 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / PROJECT DRIVEWAY "B" (NS) FUTURE DRIVEWAY FUTURE DRIVEWAY FUTURE DRIVEWAY © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e 5 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 8 : 1 7 p m b y : Tn m 1 CHERRY AVE (NS) / BEECH AVE (EW) 6 CHERRY AVE (NS) / I-210 EB RAMPS (EW) 2 BEECH AVE (EW) / I-15 SB RAMPS (NS) 7 CHERRY AVE (NS) / S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) 3 BEECH AVE (EW) / I-15 NB RAMPS (NS) 8 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / SAN SEVAINE RD (NS) 4 BEECH AVE (EW) / SUMMIT AVE (NS) 9 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / HEMLOCK AVE (NS) 5 CHERRY AVE (NS) / I-210 WB RAMPS (EW) 10 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / BEECH AVE (NS) FIGURE 5: EXISTING INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS (INTERSECTIONS 1 - 10) WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA NO T T O S C A L E LEGEND - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - STOP CONTROLLED APPROACH - EXISTING GEOMETRICS - STUDY INTERSECTIONS# © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e 6 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 8 : 1 8 p m b y : Tn m 11 CHERRY AVE (NS) / VICTORIA ST (EW) 16 CHERRY AVE (NS) / ROANOKE RD (EW) 12 CHERRY AVE (NS) / WALNUT ST (EW) 17 CHERRY AVE (NS) / MEYER CANYON RD (EW) 13 14 BASELINE AVE (EW) / I-15 NB RAMPS (NS)15 CHERRY AVE (NS) / BASELINE AVE (EW) 18 CHERRY AVE (NS) / FOOTHILL BLVD (EW) BASELINE AVE (EW) / EAST AVENUE (NS) NO T T O S C A L E FIGURE 6: EXISTING INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS (INTERSECTIONS 11 - 21) WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA 19 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / PROJECT DRIVEWAY "A" (NS) 21 PROJECT DRIVEWAY "C" (EW) / SAN SEVAINE RD (NS) 20 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / PROJECT DRIVEWAY "B" (NS) FUTURE DRIVEWAY FUTURE DRIVEWAY FUTURE DRIVEWAY LEGEND - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - STOP CONTROLLED APPROACH - EXISTING GEOMETRICS - STUDY INTERSECTIONS# Traffic Impact Analysis Page 17 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project The threshold for identifying a significant impact to intersection level of service is for the project to “substantially and adversely change the LOS at any off-site location projected to experience deficient operations (a LOS D, E, or F) under foreseeable cumulative conditions.” For this study, the County’s LOS D standard is assumed to be the minimum level of service criteria for the study intersections including the interstate ramp intersections controlled by Caltrans. D. Existing Conditions Traffic Analysis Existing intersection capacity and LOS analyses use the existing intersection geometrics and the AM and PM peak hour traffic counts discussed earlier. The results of the analysis are shown in Table III-3 and provided in Appendix E. Table III-3: Existing Conditions Intersection Levels of Service Intersection Control Type AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS 1. Cherry Ave (NS) at Beech Ave (EW) TS 119.7 F 71.2 E 2. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Southbound Ramps (NS) TS 17.6 B 8.6 A 3. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 21.6 C 52.8 D 4. Beech Ave (EW) at Summit Ave (NS) TS 116.6 F 120.4 F 5. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Westbound Ramps (EW) TS 44.0 D 34.8 C 6. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Eastbound Ramps (EW) TS 25.2 C 46.8 D 7. Cherry Ave (NS) at S Highland Ave (EW) TS 34.0 C 27.5 C 8. S. Highland Ave (EW) at San Sevaine Rd (NS) AWSC 16.7 C 21.1 C 9. S Highland Ave (EW) at Hemlock Ave (NS) SSSC 12.7 B 16.1 C 10. S Highland Ave (EW) at Beech Ave (NS) TS 100.9 F 191.2 F 11. Cherry Ave (NS) at Victoria St (EW) TS 38.3 D 15.9 B 12. Cherry Ave (NS) at Walnut St (EW) SSSC 33.4 D 65.8 F 13. Baseline Ave (EW) at East Avenue (NS) TS 178.1 F 115.2 F 14. Baseline Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 20.9 C 29.3 C 15. Cherry Ave (NS) at Baseline Ave (EW) TS 192.8 F 279.7 F 16. Cherry Ave (NS) at Roanoke Rd (EW) TS 33.2 C 42.3 D 17. Cherry Ave (NS) at Meyer Canyon Rd (EW) TS 49.8 D 47.9 D 18. Cherry Ave (NS) at Foothill Blvd (EW) TS 193.5 F 214.3 F Abbreviations: TS – Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection, AWSC – All Way Stop Controlled Intersection, SSSC – Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection, Delay – seconds per vehicle, LOS – Level of Service, N/A- Not applicable Traffic Impact Analysis Page 18 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project IV. OPENING YEAR 2027 BASELINE CONDITIONS A. Growth Projections This scenario represents conditions at the time the proposed project is anticipated to be fully constructed and occupied (known as buildout which is the year 2027 for this project) but without traffic generated by the project. Forecasts for this scenario are based on ambient growth, a general rate of growth in traffic from overall regional growth (assumed to be 2.0% annually for this study). B. Opening Year 2027 Traffic Analysis Figure 7 illustrates the opening Year 2027 baseline traffic volumes for intersections 1-10 in the study area and Figure 8 shows volumes for intersections 11-21 in the study area. The background conditions analysis uses the existing lane geometries and Cherry Avenue improvements presented in the RAISE project. The results of the analysis are shown in Table IV-1 and provided in Appendix E. Table IV-1: Opening Year 2027 Baseline Intersection Capacity Analysis Intersection Control Type Opening Year 2027 Baseline Conditions AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS 1. Cherry Ave (NS) at Beech Ave (EW) TS 122.3 F 74.8 E 2. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Southbound Ramps (NS) TS 21.4 C 9.1 A 3. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 22.8 C 65.3 E 4. Beech Ave (EW) at Summit Ave (NS) TS 127.1 F 120.5 F 5. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Westbound Ramps (EW) TS 47.9 D 35.6 D 6. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Eastbound Ramps (EW) TS 35.1 D 36.6 D 7. Cherry Ave (NS) at S Highland Ave (EW) TS 25.8 C 23.3 C 8. S. Highland Ave (EW) at San Sevaine Rd (NS) AWSC 19.8 C 27.3 D 9. S Highland Ave (EW) at Hemlock Ave (NS) SSSC 14.1 B 20.3 C 10. S Highland Ave (EW) at Beech Ave (NS) TS 101.5 F 198.0 F 11. Cherry Ave (NS) at Victoria St (EW) Realigned 12. Cherry Ave (NS) at Victoria St/Walnut St (EW) TS 37.8 D 34.6 C 13. Baseline Ave (EW) at East Avenue (NS) TS 198.8 F 122.2 F 14. Baseline Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 22.3 C 33.6 C 15. Cherry Ave (NS) at Baseline Ave (EW) TS 210.9 F 298.1 F 16. Cherry Ave (NS) at Roanoke Rd (EW) TS 34.4 C 46.2 D 17. Cherry Ave (NS) at Meyer Canyon Rd (EW) TS 49.9 D 49.5 D 18. Cherry Ave (NS) at Foothill Blvd (EW) TS 212.8 F 228.3 F Abbreviations: TS – Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection, AWSC – All Way Stop Controlled Intersection, SSSC – Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection, Delay – seconds per vehicle, LOS – Level of Service, N/A- Not applicable © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e 7 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 1 0 : 1 5 p m b y : Tn m 1 CHERRY AVE (NS) / BEECH AVE (EW) 6 CHERRY AVE (NS) / I-210 EB RAMPS (EW) 2 BEECH AVE (EW) / I-15 SB RAMPS (NS) 7 CHERRY AVE (NS) / S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) 3 BEECH AVE (EW) / I-15 NB RAMPS (NS) 8 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / SAN SEVAINE RD (NS) 4 BEECH AVE (EW) / SUMMIT AVE (NS) 9 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / HEMLOCK AVE (NS) 5 CHERRY AVE (NS) / I-210 WB RAMPS (EW) 10 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / BEECH AVE (NS) FIGURE 7: OPENING YEAR 2027 BASELINE TRAFFIC VOLUMES (INTERSECTIONS 1-10) WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA 235/107 14 2 / 3 6 0 34 1 / 2 0 2 10 9 / 1 3 2 98 / 2 0 6 157/116 275/295 50/156 232/219 108/321 32 9 / 2 2 9 14 6 / 6 2 404/590 293/135 299/525 599/401 26 1 / 2 7 9 27 6 / 1 1 7 579/697 86/167 822/741 243/466 55 0 / 8 4 6 76 / 1 9 0 69/113 16 0 / 2 7 4 30 5 / 2 4 9 81 / 1 2 3 44 / 1 1 9 34/70 224/457 430/473 263/302 86/87 73 / 9 5 47 6 / 2 2 5 351/360 31 8 / 6 4 7 47 6 / 3 9 8 32 2 / 3 1 3 8/6 118/204 25 0 / 1 9 8 51 6 / 6 4 5 69 5 / 6 7 1 32 4 / 3 8 7 335/431 9/12 124/315 13 2 / 8 2 395/126 73 1 / 9 2 7 96 6 / 9 2 4 21 0 / 3 0 0 114/105 64 / 1 8 3 61/97 60 7 / 4 4 9 48 3 / 3 9 5 39 / 3 1 86 / 1 0 7 42/60 162/401 131/97 163/164 87/104 55 / 1 4 0 61 / 8 6 23/87 7/ 8 7/ 7 57 / 2 6 95 / 7 2 25/57 235/488 12/29 282/167 12/27 19 / 7 61 / 2 4 37/36 14 0 / 1 7 6 15 0 / 1 0 2 51 / 3 7 44 / 8 7 20/34 190/402 69/47 342/150 21/31 38 / 8 0 11 6 / 4 4 NO T T O S C A L E LEGEND - AM/PM TRAFFIC VOLUMESXX% # - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - STOP CONTROLLED APPROACH - STUDY INTERSECTION © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e 8 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 8 : 1 9 p m b y : Tn m 11 CHERRY AVE (NS) / VICTORIA ST (EW) 16 CHERRY AVE (NS) / ROANOKE RD (EW) 12 CHERRY AVE (NS) / WALNUT ST (EW) 17 CHERRY AVE (NS) / MEYER CANYON RD (EW) 13 14 BASELINE AVE (EW) / I-15 NB RAMPS (NS)15 CHERRY AVE (NS) / BASELINE AVE (EW) 18 CHERRY AVE (NS) / FOOTHILL BLVD (EW) BASELINE AVE (EW) / EAST AVENUE (NS) NO T T O S C A L E 119/83 14 0 / 2 1 0 16 7 / 1 1 2 22 1 / 1 4 5 26 1 / 2 5 3 260/290 645/1107 39/134 1676/828 221/273 18 9 / 9 4 40 8 / 2 7 3 27 6 / 3 3 4 41 7 / 7 4 1 729/950 366/499 1740/845 190/195 441/316 56 7 / 1 0 1 6 64 6 / 4 8 6 63 / 1 5 3 17 2 / 3 3 7 119/86 579/1107 273/304 1526/611 137/75 87 / 1 0 9 33 7 / 1 2 8 77 8 / 1 4 5 0 13 5 3 / 7 7 8 61 / 9 8 61 / 5 4 79/70 301/280 27 6 / 1 9 8 30/42 84 5 / 1 2 1 7 10 7 6 / 8 2 4 73 / 1 1 3 76 / 4 1 125/71 47/24 41/43 22/22 100/169 18 2 / 6 6 27 / 3 2 209/105 53 6 / 9 6 2 89 0 / 4 9 7 20 1 / 2 8 6 12 6 / 1 6 8 153/127 472/953 252/235 1088/679 137/158 28 0 / 3 3 6 16 3 / 1 5 5 FIGURE 8: OPENING YEAR 2027 BASELINE TRAFFIC VOLUMES (INTERSECTIONS 11 - 21) WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA LEGEND XX% # - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - STOP CONTROLLED APPROACH - STUDY INTERSECTION 19 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / PROJECT DRIVEWAY "A" (NS) 21 PROJECT DRIVEWAY "C" (EW) / SAN SEVAINE RD (NS) 20 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / PROJECT DRIVEWAY "B" (NS) FUTURE DRIVEWAY FUTURE DRIVEWAY FUTURE DRIVEWAY 27/28 54 3 / 1 0 0 7 84 4 / 7 7 6 31 2 / 1 3 7 64 / 3 1 6 369/179 36/17 312/199 49/3 84/23 81 / 7 2 43 6 / 2 0 2 REALIGNED FOR RAISE PROJECT - AM/PM TRAFFIC VOLUMES Traffic Impact Analysis Page 21 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project V. OPENING YEAR 2027 + PROJECT CONDITIONS Opening year 2027 plus project conditions adds the project’s estimated trip generation in the opening year (2027) baseline conditions scenario described in Chapter 4. A. Project Description As detailed in the Westgate Specific Plan Final EIR, the Westgate Specific Plan encompasses 964 acres in the northwestern part of the City of Fontana. The community is comprised of four villages. The land uses within each village are incorporated into 68 development areas, designated as “Planning Areas” (PAs). The approved land uses in Planning Area 27 include 272,511 square feet (SF) of Office Park and 48,090 SF of Industrial Park. Planning area 27 has a General Plan land use designation of Mixed Use – 1 (MU-1). This designation permits medical facilities and offices including medical, dental, and health related services of all types for humans, including laboratories. The applicant proposes to construct two four-story medical office buildings totaling 208,000 SF on Planning Area 27. The proposed project is bounded to the north by the I-210 freeway, to the south by Highland Avenue, to the west by a Southern California Edison high tension line corridor, and to the east by San Sevaine Road. As previously presented, Figure 2 illustrates the proposed site plan. As shown on the site plan, access to the site is proposed from two full access driveways along Highland Avenue and one full access driveway along San Sevaine Road. On Highland Avenue, the primary driveway (designated by note #1 on the site plan) is approximately 720 feet west of San Sevaine Road (centerline to centerline) and the secondary driveway (designated by note #2 on the site plan) is approximately 1,250 feet west of San Sevaine Road. The third driveway located on San Sevaine road is approximately 275 feet north of Highland Avenue. B. Project Trip Generation The project’s trip generation was estimated using the 11th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Web-based App with trip rates for the AM (7-9 AM) peak period and PM (4-6 PM) peak period of the Adjacent Street Traffic. Table V-1 summarizes the estimated trip generation for the proposed project site, for the AM (7-9 AM) peak period and PM (4-6 PM) peak period based on the Peak Hour of the Adjacent Street Traffic. The proposed project is estimated to generate 7,488 daily trips, 645 AM peak hour trips, and 817 PM peak hour trips during the adjacent street peak hours. Table V-1: Estimated Project Trip Generation Land Category Gross Floor Area (KSF) Average Daily Traffic AM Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic PM Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic In Out Total In Out Total Average Trip Generation Rates (Trips / KSF) Medical-Dental Office Building (ITE Land Use Category 720) 208 36 2.45 0.65 3.10 1.18 2.75 3.93 Trips 7,488 509 136 645 245 572 817 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 11th Edition. Traffic Impact Analysis Page 22 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project C. Project Trip Distribution and Assignment The distribution of project trips to the surrounding street network is based on assumed origins of the project’s employees and concentration of homes. The directional distribution patterns (east, west, north, and south) are consistent with area traffic patterns and conversations with City Traffic Engineer. The trip distribution assumed 20% of the project trips utilizing the I-15 Freeway south, due to the proximity of available medical offices and housing concentrations. The Approved Traffic Scope Agreement is provided in Appendix A. The specific project trip distribution for intersections 1-10 are presented in Exhibit C-1 of the Scope Agreement. The specific project trip distribution for intersections 11-18 are presented in Exhibit C-2 of the Scope Agreement. The specific project trips for intersections 1-10 are presented in Exhibit D-1 of the Scope Agreement. The specific project trips for intersections are presented in Exhibit D-2 of the Scope Agreement. D. Opening Year 2027 + Project Traffic Analysis Figure 9 illustrates the opening Year 2027 plus project traffic volumes for intersections 1-10 in the study area and Figure 10 shows volumes for intersections 11-21 in the study area. The opening Year 2027 plus project conditions analysis uses the existing lane geometries and Cherry Avenue improvements presented in the RAISE project. Table V-2 compares opening year 2027 baseline conditions with Opening Year 2027 + project conditions. The results of the analysis are provided in Appendix E. Table V-2: Comparison of Opening Year 2027 Baseline and Opening Year 2027 + Project Intersection Capacity Analysis Intersection Control Type Opening Year 2027 Baseline Conditions Opening Year 2027 + Project Conditions AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS 1. Cherry Ave (NS) at Beech Ave (EW) TS 122.3 F 74.8 E 127.8 F 75.1 E 2. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Southbound Ramps (NS) TS 21.4 C 9.1 A 28.6 C 9.4 A 3. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 22.8 C 65.3 E 23.5 C 73.4 E 4. Beech Ave (EW) at Summit Ave (NS) TS 127.1 F 120.5 F 129.1 F 124.0 F 5. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Westbound Ramps (EW) TS 47.9 D 35.6 D 53.4 D 38.6 D 6. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Eastbound Ramps (EW) TS 35.1 D 36.6 D 35.9 D 41.0 D 7. Cherry Ave (NS) at S Highland Ave (EW) TS 25.8 C 23.3 C 27.7 C 29.1 C 8. S. Highland Ave (EW) at San Sevaine Rd (NS) AWSC 19.8 C 27.3 D 29.3 D 55.1 F 9. S Highland Ave (EW) at Hemlock Ave (NS) SSSC 14.1 B 20.3 C 15.4 C 24.6 C 10. S Highland Ave (EW) at Beech Ave (NS) TS 101.5 F 198.0 F 102.9 F 199.9 F 11. Cherry Ave (NS) at Victoria St (EW) TS Realigned Realigned 12. Cherry Ave (NS) at Walnut St (EW) SSSC 37.8 D 34.6 C 37.8 D 39.2 D 13. Baseline Ave (EW) at East Avenue (NS) TS 198.8 F 122.2 F 199.1 F 125.8 F 14. Baseline Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 22.3 C 33.6 C 26.3 C 34.9 C 15. Cherry Ave (NS) at Baseline Ave (EW) TS 210.9 F 298.1 F 216.7 F 301.0 F 16. Cherry Ave (NS) at Roanoke Rd (EW) TS 34.4 C 46.2 D 34.4 C 46.2 D 17. Cherry Ave (NS) at Meyer Canyon Rd (EW) TS 49.9 D 49.5 D 50.0 D 50.1 D 18. Cherry Ave (NS) at Foothill Blvd (EW) TS 212.8 F 228.3 F 215.5 F 233.9 F 19. S. Highland Ave (EW) at Project Driveway "A" (NS) SSSC Not Applicable 12.8 B 16.6 C 20. S. Highland Ave (EW) at Project Driveway "B" (NS) SSSC 30.3 D 225.4 F 21. San Sevaine Rd (NS) at Project Driveway "C" (EW) SSSC 12.7 B 12.6 B Abbreviations: TS – Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection, AWSC – All Way Stop Controlled Intersection, SSSC – Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection, Delay – seconds per vehicle, LOS – Level of Service © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e 9 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 1 0 : 1 5 p m b y : Tn m 1 CHERRY AVE (NS) / BEECH AVE (EW) 6 CHERRY AVE (NS) / I-210 EB RAMPS (EW) 2 BEECH AVE (EW) / I-15 SB RAMPS (NS) 7 CHERRY AVE (NS) / S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) 3 BEECH AVE (EW) / I-15 NB RAMPS (NS) 8 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / SAN SEVAINE RD (NS) 4 BEECH AVE (EW) / SUMMIT AVE (NS) 9 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / HEMLOCK AVE (NS) 5 CHERRY AVE (NS) / I-210 WB RAMPS (EW) 10 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / BEECH AVE (NS) FIGURE 9: OPENING YEAR 2027 + PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES (INTERSECTIONS 1-10) WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA 260/119 14 3 / 3 6 6 34 6 / 2 0 4 11 2 / 1 4 3 10 5 / 2 3 5 167/121 275/295 50/156 232/219 108/321 32 9 / 2 2 9 14 6 / 6 2 411/619 293/135 299/525 599/401 28 6 / 2 9 1 30 1 / 1 2 9 604/709 93/196 822/741 250/495 55 0 / 8 4 6 76 / 1 9 0 69/113 16 3 / 2 8 5 31 5 / 2 5 4 88 / 1 5 2 44 / 1 1 9 59/82 224/457 430/473 263/302 86/87 73 / 9 5 47 6 / 2 2 5 427/397 32 9 / 6 9 3 51 7 / 4 1 8 34 2 / 3 9 9 8/6 118/204 25 0 / 1 9 8 54 7 / 7 7 7 81 2 / 7 2 7 34 4 / 4 7 3 411/468 9/12 124/315 13 2 / 8 2 447/343 73 1 / 9 2 7 96 6 / 9 2 4 40 3 / 3 9 3 166/322 25 7 / 2 7 6 61/97 60 7 / 4 4 9 48 3 / 3 9 5 54 / 3 8 86 / 1 0 7 46/77 170/435 134/108 194/179 87/104 55 / 1 4 0 71 / 9 1 23/87 7/ 8 7/ 7 62 / 2 8 95 / 7 2 26/63 250/551 12/29 338/194 12/27 19 / 7 61 / 2 4 37/36 14 0 / 1 7 6 15 0 / 1 0 2 76 / 4 9 44 / 8 7 27/63 206/471 69/47 403/179 21/31 38 / 8 0 11 6 / 4 4 NO T T O S C A L E LEGEND - AM/PM TRAFFIC VOLUMESXX% # - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - STOP CONTROLLED APPROACH - STUDY INTERSECTION © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e 1 0 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 9 : 4 2 p m b y : Tn m 564/620 102/49 572/494 41 / 1 7 2 23 0 / 2 5 4 30 4 / 2 2 6 10/40 36 / 1 7 279/483 285/137 509/231 87/42 23 / 9 7 63 / 2 6 3 11 CHERRY AVE (NS) / VICTORIA ST (EW) 16 CHERRY AVE (NS) / ROANOKE RD (EW) 12 CHERRY AVE (NS) / WALNUT ST (EW) 17 CHERRY AVE (NS) / MEYER CANYON RD (EW) 13 14 BASELINE AVE (EW) / I-15 NB RAMPS (NS)15 CHERRY AVE (NS) / BASELINE AVE (EW) 18 CHERRY AVE (NS) / FOOTHILL BLVD (EW) BASELINE AVE (EW) / EAST AVENUE (NS) NO T T O S C A L E 120/89 14 0 / 2 1 0 16 7 / 1 1 2 22 1 / 1 4 5 26 6 / 2 5 5 260/290 660/1114 39/134 1707/960 221/273 18 9 / 9 4 40 8 / 2 7 3 27 6 / 3 3 4 51 9 / 7 9 0 749/960 366/499 1773/982 190/195 441/316 62 3 / 1 0 4 3 66 1 / 5 4 9 63 / 1 5 3 17 2 / 3 3 7 119/86 579/1107 395/363 1526/611 137/75 87 / 1 0 9 37 0 / 2 6 5 82 9 / 1 4 7 5 13 6 7 / 8 3 5 61 / 9 8 61 / 5 4 79/70 306/282 27 7 / 2 0 4 30/42 89 1 / 1 2 3 9 10 8 8 / 8 7 5 73 / 1 1 3 76 / 4 1 125/71 47/24 46/45 22/22 100/169 18 2 / 6 6 28 / 3 8 209/105 56 1 / 9 7 4 89 7 / 5 2 6 20 1 / 2 8 6 12 6 / 1 6 8 153/127 472/953 262/240 1088/679 147/163 28 3 / 3 4 7 16 6 / 1 6 6 FIGURE 10: OPENING YEAR 2027 + PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES (INTERSECTIONS 11 - 21) WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA LEGEND - AM/PM TRAFFIC VOLUMESXX% # - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - STOP CONTROLLED APPROACH - STUDY INTERSECTION 19 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / PROJECT DRIVEWAY "A" (NS) 21 PROJECT DRIVEWAY "C" (EW) / SAN SEVAINE RD (NS) 20 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / PROJECT DRIVEWAY "B" (NS) 27/28 72 1 / 1 0 9 3 89 2 / 9 7 6 31 2 / 1 3 7 64 / 3 1 6 369/179 36/17 327/206 49/3 84/23 81 / 7 2 44 0 / 2 1 9 REALIGNED FOR RAISE PROJECT Traffic Impact Analysis Page 25 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project VI. FUTURE YEAR 2050 BASELINE CONDITIONS A. Growth Projections The future year 2050 baseline conditions scenario represents long-term conditions with a nearly 20-year planning horizon without traffic generated by the project. The 2050 forecasts are derived from the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority’s (SBCTA) regional transportation analysis model (SBTAM). The SBTAM’s 2040 forecasts are used to develop annual growth rates which are applied to the 2024 traffic counts and compounded annually for an 18-year period between 2024 and 2050. The SBTAM plots are provided in Appendix C. The SBTAM’s 2040 forecasts included the approved Westgate Specific Plan Project. The purpose of this report is to provide an updated analysis for the proposed development of Planning Area 27 (PA-27). As such, the currently approved project trips were subtracted from the developed future year 2050 baseline traffic volumes to produce future year 2050 baseline traffic volumes without the approved PA-27 volumes. The approved Westgate Specific Plan Project Planning Area 27 project trips are provided in Appendix D. Figure 11 illustrates the future year 2050 baseline traffic volumes for intersections 1-10 in the study area and Figure 12 shows volumes for intersections 11-21 in the study area. The future year 2050 baseline conditions analysis uses the existing lane geometries and Cherry Avenue improvements presented in the RAISE project. B. Future Year 2050 Baseline Traffic Analysis Intersection capacity analysis for this scenario uses the forecast traffic volumes described above and existing lanes geometries. The results of the analysis are shown in Table VI-1 and provided in Appendix E. Table VI-1: Comparison of Future Year 2050 Baseline and 2050 Baseline + Project Intersection Capacity Analysis Intersection Control Type Future (Year 2050) Baseline Conditions AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS 1. Cherry Ave (NS) at Beech Ave (EW) TS 138.4 F 112.0 F 2. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Southbound Ramps (NS) TS 120.5 F 13.8 B 3. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 23.7 C 136.5 F 4. Beech Ave (EW) at Summit Ave (NS) TS 182.3 F 386.4 F 5. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Westbound Ramps (EW) TS 54.5 D 38.7 D 6. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Eastbound Ramps (EW) TS 36.3 D 41.5 D 7. Cherry Ave (NS) at S Highland Ave (EW) TS 36.7 D 30.7 C 8. S. Highland Ave (EW) at San Sevaine Rd (NS) AWSC 86.1 F 127.9 F 9. S Highland Ave (EW) at Hemlock Ave (NS) SSSC 47.3 E 146.1 F 10. S Highland Ave (EW) at Beech Ave (NS) TS 113.5 F 201.1 F 11. Cherry Ave (NS) at Victoria St (EW) TS Realigned 12. Cherry Ave (NS) at Walnut St (EW) SSSC 47.5 D 41.5 D 13. Baseline Ave (EW) at East Avenue (NS) TS 341.5 F 162.0 F 14. Baseline Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 19.6 B 88.5 F 15. Cherry Ave (NS) at Baseline Ave (EW) TS 149.0 F 335.7 F 16. Cherry Ave (NS) at Roanoke Rd (EW) TS 34.6 C 47.1 D 17. Cherry Ave (NS) at Meyer Canyon Rd (EW) TS 50.2 D 50.6 D 18. Cherry Ave (NS) at Foothill Blvd (EW) TS 219.9 F 269.4 F Abbreviations: TS – Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection, SSSC – Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection, Delay – seconds per vehicle, LOS – Level of Service © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e 1 1 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 1 0 : 1 5 p m b y : Tn m 1 CHERRY AVE (NS) / BEECH AVE (EW) 6 CHERRY AVE (NS) / I-210 EB RAMPS (EW) 2 BEECH AVE (EW) / I-15 SB RAMPS (NS) 7 CHERRY AVE (NS) / S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) 3 BEECH AVE (EW) / I-15 NB RAMPS (NS) 8 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / SAN SEVAINE RD (NS) 4 BEECH AVE (EW) / SUMMIT AVE (NS) 9 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / HEMLOCK AVE (NS) 5 CHERRY AVE (NS) / I-210 WB RAMPS (EW) 10 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / BEECH AVE (NS) FIGURE 11: FUTURE YEAR 2050 BASELINE TRAFFIC VOLUMES (INTERSECTIONS 1-10) WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA 331/112 15 4 / 4 7 1 42 0 / 2 0 4 14 9 / 2 7 7 11 7 / 3 5 0 220/174 305/440 50/170 305/275 105/245 31 0 / 2 2 5 15 5 / 7 5 447/875 285/140 430/540 960/530 37 6 / 4 0 7 31 1 / 8 7 751/972 72/310 1325/895 327/535 62 5 / 1 1 7 0 65 / 1 7 5 90/100 16 9 / 5 5 2 71 5 / 3 8 9 13 7 / 1 4 5 35 / 1 1 5 66/82 270/480 615/1055 290/335 55/145 75 / 1 2 0 94 5 / 4 1 5 223/375 43 5 / 1 0 6 3 84 7 / 5 7 9 22 1 / 2 3 0 5/5 155/310 38 5 / 2 2 0 49 6 / 8 2 2 85 0 / 8 2 4 37 1 / 3 1 0 358/340 5/10 160/470 22 0 / 1 3 0 346/42 76 0 / 1 1 3 0 11 9 0 / 1 0 2 5 93 / 2 8 9 106/2 18 / 1 3 9 80/110 61 5 / 6 9 5 65 5 / 4 6 0 46 / 3 8 10 0 / 1 6 5 48/73 201/556 119/122 261/161 80/110 60 / 1 6 0 80 / 8 9 10/30 5/ 5 5/ 5 18 5 / 1 0 9 30 / 4 0 94/161 368/751 15/55 402/272 5/10 5/ 5 90 / 2 5 195/50 18 0 / 3 0 5 36 5 / 1 1 5 11 / 2 7 60 / 2 3 0 27/5 333/392 105/35 398/257 85/100 85 / 3 3 0 60 / 5 5 NO T T O S C A L E LEGEND - AM/PM TRAFFIC VOLUMESXX% # - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - STOP CONTROLLED APPROACH - STUDY INTERSECTION © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e 1 2 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 9 : 4 8 p m b y : Tn m 11 CHERRY AVE (NS) / VICTORIA ST (EW) 16 CHERRY AVE (NS) / ROANOKE RD (EW) 12 CHERRY AVE (NS) / WALNUT ST (EW) 17 CHERRY AVE (NS) / MEYER CANYON RD (EW) 13 14 BASELINE AVE (EW) / I-15 NB RAMPS (NS)15 CHERRY AVE (NS) / BASELINE AVE (EW) 18 CHERRY AVE (NS) / FOOTHILL BLVD (EW) BASELINE AVE (EW) / EAST AVENUE (NS) NO T T O S C A L E 124/66 18 0 / 2 7 0 28 0 / 1 2 5 39 5 / 2 7 0 23 5 / 4 1 4 660/295 796/1518 65/140 1771/952 170/235 15 5 / 1 4 0 67 0 / 4 7 5 23 5 / 3 3 0 35 4 / 6 5 6 791/1282 395/790 1830/923 240/245 420/330 57 2 / 1 1 0 7 69 3 / 4 6 1 80 / 2 3 5 19 0 / 3 8 0 125/100 605/1345 170/338 1760/895 130/75 95 / 1 1 5 43 0 / 8 8 77 7 / 1 5 7 3 13 0 4 / 7 9 5 45 / 9 0 65 / 5 5 60/65 335/314 27 9 / 2 1 6 30/45 85 2 / 1 4 4 9 11 3 4 / 8 3 4 80 / 1 5 5 85 / 4 5 155/75 55/20 40/39 20/20 100/175 18 0 / 6 5 24 / 3 1 265/85 48 6 / 1 0 6 2 98 2 / 4 6 5 19 0 / 2 7 0 12 5 / 1 2 5 225/140 630/1115 310/394 1215/745 140/199 27 9 / 3 2 7 15 4 / 1 8 7 FIGURE 12: FUTURE YEAR 2050 BASELINE TRAFFIC VOLUMES (INTERSECTIONS 11 - 21) WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA LEGEND XX% # - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - STOP CONTROLLED APPROACH - STUDY INTERSECTION 19 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / PROJECT DRIVEWAY "A" (NS) 21 PROJECT DRIVEWAY "C" (EW) / SAN SEVAINE RD (NS) 20 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / PROJECT DRIVEWAY "B" (NS) FUTURE DRIVEWAY FUTURE DRIVEWAY FUTURE DRIVEWAY 25/25 42 7 / 1 0 7 6 93 3 / 6 9 9 44 5 / 1 3 0 60 / 2 7 0 260/355 35/25 336/328 60/5 85/15 80 / 9 5 50 3 / 2 7 3 REALIGNED FOR RAISE PROJECT - AM/PM TRAFFIC VOLUMES 5/ 5 Traffic Impact Analysis Page 28 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project VII. FUTURE YEAR 2050 + PROJECT CONDITIONS The future year 2050 plus project conditions scenario adds the project’s estimated traffic generation to the future year 2050 baseline conditions scenario described in Chapter VI. A. Future Year 2050 + Project Traffic Analysis Figure 13 illustrates the future year 2050 plus project traffic volumes for intersections 1-10 in the study area and Figure 14 shows volumes for intersections 11-21 in the study area. The future year 2050 plus project conditions analysis uses the existing lane geometries and Cherry Avenue improvements presented in the RAISE project. Table VII-1 compares the levels of service between future year 2050 baseline conditions and future year 2050 + project conditions. The level of service worksheets and provided in Appendix E. Table VII-1: Comparison of Future (Year 2040) and Future + Project Intersection Levels of Service Intersection Control Type Future (Year 2050) Baseline Condition Future (Year 2050) + Project Condition AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS 1. Cherry Ave (NS) at Beech Ave (EW) TS 138.4 F 112.0 F 148.7 F 117.7 F 2. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Southbound Ramps (NS) TS 120.5 F 13.8 B 121.1 F 15.2 B 3. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 23.7 C 136.5 F 24.2 C 144.5 F 4. Beech Ave (EW) at Summit Ave (NS) TS 182.3 F 386.4 F 182.6 F 387.3 F 5. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Westbound Ramps (EW) TS 54.5 D 38.7 D 54.6 D 42.3 D 6. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Eastbound Ramps (EW) TS 36.3 D 41.5 D 43.1 D 49.6 D 7. Cherry Ave (NS) at S Highland Ave (EW) TS 36.7 D 30.7 C 37.1 D 31.1 C 8. S. Highland Ave (EW) at San Sevaine Rd (NS) AWSC 86.1 F 127.9 F 112.2 F 157.7 F 9. S Highland Ave (EW) at Hemlock Ave (NS) SSSC 47.3 E 146.1 F 63.3 F 210.6 F 10. S Highland Ave (EW) at Beech Ave (NS) TS 113.5 F 201.1 F 115.3 F 211.4 F 11. Cherry Ave (NS) at Victoria St (EW) TS Realigned Realigned 12. Cherry Ave (NS) at Walnut St (EW) SSSC 47.5 D 41.6 D 48.4 D 43.9 D 13. Baseline Ave (EW) at East Avenue (NS) TS 341.5 F 162.0 F 342.2 F 163.5 F 14. Baseline Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 19.6 B 88.5 F 21.7 C 88.7 F 15. Cherry Ave (NS) at Baseline Ave (EW) TS 149.0 F 301.9 F 151.7 F 301.9 F 16. Cherry Ave (NS) at Roanoke Rd (EW) TS 34.6 C 47.1 D 34.9 C 50.9 D 17. Cherry Ave (NS) at Meyer Canyon Rd (EW) TS 50.2 D 50.6 D 50.8 D 51.8 D 18. Cherry Ave (NS) at Foothill Blvd (EW) TS 219.9 F 269.4 F 220.8 F 274.2 F 19. S. Highland Ave (EW) at Project Driveway "A" (NS) SSSC Not Applicable 12.3 B 15.3 C 20. S. Highland Ave (EW) at Project Driveway "B" (NS) SSSC 39.8 E 129.5 F 21. San Sevaine Rd (NS) at Project Driveway "C" (EW) SSSC 17.6 C 20.7 C Abbreviations: TS – Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection, SSSC – Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection, Delay – seconds per vehicle, LOS – Level of Service © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e 1 3 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 1 0 : 1 6 p m b y : Tn m FIGURE 13: FUTURE YEAR 2050 + PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES (INTERSECTIONS 1-10) WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA 1 CHERRY AVE (NS) / BEECH AVE (EW) 6 CHERRY AVE (NS) / I-210 EB RAMPS (EW) 2 BEECH AVE (EW) / I-15 SB RAMPS (NS) 7 CHERRY AVE (NS) / S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) 3 BEECH AVE (EW) / I-15 NB RAMPS (NS) 8 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / SAN SEVAINE RD (NS) 4 BEECH AVE (EW) / SUMMIT AVE (NS) 9 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / HEMLOCK AVE (NS) 5 CHERRY AVE (NS) / I-210 WB RAMPS (EW) 10 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / BEECH AVE (NS) 356/124 15 5 / 4 7 7 42 5 / 2 0 6 15 2 / 2 8 8 12 4 / 3 7 9 230/179 305/440 50/170 305/275 105/245 31 0 / 2 2 5 15 5 / 7 5 454/904 285/140 430/540 960/530 40 1 / 4 1 9 33 6 / 9 9 776/984 79/339 1325/895 334/564 62 5 / 1 1 7 0 65 / 1 7 5 90/100 17 2 / 5 6 3 72 5 / 3 9 4 14 4 / 1 7 4 35 / 1 1 5 91/94 270/480 615/1055 290/335 55/145 75 / 1 2 0 94 5 / 4 1 5 299/412 44 6 / 1 1 0 9 88 8 / 5 9 9 24 1 / 3 1 6 5/5 155/310 38 5 / 2 2 0 52 7 / 9 5 4 96 7 / 8 8 0 39 1 / 3 9 6 434/377 5/10 160/470 22 0 / 1 3 0 398/259 76 0 / 1 1 3 0 11 9 0 / 1 0 2 5 28 6 / 3 8 2 158/219 21 1 / 2 3 2 80/110 61 5 / 6 9 5 65 5 / 4 6 0 61 / 4 5 10 0 / 1 6 5 52/90 209/590 122/133 292/176 80/110 60 / 1 6 0 90 / 9 4 10/30 5/ 5 5/ 5 19 0 / 1 1 1 30 / 4 0 95/167 383/814 15/55 458/299 5/10 5/ 5 90 / 2 5 195/50 18 0 / 3 0 5 36 5 / 1 1 5 36 / 3 9 60 / 2 3 0 34/34 349/461 105/35 459/286 85/100 85 / 3 3 0 60 / 5 5 NO T T O S C A L E LEGEND - AM/PM TRAFFIC VOLUMESXX% # - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - STOP CONTROLLED APPROACH - STUDY INTERSECTION © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : D: \ t e m p \ A c P u b l i s h _ 2 6 3 0 4 \ Fi g u r e 1 4 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 1 0 : 1 6 p m b y : Tn m NO T T O S C A L E FIGURE 14: FUTURE YEAR 2050 + PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES (INTERSECTIONS 11 - 21) WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA LEGEND XX% # - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - STOP CONTROLLED APPROACH - STUDY INTERSECTION 750/569 102/49 532/602 41 / 1 7 2 37 0 / 4 4 0 51 0 / 5 0 0 10/40 36 / 1 7 465/432 285/137 469/339 87/42 23 / 9 7 63 / 2 6 3 19 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / PROJECT DRIVEWAY "A" (NS) 21 PROJECT DRIVEWAY "C" (EW) / SAN SEVAINE RD (NS) 20 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / PROJECT DRIVEWAY "B" (NS) - AM/PM TRAFFIC VOLUMES 11 CHERRY AVE (NS) / VICTORIA ST (EW) 16 CHERRY AVE (NS) / ROANOKE RD (EW) 12 CHERRY AVE (NS) / WALNUT ST (EW) 17 CHERRY AVE (NS) / MEYER CANYON RD (EW) 13 14 BASELINE AVE (EW) / I-15 NB RAMPS (NS)15 CHERRY AVE (NS) / BASELINE AVE (EW) 18 CHERRY AVE (NS) / FOOTHILL BLVD (EW) BASELINE AVE (EW) / EAST AVENUE (NS) 125/72 18 0 / 2 7 0 28 0 / 1 2 5 39 5 / 2 7 0 24 0 / 4 1 6 660/295 811/1525 65/140 1802/1084 170/235 15 5 / 1 4 0 67 0 / 4 7 5 23 5 / 3 3 0 45 6 / 7 0 5 811/1292 395/790 1863/1060 240/245 420/330 62 8 / 1 1 3 4 70 8 / 5 2 4 80 / 2 3 5 19 0 / 3 8 0 125/100 605/1345 292/397 1760/895 130/75 95 / 1 1 5 46 3 / 2 2 5 82 8 / 1 5 9 8 13 1 8 / 8 5 2 45 / 9 0 65 / 5 5 60/65 340/316 28 0 / 2 2 2 30/45 89 8 / 1 4 7 1 11 4 6 / 8 8 5 80 / 1 5 5 85 / 4 5 155/75 55/20 45/41 20/20 100/175 18 0 / 6 5 25 / 3 7 265/85 51 1 / 1 0 7 4 98 9 / 4 9 4 19 0 / 2 7 0 12 5 / 1 2 5 225/140 630/1115 320/399 1215/745 150/204 28 2 / 3 3 8 15 7 / 1 9 8 25/25 60 5 / 1 1 6 2 98 1 / 8 9 9 44 5 / 1 3 0 60 / 2 7 0 260/355 35/25 351/335 60/5 85/15 80 / 9 5 50 7 / 2 9 0 REALIGNED FOR RAISE PROJECT 5/ 5 Traffic Impact Analysis Page 31 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project VIII. IDENTIFICATION OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION OF INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFICITS 1. Opening Year 2027 + Project Conditions with Mitigation Table I-4, presents intersections levels of service with implementation of mitigation measures. The last two columns in the table show the change in intersection delay in the peak hours. For each intersection the first row shows the increase in delay with the project’s traffic added to the opening year 2027 baseline conditions. The second row shows the change in delay with the project’s traffic added to the opening year 2027 baseline conditions with implementation of feasible mitigation measures. Negative changes in delay reflect an improvement in the intersection’s opening year 2027 baseline conditions meaning that the proposed mitigation offsets the delay caused by the addition of the project’s traffic. Positive changes in delay are associated with implementation of traffic control device mitigation measures (e.g., converting stop control to signal control) but which eliminates level of service deficits altogether (e.g., LOS improves to LOS C or better). Table VIII-1: Comparison of Opening Year 2027 Baseline and Opening Year 2027 + Project Conditions with Mitigation Intersection [a] Control Type Opening Year 2027 Baseline Conditions Opening Year 2027 Baseline + Project Conditions Change in Delay (Seconds) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS AM PM 1. Cherry Ave (NS) at Beech Ave (EW) TS 122.3 F 74.8 E 127.8 F 75.1 E 5.5 0.3 Improvement: optimize timing 120.7 F 70.9 E -1.6 -3.9 3. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 22.8 C 65.3 E 23.5 C 73.4 E 0.7 8.1 Improvement: optimize timing 22.7 C 64.7 E -0.1 -0.6 4. Beech Ave (EW) at Summit Ave (NS) TS 127.1 F 120.5 F 129.1 F 124.0 F 2.0 3.5 Improvement: optimize timing 123.4 F 120.0 F -3.7 -0.5 5. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Westbound Ramps (EW) TS 47.9 D 35.6 D 53.4 D 38.6 D 5.5 3.0 Improvement: optimize timing 51.2 D 35.5 D 3.3 -0.1 8. S. Highland Ave (EW) at San Sevaine Rd (NS) AWSC 19.8 C 27.3 D 29.3 D 55.1 F 9.5 27.8 Improvement: Install traffic signal with north/south protected left turn phasing TS 29.0 C 33.7 C 9.2 6.4 10. S Highland Ave (EW) at Beech Ave (NS) TS 101.5 F 198.0 F 102.9 F 199.9 F 1.4 1.9 Improvement: optimize timing 100.0 F 183.0 F -1.5 -15.0 13. Baseline Ave (EW) at East Avenue (NS) TS 198.8 F 122.2 F 199.1 F 125.8 F 0.3 3.6 Improvement: optimize timing 191.7 F 115.4 F -7.1 -6.8 15. Cherry Ave (NS) at Baseline Ave (EW) TS 210.9 F 298.1 F 216.7 F 301.0 F 5.8 2.9 Improvement: optimize timing 207.3 F 277.4 F -3.6 -20.7 18. Cherry Ave (NS) at Foothill Blvd (EW) TS 212.8 F 228.3 F 215.5 F 233.9 F 2.7 5.6 Improvement: optimize timing Not Applicable 203.4 F 218.8 F -9.4 -9.5 20. S. Highland Ave (EW) at Project Driveway "B" (NS) SSSC 30.3 D 225.4 F Not Applicable Improvement: Install traffic signal with protected left turn phasing TS 6.8 A 13.9 B Notes: [a] Study intersections not included in this table have negligible or no project-related impacts or are included in the Westgate Specific Plan FEIR - Addendum for the Cherry Avenue and Victoria Street Complete Streets Infrastructure Project (RAISE) whose improvements have been integrated into this analysis. Abbreviations: TS – Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection, SSSC – Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection, Delay – seconds per vehicle, LOS – Level of Service Figure 15 illustrates the Opening Year 2027 plus Project geometrics for intersections 1-10 in the study area and Figure 16 illustrates the geometrics for intersections 11-21 in the study area. · Signal Timing Optimization. Most of the study intersections are in built out areas of Fontana with development fronting the streets approaching the intersection with no excess right of way in which to add additional lanes. At these intersections—those which are signalized—the recommended mitigation is to optimize the traffic signal timing while maintaining the city’s 130 second cycle length requirement. As shown in Table I-4, this measure reduces the project’s delay below the intersection’s baseline delay, thus off- setting the project’s increase in delay and eliminating the project’s impacts. © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e 1 5 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 8 : 2 3 p m b y : Tn m 1 CHERRY AVE (NS) / BEECH AVE (EW) 6 CHERRY AVE (NS) / I-210 EB RAMPS (EW) 2 BEECH AVE (EW) / I-15 SB RAMPS (NS) 7 CHERRY AVE (NS) / S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) 3 BEECH AVE (EW) / I-15 NB RAMPS (NS) 8 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / SAN SEVAINE RD (NS) 4 BEECH AVE (EW) / SUMMIT AVE (NS) 9 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / HEMLOCK AVE (NS) 5 CHERRY AVE (NS) / I-210 WB RAMPS (EW) 10 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / BEECH AVE (NS) FIGURE 15: OPENING YEAR 2027 PLUS + PROJECT INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS (INTERSECTIONS 1 - 10) WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA NO T T O S C A L E LEGEND - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - STOP CONTROLLED APPROACH - EXISTING GEOMETRICS - STUDY INTERSECTIONS# - RAISE GEOMETRICS - PROPOSED GEOMETRICS © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e 1 6 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 8 : 2 4 p m b y : Tn m 11 CHERRY AVE (NS) / VICTORIA ST (EW) 16 CHERRY AVE (NS) / ROANOKE RD (EW) 12 CHERRY AVE (NS) / WALNUT ST (EW) 17 CHERRY AVE (NS) / MEYER CANYON RD (EW) 13 14 BASELINE AVE (EW) / I-15 NB RAMPS (NS)15 CHERRY AVE (NS) / BASELINE AVE (EW) 18 CHERRY AVE (NS) / FOOTHILL BLVD (EW) BASELINE AVE (EW) / EAST AVENUE (NS) NO T T O S C A L E FIGURE 16: OPENING YEAR 2027 PLUS + PROJECT INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS (INTERSECTIONS 11 - 21) WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA 19 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / PROJECT DRIVEWAY "A" (NS) 21 PROJECT DRIVEWAY "C" (EW) / SAN SEVAINE RD (NS) 20 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / PROJECT DRIVEWAY "B" (NS) - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - STOP CONTROLLED APPROACH - STUDY INTERSECTIONS# REALIGNED FOR RAISE PROJECT LEGEND - EXISTING GEOMETRICS - RAISE GEOMETRICS - PROPOSED GEOMETRICS Traffic Impact Analysis Page 34 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project · Traffic Signal Installation. The project’s effect at the study intersection of S. Highland Avenue at San Sevaine Road does “substantially and adversely change the LOS at an off-site location projected to experience deficient operations (a LOS D, E, or F) under foreseeable cumulative conditions”. The addition of project traffic at this all-way-stop-controlled intersection changes the level of service from a LOS C and LOS D to a LOS D and LOS F in the morning and afternoon peak hours respectively. Further, this intersection meets warrants for the installation of a traffic signal.4 The proposed mitigation measure for this intersection is for the project to contribute a fair-share to the cost of the design and construction of the traffic signal. · Project Driveways. The primary project access driveway on S. Highland Avenue—analyzed as a full-access driveway with side-street stop-control—is projected to operate at a LOS D and a LOS F in the morning and afternoon peak hours respectively. The deficient level of service can be mitigated with the installation of a traffic signal. The driveway meets warrants for the installation of a traffic signal1. A traffic signal at this driveway should be synchronized with the proposed traffic signal at S. Highland Avenue at San Sevaine Road. 2. Future Year 2050 + Project Conditions with Mitigation Table I-5 presents intersections levels of service with implementation of mitigation measures. The table presents the same information as the previous table identifying the change in delay with the addition of the project’s traffic to future year 2050 baseline traffic projections and the change in delay after implementation of proposed improvements. Table VIII-2: Comparison of Future Year 2050 Baseline and Future Year 2050 + Project Conditions with Mitigation Intersection [a] Control Type Future (Year 2050) Condition Future (Year 2050) + Project Condition Change in Delay (Seconds) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS AM PM 1. Cherry Ave (NS) at Beech Ave (EW) TS 138.4 F 112.0 F 148.7 F 117.7 F 10.3 5.7 Improvement: optimize timing 130.3 F 109.6 F -8.1 -2.4 3. Beech Ave (EW) at I-15 Northbound Ramps (NS) TS 23.7 C 136.5 F 24.2 C 144.5 F 0.5 8.0 Improvement: optimize timing 22.8 C 133.5 F -0.9 -3.0 6. Cherry Ave (NS) at I-210 Eastbound Ramps (EW) TS 36.3 D 41.5 D 43.1 D 49.6 D 6.8 8.1 Improvement: optimize timing 36.0 D 39.9 D -0.3 -1.6 8. S. Highland Ave (EW) at San Sevaine Rd (NS) AWSC 86.1 F 127.9 F 112.2 F 157.7 F 26.1 29.8 Improvement: Install traffic signal with north/south protected left turn phasing TS 41.2 D 54.9 D -44.9 -73.0 9. S Highland Ave (EW) at Hemlock Ave (NS) SSSC 47.3 E 146.1 F 63.3 F 210.6 F 16.0 64.5 Improvement: Convert to All-Way-Stop-Control AWSC 16.2 C 26.3 D -31.1 -119.8 10. S Highland Ave (EW) at Beech Ave (NS) TS 113.5 F 201.1 F 115.3 F 211.4 F 1.8 10.3 Improvement: optimize timing 110.0 F 183.9 F -3.5 -17.2 13. Baseline Ave (EW) at East Avenue (NS) TS 341.5 F 162.0 F 342.2 F 163.5 F 0.7 1.5 Improvement: optimize timing 336.4 F 160.1 F -5.1 -1.9 15. Cherry Ave (NS) at Baseline Ave (EW) TS 149.0 F 301.9 F 151.7 F 301.9 F 2.7 0.0 Improvement: optimize timing 138.4 F 298.2 F -10.6 -3.7 18. Cherry Ave (NS) at Foothill Blvd (EW) TS 219.9 F 269.4 F 220.8 F 274.2 F 0.9 4.8 Improvement: optimize timing Not Applicable 218.3 F 263.7 F -1.6 -5.7 20. S. Highland Ave (EW) at Project Driveway "B" (NS) SSSC 39.8 E 129.5 F Not Applicable Improvement: Install traffic signal with protected left turn phasing TS 7.2 A 14.0 B Notes: [a] Study intersections not included in this table have negligible or no project-related impacts or are included in the Westgate Specific Plan FEIR - Addendum for the Cherry Avenue and Victoria Street Complete Streets Infrastructure Project (RAISE) whose improvements have been integrated into this analysis. Abbreviations: TS – Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection, SSSC – Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection, Delay – seconds per vehicle, LOS – Level of Service 4 Warrant 3 (Peak Hour) from the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). Provided in Appendix F. Traffic Impact Analysis Page 35 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project Figure 17 illustrates the Future Year 2050 plus Project geometrics for intersections 1-10 in the study area and Figure 18 illustrates the geometrics for intersections 11-21 in the study area. · Signal Timing Optimization. In future year 2050 conditions, as traffic volumes and patterns change over time, signal timing optimization remains an effective way to reduce the project’s delay to levels less than the intersection’s baseline delay, thus off-setting the project’s increase in delay and eliminating the project’s impacts. · Traffic Signal Installation. No additional traffic signals are required under future year 2050 conditions. · All-Way-Stop-Control Installation. The project’s effect at the study intersection of S. Highland Avenue and Hemlock Avenue does “substantially and adversely change the LOS at an off-site location projected to experience deficient operations (a LOS D, E, or F) under foreseeable cumulative conditions”. The addition of project traffic at this side-street-stop-controlled intersection contributes substantial delay to the baseline LOS F conditions in both peak hours. The proposed mitigation measure for this intersection is for the project to pay the cost to implement all-way-stop-control and associated pavement markings for the City of Fontana to install when warranted. · Project Driveways. No additional mitigation is required beyond the proposed mitigation under opening year 2027 conditions. © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e 1 7 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 8 : 2 5 p m b y : Tn m 1 CHERRY AVE (NS) / BEECH AVE (EW) 6 CHERRY AVE (NS) / I-210 EB RAMPS (EW) 2 BEECH AVE (EW) / I-15 SB RAMPS (NS) 7 CHERRY AVE (NS) / S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) 3 BEECH AVE (EW) / I-15 NB RAMPS (NS) 8 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / SAN SEVAINE RD (NS) 4 BEECH AVE (EW) / SUMMIT AVE (NS) 9 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / HEMLOCK AVE (NS) 5 CHERRY AVE (NS) / I-210 WB RAMPS (EW) 10 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / BEECH AVE (NS) FIGURE 17: FUTURE YEAR 2050 + PROJECT INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS (INTERSECTIONS 1 - 10) WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA NO T T O S C A L E LEGEND - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - STOP CONTROLLED APPROACH - EXISTING GEOMETRICS - STUDY INTERSECTIONS# - RAISE GEOMETRICS - PROPOSED GEOMETRICS © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS I-1 5 F R E E W A Y I-210 FREEWAY 1 6 7 12 11 15 WALNUT ST VICTORIA ST BASELINE AVE S HIGHLAND AVE CH E R R Y A V E 2 3 4 1089 SA N S E V A I N E R D HE M L O C K A V E BE E C H A V E 5 13 14 16 17 18 BEECH AVE SUMMIT AVE CH E R R Y A V E ROANOKE RD MEYER CANYON RD FOOTHILL BLVD WEST LIBERTY PKWY EA S T A V E 2019 21 Dr a w i n g N a m e : P: \ I \ I T X P 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 \ 0 4 0 0 C A D \ E X H I B I T S \ T r a f f i c \ Fi g u r e 1 8 . d w g La s t O p e n e d : J u l 1 7 , 2 0 2 4 - 8 : 2 5 p m b y : Tn m 11 CHERRY AVE (NS) / VICTORIA ST (EW) 16 CHERRY AVE (NS) / ROANOKE RD (EW) 12 CHERRY AVE (NS) / WALNUT ST (EW) 17 CHERRY AVE (NS) / MEYER CANYON RD (EW) 13 14 BASELINE AVE (EW) / I-15 NB RAMPS (NS)15 CHERRY AVE (NS) / BASELINE AVE (EW) 18 CHERRY AVE (NS) / FOOTHILL BLVD (EW) BASELINE AVE (EW) / EAST AVENUE (NS) NO T T O S C A L E FIGURE 18: FUTURE YEAR 2050 + PROJECT INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS (INTERSECTIONS 11 - 21) WESTGATE MEDICAL CAMPUS PROJECT (WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 27) FONTANA, CA 19 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / PROJECT DRIVEWAY "A" (NS) 21 PROJECT DRIVEWAY "C" (EW) / SAN SEVAINE RD (NS) 20 S HIGHLAND AVE (EW) / PROJECT DRIVEWAY "B" (NS) - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - STOP CONTROLLED APPROACH - STUDY INTERSECTIONS# REALIGNED FOR RAISE PROJECT LEGEND - EXISTING GEOMETRICS - RAISE GEOMETRICS - PROPOSED GEOMETRICS Traffic Impact Analysis Page 38 for the Westgate Medical Campus Project IX. APPENDICES Appendix A: Approved Scope Agreement Appendix B: Traffic Counts Appendix C: Model Plots Appendix D: Westgate Project Trips Appendix E: Capacity Analysis Appendix F: Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis